Yeshaya HaLevi Horowitz - The first Horowitz - Should we sever the connection from Horowitz to Benveniste?

I'd say leave it, and do not sever. I'm a Horowitz descendant on both sides paternal and maternal, from the Haflah and the Shelah. The oral tradition of the family originating in Gerona is strong on both sides. And there is one compelling reason to consider it more than legend. As you probably know. there were generation upon generation of marriages between the great rabbinical families of Europe - be they the Shapira and Luria, the Wahl, Landau, Katzenellenbogen, Loew, Mintz, Ashkenazi, Margoliyos, Schor and several other families. Horowitz scions and their Halevi ancestors were an integral part of this from earliest days, and it would beg the question - what gave them their pedigree? Why would the most "yichusdik" families in Europe feel compelled to marry in to the Horowitz clan - repeatedly, over generations? Aside from any other considerations or traditions, it seems logical the connection was desirable because the family was already known, and of high rabbinic pedigree.

I agree with Arieh Rosenblum. What I would do is add a link to the article and a synopsis of its important points to the Horowitz project.

I'm also a Horowitz / Katzenellenbogen / Loew etc. descendant. They're all so intertwined.

Although Horowitz could have the pedigree to be in the mix with the others without the Sephardic ancestry.

I agree with Hatte Anne Blejer.

Arieh, what evidence is there for the oral tradition before 1890? So far, none.

And the Horowitz family was a very prominent rabbinic family from Prague, a renowned center for torah learning, so why wouldn't the descendants have intermarried with other rabbinic families? I don't get the argument.

This is a classic case of the "wish being the father of the idea."

We need to investigate the sources of similar legends (for Eppstein, for example). It could be that they were all made up by the same rabbi in 1890.

Randy

Randy - I would let a couple of months at least pass, to give the scholarly community time to respond to the article. I see that you are convinced and it seems very likely to me also, based on having read the article, that the connection with Benveniste was a late addition to the Horowitz genealogy.

But I at least would prefer to hear feedback from other scholars first before changing the tree on Geni. Or if there is no feedback, I would assume that his argument was convincing.

Randy Schoenberg The Beit Hatfutsot Museum seems to hold “family tradition” at least on par with documentary evidence in such cases. In fact, they provide the Horowitz family an example of a famous Levitical family, such as was the Benveniste family in Spain.

Unless definitive proof can be provided for the lack of a connection to the Benveniste family, both universally recognized levitical family lineages, we certainly should not severe a connection that has not been disputed till now.

Lack of source material might simply be because this fact was so obvious. Plus Sephardi lineages, because so many families assimilated, were not highlighted in the Ashkenazi world, and not advantageous to rabbinical yichus.

See under Lineage.http://www.bh.org.il/databases/family-names/jewish-family-names-int...

I incline to Malka's position in this -

"Unless definitive proof can be provided for the lack of a connection to the Benveniste family, both universally recognized levitical family lineages, we certainly should not severe a connection that has not been disputed till now."

Last year I raised hell about a Lithuanian 'Maimon' family with no connection to Rambam's descendants - I gave up trying to sever because the family has made it their heritage and it's their heritage, not mine.

Hatte's approach is good. Let's see if there is anything that comes up. What I'd like to do is investigate some of the similar claims, like Eppstein, and see if it's the same suspiciously recent source.

P.S. I am a Horowitz descendant too, with decent documentation if you want to take a look. http://geni.com/KZBmW I am still also looking to confirm another connection, via the Nachod family, who are buried in the Horowitz family section in the old cemetery in Prague.

I agree with Hatte. I would also be interested in the funding of more whole genome research into all Jews. We are an unusually restricted group in terms of genetics, and thus i think that taking that into consideration has a part to play in any neutral and cautious approach to creating a genealogical history.

שלום וברכה!

א] החוקר הנכבד לא ציין שהיחוס מופיע גם בספר בר לואי שהופיע ב1861
ודאי הוא לא המציא סתם.
ב] גם הוא מקורו מספר יקרא דשכבי
ג] גם בשם הגדולים לחידא שיצא 70 שנה קודם מצוין החיבור.

ד] זה שבפוזנא לא ידעו את שורשיהם כמו שמשמע מהנוסח - זה לא אומר שזה לא נכון' , גם סבא שלנו לא ידע את כל מה שאנו יודעים היום!

"לא סדרתם לו מנוי בGENI!

אז אנא לא להסיק מסקנות חפוזות.

בברכה לכולם!

זאב מאור

Hatte Blejer (absent until Nov 1) Google translate is incomprehensible, could you please help translate this message for us? Interestingly enough, Menachem,
מנחם זאב מאור is connected to a number of respondents in this message thread.

1. https://geni.com/gvqwj
2. https://geni.com/0fVTr
3. https://geni.com/zdx1K
4. https://geni.com/F5Xsj
5. https://geni.com/ZkHNt
6. https://geni.com/DB23m
7. https://geni.com/ZkHNt

"Google translate is incomprehensible" Yes it is.

Greetings!
A] honorable investigator noted no reference appears in the Book Bar Louie appeared in 1861
Certainly is not just invented.
B] also comes from multiple call "Dscbi", (name?)
C] Greatest ("Chida" or "Posen") (name?) also named 70 years before "leaving a great connection"?.
D] The "weight" does not know his roots as I heard from the version - that does not mean it is not true, and our grandfather did not know all that we know today!
"I have not been involved in the organization geni!
So, do not jump to conclusions.
Welcome everyone!
Ze'ev (Maor?)

Malka Mysels -- I'll translate but I'm sure a native speaker will correct me ;) He uses some phrases and references that are beyond me.

A) The esteemed researcher did not note that the relationship also appeared in the book of Bar Lavi, that was published in 1861. Surely he didn't just invent (it).

B)

C) Also in Be-Shem haGdolim LeChaida that was published 70 years earlier the relationship was noted

D) It does not mean that this is not correct even if the Prozena ?? didn't know their roots (ancestry) ... Also our grandfather didn't know all that we know today.

(more stuff I'm unsure of :))

Best wishes,
Ze'ev Meor (Maur?)

Hatte Blejer (absent until Nov 1) Thanks so much, your translation seems to capture the main gist of the message. Perhaps Private User can help decipher the remaining text?

Mr. Maor mentions 3 sources of the YICHUS:

א] החוקר הנכבד לא ציין שהיחוס מופיע גם בספר בר לואי שהופיע ב1861
ודאי הוא לא המציא סתם.
A book by the name of Bar Levai or Bar Lui.

ב] גם הוא מקורו מספר יקרא דשכבי
A book named: Yikra Deshokhvi.

ג] גם בשם הגדולים לחידא שיצא 70 שנה קודם מצוין החיבור.
Also [a book?] named Hagdolim Lekhida. That one appeared 70 years before, and mentions the written composition [which one?]

All the best everyone.Horowitz are my ancestors as well.

Bella

Private User Wow, thank you so very very much!

So you are saying Menachem Maor mentions 3 sources for the Yichus (Lineage)?

yes indeed. this is what I understood from his Hebrew.

a) maybe here in 9) [He was a Levi] :
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pagefeed/hebrewbooks_org_34779_93.pdf

b) http://hufind.huji.ac.il/Record/HUJ000184787

c) https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%9D_%D7%94%D7%92%D7%93%D7%95...
The actual book:
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/vl/tohen.asp?id=306

About HashLa:
second source c.
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/vl/tohen.asp?id=306
Letter: י [Yishayahu] page 118.
A lot of information about HASHLA's writings and biography, but I did not see the name Benbenisti mentioned there.
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/vl/shemhagdolim/shemhagdolim07.pdf
C - seems to be the oldest source, and many books are mentioned there that perhaps should be checked one by one for ganealogical information.
The exact name of this source book is: SHEM HAGDOLIM and not as I wrote before.

one interesting information about HASHLA's book SHNEY LUKHOT HABRIT.
Rabbi Yishayahu Segal Horowitz is named HASHLA after that book.

It was first printed in Amsterdam in 1649.
The name of the publisher was: Imanuel Benvenisti.
[1], מהדורת אמשטרדם: דפוס עמנואל בנבנישתי, ת"ט 1649, במאגר הספרים
הסרוקים של הספרייה הלאומית (המהדורה הראשונה)
https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%A0%D7%99_%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%97...

Private User Amazing, you located all three sources! It appears that C - SHEM HAGEDOLIM is also availabe as a free download on Google.

ספר שם הגדולים:

https://books.google.com/books?id=QtdRAAAAcAAJ&pg=PT174&lpg...

Private User That is fascinating indeed! I wonder if Private User has any information regarding that period and printer?

Hashla's son Sheftel Horowitz, had his will placed in his book YESH NOKHALIN, which was also printed in Amsterdam. There might be there the ganealogical information about the connection to Benvenisti from Spain.
2 of the sources mentioned by Mr. Maor can be found in the following remark, which has a more exact placing in the sources. the remark also mentions that the wording [the will?] is brought in those sources.

[1] צוואת ר’ שעפטיל נדפסה בפעם הראשונה בסוף ספר “יש נוחלין”, דפוס אמשטרדם תס”א. ר’ ב. מ. לוין מציין, שדברי ר’ שעפטיל מובעים על ידי החיד”א ב”ברכי יוסף” ליורה דעה, סימן רמ”ו. נוסיף, שהם מובאים על ידי החיד”א גם ב”שם הגדולים”, ערך תלמוד בבלי.

http://www.toviapreschel.com/he/%D7%9E%D7%A1%D7%9B%D7%AA-%D7%9B%D7%...

I found the part of the will of Sheftel Horowitz the son of HASHLA, as brought in SHMOT HAGDOLIM in the part dealing with the TALMUD BAVLI.
Here there is no mention of ganeology.
http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/vl/shemhagdolim/shemhagdolim22.pdf
p. 178, just before the item: TALMUD YERUSHALMI.

However, I could not reach the digital version of Yesh Nokhalin, in the Amsterdam edition. It should exist in the Sifiya Leumit in Jerusalem.
Other digital versions are of later not identical versions of the book.

I need to check the texts by Dr Arthur Mento and Moshe Shaltiel-Gracian. Arthur worked from family records and contribution from different branches that married into Charlap Family. Moshe Conducted research in Catalonia and Aragon to sort out where Horowitz branch connects to his family.

I would also like to examine the texts pointed out on 'HebrewBooks' - I need to look at the texts and see if they reconcile with the work of Arthur and Moshe.

In my experience, there were printers who were sympathetic to Shabtai Tzvi during that period, in question, and hese printers knowingly injected errors into family yichus in order to foment mishigas.

Glad to see most of what I missed were names of books :) Thanks Private User.

Thanks Malka and Hatte, and everyone interested.
I love detective-ganealogy.
Naturally it helps occasionaly being a native-speaker of a language. I mainly wanted to bring the names of the books, not to re-translate the whole text.
Well, this Horowitz-Benveniste origin question, is not finished yet.

Private User "Well, this Horowitz-Benveniste origin question, is not finished yet.", but certainly we are a lot closer thanks to your extraordinary research skills!

Thanks so much Malka dear.

I found Zeev Maor's first source of the 3, and searched it till page 15. in that part several ganeologies are mentioned, but not one leading to Benveniste.
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=760&st=&pgnum=...=
However, I am not that skilled in reading Rashi-letters. perhaps someone else can find more. it is a big book with 384 pages. The ganalogical information is often either in the beginning or in the end of the text.
Good night all.