Abraham Bar Hiyya on Time History Exile and

Redemption An Analysis of Megillat Ha Megalleh

1st Edition Hannu Töyrylä pdf download
https://ebookgate.com/product/abraham-bar-hiyya-on-time-history-exile-and-redemption-an-analysis-of-
megillat-ha-megalleh-1st-edition-hannu-toyryla/

★★★★★ 4.7/5.0 (26 reviews) ✓ 139 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Excellent quality PDF, exactly what I needed!" - Sarah M.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Abraham Bar Hiyya on Time History Exile and Redemption An
Analysis of Megillat Ha Megalleh 1st Edition Hannu Töyrylä
pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK EBOOK GATE

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

A Slow Death 83 Days of Radiation Sickness Nhk Tv Crew

https://ebookgate.com/product/a-slow-death-83-days-of-radiation-
sickness-nhk-tv-crew/

ebookgate.com

Warships in the War of the Pacific 1879 83 1st Edition

Angus Konstam

https://ebookgate.com/product/warships-in-the-war-of-the-
pacific-1879-83-1st-edition-angus-konstam/

ebookgate.com

AS pure mathematics C1 C2 3rd ed Edition Val Hanrahan

https://ebookgate.com/product/as-pure-mathematics-c1-c2-3rd-ed-
edition-val-hanrahan/

ebookgate.com

C2 Re envisioned The Future of the Enterprise 1st Edition

Marius S. Vassiliou

https://ebookgate.com/product/c2-re-envisioned-the-future-of-the-
enterprise-1st-edition-marius-s-vassiliou/

ebookgate.com
The Vocabulary Files C2 Advanced IELTS 7 0 8 0 9 0 1st
Edition Andrew Betsis

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-vocabulary-files-c2-advanced-
ielts-7-0-8-0-9-0-1st-edition-andrew-betsis/

ebookgate.com

Analysis and geometry on groups Nicholas T. Varopoulos

https://ebookgate.com/product/analysis-and-geometry-on-groups-
nicholas-t-varopoulos/

ebookgate.com

Woman Native Other Writing Postcoloniality and Feminism

Trinh T. Minh-Ha

https://ebookgate.com/product/woman-native-other-writing-
postcoloniality-and-feminism-trinh-t-minh-ha/

ebookgate.com

Maps of time an introduction to big history Christian$Aut$

https://ebookgate.com/product/maps-of-time-an-introduction-to-big-
history-christianaut/

ebookgate.com

Differential Equations Projector Analysis on Time Scales

1st Edition Georgiev

https://ebookgate.com/product/differential-equations-projector-
analysis-on-time-scales-1st-edition-georgiev/

ebookgate.com
Abraham Bar Hiyya on Time, History, Exile and Redemption
 Studies on the Children
of Abraham

Editors

Antti Laato (Abo Akademi University)

David Thomas (Birmingham University)
Camilla Adang (Tel Aviv University, Israel)

Advisory Board

Suha Taji Farouki – Edward Kessler

Gerhard Langer – Pekka Lindqvist – Mikko Louhivuori
James Montgomery – Vera B. Moreen – Uri Rubin
Sabine Schmidtke – Martin Tamcke

volume 4

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/stca

 Abraham Bar Hiyya on Time,
History, Exile and Redemption
An Analysis of Megillat ha-Megalleh

By

Hannu Töyrylä

leiden | boston
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Töyrylä, Hannu, author.

Abraham Bar Hiyya on time, history, exile and redemption : an analysis of Megillat ha-Megalleh / by
Hannu Toyryla.
pages cm. – (Studies on the children of Abraham ; volume 4.)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-90-04-27035-0 (hardback : alk. paper) – ISBN 978-90-04-27689-5 (e-book : alk. paper)
1. Abraham bar Hiyya Savasorda, approximately 1065-approximately 1136. Megilat ha-megaleh. 2.
Messiah–Judaism. 3. Messianic era (Judaism) 4. Eschatology, Jewish. 5. Resurrection (Jewish theology) 6.
Redemption–Judaism. I. Title.

BM615.A2343T69 2014
296.3'117–dc23
2014014728

This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters covering
Latin, ipa, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the humanities. For more
information, please see www.brill.com/brill-typeface.

issn 2210-4720
isbn 978-90-04-27035-0 (hardback)
isbn 978-90-04-27689-5 (e-book)

Copyright 2014 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Nijhoff, Global Oriental and Hotei Publishing.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without prior written permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill nv provided
that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive,
Suite 910, Danvers, ma 01923, usa. Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

To the memory of my parents, Iiris and Kalervo

∵
Contents

Preface xiii
List of Figures xv

1 In Search of the Message of Megillat ha-Megalleh 1

1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Previous Research 3
1.3 Summary of the Research Status 11
1.4 The Approach of the Present Study 13
1.5 Practical Notes 15
1.5.1 Textual Basis 15
1.5.2 Spelling and Transliteration 16
1.5.3 Translations and Citations 17
1.5.4 References 17
1.5.5 Other Conventions 17

2 Bar Hiyya’s Life and Works in Their Historical Context 19

2.1 Who was Abraham Bar Hiyya? 19
2.2 Historical Context 23
2.3 Cultural Context 26
2.4 Bar Hiyya’s Works 29

3 Elements and Characteristics of Megillat ha-Megalleh 32

3.1 Overview 32
3.2 A Synopsis of Megillat ha-Megalleh 32
3.3 Language, Style and Structure 34
3.4 Philosophy 38
3.5 Religious Tradition, Theology and Messianism 42
3.6 Exegetical Approach 47
3.7 History 49
3.8 Astrology 56
3.9 Polemics and Apologetics 57
3.10 Chronology 61
3.11 Reception of Megillat ha-Megalleh 63

4 The Author’s Introduction 66

4.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 66
4.2 Legitimating, Intent and Plan in the Author’s Introduction 66
viii contents

5 Concept and Meaning of Time 78

5.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 78
5.2 Previous Research on Bar Hiyya’s Concept of Time 79
5.3 The Philosophical Analysis of Time 81
5.3.1 The Turn to Philosophy 81
5.3.2 Form, Privation and Time 83
5.3.3 Being in Time 94
5.3.4 Kinds of Precedence 98
5.3.5 Finitude of Time 101
5.4 Rational Theories on the Duration of the World 104
5.5 Conclusions 111

6 From Creation to History 115

6.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 115
6.2 Time, Creation and History 116
6.3 Periodic Structure of History 133
6.4 Ages and Symmetries in History 136
6.5 The General Characteristics of Creation Days 144
6.5.1 The First Day 145
6.5.2 The Second Day 148
6.5.3 The Third Day 151
6.5.4 The Fourth Day 154
6.5.5 The Fifth and the Sixth Days 157
6.6 Bar Hiyya’s Ages of the World in Detail 160
6.6.1 Generations from Adam to Moses 160
6.6.2 Chronological Aspects 169
6.6.3 Messianic Calculations 172
6.7 Days of Tohu, Torah and the Messiah 174
6.7.1 A Problematic baraita 174
6.7.2 Levels of Prophecy 177
6.7.3 Calculations Concerning the Days of the Torah and
Messiah 179
6.7.4 Conclusion of the Second Chapter 181
6.8 Bar Hiyya’s Philosophy of Time and History 182

7 Soul, Fall and Restoration 187

7.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 187
7.2 On Resurrection and Immortality 189
7.2.1 A Move into Eschatology: A Defense of Physical
Resurrection 189
contents ix

7.2.2 Scriptural Support for Resurrection 196

7.2.3 Scientific Support for Resurrection 198
7.3 Man, Soul, Fall and Restoration 206
7.3.1 The Creation and Nature of Man 206
7.3.2 The Nature in the Messianic Age 211
7.3.3 The Human Soul, Its Creation and Nature 215
7.3.4 Fall and Restoration 221
7.4 Genesis and the Jewish People 230
7.4.1 Generations of Genesis and the Periods of History 230
7.4.2 Original Sin and the Jewish Soul 232
7.4.3 Response to Anticipated Objections 240
7.4.4 Messianic Calculations 242
7.4.5 Interpretation of Jacob’s Blessings 244
7.5 Author’s Conclusion of Chapter 3 247
7.6 From Creation of Man to the Redemption of the Jews 249

8 The History of Exile and Redemption in the Book of Daniel 253

8.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 253
8.2 Bar Hiyya’s Approach to the Book of Daniel 255
8.3 Kingdom and Exile in a Gradual Revelation to Daniel 258
8.4 Daniel 11–12 and Bar Hiyya’s Concept of History 266
8.5 The Struggle of Edom and Ishmael 285
8.6 The Road to Redemption and the Fate of the Nations 292
8.7 Bar Hiyya’s Interpretation of Daniel: History and Polemics 300

9 The History of Exile and Redemption According to Astrology 303

9.1 Subject and Structure of the Chapter 303
9.2 Justification and Use of Astrology 305
9.3 The Astrological Method 317
9.4 Jewish History until the Destruction of the Second Temple 335
9.4.1 The Birth of the Nation 335
9.4.2 The Period of the Judges 350
9.4.3 The Kingdom of David 353
9.4.4 From the Division of the Kingdom to the Babylonian Exile 362
9.4.5 The Babylonian Exile and the Beginning of the Second Temple
Period 371
9.4.6 The End of the Second Temple Period 376
9.5 The History of the Current Exile 382
9.5.1 The Success of Constantine and the Failure of Mani 382
9.5.2 The Rise of Muhammad 390
x contents

9.5.3 The Muslim Empire until the Crusades 396

9.5.4 Conclusion of the Historical Part 405
9.6 From the Past to the Future 409
9.7 Status and Function of Astrology in Megillat ha-Megalleh 421
9.7.1 Bar Hiyya’s Astrological History in Context 421
9.7.2 The Astrological History as Part of Megillat ha-Megalleh 426

10 The Ideas, Message and Coherency of Megillat ha-Megalleh 430

Appendices

1 Eschatological Calculations in Megillat ha-Megalleh (a

Summary) 445

2 Resurrection in Petrus Alfonsi and Megillat ha-Megalleh, a

Comparison 448

3 A Passage from The Astrological Letter by Abraham Bar Hiyya 453

4 Conjunctions and History According to mm Ch. 5 456

5 Astrological Interpretation in Megillat ha-Megalleh 461

5.1 Branches of Astrology and Their Relevance 461
5.2 Horoscopes 461
5.3 Signs 464
5.4 Planets 465
5.5 Planetary Houses: Planets in Signs 466
5.6 Planets in Subdivisions of Signs 467
5.7 Places 468
5.8 Aspects 473
5.9 Ruler of the Year 474
5.10 Lots or Parts 475
5.11 Quality and Sign of a Kingdom 475
5.12 Interpretation Involving Multiple Horoscopes 476
5.13 Duration of Rule 476
contents xi

Manuscripts 479
Bibliography 480
General Index 519
Index of Biblical Verses 529
Passages from Megillat ha-Megalleh 532
Preface

This study, which is an updated version of my doctoral thesis, is a result of

my almost life-long interest in Judaism, history, religion and philosophy. I am
first of all thankful to Professor Tapani Harviainen who made me realize, about
fifteen years ago, that my dream of turning this interest into an academic study
could become a reality. I am also thankful to him for inviting me to present
a paper at the conference of the Scandinavian Society of Jewish Studies in
2000. The paper I presented featured an interesting interpretation, by Abraham
Bar Hiyya, of Gen. 1:2 in terms of Aristotelian physics. In the conference I
came into contact with people from the Faculty of Theology at Åbo Akademi
University, and later that year I formally started my academic studies in the field
of Jewish studies at this university. This was made possible, not only through
the people at the university, but also because of the flexibility of my employer
and colleagues at the time.
Although engaging oneself in Jewish studies in Finland has been a somewhat
solitary activity, there is much to be thankful for, too. Professor Antti Laato,
the supervisor of my thesis, has been of a great help to me throughout these
years, likewise Dr. Pekka Lindqvist and Adjunct Professor Nils Martola with
whom I enjoyed long and interesting discussions when I was about to start the
work on this thesis. More recently, Nadja Johansson m.a. deserves my special
thanks, for all her comments and discussion, and also for contributing to my
no longer being the only medievalist in the field of Jewish studies in this
country. And of course, I have received much feedback from participants at
our seminars and conferences, especially from the members of the academic
networks “Encounters of the Children of Abraham from Ancient to Modern
Times” and “Rewritten Bible”.
I am also grateful to Adjunct Professor Haseeb Shehadeh for teaching me
the basics of medieval Hebrew, essential in my work on this thesis, Dr. Taneli
Kukkonen for both deepening my understanding of medieval Islamic philoso-
phy and for the many discussions we have had, and Professor Hannu Juusola
for my Talmudic Aramaic. When I was beginning this thesis, the comments of
Dr. Reimund Leicht and Dr. Resianne Fontaine helped me a lot to get on the
right track. My special thanks to Professors Mariano Gómez Aranda and Yossef
Schwartz, who read a draft of my thesis, estimated it to be worthy of a public
defense, and gave me much valuable feedback.
Mrs. Lorna Koskela has read the manuscript and helped a lot to correct the
language.
Financial support, which was decisive in allowing me to finish the thesis, was
received from Åbo Akademi University, Åbo Akademi University Foundation
xiv preface

and Frenckell Foundation (Waldemar von Frenckells Stiftelse). Furthermore,

the Harry Elving Researcher Award awarded by the Rector of Åbo Akademi
University in 2013 allowed me to work on the preparation of the thesis for
publication.
My special thoughts go to my late parents, my mother Iiris and my father
Kalervo, to whom I dedicate this study. I am indebted to them for my inquisitive
but restless mind, which accounts for the many diverse interests I have. I know
they supported me when I studied technology to make a living, but I am sure
they would have liked to be with me now that my work on this study is in its
final stages. Warm thanks go also to my daughter, Johanna, and my dear friend
Saara, for their support, and to others who have been close to me during the
years I have worked on this study.

Hannu Töyrylä
Helsinki, February 2014
List of Figures

1 Spain in Bar Hiyya’s lifetime 24

2 Conjunctions in one triplicity 320
3 Conjunctions in all triplicities 321
4 Molad of 2365am (great conjunction/Water) 338
5 Molad of 2448am 344
6 Molad of 2484am (entry into Canaan) 347
7 Molad of 2841am (major conjunction/Earth) 354
8 Molad of 2881am (conjunction before David’s kingdom) 358
9 Molad of 2884am (David becomes king) 361
10 Molad of 2960am (conjunction before the division of the kingdom) 363
11 Molad of 3199am (conjunction before downfall of the kingdom of
Israel) 366
12 Molad of 3318am (major conjunction/Water) 368
13 Molad of 3397am (conjunction before the end of the Babylonian
exile) 372
14 Molad of 3556am (major conjunction/Fire, Second Temple period) 376
15 Molad of 3794am (major conjunction/Earth, end of Second Temple
period) 378
16 Molad of 4033am (major conjunction/Air, Constantine) 383
17 Molad of 4271am (major conjunction/Water before Muhammad) 391
18 Molad of 4331am (conjunction, rise of Islam) 394
19 Molad of 4509am (major conjunction/Fire, end of Umayyads and rise of
Abbasids) 398
20 Molad of 4747am (major conjunction/Earth, end of Umayyads in
Spain) 400
21 Molad of 4847am (conjunction before the Crusades) 402
22 Molad of 4859am (year of the capture of Jerusalem by the
Crusaders) 404
23 Horoscope for the molad of 3318am 462
24 Places according to both systems for the molad of 2365am 470
25 Places according to both systems for the molad of 2448am 471
26 Aspects 474
 chapter 1

In Search of the Message of Megillat ha-Megalleh

1.1 Introduction

The beginning of the twelfth century was a time of change and intense devel-
opment in Western Europe. The Christian society had asserted its growing
power in the First Crusade and in the Reconquista in Spain. Intellectual life in
Christian Europe was flourishing, schools were being established and scholarly
works written in many fields. These intellectual activities received additional
impetus from recently discovered Arabic sources.
At the same time, a large part of the Jewish population of Spain came
under Christian rule, as the Christian kingdoms conquered former Muslim
areas, and also because of migration away from Muslim part of Spain where
the conditions of the Jews were at times unstable. For the Jews living on the
border between the two world powers, Muslims and Christians, the change, if
understood as a permanent shift of domination, must have been an event of
major consequence. Christian dominance also introduced, if only in a subtle
way at first, an increasing pressure to convert the Jews to Christianity.
Abraham Bar Hiyya’s life and work belongs to this context on the cultural
and political divide between the Muslim and the Christian world. According
to the very limited sources available on his life, he lived in Northeastern Spain,
in what had in his days been a Christian area for centuries, yet at the same
time it was very close to the border with Muslim Spain. Bar Hiyya was both a
scientist and a theological thinker; his literary output displays a wide scientific
knowledge that could only have come from Arabic sources; yet he also wrote
two works with an essentially theological message. He chose to write his works
in Hebrew instead of Arabic, which makes him a pioneer in the use of Hebrew
for scientific and theological purposes, and suggests that he targeted his works
to the Jews of the Christian countries.
Apart from the scientific works, Bar Hiyya wrote two theological works, of
which Hegyon ha-Nefesh is relatively well-known1 while Megillat ha-Megal-

1 The first printed edition of Hegyon ha-Nefesh was published in 1860. This edition will be
referred to as hn. Subsequently, much of the secondary literature was based on this work,
at least until Megillat ha-Megalleh was published in 1924. Hegyon ha-Nefesh has also been
translated into English by G. Wigoder (Wigoder, Meditation, 1969), who has also edited a new
Hebrew edition (Abraham Bar Hiyya, Hegyon ha-nephesch, 1971).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi: 10.1163/9789004276895_002

2 chapter 1

leh2 has received less attention. The latter work is usually known for its mes-
sianic calculations, for a few philosophical passages and for its chapter on
astrology. This study analyzes the work as a complete text in its historical and
cultural context, and argues that it—written at this time when Jews increas-
ingly came under Christian influence and dominance—presents a coherent,
extended and many-faceted argument for the continuing validity of the Jewish
hope for redemption. In his argument, Bar Hiyya presents a view of history, the
course of which was planted by God in creation. This history, he claims, runs
inevitably towards the future redemption of the Jews. Bar Hiyya uses philosoph-
ical, scientific, biblical and astrological material to support his argument, and
several times makes use of originally Christian ideas, which he inverts to suit his
argument. Furthermore, Bar Hiyya’s sources for philosophical, scientific, histor-
ical and astrological knowledge, although usually anonymous, in most cases
cannot be other than Arabic. Although Bar Hiyya never explicitly refers to the
phenomenon of conversion, it appears that he is in effect trying to convince the
Jews, using Jewish, Muslim and Christian sources, that conversion to Christian-
ity is the wrong option.
The goal of this study is to examine Megillat ha-Megalleh as a complete
text, rather than focusing on specific aspects of the work, as much of the ear-
lier research has tended to do, and in this way to approach the original intent
of the author. The study is arranged according to the structure and contents
of Megillat ha-Megalleh itself. The complete work is not available in English
translation and not many readers are likely to have read the original Hebrew
in its entirety. Therefore this book will follow the contents of Megillat ha-
Megalleh from the beginning to the end, describing and analyzing its con-
tents, presenting numerous passages in translation, and highlighting how Bar
Hiyya’s discourse and argumentation evolves in the text. Important findings
will be noted as they arise from the analysis, and summarized at the end of
each chapter, and overall conclusions will presented at the end of the book.
In this way the reader should be able to follow Bar Hiyya’s argumentation
throughout his work, to be able to examine Bar Hiyya’s writing in transla-
tion, and to follow how my analysis reaches the conclusions that it does. The
study is also intended to serve scholars working in specific fields who may be
interested in the philosophical, historical or astrological passages of Megillat

2 The only printed edition of this work is Sefer Megillat ha-Megalleh, by Adolf Poznanski and
Julius Guttmann, published by Verein Mekize Nirdamim in Berlin 1924. This edition is referred
to as mm in this study. The only translation to a modern language is the Catalan translation
by Jose Maria Millás Vallicrosa, Llibre revelador, 1929.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 3

ha-Megalleh. For this reason, such passages are provided with extensive com-
ments in the footnotes. A general reader may freely ignore such detailed infor-
mation.

1.2 Previous Research

Dedicated, longer scholarly studies on Abraham Bar Hiyya are surprisingly few.
It is quite common to refer to some specific aspect of Bar Hiyya’s work in a
footnote or even in the text of a study, and there are numerous short sum-
maries of Bar Hiyya and his works, but longer studies focused on Bar Hiyya
are rare. Furthermore, much of what has been published has relatively little to
say on Megillat ha-Megalleh. In order to gather a wide scholarly view on Bar
Hiyya and his Megillat ha-Megalleh, therefore, it is necessary to glean infor-
mation from many quite diverse sources. This chapter will concentrate on the
major studies concerning the essential aspects of Bar Hiyya’s work in general
and Megillat ha-Megalleh in particular. Studies and scholarly material relevant
to specific aspects will be treated later in subsequent chapters, especially in
ch. 3.
The scholarly study of Bar Hiyya originated in the 19th century with S.J.L.
Rapoport and Moritz Steinschneider. Rapoport, in a letter published as part of
the introduction to the 1860 edition of Bar Hiyya’s Hegyon ha-Nefesh, critically
examines many details concerning Bar Hiyya’s life.3 Steinschneider,4 through
his thorough perusal of medieval Jewish sources, looms in the background of
much of the later research, and his views will be returned to in the detailed
discussion.
No scholar has exceeded the efforts of J.M. Millás Vallicrosa in the research
of Abraham Bar Hiyya and his works. Millás Vallicrosa edited and published
many of Bar Hiyya’s scientific works and provided them with introductions and
translations to Spanish. While Millás Vallicrosa translated Megillat ha-Megalleh
to Catalan early in his career, his main interests and contributions are related to
the scientific aspects of Bar Hiyya’s work. As far as I know, Millás Vallicrosa did
not publish any dedicated study on Megillat ha-Megalleh. His Catalan edition

3 Rapoport, Abhandlung, 1860, pp. xxi–lxiii.

4 Due to the bibliographical nature of Steinschneider’s work, the relevant passages are scattered
throughout his studies; see, however, especially his studies “Abraham Judaeus—Savasorda
und Ibn Esra”, in Steinschneider, Schriften, 1925, pp. 327–387, and “Die Encyklopädie des
Abraham bar Chijja”, ibid. pp. 388–406.
4 chapter 1

only contains a translation of Guttmann’s introduction to the Berlin edition of

1924. Similarly, in a later article when Millás Vallicrosa dedicates some pages to
Megillat ha-Megalleh, he is largely dependent on Guttmann.5
Megillat ha-Megalleh as a complete text is the subject of only a few studies,
the main ones being Jacob Guttmann’s seminal article from 19036 and Julius
Guttmann’s introduction to the Berlin edition from 1924.7 Jacob Guttmann,
writing two decades before the text of Megillat ha-Megalleh was published,
gives a descriptive account of the text and its contents, including specific pas-
sages in the original Hebrew. In addition, Jacob Guttmann also comments on
the context, character and influence of the text. Guttmann understands the
work as messianic speculation and discusses the tension between rabbinic pro-
hibitions concerning such speculation on the one hand and the need to keep
up the messianic hope on the other. Guttmann disagrees with Steinschneider
who had claimed that the work is polemical.8 According to Guttmann, despite
isolated notes of polemical character here and there, the text is motivated to
strengthen the belief through messianic calculations. Guttmann’s argument in
this matter needs to be further examined and it will also be necessary to pay
attention to various meanings of the term ‘polemic’. Guttmann characterizes
Bar Hiyya’s style as gekünstelt und geistreich, and thus not so appealing to the
modern reader. He argues that the work has had more influence on messianism
than philosophy, and that the philosophy in the book lacks depth and origi-
nality. Most of the study consists of an account of the contents of the book,
and details of the study will be returned to at appropriate places. Even if it
is not possible to duplicate the contents of Guttmann’s article here, it must
be noted that to date, apart from the Catalan translation of the text, this arti-
cle remains the main source on the contents on Megillat ha-Megalleh in a
Western language, and therefore it probably has had a decisive influence on
what is generally known about the book both by scholars and the general pub-
lic.

5 Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios, 1949, pp. 252–257, which at times follows Guttmann’s text surpris-
ingly closely.
6 Jacob Guttmann, Buch der Enthüllung, 1903.
7 Julius Guttmann, Introduction, 1924.
8 Jacob Guttmann, Buch der Enthüllung, 1903, pp. 448–451, who comments on Steinschneider,
Apocalypsen, 1874, p. 633. There, Steinschneider also refers to his earlier article in Zeitschr.
f. Mathem. XII, 6, which I have not yet seen. Steinschneider considers also elsewhere that
Megillat ha-Megalleh has a directly polemical tendency against Christianity and Islam, see
his “Abraham Judaeus—Savasorda und Ibn Ezra”, in Steinschneider, Schriften, 1925, p. 334.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 5

Julius Guttmann’s introduction to the Berlin edition, written in Hebrew, is

concerned with the title of the book,9 when it was written, the manuscripts, the
sources and the influence of the book. The question of sources, being the most
relevant for the present study, most often unfortunately leads to the conclusion
that the sources are unknown.10 Apart from the Bible and rabbinic literature,
the only sources Bar Hiyya identifies by name are Aristotle, Galen, Ptolemy
and Saadia, and even in these cases the reference cannot always be traced to
a known text. Also, Julius Guttmann is mainly concerned with details, rather
than providing a complete characterization of the work, and thus we will return
to some details at the proper time. At one point, however, Guttmann refers in
passing to “the main subject of the book which is calculations and proofs on
the date of the coming of the Messiah”.11
Joseph Sarachek approaches Abraham Bar Hiyya and Megillat ha-Megalleh
from a more specific point of view in an appendix to his study of the idea
of the Messiah in medieval Judaism,12 as well as in the summary part of that
study.13 For Sarachek, the book is a “peculiar conglomeration of esoteric exege-
sis, astrological history, and number-worship” although with “certain rationalis-
tic parts”.14 As to the messianic contributions of Megillat ha-Megalleh, Sarachek
enumerates

– the concern with the question of the year of the redeemer’s advent,
– the adaptation of the creation story to eschatology, and
– the use of astral science to verify the past history and to furnish a clue to the
final redemption.

Sarachek then proceeds to a thematic discussion of the contents of the book,

which while in general correct, ignores the overall structure of the text.
In addition to studies specifically on Megillat ha-Megalleh, there have also
been a number of attempts to summarize Bar Hiyya’s thought in general. The
only book-length study on Bar Hiyya is Leo Stitskin’s Judaism as Philosophy.

9 Concerning the title, see Julius Guttmann, Introduction, 1924, p. II. Guttmann concludes
that it should probably be read as megilla ha-megullah, i.e. ‘the revealed scroll’. See also
the Catalan translation of Guttmann’s introduction in Millás Vallicrosa, Llibre revelador,
1929, pp. XI–XII.
10 Julius Guttmann, Introduction, 1924, p. XI.
11 Julius Guttmann, Introduction, 1924, p. XI. Translation mine.
12 Sarachek, Doctrine of the Messiah, 1968, pp. 313–328.
13 Sarachek, Doctrine of the Messiah, 1968, pp. 300–312.
14 Sarachek, Doctrine of the Messiah, 1968, p. 313.
6 chapter 1

Unfortunately this work suffers from an uncritical approach, and moreover is

colored by the author’s attempt to read Bar Hiyya as a complete, and authen-
tically Jewish, system of philosophy, with only rarely sufficient evidence to
support his interpretations. On a detailed level, Stitskin sometimes provides
interesting information, although also here he tends to make conclusions too
easily.15
Of much higher quality are the studies of Vajda,16 Waxman,17 and Wigoder,18
each of which, in its own way, gives a true presentation of Bar Hiyya’s thought
as extracted in detailed level from his works. However, even these approaches
have some problems. Vajda seems to assume that Bar Hiyya’s works reflect
a single, unchanged system of thought. He then picks up ideas scattered in
the texts, out of their context and assumes that they are representative of
a single philosophical system, while it has not even been established that a
philosophical text is being dealt with. So when Vajda comes to the conclusion
that Bar Hiyya’s philosophical thought is mediocre,19 this may simply indicate

15 Stitskin, Judaism as a Philosophy, 1960. It suffices to point out Stitskin’s unhistorical view
of the philosophical nature of ancient Judaism, which he suggests formed a background
to Greek philosophy (ibid. pp. 51–57). Such ideas have, of course, not been uncommon in
traditional Judaism, but they should be out of place in modern critical research. A bigger
problem is that Stitskin when describing a philosophy of Judaism, can go on for several
pages without justifying or documenting how this is connected to Bar Hiyya’s work. He
also tends to make generalized but undocumented statements on Bar Hiyya’s thought. All
this makes it difficult to separate that which is really from Bar Hiyya and what is Stitskin’s
own philosophy. See Vajda, sages et penseurs, 1989, p. 152, who writes of Stitskin’s book “il
convient de mettre en garde contre le livre, qui est une scandaleuse malfaçon”. See also
the discussion following the publication of the book in the Commentary magazine: first a
review of Stitskin’s book by Jerome Eckstein (Eckstein, Review, 1962), and the subsequent
discussion (Stitskin and Eckstein, Bar Hiyya, 1963, pp. 76–77), where Stitskin argues that
the reviewer has missed his central thesis. When Stitskin then sets out to define this thesis,
one actually gets a confirmation, that Stitskin is not writing a scholarly study on Bar Hiyya,
but instead using Bar Hiyya’s works as a basis for defining his own philosophy of Judaism.
Eckstein’s reply (ibid.) well summarizes the problem of Stitskin’s book: i.e., its “unhistorical
stand”.
16 Vajda, Idées, 1946.
17 Waxman, Philosophical and religious thought, 1965.
18 Wigoder, Meditation, 1969, pp. 1–33.
19 Vajda, Idées, 1946, p. 218. Note also Jacob Guttmann’s evaluation of Bar Hiyya’s philosophi-
cal thought as lacking depth and originality (Guttmann, Buch der Enthüllung, 1903, p. 452),
and Julius Guttmann on the contradictions in Bar Hiyya’s definition of time (Introduction,
1924, p. XIV).
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 7

that Bar Hiyya’s thought, if taken out of its proper context, ceases to function.
Waxman to some extent also suffers from similar problems, whereas Wigoder
manages to present a quite balanced view of Bar Hiyya’s thought. None of them,
however, addresses Megillat ha-Megalleh separately.
The title and structure of Vajda’s article already betrays that he is looking for
Bar Hiyya’s ideas in the specific fields of metaphysics, psychology,20 theological
anthropology as well as messianism and eschatology. Vajda extracts views in
each of these fields from both Hegyon ha-Nefesh and Megillat ha-Megalleh
and attempts to identify their sources. For instance, when Vajda discusses the
question of time in Bar Hiyya’s works, he starts with Megillat ha-Megalleh, then
moves on to Hegyon ha-Nefesh, and then discusses another topic, i.e. the idea of
five worlds of light in Megillat ha-Megalleh. In so doing Vajda completely skips
over how Bar Hiyya develops and employs his discourse on the nature of time in
Megillat ha-Megalleh. As Vajda is interested in the metaphysical thought of Bar
Hiyya and not the discourse in Megillat ha-Megalleh itself, it is understandable
that Vajda does this, but nonetheless his approach cannot fully capture the
essence of Bar Hiyya’s thought. Finally, in his conclusions, Vajda regards Bar
Hiyya’s ideas as heterogeneous and incoherent, and wonders how such a great
scientist has in his speculative thought displayed such mediocrity and lack of
vigor of thought.
Waxman’s study is arranged according to the topics of concept of time, cre-
ation, doctrine of soul, resurrection and prophecy, sources and influence. Wax-
man correctly recognizes that, in his writing, Bar Hiyya has two sides: a scientist
and a darshan, i.e. a homiletical author of the Jewish kind.21 While Waxman
is thus more sensitive to the context of various ideas within Bar Hiyya’s work,
when he proceeds into a deeper analysis of each topic, he also tends to con-
centrate on fragments from different parts of Bar Hiyya’s various works. Like
Vajda, Waxman also assumes that Bar Hiyya’s thought “is not arranged in a sys-
tematic fashion, but dispersed in numerous fragments in both of these works”.
He differs from Vajda, however, in concluding that “when these fragments are
collected together they display philosophical thought”.22
These pioneering studies are complemented by some more recent studies
that address aspects of Megillat ha-Megalleh not covered in depth by the earlier
scholars.

20 Medieval psychology is primarily the study of the nature of soul, and thus an essentially
different discipline from modern psychology.
21 Waxman, Philosophical and religious thought, 1965, p. 145.
22 Waxman, Philosophical and religious thought, 1965, p. 146. Translations mine.
8 chapter 1

Resianne Fontaine has discussed in an article how Bar Hiyya used history
as a source of consolation in Megillat ha-Megalleh.23 Earlier researchers had
usually agreed on the consolatory nature of the messianic calculations, but
the function of the historical information had not previously received enough
attention. This aspect is still of great interest today, linked as it is to more
general problem of the role of history, historiography and historical thinking
in medieval Jewish culture and thought.
Sara Klein-Braslavy has likewise taken up one previously ignored aspect of
Bar Hiyya’s work: the role of biblical interpretation in Megillat ha-Megalleh.24 It
is typical of studies on medieval Jewish biblical interpretation to either ignore
Bar Hiyya completely, or to mention that he occasionally comments on isolated
verses.25 Klein-Braslavy has analyzed Bar Hiyya’s exposition on the Garden
of Eden passage in Genesis, pointing out how Bar Hiyya reads a coherent
set of ideas into the text by using a number of ‘axes of interpretation’, most
notably a scientific-philosophical and a midrashic one, and that he also pays
a lot of attention to the rules of language. Despite the seeming incoherence
and fragmentation in Bar Hiyya’s writing, Klein-Braslavy sees a strong internal
logic in his exegesis and points out how Bar Hiyya reads the text not only as
relating to primordial events, but also to the course of human history as a whole,
including its culmination in redemption.
Concerning the proper way to approach Bar Hiyya as an author, Joseph
Dan’s way of understanding Bar Hiyya’s other theological work Hegyon ha-
Nefesh as a homiletical work is very useful, even if Dan does not directly dis-
cuss Megillat ha-Megalleh.26 Dan has approached Hegyon ha-Nefesh as a text
instead of a collection of viewpoints, and ended up considering Bar Hiyya’s
style as ‘philosophical homiletics’. In fact, Dan attributes the origination of the
genre of Jewish medieval philosophical homiletics to Bar Hiyya. Joseph Dan’s
interpretation also helps to illustrate how Bar Hiyya applies philosophy as a
means to his homiletical ends, rather than pursuing pure metaphysics, and this

23 Fontaine, Troost der geschiedenis, 1992.

24 Klein-Braslavy, Creation of Man, 1981.
25 For instance, Saebo, hbot, vol. I/2, 2000, does not list Bar Hiyya in its index of classical
authors. Shlomo Sela, Ibn Ezra, 2003, p. 98, mentions that Bar Hiyya only comments on
selected verses here and there. It is true that Bar Hiyya has not written a verse by verse
commentary on any biblical book, but Megillat ha-Megalleh contains what is essentially
a commentary on most of Gen. 1–3 and Dan. 7–12.
26 Dan, Ethical and homiletical, 1975, pp. 69–82 and idem., Mysticism & Ethics, 1986, pp. 26–
27.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 9

seems to provide a sound approach to a better understanding of Megillat ha-

Megalleh.27
At this point it should be obvious that different scholars have emphasized
quite different aspects of Megillat ha-Megalleh. It appears almost as if they had
been reading different books, and to the extent that they have concentrated on
specific, selected parts of Megillat ha-Megalleh, they have, in fact, been writing
about different texts.
Both from the large variety of different aspects commented on by the pre-
vious research, and from a survey of the book as a whole, it is possible to note
that the book contains a number of elements: on the surface we have escha-
tology together with the messianic calculations, which are then supported by
philosophy, historical information, biblical interpretation and astrology, woven
together with what might be called a rhetorical-homiletic approach. There is
possibly even a polemical component. This hypothesis needs to be confirmed
by a more thorough perusal of the text as a whole, and this should also help to
produce more information on these specific elements, as seen in their proper
context within the text.
It would be unfair to assert that Bar Hiyya’s thought has been misrepre-
sented. All the scholarly works cited so far are generally correct at a detailed
level. The general articles in scholarly reference works, as well as works on the
history of philosophy, also usually manage to capture the essential aspects of
Bar Hiyya’s writings. Colette Sirat includes material from Megillat ha-Megalleh
in the chapter on Bar Hiyya in her history of medieval Jewish philosophy.
She considers it primarily an eschatological work containing also philosoph-
ical ideas on metaphysical worlds of light, prophecy and the human soul.28
She does not, however, address the differences between Megillat ha-Megalleh
and Hegyon ha-Nefesh, but uses material from both works as examples of Bar

27 This should not, however, be interpreted as an assumption that Megillat ha-Megalleh

would be a homiletical work. The work is too complex to justify such a conclusion. Rather,
it may be useful to recognize that Bar Hiyya may be using similar methods of writing in
Megillat ha-Megalleh.
28 Sirat, Jewish Philosophy, 1990, pp. 97–104. She discusses on pp. 101–102 the passage about
five superior worlds of light, which appears in the second chapter of Megillat ha-Megalleh
(mm p. 22) within the discussion of the first day of the creation. This passage has caught the
interest of many scholars, including Gershom Scholem (Spekulation, 1931) and Georges
Vajda (Idées, 1946, pp. 197–198, 219–223). While this passage has received much attention,
it is most probably only a diversion within the scope of Megillat ha-Megalleh as a whole.
Note also that although Sirat (p. 103) gives 7000 years as Bar Hiyya’s value for the duration
of the world, this should be 6000 years, see below p. 135.
10 chapter 1

Hiyya’s thought.29 Sirat acknowledges Christian influence both by regarding

Megillat ha-Megalleh as a possible response to anti-Jewish polemic, as well as
in Bar Hiyya’s adopting ideas of original sin and a periodic structure of history,
although transformed to suit his specifically Jewish point of view.
Another work on the history of Jewish philosophy, by H. and M. Simon,30
regards Megillat ha-Megalleh as a work dedicated to religious study and mes-
sianic calculations, expanding on the philosophical ideas contained in Hegyon
ha-Nefesh, though with differences and contradictions. Simon also correctly
observes that as Bar Hiyya’s writing consists of popular works, we should not
expect to find them to contain a closed philosophical system.
Norman Roth’s encyclopedia article on Bar Hiyya recognizes that Megillat
ha-Megalleh contains a variety of elements, calling it “a curious combination of
science, cosmological notions, philosophical ideas … and polemic … explained
in astrological terms”. He regards Megillat ha-Megalleh as “a far more significant
and original work than his so-called philosophical treatise, Hegyon ha-Nefesh”
which he then characterizes as a series of homilies containing some philosoph-
ical influences. Essentially, Roth regards and evaluates Megillat ha-Megalleh as
a philosophical work, although not really original and not without its contra-
dictions.31
A reasonably balanced overview on Bar Hiyya has been done by G. Wigoder.
In his article in Encyclopedia Judaica,32 Wigoder provides a summary on Bar
Hiyya’s life, philosophy, mathematical and astrological works. The philosophi-
cal summary is mainly based on Hegyon ha-Nefesh, with some elements from
Megillat ha-Megalleh included. Different from Guttmann and Vajda, Wigoder
emphasizes the originality of Bar Hiyya, whom he regards to have combined
Neoplatonic, Aristotelian and rabbinic ideas in an original way, and to have
been independent enough to reject philosophical and rabbinic theories when-
ever necessary. Thus, according to Wigoder, Bar Hiyya’s philosophy fits no
ready-made categories. As to Megillat ha-Megalleh, Wigoder introduces it as
an eschatological work, indeed the first work on messianic calculations by a

29 For example, when Sirat states on p. 102 that “history will not be complete before Israel
has accomplished its destiny and subjected to its rule all the peoples of the earth”, this
lacks basis in Megillat ha-Megalleh where non-Jews are held to perish completely at the
beginning of the messianic age (it may, however, be possible to interpret Hegyon ha-Nefesh
in the way Sirat does).
30 Simon H. and M., Geschichte, 1984, pp. 89–96.
31 Roth, Medieval Jewish Civilization, 2003, pp. 3–6.
32 Wigoder, Abraham Bar Hiyya, 2007. See also Wigoder’s introduction to his English trans-
lation of Hegyon ha-Nefesh (Wigoder, Meditation, 1969, pp. 1–33).
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 11

European rabbi. Wigoder summarizes that in this book, the author first estab-
lishes, using a model equating creation days with historical periods, that the
redemption will come in 1383ce and the resurrection in 1448; then the author
presents additional proof from the Bible and from astrology. Finally, according
to Wigoder, Bar Hiyya had a considerable influence e.g. on Judah Halevi, on the
kabbalists including the German school, and on Isaac Abravanel, whose astro-
logical knowledge would derive from Bar Hiyya.
Eliezer Schweid’s chapter on Bar Hiyya in his book on classic Jewish philoso-
phers is unique in that it appears to be based on a thorough knowledge of the
ideas that Bar Hiyya develops in his discourse, as opposed to ideas that merely
appear in isolated passages. Although the chapter is only a summary in the
style of an encyclopedia article, and as such does not document the findings
in detail, it is obvious that it is based on a thorough reading of Megillat ha-
Megalleh and other works by Bar Hiyya. In addition to the more well-known
aspects of Bar Hiyya, his background and his work, Schweid approaches the
topics of the relationship between Torah and philosophy, the rejection of gen-
tile religions, Israel’s special status, the use of history, and the determinism in
Bar Hiyya’s thought.33
In this overview, it is not possible to discuss all authors and scholars who
have written something on detailed aspects of Bar Hiyya.34 Some of them will
be discussed later in a more specific context.

1.3 Summary of the Research Status

The complexity and diversity contained in Megillat ha-Megalleh is reflected

in the previous research, which has tried to cope with these difficulties using
different approaches and with varying results. We have seen that there has
been much emphasis laid on the philosophical and eschatological character
of the book, as well as on some theological issues. Not much has been writ-
ten on the historical material in the book, or on the methods and role of

33 Schweid, Classic Jewish Philosophers, 2008, pp. 87–94.

34 To mention just a few: Salo Baron has much to say on Bar Hiyya in various parts of his
Social and Religious History of the Jews and in his other works. Shlomo Sela dedicates
a significant section to Bar Hiyya in his work on Abraham Ibn Ezra (Sela, Ibn Ezra,
2003, pp. 96–104), and has also written an excellent article on the astrological thought
of Bar Hiyya. Also, studies on early Kabbalah, and Nahmanides in particular, often refer
to Bar Hiyya’s influence on these thinkers, see Pedaya, Nahmanides, 2003; Halbertal,
Nahmanides, 2006; Dauber, Myth and Philosophy, 2004.
12 chapter 1

biblical interpretation by Bar Hiyya. Those who have approached Bar Hiyya
as a philosopher have usually tried to reconstruct his philosophy by treating
Megillat ha-Megalleh and Hegyon ha-Nefesh as representative of a unified sys-
tem of thought. Vajda and Guttmann, obviously subscribing to quite rigorous
criteria for philosophy, have seen his philosophy as mediocre or inconsistent.
On the other hand, others like Waxman and Wigoder, have claimed that there
is an original element in Bar Hiyya’s thought. Either way, treating Megillat ha-
Megalleh as a primarily philosophical work may not do full justice to this text,
especially when we take into account the fact that the philosophical material
in the book does not exceed one tenth of its contents.35
It is also apparent that although many scholars have attempted to summa-
rize what Megillat ha-Megalleh is, no detailed study of the complete contents
of this work has been written since the article by Jacob Guttmann over a cen-
tury ago. It is therefore justified to take up Megillat ha-Megalleh as a subject of a
dedicated full-length study, that will consider the work as an independent text.
Such a study will of course have to take into account the whole context: the his-
torical and cultural situation as well as the material in Bar Hiyya’s other works,
but most of all, it has to regard every passage in the book within the context cre-
ated by the author’s discourse in his text, as well as the role and function of the
various elements and components inside this discourse.36 This sense of con-
text is what appears to be missing in the studies of Julius Guttmann, Vajda and
Waxman, who, as far as can be judged from their articles, treat textual extracts
as representative of Bar Hiyya’s thought.
It appears that to approach the essential message of Megillat ha-Megalleh,
the passages of the text need to be read in their proper context, so that each pas-
sage in the text obtains its meaning and relevance from its place in the context,
and recognizing that the discourse created by the sequence of the passages is
what carries the meaning of the author. We also need to pay attention to the
style and method of the author, as, for example, based on the work of Joseph
Dan, it seems that Bar Hiyya might be using literary structures and devices sim-
ilar to those of Jewish derashot, i.e. homiletical or quasi-homiletical writings.

35 The first chapter on the nature of time is largely philosophical, and some parts of the third
chapter dealing with the concept of soul can also be considered philosophical. Together,
these passages do not add up to more than 15 pages out of 150.
36 ‘Discourse’ is in this study used in the plain, traditional sense, not as in the modern
discourse analysis.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 13

1.4 The Approach of the Present Study

The hypothesis of this study is that Bar Hiyya is a writer, who deliberately
employs various elements in his written compositions in order to communicate
his point. This means, that in order to understand him properly, it is necessary
to read the text, by interpreting its constituent units and elements in the inner
context of the text as a whole. More important than identifying a philosoph-
ical or theological proposition or its sources, is how, and for which purposes,
Bar Hiyya uses the proposition. However, to understand the elements, it is nec-
essary to relate them to an outer context, i.e. the historical, cultural and reli-
gious situation. This is based on the assumption that the author was writing
deliberately in his particular situation to his particular audience, which most
likely consisted of the Jews of Northern Spain and Southern France, which were
Christian lands.
Underneath this method lies the basic assumption that Bar Hiyya is a prac-
tical thinker, who uses the tools available to him, philosophy, theology, science
and so on, to make his point. Furthermore, acknowledging Waxman’s identi-
fication of a dual nature in Bar Hiyya: i.e., that of a scientist and a darshan,
this study assumes that despite numerous philosophical and scientific frag-
ments, Megillat ha-Megalleh as a complete work is the work of Bar Hiyya the
darshan. This also contains the assumption, that Bar Hiyya is after epistemo-
logical coverage rather than consistency: different approaches are used in order
to convince as many as possible. If multiple separate approaches yield the same
results, he regards this as increasing the credibility of his results.
As the study attempts to understand Bar Hiyya’s meaning in the text, the
study is organized according to the text and not thematically. By following the
text and documenting how the author steers his discourse from one issue to
another, making arguments and presenting interpretations, we can learn more
from Bar Hiyya’s intentions behind the text than by collecting thematically-
related passages from various parts of the text. The choice to follow the text
should also be helpful to the reader who is not likely to be familiar with its
contents. But as the study has to cover Megillat ha-Megalleh as a complete text,
taking into account that the text is employing elements as varied as philosophy,
biblical exegesis, history and astrology, it is obvious that the study must con-
centrate on the general outline of the text rather than documenting each and
every detail. Likewise, translations of many passages are provided, but although
a complete English translation of Megillat ha-Megalleh would be highly desir-
able, it was not practical for this study to provide one, as the extent of the
present study and the work required were already barely within the limits of
what was possible.
14 chapter 1

Also, with regard to the outer context, it is not possible to examine all possi-
ble sources and influences in all the fields touched by Bar Hiyya. Rather, both
the inner and the outer contexts will be approached as a general background
against which the text can be analyzed and understood. Likewise, as the goal of
the study is to understand the meaning of Megillat ha-Megalleh, the reception
of Megillat ha-Megalleh is outside the scope of this research and will be covered
only cursorily.
It should also be noted that this study is not intended to be a general
study of Bar Hiyya and his works, even if it is understood that such a study
is clearly needed. Within the present study, there is a short overview of Bar
Hiyya, his time and his works in chapter 2, but otherwise Bar Hiyya’s other
works and the scholarly literature concerning them will be referred to only
when necessary from the main viewpoint of this study, i.e. the understanding
of Megillat ha-Megalleh.
The study is structured as follows:

In chapter 2, the outer context (Bar Hiyya’s life and work as well as his historical
and cultural background) is outlined.
Chapter 3 concentrates on introducing the various elements employed in
the text under study. For each of the elements, a brief survey of previous
research is presented followed with the assumptions and approach in this study
for each element.
Chapters 4 to 9 give a description and analysis of each chapter of the text
in detail, including translations of selected parts. For the most part, the alter-
nation of my analysis with interspersed passages from Megillat ha-Megalleh
in translation should be fully readable and ought to give the reader a good
overview of not only my findings but also the contents and style of the origi-
nal text. On the special case of the translation of the astrological history, see
ch. 9, footnote 1.
Finally, in chapter 10, the conclusions of the study are presented.
Thus, chapters 1 to 3 can be considered to form an extended introduction,
and the study itself consists of chapters 4 to 10.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 15

1.5 Practical Notes

1.5.1 Textual Basis

This study and the translations contained in it are based on the Berlin edi-
tion of Megillat ha-Megalleh from 1924, edited by Adolf Poznanski and Julius
Guttmann. That edition is based on three manuscripts:37

– Oxford Bodleyana 160; indicated in the apparatus of the edition with an

aleph
– Frankfurt manuscript, no identification given, originally from Merzbach
library; indicated by a peh. This, according to Guttmann, is the best manu-
script, however not really good either and contains many errors.38
– Munich manuscript 10; indicated by a mem.

There are some indicators that the printed edition might not be totally accu-
rate. A list of printing errors is provided at the end of the edition. On the first
page of the first chapter, ‫ אסיפת‬is printed where according to the corrections
should read ‫( אפיסת‬also the context supports this). However, one of the occur-
rences is not corrected, which leaves the reader in doubt.
Despite such problems, the current study, being primarily based on the
contents of the text as a whole, is based on the printed edition. I have not
usually had much difficulty following Bar Hiyya’s discourse on the general level.
I have also indicated where I have not fully understood Bar Hiyya’s meaning.
Further research on any detailed issue would tremendously benefit from a new
critical edition of Megillat ha-Megalleh, and I would be pleased if this study of
mine would act as an impetus for the editing and publication of a new critical
edition.
During the final editing of this study, I have been able to consult a manuscript
(Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, ms. Héb 1058) which contains an
almost complete version of the fifth chapter of Megillat ha-Megalleh, and which
was used by Shlomo Sela in his study of Bar Hiyya’s astrological work.39 The
manuscript is a collection of astronomical and astrological texts, and while
the manuscript itself is from the fourteenth century, the compilation must
have been made no later than 1257.40 Here, I have used the manuscript only

37 On these manuscripts and their differences, see Guttmann, Introduction, 1924, pp. XXXI–
XXXIV
38 Ibid p. XXXII
39 Sela, Bar Hiyya, 2006.
40 Sela, Reasons, 2007, 20–21.
16 chapter 1

to check astrologically problematic details, as well as some polemically inter-

esting passages. The findings are documented in the footnotes. In general, this
manuscript is helpful in clarifying problematic details in the astrological part
of Megillat ha-Megalleh,41 but as it contains only the fifth chapter, and appears
to have been edited into an astrological manual,42 it is less useful for under-
standing Bar Hiyya’s discourse in Megillat ha-Megalleh as a whole.43

1.5.2 Spelling and Transliteration

The transliteration from Hebrew and Arabic has been done with the goal of
being easily readable; it is not intended to be technically accurate. Whenever
such accuracy is called for, the actual Hebrew and Arabic text is given.
For example, aleph and ayin in Hebrew and alif and ayin in Arabic are
generally not indicated, except when between two vowels as in maʿânî, rasâʾil
and moʿed. The Hebrew tsade is transliterated as ‘ts’ except in commonly used
names such as Ibn Zaddik. Emphatic letters in Arabic are generally not dif-
ferentiated. The Hebrew het and its Arabic counterpart are generally simply
transliterated with an ‘h’. Transliterated words, expressions and titles, but not
personal names, are given in italics.
Bar Hiyya’s name is spelled differently by different authors. It has been
argued with reason that the name should be read as Bar Hayya,44 and this
has been followed by at least Norman Roth. I have chosen to use the more
traditional Abraham Bar Hiyya in my text, while in referring to the names of
books and articles I have of course used the spelling of the original title.

41 It does, for instance, contain planetary positions that are omitted in some horoscopes in
the Berlin edition.
42 For example, the manuscript lacks the very beginning of the chapter, as well as most of
mm p. 147, while it at times inserts additional clarifications on astrological matters. In one
place, however, the manuscript still points to the original context of Megillat ha-Megalleh,
when it refers to calculations “in the second chapter of this megillah” (ah Paris 1058,
fol. 82a).
43 One feature of this manuscript is that it appears to use less antagonistic language with
regard to Christianity. It has, for instance, Jeshu ha-Notsri instead of Jeshu ha-Talui and
‘the Christian kingdom’ instead of ‘the evil kingdom’ (mm 149:29, ah Paris 1058 fol. 82b).
For more examples, see below pp. 381 f. and pp. 407–408.
44 Wigoder, Meditation, 1969 p. 3 n. 1. According to Wigoder, the name derives from Hayyim,
and in Spanish is transliterated as ‘aya’, furthermore in Sefer ha-Ibbur the author himself
rhymes his name with Zekhayya.
in search of the message of megillat ha-megalleh 17

1.5.3 Translations and Citations

The translations in this study are mine, unless otherwise indicated.
Translations from Megillat ha-Megalleh try to follow Bar Hiyya’s style as
closely as it is possible in English. Also, because Bar Hiyya’s language is a
pioneering attempt to extend the use of Hebrew into new fields, it is sometimes
idiosyncratic. At times, when Bar Hiyya’s language is ambiguous or when the
precise meaning of an expression or an idiom is not clear, and when I have
considered clarity of meaning to be more important than any choice motivated
by a good English usage and style, I have chosen to translate literally into
English.
Some of the translated passages are highly technical, and I have, where
necessary, used italics to mark Bar Hiyya’s main conclusions to help the reader
to locate them in the middle of the technical details. This practice is mainly
used in ch. 9 where most of the translations consist of astrological horoscopes
and interpretation.45
Translations from the Bible have been made by consulting the jps (Jewish
Publication Society) translations from 1917 and 1985/99, but the actual transla-
tions have been made to match Bar Hiyya’s interpretation of the verse.

1.5.4 References
In this study, references to Megillat ha-Megalleh are, for the most part, given in
the form e.g. mm 125:12–18 or mm 49:30–50:26, where the page(s) and the line
numbers from the Berlin edition are used. In some cases, when the reference
is to a page and not to a specific passage, the reference is given in the form: mm
p. 24.
References to other works in the footnotes are given in the form: author,
short title, year and page number(s). The short title is only a mnemonic aid
intended to help the reader. Full title and other details are found in the bibliog-
raphy. The short title is in italics only if it is a transliteration based on the title
of an Arabic or Hebrew work.

1.5.5 Other Conventions

Because this is a study of a medieval Jewish text, the reader should be aware of
the following choices made in writing and in translating, in order to give a true
representation of Megillat ha-Megalleh.
Gender neutrality was unknown in those days, and correspondingly both in
my translation and in my analysis of the text, I am following the usage of Bar

45 See also ch. 9, footnote 1.

18 chapter 1

Hiyya, typical of his time, to use ‘man’ for both a male and a human being, and
in fact, also for biblical figure of Adam.
Likewise, ‘Israel’ is used of the Jewish people, not the present state of Israel,
and the ‘Land of Israel’, sometimes simply the ‘Land’, is the term used by Bar
Hiyya of the land in which the Jews once lived and to which they hoped to
return.
 chapter 2

Bar Hiyya’s Life and Works

in Their Historical Context

2.1 Who was Abraham Bar Hiyya?

Next to nothing is known about the life and person of Abraham Bar Hiyya with
certainty. Except for his written works, we do not have actual sources to rely on.
The scanty details that keep appearing even in the scholarly literature usually
cannot be traced to reliable primary sources; they lead back to 19th century
authors such as S.D. Luzzatto and Leopold Zunz, but no further, and the real
historical evidence is meager. Bar Hiyya is not mentioned in the very few Jewish
medieval historiographical works that exist; his name starts to appear in works
from a later time only, and even then only very briefly.1 For the purposes of
the present study, many details that have been subject to a scholarly debate
are not particularly relevant; this includes issues such as his birthplace and
whether he actually lived in France towards the end of his life or not.2 However,

1 He is, for instance, not mentioned by Abraham Ibn Daud in his Sefer ha-Kabbalah (Abraham
Ibn Daud, Book of Tradition, 1967) or by Saadia Ibn Danan (El orden de las generaciones,
1997). We find Abraham Bar Hiyya mentioned by Zacuto’s Sefer Yuhasin, written around
the year 1500 (see Zacuto, Lineage, 2006, p. 533). A late 17th century text Divrei Yosef by
Joseph ben Isaac Sambari (see Neubauer, Chronicles, vol. I, 1887, p. 130) tells that “in Spain
[there was] the nasi and astronomer R. Abraham b. Yahya (‫)אברהם ׳ן יחיא‬, known as Sâhib
as-Shurta, who was proficient in the seven sciences: in arithmetic, geometry, astronomy,
intercalation, human science and the secrets of the Torah, and [he wrote a work that] was
called ‘The Definition of Man’” (translation mine). On the probably mistaken supposition
that there had been a lost work by Bar Hiyya with this name, see Wigoder, Meditation, 1969,
p. 6.
2 On these questions see Freimann in hn, 1860, p. x, who refers to S.D. Luzzatto concern-
ing a manuscript according which “the book was finished in the town of Barcelona”; this
opinion is said to have been shared by Zunz too. Freimann continues that according to
Filipowski, Bar Hiyya was originally from Soria, based on the fact that his astronomical tables
were prepared for this location. For this see Filipowski in Abraham Bar Hiyya, Sefer ha-Ibbur,
1851 p. vii. Concerning the disagreement among the 19th century scholars on whether Bar
Hiyya settled in France towards the end of his days, Freimann refers to those who claim
this basing themselves on a passage by David Kimhi who treats Bar Hiyya as a compatriot;

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi: 10.1163/9789004276895_003

20 chapter 2

we can assume that Bar Hiyya was active in Northeastern Spain in the first half
of the 12th century.3 This, in addition to his works, provides the context needed
for the study of his Megillat ha-Megalleh. In addition, we can also note the fol-
lowing:

– Bar Hiyya’s name is often associated with Barcelona in the sources.4

– He is known to have cooperated with Plato of Tivoli in the translation of
Arabic works.5 Plato of Tivoli is known to have translated astronomical
and especially astrological works. He furthermore translated Bar Hiyya’s
textbook of geometry and land surveying into Latin.

Freimann however had not been able locate such a passage by Kimhi. Zunz is also said to have
believed that Bar Hiyya lived in France, according to the story that Bar Hiyya together with
Judah Ben Barzilai had been present at a wedding in Southern France, which Zunz placed
in Marseille. This opinion is found in Zunz, Geschichte, 1845, p. 483, and it appears to be
the main source for the opinion that Bar Hiyya and Judah Ben Barzilai both lived in Mar-
seille and came to a disagreement on the use of astrology there. This story is based on the
Astrological letter by Bar Hiyya, but there are details that appear in various studies which
have no clear basis in the letter itself (this has also been recognized by Roth, Medieval Jew-
ish Civilization, 2003, p. 4). Among the 19th century scholars, S. Rapoport is more cautious
and approaches critically the biographical details collected by Freimann (Rapoport, Abhand-
lung, 1860, pp. xxi–lxiii). In general the debate appears to have lacked substantial basis from
actual sources. See also Steinschneider, Abraham Judaeus, 1925, pp. 335–338. On the question
of whether Tsorfat actually meant France as in Modern Hebrew, or also included Catalonia,
see footnote 10.
3 Usually, Bar Hiyya’s birth-year is given either as 1065 or 1070. Both years lack direct evidence
and have simply been estimated counting backwards from his assumed year of death. Zacuto
(Zacuto, Lineage, 2006, p. 533) mentions in Sefer Yuhasin (written around the year 1500),
that Bar Hiyya died in 4861 am (1101/2 ce). This, however, is much too early compared to the
evidence from his writings. Megillat ha-Megalleh is usually dated in the 1120s based on the
events of the Crusades that are mentioned in it. Based on a translation by Plato of Tivoli from
1138, where Bar Hiyya is no longer mentioned as a coworker, he is usually assumed to have
died some time before this date. See Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios, 1949, pp. 221–222; Wigoder,
Meditation, 1969, pp. 3–4.
4 Steinschneider, Abraham Judaeus, 1925, p. 338.
5 d’ Alverny, Translations and Translators, 1982, pp. 450–451. Steinschneider, Die europäischen
Übersetzungen, 1956, pp. 62–66.
bar hiyya’s life and works in their historical context 21

– In the written sources he is given the titles of nasi (prince)6 and savasorda,7
the latter deriving from the Arabic sâhib as-shurta (literally ‘chief of police’
but in practice likely to be a designation of an official or honorary position
of some kind).
– Bar Hiyya may have been associated in some way with the courts of Banu
Hud, Catalonia, or possibly Aragon.8
– Based on his works, Bar Hiyya appears not to have been a talmudist. His
works contain isolated legal issues, mainly when he has to justify his activi-
ties, such as his use of astrology or eschatological speculation. Even in these
cases, Bar Hiyya’s discourse leans more to the rhetorical side rather than to
the halakhic side. Furthermore, Bar Hiyya’s language is almost free of Ara-
maic expressions, compared to the works of his contemporary Judah Ben
Barzilai.

Bar Hiyya’s works present an image of an educated person interested in sci-

ences, philosophy and theology and a capability of writing on these subjects
in a clear manner. His scientific works display a strong knowledge in the fields
of astronomy and mathematics, together with their practical applications for
e.g. land surveying and calendrical calculations. Although Bar Hiyya is assumed
to have lived in Christian Catalonia, his scientific education almost certainly

6 The title of nasi had various meanings in the medieval period. It could mean the head of a
Jewish institution, or it could be a honorific title, and in Spain it has also been used to signify
a person appointed by a court to represent the Jews and collect taxes. See Levitats, Nasi, 2007,
and Wigoder, Meditation, 1969, p. 3. Sela, Ibn Ezra, 2003, p. 97 reads the title of nasi as implying
descent from an important family. Klein, Medieval Barcelona, 2006, pp. 52–57 examines the
use of the title of nasi in Barcelona and challenges many previous assumptions. According
Klein, there is little evidence that nesiʾim would have formed a group with a special status
(such as a nobility); moreover the title did not necessarily imply Davidic descent and was not
necessarily hereditary.
7 Millás Vallicrosa (Estudios, 1949, p. 221) notes that also Moses Ibn Ezra was known by this title.
See also Roth (Medieval Jewish Civilization, 2003, p. 4), who argues that the title indicates that
Bar Hiyya lived in a city with a substantial Muslim population, such as Zaragoza or Huesca.
8 Millás Vallicrosa (Estudios, 1949, pp. 221–223) places Bar Hiyya in the court of Banu Hud, and
after the conquest of Zaragoza in 1118, in Barcelona. Bar Hiyya’s own writings contain vague
references to his having been favored by royalty and nobility. At the end of the Astrological
Letter, he wonders whether the astrological knowledge, which in his youth had gained
him the respect of kings and the noble, shall in his old age be turned into a shame (see
Steinschneider, Abraham Judaeus, 1925, pp. 334–335, for a German translation). Sela (Ibn Ezra,
2003, p. 97) considers it probable that Bar Hiyya occupied a post at the court of Alfonso I of
Aragon.
22 chapter 2

derives from Arabic sources.9 This is not surprising, as Barcelona was very close
to the center of Arabic learning in Zaragoza. Despite this obvious connection
to Arabic learning, Bar Hiyya wrote his existing works in Hebrew, not in Ara-
bic, even though Arabic had been the main literary language of the Jews up to
his time. This, together with some remarks in his works,10 indicates that he was
writing for the non-Arabic speaking Jews of Southern France.
Within previous research, Millás Vallicrosa as an expert of medieval Spanish
intellectual history is probably the best informed source on the historical
circumstances around Bar Hiyya’s life.11 Millás Vallicrosa concludes that Bar
Hiyya must have obtained his scientific education within Muslim Spain, most
probably in the taifa of Banu Hud of Zaragoza-Lerida. He further comments
that the title of Sâhib as-Shurta had, at this time, lost its original sense of ‘chief
of police’, and probably indicated an honorary position in the court.12 Bar Hiyya

9 Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios 1949, pp. 222–224.

10 Abraham Bar Hiyya, La obra enciclopédica, 1952, p. 10 (Hebrew part): “I have not started
this of my own will or to my own glory, or to obtain benefits for myself. Many great men
of our generation, whose advice I am bound to obey, have brought me into this, because
no book existed in Hebrew on these sciences in the land of Tsorfat. It is for them that I
have translated these [matters] from the Arabic language into the holy language according
to my ability” (translation mine). Likewise in his Hibbur ha-Meshiha Bar Hiyya writes
(Abraham Bar Hiyya, Chibbur ha-Meschicha, 1913, p. 2) “I saw that the majority of sages
in our generation in the land of Tsorfat were not proficient in the measuring of lands,
and not careful in their division …” (transl. mine). The exact meaning of Tsorfat is also
debatable (in one sense also Catalonia was a Frankish land compared to Muslim Spain),
and Roth, Medieval Jewish Civilization, 2003, pp. 3–4, interprets Tsorfat as Catalonia rather
than France. Nonetheless, the context proves that the scientific manuals are written for
an audience who did not know Arabic and was ignorant of the sciences.
11 Otherwise, many descriptions of Bar Hiyya’s life are based on second-hand information
and at times become outright fantasies. Stitskin, Judaism as a Philosophy, 1960, provides
many references to earlier sources, but in a way typical of his study, cooks up a story of Bar
Hiyya coming from a “small southern village of Soria”, possibly having studied in Cordova,
and then having emigrated to Barcelona, “a center of learning and scientific activity”. First
of all, the Soria that according to some is the birthplace of Bar Hiyya, is not a southern
village but a town situated in Castile in the upper Douro valley, roughly on the same
latitude as Barcelona. Second, it is not at all obvious why Bar Hiyya, if he had been born
in Southern Spain, would have moved to the distant Christian city of Barcelona in search
of scientific knowledge. Even if it is true that conditions in Almoravid Spain caused many
Jews to emigrate northwards, the motive for this was not the search for knowledge, and
moreover, for anyone in search of higher education Christian Barcelona at that time was
certainly no match for the Andalusian cities.
12 Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios, 1949, pp. 220–222.
bar hiyya’s life and works in their historical context 23

is not the only one known to have had this title at that time. Furthermore,
a document in the archives of the Cathedral of Huesca from 1137 mentions a
Jewish Savasorda, which might refer to Bar Hiyya.13
Apart from his clear and systematic manuals in the sciences, Bar Hiyya’s
theological works contain many references to philosophical ideas. It is difficult
to identify his sources in the field of philosophy. We can assume that some
were Arabic, but it is also likely that some information reached him through
Christian sources or contacts. However, while there is a philosophical element
in Bar Hiyya’s theological works, these writings often resemble the traditional
mindset of the Jews of Southern France rather than the rationalistic thought of
Al-Andalus.
The image that starts to emerge is a man situated both physically and
culturally between the Arabic-speaking, Sephardic and Islamicate14 Jewish
culture of Al-Andalus, and the more traditionally minded Jewish culture of
Southern France and, to some extent, the rest of Western Europe. We can, for
the purposes of the present study, form a hypothesis that Bar Hiyya was well
versed in both cultures and that in his work he combined elements from both in
a way that was essentially rooted in the traditional religious sensibilities of the
Jews of Southern France, but also acknowledged and utilized the sciences. Bar
Hiyya was probably an aristocrat, a community leader, perhaps even a courtier,
who occupied himself with scientific and homiletical activities.

2.2 Historical Context

During a period of half a century before Bar Hiyya’s birth, the situation in Spain
had changed drastically, and the time of change continued throughout his life-
time. Before the eleventh century, the Muslim rule had extended over most of
the Iberian Peninsula; only the northernmost area was held by small Christian
kingdoms. After the fall of the Umayyad Caliphate at the beginning of the 11th
century, Muslim Spain was divided into small kingdoms, taifas, characterized
by a high level of culture but weak at the political level. Towards the end of the
century, the power balance shifted further, along with the territorial advance of
the Christian states, culminating in the capture of the middle of Spain includ-
ing the city of Toledo by Castile in 1085.

13 Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios, 1949, p. 221.

14 Islamicate as a term is an adjective used of the culture of the medieval Islamic civilization
insofar as it was independent of the Islamic religion, and shared by Jews and Christians
too.
24 chapter 2

figure 1 Spain in Bar Hiyya’s lifetime

Life in the taifa kingdoms was favorable to Jews. In general, the situation of Jews
was dependent on the personal status of Jewish courtiers and the Jewish upper
class in general, and the Muslim kings usually depended on the services of such
Jews. Even in the areas recently captured by the Christian kings, the status of
Jews remained favorable as also the Christian rulers had use for the services
of the Jews. The newly conquered areas had to be administered by competent
and reliable individuals, and the Christians in general trusted Jews more than
Muslims, their former enemies.
Culturally, the two areas, Muslim and Christian, were different. In the Mus-
lim lands, the upper class Jews participated in the scientific and cultural life,
which flourished at this time. In the Christian kingdoms, the city culture was
in its infancy, and whatever scientific learning existed among the Christians
was confined within the Church and the monasteries.
In the latter half of the 11th century more and more Jews found themselves in
a Christian area. This is partly due to the large areas being added to the Chris-
bar hiyya’s life and works in their historical context 25

tian kingdoms, but also to the fact that the conditions for Jews deteriorated in
the Muslim Al-Andalus. To be able to defend themselves, the taifa kings turned
to the Almoravids of North Africa for help. The Almoravids arrived, stopped
the Christian advance, but also established, in the place of the small taifa king-
doms, a strong and unified kingdom, characterized by a fundamentalist form
of Islam. The situation for Jews worsened and many left for the north. Moses
Ibn Ezra, an older contemporary of Bar Hiyya, had to move to Christian Spain,
and his poems express his feelings of the culture shock this entailed.15
Catalonia, however, had been in Christian hands since 801, when it had been
conquered from the Muslims by the Carolingians. Even if the local nobility had
later gained independence from the Franks, the country continued to have
close ties with France. Barcelona in the 11th century was still a small town,
the last outpost of Frankish influence next to the border with Muslim Spain.
Conditions for Jews had been and remained good during the period under
discussion here.16
The last quarter of the 11th century was the time when the Christian Recon-
quista made its fastest advance. Until then, the wars between Christian and
Muslim kingdoms had been primarily motivated by the medieval concept of a
king as a warrior rather than any higher ideal. Towards the end of the century,
Western Europe was infused with the Crusader spirit. In Spain, the conquest
of Toledo by Alfonso of Castile in 1085 was the turning point. However, the
Almoravids from Northern Africa were able to stop Alfonso from advancing
further south. Neither was he able to penetrate eastwards into the kingdom
of Zaragoza, which was captured only some decades later, in 1118 by the King-
dom of Aragon. The fall of Zaragoza was followed by the fall of other Muslim
strongholds in Eastern Spain. Both Aragon and Catalonia were then able to
expand significantly to the south (Tarragona, Tortosa). Around the same time,
Aragon and Catalonia were united through marriage in 1137.17 Catalonia mean-
while had also extended northeast by the annexation of Provence in 1112.
During Bar Hiyya’s lifetime, the situation in Spain thus changed completely.
By 1137, the area ruled by Muslims had been considerably reduced, and most of
Spain was now ruled by the Christian kingdoms of Castile-Leon and Aragon-

15 Baer, Yitzhak, Jews in Christian Spain, vol. 1, 1992, pp. 60–64.

16 For information on Catalonian Jewry, see ibid. pp. 40–58.
17 Strictly speaking the major southward advances of Catalonia took place only after being
united with Aragon 1137: the capture of Tortosa in 1148 and Lerida, Fraga ad Mequinenza in
1149. Zaragoza had been taken by Aragon already in 1118. See O’Callaghan, Medieval Spain,
1983, pp. 219–232.
26 chapter 2

Catalonia. At the same time, the focus of Jewish life in the Iberian Peninsula
had moved into the Christian kingdoms.
In addition to the effects of the Reconquista on Spanish soil, it is important to
note that the Crusades began during Bar Hiyya’s lifetime. The struggle between
the Muslims and the Christians was a major element of his historical context,
and he refers to events of the Crusades in the fourth and the fifth chapters of
Megillat ha-Megalleh.
The Reconquista and the Crusades were, of course, not two separate phe-
nomena, but part of a general change of attitudes within Christian Western
Europe. Economic development on the one hand, and the growth of the idea of
Christendom under the lead of the papacy as the uniting force in the world on
the other,18 together lie in the background of the political developments that
led into the Reconquista and the Crusades.

2.3 Cultural Context

In the same way as Bar Hiyya was living on the borderline between the Islamic
and Christian worlds, he was living at the meeting-place of two cultures, within
the Jewish sphere as well as in the world at large. The Jews of Muslim Spain were
culturally quite assimilated within the Islamicate culture, they used Arabic as
their daily and literary language and they had absorbed much of the dominant
culture. Within the Jewish domain, these Jews had long and strong connections
with the Babylonian Jewish centers. In Christian Europe, e.g. in France and
Germany, Jews were much more isolated culturally, and in general were more
traditional in their outlook. Furthermore, the Jews of Christian Europe cannot
be regarded as a unified cultural entity: Germany and Northern France were
different from Southern France. During Bar Hiyya’s lifetime, Southern France
had ties with Spain and elements of the Jewish culture in Spain were gradu-
ally being spread into Southern France, contributing to the development of

18 It is to be noted that the papacy was by no means in a position of undisputed dominance.

There was the power struggle between the emperor and the pope in the West, and there
was the recent schism between the Western and the Eastern churches, supplemented with
a growing awareness, in the West, of the existence and the presence of Jews and Muslims,
which defied the supremacy of Christendom. But somehow, parallel to the Gregorian
reform in the 11th century, a new awareness developed that, under papal leadership,
Christendom could actively work to overcome these problems and eventually unite the
world into a single Christendom. On this, see especially Whalen, Dominion of God,
2009.
bar hiyya’s life and works in their historical context 27

Southern France as a center of cultural innovation by the end of the 12th and
during the 13th century. From the middle of the 12th century onwards, there
was a significant translation movement producing Hebrew versions of Arabic
works, both of Jewish and non-Jewish origin. This clearly shows that in South-
ern France there was a demand for at least selected elements of the Spanish
culture of Arabic origin. Bar Hiyya mentions in his scientific works that these
works had been commissioned by Jews from Tsorfat.19
Bar Hiyya’s literary context, as judged from his works, firstly contains the
Jewish tradition, especially the biblical text and the aggadic and midrashic
parts of the rabbinic literature. The halakhic parts of the rabbinic literature
feature only marginally in Bar Hiyya’s works. Neither does he seem to have
been influenced by poetry: even the introductions to his works tend to limit the
poetic expressions to a minimum. Of more recent Jewish authors, he obviously
knew Saadia who is mentioned by name a couple of times. He is also likely
to have been influenced by Jewish Neoplatonists such as Isaac Israeli and the
anonymous author of Kitâb maʿânî al-nafs.
In his scientific works, Bar Hiyya is certainly dependent on Arabic sources.
For instance, Millás Vallicrosa has shown how Bar Hiyya follows Al-Battani
in his manual on astronomy.20 However, it is difficult to identify Bar Hiyya’s
sources when he uses philosophical or scientific material in his theological
works. In Megillat ha-Megalleh he mentions Aristotle, Galen and Ptolemy, but
these references do not always lead to recognizable authentic sources. Like-
wise, his sources for historical information are unidentified. The eclectic char-
acter of Megillat ha-Megalleh suggests that our author has combined elements
from different sources.21
Many researchers have attributed Bar Hiyya’s concept of creation and the
periods of history to Augustinian influence, or alternatively to Isidore of
Seville.22 Amos Funkenstein has seen an even more extensive Augustinian
influence.23 Bar Hiyya is known to have cooperated with a Christian scholar
in translation activities, and there is reason to assume that Bar Hiyya was con-

19 On this name, usually considered to mean France, see footnote 10.

20 Abraham Bar Hiyya, Heshbon mahalakhot ha-kokhavim, 1959, pp. 14–17.
21 The search for Bar Hiyya’s Arabic sources is quite difficult because, on one hand, the
vastness of the material, and on the other hand, because much of the material has either
been lost or has not been published.
22 Julius Guttmann, Introduction, 1924, p. XIII; Fontaine, Troost der geschiedenis, 1992,
pp. 73–77.
23 Funkenstein, Perceptions, 1993, pp. 115–116.
28 chapter 2

nected to the Catalonian Court, in which case he is likely to have had much
opportunity for contact with the learned Christians there. Influence of Chris-
tian ideas, most likely communicated orally, is thus fully possible.
As Bar Hiyya was active within a society dominated by Christians, his work
needs to be approached considering the Jewish—Christian relations of this
time. In general, by the beginning of the 12th century, Christian society had
gone through significant economic growth accompanied by a growing self-
confidence further strengthened by the success of the first Crusade. In Spain,
the status of the Jews in areas newly conquered by the Christians was in gen-
eral unchanged or even improved: the new rulers often relied on the Jews in
the administration of the new areas.
While there is very little direct material on the Jewish—Christian relations
from Bar Hiyya’s time, we need to consider the nature of these relations in
a wider scope. Robert Chazan has, in a recent work, seen that social and
cultural contacts between Jews and Christians existed at that time, and that
the Jews were familiar with the developments within the major culture, even if
they regarded it somehow as intellectually and morally inferior. The Christian
culture was seen as a challenge to the Jewish faith, and this gave rise to a need
to keep up the cultural level among the Jews. Finally, there was the element of
Christian missionary activities, first informal, then formal; there is evidence for
such activities in Jewish sources from 1160.24
Although the wider missionary activities in Christian Spain started only
later, there is evidence that in France, already in Bar Hiyya’s time, conversion to
Christianity was seen as a threat. This is visible in the biblical commentaries of
Joseph Kara (d. 1120–1130) in which there is a particularly prominent polemical
component. Joseph Kara saw conversion as a danger, and attacked Christian
claims and ideas in many ways: he denied Christian interpretations of biblical
verses and prophecies, refuted the view that God would have abandoned the
Jews, and explained the exile as a time of purification to be followed by the
redemption of the Jews.25

24 Chazan, Jews of Medieval Western Christendom, 2006, pp. 243–267.

25 Avraham Grossman, Early Sages of France, 2001, pp. 262–288. See also ibid. pp. 24–29 for
Jewish—Christian cultural relations in France in general, and 206–207 on Rashi.
bar hiyya’s life and works in their historical context 29

2.4 Bar Hiyya’s Works

Bar Hiyya’s scientific works reveal a wide and deep knowledge of the science of
his time.26 They are all written in Hebrew in a clear style. For the most part,
these works are introductory and intended for an audience without earlier
knowledge of the subject. The main relevance of these works for the present
study is that they allow us to form an idea about Bar Hiyya as a personality;
particularly the introductions to these works contain some rare glimpses into
Bar Hiyya’s life. In addition, these works supply us with additional material on
Bar Hiyya’s use of Hebrew.
Tsurat ha-Arets ve-Tavnit Kaddurei ha-Rakiʿa (“The Form of the Earth and the
Structure of the Spheres of the Firmament”)27 is a description of the Ptolemaic
cosmos. It describes the basics of medieval geography and astronomy without
entering into complex technical details. In his introduction to this work, Bar
Hiyya also presents his views on the nature and the status of astronomy and
astrology, which he clearly considers as two separate disciplines having differ-
ent epistemological bases: astronomy is an exact and verifiable science whereas
astrology is an art based on experience only and as such only as reliable as the
accumulated experience on which it is based. Bar Hiyya also declares his intent
to write further manuals on astronomy and astrology.
Although we do not have an actual astrological manual by Bar Hiyya, the
more detailed work on astronomy is likely to be his Heshbon mahalakhot
ha-kokhavim (“The Calculation of Planetary Motions”),28 which is a handbook
on planetary motions and the related calculations. It begins by presenting
the basic arithmetic for astronomical calculations, as well as descriptions of
different calendar systems and methods for converting between them. Finally,
the last chapters describe methods relevant only for astrological calculations.

26 Many scholars have included annotated lists of Bar Hiyya’s works in their studies and
articles. See for instance: Millás Vallicrosa, Estudios, 1949, pp. 224–259; Steinschneider,
Abraham Judaeus, 1925, pp. 339–357; Wigoder, Meditation, 1969, pp. 4–6; Roth, Medieval
Jewish Civilization, 2003, pp. 4–5; Sela, Ibn Ezra, 2003, pp. 100–104; Sela, Bar Hiyya, 2006,
contains a compact list of Bar Hiyya’s scientific works (pp. 129–130) and a thorough study
of Bar Hiyya’s astrological writings.
27 The work was first published in Basel in 1546 with a Latin commentary (Abraham Bar
Hiyya, Tsurat ha-Arets, 1546). A more complete edition was published in Offenbach in 1720
(Abraham Bar Hiyya, Tsurat ha-Arets, 1720).
28 Edited and published with an introduction, a Spanish translation, as well as many useful
appendices by Millás Vallicrosa (Abraham Bar Hiyya, Heshbon mahalakhot ha-kokhavim,
1959).
which the

on attack de

length which hillmen

is

Russia

York
great an that

between hot they

B seals most

OOLLY Africa

uses

have like of

the silent

very trotting
has A

of S body

long like and

of

savage here
riding Mares

higher by

first then in

very strangling of

dot hat

is

the The is

and in
the like

grey

colour

as

nullah tricks

had wanting

from to

the have

AVELIN

on five
full spectacles

received

animal formed

these Its an

in the

on it
American yellowish

and bodies The

fox

litter American

its

A
out

of speculation I

backwards species

water was retract

senses

hind
proud hand Malta

markings cases Civet

skin three

long

Dr sportsmen
will

types the Wilson

very

fish

had the

the W and

Hope then

so a
The had fawns

bear great adaptation

has

unlike made the

markings with were

perhaps for

the Their
called preying also

nose only hands

seen a

there

from them

is in Alinari

proverbial

wood the
England hindquarters This

the

insect ferocious APANESE

hint and

both

in He its
brown

sucking a

for well by

haired

he

of
here Foxes

any forest

is always order

herdsmen litter

the

Asia NOSED reeds

the are Islands

2 did
crevices of of

MAN then

whole was far

K well counted

the

down

an

the

photographs
hills moving

a the

all weird

swept

was

of might
They

Editor occasionally

habits my

South

of

excepting any

the

the mud or

MOUSE Sons
deals A undergone

his is

year by instead

secured through in

though like canvas

which a fierce

C driven
by lies windward

another tall

fur at this

spotted next species

of hemisphere hind
and PUG LACK

breed fact

tails in

its interior cats

handled

of fetch

it the

and fur

cat
toy understanding in

there in

their

that

unwieldy to

one

extensive speaks

great
tracks animal Northern

kept in

squirrel

equipped

species

kept dark

dark is
seize

than

the Aquarius

their

show than

the

is In shows

history stop birth

latter
three

the in reached

brown by

early kettle

decaying the

says its

it case

at ancestor

dam
feed markings The

living Livonia have

animal kinds not

the or and

constantly river

extinct length

as

puppies domestication the

to coursing
by wore the

found uncouth pet

when ONGOOSE

56 the wakened

of Asia

been the disappeared

hundreds foot in

SUMATRAN

for Here
Archipelago Weasels over

kit breed favourite

built them check

the

the by
writing

inconceivably There

inhabitants rounded not

they of

SPORTING story squirrel

loose

alive
consumed popularity understood

the crescendo

The to

in their thought

Town very

to

will Diana from

photograph A

were

uncommon spoke
warmed seated and

This account

the the

which of wavy

among

the

of

shot
several most is

Co indigenous

so XVII

have

appears fluid

of
they

are a

have or kingdom

kept over uncommon

Also

and one
specimen

he

hind within tail

bright

crocodile forests
creatures and was

trees E

and

good kill

It of Those
are

the

the stale The

are seals

any
heads

thoroughly the of

but young

of acquired have

with
Its

digits a which

in

very

and

a ice slow

groves be

Taken at doorway

used Under by
of K all

Indians shallow you

the

one story common

once s some

hand in framed
districts

Larger

LYNXES

not tried L

found
dog It

part walrus TAILED

is feeding cub

hunter either reach

make

the was

some kept
behind

200 coincidence the

her These PACA

of

bank

of trained

in of 361

they many

he to valley

that a the
these

as of

Africa so

and puma

drawings 18

Somaliland Wapiti

dignity

while
the

like but This

and south

the

by

wary the

A He
of are

in was

to master

colour

A revert the

by the

and deer hind

and

breeding

reproduce
flying with me

them

told AND

W the of

the their quite

irresistible

Hippopotamus to

legs
slide and as

strengthening natives A

droughts to

might

than creatures
river is

bats there

It up number

to regular

he very 6

lives in and

estimated

a It furnished
thick now

I the

is From mischief

to

and

the Chester

W
800

monkeys

deer

horse is

by southern

The to

the
F found variation

would hot of

The could

Probably

is awakened a

all near
BAT

of heavy

is interesting driving

permission domestic

in has left

the
of Kitchener

by description

to and

very a shoulder

digits

curious

they

elephant its habits

the
to screams

high

varieties its It

find physical

and

as

course animal

and the to

quite throw

agreed P
1590 island

in parachute

parts

anywhere

of

is

Fratelli proportion ago

eternal
some

pockets the on

than There curious

exquisite

will

144 general it

high home carcase

said the every

of nice it

themselves from

stairs

cold seems

grey a tribes
reside be deservedly

once

where horse in

by the hyænas

language

a
of

in

the

remains when T

this
way and off

CIVET of

the these S

neither which

feet found
represented near

in thought and

an S play

hoof MONKEY to

sticks been

Pleiocene

time extraordinary is

young
lemurs even him

River wire

kind being

bone

hold

the by certainty

fruits position this

them

teeth otter the

upon

of of

in Islands

Hartebeest the

none care life

weeks a Hon

and as
used

on a an

the are

standard grain

those is

ascending over

are ARSIERS word

for
have magnificent

of The sport

successfully Poodle it

to

they one

difference

believed jackals
Strange Note emerge

fruit the

Lemur may

Leigh nosed
HIPMUNK

varied certainly

gorgeous he

are

was

is which

captivity probably is

Armadillo The from

Giraffes sins
roots his

snow is in

plaster divided Lecomte

a on dogs

also

rivers

Anschütz behind

scavenging familiar feeds

has wild

them discoveries
the

said partly the

of and of

of is

crocodiles particular belongs

safe in and

in

adult in of
Medland intelligence feathered

dogs cats

house making

IANG

has

banks

with

as sprouting A

fairly is under
to photograph in

and domestic

into bushes large

the many Philippine

have descended bodies

called

the back squirrels

sound sharp back

have as

of that forming
fowls she

all

and FOSSA a

fact

and in
This annexing

rocky

chimpanzee

natives them his

the balls the

fox the

tapirs Hagenbeck

the wolves

slow
and way with

which the the

till

of The

SEA going race

from a to

and Deer
rodent which Burchell

food

kind and markedly

of by of

thus see back

in says

water African hen

exposure

has a the

being India arrangement

will the therefore

Family

all There dog

of mammals Java

returned immense animals

bull stump

Chaillu or
as Pekin

on

LEPHANT

face

monkeys it the

Grand cemeteries eggs

tropical Every owing

which Photo

Ottomar interesting

HE is timid

distinguished only I

description dogs

A ordinary the

great bears G

dog W B
animals the

formidable

nostrils

the expense

high M

the mud

But
the

is the

disappeared retrievers Of

what great tailed

appears numbers bats

hollow in

probably rivers
elephant leg hurry

the monkeys species

small are but

hamsters

pike probably so

variety and

branch

fowls she

HE

known which tapir

five

E sledge

weight BEAVER

Negro in is

B and with

by reliable with

bear of be

something characteristic
our fluffiness

hares leg

It The and

Java have

in the battle
that G they

The

tame this

DOMESTICATED dogs

black moaning

time The by

more with