Hayyim ben Benjamin Ze’ev Bochner: Kabbalist, Talmudist, and Grammarian

by Marvin J. Heller[1]

Hayyim ben Benjamin Ze’ev Bochner (c. 1610–84), a multi-faceted individual, was the author of varied works reflecting diverse contemporary intellectual interests. His books are both independent works and commentaries on earlier titles. A Kabbalist, Talmudist, and grammarian, Bochner wrote on these subjects as well as annotating numerous other works.

Born in Cracow, Bochner’s family was one of that city’s wealthiest Jewish families, owners of a stone mansion and two adjoining stores on Casimir place, a street otherwise without Jews. A student of R. Israel Seligman Ganz (1541-1613) in nigleh (revealed Torah) and of R. Jacob Temerls (Jacob Ashkenazi, d. 1666) in nistar (concealed Torah – Kabbalah), Bochner married the former’s daughter. Upon his father’s death in 1647, Bochner inherited a share in the family business and property. He elected, however, in order to further pursue his studies, to forgo his portion of the business and the properties in lieu of a life-long weekly allowance, selling his share to his three brothers a a sister. Initially, Bochner opened a free rabbinical school and associated with several renowned scholars, among them R. Lipmann Heller. Bochner, however, was subsequently called to serve as rabbi and head of the bet din in Ebenfurth and afterwards in Lackenbach in Austria, maintaining a yeshiva in both locations. He later relocated to Vienna, remaining there until the expulsion of the Jews from that city in 1670. His final residence was in in Fürth, Bavaria, where he passed away on Feb. 2, 1684.[2][3]

Bochner was a Talmudic scholar, reflected in his works. His primary lifetime occupation was writing, editing, and publishing books.[4] In this article we first address books which Bochner authored or seriously annotated, followed by other titles which he edited or annotated to a lesser extent. We begin with Orhot Hayyim published in 1654.

I

Orhot Hayyim – Bochner based his first composition of consequence, Orhot Hayyim, on the Minhagim of R. Isaac Tyrnau (1c. 1380/85-1439/52); it is an abridgment and annotation of that popular work. Orhot Hayyim was published in Cracow in 1654 at the press of Menahem Nahum ben Moses Meisels. It is a small book, a quarto in format (4⁰: [10] ff.). The Meisels’ press was established in 1630, acquiring the typographical equipment that had previously belonged to the Prostitz press. In addition to that acquisition, Meisels had new letters cast in Venice. Meisels’ publications reflect the Prague style, likely due to the influence of his manager, Judah ha-Kohen of Prague. Meisels received a privilege from King Sigismund III Vasa, later reconfirmed by King Ladislaus IV Vasa and the town authorities.[5]

Isaac Tyrnau’s Minhagim was very popular at its time and remains so today. In the Bet Eked Sepharim, Ch. B. 2Friedberg records thirty-two editions of that work, beginning with a 1566 Venice printing though an 1880-88 Munkatch edition, including commentaries and Yiddish translations.[6] Minhagim, a compilation of customs written in the mid-fifteenth century, records the religious conventions and practices of central European Jewry for the entire year.[7]

Tyrnau was born in the Hungarian city of Tyrnau (now in Slovakia) or in Vienna, but later resided in Tyrnau, Austria. He was a student of R. Abraham Klausner, R. Shalom ben Isaac of Neustadt (Sar Shalom), and R. Aaron of Neustadt (Blumlein). Tyrnau later served as rabbi in Pressburg. An interesting digression. It is reported that Tyrnau’s beautiful daughter was kidnaped by the crown prince of Hungary who fell in love with her and subsequently renounced the crown and converted to Judaism. The prince went to study Judaism with Sephardic rabbis, returned to Hungary and had a clandestine marriage with Tyrnau’s daughter. He continued to study, with Tyrnau. Catholic priests, however, accidentally became aware of the prince’s situation, and demanded that he return to Catholicism. Upon his refusal, he was burned at the stake and the Jews were expelled from Tyrnau.[8]

The title page of Orhot Hayyim notes the inclusion of material from the Zohar and is dated, in the year, quiet השקט in the month Menahem (Av) (414 = July/August, 1654). Bochner’s abridgment of Tyrnau’s Minhagim is described on the title page as:

Abridged Minhagim of the gaon R. Eizek Tyrnau with the annotations and many laws collected from the work of the great gaon R. Moses Isserles (Rema, Shulhan Arukh) of which the eyes of all Israel behold and from whose waters they drink and according to whom the halakhah is determined everywhere in these lands and by whom we live and from other poskim who have gathered in their hands the spirit of God. . . . All the customs and laws of the entire year done and mentioned, all the order of prayers and [birkat ha-mazon], piyyutim and yozerot (liturgical poetry), reading of the parashiot and haftarot, all explained. This book includes only that which every man does not know well. . . .

On the verso of the title page is Bochner’s introduction, where he writes that he has written this work because he has seen that the hearts of people are much troubled due to the many hardships and bitterness that have befallen us in our exile, harsh and bitter, in which we have forgotten many customs which are not so frequent. Bochner continues that the gaon [R. Isaac Tyrnau] ז”ל arranged them correctly albeit in a new order, found in most siddurim (prayer books). Nevertheless, it appears to him that they are not understood by all due to their length and errors occur in many matters. Bochner remarks that many entries are not arranged in order but rather are scattered here and there so that it is not easy to locate them. Also, in some instances, they are located in a new entry, others in the applicable laws. With the result that many people, of varying stature, lesser and greater “are astray in the land” (cf. Exodus 14:3) and in doubt about many customs and laws, as Tyrnau brings different opinions that are inconsistent with each other. Furthermore, the gaon, the Rema (R. Moses Isserles, 1530-72) who came after Tyrnau, made great effort as to “search Jerusalem with lamps” (cf. Zephania 1:12) for all the customs related to Ashkenazim. Many customs are found in the Shulhan Arukh that are not among the customs of Tyrnau. Bochner notes that the world is accustomed to follow the decisions of Tyrnau when in truth they should follow the Rema whose rulings they have “ordained and taken upon” (Esther 9:27) themselves to follow. So that there should not be two Torahs he has therefore arranged it with that in mind. He has entitled the book Orhot Hayyim so that one should know the way of life (Orhot Hayyim).

1654, Orhot Hayyim, Cracow

Courtesy of the Jewish National and University Library

There are approbations from R. Gershon Saul Yom Tov, called Lippman ben Nathan ha-Levi Heller, and R. Isaac ben Abraham Moses Israel Eilenberg, a listing of the contents, and the text in two columns in rabbinic type, excepting 7a-b which are primarily in one column. Pages have the heading dinei from the book Orhot Hayyim. Isaac Yudlov observes that the text, as suggested above, is an abridgement of Isaac Tyrnau’s Minhagim with annotations and additions from the Rema’s Shulhan Aruk.[9]

There is only one incomplete edition that survives. It was part of Mehlman and now in NLI. Thus, all of the reprints are also incomplete. It was also republished in 2003, (Zikhron Aaron, Jerusalem), with Or Hadash. It is preceeded by a of part of Yudolov’s article that appeared in Moriah discussing the unicum and Bochner. Apparently Orhot Hayyim was not reprinted for several hundred years. the Jewish National and University Library catalogue records two later editions, that is Jerusalem 1994 and Brooklyn 2006. The former is incomplete, that is, selected portions of Orhot Hayyim, the second not seen.

Luah ha-Hayyim – Our next Bochner title is Luah ha-Ha-Hayyim, a popular medical work on dietetics. Published in 1669 in Prague by Judah ben Jacob Bak. It too is a small work, quarto in format (4⁰: 4 ff.). The Bak press was a printing house of note, founded by Jacob ben Gershom Bak (d. 1618) in 1605; eight generations of the Bak family printed Hebrew books in Prague until the beginning of the nineteenth century. Jacob Bak was succeeded by his sons Joseph and Judah who, from 1623, printed under the name Benei (sons of) Jacob Bak. After Joseph left the firm in 1660, Judah printed alone until August, 1669, when a libel suit caused a temporary cessation in printing. Two years after Judah’s death (1671), in October, 1673, his sons Jacob and Joseph were permitted to restart the press, afterwards publishing books with Hebrew letters until 1696 under the name Benei Judah Bak.

1669, Luah ha-Hayyim, Prague

Courtesy of the Jewish National and University Library

The first text page has a heading and introductory paragraph in place of a title page, stating that:

“It shall be health to your navel” (proverbs 3:8), etc. For to the Lord, “For they are life to those who find them, and health to all their flesh” (Proverbs 4:22).

Concise rules of behavior for a person for medical purposes, to maintain bodily health. This is a great principle in the service of the Rock, may His name be blessed. For the public good it is being published anew by R. Hayyim Bochner of Cracow. And it is ישקיט (429 = 1669). “For this was the custom in former times in Israel” (Ruth 4:7) and it has received approbations from the leading physicians. All these things are correct, “and right to those who find knowledge” (Proverbs 8:9) and thereby merit.

Below this brief header are approbations of two doctors, Dr. Solomon and Dr. Mattathias, both of Lublin, followed by the text, in two columns in rabbinic type with enlarged initial words in square letters. Luah ha-Hayyim, brought to press by Bochner, is frequently attributed to a R. Raphael by distinguished bibliographers such as Isaac Benjacob and Moritz 4Steinschneider, who note that Raphael’s name is formed by an acrostic of the initial letters of the first line, רבות פעמים אשר לקטתי .[10]

Luah ha-Hayyim provides dietary advice, such as not eating or drinking until one is hungry or thirsty; nor immediately after exertion; recommends wheat bread and pure sweet white wine, but in limited measure; strong drink made from wheat is also good but should be aged, pure, and clear, that being a sign that it has been properly and sufficiently cooked. One should eat more in the winter and in those long nights additional sleep is beneficial. It warns against harmful foods, among them fruit from trees, limiting those that are dried and especially those that are more juicy, which if eaten when not ripe are like a two-edged sword; and lists foods that are diarrheic. An example of the text is:

It is beneficial to let blood in the first three hours of the day, for the blood prevails over a person during the first three hours of the day. In the winter bloodletting should be done from the left arm, in the summer from the right arm, indicated by, “Length of days is in her right hand” (Proverbs 3:16). Bloodletting should not be done on a day when one returns from traveling nor on a day when one is intending to leave, nor should one go to the bathhouse that day. Also, on the day before and after one should refrain from marital relations.

At the end of the volume is the following tail-piece.

Luah ha-Hayyim was a popular work. It was also printed in Cracow in 1669 and reprinted by Johann Wagenseil in Altdorf, 1687, is one of four Hebrew translations in Exercitationes sex varii agumenti. [It appears on pp. 78-98.], accompanied by a Latin translation entitled Tabulae vitae…brevis introductio hominis, in viam sanitatis. In that edition the Hebrew text and Latin translation are set in parallel columns. In Prague in1688, Altdorf in 1697, and Berlin in 1699, as well as several later editions.[11] is Menorat Zahav Tohor (4 ff.), a kabbalistic commentary on Psalm 67 attributed to R. Solomon ben Jehiel Luria (Maharshal, c. 1510-64). The Berlin edition is printed together with R. Ze’ev Wolf ben Judah Leib of Rosienie’s Gefen Yehidit, an ethical work based on the memorial prayer El Malei Rahamim, and that commemorates what befell the Jews of Podhajce (Podgaitsy), Ukraine in 1677 during a Tartar incursion and massacre of the Jews.

Parenthetically, Bochner is also credited with a Luah Hayyim, extant as a 12ff. unicum in manuscript only. Written in 1684, shortly before his death, it is in the National Library of Israel, as a 12 ff. The subject matter of Luah Hayyim, in contrast to Luah ha-Hayyim described above, is the calendar.[12]

Or Hadash – Our next Bochner title, Or Hadash, was published in Amsterdam at the press of Uri Phoebus ben Aaron ha-Levi in c. 1671-75 in quarto format (4⁰: [6], 53, [3] ff.). Uri Phoebus ben Aaron Witmund ha-Levi, who had previously worked for Immanuel Benveniste, established his own print-shop in 1658. He would print about one hundred titles, from 1658 to 1689, the period he was active in Amsterdam, generally traditional works for the Jewish community, encompassing Bibles, prayer-books, halakhic works, haggadot, aggadot, and historical treatises (Yosippon). In 1689, Uri Phoebus ceased printing in Amsterdam, in order to relocate to Poland. He established a Hebrew press in Zolkiew in 1691. His descendants continued to operate Hebrew printing-presses in Poland into the twentieth century.

The title page of Or Hadash has an architectural frame. The text notes that it is a very small volume:

“full with the blessing of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 33:23) specifically birkat ha-mitzvot and birkat ha-nehenin, as “men of renown” (Genesis 6:4) testify. Therefore, we said it should be printed, perhaps it will be a refuge in time of trouble for us, “to be enlightened with the light of the living Or ha-Hayyim” (Job 33:30), “and he shall plant the tents of his palace” (Daniel 11:45) . . .

The title-page is dated בו יגדל שלום (in which peace will grow, 431 =1661). The colophon is dated, Monday, Rosh Hodesh Shevat תל”ה (435 = January 28, 1675). It has been suggested that the colophon is a typesetter’s error and should read תל”א (431 = January 12, 1671), both days are Mondays, which would be consistent not only with the title page but also with the dates of the approbations, which were given in 1671 or earlier. The title-page is followed by Bochner’s preface with a border of verses, the first line is from the prayer book “Shine a new light (Or Hadash) upon Zion, and may we all soon be privileged to [enjoy] its brightness.” In the center is an acrostic of Bochner’s name, חיים באכנור Hayyim Bochner (above).[13] This is followed by twenty-six approbations from prominent Ashkenaz and Sephardic rabbis, among them among them R. Yom Tov Lipmann Heller (1579-1654) and R. Jacob Temerls (d. c. 1667).[14] The approbations are followed by a note of appreciation from Bochner (5b), his introduction (1a-6b), and then the text (7a-52b).

c. 1671-75, Or Hadash, Amsterdam

Courtesy of Hebrewbooks.org

The text of Or Hadash encompasses all the blessings of birkat ha-mitzvot and birkat ha-nehenin, excepting those pertaining to prayer. Or Hadash incorporates Or Yisrael, by Bochner’s teacher R. Israel Ganz, as well as his Birkat ha-Nehenin, which is from Bochner’s Orhot Hayyim (Cracow, 1654) on R. Isaac Tyrnau’s Minhagim, as well as other small works.[15]Among its contents, in addition to the blessings over food, are benedictions for a talit katan, tefillin, talit gadol, fixing a mezuzah, lulav, Hanukkah lights, dam betulah, sanctification of God’s name, visiting the ill, comforting mourners, and accompanying a body to its burial. As alluded to on the title-page there is an appendix entitled Or ha-Hayyim, also on dietary issues.

There are copies of Or Hadash in which the title page has a variant arrangement of the text. The text of Or Hadash is set in two columns in rabbinic type, excepting headers and initial words. There are several attractive woodcut tail-pieces, among them one, appearing several times, with a hand pouring water from a lave and two fish on each side, all symbols of a Levi, which here would be the printer, Uri Phoebus.[16] Reprinted and re-typeset in the 2003 Zikhron Aaron edition discussed above.

Or Hadash is recorded in Shabbetai ben Joseph Bass’s (1641-1718) Siftei Yeshenim (Amsterdam, 1680), the first bibliography of Hebrew books by a Jewish author, the only one of the above works so noted.[17]

Tozot Ḥayyim – This is the only edition of Tozot Ḥayyim (the Issues of Life), an abridged grammatical work on the popular Perek Shira by the renowned grammarian R. Elijah Levita (Bahur, 1468-1549). Published together with Perek Shira is Bochner’s Ma’amar al Shimoneh Beninim im ha-cenu’im ha-peshutim ve-ha-Mercovim (Essay on the construction of simple and complex pronouns). Tozot Ḥayyim was published in Hamburg at the press of Isaac Hezekiah di Cordova, one of the first publications of that press, established in 1710-11. Tozot Ḥayyim was issued in duodecimo format (12⁰: 20 ff.).

1710, Tozot Ḥayyim

Courtesy of the Jewish National and University Library

The title-page dates beginning of the work to Tuesday, 23 Adar in the year “In an hour of favor I answer you בעת רצון עניתיך (470 = 23 February, 1710)” (Isaiah 49:8).[18] The text begins that Tozot Ḥayyim is an abbreviated essence of Perek Shira, divided into thirteen stanzas and with the addition of Ma’amar al Shimoneh Beninim im ha-cenu’im ha-peshutim ve-ha-Mercovim.

Perek Shira, the first of four parts of a larger work by Levitas entitled Pirke Eliyahu, was first published in Pesaro in 1520. It discusses in thirteen stanzas the laws of letters, vowel-points, and accents.[19] Ma’amar al Shemoneh Beninim, Bochner’s contribution to Tozot Ḥayyim is a small work, beginning on 12b. The text is bi-lingual, comprised of both Hebrew and Yiddish (Judeo-German) entries, the former in a square vocalized font, the later in rabbinic (Rashi) letters, explaining the rules of Hebrew grammar.

II

Midrash Konen – Our first Bochner title which he edited or annotated to a lesser extent than in the above works is Midrash Konen, printed in 1648 in Cracow at the press of Menahem Nahum Meisels, noted above. It as a small 20 cent. work (8, 5, 4 ff.) published together with Ma’in Hochmah, at the end of the volume.

1648, Midrash Konen

Courtesy of the Jewish National and University Library

Midrash Konen deals with creation, heavens, paradise, and hell. It reflects apocalyptic sources of the Second Temple period and mystic literature of the beginning of the Middle Ages. It was composed in about the 11^th century and first published in Venice in 1601.[20] The title-page begins that Midrash Konen is based on the verse “He established the heavens by understanding” Proverbs 3:19). The title-page notes that it was edited by Bochner,

Sefer ha-Nikud vi-Sod ha-Hashmal – Also printed in 1648 is Sefer ha-Nikud vi-Sod ha-Hashmal, also in Cracow, also by the Meisels press, in octavo format (8⁰: 13ff.). These are kabbalistic works. Sefer ha-Nikud is a mystical explanation of the vocalization and deeper meaning of the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet; Sod ha-Hashmal is on the vision of Ezekiel. Both titles, written by R. Joseph ben Abraham Gikatilla (1248–c. 1325), were first published in Venice at the press of Giovanni di Gara in Arzei Levanon, a compendium of seven small independent works.²¹

1648, Sefer ha-Nikud vi-Sod ha-Hashmal

Courtesy of the Jewish National and University Library

Additional works that Bochner contributed to are Tikkunei Shabbat (Cracow, 1660) based on R. Isaiah Horowitz’s (Shelah ha-Kodesh, 1555-1630) Shenei Luḥot ha-Berit. It was published in octavo format (8⁰: [25] ff.), the press is uncertain. At the conclusion of Tikkunei Shabbat are prayers to be recited at the conclusion of Shabbat. Another small title that Bochner added to is R. Ḥayyim Rashpitz’s (Raschwitz) Iyyun Tefillah (Amsterdam, 1671) on meditation in prayer based on the persecutions and the martyrdoms of Prague. Yet other titles to which Bochner is credited [he lists these, and others at the beginning of Or Hadash as written but yet unpublished] with having contributed to but not seen by this writer include Mayim Ḥayyim, containing homilies on Bible and Talmud according to the peshat, remez, derush, and sod; Beit Tefillah (Arba’ah Roshim), a grammatical and mystical commentary on the prayer-book, the laws concerning prayers; and Patora di Dahaba, a compendium of the Shulḥan Aruk unpublished [a portion (or whole?) was published on circumcision in 2003 as part of Sefer HaBrit].[22]

III

R. Hayyim ben Benjamin Ze’ev Bochner was, as noted above, a multi-faceted individual. He was the author of varied works reflecting diverse contemporary intellectual interests. His books are both independent works and commentaries on earlier titles. A Kabbalist, Talmudist, and grammarian, reflected in the titles he wrote and annotated. In summary, the works addressed in this article, all relatively small, are Orhot Hayyim on minhagim; Luah ha- Hayyim, a medical work; Or Hadash on the blessings birkat ha-mitzvot and birkat ha-nehenin; Tozot Ḥayyim, an abridged grammatical work; Midrash Konen dealing with Creation, heavens, paradise, and hell; and Sefer ha-Nikud vi-Sod ha-Hashmal, kabbalistic works a mystical explanation of the vocalization and deeper meaning of the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet and on the vision of Ezekiel as well as additional works.

These works were written while Bochner was occupied with communal issues and Torah, for which he gave up his share in a successful family business. Not well remembered today, Bochner led a meaningful and fruitful life, and should be recalled for his lifestyle and personal achievements.

The Identity of an unknown Yiddish Prayer Book
(From Zürich to Zürich)

Dr Moshe Nathan Rosenfeld, London

Moshe Rosenfeld has published books on Jewish printing in Augsburg, Wilhermsdorf and Karlsruhe as well as articles on Fuerth and Sulzbach prints. His most recent publication is the biography ‘The Rav of Fuerth’, highlighting Rav Dovid Kahana Spiro szl (1901-1970).

His contact information is mnrosenfeld@gmail.com

Yiddish printed books are the stepchildren of Hebrew bibliography.

We have systematic bibliographies of Hebrew books from nearly 500 years ago, amongst the authors are non-Jews like Gessner[1a], Bartolocci [1b] and Wolf [2]. To single out Yiddish prints for a separate bibliography did not happen until Moritz Steinschneider [3], presented a listing in 1848-9.

C. Shmeruk [4] offered in 1981 a list of Yiddish imprints from Poland until the year 1649, followed in 1982 by a similar list of Italian Yiddish prints [5]. The Poland bibliography lists 68 items, of which a staggering 40% are listed as unique copies and 23% are only known from earlier references. The Italy list of 35 Yiddish works contains 35% unique and 31% unlocated items.

The scarcity of early Yiddish prints has two main reasons. Firstly, the Yiddish text was not accredited with the same holy status as Hebrew texts. Since the contents was often of a secular nature, the book did not command the same respect. Additionally, the heavy perusal by common folk led to disproportional wear and tear. This was certainly true for prayer books and biblical works and so much more for profane texts.

In 1985 I examined the origins of Yiddish printing, covering the first 25 years and including items published in Prague and Germany [6]. I have since compiled a yet unpublished database, which to date lists close to 1000 Yiddish works until the year 1700.

Some years ago, I was sent copies of a few pages from a Sidur, a Jewish book of daily prayers, printed completely in Yiddish. The earliest all-Yiddish prayerbook known to us was printed in 1544 by Chaim Schachor in the small Bavarian town Ichenhausen, of which a single copy survives today in Munich (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek). It is likely that earlier Yiddish translations of the common prayer book existed, and we find such a manuscript, dated 17 Tevet 5296 = 12 December 1535, in the Bodleian Library, Oxford [7].

A Venice 1552 unlocated edition is mentioned in the Mantua censorship list, 1595, Nr. 176, quoted by Shmeruk, Italy Nr. 9 [5]. This imprint might have been a mixed Hebrew/Yiddish edition. Otherwise, only a Prague s.a. edition (translation by Avigdor Sofer of Eisenstadt) is quoted by Wolf II, p.1457 [2]. With the Amsterdam 1650 quarto imprint, these count amongst early all-Yiddish prayer books for all year round. (All-Yiddish Festival Prayers, also called Krovetz, are not part of this discussion).

The unknown Prayer book – an early Yiddish Sidur

It became clear to me that the copies sent to me did not match any of the known editions and as beginning and end was missing, other clues were needed in order to identify this imprint.

Since I had no access to the original, my efforts were quite limited. The typeface clearly belonged to the 16^th century and had Southern Germany features. This excluded locations like Prague and Krakow. I drafted an initial list of potential printing places (printing activity in brackets):

1. Augsburg (1533-1544). Chaim Schachor apparently did not print here anything in Yiddish. There are, however, three all-Yiddish prints published by the apostate Paulus Aemilius. These are the Melochim Buch (1543), the Shmuel Buch (1544), and the folio Pentateuch, Megillot and Haphtaroth in two versions (1544). Whilst Aemilius only mentions his name in the Pentateuch (reverse of title and end of introduction) destined for the Gentile market, it has now been proven, that the Melochim and Shmuel editions were also published by him [8]. Till today we have no knowledge who actually translated these Biblical texts into Yiddish.

2. Basel (1557-1600). Basel started printing Yiddish books from 1557 onwards. Prijs [9] records titles like Sefer Daniel (Nr 97), Die Megilla s.a. (Nr. 101), (unique copy in Basel UB), a Yiddish alphabet, 1561 (Nr. 108a) and a Pentateuch 1583 (Nr. 137). The Basel printer Froben relocated to Freiburg i. Breisgau for two years, where some Yiddish was printed, but all this activity takes us past the date we can safely assume for the unknow prayer book. We should however note, that through the activity of the Basel printer Waldkirch, starting towards the end of the 16^th century, appeared an amazing output of Yiddish prints.

3. Heddernheim (1546). We know of two books produced by Chaim Schachor in 1546, but no Yiddish prints.

4. Ichenhausen (1544-45). Chaim Schachor published here two books, one is the first all-Yiddish prayer book (1544), the second is a Hebrew Pentateuch (1544-1545).

5. Isny (1541-42). Elia Levita published here the famous Buovo Buch (1541) in the printshop of Paulus Fagius. The same Yiddish type was also used in the small dictionary, Shemot Devarim (1542). The equally famous and rare Yiddish Sefer Midot appeared here in 1542, though no printer is mentioned.

6. Konstanz (1543-44), Paulus Fagius moved from Isny to Konstanz in 1543, and 3 out of 4 known products from this press have Yiddish texts: a) Compendiaria Isagoge in Linguam Hebraeam (e.g. folios E2a, E3 ,T2; 1543); b) Prima Qvatvor Capita Genesos Hebraice, cvm Versione Germanica e regione Hebracis (extensive Yiddish, with Grammar, possibly taken from Merkevet Hamishne/ Sefer R. Anshel, Kraków 1535; 1543); c) Pentateuch, Megillot and Haftaroth (First all-Yiddish edition, 1544). The translation is credited to Michael Adam, an apostate, whose name is also mentioned at the end of the Yiddish edition of Jossipon, Zürich 1546.

7. Tiengen (1560) is located in southwestern Baden-Württemberg, close to the Swiss border. Printing activity was limited to the year 1560 and none of its known 6 books carries any Yiddish text.

8. Zürich (1546-1558). We know of an all-Yiddish Josippon and Sefer Hayira (both 1546), as well as a Yiddish Psalms issued by R. Eliezer Treves in 1558.

I felt it safe to exclude Heddernheim and Tiengen from this list, where no Yiddish was ever printed.

Comparison of Typeface and fonts:

Augsburg

Taking samples of the last page of the Shmuel Buch and Melochim Buch and comparing it with a text sample from the unknown Sidur, we find:

Melochim Buch, Augsburg 1543, part of last page, Courtesy British Library

Shmuel Buch, Augsburg 1544, last page, Courtesy British Library

Unknown Sidur, quire D3

The fonts are distinctly different, especially the letters ע, ש, ק, ם, ט

In addition, the numbering system of the quires includes both Gothic and Hebrew fonts, whereas the Sidur shows only the German font.

Quire numbering, Shmuel Buch, Augsburg 1543

Based on this information, Augsburg can be excluded.

Basel

The earliest known Basel Yiddish print, the Biblical Daniel Buch, appeared in 1557. It is listed by Prijs [9] Nr. 97.

The square type seems identical. But Yiddish letters, like א,צ,ק are quite different and the quire numbering is only in Hebrew, as is the pagination.

Prijs also describes another all-Yiddish book, Die Megilla (Nr. 101), a Yiddish paraphrase of the Book Esther (unique copy at UB Basel). The square type again appears to be identical, and I did not find any significant changes with regards to the Yiddish fonts. The same vignette was used in Zürich with the Yiddish Psalms, 1558, as well as in Tiengen, both publications of the known Rabbi Eliezer Treves of Frankfurt.

Die Megilla (Universitätsbibliothek Basel)

Psalms, Zürich 1558 (British Library) Shir HaYichud, Tiengen 1560

The quires for both Die Megilla and Psalms 1558, show the same Yiddish font. The book is complete but does not present us with a location or date. Sidorko p.169-174 [10] suggests, it might be a Tiengen imprint based on the vignettes used. There are two reasons to disagree with this possibility. Firstly, as mentioned, there are no Yiddish fonts used with any of the 6 known Tiengen publications, all from the year 1560. Secondly, the watermark is an oxhead, totally different from the Tiengen imprints, which show a crowned snake (except for Begidat Hazman and Malkiel, for which I did not find any watermarks). I would rather assign Die Megilla to Zürich, ca. 1558-9, a product of the Treves activity, while still present in that city. We know that at a meeting of the Eidgenossenschaft in Baden, the Catholic representatives of Luzern, accused their Zürich colleagues of allowing the sale of anti-Christian pamphlets in the streets of Zürich. Undoubtedly this put pressure on the fledgling Zürich print activity of Rabbi Treves. The missing place and date of printing could be due to the producer Eliezer Treves wanting to finish this small booklet without getting the printshop of Froschauer into trouble. By the end of 1559 Treves re-located to Tiengen with the permission of the Count of Sulz, but clearly had to leave the Yiddish types behind. By summer 1560, the threats of the Swiss from across the border, also brought the Tiengen activities to an end.

Further Yiddish printing occurred in Basel only in 1583 (Pentateuch, Prijs Nr. 137). There followed Sefer Hayirah (not mentioned by Prijs), Chaye Olam (Nr. 138), Mishle Shualim (Nr. 140), (a copy of which has since been located by Erika Timm in the Alliance Israélite Universelle, Paris) and Targum Chamesh Megilot (Nr. 143), all published by the Basel printer Ambrosius Froben in Freiburg i. Breisgau, 1583-1584. Here we have a fair match of Yiddish fonts, yet the square type is completely different. The quires show Hebrew and German letters, which does not match the unknown Sidur.

The later Basel Yiddish imprints by Waldkirch (Prjis Nr. 153 and onwards) seem to have inherited some of Froben’s typographical material.

Whilst none of the Basel publications are perfect matches to the unknown Sidur, Basel cannot be completely excluded as a potential printing location.

Ichenhausen

As mentioned, the first known Yiddish Sidur was published here in 1544. A comparison of pages, showing identical text, will exclude Ichenhausen as a potential candidate.

Unknown Sidur, last existing page Sidur Ichenhausen, 1544, page [148b], Courtesy BStB Munich

Again, there are distinct differences between the letters א, ש, ט etc. and most markedly the completely different style of the capital letters. Whilst Ichenhausen used a fair amount of punctuation, this is completely missing with the unknown Sidur. It is however possible, that the text, which only shows mild alterations, was copied from one to the other.

Isny

The famous Buovo Buch was printed in Isny אייזנה in 1541 by Elia Levita. This edition has come down to us as a unique copy, preserved in the Zentralbibliothek Zürich. The book is completely in Yiddish, but for a few Hebrew words in the title and the final leaves. The Yiddish type differs from the prayer book, especially the letters ט, ל, ע, צ, ק, ש, ך. The square Hebrew font is totally different, and the quires are numbered with Yiddish letters, there is no pagination. The printer Paulus Fagius is not mentioned.

Sefer Midot is the forerunner to the ever-popular Orchot Zadiim. It was printed in Isny אייזנא in the year 1542 and the all-Yiddish text has only square Hebrew type on the title and at the beginning of chapters. Till today, a mystery surrounds this edition, as no printer or publisher is named. The types used throughout match with the Buovo Buch. The quires are marked with bold square font and Latin letters. The pagination utilizes Yiddish letters. No printer is mentioned.

Shemot Devarim is a multilingual dictionary compiled by Elia Levita and published by Paulus Fagius in Isny, 1542. The fonts match the Buovo Buch, there is no pagination, and the quires are printed in Latin characters.

The above examples exclude Isny as a possible printing place for the unknown Sidur.

Konstanz

The Pentateuch, Megillot and Haftarot, printed by Paulus Fagius in 1544 represents its first known Yiddish translation, which was followed two months later by the Augsburg edition, published by Paulus Aemilius. Whilst the Yiddish font shows certain similarities, there are small differences with letters like ט, ע, פ, ק, ם etc.

Unlike the unknown Sidur, this Pentateuch has Hebrew page numbers. The quire numbering seems to be a close match, the square Hebrew font is however the ‘Chaim Schachor – Augsburg’ style. One also needs to consider, that a Yiddish prayer book would not fit into the portfolio of Fagius, whose Yiddish prints served mainly to assist non-Jews in their studies.

Pentateuch, Konstanz, 1544

Comparison of quire signatures:

Jossipon, Zürich

Pentateuch, Konstanz

unknown prayer book

Zürich

Even knowledgeable bibliophiles barely know of the existence of the all-Yiddish Josippon edition, which appeared here in 1546. The existence of the Yiddish Sefer Hayirah, also printed in 1546, has escaped all but a few bibliographers. The most comprehensive work by Manfred Vischer: Bibliographie der Zürcher Druckschriften des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts, erarbeitet in der Zentralbibliothek Zürich, 1990, failed to list another all-Yiddish Zürich book, namely Psalms 1558.

Initially, I had some doubts, if Zürich was a possibility, until I noticed the following entry in the helpful booklet by Karl J. Lüthi, Hebräisch in der Schweiz, Bern 1926. He quotes some addenda on p.32:

Lüthi 1926

The first entry caught my eye: Adamus Michael, Liber Precum etc., ‘Liber Precum’ (‘Gebetbuch’ or book of Prayers) with Hebrew Germanic types, Quarto, without date, Froschauer (the printer). I assumed, Lüthi had seen a copy, but my search in Swiss libraries was without a positive result and I realized, that Lüthi (p.30) probably quoted from Julius Fuerst, Bibliotheca Judaica, Leipzig 1849 and 1863, or earlier sources. Indeed, the same entry is found in E. Camillo Rudolphi, Die Buchdrucker Familie Froschauer in Zürich, Zürich 1869, quoting a Yiddish book (Hebraeo Germanico) Liber Precum, by Michael Adam, printed without date in quarto.

Rudolphi, Buchdruckerfamilie Froschauer in Zürich, 1869

It is unlikely that Rudolphi saw this book and some further research led me to Johann Heinrich Zedler, Grosses vollständiges Lexicon aller Wissenschaften, Leipzig 1751. He quotes on p.426 (referring to Hottinger and Leus) :

“Adam (Michael), a born Jew, later of Lutheran faith, citizen of Zürich. He was still alive in 1550 and published etc., Librum Precum, Yiddish characters in Zürich, quarto”.

It is likely that Zedler got his information from Johan Scheuchzer’s Bibliotheca Helvetica, Tiguri (=Zürich 1733). He lists the activities of Michael Adam, ‘previously a Jew and authorized by the emperor to settle in Zürich; still alive in 1550’. Scheuchzer features the Yiddish Josippon (Libris de Bellis Jud.), the Konstanz Pentateuch (wrongly dated 1545) and our Liber Precum, Zürich, Froschauer, in quarto.

Scheuchzer, Bibliotheca Helvetica

It appears, that Scheuchzer did not see these books, but refers to Hottinger (Hottinger, Johann Heinrich the Elder), presumably his Schola Tigurinorum Carolina: id est, demonstratio historica, ostendens … Reipub . Tigurinæ Scholam a Carolo Magno deducendam … Accedunt. I. Bibliotheca Tigurina, sive Catalogus librorum … a Tigurinis scriptorum. II. Observationes de Collegii Carolini origine … III. Judicia quædam exterorum de schola Tigurinorum reformata. Tiguri 1654.

There on p.65 we read: ‘Adamus Michael, ex Judaeo, … quanquan oblervo imperatori quodam privilegio aliquot retro seculis … Tiguriono permissum Suisse, ut certum etiam iudaeorum numerum civitatis jure dnatem. Sex libros de belle judaicis capitibus 97. Distictos germanice vertit & editit, sed characteribus hebraeo germanicis. Ita & pentateuchum & libros VT historicos. Excusos Constantiae 1545. Vixit adhuc 1550.

(Adamus Michael, a Jew, … the emperor had given a certain privilege some centuries ago … allowed Zürich to assign a certain number of Jews to the city by law. He translated and published the six books belle judaicis in 97 chapters (i.e. Josippon), translated and published in distinguished (?) German, but in Germanic Hebrew characters. As well as the Pentateuch and the historical books of the Old Testament. He left Konstanz in 1545. He was still alive in 1550).

Hottinger does not mention our Liber Precum and it is therefore possible that a copy of the Zürich Yiddish prayer book was only seen somewhere or noted between 1654 and 1733.

Michael Adam

Not much is known about this apostate, but important information can be gleaned from Konrad Pellikan’s Chronikon (ed. Bernhard Riggenbach, Basel 1877). He left the Jewish faith around 1537/38 whilst in Strasbourg, where he probably met Hebraists like Capito, Bucer and Calvin. It is also fair to assume, that he met there Paul Fagius and his brother-in-law Jacob Froschesser (Ranivore), which later laid the basis for their joint venture, the Konstanz 1544 Yiddish Pentateuch. Seeing no future in Strasbourg, Adam moved on to Zürich. Here he found employment at the important printing house Christoph Froschauer, who employed him to assist with the German Bible editions. There Konrad Pellikan befriended Adam and provided lodging for him for many months (Leeman-Van Elck, Paul, Die Offizin Froschauer, Zürich, [1940], p. 136). In 1539 he married the widow Stapfer and spent time travelling on behalf of Heinrich Bullinger. After taking part in the first all-Yiddish Pentateuch edition in Konstanz, Fagius moved to Strasbourg and Michael Adam returned to Zürich. In 1546, he prepared the Josippon (Pseudo-Iosephus Flavius book) and the Sefer Hayirah (which does not feature Adam by name) both exclusively in Yiddish. After this activity he seemed to have fallen again on hard times and financial and family issues made him return to Strasbourg. He borrowed and lost money, was arrested in Basel (1549) and the famous Hebraist Sebastian Münster refused his request to post bail for him [11] (Note 13). As mentioned, he was still alive in 1550, but no further traces of him are found in the literature.

It is amazing that the Liber Precum, a Prayer book printed with Hebrew German characters in the Zürich printshop of Chr. Froschauer, through the efforts of Michael Adam, although mentioned in a variety of publications, escaped the attention of bibliographers. Its identity with the unknown Yiddish Prayer book in hand cannot be doubted. The final confirmation comes by comparison with the known Yiddish imprints, Josippon and Sefer Hayirah. Both show a perfect identity of the Yiddish font, the square Hebrew letters and the numbering system of the quires.

Recently I traced today’s owner, the known bibliophile David Jeselsohn of Zürich.

The book had returned home.

Yiddish Sidur

Dr Jeselsohn shared with me a digital copy of this book, which is lacking beginning and end. By comparison to the layout of the Ichenhausen prayer book, we can estimate its actual pagination.

Pagination: A-Z⁴ (no letter U), a-h⁴. Quires A1-4 missing, R1-4 missing, last quire h3 (totalling so far 127 pages). Page 127 equals to Ichenhausen p.148 . Hence, by interpolation, the unknown Sidur had 144 pages, A-Z⁴, a-m⁴. It is missing the first 4 pages, and 17 pages at the end. The size is 18 x 14 cm. [Zürich, Chr. Froschauer, ca. 1546]. It appears to be a close reprint of the Ichenhausen 1544 edition.

Addenda: Hebrew in Zürich

For Hebrew bibliographers, Zürich is only on record for the Josippon, Sefer Hayirah (both 1546) and the Psalms, 1558. It should however be noted that occasionally Hebrew text appeared in other Zürich books from the 16^th century and deserve to be mentioned. Here is a tentative list:

1. Zwingli, Ulrich, Complanationis Isaiae prophetae foetura prima cum apologia qur (sic) quidque sic versum sit, Tiguri: Christophorus Froschouer, 1529 (some odd Hebrew words).

2. Bibliander, Theodor Institvtionvm Grammaticarvm de Lingva Hebraea liber unus, Zürich: Froschauer, Christoph d.Ä., 1535, (p.193v large Hebrew ABC, odd Hebrew words throughout. (for a detailed description of this book see [11], repro on p.133)

3. Zwingli, Ulrich: Operum Huldrychi Zuinglii. Tomus Tertius, Ea, Quae In Genesim, Exodum, Esaiam & Ieremiam prophetas, partim ex ore illius excepta, partim ab illo conscripta sunt, una cum Psalterio Latinitate donato, co[n]tinens, Tiguri: Froschauer 1544

4. Bibliander, Theodor, De ratione communi omnium linguarum et literarum commentaries, Zürich 1548

5. Bibliander, Theodor, Christanismus sempiternus, verus, certus et immutabilis, Zürich 1556

6. Stucki, Johann Wilhelm, Antiquitatvm Convivialivm Libri III, Tiguri: Excudebat Christophorvs Froschovervs, 1582

Chr. Froschauer Stucki, Antiquitatum, Zürich 1582 p.27

Froschauer often used a signet with the text “Ein yeglicher guter Boum etc.”, which sometimes shows Latin, Greek and Hebrew translations. Elck notes on p. 166, that Hebrew Letters were in use already in 1526, (found in Oekolampad, Johannes, Apologetica. De dignatato eucharistiae sermones 2, Zürich 1526). A similar signet is found at the end of Zwingli, Ulrich, Svbsidivm Sive Coronis De Evcharistia Huldrycho, Zürich 1525, without Hebrew text.

Printer’s mark, Apologetica Zürich 1526, (Courtesy OeNB)

It is remarkable that Michael Neander (Sanctae linguae Hebraeae Erotemata: … Accesserunt ad finem dicta ueterum Rabinorum, Basel 1556, p.240) quotes a German Bible with Hebrew characters, prepared by Michael Adam the Jew, for the Jews, printed in Zürich. It is more likely, that he refers to the known Josippon, published by Michael Adam in Yiddish, printed in Zürich 1546, but lists this book as ‘Bible’. Or did he mean the Konstanz 1544 Pentateuch, by Michael Adam?

Michael Neander (Sanctae linguae Hebraeae Erotemata)

Notes:

[1a] Conrad Gesner,: Bibliotheca Universalis, Zürich 1545 (pages 38a-42b).
[1b] Giulio Bartolocci, , Bibliotheca magna rabbinica de scriptoribus, & scriptis Hebraicis, ordine alphabetico Hebraicè, & Latinè digestis, Rome 1675.
[2] J.Ch. Wolf, Bibliotheca hebraea, sive, notitia tum auctorum hebr. cujuscunque aetatis, vol. 1-4, Hamburgi, [1715-1733].
[3] Moritz Steinschneider, Serapeum, Jüdisch Deutsche Literatur, Leipzig, 1848-9.
[4] C. Shmeruk, Yiddish Literature in Poland, Jerusalem 1981.
[5] C. Shmeruk, (Yiddish prints in Italy), ITALIA, Studi e ricerche sulla cultura e sulla letteratutra degli ebrei d’italia, Vol. III, Jerusalem 1982.
[6] Moshe N. Rosenfeld , The Origins of Yiddish Printing, in Origins of the Yiddish Language, Winter Studies in Yiddish Volume 1, ed. Dovid Katz, Oxford, 1987,111–126).
[7] compare M. Steinschneider, Jüdisch Deursche Literatur, Serapeum, Leipzig 1848-9, No. 338-340, suppl. 361; MS Opp. 656, Neubauer 1214; Yiddishe Prachtdrucken, Yivo Bleter, N.Y. 1949, 16, 45-58.
[8] Hans Striedl, Paulus Aemilius an JA. Widmanstetter, in: Ars Jocundissima, Festschrift für Kurt Dorfmüller, Tutzing 1984.
[9] Joseph Prijs, Die Basler hebräischen Drucke (1492-1866), Olten 1964.
[10] Clemens P. Sidorko, Basel und der jiddische Buchdruck, Basel 2014.
[11] Clemens P. Sidorko, Zürich und der hebräische Buchdruck in der Frühen Neuzeit, Judaica, Heft 2, June 2013.

©2024/5 mnrosenfeld@gmail.com

The Illusory Portrait of R. Yom Tov Lipmann Heller: Deceptive Art and Jewish Images in Vienna

By: Dan Rabinowitz

For if I am deceived, I am.
for he who is not, cannot be deceived;
and if I am deceived,
by this same token I am.

Wolfgang Kemp after St Augustine of Hippo
(Epigraph to Rembrandt Hoogstraten: Colour and Illusion)

On October 8, 2024, Vienna’s Museum of Fine Arts, the Kunsthistorisches Museum, opened the exhibit “Rembrandt – Hoogstraten Colour and Illusion.” The museum’s permanent collection features remarkable works by Rembrandt, including a self-portrait and a now-confirmed portrait of his son, Titus van Rijn. This exhibit showcased many more items from its collection and loans from other museums. The term “illusion” in the exhibition’s title primarily refers to Samuel van Hoogstraten, a student of Rembrandt, and his exceptional use of the trompe-l’oeil technique. Trompe-l’oeil, from French, “fools the eye,” is an art that typically uses architectural elements, light, and perspective to trick the viewer into seeing a three-dimensional image, even when rendered on a single plane. Hoogstraten was one of the most skilled practitioners of this technique. It remains among the canonical approaches to art. Most recently, the Metropolitan Museum of Art recently held an exhibition, “Cubism and the Trompe-l’oeil Tradition,” featuring works by Picasso and his contemporaries.

In the lead-up to the Vienna museum’s exhibit, the city’s Morris columns were adorned with posters, and large billboards were scattered throughout the city announcing the exhibit. There were three variations of these advertisements: one featuring a Rembrandt self-portrait and two “illusory” portraits, Rembrandt’s “Girl in the Window” and Hoogstraten’s “Old Man at a Window.” In Rembrandt’s painting, the girl gazes directly at the viewer, gripping the exterior window frame, with her fingers extending beyond it. Combined with Rembrandt’s unparalleled usage of light and color, the image is unsettlingly realistic, even when reproduced in books.

Hoogstraten’s painting, “Old Man at a Window,” depicts an old, wizened, bearded man, crowned with a round fur hat, seemingly poking his head out of the window like a gargoyle protruding from the building. While the exhibit’s advertisements are silent about the man’s identity, many Orthodox Jews might recognize him as R. Yom Tov Lipman Heller, the author of, among other works, the Tosefos Yom Tov commentary on the Mishna. Heller is associated with Vienna, having served as its Chief Rabbi in the early 17th century; however, art historians and Jewish scholars have conclusively shown the impossibility of this being an authentic representation of Heller. Nonetheless, much like the trompe l’oeil technique, the Old Man at a Window continues to deceive, and many still believe it is Heller.

Figure 1 Samuel Von Hoogstraten, Old Man at a Window, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna

Rabbi Heller’s Chronicle of Imprisonment & Redemption

Rabbi Yom Tov Lipman Heller was born in 1578 in Wallerstein, a small village in Southern Germany, home to around twenty Jewish families (Davis 21). As a teenager, he married into a prominent family in Prague. His perspicacity and deep knowledge were quickly recognized, and at 19, he was appointed to serve on the Prague Beis Din, overseeing the largest Jewish community in Christian Europe (Davis 25-33). A year later, he published his first book, a somewhat unusual choice for a traditional rabbinic scholar, a commentary on the philosophical work Behinas Olam. He subsequently authored dozens of books across varied genres, completing his magnum opus, Tosefos Yom Tov in Heshvan 1616 (Davis 225-231). His identity quickly became bound up with this work, and even on the epitaph of his daughters’ headstone from 1639, he is referred to by the book and not his given name (Muneles 321). (The book’s original title is Tosefes Yom Tov, and later Tosefos Yom Tov. While some posit that this change was first documented in 1653, it already appears on the epitaph. (cf. Haberman 125n1)). He also “left ample records of himself… books, letters, archival documents, responsa, poems, prayers, sermons, commentaries, and even a memoir” (Davis 1). Nevertheless, there are no surviving portraits or other images.

Rabbi Heller spent time in Vienna on two occasions. The first, in 1625, he was induced to leave Prague for Vienna’s chief rabbi position. Despite his short tenure of only two years, he scored a significant victory for the Viennese Jewish community. Until then, it was dispersed throughout the city, and Heller secured the right for the community to reside in a single area and strengthen its ties. That cohesion was shattered in 1670 when Emperor Leopold I expelled them (one of the many expulsions Viennese Jews suffered), and the area was renamed after its extirpator, Leopoldstadt. Prague, however, drew him back, and in 1627, he took on the role of chief rabbi there.

Just two years later, some of the city’s Jewish community bristled at his involvement in tax collection, accusing him of determining tax rates unfairly. In June 1629, they denounced him to the government, which resulted in his arrest and summons to Vienna. He recounts the events in his autobiographical work, Megilas Eivah—an allusion to the first letters of the first four words of Megilas Eicha, written between 1644 and 1648. Initially placed under house arrest, he was imprisoned on the 17th of Tammuz and confined in a common jail with prisoners awaiting execution. He was denied visitors and remained isolated, “no one could speak with him, even via the window.” Two days later, following appeals from the Jewish community, he was transferred to a special prison and granted visitation rights. After forty days, the community agreed to pay a substantial fine, and he was released, almost immediately departing for Prague, never to return to Vienna. By 1643, he arrived in Krakow, where he served as chief Rabbi until his death in 1654. 

Megilas Eivah circulated in various manuscripts but was published only in 1836 (Davis 228 n31). While its authenticity is beyond doubt, the additional section that first appeared in the Hebrew 1880 edition is considered a forgery. Allegedly written by Heller’s son Samuel, it “has a quality reminiscent of Dumas and The Three Musketeers: [Heller] saves a young woman from a bull, and her husband, the French ambassador, intercedes on behalf of Rabbi Yom-Tov.” In 1905, “Moritz Steinschneider identified the source as based on a short story written by Ludwig Philippson (1811‒89), a rabbi and journalist, and the author of a series of Jewish historical novelettes and stories for young readers” (Davis 146 n36).

Samuel van Hoogstraten, Master of Illusion

Samuel van Hoogstraten was born in Dordrecht, one of the oldest cities in the Netherlands, on August 2, 1627. He was the eldest child of the artist Dirk van Hoogstraten and Maeiken de Coninck. Samuel started his art studies with his father, continuing until his father passed away in 1640. Around 1642, Samuel moved to Amsterdam and began studying under Rembrandt. He rapidly proved himself to be a standout student, leading classes, reviewing his classmates’ work, and so effectively absorbing his teachers’ lessons, that some of his works were mistakenly attributed to Rembrandt (Brusati 16-31). As part of the preparation for the current exhibit, “Young Woman at an Open Half-Door” (1645) has been reassigned to Hoogstraten (Illes; Van Sloten 125).

In 1651, Samuel traveled to Vienna, the epicenter of power and prestige within the Hapsburg Empire, seeking to enhance his reputation and standing among elite society. He succeeded almost immediately. Samuel’s student, Arnold Houbraken, recounted how, on August 6, 1651, Samuel presented three of his paintings to the emperor. The first two were well received, but “the third piece,” in the trompe l’oeil style, was a still life that captivated the Emperor, who appeared to be completely taken by it. He looked at it for a long time and, finding himself still deceived, said, ‘This is the first painter who has deceived me.’ And he went on to say that he would not get the picture back as a punishment for that deception, for the Emperor wished to keep it forever.” (Houbraken 2:157-58). However, Samuel did not leave empty-handed. The Emperor awarded him an imperial medallion and a gold chain, which he took immense pride in; this would become a standard element in his subsequent self-portraits and among the items he viewed as symbolic of successful artists (Hoogstraten 371-72; Brusati 54).

Hoogstraten broadly characterized art as a form of deception. In his magnum opus on the theory of painting and color, Inleyding tot de hooge schoole der schilderkonst: anders de zichtbaere werelt (Introduction to the Academy of Painting; or, The Visible World), he describes what he considers the “perfect painting.” It “is like a mirror of nature; it makes things that are not there appear to exist and deceives in a permissible, pleasurable, and praiseworthy way” (Hoogstraten 79). One way to achieve this effect is by combining architectural elements such as open doors or windows and adding “some figures” to the composition, “by which many have been artfully deceived” (Hoogstraten 304). He takes pride in having accomplished this with his paintings completed in Vienna. One is “Old Man at a Window,” painted in 1653. (Brusati 65).

The Religious Conversion and Reversion of the Old Man at a Window 

The earliest catalogs describing the painting Old Man at a Window do not mention the man’s religious affiliation. It was not until the 19th century that two scholars suggested a Jewish connection, and even then, there was no mention of Heller. Nonetheless, this association never gained traction, and the painting continued to be described without any reference to Jews. We must wait until the 1950s for Heller’s connection to emerge. However, that link lacked any supporting evidence, leaving us in the dark about what prompted the change from an Old Man to Heller. Even that association was quickly dismissed due to the significant gap between when Heller was imprisoned and when Hoogstraten painted Old Man at a Window.

The 1653 painting is one of the first works by Hoogstraten that Emperor Charles II acquired for his castle in Prague, possibly commissioned specifically for him. The painting is described in detail in an early catalog:

No. 4. By Samuel van Hoogstraten. A lifelike, grey-bearded old man looks out of a window. His fur hat, the furrows on his face from his age, and his grey beard are so well painted that one believes one can see nature itself in each one. Hoogstraten, who did not only paint as a mere colorist, showed his deep insight into the subject and reflected light in the chiaroscuro and the deep and penetrating shadows. Just look at the head . . ., and you will find that in it, the master’s hand, which . . . expresses itself quite magnificently. The lead on the round window pane, the wooden frame, that is the glass frame, is also very well painted, but the window’s stone frame makes you believe entirely that it is the work of a mason, almost as if you can see the mason’s hand on it. The straw stalk lying on the window stone, the feather, and the bottle standing there are no less well-painted and serve to prove the excellence of the whole. This picture is painted on canvas, 3 feet 6 inches high, 2 feet and 9 inches wide. The head is life-size. The artist has engraved his monogram and the year 1653 on the window stone of this painting” (Rigler 163-164).

During the 17th century, two inventories were created for the collection. In both, the painting is described as “a man sticking his head out of the window through the shutter,” without any reference to the man’s religious affiliation or any connection to Rabbi Heller (Köpl clvnn330; Brusati 361n76). Hoogstraten’s Old Man at a Window was relocated to Vienna after the Habsburgs acquired the Belvedere Palace in the 1730s. The Palace is perhaps best known today for Gustav Klimt’s “The Kiss” and other notable Viennese Expressionists. In one of the earliest catalogs of the Belvedere by Christian van Mechel from 1783, the subject is referred to simply as a “grey-bearded man with a round fur hat on his head, looking out curiously from a window” (Mechel 84n4). That is how the description remained, unadorned with any religious identity until the 19^th century.

In the 19th century, two descriptions of the Old Man at a Window added his religion: he was a Jew. In 1839, German art historian Georg Rathgeber, in his study of Netherlandish art, asserts that “this picture’s title is “Böhmischen Juden,” “Bohemian Jew.’” Rathgeber disputes the identification not for its lack of historicity but because “the character of the facial features does not seem to correspond very well to” his antisemitic views on Jewish physiognomy (Rathgeber 147). Similarly, in 1861, French art critic Charles Blanc, in his encyclopedic work Histoire des Peintres de Toutes les Écoles, asserts that the Belvedere catalog now refers to the painting as “Un vieux juif (dit le Catalogue)” or “an old Jew (as it appears in the Catalog)” (Blanc 4). This portrait impressed Blanc and is among the few he reproduced in his discussion of Hoogstraten (Blanc 1). However, Blanc is notorious for identifying Jews in Rembrandt’s and his school’s works without any supporting evidence (Knotter and Schwartz 7-9). Contrary to the “catalog’s identification,” Blanc, like Rathgeber, asserts that the face “is not Israelite” (Blanc 2). Neither Blanc nor Rathgeber mentions Rabbi Heller.

Figure 2 Charles Blanc, Histoire des Peintres de Toutes les Écoles

Blanc’s and Rathgeber’s Jewish association did not take hold. For example, G.H. Veth, in his 1889 article discussing artists from Dordrecht, including Hoogstraten, cites Blanc and notes his reproduction of Old Man. However, Veth describes it without mentioning any Jewish connections (Veth 145). Similarly, a 1903 tour guidebook of Vienna confirms that at the Belvedere, the painting’s title remains unchanged as “Old Man at a Window” (Baedeker 73; cf. Gerson, 282).

Despite the absence of objective evidence and the dismissal of Blanc’s and Rathgeber’s 19th-century Semitic connection, one scholar in the 1950s cryptically associated Rabbi Heller with Hoogstraten’s painting. Margarethe Poch-Kalous, the head of the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna (Akademie der bildenden Künste in Wien), in her 1959 survey of Dutch art in Vienna, refers to the figure as “ein bärtiger alter Mann (Rabbi Heller),” “a bearded old man (Rabbi Heller)” (Poch-Kalous 198). The basis for her identification is opaque. Poch-Kalous’ two citations offer no support; neither mentions Heller nor suggests that the figure is even Jewish, nor does she reference Blanc or Rathgeber (Poch-Kalous 198 citing Engerth 207n928 and Köpl clvnn330).

Oddly, unlike other personalities, artists, and subjects discussed in her article, which consistently include personal names and birth and death dates, Poch-Kalous provides nothing beyond “Rabbi Heller.” This is especially puzzling for an article in the Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorische Sammlungen, whose readership is unlikely to be sufficiently familiar with the history of 17th-century Bohemian rabbis to provide the missing details.

Whatever the basis for Poch-Kalous’s connection between Hoogstraten’s painting and Heller, it was swiftly dismissed. In 1972, Klaus Demus, the art historian and curator at the Kunsthistorisches Museum, demonstrated that it was impossible for Heller to be the model. He explains that Heller was imprisoned in 1629, and by 1644, he was serving as a rabbi in Krakow, where he remained until his death in 1654. Hoogstraten, who was only two years old when Heller was imprisoned in Vienna, painted Old Man at a Window in 1653, long after Heller had left Vienna (Demus 47-48). Today, the Kunsthistorisches Museum’s website alludes to Poch-Kalous’ attribution and rejection: “According to a tradition that is now presumed to be mistaken, the man is Rabbi Yom Tov Lipmann Heller.” Hoogstraten’s “deception” and “illusion” did not extend to rendering persons he never saw.

Illustrious Jews and Illusionary Jewish Sources

Jewish sources similarly are not more persuasive in linking Heller to Hoogstraten’s painting. Generally, rabbinic portraits prior to the 19th century lack authenticity (Cohen), and Heller is no exception. Most of the few early verifiable images exist as frontispieces in books rather than as paintings, and none depict Eastern European rabbis. Heller’s image first appears in Jewish sources in the early twentieth century. It depicts an old man, yet he is completely different from Hoogstraten’s version. The first instance of Heller masquerading as the Old Man at a Window is over a decade after Demus debunks that theory!

Figure 3 Bader, Drasig Doyres, 175

The first Jewish source of an alleged portrait of Rabbi Heller appears in a Yiddish collection of stories and hagiographies of rabbis in Gerson Bader’s Drasig Doyres Yiden in Poylen, published in 1927 (Bader 175). Bader’s depiction of Rabbi Heller does not resemble the individual shown in Hoogstraten. Bader claims that his source is an “old drawing,” yet he does not provide any further details, such as where or when it was published.

Bader’s book features other alleged rabbinic images from “old drawings” that are demonstratably false. For example, Bader’s portrait of R. Aaron Shmuel Kaidanover, author of the Birkas ha-Zevach on Kodshim, is of the Karaite and forger Avraham Firkovich (1787-1875) (Bader 185). It is undoubtedly Firkovich, as it appears in his Avnei Zikaron, published in 1872, during his lifetime. Similarly, Bader misattributes Joseph Delmedigo’s (1591-1655) portrait from the frontispiece of his Sefer Elim (Amsterdam, 1629), and the photo of R. Shmuel Salant by Zadok Bassan, assigning them to alternative rabbinic figures (Bader 204, 321). Nonetheless, Bader’s depiction of Heller was often reproduced, to the extent that in a 2000 biography of Heller, it is referred to as “iyur amimi nafuts shel ha-Tosefos Yom Tov,” “the widespread folk image of the Tosefos Yom Tov” (Herskovics 32).

Figure 4 Bader, Drasig Doyres Yiden in Poylen, 175.

Figure 5 Firkovich, Avnei Zikhron, From the Gross Family Collection, The Center for Jewish Art

It was only in 1984 that a Jewish source connected the Hoogstraten painting to Rabbi Heller. The cover of the book The Feast and the Fast: The Dramatic Personal Story of Yom Tov Lipman Heller, a translation of Megilas Eivah, depicts Rabbi Heller in prison and is modeled on the figure in the Hoogstraten painting. To eliminate any doubt about the source of the cover art, the back of the book features reproductions of title pages from Heller’s works and his gravestone, along with a photo “of the drawing in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna, Austria, entitled ‘Man at the Window’ (1653) by Samuel Van Hoogstraten (1627-1678)” (Lipschitz and Rosenstein). A similar image was used for the cover illustration of another translation of Megilas Eivah published in 1991 (Heller). The English section of the 2000 biography of Heller reproduces the cover of The Feast and the Fast, describing it as “featuring a picture of the Tosefot Yom Tov” (Herskovics 101). However, it does not attempt to reconcile this image with the clearly different “widespread folk image” presented in the Hebrew section of the biography. Although not mentioned in any of these sources, they were presumably misled by the bars on the window. However, those are not prison bars; rather, as was common in that era, the windows were supported by these architectural elements (Hermans 249).

Figure 6 Cover, Feast and the Fast, 1984

By 1999, however, Jewish sources also recognized the impossibility of associating Heller with the painting. R Ya’akov Yeruchum Wreschner republished Megilas Eivah based on four editions and two manuscripts and includes a comprehensive introduction regarding Heller. In two footnotes within the introduction, Wreschner briefly addresses Heller’s connection, or lack thereof, to Old Man at a Window. Like Demas, Wreschner contends that the nearly twenty-five-year gap between Heller’s departure from Vienna and Hoogstraten’s painting of Old Man renders it impossible for Heller to have been the model. Wreschner asks rhetorically, how could Hoogstraten “paint Rabbenu [Heller] when he never set eyes on him?” (Wreschner Megilas 48n3). Wreschner also contacted the Kunsthistorisches Museum and received a response confirming that “not only is it not the Rabbi, but it is not even a Jew” (Wreschner Megilas 17n4). As a result, Wreschner refused to reproduce that portrait in his book. Similarly, despite being titled Portrait of a Seventeenth-Century Rabbi, the most recent academic biography of Heller by Joseph Davis includes neither the Hoogstraten portrait nor any other image of Heller (Davis).

In 2024, Wreschner published a significantly revised and retitled edition of his book. Despite discrediting Heller’s connection to the painting over twenty years ago, various Jewish books, newspapers, and other ephemera continue to publish Old Man at a Window and link it to Heller (e.g., Alfasi 137; Stern 184-86; Berman). Wreschner was, therefore, compelled to revisit the painting, presenting additional arguments and greater detail regarding his discussions with the Kunsthistorisches Museum.

Wreschner, in 1999, first spoke telephonically with the Director of the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Dr. Karl Schütz, who confirmed that the painting was not connected to Heller. Schütz followed up with a letter detailing the sources for his rejection. Schütz stated that, with one exception, from the earliest catalogs to contemporary analyses of the painting, it was never associated with any specific individual, Jewish or otherwise. This is consistent with Hoogstraten’s intent, showcasing the trompe l’oeil technique rather than portraiture. The only time it appears – in Demus’s “detailed catalog of Dutch painters from 1972”—is solely to repudiate Poch-Kalous’s chronologically impossible and otherwise undocumented connection to Heller. Schütz also discredited the claim that following the Anschluss, the painting was categorized as Jewish art and consigned to the museum’s basement. On the contrary, a coterminous catalog lists the painting among those on display.

Despite Wreschner’s certitude about Schütz’s rejection, for unclear reasons, Wreschner attributes an otherwise unrecorded episode to Schütz. This alleged event appears to offer some support for linking Heller to the painting, but it is completely absent from the letter. According to Wreschner, the letter references an event in 1972 when an unidentified Jew approached the museum and claimed there was “a tradition that it was Tosefos Yom Tov” (Wreschner 2024, 24-26). The museum expressed skepticism about that tradition but did not completely dismiss it. In Wreschner’s retelling, it suggested the possibility that “a Jew conjured up Heller’s image and Hoogstraten copied it.” The actual text of the letter directly contradicts Wreschner’s account. Schütz references 1972 not as the date of an important meeting that supports the “legend” but as the first substantial discussion – by Demus – and his definitive rebuttal without mentioning a meeting with the Jew.

Beyond Schütz’s letter, Wreschner adds internal reasons why the painting cannot depict Heller in jail. The window is large enough for the man to stick his head out and features high-quality glass, an uncommon design for a prison. Furthermore, the expensive fur hat worn by the Man at a Window is an unlikely accessory in a prison housing hardened criminals sentenced to death and an incongruous headpiece for the July heat when Heller was imprisoned. Wreschner could have included another element in the painting that contrasts with a prison – the wall behind the Old Man has patterned wallpaper.

Following his earlier edition, Wreschner learned of an earlier source linking Heller to the painting, which is summarily dismissed. R. Shimon Fuerst, who lived in Vienna before 1940, in his book, Shem mi-Shimon, published in 1967, recalls visiting the museum where he saw firsthand “the painting made during the imprisonment” (Fuerst 426). Wreschner is unmoved by Fuerst’s identification. First, Fuerst was not an expert on Heller. Fuerst writes that Heller left Vienna to assume the Chief Rabbi position in Krakow, which is false. After his release, Heller returned to Prague, only leaving for Krakow fifteen years later. Aside from this obvious mistake, Fuerst’s opinion is irrelevant. Wreschner does not dispute Fuerst’s rabbinic bona fides, yet he is not an art historian. When faced with questions of rabbinic law, we defer to rabbis, but, according to Wreschner, “when it comes to questions of attribution of art, we look to experts in that field” (Wreschner 2024, 26). Regardless of the reliability of Fuerst’s claim, the mystery of Poche-Kalous’ source remains unsolved as her work predates Fuerst’s by four years.

Going Once, Twice, Three Times – Sold!

The identification of Heller with the Old Man at a Window is not the first, nor likely the last portrait erroneously attributed to a well-known Jew. One such example is the “traditional” portrait of the founder of the Hassidic movement, R Yisrael Ba’al Shem Tov. This portrait depicts a Ba’al Shem, a Wonderworker, but not Yisrael; rather, it is of Ya’akov Falk of London (Oron). He was an alchemist and an eccentric, and according to R Ya’akov Emden, a crypto-Sabbatian. However, evidence does not always prevail. Books and numerous sukkah decorations continue to utilize this portrait.

There is even another Hoogstraten portrait that falls into this category. A 1670 Hoogstraten portrait now in the Jewish Museum in New York was previously associated with Baruch (Bento, Benedictus) Spinoza. This is just one of many alleged portraits of Spinoza. Yet, most, if not all, lack independent verification or directly contradict the existing evidence (Ekkart). Indeed, “It is the same with the portraits as with so many other aspects of Spinoza’s life: little can be said with any certainty” (qtd. in Ekkart 25). This portrait was first linked to Spinoza in 1929, partly based on “a slip of paper on the back bearing the scholar’s name” (Ekkart 5). It is unclear who made that determination or even when the paper was inserted into the back of the painting. Consequently, the Jewish Museum now describes the painting as “Portrait of a Man (previously thought to be Baruch Spinoza).”

Similarly, despite art historians and Jewish sources resoundingly rejecting Heller’s connection to the Old Man at a Window, it seems unlikely that the idea of Hoogstraten depicting Heller will be dislodged in the collective Jewish consciousness. The attribution is so deeply ingrained that someone spent a staggering $120,000 before fees on a late 19th-century reproduction of Hoogstraten’s painting.

Figure 7 Lot 318, Kestenbaum Auctions, March 12, 2014

In 2014, the American Judaica auction house Kestenbaum & Company listed an 1887 painting described as “Yom Tov Lipman Heller, Portrait: Imprisoned in Vienna,” with a $12,000-$18,000 estimate. The portrait also served as the front cover image of the catalog. It is described as “the celebrated portrait of the Tosefos Yom Tov” and claims that Hoogstraten “painted Rabbi Heller in 1653 and entitled it ‘Old Man in the Window.’” The catalog warns that “it is not known if van Hoogstraten ever met or saw [Heller]; however, it is likely that he was aware of the Rembrandt (School) painting of 1643 entitled ‘Portrait of an Old Jew’ (today in the National Gallery of Denmark) – where a similar, bearded Jewish man, with head cocked, looks emotively at the viewer.” Scholars acknowledge that elements of Man at a Window and other Hoogstraten paintings evoke “the face studies of costumed figures routinely produced in Rembrandt’s studio,” but this does not transform the man into a Jew, let alone Rabbi Heller. The Jewish identification of the painting in the National Gallery of Denmark is also of questionable relevance. Some aspects of that painting, most notably the chain around the man’s neck, make it highly unlikely that it depicts a Jew (Alexander-Knotter 80-81). The catalog’s only citation for attributing the subject to Heller is the 1984 book, The Fast and the Feast, mentioned earlier. It does not reference Demus’ or Wreschner’s discussions that challenge that attribution. 

The significance assigned to the artistic rendition of the original is also debatable. The 1887 reproduction bears the signature of the artist “Paul Krüger.” However, Krüger was not a recognized artist; instead, it was a commercial reproduction company in Vienna that commonly attached its labels to the works. Its full name is “Paul Krüger Atelier für Porträtmalerei in Wien” (Paul Krüger Studio for Portrait Painting in Vienna). The studio functioned in the late 19th century and reproduced numerous paintings from the Kunsthistorisches Museum. Today, for those wanting to display a similar commercial reproduction of the painting on their wall, it is available through many websites that specialize in creating highly accurate copies of famous artworks. One such site offers a hand-painted version, almost the exact size of the original, with a similar frame, for about $1,400.

If the buyer had waited a year, they could have acquired an earlier reproduction by a recognized and significant artist. On May 18, 2015, Ferdinand Waldmüller’s (1793-1865) painting “Old Man at the Window,” modeled after Hoogstraten and executed in 1819, was auctioned with an estimate of €22,400 to €28,000. Unlike Krüger’s shop, which served as a commercial entity, Waldmüller is regarded as one of “the most important Austrian painters of the Biedermeier period.” Nevertheless, the lot remained unsold.

The Krüger copy may not be the best reproduction, but the auction catalog description proved worthwhile for reproduction. Rabbi Moshe Bamberger is the author of a series of books on “Great Jewish” items published by Artscroll. One book focuses on letters, another on important Jewish books, and another titled Great Jewish Treasures, is “A Collection of Precious Judaica, Associated with Torah Leaders.” This work contains a chapter dedicated to “Artwork” that discusses some well-known examples of rabbinic images. He ably covers several of these topics and discusses the traditional portrayal of Yisrael Ba’al Shem Tov, accurately aligning it with London’s Ba’al Shem, Jacob Falk.

Bamberger also includes a section focused on the “famous depiction of Rabbi Yom Tov Lipmann Heller (1579-1654) peering through the window of his prison cell” and reproduces a version of the Hoogstraten painting. Bamberger tries to reconcile the inconsistency between the dates of imprisonment and the time when Hoogstraten painted Old Man. Bamberger’s source is the auction catalog, yet he seems to disagree with one item: which of Rembrandt’s “Jews” Hoogstraten supposedly used as a model for Heller. Rather than the 1643 “Portrait of an Old Jew” attributed to Rembrandt’s school and currently housed in the National Gallery of Denmark; according to Bamberger, the model was the subject of a painting by Rembrandt, also titled “Portrait of an Old Jew,” now held in the Hermitage Museum in Leningrad. Bamberger does not provide a rationale for selecting the Hermitage painting over the one in the National Gallery. Nevertheless, the Hermitage painting is equally unlikely to depict a Jew and is now referred to generically as “Man in an Armchair.” (Schwartz 371-373). Ironically, Bamberger’s use of the Hermitage painting only reinforces the unlikelihood that Heller served as a model for Hoogstraten. The Hermitage Rembrandt originates from 1654, one year after “Old Man in a Window.” Hoogstraten certainly did not use a nonexistent painting to model his artistic expression.

Whether we will ever fully explicate to our satisfaction the enigmatic history of Hoogstraten’s 1653 painting Old Man at a Window, Hoogstraten’s masterful execution of the Trompe l’oeil technique makes the painting worth seeking out on its own. The exhibition closed in Vienna on January 12, 2025, but relocated to Rembrandt House in Amsterdam, “The Illusionist. Samuel van Hoogstraten,” from February 1 to May 4, 2025. The Amsterdam exhibition is entirely dedicated to Hoogstraten. To accompany the Vienna exhibit, the Kunsthistorisches Museum published a collection of articles titled Rembrandt Hoogstraten: Colour and Illusion, edited by Dr. Sabine Pénot, the Curator of Netherlandish and Dutch Paintings at the museum. This book is of excellent quality, beautifully reproducing many of the exhibit’s paintings and etchings. One article is a detailed study of Hoogstraten’s process and technique in Old Man at a Window (Hermens). While it employs various infrared and other technologies to uncover what lies beneath the surface, no rabbi is lurking behind the layers of paint.

* I want to thank Dr. Shnayer Leiman for bringing to my attention Gershom Bader as the earliest source of Heller’s representation within Jewish sources. I also wish to thank Professor Marc Michael Epstein, Professor Marc Shapiro, Dr. Lara Lempertienė, and Menachem Butler for their thorough review of the draft and invaluable feedback, Dr. Sabine Pénot for scouring the Kunsthistorisches Museum’s collection for information regarding Heller’s link to the painting, and Shaul Seidler-Feller for his expertise in translating Yiddish. Additionally, I am grateful to Rabbi Yaakov Yeruchum Wreschner for sharing his correspondence with the Kunsthistorisches Museum, and, as always, Eliezer Brodt, whose enviable encyclopedic knowledge, which he freely shares, ensured I did not overlook crucial materials.

Sources:

Alexander-Knotter, Mirjam, et al. The ‘Jewish’ Rembrandt, The Myth Unraveled. Waanders Publishers/Jewish Historical Museum, [2006].

Bader, Gershom. Drasyig Doyres Yiden in Poylen. Oriom Press, 1927.

Bamberger, Moshe. Great Jewish Treasures. Artscroll, 2015.

Blanc, Charles. Histoire des Peintres de Toutes les Écoles, vol. 2, “Samuel van Hoogstraten”. Paris, 1861.

Brusati, Celeste. Artifice and Illusion: The Art and Writing of Samuel Van Hoogstraten. University of Chicago Press, 1995.

Cohen, Richard I. Jewish Icons: Art and Society in Modern Europe. California UP, 1998.

Davis, Joseph M. Yom-Tov Lipmann Heller: Portrait of a Seventeenth-Century Rabbi. Littman Library of Civilization, 2004.

Demus, Klaus. Friderike. Katalog der Gemäldegalerie: Holländische Meister des 15., 16., und 17. Jahrhunderts. Kunsthistorisches Museum, 1972.

Ekkart, Rudi. Spinoza in Beeld: Het onbekende gezicht/Spinoza in Portrait: The Unknown Face. Amsterdam Vereniging het Spinozahuis, 1999.

Engerth, Eduard van. Gemälde Beschreibendes Verzeirchness, vol. 2. 1884.

Gerson, Horst. Ausbreitung und Nachwirkung der holländischen Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts. De erven F. Bohn n. v, 1942.

Haberman, A.M. “Piyutav ve-shirav shel R. Yom Tov Lipman Heller.” Le-Kovod Yom Tov, edited by Judah Leib Maimon. Mosad HaRav Kook, 1956, pp. 125-145.

Heller, Yom Tov Lipmann. A Chronicle of Hardship and Hope. Translated by Avraham Yaakov Finkel, C.I.S. Publishers, 1991.

Hermens, Erma, et al. “Samuel van Hoogstraten’s Illusionistic Paintings for Emperor Ferdinand III – Two Case Studies.” Rembrandt Hoogstraten: Colour and Illusion, edited by Sabine Pénot. Hannibal, 2025, pp. 232-51.

Herskovics, Mayer. Two Guardians of the Faith: The History and Distinguished Lineage of Rabbi Yom Tov Lipman Heller and Rabbi Areyeh Leib Heller. Graphit Press, 2000.

Hoogstraten, Samuel Van. Introduction to the Academy of Painting; or, The Visible World. Edited by Celeste Brusati and Translation by Jaap Jacobs. Getty Research Institute, 2021.

Illes, Angelina. “List of Works.” Rembrandt Hoogstraten: Colour and Illusion, edited by Sabine Pénot. Hannibal, 2025, 258.

Knotter, Mirjam, and Gary Schwartz, editors. Rembrandt Seen Through Jewish Eyes: The Artist’s Meaning to Jews from His Time to Ours. Amsterdam UP, 2024.

Lipschitz Chaim Uri, and Neil Rosenstein, The Feast and the Fast: The Dramatic Personal Story of Yom Tov Lipman Heller. Moriah, 1984.

Mechel, Christian van. Verzeichniß der Gemälde der Kaiserlich Königlichen Bilder-Gallerie in Wien, Vienna, 1783.

Oron, Michal. Rabbi, Mystic, or Imposter. Translated by Edward Levin. Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2020.

Poch-Kalous, Margarethe. “Das Legat Wolfgang van Wurzbach-Tannenberg an die Gemäldegalerie der Akademie der bildenden Künste in Wien,” in Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien vol. 55, 1959.

Rathgerber, Georg. Annalen der Niederländischen Malerei und Kupferstecherkunst: Van Rubens Abreise nach Italien bis auf Rembrandt’s Tod. Gotha, 1839.

Rigler, Hieronumus. “Beschreibung und Beurtheilung verschiedener Gemälde der S.S. Bildergalerie in Belvedere van Hieronymus Rigler aus dessen 1783 herausgegebenen, ausser Wien wenig bekannten und bereits geendigten mächentlichen Anzeigen van Künstlern und Kunstsachen,” in Miscellaneen artistischen Innhalts, 21, 1784, pp. 158-177.

Schwartz, Gary. The Rembrandt Book. Abrams, 2006.

Stern, Yechiel Michel. Gedoli Ha-Doros. Minchas Yisrael, 1996.

Van Sloten, Leonore and David de Witt. “Challenged by Rembrandt,” in Samuel van Hoogstraten, The Illusionist. Edited by Nathalie Maciesza and Epco Runia. WBOOKS, 2025.

Wreschner, J. Megilat Eivah le-Ba’al Ha-TY”T.  [], Jerusalem, 1999.

Wreschner, J. Ha-Tosefos Yom Tov u-Megilaso. [], Beni Brak, 2024.

Appendix:

Hoogstraten’s painting was copied and reinterpreted multiple times, with variations in style and even gender. (See Brusati 361, which discusses two copies in royal collections.)

A few more examples:

A more compact version with a whiter and shaped bear is attributed to a Dutch painter of Hoogstraten’s school and possibly one of the versions mentioned by Brusati.

Described as 18^th Century Flemish School, without identification of a specific artist, sold for CHF 800.

Two versions: a man that is a crude likeness of Old Man in a Window and a woman wearing a linen cap sold for $2,000.

An alternative version of a woman was painted by Josef Hauzinger, (1726-1787), currently at the Pushkin Museum in Moscow. A later version of this rendering appeared at auction in 2022.

Another example of a woman at the window is a 1936 Picasso painting.

Sale: Sefer on the Manna

By Eliezer Brodt

This week, we read Parshas Beshalach, and one of its key sections focuses on the Manna. As is well known, we live in a generation where there’s an explosion of information, and it’s simply impossible to know or read it all. Countless seforim have been written on virtually every topic, and the subject of the Manna is no exception.

In an upcoming podcast (to be released this week) from my Musings of a Book Collector Series, IY”H, I will delve deeper into the subject of the Manna and some of the recent literature about it.

One recent work I’d like to highlight is a remarkable sefer by Rabbi Abish Dachs, titled Otzar HaParshah: Parshas HaMan (Soft Cover, 435 pages), first published in 2024. This comprehensive, encyclopedic exploration covers every aspect of the Manna in great detail.

The sefer is currently available for purchase exclusively through me, while supplies last, as it has yet to be sold anywhere else. For more information or to order a copy, please contact me at Eliezerbrodt@gmail.com.

Below is the Table of Contents, which provides a glimpse of the vast range of topics addressed in the book.

New Books from Kodesh Press

By Eliezer Brodt

The Seforim Blog is proud to announce the publication of our frequent contributor Mitchell First’s newest book From Eden to Exodus: A Journey into Hebrew Words in Bereshit and Shemot. It comprises short essays on the parshas in Bereshit and Shemot, mostly related to words.

Here is the table of contents:

Available for purchase from Kodesh Press here

I would also like to point out two other special recent new books from Kodesh Press:

1. Rabbi Gil Student’s Articles of Faith: Traditional Jewish Belief in the Internet Era.

Here is the table of contents:

Available for purchase from Kodesh Press here

2. Dr. Moshe Sokolow’s Pursuing Peshat:

Here is the table of contents:

Available for purchase from Kodesh Press here