Your email is not valid
Recipient's email is not valid
Submit Close

Your email has been sent.

Click here to send another


A collection of ketubot at New York’s Jewish Museum prompts the Jewish Theological Seminary’s chancellor to consider marriage contracts from medieval times to our own

Print Email
An 1885 ketubah from Isfahan, Iran. (The Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary)

The 30 marriage contracts now being exhibited at the Jewish Museum, on loan from the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary, where I am chancellor, repeatedly take me back to the signing of my own ketubah nearly 30 years ago. It remains the most beautiful work of art that my wife and I have on our walls, and the details of the day remain remarkably vivid.

It was a picture-perfect August morning, the sky over northern New Jersey a California shade of blue and the air unusually fresh. My friend Jonathan had finished building the chuppah with at least a half-hour to spare. My best man, Neal, had located the ketubah, which I had managed to misplace. Three little nieces in lovely pink dresses had been to the bathroom and back for what seemed the umpteenth time. The guests were seated expectantly, and the wedding party was lined up and ready to go. The only one not quite ready to march down the aisle, I then learned, was me: The friend and teacher who was going to perform the ceremony approached me with the suggestion that I take a few moments to reflect on the life-altering step I was about to take. “Where’s Arnie going?” my almost-mother-in-law asked my bride. “He has to think,” she replied. I did so, grateful ever after for that moment.

But if it’s hard not to reflect from the ketubot in the show to the one on your own wall and to the moment when you ceremonially signed on to more than you could possibly have understood before entering into marriage, it is harder still not to wonder how much of your own experience was shared by the couples whose names, prayers, and promises we know long after their deaths only because they (or, more likely, their fathers) chose to engage skilled artists to make beautiful the legal document that sealed their union.

I am particularly mesmerized by the earliest contract in the exhibit: a fragment from the Cairo Geniza that dates from the early 12th century. The word that stands out most clearly—easily deciphered by any Hebrew reader—is simcha: joy. One wonders, how long did the joy last? How long did the lives of bride and groom last? How old were they when the witnesses signed them over to one another? Teenagers, perhaps? And what did the young couple feel as the witnesses confirmed their contract? What was joy for them?

Historians can give us facts on the average age of marriage in medieval Egypt, average life expectancy, average divorce rate. But I want to know about the couple’s emotions, which—even if average, too—were surely not experienced any less intensely. The legal document that joined them powerfully resembles every other in the exhibit, as well as the one that bound my wife and me to each other. But would that Cairo bride and groom have been friends? Were they in love? Did they look to their love, as we do, to defy time and change? If so, they succeeded after a fashion. This scrap of paper survived, after all. Here I am staring at it, enchanted.

“A window onto history,” one might say of the ketubah show; “a window” into marriage is what many of the ketubot were, it seems, intended to be. Take the contract made in Modena in 1756 or the one signed in Baghdad a few years later. In each, a block of text is written on a white background and framed by intricate and delicate ornamental designs that bring to mind windows. It’s as if the artists were expressing the paradox to which every illustrated ketubah points. Marriage, unlike romance, depends for its survival on the legal fine points: promises made not in general but in specifics, intentions made good in routine provision of raiment and furnishings, 10 zuzim here, 6 zuzim there. Even conjugal rights are codified. But marriage also requires romance and, I’d wager, always did: splashes of color and extended plays of line, flourishes that are and are not measured, order that is accomplished in and through profusion.

It is telling, I think, that the congratulatory wishes characteristic of Sephardi contracts are writ large, as in the Modena ketubah, and the legalese much smaller. The Baghdad ketubah sets its three windowed prayers above the legal door through which the couple are about to walk. Light streams from both openings. Words and artistry form a unity that one hopes bride and groom were able to emulate for many years.

It’s probably my own fancy, but the large cypress tree that rivets the eye on the Isfahan contract of 1885 seems to me a giant teardrop. Lion and sun may be a Persian national symbol testifying to the age-old Jewish desire to be part of the lands in which Jews dwelled and not only set apart from them by distinctive customs such as ketubah-signing. To me these symbols seem universal as well in their implicit prayer: May God guard bride and groom from sadness, or—because we know sadness will come—may God protect them in time of trouble, may the sun rise to shine on a new day.

The symmetry of the contract from Afghanistan, framed in red and blue, seems to intend similar comfort. Indeed, the beauty of the ketubah itself—the colors, the flowers, the burst of life, as in the Damascus document from 1885—all seem prophylactics against loss, harm, death. I wonder if the brides, whose futures were arranged for them by these contracts, uttered prayers as they received the ketubah that they get pregnant and not die, as so many women did, in childbirth.

Two of the three New York City ketubot seem to my eye far less solemn or intense than the rest. One features twin grandfather clocks set at 6:13, the traditional number of commandments binding Jews, a cute touch at a moment when cuteness seems unsuitable; the twin rings adorned with handshake and crown are cleverly joined by the clasp of contract and reinforced by arches above and below. Maybe the Civil War raging when it was signed, in 1863, made lightness of mood and design imperative. Abraham Hochman looms large in the ketubah that he has provided to bride and groom in his Central Palace Hall. We can see him, much like contemporary caterers who take charge, ushering the young couple up the stairs to the red curtains surmounted by the all-American eagle. Right this way, please! Did the wedding party want to be reminded, as it mounted the stairs to the window of possibility framed by the red curtains, that it stood in a millennia-long queue?

I prefer the distinguished serpentine line and color in the Jewish National Fund ketubah, from around 1930, not seeking to fill its parchment, muted perhaps by the Depression—and seizing on the mention of Jerusalem in the wedding ceremony to solicit funds for the rebuilding of Palestine. Is this bad taste in a wedding document? Maybe—but it is true to the text’s concern with sums of zuzim and also to the ceremonial breaking of the glass at the wedding ceremony’s conclusion in memory of the Temple’s destruction. Jerusalem was being rebuilt in 1930, as the design at the top of the ketubah reminds us. The bride and groom might well want to get on a boat and visit.

My wife and I inscribed our intention to do more than visit Israel on our ketubah. After consultation with us, the artist who designed it, Shoshana Walker, placed verses featuring Jerusalem in a gold ring surrounding the legalities, and she surrounded those words, in turn, with a delicate floral pattern of deep blue, paler blue, white, and red. Our parents learned under the chuppah, not entirely happily, that we intended to go on aliyah; we ourselves learned under the chuppah, and in the hours of dancing afterward, that we were thankfully part of a generation that had reclaimed elements of Jewish tradition that had long lain dormant, the illustrated ketubah being one of them.

I don’t think I realized at the time that, until this revival, ketubot like those in the exhibition at the Jewish Museum would almost certainly not have been hung on the wall. They would have been locked away in safekeeping until required to ensure the woman’s rights in the event of divorce or death of the husband. Jews did not need displays of Jewishness in medieval Cairo or early modern Baghdad to remind them who they were. They knew, and so did their neighbors. Still—I like to think that those couples did not miss out on the pleasure gained from casting their eyes over the ketubah from time to time, remembering the beauty associated with their union and perhaps saying again a prayer to the Merciful One that joy and life continue.

The exhibition The Art of Matrimony: Thirty Splendid Marriage Contracts from The Jewish Theological Seminary Library opens at New York’s Jewish Museum today.

Arnold Eisen is chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary.

Print Email

Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180

Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

Carol says:

Why do we need to read this crap about Arnie Eisen’s marriage. Why not just a little background to the ketuba, what it says, and why anyone in their right mind would want to hang it on their wall.

shualah elisheva says:


such unnecessarily harsh words for a man who is willing to share his insight regarding a beautiful mitzvah. you have the opportunity to choose what you read – certainly no one forced you to read this article. also, to address perhaps the “why” of things, there are a plethora of sources for the ketubah text itself. chancellor eisen’s insight, plus the gorgeous snippets of ketubot from ages past, is a unique addition to the internet’s growing library of judaica.

I agree with Carol. Mr. Eisen’s opening paragraphs were complete non-sequitur for the rest of the article.

LP Weiberg says:

Carol. Punctuation. You place a question mark at the end of an interrogative. That’s my comment on your form. I won’t comment on the content. Understand?

isabel says:

thank you so much for this article and these amazing works of art. The ketubah made in New York City with the hands joining in what looks like a handshake, is especially captivating, since it implies a relationship of equals.

yes, the ketubah is a contract, and like all contracts, the parties are investing in a relationship that promises hope and joy for the future. Whether those expectations were met, we will never know. Despite that mystery, i would love to own any one of these beautiful contracts, and unlike the couples from centuries past, would gladly display it on my wall.

A beautiful article, I look forward to using these ketubot to inspire my own.

Judith says:

I am having a ketuba because of its role in the ceremony. And although I know very well that a marriage is not a 50-50 proposition at any time, I am choosing to look past the unavoidable inequality of it to be part of the bigger pictured of a couple joined under the chuppah. Carol’s questions are valid, why do traditional jews still have this document as part the ceremony. I no more look forward to being owned than my other half to owning me.

Lovely article now defiled by some tasteless and infantile comments. I had wanted to forward the article to others. Can we get it without the derogatory comments attached?

I’ve said that least 450662 times. The problem this like that is they are just too compilcated for the average bird, if you know what I mean

Mortgage loans are needed using several times, out of your remortgage rating locating a improve percentage rate, or maybe buying among the widening a guarantee in your residence to get balanced collateralized debt home mortgage, parenting money for you to merge present credit card debt perhaps even performing anyone inevitably needed girl enhancements.

Great post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed! Very useful info specially the last part :) I care for such information a lot. I was seeking this particular info for a very long time. Thank you and good luck.


Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.

Thank You!

Thank you for subscribing to the Tablet Magazine Daily Digest.
Please tell us about you.


A collection of ketubot at New York’s Jewish Museum prompts the Jewish Theological Seminary’s chancellor to consider marriage contracts from medieval times to our own

More on Tablet:

Obama: Denying Israel’s Right to Exist as a Jewish Homeland is Anti-Semitic

By Yair Rosenberg — The president draws a line in the sand in his latest interview