History Politics and Messianism David

AJS Review 35:1 (April 2011), 3560 Association for Jewish Studies 2011
doi:10.1017/S036400941100002X
H ISTORY, P OLITICS , AND M ESSIANISM : D AVID H A -R EUVENI S O RIGIN AND M ISSION

by
Moti Benmelech
In the last weeks of 1523, a colorful traveler arrived in Venice from Alexandria: Dark in aspect, short in stature, gaunt, his language Hagarish [Arabic] and a little Jewish. He wore striped silk according to the custom of the Ishmaelites, and on his head a white scarf, with which he covered his head and most of himself.1 The traveler presented himself to local Jews and community leaders as David, the ambassador of an independent Jewish state on the Arabian peninsula, where he claimed that his brother, King Joseph, ruled over the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and half the tribe of Menashe. The Jewish ambassador announced that he was on his way to Rome to hold a state meeting with the Pope, as an emissary of the Seventy Elders, the advisers of his brother the king. He added, of course, that he needed money.2 The leaders of the Venice Jewish community were far from eager to assist the mysterious traveler, who shortly began to be called David Ha-Reuveni, but he did manage to enlist the support of several wealthy community members and set out for Rome. He remained there for about half a year, met several times with the Pope, and even received a letter of recommendation from him to the king of Portugal. After prolonged delays, in late 1525 Ha-Reuveni finally left for Portugal, where the open presence of Jews had been forbidden since the forced conversions of 1497. He remained close to the royal court there for several months, holding negotiations about political and military cooperation between the alleged independent Jewish state in the Habor Desert3 and the European power. His presence aroused religious and messianic fervor among the New
1. This is how he was described by Daniel of Pisa upon Ha-Reuvenis arrival in Rome a few weeks later. See Aharon Zeev Aescoly, Hatenuot hameshih . iot beYisrael (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik, 1988), 371. 2. Regarding Ha-Reuvenis stay in Venice, see Aharon Zeev Aescoly, Sippur David Ha-Reuveni (Jerusalem: Mosad Bialik 1993), 3132. Regarding the tribal state in the Habor Desert, see ibid., 7. The account below offers merely general outlines as background for the more detailed discussion to follow. 3. According to I Chronicles 5:26, the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and half the tribe of Menashe were exiled to Habor ( )by Tiglathpileser, king of Assyria (according to II Kings 18:11, all Ten Tribes were exiled to Habor).
35
Moti Benmelech
Christians of Portugal, and he finally lost favor with the king and was expelled from Portugal in the summer of 1526. After tribulations on sea and land, including, apparently, capture and imprisonment in France, Ha-Reuveni reappeared in Italy in early 1530. There, however, he was shown to be an impostor and forger.4 Nevertheless, he was soon joined by Shlomo Molkho, who had met him in Portugal, and in August 1532, the two men set out to meet Emperor Charles V in Regensberg. After the meeting, the two were arrested. In December of that year, Molkho was burned at the stake in Mantua, while Ha-Reuveni remained incarcerated, wound up in Spain, and was executed, apparently, in 1538, in an auto-da-f in Llerena.5
T HE S TATE
OF
S CHOLARSHIP
This strange but fascinating episode, a mixture of fantasy and reality, captured the imaginations of writers, poets, and dramatists, and also aroused considerable scholarly attention. Yet many scholars have been unable to define the limits between reality and imagination in the episode nor to discern the purpose and attitude of the mysterious traveler whose identity is still unknown. The main source of the events is Ha-Reuvenis journal, which includes a detailed account of his activities from the day that, as he claimed, he left the tribal kingdom in the Habor Desert until he was imprisoned in France6 after being deported from Portugal in June 1526.7 Ha-Reuveni describes at length his sojourns in Italy and Portugal, his meetings with Jews, Marranos, and Christians, and the essence of his meetings with the Pope, the king of Portugal, and others. Many details in the journal have been confirmed by external Jewish and Christian sources.8 A comprehensive list of his income and expenditures is attached to the journal.
4. See Shlomo Simonsohn, Shlih . uto hashniya shel David Ha-Reuveni beItalia, Zion 26 (1961): 198207. 5. A survey of the various opinions that have been advanced regarding the exact circumstances and location of Ha-Reuvenis execution can be found in Eliahu Lipiner, Iyyunim befarshat David Ha-Reuveni uShlomo Molkho, in Aescoly, Sippur, 5258. 6. Ha-Reuvenis account about his arrest and captivity in France as well as the identity of the Lord of Clermont, who allegedly arrested him there, are unclear. There are also several contradictions between the descriptions in his diary and in his interview with Ramusio (compare Aescoli, Sippur, 136, 143, 148; Aescoly, Hatenuot, 404). This whole episode is plausibly imaginary and was probably written to explain Ha-Reuvenis absence from the public sphere in Italy between his expulsion from Portugal in 1526 and his reappearance in Italy in 1530. 7. This is the date that appears in the official Portuguese documents regarding the matter. See Lipiner, Iyyunim, xlvi. Ha-Reuvenis journal, in contrast, indicates that he remained in Portugal for nearly ten more months (he states that shortly after he left Portugal, he was imprisoned by Lord Clermont in Iyar 5287 [April 1527]). See Aescoly, Sippur, 143 (Elkan Nathan Adler, Jewish Travellers [London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1930]), 328. All the quotations are from this out-of-date and incomplete edition; it is the only English translation of the journal. 8. See the list of sources assembled by Aescoly in appendix B to his edition of the journal (Sippur, 16791). Other sources have recently been published in Lipiner, Iyyunim.
36
History, Politics, and Messianism

The only manuscript of Ha-Reuvenis journal was discovered in the first half of the nineteenth century. Bought by the Bodleian Library in 1848, it was lost in 1867. Fortunately, a facsimile of the manuscript had been created and has been the basis for research and other editions.9 Nevertheless, the fact that it is only a facsimile reduces the possibility of reaching codicological conclusions about the time and place of its writing. It cannot be determined if the manuscript was written by Ha-Reuveni himself, was dictated to a servant, or was copied at a later date.10 Many articles and differing opinions exist, but none suggests a way to resolve the truth about the story. Thus, for example, it has been argued that Ha-Reuveni was Ashkenazic,11 Sephardic,12 Yemenite,13 Ethiopian,14 or even Indian.15 Research has not yet managed to transform the episode from a strange and sometimes amusing anecdote to a report of a significant event that can be examined in its historical context and from which conclusions can be drawn about the nature and character of Jewish society at that time.16 In this article, I propose a new reading of this episode. The focal points of this interpretation are to identify and analyze the purpose of his journey and to place it within both the geopolitical events of the first third of the sixteenth century and within the time of messianic arousal and activities among Jews at that point in history. I will point out the deep influence that Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi, the famous Jerusalem kabbalist and messianic propagandist, had
9. On the genealogy of the manuscript, see Adolf Neubauer, Mediaeval Jewish Chronicles and Chronological Notes (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1893), 2:xiixiii. Neubauer published the full manuscript in Hebrew for the first time, ibid., 133223. It was reprinted by Yehudah David Eisenstein, Otsar masaot (New York: privately printed, 1927), 14066. The first scholarly edition was published by Eduard Biberfeld, Der Reisebericht des David Reubeni; Eine Beitrag zur Geschichte dex XVI Jahrhunderts (PhD diss., Universitt Leipzig, 1892). A second Hebrew edition was published by Avraham Cahana, Sippur nesiat David Ha-Reuveni (Warsaw: Di Welt, 1922). A scholarly edition with a comprehensive introduction was published by Aharon Zeev Aescoly, Sippur David Ha-Reuveni (Jerusalem: ha-H . evrah ha-Eretz Yisraelit le-historyah ve-etnografyah, 1940). This edition was reprinted without revision in 1993, accompanied by two introductory articles by Moshe Idel and Elias Lipiner. 10. On the manuscripts paleography, see Sonnes review of Aescolys edition: Isaiah Sonne, Biblioteca Historiographica Hebraica, Jewish Quarterly Review (NS) 34 (194344): 24359. 11. Aescoly, Sippur, 196. Aescoly accepts Neubauers opinion on this matter. 12. Abraham Shalom Yahuda, David Ha-Reuveni, Motsao, leshono uteudato, Hatequfa 34 35 (1950): 599625. This opinion was also espoused in Yitzhak Baers review of Aescolys edition, Qiryat sefer 17 (1940): 312. 13. Azriel Shoh . at, Lefarashat David Ha-Reuveni, Zion 35 (1970): 96116. Zvi Ben-dor Benite, The Ten Lost Tribes: A World History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 11333. 14. Moshe David Cassuto, Mi haya David Ha-Reuveni, Tarbiz 32 (1963): 33958. 15. Ervin Birnbaum, David Reubenis Indian Origin, Historia Judaica 20 (1958): 330. 16. Miriam Eliav-Feldon has discussed this episode and placed it in the broader context of sixteenth-century impostors. Most of the impostors at that time are to be understood against the background of geographical discoveries and the development of communications. Yet Ha-Reuveni differs in both the religious-messianic meaning attributed to him and in not gaining material profit from his imposture. See Miriam Eliav-Feldon, Invented Identities: Credulity in the Age of Prophecy and Exploration, Journal of Early Modern History 3 (1999): 20332.
37
Moti Benmelech
on Ha-Reuveni, and will show how his misunderstanding of Halevis intentions brought on a new messianic concept. H A -R EUVENI S P URPOSE Ha-Reuveni quite explicitly set out his goals for his journey in his diary, describing his first meeting with the Pope, which took place in Rome on 17 Adar 5284 (March 3, 1524).17 In this interview he explained the purpose of his mission, his reasons for coming to Rome, and his plans for future action. Nonetheless, the plans themselves are vague and unclear:
And I said to him: King Joseph and his elders ordered me to speak to thee that thou shouldst make peace between the Emperor and the French King for it will be well with thee and them if thou makest that peace, and write for me a letter to these two kings and they will help us and we will help them; and write also for me to King Prester John.18
The Pope replied that such a task would be beyond his abilities:
The Pope answered me, As to the two kings between whom thou askest me to make peace, I cannot do it, but if thou needest helpthe King of Portugal will assist thee, and I will write to him, and he will do all.19
Although it is difficult to discern Ha-Reuvenis definite plan here, it appears that he went to Rome to forge ties between the imaginary Jewish state in the Habor Desert and the two central European powersthe Holy Roman Empire (including Spain) and France20and to make peace between them. The Pope explained that this was an impossible mission and that he lacked the power to work out a compromise in the struggle between these powers, instead proposing that Ha-Reuveni be content with forging ties with a different power, Portugal. As described in the journal, Cardinal Egidio [Giles] da Viterbo was present during Ha-Reuvenis audience with the Pope.21 The cardinal, who apparently had considerable knowledge about Judaism and also knew Hebrew and Arabic, served as an interpreter.22 This is corroborated by Ha-Reuvenis later statement, that when Egidio was forced to
17. Aescoly, Sippur, 3334 (Adler, Travellers, 27172). 18. Ibid., 35 (Adler, Travellers, 272). 19. Ibid. 20. On Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor, and his political struggles as a whole, see Geoffrey Parker, The Political World of Charles V, in Charles V, 15001558, and His Time, ed. Hugo Soly (Antwerp: Mercatorfonds, 2000), 11326. The classic work on the tense relations between Charles V and Francis I of France is Franois-Auguste Mignet, La rivalit de Francois Ier et de Charles-Quint (Paris: Didier, 1876). 21. And we went, I and he [Egidio], to the apartment of the Pope, Aescoly, Sippur, 3435 (Adler, Travellers, 271). 22. On Egidios knowledge of Hebrew, see Francis Xavier Martin, The Problem of Giles of Viterbo, Augustiana 9 (1959): 36566.
38

leave Rome and return to Viterbo, he needed a different interpreter for his audiences with the Pope: And I wondered who would help me and stand between me and the Pope. I saw a man whose name was R. Daniel of Pisa who used to frequent the Pope . . . a very rich man and a Kabbalist, and I decided to ask him.23 Egidio thus served as an interpreter for Ha-Reuveni until Egidio had to leave Rome, at which point Daniel of Pisa took his place. Other sources give a different impression about both the content of the discussions and the participants. A detailed account of the first meeting between the Pope and Ha-Reuveni appears in a letter sent by Daniel of Pisa himself.24 This document, which M. D. Cassuto correctly described as the most important document about the figure of Ha-Reuveni,25 contains the first physical description of Ha-Reuveni, mentioning his appearance, dress, language, and habits. Two central points arise from it and contradict Ha-Reuvenis journal. Daniel says that he had already served as an interpreter in Ha-Reuvenis first interview with the Pope.26 Daniel also describes the purpose of Ha-Reuvenis mission in an entirely different light:
This David was sent from Habor Desert, from the three hundred thousand people of Israel there to make a treaty with the Pope. And to ask for weapons from him, such as corteti and falconeti fire-throwers [i.e., cannons] and the like, through the king of Portugal, to a port named Jeddah, which is about a three day journey to their country, ten days at most.27
According to this account, Ha-Reuveni came to Rome with a clear and well-defined purpose: to obtain a recommendation from the Pope to the king of Portugal so that the latter would supply him with a ship and firearms (Daniel even mentions the names of the weapons that Ha-Reuveni sought). Ha-Reuveni wished to sail to the port of Jeddah, which, he claimed, was close to the place where the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and half the tribe of Menashe lived. Support for this account appears in other sources. The Venetian ambassador to Rome wrote a letter (copied in the journal of Marin Sanuto)28 describing Ha-Reuvenis appearance in Rome: He came to ask for a craftsman to make cannons and gunpowder, saying that in a Portuguese ship it was possible to arrive there easily through the Red Sea.29 Similarly, the account of Abraham
23. Aescoly, Sippur, 41 (Adler, Travellers, 276). 24. Aescoly, Hatenuot, 37172. 25. Cassuto, Mi haya, 339. 26. And when he arrived he was brought to the cardinal and spoke with him at length. In the end he did not rest nor was he silent until the cardinal brought him to the Pope, and I was called as the interpreter between them, and see Aescoly, Hatenuot, 371. 27. Ibid., and see Aescoly, Sippur, 151. 28. 8 See Marin Sanuto, I diarii di Marino Sanuto, 54 (Venice: Visentini 1903): 14548. 29. Cited by Aescoly, Hatenuot, 373. Interestingly, Aescoly remarks that Marco Foscari, the Venetian ambassador to Rome, who sent this information to Venice, mentions the Popes aspiration to achieve peace between the emperor, the king of France, and the Venetian Signoria in other letters that he sent to Venice. If Ha-Reuveni actually presented his mission to the Pope as he describes it in
39
Moti Benmelech
Farrissol, though based on hearsay, claims that the Pope agreed to send Ha-Reuveni with honor in a great ship full of weaponry and Jewish and Christian craftsmen via Portugal to arrange with the king to fill it as he wished.30 Further confirmation of this account appears in the Popes letter of recommendation to the king of Portugal. This source demonstrates that Ha-Reuvenis request was not considered problematic. In his letter, the Pope asked the king of Portugal to assist Ha-Reuveni:
May it please you to assist him according to your ability and to send him accompanied by your fleet after he has obtained what he wished, especially since he is not asking for a great thing, so it appears, and is only asking for a few cannons and a few people who know how to maintain and operate them.31
In addition to these external sources, Ha-Reuvenis journal also indicates that Portugal was indeed his original destination and not a fallback solution recommended by the Pope. Ha-Reuveni states that before he had left Jerusalem for Italy, he had asked a local goldsmith named Abraham ha-Ger to [m]ake me a model showing Venice, Rome, and Portugal.32 Thus even at that early point in his journey, he had tried to obtain maps not only of Venice, via whose port he would reach Rome, but also of Portugal. Later, in describing how he had asked the Venetian consul in Alexandria to arrange his voyage to Venice, he wrote that he told the consul of his wish to go to the Pope and then to the King of Portugal.33 These sources show that Ha-Reuveni planned to go to Portugal, and went first to Rome to obtain a letter of recommendation from the Pope to the king of Portugal, which is indeed what finally occurred. Most likely, after the abject failure of his mission to Portugal, he sought to diminish its importance and later removed Portugal from the original list of his destinations, presenting his trip there as the Popes initiative. It also appears that in order to vitiate the arguments of Daniel da Pisa, Ha-Reuveni removed him from the scene of the audience in his journal and placed Egidio there instead. However, while editing the journal, he apparently forgot about the references to Portugal in the conversation with the goldsmith in Jerusalem and with the Venetian consul, and the text is preserved in its original, unedited form. These sources indicate that Ha-Reuveni addressed the Pope with a clear, concrete request. Rather than wishing to intervene in world politics or make
his journal, it is likely that the Pope would have been interested in including him in the process, which he himself favored, of making peace among the various European powers, and he would not have sent him to the king of Portugal. Thus the Popes directing of Ha-Reuveni to Portugal shows that he wanted to be sent there in the first place. See Aescoli, Sippur, 171. 30. Aescoly, Hatenuot, 375. 31. Ibid., 378. Petrus Balan, ed. Monumenta Saeculi XVI, Historiam Illustrantia Vol. 1: Clementis VII Epistolae Per Sadoletum Scriptae, Quibus Accedunt Variorum Ad Papam Et Ad Alios Episto (Oeniponte: Libararia Academica Wagneriana, 1885), 2829. 32. Aescoly, Sippur, 27 [Adler, Travellers, 265]. 33. Ibid., 29 [Adler, Travellers, 267].
40

peace between France and Spain, he wanted to acquire a Portuguese battleship loaded with guns and cannons, a request that the Pope termed not a great thing, and to sail to the Arabian Peninsula to the city of Jeddah.34 Thus, at this stage Ha-Reuvenis mission had a concrete purpose, and there is no reason to assume that this request was merely a camouflage for some other activity in the religious or messianic sphere.35 But we must ascertain why Ha-Reuveni needed a Portuguese battleship. What use would he have made of it, had he succeeded and had the king of Portugal equipped him with a ship loaded with firearms to sail toward the port of Jeddah, a long and dangerous voyage along a route that had only recently been discovered?
H A -R EUVENI S P LAN
AND
H IS M ESSIANIC C ONCEPT
The key to understanding Ha-Reuvenis intention is in his explicit statement of his destination: the city of Jeddah, a seaport on the western coast of the Arabian Peninsula, and the nautical gateway to Mecca. Jeddah is mentioned several times in the sources cited above. In Daniel of Pisas letter, it is explicitly named as Ha-Reuvenis destination: And to borrow weapons from him . . . through the king of Portugal, to a port named Jeddah.36 In Iggeret orh . ot olam, Farrissol mentions Jeddah in his description of the place where the remaining tribes live: Because this Jew is one of the sect of the two tribes . . . and beneath them and beyond are the other Ten Tribes, and they are close to the desert to go to Amicca and Jeddah.37 Daniel of Pisa, as well as Farrissol and the Venetian ambassador to Rome,38 cite Ha-Reuvenis declaration that the cannons would enable the conquering of Mecca from the Muslims, and that the port leading to it was Jeddah. However, Portuguese intervention in Jeddah is mentioned in yet another source, one that likely provided the background to Ha-Reuvenis mission. Abraham ben Eliezer Halevis messianic propaganda characterizes Ha-Reuvenis goal and defines the relations between its various political and messianic components.
34. Shoh . at proposed a similar hypothesis, but argued that Ha-Reuveni wanted to sail to Aden in the ship. Shoh . at believed that Ha-Reuveni was a Yemenite Jew who wanted to connect his activity in Italy and Portugal to the messianic awakening that he estimated to have taken place at that time in Yemen. He suggested that Ha-Reuveni truly regarded himself as the messiah according to the criteria proposed by Maimonides. See Shoh . at, Lefarashat, 11213. Yet there are not sufficient proofs about such a messianic awakening in Yemen at that time, and in addition Ha-Reuveni emphasizes, throughout his sojourn in Italy and Portugal, that he is a diplomat and soldier and not a messianic herald. 35. Yitzhak Baer, review of Sippur David Ha-Reuven, by Aharon Zeev Aescoly, Kiryat Sefer 17 (1940): 303304. For a discussion of the various approaches in scholarship regarding Ha-Reuvenis purpose, see Idel, Introduction, in: Aescoly, Sippur, 1924. 36. Aescoly, Sippur, 151. 37. Ibid., 153. 38. Aescoly, Hatenuot, 373.
41
Moti Benmelech
The City of Jeddah and Abraham Halevis Messianic Propaganda The greatest Jewish messianic propagandist in the first third of the sixteenth century was the renowned kabbalist from Jerusalem, Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi.39 Halevi, who was born in Castile, left Spain at or near the time of the expulsion and apparently moved to Portugal.40 After a few years he fled to Italy and from there set out for Salonika, Constantinople, and Cairo on his way to the Land of Israel. Around 1514 he settled in Jerusalem. In 1508 he wrote Meshare qitrin (Steeping of the Incense), a book on calculating the end of days and determining the time of redemption based upon verses in the Book of Daniel. The text was printed in Constantinople two years later. From Jerusalem, Halevi continued to conduct an extensive messianic propaganda campaign. In 1517 he wrote a commentary on Nevuat hayeled (The Prophecy of the Child), a collection of five brief, obscure prophecies in Aramaic that are attributed to Nah . man, a child prodigy endowed with prophetic gifts who transmitted his words in an obscure manner so as not to reveal the end of days.41 In his commentary, Halevi wrote that these prophecies alluded to contemporary events that, he claimed, heralded the imminent advent of redemption. Thus he states that Ottoman military victories in southern Europe, the appearance of Martin Luther, Hebraism in Italy, as well as lesser events such as internal intrigues in Europe, Persia, and the Ottoman Empire, were all signs of the redemption, insinuated in the obscure prophecies of Nah . man. Two years later, in 1519, he sent Iggeret sod hageula (Epistle on the Secret of Redemption) to the leaders of Italian communities, producing a long and comprehensive epistle that lays out the stages and events of redemption in detail. Halevis writings were widely circulated in Italy and aroused great interest.42 A number of epistles, sent to various personages and dealing with aspects of his
39. For general information about Abraham Halevi, see Ira Robinson, Abraham Ben Eliezer Halevi: Kabbalist and Messianic Visionary of the Early Sixteenth Century (PhD diss., Harvard University, 1980) and Messianic Prayer Vigils in Jerusalem in the Early Sixteenth Century, Jewish Quarterly Review 72 (1981): 3242; Gershom Scholem and Malachi Beit Arieh, introduction to Maamar meshare qitrin (Jerusalem: Beit ha-sfarim ha-leumi ve-hauniversitai, 1978) [Hebrew]; Moshe Idel, Al mishmarot umeshih . iyut biYerushalayim bameot 1617, Shalem 5 (1987): 8394; Avraham David, Letoldot ha h . amim biyerushalayim bamea hashesh esre, Shalem 5 (1987): 23643. 40. On his sojourn in Portugal, see Moti Benmelech, Anusei Portugal be-reshit ha-mea ha-16 leor Megilat-starim le-Rabbi Abraham Halevi, Zion 73 (2008): 299310. 41. On Nevuat hayeled, see Yoseph Dan, Lequtot lemaase Nevuat hayeled, Shalem 1 (1974): 22934. 42. Halevis intense messianic propaganda campaign was waged by means of epistles to which were attached other compositions of his, which were not printed, the most prominent being his commentary on Nevuat hayeled. Meshare qitrin was also well known at that time in Italy, as we see from the description of Halevi by R. Moshe Basola in his travel journal: An eminent and modest man the honorable Abraham Halevi, who wrote Meshare qitrin (in Avraham David [ed.], Erets Zion veYerushalayim; masaot Erets Yisrael leR. Moshe Basola beshanim 52815283 [Jerusalem: Proyekt Yerushalayim, 1999], 22). The treatise is also mentioned in an epistle that R. Yisrael Ashkenazi sent from Jerusalem to R. Abraham of Perugia and also in an epistle that reached Monte Castello containing information about a special stone upon which signs of redemption were engraved (see Avraham
42

calculation of the end of days, have also been preserved.43 Thus Halevis writing not only aroused great interest, but also created a dialogue in which readers participated and responded. Cassuto was the first to suggest that Ha-Reuveni was influenced, directly or indirectly, by Halevi, especially in connection to the idea of 1524 as a messianic year.44 Idel notes that although Ha-Reuveni was probably aware of Halevis messianic calculations he does not explicitly refer to them, and therefore suggests that he did not regard him as an important source.45 I suggest that Ha-Reuveni read Halevis writings as a messianic blueprint according to which he built his messianic mission. In his commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Halevi twice mentions events connected to the city of Jeddah as part of the signs of redemption. In his interpretation of the first prophecy, he writes about the sentence umigdal bnei gadya ot (and the tower of the sons of Gadya is a sign):
And he [i.e., Nah . man] said that the tower of the sons of Gadya is a sign that when it will fall, it will be a sign and a symbol from the signs that will be at the time of the end of days. And that place is called Gidon in the Holy Tongue, and it is close to the city of Mecca, and in Arabic it is called Goza. And I found written in a book about a dream that the holy Rabbi Shimon bar Yoh . ai of blessed memory dreamed and those wars that he mentioned there are at the time of the end of the reckoning of the sons of Ishmael the son of Abraham, which is in the year five-thousand-two-hundred-eighty-two.46
Neubauer, Qibutsim al inyenei aseret hashevatim uvenei Moshe, Qovets al yad 4 [1888]: 34). These epistles were widely circulated; they were copied and disseminated beyond their original addressees. 43. Several epistles were already published. See Ira Robinson, Two Letters of Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi, in Studies in Medieval and Early Modern Jewish History and Literature, ed. I. Twersky, (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1984), 2:40322; Avraham Yaari, Iggrot erets Israel (Tel Aviv: Gazit, 1943), 16066; Malachi Beit-Aryeh, Iggeret meinyan aseret hasehvatim meet R Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi hamekubal mishnat 1528, Kobez al yad 6 (1966): 37178; Avraham David, Iggeret Yerushalmit mereshit hashilton haothmani beeretz Israel, in Prakim betoldot Yerushalayim bereshit ha-tkufa ha-othmanit, ed. Amnon Cohen (Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi, 1979), 3960; Avraham David and Uri Melammed, Megilat starim le-Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi: Iggeret meshih . it mishnat 1524, Shalem 8 (2009): 45367. On this letter, see also Yosef Hacker, Rikah umashmautah shel Megilat starim le-Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi, ibid., 46877. 44. Cassuto, Mi haya 35152. 45. Idel, Introduction, xxiiixxiv. 46. . . , . " " Amnon Gros (ed.), Shloshah maamrei geulah: perush nevuat hayeled, iggeret sod ha-geula, Maamar Meshare qitrin le-Rabi Avraham ben Eliezer ha-Levi (Jerusalem: privately printed, 2000), Perush nevuat hayeled, 21. Because of the obscurity of Halevis messianic texts I have included the Hebrew-Aramaic source.
43
Moti Benmelech
He mentions the destruction of a fortress (tower) in a city near Mecca known as Gadya, Gidon, or Goza. The name Jeddah is not mentioned explicitly, but the sound of the name of the city and its proximity to Mecca indicate that the reference is to Jeddah. Halevi also wrote that the event would take place in 5282 (1522). Later, in his interpretation of the fourth prophecy of Nah . man, Halevi once again discusses events in Gadya at the end of days:
Gadya is a city in the East near Mecca and it is mentioned in the first prophecy where he said the tower of the sons of Gadya is a sign, and it is called Gadya after a nation who have that name and a few people from whom settled in that country long before Muhammad, and the people of that nation are called Godiim and in the foreign language Godosh. And in my opinion they took that name in honor of their heroism and because they wanted to be related to the sons of Gad in strength and heroism, not that they were, perish the thought, and certainly the heroism of the Godiim was not like the heroism of the tribe of Gad, but in any event they were very heroic.47
Here Halevi connects the residents of Jeddah to the tribe of Gad, suggesting a geographical relationship between them. Moreover, in the view of the kabbalist from Jerusalem, the events that were to occur in Gadya were related to the Portuguese drive to expand to the east:
He [i.e., Nah . man] said that after king Salem [i.e., Sultan Selim I] will conquer Egypt, afterward ha-katzavim hacorim leazabim [the butchers who kneel before idols] who are the men of Portugal, will enter.48 And he said that when they will enter they will build a building and a dwelling close to the desert, and he did not say in what land they would enter and on what side of the desert they would build the building. But we can understand it from what comes after, since the men of Portugal look to the end of the earth, and since they go to the end of the eastern seas, therefore they will enter the eastern lands near the city of Mecca as he says. And he said that their fortune will overturn on them and will uproot them and overturn their joy and that evil will come at their hand. And he said: sof yama h . arev al 10 milin mith . arev [the edge of the sea will dry out; at ten miles it will be destroyed], which might hint that the Ishmaelites in that land will flee from all the places on the sea coast around ten miles, and the whole border of the sea will be destroyed to that measure. That is to say, the settlement of Ishmaelites at the edge of the sea and it means that they will waste away, that is the people from Portugal who come to fight in that land, their power will
47. , " . . " , Ibid., 74. 48. Halevi refers to the Portuguese as butchers (katsavim) because he claims that no other nation had hated the Jews as much as the Portuguese did. See ibid., 73.
44

weaken and their fat and flesh will become thin. And that will make the Turks happy and will be a fulfillment of their hopes. For they will seek strategies to attack them [i.e., the Portuguese], and to fight against them and take revenge on them. Such a strategy may be that the Ishmaelites flee, as well as the Turks who dwell there with them, until many Edomites [Christians; i.e., the Portuguese invaders] will move from the sea into the dry land. And then they [the Ishmaelites] will ambush them there from behind and those who fled will turn to the pursuer, or other strategies of warfare that they will do to them.49
Halevi interpreted the childs prophecy as describing a future Portuguese failure to penetrate the Arabian Peninsula via Jeddah. This failure would take place after a preliminary Portuguese success, the establishment of a bridgehead on the ground (apparently in Jeddah), and a Muslim retreat from Jeddah to the interior of the country, alluded to by the words that the edge of the sea will be destroyed for ten miles. When the Portuguese try to advance to the interior of the country, they will encounter a Muslim ambush and be wiped out. It is not clear how the sign mentioned in the first prophecythe fall of the Tower of the sons of Gadyafits into this sequence of events. Was the tower supposed to fall during the Portuguese penetration or later during the Muslim counterattack? Either way, the Portuguese failure in Gadya was to be one sign of redemption. Abraham Halevis interpretation of Nevuat hayeled is based on a good acquaintance with the geopolitics and martial reality of the time (the first third of the sixteenth century). To understand his emphasis on Jeddah as the arena of important messianic events, we have to examine its role in early sixteenth-century politics and trade. The Portuguese spice trade with India was based on three key strengths that ensured their control over major trade routes in the Indian Ocean: Goa and Malacca (two of the most important seaports and trade centers of the East), and the island Ormuz in the Persian Gulf.50 By occupying Ormuz, the Portuguese gained control over the entrance to the Persian Gulf, prevented passage of merchant vessels to the ports of the gulf, and ensured control over nautical trade
49. . , , . , , , , , . , , . , : . [ " . . . ] , . , , . . . , . , , Ibid., 7576. 50. Charles Ralph Boxer, The Portuguese Seaborne Empire 14151825 (London: Hutchinson 1969), 4649.
45
Moti Benmelech
routes.51 The Portuguese also tried to block the entrance to the Red Sea, and thus attempted to close all nautical routes from the Indian Ocean westward, except for the one surrounding Africa which they controlled. Had they succeeded, they would have made the Indian Ocean a mare claustrum. In 1507 they occupied Socotra island for that purpose, but it proved to be too distant and impoverished a place to serve as a naval base and in 1510 it was abandoned. In 1513 an attempt to seize Aden failed, and the Red Sea remained the only nautical route between Europe and Asia that was not in Portuguese hands.52 Jeddah was one of the most important seaports of the Red Sea. As the port for Mecca, it attracted thousands of Muslim pilgrims from all over Asia who, en route to participate in the Hajj, made it the major trade center of the Red Sea.53 Merchants and caravans arrived in Jeddah not only by sea, but also by land through the ancient trade trails of Arabia. From Jeddah goods were sent by ships to Suez; thence caravans brought them to Cairo and Alexandria for distribution in Europe by Italian merchants. Thus, Jeddah became a center of Asian commerce that bypassed the Portuguese, and was an important competitor to the Portuguese monopoly in commerce with the East.54 After the Portuguese failed to block the entrance to the Red Sea, Afonso Albuquerque, the viceroy and governor of Portuguese India, planned to attack Jeddah; in a letter of 20 October 1514 to King Manuel, he wrote: When these things are accomplished it will be time to think of Jeddah, Mecca, and Suez, and, as there are plenty of horses in Prester Johns territories [i.e., Ethiopia], it would be an easy matter for 500 Portuguese horsemen, in some good taforeas and caravels, to land near Jeddah, and proceed from thence to Mecca (one days journey) and reduce the town to ashes.55
51. The Portuguese permitted passage of pepper to Safavid Iran in exchange for silk. Since the Safavids fought several wars with the Ottomans, the Portuguese tried to establish good contact with them. See Michael Naylor Pearson, The Indian Ocean (London: Routledge, 2003), 130. 52. Boxer, Portuguese Seaborne Empire, 4649. On the consequences of the Portuguese penetration to the Indian Ocean, see Kirti Narayan Chaudhuri, Trade and Civilisation in the Indian Ocean (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 6380; Patricia Risso, Merchants and Faith: Muslim Commerce and Culture in the Indian Ocean (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1995), 7287. From the 1540s on, the Red Sea became an important route in the spice trade between the Atjehnese Sultanate in Sumatra and Europe, and by the end of the sixteenth century, the Portuguese pepper trade was down by 25 percent (Boxer, Portuguese Seaborne Empire, 59). On the spice commerce through the Red Sea, see Charles Ralph Boxer, A Note on Portuguese Reactions to the Revival of the Red Sea Spice Trade and the Rise of Atjeh, 15401600, Journal of Southeast Asian History 10 (1969): 41528. 53. Risso, Merchants and Faith, 72. On Indian pilgrims to Mecca, see Michael Naylor Pearson, Pilgrimage to Mecca: The Indian Experience, 15001800 (Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener, 1996). 54. The importance and wealth of Jeddah, as seen by Portuguese eyes, are apparent in Luiz De Camess Lusiads, canto 9, st. 34 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 177. 55. Frederick Charles Danvers, The Portuguese in India (London: Nelson, 1966), I:305306. See also George William Frederick Stripling, The Ottoman Turks and the Arabs (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1942), 30. Some scholars suggest that Albuquerque even planned to steal the body of the Prophet Muhammad from its burial place and hold it for ransom until all Muslims had left the Holy Land. See Andrew James McGregor, A Military History of Modern Egypt: From the Ottoman
46

The people of Jeddah were aware of the Portuguese threat. Ferdinand Magellan tells that after the defeat of the Muslim fleet in the Battle of Diu in February 1509, Emir Hussein, captain of the defeated Arabian fleet, came to Jeddah to build a fortress to protect the port from Portuguese attack.56 In the second and third decades of the 1500s, Jeddah was rumored to be the next place of conflict between Portugal and the Islamic world. Such a clash would have served two Portuguese purposes: Economically it would have diminished Muslim trade in the Red Sea region, and politically it would have threatened the holy cities of Islam and an unprotected corner of the Ottoman Empire. When Abraham Halevi referred to Jeddah in his commentary to Nevuat hayeled, he indicated, once again, his knowledge of the political and military news of the time. It appears that the plan behind Ha-Reuvenis mission is stated in Abraham Halevis commentary on Nevuat hayeled that refers to Jeddah and to a possible Portuguese attack there. Ha-Reuveni was thus artificially trying to bring about this Portuguese intervention in the Arabian Peninsula, which Halevi had predicted; hitherto, it had not occurred naturally. It is difficult to estimate which part of Halevis messianic scenario Ha-Reuveni sought to set in motion. Did he plan to enter the port of Jeddah and bombard the Tower of the sons of Gida (i.e., the new fortification built in the early 1500s), or did he plan to drag the Portuguese into the interior of the country to some meeting place with representatives of the tribes who dwelt about a three-day journey to their country, ten days at most,57 hoping that on the way they would be attacked and destroyed by the Muslims? Did he wish to fulfill both prophecies together? We find a new model here of messianic activity, which I suggest that we call historical messianism. The arena where the messianic drama is to take place according to this conception is in historical and geopolitical reality, and the approach or advancement of redemption will be accomplished by creating a historical and political situation to serve as background for the messianic event, and by shaping it according to the messianic scenario. The means needed for this are not magical nor religious: They are political and diplomatic actions guided by the messianic scenario. Martin Jacobs recently claimed that historical events such as rivalry between Christian Europe and the Muslim Ottoman Empire, and the struggle over the spice trade in particular, fed Jewish messianic hopes in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and that Ha-Reuvenis story is an
Conquest to the Ramadan War (Westport, CT: Praeger Security International, 2006), 2021; Charles Raymond Beazley, The Colonial Empire of the Portuguese to the Death of Albuquerque, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, N.S. 8 (1894): 122. 56. Duarte Barbosa, A Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar (London: Hakluyt Society, 1867), reprint 1970, 2325. The book was published as the work of Duarte Barbosa but was actually written by Ferdinand Magellan; see H. E. J. Stanley, Note to Thirty-fifth Publication of the Hakluyt Society Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar, ibid., not numbered. 57. Aescoly, Hatenuot, 371.
47
Moti Benmelech
expression of a Jewish perspective on this power struggle.58 I suggest that Ha-Reuvenis activities reflect an attempt to affect and design the historical events, and not merely passively watch and interpret them. The choice of a type of action that is neither magical nor linked to particular kabbalistic action accords with Abraham Halevis positions, as expressed in his Iggeret sod hageula, where he tells the story of R. Yosef Della Reina. Della Reina, a Spanish kabbalist and magician, tried to expedite the redemption by magical means and is said to have almost succeeded. According to Haveli, his unavoidable failure in the last minute resulted in disastrous consequences including postponement of the redemption for forty years following 5250 [1490], to 5290 [1530], a postponement during which the expulsion from Spain and forced conversions in Portugal took place. Della Reinas attempt is the most prominent example of the dangers encountered when magical action is applied to advance redemption.59 Ha-Reuveni, in contrast, proposes a different pattern of action. On the one hand, his suggestions are actively messianic, but on the other hand, they lack the problems or dangers entailed by magical action or by the use of practical Kabbalah. These messianic conceptions in the wake of Halevis writings are not surprising. Halevi asserted, as I have already mentioned, that history and especially geopolitical reality provide the stage on which the messianic process will occur and be seen. By means of the intense messianic propaganda campaign that he waged from Jerusalem, he created ardent messianic fervor, while at the same time making a categorical demand for absolute passivity with respect to magical action to advance redemption. The tension between these two poles, which intensified as the dates for the end of days predicted by Halevi approached, with no visible messianic events,60 was likely to be released by the creation of a new messianic channel, which would be sufficiently active to give actual expression to the messianic fervor but would not contradict Halevis demand for passivity.61 Ha-Reuvenis plan is an exceptional interpretation of Halevis doctrine, deriving from a blurring of the differences between Halevis various works. His book, Meshare qitrin, is primarily theoretical. As an exegetical work in the kabbalistic manner, it explains parts of the Book of Daniel. In the framework of his exegesis, Halevi came to conclusions about the date of the redemption; it seems that these messianic conclusions were the purpose of the book. However, the work is theoretical. The commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Iggeret sod hageula, and Halevis other epistles belongs to a different genre. Halevis conclusions in Meshare qitrin are the point of departure for these works, and their purpose is to publicize
58. Martin Jacobs, David ha-Reuveniein zionistisches Experiment im Kontext der europischen Expansion des 16. Jahrhunderts? in An der Schwelle zur Moderne: Juden in der Renaissance, ed. Giuseppe Veltri and Annette Winkelmann (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 191206. 59. Halevi, Iggeret, 4142. 60. The dates of the different stages of the redemption according to Halevi were 1520, when the first stage was suppose to occur, the second in 1524, the third in 1530, and the final stage in 1536. See Halevi, Iggeret, 20. 61. Halevi referred to doubts and questions aroused because of the absence of visible progress in the messianic realm in some of his epistles; see Robinson, Two Letters.
48

his conclusions and to find support for them in historical reality or in other sources such as the prophecies of the child Nah . man, dream divination, magic, gematria, and astrological calculations.62 These works were part of a general discourse on the subject of redemption. In them, Halevi responds to questions, ideas, and doubts about redemption, its date, and its nature. In this respect, they present details about events surrounding the messianic event itself. Halevi regarded himself as part of a broad messianic discussion, and in this framework he offered his own interpretation of Nevuat hayeled as a suggestion, not as a final answer.63 In this respect, one can perhaps distinguish between the character of Halevis activity while he was living in Greece and Turkey, where he composed and printed Meshare qitrin, which was fundamentally a theoretical discussion, and his activity in the Land of Israel, where he dealt with messianic propaganda. Ha-Reuveni, by contrast, read Halevis propagandist works as theoretical compositions. From his point of view, the commentary on Nevuat hayeled and the Iggeret sod hageula did not just analyze historical events and consider them as the historical framework in which messianic action would take place, but rather presented the essence of messianic action. Consequently, Ha-Reuveni took what Halevi had presented solely as an anecdote (something that would take place on the margins of the messianic process) and turned it into a substantial component of that process. A BRAHAM H ALEVI S I NFLUENCE
ON
H A -R EUVENI
Up to this point, I have presented the influence of Abraham Halevis writings on the general schema of Ha-Reuvenis historical messianic activity. However, echoes of this influence are also notable in many other details of Ha-Reuvenis story and in his invented biography. The Connection with the Tribes of Reuven and Gad In describing the independent Jewish kingdom in the Habor Desert, Ha-Reuveni claimed that his brother Yosef ruled over the tribes of Reuven, Gad, and half the tribe of Menashe. The choice of these tribes can be explained in light of the special emphasis given to them by Halevi in his writings, and especially in the latter s description of stages of the messianic process. As I have pointed out, Halevi connected Jeddah and the tribe of Gad, claiming that the name of the city of Gadya was an allusion to the tribe of Gad, whose heroism the Gogites sought to imitate.64 The aspiration of the people of Gadya62. On the place of gematria in Halevis calculations of the end of days, see Halevi, Iggeret, 23. On dream divination, see p. 48 there; on Halevis magical interpretations, see pp. 1314. Regarding the centrality of astrological calculations in determining the end of days and in Halevis messianic propaganda, see Gershom Scholem, Hamequbal R. Avraham ben Eliezer Halevi, Qiryat sefer 2 (192426): 27172. And see also Halevi, Perush, 2325 as well as Iggeret, 38. 63. Halevi, Perush, 11. 64. Ibid., 74; and see p. 44, near n. 45.
49
Moti Benmelech
Jeddah to present themselves as descended from the sons of Gad in power and heroism65 is explicable in light of the geographical proximity of Jeddah and the tribe of Gad, as presented by Ha-Reuveni.66 Halevi pinned high messianic hopes to the sons of Reuven as well. He believed that the first and preliminary stage of the redemption had already taken place in 527980 (15191520). While he refrained from stating with certainty what had occurred in those years, he did estimate that this first stage of redemption was connected to the tribe of Reuven:
Even in the first of those eleven years, which is the year 5280 of the Creation of the Universe something of the matter of redemption will be renewed, and that year will be the beginning of the visitation, and some of our brethren will be redeemed, and they will shed the shafts of the yoke of the gentiles from their neck. And I do not know where this will be or how it will be. And perhaps it will be that the sons of Reuven who will go out and redeem some of their brethren who are close to them in that year, that the Zohar said.67
In an epistle of 5285 (1525), Halevi again mentioned events connected with the tribe of Reuven as part of the early stages of redemption. He answers a question about the second stage in the redemption process, which was supposed to have occurred a year earlier:
And similarly it is possible that in the year 5284 (1524) there was a redemption even if it has not yet been made public to us where it was. And my heart tells me that the people of Reuven and also a few others from the other tribes sent out and transferred their place and went out of their frameworks in that year and were redeemed by a few of their brethren in every place they reached. And what I say about the people of Reuven is because in the Zohar it says that they will be the first to go out at the time of the end.68
Ha-Reuveni, who took upon himself to set the process of redemption in motion, chose to identify as a member of the tribe of Reuven because the first steps heralding the advent of the messiah were said to be connected to that tribe.69
65. Ibid., 74. 66. The proximity of Ha-Reuvenis kingdom and Jeddah is mentioned in Daniel of Pisas epistle; see Aescoly, Hatenuot, 371, and by Abraham Farrissol in his Iggeret orh . ot olam (Itinera mundi), 374. 67. Halevi, Iggeret, 1. 68. Robinson, Two Letters, 408 (the quotation is from an epistle of 5285 in which Martin Luther is also mentioned). Although Ha-Reuveni set out on his journey before this epistle was composed, it is informative regarding the centrality of that date in Halevis messianic conception. 69. Although Ha-Reuveni introduced himself to the Pope and to the king of Portugal as a member of the Tribe of Judah and even presented a family tree to them, showing him to be descended from King David (see the epistle of Daniel of Pisa, Aescoly, Hatenuoot, 371, and Sippur, 85, 101 [Adler, Travellers, 306]), there is no doubt the Jews saw him as a member of the tribe of Reuven, and he explicitly connected himself with that tribe, declaring that his brother was ruling the tribes of
50

Pretending to be a Member of the Prophets Family Halevis writings contain two other characteristics related to Ha-Reuvenis actions. In his commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Halevi devoted a long discussion to splits within Islam and the differences between Sunnis and Shiites, the latter of whom he calls shufiza (Sufis).70 Halevi claims that in 5245 [1485] a new leader was born to head the Shiites, a group he believed had been nearly assimilated into broader Sunni Islam. The new leader would bring them to mighty achievements. In addition to Nah . mans prophecy, Halevi bases his claim on other sources: information that had reached him from a trustworthy Jew in that country, and on the calculations of a well-known astrologer in Greece.71 Halevi also states that the Shiite-Sufis are outstanding in their swordsmanship, and that the sword is their main weapon.72 This lengthy discussion is apparently what led Ha-Reuveni to write in his journal that during his trip from the Habor Desert to Alexandria, where he boarded a ship to Venice, he pretended to be a member of the family of the Prophet. Halevi predicted the appearance of a figure from the Prophets family and attributed great importance to his activity. Ha-Reuveni thus disguised himself not only as an emissary from the tribe of Reuven, whose arousal was,
Gad, Reuven, and half of Menashe. Shoh . ats assumption that Ha-Reuveni did not present himself as a member of the tribe of Reuven, and that he even opposed the very epithet (Shoh . at, Lefarashat, 103) is not convincing, especially since Shlomo Molkho calls him by that name even when addressing him with great respect and admiration, as a disciple before his master (see Abraham Rotenberg, H . ayat kaneh [Amsterdam: Uri Feibesh, 1660], 5v). It is difficult to assume that Molkho would have called Ha-Reuveni by the very epithet to which he objected. In my opinion, the contradictions to which Shoh . at referred between Ha-Reuvenis identification as a member of the tribe of Reuven and his family tree from the tribe of Judah, and also the fact that at the beginning of his journal he first mentions the tribe of Gad and only then the tribe of Reuven, are the key to understanding some of the central points of his mission. The connection of the tribe of Gad with Jeddah and his membership in the tribe of Reuven, despite the difficulties presented, derive from the desire to emphasize the messianic task of the tribe of Reuven at the start of the redemption, rather than the family tree from the tribe of Judah. It is possible that Ha-Reuveni presented two identities: one as a descendant of the tribe of Judah, which he displayed to Christians, and the other as belonging to the tribe of Reuven, which he displayed to Jews. 70. See Halevi, Perush, 4246. It is possible that Halevi refers here to the rise of the Safavid Shiite Empire in Iran at the beginning of the sixteenth century. The early Safavids arose from the Safaviya, a mystical Sufi order popular in northwestern Iran. Indeed, Halevi refers to them as Shiites and Sufis. The name Shufiza might be a confusion of the original Safavid or Safaviya. Ismail I, the first Safavid Shah of Iran, was born in 1487, close enough to 1485; Halevi noted this as the birth year of a new Shiite leader. Another possibility is that Ha-Reuveni himself was born that year (in 1530 he was described by the Venetian geographer Giovanni Battista Ramusio as a man in his forties). See Sanuto, I Diarii di Marino Sanuto, 6:14647. On the Safavids, see Hans Robert Roemer, The Safavid Period, in The Timurid and Safavid Periods; The Cambridge History of Iran, ed. Peter Jackson and Laurence Lockhart (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 6:189350; Roger Savory, Iran under the Safavids (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980). 71. Halevi, Perush, 45. 72. Ibid.
51
Moti Benmelech
as noted, a sign of redemption, but also as a Sufi leader whose ascendancy was also a sign of redemption according to Halevi.73 The Advantage of Modern over Antiquated Arms Another prominent detail in Halevis commentary characterizes Ha-Reuvenis action: the decisive advantage of modern arms over more antiquated weapons in determining the outcome of a battle. Halevi attributes the victory of Crusaders over Muslims, and the success of the former in conquering Jerusalem, to the superiority of Crusader weapons over antiquated Muslim arms: And in the end [the Christians] aroused arrows and catapult stones and spear blades and daggers [against the Muslims] and shocked those whom they pressed and emptied from the land, who are Ishmael. And the nation of Ishmael chose to flee before Edom and they despised their weapons of war.74 Later, as well, Halevi attributes the victory of the Turks over the Persians to their use of firearms: And they brought with them many catapults and destructive weapons with fire and sulfur, and the king of Persia was with three hundred and fifty thousand cavalrymen. And the Turkish king camped close to him and launched all the catapults and the destructive weapons with fire together against the Persians and they turned their horses around to flee.75 Here, too, Halevis writings are the background to Ha-Reuvenis presentation of his mission to obtain advanced armaments. The Timing of Ha-Reuvenis Appearance and Action The date of Ha-Reuvenis appearance is connected to the messianic plan laid out by Halevi. Ha-Reuveni left Alexandria for Venice in Kislev 5284 (December 1523).76 In his mind, that year held great importance in the Jewish calendar. Ha-Reuveni appeared among the Jews and Christians as a representative of the Ten Tribes, met the Pope, and obtained his recommendation. Had it not been for delays on the part of the Portuguese ambassador in Rome, Ha-Reuveni would even have reached Portugal that year.77 The year 5284 had great importance in the second stage of the messianic course plotted by Halevi.78 Exactly what was supposed to happen in that year was not clear even to himself,79 but he raised the possibility that the messiah the son of Joseph will crown himself in the crown of delight to do battles for
73. Cases of Jews who disguised themselves as Muslims in order to travel more easily in a Muslim environment, especially in Africa, are mentioned in Abraham Halevis epistle on the Ten Tribes and on the Falashas. There is no mention of disguising oneself as a member of the Prophets family, but rather a description of the situation, and it is possible that Reuveni was also aware of it. See Beit Arieh, Iggeret miinyan hashevatim, 376. 74. Halevi, Perush nevuat hayeled, 38. 75. Ibid., 53. 76. Aescoly, Sippur 31 [Adler, Travellers, 268]. 77. On this delay, see ibid., 4849. 78. Halevi, Iggeret, 20. 79. See for example ibid., 3839.
52

the Lord, and he will awaken in the place where he awakens.80 He did state positively that the year was destined to play a central role in the messianic scenario: And since that year is the year of visitation and it is likely that some great arousal will be in the world, and miracles and wonders will be renewed, from which we will perceive and know that God has visited His people.81 Even after 5284, Halevi continued to believe that the events he had predicted had taken place, and he suggested that the activities of Martin Luther were part of its expression:
And behold recently trustworthy Jews from Germany and Bohemia have come to Jerusalem, and both writings from here and from there, indicate and testify to the matter of a man who arose in those countries whose name is Martin Luther; he is a man whose fame reaches every country. In the year 5280 [1520] he began to differ with the religion of the uncircumcised, and to teach them that their ancestors inherited a lie and vanity, and there is nothing useful in them. And it can be understood from their words that last year, that is 5284 (1524), he revealed things from within it and showed publicly the falsity of their belief, for your banner is a lie, and he showed himself to be against the hanged man.82
It is clear that the time Reuveni chose to set the messianic process in motion by action in the arena of history was not coincidental, for it derived from knowledge and dependency on the central place of that date in Abraham Halevis messianic model. H A -R EUVENI S H OSTS
IN I TALY
One cannot assume that Halevi was aware of his connections to Ha-Reuveni. He did indeed hear about the appearance of the Jewish ambassador in Rome and about his activities there and in Portugal, but he assumed the man in question was an Ethiopian Jew.83 Nevertheless, it is interesting to discover that throughout his sojourn in Italy, Ha-Reuvenis main supporters and the people with whom he was in close contact also maintained contacts with Abraham Halevi. During Ha-Reuvenis very first encounter with the Jews of Italy, the leaders of the Jewish community of Venice refused to support him financially. The man who did come to his assistance was Shimon ben Asher Meshulam,84 a scion of the well-known Venetian family of bankers.85 His father, Asher Meshulam,
80. Ibid., 38. 81. Robinson, Two Letters, 408. 82. Ibid. 83. Beit Arieh, Iggeret Miinyan Hashevatim, 376. 84. Aescoly, Sippur, 32 [Adler, Travellers, 26970]. 85. On the Meshulam family, see David Jacoby, New Evidence on Jewish Bankers in Venice and the Venetian Terraferma (c. 14501550), The Mediterranean and the Jews: Banking, Finance and International Trade (XVIXVIII Centuries), ed. Ariel Toaff and Simon Schwarzfuchs (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press 1989), 15977, and Daniel Carpi, Lindividuo e la collettivit: Saggi di
53
Moti Benmelech
corresponded with Halevi and was one of the two addressees of Megilat starim (The Scroll of Secrets), an epistle sent by Halevi in 1524, in which he explains his predictions and tells how he obtained his messianic knowledge.86 This epistle was very important from Halevis point of view, as he reveals details about his past as a converso, facts that had not been known. The title of this epistle implies its sensitive contents, which Halevi preferred not to reveal except to close associates. One of those men was Asher Meshulam. Ha-Reuvenis next stop was Pesaro, where he arrived at the beginning of the month of Adar (February 1524), after leaving Venice for Rome. In Pesaro, he stayed at the home of R. Moshe of Foligno.87 R. Moshes name is mentioned in an epistle sent by Rabbi Yisrael Ashkenazi from Jerusalem to R. Abraham of Perugia, in which he reports about the Ten Tribes and various signs that were seen in Jerusalem and grasped as having messianic significance.88 In this letter, to which was appended Abraham Halevis interpretation of Nevuat hayeled, we read: Your friend, the honorable rabbi Moshe of Foligno, may take pleasure in it and copy it if he wishes.89 Moshe of Foligno was thus interested in Halevis writings and message, and R. Yisrael Ashkenazi of Jerusalem even obtained Halevis authorization so that Moshe could copy his commentary on Nevuat hayeled. We then see that at the next stage, after leaving Venice, Ha-Reuveni was again assisted by the good offices of one of Halevis followers in Italy. His most outstanding patrons for the rest of his stay in Italy, the members of the da Pisa family, were also connected to Halevi.90 When Ha-Reuveni left Rome, at Purim 5285 (March 1525), Daniel of Pisa, who served as his interpreter and as an intermediary between him and the Pope, sent him to his cousin Yeh . iel. Ha-Reuveni stayed with Yeh . iel in Pisa until leaving for Portugal in the middle of the month of Tishri 5286 (October 1525). Yeh . iel of Pisa was involved to a
storia degli ebrei a Padova e nel Veneto nellet del Rinascimento (Florence: L.S. Olschki, 2002), 61110. 86. On Megilat starim, see David and Melammed, Megilat starim; Hacker, Rikah, and Benmelech, Anussei Portugal. On the economic aspects of the activities of Asher Meshulam and his family, see Brian Pullan, Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice (Oxford: Blackwell, 1971), 479 83. Ruth Lamdan suggested that Asher Meshulam was the addressee of Iggeret bnei hayeshiva (the epistle to members of the yeshiva), which Abraham Halevi wrote (see Ruth Lamdan, Moshe Basola h . ayav veyetsirato [Masters thesis, Tel Aviv University, 1983]), 11. If her conjecture is correct, it is possible that, in the wake of the epistle to members of the yeshiva, which was sent in 1521, a personal connection was made between Halevi and Asher Meshulam, which then found expression in Megilat hasetarim of 1524. 87. Aescoly, Sippur, 33 [Adler, Travellers, 270]. 88. Avraham David, Iggeret R. Israel Ashkenazi miYerushalayim leR. Avraham miPerusha, Alei Sefer 16 (1990): 121, and in the notes on lines 19091. 89. Yaari, Iggrot, 177. 90. On the members of this family, see David Kaufman, La famille de Pise, Revue des Etude Juives 31 (1895): 6273 and La famille de Yehiel de Pise, Revue des tudes Juives 26 (1893): 83 110, 22039.
54

considerable degree in Ha-Reuvenis mission to Portugal: He supported him financially, put him in contact with the Avrabanel family, and even arranged his voyage from Leghorn to Portugal.91 Yeh . iel himself was connected by marriage to the Meshulam family, as his wife, Diamenta, was the sister of Shimon Meshulam of Venice.92 However, in addition to his ties to the Meshulam family, Yeh . iel also corresponded with Abraham Halevi. In an epistle from the year 1528, dealing with rumors about the Ten Tribes, Halevi addresses an anonymous correspondent but mentions Megilat setarim, which I have already sent to the esteemed and fortunate sage your father-in-law.93 Hence the addressee of this epistle was the son-in-law of one of the two addressees of Megilat setarim, mentioned above, which was addressed to Asher Meshulam of Venice and to Mordecai of Modena. Mordecai of Modenas eldest son was nine years old in 1530. Thus it appears unlikely that two years earlier, when the epistle was sent, R. Mordecai would have had a son-in-law who corresponded with Abraham Halevi. We must assume instead that the epistle was addressed to the son-in-law of Asher Meshulam of Venice. As noted, one of his daughters was indeed married to Yeh . iel of Pisa. It is very probable that he was the son-in-law to whom Halevi sent the epistle in 1528. Although that epistle was sent a few years after Ha-Reuveni had left the home of Yeh . iel of Pisa, it is evidently addressed to someone well versed in Halevis writings, and it gives the impression of a long-standing connection.94 If Yeh . iel of Pisa is indeed the addressee of that epistle, he had direct contact with Abraham Halevi and deep familiarity with his works and messianic writings. All the prominent figures who assisted Ha-Reuveni in Italy with the Jerusalem kabbalist Abraham Halevi are thus connected. The correspondents of Halevi were most interested in messianism and in the progress of redemption among the Jews of Italy. They were also aware of the political, cultural, and religious occurrences and vicissitudes of their time, interpreting them as different stages in the messianic process. They would most likely have understood the arrival of a messenger from the lost tribes of Israel (i.e., Ha-Reuveni) as another piece in the messianic puzzle outlined in Abraham Halevis writings. Although the deep connection between Ha-Reuvenis mission and Halevis writings is clear, I must emphasize that Halevi was not aware of Ha-Reuvenis actions, and that Ha-Reuvenis interpretation of Halevis messianic interpretation was fundamentally erroneous. The extent to which Ha-Reuveni was directly or indirectly influenced by Halevi in person or by his writings is unclear, but there
91. See Aescoly, Sippur, 5260 [Adler, Travellers, 28084]. 92. Ibid., 53 [Adler, Travellers, 282]. 93. Beit Arieh, Iggeret, 373. In the body of the letter the word h . amif appears, but this should probably be emended to h . amiv (his [formal for your] father-in-law), both because of the content and also because later in the epistle the word h . amiv appears explicitly. See ibid., n. 1. The conjecture that this epistle was originally addressed to a rabbi named H . amav, H . amif, or H . amui, which was advanced by Beit Arieh, seems groundless, since the original of Megilat setarim has been found, and in it are the names of the addressees. 94. Ibid., 377.
55
Moti Benmelech
can be no doubt that Halevi, who opposed any intervention in the messianic process, was uninterested in action of the kind initiated by Ha-Reuveni. W HO WAS D AVID H A -R EUVENI ? In light of my conclusion about connections between Ha-Reuveni and Abraham Halevi, it is obvious that Ha-Reuveni must have come from a place where Halevis teachings and writings were known and influential. The main arena of Halevis activity was Jerusalem and the Land of Israel in general. There he strove to confirm the conclusions found in Meshare qitrin by means of astronomical findings,95 commentary on prophecies, and other sources. There he composed his commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Iggeret sod haegula, and his other writings, and also instituted vigils for study and prayer in order to alleviate the imminent end of days.96 Halevis writings also enjoyed extensive circulation in Italy. Halevi himself lived in Italy for a short time after leaving the Iberian Peninsula; he sent his epistles there, and they were copied and preserved.97 It is unlikely that Ha-Reuveni encountered Halevis teachings in Italy or that he had spent any significant time there before arriving disguised as the ambassador of the Lost Tribes. In his journal, he repeatedly states how impressed he was by the way of life of the Jews of Italy; in particular, he mentions the behavior, character, and education of the Jewish women.98 The Italian Jewish communities are the only ones Ha-Reuveni writes about in his journalhe hardly describes the Jews of Egypt and the Land of Israel. His journal gives the impression that this was his first exposure to a new way of life and a community. Moreover, if indeed he had lived in Italy for a significant amount of time, and his messianic conception had been formed there, it is unlikely that he would have risked being identified by someone in Italy. Hence, it is probable that Ha-Reuvenis acquaintance with the doctrine of Abraham Halevi originated in the Land of Israel. The detailed and precise descriptions in his journal of the places he visited in the Land of Israel support that assumption.99 Ha-Reuveni rarely describes the physical sites and places through
95. Malachi Beit Arieh and Moshe Idel, Maamaral haqets vehaetstagninut meet R. Avraham Zakut, Qiryat sefer 54 (1980): 175. 96. On this subject, see Robinson, Messianic Prayer Vigils in Jerusalem in the Early Sixteenth Century, 3242, and Idel, Al mishmarot umeshihiyut bi-Yerushalayim bameot XVXVI, 8394. Halevi composed and printed his book Meshare qitrin within the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire (in Seres and in Constantinople), but it appears that we must distinguish between this article and his commentary on Nevuat hayeled and the epistle on the secret of redemption. On this see above. Regarding the time of his arrival in the Land of Israel, see David, Letoldot h . akhamim biYerushalayim, 239. 97. See Beit Arieh and Scholem, introduction to Maamar meshare qitrin, 3842. 98. Regarding Ha-Reuvenis attitude toward the Jews of Italy, see Aescoly, Sippur, 43, 92 [Adler, Travellers, 278]. The strong impression that the Jewish women of Italy made on Ha-Reuveni is evident throughout his account of his sojourn in Italy. See ibid., 37, 38, 39, 52, 53, 57 [Adler, Travellers, 275, 28283]. About the role of women in Ha-Reuvenis diary see my forthcoming article Ha-ah . erot beinei ha-Ah . er, nashim be-yomano shel David Ha-Reuveni, Festschrift in Honor of Robert Bonfil, eds. M. Ben-Sasson, E. Baumgarten, A. Raz-Karkotzkin, and R. Weinstein (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute (forthcoming): 14764.
56

which he passed, except for places in the Land of Israel. His description of the Makhpela cave is consistent with its physical and archaeological state,100 and the description of the guards behavior and the atmosphere is similar to descriptions of other travelers of his time, including R. Ovadia of Bartanura101 or Meshulam of Voltera, who relates that Jewish women enter the cave disguised as Muslims, with veils over their faces so that they cannot be identified. Perhaps this account is the source behind Ha-Reuvenis story that he entered the cave disguised as a Muslim member of the Prophets family.102 The description of a visit to the Temple Mount, Ha-Reuvenis stay under the Dome of the Rock, and his travel to other sites in Jerusalem also mention features that appear in other local descriptions from that period: candles burning under the Dome of the Rock,103 a large building beneath the Temple Mount,104 and descriptions of burial caves on the Mount of Olives and of the Tomb of David on Mount Zion.105 Ha-Reuvenis choice of the Temple Mount as the place where various signs occurred to confirm his mission (the arrival of the emissaries of the seventy elders from the state of the Ten Tribes, the inclination of the crescent on the dome toward the east twice[!], and other events that he does not list in detail, including actions he was ordered to do by the seventy elders)106 is also not coincidental. In those years, descriptions of signs, especially omens appearing on the Temple Mount, occupy a central place in epistles sent from the Land of Israel to Italy. It is difficult to determine with certainty whether Ha-Reuveni actually visited those places or if he based his descriptions on other accounts. It is also difficult to know whether the sources we have mentioned reached Ha-Reuvenis eyes. We must remember that the epistles in which these descriptions appear were sent to and circulated in Italy, and, as I have argued, Ha-Reuveni did not live in Italy for a significant time. It is likely that his acquaintance with these places took place in the Land of Israel and not abroad. A picture emerges of fundamental internalization of traditions from the Land of Israel and of the mood there, especially regarding holy places in the early sixteenth century. These were the traditions and sentiments to which anyone who lived in Israel at that time was certainly exposed.
99. Ibid., 2228 [Adler, Travellers, 25968]. 100. Regarding the inner structure of the Makhpela Cave and study of the Cave and its surroundings, see Oded Avisar (ed.), Sefer H . evron (Jerusalem: Keter, 1978): 26595. 101. Yaari, Iggrot, 126. 102. Eisenstein, Otsar masaot, 98. 103. Aescoly, Sippur, 25 [Adler, Travellers, 26364]. Meshulam of Voltera also mentions the candles. See Eisenstein, Otsar masaot, 200. 104. Aescoly, Sippur, 26. R. Ovadia of Bartenura also mentions such a building. See Eisenstein, Otsar masaot, 119. 105. Aescoly, Sippur, 2627 [Adler, Travellers, 265]. Bartenura also tells about two caves on the Mount of Olives (Yaari, Iggrot, 135). Meshulam of Voltera (Eisenstein, Otsar masaot, 100101) and Moshe Basola (in Avraham Yaari, Masaot Erets Yisrael [Tel Aviv: Gazit, 1946]: 145); both describe the Tomb of David. 106. Aescoly, Sippur, 2527 [Adler, Travellers, 265].
57
Moti Benmelech
Ha-Reuvenis awareness of European politics, and the fact that he was capable of presenting himself as an emissary from a distant land in an epoch of discoveries and of encounters with remote lands and cultures, shows his acquaintance with events in Europe. He also names places in the Arabian Peninsula and East Africa, claiming to have visited them. It is not clear where Ha-Reuveni acquired this extensive knowledge of geography and of geopolitics. However, Halevis epistles also contain considerable historical, political, and geographical information, and one gets the impression that despite the physical marginality of Jerusalem at that time, a good deal of rather detailed and precise information about events in the worldin Europe and the Orientreached it, and was available to Abraham Halevis circle.107 Many scholars have endeavored to discover, on the basis of the place names mentioned by Ha-Reuveni, his country of origin and geographical route. However, no clear and unequivocal answers to these questions have emerged.108 It seems to me that this lack of clarity derives from the fact that Ha-Reuveni never made such a voyage at all. Rather, he constructed a route based on information that reached Jerusalem, expressed in Halevis writings. Ha-Reuveni strove to construct a logical route for himself based on the partial geographical information at his disposal, and this effort has misled modern scholars in their effort to turn an imaginary route, based on partial and fragmentary information, into a route based on physical and geographical reality. One indication that could shed light on Ha-Reuvenis origins or at least on his cultural milieu is found in an anomalous halakhic detail mentioned in his journal. He claims that while he was in Portugal he bought a Muslim slave woman from a converso to help his servants in the housework. Immediately after buying her, Ha-Reuveni converted her to Judaism, apparently so that he could eat the food she cooked without concern that it was cooked by a non-Jew. Here is Ha-Reuvenis description of the slave womans conversion:
I sent Shlomo Cohen the elder and two of my servants to the river with the slave woman, and the elder Shlomo brought the slave woman into the water and washed her and completely immersed her in the water three times. After they returned to the house I asked them to cut her nails and a little of the hair on her head.109
In addition to the slave womans willingness to convert (mentioned a few lines before this passage) and her immersion in the river, the cutting of her hair and
107. An indication of the pace of the transfer of information can be gleaned from the letter of David min-Haadumim (Yaari, Iggrot, 186) dated March 1535, in which he recounts that three months previously the rumor had reached Tripoli about the death of Pope Clement VII. Clement died in late September 1534, and news of his death reached Tripoli at the end of December that year, giving us an idea about the content of the information and also about the length of time that it took to arrive. 108. See Aescoli, Sippur, 6485; Samuel Hillelson, David Reubeni an Early Visitor to Sennar, Sudan Notes and Records XVI (1933): 5566. 109. Aescoly, Sippur, 74. See also the description as it appears on p. 71.
58

fingernails is mentioned as part of the process of conversion. Since these things were done after the immersion, they were not intended to prevent blocking of her bodys contact with the water. Rather they are an act with independent significance in the process of conversion.110 One might claim that this was an error or confusion in the order of writing. However, the custom of cutting a converts nails and hair was customary not in cases of conversion, but in those of repentance of converted Jews to Judaism.111 Although the origins of this custom were in medieval Ashkenazi,112 it was practiced in southern France and appears in the writings of Sephardic scholars in early fourteenth century.113 Evidence that it was customary in the Iberian Peninsula appears in testimony before an Inquisition tribunal in Huesca, from 1489. It was argued that thirty years earlier the Jews had held a conversion ceremony, and then it was the custom of the Jews in accepting converts to remove signs of Christianity from the convert by immersion and by cutting the nails, and by rubbing the forehead of the convert at the place where the baptismal chrism touched it.114 Jews denied the existence of this custom, but it seems that the acts that the Christians interpreted as efforts to erase signs of Christianity were the cutting of fingernails and hair, and it is likely that, despite denials, this custom was observed in Spain in the fifteenth century with conversos returning to Judaism. Thus it appears that Ha-Reuveni lived in a milieu in which conversos returning to Judaism underwent ceremonies of this kind (that is to say, a Sephardic milieu) and that he interpreted these acts as part of conversion and so applied them when he wanted to relate the conversion of the slave woman. Ha-Reuvenis conception of the ceremonies for the return of conversos to Judaism is similar to his reading of Halevis writings. In both cases Ha-Reuveni shows himself to be familiar with small details but does not understand their broad context, and as a result he translates them into acts that were not part of the original intention. Evidence that Ha-Reuveni was a Sephardic Jew has already been put forward by Avraham Shalom Yehuda through an analysis of Ha-Reuvenis
110. This custom, as part of the conversion ceremony, appears in the Tur yore dea sig. 278; and see Bayit h . adash and Beit Yosef there; see also Shulh . an arukh Yore dea sig. 278. Nevertheless, there is almost no reference to this custom in the responsa literature, and it is not part of the conversion ceremony as practiced today or in the past. 111. This custom is based on a homily presented in the name of R. Moshe Hadarshan, according to which anyone who had committed idol worship was required to be shaved as though he were a leper. See Rashis commentary on Numbers 8:7 and the comment of Bayit h . adash in Tur, yore dea sig. 278. 112. On the medieval Ashkenazi attitude to converts returning to Judaism see Jacob Katz, Af al pi sheh . ata Yisrael hu, Tarbitz 27 (1958): 20317, and see the recent discussion of Ephraim Kanarfogel, Returning to the Jewish Community in Medieval Ashkenaz: History and Halakhah, in Turim: Studies in Jewish History and Literature Presented to Dr. Bernard Lander, ed. Michael Shmidman (New York: Touro College Press, 2007), 1:6997. 113. See Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi, The Inquisition and the Jews of France in the Time of Bernard Gui, Harvard Theological Review 63 (1970): 31776; Joseph Shatzmiller, Converts and Judaizers in the Early Fourteenth Century, Harvard Theological Review 74 (1981): 6377. 114. Yitzhak Baer, Hatenua hameshih . ion 5 (1933): . it biSefarad bitequfat hagerush, Maasaf Z 7273 and see the source on p. 73, n. 1.
59
Moti Benmelech
language.115 These conclusions are consistent with the information mentioned about Ha-Reuvenis familiarity with life in the Land of Israel, that was in those years a focus of attraction for conversos who wished to return to open Jewish life.116 We may thus conclude that Ha-Reuveni lived in the Land of Israel close to the Sephardic community, where Marranos who returned to Judaism would settle. C ONCLUSION Our discussion of Ha-Reuvenis identity and the goals of his mission in disguise permits us to present him within a broader historical perspective of Jewish messianic expectations and activities in the first third of the sixteenth century. This discussion reveals the full extent of the influence of the figure of the Jerusalem kabbalist and enthusiastic messianic propagandist Abraham Halevi, whose intense messianic propaganda was influential and reverberated extensively among the Jews of Italy. I have presented Ha-Reuveni as the product of the messianic pressure cooker created by Halevi. The tension between the demand for passivity and the pressure to refrain from intervening in the messianic process led to the formation of a new kind of messianic action. According to this model, of which Ha-Reuveni is the most prominent, though not the only example, messianic action focuses upon the creation of a historical situation (for example, complications arising from a Portuguese military debacle on the Arabian Peninsula near Jeddah), which was meant to be the background for the messianic activity itself. The central innovation in this model is the conception of the historical and political situation as the arena for messianic drama and the focusing of messianic activity on this arena in particular, so that there would be no forbidden (magical, mystical, or metaphysical) intervention in the messianic process itself but only in its background. This new model can be the basis for a discussion of Jewish selfconsciousness and self-conception about the place of the Jewish people in history and their ability to shape and influence historical processes and thus become an active and formative agent in history, not merely await developments shaped by external factors. This new conception had its origins in the sharp and rapid changes and crises that affected European society at that time in the areas of religion, politics, society, economics, and geography. Moti Benmelech Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem, Israel
115. Yehuda, David Ha-Reuveni, motsao, 60614. 116. On this see Avraham David, Tsefat kemerkaz leyeshivat anusim bameah hatet-zayin, in H . evrah u-kehila, ed. Avraham Hayim (Jerusalem: Misgav Yerushalayim, 1991), 183204.
60

History Politics and Messianism David

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

History Politics and Messianism David

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

AJS Review 35:1 (April 2011), 3560 Association for Jewish Studies 2011

H ISTORY, P OLITICS , AND M ESSIANISM : D AVID H A -R EUVENI S O RIGIN AND M ISSION

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

History, Politics, and Messianism

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi