Antisemitism in a Renaissance Dialogue: The Ideological Role of Jews and Judaism in Viaje de Turquía

Şizen Yiacoup

doi:10.3828/mlo.v0i0.365

Abstract

Despite being widely regarded by commentators as advocating cultural and religious diversity due to its ideological indebtedness to reformist and humanist thought and its largely flattering portrayal of Ottoman Constantinople, the anonymous sixteenth-century dialogue known as Viaje de Turquia is nevertheless reliant upon antisemitic stereotypes to facilitate the development of its plot and central characters. The analysis presented herein addresses the conspicuous gap in our current understanding of this seminal example of Spanish Renaissance literature by scrutinizing the crucial parallels it draws between two situations presented as broadly analogous: Christ’s persecution at the hands of the Pharisees and his subsequent crucifixion by the Roman imperial authorities, and the hero’s mistreatment by Sephardi physicians and the constant threat of execution held over him by the Ottomans. A fundamental aim of this study is therefore to challenge and ultimately alter scholarly perceptions of a text widely acclaimed for its espousal of Renaissance humanist ideals, and, by extension, to underscore the fact that those ideals were by no means unanimously concerned with achieving harmonious coexistence with the Other.

Highlights

Viaje de Turquía is frequently regarded as advocating cross-cultural and religious toleration on the basis of its portrayal of sixteenth-century Constantinople
It is unsurprising that Viaje de Turquía remained unpublished until the twentieth century, when it was included by Manuel Serrano y Sanz in a compendium of memoirs entitled Autobiografías y memorias (Madrid, 1905), nor that its flattering portrayals of the Turks and their judiciously organized, culturally diverse Empire have occasioned a scholarly consensus as to the text’s overarching objectives
By means of its portrayal of the acrimonious relationship between the aforementioned, enslaved Christian hero and a privileged community of Judeo-Spanish physicians living under Ottoman imperial rule, the text draws crucial parallels between two situations presented as broadly analogous: Christ’s persecution at the hands of the Pharisees and his subsequent crucifixion by the Roman imperial authorities, and Pedro’s mistreatment by the Sephardi physicians and the constant threat of execution held over him by the Ottomans. Both situations test and corroborate the faith and resolve of the Christ-figure and eventually culminate in his transformation: in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, by means of his resurrection three days after being crucified; in that of Pedro de Urdemalas, through the symbolic completion of his protracted voyage towards spiritual rebirth following the three days over which he narrates the story of his enslavement and subsequent flight from captivity. The significance of these recurring references to Trinitarian theology is reinforced by the trio of central characters among whom we witness – and ideally with whom we share – the cathartic and redemptive effects of the dialogic journey

Summary

Introduction

The central character through which the dialogue exemplifies the figure of the Jew as a negative ontological template for the ideal Christian (that is, for the spiritually awakened, reformist Catholic aspiring to live in imitation of Christ) is the Judeo-Spanish chief physician of Sinan Pasha’s court, Moisés Amón, referred to in the text as ‘Amón Ugli’ or ‘Amón’.8 Amón’s portrayal constitutes the most overtly derogatory and strikingly antisemitic configuration of Jewish attributes in the dialogue, a feature that is further complicated by the fact that he is a fictionalized version of the noted physician Moisés Amón (c.1490– 1554), a famously accomplished Ottoman medic of Sephardi descent who by all accounts was well loved and highly respected by his coreligionists as well as by his Ottoman master, Sultan Suleiman I.9 The decision to cast Amón in such an unsympathetic role is profoundly ironic, since the fictional rendering stands in stark contrast to the historical figure from whom his name and professional status derive.

Results

Conclusion