Azariah dei Rossi and the Rise of Jewish Historical Criticism

A number of Jewish historical works were written during the sixteenth century including Sefer Yuhasin by Abraham Zacuto at the beginning of the century and Semah David by David Gans at the end of the century. The former preceded Dei Rossi’s Me’or Einayim and was intended for the accomplished Talmudic scholar while the latter was intended for the masses.3 While they differ in content and theme, both of these historical works emphasized the precise knowledge of the rabbis with the underlying goal of preserving the authority of the tradition. Zacuto’s work affirms the literal truth of all rabbinic accounts, including those with a legendary or mythical tone to them. For Zacuto, history is not an end in itself but must instead serve to strengthen trust in G-d’s power and providence. The history of the Jewish people fulfills the words of the Torah to “remember the days of old.” Both works include a review of non-Jewish history but view it as separate, and both works view any disagreements or discrepancies between Jewish sources and non-Jewish sources are decided by the former.4 For Gans, writing after Dei Rossi and in response to many of his stances, any account that did was not divinely inspired could not be trusted absolutely. Like Zacuto, Gans affirmed the position rejecting any historical source that contradicted or called into question even the smallest detail of Talmudic Aggadah.