history, politics, and messianism: david ha-reuveni’s origin and mission by moti benmelech

8/11/2019 HISTORY, POLITICS, AND MESSIANISM: DAVID HA-REUVENIS ORIGIN AND MISSION by Moti Benmelech

1/26


2/26

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.4Never-

theless, 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

THE STATE OF SCHOLARSHIP

This strange but fascinating episode, a mixture of fantasy and reality, cap-

tured the imaginations of writers, poets, and dramatists, and also aroused consider-able 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 atti-

tude 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 fromPortugal 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 Cler-

mont 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 incom-

plete 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.


3/26

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 facsi-

mile 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 ofthis 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 andChronological Notes (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1893), 2:xiixiii. Neubauer published the full manu-script 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 publishedby Eduard Biberfeld,Der Reisebericht des David Reubeni; Eine Beitrag zur Geschichte dex XVI Jahr-hunderts(PhD diss., Universitt Leipzig, 1892). A second Hebrew edition was published by AvrahamCahana,Sippur nesiat David Ha-Reuveni (Warsaw: Di Welt, 1922). A scholarly edition with a com-

prehensive 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 withoutrevision 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,Hatequfa34

35 (1950): 599625. This opinion was also espoused in Yitzhak Baers review of Aescolys edition,

Qiryat sefer17 (1940): 312.

13. Azriel Shoh. at, Lefarashat David Ha-Reuveni, Zion 35 (1970): 96116. Zvi Ben-dorBenite,The Ten Lost Tribes: A World History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 11333.14. Moshe David Cassuto, Mi haya David Ha-Reuveni,Tarbiz32 (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 back-

ground 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.


4/26

on Ha-Reuveni, and will show how his misunderstanding of Halevis intentions

brought on a new messianic concept.

HA-REUVENIS PURPOSE

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 hismission, his reasons for coming to Rome, and his plans for future action. None-

theless, 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 thathe 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 com-

promise 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 audi-

ence 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, inCharles 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.


5/26

leave Rome and return to Viterbo, he needed a different interpreter for his audi-

ences 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 dis-

cussions 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 docu-

ment 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 differentlight:

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 describingHa-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


6/26

Farrissol, though based on hearsay, claims that the Pope agreed to send

Ha-Reuveniwith 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 rec-

ommendation 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 rec-

ommended 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 wishto 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 initiat-

ive. 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 forgotabout 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, whichhe 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: Clem-

entis 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].


7/26

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?

HA-REUVENIS PLAN AND HIS MESSIANIC CONCEPT

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 InIggeret orh. otolam, Farrissol men-tions 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 andbeyond 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 criteriaproposed 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 ofSippur David Ha-Reuven, by Aharon Zeev Aescoly,Kiryat Sefer17(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.


8/26

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 wroteMeshare qitrin (Steeping of the Incense), a book on calculating the end of daysand 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 onNevuat hayeled(The Prophecy of the Child), acollection 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 commen-tary, 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 sentIggeret sod hageula(Epistle on the Secretof Redemption) to the leaders of Italian communities, producing a long and com-

prehensive 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 Uni-versity, 1980) andMessianic Prayer Vigils in Jerusalem in the Early Sixteenth Century,Jewish Quar-terly Review 72 (1981): 3242; Gershom Scholem and Malachi Beit Arieh, introduction to Maamarmeshare qitrin (Jerusalem: Beit ha-sfarim ha-leumi ve-hauniversitai, 1978) [Hebrew]; Moshe Idel,Al mishmarot umeshih. iyut biYerushalayim bameot 1617, Shalem 5 (1987): 8394; AvrahamDavid, Letoldot ha h. amim biyerushalayim bamea hashesh esre,Shalem5 (1987): 23643.

40. On his sojourn in Portugal, see Moti Benmelech, Anusei Portugal be-reshit ha-mea ha-16

leorMegilat-starimle-Rabbi Abraham Halevi,Zion 73 (2008): 299310.41. OnNevuat hayeled, see Yoseph Dan, Lequtot lemaaseNevuat hayeled,Shalem1 (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 com-

mentary on Nevuat hayeled. Meshare qitrin was also well known at that time in Italy, as we seefrom 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.], EretsZion 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 con-

taining information about a special stone upon which signs of redemption were engraved (see Avraham


9/26

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 par-

ticipated 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 mes-

sianic 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 blueprintaccording to which he built his mes-

sianic mission.

In his commentary onNevuat hayeled, Halevi twice mentions events con-nected 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 thetower 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 yad4 [1888]: 34). Theseepistles 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 benEliezer 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 eretsIsrael (Tel Aviv: Gazit, 1943), 16066; Malachi Beit-Aryeh, Iggeret meinyan aseret hasehvatimmeet R Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi hamekubal mishnat 1528, Kobez al yad6 (1966): 37178;Avraham David, Iggeret Yerushalmit mereshit hashilton haothmani beeretz Israel,inPrakim betol-dot Yerushalayim bereshit ha-tkufa ha-othmanit, ed. Amnon Cohen (Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi, 1979),3960; Avraham David and Uri Melammed, Megilat starimle-Abraham ben Eliezer Halevi: Iggeretmeshih. 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.


10/26

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 geo-

graphical 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 conquerEgypt, 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 theirfortune 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 al10 milin mith. arev [the edge of the sea will dry out; at ten miles it will bedestroyed], 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 Ish-

maelites at the edge of the seaand 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.


11/26

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 Portu-

guese 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 tothem.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 forten 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 goodacquaintance 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 mer-

chant 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.


12/26

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 occupiedSocotra 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 distri-

bution in Europe by Italian merchants. Thus, Jeddah became a center of Asiancommerce 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 taforeasand 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, 46

49. On the consequences of the Portuguese pen-etration 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: MuslimCommerce and Culture in the Indian Ocean (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1995), 7287. From the 1540son, 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 RedSea, 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

CamessLusiads, 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: Universityof 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


13/26

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 Feb-

ruary 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 toNevuat hayeled, he indicated, once again, his knowl-edge 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 possiblePortuguese 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 placeaccording to this conception is in historical and geopolitical reality, and the

approach or advancement of redemption will be accomplished by creating a his-

torical 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 historicalevents 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; CharlesRaymond Beazley, The Colonial Empire of the Portuguese to the Death of Albuquerque, Trans-actions of the Royal Historical Society, N.S. 8 (1894): 122.

56. Duarte Barbosa,A Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar(London: HakluytSociety, 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 SocietyDescription of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar, ibid., not numbered.

57. Aescoly,Hatenuot, 371.


14/26

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. DellaReina, a Spanish kabbalist and magician, tried to expedite the redemption by

magical means and is said to have almost succeeded. According to Haveli, his una-

voidable 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 conver-

sions in Portugal took place. Della Reinas attempt is the most prominent example

of the dangers encountered when magical action is applied to advance redemp-

tion.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, theylack 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 inten-sified 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 mes-

sianic 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, deriv-

ing from a blurring of the differences between Halevis various works. His book,

Meshare qitrin, is primarily theoretical. As an exegetical work in the kabbalisticmanner, 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 mes-

sianic conclusions were the purpose of the book. However, the work is theoretical.

The commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Iggeret sod hageula, and Halevisother epistles belongs to a different genre. Halevis conclusions in Meshareqitrin 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 euro-

pischen Expansion des 16. Jahrhunderts?inAn 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.


15/26

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 ofNevuathayeledas a suggestion, not as a final answer.63 In this respect, one can perhapsdistinguish between the character of Halevis activity while he was living in

Greece and Turkey, where he composed and printed Meshare qitrin, which wasfundamentally 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 andtheIggeret sod hageula did not just analyze historical events and consider themas 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.

ABRAHAM HALEVIS INFLUENCE ON HA-REUVENI

Up to this point, I have presented the influence of Abraham Halevis writ-

ings 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 latters description of stages of the messianic process.

As I have pointed out, Halevi connected Jeddah and the tribe of Gad, claim-

ing 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 Gadya-

62. 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. Regard-

ing 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.


16/26

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 redeemsome 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 redemp-tion 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 herald-

ing 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 com-

posed, 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, andSippur, 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


17/26

Pretending to be a Member of the Prophets Family

Halevis writings contain two other characteristics related to Ha-Reuvenis

actions. In his commentary onNevuat hayeled, Halevi devoted a long discussionto splits within Islam and the differences between Sunnis and Shiites, the latter of

whom he callsshufiza (Sufis).70 Halevi claims that in 5245 [1485] a new leaderwas 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 achieve-ments. 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 thatthe 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 theProphet. 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.ayatkaneh[Amsterdam: Uri Feibesh, 1660], 5v). It is difficult to assume that Molkho would have calledHa-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 thetribe 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 Safa-

viya, a mystical Sufi order popular in northwestern Iran. Indeed, Halevi refers to them as Shiites and

Sufis. The nameShufiza might be a confusion of the original Safavid or Safaviya. Ismail I, the firstSafavid Shah of Iran, was born in 1487, close enough to 1485; Halevi noted this as the birth year ofa 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, TheSafavid Period, in The Timurid and Safavid Periods; The Cambridge History of Iran, ed. PeterJackson 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.


18/26

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 ofCrusaders 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 fireand sulfur, and the king of Persia was with three hundred and fifty thousand caval-

rymen. 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 messianiccourse 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 TenTribes 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,Sippur31 [Adler,Travellers, 268].77. On this delay, see ibid., 4849.

78. Halevi, Iggeret, 20.

79. See for example ibid., 3839.


19/26

the Lord, and he will awaken in the place where he awakens.80 He did state posi-

tively 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 pub-

licly 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 messianicmodel.

HA-REUVENIS HOSTS IN ITALY

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 hissojourn 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 andInternational 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


20/26

corresponded with Halevi and was one of the two addressees ofMegilat 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 ofNevuat hayeled, we

read:

Your friend, the honorable rabbi Moshe of Foligno, may take pleasure init 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 Nevuathayeled. We then see that at the next stage, after leaving Venice, Ha-Reuveniwas 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 asan 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, andBenmelech, 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), 47983. Ruth Lamdan suggested that Asher Meshulam was the addressee of Iggeret bnei hayeshiva (theepistle to members of the yeshiva), which Abraham Halevi wrote (see Ruth Lamdan, Moshe Basolah. 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 personalconnection was made between Halevi and Asher Meshulam, which then found expression inMegilathasetarimof 1524.

87. Aescoly,Sippur, 33 [Adler,Travellers, 270].88. Avraham David, Iggeret R. Israel Ashkenazi miYerushalayim leR. Avraham miPerusha,

Alei Sefer16 (1990): 121, and in the notes on lines 19091.89. Yaari, Iggrot,177.

90. On the members of this family, see David Kaufman, La famillede Pise,Revue des EtudeJuives31 (1895): 6273 and La famille de Yehiel de Pise,Revue des tudes Juives 26(1893): 83

110, 22039.


21/26

considerable degree in Ha-Reuvenis mission to Portugal: He supported him finan-

cially, 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 sageyour 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 wasaddressed 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 assumeinstead 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 Jerusa-

lem 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 occur-

rences 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 wordh. amifappears, but this should

probably be emended toh. amiv(his [formal foryour] father-in-law), both because of the content andalso because later in the epistle the word h. amivappears explicitly. See ibid., n. 1. The conjecture thatthis 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 ofMegilat setarimhas been found, and in it are thenames of the addressees.

94. Ibid., 377.


22/26

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.

WHO WAS DAVID HA-REUVENI?

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 mainarena of Halevis activity was Jerusalem and the Land of Israel in general.

There he strove to confirm the conclusions found in Meshare qitrin by meansof astronomical findings,95 commentary on prophecies, and other sources. There

he composed his commentary on Nevuat hayeled, Iggeret sod haegula, and hisother 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 Penin-

sula; 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 descrip-

tions 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 sefer54 (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 bookMeshare 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 onNevuat hayeledand the epistle on the secret of redemption. On this see above. Regard-ing 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-Reuveniis evident throughout his account of his sojourn in Italy. See ibid., 37, 38, 39, 52, 53, 57 [Adler, Tra-vellers, 275, 28283]. About the role of women in Ha-Reuvenis diary see my forthcoming articleHa-ah. erot beinei ha-Ah. er, nashim be-yomano shel David Ha-Reuveni, Festschrift in Honor ofRobert Bonfil, eds. M. Ben-Sasson, E. Baumgarten, A. Raz-Karkotzkin, and R. Weinstein (Jerusalem:

Bialik Institute (forthcoming): 14764.


23/26

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 descrip-

tions of other travelers of his time, including R. Ovadia of Bartanura101 or Meshu-

lam 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 dis-

guised 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 descrip-

tions 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 signsoccurred 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 dif-ficult 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 funda-

mental 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 tra-

ditions and sentiments to which anyone who lived in Israel at that time was cer-tainly exposed.

99. Ibid., 2228 [Adler,Travellers, 25968].100. Regarding the inner structure of the Makhpela Cave and study of the Cave and its sur-

roundings, 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); bothdescribe the Tomb of David.

106. Aescoly,Sippur, 2527 [Adler,Travellers, 265].


24/26

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 reachedJerusalem, expressed in Halevis writings. Ha-Reuveni strove to construct a

logical route for himself based on the partial geographical information at his dis-

posal, and this effort has misled modern scholars in their effort to turn an imagin-

ary 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 slavewoman 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 thewater 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 toSennar,Sudan Notes and Records XVI (1933): 5566.

109. Aescoly,Sippur, 74. See also the description as it appears on p. 71.


25/26

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 signifi-

cance 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 med-

ieval 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 custom-

ary 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 con-

version 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 thatthe 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 toJudaism 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

seeBayit h. adashandBeit Yosefthere; see also Shulh. anarukh Yore dea sig. 278. Nevertheless, there isalmost no reference to this custom in the responsa literature, and it is not part of the conversion cer-

emony 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 ofBayit h. adashin Tur, yore dea sig. 278.

112. On the medieval Ashkenazi attitude to converts returning to Judaism see Jacob Katz,Af alpi sheh. ata Yisrael hu,Tarbitz27 (1958): 20317, and see the recent discussion of Ephraim Kanarfo-gel, Returning to the Jewish Community in Medieval Ashkenaz: History and Halakhah, inTurim: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 andJudaizers in the Early Fourteenth Century,Harvard Theological Review 74 (1981): 6377.

114. Yitzhak Baer, Hatenua hameshih. it biSefarad bitequfat hagerush,Maasaf Z. ion 5 (1933):

7273 and see the source on p. 73, n. 1.


26/26

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.

CONCLUSION

Our discussion of Ha-Reuvenis identity and the goals of his mission in dis-

guise 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 mes-sianic pressure cookercreated 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 his-

torical situation (for example, complications arising from a Portuguese military

debacle on the Arabian Peninsula near Jeddah), which was meant to be the back-

ground 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 self-

consciousness and self-conception about the place of the Jewish people in

history and their ability to shape and influence historical processes and thusbecome 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

history, politics, and messianism: david ha-reuveni’s origin and mission by moti benmelech

Documents