How the Database can be Accessed and Reused:

The initial design of our database focuses on a network of manuscript items in which all the manuscripts (nodes of the network) relate to each other via textual units (edges). The analysis is based on the methodological premise of connectedness of textual units mediated by their appearance in the same codex—a physical artefact, and the connectedness of manuscript items via the textual units they share. 

In the first basic variant of the network, each node represents a manuscript item (a physical codex), while the edge that connects any two nodes is a recognised textual unit (click here). In the reversal of this network, any nodes stand for textual units that are connected by an edge when they appear in the same manuscript item (click here). Additionally, the interconnectedness of manuscript items and textual units may be refined from the perspective of places of production and time periods, especially for the underlying data that is sufficiently accurate—sadly, not always the case in our initial dataset.

Initially we may notice that four interconnected clusters dominate the picture. Interpretively, however, the large amount of data and complexity of connections may be of less importance from a bird’s eye view than a close reading of the graph divided into periods. Thus, if we limit the network to the 16th century, for example, the dominant cluster within the community of manuscripts centres on items with a relatively large number of textual units (between 10 to 33) and high level of interconnectedness. These stand for manuscripts that contain a large pool of kabbalistic commentative texts belonging to the genre Commentaries on Ten Sefirot, on the one hand, and for those manuscripts that contain compilations of excerpts from various longer kabbalistic textual units, on the other (Ma’amarim, Likutim). 

As it happens, all of the largest nodes signify large codices with a high amount of shorter textual units, with additional smaller clusters representing—as easy to predict—smaller and single text codices. Not surprisingly, this cluster of clusters contains all manuscripts whose textual contents include a Lurianic type of kabbalah, that is, a kabbalah that slowly spread in the late 16th century from Palestine across the Jewish world and held dominant status among other kabbalistic theosophies up to the late 18th century, also in Ashkenaz.

Interestingly, the transmission of Lurianic texts can be divided into four main textual/material forms: click here. Manuscript items in all of these four clusters contain, for the most part, only one text. However, the most interesting nodes in the network—teased out via the metric of betweenness centrality—lie on the fringes of the biggest clusters that connect them to the rest of the manuscript item community: these stand for manuscript items that contain more than two textual units and, in most cases, connections to all the major clusters of manuscript items. 

Finally, the network has several clusters that are independent from other manuscript items. Most of these clusters result from only one shared text between the manuscript items in the community. These may reflect textual units not usually combined with other texts (or combined on a regular basis with the same textual unit): in our dataset these include several groups of Lurianic kabbalistic texts, especially those devoted to particular kabbalistic rituals that accompany regular religious ceremonies and were usually contained in a single-text codex. Among several clusters that are connected to the main group of clusters but only via one or two texts, one interesting group stands out: these are the manuscript items that connect to the largest cluster of manuscripts, the kabbalistic manuals for kavanot, and at the same time contain magical content (charms, recipes, adjurations). Further exploration of manuscripts in that group may help clarify the position of magical rituals in the distribution of kabbalistic prayer rituals of a Lurianic character—a subject of utmost importance from the point of reassessment of the character of early modern kabbalah in general, and of kabbalistic practices in Central and Eastern Europe in particular.