Seite - 53 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Band 07/01

Born under a Lucky Star | 53www.jrfm.eu 2021, 7/1, 45–65 had been preceded by a long tradition of specifically Jewish clothing, partly imposed by political authorities, partly upheld for reasons of inner-Jewish re- ligiously motivated distinction. For these reasons the negotiation processes around Jewish clothing can be understood as a reflection of the tension be- tween particularism and acculturation in Central Europe in modern times.18 The woodcuts depicting a man dressed in modern clothes can thus be under- stood as an expression of social integration and of hopes for greater social participation and involvement.19 Four other woodcut pairs show a woman, who is usually naked but in one case is dressed, holding a plant in her hand (usually for a girl) and a naked or dressed man with a bow and arrow (for a boy) (fig. 2a and b).20 These figures can be interpreted with some certainty as representations of the zodiac signs Virgo and Sagittarius, given their correspondence to typical iconographic traditions of these signs.21 For one subtype, this interpretation can even be proven, since the identical images can also be found in calendars, where they are printed together with the other zodiac signs and with the cor- responding Hebrew designations. To my knowledge, one print of the version for a girl22 and three prints of the version for a boy23 of this subtype have been preserved. The same woodcut prints are also found on calendars and a book from the Jewish printing houses in Fürth, so the amulets can also be locat- ed there. The calendars are assigned to three printers: Ḥajim ben Zbi Hirsch (practised 1737–1772), Izig ben Löb Buchbinder (practised 1761–1792) and Itzig ben David Zirndorfer (practised 1775–1826).24 This repetition indicates that the 18 See Silverman 2013, xvii–xxii and 68–73. 19 We can note, therefore, that persons open to modernity were a target group for the amulet. At the same time, however, the illustration emphasizes adherence to religious identity with the representation of the book. 20 However, only one subtype shows the image of the naked woman on the front and that of the man with a bow on the back. Another subtype shows the man with a bow on the front and the man with the book on the back (probably a mistake by the typesetter). Another subtype shows in some prints a naked woman (for a girl) and a naked man without a bow (for a boy) and in other prints the same naked woman (for a girl) and a man pouring wine (for a boy). From another subtype, I know of only one print that shows a naked woman (for a boy – so perhaps a setting mistake). 21 See Hübner 2013, 253, and Fishof 2001, 116–119 and 128–131. 22 Gross Family Collection 027.011.891. 23 F_Kindbettzettel_1 and F_Kindbettzettel_2 (found in the Geniza Freudental, today: Pädagogisch-Kulturelles Centrum Ehemalige Synagoge Freudental) and M 1252 (found in the Geniza Memmelsdorf, today: Jüdisches Kulturmuseum Veitshöchheim). 24 See Löwenstein 1913.