GIL P. KLEIN

FORGET THE LANDSCAPE: THE SPACE OF RABBINIC AND GRECO-ROMAN MNEMONICS

Abstract essential difference between images and memories, how This article investigates the notion of memorization in rabbinic could their interconnectedness, even their confusion, be and Roman spatial practices. The Greco-Roman mnemonic explained not only on the level of language but on the level technique, in which space was a structuring device for the of actual experience: Do we not speak of what we remem- memorized ideas, words or images, has been extensively stud- ber, even of memory as an image we have of the past? ied. Scholars have also demonstrated how such a technique (Paul Ricœur).1 was applied in rabbinic systems of memorization and the In a well-known story from the Palestinian , arrangement of oral traditions. Nevertheless, very little has Rabbi Ḥiyah is asked to explain why he was ignoring been written about the role of mnemonics in the organization of his colleague Rabbi Ishmael in the bathhouse.2 In his space itself. In the first part of the article I use the comparison between the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum (first to fifth defense, Ḥiyah claims that he was not even aware of centuries CE collection of illuminated manuals of land survey his colleague’s presence since, at the time of Ishmael’s and urban planning) and tractate Eruvin to explore refer- arrival, he was “running his eyes over” the aggadic book ences to cities in the shape of Greek letters, which are almost of Psalms.3 As shown by Shlomo Na’eh, Ḥiyah is under- identical in the two texts. The fact that a list of cities in the stood here to be reviewing in his mind’s eye an image shape of letters was used in the Roman corpus as a mnemonic of a book he had memorized, to the point of rendering device for the memorization of urban layouts suggests that his physical eyes blind to his surroundings.4 Following the rabbis corresponded with such methods in their spatial this dangerous kind of immersion in Torah-study, two formulations of the Sabbath Boundary. In the second part students are appointed to accompany the rabbi at all of the article I investigate the rabbinic system of forgotten times so as to ensure his safety. produce (shikheḥah) that maps fields in order to determine The link made in this story between memory, which crops were unintentionally left behind by the farmer and image, and place was well established in the Greco- consequently belonged to the poor. As I demonstrate, many of the spatial and visual principles applied by the rabbis in this Roman world at least since Plato and Aristotle. In system echo the mnemonic principles described in the Roman their respective discussions of knowing, these two work on memorization Rhetorica Ad Herennium. The primary philosophers thought of the mechanism of memory as purpose of the article, however, is not merely to illuminate involving a visual component. According to Plato, we an instance of cultural exchange, but rather to point to the have in our soul a component akin to a block of wax profound link established by mnemonics between space, image on which our perceptions and thoughts make marks and language. The mechanism of organizing words and ideas (sēmeia): “whatever is impressed upon the wax we spatially and visually affected the ways in which space was remember and know so long as the image (eidōlon) perceived and was, itself, organized. remains in the wax; whatever is obliterated or cannot be impressed, we forget and do not know” (Theaethetus, The troublesome question is the following: is a memory 191d).5 Elsewhere in this dialogue, as well as in works a sort of image, and if so, what sort? And if it should such as the Philebus and the Sophist, Plato describes prove possible through eidetic analysis to account for the the relation between the image and the imprinted

1 Paul Ricœur, Memory, History, Forgetting, (Chicago: University 4 Shlomo Na’eh, “The Craft of Memory: Memory Structures of Chicago Press, 2004), 44. and Textual Patterns in Rabbinic Literature” in Meḥqerei Talmud: 2 yKet 12:3, 35a = yKil 9:4, 32b. Talmudic Studies Dedicated to the Memory of Professor Ephraim E. 3 The term used here is ashgerit eynayi. Marcus Jastrow, A Urbach, eds. Yaakov Sussmann and David Rosenthal, (Jerusa- Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and lem: The Hebrew University Magness Press, 2005), 555–556 (in the Midrashic Literature, (London: Luzac & Co., 1903), 1522. For a Hebrew). review of this story as an example of rabbinic visual piety see Rachel 5 Plato: Complete Works, ed. John M. Cooper, trans. M. J. Levett Neis, The Sense of Sight in Rabbinic Culture: Jewish Ways of Seeing in and Myles F. Burnyeat, (Indianapolis, Ind.: Hackett, 1997), 212. Late Antiquity, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 231.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2017 IMAGES Also available online—brill.com/ima DOI: 10.1163/18718000-12340080 Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 24 Gil P. Klein wax by using terms that we associate more closely surroundings could be seen as stemming precisely with the visual and the spatial: eikōn and tupos.6 This from his movement deeper into the imaginary space of problem of representation and memory is found also Torah and away from the real space of the bathhouse in Aristotle’s work, in which the imprint, or affection, and its social conventions. produced “by means of perception in the soul and in Most importantly for my exploration here, the dia- that part of the body which contains [it],” should be lectic of mental and physical vision in Ḥiyah’s story considered a sort of picture (zōgraphema), “the having points to the spatial dimension of rabbinic memorizing of which we say is memory.”7 techniques, which is also central to the Greco-Roman Following classical Greek philosophy, the metaphor art of memory. Although the relationships between of the wax and the imprint developed as the basis for rabbinic and Greco-Roman mnemonic techniques are memorizing techniques, which had a significant impact not entirely clear, scholars have shown that traces of also on Roman philosophy and rhetoric. In her analysis Ars Memoria are evident in rabbinic text. For example, of the art of memory, Frances Yates quotes the Latin one rabbinic method of inscribing information onto work Rhetorica Ad Herennium, the earliest available the mind was the arrangement of this information in classical treatise on mnemonics, which was written various “inner chambers” (ḥadrei ḥadarim) located sometime at the beginning of the first century BCE in the “heart.”10 In view of the perceptual continuity and has been erroneously attributed to Cicero. The and interdependence between the imaginary places author of Rhetorica Ad Herennium writes: “For the of memory and the physical places that inspire them backgrounds (loci) are very much like wax tablets or in the Greco-Roman art of memory, it is not surprising papyrus, and the images like the letters, the arrange- that the direction of such inspiration could be reversed; ment and disposition of the images like the script, the mnemonic techniques of organizing information and the delivery is like the reading (III.17.30).”8 As sometimes change the actual production and under- recently noted by the architectural theorist Dalibor standing of this information in reality. Frances Yates Vesely on the basis of Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s work, and Mary Currathers illuminate this phenomenon in this mechanism of memorization uses the inherent Medieval and Renaissance cultural projects. interdependence and continuity of our thoughts, In the context of the rabbis, scholars have demon- our bodies and the places we inhabit both externally strated the role of memorization in the development (through experience) and internally (through visual of rabbinic study traditions, as well as in the formation recollection). The lack of such interdependence and of the rabbinic corpora.11 Nevertheless, this work has continuity is apparent, for example, in people who so far been mostly limited to the evolution of rabbinic suffer from delusion or various forms of aphasia.9 In study culture and the collected traditions it produced. this sense, Rabbi Ḥiyah’s temporary blindness to his What I wish to argue in this article is that the spatial

6 See the broader discussion of this issue in Ricœur, Memory, Avot de-Rabbi Natan B 13; Deut. 355. For the important link History, Forgetting, 7–15. between vision and the heart in rabbinic literature see the illumi- 7 Aristotle, Peri mnēmēs kai anamnēsēos, 450a26–27, 450a30. nating analysis in Rachel Neis, “’Their Backs toward the Temple, See Richard Sorabji, Aristotle on Memory, 2nd ed., (Chicago: and Their Faces toward the East:’ the Temple and Toilet Practices University of Chicago Press, 2006), 37; Ricœur, Memory, History, in Rabbinic Palestine and Babylonia,” Journal for the Study of Juda- Forgetting, 16; Janet Coleman, Ancient and Medieval Memories: ism 43 (2012): 330–338. Studies in the Reconstruction of the Past, (Cambridge: Cambridge 11 Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition University Press, 1992), 5-38. and Oral Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity, 8 Harry Caplan, [Cicero] Ad C. Herennium De Ratione Dicendi (Lund and Copenhagen: C. W. K. and Ejnar Munksgaard, 1964); (Rhetorica Ad Herennium), Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Jacob Neusner, The Memorized Torah: The Mnemonic System of the Harvard University Press, 1954; reprint, 1964), 209. Caplan translates , Brown Judaic Studies (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985); loci (the parallel of the Greek topoi) as “backgrounds” while Yates Martin S. Jaffee, Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition translates this term as “places.” Frances Amelia Yates, The Art of in Palestinian Judaism, 200 BCE–400 CE, (Oxford and New York: Memory, (London: Pimlico, 1992), 22. Oxford University Press, 2001); Steven D. Fraade, From Tradition 9 Dalibor Vesely, Architecture in the Age of Divided Representation: to Commentary: Torah and Its Interpretation in the Midrash Sifre to The Question of Creativity in the Shadow of Production, (Cambridge, Deuteronomy, (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1991), MA and London: MIT, 2004), 97–103. See Maurice Merleau-Ponty, 110–121; Michael D. Swartz, Scholastic Magic: Ritual and Revelation Phenomenology of Perception, (London: Routledge, 1962; reprint, in Early Jewish Mysticism, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University 2002), especially 22–29, 157–161. Press, 1996); Elizabeth Shanks Alexander, “The Orality of Rabbinic 10 Na’eh, “The Craft of Memory,” 570–576. For another technique Writing,” in The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic see also Na’eh, 561, n81. And see mSot 7:7; tSot 7:11–12 (MS Vienna Literature, eds. Charlotte Fonrobert and Martin Jaffee (Cambridge does not mention the “heart” as the location of these chambers); and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 38–57; Na’eh,

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 25 and visual components of rabbinic mnemonics not survey, a planning and measuring method that involves only shaped the methods and products of Torah study, geometrical and astronomical calculations.13 It is a but also profoundly informed the ways in which the collection of several first- to fifth-century CE works rabbis perceived and ordered the environment in their in Latin, recorded in illuminated manuscripts whose rulings. By reviewing spatial practices such as the Sab- earliest recension dates to the sixth century CE.14 The bath Boundary (teḥum ) and Forgotten Produce application of Roman surveying techniques in late an- (shikheḥah), through which the rabbis mapped space tique Palestine is evident in the archaeological traces and prescribed its usage, I will illuminate here the of urban planning at the sites of Galilean cities such role of memorizing techniques in the sages’ regulation as Sepphoris and Tiberias, which figure in rabbinic of their cityscapes and landscapes. In doing so, I will literature as major rabbinic centers.15 Roman surveying compare these rabbinic practices with related Roman and planning is marked by the division of land into practices, as they appear in classical and late antique rectangular or square plots, which are oriented to the works on memory and land survey. cardinal directions (fig. 1). A more direct rabbinic reference to Roman prac- Greco-Roman Land Survey and Rabbinic Literature tices of land survey is found in the literature itself. Both the Talmudim, for example, mention sages using Before turning to the question of mnemonics in the Greco-Roman land survey tools such as the dioptra and sages’ regulation of space, I will briefly present some the measuring rope when determining the Sabbath of the most apparent links between rabbinic texts on Boundary.16 In addition, many of the measuring in- the Sabbath Boundary in tractate Eruvin and Roman structions given by the rabbis have striking parallels texts such as the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum.12 in the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum.17 Finally, The Agrimensorum is a late antique manual of land the Babylonian Talmud refers to the sage Rav Ada, for

“The Craft of Memory,” 543–589; Moulie Vidas, Tradition and the Cartography, ed. J. B. Harley and David Woodward (Chicago: Uni- Formation of the Talmud, (Princeton and Oxford: Princeton Uni- versity of Chicago Press, 1987), 201–211. versity Press, 2014), 180–202. 14 Brian J. Campbell, The Writings of the Roman Land Surveyors: 12 The main rabbinic texts analyzed here come from tEruv Introduction, Text, Translation and Commentary, (London: Society chapter 4 and mEruv chapter 5. For a comparison of the two for the Promotion of Roman Studies, 2000), xlv–lxi. For the from the perspective of urban geometry see Gil P. Klein, “Squaring historical background of land survey see pages xlv–xlvi. the City: Between Roman and Rabbinic Urban Geometry,” in 15 See Zeev Weiss and Ehud Netzer, “Hellenistic and Roman Phenomenologies of the City: Studies in the History and Philosophy Sepphoris: The Archaeological Evidence,” in Sepphoris in Galilee: of Architecture, ed. Henriette Steiner and Maximilian Sternberg, Crosscurents of Culture, ed. Rebecca Martin Nagy et al. (Raleigh: (Farnham, UK and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015), 33–48. For North Carolina Museum of Art, 1996), 29–38; Yizhar Hirschfeld a short discussion of rabbinic Shabbat Boundary and land and Eran Meir, “Tiberias—2004,” Hadashot Arkheologiyot 118 surveying in the context of mathematical calculations see W. M. (2006), accessed July 4, 2017, http://www.hadashot-esi.org.il/ Feldman, Rabbinical Mathematics and Astronomy, (New York: report_detail_eng.aspx?id=337&mag_id=111. Hermon Press, 1978), 25–26. Feldman mentions Rabbi Abraham 16 For meẓupit and sheforferet (dioptra) see yEruv 4:2, 21d and bar Chiya’s twelfth-century book on Geometry and Mensuration bEruv 43b. For the measuring rope see mEruv 5:4; tEruv 4:16; (hibur ha-meshiḥah veha-tishboret), in which the author discusses yEruv 5:3, 22d; bEruv 57b-58b. For a discussion of Greco-Roman his contemporary medieval land surveyors. For a reference to surveying instruments in the context of Rabban Gamaliel’s dioptra “surveyor” in the Palestinian Talmud see Jacob Neusner, The Talmud see Michael Jonathan Taunton Lewis, Surveying Instruments of the Land of Israel: A Preliminary Translation and Explanation, of Greece and Rome, (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge vol. 20— and Qatan (Chicago and London: The University Press, 2001), 46–47, 305–306. Daniel Sperber, Nautica University of Chicago Press, 1986), 161, 158. For measuring and Talmudica, (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 1986), 107–109. surveying tools in general with some reference to rabbinic literature , Kifshuta, (New York: Jewish Theological see Ronny Reich, “Measuring Tools in the Service of Architects Seminary, 1955), vol. 3—Moed., 382 (in Hebrew). Saul Lieberman, and Masons in Antiquity,” in Measuring and Weighing in Ancient Hayerushalmi Kifshuto , third ed., vol. I.1 (New York and Jerusalem: Times, ed. Ofra Rimon (Haifa: University of Haifa, 2001), 61-67. For Jewish Theological Seminary, 2008), 282 (in Hebrew). Uri Zur and an acknowledgement of the connection between rabbinic practices Yehuda Ashkenazi, “Rabban Gamaliel’s Telescope and Proposed and orthogonal urban planning in the Greco-Roman world see Method for Measuring Valley Depths—a Talmudic Geodesy,” BDD Michael Chyutin, The Jerusalem Scroll from Qumran, (Tel Aviv: 19 (2008): 525 (in Hebrew). Bavel, 2003), 120–136 (in Hebrew). And see Shmuel Safrai and 17 For the practice called qidur or qidud (cutting-through), which Ze’ev Safrai, Mishnat Eretz Israel, Tractate Eruvin (Moed Vol. 3): appears mort frequently as meqadrin be-harim (cutting-through With Historical and Sociological Commentary, (Jerusalem: The E.M. mountains), see mEruv 5:4; tEruv 4:14-16; yEruv 5:3, 22d; bEruv 57b– Liphshitz College Publishing House, 2009), 163-165 (in Hebrew). 58b. For an alternative translation see Heinrich W. Guggenheimer, 13 Oswald A. W. Dilke, “Maps in the Service of the States: Roman The . Second Order, Mo’ed. Tractates Šabbat and Cartography to the End of the Augustan Era,” in The History of Eruvin, (Berlin and Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2012), 675. On

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 26 Gil P. Klein

Fig. 1. Illustrator Unknown. A Diagram of a Centuriated City from the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Hyginus (2), Constitutio Limitum, C 136.18-22. MS Arcerianus A, Sixth Century CE, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. 36.23 Aug. 2° folio 44v. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel). instance, as a meshoḥa’ah, a term specifically designat- from this border to a distance of two thousand cubits ing land surveyors, and reports his advice on matters on all sides is regarded as the Sabbath Boundary— concerning teḥum shabbat.18 the area to which travel is restricted on this holy day.20 The Sabbath Boundary and Greek Alphabet One of the rabbinic articulations of the Sabbath Boundary that resembles the language of the Corpus The stated purpose of the rabbinic Sabbath Boundary Agrimensorum Romanorum provides an important in- is to offer a legal remedy for the biblical prohibition sight into the link between land survey and mnemonic from Exodus 16:29, of leaving one’s “place” during techniques. It is found in Tosefta, Eruvin 4:4 and is the Seventh Day. For the rabbis, the minimum place concerned with regulating cities’ borders in various of an individual is four square cubits, which, similarly architectural situations: to the notion of the Roman architect Vitruvius, is de- How are the cities augmented [for the purpose of the scribed in the Tosefta as deriving from the measure- Sabbath boundary]? [If the city is] elongated [i.e., ments of the human body.19 However, when one is rectangular]—[it is regarded] as is. [If the city] is circular— within a structure or a settlement, the perimeters of we make it [so that it has] angles [or, corners—i.e., we this structure or settlement constitute one’s legal place enclose it within a square]. [If the city] is square—we do for the duration of the Sabbath. As in the case of the not make it [so that it has] angles. [If the city] is shaped Roman land survey and urban planning, the perim- like a bow, [or] like [the Greek letter] gamma, we regard eters of a settlement should first be enclosed within a it as if it was even [i.e., its empty area is included in its square border (fig. 2). The region extending outwards boundary]. (tEruv 4:4).21

this practice and its name see Abraham Goldberg, The Mishnah 19 Vitruvius, De Arch., 3.1.2-3. trans. Morris Hicky Morgan (Cam- Treatise Eruvin, (Jerusalem: Magness Press, The Hebrew Univer- bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914), 72–73. tEruv 3:11. For sity, 1986), 142–145 (in Hebrew). In the Roman contexts see the the four cubits as a Greek measurement, which was adopted by Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Frontinus, De Arte Mensoria, the rabbis, see Daniel Sperber, “A Note on Some Shi’urim and C 13.3–15.33. For commentary and diagrams regarding this section Graeco-Roman Measurements,” Journal of Jewish Studies 20, in Frontinus see Campbell, Land Surveyors, 330–331; 488–490. no. 1–4 (1969): 81–86. See ibid., 500, for the definition of cultellatio—the technique of 20 For an understanding of rabbinic laws of the Sabbath, including sloping ground in a survey. Like its rabbinic parallel, the including the Sabbath Boundary, in early Christianity see Shaye term may be associated with the notion of cutting through, and is J. D. Cohen, “Sabbath Law and Mishnah Shabbat in Origen De possibly derived from culter (knife). And see ibid., 499 for a defini- Principiis,” Jewish Studies Quarterly 17 (2010): 16–189. tion of the chorobates—the instrument for measuring horizontal 21 For an illumination of this passage see Lieberman, Tosefta distances on an uneven ground. Kifshuta, 366–368. 18 bEruv 56b; bBM 107b.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 27

Fig. 2. Illustrator Unknown. A City’s Square Sabbath Boundary from bEruv 57a, Nineteenth century, Vilnius. The Vilna print edition of the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Eruvin. Jerusalem: El Ha-Mekorot, 1948.

According to the Tosefta, cities whose borders are not land survey treatises.23 One treatise, the Casae Lit- perfectly square require the institution of a clear rect- terarum III, is particularly relevant to the discussion angular border from which the two thousand cubits of of the Tosefta, as it similarly describes the outline of the Sabbath Boundary could be measured. Hence, the settlements by equating them with the forms of Greek Tosefta’s augmentation of cities as part of this imagi- letters. The settlement that has the form of the letter nary urban redrawing speaks in geometrical terms: a gamma is comprised of two linear elements, which are circular city would gain angles or corners, and bow-like perpendicular to one another (figs. 3a and 3b).24 The or gamma-like cities, which enclose an empty region, letter sigma, marked in the manuscript’s illustration as would be theoretically adjusted so as to include this a lunate sigma (C), represents a bow-like settlement region in their outline.22 whose empty region faces a river (figs. 4a and 4b).25 The Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum also lists As noted by Brian Campbell, the Casae Litterarum geometrical elements such as rectangles, squares III was a school exercise, meant to help the student of and circles, as well as arches and right angles, in its land survey memorize various architectural situations

22 It should be noted, that the Tosefta speaks about such cities 23 See for example Hyginus [1], De Condicionibus Agrorum, as urban plans, whose shapes are highly abstract; purely square, C 82.1–5, which is included in the Agrimensorum. circular, rectangular, arched or gamma-shaped cities were ex- 24 “Γ. It extends up to a hill. It does not have extensive land. It tremely rare in the Greco-Roman context. This abstraction is not is in the shape of the [letter] gamma. Behind it, at the foot it has entirely surprising in view of the theoretical nature of rabbinic legal a spring, and below, a river.” (Casae Litterarum III, C 236.30–31). speculations, but it could also be explained as an attempt on the See Campbell, Land Surveyors, illustration 230. part of the rabbis to describe general outlines that would apply 25 “Σ. It occupies a valley. From a water [supply], it extends over to a variety of urban situations (in reality, what the rabbis call “a hills and returns to the water. (Its boundary occasionally has a circular city” could simply refer to a loosely concentric structure, for river).” (Casae Litterarum III, C 238.7–8). See ibid., illustration 240. instance). For the symbolism of geometry in the context of rabbinic and Roman urban practices see Klein, “Squaring the City,” 44–45.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 28 Gil P. Klein

Fig. 3a. Illustrator Unknown. “Gamma” from the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Casae Litterarum III, C 236.30–31. MS G, Ninth century, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. 105 Gud. lat. folio 99r. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel).

Fig. 3b. Illustrator Unknown. City Shaped “Like a Gamma” from bEruv 55a. Nineteenth century, Vilnius. The Vilna print edition of the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Eruvin, Jerusalem, El Ha- Mekorot, 1948.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 29

Fig. 4a. Illustrator Unknown. “Sigma” From the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Casae Litterarum III, C 238.7–8. MS G, Ninth century, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. 105 Gud. lat. folio 100r. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel).

Fig. 4b. Illustrator Unknown. City Shaped “Like a Bow” from bEruv 55a, Nineteenth century, Vilnius. The Vilna print edition of the Babylonian Talmud, tractate Eruvin, Jerusalem: El Ha-Mekorot, 1948.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 30 Gil P. Klein and topographical conditions.26 The mnemonic utiliza- The Forgotten Produce and Spatial Context tion of the alphabet, a set of signs whose serial order would have been known to every educated person, was Once, during dinner, Umberto Eco and his friends common in the Greco-Roman world. In the case of the amused themselves by inventing advertisements for uni- Casae Litterarum however, the alphabet is used not versity positions in nonexistent academic disciplines.28 only as a serial notation system, but also as a source One such discipline was called Impossibilia and con- of iconographic vocabulary that stands for spatial and tained impossible fields such as the history of the wheel visual models. Hence, if most Greco-Roman memoriz- in the pre-Colombian empires. Another discipline was ing techniques used places as organizing frameworks Oxymoronica, which contained self-contradictory sci- for images and elements of language, here, images and ences like nomadic urban studies. A particularly inter- elements of language were used as organizing frame- esting area of study invented during this dinner was works for places. This brings into relief the Platonic called Ars Oblivionalis—the art of forgetting. In a later link mentioned in the introduction between eikōn and article from 1988 entitled “An Ars Oblivionalis: Forget tupos: the painted image of a city carries both meanings It!” Eco explains that, unlike in the case of the art of of tupos—type and place. memory—forgetting cannot be an active technique.29 What may we make then, on the level of cultural Any attempt to remove an image or an idea from history, of the similar intersection of letters and settle- our memory would only turn our attention to this ments in the Casae Litterarum III and Tosefta Eruvin? image or idea and would, at best, relocate it in our I would like to argue that, although the rabbis some- minds and, at worst, make it even more vivid in our time use the term “gamma” to mean “right angle,” imagination. and although the reference to a city shaped like a Notwithstanding Eco’s solid semiotics, for the rab- bow does not actually mention the letter sigma, the bis, as well as for the Church Fathers, the act of posi- fact that the Tosefta specifically articulates urban and tively defining a negatively constituted phenomenon rural landscapes in this manner appears to be more such as forgetting is certainly possible.30 Carruthers than a coincidence.27 If the rabbis in this case indeed mentions the example of John Cassian, into whose appropriated a segment of a Roman alphabetical urban memory classical poetry was apparently inscribed so list for the purpose of elaborating on the Sabbath efficiently at a young age that it interfered with his later Boundary, our passage from Eruvin has far reaching attempt to memorize scripture.31 John presented this implications. This possibility suggests that, whether the problem to the Egyptian monk Abba Nesteros, who mnemonic technique here was acquired from a manu- instructed him to actively “replace” the old mnemonic script or through the oral transmission of professional sites with new ones. Na’eh mentions a similar example expertise, the method of impressing information onto of removing information from the memory in the rab- the memory ultimately affected the halakhic formula- binic context.32 In Mishnah Avot 3:8 the sages famously tion of a spatial practice. debate whether a person who forgets something that

26 Ibid., xliv. The suggestion that the Casae Litterarum is a school the memory of forgetting, as this is authorized and sanctioned by exercise was made already by Theodor Mommsen, Gesammelte the return and the recognition of the “thing” forgotten? Otherwise, Schriften, 8 vols. (Berlin: Weidmann, 1905–1913) vol. 7, 466–467. we would not know what we have forgotten. An enigma, because For a comprehensive study of this work see Åke Josephson, Casae we do not know, in a phenomenological sense, whether forgetting Litterarum. Studien Zum Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, (Up- is only an impediment to evoking and recovering the “lost time,” or psala: Almquvist & Wiksells, 1950). whether it results from the unavoidable wearing away “by” time of 27 The fact that the illustration in the manuscript diverges from the traces left in us by past events in the form of original affections.” the text and exhibits a lunate sigma, which looks like a bow, raises In his discussion of memory and forgetting, Ricœur also refers to interesting questions regarding the rabbinic parallel. It points to the Henri Bergson, Matter and Memory, trans. N. Margaret Paul and possibility that the exchange between the rabbis and this Roman W. Scott Palmer (London: Allen & Unwin, 1950); Henri Bergson, work involved an illustration rather than a text. “Intellectual Effort,” in Mind-Energy: Lectures and Essays (Westport, 28 Harald Weinrich, Lethe: The Art and Critique of Forgetting, CT: Greenwood, 1975), 186–230. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2004), 12. 31 John Cassian, Conference, XIV.13. Mary Carruthers, The Craft of 29 Umberto Eco, “An Ars Oblivionalis: Forget It!” PMLA, 103 Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400–1200, (1988): 258. (Cambridge, U.K. and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 30 And see Ricœur, Memory, History, Forgetting, 30: “For 88–92. See also Columba Stewart, Cassian the Monk, (New York: mediating memory—Gedächtnis—forgetting remains both a Oxford University Press, 1998) 94–95. paradox and an enigma. A paradox, as it is unfolded by Augustine 32 Na’eh, “The Craft of Memory,” 553. the rhetorician: how can we speak of forgetting except in terms of

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 31 he has learned, probably as part of his Torah study, is [With regard to its] reputation—[for example, the tree] liable. They conclude that only those who forget their is [known] as the one which flows [with oil] or as the one learning by actively removing it from their heart are which is shy [in producing oil]. [alternative translation: in fact liable. Apart from the significance given in this a tree of the kind growing in Bet She’an] ruling to the retaining of Torah in the memory, it is [With regard to its] production—[for example, the tree] produces many [olives]. noteworthy that the rabbis appear to know here of a [With regard to its] location—[for example, the tree] method by which ideas or words could be erased from stands next to the winepress or next to the opening [in the mind. Na’eh speculates that, if the technique of the fence]. (mPe’ah 7:1) memorizing is based on arranging information in an imaginary place, the opposite action of removing this The Mishnah attempts to determine whether it is possi- information from its assigned place will bring about ble to forget olive trees while harvesting their fruit and, the desired forgetting. if so, what might be the conditions of such forgetting. Interestingly, the most extensive rabbinic theoriza- It begins by stating that a tree, which is distinguished tion of forgetting is found not in discussions of Torah from other trees in its immediate environment, can- study and its learning techniques, but rather in the not be regarded as forgotten because its distinguishing context of agricultural rules in tractate Pe’ah. This qualities make it noticeable. It is unlikely, therefore, tractate deals primarily with the biblical laws, which that the farmer would forget it while harvesting, so the require landowners or farmers to leave portions of what fact that its fruit was left in place is only temporary; they grow to the poor.33 One of the biblical injunctions the farmer would surely return to harvest the tree at at the heart of Pe’ah comes from Deuteronomy 24:19, some point and the poor are, thus, not allowed to take which commands the Israelite farmer who forgets or the olives for themselves. The Mishnah then proceeds overlooks a sheaf in the field while reaping the har- to detail what constitutes a distinguished olive tree. It vest, to refrain from turning back to gather this sheaf, opens with qualities that pertain to the productivity so as to allow the poor to collect it. Hence, in their of such a tree and to the reputation this productivity interpretation of what came to be called shikheḥah— has given it. If the tree’s fruit exudes much oil or if it forgotten produce (sometimes translated as “forgotten produces many olives, for example, the farmer is likely sheaf,” or “forgotten things”)—the rabbis would have to remember it and his failing to harvest the tree does to determine how objects that slipped the mind could, not constitute forgetting. nevertheless, be discerned and regulated in law. This principle appears to reflect a notion, apparent In order to define forgetting, the rabbis used a also in the Greco-Roman art of memory, that we are central principle of memorizing: spatial, visual and likely to remember something which is unique and to mental context. In their articulation of shikheḥah the which we have a strong mental or emotional attach- rabbis are guided by the idea that an object can only ment. In formulating what he calls “the theory of im- be regarded as forgotten if it was not conspicuous or ages” the author of Rhetorica Ad Herennium explains: remarkable enough to be remembered. Chapter 7 of tractate Pe’ah in the Mishnah states: When we see in everyday life things that are petty, ordi- nary, and banal, we generally fail to remember them, Any olive tree which has a reputation [or: is distin- because the mind is not being stirred by anything novel or guished] in the field, even as an olive tree [whose fruit] marvelous. But if we see or hear something exceptionally exudes [much oil] at the time [of its harvest], and [the base, dishonorable, extraordinary, great, unbelievable, or farmer] forgot [to harvest] it, it is not [subject to the laughable, that we are likely to remember a long time. restrictions of] forgotten produce.34 Accordingly, things immediate to our eye or ear we In what case does this apply? [It applies in a case of commonly forget; incidents of our childhood we often a tree which is distinguished from other trees by] its remember best. Nor could this be so for any other reason reputation, and [or] its production, and [or] its location. than that ordinary things easily slip from the memory

33 See Lev. 19:9–10; Deut. 24:19–22. For the distinction between For an alternative reading of netofa see Shmuel Safrai and Ze’ev such allocations and the concept of charity see Gregg E. Gardner, Safrai, Mishnat Eretz Israel, Tractate Pe’ah (Zeraʿim Vol. 2): With The Origins of Organized Charity in Rabbinic Judaism, (Cambridge: Historical and Sociological Commentary, (Jerusalem: The E.M. Cambridge University Press, 2015), 31–32. Liphshitz College Publishing House, 2012), 228-233 (in Hebrew). 34 The word, “even” used to distinguish an olive tree does not appear in MS Kaufmann.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 32 Gil P. Klein

while the striking and novel stay longer in mind. (Rhe- In this ruling the olive tree’s position makes it con- torica Ad Herennium, III.22.35).35 spicuous and memorable not because it stands next Although our ruling from Pe’ah is not interested in to specific landmarks in the field, but, rather, because mnemonic mechanisms as such and may not be a of its relation to this field’s outline. Generations of direct response to Ad Herennium, it betrays a similar commentators on the Mishnah have tried to explain understanding of how memory functions and what the term “three rows of two rectangles,” claiming for constitutes a memorable object. example, that the rabbis speak here of three rows of The other indicator for the Mishnah that an olive olive trees, which are separated by two rectangular tree is distinguished from all other trees in its vicin- spaces or planted areas.38 Figures 5a–5c are contem- ity, and should not therefore be considered forgotten porary renderings that demonstrate various interpre- produce, is its spatial context. If the tree stands at a tations of the Mishnah.39 In view of the similarities special location in the field, alongside the winepress or I illuminated between rabbinic literature and the near the opening in the fence for instance, the rabbis Roman texts of the Agrimensorum, I would like to offer assume that the farmer would not forget it easily, and another explanation, which has implications also for that any failure to harvest the fruit of such a tree is, the issue of memory. again, only temporary. Here too, we are faced with a In the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum the rect- central mnemonic principle: the spatial position and angle is the fundamental element of centuriation (cen- visual conspicuousness of an object or an image in rela- turiatio or limitatio)—the division of a territory into tion to its immediate surrounding affects our ability to individual plots of land for the purpose of cultivation remember it. The more peculiar its position or form, and inhabitation.40 Interestingly, many of the works the deeper it will be inscribed in our mind. When in- in the Agrimensorum explicitly discuss olive trees as structing the student of memory, Ad Herennium states: boundary markers, which are planted on the measured borders of such plots and the pathways they provided Further, backgrounds differing in form and nature must (sl. limes). For example, an anonymous text from the be secured, so that, thus distinguished, they may be Agrimensorum reads: clearly visible; for if a person has adopted many inter- columnar spaces, their resemblance to one another will We set up a fruit-bearing olive-tree on the line of the so confuse him that he will no longer know what he has limes, and this indicates a well, or certainly a river-bed. set in each place. (Rhetorica Ad Herennium, III.19.31).36 (Ordines Finitionum, C 248.25–26) (fig. 6) As in the case of the Mishnah, which deems a uniquely In another text from the Agrimensorum we find a dif- positioned olive tree unforgettable, Ad Herenium’s loci ferent example of the use of olive trees as boundary of the imagination must be distinct in order to be vis- markers. Figure 7 accompanies the following text: ible to the mind’s eye. In an olive grove you should find out the direction of the The notion that spatial and visual context has a boundaries in the following way. If the rows of olive-trees role in making things memorable, is expressed also in meet one another at an angle, this is a boundary line. a ruling which follows the one we have just reviewed. If they meet in straight lines, this does not constitute a Here, the Mishnah rules: boundary … (Ex Libris Dolabellae, C 222.21–25) (fig. 7)

An olive tree which stands in the midst of three rows These two out of many references to olive trees as of two rectangles (malbenim) and [the farmer] forgot boundary markers in the Agrimensorum, which are [to harvest] it—it is not [subject to the restrictions of] often accompanied by illustrations in the manuscripts, forgotten produce ... (mPeah 7:2).37 are telling (see for example figure. 8). They demonstrate

35 Caplan, [Cicero] Rhetorica Ad Herennium, 221. 39 Figs. 5a–5c are diagrams from the modern Steinsaltz edition 36 Ibid., 211–213. of tractate Pe’ah, which render the understandings of this phrase 37 And see Sifre Deut. 284; Midr. Tan. Deut. 24:19. Safrai and by traditional commentators. These commentators include: Rabbi Safrai, Pe’ah, 234-240. Moses Maimonides, Rabbi Samson ben Abraham of Sens, Rabbi 38 For the term malbenot tevu’ah (rectangles of crops) see mPe’ah Solomon Sirilio, Rabbi Elijah ben Solomon Zalman (Gaon of Vilna), 3:1. The term rectangle in this Mishnah is, however, not referring to and Rabbi Meir Merim Shafit of Kobrin. crops and often appears in a more general sense of a geometrical 40 See for example Hyginus [2], Constitutio Limitum, C 134.1– shape. See Safrai and Safrai, Pe’ah, 116-117. 162.23.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 33

Fig. 5a. Michael Atkin. “Three Fig. 5b. Michael Atkin. “Three Fig. 5c. Michael Atkin. “Three Rows of Two Rectangles,” Rows of Two Rectangles,” Rows of Two Rectangles,” mPe’ah 7:2 and yPe’ah 7:2, mPe’ah 7:2 and yPe’ah 7:2, mPe’ah 7:2 and yPe’ah 7:2, 32a, 1997, Jerusalem: The Israel 32a, 1997, Jerusalem: The Israel 32a, 1997, Jerusalem: The Israel Institute for Talmudic Publica- Institute for Talmudic Publica- Institute for Talmudic Publica- tions and Koren Publishers. 163. tions and Koren Publishers, 164. tions and Koren Publishers, 165. (Courtesy of Rabbi Adin Even- (Courtesy of Rabbi Adin Even- (Courtesy of Rabbi Adin Even- Israel (Steinsaltz) and Koren Israel (Steinsaltz) and Koren Israel (Steinsaltz) and Koren Publishers, Jerusalem.) Publishers, Jerusalem.) Publishers, Jerusalem.)

Fig. 6. Illustrator Unknown. Olive Tree as a Boundary Marker from the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Ordines Finitionum, C 248.25–26. MS G, Ninth century, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. Gud. Lat. Folio 73v. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel).

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 34 Gil P. Klein

Fig. 7. Illustrator Unknown. Olive Trees as Boundary Markers from the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Ex Libris Dolabellae, C 222.21–25. MS G, Ninth century, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. Gud. Lat. Folio 103v. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel).

Fig. 8. Illustrator unknown. Olive Tree and Other Types of Trees as Boundary Markers from the Corpus Agrimensorum Romanorum, Agennius Urbicus, De Controversiis Agrorum, C.36.29–33. MS Arcerianus A. Sixth century CE, ink on parchment. Wolfenbuettel, Herzog August Bibliothek: Cod. Guelf. 36.23 Aug. 2° folio 72r. (Courtesy of Herzog August Bibliothek, Wolfenbuettel). that, in the context of Roman land survey, olive trees that functions as a boundary marker, suggests that the are signs that distinguish territories from one another; rectangles it mentions are regarded as centuriated plots they are subtle hints inserted into the landscape, whose of land. If this is indeed the case, we may understand spatial message can be deciphered by a trained eye. this olive tree as unique and memorable not because it In this sense, the trees are the elements, which give stands out, but because its location on the boundaries structure to the continuous land and make the specific of various plots makes it a spatial and visual marker. plots—the places themselves—memorable. In other words, the tree is not likely to be forgotten With that it is possible to return to the Mishnaic because it is itself a reminder; it speaks in the tacit statement about the olive tree that stands in the midst language of land surveyors about a hidden water source of three rows of two rectangles. The possibility that the or a boundary between two properties (figs. 9a–b). Mishnah corresponds here with the traditions recorded The last rabbinic discussion of forgotten produce, in the Agrimensorum and has in mind an olive tree which I would like to analyze here, comes from tractate

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access Forget the Landscape 35

Fig. 9a. Gil P. Klein. “Three Rows of Two Rectangles” (mPe’ah Fig. 9b. Gil P. Klein. “Three Rows of Two Rectangles” (mPe’ah 7:2; yPe’ah 7:2, 32a) understood as boundaries of centuriated 7:2; yPe’ah 7:2, 32a) understood as boundaries of centuriated plots, option I, 2017, digital rendering. Courtesy of author. plots, option II, 2017, digital rendering. Courtesy of author.

Pe’ah in the Palestinian Talmud and is much more ex- because things seem different to different persons. The plicit about the question of mnemonic techniques. This same is true with respect to images: one that is well- discussion is brought by the Talmud in its elaboration defined to us appears relatively inconspicuous to others. of the Mishnaic ruling about the distinguished olive Everybody, therefore, should, in equipping himself with tree (mPe’ah 7:1), which I reviewed above: images, suit his own convenience. (Rhetorica Ad Heren- nium, III.23.38–39).41 Rabbi Jeremiah inquired [i.e., suggested]: “If [a particular tree] is distinguished in one’s mind (be-daʿato)—[the Hence, if memory is fundamentally subjective and law applies to it] as if it was distinguished [in reality] …” relative, Jeremiah’s statement simply takes this prin- (yPe’ah 7:1, 20a) ciple to its inevitable conclusion—no person can truly know what triggers the memory of another person For Rabbi Jeremiah, a tree does not have to have and what, therefore, brings about their forgetfulness. unique features in reality in order to be exempt from Although Jeremiah may not have thought of his theo- the restrictions of forgotten produce. According to retical farmer as having an imaginary grove or field him, it is enough for a tree to be unique in the farmer’s in his mind, wherein each tree is placed according mind to qualify it as distinguished, and to assume that to special visual and spatial features, seeing his state- this farmer would have returned to harvest the fruit ment in light of Greco-Roman mnemonics allows us at some point. To phrase it differently, a farmer may to understand his contribution in the context of a have his own way of marking the tree in his memory broader discourse of memory. In this regard, it is pos- and should, therefore, be allowed to keep the fruit he sible to position the Talmudic problem exemplified by forgot to harvest even if, in reality, the tree is utterly Rabbi Jeremiah’s opinion in relation to the Platonic unremarkable. formulations of memory with which I started. In the This seems to take the case of shikheḥah to its ex- Philebus (38a–39c), for instance, Socrates speaks of a treme legal and philosophical limits. By claiming that scribe (grammateus) in our soul who records true or the principle of Forgotten Produce is completely sub- false accounts of impressions (pathēmata) we experi- jective, Jeremiah undermines the entire legal project of ence. Alongside this scribe, a painter (zōgraphus) is at regulating forgetfulness. He effectively takes away the work in our soul, providing illustrations to his coun- court’s ability to determine, on the basis of observation terpart’s words. With this, a separation is established and evaluation, whether a tree is indeed memorable or between the result of sensation and “the images he not. In order to better understand this bold move, I turn, has formed inside himself ” (39b).42 For the rabbis, once more, to the Rhetorica Ad Herennium for assistance: this separation interestingly allows to treat the most Often, in fact, when we declare that some one form emancipated internal image as evidence in the dealings resembles another, we fail to receive universal assent, of reality.

41 Caplan, Rhetorica Ad Herennium, 223. 42 See Ricœur, Memory, History, Forgetting, 14.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access 36 Gil P. Klein

Conclusion urban planning and land survey (from the spaces and representations themselves) changed the rabbinic “car- The sources reviewed here strongly suggest that mne- tographers” and eventually affected the places where monic techniques shaped rabbinic texts and traditions, their traditions became common practice. but also affected the evolution of the sages’ understand- Lastly, Roman land survey and urban planning ing of space and image. The spatial techniques and point to another aspect of memory, which has to do principles of memorization as they were applied in with the recording of the urban territory and its story. rabbinic scholastic and ritual practices appear to have Apart from being a professional manual, the Corpus made their way into the rabbis’ laws and discussions. Agrimensorum Romanorum chronicles the history of Joan Branham has recently proposed a useful way to the specific sites and communities that its authors think about such a phenomenon in the context of map- encountered in their work. In addition, surveyors made ping sacred space, which is particularly pertinent to the copper maps of the plots they allocated and placed rabbinic systems I explore.43 As she notes, Jonathan Z. them in the city’s archive (often located in the local Smith uses the semantic phrase “map is not territory” temple) for safekeeping as a legal document, which to think about the gap between religious symbolic could be consulted in cases of disputes over land.47 The representations and the worlds they represent, claim- city of Sepphoris is said to have had an archive, perhaps ing that “maps are all we posses.”44 Following Smith, located in a local religious or civic building, and we Jacob Neusner describes the Mishnah and its treatment may only speculate that the maps recording its plots of the sacrificial cult and the Jerusalem Temple as were kept alongside the lists of witnesses described in “map without territory,” implying that, for the rabbis, rabbinic literature as deposited there.48 The account the text replaced space or its visual representation.45 of land disputes, which were not always resolved by Branham, however, complicates this model by saying that the surveyors’ maps, eventually entered the pages of “... mapping is relational; the mapping of one entity by the Agrimensorum, serving as instructional stories for means of another redefines and reformulates spaces as future surveyors. As a text with technical, legal and well as the participants acting within them.”46 In this pedagogical components, which records urban stories sense, the act of mapping changes the cartographers as it aspires to shape urban space, the Agrimensorum and, consequently, the topography they set out to is, therefore, not entirely different from rabbinic texts. chart. It may be said, therefore, that the mapping of This similarity and the shared late antique reverbera- words and images in internal spaces in the rabbinic tions of place, image and literature it reveals indicates art of memory, as well as the mnemonic elements that that space and its representations may themselves the rabbis seem to have absorbed from Greco-Roman become objects of memory.

43 Joan R. Branham, “Mapping Sacrifice on Bodies and Spaces Semantics, 1st ed. (Brooklyn, NY: Institute of General Semantics, in Late Antique Judaism and Early Christianity,” in Architecture of 1933; reprint, 2000), xvii. the Sacred: Space, Ritual, and Experience from Classical Greece to 45 Jacob Neusner, “Map without Territory: Mishnah’s System Byzantium, eds. Bonna D. Wescoat and Robert G. Ousterhout (Cam- of Sacrifice and Sanctuary,” History of Religions 19 (1979): 110–112. bridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 203–204. Neusner’s approach appears to represent the now obsolete 44 Jonathan Z. Smith, Map Is Not Territory: Studies in the History understanding of rabbinic Judaism as a strictly textual culture that of Religions, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 309. And has very little to do with space, image and matter. see pages 104–128 for the book’s treatment of space in Judaism. 46 Branham, “Mapping Sacrifice,” 205. Another highly influential work in the contest of religious space 47 Claude Nicolet, Space, Geography, and Politics in the Early is Jonathan Z. Smith, To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual, Roman Empire, (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991), 154. (University of Chicago Press, 1987). For this phrase “map is not 48 mQid 4:5. And see the discussion of this institution in Stuart territory” in general semantics see Alfred Korzybski, Science and S. Miller, Studies in the History and Traditions of Sepphoris, (Leiden: Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Brill, 1984), 46–51.

Downloaded from Brill.com10/10/2021 12:31:58PM via free access