time at Cluny (ca. 1031–35), then briefl y at Béze, fi nally
returning to Auxerre.
In addition to his Latin Five Books of Histories,
Glaber wrote a hagiographical vita of William and some
epigraphy that, due to the jealousy of the monks, was
destroyed. He seems to have had diffi cult relations with
a number of people, including his mentor, William, and
some of his independence of mind shows up in his writ-
ing. His history, dedicated in a later recension to Odilo of
Cluny, began with the year 900 and presented the history
of the German emperors and French kings, which, as it
reached Raoul’s own time (Books 3–4), included events
from all over the known world and, in his old age (Book
5), included a brief autobiography and anecdotes about
anonymous people. Several accounts of the same global
material also appear in the independently composed but
contemporary history of Adémar de Chabannes.
Often criticized for inaccuracy, gossip, disorgani-
zation, and prodigy mongering by modern political
historians, Raoul has proven a rich source for social
history and mentalities; his theology of history, though
crude, prefi gures such 12th-century historians as Hugh
of Saint-Victor, Otto of Freising, and Joachim of Fiore.
Raoul is best known for his apocalyptic interpretation
of the two millennial dates 1000 (Incarnation) and 1033
(Passion), which he linked to mass manifestations of
religious fervor—heresy, church building, pilgrimage
(especially to Jerusalem), and the Peace of God move-
ment. He has accordingly suffered from polemical treat-
ment at the hands of modern historians opposed to the
romantic notion of the “terrors of the year 1000.”
See also Hugh of Saint-Victor; Joachim of Fiore;
Otto of Freising
Further Reading
Raoul Glaber. Les cinq livres de ses histoires (900–1044), ed.
Maurice Prou. Paris: Picard, 1886.
——. Rodulfus Glaber opera, ed. John France, Neithard Bulst,
and Paul Reynolds. Oxford: Clarendon, 1989.
——. Rodolfo il Glabro: Cronche dell’anno mille (storie), ed.
Guglielmo Cavallo and Giovanni Orlandi. Milan, 1989.
France, J. “Rodulfus Glaber and the Cluniacs.” Journal of Eccle-
siastical History 39 (1988): 497–507.
Iogna-Prat, D., and R. Ortigues. “Raoul Glaber et l’historiographie
clunisienne.” Studi medievali 3rd ser. 26 (1985): 437–72.
Richard Landes
“RASHI” (SOLOMON B. ISAAC)
(c. 1040- 1105)
Solomon b. Isaac, known by the acronym “Rashi” Rabbi
Shelomoh [b.] Yis.h.aq), was born ca. 1040 in Troyes (in
the county of Champagne in France) and died in 1105-
He was wrongly referred to as “Solomon ha-Yarh.iy”
(i.e., from Lunel) by the Dominican polemicist Ramón
Martí and by the Christian Hebraists Sebastian Münster
and Johannes Buxtorf, and (less incorrectly) “ha-Rav
ha-S.arfatiy” and “Shelomoh ha-S.arfatiy” by Asher b.
Saul and by Abraham b. Moses b. Maimon (son of Mai-
monides), Abraham b. David of Posquières referred to
him simply as “ha-S.arfatiy.” He was the fi rst to compose
a detailed and complete commentary, almost line by
line, on the Talmud (except for parts not fi nished before
he died). He is also famous for his commentary on the
Torah and on several other books of the Bible, although
in fact these commentaries have been overpraised. In
addition, he wrote some responsa, or legal decisions,
which are of importance also as a refl ection of historical
conditions. The fi rst known printed Hebrew book was
the commentary of “Rashi” on the Torah, but contrary to
what virtually every scholar who has written on “Rashi”
says, this was not the Reggio (Italy) edition (1475), but
Rome, ca. 1470–72 (printed by Ovadyah b. Moses and
the brothers Menasseh and Benjamin). This was fol-
lowed by the Reggio edition, and almost immediately
by an edition in Spain (1476), both without the biblical
text; the fi rst edition of the text and commentary was in
1482 (additions to the commentary, found in the Spanish
Guadalajara and Ixar [Híjar] editions, were reproduced
in Kiryat sefer 61 [1986–7]: 533–35). “Rashi”’s com-
mentaries were unknown to Maimonides, and generally
in Spain until relatively late; however, in Germany he
was highly regarded. Meir b. Barukh of Rothenburg
wrote of him “from his waters [commentaries] we drink
every day” (responsa, Cremona ed., No. 137). An old
saying has it that “all the commentaries of France may
be thrown in the trash except those of Parshandata and
ben Porata” Parshandata, of course, is “Rashi” (for
the saying, see Azulai, Shem ha-gedoliym, s.v. “Rashi,”
and other sources). As for ben Porata (Joseph), this has
been thought to refer to Joseph T.ov ‘Elem of France
(contemporary of Rashi, a rabbi in Limoges; however,
he is not known to have written any commentaries), but
S. D. Luzzatto (Beit ha-os.ar [1881], p. 100) was surely
correct in his opinion that it refers rather to Joseph
Qara, a student of “Rashi” and possibly the editor of his
commentary on the Torah, who wrote commentaries on
most of the Bible.
“Rashi” studied at Mayence (Mainz) in Germany,
where the yeshivah was headed by Jacob b. Yaqar and
Isaac b. Judah, pupils of Rabbe ̄nu Gershom (Gershom b.
judah). Another teacher of “Rashi” was Isaac ha-Levy,
about whom little is known. Gershom’s students had col-
lected his oral comments on the Talmud as they studied
with him, and this written collection was known as “
Qunt.res Magenza” (or Collection of Mayence), and was
used by Natan of Rome in his famous talmudic diction-
ary ‘Arukh. Later in Italy it was attributed to Gershom
himself, and it was printed in the famous Vilna Talmud
edition (and see A. Epstein’s introduction to Ma‘aseh“RASHI” (SOLOMON B. ISAAC)