chapter four

THE REUCHLIN ‘AFFAIR’ UNFOLDS

In order to establish why Reuchlin had the Augenspiegel printed at that particular date, it is necessary to follow the course of events that led to the pamphlet’s immediate publication. A cursory analysis would indicate it to be a liberal document of a humanist scholar pleading for a more enlightened and tolerant approach to while defending the right of intellectual freedom. The author himself gives a far less altruistic motive, and publicly claims he published the Augenspiegel ostensibly to redeem his character. This had resulted from allegations made in an earlier pub- lication entitled ‘Hand Mirror’ (Handt Spiegel, Mainz; 1511) by an apostate Moravian Jew, named Johannes Pfeferkorn (1469?-1521).1 He had accused him of accepting bribes from and of not being the true author of his scholarly works. He speci cally criticised Reuchlins’s legal report on Jew- ish religious books which Reuchlin had submitted to the imperial commis- sion set up to investigate these books in 1510. Reuchlin’s submission enti- tled, ‘Counsel on whether one should con scate, suppress and burn all the books of the Jews’ (Ratschlag ob man den Juden alle ire bücher nemmen/

1 For a list of Pfeferkorn’s works and biographical details see, Ellen Martin: Die deutschen Schriften des Johannes Pfeferkorn. Zum Problem des Judenhasses und der Intoleranz in der Zeit der Vorreformation, pp. 11–25 & 392–393. Dall’Asta (ed.): Briefwechsel, vol. 2, Letter 177, Reuchlin to Zyprian von Serntein, pp. 181–185, here p. 184, and note 4. Also Hans-Martin Kirn: Das Bild vom Juden im Deutschland des frühen 16. Jahrhunderts dargestellt an den Schriften Johannes Pfeferkorns (Tübingen, 1989), (Texts and Studies in Medieval and Early modern Judaism, vol. 3.), pp. 9–12 & pp. 201–204. See also Johannes Pfeferkorn: The Jews’ mirror (Judenspiegel), here pp. 1–32. A rather dated, but useful work on Pfeferkorn’s life is Meier Spanier: ‘Zur Charakteris- tik Johannes Pfeferkorns’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland, 6 (1938), pp. 209–229. L. Geiger: Johann Reuchlin, pp. 209–226. A reference to Pfeferkorn’s year of death has been uncovered by R. Jütte. See Robert Jütte: ‘Johann Reuchlin (1455–1522) und die soziale Frage seiner Zeit-Ein Beitrag zur Konjekturalhistorie’, in: Daniela Hacke, and Bernd Roeck (eds.): Die Welt im Augenspiegel: Johannes Reuchlin und seine Zeit (, 2002) pp. 41–42. Some further details on his life are provided by E. Rummel: TheCaseagainstJohann Reuchlin, pp. 3–13. See also the entry for ‘Pfeferkorn’ in: P.G. Bietenholz & T.B. Deutscher (eds.): Contemporaries of , vol. 3, pp. 76f. 50 chapter four abthun vnnd verbrennen soll).2 The commission became necessary following Pfeferkorn’s personal attempts to have Jewish religious books con scated and banned. His motivation for this is not fully evident. He had begun his campaign against all Jewish books a number of years earlier following the publication of his Der Juden Spiegel (, 1507),3 but this self-imposed task had not been sanctioned by the imperial authorities and thus could not be considered legal. He had already published a number of polemical texts critical of Jewish life and customs showing authentic scenes of Jewish religious practices. Among these was one entitled Ich heyss eyn buchlijn der iuden beicht (Cologne, 1508) with woodcuts of Jews at prayer in a synagogue, with their eyes blinded, indicating the superiority of .4 In 1509, he managed to obtain an imperial mandate5 that permitted him to con s- cate and examine all the books of the Jews resident in the Empire for what he considered to be slanderous or contrary to Christian teaching. Through this campaign he hoped above all to con scate every copy of the which he considered to be the main reason why Jews did not convert to Christian- ity. To help him obtain the imperial mandate, he had gained the support and encouragement of the Chief Inquisitor Jacobus Hoogstraeten (1460–1527)6 together with the theological faculty of the .7 He had also procured a letter of recommendation from the Emperor’s sister, Kuni- gunde.8 She had entered a religious congregation, the Order of St Francis, on the death of her husband,9 and ful lled what she must have consid- ered her religious duty by agreeing to Pfeferkorn’s request rather than any explicit Jewish antipathy. Before he made his approach to her, Pfeferkorn

2 My translation. See Augenspiegel, folio (Br = Ir). (The title is cited hereafter in the short form as Ratschlag). 3 The complete text appears in Hans-Martin Kirn: Das Bild vom Juden im Deutschland des frühen 16. Jahrhunderts dargestellt an den Schriften Johannes Pfeferkorns, pp. 205–230. 4 See R.I. Cohen: Jewish Icons: Art and Society in Modern Europe, pp. 11–27. 5 An account of Pfeferkorn’s eforts to procure the mandates and their consequences is provided by L. Geiger: Johann Reuchlin, pp. 215–227. See also Dall’Asta (ed.): Briefwechsel, vol. 2, Letter 170, Archbishop Uriel von Gemmingen to Reuchlin, pp. 154–157, here p. 156, and note 4. 6 H. Peterse: Jacobus Hoogstraeten gegen Johannes Reuchlin, pp. 29–30. 7 The theological faculty had been granted authority by Pope Alexander VI to combat heresy, witchcraft and . Its teaching methods were based on via antiqua. H. Peterse: Jacobus Hoogstraeten gegen Johannes Reuchlin, pp. 56–57. See also the article by Franz Machilek: ‘Schulen und gelehrte Bildung’, in G. Bott (ed.): Martin und die in Deutschland, pp. 89–116, here p. 98. 8 Ellen Martin: Die deutschen Schriften des Johannes Pfeferkorn. Zum Problem des Juden- hasses und der Intoleranz in der Zeit der Vorreformation p. 138. 9 L. Geiger: Johann Reuchlin, p. 216.