EAJS Conference Grant Programme 2021/22

Workshop Report

Space and Place in the German-Jewish Experience of the 1930s

University of Rostock, 12-13 May 2022

Organised by:

• Ofer Ashkenazi (The Richard Koebner Minerva Center for German History)
• David Jünger (University of Rostock, Historical Institute)
• Björn Siegel (Institute for the History of the German Jews)
• Katrin Steffen (Sussex Weidenfeld Institute of Jewish Studies, University of Sussex)

Supported by:

• the European Association for Jewish Studies (EAJS)
• the Axel Springer Foundation
• the Academic Working Group of the Leo Baeck Institute in Germany (WAG)
• the Association for Jewish Studies Germany (VJS)
• the University of Rostock
• the Koebner-Minerva Center for German History at the Hebrew University
• the Institute for the History of German Jews Hamburg (IGdJ)
• the Sussex Weidenfeld Institute of Jewish Studies at the University of Sussex

Report

The workshop Space and Place in the German-Jewish Experience of the 1930s was carried through successfully and according to plan. During the conference, 13 scholars from Germany, Israel, Austria, the United Kingdom and the United States presented papers and participated in thorough discussions on the workshop’s theme. The papers offered an in-depth overview of the research projects of the participants. The ensuing discussions analyzed the strengths of the arguments and underscored the (methodological and thematical) relations between the presented projects.

The workshop’s aim was to explore spatial aspects of the experiences of German-Jews during 1930s, in Germany and in transit. In highlighting the convoluted relations between place and identity — and the essential influence of these relations on the history of emotions, thoughts and culture — the workshop focused on the spaces that shaped German-Jewish self-perceptions in the face of National Socialism. Professor Marion Kaplan from the New York University delivered the keynote lecture on Thursday night, with the title The Emotional Dissonance of Space: German Jewish Refugees in Portugal. The talk discussed the experiences of the German-Jewish refugees in Portugal during the WWII years, with emphasis on gender-related experiences, interactions with local people and local authorities, and the maintenance of correspondence with relatives who were still in Nazi Germany (and later deported to Eastern Europe). Marion Kaplan considered three spaces that governed refugees’ experiences in transit: waiting lines (such as consulates, travel agencies, ship companies), cafés and letters. Each of these spaces dictated and enabled different connections between the refugees and their social environment. Prof. Kaplan showed how a careful examination of the spatial aspects of experience leads to new insights on German-Jewish history, and opens new paths for scholars of modern migration, fascism, women history and Jewish history. The talk was followed by a lively discussion that included the workshop participants, alongside with students and faculty from Rostock.

Most of the speakers presented case studies and applied concepts and methodologies of space and place to their topics. Some of the papers demonstrated how the writing of history of specific locations leads to new understanding of supposedly well-known times. Thus, for instance, Joachim Schlör’s analyzed the versatility of Jewish experience through a consideration of the tenants and experiences in one building in Brückenallee 33, Berlin. Katrin Steffen (Brighton) offered similarly insightful findings in her analysis of Jewish Heritage Societies (Heimatvereine) in 1930s Berlin. Other papers enhanced the scope looking at various public, private and ‘Jewish’ spaces in Nazi Germany and in the 1930s. A panel that included Guy Miron (Jerusalem), Teresa Walch (Greensboro), Kim Wünschmann (Hamburg) and Miriam Rürup (Potsdam) dealt with a variety of such spaces and their changes in the course of the 1930s and 1940s. The papers in this panel showed how scholars’ shift to space, and to the contemporaneous thinking about space, vitally affects the study of German-Jewry and of Nazism. A third group of speakers, including David Jünger (Rostock), Charlie Knight (Southampton) and Björn Siegel (Hamburg/Graz) explored the interplay of migration, tourism and vacation at various stages of the 1930s and the interdependencies of expectations, imageries and geographical or physical boundaries of movement. A fourth set of papers by Robert Mueller-Stahl (Potsdam), Sarah Wobick-Segev (Hamburg) and Ofer Ashkenazi (Jerusalem) considered the aforementioned topics through visual sources. Their papers indicated the benefits of combining methodologies (and questions) related to the “spatial turn” in historiography with the ones related to the “pictorial turn.”

While there was some general discussion about the concepts of space and place as analytical tools, in the course of the workshop it became obvious that more than abstract theoretical concepts, the discussion of spatial elements would benefit from specific case analyses. In doing so, the discussions of the papers as well as the final discussion at the end of the workshop yielded some general observations. First, a spatial approach necessarily goes hand in hand with other adjacent approaches, such as ones that emphasize transnational, visual or emotional aspects of historical experience. Second, a spatial approach does not require reinterpreting the 1930s in a radically different way, but it does allow for broader perspectives that expand our understanding of the period, especially with regard to Jewish agency.

Last but not least, the workshop brought together a wide range of scholars – from young researchers to the prominent scholars of the field. We expect that this combination of scholars will lead to new research collaborations and prompt new inquiries in the field of German-Jewish history, with emphasis on space and place. We believe that the workshop papers should be published in an academic journal. We are currently in negotiations with the workshop participants and publishers.

Programme

Thursday, 12 May

12:00–12:30 | Arrival

12:30–13:00 | Introduction

13:00–15:00 | 1. Creating Spaces of Memory

Gerald Lamprecht (Graz): Entangled Memories. Jewish and non-Jewish Discourses on the Great War in Interwar Austria

Katrin Steffen (Brighton): East German-Jewish Spaces in Berlin. Jewish Heritage Societies (Heimatvereine) and their diasporic milieu in the 1930ies

Joachim Schlör (Southampton): Brückenallee 33, Berlin

15:30-17:30 | 2. Being In-Between

David Jünger (Rostock): From Myth to Reality. German Jews Discover Palestine (1933–1938)

Charlie Knight (Southampton): Mapping your coordinates. Space and Transnationality in Refugee Correspondence

Björn Siegel (Hamburg/Graz): Ships to Nowhere. A Maritime Space and Its Relevance to Decode Jewish Refugees’ experiences in the 1930s

18:00-19:30 | Keynote Lecture

Marion Kaplan (New York): The Emotional Dissonance of Spaces. German Jewish Refugees in Portugal

Friday, 13 May

09:00-11:30 | 3. Vanishing Jewish Spaces

Guy Miron (Jerusalem): Synagogues, Cemeteries, Sports facilities. Jewish spaces and places in Nazi Germany

Teresa Walch (Greensboro): Rendering Germany ‘judenrein’: Space, Ideology, and German Jews in the 1930s

Kim Wünschmann (Hamburg): Filming the destruction of the Munich Main Synagogue in June 1938. A spatial history-approach to the reading of visual sources

Miriam Rürup (Potsdam): Dejudaization before Deportation. The removal of Jewish traces in urban topographies of German cities

12:00-14:00 | 4. Visualizing Jewish Spaces

Robert Mueller-Stahl (Potsdam): Capturing crisis. German-Jewish private travel photography between the Weimar Republic and Nazism

Sarah Wobick-Segev (Hamburg): Being and Not Being in Time and Place

Ofer Aschkenazi (Tel Aviv): The Displacement of the Ordinary. The German-Jewish Home in Photography Narratives of Emigration

14:15-15:30 | Round table: Final Discussion with Sandwich lunch

End of conference & farewell

EAJS Conference Grant Programme 2020/21

Report

The Hasidic Century: New Perspectives on Hasidism in the 20th and 21st Centuries

Wrocław, Taube Department of Jewish Studies, 20-23 June 2022

Main Organiser and Report Author: Dr Wojciech Tworek

Hasidism has arguably been the most popular Jewish mystical movement of all times. Originating in 18th-century Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Hasidism spread around most of Eastern Europe a century later.  Severely tested by the First World War and its aftermaths and decimated in the Holocaust, Hasidism managed to successfully recreate itself, with its major centres in USA and Israel. Today, Hasidim constitute an important segment of the Jewish orthodoxy, with its cultural (and in Israel also political) influence reaching well beyond the orthodox and the Jewish community. All predictions for the Jewish future now take it for granted that Hasidism will continue to flourish and exert increasing political, religious, and ideological influence.

The main goal of the conference was to open new vistas in the research of Hasidism. While Hasidic history, literature and thought have been part of the Jewish Studies endeavour since almost its inception, Hasidism has been researched selectively, with the predominant focus on the generation of the founders in the 18th century. Recent years saw a significant shift in this trend, with several studies exploring Hasidic history in the 19th century. Still, despite the profound significance of the 20th century for Hasidic history in particular, and for Jewish history in general, this period has been by and large neglected by the scholars. Few studies concern major Hasidic courts in postwar America, and even less deal with the interwar period or the Holocaust. This conference wants to encourage research on the recent developments in the Hasidic culture and foster a better understanding of the contemporary Hasidic culture.

In addition to shifting the focus of the research to the recent historical period, the conference aimed to foster new methodological approaches in the study of Hasidism. By inviting participants representing various methodologies, paradigms and disciplines, the conference sought to explore the possibilities of multidisciplinary research on Hasidism. All participants were asked to submit copies of their sources prior to their arrival. Subsequently, a book of diverse primary sources (from Hebrew and Yiddish texts to artefacts of visual culture to maps of social networks) was pre-circulated. The theme and the structure of the conference encouraged collaborative searching for cross-disciplinary approaches to these sources, in which linguistic or social studies research can contribute to the literary or historical, and vice versa. The conference’s international character allowed academics in vastly different fields of scholarly discourse (Israel, America, Europe) to come into conversation with each other.

Additionally, the conference aimed at being a springboard for the new generation of Hasidic scholarship. The majority of participants were early- and mid-career scholars, including doctoral students and contingent scholars, who otherwise may have lacked funding and opportunities to showcase their work. The structure of the conference, with pre-circulated sources, a round table, and significant time allowed for discussion (one hour per each three-paper session) facilitated a collegial and affirmative environment, in which everyone was able to share their work and receive constructive feedback. Participants came from Poland, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States and Israel.

The organisers of the conference are painfully aware of the gender imbalance in the community of scholars of Hasidism. The conference aimed to be a harbinger of change in that respect. It brought female scholars from all stages of academic career, to foster the emergence of a more diverse and just scholarly environment for Hasidic studies. In total, out of 24 presenters, 11 were women.

The conference took place over three days, from 20-22 June 2022. All events took place in the lecture halls of the Taube Department in Wrocław. In total, there were seven panels devoted to various aspects of Hasidic history and culture; each panel had three twenty-minutes papers, followed by an hour-long discussion. There were two additional events, too: a commemorative session on the first evening of the conference, devoted to the memory of Ada Rapoport-Albert, and a film screening on the second evening, with the participation of the director. As the conference coincided with the conclusion of the academic year at the Department, participants who decided to stay in Wrocław were invited to join the faculty and students at the Departmental end-of-the-year party, followed by a lecture by Naomi Seidman and an exhibition co-organised by the faculty and students of the Academy of Fine Arts.

Panel 1. Contemporary Hasidic Culture

In this panel, moderated by Gadi Sagiv, presenters explored various examples of Hasidic creativity. Lily Kahn and Sonya Yampolskaya opened by discussing the case of 23 under 1 Roof, a book series for Hasidic children. A close analysis of one fragment in Hebrew, Yiddish and English translations allowed for demonstrating how the language (and the target audience) shapes the form and content of Hasidic kid lit. In the second paper, Jessica Roda examined the participation of contemporary Hasidic women in the arts and entertainment industry in North-American Hasidic communities. Using her fieldwork and Yiddish press interviews, Roda analysed the strategies used by Hasidic female artists and performers in negotiating communal customs and religious law. Itzik Melamed delivered the concluding paper of this session. In his presentation, Melamed focused on musical traditions among Karlin Hasidim in Israel. Using oral traditions passed within his family, Melamed presented cases of introducing new tunes in the Karlin community.

Panel 2. Hasidic and neo-Hasidic narratives

The second session, chaired by Ora Wiskind, explored various types of Hasidic literature. Chen Mandel-Edrei analysed a rarely researched branch of Hasidic tales. Focusing on stories published in Romania, she examined tales concerning tsadikim who travelled to the Land of Israel, against the backdrop of Hasidic politics and history in the interwar period. Two other papers concerned authors of Hasidic background, who left Hasidic communities but continued reworking Hasidic motifs in their works. Philip Schwartz focused on the oeuvre of Khayim Yitskhok Bunin, an ex-Chabad Hasid, journalist, educator, and almost forgotten author of fascinating stories depicting Hasidic life. Ariel Evan Mayse, in turn, explored less known aspects of the poetry of a famous literary persona, the Hebrew poet Zelda. The close reading of her poems demonstrated their engrossment in Hasidic spirituality and raised the question of Zelda’s place within the Hasidic literary canon.

Panel 3. Perspectives on Hasidic education in interwar Poland

This panel, chaired by Daniel Reiser, explored the radical transformation of Hasidic education in the interwar years. Wojciech Tworek’s paper focused on the social history of Hasidic yeshivas. Using the Chabad school Tomkhe Temimim as a case study, Tworek explored methods and goals of student formation in interwar Hasidic yeshivas. Warsaw Hasidism was also the topic of Marta Dudzik-Rudkowska’s presentation, who focused on the Piaseczner Rebbe’s concepts concerning Jewish education. Dudzik-Rudkowska presented the Polish background of the Piaseczner Rebbe’s upbringing and activities, and showed the strong ties between his educational innovations and the developments of pedagogy in interwar Poland. The session was concluded by Naomi Seidman. Her paper concerned Bais Yaakov, the network of schools for orthodox girls. Showcasing one story about the founder of Bais Yaakov, Sarah Schenirer, Seidman pointed at its similarities with classic Hasidic tales and used them to spark a discussion about the place of Bais Yaakov in the history of Hasidism.

Panel 4. Aspects of Hasidic Leadership

Panel four, moderated by Naomi Seidman, explored various approaches to the study of Hasidic leadership. Levi Cooper offered his perspective on the female Hasidic leadership, exemplified by the Belzer rebbetsn, Sarah Rokeah. Cooper’s paper both raised a discussion about new female Hasidic leaders, and made a case for using online auction catalogues as a rich source for the study of Hasidism. In the second paper, Marcin Wodziński presented the usability of the tools of Digital Humanities for the study of Hasidic dynasties. The paper, which resulted from a joint project of Wodziński, Uriel Gellman and Gadi Sagiv, showed preliminary conclusions on marriage strategies undertaken by the families of the tsadikim. The final paper, by Gadi Sagiv, looked into the function of a rebbe’s personal assistant. Perusing a hitherto unused type of a source – ego-documents by former servants, Sagiv discussed their trials and tribulations, and the new vistas which the testimonies of the rebbe’s servants open on the organisation and practices of a twentieth-century Hasidic court.

Panel 5. Canonical texts across generations

This panel, chaired by Don Seeman, was devoted to the explorations of Hasidism as a current in the tradition of Jewish thought and mysticism. Two papers, Naftali Loewenthal’s and Eli Rubin’s, concerned the Chabad school of Hasidism. Loewenthal examined the use of the foundational text of Chabad Hasidism: Shneur Zalman’s Gate of Unity and Faith as a basis for spiritual contemplation in contemporary Chabad. Rubin, in turn, spotlighted the series Bati le-gani; a series of mystical discourses initiated by the sixth- and continued by the seventh Chabad rebbe. In his presentation, Rubin showed how the re-writing of older discourses generates new meanings to the Chabad mystical traditions for the next generations of Hasidim. Ora Wiskind’s paper focused on the classic text of the Gur Hasidim – Sefat emet. Instead of a standard 20-minute paper followed by questions, Wiskind invited the participants to a joint reading of Sefat emet’s commentary on the journeys of the Israelites in the Book of Numbers, and the discussion of the topicality of Hasidic commentaries.

Panel 6. New perspectives on interwar Hasidism

This panel, which was chaired by Yitzhak Melamed, aimed at bringing new research perspectives to the study of Hasidism in the interwar period. Jonatan Meir’s paper focused on the case of Bratslav Hasidism, which underwent a small revival in interbellum Poland. He brought new archival sources, including posters, flyers and pamphlets testifying to the increased activities of Polish Bratslav Hasidim and to the reconfiguration of the Bratslav spirituality and practice at that time. The second paper was delivered by Leore Sachs-Shmueli, and concerned a curious case of Avraham Yaakov Shapira, a scion of Hasidic masters, an ardent Zionist and an accomplished painter. Sachs-Shmueli introduced his life and works, and examined excerpts from his homiletical works, published as Netivot shalom. In the last paper, Uriel Gellman proposed possible ways of looking at interwar Hasidism, which would not be limited to the focus on the most powerful tsadikim (of Gur or Aleksander, for example). In his talk, he highlighted some less prominent figures (including that of Shlomo Hanokh Rabinowicz of Radomsk) to show, how refocusing on smaller currents allows for exploring in full the complexity of Hasidic responses to the challenges of the interwar period.

Panel 7. Hasidism between doctrine and social practise

The last panel, moderated by Leore Sachs-Shmueli, explored some practices of Hasidim and non-Hasidim who interact with them. In the first paper, Don Seeman explored the appropriation of some Bratslav practises by Ethiopian Jews in Israel as a springboard for the discussion of the limits of their integration into Israeli society. Alla Marchenko followed Seeman’s paper with a talk on the Ukrainian and Polish responses to Hasidic pilgrimages during the Covid-19 pandemic. Marchenko analysed press and social media releases of local authorities in Human and Leżajsk, showing a variety of on-the-ground strategies for engagement with Hasidic visitors. Finally, Daniel Reiser spotlighted Hasidic engagement in education and the job market in Israel. He showed a discrepancy between the involvement in pursuing careers by Hasidim and by the non-Hasidic haredim and raised a question of whether it may be related to different interpretations of the theological notion of tsimtsum by their formative years.

Two additional sessions took place during the conference. The first one was the Ada Rapoport-Albert Memorial Event on the occasion of the second anniversary of her passing. During the event, Wojciech Tworek spoke about Ada Rapoport-Albert’s connections with the Taube Department in Wrocław. Lily Kahn spoke about her as a mentor, and share her experience as Ada’s doctoral student. Naftali Loewenthal spoke about Ada’s encounters with Hasidic scholars and presented her as a bridge connecting the academic and the Hasidic communities of researchers of Hasidism. Finally, the departmental librarian Monika Jaremków introduced the conference participants to the Ada Rapoport-Albert collection, held in the Taube Department. The collection comprises Ada’s working library, donated to the Department by her and her family. Jaremków showed the reading room containing the bulk of the collection, and showcased several interesting artefacts from it.

The second additional session was the screening of Pearl Gluck’s film Divan. Pearl Gluck arrived in Wrocław, where she was filming her new documentary project, including interviewing some of the conference participants and shooting some of the panels. Furthermore, she showed her earlier film, Divan, in an event moderated by Karolina Szymaniak and followed by a Q&A session.

The conference brought together scholars from many academic centres and different career stages, men and women, working on various aspects related to Hasidic culture and history. It showcased methods and perspectives often marginalised in the study of Hasidism, including linguistics, ethnography or social networks analysis (in works by Lily Kahn, Sonya Yampolskaya and Jessica Roda, Alla Marchenko and Marcin Wodziński, among others). It also featured under researched figures, movements, sources and phenomena in Hasidism, raising new questions and initiating discussions concerning the future directions in Hasidic studies. In particular, Uriel Gellman’s paper led to a debate on the conventions of Hasidic research and their limitations.

Moreover, the event promoted the Taube Department of Jewish Studies in Wrocław as an important research & teaching hub for Hasidism in particular and Jewish Studies in general. In particular, the Ada Rapoport-Albert collection and the reading room brought the attention of the conference participants.

The organisers plan to publish selected conference papers in a special issue of the Journal of Modern Jewish Studies. The initial arrangements were made with the editors of the journal. The issue will include approximately 6 articles and will be preceded by a comprehensive introduction by the conference conveners.

The conference was advertised on the website and social media profiles of the Taube Department, H-Judaic, academia.edu, and social media outlets of our partners. Additionally, the film screening was advertised separately and the audience included some students, alumni and friends of the Taube Department. Posters and flyers were posted around the University of Wrocław.

Link to the programme (published on academia.edu)

EAJS Conference Grant Programme 2019/20

REPORT

Bibles and Scholars: A Tribute to Paul Kahle and Gérard Weil

 Aix-Marseille University, Aix-en-Provence, France

Main Organiser and Report Author: Dr Élodie Attia

Abstract

The colloquium “Bibles and Scholars : a Tribute to Paul Kahle and Gérard Weil” has been held in Aix-en-Provence, from 9 May to 12 May 2022. Originally planned for April 2020, it had been delayed due to the COVID 19 crises and to the loss of Prof. Philippe Cassuto (IREMAM, Aix-Marseille University) who was co-organizer, and one of the last disciples of Gérard WEIL.

The event invited different specialists and people who worked with Gérard Weil to communicate and exchange experiences around the heritage of one or both scholars. The scientific fields and disciplines involved were Qumranic studies, biblical editions, Masoretic studies, Medieval manuscript studies. The event gave opportunities to shed new light about the ‘Weil Archives’ which, since 2017, are kept at the BIAA (Library of the TDMAM Research Center). The event gave the opportunity to celebrate the last year of the ANR Project Manuscripta Bibliae Hebraicae (MBH Project) specifically devoted to Medieval Hebrew Bibles of Western Europe. Future collaborations beyond the end of the MBH Project funded by the ANR are planned, for instance, with the University Complutense of Madrid (UCM). The proceedings are in preparation.

Event Rationale

The legacy of Paul Kahle (1875-1964) and Gérard E. Weil (1926-1986) for the study of biblical manuscripts and the Masorah is of the utmost importance: it is sufficient to recall the fact that they are two of the best biblical studies scholars of the last fifty years and that what is still today the most widespread critical edition of the Hebrew Bible (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia) is based on the B19a Leningrad manuscript identified by Kahle in 1926 as codex optimus, while the text of the Masora Magna was edited by Weil in 1977 in the BHS. The conference proposed here intends to celebrate the two scholars, remembering their scholarly connection and deepening the impact of their studies on the history of the text of the Hebrew Bible as handed down through ancient and medieval Hebrew or non-Hebrew manuscripts.

The Universities of Turin and Aix-Marseille share one exceptional feature: they both now host the former private research libraries of these scholars. The Kahle library was acquired in 1967 by the University of Turin, while the Weil private library was donated in November 2016 to the TDMAM Research Centre of Aix-Marseille University, in coordination with Philippe Cassuto (IREMAM, Univ. Prof. of Semitic Languages) and the ANR Project Manuscripta Bibliae Hebraicae supervised by Élodie Attia (CNRS researcher, TDMAM). Paul Kahle’s archive in Turin and Weil’s archive and books in Aix reflect many scholarly points of interest in the various fields of Oriental languages and cultural studies. More in-depth research is required on both archives in order to articulate the sources of Kahle’s and Weil’s perspectives and works.

Originally, this event was interdisciplinary and was meant to deal with Hebrew, Arabic and Oriental studies in relation to the tremendous research perspectives that Kahle and Weil opened up during their scholarly activities, as well as their own intellectual interests as attested by their private libraries. A cursory examination of the books of these two great scholars shows that no discipline can be cherished only for itself but has to be understood within a wide range of other cultures: Arabic, Turkish and Persian sources, mostly from the post-classic period (12th-19th c.), in Kahle’s case; Georgian, Syriac and Arabic in Weil’s. Moreover, one of the most important of Kahle’s works concerns the Hebrew Bible, which was often examined from the angle of the history and tradition of the text, its language, and various editions. Together with Rudolf Kittel, he published the text of the Hebrew Bible, producing the so-called “Kittel-Kahle” version of the BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia) based on the Leningradensis B19a manuscript. His Masoreten des Ostens and Masoreten des Westens left a strong mark on their period. Kahle’s studies on the Masorah were interestingly transmitted and taken further by Gérard Weil, of which it is sufficient to recall his monumental contribution Massorah gedolah (Rome 1971) and its insertion in the BHS.

This conference will be an opportunity to foster interdisciplinary biblical and manuscript research. In a context of increasing interest in biblical manuscripts and interdisciplinary research in Europe, the research archives of both Kahle and Weil are a key to conceiving new perspectives on Hebrew biblical manuscript studies in the areas of both Qumran Studies and Medieval Studies, in which each scholar had an interest. The results of the most ancient biblical codicology represented by the Qumran manuscripts could be related to the very vast field of medieval codicology, as well as the implications for the texts handed down in the form of codices and scroll.

Finally, this conference takes place during the final year of the Manuscripta Bibliae Hebraicae Project, funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR) since September 2016. This project has developed a new research database dedicated to the description of Hebrew biblical manuscripts from Medieval Europe. Such a project is indeed a direct line to Weil’s activities of cataloguing Hebrew Bibles, which were abandoned due to his untimely death in 1986. The Kadmos project (University of Turin), initiated by the late Bruno Chiesa and now led by Corrado Martone, has reached its goal of inventorying Kahle’s manuscripts and archive by providing online access via a database that includes images of the most significant parts of the archive. This conference will help to disseminate the new results and perspectives, and explore the possibility of further interoperability between projects thanks to the participation of the best international scholars in the numerous fields inspired by the studies of Kahle and Weil.

Detailed overview of sections and papers

Preliminary Note: The event was modified and adapted due to the very unstable situation caused by the Covid 19 pandemic.

The colloquium was divided into four sessions and one introductory opening session. The last day was planned for visiting ancient synagogues of the Comtat Venaissin, with the help of the cultural services of the regional council (PACA).

The afternoon opening session was introduced by Élodie Attia (CNRS – TDMAM Aix-Marseille University), who focused on the biography of both scholars and explained how the idea of this conference came about as a result of the university recovering the private library of G. Weil in October 2016. She recalled their different backgrounds and the evolution of their work, having both begun with Babylonian biblical texts and shared the idea that the Babylonian System (expressed by the Berlin ms Or. Qu. 680) was a pre-Masoretic system leading somewhen to the Tiberian System (p. 105 Weil 1962). They both thought it important to study the Bible as an academic subject in the field of humanities, and not only as an object of belief. The common idea of the existence of “a monolithic Masoretic Text”, based on a “model codex”, was, according to Weil, inaccurate (cf. “La Massore”, REJ, 1972). Attia also highlighted the importance of computer sciences applied to languages and text analysis, which Weil pioneered in the 1960s and early 1970s. She also spoke of Philippe Cassuto, who was Gérard Weil’s last and outstanding disciple between 1983 and 1986, and one of the greatest specialists of Masorah and Hebrew languages. Anne-Marie Guény-Weil, former CNRS colleague of G. Weil, read an unedited text by him (une homélie funèbre) which demonstrated all the admiration and friendship that Weil had for Kahle. Gérard Jobin, former CNRS colleague of G. Weil, shared his memories, recalling us of the activities of the “Section Biblique et Massoretique” of the Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes, in Strasbourg, Nancy, and then Lyon, where he knew Philippe Cassuto as a young PhD student in the late 1980s. Prof. Corrado Martone (Turin Univ.) reminded us that in 2014 the project of reorganising, cataloguing, and partially putting online the huge archive of the German orientalist Paul Kahle (1875-1964) was completed. A colloquium was held in Turin on this occasion (since published in Henoch Review). Bruno Chiesa, Professor of Hebrew Language and Literature at the University of Turin from 2000 to 2015 (the year of his untimely death), was the main architect of this project, which without him would never have been completed (and perhaps not even begun). After a description of the Kahle holdings, this paper dealt with the personality and scientific activity of Chiesa. During the discussions, Viktor Golinets underlined the difficulty of working on Scholar Archive, but its necessity too, as in the case of Gotthelf Bergsträsser, Prof. of Semitic Languages in Munich, and his critical edition of Qur’an manuscripts, which remained forgotten for years and has, since 2007, been used within the framework of the Corpus Coranicum project (Science Academy of Berlin-Brandebour). Viktor Golinets also suggested that the use of the archives of the Deutsche Bible Gesellschaft would be useful to counterbalance Kahle’s opinion of Weil’s Masoretic edition of the BHS. Elvira Martin-Contreras recalled the fascinating book of Marie Kahle (What Would You Have Done?: The Story of the Escape of the Kahle Family from Nazi-Germany, London, 1945). Corrado Martone pointed out the fact that some of Kahle’s archives are nowadays preserved in Bonn. (Note: Colette Sirat was due to participate but she unfortunately had to cancel.)

The morning of the second day began with a session attended by specialists of Qumranic studies and chaired by Viktor Golinets (HFJS Heidelberg). The presentation by Jean-Sebastien Rey (Nancy Univ.) started with Khale’s crucial analysis of the textual history of Hebrew witnesses of the book of Ben Sira found in the Cairo Genizah and Dead Sea Scrolls. Rey sought to demonstrate that, contrary to Kahle’s hypothesis, it may be possible to reconstruct the stemma of the medieval Hebrew manuscripts. The presentation focused on placing the so-called manuscript C, an anthological manuscript dating back to the 13th century, in this stemma. The MS C’s relationship to other manuscripts has always been a conundrum for scholars. To reconstruct the stemma, Rey used the method of conjunctive and disjunctive errors designed by Paul Maas, and based his study on the critical edition he is preparing with Eric Reymond (Yale). Finally, on the basis of Altschul’s work, Rey questioned the utility of stemmatology when it is not used to reconstruct an Urtext or an archetype. Between old philology and new philology, a path is emerging to understand the mouvance of the text, its variance throughout history, but also to apprehend the genealogy of scribal versions that shed new light on scribal behaviours. During the discussions, this method appeared to be useful for Masoretic editions. Rey mentioned the editorial Lachmaniann Method (diplomatic Archetype), the Bédier’s Method (each manuscript is important in the reconstruction of an eclectic edition), the New Philology Method (each manuscript is a unique product), and a fourth method developed by Nadia Altschul (genealogy of scribal versions), which he preferred. Elvira Martín Contreras discussed the place of the variance: according to her, variance should not always be seen from the prism of its relationship to another text, but can also express a separate different tradition. According to Rey, it appears that working on each text independently (New Philology) in the end leads to the question of a stemma a stemma. Ron Hendel also pointed out some unconscious terminological judgment used by Rey in the form of a bias for naming the “variances”. He made the suggestion of using “horizontal transmission or vertical transmission”, with which Rey and the audience agreed. In “Qumran Biblical Manuscripts Written by Unprofessional or Unskilled Scribes”, Eibert Tigchelaar (Leuven Univ.), via Zoom, raised two difficult questions: first, “how do scholarly models of textual communities influence our interpretation of the Dead Sea Scrolls?” (or sources); second, “how does the study of the scrolls as scribal objects enable a reassessment of scholarly models?”. The specific approaches suggested were the “material and palaeographical approaches” and the question of the “copying process through variants and errors”. He first highlighted the problem with “old terminology” (rather subjective in nature, such as “unskilled / vulgar / elementary / substandard biblical mss”) and the further issues it causes. Recent scholarship on the Dead Sea Scrolls (Longacre, Popovic) has suggested new more neutral terms for describing manuscripts and hands, for instance 4Q76 and 4QXII^a. Tigchelaar also explained that what he called “unskilled writing” seemed to have correlations with elements such as smaller-sized scrolls, larger-sized script, the use of nonstandard orthography, and copying errors. Finally, he highlighted some research perspectives such as knowing more about the purpose and function of the copied (biblical) manuscripts. Concerning the use of palaeography in the study of the text and textual history of the Bible, he suggested that the question of the skill of the scribes and quality of the manuscripts may provide insights that could, for instance, help build theories about the textual history of the Bible, using these manuscripts to formulate hypotheses about the scribes’ concerns about the form of literary compositions. In the discussion, Gurrado and Attia pointed out that, regarding the terminology, that there are lots of common perspectives with medieval palaeography. As for the function of the biblical manuscripts, it is a question shared with the MBH project on Late Hebrew Bibles. With “Paul Kahle and the Research on non-Tiberian (pre-Masoretic) Hebrew”, Ursula Schattner-Rieser (Insbrück Univ.) reminded us that Khale was the first to use non-Hebrew sources that predated the medieval Masoretic text. Kahle argued that the first Masoretes (Soferim) established the consonant text using existing old manuscripts and corrected their textus receptus after them with their own rules, by eliminating variations and replacing them with new correct ones. The Masoretes would have then ensured that all significant deviations from the model manuscript disappeared. Only minor differences existed after the establishment of Musterkodices / model codices by Masoretes. Beyond textual differences – Kahle was particularly interested in phonological and morphological variants in the Isaiah scroll from Qumran. On some points, Kahle was perhaps right in his arguments about artificial correction: regarding the so-called waw-consecutive, the imperfect tense construct derived from an old prefixed preterite verb originated, according to Bauer’s comparative historical study of the Semitic verb, from Akkadian (p. V, p. 20).

In Origen’s Secunda, there is no such thing as a strong waw. The conjunction is always “ou-” like “oua” in Samaritan Hebrew and the Yemenite pronunciation. Bauer had already described the prefixed preterite yaqtul as “timeless” and the lack of distinction between the short and long imperfect forms should not have caused difficulties in understanding the text. Those familiar with this usage in Biblical Hebrew or other Semitic languages can easily recognise the preterite meaning of these imperfect forms, whether they are formally distinct or not. That the narrative refers to the past is usually clearly defined by the context, or the situation, and by adverbs. There was no misunderstanding, as proved by the Aramaic Targums which generally rendered the preterite yaqtul in general as past tense. In his talk entitled “The Distribution of Morphological and Orthographic Features in Selected Dead Sea Scrolls: A Quantitative Linguistic Inquiry”, prepared with Eibert Tigchelaar, Dirk Speelman, and Pierre Van Hecke, Johan de Joode echoed Weil’s studies on quantitative linguistics published in the 1980s. Here, quantitative linguistics was applied to the Dead Sea manuscripts. Emanuel Tov suggested eighteen linguistics features which can serve as indicators of a Qumran scribal practice found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. De Joode’s contribution critically assessed Tov’s hypothesis by analysing the statistical frequencies of these linguistic features. A dimensionality reduction technique known as “correspondence regression” was used to visualise the number of “traditions” present in the manuscripts. Advanced 3D visualisation techniques suggest that a) there is indeed a contrast between MT and non-MT manuscripts, b) there are multiple documents that fall “between” these two extremes, and c) there are considerable variations within MT manuscripts and non-MT parchments, particularly parchments in the non-MT group which cluster significantly. The fact that there is a non-MT-like group is not surprising given the binary features defined by Tov. The data do not support the hypothesis of a single practice.

The afternoon of the second day continued with the presentation of two achievements of the MBH Project: first, the creation of the “Weil Fund” by Christiane De Olivera Rodrigues (MA Aix-Marseille University – former MBH Project Assistant). She presented the ongoing process of cataloguing the Weil holdings by the TDMAM Centre, and the difficulty of gathering archives, notes, and private documents. More than half of the Weil private library has been integrated into the main catalogue (currently 500 items entered in the Frantiq catalogue website). Maria Gurrado (IRHT – CNRS, France) presented the final v. 2 of the Graphoskop software developed thanks to the MBH Project in 2021. Graphoskop is a plug-in for IMAGE J, available on the website of the MBH Project (open data). This tool can help to find, for instance, discriminating elements between two scripts that are very similar in type and ductus (Attia, Gurrado, Mailloux 2019). The lively discussion with Johan de Joode on the quantitative methodology showed the need to go further this method. The session ended with an exhibition of some valuable books from Weil’s private library. For instance, the BHK Bible volume annotated by the hand of Weil is one of a kind and a project for its digitisation is being discussed.

The morning of the last day was dedicated to “Biblical Editions”, another important aspect of Kahle’s and Weil’s work. It began with Michael Segal’s presentation “The Hebrew University Bible Project Edition of the XII Prophets” based on his famous Aleppo Codex. The critical apparatus is very rich, encompassing traditions such as Greek. The discussion underlined the very long-term process of such an edition – not deviating from the original project led by Moshe Goshen-Gottstein decades ago. Elvira Martin-Contreras (CSIC, Madrid) recalled that Paul Kahle was linked to the original project of the edition of the Cairo Codex of the Books of Prophets, which the Spanish School of Madrid started to publish in 1979 under the editorial leadership of Federico Pérez Castro. The friendship between these two scholars played an important role in the origins of this editorial project. Their correspondence also gives us an idea of the preliminaries to the edition of the Cairo Codex of the Prophets. The first volume, the Minor Prophets, and the Preface justifying the edition and explaining its structure and character were published in 1979, and the last of the seven volumes containing the biblical books in 1987. In 1992, Volume VIII, an alphabetical index to the Masora Parva and Masora Magna annotations, was published. Between 1995 and 1997, other complementary studies were published: the analytical indices of the Masora Magna, of the Masora Parva, and of the occurrences of let cases. This edition was, in Prof. Dotan’s words, “a real innovation in the field of biblical publications” for several reasons. This statement is based on two facts: 1. it was the first printed edition of the earliest dated biblical manuscript, and 2. it was the first edition to contain the biblical text and its Masora Parva and Masora Magna annotations only, reproducing the codex as exactly as possible, with no modification or emendation. It was the first edition to reproduce both the Masora Parva and Masora Magna of a whole manuscript, and to give the biblical references in parentheses in an apparatus below the biblical text. It was also the first edition to add an apparatus with explanatory notes giving additional information for understanding the Masoretic notes. Ronald Hendel (Berkeley Univ.), via Zoom, presented “Kahle on the History of the Pentateuchal Text: Reception and Reappraisal” reminded the humble position the researcher should stay towards his own objectivity while using theory of others. Kahle’s views on the early textual history of the Hebrew Pentateuch are often misunderstood, in part due to his terse formulations. Talmon harmonised Kahle’s views on the Old Greek version(s) – and his disagreements with Lagarde – with his views on the early Hebrew text(s). On the latter, both Kahle and Lagarde accepted the genealogical (or Lachmann) model of textual history, which is arguably correct. Hence, there is no Kahle theory of “pristine texts” for the Hebrew Pentateuch, and those who advance this theory must do so on different grounds. Attia remarked that Weil too was against the idea of an existing Tiberian Model Codex. Edson de Faria Francisco (Metodista di Sao Paulo Univ.) highlighted the importance of the Masorah of the Leningrad Codex B19a in the Biblia Hebraica series, and its contribution to the current Masoretic studies.

The last session was dedicated to Masoretic studies and Hebrew manuscript studies. Yossef Ofer (Bar Ilan Univ.), via Zoom, first discussed the studies of both Kahle and Weil on the Babylonian Masorah, which is so important as it was an ancient stage of the Masorah, and explained how it could have emerged among several traditions that are difficult to trace and explore due to a scarcity of sources. “The Targum of the Sin of the Golden Calf in Halakhic Sources and in the Babylonian Masorah” explored the phenomenon of untranslated verses in Exodus 32. This tradition to not translate certain verses in Exodus 32 into Aramaic was expanded by the Masoretes over the generations: from six verses to eleven, and then to sixteen verses. The explanation of this phenomenon is to be found outside the Masoretic tradition. This sheds new light on the different traditions of the Pentateuch Masorah. In his lecture, Viktor Golinets (Hochschule für Jüdische Studien, Heidelberg) asked the question, “(How) Can the Masorah be Edited?”. He aimed at discussing with the audience approaches and solutions to editing the Masorah in editions thereof as well as in scholarly editions of the Hebrew Bible. Firstly, using the list of all available editions of the Masorah, he showed that there are only a few manuscripts whose Masorah has been edited (and several manuscripts have been edited repeatedly). Secondly, he pointed out that every edition of the Masorah had its own purpose and this purpose determined strictly the way in which the Masorah was presented and displayed in the edition. The present situation is still quite the same as when Weil began to work on his catalogue of Hebrew biblical manuscripts, and on his edition of the Masoretic notes to the Hebrew Bible in the Leningrad Codex. Apart from M. Breuer’s edition, which sought to reconstruct the orthography of a number of Hebrew words, there is no comparative edition of the Masoretic notes of a considerable number of biblical manuscripts. Hence, the possibilities of conducting a comparative study of Masoretic notes and answering specific questions about the development of the Masorah as a system are still very limited. In “Cataloguing Biblical Manuscripts I: From “Manuscrits dates” to the BNF Project of Cataloguing Hebrew Manuscripts”, Javier del Barco (Complutense Madrid Univ.) examined the context of the development of the catalogue of Hebrew manuscripts from Sfardata Project (for every dated manuscripts) to the MBH project (for Bibles only) underlined that the famous “archaeological turn” and the establishment of codicology as a historical discipline in the mid-1950s open the way to a series of ambitious cataloguing projects that initially focused on dated manuscripts. Following in the footsteps of the Comité international de paléographie latine, the Comité de paléographie hébraïque was founded in the 1960s, with the primary objective of cataloguing the dated Hebrew manuscripts following new methodologies which focused more on the archaeological and material study of the codices. As a result of this task, the volumes of Manuscrits médiévaux en caractères hébraïques portant des indications de date were published, a fundamental pioneering work that represented a new paradigm for the study of Hebrew manuscripts. The French school of Hebrew codicology, which participated in this innovative task under the guidance of Colette Sirat, has since produced numerous tools for the study of Hebrew manuscripts. More recently, two ambitious cataloguing projects have been developed, which aim to produce a new catalogue of the more than 1,500 Hebrew manuscripts held by the BNF. The first project was, again, started under the direction of Colette Sirat and has produced several volumes of catalogues with highly informed and detailed descriptions, while the second project, still in its infancy, has followed in the footsteps of the previous one in terms of its objectives. In his presentation, del Barco sought to explore how the study of Hebrew manuscripts in the French school has evolved from the pioneering Manuscrits médiévaux until the more recent projects of cataloguing manuscripts at the BNF sur the ANR Project BiNaH. In “Cataloguing Biblical Manuscripts II: From Weil’s Cataloguing Project to the Current Manuscripta Bibliae Hebraicae Project”, Élodie Attia (CNRS, Aix-Marseille Univ., ANR MBH Project) reported that Weil set up a Unit for Documenting the Hebrew Bibles and that a project for cataloguing Hebrew and Aramaic biblical manuscripts was developed in parallel with applying computer sciences to the biblical text. Reports on the activities conducted at the Research Centre he headed show an intense work of describing manuscripts (fragments, codices, scrolls) from European Libraries and Russia between the late 1960s and the 1970s. His premature death prevented him from joining C. Sirat’s publication project Manuscrits dates, which was planned for 1985. The MBH Project follows in some of the footsteps of Gérard Weil and Philippe Cassuto in a new technical context, but in which Weil was a pioneer. The collaboration with Javier del Barco and interoperability open up enriching perspectives.

The final round table discussions focused on the diverse possibilities in Hebrew Bible studies for exploring either ancient or medieval manuscripts by always drawing on complementary perspectives: the editorial work done using one or several manuscripts as basis and the ways to consider them; the textual critical perspective; or the material historical-critical perspective with the problems of dating and locating, classifying and cataloguing the Hebrew Bibles, which is one of the many problems that arise when examining them in depth. Future collaborations will help to explore shared issues (for instance, the terminological issues with naming the phenomenon in palaeography). Hebrew Bible manuscripts are most common objects produced by Jews over time, and are multiple spectral objects, requiring different levels of interpretation.

Summary of most significant and productive threads

The final round table discussions focused on the diverse possibilities in Hebrew Bible studies for exploring either ancient or medieval manuscripts by always drawing on complementary perspectives: the editorial work done using one or several manuscripts as basis and the ways to consider them; the textual critical perspective; or the material historical-critical perspective with the problems of dating and locating, classifying and cataloguing the Hebrew Bibles, which is one of the many problems that arise when examining them in depth. Future collaborations will help to explore shared issues (for instance, the terminological issues with naming the phenomenon in palaeography). Hebrew Bible manuscripts are most common objects produced by Jews over time, and are multiple spectral objects, requiring different levels of interpretation.

Planned outcomes and outputs

Here are some possible and planned outcomes:

• Collaboration with Johan de Joode and Maria Gurrado for the next study with Graphoskop (version 2).
• Collaboration with the Complutense Madrid on the V.2 of MBH Database (now in conversion to the Heurist system) focusing on Hebrew Bibles produced in Western Mediaeval Europe.
• The MBH team will be partner with the actual ANR Project BINAH (catalogue of the Hebrew manuscripts of the BNF Paris) to deal with Hebrew Bibles descriptions.
• Propositions of collaborating with codicologists from other fields concerning methodological and terminological issues.
• Documentation: some of the items of the “WEIL Funds” at the BIAA in Aix-en-Provence should be digitized and available on-line and in the MBH Project website and in other platform.
• The publication of proceedings of the conference.

Final program

DAY 1: Monday, 09/05/2022 afternoon

14h :  Welcoming coffee

S1: Biography, collaborators and disciples of Paul Kahle and Gérard Weil (indicative)

15h Opening / Élodie Attia : In Memoriam Philippe Cassuto: Introducing the work of Paul Kahle and Gérard Weil

15h40 Anne-Marie Weil (former CNRS) : Gérard Weil et Paul Kahle : une amitié sincère

16h20 Gérard Jobin (former CNRS) : Travailler au côté de Gérard Weil

17h Corrado Martone (Torino Univ.): In memoriam Bruno Chiesa: Bruno Chiesa’s contribution to the creation of the Kahle Fonds.

Dinner in town 19h30

DAY 2: Tuesday, 10/05/2022

S2 Qumran perspectives of research

9h J.-S. Rey (Univ. Nancy) : Paul Kahle and Ben Sira: from the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Cairo Genizah.

9h40 E. Tigchelaar (Leuven Univ.) / via Zoom : Qumran biblical manuscripts written by unprofessional or unskilled scribes (via Zoom)

Pause

10h30 Ursula Schattner-Rieser (Insbrück Univ.): Paul Kahle and the research on non-tiberian (pre-masoretic) Hebrew

11h10 Johan de Joode (Leuven Univ.) The Distribution of Morphological and Orthographic Features in Selected Dead Sea Scrolls: A Quantitative Linguistic Inquiry

12h Lunch at the MMSH

S3 Libraries, catalogues, manuscripts

14h Christiane Rodrigues De Oliveira (Aix-Mars. Univ, Projet ANR MBH, M. A.) La bibliothèque de G. Weil : un nouveau fonds de livres et d’archives à la BIAA d’Aix-en-Provence / + Books exhibition (to confirm)

14h40 Maria Gurrado (IRHT, Paris-Orléans, in collaboration with ANR Project MBH) Graphoskop : A tool for quantitative Palaeography

15h20 – 16h20 Exposition of Book of the WEIL FUND

19h30 Dinner in town

DAY 3: Wednesday, 11/05/2022

S4 Editions of the Hebrew Bible

9h Michael Segal (Hebrew Univ. Jerusalem) / via ZOOM The Hebrew University Bible Project Edition of the XII Prophets

9h40 Elvira Martin-Contreras (CSIC, Madrid) : The Biblical Editions of the Spanish School of Madrid: The Cairo Codex of the Prophets and the Manuscript BH MSS1 from the Complutensian University Library

PAUSE 10h10-10h25

10h30 Ronald Hendel (Berkeley Univ.) / via ZOOM: Kahle on the History of the Pentateuchal Text: Reception and Reappraisal.

11h10 Edson de Faria Francisco (Univ. Metodista di Sao Paulo) : The Masorah of the Leningrad Codex B19a in the series of Biblia Hebraica: Contribution to the Current Masoretic Studies

12h Lunch at the MMSH

14h Yossef Ofer (Bar Ilan Univ.) / via ZOOM : The Targum of the Sin of the Golden Calf – in Halakhic sources and in the Babylonian Masora

14h40 Viktor Golinets (HFJS, Heidelberg Univ.) Viktor Golinets (HFJS, Heidelberg Univ.) (How) Can Masora be Edited? Approaches and Solutions in Scholarly Editions of the Hebrew Bible

PAUSE 15h10-15h25

15h30 Javier del Barco (Complutense Madrid Univ.): Cataloguing Biblical Manuscripts I : From “Manuscrits dates” to the BNF Cataloguing Project of Hebrew Manuscripts

16h10 Elodie Attia (CNRS, Aix-Marseille Univ., Projet ANR MBH) Cataloguing Biblical Manuscripts II : From Weil’s Cataloguing Project to the Current Manuscripta Bibliae Hebraicae Project

17h Discussions: Biblical studies and future perspectives

DAY 4: Thursday 12/05/2022

Visiting some ancient Synagogues in Provence (Cavaillon / Carpentras).

EAJS Conference Grant Programme in European Jewish Studies

2021-22

Nine events were originally funded for the 2021-22 cycle of the Conference Grant Programme. Whilst some of these events were delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, seven of them have now taken place, one has been postponed due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and one has been cancelled. Reports for the events that have taken place can be found below:

1. Medicine, Illness, and the Body: Healing and Healers from the Middle Ages to Early Modernity; Institute for Jewish Studies, Freie Universität, Berlin, Germany, 25-26 July 2022.

2. Jews of East-Central Europe after the Catastrophe: Multiplicity of Experiences, 1945–1956; Ukrainian Association for Jewish Studies, Kharkiv, Ukraine. (Conference postponed due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine).

3. A Jewish Europe? Virtual and Real-Life Spaces in the 21st Century; Centre for European Research, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, 3-5 May 2022.

4. Space and Place in the German-Jewish Experience of the 1930s; University of Rostock, Germany, 12-13 May 2022.

5. Theory and Practice of Allegorical Exegesis in Medieval Jewish, Islamic, and Christian Philosophy; Arabic and Hebraic Studies Department, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France, 21-23 February 2022.

6. Unfolding Time: Texts – Practices – Politics (BAJS Conference); Theology & Religious Studies, King’s College London, UK, 11-13 July 2022.

7. Rabbinization and Diversity: Methods, Models, and Manifestations between 400 and 1000 CE; École pratique des hautes études (EPHE), Paris, France, 14-24 March 2022.

8. Vienna and Thessaloniki: Two cities and their Jewish histories; Institute of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, University of Vienna, Austria, 17-19 February 2022.

Link for events and reports from previous years:

CGP Reports for 2019/20 and 2020/21

CGP Reports for earlier than 2019/20

 EAJS Programme in European Jewish Studies

funded by the Stiftung “Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft” (Berlin)

* * *

2017/18 Academic Year

Three events (a roundtable, a laboratory and a workshop) took place in the 2017/18 academic year in the Programme in European Jewish Studies:

1. EAJS Summer Laboratory for Young Genizah Researchers and those interested in the field [EAJS Laboratory, Munich, 6 – 9 September 2017]
2. E Pluribus Unum? Multidisciplinarity in Jewish Studies Programmes and Teaching [EAJS Workshop, Girona, 28 – 29 May 2017]
3. EAJS Roundtable on an International Program of MA Jewish Studies: Teaching Methods and Implementation Perspectives [EAJS Roundtable, Krakow, July 2018]

The reports for these three events can be found below.

1. EAJS Summer Laboratory for Young Genizah Researchers and those interested in the field

The laboratory aimed at providing a platform for students who either have not yet started their PhD but are interested in working with Genizah material, or who are in an early phase of their Genizah-related dissertation and need some guidance by experts within the vast field. It was intended to give young researchers the opportunity to establish a network for future cooperation with others working in the same field.

Conveners: Professor Judith Olszowy-Schlanger (EPHE Paris), Dr Ben Outhwaite (Genizah Research Unit Cambridge), Professor Ronny Vollandt (LMU Munich)

Organiser: Dr Friederike Schmidt (LMU Munich)

Report: Link for Young Genizah Researchers and those interested in the field report

2. E Pluribus Unum? Multidisciplinarity in Jewish Studies Programmes and Teaching

The EAJS held a workshop in Girona dedicated to an exchange between colleagues from nearly a dozen European countries (Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Ukraine, and United Kingdom), as well as from the United States and Israel, to discuss the potentials and challenges of the pluridisciplinary character of Jewish Studies.

Organisers: Dr Javier Castaño and Dr François Guesnet

Report: Link for Girona workshop report

3. EAJS Roundtable on an International Program of MA Jewish Studies: Teaching Methods and Implementation Perspectives

This Roundtable invites leading scholars and administrative leaders to discuss teaching methods in Jewish studies in different universities; the difficulties and obstacles they face; and possible solutions to these problems; and to set up a working group of scholars and administrative leaders to work on the creation of a concept for an international Jewish studies MA programme.

Organisers: Dr Jurgita Verbickiene and Professor Marcin Wodzinski

Report: Link for EAJS Roundtable on an International Program of MA Jewish Studies

* * *

2016/17 Academic Year

Two events, one Round Table and one Laboratory, took place in the 2016/17 academic year in the Programme in European Jewish Studies:

1. Turning the Page: Jewish Print Cultures and Digital Humanities  [EAJS Roundtable, Amsterdam, 6 – 7 February 2017]
2. Yiddish Language and Culture. A Relay Station of Modernity and Lieu de Mémoire of Postmodernity  [EAJS Laboratory, Vienna, 13 – 14 February 2017]

The reports for these two events can be found below.

1. Turning the Page: Jewish Print Cultures and Digital Humanities

This event brought together Jewish Studies scholars, Digital Humanities scholars, and curators from across Europe, to discuss opportunities and challenges arising from the new technologies for the textual, cultural and social analysis of Jewish printed sources.

Organisers: Professor Irene Zwiep (University of Amsterdam), Dr Andrea Schatz (King’s College, London) and Professor Emile Schrijver (Joods Historisch Museum Amsterdam)

Report: Link for Jewish Print Cultures and Digital humanities Report.

2. Yiddish Language and Culture. A Relay Station of Modernity and Lieu de Mémoire of Postmodernity

In current models and reflections on “new world literatures”, translation plays a crucial role on the level of experience as well as in theoretical reflections. Yiddish literature and culture have been and are shaped by processes of encounter, transfer and transmission to a particularly high degree. This laboratory confronted and expanded existing notions of translation in diverse fields of Yiddish cultural production, and extrapolated the multifold cultural interactions that have made Yiddish culture a relay station of Modernity and a lieu de mémoire of Postmodernity.

Organisers: Dr Olaf Terpitz, Mag. Marianne Windsperger and Professor Gerhard Langer, University of Vienna

Report: Link for Yiddish Language and Culture Report.

* * *

2015/16 Academic Year

Two events, one Roundtable and one Laboratory, took place in the 2015/16 academic year in the Programme in European Jewish Studies:

1. YIVO’s Histories, Contexts, Tensions: An academic roundtable to accompany the annual ‘Litvak Days’ (with the Lithuanian embassy, London) and YIVO (New York)   [London, 1 – 2 December 2015]
2. Research Approaches in Hebrew Bible Manuscript Studies. A Critical Overview Based on Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls, Cairo Genizah and European Genizah  [Aix-en-Provence, 6 – 8 June 2016]

1.  YIVO’s Histories, Contexts, Tensions: An academic roundtable to accompany the annual ‘Litvak Days’ (with the Lithuanian embassy, London) and YIVO (New York).

This event commemorated the 90th anniversary of the founding of YIVO and contributed toward a richer understanding of its complex history. It explored the institution’s origins and impact, its fate during the Holocaust, efforts at collection of cultural material, relations with the greater Litvak context(s), and comparable efforts to explore and activate the folk culture of East European Jewry.

Organisers: Professor Michael Berkowitz and Dr Helen Beer, University College London.

Report: Link for YIVO Report

2. Research Approaches in Hebrew Bible Manuscript Studies. A Critical Overview Based on Evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls, Cairo Genizah and European Genizah.

This laboratory critically examined the research approaches used for the study of the transmission of the Hebrew Bible from Antiquity to the Middle Ages. It brought together PhD students, Early Career Researchers, as well as senior scholars of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Cairo Genizah and the European Genizah, in order to share their research methods and approaches. Furthermore, it critically addressed questions regarding the Digital Humanities and how they can improve the scholarly work on the transmission of the Hebrew Bible. 

Organisers: Dr Elodie Attia-Kay, Centre Paul-Albert Février, Aix-en-Provence; Samuel Blapp, University of Cambridge; and Mr Anthony Perrot, École Pratique des Hautes Études (EPHE).

Report: Link for Aix-en-Provence EAJS Laboratory Report

* * *