Jewish Wedding Rings with Miniature Architecture from Medieval Europe

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

p. 2 Narbonne (Sepharad)

Narbonne isn’t located in Spain (Sepharad). It is a city in the south of France (Provence).  

n. 23

The bride money was very high and was supposed to secure the wife as well as the whole family after the death of the husband, and also in the case of divorce.

p. 3 As for Mordekhai Kimhi, also for Meir of Rothenburg the false statement was more decisive for the annulment of the connection than the actual material.

This is the plain meaning of the Jewish law, and not a unique insight of these sages.

p. 12 According to Jewish law (halakhah) and customs, the ring should (actually) be made of gold, but silver, copper or other materials were also used

There is no requirement in Jewish law for a gold ring. However, when a cheap metal ring is presented as a gold ring, the marriage is void.

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful comments, I will implement them when revising the paper!

Narbonne isn’t located in Spain (Sepharad). It is a city in the south of France (Provence). --> deleted Sepharad  

The bride money was very high and was supposed to secure the wife as well as the whole family after the death of the husband, and also in the case of divorce. --> added

As for Mordekhai Kimhi, also for Meir of Rothenburg the false statement was more decisive for the annulment of the connection than the actual material.

This is the plain meaning of the Jewish law, and not a unique insight of these sages. --> yes, thats what I say!

According to Jewish law (halakhah) and customs, the ring should (actually) be made of gold, but silver, copper or other materials were also used.

There is no requirement in Jewish law for a gold ring. However, when a cheap metal ring is presented as a gold ring, the marriage is void.

--> I changed the sentence to: According to Jewish customs, the ring should (actually) be made of gold, but silver, copper or other materials were also used. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Brief Summary.

 The author considers four rings (three of which exist and one which is referred to in an inventory - all with bezels constructed in an architectural form. The author shows that these are to be interpreted as Jewish wedding rings. The paper considers their function in the Jewish wedding ceremony in the medieval period, their role in marriage as a legal transaction, and the symbolism of this particular design.

General concept comments.

The author provides is well-considered review of the visual and documentary evidence for the ring in the Jewish marriage ceremony. Although much of this is later than the date of the three rings with similar bezels, it gives important insight into the likely place of the rings in the ceremony, especially the relationship between the dowry and the ring, and the high profile of the ring in the ceremony, which explains the size of the bezel.  The suggestion that the content of the bezels was meant to rattle reinforces the argument that the rings were for displaying at the wedding ceremony. The article is both well-organised and the rings well-illustrated.

Review.

The date/s of deposition of the three hoards in which the three rings were found should be mentioned.

The point should have been emphasized that while all are found in the hoards deposited in the persecution of the Jews in the mid-fourteenth century, and therefore have a similar date of deposition, although the author makes the entirely correct point that the Colmar ring probably dates to the first quarter of the fourteenth century, and so it is understandable that it presents a more round-arched appearance than the pointed arches of the Erfurt ring.

The description of the rings is brief. There are similarities between the three but more could have been made of the differences between them.

 Specific comments

Footnote 57. Does this ring still exist or is it just a reference in an inventory.

Page 6, para. 3, line 3 refers to the heads joining the hoop and bezel as ‘lion’s heads’. I see nothing to suggest that they are lion’s heads and think that the usual description of them as dragon’s heads should be used.

Page 6. The flower above the dragon’s heads is not mentioned. Could it be related to Jewish marriage?

Page 7. Para 2. To begin with the statement ‘Another ring from the Erfurt treasure’ implies that a previous ring from the Erfurt Treasure has been discussed. This is an example of how the meaning of the English needs to be checked.

Page 8. Fig. 4. I am very glad that this picture of the Erfurt ring has been included since it enables one to see the shape of the Hebrew letters, which appear to be very different to the style of the letters on the Colmar ring. It would have been good to have drawings of the exact shape of the letters of the two inscriptions and/or some comment on the epigraphy of the inscriptions. Also the letters on the Erfurt ring appears to be filled with something – is it niello?

Page 9. The Weissenfels ring is described as being close in time to the Erfurt ring. Why? It may be closer in time to the Colmar ring, and the Erfurt ring later.

I note that the object which serves as a bezel is described as chapel-like, since it is long and rectangular. It could equally well be imitating the idea of a Christian shrine which in Germany in the thirteenth century were long, rectangular in plan and also exhibited architectural features, and served as containers for significant religious objects. It is possible that the Weissenfels ring might be imitating a different type of architecture than the other two.

 Page 10. The Wittelsbach Munich ring. It should be clearly stated that this no longer exists. The reader should be given a clear translation into English. In the text the author says that the interior inscription is mazal tov, but the German appears to say only that there are Hebrew letters on the inside on the ring.  Later on page 10 it is asserted that the inscription is mazal tov.

On page 11, section 6. The commemoration of the Temple. These three paragraphs are most interesting and revealing of the significance of the architectural structures which serve as the bezels of the rings. They would be strengthened by at least one illustration of the Temple as depicted in the ketubbot. When was the earliest such depiction? The text says since the Middle Ages. Does this after the Middle Ages?

Are illustrations of the Temple shown with round-headed arches or pointed- arches?

The text also comments “the destroyed Temple in Jerusalem has been depicted in the form of the Dome of the Rock in both Christian and Jewish works of art since the 11th century: The Bible moralisée from the 13th century and Schedel's World Chronicle from 1492 show a dome-crowned central building, as do the illuminations of Jewish manuscripts.”

It would be informative for the reader if there was more detail here. How early are the manuscripts? Where were they produced? Are the depictions consistent? Could one be illustrated?

The Dome of the Rock is octagonal. The structures on the rings are hexagonal (or in one case quintagonal). The Weissenfels ring has a very different shape of structure from the three others, and its rectagonal shape is not the least like the Dome of the Rock.

This leads one to speculate about the model that the Erfurt (assuming the Erfurt ring was made in Erfurt) goldsmith may have used. Was he copying such Christian gothic architecture that he had seen in Erfurt? or was he copying a drawing or illustration, as were to be later copied in the illustrations of the Temple preserved in later manuscripts?

Author Response

Thank you for your helpful comments, I will reply in the uploaded document!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx