Church History and
Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
Church History
and
Religious Culture
brill.com/chrc
The Kabbalistic “Teaching Panel” of Princess
Antonia
Divine Knowledge for Both Experts and Laity*
Elke Morlok
Goethe-University Frankfurt a.M.
morlok@em.uni-frankfurt.de
Abstract
This article explores the complex interweaving of kabbalistic and Christological concepts within the kabbalistic “teaching panel” (Lehrtafel) of Princess Antonia of Württemberg. The essay discusses the artwork in the context of visual representations of
the ten sefirot, the divine attributes or vessels in Jewish mysticism. Executed as an
altarpiece for the church in Bad Teinach in Southern Germany, the work integrates
the sefirot into a pansophic concept that served devotional and educational purposes
with a salvific goal. The article argues that, with the Lehrtafel, Antonia and her teachers
created a devotional object that could be accessed by both regular Christian laity and
experts who possessed deeper knowledge of Kabbalah.
Keywords
Christian Kabbalah – sefirot – lay theology – symbolism – Philosophia Perennis – Arbor
Sephirotica
* This article is being published within the framework of the loewe-funded Hessian Ministry
for Science and Art research hub “Religious Positioning: Modalities and Constellations in
Jewish, Christian and Muslim Contexts” at the Goethe-University Frankfurt and the JustusLiebig-University Giessen. All photographs of the altarpiece have been taken by Friedrich
Wirth (Germany), with whose kind permission they are reproduced in this article.
© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi: 10.1163/18712428-09801005
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
1
57
The Trinity Church in Bad Teinach and Princess Antonia
of Württemberg (1613–1679)
Situated in the Black Forest hamlet of Bad Teinach, the Lutheran Trinity Church
(Dreifaltigkeitskirche) houses a jewel of German Baroque art, the so-called
“teaching panel” (Lehrtafel) of Princess Antonia of Württemberg. The Lehrtafel
is actually not just one panel, but a monumental altarpiece, consisting of a large
outer painting as well as a large inner painting and two side panels. The outer
doors of the altarpiece could be opened on holidays to reveal the central inner
painting which was more opulent than the other paintings of the triptych.1
Employed to educate and aid laity in devotions, the most common scenes
depicted on such altarpieces were the last supper, the crucifixion, Christ’s
ascension or his resurrection, but the retables could also include allegories
of Christian virtues and widespread Christian symbols. The late Renaissance
Trinity Church in Bad Teinach contains other (lesser) works besides Princess
Antonia’s “teaching panel,” but it is the unusual altarpiece that has captured
the attention of both scholars and regular visitors to the church from the
seventeenth century up to the present day.
What makes the artwork so special is, above all, its combination of Christian
motifs with kabbalistic ideas and symbols from the Jewish tradition. Old and
New Testament subjects are conceived and visualized as one unity, an expression of the early Baroque influence of pansophic thought. Yet there are other
stylistic and historical factors that set the artwork apart. Most of the faces of
people in both the outer and inner paintings can be identified with members
of the house of Württemberg.2 In their iconography, the retables also drew on
1 The church was erected by the reigning duke Eberhard iii of Württemberg (1614–1674) in
the years 1662–1665 after the Thirty Years’ War (1613–1643), during which the family had
lived in exile for four years in Strasbourg. The duke and his sister, Princess Antonia had
lost their parents at a young age. The family could only return to Württemberg in 1638. The
church served as vestry for the ducal family and their guests, which used to spend their
summer holidays in the spa town of Bad Teinach. For a detailed description of the church
and the teaching panel from the perspective of an art historian, see Eva Johanna Schauer,
“Dramaturgia Pietatis im Württemberg des 17. Jahrhunderts: Prinzessin Antonia und ihre
kabbalistische Lehrtafel” (Diss., Hannover, 2003). On the kabbalistic material, see mainly Otto
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte. Die kabbalistische Lehrtafel der Prinzessin Antonia in Bad
Teinach (Metzingen, 1996).
2 Reinhard Gruhl, Die kabbalistische Lehrtafel der Antonia von Württemberg: Studien und Dokumente zur protestantischen Rezeption jüdischer Mystik in einem frühneuzeitlichen Gelehrtenkreis (Boston / Berlin, 2016), 2.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
58
morlok
various disciplines of the time, from oriental studies to theology to the natural
sciences and even mathematics, making the altarpiece a truly unique snapshot
of Early Modern intellectual and religious culture.3
The altarpiece’s conceptualization has been attributed to Princess Antonia
of Württemberg and her teachers. Antonia, the elder sister of Duke Eberhard iii, was obviously fascinated by kabbalistic symbols and their power.
Johann Jakob Strölin († 1663)4 and Johann Lorenz Schmidlin (1626–1692),5
grandfather of the well known Pietist Johann Albrecht Bengel, were her teachers in kabbalistic and Hebrew learning. The artwork itself was constructed
between 1659 to 1663 according to their sketches and finally realized by the
court painter Johann Friedrich Gruber (1620–1681) on the occasion of the
princess’ 50th birthday in 1663.6 The altarpiece was kept in Stuttgart for ten
years and then installed in the church in Bad Teinach, where it occupies the
entire right side of the altar area at the southern wall of the small church.7 On
4 June 1673 it was inaugurated with a sermon by Balthasar Raith (1616–1683),
pastor and professor of theology and oriental languages in Tübingen. Raith’s
sermon centered around the work’s imagery and was immediately put into
print.8
As early as 1662, Antonia’s tutor Schmidlin had composed an encyclopedic
poem on the “teaching panel” with the title Pictura Docens,9 explaining the
3 Ibid., 55.
4 Ibid., 33–125. On Strölin’s Turris Antoniae as matrix for both Schmidlin and later Friedrich
Christoph Oetinger (1702–1782), who wrote an elaborated commentary on the altarpiece, see
Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel, 33–37.
5 On the complex relationship between Schmidlin’s rhymed description of the “Lehrtafel”
with the title Pictura Docens, as well as his relationship with Antonia and Strölin, cf. Gruhl,
Kabbalistische Lehrtafel, 28–53; Johann Lorenz Schmidlin, Pictura Docens, ed. and trans.
Fritz Felgentreu and Widu-Wolfgang Ehlers (Stuttgart, 2006). For the source material for the
altarpiece, the correspondence between Schmidlin, Strölin and other scholars of this period,
see the collection of 40 documents in Codex Hist. 551, Württembergische Landesbibliothek
Stuttgart.
6 The painting was not created by Gruber alone. The last third of the outer artwork was
executed by a less gifted artist. See Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 226.
7 The shrine measures 5.1 × 6.5 meters.
8 See Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 4–7. The text of the sermon with critical
notes has been printed: ibid., 239–253. On Raith, see ibid., 254 n. 1.
9 Friedrich Häussermann, “Pictura Docens: ein Vorspiel zu Fr. Chr. Oetingers Lehrtafel der
Prinzessin Antonia von Württemberg,” Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 66/67
(1966/7), 65–153; see also above, note 5.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
59
symbolic background of this pansophic artwork as the summa of Christian
soteriology. The poem discusses the kabbalistic sefirot, or attributes of God,
through a Christian lens, assuming that Jewish Kabbalah had predicted the
Christian faith. This was a commonly held belief of Early Modern Christian
Kabbalists and Antonia obviously held to this notion as well, since the harmonization of Christianity and Kabbalah was a major theme in the writings that
she has left behind.
The combination of Christian Kabbalah and Lutheran theology present in
the altarpiece also found expression in Antonia’s prayers and poems.10 In a
social context dominated by men, Antonia joined a very select few female contemporaries in learning Hebrew.11 She also carried on a correspondence with
the scholar Johann Valentin Andreae (1586–1654), who was deeply involved in
kabbalistic and Rosicrucian theology and who put the feminine in the center
of his own theology.12 Although Antonia and Andreae exchanged letters, it is
difficult to discern what role he may have played in influencing Antonia or her
“teaching panel.”13
Along with her sisters, Anna Johanna and Sibylla, Antonia dedicated herself
to the study of the arts and sciences, but despite achieving a high level of
education and competency in different languages, Antonia regarded herself as
an amateur.14 In her prayers and poems she stresses her lay status, her devotion
and her modesty, even her incompetence, all of which she hopes will “save her”
from exaggerated self-esteem.15 At the same time, these arguments give her the
10
11
12
13
14
15
Antonia’s extant papers are found in Codex 551, Württembergische Landesbibliothek Stuttgart. For details see Reinhard Gruhl and Matthias Morgenstern, “Zwei hebräische Gebete
der Prinzessin Antonia von Württemberg (1613–1679) im Kontext der Einweihung der
kabbalistischen Lehrtafel in Bad Teinach,” Judaica 62,2 (2006), 97–130.
Among them were Anna van Schurman (1607–1678) and Ursula Margarethe Schickard
(1618–1634), daughter of the famous Hebraist and professor of oriental languages, Wilhelm
Schickard from Tübingen.
See for example, Johann Valentin Andreae, Ein geistliches Gemälde, entworfen und aufgezeichnet von Huldrich StarkMann, Diener des Evangeliums, nach dem wiedergefundenen
Urdruck Tübingen 1615, ed. Reinhard Breymayer (Tübingen, 1992).
Some of his letters are preserved in the hab Wolfenbüttel. Cf. Gruhl, Kabbalistische
Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 53 and 254 n. 1. A letter from Antonia (November 3, 1646),
signed in Hebrew letters, has been published with commentary: ibid., 307–316. Cf. Martin
Brecht, Johann Valentin Andreae 1586–1654. Eine Biographie (Göttingen, 2008); Gruhl,
Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 42 and 312.
Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 87f., 103–107. See also Gruhl and Morgenstern, “Zwei Hebräische Gebete” (see above, n. 10), 110 f.
On Antonia’s prayers and her studies of Gematria, cf. Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
60
morlok
rhetorical space to take certain freedoms that a theologian or public scholar
would not have. As a self-proclaimed amateur, she could innovate creatively
and integrate unusual theological concepts.
The daily prayers in Antonia’s own devotional schedule (Andachtsplan) corresponded to the usual structure expected in that era for a noble lady’s private
worship. However, her interest in Hebraism and her adaptation of kabbalistic elements transgress the usual spiritual aims of praxis pietatis for women
and laity.16 It is very difficult to find evidence of high levels of Hebrew learning outside universities in this period, and this is even truer regarding women.
Although many pietists studied Hebrew informally, they seldom achieved a
level of proficiency that could allow them to reach the level of composing
poems or prayers in Hebrew.17 It was usually only the offspring of Hebraists or
Orientalists like Johannes Drusius (1550–1616) or Johannes Buxtorf who had the
opportunity to learn Hebrew outside the university system. Yet Antonia’s extant
papers reveal how she made progress in her studies with Strölin and how she
managed first to punctuate and then even to compose her own Hebrew prayers
and poems.18 Antonia was even capable of imitating the poetological style of
Hebrew liturgical poetry, or Piyyut, in her prayers and poems—an achievement
that earned her the compliment of “knowing Hebrew like a man.”19
16
17
18
19
above, n. 2), 59–86. On the salvific function of her prayers and on her disesteem of her
own capabilities, cf. ibid., 87f.
Antonia’s sister Johanna may also have had an interest in teaching theological principles to the laity, since she translated Matthias Hafenreffer’s theological compendium into
German. She regarded that work as a “service of a layman for a layman.” See Gruhl and
Morgenstern, “Zwei Hebräische Gebete” (see above, n. 10), 110; and Gruhl, Kabbalistische
Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 120 n. 397. The sisters also corresponded with laity on theological subjects; cf. Gruhl, ibid., 319. During her adolescence, Narcissus Schwehlen, Antonia’s
teacher of religion, had compiled a handwritten lay dogmatics for her. See ibid., 64. There
are yet further facts relating to the Lehrtafel that hint at a broadening of women’s usual
sphere of activity: Antonia’s sisters acted as donors, intermediary agents, and patrons for
the altarpiece and Antonia recited a public prayer for its inauguration. Gruhl and Morgenstern, “Zwei Hebräische Gebete” (see above, n. 10), 111 and 114. On female patrons in
Pietism, acting on behalf of the laity, see Lucinda Martin, “Öffentlichkeit und Anonymität
von Frauen im (Radikalen) Pietismus—Die Spendentätigkeit adliger Patroninnen,” in Der
Radikale Pietismus, ed. Wolfgang Breul, Lothar Vogel, and Marcus Meier (Göttingen, 2010),
385–402.
On Christian women studying Hebrew during the Baroque period, see Gruhl and Morgenstern, “Zwei Hebräische Gebete” (see above, n. 10), 101–107.
See the careful analysis by Gruhl and Morgenstern, ibid.
On this genre in Hebrew literature see Leopold Zunz, Die synagogale Poesie des Mittelalters
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
61
The altarpiece in Bad Teinach combines Christianity with kabbalistic and
Hebrew elements in ingenious ways. The outer panel of the shrine displays
an image of a bridal procession—Princess Antonia herself “marries” Christ—
while the large inside painting is a symbolic representation of the spiritual
evolution of mankind within the kabbalistic structure of the divine sefirot
(attributes / essences). In the inner painting, Antonia stands at the gate to a
garden, ready to tread its path. It is especially in this retable that kabbalistic and
Christian symbolism are conflated to visualize the upward “path” to mystical
union. The two smaller side panels of the shrine that open to reveal the inner
panel exhibit images that support the messages of the large painting on the
inside. The left panel depicts Jesus as a child on the flight to Egypt (Matt. 2:13–
15) and the right panel features the baby Moses by the waters of the Nile (Ex.
2:5–10). At the same time, these two children represent Antonia herself, since
they bear her countenance. They thus refer to her (and humanity’s) spiritual
rebirth.20 The three parts of the triptych work together to communicate a rite
of passage in three steps: a break with the profane world (the bride’s procession
in the outer painting), a transformation (the images of Moses and Jesus in the
side panels) and finally resurrection and the new community of Christ (the
inner panel depicting the mystical path to spiritual rebirth).21
Recent scholarship has demonstrated that important kabbalistic texts were
involved in the production of the Lehrtafel. The “Gates of Light” (Figure 1) of
Joseph Gikatilla as well as the kabbalistic writings of the Christian scholar
Johannes Reuchlin were present at the Court of Stuttgart and Antonia and
her teachers made intensive use of these texts.22 The divine concepts and system propagated in these treatises establish the intellectual background for
the “teaching panel.” Of course, regular laity would not have understood the
kabbalistic references embedded in the structure of the artwork (Figure 2).
Nonetheless lay spectators could apprehend the shrine as an expression of
deep piety. The imagery gave the impression of an immediate and overwhelming glimpse into the divine realm, and provided ample material for contempla-
20
21
22
(Berlin: Springer, 1855); Elisabeth Hollender, Piyyut Commentary in Medieval Ashkenaz
(Berlin, 2008); ead., Clavis Commentariorum of Hebrew Liturgical Poetry in Manuscript
(Leiden, 2005).
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 36 f.
Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 2 and 48. On a similarity with Albrecht
Dürer see ibid., 2 and 150.
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 4; Häussermann, “Pictura Docens”
(see above, n. 9), 70–72.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
62
figure 1
morlok
Frontispiece Joseph Gikatilla, Portae Lucis, Augsburg 1516
bayerische staatsbibliothek münchen 6985602 4 asc. 836
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
63
tion on human-divine and inner-divine relations.23 Through meditation, the
viewer was initiated into the dynamic divine system and invited to elevate his
or her soul to unite with its heavenly source, defined in the Christian context of the altarpiece as Christ, the redeemer and bridegroom of the human
soul, as indicated in the painting on the outside of the shrine, depicting the
bridal procession. A deeper, underlying message—that Jewish mysticism foreshadowed the role of Christ—would be available for those knowledgeable in
Kabbalah.
2
Kabbalah and the Christian Interest in a Philosophia Perennis
As early as the Renaissance, Christian authors had looked to Jewish mysticism
for antecedents to Christianity.24 This interest continued to spread so that by
the seventeenth century, Christian scholars across Europe were appropriating and adapting originally Jewish doctrines within a Christian context and in
languages other than Hebrew.25 One of the most fascinating examples is the
translation of kabbalistic writings into Latin by Christian Knorr von Rosenroth
(1636–1689). This enormous anthology entitled Kabbala Denudata or “Kabbalah Unveiled” was prepared with the financial support of the Count Palatine
of Sulzbach, Christian August (1622–1708).26 The work included both Christian
23
24
25
26
On a dynamic contemplation of the divine realm, which contains a paradigmatic structure
of the lower realms, in kabbalistic literature, see Moshe Idel, “Some Concepts of Time and
History in Kabbalah,” in Jewish History and Jewish Memory. Essays in Honour of Josef Hayim
Yerushalmi, ed. Elisheva Carlebach, John M. Efron, and David N. Myers (Hanover / London,
1998), 153–188, here 161.
Count Giovanni Pico della Mirandola is considered the first Christian Kabbalist (although
a few Jewish converts to Christianity offered Christian interpretations of Kabbalah before
him). In 1486, he composed a treatise with 900 theses about religion, philosophy, and
magic and offered to defend them. The introduction to these theses is called the Oration
on the Dignity of Man, a key text of Renaissance thought. In one of them, he declared that
no science could better prove the divinity of Christ than Kabbalah and magic. For further
details, see Stéphane Toussaint, “Kabbalah and Concordia in two of Giovanni Pico della
Mirandola’s Ophic Theses,” Accademia 12 (2010), 13–26.
On different currents in Jewish kabbalistic thought in the seventeenth century, see Moshe
Idel, “Differing Conceptions of Kabbalah in the Early 17th Century,” in Jewish Thought
in the Seventeenth Century, ed. Isadore Twersky and Bernard Septimus (Cambridge, ma,
1987), 137–200.
The first volume was printed in 1677 and 1678 in Sulzbach and the second in Frankfurt /
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
64
morlok
interpretations of kabbalistic concepts and translations into Latin of Jewish
mystical writings, among them some of the most important texts of the socalled theosophic-theurgic brand of Kabbalah,27 including parts of the Sefer
haZohar (“Book of Splendor”) and Joseph Gikatilla’s Shaʿare Orah (“Gates of
Light”).28 Furthermore, about half of the material stems from the Kabbalists of
Safed, that is to say, Lurianic Kabbalah.29
Kabbala Denudata became one of the major sources of information on
Kabbalah in Europe. For contemporaries, one of the most impressive aspects
of the work is its diagrams of the so-called Ilanot. These are visual depictions of
the inner-divine attributes of God (sefirot) in the form of an Arbor Sephirotica
or “Tree of Life.”30 These figura were understood, alongside other examples
of ancient wisdom, as “prefigurations” of Christianity. Students of Christian
Kabbalah could thus interpret the diagrams to have Christian meanings.31 The
Kabbala Denudata built on the conclusions of earlier Renaissance scholars of
27
28
29
30
31
Main in 1784. See Boaz Huss, “The Text and Context of the 1684 Sulzbach Edition of the
Zohar,” in Tradition, Heterodoxy and Religious Culture: Judaism and Christianity in the Early
Modern Period, ed. Chanita Goodblatt and Howard Kreisel (Beʾer Sheva, 2006), 117–138; id.,
“Translations of the Zohar: Historical Contexts and Ideological Frameworks,” Correspondences 4 (2016), 81–128. On Knorr see also Gershom Scholem, Kabbalah (Jerusalem, 1974),
416–418.
On the division of medieval kabbalistic literature into theosophic-theurgic and prophetic
or linguistic schools see Moshe Idel, Kabbalah—New Perspectives (New Haven / London,
1988), xi–xx.
Cf. Elke Morlok, Rabbi Joseph Gikatilla’s Hermeneutics (Tübingen, 2011).
Coudert speaks of about one quarter of the material as being of Lurianic origin, see Allison
P. Coudert, The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century. The Life and Thought of
Francis Mercury van Helmont, 1614–1698 (Leiden / Boston / Köln, 1999), 119. A glance at
the table of contents suggests rather that about half of the material is Lurianic: Baharah’s
Emeq haMelekh, Herrera’s treatises, De Revolutionibus Animarum and the diagrams are all
included. Moreover, the translation of the Zohar and the Loci Communes were also under
Lurianic influence.
Giulio Busi, Qabbala Visiva (Turin, 2005), 389–394; J.H. Chajes, “Durchlässige Grenzen:
Die Visualisierung Gottes zwischen jüdischer und christlicher Kabbala bei Knorr von
Rosenroth und van Helmont,” Morgen-Glantz 27 (2017), 99–149; id., “Spheres, Sefirot and
the Imaginal Astronomical Discourse in Classical Kabbalah,” (unpublished manuscript).
My thanks goes to J.H. Chajes for providing me with that article.
Saverio Campanini, “Il De Divinis Attributis di Cesare Evoli,” Materia Guidaica 15–16 (2010–
2011), 339–355; id., “A Sefirotic Tree from a Miscellany of Christian Kabbalistic Texts,” in
Manuscrits Hébreux et Arabs; Mélanges en l’Honneur de Colette Sirat, ed. Nicolas de Lange
and Judith Olszowy-Schlanger (Turnhout, 2014), 387–401.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
65
Christian Kabbalah and helped to confirm the conviction that the true identity
of Judaism and Christianity is to be found in an underlying prisca theologia or
philosophia perennis.32
Knorr and other Christian kabbalists considered diagrams such as the Ilanot
to be essential for providing esoteric knowledge to aspiring readers and for
fostering apprehension and memorization of complex material at a glance.33
The diagrammatic images sometimes depicted the sefirotic tree as concentric
circles, “wheels within wheels,” and could even function as computational
tools. These different forms and uses enabled not only the preservation of old
doctrines, but also the creative production of new knowledge.34
At the same time, they exercised a fascination upon Early Modern exponents of Christian Kabbalah, who used these diagrams when creating new
emblems and “hieroglyphs” to express energetic qualities of occult powers and
cosmic secrets. This was true for Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), Heinrich Khunrath (c. 1560–1606), Robert Fludd (1574–1637), and Athanasius Kircher (1602–
1680), among others. According to these scholars, kabbalistic tree diagrams
constituted the “heart” and the “foundation of the whole doctrine” of Jewish
esotericism, as Johann Benedict Carpzov ii (1639–1699), professor of Oriental
languages in Leipzig,35 explained in a letter to the pietist Johann Jacob Schütz
(1640–1690) in 1678.36
However, Christian scholars of the Renaissance had also been intrigued by
diagrams and the notion of hidden meanings in Kabbalah. Within the framework of the Renaissance notion of ancient wisdom or philosophia perennis,
scholars had believed the texts to contain divine arcana.37 For this reason,
32
33
34
35
36
37
Chajes, “Durchlässige Grenzen” (see above, n. 30), 104.
Ibid., 108–110.
For the Christian tradition see Mary Carruthers, The Book of Memory. A Study of Memory
in Medieval Culture (Cambridge, 2008).
Chajes, “Durchlässige Grenzen” (see above, n. 30), ibid.
Carpzov was a former student of the Orientalist Johannes Buxtorf (1599–1664) in Basel.
The letter from October 18, 1678 can be found in the Herzog August Library Wolfenbüttel,
Cod. Guelf. 157.1 Extrav. fol. 42r–v (http://diglib.hab.de/wdb.php?dir=mss/157‑1‑extrav). Cf.
Rosemarie Zeller, “Der Nachlaß Christian Knorr von Rosenroths in der Herzog August
Bibliothek in Wolfenbüttel,” Morgen-Glantz 16 (2006), 64.
Moshe Idel, “Johannes Reuchlin: Kabbalah, Pythagorean Philosophy and Modern Scholarship,” Studia Judaica 16 (2008), 30–55; id., “Prisca Theologia in Marsilio Ficino and in
some Jewish Treatments,” in Marsilio Ficino: His Theology, His Philosophy, His Legacy, ed.
Michael J.B. Allen and Valery Rees (Leiden / Boston / Köln, 2002), 137–158. On the notion
of prisca theologia, see also Wouter Hanegraaff, Esotericism and the Academy: Rejected
Knowledge in Western Culture (Cambridge 2012), 6–8. Johann Reuchlin published two
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
66
morlok
Christian kabbalists had compiled Latin translations and anthologies of the
Zohar during the Renaissance and the Baroque period to demonstrate that
Kabbalah and kabbalistic hermeneutic techniques could reveal and verify the
truth of Christian doctrines.38 Christian Kabbalists took the antiquity of kabbalistic doctrines for granted, assuming that they contained ancient wisdom
whose Christological seed needed only to be disclosed.
It was but a short step further for Christian Kabbalists to believe that Kabbalah could be made fruitful for missionary purposes. Many dreamed of a universal Christianity, consisting of converted Jews together with the members of
the different Christian denominations, all bound together in one faith.39 However, Christian scholars were not just interested in converting Jews. They were
also genuinely interested in exploiting kabbalistic texts for their own intellectual and spiritual interest.40 In fact, there are indications that missionary
rhetoric served as a pretext for studying the texts. Furthermore, contemporary
records indicate that the strongest interest in converting Jews was found not
among Christian scholars, but instead among Christian sovereigns and the aristocratic elite.41
38
39
40
41
books on Kabbalah, De Verbo Mirifico—“On the Wonderful Word,” in 1494, and the Arte
Cabbalistica, “On the Art of Kabbalah,” in 1517. One of Reuchlin’s most influential doctrines
concerns the kabbalistic secret of the name of Jesus, which is comprised of the letters of
the Tetragrammaton—yod, he and waw, with an additional shin, bringing the divine name
to its messianic perfection.
Huss, “Translations (see above, n. 26),” 83–84, 99, 122.
Lucinda Martin, “Noch eine ‘res publica literaria’? Die Briefe der Unsichtbaren Kirche als
diskursiver Raum,” Aufklärung 28 (2016), 135–172. See also Coudert, The Impact of the Kabbalah (see above, n. 29), 117. Wilhelm Schmidt-Biggemann is convinced that Knorr indeed
had missionary intentions with the Kabbala Denudata; see “Knorr von Rosenroths missionarische Intentionen,” Morgen-Glantz 20 (2010), 193; Andreas Kilcher, “Kabbalistische
Buchstabenmetaphysik: Knorrs Bibliothek und die Bedeutung des Sohar,” in Christliche
Kabbala, ed. Wilhelm Schmidt-Biggemann, (Ostfildern, 2003), 211–223, here 222f.
Chajes speaks of their “rigorous antiquarianism and enlightened scholarship.” See “Durchlässige Grenzen” (see above, n. 30), 104f.
This is exemplified by a letter that Christian August of Sulzbach sent to Rudolf August of
Braunschweig Wolfenbüttel to accompany a copy of the Kabbala Denudata. In the letter,
the former touts the potential of Kabbalah for converting Jews to Christianity, also with
a possible Sabbatean background, estimating the Zohar higher than the Talmud. On the
Sabbatean context of the Zohar edition in Sulzbach, see Huss, “Text and Context” (see
above, n. 26), 130–138. The letter from Christian August of March 21, 1684 was attached
to the first volume of the Kabbala Denudata (hab Wolfenbüttel, Sign. Theol. 229.20).
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
67
Paradoxically, Christian scholars were the first to publish kabbalistic writings, translated into Latin, even before these texts were printed in their original
languages. Latin translations of kabbalistic texts printed in the sixteenth and
seventeenth centuries were later translated into modern European languages,
and became sources for knowledge of Kabbalah across Europe. Christian Kabbalists, however, also supported the printing of kabbalistic texts in their original
languages, both to study these texts in their original language and to propagate
the study of Kabbalah amongst Jews, thereby “demonstrating” the supposed
compatibility of the Jewish and Christian faiths. Through such channels, the
texts of Christian Kabbalah had a significant impact on both Christian and Jewish cultures, as many important European scholars, philosophers and scientists
were interested in Kabbalah and tried to integrate it into their intellectual systems.42 These include luminaries such as the English scientist Isaac Newton
and the German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz as well as Jewish writers such as Jacob Zemah (died c. 1655), who was responsible for the first grand
diagrammatic scroll on Lurianic Kabbalah.43
3
The Sefirotic Matrix
The ten attributes, or forms of revelation of God, known as the ten sefirot are
central to most kabbalistic systems. Medieval kabbalistic literature offered a
variety of ideas concerning the nature and essence of the sefirot, and many different names and symbols were used to designate them. The major paradigms
include describing them as characteristics of God (such as His wisdom, mercy,
and anger), as the anthropomorphic “body” of God, as God’s masculine and
feminine aspects,44 or as a divine family (Figure 2).
42
43
44
The letter has been published by Rosemarie Zeller, “Der Nachlaß” (see above, n. 36), 58
n. 8. For a partial English translation see Huss, ibid., 127.
A.P. Coudert, Leibniz and the Kabbalah (Dordrecht / Boston, 1995); ead., The Impact of the
Kabbalah (see above, n. 29), 284.
Chajes, “Durchlässige Grenzen” (see above, n. 30) 114.
The erotic tension between various elements of the sefirotic system has been a major
topic in academic research in recent decades. See e.g. Elliot Wolfson, Language, Eros,
Being: Kabbalistic Hermeneutics and Poetic Imagination (New York, 2005); Moshe Idel,
Kabbalah and Eros (New Haven / London, 2005); Daniel Abrams, The Female Body of
God in Kabbalistic Literature: Embodied Forms of Love and Sexuality in the Divine Feminine
(Jerusalem, 2004) [in Hebrew].
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
68
morlok
figure 2
Sefirotic Tree. Online course of Boaz Huss and Yoed Kadary: Introduction to
Kabbalah kab 1010x
https://courses.edx.org/courses/course‑v1:israelx+kab1010x
+3t2017/pdfbook/1/ (accessed 12.02.2018)
In kabbalistic prayer, the mystic ascends through the lowest sefira, Malkhut
(kingdom), through the sefirotic realm to the highest sefira, Keter (crown), in
order to initiate the divine influx from above, down to the earthly realm.45
This ascent is often associated with erotic relationships both between the mys-
45
Moshe Idel, Enchanted Chains. Techniques and Rituals in Jewish Mysticism (Los Angeles,
2005), 3–30, 165–204; id., Ascensions on High in Jewish Mysticism. Pillars, Lines, Ladders
(Budapest, 2005), 23–72.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
69
tic and the sefirot and among the sefirot themselves.46 Therefore, many texts
include a description of an erotic union between the male mystic and the lowest, feminine sefira Malkhut (kingdom), functioning as an “entrance” into the
divine sphere.47 If, however, the mystic is depicted as feminine—the human
soul is usually designated as female—then the union takes place with the sefira
called Yesod (foundation), which has an evident phallic connotation. It is also
closely related to circumcision and to kabbalistic exegesis.48 Yet another variation was for the mystic to initiate a union between female Malkhut and male
Yesod or Tifʾeret.
In the sefirotic system, the En Sof, the “Infinite,” is understood as the completely transcendent and hidden aspect of the Divine. The sefirot emanate out
of the En Sof in a process of revelation. Of special interest are the dynamics between the different sefirot and the effect of their changing relations on
one another, on the material world and on human history. The most detailed
description of this inner-divine, dynamic life of the deity is found in Joseph
Gikatilla’s Shaʿare Orah (“Gates of Light”) of 1293, in which the sefirot signify the
divine essences or modes of action that correspond to the ten divine names.49
With the help of the “correct” kabbalistic exegesis and meditative prayer centering on the divine names, the mystic may exercise a certain influence on
the divinity in a theurgical or magical manner. Gikatilla’s text is recognized
as the most detailed and best organized mapping of the divine system. Paulus
Ricius,50 a Jewish convert to Christianity, translated Gikatilla’s “Gates of Light”
into Latin, and published a paraphrase of it under the title Portae Lucis in 1516
(Figure 1). This was the first published kabbalistic text, and it had a tremendous
impact on the further development of Christian Kabbalah.51
46
47
48
49
50
51
Morlok, Gikatilla’s Hermeneutics (see above, n. 28), 123–131.
Idel, Kabbalah and Eros (see above, n. 44), 39–41.
Elliot Wolfson, “Circumcision, Vision of God, and Textual Interpretation: From Midrash
Trope to Mystical Symbol,” History of Religions 27 (1987), 189–215. Christian treatises dealing bridal imagery usually eliminated the phallic references. Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 163 f.
Idel, Kabbalah—New Perspectives (see above, n. 27), 112.
Bernd Roling, Aristotelische Naturphilosophie und christliche Kabbalah im Werk des Paulus
Ritius (Tübingen, 2007); see also Gershom Scholem, “Zur Geschichte der Anfänge der
christlichen Kabbala,” in Essays presented to Leo Baeck on the Occasion of his 80th Birthday
(London, 1954), 158–193.
A fascinating example of the influence of Kabbalah on Christian speculation can be
found in the work of the mystical philosopher, Jacob Böhme. This influence, noted by the
great scholar of Kabbalah, Gershom Scholem, has recently drawn new scholarly interest.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
70
4
morlok
Antonia’s “Marriage” to Christ
With the Lehrtafel, Princess Antonia and her teachers created a visual representation of the sefirotic system that experts of Kabbalah could interpret and
understand, but that would also fulfill the devotional needs of regular Christian worshippers. The specific contributions of the different parties involved
in conceptualizing the altarpiece remains unclear, but there is evidence that
Antonia took on a central role.52 The princess was very interested in rabbinic
and kabbalistic literature and she corresponded intensely with her teachers as
well as other scholars about the kabbalistic motifs in these paintings.53
The outer painting depicting Antonia’s “marriage” to Christ signals that
bridal mysticism will be the doctrinal framework of the entire altar.54 Christ’s
centrality is emphasized both in the image on the outside of the altarpiece,
as well as in the central panel on the inside.55 In the outer painting, Antonia receives a crown from Christ, her “bridegroom.” She gazes at him with the
expression of a love-struck bride. Such erotic bridal imagery derives from the
Song of Songs (Song 1:1) and other biblical texts, and both kabbalistic literature56 and Christian mysticism often refer to it.57 In the altarpiece’s depiction,
52
53
54
55
56
57
See Gershom Scholem, “The Name of God and the Linguistic Theory of the Kabbalah,”
Diogenes 79 (1972), 60; Gerold Necker, “ ‘Out of Himself, to Himself’: The Kabbalah of Jacob
Böhme,” in The World of Jacob Böhme, eds. Bo Andersson, Lucinda Martin, Leigh Penman,
and Andrew Weeks (Leiden, 2018) (at press). Special thanks to Gerold Necker for providing
me with his article before publication.
Häussermann, “Pictura Docens” (see above, n. 9), 77.
Gruhl and Morgenstern, “Zwei hebräische Gebete” (see above, n. 10), 103 f.
Cf. Paul Peucker, A Time of Sifting. Mystical Marriage and the Crisis of Moravian Piety in the
Eighteenth Century (University Park, 2015).
For a detailed description of both paintings as well as references to unpublished source
material in the Stuttgart Landesbibliothek and the hab Wolfenbüttel, see Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), chap. 3 and 4; and Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte
(see above, n. 1).
Cf. Moshe Idel, “Sexual Metaphors and Praxis in the Kabbalah,” in Ultimate Intimacy. The
Psychodynamics of Jewish Mysticism, ed. Mortimer Ostow (London, 1995), 217–244; Elliot
Wolfson, “Coronation of the Sabbath Bride: Kabbalistic Myth and the Ritual of Androgynisation,” Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 6 (1997), 301–347; Peter Schäfer, “Daughter, Sister, Bride and Mother: Images of the Femininity of God in the Early Kabbalah,”
Journal of the American Academy of Religion 68 (2000), 221–242.
Cf. for example, Philipp Nicolai (1556–1608) in his famous choral on Christ as the bridegroom, the shining morning star (“Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern”) of 1597. All seven
verses refer to the bride symbolism from the Song of Songs. Cf. Hermann Kurzke, “Wie
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
71
Antonia occupies the role of Shulamith in Song of Songs 7:2, leading the bridal
procession towards her heavenly bridegroom (Figure 3). He has been victorious
over suffering and death, as the palm leaf that he is holding indicates, and he
places on her head the crown of life, bestowing her with eternal life and bliss.
In the painting, 94 women are following Antonia in a bridal procession, 77
of whom have been identified.58 The women in the picture represent figures
from the Old and New Testament, but at the same time they bear the likenesses
of real people, most from the house of Württemberg. Directly behind Antonia
stand her two sisters; the three sisters together symbolize hope, faith, and
love (1 Cor. 13:13). Together with the heart and the crown, these three build
yet another bridge to the kabbalistic picture inside the altarpiece and to the
sefirotic system featured in it.59
Written on the crown of thorns lying beneath Christ’s feet, one reads: consummatum est (“it has been completed”), referring both to mystical marriage
of bride and bridegroom, and to the words that Christ spoke at the crucifixion,
right before dying (John 19:30; Luke 23:46).60 Shulamith / Antonia signifies the
soul’s union with Christ, but she also stands for all believers connected with
Christ in true love, receiving the “crown” when still alive and not only after
death.61
58
59
60
61
schön leuchtet der Morgenstern,” in Geistliches Wunderhorn. Große deutsche Kirchenlieder,
ed. Hansjakob Becker et al. (Munich, 2003), 146–153.
Otto Betz was able to identify 77 figures using Strölin’s sketch of the procession. He also
relied on a copperplate that the Pietist Friedrich Christoph Oetinger had had executed.
The copperplate was made according to an original sketch by Jacob Friedrich Klemm and
Andreas Knoderer who went to Bad Teinach to map the painting. Cf. Gruhl, Kabbalistische
Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 9–11. Cf. Oetinger’s influential study of the shrine: Friedrich
Christoph Oetinger, Die Lehrtafel der Prinzessin Antonia, ed. Reinhard Breymayer and
Friedrich Häussermann (Berlin / New York, 1977).
On the role of female guides in mystical Jewish literature, see Idel, Kabbalah and Eros
(see above, n. 44), 177. Cf. also Barbara Newman, From Virile Women to Women Christ
(Philadelphia, 1995), 218–223, 230f., 242f. and ead., God and the Goddesses (Philadelphia,
2003). On the crown motif, cf. Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 91.
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 30 f. All the other Biblical figures are
explained online under http://netscore.de/Antonia/Startseite.html (accessed 12.02.2018).
See Ernst Koch, “Beobachtungen zum Umgang mit dem Hohenlied in Theologie und
Frömmigkeit des Luthertums im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert,” in Studien zur Theologie- und
Frömmigkeitsgeschichte des Luthertums im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert, ed. Matthias Richter and
Johann Anselm Steiger (Waltrop, 2005), 285–306.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
72
figure 3
morlok
Epitaph picture of the altar (closed): Bridal Procession of Shulamith
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
73
The subject of the soul and its “coronation,” or marriage with Christ, ties the
inner and outer paintings of the altarpiece together. A verse at the very top of
the outer painting thematizes this mystical “marriage”:62
Christ:
Come, soul, marry me for forever
Take, Beautiful, the crown, the heavenly adornment.
Death, the devil, and the might of hell I have conquered,
infinite joy through suffering gained.
Bride:
Only thou most worthy Jesus, thou hast been my delight,
with exception of thee I knew no joy.
I loved thee sincerely by faith without seeing:
for hope is open, to go to heaven.
Angel:
Welcome, you pious, come all at once
to live and sway, in the blessed Kingdom,
Help to praise the thrice hallowed name,
the a and o. Sing Hallelujah with Amen!63
62
63
The following English translation is mine with assistance from Lucinda Martin. The
German text can be found in Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 30:
Christus:
Auf, Seele, vermähle dich ewig mit mir,
nimm, Schöne, die Krone, die himmlische Zier.
Tod, Teufel und Höllenmacht hab‘ ich bezwungen,
unendliche Freuden durch Leiden erzwungen.
Braut:
Nur, wertester Jesus, du warest mein’ Lust,
und außer dir war mir kein Freude bewußt.
Ich liebte dich herzlich im Glauben ohn’ Sehen:
Für Hoffen steht offen, in Himmel zu gehen.
Engel:
Willkommen, ihr Frommen, kommt alle zugleich,
zu leben und schweben im seligen Reich:
Helft preisen den dreimal hochheiligen namen
Das a und o. Singt Halleluja mit Amen!
A(lpha) and O(mega) refer to Rev. 22:13, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the
end, the first and the last.” Versions also appear in Rev. 1:8, Rev. 21:6–7, Rev. 1:17–18. They
also recall Isaiah 44:6 and 48:12 in which the divinity is the “first and last.”
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
74
morlok
The imagined dialogue between Christ and the soul, which concludes with
the angel’s address to the observer, is a song. The painting even contains the
melody and musical notation, and depicts the angels as accompanying the
scenery with instrumental music, which appears to radiate from the heavens.
Seven of the angels are playing trumpets, which serves as a visual counterpoint to the seven trumpets of judgment depicted in the inner picture of the
Lehrtafel.64
Yet another element connecting the inner and outer paintings of the altarpiece is the motif of the heart. In the outer painting, Antonia’s cloak is held
together with a clasp bearing her initials, and her hand is lying on her heart. In
the inner image, Antonia is holding her heart in her hand. This is surely a reference to Antonia’s instructions that her heart be buried behind the altarpiece
after her death.65 At the same time, the heart also refers to a wordplay on the
German terms “Herz” (heart) and “Herzogin” (duchess).
For those versed in Kabbalah, the “heart” had a further, more esoteric significance. The Hebrew word for heart, lev, has an alphanumeric value of 32.
In kabbalistic traditions, this number refers to the Sefer Yezirah (“Book of Creation”) and its 32 wondrous paths of wisdom (pliʾot Hokhmah) in creating
the cosmos. As these 32 paths (22 Hebrew letters and the 10 sefirot) are contained and appear in the oral Torah, which is also called the Shekhina, she—the
Shekhina—is called the “heart” or “heart of heaven” and receives a central position in the Sefer haBahir, one of the earliest testimonies of Kabbalah.66
The heart motif provides an excellent example of Antonia’s twofold hermeneutics: the lay spectator could associate the heart with well-known Christian
motifs and theology—inviting Christ into the heart and so forth—whereas the
expert could connect these symbols with their kabbalistic content. The heart
symbolism is also connected with Jewish and Christian meanings of the word
“crown” and its associations with circumcision. In Romans 2:29 the apostle Paul
speaks of a “circumcision of the heart” to make the point that belief must be
internalized and not just exhibited by outer, physical circumcision.
The crown (Keter) is the highest sefira in the divine sefirotic system (Figure
2), and at the same time it evokes here Christ’s crown of thorns, the symbol
of his suffering. Coronation similarly calls up multiple layers of meaning: in
Jewish mysticism it refers to a union with the divine, including through circumcision. In kabbalistic literature, the language of “crowning” is often used
64
65
66
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 30.
Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 1.
Gershom Scholem, Origins of the Kabbalah (Princeton, 1990), 171.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
75
interchangeably with the revelation of the corona (crown) in circumcision.67
In Christian bridal mysticism, receiving the heavenly crown is a sign for attaining heavenly royalty, which was more important to Antonia than her earthly
status as a member of the ruling class.
5
Antonia’s Paradisiacal Path
The inner painting of the altarpiece (Figure 4) depicts a subject already indicated by the outer painting: the soul’s ascent to the highest realm, the return
to its source, resurrection and the new community. The entire picture presents
the underlying sefirotic structure according to Gikatilla (Figure 1) as a ladder of
ascent through the divine, primordial powers.68 In this image, nature and faith
are in complete harmony; through the contemplation of nature, the believer
opens the way for the soul to unite with the divine. The liber Dei is here identical with the liber naturae. Through knowledge about nature and what it reveals
about the divinity, one may gain access to the upper realm.69
Like the mystic entering into the sefirotic realm via prayer (Figure 2), Antonia is depicted standing at the gate to the lowest sefira Malkhut (kingdom) or
heavenly realm, that is, she is returning to “lost” paradise (Figure 5).70 Antonia
is just ready to enter, to tread the spiritual path and to receive her “crown.”
Paradise is open to believers and the spiritual path is revealed in its eschatological significance. Yet a closer look at the painting’s composition reveals that
the soul’s journey entails the help of the sefirotic system and the divine names
according to Gikatilla’s description in his Gates of Light (Figure 1).
The subject of spiritual coronation that is thematized in both the inner and
outer paintings is a common metaphor in kabbalistic literature. To correctly
67
68
69
70
Wolfson, Language, Eros, Being (see above, n. 44), 133–141.
Häussermann, “Pictura Docens” (see above, n. 9), 76. On the “ladder of ascension” in
kabbalistic literature see Idel, Ascensions on High (see above, n. 45), 187–192.
Moshe Idel, “Deus sive Natura—The Metamorphosis of a Dictum from Maimonides to
Spinoza,” in Maimonides and the Sciences, ed. Robert S. Cohen and Hillel Levine (Dordrecht, 2000), 87–110. See also Kocku von Stuckrad, “Rewriting the Book of Nature: Kabbalah and the Metaphors of Contemporary Life Sciences,” Journal for the Study of Religion,
Nature, and Culture 2,4 (2008), 419–442.
The return of the soul to paradise after death is a widespread motif in kabbalistic literature. However, kabbalistic texts also describe this return to the soul’s origin as a possibility
for believers in this life. See Moshe Idel, “On Paradise in Jewish Mysticism,” in The Cradle
of Creativity, ed. Chami Ben-Noon (Hod HaSharon, 2004), 609–644.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
76
morlok
figure 4
Inner painting of the Triptych
interpret texts and penetrate to their deeper layers of significance, the male
Jewish exegete has to be circumcised (“crowned”). This notion is emphasized by
the Hebrew homonym milah, which means both “word” and “circumcision.”71
71
See notes 48 and 56 above.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
figure 5
77
Lower part of the inner painting. Antonia at the entrance to the garden
At the same time, “coronation” underscores that the mystic is being transformed during the exegetical process into the “crown” of the divine, the ʿatara
(“diadem”), the female partner of the divine, as presented in Gikatilla.72 For
this reason, only a male mystic may enter into the mystical exegetical process, as the revelation of his corona (crown) during circumcision is the conditio
sine qua non for his apotheosis in this process. In Gikatilla’s Gates of Light this
unio mystica is described as the unification of the “king and queen.” The implementation of this eroticized imagery in the hermeneutical exegetical process is
based on the anthropomorphic correspondence between the human and the
divine realm, which is also found in the Zoharic corpus.73
72
73
Morlok, Gikatilla’s Hermeneutics (see above, n. 28), 124–129.
Ibid., 119, 124, 128f.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
78
morlok
One of the most fascinating aspects of Princess Antonia’s kabbalistic “teaching panel” is the gender-switch she implants in her visual presentation of the
sefirotic tree, as all the traditionally male sefirot are represented here by the
female figures flanking the temple.74 For instance, the central axis of the interior picture is dominated by a large temple construction. Female figures—
generally understood to represent the Christian virtues—are arranged symmetrically around the temple, following the structure of the sefirotic system.
The erotic tension of the entire picture is focused on Christ and Antonia below,
although all the female figures of the upper, inner-divine part also refer to the
only male figure of the system, Christ. Antonia represents the soul, the anima
devota, standing at the entrance of the garden, ready to ascend to its divine
source (Figure 5). Furthermore, the most feminine of all sefirot—Malkhut
(kingdom) or Shekhina—is presented here as Christ, a male figure. The painting implies that Christ will unite with Antonia, yet according to traditional
kabbalistic concepts, the place she holds is normally reserved for the male
mystic. In fact, the painting represents all the sefirotic components as female
figures,75 with the exception of Christ in the place of the lowest sefira. Paradoxically, this sefira is usually designated as the bride, virgin or daughter.76 Antonia
thus approaches kabbalistic literature very differently than most contemporary experts. Furthermore, other Christian Hebraists who integrated kabbalistic symbols into their eschatological and soteriological concepts addressed
their writings solely to expert male readers, while Antonia presented her teachings for the laity, including women.77
The paradisiacal garden in front of the temple is the focal point of the
painting. It is placed within nature, on earth, and at its center Antonia faces
74
75
76
77
Significantly, Andreae also focused on a female figure in one of his poems: Andreae, Ein
geistliches Gemälde (see above, n. 12). Cf. also Ulrike Gleixner’s analysis of bridal mysticism
within the praxis pietatis and its reform; Ulrike Gleixner, Pietismus und Bürgertum. Eine
historische Anthropologie der Frömmigkeit. Württemberg 17.–19. Jahrhundert (Göttingen,
2005), 39 f.
Elisabeth Moltmann-Wendel goes so far as to speak of a “feminization of the Kabbalah”
in Antonia’s picture. Elisabeth Moltmann-Wendel, “Antonia von Württemberg,” in Gotteslehrerinnen, ed. Luise Schottroff and Johannes Thiele (Stuttgart, 1989), 118; cf. Gruhl,
Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 42–47.
Cf. Arthur Green, “Shekhinah, the Virgin Mary and the Song of Songs: Reflections on a
Kabbalistic Symbol in Its Historical Context,” ajs Review 26,1 (2002), 1–52.
Cf. Gerold Necker, “The Female Messiah. Gender Perspectives in Kabbalistic Eschatology
and Christian Soteriology,” in Envisioning Judaism. Studies in Honor of Peter Schäfer on the
Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, Vol. ii, ed. Raʾanan S. Boustan et al. (Tübingen, 2013),
837–856.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
figure 6
Christ in the center of the garden
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
79
80
morlok
Christ (Figure 4 and 6). He is surrounded by the 12 sons of Jacob, the heads
of the old and the new nation of God.78 In contrast to this group, the princess
is standing alone, gazing at Christ. According to the Book of Genesis, a cherub
with a sword guards the entrance to the garden of paradise, but in this painting,
it is Antonia who takes up this post (Gen. 3:24). Since the garden is once again
open for all, no sword-wielding cherub is needed. Christ, as the “second Adam”
has reopened it: through him, all can gain access to the kingdom of God.79
In the place of the cherub and sword, Antonia is holding her flaming heart in
her hand—a widespread motif in Early Modern religious iconography, signifying that Antonia’s heart belongs to Christ both in life and in death. The burning
heart was a common symbol for a passionate devotion and love to Christ. On
Antonia’s left, an anchor supports her. The anchor is yet another traditional
Christian symbol for hope (Heb. 6:19). The crossbar of the anchor is a symbol
of the cross itself. The lamb (John 1:29), representing Christ, accompanies Antonia and at the same time symbolizes the third Christian virtue, faith.
The garden is surrounded by red and white roses, whose colors refer according to rabbinic and early kabbalistic texts to the divine attributes of grace
(Hesed, white) and judgment (Gevurah / din, red).80 In Christian tradition, the
red rose symbolizes martyrdom and wisdom, whereas the white rose stands for
purity and the Virgin Mary, also called the “rose without thorns.”81 In the Song of
Songs 2:2, the Hebrew Shoshanna is usually translated as “lily” but it also means
“rose,” and in Christian imagery the lily and rose often appear together. The
symbol of the rose thus appears in cathedrals as “rose windows” and Catholics
pray a “rosary.”
78
79
80
81
According to Genesis 49. Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 187–238 gives
a detailed discussion of this image. See also the examination in Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1).
Betz, ibid., 39 f.
The “rose” therefore became a central symbol in Zoharic literature and is introduced
in the very first lines of the opening of the Zohar. Gerold Necker, Sohar. Schriften aus
dem Buch des Glanzes (Berlin, 2012), 9 and the commentary on the passage on page 171f.
The kabbalistic colors of Gevurah (judgment, red) and Gedulah / Hesed (mercy, white),
the divine attributes that need to be in balance to receive the divine blessing, are only
indicated in the floral wreaths on the heads of the two figures sitting on the pediment of
the temple (Figure 4). On colors in kabbalistic symbolism see Gershom Scholem, “Colours
and Their Symbolism in Jewish Tradition and Mysticism,” Diogenes 108 (1979), 84–111; 109
(1980), 64–77.
George Ferguson, Signs and Symbols in Christian Art (London, Oxford, New York, 1954),
37f.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
81
Christ appears in the garden as the incarnate Logos (John 1:14), and represents God’s presence in the earthly realm. He occupies the central position
within the 12 tribes, surrounded by 12 animals and 12 gems, which appear again
on the breastplate of the High Priest in the place of Tifʾeret (splendor) (Figure
11). Christ stands upon a rock within a little pond, wearing the signs of his suffering, the crimson cloak and the crown of thorns, a contrast to the two heavenly
crowns at the top of the picture (Figures 6 and 10). According to traditional
Christian exegesis, the “rock” stood for the church in Jesus’ teachings or even
for Jesus Himself (Matt. 7:24; Matt. 16:17). Similarly, Christians believed that
certain passages of the Hebrew Bible prefiguring Christianity also referred to
rock metaphors (Psalms 18:2; 2Sam. 22:2). For instance, Christians interpreted
Moses bringing forth water from the rock as a metaphor for the creation of the
church (Num. 20:1–13). At the same time, the rock (even) was also a subject in
Gikatilla’s kabbalistic treatise, and represented the tenth sefira Malkhut.
The pond surrounding Christ also bears a cabbalistic meaning. Berekha
(“pond”) recalls a Hebrew pun that Gikatilla had employed, playing off two
words that use the same consonants—Berekha / Berakha (pond / blessing).82 In
Malkhut (the lowest sefira)—here identified as Christ—all streams of blessing
are gathered and mediated to both the earthly and “spiritual” community of
Israel (Knesset Israel).83 Christ, the messianic king is now the one mediating
divine peace and blessing to the Christian community. The metaphors of rock
and pond provide evidence that Gikatilla’s Gates of Light was one of the main
sources for Antonia’s teaching panel.84
Below the central figures on the middle pillar of the sefirotic tree, which also
fall on the middle axis of the painting,85 there are Hebrew inscriptions with
the Hebrew personal pronouns Ani (“I”), Atta (“you”, male) and Hu (“he”).86
82
83
84
85
86
See Shaʿare Orah, ed. Yoseph ben Shlomo (Jerusalem, 1981), i:59 f.; Gruhl, Kabbalistische
Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 159.
Knesset Israel is signified in kabbalistic literature by the tenth sefira. On Christ as the
fountain, Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above, n. 2), 276.
The rock also contains a reference to Ps. 118:22 (Malkhut) in Gikatilla, ibid., i:63 f. On
Gikatilla as the major source for Antonia and her teachers see Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 19–26, 65–68; Gruhl, Kabbalistische Lehrtafel (see above,
n. 2), 321–348 (on Strölin’s Kurze Erklärungen zu den Sefirot) and 414–416.
This line is called qav haʾemzaʿi, which mediates the divine influx from above to below and
signifies the axis of direct ascent to the crown (Keter). See Morlok, Gikatilla’s Hermeneutics
(see above, n. 28), 259–264. It corresponds to the Tetragrammaton in Gikatilla’s constellation between the sefirot and the ten divine names.
The same identification of the pronouns with these sefirot is also found in Gikatilla’s other
book on the sefirotic structure Shaʿare Zedeq (Gates of Justice) in the fifth gate.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
82
morlok
The word Ani (“I”), which has the same consonants in Hebrew as the En of En
Sof (Infinity) appears beneath Christ, and refers in this way to the transcendent
God.
A striving soul, ascending from Christ or Malkhut to the highest sefira (Keter)
needs to then reach a female figure on a sickle moon. According to Early Modern art conventions, this is the pregnant woman from Revelations 12 (Figure
7) who was to give birth to the Christian church—or to Israel, depending on
one’s interpretation. This position is normally inhabited by the phallic symbol of Yesod (foundation). The woman from Revelations 12 bears a familiar
countenance—it is once again, the face of Antonia. She is now pregnant after
her heavenly marriage and union with Christ and has been “reborn” as confirmed by the images on the side wings of the altar.87
After this, the ascending soul reaches the Virgin Mary in the place of Tifʾeret
(splendor). She is labeled Atta (you, male) (Figure 8), and again her visage is
Antonia’s.
Finally the soul ascends to Keter (crown), the highest place, here designated
as Hu (he) (Figure 9, figure with white dress in the middle). These personal pronouns communicate a central Christological message: the transition between
not being (Ayyin) and being is incorporated in the lowest place in the system,
in Christ, who is incarnate as the Ani (“I”). Therefore, Christ is the revelation
of the transcendent divine in the earthly realm, the preexistent divine Logos
according to John 1. The ascent of the soul back to its source is only possible
because of Christ’s descent to earth.
What is more, Antonia embeds the Trinity into these kabbalistic figures (Figure 9). Keter (crown) in the middle represents the Father, Hokhmah (wisdom)
on the right is the preexistent Son, and Binah (understanding) on the left stands
for the Holy Spirit.88 Binah as the virtue of Prudentia is holding a snake (Matt.
10:16) and a mirror in her hand as symbols for self-reflection and truth (Figure
9).
The two construction instruments in front of Binah, an angular measure and
a plumb-line,89 usually belong to Hokhmah (wisdom). This sefira symbolizes
the primordial Torah as the preexistent construction plan for God’s creation of
the cosmos, inhabiting the place which in Christian tradition is ascribed to the
87
88
89
Antonia herself could not get married as after the war the family did not have the means
to give her a proper dowry.
This is indicated by seven flames above her head according to the Acts of Luke 2:3 and the
seven spirits of John in Rev. 4:5. Smidlin also refers to Binah as Providentia.
Here presented in the form of an anchor to remind one of the crucifixion. See Betz, Licht
vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 76.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
figure 7
The pregnant woman from Revelations 12 at the position of Yesod ( foundation /
fundament), the 9th sefira
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
83
84
figure 8
morlok
Mary with little Jesus at the place of the 6th sefira Tifʾeret (splendor)
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
figure 9
85
The three highest Sefirot: Keter (crown) in the middle, Hokhmah (wisdom), right,
Binah (understanding) left
preexistent Logos. According to Jewish tradition, personified wisdom stands for
God’s architect and muse.90 In the picture, however, this sefira has less a cosmological function than a salvific one. She is holding the communion chalice and
wafer, and left of her is a water pitcher, signifying the sacraments of communion and baptism. These two symbols of Christian faith are complemented by
an open book on her legs representing not only Scripture, but also the virtue of
Fides (faith). At her feet rests a phoenix as the sign for resurrection and rebirth,
an ancient mystical symbol of transformation. In Zoharic literature, the second
sefira, Hokhmah is considered to be male. Thus it could here represent Christ
in his elevated form after the resurrection. However, in the painting this sefira
is also presented as female, like all the other sefirot except for Malkhut.
The composition is topped with a crown decorated with four jewels (Figure
10). On each of these four gems appear Hebrew letters or words. The top middle
90
As described in various interpretations of the Wisdom of Salomon 8:22–23. Peter Schäfer,
Mirror of His Beauty. Feminine Images of God from the Bible to the Early Kabbalah (Princeton, 2004).
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
86
morlok
figure 10 Upper Crown above the sefirotic system, with the initials Antonia of Württemberg (a
and v, surrounded by the letter o, referring to Rev. 1:8); below, on top of the cupola,
one finds Moses, Elijah, and Enoch
gem has the Hebrew letters aleph (“beginning,” “father,” “the name Ehyeh”).
The gem below it is labeled shin, the sign for Christ according to Reuchlin’s De
Verbo Mirificio.91 The two remaining stones carry the inscriptions Hu and Natan
(“he gave”). This inscription probably refers to the beginning of creation as an
active impulse of the divine.92 Around the crown, connecting the upper part
with the three lower figures, the 24 elders from Revelations 4:4 praise God as
the Almighty.93 Antonia’s emblem is placed under the crown with the anchor
91
92
93
Reuchlin, De Verbo Mirificio 1494, sig. g 5r; cf. von Stuckrad, “Rewriting the Book of Nature
(see above, n. 69),” 433; Charles Zika, “Reuchlin’s De Verbo Mirificio and the Magic Debate
of the Late Fifteenth Century,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 39 (1976),
104–138. See Figure 10 below and the letter shin in the middle of the crown above the letters
a and v.
On creation in kabbalistic literature, see Gershom Scholem, “Schöpfung aus dem Nichts
und Selbstverschränkung Gottes,” Eranos-Jahrbuch 25 (1956), 87–119.
These 24 elders have been interpreted differently: a) as the 24 Temple priests (1 Chron. 24:
7–18), b) the number of the apostles plus the number of patriarchs, c) the 24 star gods of
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
87
symbolizing the Christian faith. Her name is inscribed in heaven to reveal that
she has been received among the community of believers.94
Moses (middle), Elijah (left) and Enoch (right), who had been taken to
heaven without having died, are visualized under Antonia’s monogram, above
the three highest sefirot (Figure 10). According to the Zohar, Enoch had received
a book from the angels in order to explain the ways of God. In kabbalistic literature, Enoch often stands for the concept of transformation, because he was
transformed into the angel Metatron, without having to die.95 Moses, of course,
is regarded as the highest prophet, since he was the only one to experience God
directly, both in the burning bush and in hearing the name of God, “I am who
I am” (Ex. 3:13–15). In contrast to the other prophets who received divine revelation “as through a cloudy mirror,” Moses received knowledge of the divine
through “the speculum that shines” (haʾaspaqlaria haMeʾira).96 Elijah, the third
of the trio, holds a sword in his hand reminding the spectator of his violent
opposition to the heathen priests of Baʾal.
Between Moses and the woman with the white dress signifying Keter, God
the Father holds the cosmic globe in his left hand and angels stand at his feet.
This depiction follows Daniel’s vision about the divine throne, judgment, and
the Son of Man (7:9–14 and 10:4). However, in place of Keter, where one would
expect to see God the Father, a female figure in a white dress appears. Her head
is surrounded by seven eyes (Sacharja 4:10), representing the omniscience of
God (Figure 10). In her left hand, she holds the flaming heart, also held by
Antonia at the bottom of the painting. The three figures of Keter, Hokhmah
and Binah, (figure 9) are grouped around a banner, inscribed with three geometrical figures—a circle, square, and triangle. They signify both the Trinity
94
95
96
Babylonian mythology. Cf. Russell Morton, “Glory to God and to the Lamb: John’s Use of
Jewish and Hellenistic / Roman Themes in Formatting His Theology in Revelations 4–5,”
Journal for the Study of the New Testament 83 (2001), 89–109, here 96–99.
Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 79–81.
On the complex role of Enoch / Metatron in kabbalistic literature and its transition to
Christian Kabbalah, see Moshe Idel, “Enoch the Mystical Cobbler,” Kabbalah 5 (2000),
220–240; id., “Adam and Enoch According to St. Ephrem the Syrian,” Kabbalah 6 (2001),
197–218; id., “Enoch is Metatron,” Immanuel 24/25 (1990), 220–240, id., “Enoch and Elijah:
Some Remarks on Apotheosis, Theophany and Jewish Mysticism,” in The Salt Companion
to Harold Bloom, ed. Graham Allen and Roy Sellars (Cambridge, 2007), 347–377; Daniel
Abrams, “Metatron and Jesus. The Long Durée of Rabbinic and Kabbalistic Traditions. An
Eighteenth-Century Manual of Christian Proselytizing in German and Yiddish,” Kabbalah
27 (2012), 13–105.
Ex. 24 and in Christianity 2Cor. 3:18. Cf. Elliot Wolfson, Through a Speculum that Shines.
Vision and Imagination in Medieval Jewish Mysticism (Princeton, 1997).
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
88
morlok
figure 11
High Priest in the Holy of Holies, center of the inner painting. The priest is flanked by
Moses and Joshua on the left and John the Baptist and the apostle Paul on the right.
and the kabbalistic idea of an expansion from point to line to area and space
in divine creation and the emanation of the sefirot.97 The threefold Qadosh—
“holy, holy, holy” also called the trisagion (Isaiah 6:3) and the Tetragrammaton
are also found on this banner, where the divine name Ehyeh is usually placed
in kabbalistic literature. But since Antonia has used that name for the upper
crown, here she uses the name yhwh as the starting point of creational emanation and divine blessing.
Moving down the middle axis of the picture, the beholder of the painting
is led into the “Holy of Holies.” The High Priest wearing the traditional breast
plate is in the center. The crucified Christ flanks him on the right and the
serpent of Eden—symbolically crucified—is on his left (Figure 11). This image
presents the Christian Church as the New Temple and paradise.98 The seven
steps leading into the innermost part of the temple follow Ezekiel’s description
97
98
Morlok, Gikatilla’s Hermeneutics (see above, n. 28), 83–108, 188–190.
Similarly, in late midrashic and early kabbalistic sources there is a close connection
between the Temple cult and kabbalistic exegesis and ritual. Maurizio Mottelese, Analogy
in Midrash and Kabbalah: Interpretive Projections of the Sanctuary and Ritual (Los Angeles,
2007). Cf. Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see above, n. 1), 68–70.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
the kabbalistic “teaching panel” of princess antonia
89
of the temple (Ez. 40:22 and 26), a passage that lay Christians would have
recognized. At the same time, the initiated spectator would have recognized
the seven lower sefirot below Binah (understanding) and Malkhut (kingdom),
referring to the seven days of creation and the final, paradisiacal Shabbat at the
end of time.99
Left and right to the temple entrance appear the two columns of the First
Jerusalem Temple, called Yahin and Boaz. Here they have been reinstated. In
the Holy of Holies and left to the high priest stand two representatives of the
old covenant, Moses with the stone tablets and Joshua, dressed as a Roman
soldier.100 On the opposite side, John the Baptist and the apostle Paul stand as
representatives of the new covenant. While John and Paul point to the crucified
Jesus, Moses and Joshua point in the direction of the serpent. The figures are
thus not focused on Aaron, the High Priest, but instead direct attention to other
figures. Aaron holds an almond branch, a reference to Temple sacrifices and
even he points with his left hand to indicate that he is no longer the true High
Priest, but Christ (Hebrews 9:11–12). This composition communicates that the
old covenant has been replaced by the new one.
Apocalyptic motifs such as the last battle at Edom appear in various places
in the picture (Figure 4, left side of the cupola). A warrior angel with helmet, sword, and shield fights against the powers of evil, the angels of darkness
according to Revelations 12: 7–9. The warrior angel is being helped by Michael
and two other angels, but the dragon has seven assistants, rendered here as
strange human-animal hybrids. These are the seven demons or the personification of the seven “deadly sins” in Christianity.
The battle between good and evil in human beings is a central theme in
rabbinic and kabbalistic literature. However, the main battle in the sefirotic
system is taking place at the lowest and weakest part of the system, around
Malkhut (kingdom). The painting transfers this battle to the heavenly realm,
as the victorious Christ in the place of Malkhut is no longer attacked. This
lowest, female part of the sefirotic system is usually threatened by demonic
powers who try to gain access to the divine system. It is the mystic’s task to
elevate and save the female part of the sefirotic system with his good deeds, his
99
100
Scholem, Origins (see above, n. 66), 463. The seven steps also refer to the seven biblical
aspects of God, signified by the seven lower sefirot in kabbalistic literature, and discussed
also by Böhme; cf. Martin, “Schöpfung bei Böhme” in Grund und Ungrund: Der Kosmos
des mystischen Philosophen Jacob Böhme, ed. Claudia Brink and Lucinda Martin (Dresden,
2017), 82–103, here 87–89.
See the detailed description of the columns in Betz, Licht vom unerschaffnen Lichte (see
above, n. 1), 82f.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90
90
morlok
contemplative prayers and even through his mystical union with her.101 Yet, in
Antonia’s picture no signs of such a battle can be found in the lower part. The
only hints of something negative are in the angels of darkness on the left side
of the cupola and in the dark clouds on the outer bridal painting. Those clouds
symbolize the “hidden” nature of God (Sod, secret), the Deus Absconditus, just
as the inner painting represents the Deus Revelatus, and the “New Jerusalem,”
the soul’s ascent to its origin and its true knowledge of God’s glory (Kavod).
6
Conclusion
In interpreting the imagery of Princess Antonia’s altarpiece, a twofold layering of symbols and meanings becomes apparent. On one level, the artwork
employs emblems and symbols familiar to a general Christian audience that
the layperson could easily access for the purposes of Christian devotion and
spiritual benefit. On another level, the expert spectator with knowledge of
Hebrew and kabbalistic traditions could contemplate the picture in its depth
and gain “esoteric” insights. These latter viewers could refer to kabbalistic
sources in order to understand the “deeper” meaning of the panel. Antonia and
her teachers obviously saw it as their task to translate these esoteric secrets
into a visual system. While the paintings present a double hermeneutic, they
are absent of any hierarchical difference between the two intended audiences.
After all, Antonia describes herself as a layperson, although she and her teachers had substantial knowledge of Jewish mystical literature. Instead, Princess
Antonia’s altarpiece testifies to the Early Modern belief that old and new systems of knowledge, exoteric and esoteric knowledge must be combined in
order to redeem the cosmos through wisdom and faith, thus helping to institute
the “New Jerusalem” as a place for both experts and laypeople.
101
Moshe Idel, “On Jerusalem as a Feminine and Sexual Hypostasis: From Late Antiquity
Sources to Medieval Kabbalah,” in Memory, Humanity, and Meaning; Selected Essays in
Honor of Andrei Pleşu’s Sixtieth Anniversary, eds. Mihail Neamƫu and Bogdan TátaruCazaban (Cluj, 2009), 28.
Church History and Religious Culture 98 (2018) 56–90