Kalonymous ben Kalonymous, an important source of Jewish history in Southern France. |
R. YITZCHAK OF MANOSQUE - ‘FRENCH, BUT CHARMING’:
INTRODUCTION:
As of the time of this writing, a Google search for Rabbi
Yitzchak haCohen of Manosque[1]
yields no meaningful results. The Jewish Encyclopedia has a few lines basically saying that not much is known about R. Yitzchak haCohen:
In this article, in an attempt to discover more about this man was, I have drawn extensively from the research of Professor Joseph Shatzmiller, who specialises in medieval European-Jewish history.[2]
In this article, in an attempt to discover more about this man was, I have drawn extensively from the research of Professor Joseph Shatzmiller, who specialises in medieval European-Jewish history.[2]
R. Yitzchak haCohen was active around the early 14th-century,
in Manosque, a town in south-eastern France. The actual town of Manosque was nondescript and described
by Kalonymous ben Kalonymous[3]
as “a dead end and visitors only come by once in a blue moon.”
However, Manosque was valuable historically as it housed
some of the most important collections of records in France. These include
municipal records and court documents. Although at the time there were only
about 200 Jews out of a general population of 3 500, the Jews are
referenced frequently. This indicates their degree of prominence in the town.
R. Yitzchak haCohen, in particular, is mentioned regularly in these records.
Professor Shatzmiller writes:
“If we add to these records,
especially those dealing with cases of litigation against him, the Hebrew
material relating to R. Isaac, which is considerable, a rich and colourful
picture emerges, which may well afford the best reconstruction of any rabbinic
career of this period.”
Thus, despite the scarcity of material on the internet, there
is probably more information about the life of R. Yitzchak of Manosque than any
other rabbi of that time. This is due not only to his name occurring in various
responsa literature and other writings of the rabbis, but also because no other
town kept such precise records as those found in the archives of Manosque.
In the municipal
documents, R. Yitzchak is referred to as Magister Isaac, indicating he is
an important and leading figure.
[It is interesting that the Latin word Magister
was sometimes translated in England as Rabbi or Rav. Thus there
are records describing Christian clergy as for example Rav Hugh of
London, Archdeacon of Colchester.]
R. Yitzchak is sometimes called ‘Erbi’, which may be
the way bureaucrats recorded the word ‘rabbi’. One of his son’s names is
Amadeus (this may or may not refer to his son Rabbeinu Peretz). The records
show that R. Yitzchak mediated in communal matters, adjudicated in arbitration
and was sometimes also the target of such activity.
THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF HIS STUDENT:
Shatzmiller shows how, according to Kalonymous ben
Kalonymous, R. Yitzchak ran a large Talmudic academy in Manosque, one of the
few such institutions in Provence (Southern France) at that time. In a
responsum (Teshuva)[4]
of Rashba (R. Shlomo ben Aderet 1235- 1310) from Barcelona, reference is made
to R. Yitzchak standing in front of his Talmudic academy in Manosque with his
students ‘twenty-two in number’[5]
holding a Torah scroll while excommunicating one of his students, apparently
for spreading some rumour:
“On behalf of God and on your
behalfs I ban, excommunicate and anathematize that man...even though he is one
of my pupils...
And they all responded with
Amen and said: it is truly so, our Rabbi, we agree with you, and let the man
who spread the rumour be anathematized.”
AROUSING THE IRE OF THE CIVIL AUTHORITIES:
The non-Jewish authorities were not always pleased with Magister
Isaac and spoke deridingly about his assumption that he had control of the
judicial power of the town. The records also show an abundance of incidents
which indicate a breakdown in the relationships between R. Yitzchak and his
community.
IN DEFENCE OF R. YITZCHAK:
R. Yitzchak ben Mordechai Kimchi wrote in defence of the
honour of R. Yitzchak of Manosque:
“Behold, his fame has been
spreading for some years now in most parts of this region and we, all of us,
must not detract from the honour due to him even by the breadth of a hair.
Even if he should declare the
clean unclean and the unclean clean, it is our duty to be kind to him and to
find mitigating circumstances for his actions to the best of our ability.”[6]
Kalonymous ben Kalonymous writes of R. Yitzchak: ‘Tzarfati
hu, ve’ish chamudot’[7],
‘he is French and charming’ – which could also be read ‘he is French but
charming’, considering the general hostility towards the (northern) French,
displayed by the inhabitants of Provence (in the south).
THE CONFLICT WITH GERSONIDES:
Shatzmiller is quick to point out that R. Yitzchak was not
admired by all and that, in fact, he was quite a controversial rabbi. There
were some who wished him ill. Some of his enemies were even rabbis.
R. Yitzchak got embroiled in a conflict with the famous rabbi,
philosopher and astronomer Gersonides (R. Levi ben Gershom 1288-1342). This
incident was recorded, once more, by R. Yitzchak ben Mordechai Kimchi.
The case involved a woman who had received a questionable get
(bill of divorce) and wanted to marry again. Gersonides came head to
head with R. Yitzchak as to the ruling in this case, and didn’t mince his words
in insulting him. R. Kimchi again comes to the defence of R. Yitzchak and writes
to Gersonides:
“You have gone too far...with
your insinuations against the great Rabbi...we must treat his respectfully.”
THE CHAOS AT A CIRCUMCISION OF THE CHILD OF AN
EXCOMMUNICATED MEMBER OF THE CONGREGATION:
Shatzmiller explains that not only did R. Yitzchak
excommunicate his student, but there are references to many other of his bans
of excommunication as well. One such case concerned a certain Manosque Jew by
the name of Leonetus, who had also been excommunicated by R. Yitzchak.
It seems
that members of the congregation would not attend the circumcision of Leonetus’
son, under the impression that R. Yitzchak had forbidden them from so doing.
When challenged on this issue, R. Yitzchak clarified his position that people
should attend the ceremony. But the story doesn’t end there.
Both Leonetus and his brother (from a different father) Jacob
had, for reasons that we do not know, been placed under a ban. Jacob then took
R. Yitzchak to the court of the Bishop of the nearby town of Sisteron[8].
The court case was very serious. It involved a charge of culpability
against R. Yitzchak regarding the circumcision of the baby of Jacob’s brother,
Leonetus, who had died as a result of the procedure. This, despite
the fact that R. Yitzchak had apparently not even attended the ceremony, which
was performed by one Mosse Anglicus, whose lack of expertise resulted in a
fatal haemorrhage.
The non-Jewish authorities back at Manosque felt aggrieved
that Jacob had overridden their jurisdiction (which was guarded very dearly) by
going out of town, and they, in turn, brought Jacob to court back in Manosque.
But the case gets even
more complicated because in Manosque the practice was that the doctor of the
town, Dr Banafos - who happened to be Leonetus’ father - usually performed all the
circumcisions.
However, on this
occasion, Dr Bonafos refused to perform the circumcision on his own grandson because
of the conflict between R. Yitzchak and his son, Leonetus! (Probably out of loyalty
to the rabbi.)
And Vitalis, the tailor, testified that R. Yitzchak refused
to attend the ceremony until and unless:
“...the Magister [R. Yitzchak][9]
is first treated with the respect which is due to him.”
Then later, when Jacob was excommunicated apparently for the
second time, he declared:
“...it would have been more
correct to excommunicate the Magister for having caused the death of the
child.”
A further complication ensued after R. Yitzchak
excommunicated Jacob - because in Southern France at that time, the local laws
prohibited any rabbi from imposing a ban of excommunication on any individual
unless the authorities were first consulted.
There was a French ordinance in place which instructed that:
“No sage should use the power
of excommunication to protect his own honour.”
R. Yitzchak did not consult the authorities in the case of
Jacob. When taken to task, he simply denied that it was he who had imposed the
ban but claimed it was another Magister entirely, who had been confused with
him. The court accepted his defence.
THE CONFLICT WITH R. BARUCH:
Shatzmiller points out that another recorded conflict
concerns a certain rabbi about whom not much is known other than that his name
is R. Baruch from nearby Digne[10]. And clearly this R. Baruch was highly
respected because according to the sages of Avignon:
“His wisdom and piety were
widely known, and the greatness of our teacher, Rabbi Baruch, was apparent to
all and celebrated even in the most remote regions.”
It appears that at some stage R. Baruch may even have been
R. Yitzchak’s teacher. Nevertheless, R. Yitzchak refers to R. Baruch as being
aggressive and insulting, claiming R. Baruch had called him:
“...a fool, a wicked man, an
ignoramus and an obdurate sinner.”
R. Yitzchak responded:
“...if I am obdurate, you are
obdurate as well”
R. Baruch looked towards the rabbis of (northern) France to
support him in the ensuing conflict and they obliged by placing R. Yitzchak
under excommunication!
R. Yitzchak then writes a public apology to R. Baruch but he
doesn’t spare the rabbis who excommunicated him:
“I would like...to declare now
that I cannot believe any of the sages in France to have accused or censured
me...However, if any one of them should have done so in error...if he has made
improper remarks about me...or if he has censured, accused or pronounced the
ban against me, I hereby refute him and moreover declare that his censure,
accusation or ban apply to none other than himself...”
Thus R. Yitzchak effectively placed those rabbis who had
excommunicated him, under ex-communication.
Then R. Baruch placed an additional ban of excommunication
on R. Yitzchak because he:
“...repudiated the authority
of the sages.”
And, of course, R. Yitzchak reacted in kind against R.
Baruch by placing him in under ban of ex-communication!
Shatzmiller describes the chaotic situation as follows:
“Isaac, who knew that he could
not expect sympathy from the rabbis of [northern][11]
France, now turned to his colleagues in southern France, and they - judging by
the records in our possession today – did not hesitate to side with him.”
This again attests to the great divide between the north and
the south of France. [See previous
post.]
THE PAPER TRAIL STOPS ABRUPTLY IN 1316:
After 1316, R. Yitzchak of Manosque disappears from his
frequent mentions in the public records of the town and is never mentioned
again. It seems that he must have left Manosque at around that time. During the
following two decades the local synagogue has some mentions of various scandals
- such as the quarrel which broke out on Yom Kippur of 1338, regarding the
correct manner in which to conduct the service. At that stage a certain
Magister Vitalis was at the reigns of the community.[12]
Professor Joseph Shatzmiller leaves us with a tantalizing
piece of information: There is so much more knowledge and information like this
still waiting to be discovered in the local archives of these regions...
A PARALLEL CULTURE OF EXCOMMUNICATIONS:
Fascinatingly, Shatzmiller shows that during that same
period, and also in Provence in southern France, a register of Christian
excommunications has survived from the diocese of Riez.[13]
It too contains references to parallel and repetitive bans and counter-bans.
This seems to have been par for the course in those times.
ANALYSIS:
What is immediately apparent is that the issuing of multiple
bans and counter-bans within the Jewish community was out of control. In most
of these instances, it appears that the bans were initiated because of personal
attacks on the dignity, prestige and honour of the individual rabbis. One would
have imagined that resorting to the severity of bans of excommunication would
have been applied to far more fundamental issues that threatened the integrity
of the tradition rather than to such relatively petty matters.
Was France different, or should one wonder about the
motivation for similar bans which have taken place throughout our history, and
continue to some extent to the present day?
[For more on the allied concept of the censoring and banning
of books see Hey
Teacher Leave the Text Alone.]
[See The
Heresy of Nosson Slifkin.]
[See a counter-ban by Chassidim against the Mitnagdim according to the Cherson Letters.]
[See a counter-ban by Chassidim against the Mitnagdim according to the Cherson Letters.]
[2]
Joseph Shatzmiller, Rabbi Isaac Ha-Cohen of Manosque and His Son Rabbi
Peretz: The Rabbinate and its Professionalization in the Fourteenth Century.
[3]
Kalonymous ben Kalonymous, also known as Maestro Calo (1286- after 1328), was a
French writer, philosopher and translator. He was a student of Abba Mari.
[4]
Rashba Responsum no. 460.
[5]
Apparently, this was considered by Kalonymous ben Kalonymous to be a ‘large’
number of students for a Talmudic academy.
[6] S.
Schwartzfuchs, ‘An Ordinance from 1313’ (Hebrew), in Bar Ilan vols. 4-5 (1967)
pp. 209-10. Translation Shatzmiller.
[7]See
The Scroll of the Minor Apology.
[9]
Parenthesis mine. Translation Shatzmiller.
[11]
Parenthesis mine.
[12]
R. Yitzchak left a son,
Rabbeinu Peretz, probably one of the first recorded professional rabbis (i.e.,
a rabbi to be paid for his professional services). This information is
preserved in letters from the Ran (R. Nissim of Gerona, 1320-1376) who urged
the communities of Catalonia and Aragon to combine with Barcelona to pay the
salary of Rabbeinu Peretz. This allowed Rabbeinu Peretz to serve the Barcelona
community with a five-year contract with an annual salary of one thousand ‘silver’
(croats). After the first year, Rabbeinu Peretz realized that his salary
was insufficient, and he considered moving to Toledo where he would be better
paid. The Ran intervened again, and tied to rally support from other
communities to get Rabbeinu Peretz to stay on in Barcelona with an increased
salary.
No comments:
Post a Comment