Skip to main content
Log in

Invention and convention: Jewish and Christian critique of the Jewish fixed calendar

Jewish History Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The institution of the Jewish fixed calendar has provoked muchcontroversial discussion not only among Jewish, but also Christian scholars. The significant contributions to the subject by two of the great sixteenth-century polymaths, the Jew Azariah de' Rossi and the Christian Sebastian Münster, pinpoint the delicate nature of calendrical investigation. Münster's frequent use of one particular piyyut (a religious poem) to undermine the basis of the Jewish fixed calendar is intended to defend the contradictory calendrical data in the Gospels. De' Rossi implicitly attacks Muenster for his recourse to this unhistorical text. Yet de' Rossi himself is intent on proving that the Jewish fixed calendar is a late post-talmudic convention, an iconoclastic approach which was not welcome in certain rabbinic circles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weinberg, J. Invention and convention: Jewish and Christian critique of the Jewish fixed calendar. Jewish History 14, 317–330 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007196823678

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007196823678

Keywords

Navigation