The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 11.

&&%<&
THE
JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

/"
EW SERIES
EDITED BY
CYKUS ADLER :y^
VOLUME
1920-1921
XI
PHILADELPHIA THE DROPSIE COLLEGE FOR HEBREW AND COGNATE LEARNING

LONDON: MACMILLAN & COMPANY, LTD
PRINTED IN ENGLAND
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
OS
101
CONTENTS
Casanowicz,
I.
M.
Schleiter's 'Religion
:
and Culture'
PAGE 403
543
553
Cohen, Solomon Solis

Davidson, Israel
:
Jewish Medicine (Reviews)

to
Some Notes
Mahzor Yannai
Duschinsky, C.
The Rabbinate
of the Great Synagogue,
London, from 1756-1842.

Finkelstein,
(Reviews)
...
Religion
21, 201,
345
Louis
........
:
Recent
Hellenistic
Literature
389
Greenstone,
(Reviews)
Julius
.
H.
......
The
of
.
.
Israel
396
197
Hirsch,
S.
A.
Isaiah 14. 12
:
Hirschfeld, Hartwig
The
i\uthor of the Yigdal
Hymn
.
86
Hoschander, Jacob
of History.
The Book
of Esther in the Light

. . .
Chapter
:
V
'
.307
.
Hoschander, Jacob Biblical Literature (Reviews) Hyamson, M. Husband's Prosecution of Jesus

' :
473
89
145
Kohler, K. Kohler,
The Essenes and

J.
:
the Apocalyptic Literature
Max Max
:
Wolf's
Notes on
'
the
.
'
Diplomatic
.
History of the Jewish Question
.120
.405
.
Kohler,
J.:
Baron's 'The Jewish Question at the

.
Congress of Vienna
Kohn, Jacob
An
Explanation of Abot VI. 3

Z.
:
:
S^ 169
Lauterbach, Jacob
Levitan, Isidor
S.
The Name
'
of the Mekilta
Efros's
Menorat Ha-Maor, Time

259
and Place of Composition
'
.....
IV
CONTENTS
PAGE
Mann, Jacob
The
Last
Geonim
of Sura
409
Mann, Jacob
Mann, Jacob
Fihrist of Sa'adya's
Works
.423
429
Abraham
B.
Nathan (Abu Ishak Ibrahim
B. 'Ata), Nagid of Kairowan

'
:
.....
'
Mann, Jacob Addenda to The Responsa of the Babylonian Geonim as a Source of Jewish History
. .
433
98
Marx, Alexander
Hebrew Incunabula (Reviews)

:
Marx,
Alexander
Adler's
'
Gazetteer
of
Hebrew
265
Printing'.
Melamed, Raphael Hai

according to Six
1
The Targum to Yemen MSS. Compared

:
Canticles
with the
1
Textus Receptus' (Ed. de Lagarde). Chapters II-V

A.
.
:
Montgomery, James
Josephus
. .
The
.
Religion
.
,
of
.
Flavius
.
.277
237
Poznanski, Samuel
of the
Mishnah
S.
.
'.......
:
Hirschfeld's
'
Early Karaite Critics
Sassoon, David
D.
Inscriptions in the
. . .
.
Synagogue
.
.
in
Kai-Fung-Foo
.127
in
Williams, F. Wells:
China'
.
Saeki's
. .
'Nestorian
.
.
Monument
. .
.125
THE TARGUM TO CANTICLES ACCORDING TO SIX YEMEN MSS. COMPARED WITH THE
'TEXTUS RECEPTUS'
(Ed.
de Lagarde)
By Raphael Hai Melamed, New York.
CHAPTER
II
AB
82.
in
As
stated above, the
Yemen MSS.
are not uniform

in
their
texts.
While forming a group
themselves,
distinct
from L, they nevertheless diverge one from the
other in text, in orthography, and matters of morphology
and syntax.
tinctive
Each of the manuscripts has

itself
features, diswill
to
alone,
as
the
following analysis
endeavour to show.
83.
The most
They
errors,
reliable
and best preserved of these texts
are
AB.
contain the least
number of textual and
scribal
and seem to preserve the more original
Yemen
readings.
being the better written of the two,
was used
as the basis of this edition.
TEXTUAL VARIANTS
A.
84.
in
:
Independent Readings.
n^D
The
following independent readings are to be noted

I
AB I. nhw now
1.
btT\^
*331
"IDK
NT3T NDTC NTPn^n KTVTO

;
K-in3
dih^d mrta inns

}D1
;
1.
rb
rap KT3
B
po
:
9 *0D
2.
13
Wl
2.
14 -pTnDl
I
2. 17, 3. 6, 4.
6 KJnhfi
VOL. XI.
2
5>ni^
THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

rvm
;
3. 7
kw^
4.
3.
10 *jm
;
|b
jitd
4.
nim n^bi
;
mrw-12 -on
nayob
rtftari
;
rrn p*Dy nvtt
4.
13 DTin
mm
6.
4 pra
8.
6 itfnap].
B.
Fuller Readings.
in
85.
There are a few instances

123
AB, none
:
of which,
however, art of any material significance

ibid.
4.
1. 1
bis [rva]
2TD
[N^nrt |imn]
[5>a
n&>>E;
124
4. 2
Oppiyi] K^WI DJ1N

[5>y]
^>2B |*2Tl;
14 mp
ay];
5. 7
NmiN
nnsn.
There are three instances where

1. 1 [n[*]33]
R are
5.
fuller
than
AB
nb^;
1. 1
[ayu2K 12] pini;

C.
16
*|ipn
[>in]
pi.
Order.
86. Several
in
instances of transposition of words occur

;
AB:
rv
5.
10 piDjn y2~iK2
6.
OUni
WVn;
12fi
7.
^pn
xnuin
In
2.
wtru. 126
alone there
is
one instance of inverted order
15 NT7 Ninn.
GRAMMATICAL VARIANTS
A.
87.
The Orthography of AB.

b
;
AB
have a strong preference for d against
thus
we
find iDy,
THDy, n^cd, but
pPDW.
1
Likewise they express consonantal

nilWn, niiyta, but also
88.
by
11,
thus: Nmi3T,
by
single
in KTtia,
nnoi.
**,
AB
always write the Tetragrammaton thus:

D"Tp,
and abbreviate not infrequently
7*HB*j
DHXO.
124
AB
were probably influenced by the recurrence of the phrase
later
in the verse.
12 5
writes
**mi <*m.
126
Cf.
Onk. Gen.
30. 37, 38.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
B.
89.
MELAM ED
and
in
1.
Phonetics.
in
"]tti,
While
AB
z,
read
1.
"in:
12
KTD,
change a to
Patah
is
reading
NTli.
in the pass. part, in
lengthened to Karnes
,
1.8
where
In
A
1.
reads &V2
2
R
,
tfyh
writes n^rn,
p35
cf.
1.
Vyrn;
2.
11
A
A
R
*pn,
rpijfi
;
AB
R
cf.
always write
1.
14, 2. 6, 2. 8, 3. 8, &c.
-In
<K.
15
AB
write xpby,
Kj^Dy
7.
writes <S
'
if',
In
3.
**?
verbs
1
AB
retain final
f,
which
change to
But
2.
4,
5.
where
AB
R
write
new,
z,
R new.
ânNl.
A
a
writes
tanm,
while
retain final
Shewa and patah change

word
:
places in the beginning of

cf. 2.
8.
AB
I^DNl,
I^BNI;
NfcripE,
15, 8. 4.
In the group of nouns

KBH"i
in
&n:n, Knmo, wapo, and
AB
generally use the patah over the prefix, except
the word
NBm, where
&c.
a hirek
is
usually found.
AB
1.
usually write
2. 7,
7. i,
NnnPD with
a hirek over the 1
cf.
1,
1. 9,
C.
1.
Morphology.
2. 5,
Verbs.
90. Peal.
The
impv. form vVyDi occurs in
A, by
the side of
Pael.
mym
of R.
pt.
For the Pael pass.
in
2. 3,
AB
read rUPDI?
niura.
Aphel.
The Aphel
pf.
In
2. 7,
3. 5,
5. 8,
ffyW,
the
inf.
while
R
In
read
rVMBW.
have
In
2. 15, 8. 4,
AB read AB read for

R
B 2
Nn:N^, while
1.
R
14
Kn5i>.
Ithpaal.
AB
have
fip[*]TiN,
while
have
npf^riK.
4
Ithpe.

and Ithpa.
In
6.
12
AB
writes
Ithpa.
^flN,
Ithpe. ^5nx.
2.
Nouns.
91.
AB
have a strong preference

;
for
15,
forms of -my,
2.
'work', with surek

also write jiMaiy;
3.
cf. 1. 6,
1.
12,
1.
10,
&c, but
cf. 2. 16.
Prepositions.
92.
With a
single
exception,
1.
AB
always write Dip>

In
4. 13,
with hatet kames.

write
*5vi,
In
writes Dip.
AB
while
R have
^[nJh.
4.
Adverbs.
93.
cf.
1.
AB
always write pa3
'
in order that
',
with hirek
14, 2. 6, 2. 8, 3. 8, &c.
;
AB
prefer to write the adv.
}DT3
with patah
cf.
1. 1, 1.
15, 2. 9, 4. 7,
cf.
&c.
but occasion2. 7.
ally
they write JOD with kames;
1. 1,
2. 3,
AB
where
have
prefer the adv. p5ni with kames,
which
is
the correct form,

cf.
but sometimes write
it
paiVi
with patah;
1.
1,
both forms occur.
In
1.
14
writes pa3 Kn, while
5.
Conjunctions.
94.
AB
generally write conj. mod

Kri is
vi
;
'as'
cf. 1.
cf. 2. 3,
2. 6,
2. 7, 4. 2,
&c, but NDD
also found
cf.
io ;
3. 8.
AB generally prefer "D,

but the unusual form VD
is
1.5,
2. 7, 2. 14, 3. 5, 3. 6,
cf. 2. 7, 5. 5.
&c,
also found,
D.
95. Peal.
Syntax.
Verbs.
*p"ny,
In 4. 6
A
4
uses Pe. pt. const.
while
have the abs. ppiy.

Pe. and Pa.
Pe. Nrra'5.
In
5. 2
1.
AB
use Pa.
pf.
k5t2> while
In
AB
write Pe. impv. îfi, while
R R
have
have
Pa.
-iin.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
Peal and Aph.
In
8. 4, 8.
MELAMED
5 while
9
8.
R R
writes
Peal "13T, and in
AB write Aph. "2T, 14 AB write Aph.
n^ni,
Pe. nttfn (L ncTil).

Pael.
In 4. 8 In
8.
Ithpe.
AB have Pa. pt. c. pDD, R abs. ppoo. 9 A writes Ithpe. pt. det. NmnyriE, while
ERRORS
writes the indetr. Nnfiynrb.
A. Textual.
96.
Omissions.
The
following omissions occur in

[i>NT^-i]
AB
3. 2
nppnDNT
[w:d]j
4.2 pan [mm]; 5.1

[N3-]
kth3;
*iy.
5.10 ^Dyn
[KB&'a]; 7. 3
im D;
S
8.
14 [pi]
In
4.
alone the following omissions are to be noted
10 pjnp
[tw]; 7.3 [rrms] Dîsno. There are two passages in which B alone omits words
contained in
In
8.
1.
4 [toWa] ndsô
3.
8 [3ir6] j^noi.
11
AB
:
contain an omission due most probably to

[nn
s
homoioteleuton
idni
D^lTa]
rov 3TO*.
B.
1.
Grammatical.
and
4. 1 K:3Tip
Suffixes.
97.
in the
In
1.
11 ^DTia
alone
is
incorrect
omission of the suffixes.

2.
Gender.
98.
AB
:
only have the correct gender

12 J^riDDi
(twice)
;
in the
;
following
passages
In
5.
6.
KW
7.
8 fBHSno
2.
14
]<:pn.
4. 8
79
and
5.
12 JCpl,
in
A alone
is
correct.
AB
1. 1
have the incorrect forms

2.
the following instances
pni;
8 j^non.
is
A
8.
alone
incorrect in 3. 10 p^D'l
5. 2
mm
8.
pWpl;
11 HOT.
alone
is
incorrect in
7.
IW,
6
3.

Number.
In
8.
90.
wpTtti>
and
8. 1
njhn N^y,
AB alone AB alone are

AB
errs.
are correct.
incorrect.
In
7.
6 ^ni?
4.
Prepositions.
100. In 8. 11 .T^y 3"6si
are incorrect.
In
3. 8
Kmnb
alone
CHAPTER
C
101.
III
The
text of
presents a
It
number
of independent
readings
itself
and forms.
it
has
many
features peculiar to
which mark
all
apart from the rest of the manuscripts.

it
But of
the texts,
is
is
most prone to textual errors and

it
omissions.
Especially
;
careless
is
in
omitting words
and phrases
of such omissions there
a large number.
TEXTUAL VARIANTS
A. Independent Readings.
102.
1. 1
The independent readings

1.
2.
of
C
;
are the following

2.
^21;
127
% prosy
M>on; 1.4 wnniK
13 Karip; 2.6
inoh;
insm
2.
10
iw-iBn Nn^:D *n"md iiayc

s
TOWB
THDa;
130
;
t^
129
pndi
^n paw
z*fo#.
rnwi
fcOBV;
4.
1
T^ jwpta *n*m
3. 8
!>tk
*9ip
128
;
14
3.
6 n*FW3;
jtrai*
ânaa paiw
132
NnniN
127
3.
am
and
asm
131
;
apy^n
waao ppnx
The
roots 'vn
vl
are closely related
either
word might be
Cf.
used here.
128
13u
The reading
of
C seems
superfluous.
is
129
Heb.
"iriD2.
L
C
writes NJV11N
OJnQa pTflN; C
good;
it
is
an interesting
variant of
131
L.
refers to the various
woods
R to the temple.
132
This
may be an
error of C.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
4.
MELAMED
6.
7
-
6 prai;
;
5.
3 prov a*n*;
13:{
6. i
y npap rmp mpknoia;

tt
;
NnniN
6.
6 ttani
7.
13 vmi
8.
5 Niftpa.
B.
Fuller Readings.
fuller
1.
103.
1. 1
There are a number of

i.
readings
in
C
2.
noô];
[iTnnôi] ny-\z;
14 [npon] "IT;
5.
*abs [pa];. 3. 6
[i]r6sn [S>K-itî
prw]
unam;
14
prow
[ppvrai]; 184 7. 6[x"van] fPlBO.
C.
104. In
Order.
different order
S>y
some cases a
:
is
found
in
the
text of
C
2.
2.
amm
k-iib
;
npS>
ri3B>
2.
9 pe^jn naon by
5. 7
TDSi
7.
135
;
17
N^p linNI
4.
14
^B
aotan rrpnv
13 KK>mo
awaa
aS>i.
A.
105.
The Orthography of
^NC which occurs
C.
Like
AB, C
prefers the use of D to that of B\

twice, uses only
and, but for the word

the
D.
C C
jiii>y,
prefers final N to n, writing invariably
NE and NED,
but also
WW,
nsiD.
11
;
rarely uses
it
occurs but once each in the words

;
*n!>i,
mnDi, and pnnna?
ordinarily
xnirjr,
Nniyn, prmfe.
find
C C
rarely uses ", generally preferring \

}vn, pta.
Thus we
npwnK, a^nnNT, but ffnnix,
frequently abbreviates
besides the
such
words as
K3TIK, NO^y,
D^PI'V,
common
abbreviations
ni.T Dip, i\NTJ'\
133
E. K73riD1 does not occur as a
noun but
as
Aphel
pt.
134
135
C mg.
Cf.
al.
m.
a,
Pesahim 39
and Low, Aramaische PflatUHHtmmtn pp.

,
87, 179.

B. Phonetics.
Vowels.
106. In half or completely closed syllables
the original a which
changes to
e or i\ 5.
C 3 C
retains
thto!>j
-nni>.
When
*
followed
by a
labial
Z"
becomes u;
1.
11
Ky3D>,
changes to
I
in 5. 6
Final
becomes
e;
C W35, R Wiix. 1. 17 C *3tanm, R *53rrtn
7.
13
*K,
R
5.
*N.
is
changed
to
in 3. 3,
6.
where C writes Tim
for
Tirn
is
14 piAn for
R pin;
in 1.
4
;
C Tnun, R
Trillin.
Patah
reduced to shewa
14
C
1.
Jn(),
jfirite).
Characteristic of
(and D) alone
is
the method of
writes
punctuating the conjunction
Almost invariably C
thus
fT,
\ contrary to rule, before the
f|D3 letters,
iWlBtDl,
NnmnT,
nnwTi
1.
ânaT, &c.
In two instances
regular form
writes
"I
in ^Dpj, *fiop\ against
the
1
It is possible
it
that the pronunciation of

1
before
last
t\i22
was as though
were written
and that the two
forms mentioned are merely mistakes of the scribe.
C.
1
.
Morphology.
pi. 1.
Verbs.
Pt.
107. Peal.
m.
16
pps,
ptâ from Vena,
|P8
vVa.
9
3.
Inf. 2.
C
3
birb,
tbzrb,
fcAarob. 136
7.
Impf.
(Gr. 271).
ph'it,
\)bk-,
C pbom, R ^nom
'
3f
'
is
best form.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
Pael.
Pt.
f. s.
MELAMED
tfritol.
Pt.
m.
s.
i.
jo
DfrBDi,
kvide,
ntidc.
2.
Nouns.
108.
in
1.
Two
different forms of the
same noun
1.
are found
1,
where C writes rnoy,
*fnoy; 137
11
rrDy,
"fnbv;
2.9C
&*D*ari,
AB
ndd'h,
C always
writes Ktsnpib while
EF mdî. R generally
in
write NBnpc-
^y
written in various
ways
is
found
as
*::y.
In
6.
writes 'D^rn,
'ib'rn.
D. Syntax.
109. Peal.
Verbs.
In
7.
writes Pe. pf. where
write pt.
ip^D,
ppi>D,
L
6.
Jpi?D.
Pe.
and Pa.
5
3.
C
3
Pt.
writes Pael.
wph, R
Pe. teph.
Pe.
and Aph.
writes
1.
"nt^l,
R -ne^.
NPDynDI.
7.
Pe. and Ithpe.
13
138
R KPW, C
l^non
(intrs. pi.),
C ^ton.
Pt.
Pt.
1.
1.
Ithpe.
and Ithpa.
Ithpe.
and Ithpa.
C ip3fiB>*n, R ip:nrNT. 11 C pBnsntDT, R penDntn.
ERRORS
A. Textual.
no. Omissions
in
are very frequent, as
may
be seen
from the cases given below.

1.
1.
Homoiotclcuta.
9 b^y n^d iv
prraw pmaia panyi

;
wn
p-io
b-y [ub
[\ya
*j-ijn
wd
napi
m N3T^ w ND^y pan

cf.
2.
Ki>y *6iai
ne ra:] $b ^\s wa] nawDi

ton kh^k pro
pa jvjv
pync
5. 9
snta pvN^> tfey

C =
r\")bV;
^d
Km*Bp*i 'nin ntwa n L ^^] jozv

1.
187
138
Noldeke, Afarf. Gr., 154, note
L writes J^DC"!
IO
tnbv
8. 7
rwp
pel
pm
*m
i>moi>
[>ya
8.
6 ^y [>p?yn
âa
in^] bv
-po
rv âooi>
pi>a*
5>a
ttb
?mo
pra
am
son]
*)vb
mnn
[/ioS?
p^non
y-iK >ata
ptwano.
2.
Omissions.
in
[
in. Plain omissions

[wp]
are as follows:
i.
13 Nyai
[rrâp];
141
pom;
1.
17 ân&n
w i]
2.
x&npo;
139
2.4 '^y
2. 7 [pDôb]
pTtn [>h] M0
;
14 toa-io [pnnoDoi]
;
ibid.
142
;
[torwn] Kn&wa
#*tf.
2.
;
15 [t:j]
wen
;
2. 3.
16
*jjy
ninno
[pa:i]
;
K-n
O^]
;
3.
2 "inwi [i?^:i]
[*] -ion
3.
143
4 [nnn]
nwap
;
3.
[r6] pnaynoi
3. 7
[no^] nô
3.
10
W01
4.
[*ny];
ibid,
[5>k-ib>h]
win;
144
4.8 [p^pn] pana;
[ay^*] *&*; 4. 15 [ofeiTa uanoi] nbhpb rraa; 4. 16 [S>up]

\-6n
;
5.
;
15 [xa-jp]
6.
frrc:
6. 1
;
w n]
Knnat^n
6".
2 aooô
;
Otmpn]
[>na-i]
4 [nnoôa] w ion Nn^:a [wan] i(^:a-i; 145

146
7. 1
z#z#. n5>t? [^]

6.
wan
6.
6.
9 xrbz [nin];
7.
11
rva$>
pwi
prrr
<a 8.
147
[cnpo];
['in] Nnâ;
[^00^] pyri
; ;
2 [woin] i?^va;
pon [pan]
;
pam
ibid.
zfoV/.
[^-11 pjp]
w
8.
148
7.
pyapi
7.
8 [wjna] ponan [Tyai

^p>Toi?
;
8. 1
[ay-itn]
;
Noy
3 i&n
[>i>an5>]
8.
4 [ponA]
7
.
wn
ibid,
[pi]
13T
6 Tiy [spou]
3.
ah
zfe pon
[].
Sci'ibal errors.
112.
1.
The
following scribal errors occur in

3. 7
C
3.
10 K3BM3 njv-iin v^dd jo;

;
pnnan
;
10 jo;
;
4. 3
xa^
\&M>
;
4.
4 " N*m
;
14
4. 7
;
'-w na
4. 8
paDfH
;
4-
15
;
Wpc
139
140
142
1,1
5. 1 -iim
5.
4 1011
5. 9 Nfifo
nx pT*&
6. I
"po
shorter, perhaps.
al.
iOI written C mg. C writes pWI, mg.
m.
al.
m.
i Jj writes "pa"lO. i Not necessarily omission.

l
writes Xa-|p1.
c ^31.
m. [13^.
141
NJTa;", hence
may
not be an omission.
147
C ^.
is
Cmg.
al.
uo This
both an omission and error of C.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
6. ii
MELAMED
pidfi
;
IT
u:nxn
7. 1
rffcl
;
7.
7.
pm
1.
ibid,
;
7.
;
5 inferi;
8.
#a
ibid.
xw
NE3
;
7.
8.
6 rmpDi>
7 niate
8.
4 r>TrpDD^
is
5 pan
6 nidjA.
15 "
In
11 there
a textual error of
against the correct reading of

B.
1
*y3KK3,
$3X1(3.
Grammatical.
errors
in
Verbs.
113.
in
The
following
verbs
are to
be noted
C
1.
6 rrr'im;
;
1. 7
;
f$6fc5o;
1-
17 pn*;
2.
8. 7
3 3nci>;
2.
17
pSSooi
3.
3 tbSk
3. 8 pfiij
5.
fens
alone
nro?.
In the following verb forms

2.
is
correct
12
2.
torirlN
2.
17 fDDIIBO.
151
Nouns.
114.
The
following errors in nouns occur in C:

1.
1. 9, 2.
6 ;Vn;
;
16
fid?5ai;
2.
13 nii:^
3. 8
Knta
cir-
cumcision
3.
"i
7.
prpj'zn'.
Suffixes.
15.
In
3.
5 fDnrUM?
alone has the
wrong
suffix,
while
in 7. 7
pDJXl
alone incorrectly omits
it.
4.
Gender.
116. In the following passages
C
152
alone has the correct

6.
gender:
1.
11 p'Jtt; 4. 12 jn^n^b;
10 p*BP.
1.
In the following
ppntfl
;
is
incorrect in gender forms:
16
2.
10 bT;
7. 7 I^V.
5.
Number.
117. In 2. 14
KvE and
5. 2
TnyDl C alone
are:
I.
is
correct in
2.
number.
160
Errors of
in
number
151
14 KtfD;
[5
is
blurred.
L
;
writes
pDDISO.
,
152
The form C
meant
r6nVo
is
not found
it
should be {AbriPB
but
is
clearly
for feminine.
12

2.
|VTO;
17
W2-ip;
6. I
153
4.
6 piTTO;
7.
4. 11
N^TIB;
154
4.
12
p*TT pjn33; 156

6.
P"1WI; 156
3 NON.
Prepositions.
alone has the correct
preposition
6.
10 j?3;
7.
3 n:;k2.
In the following instances
wrong preposition:
5.
1.
;
C either omits or inserts the xWa, 7 NriDra 2. 15 K^nriKn

;
13 khd3, 14 pmaeo
6.
2 jmnaD^.
CHAPTER
IV
D
119. Despite
its
fragmentary character,
contains a
number
of interesting variants
and forms.
It
contains even
an independent reading which appears to be genuine and

not a corruption.
While
it
presents closer relation to

its
C
it
than to the other manuscripts,

is
variants indicate that
an independent text, and the missing sections would no

in
doubt have given us a number of interesting variants

form and
text.
TEXTUAL VARIANTS
A.
120.
in
Independent Readings.
is
The
12
following independent reading
to be noted TD.
in
7.
D: 7. The D: 1.
10
pmv w & n*o

differences
ibid. K*;
'iw
in
j?2
NDy
un
7.
following
9 prr^y
NDrfc.
individual
words occur
9
fcnn
1.
13 tura;
KTWJa;
mn
L
153
164
writes PP33T1P.
Li writes
L. writes
PpTlD, which points
to a different text.
166
ptn yniM.
Al
write
fcOWl.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
B.
121.
MELAMED
D
:
13
Fuller Readings.
1.
The
7.
following fuller readings occur in
14
iw-iB* [a];
wn
[ma];
7.
farm* [wn] psi.
The
[Weni]
following abbreviated readings occur in
1.
nw;
1.
8 [nrf>ci]
nn
7.
10 [*n] kio'd.
C.
122.
Order.
is
case of inverted order
preserved in
1.
17
A.
123.
The Orthography of
1,
D.
generally omits
writing prfa, Ksnp,
wn,
but
fWVJD
also occurs.
D
11,
uses
11
but once
anijn.
in
iTrui^m, preferring forms without
as
tenia?,
generally prefers
in
'
to
*,
making use of
with one \
*,
strangely
enough,
two words N"3D and K*a, which are written
in the other
MSS. and
in
also writes
rwnis, but
ptan, wnniK.
for abbreviations,
in full
D
^N"^\
shows a strong preference
DnvD,
D^n*
each being written
once.
all
Otherwise
these words are abbreviated together with
other proper
names, as well as such words as nNUa, ND^y, N*miN, which

are written as 'inn, 'nbv, or
B.
1.
'bv,
*Wf.
Phonetics.
Consonants.
1.
124. In
2.
writes anoâ,
Krw*a.
Voivels.
125.
syllables
D
is
retains the
a which
e.
in half or
completely closed
changed
to i or
Thus
1.
Kb"UQ,
R K01*a,
4
is

lengthened to a in Pa. pass.
e in
cf.
a
I
pt.
i.
nD
;
ppiib,
R
-
pp\b.
157
changes to
if fro.,
I. 12,
B ipu, D
tfn,
;
spa
7-
IO
>
8 5 K?
>
&c;
7.
*,
9 nron, 7
changes to
1.
and shewa interchange:

to
8.
D nn 7- 9 *> D ** p atah Peculiar 5 D pw, R pW.

1
(and C)
is
its
writing of the conj.
before *pl with
a shewa.
Thus
pnfn,
PPFnPW,
"iensil.
It is
probable that
D
as
imitated
it
in this peculiarity in all

it
the missing sections,
imitated
almost entirely
1
in
those chapters extant.
The
pronunciation of
1.
before *|n was probably as though
written
C.
1.
Morphology.
of Peal impf. occur in
1. 8,
Verbs.
Peal.
126.
8. 4,
Impf.
Two forms
where
writes xrn,
".TV
158
Pael.
Pf.
Two
f.
forms of Pael
pf.
3 m.
s.
in
1.
in,
in.
Pt. pass.
Pf.
pi.,
two forms
forms
in 1. 11,
Aphel.
2.
Two
in 1. 1
D plDD, R plDD. D na&, R n*5S.

same change
KnatSfi,
Nouns.
1. 1
127. In
we have
four instances of the
of form of numerals, where

KTYYDJJ for
D writes
1.
Nn^bn, KHPSPj
KJWDn,
Kn$*nv, RrfchDR,
10,
wHw.
D
1.
Two
forms
of the sing, noun occur in
where
writes ND1D and
R R
n^did.
D
168
preserves a singular reading,

In
8.
16 Kjîufi,
k5n^M.
3.
writes pttfr,
pDuJf.
Conjunctions.
8. 1
128. In
two forms of the
conj.
occur where
writes
Fpjt,
Cjfc.
w
159
Cf. Gr., 332.
158
Cf. Gr., 354.
Cf. note 87 above.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
Syntax.
In
3
1.
MELAMED
15
D.
129. Peal
Verbs.
9
and
Pael.
writes Pael 3 m.
s.
lap,
the Peal nay.
In
i.
D
In
writes Pael 3 p. urrn,
Peal
intrs.
lorn.
1.
Pael and Ithpaal.
D
2
writes
Pa. pt.
rprro,
R R
Ithpaa.
ppmn.
In
8.
Ithpeel and Ithpaal.
writes 3 p. rifiyntn,
Kyrirot!?,
nnynsi.
Inf.
In
8.
has Ithpaal
Ithpeel
ERRORS
A. Textual.
1.
Omissions.
130.
7.
The
following omissions are to be noted in
11
[-n]
\>vb&
paw;
8.
x-van [win] na;
8.
3 si^p njw
[^nai] ^bd pban.

2.
Scribal Errors.
following scribal errors.
n$B> for
r\6Û
; ;
131.
1.5,
D contains the 1. 17 D repeats

1.
In
1. 1,
1.2,
I.
îoîa;
1.8
1.
KrVVsp;
n*ay;
7.
11
H|T;
i.
14 Ka Nn
7.
ibid,
8. 1
pifei;
8.
^r;
5 K*aa.
16
10 rn^znin
error,
13 nsoj;
IV;
A
13
textual
apparently a doublet, occurs in
1.
n DDK.
B.
1
Grammatical.
Verbs.
132.
The
ibid.
following errors in verbs occur in

;
D: 1.8
nzro
&fn
1.
13
|fr3l&gtt;
8. 1
tnodl.
2.
Nouns.
133.
The
following errors in nouns occur in
D:
1.
16

I.
prftbVtb;
in
9 vi^ni
7.
14 niyi.
The
;
following noun forms

160
are better than in

3.
1.2 nv:D
1.
prvriy.
Gender.

1.
1
D
;
is 1.
incorrect in gender:
8
ntf
nvprurr;
;
1.4 mn;
1.
ppp
^riDT;
1.
11
lenanoi
4.
1.
14
pinK
1.
16 two
Number.
135.
it is
alone
is
correct in
number
in I.
15 T*litf, while
incorrect in ibid. KB>np KSKtan.

5.
Prepositions.
1.
136. In
10 KT33, 12
Xinn
7.
13 KOjn
is
incorrect.
CHAPTER V
EF
137.
In
EF
also
we
find a
in
few variations
in text.
There are further
differences
orthography, phonetics,
morphology, and syntax to be noted.

of
The orthography
from
especially, which, however,
is
distinct
in
many
Taken
respects,
all
has a
number
of
interesting
points.
is
in all, the text
of these
two MSS.
well preserved,
and contains by
far less of textual errors
than C, and
is
only slightly inferior to
AB.
TEXTUAL VARIANTS
A. Independent Readings.
1
38.
The
following variations in text are to be noted in

:
EF,
1.
jointly or singly
1.
KW
5.
1.
1
no;
1.
8 |1D1D3;
7.
1.
9 Kin;
14
ww;
4. 1
xnswa
33;
10 nanoo;
11 uncâ
rw?o;
tnox
i.
^nPH;
160
all
8.6
fo-ie* rva;
Cf.
^tnB*
*aai
17
CE write niS^D-
JLoJusê and Merx,
Chrest.. 10. note 9.
where
these forms repeat themselves.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
'Dip
;
MELAMED
3
pnfc
17
4.
i>sn
5. 8 pri^y
rroowc
7.
pnn
7.
4 rrroi
B.
139.
Fuller Readings.
fuller
There are a few

ipDD
readings in
2.
EF
1.
10
ib&TW to]
na;
2.
[jjwt] Kjn;
13 [^r&o] îp;
C.
140.
Order.
is
One
instance of inverted order

Nânoi.
to be found in
EF:
4. 2 fcopjn
141.
The Orthography of EF. E and F differ in the use of D and w E

A.
;
prefers
b',
writing "TO,
TH^y, xbw, but ^NDI and the proper names

F, however, prefers
D,
DID and
in
pDioi.
using the
W but once
"TOP
^KP and
ptnariB,
D,
and
in
the proper names
"iw and
otherwise using
as in iDy,
TnDy, N7DD.
alone shows
K?y,
a decided preference for vocal X, writing
KHn,
1
WDP,
ixnD, .THNW, &c.

strongly than
Both
and
prefer
defective,
F more
it
E, and
the
same tendency
11,
prevails with
regard to
is
defective.
EF
rarely use
the word NnilDT
true, occurring several times,
but more often KHDT, snijn,

'
&c
Similarly,
EF
rarely use *, preferring single
forms.
Finally,
EF
are
not inclined to abbreviate extensively,
confining their abbreviations generally to m.T Dip.
rarely
abbreviates even Dip.

B.
Phonetics.
142. In
2.
9 while
write
nfn,
writes 3>31
e is
and
F
I
yo-i.
In
1.
13
write 'HPK,
EF
niM N.
reduced to
2TIN
;
in 2. 10, 3. 3, 5. 3,
where
writes
Tns and
5*
VOL. XI.
l8

twft*,
P"njn.
E R
R wix;
In
1.
6.
12
t^jon,
EfW;
8.
14
EF
pnyi,
14
writes n"nh*o, where
R write
airman
in 2. 14
writes aniiD,
places in 4. 11, where
R Nine. Shewa and EF write NrntSD and R

Morphology.
patah change
Kfrityfi.
C.
1.
Verbs,
Pf. 3 pi. 5. 9,
143. Peal:
3 m.
s. 8.
i2,
kit,
Pt.
R
m.
\t.
s.
vnen.
8.
Aphel:
2.
EF pom, R HOWL Impf. Impv. 2 5. 2, EF ron, R Inf. 14 to, EF pjo, R

s. f.
p^jrib.
EF
2.
Kn:j#,
tm&p.
Ithpaal
Pf.
3 m.
s.
1.
14
a*nniH,
R
2.
a*nrwi<
Adverbs.
5
144. In
has form vie,
UD.
In
1.
12
alone,
and
in 2. 17
EF jointly,
K3"l
nnp p,
where
have
r\6ip
p.
Verbs.
D. Syntax.
145. Peal:
In
6.
EF
use the abs. pt.
"p^P P^K,
8 the pt. act.
,
where
have the
est. pt.
"p3*V>P
^3N.
;
In
1.
and
pt. pass, are

5. 2
used interchangeably
8.
EF
E
D^rn
likewise in
and
14,
5*5*,
^5;
TDT7,
R Crn R i^DTi;
In
8.
EF
have Peal
pt. pass.
pf.
ppWl, while
interchange in
have Pael
pf. ip^Dyn.
Peal and Pael

In
1.
5. 5,
rtfrn,
R
E
rwin.
5 and
2.
5 Peal
intr.
and Pa.
rpnnp.
inf.
pf.
interchange,
8.
pSo,
p^'6,
p^d
F mMp, R
In
EF
use
Pt.
Peal
act.
inf.
$&&{>, while
pt. pass,
have Pael
5.
bdd!?.
Pael:
and
3.
interchange in
10
rnnD,
R
F
;
rrtraNnfiDD, iSlftn,
In
the
Pael and Aphel

In
3.
pt.
interchange,
NinDD.
In
2.17
8
writes Aphel,
Ithpeel
-ovnt.
riDnrinxn,
EF
have Ithpa., while
have
Ithpe.
TOnnrrxi.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
MELAMED
19
ERRORS
A. Textual.
1.
Homoiotelcuta.
146.
The
following omissions due to homoioteleuton arc

:
found
in
;
EF
3.
2.
12
fy:>
NO
pnjw ma fOOH Dm:6] nnom

y-ixi?
[nnoNn
5.
[wn
kto
oimn
ds:
rv
^yo wn]
;
pym
4 [pniv âNi -nntn &ota
nnmo
p-irn
Tn] prov
-in
8.
1a pro] trta
pna [ub p*33i NTirv pD3^

2.
oynT.
Omissions.
147.
[itoji]
The nmi
4. 1
following omissions occur in
EF:
;
I.
"ju:
|D
[xjrpm]
1.
14 [n3d:^]
;
tovn
5.
1
1.
15
mooa
[rape]
ittph [appn *waa] #p*re

*jpb.
n^hd]
wk
1.
fjn
[mpa torn; 8. 9 nw [-nn"] The following omissions

[pam pps wn:Ni njhk ^y]
3.
are found in
alone:
16
p'oo; 2.
5 tnrb [nnNi].
Scribal Errors.
148. Errors of divers kinds are to be found in
1.8
6.
8.
WH;
prnfri
;
2.5
7.
rvy-i;
*ri
;
2.9 K3Drr
7.
5.
11
3m;
10
10
11 fym
8. 7
jodi
ibid.
;
EF pH;
161
;
8.
8 rv
14 k!wt;
zzV ppny.
The
following errors in vowels are to be noted in

1.
F
162
over the prefixes b and T;

5. 1 2 pififi
11
Ny pi^;
s
1G2
5.4 pvs-n;
4. 8
8.
The
5.
following are textual errors in

6.
alone
xrn
5 nniy;
4.
nno
iy;
6.12 fwxb]
7.
5 Knni6;
5 p!Q.
Miscellaneous Errors.
149.
The
1.
following miscellaneous errors are found in

11 xini
;
alone:
;
1.
1
14 nd
rr^DNi
;
2.4 WllpD;
8.
2.
14 'msroi;
3. 11 b'^nn
161
162
4.
6
;
5.
wrsn
DK.
is
R have Hv
In these
hence the very opposite thought

it
here expressed.
two instances
may
be the influence of the guttural H that
altered the vowels of F.
Cf. Gr., 224.
20
contains the following errors

2.
i.
xvnnb
i.
Wfcn
ibid, xcr;
3 n c#>; 2. 14
warbl.
B. GraMxMATICAL.
1
Verbs.
150.
2. 8
EF
4
.
have the following errors

3
in
verbs
2.
1
3 fj6i
w;
$6; 4 to
.
spiJ;
41.
16
HM;
;
5.
wfoto;
;
E
3.
alone has the following errors:
9 ipincsn
3. 7 pnfuriD
7-
10 k*i&;
4- 7
najj; 4- 8 ppoo;
:
5.
2.
atfrobS;
;
3 n 'nib5.
F
5.
alone has the following errors
17 KJDI
3.
l^bi
4 n^rmby
2.
5.
10 rrin6;
8.
14 pep.
Suffixes.
151.
In 5. 16 wni,
suffixes.
aw;
6.4
"prolan;
8.6
"f?,
EF
have wrong
3.
Gender.
2.
152. In
p>s,
2 |HJ*3; 3. 6 FP7,
EF
7,
are incorrect.
2 P")pEl,
In
1.
16
E
4.
is
incorrect.
In
1.
10 nrp;
is
incorrect.
Number.
In 1.9 NjfrW;
2
153.
2.15
tt3B>3
6.10 p.TD3
1.
11
NTan
2.
NVjm
2. is
6 KIB^D,
EF
In
are incorrect in number.

1.
In 4. 5 ndD3,
4. 2
incorrect.
KWT;
2.
2 |3Pt3);
|JW,
5.
is
incorrect.
Prepositions.
154.
8.
The
In
following errors occur in

1. is
EF
7.
10 nypai
13 *37.
;6y,
alone
is
incorrect.
In
4.
13
NWaa,
F
6.
alone
wrong.
Conjunctions.
1.
155. In
1;
13
and
4. 4,
incorrectly omits conjunction
WT,
|B^3.
THE RABBINATE OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE.

LONDON, from
By Dr.
C.
1765-1842.
Dusciiinsky, London.
APPENDIX V
Hebrew Letters and Documents.
1.
2.
3.
Adar 1776. R. Tevele to R. Meir Hanover. 21 Adar 1776. Aaron Goldschmid to J. Kik in Hamburg. 21 Adar
R. Tevele to R. Meir Schiff.
21
1776.
4.
R. Tevele to R. Meir
Schiff.
Iyyar 1780.
5.
6.
7. 8.
The same
to the same.
to
14 Elul 1781.
Schiff.
Moses Schiff
R. Meir
14 Elul 1781.
R. Tevele to R. Meir
Schiff.
22
Adar
1782.
The same
The same
to the same.
20 Elul 1782.
9.
R. Tevele to Isaac Speyer.

to the same.
20
Elul- 1782.
10.
11.
15
Ab
1785.
R. Tevele to R. Meir Schiff.
15
Ab
1785.
12. 13.
The same to
R.
19
the same.
26 Sivan 1787.
Furth.
Tevele to Rabbi Joseph Steinhart of
Adar
-
1771. 19
14.
R. Tevele to Rabbi Saul of Amsterdam.

I77 1
Adar
15.
The same
to the same.
10
Adar
1779.
16. Title
17.
page of the book
3HT [\wb. Schiff.
R. Isaiah Berlin to R. Tevele

1785.
26
Tammuz
18.
19.
The same to the same. 3 Adar 1787. Document by the Beth Din of London.
1769.
27 Nisan
20. Ditto.
21. Ditto.
28 Tishri 1772.
5 Elul 1783.
21
22
Letter
Fol.
I.
i a.
'b
vbpn -n k"d pyb

'
n'a
'ipvi 'ary p" 2
o
j'k
inD
'^Dn
'*n
I"" 10
TT
'^ '^
o^pb
'^N3i
dv
'n
nroi
'*n
n"y nianaa
raraii
}ia
i$>
nw6
nona
Vno
*anaa noâc no
"poxa "pnan porno

>o
k5>i
tikoe>
a*ys inn yn*n
mmn
'^nprnx
>pw o'o non
,OBnn rmvh (Ppma) jx^frooipyn po&
noaa
.nDio
iniKi>
5>k
tid"*
a"y
dk
nrn
wn
(1)
nx eynn xbv
^btk
n mn
'im non
oa^ 'ho
jwd* 'onoo
nnon
ppa oa
-jnK
noan a'aya p'n

^y t^ e*
p"p
nns Stub n"p p"p Tont
paan nwn^
pnwi no
ox dtdm
-oral oaaa
^'m nooa in
nata
,*flnn
^>ai>
baiN^ jaw nrota iJ'nî mpn^

n*pi>
tidm
i>y
jâo itapyn nyn nnx

s
p-i
tikvo run rum

Dana nn pvp
'nya
nryb
Vr6
Nin
ai
na laiuon
amm
Kim o-maxa^np
jnisa
;aai>
am
sin umyi ,ns

f
N^Da *ax Kinn

.pvnaoipyn
143
imaon a'nan pw n&6 mox

jaai
,
ann
n^n
tram?
xin a'i
.^jn anni> nso pan

p"n nna&?o
*a
iv
pron
nmanpo nn wxo*
win
koo
|aa
aaan
pnx
*iao
xm
pn "itido ns pDy
vaxa
wn tn no
dim
ny
yxm
^y
mba^
?Dwnp
Drai
ini^
"id*ik
na^p
Di>ya
&m
i6a "poiai? djon /laxpâ n"p p"pi rvuain î

*nnna
onaâ
naian
niDai
-mora
diS>d
nayn
a'nai
.'iwy
v&imp
ana^
no
-vxo
nxA n"k
'i
pr
piann ppa pnyn ioa naian "n " ina-nn irnor6

;oi?r
'pni
x/
oîan
in
"n
. .
-j^nii
,
nsro
,
n *pn ja
cj^p a"n
'an
joS>t
"pn a"c jnn naian
"n 'pn Dai
n'p
hô
i>y
xmi
"pn
D-V11
kdhddi
n' p
*rô nmnx nrvn ratvmn mcx

"pn
inoon
,n"p^
oainy
ioa
f]^p o"i
-jdô
a
*'y
r
}n
-jnv
-noy
D*^sp
dkoîkb
ors pno
â
nxa
>nyni>
payp
l^s .niDM np^y

ns N<ry
T
'a.-6
notro foaynasacnip
;
i^ Nia>
dco nohdoi
g n-non
o^ ro
yjnn*
a'D 'a riHGfma
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON

ptMWT!
.fyp
s
DUSCHINSKY
[Ma
23
pi
vS>k
hiijk
ono
|mo
l'a
p
o*a
"pr\
i>aea nbaps?
pjj
pno ikii ins p jTMKDemp a'r6 nh

.
>o*y -ivo ann nax
ro<sp nr*
|tm
nn
piyn ono en
,pa nâo
|wm
iddt6 amp
s
2"v oy nvy npnon nmb .ODynoa foeo^jn u a uD*n ona ny. B3W 1P *ayoi> Da /oy DâDrn /roe ibm
oaNT -inn
to ^m
\~\nx
rfi
pmaona
.fnia
p-p
îayo rfa
apy^ ifa 'pn
minK p& ante

N a
ff
pi
d.tk
i>w
^11
jk
pip
naio
pa anno
'nyai
S>kt
d.tk
b'an
en
to
.?!2-\p
nayn
dim ny dpk
oaynasae-np
p"ne
,
ny pkii pvyranx
Kll
plain
ppa pnyn
oni>
t taara to b'an x"n 'pn maia wwjn ,ni?oa .-60 PMy

i?"an
naai
payiasaenip 'Kiviai
'yoea
.
tik
nnx
nniD
a"a orx oaxr K*l 'pn

i>Ki
to
'w
xb b'sn k*i
kt
Mane
nab by n^y
,01*11
144
wioa poyn ^s
Da aK na
|wm ^kii
p p
s
pun n"pi> poon noana

poîr
maa pi px ovr noxai

meyi>
I
.pan row niaai
n*a to
y
pi kôo ]^yp *ann

s
tn
na*
b>kii
wbx
pa
or esn
'rb\
i
Dipoa
bbn 'âyai ;bx nanae n ey

145
a'ay ,nsnt5M
n,oei>
&^no payioea na niaann eoiK t 13K ooip .two p*a w t^ I^b oanna pôe
oea^yr
'** n
n â
na"i>p
wk nan
J>y
'*m
'
1
" 3 ,n N
^npi?
aKbeaK nyn /loinn maaae iidm

oin
ipisi
1^
pne
n"p
Fol.
'
b.
n'a
Dâe nr
/awa
Daa
n^
nai
.fryvia
o^no o
ins*
ôsya
|a
'v
nfN 'mi noe Tyn nêyo n"po

iâjn
naa
jryiia
onw man
'nDj
pi ODNenapa *o^ ^n t^ ^riyia ^naem /nua ,|yp jmo naio p piM o a nô aw p^ne p^w .nea Kin inî> xyns* nms )t&v payp jpmv bnn tn* ^vn ^nan
s
wma
T-nai
D'Dy
,,,, )
bnpn bib âna niNnni?

r
i?ia
% Kin a"Dys
3npn bib
nam
< t*o
148
o n^np.
o"aai wsanyoa
^^k
un iaô D"ea noKi.
r^no x^no
:aD
'yô Kaa
24
Daoa
f
ma
^ nPn
wvb
1 n2 ^ nnjnî a^sni?
ikii
oaana
o**naayi>a
*oyn
ins*
dvs iniNi tonn tân

vara
i>a
|Na
a'an
i?a
i>vN
n^nnm mpnn
*a
j.TDaao
nw
a'a
Dâxn
ino
*bx ynnna
.nar
di*^
t*S>i
'K>0Ki>
.fyMwaa
*"yi
aym
araât* nyn
opn
nt
Dno nNPa
*y*ON
n"ph
a'ni?
ioa
nnaa rnrvn
pinm noanb
i>a
mow
anp
nvo
5>'aa
noyns pa
'nana naa
no ^y
syDini?
px pa
papo
nxo
'*ni
'ltai
D"dk
aioai aio
lanya moa* aion 'm
.^"n
*pp p"D
t*3
.*mtw ^nx ^î #n

s
âyo
"pn
r" 3 n ^> n a
'
to
a"a
f.-noa
Bwioy
"*n
t^
^xn
/nnn
'33
oayo
oona
nha*o
'o 'an TpD*a
D*pmn ânan
p*nyni? Tpt*
nnnan
.nr!>n
i'na
r^r^n
x"^
ni?ao
,naioi>
jmo x"a an KWioy pya

*na jyn
'anao opk
Dms*
'&*
pan
re
rnx
eh ira
Letter
II.
Fol. 2 a.
.i^pn
iv
tik aio
fv
naian o"n "pn^>

ir
yssp
n'a
pTiny
nai>
np\n 'moi? matrno atnn *m*n
nanoi?
wa
dvo
]':]}p
nya
fKretfnoipyn na^r o*o
nhnan it
,tro
*oi
i?y
n^yan aion
naNoenD^r*
Ton
nnxii
tn "&n
fair*
jk
maann din en &mn

re
sr6n
nv-inr* 'oayp
pn
nraa ;m
.paâ
*aN\n
an o^naayâ
*Dns
pi>nNonaK 'pn 'moi?
Din
o*o o^naayâ naa
tk Nâ
eh *nyo^sr Tôya .naicxnn naion pyo fanny re naio na^x aois* spp n No nmnoa xi?Dion âann p>nn *nxi raatsp's n^p p"pa niaann
N
nvnb
bs
oair
tdnh
c*ax s Dyvnyoa\s
s %
naâ^N
pa
Tnn
.pa
a'sao
'na
pâ
Bwa
i?ai
iriwia^x ot n
'nba^
-\J?
in
ny en ^"an
p"pa îdb
nâxi?
naiy
oa
NTayn snô
Nin
oaos
mny
'inro^
rrw
nn\s
*r\)n>
*nynn
niannai ^poiaa
b'an
t ^
i?na
î
dcî
d^
;n
s
nar^ pnvm pTjr

r
^vn ^yorâ vna*n
ppa
t 'v
pn
b^^
'na 'nxb nais raei nann nâi va^ya

jo
nNvo dn
a y
Tyn naaa
'â'aoa
ho*
146
nann
n^cr naô
/o^Kll
pnaoipyn
:nvni*
pnsn
onn niaa n^noa n"i n #aoa #
i^s ^k.
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE. LONDON
DUSCHINSKY
25
pwbaw
pjya
BBoyn -vbbx
tsn
spx yum -po 'ubv jrtnan |w

rc
rfi otpon
"jnc
nnD.ni> <nyn by
rbw
;d
p'DipDpy
yn law: oaw intcm d*y

tâ
'pn
yd ^Dtrn
r,
jrnDNi
bwm
,Nnta kjd^d dsdm /to im
p"pa *DipDa a y
a'ji
'^ ^nw
.p*na N"a
Vid
|tta
nwam
'*p *pn
'ino s'neai 'mpa *5nn
dvs
i>Nt?
y^n
p"pn 'wain
S>y
nnuo dipd
pi
plan nbnpn pii wanb ,>ki pn nwo

d^j
inn: d'b
robe
in
bn rwjKMraa imyo tfaoa p-nyii jn (Pianvi) .... nprnm nbrun ill npn was* pie 'vnb h^ sia^ asa nr niyb pnyais f^ T* ^ ,nwwm
1&2 ybubv
.pmcDipftc
y
T
nt?yD
'y
^niDvy ise pa
aina
|o
in ^nt yiDipn iaa

fbrre
maiD^
.waittb.
witb6
proa îcjd ba
'w
Letter III.
n'a *pn
lmnx
fab
d^dstt^ pna
n'a i"a "pn
bw anano yaxp
apy^
.pjlba l'bpn iin
n"*]
s
a'na
pp
,r
TODt? ntrsa
y^P
pit
ny naiD p s din
|U
*'v
jn
^ ib i>Y Parnate
ipa naN DlB*a Yya yt i^sa
py:
an p\s n"pa [no 5>y
wnbnpi n"3K
rnN p"a epp ynid 'moa abaicn wain pin a"p

Dair
lin
p'a
âyD
'hid pNan
a'p
Fol. 2
b.
nreaî pa b'an
\>"pb
VsNiDipsn
â
tin Din '

d?\x
nmn
'abi?
nwpai 'ianna pvb

.j?jma
xiu
dpn /pb un ny
ny
noNai ,|Db
baa Dbpio Da
an
s p p
nan ny "piN
*iv
pm .nnoi mbyD.n
jmiM a
r
'wi |o '^31
pyj nibna nibnp nai ?ana"a p"pa
pn ny
pi'aa
r
i?
t::\x
'mo pjn a"^ an

b'n ixn
nnw pn
.pyiij
fa
yd
di\s
kii
p"pn
pn yd
tiw
|0
'n
'3i
"aa p"pa
pn iw inx dps
p\s
%
:n
âyo
r
pw vd
11
iniiM
|nDi
nu'd
di:
'oniaD kii n a
iv
nwn w\i
;ryn:
^y =
fnyrca
r ^y ban dt\s oya inisa psr
no
y^vd f
an 'nryai
Dasn: 'vvsnDipyn
-en
^v"r
pnv
n ~r
irtc
Dayc
p:
,|W3
sin anw
p'a
-j'dd nai? -j\s
fsa n^np.n baa 'oniaD

a*B>
nahr
PN ins
ysd
nn'n.nDa
pin
vns^ pyj
"j\s*
26

*asn
pp
pyfei
ps
i3i
i*a
.fs^yn
iv
b'an
S>'an
p"pi
'mmh
jmB
nut:
n'pa "a *du

|M
*srma
-jik
*
'^
a'ai
(?Tyi>) y"yi> oayoaia^mp

?roo ra vai?
pt& wzbv
noai?
3n fnww
tn *w
ny pa Din
ooip 310
a'ai?
'mya I*m ynaina tk nB6 y^xnoipyn bid ,pi

i>na
nyii
idton tk 'a* .d"to pn pasn

n'3K
ioa
*'
N*a en
DnT))
ianS>npn
paan a'V
'wai
x'a
pi D"W&a*K Taxi *v
'ins
k*3 ^xn
dpn
rbayo
""taia
bwi
*'p
pa pi
inaioi>
n"pi>
pio
naw
jnypa na^na
ma
tt.i tiin "W pnoipyn
poahfl
'mil
pa
':in
b*dki n.Toyâ e*na
to oaâ pnK&p
.inaio5>
iv o'o
fi
pio
nanai nana
Letter IV.
.p"ai>
n"pn ik n"n p"t?y pai^ n'a

P* 1
'"
man ny
p"a ~>ô
'
'îon vnnn tt
mx
'mtA d^b>
.j'n
^^xa^
'*n
onai 'n nnp\n hd*j
,nai?n
!>a
nan by ib
^y
it
toot pain cpai .niop jDâ 'n p -jana nnoyi Tiaia rwnww m^nni? ata "inap^ nxa
hint; iayn d^
aaiyi
k5>i
ibiw
ainai?
nnai>
*b '*ni
KToa
nyi
wno
,"pvy
S?as
"inai
poiyi
nr
bia n'D3
"6
niwa Dnsp onaia

'^pioyi
now
noxni
pari
dib6i
"I^x
pxi
147
/aa aaan pnxa
'wra onaia
nanai
.nri>
too
i>3pi>
n"k pinb hbot
jo &rani>
n,a^ni>
i^bn /toîi 'nan

/yana v^y
is
i>yi
ncyoi? nabn *iTvi> Dôya^ dn

in
wy
^y rwp .nabna irpn nan w\w
nsa
nnna ^d^
r,
nansa
pmyn!?
pa
yaoa
a^ya
nc\n nnx vutt&
i>
Dyraa
in*
pmyni? 'a
vn
n^ nion nvp nan

pa
p^Daa
m^ na
wn
148/
^nrya
p|i
"pa
y
n ^' Qôya^
nr
dk
'^pnan
noia
n^ nytr ab /it Da
nT^
r
n yn^
s
^'nrya
DayiaNapymp na^D^â
/,
mm
iai
^nya
pa
aiN
p^ ânn paya
iibkb>
nar
<NniDNa a"a usm nrca pn
,n3VM naaxâi?
^ncp irnn
io^
nWm
p?
nvp
P^n^
-c^^
^"yw
Nh
aae sniDDa
,b^ nan^
n-acj*
^non
147
,owte to
"Da Jwh
pi
'"y.
pa
nnoa
-jana
by a v J\s nnyoi
^144^
Ui n"b
mana.

*:y
DUSCHINSKY
*o*ab
t,d.-i
27
inio
'*bn
s6n
.n:5>KnD
jmaa7i
,D"n
p"
'nn
s
;nô
tddhc
*n *iKino
pa
jrvS>
,*ajf
inwb ^dd ananap

mai t^v
ty'ao
:y winS>
.na5>Nr6 y"z 'n
nffmn
'ajyoNn
ôn
i>aa
.nâo muc
%
won may my
NcnDD
p:
ii>
inn b'an
'd^ may
(fl.
"iaa
row
p'a
'nn iafei
'in?
d-pn
wiiD
6,
12)
*aiae>r6
Tipym
.pn poip TUB
5>npD
ii>
TW\
nyvb nyvn pypn
i?a
a naniaon
p*ba
,vn
d<
p"pn
ann
'nron
lpo&p na
nw
no
,jdt
aD"yNi
?pyn
jxa
5?a
^ni ptaya
iniTiom
'nisi
,wb
1^ b"v2n jnapa w*ayi

fnia
nx^ nntrb
rwan
[nute
ainan
n'n by nian nbir
o:na b6k
tn bwi n"p
s
ve>ay
*niN
penTp rnnn
np^b
iniKb
\rA n'abi
^n
a"y
s ne>
',Ta*a
nnnan '^mnnbB>
Dnb&?
bnpo
TniK
wn
nw2
ba
wvb
.
fa^no E'aa
s
pa
sbp
'*arnne>
sbi
.onbe> jrn im
yna Kim?
n'ab
.KpfiPiB
a b 'n na nnb xbx pcrrp

a be> bin:
Tnno
Kb
vnniN by
nîyi naa:n
:mn c\x
mayp ^ rue
.
fp:yn DiT^n a-iipto
*aNB>
ioy 'H3aa nioai nrbn a*b 'n noatai

ta*x
.paio
tana
pny
poip
nyai
a":
,;y^Na d^hn "v panTp rnnn D-mi

rntnn
'*aa
nyn
.n?o
nra pnyn
X'n
bia
s
p>p
wx
n:vb b'an bnpo arcp
o^n niana nn*w naa
ipbn
pirn
b'an '*a?b
manoa
p*p
,Dbw din nyn by nby î
n^y
a'n S>npa an
piaN
^ '^nw niTa^ yvp a'n i?npo pTiuuM n."W *^ Snp nvni ;d"-i fnx nnî> 50 sn piî ^v^'i âsyi nno^ 'nDn uwn |Tna iv t^ aôNn pa dtn poip 'D^ nnx nu^z d*i ^d iwi 'noiy n "'^ bnpno ^ c^ nno^ D^riNDn^ i^ ^nana iaa a t:iy^ nKîn ^nu 'o nro nan ^npo h^dni na"DK bi) p^sia 1^ mvpa ni?npn nayiô -in^ a-in na^ yn^ a^mais S*r noaan
r,
nrn
a'nai
nw
'*aiK in^tatr
nxa
d^j
wbx
%
ww\
p:^
pa
noa p'nL"
-in
%
prp
,paKi
naan
o*m
'i
âi>
pâ
149
,r6np
")3:
pw
dpn*
p\x
loenâ
1BV3^"W
.inrom
imvnp
nvcp nca
i^
nvp c
#
'ai
jnvn
niND di^d -pna ;nni> baw ban n

.anaa
mxn^
na*6
nar na
nn nromv TK
nno8?a
149
^rab
.*n-nNi
myn
^nNa
aiuai
iniNni?
//
iica
npiBTw?
mno paw
2"V
pp nnT nmay.
28

i?
rmb bwwh
nrn
vuna mrb sh
s
*a
nioon
.wim&fl
wrb)
S>'an
a*Ka np^:n
'n
i?y
nmn
loy Tinî tikcwp ynr in

:a
yb
p:io d'*3
djp p"a ne>o n'a 'nan

''3J3T
noyo3 nvaa
tfi>i
5>'an
'wa
nayn
riTnoi ,âi ia 'ôrb n*n
/aioa
nA npwn
D*iy v5>y
laps?
roian
v^n Bna
n' s x
a'a3i
149a
pjn
150
n6n t^to n^nai noan

.b^s n"ii wa*3
'w
nnioni
TT
ay
a":i
^ now W3n pre yb n'3 ntyo n'a 'nan "\>7\ ny fe pna re w: vn '*33i lmnin iok p&n ,pâ p
|p
ta*a
win
,51
"tap nfiJW3
.Npnyoaot? vn nyvD3 db6

notan
d.tS>k
nbiw
.iayn
3repn
zwioy
I^vni
3"a
p"p3
vn
ny
s,
'nan
IP
\m
a'ny
nDD3
pne>
manxa
|*o
oxn
vnsi>
n'a
n^pa
'nan
nxô-wa
jd^p xâ
nn^Doa
pfcntw n'*K
iSre
o'an ti: on n
jkn
bsdît
b'an
n&>o
ss^n
n^pan
tn
fyp
tin
ansn
.n'w
taaxôip 'w p"a

.aanipoi
^"r
nco
n"3
"oa
o^'o pDya
'toot
p^xoipn oâ^n^ n bmi

'arepni'
S>ir
c"on maon
"03
'oDniaon
-pa
pn
S>"n
pni>
to
ff
*3*ot
3pa nnn :yta
|n
^n pa
n?
pn^
pn
re
-p^n
;k
ânn d-hdni aps> "n "pn ny

n
paya
nsiib
;ay!>a
m a^
""i
,'*ynvi
'*aniG?on
'wvpm
notj
antoo'Dipa
nwo
,nnnon nsa oôc nnino yKTOSPiK p nyayôip

niay
nN*s
nD*^?o
wra
ni?yi noDitt>
ids h? nmnoa
12^
a":
nnKire Qino ny
nov
nnino p i3s*
d^d^
|DK>ai?yr
'^3 wyn i?"n 'ênwon 'ynepn n p^n^ hd^ 'nmon Dîptr nninon 3n /imon
nas
îd^ji
Din opw noB^
s oyab "ly^yoîpn cnit
it
nanoats'
[tc
i^xpnDNai?
^n
w
y
nninDn
1
bîi
pn unynp n n:n3
nis&h
i3oi
nyay^D^Npn no
oô nTn* nnnoi ,pnyii oaip nxs

nanoni?
pîTn
ot^n*
iopyn i^
nnn Dênn n^^ onynp *pN op^ jNa^ nanono pnyap

'ji
y
nhr
na
;o
n*^3
xn
k^j
no^ rn^
pn^nniN
nioc
"t
nw 3o
H
oâ^n*^
n
%
cnii ^nosô ooipa vKti fM^Dnsip

op*B>
ip^
naîT
onnîniN nninoi
nanoni poîo |o
m
onh
dpm c^^nt paip eHbnaiw
fo in 3 jno o:xtj niD'c>
no^
vk
101
aniaDyna.

u^
nniDni?
DUSCHJNSKY
29
nop
(?)oen
'ecN^> epn
naî?
,*jti
minDn nyn
KH
po^ n:*ie
iv
minD rcfo? ldvn tsi ,rw '*yxth nnN |Wp tt*k |N3 no vnlriyw |o T^*rn 'ecN3i "hth minD *sDii> ':in tna Dpv
snap nrno^
pp dpn pê
rni no
nee
a'apn
.j*
3*
ifow
*pn
no
IBS
**n
pum bwimcd
S>tr
in*
nh "ids mino p nyjy^Dip pa y^rtD^N p mino niêa 2'ay ^nn pt -i:w

iJKtaya
-ins
*pn io3
pn dd-iisd DJtftfDip
[K3
nc rwibvi ijn
':in
.ma '^^nn 'nw*
nw
in i>":n
."3
niDy
i>N
.id^d dpîon
nîe d&6b> apy*
p
vnn
i^pon
'ro
ja
'ran
[Kti
iv
yDnw
ne> Nin
pny dn djdn ,nDe innaeD

cpDDi
.iDii?ea
33b
a sy
-piD fnn
uvv 5>aw una pnNDe itii ^c

d'-d
i>y
wi
3^
n*a "pntr
nros
b*t
p*a nayn nos bw

n"-p
w
in
pw
ja anaan
ami eninD Divrn
"wyD^nxa hrc
tTyi*i3
K\xn
dtii t-u
INn 3^N iT3

n'N
jiTa
mnan
jNai?
p3 .dpn
Tayn n:e3 103 pDya nyn

,ik>
i>>ii
iv
D"pîry-i in
jnvi
2"ay
poip
jNai>
^sr
DDyj d^d n'-p
nmeD no^D
ucoir
i-idb>d
ny oyn dns pn pN eNn pyr
pi dnd
ni:pi>
n:ir:
px nu
"jhm
c6n dtii B^yBB>j pavi
"iny eNiiDy iaina
|&oi>
nv
ptw
Nine nâa
â
dn
;
epDvA
dn vta |nwia 'nain w\rb
"inNn
s"ay
nmD Kim mino

dni
"m
'i3i
inuno n&
i?y
inipTie
iav6
ii>n
"133
hep pny
.1311 iriv
[jn
it
^3p^
n"\s*
^n^v
dt\s*
p^w
,r
is*
ditj n"*N |K3^
inii
.nayn 'anaa
ê TniK
'y
mn\x ^3
it6 dni
.^03o
-j\n
n^non n"3N
naai
^3pi?
JN3
in*
wm
'uinr
;nd
^3^3
yD-isiu
pa
.iprn no n3n
NT
'JIN
s
hind *:e id neiT ââ niavim

DnittSI
331DM1p
N"3
jnn
,^0D ''nj^pD
^3H l"3N^ mnfe

"id
dn
n^3p3
in^p
n.tî 'ivy nri?
ân
mW
by
dwtok
aaiOTp
Tn dn3
-inNî
iynin^ ^nN3
pa n^N
i^v ?
nDDve
s
"jon
yvo
i>uâ mib*iip inî
may
yn
âpi?
dth DTnyfiw
"y
.
nâp naîr
i6)
.nxitea ion nrx*

p^p
Kim
'^n
|ndd "j:yDN
nin^N
fp
v iv e
n^ v^rrfiavnn
n3ien
td
,nii
^3
,wa
roan
30
-pK *ipa

ô'en
<ta
ana
nn^
âtâ
Dy-i2Dpy
.tara
mbw
.D^nsvn jxa
niTatn
j*"*1
"*2nn pdv "n"?ya
nia^Nnn ^y
"inn
iv
wan
nr
natal
n>an
'dnp oyn pin
cin
n"d
na rvfonnn â pn
fii
now wtoi?
mi
"pn
tatrapa -jnnnta
nnaita
nap ins
deît pn
man
ton 'aw /oipa
ppaDi
B>*n
"pn aDi n"nNo
diî 'n pn n*c t6

,tpp p"a
'bnyta
"
'
-jinn
mie> npia tiko

,p*n ^n ha*o '
.B>"n
nanai
>"n
v
r,
p"a n ^ Q n /:j ,rQn
nSron inow
ff
a"na ib&
'nnwan iana
ta^ny
D^yii
jxii
/a
lB2a//
i3i
uwnNi "w np wn^ Kpwn Kiw n nam ina nana *ab

*ni
"^
n"n
nt ,taiw
jpw &wiDy 'b6 inn^na

ta>a
i>"an
na^pcM n"ai>
"y
ewi pn
tfSDta
ny&y
-ab
las
jyp
.pan
'nani? nyta aetata

.taîr
an
pn
train?
,t?"n warn
pvni> ^nâp
nayn
'ma
p:i
np n"a
anan
Letter V.
,"i>
NDpn
Wn
n""
pnaA n"a
1
ttb&iDn
pnn
'n
"na "in&6 o^ni? nni>&6 ninnn aina'

nnrc nnp\n *now
inair
o^n'^non
nmntaa
Dnai
nuxv
oy
./'_
>
na
".
pa tno
.}"k
^"Nain /'n
nan
nvni> T,nN nDNntr
nnaa nmn nanai ni?ap nayn K"ao nana
'n"Nttm T'ion nyâ oai âta En"itan na niaioo

napsrna ,n&a nr
jvyn
nnsi?
wna tan *aw
nana
ntrxa y"nxta *ana (nvcnp) ni^p
nam
oasa
.taa
inanb
nmni>
aya pjna
nana
'\n
rftmn
jna np
ta ,i?Kn pana \n"?ya n^yn no piann
ybx p^nynb ^nsvo
ni'cnf nra ynin(> nxa npisi n"j

s
wsin
nmnn
nicy nnsi
162
- ypiKDBDNDn.
i62a
a^y va naiD 'y.

11
. .
. ,
DUSCHINSKY
n"*n
*"n
31
%-n n""
fN
mimb
d"h xmrrb
tutu a
i>":n
map
n'v
"Wia
25
18
opt?
"Q* T^V wayoK

tfznnT ^"n
^mcn^
...
,#
id
"w n"a "jd ":;yDNn may jnn "v nwo wui

"ni
^n una
DrroiFP
pDKâ npo
30
nrv anr "x "wi>i d"i "k n:w&nni>
ono ne "s^ '"nam t"^ "nan

i>"T
ID d"IiT3^dn ybv "to "a nnnas n"a mnnxb

11
m uxH>
%T? K*<
.
25
5
....
.
"mr n"a id ^"d

"inr
a^ -n"na
pvpn txhi Te6 "
"n
may n^n
'o
^d
D*n
'a
wib
97-3
n "D
n"ai /jKâ
nt>E
fe n"D^
wrap
patrnn nnayn nape
i"!>
nana
s
43 36
:
nn d**b -pna
*si
2:6
aa d^
"aEi>
pnn
95:24 *p i'w
n!>
n's 'd s :
nns pa iwiro
lnnnoi?
u'-i
mopyi
35
35
79m
77:5
na Hainan "ayoN
28
7
:
45
:ayDN
may ncbv n?o

t/'td
i>apni
2:6: Dt^yn
1 1
:
tn
"pna
a^
va^n
iv
rt?
S>*a
nî
^ymm
na
pipa
. .
*"n
hhdn
wmmA
prD
ntaiyb ni
n"a
1 1
:
nnnisi>
d's
P^dw
=
20
y"*
kd*3D D.nnas*
26
^ *wW
v
77:5
"pn
pi>y?
a"ci>
wa
'
VV6
s n ina
nban
it
n-nay
,npwn
n an
irwi
Dyn
d"?d$>
kwp
n
i'V nap px\x nn"na 'osteon
.JBWYi
|N Dn'ttl
,pdxdp
%
as *taff3 *p pvpn i:nm vnx cy

*b
k's t,de
Ap
"::yDs
.ax *ao <ana bv *\wrb
px onann
irv\
163
ND^
to Giessen.
32
li?VN
opny pv
fyb nâp
.anaa
/li?
''nana
irnoa
12a
.annoxn "n
tiik
maw
*wn
no
,fnyra
man
.opm
Daw
*pn
.
.
nii>iya
pp nopo
a*a
na-ii>
r,
,rwS>B>
moyS> few ô 'nana

ptapian
.xa* ai>
it
Dapna
D^m
(?
p"on PP i ann!> ynw mnoi naxSn pap norf>on "o
mnabp opxaa
^y nana
p"no S^n annp ^n

wmiai
.
srww
tayoai
nrw)
nbvx
'n
poyo ann fcppp toop
.n^n rri^nna
pfpn iopa nns
n"a p"no
faa
i>y
nrpncn
aa^n?
a""
nno>i>
"n
t.do "aayaa
jna
oaiwa
oaynxapnp orw
p?
mm
,ia-m^
n*a aio dv n"nna

S>"aD
pv\)
Tia
s
nop pan
i^
viw anai ,|&o
a^
nmw â
n"w on u 'aw pn
paâa iv
mpa
onî ,pn
npm dptii
.pfot
yonw jn ny pxn jaw ^"ao 5>"n "pn DPa Dnw iop^w Da miT ix don* opâ !?vk inr .DiniK pt nyoaw }anpa
taajnatOBnip
no^
"pnn
mm
pa iîi
.rr6 s anan
'
wa
ja^na
"jâ
nayno tapâ
b"~\
nanî /naan "oao N"a pr
iwJ?
aâao
anw opap
^"aD
nop
a"a dtii *"n
w
-\y&
,pn
ni^pi?
o^ "na hnon pa
"pn i>p vaao nro* ,^'aD ^"n "pno aio

/i"*k
oâ
P*"
i^
"J*^
"inKi
W3
ôia
P*
nnyhp na^w
o'-o
oa^nopa
.paxp
bnKiiiîa
^"ii naôio
.p^n oipa pn
"snap naôio vn Dai
.paxp âxx
pp
Dai
ooNta
pîi
"y\x
jpyua
oâ
nop
"aa
pio ,ppyii px jo^Nn anxa
n
oâ
nono
\>"p~i
â
'aw
na
nmnD pn
i?y
^.Ta
iv
hrn nns
nai
na'an T'aDnp jopn
naon rp
ni?pn
âioaiap
,^
"ir&6
Dânfe pr anDo
oâ
onî .nnno^pn ns 3na
no^nnm na^nan
rn>
"w
ynx
nn*nan pyoi
#
ovna
-ns*
pN
nr
nbv
ii>
p"a
,p"a
N
nô i^nxh
nînon "nvn^î
n"a
"p
n nanai
-jnairî
"^ni?
*aai
âyo
"pn p"nn
i^d^î
:
tea
'n
i^nvnx
s
nâp lana ^"niai p"n paio npo iirb"

*aNi
("'p o-i"nn âaoi
aoo)
'vw
pnip:\s
niay
i>jn
bm
pi?Na
paoyiisa i"o n^nno ynosi?

i?
^no âoia ay pDyn

dn
Dai
âor^
myo n^p as
11
nâpon
n'^s*
.Vao
is
anno
mps ^p
%
lana npya no *]oo
îNiny
yan;
n's n
n\bn
npyon by n"T nnnpno oapo

npaîi
n'c^:
on"ia
y^ôsa ny>b
kî
aâaay
naiN
a'\x
'pw
n"a niaon na ^nô "pn oninsi inaâ "pn
ôo naion opaa nnsa

2
DUSCHINSKY
W1
N'H
:
33
nicy
pfiicp
13^ âiap nh b6*C Sinii nt ;no nwm nmo npmn iroitrm nspn hx rmajn minn i>y inôani> W3i m^N
ppyita
it
p*e>$
p*?
na
.;x3
oson nono
S?"n
oy b":o
Vina
*pn^
,ODB^ nân nn ny prom inn era
row
..id
3*a K>"n3
v": finN
3^
n"nn:> pspn "ran
Ynna 3*p
"D-naon pspn
,7T3 rocnn db6<n p"ne> d"toi c"t i^n /b
irawra an pm
Letter VI.
."i>
K"opn
Wk
#
i
pufc n"3
s
"inn
'ft*
Y'k "iroA /r6 nniwi? nnnî 3in3

"v\
,D*p
nsah
nyi>
*nn
mm
**n
mpvi
p'
rj;
y p"3
tno "mo
*fr
"baion
jaim
"n
*i?y
i>
onnb
s
^nap ona
^>y
oî> D&ns>n
ixn
mpan
d<
ik3
n-ota
n3T aua oa
.wnun
nw
moi law nsn

"n
i?x
row
.irhp
D"n vn onvo
na^rnn
n^nni? lira nyai
nm
tw6 ma dW
fvv nrn
i?i
1W3 p
i?y
p*n *yao ^y riwi ^nrraa * oimai debô
nn&o iyT ni>m 3kt

nyn nn3in
"n in
1
.i3xn s
t unn mpo Dôn "13m "W3

,d s
y
lanyio
nnp
iaw
nS>
nuio
,wn5
iyn*
nenn
mm
(nua) -ibo 3^
po< id
onw nyv nna nyn

in3Tiyi "
y
i3ynn \x;;r
i>33
iapm* pn i>Koc> ix
ti^
*"na
wsi
on-non
,foa *pta
no^ p ,WBtn
ii\N3
ni33no paa
iv
Daxn^MD
nn3iai
nin
mi>yoS> priDiM u*a [Kp tn
03na na dôm
nra
tvi
pn
uoo inpta
N13"'
ns
i^nynin -133
jTn
py "no jniwon
n^y*
/s
n3)ob
ND3n nv ny3 djdn /îp oipo3 mp* h
kî
k^
nun
n^yo
y
no DnoN3 ^rwvi
nanai
"iai
nay nnnni
rbv ni3iD naii>

*y
op *^n
mis nna *n
n3n3
nn
nibnpn
^s
yms\
nr
"m
lM
ioy3
rwy 2vc
(?nun)
'.thun
mpi?
nrn
mi3?3
Doano
,DiTT3
n33 nn
.133
now
,aw
164
3mN nw no
iovy3 b"v.
VOL. XI.
34
nwy piy py "n nvrb <D31 ON.l DWD*np:K3

nahni
.nw
-IV
in: nnix nnyii
rubyfl
\ym yix
!>3V
^tt ^lin
p:n
"WBE
u!>
K^l
i^
n"y3o p:
try
. . .
am
n: s
pp nnjm
bpk n:w
ny
156
dtii
,onoe> p*p
iniN
an psn ny no p:na tain p nyoaiK a par nw mn p^ta

"1:1
155
,n:nn ô>:
T^ n *w
.r6npn
ny
iiaa
bn
cj*n:n
im ^n
nx
&>pa s
!>n:
wn 154a
np<
3nyo no^yn^ -nw?n pn
.Tâyns
"p^Ni
\vb:
yT
n^ dk
[k*
n^
n^
"<:no
D-inn
3in3 s i
3n3:i
osmn
d:on
^
"131
5>":n
K"nts> p" 1
^ n Po
rwn
p"
11
n*y nivn
3ron ânb nnoi? i^naoyo xnp:^ no stuk

n*n
ny3
tarn
p*njf
.p:y:
nnyni
lrmpa
/ia
mp
i>npc>
isina
vr n j^n on* n^ nyi>3oi

inausni
-iidnp nsna>
.|y&>:
nioyi?
i>av
n^
k"i:
pm
byi
mb tiw pi iw
inai^n
by)
ik^ va
no
n"^
ff,
nara
^npn
in:ui
(?)uoo
.n3ioi
-ikbo
3ê>
poi
^n
nn d^k^
n*n^
na*
nr '\ti
"n
.Tinrw
,*wi
noa
s
(d^dki)
mnoNi
#
,
Swo diî ""n

n-in
"*fco 'npa
S>a
on imp
"di x"i
1
pwn
n-ô
>V
w
s
Dôn coiini
n3
nahp
nVi iiaa n wnnap >:a W> v" p"3 spp âya "mo "^32 'V npo "n3n "nni "n qib ".Toa ny "mini onsai sn .133 ikk^ "noi n3-i3n i>y noy non m ^"jd "m ^"n yov
o"ni3i
.:
/7,
oy3
Letter VII.
"b
3"opn -nx 3"t p:^ n ,:i
'
^n nip^n
"ary
i"n:
p"3
tno
by nnn
"inino
6aion pnn
4
n ^nxi?
Dîy ny 'i^
vi
"m on3i
npns
%
^t
inno
^3 nn^wnn
::ni
n^3p *n
;o
nD:3n
pc ot^n p: /ovy ns y^psni? ^ n -vyb ib nvnb "2 ps qv i>3i /mo poip riN mm mB> pnn3 ^^n pmô: oîi nt ^^13'' si? n^non 3in bm ppo s nino no -an ^1^1 iîni oyono
/lonai ^331 '^na
i6a
/,,
do3 nonten
*piN
'o
^laano^ niNWin
or
^//
o ,moy
h^k
yf
niK3v
"^ :tfnittbn
^ nnn^b
f
i
WJ3
n
t,
nin^D ,v, y HK 32yo
156
'/-,
^^ D>
156
//j
np>

yam y;n
i>ai
y
DUSCHINSKY
T^Bmw
w
pWKtia
35
|"B
aicn
i:o6
o"a
a'a
nipa nae
200 pirn
pp /inyiN
'vann '*a*i
xpi'Dn iod
b"j
-qn
b*
/:
mn^
'wnaDi
DH*pw ^
nt
ôttm ,nnoy namyoi

'anon
nrna *njn
1KB
iv
p"N
in loenâ am
,T$>y
nan bv
mxp
"naica
nnnx nanaa naK ram

.
/pmaNi nn nyn" n^ n&?K mpo
[nw
n'm i?Dn roi n"m nayo"inNDn nanam ns nonta
nh
,bdp 1KB
..Npnyoa oy '&& nono onm

po^nS? rrenn /larainm
fn"DK> aaitroa not? vcyay
e*m py
noaanm n^npn nanan ta*p
o"ok>
ins
ioa
now
"jk
/pi>a rii ik^

"o*yi>
mpN
xi?
newa dni ,^nrp bnnm poi?

inism p'-n
"ni>ap '"o"
x^d nan n"n no
yaian
pay
Niono
-ji>
nWn
.p*TP
-pnai
no pDya lan mai anno :job anao

n:rnoi>
smn m
'*a*nn
r"yi
i^n
n!>b>
*naam
iojd
n?
'mo
""n
s
"navo
Nan n#B
sa n^
"n
"pn
fsb uiv 2)"u p"wv

12b
'*n
nana
;nomni
p"nye>
"nyo^
<ana pirn pnnnai anpi nâo xm*^
dn
ii>
.nyon
*nanai
ymni? P!b inanoa

'"aâa ani?
)b
hip
'*aan
m^tpo "k dic

i>pi>pn:
'*aiianp
my
p"ddo
uw
"tn
roaann noyo
nvn^ nnao
*S>*kp
nîpi
Dipo
1^
manni? nana Naa
man ^n
anan
nan"E>
nxa
yaraa
*nmm
pb6
.nanon mNarta maai> \nn niaann âp^

'\n
.rnri>i
na"a
'nann
mora
i"t
pirn
,a*na
oypNBn
c\sn
r
|Kai>
nyiopn nxa uac
"n nvai /iaiaa
nawn^
.p-iNM poiaa
aiN janaa jn
^nj^d pa^
âo
'aâ
ai"D?D
pna
,D"S>
oy
poo 7^1^
xjo^d în ny^n
nx
pimi?
"mow
tt^snn 'ânam
^ ianD
-ji"s^
Niaa nnyi .nâ^
ama^
"mm
ttbi
iamb
-]bn
anan^ snô
"moN* pjNp"^ pny
mm
invyi iny-n naiaa nai^n "joo
nnuvTvi 'nsnTnn ima nanai "onxiny pa j&nbn Ka"D "^n* sd"3

nt
i>y
'aah
"^
aio^ no
nri> niDia
ni^y
wana "nh ,nann a^fir6 âoi

^"r
1^ mi: aan
"jnyn dni .nioa
s^n"s
*pi"ST
.nocî
i?iyD^
^
nn
r
,"jy"mn^ ina "Da ons* ninya ""nrya

a"tô cyriKi
bnw\ nx:
7
nanoi n"ax
i?"r
tn b' a*mmo
'iai
|p
^"r
nasHnâ nn
D""na
i:niya
'a
py rrvprm
/%
|wan
man
"i?
rc'
!:,T
nn
is? -,y
oy
nani?
""n
l^nan
uoo
nvi?on an3
p"îd
'%n
/i
pnnyo
ws^n
j^pn n yj. D n"amo na"non
ton
p^na
nan
mnip
n"D
'd\j
379 Ti ;o3"ip n"n 'nn pnar^ i)ib rbnr\ 'o '$
.a^pn
'"D
D"nyn.
36

'<aai
r&Hch oya miaa ^nanai

TNOi
h"\
bpp rTa
vm
in
"n
mix
n
b"an
X'^
i?"r
no
-\o
*t
i>y
r6w
rfoya n^jn
iniann
dipe
ion
iroy
^py n"a vn
fK^ a
a"nKi
irPB>
nm
bpkpi
tot
n"a
*ai>
man k^ ân nnb rwfon ana Dy ronDfA vnnî pmr he id ^ iw mio nntfta ova ba ^ ppam *iena ao ncyai '*XKxh anp ''*3 x^ P to "WK31 'n*nitn snv
âio
l58
mm
pna
nina
pîan *oaaa
"*n
'*n
-iKân
Da
pddidmd \n
'*Daai
n^
i>a
wa
t& Dîyoi '*3np âro 'naa pnxa jâ

^y r6y
'w
ii>
nâô
jrvi>
myn
("mna^ -pay
159
fa
kti"
potto nva anaa)

*rtk
n'ana
nn^pnn
Dai
n&>pi
5>a
ton
*h
xw
ii>
nanoa *mK b**6
-in^
,\h d*
naa
mono
ro
fn^ a^TO
mnp
ni>n
b*wi Dy
iniB
a^nn
s
nr
.no id b"m prw n"a "nan N"ai?

*n
!>'an
pvfc
n^no
dv
D a^ nr
my
'vi
nnNi b'an
b*k&
A n^N
mwo
*6
fn^ ran *6p

'*n
B*tcn
Dy âioao
^'an pn*^ n'a 'nan5> 'vi inioai

i?'an
b'an
prw n'ap *ah .nn^pnna Vaaa poan no
pwi
npann
pirn in
nw
anp
mra nfapn infc6 *pn nroxatr ids

di^ cpai?
fvw
,i>'an
nicy^
mm
.icy
aâa Nnia
i?aa
nnytti
.jmaon a"y
paryc yvo
:(nniND anaa)
imw
âm
r
py T*na i*to* DD-iiaon p-xpn

nr ^ni>3p{r
ny enm
Nnvi?yo
awi? a^n amy vd ba xhoon una i?y i*y

a'tî?
s
â
Bên ppferin ânaa ^nanac>
.i^n DÂan
i?a
Dy 101^
enn
ano
pn
i^nya
oyn lanND ins
w ncmax taaâ tarx pTii naa nn vb ivan i?a^ ^nyn^

aB
bwX
n"iitai?i
1
jma
[nK*D*aNna
nr la^maân
'a
,n6
nan hdi
160,,
'til
âa 'sai p5np ix ta^pa^yaa

)b
pw pnas
^na^n
mn
"vna
|o
i?oy-i
n^d^
'w xh
n'a
i?y
hraw
i?ia*
mm
Dsai
;aya
^>y
yp
"aayox ^"na
}"a
ta a
ff
tod
n-vnoa oain
ot
^nN^
.^ddh
nnu
Dîp hdb6
naui?yr nyn nvni?
7 Idd
w
a"a
fl.
75 âtra
fl.
% ^n^
%
"pn a"î?
"pn a"c
iâyn
xn
âirny
mn p
pTUHjnp
nxij
fl.
66 d^d taâay^
"w
^d
'jik
/jnvn ^y
75
#a
n DN ai
n #a
p-,-,^^
.pnâa^DN iv
y_
p|i
^y
nr^n id Dayocaya yD s a
168 169
n ^
" 3 //y D D
nuina /'n
a"a.
160
d^ ra ^cd.
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE,
L<
).\DUN- DUSCHIN-KY
iroa
37
'-j
1
inniDi
pmPDM
rc
fl.
141
mnr
dtop *ono
-t-n:;
>
^nyiw: k p"n> naK rc pith ptj"*c *nn&an aai pmpg9D i'lonx Pin 'nrr; DOBA 0"BPp3K3 Brown & Collinson
:
WW
nmm
w
3*6
pe&ciia tf?
pfi
â
"iw
pun a'w "6wm
ofop
nyn
pefab
p
nauc
pea
.pc&Kru wSdnp ni?vN oîy nyn [a arcna
p^m
patera
paw
Daao
'wipan cht'dnp nsma mate tin
nina ktid obiy nyi
bw
h"d
nvp p*fih
rr^
jvn Ninn xniin Bnr6 b*i enjppaeta
dotibki
ff
pw
pno
ff
ayDN k*3
tpi Dai>ia
uva
'naifc "rona nnyoi
'n? enin nr
dpk "nn 7 "po imvbo
d"< n"3
iw
'a
by b"io
nn^
22"j?ni
,tmi p?
noe> iioon
Tn^
n-03ni
.orna zn jxdo
ltrcr
,b"an pirpn
3"&6
toiw
no
Try
nw
ôxn npv
p*s
joip3
n'a '*a*spn by n"n aptr n*a "pno 'aayDN
Daha
aa
iv is n'^x
inawna ooipn o^nwn nia*n bwi 7 ~jdo '*aniPDi tb&h hod nop 1&033 o^t pfcs 7 kh i>":n n:rK n'a |jni dj
ncana ny 3"a
n"D
p"ni?
piao
Iliac
nmnx
b"2D
dbh*ii
'ai
n'w inawna n'w p^yo

-laiD.nb
w
piu
a^
H3
n"Dno
mmnnn p^yo
\p
,jp*p iv
n^
fl.
rrao bv2)
nsiDno arampi loy aienî
p*3
iKiw
"i3yn vi>D3 '30
ura
"in?
o^
naai>ia
ors laws?
papm
40
d*b6
"iaiDni>
nofet? ireA *:oo
fl.
75 in y'jn "jjyD
w
"in?
b*aa i>3pnc no ivnyn vway ooip

,"B>K
n"3
S>K>
"j:yDwS
^3U'3
nsiDn
fl.
na^b
d^jd-in
yni:
my
r,
p^mcst
nn t* w fw
ny3 ^n*
"inr
j'inr
xta
jon ^y3 n3^ 13^0
n" s t,do
n"i
-jd
'jjyDN* 'n
tid^ imon^ n33 no^c* 'on
-j^y on.TjjyDx n.TX otii
ms 0^
n*i
i?
n*3 "pn db6i
td6
"li?
nj^ vn âa avua 'n

"inr
âo
n'ai
nrn
ovna
'inr
s n*'
onn^rox
*]^y nd^j
DnnaK
'on
irnxh
ipnp
.
"inr s's b3^3 ^":d bpyi "n

11
wnni 'on
n*j-:
nn 'wt
i"c
pw
re
^r:o
^-j*
n"o nôn db' nafe *in
38
pttD jn^nn naisa nnicmi nrbn
pawn
aewi pyb -jee ntrpiai
.wpaborrm
b'aD
n^b
pa pa nam
fxrib
n'a
"pnp b*aea
n'3
b"ti
-iwa tn n'ona aannyap

(?)
tP*tf
^ PN
nno
ton
nno
TT3 win n^x

aannyap an -pn
ptaban
n'ab
Bast
>VDy
,dpk vpDyn
bann
pby?
Dyn
bm
,t3Tn
is>3ik
p* no ^ "peon
tarro
nra n"Dn
a^b
&e>ayp
nh
|k
ppa ntam
jnrwrw
na-iya P3
.b'an
b'aD
n'3
'pno in
n'*N
a^&ipa <3ee
mix
new
D3dk
^/nnbt? nbaa Dnnao ton

Knit?
"b
nonca
ntabab
nnoy nnnaa two

ax
yrb N33nx
NnbrD *nnni
nop 'nnion
inii
noyroD pina^
iam pabia on^by
'aayoa
town
''bnan
Vaxn
K3nm
by
wm
nfc>D
n'3 "pn nanin
po
b"r paiv 3*b n'a
"b 3na
tsabia
i:pk
b'aD
anan *pna a"n pbni ^byu&o
b>b n-pb paiv
3^
n'a
"pno
ta-pvi
ana
pbyo
pa
"pf
Bn -p^bo
few
/inr
tHin?
p
s
bw
iv
'a
iv'aai^vp naa
'a
b'aea pby
'inr
ibvN
una
taîb
naayna
iava
wtr
pa"T
n"
*m
pbn&rea
.nayn vboa
DV TlDlp D3DK
>b
TiK 3"l taTBKT" BPK
't^H
3D3 inN nDN31

n?
Sti
nn'br
ia*3K
nn*o ov Kin a"i n^sa amab
*aab
nn
ib
nvnb nn'bt
waK
nat noi ,riWn nnyai nâynn n?anE msîn
nDc> -ien3c ioai ,piann spa n"n by
-p^nb nxa
ine?ab
niarb
ww
\mn
'31D
np^ybi ban
rnw
"jn"^? by pn^n ^nnna xobyn nnanab
pn23
B>'
b'm n"n 'oon poiy nnKty
mw
ia^m
nnxo
it
nn^p
'nan ôtii P"pn 'n^bn oy nobs paT>y hed^
'dot
payoi *'^"iâ by 'Din 'nypop
no ba by
''ait^
"i"yab
'nonai
.payb
nmnm /uns Din 'naim
,wn
nrx ib pnynb nnni
.vnpnym nn enTn
iaino
^3
"buys "pn 'S'm

"n
^n
aoDi
.Vine
'ibtr
rn*0K3 nx
nm
inairb
tnsui k^31
nbna^ro '
mpn
^noâi p'D
nô
%
n'a 'nan *33 vpv
rnw
n?\s |BBaby? s n nbna^

.'^''n
nnoâ lanm
n^2s 'n
noa
Dn^bs 'nbam lanvnxi
'w nô lanxb pi

&n
iikidi
DUSCHINSKY
i(n^?ana 'o nana)
39
niNO ^nnotr
|n*
ay^>
nuDjnip nri?
nom vom ana

.-pninK
'n
it
Dena*fia
ntfian
pa diith
'nija
rc
"p
n^sn
ninetr
yawa
u'^
pwataaip
wfca
iA-r ^"jd '"rraa*?

'-i
|oi>i
nn'na rnaon na hana

tfSjffiBtfK a'a i"-u
n*6 a'nai '*n
nan
x"a
nn<
'mn n*r wi?
en <jd nnyD nap BH

-nyo
(?
ma*? is '^ cpv wi> pai 'v flpra
BM
^Nn)
t P^^ bpn D311T3 BSKenama nyn frw-iy bmw tan*n an anpa yx jtp 'n i^vzx *w:k aaia*o pna bk
|p
tor
bwi *n noNo
'nini>
nawi
|a
dps*
an pa*p
jr^-iy
.esn oaK-iaa -nys
to
-iujik "pb>rpp
Letter VIII.
.'b
a'opn
Wn
'a
p"p p3-6 n'a
.('*)
pnn nx
s
'ins n'i-6
oinrn aina s oâie D"ni> Dnin nina i&raan ny f-ia p"a

1
n&iroi rnpn
tidvi inair
*apn naiai '*ana na-iaa laiarv
D3
'*n
two m*vrcaa 'won 'am '*n nam onai '*n nee me

.nanan
i>y
'a
eta
nt?B utiki 'n
p^\x^
mW>inn irnvns ranch pana*
vw
'v
a'ê
una
i>y
navun pi
-iDino
.inaiBn
wan
nayn
DD-iisen "pn
13TT a'Vi jnTn ;naa -jn^yr^ naiNntr no

"ucnfi^
cmc
nx
i>
i'y
pro m'na pan
i*piDi
n^n-n
b*m anan
spa /plan
rmtpa pi i^h raivni nan ta nsnpn nrv\x

n?a
piann
nb nann ^njn *ny-n âw nna^ mien 5>a i>y |n na*naa bw ^bik n^n^^ nanac no i^n 'nann notta xhx oai TKiaoa pn pnabi /maw nnapi mpn i?y ^ nv 'lai nam rrwa nSnpn omn ''yaipi n^npn rnna ny^ ^^ ''Dwoo a 'a near nanac no
40
nya
's

n
dk
nr\D
insa n*n <3tw na^ nvr&
bw
'*aiDn nDiptaa
Tatyni?
.p-iD
i?y
^y tela 13 ââi nfer 'ray nnna nana ,db> wid '\t ata *aaa -pan âci? Tayw /6npn nprn mni> pDBn
rrvpn
s
TW
/n
nana
-insS>
.^"nn
^y
wa
iaa Son -w*p d*i
ww
&>"
'ahp
-inn
"n
rinpn nprn nnb
m
'nai
'nrot
nAnpa
sara
^rw
Vflfl
di^d
ww
y
|rf>r
p no^
a'ay
n"n
wy
tara
iw
taâ
tarw
wn /p wn
onn naac nana

nai
-ryn
,mnw
"n
jnn
-ok
,?artn
etc
pith 'aw
S>m
jn
i>
hi nana p"n
^dkp
niana
yw
-Dfi^
p^sa
to
'wp
mnrvp
nyn
h
jjypn
iv
paio
tra
'wi
iianir
wimp
ransai
a^
pm
ins
inxn
'
.dv
"6v
no
5)Hy
^11
ppnw
m?a
np^ .naniô wots nh pa onpin

,|K
DTK
fNO
t/aoi
nny>a
D^stâ
ny
T^
taTii
taaasa
yma iaTi
cai?xr
taawa ta^n
â ma
niNDi nana pn
taaayn
'"n
maro
ik
oya dip
nw ^
th
p" s
'ahp âyn
tasôa
o'a
spn
r6npn nprn n"y
tapp nytsa a^K n"ya

âra
y"'
.pnwi
taa^taa ^"t r"n
^nP
^ awn
nrantaa
a^ys pTiiny
nai>
inaw
nar
/s
DaraK
dn
n^n
'nain
inw /nyT
n^
i?
ay
'wi
nra,
xta ^y
taâ
n^ nai rrw na&j6 nan nman hkti maan Dwap was wys n?a /^n nnna (?)mia^
ntd p^
^mya
pin^
nw \6
Nitri>
Dia^N
dpn
â"N ntax
%
N^riDi
i^y âorA -nyia
fna
n^yoa
xanb
ptai>Nn
p?aip
nam
waâ
d^n i^ a to
^t
pa? a'sy^
,pn w n
^nrya
m
nr
.oâ^
na
j^k natynoai
iDaiN iv nr pDya naiam "imon 'p^na paynaxs^Tp m*D*ta

'n
.Yâw naiD^ lanya

â
t:^
a'tatsn
jo
1^
py^DD
nn^ Nam
a'ay
*yo
nn^cxn
/s
l>a
nwvb ^nyTa
.naitai?
nai nnn hxw 12
anDaiD
iron
iniN Tioa^ nrn
iann
i?y
tko
wtvô d
Gnna
n'a
iwx n"a
dtdnh tarx iy ixab Tin^ xh nrn Tyi? pin piTDKp iv pw naîr .tanâ pn iv
">aa
p"h "pn?a 'aayDK w*a Tn taaâ 'ajyoN nh aahyta^ nnta^ nycn idd
i?y
jdt
inwa
"i^n
b'm
?)spn ;y s
/h>
'aayoxn
td dnh
^'^n ta"^ niDD
.ttK^n pDipa
TBI maa
n'* pi?yo
nô 'aia

laajna db>3
fl.
DUSCH1NSKY
aicn
n?
41
r,
n inwrb bbn n'r eniTO'DM

'inr
bv\
25
KD*3
n'a 'aayoien -1 -
Dm3N
.
'fl
'"111*6
DnfTO3*DK
T^ ^*
;nn
'B^
n
16
.
'in?
,
,
K*
'in?
r"n
nay
*pn
nô xwwb
n
30
r
.
inr
n"
11
may
a^
'inr
mW '"Wsa
n'a
D*n
irini
w**m
.
'in?
'b6b>
b'aD
cî
tdsjA
n'ono inniD baca
nenon avian by noDin

ntro
"i>i
y'r
2
.
ona
.
net?
rah one
pdkS>b phpd **A

'inr
pa
"3 ni "sab pbna pbn
ap in'
95
"inr
n"s in*
b":o
nn uawn rnnm
ID
w"i
>"n
'pno 3D3 niap nyiap nr*s

ruDMa rmoana
rn
m
'a
wn
vnKi D"n "pni

oa
/p^b tojpp
5>n
irnn
S>'an
nn
*6
wn
dj^
^n ana inxa "m

3n3 a"ayKi
n'a
/pw
fp
"idjpp
t3Tt6 Tnvn
"pni'
^vya ainas
y-n i^k
3kp
nî
apjr n'a "pn ny

#
nan*
"inxh
nrn
Bnn
apy
id^ Tianap
rusted
*6 jnv
P
,
;a
p"n
Vna
n^y
pi
.lbvs*
}P
nn
mm
nvna
wn
""ii>
amaKP
ana
Tina nn:DD
wwyi
n'a p'r6
rnw
.nrn
ntppaai
niansa nanai
niW mnD3n
D"pi?
o"n^ ymiyi
ri'-h *nanae>
.Danaai>
laon^ n"D.n -iddp
Dan
/ta\s
nan
niaDKio 'nayDîKD 3na niap n3a n"in

'?aoT
it
,sai>
dv
fa
bai
N3 xb pnjn
jnia
niyi3B> ntrba: n?
aasi
.nows 3nn njrwD
ban
naa
pin3 pDy '
nw
mix mnai?
iny*a:
nna n?o^
yoMn
mn
s
nw
Tyn
pnyn
anao pnyn
}
wi
ona*
anan myoirci
,w^
"jbn
aai
rows
nns
kd^d 3nn
ni
3natr
no pnyn
wan
dj
,P'nyi5
T.W myiD
o;i
(?)i*3B
jnaa
nd^
*pi 3nn
rn nnix wno
yiaab
^*dn
p"p*i
mnb
nns>
n^ p*c6 xin
n'n^
pnmm
naaa
vc>y
.o^nnr imax rmah bni
n'n
s
dn
^p^
no^pn
%
i'n
n^
nD3m
nxn-
n3n3 nîddi iin*sb\
toîui
n"n b^
> jna3
p nd^
a inn3
,
p"pn annio n-cnnni anan myDBô
max Tyn
lan-j*
'^n 'mo 'dtibdh tdhti nivv D y
oaDN
.axnaa r"y
rn
nbnn3 :sna p"pi

nciyi
yvw
d "idw
oai
bni
nN*r ^ynnb ^NB^na
myo
/aoiaa pin-j^
nnaiD sin nya
42

iiavyD
aim?
nxa
Kin ni>Kn
onmn
impa
-inxi
,mD-nan n^npn
ha*
'*n
xi>
>aa"i
/idpd
m*b maim
,)bipb "b
niEyi?
pina p"pi
rni>e6
ma 'w no^ maia pnyn
lâx
naDa Dans
ninD
11
,dw "wa
pww
'
,d"dk
Tinnan
nâi
Marion nans ^ddi n'lKB nanai

spp p'a âyo *pn
'ifen
w rn ,D"r6 nni?^ ttpnsn

.oa^ya
T
iv
'ni>
^nv
o<a
pn6 "pna nnn

a':
DaP
ptfi
'
runs n^x
oytan
novya
pama
'*n
n5nana
nhnan
'npvi
s
"ino^
t
.niia
n*nm navta D^hî? /\A nrrpo dbot n

a"y
p*np
n'a
oca ib*
5>a
rwn
naicn
rfop
nyi?
,nw
'r6
'dd 5>k-ib3 pinn
o^pi?
1 '
,iwn ^xn ma linu
mib
mwt Dipn Wi 'no3 maa^mi '*aaKB> nma&a /taini? h rnaA nanan e|w 'm '*ana nana wd it /an ta^
nxm
nap
wi
,*6a-i3
/on r6sn kb* naia iwny 'iW>. mpa pimo "3:x na

rmDi> ia^y nxan
i?inai
nenia 'vm
nW
inaioi?
nn pion a
ff
'a E>aa parn ivana ,.133 'nsya
^s
ova
/nuo nsrns
p*3 pj^ âyta 'iro
pawn ann
n"^3 nD
pn
.pw
a"a>
**?*
w
spw
'a
tvh Dirta 'ni>am pit
mm
i"-ia
'
s
n Dnai
'*n
nyn
in;n^
.o"mai an
yn
nfc' '^
.pnr' -iaw rrann inyn
am
Pîdd
% k"n bkh yvrn i*yi
kot6 D^yair r6unn

/n
s
b new
yaw
yrrca thd
Da^yii
aai>
ln^yai ins rvaen
S>yian i>s naro
naion u>roTO
Letter IX.
3"y
/i?
3'iapn
Wk
'a
p"^y
pa^
n'a
nh-j-
Mrnnn
*aoi
^naia Kte
xavi
snv^yo
vo ba smn
b*k a"^ 'ins n'n ^n^-nsa ppojrt ion ^niara *cân K3i xi2:b
anan 'diwdh pvpm *cNin cp^Kn anpa nnyu inanx
-i-j\n
âaâ
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON DUSCHINSKY

-IPN
40
n^Nm
p*K "n'na
n"tra
pxon
dtit
lanan* non on
nbv
ma
by
niw
H
^nn pan dt.i Tjarri ^nw raai ,noy 'n jna
.D :na
nae>a
nanab ttaDon -piacn hcnc
tin baB> aian ba by biai rrnn obcrb Dips! rpx noa
mop
loaw
aia
nmun
x?an:i
ba
wire mnnn
at
'y
"ins "jbin
bam
,isttap n"aa
*aa
poya naiab nbnnna

urn
'n
nor
babanai
%
<na
bâeai
anD3iDi
mem *âw
yrvn
nm
nnx
s
xnianr
bip
.an'eai
n'a
*Vna
>\xb
|n
nnnbi *aa xbx

D*^b
px /nipa
lam
D^nb mix Dinnbi ainab
/ibnnb'i
warn
.nbD aio ba 3naoi
nmna
oâita
'ny
inixb
s
vxvxv nnrcca
ait:n
row
pbî nnni o*aiu
.nbyo
Dâ
ban nnx
nin invy nnx nab^n
nytr âbe
p px nbnai nenjn rum nxn *b ht& nann pyuai

s
nam
Tianxm
,D>apT
nvya
pn o-o^b
"Vyro nxaa narx x\n
ivk
n?n
nan iai
r-ta p*a
td
jcd
nnniEa
pm
ânn
wtt
*ro6 'vna
pno nvnb xynx

cna
bab
s
nnix ixb nx
s
.jaabi fxab nby "x
pnan
/
waw
by
mm
DaB>a
fispn
nxb 'nann nana

DD-naon "pa
iab*a&>3
nxrbi
ma
bnab
vaa onann pn?on
V
*jx
*w
3*p "viiA nrn?
lronNi iroarnayai
,xnn nyc by
pnoo nyn by
nanttn
pnyi
nnot? mitan ba by nxb*
mx
Taynb lawi 'w xbc nnaa rain
bnnDm
lanya
,nryn
Tias
'm
fvaia ibn |ny
morn nbnn nnx y^w xb i"n nxr b*a&ai nE>axa inn 'w dx /Bpiaoa nnix noa* nwna # .|a b"r ^bp a b b^ â n^n^ i jn ,n3iob
s
nipD
1D3
-nyi
*nvo
tfb
,iar^
dj
5]ni
D.T3N
rwYT pis
idt^
pin
DiTniN3iy3
''nynb
ncxa
âTiNp 3sn max nô

s
pnux be n'ynb nro b^'nb ^tdnw nibnan ^bs*a bnanb uana

nnr amab liar
jorpsn
2^12
în
ab
nTpnn nnx
inânb
n /s x nro
*nbia3 '*m ds*
yum
\c \anx\
'w nxnob prn Vwi swno

mp
pN
ib
/nD baa mix -nayb yaoN bae /na

naen
c\n-i
nwinb
nbui
nm
nay s
wibe nx
%
'^pb
nayo *aa
nr
'vw
nay:
eaaa n^nyo na warn xnon ana naiub vby
'n
^pjy
2
:
nn'br p'a sj^
pbr
'inta
x"N ba
^bayt: p'n
ab baa imiayb
p''p
pw
'in
.vsV runom p^b

ba oy 'n?
v'\x
na
d'dd
nnna na-^b 'omaon "jnaxn pipn wnni rn^sb
44
rrofo Tpa" Kin d:
pbw
rv-ni nana niN

1
;ni:
'Jjn
tan '*BDWDDri
.v'aw nann"
oipD3 niEyb
lSnj
mm mm mom
wan
iw
'">
n:nnb tta
mail
i&ami any:
nis-inb
nx nay nx
rrcno
(T^ n bnn jhk n^xn nbiK
raTM)
npn
otaTi
.ni?
nw
'pn
n^y *nbam /iwtt D^nai man

Dip-to
-isid
ct
prnb nprnn n*i
nprnn ansa
ay ^ya pipnb bix n^ ^k t<?k ,na

^sjnxi -inns
on
iin ya^ Ti^pai

/
wnn
^n pb
;y\ivh 'nniD
*'v 'D-IIBOn
162
d^sk tin3
d'jtkd *p
TBnai r\w
nt
'w
nins mpio
wab nnpwb
ynanb
mar
wai
p&on
/int
rw
^ybi n"pyb
nma*
pin nny -vny nn
'-oid 'r6
inbxb
'*phs
nap
oy
'n
inarura
kb'^p
jâ 5)^
^nyo
nYw
mn
x"^n np
n yn
s
'n^n ba
im^
lV
ba
x"k "nn'a 'inn 'Dnisnn "pn ny nirnan

ib
unm vnx
nbn:
D s En
\nrb
'ib^
'n
nw
nan-n
nai-jo
nnm
nanai
.Dn^x
(: k\-i
D^n
|wrw nuaya na^nan)

Sallomon
in
Herm Mayer
SchirT
Jude gegenw.
Frankfurth
am Mayn
Letter X.
,"bn'pn aâ y'on jrab n'a
Taam anan DDiiBDn
pvpni ctf-in fjitan n'n

i'ip
n^
i"n
'm^b Dita
hnan ftairwi
nron
n/'r
.1"^ tr'iwai
fDT
3^ nYro nVa
n'î
\T
naiEDn nyiaâtr wii^

na3i
anpp
'n
n'^b *nana
'a
nannb ian
DaB>n
:sb
xa ax
ova^
m
%
pi
capon
mra
pisnb
>aia
ia"m
^ypo
na*p nnni latapp
ah
iV ana^yne n^
n D nas:n pvpn
s
m s b np^yn um
pp
s
tnbi ,n'iya
Dvoynonb
Dntoa^P no
mni toonx
br"n
i^t
p
%
crn6 pjnx vs mpyn

%
on!?
nncn ^nna by
,uy:<
pnb buonx nv
nyi ^Yn* -jb^n
non hnpnb
nyvc^n
nvp-j'
tone d^p b> i^bvp
w^m
/'nrya Ninb
%
nanp
ovn ny nrbn poyn ninn:c no ba '^ n ?^\ni

ir 2
'
^n
^D2
wn
na
i"o n #a *!jpb 'y.

p?n
yap*l
s
DUSCHINSKY
nâa
4s
'n
'aN
new my
/peon is
Dy
b'aa
uh
ân as
/irn
'pn tt
'*aaita
BKn
'mi
n't 'n
ova na*vin dd&q ona nwpnb
/ion
(?
brwnb
ny
b'an 'n^ni>
ui.ToynN
c|n-i:
sp^n b':n
sb
'"i
,rm&>
worn
in
n"v) t"v jsisni pâasp
p*mn
u*m
"y
cna baa
b^j
Dy
B^jn
paap
PWT3
toiy
py!?D3yiAx
P|*na
irritn
%
pa
itasyabyt
^nj epk b^n

onnan
,pyaap
b'n
'pn
man
-inn
,|jn bi
dsh
nnno
s
-mnb ims mnab
paaa pyboayyibN 6]K"iab b'ln b'n'pn

p?yiia
nny? "OK pa*? b^n

tsii
nn^n
s]K"ia
myio
"jm "OK
tME&np
p nc mo
jb
pa
oneai
cna nfDKo
/
i>aa
lbn
Lannyaa
nDn [ko
|yn fa
did^h
dwi ny
p\x
prom
fta
pica
8Wi
nais
onaaa D*inn Dy paso banDyo

nai\xn
no n'T
mis -nob niaboa

b aic sin oa
?n&o*nipyi
s
D'amyi D**wro nnxb pya bny

b'an
1*?
"mb
painy
npnb
warn law
,n'-r
*ibob
"y
ia*m nbya
[K dxh b'an -mwi bvsi
/fT ibon
nwi tn ,pyaap e|&na |ta oisai b'an nmê nanno f? DâTi nans by tnsai d^ddî o*ab?an -inso paw naissn
can b*o-iy bnpb
prow
iv
ixa
}*vNDniBa N
iv
p? is:
?bn
poyn onaai
dv
ba
p?
iin pawn
|o
n'T ibn nnn pv

,paya
~iy
tars
uxn Da*va t? B&poa

p*a
pnn
pbKV
bx? ?k
can nsy
payaa
i*n ^pirpoapnna
d.tk nyn
vby niar nobn nvp iy en
jawr\
ds^d pn
oawn
bvN tars jmo

"pn
iv
cnii
jnyr
^snroyD
ta^ |ko jsp a'rw /^rw
bxww no
bab piDn pyaasp pjNia fynsaa p"p ?2$r\ /fn* "jbon cjna
b'an BBiiwi
pinb pnâ
?]3^n
taxn
taair
/i^n poya lace
#
S>
-i
tannsD b'in bbibvi
pnn la^m /nwa

an
ny ia^D BâbN? naiN
Vcn
ana
nais
.nvâa
i^wb) fnb Dipcb dip^d nanoa onn

p"tra
r
crtaip
ddsd p d^d nayn

DiiTii
#
a
a*
,r
yi
pryiia
|ao niKDie
poip |ab
wi dps a"D
s
wX
ova
ânw
fyn
b'an
pnnb ân
prm
poip
a'nsi
'a
.pryiia
baNnyiiss D
-jSran
nh
^'an p|Knanb
}"P
pnno anaa ronem Dy

pn Tiwob
"fp
"fl
n'-v
/
bsmoyo
Dvn ny
poip ddik^ n^yc^ no ^y naoon n'n^ "lion
nnyii
nwi
n'*
dv casna nnva âaio nayn a"D iô pawn pa

b":n fjsna
pjNna
pvrb
lain p
jyaasa
prb
mm
b'an b"i 'pn

;na
^nona^ laâv
Dnao
b"an
piw
onanni nDn
'm pyan bw wtn bv
my epab
46

,b'an
ni^m n^paa
osicn
ib
pmb nanob "y ainab

a"2>
oa^biia
in
13T
oai
io*ya anan
iido^
b"i
/r
pn^ anan ima mambi

ions'
"pn a"syxi /ibiia naaia
un
b'aa
ivp 'm
-wtoi X** 5 iy
r,
mpob nanob pin^sa

^"kb
|DT ib
ok>kd
iyi oô a"a

ib
ioy nan oai matiM anan

pro? ib idki b"an
-idi
ny oy cp*n b an b*i ^nv D^naa pninap bbiph

lonbi |nb mis
jna
dbot pnn
>aya
"ni
rwvw nnoan
b"aa '*n pin
ib*aâ
a^
Nine pi ,b"an sîab *p*n lovya

ff
nwb
"n dt
dv noan nn /fby mar lobbi n
-jbon
jnai
ba arc iaib
N":a
a^ninb b"an b"i "pnb Dinni
ama
ep">n
pnn
px
s
/Kp wpia b"an a"N neon
btf
pin dv
wi
,dv
"i by
pin or
,nv "i by a^nin iyan
be pin dv pi
nn
a"y
"n nv
b"aa pi ,pya
ri"a
iy
;p
ion naox ,meyb pin
Ta na
nn
b"an b"n "pn
,1.-110
nbiys
banoyon no a"nsi ma? nvp lobb bar

lyane mpob
s
ansn
idoi
pinxaa
ray
Dian
pnn mpoo
*p*n
b"an
ors*
Disnn iyan
mbmen
moo
"yi
îidni ma loieb
pino
'nw
3*y3 ian
anb }me "i bx bban^ lms i\i?m paxisea iovy
Nim /v'aw o^nb

itn bionx
laaai
'iai
innab
b"in
xan na
**y
mox laDoo wvinb n"m lboni ioko Dipê wave mai lex lain
s
bna
pbo
'*pioy
ia
veayi ,Dibebi
i">byi
jxab b"an b"i
"pi
fNnxai ,pyaaap *|Nia
piN Dôinn '\t
,p?b re
paso banoyo
ia \"p jvaai ,|Kao onaaa

"jbonb
n'N N
onmo
"n
pryiia
nrK
nyi ,niiB> nt^Diii ,f^

.prsb
abi
is
cobir
0111
-jab
invon i^ni
ponn bxis^
idio n"T
pa
D"y
tarx
D'onibi
naiob
omonb
Ta
Dâbo
jpt
imo
nnnc
a"a ikii
traa
,nvw v n
byis D'ay
mo
pasn
/lowan
b^
ff
nipâ bbaa a"a
nyc ni nyc v n bâca nac> bbnb iioa^ "ib

iaip
,T aiN o^nb
jbono iDni
moo
fn
ib^'nb naiob lanya
mpi
mvon
n"T
it
mcpaa oa^na p 0111 bxnoyo

ja
wn
nyib ns*n
nanob
'*rv
pin
dni
n'^s
fp^ nn\x pbbir ;t nanob nnobiy

iy
|p
naspa
xbi
-a^r
pi /imonb ^nbao
mm
(?iXBrr^)
rvaiw Dipob
inn
.nw mrpab
-jbon
ab
monb
an'eai n"a "n pvn

b"an
DUS< HINSKY
47
nnrn
p*p
d:i
[mta
tra
fN3
to
nnv
payp
nnyo pi raap* r: :ipna didoi
-jôn i?K lovya
nanb
,fniB
a'a pyaaxp
cfcn
n"T
^dio^
jno
ors nntea
d?*k
ruwm
dww
'ne>
tw? ^s
in
ipqw fiwa b'aa ^snoyo "y no pi /is rone onm: n^nna pun Kn pan b":n nm^n onaaan oôinnn T ,?wa nx"io ran "p? a"D b"-\ "pno pin w **y pi ,mnrib anaa tk i^ni pn ;pnw o : ^: nyp *zb n^yo *roea wn wi avip tiodh ywa pun pitta non -j"to |*T osôn jot *K-mi>
cni
s
tt&n
naKiai
,p^K"ii
pTN^
rDtôo n^nina o^ n"3o
aKfi ?
,oin
i"n
noiy
lain no bv vta awai>

s
wroth
rTa
"j:6
pm
hno
\itt
"iny
nyie*S>
S?rn
n-iDDN
rnoN dn
nnyoi
an'tsai
"n
uwnn
ninion
csn
niSnai rnaxi "o
nâni rron inoui
nwn
onytta
pic i"n
wn
^y r6y&>
ntoo
ir
aaNna
DiBai
nr
poyo
own
i"n
np*c n?
tk
tt*n
*awim ivp
pm 'w
ii>n
yiatt
/ii-ik
yno
nfannn
row
bii
rD
/ewia
pyn
01B21 /ttaa aynn ^3iK

5>tt
nb^m /um jnytta ^yo nw rma

5>3*i
mhnnn
*mn
nron
iyotro3 ,p*s mon:S>

"p
n"3yo
3Kn
poo bv
s
3"a
Dtni?
>3Kn
nyia yotto
u '
nto nd :
"jtî Jni
pa
l
jTcwyo numnn
no^j
n33
v
'ôyai?
law
orma pa n"a ^"n nnx

janâ non V'to
s
*niwnn aaiwatayo
\"P
fn nfcnnno
niwnnn
nrnan
p:^r
las bnwi ,fiwa mhsnnn

>zb
s
nô^ nioa
y
**n?ya pa njna
ii?y
3n33 unh
tn
oaâ
^N"i n^yoi? ny
pa^ni?
nNacDi ^nnim
n
ibyi
Nin
niNvin
,64
wa o^yans*
c"^
ny nc^DN ,nnv nann
.pôo
mra ncom D^yanx
x^r
o"o nainat^ nunnn
nh
d:i
inii
pn pyna
Nra D^yanx nnjrn oacon pt

pw'oip
n a tt^
s
niwsvin
pBB>ai?
naw /unDri ob^b nyn oô pinxa

pnn no;
nns* b"i)
paso
nuai?
nDiD"
s
1
iv S>"aa
nnyo
wnixm
onayî
nmon
;"i?oo
pno osn ;k
s
^Bynoa^ d^b^d poîr
tpiuc
paaa
3 ioiN N i?
>
cnac ^sanbi
jm pi no;
rptaao
s
,poya 'aw 'o^pnsi
&vbu\ nnnem
rns niyon
s
N vin^ nnoj n^n

mi'o K^nni
tyabiT
Ty
dtp
N
jn .o.Ta
ncn
nh
nt
,nî
puma
tefsa^
s
'asn
^n
naha Sn
^yi
nnvn
piToayryna o
1C3
164
n'ayo on n
dô
,dW
^yi pa^n
msmn
NaVl
aan^'NiyO = management
guinea.
of expenses.
48

re
nnn ^bioa Daw
o*bia Q'biy By*!
niaa
na: dji
,pbn*
rc
ittin
td
n":iD
wn
,n3iB>n
"bits *ba "D-i&nny

ibytr
pa pwi
-jba
ne pma'DN
pp
D^ya-isn by
i"n
vby bt paya
,N"y
*sa "in
bab obcb baiKP
na
,a*a
nnv nwvinn
-id
i"n
nvnb
in
baro
*D*a nDsaai
mvoa mt
t/k
'
vb)
bi
s
/nnoan
ican nnx n"in

b"aa s'by
h^k
to myii
*b
rhvh
n D3nb na
n^K n"a T3 mbcrbi pmb p3ya

b'aa
paai^vipi
p3en naiab
b# ban id vby
n -p
ff
bpk
3TO
nip:
s
-nn-K
ba n'ai n'^ba "*aD n^
ôn
a"np3 n"c naiab

iv naniab
icwa dk
pnwiB
iv
rnxvinn
b"aa
a";
bpkp ,fpv
yn yaa ba?a
pn vynvo
"jn
"y
yomK wana ôipa nDn

mxvin
n*b â a":
s
bxn^
nra
ba aanb bxr n'aiwi ,nDinai yb "pin
baae pno
poya
âayia
iv p*oa
niai pn breo
nape n"apn
Darax
pw
ânnyvia re
iab
dpk dôbm
naa^
b"aa
na^n nann nox ,pn

165
nyp "no nacn
b*
nyn p /tun snyv mab "nb

mis "n t-qhp
lsiaa
y
row nac> wipi /nno biawi njwm nmon

onsat
/ia
/o'^y
n^na nanaa d^dn
b"aa
lnai^n
ib
aaiLanNiny
npyp nbna nrecn

pbr
by xaai frnya najr
[in ,131001 isiaa

laiooai
p"wtbi /rroi ncnya lanDn xbw\ iaab nanaa

p"a
sps?
rnbnwna
'ino
xx"ba *bayo "pn
nn nbsn iba 310a vniacn vo> .n'> nrnem rnaib P"pan 2"sd nn"br
Letter
,"b
XL
n'opn asa y"Dn jnaib n"a

r
inair
ny fia
]'"a
o'lime pnn xbaion ânn mx "mxb

j'n
ib^
*no*a
^"^Nai
?"n
*n
nam
s
onai ^n
nnpM
20 iDe n"n
nibc
"pbtf
"pn by
n"ii
s
*pno 'aayoxn oy non n"aD iana
c"na *n p"nb
ana
pmn
p'L
pji'3
nnb^
naiiaa i3DTa *n :r
ba ns*
nxnn
J 'ya
nnx
165
oaB>
na
sn p*D3 ^"nb
nin\x *ba
miK
y> v n
ND p K33t

"pnb
DUSCHINSKY
*;aw
,103:1
/
49
nAi
Mrwn nn
ix
rnstpa tiborw
na
rwe> /wfei poya nrnpn
fe na
b'an
pmrDN
ai
v6y
"mix
pp
s
*b
\rrhi
Dnpica
,w
b'an
-i
-i
eh naxn
naaai
wna
ten
aicn
"Din np^yai
*d!?
mr 'mk
to
':2b
p^ny id
b*k Kin
rerun
*a
tDTb
,jn
fppop
nai
mxW
mnn ^3 itw
ya imo c>n>c6 a"syx
n^b
To xanb {>? n'aern '*anen rniain ^y pomani rae*non onaia ;mn p law nra n^ Nae> * noxa a /ibaa niavDae pi ^xo ,a-i pw na 'vDy pv pa^r &?y nax ,b*nB*u >sa n&n dpk "tomA ^y nra npd kb^ uai> tt>oc b"~\ "pnb p na ^nanac 12a DTB31
nyr
/-m
niniD
nni /ina Kjpua D*asn
w iwaai
-jd
poo by Din^
p-iya
amv wd
pa "pa
pi>i?
s
Tn fjm ,îi
pan
rc
-intAp ejsKp nyn
*uw bflnj
iku
yaa
iwnwa
nap
s
xâxn an
pn "pw
K"n |*p
'"a
p<
wn
naiN
na^n
p^w
nariK ntao nahr

-ins
pno oyn ma
/ayn Da naa ran to aoan

,i*n
pa
yw
ini>ia
niy\n
pDyai
mi>Bnnno paan na^n Dâ ^y nSym
sarrx
n?
a"ay m\n ny
"lain
^-un toy*
y-iaob *sn
nisi?
i>"an
>"n
p'nb
^nana
s>
"retta
>x
nam
aits
a"n&ai n"a "n pvn

y
'w
dki
,nnn nyp
a^
no na^n
naiui>
-ppi
psm nna
ba
naiD^
on^m ôn
mvona
iv
nya
"noa^ an'sai n"a "rh mpa D^naai pxn

paai ;vs
obiro
^pao na ^xnx
ff
nom^ nan
"pn ^naiD^
\r\y\b
nnncai Si^ â nyai oiann

pioi
\>"pz
joi?r
mo
Nâ
âyD
^"nn Tnx ^kib'

r\s\r\
(nai)
.> sworn
<"b>
a"ao
rfrht
*-i *]D^
âo pi ^n i^mnaco
*:a
âi?
ona
'ti
"'"''
fn p|V ns:miN
tnoâ nâi
,9p*e>a
nnpM
The
address outside
is
as follows
Monsieur
Mqnsieur Isaac Michel Spayer

tres
Renomme Banqr
a L. Schvalbach.
160
The customary
greetings.
VOL.
XI.
50

Letter XII.
fy
r'rapn
'baiia.n
s p D
i'-j
pyh
n'a
fa
i^ko
nnmo pnn
.|DN
*jann
ai>i
wwti n*r
tin 'in^ 'i^p
= ^N
;rw
vrv
onm rnpn
tid^ mair ny
^'na
nvr6
ppiai
anaa
6
^rw dm *ni>ap b'an n"n j inns ,nn',T iaDN mm niar^ m^ yruM mays? Wn i?a mya nnB>: r\\a/b *nw r"a NnaN any* Diai? maynn nîn n6
Trnâ
'jdk
'mm^ ^n
nnray
*ar6aKnt?
'^pi
vy
'wna 'âxci
nx
Tipnni
166a
niana
nw
*'nrya
*pai
h?m "pnaaK> n"n ^y awi>
/nwpD
nt
noi ,v5>y
3nw nan m^ "pnaa

*'"iTya
n&rc
n^ i>yn î
r6m
Ti^yn^ '*Bm*n
T" ^
1
Diana ni^yni? ennai>

"inn
dm Bnv6 dn ânWcr
mi?ir in
dk
'*a
habai?
manâ
Nine no tqikti nan Anrya
ni^yni? nroa ^nyn
px
nwpa wx dn
n?ai
/w^n
d'^di nani>
'*a*n
a
law
nr oa
wib
'a ia^
dk rfaaa aâ inn

,par6 ip^n
kw
no
Diana
/S>
law niw nana^ nn^ nnwen dk> dn$6

/& nam nwi onx
in
s
Ni"Nai> jna
nwn
ma
dki
/â
oai
'w
"pa no ,nra t&ni pan
/*ana 'nana pjp

vniyiap
'*jp
nB
'w nina* Diani> ww ia"y now pn nrta iovy

piani?
omp
p^D
Dip^
1
mrw
jiaai
îNn
wnin
nss^
iDvya Nini
b'an
âbai
'*jb>
DHiaii?
on^ya nan^ no
*a
n&6&y in
a"yi
'wi*na
ns^ni
^nna
niaai?
a^'y
db6 narp pinn

inaiia^
/s
i?
s
jaw
a"yi .Diana
ff
nar
xt?
nî
d^^
/s
d Danx .nnx naa
N rby pn nN^'
i^
oyro 1
a^
nann niax* dn
nan
naa^
xi?
'^naa d^
nvrb nonn
.vao njnoB'
i?y
|op
aN
nnra
'ax
^nita .naiiaa
vyn
no
nita
f.n
/nrya nnin bv nnvxb

->aDa
r"y
niv>pa Na^ni? yaia^

-jnn
'aai?
.naon
anu
;n
r
nsnro
s
o cmn
ni 'n
'a
nvi^
n"aaa -jinx in nvp haâ

'ax
n'a 'n
n^y
nvn^
naDa anaat^ nnxbi
nnn
'nnN^ âa
^ s ^ya
niaab
a'ay ^nyni? Tnv Dânni? na^N .nrc

vnr
pjk
anc nann nxvm

la^*
b rw wiui pmpD nna 'uven

mar
s
anVai
'hoi^
nr yâo
âa oa
106a
âca N
pC,
%/
nr
vcw
'hoi^ inv^
n //y n //-j
1n
^y^

rib rrona
,Kin
*
'n
DUSCHINSKY
nnw
nicyi>
'*pfo<
>ti&
51
uarw
nsi
,^'aa
oyiD
ânc
nonon
310
dc
hnji [pp '^(i?)
ywa wrno
nra
inns man
in
3aa nonon naan

dni
,ina
in?
5|N
tn
*a
s
nnxi
**jn
'w dvd
mieyi>
i>ia
nonon
bcd
maai?
in
bwi
m
Kin
pw
ni^ni?
nropa nyn
'wi
nanon "k
wpa
NE>i?yn
n*nn h? nncsi?
."iic:
^r Kerne
nxa aottt a'a N^riDn /ta D^noinyo p*n nn'na niD?:n 'pn !>p unao npnpn nnn nay yiae S>'an ^n^ nanae no npnyn mtnb n,^ ktto n.t poa niinnen "p*" rnw ^ .?a dc f?yan ^c 'tDgnoBMn ana
iPM npene
vww
nvni?
ôa
2';
nano nam Nine

ryia
5>'an
paryn
t,d
bipb rfT ne-ra ntatan nvna
pyop
'n
'pro
nbym
nW>
nra
inane:
'*oo5np
noai
J/xi
P NnD
'nnana
ieyi b'an
'pn unino!>
ainai? ''Dfinoisacn
'prb
narai?
fF
.pnyn anan nra Nvon nesa
nana oxi
t"ti
epaoi e"nn
-pntf
"oooi
n'nxo
'ii?Bn
'n pn
'ma tin pK
paii P"pz 'in s'sd nrfyl p'a
mnan
'a ansai
T^
n'n
w ninpn lawroAi
t^T
'mo N'Nâ âyo
'pn "jnaio
k'jp
nanom
,e"n ne?a i:nNi ^nas* 'a
.pnyn
nnn
'n
jinnei naan
'Dmaon
'pn
'mo nxnp^ 'hth n*v

i?y
*a
na
na chip ^np W>an by n5>n Ty *ovy
ah iV
'nt
pfli n'nna
t:nsi
D.n^y
nan>
neN 'ôik
mioa âr
s//
'":yi
nmn
noii>
noa non fenra iwwi

n"a
mar
Ww?
,
3.n"cai
n^nî '^m
dni
|Dp
â
''DenoBKn 'ynrpn ncpa

py
i:
s
*ca
nis naiD^ nicyi' b*nv*2
Nin nnyn
r
yac wjn
i^rya ma: nna hia uWi poj^rw

^\s*
s/
nrai nra
n n^ niai?m
rwimn âcvn
n:ip
nrya
i^
b^b> oen
t ^y
3Bn
nnx nyca
icbiy
no: ^rr dn nvnan pi

aina^
^n Dam pa: a^ iaai> nniyi? ^nyn ^racn p bwv aiu nac ^y i?nr nicîy
'n?ya
^vyn
i>y
n^y
naai
nhn:n
"pn
m^
by
nwn m3
'ino
.
.
.
i'Y
nsâc p^M nn'na
n iD
'Dmaion
a"ci
.b
"pn ini>y niaa pa naicra *yvK

s :ca ni?
micyh msD^
\ov nainp *njrw
nan n d
i^n nsr nî>o

â
wa
sâ^
ww
âi
":
nan niDi nâ 'nana
snnn we 'ana
bo nm!?n e6en
52
rvpiD
tariff D3i

nna vbx s"n 'v "pn miro
ni33&> 'dtiddi
yrr
its
"ouk
.d s 31d^ TDni?
'*a*anai
'into
tas naB*
ppwn mnori u^ d^k bw inna3 nnian id&pi 'wum v6x 'wi 'w n^ onown nvp
s
*an
nain3
*ni^ nanon in nan nbx '^nan apv o^yn jhkd inniiab jaiDrt rratyc inn$? i>y mnyi? naia vbx n^K
pn
'wo paaiw ihm
papi
pin ^won
ibhp
>aann
nm
/itay
n"a
K>"n k"3
p'a
vt yn
n^ro
nrw
D*n"i
pyo n^yn ntsw fna

aaioi
nans mai?
mDA
nbw roa^n i^m
two na yao brpD
^n 3^ .i? mbvb bwwb wpya i?w n?a nnx atc Da .diWi ttbnnn f *u in^yn d^b* n^ pa*tt wy n^sa n'^m D3dk ib awi
n^DD law ,wpai> nai3
nvni?
*3B
N s*ta
,tbid
b3^ inwo moi>
mine i"na pwn mn 1*0 k"x vn an ima^ '^w mm nVi rnwp wy a .31btik p n^ hdik p xb aa&o /muc ""acina rumoa "'nrya wk l'na ir6yB> "wa motii 'n 1313 na nyi
s
.it
ntann pya
5>3
rvatPB
a'3y nvrA
rw
tin
s
vnynw nnw
oy
,pyn |
mina ^miai /âmano niv6 D^yrw -1^33 nî nroi iDvy ^y

paa px
i"na
^'33
3Bnna
pnnty t;d3
nam
[no
ph
si?
ai>3
n3ni>
âo
nT
T"n
â3 13b Kan -iw"i

n^'K
ôna
my
ntnn
s
*\nbyv
d^b ata
yaiat?
nw
n ^3
r
r
'nann
jn
T3Tni?
âx
^'y
3 on "ovyi' ^3 niyi
vmvoi VTipa mio^ na^N xh nrx n^
D^y
x^ni
.Dââ
3^
ny n3"i3
ii>
pâ
11
onnn
^y
pbw 3b
;m^yb
iD s a n 3
D^ya i?3o ^n
-^?0N ,
mq'^v
p 3 5|>^ ^3yta
p d^ni ^m na3^ ny inw 'inn pwn 3nn i'o NK'i?a nssâ

on3^
nai
by Dpwi
"pn K*ai
o^n mtmh nn
''3
2'w ^yb
1^
a'nai '^nn
'i^ ^n nânn
'ti
TiDâ wiaiA
DiW nnoM a^n xm pjn -pnai "mn 'wmb b':n
no^yan
/s
tijit
^'ao ^nro
'*n
^mh)
n nmb)
nmris
.% ^13N
ô
jnnnb
3 jnnn
^"r
3"^ msni
'Ab> on^ ncrs
bi
'*e>
rw6
m^
oipiD3 îT-iy
iLa*^ oai
p
cjni
a^ n"nn3
o"a
"xb
ana paa^ p
iv
nx^n
3"n i3in3 naiEC ntr3 ,pm^

'vn
y
p^ytMSQ 3'ca
o"a pSiNV tanyn o^Np nc
na3
.
âyo msfz "ran

}wN3
*ni>3p "133
|K3
Henn Meyer
Sallomon Schiff Jud. geg.
in
Frankfurth
am Mayn.

Letter XIII.
DUSCHINSKY
53
tyiiWBB'
5]dv
'"i
'an*?
spe*
bign
'n 'an
mate
.ItnPfi p"pn "UN

.n'a
na^na ova
m*pna
i>aa
nWa mi
niii>yn
misa î
ai>
Dan
/two bmn
nne*
nnaDi
Toa
mi&6
tvwb .nmm nam n^N nnma
mma
rvircK
nainy
nnma
robn
woW
'n
TiDnb
ib
n^n
HDD
^v
mn
Ty.-6
rnroni nyn
a'mtc&n
ain n'n
,mwi
'n
naap Dy
new mine
n&cva icy -prinki
mn
nwoi
maa nn^Na an bnpa m^>nn 'maon pican n'y 'a mtcron bpo *ay v'a 5)dv n'lo .Terayon 'mva p"pn ra'm Vax hian arvi
w^
raram
,|*n
ini?yrara
mm
dAp
Nvn pnm
"2
iy
ppai'
6n Dy
mica
by
/inninh
noi?
w*m
^y
nnN
'a
now
ntrran
dv dv
"ps/i>
mmin
mpwn
nn new mis*
p*can
dw
on
nr
nenanatf '"noinyn *S>a^ rone
'nw
n^ na
nâa
,nrbn
nanpa nnN p*6 wwnb
nnn
na
b**-
nnyi noin
uh
vrw
Tyrae*
ini>yra
ony
ptcan
ni?
pm ,^n ram
nprna
nnrnb nr by ^naay
.rrcmana
in^yra
na^na
m*a
Dacaei
1
'rraaav
nvnb
\xn
nnraira
nr
by xwirb
a
rrmrb ^y
i?a
-a ?
in
.msnana
in*
ramp
paean
Dy ,pB*nan by tjjdp irac ny

,
,
/ia
pae
dn o nnya p vb faavira kto nnroB* ovp nya ^"rn bpn dni ,dwd nina nnyae* nan
(
nr
paei
ne6ra
kwiuci
na
.
Di^ra
dn
'bur nr^xn 'aa
nNiara
Dyran
nnN ny inâm
/eaoa^ Npn
'aw
mm
dice dn âi> Nnâyn Nnfe
mm
D30K
Dny *w
Da ?]N
rb
nvn mba onan

.a'jp
'^d
pm
"iidin
pic
pemâ
pay5>
nvnai
y"Na nNiacn
ncnana
'iTaaaB*
'n^yron
'
(Tnn^) Saw naa^N pcn^n ^y nnna onny

si>
unv ony
onnn
^b* nb
s/
lin
.oann ^dd nî

nr
Dai
Dn^sro
ia^x
np^ym
sy
pme^m
bprw
nnDNan naon
xbi
X* ^d y*a nn^n ia\si omto nn*o *Tya

a'tcciD
nny
nb
iK*a
oan \sniui pem*a n^ya
/wd
*Tya
n"n nprna 'n^w n^N w*a i*nni ub ps
um
.Dnnn ao *ano
Dny
rw
in /san
c]ia
nTa
l^l-
n^ dn nenanaB* rnoim
nnnm
54

noTirn n'a hb^d
.nn>3
Yan t
tw
in
/s
ntsnana
Dmaaap
'*TyB>
fnno n'l^n pnn ystnn dk>3 a'jp d ppo y"N3 nsnoa 'na*a ,Kaia d^ n'a nwyn pi rn^D wm y'i>* vnan *bî "n '<d a*n J? npyiaai ,Dvp *jnv pn n^n Y^ epyo mtwaa ''an 'a a'ap d y"ra
/s
D*ny r6
pap
mown
nsiwa
nam ysi Dvp
I'*
spyo
'3
n'a
pawan "vnni> baw n^> ,nBnana Dmaaap on^n in jn2^ dm spa mî? fna pwn in^yo bincp dn .Dânn *a^D ^nin^ nvnh ,n*a nwyn nnn Dn*aoh (d'imk) iaa
"aa
k!>
(ikxiw) ny Dân anr nniDâ nniawn ns^xn miaym dbh n"a *m

nnci?
nmn mown newm

nanoa ^*np*n
naiaan
n"3n
n*
nr^n
....
epa
ntâi?
inncfiy
*nvy a'y
*y
.niD'wa NK>an
Tin b* dni
tanpio
Dan
|n^
mW
cm
n^nn n^p cbon nwnan iniah 'w&a pawan -vna n^> cn wrb (i"na pwn .) inb'o
. , , .
.^ ncN>i ânv b'an pxiâ

nvni?
mnnb anp
s
nnr nna
,mve nana fna pwn

pya^
'*at&>
'a
mntani>
iided
anns
s
Dvy tins niy

"n
Tiod
a^
"na
'^na
ay
b^k
nto3
na
nnam
i!>
nw
ni>
nny m\n hdi n^N n^ ngw n^
Btaswipnyai*
airy!*
n^N
5>a
mam
.nnannD 'nim in rain maoi? ima ns

('âon)
'anao 'una
nibn
mW
naa ncaan fc^m nAn
na*ni>
nnai
D"ai^
rwivb vnn mrnn
jyrf>
niam nv^p
lrwic
ai?
by
nam
n 33
H
nm
nya ni?ayn nD^3 n^sn .ytn^D ârx notaiNi nasco N^m

î^b
s
nn nirnn^ nniN
*tb tanaai
/(
i?aia
n^ ntrNai .p^na
n^D
în
n'iDa n"iD "pn
n^y3 n
Da
iapi>
nmna^
âpi?
baia
ti^n
na^nn^ n^ya
ni?ya
pa
nn
.jNai>
rnnN mrn^D Dan

nya
nnv nân nâa
^21
*wn
^^3
nr^n
^n
Nim
napr
nw
nai?o â Dan nâp3 nmnai?
n^N
naai
ryfy&
nanoa n^x sâ

lan^
n^ n^yai
^moâi
ian
ia
naiay dk>
nae6 n^
n^pa
a"y
nnn nrn
i?y
nâom
.Dan i?ap^ n3^
n3nî rb Nnp^ i"na
un pwn
na
niâen
in^yD^
nm^
rw^yb
i>yi
\n
id^d )byw m5nn â

iDipoa
âxi
d^6
ân n^ya iDiy nvnnn

tiît
D.Ta^
noipoi
Axw nwwnno
p'*y
ni?^ jm nahni?
mioyN
6y
*rra&>!D
^y
pxan ' inavcn
naw low
my
.
. .
n^N ba
i>ai
ni^yi? >b
"by
.n3n^ ô\n
.
nan
pn
nTp
wi
nnoy nnays* vnan ^s* Niaa naynw )b:i man3 D^m innaa ,DNan n"N non mnnwic pnx '*bn nnuyi nnmn by *\)~\un

fn& nonn
n'op
'*d
DUSCHINSKY
rruien
55
x"n
nr
r'anni?
i>a
naicn
mwm
N
mfa in*
mwi
'>^d
i5>
*3oo pirn
b*
*a
*a5>
ny .nnrn
ao jnny
a
"vnn5>
nvm
nny
m
l p
/byzb ipDs b n'w

*a
i>yn
'*anan bo
anan *bd "n ny dk

ejor
i^ p pn
anni?
jvm
,vi>y
12-1231
,*vnr6 db>
'nmc
"':
'wo imffi P"pn nux
Tnni>
raîya
nyn p*B> no
o'<
.N^pn tik
Letter
XIV.
,p"s^ o"[pn 03b> a'a pjii> n'a
naTi
ni?yo
nbyo "n
inprrv
J'"
s/
1
nî*wi
rrnna
*nB>3
5>ikb>3
ii>ia:
DD-iiaon bnan
pwn ann
'w
biNtr
n'n n^nrta
uvh D^To^na
n'na
'njj
<
nWnnon P"pn o"ti n'ax
'wo
niaa
nhaa
nyD ,nan
^ im wa
win
nvp
^y
PD23
nao nnyno onnx

pton n'na
s
dô'
run
n^yo
"y
niw
no
I'na
3dS?
nivni?
wmpna
*rt
inmoo
,Nim
ni3ai>
(?3 s o s )
3i
tAw
*'y
03
mroa
'ibyra
tap
npyoî
y'^vi
naW
:
now nym
i>yan
n"oi>
'131
mm
nyn
myn
D
*jawî
nan
nr
'a nix e>"y
rpW nwnnn
^yo x'op
nro5>B>
r,
noua
nyatr nbroa
03
jww
s
fpmi
d^do
mnioi 3oo
riBniao
3'i>tn
awn
nro
yVn nDmn Bân Ta ik nnawn mew Ta

3"y kxoj
wn*B n^k spmp una

p'01
.p"e>
i"6ap
rvbw Kin
nmta
'*a
.ons bi>
tn
a' ^yao 03 rh t^w!> rnswn
raw
mean
rrfrr
wwb
s'yx
'iai
uoo n^nao Knn nnta*

'"^"wo
t,3
s
t!> 03n
*'an
r,
pw
i/an
y"ca mtreo *6 nâp n^sâ
un pw? nmo
%,
m
D
s,
N^no ^3.n nnîn dxi
o'dd
'^n s onn pn s"op

n!?3p
'a
h?
n^c nDi3 3a toan pS nâp n^c Kin y"cn nDi3a âm Bâa si?n -ma "Din *nxn^ n^c s, y t^n^b D 3ni3 pKi pâ po^n -noa D 3nnsn vnrorn w?*i fehtron HBiB^bl c"3n nDi3D nin^b nvn osn ^3 o'oi nâp no^nn oô^pon nnna nny c^ dx p"^ ^y t^n3^ niD\s* pn |ra
pa
.urbp
pnpn
win
d^ nion N anc
^fcpanw D^nnsai c"y a"D p"d x'op 'd3 T"oni n"an j/oai
r,
M nn
nm^
ii>
n a
s
e>"3
/s
^
s
nxcnn
nDi3 ain^^
nvn dn
"nv^ by rby tu&M

^"3 S>yan n,nv
r
idiolm 31
ny
3sa inis n3oo'C'D
rt*W iion>
iai
56

vaab ninrjc ioa nnDon
'tti
-hm
aim!?
B>an
nnx
S>yan
aiani? i>3K
.oan
ptâ
nao nytra
nDiaa *iai
mbw
T>a
nnann
jnis
noiK
pap rhvpa
nmh? T3 rwtmnn
ainai?
a'nxi it!>
taan
htdoi rv^n
pa: irs E>"an
iyop
n^
T^n
no ponmi pania n*nnn nyn

'*pDiarn p*a nta
nnixai?
noii>
'annNi âiBri
ktbp pan
a'n
ipbk
nana:
"jx
i>yao
nroi
na
pn
onnana iTarn vb
"p** n
iv nixa '*bu
7
eân
na
^yan noN* mrai
onnana fram xh
nmnnn
7ns ntdp
s'ay naiD.np rvarn &61 uib6 ninv ^33 ania K'ap n*pDian iTarn
psn n^n /TVdoi
iao
rwa
nan nnno
ea
pviina ^yan noiKP 'nan ainab

by ^y
^"dvi
pii?ni>
tikvo nro nhnai ^yan

d^di -pixa c"y pa*
ain
|Na
naK
r's
i>
mnonp
'*d
nra anr
p"d k"op
moa
ini
noâ
a"ni
iaôc> 10a
"pan pnon in riKBnra d"o
wi
tb
/naa
â
nir
bm*k
*w
k!?n
*6n
0:
Dyoo
d"o
paya
nmns pnoxn
in^
ioa
T*wi pe
i?a
iana^ tod
nifen
ba
'w
k^
wnua
Bn-pB3
y'ay
nâro
'131
pxp
n"oK>
h?
w
^lao
i>aa
rnrinr
t"o
pna*n
ana
1 '
nBiDnt?
tod k^x '*awn niaie^n
n^nnai?
^miai /nno^ nsâ rorann pn fvn nani>
nn ^"y
i>yan
dn
i>3N
/lwnna
ainai?
ainan
pâ
nn^Doi
rwa
noN
noi^ rr6p
s
n^B nxcnn
noia3
reoy
'âniap fwfca
^00
i?yan
nox &6
wyeo
^yann ainan B3 nxfinnn noia aina^ pha^ 3B"yN*n

ioid ni:i^n
>ai>
ama naion^
nan3 onB3i
ix
i?a
nâro
u\x^ ^B"yx
n^
o:n nDioi
i>a
^sp:
1
pnyi /'dh ^"oai

/r,
nVa
10a 'wrun pna^n
pa^ wh nbn' '*aa T\mb inv

nîan
si>
BN
n^^
ni^yi? 10a 13 ni?n

i?3p^
mn^cn
nip^yc
S>yan
ikbn
ini^ n-o
nbw n^Nn
noia n":p
ni^j6
nwaa ^"yi
noi? ci^yD
"op ^d y"ca noN'31 nTDOi n:o ny^3
'w
poâ
nn^Doi âo nyco ^yan
nan
noiai
nx^nnn
r,
D3i
s
nnDo
-jiaa
i?a^
âi?
oaos nnvpa poân nnoa pi pynai naDin

poâ
!?a
nscnn
.nana
noiai
nnvp3
it
nnoa
onâB^
xm^
r
10a
nnoo non
nvn!>
mvb nsa nxb

s
^"an noiaa noipo nvpa ânta

ionî nmyi?
nnvpa oan nno
n n^
i
DiBnn
naD âa^
nxa
aasn
piam omp a"o ni *ap oan nnoa naan

4s
bn
im^ nbw
,iapna
ini^c in nns*
pnom o"oa vjânn tb na\'vrnLM mpo âai non "iai

5>a
n?oi
pvbn n"D nwa
on
.Dais*
^bni 'nibc nxo ny

dtv
'3
DUSCHINSKY
*Ap mcwi by
>aan
57
b3 ipinoi
^vd
ww
fiX*v
n3nb ôvy
-jbn
Dâanfr
wpn
\rA
ine*
dkb>
&na^ !tni
dm nannb
-riDai
nnx
rniD
aiipDi
s
by
w
*
ua
nmfpa ptra
s
wsm nvp
'w
D"yK
\s*an
xan
*"y
ma^
mjnn
s
B"
pry
wn
jk3
b*i
dhd ena^
mm
irx
'wann
*by
/s
paya
wi
xbta>
unwn n^nn nsnn mb

anaai ,p" b3
ppnrnb
ran
pi
'^^bn
spsb
nbi3 s
onsuo Danw
Kian?
taa3
d N"En n*a?n tovfia
K*a
nwp
*n*n
sbi
,/r
,K"iH5oe
p"pa pama
la nynb
VWW
nni
"i3n
ioai
*B>aai
nmnyi niaaera /y DUDn eptidd

m*n nan hdi
a*bn'>D
3ri3
d*p
d"d n'op
d:i
p'pi
"3
D3nn
di'sb
wya mn
n'o
^131
'd
3in3b
k'jp
nbnp pid pama

Da
ap
n?
a"D3i
i-in
n"bm
n"aD3 wan
by
'
s
wa
*rraop
i'o
nâ
"idkp
nn^
133 n'o
y'b:n
wbt?
a"D3i
b3
imam o'aonn by ma isddp ^mta
v"y wann nowi d*&*

K*arre>
n'amm
n?
"I'amn man bn a'po n'b S D3 p"an

/
mannwi
nyaoi
kjwbd
aan
r*a
ppo
b'tqi
tr"y
i'
*^ "kb
P
wrrai
wan
dvsi bitaub nana
niwm
ai
-non
ppiro
law
s
ia
main
"in'3D3i
ânoa vby 'nan \m ba nanp

nana
,iasiK
*amaaii b'a3 nasy

b
nnoô
by niDy ,nanai
by nan
aw
nvnb
ntcpam
,naina
b33 naoNa iani n'an
.naa''
-bs
i^n b33
nn mm
*pn naiyi ny
Letter
XV.
.3"y
,^"dn V'axanb
'b
ta'bpn
tux n'r n'a
&yi
t[\n
owh?
ai
n^b isânv b"an n"-iD

ib
onn
n3*i
by
'my
3niK^ ib^m in3 n^^ Kn*mfc6i

.pyab
sai^
.ptaa
a
;n
\rv\
iWhdi
lai^b
nnn nMD
ino ama "anwnn nai (?*rj^b) pnsb
inyi by
N*b
nbyts>
no
/nyn nam b pnjw ain ncnn a'eyw

p dnc*
p-3
D^p n-cyni
bta3 ann
imb
nai^xn nfipevo nbnan

'iai
niKtsn
my
ia^ nc&ti nvd imaaai ioxy3 Kins? naic
a'a
imepn
nanai inttta
pen^p nbap dn pi inenia mrno

r
jna
Kin dm
nun
.nun
*^ oao bio^ pp^nn
txrb
'b
"onoi
a^D
}vyn nns-j* ni
58

na>
wya
nb\y
fvon.n
p son
an
*a
innin
a'â
.1&61
pi
1^
din
vim
"iw3
pa
d^
dn>
oyann ik^> Dnip
p nn*^ P#& NEâ

ddji:
fm ixb
nTioN^
nnw
'sn
dk n'po
.D"p n^yDi i>aa

a'N&>o
"wn.n nvdji
nmp "wn T/nn n
.wid
iâ Don ih
a'nx^ *wnn n-VDN nna

ne> n?DN
n^ Dmp n^yon n^K can cyan n^y^n
fe
n"ai :"a
wna wnp
s
ia
'vi
n^yon
nTc^
nay
^Dnci
Vn
Yai
a'ai
njnDn
^no nay
'd
dn nnôK
s
a"an
dn wn
naa> jva a"N

a'aa
s
n'?
*'an
DN an Yajnni
'jhd
pjid
pm
noiN.n "aa 'Dim
N:nn a'na nro^ dn

Êani?
no "wnn nnip npyian nc
nwynn
*ano
i?
ri'T'DN
ha*
wn
fpD
n^yob Dmp "wna wana

i?ae>
nmi> ajn
nroi
n^n:^ Dmp nnosn nnann

Kin
nr
a"yK
n^nnac
'^pDiab
n'a
nv\w
^>yi
.urwa
;va
nE>yEn
nTCNi naon
i>y
^n
n:
p^D >'nnD :"Da^

k'dc>
wn
nn*n
Tinn*
':a
jpni>
ron
pwn
n&K naa
nannn inyn
piid^
vb
w:zbv a'oa^
"6
n^y^ Dmp wna

ianni>
n"ai a"a
wn
nmnxa
a'nx ppTi
pK npyon
*3Ni
Dân.n inNa ypynpni? &6n naSna

n^n naa byan ^:n
'anaac
''ByD.nia
i?y
inapi?
Tito
'ob
^
nra
bVoai
*S>y
a: n"yi
-idin
didn^
ana
'^xti
m^
s
Dinpn
naa
*3K
laâ
nra nam dbk
n*D
ww
ini
nani? ppnrni? "ovy^
nnay bwx $b +vb

dji
my
&02nt?a!>
wmx.nn niaâa ana

n^
nab
in
.nuni ^nianD n^yo

^di
n xn
s
i>i
la^y
nana
nbv x&v
^x^n
i?y
dj
d^
panw
wvy nan bv \rvw nom

^y
i)i
/s
nonnn 'w nn^nan pyDi no aD^ 'm ,nin inning ^b n^n 3ma irooai n^nn inyni nanx mniaya nicpn r na nconn innina w^pbn nn^ wn*
nni?
s
'pn
nW^
pDi?Dâ nnaionb
.pin
'w
nbiyb
.p^b ticdh nnxa

uins* niaa
r
^d DDniQD.n hn:n pw.n ann ââm tt

.i"nJ
.Yn
pnvn
îs^ nn"mnD
n*a
D*m n"ax
n".na n'y
naco nDDa tikv^c nn\x

13dd nn nan
x^n^ n^nnni nanan nnx
uâc manvm
y",nN
hfeben
% ni^\s nia^no l'aa ôi>
D^run
Dâ
nyni?
pna^ war^ anVai

p^n apy^
n"ac.n^
nxnin *nrwi ,nnyj

*b
s^
l'ep
^d
ma^
n'Yj'a
p nVDi
'iten
npyob ynani nvn n^ D"aa n"as
'*<!&
b"w
fi ^naa
"ino |ian

riNiiv
DUSCHINSKY
1
59
a"y dj root?
unaai jmartfc
vmano neê hni sta o^ ma p'nnr-j r*a in nS> hr"? îwn pen n*a mi in: prrw hon
Dap
*K3ll
i?y
c;a
XVI.
% igbiN 'son npya nina* nrs pa $ja
tpn "am pe6 "neon

rwfei
*w
K'tpfo ^*a
p|^
âyo 'mo
p*in K"i>a ne>D
pun
n"rra
'rA
o"m n"aN
nt$>
"ison ann n"n^
tv
wn
*}ny
nr
:(mo macb) pen "2

"vie
*"n$
"*a
"pn
in anian dn:
.1*13
p"a
âyo
.spp p"a
nrn
naon pnyn^>
*mw
FpDin^>
oêm ^ta
nyn
"jta
niw
"n fii njn
167
no
^po
"jaia
my
nnai
easy
n"a
310 aa
noah
nars> nrn
nan&n man rronn mar
mar n: n^rnma
wire
nr
s
.paaTi *anm paai na nani? naâa nx
cnnî d*j6
rt p"p nva n"ya
Dian
n^
iânin ipnyn^
*t5>
xa naon
man minn mar ^ kj mar ^k "n joi p"2^ s"pn nap a"i? nnao mwi nrn naD.n mbb pdtkp nrn isd Tanen i?ya man mas
.tan
new p
}dk
'iai
Tina nr "aw
*a
Dnp*i nmni>
aa
hah
(:nra trcea Dân D*an nr\x nnsn)

,'anr
p&6'
ja'neoi n'a *"nwa

n'-s
r\-\vvnb
.nnn
rn^n
by
ama Tnivoa
ni>yKP
twnn
,nnn{>
/Toa BnnKP nnann
ba 'w
ff
&6p .mueon tsn^

.niân lâ
M>an*ti
,nmy; nean
jflt;
p a âyD "pn
nn
Letter XVII.
.âye
'n
'art
pina
I.
'wî
N"y
'ane
nna ^nr
.n^Dyna
b"v rpp pnrai
pôra
'i>
n'epn nen
i"l
"a 'v n"ya

ne^poi
n^nc "na nanai

jna
r'na
einnn
nâ
kv
.jniajn
nan ^no
167
,a'a
p"aa]
"na
NpoijA
n^n^
pn
*^y
s av
nr
yyaî^na
p"pn ann b"i -\yb bnaa
ana:
nwâa
anr
wb
naDn ^r.
60

romn
'oa pn ira as jm "n
w^b!?
'î>n
roiD b'zy naiDa

'pivi>
man
!>nnnp 'pn
nimi xin
wn
i>as
ibs nvp pnpni? p*

,i"p
/n i^k>
167a
'*ma
s^>i
'"ion -p inon:i
'to
*'en 'naa
'innoo 'nwain
sin
'j^ti
.s"t.
urn
mp
niaina
niDa
'
irvo sSti 'poiy^ jvron

'on:6
,D*na$>
mana '6n
:n'^p
:r^
jan s
'*&p
"w
pH5*m
"an
a'aa
rm p^nom s"y msE>5> is^n *'jn nan iino p*m r^p "aa na*N /vmyop nnnoi pnasna sin 'j^m man n^nnna tn ana dk> nnc jntana *anfc uyT sb dîs ufc '*Rna inDn: 'to ^n b'ay snna pnsa 'mina *6n in* sin nnj& 'iai Vwu 'noma anas? nn *'m "ya no pan ^hv îa isin n"as non:6 sdô /map i?snâ wn nann 'nta ni>ja s^ya sj>n \tb6 âs /ins dipdd sn nvp inavs sin srn n'na "'nn '^y nsn^sn .&"i> p"aa nnp yi: '^d santa pane [(''Nn!? nns 'lpoo naiDi ms di^ sun si> "'&n dji) 'iai a"> n'n ,jnipy }yvb no^ nnma pDiy ^na^.na CTon on^n!*
pan Troî 'nan
: ff
pn
/s
'una
y fn"s
u '^mi nvy
laano
"pai
spnn
;njvi
nna
"ansra i?njn ps;n

l'na
ann
wi y^Da up
tt
oiny ny
nw
i?y
n"asi
za"n
.jnim
.jnisni> nara oaiaE
jinn
d^t
Di\n
iana*ai
wa
wi>a
mrbyn nnnn
^ya "t 'awn new

"i?asn '*p*rc
'va
naaa
nn?ae>a
nra
my
iv^y
*nntn
'*oa
'^y nn
nuta Tiisna J?n
'"pinn
pss nun^ np^Di n^n '^h 'n^msa vb noxoa
ii'nDan 'îDa
nnmn
sv
nn
ff
(s)
3na
y~H
jna
bd
'svim
â uipn niana
by Tnroi
("n piDD3)
^ns nDi^n nnai n a hna

'vn^
nynb ^njna
"jan
*a
^vyn
p^sn nosn noiy n^D nnt^

noan nwyh i?sn^ â
S>s
nsn:n nn*^
n^
nanî nros^^
^ nDs
a^nai
nt^si 'piDaa
pjn^ a^n
i?an nîyi 'iai
vn n^s d^js
'nn
^
i?y
.ins^pai
manna naunn
'j^ya ^'na fjnnn psan a"t^ ni?y?o
a^n
}rp
.nri?
nnvo Dntîpa niansn >nana^ nn
b ns
n^
pTiyni?
(bm) bais <nn

rs
nww
nna s"cnnn c'na .Dnnaio
D3 a
'npn dj
moon nsn
r
nuns onanm
'idi
d:\s*^
nan
,Q.nb
iai
'âra
^.tc o'lay
non nmnn paya no ^"oi

ps
(a)
f^y nya
/s
Drsi 'utrcoi
'ipibnca
nyon
n^SK 'n^nim
lC7a
n'i
nyv
n'^n
n:^
^bm
py^
n -j

pjk
DUSCHINSKY
êno by non
ittfoc 'ti
61
Kin âp nan 'wi n"a nyv over) sbK

pibn<
nivw
a
pan by
nrybs*
:i"y
ninaoa
/ktom mrv
nsp 'pvn
'nb
b"oi
'n*nn rfam ynaa Dnnanoi o"aa notn
-y'ni
|e
'nisb^
'*aiaa
"nn wronb mbyo 'nyn neK nanai /ncrrr *Wan 'lion anae a'on Dyoa lrayu \m 'moms' n'av ircoi 'twi
-pinK riN n*an
nvpi)
'iai
no by oybab n,Nbon nose noo ton
a'na
nma yae
n'am K*n
'naiyai
bbaa n? nan 'ran

n?
wn
nr
*a
by a'a ia*nir n'no 'Tpn *ya
Kb ,kvi a"o
yT Kb
mKva
inbyo
nmn
nan
onfe
,r
.ns"n o'aa *ana naanaai
wye
ba by
/r
vonm Knpo >nn

'\anaa
ba
by wdttti *an
:r r"yan
nbna
nayob KynK nniK 1Kb

by nyo jjvb niroi]
Da
'\ai
nb
nn
oa
ainai
ana
rajra
'nKn 'naon
'*aoi
['iai
anan pn KbK
lainK by
*an
Yrb :n"p 'naoa pi

,n p
#
anai
d"d
aas?
r*n,
yna son
ana
sa
n'oi
or tdot
nanai
'iai
prfc
pbn 'aa pioaa 'xnn
nne
pKi
*ba
*aipna
f
nnn
f
yiapb )Wp2 ra'noi nnNan

d:
wn
bxnt^b nanaa
-jnb
u aae ynan hnt

'n\sna e"p
.bba Dybab pay
aae yna
,"a s
nana
aa
.[jnxnb Dipo ja pi
.pic in* n* by 'oaa 'ena

s
by
n?a
'*aDm venp
jni
narra aa
by
jn
nany neK onann nn
byi
Km toe
iDyiDc
sbs*
"j^n
nxn
r,
py v^yn
^nan invd^ by pn ba bya
*nw
/nb\nn
ba
by
nonn
nuao
b^'xn
nes ^bn nmn

'""joaK
it
s
nnyi
nna xb a'na nnra^ no bu nosn ndd

^loabi
pnna
b ^b
now
by
non
'none
s
nby.n
/n 'nan
ikvd
^bi
r
''aioa
icnp
nana
(:)
/barn
'nn
^sj
&panb
na
noi
,\r
Taa
jn
'Din
ixane Dw n
nan ns D^pb wab any

anae Vias a^nb pn
by a y
r
'nôN Neia.n
r
noin 012b nra i-noa
s*bs*
Dn:n 'pb n nnn a Nbe o^n 'nn

/s
% Dna n ^ r,
na^D
pyta
"o:
Dexn
s,
'anoo
'"odj
:iyra
pv
n'n
nr
n^se n.ne pinob

naJp
ra:
nna.n.n
enn xnyo
d?n
\s\no
sbn reoa n'nnn Ka

pipn ncib
."12
nes nanni
ijox
1
(n)
.ynivra
diô na^D
n'n
âij
i:*:-
nan
'
/lai
'^Da
^yab
xbn
'Dina
nby
ca
inbyo
Nan neNi
nby.n
nes
ibbn 'Din
nun ^r
rap nn
.aen
|T3 nnby xbi noana
lababai
nnb /na pwn
62

.n"y
i
*p
'ran naeon
sp nnisnn
aab
'131
nex
pw
a'ai D'en p*ba by ^nana nn3i

.'d'jd
b'*3 retool a'a

11
ynna fn paiyo ;np *aa pomp *>&ben

,db>
i'
pa
Dîm n"nn
'"am
rowon naen mvk
pi
nvaecan
by
naem on dice 'wik inn b'vn 'n<anb t nibeb îwn* Nih nns /unio^ ynien *B>aa nyne a'3y ,KSa Nb 'wa
'îp by 3in3b lenp ynr *]pn

pi
'i3i
my
(n)
.mnipa b3 by d d
s
*p">as
.?y
po*a
'in
5/3y
'nsnp
'i3i
f3
ptn :n'y ^nnro r*cn
bip
nbnn 'on win

n?oe
ibbn 'in |Di
pnv
Vk
n"n
,n'v
m3H
'inn
aba nvra nnv nn pnTi pnnb

a'yx
bi3>
'nsyab
b'nn nc3n
wi
in?
oran
,wpa
aon "pb
wa
s
T>yp 's*k pnnb

n"n
in* nny pn^ne
fi33
a"3
nw
n3 n
noa *ap '^bani
nw
*3*k
pnnb
pbô
ixb
jw 'ipoa b^nb ^nnEN ^ki /na *ann pw nn3^ 'inn a'y iron bip pxan be
,Yp niEira 'in e'Esyn nnb xb
n"e mby nai spin
rcnra
nroib
n-ancn
nn^nD p
'i3i
nam ;-nw
nepro *an
einb bbp JV3 *a

'131
^ 'wn
*oia
s
3'ni
.?"y
tdh
'wd
hd33 *aeD
na
aynra e"?3 e* 'w 'en nnnns e wnn 'ipd nEib inb n*a xbn nn
Kn*n inb r"Dn
bipn
p*a
/in idjdp '"ae
nbxe
p
D"en
pw ww
a'rp
s
oae xyn
-pnxi
iT3
'îd
un3
maw
nnNEn
'wn
nnx Dipnn
pnnb
bwn
'viid n,n
'hdk
b'no
'i3i
tn nitai
*oa '^b
mn xm
âô Ta^n
DHpm
ora
ton bipn n^by

ibn
pTa 3'nô
/3n &on
ww iwj
.nbiyb
Ty un3n N^p xn
mm nb^nnn nxvb
obiyb nu* sb nb>i
*a^Di 'noax Da ron bipn non nrn

naisa
udm
byi
nnD b3
Nn
11
xb^ nâsi npmn inn ia^m wâ n^y^
.n^bann n^ycn
|n
unnn
x'*
^nin nns bâm Kinn nnnn pnnb b'n nsnyn

"k
s
n"n
d^ ^naona n"n be
>b
^Dnio
nenpn
nney
nirnon p*bam
'ney
(i)
n"n Nine bueai
nn
D e33 "n
'131
enn
noib3
^bdijd
naen e^n ibdio ia^n nney ^ddid n? ioni b^ybn
b'\3
ney nnx nnaoD
nbiyi
nns Tyî
Dîsoa
*t
nnx
b"N
nns na '\ie
ennne n"n jn n"n
"y obieD laun ^y:
n"n nen
'in
mîn
nrai
ennpD nn^ye '^bsy 'iylne cm 'naomn nen 'inn e"n '131 a j&rwn wvhw b*n nne ^3 âip^na n3n3 '131 nae b33 b*nv*
,,
"i3i
nn^ye fb "naDinn d^3
'131
inp n"n
,t"u
nya
'in
b^d
DUSCHINSKY
onw
"r
63
rnpc
onw a*'
paiwia (?"nsDina)
pro
id
*a
a"r
^m
n*ia ins* 'moan Dva "a ana rwioen nDca
b'm HNDDin wn ma^na
'nana)
D^sn dh^
rwn vwi 2'^ ^:a nnx rrwjja wen
î Y'pn .ib>pd tbp Ta^wi [Dm âa nnw (or6n *ne> ^:a imc maim tern idio tid*S> nr n^j dk dji .pa: a"nn "y atrn nnp 'wtyun pa pbni> w* -nas /an Nan dj *jb>b 'ipoa a'na piA
âx
tm tw
nuaipn
'ya
'a**n
i>a
'won nbnna n^n

n$h Kin maibi
s
*3b>o
n5>
'ni^na
'*bk
b xi?N
*jnp
'd*k n^ya k
bv K3poo^
:np
,wd
nar
w wna napj
ya
<n
d^bw
a"nn
xpvi
iniiia
Dmxn
i>a
nisnnvnai
k^ nw
Kimv
!&a
nmnpa s'kk aw
n^ Dna /ronn b)p bv2 paon ,0110^3

py in^ *nncK .-np5> tjd b*
"n ."opiaa *nKVi
(?)
nv nsn
'*nainoi n5>ytA jiwn
.toi
ma*n n^nna vsh "npnw na max hpa nD p'd i>y num man âa wy
,,
nWi d^ jb6 Dâwn {/ai 'ia nna di^ n"n -i*pn ana nianan oâwn roviaa paan mw 'Wn a"y in3D? T/nsn ma nm nnx
c"an piao
'Nil
w
air
*jb>
nn ^n
nW
'-ynr
nroap nnx
nWi
d^
*3e6
Tarn^
a"yx
k!?
on ,nren ny
pa
k5>k ^laxi? &6b>

-a
inrn in^D?
*pnN-i
xna
fc^n
'wi
nWn
Vatf 'ipwi i^qk
niw
npnnn inayn n"pn n:nan

."y "a *p
.n"oa
n^noa d"d
n"n
piana nr^
dn
d: inô
pvn ^n
ny xk\ âsi? pfo
m"j ^nara 'Din iana naa nnt^ non naa ana

ny
r
miyw maao
p^nnni?
s
nivn
pnnn
ân
it^y
n^ "n
/iai
%/,,
nWl
^c^
ny^ptr
3^ pSaw5?
^nsâ '^03
lynr
my
(n)
ncnn
'w no mn na^n
s
ints^K \s^n natr ^nia n d yn 'v^p ^y a cn^ pvn

TnDv\xn
pyn^
pnv
at^
n"oa
j'artn
a"tr
n^D
ana fy\ 'di
nara ' anpn

h?
^'Da niy ny anpi mnî
dwi âa
wai>
irN*^ TDn
wmi ^3M
^nara
nna
î
nnx
nti
ma
tr"E
pn^
'\t
:n"a
%
Bn
inn nmi> y^n

.n"a
ds*
Ton fe www nnaa nnâi *nan nsra ;ai ,N*tD TWa nxncn b^ n"h n^y Nvit: nns**^ Dipn bz b"i ncsm an snp a\-ia
a"ra
n"2
n^na
nstarâ
Dâna
i:\s
wa
6\
rwvyb rninn
'r\w\
w
i>y
t6i
a^n ^"Taa e>Vi
3dib
d.t:b>
'pk b)y
wpb nâx on iid^n -j-n mvo .ropann âa ai&> win ws xh nhy ta wana (?B>"ai>) s/'ai? D^pb "na B>nn n oa Dâni? b* naea TOn nbiy wi nnyoi
v"y
nn\-in
*3Tia npyn
nâ
ia
r
na^ h^n
dib>
xyb
it
natpanai
nnma
nn^ts
mro
pai
paayn
'*aN
nre
pa inn niâ pDiy Ninp p?

f|&n
bn
irtp naâ
-inn
pts naa^
n33> a'yK
db>
'âni ^yao
n!>i
tf
Tn owni? wit? &> vuzh *na 'o nnn wn ptd ^"dt a"a *n bw ran ** '*a Tinn^ &6p 'anyn nna nnôa myn nia^y uni 'n*wi -no^ n"a nwia '^na) D^nn jd ciâi? ^nno Nin^ nypa n^>k pmn *'tk n"aan ntwh &n*a si> *~\nv n^ nn taa na ta 'w (a'o
v6&
.mm
pw aB aayo uw nd?
paayo
paayo
pw
yn
pro ^y
'*bk PDiy xin>
p?
i?a
nôa
ia
nÂ
nnira
bhpbdp na^ nnn itwpaw Ton pnpa

-pna
"|i?nnn *]ysh)
ru\aa
mo b
nnyoi
ii>ia
â
nx
swnn nnôa
a'y
niD^N dib> in 'a^h
nn^y^ anpn ^norai nann }anp mix ta* ntMPBri â&> pân myn ny nitai> dk a pjya n^DK ^n pi>i ."n^manD a": naiy t^caâ a"N nat? nnn irs ^dbjb dice nn cw :"yN nmy oy i>D3Jc pip nrrta Tnni? anpnn "np d: a"s na^ 'rni 1W Dânn np^y^ n^n i?t^ it^xna 3'kb>o /TQ*y
a
i. 'iai
t^mpa nôa:i naron
anat^
ywi ito
â
'nyn^
n:n ^noxnai taânn
""Nti
i^^na
nybao
yn
i?a -ja
naiD
wx
iai
'^nn n^yâ
7
^nnra
opa ^n
nnô n^b Nip inovKi anatr yssn inna aiD papai> MD nia^y naxâ Tn 'mnm no6 n'no nmya obixi>
s
w
ivn
nxr
d<
'"6aw k"3 nxtr

(an
pKfi^
.id
myn na
bi3N^
s
nvm
^nyn nbtaat? nr onx

^yi?
s
iD)b vx ito 'anya âsn
.m n
îdd
nana
naai)
,ia
p *iu y
s
on
'n^Dpi?
Nincr
pnnn a"s myn n

pjn
îax^
mm
7
dn mi
d"d myn ns
5>aiK
^"n^ a"yx
pâisa
nia^y
p nntr
inyn
ptDâo d^3i"6 ivi onn
'wn
a"no Karw s xnn d:
nâ
ivn
vatm nî?nn
nr
\sn
px
.D.Tnmy ni nnix 'âi Dâwi

*1k
-jnn
"t
pni no^j N^n
'^n^ in*ww
"ai ;b n:
îna
nnnn
n!?nj6
n?ai^
ibn
bi>aa
y'nn
naiD nvp
pvxin
ph
nnswi
y^n '^nno
a^n^
pcNnn s n
ana^
pnnsn "no N"aa icxya

.rnniDi
DUS< HINSKY
nbtc 'a*n
noxn whc nx *nanK
*a
*nana noôb
ba
;.n
,m
ipaa
pcynoi
Nb
Ton be
wm ^^c
be
my
'nwpn
ens
Npnn ninb in*
Ton pnpn Dieo mya

&tsnr\
mbiob yipn "puMPH
neaa
niyi
my Tin bay Tn npo.wm

:"a-jp
.a"ap
pinna
noxn
^biybi
naieto nae ban TDiba
,vw p
*ebi
u*n pdb
npo
-pn bayn pan be
mym
jbia
ânpn pupb
e"n nieo
den
'âiDa '**na
'lai
tttn "p Nine obo

bay
n"n
neaa Hwrro hjra payî nNoiob eoo ni*an .1*0 onDBa *Vi aâi eV
,Ya onDBa
'in
mmx
be exnn myae
'01
sn n"n
a"ai
ib
.ibas^
,TP3 oyo
.a"y "3 sp
b* "pn
.n"D3
map p
pn)
bay
be
win my m
payb
pbaixa
ma y
s
pan abbab
"p
pmn
xonD
bwBi
nNoio
neaa niy nnbn

la n,b\ne in
nbnxb
'*anon 'b s d ton
nmay na
onn
nayoi myn p^tysnea
myn
'ieoi
niaanp
nxea pnnb nnam

naea
spv
ibâx
Tab (neaa
my npo
*|U
xbn
.nonwi
n"m
a"n
^riNT ^bibi
anpn T"i&W pnpn

nes*
ba byn
(id)
P^n 'wo bnan

ntêb
anno
b"vr
Tibsea
fna?
by
e"o
nra
Tiymn
'n:
pwn
Tiinx
byn
n"n
pn
,x"-|
a*3
nmbo Ha 'n pnpn nmbo nivon nmnpb bax
ninaoa
pVioa
'bno
B'ai
.'*
nva naiona
%
nia^y
Dieo xa*b mya

N"aoai
'a
Da
nn /bsb
'*d
n'\\*
n'sa
Tirana pdb
''ep
D'aonn Da
'yo d'wi
*pnov\xn
wb
r
a"s ^bv nn^bo
na
inbcn n s pn narc nic^N
'VDisn "-ami
.
'niD
na
niNua vbx ^naeni
.naea
^bn
anpn
'nann
nan nbx
by Dnpaip
Voa ^nr^
ia
s
pbaixa
tot
pN paya
-jinai
(*)
nibaND 'bno t"d3 Taon ann bô by ^nana ma^y payn
5W
na
nNnai b^n
-jib^n
na
inboa inâci
âa
an
c^rai b'nra
ia
s
nniDM
"po
-pbn
mn y
s
na
nai niyn nn^y

r
b^'dc
an be
niy'w'b
niye Nine nsna
iai
nia y ia^n nn^ben

s
onno
b^'jt
fa^b' 'iai b^D
âm p'nn nan nnab

s
"pnan c'nbn Da
bô "pbn
na nu^y
r,
D-saann ibbn D\s aan ba nam

niNob
xfp
ra'nn
nan
N*an d"d
D n sa
mom ê
XL
"pWi
na
iroai
niyn nia^y na b^'dd nns paaca
VOL.
66

noai
ja'ap pbinai
na nmay na
Y mDaa mnb nana

o'3om
baai
a'ai
nw
w
\rw
/a pi nxoion niaK
'bno
s"a3
pb*e 'i *pbM 101b ib>bn

'abi
baab
anai
'"poian
"n
a^np d"km
payo ibbn
nw
dî
mrw
'i
an
'oia Dnb
mp
a'ai
baa
b3ab
ixana awipi
n-rnybi
nbnnbi
'bno n"aa
ba3
D"3om
pbô nyaiK
'*T nbôa pi pi) 'a pi nban 'bno i"aa nbnnb pay h' 1
pi'ma'a
na
oaE>o
py
bya
mao
n^nmi D'aoina law vnavo b

i"a '"o "aax
ny
iiNi Kb&>
no by Tyn niaia 'bno

'd
pw
:a'ap pbina
.
nb^nna -anon anai Kna a"Dp

/viaia 'bno
^'33
i'a
n\x y"c>3 nbian ixaa pi

'iai
ymi
;o^d
D'aoi nbian iaa pnt
'*wd ova px dx
p*jn 'ani
'nw
n'l
'n^bi
no by Tynt? nmbo
wpa
vba
Da
liar
n^
mm
ib
y*x nnyoi ^ny baa

'iai
nvp
nils
iayts>
mn D'aoim kvoi nxm n'a ma v ^"i3 my ^npipii
a'op '*d
(D'aoin
man ipk atoao 1'aKa'nn
am
n*a iyo&>a ibbn ni.mono
p nbix ,payn
iom
*ab aics
'UTa yma inai^na

'"noaa
anai
wd
ins
^ya noa loanna pia
iyi
Yo
s
iovy3 *'vn w'nsb PâDo

b'an
warn? paiyap
inN
Kb ti
nban "mana
axi
/man?
*b
nai mona
ponn
baa
liya i"oa Tiaian
nannb
y
Dipo
lrwn
ibw
"jnyn by i'oa
bapb Dipo ia pan

bai
7/
^na
jbô DâynDon Dâay noaa

s
raa
ib
/7
nniD ina&w nbnan it aNin

ra
*axi
s
(>)
,(l
'*b
nx
'naDinn a y Nâ
py xa
jn^
r
n?di
pâa ana^ no
oanb
Nâni
d^n
inin^K
p^n
n^nai vi^ni irna na s /^''in
ij^nyw
by
iavy
s
omaâ
Din
b^
nrbn
paya n^pio nbia^ s\nn
'naDinn
i"oa nin^ nxaDin Nana nam
.n'am ppn 'aîvi Dniaâ
mo
yi
nioys nyai
s
nmb^
a"y piab nvpoa
^nvoi ^nnan nmaomn by
b
ia
nxin my
(a*)
.now
noin myn
pM
bna
bip
ibip
nyou'sn
vnna bi aô n'a âc it^yoa o'lnn anac> nin
am
lni^pa
ab
ib
s
s
ip*
troma
faom
r
'âa
nwib
inbyo ansi pâo ^noo ^nyr

iai
^nio^
ib tno vaôn
iryb
^b
fvbaa âab naina

Dibpaix
r
(P^msb) 'n
ma-n
'aina
mi
^'ini
iain
'poy pôynb soâin

ib'n
aô
b^ miDi
r
'ipioy
tynab
iôn
pnb maaa
f'aoin
'ipo
oan
im innaâ
r
'anb svvn nb^ na*n i-oynb nrya
'n 'nn .N'm
iaiy pni xvn
aa j'aom a'y 10 'lyn-c nx^ban 1213
(a*)

'VDiano inN wna?
*6
noi>i
DUSCHINSKV
Kpwi
n^n
-122'
67
x-z
,niaan
*ri3
nvn nan ,nnan
jd
*iatan
nr
jtd^ p ^633 Kin *^k t:

''pea
ia*ni
pwi
spa
faonm nnx
-133
,r
p^bdo
/
pwp
a'y
in pm pndb anacc
pn
|ta
nah
nt^yobi
roM
X^H
'131
^ hkt
a'nn oy
'*aeâ
i 3N B^nraa jfnn Dy pi axiDo

tn
"jd\-6
;i?n
Vax n'nno
H03
i>31
noana nÂfi
D"c?3
fP3
ni>yi
B^DH
pnnaioi
">"pl
mo^
.K*y 3 ep
tbt
.1*03
ta'o '*d
s
3v D3nn v"n *n3n3i ,nnan jo

k5>
pjk
'w
i*6y
-noi>t>
pa*rn
^
j
n'aa ptâyo
pat?
't,
nyi
niosno a^nao ^'ino '*enp ^y

psan
nr
pa^'o pai on
mas
nam
b'an v'n
an3i
tfT rhw
xb /naicn
r"a3
ici-vsa
D'aonn 3n3
nnp max nan
pB> nai?
n'3pnp ni> nyiD^n *a ^'nra narai

nr
sjioa
pvmaDi
nawab
131
^3n
dîw
3D3
ttb
iW>n D'aoin *iai v'nn

,xinb nyiiDBM
ni dn îki
'iai
pajr t&
i6n
^d
jn^y anas? niai>n ^poa ^33 103

'^bk nirr6
iai?
un
's
pairooi niiaxn r Da
nns ni
nM>n
rrtcta na
'nai?.i
maxo
\y*tb*
'iai
nimpro ncaai n^pio

n"i
:a"i>
\t
&6b>
>">
noxn
disk
^y rrroayr6
nanta
ki warn
3"n 3py
nd3
r"y
'in
'aita
nnxi
'd
nn^
'3icn3 >"d3 n*a

S>"t
na
*naini
,pn nans&DD
nai
dni n*i i*b

s
mai3i
ta'înn *apr
nn
'ind p*D3
r
o'op
n"iN3^ no ^30 nvpo nvp'^BN dbtis^
3n3 *6i ^nnroN j'jnn 3*^ a*n ^na b^
^ nâ si i3i innoan man nWi /i? paya n'oa

pay^ k^k faorwi
nL*>y
Taanea
pi i"i3^
jai
^13^
^3 n3iy
law %An nnuy
amaw
"i3iy
*n nyn
pai la
farm
p^n)
p^
nt
niyoena pi
*]3
pan
diîo ':ni> '^pDian
w^n k*ii )~wn xb

ma^
px d^p
enann
nya
*anî
pm
nr
in^ ^y npii?
-naya
in^cn D'3oin
(i
s
na îni
a'a
a^nb
i 3n3^ niaiinwn nn3i3
.('tarn
rn^yo ia
n3 njc^>3
D^3DO
JDT
s
tî *am
nN
b'xv *nii
s
*vw mry3
'anna paai
nn vJM paya ^ton "v

D"l31Tw
PS1 ,310
3 13
"IDNa *NT1
.mi>yO
W33 '^31
no
iDxi?
^y
pi i3*n5 pirn
'w
%
d^wi
'iron
nwi ^tya
oa
3"^ nbyo
*3B ni?ns
pai /a^y UwS 3 nc pr nsâ
â^y -lis
,TW
:
68
nn
nr

3N3ni ynbn
*3
nvp D*aian awh *3na

vaai>
1^
any* *aa*nn
anym oapn
nma
imita^
nV piy
*iw r6nN
,anyi
pr\ 'rsna oxi ina

3"ipi
pan3 pinjo
'w
*pn
nnp
paai
3^>
bzi
5>'wd
/aara a'na
'*ni
nî
mns
nnpi ibn
'*aiD3
âit
y^t
aitai
-i-nyi>
plpn nx
aa
aayra
wn
J>'*p*
.n^ panjn
/ntsnnnB nvp
*ik
jm phn pa
nc^ nan .Din
nw
)b
dio
mea
iasv
nn
'iai
nnp
d'tt
ni?y
"id
pm
ir6a^ nc6 Tia^n

ira
nwn in*
p|5d5>
n*ni> &>p\n
aayiaa
n'n
'yiub
.n*v D'33
nrpn
nxv31
N^pnis
nwtn
ni>
napcnai ,3n nia^p

-jid s j
p
n"n
anm
'in
avi-pni
'iai
*pw
TPn
^pi
aiK>
a'xi
iam
'iai
wn
law
'awta
c'oay
-idi!?
'va
nwi
*B^n 'npm
no
.-1W3
''ax
'*3oai anpra
aa aaraN
,n
#1
rroona
paiya jcp^
S>'pn
p^dd
nr
aaysn
'
s
noA p
.a'*
a'w ova 'âaaâ âxi
nw
oa*K y"aa
'van
'
aaan
a'w ,n3rn ay ''Kan 'naaa ia*n "n notfpn

ny ny mta!? nK"vi
.nraxan
"pD'on
aayjan
wn
mn
nhn
jaw n"aa ^mnai ^nami>
Vip
,nn. N3
M'p
'^nat
^jid
w*b
ynfnb
âa
van lysis
wm
'iai
BHn nxr my
no pnbd aîô
'iai
kedd pp rbib no
ntnyaa
friKBita
wm
'*DpS>
nnaa
ai>n i>3N
W
pw
incca pkbb> pNOta d^-ib6
tott (P'-nm) -inu3

/"iDa5>
antryi
hnd
n^d
fe sddd ia^ 3i?n nn^ m^na p mai Nin mnDi Nam paiDai j"i ^noa '^nai naô naDina va>y -inî wy ^n^ /n *a ^ D:)n ^ ptnao
i
now
niana
am mn^vn
yatî
^mpn
nnnta
.
i?y
.
.
fni?ia3
B*ia3
Letter XVIII.
,îa pnaâ n"a p a o'nnta 'Duabn pan ain a"c
."iôy-ia
w
niaai?
T"opn
m
r
*a
'n
'v
n"D3
!>n
pe^] Nninan Kâna 'tioini Kaianc *ii n"3N ain maa

mas*
,na
'm
'naity 'nna 'aa

/s
'nNna
iai
N^via n i
'iai
n's
iainaa "en
"333 in^ ^dnd
^y: i^n 'nan
pnv
'm
'nai^ pyo
r"n
.-i"^nmDa ^'cn p^b nam lanx apyn 'naitr ?vv
&x
tmsb
DUSCHINSKY
^n
i>
69
'*ma
wtvk
nxan:
pnv
'n nam /3pjn

*pBJi
'*tdw pye
napn
/
"121
'to *mn*?
'di 'lainaa
n!?n
torn
'fina
d:ck
Dwn
myaa
n'a D"aan
wvi> a'aa
nab
nam ,Dnn enoina
'we nn.TT pan
J"ys
pnv 'n
nt
'naisy
&:zb a'nx pnyji ro ^y

anac?
ana *k
awip K^n "wb 'htA nvobm K*n NânDon nWi

noii>
^ma
poo-im n"n my
*a
miw ma
*'Bn
mano
rwpa a'nai
n'aa noxn mrin
pDia-nn n"n
*ma my
'*di
Dan: a'nxi
/snorm n^
ba
a";
Bnanx bn ana n^nnan n^d an
nan niw
'nnnjDa
si>
s
dki
'iai
na
n?
iinai
/Bnarvx
&rin
Mna
.Y<
ini
p*oai)
nDî
new nnx -nana

"nsna
'ma*i *jp
,Bnia
dki
Tarn
man
%nac
no^
m
a"an
nian
nDnn
pnna
now
'iai
na
îbwb
s
mpoann
ana
nans n^yn
'b
wk
:
nra a: tk
n"aa ':nKn tonn a

'en
ph pa
anpca
pa
xn
k^
noh nan*k xb n^nna

pDiy 'oniaon
t
K-mn nnma
a^
'ni
binn
}ian
ann
2V
['Vnao
D'amn ana^ no
"m
nro
i p 'nDaa]
'nns
'wnp bw pa
'tai
sncjai ruroai
"n
inonaa
i>n
^y
r
^dd "na omo
n'n
i>anDD n^h n'n

i>a
|Di
'iai
'an nano pK
n"n
iai
'
np icdk /woa dp buiA

ot^b> sonaa naio
'iai
op&ni
r"y
,d"ep
na^
'oinai
3*3
*p
'nsnon
ps
r
'iai
'nsmp ta pao yotrona nniD yaoo

,T*p
nan
xb
nra
nniD nnwab rby inxm
'nDa
'wi
^n
a'n
avj
'n
wnj
"2
tnpion
^'cai?
nna (n3H$> ^xnn a

nisni?
ai)
nmo
(yaoro) 'o
lrrawn naisn 'on

n"n
r"ya 'oin
nnn na
w
T
^:n
ff
mtffw
nanan i^nnn
py^ en pnio
^n
yv\
nô naio n^
a"Dp ^d
5]id
^sn
a'âi
ntoan
,r
T-M
fco*i^
/j
si'x
'n
ya 'Din k^dbS dj
n's
aa
t^' *b pa nôa pnpni? w nvp ttt r6 on^y ^no 'ann n^-j p"Dn "*^nai /ana îni /^np bv pa ana omo 'm n"n
s
:
"nnaai
r
tpp pe6 pa3

s
i>y
r
'*m onrnp
r
^ wa
,,,
r'yai ''naaa
ên
/7
'an:
n S>Vi njpni
ipr
dv
na onô
k (pdY'bb Dian â^') p"sn
'^â
dj
nn3
'nwi *n noBnD va
WB^ my .w:nDN3 'w pnv .in^ya> pis npyo vt ^yao .imryi? pnv rrwo
noxa [^s^^d n3 na^ ^1 m^nn ^Dn

npnc\xn xan
Dn:^
Sipa
xa^ iy n^D pwa ,vni6v
c^nna xhoD annay
^p'D
(.
ana ^)
nenoo
ny urco oipo crnnn^N K^ vây ny 'vnai D^yicy^^
Si /VfiD low
70
ratyv nbyao rrnobi
nnaxa
f na
nn nvp nm may nan mro nani> pppra'wi pwn ann 2n w two ni?yo nan" n>N3 an^ bo nao^K
1
ny onai3 inw
nS>yo3
S?ya
*pai>
noty nnianon
nao nry^K
naai>
axn
pmn
1?
^NfcOBDN annax
p*rc
ninyon "pn
u*Mn t
'to ,vonn noa*

s
no
'ai^n
nnw
/rhn
nwpai 'isnna nhnan it 'ann
wxn nnN vnô 'y nini? new 5>y naa nnyi /vtsxh nmta
nW
168
by
inbyo
'*dn
pnt?
pidi
/I'bpn 'oa
nWa 'nw
'aTa
'*b
*td baa
nbn
'wo
n^yi
'n^m
dh '"bap nan ,noKo n^yi pbn paya

"n
via 10a
n&yyi
noso
vi
nt^yi
bt?
pbn
p^nao
a'ay
nnp
n\xn
'n*a
a"ya
iîTan ann '*bnan bab b'ao a'ao âo
pyit^y.n
pbn iyo>oa iowa snab âo ^byo oican no ba
tfbn
.is
nyai
nJj
nm i^k
'i^n
nana] imcaa 'nnyot? pbb âioyn
'w pp^yn
ltsnp
v'ia
-ib>k
ynx no na nnnb ,nan& paa nbiaann pay by

bya
pyoo
,yn*
mao
paon
nan pnynb a"^ nynbi neon byab

nana
pb"
1
pw
-ibw nao 'naio 'a^pinoi
<navoB> ^pbn by 'anin
nnai /PK>ano
pinna *'Bn
'*a*aye
/ibaia*
pnv nnroo -vyn nâ< n"yi nac? na* [man
mo^n
nrvn
nm
a*b
[inb
nn^N n?m
nnnn
*bna
aita
ba D*a6 anai ,p
.a'1
aon
'ui
inp
['aam] ^"oa
nbâon
'"naaabi
'11
a"a
noan ao*b
opai nb'OK.np noa* Swots'
mp
maoa in*
'Dian
*w
ini ''enaai t^Dro
nâxn^
'Dia
lyoîai
nâxnc pnv
an
nxi?ana
'iai
^nanai
P a
,7
/inm îp
Nam
nnm
^na xn^ ptortn
mana ^nra bnp nnya inyn anatr nhn panya^ ^np nâon nh paisw ^1 'iai phm p'aa na^b nyD nnai
nâi
nw
n n
;/
Nam
*&n
'âai
phna
'ni 10a
nnm
^na ona^ N^n anona

si?
mm
îp
'anan a'yx
sod nan nâw nriM

aita
ton
fm
iai
^na
iam
nyncy] win
oc
jtapi
i?na
no inya nani
ôn
^
r,
tjniy
îaaa iDaaâ Na^f î^n Dâô 'no n"aa a"aonn nyni? nbiy
bi3N^ xas tffltb nnio 'ioin
^n
yaô
;a
Nâ
'^m
y?:con
'iai
a'layn
a'î (?)'^ iannî
aa
jâonn ^"oa
nnm
!?a
/s
^np
aN
imn ^c
xnpo
xi?x
wrjo nan nn^n ia^*o
n^ "noaac >sb nrvbv non ppoyn paan ann

aio
avn ncxa nioix yaca anan

x^x n"n
'iai
ô
o^nai
r^
phm
r,
aiDa *n nan pspnp
nan pin
a"y i"aonn
168
3 //y
|'/>
n ^ D ty

nbx nwoiB
wx:on-i
DUS< HINSKY
fttar
71
\rb
'ai
n:*
*b*i
ybrw paw um
ni?axi
jbaian
nroci
n mvb main
trnan
3"y
tw*
"?
*&& nx
yranz bbv
jnwa pniDKP
dj
)im?
insH
b'nii
wp
h^
E>na
n!h
rwa wi a
p*D3i
p nnx
y?w
dh^ nnira
ny
n?n
noH
"t
"pn Kavn
ybm
wca 'mwcn
farann
ii>3Nty
y
nnnn nam
'nraja
man
nn
'hp
pbin
'Drara
N"a
i^3D^ 'n
ni>3Ki
Ww
nma pi ,wa3& y3&>3 pn nH DiT3*in dp6p ^bh nraN nn 'oarm nnann kW

/s
dn
'aa
3*nana *"Bn 'naoN /an
'ra:ini>
'â
yn<i>
*nai
.Dîyi>
cmp
xb*i
wnpia dj nam
^fcn
nyira nSjn
nr H
yonm \hv
'"}
(praray yac>3
nrata) h^n D*oyn nyra pi a*na ?"d pioaa

iyra:r?a
ni>yrai>
c'Daip
nvann
/lDpa
i>3
mnn
i>
n!?na
jma Tpta *i
S?ara
"HW
^nn
-' N1
K^n
K.na
pn
n-ainan nipinnn niraiN
"ikb>
pscy
"T3 dj
Ta^K \hv nx rtaxi pas '*a*a<y nsc mniN "ra d: -mm miK nsâ 0^-113
^33 âs
5&e>
/ww
i>3
i?is>
mown
nnnn
i?a
i'"
1
by
*x?
Y* "a dp a^roi T3nK

a^nai
a^nai
Kaxn
va6 "WW
^lya oennn
3^nrn
n n3i
,
nN rtaw
aipâ d:
pioaa
snx nhw
i rran ?pD
rnr^n
3"y 3iD
mraix
i?3
D^ra
iraa
^n
"t
ii>
rm'DM
Knn ha*
imp
N^ni> mraiN
lbbaa nnyra
S6bh pjy^n nnyo tumc

ni?aNi
"ipD baw
ny"i3
/pn
^r
nyca wm nâw i?^ dk

innna nNPan K*n
piaia
ait:
ma
,
>
ieaa nnsb
5]wS
ba
D^si?c
nN^Dni
namn
inyn^ nra
r
Ti^n
dni ^'aoin 3n3 j
njrj'xnn
nan Tiaî ^nra n
3 3ro pjyn f]iD3 âanh
oân no toip noa

^'ni o'aein
pw
i>'n?a
Dip^3 xain
d>l:di^
"ia
*a
naoo
D^nip^
omar^
'w
nn nî /?
N.i3
nn
r\zn
nnij
,-j
wi
pn"3y "p-wni 3in

?y
nv
s
by 'rupn
"1330
5]-i
'am
n^naa ^'on
3id
â
s
n'a
'n*
pi niDc
ncna
j'aona
'n^s*
pc ^va
i>a
'^d
.?'<
^nai
pinna
wb
nra
n:^v irnin Datro >n^3 -anEn maai?

n:
c]n
nvna
Tin onasn dîpti nrx

ai?^
niraipc
/,)
nNnon ^3 nn v by
P*xa c\smj
ym
s
n'n
'n^s*
/^
tmn
'ann nnna njnra nns*

^ra^j'inâ
'"D1
nnn:
pn
nî
'oaa
ra:
am
di
!?33
s
'îtj nn^'i n^ran

nytr *zb
/,
s
^nom
a'a
'naDa
vb iDipo *nyn
,
/s
i>
n3D3
pinruon
'vaips
t&
:"2
nr
r"y3i
/n n'nn
;iD3
dj
^^n oVa
rwb
nva
n^
nx my ."ja^ nvp 'niyowDn nannxi
Twycwc 'n'Nn
72
piK-01
n"-i

,Yj ep Yn.
wi V*
'âioa
it
tto
-nnn paan
t^pni
'iai
&>"d
nnax
5)Hy j"nn
n'Dn
anatr
'Din
yoÊ
no hi
ppnpn
'nenaon
fcnnm
(a"r
ban
an
'iai
nx nn hr
,payn
tid
ny b/jp
p'y
xi'b
iv-iw
'dk&
noi
wmii
i>"r
'*wp
Dian a'-p *p) ptrimpa

Da
?wvp
'iai
mama
win
jnwp
*aa
"ian jntan
'iai
nra
feai
n'-i
'nnnoi
iniaopa
'^d
na pt^po nywi
/iai an
'*pi>n
'n
ion
db>
yw
*axi
no nan
ynt^n
nt
kS>
*oii>m tnwb
wo
'iai
5>'n
nai 13 ny
'ipa
naana
i>an
hi:
nt
npyapa Tyni?
xbv myB>
mxa
'*b>i
pna nxana
Marion
^'2
few
naopn pa
wnao
oy
Dai
*db$>k
ann nx a"ya
mam -pn lamar miw wimw nnxi?

'*n
wnma B'nnitaa ^"na n^m nji^d
j'-ina
iw
nnv
i^y
it
my Taw i>"? pwn maaa nan hoi pcnmp^ ny y.ira ana 'nam mnai ''yen '*pm pjya /* ep mana mama ^y i>ina errn mana /^yisn pna 'nwna nanxi nbw nn nS '*pm 'sa nvn ^niay a^ k!>i D^yia mam nwpaa 'ison i?na mix kî 'iai y^M Nnan ny n^n an an^ :t"p "naoa Da) '^yian
,te>
nyi
'y>b
naira
/,
aiD
m&> ;ma
'*prn
D'-B>n
want?
'*&ni
/*prrno
nan
dib>
nara
a'nx
xain
'vw
a"Ki
nin a'nN i?ax
nanxi r6in nn n^ yei>K

*pna
man
n^N
'ipo i>aa
mD&ni N'nn
Dai
'iiaipfc
/,(
nâ
S>a
nam
*an
maî>
r
mapn np
'âipm
noa
nKnron
Da
'wewnai
Dina
'vd ya^ nBi Dâî

jpinD
'wvn pnsa
r
an dk^ Kinn
wnpn naoa
r
n"Da
2W
r,,
mana rwn
r
n^ni 'nin^ -jta 'spin

]b*i
xa^ iy
iai
xnaa^
nam ^mar^
'lanan
aiDa
vaiD
nâ
Dycai
noa
nam
*nA
r
'n ''P^n
nan
pmi
1^x1 i^sn
n"oa pan ai^ Da

|^n
-pnK,ni>
nt
onniD Daw N"nn v"ia
bv
.payi?
i^ni
nnai>
ipo
|a
pw
#,
,
'w
^nsr
POT
payo
^^
-j^w 'aôa
ncrK
nt^N
âpa
n'm payno
pin
mon
r
s
ja
a'n
n& nniynn
moo
'aa f'acnn
nan
niaitrNnn by 'ait^Ni
s/
wd mama m^yn
n^ *rw Vteb
n,ia^N (?
aan
ann
i?yi
V)
r
aan
manai .i^nâ j'aonn nan nDio

nny onmrn^ pna pi f'aonn ana^
vn
s
mo^
nt
mDB' ann
Dânn
r^.n pay *pna niDo nnoa

ian
aiyi
pn D nnnfe a isonnni ova* nya^ nano^ pino

s s
Dnxi
dk
wwzb
criTa "piv 'nwab
'iai
niava ninin nDioi ^NnL^
cnip haN^ y*N nnoi> ai^ lanuv n^ iiava nnnin
nNOioc
Di^ra
DUSCHINSKY
73
twmh vbx ('mm sb ^v) n-imn [Ra nyi a'nai enpob waain abcr mron nv by hnxmb 'wtw ma bus nnoiBa oxnp m% mnr -pvin nobn .n^ba: mv nba^ Dipna i*can* Dntcouaa
rvtwno onb nam
tfbn
/iwn
mnm
nKDtta an bn nyD Dnb

n:tra |d*j
Tan?
intra
ppcn Dpiw ova onvoo anxvb

ia
rw
'*an
nin puna
n:iEE>
naboi
c]noi>
'mm
ntn
"ena c"y
'wi ny
'
/d ptw 'via nmsnfi

ba '"jnv vn
|nwa
-it
.nap '
Wn
sb^ 'a^n:
rn b
nvp
-mm na^ ,psyb maw

iw
jrroc
ban
,i*P
nrpana ^0333
/aaa D'aenn njnbp
*nj
naba axa 'oa K7N otic
t/ab djdn
vnnm no nxDm
D^-iao b*i
*an jnb
'iai
'mnb np
dv n"n
-pvin bi
:'b rv:yn
ov baa D*n
[an*
ibatr
'dw
nnyi ,D-np lbbn
d^h
onb
nun \xm
'*enpn
*imw
^r
onai
'iea*a
Tanb Dnb Twin sb pmo 'onboa is

a*ai nynb pa i*anb
Ntroai
bwai
'naa
Kin *an 'aenpi noib ,D*yiv

"pae>
main pno nranbca pn
yjDa
bas
bnxa
dvodo d^k
napi
.k*d
fcnpi
bn coro ):n bk ubo ipsa sb pie 'Dnbna aTiai

Da*N
'*kddd
"nan
*'a
coi bnB ins lb*B bupx
Ve
p'n nynb
bp nn nîb
ia*m d*kdi
o.nb
Tanb
Tron
^3
Pncqd
Nbtr ''raan nynbi
'*nbb Kîaai yaoa a'ayi
mrvrb
ni
b" 1
pi,
'naon
>"na
d\neee
N"n
^n bopN
'am
nam
b\sin
n'sN
^sn^D
"in
b^p^N
Kobn nop
nwna
}H3
/
s
hndid pDDa
mm
iDnsai bop-'sn
mia incd: sb
mnt5
run
ânm dôdi
jrora
onb Tanb
Yd2 ^mn
Dâb
pa^
nmo os
bnxa
*naa
no nKDio
nx bna noy >aom naiiw naipn
/w*nn NDa by â^vnbi hkivi \sn^ ^ni .d^

nny pT
n**n
pi*
naa
nonp ?nw
/nnm naa
])$ir\
na eniib Dnb
mya D^ca man

r
n? â
s
bnnx xb
tnya nai nâmbo) 'didti
^nvna
iia?
nac anya
"-ij
nan i'a
ann
nynoa
"î
mar
Niabn is v n
s
-r^
b^ in bava
r|g* S"^.
nn ava
ra
w n aoni anal
168 a
74

/a my
bb nw pnar pay wsm '^ xnâi ,dv baa nob i6nN fn^ en ^nass>n man na Tin "oni .nynn pnar a<nan n-va? ioa niTa? ikbqi innpb m^ya DDnsb 'am "iiar 'aa 'pn xbi Tap no^b wk onan -iNâi xbx an pnay Nb a'nai an a^nan pboy nTan djdn ,nw bab xp)i nnvo iar yapj mar
law
'aaa
nap
'aa
pn&K r'm
xb
nianaai .na^n t&
'iai
Tana
'*m
'iai
lb
npy -ipk nx
abo noa ^nnapD in:^ &nn n^y
dw
*iy
abn
nanpn non px
'*a
mN minm
'b
nnap bbab
"pbi
aa"
napn nibaa nsej *'bh
Vi
'nm
,napi
nap baa pTarfc
nnap bbab payn

(nr
w>
tfb^ noiba
(?)
na^n
b
nbysn
Kaw
naap Npns Tina
Dys naiÊ
n'-i
t^kp
'
y"T
'iai
"n (Nn):iibs
d'ph ^n^Di 'b *p
'Dâ
Tyn ^na a'p
n^yaen p"aa nany na^D aân

~\&r\b
*a
xbi
'n^nao
pnna
(N)npa
'iai 'iai
n'm napo n\t warn ussd

D^nar
oVa
'ôya 'ann
nDxai
nnx Dys
t:k nox
bp
jiaipo
npa
*a'ann
a'p n'a -pnKni

"oa
nix npbfc> nnv insdi ^>p d'bo

.-p^nb pi '*:m b'sn
paion
by '<p 'âpon
ia
pm
'ipoa 'n*ar6
'iraipD
t ^mbw
ba
s
niopD 'nrorn
ba
lanai .Tanb 'Din '.Tby

/d3
ny n^K
pi
wbyn nip
'aipTOi
5>*sa
"jTab ianap 'ip&a
.napa n apa xbi
bwn
^m
pA
^nanai piD
pans
'iai
ppâo p .yhd /id ppirpa "Din c"t dîni

it
i^nni? b^yv xbi yju
i^n*
\^v
ba ona
s
.onnaia pio
i"oa
avv
nob
n n
r
/i
iann t& naswa
nn^ Nn na
r
^m nm^
.d n'ia
'n*ia
nxân
pa^
ntrp a"si
^*nn
'Din
a'a
DDi
y"-i
nâ rvmi mm
nr pi
n^n bbs
.rfp
na^
:
^'a paa n*n

-ia
ruBWi "insb
r
d'jwi
r
poâa
nana
pi
n"i
p^n nosy 'djh d: 'nan naâ 3

a^niroi
;
ai
^jnm
:
nann awai 'n^nao
'yno pa^ n D
/s
c"ai
t"t
n-iasn fiiDa
una:
nra
pôa
b"Dn nnyn) nic^pnb

": f\i
;/
w\
cr (:
*6 na^DDi
lbsn
^np
'iai
nhi xnabn
nit^pnb
Dm D^n
ioib
'd
nt^pc
p"m 'on "
onmn
'aai
nsn xb naôon y no nicpnb

pâ
"jnsin
nî
-^"y in^j
P'n '^lDan
pn^ nnyoi
dj
'iai
naya rum ny
însb
b s yb
^no 'n
niôai
n'na
"jD^b
'n^nan
$p)i
niain
-n-D^ jva xn^naa n'n n'o rru 'Din Kôai

m^pni? nsn sb
'*:n
a'ai
par*! 'n^nan
an
nrôm
".(""nan
nxca
a'na
my
Kan
d'-jm

natrr*
DUSCH1NSKY
nm itnaWn
pap p
75
mraaN^ mwpy\ ^nnan xnp 'an* n'atn
ybbh
_ i
sa*py 'ti
:
nd^d
i>a
nw nvp pirn
pay inan
dsittii) B^*vn 'Din p'Da
_'"'
"a
p'd 'in t/raa

iB>i-vaa
ivpwfc
nnwna nae6
a'ai 'iai
dh
noaa pi
M'tnm Viae nw?

('iai
nosa iaa
mn on nrr n*n
*wi6
Ttaa
^" n
nppon âwi
y'-i
*ani
pap
man
ibij6 pap
irs dn
vvd
'vnpo noai
nu*ta6i
'iai
?
cj^dS>
pM
ibiic Ka^py 'n
n'n 'ânran 'n*"ian

i"p
y'nni
'*i
'did '<npa ibib
p* tr"y
a'nin
nine
'iai
pari ^'on
-i'j
a'nvi
nap
baia
ana^n am
yb T"*
myn
^y
Tni ,pan
pm
Nanra rDir6 y'ni> b'n a'api) my^taa
nppn 'nakne
>i7P
nanan napoi
:
mo ^
pn
ma*na nam
"id
(pari
nraii?
Ttaa
"rp
n"ia Kâni?
py a'ann
"iai
p'n ins bnp^ mp pa

in*
'iai
faai
n'ca 'aio
wp
papa
nnan
'n;o
aV
n'a xa
'*ah
/wpna nanp
^"n
n'^p
."ian
na-c-ra
kvii ita
tdki
'Dina
*nn;n
rwp
a
*aipn
p*ona *an n'iq

'"d
a"v
mama
p*iea
rre
i>y
"p
miayn aaa
Da
<a
'bi
n*N
n?
D^p
i?y
'Da
mm
'n
inx aaNi
'*ap
manai
"t
ra
d;
nana "piaon
pi
.nyi
ns
iana oyn lays? "ins nanon Kêa

"n
-jina
PN'nna
oiny^
Tnaion
a**K dki
oyn
iapp
'n*
"in
r"a
b'yi
npnvi nto
hyi
nrai
ma
.pa:
^y
ma
mana
nm<
faai
r
ma^n
dw
jD^n
naafe pno âna Dioyn
'naab
myrb
inrvna l^^ idp nya i^nyo inaiob ntsnpon a*y
nan dd
,^st laora
naa
vw
s
pwna pîya 'w

aain n'hd ana*: *aa
r
pn
^dsd
a^
'na
unaya
'ino *pn
a*^ noin niaab
nns T^' n nin!?^' nso a nife nivo D^p r n a naiBwn nîpon 'isran "pn a'e ^nwi *an nni ''na 'iac fiwn
jnra
nvid ^'pn innnan iidb^ ioib

aiia âi
enn
'aan
nra na
"w
l'na
a a a^
m^
an
^m
i^T
^ 'ân
n iD
r/
oy âann êion a'c

d"31e
laniy
nr
iaa^
ma
'ib^
hitd
*")3
'^Diran
D^r kt
dl"
'inn
lain*?
faina inbs*^ n'jn
n'rana â^vra ip^n
tj's
inmna *nncw
J"
nnnta an
aao
îi?
'n^
n'sKi
i?y
'cc^
biw*
nawna
dvd
ann
âo"
*a
d an li îa maib Dipra nna

nî
n~~
'*anran
.nâar,
n*^N
â mbnn n^n
,a"n,n
naow
!>ai
laai*
nraa'
dHni
'ac
6n aaw
'ib ân nra 'vn
wnan
nan
ma
niay nai^Kia nnraxan p^rnn^
nann
nta^rra
pne&
76
-pno

nosA nai
/aioi?
iw
'*m
'airyn
ion
5>k
itao jan 113*33

/"o^n
Vip
'i3i
wn
'Dia
ff
-jino
bw nernw nrnv Tin *noid3
Aid
im
*ni>3
/Peiia^) pns nivo iaia 3&tjob> lmait ia *pnp pnri

*an n*i
K>"y
piS?nb
'iai
:n"d paii*y 'Din w"Dsh 11133 ndd

'iiiT
*aai>
nanra
'Din
yi
'n
:*?
*no*N irvo 'nîaai
wnatros 'iai
n"i
:'o nv*3
:
niyiap 'Dim
'*pp
'n^>o
ion
n'n
pea
'oini
nm
n(?i
i&i onn3i s"y pan n"i

in
n5?.i
,rfa pbin 'Dim yasw n*i

'i
n'o
'iai
jki 'a^N
'iai
'iiiT
nâo
k>*i
oVn ins
'urn 'i
:no
'n*na n^n napoa law

.par
D*ifc>y
ppna '*aBW pra

it
wn
Nin
ioni
3'ni
nr
iaao i'D3 tdini
payil
phn tbb>
nay*
ienp
pyoo
no nyo&?N
nNti?
icino Tiba mtoi 3naoa r ana
'ôyai?
dn pin r6o*
ii>iaa
pmi 'w
x')2v nyâ
nW
peN3 3naj
bv
/
1311 ni\i
(ibto)
naa
.nmayn
i>yi
nmnn
nmn& "nop/mio dsn3
XIX.
Documents from the Beth-Din of London.
I.
nny
na:
pinx
pV
î?a iy nîi
djnt iai
aitaa
wxb
aan
N3 ?pr ia niv
'i
!?b>
na naiyD Hainan ns aan
p
jn
o*o pyna ehpo oyn nos

jyi
it
nn
oaxra
K"a*a dot uin jmoa

!>kiei
tk dot uin two

nyaoa
3*i>
n^3ni pn nny nhx iaia
nro
ma
DrnsK na di^ci
5]dv
n^mpo nN na in 'a pyna

*b
13 kiv nyn
r
d:int
uin c^n Dap^

B>a*j
pib>d
na naiyD nhnan
13 niv
^n oiyna
in: în oxn iais pyy ^p>j i.tn osn
nbpai hia ovxai

opn
|K
?'an
jn^K3 y"na wasA Tyn a^ na nn a nanyD nanyo B*n kii [nyra uxn -pK pe^n nra Din /
l69
ojNiaa
&w
.pr
189
ON.n
nn
bni
pn pN
pjdv
ia niv oyn
naiyo dkh
tnpo
wyai
Nn iy
b DN3
c\sn
bpn
w foip cjiin pna w 3*i naiyo

n*i.
i3iy
tv
nny nuna

fN
DUSCHINSKY
"c>
,,/
77
naiyaae
wn
"6
us.n i:in
faatta
"iy
or ^hnd k^ti
^;n-;
ma
1*0
n nyaua
ncnipo ns
njix
nn
Dawa Ban naia proa n;xn
tn
^to
pxn cpnn aiyna

.3^ na
pyr;
b^k tn an B*n bme*! mro
in
BjDV
nyn
nan
a"y
faaaa
pyw n bpk
paten
am
'a
nbpai
i>na
DVNai
yv'â y'na u*i Tyn onnax na Dife

13 N1V N1V pClp 5pn p3 "pK jIB^n
Tin pt PN
pa poip t/k
a'nt<
pyii:
HO Din
sni
/vrra pn tr nâxa pa
oai
tanâ
pan to cxn
Nn a^ in in
n't
n^pDn vn Dy spv in tnv dpk
T bjkm
nv
^Nt
dnh nan
bit
jnyra
1
to
an
nt
pnip rprm ron-yD one

P*o
pâia ^y P3 pr
iv |3ya
1
^P" :
t/n
B^n pya *p ny^pn

pya a'n fti
vpn
tar
n^n nTs n dnh

t^N
NT* B^K LDOJyiJIp

73 DT11
fmtaa
n 3n LONnSJ
7D KV
TO
nais
tk tn an ,dtii TN 3Nn T/N N ^H

n BNH
|T
pva D"IND
jn naiK
Dim
VipiD N'T
kt
n:an
ttn
a"y
|wa *^naa*a jyn
ntt dnh
poip
to pan
Dita nyn
Ijniî hb>d
ma
ir
nyaoa ^ n^mpo n nn
an
tarx
djnt: tawi
nan
faaa
pyiiN
am
5>ro
[BWKtta in: ^!>n
.dptok na
nnyn
'tiro
iâpi iayB> ^'an â
,p*T 'na
frrnaa
r"-j
n:xn
'n
r
tn
;k naiN
x"Nâ âyta *pn
'i?
n^'apn
?"? na
}Da
#
wmtn
.p'a
pn 'aa
wnwn
p:^
/r
in
d'sd
i?rv
k*^
nsw
^^
fiKai
i^t
,pn:i^ p pn fowi b^db>
^dv nô ppn dn:i

,5|^p
"pn
,r
.a y
nanyD
'o
nhnan noyca n^D na iâ^s
n6n nn onn nbpai ^na nvsai yv'â

ân nanyD
nô
p p
nt
s
wxb sa arj* y"na ........

'a
na
jyn
tarK
iryiia
TnN ot-n 5>nw
n dtp
b'<
:nd |Dvyb
ps
na nanyD DN.n (Pp^vn) aaibaî

ny bh cpv
p
^11
pT.n ps rnn
noyiD
prvna
taasra
niv Dyn
n\s iv
pw
nn\s
*ch
^t
xn
}jni
taaxra
^k axn dnh
^jra
tjTN
nnyo nana
dpn
nt''
na laiNW naiN faaw n*w pa

"\"D
fayaoaN DiTn
tw ^n
"ijn
px poip
oaKta
iv
ny dpn a"nN B3N?a 0^ oia on law poip ny
t^ 2^ n
t2N.n
ytatyna
v^pv nn-x
aj<n -j^n oaNta
Dn naw nna
taâ
Dasra
naiN
pan:
niN
nanyD ny oxn
B^Ti
3â
I's
78

168
Bn
pk
3"y
bp: 0Di6 oryua enpo

kv
iv
>a"K
,-ian
mi Dy
dv
a"a
no-ism
in T ^n 169 nyn po K^yo x"iw kh pa xv -iyiw oy* djktj aw

era
pana tdid
m "rtyo
latan
'in
sh kt axn waa!> Tynp n^n

k*d
*pp
3"nx paxra n own B>nu

-a
ita^K
'a
nyn
i>nyo
nn
*pn
pa p>d
|oh "wd
K**6a
,k*sp
nanom
cisai
.jnaA p'pi
|DK3i &?e^
iw
5jdv
,sp!?p
nwn
]opn
nvv ppn
Dxai
XX.
Document
2
:
nny
n"3a
.n"a
onyn
oai
omvn
kh
xooipi?
mxi
ww
S>"t
anna an
*a sniri
anioa
-ayn n"n nat?

pa
"laxn
mw waaa
nrro
-idk
*6n D^n 12 pyvv 'yv uyepi

jt'o
'a
jk ^"iaa*a p*K
pitM ny dxh
-iais
^ nwt^n
pni>
tied
n nn
'a
ttaxra
bkh
'a
bxtro^
na ina* rfonan
.^
nais
^t pnt* in o^n
jryna
K*a xn dpk an
n&mpE
.^t apy "n *pv

'a
b'an
prai
|k
dw
warn
poiaa
moa
*wa
iwtx>
-i.tn
'a
na ina* nhnan
b*T
naxn
wk
pn
dsh
^n
o^n 3*3
ww
bp
&n
nssnipo
nx nn
"13
oaxra
b|dv 'di
nrrw
w
"13
bkpi
law ^naa*a
'3
ptf pitaa
,npy s
taxn
7
pn
D"n
^'an
pyna fcâ an
'3
-13
on
$n
ân xina^
faaw
5?kt
'i
pyop
ia
ion 31^
% pyoiy ;s
y an vbwo rbwirb
aas^
"iy
sswi aaata
b'an
.nhnarA pahr Daxra ia ttn pyop
"laix
o^v
naw
oaîp
ny oxn ^laaâ in
b'an
pyor
'3
ion
Da
dt
3'nsi
^yni
y"i^x caiy3 y"n3
wxb
pyo
"^yn ^"r
pn na n^n
pyofc?
'3
niyioc naxn
i^n
ân ov3 rna 3sn
*^s
âen
fora
nn
Nîaô r6in3r6 dkh oaxra

îbic
oasna
i9a
n>h onyna ny
pwn
b'an
(?pn)
"iy
"13
o^n anp pn oxn nsr ny3D3

"iy
^nii
ch-un
dear.
oxn uayn
oâ
db>:kt
161,b
^ ntmpo nx nh oasra DiTN
My
Last night.

1a
DUSCHINSKY
ns*
79
Tn
,^*ob*i n^'o
nna
it
niao:
nenipo
jnpra
is ny vi b*t ny
in
c^yu âaê p
pah?
taâ
^"r
nn dot myru pn* -p mn dmh

nara nrrn
|m
py:-j'
t6"w
'inaaâ
taxn
4"iaa*a
.i33N3
ns*a
xn ;:nd na^tay pyop

ny
.taaxna
pa
î ton
fnyra
ta*a
fnyta
nas
tan
pyB>
bh
dn.i
ny jxn
'a
dpn
praip
imn
naicn
ttn
y"na waai?
pyB>
apy in cpv
f.nyra
Tyn
aw
[roea
wic
jn
boît
m pxn
ny
tri>K
njnaen
Din
;n
B9ijni
yi'^N
wiya
dmd
*a
an Dn mix naxn i.tn
^'an
n^hê
[roea
naaa p*w
ti
navin
nvp Dân mix nyataa
nBnipo hn
nn
p>r
djnt:
ny Bn pxr
DBmaK
5>it
bunt:
'nax ffa n^n anp

nsmpro ns
sipv
d.tn enh
^nsn
nt^ra
ma
it
nyataa
^"r
nn
i?"r
fax?
onyna
"in
mm
*a&>
D-ainp nt Dy nr
non
apy na
ny.m
pirac
o^n iyn
*ac>3
.as nvD
>aiya
y"na waa!>
1X11
tot
p'a
Dim
a'a
y
ppr
nyiatn
"a
ia*aa!>
dj
pyB>
fjnma
mn
Dyi p ny bh
f.nyra
Din
para
coiyai
yi"^K
bnaô ix
oxn py&B>
navin ltd ntmpra
am nx nn
ny Ban b'an
pnan s^nrci
"iaa*a
Ba?a
naw ^naaa
car*
p*K jniDa
nnw*
Tin oyn
djnt:
5|dv
nx
i>'an
Dim a'a epr ny
înaîa
'aynta
;^
N"a nt
nn
jaaa
J>kdk ia
tars
pyB> ton anyna ny
DKn
kh pp
ntrmpft
a'ns
^xnî nco nna
it
nyaoa
nx nn
xn
.a"y
fiyiia
Na xn
mm
na
DNn sn
na
7
\mv
a taxn
.
bw
io*a
pns
na ^naa
l,B o
a iv
asn
taaxra
Ni?n:^D
L-y
5|dv
;nd
,
pmN
poiKii
fyn
piwB
p*M nsj
dpn
oama
Din:
nniâ
n'byo
nm
K^na^D
pa
onax na D^n t"^ nni^ t"d pai ,'vdpidd na>n n*ywn nan n b mwai /na fnyta n^ nm^ Yb rrw pai .n"a KD"p pT ipnoa n^trni n : Dc> nan n^ rmeai ,pnc: n^'^n
ff
anym Dnas
onnîi
p'a^ a"!?pn
ncn
n"i "x
,,|nc
dv
iaaaa
rwya
nr
cjnai
nr
n"S?yr:
anaan
k'c^v
p'a t&>
P^
^"^2 âyta "pn oinnn
i?y
iaa "wni'i
r
,n> nanom
,piaA P"pn
l
pai^ p'pa
2"dk
.DNDcna^nc nsâc |Diai it^^n

[DK3i
B^My
i'rv
^dv nena
A joke.
80

XXI.
Document
3.
s
13 nobp
tip
'3
Naoipi>
nhni 3^n Nina an
nbn 3niE3
nmn
ittynn Din caiy3 yv'5>N3 y"n3
waab
'a
Tym
ftn
piw
nan3
ta"ita-ijn
p iy kh jprrv
'3
ytaa
n^ nni3K nn
santoi
Banana ytaii iw'voiN tan
isnx
iv
on\s*
pya 'aw
Kp*w
':1k
iw pw
a*Dba
dpk
wt*3
bhm
i?n
.o:wna
t*
?? k*3
wwta pw
pw dps
taân
iy b>ki pya pay? iyi

i!?ddi3
taîo
iy cwn îd^ poip pin
iy iyn
-na*p
k**3
'aw ,pn3a iiayi?in
w
pw
jcn:
p*D
N*wt
wna pw pa
pw
*p
p tan 'aw
jtyiia
pn 'aw
pi"ik
pam *pp
*pw iy bpk pyna 1^11
iyn
iy 'aw
ppwn în iy bpk

pa
169fl
mx^ myn
jrwi
fpa
fryiia
dpk
piKBwa ny DfN *pp oyi ?pw 'aw
d".in pbyn lw.i spp pit
yam Swiîk
DiTN 'aW
169e
,
biide>
"JNa
*33
iyi
>ni
swim
m iy ia*m
1
KHDBK
K"11
D* p1p3 D.1W
BPK
(?
y^1"l)
PNian 'aw
pr
me
bpk piyn
inn /srrn pw iia^n
Daxra
tt^p pn jnyra tin b"s iyi ia Lwn -iy taara Dnw i>'an taîy n wii iy taawr tin
'aw pixii
S>'an
'aw ,11333 piNii

.
pinii taanp ins

*ai>
^n
pKiu ^pn jayi?a
iy
iyii
yaxDax D113 p 10m
^>3ni
picn
i*pa
p jbiki bwu epp

*ftn
'n
'a
dv pai^ id
3'an
pnv in
ni>p
r
pw tp piNBpa '3 Y3 waas Tyn

pn
"^
w
a
a"ao n'nto p'a ^ty p^r 'ino x'vbi ^3yta
pn
Wn
'in
n>
.nancni
'1.1D3
paii>
p'pa
.aNIBO DÎ^D
pyK> "pi
/Daao iaii3n
.n.Vbr
oni3N "pn
,7
iry^N ii'innn npy*

laâa^
pn
na
idv6 ^ an
nb^
'3
nns*
nap
nr
nnn^ nnn
naiD
hd^
c-
noN385>
on3i mil dh^

Sb>
ân
nn^
n"a
y*nn dî
imnM
d\dii3d
.in
i^DDin erwi
*b^
iann 'Mtr nna

laâs^
d^ pi ^'an ny
ids*
idnc
nyn^ nny man nyP3

3s^
i^ns
niytan
nbrb
ny
n^Nc y"nND3 ipy

169,1
n%3
pan
mvi
169 e
bvx
nno
Nw
Stuart.
Officers.

b'jn
DL'SCHINSKY
itdo
8l
nnô
not?
a"; icb anat?
nayn
t?*t?
n:t?
npnare nnwo ana u*b row
m?
jNaa
ne*c
ib
ppovn
â
onan ana
a'a
-';
nvp noîpo noTinni jndo^d DnnaK anan by Dinni jb/hbd

,0'ai
bwma
Nb
-jn
n'a
p"d
v*D y"nND r'*

nynv anon
mnst?oi
ion
t?"aa
pyi
/rnao nvp
jnn pn:i
.dvp v'a pay nipoan N'a p"d ot? o"nn

r,
wane
n?
n'urai
by naitpn
nt?
bt?
ion u'jabp dvp nvpn
wba pdb
nbin
anaa
îbs
'nanen
pa^
was?
nnann
nana
*jb lata Nb Dânaai nnya*? nam

'\ns?i
iDin*'
anon
by
Nint?
Dvraio
Dipoc
bNônN b*N nnnNa
Dt?i
ôt?
nant? jva /ata
Dnann
ba
.jNao
KViBn
nonbo
n^y
bt?
nt?i
n:*SD
fNao
-jbnt?i
yo^n
's
y"nNoa apy^
ttns?a
at? n"it?a
fyi
V3N den
lot? 103
non nbn
d
D^ny ^t? s"ya
wxb
iTyn Nb a'aya*? djon dni /nv
pn
nt?ai
2"ya
Tyoa i^n
wn
anan ôt? inn nnx nya pn aim
nnN ny noopan
n"o t^yo t's 'd b'an y"t?a

jxao ina^nn
t?*
n^n
naai nt?N
nnya
un
TOm
n"it?a
noopa
p"yi
'"in
noib)
t?pynnb
nt?2Ni ,;on:
ot?
bpnb
Tona on
p"op p"d
noN.n tn //ana
nant?
'*d
nbya
*ba
n'ab
in"1
Na nyn dn bpnb t?n
n^n dp
d:i
nv
apy*
ap
*anan
pn:t?
Pâ
}Nai
d&? t?"an Da t?"oa nt?N.n

nt?N.nb
infant?
np^ym ,not? bba

rtjDDfi
mo
Nb nunan Na iy\
'nniyo \n
no
's
nt?yi
by
"jbnt?
2"yNn naiayb
ni)
jNao ina^bn nyt?a nioN nt?Nn
nrwm Ton npo Nb \m hut bbaa 'n pny n-cyj*

Nb
noNa n^wai innot? bapb m^Nb nNt?nni na ,mj Sn nrson by naa
/Mon
s
by lbn
pasTibi ^loiN.n
pa ypnt?nb Sn
inym nbap
'"n
oyo pbn bao

s
,bba
noop
'a
}N3 pN nvo^ vjai
in^b mrnb
inym
i^jab pv n
yoa
nt?N nn\nt? b^n
onnaN na nnt?
naa bab
n-j'N.n
ny
inmno UNnn
N"Nba
'bayo
niy^syo )frv 'm

"pn "b :"opn
pu^nn
'in
Naoannb nnsna
bibs i"i
pnaib na
nninn n'a ni*6w

,r
}
,N"y
nano'm
}naib
p"pd
2"do nn'br
a p]^* ;obr 'ino
,3Nnso D/Vco "inoa pyot? "pn

/*D330
maon
onnax "pn
.nn'br nry^bx nn'inoa apy^ "pn
VOL.
XI.
AN EXPLANATION OF ABOT
In the issue of The Jewish Quarterly Revieiu
vol.
VI.
for January, 1920,
X, pp. 199^".), Dr. Joseph H. Hertz suggests a very interesting

3.
emendation of Abot VI.

D"Hn-j *)p
He
reads
D^snaE* in place of
'
:
and therefore
translates the Baraita as follows
He
who
learns
from his fellow a single chapter, a single verse,
a single expression, or even a single letter ought to pay him
honour, for so we find with David, King of

nothing
Israel,
who
learnt
from Ahitophel but ??ierely conversed with him and yet regarded him as his master, his guide, and his familiar friend
as
it is
said
But
it
was thou, a man, mine equal,

(Ps.
?
my
guide and
my
familiar friend
55.
14).
Now,
is
it
not an argument
from minor to major

nothing
If David, the
King
of Israel,
who
learnt
him
as
from Ahitophel but merely conversed with him, regarded his master, guide, and familiar friend, how much more
rule, verse,
ought one who does learn from his fellow a chapter,

expression, or even a single letter to pay
him honour?'
is
The
purpose of the emendation, as Dr. Hertz points out,

force to the "iom
b\>
to give
which otherwise
is
decidedly lame, in view
of the fact. that two words or expressions are undoubtedly
more
than one.
It
has been
my
I
privilege in
connexion with certain studies
in
Abot, in which
have recently been engaged, to examine several
old editions and manuscripts in the library of the Jewish Theological
Seminary containing the Baraita

is
min
\^p,
and
am
convinced that the emendation

of the syllogism,
if
not necessary to save the force
the proper reading be reconstituted according
to the manuscripts.
The words
Out of the
These
nriN
-m
and nnx
HW
are not
well authenticated.
sixteen editions
and manuscripts
on
my
list,
find that six omit nns* 121, four omit

latter
nnN ms, and

prayer-book
two omit them both.
are a French
83
G2
84

Vitry, both dating
and a copy of the Machzor

century.
from the thirteenth

all
The dubiousness
mentioned make
of these readings, evidenced by
the manuscripts, and their omission from the two very valuable
texts just
it
very likely that they did not form
part of the original Baraita.

text of Kalla, to
careful scrutiny of the printed

will
which Dr. Hertz makes reference,
lead to
the
the
same conclusion.
/TIN
Not only
"iriN
is
*inx
"m
omitted, but
reading nriN
the
^2N1
"on l^DN! gives the impression that

a
later
second 1^2N1
introduces
addition
to
the original
statement.
According
to the best textual evidence, the Baraita reads as

-iriN
w
.
follows
:n^ in*
pioa in
nns
roi>n ik
-jta
nnN pis nan td&i

psr
xbx ârvriKE id? xfe

ânya
-ii>
^n^
"jta
nna wro
.maa
^tdi *ssii?K i?N ^rvnwD

roi>n
b>ijk
nni *jp isi^ni
k^
5>&ats
hi ikot nai>a nna-r nn hdi nem bp onm N^nt
ik
ii-in
pis nania iDibn lsitai
in^v nai>a
onn
jp
,-naa ia amis
t^c
'
nai na
or
'
nn ^y nnx
'
pidd i^qn in nn,

less
and
since
'
two words
expressions
may be
than a whole
Scriptural verse, the
-|E>ni
?p remains in force.
Dr.
Hertz
is
of course correct in assuming that the verse

is
immediately following that quoted in our Baraita

explain the allusion.
required to
Raba
in
Kalla
and most
of the
com-
mentaries take for granted that the teachings of Ahitophel are
summed up
Bttia
in the
two phrases TiD pTiD3
V-JIT
and D\"6n rpaa

taken
"]bm
respectively.
Now
that
these
two
expressions
together constitute no less than one whole passage and therefore

it
may
As
a
well
be
puzzling
the
peculiarly
out,
llbl
onm
emphatic form
N'^N, as Dr.
fact,
Hertz points
Baraita
should be used.
matter of
the
was not guided by the

it
division into verses
now
If
current,
and
is
very likely that the

in
word "irs did not introduce a new passage (see verse 20

the
at
same Psalm).
we assume
this
to
be the case, we see
once that the two expressions which sum up the teachings of

less
Ahitophel constitute together considerably

passage,
than one whole

therefore
and the emphatic form laâ Dnan
W would
not be unjustified.
EXPLANATION OF ABOT
VI.
KOHN
reading,
titles
is
85
quoted
A
is
careful
examination
is
of
the
manuscript
the
It
above, shows that *??.$

said to have applied
not
among
which
David
for
to Ahitophel.
possible that,
purposes of the homily, our Baraita read *JTW instead of TJJB*
which would make the relation of the proof-text to the Baraita
much
follows
clearer.
'
:
The passage could then be freely rendered as Thou, a man mine equal, my guide and he who teaches
that
me, that
we should take sweet counsel together and
we should
walk to the house of

If there
is
God
with the throng.'

for accepting the
no
real
need
proposed emendais,
tion, interesting
and suggestive
as
'
it
undoubtedly
we need not
'
of course assume an exceptional
process of transmission
in the
case of our Baraita, an assumption to which
we would otherwise
Jacob Kohn.
be compelled.
New
York.
THE AUTHOR OF THE YIGDAL HYMN

Professor A. Marx's 'List of the
poems on the
305 sqq.)
It
is
Articles of
the Creed
'
in this
Review
(vol.
IX,
p.
a product of
comprehensive and careful research.

fascinating subject,
certainly deals with a

things, the
and shows, among other
enormous
having
influence which Maimonides' articles exercised even on the poetic
genius of mediaeval Jews.

directly stimulated
am much my
gratified
at
in-
him
to take
up the question of the authorship

suggestion that the author of
of the Yigdal.
the
Marx
objects to
hymn
is
not Daniel b. Judah Dayyan, but

rests solely
Immanuel
of
Rome.
his
His contention
on Luzatto's
oft
quoted remark in
rite.
Introduction to the Mahzor of the

1
Roman
To
end
style this a
positive proof
'
is
surely carrying the ipse dixit too

this,
far,
for
if
we
abided by dicta such as

gressive research.
there would be an
to all pro-
of the
The whole question word oyi?^ which Marx takes
hinges on the explanation

in the sense of
'
he com-
posed
'.
Now
at
all,
the verbal
root
11D does not occur
in biblical
-
Hebrew
and
whilst the two

3- 2 Z)
nominal forms ^"HP (Jb IO 22 )
[VTIDtt
(J u dg'.
Dear tne meaning 'order'
and 'arrangeIn the Tar-
ment of
pillars
Wherever we
used
find verbal forms of this root in
post-biblical literature, they are denominativa of "Hp.
gums
e.g.
the verb
is
for
Hebrew *py,
11. 8).
as likewise in the
Mishnah,
EH?n ns
"TOD
(Men.
It is
hardly necessary to quote
any of the numerous passages
in
which both the nominal and

In
'
verbal forms occur in the Talmud.
all
these passages the

;
'
meaning
is
'
to arrange
',
but nowhere
to
compose
There
for if this
were so one might assume that Simeon Happekuli was the author
of the Eighteen Benedictions (Ber. 28 vo.).
is
really
no
need
to multiply quotations
o'f
from rabbinic writings, but we should

the notice in question was sufficiently
suppose that the writer
acquainted with the meaning of "HD, and not charge him with
86
AUTHOR OF YIGDAL HYMN

a loose application of the term.
HIRSCHFELD
87
which Professor Marx ascribes
The note in Cod. Brit. Mus. to so much importance is only a
mechanical copy of the other, being written by a professional

copyist devoid of any argumentative power.
Professor
Marx
disagrees with
my suggestion
that in the words

.In
skill
?N )ny? one
opinion
it
may
find
an allusion to the author's name.

if
my
had
would be surprising
a poet of Immanuel's
name in the usual way of an acrostic or by similar means. Now here Marx overlooked a point which is even more serious than the previous one. The name
not been able to introduce his
full
?fcOJy has four tenuoth,
and could only have been

first
inserted in the
Yigdal by dividing
it,
putting the
at the
two
syllables at the
end of
In the
of
one hemistich and the other
beginning of the next.
This the
poet very appropriately did in the longer

Yigdal,
poem
(line 12).
however,
it
would not only have been a
violation
the artistic structure of the poem, but also quite out of place in
view of the double meaning of the name.

tion,
'
What
has an ejacula-
God
with us
',
to
do
in a register of philosophical
and theo-
logical
axioms?
The
poet had a choice of terms at his disposal, 1
but he deliberately chose one which not only expressed what he
wished to express, but also delicately intimated his name.
This
was both ingenious and good
taste
For myself
I
this is so striking
a proof of Immanuel's authorship that
consider an accidental
out of the six
slipping in of these two words, containing five

letters of his
name, out of the question.
In an unvocalized manu-
script in
which the
is
letters are generally written closely together

still.
the similarity
greater
We
the
must
also consider the relation of the Yigdal to the larger

its
poem from which
lines are culled.
Both have the same metre,
same rhyme, and many
similar expressions
If,
and
clauses,
and
several half-lines are identical.
as
Marx
argues, literary pro-
perty was thought of differently in those times, this holds good for
ideas, doctrines, or systems expressed in prose language, but not
for poetry.
Thus Marx admits Immanuel's authorship

1
of the
e.g.
apy^ bsmrb, mra^, irbnb, &c
88

if
adapted passages, but
in
poem
this
of thirteen
lines
eleven
abound
in such
adapted passages,
I
goes beyond the limits of
literary honesty.
am
therefore driven to the conclusion that
Daniel did not wish his grandfather to pose as the author of the
poem.
Finally, there
is
the following to be taken into account.
On
one side
figures a person
not
known
to
have composed any
liturgical or secular
poems, except the one seemingly attributed to
him by
his grandson.
article of
The Yigdal
creed with
betrays great ability.

abstract notions into
rules of
To
one
compress each
line, whilst at
its
the
same time observing the

to the
prosody and
other of the
it
rhyme,
is
an achievement of amazing
skill.
No
numerous poems devoted
same subject comes near
in
impressiveness and concinnity.
The proof
is
that for centuries
they lay buried in the tomes of manuscripts.
Had
Daniel been
a poetic genius he would surely have tried his hand at the pro-
duction of other hymns.
On
the other side
we have a bard
renowned
for his facility of turning out a galaxy of elegant verse.
Immanuel had shocked pious devotees by

yet Daniel
is,
the levity of his pen,

for
after
all,
to be
commended
having had the
courage to introduce the Yigdal into the daily Prayer Book.
The two
are also
to
anti-Christian
poems reproduced by Marx

the end of a
(p.
307)
be found
at
MS.
of Joshua Segre's
Catalogue, No. 453)
^n
H. 324, fol. 40, see with numerous variations and omissions.

D^N* {Cod. Montef.
my
Hartwig Hirschfeld.
Jews' College, London.
HUSBAND'S 'PROSECUTION OF JESUS'

The Prosecution of Jesus.
Its
Date, History, and Legality.
By
Richard Wellington Husband,

Languages
in
Professor of the Classical
Dartmouth College.
pp. 302.
Princeton
University
Press, 1916.
Professor
Husband has given us an elaborate study of a theme on which much has been written, a theme obviously of profound
and abiding
of the
interest to all Christians
and
also to that small section
human
race from which the founder of Christianity sprang.

is
The
trial
of Jesus
the topic discussed with

all
ability,
critical
acumen, and
most important of
fair.
with
an anxious desire to
entitled
be scrupulously
In a
little
book of some 300 pages,

course and
The Prosecution ofJesus, the author deals with the charge against
Jesus, the date of the
trial, its
its
legality.
In con-
nexion with the subject he also treats of the legal rights of the Jews
under
Roman
rule,
the account of the
trial
in the Gospels,
and
the credibility of that account.
The main problem

Professor
is,
Who
was responsible
for Jesus' trial,
condemnation, and execution?
The
is
current
popular view,
as
Husband
correctly states,
that Jesus was tried
by the
supreme Jewish
court, the
great Sanhedrin,
on the charge of
blasphemy, and that he was condemned to death by that court

but in order that the sentence should be carried into execution,
the consent of the
Roman
authorities was
requisite.
This was
at
reluctantly extorted from Pontius Pilate, the
Roman
procurator
Jerusalem.
These impressions the author

most
tried
part, confutes.
critically
examines and,
for the
He
rejects the view that Jesus
was formally
by the Sanhedrin
for
an offence against the Jewish criminal
law.
He
regards the
trial
by
Pilate as the only formal trial that
took place.
He
assumes, however, that there was a preliminary
89
90
hearing before the Sanhedrin and starts the novel theory, for
which he
offers
no support, that
to
this hearing
was
in the nature of
an inquiry analogous
grand jury proceedings.

First,
The
subject manifestly bristles with difficulties.
what
in
credence are we to give to the Gospel narrative ?

their present
The Gospels
and
form were reduced to writing long after the events

of the arrest,
variation
trial,
they record.
admittedly
The accounts present so much

consideration
crucifixion
and discrepancy
be borne
that
it
is
hard to extract a satisfactory idea of what actually did take place.
The
following
has
also
to
in
mind.
anti-
Christianity soon broke
away from the parent creed.
The
nomistic form which

resented by
it
received under Pauline influence, while

Christianity acceptable to
some of the Apostles, made

and gained
for
it
the Gentile world
adherence among the subjects

ultimately
of the
Roman
Empire, of which
it
became the
State
religion.
tendency, possibly not altogether conscious, would
naturally arise to
remove the blame
for the execution of Jesus
from the representatives of
Rome and
place that responsibility

Entirely to exonerate the
upon the
obstinate, unbelieving Jews.
Roman
authorities
would have been a distortion of truth so con-
trary to the
well-known facts of history as to be incredible.
But
without going to this extreme, the offence of the real culprit
might be extenuated, and the blame shifted on to the victim's

co-religionists.
And
is
this is precisely
what has happened in the
Gospels.
fully.
Pilate
whitewashed
to
be
sure, not very success-
The Sanhedrin is painted in the blackest colours. Professor Husband endeavours to redress the balance and to
distribute the
burden of responsibility more

of the author
is
justly.
all
The weakness
round
;
that he tries to be fair
fair to Pilate, fair to
the Jews
who brought
Jesus before
Pilate, fair to the writers of the Gospels.
He
aims at avoiding
the necessity for assuming falsity on the part of the writers of the
New
Testament, malice or
'
illegality
on the
',
part of prosecutor or
says.
l
judge.
There are three
possibilities
he
First,
that
Jesus was under the legal control of the

the time of the arrest
till
Roman
authorities from
the crucifixion.
Second, that he was
HUSBAND
tried for
'
PROSECUTION OF JESUS
for false
HVAMSON
91
blasphemy or
prophecy under Jewish law and
procedure, and was convicted and then either (a) sent to Pilate
for rejection or ratification of the conviction, or
(/-)
re-tried
by
or
Pilate
(c)
on the same charge according

he was
tried
to
Roman
procedure,
that
on a charge of treason advanced by the
Sanhedrin.
Third, that the proceedings before the Sanhedrin

in order to present a
were merely preliminary hearings, conducted

charge before the
the charge
Roman
court,
and
that the Sanhedrin presented
and the evidence
to Pilate
who conducted
the
trial
according to
Roman
procedure.
Jesus would then have been
under the
legal control of the
Jewish authorities until the time of

in the legal control
his transfer to Pilate, after
which time he was
Romans (pp. 14 and 15). This third view the writer favours. The fundamental doctrine he advocates is that the
of the
'
whole case was one of
Roman
law and that Jewish law played

(p.
a most insignificant part in the proceedings
15).
With
one
trial
this last
conclusion one
is
inclined to agree, except as to

in the
point.
That the Sanhedrin took any part whatsoever

pace the Gospel accounts
of Jesus
is
highly questionable.
All the probabilities are against this view.
The
institution of
grand jury proceedings was unknown

act as a delator or informer was,
to
Jewish jurisprudence.
at the present day,
To
most
and
is
repugnant to the Jewish conscience.

Sanhedrin, of their
For the members of the
own
motion, to have arrested a Jew, surren-
dered him to the hated

against him,
parallel.
Roman
authorities, preferred a charge

is
and pressed
that charge,
unthinkable and without
Nor was
there anything in the teaching of Jesus which

to
would form the ground of a charge by the Sanhedrin, or

they would take exception.
Jewish.
which
is
The
ethics of the
New
Testament
The Sermon on
the Mount, with
its
stress
on
purity,
meekness, and mercy,
reflects the spirit of
Judaism.
The
sayings
of Jesus have their parallels in the Old Testament, Apocryphal

literature
and Rabbinic
traditions.
In insisting on the indissolu-
bility of marriage,
Jesus was following the school of
Sham ma
i.
The
teaching of the Scribes and Pharisees he holds in respeet.

sit
'The Scribes and Pharisees
in
Moses'
seat.
All therefore
92

'
whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do

23. 2-3).
(Matt.
He
is
declares that he did not

it
come
to destroy the law
but to confirm
{ibid.
5. 17,
18).
He
is
heals on the Sabbath.
Where
fourth
is,
there
no actual work
this involves
life
no
violation of the
commandment, and where
in
danger such violation
according to the conception of Judaism, a positive duty.
He
consorts with the

ciation to
common
people and
is
influenced by this asso-
make
light of the laws of ritual cleanliness.
But such
laws were observed rigorously only by the Chaberim.

scious of a mission to his people alone.
'
He
is
con-
am
not sent but unto
the lost sheep of the
House of
Israel' (ibid. 15. 24).
He
is
fully
accepts the doctrine of the Resurrection in which he

with the Pharisees and against the Sadducees
(ibid. 22.
?
at
one
23-33).
In
all this
what ground
is
there for accusation
Why
should
to
the Sanhedrin have tried
him ?
But, as
His teaching was no danger
Judaism.
His claims to the Messiahship were no offence from

it
the Jewish standpoint.
implied the rescue from the
Roman
who
tyranny,
its
assertion was a danger to the foreign
power
therefore tried him.
Who
nounced
denounced him
to the people. Pilate
to Pilate
Those whom he had
de-
The
ignorant and venal priests, crea-
tures of Pontius
arrest.
whom
Jesus had angered, ordered his

possibly assisted by
The
captain of the
Temple guard,
What exasperated the priests was Jesus' disapproval of the Temple service as conducted by them. His statement that he would pull down the Temple
soldiers,
Roman
carried out the order.
and rebuild
chief priests,
it
in three
days was blasphemy in the eyes of the

to surrender
and induced them

itself
him
to the for his
Romans.
condem-
But that by
nation.
would have been no ground
Hence they charge him with not only perverting the people but causing unrest among them. And this charge was
undoubtedly well founded.
king of the Jews?'
claim.
(ibid.
Pilate asks the prisoner, 'Art thou
27. 11).
And
Jesus does not deny the
For the
for
Roman
procurator that was sufficient.

after
There
was no need
'
further evidence
the virtual
admission
Thou
sayest \
despised Jew could obviously not claim the
HUSBANDS PROSECUTION OF JESUS

(
H YAMSON
93
same formal
foreigners
trial
as a
and sentenced
to
for
Roman citizen. And so he was condemn the Roman form of execution reserved
the worst offenders.
Pilate
and
The statement
evil
all
in
the
New Testament
27. 24)
is
that
found no
in
him, washed his
hands, and thus symbolically disclaimed

unhistorical, as Professor
responsibility {ibid.
all
Husband, with
to roll
sober
critics.
admits.
The purpose
is
manifest
away the reproach

it
for
the crucifixion from the

rejected salvation.
ling
is
Romans and
fasten
on the Jews who
The
portrait of Pilate as a vacillating weak-
inconsistent with the Procurator's character

Pilate
and career
as
condemned Jesus on political grounds as other insurrectionists had been condemned before This was well understood by the Roman soldiery who him. crowned him in King of the Jews hailed him derisively as
delineated by Josephus.
'
',
mockery, and
the King
set
above
'
his
head the inscription,
'
This
is
Jesus
of the Jews
{ibid. 27. 37).

?
Was
the
'
Jesus justly
condemned
rebellion
that
No.
For he did not

the
'
incite
people to active
against
is
Roman
authority.
Render unto Caesar
which
Caesar's was his counsel.
In
this policy of
submission to the political powers that be, he was

attitude
to the
following Jeremiah's
attitude to
Babylonian
ruler,
Hillel's
Herod, and anticipating the advice of R. Johanan ben
Zaccai to surrender to the
Roman
generals.
He
was misunder
his
disciples.
stood
by the people, and possibly by some of

his
Hailed on
entry into Jerusalem as the expected Messiah,
the saviour of the nation from oppression, the popular enthusiasm
cooled when the hopes that had been raised were not realized,
and no insurrection was

world
'
started.
'
My
kingdom
is
not of this
was too ethereal
to
be appreciated by the masses.
Hence
also the attempted rescue feared by the priests did not materialize.
Pilate,
however, the foreign governor
who
held the Jews by the
power of the sword, drew no distinction between the claim of

temporal and spiritual power.
pacificism.
Possibly he was unaware of Jesus'

that Jesus asserted that he was the
Enough
for
him
Messiah and was so acclaimed.
As such he was
a danger to the
for
Roman
domination.
But the Sanhedrin had no responsibility
94
his trial,

condemnation, or execution.
The
The
preliminary hearing
b),
took place not in the Hall of

but in the house of the High
6'A.ov
Hewn
Priest.
Stones (T. B., Sanhedrin 14
statement (Mark 15. 1)

either incorrect or
to aweSptov,
The whole
council
',
is
may
per-
refer to
a special Beth Din of the
priests.
There was no reason
why
the Sanhedrin should have accused Jesus.

let
They had
mitted him to preach in the Synagogues without

his teaching could, therefore, not
priests prosecuted
or hindrance
have been heretical.

as
him because he opposed them,
The chief did many of
the Pharisees of the time.
The
high priests during the second

(T. B.,
Temple were most

71b, Horaioth 13
*
of
them unworthy
Pesachim 16 a.,Jbma
a).
This explains Jesus' saying that he would

rebuild
it
destroy the
Temple and
in three days
',
w hich moved
r
What Jesus obviously meant was that it was high time for a change. The parallel is the old promise, I will create a new heaven and a new earth In conclusion I wish to discuss a few detailed points. Where does Professor Husband get his statement (p. 74 and p. 107) that
the
High
Priests to cries of horror.
'
'.
the severest form of excommunication was equal to death
What
the
is
first
troubles Professor
Husband
is
as to the day before the
Passover being called Passover
not
difficult.
The
precept,
'
On
day you
shall
cause leaven to cease in your houses

as referring to the 14th of Nisan, the
explained in the
day before
last
Talmud Passover. The
eating of the Paschal
lamb
at the
Supper on Thursday night, when Passover began Friday

is
evening,
the
first
certainly strange.
fell
But
if in
the days of Hillel,
when
day of Passover
in
on the
first
day of the week, the
people were
doubt as to whether the Paschal lamb should be
slaughtered on the previous day, the Sabbath, and their religious

leaders could not resolve their doubts {Pesachim 66
a),
then
it
might well be that when the
first
day of Passover
fell
on Sabbath
some might have held

44, 1st line).
that the Paschal
lamb should be eaten not

a short time after
Friday night but on the previous Thursday night.

(p.
'The Jewish day began

to say that
sunset and continued until the same time on the following evening \
It
would be more correct
it
began with night-
HUSBAND'S
fall
<
to
nightfall
'
HYAMSON
On
the
95
and continued
the next day.
eve of
Sabbath or Festivals we add a short period before

not to violate the sanctity of the day.
(p. 44,
nightfall, so as
5th line).
'
The time
of the appearance of the
new
moon was determined by

at this
calculation rather than by observation
time
'.
This
is
not in accordance with tradition.

chs.
1
The
Mishna (Rosh Hashanah,
and
2) clearly
shows that the new
moon was determined by the Supreme Court on the evidence of eye-witnesses. The accuracy of the testimony was checked by
the
'
astronomical
knowledge of the Court
(cp.
R. Gamaliel's
2. 8).
Figures of Phases of the

(p. 44).
'
Moon
',
Rosh Ifashanah,
the
The first month of the year began on the evening of new moon nearest to the vernal equinox \ This would not
so.
necessarily be
Sometimes owing
to
the
lateness
of
the
winter and backwardness of the vegetation, an intercalary
month
had as
Adar Sheni was added.

(p. 71).
The
questions put to Jesus
may
well have
their object not to trap
him but
to ascertain his point of view.

is
As already pointed
in
out, healing
on the Sabbath
is
not forbidden
It
it
Rabbinic law, when no actual labour
involved.
ill.
'
is
positive duty
for a
where the patient
is
dangerously
Is
lawful
man
79).
to put
away
his wife for every cause
'
is
a moot point,
on which the schools of Shammai and

(p.
Hillel differ.
in a neutral sense,
oÂos
may mean multitude

'It
not
necessarily rabble.
Cp. Rabbinic phrase pDl^3lN3 rantt.
(p. 102, last line).
was expedient that one man should

2).
die
for
the people'
(John
18.
This clearly means that rather
than that the people should be misled into an abortive resurrection for
it
which they would be punished by the

politic
Roman
authorities,
was
that the claimant
to the
Messiahship should be
surrendered
to the
Romans.
The
phrase
may be due
to the
influence of the Christian doctrine of the Atonement.

(p.
no). The reason why Jesus was taken before the

was
for the latter
I:
Priest
to
determine whether Jesus should be
surrendered to the Romans.

in
The High
Priest
and
his Council,
their
condemnation of Jesus, acted from
mixed motive-.
96

authorities, they
Appointed by the secular

selves responsible for the
may have
felt
them-
good behaviour of the
citizens,
and
regarded
it
as their duty in the interests of the people to prevent
insurrection.
The
charge,
'We found
'
this
man
perverting our
that
nation and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar,
and saying
he himself
that the
is
Christ a
Priest
King
is
absolutely consistent with the view
High
was not trying Jesus on the charge of blasto ascertain

if
phemy, but only holding a preliminary inquiry

Jesus should be given up to the
Romans
as
an insurrectionary.
135.
The
made
justify
author indicates a similar view on page
'The
being
Sanhedrin conducted an investigation into the charges
against Jesus to see whether these were well founded to
them
in preparing
an indictment against Jesus
for
submis-
sion to the
Roman
Court.
When
Tacitus, in his history of the
reign of Tiberius, spoke in one brief sentence of the crucifixion of

Christ, he placed all responsibility
upon
Pilate, for
it
could not
province
is
have occurred to a
Roman mind
that
any person
in a
could be tried by any authority than the

said.
Roman
'.
This
well
We
are in agreement with the author, except that
we would
substitute the
(1)
High
Priest's
Council
for the
Sanhedrin
There was no
trial
of Jesus by the
Sanhedrin.
The
Sanhedrin tried capital charges in the Hall of

Jesus' preliminary
(2)
trial
Hewn
Stones only.
took place in the High' Priest's house.
trial
by the Sanhedrin would not have taken place on
the eve of the Sabbath or Festival.

(3)
Voting with reason
for
opinion would have been given by
the
youngest
first.
member
first.
Here the High
Priest
gave his
opinion
(4) If the
condemnation was unanimous, the

acquittal.
result
would
have been an
(5)
ability
The Sanhedrin would

to
not have regarded

in
the claim of
destroy
and rebuild the Temple
three
days as
blasphemy.
(6)
The Jews
'
at
this
time had lost the right of
trials
on
to
capital charges.
It is
not permitted to us to put any
man
death
',
said Jesus' prosecutors to Pilate.
HUSBAND
<
is
HYAMSON
law
97
(7) Crucifixion
not a Jewish punishment.

a
capital
(8)
Nor
is
theft
offence
in
Jewish
except
kidnapping.
Hence
the crucifixion of the two thieves was repugjustice.
nant to the Jewish sense of
On
states,
all
the above grounds,
many
is
of which Professor
Husband
by the
the legitimate conclusion
that Jesus
was not
tried
Sanhedrin, but that he was
surrendered by the priests to the
Romans.
At the
rection
They were exasperated by Jesus' disapproval of them. same time, they were moved by fear of an abortive insurand
its
dire consequences to themselves

will
and the people.

and
'The Romans
nation
'.
come and
take away both our place
The
statement under item
4 in
the
conclusion
'
If
the
condemnation of the Court was unanimous, the

have been an acquittal,
is
result
would
based on the dictum

7\y\rb }^13
in the
Talmud
n-| "ttDK.
(Sanhedrin 17a): fniK ptttB
IXT^
mnjD WH3
is is
Rav Cahana
also
says
'
If the entire
(in
Sanhedrin
in favour of con-
demning the accused
a capital charge) he
acquitted.'
1
:
See
Maimonides' Code Hilchoth Sanhedrin,

iibb
nr
ch. 9, part
pTWISD
WW ny
nn
an jha
new
rbnn
rwm
pare
via
nvpno
tb\2
lnnap
n.T -pnnw patron uti inian reason given in the Talmud is that
allow
iaaw
dp.
The
to
the object of not pronouncing

trial, is
a sentence of condemnation on the same day as the
opportunity
for
finding
arguments leading
to
acquittal.
Where
for
the Court, however, had

this
made up
would
its
mind unanimously
That
is,
condemnation,
object
fail.
there
is
obviously either bias and prejudice, or at the least lack of the
openness of mind and judicial

in a Court.
spirit
of calm deliberation requisite
The
iha
.
rule
above stated
is
expressed in popular phrase
as **o?
am
M. Hyamson.
Jewish Theological Seminary of America.
VOL. XI.
HEBREW INCUNABULA
Cassuto,
Umberto.
S.
Incunaboli Ebraici a Firenze.

36,
2
.
Firenze,
Leo
Olschki, 191 2, pp.
Hebraische Inkunabeln 1475-1490.
Mit 33 Faksimiles. Katalog Miinchen. 151 von Ludwig Rosenthal's Antiquariat.
Since
De
Rossi's famous Annates Hebraeo-Typographici
sec.
XV, Parma,
Centralblatt
1795, the short and exhaustive paper of A. Freimann,
'Ueber hebraische Inkunabeln', Leipzig,

fiir
1902
(reprint
from
first
Bibliothekswesen,
to our subject.
XIX, 108-16), was the

While
monograph devoted
De
Rossi
first
dealt
with the dated incunabula in chronological order and had
them
show
followed by the undated ones, Freimann arranges them according

to cities
and
presses.
The two
publications under review
the
same
difference of arrangement, only that Cassuto places the

their
undated books in
approximate places, as does Jacobs
in
Jewish Encyclopedia, VI, pp. 578-9.
Together with the descrip-
tions of incunabula in Wachstein's catalogue reviewed previously
{JQR., N.
1
S., vol.
VI, pp. 107 seq.) they form
most welcome
:
Freimann enumerates 101 books, omitting two recorded by De Rossi

Finzi, DIIlV,
Mardokai
(a
Mantua;
De
Rossi, 113;
Steinschneider, 1658-9
copy of
I
this unusually rare booklet
was acquired by Mr. Sassoon some

Proctor, 9602
time ago,
teuchs,
learned from Mr. E. N. Adler) and one of the two Ixar PentaRossi, 73; Steinsch., No. 8;
;
De
or
De
Rossi, 143;
Steinsch.,
No.
ion
Proctor, 9601 (he gives the Steinsch.
number
in
for
the
first,
the Proctor
number
for the second)

:
and two recorded
in Stein-
schneider's
Supplementum
Cat. Bodl.
Abot with Maimonides
23 leaves,
of the
being a separate issue from the

signature of the latter (see
the two leaves of Alfasi.
Roman Mahzor with

p.
omission
now ZfHB., XIV,
49, and 187, No.
n) and
Since that time a few more incunabula have come to light and are
described in ZfHB., mostly by Freimann.
98
HEBREW INCUNABULA MARX

addition
to
99
will
the
literature
on our subject and

in
this
field.
have
to
be consulted by every bibliographer
Rosenthal's
catalogue offers sixty-eight numbers containing forty-eight different
books or parts of books, a collection which could not be

duplicated again, as
scarcer.
class of
easily
Hebrew incunabula
far
are constantly growing

for this
The
prices
go
beyond those ever charged before
books and seem to
me
in
is
many
is
cases to be exorbitant. 2
The
description of the books
very well done and shows the
hand of a trained
the history of
bibliographer,
who
thoroughly familiar with

gives careful collations
Hebrew
typography.
He
and typographical
descriptions.
For the
Rome
he
prints,
tries
which we
prove a
generally describe as printed before 1480,
to
somewhat
earlier
age under No. 48 and places them tentatively

(
in the year
1475
see W!^)
Among
the Spanish incunabula he
has leaves of various
unknown
editions,
about which
hope
to
speak more in another connexion.

of
Thirty-three facsimiles, five
them giving
full
pages, are a particularly

It is
welcome addition as
350 of Gersonides
its
they are selected with discretion.
a pity that for the Conat

fol.
type the author did not think of reproducing
on the Pentateuch,
in
which a
letter
was pulled out of
place in
get the
long,
the course of the printing and laid
upon the
p. 4,
forms.
We
measures of the type employed by Conat,

6 mm. broad).
3
no. 4 (27
mm.
Facsimile 30 does not belong to No. 63

latter,
but to 66.
The
a Pentateuch with
Targum
(of which the Jewish Theological

its
Seminary has two leaves, presented to

by Dr Schechter), seems to
press.
Library some years ago

a very early Spanish
me
it
to
come from
Rosenthal compares
with Haebler 332, of which unforin
tunately
no facsimile
is
found
Haebler's Typogrcfia.
This
edition of the
Tur
is
ascribed to Lisbon only on the authority

is
of
Van
2
Straalen,
which
of
little
weight in
such
questions.
Since writing the above
i^July,
19 18)
the prices of rare books in

that
general have advanced so

anticipated the
3
much that one can only say movement by a few years.

London, 1887,
Rosenthal
See
for similar instances in

tlic
Latin incunabula, Talbot Baines Reed,

p. 24.
11
History of
old E)i^lish Letter Foundries,
IOO
Freimann,
In

p.
9,
note
2,
considers his statement very doubtful.
my
opinion the book, of which the Seminary Library has two
leaves,
was printed in Spain.

calls
Incidentally I
may remark
book
press,
that
Rosenthal
Lisbon,
No. 57,
Ramban
!
1489, the
first
printed in
that
but ascribes our fragment to
the same
of
Toledano, and to the year 1480
Cassuto describes only forty-three volumes containing
thirty-
one
different
incunabula which are found in the libraries of

in
Florence,
Italy.
and they are with very few exceptions printed

in
But
spite of the smaller
number
of books described,
his is a very important contribution to bibliography, for the author,
while consulting
all his
predecessors, does not accept any of their
statements without careful examination and not infrequently takes
occasion to correct them. Cassuto dwells less on the typographical

description
;
his collation
is
less detailed,
but he reproduces the
characteristic parts of the epigraphs, notes of former owners, &c.
The book
the most
is
a reprint from Olschki's
Bibliofilia,
XII-XIII, and
this explains the fact that the
few facsimiles given are taken from
common
incunabula described, those that happened to

It is greatly to
be
in the possession of Olschki.

for
be regretted that
no exception was made
the unique
Pentateuch described
under No. 43 and such rare works as Petah Debarai of 1492 and Like Rosenthal the Brescia Psalms of 1493, Nos. 40 and 42.
and Wachstein, Cassuto does not seem

Manzoni, Annali
tipografici dei Soncino,
is
to
know
the
careful
1
description of thirteen Soncino incunabula in vol. II, part
of
Bologna, 1886.
Special attention
paid to the dates, and in some instances
common
is
errors are corrected.
Under No.
first
19,
Cassuto convin-
cingly shows that the date of the
edition of the
Hagiographa
slip
wrongly printed, and that in Tishri 5248 the printer, by a
of memory, repeated the date of the previous year, thus giving the impression that the third volume appeared before the
first,
while
in
the
colophon
to the
to
latter
he
expressly
refers
to
the other volumes as
still
be printed.
The
error of Stein-
schneider in giving the date of the conclusion of printing the
Pentateuch of the
first
complete Bible by Soncino, as February 23

instead of April 22,
I.e.
ioi
had already been pointed out by Manzoni, 152; not only Freimann and Jacobs, but also Darlow and
Moule, No. 5075, repeated the mistake.

of dates quite
subject,
Of wrong
all
calculations
number
are
found
in
the works on
in
our
and even Cassuto repeated one

Kimhi's Sefer Shorashim
at least
is
No. 36
Rosenthal 37.
said to have
been
first
finished in Naples, Thursday,

of
Rosh Hodesh Adar, 1491.

1
The
Adar
of that year
fell
on the
ith of February, the date generally
given for our book; but the

the
first
nth was
date
22,
a Friday, and therefore
day of Rosh Hodesh, February 10th, must be meant.
Rosenthal,
No.
18,
places
the
of the
colophon of the
;
Talmudic
treatise
Niddah on July
1489
but the 25th of
Ab
fell
on the 23rd.
earlier,
on the 15th of
The treatise Hullin was finished a month Tammuz, identified by Steinschneider with
is
the 13th instead of the 14th of June (January in Freimann

a misprint).
of dates in
may be permitted this connexion. The

I
to
add two more corrections

dated incunable, the
earliest
Rashi of Reggio, was finished on the 10th of Adar, 1475, which is the 1 8th, not the 5th, of February. Ibn Ezra on the Pentateuch
was finished on the 36th day of Omer, 4
rightly remarks, the 21st of Iyyar.
i.e.
as
De
Rossi, p. 58,
Steinschneider emphatically
maintains {Cat Bod/.,

that
it
p.
680, comp. introduction, p. xix, note 16)

all
is
the
22nd,
and
the
bibliographers
down
to
the
Probedrnck of the
follow
German
Gesamtkatalog der
Wiegendrucke
him
in giving the 3rd of
May
instead of the 2nd.
Some
of the dates of the incunabula are unfortunately in;
complete and cannot be identified with certainty

4
the statement
1916,
p.
Mahler, Handbnch der judischen Chronologie, Leipzig,
xv,
maintains that dates were never given according to the 'Sephira'!

present case shows
The
how
necessary a Sefira table
is
for practical purposes.
See also the date of the Mantua Josippon.

in
dating letters and responsa.
The Sefira is frequently used The following three cases from colophons
illustrate its application in different
in
of manuscripts of the
countries.
Seminary Library
1628 Sel
--=
Mishna Zeraim with Maimonides' commentary was finished

the
fcODyil "2
.
Yemen on
April 21,
1316,
Nahmanides on
Almunia, Spain,
Gittin the 36th
day of Omer, 5157

=
March
18, 1397, in
a Siddur on the 37th day, 5203
April 22, 1443. in Arezzo, Italy.
102
in

it
the Yosippon that
was finished on the 49th day of

is
Omer
came
without a mention of the year
perhaps the most striking instance.

I lately
The day
me.
to
of the
month
is
more frequently omitted.

(Rosenthal,
across a case in which an exact determination seems possible to
The Lisbon Nahmanides
No.
57),
according
De
Rossi, was printed in Ab, 1489.
Steinschneider remarked
in the
that the
day of the week was also mentioned
colophon
(reprinted
MGWJ.,
II, pp.
281-2), being expressed by
3DD
Dl\
Wednesday.
In this case
we must expect
I find
it
that the
day of the
month was
K1fl
also given,
and
in this very passage, 331D
DV2
con18th
2t& b&'wb
the date.
tains
Bnnm .... mB> NV1 tt nN. Here n The printer cannot, however, mean the
fell
of
Ab
6th of July, which

;
on Thursday; we
certainly
must not count the S

the other two
letters,
perhaps he wanted to place dots over
but forgot.
mistake on his part
is
also
not quite impossible.
However
that
may
be,
it
is
possible to
date the book July 15, 1489.

I shall
now add some

same time
in
remarks, following the order of Cassuto,

to the parallel entries in Rosenthal.
is
referring at the
The
first
book
Cassuto
the
Mantua Josippon, which he

it
describes as a
folio,
while Rosenthal calls
a quarto.
that
Chwolson,
imâ
of the
it is
DIBin rCT
nWl,
p.
n,
states
the two copies

this
book he has seen are almost
folio size.
In
connexion
interesting to
editions,
remember
that Azariah
de Rossi speaks of two

in the
Conat
an assertion which Luzzatto
name of Almanzi
editions,
II,
explains by the fact that

larger
13).
Conat printed two
one on
pp.
and one on smaller paper (Ozar Nechmad,
12-
De
Rossi's assertion (Anna/es, p. 115) that Tarn ibn
Yahya
in
the Constantinople edition also refers to previous
editions,
Steinschneider rightly considers doubtful.
As
which
a matter of fact,
Tarn only speaks of

Josephus.
his text in opposition to the Latin versions of
The Constantinople
edition, to
De
Rossi
refers,
contains nothing more than the Venice edition, which slavishly

follows
its
predecessor, only placing the epilogue of the editor

in the front of the
and the table of contents

the end.
It
book instead of
at
even imitates the colophon as closely as possible.

As
I
the
book
is
extremely
rare
it
is
only found
in
Par
Y.
the Vatican,
and the Library of Columbia University, N.
give here this colophon from the latter copy (purchased from
Catalogue Lehren, Amsterdam, 1899, No. 955), overlining the
words which
differ in the
Venice edition
ns*
D*OP J"DN^C
nppiTD
C^.
bwotf 'm
by)
nn
'n
onNiaen D*ppinn *T bv DTO3S?

Dioin
n^-w
',
niDîwi nâra
-niyn
n:^c nx Dîyn
npy
"iy
ran wroru
ua
mip
Dnm
dji3
djd^ m5> xco new d8wk lpnnn dt

kît
:
nn^ poipn Smb>
Vm
'j
-i"n
nvn xba
rottn
rnxon
rw
rrW
3K n""o inhpn nn*rn
nb)V
s
onb ninyn onp-ivi n^ya ta

"jT>iin Y'r:
wjhk r?DD nnn nm

ypin
'JDN
-ib>k
nni KWHBenps
NBoni
n*"v
uai
wai
$0*31 TniDô
Sra
\obw iten
^^2
flHia
1C&U1 |W1 ST
pi ^NU |w K31 nuib p3B* hrw*l
The Constantinople
edition begins with the words D"i /^n Qg>3

in a large old
"SD
^nx pvyi, which are written
German
in
hand
in the beginning of the
copy of the Mantua edition

in
Columbia, just as they are found
the
facsimile
it
of Baron
Giinzburg's copy in the front of his reprint of
(ed.
Kahana,
Berdichev, 19 13) and the three copies of
De
Rossi.
A. Cohen,
Hebrew incunabula
in
Cambridge,
these words as part of the text,
(JQR., XIX, p. 745), takes as had been done by Roest when

p. 2
describing the Columbia copy (Catalogue HDD rVlp, Amsterdam.
1867, p. 193).
This copy
is
a small quarto.
it
'
It
once belonged
aureis
'
to
Andreas Osiander, who acquired

July
7,
duobus nummis
Tubingen.
on
1526, from Joh. Bossenstain

it
(=
Boeschenstain), and preIt after-
sented
later
to Matthias Hafenreffer in
wards came into the possession of Solomon Dubno.

copy, described by Roest as on larger paper,
of the
is
The second
Library
now
in the
Hebrew Union College. The John Rylands Library

is
at
Manchester possesses a copy

p.
oi
Josippon on vellum (Catalogue, 1899,
953).
list
As none ofConat's
of
books
represented
this
is
in
Freimann's
Pergamentdru
of his
(ZfHB.) XIV)
the only
known product
pn
printed on vellum.
104

The
contradiction
in
the date
of the
second number of
noticed
Cassuto,
schneider.
Gersonides
on Job, was
already
by Stein-
While giving extracts from the colophon
to
the Psalter of
interesting
1477, Cassuto ought not to have omitted the most
statement that the size of the edition was 300 copies, the same
as that of
some
of the books printed by
Sweynheim and Pannartz,

In
the
first
Italian printers, at
Subiaco and Rome, 1465-1472.
a letter to the Pope they enumerate twenty-eight books, nine of
them printed
in
in
two editions, four of which they had produced

in
275 (see Serapeum, XIII, pp. 241-8; 300 was also the Brit. Mus. Cat. of Incunabula, IV, p. 15).
300 copies, the others
John of Speyer's second edition of Cicero's Epistolae ad Familiares, Venice, 1469, and Philipp Lavagna's edition of the same book in Milan, 1472 (see Alfred W. Pollard, An Essay
size of
on Colophons, Chicago, 1905, pp. 32-3 and 151).
Wendelin of
This was also
Speyer published in Venice, 1470 and

Sallust of
147
1,
two editions of
400 copies each (Pollard, pp. 37,
39).
the size of
Solomon Alkabes's
edition
of Kimhi's
commentary
this is the
on the Later Prophets, Guadalajara, 1482 (evidently

meaning of the colophon, Cat. Bodl.,
editions were
p.
869).
Some
of the earlier
first
much smaller
thus John of Speyer brought out a
edition of Cicero's letters as well as Pliny's natural history in only
100 copies each (Pollard, pp. 31, 35, 36).

likely that
It is therefore quite
Baron Giinzburg's hypothesis

consisted
of
that Conat's edition of the

is
Tur Orah Hayyim

as against Chwolson,
to
125 copies
well
founded
(Festschrift Chwolson, Berlin, 1899, p. 60).

/.
He
is
certainly right
c, p.
7,
in interpreting
Conat's colophon
the
daily output
mean
that
125 double leaves
constituted
of his press.
this
To come
back to our Psalter, the Breslau copy of

(p.
edition,
according to Zuckermann's catalogue
47),
has
;
not the
the
Cat.
is
name Neriyyah (one

is
of the printers) in the colophon
same
the case in our copy (formerly Ghirondi-Schoenblum
M.
Spirâtis 76, Leipzig, 1900,
No.
39), in
which the
last leaf
facsimiled, evidently from the Breslau copy.

p.
The
typographical
arrangement (reproduced by Wachstein,
36) shows that the

name must have been
out in one copy.
originally there,
IO5
and probably was
rub:
The Moreh (No.

the
first
5) was,
according to Chwolson
{I.e., p.
32),
in
of the books which were printed in
Rome and
it
c.
appeared
1476 or 1477.
Rosenthal (No. 49) places
1475, suggesting
an even
earlier date as
he finds the
Rome
prints
more
primitive
and representing a lower stage of the development of printing than His reasoning, however (see p. 21), presupposes a Conat's work.
general logical development of the printing craft for which there
is
no
proof.
The
it
printers generally imitated their predecessors, the

is
scribes, class of
and
possible that the
Rome
printers took another

cities.
manuscripts as their models, than those of other
Perhaps an influence of Christian printers might be traced, as

it
is
in itself not unlikely that
some
of the early Jewish printers
may have served their apprenticeship with printers of books. Were there Jewish artisans among the latter?
the familiarity with
to these questions presupposes.
Latin
I
lack
non-Hebrew incunabula which an answer

But a glance through the pages
British
of the
Rome volume
Books
of
the
Museum
Catalogue of
Fifteenth-century
printing in one
will
convince any one that there also

far
column was
more common than

argument
in
double
columns.
Rosenthal's second
that the large square
type used indicates greater age, and that only later were smaller
and Rabbinic types employed, has no foundation whatever.
The
the
Tur of 1475
is
printed in very
small
square characters,
Reggio-Rashi of the same year with Rabbinic type of a Spanish

character, while e.g. the
Zamora-Rashi of 1487 shows square type

is
of a
regular
size.
Lack of colophons
books that
it
so
common
it
with
as
undoubtedly
later
is
very risky to take
an
in
indication of an earlier date.
Since colophons were
common
ones,
in
Latin books printed in Italy long before the

special ingenuity
Hebrew
no
was required to imitate
this
custom
Hebrew
require
books.
The argument from

likely
the selection of texts, that Nah-
manides most
refutation.
preceded
Gersonides,
does
not
of the
On the Rome prints
other hand
we have
a positive date for one
which,
think, prevents our going back too
106
far.

Seeligmann drew attention to the epigraph
is
in
Kimhi's
Shorashim which
VII,
that
p. 25),
it
only found in the

{ibid.,
Amsterdam copy {ZfHB.,

showed
and Freimann
note, cp. VIII, p. 127)
contains a reference to the decision of a quarrel which was
given in 1478.
Here we have then one

1478.
of these books which
was printed
after
According to
Seeligmann
in
(I.e.
and
ZfHB., XVII, 14) these incunabula were not printed
Rome. This reference to Seeligmann also escaped Cassuto, who (No. 7) describes a splendid parchment copy of this book which,
all
while containing
the blank leaves at the beginning and end,
evidently lacks this epigraph
which, in the
Amsterdam copy,
edition of the
immediately follows the
final
words
reproduced by Cassuto.
This
is
perhaps a parallel to the Naples 1491

British
same book of which the

the
Museum copy
has at the end
name of a printer, Catorze, not found in the dozen or so other known copies of this edition (see infra). The Bologna Pentateuch of 1482 on parchment (No. 8) has
sale,
a note of
unfortunately not a very early one

thirty florins.
is
it
is
dated
1633
the price being

Geschichte, p. 460)
if
The
only other price found
in the Florence
incunabula
a statement that Maimonides' code

giulii (f
(No. 28) was given as security for 8
of a scudo; Zunz,
Zur
is
and should become the property of the
lender
the
given.
money was not paid back in April but no year As we get only very few instances of the prices paid
Freimann
(
for
incunabula such notes are of value.

p. 4)
Ueber hebr.
Inkunabeln,
could only enumerate four instances, to which

fifth
he
later
added a
{ZfHB., XII,
p. 38),
a Kol-Bo purchased of the
for 15
Bolognesi in 1575.
for
The Seminary copy
same book
was acquired
20 Bolognesi by Moses Finzi da Arezzo

time.
who
lived about the

in
same
According to an undated statement
the
Seminary copy of Nahmanides, Shaar ha-Gemul Juda

it
(Leon) Gonzago acquired
for 2 giulii.
Our copy
marks
of the Ixar
Yoreh Deah was given

d'T\ pprno
interesting
b"i \ro
as security for 20
in 15 18
|).
(pLM E?
Nxb"nN Y'n
from
the
nn
year
j*na
is
more
Pelli-
reference
1500
found in
canus' autobiography (see
Das Chronikon
des
Konrad
Pellikan,
I',;
herausgegeben durch Bernhard Riggenbacb, Basel, 1877, p. 20; Die Hauschronik Konrad J'ellikatfs, deutsch voti T/i. Vulpius,
Strassburg, 1892, p. 22).
Tubingen bookseller sold him the

he
Brescia Bible for
\\ gulden, while
for so rare a
had thought he would

(See also the price of
have to pay 6 to 8
book.
Josippon quoted above.)
Rosenthal also has a parchment copy

6),
of the Bologna Pentateuch (No.
which he combines with the

a-^k^
Soncino Prophets as the

10,000
has
first
Bible edition, for which he
M. forgetting some parts (Nos.

!
the Hagiographa altogether, of which he
26 and 28).
this
The Seminary
Library has
one of the few paper copies of
Pentateuch, in which only

;
a few pages are missing at the beginning and end
besides,
it
has two leaves on parchment which are printed on one side

only,
and had been used

correct
12),
as binding for a book.
The
number
of pages for the Early Prophets
(No
10),
Albo (No.
and the Later Prophets (No. 16) have already been
given by Manzoni (pp. 58-9, 70, 133), for the latter also by Zedner
(p. 121).
Manzoni
schneider in
and 152) also has corrected Steinthe dates of the Mahzor (No. 14) and the Soncino
(pp. 133
Bible of 1488 (No. 25).
The dated
press
Ixar Pentateuch of 1490 (No. 32)

printer's
is
is
from the same
and has the same
mark
as
the
undated one
first
(No. 35), the colophon of which
reprinted here for the
time
accordingly the
in
name
cases.
of the printer, Eliezer Alantansi,
ought to appear
both
Solomon Zalmati,
as he himself
says, only supplied the
funds for the printing

SHI
"MM
rOPF) D1N3
Wp mnjn
lDlpDD
*U1
U1, as he had done seven years
earlier for the publication of a Latin
commentary on the Psalms

the
by the convert Perez de Valencia, the author of an attack on the
Jews also printed
in
Valencia
by
same
printer,
Alfonso
Fernandez de Cordova, evidently a friend of Zalmati (Haebler,

Bibliografia
Iberica,
p.
253).
For
the
undated
Pentateuch
Cassuto gives 190, Wachstein (No. 70) 191 leaves, both put the
printing
c.
1490-5, following
in this respect
De
the
Rossi,
who conhas
sidered
"HttPM a Portuguese city.
Since
place
been
it
identified
by Zunz
{Zeitsc/irift, pp.
135-6) as being
in Spain,
is
108

it
of course evident that
must have appeared before

this inference.
the expulsion,
and Zunz indeed expressly draws

one parchment
(No. 55).
Alantaii.
leaf (Gen. 18.
Rosenthal has
10-30) of the dated Pentateuch

calls
Following a misprint in Freimann he
the printer
For Kimhi's Shorashim, Naples 1490 (No. 33) Cassuto gives the name of Samuel Latif as printer. Latif, however, only served
as a corrector to
treatise
some
printer, as
he did to Soncino
for
the
Ketubot according
p.
to
14).
his
epigraph of Dec. 15, 1487
(Freimann, ZfHB., XII.
In Cassuto's abstract of the
colophon the reference to the several copies he consulted and

the claim of great correctness ought not to have been omitted.
For the 1491 edition (No. 36) Cassuto missed the reference to Zedner, p. 200, who, as I mentioned before, found in his copy
the
name
of the printer, Isaac
ben Judah ben David,
called
Ben
Catorze from Calatayud, Aragon.
Since the colophon of this edition, which

the Florence copy, contains
is
partly missing in
some
interesting statements,
and has and the
not been reproduced,
it
may be
given
here according to the
Seminary copy, adding
in brackets the last four lines
addition in the third line before them, which occur only in the
British
Museum
;
:
copy.
The ends
of the lines are indicated by
vertical strokes
the underlined words are printed in Rabbinical
characters
7lp1
N-|pN
D^N
D3^N 'DWitt UTOK1
N1H
7TW2 DV
HTH
DVH
NVEn
I
ixnt
rminb
pp
|
pw
3n?
inn
^dz
inn
-
dto
d^n
ban
nrn p^jn
d^ddim DnaDn
,#
ikb> bz *d wincn nbxn
owâ D3^s:
rta
5>3o
|tawD'*'D**V3N nrb
DnDDn rbm
wmv
|
ttji
Dmoy
\vvb
3P3
idd.-i
nr
D^*ir6 UBOon nam

Dips
*DWpn
wpe
I
ti^bn
vb
rrcra
inuppn
mien
dj
Tan
neon
uid nuin jvd^

ia
snip p*v
p nrw
*d-id3
I
nt:na
nija
awn
tj*k
nbnru
-v^ni?
njni
niDP nnwna
rrj'-ian
iddh onon
umdh

&6s?
i>n:
5>a
K.9
^n why
"iddh
I
pibjv bib inuna? djdm rm
nan
"unoa
mpn
irr
i
nr
nam
*Dipn
|
nNima wjhdp
!>n
awn wwa
Dan
i>ai
nno -inn
jvyn
D^nncn
d:
I
ai>
5>a
bit
r6ywi
nan
!>y]
imin n^DXJ
n*nn inupi' oi> xxrv
ipn
ropu*n
|
nota
*6ibw Tj?n na
ntôn
id^j
imura
tnn cmo *B*n
|
n&hs>"Di* uuc
nap
d*b!?k
I
n^ -na
I
ova

|
[n&i>
mnnn *r
new avN
I
nyS" 5 *vv
bit?
'ae>w ^siwa inn *jn]

*a
yixi?
n"TO^ nnsi ewikoi
}a
ruiaDn
nn p rmrp
prep
priN
niaîoa
Rosenthal (Nos.
35-7),
following
Freimann,
ascribes
is
both
editions to Joseph Gunzenhauser.
This hypothesis
entirely
unacceptable.
The two
editions appeared within
five
months
of each other about twelve discussed before. a general
years
after
the
editio
princeps
we
That there should have arisen suddenly such

for a dictionary of the Bible at
demand
Naples among
to
the scholars, beginners,
and
especially
teachers,
whom
the
printer looks as prospective buyers, does not
sound probable, and

in
one cannot understand why a printer should
such a way
compete with
himself.
We
certainly should expect
some informaInstead,
far superior to
tion about the peculiar circumstances in the colophon.
Catorze only praises his D^HinDH HASH EPWIXP as

all
printed works on the subject, thus including the
Makre DardeMoreover, the
ke of 1488, as well as Latif's edition of Kimhi.
two editions are very

in
different
not only
is
the earlier printed
one column, the
later in two,
but the former has the references
in the margin, the other in brackets in the

fact that in the
body of the
text.
The
in
1491 edition two columns were omitted
the
is
early part of the
book (end of
in
letter n)
and supplied
for the
at the
end
perhaps due to hurried work

too great an advantage.
order not to give the other printer
This also accounts
omission of
first
the references to the pericopes of the Pentateuch after the
dozen
folios or so referred to in the

is
colophon.
Furthermore, the
type used
different in both, the Rabbinical characters
employed
sets of
for the references
being
much
smaller in the former.
Both
HO
type seem to
e.g.
I

me
different
It,
from
all
the other fonts used at Naples,

in
the ligature
which both use

(Similarly,
the
Rabbinical type,
Festschrift
have not seen elsewhere.

p. 96, note,
Baron Giinzburg,
Chwolson,
points to the difference between the Conat
type used for the early part of the Yoreh
Deah
of 1477
[fols.
1-30
and 39] and the Ferrara type used for the rest as most evident Accordingly Rosenthal's statement in this same ligature t.)
that the types used are identical with those of Gunzenhauser's
edition
of Nahmanides'
Shaar ha-Gemul
is
incorrect
in
both
instances.
Of Avicenna's Kanon, Cassuto

also has a copy.
I
describes a fragment (No. 39),

;
Rosenthal an almost complete copy (No. 39)
Wachstein (No. 48)
This book, of which

carefully,
possess a copy myself,

will
lately
little
examined rather
and
go
in
this
instance
Rossi,
all
more
into bibliographical detail.

is
Following
De
the bibliographers state that the book
printed in two columns
and has
fifty
lines to the
varies,
column
only Cassuto notices that the

is
number
column.
of
lines
is
and that one page

last four lines
printed in one
first
This
the case with the recto of the

I
leaf
of
signature n in
ture X of
Book
and the
In
of
fol.
b of
signa-
Book IV,
in
which two instances the
lines are continuous,
covering the whole page.
Book
III, signature }\ fol. 3 a, only
one column
is
printed in the middle of the page.
The number
the columns of
of lines varies from 40-55,
and
differs greatly in
one and the same page.
To
T,
give a few examples picked at

fol.
random
col.
Book
col.
I,
signature
3,
col.
has 44, col.

1
2,
40,
col. 3, 47,
2,
col. 4,
3,
44
lines
in the following leaf col.
has 50,
49,
48, col. 4, 46 lines (counting the spaces left

lines).
between the chapters as
This gives an idea of the uneven

I
appearance of the book, of which
think
we
find
no other
example among Hebrew incunabula.

in
Only Rosenthal noticed that

find
Book
I,
signature X, leaf 8
a,
we
on the margin a woodcut

collation of the
diagram of the bones of the neck.

offers
The
book
more
difficulties.
De
and
Rossi counts 143, 192, and 141 leaves,

T40,
Rosenthal 143,
194,
Pellechet,
No. 1670:
144,
194,
and
142, Roest in his catalogue of the Rosenthaliana at Anister-
HEBREW INCUNABULA
dam,
pages
p.
;
MARX
ii'
455, has 473, Wachstein 477, Xedner, p. 293, gives 486

the last seems to be a misprint for 480, caused by the
in the refere
occurrence of the number 86 on the same line

to
De
Rossi, which curiously
is
;
also misprinted as 486.
Roest
must have had a defective copy

to
the other discrepancies are due
the fact that most
copies lack
some of
the
blank
lea
Unfortunately no detailed collation of the British

is
Museum copy
available.
used Steinschneider's complete copy, which has

leaves),
no blanks (474
Rosenthal.
and
that of
Columbia, which has three
blanks, the only detailed collation of Wachstein,
and
that
of
From
these I derive the following collation

1
Book
I.
Preface and contents (i 4 ),
and 4 b being
blank
8
blank; *n-N,
II.
(i
),
b and
=
6
70
Contents blank
(i
),
b and 6 blank;
n-K,
10
tf,
D, 6
=
8
76
III.
Contents (i ), 1 and 2a blank; 7 b and 8 of last blank

Contents Contents
(1"),
1
:o-2,
=194
4b
blank
,,
IV.
a blank
8,
;
-K, N\ *y
,;
V.
(i
),
blank;
1-N,
(i
),
= =
96
44
480
This method of collation, which
is
common
means
in the description
of incunabula in general, has to be applied consistently to the
Hebrew incunabula
It is
as well.
By
this
it is
it is
easy to examine
is
any copy and determine whether
complete or what
missing.
more convenient
to follow the signatures of the
books than
to count through the

this
whole volume as Wachstein does, and by

left
method the blanks

find
their
by the printer are most

explanation.
is
easily indi-
cated and
natural
In the two
cases
where a new volume begins

volumes, Books I-II,
the recto of the
I
first
the Kanon mostly bound in three III, IV- V with Books III and IV
i.
e.
leaf of the table of contents

is
is
left
blank.
think that this detailed description

it
not quite out of place
here as
corrects the books reviewed in various points.

I
In this
connexion
'
want
to
draw attention
to a very instructive paper
Desiderata in the cataloguing of Incunabula, with a guide for
112

',
Catalogue entries
by Arnold C. Klebs
1
in
Papers of
the Biblio-
graphical Society of America, X,
916, pp. 143-63last
The
numbers.
rarest
books described by Cassuto are the

Psalter of Brescia 1493 (No. 72)
is
two
The
not found in
Oxford; Steinschneider includes the number 13

indicate the fact,
to acquire, the
in brackets to
and but
for a
couple of leaves
is
copy in Florence
unique.
set
De De
Rossi was able Rossi remarks
that
it
was produced from the type

at the
for the Brescia Bible
which was printed

text being
same time, each column of the Bible

to prepare a
broken into two so as
handy pocket edition
of the Psalter.
Other instances of the same practice by Soncino

p. 158,
were given by Friedberg, ZfBB., VIII,

overlooked
this
who
like
Cassuto
remark of
curious
De
Rossi about our book.
The most
of the
Florence incunabula
is
No. 43,
text of
Hilleli-
Pentateuch, Megillot and Haftarot. which claims that
its
the Pentateuch was corrected according to the famous
codex.
Cassuto contradicts Freimann's assertion that
this edition
was meant to serve as a Tikkun, since the text is too incorrect. It is much to be regretted that we have no specimen of this print
which Freimann, who discovered

simile
it,
intended to publish
in
fac-
{ZfBB., VIII,
p. 144).
Since the Codex Hilleli remained

to the time of the expulsion (see
in the Iberian peninsula
down
Zacuto, Juchasin, ed. Filipowski, London,
1857, p. 220b),
we
are justified in ascribing this edition to a Spanish or Portuguese

press.
As a supplement
'
to his Incanaboli
Cassuto published in the
Rivista Israelitica, IX, pp. 167-73, and a reprint of seven pages
Note bibliografiche
sulla
edizione principe del Kol-Bo.
He
had found a copy

after his
of this incunable in the Collegio
Rabbinico
book had appeared, and upon
careful examination of
is
the
book reached the conclusion

book was printed
that there
no basis
for the
still
assertion of the bibliographers

follows, that the
which Rosenthal (No. 41)

in
Naples
c.
1490.
It
belongs
to the
books
for
which neither place nor date
is
known.
dealt with rather
its
One of the very rare incunabula which

briefly
is
by Rosenthal (No.
40), the
Behai of Naples, contains in

long epigraph, which
stein, pp.
is
-13
for the first
time
fully reprinted
it
by W'achis
21-3, a statement which,
if I
interpret
right,
of j^reat
Hebrew typography. Azriel ( iun/.enhauser's brother-in-law, Moses ben Isaac, is called 3B>im Dan BHT1 YW nbt Diann naKS> baa nitryb py ntmna. Steinschneidei (Zeitinterest for the history of
schrift fiir Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland,
this
I
'
I, p.
105) explains
'.
war vielleicht ein Letternschneider oder Pressenverfertiger
think the text clearly implies that he was also, and in the
first
place, a wood-engraver.
Our book
contains
in
some very
p. 20),
pretty
woodcut borders (see the reproduction

which strengthens
Wachstein,
a fact
full-
this theory considerably.
Besides these
page borders the names of the books of the Pentateuch are

printed in a woodcut frame.
In examining the various Naples
incunabula of our library
found that
this
woodcut frame of
our book, the latest dated Naples incunabulum, occurs in the

earliest
is
Naples books, the parts of the Ketubim as
well.
It
reproduced by Rosenthal as No. 16 of the facsimiles from
Proverbs 1487.
We
find
it
again in the Ibn Ezra of 1488 (see
Jewish Encyclopedia, VI, 523), Nahmanides 1490, &c. Sometimes If we it is turned around, the bottom being put on the top.
compare the various books we can see how the frame

being broken
is
gradually
on one
side,
and the
If
signs of
wear are very

is
evident in the later books.
Moses ben Isaac
the wood-
engraver whose work

in ascribing to
is
used
for the Behai,
we
therefore are justified
him
all
the woodcuts used in Gunzenhauser's office,

in Italian incunabula. 3
artist
and these include most of those found
Whether they are the work of the same

examination.
requires expert
Here
only wish to establish the fact that we

for a
have the name of an active wood-engraver working

printer.
Hebrew
The
question might also be raised whether Moses did
some work
for printers of Latin books,
and whether perhaps the
same designs
also
occur
in
non-Hebrew books.
illustrating
in
careful
investigation of the
woodcuts
Ibn Sahula's Mashed

Schreiber,
ha-kad?noni (not
5
mentioned
W.
L.
Manuel
de
See now Freimann, Zur Geschichte der ZfHB. XXI, 1918, p. 25 seq.
iidischen BuchiUnstration bis
iJ-/<>.
VOL.
XL
114 V amateur de

la
if Steele, V might have an important bearing on this question. As a matter of fact it has been established that the border used by Tuppo in
gravure sur
bois
et
sur metal au
Naples, 1485, for his edition of
Aesop occurs again
in the first
complete edition of the Hebrew Bible (Soncino,

F.
1488);
see
Lippmann, The Art of Wood-engraving in Italy in the Fifteenth Century, London, 1888, p. 15, note (where Naples is wrongly given
of
as printing-place
Illustrations,
the Bible)
A.
W.
Pollard,
Italian
Book
one of
2nd
the
edition,
London, 1894, London, 191 7,
p. 23,
and Early Illustrated Books,

Only researches
in
p.
83.
great
libraries
abroad could throw further
light
on
this
problem.
On
the most interesting Spanish

I
and Portuguese incunabula

No. 50, which
is
of Rosenthal
shall only
add
a few brief remarks.
the Seminary Library acquired together with No. 52,
different
from the Guadalaxara edition of Kimhi on the Later Prophets,

of which the Breslau Seminary possesses a complete copy.
The
Zamora Rashi does not speak

issued from the
of three earlier editions of Rashi, as
claimed under No. 52, but states that Rashi was the third book
Zamora
press, the
is
preceding two being a Pentateuch
and a prayer-book.
which
I
No. 55
is
*
recorded by Jacobs as 65, No. 66,
have seen,
only part of a leaf containing Gen. 43. 29
44. 23.
Instead of
Leiria
is is
Kommentar
incorrect.
',
p. 27,
line
1,
read 'Targum'.
Under 67
cunabula.
called the last printing-place for
Hebrew
in-
This
The
last
place
is
Barco, where
Soncino printed
in 1497.
I
In conclusion
wish to draw attention to a two-column article

little
on an Hebrew incunabulum which, although a

probably known to very few of the readers.
I
older,
is
few years ago
received, through the kindness of the author, Mr. S. Seeligmann
of
Amsterdam,
',
a reprint of
an
in
article
Eene zeldzame Rasjeauthor,
uitgave
in
which had appeared
Centraal-Blad voor Israelieten
Nederland, XXI, No. 43

'J'\s n
%
(1901).
The
who
signs his
name
pose
HW,
deals with the
Rome
edition of Rashi, of which
the Seminary Library has a splendid complete copy, but his puris
not to give bibliographical information, but to point to

the importance of the book for textual criticism, illustrating
it
115
by
a few good readings not recorded by Berliner.

in
This
is
a point
which the value of the Hebrew incunabula greatly

in other languages.
differs
from
most of those
In the
latter the texts
comand
monly used are
in every
way superior
to their early predecessors,
being based on the best manuscripts which came
down
to us,
having profited by the vast advances of the study of philology
For most of the Hebrew

to the
texts the early editions are far superior

in
modern reproductions, and they enable us
numberless
Outside
cases to correct difficulties and establish a better text.
of the Bible editions examined by
De
Rossi, Baer
and C. D.
Ginsburg,
D "ID1D
N s
and the Talmud

(Kohut's
treatises
culled
in
Rabbinovicz's
pnp"i, very few of these books have been consulted for
modern
editions
Aruk
of
is
perhaps the
most notable
exception),
and
is
a collection
Hebrew incunabula and other

tools
for
early editions
therefore not a matter of curiosity to be relegated
to
museum, but represents the indispensable

Unfortunately they
yet, since there is little
the
Jewish scholar.
for a long
effort
will retain this
importance
time
prospect for an organized

editions
to
produce the necessary
critical
of
all
these
important works to supersede them, an
effort
which could only
be directed by a Jewish academy with large financial resources.

I
have in the foregoing review dealt
at great length with the
points in which I had to disagree with the authors on a subject

to
which
have devoted a great deal of time
lately in
connexion
America.
with the census of fifteenth-century books

I
owned
that the
in
gladly state
once more
in
conclusion
books, and
especially that of Cassuto, are a very important contribution to
field
little
cultivated,
and
that I
derived
from
them
most
valuable information.
Lately
J.
Maarsen,
nwb
mKBTl
Textstudien
op den
Pentateuch-
Commentaar van Mozes Nachmanidcs, I

1918, corrected the text of that
{Genesis en Exodus^,
in
Amsterdam.
commentary
numberless cases on the
basis of the early editions, especially that of Lisbon 1489 yielding very
valuable readings.
The
earliest
incunabulum edition.
Rome
before 1480.
unfortunately
was
inaccessible to him.
I
Il6

Gli studi gludaici in Italia negli ultimi
(1861-1911).
Cassuto, Umberto.
cinquanf
anni
Fascicolo
Bibliografia.
Roma,
19 13 (reprinted from Rivista degli studi orientali, V).
pp. 88, 8vo.

Italian
Jewry has always maintained a high
level of culture
it
and education.
boast
of
is
While the number of standard works

very large,
it
can
not
can point to the Aruk as the

literature for a
classical dictionary of
Talmudic
period of eight
centuries.
its
Modern
historical criticism in
Jewish literature takes

of Azariah
his time.
starting-point
from
the famous
Meor Enayim
far in
de Rossi (Mantua, 1574), who was
advance of
Among
the founders of Jewish Wissenschaft in the nineteenth
century Isaac
Reggio,
and
especially
Samuel David Luzzatto,
take a very high rank.
In spite of the relatively small
number
of Italian Jews, everybody familiar with the recent development

in
the field of Jewish literature
is
well aware of the important
contributions in this field due to the zeal of the small
band of
devoted Jewish scholars in that country,
The
ten volumes of the
Rivista Israeiitica, a strictly scientific bi-monthly, contain a great
number
scholar.
of articles of the highest value in all departments
of
Jewish learning and are indispensable to the serious Jewish
But even those who have more or
less closely
followed the
progress of Jewish studies in the various countries will be surprised
by the amount of work actually accomplished

biblical
in the field of post-
Judaism
in Italy
during the
last fifty years
and recorded
It is
in Cassuto's careful
and most valuable bibliography.
only
through
it
that
we
get full insight into this activity of our Italian

is
co-religionists.
Incidentally an index
supplied to the articles
of scientific value which appeared in the various Italian Jewish

periodicals (of course with the omission of the contributions of
foreigners like Berliner or Steinschneider, which, however, at least
in
the case of these two scholars, are enumerated in the biblio-
graphies of their writings).

years of his
life
Luzzatto comes in for the last five
only, but the
numerous posthumous publications
HEBREW INCUNABULA
are included
MARX
>'
(TMNn rV2
was reprinted
at
Lemberg, 1881, i6mo).
We
get interesting bibliographies of Castiglione, Castelli, Chajes,
Lattes,
Modona, Mortara, Perreau, Soave, and Cassuto

list,
himself,
to select a few of the large
in
which of course contributions
to biblical literature are omitted.
Very numerous and important are the contributions

political
to
the
and economic
history of the
Jews
in the various parts of
Italy, frequently
based on unpublished material from archives.
Many
cities
of these appeared in local serial publications of the different

easily consulted or
and provinces which are not
even generally
I
accessible.
Going over the bibliography of Cassuto,
came
across a considerable
number
of references which greatly interested
me and would otherwise sure my experience will
have escaped
my
attention,
and
am
be duplicated
by many others who
consult Cassuto's thorough work.
For the principles followed

graphy a
slip
in the compilation of this biblio-
in
front of the
volume
refers
to
second part
which
is
to follow.
Meantime we can gain some information

itself.
on
this point from the book
The omission
Riva di Trento,
and of
of Carmoly, Annali delta stamperia ebraica di
recati in italiano
da Giovanni Bampi, Trentino,
1883, of Perreau's translations of Zunz's chapter on the Jews of

Sicily,
Berliner's Delle Biblioteche italiane
and Sei mesi
in
Italia,
shows that such translations of modern
scientific articles
are excluded
on
principle, while naturally translations of mediaeval

(e. g.
Jewish literature are duly recorded
Maimonides' Moreh
by Maroni, his Logic by Isaia Levi, Cuzari by Foa, Ikkarim by
M.
Sorani, Israeli's
Guide of Physicians by Soave, &c).
The
ibn
same
applies to poetic works,
and
in this field not only the older

e. o.,
poets (Judah ha- Levi by Barzilai, Benedetti
Abraham
Ezra by Jona, Immanuel of

Sacerdote, Sepilli, or
Rome
by Balzo, Benedetti, Modona,
Moses Zacut and Jacob Daniel Olmo by Foa), but even the poems of Bialik by Sorani are included.
Works of authors
written
(e.g.
hailing from
Italy are
included wherever
Sabato Morais and
Sacerdote), while of foreign
scholars
who have
lived for a few years in Italy only those items
Il8

e. g.
are included which appeared during their stay in Italy (see
Margulies, Elbogen, Chajes).

It is characteristic
of the country that a considerable
number
is
of important contributions to the study of mediaeval Jewry

to
due
the efforts
of non-Jewish scholars
all
such
as
Garucci,
Guidi,
Lagumina, Lasinio, and above

it
Perreau.
In
many
instances
is
hard to say whether the names belong to Jewish or nonis
Jewish scholars, as no indication
given,
and only
rarely short
biographical notes are added which
we would
have liked to
meet
much
realize
less
sparingly in these pages.
Of
course every one will
how
very difficult
to the
it is
to gather such information,
and we
must be
respect.
grateful
author for what he has done in this
One
Castelli,
misses
all
the publications caused by the contest over

of Tunis,
the will of Caid
Samama
some
of which, at least, like
// diritto di testare nella legislazione ebraica, Florence,

to
1878,
seem
consider the questions at issue from a general

of interest
for
point of view, and are
the subject of Jewish
Law
(see the
list
of
titles in
1
pleted
by U.,
XIX,
01),
REJ., XVIII, 156-77, to be comand one of which, therefore, is

bibliography
in his
included in
Steinschneider's
'Allgemeine
Einleitung in die jiidische Literatur des Mittelalters' (JQR., XVII,

p.
549, No. 35).
A
the
that
few occasional cross-references would have increased the

use of the
practical
book.
Thus an
article
published under
the statement
name Feroso is recorded under Maroni with the former name is a pseudonym. But this is
be mentioned
in
hardly
known
to everybody and ought to be stated under Feroso.
Reviews
ought also to
connexion with the name of the
book
itself.
is
Levi, 1*HP niJpn,
better
(Brody, 1879, 16
pp.,
r6mo)
Geschichtsliteratur, 115.
known under the title of the reprint D^rn DUpn see Steinschneider, The many instances of reprints with
:
special title
and pagination of
articles
by Perreau, Lattes, Cassuto,
and many others ought perhaps

Bampi, 'Delia stampa
e
to
have been recorded.
degli stampatori nel principato di

Trienti fino deals
al
rig
1884, which
1564/ Archivio Trentinu,
II, fasc. 2,
with
Markaria's
Latin publications
in
connected with
the
Trent Council (unknown

to
Z/HB., X,
'
p. 94,
and inaccessible
me
even now), and Cesare Musatti,
II
maestro Mose Soa

I
Arch. Venet.,
XXXVI,
part
2,
1888, are the only additions

'
can
make
in
to the bibliography, besides the article
Ventura, Rubino'
Jewish Encyclopedia, XI, by the author of the bibliography.
P. 82 read M[oritz] Steinschneider instead of M[ax].
The
only thing one misses in the useful volume
is
a subjectits
index grouping the material recorded and thus facilitating
use
and increasing
its
helpfulness, but such an addition was probably
excluded by the scheme of the larger work from which Cassuto's

is
reprinted
'
:
Gli studi orientali in Italia negli ultimi 50 anni
',
published by the Scuola Orientale at the University of
Rome.
this
Perhaps the promised second part
will in
some way supply
demand.
It is
much
to
be desired that Dr. Cassuto should follow up

five
all
this
volume with a continuation every
years
or
so.
He
would be sure of the sincere thanks of

the furtherance of Jewish literature.
those interested in
Alexander Marx.
Jewish Theological Seminary
of America.
WOLF'S NOTES ON THE 'DIPLOMATIC HISTORY OF THE JEWISH QUESTION'.

Notes on the Diplomatic History of the feivish Question, with Texts By Documents. of Treaty Stipulates and other Official
Lucien Wolf. Printed for the Jewish Historical Society of England. London 1919. x. pp. 133.
:
It
is
a very interesting
and important contribution

this
to diplo-
matic history, Jewish history, and the history of religious liberty in

general,
which Mr. Lucien Wolf has made in

title
book, to which
he has given the very modest
quoted.
Prepared originally as
a paper read before the Jewish Historical Society of England in
February 19 18, Mr. Wolf expanded
it
and published
it
in time for
use in connexion with the Peace Conference, and

cript
its full
trans-
of
documents made the work

It
is
particularly useful
for that
purpose.
interesting
to observe that
(in
both the American

1918),
Jewish Historical Society
1906,
19 16, and
and the
English Society (in 191 8), recognizing the value of history as

a Hilfswissenschaft, issued elaborate historical studies of various
phases of the Jewish question in diplomatic history, for such practical use.
As our author
well says in his preface to the present
work
'
The Jewish Question is far from being a subsidiary issue in the Reconstruction of Europe, (but has) a great tradition of effort and achievement in regard to it, and this tradition, apart from the high merits of the task itself, imposes upon them (the plenipotentiaries at the Peace Conference) the solemn obligation of solving the question completely and finally, now that the opportunity of doing so presents itself, free from all restraints of a selfish and It is not only that the edifice of Religious calculating diplomacy. Liberty in Kurope has to be completed, but also that some six millions of human beings have to be freed from political and civil disabilities and social economical restrictions which for calculated cruelty have no parallels outside the Dark Ages. The Peace
120
WOLF'S 'DIPLOMATIC HISTORY',

Conference
will
F.TC.
KOHLER
i-i
have accomplished
relatively
is
this blackest of all
European scandals
little, if a shred of allowed to survive its
deliberations
'.
Mr. Wolf
freely
and avowedly draws on Dr. Cyrus Adler's

of the United
the
States,
States,
Jews
i?i
the Diplomatic History
Kohler and
Wolf's Jewish
Disabilities
i?i
Balkan
and
M.
J.
Kohler's
pamphlet, Jewish Rights at International Congresses,

;
reprinted from the American Jewish Year
Book for 1917-1918) Kohler's Jewish Bights at the Congresses of Vienna and Aix-laChapelle which would have supplemented Mr. Wolfs narra-
tive
regarding
those
two early congresses

issued
was
if
not available
with
the
to
him,
having
It
been
nearly
simultaneously
present work.
might
fully
have been helpful
Mr. Wolf had

not
to
incorporated
more
American precedents, and had

with
contented
himself
so
largely
mere
cross-references
Dr. Cyrus Adler's volume, for America has, as Mr. Wolf himself
well says (p.
5,
compare
54),
'
on many occasions shown a
really
'.
noble example of the purest altruism in international politics
Moreover, he also frankly points out (pp.
4, 5,
54-5) that Euro-
pean reasons of
in
state often
complicated and shaped their action,

while America, freer
connexion with Jewish emancipation,

alliances, acted
from such entangling
more
is
in accord with principle
and
set the
precedents which Europe

the close of a
entire
more.
In
fact, at
',
now following more and war to make the world safe for
'
democracy
the
argument would
have
been
greatly
strengthened by a frank recognition of the fact that the

for international safe-guarding of religious rights
tion, in the international field, of
is
movement
but an applica-
America's fundamental, constiinternal constitutional
tutional, separation of
Church and State and

civil liberty
guarantees for religious and
regardless of race
and
miss
creed, since adopted by Western Europe.

citations of the valuable writings of
We
therefore
Field,
David Dudley
John
Forsyth,
Thomas
F. Bayard, S.
M.
Stroock, and Oscar S
Straus,
Accordingly, and of H. C. Hodges's Doctrine of Intervention. in the light of the very early treaty between the United States and
Tripoli of 1796, the statement should be modified (p. 68) that the
122

treaty of
French
1864 with Switzerland, assuring French citizens

is
',
'without distinction of creed' rights in Switzerland,

article
'a form of
without precedent in instruments of this kind

is
though the
statement
probably true of Europe from the period beginning
with the Napoleonic downfall.

tion of Swiss discriminations,
On
the other hand, in the considerareference to Napoleon Ill's
we miss
and
earlier valiant
which led to
and vigorous espousals of the Jewish cause, the adoption of this very treaty, and paved the way
United States
too.
',
for the Swiss treaty with the
We
also miss
reference toother forcible French pronunciamientos for instance, the
discussion of the important Russian treaty violations in the French
Parliament in December 1909, and to Dutch and other utterances

with respect to Switzerland, and earlier incidents.
On
the other
hand,
it
is
interesting to read
the statements from the

(p.
pen of
the
Montefiore's chief
biographer
18):
Sir
'Meanwhile
(after
Crimean
war),
under the influence of
Moses Montefiore, and
more
of
M. Cremieux, the Jewish Board Deputies had plucked up a measure of courage, and had begun
especially of his jealousy of
to take a
more
active interest in the larger political questions

co-religionists
'.
which involved the future of their foreign
Nor
does Mr. Wolf's cross-reference to Stern's Urkimdliche Beitrdge

iiber die
Stellung der Papste
zit
den Juden conveniently dispense

intervention
with useful
references to Papal
on behalf of the
Jews, particularly to the Pope's recent communication on behalf

of the Jews in Poland, issued at the instance of the
American
Jewish Committee. In view of Mr. Wolf's express disclaimer of completeness,

it
would be ungracious
been included.
does not confine
to
is
enumerate other items which might have

all
This
the more true, as the book before us
itself to
proceedings at international conferences,
but includes the entire range of diplomatic action, and contains
many new
final section
'
finds
'
'
hitherto overlooked.
It
also
embraces as a
The
',
Palestine Question,
and the National Restora-
tion of the
Jews
where interesting and hitherto unpublished
documents of 1841 appear, regarding a proposed establishment,

then already, of a separate state
in
Palestine under
European
WOLFS 'DIPLOMATIC HISTORY

auspices.
ETC.
ROHLEB
1^3
On
in
the other hand,
Hyamson's and SokoloVs recent

this section.
for
works would have supplemented
As rush
getting
this
valuable work out
use by the
Peace Conference and exigencies of space, compelled curtailment,

it
may answer
11,
a useful purpose to add here references to the
elaborate 336 pp. report of the U. S.
House
of Representatives of
S.
December
Treaty
191
1,
on the proposed termination of the U.

Session
with
Russia (32nd Cong. 2nd
House Report,
to
No. 179), and to the treatment of that subject and the Kishineff
Massacre Petition
Prof.
in
Simon Wolf's Presidents I Have Known,
David Kaufmann's scholarly treatment of the International
Intervention on behalf of the Jews of
Bohemia
in
1744, in his
Gesammelte Schriften
(II.
328-373), and to Krengel's elaborate
transcripts of the British
documents on the same incident

44,
in the
Mo natssthrift
American Jews
work
(pp.
(1900, vol.
pp. 177
et
seq.
and 259
et set/).
will learn with interest,
however, from the present

the British Jewish
82-3) that
Sir
Edward Grey advised

1,
Conjoint Committee, on October
191 2, after the United States
had abrogated the Russian

position
treaty, that
England's support of our
would
'
also have led to her termination of her treaty with

result
Russia, which
would
in
no way advance the
interests of
those
whom you
represent,
and would
'.
in other respects
be
dis-
advantageous to British interests
In discussing
(p. 64) the
important question of the evolution

full
of recognition of the status of the Jews as
subjects, reference
might be made to the important British precedents established as

far
back as 1672, when the 'Council
for the Plantations' over-
ruled a Jamaican court
and
held, in
'
Rabba
Couty's case, that

',
Jews were not aliens under the

1675,
in
Navigation Act
and again
in
when they secured

Dutch
the recognition of British Jews settled
Surinam as British
subjects,
under the treaty of Breda, as

them.
us, in
against
efforts to restrain
In one of the few passages in the valuable work before
which Mr. Wolf gives expression to
his personal views, instead of
contenting himself with explaining and setting forth important
documents
often
first
discovered
by himself
he
well
says
124

(p.
regarding the Congress of Berlin

of European policy,
that
24)
'
It
made
it
a principle of territory
no new
state or transfer
should be recognized, unless the
fullest religious liberty
and
'.
civil
and
is
political equality
were guaranteed to the inhabitants

it
This
the thesis of this book, and
was doubtless a great satisfaction

have unearthed
to the loyal
and scholarly
British Jewish author to
the British utterance of eleven years earlier, 1867, from the British
State Papers regarding
Rumania
(p.
24)
'
The
peculiar position
of the Jews places them under the protection of the civilized

world.'
Max
New
York.
J.
Kohler.
Postscript.
Some of the materials

24,
collated by Mr.
in the
Wolf and
the other workers in this field are

letter
embodied
monumental
to
of Clemenceau
on behalf of the Peace Conference,

1919, accompanying
Premier Paderewski, dated June

Polish treaty
Jezvish Year
the A?nerican
;
the
they can be conveniently found in the American

for
Book
191 9
the
October 19 19 Snppleiiient to
Journal of International Law, pp. 416-436, and in British Treaty Series, No. 8 (1919). The French Government
published an elaborate summary of Jewish memorials to the Peace
Conference
Strangers',
in
the
official
periodical,
'
Recueil de Documents
dated Paris, July 31, 1919, No. 46, issued by the
Ministries of Foreign Affairs
and of War,
entitled
'
La Question
juive devant la Conference de la Paix.' m
SAEKI'S 'NESTORIAN
MONUMENT
By
IN CHINA'
The Nestorian Monument in China.

at
B. Y. Saeki, Professor
:
Waseda University, Tokyo. London Promoting Christian Knowledge. 19 16.

the
Society for
pp.
xii.
342.
A monument,
in
which may
fairly
be said
to rank in
importance
with the Rosetta Stone and the
Rock
of Behistun, stands to-day
one of China's deserted
capitals the sole tangible evidence that
thousand years ago there were some millions of Christian
believers living in the
Middle Kingdom.
This
is
the Nestorian
to
inscription of Hsian-Fu, erected in 781
by a grateful Bishop
to
declare the nature of the faith
and
testify to its
It
protection by one
of the T'ang Emperors of China.

in the persecution of the
its
seems
have disappeared
certain Jesuit
creed which followed within a century of

until 1625,
its
erection,
and was not unearthed
when
missionaries published the news of
discovery to the world, to
be so completely discredited by Protestants and unbelievers in Europe that the monument was not submitted seriously to study
until
two generations ago.
Replicas of the stone exist
now
in the
Metropolitan Museum,
New
York, and at
Koya
San, in Japan,
Yet,
it
while numerous rubbings have been distributed broadcast.

while
its
contents are thus secured to scholarship for ever,
is
rather curious that
no
seat of learning in
it
America except Yale

itself
should thus
far
have thought
worth while to possess
of a
full-sized cast of
China's one unchallenged monumental contribu-
tion to history.
Professor Saeki's purpose in adding to the literature on this

subject seems to be two-fold
:
to account for the extraordinary
disappearance of a numerous body of Christians from China after

the ninth century,
and
to
show
that Nestorians brought to that
country the conception of a personal

faith in
God and
to
of salvation through
Him, thus contributing

as
'.
to the creation of
what
the
is
known
in
to-day
Chinese
Buddhism,
first
and
confirm
belief
Amitabha
On
the
point he reaches the notable conclusion
that after the persecution in 845
most of the Chinese Nestorians
I2 5
126
THE JEWISH. QUARTERLY REVIEW

in
found refuge
becoming Moslems, while

in the
after the
Mongul
irrup-
tion all Christians remaining in Central Asia
between Iran and

at
China
Islam
were swallowed up
conversion of the Tartars to
that the greater
number
of
Moslems (reckoned
twenty
millions) in
China to-day are descended not from

;
original converts
from Nestorian Christians that the issue of those who were not thus perverted are to be discovered to-day in the Pill of Immortality Sect secret society caUed Chin- tan C/tiao,
to Islam but
' ',
still widely spread and powerful in the northern Chinese provinces and Manchuria. Professor Saeki identifies the founder of this
sect,
Lu Yen,
with the scholarly caligrapher of the Nestorian
monument, whose name appears upon the stone. adduced for these conclusions is ingenious, and it
The evidence
is
by no means
impossible to account thus for the survival of the more faithful adherents of a creed that was done to death officially in the ninth
century.
But no
is
positive testimony appears thus far to support a
theory that without further proofs drawn from contemporary T'ang

literature
not likely to convince historical scholars.
The
but
author's second postulate involves
him
in the fascinating
illusive
problem of the source of the atonement and salvation

to
doctrines
common
that
alike
Mahayana Buddhism and

Hellenism,
Christianity.
The
streams
transformed
all
Judaism, and
Hinayana
seem to flow from the region of ancient connexion they had with each other is a Bactria, but what question still unanswered. Professor Saeki cannot be said to have
Buddhism
proved his contention that the Vairochana sect and Nestorianism

in
minds but his scholarship and of the Chinese of the T'ang period acquaintance with the literature of S/iin-Shu, the Japanese True
China held
practically the
same
tenets
at least in the
'
Religion Sect
',
throw new
light
upon the
matter.
is
His discussion
sufficient in its
of every issue dependent
upon the monument
erudition to win the approval of Professor Sayce in a complimentary preface

prises a
catives
;
it
fills
half of the volume, the rest of
which compieces justifi-
new
in
translation of the inscription, notes
and
Chinese.
The book
is
distinctly
worth having, and
might be called one of the most valuable among many contributions to the broader study of Christianity issued by the well-
known
Society, which
assumes the cost and

F.
risk of publication.
Wells Williams.
Yale University.
INSCRIPTIONS IN THE SYNAGOGUE KAI-FUNG-FOO

By David
S.
IN
D. Sassoox, London.
is in
The
following article
connexion with the important

lately
J.
document (Codex Sassoon, No. 456) which has to me as a gift from my cousin Mr. Reuben D. E.
of Shanghai, whose father
is
come
Abraham
one of the leaders of the comthere,
munity and an indefatigable worker
and who himself

Rescue of the
defunct
was also the president of the Society

Chinese Jews
for the
own
^KTJ"
n
in
mrj&
man now
which was formed
in 1900. his
Father Jerome Tobar
Inscriptions juives
dc
K ai-fojig-fou
'
published by the Catholic Mission. Shanghai,
19 1 2, mentions that they had lately received from

several
Rome
which
documents
relating to the
Synagogue
in
Kai-fung-foo.
Among
these was a
copy of several
inscriptions
decorated the Synagogue, and which had
been sent to
Rome by
himself
missionaries,
and very
likely
by Pater Gozani
in
who
discovered the inscriptions suspended
the
Synagogue
at Kai-fung-foo in 1702.
Tobar
also
mentions having used for his publication,
copies of hanging inscriptions which G. Deveiia himself had
made, and also the diary of the two Chinese envoys sent
to
Kai-fung-foo
Christianity
by the London Society among the Jews, entitled The
for
Promoting
at
7civs
Kac-
fnng-foo, published by the Rev. G. Smith, Shanghai, 1851.
My
manuscript gives the Principles only, whereas Tobar
has complete copies of the twenty-three horizontal and 127 VOL. XI. R
128

hanging
inscriptions.
seventeen vertical
inscriptions
Nearly
all
his
have the date, and some have also the names
of the donors or the names of the scribes

after
who wrote them

cases
all
having washed their hands, and

In the
horizontal
in
some
three
are mentioned.
inscriptions these are

left
given in vertical lines on the right and
of the text.
Most of the horizontal ones

1656, and the latest, 1679.
are dated, four being 1668,
are dated, the earliest being
Of
is
the seventeen vertical, five
and one 1676.

in
The manuscript which

tinge.
my
possession consists of
one long sheet of very thin Chinese paper of a yellowish

It
measures 30-^! inches by an average of
g-fe
inches
wide.
First of all I shall give a
written, signed,
copy of the testimony
in Latin,
in 1705,
and sealed by the Jesuit Visitor
as follows
'
Inscriptiones,
quae
in
in
hoc
folio
descriptae
sunt,
appensae prostant
Provinciae
publica Synagoga Iudaeoru Sinensiu

est in
Ho
Nan, quae erecta
metropoli Cat
Finn Fu.
Ita est, et in
hunc fidem subscripsi
Philippus Grimaldi e soc Ies. Visr.
Pe
Kim
8 US obris 170J.'
(Translation.)
The
stand
inscriptions,
in
which are written out on
this page,
hanging
the public
Synagogue of the Chinese

is
Jews of the Province

metropolis Cai
Ho
Nan, which
erected in the
Fum
Fu.
in
Thus
it is,
and
witness hereof
have signed
Philip Grimaldi of the Soc. of Jes. Visitor
Pe Kin 8th November, 1705.
SYNAGOGUE INSCRIPTIONS The

1
IN KAI-FUNG-FOO
SASSOON
29
seal, of
which the colour
is
red, reads as follows
Societatis Iesu Vis. lap. et Chin.' (Society of Jesus Visi*
Japan and China).
My
and
document has seventeen

vertical.
inscriptions, ten horizontal
and seven
Gozani,
in 1702,
gave seven horizontal
five vertical.
From
it is
the dates
we know
in
that
all
the
hanging inscriptions must have been
the synagogue
when
Gozani
visited
it,
but
not improbable that the missionary
was not allowed

inscriptions were.
to enter the place
where some of the

in
Finn, in The
'
:
Orphan Colony of Jews
Chinas
p. 62,
says
The men
of
told us that several strangers
had before
do
so,
tried to enter, but they
would not allow them to
because
of
'
many
them were merely pretended

',
professors
their
religion
and the following
is
in
foot-note
century
?
'
Were these the Jesuit The same author on

inscription,
I
missionaries of the previous

p.
6j gives an incomplete
'
copy of an
and remarks
While engaged
in
copying the above, before

a
had quite finished the sentence,
man
of the
name
of K'heaou,
who had
what
I
attained a literary
of the
degree,
came and drove me unceremoniously out
temple, telling
me
to be careful of
is in
was doing.'
left, is
My
manuscript, which
Chinese from right to
written very carefully in a
most beautiful hand.
The
ten
horizontal
inscriptions
are in large and
bold characters,
smaller.
whilst those of the vertical ones are

vertical inscription has three seals,
much
Each
seal at
one quadrangle
the right-hand top, and
two square ones
at the left-hand
bottom.
is
In the top square of the
first vertical
inscription
all
is
written
the word sigillum, which
shows that
seals.
It
the
quadrangles and squares are meant for
usual
with the Chinese to put their seals on nearly everything
they make.
130
It

should be noted that on comparing the horizontal
inscriptions in
my
10),
manuscript with Tobar's book,

:
find
14),
three
slight
variations
in
Nos.
6
8),
(Tobar,
No.
7 (Tobar,
No.
and
8 (Tobar,
No.
namely, the second

in
character in
No. 6 and the fourth character

left,
No.
8,
reading from right to

the same
both being the same,
differ in
way from
No. 10
in
Tobar's,
and
It
in
is
is
No.
7,
the fourth
that
character varies
inscription
at
all,
from Tobar's.
remarkable
my
manuscript
not given by Tobar
notwithstanding that he has as
many as
twenty-three
horizontal ones.
The
following are the respective dates of

I
the inscriptions which
have taken from Tobar's work.

order in which they
The numbers
refer to the
come
in
the manuscript.
SYNAGOGUE INSCRIPTIONS
ist
It is
IN
KAI-FUNG-FOO
SASSOON
decade of the 9th moon of the year meou-chcn [1668].
Ngai-Fou-cheng, member of the noble [Jewish] Religion,

after
who,
having washed his hands, respectfully wrote
this
inscription.'
The English
translation
It
was also very kindly sent
to
me
by Mr. Abraham.
was done by Mr. Charles Budd
of the
Tung Wen Kwan

letter to
Translation Office, Shanghai, from whose

I
is
Mr. Abraham,
'
give the following interesting
extract
The
inscription
an attempt to express foreign
theological and philosophical terms in Chinese, and such
documents are much more
difficult to translate
than purely
Chinese documents, especially when the ideas to be conveyed
from one language to the other are abstract or abstruse.

In
some
cases
it is
extremely doubtful whether the original

the
ideas are clearly conveyed in the Chinese terms of

Inscriptions, as
some of these terms would bear

translation
is
different
it
renderings.
My
somewhat
stiff,
but
follows
the apparent meaning of the original closely.'
The
No. 12
'
fifty-three
chapters
'
mentioned
in
inscription
a,
are the weekly Parashiyyoth which
make up
the
annual cycle of the Pentateuch.

the
list
This
is
in
accordance with
in
of weekly Parashiyyoth given by Maimonides

at the
the
Yad Hahazaka
is
end of nimn ma^n, the number of

9-Deut. 30) and 1^1
which
(ibid.,
fifty-three, D^nv: (Deut. 29.
3 1 ) being counted as one Parasha.
From the fragments

we
see
of the manuscript prayer-books from Kai-fung-foo
that the Chinese Jews, like the Persian Jews, followed the
ritual
laid
down by Maimonides.
all
The
rubrics in those
manuscripts are
in Persian,
and most of the Pizmonim

This shows
therein also exist
among
the Persian Jews.
that at least during the last few centuries the Kai-fung-foo
colony received their Jewish education from Persia.
132

There
is
also other evidenceof this.
It is
from a twelfth-
century
manuscript of a Masoretic Pentateuch (Codex
Sassoon, No. 158) of Persian or Babylonian-Persian origin,
which
acquired
is
when
in
Baghdad
in 19 10. in the
In this
Codex
each Parasha
carefully indicated
margin by the
In the case of
it
word 'BHB within an illuminated design.

the Parasha
^1
it
is
not so marked but
is
treated as
a continuation of the preceding
Parasha
D'QVJ.
In
my
Farhi Bible (Codex Sassoon, No. 368, dated 1366-83) also,

the
as
number of nvens
fifty-three.
is
given at the end of the Pentateuch

lists
There are three Masoretic
in
that
manuscript
Parasha. 1
in all
of which "pi DUVJ are treated as a single

I
By
the way,
may remark
in
that
found several
fragments of Judeo-Persian songs
the binding of
my
Baghdad manuscript.
The next
sign of which
thing we find are the six words the

is Sibv
mnemonic
iTD
as to
which the Masorah prescribes

'
that they should, respectively, be written
at the beginning
in
of the line and at the top of the column,
the scrolls of
the
Law \
(1)
They
are
nwra
23. 24),
(Gen.
1. 1),
(2) rrnrf (ibid., 49. 8),
(3)
D-aCii
(Exod.
(ibid.,
14. 28), (4)

(6)
njwi id*
Dn rrryKi
(Deut. 12. 28),
(5)
yr\W rao
scrolls of
(ibid., 31. 28).
The
the
Law
which were brought from Kai-fung-foo, however,

this order in
differ
rvnrp
from
two
instances, namely, instead of

1
they have on: TiDn

n?o^ they
1EW
(Gen. 49. 14), and instead
of
njwi
have DHDcn
D*ttBP (Deut. 16. 18).
These
differences are in complete
agreement with
my Baghdad
of Persian
manuscript, which, as
1
have already
said, is
It
is
extraordinary that in this manuscript the passage beginning
Hvn
5]DD
DN
(Exod. 22. 24)
is
treated as a Parasha and a special Hafrara

16.
given for
it,
namely, Jeremiah 31. 30 to 33.
HP
">
nm
,b
fir 'j
t-3
U
T\J/"V
W3 UTjjHi flfjwi^ W^p
FIG.
2.
REDUCED FACSIMILE OF A PACK FROM THE BAGHDAD MS. (CODEX SASSOOX XO. ijS)
H
> --*V5* *3
MMBHM
r-
^r>"yjcru
Tf2
<Mii^5MH
IP,
t^Ttoiî
is*
am
!V'i:aPKp3^3n^,
^
i
REDUCED FACSIMILE OF A COLUMN FROM THE RABBI SHEM TOT. BIBLE (CODEX SASSOON NO. 82) WITH THE MARGINAL RUBRICS ON THE RIGHT.
IIC. 3.
origin.
It is
IN KAI-FUNG-FOO
SASSOON
I
133
a matter of gratification to prove,
think, for
the
first
time, that these

in
two remarkable deviations from
the
Masorah are not

are
any way due
to
mistakes or
carelessness, but
strictly in
accordance with certain
ancient Codices which are
now
lost.
Proof of
this is to
be
found
in
the famous model
Codex
of the Bible (Codex
Sassoon, No. 82), written by Rabbi
Shem Tob ben Rabbi

in Soria.
Abraham ben Gaon

in Spain, in the year
(ny biao avi)

1
and completed
5072 (= 311 -12).

8),
Here, against the

is
name rm.T
(Gen. 49.
:
the following important rubric

.
given in the margin

:
naoai
mm
naoa
Mtfi
cm
)tiv .Tin
n"v
-i3wn nnryn the Yod of teP nu should be

in the scroll
at
;
the
in
beginning of the column
of the
it
Law
the
but
the Codices of the 'Azaroth (or Court),

13
1
is
Yod
naoa
of
{ibid.,
49. 14).
Likewise, lower down, against

:
Taw
(ibid.),
the
Masorah remarks
:6iai
it is
NS1
em
'l
-iryn
in
the Codices of the 'Azaroth

is
at the beginning of the
column, and there
difference
'
of opinion about
it.
These
the
'
Codices of the 'Azaroth
are those Codices which

4. 2)
:
Talmud Yerushalmi
(Ta'anith
says, were found in
the Court of the Temple, as follows
into '3
km
-ibdi
^lBy? n2Di
*jiyo
"idd
rnrya into o^nao
';
ltam
nw
io*pi
mp via tod ama Dwm mp

ua
'n 'moyr tin
rtf*i
v6n pyo ama

into 'Na 'n
*:a
r6en ama
jwi
D*awai ^nib"
ama
y^n ama into 'Na
ltaai
ltaai
:mx
Codex
Me'oniy and
dw iDpi tana* dw idpi nvi n*<
ny: nx
ama owai
In one
Three Codices were found
in the
Court [of the Temple],
Codex
Zciatuti, and
Codex Hi.
[Codex] they found written Dip *r&N pyo (Deut.

in [the other]
33. 27),
and
two [Codices] Dip
*fli>N
TOD, the [reading of

[that of the] one
the]
two [Codices] was confirmed and

In
[Codex] was abandoned.
one [Codex]
they found
134
written
hm&
*33
"mm nx rbw\ (*BW

in
the
young people)
nb"l
(Exod.
htr\W
24. 5),
and
the
[the other]
two [Codices] nx
*,J3
nyD,
[reading
of the]
two [Codices] was
confirmed and [that of the] one [Codex] was abandoned.

In one [Codex]
they found [the word] KTi written nine
times [with yod\ and in [the other] two [Codices] ton eleven
[times], the [reading of the]
two [Codices] was confirmed
and [that of the] one [Codex] was abandoned.

(Translation.)
1
Reverence Heaven and pray

2
for blessings
on the country.
Reverence and
fear the Glorious
Heaven.
The Glorious Heaven
the Supreme Ruler

4
proclaim (the principles).
5
By Heaven's command
Intelligently serve the
Supreme
6
Ruler.
Lord
of the Pure
and True Religion.

7
Images have no part
in this Religion.
The Law
of this Religion
is
Heaven's Truth.
Image (worship)
is
not a part of this Law.
10
Reverence Heaven and respect men.
IN
KAI-FUNG-FOO
SASSOON
135
II
a.
all
[He] creates and nourishes; [His] Doctrine contains

;
production and sustenance

b.
[He] collected together the breath and

:
settled
the
forms
the Doctrine existed before form and breath.
12
a.
The Source of the Doctrine is from Heaven
fifty-three
chapters contain the complete Doctrine of the production
of the heavens, the earth, and men.

b.
The foundation
of the Religion
is
in holiness
finals)
twenty-
seven characters (27
22 letters and 5
can transmit
the hidden meaning of mind, doctrine, and learning.
a.
Although existing
(it)
(it) is
not in images
:
although not
is
still
(existing)
is
not lost in vacuity
the Doctrine
outside the existing and non-existing.

b.
Ritual
is
is
(derived) from honour given to
Heaven
righteousness
the law of the heart

ritual
(but the Source)
always existed before
and righteousness.
14
a.
This Religion was established by Ah-lo
the principles
of the
b.
Law do
The
is
not (permit) images
Scriptures were transmitted
by Meh-she
the
Doctrine
the original and true one.
15
a.
Unceasingly producing
;
the constant Lord of pro-
duction
b.
Creating without end
the
Lord of
creating.
136

16
a.
Those who recognize Heaven and Earth, the Sovereign,
Parents,
and Teachers, cannot stray
far
from the correct
path of doctrine and virtue.

b.
Improvement of moral character

righteousness,
propriety,
is
to be found in
benevolence,
sincerity,
knowledge,
holiness.
and
which are the sources of virtue and
a.
The whole heaven and
earth,
men and
things, establish
the Doctrine, but famous images are not honoured.

b.
United Sovereign, Parents, Teachers, and Friends

;
establish the religion
it is
not inanity.
lines
The
following
Hebrew
given by
me
are,
with the
exception of a few inscriptions, only probable parallels, or

possible sources of the translation of the Chinese text.
It is
an expression of thought
in spirit
but not in words, the
exceptions being parallels in words also.

pointed out,
it
As Mr. Budd
giving
it
has
is
difficult to
know what was

The
exactly meant.
the
In presenting this
title
article, I feel justified in
D^sn bvrw Vlb

',
mn
-npy
<
Principles of Faith of
in
the Chinese Jews

parallels
for the reason that
the seventeen
which
have endeavoured to
give,
we have no
These
fewer than ten out of the thirteen Articles of Faith.

ten,
I
have supplied wherever they occur, between parentheses
at the
end of each
parallel.
Some
of these inscriptions are
repeated, and in two cases as often as four times.
The
in
Articles of Faith used
by me are those which we,

conclusion
in the
the East, recite

service,
every day at the
of the
morning
BHinn
follows
and are to be found

the
Prayer Book
rtan
:
of
Eastern
Sephardim.
They
are
as
.Tj'npn rninn
IN KAI-FL'NG-FOO
SASSOON
37
bv
ib
n^y rnw
;\xi
tfam
mbv
(3)
,
rwiDiea potce
,
* nn
men
v~iv)
\b
(1)
j\xi
ppa
(:)
ins Kim
inbub
may
pai (n)
d^hp
n ;u ?:i TO3 n"2prv (n)
ponp kiwi
(t)
(n)
ûn
Ninin (n)
nN Ditan vby u3l nô nsnî

0)
mx
*J3
nranc
runpn sben
31B
own
DWib
|o
roina
rninnen (d)
trwaan bib jrw

Dlhsn
nap d^cei
B*#o n*3pnp] (^)

{)
Dn pi
(t)
mea
.nvnnb
dhto imnyb i:ir
umm
îDncy
won
lbs
K3*en
'n
n^nvb
|wi
utium *n$w wiiw

jpvn
"paste
w
o<
[ok
men un
6, i,
Although
yet,
in
all
have not found here Articles

there
and 13
probability,
were
hangings or tablets
recording such beliefs, and
they must have disappeared

of the eighteenth
in
during the ages.
From
the Jesuits
century we learn that the Chinese Jews believed also

resurrection of the dead
I
the
DTicn
me
n^nn
hereby express
my
gratitude to Mr.
Reuben Abraham
for so kindly presenting
with the precious manuscript

in its publication.
first
and thus being instrumental

It
is
my
good fortune to be the

and to
to treat these
inscriptions in a Jewish style
find parallels in our
holy literature for those beliefs and sayings of our brethren,

the Chinese Jews, which were inscribed upon the tablets
that
hung on the walls of
their
ancient
synagogue
in
Kai-fung-foo.
DOTcn Sfcotr *nh mr\ npy
:('i
'n
onm)
mya
ins*
ron*bi
wra
nabb ynbx
n nivo n
nwi
psi=) tn
(jinbnb
'n
mny
bx
ibbsnm nop nans wfcan t:\x Tyn

:
b6p nw lumi
d"j '*dt)
('r
(Reverence Heaven and pray for blessings on the country.)
138

'a
(rtrbvb
mny |W=)
:(k^
'3
D^nn)
'lai
nsnu
'n
nx nay
(Reverence and fear the Glorious Heaven.)

'a
'n i?
*'n
:(n"*
a"p
n^nn)
i>a
nh
â
S>aa
imn^Di
woa
$>ai>
pan
d*d?3
'n
pai n'wa
:(** a"a
ivim
nvam miteron miaam ninan
,'a
D**n
nm)
bw5>
WMnom
!)
nateon
(The Glorious Heaven
the Supreme Ruler

*i
'1
:('n
nnan) nns
'n
u*ni
'n
bane* yEP
(By Heaven's command proclaim (the

'n
principles.)
miay pai=)
(a"a
'a
r,
-r)
'w
'n ^:k
Tiia
yn
i>ae>n
(:
irtarb
(Intelligently serve the
Supreme
'l
Ruler.)
;('b &"
D^nn) a^y m\xo
ma
'n
nrco
(Lord of the Pure and True Religion.)

'r
(:
ir6ni>
rnny
pai
('n '3 ni&>)
'iai
nation
S>ai
!>dq
"jb
npyn xb
(Images have no part
in this Religion.)
'n
twdh
'k
ibkb> inn
:('*
d's
o^nn) rov ipis hen

by
'n
Baps
'n
nrp ipnv idni o^j'aiyn
nw
in
ncx
"idk
nrp lpnv now
dbpd
by
ickb nnpy) ,iann

:(D*pnvb
Kin obiyn naiu oy

sâyo
md nap obra nwib

is
nm Dîyn n 3pn^=)
ff
wy
:('i
pna
(The
Law
of this Religion
Heaven's Truth.)
'B
'iai
onayn bl Dnb
mruwn
is
b :'hi naion bai boa
-jb
nryn xb
/a niDtf)
:('n-'"r
(Image (worship)
not a part of this Law.)
IN
KAI-FUNG-FOO
'i
5ASSOON
nte
.
;(:"'
3"
nbnp) 'W K"V tWlbltn
t6 ns
nnnp
won
ilia bvu (' 2"d

:
unit) one no^ynm
(a"y k*b pi3) rninap
wyr
(Reverence Heaven and respect men.)
j(?*3
'a
n^snn) 'w dish ns

^>3
% d'-7n
msn
nsi
(0*3
pxn ^3 *jb 'h nwi3)

'1:1
^>y
-tj\x
vit yi? 3B>y

'rp
ns*
qd^ *nnj n:n
vrbx notn
S>3
nbsi'
coi?
y-
ynr
py
(:
na
13
t:\x pyn
rwo
n*3pne>
=)
'n
D^n ns^: vss3
na*i
noian
fo
isy dikh ns dm^k

:('i
im
'n
'3
'3
nnftro)
*::p
(3*3 'n
$>&>)
tk v^yaia ni?
dtt rvpan
(#.
[He] creates and nourishes; [His] Doctrine contains
all
production and sustenance

b,
[He] collected together the breath and

:
settled the
forms
the Doctrine existed before form and breath.)

3"<
ruinj
minnn =)
:(3*3 '3 twqw)
osoy
mm
i?3i
own
[fa
N \
(tD'BPfi |o
[:rAi3
minn ns M>i3 rwna

iwk-q) d3v
:(n
ff
Dwm
nefop]
j('k '3
psm own
oy]
!>3
i!w
'2
o k^
[t"3
Nnp-i) 'wi onrrp onron
fans
3
prom pp pvn fppn nvnw pie rrw ibd) nwb Tnyn i>3
^jd
myn
DTin cnry
b>w
pbji
on3
to
:('3 rB>D
sb
*3
srunt n3e> hvn
^n h? *W3
-nayn &6k
kjv3 sa^s noib
wpw
noi
*nn3 *6 ns
ni>3
icn^ mmn
,(n"a
a"b
onw&ni psi
dw icpn:
,
rmnrn
sinsn
'w)
*np k^ pKi
3"3
,('i
nâa
ionb'
inn
nrrnx
mpn nbfa cr mv3 nb^k nrmwa nssv

'k
dw
in
prfir
-i"n
%
rvm
Bm3 nowi
oy
Dnw
f.i3
tp)
,
,
13 nnoeoi
DrrvroK)
/p
\ti 3"3 iisni

[:r"3 )by i*\}jb
mvin n
n3nr J
nvnw :::
"1133
nww
3"3j
:(hnn mân
140
(a.
The Source of the Doctrine is from Heaven
fifty-three
chapters contain the complete Doctrine of the production of
the heavens, the earth, and men.

b.
The
foundation
of the
Religion
is
in
holiness
finals)
twenty-seven characters (27
=
;"<
22 letters and 5
can
transmit the hidden meaning of mind, doctrine, and learning.)
TN
"p
mbw
t6i
.py
m*n
nî
;nx yac>
iw-
nb)
,K*aJ
nnx
ni>i
.nêj nna
.o^yjn yddi
S^-paa
(: pjian
:-py nnxi? psi
.lossA
bx
*fea
.wa row
.jvti jar
'a
:pw
mvi
.jwaa nn :man oipa

'* mai>a
^13
5>a
011:31
nafo
idd)
pro
kvti
nawa^
piay
.nsn?
pirny
.taw* w
:(i?"r
mm
^ pw
.ina kiwi
n*apw=)
parw. wrna^n fon

artNai
irw
maabn nain
ton naisxn
S>apapi
muyn
irmnni
nDaai
in*
'3
iaaa piaai
"i^xro
rasa
yanai
iniK
KT31 hiit
13
imaen nx
abn
pneapi v^n
n?!>
na^nm
iaan!>
naa'P naa
wnwsa niDaai in nonm l-maiaa pianasn

laaa
imx
ia&
uwd
"na
niaa^n nain)
'131
D*nan
naw ^30
:('s*
laiaxai s|tan
pi?n
naipn 3*T
;
(#.
Although existing
(it) is
(it)
is
not in images
:
although
is
not (existing)
still
not lost in vacuity
the Doctrine
outside the existing and non-existing.

b.
Ritual
is is
(derived)
from honour given to Heaven

:
righteousness
the law of the heart

ritual
(but the Source)
always existed before
and righteousness.)
ys
nama
rrnnwi=)
:(3 a
ff
'a
map) oaay Tnan
own
|a *a
'
(:D*apn
fa
npa T
"pn
^y nainan
nbia
nwn minn
!>a
*a
paap Kim
own
jc
minn
p^y)
nxa
v^s
njww
iaii>a miaasi *2a rAia
kw
*}b
n"y ir:i
Tidti
(:
naoai nvji pib
5>*t
o*aanr
rowan
'iai
prpfia
>awn
p-nnao
k!>
?('i
'a
map)
naian bai bzz
ntryn
SYNAGOGUE INSCRIPTION^
nKiaai=) :(1 fb cnan)
IN
KAI-FUNG-FOO
rbnp rnnio
BASSOON
wb to
141
apsr
---:
rrwi
'a
row
&A tj's Kin nbwn -iain

D'j'n
:('n
d^ o^nn)
'ui
nowi
&6i
'n
rmn
i
NWa
nnâni
on
|ot
min
-injv
itj nv&jp nni
pion
noDin
nni^fi5>
nyanb
fnon dip na
'w
:(a"a
ttsn
pns
'a
n run ronsn
dib>3
nantpn
t6
mmnen=)
tdkb onp
(a.
This Religion was established by Ah-lo
the prin-
ciples of the
b.
Law do
not (permit) images
The
is
Scriptures were transmitted by Meh-she
the
Doctrine
the original and true one.)

l"t3
fiv
xb
pan
&ma
:
n)
n"113
'
n b^p n
'
nyo^ ub dk npT
inaiani?
xii-n
'a-'s
(:owip
bJ? jvudi
bJ? pwi?
Kim=)
:(rr*a '
'w)
-ipn
p py
sin inr "parr tnianp
-mntta 's -ipp)
Dwsn
ptd^p naiiDKa j*kd
uk
npjn
rttenjn
wp
nai>
mm bwian
(a.
Unceasingly producing
;
the constant Lord of pro-
duction
b.
Creating without end
the
Lord
of creating.)
(Y'-
'*
onan) na
new*
bi pn
D*Dt?n
wi
'iai '131
D*DB>n i*n^s 'r6 in
'a
:(s"a Y'a
:(a"
,,
hw)
"jî
pini
aa 'n
nw nt
'a
('a
niDB>)
a's
ION
T^ n 132
v:n
p*n
:(k*P n"a
nima)
rîpp
Dnuw
:
iS>
&np*i)
i*rwi
i*ai
(a* 1
na^n
*a
*i
pna max) d<b>

'n
ntim Tan
na din
~]b
trno
nansi bbb>d
nwp ex
j('*
teo enn
j('n
'i
roi
am
Tan
'a
na*) -j\-6n dv nat> pavni ir-
'd
^po) nau
DWp
1
njni 'n jint ncrn n^nr

'n
:(a^ n"
onan) t>t6n
DP s nn Dnsr
I42
(a.

Those who recognize Heaven and Earth, the Sovereign,
Parents and Teachers, cannot stray far from the correct path
of doctrine
b.
and
virtue.
is
Improvement of moral character
to be found in
benevolence, righteousness, propriety, knowledge, and sincerity,
which are the sources of virtue and
holiness.)
'n i?
pani
:
own b
(n"
. .
,
mnm
dvom
nvam
c*3
(ivd
,'n
m^nni mu:m r6nan 'n i? KBoncm nrtattn nm) '*ni>
'n
it
muam
DU3on
j(b^
n"3pn^=) nwizi npy

mara)
E>DB>n
it
ni?nan 'n
-ji>
:(N"y n":
bz
(rwo
n"3p.x>=) onvro
nx^
idi
nan rrvn
'n
nw
'mi
riN
rpaai no*o^n
rpinnt$>.-n
Try
nkti
nnxi)
Drnayi nr6
:(n":d
nrra
own
ns
Nnv
k-p
'3
i"3
^p)
'mi
'mi i^di *33 'n
:(n"^ 'a
mo^)
idk n*o ton ns 133
ninna) pi>w
orww
heê
('a
tr\p*i)
'mi
wvn vnw
s
ik b*k
n"a>
:(N"y
:(a^ rc&n
'n
pna nux) d
d*^
niidd
-p-i
&ni
(n^ u"i tapi)

(#
.
'mi
tids *7vn^
mnM
The whole heaven and earth, men and
things, establish
the Doctrine, but famous images are not honoured.

b.
United Sovereign, Parents, Teachers, and Friends,

;
establish the religion
it is
not inanity.)
A Hebrew
Letter to the Jews of Kai-Fung-Foo.

it
While writing about the Kai-fung-foo Jews,

of interest to give here a
letter
would be
copy of an unpublished Hebrew

in 1850.
which was addressed to them
The document (Codex Sassoon, No.

kindly given to
54)
which was
in 1908,
me by
to
the late Mr. S.
M. Moses
must have come
him through
his father
who was once
r.
J
t
?
p
i
1 r
/
9 c
c
c
c
*
c
r
ri
r-
2
r
r-
9
/
3
F
X
:
r. f.
c
-
afc
_
^t
../>at
...I.
if^gY y.
jâ
it***
wwtm
'&&'
f"-*
HEBREW LETTER TO JEWS

trading
in
IN KAI-FI
NG-FOO
letter.
partnership with the writer of this
Isaac
Faraj ben
Reuben Jacob.
It
is
written
in
large square-
Hebrew
characters on one side of a thin, folded sheet of
light-blue paper measuring i6|

is
by ic^
inches.
The
letter
folded so as to
make
it
the second half of the sheet serve as

is
an envelope, and on
tfptas n?JT 1BJ0KB *3
the address as follows
"icu'n
is
-y
to
Ty PHp ^pb OWiprb

shall
this letter
in
the
holy people, the holy congregation

;
the
46.
city
6).
of
Kai-fung-foo
the
God
help
[her]
(Ps.
On
back of the addressed page there are two

Chinese, of which the following
letter in reply to this
is
it
vertical
lines in
*
a translation
to Shang-hai
If
you have a
send
town care
of Sassoon
Company.'
An
interesting reference to a
somewhat
similar letter
written about the
same time
is
to be found in
(p.
The Jews
It
is
ai
K'ae-fung-foo, by the Rev. G. Smith

follows
:
viii).
as
'
Three Jewish
merchants
also,
from
Bagdad,
resident
at
Shanghae, and connected with
the opulent
Jewish firm of Sassoon

help
;
& Co.
at
Canton, contributed valuable
one of them having written a letter in Hebrew to their

for the
Jewish co-religionists at K'hae-fung-foo.
purpose of
introducing the two Chinese messengers, and inviting the
Jews
It
to visit Shanghae.'
may be remarked that Isaac Faraj's eldest son, Joseph Rahamim died in Shang-hai and was the first Jew
to be buried in the
cemetery
there.
In the
name
of
God
shall
This the 25th day of

year [o]6n
we do and prosper. the month of Heshwan,

(=
1850).
is
in
the
the year
Israel,
five
thousand and six hundred and
eleven from the creation of the world
Great peace be unto the city wherein there

congregation of
Kai-fung-foo
!
the holy
VOL.
XI.
144

After due inquiry about your good health and well-
being: this
pleasant,
is
to inform
I
you that our health
is
good and
and
have come to inform you that
am
Isaac
Faraj the son of
Reuben Jacob, may

alive,
his Creator preserve
him and keep him

I
from Babylon (Baghdad), and

in the
came to the city of Shang-hai

I
year [5]6o6
= 1 845-6),
have heard
and
settled there for trading purposes.
that there are Israelites in your city, and

to be cognisant of your welfare,
And I am
very pleased
letter
and to send you a
so as to hear news of joy and happiness from your city,
and
Let
beg you to send

:
me
a reply to what
ask you.
?
me know
is
there a scroll of the
Law
in
your city
and do you read the Haftaroth from the Prophets ? and do
you possess the
four and twenty books of the Bible

in
the
Mishna and the Zohar? and

learn
?
what books do the children
and from which

I
tribe are
you
to,
beg you to excuse

I
the trouble
am
if
putting you
tell
and
request you to
city,
answer me, and further to

to let
me
all
about your
and
me know
there
is
another city wherein Israelites

to
are to be found.
And
I
if
you wish
have anything from
me, such as Pentateuchs, Prophets, and Hagiographa, and
any other books,

blessed, that
have
faith in
His Name,
I
may He
be
He
will fulfil
your wishes, and

for.
shall
It
send you
an answer, and whatever else you wish

given
would have
me
great pleasure to
come and
visit
the children of
it
Israel of
your
I
city
and to learn of your welfare, had
not
been that
were afraid of the fatigue of the journey, and
certain other matters, and travelling difficulties.
And we
are
still
in
exile
speedily in our
may He time, Amen.

;
shortly send us our Messiah,
Isaac Faraj ben
Reuben Jacob, may
his
end be good.
THE ESSENES AND THE APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE*

By K. Kohler, Hebrew Union
College.
Among the treasures of Jewish Literature the Apocalyptic

writings are least
their value
is
known
to the average Jewish scholar, and
scarcely appreciated.
The
reason
is
that, while
the Church has in
some hidden corner
of the world, where
heretic sects continued to exist, preserved the one or the

other, so as to enable learned travellers in recent times to
bring
them
to light, the Jewish world let
them
fall
out of
sight together with the
Apocryphal books, ever
since the
beginning of the Talmudic period. Accordingly Dr. Schechter

in his
Aspects of Rabbinic Theology\

:
p. 5, dismisses
both of
left
them with the following remark

exception perhaps of the
'
Whilst these writings
a lasting impress on Christianity, they contributed, with the
Book
of Ecclesiasticus,
little
or
nothing toward the formation of Rabbinic thought.
The
milder
Rabbis were either wholly ignorant of their very existence,

or
*
stigmatized
1.
them
as
fabulous
or
external
(a
R. H. Charles,
in
critical
History of the Doctrine of a Future Life in
Israel,
Judaism, and
in
Christianity, or Hebreie, Jewish

till
and
Christian
Eschatology
from
Prcprophetic times
the close
of the
New
an
Testament Canon,
2nd
ed.,
A. and Ch. Black, 1913.
2.
R.
H.
Charles,
The Book
of Enoch,
with
Introductory
by
W.
O.
S. Oesterley, Society for
Promoting Christian Knowledge. London.
1917.
3.
F.
Crawford Burkitt, Jewish and Christian Apocalypses, The Schweicfa
Lectures, 1913, London, 1914.
H5
146

some
1 cases for heretical), and thus allowed
expression in
them
to
exert
no permanent
influence
upon Judaism.'
failed to
Obviously the eminent master of Rabbinic lore
take due cognizance of the extensive eschatological and

cosmological passages, of the angelology and demonology,
not to speak of the thaumaturgical matter which occupy so

large a place in the
Talmud and Midrash, and have

the centuries. All these
exerted
a decisive influence upon the views and doctrines of the
Rabbis throughout
all
show
a striking
family resemblance to the contents of the Apocalyptic

literature
and point
to a
common
source of tradition, with

presents
the
only difference that the
latter
the
whole
material in a coherent and systematized form, whereas the
former has
it all
given sporadically in the form of tradition
without order or system and without claiming any higher

authority.
Nor should
the fact be ignored that
some
of
the apocalyptic books appear in fragmentary form under

other
names
in
the Gaonic period, as was especially pointed
out by Jellinek in his instructive introduction to his Beth
ha-Midrash volumes.
1
On
closer investigation
we cannot
R. Akiba's
Schechter refers to the term DOlV^nn DTISD (Sanh. X,

:
1) in
dictum
'
He
also (has
no share
in the
world
is
to
come)
who
reads (in public)
from the " extraneous " books.'
But as
evidenced by D'OlXTin "]TI
(Meg. IV, 8; comp. Hag. 15a
pn3B
'),
K7D1T }2
pHJJ 'Ben Zoma
is still
outside
the pale of doctrinal Judaism
the term denotes heretics, aa Babl. Sanh.

V"I3D.
100 b correctly explains

the Christian censor had
it:
it
D'OVOi"!
Thus
Alfasi
still
reads, while
changed
into
CpH^Tl.
The
d.
text in Jer. Sanh.

Rcligionsgcsch.,
I,
28 a
is
corrupt,
as
was shown by
read
Joel, Blickc in
flJD
(
70-76, and
i?3N
should
DÎH nSD
my^ p
fro
12D1 sStfn
"1BD f1331
\\xso
DWnil D^BD3 NTlpn PJN = the Hermes books, not Dn^DH)
K-npa
&npn f^n
\sraw Dnson b^ ktd

Ben
Sira (Sanh. 100
Ill,
b,
-ibd
m3N2. A
as
later deprecation of
previously quoted
one of the Kethubim (see Schechter, JQR.,
682) seems to have

r.
caused the corrupt reading in the

XII.
12.
Talmud
Jer. as well as in Koheleth
to
ESSENES AND APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE

escape
the
KOHLER
of of
147
conclusion
existed
that
for
this
class
Haggadic
the
material
there
among
the
apocalyptists
in
Rabbinic schools a chain of tradition
the form of IDE
and blp similar to that which existed

I
for the
'
Halakic, as
'
have shown
in
the introductory article
Cabala
in
the
Jewish Encyclopedia with especial reference to the Book of

Jubilees.
Of
course, the Halakic tradition, being concerned
with the practice of the law, bore an altogether democratic

character in accord with the Pharisaic spirit and was traced
back, as the
first
Mishnah
of
Aboth has
it,
to the last
prophets and from there to Moses on Sinai.

lore,
The
apocalyptic
on the other hand, was originally esoteric
in character
and was believed to have come down as

the progenitors of the
secret lore from
human
race,
from Enoch, Noah, or

also
Adam
Job.
and Shem (= Malkizedek), the Patriarchs, and
This cosmopolitan view was given up by the Rabbis
after the destruction of the first
Temple, and the popular
heroes of the Babylonian captivity such as Baruch and Ezra
took the place of the

destruction
of the
men
of hoary antiquity
and
after the
second Temple and
State the
great
martyrs of the Barkokba war became the bearers of the

heavenly mysteries.
At
all
events the belief in secret lore
entrusted only to the few initiated was persistently main-
tained throughout centuries, as of Dan.

8.
is
shown by a comparison
1
;
26;
12. 4,
9;
Enoch
82.
43. 10; 104. 12

;
f.,
and 4 Ezra
14. 2
47 with Hagigah
of
2. 1
Meg. 3
;
a,
with
reference to the
Targum
'
Jonathan
b.
Uziel
or with
Cant. R.
1.
29,
the secret
chamber of Behemoth and
Leviathan called also the chambers of Paradise {Agaddaih
Shir ha-Shirim,
ed. Schechter, 13, 99), 'the secrets of the
Merkabah and
of the
b).
Messianic end
'
(Pes. 56 a
Keth.
in
Sanh. 97
148

Almost
all
Jewish authors agree that this entire secret
lore
known
as
manB iTOD and
nWD
nfiyye
(Hag.
2. i),
the
theophany and the cosmogony as well as eschatology,

formed the monopoly of the
Essenes
and
;
their
select
successors (see Frankel, Zeitschr., 1846, p. 457
Monatsschr.,
1853, p. 72
I,
Graetz, G. J., Ill, 494

II,
f.
Jost, G. d. Judenth.,
212
Herzfeld, G. V. Is.,
Sira, III, 20-23,
408
Leopold Loew, Mafteah,
6y).
Ben
quoted
in
Hagigah
2. i,
obviously
refers to this secret lore.
That there
exists a close relation-
ship between Essenism and the Apocalyptic books has been

especially
his
shown by
Jellinek in the introductory notes to

II
:
Beth ha-Midrash, see
XIII
f.,
XVIII;
III:
XX,
work
to
XXXII, and elsewhere. Of Christian writers
it
was Hilgenfeld who
in his
Die jiidische Apokalyptik, 1857, pp. 243-86. endeavoured
prove the close relations of the Essenes to the Apocalyptic

literature,
and
if
he had recognized the real meaning of the
name Essaei or Essenes (the one corresponding to the Hebrew own the men of silence the other to t^yov the discreet
' '
',
ones
'),
he would have more strongly adhered to
this
view
later on,
when he was misled by
his critics to the
assumption
of foreign elements in Essenism on account of Josephus's

sensational suggestions.
Lucius partly endorsed Hilgenfeld's

p.
view
in his
work Der Essenismus, 1881,
109
f.,
and the
theory was further elaborated with especial reference to

the beginnings of Christianity
E.
by an English
scholar John
M. Thomson
entitled
in
an interesting, yet rather antiquated
work
Books which influenced our Lord and His

12,
Apostles,
Edinburgh, 1891, pp.

lore
no, and
elsewhere.
That the apocalyptic
formed the essential elements of
nascent Christianity, and especially of the Messianic conception of Jesus,

is
to-day generally admitted, owing chiefly

to Baldensperger's book,
KOHLER
All the
I49
Das
Selbstbcwusstsein Jesu, which
has gone through several editions since 1888.

strenuously
is
more
the connexion of Essenism with the apocalyptic
literature denied
specifically
istic,
by many Christian
writers of to-day, as
is
done by Baldensperger.
in
It is quite character-
then, that Charles
his
work on Hebrew, Jewish,

Chasids
and Christian Eschatology ostensibly avoids the very name

of the Essenes, and, instead, speaks of the
'
'
of the
',
Maccabean
'
period,
'
the forerunners of the Pharisees
as
the authors of these prophetic or rather deutero-prophetic

'
works
',
the champions of the higher theology in Israel
'.
In describing their character he uses the following glowing
terms (pp. 17 1-3 of the second edition): 'Though
first
appearing as the champions of the

Sadducees, they were
still
Law
against Hellenizing
representatives of
more the
advanced forms of doctrine on the Messianic Kingdom and

the resurrection.
To
this
comparatively small body of
men
save
was entrusted
for
some decades the
defence, confirmation,
and development of the

the
religious trtiths that
were
to
world
(the Italics are mine).

self-sacrifice
How
is
nobly and with what

themselves
all
prodigal
they
proved
worthy
in
guardians of this sacred trust
told for
time
their
the
Enoch and Maccabean

in the course of a
literature.
Through
agency
the spiritual aspirations of the Old Testament few became
century the unshakeable conviction of
Palestinian Judaism.'
And
here the author

is
has
in
the
second edition of the work

of the
first
which
is
on the whole a reprint
an
entirely
new chapter on Prophecy and

of special interest to the
is
Apocalyptic (173-206), which

Jewish reader.
Here the claim
set
forth
that
the
apocalyptic lore 'while built upon the ancient prophecy,
was the
result
of
the
same
psychical
experience
and
150

life,
concerned with the same object, the future of
but
it
had a larger scope than the

unlimited
'
latter, it
being universal and wider view.'
as
to
in
time,
having an
infinitely
It
sketched
outline the history of the world

evil, its
and of
mankind, the origin of
course and inevitable overfinal
throw, the ultimate triumph of righteousness and the
consummation
philosophy of
of all things.
religion,
It
was
in
it
short
Semitic
and as such
was ever asking

put these questions
Israel,
Whence? Wherefore? Whither? and

in
it
connexion with the world, the Gentiles,
and the
first
individual. to
Apocalyptic, and not prophecy, was the

all
grasp the great idea that

is
history
alike,
human,
cosmological, and spiritual,
a unity
unity following
naturally as a corollary of the unity of God, preached
by
the prophets.'
Biblical Canon,
'
Only by reason of the completion of the

which implied the cessation of prophecy,
to
'
pseudonymity was resorted

dition,'
by the
writers,
which conrise
says
our
author,
in
changed
with
the
of
Christianity.'
Thus
emphatic contradiction to the view

denied to apocalyptic
'
of Jewish
scholars
who 'have
'
its
place in the faith of pre-Christian orthodox Judaism

a view which he declares to be
absurd
'
and a blunder
'
'
our author claims 'the existence of two forms of Pharisaism

in
pre-Christian Judaism,
'.
i.e.
the
'
apocalyptic
and the
to,
legalistic
The
former, he says,
has given birth
and
shaped
the
higher
theology
of Judaism
and became,
' ;
historically speaking, the parent of Christianity

'
the latter
drove the apocalyptic from
its
it
position
of
secondary
authority and either banished

it
absolutely, or relegated
wholly into the background, and so arose Talmudic
Judaism'.
Obviously Dr. Charles wanted to
offer in this additional

portion of the second edition of his
KOHLER
to
151
work the keynote

was
central idea of his whole book, which
present an
exhaustive exposition of the entire development of Jewish
eschatology as emanating from the prophetic concept of

'
the day of
Jahweh with the view

'
;
of having
it
culminate
in the
appearance of Jesus the Christ as the fulfilment of
the prophetic hopes

writers
'.
made world-wide by
in
the apocalyptic
Now,
while there are here and there valuable

the book, the author
observations presented
makes himself
ascribes
rather guilty of an egregious 'blunder'

to
'
when he
the older Pharisees

',
',
'
the Chasids
',
'
the spiritual children

of prophecy,
of the Scribes
after these
the belief in their

Scribes, or
own power
very
Soferim, had
2) that
declared
(see
Psalm
74. 9
and Tos. Sota XIII,
with the death of
Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the power of prophecy, or

the
holy
spirit,
ceased.
As
matter of
fact,
only the
Essenes
still
believed in the continuous working of the spirit

is
of prophecy, as
I,
learned from Josephus (B. J.,
II, 8,
12
3,
III,
(S,
3.
Comp.
B.
'
Wisdom
absurd
',
VI,
it
25).
Moreover,
if
anything
may
be termed
is
to
assume that
the later Pharisees should have forgotten the very existence

of the books rated so highly
by the former,
particularly
when we consider
at the time
that these apocalyptic writings appeared
when the
schools of Hillel and

lore,
Shammai
'the
fathers
'
of Talmudic
the
contemporaries of King
at the close of the
Herod, and that of Johanan ben Zakkai
Temple period
flourished.
Surely the
most
superficial
glance at the history of Jewish literature of the time would
have convinced our author of
his erroneous construction of

calls legalistic
in
Judaism, and shown him that what he

that
is,
Judaism
the Halakah, had

free
its
counterpart
the
Haggadah
which contains the
and popular discussion of the same
152
human, cosmological,and eschatological problems that form

the substance of the apocalyptic literature, and offer the
same wide outlook upon the

occasionally
world.
Indeed,
we
find here
compare,
for instance,
Hagigah 14 b. Suk. 28 a
ecstatic
the
same psychical experiences,
visions
and
had.
auditions of Pharisean leaders as the apocalyptists
Only authoritative power was denied

mystic forces (see B. M., 59
the heavenly voice, for
it
in
the schools to such

is
b.
is
No
:
regard
c
to be given to
in
said
It
is
not
heaven
Deut. 30.
12).
As
a matter of fact, Pharisaic or Soferic
Judaism
in
placing the book of Daniel

its
among
the Hagio-
grapha, denied from the very start
prophetic character,
and consequently could not ascribe to the books of Enoch and similar writings based on the visions of Daniel any
kind of prophetic or
'
deutero-prophetic
falls
'
character.
Thus
the whole theory of Dr. Charles
to the ground.
F. Crawford Burkitt in his luminous lectures on Jewish
and Christian apocalypses approaches the subject with
more
fairness.
:
The
!
following fine remarks, pp. 5-6, are

of Israel
worth quoting
who came after Ezra had the Law already, but it was they who brought the prophets into the form in which we read them, and the
Psalms, whatever ancient fragments they
contain, were in the
The wise men
may
probably
it
main
their work.
To
the prophets
had been given

Scribes
to
make
the Religion of Israel, but the

It is difficult,
made
the Bible.
when we
think of
to find
the
immense
effect that the
Old Testament has had,
words high enough to describe the importance of the work

of the Scribes for after generations.
And yet it was secondary
and derivative.
direct
The
Scribes had not in themselves the
and masterful authority that belonged to the Prophets

before
who went
them.
They were
not
commissioned

themselves to say
the
crisis
KOHLER
And
so,
153
"
Thus
saith the
Lord
".
when
came, we
find a
new phenomenon.
for his
The Jew who
feels
himself to have a
new message
brethren shelters
himself under a pseudonym.
The
original literature of the

of
two centuries and a half that preceded the capture

Jerusalem
is
either
anonymous, or
of old time".
far the
it
professes to be the
work
of
some "worthy
It is difficult to
know
in particular cases
how
pseudonymity was an underfar

it
stood literary artifice and
how
was
really deceptive.
What
think
if
is
clear,
is
that both authors
and readers
true,
it
believed that,
any Revelation from God was
could
not be new.
of antiquity.'
It
must have been given to the great Saints

is
Especial stress
'
laid, p. 7,
is
and rightly
so,
on the
fact that
'
in
Daniel there
is
a philosophy of universal
History
'
there
something cosmopolitan
'
about
his
outlook upon the world'.
Judaism
'
is
to the author of
Daniel a cosmic world-religion.'

that
is
The Kingdom
of
God
the
central
idea.'
But then, claiming that with
Christianity the
new age
predicted
by Daniel (and the other

John the
apocalyptists) had come, Dr. Burkitt discriminates in favour

of the
New
Testament Apocalypse ascribed
to
Divine, the writer of the letter to the seven Churches of

Asia, claiming that he comes with
'
new message
given to
the contemporary seer

is
'
and no longer pseudonymic.
This
an
uncritical attitude.
well as those in
The apocalyptic portion there as Matthew 24 to 25 were simply taken over

Another erroneous statement
differentiates
is
from Jewish sources.
made
by Burkitt when he
and
between the time before

the renunciahis
after the capture of Jerusalem, ascribing

'
tion of the apocalyptic idea
to
Johanan ben Zakkai and
school
(p. 1 2)
He finds this in a very sagacious interpretation

R. Akiba and Johanan ben
of the controversy between
154

in
Zakkai
Gen. R. 44. 25, 2 where R. Akiba,
in
explaining
9,
the words
mnn DV3
in
Gen.
15.
18 after Isa. 25.

this
says,
God
14.
revealed to
Abraham both
world and the world to
come, whereas R. Johanan ben Zakkai referring to Zech.

9,
says, only this
world was revealed to Abraham.
R. Akiba as the ardent adherent of Bar
Kokba worked,
he
thinks, in the spirit of the Apocalyptists, for the
immediate
establishment of the
Kingdom
of
God by
'
the expected
the destruc-
Messiah, while Johanan ben Zakkai was,

tion of Jerusalem
religion into
when
was
sealed, to guide Jewish
thought and
new
channels,
and thus
to create the reformed
Judaism of Jamnia and Tiberias'.

tries to
(p* I 5)
:
Dr. Burkitt certainly
be just
'
in his
estimate of Pharisaism
when he
in
says
The work
heroic,
of Johanan ben Zakkai and his successors
was quietly
and they succeeded so well
their
reorganization of Judaism that their

day.
work stands
to this
But
they were able to carry their work through,
just because they
had dropped the conviction that had
produced the apocalypses.
That
is
the reason
why
in
these
documents, speaking generally, were preserved
Greek,
and not
in
Hebrew
by
Christians
and not by Jews.'
He
forgets,
however, that the Ezra and Baruch Apocalypses
emanated, as has
been
shown by
F.
Rosenthal
Vier
apokalyptische BiicJier mis der Zcit
und Schnle R.
Akiba's,
1885), from these very schools before the Hadrianic war.
The concluding words

by a
2
of his
first
lecture are also dictated

'
:
spirit of fairness
when he says
The
nation
left
two
'"1
The passage reads

rrTyn
^)3N *b H^J t*nyn
TON 1H 5!^
tf3*l
pV
.
\b
nh an^m
nnx -ien wirnM

in
rta t6 nrr*yn; com P also

its
Midrash Lckah Tob.

characteristic
Akiba's longing after the Messianic time finds

his
'
expression
all
declaration
of
the
Song
of
Songs as
'the most holy of
the Writings
(Yadayim,
III. 5).
ESSENES AND APOCALYPTIC LITERATUREKOHLER

successors the Christian
Church and the Rabbinical School-,
each of which carried on some national aim.
And
of the
two
it
was the Christian Church that was most

it
faithful to
the ideas enshrined in the Apocalypses, and

itself,
did consider
not
.
. .
without some reason, the fulfilment of th
ideas.
it
The new age which they announce proved when

be different from what the Apocalyptists taught,
came
to
not only of the great
movement which they

hope
heralded, but
also of the unconquerable

testify/
in the future to
which they
On
the whole Dr. Burkitt casts no more light

of the Apocalyptic
upon the authorship and the sources

literature than does Dr. Charles.
Oesterly, in his Introduction to tJieBook of EnocJi, pp. viii-xi,
goes
much deeper
into the motive
and inner working of the
Apocalyptic writers, pointing chiefly to the supernatural
which plays a great part

so
in the
whole
literature
which deals
much
some
with other-worldly forces.

'
He
correctly describes
them
in
as world-fleeing visionaries
who
received their message
fantastic guise', unlike the large class of Pharisees,

is
Especially striking
'
the emphasis laid by him on their

'
rigid
predestinarianism
their
absolute conviction that
the whole course of the world was predetermined by
God
Almighty before
all
time.
'
This
',
he writes,
'
was a funda-
mental postulate of the Apocalypticists
who devoted much
of their energy to calculations based upon the close study of
prophecy as to the exact period when history should reach

its
consummation.'
'
But
all
these things were divine secrets
hidden from the beginning of the world, but revealed to

God-fearing
men
to
whom was
accorded
the
faculty of
peering at the hidden things of

laid
God
upon these men was
the privilege and the
duty of revealing the divine

name,
revealcrs.'
secrets of others, hence their
156

But Oesterly
fails
to
see
that
this
is
exactly what
5,
Josephus says of the Essenes (Ant., XIII,
comp.
certain
XVIII,
1,
3-5).
While the Pharisees hold that
things are predetermined
by
'
destiny and certain things
by
all
human power,
things and
divine
the Essenes
declare destiny to govern

is
that nothing
'.
happens but
is
so decreed
(by
Providence)
This
'
not, as Bousset (Rclig. des
Jud.,
533)
says,
fatalistic
view altogether
foreign
to the legalistic spirit of Judaism \
To
a certain extent
in
Pharisaism also voiced the doctrine of predestination
such sentences as
'
No
r.
bird
is
caught
6;
in the snare
without
heaven's decree' (Gen.
LXXIX,
'
comp. Matt.
it
10. 29), or
'No one
bruises his finger here below, but
has been
decreed in the world above
(Hul. 7 b).
Only Pharisaism
(Aboth
would not allow an interference with man's freedom, as

stated
It
by Akiba
foresee
IOT1J
IWim
'IQV
fan
III,
19).
denied any one living after the three last prophets the
power to
and
foretell
the future (Tos. Sota XIII,
Sota 48 b;
Yoma
9 b), whereas the

'
Essenes claimed to
as
possess such
power,
being trained
',
Josephus states
(B. y., II, 8, 12) 'to use
holy books, different modes of

(for
sanctification
and prophetic utterances
this
purpose),
'.
and
it
is
but seldom that they miss in their predictions
Instances of this are given
by Josephus
in the case of
I,
the
Essene Judas under the reign of Aristobulus

'disciples instructed at the
who had
1
Temple
11,
in the art
2),
of prophesying
(B. J.,
I,
3,
5; Ant., XIII,
Essene, a contemporary of
the predecessor of
II, 2
;
Menahem the King Herod (Ant., XV, 10, 5),

or of
as head of the school (Hagiga,
,
Shammai
comp. Graetz, G.
b).
4 J., Ill
213, and Geiger, J. Z.,
VII, 17
The
real character of
such prophetic power

tell
is
best illustrated
by what the Haggadists
of
Adam
as the

first
KOHLER
15-
man who emanated from

in
the hands of the Creator

all
he read from God's book
which
things are written,

,
all
the events of the future (see Midrash Teh. to Pa.
..
l6;
Ab.
d.
R. N.
XXXI,
Pesik. R.
XXIII
is
<
:
Sanh. 38 b
Tanh.,
Beresch., ed. Buber, 29).

in
There
8)
also a significant
remark
the Midrash (Gen.
r.
XLIX,
Before
God
revealed His
it
counsel to the prophets'
(Amos
3. 7),
He
revealed
to
His
worshippers of hoary antiquity
(Ps. 25. 14),
and afterwards
Exactly
to the patriarchs, the upright ones' (Prov.

this
is
3. 32).
claimed
in
the Apocalyptic
literature
for
Adam,
Enoch, Noah, and again

to Ezra.
for the patriarchs
and Moses down
As Volz
p.
5,
in his Jiid.
Eschatologie von Daniel bis
Akiba, 1903,
lore ("
in
correctly says:
")
'Apocalyptic
is
secret
Geheimwissenschaft
received from heaven and kept
books hidden by the wise' who keep the secrets (Dan.
12. 4, 9; 4
Ezra
12.
37
f.
14.
6-j
45-47
comp. Aeth.
Enoch
7.
109. 12-13; 17. 3; Slav.

12. 27
;
Enoch
24. 3; B. Jubilees.
38
45. 16, see Charles,
who
so
regards the book as

is
an Esoteric Tradition (Introd.
Assumptio Mosis
But so
\
'
named
also Secreta Moysi, Charles, Introd. xlv).

lore, a
'
were the Essenes keepers of secret

as Bousset,
I.e.,
'
mysterienverein
532, calls them, pledged
by
a fearful oath
to guard the sacred
books
of the order
and not divulge or

7).
'
alter their contents (Josephus, B. I. II, 8,
And
the
contents of these
crvvrdyfiara
'
writings of the ancients

6
;
(r<ov
iraKami'
(II, 8,
comp. Philo using the same terms

II,
regarding the Therapeutae,

ascribed to the
475),
that
is
the
books
men
of hoary antiquity, are by no means of

/.
merely a magical character, as Bousset,
e.,
thinks,
but
especially the cosmological or cosmogonic and the celestial
mysteries
known
in
Rabbinical literature as
1),
Plt^yDl iT33")0
fipyo
JWfcna (Hagig.
II,
and
chiefly
so
the
eschatological
158
secrets.

According to
later
Rabbinical
views,
however,
;
these were either withheld from every mortal (Shab. 138 b

Pes. 56 a
;
Mid. Lekah Tob. to Deut. 29.

concerning the
'
28), or all these
calculations
end
'
were deprecated and

a, b,
is
declared to be deceptive (Sanh. 97
99 a; Meg. 12 a;
comp. Cant.
calculations
r.
2.
18-19).
Yet
it
exactly upon such
from
prophetic
utterances
(Dan
9.
2)
after
certain
world periods and jubilees that the apocalyptists
based their predictions.
Whether these world periods were

it
taken over from Babylonia or from Persia,

only
in
was certainly
these esoteric circles that calculations concerning

9,
'the end' (Dan. 11. 31, 35; 12.
13) were
in
made.
the Introduction
But
it is
noteworthy that G. Behrmann
to his very valuable
Commentary
to Daniel, 25-26,
comes
to the conclusion that the
book was written within and for
the esoteric circle of the Hasidim
await patiently the divine help

ference (Dan.
8.
who were admonished to without any human interThis

is
25
comp.
2.
34).
exactly what
'
Josephus (Ant., XVIII, 15) says of the Essenes, that

chief doctrine
is
their
'.
that
all
things should be
left
to
God
These Asideans of the Maccabean books kept apart from

the
p.
Pharisees,
f.,
as
Wellhausen, Pharisder
u.
Saddncaer,
79
has shown.
Yet these are the very ones from
whom
the Essenes
emanated, and 'the whole literature of the

is
Essene order' to which Josephus refers

the Apocalyptic literature.
none other than
In order that the holy spirit of wisdom should
come
or
fT.
;
over them
visions,
9.
and prepare
(9.
them
for
divine
(4
revelations
Daniel
f.
10. 12)
and Ezra
Ezra
5.
13
23
f.)
spend days
in fasting
and prayer, and

all
for the
same
purpose the Essenes abstained from

(Josephus, B.
I.
sexual intercourse
II, 8, 2),
exactly as the people of Israel in
KOHLER
'
preparation for the Sinai revelation were told
not to
come
near a
told
'
woman (Exod. 19. 15), and when afterwards

'
they were
to return to their tents
',
Moses was
to
remain with
this
life
God
'to
receive the
Law'
(Deut. 5. 27-28),
be
understood to refer to abstinence from conjugal
enjoined
d.
upon Moses
(see
Targ. Jer. to the passage

;
Ab.
R.
Nathan
II
Shab. 87 a
Philo, Vita Mosis, III, 2).
Accord-
ingly the Midrash (Sifre
Num.
to
99) tells that,
when Eldad
of
and Medad had become prophets, Zipporah, the wife

Moses, exclaimed:
'Woe
the
wives of these
men!'
inasmuch as they were no longer to have intercourse with

their
husbands (comp. Enoch's

;
state
85. 3
;
of virginity
when
having his visions (Enoch 83. 2

14. 4).
and Apoc. of John
Such a
state of sanctification
was deemed necessary

prophecy
by the Essenes
for the receiving of the spirit of
and the invocation of the
Name
of
God
for the
performance
of their miraculous cures, but must not be taken as the
acceptance of the monastic principle of celibacy, or as mere
misogyny, as Philo
the reader believe.
that the
II,
638 and Josephus,
I.e.,
want to make
us (II, 6321
In fact, Philo expressly

'
tells
members of the order were
all full
grown men and
already verging upon old age, such as are no longer carried
away by the vehemence

liberty
of the flesh nor under the influence
of their passions, but in the enjoyment of genuine and true

'.
Also
a.
later on,
when speaking of those who have

words
happiness, even
reached
'
feeble old age, he uses the significant

life in
if
they spend their
they happen to
be childless/
More
explicitly he says of the Therapeutae,

(II, 474),
the Egyptian branch of the Essenes

their property
.
.
'Abandoning
they
flee,
without turning back, leaving
their brethren,
their
their
children, their wives, their parents,

their
numerous
families,
affectionate
friends,
their
VOL. XL
160
native lands in which they have been born and brought up.'
And
this world-flight
he frequently extols as the means of
obtaining a holier state of the soul

(II, 410), to
when
referring to
Enoch
(I,
the Levites
(I,
238, ^59), or to himself
81),
and those who are

Jeremiah,
(
to receive the mysteries of

'
Moses and
of
the prophet and hierophant
(II,
147-8).
This strange world-flight of the Essenes

apart from
region of
object
all
who had
settled
Palestinian civilization in the fertile
palm
En Gedi
near the
to
Dead
Sea,
became a
world
particular
of wonder
the
non-Jewish
which was
especially interested in the asphaltum
and the apobalsamum
derived
from the
neighbourhood.
Hence spread such

by Pliny
(iV.
fantastic descriptions as are given
H. V,
15),
Dio Chrysostomus (Synesias Dio Chr. IV-V), and others

after
an older
common non-Jewish
rest of the
source (see Lucius,
Der
Essenisvuis, 32), according to which this Essene colony,

isolated
from the
Jews and recruited ever anew
by newcomers eager
antiquity
as
to live like
its
them
in
a state of celibacy,
remote from the world, had

'
existence there from a remote

'
since thousands of centuries

or
'
',
a perennial nation
',
'
Pliny says,
blissfull
commonwealth
is
as
Dio
Chrysostomus puts
it.
Puzzling as
the
fact
that no
reminiscence of this undoubtedly ancient colony of Essenes

at
En Gedi
is
found
for its
in
Talmudic
literature,
while
the
a)
locality
famous
costly
apobalsamum (Shab. 28
was well known to the
rabbis,
we must take
notice
of
a remarkable Jewish tradition clustering around 'the fertile
land of Jericho
record in
'
which seems to cast some light upon the

It
is
Pliny.
the oft-repeated
Midrashic story
concerning the sons of Jonadab, the Rechabites of the
Kenite
tribe,
kinsmen of Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses

2,
(Mek. Yithro
p.
62
Sifrc
Num.
78. 81
and Deut. 352
KOHLER
l6i
Ab.
d,
R. N.,
XXXV, ed. Schechtcr,

a),
105
Yalk. Judges 1.16
Sota 11 a; Tern. 16
division of the
according to which Joshua at the

fertile
Holy Land assigned the

until the
portion of
Jericho
'
the city of the palms' to the sons of Jonadab the
Rechabite,
who occupied
left it
it
Temple
of
Solomon
was
built in the territory of the tribe of Benjamin.
Then
they generously
plain of
to the Bcnjamites
and went to the

saintly devotees
Arod
in
the South-land to
become
of the
Law
under the leadership of Jabez, the saintly one,

else
who, according to the rabbis, was none

Othniel the son of Kenaz.
but the Judge
Of
course, this haggadic legend,

1.
based upon the narratives

Jer. 35.
in
2.
Judges
$$ and
16
Kings 10.1533
2-19
Chron.
4.
9-12 (where the

3D")
LXX
no
;
and Targ. preserved the original

historical
for
it
H31),
is
has
value
it
in
the
form
in
which
facts
presented
nevertheless
rests
upon certain
it
which are merely
antedated.
Certain
is
that
the
sons of Jonadab the
Rechabite occupied a distinct place among the patrician

families of
Judea during the second Temple, where they
had a
special
day appointed
for the offering of kindling

;
wood
'
for the altar (Taan. 4. 5)
they are identified with

In
the
families
of scribes',
'
the
inhabitants of Jabez.
'
identifying the Kssenes
Jessaioi
with the sons of Jonadab

Sinai
the Rechabite, Nilus, the

century,
Mount
monk
of the
p.
fifth
f.)
quoted
by Hilgenfeld
(Ketzergesch.,
138
find
obviously followed Jewish traditions such as we

Pesik.
r.
in
31,
where they are spoken of as

'
living 'in the
land of Sinim
(Isa. 49. 12) in
the South, according to the

lost tribes
Targum,
29c;
to be brought
back with the ten

r.
and
especially the sons of

10.
Moses (Num.
16. 15; Ver.
Sanh.
are
Ber. 7 a; Targ. Y. to
Kxod.
34. 10).
They
M
2
probably the Klders of the South,
333H ^pT,
who
are said
162
to
have answered the ten questions propounded to them by

a, b)
;
Alexander the Great (Tamid 31 b-32

Zeitschr., T846, p. 400).
comp. Frankel,
One
as
of these 'sons of the water

is
drinker',
D* \\T\W
*22,
they are called,
especially
recorded (Mek.,
I.e.)
as having offered a sacrifice at the
temple to
call
forth
a special
'
voice of heaven
'
in their
praise, since,
Hving outside of the holy land, they would as

Before they
a rule offer no sacrifices.
moved
to the South,
where they
until
3
left
traces partly legendary, partly historical,
modern
times, 3 they
seem to have merged with the

Ch.
II, 23,
While Hegesippus (Eusebius, H.

'
17) tells of
'a.
Rechabite
priest
to
have championed the cause of James the Elder

to
find
at his
martyrdom,
and Jose ben Halafta claims

(Yer. Taan. IV, 68
a description of the of
a),
have descended from Jonadab ben Rekhab

in
we
Benjamin of Tudela's
travels,
p.
70,
Bne Rekhab
as a warlike tribe inhabiting the province

in
Thema
in
South Arabia, and bent
common with
their
Arabian neighbours
on predatory expeditions, Abraham Yagel's Yaar ha-Lebanon, quoted by
Neubauer, JQR.,
I,
411-13, refers to the Rechabites together with the

all
Ten
;
Tribes and the children of Moses,
living be3'ond the river

I,
Sambation
likewise Jacob Saphir in his Eben Saphir,
96,
and Joseph Schwarz

the
in his
Holy Land (Germ.

(Judges
Transl., p. 107),
who mention them by

that
is
name given
them by the Arabs, of Yehitd Hebr,

4.
descendants of Heber the Kenite

found by the Missionary Wolf,
p.
11).
So does
Jewish
tribe
quoted by Andree, Zur Volkskunde dcr Judeit,
226
f.
in the
mountains
near Hedjaz, observing the Mosaic law, claim to be descendants of Jethro
(comp. Num.
10.
28; Judges
4.
11).
Of
especial significance
fifth
is
also the
story of Zosimus, a Christian apocryphon of the
or sixth century (see

f.,
James, Apocrypha Anccdota, Cambridge, 1893,

a description of the
life
p.
94
101-3^, containing
of the sons of Jonadab the Rechabite which has

'
a decided Essene character.
They
abstain from sexual intercourse after
they have brought to
life
two
children.'
The
identification of Jabez with Othniel the son of
Kenaz
is
found also
in the patristic literature
where Kenaz
is
said to have been 'a prophet

in the
who
The
lived in the land of Saar (?)
and was buried
cave of the Kenazite
who was
James
(/.
a Judge in the days of Anarchy' (comp. Judges 21. 25).
prophecy of Kenaz has been the subject of an apocryphon regarded by

c, 476-79)
as originally Jewish.
like
Both Jonadab and Jabez are

Elijah, entered
counted among the persons who,
Enoch and
Paradise

Essene colony
at
KOHLER
God
that
163
Kn
Gcdi, and given

to
it
a peculiar character.
of
of
So they regarded, next

Moses the
II, 8, 9).
4
the
name
legislator as inviolably sacred
(Joscphus. B. I
This Essene colony at En Gedi seems to have
some
historical
connexion with the assembly of the Elders

in Jericho,
or the
Wise Men near Beth Gedi
who heard
heavenly voice (Bath Kol), declaring one
in their
midst to
have been worthy of receiving the holy

referred to being understood
to
spirit
the
person
have been Hillel (Tos.

III, this
Sota XIII, 3; Yer. Sota IX, 24 b; Horayoth

Sanh. 11
a).
48 c;
Still it
is
rather difficult to
make
in
more
than merely conjectural, as the text varies

sources.
the various
To come back
to the
main
point, the
whole complexion
of the apocalyptic literature points to circles remote from
alive
(Derek Erez Suta

is
I.
ed.
Tawrogi,
p. 8}.
5. 5.
Jabez as contemporary of
Jeremiah
4
mentioned
in
Syr. Apoc. Baruch
Joseph Schwarz
{I.e..
290-3% while finding Essene

Zohar
III,
traditions preserved
in the Zohar, calls attention to
83.
where the highest

Moses
attributes
are assigned to
in
Moses
as King, the verse Deut. 33. 5 *]bc

to
:
pTlB^D NT1 being,
connexion with the preceding verse, referred

in
'And he Moses)
in
became king
of
Jeshurun
'
an
interpretation
in Sifre
found also
the Targ. Y.
and the Lekah Tob, but not accepted
or elsewhere.
That the name

its
I.
Moses was invoked
in
an oath
in Palestine is
shown by
38c; Meg.
frequent use
by R. Haggai (Yer. Demay,

IV, 67 b; Nazir 54 a;
IV, 26a;
II,
;
Yoma,
;
I,
72a; Taan.
and
Sanh.
19 d
Hor.
Ill,
47 d), and the former

a},
Palestinian R. Safra (Shab. 101 b
Beza, 38 b; Sak. 39 a; Hult. 93

in
the custom
I,
was kept up
in
Yemen
the
Maimonides" time (Sefer Hamizwoth,
7).
This
may have
Moses
led
Essenes, as far as they claimed special
relationship to
either as Rechabites (Kenites) or as

*
Sons of Moses,
to
(which
may have
originally simply signified,
disciples of
Moses '\
punish
any abuse of the name of Moses with

Mosis which
death.
Of
this great veneration of

in the
Moses, which comes near an apotheosis, traces are found
Assumptio
presents him as a Mediator prepared from the foundation ol

r.
the world (co;np. "11D1D in Pes.

I,
Exod.
r.
3.
6.
Deut.
r.
III.
13
14;
III,
12; comp 11
16).
164
the seat of Pharisaic or Soferic Judaism, to a class of men,
who, living rather on the borderland of Judaea, were brought
more
in
touch with popular traditions and foreign currents
of thought, such as Babylonian and Persian systems offered,
and were therefore induced

of thought.
to create altogether
new systems
Especially the books of Enoch, which were of

rest,
determining influence upon the
betray a familiarity
with the geographical conditions of the land around the
Dead Sea and along

dwelling-place
of
the Jordan river, which indicates the
their
authors
in
to
have
been
in
that
neighbourhood rather than
any of the
cities of
Judaea.
Thus the hot

B.
springs of Calliorrhoe to the East of the
Dead
Sea to which King Herod resorted to

I. I, 33, 5),
for his cure (Josephus,

6, 3)
or of Machaerus (eodem,Vll,
are spoken
of as having been brought to that state

fires
by the subterranean
view re-echoed also
clearly does the
of
Gehenna (Enoch
67. 5-1 1)
a).
in the
Talmud (Shab. 39
Still
more
story of the fallen angels,
who had their meeting-place upon Mount Hermon and whom Enoch found weeping at Abel Maim near the waters of Dan (Enoch 13. 7-9 comp.
;
2 Chron. 16. 4; 2
Sam.
20. 14
f.)
betray a familiarity with
the ancient folklore clustering around the sources of the
Jordan and scarcely to be found
in the schools of the Scribes.
As
a matter of
fact,
the whole story of
Enoch and the
fallen
angels appears to be a survival of ancient Semitic mythology

of which the verses in Gen.
6.
1-4 form but a fragment.
Especially
Mount Hermon,
the top of
Lebanon and Antithe

sort
Lebanon mountains, seems

and
on
to have been originally 'the

',
sacred seat of the old pagan deities

indicates,
'
as
term
of
firD"in
later
turned
?t.
into
d.
Semitic
II,
Blocksberg' (Sepp, Jerusalem

5
Heiligc Land,
comp. Pirk.
d.
324).
The
story of the fallen angels, the
D^^DJ
R. E. XXII,
KOHLER
no
less true
165
What
the
is
true of the books of Enoch,
is
Hook
of Jubilees,
is
where the story
of
Enoch and the

;
fallen angels
likewise related, though only briefly
and
also of the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs where the

in
heavenly tablets of Enoch are constantly referred to as

the
Book
of Jubilees.
is
But there
in
another important point to be considered

lore,
connexion with the apocalyptic
and that
is
the
strange solar system of a year of 364 days presented by

the Ethiopic book of
elaborate form in the
Enoch
(chaps. 72-82),
(6.
and
in a
more
is
Book
of Jubilees
28-38), which
in direct contradiction to
Jewish tradition, which adhered
to the lunar calendar of the Scripture.
As As was
a matter of
fact, this
could only be offered by such
as formed
an opposition to the authority of the Scribes.
suggested by
Abraham
Eppstein, quoted by Charles,
D^'J'n |0 iPSJty) with their two rebel chiefs Azazel. ^Xty (comp. Brandt,
D. Maud. Rel. 198 and Norberg's Onomasticon) and Semiaza,
"NTflTX* (the full

;
name
""NTnX "'KDC
'
the seizer or assailant of heaven

p. 32,
'
like
Etanim or Titans
seeSayce, Babylonian Literature,

III, 26,
and comp. Angra Mainyuin Bundahish,

p. 176, note)
is
Stave, Parsismus
im Judenth.,
found also and with
characteristic additions
in
Mid. Abkir, see Yalk. Bereshith, 44, Jellinek,

in
B.
IV, 127
f.
There Shamahazai
punishment of his seduction of the
daughters of
Name
is
cast
Both the
daughters
men and his instruction of them in the magic use of the ineffable down to be henceforth suspended between heaven and earth. Biblical story of the sexual union of the sons of God and the of men and of Enoch's supreme station among the angels, "J/iirH
,
tT~?N JIN "pjn

25.
1
;
was given
a different interpretation by the rabbis (Exod.

ff.
r.
comp. also Bezold, Die Schatzhohle, 14
and the Ethiopic Book of

p.
Adam and
degraded
fathers,
Eve, transl. by Malan, chaps, xxx.
ff.,
137
f.).
Enoch was
in the
estimate of the rabbis, and later on also of the Church
whereas the mystics and Cabbalists retained the views of the

created the celestial
figure
apocalyptists and
Henoch-Metatron*
that
the heavenly charioteer of the Merkabah such as Mithras in the Persian
mythology
was
(see
besides
Kohut,
309ft'.,
Angvlolog.,
".,
p.
36
f,
'
and
Aruk.
'
.
Windischmann, Zoroastr. Stud.,
and/.
VIII, 500.
art.
Merkabah
66
B. Jubilees, p. $$, note, the underlying idea seems to have
been to build up a chronology based on the heptade of

months, years, and Jubilees.
Yet
this again points to the
Persian idea of the seven millennia referred to also in other
apocalyptic books such as the Slav. Enoch, 33.

of
1,
the
Book
Adam
and Eve,
p. 42,
and the Assumptio Mosis X, 12

Christian
;
(where the text has been tampered with by

copyists),
and echoed
17).
also in the
Talmud
(Sanh. 97 a
comp.
Midr. Teh. Ps. 90.

in
Such calculations are alluded to also

2.
Syr.
Apoc. Baruch LVI.
This entire eschatological

its
and cosmological system, with

ology,
is
angelology and demon-
the product, not of the Scribes or of the Pharisaic
schools, but of a special class of
men who
kept
in
touch
with Persian and cognate lore and shaped an esoteric Jewish

lore in adaptation of the views
and methods prevalent
in
the same.
Only
in
such secluded circles such as the Essenes
were, not confined to the land of Judaea and rather eager

to enlarge their theological system
religious doctrines
by borrowing from other

mysteries, could the
and
practices, or
apocalyptic lore with

its
its
hosts of angels and
demons and
peculiar concepts of heaven

less
and
hell
emanate, so as to
few, also the
remain more or
the
monopoly
of the
mystics of the Talmudic and Gaonic period.

logical
lore
is
The
eschato-
characteristically called, 'the mysteries of
God' which were not

Buber, comp.
Midr.
instructive are the
to be divulged (Tanh.
Wayehi, 9 ed.
Teh.
in
Ps.
119.
38).
But especially
words
Midr. Tanh.
Waera
4,
which
contains a reminiscence of these apocalyptic writers in the

following words
'
The
tribe of
Levi was
free for
study
({rnt^, the Greek Qecopia

said to to the
=
:
contemplation'),and so Pharaoh
Moses and Aaron
"You
only
make
the
work hard
men
to which they should apply, instead of listening

to the vain to
KOIILER
l6,
words contained
to
in the scrolls
which arc offered
them from Sabbath

and
Sabbath to comfort them by the
message of the coming divine redemption"' (comp. Apoc.
Baruch
It is
86.
77. 12).
easy to see
why
these apocalyptic writings were
rejected
by the Pharisaic
schools, while a large part of their
contents was appropriated by them.
Already Ben Sira
III,
19-24 says that secret lore
is
only for the humble, but
warns against intruding into the hidden things which are
beyond men,
as
it
leads
them
astray.
So does the Mishnah

be
Hag.
what
II, 1
is
most emphatically deprecate such prying into

will
above and beneath, or what was before and
thereafter,
and
it
directly forbids such teaching in public,

disciples, of the
that
is
to
more than one or two worthy

;
theophanic and cosmogonic lore
and the Amoraim (Babli

directly to this passage in
Hag. 13 a
Yer. Hag. 77
c) refer
Ben Sira
as the source.
In regard to the eschatological

9) refers to
mystery the Midr. (Tanh. Wayehi

Proverbs 25. 2
to
:
the verse
in
',
'It
is
the glory of
in
God
to conceal a thing
to allude.
which also the Mishnah
Hagigah seems
Over against the whole
attitude of the Essenes
who
believed in resorting to supernatural interference through

miracles
and
invocations,
the
Pharisean
'
:
leaders
based
'
themselves upon the Scriptural words

(Deut. 30. 12) (see B.
religion
It is not in
heaven
M. 59 b). their purpose being to bring within the domain of human life. For the same
all
reason they discouraged
apocalyptic predictions based
upon the prc-deterministic view of the Essenes as hampering

men's freedom of action and
self-reliance.
Moreover, while
Essenism and the Apocalyptists were chiefly concerned

with the Messianic
Kingdom and
is
the world to come, taking
the pessimistic view such as
expressed
in
4 Ezra
~.
l68

are created,
'Many
and
but few are saved '--which has
its
parallel in the
Testament of Abraham (n, and Matt.
22. 14),
also in the opinion voiced

fcaaJSPD
by the Shammaites
against
the Hillelites:
for
Nnn: &6p
mvb mo
'It were better
man had he not been
created than to be created (Erubin

is
13 b)
the
predominant view of the rabbis
optimistic.
',
As
it is
expressed by
Nahum
of Gimzo,
'
All
is
for the best

;
and likewise by Akiba (Taan. 21a; Ber. 60 a

R. Jacob
in
comp.
Aboth
4. 22).
The whole
is
point of view of the
Essenes and the Apocalyptists
like
that of the
New
Testament other-worldly, whereas that of the Pharisees was

rather this-worldly, as
may
r.
be learned from the saying of

"
R. Meir 'Even death
is "
Good
(Gen.
3)
r.
9.
comp. 18-13),
and
Hillel's
view
(Lev.
34.
that
the
human body
a religious
should be honoured as the dwelling-place of the Divine

Spirit.
Pharisaism aimed at making of the
Law
democracy, following the
maxim
'
The
secret things belong
unto the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed
belong unto us and to our children (Deut. 29,

'
28).
Essenism
with
its
world-contempt and secret

literature,
lore, as
voiced in the
It
Apocalyptic
could only appeal to the few.
was
a preparation for the
Kingdom
of
God
hence the Essene

'
and the
New
Testament morals were
to
exceed
5.
the
20)
righteousness of the Scribes and the Pharisees' (Matt.
such as found expression

108),
in
the latter part of
Enoch
(99 to
which
is
also the source of the Beatitudes

23,
and Woes
6).
of the
New
Testament (Matt. 5 and
and Luke
THE NAME OF THE MEKILTA

By Jacob
Z.
Lauterbach, Hebrew Union

'
College.
The name
'
Mekilta
or
'
Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael
'
by
is
which the Halakic or Tannaitic Midrash to Exodus
designated, has been the subject of considerable discussion
among Jewish scholars. Many valuable suggestions have been made, many good ideas have been offered, but so far
no satisfactory theory has been advanced which would
explain, convincingly and satisfactorily, the origin and the
meaning of
designation
this
name, and
this
why
in
it
was applied
as a special
to
Midrash
particular.
This, to
my
who
mind,
is
due mostly to the
fact
that
the
scholars
discussed this question accepted as established facts certain

ideas for which, in reality, there
was no foundation
at
all.
The
result of such
an acceptance of wrong and unfounded
premises by these scholars was that they reached wrong

conclusions,
and
failed to find the
correct answer to the
question.
for granted
Some
it
of
them reason
in
circle.
They
for
take
what they
set out to prove,
and then proceed

granted
to prove
on the basis of what they have taken

facts.
and assumed as
1
Others, again, while having correct

I
The plan
of the Jewish Classics for which series
am
preparing a
new
to
critical edition
I
of the Mekilta provides but limited space for Introductions.
am, therefore, publishing here part of what should be an introduction

edition
my new
of the
Mekilta.
ot
The
next article will deal with
the
arrangement and the divisions
the Mekilta.
in
The views
as to the
meaning cf the name Mekilta, expressed by me

444
f.,
the
Jewish Encyclopedia,
vol. VIII, d,
are hereby abandoned.
169
170
ideas

and
good
suggestions,
failed
to
follow
up
their
correct ideas or
good suggestions by
further research,
all
and
a thorough investigation of the question,
because they
could
not or would not rid themselves
of certain pre'
conceived notions as to the meaning of the name,

I
Mekilta'.
say
this,
not in mere criticism of the scholars whose
answers to our question are unsatisfactory, but by
way
of
an apology for the rather lengthy and detailed discussion
which
am
about to give to
this subject.
The
into
its
best
method
to follow in the attempt to solve our

to
problem seems to
me
be the one of dividing the problem
different parts,
and treating each part separately.

to
Accordingly,
questions
First:
use,
i.
:
we must seek
did the
answer the following three
When
name 'Mekilta'
it
first
come
into
e.
when and by whom was
applied as a special
designation for our Midrash in particular?
Second
in
What
name
is
it
the exact meaning of this term, and
what sense was
used at the time when
it
was applied
as a special
to our
Midrash
Third
Does our Midrash possess any

it
characteristic
its class,
is
feature, distinguishing
from other Midrashim of
so
as to justify
its
having a special name, and

indicated
this
characteristic
feature
?
fit
by
or
expressed
in this
special designation
In other words, does the designation
Mekilta especially
our Midrash to Exodus?
As
stated
to the
first
question,
when and by whom

in
this
name
has
not
was given
to our
Midrash
that
particular,
Z. Frankel
correctly,
the
designation
Mekilta was
given to our Midrash by R. Ishmael to

is
whom
I
our Midrash
ascribed (Monatsschrift, 1853, p. 392).

further,
believe
we can
go
and
state with
all
certainty that
the
name
LAUTERBACH
its
171
Mckilta was not given to our Mid rash by
Redad
whoever he was.
The name Mekilta was given to our Midrash by others, and at a much later time than its
by
this designation
redaction, to describe or characterize
some
peculiarity of this Midrash.

this designation
The approximate time
when
fixed
was applied to our Midrash can be
by
ascertaining the period of time during which our

this special
Midrash was not known under

even called by another name.
name, or was
of
The Talmud does not know our Midrash by the name Mekilta. The term Mekilta in the passage of p. Abodah
8 (44 b)
Zarah IV,
does not refer to our Midrash as Weiss

Mekilta,
p. xviii)
{Introduction
to the
would have
to
it
(see
below, and comp. Fried mann, Introduction

p. xxxi).
the Mckilta,
gestion
Nor can we made by Weiss
consider seriously the other sug(ibidem), to correct the text in

all
those talmudic passages where, beside

is
HQD and
fcOBD, there
ttnafal
mentioned MTti^n, and to read Nntao instead of

Friedmann, Introduction,
p. xxxiv).
(see
Without entering
into
any discussion of the question whether or not the

in
Talmud knew our Midrash,

preserved to us,
the form in which
it
it
is
we can
under
state with all certainty that
did
not
know
it
the
Tannaitic Midrash to
in
name of Mekilta. Whatever Exodus the Talmud did know, or
whatever form
it
such a Midrash
may have
existed in
collection
Talmudic times,
was considered as a part of the
of Tannaitic Midrashim to the
three books of the Torah.
Exodus and Numbers and Deuteronomy, and was

in
2
included
to
l\
the general
title,
'
Sifre
debe
Rab
\*
given
this
Or 21 "Q1 "HDD
"INC,
he
the other books of the Pentateuch,
Leviticus, containing laws; see
Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung

and Zur
in
di>:
halachii
Mtdraschim, Berlin, 1887,
p.
40,
a.
Einltitung in die Mtchilta

5,
d:-Rnbbi
Simon
ben Joc/tai, Frankfurt
M., 1906, pp. 2 and
note
1.
172
collection

of Midrashim in the Talmud, but
itself.
it
did
not
have any special name for

This
fact,
that theTannaitic Midrash to

in
Exodus formed
is
part of the 'Sifre' mentioned
the
Talmud
attested
by the
all
best rabbinic authorities, and accepted

scholars.
-
by almost
the
modern
This
including
of
of
the Midrash
to
Exodus
calling
in
in
it
collection
the
other
Midrashim
and
by
the
name
of Sifre, which
also
in
we observed
times
the Talmud,
continued
post-talmudic
throughout
the
early
entire period of the
Geonim, and
is
found also
among
rabbinic authorities of the period after the Geonim.

I
shall arrange here in chronological order those post-
talmudic authorities who did not

the
name
;
of Mekilta, but refer
know our Midrash under to it under the name of

occasionally use
Sifre
then,
those authorities
who
the
term W)^3B, not as a name, but as a description of our
Midrash or of parts of
it
and
finally,
those authorities
who
for
use the term xr6*20 as a designation or as the
our Midrash.
This
will
show us the
name time when the

when
this
name Mekilta was given to our Midrash, name became its special designation.
or since
Among
Sifre.
the
Geonim of the
includes
ninth century our Midrash
was not known by any
special name, but
was included
in
in
Amram Gaon
responsum
our Midrash
the Sifre,
see L. Ginzberg,
Geonica, II, pp. 307, 329.

of the
In
another
Gaonic
ninth
century,
is
published
by
Ginsberg {ibidem, pp. 37-9), there
given an interesting
explanation of the meaning of the word xn^3, which we

shall discuss further on.
What
interests us at this point
is
that, apparently, neither the questioner
nor the respondent
knew of a Midrash
called
by the name of Mekilta.
LAUTERBACH
The author of the Seder Tannaim wc-Amoraim does not know of any special name for the Midrash to Exodus.
He
the
plainly states
to
that
this
Midrash, together with the
Midrash
Numbers and
Deuteronomy,
is
called
by
name
Sifre.
The statement reads as mm iw ram n^pzn ram

editions of the Seder
in
follows
H^Kl
BWH
is
\%W 1DD1
nice.
This
the original
the following
and correct reading of the passage as given
in
:
Tannaim we-Amoraim
p.
S.
D. Luzzatto
Kerem Chemed, IV,
193; Filipowski's edition of the

;
pDnv, London, 1857
(p.
253
comp. Vitry, 492); Graetz,

;
Einleitung in den
Neue Texte des

It it
Talmud (Breslau, 1H71, p. 32) A. Marx, Seder Tannaim we- Amor aim, p. vi.
SederTannaim we-Amoraim
*iy),
true in the edition of the

J.
published by H.
D. Azulai
in his D*3r6
there
is
found
a reading which mentions our Midrash by the
name Mekilta.
The passage
snDD
cjid
reads
run
unm p T\W
is
ni?N1
1BD
KW
xnâo
It is
iy D37.
But
this
not the correct reading.
a variation
made by
a later hand,
by one who already knew

as xn^3.
that the Midrash to
Exodus was described
The
same
is
to be said about the passage in
Halakot Gedolot
p.
at the
end of iDDn mr^n
(editio
Vienna, 1810,
:
ic6a), 3
**1BD1
where we
find the following reading
H3D nyaiM
\iw
fn
onmn
Here
n?Ni
wi nsoi
nice h?nh xn^rjDi
am
rwtra
Am
*"IBD1
also the original text
had only the passage ]iW

follow,
HBD
nya-iN,
and the words that
from
[n
I7\xi
to
Dnîn
npNI, are a later interpolation, explaining the fore-
going statement (see L. Ginsberg, Orientalistische Liter at urzeitung) iqio,

3
No.
5, p.
227).
We
cannot determine the time

is
This passage of the Halakot Gedolot
also found
in
the
Gaonic
MIO D^
^ WBHB TlTD,
a.
published by Ch. M. Horowitz
in \>V
jmin
EWNBWl, Frankfurt
M., 1881, p. 43.
174

of this explanatory interpolation lived.
when the author

It
is
evident, however, that even in his time the

still
Midrash
to
Exodus was
considered as part of the Sifre, and
included in this name.

a description
The author merely

of
wishes to give
of this part
the Sifre, the Midrash to

fctnâo.
is
Exodus,
for
which description he uses the term
Of the Geonim
one of
to our
of the tenth century, Saadya
the only
whom
it
could possibiy be said that he referred
Midrash under the name of Mekilta.

in
In a Genizah,
I,
fragment cited by Harkavy
Hakedem^
1907, p. 127
is
and supposed to contain statements of Saadya, there

found the following passage, Nn^3n
Tix
Dm:n
133 D nîc
s
nr byi
jwn
in
i6
Tin "nam
niDB>
nbm, referring to the saying

b).
found
our
Mekilta (Bahodesh X, Weiss 79
It
is
apparent, however, that the term

is
Nn^Dft in this passage
used as a description, and not as a designation for the
Midrash to Exodus.
Had NTv^D been
the designation or
name
of the
npsi
Midrash to Exodus, the additional words

entirely unnecessary. 4
row
would have been

N"ip N 1 fcoaD,
Just as
we never say
because Sifra
Leviticus, so
if
except, of course,
when we wish
Wayikra
NnâtD
to refer to a passage in Sifra belonging to the Sidra

is
it
known
to be the
name
of the Midrash to
could not have been said
row
vbttXl
Mekilta had been known as the name of the Midrash

It
is
to Exodus.
even more likely that the term

as in
Nn?*a?o
JTW
4
n?tO in this passage, as well
the interpolation
to the
Halakot Gedolot and

that the
in
Azulai's version of the

added
to distinguish the
To argue
to
words
fllEC'
rvNH were
to
Midrash
Exodus from Midrashim

would take
for
other books of the Pentateuch,
likewise, called Mekilta,
granted that the Geonim designated

to
by the name 'Mekilta' not only the Midrash

Midrashim, when, as a matter of
fact,
Exodus but
proof
also other
we have no
that name.
for their
having
known even
the Midrash to
Exodus by
Till:
NAME OF THE MEKILTA
LAUTERBACH
' '.
175
Seder Tannaim we-Amoraim, simply means

or collections, 5 of
the collection,
In
Midrashim to the book of Exodus
a responsum
by
Gaon who
lived after
Saadya (Harkavy,
No.66,p.3i) a passage from our Mekilta(Shirah I,\Veiss4ia)

is
WV tfnm nm. So this Gaon knew our Mekilta by the name of 31 31 nSD "WW and not by the name of Mekilta. Sherira Gaon does not know our Midrash by the special
quoted as
"21
1BD "IK#3
name
of Mekilta.
For
in his
famous
epistle in
which he
mentions Midrash, Tosefta,
Sifra, Sifre,
and Talmud, when

fails
and by
whom
they were redacted or arranged, he
to
mention the Mekilta.

in
Nor was he asked about

his
the Mekilta
particular.
Evidently both
questioner,
Jacob of
Kairuan, and Sherira himself knew the Midrash to Exodus
merely as part of the Sifre and included

not by the
in this
name, and
name
of Mekilta.
In another responsum addressed to Jacob of Kairuan
(Harkavy, No. 262,

in the sense of
p. 135)
Sherira uses the term KnK7*30
mmDO
or
Mishnah
collections.
Evidently
he does not know the term NTiTaD as a special designation

for the
Midrash to Exodus.
of the last of the
Even
Geonim, Hai Gaon, we cannot

to
state definitely that he

5
knew the Midrash
Exodus by
If in
The word
is
probably to be read in the plural form

I
NrOÊ.
this has
the
course of this article
use the form Mekilta,
do so because
become
the generally accepted form, though the proper pronunciation of the
name
should be in the plural, Mekilata

6
I
see below, note 23.
cannot accept the suggestion offered by Ginzberg [Orientalist

I.
Literaturzeitung,
c.)
that the
Geonim might have made

in
a distinction
between
the use of the term
Xn^DD
the singular, as designating the Midrash to

in the sense of collections, or
for
t
Exodus, and the use of the plural Nrip'OD * t

mr!2Dft.
For, as a matter of
fact,
we
have no proof whatever
the
assumption that the Geonim ever did use the singular NHp'Ott as
of the Midrash to Exodus.
a designation
VOL. XL
176
the
name
of Mekilta, though
it
must have been
in his
time that the Midrash began to be described or called
by the name Mekilta.

the following passage
pro "tun lrfe
i:n
In a responsum of
his,
probablyis
addressed indirectly to Samuel Hanagid, there

in
found
which the term Kn^DD occurs
nynn
nmi?
jtin
pm
^y
pjki
&wi 21 "an
naDD
wma
wy>
n np^y
*\fcn
5>3
"nwo niN Kin pi
rrai?
nnv
pnwi
mn
paw
*s
5>k-ib
pxi
sn^Doni "iwi nnan *bd
inn ix D^ynn *rw nnni? -dt.
The
in
Baraita referred to in this passage
is
the one found
our Mekilta (Mishpatim

is
XVI) though
the reading in
our Mekilta
somewhat
different.
is
Now
in the
'
the
Gaon
of
tells
us
',
that the origin of this Baraita
Sifre
debe Bab
'
so he refers to our Mekilta under the
name
Sifre
debe
Rab \
The Gaon
further tells us that all the versions or
editions of this Baraita of the Sifre agree in the reading
rmp, The only

versions
is
difference that exists
between the
different
in
the
is
introductory formula with which the
Scriptural support
adduced.
there
is
Instead of the introductory
formula
-iix
Kin pi,
found
in
the
Palestinian
fc'lWl.
Mekilta, 7 the formula
nr6
13?
nr6
ffvn
|W
The
same formula which the Gaon found

Mekilta
the
is
in
the Palestinian
the very fact that
'
also found in our Mekilta.
From
'
Gaon
uses the phrase

',
bm& pKI
it
Nnâom
the
in the Pales-
tinian Mekilata
it
and contrasts
with the
Sifre
debe Rab
',
is
evident that he did not
know
name Mekilata
to
as
being the special designation of the Midrash to Exodus.
For had the Midrash

the
7
to
Exodus been known

'
him under
',
name
Here
Mekilta, the qualifying term

word
is
Palestinian
pN"i
also the
probably to be read
in
the plural form
NriTDDin
unless
we assume
in
that the
Gaon
is
refers only to the
one
part, or
NPSD?^, of our
Midrash
which the passage
found
see below, note 23.

7IFW5",
LAUTERBACH
It
8
177
would have been superfluous.
would have been

after
'.
sufficient to say, 'in the Mekilta'.
Again,
haw
which
identified this
Midrash with the
'
Sifre
debe Rab
he told us was the source of the Baraita

could the Gaon,
in
in question,
how
same
Sifre
the
same paragraph,
call
it
the very
Midrash by another name, and contrast
with the
'
debe Rab
Sherira,
'.
It
is,
therefore, evident that, like his father

in
its
Hai Gaon uses the term Nn^SD

'
general
meaning of
collection
',
hence the need of the qualifying

P"1*n, to
term 'Palestinian', 7K1B*

lection of the 'Sifre
describe in which col-
debe Rab'
this variant
reading was
found.
The
phrase, blTWP
p6H
Knâoni, accordingly means
nothing else than a Palestinian version, or edition, of the

Sifre
debe Rab, or of that part of
it
dealing with the book
of
Exodus.
Thus
it
may be
stated that the
Geonim,
like the
Talmud,
did not have any special designation for the Midrash to
Exodus which they considered and knew only

8
as a part
The argument
that the qualification
bN1- ,> fHNI might have been

alone
necessary to distinguish our Mekilta from the other Mekilta, the one of
R. Simon
b.
Johai, assuming that the
Geonim
there
b.
in the Sifre
was included by the debe Rab (compare Hoffmann, Zur Einhitung in dn

latter
p. 36,
halachischen
is
Midmschtm,
note 2), does not hold.
In the
first
place,
no proof for the assumption that only the Mekilta of R. Simon
Johai was identified by the

in
Geonim with
die
the Sifre debe
Rab (compare
b.
Hoffmann. Ztir Einhitung

Frankfurt
a.
Mechilta
dc-Rabbi Simeon
Jochai.
M., 1906, p. 5,
where Hoffmann himself expresses some doubts
in the matter).
On
the contrar}-,
we
have seen that our Mekilta also was
included by the
itself.
Geonim
in the Sifre.
But above
b.
all,
the argument defeats
For,
if
the Mekilta of R.
Simon
Johai alone, and not our Mekilta,
was included
Midrash
in the Sifre
and called by that name, then there was only one

:
left to
be called by the name of Mekilta, and this was our Midrash
and the mere name Mekilta, without the qualification 7XTJ M ""INI. would
have sufficiently distinguished
included in and called
b}*
it
from the Midrash of R. Simon

of Sifre
b.
Johai.
the
name
debe Rab.
T78

Sifre.
of the
In only two instances

to the
when
referring
Midrash to
we have found that Exodus the Geonim,

as a description of
Saadya and Hai, use the term Wt7*3D

that Midrash, but not as
It is
its
special designation.
only outside of Babylon, and by teachers

official
who do
name
or
not belong to the
schools of the Geonim, that the
name
Kn?*3D
is
used as a special designation, or as the
for the
Midrash to Exodus.
The
first
to our
'
knowledge
'
to designate our
'
Midrash by the name of
Mekilta
Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael' were the contemporaries and
correspondents of Hai Gaon, R. Nissim of Kairuan and R. Samuel Hanagid of Granada in Spain.
In his
work on the Talmud,

1847,
P-
Sefer
b,
ha-Mafteah
(ed.
b).
its
Goldenthal, Vienna,
44
t0
Sabbath
106
R. Nissim, referring to a certain Baraita, states that

origin
is
in
the Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, NJvnn
nr
-ipw
bnWXfi *:m
NDÊ
spD3.
This Baraita
Nissim, then,
is
indeed found at
the end of our Mekilta.
knew our Midrash

Still
by the
more
who,
specific
name
is
of Mekilta de- Rabbi Ishmael.
definite
in his
his
contemporary, R. Samuel Hanagid,

expressly distinguishes the
Mebo ha-Talmud,
Midrash to Exodus, which he designates by the name of

Mekilta de- Rabbi Ishmael, from the
to comprise only the
Sifre,
which he declares
two books, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
He
It
speaks of mini ntyps

rbvfi
tinxm
wi
nvrnxi
iwoe*
am
snâo
-\2iD2
HQDi 12b topî nao Kim ktbd iwi D^ro.
was probably from R. Nissim that R. Samuel Hanagid
learned to distinguish the Midrash to
Exodus from
the Sifre,
and
to
apply to the former the
specific
name
of Mekilta
de-Rabbi Ishmael.
R. Nathan of Rome, a younger con-
temporary of Samuel Hanagid, likewise distinguishes our
Midrash from the
Sifre.
He
declares the Sifre to consist

of the
LAUTERBAC H
Deutero*tdc
he-
Mid rash
the
to only
two books
Numbers and
nomy
of
j\ v,
Pentateuch, [nran
[W \rbm mn
(Aruk,
quotes
1BD), while the
Midrash to Exodus, which

Accordingly we
many
times, he calls Mekilta.
may
state definitely that in the eleventh century
some
teachers,
R. Nissim, R. Samuel, Hanagid, and R. Nathan of Rome,

considered the Midrash to
Exodus
as a
Midrash
it
distinct
and separate from the

specific
Sifre.
and they called
by the
Ishmael.
name
of Mekilta or Mekilta de-Rabbi
And
from the twelfth century on we find an increasing

of teachers applying the
'
number
name Mekilta
'
'
or
'
Mekilta
de-Rabbi Ishmael as a
to
specific designation for the
Midrash
Exodus.
However, even then the older practice of con-
sidering this Midrash as a part of the Sifre and designating

it
as such
still
continued.
And up
by
its
to the
close of the
fourteenth century
its
we
find
our Midrash
called
by both
Mekilta.
older
name
H)D, as well as
new name
Only
after that period the older
mode
of designating our
Midrash by the name of
Sifre
was no more used, and the
new name
its
Mekilta, or Mekilta de-Rabbi Ishmael,
became
sole
name.
Before proceeding to inquire into the meaning of this
name, and why

I first
it
was given to our Midrash
in
particular,
wish to cite here those authorities up to the close
of the fourteenth century
who
it
still
considered our Midrash

it
as part of the Sifre, and

I
would quote
by that name.
deem
this necessary, for
furnishes additional proof for
our theory that
Mekilta
is
the
younger name of our
Midrash, and that this new
name only gradually supplanted
the older original name, which was Sifre.
Had
Mekilta
been the original name of our Midrash

to explain
it
would be hard
how
after the eleventh century,
when our Midrash
]8o

certainly
was
already
distinguished
from
the
Sifre
to
Numbers and Deuteronomy and forming a some authorities should come to designate
of Sifre, a
separate work,
it
by the name
name then
b.
already applied as a specific designa-
tion for the
Midrash to Numbers and Deuteronomy.
R. Gershom
Judah of Mayence,
in
his
commentary
ib>d).
on Temurah 4
second time
passage
is
it
a,
is
quotes twice a passage as from Sifre (the

printed
by mistake
is
N")DD for
This
not found in Sifre, but
found
in
the Mekilta
calls
Kaspa
(Mishpatim XIX).
But R. Gershom
our
Mekilta by the
name
of Sifre (see
Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung
in die halachischen
Midrashim,
p. 72).
R. Solomon
b. Isaac
(Rashi),
who knows our Midrash

it
by the name of Mekilta, and frequently quotes

name, and
in
by that
it
some passages expressly
distinguishes
from
"p
the Sifre (see his remark

*|"6n
xnÊn
i?3N
naM PPW
11.
KVl
iTW,
in
his
commentary on Numbers
our Midrash by
its
20), yet
Sifre.
occasionally calls
older
18. 3,
name
Thus
in
his
commentary on Exodus
in
he quotes a
saying found
our Mekilta
it
59a), and adds to
nSDi
Amalek IV(Yetro II, Friedmann WW *p Thus we learn in Sifre'.

'
This saying
is
not found in
Sifre,
but Rashi here
calls
our
Mekilta by the
(published
1
name
of Sifre.
Likewise
in a
responsum
by
J. Miiller in
-vnta X\5TU
v^n nown, Vienna,

in
881,
No.
25. p. 13)
he refers to a passage as being found
in the Sifre
debe Rab.
But the passage
question
is
not
found
in Sifre,
but in our Mekilta (Bahodesfi VII).

calls
So here
of
'
again Rashi
our Mekilta by the
name
Sifre
debe Rab'.
In his
commentary on Job
the Mekilta Beshalah
38.
1,
referring to a saying
a),
found
in
(Friedmann 32
he uses
the phrase HBD3 BnBlD13.
Likewise, in his
commentary on

the
in
LAUTERBACH
l8l
Talmud (Shabbat 146 a), referring to a saying found the Mekilta Bahodesh IX (Friedmann 71 b), he uses the
KWTO.
"iD),
phrase TBD3
R. Eliezer
b.
Nathan,
in
his
Eben
ha-Ezer (|*3K1
found
102
b),
paragraph 271, referring to a saying
in
our Mekilta Kaspa II (Mishpatim
XX, Friedmann
is
uses the phrase

in Sifre.
*21
naoi
9
W.
The
The saying
calls the
not
found
Evidently fDHI likewise

of Sifre debe
Mekilta
by
the
name
Rab.
Tosafists, likewise,
occasionally refer to our Midrash under the
name
of Sifre,
although, like Rashi, they also

Mekilta.
12 b,
s.
knew
it
by the name of
B.
Thus,
in their
comments on the Talmud,
M.
v. n*32
toya KD, referring
to the statement found
in the
Mekilta Mishpatim III that a
woman
NJV&03
cannot
.
sell
herself into slavery, use the phrase
HBM
In their
commentary on the Pentateuch, commenting upon Exod.

12. 30,
they quote a passage from our Mekilta (Pisha XIII),

it
and introduce
Sifre'.
with the phrase
*T5D3
pHOto
'
We
say
1,
in
Kikewise, in their comment on Exod. 20.
they
quote a passage from our Mekilta (Bahodesh IV) with the
remark that
it is
found
in Sifre (Sifra is a
misprint for Sifre).
R. Jacob Tarn probably also considered our Mekilta as part

of the Sifre, see Ginzberg, Geo7iica II, p. 329, note 9.
i
R. Judah
b.
Eliezer (tf"nn), in his
commentary on the
the
Pentateuch (printed
the Tosafists,
together with
commentary of
by the
Warsaw,
1904), also calls our Mekilta
name
of Sifre (see his
Asheri, in his
comment on Exodus 16. 35). And commentary on Nedarim 36 b, also includes

the
our Mekilta
in
name
of Sifre (compare Ginzberg,
Geonica, II, p. 307).

9
For
this reference as well as for the reference to

a, I
Rashi Job 38.
and
Shabbat 146
am
indebted to
my
friend, Prof. L. Ginzberg, of the
Jewish
Theological Seminary in
New
York.
l82

Perhaps the statement
Samson
of
Chinon
in
made by R. his Sefer Keritut (Leshon Limmudim,

*n nao
ddd,
Sifre
bxyw
II, 13), is to
be understood as referring only to the Mekilta,
which the author considers as part of the

calls
it
and hence
has been
in full
by that name.
Possibly the word
rmth
omitted by mistake, and the statement should read

btiVQ&s *31 niDB^
H2D DDD (compare
Z. Frankel.
Darke ha-
Mishnah,
p. 309,
and against him H.
S. Horovitz, Siphre
vi,
Ube Rab
Gittin
(Leipzig, 191 7, Introduction, p.

in
note
4).
R. Solomon Ibn Adret,
his
Novellae to
in
Talmud
64
b,
introduces
saying
a)
found
our Mekilta
Mishpatim III (Friedmann 78

"ISM
with the words,
wvn
'3T1
'Thus
it
is
found
in
Sifre'.
/.
R. Nissim
b.
R.euben
Gerondi, in his Novellae Gittin,
c, also cites the
same
*3iTl
saying from the Mekilta with the remark, n&D2

'
pnm
Thus we
b-2
interpret in Sifre
'.
Hasdai Crescas, who

(p.
1
in the preface to his
Or Adonai
of the
a)
mentions the
Sifra,
authors
or
redactors
Mishnah, Tosefta,
Sifre,
and
the
Palestinian
and
Babylonian Talmud, but does not mention the Mekilta,

10 evidently also includes the latter in the Sifre.
Let us now proceed to inquire into the meaning of the
name
It
Mekilta, and
why
it
first
was used
as a description
and then applied as a designation of the Midrash to Exodus.

is
assumed by almost
I
all
scholars, 11 that
xni^D, the
an author
of
10
subsequently found that R. Joseph di Trani
EDînD,
the second half of the sixteenth century, also, occasionally applies the
Sifre to
name
I)
our Mekilta.
d'j,
In his Novellae to Kiddushin
nay I3jn NÎM
Furth, 1768, p. 20
he refers
to a
passage in our Mekilta (Mishpatim
with the remark,

11
nBD3 DHH WnZ).

{Monatsschrift, 1870, p. 283" and Ginzberg
1.
To my knowledge Giidemann
{Orient. Litcraturzeitung,
c), are the only ones
who
refused to accept this
interpretation of the term Mekilta.
THE NAME OF THE MEKILTA- LAUTERBACH

Aramaic equivalent
'method'.
for the
iS;
Hebrew mo, means
'rule' or
rules
PltTO,
The
plural nvio,
meaning the exegctical

Jfl3
by which the Torah was
interpreted,
nCH"M HTV1W
became the name
for the
Midrashim, since they employ
these methods or rules of interpretation.
The Aramaic
plural
equivalent
for
nno,
i.
e.
Mekilata, the
form
of
Mekilta, thus
became the name
of our Midrash (Zunz.

;
Gottesdienstliche
Vortrdge, pp. 50-51

;
Friedmann, Intro-
duction to the Mekilta, p. xxxii

etc.,
Hoffmann,
Z ur Einleitung,
in
pp.
3,
37,
and 71
P-
compare also Frankel

According
Monatsof
sclirift,
1853,
39*)*
to this explanation
the meaning of the term Mekilta, the

to all
name would apply
Midrashim
alike.
It
must therefore be explained
why it was applied to the Midrash to Exodus in particular. To meet this difficulty Friedmann offers the following explanation. The name Mekilta, indeed, was the original name for all the halakic Midrashim to the four books of the
Pentateuch, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
But
after the
Midrash to Leviticus received the special

after the
name N13D, and

name
to
two Midrashim
to
Numbers and
the special
Deuteronomy were joined together and given

"HaD, there
was
left
only the Midrash to Exodus

to
be called by the original name Mekilta {Introduction

xl).
Mekilta, pp. xxxvi and
This explanation, however,

false.
must be rejected as utterly

presupposes that Mekilta
Sifre are
is
In
the
first
place,
it
the older name, and Sifra and
the younger ones.
In
this
case
wc
certainly
should expect to find the older, original

in
name mentioned
does not explain
special
the Talmudic literature, where the two younger names
are frequently mentioned.
Secondly,
it
why
just the other three
Midrashim received new

left
names, and only the Midrash to Exodus was
to retain
184

But, above
all,
it
the older name.
is
refuted
by the
fact
that the Midrash to
Exodus was
also included in the Sifre,
and called by that name even
after the
two Midrashim
to
Numbers and Deuteronomy had been joined together. Just as untenable is the theory offered by Felix Pedes
{Orient alistische Liter aturzeitung, 1 909, No.
also
Kerem Hemed,
II,
p.
355 comp. 195, and Geiger, Nachgelassene

8, p.
;
Schriften, II, p. 125).
According
to Perles, the Baraita of

rules, or
R. Ishmael, containing the thirteen
mirW nno
a**
fm ncm:, now found

originally
its
at the beginning of the Sifra,
had
to
place at the
then,
beginning of the Midrash

to
Exodus.
s n^3D
4
This,
rfriD.
gave
the
Midrash
the
name
Later on,
for reasons
which can no more
be ascertained, this Baraita of the thirteen rules was transferred to the beginning of the Sifra, but the
it
name which
latter
gave to the Midrash to Exodus remained with the
nevertheless.
Without entering
into a discussion
of the
question whether or not the Baraita of the thirteen rules

originally
had
its
place in the Midrash to Exodus,
it
is
evident that this could not have been the reason for giving
the Midrash the
name
Mekilta.
For the Baraita

is
itself is
nowhere
bttyZW. 12
called nh^jdd or
nno, but
referred to as "ai B>TIB
Furthermore, we have seen that the name Mekilta

earlier
was given to our Midrash not
than the eleventh
century, and at that time the Midrash to
Exodus did not

Thus we
see
contain the Baraita of the thirteen rules.

that even granting the premises that
nno was
is
a technical
term designating Midrashim, and that NrOTB

translation
the Aramaic
of this
Hebrew
technical
term, even
then
it
remains unexplained
12
why
our Midrash, once called Sifre

and 8
-
n^BH ni^bn PUPICn

op.
cit.,
"IBD, PP- 7
For other references see
Zunz,
p. 53.

like the
LAUTERBACH
its
185
Midrashim
to
Numbers and Deuteronomy, should

special designation.
have received the name Mekilta as
As
a matter of fact, however, these premises are not correct
There
in the
is
no proof
for the
statement that
nno
is
used
Talmud
in
as a technical term for Midrash.
In those
or HlttO
i
passages
the
Talmud
in
which the term

teachings,
mo
it
found
as
designating
halakic
means
It
col-
lections of halakic teachings in
Midrash form. 13
halakic
may
possibly be interpreted
in
to
designate
collections
it
both
Midrash
and
Mishnah
form,
but
cannot
be interpreted to mean Midrash collections
exclusively.
s
Thus the saying

xypy
'
of R.
Simon
b. Johai,
WIDP nno UP
'22
*n bw vnnD merino mnn
(Gittin 6y a)
means
Study
my
halakic
collections
for
they are the choice
14 selections from the collections of R. Akiba'.
Likewise
the
term
yiE^
p UJ&K
*31
b&
Mine
in
Menahot 18 a simply means R. Eleazar's

halakic teachings.
collections
of
Judging from the context one must

collections were
assume that these

not Midrashim. 15
Mishnah
collections
and
As
in
to the
meaning of the Aramaic term
Kn?*3Dj as used
it
the
Talmud
in referring to halakic teachings,

it
is
even
in
'5
more evident that
was applied only to
collections
Mishnah form, and never was used to designate Midrashim. 1
For the sake of completeness,

passages
13 14
will cite here all the

in
in
the Babylonian
/. c.
and Palestinian Talmud
Compare Ginzberg,
Rashi explains
it
K3py
15
m bw wnwpc ^pv
it
to
refer to
the Mishnah-collections of R. Akiba
lino D^no-mi
Dmna wnn
Mechilta
vxeb.
R. Eleazar
10
From Yebamot 84 b is b. Shamua Mishnah and not Midrash. Compare Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung in di
evident that Judah Hanasi studied with
tic-
Rabbi
Sit
b. Joc/iai, p. 2.
l86

it
which the term n^3 occurs, and

of
will
be seen that
in all
them the term designates aMishnah or Baraita

it
collection.
In Pesahim 48 a
is
said, that
although
in the
Mishnah
R. Eliezer
is it
silent,
and does not answer the argument of
R. Joshua,
his
does not follow that he agrees with him, for

collection,
It
is
may be found in another TinnK Nn^Dn rr6 tt.ini pryonion rr.

answer
Mekilta
in this
p>W "WN
evident that
for then the
It
passage cannot
mean Midrash,
he was
qualifying term
Wins would
in
be entirely superfluous.
would be a
sufficient contrast to say,
silent in the
Mishnah
evidently
but answered
the
Midrash.
But Mekilta
means a
it
collection of halakic teachings like our

is
Mishnah, hence
necessary to add the word Tinnx to
indicate that the answer of R. Eliezer,
though missing
in
our Mishnah,
may be
Tnâoa
found
in
another Mishnah collection.

a,
In the passage in Gittin 44

to R. Zerika
\"V P1B,
where R. Jeremiah says
the term Krtao cannot

explains
it,
mean
ftttPDa
Midrash.
*]b
It
rather means, as Rashi
mviDn, a collection of Mishnayot or Baraitot.
And,
indeed, the Baraita which R. Zerika, after

find,
is
some search did

am TBK IBto
a Mishnah -Baraita
and
not a Midrash-Baraita.
Likewise, in the statement Knbôo
nw
b"~\
^nnns (Temurah 33 a), the expression WnnK KnâiDB cannot mean from another Midrash as Zunz {op. cit. p. 50) seems
(
',
to assume.
or,
It
merely means
it,
'
from another collection
', 17
as Rashi explains
from another Baraita which he
found TinnN Kn*13

there
is
HXW.
p*w
n:ik
And,
indeed, the Baraita cited
a Mishnah-Baraita, and not a Midrash-Baraita.

nnxi> bin
In the passage,
wm
vbyi2 ann urn pa "o
nan
17
mm xbyv
tnn
\b
nana *p*
*mn
"Offi,
pan
nfy
Hp\D
Tosafot s.v. b"2-*~\ read TinriN
Nn^32
;
which means, he
recited a Baraita, found in another collection
see below, note 21.

(p. Shebiit,
LAUTERBACH
i6a*D
18^
X,
p.
39
18
d),
the
term
evidently
me
tractate or NVDDC
clusively.
or collection, but not of Midrash ex-
The meaning
of the saying
is,
that
if
the people
honour him because they believe him to be learned or

versed in two tractates or collections he must not accept
this
undeserved honour, but declare to them that he has
studied or
knows only one

in
tractate or collection.
Likewise,
the
statement
nh^dd tVWW
'"I
pfiK
(p.
Abodah
lection
zarah, IV, p.
44
b) the
term ND^3D means a
col-
of
halakic
cites
teachings.
And
is
the
Baraita
which
R. Josiah
from
this collection
a Mishnah-Baraita
and not a Midrash-Baraita. 19
There
is
only one passage which would seem to lend
support to the supposition that the term
nno and
its
Aramaic equivalent NH^nD were used

and
this
is
to designate Midrashim,
i,
the passage in the Midrash Leviticus R., Ill,
which we shall now consider.
The passage
rprmn
reads, as follows
Dmo
*JP rutPP *d 31B
am ^m rw kw * Dm ^m rroiri ruw ^ am p^n -in npnw 12 npnw rvrnjn nn rnjm k5>n nm ^n dki nviDi niakn row ww <o nm ^m nnroi rna^n row kw * aio jk53D npnw rpnijn nn msm n!>k Dm ^n i:w td^hi nni rvehn
nn
nijni
xbx nnn
Sn uw
nchn rwiw
ffi^M "13.
R. Nathan, in Aruk,
j.
^.
^lft,
%
quotes the second sentence
of our Midrash PHB1 nttta

follows
18
:
pin
ruWP D which he comments on as nv;mD -oin mnimci rowo nawv ' aie pitb
Aruk
s.
z/.
So
it is
explained by
t>3E.
19
The
fact that this Baraita
is
also found in our Mekilta does not in the
least affect the correctness of
our statement.
their
The
redactors of the halakic
Midrashim have embodied
in
works many Mishnah-Baraitot taken

in
die
from other collections; see Hoffmann. Zur Einleitung

Midrascliinij p. 3.
halackiscktn
l83

Following
this suggestion of
(op,
Nn^3D.
p. 50),
Aruk, Zunz
cit.,
(op. cit.,
and
after
him Friedmann
note
5),
p. xxxii),
and
Hoffmann
I,
(op. cit. } p. 3,
and Bacher (Terminologie,

in this
p. 102)
have understood the terms nvro and |K^30
Midrash passage to mean Midrashim.

interpreted this Midrash to
They, accordingly,
one to
mean
'
It is better for
study only two orders of the accepted Mishnah and be

thoroughly familiar with them, than to study the entire
Mishnah
collection
(ni^n being the designation of the
accepted Mishnah of Judah ha-Nasi), and not be thoroughly

familiar with
it,
merely to
satisfy his
It
is
ambition to be called
a student of the Mishnah.
better for one to study

it,
only the Mishnah and be thoroughly familiar with

to study
than
the
Mishnah and the Midrashim and not be
thoroughly familiar with them, merely to satisfy his ambition

to be called a student of the Midrashim.
It is better for
one to study only the Mishnah and the Midrashim and be

thoroughly familiar with them, than to study the Mishnah
and the Midrashim, and

(that
is
in addition to these also the
Talmud
the
Amoraic
discussions
and comments to the
Tannaitic teachings) without being thoroughly familiar with
them, merely to
of the Talmud.'
satisfy his
ambition to be called a student
This interpretation of the Midrash passage, especially

of the second sentence of
it
which concerns
us, is
not correct.
According to
this interpretation, the

is
second sentence of the

first
Midrash passage
out of keeping with the
and the
third
sentence, and logically not consistent with the main idea
which the Midrash wishes to convey,
viz.
that
it is
better to
study a small part thoroughly than to study a larger part

superficially.
In the
first
sentence the advice
is
given to
the student rather to be content with a thorough knowledge
THE NAME OF THE ME KILTA

of but
LAUTERBACH
18c
two
orders, that
all
is
is
a part of the Mishnah, than to
study superficially
the orders of the Mishnah merely

to be called a student of the entire
it.
because his ambition
Mishnah and not

refers to
o( merely a part of
is
The
third sentence
one whose ambition
to
be called a student of
the
Talmud, which requires a knowledge of both the
Tannaitic teachings as well as the Amoraic comments on

the same, for one cannot study a
text.
commentary without the

is,
The
advice given to such a student,
likewise,
rather to content himself with a thorough knowledge of
only a part of the Talmud, than

to
i.
e.
the Tannaitic
teachings,
study the whole of
it
superficially.
The second
interpretation
sentence, in the
meaning given
to
it
by the
of the scholars mentioned above, advises one,

it is
whose ambition
to be called a student of
Midrashim, not to try to study
Mishnah and Midrashim
superficially but rather to content
himself with a thorough knowledge of the Mishnah.

it is
But
just here
where
is
this interpretation
is
logically at fault.
as, in
For Mishnah
sentence, the
or, as in
not a part of the Midrashim.
the
first
two orders are but a part of the

Furthermore,
entire
Mishnah;
the third sentence, the Tannaitic teachings are but
a part of the Talmud.
why
should one whose
ambition
it
is
to be called a
Midrash student, be supposed

?
even to try to study both Mishnah and Midrashim

It
is
therefore evident that the term
nno and fKTOQ
in this
Midrash passage have the same meaning which we

in all
have found them to have
the other passages of the
Talmud where they

tions
occur.
They merely
Mishnah
to
designate colleccollections.
of halakic teachings or
it
The
in
one whose ambition
is
be called a student versed

will,
many
different Mishnah-collections,
i.e.
of course, study
K ~.
the main collection,
the accepted Mishnah, called nir
190
But, he will also try to study in addition other collections.
The
advice
is,
therefore, given to
him
rather to content
himself with a thorough knowledge of but one part of the
Mishnah
collections,
all
i.e.
the accepted Mishnah, than to
study superficially
the various Mishnah collections.
Thus we
to
find that the interpretation of the
term n^3
mean
a Midrash collection cannot be supported
by any
seen,
proof from the Talmudic Literature.

in all
it
For, as
we have
is
the passages of the
Talmud where
the term
in
used
unmistakably
refers to a collection of
Halakot
Mishnah
in the
form.
We
have also found that even the passage
Midrash Leviticus R. which Zunz considers as the most

decisive support for his interpretation of the term Nnâo,
does not at
all
decide in his favour, but rather favours the
interpretation of the term as
meaning halakic
collections in
Mishnah form and not Midrashim.

If
we
consult the post-Talmudic authorities as to the
meaning of the term Nn^3, we likewise find that, with the exception of the one suggestion by Aruk cited above,
the ancient authorities did not understand Nnâo to
mean
II,
Midrash.
Thus,
p. 39)
in the
Gaonic responsum (Ginzberg, Geonica,
already referred to above, the
Gaon 20 explains Nrtac
mean a compendium of choice Halakot collected from the entire Talmud and made into or arranged like one
to
tractate
or
ND3DD.
It
should be noticed
also
that
the
questioners merely asked whether

tractate or merely a Baraita
21
Nni^B means a whole

IS*
RT1
arvna
KVI
NrDDB -pnâo.
'20
It
was probably R. Zemah Gaon,
since the latter's explanation of the

is
term
WO'OB
It is
as quoted by Johasin s.v. Np"Hl
identical with the
one given
in this
21
responsum.
probably the observation that
in
some passages
in
the
Talmud the

So
it
LAUTERBA4
[I
19:
seems that
it
never occurred to them that KDTOC
might possibly mean Midrash.

Sherira
We
have seen above that
Gaon
uses the term Kn*6*30 in the sense of mnaDO.
Aruk s.v. i>DO) takes xr6*r: to be like n^:o, the Gimel and the Kaf being- interchangeable. Accordingly he understood it to mean a scroll,
R. Nissim of Kairuan (cited by
containing a collection of Halakot.
The author
tations to the
of the
Aruk
himself
(/. c.)
gives two interpreit
word nd^do. According
to the one
means
a Baraita containing reasons or discussions of the
Tannaim
other,
it
DWJnn
EyB
m 1W
11
.
Kn*T3.
According
as
to
the
means a
p.
N713DD
or Tractate, just
the
term K73D
in
Shebiit, X, p. 39
We have also mnD fttBto, i.e. a

collection of
seen that Rashi explains Nn^DD to
mean
well ordered or systematically arranged
Halakot or Mishnayot.
We
accordingly find that with the exception of the one
interpretation
by Aruk, the ancient
authorities interpret the
word Kn^DD
to have the
same meaning
as the
word NTDDD
assumed
and to designate a Tractate or a compendium of Halakot.

This meaning of the word NDÛD
is
practically
by
all
rabbinical authorities from the eleventh century
down
to our
in
own
days.
For, as
is
is
well
known, the word Kn?*DO

in
the sense
of NnSDft
frequently found
works of
tractate
Rabbinic authors, and

term
is
used to refer to
when only one
As
any
NnzOE
apparently
is
applied even
is
statement from
a collection, i.e. one Baraita,
referred
to, that
caused them to think that

a matter of
fact,
XnÎlfO might possibly mean
a single
is
WVHS.
however,
the reference in such passages
really to the collection from
which the
Baraita
really
is
quoted. Thus the phrase
WUW
Nn^30 ^HID
in
means, he argues from a Baraita found
Temurah 33 a another collection. The

in
improved reading offered by Tosafot there (see above, note 17) makes
this
meaning
still
clearer.
VOL. XI.
192
of either

Mishnah or Tosefta, Palestinian or Babylonian
Talmud.
This fact certainly supports the supposition that the
original
meaning of the term xnâD was
like KrDDO.
Had
the term KDTOE been originally used to designate Midrash

exclusively, one could hardly explain
how
the later rabbinic
authorities
came
to use
it
so extensively
when
referring to
the tractates of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
Having ascertained the meaning

especially the sense in which
it
it
of the term NHP'OE and

at the time
was used
when
last
was
first
applied as a description of the
Midrash to
Exodus, we can now proceed to answer ^he third and

question of our problem,
viz.
does the
name NDâD express

special designation?
a special characteristic of the Midrash to Exodus, so that

it
could justly be applied to

it
it
as
its
For
is
evident that the meaning of the

is
name NDTOB
as
given to our Midrash
the same as the meaning which this

it
term has
in
the Talmud, and in which
is
used by the
find, indeed,
post-talmudic rabbinic authorities.
Now, we
that our Midrash possesses a peculiar characteristic or one

special
feature
which
distinguishes
it
from
the
other
it
Midrashim of
its class,
especially from the Sifre to

entitles
it
which
originally belonged,
and which
to the specific
designation
consists of
WOTD.
its
This special feature of our Midrash
peculiar arrangement according to tractates
or rorDDO.
The Midrash
Each one
an independent
to
Exodus
consists
of nine
tractates.
of these tractates forms a separate collection or

treatise, dealing
with one topic or one group
of laws or one event or period in the history of Israel as
recorded
tractates
in
is
the
book of Exodus.
Each one
of these
called KTDDD, e.g.
KmnSH KTDDD, KnDBI KTDDD, &c.

It is
LAUTERBACH
is
03
in
divided in chapters and each chapter
subdivided
paragraphs called
nwn. 22 Thus,
in
form and arrangement,
these tractates, constituting our Midrash, are not in any

different
way
from the tractates of the Mishnah or Tosefta even
though their contents form a continuous commentary or

Midrash to a large part of the book of Exodus.
It
was because of this peculiar feature that the description
Kn?*3 was used
when
in
referring to this Midrash.

to
Its
name
was "HDD
like the
Midrash
Numbers and Deuteronomy,

was used instead of
real
but occasionally, as
description NTi^nn
'
the case of the Saadya-fragment, the

'
Tractates
its
name
as
it
"12D.
But, since this description was not definite,

refer to
might
another group of tractates, the words
rnDB> n?NT7
were added to indicate which group of tractates

viz.
was meant,
the one belonging to, or dealing with, the
book of Exodus.
and more
the
Gradually
this
substitution
of the
description Nni^3D instead of the real

into use, but for a long
Sifre.
name HBD came more

it
time
did not supplant

authorities like
name
Hence we understand how
Rashi, the Tosafists, and others refer to our Midrash both

as Sifre and as Mekilta.
For they retained the

Sifre.
original
name
of our
Midrash which was
But when they

Sifre,
wished to make clear that they refer to the part of

dealing with Exodus, they would describe
istic
it
by
its
character-
feature as consisting of a group of tractates
and would
use the description NJ1^3, or the plural form
JTOW,
or t6\3.
They used
when
referring to the
Midrash as a whole,
22
In the editions of the Mekilta the marks for these subdivisions have
still
been entirely obliterated. The manuscripts

of the D^pID into JTD?n.
show traces
will
of the subdivision
More about
this in the article dealing
with the
arrangement and the divisions of the Mekilta which

issue of this
appear
in a
subsequent
Review.
194
for
it

consists
of a
group of
tractates. 23
Occasionally,
however, when referring to one of the tractates of our
Midrash from which they quoted a saying, and not to the

Midrash
in its entirety,
is
they would use the singular form.

suffix of the
This singular form
sometimes used with the

a4
third person masculine as n*n^3D3.
This
is
not shortened
p.
from
bwQW
""111
rvn^33 as Friedmann
(I.e.,
xxxiii)
assumes.
23
The
suffix points to the subject
under discussion
and not
The
correct pronunciation of the
name
is
NflT'Dip Mekilata
Nnb'OD
Mekilta.
to
Not only do the
plural
forms p]"6*3,
TvÊ,
and
iJlb^D point
such a pronunciation, but
we
have direct evidence from
mediaeval authorities for the plural form.
Narboni mentions our Midrash

form (see Brull, Jahrbiicher, IV,
under the name of WlX?' 2E>

,
in the plural
p. 164).
The doubt
raised
by Ginzberg
{Orient. Liter., I.e.)
on the ground
that in Midrash Tehillim 36 (Buber, p. 252) the singular form 'Ql
THM
*KITP
*1VD^ occurs, can easily be removed. The reference there is to one collection of R. Simon b. Johai, hence the singular is used. But the
name
of our Midrash
it
was given
is
to
it
because
it
consists of
many
collections
or tractates, hence
to be
pronounced
in the plural form.
In a letter
Ginzberg
gives the
calls
my
attention to the fact that Azobi in bis P]D3 TT\V?
^ so
name
of our
Midrash in
to
the
16.
plural
1,
form.
a)
The expression
does not prove
mJD
Wlb'ODn (Lekah Tob
Exodus
Buber 52
anything against the plural form of the name,

the one particular tractate of the Mekilta
for the reference there is to
where the quoted saying occurs.

TV\J?n,
it
The expression Nn^3n 1D1NB> HO

probably shortened from
(in
K^pn P^SH
5N"IT "ti),
is
Kn^Ôil bvi
in
1DWP
HD, or
should read
to
Nrv^DDl
quotation,
"IDINfc?
HE
as
the
same paragraph, referring
the
It
same
cannot
Or Zarua
actually uses the expression

at
Nfv'OES "V2K1.
early time the
in the
be denied, however, that already
a very
name was
at the
erroneously pronounced in the singular.

of the Mekilta the
editions
Thus
colophon
end
name
is
evidently used in the singular form.

the words
In the
the
colophon
it
begins with
the manuscripts
all
begins with the words
SHP^D ]*l?Dn, and in NDPÊ p^D or H713 NH^SE pvD,

shows
that the3" read
of them using the singular form of the verb, which
This may have been originally due to The mistake was then accepted by many so that a mistake by the copyists. it became customary to pronounce the name in the singular form, Mekilta.
the
name Mekilta
in the singular.
24
Thus frequently
in
y'DD, but
also found in
D^PDn
"12D.

or the saying quoted, and rvrpôa
LAUTERIiAf
'
II
195
means
in
the respective
in
tractate', i.e. in that Tractate of the
Midrash
which the
subject in question
is
discussed or the quoted saying found.-"'

is
In the majority of instances, however, reference
made
to
the Midrash as a whole, and the plural form of the description

xr6\DD or pn^DD 'the Tractates'
is
used.
In the course of
time this description was so frequently used as to cause

the real
name name
of our Midrash, Sifre, to
fall
into disuse.
The
and
description
NnTOE then became the

of our Midrash.
specific designation
the sole
As
i.e.
regards the second part of the

1
name
of our Midrash,
to say that
btiVW
WT,
it
certainly does not
mean
R. Ishmael was the author of our Midrash.
This additional
begins with the
c).
name was
words
given to our Midrash because

H
it
^KtfDB*
21 (see Zunz,
op. cit., p. 51,
note
its
Just as
its
the Mekilta of R.
Simon
b.
Johai receives
name from
opening words
""IE1N
'KITP
p
6),
JiyDSP *31
(see
Hoffmann, Zur
Einleitung in die Mechilta de-Rabbi Simon ben Jochai,

Frankfurt
a.
M., 1906,
p.
in
the
same way the work

(Or Zarua,
I,
rrbyn was called
S>KJ?DB
an
wvnn
called
p.
40)
because
it
begins with the words tajw* '31 10K, and the

is
Midrash Rabbah to Genesis
by some
authorities,
25
,
In a different
manner does R. Menaliem

it.
b.
Salomo
(first
half of the
twelfth century) distinguish between the entire
work
of the Mekilta
and
the individual tractates which compose
In his Midrash
Sechel Tob
(ed. Buber, Berlin, 1900) he mentions our Mekilta

(to
by the name of
ND^TD
be pronounced in the plural Mekilata).
However, when
referring to one
tractate of the Mekilta,
and not
to the collection as a whole,

p.
he simply uses
,l
the term NDDDTO.
Thus on
1i"6
154
he uses the expressions

to the
J'm3
NTDDm
and
pn3D3
CnSDl, referring
as the
Tractate of the Mekilta,
where the passages are found.

term xn?'OE>
the term
This further proves that the meaning of the
when used
name
for our
Midrash
is
identical
with
STDDD.
196
"O-n

IVBWD,
because
it
ilWSffl]
begins
with
20
the
words
nns nan
26
rwin
an (see
Zunz,
I
op. cit., p. 184).
For the sake of completeness
wish
to call attention
to a peculiar
designation applied to our Midrash, or to parts thereof, by some mediaeval

authors.
In
DUTn
PID^ Wirb ppÔ rPDft 6WTB,

is
ed.
H. P. Chajes,
Berlin, 1909, p. 31, our Midrash
referred to as fcOJDl
Wl^SlDa.
two terms
The
Karaite Judah Hadasi in his "1313 H 7)DW, p. 36 a refers to our Midrash
under the name of

and
fcOJD*7,
W^DT
/.
WI.S^D.
and
The meaning
identical,
in
of these
W^Dl
is
which are probably

c,
has
not
been
satisfactorily
explained, see Chajes,
his
Introduction, p. xxii.
Chajes
inclined to think that in both instances the Mekilta de-Rabbi
Simon
b. Johai,
and not our Mekilta,

In the
is
referred to.
described as i"Q1 TY\DW
Munich Manuscript (codex Hebr. 117) the Mekilta is erroneously n?X. Thus the copyist has written in the beginning
the following words
H31 r\)VW rb*2 D"D&0 ^TinN nnBa
v6* DBD.
This
is
due merely
to
a mistake on the part of the copyist, a mistake which
The codex contains the Mekilta and the Midrash Wayikra Rabbah and other Midrashim. These, in all likelihood, had been the contents of the original from which this codex was copied. The copyist, noticing that the Midrash Wayikra Rabbah was preceded by a Midrash to Exodus, erroneously took the latter to be the Midrash Exodus Rabbah.
can easily be explained.
ISAIAH
14.
12
By
There inp p W>\i
meaning
is is
S.
A. HlRSCH, London, England.
a consensus of opinion that the expression
in Isaiah 14. 12
denotes the morning
star.
This
attached to the word by the older versions.

renders
it
TheTargum
is
KTO3, the term
by which
that planet
usually designated.
The
old commentators accepted
that rendering, which holds the field to the present day.
There can be no doubt that

bbn 'to light, to sparkle'.
in
It
bh^n
here
is
derived from
in the
has that meaning
Kal
5>
Job
29. 3, nPNI *bv VIJ livia
when
his
lamp shined above
my
it
head, and in the Hiphil in Isaiah 13. 10, mis*
&T
$//#//
not give their light Job 31. 26, ^rp

\
11N //^ sun
when
shines, ibid. 11. 10, Tin
br\r\
flasli forth light.

is
The metaphor
applied to a king,
others,
feet.
in
our passage
all
meant
to describe a
is
heavenly body, that outshines
others,
and
therefore
all
who dominates over and subjugates an overlord who has brought the whole world to
is,
his
It
therefore, thought that
it is
a most apt figure

star,
to
compare such a conqueror with that

morning when
invisible.
all
which
is
still
brilliant in the
other stars have

is
lost their
light
and become
This
further thought to be
'the son
clinched by the apposition
in^ p
Is
of the dawn,
the son of the morning'.

retains
its
not Venus the star which
brilliancy after all others
have been darkened

bb*r\
For
all that,
the translation of
197
by Venus has
'
'
its
[gfl

In the
first
place, that star does not eclipse,
but only outlives the others fo r a short time
then metaphorically designate the

the nations', and
how can it conqueror who had laid

;
'
now
has fallen from heaven, and
been brought down to the ground'?

tyrant of our chapter
'
Secondly, the cruel
had made the earth tremble, shaken

its
kingdoms, made the world as a wilderness, overthrown

ics,
.
and had not loosed the prisoners to their homes'

;
16. 17)
who
in
ambition
'
had said
in his
heart, I will ascend unto heaven, I will exalt
my
throne
above the
of thee:
:
>f
ill
God
be
like
will rise
.st
above the heights
High'.
gentle brilliancy,
How
can the
star,
with
its soft,
be the emblem
oppressor 2
ambit;
he:.
:
an overbearing and overpowering

be a very feeble likeness of such
[t
;r
has that star any of the ruling powers
in
as to
symbolize these aspirations. The morning

love and magic, but
star has been aptly connected with
would be
useless as a poetical comparison with a king
who
intended to become the monarch of the whole world.

It is
the term ~~-'
'I
the son of the morning

is
which
misleading here.
There
only one heavenly body
which can serve as an emblem of the aspirations of an

overlord of the
and
that
is
the sun.
The sun
is
the child of the dawn, born after the darkness of the night
out of
its
;
beautiful appearance.
Thence he ascends the

stars of
is
heaven
rises
he exalts his throne above the

;
God
he
above the heights of the clouds
he
like the
Most
Great
High, being worshipped as such by

kings have taken the sun
called himself
-
many
nations.
as their device.
;
Louis
XIV
star
'.
le
Rot Soleil
the flatterers
'
who surrounded
court would never have called
him the morning
ISAIAH
14.
12
HIRSCH
199
We
have the contemporary example of striving to have
a place in the sun.

flying
in
The arms
of the
of Prussia represent an eagle
the
face
sun,
and bearing the legend
ncc soli cedit, 'he yields not his place to the sun*.
Had
William of Hohenzollern come triumphantly out of the

latest conflict, the host of admirers
who would have
exalted
his
name w ould
r
not have compared him with the morning
star.
The sun is used as an emblem in the coat of arms of many States and dominions, and it would be quite superfluous to point
them
out.
is
In the above-mentioned passage
of Isaiah, the root
77%\
applied to the stars, the sun, and

it
the
moon;
in
Job
31.
it
26
is
used directly of the sun;

T
whilst in
Job 41. 10
occurs in parallelism w ith HT0
*fiP&9
the eyelids of the morning.

I
do not hesitate to suggest that
Wp
born
bb^n
in
our
passage denotes the illuminating
star,
out of the
dawn the
sun.
THE RABBINATE OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON, from 1756-1842.

By
C.
Duschinsky, London.
APPENDIX
VI
Translation of Letters I-IX.

Letter
I.
Fol.
a.
London, 21 Adar,
^^6
(1776).
Peace
his wife
to
my
brother the Dayyan, &c., R. Meir, and to
and daughter.
Amen
In order to keep the promise

of eight
made you
(certain)
I
in
my
letter
days ago, namely, that

1G9f
should answer you at

Rabbinate,
al-
length with reference to that
though your words are very veiled
gather that you have
recommendations to that place from important people.
You have
in
fit
not told
me who
of
it
they
are,
but
suppose you
For, indeed,
would not make so much
without reason.
Hamburg
for that
there are
many
scholars to be found
who
are
high position, and the Copenhagen congregation

Nevertheless, you are
always gravitates towards Hamburg.

right.
'
Do
if
not despise anything' as our sages say, 170 and
especially
you have anything

I
to rely
upon to build (your
hopes) on that ground.

I,
have therefore considered how
likewise, could be of help to
you
in the matter,
but see,
have only found one

(
man
here
who has
a direct correis
spondent to Ch.
i69f
Copenhagen), and that

in
a certain rich
by me, where
to
The words added

translation
brackets are supplemented

text
literal
of the
Hebrew
would be
difficult
understand
otherwise.
170
Mishna Abot IV,
3.
201
202

This
man, the Parnas of the Hamburg Synagogue here.

is
the very
the
to
man who in those days brought Hamburg Synagogue here, 171 and he is
like
the Rabbi of
still
attached
him
a brother.
dare not disclose to this
man
much as a hair's breadth, for the family of H. Z. (Haham Zevi) will soon find one of their relations whom they will want to recommend there, and I must keep the
even as
whole matter
South,
to
172
secret.
Here
it
is
like
in
the land of the
and nobody knows unto

I
this day,
except for those
whom
at that
had communicated
is
it
as a great secret, that the

I
Rabbinate of Ch.
it
vacant.
for
However,
could not leave
and do nothing
you
and
have on Friday
letter,
last written
by post
will
to R,
Meir Hanover a
copy of
lives
which you
find
on the attached page.
There
here also a certain R. Moses Walich,

his
wife's
who has
written to
stepmother, the widow of the late R. David

is
Hanover, who
a native of Copenhagen.
Also R. Zalman
?)
Hanover, the son-in-law of
my
cousin R. G. (Gershon
sister,
Kief (Cleve), whose

quently)
surely
first
wife
was her
(and conse-
likewise a native of Ch. (help
he,
if
is
R. Zalman, will
stand by you
will
you)
your brother-in-law
R. M.(eir) Kief
could,
I
ask him.
Influential
Hamburg
like a
people
think,
do much, as Hamburg
Probably you
will
suburb of
Copenhagen.
people
get best help through
who
.have correspondents from there to here.
As
far as I personally
I
am
concerned
I
have nobody to
whom
I
could write direct, unless

I
do
it
through those rich men

these,
whom
171
have already mentioned, and to inform

responsible for his election.
T
Was
Hamburg S3 nagogue = Hambro

'
Syn.
172
In Palestine they called far-off countries the

30.
land of the South
'
cf. Isa.
it
6 and 7; Dan. chap. 11, where Eg}'pt is termed 'the south'; also means a dry land'; cp. Talm. B. Temurah 16 a.
'

fear,
DUSCHINSKY
it
203
would even be harmful, instead of helping the matter.

does not
cousin
Others would not move (do anything) because

concern
me
personally.
After consultation with

[to
my
the Parnas
Aaron Goldschmid, he agreed
my suggestion]
tells
and
is
writing
by
to-day's post to his sister's son Jacob,

in
son of Mendele Kik
Hamburg.
is
He
(Goldschmid)
me
that this
nephew
of his
under obligations to him,

in
being his correspondent unto this day, and
former times
had great benefits from him.
R. Aaron told
me
should
make
it
a concept of what he should write, and he will copy

for
word
word.
And
so
did,
and a copy of
tells
it
is
annexed
that his
to
to this
letter.
is
R. Aaron
me
furthermore
quite
certain
nephew
a great merchant, and

in
have correspondents
Copenhagen.
You need
not
think that the words of R. A. will only be listened to like

c
wise words of a poor

I,
man \ 173
wish that we both, you
and
had as much
at
all.
as
he has, we would not be obliged

a matter of fact he
is in
to be
Rabbis
As
the
same
you
honourable position as before.

of doing on your behalf, and
This
is
all
could think
Still
God must
in
help.
have acted properly

it
in
writing to me.
In these matters
the days
is,
as I
had occasion to experience
when
endeavoured to obtain the Rabbinate here, as the saying

'
goes,
small stone
is
also necessary to build a wall

is
'
the chief thing, however,

wall
[fol.
is built.
1
the foundation on which the

I
Your
suggestion that
should write to the
b]
congregation direct,
you
cannot have
meant
seriously,
and does not appeal to me.
few years ago
there was a single
young man from Ch.
here, belonging to
one of the rich families, and he came several times to

house.
I
my
thought (now) to renew an old acquaintance,

173
Cp. Eccles
9. 9.
204

by now he would be married, and intended
in
as probably
writing
matter.
him whether he could do me a favour

In the course of the letter
I
this
might have mentioned
that
it is
not usual to write to the whole congregation, but
he was at liberty to show

I
my
letter to the congregation.

in
would have had an opportunity
any case
However,
to praise
after
you
at length before the
community.
of
making
heard
inquiries
among
the
members
my
congregation from the

I
people where he used to live while staying here,

that
all his
people had died after having lost their fortune,
and they are now forgotten.

to the ground.
So
I
this
plan has also fallen

far as
In
Amsterdam
regards
letters go, just as
am a stranger as Hamburg and Ch., and

I
as for
writing through an intermediary

that
it
have already said above

useful,
would be more harmful than

I
so there
is
nothing more to add about what

Merciful,
I
have done.
all
God, the
may
grant us well being, and with

life
good wishes
ac174
conclude.
Peace and
may you have from God

Mose the
Your
cording to the wish of your brother, Tebele C'z
Scruff.
My
you
son the Bahur (single man)
Priest sends
his regards,
he also has done something

letters.
in the
matter
by copying the enclosed

help for good
sister-in-law, the
virgin Mindle, also sends greetings,
and would
also like to
(=
to achieve a
good
result in the matter).

tell
To
if
our venerable father you

it
may
of the prospect
you think
advisable to
174
tell
him of
this letter.
C'z
= y"D,
a Cohanite.

Letter
II.
DUSCIIINSKY
205
Fol. 2 a.
Copy
(of the letter sent) to
Rabbi M. Hanover.
17 Adar, 5536.
Ever since
plating
came
to this country
have been contemdear relative, the
how
time
could return to you,
my
good
services
I
you have done
me by
your recommendation
at the
(in
I
endeavoured to obtain the Rabbinate here

I
London), but
I
never found occasion for a revanche.
wish
would
find
it
some means
(to
show you
my
for
thanks)
in
whatever way
I
may
the
be.
have now, however, occasion to ask you

similar
to
another
favour
one
mentioned.
is
have
heard
the Rabbinate of
Copenhagen
vacant, and
my
brother,
the efficient
to that
Dayyan R. Meir SchifT of Frankfort, aspires As to his being worthy of the position, position.
I,
although
it is
as his brother,
am
disqualified to bear witness,

tell
beyond question, any one can
you that he has
acquired fame as a sound scholar in the religious codes
and
casuistics.
know
that you,
my
friend,
have great
influence in the said
community, your words are of weight
with the honoured
men
of that
town, and
ask you
therefore, if I have found favour in

itself also
your eyes and the idea

kindly recommend
will
appeals to you, that you
may
my
you
brother.
for
it
Apart from the certainty that you
earn
reward
from Heaven and thanks from the people,
will also oblige

I
me
personally.
for troubling
Although
cannot excuse myself sufficiently
you with
this, it
seems to
me
a sign, as you
my
friend with
God's help have been of great assistance to
me
in
the
appointment as Rabbi here, and through that

was elected
in
my
brother
my place
as
Dayyan
in
Frankfort
perchance
206
is

the will of the
it
Almighty that you should be His

help him
messenger
in this affair likewise, to
(my
I
brother)
will
obtain the safe harbour of that Rabbinate.

trouble you
refuse to
not
any
further,
but in conclusion ask you not to

request, but to use your great
I shall in
if
comply with
you
my
influence (as far as
can).
return be always
ready to do you any service

I
occasion arises, and, as
have already
said, I
am
already in your debt for the great

all
service
you have done to me personally, and with

I shall
my
power
try to serve
you
to
your best
interest.
Letter III.
Copy
of the letter of the Parnas
Aaron Goldschmidt
in
to
his sister's son, the
honoured R. Jacob Kik
Hamburg.
London.
dear nephew.
21 Adar, 5536.
...
I
I
have also a favour to ask of you,
my
have heard, namely, that the community of Copenhagen
intends to elect a Rabbi.

the
There
is
in
Frankfort a Rabbi,
Dayyan R. Meir
Schiff, brother of the
Rabbi
of our
congregation,
is
my
cousin Rabbi Tevele SchifT.
That Rabbi
looking out for such a post, and has already

influential
many
indeed
recommendations from
people.
He
is
worthy of the position

at
as he
is
a great Talmudic scholar,
home
in that vast literature
and of great
intellect,
and
has also other great qualities.

a (Chief) Rabbi hitherto, he
is
Although he has not been
Dayyan
in Frankfurt,
and
many
congregations have elected
Dayyanim
in
of Frankfort
as their Rabbis, as
we
did here, for our Rabbi,
my
cousin
R. Tevele, was likewise only Dayyan

still
Frankfort, and
we
have, thank
well in selecting
God as is known him, may God prolong
far
and wide
days!
done
To
tell
his

you the
truth, in those
I
DUSCHINSKY
207
days everything was done through
(by) me, because

late uncle
had received a recommendation from our

I
R. Johanan and, thank God,

in the
succeeded, as
I
it
is
known here
should
whole community that practically

carrying through his election.
alone
was instrumental
I
in
now
like to
do a similar
Aleir
service to his brother,
my
cousin the
Dayyan R.
in
C'z, in
helping him to
I
obtain
the
Rabbinate
the said community.

city,
have,
however, no correspondent at present in that
but you,
my
Ch.,
dear nephew, have very likely
many good
I
friends in
and
would
like
you to do the same that

good
have done
and take an
tions there.
interest in the
I
matter by sending recommendaif
can assure you that,
results are
it,
achieved,
I shall
you
will
only derive great honour from

obliged to you.
will also
and
be very
much
Naturally
my
cousin,
our revered Rabbi,
be glad and ready to serve

;
you
in
return for this favour
please do therefore your
utmost, dear nephew, by direct recommendations to Ch.

as well as
through those of your friends.

I shall
You
will
give
me
great pleasure and
be pleased to do the same
for you.
Letter IV.
Fol.
1 a.
London.
Peace to
Friday,
New Moon
of
Ijjar,
5540.
my
brother the eminent
Dayyan Rabbi Meir

all
C'z and to his wife,
my
dear sister-in-law, and to
who
belong to them
Your
next page
letter of
I
Nisan the
cSth
duly received, and on the

in
have answered you
the halakic matter.
It
was not
my
I
intention to criticize you, but only to
show
p
you that
have perused your words from beginning to
VOL. XI.
208

it
end, and derived great pleasure from

in
on the
last festival
seeing proofs of your clear mind and deep thoughts.

tell
To
you the
truth, in
short notes like these
we can
continue to write to one another, but in more extensive
and deeper subjects

I
am
like
'
in
the land of the south \ 175
have no colleagues nor pupils to study with, and even no
one to
whom
to.
can talk on these matters when you write
me
I
anything,
and cannot go into
it
as
thoroughly as
I
ought
Sometimes
it
occurs the other way, that

'
enlarge at length upon a nice

tion) or a halakic point,
it
Derush
'
(homiletic explanait
and then
I find
difficult to
copy
this
all.
have found nobody to help

If therefore
me
even
in
respect.
you
or
I will find
some time
or other
new
point of interest
(in
our studies) we shall not deny

it
ourselves the pleasure of communicating

in brevity,
to one another
and
for the present
we
shall not discontinue to
deal from time to time with the matter of the
Gabbaim, 176
must not
',
and
put
settle this
it
by frequent correspondence.
say,
'
We
said
off
and
shall learn
when
have the time

'
although
of
we
to
find that
even our
Amoraim
We
beg
you not
is
come
to us at a certain time
', 177
and although
still
there
is
a difference between their case and ours,
there
a slight resemblance.
Now
is
to
answer your
I
letter point
by
point.
Our account
settled.
was surprised that you made an alteration

16
a.
175
176
Cp.
Temurah
Referring to R. Meir Schiff's dispute with Meir Rothschild.
See
above, and Appendix VII.

177
Cp. Berakot 35b.
Raba
said to the other scholars,
'Do not appear

not be occupied
before
me
in the
days of Nisan and Tishri, so that you

for a living during the
may
with your search
whole year'.
R. Tevele asks his
brother to settle his disputeâs soon as possible, in order not to have to

trouble about
it
later,
and compares
it
to this
Talmudic saying.

in
DUSCHINSKY
to
209
my
order and gave 18
}*"2
= Groschen)
my
the
brother-
in-law
I
Hayyim and deducted them from

If
amount
sent for the widow.
even what a poor
man
left
over belongs to the same poor

to him, the
man and must be
given
more so he ought not
to be deprived of that
which has specially been sent to him, and by right you

ought to refund the money from your own.
however, pity on you, and
18 Groschen to the widow.
I
have,
give
herewith order you
to
Apart from the 18 Gr. you

brother-in-law on
have already given to

please give
my
my
account,
him
fl.
5 from me, and thus you will have laid

will
out
fl.
6.
12.
The cheque from Vienna

by now.
probably have
reached you
As
regards
is
the
Rabbi of the
Hamburger
to
(congregation),
all
at
an end.
From hour
to give
hour he begged the community to allow him to remain
nevertheless they insist
upon what they decided,
him 50 yearly
to
for
life.
He
is
leaving next week, and
your astonishment
still
holds good,
why
for
I
it,
should have
apart
do everything without being paid
from
presents (nunc) on Purim and
Rosh-Hashana from those
who were
in
the habit of remembering
sions (I have no income from the
me on those occaHambro Synagogue).
As
to weddings,
it
is
now
usual with them, in accordance
with an order from their Board of Management, that the

parents of the bridal couple have the choice, and can take
either
flatter
me
or their Hazan.
As
the
Hazanim wroncrlv
whole of
their congregants, I did
not, during the
last year,
perform more than one wedding ceremony, and

of the marriage of the daughter
that
was on the occasion
of R.
to
Leb Tosca
(NpiriD),
who
is
a friend and like a brother
me, a learned, respected, and very rich man, inquire

This R. Leb and
about him of R. Moses Munk.
many
v 2
2IO
others of the respected
men
(of the
Hambro Synagogue)
it is still
think that in time the right to perform wedding ceremonies

will fall
exclusively to me, but at present
far
from
that.
It
may
be that
in
time some newcomers will also
send
me
n""i),
presents at the periods mentioned (namely Dnis
and
but a separate salary from that congregation

It
is
not to be exoected.
might be that
my community
200
will
will
ask the Hamburger congregation for a contribution towards

the salary they give me, namely, the a year, and
according to
my
opinion they will be able to tear out of
them 50, but of that not one penny

pocket, but even with that
I
go into
my
have
am
satisfied because, as I
I
already written you, the salary of ^"200
have from the
congregation
is
insecure,
and
at
every meeting of the
Kahal they spoke about reducing the salary of the Rav

and of other
officials
of the congregation, on account of
the increase in the expenses and reduction of the income.
In short, were
still
to write
you many sheets
full,
you would
not understand the

is
way
of this town.
You imagine
Far from
it
it
London
you
a Kehilla (community).
No
Justly as you write, there are

for
many
things
for),
is
difficult
I
to
understand
(find
answers
&c.
in
have
very
understood your hint, and could explain

simple manner to any one
all
who knows
the
way
of this
it
town and about me

impossible to do
oath),
it
(the nature of
in
my
position), but
is
writing.
swear (assure you on

I
So may
see
plenty of joy, that
long to see
you
to
I
in
joy and happiness here at

tell
my
that
house, to speak
is
you personally and
you
all
in
my
heart.
did not unintentionally write you to ask Moses

I
Munk
said
about R. Leb (Toska).
have spoken
at
length with
him on the
last
Yomtof
of this matter,
when the

(R. Leb)
DUSCHINSKY
who
is,
211
was
at
my
house, and
did so in the presence

y"2,
like
of
my
son,
the Bahur R.
this,
178
Moses
but
me,
anxious to achieve
(utterly refused),
like
he
refused
point blank
and the
refusal of
an old and wise man

is
him means building up, not destruction (=

I will,
meant
well).
D.V., explain to you another time the partus,
of builder
and housebreaker that were played between

this for the present.
b.
I
and enough of
the young
have spoken with

told
man Moses
Leb Zunz, and he
me he
could not imagine that his stepmother and her children,

his
is
brothers, were not satisfied with the contribution he
sending them with the help of his brother in America.

received what he sent
if his
179
They probably have

last Passover.
in
them
is
for the
Nevertheless,
brother
who
studying
of his
Pressburg has any particular
request to
make
it
brothers he should write at length
and enclose
will
with
the
your
letter.
The young man Moses

I
then pay
me
amount
is
(he intends sending to his brother)
when
the letter
delivered to his hand.

is,
could,
if
knew what
the
request
recommend
reference to
j*"d,
the (fulfilment of) same, please God.
With
what you wrote about business
for
my
son Moses
for
that he should
become commissionnaire
rich
(agent)
the
great merchants (famous
men) the
brothers, sons of R.
M.
it
S.
(Michael Speyer?) and their

business to
partner,
have made
my
make
I
inquiries in
easily refuse
the matter, especially as you often wrote that

all
such proposals.
spoke of
it
to R. Jacob Rotterdam,
who does
a lot of commission business to your place, and
especially for the well-known partners R.

178
Leb Haas and

Hambro Synagogue
Obviously the election of R. Meir as Rabbi
to the
was
in contemplation.
179
Written lfc6p*B1KB.
212

J.
R.
Schuster, and
we came
to
the conclusion that

for
it
would be worth while to be an agent

goods, but not for woollen merchandise.
East Indian
does,
it is
He
it
true,
do business even
in these for the firm of
the sons of R.
Leb
pay,
Hanau and
(Frankfort)
his
brother-in-law,
but
does
not
because most of the goods which the merchants from there

buy,
in
they
order
direct
by
letter
from
the
manufacturers
this country.
What
a commissionnaire
for
sometimes sends there, he must have credit

because
all
(here)
the goods are sold on terms of credit for six
months
or
more
besides, there
is
the trouble of transit
from the country to here and from here (London) to there

(Frankfort),
and nothing to be profited by
it
except the
write about
are
commission he gets from there.

understanding (the business)
is
What you
folly.
The samples
sent from the country, the goods are ordered and
they
are sent according to the samples
some
one has told you
there a foolish thing that sometimes one might

a swindler!
If that
buy from
That might happen once

it
in
seventy years.
occurs
can only be sold to some one

find
who does
buyers
for
business with
Amsterdam, where he can
good and bad goods, but one could not send faulty goods
to an established business
reason
only
man there (Frankfort). For this some one who is used to exporting goods,
in
woollen or East Indian, could become a commission-agent

for
woollen
merchandise manufactured
England, he
like the said
must be well known here as commissionnaire\

R. J(acob) or other people
who
i
are used to
it.
Page
If the
b.
young man
Slisskind, son of Jacob Schloss, has

his
already
left,
do not frighten
family.
If,
however, he

is
still
DUSCHINSKY
210, j
there, tell
him
that
Leb Binga
(Bingen) wishes to
letter
be remembered to him, and would like to add to the
which he has by now received from him
dated
here on
the eve of the last days of Passover (20 Nisan)

a few days
it
that since
will put
is
spoken of again that Parliament
pressure (on Jewish travellers?) like last year, and he has
the choice whether he will

if
it
come here
or not.
In any case
he does make up his mind to come, he should see to

that in the passport he obtains from the government
authorities there, should be said

in
more than
if
is
usually said
a health-pass
is
(certificate),
and,
possible,
should be
travels
fail
added that he
thither as a
a Schutz-Jude from there
who
merchant to buy goods.

this
Please do not
to let
if
him have
message
in full if
will
he
is
still
there, but
he has already
left,
your silence
be better than words,
and God
If
I
may
bless his journey.

left,
he does intend to come here or has already

if
expect to receive the mantle through him, and

it)
not
last
(send
letter.
I
without delay according to the order
in
my
am
waiting to receive on behalf of some one here
from the Rabbi of the Province of Wurzburg the sum of
two hundred gulden or somewhat

I
less,
a legacy
left
to him.
have already sent to the Rabbi the receipt and
letter of
indemnity attested by me, and have at the same time

ordered that the
money should be
same
sent to
shall
you
for
me, and
if
that your acceptance of the

it
be regarded as
were already received by me,
if
you give a
I
receipt for
the amount handed over to you, D.V.

that
if
herewith ask you

it
such amount be offered to you, to accept
on
it
my
to
full
behalf and to give a receipt, and afterwards send
me by
assignment without a moment's delay, the
214
amount
matter.
do
not deduct the account which
we have with
one another.
Send me a separate
letter
expressly in this
I shall
get the postage refunded here.
Apart from
said,
this I will
only repeat what
have already
that
you should try
to settle the matter with the
Gabbaim without
house, so that
I
hesitation, as well as the letting of the

it
should get
off
my
mind, and that you
should be sure of what you get as reward for your trouble.
Otherwise there
is
no more (news), only
life
and peace
for
(may be granted
the same) from
to you) from the
Lord and (wishes

greets
me your
brother
Schiff.
who
you and
desires
your welfare.
Tebele y"2
My
son the Bahur Moses y"2 sends his regards, he was
very pleased with the few lines in your letter which you
addressed to him
particularly.
Your
sister-in-law,
the
maiden Mindel, likewise sends her regards.
Greetings to
our brother Moses, to our sisters and their children.

cording to your letter
I
cf.
Ac-
note the childish remark
(ww
NpWH
on
children's talk,
Sukkah, 56 b) of your daughter
Resche.
When
send her something with M. Siisskind
his return, she will then
have reason to say what she

it
said.
For the present

I
cannot think of what

letter
should
be (that
send
I
her).
The
from R. Moses Munk,
of last Purim,
received with thanks and send
him
regards.
Letter V.
London, 14
Elul, 5541.
He who
the book of
(&c.)
gives
life)
life
to the living
may
write and seal (in
for
life
my
beloved brother the
Dayyan
Mathe
them
to
Rabbi Meir the

their
Priest
and
his wife the lady

all
and
daughter Resche.
To
who belong
Peace

Your
letter
I
DUSCHINSKY
21 5
of the
21st
of last
month has reached

tell
me and
will
begin with words of the Torah (and

I
you) that you are right.

of finance.
also the
am
not well versed in the laws
Here the Tur Hoshen Mishpat and nearly

18
Yoreh Deah and Orah Hayyim

the questions
refer to
are negligible.
as
Most
I
of
the
Eben Haezer, 181

glance
it
wrote you long ago.

to
At
the
first
would have
seemed
me
that
you are
right in every way.
On
going
further into the matter I found other points, and
have
mind,
written you on the other page what occurred to

please read
it.
I
my
After Torah follows charity.
ask you to send on
my
account without delay
To
our uncle Rabbi Z. S. in Fuerth

to
11
00
Ten
self
your mother-in-law, a cheque sent by Bearer

.
for your.
25 00
:
To
our brother Moses eighteen florins

.
give
.
.
in
.
my name .18:00
.
To
the wife of the late Moses Trumm and the wife of Moses Platen, who wrote to me through the young man Z. Oppenheim to the former one R. Thaler and the latter one florin, together
30
To
I
Giessen for the order of R.

sent to
Abraham ben
.
J.
.
you eleven
for
florins
1 1
00
co
For yourself and
R.
Leb
the Levite
25
To my
on
brother-in-law
Hayyim
.
the Levite send

.
my
account
five florins
5 00
:
Total
97:30
180
Parts of the four Turim, a ritual Code by Jacob ben Assher dealing
dietary laws, and rules of prayer and festivals respectively.
of the
with
civil,
181
The part
Tur dealing with laws of marriage,
divorce. StC.
2l6
From
follows)
last
year the account
between us stands
(as
40 from the
bill of Moses Bloch and 85 from Oppenheimer according to your letter of M.
the 19th of
Tammuz
.43:36
netto
.
From
Jehiel
eleven
New
Cohen after deducting Thaler for your trouble
35 35
:
79:11
Out of this you have paid for me Assignment (cheque) to I. Altert (?)
In accordance with your letter of Iyyar the 27th to our sister Esther
28 45
:
11
co
00
On
To
Sivan the 19th to the order of Abraham of Giessen

. .
1 1
the
Gabbayim (Managers
of Poor-
box)
26:20
77:5
2:6
Out
of the 97
30
is
to be deducted according to your
letter of the
36th day of
:
Omer 2:6;
remains owing to
my
we
brother
fl.
95 24, and you will find enclosed an assignment,
please let
me know how much you

charity
obtain for
it
so that
can note one against the other.

After
comes
Divine
Service,
which
means
prayers and good wishes of David to our relative Isaac

Speier,
who
celebrated
the
marriage
of
his
daughter,
(congratulations) to
him and
I
to his brother
and son-in-
law
in
my
of
name.
have nothing further to add to
my
letter
the
22nd of Ab.
His assignment of eleven
shillings has not
been presented to
me
yet.
I
Referring to your reproaches about Rotterdam, already written you

that
I
have
have not seen any earnest

Proof of
it
(endeavour) on your part.
is
that
you have

not achieved any results there.
for
DUSCHINSKY
were
it
21?
not
Secondly,
the unfortunate occurrence with the

I
Rabbi
of
P*DN
(Amsterdam),
against them.
wrote you
already
who
can stand up
Thirdly, on account of the war between

this
Holland and
regularly.
I
?)
country,
just
the
post does
not
come
in
P*fl
had
heard that the Rabbi L. of
(Halberstadt
was not coming, when soon afterwards, by

I
the next post,

of
heard that they had elected the Rabbi

surely had an intention with this hurry,
Emden.
They
but enough of these excuses.

I
enclose assignment of eight pounds twelve shillings on
a certain Yomtof, son of

is
Nathan
of Livorno.
This (man)
(? 3D)
a correspondent of
Rabbi Leb the Levite

letter,
from
here.
He
sent
him a
saying he would be there at
the
fair,
so please inquire, he will easily be found
and pay
of the
without delay.
said R.
You may
also tell
him
in
the
name
Leb
that he wrote
him there
(to
Frankfort) under
his address.
Being a correspondent of R. Leb the Levite

invite
you could
speak
(to
him
to your house out of respect, and
him) well of R. Leb.

will also
One
fair,
of the
sons
of
R. Yomtof
be there at the
and
after the fair
proceed to here, please send

white cotton caps.
me
(with him) half a dozen
Not
striped with several colours but
simply white ones.
Also half a dozen handkerchiefs which

in
keep good colour
washing.
They must be washed and

(in
hemmed
there.
Do
not look for cheap ones but for good
quality, but not
much white
Send me
them) on account of the

the small book with
the
snuff-tobacco.
also
memorial sermon of the Rabbi of Prague about the Empress,

he will not refuse to bring them here to me.
Apart from
(so I
will
this I
have no news to-day, and as

be written and sealed
began
(in
close),
may you
the
2l8

life)
book of
our
for ever for
life,
you, your wife and daughter,

y"2
sister,
our brother
sisters, also
Moses
(the
priest),
and the
sons of our
the
your brothers-in-law.
These are
words
of
your
brother
small) Tevele the priest.

to
I
who sends greetings, (the From me and my son Moses

and
R.
Moses
Munk
letter
;
greetings
the
New
Year wishes.
on Nov.
15,
received his
lottery
I
begins
Falk can insure for him and

it
will
if
be the supervisor for
(= take
in
care of his
time.
interest)
he will send
me
the
money
I
With regard
(to hear)
to
Gumpil May's
affair
expect from you
what has been done
in the
Din
(religious case) of his wife
by the Rabbi
the matter.
or
by the
Beth-Din, also whether there was a decision on the part

of the
Government (Law-court)
in
(Handwriting of Mindel Sinzheim)

I
send
many greetings and

Year according
wish the dear family likewise

to their
happy
New
own
wishes.
From
me, your sister-in-law and

late
sister
Mindel, daughter of the
Zalman Sinzheim
the Levite.
Page
(Postscript
of the
letter.
by R.
Tevele.)
to the white caps, these
With regard
kerchiefs
and the hand-
must be washed there on account of the duty

Also do not forget
in
payable here.
your answer words
of thanks for Rabbi L. (Leb) the Levite and his wife and
sons,
assuring
them of your
best wishes.
Leb, son of
R. S. (Samuel), Pressburger of Vienna, has become engaged

to the daughter of
my
relative
R. Aaron
line has
tr":
(Goldschmid)
from here.
able
(Here one written

If
been made unread-
by
penstrokes.)
you, in your answer to
me
will
DUSCHINSKV
2ig
send him greetings and Masoltow (congratulations) you
may do
so.
Letter VI.
London, 14
He, who
lives
Elul,
,5.541
for ever
and remains
life
for eternity,
He
may
write and seal for ever for
my
dear uncle the
efficient
Rabbi Meir
y"D
and
to
his wife
and daughter, Amen.
May
to all
who belong
him be Peace
and payment have come, when
The days we pay

voice to
of reckoning
with our lips instead of with offerings, raise our
God
for
that
He may
answer us on the day of grace

I
and help us on the day of salvation, and

to
offer
my
prayers
God
him (you) and
his
house that
He may
impress
on their heads the sign of

righteousness, lead
life
and bring to
(life's)
light their
them on paths of
waters, and
we may
see in her beauty Zion the
town of our testimony,
the splendid place where wolf and lamb will graze together
and not do
reprimander
evil
in
any more, where they

the gate and the
will
welcome the
speaker of truth and
abhor the rebuke of the foolish man, and the one and only
Shepherd
spirit will
will
guard them, a righteous heart and new
the
Almighty give
to
all
who
will
revolted against
Him, sinned and forsook Him,

more
either to right or
us,
left,
so that they will not err
any
but
He
make
us firm and
strengthen
I
so
may
it
be God's
will,
Amen.
cannot refrain to inform you of the great honour we

in these
had
days
(follows a private family incident).
What happened
with
R.
Isaac
the
Hazan
have
already written you at length, that they have taken his
crown from him and he may not stand any more

holy place.
in
his
is
Now, however,
that
the
Atonement day
220
coming, many stand up to say a good word for him to

bring him
back to
his
old
position,
saying the wrong

("n)
he did was done on account of a

led
man
Hayyim, who
him
is
astray,
and thus
many
plead in his favour.
And
as
usually the
way
in
the Kehillot
(=
congregations)
they took to the old doings (= ways) of their fathers, and
what the one
likes the other dislikes, this

else,
is
one says
this
this,
the other something

that.
and some say neither

still
nor
As
it is
R. Isaac
in prison
and cannot move
about
like a free
man, because he was made bankrupt, and
according to the law of the land must have the majority

of his creditors (namely, to consent to his liberation)
whom
he
It
will scarcely bring

is
under one hat
(to
agree to that).
not an honour for the

these
are
congregation,
in
but outcasts
like
not
to
It
be
is
found
any other town

in
and
it is all
in vain.
only that leaven

it
the
dough
which
hinders
everything,
is
if
that
man who always
creates strife
and cannot sleep
he has not done some
harm.
given
large
this
But God helps the persecuted, and the advice was
by the congregation, sheet and write what
that
is
R. Isaac should take a
called a Memorial,
and bring
In this
document
as soon as possible to the judges.
memorial they wrote that the congregation has reserved

his position for him,
and that he was
really being punished
on account of R. H.
Now
and by
the
time was pressing, he
cannot help himself, and without him (the judge) nobody can raise hand or
foot,
his
word only they can come
and go. therefore he implores him that the mouth that has
imprisoned
is
may
liberate
again, &c.
So
far,
his
answer
still
expected, and on his answer and wisdom the comrelies.
munity
God.
We
shall see
what he
will
answer, please

I
DUSCHINSKY
221
will
now
close with
what
began.
help to the righteous and be a shield for

in purity.
God may send those who walk

life
May He
for ever
raise
our
lot
and may
and peace
come So
to
you from God the living Master of the worlds.

your nephew Moses, son of the great
will
pray
Gaon
R. Tevelc Schiff.
To
all
our family greetings and
New
Year wishes, especially

guard them, also
to
my aunts
I.
and
their children,
I
may God
my
uncle Moses.
also send
regards to your brothers-in-law L. and
the Levites,
times,
may
they likewise be blessed by
God thousand
Amen.
Letter VII
(p.
a).
London, 22 Adar, 5542.
To my
I
brother the
Dayyan R.
Meir, &c.
have duly received your
letter
of
:
Adar
6,
and
have
to repeat
It is
what
have already said
Leave
I
off with this
impossible for
me
to help you,
have enough to do
to keep myself.
far,
My
income
at present has diminished so
that with difficulty only can

it
and
is
getting less every day.

I
make both ends meet, Were it not for the little

I
(income)
I
receive
in
interest
from
Government Loan
for other
could not exist, as the expenses increase on account of

the taxes are great
is
the war,
causes.
and heavy, and
My salary of 200
I
not being paid

it
me
punctually,
and every moment

It
is
have to expect that

to think, that
I
will
be reduced.
not, as
you seem
am
not on good
terms with them, on the contrary,

leaders as
for
have
many
of the
my
at
friends,
my
welfare.
surprised
you,
who appreciate me and are anxious The gist of the matter is, and I am how do you imagine to be able to
understand a place which neither you nor your forefathers
222
knew.
As
little
as
anybody
in
another land understands

of the
this war, the
ways of the Parliament and the powers

what the papers
will
will
king here
even
write there
now
about peace with America
as
Who
little
any one under-
stand the ways of the Kehilla and
anything about
my
and
income and expenditure.

he who does not
likes
may
I
believe
still
it,
may
in
forbear,
and
if
there
remains
will
some apprehension
be the case,
I
your heart, which

:
hope
not
tell
you
Far be
it
from you to
sin in this
way, and enough of
this.
I
In the matter which concerns myself
must write you

I
something remarkable.
a
letter
About
month ago
and
his
received
from the Rabbi of Prague
Beth-Din
concerning some business (religious matter), and

the (signatures of) the
among
he had
Dayyanim
found the signature
of R. Levi Fanto, and gathered therefrom that
not gone to Wiirzburg, and

to the Parnas
wrote on the 17th of Shebat

relative
Moses Rofe, an acquaintance and
of mine, who, however, had
become
(a
little)
estranged
from
to
let
me.
The
chief point of
as
my
there,
letter
was a request
Rabbis elected
me know,
none of the three
by
for
his congregation
this
had gone
whether the reason
was that the income from the Rabbinate had

worse
I
become
years.
of
late
than
it
used
to
be
tell
in
former
all
also wrote
I
him that
if
he would
me
the
circumstances
attention
to
would write him
at length
and draw his

to
some one who was
willing
accept
the
Rabbinate, and whose appointment would bring honour

to his congregation.
I
made an
allusion to myself,
and
the contents as well as the form of the letter were written

in
very pleasing style and language, and
hoped
to receive
a favourable reply.
On
the Sunday, the 26th of Shebat,
DUSCHINSKY
223
left
however, came the news that the packet-boat which
here with the mail of the 17th of Shebat had been attacked
and captured by the enemy, and the

into the sea.
I
letters
were thrown
intention of
then said to myself
without
losing an opportunity
that
in
it
may
be a sign (from God)
that the letter
was
lost,
and did not write again, but now

which,
when your
said
letter
came,
among
other news, you

still
wrote that the Rabbinate of Wiirzburg was

I
vacant,
again
that
I
it
might be a sign
full
in
the
opposite
(to let
direction,
and
expect from you a
answer
me
know) what you think and your advice without keeping

back anything.
With Almighty
rests
the knowledge of
what
is
good
for
is
me and my
son,
for
body and
soul,
everything else
(think
it
only the commentary, go and study
over).
If
you approve of the idea
herewith give
you permission
to
do with God's help the work of man,

let
according to your power, and

I
me know.
can easily answer your inquiry about the late David
Fridland.
Many
years ago,
182
when the Gaon Rabbi G(ershon)
Chief Rabbi of Moravia,
may
his
memory be
a blessing,
was
still alive, I
received a letter of recommendation from

to
him, asking
wife
me
speak with the said David about the

his late brother Jeckl.
I
and children of
then wrote
to the country place
where
this
David
lived,
and he did
according to
of
my
wish and sent, through me, an amount
money
to
Nikolsburg, and from that time dates

his lot.
my
knowledge of the man and
Some
time afterwards
T
arrived here the son of his brother Jeckl,

Isaac.
I
w hose name was

to his
sent
him with a
letter of
recommendation
uncle, but
182
he did not help him much, according to what

See Kaufmann,
1.
R. Kherson Pulitz, Chief Rabbi of Moravia, 1753-72.

p.
Gedenkbuch,
379, and the
literature given there in note
VOL.
XI.
224
he told me, but every time he assured him that after his
death he would leave him an amount according to the law
of heritage of the Torah.
As David grew
in
old and
was
nearly eighty, he became blind, his property was neglected
and partly
(PPIBI
,|
lost,
and what remained was
very bad state
D^d), like
abandoned property, 183 which nobod)^

the margin 'and
looks after, as he was here in a strange land without friends,
and had never been married (added
in
was
afraid
he might be thrown on public charity').

all
He
decided to give
country, and
this
he had to a rich
181
(TON)
man
all
in the
made an agreement
as long as he lives,
in the
Law
him
Court with
he wants
death he
man
that he should undertake to give
(= keep him)
and
after his
should give a certain
sum
to his nephew, the said Isaac.

all
In exchange for this undertaking he ceded
he had to
that man, and lived afterwards for a few years.
death the said

declined to give
in
Isaac had
disputes
with the
On his man who

pay him
him what he had undertaken

soon
to
the said agreement, but as Isaac wanted to get married
as
indeed
he did marry
after
he received the
money
he
came
to
an understanding with him (and acThis

is
cepted a lesser amount).

since then
for
it
how
it
all
happened, and
is
like a stone
thrown into a well to expect
any one of the
relations
any help from that legacy.

:
(Added
later,
and addressed to Isaac Speyer)
still
owe an answer
which
to
to
my
cousin the famous pfp, our friend

letter full
R. Isaac Speyer, to his

I
of valuable information,
ago, and
I I
received about a
all his
month
send greetings
in
him and
people.
What
I
mentioned
is
my
first
letter that
he
will
do
it
without commission
not to be
understood otherwise than (that

183
expected
c
this)
',
from our
be
rich.
See Arakin 25
a.
184
Verbally
valued
viz. to

friendship for one another, because I
all his
DUSCHINSKY
that he will
it it
is
225
know
While
power
to
do
either of us a
good
service,
I
like,
as in water, face answering face. 185

to
write
occurs
me
(to
mention) that he surely
will not
it
mind the trouble

I
and inconvenience connected with

to-day to
f
that
am
sending
my
brother, our friend R. Meir C'z, a cheque
7 on
a certain man, who, however,

I
might not be there
at the next fair.
therefore request
my
to
dear cousin to
give to
my
to
brother on
my
if
account
fl.
fl.
Jj, and, as
you have
already given
me
fl.
credit for
66,
assign the whole

to
amount
me, and
you should have
pay
to
my
both
brother the said

together of
I
fl.
75 to draw a cheque on
me
I
. .
for
141,
and to excuse the trouble

(? W"iJfittUK.
have given.
.),
promised to write some news
and
will
mention that yesterday a great firm of bankers, namely
Brown and
Collinson, have
gone bankrupt, and the

in
public,
Jews and non-Jews, have had great confidence
them.
They had
as
is
tens of thousands (of pounds) in hand, because,
the custom here, they held cash deposits from the
public,
and now people are very anxious
lest other cashiers,
who
and
are called bankers here (other firms will be involved),

it is
feared that one friend will have another.

it
For the
present
is
quiet,
and
18G
it
may
be advisable to put on
Rotterdam
(lottery
?).
To
return again to our account.
Enclosed
b.
left
is
an assignof
ment from R. Leb the Levite on Asher

Livorno
a
for
Yomtof
fair,
the
sum
I
of
the latter
here about
never-
month
ago, and promised to be there at the
theless, see
185
186
what
wrote to
my
cousin (Isaac Speyer).
Cp. Prov. 27.
19.
is
This part of the letter
intended for Isaac Speyer
what follows
is
again addressed to his brother R. Meir.
226
P. lb.
Follows also an assignment from R. Jacob Rotterdam
on the firm Jacob
know
if
in
Hommel and partners for j your answer how much you received for
;
let
it,
me
also
the said R. Asher should pay you the j,

for that.
how much
last
you received
all
In your answer
tell
me
also exactly
your expenses
for the Sefer
Torah to the
penny,
how much you

settle
paid to the Sofer (scribe), and

I
how much
to the corrector, so that
can
tell
R. Leb the Levite and
with him
send
me
therefore the receipts from the
Sofer and corrector.
The account between

20lh of Kislev, as follows
:
us
is,
according to
my
letter of
Remained
in
your hand after paying the Sofer

.
thirty florins
fl.
4 40
:
To
this
add the proceeds of the two assignments, or else the fl. 75 you will receive for the cheque on R. Asher. On the other hand I have to pay you a further forty florins for the Sofer apart from corrector's
fee
.
fl.
40 00
:
You have
my
sister-in-law, a
Adar
Payment
already paid to your mother-in-law, cheque of fl. 11, and on 19 I will assign for her fl. 25 (together)
fl.
36
00
to you as usual every half year for yourself and R. Leb ^"JD
.
fl.
25 00
:
Ditto to R. Abraham Gissa (Giessen) drawn on you to-day

.
.
fl.
00
Ditto to send to our uncle R. Zekl b")D on my account fl. 11, and give to our brother Moses from me fl. 15 (together)
. .
fl.
26
co
This makes, apart from the corrector's

total
fee,
.
a
.
sum
of
fl.
igcS
DUSCHINSKY
know
is
I
227
Please look into this account carefully and answer
punctually with a detailed account, as you

great lover of orderliness.
Sefer Torah, R.
me am a
Concerning the sending of the
Lcb
with
b"lD tells
it
me
it
that, as
he
is
very busy,
he
will
will entrust
R. Asher when, as
probable, he
be there
at the fair,
and so
docs not concern us any
more.
You may keep
the Sofer Torah with you until you
receive further order from
me
or from R.
Leb
to R. Asher.
That Abraham Emmerich has gone bankrupt seems
to
me
like a firebrand in a cedar.

I
am, however, not familiar with the circumstances of

I
the merchants there, and only in one case
require to
know
the standard of the people, and that
is
with reference
to the eminent people
on
whom
187
send you cheques here-
with, namely, their fathers.
Enclosed
is
a letter for the wife of the late R.

is
Leb
Zunz from her stepson R. Moses, which

into her
to be delivered
own hand because

b.
there
is
bill
of exchange in
the
letter.
Zanvil
Judah of Leinich (Leineck?) has had a

he
letter
now from R. Leb

for
fl.
the Levite that he should call on you

calls
11.
When
pay him and obtain a
receipt.
These eleven
in
florins are
already accounted for between us
my
letter of
20th Kislev. dated 22 Adar, but

is
I
This
letter is
have written
it
day
earlier, as
on the 22nd
I
the anniversary of the death of
our late father, and
shall be
weak on account of the

I
fast
and the sleepless night, and while

of blessed
mention our father
memory
I
am
I
answering your words of Torah

for the benefit of his
on the annexed page, which may be

soul.
As
say there,
187
have only briefly answered your

is
This reference
not quite clear.
228

I
question, and as chief subject

tion, seeing that
have treated
in
my own
ques-
you
are
engaged
the study of Tractate
Baba
Batra.
have, thank God, collected
good notes on
I
this tractate at various
times (chiefly)
when
on
taught in
Worms, namely, answers

ask on
subject
(in
to all questions which Tosafot
Rashi's commentary,
that tractate).
I
and also
every
other
intended copying for you
some
of these novellae, but they are for the most part

I
lengthy, and so
have only selected one and copied
it.
With
this
will conclude.
Peace be with you from
Almighty according
C'z Schiff.
to
the wish of your brother Tevele
My
son Moses and your sister-in-law Mindele
send greetings,
in particular to
your
wife,
will
my
sister-in-law,
lines
maybe your
herself.
sister-in-law
Mindele
add a few
Greetings to our brother Moses and our sisters
and
their families.
(In
Mindel Sinzheim's hand)
Dear beloved
sister, I
was
very, very pleased to hear that

health,
you are again

it
in
good
may Almighty God

This
late
is
grant
to continue thus, until
a great age.
the prayer of your sister Mindel,
daughter of the
R. Solomon Sinzheim the Levite.
To my
brother in-law likewise, and especially to
my
niece Res'che, to
my
for
brother Simon, and naturally also to

I
brother Joseph, greetings.

is
assure you
all
that no one
I,
more anxious
I
the welfare
of the family than

it
although
can at present only express

to be able to prove
it
in
words.
May
God
(in
help
me
soon personally there

sister
Frankfort).
This
is
an answer to
Mate's latest
letter.

Letter VIII.
DUSCHINSKY
229
London, 20
(Page
1
Elul, 5582.
a).
He who
into the
forms the destiny of

life
man
like clay
may
write
book of
for life
my
dear brother the
Dayyan
date
Meir, &c., his wife and daughter, &c.
Last Tuesday your answer reached

missing
me the
is
to
my letter of the
12th Ab, and referring to what

affairs,
you mention therein of your own
and that our
cousin the charitable R. Isaac Speyer has done your wish,

I
enclose on the other side a letter of thanks to
him
for
all
the trouble he has taken in

itself I will tell
my
interest.
My
opinion
about the matter
you
here,
and
my
words
are addressed also to him.
You
wrote that the aspect of

I
the congregation
is
changed, and
Fathers.
am
sorry for the place
and the graves of

write that
my
As
to our
own
affair,
left
you
and
many members
in
of the congregation have

place.
taken up their abode

I
some neighbouring
I
Maybe
time,
should have done the same had
lived there at present,
nevertheless, evil times are
bound
to be over
some
and so
feel
it
my
now
duty to see that our right
in
the
community should not be

to come.
I
interrupted for the generations
will
refer to
your words one

(heirs)
after the
other
you
write
all
that
the
children
of
R.
M.
Scheyer have
after those
signed already
live in
J.
it
is
necessary to inquire
who
other congregations but have the
right
of domicile
there.
is
R.
Kulpa, you wrote, has

b.
already signed, that

will naturally sign in
well.
That Lima
Zalman Haas
seems to
not too
me
late.
likewise very probable
any case
it
is
R. D(avid) Kassel, the
son-in-law of the wife of R. Z. K., you say, will not and
230

;
must not sign

doubt that he
because
to
that
in
course of time, however, there
is
no
will sign.
(This remark) does not please me,
who knows what happens in well-known cruel man (who

sign
the meantime.
suggests)
in
As
that his
brothers should
joint
a pre-dated
will
bill
favour of the
as
is
firm
falsehood
is
not
is
prevail,
especially
his
his
inclination
too strong, as
well
is
known
way
to
begin
strife.
The more
him
likely
he to do
so, if
one were
to prove to
his dishonest words,
then he would at once
start a law-suit in his anger.
You
never mentioned Henle
Kulpa.
believe he
was
also a debtor at the time
when
the community allowed you (your debt) on account of your

right (of residence) in the
community, (and) the debt of

off, or, I
all,
my
late brother-in-law,
R. Z(alman), was paid

alone.
am
not sure, on your
own account
(if
After
although
your words are
full
of sagacity
and piety, the Mizwah

it
would be great
a result were achieved), and
were
better to keep quiet so that this poor
woman
that
I
should not
be wronged as time goes

you, our Father in
on.
What
shall I further question
Heaven has decreed

this,
'.
should have
a different opinion to yours in

says,
'
and
as the proverb
fear
cannot be talked away
In spite of this
in
we
be
have
in these
days come nearer to one another

for
thought
this
and deeds than (we were)
many
years.
Let
in
now
a rule
between
us,
please
God, to have
future
frequent correspondence in the roles of builder and house-
breaker
= discussion/;-^
and contra)
in this matter,
and 'he
\
who wants to purify himself May God help us for good,

neglect this and do
settle the
all
receives help from

I
Heaven
will
am
sure that
I
you
not
you
can, as
am most
.
anxious to
matter favourably.
is
Enclosed
an assignment from R. L(eb) K.
to
Asher

b.
DUSCIIINSKY
it
23
Yomtof of Livorno
of seven pounds sterling;

left
is
dated
at the
already from July because that gentleman
town
time and
will not return before close to the festivals,
and
he
left
the assignment with

let
me
to
collect
the amount.
it.
Please
me know how much you
received for
Out of
in
have assigned to your mother-in-law the name of the bearer of assignment on

this I
fl.
10 Elul
17 Elul,
25
11
drawn upon you to the order of Abraham

. . .
.
. .
Giessa
fl.
To To
our brother Moses give
in
my name
in
fl.
16
11
our uncle R. Z. S.
in
Furth send
my name
fl.
For yourself and for R. Leb the Levite thirty florins, which includes an addition of five florins for your trouble in connexion with the Sefer Torah
For the wife
fl.
30
Moses Platz and the wife of Moses and the daughter of Moses Trumm together, equally divided between them, for
of
Trumm
each 2 Gr.
fl.
2
9.5
Total
fl.
few weeks ago
received a letter from R. M(eir?)
b. S. the Levite,
and
in
the postscript his uncle Hirsch
Haas assured me
also stand
that he will stand
by you, and
it
need
will
not be mentioned that R. M. himself and his brother
by you.
R. Madl wrote to
me
that he, as well
as his uncle, will speak to R. Jacob
Kann, but nevertheless
he advised
me
in his letter that I
should personally write

I
to R. J(acob)
K(ann) as he might hear that
wrote to
his brother-in-law Hirsch
and not to him, and might be

J.
offended.
After
have written to R.
I
he
will
support
me by
speaking to him.
have done so to-day, and
written at length and with special emphasis

to R. Jacob
my
request
Kann, and have enclosed
it
with the letter
232

I
which
sent to R.
M.
to-day,
this.
I
and reminded him to
fulfil
his promise.
Kindly note
As to Romburg
day now.
the Sefer Torah,

of
have received a
it
letter
from
Ostend that he handed

;
over to the shipper

is
three weeks ago
it
has not arrived yet, but
due any
With
reference to the happenings in Berlin,

is
all
about
I
the Rabbi's departure from there
known
left
here,
and
have
seen a copy of the letter which he
before he journeyed
it
from there with instructions to open

left
six days after he

is
the town.
According to what
it
hear he
now
in
Vienna, and from the letter

is
appears that his intention

I
to emigrate to the
letter
Holy Land.
have also seen the
copy of a
from the Rabbi of Lissa to the Rabbi
of Amsterdam, as well as the copy of a sermon delivered
by
the Rabbi of Lissa in this matter, where he

letter
condemns
R. H. Wesel (Wessely), and the
which he printed.
full
The sermon
wise
is
in
very pure language,

not to offend
the
of pious and
words,
careful
majesty of
I
the
Emperor.
did the
From
in
the letter and sermon
gather that they
same
Posen, and in Wilna they burnt R. H.
Wesel's letter outside the town by order of the famous
Gaon
Elijah.
187a
Mention
is
also
made
it
there that the
Rabbi
of Prague at
187a
first
preached against
at Prague, now,
how-
Cp.
own
letter
Gudemann in Monatsschrift, 1870, pp. 479-80, and Wessely's in Kerem Hemed, vol. I, pp. 5-6 and Kobez-al-Jad, vol. X, p. 75.
in
Wessely himself mentions
Kerem Hcmcd
the Rabbi of Posen,
'
son-in-law
of the Rabbi of Prague', the Rabbi of Lissa, and Rabbi Elijah Hasid of
Wilna, as having issued a Herein against him.
The Rabbi
of Lissa
cp.
was
R. David Tevele Horochow, a native of Brody, about

Gesch.
whom
Lewin,
known
d.Judcn in Lissa, pp. 195 and 200. The Rabbi of Posen was R. Joseph, as 'Hazaddik' ben Pinehas, son-in-law of R. Ezekiel Landau.
:
Cp. Perles
Elijah of
Gesch. d.
is
Juden
in Posen, Monatsschrift, 1865, p. 261.
Rabbi
Wilna
generally
known
as
'
The Gaon
of Wilna
'.

ever, he
is
DUSCHINSKV
and
is
233
obliged to remain quiet
in public,
working
quietly to arouse Rabbis of other famous congregations.
After
all this it is easily
understood that the Berlin Rabbi

congregation, and was obliged to
could not remain

leave.
If
it
in his
were possible to send a copy of the declaration

I
issued there
close in the
in
should be pleased to receive

I
it.
I will
now
way
life
started this letter,

in
may He who
dwells
Heaven write you

life,
the book of the righteous for ever
for
may
and peace be with you from Almighty
according to the wish and prayer of your brother Tevele
Cz
SchifT.
As you
letters,
I
wrote
should not
let
anybody write on
my
have not allowed your

;
sister-in-law, the
all
maiden
Mindel, to write
she wishes you
happy New Year.
Page
b.
(Moses SchifT to R. Meir

Fulfilling the yearly
SchifT.)
custom
at a time
when every man
in Israel raises his voice
praying that happiness
may be
his lot in the
from the
New Year, I send you and all yours greetings distance. May the coming year be a happy one
enjoyment of happy dwellings,
which God
in peaceful
may
it
your days
is
be as numerous as the sand on the seashore.

priestly wish
This
my
may
fulfil,
is
adding to
a thousand
times more, your nephew
who
always ready to serve
you, Moses, son of the great Rabbi Tevele C'z of Frankfurt -
on-Main.
their
To your
wife and daughter, to
my
aunts and
families,
and to uncle
,
Moses greetings and good
wishes.
In that certain matter
my
father, the
Rabbi, has written

will
you
all
his opinion,
and
it
have no doubt that you
do
and
you can
to bring
to the desired successful issue,

will surely
your reward from Heaven
not
fail
to come.
234
Letter
IX
(p. 3).
London, Friday, 20
Elul, 5542.
. .
New
God who
Year's greetings, &c, ... to
my
dear relative
all
R. Isaac, his wife and children,

will
may
they
be blessed by
confirm the priestly blessing

I
How
From
in
can
thank you
to
sufficiently for all the kindness
you have shown
me and
I
to
my
son during this year.
the worthy has
come good, namely, a good beginning

have no other power but
I raise
the business, and
(no other
:
way
of thanking you), and
my words my voice to
God Oh, give good reward to that good man, give him name and fame and inscribe him to happy and joyful life, may he rejoice in the welfare of his offspring for many
years in Torah and fear of God, in riches and greatness.
This
may
be the
will of
God
in
Heaven.
Forgive
although
it
me
that
have not followed your advice,
was not
like that of a
man young
in years,
but
like the advice of
an
elder.
have written on
this
matter
at length to-day to
my
it
brother our friend R. Meir C'z,
point for point, and

for
will suffice for
both sides (=
is
meant
you
also).
It is
not right to refuse to listen to a great

for this
man
I
like you,
and
reason
have written (what
want to say to you)

I
to
my
it
brother,
will
who
is
a few years
younger than
in
am, and he
explain matters to you'

I
pleasing manner,
why
is
that
refuse to listen to
in
you although you have taken such great trouble

interest.
I
our
rely
upon your friendship #nd meekness that

it
you
will not,
even for a single hour, take
amiss,
and put
aside the true love which
we have
that
for
one another.
On
settle
the contrary,
rely
upon
it
you
will
be able to
DUSCHINSKY
Leb Kief
win
the
235
the matter with God's help for our benefit.

to the legacy of the children of the late R.
it
With reference
here,
is
still
in
abeyance whether they

estate
I
will
case
if
relating
to
the
it,
of their grandfather, and even
they do win
for the
cannot see a way of obtaining anything

I
debtor of their father, as

court
is
think that the law of
the
civil
the
same
as
our law, and a thousand

of one
difficulties are
in his
placed
in the
way
who makes
a claim
result,
grandfather's right.
will write
But time
after
I
will
bring the
and
you further
have made inquiries

civil
from people who are familiar with the

not assure you that
I
law.
need
will
do
all
in
my
power
to advise
all
you
in this,
and
shall not hesitate to serve

this I
you with
my
might.
Apart from
have no news.
at
May God
the prayer
bless
you with peace and look down

in
you on the coming

This
is
New Year day

of your cousin
mercy and kindness.

is
who
always ready to serve you, Tevele,
son of the late R. Zalman Schiff of Frankfort, Rabbi in
London and the
Province.
To your
brother and
I
son-in-law E. Z.
and
all
who
dwell with him
send greetings,
may he
too be
remem-
bered (by God) for good and his years continue, his honour
and greatness
(In
increase.
Scruff's
Moses
hand)
Youths ought to be hidden

Sir,
and not stand before the great and wise men, but you,
have shown
weak.
to
your servant your greatness

prayer be
in assisting the
result, for
May my
is
my
thanks and bear

the
if
my
I
pen
not able to write

I
down
immense gratitude
occasion presents
feel
for you.
beg of you that

(to
itself to
remember me again
put business in
into the
my
way),
and may God Almighty inscribe you

righteous for a long and
book of the
the wish of
happy
life.
This
is
236
your servant always at your command, Moses, son of the

great Rabbi Tevele C'z Schifif of Frankfort-on-Main.
To
your brother and son-in-law, the learned R. E. Z and best wishes for the
greetings
New
Year.
(Address on the outside of the sheet)
Herrn Mayer Sallomori

SchifTJude gegenw.
Frankfurt
in
am Mayn.
REMARKS ON 'EARLY KARAITE OF THE MISHNAH'

Under
title
CRITICS
the above
title
Hartvvig
Hirschfeld
published and
elucidated two Karaite manuscript texts in this Review, 1 yet the
does not correspond exactly to the contents of the

not at
all
texts.
The
latter are
a criticism of the Mishnah, but rather Karaite

legal precepts,
attacks
on the rabbinic construction of various
such as we meet with in
many
other
Karaite
works.
The
Mishnah
I
serves only as a substratum.
To
prove
this assertion
propose to analyse these texts minutely.

I.
The
first
text,
hitherto
its
unknown,
is
particularly interesting,
both on account of
contents and
its
form.
It is
a fragment
of a Karaite anti-rabbinic polemic, in which the following points

are argued
(i)
is
The
bn
invalidity of the dehiyya D'"l12 l"2) Nv (fol. 37),

I,
which
proved from the Mishnah Meg.

:
2-6, where
.
.
it
is
expressly-
stated
jj'ana
nvnb bn
first
rU'JO m\-6.
Thus
the very
point
n^ dv twb bn shows that we are not

Curiously enough,
wa
dealing here with a criticism of the Mishnah.
the Karaite author adduces also the continuation of the Mishnah,

I)
7
1
_ 9j which evidently has nothing

JQR., N.
S.,
to
do with the
World War
subject.-
VIII, 157-88.
Owing
to the
this part of the
Quarterly reached
-
me
fol.
only recently.
exhibits
7
:
At the same time our author

37 vo. at
1.
two omissions through homoioline
teleuton, namely,
one
added by Hirschfeld after

at
}'D33J [rD333 pttt?

1.
D1p ^3N
WDrQl
"OBO] (not pD*J3C), and

failed to
two
lines after i"inW
[Wlpj which he
complete
[men S^N
These
nrm imp rwn mnynji pmnn Tita

omissions
this is
rhvcm n imp].
responsible for them.
may be due
to the copyist, but if
we
is
accept with Hirschfeld that
an autograph, then the author himself
237
238

again:
Then
vh
Q-Qin^n
pa
rnran rbmi ampn 'bw rnr^mi
1DY3 Npni imin H> nx\ As the source of this citation Hirschfeld Talmud Meg. 12 b (should be 19 b), and believes that under ni3?n our author means the Gemara (see further below). But in the Talmud this passage sounds differently tib K"l1pn
indicates
:
UB>
113^3 xniEX nb inei

,
,
Nnnnfa KÔ am
inain
are
KIP,
similarly
,
,
in
Halakot Gedolot
t6
Kllpn.
Thus
the words *T
wanting in both places, but they are extant in the

(ed. Schlossberg, p. it),
Halakot Pesukot
and the
latter
no doubt
served our Karaite author as source.
The
nD2
nullity of the dehiyya
onia
T*3? ^,
identical with
s^>
p&n l"ix fc6, &c, on the basis of the Mishnah, 3 occurs also among other Karaite writers, as e. g. Hadassi (Eshkol Hakkofer, alphabet 184, V ff.): Kp"B3P 1^33 )b)W D^nDS *3 .
l"*n,
.
.
nn^n
ossa
nvr6 onis ^n^3

pi
rowa
'3 d^tis
W3
"ien nâo
.
.
.
p
'131
n3&?3
no s
W31 "nwwi
i>33
p n3ea b^P3
nvr6 Jjnea pi
.
sropn
birb
i?33
(r.
yusri
iw
nmsn) Dnias dv iâs^ jrao pi noan dv inoiyi? p *|K. Then in Aaron

.
b. Elijah
(Gan Eden,
fol.
6 d)
n&Opa
rto
D~lEK Kin
*JT3B>
|B1M
12 irn rpn jWfcnn dv rwi
dk
nmo
nn jnaswi
"d'
bi bbnai
nK Y?K3 iai "p im rrn
V3
1
sin
t^s
rarci
wn
dv
hm
dxi "pi
TiD V'3? N^
""IE>N*^
In addition, these two authors, and especially

in
Salmon
b.
Jeroham
his
manuscript polemic against Saadya
(chaps. 4-6),
adduce a number of other passages from which
results the voidness of the dehiyya, namely,
Mishnah
Pes. VII, 10
n3P3
*\Vty
nwi!>
~i&ry
rww
br\
ivy r\wi2 ysn& -imam pram
majotfi
4
ny3^3 1EHB*, hence Passover occurred on a Friday;

:
Hag.
II,
'"Dl
3
rw3
nvrb rbn dn^ d^toi

DVtr,
mp
nnyn nrni? brw
msy
on
:
D3KT1
nns nUD
hence the Feast of Weeks

(fol.
i.
fell
So the words
Vib
of our author are to be understood

(r.
37 vo. end)
N[S>]l
bl DniS
*6l riDD
*nt)
"131
*6 ^B3a
b.
n3ITD1
e.
probably
^1
BW
4
HS
H3
S^, or something
similar.
Comp. hereon the passages from Hananel

in Jiid. Zeitschrift,
Hushiel's commentary of
Pesahim adduced by Geiger

Hiyya's
VI, 149, also

all
Abraham
b.
TQSM
"1DD. p. 59.
f.
In addition, with regard to
quotations here
given, see
JQR., X, 271
EARLY KARAITE CRITICS OF THE MISHNAH

a Saturday;
4
POZNANSK1
2^9
~~ H3BO nvnb 2" TT$h /3wS : 3*iT b'^ Tyt? n3 31JD, therefore the Day of Atonement fell on a Friday Shab. XV, 3 *?2H 3*n*3 pmp 1130 *3^TI
Menahot XI, 10: nvr6 hn
'Dl rQ'J'n
3*T
78?
si?,
hence
this
day occurred before and

1
:
after
the Sabbath; finally Tosefta Sukka III,

131D2
rOPfl
ns nnn
3717
rmyi in^nnn, hence Hoshana rabba occurred on

also the passage from Seder
first
a Sabbath.
5),
Then Salmon quotes

which
tells
olam (chap.
Friday."'
that the
Passover occurred on a
It is
not impossible that

in
all
these tannaitic quotations also existed
our author's manuscript before
the
passage
from Mishnah
Megilla.
Now
will
all
these citations are directed against Saadya
who,
it
be recalled, maintained that the constant Jewish

all its rules
calendar with
was of Mosaic provenance, and that
all
the contrary statements in the

referring to hypothetical
cases, that the expression
in the sense of
Mishnah
are to be interpreted as
and
ideal but never to actual
and
real
nvn? ?n must therefore be understood

'
:
nvn? ?n DN
admitting that this holiday would

'.
occur on this day, such and such a law should be applied

6
But
Some mediaeval
Passover
fell
authors state in the
name
of the Seder
loc.)
;
Olam
that the
first
on a Thursday (see Ratner, ad

its
probably later
generations took umbrage at

accordingly.
occurring on Friday, and changed the text
As
a matter of fact the Mekilta, Pesikta, and Rabba, all have

ibid.).
Thursday (see Ratner,
Moreover, the Karaites prove also from the

7.
Scriptures the futility of the dehiyyot, namely, from Ezra
9 and
first
8.
31-3.
From
these verses
first
we
it
learn that in those days neither the
of Nisan,
fall
nor the
of Ab, nor the twelfth of Nisan, nor the fourth of Ab, could
on a Saturday, and
follows therefrom,
fall
if
the rabbinic calendar
is
correct,
that then Passover could
neither on a Saturda}*, nor on a Sunday, nor

it
on a Tuesday, nor on a Thursda}-, and hence on a Wednesday or on a Friday.

untenable.
fell
either
on a Monday or
Thus the
first in
dehiyya
nDD Y"12 N^
JQR., VIII, 686
against
Elijah
is
.
This evidence
in
is
found
b.
Kirkisani (see
then
elaborately
in
Salmon
(Es/ikol,
Jeroham's polemic
tract
b.
Saadya
(ch. 4),
fol.
Hadassi
185 V-3), and
Aaron
in
(Gan Eden.
6 b-c\ and
was opposed vigorously by Saadya

46).
(comp
(fol.
Z/HB., X,
Comp., on the other

it is
many of his writings hand, Pal. Aboda zara I,

1
39 b below),
where
said in reference to Neh. 9.
r,
that the twenty-
third of Tishri could not be a Saturday, for then the
Day
of Atonement
12).
would
fall
on a Sunday (see hereon Wiesner, Dvw"l"l > ny23, p XI.
VOL.
240
already Isaac b. Baruch refuted this view of Saadya, and pointed
out
among other things that in the Talmud Hoshana rabba on a Saturday is stated as a
teachers, the Talmudists. 6
the occurrence of
fact.
This serves
the Karaites as a pretext to attack Saadya as a despiser of his
own
(fol.
Our Karaite
36
author, towards the end of the fragment preserved
vo.), reverts
once more to the question of dehiyya, and

e. g.
proves the possibility of
l""n3 nDS in a very peculiar way.
Since the firmament was created on Monday, the luminaries on
Wednesday, and the human pair on Friday, and since the

follows that the Feast of Passover
first
Passover celebrated in Egypt occurred on a Friday (see above),

it
may
fall
on any one of these

But
Nl]
three
days.
It
is
difficult
to
find
out
what the creation of
these objects has to do with the beginning of Passover.
here
is still
another extremely interesting passage
py "IDN Tî
rraiDm jpaswi
'ID!
dv noon [?nm]i naio
^n
nh\ fidd jnt t6
nmna
inKHD.
Thus 'Anan,
never
the restorer of the lunar observation,
agreed nevertheless with the Rabbis in their method and asserted

that Passover can
fall
on a Saturday nor
the
Feast of
Tabernacles on a Sunday, while our author considers these two

days feasible on the ground that the light was created on Sunday
and
that Saturday
is
a day to be kept holy.

helpless
in
Hirschfeld
is
quite
the
face
of
this
passage,
maintaining that he could find nothing of the kind in the extant
fragments of 'Anan's book of Precepts, and he therefore proposes

the emendation nDS
INI
tib.
Apparently he overlooked a
(Stud.
is
frag-
ment of 'Anan's book edited by Harkavy

and myself (REJ., XLV, 18 1) where
it
u.
Mitt, VIII, 72)
expressly stated that
when Passover
lamb
,
.
falls
on a Saturday the offering of the Paschal

:
is
postponed to Saturday evening

n*a
. , .
N3iy
|*IU1
bn
DN1
rrWa pruv pnn

.
warn nhds
Raa*ip
b.
D*\yb
f?
tidn Knaen aa-ijn khd&i
nan an waSip
|ira
wi Ka
oa
rrrrtyb
rA
*ixri
Namra
6
xnoan
xmvb ntn
/.
*an
Knaen
'">
ww
"inn
In the
See Abraham
b.
Hiyya,
c, pp. 59-60,
fol.
and/07?.. X, 271-2.
same way Aaron

'
Elijah
(Gan Eden,
5 b)
^DH
fcOiyD
PW1 ^30
31
Tvianb.

MTI3&3.
POZNANSK1
2.' I
According to 'Anan D'2iyn pa

',
signifies 'after the setting
of the sun
but the offering of the Paschal lamb does not set

little
aside the Sabbath, as

in
as
e. g.
circumcision, which likewise,

is
case the eighth day occurs on a Saturday,
performed
after
sunset, for the term
D^nyn p3
is
construed both as part of the

I.e.,
passing
and part of the beginning day (Harkavy,

it is
77)/
'Anan,
offering
true,
speaks only of the postponement of the Paschal
and not of the postponement of the Feast of Passover,

informs
1.
but
Kirkisani
us
about 'Anan distinctly (Sect.

|D
S
I,
ed.
Harkavy,
p. 313,
16):
rDD^K DV
npy nno dv
in
niw nn^N
i.
"CT riDEi) QV ypi tHKl nv ^x tj&n njoriN ysn 'and

J
*S
when
the fifteenth of Nisan

e.
fell
on a Saturday he postponed the

',
Festival to Sunday,
the sixteenth
hence also the Festival
was postponed.
With regard
to
postponement of the Feast of Tabernacles,

immediately
after the
we read
nDD^K
in Kirkisani
"J/TDI
above-quoted words
""a
'and likewise with the Feast of Tabernacles',
without specification as to the day and without further explanation
and
justification,
but the
latter
may be obtained from

most
is
later
Karaite writings.
What
surprises us
that
'Anan mentions
the Feast of Tabernacles

falls
and not the
New
Year, which always

is
on the same day
but here the following consideration

is
of importance.
to justify the
In Karaite literature search
made
after a verse
commandment about
pc'S"in
the building of a booth (for

this
men
ni3D3 only enjoins to dwell in tabernacles), and
was
is
deduced from the verse
DV2
D3$>
Dnnpî, which, as
For more
details see
my
article in
REJ.,
/.
c,
176
ff.
Probably Kirkisani had this
in the
ninth
section
of his work, the

first
section dealing with the holidays.

(ed.
In the sixth chapter of the
section
Harkavy,
p.
304,
1.
5) Kirkisani says of the
Sadducees that they did not
count the Sabbath either on the Passover or on the Feast of Tabernacles,
and that they grounded
this
proceeding on
Reg.
s
8. 66,
T
where
it is
said that
Solomon dismissed the people on the eighth da} of the

could be the 23rd of Tishri (see 2 Chron.
counted.
7.
Feast.
This day
10
only
if
the Sabbath
was not
in
But here the reference
is
it
to the
Sabbath within the Feast
general, whatever day of the Feast
may
be.
242
well

known, the Karaites
refer to
the booth
Take unto you

However,
the four plants in order to
make
'
a booth out of them.

first
ptPtnn DV3 cannot not be dwelling
mean
on the
day
',
since then
we would
There-
full
seven days in the booth, and again the

is
erection of a booth
fore
on a holiday
forbidden as labour.
pBWin DV3 must

at
necessarily
mean
'
before the
i.
first
e.
day
',
probably
the
end of the day of preparation,
on the
fourteenth, approximately before the approach
of the evening,
unless the time does not suffice, in which case
we must begin
falls
building earlier in the day, or
when the
fourteenth
on a
Saturday, in which case the booth can be put up even earlier
(about the thirteenth), see Bashiatshi, Adderet, niDDH an

ch. 2
:
T1D,
tmp nyD3
n'în oya
mnaa unvd
pi
mion
ortaNzi
r\"wy nyn
n*a
paa
/ta
i
pswnn nvi
n"o nya
îsn arbn
nvnb
nam
jnenrr
n^
>
nyn^ in^n roaDn mro

*)n
"in xinp
irvTi
i>y
nvm now ptwnn nyn

p imp
,inhn
-nyi trc&p d'\i nroa iwyj-6 i^sn Dy^n i^pn n**3 n #, nn lens dhi .hwd
w
1
pswrin
ovn mip
n^nn tun tok }nan unjr nawi ovn pi

ini^yi?
wsm
^ny^ tied
nr
w
nnca
kS>b>
insm
dv
nn
dn pi
*ik"up
nwyn nTxpa
also:
mpw
idd
V'"
nw
wn
spo
c).
Then
nt^y nyn-ix
dto nvn!?
"lsn
pcnon
n^^y
in
fol.
ny*: iTnn
dn
D*npi
yn^n
this
tjnnb (comp. also
Gan Eden,
It
is
65
Later Karaite sources dealing with the subject and accessible to

us
do not
exhibit
opinion
of
Anan.
very likely,
however, that he insisted that the booth should be erected on

the fourteenth, and
when
this
day
fell
on a Saturday he postponed
the
the
Feast
to
the
sixteenth.
By analogy with
Feast
of
Passover and in view of his other eccentricities in interpreting

biblical
precepts
it
is
not surprising that 'Anan should
have
ordained, in spite of the express statement of the Bible, that the
Feast of Tabernacles
should begin on the sixteenth.
'Anan's
opinion was not merely a theory.
We know
from Kirkisani that

'
some Karaites followed

others
the
'
Head
of the Exile
in
adding one
day to the Passover as well as to the Feast of Tabernacles, while
added a day only
to Passover
and not
to the Feast of
EARLY KARAITE CRITICS OF THE MISHNAH POZNANSK1 2^3

Tabernacles
Ka
.
It
goes Without saying that this day was added

fell
when
the
first
holiday
on a Sabbath.
(fol.
(2)
The second
attack of our Karaite

I,
38-39
9
ro.) is
directed
against the
Mishnah Rosh hashanah
4. 5.
and
II, 7. 8,
where
fix
the messengers dispatched and the witnesses arriving to
the
beginning of the month are permitted to desecrate the Sabbath,
and where the well-known

R. Joshua concerning the
conflict
between R. Gamaliel and

is
Day
of
Atonement
set forth.
Our
Karaite sees therein a violation of the biblical prohibition which

10 decrees death for the desecration of the Sabbath, and likewise
a disregard of the
commandment
in
Lev. 23.
11
4.
Other Karaite
authors,like Hadassi {Eshkol, 184, off.)
and Aaron b.Elijah(C7rt#
Eden,
7 a),
quote these passages, but for an altogether different
purpose, namely, to remark that in ancient times the
new moon
also adds
was fixed on the basis of lunar observations.

that
Aaron
Saadya refuted these proofs through the assertion that while

fix
some people
does
it
the
new moon by observation

calculations.
Israel as a
whole
by calendar
6
(3)
(fol.
The Mishnah Rosh hashana

ro.,
1.
IV, 4 serves
our Karaite
39
39
i.
vo.,
1.
2) as
proof that in the conception of
the misleaders,
days.
I fail
12
e.
the Rabbis, the
new moon may

in the
fall
on two
to find this
Mishnah quoted
works of other
8*
Ed. Harkavy,
p. 318,
1.
nO'22
*S nfeti&M DN"I
JDWI
[D DTUD1
h:jd^
9
*a
nxnNrv oh.
II, 8,
But also here our author quotes the Mishnah

the
which has nothing
in
common with
,0
#
theme treated by him.

fe.
nv ro n^bno niD^nn rbx
nia^nn 'opposes',
;
recalls
in
it
form
^nn
'
in
the
Hebrew Ben
Sira (44. 17
46. 12
'
48. 8),
but there
means
11
compensation, substitution, substitute

337).
(comp. also Kaufmann,
MGWJ,
XLI,
The
conflict
between R. Gamaliel and R. Joshua

T,
is
more
fully told
by
Hadassi, alphabets 192 C-194.
with
all
kinds of amplifications which

I
may
have had their source in some apocryphal Baraytot, and of which

to deal at length
12
intend
on some other occasion.
pnnftn
instead of
|WlBfl
(likewise
fol.
40
vo.
mbc
instead of "^'J'
244
Karaites
of two
(4)

who contend
days.
against Saadya's proofs for the existence

13
New Moon
(fol.
Quite original
is
the criticism of
Mishnah Rosh hashana

In
IV, 9
39 VO.-40
ro.),
which
is
of a linguistic character.
the text of our Karaite there was here, as in

scripts
some other manu163),
of the
Mishnah
(see
Hirschfeld, p.
DWS
Ttthv
instead of vhw,
nE^CP
is
and he attacks the Mishnah on the ground that masculine (nnan rwbwi), as in Exod. 2. 2 and Gen.
18. 2, while
DTO2
requires
{$6b>,
as
proved by Exod.
23.
14 (but
here
we
find
D^Ji b6b> and not coys, apparently our Karaite

ibid.
quoted from memory) and
34.
23.
therefore a lack of knowledge of the Bible
DTOa Twh proves (nyi3 *6 D^ya nwhw

on philological
in the
nninn
in
TH" ).
1
An
anti-rabbinic controversy
is
grounds,
if I
may
so express myself,
found elsewhere
b.
polemic
the
treatise of Sahl b.
Masliah against Jacob
Samuel,
pupil
of Saadya, in which
orthographic and grammatical
errors, as well as incorrect turns of speech, are
pointed out in
p. 181).
the style of his opponent (see Kaufmann-Gedenkbuch^
But
it is
not impossible that our Karaite author aimed to attack
the blowing of the Shofar, which his co-religionists have been
known
to reject, but did not get to a criticism of the
Mishnah
cited, as
(5)
we
shall
soon see in other cases.

(fol.
The
as
1.
next attack
40 vo.)
is
directed against
some
alleviations with regard to Sabbatical precepts
on the part of the
Rabbis,
expressed
in
the
cites
Mishnah Shab. XVI, 6-8 and

here the Mishnah only, without
is
XXIII,
Our Karaite
it,
adding his criticism on
but that
sufficiently clear
from the
mere quotation of the

Rabbis that they make
text.
The
reproach
made
against the
light
of the Sabbath
that day,
is
and permit many
things that are forbidden
on
a standing
theme
in
the Karaite controversies, beginning with Kirkisani.

cites also the
'iai
p"
1
The
(sect.
latter
Mishnah XXIII,
adduced by our Karaite

9.
(bNTJ'
I,
"Ha
p.
nâriD DIN), and refers Jer.
to
it
ed.
Harkavy,
13
287
then also in the second text edited by HirschMann, JQR., N.

S.,
Comp. on
this point
IX, 141, where also Hadassi
(Es/ikol, alphabets 197 "1-11)
should be added.

feld,
I'OZNANSKI
It
is
2^5
which
b.
will
be discussed further below).

in
cited also by
Salmon
Jeroham
his
manuscript treatise against Saadya,
chapter 14.
(6-7)
dietary
The
next two points

dealing
as
(fol.
41) belong to the domain of
laws,
they do with the enjoyment without

(Nîr), respectively of
slaughter
of the
after-birth
an embryo
fat
tail
(WsP,
(nvN),
among
the Karaites
pro
or DUp),
and of the
together
with
the
kidneys
and the lobe of the
liver
(I33n mnv), which the Rabbis permit but the Karaites forbid.
\\: ith
reference to the
first
point our Karaite quotes the
Mishnah
Hul. IV, 10. 8;
with regard to the second point, however, he
adduces no
text,
but simply says
1237]
mnv[l] nvbam
19.
It
is
tAlfft\
iTnn "WR. This is ment of these things

that the relish of
against the Torah, which forbids the enjoyin Lev. 11. 39
and
9.
well
known
an embryo forms one of the points of difference
between the Rabbis and the Karaites.
The former
permit
it
in accordance with the principle 1DN "p* 13ty,
and even without

are permitted
slaughter
(lmnDD 1DN
now)
nay, even the prohibited parts
of an animal, such as the

in this case, in
fats,
the tendon,
&c,
consonance with the rule
IPDN'n
nmx
is
ntHED, that
allowed (see
everything found in a purely slaughtered animal
Hul. 74aff. and comp. in addition
my
yet
conclusions in Kaitfmanrts
Gedenkbuch,
the
p.
176
if.).
The
Karaites,
on the other hand, forbid

born are called WZ2
1.
embryo,
since
children
not
in
accordance with Gen. 25. 22 and Ruth

prohibition of
and therefore the

good
here.
in
nw
IRIS (Lev. 22. 28) holds

that
But
an
they go even further and assert

animal, be
it
everything found
sperm or a piece of
is
flesh or
even water,
is
prohibited,
and
that this prohibition

3l).
likewise to be derived from Lev. 11. 39

interpret this verse in such
(nDTDTl ]D niD'
a
They probably
of one
14
way
that the
death
part of an
animal reduces the
whole animal
14
to a carcass.
In a similar manner the Rabbis
found this verse applied to our prohibition nowhere else except

:
mi
.
,
Hadassi (alphabets 308 2)
DITO
KXD971
*a
TJO rDVW
Pin p^
ny ntanBoa
torn
mai
mo
inn
jr
naew mawoa km nonan
246
differ
fat

from the Karaites with reference
tail,
to the
enjoyment of the
liver,
of the
the kidneys,
all
and the lobe of the
since the
Karaites hold that

at the sacrifice are
the parts which are burnt on the altar
comprised under 2?n, and hence are forbidden.

to
Our Karaite proceeds
quote Lev.
9.
19,
where
all
the three
prohibited parts are mentioned consecutively in one verse.
Both these points of contention form another important theme

in
Karaite anti-rabbinic polemics.
Already Kirkisani
(sect.
I,
ed. Harkavy, p. 291) cites the contents of both
Mishnahs adduced
by our Karaite and claims that the Rabbis, together with the
enjoyment of an embryo, permit also seven other prohibited substances, namely, a
dead animal (since
in their opinion the
embryo
1JYIN,
may be
eaten without special

Tin JD "ON,
killing),
blood,
10
fats, 133
DNI
na: nt^n^,
and the tendon.
Again, the enjoyment
of forbidden fats forms one of the principal arguments in the
polemic between Saadya and the Karaites, see
njn
"1333
\>hrb
ivy ivv *vi*Bn nhjjd
Gan Eden, fol. 96 b: Kin Dînn ewyi

. . .
vniynô
nap
122 n"y
w3m
three
D\x-ipn
(comp. also Eshkol, alphabets
231-3, and Adderet,
HD'W py,
chaps. 18-20).
(8-10)
(fol.
first
'131
The
last
points
contained
in
our fragment
36
the
ro.)
relate
to the laws of purity.

III,
Our Karaite quotes

D'OIOP
Mishnah Nidda,
ibid.,
:
(riWin rwx D*y3")K DV ni>Bn
-6b), then
IV, 6
('131
mpJ b&
"pm nwpvn),
winding up with
biy
is
Hî
y^-lft
^ rWn p JW.
pDi
wy
N^ IC'N DUT
fen Dnwn
is
HON
"IBM
His objection
to the
Mishnah
not indicated in the fragment, as

points
the case in dealing with

to the
first
some other
n*o iniN
of difference.
With reference
*a
wdi awn
n lnm ww
jjb
:i^y hudni
mi
'131
i:^y
KW1 TOPOn miDN 'W.
'Anan, as
is
known, derived from

an animal about to die
this verse, in
an exquisite way, the prohibition
to kill
(1"031DE or DISDID), see REJ.,
XLV, 57-9
it,
but already Daniel Kumisi and
Kirkisani expressed their opposition to

15
see
JQR., VIII,
to
685.
8.
This number varies with different Karaite authors from 6 to

,
see
Kaufmann-Gedenkbxicli
239, 7-3),
p.
176, n.
8,
1,
where the reference
Hadassi (alphabets
who
likewise has
should be added.

Mishnah
if
it
POZNANSK1
247
must be noted
that in the opinion of the Karaites,
human form is perceived in woman is subject to the same

a
lying-in,
the abortion, the miscarrying
law of impurity as a
woman
and
if
in
this
form the male cannot be differentiated

unclean for eighty days
uncleanness does
from the female the

(see
woman must remain

114
b),
Gan
Ede?i,
fol.
hence the
state of
not depend upon the days of pregnancy.

cited
The second Mishnah

or,
above expresses the opinion of the Rabbis that conjugal

with a
communion
as the case
woman
lying-in
is
allowed within the 33
may
be, 66 days, against
which the Karaites protest

I,
violently (comp. Geiger, Jiid. Zeitschrift,
51;
II,
27; Nach-
gelassene Schriften, III, 316,
and DnENE
it
r\*)2p,
my
edition, p. 89).
Finally, with regard to the last point,
likewise forms debatable
ground between the Rabbis and Karaites, the former allowing

the menstruous
woman
e. g.
to
count D^pJ
r\y2V,
while the latter
consider this obligatory only in the case of a
woman
afflicted
. . .
Gan Eden, fol. 113d: X3B DOVy DttTVn nprnn d^jh fa iBn npnym nnb nDi rmnn mnp tod fbbp nfa nat t6) ma xb nnb pw d^pj nw nyiv nneiDP ma?
with a flow, see
piwd *mk ni^N
imn
by i^Din $b -iko by onniy

It is therefore
d.ti
cm
aa
UBD
lynan N^l DSnN.
unnecessary to
emend
with
Hirschfeld
W3H
fa into nVOTI fa.
From our
analysis
it
results that
we
are not dealing here with
a criticism of the Mishnah, but rather with a fragment of a

polemical, anti-rabbinic work.
Next
in line
is
to
determine the
time and
the author of the fragment.

it
As
regards the time,
Hirschfeld places
in the ninth century,

:
supporting this view
by the following two proofs

is
(1) the
handwriting of our fragment
older than that of other manuscripts dating from 1004, 1019,

(2) the Karaites
and 1030;
than
that.
began
to write
is
Arabic in the tenth

older
century, hence our fragment which
in
Hebrew must be
However, both these reasons are precarious.

is
Assuming
tfie
that the handwriting of our fragment
older than that of
above-mentioned manuscripts, then
it
should only be younger
than the eleventh century, and could therefore date from the
248

But, judging from the present state of
tenth century.
Hebrew
Review,
paleography,
of a
it is
extremely
difficult to
determine exactly the time
Hebrew manuscript
Still
(see
on
this point
is
Marx
in this
VI, 176).
less
convincing
to write
the second proof.
It is true
that the Karaites
began
Arabic in the tenth century, and

is
;
the
first
known Karaite work
written in Arabic
the Kitab
if
al-
'anwJr, composed by Kirkisani in the year 937
therefore
we
it
have before us a Karaite work

before the tenth century.
in
Arabic we cannot place

fact is that
But the
even
for
b.
after that
the Karaites did not cease to write Hebrew.
Thus,
example,
c
Salmon
authors
b.
Jeroham,
the
Sahl b. Masliah,
century,
and Yefet
Ali,
all
of
tenth
wrote simultaneously in both
languages.
Moreover, we have seen above that the point dealing

is
with the dehiyyot
directed against Saadya,
and
for this very

Still,
consideration cannot date from the ninth century.
I also
am
of the opinion that

is
it
is
quite old.
First,
because the
tetra-
grammaton
In
this
written nifp
is
(fol.
36) and not
lc
as usual,
and
then because \Anan
mentioned without any honouring
epithet.
way he
is
mentioned elsewhere only by Benjamin Nahafol.
wendi (pD'OS nNK>D,
2c; comp. Harkavy, Stud.

i>"vr.
u.
Mitt.,
VIII, 127), although with the eulogy
But already Kirkisani,
although he mentions him quite frequently by

sect.
I,
name
1.
only
(e. g.
ed.
Harkavy,
p. 279,
1.
10,
280,
1.
17,
284,
24), yet in
most cases he gives him the

Yefet
c
title
nvtfi/N DN1,
i.e.
exilarch.
b.
Ali quotes
him once (REJ., XLV, 186) by name
only,
but with the eulogy
my
2,
rhbx *n, another time simply as DS"l

also as
i>"T
n^Niiw
(ibid.
179),
and then
ed.
py
'an
'un
'HN (comb.
mentary on Cant.
Ill,
Barges, p. 42).
Jacob
Simon,
the translator of Jeshua's nviyn 1SD,

(ed.
Markon, pp. 100 and naming him by title bttW
104),
names him bx ITOnT py but already Hadassi insists on

trtn (alphabets 23
T,
tf'SW r6ijn
147 D,
16
The writing miT
is
found also
in
some epigraphs
of Karaite Bible
rolls
and Bible codices from the Crimea (see Harkavy-Strack's Catalogue,

is
pp. 26, 32, 99, 237, 238), but here there
no telling which
is
genuine and
which
is false.

236
T).
POZNANSK1
249
Our fragment
therefore
is
a product of the eleventh, or
perhaps already of the tenth century.

Hirschfeld also comes to a conclusion as to the identity of
the author of the fragment.
According to him,
it
is
no other
head
than Nissi
b.
Noah, whose name he even placed
at the
of his introductory remarks on the fragment.
As
is
well
known,
Pinsker identified
Nissi with
Aha, a reputed
pupil
of 'Anan,
which
still
places
him
in the eighth century.
Others, like Graetz,

It
bring his date
down
to the ninth century.
was P. F. Frankel
who
believed he had established the fact that Nissi lived after

latter's
Hadassi and made use of the
Eshkol.
Now
is far
agree with
Hirschfeld that Nissi's dependence on Hadassi

indeed,
I
from proved,
believe
am
able to establish quite the contrary.
For
Nissi says (in Pinsker, pp. 12-13) that the teacher must possess
twelve qualities, the last three of which are as follows
^DTP
'\m
pmw
*pa
N'"
,
i
;V3b
rrcw
n"\-n
ns nvp* bm nax bv mm -im ;&prh) m^yi* ]\x rwi trproi d*dbb>d3 nreoa
n pp
bvc\
12b
nnam maom
they
,
t,dS>*i
rai>rai
m^nn
nrcvi.
Hadassi,
ff.),
too,
enumerates these qualifications (alphabets 134 2
but
here
:
amount
to only ten in
number, the tenth being as follows

b^2 *p2
D D2*c7:i
D^m
}\x
niVD3i
nmn
nwc nnwn
rnzivjm
nbv dhd
*pnpTi
tenth
nvp
pi
dijdî
D^yDnî
onninb
rni>Ke>
yyyb Ten.
quality,
Hadassi evidently omits altogether
Nissi's
while he combines the eleventh and twelfth into one,

(}'N
%
,
retaining their characteristic expressions

certainly easier to
to
'pa
WW).
It
is
assume
that twelve qualities
may be reduced
ten
by the omission of the one about the teacher being

always set on number
fulfilled
conversant with the Mishnah, Talmud, Halakot, &c, than the

reverse.
Especially so, since Hadassi
is
ten, as, for instance, ten
promises to be
y),
with regard to
the
Holy Land and

Torah (130
&c.
Israel (129
n),
ten proofs for the authenticity
of the
ten duties of pupils towards their teacher

b),
(134
faith,
is
*),
ten degrees of dignity in Israel (135

All this
is
ten articles of
that his
probably due to the
fact
book
based on the Ten Commandments, and
this
fundamental idea
fails
he
may have
derived likewise from Nissi.
That Hadassi
250
to

all
quote Nissi anywhere matters nothing, for he was not at
particular
about naming his sources, referring to his

with
the
Karaite
rD.
17
predecessors
general
phrase
in^yn:
and
DimsDD
Thus
Nissi lived before the twelfth century,

in
this agrees with

vii)
Harkavy's discovery (mentioned

that he lived in Persia about
Stud. u. Mitt., VIII, p.

after 'Anan,
300 years
hence
in the
eleventh century.
What
!
a pity that Harkavy did not communicate
the text he discovered
Thus
century.
for
neither
Nissi nor our fragment

let
belong to the ninth
But nevertheless
authorship.
us examine Hirschfeld's proofs

similarity
Nissi's
The
between
Nissi's
is
auto-
biography, as Hirschfeld calls
it,
and our fragment

:
supposed
to consist in the following three points
(1) Nissi
recommends
[in
the study of punctuation, accentuation, defective
and plene
"p*B>
the Bible], as they are in vogue

Pinsker, p.
'di
among
. .
the Babylonians (comp.

. .
NE
nmpJ
is
vfrxb)
niH>
pidsi
D"kxn
-iy:B>
wmh nnm nnDm cevd
nvnwsi), and a goodly
part of our fragment

tion
;
provided with the Babylonian punctua-
(2) Nissi
recommends the study of the Mishnah, Talmud,

as well as
rni?ri:
and Halakot,
the
great
and small Toseftas
(ibid.
nwp msDinm
niaDinai
m^rai ni^nm nwfoi panh; 18
see also above concerning the twelfth qualification of the teacher),
and the author of our fragment occupies himself likewise with

the
it
Mishnah and
calls the
Talmud, Halakot
(3)
Nissi considers
a good point that he writes in
Hebrew
%
(ibid., p.
35
D,
ms 3
,
cnayn nana rnnx pe&a mna nepa [D pnm m.in nx r6ian *mvb nann jib6 kto ovrw DniK'N ])vbi ubi), and
our fragment
17
18
i>"n]
also
is
written in
Hebrew.
Comp. Bacher, MGIVJ., XL, 126. Under great and small mEDIf! Nissi understands perhaps the Tosefta
In talmudic-midrashic literature the term
and Baraytot.
is
m^HJ
1.
DVJ-'D
2. 8.
not wanting, e.g. Horayot end, as well as Kohelet rabba on
5 and
Right there occurs also the form
mDDin employed
;
by
Nissi.
;
so
Pal.
r.
Peah
1.
II,
(fol.
17 a,
1.
13 from below)
Lev.
r.,
ch.
22 and 30
Cant.
to
15 and
6. 8,
&c. (comp. Lewy, Ucbcr cinigc Fragmente aits der Mischna

p. 4).
des
Abba
Said,
EARLY KARAITE CRITICS OF THE MISHNAH POi

However, these three proofs are hardly conclusive:
Babylonian punctuation cannot
author, since
in
85]
(1)
The
be characteristic of
especially
any one
Genizah
recent
times,
among
the
fragments,
more and more

11
'
post-biblical texts are found with this
punctuation;
(2)
all
Karaites
quote
extensively
especially
from
the
b.
Mishnah
Jeroham
in their anti-rabbinic polemics,

in
Salmon
his controversy against
Saadya and Hadassi
in his
Eshkol Hakkofer. Nissi does not

from one another.
call
the Talmud, Haiakot, since
he says twice niapni TiO?n expressly, thus differentiating them
Nor does our author

not,
call
it
so, for
the haiakot the
which he quotes do
as
Hirschfeld
asserts,
designate
we have seen above, the Hebrew version of the Haiakot Pesukot w (3) still less can the Hebrew language of
Gemara,
but, as
the fragment be a proof for Nissi's authorship, since Karaites,

as pointed out above, did not cease to write
Hebrew even
after
the
commencement
its
of the Arabic period.
Judging then from the condition of our fragment no conjecture

is
possible as to
author.
Nevertheless we are thankful for
its
publication by Hirschfeld.
Perhaps chance
will yield us,
among
to
it
the treasures of the Genizah, further fragments of this quite old

anti-rabbinic work,
and then some of the enigmas attached
may be
unravelled.
II.
Still
less
does the
title
of Hirschfeld's article
is
fit
the second
text published therein.
This
the end of chapter 14 and the

l_>U!) of a
beginning of chapter 15 (j^c ^.olil

19
polemic
treatise.
MS.
Vat. 66 contains even a Sifra with Babylonian punctuation, see
JOR., N.
20
S.,
VI, 179 and
OLZ., XXI (1918^

I
53.
Since this version, as

in Palestine,
have proved elsewhere
(REJ.,
LXIII, 235
s
.
had arisen
there, the
we
might assume that also our Karaite author lived
more
so as Palestine
was
a centre of Karaite learning during the

half of the eleventh centuries.
second half of the tenth and the
first
But
against this assumption stands the Babylonian punctuation employed by the

author,
if
we
accept the statement of Hirschfeld that the fragment
is
an
autograph.
252
It
appears that Saadya's deductions about the necessity of oral
teaching and the rejection of analogy (^-Us) were quoted in the
former and refuted in the
latter chapter.
21
was the
first
to call
attention to this text {Steinschneider- Festschrift, p. 210),
and then,
what Hirschfeld seems to ignore,

of chapter
published a considerable part

ibid.,
15 (ZfHB., Ill,
685).
I
175-6; comp.
X, 43
ff.,
and
JQR., VIII,
between
al-anwar.
proved on internal evidence the connexion

Kirkisani's Kitab
this text
First,
and the second section of

it
is
this
second section that deals among

analogy, 22 then the style
Kirkisani,
23
others with the
method of employing
and manner of expression are those of

all
and,
finally,
the references of the author to his previous deductions are

in the first section
found
our
published in Harkavy.
Hi.), p. 187,
^~if* **.^j
1.
Comp.
e. g.
.
text,
ed. Hirschfeld
(=
*Ij~C
****-*
JiUj
us*
(*
La slyi
^_p1-...>
t^LlS^sj
1^9 s^jjum,
,
. .
0*?f3 and also
^^
*b
o^\
p.
:c
ed.
Harkavy ( Ha.),
cn>
287 below
wis 1^31
cîl
panrn
xsnn nno^s*
*a
[kdjn^k ana* jk itn3ni

#*</.,
1.
"1^ p&*5 in kb*5 ainta

jl
(r.
TNnta
jd^*
jk; Hi.
,jl
3: d.)j5j
&)
jus
jj iJb,
1.
^LjÎ Jso
a
*4*^sJ
tlDir
1.
^
:
*y^
^>
and then Ha.,

VTIK
p. 288,
,
21
npn |ND:^N
j
|K
IDin lîai
ynN
n^B
the
same verbatim
Hi. !%,
lyj>
j/sj
and Ha.,
Hyrkanos
1.
p.
is
299,
1.
20,
where the story about Eliezer ben

(comp. also
sJdail
told in detail
.-a*}
p.
283,
1.
7)
Hi., ibid.,
lil
14: iLsJJl i^LLJl

21
5i Lbl Ll*jJ A9
,Ac
The beginning
of the partly preserved chapter 14

in
may
be reconstructed
this un-
from the refutation
chapter 15,
fol.
and indeed the refutation of

49
ro.,
1.
preserved beginning goes up to
5.
Apparently the Karaite,
in his refutation, quotes Saadya's proofs almost verbatim.

22
The
:
superscription of this section

rbri
is
(see SteiiiscJincider-Fcstschnft,
p.
196)
nsansi nb^Ni ftmta 3si\s

let
*a
rnsf^x f&KpDfo
Dtvpbm bpvbx.
23
Of
the
numerous examples
is
me
cite one,
namely, that the Christians
maintain
God
a **i\s\
aJlU
>*> an expression that occurs in our text

first
(p. 187 below), as well as in the
section, ed.
Harkavy,
p. 305,
1.
21.
EARLY KARAITE CRITICS OF THE MISHNAII

v^so y
(r. l^9)
POZNANSK1
1.
253
Li
*^>-}\
Uj, and Ha.,
p.
286,
22
DfttH 17*1
i?H
on me^N
nee
is
rnbyii
mbnn
*^dd
p hkWw
p.
wpotc.
Yudgiin, &
All
In
addition, there
the passage about
Abu Tsa and
quoted by
me
in
Steinsehneider-Festsehriff,
219.
this
evidence makes Kirkisani's authorship a certainty.

It is true that
a later author of the sixteenth century, namely,
Moses
Baslr.
Bashiatshi, quotes a passage from our text

7\kt\t\
and
i.e.
labels the
author thereof n"y
pjdV
'm h"W
DHDR,
Joseph
al-
But
have pointed out that Bashiatshi confused al-Ba-ir
with Kirkisani also in other places, and quoted passages word

for
word from the Kitdb al-anwar, which he

hnjn
(see
is
calls in
in
freely
TiKEn (once also
Dmsn
~lD),
I.e.).
24
the
Hebrew name of
al-Basir
Steiiischneider- Festschrift,
This
confusion,
however,
manifested already in the chain of tradition which

Nisan, in his
of the
v.
Mordecai
the DN"vN
b.
^"PE
Tl, chapter
9,
took over from
HDD
above-named Moses Bashiatshi, and which

David ibn Saglr
find
(first
goes back to Yefet

century).
half of the fourteenth
Here we
fol.
such blunders as the following (ed.
Vienna,
ni rwi
b)
,
DniT
.
nvb& 2~b p^nyn
(n: 3-1 b"-i)
wm
nrwom
D^
'"
'JKDp-tpn
pny
3py^
mh
11
ro
*pv rfo
mi onrv p
|ttp
mam
*i
^ wpm
.
fe iTE^>n
nnx
n\i
aim
nwiw
5>'?
jd?3
wrap nn
ikhmi
TJ'sa
iwa (r. nans?) nam nixon naoa naoa T3?b ryn p in 3-6 mp-nyn Dm p npy rta
.
,
pw nnyo taw cjdv toujkm 6

s'ln
pidv
n"-t
nwi
~ied
to
^NDpnpn spy ni
ikdS>
'131
p nnn
s|DV 21b)
nvnn omaK p
rm*o
difficult
m
wm
ny ns* D'-pnpnm
DHnwi
^
It
by bna
is
nan
fcWMn nb&>
Wllb npTiym.
which
find
oneself
in this confusion
bristles with chronological impossibilities
but this
much may be
gathered that Kirkisani,
who
is
named
rightly in the beginning
Jacob
b. Isaac, is
made
a contemporary
of a certain Joseph
who polemised
as
against Saadya in his "iD
liNDn composed in the year 930.
By
this Joseph,
however,
is
meant Joseph
24
al-Basir who,
is
we now know,
D'HIXm ~12D
p.
lived a century
Thus the Kitdb al-anwar

b.
called
also in the
ibid.
.
Hebrew
193^.
translation of Levi
Yefet, see Pinsker,
90 încorrectly,
p.
254

colophon of Elijah
b.
after Kirkisani, see the
Baruch
to his
copy
of
Salmon
s
b.
Jeroham's polemic treatise against Saadya, MS.

in Bardach, P|Bn ^ni>
Pinsker 27
(communicated
T3TO,
p.
37)
.
.
xnpo ya
nm-\n
(V) p
'131
^swoo onna o^n ^yn bjdv uan ws 5>b> nan an
Ooirvan nx
.
.
.
i>*n)
vtodbbm
ian
Dmn*
pi?D
po^D D an
s
n*i njspa
namon niKn nana un
wan
S>b>
rwD,n
fflW. On the other hand, mention is made in the abovenamed chain of tradition of a Joseph ha-Roeh b. Jacob Kirkisani,
the author of a great code of laws,
Kirkisani,
known
in later sources
who may be the well-known by the name of Joseph (instead

b.
of Jacob), but not al-Bas!ry
who was
fol.
Abraham. 25
Even more
n~itf.
is
confusing are the data in Simha Isaac Lutzki's

the chain of tradition on
D*p*Ttf
In
21a, which no doubt

b.
derived
is
from that of Mordecai
b.
Nisan, Jacob
Isaac al-Kirkisani
said to have taken over the law from

it
Salmon and transmitted

in
to his son
Joseph ha-Roeh, who composed the hnjn nitfen
the year 910.
But
in
the
list
of the learned on
:
fol.
21b
the
following are enumerated separately

then,
Jacob
b.
Isaac al-Kirkisani,
in
two
lines
below, Joseph
b.
Jacob al-Kirkisani, and

b.
addition also Joseph ha-Roeh ha-Kohen

list
Abraham.
In the
b.
of Karaite writings again the

(fol.
CniN
is
ascribed to Joseph
Jacob al-Kirkisani
23
a),
the bvon niXD.n and a

(fol.
)m
'd to
Joseph ha-Roeh ben Jacob al-Kirkisani

a
24
b),
and likewise
niD
'd
to
Joseph ha-Roeh ha-Kohen

in
b.
Abraham.
Thus
any one who

25
the fixation of older Karaite authors and their

is
Possibly al-Basir
meant by naTCHl DHnaK
C|DV 21
a"l is
p
due
2pV* ai,
to a mis-
"HJfiaR having been formed from "VJfaPK, while
apV
understanding of apJT US*.
In his
HinV
"1DD (ed.
Markon
in D"Ip."l, III,
57-78) Moses Bashiatshi calls al-Basir mostly

but once also
HKlin DnnaK
(p.
*|D^ an,
p. 73).
TVUH
DnnaN an
s
*1DV
is
ân
64. comp. with
On
last
p.
67 HNinn PJDV
an !?n:n nlKDil
named together with an

I
other-
wise unknown
"WOn apV
an Pin^n ann.
presume
that here too the
named had arisen from "Vin,?N

is
apV* 12K, and that Bashiatshi had

This
is
divided one person into two from sheer ignorance.

for the confusion which
further proof
manifested in his writings concerning the older
Karaite authors.

works
relies
POZNANSK1
is
275
on the data of
their later co-religionists
sure to
lose himself in a hopeless labyrinth.
In spite of
all
this,
Hirschfeld follows the data of Moses
Bashiatshi and ascribes the text edited by

proofs against
him
to al-BasIr.
(1)
His
Kirkisani's authorship are as
follows:
Some
points mentioned in our text are found also in the
first
section
of Kirkisani's work
refer
why does not

text tells of
the author of the fragment
to
this
section,
but to detailed discussions which are to
follow later?
(2)
Our
Yudgan
that he considered
himself a Messiah, while Kirkisani

sidered by his pupils only.
(3)
states that
he was so context, in
The
tone of our
which
some harsh expressions

(p
186,
p.
1.
are used against
Saadya and the Rabbis
4 from below: Ijaî ^*

187,
1.
j*^~>
lJ^
<J^
*?&)
fit
uAJlj
9:
*4~>Li
*$As>
dssâJ j.a Jj),
does not
in
with the otherwise mild tone of Kirkisani, but rather
suits
contemporary of Yephet
b. 'Ali,
26
who
frequently employs such
harsh and insulting expressions against his rabbinic opponents.
But
of
all
all
these proofs by Hirschfeld are not conclusive.

first,
Least
the
for,
as
we have seen above,

Kitdb al-anwar.
the author of our
fragment does refer to what precedes, and

in the first section of the at the
all
all this is
indeed found
refers
But when he
it
same time
also to
subsequent discussions,
section he treats
all
is
not at
surprising, for in the
first
these subjects
in
a casual way only, dismissing summarily the divagations of the

their false conceptions
;
Rabbis and
the details, however, were
reserved for a special section, and hence, for example, everything
concerning the Sabbath was reserved for section V.
That
is
why
we read
nyviD
p.
in
section
I,
where he makes the above-mentioned

(p.
reproach to the Rabbis concerning the prayers

S
287,
1.
3):
D nirbvO
1.
DkWn
Drona
was
a
S in BffiMD1.
%
Likewise, for instance,

:
294,
4,
with regard to the search of the fresh ears of barley

NtDO
*a
n*3N^N
26
mrr
xd
nn
*an*tDi
3<3i6m abc
ziixi
That al-Bas
contemporary of Yefet
is
not at
all
proved.
The
his
latter
belongs to the end of the tenth century, while
al-Ba--ir
composed
legal
code
in
1036-7.
VOL. XI.
256
vib6k Din

^>v
n.td
obn^
*rb$ *m njnNota
is
ri^p^s
'a
-jini
SUN^NI
2"
.
Of even
less
importance
the second proof which

refutation.
Finally, as
is
amounts
to quibbling,
and hardly needs

it
to the third point, while
is
true that Kirkisani's tone
mild
It
is
on the whole, yet harsh expressions are not wanting.

sufficient to read the first chapter of the first section,
where he
reproaches the Rabbis with the ruin of religion (rfci j'"6x BNpDN,
p.
(p.
286, 290,
1.
15),
8),
deceit
(p.
287,
1.
24),
1.
ignorance and blindness

18,
1.
ridiculousness (p. 295,
where we should read

to
rrDD instead of mDD), &c.

also the expression nnVtfD,
With reference
Saadya he employs
in our
which occurs likewise
fragment
p. 9).
(see
my
The Karaite Literary Oppo7ients of Saadiah Gaon,

this
Apparently also
proper support.
proof against Kirkisani's authorship lacks
There
is
is,
however, also an external proof that our fragment
not from the pen of al-Basir.
The Kitab al-anwdr

and every section
of Kirkisani
was divided into sections
(n?Npft),
into chapters,
each one of which had DN2

of our
'istibsar,
at its head, exactly as in the case
fragment.
In
al-BasIr's
legal
code, entitled Kitab aU
which was likewise divided into sections (ri?NpD or DN?3)

title
and chapters, every chapter bore the

the Kitab al-istib;ar
is
?B.
A
U*9
fragment of
(Cat. II,
found
in
MS.
end:
Brit.
Mus. 2576'
s.-iAd
No. 591), and here we read

.
at the
^Wl
dUj5^
c^Jl
ij
is
u**}/^
BasTr, as
J r ttJl J*\ Ji J^ CU^ ô^ J1j01 J Jyfl iW "*^ ujlif ^ uyî^Jl (J J$&\ J. Joseph al5
well
known, was blind, and therefore dictated

remark of Kirkisani, where
Ji*l)
(
2s
27
Comp.
also the general
his procedure in
is
mentioning rabbinic deviations and later detailed discussions thereof

formulated as follows
(p.
295,
1.
21)
JD
HINDS flWWi
NHH 13N
-Di:)
XTC1B
*B
HIDIJ t6
*B
Mtib
^H
^12) ^VSJ MDJKB 2toi>N NHH

K!>:D
NJND tOKVlta
hitni D^> NDO
DK^N
H>2
b)W *6 NE D
S
nyvio
28
*B.
Numerous passages from
al-Basir's al-Mithtawi,
where
this expression
occurs, are cited and discussed
by Goldziher (REJ., XLIX,
227. n.
r).

his
PCX
will
KI
257
work
to his pupils.
traits
Considering
different
this characteristic expression
and various
elsewhere,
I
of a
nature,
which
be treated
a!-
recognize
now
the
connexion with the Kitab
'isiibsar of a
Genizah fragment described by

No. 20 (Ar. T.-S.
part
me
30),
in the
Karaite
I
Literary
designate
Of>f>07ients, p. 56,
which
could
code.
there
this
only
as
of
an old Karaite
[B
legal
Also
in
a
fragment we read:
then:
fibsp^
'a
itfhta
dn^k,
nxrtax ND'B n;"2 ip K3M s-ivi^d man naa ne *by

.
.
NEHp nW7CN rniD, and

are
rjiyn
accordingly the headings of the chapters

*a
termed here ,sa, e.g. rbx HN1 rlp

|0
TJ'y DDNi)S>K
h^K
cites
Wp&n.
Besides this the author of this fragment

I
his
"pDL'^N*
3NDD.
conjecture
therefore
that
the
fragment
MS.
Br.
Mus. 2576-, which deals with leprosy and other laws
of uncleanness, and where the author cites his JîJl i_>L5 (see Cat.,
I.e., p.
181
f.),
is
likewise part
')
and parcel of the Kitab
al-istibsar,
'>
.
and
that
instead of J^x^Jl
we should read djCJl
But
title,
also in this fragment the individual chapters bear Jas as e.g.

dlijo
J*asj
i^^
(^9 l4*5sj>
^Jjj c>c1 LJ1
ajL, Jwas.
Thus,
for various reasons, the
fragment edited by Hirschfeld
cannot come from al-BasIr, but must be considered as part of

Kirkisani's work.
Here
too, nevertheless,
thanks are due to the
editor for the publication, since every fragment from Kirkisani

greatly enhances our
knowledge of
early Karaism.
Samuel Poznanski.
Warsaw.
Mention
to
is
also
made
there of a pupil of al-Basir, namely
Abu
Galib Tabit.
whom
his teacher dictated,
and the wrong notions concerning him are
righted.
s :
IS
THE MENORAT HA-MAOR A PRODUCT

OF FRANCE?
reading the article in the issue of the Jewish Quarterly
While
Review
(vol.
IX, Nos. 3 and 4) entitled

',
'
Menorat ha-Maor, time

Efros,
and place of composition

question
by Dr.
Israel
a Talmudic
came
to
my
mind.
In a discussion of our sages upon

its
the date of the
Book
of Job, while they generally maintained
historical character, a disciple surprised
Rabbi Samuel
b.
Nachmani
work
by declaring his conviction that

is
'
Job never
existed, but the

'.
a parable,
i.
e.
a moral or religious apologue

'
The Rabbi
the case
promptly refuted his theory by saying,

is
If this
is
why new
his
name and
I
place recorded?' (Baba bathra i5 a ).
With the
same question
confront Dr. Efros in refutation of his

is
theory that France
the place of composition of the Menorat

its
ha-Maor and the birthplace of
author.
If this
is
the case,
how about
his
name and country ?

'
In the manifold editions which the book has gone through

the title-page reads
indicates that Spain
Isaac
Aboab
this
ha-Sefardi
',
which unmistakably
was the place of composition and the author
native there.
For centuries
book was considered

all
as a product
fact that
it
of Spain, and quoted as such by
scholars.
in
The
was published with a Spanish translation

as
Leghorn
as early
1657, and that according to the opinion of an
Amsterdam
a Spanish
scholar, R.
Hyman
(Ozar
Arbich, the author himself
made
translation
Jia-Sefarim,
by Ben-Jacob,
it
p. 339), sustains
the
current established opinion that
is
a product of Spain.
To
contradict such an opinion positive evidence must be adduced
from the contents of the book, as
style,
thought, historical allusions,
or reference to prevailing customs, to corroborate the
new
theory.
The
writer, after furnishing us with
(what seems to him) internal
evidence in support of his assertion, concludes that Isaac
Aboab
2 59
260
ha-Sefardi,

though of Spanish origin as the name implies, lived
his
and composed
work not
in Spain but in France.

is
Now.
as the
burden of proof
if
it
on him,
let
us examine his
evidence and ascertain
is
strong enough to overthrow the
unanimous opinion.
The
which
is
first
clue the writer offers as evidence
is
this
in ch. 93,
mainly an explanation on the benediction called Baruch

:
Sheamar, Aboab says
idnp inn rv6nnn

the
nmpm i:pn
benediction
d:i
'
They
have instituted before the Psalms

Sheamar".'
"Baruch
Now, Abraham
of Lunel in his work Ha-Manhig,

is
states that the

all
French custom
to say
Baruch Sheamar before
the Psalms on Sabbath as well as on the week-days, but the

is
custom of Spain
that the
Sabbath Psalms preceded Baruch

in
Sheamar on Sabbath.
In the
Our author
making no
distinction
is
evidently followed the French custom.

flimsy.
first
This evidence
is
very
place, the
Menorat ha-Maor
not a code
of ritual laws, but a moral

in the
and
ethical collection of
gems found
Talmud and Midrash.

he
refers
The
author speaks of some ritual
laws, but only in a general way, without going into details, for
particulars
chs.
this
the
his
reader to
his
other two
is
books (see
154 and 155);
aim
in this chapter
to
comment on
his
benediction and no more.
In the
second place,
it
text
of Baruch
Sheamar
is
purely Sefardic, because
contains the
words KTIpm, brim, "jten 'the Great and Holy King', and
inn
no
1W
*JH21
Kin,
'blessed
is
He
from
and His name',

his
therefore,
conclusion can be drawn

precedence.
silence
in
the
matter of
Another clue Dr. Efros
finds in ch.
103, where the author
speaks about the custom of swaying to and fro during prayer,
which the Manhig holds to be a French custom.

is
Now,
if
this
evidence, then the Kuzari of Jehudah ha-Levi was also comin France,
posed
because the above custom
is
mentioned and
explained in that book (Kuzari, book

the
II, sec. 80).
And
thus by
his
his
same argument R. Jacob, the author of the Tur, wrote

in France,
work
because he mentions the above custom
in
commentary on the Torah
(Exod.
20.
15),
Abudraham
also
IS
MENORAT HA-MAOR PRODUCT OF FRANCE?

it
LEVITAN
(Warsaw
261
speaks of
p.
as a general
custom among
this
all Israel
edit.,
29); also the Zohar
comments on
custom (Zohar Pinchas).
On
the contrary, the trend of the conversation in the Kuzari proves
that the
custom
is
universal
among
the Jews, and not confined to
a particular country.
Another allusion
to a
French custom Dr. Efros
finds in ch. 152,
where the author speaks about the solemnity of Hoshanah Rabba
and says
the
that
additional Psalms are recited on that day', which

to
Manhig holds
be a French custom.
But neither
is
this
proof convincing, because

places where
in
it
Abudraham
as
also states that there are
is
customary to add Psalms and to say Kether
Musaf on Hoshanah Rabba

some
is
on holidays, and he alludes
to
places in Spain, because he mentions Kether in
Musaf
this
which
according to
the
Sefardic
ritual.
Accordingly,
custom
is
not exclusively French.

to
In ch. 286 where the author speaks about the custom
mourn and the month

of
abstain from pleasure during the

of
first
:
nine days of
'
Ab, we find a sentence as follows
The custom
some
is
to abstain from
meat during
this
period, especially
on the
last
meal before
'
:
fasting,
on the eighth day of Ab.'
On
this Dr. Efros says
Because he speaks about abstaining from
meat during the nine days, and we learn from various sources
that
it
was not a Spanish custom.'

Spain, as
it
admit that the custom did

states
not prevail in
Abudraham
appears to
that
it
was only
practised by a few, but

interpreted the passage.
that
it
me
that
Dr. Efros mis-
The above
sentence does not
mean
was an established custom, but that some scrupulous

is
observers abstain from meat, and this
in
accord with Aboab's

the custom
countryman Abudraham, who

Another clue the writer
states
that
was not
prevalent, but practised only by a few.

finds in ch, 290,
where Aboab quotes
from the chapters of R. Eliezer about sounding the Shofar during

the
a
month
of Elul, which according to the
Rosh and Tur
is
German Minhag
wish to
(not, as the writer says, a French).

'
On
this
\
the writer remarks,

I
Aboab speaks
takes
it
of
it
as a fixed institution
know where he
from.
Where does
it
say that
262

The sentence D ^3n Wpnn pypin 1!W and therefore have
s
'
it
was an established Minhag?
"pi
nyj'l
H3
^3
Wk
C in trton
,ta
the
wise instituted to sound the Shofar

a
on the
first
of Elul
'
is
merely
quotation from the chapters of R. Eliezer (ch. 46), and even
his
own
addition of the words

it
CHnn
i?3
'
the whole
month
',
does
;
not necessarily indicate that
was the Minhag of his place
he
may
this
refer to a
German Minhag, and
as I have said before that
book was not intended

it
to serve as a
code of
ritual laws,
it
therefore,
was unnecessary
as the
for the author to
remark that
was
German Minhag,
says,
'
Rosh and Tur
do.
The
writer finds
another allusion to a French custom in the same chapter, where
Aboab
before
We
also find that

',
it
is
customary to
to
fast the
day
Rosh ha-Shanah
;
which the Manhig holds
be a French
custom
with this the writer concludes his evidence.
But he
',
failed to notice that
Aboab does not

it
say
'
it
is
customary
but
'we
find', i.e.
we
find some, yet
is
not general as in France.
This corresponds with the language of Abudraham the Sefardi,
who
says
'
:
There are individuals who

edit.,
fast
the day before

all
ha-Shanah' (Warsaw
p. 140).
is
After
the
Rosh aforesaid we
see that Dr. Efros's evidence
not convincing, consequently the
book remains
strength of
its
as
it
was before, a product of Spain, upon the
tradition,
and no
further
argument
is
necessary.
Nevertheless, to remove any doubt or suspicion, I will point out
a few clues which
have discovered in the body of the book
favouring the prevailing opinion.
/In chapter
337, where the author speaks about the virtue of
modesty and the homeliness of immodesty, he quotes
from
Masechet Kallah, chapter
1,
where
it
is
related that R. Akiba,
seeing a child with uncovered head, said he was sure that the
child was the offspring of an incestuous marriage,
and Aboab
is
concludes with the quotation that

great
'
bare-headedness
considered
immodesty and pride

first
'.
Now
the custom of covering the
head was
noticeable in the middle ages in Spain.

states that
Abraham
of Lunel in
Ha-Manhig
he found
a
in
Spain that the
people covered their heads during prayer,
comment which
In the
indicates that the practice was not customary in France.
IS
MENORAT HA-MAOR PRODUCT OF FRANCE?

Germany and
R. Meir
LEVITAN
263
thirteenth century boys in

called to the law in the
adults in Prance were

to
Synagogue bare-headed (Darke Moshe

3).
Tur Orach Chaim,

burg says:
'It
is
282, note
b.
Baruch of RothenJoseph
not forbidden to go
says: 'It
is
bare-headed.'
Solomon
and
in
del
Medigo
customary
in all parts of Italy
many
to
countries under the dominion of the emperor of
Germany,
p. 49).
go with uncovered head
'
(Mazref Lachochmah,
Therefore,
his
we may conclude,
in
that
had Aboab
lived
and
composed
book
France he would not speak of bare-headed-
ness in so harsh a tone and

In chapter 80,
name it immodesty and pride. where Aboab speaks of the significance

:
of
circumcision, he says
'
Through
where
',
its
merit the Almighty listens
to the prayer of Israel
'
this assertion is
it
hinted at in one of the
eighteen
benedictions,
says,
'
For thou
hearest
'
the
'
prayers of every
mouth
the numeral value of n ?

is
mouth
is
equal to
HW
'circumcision', which
'
85,
and he construes the

'.
sentence to
mean For thou

also
hearest the prayer of the circumcised
Abudraham
clusively that
makes the same remark.
This proves conthe text of the
he followed the Sefardic
ritual, for
German and French form of prayer, does not read yDH5> nns *3 na bi nân of every mouth but bvow *py rtan for
'
',
dwq
'
thou hearest the prayer of thy people Israel in mercy
'.
Dr. Efros, not content with opposing the prevalent opinion
with regard to place, attempts also to contradict

to time.
it is
it
with regard
He
disposes of Dr. Zunz's scientific essay
in
which
proved conclusively that Aboab lived about the year 1300

last
with a stroke of his pen, and concludes that he lived in the

part of the fourteenth century, about 139 1,
and the
early part of
is
the fifteenth.
To
discuss
his
new theory of date
not
my
purpose here.
I will
quote only one of his arguments in support

In the course of
'
:
of date, which disproves his theory of place.

his
argument
to solve the
problem of
date,
he says
The
greater
part of the fifteenth century

territory,
must be excluded from the problematic

silent
because Aboab
its
is
about the
'
Mourners' Kaddish
'.
which assumed
therefore,
present aspect early in the fifteenth century,

at that period.
he cannot be placed
This argument
264
proves

conclusively
against
his
own
no
case
it
refutes
his
new
and
theory with regard to place.
The Kaddish
'
'
originally has
it
relation to the prayer,
still
less to the
dead, because
contains no mention of the dead.

recitation
to
after
It
was originally instituted
for
completing a
fol.
Talmudical discourse (Tosaphoth
Berachoth,
3).
How
and when the custom arose

and when the
that the
mourners
it
recite the
Kaddish,
belief sprung
up
that
has a power of redeeming

is
the dead from the suffering of
Gehinnom,
not known.
This we
do know,
that the Mourners'
Kaddish or the Orphans' Kaddish
originated in
among
in
the
Germany and France, long before it found a place Sefardim. Abudraham the Sefardi, in his book written
1340, has no allusion to
it.
the year
Simcha of Vitry
it
in
France, in his 'Machzor' written in
1208, refers to
plainly
by the words, 'The lad stands up and says Kaddish' (Machzor

Vitry , p. 74).
Isaac of Vienna,
who
lived in the year 1250,
mentions
it
in his
work Or Zaru a.
is,
He
says
'
:
The custom
recites
of
the people in the Rhine-lands
that the
orphan
p.
Kaddish
after the conclusion of the prayer
(Or Zaru'a,
n).
Now, had
In
Aboab
lived in France in the latter part of the fourteenth century,

in silence the
he would not pass over

dead man, which
Kaddish,
it
Mourners' Kaddish.
chapter 9, where he relates the legend of R.

is
Akiba and the
given by
many
as the source of the orphans'

to speak
would have been very appropriate
of the
Kaddish.
his
This proves conclusively that Aboab lived and wrote

in
book
Spain where the institution of the Orphans' Kaddish

until the fifteenth century.
was not yet established

In conclusion
recognized
I
will
say
that
the
Menorat ha-Maor was
by Abraham Zacuto, Azulai, Zunz, and others as

is
a work composed in Spain, and as there

contrary,
no evidence
to the
we must accept
its
the traditional view as authentic, as the

'
inscription of
title-page indicates,
Isaac
Aboab
ha-Sefardi
S.
'.
Isidor
Baltimore.
Levitan.
ADLER'S 'GAZETTEER OF HEBREW PRINTING'

A
Gazetteer of Hebrew Printing.
By Elkan Nathan Adler.

Co., 1917.
is
London: Grafton &
pp. 23.
The
diffusion of
Hebrew
printing
it
of great interest from
many points of among the Jews

shown
and
its
view, reflecting as
does the state of culture

world and the interest
in the various parts of the literature, or
in
Jewish
more
particularly
in the Bible
language by the peoples

only
serious
effort
among whom
this
they lived.
The
article
to sketch
development
Ersch
is
the
by Steinschneider and Cassel

Section,
vol.
in
28,
and Gruber's
is
Encyklopaedie (Second
pp.
21-94) which
mainly based on Wolf's great Bibliotheca Hebraea and practically

stops with
the year 1732.

is
This
article,
which concludes with

Steinschneider
his
list
of 155 printing places,

it
now very
antiquated.
in
himself corrected
in
innumerable passages
interleaved copy
(Cassel's
is
Bodleian
Catalogue, and his
own
covered with his
additions and corrections.
copy which also must have
come
I
to the
Jewish Theological Seminary at
New York
with
the rest of his library unfortunately could not be found
when
gives'
came
to the institution fifteen years ago.)
Freimann's Ausa.
stellung
hebraischer Druckiverke,
Frankfurt
M.
1902,
the
179 places represented in the splendid
municipal
library
of that city and, therefore, cannot be expected to be complete
or always to record the

list
first
book printed
in every place.
The
of printing places in the Jewish E?icydopedia, XII, 328-30,
includes almost 300 names.
These
enumerated
ai\d
other
predecessors
of
Mr.
Adler,
which arc
at the
end of
his short introduction, generally limited
their attention to
sets
for
itself
all-Hebrew books, while the present Gazetteer
much more ambitious

265
goal.
It
enumerates
266
all

the places in which
Hebrew
type
was used, even
if
only
in
casually, for a few
words found somewhere in a book printed

to
other languages, like Priestley's Letters
the Jezvs, printed in
Birmingham, which have a

title
line of
Hebrew
as a
motto on the
page.
Accordingly the number of places enumerated exceeds

of
all
by
far that
his predecessors, reaching the
imposing number
of 547-
The
is
titles
given show at a glance whether a
Hebrew
text
or a treatise containing only
some Hebrew words

if
or passages
recorded.
It
would have been interesting

texts
in those places
in
which complete Hebrew
were printed
after
Hebrew
first
type
had been used

by a second
words printed
previously, this fact

entry.
in
would have been recorded

the
To
give
an example,
Hebrew
Germany
are found in an anti-Jewish tract of
Peter Schwarz which appeared in Esslingen, 1475; in the same

city a
Hebrew book was
printed in 1846 (L. Dukes, Kobez al

this
/ad).
a
Perhaps Mr. Adler might take up
larger
task in
second edition, which we certainly wish,
for his very useful

will
booklet.
For such a revision some material
be offered in
the following remarks.
In a few instances
the
places
came
across earlier books printed in
mentioned
collections
in
by Adler, but
not
having
made any
haphazard,
in the
in
systematic
my
additions
are
decidedly
and
do not claim
are
any case that the books enumerated
following
the
earliest in
which Hebrew type appeared
a certain place.
Aguas
Calientes,
1891.
second edition of Canticles with
the Spanish translation of Jesus Diaz de

first
Leon
when did
the
edition appear
Altdorf, 1643.
P art f Nizzahon was published by Schnell (Cat. Bodl. No. 2569) before the complete edition by Hackspan.
Amsterdam, 1605.
But according
to
Hugh
Broughton, The
this
fa7?iilie
of David.
Burger and Hillesum
and Broughton's
See
Parshegen Nishtevan were printed in Leyden or Franeker.

[I.
M. Hillesum],
Bibliotheca Rosenthaliana
pp. 17-19,
en Boeke?i,
Amsterdam. 1919,
Een Keur ait de Hss. No. Si. The Spanish

:
ADLER'S GAZETTEER OF
HEBREW PRINTING MA!

No.
74), s
I.
translation of the TirnE {ibid.,
1604, which has the

in the
word "WriE on the

in
title
and a few Hebrew words
book
(cut
in
wood, not printed from movable type) possibly was printed
Amsterdam.
Andover.
1813
;
The
first
edition of Stuart's
(Dr. A. S.
Cat. Brinley, no. 7269.
Grammar appeared W. Rosenbach.)
in
Antwerp, 1545.
scrivere
G. A. Tagliente,
5).
La
vera arte de
lo excellente
{RE/., LIV, 261, note

3.
Augsburg, 1509, Jan.

Avignon, 1444(F).
PfefTerkorn's Juden-Feind.
About Waldvogel's types

OLZ., 191
1,
.
see
Freimann,
ZfHB., VIII, 46
Nestle,
155-6.
.
.
Avignon, 1756(F).
Specimen of P
;
Lexicon Hebr. Chald.

I
Lat. Biblicum sub auspiciis Passionei
the preface of
it
promises
title
the second volume for 1759, although

page, the date 1765.
It
bears
itself,
on the
in
mentions a review of a specimen
Acta
Ernditorum, April, 1756.

Baltimore, 1867.
B. Szold, Andachtsbilchlein
Dunbar contains
no Hebrew.
Breslau, 161
fo.
1.
Peter Kirsten, Notae
ad Evangelium Matthaei.
'practically
',
Cambridge, Mass., 1640.

the
a
first
The Bay Psalm Book,
book printed
in the British
American colonies
contains
few words in Hebrew, which were printed from blocks, not
from movable type.
(W. Eames,
list
of editions of the
Bay
Psalm Book, New York, 1885, p. 6.) Chur read 1616. Voitberger, Arcanum punctationis
:
(Porges).
Cologne,
1509.
Joh.
PfefTerkorn,
Wie
die
Juden yr Oster
in
ha Iten.
Constantinople.
It
ought to be mentioned that the Tur

is
express words bears the date 1493, and that 1503

in
a correction
which
all
bibliographers agree.
(not
If Adler's suggestion that the

in
Behai of 1401
correct
1487) appeared
to
Constantinople
were
the book seems

in
me
to
the emendation
doubtful.
is
the date of the
come from a Spanish press Tur would become rather

far as
In any event, either of the two books, as
known,
the
first
printed work produced by any press in the Near East.
268

G. E. Levi, BHp, Ossia
cere muniale
Cuneo, 1865.
per
la ce?ia
religiosa di pasqua.
Dayton, O.
The book mentioned by
Adler does not contain
any Hebrew.
In 1890 there appeared aan*WK "WK lin3KmyB

INS a booklet, which
PWJJB &r\H n3PlN "Un

Danzig, 1554-5.
on
p.
with the
heaviest type has the remakable misprint "jy& EiriNl
Philipp Wolff, Spiegel der Juden (Schwenke,
Altpreussische Monatsschrift,
XXXIII,
in
1896, p. 84).
the
Denipontum
place
is
is
misprint for Oenipontum, Innsbruck, as

correctly
printed
Catalogue Gesenius, No. 242, to
which Steinschneider
as source.
in his author's
copy in our Library
refers
Dessau, 1696.
rmb
sarr;e
sb%T\
appeared
earlier
than 3p}T
pn,
although in the
Mendelssohns,
year (M. Freudenthal,
Aus
der Heimat
p. 169).
J.
Dinkelsbuhl, 1838.
filr Israeliten,
Heidegger, b*
m,
Tempel
des
Herrn
contains only the two words on the

(?).
title in
Hebrew.
Dodrecht, 1584
The Spanish
translation of the "TITHE with
the printing place 'Moguntia' (Seeligmann, ZfHB., XIII, 130-1).
Frankfort
the
Thomas Mumer's Latin translation of Haggada, which contains a few Hebrew words, appeared before
o.
M., 15 12.
the Birkat ha-Mazon ([M. Sondheim], Die altesten Frankfurter
Drucke, 1885,
p.
19 seq.).
is
Freiburg i/Br
Galatz, 1882.
identical with Fribourg.

fo.
hxyrw weekly,
(Vol. II, Nos. 9-34.)
Giessen
Glogau,
read 1608.
1830.
Arnheim, Leitfaden beim
Unterricht in
der
mosaischen Religion.
Gotha,
(Porges).
1643.
Reyher,
Prima
legendi
hebraice
rudimenta
Hamburg,
deutsche Juden,
1536.
Psalmus
XL VII
(Grunwald,
Hamburg s
}
Hamburg, 1904, p. 153, note 1). Balmes, Hebrew grammar Hanau, 1594.
Harderwyk occurs
Heidelberg, 1586.
twice.
(Steinschneider,
Zusatze).
Polyglot Bible (Cat. Bodl., No. 269).
ADLER
GAZETTEER OF HEBREW PRINTING

1.
MARX
209
Hildesheim, 171
(Gen. 1 17
;
Witteck, Iura Israelitarum in Palaestina

I,
see
Le Long-Masch,
Petrus
p. 160).
Ingolstadt,
antiquitatis.
1534.
Apianus,
Inscriptio7ies
sacrosaiutae
rare
Hebrew words occur in tne printer's mark of this bock which was shown to me by Mr. Voynich. Are there
books by the same printer?
earlier
Kiel, 1666.
Wasmuth, Hebraismus
restitutus (Steinschneider,
HandbucJi).
Konigsberg,
1552-3.
The
printer
Hans Weinreich used
woodcut of the Tetragrammaton

(/. c.
;
in several publications
(Schwenke,
see Danzig).
Kreuznach.
repetition
Tarn
u-Muad does
not belong here, and
is
a
in
of the
following.
Did the booklet not appear

Culmacher,
Breslau
Leipzig,
Pestilenz
III, p.
after
1492.
Philip
Pegimen wider
die
(Hain 5848*, British
Museum
Catalogue of Incunabula,
639) contains a few
Hebrew
letters
on
fol.
b.
Dr. G. P.
Winship of the Widener

attention to this fact.
Library,
Harvard,
lately
drew
my
Before Novenianus's Elementale Hebraicu??i which Mr. Adler

mentions, the grammars of B. Caesar (Bauch,
pp. 283
MoGIVf.,
48, 1904,
and 481, No. 21) and those by
Cellarius (ibid., No. 24-5)
came
out.
Magdeburg, 1607.
Mainz,
1542.
Jonah quadrilinguis
1523
(Cat. Bodl.,
No. 369).
Wicelius,
Idiomata quaedam linguae sanctae

refers to
(Steinschneider, HandbucJi).
Psalms (Cat. Bodl.,

;
No. 45) which, however, do not contain the Hebrew text have the title Psalterium iuxta Hebraicam veritatem
:
they
dive
Hieronymo
Centralblatt
intei-prete,
which gave
rise
to the confusion (Falk,

p. 62).
fur Bibliothekswesen, XVIII,
Breydenbach's
Travels to Palestine which appeared in Latin and

contain a
German
in
It
14S6
Hebrew alphabet
cut in wood, as plate 12.

ca.
was
repeated in the reprints Spires 1490 and
1495 (^
L. Schreiber,
Manuel
Steele,
de
1,
F amateur
de gravure sur bois et sur mital au
V,
pp. 146-8).
270

1843.
S.
Mannheim,
Fibd
Hochstadter, Kip lElN bip, Hebr. Lese-
(Steinschneider, Handbuch^.
:
Mecklenburg
Long-Masch,
Metz, 1764.
read Neu-Brandenburg
17 1-2).
in
Mecklenburg (Le
Crusoe
I, p.
Beschreibung des Lebens von Robinson
(Steinschneider, Zeit.f. Gesch. d.Juden in Deutschl, V, 150). Nieto
appeared 1780.
Milwaukee, Wis., 1884.
Prayers.
12 mo.
S.
Is.
S.
Moses, T\mh nbzn
Order of
Mulhausen, 1839.
Dreyfus, Abrege de la grammaire

p. 123).
he'-
braique (Freimann, ZfHB., Ill,
Munich, 1826.
A. Behr, Lehrbuch der mosaischen Religion.
Naumburg, 17 14.
G. W. Dieterici,
De
Uri?n
et
Tumim.
4k).
New York,
Pavia,
1694. George Keith, Truth Advanced. (Dr. A. S.
W.
in
Rosenbach kindly drew

1539.
my
attention to this book.)
Teseo Ambrogio Albonesi, Introductorium

4to.
chaldaicam linguam.
Pforzheim, 1505.
Philadelphia, 1693.
Persecution, 4to.
Reuchlin, Tiitsch missive.
[George Keith],
New
.
England's Spirit of
(Dr. A. S.
Regensburg, 1538.
4to (Bauch,
Riga,
/.
W. Rosenbach.) Winmann, Oracio in hebraicam

.
.
linguam.
c, p. 490,
No.
65).
1780.
G.
Schlegel,
Bemerkungen zum
erhichternden
Studium der
hebr. Sprache.
16.
4to (Steinschneider, Zusatze).
Rostock, 15
Marschalk, Rudimenla prima lingue hebraice
(Bauch,
/.
c, p. 485,
No.
42).
leichteren
Schwerin, 1753.
Clemann, Versuch zur
Erlernung
der hebr. Sprache (Steinschneider, Zusatze).
Sensburg, t86i.
Aggadath
Bereshit, &c.
12 mo.
Slankowitz
a few lines
is
evidently a mistake for Slopkowiecz which follows
later.
Stockholm, 1660.
Terseri.
fo.
:
Exodus
;
hebraice et latine
cum annolationibus
(Wolf, II, 395
IV, 136).
Thienjen
read Thiengen.
Feier zur Grundsteinlegung der neuen Synagoge.
Trier, 1857.
Tubingen, 15 12.
Reuchlin.
Aldus's Introductio appeared a

printer's
month before
Anshelm's
mark with the tetragrammaton with
ADLF.R'S
inserted
GAZETTEER OF HEBREW PRINTING MARX

in
271
which he had used
Pforzheim since 1507, was used

1.
in his first
Tiibingen book, Bebel, Commentaria, July 151
(Steiff,
Dererste Buchdruck in Tubingen, 1881, pp. 18-19, 75, 89-91.)

Venice.
Felix Pratensis's Latin translation of the Psalms
is
out
of place here.
Instead, Aldus's Introductio ulilissima hebraice
discere cupientibus of
1500 or 1501 (partly reproduced by Panizzi,
Chi era Francesco da Bologna? London, 185S) or the specimen

sheet of a polyglot (reproduced in Renouard, Annales des Aides)
should be mentioned.
See Papers of the Bibliographical Society
of America XIII, 1919, pp. 64-7.
As
have learned
since,
Hebrew
words occur already

Vienna,
(Delitzsch,
in
1499 in the Polyphilo printed by Aldus.

praecipua fidei
Christianae
1562.
Weidner, Loca
Wissenschaft,
Kunst und Jitdenium, Grimma, 1838,
pp. 290-1).
Wittenberg, 1508. Carlstadt, Distinctiones Thomistarum (Bauch,

I. c.j
pp. 146, 482, No. 23).
Boeschenstain, Institutiones of 1518,

letters,
which Adler mentions, does not have any Hebrew

blank spaces are
left
but
in
for
them which
are filled in by
hand
the Seminary copy, as they are in that of the British

(Proctor, no.
Museum
11837) and Bibliotheque Nationale, according to
Schwab's Les incunables orienlaux,.p. 76.

Zaragoza,
1547.
Antonius Nebrissensis,
De
Uteris hebraicis
opusculum (Steinschneider, Zus'atze)*

Ziesar
:
read Zeitz.
Zerbst, 1603.
Rudhnenta linguae sanctae
.pro schola Serve-
stana.
4to.
In the foregoing repeated reference was

'
made
to Steinschneider,
Zusatze und Berichtigungen zu

iiber die Literatur
ftir
meinem Bibliographischen Hand'
buch
blatt
hebraische Sprachkunde
in
Central-
fur
Bibliothekswesen, XIII, 1896, pp. 345-79, 441-89,
and
to Porges,
Nachtrage zu Steinschneiders Zusatzen und Berichti,
gungen
I
',
ibid.
XV, 493-508, 566-78.

following
From
these
sources
gather the
additions
without
being sure to have
exhausted them
Bautzen, 17 19.
Erdmann, Summarium
ebr. linguae (St.).
Bergen, 1784.
Arentz, Nomenclator Hebr.
Svo
(St.).
VOL. XI.
272

410
(St.).
Berlenburg, 1720. Schefer, Hebraisches Worter-Buch.
Clausenburg
punctatio?iis hebr.
(or
St.
Claude?),
1698.
16).
Alting,
Fundamenta
8to (Z/I/B.,
XX,
Culmbach,
4to (Porges).
1779.
Heerwagen,
De
quibusdam impediment's.
Detmold, 1840.
Bertbold, Patrocinium linguae hebr. 4to (St
).
Dortmund, 1548.
Sceuastes, Methodus recte legendi Hebraica.
i2mo
(Porges).
B. Hochstadter, Hebr. Lesefibel{ZjHB., Ill, 123).
Ems, 1855.
Graetz, 1737.
Freistadt, 1708. Schwindel, Exercitatio critico-literaria. 4to(St.).
Hertel,
Anweisung zur h Sprache
8vo
(St.).
Lausanne,
1768.
[Kalmar],
Eio-aya>yry els to 'EySpouKor i8taj/xa
8vo (Porges).
Malta,
1837.
[Lowndes],
r'pa/jL/maTiKr)
tJJs
IfipaiKTjs
yXbKTcrrjs
8vo
(St.
Porges under Anonymous).

[Schreiber], Sendschreiben
Merseburg, 1770.
Schmidt.
an
Herm
Prof.
8vo (Porges).
Bougetius, Brevis exercitatio ad studium
Monteriascone, 1706.
I.
h.,
i2mo
(Porges).
Norwich, 1824.
Osnabriick, 1744.
Robertson, Clavis Pentaieachi.

Schwarz,
8vo
(St.).
Trias observaiionum
gramma ti-
carum.
4to (Porges).
Lizel,
Speyer, 1739.
Epitome
gr. h.
8vo (Porges).
fo. (St.).
Stralsund, 1700.
Franckius,
Cellarius,
Lux
Tenebrosa.
Weissenfels, 1672.
Compendium
gr. h.
4to (Porges).
in
There can be
little
doubt that the number of places
which
Hebrew grammars have been

the Gazetteer.
printed will considerably increase

still
Steinschneider's Ha?idbuch
requires careful
examination
for this purpose.
Furthermore,
printed in different places contain

to yield additions, but here
many of the catechisms Hebrew words and are likely

careful, as often
one must be very
the place of publication
is
not identical with the printing place.
Accordingly
abstain
from
drawing
on
the
des
bibliography
in
Strassburger, Geschichte der Erziehung
und
Unterrichts, since
the books are inaccessible to me.
The
is
following
list
of additions, with exception of the
first
item,
taken from
the
Seminary Library, and based on

part
personal
of
inspection.
considerable
of
it
is
due
to
the zeal
ADEER's GAZETTEER OF
Mr.
Israel Shapiro, since
HEBREW PRINTING MARX

years
273
many
my
assistant
and co-worker
after
in the
Library of our Seminary.
They were
I
collected
we
had
received the Gazetteer)

in
the casual notes
had made previously

I
my copy
of Freimann's Ausstellung hebrdischer Druckwerke
pleasure in putting at Mr. Adler's disposal during his

this
last visit to
country,
when he was working on
his
list,
and these few
notes he graciously acknowledges in his preface.
Aracena, Spain, 158 1.

Latin translation,
fo.
Hebrew Bible
I,
with Arias Montanus's
(Le Long,
Paris, 1709, p.
92; Le Long-
Masch and
Cat. Bodl. have
Burgum Aracense
1?0
for
Aracenense.)
8vo.
Bacau, Rumania, 1896.

Bara, 1880.
IDDn over
4to.
Nttlf
Is.
Friedmann.
N-|inn
N^VQ.
Bayreuth, 1838.
Harburger,
pX
*pn D3DD.
8vo.
Bender, Russia, 1905.

in Yiddish).
Baumzweig, Q1WH (Bar Miswah sermon
32mo.
Herxheimer, ""nnn ^10% third edition.
Bernburg, 184c.
i2mo.
Borgoprund, Hungary, 191 2.
Brandon, pE'02
pfty
4to.
4to.
Butow, 1884.
H. Faust, niECO
Galicia,
4to.
mum
Seelenfeier.
J.
Buczacz (D'UwXirDU),
1906.
A. L. YVarman, ^S*
N^n
fro
.
nthi-ie omas*.
Byelgora (tonU/U), Russia, 19 10.

fo.
Nathan Natke, JiniND m*
Caen, 1866.
8vo.
E. A. Drouin, Diciionnaire compare' des fatigues,
Chrzanow
(T)2Nnp),
Galicia,
1904.
Abi
Asaf,
^JOB*
^VM
(biographies of Jedajah of Beziers and
Solomon Alkabes). 321-no. Coimbra, 1903. MendesdosRemedios, Uma Biblia Hebraica. 4to. Craiova, Rumania, 1902. A. S. Gold, Pentateuch with Rumanian
8vo.
I.,
translation, I II.
Des Moines,
one
S. Glazier).
1904.
% r,EN
HBK
(Yiddish pamphlet against
8vo.
Dijon, 1873.
Gerson, Allocution.
A.
8vo.
I.
Er-Myhalyfalva, Hungary, 1902.
Gluck,
pny
TVfW.
fo.
Grayevo, Russia, 1908.

Giitersloh, 1896.
J.
B. Feiwelsohn, ^NTJ" *)J?.
8vo.
Svo.
E. Rupprecht,
Des
Ratsels Losung, II.

L
Haarlem, 1842.
der oudste
.
[A. A. Wolff], rv:Ni D1

Bvo.
U'
mny De
Sv<>.
Stem
Rabbijnen.
Hermannstadt, 1873.
A. Dornzweig, "non hi:.
274

Abr. Ginzler, r&JD main.
8vo.
Kaschau, 1868.
Kis-Koros (wytyp W?), Hungary, 1896.

fo.
Rubinstein, U*3 1BD.
Lauingen, 1584.
cinia.
Philipp Hailbrunner, Esaiae prophetae vati-
12 mo.
Festschrift
Linz, 1877.
zur
Einweihung
des
Tempels.
8vo.
Lomza, 191 2.
Ludwigshafen,
M.
I.
Edelmann, Ttobnn oanB.
8vo.
1859.
M.
8vo.
Elsasser, Erster
Unterricht in der
israelitischen Religion.
Louisville, 1898.
U\bv
m3 muy Services of the B'rith Shalom

Braminen und Rabbinen.
iTYlrtn
Congregation.
1 2
mo.
F. Nork,
S.
Meissen, 1836.
8vo.
Israelitische
Miinden,
Glaubens-
1831.
Herxheimer,
121110.
HlD
und
8vo.
Pflichtenlehre.
Nagytapolcsany,
edition.
1904.
M. A. Roth, Der Zionismus, 2nd

n*3, 1 II (monthly). 8vo.
Neuhausel, 1894. Leuchter, D^3r6
Ijfl
Neustadt
tische?i
a. d.
Haardt, 1882.
8vo.
S. Levin,
Die Frage
des israeli-
Religionsnnterrichts.
(pTJtt),
Nyezhin
Russia, 1894.
Alotin,
^V
T133.
8vo.
I,
Odensee, 1835.
8vo.
Kalkar, Qiiaestionum Biblicarum specimen,
Pelszawisza
(kWE^b),
(N.Y.),
1907.
DW3fi? Wti8vo.
I,
8vo.
Penn Yan
Piatra,
1846.
Isaiah
McMahon, Hebrew
No. 22-11,
it
without
a master on the Robertsonian method.
Rumania,
1881.
first
bm*W
in
No.
8.
fo.
(Periodical, appeared
Jassy,
later
was transferred
to
Galatz,
and
finally Czernovitz.)
Pinsk, 1910.
Poltava, 19 1 3.
inxn 121 on the meat tax.
i6mo.
*3T13.
A. Resnick, DpnTJJ ':'N 2in

S.
8vo.
Proskurow, 191 3.
Wahl, pvbn 1a
nwpn.
8vo. 8vo.
Rennes, 1845.
A. Latouche, Philosophie des langues.

1891.
J.
Roman, Rumania,
Sanok, 191 2.
Lebel,
D"n
HUT
i2mo.
8vo.
Eleazar Rokeah,
Is.
npn WJfD.
Savannah, Ga., 1902.
P.
Mendes, First
lessons in
Hebrew.
i2mo.
ADLER'S GAZETTEER OF
Sniatyn, 1907.
Steyer, 1756.
HEBREW PRINTING MARX
275
Moses Eisenstein, Pogrom
ha-Bia/ystoki. 32010.
JVJ'N'U published together with Wartha's Grain-
matica nova.
12 mo.
Szamosujvar ("INVPN'^NCND), Hungary, 1910.
Cy rain nsn/O
nEN
im
1VV
2r\2 (against a shohet).
8vo.
Szilagy-Somlyo
(^fcNÎN^D), Hungary,
fo.
1904.
Abr. Jeh.
Cohen,
m
8vo.
hp TfW.
Szolyva (yil^NIID), 1913.

Tiszazasfalu
fcHB*.
Josef,
DH5W
33.
1.
4to (Derashoth).
(n^NSDKD),
Hungary,
191
nnP
*|DV
'Cipp
Tolczawa (KII^'D^XD), Hungary.

Ujhely, 1872.
Fried, fl*h "ID1K.
P. Schwarz, [3311 pTtD.

4to.
Vicenza^
1775.
4to.
1
Octavius Pace, Syntagma de vaticinio Iacobi.
Gen. 49.
Wiznitz,
9 13.
M. H. Herzberg, mD"l33^
A. Schapiro,
pjJEtt'D
D^3
(Yiddish).
8vo.
Zaleszyki, 1904.
UW.
8vo.
Of
these additions
more than
half date
later
from
the
present
last,
century,
most of the others from the
part of the
in
illustrating the
remarkable diffusion of Hebrew printing
our
own
time.
is
It
evident that a
first
effort
at
so ambitious
an under-
taking as Mr. Adler's Gazetteer cannot
be complete.
Only by
co-operation of
many
bibliographers for a
number
of years can
for
such a goal be reached.
Mr. Adler deserves great credit

difficulties
not
having been deterred by the evident
and the unavoid-
able incompleteness, but courageously undertaking the task which
he accomplished with great
credit.
Of
course, Mr. Adler
is is
in
a particularly favourable condition for such work as he
the
owner of one of the
greatest
and best Jewish
libraries in the
zeal,
world which he has brought together with untiring
and
in
London he
a matter of
collection,
is
has access to
fact, his
many
other important collections.
As
Gazetteer was very largely based on his
own
It
and only afterwards enlarged from other sources.
remarkable that Mr. Adler has been able to accomplish so

in his leisure hours.
much
Meantime he has not

is
limited himself
to the admission in his preface that he
aware of the incom-
pleteness of his
list,
but has continued to collect additions and
276
corrections,

and
I
conclude
this
long review, which

list
is
commensurate
with the importance of the subject, by a
of additions which 19 18) to include
the author himself asked

in
me
lately
(June
12,
my
review
Bristol, 1830.
W.
T. Philipps, Elements of Hebrew grammar.

J.
Curacao, 1880.
Exeter, 1703.
Leerrede door
H. M. Chumaceiro.
""^HD or
Hy. Hingeston,
J~\\>
a dread/id alarm
upon the Clouds of Heaven mixed with love (Peddie).
Fossombrone, 15 13.
Paschae
celebratione.
fo.
P.
de Middelburg, Paulina
de
II,
recta
(Leighton, Early Printed Books,
265.)
Gloucester, 1891.
A.
Watson Hand, Introduction
to the
study
of Hebrew Synonyms.
Goteborg, 1858.
Bonbok, Hebreiv and Spanish Prayer-book.

Printing card of Dr. Joseph Jermans.
Hebron
(before 1888).
Oran, 1853-4.
Shai Lemora, Novellae on Genesis.

1.
Ottobeuren, 151
Passio Septem Fratrum (Proctor,

J.
II).
Pittsburg, Pa., 1903.
Leonard Levy, Textbook of religion and

literary societies, 8th
ethics for Jeivish children.
Plymouth, 1909.
Report.
Union ofJewish
Centro
Annual
Rio de Janeiro, 19 10.

St.
Israelita, Esialutos.
Louis, 1875.
3TU D?B Mannheimer, Hebrew Reader.

1865.
E. Hecht,
Sankt Wendel (Prussia),

(B. M.).
Der
Pentateuch
Tubingen, 22/3, 15
12.
Joseph Hyssopaeus,
Lanx
argeniea.
Waitzen, Hungary, 1899- 1900.

children of mixed marriages.
PpVD 2WV on the Dinim of
Wilmington, N.
C.,
1868.
Myers, 1200 Questions and Ansivers
on the Bible, 2nd edition.
Toronto.
The book mentioned
in
my
Gazetteer was published
at Toronto, but printed at
New
York.
including
these
additions,
The number
amounts
to 626.
of
printing-places,
Alexander Marx.
Jewish Theological Seminary
of America.
THE RELIGION OF FLAVIUS JOSEPH US

By James A. Montgomery, University of Pennsylvania. JOSEPHUS
is
known
to the
world as the Jewish historian.

facts for the period in
His histories are a mine of
which
Christians are interested as the birth-age of the Church,
but his theology has not concerned them, except so far as
he has served at times as another horrible example of

Pharisaism.
The Jews have

in
neglected him, as they have

forth as
crisis.
Philo, but with the further
animus that he stands

the hour of
its
an apostate to the nation
greatest
Yet
while, with the exception of Philo,
we must
rest content
with the fragments of the poets and prophets and historians

of the Old Testament, and with the dicta and occasional
anecdotes of the rabbis of later ages, until
we reach
the
the
opera of the mediaeval philosophers, in the case of Josephus
we
possess
extensive
works proceeding from
ripe
in
experience of a stirring political and intellectual
life,
sum
a very considerable pile of literature, and that from
the generation that marks the dividing point in Judaism's

history.
In one of these works, his Life, he gives his

in
own
apology as a Jew, and

statement of the Jewish
quities he
is
his
Contra Apionem a positive
faith
and practice;
to present his
in
his
Anti-
perforce
bound
own
is
religious
interpretation of the sacred history he narrates.
Of
that
holy story he
defender
in
is
by no means ashamed, but

fact,
its
doughty
theory and
and
277
it
matters not whether our
VOL. XI.
278

interpretation, Jewish or Christian or rationalistic, be
is
own
otherwise, his interpretation

tion of the
of supreme value as a reflec-
Judaism of the
first
century from the soul and

It
is
mind of
difficult
a
to
very remarkable man.
at
first
sight
understand
Josephus
as
exemplary of the
Pharisaism which he affected, and prima facie he
may
unfit
be
to
regarded with suspicion as a Hellenizer and so speak for Jewish orthodoxy.

sincere
if
But he
is
nevertheless a
religion,
and genuine product of the Jewish

aside our preconceptions of
in his day,
and
we put
what a Pharisee must
have been
we have
to allow that he
may
repre-
sent in fact a
much
larger class of the Jewish illuminati
than we might gather from
the
scanty and
Before
one-sided
into
survivals of the thought of the age.
we launch
the vast Rabbinic unification of Judaism
we may
well ask
whether such writers as Koheleth and Philo and Josephus
and the author of Wisdom were not something more than

self-representative,
and whether such sporadic writers as

not light up what Friedlander calls
in
these
'
now appear do
\
T
the religious
movements within Judaism
the age
of
Jesus Christ
1
This paper
is
the fruit of an independent reading of Josephus, and

to
my
comparison of the pertinent literature was subsequent

of
its
my
I
plotting out
argument.
Reference
to the other treatments has given
some points
might avoid
for amplification of
my subject,
and
still
more has shown what
as already adequately handled.

I
cite
the following literature bearing on Josephus's theology:

e
Bret-
schneider, Capita theologiae Iitdaeortim dogmaticac

collecta,
Flavii Iosephi saiptis
Wittenberg,
1
,
1812;
Gfrorer, P/iih,
;
2,
356-67; Dahne, Jiidisch'
alexandriuische Religiousp/n'losop/n'e, 2, 240-5
Paret,
p.
Ueber den
Pharisais-
mus des Josephus

d.
Tlieol.
Stud. u. Kri/iken, 1856,
800; Graetz, Geschichte

religionsp/iilosop/n'sclieu
'
Juden,
vol. 3,
note 10; A. Poznariski, Ueber die
Anschauungev, des Flavins Josephus, Breslau, 1887; A. Schlatter,
Wie
sprach Josephus von Gott?' Beiirdge cur Forderung chnsilicher Theologic.

1910, Heft
1
;
B. Briine, Flavins JosepJnts u. seine Schrifien in ilncm Vtr-
RELIGION OF FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS

Josephus himself
interest
is
MONTGOMERY
own
religious
his
in
fully conscious of his
and of the responsibility which

faith that
( 4)
'
studies
lay
in
upon him of expounding the

the Preface to his Antiquities
for his
is
him.
So
he thus makes apology

that read
much
theologizing
it
Those
my
works
may wonder how

so
is
comes to pass that
my
discourse which
promises an account of laws and historical facts contains
much philosophy
therefore to
of causation ((pvaioXoyia).
that
2,
The
reader
know
the
Moses deemed
it
necessary that
he
to
who would conduct

others,
in
first
his
own
life
well
and give laws
place
should consider the divine

in
nature,' &c.
Josephus then proceeds

his
the climax of his
argument to the presentation of

divine philosophy of history,
that
'
history as really a
it
for.
as
he says,
is
will
appear
in this
whole undertaking there
nothing disagree-
able to the majesty of

hdltnis
God
or his philanthropy'.
That
sum
Judcntiinie, zur griechisch-romischen Welt, u.
zum
u. I.
Chrisfentuuic,
mil griechisclier Wortkonkordanz

Giitersloh, 1913
;
znm Neuen
Tcstamente
in
Clemensbrie/e
also the articles on
Josephus
Hastings's Diet, of the

S. Krauss), the latter
Bible, extra vol. (b}'
Thackeray) and Jewish Enc. (by

;
a most impartial brief statement

{passim, see
Schlatter,
also Bousset, Die Religion des

I
Judentums
Poznanski.
its
Index).
Of
its
is
these
would name
is
especially
and Briine. and
Schlatter's
monograph
admirable, both for
philological studies
comparisons with Palestine Judaism.
Bnine's
book (over 300 pages)

tentious of
all.
the most encyclopaedic and also the most pre-
It
contains an
immense amount of
philological material,
literatures are
and
its
comparisons with the

;
classical diffuse,
and early Christian
most useful
but the
work
is
badly put together, and a hopeless
wilderness for lack of a good index.

is
selected vocabulary of Josephus

is
a desideratum.
N. Bentwich, Josephus, Jewish Pub. Soc, 1914,

to give
too
unsympathetic towards Josephus

2
any treatment of
his religion.
The
use of (pvatoKoytiv at the opening of Ant.
1, 2,
where Moses
It
is
is
said to have
begun
to tpvaioXoyeiv in
Gen.
2, is interesting.
the
first
appearance of the notion of a distinction between the two Creation
stories.
Compare Whiston's quaint remark, who holds

the rest of the second and the third chapters
it
'probable that he understood
in
some enigmatic or
allegorical
or philosophic sense '.
280

Josephus recognizes
his
is,
duty as a theologian, and by
consequence as a moral teacher, even as he sets forth to be

his people's historian.
And
wherein he
fails
as historian,
he can be
his
all
the
more taken
as a religious
exponent of
age and people, one who speaks not as an ignoramus

his religion's theory.
but as well furnished with
In the opening of his Life Josephus gives the natural
grounds of
his theological interest.

for
He was
born a priest
first
and of the best of the stock,

of the priestly courses.
he belonged to the
Indeed, he was descended from

priest,
the great Jonathan, the Maccabaean high
and so
was of royal
as well as of sacerdotal blood.
Theology runs
with the blood, and according to Josephus this was particularly true of the divinely appointed Jewish priesthood^
those, as he says,
(Apion.
2,
21 [22]).
who 'had To this
the main care of the
Law'
inheritance he attributes one
divine energy he himself possessed, that
of interpreting
the
omens of the
future, for
in
he
tells
that in the
emergency
when he was caught

being
the cave at Jotapata

its
by the Romans
interpretation,
he had a dream and was able to give

'
not unacquainted with the prophecies contained in
the sacred
books as being a priest himself and of the

'
posterity of the priests
Wars,
3, 8. 3).
its fruits
The blood
development.
of his fathers
had
in his youthful
He
boasts of his
early love for learning

at
which brought the rabbis about him

learn his opinions (Life,
2).
an early age to
More
attractive than this bit
of conceit jahre.
is
the ensuing account of his religious
Wander-
He
started out at the age of sixteen to taste (pace

3
)
the Scotticism) the various schools (alpeo-eis

3
of his religion,
2, 8. 14,
Generally so; also
<pi\oao(picu,
Ant.
18, 1.
cf.
Wars,
end
ntpl
Twv
\v 'lovdaiois (piKoaoôvvrcuv.
So
also
he speaks of the Stoic diptou.
RELIGION OF FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS MONTGOMERY

the Pharisees, Sadducecs, and Essenes.
28
his
These were to
youthful
mind so many schools of philosophy, and he

himself in after years that he had passed like
might
flatter
a butterfly over the various pastures of
wisdom
until
in
maturity he lighted upon that which pleased him
best.
At
the age of nineteen he
made
his choice
and became
a convinced Pharisee according to his
own mind, nor have
we any reason
that
'
to doubt his sincerity and acceptability to
heresy
'.
But he always retained a warm memory
of his experiences
among
the Essenes,
4).
whom
Too
he compares
practical, too
with the Pythagoreans {Ant. 15, 10.
much
of a worldling, too rationalistic to remain a

separatistic
sect
member
his
of that
of monks, he never forgot
youthful admiration of their holy asceticism, of their com-
munity
life
of love and labour, and he never became so
sophisticated as to lose his tender
reminiscence of their
(e.g.
mysteries
and
spiritualistic
practices
Wars,
2,
8).
Perhaps some of his subsequent psychological experiences,
which he
details with so great emprcssement, such as his
ecstasies (e.g.
(e.g. 9),
Wars,
3, 8. 3)
and
his
dreams and prophecies

mystical
had
their original
cultivation in that
society of adepts.
He
even carried his religious experience

for a period of years (although
one step further and became

his
chronology
is
self-contradictory) the disciple of a certain
anchorite Banus,
who
lived in the desert
and used no other
clothing than grew upon trees and ate only such food as
grew of
itself
and bathed
'
in
cold water
I
night
and day
'
to preserve his chastity,

{Life,
It
2).
in
which things
imitated him
would be interesting to learn
all
his reasons for his
choice of Pharisaism.
As
a priest and one
who
held that
the conduct of religion lay in the hands of his caste,
we
282
might think of him as rather inclined to Sadcluceeism.

Perhaps
Ant.
one,
political
convenience
may have swayed him

was a genuinely
(cf.
18, I. 4), but his conviction
religious
and
his
adherence throws light upon the liberalism
of the Pharisaism of his day.
The
Pharisaic theology, that
of the divine providence, appealed to his instincts, as did

also
its
mystical tenets of belief in angels, the resurrection,

forth,
and so
although he actually makes

4
little
use of
some
the
of these doctrines.
Some
personal reactions
his
may have
that
'
taken
place,
as
appears
from
comment
Pharisees are friendly to one another and stand for the

exercise of concord and
regard for the public

is
whereas
the behaviour of the Sadducees to each other
somewhat
is
rude and their conversation with their fellow-partisans

as barbarous as
2, 8.
if
they were strangers to them
'
Wars,
14).
The
conventional, snobbish Sadducees did not
appeal to the bright-witted

affection he finds
man.
The
greatest mutual
among
the Essenes
{ibid, y 2).
At
',
the
same time he admits

added
that the Sadducees held strictly to

'
the letter of the Lawgiver Moses, that

the
divine
man
while
Pharisees
to
it
with
their
tradition
(Ant.
13, 10. 6).
And
while admiring the conviction and pertiis
nacity of the Pharisees he
open-minded enough
to
censure."'
to
blame
them when they

the Pharisees
are
open
Doubtless as
a statesman he appreciated most highly in the genius of

their
work
in
unifying the people in
one
religious practice
4
and one
social polity.
Herein he
ff.
may
Tor his slighting of the doctrine of angels see Schlatter, pp. 32
Josephus's impartiality as an historian appears in the occasional and
doubtless justified criticisms of his

influence with the palace harem,
own
77
party,
e. g.
Ant.
17, 2.
4 (n.b. their
f.
;
ywaiKcuviris).
See Paret, pp. 817
Friedlander, Die religiosen Beuegungai innerhalb des Jiidciithmns iiu Zcitalter
Jesn
Clnisii, p. 90.
RELIGION OF
LAVIUS JOSEPHUS
MONTGOMERY
28-5
have seen the future salvation of his people, and indeed.
Jews have ever since recognized,

the sole basis of their existence.
is
this objective
could be
This amazing orthodox}of the divinity of the

It
is
to his
mind one of the proofs

{Apion.
2,
Mosaic
Law
19
ff.
[20]).
this unity,
based
on the sublime perfection of the Law, which explains
why
the Jews have never been inventive in thought or works
of art
20 [21]):
the character of the
Law
a
as a fixed
tradition excludes all innovations.
As
it
an apology to the
is
Greeks
this
was a sorry defence, but
fair
example
of the insight with which Josephus, without always marking

the implications of his
logic,
could hit the point on
its
head.
Josephus had a thoroughly

Jewish, habit of
first,
religious,
7
and so genuinely
religion
mind towards
life.
For him
came
and despite the Hellenizing temptation
to
regard
religion as an ethic or a
insists
handmaid
to the ethical, he stoutly

lies
that the excellence

in
of Judaism
prior
in
in
this,
that
religion
that system
is
and superior
2,
to ethics.
'The reason why,' he says

constitution of this legislation
Apion.
16
[17]),
'the
was ever better directed to

is
the utility of did not
all
than
all
other religions
this, that
Moses
he
make
religion (evveptLa) a part of virtue, but
saw and ordained the other virtues

I
to be parts of religion
mean
justice
and fortitude and temperance, s and the

of the citizens in all things
all
:
common agreement
8
for all
our
Josephus
is
possessed with a congenital dislike to

his objection to the Zealots
112, 234.
innovations in
Church and State;

See Briine, pp. 27,
7
was
therefore principled
Cf. Krauss, Jew, Eiic, 7, p.
275
'
Josephus's orthodoxy and piety are
t li
us beyond
8
i.
doubt.'
e.
;
the four cardinal virtues, evoi&ua replacing" <ppomiai^. and Kaprfpui
av tip da
sec Poznariski,
p. 39.
28.

and studies are related to piety towards God,
left
actions
for
he has
mined.'
none of these things
indefinite
or
undeterthat
For him reason does indeed

although
it
agree with
revelation,
never
is
in
the
moralizing
terms
of
4 Maccabees, but
merely the endorser and exegete of
what
is
is
given through God's revelation

religion
by Moses. Judaism
rational
based on authoritative revelation.
None could
done
in
better express than Josephus has so capitally
the words quoted the relation of religion and ethics
for the religious
mind, and accordingly the credit should
be given him of a true sense of religious values.
For a survey of Josephus's

would
call
it,
9
faith, or
'
persuasion
'
as he
one can follow
his
four great unities, the
One God, the One Law, the One Temple, the One People. 10 To these points we have to add his Pharisaic eschatology
of the individual, so that, barring Messianism, he strikes
the great notes of Jewish orthodoxy.
Upon
9
the .doctrine of
God Josephus
Apion. 2, 16
01
uses the
common-
Josephus's use of the verb ndOeodai might have been noticed by Briine.
quite parallel to
Trt(jT(va>
:
It is
cf.
yap itioTivoavrcs kmoKoireiv

Cf. the
6e6v with
41
TretTtiadai
tov 6ebv iiro-nTtvovTa hilntiv.
New
Testa-
ment
use, e.g.
Rom.
8.
38; 2 Tim.
1.
12; Heb.
in
11. 13 [text. ice).
Uians
and viardiw are not common words
Josephus, and
deserve a fuller
treatment than Briine has given them (see his Index).

p.
See also Schlatter,
27.
We
having his
prophecies
{r-qv tt'kjtiv
may note the sentence in Apion. 2. 30 [31]: 'Every one, own conscience as a witness to himself believes, on the of the Lawgiver and God supplying the strong ground of faith iax^pdv), that [to those who die a martyr's death] God gives
life.'
a revivification and a better
Faith
is
generally objective and dogmatic

in
with Josephus, but his use has many parallels

Nevertheless, he uses the
the
New
as
Testament.
praise
p\dva>
word
in its fullest spiritual s nse,

:
in his
of Izates and others likeminded

TTfTTioTtvicooiv,
10
I
tois us abruv (dtdv
anofikenovoi
teal
Ant. 20,
2. 4,
end.
(p. 78),
might add, following a thought of Schlatter's
Josephus's
to the
idea of the unbroken unity of Jewish history from creation

destruction of the temple.
down

places
IIONTi
IERY
of
monotheism, but
strongly.
God
'is
simply and Father and Lord (Secnrorris u ) of all
he
puts
these
things and supervises
all
things indura lirLfi\iiT(ov)\ (Pref.

2,
is
Ant.
4).
He
presents Moses' doctrine (Apion
16 [17])
as ascribing the rule
and power to God, who and from

'
the cause
of
all
good
can
things,
thought
be
hidden.
whom nothing in He is unbegotten

in
deed or
and un-
changeable
concept,
for eternity,
exceeding
beauty every mortal
known
to us
by
his power,
but unknowable as to
First
his essence.'
In his
2,
commentary on the
ment {Apion.
is
22 [23]), Josephus
(to,
maintains
Commandthat God
'
wholly absolute
sufficient for
irdvra TravreX-qs) and

all
is
happy
(fiaKa-
pios),
himself and
all.
things, the beginning
and mean and end of

benefits,
He
manifest
in
works and
more apparent than anything whatsoever, but

size',
most unapparent as to form and

art
is
hence no material
observe too
worthy
for his representation.
We may
his description of
God
as iroXiiv
kclI
-navrayov Ke^vfieuoy
spirituality put
{Ant.
in
6, 11. 8),
and the expression of God's

8, 4. 2.
Solomon's mouth, Ant.
In one passage alone
Josephus takes a step into theosophy, when he makes
Rehoboam
work'
declare
the
doctrine
that
'
God
is
his
own
(oy 'ipyov ecrrlu
avrov) (Ant.
in
8, 11. 2, end).
deistic
form of expression appears
Josephus's frequent use of
to Oelov for the Deity, for which he might

in the abstract EloJiini of the
have excuse
Hebrew.
12
The
11
practical extension of this doctrine of the
one God,
Briine
makes quite too much of

'
this
term
to
prove that the Pharisees
Were therefore
^p.
Gottes Sklaven
'
in
the
most slavish sense of the word

5.
52
and ignores the Septuagintal and early Christian use of both
and
5.
SoOAos.
See
also Schlatter, pp. 8

is
ft*.
Josephus's interchangeable use of

a citation of
1,
and
Kvptos in private life

12
shown by
3, 8.
B rune's,
ia, 6. 3.
p. 48.
e g.
Wars,
2, 8.
3; Ant.
11.
286

lies for
Father, and Creator,
Josephus
in his
theory of the
Divine Providence.
the
Here he
rings true tc the religion of
Hebrew
is
Bible, from Genesis to Chronicles.
For him
and
in
history
the philosophy of the
divine activity,
great things and small our author never wearies in pointing
out the care of

doctrine,
God
over
all
his
works.
This capital
the
distin-
Josephus
repeatedly
relates,
was
guishing characteristic of the Pharisees as distinguished
from the Sadducees, the former he accordingly compares

with the Stoics, and the latter he might have aligned with
the Epicureans. 13
The
constant word he uses for provi-
dence
in
is
Trp6voia 'forethought',
y
and the word or idea appears

This providence
is
almost every leading narrative.
universal, not only for God's people.
From
the anecdote
of Titus's remarkable escape from the surprise attack
made
of
upon
him
when advancing upon Jerusalem, Josephus

'
deduces that
both the
crises
of
war and the

'
perils
kings are a care (neXovTai) to
God
Wars,
5, 2. 2).
:
He
'
observes this providence in the history of Joseph
God
exercised such a providence over him and such a care of

his happiness as to bring
him the
greatest blessings even

'
out of what appeared to be the most sorrowful condition

(Ant.
trious
in
2, 2. 1).
He might
indeed have regarded his
illus-
namesake
as a type of himself, for
he
is
constant
his expression
of the divine providence over his

is
own
life,
a belief that
not to be too readily attributed to his

it
particular conceit, for
is
the characteristic of
all piety.
Thus
of
in the
shipwreck
in
the Adriatic he, with

'
some eighty
others,
was saved on a Cyrenian ship

'
by the providence
God
13
(Life, 3)
an interesting
7,
parallel in circumstances
For his polemic against the
1.
He
politely avoids the comparison.

10, II.
Epicureans see Ant.
and, for a personal comment, 19,
5.
RELIGION OF FLAVI US JOSEPHUS

and
religious
MONTGOMERY
of
Paul's
theory to the story
shipwreck.
In another
imminent danger, from
his enemies,
he describ
how he was saved by

and adds,
of
'
the report of the approach of friends,
God perhaps
[Life, 58).
(jdya)
also
at
taking forethought
of his
life,
my
safety'
And
the end
looking back
with
clean
conscience
upon the many
malicious accusations that have been brought against him,
some of them threatening

God's providence
I
his ruin,
he concludes that
'
by
escaped them
this
all' {Life, 76).
But along with
most
religious theory goes another
point of view that sounds most pagan.
In the story of his
amazing escape from the hole where he had taken refuge

after
his
the
fall
of Jotapata, his companions,

resolved to
kill
much
against
own
fall
will,
one another by
;
lot so as
not
to
alive into the
hands of the Romans

in
but he
'
not
being resourceless and trusting
the guardian
God
hazards
his safety (ttl(ttv<j)v rco KrjSe/j.oi'L BeS> tt]v acorrjpiau irapa-
fidWeTou)
'
and accepts the

last
lottery.
He
and one other
remained to the
and the two decided not to carry out
the compact to the end; 'so he survived', he says, 'whether
we must say by chance (vnb

providence of God' (Wars,
of fate
3,
rvyj)s), or
8.
whether by the
this doctrine
7).
And
his
plays
considerable
part
in
notion
of the
administration of the universe.
That he discovered nothing
alien to his
Judaism
in this
element appears from his repeated classification
of the
fate,
Pharisees as those "who believed in a providence or
wherein he says, they resemble the Stoics (Life,
2).
lie
several times distinguishes the three schools of the
Jews
to
by
their
position
towards
determinism.
According
Ant.
13, 5. 9
the Essenes are absolute determinists, the

fate
Sadducees do away with
and take no account o(
it.
288
while
*

the Pharisees say that
some
actions, but not
all,
are
the work of fate (dixapfievrj, the word used through the

section),
but some are in our
own power, both
as to occur-
rence and non-occurrence.'
Similarly, but with different

2, 8.
proportion of language, according to Wars,

Pharisees
#ea)),
. .
.
14:
'The
re kglI
ascribe all to fate
and God (eZ/zap/ze^
and hold that doing

in the
right, or the opposite, lies for
the
most part
((3or)deii>)
power of men, although
fate co-operates
18,
1.
with each one.'

'
Again
all
in
Ant.
3,
the
fate,
Pharisees,
while holding that
things are done
by
do not take away from man the freedom of impulse to the

doing of them, for
tion
God thought
fate
well to
make
a composi-
between the purpose of

is,
and that of man, and the
result
as the case
may
be, virtue or evil \

is
In these statements Josephus
ambiguous, as every one
must be
in
dealing with such recondite themes of theology,

Is his fate the
?
unless indeed he be a Calvin or Spinoza.
same
as the divine will, or are they distinct

is
In general,
the affirmative answer
to be given
on the supposition
that fate was the Hellenistic affectation for the providence

of the
Hebrew
religion.
Yet
at times
he distinguishes the
14
See the collocation of these passages
in Schiirer,
History of the Jewish
People, 26, 4th
German
ed., vol. 2, p. 449.
Graetz polemicizes against

But, divesting Josephus
is in
Josephus's theological distinction of the parties.
of his affected Stoicism, his practical use of determinism

consistent with the Scriptures.
pp. 812
ff.
;
general fully
ff.
;
Compare Bretschneider.
ff.
;
pp. 31
Paret,
Poznanski, pp. 10
Schlatter, pp. 49
ff.
For the various
uses of tvxv see Briine, pp. 186

Ypea/j/,
ff.,
and
oidjj.app.ivr}, p.ep.oipap.(:vq, ircvpcupivr],
pp. 122
ff
205.
It
has not been noticed in these discussions that
there
Yeser.
was
in the
Jewish ethics the unsolved mystery of the Good or Evil
What
this
meant as a problem
in that
generation can be seen from

takes philosophically and
Paul and the author of 4 Esdras.

in
Only Josephus
the
terms of the scholasticism of his
day what those deeper souls
wrestled over.

two.
MONTGOMERY
cited
This appears
3, 8. 5,
in
is
the
passage
above
from
Wars,
where he
uncertain whether his miraculous
preservation was due to chance or God.

of religious modesty?
Or
is
this a bit
In Wars,
2, 8. 14.
?
he speaks of fate
and God.
the
field
Are
the terms epexegetical
That apart from
of ethics the notion of an arbitrary or at least

fate
unintelligible
his
was cherished by Josephus appears

Josiah's
refusal
in
in
comment upon
to
his
let
Necho pass
:
through his realm, which resulted

1
untimely death
fate
(7-77?
7r7rpoofx{vr]9) y
suppose, urging him on to this
[Ant. 10,
5.
1).
If ever there
was a case
in
the sacred
it
history which lay
beyond human understanding,

good
king,
is
the
tragic death of that
and Josephus was speaking
as a
man
speaks
in
the face of a blind purpose.
He
cannot
fore-
here preach his

thought.
favourite
in
doctrine
of
the
divine
And
blame
his
the region
where theologians
fail
we
cannot
Josephus's
natural
comment.
in
Another
example of
doctrine of fate
appears
the laboured
discourse over the share of blame in the tragic misunder-
standing between Herod and his two sons, which led to

the execution of the latter {Ant. 16, 11.
8).
He
balances
the faults of the two parties, and then asks whether chance
(rvyy]) has not greater
power than wise reason

'we
call
it.
and
this
necessity (dudyKrj), he says,
fate (el/iapfieurj),
as
nothing takes place except through
And
In
this
was long
before us the philosophy of the Law'.
commenting
Julian, at
upon the death of the bold but rash centurion,

the attack upon Antonia, he says that
he was pursued
being
mortal
by
fate,
which
he
could
not
escape,
(Wars,
6, 1. 8).
it
In conclusion,
may
be said that Josephus was techniin his
cally untrue to his
Judaism
use of the word 'fate'
29c

in
but that word stands for doctrines found
the Bible, and
expressed his own experience before the divine inscrutability.
Moreover, his Stoic phraseology was a captatio ad
bencvolcntiam in his attempt to claim his religion as the
world religion.
Paul yields to the same tendency
in
his
arguments with the Greeks.

poet,
'
His quotation from the Greek
We
are also His offspring,' can hardly be said to be
Biblical in phraseology.
For Josephus history
is
drama
of theodicy, and he
follows the suit of his Biblical copy in pointing out God's
judgements.
When
he passes beyond the Scriptures
less
of this note appears.

inflicted
He
records the divine punishment

his sister
upon Herod the tctrarch and

7.
Herodias
for their specific sins {Ant. 18,
2),
and also the judgepartisans (see
ment of God upon the crimes of the Zealot

below).
To
his personal satisfaction
he notes the divine
penalty befalling his calumniator Catullus,

as great a proof as ever
who 'became
was of the providence of God,

'
how he inflicts penalty upon the wicked {Wars, 7, 11. 4). To his mind the death at the moment of success of one
of the Jewish defenders of Jerusalem
acutest
exhibited
'
in
the
those
way possible who have good
the nemesis {veâis) which befalls

fortune without
good cause
'
Wars.
6, 2. 10).
This divine providence implies exact foresight and can be
communicated to men
This view
in the
is
in
prophecies, dreams, and portents.
natural
to one
who
believed
unboundedly
predictive character of Biblical prophecy, but for

is
him
it
corroborated by
many
experiences outside of the
sacred history, as for instance in the

the
fall
omens which preceded

3),
of Jerusalem
Wars,
6,
5.
and
to
his
own
personal satisfaction in the dreams and prophecies of which
MONTGOMERY
(
2QI
he professed to be the medium and object.

of Vespasian's
3,
His prophecy
IVars,
mounting the throne of the Caesars
8.
7)
is
famous.
At
the end of the section he

corroborative
of
his
gives
Vespasian
powers.
an
anecdote
prophetic
(
In an earlier section of the

spiritual
same chapter
3)
he records the
experiences he had
;
when
in
the
cave hiding from the
Romans
he had had a number of
dreams of
late,
and being able to put together the things
obscurely spoken by the Deity, and moreover as acquainted
with the prophecies and being himself a

ecstatic ('ivOov y)
priest,
he became
'
and was given
to
understand that
the
'.
power of the Jewish nation had gone over to the Romans
He accordingly prays that as a The claim may be spared

!
prophet of the truth his

of a
;
life
priestly right to
the
interpretation of
it
dreams
is
of interest
he
may have
derived
from the powers claimed by the Hasmonaeans, notably
Hyrcanus.
Essenes,
It is to
His 'ecstasy'
may have
been learnt from the
who were
past masters in spiritualistic practices.
be observed that he held the later suspicion against
prophets as such and regarded the Urim and
Thummim
(Ant.
as a corrective to 'the evil practices of prophets'

3. 8- 9)-
Josephus naturally expatiates upon and expands the

miracles of the sacred history.
in
The prayer put by him

is
Moses' mouth at the brink of the Red Sea

'
worthy
piece of religious sentiment.
Thine
is
the sea, thine the
embracing mountain, so
or the ocean
at
thy bidding this can be opened
become
air, if it
1).
a continent.
Or we can escape even

'
through the
(Ant.
2,
be thy will to save us in this fashion

feels
16.
Withal Josephus
for
constrained
to
make some apology
these miraculous stories.
After
narrating the act of salvation at the
Red Sea he
proceeds
^92
[ibid. 5)
'
:

For
my
I
part
have communicated every one

in the
of these things as
have found them
sacred books,'
and he then gives as a corroboration of that wonder the

story of Alexander's passage through the Pamphylian Sea.
Upon
1
the account of the wonders at Sinai he
comments
I
Each of
my
readers
may
think as he
will,
but
am
under
the necessity of narrating these things as they are written

in the
holy books
for
'
(Ant.
3, 5. 2).
15
Faith
Josephus seems
e. g.
77
to
be primarily the right

rov Oeov
tticttis
doctrine about God,

2,
irepl
(Apion.
16 [i7]),
1G
but this faith
is
proved by the commensurate
practice
of the divine
Law.
He
believes
e. g.
devoutly
3. 8. 3,
in
prayer, as in his
is
own emergencies,
Wars,
and
convinced that
2. 1
;
God
hears
the prayers
5.
of the
pious
(Ant. 14,
cf.
Ep. James
17
ff.).
His expressions
:
concerning prayer
the sacrifices
in the cult are

first
beyond reproach
'
At
we must pray
;
for the
common
welfare,
then for ourselves
for
we
are constituted for fellowship

prefers this to
his
(knl Koiv(>via yeyoisafiev),

selfish interests is
and he who
most pleasing to God.

to
Let supplication
he give
and petition be made
God
that
in prayer, not that
good things
for he
to all
has given them voluntarily and
made
them common them and
but
to
we may be able
'
to receive
2,
;
receiving
in
them
keep them
(Apion.
5.
23 [24]).
1
Compare
2.
1
fT.,
the
17
&c.
New He is
Testament, Matt.
a
45
Tim.
divine
it
;
devout believer
in
the
co-operation (crvvepyia) for those

for
who
faithfully seek
example,
15
16
in the story of
Samson, Ant.
5, 8. 9, this faith
For other cases of similar expression see Poznanski,
p. 37.
See above, note
9.
17
For his terminology

ff.
of
prayer
see
Schlatter,
pp.
76
ff.
Briine,
pp. 99
RELIGION OF FLAVIUS JOSEPIIUS

is
MONTGOMERY
2c,3
contrasted with the hero's preceding faith in his

*
own
)ne
1 virtue (aperi]).
None is a stouter champion than Josephus for God as against the gods of heathenism, but he
whether from a natural liberality or
the
appears,
for policy, to
have
respected other people's religions as well as their opinions
which
after all
was the only
possible
modus vivendi
in the
Empire.
the
first
In his digest of the Mosaic laws {Ant.
4, 8. 4IT.),
of the Jewish digests, he thus
10) interprets
Exod.
22.
27(28):
'
Let no one blaspheme gods
whom
votive
2.
other states regard as such, nor steal things which belong

to temples
gift
of other religions, nor take
away any
to
any god.'
tcc
:
We
'
naturally
recall
;
Romans
22,
6 fiSzXvcro-oiievos
eiScoXa UpoavXeTs
also according to
Apion.
2.
33 [34]
Our
Legislator has forbidden us to
laugh at or blaspheme those
by others on account of the

them.'
who are very name
considered gods
of
God
given to
He
holds with the Christian apologists that Moses'
notion of
God was
shared in by the Greek philosophers,
Pythagoras, Anaxagoras, Plato, and the Stoics, but that these
were
afraid to disclose these opinions to
more than a few

2,
because of the prejudices of the masses (Apion.
16 [17]).
{eKeivco
Indeed these philosophers were followers of Moses

KCLT-qKoXovO-qcrav)
(ibid.,
39
[40]),
but
Josephus
never
claims, like
doctrine.
some Christian
apologists, that they stole the
For Josephus the Law

final
is
the
perfect, complete,
and
expression of the will of God.
This
is
demonstrated
absolutely
by the
fact that
God gave
by
all
that
Law
with his
own
voice which could be heard
(Ant.
3, 5. 4),
and
empirically
by the evidence he
18
gives that no other people

p. 822.
See Paret,
\<)L. XI.
294

a
possesses so divine
intrinsically, this
law (Apion.
is
2,
15 [16]
ff.).
Also,
places
Law
the best possible, for
it
religion (evaeêia) as the

it
climax of the virtues, and because
combines, as no other legislation has ever effected, both

{ibid.,
precept and practical exercise

its
16 [17]).
Further,
own
its
unity and the orthodoxy of the
Jewish people
of the
prove
worth.
These
characteristics
Jewish
religion are inculcated
and enforced by an education that

(ibid.,
begins with earliest childhood

the
'
17 [18]), including
',
appointment of every one's
diet
and by the rigour
of the execution of the laws, which allows neither favour
nor excuse against the drastic penalties that are ordained.
This discipline, he says,

in us
it
is
which
'
first of all
has created
our wonderful consensus
(ofiovoia),
and that harmony
of the Jews, the most perfect to be found

is
due to
their having the
same opinion
(firjSev
among men, (86a) about God

'
and
entire
2,
identity
in
life
dXXrjXcou
is
Staêpeii/)
(Apion.
19 [2c]).
Accordingly there
no
conflict
among
the Jews and also no contradictions in their views about
God such as the philosophers insolently indulge in. The Law, this supreme revelation of God, is distinctly
a
legislation,
the
written
rule
of
life;
Josephus
uses
constantly the terms

iraTpia, &c),
vo/ios, vo\ioi y vojioOecria

is
(also vo\iiyia
vofioOiTrj?).
and Moses
the Lawgiver
for
(6
He
glories in the
word nomos,
he can prove that the
Jews are law-abiding and the Gentiles lawless or lawbreakers.
In fact he
makes the shrewd remark

vofios is a
for
he
is
quite a philologist
in
that
word not to be found

had no
Homer, thus
indicating that the early Greeks
idea of law, the people being governed merely
by wise
saws and the prescriptions of their kings, which were

always changing (Apion.
2,
15 [*6]).
It
cannot be denied
RELIGION OF FLAVIUS JOSEPH US- MONTGOMERY

that Joseph us's position
as
is
295
one of Nomism, a position which,
wc have
seen, does not
deny the elements of

1,
spiritual
religion.
Compare
'
the expression in Apion.

it
12
that
life
the Jews
to
consider
the most necessary business of

vo/iovs)
keep the laws {(puXdrreiu tovs
and the piety

for
(eu(r/3eLai>)
handed down by tradition
\ 19
But
Josephus
this
Law
is
not a yoke of burden but of direction.

it
For
him, as for Paul,
was
just
and holy and good, but unlike

119th Psalm,
'
Paul and
in the spirit of the

. .
.
its
reward
is
not silver or gold
but each one believes having his

2,
conscience as witness' {Apion.

its
30
divine energy
which
facilitates
The Law has and executes it in men

[31]).
of
good
conscience.
Herein
is
untainted
Pharisaism,
spiritual life
Moses provided the whole equipment of the

of his people, persuaded
it,
them
it
{ibid.,
16 [17]) to receive
and took measures that

it.
should be guarded effectively
by those entrusted with
The Law has
its
social
complement
in
a political body
{noXireLa, TroXirev/xa), 20 a definite corporation, founded
by
a statesman legislator, and existing with the

as does
same
all
rights
any other
being
21
.
nation.
But
it
differs
from
other
polities in
and Joseph consciously invents the term

This theocracy has
theocracy
10
God
himself for
8,
its
Schechter, in
Some
Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, chap.

thorali.
opposes the
identification of nomos
and
But the Greek-speaking Jews, Palestinian
quite as well as the Diaspora, deliberately adopted hoijios as the sufficient
expression, gloried
out
all its
in
the term, and, as
we
learn from Josephus, carried

ft'.
implications.
See Paret,
vofxos, for
p.
825, Briine, pp. 54
Josephus only
rarely uses the singular
which he prefers voôOtaia, but generally
thc plural
20
21
the reverse of Paul's use.

Briine, pp. 57
ft'.
See He,
at various points in the history, describes the polity as actually
a monarchy, an aristocracy, a democracy, as the case

is
may
be, but his ideal
that of the theocracy, with the high priest as
God's representative
2Q6
invisible governor, while the corporate administration lies

in the
hands of the
priests
and of the high priest supremely

Apion.
2,
(rr)v tS>v
aWcov Upicou
community,
rite
'
r]ye/ioytav,
21 [22]).
Under
this
hierarchy the
body
'
of the people functions as a wholly
religious
the whole polity being ordered as
a sacred
cocnrep 8e TeXerfjs
twos,
ibid.,
is
22 [23]).
This functioning of the whole people

the broken
rites of
constant, unlike
the Gentiles
all
(ibid.).
Thus, on the one
hand, the Jews are a nation with

thereof, on
the rights and advantages
the other a church-state of divine authority

Its
and
is
sanction.
members
are
its
citizens, its
is
practice
a body of laws, the success of which
due
in
part to
the people's unfailing obedience, in part to the unfailing

severity of their execution ( 17
f.
[18
f.]).
The Jewish
[37])-
polity
is
comparable to Plato's Republic

not politics.
36
But
its characteristic is religion,
Josephus never questions the divine election of
Israel. 22
5, 9. 4).
God was
peculiarly their Creator
(6
'
Kricras,
Wars,
in
And
yet, as Bertholet points out,
he stands,
one word,
at the height of Jewish universalism \ 23
He cites Josephus's
(
expressions about that religion as the evaefteia dXrjOea-rdrr]

{Apion.
2,
41 [42]) and the
Koa-fiiKrj dprjcrKtia
Wars,
4, 5. 2)
as proofs of Josephus's implicit belief in
Judaism as the one
true religion. 24
Our author takes an
intense pride in the

for,
spread of the Diaspora over the world,

there
22 23
as he maintains,
is
no
city of the world
where the Jewish customs

God
of Israel.
p. 294.
See Schlatter, pp. 67

Die Stellung der
ff.,
for his doctrine of the
Israeliteu u. der
Jnden zu den Frcmden,
24
Josephus frequently lays his finger,

in the current anti-Semitism,
somewhat
artlessly,
upon the
main count
28
that of unsociability.
e. g.
He
;
takes
2,
pains to deny the grounds of such calumny,

f.
Ant.
8, 4.
Apion.
[29
;
f.],
41 [42].
He
himself was animated by a cosmopolitan friendli-
ness
cf.
Bertholet, p. 291.

of
MONTGOMERY
-j.
and lighting of Limps and prohibit* of foods have not come and provoked imitation, and
Sabbath and
fasts
all
men
try to imitate
in
us in our concord
and charity and
diligence
2,
trade
and fortitude
in
persecutions (Apian.
39 [40]).
He
concludes the paragraph with the triumit
phant and noble remark that
is
'
most remarkable that

and as God pervades
the Law. without any inducement of pleasure and bare

of seductions, has prevailed
(7T(poiTT]Ki')
by
itself,
all
the
all
world so the
Law
has
progressed
(fitfidSiKev)
among
men'. 25
In the preceding section

;
he breaks out
he says,
in a strain
of ringing enthusiasm
for
though,
we be deprived
'
of our wealth and
cities
and other
'
advantages,
vo/ios
i)\iiv
the
Law
remains
for
us immortal
(6
yovv
aOdvcLTOs Stafieuei).
He would
the
fain see the
One
Law
of the
One God becoming

this
One
Religion of the
whole world.
But despite
catholic ideal of the Jewish religion

its
no infringement of
gested.',j
Pharisaic
character
is
even
sug--
Josephus was no trimmer
in religion
whatever
he was
in politics.
The
chief formal obstacle to the spread
of Judaism, the
rite of circumcision, is stoutly
championed
by Josephus.
His particular argument against Apion,

the Jews for their animal sacrifices, their
who
rite
2,
ridiculed
of
circumcision,
',
and abstention from pork (Apion.
13 [14]
is
of interest.
He
asserts against
him
that the
Egyptian
priests themselves practise these rites,
and adds
the humorously malicious note that
Apion himself died
from the
25
effects of
an operation of circumcision performed

IT.,
Sec Paret,
pp. 838
for
Josephus's missionary enthusiasm, and

If.
for
his
propagandism, Briine, pp. 215

26
For Josephus tvoc&ua

p.
is
the practice of the cult
sec Schlatter,
p.
76
Brane,
98.
298

as a medical measure.
upon him
In the opus
magnum on
12),
Jewish theology and cult which he prospected (Ant. 20,
he planned to give among other things the reason

for circumcision
(atria)
(Ant.
1,
10. 5).
In individual
instances
for
he extols the virtue of those who became circumcised,
example, of King
Izates, son of
Queen Helena, who,
despite
the political embarrassment involved, accepted the
rite
and
was rewarded
for his piety
by the
special providence of
2. 4).
21
God
as
shown
in his fortunate life
(Ant. 20,
For the equal stringency required by Josephus

laws of Sabbath, foods, purity, &c,
discussions. 28
I
for the
refer to
previous
He
does not consider the question whether
these ordinances
were an obstacle to
religion.
the
diffusion
of
Judaism as the world
On
the negative side, that
the Jews should be allowed to follow their

their
own
rites in
own way without

its
interference or ridicule, the
more
so that similar rites were practised
by
(e. g.
all
other peoples,
2,
and each nation had

he
is
own
religion
Apion.
36 [37]),
most reasonable, but he avoids the objections which

he had written his
might be made to many of the principal points of the

Jewish law.
It
would be interesting
if
27
This story
is
instructive as to the variety of opinion concerning the
necessity of circumcision for proselytes.
Izates
first
teacher, one Ananias,
excused him, against his
own
desire
from the
rite
on the ground that the
worship of God
{fcvpiujTepov
(to Oelov
aefieiv)
was more
l
obligatory than circumcision
tov n(pLTefxv(a6ai).
But a Galilaean, Eleazar, came on the scene,

:
Read thou and see that irreligion You must not only read (aaefieia) would consist in just such avoidance. However, Josephus took the humane attitude the laws but practise them in objecting to forcible circumcision, in an instance which came under his
who
reproached Izates for his neglect
'
official
purview
in Galilee {Life, 23).
Despite Paret's remark to this
effect,
p.
837, he gives no approbation to Aristobulus's enforced circumcision of

11. 3).
;
the Ituraeans {Ant. 13,

28
Paret, pp. 827
ff.
Briine, 35.
MONTGOMERY
299
magnum
rites.
opus tJieologicum,
in
which doubtless he would

circumcision
'
have displayed the reasons
for
and similar
symbolical
Doubtless he would have given such
explanations as appear, for instance, in Pseudo-Aristeas,
where the laws of foods and purity are so treated, although

circumcision
is
ignored.
This question leads on naturally to the discussion of

Josephus's Alexandrianism and his allegorizing tendencies.
' '
He
a
ate
is
of peculiar interest in regard to that trend of early

in
Judaism, for
him we observe,
as in a full-length portrait,
Palestinian
and Rabbinic Jew, who was nevertheless
23 fait with the Hellenistic philosophies.
So
far as
we
know he never went out

to
fall
of Palestine except for a voyage

until his exile after the
Rome
visit to
in his
young manhood
of Jerusalem.
After his release by Titus he paid
a
cf.
Alexandria and married a wife there {Life, 75, Apion. 1, 9). Some scholars would make much of his
Alexandrianism, for example, Gfrorer and

Poznariski's position
is
Dahne, 30 but
much more
reasonable, that this
tendency was not a part of Josephus's principled theology. 31
However, he was well enough read, or informed, and

ingenious
enough to be
able
to
use
the
Alexandrian
schemes, as for instance in his allegorical interpretation of

the equipment of the tabernacle (Ant.
3, 7. 7).
But
for
him, the sober historian

Poznariski),
this
('
der niichterne
(f esprit,
Historiker', so
was more a jeu
thrown out
in
2<J
30
See Briine, 52-4. Gfrorer, pp. 656 ff.
Dahne, pp. 240

81, n. 10.
ff.
For Josephus's possible

Diet., p.
acquaintance with Philo's writings see Thackeray in Hastings's

Schiirer, Gcsch. d.jiid. Folkes,*
31
I,
471
p.
Poznanski, pp. 33
ff.
Briine goes
much
too far on the other hand in

p. 115)
pressing Josephus's antimystical rationalism (e.g.

natural hospitality of mind.
and ignoring his
300

In fact there was no other
attractive
it
apology to the Greek world.
way
is
of
making the minutiae of the Jewish law

and philosophic Greeks.
to the poetic
Nevertheless,
of interest to observe a pre-Talmudic
Jew of
rabbinical
this
status
and Palestinian origin recognizing and using
arm
and
of propaganda, and the observation should caution

'
us against drawing too fast a line between

'
Palestinian
or abroad
in
Hellenistic
'.
The educated Jew

of
at
home
was even then a good deal

intellectual
a cosmopolitan
his
equipment.
Josephus was enough of a dilettante to have a taste for

the mysteries of religion, and he shared this with
of the most reputable founders of the
some
Talmudic system.
For him there was a

it
secret
Kabbala or Tradition which
was unlawful
(ov Oifiis, aBtfiLTov) to reveal.
Of course
he dares not pronounce the
Name
of
and with absurd

publicly
affectation
he says
God (Ant. 2, 12. 4), he may not declare

5) to repeat
what was written on the two tables of stone

although he proceeds at once
(
(Ant.
3, 5. 4),
the
over
Ten Commandments.
him the notion
to.
There
is
evidently hovering
as
is
of
an esoteric tradition such

interpretation of these laws
(e.g.
Rabbinism held
the work
The
of the
priests
Apion.
21
f.
[22
f.]).
and
he
lays
no
stress
on the authority of the doctors of
the Law.
In his doctrine of the temple Josephus reveals himself,

as a philosophic historian in his fine expression concerning
it,
at
once a
sufficient
statement of
' :
its
solity
and a noble
apology
for its
unique purpose
(eh vabs evb? Beov), a
One God, one temple temple common to all of the common

'
God
of
all,
for,'
he adds,
everything demands congruity

23 [24]).
for itself ((j)i\ov
yap
del irav-l to ofioiov) (Apion. 2,
MONTGOMERY
301
With
this
we may compare the
similar assertion in slut.
4, 8. 5, in
the rendering of Moses' injunction to build but

:
one temple
another
'
Let there be neither temple nor
altar
Is
in
city, for
is
God
the
is
one and the Hebrew race

capstone of
the
one.'
The temple
have lurked
dedication
aTToudvai),
visible
Theocracy.
There, despite any rationalism or Hellenism which

in his
(fioTpcti>
may
mind, as he makes Solomon pray at the

riva rod crov wvevfiaros
eh rbv vaov
'
some part of the divine
Spirit dwells,
'
so that
thou mayest appear to us on earth
{Ant.
8, 4. 3).
This
presence was exhibited in the Solomonic temple by the

descent of a cloud
( 2),
even as
God made
his presence
visible in the tabernacle {Ant. 3, 8. 5) in a cloud
dropping
a sweet dew, so
'
revealing the presence (irapovaia) of
God
to those desiring
and believing
in
it
'.^ 2
God
'
is
spatially
unbounded,
He may have His

2),
'epiphanies
for
when and where

at the
He
will
2,
throughout the world,

16.
example,
Red Sea
(Ant.
but the Biblical doctrine of the peculiar

in
presence of Deity
the temple, sensible to believers,
is
unquestionably accepted by Josephus. 3 ^
The
32
tragic
denouement of the history of that
hoi)* place
may
is
refer to a suggestion of
mine
in
Journ. Bib.
Lit. 29,
39
ff.
that
Ps. 68
a Dedication
in
hymn
God
the reference to the rains accompanying the
theophany
in the
33
verses 8-10 ma}- then be connected with this mystical belief

in his sanetuar}-.
dewy
presence of
Schlatter, p. 72, has

in
some pertinent remarks concerning Josephus's

it
dominating interest
the temple, that
was
a religious interest as over

'
against the political nationalism of
many
of his people.
Die Freiheit der

Leidcn-
Gcmeindc,
fur die die Zeloten kiimpften, bildet fur J. nicht ein mit
;
schaft begehrtes Ziel
er
ist
zufrieden mit
dem Recht
zur
Ausubung des
Kultus, das der rOmischc Staat der Judenschaft gew&hrt.
Den Verlust
des Tempels hat er dagegen schwer beklagt.

sich
Dadurch unterseheidet er
von den Zeloten, die

.
bei
ihrem
Kampf
vor allem die Befreiung der
Gemeinde anstrebten
.'
302
is
the most engrossing point in Josephus's revelation of his
experiences.
In
the
camp
its
of
the
attacking
army, a
renegade to the mind of

it
valorous defenders, he saw
destroyed.
We
possess one Biblical parallel of an eye-
witness's
its
memoirs of a destruction of the Holy City and

and character, we cannot avoid the com-
temple, Jeremiah, and far apart as he and Josephus are
in personality
parison.
Josephus remained a convinced Jew to the end,

is
and
his philosophizing
of equal interest with
all
other
Jewish testimonies.
In
IVars, 5,
9. 4,
he
retails to us the
speech which he
It is a
says he
made
to the defenders
on the
walls.
survey
of the past history, quite on the lines of the Deuteronomic

historians
:
the
nation's
and
Jerusalem's
fate
has ever
depended upon the

righteousness or
God according to the people's wickedness. The present calamity has

will of
it
come
as divine punishment, although
is
not too late to
recognize their sins and surrender to the Romans.

things have
But
come
you \
to such a pass that
'
think that
has
fled
from the sanctuary and stands with those
God who
Lord
fight against
One
is
reminded of a certain prophet's
vision of the dramatic departure of the Glory of the
from His temple (Ezek.

( 3)
10).
In the preceding paragraph

is
he pictures
how
invincible
the dominion of the

will of
Romans, a manifest token of the

'
God and how
fortune {rvxn) has on
all
sides
gone over to them, and
God, having passed the dominion about among the nations,

is
now
in
Italy' (vvv
em
his
rfjs
'IraXias elvai).
It
was
a Jeremiah
who bade
people pray for the peace of
Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon, and while here we have

no Jeremiah weeping over the ruins of Jerusalem nor the
pathetic outpourings of the writer of 4 Esdras,
it
is
the
MONTGOMERY
pathos appears
in
opinion of a philosophic Jew, a student of the philosophy

of his
people's
history.
certain
Josephus's attribution elsewhere of the destruction of the
temple to a certain divine
fate, as
though the tragedy lay

~
beyond human computation (Wars,

it is
6, 4.
} ),
and
think
the
human
factor
we should observe
its
in this
thought
of despair rather than
gross philosophic
expression.
The temple was
set
on
fire
against Titus's express orders.

it
But on the very anniversary of the day on which

burnt by the king of Babylon and according to the
of
1
was
doom
God
(tov 8e
dpa
KareyjrijcpLo-TO
pXv to wvp
'
Oebs 7rd\ai)
77
the fated day
came round again
(irapr]v Se
dp.app.kvi)
XpovcDv
M 7repioSos).
The
c
soldier
who
started the conflagra6pfj.f});"
tion was seized with
an inspired fury' (Saipovia

this
as though proving that
was the work of God.
It
was
a deserved purging of the city
by
fire
:J0
(e.g.
Ant. 20,
:
8. 5).
'
Yet there
is
hope
in the future for

if
(
the miserable city
Oh,
mayest thou grow better again,

the
ever thou canst propitiate

5, 1. 3).
God who
destroyed thee
'
Wars,
With these
his
words he rings down the curtain on the future of

nation.
The temple and
its
cult
were destroyed, he had
no Messianic hope, 37 there was
left for
him but the
practice
it
of his religion as the Jews had learned to practise

34
in
in
tt)v
Cf. 8 Oavfxdaai
8'
dv ris h'
that
olvtti
'
7-77?
TT(pi65ov
ttjv aKpilSciav,
and
the
same paragraph he remarks

which
is
'.
one can take comfort from
late
eifAap(j.iuT)v),
unescapable, as for animate things, so for things
made
and places
35 38 37
For
SaifMjvios cf. Briine, p. 122.
As
Briine notes, a Stoic theologumenon, pp. 107, 205
f.
is
See Poznanski, pp. 28 ff. The nearest approach to a Messianic theme his reference to the meaning of 'the stone' in Dan. 2. 'which I do not
It
think proper to relate' {Ant. 10, 10. 5).
was
a perfectly logical develop-
ment of Pharisaism
Cf.
for
him
to
apply the popular prophecy that

to
some one
Jl'ars.
from the land of the Jews should rule the world'

6. 5. 4).
Vespasian
John
19. 15.
304
their

wide dispersion through the world.
in
We
leave
him
settled
comfortable quarters
in
the
Caesar's
palace
(Life, 76),
making and unmaking
his marriages according
to Jewish law ( 75), with his tax-free property rights in
Palestine
( 76),
in
the possession of a copy of the Holy

(
Books given
him by Titus
J$),
one who marks the
termination of the old order for the Jewish people, leaving

the future which he cannot pry into in the hands of the
school of Jamnia and the obscure Christian sect which he
does not deign to notice.
'
For the future he looked forward with a Pharisee's sure

hope
in a blessed
immortality.
This
is
the confidence of
the martyrs (for example,
Eleazar's
speech at
Masada,
Wars,
7,
8.
5), as
equally the caution against those
who
rT.).
would despise
suicide,
this
3,
8.
body
5,
(see
his
own speech
1
against
Wars,
and compare
Cor.
6.
18
Every one has the witness

those
better
of conscience within
will live
him that
enjoy a
who
life
die for the
Law
[31]).
again and
(Apiou.
2,
30
The
in
souls of the pure will
be allotted the holiest place
heaven, whence after the
revolution of ages they will be housed again in pure bodies,
but the souls of the wicked blackest Hades

(
will
receive
Wars,
3, 8. 5).
39
There
;
is
no idea of the resurrection of
the physical body

(
it
is
the Pharisaic opinion, he says

is
Wars,
2, 8, 14),
that every soul
immortal and that only
the souls of the good pass over into other (erepov) bodies,
40 while those of the wicked are punished eternally.
38
Briine maintains, pp. 218
ft.,
that there
is
a covert polemic against
the Christians throughout Josephus's writings, but without proof.

39
See PoznansUi, pp. 25
ff.
Briine, pp. 94
ff.
40
Bousset, Die Religion des Judent/ims, 1 pp. 255
For the diversity of orthodox opinion about the resurrection see ff., especially p. 259, and
ff.
M. Hughes, The Ethics of Jewish Apocryphal Literature, pp. 309

Josephus
is
MONTGOMERY
is
?Q n
J
.
no
mere
chronicler, nor
he
only
Midrashist, although Midrash he could write at tiresome

length. 41
He was
if
a convinced Jew, schooled in the learning

;
of Judaism,
not a rabbi in the later sense of the word
man
of distinguished parts, able to
sum up and express

than of persons.
pithily his
judgements of
facts
rather
philosopher of religion rather than a theologian, his
business was that of an apologist for his people and his

religion.
His Contra Apionem
is
logically
one of the
finest
of
all
Jewish and Christian apologies, and his Antiquities
as well
was written under the impulse of the loyal defence
of the faith.
He
for,
is
worthy of more attention than has been

it
paid to him,
as
may
justly be said, he
is
the only
personality preserved to us
at length
who speaks
sympathetically
first
and
at large for the
Judaism of the
century.
Apart from the anonymous documents which have passed

into the Christian
Apocrypha, we possess three personalities
from the Judaism of that age who are technically qualified

to speak for
it
and whose writings we possess
at
any length
Philo, a philosopher of the chair, Paul, the militant
com-
batant of the Rabbinism he was born

If for
in,
and Josephus.
no other reason than that of pis
allcr
we
are
bound
to consider his very
human and
personal aspect of Judaism

in
and to weigh
religion.
41
his
sympathetic testimony
appreciating
its
doubt
if
there
is
any better example

Ant.
in
all
literature
his
of absurd
homiletics, of unfortunately
most common type, than

in
6, 14. 4.
It
moral reflections
if
on Saul and the witch of Endor

to kick
looks as
he wished
up the dust about Saul's rather scandalous end.
THE BOOK OF ESTHER
IN
THE LIGHT
College.
OF HISTORY
By Jacob Hoschander, Dropsie
CHAPTER V
The renascence of Israel's religion National The term Judeans The religious propaganda among the exiles Religious creeds aspirations and the conduct of their adherents The hatred of the Babylonian exiles towards Babylonia The attitude of the Judeans in Egypt towards this country The conduct of the wealthy Judeans in Babylonia The cause of persecutions The Judeans' attitude towards the Persians Zoroaster's monotheistic religion The characters of Mordecai and Esther The two opposing tendencies within Judaism Mordecai versus Ezra and Nehemiah The effect of the religious persecutions The predicament of the Sopherim The omission of all religious elements in the Book of Esther The attitude of the Rabbis towards this book The omission of the names
?
'
'
'
of Mordecai and Esther in Sirach's Fathers of the World.
In the preceding chapter we have demonstrated that

the Ahasuerus of the
Book
of Esther
it
is
to be identified
with Artaxerxes
II.
Now
remains to prove that the

king's
main event of our story actually occurred under that

reign.
it is
Before, however, proceeding to deal with that event,
indispensable to outline the conditions and the character
of the
Jews during the Babylonian captivity and the Persian

;
period
for the misinterpretation of the
Book
of Esther in
ancient and
modern times
In the
is
mainly due to misconception

place
on those points.
first
we have
to investigate
the term 'Jews' (DHirr).
In pre-exilic times, the inhabitants of the kingdom of
Judea, irrespective of their descent, had been termed Jew'
37
308
(DHirp). 1

Even those who were worshippers of
Baal, Moloch,
or Astarte,
nevertheless
who were
called
the citizens of that country, were
'Jews'.
This
appellation was
beliefs.
used
without the least regard to their

of idolatry did not deprive
The
practice
any one of
his nationality.
On
the other hand, Gentiles

of Jahveh, but had not
who had adopted
the religion
become inhabitants
of Judea, were,
still
of course, not called 'Jews' (nniiT), and
remained
'
'
members
of their
own
nationality. 2
Thus the term Jews
had not the
least religious significance.
What were
the criteria of the Judean nationality of
the inhabitants of Judea
who had been
carried into the
Babylonian captivity, or had migrated to Egypt?
The
!
Hebrew language 3 and

1
the national consciousness

16.
But
The term CHirP
(2
Kings
6; 25. 25; Jer. 32.
12,
&c), includes
all
inhabitants of Judea, even

(cf.
those
who
did not belong to the tribe of
Judah
2
Ges.-Buhl's Hwb., p. 311).
It
goes without saying that the worship of Jahveh, as generally
practised by the people in the pre-exilic period,

state of Judea,
was not
restricted to the
this
and thus was not characteristic of the inhabitants of

to
country.
There were the inhabitants of Samaria who claimed

4. 2).
be wor-
shippers of Jahveh (Ezra
The name Jau-Wdi of
the king of
Hamath
points to the existence of that worship in the latter country.
In this fact
we may
see a corroboration of the reading Jo ram, the
name
of the son
of the king of
Hamath (2 Sam. 8. 10), of which we find the variant Hadoram The name Azri-jau of the king of Ja'udi (cf. Winckler, (1 Chron. 26. 25). Altorientalische Forsdnoigcn, I, 'Das Syrische Land Jaudi und der angebliche
')
Azarja von Juda

latter country.
leaves no doubt that the Jahveh-worship existed in the
But
we may wonder whether

in
it is
mere coincidence
that
the
name
of that country is identical
with that of Judea, in the cuneiform

the Jahveh-worship
all
is
inscriptions,
and that
both countries
is
found.
Who
the
knows whether
cf.
there
not after
some ethnological connexion
between these two countries.
For the legal status of foreigners among
Jews
3
Ed. Meyer's Enistehuttg des Judenthiims, pp. 227-34.

still
Hebrew was
18. 26),
the national tongue, as in the period of Hezekiah
(2
Kings
and had not yet been superseded by Aramaic, as
we may
learn from the words of Ezekiel: 'For thou art not sent to a people of
ESTHER
IN
THE LIGHT OF HISTORY

soil
HOSCHANDER
309
on a foreign
endured
born
in
these distinctive marks could not have
for
a long period.
The succeeding
generations,
those countries, could not but adopt the
idiom
among whom they were dwelling, with whom they were in intercourse. Their own national tongue
of the population
was scarcely of any use
in their daily pursuits,

its
and
this fact
must have been detrimental to
preservation.
Nor could
the national consciousness of those generations survive for
a long space of time.
Gradually
that
it
must have evaporated.

have
prevented
the
There
was
nothing
should
descendants of those captives or immigrants from being
absorbed
in the nations
among whom they

seemed
to have
dwelt.
Their
assimilation with the latter
been
inevitable.
The complete disappearance
of the remnant of Israel

Israel.
was averted by the renascence of the Religion of
The
religious
ideas,
propagated by the prophets of the
captivity and a small
number
of zealous Jews,
made
rapid
among their own fellow captives of The result of that Judea, but also among Gentiles. religious movement apparently was the preservation of
progress, not only
the Jewish nationality.

principle
in
But as a matter of
fact,
new
was now being proclaimed.

in
This did not
result
restoration, but
reform
of
the Jewish
nationality.
religion,
Henceforth, neither descent, nor
language, but
was the
exilic
criterion of
'
Jews
'.
However, the
could
not
religion
the
to
prophets
resurrected
be
restricted
the narrow bounds of the Jewish nationality.

barrier
a
The
national
to
had to be removed, and every one was invited

Even
after the return
strange
speech and of a hard language, but to the house of Israel'
(Ezek.
to
3. 5).
from the captivity,
Hebrew
of
continued
be the
common
language, as
(13. 24), that the offspring of
we may adduce from the words those who married non-Jewish
Nehemiah
wives could
not speak the Jews' language.
VOL.
XI.
3IO

religious
enter into this
union and was gladly received.
Those who accepted

Covenant of
Israel,
this invitation,
and entered
'
into the
'
became
at the
same time Jews

by the Jewish
(DHliT).
Consequently, the Jewish nationality disappeared from the

scene,
and
its
place was taken
religious
community. 4
The
latter
included, on the one hand, all
adherents of the Jewish religion, even Gentiles, and, on the

other hand, excluded
to the Jewish race. 5
all idolaters,
even those who belonged
There were, indeed, Jewish

ferently.
patriots
They saw
in the religious
who thought difmovement an effective

whose preserva-
force for the Jewish national resurrection,
tion could be effected only on a racial basis.
These claims
of
:
could not but deeply hurt the
feelings
the
'
newly-
converted Gentile,
who
bitterly
complained
The Lord
But those
great
hath utterly separated
me
from His people'.
national aspirations were nipped in the bud

4
by the
same
Ed.
Meyer
(Gesck. d. Alt., Ill, p. 183) arrives at the
conclusion,
but from a point of view which the present writer does not share, in
observing
religious association
The community is no longer national, but had become a which makes propaganda and enlists adherents among foreign tribes.' Cf. aho his Entstehung d. Jud., p. 233 f. He points to the large number of proselytes in the Greek and Roman periods. The Semites
'
:
of the
Western
countries,
who were
their creed.
captives like the Jews,
may have
were
"02
associated with the latter rather than with the Babylonians, and thus
easily persuaded to
5
1
embrace
We
Isa.
shall see further

'.
below that the
latter
were designated
as "123
sons of the stranger

6
56. 3.
There must have been a national party which was
dis-
satisfied
with Ezekiel's declaration, that the proselytes should become
equal citizens in the land restored to Israel,

to pass that ye shall divide
it
who
said:
'And
it
shall
3'ou,
come
to
by
lot for
an inheritance unto
and
the strangers that sojourn
among
you, which shall beget children

in
among
you
and they
shall
be unto you as born
the
county among
the children
of Israel.
Israel
'
They
shall
have inheritance among you among the tribes of
(Ezek. 47. 22).
ESTHER
exilic
IN

'
HOSCHANDER
',
^11
prophet, the so-called

:
Second Isaiah
who
pro-
claimed
'Also the sons of the stranger which join them-
selves to the
Lord
to serve
Him, and to love the name
of the Lord, to be His servants, every one
who keepeth
the Sabbath
from polluting
will
in
I
it,
and taketh hold of
my
covenant.
Even them
bring to
my
holy mountain,
;
and make them joyful
my
house of prayer
their
burnt
offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted

altar
for
;
upon mine
for
mine house
shall
be called a house of prayer
all
people'. 7
In accordance with this principle, Jewish
nationality receded into the background, and the religion
became
its
postulate.
The
idea
of
Jewish
nationality
required adherence to the Jewish religion, not, however,

vice versa.
Idolaters of Jewish descent ceased to be
'
Jews
',
and Syrians, Babylonians, &c, who accepted the Jewish

religion,
became
lost
at
its
the
same time
'
Jews'
(d^ti.t).
The
pagans
latter
term
gentilic
significance
and became a
the
religious
designation.
In
post-exilic
times,
in
who
The
lived
among
the Jewish
people
Judea,
though
inhabitants of this country, were never termed 'Jehudlm'.

truth of this definition was
this idea in observing,
felt
'
by the Rabbis, who
expressed
idolatry
7
Everybody who denies
is
called a
Jew'
(în*),8
and further assert that the

still
To him it is irrelevant whether the stranger who worshipped Jahveh lived among the Jews or in his own country. The house of God is the common property of all nations, and everybody is made welcome here. There is only this difference between Jews and Gentiles the former are condemned for forsaking the God of their ancestors, while no blame is attached to the
Isa. 56. 6, 7.
This prophet went
further than Ezekiel.
latter, if
8
they refuse to join the Lord and adhere to their ancestral deities.
Babli Megillah 13 a: *y\7P
is
Talmud
Talmudic expression, however,

divinity of idols
.a
mt rnUJD "12^.1 hi. The misleading. A gentile denying the

iOpJ
that every Israelite
and refusing
to
worship them does not become thereby
'Jew'.
The Talmud of course means
who
refuses
2
312
biblical

commandment,
shall
'
This
is
the ordinance of the pass',
over
There
no stranger eat thereof
exclusively
refers to
a Jewish idolater.
The
latter
'
is
thus, notwith-
standing his Jewish descent, termed

("o: p),
the son of a stranger
according to the Rabbinic conception.

is
The same
Lord God
term which
used by Ezekiel,
'
Thus
saith the
no stranger, uncircumcised
flesh, shall
is
in heart,
nor uncircumcised in
enter into
my
sanctuary, of any stranger that
among
the
children
of Israel V
may have
'
the
'
same
(DHliT)
meaning.
We
11
see, then, that the appellation
Jews
in the exilic
and
post- exilic periods
was a purely
like
'
religious
'
designation,
1
and not a national term,

the Middle Ages.
It is
Nazarenes
for
Christians
H1iT
'
in
of interest to notice
that
is
the only gentilic noun from which a verbal

is
noun, DHirno 'becoming Jews',
derived, but
we nowhere
Greek
meet with a similar derivation from other

as
1
gentilic nouns,
'
WW
'
Edomite
\
',
WK
'
Aramean
of the
',
',
nvo
Egyptian
&c.
The author
;
Book
of Esther
who
to recognize idols,
is
even a descendant of any other tribe and not of Judah,
nevertheless called a
9
Judean
'.
The same
is
of course true of proselytes.
See Rashi on Exod.

Ezek. 44.
9.
12. 44.
10
In the following passages the
prophet excepts the
Levites, though they had been idolaters.

to refer to Israelites, not to utter strangers.
11
Thus the former passage seems
Cassel,
/.
c.j
p. 40, is
is
the only commentator
who
'
correctly perceived
that D'HIiT in Esther
a distinctly religious, not a national, term.
But
he was wrong
in
believing that the
designation characteristic of the relation of
name God
Israel
remained the ideal
to Israel.
On
the contrary,
the term 'Israel' has a purely national signification, including even those
who how
are not 'sons of the covenant' (rP"G
^2\
according to the Rabb>s,

It
is
and as can be seen from the term bfcO-" VÎD.

the
of interest to see
modern commentators contradict themselves.

(cf.
The}' generally
see in D'HIIT a national term

theless almost
all
Siegfried, p. 141
and others), and never-
of
them
entertain no doubt that the story of Esther reflects
the events of the Maccabean period,

religious character.
though these events had a purely
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
313
used that derivation knew that the appellation Jeliuli was

a religious term. 12
The words
of the
Babylonian
Isaiah,
quoted above,
indicate that the promoters of the religious
movement
did
not content themselves with the conversion of their

brethren, but
own
became
aggressive, and carried their religious
ideas into the
camps
of the Gentiles.
The
religious pro-
paganda, carried on successfully, produced the same change

of conception concerning the term 'Jews'
among
Gentiles
as
among
the Jews themselves.
Seeing people of non-
Jewish descent embracing the Jewish religion, the Gentiles
used the term 'Jews'
in
a religious sense.
This neither
implied that an adherent
of the Jewish religion was of
foreign descent, nor that the family of such a one belonged
to the
same
creed, which
was an individual
belief, regardless
of family, race, and country.
What
reason
that religious
may we advance for the great success of revival among the Judean exiles? Did the
country
evil
latter attribute their great miseries, the loss of their
and
of their
freedom, to their
conduct and transThis
gressions against the
God
of their ancestors?
may
have been the case with a small fraction of the
exiles.
But
if
we should judge
the reasoning of the average of the

in
Judcans by the behaviour of their brethren
Egypt, 13
we would be
them
forced to the conclusion that the sufferings

effect,
they experienced produced just the opposite

to believe that their misfortune
inducing
was due
to the
wrath
of the gods
whose worship they neglected. 14
Shall
we
12
For the author's statement that many embraced Judaism, sec the
discussion of that subject in chapter IX.

13
14
Jer. 44. 16-19.
Fd.
Meyer
G. A.,
Ill,
p.
177) assumes
that the
Babylonian Jews
314
ascribe that success to the eloquence of the exilic prophets,
and the
lofty ideas of religion
and morality they proclaimed?
In their former country the Judeans had prophets whose
eloquence and religious ideas were by no means inferior

to those of the captivity,
and yet they were not persuaded
by
their
arguments and exhortations. 15
The average man hardly ever judges religious creeds on their own merits, but by the conduct and deeds of their
adherents.
In
their
actions and
behaviour he sees the

This
is
thought differently from their
own
brethren in Egypt.
to
correct, as
we
shall further see.
But he ought
have been more explicit and inform
us of the reason
15
why
they did think differently.

is
This question
hardly touched upon by Ed. Meyer,
/. c.
He
sees
in
the exiled
Jews
strict
adherents
to
the Jahvistic religion, with the
exception of a few
who were
soon
lost
among
the gentiles, and does not
give credence to the accusation of Ezekiel that they were idolaters, considering chapters
is
XIV and
XX
is
mere
fiction.
This historical conception

fact that the
decidedly erroneous.
in
There
no denying the
idolaters,
this fact
Jews who
remained
Judea continued to be
notwithstanding the introduc-
tion of the
Law by
Josiah.
For
we
have the testimony of the

into
eye-witness Jeremiah (19, 25, 32, 33, &c.).
Those who were carried
captivity could not have been different from those
who were
left
behind.
Nebuchadnezzar did not

carried
select religious
Jews
as captives.
Those who were

is
away belonged
to the partisans of
Egypt, and there
no reason
why
they should have been more religious than the others.

7
As
to the
chapters dealing with the idolatr}

assertion
is
of the
Jews being
frequently
fictitious,
such an
rather daring.
true.
The prophets
true.
made
predictions
to
which did not come

temporaries, not for
But none of them would have dared
make
accusations which were not
Ezekiel wrote his book for his conIf
modern
historians.
he had accused them of sins

lost his
they did not commit, the prophet would have
reputation for veracity
and discredited
to
all
his prophecies.
Ed. Meyer seems to have overlooked
whom
the prophet addressed himself in those chapters, not to the

'
common
people, but to
the Elders of Israel
'.
Most of the common
people abandoned
idols not long after their arrival at
Babylon, but not the wealthy classes,

(History of the People of Israel, VII, 1)
as
we
shall see further on.
Renan
does not explain
how
the anavim,
'the pietists, the

I,
fanatics',
p. 332.
became
prominent
in Israel.
Nor does
is
Graetz, in his History,
though his
description of the exiles
partly correct.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDEft
315
influence of their religions.
Therefore, just and benevolent

a
religious creed
intercourse
fellow- men
of
will
members of
help
with their
their
more towards disseminating

code of
ethics.
belief than the highest
On
the other hand,
unfair
will
and malicious dealings of members of any creed

latter
do more towards discrediting the

conceptions.
than the worst

is
ethical
people, as a rule,
favourably
is
inclined towards the
religion
of
its
friends,
and
easily
its
persuaded to follow their example, but detests that of
enemies, without investigating which of the two religions

is
of higher quality.
This
may
be the reason
why
the
Israelites,
during the period of the Judges, were willing to
imitate the idolatrous worship of their friendly neighbours,
but always turned back to the oppressed by them.

a
10
God
of their ancestors
when
of
This repentance
process,
may
the
have been
effect
purely
psychological
and
not
religious convictions.
The modern
contains
in
scholars
who contend
rites
that the Mosaic
Code
numerous Babylonian
and myths, taken over
the exilic period, leave out of
consideration the character of the Jews.
The
rite
latter
have
been living among Christian nations
for the last sixteen
hundred years.
And
yet
we do
not find any
or custom
the Jews adopted from their Christian neighbours during

this
long period.
This remarkable phenomenon

Jewish religion.
is
by no
means due
to the rigidity of the
In modern
times, in liberal countries, where

less fairly,
Jews are treated more or

ritual laws of the Bible
many have abandoned
and Talmud, and have even adopted Christian customs.
The Spanish Jewish

in
preachers, six hundred years ago,
who
considered the stories of Genesis pure mythology, and saw

the Patriarchs and the Twelve Tribes personifications
16
Sec Judges 3-13.
316
of the planets and the signs of the Zodiac, 17 were quite
capable of changing the Jewish leligion
in the
most radical
manner, but
inflicted
for the persecutions the Christians continually
upon the Jews.
In
paraphrasing a Talmudic
:
saying,
we may
by
venture the paradoxical statement
The
and
Christians did
religion
more
for the
preservation
of the Jewish
their persecutions, than did the Prophets
the Talmudic literature. 18

of the
Mohammedans.
ideas
similar
If
The same, of course, holds true The Bible undoubtedly contains

or
identical
in
many
to
with those
of the
Babylonians.
they originated
Babylonia, they must
have been transmitted to the Jews

not at a time
in a
very early period, 19
when the Jews
suffered under the
heavy yoke
of that empire. 20
17
See the Responses of
W3'^)
: '
nTJK
ni>B> "OS, No. 415.

to
18
The Talmud observes

did
',
The
seal-ring
which Ahasuerus gave
Haman
in Israel
effected a greater success than the forty-eight prophets

:
who
to
rose
it
what none of them was

b.
able to do, to cause
them
repent
of their sins
19
Megillah 12
In the present writer's opinion, the transmission to Israel of ideas
developed in the Euphrates Valley dates back to a pre-Mosaic period

(cf.
Jewish Quarterly Review,

is
New
4.
Series, vol.
I,
pp. 147
flf.).
Of
the same
opinion
also
Jastrow, in his recent work,

York, 1914, p
Hebrew and Babylonian
Traditions,
in his
New
Albert T. Clay takes a different position,
work Amnrru,
Philadelphia, 1909, and contends that the Babylonian
religious conceptions developed mainly in the
Westland, the home of
Israel.
Renan Jews who were

at
is
20
(History, VI,
1)
remarks
'
It is
our opinion that the pious

all
captives in Babylonia willfully closed their eyes to

like
that
surrounded them,
Bretons transplanted to Paris

all
who
will not look
anything and depreciate

rather incorrect.
that passes
under their eyes.'
The analogy
Paris did not destroy Bretagne, and thus the Bretons
have no reason
tuously upon this state of luxury.
and merely look down contempThe Judeans, however, had ample reason to abominate Babylonia, even those who were not pious. Jastrow, in the work cited above (see preceding note), correctly observes that the Hebrews were in no mood to assimilate ideas from those who appeared to
to detest the
former
city,
them
in the light of ruthless destroyers.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
317
The Judeans
their liberty.
led into captivity to Babylonia naturally
hated intensely the people which had deprived them of
Their conqueror, Nebuchadnezzar, was by no
means a cruel monarch.

no desire to destroy
He was a generous
robber, and had
his victims utterly.
Though depriving
the exiles of their possessions and their freedom, he gave
them means
of subsistence in his native land.

in
The prophets
for his gentle
Jeremiah and Ezekiel, seeing
this
king the instrument
of Jahveh's judgement, were grateful to
him
treatment of the
'
exiles,
'.
and even represented him as the
servant of Jahveh
But the victims themselves thought

Little did
differently
on
this point.
in
they care whether he
was an instrument
of his judgement.
the hand of Jahveh for the execution
They saw
in
him only the merciless
destroyer of their happiness, and thus detested and cursed

this king, his country, his people,
and
all
their institutions.
The
own
exiles were addicted to idolatrous practices in their
country.
Their local gods having, according to the
common
21
conceptions, 21
no power outside of
their
own
alike.
Such a conception was generally shared by Jews and Gentiles

to Saul
:
David complained
'
They have driven me
out this day from abiding

(1
in the inheritance of the
Lord, saying: Go, serve other gods'
Sam.
26. 19).
The
colonists transplanted
by the Assyrians
to Palestine
found that their

lions, until
own gods were

to
powerless to protect them against the
they
placed themselves under the protection of Jahveh, and only then were able
worship their ancestral gods,

'
who became now
the manifestations and
ministers of Jahveh,
(2
they feared the Lord and served their
own gods
'
Kings
17.
25-33).
The Assyrians
frequently carried their captives and
their gods to Assyria, for the purpose of depriving the latter of their
to
power
avenge the harm done
to their votaries.
In Assyria the foreign gods
became
subject to the will of the indigenous gods,

if
:
and had
to
punish their
own
votaries
they were not

'
faithful to their masters.

.
.
The
Bible expresses
the same idea
The Lord
shall bring thee
unto a nation which neither
thou nor thy father have
known
and there shalt thou serve other gods,

Jahveh, having no representation, cculd
wood and
stone' (Deut. 28. 36).
3l8

in
dominions, were of no use to them
a foreign country.
The same conception

assist
prevailed
even
among
those
who
were worshippers of Jahveh, that

His votaries outside of
He was powerless to Palestine. Now the Baalim

of the Euphrates valley,
latter for
and Astartes they had worshipped were essentially and by

origin identical with
many gods
and the
exiles could easily
have substituted the
the former deities.
And
even the worship of Jahveh could
have been preserved on
this foreign soil
by
identifying
him
with one of the chief Babylonian divinities of West Semitic

origin, like
Adad
or Marduk.
But how could they be
expected to recognize the very gods to
whom
their mortal
It
enemies attributed the victory over them?

natural that the captives
to the
was quite
who could
not reconcile themselves

felt
new
conditions,
and deeply
the misery of the

their
captivity, detested
and refused to worship the gods of
conquerors.
practices,
22
Not being able
to preserve their old religious
and not willing to put themselves under the
protection of the gods of their enemies, the captives were

practically without
heart,
any
religion.
There was a void
in their
and they
felt
themselves forsaken by god and man.

the prophets found
soil
it
Under those circumstances,

prepared.
easy
to disseminate the old religion of Israel, as the
was well
The
religion
whose laws awakened memories
not be carried into captivity, and his worshippers would have to serve there
other gods.
It
was due
to
the prophetic idea of the Omnipresence of

lost
its
Jahveh that the Jewish

established
belief
local
character,
and could be
everywhere.
Nevertheless, the idea of Gahith ha-Shckinah,
that the Lord abides with his people in the captivity
and
is
powerless to
redeem them, has

It
22
still
survived in the Talmudic and Cabbalistic literature.
would lead us too

Renan,
far to
dwell upon
it.
I.e., failed
to see that the idolatrous
to detest Babylonia than those

in their miseries the
who were
pious.
Jews had more reason The latter ma}' have seen
hand of the Lord, while the former did not.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
The change
319
and aspirations immensely dear to their hearts was enthusiastically accepted

religious conceptions
by the people.
was effected
in
in their
a short time.
Not
long after the
first
exile Jeremiah could already contrast
the religious conduct of the Babylonian exiles with that
of those
who w ere
r
left
behind
figs'.
2"
in
Judea,
in
the parable of
in
the
'two baskets of
still
The Judeans
after
the
old
country
continued the practice of idolatry.

to
But as
complete
soon
as
they came
Babylonia,
the
destruction of Judea, most of

of their fellow captives
them imitated the example

religion of Jahveh.
and accepted the
They had even more

and
cause for detesting the Babylonians
their deities than the first exiles. 24
The
different
condition of the Jews
who migrated
Though
to
Egypt was
from that of the Babylonian captives.

to Judea.
Egypt
had done no harm

a
terrible
the latter suffered
defeat,
twenty years before the destruction of
the Temple, at the hands of the Egyptians at Megiddo, 25
Egypt was not responsible

to the presumption
for this calamity.
It
was due
and short-sightedness of the Judean

assured
that
government.
23
Being
The same
all
the
king
of
Egypt
Jer. 24. 3.
is
seen from the letter sent to the captives
(29. 1-32).
But not
of them had at that time abandoned idolatry {see
n.15).
24
We
may assume
that the captives at the final destruction of Judea,

to the
who had
proved themselves faithless
Babylonian
in their
covenant
with the Babylonian king, were not treated with some consideration as
were those who were

reason
exiled with Jehoiachin.
This
may perhaps
be the
why
the last chapters of Jeremiah
show such
a deep-rooted hatred
this
in
toward Babylonia, and so strangely contrast with the sentiments of

prophet toward the Babylonian empire.
Jeremiah may have learned
Egypt
25
of the sufferings of those exiles at the hands of the Babylonians,

his sentiments
23.
and thus
2
toward them naturally changed.

Cf. Graetz, Hist., p.
Kings
29
2 Chron. 35. 20-24.
296
f.
320
had no hostile intentions against Judea, Josiah had no

reason to prevent the passing of the Egyptian
his
army through
final
borderland to Syria.
At
the time
of Judea's
destruction and conquest
by Babylonia, the Egyptians were
the
to
allies of that
country and made an attempt to come

to find
its
rescue.
20
The Judean immigrants expected

in
a safe refuge
the land of their former

in
allies,
were no
doubt received
accordingly
'
a friendly
way by
the Egyptians, and
felt
a deep gratitude towards their kind hosts.
The Queen
of Heaven', to
whom
the immigrants sacrificed,

cult
was an Egyptian goddess whose
had been introduced
into Judea long before the reform of Josiah. 27
Thus the
abandoning
immigrants
had
not
the
least
reason
for
the worship of this goddess, since they believed that her
wrath for having been formerly abandoned by them was

the cause of their present condition.
We
do not know
whether at that time the Jahveh-cult was given up altogether.

It is
more probable
But
that along with the worship of Jahveh
the Egyptian Jews practised idolatry, as they formerly did

in
Judea.
after the
conquest of Egypt by Cambyses,
the intercourse of the Egyptian Jews with their Babylonian

20 27
Jer. 37. 5, 6-1
1.
I,
Graetz, Hist.
p.
300, asserts that the worship of the

after the battle of
'
Queen of
Heaven' was introduced

of such an opinion
is
Megiddo.
The
improbability
evident,
as the
voluntarily the cult of a people at
Jews would never have accepted whose hands they suffered a terrible
Moreover, the
will certainly do whatsoever goeth
defeat and to
whom
they had to pay a heavy indemnity.

:
words of the immigrants

forth of our
'
But
we
own
mouth, to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, as

fathers,
we
of
have done,
we
and our
our kings and princes, in the
cities
Judah'
(Jer. 44. 17),
prove that her cult in Judah must have dated from

friendly terms with
an earlier period.
Israel
The Egyptians were continually on
and Judea and the other Western
states, since the
Assyrians started
cult of
their conquests in the
West, and the Judeans may have adopted the
that goddess at that period.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
many
38
32
brethren was not without influence, and
of the
11
may
in-
have become pure worshippers of Jahveh.
As
The
rule,
religion
plays a minor, not to say an
significant part, in the affairs of those
who
live in affluence.
religious
propaganda was successful among the poor
and middle
however,
classes of the
Judean captives.
The nobl
who
exercised a certain authority over their poor
brethren, 29 were soon reconciled to the exilic conditions.
Having been the leaders of the people, they came

with
the
in
contact
government
officials,
and entertained friendly
relations with
latter,
many
Babylonians.
Out of deference
pay
to the
and
in
order to keep on
good terms with them,

their respects to the
these nobles were quite willing to
Babylonian
deities.
There were others who became pros-
perous by commerce, and were quite contented with their

present conditions
in
the
great
Babylonian
for
metropolis,
where they found more opportunities

riches than in
satisfied
accumulating
their
former agricultural country.
Being
ill
with their new surroundings, they had no
will
towards the king and the people

to Babylonia,
who
transplanted them
and thus no reason
for refusing to
worship
the gods of this country.
Those Jews, though representing
a small portion of the captives, were, on account of their

influence, a
constant
menace
to the religious
movement.
The
2*
activity of
the prophets was directed against them.

(published by Sachau, Leipzig, 1911)
But the Elephantine Pap)

to
ri
seem
indicate that the Egyptian
Jews were not pure worshippers of

b. c.e.
Jahveh
in the fifth
and fourth centuries
There may, however, have
been a number
who
accepted the religious conceptions of the Babylonian
Jews, and the sanctity of the Temple of Jeb was not recognized by them.
19
See Ezek. 34.

of the
There can be no doubt
that these 'shepherds'

Cf.
were
and
the
leaders
/.
Jews
in
the captivity.
Graetz,
I.e.,
p. 332,
Renan.
c.
VI.
1.
322

little
However, they had

ridiculed
their
regard
'
for
the
prophets, and
'
prophecies. 30
The
elders of Israel
fre-
quently visited Ezekiel, but not

to
his
for the
purpose of listening
respected,
teachings.'
The prophet being
and
enjoying the highest authority

it
among
the
common
:
people,
was a matter of policy
to occasionally ask his advice,

'
in
order to give to their measures divine sanction.
Hypo-
critically
they asked
for a divine
message.
But he was
well acquainted with
their
conduct, and they could not

idolaters care for
deceive him.
What do you
God and
His messages?' was
his reply.
Whenever he addressed
the elders of Israel he accused them of idolatry. 33
To
the
common As
not
people, however, he
spoke
in
a different
tone,
comforting them and correcting their religious conceptions. 154

long as the influential
men among
the captives were
won over
to the religious party, the existence of the
Jewish religion was precarious.
The
secretly.
religious
propaganda could not be

it
carried
on
fail
The
publicity which
feeling
aroused could not
to engender
bad
among
the Babylonians.
Com-
batting and deriding
idolatrous
conceptions in the very
centre of the Babylonian cult was nothing short of high

treason. 35
30
31
Such a movement was undoubtedly the cause

5.
Ezek. 2i.
If
in
the elders of Israel practised idolatry,
we
cannot assume that they
were
32
earnest in visiting the prophet and listening to his admonitions.

nearly the same at present in
It is
some European
countries, as the
present writer knows from his personal knowledge, that wealthy

influence
at the
men
of
who
all
are personally indifferent to religious observances, stand

strictly religious
head of
congregations and consult the orthodox

to carry through.
Rabbis upon
33
34
measures they want
Ezek.
14, 20.
Ibid. 18, 33. 34, 36, 37, 38. 25-9.

It
85
is
inconceivable
how Renan
(History, VI, 1)
came upon the
idea
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
On
323
of numerous persecutions, 8* which, however, had no dis-
couraging
effect
upon the
zeal of the pious Jews.
the
contrary, even those
who had
It
held aloof from the religious
movement could
of their brethren.
not remain unaffected

is
by the
sufferings
easy to sneer at religious ideas,
but they assume a different aspect

willing to
when one
sees
men
this
pay
for
them with
their lives.
effect.
However,
sympathy did not have an immediate

Jews preferred
their
Those wealthy
everything, and
own comfort above

practices.
were not inclined to expose themselves to persecutions by
abandoning idolatrous
stuff of
They were
not of
the
which martyrs are made.

of
The conquest
to the
Bel's
Babylon by Cyrus dealt a death-blow

religion.
Babylonian
The
superstitious
still
belief
in
power was shattered.
Idolatry, though
tolerated,
religion
was no longer fashionable. The seeds of the Jewish
now found a fruitful soil even in the hearts of people, who gave up idolatry and joined
community.
Nevertheless they
still
the wealthy
the
Jewish
remained
the
indifferent
members, without
the Jewish
laws.
high
regard
for
observances
of
They were
: '
the
people of
are
whom
the
Babylonian Isaiah said

that the
They who
eating swine's
Babylonians
at that period
denied both the gods and Providence.
The Babylonians were

36
certainly at that period just as religious as ever.

I,
Graetz {History,
p.
334) states that the violent hatred of the

refusal to grant
letter of
Jews
toward Babylonia was caused by Nabunaid's

mission to return to their
that they
them per-
own
country.
But the
Jeremiah stated
had
to
remain
in the captivity
seventy years (29. io\
The pious
Jews were
cherish
in that
firm believers in the prophetic prediction, and thus did not

earlier return.
any hope of an
The
indifferent
it.
country, and were not eager to leave
Jews felt comfortable Even if we should see in
that prediction a later interpolation,
we
have not the least evidence for
an assumption that Nabunaid had been kindly disposed towards the captives
on his accession to the throne, and later changed his mind.
324
flesh,

and
37
broth
of
abominated
things
is
in
their
vessels.'
If the
Jews detested the Babylonian

it
religion as being
the creed of their oppressors,
stands to reason that they
loved the Persian religion as being that of their liberators.
This love would have been disastrous to the establishment

of the Jewish religion
if
the Persians had been idolaters.
The mere
harm
to
sufficient
fact that the Persian religion did not
do much
itself
the Jewish
religious
conceptions
is
in
proof that there were no great differences between
the principal doctrines of both the Jewish

religions.
and Persian
Ahuramazda was a purely

by any image, according
to
spiritual god, not represented
the Avesta.
His emblem,
adopted by the Iranians from the Assyrians, 38 consisting

of a winged ring floating
rising
37
in
the air with a
human
figure
idol. 39
from the circular space, was not considered an

This accusation does not refer to those
Isa. 65. 4.
who
practised
idolatr}'.
No
prophet would have blamed
idolaters for not observing the
dietary laws.
On
the contrary,
if
the latter had observed them, the pro-
phets would have ridiculed their conduct.

describes different kinds of
sacrificing in
The prophet in those passages Jewish transgressors some were real idolaters,
; ;
gardens and burning incense upon altars of brick
others
were superstitious, remaining

all
among the graves and lodging

;
in
the
monu-
ments, and practised necromancy

those practices, but
38
?till
and others
finally
had already abandoned

flesh.
continued to eat swine's
This was the emblem of the Assyrian god Ashur (see Justi, History,
p.
69,
and Ed. Meyer, G.A.,
III,
p.
123 \
If
Zoroastrianism dates from

that the adopting of
it
the beginning of the sixth century,

this
we must assume
emblem was
pre-Zoroastrian, and that Zoroaster did not consider
an idolatrous representation.
89
See Ed. Meyer,
ibid.
Justi.
however,
is
of the
opinion
that
the
religion of the
Achaeamenides was not
identical with that of the Avesta,
as the latter prohibits the representation of
Ahuramazda by an image.
But
then he would have to go a step further and maintain that the religion
of the Sassanides, the most fanatical adherents of the Zoroastrian religion,
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
325
The
essential part of this
emblem was the winged

this
40
ring and
not the
human
figure,
as
emblem was
represented
frequently without the latter.
This divinity was not the
supreme god of the
Persians, but actually the only one.
The Daevas,
deities,
the gods of the popular belief, were, according
to the teaching of Zoroaster, to be regarded as spurious
and
their priests
and votaries as
heretics. 41
The
angels,
by
whom Ahuramazda was

religion
surrounded, originally
at a later period,
represented abstract ideas. 42
However,
when the Zoroasti ian

the
became
corrupt, they assumed
character
of
the
former
light,
Daevas. 43
The power
of
Ahuramazda, the god of
having continually to strive

Ahuramazda
under whose rule the Avesta was compiled, was not identical with that
of the Avesta either, as the Sassanides represented shape.
in
human
upon
Thus we cannot but assume
that the Persians did not look
these figures as representations.

4"
Cf.
George Rawlinson, Herodotus,

is
vol.
I,
p.
208, n. 3.
That
this
symbol was not regarded as an image
seen from Berossus
who was no
see
doubt well acquainted with the Persian religion, and nevertheless asserts
that the Persians
knew
of no images of the gods before Artaxerxes II
chapter VI).
41
See K.
F.
Geldner's article 'Zoroaster'
in the Eric. Brit.
J.
Darme-
steter {Zend-Avesta, p. 59) observes that
Mazdeism struggled on towards
unity
the Lord (Ahura) slowly brought everything under his unquestioned
supremacy, and the other gods became not only his subjects, but his
creatures.
Justi,
in
his
History,
remarks:
'All
these
things have
in
Zoroastrianism an essentially different position than
in the natural religion.
The j' have given up

god
(p. 82).
their character as gods,
and preserved only their
cosmic sphere of action.

'
They
are creatures and servants of the supreme
42
Cf.
Geldner,
I.e.
Darmesteter,
I.e.,
p. 71,
observes: 'They were at
first
mere
personifications of virtue and moral or liturgical
powers
but
as their lord and father ruled over the
whole world, they each took by and
by a part of the world under

43
their care.'
some of the Amshaspands possessed their own cf. the article 'Armenia' (Zoroastrian) by H. M. Ananikian. sanctuaries; in Hastings's Encyclop. of Religion and Ethics, and Ed. Meyer. G.A.. Ill,
In Armenia, at least,
p. 127
f.
VOL. XI.
325
with Anra-Mainyu, the god of darkness, was seemingly

limited.
Notwithstanding this conception, he was, to
all
intents
and purposes, the only god.
The conception
of
the power of darkness in the Zoroastrian religion corre-
sponds to that of the
spiritual
Evil One, in the Christian
enemy religion, who
of mankind, the
is
feared, but not
worshipped.
religion
is
44
The term dualism
applied to the Persian

forces of light
evil.
a misnomer.
The two opposing

counterpart,
in
and darkness represent the principles of good and

There
is
no good without
its
evil.
it is
The
latter
being the destructive element

that
nature,
reasonable
man
should place himself under the protection of the
good, constructive principle.
Ahuramazda himself was

above these opposing
later period,
originally, to a certain extent, placed

forces, as has
been pointed out. 45 In a
however,
the Holy Spirit was

44
made
equivalent to him. 46
This would
he
tells
Herodotus VII, 114 seems

I
to contradict that assumption, as

in
us
'
have heard that Amestris, the wife of Xerxes,
her old age, buried
alive seven pairs of Persian youths, sons of illustrious
men, as a thanksearth.'
offering to the god
who
as
is
supposed
to dwell
underneath the
But
Zoroastrianism
is just
little
responsible for the superstition of Amestris

devil.
as Christianity for
some mad witches who worshipped the

vol.
George
That
Rawlinson
{ibid.,
IV, p. 8) holds as probable that Herodotus merely

is
speaks as a Greek.
In the Avesta there
no vestige of such a
evil
cult.
god Anra-mainyu, being the personification of the

naturally unlike
principle,
was
any other deity

:
'
that could be propitiated
by
sacrifices.
Justi, in his History, observes
If
the ancient writers inform us that the

recognize therein a feature of the
Persians sacrificed to Hades,
we may
'
Median
45
religion of the
Magians
(p. 83).
The
latter religion,
however, was
belief.
'
not identical with that of Ahuramazda, but represents the old Iranian
similar opinion
is
expressed by Darmesteter,
/.
c, p. 82
When
two
the Magi had accounted for the existence of evil by the existence of
principles, there arose the question
how
there could be two principles, and

its
a longing for unity
was
felt,
which found
satisfaction
that
both are
derived from the same principle.'

46
Cf. Geldner's 'Zoroaster', Encycl. Brit.,
and
Justi's Hist., p. 83.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
Bchistun Inscription,
account for the fact that Darius,
in his
does not mention Anra-Mainyu. 47
Besides, the limitation
of Ahuramazda's power was held to be merely temporary,

as he
was bound
his
after a certain period to
be victorious,
and destroy
enemy. 48
To
scholarly
minds
there
might
have
been
great
differences
between the Jewish and Persian conceptions
concerning the Divine Nature.
However, to the average

in all respects
man, Jahveh and Ahuramazda were identical

but in name.
49
The
Persian
altars, 50
religion
having no images,
did
no temples, and no
the Jews
not
see
any
transgression in acknowledging
identifying
47
Ahuramazda
as God. and
him with Jahveh. 51
We may
assume that they

know anything
in
It
has been contended that Darius did not

since he
about
in-
Zoroaster,
scription.
48
does not mention Anra-Mainyu
his Behistun
Geldner,
/.
and
I,
Justi, I.e., p. 83.

p.
4)
Graetz {History,
402)
is
certainly correct in his
remark: 'They
of Israel created
is
contrasted that doctrine with their

light
own
belief that the
God
and darkness, good and
evil.'
similar opinion
expressed by
II,
Alfred Jeremias (The Old Testament in the Light of the Ancient East,
p.
276):
'The assumption
that the prophet (Isa. 45.

its
7,
12)
combats the
is
theology of Zarathustra, at least in

founded.'
is
exoteric interpretation,
well
He
further observes (n. 2)

in
'The
esoteric religion of Zarathustra

true.
not
dualistic
the proper sense.'
But the contrary may be
Zoroaster's esoteric religion

just to this
was
dualistic,
and the prophet called attention
fundamental principle which the
common people
did not perceive.
But so subtle a distinction could scarcely have made any impression upon
Moreover, it was no easy task to convince the people God himself was the creator of evil. The very idea of the prophet that God created the darkness evidently contrasted with the story oi Creation in which the first divine act was the creation of light.
the average Jew.
that
80
61
Herodotus
It
I,
131.
looks as
if
the Persians themselves

different
saw
in
Jahveh
their
p.
own God
indeed
Ahuramazda under a
name.
Marquart (Fundamentc.
49
contends that 'the God of Heaven' (Ezra 7 12, 21, 23) is Ahuramazda. This conjecture is not without foundation. The edict of Artaxerxes. in
which enormous powers are conferred upon a Jewish
priest,
even to impose
/ 2
328
did not
fail,

whenever there was an opportunity, to impress
officials
upon the minds of the Persian

of their
the close relationship
own
religion to that of the Persians,
and thus justly
claim special favours.
During the Babylonian period, the

'
distinctive
mark
of
Jews
'
(D^rp) was the rejection of idols.

this fact ceased to
Under Persian
latter,
rule,
however,
be the criterion of the
as the true Zoroastrians
did the same.
Zoroastrianism
having adherents everywhere throughout the Persian empire,

a Jew, not caring to reveal his identity, could live
Gentiles
all
among
an
his
lifetime without being recognized as
adherent of the Jewish religion.
strictly pious
Jew could
is
the
death
penalty upon those
who
is
disobey the Jewish Law,
quite
incomprehensible.
The Persian
There
rulers
were very
tolerant
in
towards the
creeds of their subjects.
nothing improbable
granting the
Jews
rather
permission to return to their old home, to rebuild the Temple and the walls
of Jerusalem, and to live according to their
own
it
laws.
But
it
is
strange
that
Persian king should
have
been so
solicitous
about the
promulgation of the Jewish
Law
it.
as to impose
by force upon those who

to find that the
I,
had no inclination
to accept
is
Hence
it
is
no surprise
authenticity of that edict

p. 165),
denied by Kuenen
{Hist.-krit. Einleitung,
Kosters {Het Herstel van
Israel, 1903, p. 114),
Wellhausen
{Israel.
itndjiid. Geschiclite, 1914, p. 160),
Th. Noldeke
{Golf. Gel.
Anz., 1884, 1014),
and others.
Ed.
Meyer
this
{Entst. d. Jud., p.
is
60
f.),
however, has clearly
demonstrated that
that Artaxerxes
document
absolutely genuine.
But
his explanation
was
superstitious,
and that the promulgation of the

is
Law
is
had
to
be sanctioned by the government
very forced.
in
There
no
parallel
between favours granted
to the
Greeks
religious matters
and
those granted to Ezra.
polytheistic religion does not interfere with
other polytheistic creeds,
while the promulgation
of the Jewish
Law
latter
involved intolerance toward other creeds.
We
therefore suggest that this
promulgation was a matter of policy on the part of Artaxerxes.

looked upon the Jewish creed as being
The
identical with that of the Persians.
He was
in
desirous of introducing the latter belief in the

to
Western countries
order
connect them more firmly with his empire, and he saw in the
Jewish
Law
such a connecting link between these inhabitants and the

shall deal
Persians.
We
with
this subject further
on
in
chapter VII.
n. 59.
ESTHER
IN

so,
HOSCHANDLR
329
ritual
not have done

laws.
on account of his observance of the
But
at that
period these laws had not yet been
firmly rooted in the hearts of the Jewish people, and

of
many
for
them may have neglected them.

for
52
The wealthy cared
more, as we have seen,

religion.
their
own comfort than
Many among
all
them, indifferent to the religious
observances, in
probability pretended to be Zoroastrians,

religion.
and concealed their

Jews we may see
in
Examples of
this
kind of
Mordecai and Esther.

in
Mordecai was born

from the
he could
we may conclude pure Babylonian name he bears. The fact that

Babylonia, as
rise later to a
high position
in
Persia seems to
indicate that he
came
to Persia in his early youth,

53
and
received a Persian education.
He
was a member of one
of the distinguished families which had been carried into

the Babylonian captivity with the Judean king Jeconiah
(
= Jehoiachin).
We
have already observed that those

fate,
noble families were soon reconciled to their

idolaters.
and were
Under Persian
rule,
however, idolatry having

it,
gone out of fashion, they apparently abandoned
as
evidenced by the fact that the late prophets do not accuse
any Jew of
idolatry.
But even then they were not quite

of the Babylonian
deities,
averse to the worship

indifferent to both the
being
Babylonian and the Jewish
religions.
There can be
little
room
the
for
doubt that the father of

In Babylonia a proper
Mordecai was a Jew of that type.
name compounded with

62
name
They
in
of a deity was intimately

having partaken of the
The Rabbis accuse
the
Jews
of that period of
feast of Ahasuerus (Mcgillah 12 a).
correctly judged that the Jewish
observances were neglected

63
at that period.
According
to
Flavius Josephus,
to
his
story of Esther,
Mordecai
moved from Babylon

of the king.
Susa after Esther had been taken into the house
This
is
of course pure fancy.
33

its
connected with the religious belief of

seen
bearer, as
may
be
from the
seal
cylinders. 54
The
bearer of a
name
Nabu protects', was a votary of the god Nabu. The name Mordecai is a hypocoristicon of a complex name compounded with the divine name Marduk. Thus the full name was undoubtedly of idolatrous character.
Nabu-nasir, 'the god
If the
Talmudic statement,
',
'
Mordecai
is
identical
with
of
Bilshan
55
is
based on tradition, the compounded

'
name
Mordecai was Marduk-bel-sJmnu,
Marduk
is
their lord \ 56
Such a name could be borne only by a worshipper of the
god Marduk.
father
life,
But that does not prove that Mordecai's

idolater.
was an
To
ease his son's path through
that he should not be
hampered with an outlandish
name which stamps one

a pure Babylonian name.
countries,
as an alien, his father gave
him
Many modern Jews

it
in
European
where
biblical
names are very seldom met with

likewise a disadvantage for
among
Christians, consider
the future career of their children to be

54
named Abraham,
Cf. J.
Krausz, Die Gotternamen

ft'.
in
den Babylonischen Siegelcylinder-
Legenden, Munchen, 1910, pp. 15

55
Megillah 15 a and Menahoth 65
a.
However, the Talmud had not

it
the slightest notion of the meaning of Bilshan, and explained

of the languages, linguist
'
as
'
master
(ptJv
?V^,
to
as he
was
said to have
been a member
of the
Sanhedrin, and was therefore supposed to understand 'seventy

',
languages
that
is
to say, he
had
understand the various idioms in use
in Palestine,
and not to have
to rely
upon the services of an
interpreter.
The explanation
which
of
is
of Bilshan presents a counterpart to that of Mordecai,
explained as 'pure myrrh' (^3*1 N"W3), the Aramaic translation

30. 23).
"TH lb (Exod.
The
fact
that the
Rabbis did not know the

it
meaning of Bilshan, and nevertheless connect

point to a true tradition.
with Mordecai, seems to
As
a matter of fact, Bel-shuna is an abbreviated
name, and so
50
is
Mordecai.
Cf. Nabu-bel-shunu, Nin-ib-bcl-shumt, Sha-la-bel'Ji?)-shfmii (cf. Tall-
quist, Neubabylonisches
Names,
1914).
Namenbnch, Helsingfors, 1905 Assyrian Personal Many of the numerous names Mardnka, Marduku see ibid.)
;
ma}- be hypocoristica of Mardnk-bel-shumt.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
for
his
33
Moses, &c.
No Jew
with
any regard
religion
would have given

dedicated
his son a
name
It
that implied his being
to the worship of
in
Marduk.
But Jair was not
an
exception
this respect.
was customary among

to
the indifferent
Babylonian Jews
name
their
children
8lc./'
7
Arad-Gnla, Na?ia-nadin, Ninib-miiballit, Sm-naszr,

as
may
be seen
from the business documents of those

be of interest to observe that we very
periods.
But
find
it
may
names of idolatrous character borne by relatives of those whose names are compounded with the divine
seldom
name Jawa.
The
latter were, as
it
seems, characteristic
of the religious conduct of their bearers and their families
as faithful worshippers of Jahveh.

in this respect,
if
Mordecai was not better
not worse, than his father, and

religion.
by no
it
means proud
of his
Though
exercising, as
seems, some authority over his humbler co-religionists in

Susa, as did his distinguished family in Babylonia, he
was
anxious to conceal his Jewish identity, which under Zoroastrianism

it
was easy
to accomplish, without transgressing
the main tenet of the Jewish religion.

57
The name Mordecai

That the bearers of such
Cf. Babyl.
Exp., IX, x and Tallquist,
I.e.
names are Jews may be seen by the names of

{History, VI, 1)
their fathers or sons.
Renan
remarks: 'A great many Jews became servants of the households of the Chaldean nobility and adopted Chaldean names, without
troubling themselves about the paganism implied by these names.
It
did
not entail any apostasy and the

are
was no more shocking than when

Hermes.'
the
Jews of
Roman epoch
wrong.
called themselves Apollonius or
His analogies
Jews never adopted in post-exilic times paganism. The name Apollonius is a mere translation names implying of the Hebrew name Samson, and the name Hermes means literally
Strictly
religious
'interpreter', and a
Jew may
bear such a name, even

if
if it
is
also that of
Greek god.
It
would be
different
Jew would
be called Apollodorus
or lsidorus.
They would
certainly be characteristic of the indifference
toward the Jewish religion on the part of their hearers.

53
See chapter IX.
332
being Babylonian, we
may assume
that he
had
for special
59 use in his dealings with Persians a pure Persian name.
Esther, like Mordecai, was born in Babylonia.
Her name,
undoubtedly identical with that of the goddess Ishtar

Astarte,
is
a hypocoristicon of a
complex name compounded

full
',
with that of this goddess.

Ishtar-iidda-sha,
for her
'
Her
name may have been

which would account
Ishtar
is
her light
two names,
But
""inDK
it
and nonn, both abbreviations,
= flp^rrnriDK. 60
name
JiDin
is
is
perhaps more probable that the
the Persian Hutaosa, rendered into
Greek
as Atossa* 1 and
was adopted by her
in Persia.
Whatever
her compounded
name may have
been, the
name Esther
Having
Ishtar evidently shows that Abihail, Esther's father, was
a worthy brother of Mordecai's father,
Jair.
lost
both parents
in
her childhood, Esther was brought to Susa
and adopted by Mordecai.
He
could not give her a better
Jewish education than he himself possessed.

59
Their real
Namenbuch.
We
find
is
names compounded with ud-da,
cf.
Tallquist,
This word
synonym
of urru,
is
fir.i
"V|K
'
light',
and of
ufiru
"0
Jjoj,
"nfl
of the same meaning, and
etymologically identical with

in the
Hebrew
'splendour', which
is
used also
formation of
Hebrew proper names

in
(see Hebr. Dictionary).
Both synonyms are found

&c.
;
cuneiform proper
names, as
I.e.)
ru " 1 Ma-lik, in llu-itr-ri, U-
Niiri- Ishtar, &c. (see Tallquist,
That ud-du does not
refer
merely to the 'daylight'; though
UD
Shamash, may be seen from the name Nabu-shakin-iid-du, 'the god Nabu makes light' (cf. ibid.). This noun may have been pronounced hitd-dn.
according to the etymology.
We
see that even the
Sumero-Babylonian
word
hekal.
60
ekal,
'great house, temple, palace*
was by
the
Hebrews pronounced
remarks
'
:
Stanley, History of the Jezvisli Church,
III, p. 196,
Hadassah
(her
Hebrew name)
is
either " myrtle", or else a Hebraized form of the

to the Persian
/.
Persian Atossci?
But the Hebrew form stands nearer
name
at the
Hntaosah than the Greek rendering Atossa.

61
Cf. Cassel,
c,
p.
54.
Many
of those opposed to Rabbinic Judaism,

rigid observances,
latter
whose aim was
start to abrogate its
found that they could not draw
a strict line
between the
and those of the Mosaic Law.
ESTHER
IN

shown
in
HOSCHANDER
333
characters arc
the second chapter of the
Book
of Esther.
Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy, the two opposing tendencies

within Judaism, are by no
teristic of
itself,
means peculiar
to
and charac-
our enlightened era.

in
They
are as old as Judaism
though
each age, in accordance with the prevailing

different character.
ideas,
Heterodoxy assumed a
As
long
;
as idolatry
in the
was fashionable, the Heterodox were

;
idolaters
Alexandrian age, Hellenists

;
under the Maccabees,

era,
Sadducees
during the Jewish-Christian

doctrines
;
adherents of
(
the Christian
in
the
period
of the
;
eonim,
Karaites
in
the Middle Ages, philosophers
and
at a later
period, Cabbalists.
Orthodoxy, the
real representative of
that Judaism established during and after the Babylonian

captivity, 02 has survived all these changes.
02
The same two

not
quite
clear.
i"lEy
The passage nmS>l HX1 Hy HX "1TIDK fTPJfl *6 is The terms DV and m?1D here and in the similar passage
DN1
"IJ1DN
"N
But
*3
nmSlE maD
(II,
20) might be regarded as hendiadys.

:
that
is
scarcely true of the other passage
njTQ TPNTI
i>31N
'
rDS'N
thîd pnxa warn ^dik roam

I
*y
nx
kw
tcn
For
how
can
endure
to see the evil that shall
to see the destruction of
come unto my people ? or how can I endure my kindred'? (VIII, 6). The term mpiD means
The former meaning is here impossible, was Babylonia, and the latter very improbable.
either 'native place' or 'kindred'.
as Esther's native place
But mi>1D may mean

Such an interpretation
also
is
place of origin
',
and could refer
to Judea.
not impossible, as the execution of Hainan's edict
involved the destruction of the Jewish state, as

it
we
shall further see.
But
is
strange that the terms
m^lEl Dy
are
nowhere found, outside of
Esther, in the Old Testament.
We
find only
rTplD
j'HN or
mSÎ
|*"IS.
Hence
there
is
room
for
doubt whether the original text contained the
word rnplft.
religion.
We shall
in
find that Hainan's edict
was not directed against

adherents of the Jewish
it.
the Jewish race, but against those
who were
if
They were
no danger,
they abandoned
But
at a later
period, the real issue of that event
was not known any
longer.
The term
m,
Dy
a Persian loan-word (which occurs so often in Esther), in the passage ?2ft JT01C
DnVfn
'their laws are diverse from all people', refers of
334

met with
in the
tendencies in Judaism are
times of Mordecai
and Esther.
Esther n.
IO
The author
of our story states

;
'
Esther had not shewed
her people nor her kindred

that she should not
for
Mordecai had charged her
shew
it
63
He
tells
it
so frankly and
if
naively, without giving

it
any reason
for such a conduct, as
were the most natural way and a matter of course, and
not a dastardly act, for a
Jew
for
to conceal his religion.
It
was indeed unnecessary
the author to explain
why
Mordecai charged Esther not to disclose her Jewish identity,

as
we can read
the reason between the
lines.
Relying upon
fail
Esther's great charms, which, in his belief, could not

to captivate the king's heart, Mordecai
was apprehensive
of her being excluded from the competition for the rank of queen
religion.
if
she was
known
If
as an adherent of the Jewish

to
For her elevation he was ready and willing
sacrifice her religion. 64

course to the Jewish religion.
in
Mordecai had been imbued with

identical term
is
rmrV
The
used in the Mishnah

'
'the Jewish
Law', and bfcW^l \V&Q
m
,
the
Law
of
Moses
and
Israel'.
m might have been

But a
later copyist
Hence we venture
the following suggestion.
The same word
contained in the original text in the passages quoted.

believing that
is
changed the word Dl into JVvID
m and
Dy
are superfluous synonyms, as a
member
of the Jewish race

original
of course
an adherent of the Jewish religion.

passages
religion.
II, 10.
Thus the
meaning of the
20 might have been
Esther kept secret her people and her
In her supplication to the king, Esther complained not only about
the evil that shall
come unto her people, but

Siegfried,
/.
also about the disappearance
of the Jewish creed.
c, is correct in objecting that
DI^D
in
is
here out of place.

oS
Ibn Ezra remarks
'
Some say
he
that Mordecai
was wrong
comBut
manding Esther not
to disclose
if
her origin, because he feared that he might
not take her fcr a wife
knew
that she
was one
of the exiles.
others say that Mordecai learned in a dream that Esther was destined to
save Israel
04
'.
Paton,
I.e.,
p. 178,
observes: 'There
is
nothing of the martyr-spirit

display their Judaism at
all
in
Mordecai, as
in
Daniel and his friends
who
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
is
335
the spirit of Ezra and Nchcmiah, there
no doubt that
rather than giving her in marriage to a Gentile he would
have
slain
his
adopted daughter with
his
own hands,
and he would certainly have charged her to disclose her

religion. 65
If
Esther had been a true daughter of Israel

in
she would
have done everything
her power not
to
become the
wife of a Gentile, preferring the
observance
informing
of her religion to the rank of a queen. 00
On
if
the keeper of the
harem
of her religion, Esther

free
would have
done her duty, and been
from blame
he had kept
her notwithstanding that reason, 07 as
we could not condemn
her for not having been courageous enough to prefer death

to that fate.
However, on the other hand, the question presents
itself:
Why
queen
If
did Mordecai
?
so
ardently desire to see Esther as

his
it
Was
it
due to
ambition
Certainly not
for
he had been ambitious,

So long as there
tell
is
would have been easy

in hiding
it,
him
let
costs.
any advantage
secrecy
is
he does not
Esther
her race; only

it'
when
no longer
useful,
does he bid
her disclose
65
(see n. 68).
The author
lets
of the apocryphal additions to the
Greek version of Esther

things,
could not comprehend either
how
the pious Esther could have acted in that

all
way, and
her say in her prayer: 'Thou hast knowledge of

I
and thou knowest that
hate the glory of the wicked and abhor the bed

'.
of the uncircumcised and of every alien
This prayer
is
characteristic of
the
mode
66
of thinking of religious
Jews
of the
Graeco-Roman period con-
cerning intermarriage.
See, however, Cassel,
p.
61
f.
67
The commentates who
think that Esther concealed not only her

latter
Jewish origin, but also her kinship to Mordecai, must admit that the
could hardly have profited anything by Esther's exalted position.
Moreover,
lounger,
for
they assume that 'Mordecai was
sitting in the king's gate' as a
and not in an
Mordecai
motives
?
official
it
character.
Thus what advantage was there
Hence
is
evident that Mordecai did not act out of selfish
in
furthering the elevation of Esther, but for the welfare of his
people (see n. 64.
336
to be appointed to a high position after the elevation of
Esther, or at least after having saved the king's

it is
life.
Thus
evident that his desire that Esther should be elevated
to the rank of queen
was not prompted by selfish motives. 68

his
Although concealing
own
religion,
Mordecai was neverand was
theless solicitous for the welfare of his people,
convinced that Esther on becoming queen would be in

a position to render them
many
useful services, as indeed
she was.
However
decai, in his
for
so prudent and farsighted the policy of
Mor-
endeavour to elevate Esther,

of
may
from
have been
a
the
benefit
the
Jewish
either
people
purely
religious point of view,
we
must condemn
his conduct
or accept utility as the
sole standard
of rectitude.
full
An
approval of Mordecai's action would give

intermarriage.
licence to
We
might say that that prohibition under
certain circumstances
may
be disregarded,
if
any
essential
advantage would accrue to the Jewish people or to some

Jewish community from such an intermarriage.
It
would be
wellnigh impossible to draw a strict line between a marriage

to
a king, a high
official,
or
any other person.
But
Mordecai no doubt belonged to that party which espoused

intermarriage
between the Jews

position. 69
in
Palestine
and
their
non-Jewish neighbours, as by these alliances they were

strengthening their
own
That
policy, however,
though of great advantage to the newly-established Jewish

state,
was disastrous to the Jewish

latter
religion,
and we
if
may
doubt whether the

68
would have survived
such a
That party was
in
all
other respects just as strict worshippers of
Jahveh as Ezra and Nehemiah, since even the family of the High-priest was
related
by marriage
to the
Samaritan Sanballat and to other non-Judaeans.
w See
chapter VIII.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
(
3^7
)n the
practice would have been permitted to continue.
other hand, the zeal of Ezra and
Nehemiah
against interin
marriage caused
many
hardships to the Jewish people
Judea, and jeopardized the existence of the
new
state,
but
the Jewish religion remained pure and intact.
Thus Ezra
and Nehemiah
represented
Orthodoxy, while Mordecai
was the representative of the Heterodox wing of Judaism

of that period which advocated intermarriage.
It is characteristic
of
Jews
in all
periods that, though
indifferent
to
religious
observances,
and
being
hardly
recognized as members of the Jewish people, at times of

religious persecutions
they do not stand aloof from their
suffering brethren,
but identify themselves with them in

less
every respect, some of them becoming even more or

religious.
The
religious persecutions
which soon broke out

Seeing the sufferings
had the same
effect
upon Mordecai.
of the Jews, Mordecai openly declared his adherence to the
Jewish religion, 70 and did everything

his brethren.
in his
power to
assist
But a change produced by sympathy, not

Mordecai, after his
conviction, never has a lasting effect.
elevation to the rank of prime minister,
was not and could

homiletic inter-
not have been religious.

pretation of the passage,
'
The Rabbinic
He was
pleasing to most of his

part
brethren
',
that
it
meant
to indicate that a
71
of the
a
Sanhedrin separated themselves from him,

great deal of truth, even
to imply.
contains
more than
the rabbis intended
part of his brethren refused to have any
intercourse with Mordecai.
Even among the Sanhedrin,
the leaders of Israel, the strictly religious Jews,
who do
not
barter the tenets of their religion for worldly advantages,

70 Cf.
71
also
Renan, History, VI,

b.
1.
Megillah 16
338

in
all
though being
periods Israel's very representatives

fraction.
and preservers, always form only a small
And
men of that type refused to associate with him. The Book of Esther was in all probability composed
in
Babylonia, not Palestine, 72 as the former country was
for a considerable period the real centre of

It
Jewish learning.
undoubtedly was composed at a time when the personof Mordecai and Esther were
still
alities
well
known.
Its
compilers were the Sopherim,

principles of
who
an
strictly
adhered to the
devolved
the
still
Ezra and Nehemiah.
Upon them
event,
in
the
task
of
commemorating
latter,
which
opponents of the
against whose principles they

as heroes
in
had continually
of Israel.
situation.
to
fight, figured
and saviours
Those Sopherim were
a most embarrassing
They
could not deny the fact that Mordecai
and Esther, though having been transgressors of the Law,

actually effected the rescue of Israel's religion.
Not
73
to
record such an event would have been disgraceful.

72
But
But they did not put

Megillah 7a:
this story
in
writing during the life-time of
Mordecai and Esther (see following notes and chapters VII, IX).
75
'
Esther sent to the sages, saying
"
Record
this event
of mine
I
for future generations."
But they sent back
"
It is
written,
Have
not written for thee three times?" (Prov. 22. 20).
This passage teaches
that
any event should be recorded only three times, and not four times, and the memory of Amalek's destruction is already recorded three times.
(Thus they refused to record
" Write this for a memorial
in
it)
until
they found for her a biblical verse

16. 14)
:
book" (Exod.
himself, here
is
"write
this " refers

;
to the records
made by Moses
(1
and Deuteronomy 25. 17-19
" for a memorial " refers to that which

of the prophets
written in the historical records

refers to the event of
in
Sam.
15.
1-34):
to
"in a book"
Purim, the story of which ought
be represented
a special
Book
( Tnro nSv
rb irbw nnni? "onnrj
mim
#
siro
snpo
;sd
rb
invo^ ny
&mrb tidn nrb nrta' ,w:n vb) dv^w 'twrbw

'naDn jra
r)~\y).
min nwni)
y\row no nxr aina

,-ibd3
tint
runs'
niôn
mrw
no
,Dw:ua airap no
ESTHER
it
IN
HOSCHANDER
3^9
could not be done without jeopardizing the religious

for
principles
which they stood.
To
describe Mordecai
religion
and Esther as ardent adherents of the Jewish

impossible.
was
The
religious conduct of
Mordecai and Esther
was well known.
Besides, the
Sopherim would under no

facts.
circumstances have consciously distorted the

represent, however, non-religious
To
Jews
as
God's chosen
instruments for the preservation of Israel, would have been

destructive to the
intact.
ritual
edifice
they strove to preserve
The people would have been perplexed, and would

:
have raised the question
How
could the
rites
and obif
servances be an essential part of the
Law
of Israel
God
chose for his
own instruments people who did them? The only way out of this dilemma was
that there was any divine intervention.
not care for

to represent
the events exactly as they happened, without suggesting
In this
way
the
compilers did not commit themselves, and the people could

interpret this story each according to his
own
sentiments.
In the present writer's opinion, a strictly orthodox rabbi of to-day would be in the same predicament,
if
compelled
by circumstances
philanthropist
to write the biography of a great Jewish

indifferent
who was
to
all
religious
ob-
servances, and would have to act in the
same way
as the
Sopherim did
in the compilation
all
of the
Book of
Esther,
circumspectly avoiding
matters pertaining to religion.
There
is
a Talmudic statement that Esther requested
the sages of her period to compile the story of that event,
and they
74
at
first
refused to
comply with her
request. 74
that this
Rabbi Joshua, son of Hananiah (flourished about 100 c. e.), still held Book ought to have been put in writing, in explaining: 'write this*
refers to
tion
what
is
written in Exodus
'
for a
memorial
'
refers to the repetiit
of that
in their
commandment in Deuteronomy to remind Israel to keep memory; 'in a book' refers to what is Written in the Book
of
34

knows whether
?
Who
this narrative
is
not based on some

it
tradition
We
can well imagine that

in
was Esther's
just
ambition to have the event
which she played such a
conspicuous part recorded for the admiration of future

generations,
difficulty of
and that the Sopherim, confronted by the

such a task, used some subterfuge to be excused
in
from compiling that story,

it
expressing their opinion that

like the Oral
ought to be handed down by tradition,
Law, and not to be recorded. 75
We may
even assume that
they definitely refused to undertake
this compilation,
and
that the only record of that event consisted of the letters sent out
by Mordecai and Esther. 70
Later, however, being
afraid lest the Feast of
Purim might assume a non-Jewish

Sopherim could
110
character, as
Samuel
we
shall see further on, 77 the
(/TftT) 3*irDt?
n3P3 3TOK> TO p~DT
,JK3
mrO'iT
HNT 3irD
CN^n
HD
"13D3,
ibid.).
In
the present writer's opinion, these
homiletic explanations do not give the real reasons pro and contra.
The
Rabbis were averse to questioning the religious conduct of Mordecai, and

therefore expressed their opinions in homiletic disguise.
75
See chapter IV.
76
\v e
shall see that the
Sopherim were even averse
to the
commemoraEsther sent
tion of this event,
because the time of the celebration was simultaneous

festival.
with that of a Persian

to the sages
; :
The Talmud indeed
tells
us
'
'
Establish for
me
a festival for future generations".
sent back:
"Will you
incite
envy against us among the nations

is
But they She, ? "

is
however, sent back: "(There

already
written in the
no fear of that) as the event of mine
book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and
Persia"'
(m
rw
"ok
rh \rhw
nnvA wsop
tfDani' "inoN
nrh nrbw
nn
D1S1
nsD bv
raina *D3 nrh nr6tr

D*D , !*I> Megillah 7a).
rw\w\ ?J? wbv m-ny

saying
HD
*J?iy?
In this homiletic
we may
perhaps see a trace of a tradition that the Sopherim refused

establishment of the festival of Purim.
to sanction the
We
in
observe, by the way, that this
saying seems
of the
to
confirm the suggestion
chapter IV. that the existence
Book
of Esther
'
may have
caused trouble to the
Jews
in
the East
in a certain period,
incitingênvy against
them among the nations'.

"1J1DS*
n The saving D^TH MS N?2DD
WK
'the
Book
of Esther does
ESTHER
IN
THE LIGHT OF HISTORY -HOSCHANDER

the
3,!
not but compile
story of that
event, and
order
its
reading on the day of this Festival.
Both Rabbi Joshua

of Esther does nol
and Samuel
in
decreeing that 'the

78
Book
defile the hands',
were undoubtedly displeased with the
non- religious style of the book, and considered such a defect

just as
bad as the scepticism of Ecclesiastes. 79

as saints in Israel,
Looking
upon Mordecai and Esther
and on the
compilers of that book as having been inspired by the Holy

Spirit, the non-religious character of that
book was beyond

believed that the
their
comprehension.
did
They may have

of Israel,
80
Sopherim
not
dare to represent
Ahasuerus
as
an
instrument of the
all
God
and therefore omitted

however, did not
if
religious
elements.
Those
rabbis,
approve of such a procedure.
In their opinion,
a book
that records such a signal rescue of Israel had to be devoid
of
all
religious elements, the records of that event
ought
not to
have been put

This
is
in
writing,
but handed
down by
tradition.
the real meaning of the Talmudic intermentioned only

in
not defile the hands',

of Rabbi Joshua.
is
the
name
of Samuel, not in that

'
Since, however,
we
are informed that
Samuel holds
the opinion of Rabbi Joshua', that Esther ought not to have been recorded.
we
must assume that

78
in
the latter's opinion, Esther does not belong to the

ibid.
.
sacred Books, and thus does not defile the hands (see
As
to Ecclesiastes, there are
divergent opinions: 'Rabbi Meir says

is
Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands, but there
disagreement concerning
hands, but there
:
Canticles';
Rabbi Jose says: 'Canticles
defiles the
is
disagreement concerning Ecclesiastes'; Rabbi Simeon says

belongs to the decisions
in
'Ecclesiastes
which the School of Shamai was more lenient
than the School of Hillel, but Ruth, Canticles, and Esther defile the hands'
(,D*wn yb>3
"21 nbnpi
npi noi
D'rn hn w:im
i:\s
rbrp
np^n'^ on-n nx keob D**wn

-inDNi
ion vno m new an
tpi nn
dhyi
70
>tt
S>3N
bbn rv3 noinoi \xtr rp3 îpc rbnp t:in pr:-"
riN
fKDOQ
72.
D*wn),
Uid. % &c.
See note
y\r\zb
rnr:N:
xh nnp>
mow
nnDK,
Megiiiah 7a
VOL.
XT.
A a
342

'
:
pretation of those rabbis opinions
The
story of Esther
was composed to be read, but not
to be written
'
down'. sl
The
latter
agreed with their colleagues that the compilation
of the story of Esther
was made by the
inspiration of the
Holy
Spirit
in
Spirit',
82
but were unwilling to admit that the

to
Holy
other
had inspired them
omit the name of God, seeing
this
omission a certain faint-heartedness.
The
rabbis, however, looked
upon
it
from a different point of

is
view, holding perhaps that the story

in its spirit,
the
more
religious
because of
religion.
83
its
being so entirely free from the
phraseology of
Bearing
in
mind the
religious conceptions of
Mordecai
and Esther, we understand why Sirach did not enumerate
them among
81
'
the Fathers
of the world
'.
To any
un-
mow
vipn nnn
p.
-inDN, *#.
III, p.
82 83
See also Stanley, History,

Wildeboer,
201.
fact
172, and other commentators conclude from the that their story
that
Sirach did not mention Mordecai and Esther,

in his time.
was
unknown
objection.
Jampel, however,
calls attention to Sirach's
omission
critics'
of Daniel and Ezra.
But these omissions do not invalidate the
The existence
of the historical Daniel cannot be denied, as
we
have for
Daniel
'.
it
the testimony of Ezekiel ^28. 3): 'Behold, thou art wiser than
latter
But there can be no doubt that the

is
was not a contemporary

as an example of a
of Ezekiel, as he
fearing
represented with
If
Noah and Job
Godno
man
(14. 14, 20).

in
he was not a pre-historic personality, he must
have lived
the
hoary antiquity.
The Book
that bears his
name
is
doubt younger
than Sirach.
As
to Ezra, Sirach
was
not a 'Bible-critic'.
In his eyes Ezra
was merely
to
the copyist of the Mosaic
Law
and a holy man.
but no more holy than the prophets Haggai, Zachariah, and Malachi,
whom
he also omitted
mention.
Ezra, in Sirach's opinion,
was only the leader
of about fourteen hundred immigrants and one of the great teachers of the people.
But having
built
neither the
Temple nor the walls of Jerusalem,
he did not leave a lasting memorial
for future generations.
Of Nehemiah
he could say that he raised the walls of Jerusalem and restored the home
of Israel.
But Sirach could not have omitted the names of Mordecai and
played such an important part
in Israel.
Esther
who
in
Jewish history,
if
he had
considered them saints
ESTHER
IN

it
HOSCHANDER
34.3
prejudiced mind
must have been obvious that they did

assemblage.
In a later period, however,
it
not belong
the
in this
Book
of Esther having
become popular,
would have
been blasphemy to
of Israel.
criticize the
conduct of these saviours
The
rabbis had no other course but to represent
them
as Jewish saints,
and endeavoured to the best of
their
ability to defend
and
justify all their actions.
{To be continued.)
a 2
THE RABBINATE OF THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE,

LONDON, from
By
C.
1756-1842.
Dusciiinskv, London.
APPENDIX
EXTRACT
Schild
'.
VII
from Minutes of the Beth Din of Frankfort
relating to the sale of
Rabbi Tevele's house
'
Zum
Griinen
MS.
T"DP
Adler, No. 935, page 187

H"3
a.
n"a
]"i7]
nsDP i^w'
-iid"id
wa
ms ma wi
"vkd
rrvaD
n"a
jd
mriDiD n"y
p*a
n*3
*mnn
**$
t^bwi
i>a
n"ir6
ppp
id
txd
-insi
n*a jo 13*3^ yan îd *iwi nr^ n"a

1^
pnn n*m i*y

'vn
Tko tkd
-iid-id
'm Kin i^3 ninoiD -dp
stoop td
tkd n^ pi i^bwi
i>ia*
nnK
"ipan
ban
5>a
nianata
msb
jwdi
ddvj?
mo:6
i^nn
p^wn
kw
a^nD
D^pi?
D^Diaoipa
b*3n
D*rane>
i:pp-in
nwai
p*-i
the n'ap iâ mina
roiDP d"-i Bnn
swnn
pi
d"-i
unao tnn npDn b'm ivb n'& \nb

hksdi nr6
Ppp
"'?
nv d*i inn nyans 6

^N
%
;r.v
i"-i:
thd
'n
p*in
p?
*va
#
pnp
td
|w'"i
=)
B>D*-n ':ki
D'n
i"cpn iôa
n v UTIKD
Page 198
n"a
b.
yam
a"n
^"n:
;*"a
epp
tkd
h"d
}in
*mnn
n'n u*i
n"a
tar
n'p
fo
^did
)b
nbw
i*y
'Anewi tkd
n"ai
m'n n*n
dn
chvb
nvnc a^n n^nswi tnd

345
Ap
n*a
wi n*)pc
346
,121 dip

my moo
pn
vi?y
yarv x^'i
rnyân
ihi>
*6
poifena rrcno fpP
nvn
fy
mw
my
my
^^
m<k
r"y
aw
pyp
ppp
mao mo
n"a
n'ai
awi
ntn
p"i
tko
n"ai
,i5>e>
a"n pymsn
5>*jn
nn^
ny nny
sw6
m*k aip
bw pofena pny nxno

,0"-!
aw
wip
^n
"pna
Bnn pa pi pro pN
b":n a"n h":n
tno nywi ^
n"a^ nno
dW mm
n"a
jo
b":n a"n
pyrao
mai nwiv
'on
nhswi mo
dS>p jvan
a-ini>
p^n ^y
nhyp p^* Wip
map two
n"ioa
p*s
rra
piTaa nau r-w
p"a ppp bayo

b :n spa?
ff
"p^
'w
i>yi
"y'jopn n&T ny
jyio
dW>
y^n
ppp
tko
jot
rTai>
f*w
w
ii>
tko
n"a aînop ii>\Y'a

rva *vn P^n
^""i
npyo
,i>y"an
rnnsn
ny d5>b b'an *pp
mm
a"n
pa
,b*jn
mo n"a a^no nr sw ny mman
djp b'an
tko
n'a
nxtna b'yan r"opn

niajb
y':n
B>"n
pyman
nha pnt
v-iana
S>":n jj^n
wip
'w
)b
n^n
tko n"a
n"ai ,i>*jn
vi?y
pywi nia^nrw
n"m .nnnpn^ pn
aw
^"n
spp
tko
s
n*Ko n":6 d^b6
yiv m k o"o
jot
*w
wo
nanp
hon
nia:6 ha* m<k
pa naoyoayr vmn
iv xbvh
lpôiaK
pnyi
pre i^np *on Mot naytr -ma ain

bm ^-|
kvw
noB>i a"n
pyia
^ ND
a^ onsai
D.Tni:yDa
-laoyDDyr
pnn ny ima my pnnnb
bv^
v^y
p:^*
ôn
nr
^y ia pnnn^
brp
mD
a"n .m^-iyo nxty
my d;c^
^10 nr
losynn ba'n *sn nam ^'an

"i
N
Nn n*a 3imn m'm
Page 199
a.
roion
n'pa
ywn nwaoa
Pipina
b'an
c"-i
tno
D^vy
ba
tr"-i
n"a
nitonna
to
n"na
i:wSVOi
pja^n
Dônsoip
y
b'an
tniun
ionn^
D"pS>
-i\sd
nnxi
id
#
âb
D:pai
Dni>
vppiu mtind
x^
DiT3^
"ipn
#
dîdo
^dd
mxo n'ai? poi^nn 'm^ mw^

b":n rjv
D^ci? b an
n*a
m
a"n
n a^no
nnnnv
nr
*aa
b":r\
nnsi
oi'a n*in n*n noyoa nr

D n
/7
oaa
fe6v
nny^pxxa 'nrno 3^ ima^r
p&6 ^y poi^n pixn b'an w'i
tno
n*ai
-in^d^
p3D
10
py
p
yuni>
n'a
# b an
b'an P]^ "1^0 n"ai? bp
no nonoi p'l ^nn iiik

^'an ^*i
nn^ iv m^d^
y^xni?
mm wn
tkd
n a
my
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON DUSCHINSKV

3ip*l
347
u*aai 2"ns
mrb
hei-iei
b\y&
my
pw
p*x
P^n
unto
J>'sn
2"- pyran
nisi
tniMP
mmp
www
pN
'wi
no
javtkv Dônsoip spina Drwa inn
pn
n*a
,^'an
-"n pjn<en
^:)"\?
i>y
**i
^"1
pa*s
td
ianp
/i"n:
âyu
rn'oa anii
t^ 'w
rt'ib
nâ
nm
n,w
nn
pp&>
**n iniN
/iy3 b*an 2"n
pyTB
y*v
w
irnaa^
vma^
i>":n
ha* u*K
na en
i>":n
ipp
yum
^'an
'm
n*a vn p^n
jwiavip *cm
"1*3
ny
S?y
ma
Nin
i>":n
a"n pyvun
p*i TKta n'a

"inn
awm
dn
owooip
spina
Dnwa
nx
n"a
pn
3ipe>
vnd
Page 199
a"y
'r
b.
pnn
n"n
winb
Ntf i"r sy'n

t
yno
n"a
n"m by
is*
â
in": p"a
epp
"a
(?*Dii) to'ii uxi ?y'n "b i"Dpn p*a 310
Page 202
n"a
b.
n?n nayn
;vd
a"iD i"a i"dd D*n n"a i.t,ne ns*
iaa^ nnN
lxai
nwnna
n"a
Nayn d^d n*a nSnpn
pa umnn n'n 'mvn waab

spp
tn n*a pnn *arnn ncyEai *pp -pnd n"a pnn p n*a vn m*3DP nrw jyioi i^boti *vnd c6tr po&prvw nr jbin by "'n 5>*an i^jpdti tnd n'ai anp pnanyn naiDP *tn poApnn p i3i nai>nn moo naa nT3D "mr ncy nns n n;^np pN !~an "\t '*nman '^tr ajwi p i>*an c"n tnd n"a n-iSm "^n ip^disn "113^31 r^p iBBa "ii303i
yani
I'na
m"n n"n
w
^
n^tr y':D
uayn DHay3
n*3
naa
anmn^ iddt uop
nw\*
a^p
!j
^nn px ana nubnn htdo

"inr
3W
l^X'm
v;n
^":n istcn
n"i p
pyiv
poi^nn
f,
nn::
D"n na^Diyc n:icn pa^D pa onei D"n

S>'an
'"ainaa
n ^*an b^'d n*3b
onays n*3 D"N^n
n-jwri
die:
pyn^n^ yT "m
k^
n"n anwn b'an

nr ^yi
"inr
pi^nn ns np^n
k^ s p^np pw
nan? trvi
^
jyl
i\xd n"3 pnn
3vn
i"y
nrni?
nrowi
nîa nîy
in:
%
kvw
PJWN nno dvdi ^Dp^ rm-\ nyi?b~\p
^2^ b an
*2
'b
i^s poi^nn
p3i
pa rnann 'm n> Dysn vK3
348
nry
po
-jx

a"T
wn
vsh icy vrb ran

n"a
xi>
nxoi>
npii?n
tn
"j-iy^
pn
ân p)^ tko

|M
pnn yan
xani>
l>*an
mw
n'a
pcintf
aw
po^ynm pinpn pa try ynann px Droyny ^ }nay a"n ô-iyta nonn

y*l
D"-in3
a.
b'an
"inr
y*i*b
npibn
myy
TXD
"py> nhyr
Spy
n"3 yan pÔ
Page 203
(x"y :"n sp)
^nn^n} n^ssi n*a
wxy
no
d:
ma
"inr
pny
iay*y a"n irnxy
ran
i*anb
(!)Dwa
it nnn
'naran pi
mixo Dnnx a"n ^
aina
Ty it nnn
nyax
Daw
a"n jnix âeoi
nyy nnx x p^np pa

,Dniayi>
^ni>a
dW
*vn
oi?<y
naay ptrxn a"n mix b*aya Dm
n^xa hnd^ nyi>y

py D*Y'rd
"in? 1b
y'jn spy o"nna yan pa*D px b'an v"-\ o"nna

paîo
pnn
jymi a"a nyiy
pai
nrinp pa ynann nyay

b'an
n^y nnx x la^np p nntaya yiTaa aina -p oiyy

"p~>* *tn
nyr
";
p$np nhr nnnx yanoa np^n
)b
o^y dx na
188
nx5>
pa*
wnbn
nbiy vyayi
yaoo
inixi
na^np pay
"6
yy*xi>n
i>a
pN nynx
ktbw
naînp
p is
dW
to
nplbn
nxoi>
aîno
"j
pa
,wisb
mion n"pa
nxiaioa
omnuytaa
(i)Tnxm
^ya
n"m
%
tx
"inr
n"a n"n aa n"in -loyoai
nxrina
trd
n'a mrin
n^y nnx x
ix
pi'-ip
p 'uina dx xin 'nniDn *priw a*yn y"n

Pâ"
1
enn
naîp
dW
*tn
khow
p nyns am? ps ain3 s ^

Nin
d^
s
t-w ia^ pa d"i cnnD nnv am ny3

xpn 'w noyn no^ ^na am^^
n
p:m law D"n

yrxb
ib
jdd nr^np px
?:p
naiiay nxai n"n mrj'h

\b
'n
jyita
nyon nnD
n:j
"inr
x"
1 '
x n*jâ aina nn
nxD^
s
"j
naînpn nya ni>yy
no
myi na^np D^rni

nvr.i?
mxo
a*D3*n
l"vw n"n
nnncM nix^v s3 3"n po^yna
-jnvy
aao p:\o
pai^yn^ 12 nvnb inivn
**n
xi?
pap
nyya nya imxai
na^np px
ax:
5>ia<
xpm
pa
ff,
iT
norn
sj^y
pc*^*
?)xi
poy nycn pnona pn 3"n
,x
nâpa
b'sn
n"nna
i^y
y"x
nvnnn
naay nnx 0*0
px
n'ai
paô
nono
xnâp
"m pn o"n yin poi^yna

TDioy a*ym nrn b*an *py
txo
u"n yino nnv aiD xin pansy nc\xa n:^np aiy yianb
\)vb by lovy
'^
pyiany nây p^niax
Agio =
M y^L X.

Page 203
(a"y 3"i rp)
b.
DUSCHIN-KY
wni fni
349
nan 'vn k"
k td*up noi inx nana bi pîp

ibtr
pic
iciy ypipn tdpti pe6 royopoai

iDPfi
"vp jjpgb n^pnp

k-i
nap pno
nn^nnn
*aa
ynsru
tfbp
p? ba kep
npma pny
n'pa
rwuca' ix\3Da
Drrroaipnai
'nwupBa
^*an
D*rwn tamem
y"s b":n
Dnrm
pin
lonnp trrap
D^pb pnpnb *vm n*-p
rm^
dwdeip *oa rum uadb mien vn d"i mso *:p *id D3p3i n'ro
ijtirb
-ibpti
"idpti
uwi tdm
upnpnp nnxi onb uppro
N>p i'ddti
|tp5>a
m ao
%
by npyap i*V nbnpn **u

riN
Tap
ripn
(U3"jn)
rr^pn
wn
ukyd
jniN
nnNi
lpvnfiM
"iopm
pp
p6a mi b";n
n"a
^Pibn pjya d'io
^yao nTpn
b*an ba
"intfb
dji b":n b*:D
wyn DHjya
n'a n*in
mnanp
a"n
nnw
Dia
a"n ppba a"n
n^wi TVn
p|^m
rnyaoo
wiyu
mnb
rren dk b"3n
abi
"in?
tf
two
n's
Ta
"\t
DToynbi onupb nvi
i"i Dyn
'in?
Mipbai canaa
Ty obpb
irvao
b"3n
*]D
p*n D*ina
ba
aîno
k pbip p pyTan
cyp D'nna
"cn
by ytrsb myân
pic
n^nn
b'an
pnnb
n"l n p< pan*WRMiMip
TbBDa*n npy npn "p

pny abpb vbyp
ppna
s
b":a b'an
Difi i"n:
ob*p naap pied
jn
b":n spp D"-na rnyân y-isn: nrai
b'an p""i o-Tna

jctd
rwr
DN3i
wryta
Dbc6
pi
riEns
Dnsnn
fn*i
ppp -i"na
i"nr
pnn Tap ana yDnyj fnw nupb

?b-\p
ob^b a^nn ir n
t
s
^
i:j
p rraiPNin
;
rorb
N
i
:pn
3â
d:i
nabnn
moD
by
d:i
a&u
potbpnn
by
ye^Nbn
npa ^p 2"n mis

b"jn
p^D pa yta iaap nnx ^"n poibpn
p*i *nna
'di
nb^
|niN
nupb na n^ nnn iN^nb

"jdd -jiy
^p
\c
o'nnab
nTpo
ba by b*i
ipy npn
^b
ibx
ba
ypbn
.
Page 204 a.
(s"y n"n
-iNiao
5jn)
naac
)*rv
n:np
b":n
di
nronD b'an
D^Tivn ranwn *ny
py-pB nia:b
nvn
^"n o^nna^
ppp
-i\sd
b'jai i:jin
n:np ôn obpb

nanp
""-13
b"jn
n*a by boiop
yp Vc^z no a'n ôiyo

133
î
p"a
mkp
^p
-pa b'yan "b T"Dpn n*n ny obp n*an ro pro
^bayo
n'lM annb
T'-'
n*a vn n"y
nhyp pro
35

ny thth b'm
nBn
e>"n
wffm tod
\
n"a
moa^
n"a ntpyoa
nnoa
"b
nata
by <*na ann
mpa
"bt'Dpn
b"an epp
i?"jn
tod
n"a by sin
avnm
fDpn
pbn
ff
tod
n"a jro
spp Dn"nab 7*b>

*iy
'w
nnnxn
no
ixma b"yan
b"an ppp
ff
nan
nbcb ppp D-Tna anno

ibtr
nr nat? b an
tod
n"ai b*an
jdi
ny
no ^no
rnran p^ny
A r:
1
na
ann vnsb
pp
'to no
wo
p*x nanp von pbn nDnD

Kirn?
cjk
aw
b an
ff
ann rnx annDty nD Kpin u*n ibotra nb^b rrenD

*ai
ff
ppp r"n
no
>p*rnD
d*moti 'onnD&r no
"in?
pa idod
dW
t/'n
na
x'pa
n*a
narap
no
no d"d
-icy
D>aE>
inyD *snn nbvb ban nv

anaap n"DD nnv bao
nDtrn >aai nnb&y

t?"Dn
fyiDi
lb
bao
^'"pn
wkp
yonb
s
b"an
*xnn
tr"n
nbvb non
'wno
b"an
tod
aînD
nu
nDtyn
sw
D'nn'aE? pn dhd
ynnb my
pbn byi ann
bc>
D"nna
d
a^n
ib
ff
na
^
'
by bi
tw
jwnanp *on "'bpnb D.n^y bDiD&> no ono tod n ab "p^ 'to no "vnn ;o pnrunp D ypnpn *pa by am pa^vnanp ai^nw v^
ff
cb^b D^yan oonnD ohy bni

s p
ff
no
"on*
"\xn xni
nnon
ib
tw
obtrb
na>ino
"s
na^D
rmon n"pa
nmna nm nuDbxn Dai v"p nxiaoa no oa DiTniayaa wwm

b.
Page 204
a"y n"n rp
bv Q'T^y b"an
'mvn nm
b"an s'p
^n
p:ya^ nrsoi i^:ab

#
i:nî onb wppnn uhnd xvo* nân os D^ph onoo ncob i an

aîno i"na
annb
yw
"m^ no
^n p^:mrip pbnc nan nâa

,ff
avnn 03 by"an "ba'Dpn n"n ny thvh

bnioc no b":n ^k>
yianb
\ob\
a
11
^ n^D
n"a
pnn
on^y
ono
"n pnro3 yan

}n
s
xim nnbtr baoa nawn
bav oa
b":n
pjD^n
nncn 6
ib
b":n
r"n td
n"ai
nnnDi b":n no^n

n"y wnvd b"an
"vmnb ann^ pynon nnsbc

n"a
ok>
jaiNai
,ff
rjnr
^rra^np
b"2n
3N1
^n "jdd r"n tno n"a
"WW nr^^
Dnaro
ponb
T^
"''i^
r>'^
^*n ^ p
^n
d^
b":n pj^
D"nna^ nan nca
bjn b"yan "b
:"cpn n"n ny
nnon *vn nhyn
D"an "b i"cpn
d"i "n "vb niK lanso jp nnx Bbe>
DUSCHINSKY
APPENDIX
ELEGY on
Isaac and
VIII
the death of R.
David Tevele
Schifif,
by
Zalman Keyzer of London.

Size 26 x 23 cm.
in
(Leaflet
printed
on one side only.
In the possession of
Mr. Sigm. Seeligmann

it
Amsterdam, who kindly copied
for me.)
ncy
.n?B:
.trawnn
omna toto
.Dânac .Dânan
.nixob
ns
wn
nns*
.ru&>Db
tt
^n *ja
.mrann D*nn
nnsyy e6b> pi
tfaian
.D s Nmi
D^bc nK ns nmb
.D.mnmroa nnbyc no
Vl"Un JPOPl
tideh pb
#
,
in
po .dtwjci nân nTa .onwraK by d*tqddi

.DrrbsK
nw
*ab
?"T
TD,N
ui ppt s
Dai
mi
"1
*a
by ny:ib
nib
nun
nwib
^
:
-ion
nnn
mna
maab
janitor
|na?b
by
.onann nb
Dnaran
.'*TW TPp nrb

a'jpn vboa n'a
"3
p
rr*a
pjTK n'an anas pnyn

brun
jnitn
nv |K*ub
Ynino
nbnnbi db6
mna Domain
"jbo nin
t*b
iikjh
mo
by
maa
inni:o jnan
in
i:nv
by
my pnajp xb ,bsnca mb^B nnn my was* my Daw sb .oyn

up mjr n^ja
.nanx
aio
no .onnon
ro
naiy *aa bip
.ittap
nnn rwwn nanxn nynca

,"n
nra
xbn
,13a
nana d^nto ninuc

.npm>i
itt
% aniK as a
dekfo
nmwa
.dtdb>
,n\st:n
now
na
.on^b
nDnai
bbvd3
onDn
nmrnniy
n*n
,JDK3 jpn
* new my
era
731*003 31*od enn

b
8?n
naap
on
,twb no .mnac nonx no dw obia wyw moan ntw
IJ&H3X ? nnx ?ma new c^na b*n

1
m3KV
/pntcon
noi
.~P
?mjn mny naiob
352
Kin

,0'TDnb nrnon
xb
ab by 'nibyna
la
%
.
ncro 'aw
nn wok
,'n'EKn aion
rwv
fwoi
nop
,rm mnb
ht
t<pk abiya *n
.b'ai
in
ity
.waixaoo won:'
nnopa htp
nv:b
/nn
aviy
Don
pnw p'n
1Pp nrb
a":pn vbaa Y'a
[nan
";
ro'^nrn
mon
n*a ib>n *nb "paa ,tfW3
iV
'"i
nrp inb n"a
p p7T
n"an anao pnyn
dv n"a
k*i
nn "n'moa iwb aD-naon
l'n
bnan ann
mo
by
.maa inm:o
-inajm Trpn
nna
pnsi bnan nan no

D'abin
.bantô
nun
ppji
.ioya
ayna
ibaî
nanoa
an a>yin nyn anb p ipk ?Kxa
non a-ym oaien nc anb p n^K ay
jivnb nn ppo
.xovai
mo
,aio
t>y
Kb bas
.avyno
*:k
nxr by
.aabi
nxvb a^ynv Tiba "pna

.no \bm pn
.inpnv
*a
ibia^
pa
bx
wan ku
vow
ba
.pnvn
acri
abiya *n
wan
niy *a
.powui prnn:
by
na
worn
baao
.nrp |obr p"n
.imy nyai wnya aio pbo* dp n^x .wan

.aaâx
snpo ao\n nob
my^bs
na
ua
.aaaab
.aa'o
11
lpin
aavnbtfôa aio baa nans "pa* "n
n? niarai
ba tno:i rue*
nao a"a annoôN na
nrp
annax p"n
.p"ab
aann nibxôai
p*o
pin pn
Translation.
On
one
brother
seeing these writings of the two worthy youths, the
ten, the other thirteen years of age, sons of
my
beloved
brethren
what
my
they wrote as consolation
for their
who mourn
the
their loss, the loss of the multitude (caused)
by
death of their leader, the High

heart spoke to
Priest
David
their
in
Rabbi,
me
6).
Train up the youth

is
the
way he should go and even when he

depart from
it
old he will not
(Prov. 22.
have had, therefore, these

be inscribed on the tables
words printed, so that they
may

of their hearts and in honour of the
DUSCHINSKY
35^
above-named pleasing
youths.
Copy
Keyzer
of the writing of the youth Isaac, son of Lazar
London, Tuesday, 24th
Kislev, 5552.
On
tion,
the death of the great Rabbi, famous in his generaPriest,

is
R. David the
may
is
he rest
in peace.
sound of crying
heard, bitter wailing.
David, King of
Israel,
dead, his flock will no
more
be led by him, who tended them with love and piety, no
more
will
they be under his rule on the quiet waters where
they found the blessings of God.
Their Shepherd
is
dead.
He
will not lead
them any more on the paths of
right
and
charity.
As
a father loves his son, his beloved, so he loved
them
as the eagle watches his nest, so he

their failings
guarded them.
in justice
still)
He saw
and reproached them
and
kindness.
He was
to thee,
averse to sinners, (and
he was
their true friend.
Woe
Is there a
London
which
is
Is
there a pain like thine
town
in
to be
found a wise
like the
one
thou didst lose?
To what
shall I
compare thy
hurt,
what
was thy
sin that
such has befallen thee?
What was thy
transgression that thou didst lose a
man whose wisdom
and deeds were
all
devoted solely to the welfare of his

?
I
congregation of his people
However, on consideration
find
is
consolation (in the
thought) that to the righteous death
the real Good.

will
For
David yet
where he
lives in the
world where he
live for ever,
will
not see either violence or sin and sorrow,

live in
for ever will
he
joy! This
may
let
console us
in
our
pain, in the sorrow of our soul,

in
and
us bless the
Almighty
whose hand
is
death and
life.
Isaac, son of
Lazar Keyzer,
354

Copy
of the writing of Zalman, son of R. Lazar Keyzer.
-
Tuesday, 24th Kislev, S55 2 On the death of the great Rabbi, famous
tion,
in his genera-
R. David the
Priest, &c.
Glory has
of his
left Israel,
as their great Rabbi, the righteous
generation, the elect
one of his people

in
is
dead.
Like sheep without a shepherd, which wander
the desert
and perish of hunger and

is
thirst,
a prey to the beasts
so
way
For
a people without a leader and judge erring on the
(of life) not

this I
knowing where
to
come and where
to go.
mourn, but not
for the
death of the righteous man,
as only his
body
is is
dead, but his soul has arrived in a land
where everything
piety.
good, there he will reap the
fruit
of his
Let us be strong and brave therefore our Rabbi
yet lives in the Eternal world (coming world), there he

will
be a good intercessor
for us
and
for his
community.
Zalman Keyzer.
Be strong and
your
lives.
of
good courage you sons of
my
brother
Eleazar, your father, learn well Torah, Mishna, and

all
Talmud
Then God
will
bless
you
in
everything
according to your
own
wishes and the wish of your uncle,
Abraham Keyzer.
Amsterdam, %% Tebeth, 5552
DUSCHIXSKY
35
APPENDIX
MS. Adler
Abrahams.
IX
2261.
Recto, pp. 1-60. Account of a firm of polishers,
Abraham
in
Michel and L.
a
clear,
I.
The
items are written
careful
'
hand, and show the cost of materials,

'.
labour,
and
profifet
The
yearly account for 1803 closes

12s.
on
p.
60 with a
is
profit of
17^. *]\d.
509
10^., of which L. A.'s
share
169
The pages
as
verso were used by R. Solomon

for authorizations
Hirschel
book of records
1,
he gave to Shohetim.
Page
verso, contains the undertaking
which every appli-
cant had to sign before being authorized

It
1.
by the Rabbi.
reads:
rbip
b ww ynp
tidwp
|t
unity
biy\
tw nipm dvipm xbw *p nppn wyb i^sn V fnyh p"?i i*aic

s^yn nTDN3
fl
^nn^
"ano
i^dn mras&
niDN Diners ata

#
i^bm ^y
onD nnB>K ah nyna nb h

t5>
^m
dipd baa Dvyb
fp
ny^pn
*nna
b an
ba
'a
by
Kpin nNianb
N"a
dj"
inâspn fivrno
n'm pnN YninDa k'n^
"n
*v "vn i*-
'ikj
note
riBtt
k'jp
;n:ib
p"p
"id in'ton m
na p sb
Moses Aaron p^'n
Zw/ of Shochctim
Page
2.
t
authorized.
b.
Zevi Hirsch
Bidefield
b.
').
Solomon of Simiatel
1
(signed 'Mr. Hart
Heshv. 5583.
Bidefield.
3.
Moses
b.
Benjamin.
b. Z.
17 Heshv. $583.
Nahman
5583.
the Levite (S.
Newman,
Leeds).
24 Sivan,
Leeds.
356
5.

Jonah
b.
Menahcm, 189
Israel
called
Jonas Levy.
15 Shebat,
5583.
6.
Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A.
Solomon
in
Hornstein
'
('
Mr. H. Solomon Horinstein

English).
Plymouth
signed
in
25 Sivan, 5583.
Plymouth.
7.
Simon
b.
Jehiel
Sofer (Engl,
5583.
2 a.
1
signature:)
189a
Simion
Jonas.
21
Tammuz,
Page
8.
Hayyim
b.
Rabbi Isachar.
in
Ab, 5583.
to
9.
Shohet
Chatham
rules)
(letter
:
the
same
for
not
obeying the
dated
17
a.
Ab, jS^3-
Page 3
10.
Michael Zalman Pollack.
26 Ab, 5583.
Plymouth.
11.
Judah Leb.
(BnN3).
b.
Mordecai.
Elul, 5583.
Norwich
2.
Falk Neumegen.
28 Kislev, 5584.
Highgate.
13.
Abraham Abraham
Samuel
b.
b.
Page 3 b. Sherage Feivish

Leeds.
of
Semija
(N^DyD).
22 Kislev, 5584.
14.
b.
Moses Neugass.
b.
9 Tebet, 5584.
11 Sivan, 5584.
15.
Michael Elijah
A. of Rawitsch.
16.
Michael.
4 Tammuz, 5584.
Page 4
17.
]
a.
Zeev Wolf
Joseph
b.
M.
Tammuz, 5584
St.,
8.
Benjamin Fishmonger, High
Worcester.
6 July,
189
5584
:
A. M.
I
Worcester (Engl.).
at
The entry reads
Jonas Levy from Exeter, Devonshire, living
Cincinnati, State of Ohio United States of America,
acknowledge
that
have
i"Dl*
given
my
ID.
hand
to the rules
mentioned on the other
side.
jDpD DnjD
|2
E2C
'Jonas Levy, Dirrect for Phillip Symonds Cincinnati, State of
Ohio. United States of America.'

i9a
Thp English
signatures will in the following be marked by
ÊnglA

19.
DUSCHINSKY
17
357
Zevi Hirsch
b.
Rabbi David of
Bialistock.
Tanimuz,
Page 4
20.
z
i
.
b.
i
Eliezer ("ip
2 3i*e>?).
First
Ab. 5584.
Bedford.
Nathan
b.
Meir.
190
day of Selihot, 5584.

a.
Page 5
2
2.
Judah Leb.
b.
K.
ff
(?"Yt p
Dn^ fTW).
;
15 Kislev, 5585.
23.
Moses
b.
Zevi Hirsch.
b.
23 Tebet 5585.
'
Yarmouth.
24.
Jacob Koppel
D. K. (Engl. Jacob Koppel

Cheltenham.
b.
Hyman
').
35th day of Omer.
Page 5
25.
26.
Leb Deutz (Moses Levy) of Frankfort on Main. 37th day of Omer, 5585. Dover. Jehiel Michael b. Abraham. 7 Heshvan, 5586.
Moses
b.
27.
Jacob Kish
tingham.
191
(wp y\2 ipy).
Heshvan, 5586.
Not-
28. 29.
Benjamin
b,
Menahem.
(Engl.).
13 Kislev, 5586.
Brighton.
M. Michael
Glasgow.
Page
30.
a.
Simon
b.
Ber y"2 (Engl. 'Simon Campl.').
12 Teb.
5586.
31.
Jonathan
Joseph
b.
Rabbi Isachar.
b.
11 Shebat, 5586. 19 -
32.
Abraham
Goldman.
my
h an d
j
A.
21
Adar
I,
5586.
Bristol.
33. Joseph
190
I
I
Dartmouth.
n :p nSTpJl to the Revd. Dr. Herschell, that
to
'I
g ave
will abide with
above mentioned Obligation

I
keep
to his orders.
to
Should
hereafter infringe on them
shall consider
myself pTDSJ
our Religious
orders.'
Sighned by
me
this day,
aniMyao tkc 12
191
;n:.
Added:
p"fib
(!)
^"jD iJV^ 13
"ai>
TH
un*:'
DnsS> Nottingham.'
n"'
192
icpn
"i dv,i.
VOL. XI.
B b
358
34.

Alexander
b.
Nathan (English: Alexander
Jacobs).
29 March, 5586 (1836).

14 Tammuz, 5586. 3 j. Michael Mordecai b. Nissan. 36. Eliezer Lczer b. Mordecai of Lissa. 14 Tammuz 5586.
;
3J. 38.
Abraham
kow?)
b.
Joseph.
b.
10 Ab, 5586.
Salomon Zalman
A(kiba?) from Saniekova (Carni;br
jmapyaWD y""0
wAv
(Engl.
Solomon
Sternburgh Glasgow).
16
Ab, 5586.
Glasgow.
Page
39. Eisik (of)
7 a.
Turkheim.
(Engl.).
15 Ab, 5586.
40. L.
A. Samson
15
Ab
5586.
27
41. Zevi Hirsch b.
Solomon Heilprin.
Ab, 5586.
5 Heshv. 5587.
42. Israel Elijah b.

43.
Dov Ber
of
*jmitt*3ina.
Meir Jacob Meir

b.
b.
Benjamin Benas (VW2).
10 Kisl. 5587.
44.
Rabbi Isaac Statthagen.
28 Elul, 5587.
Page
45.
7 b.
Simon
b.
Rabbi Jacob Leb.
Heshv. 5588. 193
Page
46. Michael Levi
b.
8 a.
R. S. Sofer of Carnikau.
24 Heshv.
5588.
47. 48.
Judah Leb.
*
b.
Isahar Levi.
13 Kisl. 5588.
forgot to sign' (R. Solomon's
nephew of Simon, he
hand).
49. Mr.
193
W. Abrahams,
"Ip3?0
'von Deemens(!) Land'. 19 *

in
(No date.)
is
Authorized as
Nini roio
porcher
the Rabbi's handwriting
added
'bwo
194
nv^n
:
'
B*i i:pr
I
nâ xb
b":r\
jwdp
to
'*i
fnsb.
His declaration reads
have given
my hand
to the
Revd. Solomon
as
I
Hirschele to abide by certain rules which he laid
down
me
am
to
kill

50. 51.
DUSCHINSKY
Exeter.
351;
Alexander
Benjamin
b. Eliezer.
Hanuccah, 5588.
b.
Rabbi Leb of Hungary.

24 Elul, 5588.
14 Elul, 5588.
52. Jehiel b. R. Nathan.

53.
Meir
b.
Samuel.
b.
1st
day of Holhamoed Succoth, 5589.

as
54. Arjeh
Jacob (signs
follows:
itn
in
Jamicar'
[Jamaica]).
5 Jan. 5589.
Page 9
55.
a.
Abraham
Jacob
Meir
b.
b.
David
Berliner.
56. Gabriel b.
47th day of Omer, 5589.

14 Sivan, 5589.
t!>3BK(?).
Portsmouth.
57.
58.
Meir.
b.
Rabbi Judah
2pv
P'^'y.
5589.
Swansea.
Page
59.
60.
9 b.
Biale.
Zeev Wolf
b.
Rabbi B. of
20 Heshvan, 5590.
Meir Solomon Zalman

20 Kislev. 5590.
b.
Aryeh Leb of Wladova.

Chichester.
19
61.
62.
Meyer Lyon
Moses
b.
of -ittDyt^D (Engl.).
Jonah, son-in-law to Mr. Simon.
Omer,
5590
(Engl.).
Page 10
63.
a.
Abraham
Gloster
b.
I
Isaac Levi
('
the particulars concerning
and
my
father
abide by.
A. Levy.)
19
Omer 5590
(Engl.).
Gloucester.
64. Isaac b.
Jacob Wolf.
13 Sivan, 5590. 13
6$. Michael Levi b.

66.
M.
Ab, 5590.
Jacob of Copenhagen (n"po

Van Diemen's Land was
Von
npr).
5 Tishri.5591.
Island
poultry.'
the
name
of the Australian
Tasmania before the year 1856.
Bb:
360

Page 10
b.
6y.
Moses
b.
Hayyim Sachs
').
(Engl.
'
Moritz Sachs
BIW
nyn-iaaypn
68.
6 Shevat, 5591.
Canterbury.
Abraham
(pfetfT
b.
Rabbi Moses
Isaac,
Rabbi of Samlin
p"n
in"N pn^ nô m*o :nnn nn*MX p"n,
A.
20
Rozenbaum).
69.
14 Omer, 5591.
I.
Jacob
b.
Meir (Engl.:
Isaac
pE^n^
BITO).
Omer, 5591.
70.
Brighton.
Isaac b. Samuel.
34 Omer.
(Engl.)
Page
71.
1 1 a.
Moses
b.
Joel
(lD)]h
(!)
D^riN).
40
Omer, 5591.
Edinburgh.
72. 73.
74. 75.
Michael Elijah
b. J.
of Rawitsch.
42 Omer, 5591.
Nathan
b.
b.
Gedaljah.
Koppel
Rabbi Perez Levi.

Jacob ben
S.
2 Tarn.
Simon
b.
ben A. of Wreschen.
5 Tarn.
559*76. Israel Elijah b. 77.
Rabbi Dov Ber.

b.
Dros
'
:
V, 5591.
Ephraim Arjeh
in
Meir Moses (Engl.
Ephraim Moses
23 Elul, 5.591.
Scarb ro
for
my
uncle Jacobs')-
Scarborough.
Page 11b.
78.
79. 80.
Nahman
Aaron
Joseph
b.
b.
Rabbi Simha 5>TpD.

10 Heshvan, 5592.
'
Zalman Rosenthal.
A. (Engl.:
Aron Abrahams
').
13 Heshvan,
5592.
81.
b.
Yarmouth.
Asher
(Engl.).
22 April, 5593.

Page 12
82.
a.
DUSCHINSKY
p
$6l
Solomon
Judah
Platura
(W nwo
Leeds
('
:
TflflD
Nliuxba rofe>).
').
20 Ab, 5593.
83.
b.
with Mr. Davis
Joseph Levy (Engl.
Israel Joseph).
20 Aug.
559384.
Lewis Levy.
13 Elul, 5593.
Bedford.
Page
85.
86.
2 b.
'a 'l,
Judah Leb.
Hirsch
b.
b.
M. Leb.
N^1
5594.
8
Abraham
of
Zevi of Gallin.
Adar
II,
5594,
d:i.
87.
Moses Landau
Engl.
:
Krakau (added prao nsn Nîr6
Moses Lando-Kenterbury).
5 Aug. 5594 (Engl.).
3 Sivan. 5594.
Canterbury.
88.
Alex r Cohen.
Page
89.
3 a.
Eliezer b.
Sam. Cohen.
R. Solomon Hirschell's hand
90. Israel 91.
Joseph (Minz?).
(in
:
A. ben Zeev
(Hebr.)
21 Elul,
of Bialistock, called also Elijah Schneider).

559492.
Judah Leb
in
of
Witas
in
Moldavia (note
'
:
He
has been
America').
b.
4 Heshvan. 5595.
7
93.
Baruch
Rabbi Abraham.
Heshvan, S595-
Page 13 b.
94.
Leb
b.
Simon the Levite (Engl.

Hanok.
Lewis Simon).
Dec,
5595.
95.
Menahem
b.
26 Shebat 5595.
9 Nisan, 5595.
96. Jesaiah
Zeev of Pitschow.
362

Page 14 a.
97.
Solomon Zalman
Wreschen.
b. Eliezer
Schotlender,
Dayyan
in
98.
99.
Nathan
b.
Rabbi Gerson.
3
1
23 Shebat, 5596.
Zalman Rosental.
Judah
Nisan
b. b.
Adar, 5596.
5596.
of Breslau.
100.
101.
Jacob.
Ijjar,
Michael
Abraham
Ijjar,
5596.
Page 14 b.
>
102. 103.
Benjamin
Berlin.
14
Tammuz,
5596.
1st
Leb Wolf b. Rabbi Juda Sternberg. Holhamoed Succot, 5597.

1
day of
104. Petahjah b. Isachar Ber.
st
day of Holhamoed Succot,
5597105.
Shmerl
b.
Rabbi Abraham Katzenellenbogen.
23
Heshvan, 5597.
106. Michael
Simon Nuernberg.
Page 15
a.
10
Adar
I,
5597.
107.
Mordecai
b.
Rabbi Moses Zevi.

1
10
Ijjar,
5597.
108. Jesajah
Zeev of Pintschow.
.
.
Tammuz,
5597.
109. Joseph b. R.
20 Elul, 5597.
of Schoenlanke.
no. Moses b. Zevi Hirsch Lissenheim 9 Tammuz, 5598. in. Joseph Caro.
10 Elul, 5598.
Page 15
112.
b.
b.
Abraham Sisman (Lipman ?)

4 Kislev, 5599.
Joseph
Eppelman.
113. Jacob
'
Leb
b.
Rabbi Mose
').
(in
1
Rabbi Sol. H.'s hand:

Nisan, 5599.
he went to Greenwich
b. Joel.
114.
Moses
Tammuz,
5599.

115.
DUSCHINSKY
363
Juda Lcb
b.
Nissan (nephew of R. Jacob of Sunder-
land) (R. Sol. H.'s

is:
hand
'The address of R. Jacob High

St..
Mr.
Jacob
Joseph,
Sunderland').
23 Heshvan. 5600.
116.
Nathan
b.
Joseph the Cohantte,

4
Ijjar,
Blitz (he
is
Shohet to
Mr. Mayer).
5600.
Page 16
J
a.
17.
Aryeh Zeev
5600.
b.
Rabbi Juda Sternberg.
10
Sivan,
118.
Moses Judah
b.
Rabbi Noah,
n^'
'2
":,
560c.
119.
Joshua Ezekiel Levi.
4 Tammuz, 5600.
5600.
120.
Nathan Cohn.
21
Tammuz,
Page 16
b.
121. Joseph Caro. 122.
Ab.
Newcastle.
Shmerl
b.
Rabbi Abraham Katzenellenbogcn.
123. Jehiel b. 124.
Rabbi Nathan.
b.
.
Judah Leb
b.
Fraenkel.
Elul, 5600.
I2
> Samuel
5600.
Hayyim, Kazan
in
Manchester.
11
Elul,
126. Michael Zevi b.
Simon (Engl.: M- H. Simonson).

5
25 Shevat, 5601.
127.
Moses
b.
Meir
C'z.
Tammuz,
5601.
Page
128.
129.
130.
17 a.
Simha
David
b.
D. Caro of Posen.
b. Isaac.
29
Tammuz,
5601.
Dov Ber
25 Ab, 5601.
of Kalish.
b. S.
M. the Levite
b.
19 Shebat. 56c
:
131. Isaac
Jacob
Rabbi A. the Cohanite (added

13 Adar, 5602.
MTV
a:
D"11BDpM3 Dinfi^).
364

Page
1
7 b.
132. 133.
Mose Kosk
Raphael
b.
(possibly Falk).
24th of Omer, 5602.

18
Rabbi Issachar Ber.
Ab, 5602.
134.
135.
Mose Rabbinowitch the Cohen. 26 Ab, 5602. 17 Elul. Michael Simon b. M. Nurnberg.
Page
1
8 a.
(?).
136.
Shemarjah David Randel
4th day of Selihot, 5603.

?).
137. Joseph b. B. of
(Freistadt
17 Elul, 5603.
138. Eliezer b. R. 139.
Simon.
24 Elul, 5603.
Abraham
b.
Rabbi
Zeril.
Day
after Succot, 5605.
140. Issachar b. Eliezer.
23 Heshvan, 5605.
141. Jacob Isaac the Cohanite. 142.
20 Shevat, 5605.
Edward Himes.
in
195 17 March, 5605.
143. Michael Zevi b.
Rabbi
S.
48 Omer, 5605.
Hazan
Manchester.
144. Zevi Hirsch b.
Rabbi Isaac of Sklow.

1
11
Ab, 5605.
Shohet
145.
Baruch
of the
b.
Rabbi Abraham.
in
Ab, 5605.
New Synagogue
Manchester.
Page 24 a.
146.
Wolf b
3Tst
day of Omer, 5587.
147. Joseph Kalish, beadle of the
Synagogue
in Alie Street
(BntDD K^lHO).
12 Sivan, 5587.
have
195
<
hereby certify that
this
day received the sanction of the
Beth Din for to slay cattle for Sir Isaac
Lyon Goldsmid
this
individually only,
and should
my engagement
Also
to
with the same cease

I
permission will be
discontinued by them, for which

obligation.
to drink
declare hereby
my
viz.
solemn religious
not to shave nor
adhere
to the rules of a Drilt^,

illness,
orders
Wine me not
from the D'MS unless for

to kill
I
and as soon as the Beth Din
must lay down
my
knife, for
which
hereby give
my
hand Cp DX?*pn.
signed by myself.
Edward Himes.'
ADDITIONAL NOTES AND CORRKCTIONS

Additional Notes to Part
Page
i
I.
(/Ci?.,N.S.,IX,p.
103).
in
The
b.
first
Rabbi of the Ashkenazim
London, R. Judah Leb

His
Efraim Anshel, was known by the name of Hamburger.
signature to the approbation he gave for the edition of Pirke
de Rabbi
Eliezer,
Amsterdam, 1708, i2mo,

^"t
*ai?
is
as follows:
s*"s
fcttliT
mny
mi>na
P"d^
naiy
niaon
riyv
bwx
tj'k
onsw rfp fn
s ai?D vb
%
p ib
impn
Katai>
Kate pa
nw
who
1
&pnn nya dtibbtdnd trTJatw ?"?
ann
*\JI
rw
rTny kk"33
ntob
rbw "m
^DHl-
This edition was arranged by R. Moseh

later
1
Gomes
Mesquita,
became Haham
in
in
London, where he died

Rotterdam, and not
to the
on May
as stated
8,
75
(cp.
Gaster, History of Bevis Marks, p. 130).

1
Rabbi Judah Leb was already

by
700
signs
in
me
(p.
1) in
1705.
He
an approbation
Menorath Hamaor,
Seeligmann
following
:
ed.
I
Amsterdam, 1700, 8vo, on the 30th of
Shebat of that year.

for calling
am indebted to my friend my attention to this, as well

',
Mr. Sigm
as for the
in
In
the
'
Kabronim Regel
manuscript
the
possession of the
Amsterdam community, containing

two entries are to be found
b"-$\
:
records of
burials, the following

p"pa,
"n"mD 3in
i"aK
jnd
'w
Tnqon
Vek
pn 'mi Judah Leb died,

The
*-iu2j
nsmme
^hmk ipn nnss n"ia yb tmrr Rabbi bv "n vr *i's "opj Vi.
this,
according to
in
on 14 Adar, 1720.
Isaac,
son of R. Judah Leb, died

entry referring to
Amsterdam, 3rd Nisan,

:
17 14.
him reads
I'llHO
mn p
jd-j
pp\s pnv* l"ca

^"vr
":
D*nyuNn -Tax
wi
"n
nnp *vip inncn
yfy
mw
Cp.
nya-wiD
also E.
pp. 36-7.
bv ^"vn |D^
lmno ova
d.
"apai
te
W>3.
Italic,
Geschiedenis
Isr.
Gem.
Rotterdam (1907),
3 65
366

Rabbi Aryeh Leb
b.
Saul of Amsterdam.
t
Page
(JQR.
IX,
p. 105).
The Beth-Hamidrash (London), MS. No.

and Talmudic novellae by R. Aryeh Leb,
Hirschel Lewin.
24, contains
Responsa
father of
Rabbi Zevi
:
Among
his
correspondents we find the names
Rabbi Herz Pintschow (pp. 2 a, 37 a, 38 a), R. Isaac Levi of Apta (p. 37 a), the Keth-Din of Venice (pp. 41 a-48 a), the communities
of Briesen (KDn3i> *r\2&r\ "lC'N
Prussia, father
ilf,
p.
49
a),
of Strassburg in East
and Koziv
at
in
Poland
(p.
23
a).
R. Zevi Hirsch asks his
why
Habdalah Service
'TV
at the conclusion of
Sabbath the
blessing of
filled
D^â
NTD
is
said
when
smelling the scent-box
with spice and cinnamon, while D*CKO
^V
(p.
N")U would be
dealing with
the proper form (p. ^^ b, middle). the question from the
The Responsum
23
Beth-Din of Koziv
a)
mentioned
Beth-Din
above, quotes verbatim a document

relating to the death of a certain
nny JT^ by
that
Jacob Cohen, whose body was
found torn to pieces and brought to Abraham Hajjim, the overseer of the
Hevrah-Kadisha (Holy-Society,
i.
e.
Burial-Society)
:
of Strassburg.
The
signatories to the
document
are
ante
Jekutiel
p^ns ynrp 'pn dk:i
Zalman Epstein was
for
some time Dayan
in
Lemberg,
and
as this
document
is
dated na"n Dn: n"l (24
Ab 488=1728),
;
he probably went to Koziv for the purpose of presiding at the Beth-Din, as at that time he was acting as Dayan in Lemberg
cp. Buber, DC? V>JK, p. 124.
Important
is
also the
Responsum
to
Venice.
a
certain
The community
young
scholar,
of Rovigo had lost their Rabbi,
and
engaged
to
the
daughter of
Rabbi
Pacifico, a
member
as
of the Rabbinate of Venice, tried to usurp

his
the
position
Rabbi of Rovigo with the connivance of
prospective father-in-law,
part of the
but to the displeasure of the greater

itself.
community of Rovigo
The Parnassim
Joseph
ben Mose, Ezekiel Aaron Luzatto, Jeremiah Michael
b.
Samuel
Solomon Concili address
a letter to the
Rabbinate of Venice,
THE GREAT SVNAGOGUE, LONDON
DUSCHINSKY
Both
:
367
which, in turn, forwards a copy of the same as supplement to

their
letter to
Rabbi Aryeh Leb of Amsterdam.
let
are copied in toto.

t2-iai>i
The Venice Rabbis
sign as follows
-nob "n dv 'rn '*Dmnn h't
rwm
na
(1744)
p"&
mo
";
Dn*3
ipv nn
*nTJi
inn noaa note <:s ante n"ni>? tnd Yi'moa p5>? mê> Tjran n"r6r [nan ne> n'tmoaa in d*d:
n'rfc?
puk3K8M10
(i)
(2;
(3)
n"r6r
DWa
iwuy K*i6a
s
apy* Tjnrn (4)
TjA pn s^ *n
n apjp
m*oa nnn
kS>
.Dinnn bv sa
y'y
Pacifico,
The same names,

Solomon
b.
with addition
of Isaac
b.
Asher
b.
Moses Halevi Minzi, and Solomon
David
Altaras,
in
are to be found in another
document of the Venice Beth- Din
MS. Beth-Hamidrash, No. 26, fol. 141 b. Omitted is there only (Compare also approbations from Venice Jacob Belilias (4).
Rabbinate to mini*
Venice, 1791.)
IPD
miD,
Firenze, 1750,
and m0 niU'D
'D,
To
conclude we reproduce the text and transla-
tion of a fragment of a to
most pathetic
letter of
Rabbi Aryeh Leb

not
some eminent Rabbi,
possibly his father or his father-in-law,
the
Haham
Zevi.
Where
:
the letter was w ritten

r
is difficult,
if
impossible, to ascertain
it
seems
likely that
he wrote
it
even
before he was Rabbi
of Reisha (Rzezow).
the pages of
found by
me between
The fragment was Beth-Ham. MS. No. 26.

N"y
bx sin nbw
nnyi x:
D*a"i
*a
nay
!*3K
mi?
s
nx
ji-it
*a
nyb
mhn
s|dv
nywn
nx
n^
b)oi
na Tin^ xj
pyiu nvn 2b niTpo *a mn woz aoina nvr6 cyan

*aiJK a
iDjn
-jx
vni>x
"prra
px t.-x
N^n rraan *6a
mm
B*
t6a nib apv

*a
pan
Dm ^
a
mm
jn
Dm
rran
h? omoâ rwiyo naia t&a nana
na îtrai nan \xn did rw) ntrx n?yo
wana
'-nayn rfcaro
*a
d^s^
nnm newo
ni^jw 'wp H?aa rrn

.
,
M ro rrcp
pi
roana
rrvna
368

2"V
CDrai ncsn
rQy5> ^jtd*i
v:t?
wjn irw
nryn
ohk
'*ro
:n
tin
pien
an nan* Try ^dv
^y
aw
wt
Hr
'ihsn
pan 02!? tjjjo
wnjr tane* dip nNi
'n
Dîa iyi? jnn
ijnn ^;i
mrw
.3^ 'n inyivin irvnya

Tra?2slation.
Recto.
.
.
may you my master
continue (to be kind to me)

it
when
sound
you have proved the heart of your servant and found
and
in
harmony with God and His
people.
My
soul.
words flow from

assist
the depths of
my
heart.
Oh
Father, Father,
do help and
me
in your kindness this time to uplift
my
See, I have
now
for
lived here for a long time days in

I live
which
have no pleasure,
here alone, without Torah and wisdom, without happiness
and
blessing, full of (mental) sufferings caused
by being obliged
to neglect the study of the Torah, prayer

I
it
and worship.
When
look back upon the work

with
did before
sick of
came here and compare

for
my
idleness here, I
am
life,
my
I
soul has been
dragged down ten degrees in comparison to what
was before
be
it
as far as
Torah and wisdom ....
Verso.
May He, who

thoughts and assist
to the wishes of
dwells in
Eternity,
be
my
Help, purify
my
me
to serve
my
heart.
Him in truth and piety according May Peace be with You, my Master,
yet see
may your days be prolonged and may you

days, have pleasure from your children
all
many
joyful
and grandchildren, they
shall
is
'know the Lord and
praise the
(
Holy One of
servant).
Israel'.
This
the prayer of your
worm
= humble
Aryeh Leb.
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON DUSCHIN3KY

Rabbi Zevi Jlirsch
in
369
London.
p.
To
The
page
{JQR., IX,
109).
negotiations with R. Zevi Hirsch must have lasted
some
time before his arrival in London.
Leb Norden,
a learned
man
of great influence in the community, writes to the Rabbi's brother,

R. Saul of
Amsterdam, complaining why

'
his brother refused to
come
in the previous year.

last
Had
he not pushed us away with
both hands
year he would, by now, be peacefully settled here
and would have saved
me
also a lot of trouble during this year.
We
are
now
awaiting your answer so as to send the Rabbinical
letter
(contract of appointment)
letter
and hasten
his
coming
here.'
This
which
162
b,
is
copied
No.
after
26, fol.
and the
MS. Beth-Hamidrash, London, Hebrew text of which we print herein the
reveals
also the reasons for R. Zevi

post.
'
Hirsch's refusal to
accept the
London
If the
Ashkenazi Shohetim slaughter
also for the use of the
Sephardim they must observe the laws and

sides,
customs of Shehita of both

said the Rabbi.
whichever are the
strictest,'
R.
Leb Norden argues
against this point from
the Talmudical standpoint.
He
was a sound Hebrew scholar,

his father
who, born
but
still
in
Amsterdam, came with
Zalman
to
London,
kept in touch with continental scholars.

visit
Jacob
Emden
on
his
several
to London became very friendly with him, and letters of Norden and Responsa by Jacob Emden to him
are printed in the latter's
work
py
n^NC*.
In his autobiography
Emden
relates
that
Leb and
his brother
Reuben, the sons of

("I2D rh":*:.
Zalman Norden,
p. 94), that
dealt in gold
and precious stones

for sale to Altona,
Leb
sent
him goods
and by the
profits derived
therefrom
Emden
was able to keep

(see
ibid.,
his family for
some
181).
years until they

It is
became estranged
pp. 146, 164,
not unlikely that
Leb Norden's
friendship with
Emden
at the time
induced him to further the appointment of a member

Zevi's family as
of
It
Haham
Rabbi of the Ashkenazim

in the
in
London.
appears that, owing to the Shehita dispute
Sephardi comprevious to
munity, which had lasted for some four or

R. Zevi Hirsch's arrival in London,
five years
many
of the Sephardim preferred
37
to eat
in

meat
killed
by Ashkenazi Shohetim.
The
Shehita dispute
question has been dealt with in

',
my
booklet 'Jacob Kimchi
and Shalom Buzaglo

letter
I
but for the easier understanding of Norden's
will
only mention that R. Hajjim Albahali, a Sephardi
Shohet, accused the other Shohetim of transgressing the rules

of Bedikah (examination of inner parts of the animal, especially
the
lungs\
He
was supported by a scholar
named Jacob
Kimchi, who wrote a book

Albahali's cause.
later)
n^m
n^N'tr,
in
which he pleads
Azulai in his lately published itinerary (see

that
indicates
they
had quite a
large following
in
the
Sephardi community.
the state of affairs
R. Zevi Hirsch was probably aware of

the Sephardim and stipulated that the
kill
among
if
Ashkenazi Shohetim,
they
also for the Sephardi

stricter,
community,
this
must observe
in
their rules
where these are

strife.
and he did
to
order to prevent further
Norden's
effect,
letter
R. Saul
of
Amsterdam seems
to
to
have had
and R. Zevi Hirsch
Lewin came
while
London.
but
his
it
longer,
died
The Shehita dispute lasted for a little down eventually, R. Hirschel being
to
prevented
by
Parnassim
in his
take any part in the matter.
Azulai mentions
itinerary 2)12 btyfi,
which was partly
published in Livorno in 1789, and has lately been reprinted in
more extensive form by the Mekize Nirdamim

in
Society.
He
was
London
in
the
year 1755, a
year
before R. Zevi
Hirsch
Lewin's arrival in London, and his notes throw light on the
communal
conditions of the Sephardim.
Although he does not

I
mention anything about the Ashkenazi community,

passage of sufficient interest for
translation of his notes after
think the
give the
London Jewry, and R. Leb Norden's letter.
Letter of R. Leb jXorden, of London, to Chief Rabbi Saul
b.
Aryeh
Leb of Amsterdam. MS. Beth-Hamidr. No. 26, fol. 162 b (middle).

'an
>nvb
jnai!>
i'-ia
pvna yb
"id
^pn ann iron pnyn

-il
cy
nmo
wa
it
uniK
nmp
*b)b
'\ti
mro
nmaoa
mk
y"*
nnn nmi> yawn nap
iw
-aoo yaio
'n
"122
mnyn
mab
ikôi

ana rbvb
DUSCHINSKY
D*aro
i:n
37
na
'm
rtp
|iwn ann
3ir6i
nawn
,roio^
i?y
reqp rane
inoi
nib 'n n'as p*on

3inai>
imb
ainai?
mâ
nvp
num
afii
-133
nK3i irmtarA *6v
wwp oannm
rw
r"y
a';
omsD
*aa^
3":
Dnasew
s
*orriP
'varm dkp unaa
Din rw p^3e pK
,DHiBDn nniain nn^y bpi>

final
pan*
maoism nrinom 'ni

s
b"i
iionp
nS>
b*i
\hv6 "6n
ijmw
lyaoa
<ja?a
iS>n
ita iyaa
ippafc
pnn , iiDxn "di sta n"ai Bâ p3B>

rb)i)
wicw
'naasPN
in-i
no
*aa
a ,Dyun aymr6 n'ayota

&&b>
'man
r"y -ny
ii>NE
i^n
iaDD ps
byi
D*ae>
DiiBBtata
nr
pama
nnai
picitfa
nmiyo
nn*aa haN^ n?o
'maoi
p*3i)
btf
pîpono aa (dv âa 'niaon

labp
ma
'*n
^y
'nnnw
ds
i
''taaPK
*ajj
npnv
^
'*n
i>a
naip
t<h
loan oso
i>
d twdi
'we*
'\i
nrno din*
nr
yon lafe Dipoa
naipi
ihn in
nprn
â
onfan
paayoi
pm
npis idbh *aa vroy pi mo\x
wi
oyoo DT3
.
nana
oiani
rw
D*aipn
on on maoxnffw
'33
itd
nnr
mm
<ie
â
i>ai
nr i?y
mnaun(D) &vv
'\i
bi Dâini
p5*ipiaa
'nww
iaca
DTifiDnc aisp
jevjth
ispbki ôt3 anaon
pi)
nn^
uw
s
'*ya *jn *3ni i^s 'nsrto 'âisn ip s y
on 'n33PNn
(ny pny
dm* .n?o bvN p
b6
bipi> [dip
'iapi>
nrrti
ucm
b nrb"*
naao ps
'^prniw
"b
naD
âayi 'hisdd
S>*jn
inp^^
s
asp mb bxw
n;\s
'mson nnoina
Ditra c]VBdi
'naasw nî DVaae^n nnoina D ;m:

nab
'maa
'vi
hd nxia dtwdj^dk3
'm^
y*i in an
dw
sh
i^max Dî^y *TDni

fol.
*3iw 'mi nr ^y Tia\x
wu
'ncnip
163 a
^ki ^-^yn p*ii i.Tnay

nan
jb
a^
jnd
nn'h pna
2b
bv
i*j\x
is*
wn^ â
on^^yo
nr
nan
nbvw
r\)bvnb
106
ns":
^:a
onan nain
nâ
nrasa b^ *a"yNi iaa
nw
y
"po nnv ana Dân^ aiana

i:b
^3m onma^D t^^' iwrb pi

^'r
on^ '-mid
crniDK
p n"yb:v Dân ona^ nr diqA ai?n in nnann nBn nnvn pna3

prnriN
si>
Win
133 notai n'syo

ni>
|K3
bix
niid^n prnns
1
noxp d*^ o
pen i^n tram

s
dw
:a
h^
anan
N"y s yp sina xaa.
,r
372
rvh

"DDK
nroxi
'nw nm dip on* b n"n vwvv

"os*
snrvs t6i
vb
*a
now
'idi
*:k
oriDn
jdi
/niD'tt
*nyn bv iid
wk
pn
nA nmoi
S>3
pmn
jb*
3"y
'131
D*an
"n
nsnm
n&nira ni> Dan

n":jyci
b'r
*6b>
jppaw
ji53
by
inyn
n 3^6 ha*
,ntD
ikd
,^dd nansn
Follows
b'm Jiwn
tik
mien.
to
ZT.y. Z>. AzulaVs descriptioii of his journey

in nVJ
London
in
1755
byD
ed.
Mekize Nirdamim {proof).

12,
(5515 z= 1755), T^/ar

at sunset
we
arrived in
Wednesday "DEN 'S in the evening the great town of London and I had
Si(gnor)
trouble until the evening of Thursday to find lodgings in the
house of a Sephardi, whose name
is
Aaron Cohen.
been the abode
Although the place was very small (crammed), but, being a clean
dwelling, honourable people,
and
as
it
had
also
of former messengers (from Palestine), I agreed to stay there.
Concerning
I
was
still
my mission great wonders happened to me. While [on my way here] three of the leading men sent word
come
into this
to
me
that I should not
town as
would not
achieve anything, especially as the messengers from Safed had

forestalled
me, and even they came twice and had to leave

I,
empty-handed.
however, answered that

I
it
was
my
duty to
go
I
(to
London), and
cannot absolve myself from the same.
rely
upon the Lord

I
that
He
will
do what
He
finds best.
And
left
when
hardly
came
to the leaders (of the congregation) they
had
the town to enjoy the gardens
{
I
for
holidays) and there was
any one (of note)

is
left.
took upon myself to wait

far
patiently, for there
no better physician than 'Time', and

took care not) to mention anything of
friends
be
it
from
me (=1
I
my
mission until
as to
had acquired some
and got information

For, these mighty
how
their
should approach these leaders.

hearts are double-faced,
their
men,
thoughts are not in
accordance with their appearance.

(learned
And also among the Hahamim
men) of the town
saw disunion, they speak with abuse
of one another, scorch one another with the heat of their words,

and the one would
like to
DUSCHINSKY
alive.
373
swallow the other

in
It is a great
shame
(that this should

to eyes that
I
be so)
the eyes of the congregants,
and woe
have to look
at
at
such disgrace of the Torah
and learned men.
looked
my
letters of authority as
messenger
and found only one and no more, addressed

I
to
'
the
Haham
and they
asked where the

:
Rosh-Beth-Din or Dayan
lived,
answered and said
There
is
no such great man

if
here,
we have
no Haham.
said to myself,
that be so
and
I
have no other
letters to great
and learned
less
men
with me,
might be injuring
letter to either
my
it
cause more or
by delivering the one

I
one
or the other of the learned men.
shall
keep
it ;
and indeed
this
was
good
thought given
me by God,
as
certain
Haham
(namely Isaac Nieto) had made enemies of the Dayanim

his congregation,
and the leaders of
and Praise be unto the

mercy and helped
First
Lord who has not forsaken

to find
I
me
in his
me
will
favour in the eyes of a few friends.

the learned
of
all
mention (among them)

Pinehas
Rabbi Isaac del Vali and

also
Si(gnor)
scholar
Gomes
Serra.
There was
of
the
great
Rabbi Jacob
Kimhi^
son R.
R.
Samuel
Kimhi
of
I
Constantinople, and
the learned
Hajjim Albahali, and
made
it
friends with them.

it
They
this
all
said that, with regard to

'
my
and
mission,
would be necessary
to
to call the
great
Mahamad
',
was usual
convene
meeting
at
the beginning of the
winter.
Already (the previous messenger) R. Massuad Bonan

until the time of
if
was obliged to wait here many months

meeting,
'
such
and we do not know what
to do, but
you
will listen
to our advice, go
and see Si(gnor) Joseph Salvador, one of the
Parnassim,
is
of a
who has gone to one of the watering-places, who clear mind (a clever man), and what he says that is
is
generally done, for he

returns
eyes,
a powerful man.
When
this
Joseph
home,
will
if
you
will,
with God's Help, find favour in his
he
not
rest
until
he carries your
matter through
I
successfully.
When
Si(gnor) Joseph Salvador

that he
came home
went
to see
him and noticed
was of a clear mind and pure

I
without any bad (qualities), and

object of
pleaded
my
cause and the
my
mission in nice language and with sound arguments.
VOL.
XI.
C c
374

answered me,
'
He
You know
if
that in this land nothing

it
is
done
except with the consent of the majority,

to your
might, however, be
advantage
you were
to see Signor to you,'

;
Franco and Signor
Mendez, they may be of assistance

This
and then
I left
him.
man
is
very rich and influential

I
he arranged a meeting
other
of the Elders, which

to get rid of
attended.
The
Pamassim wanted
me
I
without giving anything, but he waived to

if
me
with his hand, as
to say
that I should not worry, he being
on
my
side.
left
the meeting, but he persisted and did not

to arrange that
budge
until
he succeeded
called,
an extraordinary general
it
meeting should be
and the end of
was, that everything
went well and was decided favourably
at the general meeting.

it
Afterwards, through the intervention of Signor Francos,

with the
was,
Help of God, decided

b.
that Signor Pinehas
Gomes-Serra
and Signor Joseph
among
the
Abraham Francos should make a collection Yehidim. After this was done came a letter from the
at
English
Ambassador
Constantinople recommending
letter arrived
me
to
Signor Francos.
Had
this
earlier
it it
would have
was a great
made
a great difference to
to
my
cause, but, even so,
honour
me
in the eyes of the in
Yehidim (members).
Among
the friends I
made
London
I will
mention the Hazan David
Castro,
who has
a great influence in the community,
pay him
for his kindness to
me.
He
(nitt).
took
me
in
I
may God London to a

lions
great building called the
Tower
There
saw
and
an eagle ioo years

cat
old,
an Indian cat as big as a dog, another
which was some cross-breed of a strange animal, also various

chained
other beasts which had to be

I also
down by
iron
chains.
saw there a
hall
which must have been, perhaps, 50 yards

into
different
long or more,
divided
compartments hung
all
round with fire-tubes

arranged as
if
it
(rifles)
and
all sorts
of weapons beautifully
it.
were one wall and doors opening out of

all
Similarly there were on
the sides (of the hall)
and even from

and
you
the
roof,
hanging down thousands and
tens of thousands of
different
weapons
beautifully arranged according to class, art,
and height.
of iron,
I saw, further, statues of all the English kings
made
on iron
horses,
and looking
at
them they seem
to

really alive.
in
DUSCHINSKY
exists.
^75
There are
also
armours
in the greatest variety, all
proper order, various kinds of guns and cannons captured from
their
enemies during the whole time that England
Vessels
of
all
kinds and shapes, some transparent, some especially high
(are also there),
and
in
one room there
is
a small partition of
iron bars inside of which
we were shown the Royal crown and

anointed, and other royal treasures of
jewels sparkling in different magnificent colours, the golden cup
out of which the King

precious
stones.
is
All these has

if
seen
my
eye,
wondering and
joyful in the thought that
He
gives such rewards to non-Jews,
how much greater will be the glory of His People in times to come, when the remnants of Israel will see the Messiah of God
shining forth and giving light like the light of the Sun, crowned
with the most holy seven crowns.
In London
preached on
Sabbath
1
Ta?nmuz
28.
Monday
we
left
of the
week
'
Debarim
'
(first
portion
of Deuteronomy)
London and
live),
'
arrived at Dover, a nonafter midnight.
Jewish town
1
(=
at
where no Jews
on Tuesday
'
Tamimiz
29.
Tuesday of
Debarim we
left
Dover by boat
remained
Paris
and arrived
Calais,
a non-Jewish town in the kingdom of

I
France, on the same day towards evening and

at Calais, for several
there,
' . .
.
days until the post-chaise
left for
To /QR.,
Azulai in
the people of
IX,
and
2, p.
117, note
p.
n.
16
b, relates that
mo
73570, ed.
:
Livorno,
he told
Amsterdam
ivopn t6
1
Dûym DN^TDipb no^ nybv nan ptrw nowi

the times are hard,
*ai
If
you
will say that
why do you not
say
so where comedies and pleasures are in question.'
Responsa of Rabbi Zevi Hirsch
Lew hi.
Owing
work
The Beth-Hamidrash
taining
to circumstances over
to
in
London has
I
three manuscripts con-
Responsa and Talmudic Notes by R. Zevi Hirsch.

which
had no control
first
was not able
go through these volumes before the
part of this
was printed.
The manuscripts
are Nos. 24, 25,
and 26 according
C c 1
376
to the

numbers
in
Neubauer's Catalogue of the Hebrew

Oxford, 1886.
Manu-
scripts in the Jews' College, Lo?idon>
MS. No. 24 contains

by R. Zevi Hirsch's
the fly-leaf
is
for the
most part Responsa and Notes
father,
:
R. Aryeh Leb of Amsterdam.
On
the
title
m:An
wi*m
niai&pni
is
irbxw
p.
"idd
The
first
note by R. Zevi Hirsch

i?"r
on
22 b, middle,
*av p'n "iok
A*in
pa
wi 'nx p
^yifc>
PTn
Page 33
notes to R.
The question mentioned above in additional Aryeh Leb relating to the blessing of DW3
btjno
by *pJ? nb)yn
^tinvo
k5>
no
*jb
5>aai
wt
.
v"a i"onk
y'r
o^nnsn
bôbo
Dyo
wpa
*|to
Da
mia T^Wi Mima*

D>a
^y Kin
poapi nap
by aTiaaono
.
DYnio
.
.
T.&3P
p^n
i^y Pîn twin
nn
Dôt^n
(Follows R. Aryeh Leb's answer.)
Page 49 a and b have two responsa by R. Z. H. addressed ... frwb ")bw and signed *3S p"n, &c.
to
wm
to
Page 64 a.
Y'aa
b'vt
Responsum
Rabbi Reuben of Warburg.
pisn n"io a"niNon
mn
naicn
i>"r
^>y
*nas?n ns?N
nr
yztn nô -n"nio DD-naon
nnb
ann pefc nn ma-iyu p*pi

.
Y'ss^ y^r
The Responsum
^nanap no pjn
.
is
signed on page 66 a
p s
ff
n"v p"n
na"pn
b"i
jd*j
r"a
ONo^na^n
.urn mpoa
Page 77
R. Z. H.)
,p"sh Y'Dpn
a.
nam anac
Responsa
n"oa
>"nno
nâ Y'k y"c pâa
by R. Solomon Hirschel (son of
hta
i"i jniaattn p'Y
ain
nn^n
"mpnyn
Page 78 a: Y'opn W>n Y'i

signed on
p.
,k31d!?n 'pn a"n
ann noiwn
78
b.
jsna^ pp"sin W"t jnvi *as a.Ya nota p'n nxo ino
nnon
.nanoni

Page 91
a.
DUSCHINSKY
:
377
Signature of R. Z. Hirsch
,p'tb ra'pn
Mk
in
n"-i
o&snsbn zrvn
*3v p*n
MS. No. 25 mostly marked

these
contains mostly short notes by R. Zevi Hirsch,

p"13?7,
some places
JVOU
'.
f"j?i>
[V13P.
There are
also several loose slips in the
book marked
similarly.
'
One
of
reads:
m3iy
pTHI
nrOBW ^,
Forgetfulness
increases as the time passes

in this manuscript,
There are only three Responsa

to R.
one to R. Mordecai Banet of Nikolsburg, the
other to his uncle R. Jacob
Emden, and one
Juda Leb
of Posen, Rabbi in Wusterhausen.
Page 85
a.
,na
nni na nns*
ii?
lpDnoap
Page 125
a.
Dane n":
pay*
h"dd
[i*un
nn
n'e
[d fc6î>
h^ksm
it
niw
"n
.k'jt
patniiD i'-u kbtv i*no
mnn
n"n
pha nr-ra
Page 127a.
. . .
a'rmn
s
V nawn
ipwr6
i? kh
*n*wi
,wa
onm
i?
b* ;v s
Page 134 a.
.pneo envi n*ia 3^ amir i*c rrtio
pniDKiwi p*pe nbnw ,[5)nn cnid njnpap n"D paya]

26, consisting of
The most important
is
MS. No.
164 pages.
There are likewise notes marked

Responsa by R. Zevi Hirsch.
Page
5 a.
pi3T^, but the chief contents are
wane
rain
*nw aw
. .
eneo ms?a
i>"r
;vy
^3 Tana bfn
fa
80
'23
itai>
nrcD bya ann nana Dîfa

in Berlin.
"r
Page 9 a (middle) apparently written
Tyo two
.
n'loa fa*a \a& 'm ny: fa^ a D*ap
"ope
|X3^
HKT31
"pCDH
(?)PPTT.
In
the
same Responsum he
37^

at
fire
mentions that
possessions by
one time
in
the
year 1741
he
TNE
lost
155>K
all
his
while living in Zlatova.

<jai>
iw
"pa
nvmi
%
sh
n^n
îiDxi'T
p"p
nanâ
^pai
'\n
nc^s i>30
tin^ -nyn N "pn

5>a
won
N12
n*jn
"k
r6y i^sn
d"b>
pv
nono
tin
^
1^
inbo
D^nnx
In^ni
i>y
nvDiai
omm
ppto
d"3d-ii
naoa. nny nyi tnd
â^N
rfon
D^pDiyn
nwn mn nn
oi>
nain
'vri
7
n"ip
nso
n:pn ni^yb
Dnao pnn
-pn
mina
.
ton
Page 18
a.
Responsum
to
Rabbi Abraham Levi of (Briesen
?),
with reference to a dispute this Rabbi had with his congregation
on account of a divorce case which the Rabbi had declared

illegal,
but the woman's friends had obtained a decision from the

to re-marry.
Rabbi of Hanover allowing her

letters written in this
R. Zevi refers to
matter by his brother R. Saul of

Cassel.
Amsterdam
obviously
and by the Rabbi of

written in Berlin
letter
The Responsum was
when R.
Zevi was already old and feeble.

"JTI
The
*irW
begins: Dyn
tt
KÊ KW3 Vwb) D3Kn Dl^n n

*vyi
kk>n
rn)vb
bv vn nsn&\ nano
D3
-vy
*3
Vn ^ni?
-ipk nrn
Dt?n TND3
D^K Dn
imin
"I1K1
1133 *T
DJ
pniO pi> ^3DN1
^nhs*
k!>
mnw
ironK ini:6 e"e
ywm
With
nan
r6ty ni>yn*
dj
*piK3 m\n Tiaria nam ohyn
msy
the
nitani
n&Nn
jyroi>
yub
D&5>3 nina^
"p* n"ny?D D3ENn admonishes R. Abraham to take

to the congregation (pages
,Db.
first
real tact
R. Zevi
step in restoring order
and peace
in his congregation, while in a letter
which he sends
18 b- 19 a) he warns the leaders to
take care not to hurt the honour of their Rabbi and thus bring
disgrace to the Representative of the
Torah
in their midst.
He
says:
nv^yh nimi> rrnnn 1133b Dinb

.
imn
.
taio nybv ron nnyi

pnni?
mtan
nv&in no ba
Page 20
b.
Responsum concerning a young widow (np^D

is
n^n)
of
in
which
mentioned a decision by R. Joseph Steinhart

:
Fiirth.
He
signs
*emi> naro nv ^3E Tittiei
nnun
D1K2
.p"ai>
D"ipn oroia i"b "3 pbnn p"p na nninn
dw

I
DUSCHINSKY
in
>a & e
35 a
Questions, unfortunately with neither signature
nor date, by a Sephardi Rabbi, probably the Hahani
London,
who
excuses himself not having answered R. Zevi Hirsch's letter
at once,
but he had sent an acknowledgment personally through Follows a Responsum, closing with the words
:
his brother Jacob.
vtAm
pDifihi ffron
Dîn chun nniso

inn
*jp by
nann n*;c *rvn
,nj
wnm
dn
n":
a
by nann xvayn ddni tan irw

find notes to Azulai's
%
no kw
:
Page 40 a (middle) we
D^n;n DP
:a"y
n':
w?n
DiEfin
.
nya âb ps
frrb
,
rpnpBii nny.n)
pp
unn5>
wd
na*n
,jnn?
a"y
*na
naan
mynn xxn en
*tn
n';pn
ni>n
nw
'*n
*'ni
wan
(ntajy
wa
i?":n
,5>*?
ovenx rrawi nmnnn

"n
niK ^"n
Tabn 'to ana

n'Dpnn
laioai
n"Dpnn &sb&
roans
nn hnj din* yn?
rwa
naa
oven
a^
nw
n'x nn
nw
,?*b
'oa anatr n?
!>p
py
d:i
fam h? ww
*'amn
-pna
mn
jnn*
vnan noa ubb pnpm fawnn

in
naa
^"t
n^n
vi>y
'to
bmv&
fj^N
na nnB>
nriBB>
wan
TS>n
pton
mo
mm
anai
rooa
ito yn*
warn ''aanp ronaima ana S>Vni pan
wn
\n
n^nna \n
yw niw
'.n
ana iovy
pin
nsttnn
n^n
nna
.("y n*i>
p'n) rt rp
b^
'*d
c|n
pj
maa (s"y r"y p*n) "y pp [ph ^n nom n'en TS>n 'to np* na apy^ wan
i>ya
nwn
n'aann
'*d
(a"y
,'iai
"n pp p"n) "a
fennn nps wan nn^n

'\n
TS>n
*'tnn ana
';
",n
mx
TVUTO ana
(a"y n"d ep c".n) i"d *p
'<d
pa roaai
40 b
nan na *a n'awnm |Bnnn

k"s *pa
ripe
wan
bcr
n*S>n
wi n": warn
ana levy
mm
yin^
"mcon ^ya
new
nuc.na
nmaoi
|#
naatr ""^n
'oa b*T
mas
psnnn
rwB won
D3
rrc&n *vw n"as anrw
s nnr
waniy
nixc pinn nn
W2 nwi
wsâc
cina
ibbww
vnia-n int^snj n"aNn.n nâ a"y naa a*i
^"n nan
a"y
"d
nwan
d
d:i
nvsna noin enp *n^ ana (a"y r"y n"annB> ntrsK t ^"^ Da"Dn.n nmp
i":yb nr ^"aon.n
i?y
?]n)
&&
nxcb amp Sn ^Bn

'\n
niaw nvy *'trn
/nnn nn b nan
380

fi^Nin
D'nno Kin dn
^
'"d
lan pjyn
do ni3
an:a
my
onm amy
na
myi
D"nn
i>y
nun
rnn
nw
nr
vbv
towi nan Dmaw
ynr 'oti ty
awn mna
ppia
b"i
'iai
mo pmn
Knmaa
ana x^
2"b W>a >Nnn 'itrna
nv&nn
ny
^*t
tkd warn
rwm
nBrc
n:io
Ti^m
i>"r
on d^ aoant? no
âtr
nia^
p"*y
nraioô
nuwna
"i>
ntcnm
.n"a '*d
mna na D"nn nano

naien
sd
de>i
Nine* D^roay
^naoo
n&*x n*nno5> yimi

i>"r
wan
mo
1
amaaoino n'nno
n^SKtr
lossn
nw
w
oSny mo"
pan na
2W&
nD*ann
2"yxi a"a
s
D nno
dp
mnm
KPon*iu mapi d^ osn^

!>"?
onn d
'*d
it
ou
* hna
my
\n naa:?
s/ann
n&$>K
n'n nt pas?
"ni
*t
pp pip mna na D"nno

ia
s
"acina K>"oa npo na n^x 'n

a": Kin
roram
7
oa^ noxa nana pi a"p 'oa dp

x&>
kw
;op
naoai
poo
imoi>n
nxna^
li?
p^n*^
maan
|o
ann
nr
bv
wn ôô
ptrna
my
n&oao pi mna na o'nra
mn
amaaaino D*nnon nnaio o'o
.aniaaaino D'n.no
bw vmoi'n name*
Page 42
a.
Responsum
to a question of taoyt^, dated
London,
Sunday, 26th of Heshvan, 5524

Ibid.
it is
1763.
Introduction to his notes, in which he explains that
necessary for a Rabbi to

life,
make
notes on every question that
occurs to him in daily
so that the Ame-Ha'arez should not
consider him ignorant on account of his hesitating with a reply.
Page 57
b.
Letter to R. Judah Leb,
Rabbi of Halberstadt,
concerning a case of iman npaô.
Page 61
p.
, .
b.
Question by the Rabbi of Schwerin, signed on

:
64
a,
as
follows
nac>
nau
'n
jnjnw
a"opn
\>"\>
na oninni anian
s
pnaibo
D^mo prn
till
<av
p"d^
dhpb pto a^no
îoa
(Rabbi Zevi Hirsch Mirels of London, who was Rabbi of Schwerin

from 1770
of
1790, was the son of R. Aaron Mirels of London,
whom, however, we have no trace in London records so far. R. Aaron was son of R. Meshulam Zalman Mirels of Hamburg,
father-in-law of
Haham
Zevi (cp. Year-Boole, /toBWI, vol.

calls
2, p.
211).
Rabbi Zevi Hirsch Lewin
him
'
my
p.
cousin
'
(a"cy)
in
on
p.
64 b
of our manuscript (cp.JJE., vol. VIII,
608; Brann
Guttmann-

Festschrift^
p.
DUSCHINSKY
Mirels
in
33
v.
246,
and the
in
literature given there).
before
his
election
Schwerin
Rabbi
Wreschen (Posen.
Cp. Roest Catalogue, pp. 25, 139, 203, 335).
Page 65
Rabbi
in
b.
Letter on the
same question from
Elia of Posen,
Lanzburg (Landsberg), who addresses R. Zevi Hirsch
as his teacher.
Page 67
b.
Responsum
of
R. Z. H. to the above
letters
dated Berlin, 14th of Shevat of the same year.

a short index for pp. 1-42.
Page 67 has also
Page 68
that
a.
To
a certain R. Israel, in which he complains

failing health
owing
to
overwork and
he had no time to go
into the question put before
him
as deeply as he should have
liked to: 'in-d
f"yi>
wrp
ai>
v"b span
niD^ prn nmen.

his sons (probably
Page 70
R. Saul)
:
b.
Answer
to a question
>:i
by one of
aitr.
**a
&&\nn pxan
vsh
Page 71b deals with a case of marriage
in
London.
Page 73 a likewise discusses a similar question which came before him while officiating in London.
Ha
Page 75
to R. Z.
a.
Question by R. Juda Leb Eger (of Brctunochwe ig)
H.
in Berlin to
b.
which the
to his son.
latter's
response on
p.
76
a.
Page 77
Answer
Pages 78-82.
Notes on various subjects.
Page 83
a.
Question addressed to him in London concerning
the custom of baking tarts

dishes,
and omelettes on Passover
in
pewter
which were
in use all the year round.
Date 1758.
it
fTuâi ptnKBfi j*B1KP s ama p'sb ^"npn nosa
nnvi
rbvw
PBTKBn
pew u*m raw

b
is
"])r\2
nvy
hz 'nn
*baww
Ha
h? nnypa
jinn nsaxa dpi rumen
"iuni>
jniN |Dâi
nnypn
*pnn
]tw^
n^v?n
PBWV an
b*
pie
[DP Dyo
proew inn yin

fan
imi>
pvnn pd>pep
nmp
*tan hi
paoi
dtô
in*
iw&n
lawi
dn
}iiV? tj'dn*
Ha
fe ttn nnypc
-ttwai
38 2
N*:n
7,

oa nwatin nanio
pa
riDaa fiPDn&>r6i
pnnna
i^yarfc
in*n
Page 84 a
cited a
Responsum by
his
brother-in-law
Rabbi
Saul Halevy of the

brother R. Saul of
*":
Hague and page 84 b, a Responsum by his Amsterdam (V'aN ])turi *DM fv a^BW HD
dtibpbn
Page 85
p"pi
Ym
pwn
tin r"y
"6
answJriD ;/in p p)-
ff
a.
Another
until
letter
by R. Saul Halevy followed by
Talmudic notes
page 92, middle, where we find a decision

it
about raisin-wine, whether

the
can be used like ordinary wine and

it.
same
blessing said before partaking of
D\ryi>
rwrai
vi?y
ana
Tiyn rbui "iaap nvn Dy dîjo^
pi pi
'a
rwwai
K"y
pspD^ pkpi unao ^y
nmn
mn^>
mtwea
Tina
*a
p"pi i*3kti
y'r
naa^
.
ptcn
wdu dji ^nnsi? min vb h"i pton mpi oat? wa jin in Typ n^n my t6i nnx paaoa taana
wna
s"a
*6
an'sa rbv pJ? rrnioa riKiina n?oy a"DyNi a*ay
'm
Page 93
falls
a.
Rabbi Hirschel declares
that
if
a Sefer Torah
down
only the one

is
onlookers, as
the
who dropped it has to fast, but not all custom in many congregations he had found
:
no foundation
6
for this
custom
in the codes.
nto:
ibmr min
*a
naD 'wnpa maynnb Dîyn wub> n

i>
ini*6
dk
nvp *pD uko
pa
nyi
'd
n?
anaK&
â
iod pap
....
Pages
"n p"d Y'd
x"a
B>*oai
itd nhsw
n7b-i2 5a.
Letters from
and
to his brother R. Saul
and
his brother-in-law, the
Rabbi of the Hague.
Page 128.
tion in Poland).
Letter from
Rabbi Meir Posner of
S. (a
congrega-
niSip *bmk
,
.
rmrn nyTiyn
p
, .
n"ipa
"6iaai>
-peon nan3 run

s
(nw nvy:n
.
waa
paya)
onsnm jktib iid^t
10a ntaiopn
p"pa nainn nans
two
?"r\
tn'n
b.
"inei i*
nan
.
Page 140
a.
Letter from a Rabbi
Samson
Zelke in Br
concerning a certain Henle Peiersdorf of London, who bought
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON DUSCHINSKY

in
333
(the
1738 a gold watch from Gerson Goldsticker of Br
writer's congregation)
and gave him a
bill
for the
same.
Rabbi
Samson now asks the Rabbi of London to help the said Gerson, who is now an old man, to obtain payment of the said bill.
Answer of R.
letter of
H. on same Rabbi Samson on p.

Z.
page, which
is
followed by another
141
b.
Pages i42a-i44b.
.
Letters from
fi
and
to
Rabbi Juda Leb
Eger of Braun s chw e ig \]e\Hi
^Tf>X>T
Page 148
b.
Letter from Munster
b.
Nahum,
the Levite, to
his teacher, R. Zevi Hirsch, his
son Rabbi Saul, and son-in-law
R. Meir.
Page 150 a (middle).
Question from Rabbi Isachar Ber
b.
Herz of Dessau
Page 151a.
(Posner),
to R. Z.
H.
Letter from R. Z.
H.
to his
relative
R. Meir
and the important Responsa of Rabbi Saul of Amsterdam and Rabbi Zevi Hirsch, while Rabbi of London, with reference
to the
fish
called 'turbot', whether
it
may be
eaten by Jews.
R. Zevi decides in the affirmative, and bases his decision upon
documents by the Beth-Din of Venice.

lengthy for publication in this place
as follows. as TiDK; p.
(It
;
The Responsa
fish
are too
the Venice documents read
appears that in Amsterdam the

ttTOP
was regarded
151a we read:
*D13
in 'Klpjn
nn
-QT by
n&iy
dwo
rtt&ipDn i^nh tid-k in).
Page 155
N,y/s
a.
om "Vjn unwia a "n un:s dhê iDsy mm duid baâ N-ip:n wm i*n mnr6 rw*nn mea vhw troys u ubto \xbti xrvtcni i>an trp: wunoa ivk nrcnaa a uyp |n^ vdc6 Dai yn*a w^t Tnie mn iwa Y* 'a dv Dvn iniN Dâw wf* wMMBWipa DTBai p w mron .d"d Tyo DvWa apy^ 'tai nap isw n^ "mw [wrno nri apjp .rye bmnao
0to
b*n5a
m W
384

CTTV\ p"T7 Ernan n"a
npy
rurewap n^fen nawn uan mnnn

?"yfe
bv
owan wwn DH^yo

s
fe^n &npan nn ''few !>n-ib ua oy nan nwn *vya a K'y miDDn âs onnaia rniaipoa Dwtaa mioDia ia paa owian ife> D^p^pn npa d\-i p imfea n?n jtw DiTJiukd DTa tw
wi
naoxuîi
,p"ai>
na ub> uonn nn jvwnbi n?a "lynyo bk

nann n una?
n:j&>ai
pw Dâ
few new
nnoa p'D
i*o
dv nvn
najouKDaio iina a"a nchv

*ife
iprnwe "wk a"a pnv

s
ina
yw
na"a
*n
apy
p*D 6n nô na*a nrota

S?"an
n'roWa
fe
fei (?)
ani?
p"nD na inw D'few
feion
anm hen
prnitt
nina
DWipn
u'rnan D.Tnux
hund d*T3
invm
.fea piapa
nw
dnind^n nn minora noê*
aiai> nrrt?
3"f fnan
Interesting
that
'
tn rn'oa foi>? nehw n&flo mnfoaa nn D'oa

Rabbi
is
that, following
fish,
upon
this decision of their
turbot
'
is
a kasher
some members of the congregation
applied his permission not only to turbot but also to eels.
Page 156
a.
We
find a letter from

it
R. Juda of Halberstadt
he allowed
asking R. Zevi Hirsch whether

the eating of eels, and
if
was
really true that

let
so
would he kindly
him know upon
what paragraph of the codes he had based
this decision.
The
Rabbi
writes
naturally explained that turbots are not eels.
R. Juda
ofea
vrcrb
""i
nwA
psfpn
run
*n*a nana
tin
j\\*
u*y
niKP
Dan
nr nn
"pin pvn na uTyi> N3 ton nann nay aian

an
*a
Duma vn ton "n

D"an> iwan
(p!?KN xnp:n
5>Nsn i"d
u-nnn pspn unni> nfe> p^za
"n unni>
anap
% nan ny !?nto* nivian fea niD\s ia
nn) nnio wn do" rnam
an
im nn*n rein
nana
n"a
nrn
nann pan
^ main
tni
inai&n aina s c n^nsn vfe ted n?N
w6
nnw
to
nn ncyx
Tnm
na ynini>
.BMBmatans rmro >n Tbn unmb wvwfc pion ?h

The
response
this
letter
extends from 156 b to
158
b,
on
which page we find a question by one of the Rabbi's sons and

answer to the same (referring
DUSCHINSKY
This
to
is
385
to pickled nuts).
followed
Saul,
on
p.
162 b by the letter of R.

is
Leb Norden
H.
are to be
Rabbi
printed above, pp. 279-81, which
the end of the manuscript.
To
the
list
of works by R. Z.
added
Notes
2")
to
Mishna, edited by Rabbi Michelsohn, under the
title
K3X
(Piotrkow, 1907), and in the book {OliT b)p by Juda of Glogau

(Furth,
1775), a pupil of R. Zevi Hirschel, several expositions
(pp. 19
a,
on Talmudic passages are printed

Prof.
40a, 42
a).
M. Brann has
called
tib)])
my
1
attention to an approbation
by R. Z. H. to the book
(cp. p. 57).
TID'
by Isaac
Israeli, Berlin,
1777
According to Prof. Simonsen R. Zevi Hirsch had
a fourth daughter Zipporah Frade, married to
Meyer
Israel
Meyer
this
of the
family
'Hausen'
in
Altona.
Three daughters of
couple were married in Copenhagen, one of these, Dina Henriques,
was Prof. Simonsen's great-aunt

Hist.,
I,
(cp. Tidsskrift f.
Jgdisk Lit. og
Zevi Hirsch
p.
181).
The conundrum
(cp. p.
as to
how R.
went to Piemonte
45 [380])
is
solved by the same scholar,
who
it
referred
me
to the
book 31 N3V already mentioned, where

to read
is
made
clear that
we have
Pyrmont nnDTD, a small
watering-place in Germany.
Page 76 (JQR., X,
447), note 65.
Mr.
S.
Seeligmann of
Amsterdam
Judaism,
called
my
attention to
Abraham Nancy's book rhv
nsnn, London,
I,
1785, 8vo., mentioned by Schechter, Studies in

377,
p.
and by me
in
JHSE.,
trans.,
'
VII,
p.
288.
Abr. Nancy also wrote a dedication-poem 'Lofzang (Cat. Almanzi,
No. 4552) while he was

Tobias Boas
at the
(for sixteen years) tutor in the
house of
Hague, who was a great admirer of the Bal-
Shem Samuel
Nazig (cp.
1914,
vol.
s.v.
Falk.
He
is
called
there
.
Abraham Solomon
. .
S.
Seeligmann, Het geestelijk leven
te 's
Gravetihagc.
p.
12; also Steinschneider, 'Jiidische Arzte' in ZfHB.,

Zeitlin, Bid/.
XVII, pp. 68-98;

Nantisch,
p. 249).
Hebr. Post-Me?ide/ssohniana,
Page 80
already in a
(451).
list
The house
'
Zum
Griinen
Schild
J.
'
occurs
of houses of the years 1535-40 in
Kracauer's
Geschichte der Judengasse Frankfurt a/Af., p. 453 (S. Seeligm.).
386
Page 82
the family

(453).
About Isaac Sinzheim,

cp.
his
son Zalman and
generally
now Wachstein,
Inschriften des alten
Judenfriedhofes in Wien (191 7), vol. II, pp. 397-400. (S. Seeligm.).
Page 135 (506). The full Laws of the Hebrews relating

in
title
of Peppercorn's
book
is
The
to the
Poor and Strangers, written

Rabbi M. Mai-
Hebrew
in the 12th Century by the celebrated
London, Pelham Richardsons, 23 Comhill, 1838. copy formerly belonged to a Mr. William Simpson and has
monides,
book-plate.
My
his
He may
be identical with the Mr. Simpson
men-
tioned on this page.
Page 148 (519).

stein's Jiidische
About Solomon Bennett

26-7
Graber,
cp.
now
S.
Kirch-
Graphiker, Berlin, 191 8, pp. 15-27; also Zeitlin,

;
Bibl. Hebr. Post-Mendels., pp.

p.
nnSDn
nviN ]V3,
I,
28
DUSCHINSKY
387
Corrections.
Page
7
(JQK-, N.
:
S.,
IX,
p.
109) note
r,
lines 6
and
should
read
'
in
an approbation to the book
nnn pao (Amsterdam,

p. 288, no. 339).
1765)
see Benjacob
Ozar Hasefarim,
:
Page 40
Page 46
(p. 375),
(p. 381),
note 39
for
1W
nr6in
\
raz</
1**P
nnhn.
ra**
note 46, line 7
for Dr. L. Lowe, &c.,

vol.
B. Goldenberg in
Kerem Chemed,
:
IV, p. 239, footnote.

to.
Page 48
Ibid.,
1
(p. 383), line
4 from top for nephew of read related

R.
Frankel's
first
line
6: for 'whose wife was
sister'
read
whose daughter was Rabbi Frankel's

note 49
:
wife
/#/</.,
jfo*
1763 raz^ 1762 (Prof. G. Deutsch).

16
:
Page 56
(p. 391), line

:
for 6 Elul read 10 Elul

b.
(Prof.
M. Brann).
Br.).
Ibid., last line
for Simon
:
Nate Walisch read Wolcz (M.
Page 57 (M.
(p. 392), line 6
for Dn:
mano
read pjn
nam
TC0r< 2
Br.).
Ibid., line 12
Ibid.,
lines
for 1796 read 1795. 13 and 14 to be deleted, the approbation being

:
already mentioned on p. 56.

Ibid., line
16 21
for
nw m*^ HW.
note 56
6
: :
Ibid., line
^/- R. Levi read R. Zevi.

for 1825 read 1815.
"*i
Page 58
Page 61
(p. 393),
(p. 396), line p.
for
mpn mz^
"l
mpn.
Page 81 (X,
452), note 72, last Yme:
for A. Roschen read
Roschen.
p.
Page 82 (X,
nnapJi
/mV/.
:
453), note 76, last line but one: for
mapJl read
/<?/
n&np:i
m^/ nN~ip:i.
note 131, line 3
:
Page 120
(p. 491),
for
01^3.1 read DV2271.
Page 156 (X, 527), note 141 :forp. 51 read p. 54. Page 162 (XI, 26), note 147 for (144) read (143).
:
Page T94
Page 216
(p. 58), line
for Bjn read u:n.

:
(p. 80),
note
169'!
for Stuart read steward.
RECENT HELLENISTIC LITERATURE

Philo
has, since
is
largely responsible for the confusion of thought that
the beginning of the Civil Era, held sway over the

It
minds of theologians.
the
was he who
first
attempted to identify
It is true,
God
of Israel with the Hellenistic First Principle.
of course, that the two conceptions are alike, in that each was
regarded respectively by the Jews and the Greeks as the power
which explained the world.

little in
first
Yet beyond that the two ideas had
common.
la
Never could any philosopher have said of the

'
cause what Isaiah said of God,
His Glory
is
the fullness of
the earth.'
Nor
could one logically impute to the abstraction

attributes of the Deity
any of the thirteen

to
which were revealed
Moses
in
Horeb.
In order to identify the
God
to,
of the
Hebrews
really
with the philosophic conception, Philo introduces us to various

intermediaries
separate
who
are intended to unite
God
but
who
Him
from the world.
No
Jewish thinker uninfluenced

as Philo
by a foreign culture could have entertained such views
gives expression to in the following paragraph, in which he deals
with the law relating to the return of a pledge of a garment.

it
'
Is
not natural,
if
not to reproach, at least to suggest to those
who
fancy that the lawgiver displays such earnestness about a garment,
"What
are you saying,
my good man?
Does the Creator and
the Ruler of the Universe call himself merciful with respect to

1
The Platonistn of Philo Jndacus.
By Thomas H.
Billings, Chicago
The University of Chicago

London
Press, 1919.
pp. viii+ 105.
By H. A. A. Kennedy, D.D.. D.Sc. Hodder & Stoughton, 1919. pp. x + 245. Hellenism. By Norman Bentwich. Philadelphia The Jewish
Philo' s Contribution to Religion.
: :
Publication Society of America, 1919.

la
pp. 386.
2
Isa. 6. 3.
Exod. 34.
7.
VOL. XI.
389
D d
390
such a
to a
trifle

as
the
failure
of a lender to restore a garment

first
borrower?"' 8
Such words spoken of the

to
cause are
comprehensible.
unintelligible.
But applied
It is precisely
the
God
of Israel they are

trifles
with regard to such
that
He
shows
pity
and love
for
men.
(p.
Professor
Billings
14)
seeks
to
acquit
Philo
of
these
charges
by showing that these contradictions are inherent in For every religious man he says, the every religious system.
' '
',
ultimate reality must be
more than a mere, dead
logical principle.
Plato tends, under the influence of religious emotions, to

the Ideas into active powers.'
make
'The second inconsistency, that between the transcendence and the immanence of God, to use a modern expression, is an inconsistency which no system can
escape which holds to the doctrine of an unchanging reality
behind the world of sense.

itself in
Exactly the same difficulty presents
connection with Plato's theory of ideas.
The
ideas are
at
once transcendent and immanent.'

Perhaps even more important
for a
proper appreciation of
Philo
is
Professor Billings's endeavour to show that while very
often Philo adopts the vocabulary of different schools, his con-
ceptions are essentially Platonic.
Thus Logos
is
a Stoic term,
derived, as the author shows, from Aristotle (p. 31).

Stoics,
But the
who were
upon
monists, conceived the Logos as material.

it
They
Idea
also looked
as the
Supreme Being.
In these aspects, the

Plato's
author maintains, their conception differed from

of the
Good and from
Philo's Logos.
It
appears, therefore, that
in Philo's
Logos we have an amalgam of a Stoic term and a
purely Platonic conception.
The book
tion
is
well supplied with
copious notes.
The
first
chapter gives an interesting sketch of the history of the interpretaof Philo.
The concluding
that
chapter shows
how
Philo was
influenced by Plato's very style.

various strands
The
treatise,
by tracing the
appear
in
Philonic
philosophy to these
in the
sources, helps to clarify
many an obscure passage
works
of the great Jewish Philosopher.

3
De Somn.
I.
16.

Professor Hillings's work
it
FINKELSTEIN
in
3-1
is
not only scholarly
content, but
also has the
outward form of a work meant

are untranslated;
for serious students.
Long Greek passages

to form or style.
Philo's
little
attention
is
given
This can hardly be said of Professor Kennedy's

to
Contribution
it
Religion.
It
is
clear
that the
author
intended
to
be a popular book.
The
quotations from the
New
type
Testament are well chosen and are

is
freely translated.
The
larger than
is
is
usual in a scientific work, and the whole appear'
ance
that of a
best seller'.
Its literary character will,

all
however,
students
hardly detract from the importance of the work for

of Philo.
The author
chapters.
is
takes several pages of his Introduction to explain
the purpose of the
book and
to clarify the
arrangement of the
This necessity would tend to indicate that the work
fragmentary,
and not completely developed.
By
constant
comparisons between the words of Philo and those of the

Testament, the author seeks to throw
light
New
real
on both.
to
The
tendency of his studies
is
to
show the extent
which the
doctrines that were prevalent at the beginning of the Christian
Era were
similar.
Though Philo and Paul had no

and Hellenistic
personal
connexion, yet living at the same time, both coming under the
influence of the Hebraic
cultures, they naturally
had much
in
Professor
common. Kennedy shows how much
these
two
religious
thinkers were alike in their conceptions of Faith, of the possibility
of a mystic union with the Divine, in their sense of
human
frailty
and wickedness, and

might
in their negation
of fleshly
lusts.
But he
have gone even

in
further.
Many
of these doctrines are

is
found
Rabbinic
literature itself.
Alexander
represented
4
'
in
a famous passage as having asked the Jewish Sages,
What
shall
',
man do
the
that he
may
live ?
'
'
Let him cause himself to die
they answered, in words which might have
come from
Philo or
from
Apostle.
Dr. Schechter in his Aspects of Rabbinic
Theology? gives several examples of the manner in which the
Rabbis looked to
4
God
for
salvation from
5
sin.
prayer like
Tamid 32 a.
Chapter XVI.
[)
392
1

it
May
be Thy
will that
we
shall not sin
could only
come
from one who believed with Philo that no 'soul ever succeeded
in putting out of sight
and annihilating
evil
save that to which

his
God
was revealed, which he deemed worthy of

'. 7
ineffable
mysteries
In this
field
there
is
still
a great opportunity for research.

to
it?
To
how
on
what extent are these new ideas due

far
Hellenism, and
are
they
merely coincident with

is
immortality, the doctrine that the flesh

Plato's
bad,
The belief in may be based

but
there
antithesis
between
matter
and
spirit,
were probably other contributing causes.
The book
should
serve as a stimulus to search these out and to discover
why
in
some
cases Judaism discarded

its
its
own conceptions once they

in other cases
it
were accepted by
to cling to them.
rival
and why
continued
The author does
well to call attention to the apparent in-
consistency between Philo's reverence for the text of the Septuagint,
which he believed to be inspired, and

to suit his purpose.
inconsistency.
his laxity in
changing
it
Yet
that
is
more of an apparent than a

forget
real
We
must never
how
'
different
were the
standards of literary veracity twenty centuries ago from those

in
vogue now.
Just as the authors of the

felt
Wisdom
of
Solomon
or of the Sibylline works
no compunction
even so one
'
in attributing their
productions to others, in spite of the religious fervour with which

these
men must have been

of the Bible,
filled,
felt
that there was
nothing wrong in mutilating or

translators
emending
for a
'
text.
The Greek
who never
doubted the verbal inspiration of

themselves to alter
it.
Even the
in the
moment could have the Hebrew original, permitted Targumim insert passages and
case of anthropomorphic ex-
change words, especially

pressions.
8
Indeed, the rabbis enumerate several passages where
the reading of the
Hebrew
original
was
for
one reason or another
changed.
6 7
8 9
Such
practices cannot be
b.
compared with the Pauline
Eerakot 17
From Kennedy,
Cf.
Philo's Contribution to Religion, p. 97.

;
Exod. 24. 10
Num.
23. 19.
Cf. Mekilta, ibid., et
Tanhuma, Exod.
15. 7.
Gen. R. 49.

rejection of the
readily see
FINKELSTEIN
(p.
39*
whole
legalistic
system
42),
nor does one
how
Philo ever arrives at a 'position regarding the

(p. 56).
law which approximates that of Paul'
There was no
need
for
Philo being led
away 'from the region of ceremonial
into that of obedience to the Divine will', since for

identical.
him they
are
Spiritual matters are of course subjective,
and one can hardly

Professor
be
called
to
is
account
for
one's
opinions on them.
Kennedy
therefore certainly within his rights in considering
Paul a person of 'surer spiritual vision' than Philo.
Yet the
constant reiteration of such phrases produces on the reader an

effect
which
is
not happy.
The same must be said of Mr. Bentwich's repeated references to the Hellenistic movement as an impure syncretism. The attempt to condemn whole philosophies and civilizations by
' '
means of short
adjectives has
its
place, but certainly not in the
calm discussions of scholars.

In spite of his manifest contempt for the Hellenistic move-
ment, Mr.
Norman Bentwich
culture
portrays well the conflict between
the rival cultures in Palestine and in the Diaspora.

the Hebraic
In Palestine
;
fought
its
for
supremacy, and won

life,
in the
Diaspora,
it
struggled for
very
and
in
the
main cannot
be said
to
have succeeded.
this
Mr. Bentwich finds one of the

in
causes for
its
failure of
Egyptian Jewry
to
the attempt
that
leaders
and exponents made

it is
proselytize.
In
is
spiritual
matters, at least,
offensive.
not true that the best defensive

to gain converts for
a strong
The attempt
Judaism could only
end by bringing into the
fold large
numbers who looked upon

could not have for
it
Judaism
as another philosophy, but
the
same deep
bred
affection that filled the souls of all
who were born and
in the faith.
On
the other hand, the author does not lav sufficient stress
that was introduced into the Hellenistic
to substitute
on the inherent weakness
movement when Greek began

language of
is
Hebrew,
first
as the
literature,
and then
as
in
the sacred tongue.
There
certainly that element of truth
the statement of the latei
394
Sages that the day of the translation of the Bible into Greek was
one of
dire calamity.
Philo
may have been saved from becoming

All
a mere Greek eclectic by his deeply religious nature, but that could hardly save the day for his followers.
who
it
read his
works were by the nature of things more deeply imbued with

Hellenic than with
Hebrew
culture.
As a
result,
was only
his
post-mortem conversion into a Church Father that saved his
works
for posterity.
Certainly this
is
a lesson that Jewish
men
of science to-day might
do
well to keep in mind.
While
wealth
literary
it is
true that in Palestine during the
Second Commonit
Hebrew was not
the vernacular,
yet
did remain the
and the sacred language.
Moreover, Aramaic was not
identified with the particular culture

to
which
Israel
was called upon
Nor could Greek culture hope to succeed in dominating the Holy Land after the signal victories of the
combat.
Hasmoneans.
influence
It
is
true that
Greek
civilization
had a subtle
on Jewish
literature
even
after its
it
outward manifestation
had been dealt a blow from which
could not easily recover.
As
Mr. Bentwich points out, the mysticism which
became
preva-
lent in
some
Palestinian circles was
due
largely to this influence.
He
also notes that
some
of the ethical teachings of the Sages
may be
traced to Greek sources.
There
is
also the possibility
that the systematization of the
Halakah was influenced by the
presence of a scientific culture.

neutic rules
first
The compilation
of the herme-
by
Hillel,
and then by R. Ishmael, probably
goes back to the influence of the Greek love of system which
pervaded the atmosphere.
And
it
is
not impossible that the

greater
same
facts
which
brought
about
development
of
mysticism in Babylonia also led to the deeper development of

the rules of interpretation.
culture
In the west, the nearness of Greek
and of
Christianity
made
all
that was
even remotely
connected with them instinctively hated and repressed, while
pagan Persia offered a
fertile field
both for the development of
an Halakic system and of mystic imagery.

It is
not quite certain, however, that the Greek language had
the
influence
on Jewish
ritual
that
the author
thinks
it
had

(p. 117).
FINKELSTE1N
is
That Sanhedrin
is
a Greek word
true, but that that
body was
still
originally a religious rather than a purely political
one
remains to be shown.
The word Parnas

it
is
used
to-day
of a President of a Jewish community, but

in
was not so used

from
the
Talmudic
times.
10
Nor
is
its
derivation
Greek
established
to think
it
beyond doubt.
purely Semitic.
Many of the lexicographers seem The word Bima is sometimes used

is
to describe a raised dais
from which the Torah
read/ 1 but
it
is
never described in the Palestinian works as a definite part of the
synagogue structure.
Similarly, Tik
is
is
used of the box
in
which
the Scroll of the Torah
held,
12
but the word for the Ark, as

is
a definite part of the synagogue edifice

translates Zizith
Tebah.
Onkelos
by Kraspedon but
that
would not prove anything
in view of the fact that the Peshitto
and the other Targumim

use of Kraspedon would
is
do not use the word.

Onkelos
is
As
is
;
well
known, the vocabulary of

its
Babylonian Aramaic
and
merely make us doubt whether the word

In spite of such specks, the book
to English Judaica.
Its
is
originally Greek.
a genuine contribution
chapter on Hellenistic literature should
arouse an interest in that branch of Jewish studies.

it
In so doing,
its
will
serve to
bring back to Israel

it
some of the works of
children
who were estranged from

have come, and
is
not for any sins of their
own
but because of the evils of the times.
The day
of reconciliation
seems
writers
to
it
high time that the Hellenistic

literature of the
be welcomed back to the domain of the
Jewish people.
Louis Finkelstein.
New
York.
10 12
See Aruch Completum.

Shabbat
16.
1.
n Compare Sotah
Megillah
4. 5.
7. 8.
" Num.
15. 38.
THE RELIGION OF ISRAEL

To one who
German
the
is
accustomed to draw
his
knowledge of the
Bible and of Biblical ideas from some of the more advanced

higher
critics,
it
will
be refreshing to turn to these
books, which are entirely free of any bias or prejudice.
Some
of
German
scholars
are
unable to dissociate their personal
antipathies towards Israel of the present from their studies of the
experiences
and
achievements
Israel,
of
Israel
of
antiquity.
They
for the
begrudge the credit due to
because of their dislike
descendants of Israel living in their midst.

to discredit the contributions
spiritual
They
therefore seek
growth of
his
made by the Jewish people to the humanity. Some of them (e. g. Friedrich
itnd Bibel series,
Delitzsch in
latest diatribe
Babel
and
especially in his
to the extent of
Die grosse Tiiuschimg) would go

all
robbing ancient Israel of

genius.
moral excellence and even of religious

scholars, however,
These American
approach the sub-
ject with reverence in
and with sympathy.
While believing firmly
the superiority of their

this
own
faith,
and neglecting no opporto
tunity to point out
superiority
and
emphasize
it,
they
nevertheless recognize the grandeur of the teachings of ancient

Israel,
and
extol with genuine appreciation the achievements of
our great prophets and seers.
Some
'
of the
German
Biblical
scholars have not yet learned the lesson that Dr. Barton (p. 243)
deduces from the Book of Esther.
Modern
lands suffer as
acutely from race antagonism as did any country of the ancient

1
The Religion of
Israel.
By George
in
A. Barton, Professor of Biblical
Literature and Semitic
Languages
Bryn Mavvr College.
New York The

:
Macmillan Company, 1918 (The Religious Science and Literature

pp. 289.
Series),
The Religious Teachings of the Old Testament.
By Albert
C.
Knudson,
Professor in Boston University School of Theology.

nati
:
New
York, Cincin-
The Abingdon
Pr,ess, 1918.
pp. 416.
396

world.
Tin's
GREENSTONE
397
antagonism
results in plots as
bloody and cruel as
that depicted in the
Book
if
of Esther, and, sometimes, in massacres
and lynchings, which,

in
not as extensive
.
.
.
as
those portrayed
Esther, are
no
less
barbarous.
We
read in the pages of
Esther
how
it
hate always begets hate, that violence begets violence,
and
it
that
may
deflower the souls of those
who
participate in
of their fairest beauty
and noblest
spirit.'
While dealing
practically with the
same
subject, since Barton
also does not carry his investigation
any further than the period
of the rise of Christianity, these two volumes differ widely in the
manner of approach,
discussion,
in the attitude
towards the subject under

it
and
in the
is
form
in
which
is
presented.
Professor
Barton's book
'
intended primarily for the college student,

the truth as fully
really
wishes to
is
know
and frankly
not
as
it
who can be known

'.
It
therefore
text-book,
necessarily
is
suggesting
dryness and stiltedness, because the author's style

ing
most charmIt is a text-
and
his diction exceedingly lucid
and
attractive.
book, distinguished by precision and accuracy, by

sequence,
strict
logical
and
by an apparent
effort
'
at
economy
of
space.
Professor Knudson's book was written
to
meet the needs of the

It is therefore
is
preacher and the general Bible student \
supat
posed to be a popular book.
The
style
fact,
its
in
consequence
times more emotional, less matter of

homiletic.
and sometimes even

scientific
is
Without detracting from
value,
the
author succeeded in producing a volume that

that will appeal to the uninitiated,
specialist.
most readable,
and
will also
be of value to the
Because of the
they
also
different
aims that the authors had
in
mind,
follow
different
methods
in
presentation.
Dr.
Barton follows the chronological order, preferring to dwell

to the
on the causes that led

ideas
development of the various
religious
among
the ancient Israelites, although at the etui of the
book
several chapters are devoted to the treatment of specific
theological topics.
topical
Dr. Knudson, on the other hand, follows the

after the
method, taking up one
other the chief theoin
logical ideas
and showing how these were gradually evolved
the course of Old Testament Jewish history.
398

Dr. Barton introduces his work with a study of the early
Semitic religions and of the value of the Biblical narratives.
This
he regards necessary
for the investigation
in order to establish the
proper background
author's theories
which
is
to follow.
The
regarding Semitic origins, which he elaborated in several other
works and
articles, are
here boiled
down
into a few chapters
and
presented with clearness and precision.
While discarding the

advanced
fanciful allegorical interpretations of the Biblical stories
by Winckler and
his followers
on the one hand, and the equally
ingenious inventions of Jensen and
Zimmern and
refrains
their followers
on the other hand, the author

narratives
literally.
still
from accepting the

Israelitish
regarding
the
beginnings of
the
nation
He
maintains that the early stories clustering about
the patriarchal family are stray reminiscences of characters and

events that
may
actually have existed, but were not necessarily in

Israel.
any way connected with the origin of

the early Israelites were the
Leah
tribes
The main stock of (cowboys ?), who later The Rachel
entered into an
alliance with the Rachel tribes (shepherds?),
and
from
still
later with the
Bilhah and Zilpah tribes.

for a time,
tribes only lived in
Egypt
and
after their deliverance
Egypt through
first
Moses made a covenant with Yahweh.

distinction
This was the

tribes to their
between the relation of these
God and
latter
the relation of other peoples to their
gods.
in
While the
regarded their gods as related to them
a physical way, the Rachel tribes looked
upon
their
God
as related to
them by means of a covenant, which implied mutual
responsibilities.
When
they settled in
Canaan and became an
agricultural people, the religion of these tribes underwent
many
changes, influenced by the religious notions and practices prevalent in
Canaan.
Yahweh became
the
God
its
of Canaan, owning
cultivation.
in the
the land and taking special interest in
Hence
covenant
as a
many
with
of the agricultural laws
became prominent
Yahweh and
the festivals were given a
new meaning,
result of the agricultural conditions of the land.
With the appearance of the

the eighth century
B.
great prophetic personalities in
C.E., as those of
Amos, Hosea,
Isaiah,
and
THE RELIGION OE ISRAEL

Micah, a new epoch set
of the people.
in the
GREENSTONE
religious
399
life
development of the
Then
the great ideas of monotheism, of an ethical
and
social religion, of
God's love
for
His creatures, and
later, in
Isaiah, of the messianic hope, with all that this implied,
came
to
the foreground
and
little
by
little
sank into the consciousness of were further developed by
the mass of the people.
These
ideals
Jeremiah,
who emphasized
the universality of
still
God and
the idea
of individual responsibility, and
later
by the Second Isaiah,
who gave new meaning

Israel's
to the notions of the Election of Israel,
Mission, and Israel's Sufferings.

exile.
The
priestly
code was
compiled during the Babylonian

spirit into
This brought a puritan
Jewish
life
and helped
to transform the Jewish nation

itself
its
into a Jewish church.
The law
gradually endeared
with the
people,
and the establishment of the synagogue, with
popular
appeal, helped a great deal in strengthening the hold of the law
on Jewish
allowed
life.
The
Pharisees
its
and the Rabbis
still
further
life,
developed the law in

it
application to every detail of
and
to
become
the ruling principle in the Jewish religion.

this historical
In the course of
resume, Dr. Barton discusses
the several religious ideas of ancient Israel, showing
how
they
were influenced
in their
growth by the events and conditions, and

life
how
they in turn influenced Jewish
and conduct.
The
last
few chapters of the book are devoted to the treatment of several

specific subjects, as the ject of angels
development of the priesthood, the subreligious ideas of the
and demons, the
Psalms and
of the
wisdom books, the smaller books of the Bible and the
Apocrypha.
The
last
chapter
is
devoted
to
discussion
of
the Jewish Dispersion.
Although concise, the small volume contains a wealth of

information and of suggestive thought.
Every chapter
is
pro-
vided at the end with Topics for Further Study, which include also
references to standard volumes
on the various subjects suggested.
One need
will
not accept
all
the conclusions of the author, but one

fair
be greatly stimulated by the lucid presentation and the
criticism of the subjects covered by the author.
Much more
conservative in tone, though maintaining through-
400

attitude,
is
out a scholarly and critical
the work of Professor
Knudson.
enunciates
The
the
author,
principle
'
at
the
very
opening of
the
book,
that the literary prophets were not,
in the proper sense of the term, the " creators of ethical
monoin
theism
".
The
higher faith of Israel
may be
is
traced back into the

to
preprophetic period.
Indeed
its
germ
be found
the
teaching of Moses
'.
This heresy, from the point of view of

is
the most advanced critics of the Bible,
valiantly
defended and
repeatedly
sionally
ideals
emphasized.
establish
The
author
does not hesitate occa-
to
some
relationship
between the religious
of ancient Israel with
modern thought and experience.

attempts as unscientific, but
that
it
Some might condemn such really these human touches

readable and interesting.
is
make
the
book so eminently
After an introductory chapter on, the
development of Old
Testament Religion and

treatment; of his subject.
Literature, the author begins the topical
The book
naturally divides itself into
two large divisions

In the
first
one treating of God and the other of man.
division, the author discusses the Personality of

Spirituality,
God,
His Unity,
Power,
Holiness,
Righteousness, and
other divine
Love, concluding with a chapter on angels and

beings.
The second
the
section deals with the Nature of
Man, the
Doctrine of Sin,
Problem of Suffering, Forgiveness and
Atonement, Nationalism and Individualism, the Messianic Hope,
and the Future

predominates.
Life.
Throughout the book the human element
Copious quotations are given from the works of
other authors, with which the author shows great familiarity, but
the author's personality
and
his
own
convictions are manifest
on
each page.
first
All technical terms
and metaphysical expressions are

used in the
text.
clearly explained before they are
With due
solution for
modesty, the author does not hesitate to leave certain matters

unsolved, admitting that he was unable to find a
them.
In discussing the principle of the Unity of God, Dr.
is
Knudson
in face of
naturally forced to consider the Christian belief in the Trinity.
Recognizing the great advance of the monotheistic ideal
GREENSTONE
Knudson
still
the polytheistic worship of the ancients, Dr.

'
feels that
rich).
it
failed
permanently to provide
for the
complexity and
of the divine nature which seems necessary to satisfy the deepest
needs of the
human
heart.
And
so in the course of time there
grew up the Christian doctrine of the Trinity or Tri-unity'.

then proceeds to
'
He
find a
show
that even
in the
Old Testament we
number
of tendencies towards the establishment of hypostatic

nature'.
distinctions in the divine
For a non-Christian
it
is
rather difficult to understand
why
the 'complexity and richness

it
of the
divine nature
'
cannot be conceived, as indeed
was
conceived throughout Jewish history, to be inherent

Himself, as the attributes applied to
in
God
them
Him, without
giving
each a separate existence.

Spirit of
God, Word of
The assumption that the expressions God, and Wisdom of God, which occur in The deep Christian feelings make him see things which are
the Bible, are personified and conceived of as having true hypostasis is
based on very flimsy proof.
of our author and his firm faith
not quite patent to the impartial observer.
He
avoids, however,
the old orthodox policy of trying to find in the Old Testament

references to Jesus
and
to his advent.
He
lays great
emphasis
on the messianic hope as enunciated by the prophets, and believes

that this
hope coloured and stimulated
their exalted ethical
and
social ideals.
In agreement with most modern Biblical scholars,

'
he interprets the
servant
'
passages
in Isaiah
to
refer
to the
people of Israel as a whole, whose sufferings are regarded as

'vicarious
and redemptive'.
The heathen
nations, in the words
of the prophet, realized that the affliction that befell Israel should
have been their

redemptive
lot,
and
'
this realization carried with

It led to
it
wonderful
qualities.
repentance and confession and
the recognition of Israel's
God
it
as
God
of
all
the World.'
Our
the
author does not even find
necessary to add here, as does
Dr. Barton (p. 131): 'It remained for Jesus of Nazareth,

ideal Israelite, to take
up
in his
person and experience the work

for the nation,
which the prophet had conceived as possible

to
and
by
make
the ideal
real.'
The
ideals held out for the nation
the prophet, the interpretation given by him to Israel's mission in
4-02

and
interpretation held
the world, were the ideals
and urged by
It
the best Jewish minds throughout
the centuries.
was not
necessary for them to have these ideals incorporated in a person.
The
prophet's
picture
of Israel's
election as
to the
an election
Jews of
to
all
for
service, as
an example to humanity, was
ages
their
sufficiently clear
lives accordingly.
and
sufficiently concrete so as
mould
Of
course, the nation did not always live
up
to
the ideal.
But
this
life
did not in any way lessen
its
potent
influence on Jewish
strictly
and thought.
It
even influenced the

later
legal
enactments of the Rabbis of

it,
ages, and, as
Dr. Schechter puts
the idea of the election of Israel 'always
maintained in Jewish consciousness the character of at least an
unformulated dogma' {Aspects of Rabbinic Theology,
p. 57).
Julius H. Greenstone.
Gratz College, Philadelphia.
SCHLKITER'S 'RELIGION
The book
AND CULTURE'
contains, as the sub-title suggests, a philosophico-
psychological analysis and critique of the methods employed in
the study of the genesis and development of the spiritual nature

of man, or of what the
schaftc?i,
Germans not
points
inaptly call the Geistesivissenparticularly
as
ethnology, folk-lore,
and
out,
the
religious
phenomena.
pitfalls
The author
difficulties
one
after
the other, the
and
which beset the workers
in these fields
who
attempt to establish comprehensive generalizations

tions
and
classifica-
and
formulate valid universal conclusions, to which they
frequently succumb,
investigator
and the reason and causes and undertakes
thereof.
The
who devotes
intensive study to a limited geographical

to formulate universal
if
area or historical period

laws
upon the group of
cultural facts observed therein as
they
were isolated and independent, neglects the important factor of

the transmission
and intermixture of
cultural elements from
one
area to another.
Besides, the specific people under consideration

(/no,
may not be
in
a primitive status
but rather represent a process
of degeneration from a higher level of culture.
The comparative method

and
superficial
often classifies the facts gathered

in a loose
from the four corners of the earth and the ends of time
manner, taking as
its
fundamentum comparationis
a merely external, morphological criterion, and thence 'bunching

facts
without reference to their cultural settings and the penumbrae
of thoughts
and
feelings
which cluster round them
'.
Such terms
as animism, fetishism, taboo,
and so
on, designate
phenomena
affective
it
of most varied historical origin
and psychological and

is
motivation.
1
For instance, a certain animal

and
Culture.
taboo because
Religion
critical
survey of methods of approach to
religious
phenomena. By Frederick Schleiter, Columbia University Press, 1919. pp. x+ 206.
Ph.D.
New York
43
404
is

;
considered sacred
;
because
it is
it is
believed to be the incarnation

;
of an ancestor
because
a totem
because
it is
unclean, &c.
The author does

the
not disparage the comparative method, but

sifting,
pleads for a more adequate
testing,
and re-analysing of
phenomena marshalled for comparison in accordance with more critical principles, and abandonment of the exclusive use
In
of the form criterion as basis of classification of similarities.

general, the religious
phenomena should not be described and
characterized in the abstract as isolated facts lifted out of their
indigenous habitats, but their genetic history and cultural and

psychological setting taken into account.
These few remarks may convey an idea of tone and tenor of

the book, but hardly suggest the richness of
theories
life
its
contents.
All the
spiritual
and attempts
to get at the
primordiwn of the
its
of
man and
to
to determine the stages of

in a
evolution, from
mana
monotheism, are here
keen and profound manner
analysed and dissected, weighed and, on the whole, found wanting.
The absence
interesting
heartily
of an index in a
book teeming with so many

is
and important items
regrettable.
The book
man.
is
recommended
to all interested in the study of
I.
M. Casanowicz.
United States National Museum.
BARON'S 'THE JEWISH QUESTION AT THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA'

1
Efforts
recently
to secure Jewish rights through international con-
gresses of the powers have naturally brought into prominence
the
deliberations
connected with the
earliest
of the
conferences at which the Jewish question was considered, that

of
Vienna
in 18 14-15,
which had almost wholly escaped attention

until the last few years.
on the part of Jewish historians

cordingly, in the scholarly, able,
Ac-
and
interesting booklet before
us
we
find over
200 pages devoted to a theme which was wholly
ignored in the Jewish Encyclopedia, and to which Graetz, Jost,
and Philippson devoted only a few

fortify
lines.
Numerous
citations
every statement in the
text.
In the main, Dr. Baron reaches almost identically the same

conclusions formulated two years earlier in
M.
J.
Kohler's
'
Jewish
(printed
Rights at the Congresses of Vienna and Aix-la-Chapelle

in vol.
26 of the Publications of the American Jewish Historical
Society,
and separate booklet
reprint, 1918),
and almost
identical
quotations and dozens of the same citations are to be found

in
both works, though Dr. Baron does not seem to have utilized
that writer's work, probably
by reason of the
to
war.
Dr. Baron
has
had
access,
however,
some
contemporary manuscript
clears
material in the Vienna archives
and elsewhere, which

is
up
a few controverted points.
Chief of these
the famous eleventh
hour modification of the Jewish rights clause to the detriment

of the Jews, by the substitution
1
in
the passage safeguarding
Die Judenfrage auf dun IVienet Kottgress.
Auf Grmul von nun

der
Israclitischen
Tcil
ungedruckten Qucllen dargestcllt von Salo Baron.

Unterstutzung der historischen
Hcrausgcgeben mit
Kultus-
Kommission
gemeinde
in
Wien.
R. Lowit Verlag.
Vienna and Berlin, 1920.
pp.au.
VOL.
XI.
405
E C
406
Jewish amelioratory provisions secured during the Napoleonic

period
of
the words
',
'
by the several (German) states
',
for
'
in
the several states

for disregarding
which thereafter was availed of as an argument

Dr. Baron
is
emancipatory provisions adopted by revolutionary
governments under French influence.

hereof
like the writer
shows
falsified
that
Graetz's
charge
utterly
unfounded that
by
Gentz, the Secretary of the Congress, had apparently surreptitiously
the
protocol
in
the
pay of
anti-Semities
inserting this modification in accord with an apocryphal earlier
resolution
of the
congress.
He
shows
(p.
202)
that
Gentz
did not even keep the minutes of the Committee on

Affairs at
German
which
this
change was made, but that the publicist
Martens was the secretary of that Committee, and that Gentz

at the
Congress was, in
fact,
pro-Jewish.
The
original minutes
of the Conference of the earlier date (preserved in the Vienna

archives),
moreover, do in fact contain a marginal annotation,
substituting the
German word von
for in (p. 167),
and show that
the Conference's declaration in favour of the principle that the
pro-Jewish determinations in the 32nd Military Division (which
included Hamburg, Bremen, and Liibeck) were not thereby to
be continued, was then already determined upon as intended

to
be expressed by such proposed modification.

it
If
this
con-
cession be made,
is
difficult,
however, to accept Dr. Baron's
view that comprehensive terms in the Treaty, intended to except

the revolutionary governments of the Hanseatic
cities,
were to
be
restricted to those places,
on account of
this latent intention,
and not
to
be applied to other revolutionary governments, mean-
time unseated.
The mystery becomes

construed the
Jews,
all
the greater that Prince
Metternich and Prince Hardenberg, immediately after the Congress,
nevertheless
to
terms
of
the
Treaty
most
to
favourably
the
not
merely in
their
application
Frankfort-on-the-Main, but also with respect to the

of the
Hansa towns
32nd Military
District, regardless of this
change.
They
either were unfamiliar with the
change designedly made by the

it
Conference, or sought to deliberately disregard

their full influence in favour of Jewish
by exerting
emancipation nevertheless.
BARON
Dr.
JEWISH QUESTION AT VIENNA
KOHLER
40^
Baron unduly minimizes the terms employed
in their striking
letters.
He
also (p. 191)
was able
to locate in the semi-official

12,
Austrian newspaper Beobachter of Dec.

joint protest of Austria, Prussia, Russia,
1
1816, the text of the

6,
and England of Nov.
81 6, against Frankfort's disregard of the Jewish clauses of the

;
Treaty
in
the present writer in vain sought the
full
text thereof
the British archives.
But our author unjustly chides the
Jew-,
of Frankfort
and
their advocates for seeking to take
advantage
of their special grants
and
the
privileges, instead of
merely making
general,
common
present
cause with
Jews of Germany
in
whom
Prince
the
Dr. Buchholz championed so ably.

writer,
Dr. Baron, as well as the
regards
Wilhelm
von
Humboldt and
Hardenberg as the leading champions of Jewish

Metternich and Gentz.
heretofore
1
rights at
Congress, but does not do sufficient justice to the efforts of
In
fact,
Dr. Baron has discovered a
unknown
protocol of a secret conference of
May
28,
81 5, reading 'Prussia has

(p.
announced
160).
that
she will not yield

to
with respect to the Jews'
But he seems
have over-
looked significant entries in Gentz's diary and correspondence,
which the writer hereof cited

services to the
in his work,
emphasizing Gentz's
Jews on
this occasion,
and probably because of do

justice to his
in his brief
Gentz's custom of accepting presents, failed to

career, as
was so well done by W. Allison Phillips
sketch of him in the Britannica.
As concerns the under-estimate

seems
all
of Metternich's services, this
the stranger in the light of the interesting petition to

in the Austrian archives, signed
him which Dr. Baron unearthed

by Arnstein,
of each
Eskeles,
Herz,
five
Lamel, and Auspitz (pp. i4 I_ 5>
compare 148, 170-1), the

of
most distinguished Jews of Austria,

studies.
whom
he gives interesting character
He
would, moreover, have greatly strengthened the argument in favour

of the value of the Congress's action as a precedent for Jewish
emancipation, had he coupled with

(sanctioned by
all
it
the incorporated provisions
the leading figures of the Congress) in con-
nexion with the union of Holland and Belgium, which accorded

absolute religious liberty, and equality of
civil
and
political rights,
E e 2
408
to
all

common
with those professing
the Jews of those states, in
other creeds; see as to
this,
the present writer's above-cited
work and a reference

letter to the
to the incident in
Cl^menceau's famous
24, 19 19.
Premier of Poland, dated June
Similarly,
emphasis on the use of the Treaty of Vienna provisions in favour

of the
German Jews
as precedents in
England
in the struggle for
Jewish emancipation there, as also by Gabriel Riesser in

later on,
still
Germany
would have rendered
this interesting
and valuable work

however, that the
more comprehensive.
The
fact remains,
services of the Congress to Jewish emancipation consist, far more,

in the public
and notable arguments

its
in favour of such equality
of rights, advanced by
leading
spirits,
and
its
declaration of
a general principle, than in what was actually reduced to legal

formulas, as a result
of compromises which enlightened foreto, in
runners of their times were compelled to submit

gain the adherence of the
senting
illiberal
order to
majority of delegates repre-
more benighted,
petty, states.
Max
New
York.
J.
Kohler.
THE LAST GEONIM OF SURA

By Jacob Mann,
Baltimore.
THE
miss
its
importance of Sherira's Letter for the chronology

all
of the Gaonic period becomes sure guidance.

to
1
the
more evident when we

Sura school was
this ancient seat
When
in
Sherira wrote his well-known

c. E.,
epistle
Kairowan
987
the
defunct.
But not very long afterwards

its
of learning reverted to
former function.
Samuel
b.
Hofni
an
became
its
Gaon, and
still
in the lifetime of Sherira
agreement was entered upon between the two Babylonian

academies and their heads about the division of the donations
from benefactors. 2 Samuel
b.
Hofni was a renowned scholar

to his care.
and shed new
lustre
on the school entrusted
Beyond
this
the further vicissitudes of Sura have
been
entirely obscure.
as
its
Hitherto Samuel
b.
Hofni was regarded

I.e.,
last
Gaon.
Ibn
Daud (Neubauer,
of the
6j
1.
ff.)
even gave us the year
Gaon's death,
viz.
four
years before the demise of his great son-in-law Hai
Gaon
(1038
c. E.),
hence
in
1034
c. E.
And
this date has passed
without challenge into every book of Jewish history.

1
He
This
writes (Neubauer, Mediaeval Jewish Chronicles,

T\\7\
I,
40,
11.
n-12)
N'DriD KTID3 NJ-QTIID

2
lib
*3H TTOI.
is
evident from Samuel's letter, printed by Margoliouth, JQR.,

S.,
1.
XIV, 308 (cp. p. 621 and also my remarks in JQR., N. (read 3TID) 2110 p31 13^3 "ftW tibv HOT 3 P|W
VIII, 362
t.
2,
Hebrew
text
ua
*i2\
[jjnnnn
*a
(i. e.
Hai)
ua
pac
n^ d^bo
ina*DK nio |wo
vmv
np*i.
rvimn bz
<a
dhdi
[i]jdbq
44.
nwn
irâ
iana*i
una
F
f
See also Poznanski, Haggoren, VI,
VOL. XI.
49
410
On
Hai,
the very surface
it
would seem rather strange that

3
who
himself reached a very advanced age

of the school already in 985
C. E.),
(having
become
Ab
should have
outlived his father-in-law
by only
itself
four years.
But of course
such reasoning would by

ever,
carry no conviction.
How-
by means
of
new Genizah data we
are able to establish
the facts that Samuel b. Hofni was succeeded in the Gaonate
by Dosa, Sa'adya's son

end of 1 01 7
c. E.;
that the latter died towards the
that the next

b.
Gaon
Hofni
;
of Sura was Israel

that his successor
Israel
Hakkohen, the son of Samuel

in turn
was 'Azaryah Hakkohen, probably a son of
and
finally that the last president (as far as yet
known) of
the Sura
academy was a certain Isaac Gaon. To begin with, a Damascus MS. of Sherira's Letter
/.
(Neubauer,
c,
I,
189, bottom) has an addition at the end

first
of the epistle which gives
the dates of demise of both
Sherira and Hai and then continues as follows, 13HN 1PS31
bwop una
nb^
b.
"iddji
^S& t\m
:ik
ennn ân
|nan.
nut? i^D3
enn
in
w:n
W
is
una p
\ron iwos?
pfc
Accordingly Samuel
Hofni died
Ab
1013
C.E.,
while his son (Israel) died on
the eve of 5th of Kislev (1)345 Sel.

29th, 1033 C E -)*
'
(= Monday, October
There
no doubt that between U3 and

hence read
is
'ttl
13TTK
the
word b& has
fallen out,
una bv m. 4
by
internal
The
3
correctness of these dates

Ibn
established
Daud
(I.e.,
66,
1.
4 from bottom) gives his age at bis death as
69 years.
4
But the var.
led.
1,
12'% 99,
is
more
correct.
Ginzberg (Geonica,
13, note, end)

/.
was on
the right track in tentatively
suggesting that in Neubauer,
c,
I,
'
189 (not 198 as printed there), Israel
should be read instead of the second

to
Samuel \
is
But there
missing.
is
really
no need
change anything, but

in
to
supply
7^ which
(Poznanski,
RJ.
LXIII, 318,
rejects
adhering to the date 1034 as that of Samuel's death-year
Ginzberg's suggestion).
Who
?
knows whether Ibn Daud was not
confronted with the same text and thus transferred the date of demise of the
son (Israel) to the father ^Samuel)

evidence which
furnish.
MANN
411
the
Genizah
fragments
discussed here
Dosa, Sa'adya's son,
is
designated a few times as Gaon.

president of an
to
But
as his time of activity as
academy
prevalent
as
could
not
hitherto
be accommodated
title
the
chronology of the period, his
was explained away

All doubts are
paper,
having been merely complimentary. 5

dissipated
writing,
now
by T.-S. 10
27 10 (brownish
square
damaged and
Shemarya
faded), being a letter from

in
Hai Gaon
to a
Rosh Hasseder
b.
Fustat, no doubt identical with
Klhanan
344).
in the
(see
about him, JQR., N.

is
S.,
VIII,
The
jiNJ
address in Arabic (verso)
hardly legible.
in
But
middle there are clearly visible

"NH, in the
is
Hebrew
script the
words
same hand
as recto.
Moreover the
whole epistle
from
this
in
the same handwriting as another letter

give farther on
letter
is
Gaon which we
(p.
440).
Thus
Hai's authorship of this
subject to
hardly any
(recto)
doubt.
rhbx taoK -non
wn
*td ^ Kin njot

(2)
*a
*ana idj np (i)
fen
[IN |i
(3)
jm
-\2i rra nna-ijn
mxra 3NU
7
rucpa
brwi
W2
noKPN
"tfn *a
âttna
no
rn 6: [*]dm&m
nnaim
nnajon
n:y dn.?n
[*6
[n]i?ip
.... Kin [*]a i>N ay Di> *ana

s
;o
|n
top p
i>N (5)
[^]nno3
h^n^n
mono
dn-i]
....
(4)
iN ana
nnsnyi a^ 5r
pra
ndh an 10
nBi nnanjn
nana
5
in
ny
npâin iotk jdhn n:uyn
mnn
*b
mfctnvta
p nb
See especially Poznariski, Haggoren, VI, 47, and Babylomschc Geonim,
106.
A worn
6
few
illegible
letters,
probably forming the usual heading
NO'J'Z
toom
ffuj,
F f
1
412
"iBa (7)
p
8
>btf
iO HN3N
|N flJ&IC iTPK TJ'3

ni>
PJDV
i6
J-LflJl
oki-di a5a
ra&niK
^0
irn
pipn
aten ntai ip
ba*>K (8)
.
n^x nxnx
nrrm? *m
?
n^N DtnN
PK1
(9)
.
jonta
p "j^n
[i]m
9
îd^n
Kim
*TD ^NDN WN1

. .
Knil^
. .
INTOS TO3 "n[3

*s
Ht]y
ânKSî
(n)
aa Nynnos
nya man*
|m
nion
an ysy tSir bseo
rtt ne> jn i?i jd
&arp son
Hai
refers to a previous letter

in reply to
from him to the Rosh
Hasseder
here
its
the latter's epistle.
He
recapitulates
various contents.
A certain
Ibn Rushl of Fez did
not write to the
Gaon on
a certain matter.
The Exilarch
who
mentioned,
is
very likely identical with Hezekiah
then occupied this dignity in Bagdad.

of a certain
interest,
naiajJ
Further, the case
is
referred to.
But the chief item of
contained
is
in
Hai's former letter and alluded to in
the present one,
the report of the demise of Dosa, 'the
Gaon of Sura\
The
present epistle was dispatched on
behalf of a certain Ibn-al-Fadhl Joseph b. Bishr in Fustat
whose brother, the elder Ibn-al-Hasan
'Ali b. Bishr,
gave
latter
(1.
him power of attorney
to collect a certain debt.

influential
seems to have been a very
man
in
The Bagdad
8),
where the Gaon presided over the school that went by the
name
of
Pumbedita
(see
JQR., N.S., VII, 467

p.
ff.;
VIII,
348-9, and especially infra,
434 fT.). It was to please him that Hai requested the Rosh Hasseder in Fustat (viz.
Elhanan
8
b.
Shemarya)
is
to lend his aid in settling the matter.

For the
rDNTlN ?N
evidently derived from the Aramaic fcWDTltf
latter see
9
Talmudic Dictionaries.
This gives no satisfactory meaning here. Read perhaps K13VJ', thanks.
THE LAST GEONIM OF

Ilai
SL'RA
MANX
413
himself drew
up the document of attorney which

his brother
(I.
Ibn-al-Hasan sent to
7;.
Our
Sel.
was written on the 14th of Shevat (1)329 1018 C.E.). Shortly before (' in this ( = February 2nd,
epistle
1.
time',
1)
the
Gaon reported
Hai
in a previous letter the
death
of Dosa.
He must
have therefore departed

styles
in
this life
towards
the end of 1017 C.E.
him 'Gaon of
Sura', a title
Dosa
is
mentioned by also
another fragment soon to be
discussed.
There can be no doubt that he actually presided
over the Sura school.
But what about Samuel

were then two
in
b.
Hofni
To assume
tive proofs.
that there
rival
Geonim
of
Sura would be quite unwarranted
the absence of posiall, if
But the
difficulty
does not arise at

viz.
we
was
accept the above date of Samuel's demise,
Ab 1013 c.E.
Thus
his successor in the
Gaonate
for over four years
Sa'adya's son, Dosa.
The
latter
must have been very young
in
942 C.E. when
his great father died.
When
the defunct school of Sura was
re-opened after 987 Dosa, though a son of a former Gaon,
had to make way

Pumbedita
this
for
Samuel
b.
!
Hofni who was

It is
Ab
of
(see farther on, p. 420)

friction. 10
hardly likely that
took place without
But Samuel's superior

recognition.
scholarship
demanded and obtained

Dosa
in years, at last
He seems
However,
life
to have also been older than
(see note 10).
Dosa, blessed
the demise of
10
reached the goal of his
on
Samuel
in
1013 C.E. 11
the
letter
As
will
be seen from
above
(note
.
See
the
beginning
of
a
referred
to
|di
2),
nrpii
nwn
hna
wm
noa
[di id* fai
utp
nnn trcma
Samuel seems
scholarship.
11
to
defend here his position as Gaon by reason of his age and
Dosa's responsa (enumerated by Poznafiski, Haggortn VI, 47

i
ft",
no)
414

(p.
the Fihrist printed farther on

sons, Sheerit Alluf
first
423
ff.),
Sa'adya had two

is
and Dosa.
The former
mentioned
and seems to have been the elder son. Moreover, when

Sheerit was already
that Fihrist was composed, 'less than eleven years since the
death' of Saadya,
viz. in
953
C.E.,
Alluf, while his brother Dosa, in the absence of

title
any such
next to his name, seems to have not yet been advanced

It is altogether
in his studies.
obscure when this Sheerit

b.
was gathered
to
his
fathers,
whether before Samuel
Hofni became Gaon or afterwards.
But
it
may
be safely
reasoned that had Sheerit lived in 1013, he would have
had a claim to the Gaonate prior to his brother Dosa.
When
Israel
the latter died towards the
end of 1017
b.
c. E.,
Hakkohen, the son of Samuel
Hofni and Hai's
brother-in-law,
became president of the
school.
We
have
found him in Elul, 1004 C.E., collaborating in

correspondence.
his father's
Indeed, he acted for some time (probably

'
already, before 987 c. E.) as 'secretary of the school
(see
jfQR., N. S. VIII, 364, and infra,

no doubt date from the years 1013-17 Sura school.
12
c. e.,
p. 439).
12
Only a few
when he
stood at the head of the
Cp. also/07?., N.
S., VIII, 7, top.
could not find the Memorial-List,

'JEn.
referred to there, in
MS. Adier
2594.
For W}T\ read there

in reality
He
is
designated
p.
is
'
head' of the school.
But
he was only
Ab
'
(see infra,
420). Likewise in the fragment given farther on

called
'
the son of a
Gaon
',
more correctly
3,
'
(p. 415) Samuel (b. Hofni) the grandson of a Gaon
(i.e.
Kohen-Sedek).
T.-S. 8
consisting of 11 paper leaves,

:
contains
(1)
on
fol. 1,
recto, the following colophon
rODJ/N 2K]"d5>K YC\T& n^ZlNp
nana
(4)
row
&rin
xv nsj aaa
S>nip
(5)
(3)
n^y
mmo
^nd
jfioi
(2)
rrpKru&M
ân 3k:6k jkh

mri-lE^N DfrO
(6)
^tctW ;nh
is
nbâa^Ni
\mh&
pnv |ha p.
The colophon
the other
signed by Netaneel Hallevi.
Now
see
Hofni
is
rightly called here

S.,
It
Dayan al-Bab (NZDI N^"l - Ab Bet Din,

hand
his son
JQR., N.
title.
X, 339).
On
Samuel
is
also given
the same
may
be that he composed this
work on
the laws of
pawns

Halakic decisions of this Gaon have so
T.-S.
MANN
far
415
been preserved.
11 1 (2 vellum leaves, square writing, right-hand top
corners missing, faded, size 8 \ x 6 J inches) forms the beginning

of a
work on the 'duty of prayer' which
Israel
composed
at
the request of
c
Abraham
b.
Natan, better known as Ibrahim
b.
Ata, Nagid of Kairowan.
edit farther
on (pp. 430 ff.; see also greatly eulogized this prominent leader of Kairowan Jewry,
;
poem in his honour we yg^.,N.S.,IX 163). Hai

of Sura, likewise found
and
his brother-in-law Israel,
Gaon
him worthy of honour.

fragment.
We
13
give here a few lines from this
mty^K
3U1 B 2NTD] (2)

[pra [ran] (3)
'Em
i[bq]
(fol. I,
recto,
1.
1)
pw p
[*wa
bvnew
wrw p
[[ia]
}^n
5>ktb*
ppam
a]ni[3K] (4)
a-no nDtfiw wni pita n^y Wa[5>N y]vbb

pia
noDNa
its
(5)
.
nmai> pro -di m5>npn iwn

.
.
an id
-j^nn
nhin
n^N to
(6)
N aino niD-i bnncas

s
-dk nsfc6
!>Kpi
14
'iai
&odk
n^N
-psan tnnao
This work was divided into thirty chapters, as we read

and pledges
1.
(also
mentioned
in the Fihrist of his
works, JQR., XIV, 311.
fNDita 3X113) while he was still Ab of the school. But of which? Hofni was Ab of the Pumbedita (Bagdad) academy. As presumably
3 of text,
the defunct Sura school started on
its
new
career only
when our Samuel
became
its
Gaon, one would
be inclined to maintain that prior to this he too

!
acted as
If this be correct, we might obtain Ab at the Pumbedita school left it to take up his new position as president of Sura. the date when he We know that two years before Sherira wrote his Letter Hai became Ab ot Pumbedita, hence in 985 (see infra, p. 439). Accordingly we may reason
that the vacancy, filled
up by Hai, was due
to
Samuel's departure
lor Sura.
However,
on this
in the
absence of further data, too much reliance cannot be placed

in
title
1,
of
Dayan al-Bab
our colophon because the heading of the

.
.
work
(fol.
verso) reads
|MD&K 3X
3NJ13
(2)
KJBm TOW3
in
j)
the
y5 (J1W
=) KJ
bMDP UWIM *T^ n
H^RBa^KI.
There follow
MS. the
the work.
introduction as well as an index of the thirty-one chapters of
416

fol.
on
i b,
bottom, xhra
pani>
tfhvs Knn Kjjxnj x ^sa npi

i?3
kjdd&i hpta fo nS>onn* no nao bva
woni
&6sa pnbn rocAjni
ntMKW
fols. i
nrw
and
2.
no
rr^K.
There seems
to be a
gap between
Sa'adya also composed a work on 'the duty of prayer',

as already mentioned in the book-list published
by Bacher
3151
{RE J., XXXIX,

(see
1.
200, no. 30), rmyo xsrb 2o5, no.7,
m^N
n*a
i?ai
Bacher,
ibid.,
and also the
Fihrist, infra, p. 425,
24).
In another book-list {JQR., XIII, 55, no. 91) there

1131
is
mentioned a na&foc
IKHD, 15 which
may have
been
either Sa'adya's
Israel
work or
Israel's.
Hakkohen died
at the
end of October 1033
C. E.
(above, p. 410), and his successor was 'Azaryah Hakkohen.
To
in
prove this we must go somewhat
farther'afield.
We
read
the Mcgillat Ebyatar {JQR.,

!??
XIV,
460,
1.
6) of
Joshiah
the son of
his cousin
r&u \m rans* can pan innry irnn

b.
who helped
David
Daniel to proclaim himself Nasi at
Fustat (about 1080
c. E.).
Now
this
'Azaryah Hakkohen
in
was hitherto taken
to
have been the head of the school
10 Fustat, having also bequeathed his office to his son Joshiah.
That the
latter ever held the dignity of
Gaon
is
mentioned
nowhere. 17
15
As
same
has been shown elsewhere, 17 a the Gaonate in

ibid., p.
i>"T
Cp. also Poznanski,
300.
Perhaps
Israel's
work
is
also
meant
in
no. 14 of the
book-list,
[supply ptO ^K]!Otr '31 ]2tib
HM^K TP.
Poznanski,
In this case, no. 91 would certainly be Sa'adya's work.

16
See Bacher, JQR., XV,
86,
note
6,
and
after
him
Babylonische Geonim, 99.

17
Schechter (JQR., XIV, 459, note 12) refers to T.-S. 20. 104
in
which
JlfcO
!VjW
211
For
no
(?)
is
mentioned, and which
is
dated (?)KBl?l *|?K

,
IW
at
Fustat.
KBtPI
no doubt
is
read fcOC'l
1010
c. e.
Here the
Palestinian
Gaon Joshiah
meant who flourished
at this
time (see JQR..
N.
S.,
IX, 411, and especiall}* Mann, The Jews in Egypt and in Palestine under
I,
the Fit timid Caliphs, 1920, vol.

17a In
71
ft\
f.
the last-mentioned work, pp. 190
MANX
417
Egypt only began with David b. Daniel, in opposition to the But his attempt failed when he was Palestinian Academy.
deposed
in
1094
C. E.
The
first
actual
(i
i
Gaon
27-38
in
the country
of the Nile was Masliah

Palestinian
Hakkohen
c. E.),
when the
academy was no longer
in existence.
But
to return to our
'Azaryah Hakkohen. T.-S.

is
12. too,
contains a
document the end of which
given here.
The
date cannot be ascertained.

[?nn
=1
dv
i]
nine*
Ta
l8
ria
Da -nnn \m
[ii
io]
P-:2i
i?nj
1123
[nan
irw# am no
paai
"i[ry]^s
Ta no*
132-n
nofen
jnorTlrnTy
win
inp
Jwdp p[n]WD3
Ta
[nan
piTT no^nna penrn rrorra tj^p
nawi
bw
jru
r6e> *a-ia
iwk[] nryfo in no* nfen na
ppv njne^
imry
pn\D*Da
p:\x*
*ani
p^\s
hpip T
rncnm woip
c\n-i
"narronoi
pw
....
[iT-ii]y
to apy pw
nans*
Knwn bw:i
nma
nasifi n*&ttn
in i:
pmrora nann
mw
b.
Accordingly
this
document was signed by
five witnesses
and was afterwards verified by the well-known Daniel
'Azaryah, Nasi and Gaon at Jerusalem, and also by the
Haber Yehuda
Reader Joseph
b. b.
Huspit.
Of the
witnesses mentioned, the

is
Yefet (the teacher)
known from
13-14).
a letter
b.
is
which the community of Jerusalem sent to Ephraim
Shemarya
of Fiistat
(JOR., XIX, 108,
11.
Joseph
referred to therein as the representative of the congregation
having gone to Egypt to collect donations on their behalf.
Semah
b.
El'azar signs a
l>
bill
r\^y\:
of divorce together with the

pviruoa.
418

Daniel
b.
Nasi-Gaon
'Azaryah, dated Tishri 1369 Sel.
(= 1057 c. E.) at Jerusalem. 19 Of chief interest for our purpose here is the signatory Joseph Hakkohen b. 'Azaryah Hakkohen, Gaon of Sura.
He
up
is
no doubt
identical with the person
mentioned
likely
in
the
Megillat Ebyatar.
in
The document was very

or
drawn
Palestine (either Jerusalem
Ramlah).
Joshiah
probably emigrated
from Babylon to the

20
Holy Land
together with his uncle Daniel b. 'Azaryah.
As
has been
in the
shown elsewhere, 20 * Daniel was already
in
Jerusalem
summer of 1051 C.E., when the well-known Gaon Solomon b. Yehuda died, and could thus succeed to the dignity without delay. Joshiah probably stayed there for some
time.
But subsequently, very

Daniel
in
likely after the
demise of
his uncle
1062
C.E.,
he settled
in Fustat,
where as
son of a former
Gaon
of Sura
and nephew of the Nasi-Gaon
of Palestine he must have been
much
respected.
Later on
he introduced his cousin Daniel to the notabilities of FustatCairo and assisted him to obtain recognition as Nasi.
From
the time of activity of Joshiah Hakkohen, both in

it
Palestine and in Egypt,
can be inferred that his father

in
'Azaryah Hakkohen flourished

of the eleventh century.
Sura
in the
second quarter
fit
This would very well
in
with
so
the chronology of the Sura

far reached.
Geonim
at the point
in
we have
Israel
Hakkohen died
to succeed
October 1033
C. E.,
and the next Gaon
him was none other than

fact of
our 'Azaryah Hakkohen.
The
both having been
of priestly descent at once suggests that

19
20
'Azaryah w as
r
See the document

Joshiah
(i.
in Blau, Jiidischc
Ehcscheidung,
(I.
II,
102-3.
;
is
stated in the Megillat Ebyatar

b.
c.)
to
have been
b.
the son
of his
e.
David
Daniel's) aunt
'.
Accordingly Daniel
'Azaryah and
'Azaryah Hakkohen must have been brothers-in-law.

20 a
Mann,/, c, pp.
78
ff.

Israel's son.
MANN
419
As will
(1038).
be shown forthwith, 'Azaryah occupied

life
the Gaonate for a few years only, and departed this

before
Hai
So
far
nothing whatever
is
known
of
'Azaryah's literary activity.
There
this
is
one more Genizah fragment to be discussed
in
connexion.
it
As
peculiar chance willed
it,
only one
half of
has been preserved, the other having been torn
off across its
whole length.
full
Had
it
been complete, we
list
should have had a
chronological
of the last Sura

after
in its
Geonim, which to re-establish we have succeeded only

a laborious combination of scattered data.
Yet even
present state, the fragment yields several points of interest.

T.-S. 6
litur
ical
(paper, square writing)
contains on
list
verso
poems.
On
.
recto
we have
the following
Swib*
piu
wud
Din
nai
[]b']i
p {?*! mtn jwbj nm rw %s*n pw icn no avvi

21
[]h
.
ns* 3an
i^n^n n^z:
n* n
nroi
[pn]^ no
s
p
fin
waa
nro
]n^nn
rin
pw &nnp
31 noi
fionoi
'-
,J
[n]Nn
nnco nn bsiD
|xnn]tr
.
^yon i>N^n no
cpx ic\
[j]ny inu
n"Dn paa son

"i
to
*avi
10
cm
:::
5>nibi?
p pw tamp
to
w[-)d]
nnry [i]n n^"2: nn:i
:i
.,
Din 'died
V, Pass, of W.
is in
-2
This reading
accordance with the date
in the
passage cited above,
p. 410.
23
The
last
two
letters are
very faded.
Hence
the reading
is
uncertain.
420

,
ova pN3 "sn

2,
snon wsj
|in:
nroi
61
IB
f|VJ'n]-iD
J
n[Ta] rpDno
pny
[n]:c
.
D^yta npte
rw
pnn^N
^ î
"i^n
paw
pawl
urno
jd ny DNn^N
jd
Til
n:D^ *m
Til
m?n
nyDKn^N roota
r^ta
20
This
list
was found
in the
handwriting of a certain Israel
who probably was its author. The latter clearly was a member of the Pumbedita (Bagdad) school. Hence he designates the dignitaries of this academy as pH 'ours'.
We
list
have obviously before us a chronologically arranged

of the
dates of demise of the scholars enumerated

first
therein.
The
scholar mentioned
is
Tob
(i.e.
(1.
2),
most
likely identical with
Bagdad), the son of
Tob r6u^ the Gaon Semah
m^
3K
Pumbedita-
b. Paltoi
and grandNisan
1.
father of the writer of the interesting epistle, dated
(1)264 Sel.
(=953
our
the
C.E., printed in
list
JQR., XVIII,
nun,
i.e.
402,
1).
Probably
in
read
pH
3S
Tob,
Ab
of
'our' (school),
viz.
son of the Gaon
of 'our' (school),
Semah
next
b.
(1.
Paltoi
3),
is
(872-90
c. E.).
Hai Gaon, men-
tioned
no
doubt identical with

first
Hai
b.
David, the next
Gaon
c.E.,
of Pumbedita (the
sec infra, p. 435).
to reside in
Bagdad, 890-8
Hofni (Samuel's
b.
Then we have
1.
father),
Ab
of our* (school, 25
'
4).
(1.
Semah
6)
Isaac
24
(1.
5) is
unknown
I"!
to me.
Sherira
is
Gaon
died
unlike
One
could also read
[DV3].
But there
no dot on the
justified.
PI,
1. 6.
25
Therefore the reading n[T3] appeared to
me more
Already Ginzberg (Geonica,
I.
7.
note) surmised, though hesitatingly,
that llofni
was Ab
of Pumbedita.

on the 8th of Tishri.
MANN
above
(p.
42
The passage
C. E.
is
referred to
41c;
indeed gives the date of his demise as Tishri (1)317 Scl.
But the year 1005
uncertain.
life
It
is
more
likely
that Sherira departed this

close of the tenth century.
a few years earlier at the

b.
Samuel
if
Hofni
(1.
7)
list
died
on Monday,
Ab
25th, 1013 C.E.>
we combine our
with
MS. Damascus cited above (p. 410). According to

in
the Tables
Mahler's Handbuch der jiidischeu Chronologic,

fell
Ab
1st,
1013,
on a Saturday, hence the 25th was on a Tuesday

of
and not on a Monday. This discrepancy

a miscalculation in the above Tables.
died on Friday.
one day reveals

b. Besalel
(1.
Asaf
8)
He
is
no doubt identical with the Rosh

in
Hasseder of the Pumbedita-Bagdad school mentioned

a letter dated 1021 (see infra,
p. 436).
Next comes Dosa,

b.
Gaon of Sura
(b.
(1.
9).
Israel
(Hakkohen) Gaon
(1.
Samuel
list
Hofni)
'
is
mentioned next
10).
Whereas our
says
he died
in the
day
'
MS. Damascus (above p.

is
410) states
explicitly that his
demise took place on the eve of the 5th

discrepancy
really small.
of Kislev.
(1.
But
this
'Azaryah
11)
is
no doubt
identical with
'
'Azaryah Hakkohen, Gaon
of Sura.
The
'
death-roll
is
interrupted
by the mention
of
'
of the birth of a certain Hillel, a

1.
member
c, 66,
our
'
(school.
12).
Next we hear
of the demise of the famous

(/.
1.
Hai
Gaon.
this
According to Ibn Daud
4 from bottom)
(31U
happened on the seventh day of Passover
DV 3TJQ
nDS bv fnns).
Finally comes the date of death of Isaac.
Gaon of Sura (1. 14). He seems to have been the last Gaon of this academy. How long he survived Hai is
unknown.
Thus the
close of the Babylonian

it
Gaonate and
the causes that necessitated
are shrouded in obscurity.

is
The Pumbedita-Bagdad
have existed
for
school
stated
by Ibn Daud
in
to
two years
after Hai's
death
1038 under
422

But against
this
the presidency of the Exilarch Hezekiah.
a contemporary note
tells us that, after
Hai, no 'head of the

i.e.
school was appointed in Babylon' (?232,

infra, p. 434).
26
Bagdad!
see
But no reason
is
given for closing this

that Isaac presided
fathers,
ancient
seat of learning.
till
Assuming
over the Sura school
he was gathered to his
we
obtain the surprising result that Sura existed, though only

for
a few years, longer than Pumbedita-Bagdad
Why
again the
Sura academy became defunct

time
finally, is
on
his death,
and
can
this
again altogether unknown.
We
only hope for further

light
Genizah discoveries to shed
new and unexpected

this
26
on the deep darkness that covers
chapter of Jewish history.

See especially on these
1
ff.
conflicting reports.
Poznariski, Babylonische
Geonim,
II
A FIHRIST OF SA'ADYA'S WORKS

IBN
DAUD
mentions
Sa'adya's
in his
historical
work
(I.e.,
66) as
a source for
biography an epistle which the
Gaon's son, Dosa, sent to the celebrated Jewish statesman

in Spain,
Hasdai ibn Shaprut.

1
Dosa was
hitherto the only
known son of Sa'adya.

of his works.
the
T.-S. 6 J 9 1 (paper, square writing,

torn) contains an interesting
list
damaged, left-hand side
The colophon
of the fragment shows that
MS.
list
dates from Tishri 1425 Sel.

itself
(=
1113
C. E.).
But
the
the
was copied from
one which
tzuo
of
Gaon's sons, Sheerit Alluf and his brother Dosa, composed
on request when eleven years had not yet passed since the
demise
in
942 of their great father.
We
are
given the
the end
exact time and date when the Gaon died,

of the second third of
viz. at
Sunday
15th,
night, Iyyar 26th, 1253 Sel.,
corresponding
Letter
(I.e.
to
11.
May
942
c. E.
From
Sherira's
40,
1-2)
we know that Sa'adya became Gaon

Our fragment
tells
of
Sura
in
Iyyar 928 C.E.
us that his conless four
nexion with this academy lasted for fourteen years

days.
Accordingly
his accession to the
Gaonate took place

Finally,
fifty
on Thursday, Iyyar 22nd
= May
15th, 928 C.E.

life
according to Ibn Daud, the Gaon's

years,
1
lasted for
about
and
this has hitherto
been the general opinion.

in
But
ft'.
See especially Poznanski's biography of Dosa
Haggorot, VI, 41
423
424

life
our Fihrist states that his
fell
short of sixty years

2
1.
by
some
forty
and odd days

is
(see verso,
5).
Needless to say
the latter
number
the more correct one.
So much
furnishes.
It
for the biographical
data which our fragment
reads as follows
(recto,
colophon)
niD |o*d (3)
nno
by
m&"
rs*
njErn
(2)
nbb nenSwi 2nJ?K on (i)

(4)
Wi
4
'*
nan* (5) pnn
rra d s p^
mbx
ma
1^
(6)
nnai
bi ndki o^y
":3 (7)
nwi
KTVTitca
n*rm
no
b
(8)
rorux(io) nr#n 2 rbo(9) idn

fD^D
p fen
A FIIIRIST OF SA'ADYA'S
epoa *3P
WORKS MANN
*i
4.25
n[^ niTDn rone \srr\ra dhw nwa ruia[*]nn rr.uwtcn [mn]a vwdkI> nvn am ^[n] nJB^P TO
Wa
-d[s:]i
.... anpa wrpy

[wna]wni V3n3i
[i]n ni
6a
. . .
inty dipdh
rw
n ,%:
10
N [otVJ'b -mn xin nn

p
^y ubi
a i>EN3 nmni's
[nJxnDi
mo
muci Klp[i] D'DatrDn nkal

"6k
3 nanan
nan
c
JW*na
DW3ata
pi
po ffeml'M
|oi
-wn?K
9 9
rbtttnabvn
.
iiryc"
d
b *3Kyoa naai
15
my nxemi
^"11
1
nmn^
tot)
nn p
BHSB
^ndid
[f!3]W
. . . .
'
h ^B>1 s 3V60
f "1*33
TW
i"6l
ni?
-
7
îD^n
a3 rtaioi k
nn[DN] rtaoi
foi
m nN9MDi6M
i>a
8
awiai
3n3i
nKii>D^N -nD nstarfw ansta
20
pkt6k
q
3n3i n nmMnB6M a*tnai
pmvD
yâ axnai
rrw
8
mai>n TDsn[i]
^n&3k y[na]ta axnai
ai-noM) nanbtf yoa 3NH31
*nW>[K
aw]i>K 3nai
**tcwk nnspsi
t.T
i>K
The
page
is
Fihrist
seems to be incomplete (probably another
missing), since
no mention
his
is
made
;
of the Gaon's
Sepher Haggalui, Agron, or
responsa
1.
the latter are
expressly referred to in the heading on

Read perhaps WlttSKl POTTO* 8 Read *ReadnwW?N.
6a
10.
yiO^N.
VOL. XI.
G cr b
426
NOTES
a
It
is
stated here explicitly that Sa'adya indeed trans-
lated the whole of the Pentateuch into Arabic, but supplied
a commentary only to the

well as to the
first
half of Genesis
(c.
1-28 9 ) as
whole of Exodus and Leviticus. The division

time of 'Anan, as has been shown elsewhere. 9
it
of the five books of Moses into two halves each was already
in
vogue
in the
After the Gaon's death,

his bitter
seems that Aaron

conflict with
b.
b.
Sarjado,
opponent during the
David
Zakkai,
set himself the task of continuing the

left
off.
work where Sa'adya

i6 18 -end).
However, apparently only the second half of

(c.
Deuteronomy was commented upon by him

It fell
to the lot of
Samuel
b.
Hofni successfully to complete
the undertaking to furnish the remainder of the Pentateuch with an Arabic commentary,
(c.
10
viz.
the second half of Genesis

first
28 -end), the whole of Numbers, and the

(c.
half of
Deuteronomy
before Joseph
1-16 17 ). This complete work, the product
of three scholars connected with the Sura academy, was
Rosh Hasseder
b.
Jacob Rosh be-Rabbanan of
Fustat when he wrote
in 11 11 C.E. his
commentary
(really
It
10 a collection of views of other authors) on the Haftarot.

9
See Mann, Journal ofJewish Lore and Philosophy,
I,
1919, p. 348. note 6.
10
More about
17
,
this scholar, infra, p. 442, note 7,
and
my
work,
vol.
I,
243.
Bodl. 2624
(fol.
which contains a copy of Joseph's work, has a colophon

wherein the writer states that the author Joseph, "9V
\ty\
83, recto)
5]p1
-imm ^n rmo# r6w urn!? d*dbb> bx nmoa

s
mpi
[p]i
*bv
rrwo
^N
fol.
|o
nnW>K
rnirfcK tdsji
niDP rbw "6k kî
poi
nnyo umb
HNTID
for
|3
]in$
wb
H-lin^N*
13K
D^DSt? jpl JBn ]2 !>KTCH5\
The work
the
of the last scholar seems to have been split up into pamphlets
Sidrot.
Thus Or.
5554, B.,
3,
recto,
begins
6m
D5P3 (1)
new
iwn
nriK
nife
&ot
(3)
br\$2 (5)
pta
cjdv ^2 ]-\7ix ih duvFEHn no:n (2) iwno ubw "inn rrnnm oym 5p 4^ 3W Pt^M wa ai nmya wfenwi rw (6) nna b*n hjw 5p
i?i
A FIHRIST OF SA ADYA S
should
only be added that
in
WORKS
MANN
427
the book-list (printed
by
Poznaiiski, Zfllll, VII, 184-5, no. 5) tfBDPDfl

is
r6w TODT1
not
for this
Sidrah only, as Poznaiiski thinks, but for the

(c.
second half of Exodus

no. 6, ibid,,
is
21-end).
The same
applies to
(c.
where the second half of Leviticus
16-end)
meant.
b
This work, called
'
choice of practices
in
',
probably dealt
with the laws of the Pentateuch

in the five
the order given to
them
books of Moses.
In
Sa'adya furnished them with
commentary.
t
the
book-list (published
is
by Bacher,
REJ. XXXIX,
this
200, no. 22) there
mentioned a part of
work,
i]:a-i
viz.
on Genesis
(n[~NTD JO
IWjna
IfiD
*n;
1131,
[myD
c
^nti -ixmsta,
cp. Bacher, ibid,, 206, no. 9,

20).
and
Poznaiiski,
ZfHB., I.e., 186, no. About the commentary on

p.
Isaiah, see Steinschneider,
Arab. Literatur,
d
'
56
f.
Explanations of words of
questions
'
based on
is
Minor Prophets and the Pentateuch.

unknown.
It
is
This work
so far
doubtful
whether pnyttp 1WI nn TDBn

it.
{ZfHB,,
e
I.e.,
184, no. 3)
formed a part of
Sa'adya seems to have composed a number of sermons
(nscm
f
mem)
which
are,
however, not enumerated.

extensive intro-
The commentary on Psalms had an

See Steinschneider,
/.
duction.
B" k
c, 57.
I.e.,
About
these commentaries see Steinschneider,

also
57
ff.
Those on Job and Esther are
mentioned
14.
in
the
book-list in
ZfHB.,
i.e., p.
185, nos. 11
and
As
regards
CQVJ
and
There follow explanations of Deut.

last line of manuscript.)
29. 12 (vv. 10 11 are left out
on the
on VH
DN finn ni&D Wu?
(v.
18;
the intervening verses are not
commented upon).
Aaron's commentary on
nD""Qn riND
b.
is
quoted
in a
fragment of a work on the calendar by Joseph
Yehuda Rosh Hasseder
of
Mahdiya JQR., XVI, 692, see XVII, 169
f.).
Gg
428
the Daniel commentary, see especially Poznafiski, Haggoren,

II,
92-103.
1
Evidently a translation of the

'
'
scroll of the
sons of
Hashmonai
It is
I.e.,
(the Maccabees), prefaced
by an
"J3
introduction.
probably identical with KiTWDl WflDPn

no. 15), as well as with the item in
ji^:d
rrs'i,
rtol {ZfHB.,
I.e.,
RE J.,
no. 33,
mosD *town m
theological work.
n
m The well-known Siddur and the famous
religious-
An
Halakic
work
on
evidence
in
(riny),
probably
no. 38,
identical
ft
with the one

b s KDK>
n*ai
mentioned
RE J.,
int.
I.e.,
nnyo m->
ntnxnB^K ma
therein
It
seems that
the
Gaon incorporated
some
of his responsa on
this subject.
An
schneider,
p
Halakic work on
I.e..
pledges
(p*Tpa).
See Stein-
49, no. 5.
it
Owing
to the lacuna,
cannot be ascertained what
this
q
work was.
His well-known commentary on Yesirah
' '
;
the laws
in
of
Yesirah
Sepher
Yesirah
29).
',
(so
also
Sherira
responsum, ed. Harkavy, no.

r
'
collection
it is
of laws
probably an Halakic work.
But perhaps
identical with the treatise

I.e.,
on the defence
50, no. 13).
of the revealed laws (see Steinschneider,

s
The Gaon's
in
defence of the precept of kindling lights
on Friday night (against the Karaites).

mentioned
JTHXJD
t
This work
"2
is
also
JQR., XIII,
55, no. 78, naofo j*no
rbxpv)
,m
(see also Poznafiski, ibid. 329-30).
This seems to have been a polemical work.
About
this treatise
on the calendar
(lU^y), see Stein-
schneider,
I.e.,
63, no. 26.

p.
w See above,
416.
Ill
ABRAHAM
B.
NATHAN (ABU ISHAK IBRAHIM ATA), NAGID OF KAIROWAN

B.
in
It
in
is
only in recent years that the existence of Negidim

the
1
Kai rowan
first
half of the eleventh century has
been established.
Following the Egyptian example, the

officially
Jewry of North Africa had an

leader
in
recognized
communal
who went by Arab society in

al
the
title
of Nagid.
At
the Court and
general this dignitary was

first
known
as
Rais
YahGd.
his
Whereas the
Egyptian Nagid.
Paltiel,
as well as
son and successor, Samuel, had
political
authority over the Jewries in the whole of the Fatimid

realm, then comprising Egypt, Syria, North Africa,
and
even
Sicily, later events
brought about a division of the

first
office of
Nagid.
In the course of the
half of the eleventh

in
century the sway of the Fatimid Caliphs, residing

over North Africa gradually became weakened.
of the Sanhaja Berbers, seated at
Cairo,
rulers
The
Mahdiya (near Kairowan),

still
had more or
less a free
hand even while
nominally
(till
acknowledging the suzerainty of the Caliphs of Egypt

about 1044).
But then Mo'izz, the ruling governor, joined
the orthodox Sunnitcs and accepted in 1046 a
new
investiture
in
from the 'Abbasid Caliph of Bagdad.
Mo'izz succeeded
maintaining his independence against the central government

1
See Poznaiiski,
fNWp HWK,
429
pp. 4-5.
43
at Cairo,

which henceforth had no authority farther west
than Barka. 2
Under these circumstances the Jews

on the part of the Nagid residing
necessary to have a
of their
in
North
Africa could count on no adequate intervention with the

local authorities
in Cairo.
They found
it
recognized political
court of the
ruling
representative
own
at
the
governors at Kairowan or Mahdiya.
The
well as
first
f
Nagid
Ata,
of
is
Kairowan seems
greatly eulogized
to
have
been
as
Abraham
b.
who
by Hai Gaon
poet. 3
by an anonymous North-African
(p.
We
have
read above
415) of the treatise on Prayer which the
Sura Gaon
to him.
b.
Israel
Hakkohen
b.
Samuel
(b.
Hofni) dedicated
Abraham's successor
to the dignity
was Jacob
Elhanan
Also
'Amram whom we have found

Gaon
of Jerusalem,
in
in office while
b.
Hushiel was head of the Bet-Din of Kairowan.
the
Solomon
letters. 4
b.
Yehuda,
refers to the
Nagid Jacob
one of his
We
b.
edit
here another
\Ata (Bodl. 2877 42 ).

said
(it)
poem in honour of Abraham The superscription reads, 'And he

praise of the Sheikh
(the poet)
in
Abu
Ishak
Ibrahim
recto,
1.
b. 'Ata,
9,
may God
(jn:
prolong his duration \ 5
From
we
learn that the father of this celebrated person
was called Nathan

in
m lTna).
The
author, a stranger
for his generosity?
It
Kairowan, greatly commends our Nagid
high qualities, and eminent services to the community.
cannot be ascertained whence the author hailed, whether

2
See Mann, The Jeivs

I,
in
Egypt and in Palestine under the Fatimid Caliphs,
vol.
3 4 5
1920, pp. 252-3.

S.,
I,
See especially Davidson, JQR., N. See JQR., N.

S.,
231
ff.
IX, 162-3, and
my
/.
work, mentioned above,
p. 144.
In the Catalogue NtOV
is
wrongly printed as NDVp.

c. pp. 241
[1.
Cp. the poem printed by Davidson,
35) and 242
(1.
50)
ABRAHAM
B.
NATHAN, NAGID OF KAIROWAN
MANN
is
431
from the Orient or Spain.

in fluent
His composition
written
and attractive language, and deserves publication
as a leaf in the
this
crown of
laurels
wound around
the head of
prominent leader of the Kairowan Jewry.

(recto)
nNpa
n^N
iwos*
Noy
p wman
.
.plsn L J
'
^
':
nko
*
*n^N tv:
^m
::
v.iWi "jy3 -: t
,*n6a 7px ~t t
'
afoeaa
10
^ti ^3??d *Korn
.*33tfn nsai
9,
15
*nta
"*33Bta
*D"iyb
.viyma nnbw .*ny^ iw nb vijn0a
unbai ^B33 .vtWtf t t

:
dîb
-.
>nijrn nxiyi t
:
Tiijiy t
:
Tonm 3nm L
*3K t
rra
: :
12,,
nNi t:
.wiap'ob ^tya .wraeo ~ *:t: t

:
ntsai
.'nnatra *nwy\ ::
:
^^Dn noya t t
:
.nyi - t
ind ^di :
ls
nyx nya toyb -

:
:
.nyu nete v :
^ni
L :J
wyrb iym
.3Bh* t
,dw
:
Dai tflaru
.D*ycfa!> IVn
baa .D^yîbb D*pnpl
3^03 nisi .tangm itkc
.â?i i^co ,nn Kâ Dnop]

'
mna
.rnn tea Tint: t t t
-.
.muto t
is 3b nn:
:
,rru t
'
m i^na
:
N"3b t
ny\ -
n*ue .nonbos :-: T T

: :
ii3ai
;
.nosn 33b T -; T
fain .;
15
.
nran aa t- ;
nam ttLJ
IO
Each strophe consists of four hemistichs, of which the
first
three have
of each
internal
rhyme while the fourth one rhymes

is
.
externally.
The metre
first
hemistich
is
8
9
w
|
v^
except the
first
one of the
two
lines
which
i.e.
God, cp. Ps. 22. 20.

to suit the special
For *03Ty,
metre of
this hemistich.
10
The metre demands

(cp. Ps. 41. 4),
this vocalization.
The noun
is
^"l,
^"l in pausal
form
11
hence ^lll would be more correct.
Cp. Ps.
6. 7.
12 13
This word can also be vocalized
in the plural,
TINl
'At the time of (His) step',
i.e.
when He
guided Israel from Egypt
towards Sinai.
14
i.
The whole
line is
based on Ps. 68. 8-9.
e.
The
Patriarch Abraham, his namesake,
who
is
identified in
the
Agadah with m?Kn JJTX (Ps. 89. 1, see Baba Batra 15 a). 15 Just as Moses (cf. Sifre to Num. 27. 20, niDn 0D3
WO
*JD).
432

(verso)
s
ab> D3i -otap - t

':
.inbrana aviao} t v
.inbnp t
':
nub vv:
,infe>
.inbaia
t
ibhd ~
âonb noim .ns

âuftai npni ~
by
ianm ,"nto
,*33
t t
.
p-ino
bab
-ib>
*m
*m
: :
':
'oypab ry^Di t ::': t
bab ax Kim t t:
:
,*mj ^:^
t
"riN
antn* 'BDaa ~
.nô bn t
âi :
nba t:
ny
-:
ta^pa :
n:n
:
.nby Tina vrtaa t :
aaiDb d^didi t v
,w"i
^by nî -; t
TibriD
.
.n? v
nban
:
.thaW

:
= rnsn " t
:
ânyDi îss
.Trmaa
*np-i?aa
imi .wvrwa
trraijv
:
aita
top
ârainb ntaraa .;-. tt;
.ni:nâ t
iw
.rtobKi t; .
.rnaa nan -; t
.
Dâb t:
*:wnnb inai
.wpb
:
fajn
ra^raa
"npi
i
s
o'lbnb iik
btf
2^tN3
iw
t t
.n?an toa nby>a .: t t
.-idp ~ t
in
:
pm
'
. :
.ids naa ~ t v
:
wm mb
-
anprn
nab
,*g baa Dnbai

s
.^yspb ^yapi
-vtf
21
.
wanb p^ra
pnDK
nzik
ro
paânb]
jwv
s
.pniBD* D anp
bab
24
2i
.prpn â
.
nnp
"]ai:a
22
.
onx
a]
.
pri^D"
Dn*spi
Dnita toa
vn-nn
pa]
. .
au^b
16
Trub Tny rrm ,nVq iVrb
"riy
.TRn Nba dvtji]

D'H^H T", see my
This corresponds
/.
to
another
title
of the Nagid,
work,
17
18
c, p. 254.
e.
i.
supports the scholars.
Cp. the Mishnic
rQ^yD,
the pavement covering the ceiling (illpn)
here in the meaning of a cover, protection.

19
20
i.
e.
Abraham, see note
14.
Cp.
Num. R.
c.
19
*p331 D^rVQJQt? STQaa "1HDJ TWXto H?a 'OBO
jra
njnva npb nxa iot

"y KB-in: airxa ixy
21
Maw
^bbw.
me',
"y
aiwai
n
me
jya
aîrajac
ana
22 23
24
'Those that (want
to) silence
i.e. to
destroy
(cp. Jer. 8. 14).
= Abu
Here
Ishak.
Read pfip&l,
the metre
is faulty.
This text
is
evidently corrupt.
ADDENDA TO 'THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM AS A SOURCE

OF JEWISH HISTORY'
(7QR., N.
S.,
Vols.
VII-X)
By Jacob Mann,
Baltimore.
Owing
to conditions
in
consequence of the
War
the
instalments of
my
treatise
appeared at intervals of con-
siderable length.
In the
meanwhile further reading as well
as research
among
the Genizah manuscripts suggested a
number
of additional remarks which could not be inserted
much derangement. VII, 465. About the Gaon Natroi from Bagdad see also Brull (J'ahrbiicher II, 146, note), who writes that he
in the proofs
without
could not have hailed from this town since
it
was only
(in
founded
later
on by al-Mansur.
'
Therefore Sherira
'
his
Letter) defines the locality as
from the Bridge
(WTVJlin |D)
or 'from the outer Bridge' (toa
NTmn
is
JD), i.e.
the eastern
in
bank
of the Tigris.
But that there was a Bagdad
the
neighbourhood prior to al-Mansur

that already in 750 c. E, 9
evident from the fact
we
find in
Fustat a
'
head of the
see
congregation', Abu-'Ali above, VII,

477).
Hasan of Bagdad (hsi;:*n.
See also Houtsma's Encyclopedia of

1, s. v.
Islam,
I,
^64, col.
Baghdad, 'The 'Arab authors are

must not be
433
also quite explicit that al-Mansur's foundation
434
considered

as
an entirely new settlement of a hitherto
uninhabited
district.
They mention a whole

capital.
list
of pre-
Muhammedan
area
filled
places which had gradually arisen in the

c
by the Abbasid
The most important
of these was Bagdad, a village of Christians on the western
bank of the Tigris

VII, 468
f.
;
'.
VIII, 348
f.
The Exilarch seems
to have
resided in the quarter of al-'Atikah in Bagdad.
Thus we
dn
read
(in
'131
in
the account of the inner organization of the schools

II, 78, 11.
Neub.
vbvi
r>33
is
4-5) oy )rvnc
nnwi "wi K2pw

npTiy
iiyi
yipnnb
p^np mvi buz
pK3
nta cki.
As
stands here for Bagdad (see also above, VII, 466),

little
there
doubt that by npTiy

in
pN
the above quarter
is
meant.
Likewise
Nathan Habbabli's report of the
recognition of Daniel b. Zakkai as Exilarch
by the Gaon
80,
"6
11.
Kohen-Sedek and
ra nvrb npTiy
his school
we read
s
(/.<:.,
3-4),
1331
p3
yiT ibd3 ivn
N3r
Tni>)
wwi
)K2& ly
)b
n-a-iy dîotbi
onn? Dnoix vn
i>33
nno
x
"wi? wrarwai
win
t^n* ivnn
i?K.
A
B>"b>,
highly interesting responsum by Hai
(preserved in
tells
I,
63-4; shortened
in JTCTOn, 3"v,
61 b)
in
us about
the residence of the Pumbedita

pi3i
1,113
Geonim
Bagdad, lJQl 1K1
nnnc:
s>"3W3
^Dim &6s
ip
(r.
nmy mo 10^ 03anao o nrQra -ibw n mny no pap ioke> Dioy 31 iok> dhnxo ai
o
yi
Kin
Dicy 31 ionb> no ip^yn
rf"D
rwi
niypn
n5>
loixtr
"oi?
ntd3) sniD3 ah Kyiinan t& yna

, ,
jot inix3i
vn
131 on^y a*nrw lino 11333 ba
spi3 n^k
mny
na
iid
11333
pn
nw in
31 10
pa n 31 101
.im n^>
is
nnrwa
onois
r6nn Kim oanaoo oy*Dr6 ha*

1
inlaid Diip ni3i

in
dw
His Arabic name was Abu Bishr, as
evident from a letter
Jewish
Arabic (T.-S. 10 J 25 1 ) wherein the writer mentions that he sent an epistle to
ni ba "Nn ic'3 ax m*nS>N dni
who.
THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM MANN
435
oaw
Dîwrn
Djn:
ivwyb
nnvy
*|
bib:
Tisaa
[TOKjn
dj
ddtiun stood ubti ?K dhk
nNTD
lpw
on
nana mroe.
live in
Accordingly the
first
Pumbedita Gaon
b.
to
the
'Abbasid capital was Hai

there as
this
David (K90
C.E.)
who
acted
Dayyan
several years previously.

is
The
reason for
find
change of residence
not known.
in
Anyhow we
the later Pumbedita

school,
still
Geonim
Bagdad, where no doubt the

of Pumbedita, also found
going by the
name
a home.
That Kohen-Sedek
lived in
Bagdad appears from

visit to
Nathan's account of Nissi-al-Nahrwani's
him
in
the
IV
middle of the night

noyi xb*
(I.e.,
79,
1.
25
f.,
nms rrm N rtA liw
jww
DTi:
"iy
trbiyjo i nb'bn
mix nna txo
bn
*hyJ0 72
text.
nWn
nm3
mis*
KSOI
WK1
^y.
But the Arabic
JQR., XVII, 755, 1. 19, has no reference to the locality). Probably Yehudah Gaon, Sherira's grandfather, meant
Bagdad when
instructing the
Jews of Khurasan
to follow
722 TiD (above, VII, 471, note 15).

Sherira's residence in
Nehemia's as well as
Bagdad was discussed above.

Masliah
b. al-Basek,
As
to Hai,
it
should be added to the data given before
(see also above, p. 422) that
Dayyan
of Sicily, visited the

his
Gaon
in
the 'Abbasid capital, and on
return
presented to
life
the
'-|
Nagid Samuel ibn-Xagdela

n*VD, see Steinschneider, Jiid.
a sketch of Hai's
(*fc*n
Zeitschrift, II, 301-4,
and Arab.
Liter., \ 85).
Masliah
reports that during one of Hai's lectures the difficult verse
of Ps. 141. 5 was discussed, and the

to the Katholikos
Gaon asked him

its
to
go
is
and inquire of him

Katholikos
of the
meaning.
in
As
well known, the

resided
in
Christians
b.
'Iiak
Bagdad.
Also Elhanan
Shemarya
visited
the school there as

in
we
read in an interesting letter (printed
REJ. LV,
y
49-51, see above, VII, 481)
rnwi
D3n
n;i
i?n
rm
% ^s
pr6x no tnaa
ny 722 tPTOTD
(i.e.
Hai's)
436
"iii?nn
'131

nab d-m
Kin
a
nxnm
ib 3T
mon
kw-i
p)dn
nn
"id
i^k
noijo dit;.
As
S>*nB
(r.
a resident of
Bagdad Hai mentions

K>'V, I, 89, fnin?
II,
in his
responsa
-iktq31
-ioki
local customs.
See anjo pi noiD;

1:133
dvd:d
n33
ptyiy
73-4, P^nynb
pn3ipB>
vjn
pa "an an
-npio
"HJQ3)
nn n
d-ib
n5>n
iDipm
nn nx
}di
-o"i?
*3*iyEn
-ny bs kd"ib hes iniK dwxid

pjybi
,
.
into
"]iDn
un dipd^ DipDs rrewn nnvy npnyn

niprnw a"yNi "did
'131
S>k
. .
.
fiD^b
-p
s
rrnryi? nS>b>
nw
n3 nniN D'opm
nnna
pjww
nu?
Ta
b mjn[oJ
nx D'nbw mien new

is
1313 pN IID^N "Km pDWi.
(There
no doubt that
liaNfi?
*TB
is
a corruption
for
Pnv,
Peroz-Shabur
Nehardea,
Burial
as already
at
Bamberger, p~P
note 735, remarks.)
Nehardea must have been regarded

in v"'\
I,
as a great honour.
i>333
Probably
h3 s n
'131
23, i?n&?3 rrni3
3D ^331
"xn 31 nN1
nvr6 3K3 'd
vnnn new ata nyu wi nnoix p

nu*p, a
mP3
nor
Bagdad custom
is
meant.
Both R. Semah and
R.
'Amram
maintain that neither
Dyi: TPl
WO nxr
45
c,
*:ki
in [V7 X31
be said, but Hai quotes the Bagdad custom of

first
omitting the
only.
See also
p"&?
'Ittur,
?
II,
top,
'*3"ii
*nyop abi 3"v 3iy nmo3
mim v:
anjo px
ids
\sn
mwvp
^333.
district including
Nehardea, as the
Pumbedita,
is
someSee
:i
times mentioned where

Gr.
2
t
we should expect
e":, no.
the latter.
4
,
444, note
is
1,
and
44
(cited above,
VII, 467).
He
probably identical with
ptW
3D pDa
"J3
S]DK HDI, mentioned
in a
Genizah fragment containing several decisions of Babylonian Geonim
(JQR., IX, 689%

3
Abraham
b.
Solomon
cites
an explanation of
his,
together
with Hai Gaon's {Hebr. Bibliogr.,
XX,
9).
fol.
See also above,

102
d,
p. 421.
See also TlDy
(ed. Venice, 1608,
top) bv
(r.
TlTHO nUVJTOl
3"Dpnn
rw3 ^tdd
}1K3
pan (wpma) la^pmo

r.
pun)
nw
)
nbjn
Nnn3D13D
xn:3 ")D*a
Mm Kin mw
ID*"!) "IE
(r.
W31
nnttB> \*xk
(,651 c.e.
HI^B^
y:
siido) k*tdd pra win 31 ii X3 ni
THE RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

In Khalafb. Sarj ado's
MANN
*i:*6p
437
lampoon against Sa'adya (Harkavy,

nr~r
-:n;
Stud.
?/.
Mitteil.,
V, 230) \vc read, f3M 1K13 Kin

ny-j*
n-n n >s bv2)

*"\y)
"ji>
rawi
bn
nwvvn sum nNV:
(or d:n;j
f\H
BHpn *2na ny Dny:n nnn diw D*bw tiki ipafa

lt&J
N1VDC
tqmro.
These scurrilous attacks seem to
refer to Sa'adya's enforced stay in
Bagdad
b.
after
he had
left
"lyj'
Sura owing to his

I
conflict with
David
Zakkai.
rrwn
take to
mean
the Sura school, whither reports of Sa'adya's
doings reached.
By Kjmnj
b.
^y: apparently the disciples of

in
the Pumbedita school, situated then
Bagdad, are meant.
Likewise Shemarya
Elhanan was 'jmn:
TCW
"'Si
under
Sherira (above, VIII, 352).
Perhaps the responsum from
Bagdad
his
(above, IX, 14,5-6) emanates from Sa'adya during

there.
Its
stay
tendency to
combat
Karaism
is
by
deducing several Rabbinic laws from the Bible agreement with the whole attitude of
of Tradition, Sa'adya.
this
quite in
powerful defender
just as well
But Hai
b.
David could
have been
its
author, since under
him the Pumbedita school

note 18,
was transferred to the 'Abbasid
capital.
6,
Albeck
and
in his
new
edition of Haeshkol (pp.
73, note 4)
speaks of a school with Geonim
in
Bagdad
apart from those of Sura and Pumbedita.

duction,
c.
In the Intro-
6 (which
is
inaccessible to
me and
has probably
not been published yet), he promised fully to substantiate

his opinion.
But the data, discussed
here, prove clearly
Knapn \ynss xb rrnio

vb
nijyn
hdm
bnx
rwpa
nv&m
tîn *an
mw
nmirao newi *3 mxn wns WD*pi snapn^ *6n >Ki bv^n nrvo -\r\v6 tnn 3* -ma rb y*brv\ nro jypz*: pal xynnn Nm*nD pa ktiî^b ton bv2 nb nn^n *ke2 war
arm
.
\xe
(r.
KTID1) N"niD*1 RfQ'JlD. There

its
is
no doubt that Nehardea stands here
for
Pumbedita, as
Gaon, together with the principal of Sura, decided upon the
change
in
the law of ]"ITV1D (see also above, X, 122).

,
About the date 651
c. e.
see also Graetz, v 4 401.
438

new
our contention that the school of Pumbedita found a
home
in
Bagdad.
This removal took place, as Hai

b.
tells us,
during the Gaonate of Hai

VII, 471.
David (890-8
C. E.).
Jews from Khurasan

the
206,
visited
the
Khazar
dominion.
See
S., Ill,
fragment
11.
published
by Schechter
\xd> D-nrwi
(JQR.i N.
36-8) pi
Tia
km
pvn 3N nn33
iprnnî y-\xr\
VII, 480; VIII, 350.
'wk T3 lprnrn ;v pkdi pip. Elhanan b. Shemarya received

difficult
y
from Hai a pamphlet explaining the
words
in
'Aboda zarah
Zeitschr.,
I,
(see
Steinschneider.
H. B.
IV, 107;
Jiid.
313, note 20).
VII, 484-5.
The whole community

(given
of Fez seems to
have been deported to Ashlr.

correct text of
This we learn from the
MS. Parma
"OS^D.
by Lewin, Jahrb.
d.jild.-
liter. Gesellsch.,
'131
VII, 254) DVrw" DN2 bnp
liww
T))bxv )bx
N"V1B>
UJHK
The responsum was
written by Hai
and thus begins,
bib KnirnD 8^1
NTT
13 K331
N^H
"KPl
'131
Tru
nvo
*x5>y *3kb
dns
nnra.
Accordingly,
ukd
is
not a geographical
name but an
adjective referring to the

'
people of Fez,
select,
who
are complimented as
good, superior,
&c/
This responsum was written during the Kallah

Sel.
of
Adar 1298
Fez
= 987
c. E.
Probably Samuel
b.
Hofni's
letter to
(see above,
VII, 485, note 31) refers to the
Hai
in his
famous responsum about mysticism and

56,
practical
Kabbalah
'
(in D*OpT
DJ/D
top\
after referring to the amulets

to
which the SuraGaon,

of.
Moses Hakkohen, 832-43, was reported

rrni
i>32
have made frequent use
writes
roni> D^rmp on
*a
nan
)bx
cmm
is
ivi
riid
ra^3i
445).
DE>D D^pim 13N1 "15^3133.
Here Babylon
not Bagdad but the old

,
Babylon
in
which neighbourhood Sura was (see also Graetz, v 4
Besides, in the time of Moses
Hakkohen the
presided.
school
was
still
situated in
it',
Pumbedita.
Probably by the statement 'and
we
(were)
far
from
the
Gaon means the school over which he
MANN
439
persecutions prior to the expulsion of the local Jews to
Ashlr, whither also Jews from Tlemsen were compelled

to depart.
In this epistle Samuel's son, Israel,
is
already
364,
mentioned as the secretary of the school
(see VIII,
and also above,
p.
414).
Hai
styles himself in the

\
above
responsum as
'
Dayyan
of the Gate
We
know from
Hai became
I,
Sherira's letter, written in the
same
year, that
Ab Bet-Din about \W pmn iiyc p |H proof that the Ab

X331
two years previously (Xeub.,
m nnxn im
of the
41,
"ttrb
is
nwnDDi).
identical
/.
clear
its
I,
school
with
c, vol.
n^h
(see above,
X, 339, and also Mann,
5 273, top).
Of
Sherira and Hai's correspondents in Fez two are
mentioned by name.
They were the

of Jacob.
brothers
13
Abraham
2
1
and Tanhum, the sons

square hand, size
T.-S.
F
on
his
(paper,
10^x7
is
inches) contains
verso
the
beginning of Maimonides'
Introduction
to
Mishneh
Torah.
the
On
recto there
a great deal of scribbling.

Tt&D
Thus
poem
in
honour of Maimonides' work,
n"U
W2
I)
is
(see Steinschneider's
mien
But
nnic, no. 18, in

in
by
pp,
repeated four times.

of a
the scribbling the beginning

It
pamphlet of responsa has been preserved.

iia\
reads,
qtdw ipy no \q mron

bnan i"3D nbufe
"pa
!>b>
s,
d.t-dn nrb
btw new
pan
A*k rvbvw
>aao
niw
-iyp
waste dxd nann
DW
nanp
:n man laana nicn

3n
3py< pxa
mw
Y'^ci
k-ttj'
i's 2
wi
ircnkh?
**an
bnan
^'an
apy*
lawwta rniiT wans

fi*o
'di
ia*npi
unsn
anni?
N
ib
warm mn
nanb mpo
-Oion
pm
is
Nn
tihWp
(there follows the usual formula)
myo
a
bv nam nny nap
nicyb
(B. b.
ioo b ).
This
in
heading
repeated on the same page in the scribbling
somewhat shortened form.

5
Against Eppenstein
in Graetz, v 4 , 134, note 5.
440
A highly interesting
in Fez,
letter
from R. Hai to these brothers

Sel.
dated Adar 26th (1)315

in
1004
c. E.,
is
preis
served
T.-S.
T2.
829.
I
Unfortunately the
epistle
damaged and very

deciphered.
na-iab -dt
faded.
give here what could be safely-
The address
(verso) reads
mron
xmi no
â
DmaK- warn no
P*1
onvv D-rer Dirun warn
dtwi mya
D'.ron in
the second
column
is
a slip for 3py as

there
is is
evident
from
recto.
Besides the
Hebrew address
!>lk~.flJl
is
one
in
Arabic wherein the word

epistle
still
visible.
The
was probably sent
in the first instance to
Fustat for
transmission to Fez
(cp. above,.
VIII, 355
ff.).
(recto)
nbtibtf
nwn
trsn
Nin^ p
nbubt? nan8*n t?[>n *n]
mab wioi .upm no

*aa
h^ti [unn]
kwdi
,i[3^y
nono]
(1.
1)
Mwnn
isc
ib
>by
,
DWKfi nnnxn
onaann Dimn
xmi
mbp
noi oman Kami
no
(2)
i3[-i\) (3)
,
a^buon Dânnn Dnua[n]

"pa*
a
...
(4)
... Dibâ nuna
nîy nanab nar apy

fi
Dnioi oibc i:n

.
wnba nama
bbn (6)
ban -jbi
na'wi ô^n ba
fro
uoo
Dibtr
Noaxpa
.
nbbtf
1
bôx u[^]y nono

no
Noa^btf
wanna
(5)
s
nai2s nyo
nbn jtooy ib 3"tabN
rnbai nypio ypn

ir^y nono anna
(8)
pajana d
s
ok t ma mbw? aba
a
dwk
np na aob
na*ii
(7)
na^N
nibNK>bx
*ibN
s
n^K
my nbb d&on
n^N
ban
ppbx nabs*
as*
aa
*jbi
hndi
1N31
tub
nail
ibn
nar
.
noi
mama Donbw
anno
pjdv
naiab
pnv
. .
prow
(9)
spbtf
apjp
nnaNas no fan
s
oo
y*oab&n a^vobtf ovbx bno na^'o [ana^

*jh
s [na-n]b nar nby nnaDi [mby] nbb (10)

, ,
mby
*si
f?nb
|o
mom^
barns*
v6k mby
five
nyKiaabN naai yiDabx

lines,
[nanobs]
line 14
There follow
more
very faded.
On
we
THE RESPONSA OE THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

read
2\vb
is
if "13]T
MANN
PJOD.
441
*pV 1
\2
*|1^3
KmBJK
"in:h
The
TD.
epistle
(
continued on verso where nine

is
(1.
lines are îven.
)n
1.
8 there
mentioned rn
9)
6a D3e> -N
S
|3
D*3n TO
p nofe
It
concludes
31
y^ IW JW VH3
ti
rOT
in
DSDlfol.
R. Hai previously wrote to his friends
Fez through
responsa on
'Amran Hallevi
three questions.
responsa.
b.
Hillel, evidently enclosing
He
also refers to a
pamphlet of other
letter
reached him from Abu'l Faraj Alluf
(no doubt identical with the Alluf
(= Resh
Kallah) Abu'l
Faraj
Joseph
b.
Jacob
b.
'Aukal of Fustat
who was
a great patron of the Babylonian schools, see above, VIII,
357-8) containing the sad news of the demise of the famous
Jacob
b.
Nissim ibn Shahun

7
of
Kairowan
to
whom
Sherira
sent his well-known Letter.

6
This report caused the Gaon

and not pHNC.
R. Hai spells the
name
pnfett?
About the meaning of
the latter see Rappoport, D^DJ 'H JTnpin, notes 2 and 6, and Steinschneider,
JQR., XI, 614. 7 Numerous responsa were sent

the
list in
to this scholar
by Sherira and Hai (see
Pozn.,
fNTVp BOX,
size 7 x
no.
a6\
To
these T.-S.
8G7
(two paper
leaves,
5^ inches; should be added. On fol. 1, recto, top, the passage of Ta'anit 12 a, from \hy b^p tibw JVayn ^3 !>lt1# TDX till
damaged,
ITU
TIN
UmU
btt3n,
for
is
given as KD"M (text).
Then we have the

c
e.. is
explanation
(N^'WD)
l6
which the following responsum, dated 991
quoted:
y\
UWP
.
5t
3K
"Nil U3"1 1331

.
|U0 NTTJ> 133"6 712W[T\]
rrn 31 H3
a*ba n^tteren
3e> n:sr
wervp
is
ctd:
ia npy
-i[S>]
-p
"IDT
ktw
Ki3Di n~id:
-jrsi
*]\vn
idk* dn ini *id 6n in
una
pyoe>
UVUID
Wen*
"ie>K3
Mm.
a.
(1^*3
1.
explained ts prayer, as also
adopted by R. Hananel and Rashi
The
is
latter also
mentions another
explanation which, however, his master did not accept,
w}
till
*~IDN*1
1.
NI^N
fol.
1,
HTlD
verso.
*2~\
pNl
TliT.)
The responsum
continued
9 of
On
i>3
1.
10
ff.
another responsum
is
given.
TuM'C
}D
?t
J1W *Kfl
S?ni[b>
6k] ihjSobS Dinnn "Son
i*npny[ n
]
jnitp
^
133*1,
'l31
DV 1iy3 vby [nJ^Tp M&P nWy[n].

fol. 2,
There follows the whole

recto, bottom.
It
explanation of the passage, ending on
seems
that
some time
after
R. Jacob
b.
Nissim's inquiry, the Kairowan scholars again
VOL.
XI.
H h
442

and
great grief like on the days of national misfortune

calamity.
He
in
held
memorial services
for
the
departed
scholar at the
academy and
also before the congregation,
probably
one of the synagogues of Bagdad.
His sermon
moved
the audience to tears.

till
Considering the time that
must have elapsed
the news of R. Jacob's
demise
reached Fustat and thereupon transmitted to Bagdad, the
Kairowan scholar must have died early

1003
C. E.
in the
summer
of
We
is
read also of a donation of 70 Dinars
(for
the school) which a certain Khaluf b. Joseph sent.

b.
Solomon
Hakim
perhaps
identical
c. E. at
with
the
signatory of a
document, dated 1030
Fustat (Bodl. 2805 4 ).

to
Another responsum of R. Hai

T.-S. 20. 91, dealing with the
Fez
is
mentioned
in
Talmudic law of
JIM Kinc? I^nxi?
inheritance,
wherein we read
, , ,
DIN pj&
i?i
rnwn unl
rov -inK/i [dvti] una
i?i
w n
i^hn npDai
r\bv
xh n"wb vddj stop (r. ana) HN3 onm mn u:n&* rwra nawn Km
!?f
-ikb> "6
'iai
wroi dns bnp
'jn^
mrm-non pin vtia
-ir:yD:i
nnnn
^)NP &6 nrwo -insî
dimd nn ana
ah
mnto ba.
Sherira was probably no
inquired of R. Hai the meaning of this passage.
longer alive then.
The
copyist,
b.
who had
Hai's original letter before him,
was Joseph Rosh
Jacob Rosh be-Rabbanan of Fustat who flourished at the of the thirteenth century (see the colophon in Bodl. 2624 17 and beginning He was an author of standing, but still more a prolific also above, p. 426). other people s literary productions, ranging from Talmud and copyist of
Hasseder
Commentaries
to
Gaonic Responsa, Sa'ad3
a's Siddur,
and other
liturgical
works, Maimonides' writings, philosophy, medicine, and astronomy. The Cambridge Genizah Collection contains a vast number of leaves in Joseph's
handwriting which none
notice.
who went
through this Collection could
fail
to
The
on
identification of the
above responsa as having been copied by

It
him
rests
my
recognition of his handwriting.
should be added that

.
T.-S. 13
287s 44
have
Very likely Bodl. 2 1 (described above, p. 439) is also his cop}T containing Geonic Responsa, are also in Joseph's hand, because we
similar
superscription
as
above, 132"l
.
"021
JI&O
fcOHP "OTv
rr [*kfi].
Dmmyatta mnnn iscn
;d
mnpnyn
fsimp vd?
www tb
THi: RK.SPONSA
OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM
.MANN
443
VII, 4^3-";.
Of other North-African communities who

with
Sherira and
had
relations
Hai are known Kabes,
Tahort, and Sejelmessa.

of two
leaves,
T.-S. 10
paper.
"/'
contains the tops

fol.
:
brownish
On
I,
recto,
the
following can be read in large handwriting

d|
N3Dm
|
| 'tt
3Kp ^2]
PPfi
!
nvpi
I
mnn
n3[no ]
(verso)
i?i
,
u*te Akp
.
tj\n fo<
|
rrfoes?
3T1
xi>
I
[nJDina
INtb [W3i]
|
DDV DHin
npria
min [isd] nh "n wa-Ai ktib> nmi nmna sh noino nî mpos h pn
.
i?f
w6 mr:':
kî iiy
r-j*
piijwn
I
|D
ins
pup n^n nrvai

|
[\]non3.
Verso
evidently contained an index
(fihrist)
of the responsa.
The
Law.
pamphlet dealt
Fol.
'13
at the beginning with a scroll of the

s
2,
recto, reads Dn[x] INipi
WJ&7, the usual formula.
MTO [3py ] pta nav B>8C| NTIS? The beginning of this heading
N31EE TYO
iBttai
JVN*
of a
new pamphlet
is
not preserved.
rnb
is
^>y
J31X1 x
n*yiBi? .Tnî
'131
xnpm
Versu
s
wwA pyop
evidently
|
i>txi
onya pyep ^y
of
the
VI
J31K1*\
the
131
conclusion
[D]"p^
pamphlet,
I
nabn
I
[plD]xh
V13
MHN
POP
w nte^ T"53 bai

fcita 3ii.
jna
i&n \rmo
oiwini v nisi?
vnm rmpna
*:'"-', I, 1
pSa
A responsum of Hai to Kabes is mentioned in

of dead locusts
in his treatise
is
14.
His responsum to Sejelmessa concerning the consumption

also cited
by Samuel
b.
Jacob ibn Jama*

I,
on Shehita (Steinschn., Jiid. Zeitschr^
313,
note 18
see
Arab.
Liter., 15.1).
VII, 487.
see also
About Natronai's connexions with Lucena

Siddur,
1
Wmranis
oai*
S
a,
1
tokd^n ^np
UWJJ
this
tfora Kni
am
en
3W
~p 111313 FINE
s
An
YTD1
x^n
1*3 'tontaj 31
11X13 5|DV
^>y.
Probably the following responsa by

&"&,
II, 2c.
Gaon were
also sent to Lucena.
21 3HW1
p
x'j'
y:n origin |w nrbxvw

'i3i
D3^
cv:id b'apa
uratn^
toriDJ
;
i
;d^ &nni>;
11,44. ôn!> dx ftahtu 31
id5>
uwm
Hh
2
444
'ttl

T02.
Ibn Gayyat, as the Rabbi of Lucena, mentions

'
the local correspondents of Natronai as
our early (scholars)

D3
I,
'.
About Lucena
(in
see also Harkavy,
D^
D^Hn, VII, 25
42 a TlBn
Hebrew
Gr., IV).
See
further, y"nD,
Nm
Sicily should be
added to the European countries which

Naturally
had connexions with the Babylonian Geonim.

Masliah
b.
al-Basek (above,
p.
435) kept up correspondence
with Hai.
question of his to the
Gaon
is
expressly
mentioned
(Jiid. Zeitschr., II, 303-4).
VII, 489.
An
in
interesting statement about the
Jews
of
Wadi'l Kura*
post-Gaonic
times
is
to
be found in
Abraham
ncta nnb
ibn Megas's
D^K
1132 (printed in Constantinople,
1585, cited in H.B.,

bi
.
XIX,
42) (!)*3n
WS
dk>
(!)
\")-\?bx
*TW3 pi
*jb>
rwaon njnDi
pN2 nmron nvn pb K2

1221
onin^ nns
"]^no
nw
one inx
wan
-021
Dîao
iy2oi
n^ 3K^ wnb N2
(r.
nnx mb by bv: aim VT2n îd
ns
"i?yn)
D\n2 p"ni p|ba 122
on^ -idw nnvi dv
db6b>
ma
for
riKWD
02^0 0^21 .nnK twj on^sn anpa.
VIII, 340.
the
On
the variant
names Sadok and Isaac

It
same Gaon, see
also Zunz, Ritus, 185.
should be
noted that two more people have the

of
b.
name Isaac in front their names. The Pumbedita Gaon Semah (either Paltoi, 872 C. E., or b. Mar R. Kafnai, 935) is syled in
DVisn
'121
^vh
(ed.
Amsterdam,
s
as
Isaac
Semah, *b*W
2-1
wracia
Nin 2py
pa
(r.
na^)
in
nans*
can nx pn^
C. E.,
vpn.
Also an Exilarch Hezekiah

successor of Hai,
(see
is
1055
rb)i
1).
perhaps the
mentioned as
42,
BPK1 f?pfn
pnv 21 ID
RE J.,
LXVIII,
note
If
?
it
be not a mere
coincidence,
why
just the
name
Isaac
re-examination of T.-S. 12. 856 revealed the fact that
the correspondent of
Nahshon Gaon
b.
Sadok was
called
MANN
C.
445
in
T2V
(1.
1,
read [3*]3P will').
Ic
was
prominent scholar
1
Kairow
an.
Nahshon's son,
lai
(Gaon of Sura, 889-96
evidently also corresponded with this scholar.

contains a very
writing,
T.-S. 12. 77
damaged vellum fragment, brown, square

a
forming
portion
question)
of
Gaonic
.
.
responsum.
.
(evidently
end
3-1
of
WHIM ino^
(r.,
1.
5)
nc vbv *n
3ww
n3iBn[*7]
(7)
.
own
[rona^
.
.
(6)
fp
wtejin *p
-or
'di
whi pa
.
[Dnfoi?]p
w r^Kea
snip]
1.
.TDnD
[D]nmw?
;ran p*c
*C
w*m ,pn
ip
"ten
"pi
(v.,
irn
5)
3wi
(6)
(7)
3-no
wywbv
603*1
rawo
i>[y]
...
K33")1
apy^
IT
K331
3<3P
PHBH
(8)
...
3*3P
31
ri3[lB>]n3
Dnm ...
The name
of
R. Shebib's colleague,
vith
him the question
who apparently addressed together to the Gaon Hai (of Sura), is not
of the above responsum was no
office
preserved.
The author
doubt also a Gaon of Sura who held

T.-S.
subsequently.
10G3
contains twelve leaves of Gaonic Responsa,
eight of which apparently
emanate from 'Amram Gaon.

Fol. 5, verso, begins
3in.
Fol. 5, recto, ends KnktacP p^\x p^D.
pkinm cpu ta 13 yp
iw
naura priNi (ktu&cps) *ym
Thus these questions

(1)170 Sel.
arrived at the school on
Hanukah
responsum
858 C.E., when the chapters epD
(Yoma IV)
and
Jvinn (Yeb. IV)
were expounded.
The
first
after the
?131
above superscription begins BVPp 7& 02 DrfottWl
Nb
IN
in
nn^
?*2,
r013 pyo.
It
is
the same responsum as
found
8
no. 56, with the important
heading showing
Alter
1p.1
understand D*3D. (Abot 3

11
Well known
is
the expression Q*22 1TCID1I

is
HD^riD
NpC rWirQ
ix: jro
Of course
there
also an interpretation of
the Torah 113/113.

(B.
k., ch.
A
ii>
similar heading
feci
we
have
in
Gron.
II,
326.
I.
IV.
D"ny bron
k*dto ttnon
wwc
12 bop n:r
l-ni
W3Ti rms ykd

'131
'aifr
ktow
Tma tow 13
prove
dtdj
f)DV.
446
that
it

was addressed
is
to Barcelona.
But the text

7
in
our
6 a)
manuscript
begins
more correct. Also the next responsum

D"ipC3
(fol.
p
is
pfitt?
nan bv b*^xb n
is
KW1
(wherein the
opinion of R. Sadok
(fol.
quoted), while the one following

no.
,
6b )
the
same
as b")
7":
57.
There follow other

7": no.
responsa not contained in

in
whereas
58
is
not found
our manuscript which breaks off

ova vjp73P
is
(fol.
b
)
with
aita
arc
It
tfaayi
D^n
in*
an7K>
'wvnn
b"l
pn 7'ra ava nnrw.

probably
evident that the collector of

in this
left
out several
is
responsa contained
pamphlet, ra, no. 58,
taken from the missing

9
part. 9
is
The same pamphlet

Fol.
i,
r.,
1.
of responsa
apparently partly reproduced in

leaves,
T.-S. 20.
183, consisting of
17,
two vellum
brownish
ink,
torn
and
damaged.
concludes a responsum.
We
then have the
same heading as in 7"J no. 56, but without the words
n3HD2 D^Tin
wiTTia
rn3?oi
*b>k"i
it
reads
1
pan 737 one nn Nnan jpn

onaaai Dnp-
i nci
b
pienaâ ?
Minw
bxi^
mew 13 D-iroy la^na "wen DH^m cam
wdd Dita i73>p nyb 7W nit a *aa |W rbm mao mpoa jw dîddh roari 7301 *5>a Dip*D3 ;w (evidently to be deleted) ibif\ ^T7ni *K3n DD3n -|K5J*D1 mp m3D D^cm pppaoi D3D17P p7XiK> ia&* D3ioi7e>a pTD[n njha na*B*a D3iry3 vw D3 7y pa* Ten Dunn vorna oa^y nap orrw oa^v awai 7in 7301 nuyms 73ei nnvi nun 73 Danxai oa-iroî
pi
froan
wî ns
wd
*)
n^wi
v:s7
1^:37
nasnip
nya
oan^pai
Da^niWia
7a
oa7
jn*i
p
;na
n3
s
3s*
Mwa
wasA
nnis* i*npi
ww
*i>D ran^[W8]
7V unoyi ona uaianm D*T07ni n*am [d*s5>]ki DÊCO IJlN'Vn *]31. Here follow (fol.i r. and v.) the first two responsa as There is a gap between fols. i and 2. Fol. 2 a contains in T.-S. 10 G 3.
n3C no
a responsum on njMfl 1*3
|!DTB>
(see
Tur n'v
65) ni3B>7
K*
7N[B^l]
D^np
un
bane"
C
13
wnaayai
np^y
73
.
nw?
ps
iac-B>7
wan
ts pa
'an
pan Titan an
(
'iww
nan 737 ne>an Taa voce* td*k

fol. 2,
'131 fcOaipT
A.
z.
33
b).
This responsum ends
middle,
whereupon we
have the conclusion of the pamphlet D3nN1
WIN
na7n nana bwaa k?i
vnm6 nN
rOPP pH ^B7D |W1 *T pto nnex? nai>n twnn!>
10771 niD77 iarni na*a nyen naan npen

*
min nyc
b
pn 027 nna*i
To be
deleted.
Tri3D,
Till.
RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIlf

fol5.
MANM
aw
447
Between
is
and 9 there
is
a gap, but the handwriting
similar.
Dâiu
i>3
S>yi
Fol. 9, recto, begins [N'DnoJ
nhsi pnzrno
^yn
(3)
(\)
mn
[331
d^tdi nivo byi [no]am

[J3YI
(2)
mm
kc^p
k-A
n^y
in^
KW
^131
|B 1131
spr KT1
(4)
imi33 T3BP
[31N"1
3WT1
i*3K
NJOipb B*TB1 '^KP fNITpi
*6 is W3? rw3?
*na
[vn]i>.
This
;
is
the
in
same
re-
sponsum
as given in T.-S. 12. 856

is
only
is
T.-S. 10
in
the superscription
latter
shortened.
It
clear that
the
manuscript after 'Amram's responsa there followed
a pamphlet of such, emanating from his successor in the
Sura Gaonate, Nahshon
b.
Sadok.
Kairowan had very close connexions with both Babylonian

academies
(see above,
VII, 482).
It is
therefore only natural
that R. 3*3P b. Jacob should have corresponded with the
fcwa
31*0
}dk
btirvP
rHXiM pi3*p3 D3 :a ni"6 rami ropai nwjî

s
web
rrwai ruipna nnnB>3 niDî
n*3iB3i
nroaa enpn -ry
awpa
DW
ninoana
num
mncp.
:
Thereupon a new pamphlet of responsa begins
^N"^
~>3^)
nS* JC'D
n3^ wi
ovarii
n^nno uarw b&

[d*j
nawi "wb wi
jrcini
lay
i!>n
roSw
p$a
nrj*
bp nnsn aijn
Dâibw
emna wo^
*ai
wjhk men
Qtpatsn
spjn
riD&ap nnsA
inît
d^p
irvai)
jqiki
nDi
p^k
mv
noon
ins*^
b^n di5p3 [i]wata
DH^ni
mianm onix wnxi u*i i&tai D*D3nn 5y uwi ITOfl ^so in manuscript) îam ND130 Wil *3N 1DN \J? RKYJ 013 PD*DP DIpB p^&nfo niDVO (Men. 35 a, top) pD1pH3 TDD WD^ TV2 rrw u"p HDD pparbn ry ptanfo nyrai a 'i3i din
31Tdp no eh dtd
w
,
(Kelim
it
1
1
i
Menah. 31
a,
top\ This heading
is
of interest for the information

It
furnishes as to the internal organization of the school.
also appears
that Mattitya
was
then, in 863
c. e.,
already generally recognized.

Mattitya's
rival.
This was
It
the case aftei

establishes the
the death of
Menahcm Gaon,
p.
thus
reading 1171 Sel. (859 C.E.) as the year of Menahem's

letter,
demise (see Sherira's
38,
bottom QriJD
c. e.
.
31 "IDT
iTL'T-
rUI
Nyp JIX'3. where
a variant has
7]]}p,
864
448

b. Paltoi
contemporary Pumbedita Gaon, Semah
(872
C. E.).
This we learn from an interesting passage
in
Samuel
b.
Jacob's (ibn Jama') additions to the 'Arukh, which owing to

its
corruptness has not been fully understood.
It
reads
(see ed.
Buber
in
Graetz-Jubelschrift,
still
p.
17
Buber, by
some
text)
of his emendations,
adds to the confusion of the

(s.v.
(r.
twi
==)
(r.
ins
wntM
[kytp^
sno Nnanen <nru3 xnbn nih

Nr:n
dksk)
nnKn)
10
NnNnnN
(fioni?
nx^*,
Nni>
no 12
jru
*vJ?
n*b
u n^
Nn^no
Srrri)
pn iry^N no xn ^ (i>anBT=) xnm tt&n dn3n nvpo wyia *n"sn no

(r.
tm
ti^ki
ana (NrvniB=) dib

DX3N1
nwi>n
.
,
p&o)
>dn:
12
î?a
,3
3T p
no* znoi
Nrrop
wAkbh
(xnivrin)
xnanm
'
:me> nota n^Nsrn
/s
2 .tô
bw mm.
loan
'
To
prove that DN1X means a

'
',
Samuel
b.
Jacob
quotes from the writings of the
heads
(of
the schools), viz.
Natronai wrote to Nathan

c
b.
Haninah of Kairowan informing

(
him that when El azar Resh Kallah
= Alluf)
arrived (from
Lucena, see above, VII, 487) and 'brought what he brought

(viz.
a certain
amount of donations
for the school)
paid our debts and the academy wasp/eased'.

b. Paltoi in
u we Also Semah
the pamphlet of questions coming from R.

first
is
MP
uses the expression DN3N in the reply to the
query.
VIII, 353.
fols.
The Massoretic fragment
Or. 5554, A,
recto,
11.
3-4, and the lines are cited from

11.
fol. 4,
8-11.
Verso,
5-6, mentions another Massorite (Jer. 39. 3)
DHD 21
^p nm (3TD=) ro nn nun m nn Dim n (nos=) nok. Yehuda b. Ezekiel as Massorite is also mentioned in
10
11
So Codex Cambridge,
Cod. Cambr. has only
no. 376, fols. 233-6,
which
have also consulted.
~l.
12
>
Cod. Cambr. "HD^D 3"lO, an obvious corruption.
Cod. Cambr.
MP 1oS)C m!)KP3.
in
14
See also Pozn.
Hakkcdem,
II,
Hebr. part, 98, no.
4.
THE KESPON6A OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

fragments of the Firkowicz Collection
in
MANN
449
Petrograd (tee
Bibliutlul:.
H.
B.,
XIV,
105,
and Neub., Aus der Peter sburger

the Massorah of R.
y
104, top).
also
On
Nahman
(b. Isaac) see-
Le win, Tahketnoni
1,
1 1 (
91
1
1 ),
24 ff.
Graetz {Monatsschr.,
gloss,
187
49-jO
1872, 9) deals with the
same Massoretic
as cited from the above Genizah manuscript, and denies that

there were separate Massoretic schools in
Nehardea and
in
Sura.
But
this
is
now
a well-established fact (see especially,
Kahle, Massoreten des Ostens, 19 13). VIII, 353, top.
An
extensive volume of responsa by
Hai
is
mentioned
(r.
in T.-S. 8
i"iaa)
recto,
aa
11.
12
IT.
Uffnc ana
px:
nawna h*wn
na
nrn
*paa
s
wno
nbxvi
5?
*w
i^n pnsa wnosn j-dddd N
ni^NuM p:ob
own
[\-n]
15
nksu'n
[am? n^y]
pt?7a
Pia
nya-ia
TD.
dnvd^ pao pm yop sn nD2a onan The questions probably came from
b.
Kairowan where there was a celebrated house of study

under Hushiel, Jacob
Nissim, and his son R. Xissim.
pi?\s
See, e.g., the superscription of n":, no. 178,
Knfe6*K0
kpktiq u
'iai
pn*a$n
pam nwa 'am n p
p)dv
wa-n
no men
we
also
d^3
m
706,
!>i.
na t&a
wn
apy
an man.
in
In the
anonymous
ff.)
Halakic compendium (printed

read
(p.
1.
JQR., IX, 681

n*ai> 5f n:
8) d-d: M*3"hp
men
/.<:.,
"n uai
3WI
nn:n b>b
Cp. also Pozn..

b.
104.
VIII, 358. Joseph

in a
Jacob
b.
Aukal
is
s
also
mentioned
fragment of an epistle (T.-S. 10
brownish paper,
both top and bottom torn) which evidently emanates from

a Babylonian Gaon. either Hai or Samuel
b.
Hofni.
The
Gaon
writes to a certain Alluf
who may be
identical with
the scholar in
Egypt who was the

fT.).
recipient of the letter

nnjn (recto,
nyi>
rr
11.
discussed above (VIII. 349

run
DV
iai>
a.
ff.)
nain
wwi
oy vnon n enri
15
q&tc
tiforu
Pes. 70
450
S>npa irtN-ip>

(perhaps
r
[fKWjP)
p iw paroa
nx'N-in
*a
UN n^K
mjNm
\b]H
.
uwwk
dj
ai
ti[b>]
n^
n^N
ncy
wjp r6
niTB
v^y:
ruiiwna
*a
ana n^Kai
P mip
wail
n utt
ni2
s
[unn]i
uai> bjtipdi
5>aiy
uncnE n[n:w
?yx npjr
*a
*a
u]uai>
nw
|_n3]T
rum
spr
mi
lrwun in[iDB*i up]np imm
warn
no p
uk t^n
ninoann
ids?
nyi?
m ?v6n
moan
npnxa
nanab vas
d^3 kipj vniw
rn 6j
^k
This Alluf evidently acted

sentative of the
In his
wii [j]nixn^ cropo. community as a repreforward the Gaon's
academy.
He would
epistles to distant
communities, and thereby induce them
to contribute to the
upkeep of the school.
We read
also of
the Gaon's request to have one of his letters read in public
before the congregation (see above, VII, 477-8).
IX, 140, top.
The D'wn
in his
of the school are also mentioned

p. 438),
by Sam.
*fcOfl
b.
Hofni
responsum to Fez (above,

(73, no. 56).
fm
,
pan, and
3,
by 'Amram
See also Graetz v 4
456, note
and Epstein, Der Gaonaische Kommentar zur

Pozn., Mschr.,
Ordnung
To/wroth, 1915, pp. 40 and 157.
1917, 228-9, doubts whether these scholars

function in the
called upon.
had the special

whenever
academy
to quote the Baraitot

it
From
our fragment
those
appears that their task

disciples
consisted
'
of teaching
'
young
also
freshmen
the Mishnah and Tosefta.
who were Hence their name

in a
S.,
Tannaim.
The
"NniEK
are
mentioned
Gaonic
IV,
25,
document (published by Aptow., JQR., N.

II,
1.
3) 'NllDNi "nsD
pan
bjtt.
The
function of these scholars
probably consisted of teaching and expounding the Gemara

to
more advanced students of the

IX, 159,
1.5.
school.
for
nam is a synonym
(ed.
Torah, cp. Ps. 119. 96,

in
Job
11.
9,
and Erubin 21a.
Likewise we read
the
Ahima'as Chronicle
1.
Neub., Med. Jew. Chron.,
II, 113,
3 from bottom) nannn
TD^m
nnwi p*n
I.
oy dîde.
Cp.
also
Kaufmann, Mschr., XL, 544, note
THE RESPONSE OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

IX,
1
MANN
of
451
60- 1.
have re-examined
c.E.
the original
the
document dated 1034

remarks,
ibid.,
(JQK., XVI, 576;
cp. Fraenkel's
XVII, 384-6).
C. E.,
The
included
deed from
Kairowan, dated 1032
ends as follows:
(verso,
1.
4)
mvb iwh
nvn
.iiiv5h
55
top
H^2]
a i nv axna^s ^-wem
rvchw 12 n^n v\[bz]
nvn nn ^\i
nn&foc
-12
tawn
3ia pnta
mw ovp
nnisi rmn^
-in
bwn p
Thus the
Solomon, and Moses
b.
DH13N n^-in
d-d:
witnesses were Hillel b. Moses, Khalaf Hallevi b.
Yehuda
16
is
(the latter
to
is
not enumerated
in Pozn., |Mirp*BftM; no.
be rectified accordingly).
The
testatum (DVp) was signed by the members of the court,

b.
Elhanan
Daniel.
Hushiel,
is
Nissim
b.
Berakhya, and Abr.
b.
Nissim
very likely the brother of the well-
known Kairowan
VII, 358, note 59
accordingly).
scholar Joseph b.
;
Berakhya
">BOK
is
(see above.
no. 20 in jKTPp
to be rectified
The end
is
of the document,
drawn up
in
Fustat
in 1034C.E.,
as follows
nnoe6 nop
6'M 3 5>n nann pn ki
Dmaa
[p]:n
Nnanwi w nxn &o mw rrwb p

n nr
\ubr\D
*c\x-i
(1.
[2)
tobti
men
pjtatn
rin
-non
nann d^bn
rrbyo
"in
nnyo
prnr
p Dmaa
iryta
p
|na
ne>o
ftoas
Dmaa p
myD
Accordingly
Sahlan's
na
father,
Abraham, held the
titles
ronrM Tna *|&cn nann -non p*n, while Sahlan himself was
styled nuCHSWl
men
spKxn
nann
6),
mon
B*n.
Indeed,
in
marriage document (T.-S. 20.
drawn up
in Fustat, Elul
1348
Sel.
1037
C. E.,
both father and son bear the above
452
titles.

Sahlan
is
called in addition
nawi
pD, a title also
held
by Joseph
b.
b.
Berakhya
in
Kairowan (above, VIII, 363).

also
Sa'adya
the
b.
title
Ephraim was Sahlan's uncle and

is
bore
Alluf, as
is
shown elsewhere.
in
16
fK"3S
Hakkohen
Sa'adya
mentioned
at
a document dated Kislev 1355
Sel.
1043
c. E.
Fustat (onvo, Bodleian 2876 41 ).

b.
Now
that
we know Abraham
Sahlan's
is
titles,
my
suggestion
(above, VII, 478, note 22)
fully
confirmed that he was
a correspondent of Hai Gaon. 17
(All the signatories of the
deed of 1034
lived in
Fustat and not in Kairowan, and

in Poznaiiski's JKiTp
should therefore have no place
^N\)
IX, 161, bottom.

Megillat Bustanai
in
MS. Adler 4012
contains the end of
Jewish Arabic with
the
following
colophon
hmn p
nhp2
ndd
pro
[!?t]
jru
ii
no ppvn
ntanpvi
t?n iwBnn nS>y[]
owipn
i?vf
nnc^
It
a"^
p|b
n:D -ivoa jdj
pan
seems that Nathan Gaon incorporated
in his
',
book what
reported to
'his teacher's son, Hushiel

16
Resh be-Rabbanan
99.
See
my
work,
/.
c. vol.
I,
p.
17
In that letter (T.-S. 16. 318) the correspondents mention a previous
epistle of theirs to the
Gaon apologizing
for the delay in
sending the due

1.
contributions
(' fifths
'
= D^JDI PI,
see above, VIII, 347,
3)
from the
of that
(Babylonian) congregation for the upkeep of the school.

letter
The bearer
is
was
'Attat Hallevi b. Tob.
They
also
mention that certain prisoners
had
to
be ransomed for a large sum.
(Perhaps reference
brought to Egypt
in
made
to the
Jewish captives from Byzantium,

of the eleventh century; see
who were my remarks
in
the twenties
JQR., N.
S.,
IX, 420.
The
previous epistle
was dispatched three years ago and yet no answer

(1.
arrived
"lp
from the Gaon
15
ff.,
continuing the Hebrew, "9N
JO a
WD
p3D
NninyK
yi aia
na i# *bn
^dv
'-id
t by
lyb
uawa
min
,y
rbbx KHNon no*ta

jop[i]^
wa dkdto dkd5k,k
Kr6w nmsn
an::
iwn Tisn Tiwn
woti
Tî
Tii rrvaa ntaaa v-incx D"iap po p-ia Noai
d^b>
k^
dm
rtt
nni ^ toy^m).
THE RESFONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

him
in the
MANN
c. K.
453
name
in
of the 'Fathers' of the schools.
This
work was copied

this
Fustat
is
in
1012 Sel.
1001
Who
Nathan Gaon was
not clear (see Pozn., Babylonische

Dr. Marmorstein's
p.
Geonim, 109,
statement
for the latest discussion).
(nwm
nrpDn PTlO,
son,
191
7,
76)
that
Nathan
Gaon was Hushiel's

refutation.
and brother of Hananel, needs no

4
,
IX, 167.
T.-S. 10
contains a quire of six paper

Fol. 3, recto,
fO
|
leaves of which the tops are torn.
1.
from
below, reads as follows: (N1D3=) 02

-iar=) ib
nb\v
I
rh^H
|
nzbnbx TDBJ1
pr
cNin ain
npv
T3
d^dj
ua-i
nit-idd
|
n:p
wm
nip
moy n^x^n &n&i6n

uam
|
rnNoks*
jy 5>pa
ke 2Dn
(n^-in^
htan 3in SwtFin

. . ,
mo
ân
tv
s
ne>
new
px
|
pwo vtd'i
I
(fol. 3,
verso)
I
warn
mvDi ,'riw
pm t
6
I
witDBn
bane"
.ipts*
moi ronaw vo t-in^ nya nre p- pnon nv b>bj3 vw .nan 100 ni?D *b nw py i^jri nry nvr
. .
nrc imoB*
pa
ppirp
s
}awn nnxi? ny
.ipn
|
A aunn npn
,ipnx
fna*a
retri
imin a^noi
.ipnn s
nrcoai
pi
'lai
li?
npnn poi
d^b*i
.
vudwi
|
a^K
by\
.
n^n nsDni
ipaB*
bx
nvî
ny
|
.ip^r
kî
lprrr
mviai
ip-iD
htp
|
to
Kini
ipn
.
lyba
hot
.
d^c
wi
nyaiN
'hai
y:
rw
|
no
ipbn
n:o
nvn
irnm ^p
Dâô^
rw
trxi
jd^
nruc.
b.
Thus
Yahva,
first
R. Nissim was asked by his intimate friend Sadok
who
lived in Palestine, about the explanation of the

its
Mishnah of Rosh Hashshana with

calendar.
as
calculations of the
(in
He
it
sent
Sadok
his
commentary
teachers
Jewish Arabic)
he had
from
great
Hushiel
is
and X.
not pre-
(unfortunately the
served).
name
of his second teacher
The
eulogies
bestowed
upon them no doubt

interest
in
is
emanate from R. Nissim.

he had connexions with
b.
Of great
scholars
the fact that
Palestine.
;
Sadok
he
Yahya must have
visited
Kairowan previously
may
454

this
have been a native of

of Jerusalem,
town.
The
relations of the
Gaon
in
Solomon
b.
Yehuda, with Kairowan have

This explains
the
been referred to above (IX, 163).
most natural
way
the
fact
that
both
R.
Nissim and
R. Hananel were thoroughly acquainted with the Yerushalmi.
Very
likely the
connexions of Kairowan with the Holy
Land go back
to several centuries before.
The study
of
the Yerushalmi in that great intellectual centre of Jewry in the Middle Ages, Kairowan, was hardly
Hushiel,
Italy,
first
introduced by
who
is
supposed to have been a native of Southern

(Mschr.,
1911,
737,
as
Eppenstein
74 : -2) states.
Thanks
the
to the Genizah finds, the obscurity that enveloped
the history of the Palestinian Jewry from the

till
Arab Conquest
first
Crusade
is
gradually being illumined.

in
The
all
academy of Jerusalem, which was

a century before
existence at least
to
Ben-Meir, 17a
was well known
Jewry
over the Diaspora.
So
far
no responsum from Hai to Hananel
b.
Hushiel
has been preserved, though there can hardly be any doubt

that they were in communication with each other.
(T.-S.
8.
letter
265, apparently in North-African cursive writing,
damaged, right-hand top corner missing) contains some

details of interest.
,
, .
It
is
addressed to (verso)
I
rhm
11337
-innn
rMBP
13,,, nenp.
b.
doubt whether the

is
<S
well-known Ephraim
father
b^\
is
Shemarya of Fustat
meant as
ff.)
his
never styled Haber.

jnî
On
recto
(1.
we
read
. .
.
mra
n[Tnc&N] dsi td
*'p
nm
}N3
Taaxn
nfylai *dbji
"itd^k
nb yaafi
P^-id
^[ijansa
r\b
bum
yâ>
'i
nn-ii
mvro
T[n3]^t p nyonaKi
j
yip wi?
kini nay
r6
KD3
yi
p
isxd
]7a
libx
*a
r6ivi nay [n iany
onta
work,
/.
ruota
I,
ixa
n^si ^33
ff.
y?:a
See especially
my
c, vol.
pp. 50
THE RESPONSA OF
i?ib
Til E
BABYLONIAN GEON1M
vpt
dî
MANN
**
~*:~x TOKa
455
monKfi nyp Mn
D3rfc
rb
pi6
;ri>y
ina niea
tt
-n
pi
TfD^K
33DnX2
nTn^N
DX1 *Vob P[d]n

kdi ira nnh)
*i
b 33D3 -na
t^HFi fo natna
wban nd
-py *ea
m^
imn
n:ni
'a pnfo
amo nnnew
nfo ;siix
m*p ynn nnsD puron mn^^ ppoi nawn |o rostra nc nt*w ;a rowi cm "ten *te bran p rva lanaai ^wyct^
pe6a
The
writer
epistle
probably emanates from Kairowan.

letter
The
was anxiously awaiting a

But
if
from the
'
head of
the school' (Hai?

b.
his correspondent
was Kphraim
b.
Shemarya, then the Palestinian Gaon Solomon
Yehuda
read
might be meant).
On
arrival
of the letter he met with
a certain al-Kathir at Hananel's residence.

teresting details about collections of
We
'
in-
the school
in
'
(either
Hai or
money for the head of Solomon b. Yehuda of Jerusalem
Rome.
Unfortunately the representative of the school
was robbed on board ship which was captured by pirates

while
I
making
for
Bari
(the
locality
flvID (Serraleone
?)
could not identify), and thus the

Italian
Gaon
derived no benefit
by the generosity of the

of his correspondent in
Jewry.
The
writer inquires
Misr (Fustat) concerning certain
pamphlets which he sold to Elhanan, no doubt the son of

Shemariah.
longer alive.
When
the letter was written Elhanan
was no
Finally, the writer mentions that
two questions
in
were sent to Hai with the request to reply concisely

Arabic.
This the Gaon did.

his circle.
Probably the queries came
from R. Hananel and
As
to the latter's relations with 1-gypt.
it
is
of interest
to cite here a leaf in the T.-S. Collection containing
two
damaged paper
a
leaves of responsa.
Fol.
1,
recto,
concludes
pamphlet
of
fourteen
Gaonic responsa of which nos.

No. 13 reads 3TDa D1K
*an mi
12 (end)
14 are
preserved.
456

]r\b
in .(Sanh. 22a) yyib
"\zn:
isun^ p a *\wh
N
min
un
[n*a
rurw
.
nr
ww
[]in
anan
mm ymb
ana jn^ytt.
letter
[W&>
b*i
py"6
panjn
wio^ "P
D*nian
jt^
ernpn [peâ
Dya]ioD d*sd3
d^nvv
ijây
nn
nr
There follow our Alphabet and

Samaritan
to Sanh. a.
script.
I.)
beneath each
no. 358,
the
(Cp. also rft,
and R. Hananel
fol.
I,
On
.n[a]i?
jioa
s
verso,
1.
ft*,
we
read
im
anar
.
bwmn ujhk
|D inaa
[p]
it
^n
r6[NB>]
S?Np
W
nyi?
IT
N[ni?W]
wavw
^fite
nnvo Lâ]o
TP
row]
naen
â
rawn
6xy aa^
t ^n
'a
min^*
,(^yn=) yn
wan vtid^ n^x bxp nd

jd
h^n bvsbx
(Deut. ch. 23) Nvn

|i
^ nsna
nd
â
(n^rfw rr6y=)
ni>^
rra p*o
p
'iai
nn:oa
r6oa
is
n^ ^
a
(taiB*=) ne
xi?
ftobaeiDi
nn^xaD rw
and
deals
|D
Dmiai
1
|ndt nya nnttiwao rfar.

2.
There
gap between
fols.
and
The
of
latter
is
in
Aramaic
(Zeb. 77 b ).
with
the
question
aiyrw
DT
X, 129, note 192.
Very
interesting information as to
the infliction of capital
punishment within the Spanish

letter
Jewry
is
found
in
Ibn Abitur's
to
the Palestinian
Gaon Samuel Hakkohen b. Joseph note 2c). 18 The corresponding lines

fol. 2,
(see above, VII, 475,

in
MS. Adler
[f]pT
s
4009,
verso,
11.
19-23, read as follows: Wp?

Tjr6i
a vnaa
jm
'ina
pa vni^yro
-nsDa na^pjn
nn^n
18a io s
N Dcrrv
n^ k*dbdk3 nin^ i D M p xim
3au
.
â
nnN nana pa (rmna=)

inbiT^
Dwnn
nxp^n^
*oaa
ow
nw
Dwh
,9
pxb pna
pv fe
wi
18
-rot
mn nae6
now
nr naii
.bw?bw vronp.
LXX, 101-4 my work,
;
Ibn Abitur
This
letter is
1
printed in REJ.,
see
my
correction,
I,
ibid.,
LXXI,
Either
10-12.
It is fully
discussed in
/.
c, vol.
67
ff.
i8a
19
wr6.
=
'
grievous' (K^3K) or
second Attila.
is
Evidently the
man (tPOK), 'the scourge of man', name Satanas, by which Ibn Abitur's
family went,
derived from this nickname, which should really be pro-
nounced Shotenosh or Shotamtsli.
MANN
457
speaks of the grandfather of his grandfather, four generations

or about a century before him,
i.e.
the end of the ninth

in
century.
We
learn
thus
of a
communal authority
Neub.,
Spain wielding very great power, no doubt by permission of

the government.
See also Ibn Daud

.
. .
(in
I,
79)
'TOD bin
anrr?
PITH
(viz.
the Karaites) DE>-m

s
cpv
'n jron
PTTUW ny
mn tfta :do nr6 \rww It }DT3 WPW VI nî fKB\

by
fT.
[Dp
ins "ivaD pn nêu'P
seems had the Nasi wished,
he could have ordered their execution and would have been

authorized
" the government. 2
X, 142
no. 40,
Sec also Responsa of R. Besalel Ashkenazi,

b.
where an interesting responsum of R. Solomon

(Diana
Adret
svdj vbw
na^na roawna)
is
cited
on
this
question whether the help of the non-Jewish court
may
be
invoked
Bet-Din.
in case
the defendant flouts the decision of the
X, 144
in
fif.
From
the formula of a deed of sale for slaves

(in
Hai's
Kitab al-Shetarot
Wertheimer's DÛ'iT
*?aj,
III,
in
3a)
we
learn the respective nationality of the slaves

in
Jewish households (no doubt
Arabic
countries), either
Indian, Slav, Byzantine,

6
Lybian
or nKM?
(?).
pna
Ttb
rW3H
nw
nw3t
ff.
rwab
in
nxmi
in rungs* is
narwn may.
X, 310
permitting
Concerning the change of the Talmudic law

property to
their
movable
be
taken
away from
2643s1
orphans
in
payment of
father's
debt, Bodl.
contains a responsum of Sherira which deserves to be cited

20
Cp. also Maimonides, Mishnah Comment., Ilullin
1. 2,
CT1DD0
JTT1
pw? nbx\ jaa
m widw
D<a-io D<an
EFDtipDKn bas nrro niTay nayp
nnm nbapa i^maWD w*Ta hnva k!>k nr px nww oh >a

orvmy-i
hn
k!w *ia nftfinab nann D^jsa nt?y!> na^n

itdd"
1
[row
pmn
kjp
an
ea tppnorm
hie
iaai
rwiDKn
nam !*W
1
na 3ij?Dn msHKa.
VOL.
XI.
458
here.

Fol. 145 a has the following superscription n?DE^Ni
,
rivtf,
and on the margin we have the

it
letter a indi-
cating that
formed the second one
in the
pamphlet.
It
begins din â npab pain vbv

vy\o
'131
im ^n
nun
k!?i
ns
f?y
vm pa^ Nno5> w n pwi nW&yi jnoi nnDâ nnn o^Kycc^ ta-iB*
nxm *a ^n p^NyDB^n [jo nn]s -jim pta^BB wm. The scholar, who wrote the question, discusses the new point
whether movable property
is
wbw
also alike
immovable property
with regard to the priority of the claims as indicated by

the respective dates of the creditors' a responsum of R.
identical with
bills,
and he
cites
'Amram
(fol.
to R.
DW (read T2&,
1.
no doubt
the
Kairowan scholar dealt with above,

145,
v.,
pp.
(r.
445
&f)
f.).
He
|yu
"i/i
writes
14),
nW naipn
at
s
f?
JVin
!>Ni
.y-ii.ti
tnwv na onBy
S>p^D^
p*a
an no usta ab
nîbb
pyBP ma *pD mn pixn
o atr an 146,
xb)
!>nw
r.)
(fol.
pi
pna
s
mm
is
jvuns
mm
*a*n
^b^bb t&w ypnpB

mnan
jd
(r.
patr
ysw
i^bki
ypnpB pânai
5pp
^pp
nnBG?)
irb iin
nnoBH nnpn
nb^h
N3^
ttrvbi
6iai>
s
Q^pT
;kbi ypnpBa
i>as
^b^bb
^bb
^B^BBa nnp
twni
bp^D^ ^b^bbi ypnpB pânan v nh
KnsamB pnnn
win
pjp is jbi
yTK
nnaijyn
in
ana lanai ^Dôots n^K nainsi main ^ya "\x>vb pmnna

(fol.
nayn*
146, v.)
an
pwi kî
wan
bi k:b^dk
pa.Ti
xo^y
6b^bb
|b rnwt nainai
main
*6ya wiaasA
b*np* â wrai
in$>
^tD^ta?a3 n*np
âs a^nxa toani "'ypnpBa b,bd
mnan ;b nn wnwn
n^>
NnxaTiO pnnn
i^sni
âs:
(r.
wpm
srupn snna
bai
si>
W2i^
mi>
yw
xa^
nnBC DHpi
prpm) p^pm
nniKB
'ypnpica
^bSdd*i
wan yn^
1x1
pam
nuns
*ax;i
(w =)
i^bb
in
naa na:^
no
this
nail Dips?
am
bya ro^n.
As
787
change of the Talmudic
law took place
c. E.
(above, X, 310, note 223), R.

in
'Amram's responsum
was written
870 C.E. (eighty-three years afterwards). The

is
Sura Gaon decided that movable property
fully alike

to
MANN
459
immovable property as regards
priority of the claim-
(nDHp).
to the
Now
the questioner cites a responsum of Sherira

this view.
:'d
Magreb opposing
He
writes
IT
n^N*J'
pajpi
a-iyD.i <:ab
(mem nnDj=) 'm

.write
u*nn roanao rown

v.,
i:nv:
rnwn Kropn
pap
r.)
avii
(fob 147,
I.14)
'iai
na-wi nh
& *kdn (fob 148,
rntaa rnnnx hv
rvaB> nd^j
ni
rmhra
Dney
31
ui>
id (-knii =) em
L""
.-13;
.inaiera
nan
uwiic Tarn
i>ya
rown
naap no
naai
onpp
"irnxo
'as*
!??
am
nai?n
7;
am
^>yaa
it
(i.e.
Sherira's father)
'iai
WJiN
p*0 PMJn 31
naai
noo
aw
ih\sxn n:-id ;"jn
naa *6 naai?
no
dip-' "lr.ixo
moia inahpn.
Interesting
(fob 148, v .)
N:ni?D
is
the beginning of Sherira's reply: ?aa Ktt"?

jinb
% n^s pria t> iirpn *enpi nanan *cc
vnao *pn*a
t>
nwpiK^n
nano^n
nî
"id a
moy
rroc
an
~^d
jd ^*
ssny n:>ti
Km
pna
7b
.TnN"6
pnn
D"ioy
nai
an
xoyo pnapK
k*i
k^k rasnoMp
*3kto roa
m marpK
nwo
pna n:^
Ksmn
iai
urpn "pipi "ip'sd

bails* i>aa
^>aa
v^d^d snôa
aî N*n
na
nc*t*p
ruttye
Srnn Keye
aân |ND
n^k
nnoy an me*n Krupni

trope
kihwi
ijn
rra
xnsnns
wu
Np
dv
âa
pan sn:pn îd
*pDi>
r.)
toko
nan
nrjem
ni"6d
mna
rcro n^
we
irn
Ka^
'131
(fob 149,
K3nnN Dynoi "ypnpoa "bvbacb pawned
NTUpna. This independent, and at the

in
same time modest,

Gaonate.
mental attitude taken up

this
his
responsum well behoves

Babylonian
great
representative
of
the
Sherira.
X, 327, note 248.

D^N^Dn
nD'J'l,
However, Harkavy points out (DHWl

it
31, note 93) that
is
not likely that Jews
from one
district
spoke
all
these languages.
He
is
therefore
!
suggests to read for ftoKTKlfo, rtacam/tt, Kabbanitc Jews
X, 3:4, note 257.

referred to
This Gaonic responsum
evidently
ed.
by
Alfasi (cited in D*yn
D^n
in
Dn* ncn,
I
i
460

fol.
Venice, 1622, no. 63,

"b
14a, top)
rri?
(i.e. ?]"n) f 3"in
3D3
Tiy
n*n td ronn
Krpfctn
-ne>
icni ndj-d
nnan n^ -ntn
sb
n3\tt
"pa
nan
'131
una
pam fmnroa 3"n

prni
n^rw
ina'arw
NriTnoD
mc
wn xnta
e
Njn;oi n *S3
"ion).
XE"pi.
See
also Ibn Daud's
remark (am2N
X, 340.
Cp. also
51),
Harkavy, 116. no.
Anan in his Book of Precepts (ed. who conforms here with the general
"p
custom
in the
Rabbanite communities, N3\n 731

|TD$>
D*n Np
^D
'131
^>3
NH^p
^
u
&OT
.TO
p*jDp JntPH KW*3 *3

'3*n
*3
X3W
in
aw.
x^nm
.nwfea ^tns* \n
^n
pb:
nSh
atap pnn
n^
D^pn
hdb D^prn bx
ynyi Ttni
jnd
wh
nioi>
X, 344.
The shaving
Egypt
of the head as a punishment was
also practised in
in the
Arab
period.
'
See Graffinb.
Nau, Patrologia
Orientalis,
X, 546,
Ya'kub
Ibrahim,
(i.e.
the representative of a prince
of the
Muslims
the
governor appointed by the caliph), took an unjust judge
and paraded him through the

after shaving
his
streets
of Misr
' ;
(=
Fustat)
beard and baring his head
this
took
place after 849 c. E.
X, 345.
The communal
vn urm nni
prison
is
also mentioned in the

(in
Responsa of R. Joseph ibn Migash, no. 122

"imon rv33
the question),
ww
n^ri
nrn
inw "Q^ni.
About
the passage in Sanh. 9A see further Aptowitzer,

;
Mschr., 1908, 194-7
1912, p. 321, note to p. 28.
X, 345
Din,
it
fT.
As
5
regards the oaths imposed by the Betcite
will
be of interest to
3
,
the following passage from

leaves, the first of
T.-S. 8
consisting of
two
which
is
contains an Arabic glossary of Talmudic words.
There
a gap between
ith lanai
fols. 1
and
2.
The
latter begins as follows:
nnna
vb\
kwc
iiuri
nimn mur6 ah
nix[]
muni?
rtic^d
\h* \xncnm\ Nrvneb
n^ .Tim Nn^33
by\ nâ ;n:o

ova -'"na xi Nnoinxi n*e>M3 nuip:[|
,
MANN
46]
..1 pro Konnc
s~-
na bab
wwi
n\s*
Kan tape
xbi
ba
wnn tnnno nawi

;>ya it?
-:
-
DITTO Dira fcOî D'ua rrb nnoo bpob rrbn pi

,-nnoi n:h
yam
bp
tap M *fri
rrb
rrby
irwo^ wnôa
rvb jvn sa-i
main
hn inyi
amy
by
xb
KsnoM
27
run
yansw mn ia ntjnar
erneon D8?a tuyanPMi "ina py*ape i:nyn by Kb ins pjnapc

fo
upo
;kd bai
ba vby
bM vra sav M DP3

rrnnai
rww
tj\n rrnioi â
.nhyap
n
mTa
natn
bsiyni
fi&2 pbn ib n.t
xb pb*
it
nia-iyia vik
canan aew
"
20
b* *na nisav
na rrnon nyup
*jd
nbjrci
ym
*aa
pyn nine
-ma
-jino
ib
toy -arai rrrw

in-j'an
a rwnc ^k iy nam ruon

ft
now? & bs Tna nena^

bnao
n*DD mnen
oâ
iy:n rmra
mxc
fnm
(verso)
e>s?
fnasn njno
PBn[i
nvrny]
s
new
nvba
niaab
ipin
nwi
D M pi
n xini niDibyn pani nipi^y nbaoi nuunt royaci

.
nrvra
nyi obiyb
The
as Kirns
It
is
first
paragraph
is
the end of the document
known
349).
and NTttnnx (both combined, see above, X,
similar to the one published
by Aptowitzer [JQR.,
the
addition
that
N.
in
S.,
IV, 27, top),

the
having,
however,
case
person
excommunicated
does
not
comply
invoke
with the decision of the Bet-Din, the plaintiff
may
the help of the non-Jewish court, and co-religionists

give evidence
may
two
there (see above, X, 143).
The
last
paragraphs contain the introductory formulae of the lenient
and the stringent oaths.

time when oaths were
In
still
They
evidently date from the
administered (above, X, 345).

of hitherto unpublished
conclusion,
some addenda
22
KaTO.
Hence read
- *3ibe.
23
- bNTj".
it
24
The
dots beneath and above
X seem
to indicate that
should be
deleted.
25
-'
âp^l
'
in
order that he should accept
'.
?}p would be more correct.
Cp.
Yoma
18 b and 19 b, top.
2S
" =
bvrvtr \iSx nisas.
- ^nbs.
"
TPK.
462
Gaonic responsa (apart from those cited before) are given.
So
far
no responsum of the Gaon Kimoi

898
C. E.)
b.
Ahai
(of
Pum-
bedita,
was known.
In the important Halakic

flf.)
compendium (JQR., IX, 681

are mentioned twice (pp. 684,
1.
responsa of R.
Kimoi
ft",
688, bottom), but their
author
may
;
have been R. Kimoi

Geonica
I,
b.
Mar R. Ashi
1).
(of Sura,
829
c. E.
cp. also
104, note
T.-S. 10
ink,
G
.
1
,
contains
four
leaves,
brownish paper and

1.
torn
sp?'
and
. .
damaged.
Fol.
4 b,
6 from below, reads &U1D
(evidently end of question which begins on
fol. 3,
verso),
'am
'nan
'wi sn
*a[n]
wib 'navoi kiki ? Kasip
npsa
ki ktik^kp
p dni pw tin (laanK -non =) i ion ptu nop it,ti pjwi pism kwd ivdbh *bwk ian i^ki nt n5>wa As similar introductory phrase of a responsum 131 p.T^y. # we find in D*1B3, no. 76, and p p, 48 a, no. 24. In both cases
the question ends with
N*a-|D
^b\ while the answer begins
nt Kn^Ntrn (oanma) n^rana Kin 3"k (see Mailer, Einleitimg,

pp. 14, note to
J*"B>,
no. 24,
b.
and 170, note

but
b.
13).
They
are
attributed to
their author
Samuel
was not
Hofni,
who knows whether

Ahai
;
really
Kimoi
Another
snnTiiD
leaf (T.-S. 10
G 52
verso
recto blank) begins
m~\ mirr aaam njidi wi^nc nyia

icy
nnwn 6m
6a.
6s?a
tr\w2
Dîni?
D'ain?
;ive6
jna
pin saom
This
Gaon
is
Sherira's grandfather.
in
The Babylonian Geonim usually wrote their responsa Aramaic. Only when the questions were written in
in
Arabic the reply would be

e.g.,
Pl*a,
the same language.
See,
Dai
no. 371,
where Sherira and Hai write

pe&a nnaispn irab.
ia*1
nana
Nn -ltwa
owunn
T.-S. 8
62
contains a pamphlet of Gaonic responsa in Jewish Arabic

(six leaves).
Fol.
3a begins
,ia^y
**n
VKO
mint* Vsh
na
ii>\\*
ni^KV
~ia
laana
p nh&p nw*n pm
^w*
nbiy ni
.wm
MANN
i
463
rMw
i\x
nawi
wi
rnan uarm
nbubp naepv
wn
mv
nTi^n
non
u*an
fljw nya uro

pe6a
onm
nbwfe
nwn
wma
pin rrwr bjtw

lKipi
iwe ^nvd^
wio^
n c:r
s
[naiswi
aw
âi
|wa awy
web \x-"wfM ^3 mama. There

top
follow the questions and responsa in Jewish Arabic.

(
)n
the
other hand, scholarly

to
correspondents of the
Geonim endeavoured
no.
write in Aramaic.
Hai,.
Thus
in r":
325 (from Kabes to
dated 10 16
C. E.),
the writers,
so to say, apologize for sending the legal question in Arabic
because
it
reached them so from the parties concerned
in
the case (see p. 311, |6a
}mn wjhk ^zb nwn nbxvn

Bodl. 2851 21
of the
(fols.
uren
]nn ^yao naP lDa rvaiy).
45-9,
;
im-
portant
for
the wording
Talmud
text
several
fif.),
passages translated into Arabic) concludes

*dj
(fol.
49
b, l.io
toruM
pjk
paTi Kaxruioa nnDiN pe6a naonp

parp
,
id
pn^tten ct^î
yiaiMî
iamb
1^
pari*
ndp
;m p
payiawi
mnrt
tcrrpfi
nyc
nJ?)
inr2 "i
"i[n]ai>
yodk
i>y
im
nan yTo!>i
naani
80
^do twb&
mio
987
nafop
idî n-nn
uba
row
ba^ni
nym mini noan

*bd nibr.
khm^kp pton snavn

||;Jx>
&onai
anpa
nrua pis
^m
pycni inÊi kb5?k [n]jen

yfi?]\
jd[*j
n]T3.
in
pfn [ai
This responsum, written

31
c.E.,
no
doubt emanates from Sherira.
So
30
31
i.
far
e.
'
no son of Hai
is
known
at all.
DV122 D3ai
.
But Bodl. 3682
of Israel' (cp. Ps. 80. 16,
pD
,
For similar endings of responsa pamphlets by Sherira and Hai see

208, 219, 264, 314, 328, 344, 369, 418, 442.
In this
11*3, nos. 36, 47, 67,
connexion
b.
it
is
of interest to cite responsa
by a certain scholar. Sa'adya

replying
to
in
Yehuda ^probably
in
in
of Egypt},
to
He would
language
contained
have wished
write
who apologizes lor in Hebrew but had

up.
Arabic.
ot'
make use
large
the
which the questions were drawn

T.-S. 8
The responsa are

square
recto,
12.
consisting of four paper leaves,

Fol.
1.
hand, of the eleventh or twelfth centuries.
begins
3
1TO3
by
Ton ^Kwn
irons
*a
piiiiT
"ia
nnyo potm
.jdk
*:d
.(Dan.
tn vpx\
*a!o
*yn$ v\
inTDiv cipEn
-ji?np
Diiwn
"pta
464

by R. Hai
(fols. 1-2),
contains a treatise
then
(fol.
3a, in
different handwriting) a
responsum about the second day

b"i,
of the Festivals
this
(W
D"V, cp.
no.
1),
no doubt
also
by
Gaon.
in
On
fol.
4b, end, there begins another responsum

to Elhanan
(b.
by him.
Arabic, addressed
br
Shemarya,
r6l.
see above, p. 435),

in reply to
prAn
nans
bf
t&X
It
was
Elhanan's question about this very problem of
DU1D
D^
"0C\
The responsum ends on

d^d"
*38? >iabi
fol.
6 b, followed
ijni?
by
another decision
'a Dîax
ab 3T bran 3in cpv
raven
on in^3
nmbn
i^ms
omaa
dbue>
by
pjni
npm
'3E>
,
J31HN
Tb
DW
iyi bnnro iniN

(r.
JWm .(Prov. 27. 19) 51 Q'oab D^2.1 nnpi -jxunm (r. naiaxn) naiasnn -jnD3n3i
13H3
(i.
D^D3
u nnp
intt s n)
lilDWI 3^ni)D
ii^b3
e.
hastened)
Tlbnn
tfbl
flrwp DK1
!?3n
m*tfi
cmp
[ijvi^^
nwb
pe>b3
s
wm
b 3ri3
nwraa
pron.
The
1
*rori3i
ni3? ^rb
-rnba^
nn^n
rum rimy
The responsa touch upon

cerpted here: T\b
.
.
several topics.
following details are ex(1,
ffi
bP flDWH
(a,
H3JJ |KS
;
nns D3 H^ytO KDN1

'
verso)
paibs 133 [NOW]

tfbtt
verso)
. .
D DrUD mPWI ibcE
ilim .TiyD
'a
jn
Nrra
wbya
tfin
bpa onba ib3
D3n ban
nbaoi
nny b^DD
*aiKia
nô a "ok abx
kits nay xbn
oânbb xnnî no
Kixa x^dpi xan: \y nboai qhjd mni Nnbzoya b&tt&> ib *b Krama fb 3n3D Nirby khiek *a ibao nonn pan kdki
. . .
sdd^n
'a
KiDin "ijrnK nronn pan btfpa pksbp pb.

set
A new
,*|KpibK
-13
of
responsa
p|DV
begins
on
fol.
3,
.
recto
. .
^[flTl
.
J"I1313
. .
yiTn
13 pror
nx^n
i *by 3inNn
-j3ri3
*|pna Dib$?n
ii
na^n
nan
oym
iDiyon
"by
jot?
mb ymnb
|n:3
^rona
tqibtq nn?nb warn TW^wsa n nn3n3c no by mDyi 1IE63 ;n (r. vmicn) *nan nam rorp Kb xctr vttdk tmpn jwba
3iy.
Concerning a certain question our scholar writes
:
Qn^3 1^
n^fi
n^NDl
JK1
&opk &rin bno3
*b
1311 nsnbtf.
Fo1 4, verso, ends,

-
naia
mix
Dânbb
DnrariN
ww
ybR
[K
rppanbw
mono
n3bn
n^'
r\yv
nioaro
nDinc nsbn
Qi3i: in .Tiyp ib
|Ki.
THi:
RESPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM MANN
465
iM3J8>a |u
'131
ycnrr
i>"j,
mo^
5
a,
1.
\rthv
ina
nvi
wnc [mom
Most
um
mib
p*6
meant
(cp.
p.
11,
!
from below),
likely l{>
is
a scribal error for i:3"6

here.
82
Probably R. Joseph ibn Mi gash

from
is
Finally,
three
interesting
responsa
here.
collection
composed by Hai are edited

32
T.-S. 8
G5
contains
However, the author of the above responsum may be
identical with
a celebrated scholar to
whom
a question
was addressed from

leaves, of
Fustat in
first
992
c. e.
T.-S.
fol.
1,
consists of
two paper
which the
seven
lines of
recto, conclude a
responsum dealing with the question of the

1?3C).
number of days between Passover and Pentecost (JT1JDP

1.
From
ff.
we
read, BBfi JBV1

.
.
"noy B>TD1 TIT 331 f|DV Jin *E&D

i>p
ircnn
pun
6
nr
e*B>
D7!3i
[yei
pian
mw pb
p ns
%
iyv vbw m ui^n nvn raw d:' by

. . .
r6w
pmn
naan *
i:
3ins n^m
pi n*a ^
nor
si n:&>
r ..
1.
ijid?
nvn d*td bkddb3 \tai
inosra
rnn
nmn ui> men o^yn n "dp nsp^
(2,
33)
rra
.
j:?
n:r ibop
5>n
wki mswi
insni
rain
iru*3i
ramn
31D3B>
. .
mw
Kin
bl)
ra "n^yi "2tb
*3 'Bp^ K1ttB>
fol. 2,
1^13
]Wn
Wn
rwp n nfow :ian rbyfri p*SK [31KT1 M. The responsum

This Rabbi
is
not yet completed at the end of
verso.
may
be identical
with Joseph ibn Abitur
who
has been compelled to leave Spain, and

in
who
c.
I.
during his wanderings stayed for a time

pp. 67!!. ).
Egypt
(see m}' work,
/.
The
T.-S. 8
well-known
responsum
by R. Hai
(p^3,
no.
1,
referred
to
above) really formed the
thirty-first of a
pamphlet.
This
fol.
we
learn from
7
,
consisting of four paper leaves.
On
4,
verso,
we
read
ism ro id b$ rhothn
(as is b"i) 'im
(Erub. 6 1 )
n3:n ny
*jb>
mn am p
is
"wi nr
v<
ni^:
viz.
hw
Mia
d*ds
norwr.
Fob. 1-4.
contain an Arabic responsum, the beginning of which
missing, dealing
with several topics,
with Hezekiah's Passover (a Chron., ch. 30), with

7
the query of Sharezer and his companions about the fasts Zech., chs.
and 8
and with Purim.
On
fol.
4 a, middle,
we
read
>f
pXJ
HHyD
13*31
v"
31^ .WDvyi i^bc i^jdp ma :(nhpQ-) ip3 iri fvi 1K1 1HDW "6 TlTN niK^B33 iTHM pN 1Xp .WO"l 3 ^V inDnni ID^m. This responsum, concluding with [fol. 4, verso "713' *1 HJQl !"IJ33n "HyC "J?, is probably Gaonic. A couplet from a liturgy by
13ed
13^
W2
Sa'adya on Purim
is
cited.
466
six
is

paper leaves of responsa.
;
Between
3 a
is
fols.
and 4 there
is
a considerable gap
6,
on
fol.
fol.
one responsum
marked
23.
as
while another on
4a
given the
last
number
We
reproduce here nos. 23,
24,
and 25, the
being incomplete.
first
R. Judah al-Barceloni evidently had the

in
two responsa
were by Hai.
front of him, stating expressly that they
But he excerpted from them only the decisions, leaving out

just those parts of interest for
modern readers
responsum
(DTiyn
'd,
pp. 277-8
b"3, nos.
92-3
n"v, no. 84, third
seems to have been

deals,
copied from DTiyn

the
'd).
The
where
MS. breaks off, with

#
a,
the Massoretic passage of Ned. 37 b,
which formed the subject of another question from Kairowan

to Hai (n
no. 210
is
see
DWn
'd, p.
257
f.,
where the same

this
responsum
expressly quoted in the
name of
Gaon).
another
But
our responsum
was obviously written on
occasion.
Hai was asked
(no.
23)
about the difference
in
im-
Targum on the Pentateuch and that on the Prophets, and also why that on the Hagiographa was hidden. It is said that the last Targum was hidden because
portance between the
therein the time of the advent of Messiah
was revealed-
But the questioners possessed a Targum on Esther wherein

no allusion was made to this topic.
author of the Hagiographa
its
They
inquired
who
the
Targum
was, and contended that
Messianic passages ought to have been expunged while
leaving the remainder for posterity.

denies that the
b. Uzziel,
The Gaon
in his reply
Targum on Esther emanates from Jonathan

in
and states that
Babylon (Bagdad) there exist
various recensions of this
Targum, some having many Agadic
additions while others are literal translations.
We
possess
two Targum im to Esther, the so-called

tioned already in Masck. Sofcrim 1 3.6.
W Dinn being men-
A question concerning
THE RESFONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM

the Palestinian
MANN
467
Targum
(on the Pentateuch) was addressed

n
;
by Jacob
b.
Nissim of Kairowan to Sherira and Hai

'D, p. 256,
no 248, cp. also mnyn
end of
175).
It is
likely
that the above inquiry also
came from Kairowan.

word
%
\
In no. 25 the
"DSPB*
Gaon
deals with the reason of the

&,
being spelt with a double
and with the larger

so frequently
question
why
the letter
pB>
B>
should
do the
function of "]D
(namely
(to
D).
He
quotes Ben Asher

for the first
and Ben Naphtali

his
my
knowledge
time
in
rcsponsa), and also
mTm
nnDn
piD (known to us as
Midrash Haserot
versions.
Wiserot), the text of which
had
different
(Fol. 4, verso,
1.
7.)
Dnbxirm
ia
mam
nbyioo
nobi
rmnn mannb
mba
frvâ e*
nbytD
no
10
mam
raaa
dn Dwaan
**a 13 c *a
p-ora? buirn dx
mavDn
nan ypn
pro?
m
raa"
pi laoy
mos
ia
nba?:>
mam
dni mainan nann < Tijn

1
*j'pb
ppn pna?
b*p
inn
,B
nain
min
btf
mam
*
inn
ypn Sââ
nxirm
15
manni
lax
*wb dx lecn
pa nbnn
by
by noaan nâa
noixb
ib
dm Kin nam
"mwi
mam
minbe mamb r&yo b*p myir

no na k^n Dwaa h?
rj?Dn [d ctr
n-nnbtr manni
rtoDT i 'dn
faia
:!l
owaan
by
.121a
minb
hsn
ao
na
la-iEs *~\n
twaa
i
n-nn
33
be mann sax na
ijol.
nm
kdww
Hence
same.
From
the answer
6, r.,
1.
ff.)
it
appears that Hai was also
asked about the Targum to be recited together with the Hafrarah.

read here
34
mOBHTI Diami
a.
or
DW3)bl9 Diami which comes
to the
Meg. 3
468

(fol. 5,
recto)
yvw
>sd
ni
-iryta i *a
nc
nan Di^paiN
noN
iwn&^
iwny
p pw Dwaate mann
nyrynra *3k!?ei
nnar an
s
non-a
nwo vans
by nona niK yanx
nno
H133^
nât? nr Kin
S?y
^
p
nnnNi
>ip
na nnvn
neai v6an
iwtty
;nav -iy
din
*aa^
D"1S *33^
T^D W^JP
KV1 *3N
5>1
na
Dinn
-pia:6
k^k
e?p*3
ww
Snp
N3N rva maai?
niW
ii?
iwntra nip^nn
11
n^c
p*n
niaini
mow
'
nn navn Dâina
4
10
jwpDi
^D nv
p inn
nwn m^B
an
r5x
Km
hdk
i>saan
nr
nan D^paiK
nun h?
naoa
15
isnpn an dk
nr
an n pax na Kp\x
35
cniM anpo
ranDn
ovfotn
mn
nrm
ninae* p*pnai Diann
nnDK nâD mann xbn nm?o[s] new

nnDN nânn yp ibk
Kin
ppi>
pnar ia p laay
sc
iwana
is*
n^
p"ao
Na^
in
T3y
D^na
Dnw
nâ
bwrw
in*
n^rf?
Haw
20
nc
'd
oai>
[dsJ^kb* Diann myi
Diann nâ ub
jnav
nan o
(verso)
&6*n oa^VN todh nr p

jta
npy
D'ainan
err n^n
my
tb)
nustnn^w Diann
i>aaa
nr D**ie*t3 Dâia
n??a
nnoa Diann
mirnnoi nann niSDin

raaa
ia B* -ins* hie
ia
*?
:;r
no?
n:-j*
35
Dme ntrsn nww iNxm ppn

* r
pK nnsi
pna? ia
sw
37
no
Neh.
8. 8.
*K.
Read 1KB*.
THE RKSPONSA OF THE BABYLONIAN GEONIM -.MANN
469
mnnn
ota
ntai> bip
na lnjBW
fe^n
na *r
-13-in
*aaii
hfl? p*ai
n "'w ,Tn traina

N*:ri?
^0
n^ya frrh
i:b
pk pos hp
din *2ibv [Djmpna tfjnv

b>H Dli? 31D
a
own
jo
10
TO
WM
-pi
D'yiV
D*K DIN
bo dj
pnow
c^-jm
ounvw
mnn
br.iy
jiw
yoe> aiDi rpia? an
DrAxtm
/y
\xii
Donate
nam
ia
15
nwan
n*aa D;inb Kin
[m]tnn
i?yi
mmn
*a
1202 Niipi
nic*
rwrr naSi nm
s
ni?nn
nm nwo
pnmn
pn wnapiDfa]
K/i Nip:
wpa
nyi owaan
nwyn Dnno
piNi nsryo M
pm
recto)
(fol. 6,
xip:
wn
Nnpn
oairiDi Kipj
*pin
pirxm
pi
b:y
naâ BtWD^ Dinn

nns"
1
anno
n5>
niina
30
pm
niDfinn tvrw
piDao in*
i3
s
onnb
Nip* &61 ppioa
ne^po
a paa nby
pncNi nvhw
*a
K*aaai
hn
dv^n " icn na

id
Dmao:
[*c]y
o:n * idk
^ no myi
pi
'
nanwna
tt
d^txd
mvo pho
iron p:6io
pm
* d[*o]
P*db< nS>p
na
iy
fcoaja
^t
1
noa iyi
10
Dn^Nc
1-j'M
[pa*n]non
na
pw
p&mpp
S8
lyci
law*
ana
Dye no
b*
mis pNiip d^d
un
.
Meg. 25
a.
Meg. 23
b,
bottom. 24
<
Isa. 52. 3-5.
470

px-iipe* bi
*jb>
"jed inxi
pp
"ins*
iafe^'
-oferj*
irn pnpô p6ki naâ
id
b*]
[c]n]
*p -pD
mina
orw
nx ?*\p)[vv
n^n
ppfci pssra
-aâ-H
15
'2
bx
tafe^
pipjot? [etyi
*wm
i["k]
^naa
f[a]
nn nnx
bv
nnn
41
}*Epn fiwi [fleo

p*ipa
^
p
p
mi
mina pwnn
[wro]
pwnn
20
neyc wn nn
ntt?ofe
fh rbv]Kbn vh
42
[ana]n
nvb most? nn
pasfo
MnjpDi
tok
(verso)
nrw pw
row
"i3fe>
paa
nns nis
*
pnipi nix
nuiynn nwera
pa
avvat
npyD
nnw
nnon
pis nx-ipê ro> no: neîoo
na cm k\t mien
n^k nns
nitr-non ;nwi nann Dâinaa na-in
memo
paa
*prf>
sw nnn
pania
piw uk
ww
<a
p nmn
p^y
[v]n
xnp^n i^k
[l]Da pmpai pea
pa twai nnnei pwi
urw
p^npi
niainaa fr
nn pnow wn
dn
a
rniD[oi>]
dn ^1
N-ipî? b*
e>wft
10
pîn nan i^sx ania xine

43
no fe^
wan
44
w nw
*a
nncBn
pw
nap ama u\x
on:
s^
ynu pea n^n pa Kwai
nxe
41
This
fcO
here
is
only to
fill
up the
line.
42
About
this
difference
between Ben-Asher and Een-Naftali see

edit,
in
particular Ginsburg. Introd. to Masscretico-Critic.

first
of Bible, 250
b.
ff.
The
reading IDB'B' 1
is
reported
in
the
name
of
Moses
Mohah
'cp. Pinsker,
Lifckute,
Appendices, 98).

tip
MANN
i.--
471
pope pp *6n vrwrb

pdb6
'bbn
po
d*"ibid
u
i
b*i
pp nm oTia
naio
nnm mnw
Dipoa
airo^
tlî'
*an
ipn[ym
n|rn |ien
Uiw
p
Kipo "prop
6s
x[i]n pi pi
mop
D%)9
ps
[pKj no onEiD
a
mf-ibpp
n[ita]n rhx bi
enp
^d
ne{i> roi>]n !>&n&^

ty[B>]
dhdî Dns[ion]
20
DW
jn jna p:D onaio &npB Dn

off.
b.
Here the MS. breaks

18
Ned. 37
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
I.
The Fundamental
Factors.
Israelites,
Religion, History, and Archaeology, not only of the

but also of the nations to
with
of
whom
results
the latter were either related or
whom
they
came
in close contact, are the essential factors
Biblical
studies.
No
obtained
by a purely
literary
text-critical
method can be accepted which do not stand the
test of these factors.
The fundamental importance

it
of this state-
ment
Books
is
so manifest as to constitute
a truism.
The Mosaic
that present a mixture of religion, history,

in the
and archaeology
However, though
in
must of course be viewed

essential
same way.
to
Biblical
studies
subjects,
and generally considered

the
the
treatment
of these
as
modern
critics
do not look
modifying
the
upon them
Testament.
fundamental to the extent of
results arrived at
by an analytical and
critical
study of the Old

or less probable,
On
the basis of these results,
more
an
artificial edifice
of the religion, history, and archaeology of the

Its
Israelites
has
been erected.
presentation on lines, which
almost entirely ignores the Oriental

sion,
is
mode
of thought and expres-
at best highly ingenious
and
attractive.
But we might as
well present
Moses and the
Biblical writers in
modern garb
as to
view their writings in the light of modern thought.

the accuracy and precision of their
critics
Believing in
own
presentation, the
modern
and
make
it
norm
for the study of the religion, history,
archaeology of other Semitic peoples.
The
conclusions obtained
from these studies cannot but confirm their own views, since they
merely
this reflect their
own preconceived
ideas.
We may
illustrate
procedure with the words of Johns in his book (17):

fancies he can discern a surprising likeness
'Now
when one some

Bible,
between
clause in the
Code
of
Hammurabi and some

473
verse in the
he
is
wise to keep his surprise to himself until he has
VOL. XI.
K k
474

latest critical subdivision of
procured and studied the

Israel
the laws of
and
satisfied himself to
which source or sources his verse

other authorities to
belongs.
Then one has

this ruling is
to ransack
is
know
whether
one which
it
widely accepted, and even
more important, whether

law which
gigantic
had been independently reached or

to the very likeness to
was constructed with an eye

it
Babylonian
dreaded to acknowledge.'
of master
Notwithstanding the
century,
labours
minds
for
for
over a
useful
which
might have been employed
more
and more noble

Israel's
aims than of discrediting the Old Testament accounts of

history
and
religion
and thereby undermining the fundaments

it
of the
prevailing
creeds,
does not require great
ingenuity
and learning
artificial
to point out
the defects
and
to
demonstrate the
character of their construction of the religion
and
history
of Israel.
We may
illustrate
it
by one of the most important
views which forms the starting-point of modern criticism.
The modern
critics arbitrarily
deny the
historical character of
the patriarchs of Israel

existence legends pure
and consider the
history concerning their
and simple.
and
Consequently, the syncretism
discernible in the laws
religious conceptions of Israel
must upon
date from a post-Mosaic period.

the fact as to
Israel
is
There
is
no need
to dwell
how
the presentation of the history
and
religion of
affected
by that view.
The
sojourn of the ancestors of
the Israelites in of the laws
Canaan would
naturally account for the similarity
and
religious conceptions of the latter to those of the
inhabitants of Canaan, and consequently that syncretism might
be pre-Mosaic.
Living in Canaan, though in a half-nomadic
state,
the ancestors of the
Hebrews could not have remained unaffected

religion, law,
by the
civilization,
and customs prevailing
there.
Nor
are
we justified
in assigning those
Old Testament conceptions

to the exilic period
which apparently show Babylonian influence

as soon as
we accept
as
historical the
or,
Biblical statement
that
Abraham
hailed from
Ur,
perhaps,
according
to
another
account, from Harran, two of the oldest centres of Mesopotamian

civilization.
Moreover, the modern
critics,
with the exception of the radical
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
wing, concede
it
HOSCHANDLR
475
as an historical fact that the Israelites', or a section
of them at
least,
sojourned in Egypt, where they were oppn

to the desert.
by forced labour, and whence they escaped
But
notwithstanding this admission, they generally present the Israelites
who
left
that country as
nomads.
Consequently, the Mosaic laws

religion.
are considered from
the aspect of a purely nomadic

that even
if
They do not consider

on
the Israelites had been
nomads
their entrance into Egypt, the influence of
Egyptian culture
upon them would have been

passed
in art
inevitable, as
Egypt was then unsurin antiquity.
and science by any country
Though
( loshen,
the Israelites
may have
dwelt separately in the land of
their constant contact with the Egyptians could not
have been
without
effect.
evidently
The proper names Moses, Aaron, Phiheas, Hur, show Egyptian influence. The nomadic religion of
Thus
for instance,
the Israelites must have undergone certain modifications under the influence of Egypt.
the Egyptians had
a priestly caste that attended to all matters of religion.
Having
been constantly under the influence of the Egyptians, we may

reasonably assume that the priestly organization of the Israelites
was modelled
after that of the Egyptians.
Living in a country
whose
priests
were
the
men
of high literary attainments,

priests
we cannot
respect
if
conceive
how
Hebrew
less
could have
their
and maintained
was
their position
among
commanded own people,
they
had not more or

priests.
It
emulated the example of the Egyptian
in their
own
interest to maintain the religion of
their
own people and thereby prevent

They could not have been
the absorption of the latter
into the Egyptians, as in that case they

position.
would have
lost
their
so ignorant as not to be
acquainted with the art of writing.
We may
therefore
assume
books
that the Israelites, like the Egyptians, possessed religious
Only primitive peoples,

transmit
tradition,
to
whom
the art of writing
is
unknown,
by oral
religious
teachings
Israelites
in
and records of the
past
and the
under Egyptian influence could not

a
have been any longer

script they used,
it
primitive
state.
Concerning the
hieroglyphics, or
that
z.
may have been cuneiform,

there
is
even
Phoenician characters, as
no evidence
the
K k
476
latter

were not already
Ball
in
use in the
first
part of the second
millennium.
(PSBA. XXX,
Sinai
1908, pp, 243-4) called atten-
tion to a Semitic inscription written in Phoenician characters
and
reproduced in
Petri's
(p. 130, Fig. 130),
which contains the
name
Athtar.
This evidently shows that the Phoenician alpha-
bet must have been
known
{c.
in the Sinaitic peninsula in the time
of Thutmosis III
500-1 447).
Against this assumption

is
we
have merely the argument from silence which
very precarious.
The
without
critical
conception entertains no doubt that Israel was

records
in
written
those
early
times,
and
that
the
Biblical accounts are based

correct,
it
upon
late traditions.
If this
view be
is
indeed questionable whether in
those traditions
trustworthy recollections of the early period were retained.
But
the very assumption that the Biblical records are far from being
contemporary
rests
upon the view
that
the Israelites did
not
emerge from
their primitive half-nomadic state before the estab-
lishment of the monarchy, and thus presumes that the Israelites
remained untouched by the
civilizations of
Canaan and Egypt

Canaan.
that the
and were
still
primitive
nomads on
rests again
their entrance into
But such an assumption
upon the contention
stories of the Patriarchs, the
Exodus, and the Conquest are on
the whole legendary traditions.

in the presence of the Israelites in
The most advanced

Canaan the
that land.
critics see
result of a gradual
settlement,
and not of a conquest of
Others hold that
the tribes of Jacob alone entered Canaan, while those of Israel

represent the natives of that country.
Some
again distinguish
between the
tribes of
Leah and those of Rachel and maintain

in Egypt, while the latter entered
that the former
had never been
Canaan under the leadership of Joshua. Concerning the tribes of Bilhah and Zilpah, the prevailing view is that they were
Canaanite clans adopted into the union of
the patriarchal
instructive
life
Israel.
The
stories of
are considered a late attempt to sketch an

for a set of very
and edifying ancestral background
dissimilar tribes
whom some
people.
all
political necessity led to
amalgamate
into the
Hebrew
The acceptance
of such views actually
means
the rejection of
testimony of the Biblical records and
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
Thus
it
.177
Hebrew
traditions relating to that early period.

critical
is
dent that the
reasoning moves around in a vicious cin
The
results obtained
would be
totally different
if
we hold
that in
the Biblical records are not
embodied
oral traditions but early
records partly belonging to a period
when
still
the recollections convivid,
cerning the ancestors of Israel were
though naturally
more or
events.
less idealized,
and
partly almost
contemporary with the

insisting
Such a view could be maintained while

its
upon
the documentary theory in
essential elements.
reflect
The
records
coming from various sources would naturally

the various recorders, and
data,
the views of
conflicting
we could not but expect

and terminology.
and disagreement
in style
Concerning the
historical
books of the Bible upon which the

if
modern
added
critics
look with deep suspicion,
the Biblical compilers
did not merely state the dry facts found in the early records, but
to
them
their
own
reflections
and viewed them
in
the
light of the religion of Israel,
such a presentation does not

recorded are unhistorical.
circle.
justify
the
assumption that the
facts
The
con-
critical
reasoning again moves in a vicious
The
clusions
would be quite
different as
soon as we should hold that
the Biblical laws date from an early period.
Having branded the

have
Book
of
Deuteronomy
and finding
as pseudepigraphy, or in plain language,

to
dis-
as a forgery,
composed by those who pretended

that the
historical
covered
it,
events narrated are
presented in agreement with
the views of the Deuteronomical
author, they see in the historical presentation fiction rather than

truth, invented for the
purpose of demonstrating the antiquity of the
Deuteronomical
laws.
',
The
very contention, however, that
'The
Book
of the
only the
critical
Law discovered under the reign of Josiah, contained Book of Deuteronomy presupposes the acceptance of the
But even
if
doctrine that the compilation of the Mosaic Books dates
from a post-exilic period.
we should admit
that the latter
books
there
in their present
is
form had not existed

that another
in pre-exilic
times,
no conclusive evidence
and contents
book or other books

and
was
similar in form
to our
Pentateuch had not already

that
it
existed before the establishment of the monarchy,
478

Here
not a book of this kind that was discovered under Josiah.

again
we must point out the
fact that
such an assumption would
not be incompatible with

criticism can
the
documentary theory, as textual
have no bearing upon the chronological problems concerning the periods to which the various strata of the Mosaic
Books should be assigned.
We
must then go
still
further
and
assume with the great majority of the modern

the lead of Wellhausen, Cornill,
critics,
following
&c,
that the Prophets were the
very creators of Israel's religion as presented in the Mosaic Books,
and
that all Biblical references to the laws
embodied there sup-
posed to belong to
It
is
earlier periods are unhistorical.
sufficient
to
point
is
out
the defective
method of the
each
critical reasoning,
and there
no need
to disprove in detail
point of the critical arguments.

as
The
Biblical writings,
branded
pseudepigraphs, are
lies
on the defensive, and the burden of

critics.
The evidence the higher criticism presents is at best circumstantial, in many details The probadmittedly inconclusive and still under discussion.
proof
with
the
modern
lems
it
raises
can
fairly
be solved in accordance with tradition.

a verdict of
Therefore, to say the

returned.
least,
Not Proven must be

studies,
From
this point of
view the present writer proceeds to

to
review
the
present
contributions
Biblical
and
to
inquire whether recent writers succeeded in substantiating the
claims
of
the critical views.

.
religion, history,
The books reviewed deal with and archaeology. The threads of these factors
so
continually run
of Biblical
studies
from one into another
and are so thoroughly interwoven
as to preclude a separate treat-
ment of each one.
The
Biblical studies
here treated actually
pursue the single aim of presenting these leading factors, though
some consider them

from an
side.
chiefly
from a religious aspect, some chiefly
historical point of view,
and others on the archaeological

it
Therefore,
together,
we consider
more convenient
to
review
them
under the headings of Religion, History, and
Archaeology.
RIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
to
this
479
II.
Religion.
contribution
the
(r)
J.
highly-important
subject
is
P.
Peters'
book The Religion of

literary aspect,
it
Hebrews.
Considered
from a purely
will
is
a very fascinating work, and
be read with delight even by those who do not share the
author's views, which
on the whole are severely
critical.
We
is
do
not find here the supercilious tone which, as a

critics
rule, the
modern
per-
assume toward the
Biblical authors,
and the book
vaded by a
religious atmosphere, which,

it
however, seems to be
incongruous with the radical views

others of the
expresses.
This work and
same kind
are characteristic of the influence of

it
modern
upon
criticism
upon theologians, and the havoc
has wrought
their
mode
of thinking, that they are quite unaware of the
fact that the reverential
tone they adopt toward the religion of
Israel
ill
fits
their treatment of the subject.
We
frequently hear
the assertion that
modern
criticism
may be accepted
without
diminishing the value of the Old Testament as a record of Divine

revelation.
But
it
requires childlike simplicity to believe that
descriptions of events that never occurred should
assume a sacred
character because of the moral lessons they teach.
Now
and
and
then the author becomes restive under the autocratic rule of the
German
radical
school,
Biblical
whose
loyal subject
he
is,
refuses
to reject all
the
accounts as
untrustworthy.
As
for
instance, he does not agree with the radical view that denies to
Moses the authorship not merely of the Law

practically of
as a whole, but
any part of
it,
even of the Decalogue, and which
does
not
admit that Moses taught a monotheism or even a
henotheism.
Nor does he accept Budde's view
that
JHYH
was
the deity of the Kenites
whom
the Israelites adopted as their
own
god.
the
He
lays stress
on the
fact that
we must not
fail
to recognize
immense importance of the personal

religion,
factor of the founder of

to the ranks
Israel's
and should not reduce him

By John Punnett
and
iî)
The Religion of the Hebrezvs.

the
Peters, Ph.D., D.I>.

:
{Handbooks on
History of Religions, vol.

pp. xii + 502.
Boston and London
Ginn
& Company,
1914.
480

creature of his time
make him a
beyond
and
age,
who had no outlook

lived
that of the people
among whom he
and moved.
He
believes that
some
at least of the Israelites
were closely con-
nected with the tribes of the southern wilderness, as Judah and
Simeon, and
JHVH
may have been

by most
their god.
He
further
refuses to accept the view held
critical scholars that
the
Ark of the Covenant contained a sacred stone of the nature of a fetish, and not the tablets with the Decalogue, and contends
that the
latter
written on
the tablets actually dates from the
Mosaic period (see chapter IV).
However, the author does not
seem
to have perceived the far-reaching importance of assigning
the written Decalogue to Moses.
He
places the beginning of

p. 7)^
Hebrew
But
if
literature in the times of
David and Solomon (see
the Decalogue was actually written by Moses himself, and
of course in Phoenician characters, this art of writing must have
been well known
in the
Mosaic period, and what objection could
there be to the Biblical testimony that
Moses was
also the author

is
of other laws beside the Decalogue
What
reason
there for
the assumption that about three hundred years elapsed between
the writing of the Decalogue and the earliest

Shall
Hebrew
?
records
we assume
of
that with the passing
away of Moses the
art of
writing disappeared from

factor
*
among
so
the Israelites
If the personal
Moses was of
great
',
an importance that he was

his existence could not
towering above his race and time
have
it
been without influence on
his associates,
and therefore does

left
not
stand to reason that some of the latter

their
written records of
own
describing the Mosaic legislation, which were used by
later historians ?
The
author evidently failed to perceive that
the radical critics did not arbitrarily deny the existence of the
written Decalogue
religion.
and the importance of the founder of
Israel's
critical
criti-
This view was the logical outcome of their
attitude, as otherwise the
fundamental structure of higher
cism would be defective.
One cannot
serve two masters at the
same
time, nor can
one adhere
to the critical view without
denying
altogether the historicity of the Mosaic legislation.
The book
is
divided into twenty-nine chapters, which present
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
the
HOSCHANDER
of the
481
Hebrew stage down
religious
conceptions from their earliest
primitive-
to
the
commencement
Christian era, and
contains a chronology and a selected bibliography.
The
first
chapter outlines the sources and methods of study, and

trates the
illus-
Hebrew methods
of historical
and
legal
composition
by that of the Saxon Chronicle.

given,
The
views, the general dates
and the tendencies of the

in
different
books of the Old
Testament described, are

by modern
criticism.
accordance with the results obtained

chapter, which describes the
rather instructive.
The second
is
land and peoples of Palestine,
The
is
third
treats the primitive religion of the
Hebrews, which
is
compared
with that of the Arabs.
This comparison
no doubt correct
even from a traditional point of view, and thus independent of

the author's premises that the before the lime of Moses.
If
Hebrews were
in a
nomadic
state
Abraham
hailed from Babylonia,

his tribe evidently
in
and nevertheless bears a West Semitic name,

the second part of the third millennium.
belonged to those Western Semites who invaded Babylonia
Thus Abraham was
by origin an Arab, and his
religion,
which essentially was that of
the pre-Mosaic Hebrews, must have been closely akin to that of
the Arabs, though

lonia,
it
was no doubt influenced by that of Babyfurther modifications
and underwent
on
his entrance into
Canaan.
The
and
fourth chapter discusses the personality of Moses,
the nature of the

to
bond by which the

one another, the
tribes of Israel
were united
JHVH
the
to
original habitat of the
JHVHis
cult,
Ark of the Covenant, and the
date, the original form,
and
interpretation of the Decalogue.
The
treatment
inter-
esting,
and the opinions expressed are rather moderate, but

illogical,
somewhat
influence
follows
as already pointed out.
The
fifth
chapter
deals with the religious conceptions of the Canaanites and their
on the Hebrews,
in
which the author substantially
the lead
of the critical radicals.

legal institutions, rituals,
The
and
view that the
Hebrews adopted
readily
festivals
may be
accepted even by adherents of the traditional view, as

in
the
Hebrews had sojourned
Canaan before they descended
into Egypt.
The
point of departure between the critical and
482

is
the conservative views
the date which
we should
assign to that
is
adoption from the Canaanites.
Of scanty
interest
the sixth
chapter, which briefly outlines the effect of national experiences
from the time of the Conquest to the Maccabean period.
The
seventh and eighth chapters deal with the developments of the

priesthood and the
ritual.
We
cannot enter into a detailed
examination of the bold views presented there, which are well
known.
The establishment
the Exodus,
late period,
if
of the Levitical priesthood
may be
as old as
not older, and does not necessarily
belong to a
tribes,
notwithstanding that kings, chiefs of the
and
others,
by imitating the example of other nations,

office.
is
arrogated to themselves the priestly

are as old as the
As
to sacrifices, they
human
It
race,
and there
scarcely
any doubt
that an elaborate sacrificial system
had existed long before the

nations in the interest of the
Mosaic period.
was among
all
priesthood to have such an intricate system, in order to ensure

its
position
and
to
make
the laity dependent
upon
its
functions.
But the indifference of the Hebrews toward the

priesthood
is
rights of the
easily
understood as soon as we believe in the
Biblical account that the establishment of the priestly order
was
from the very outset not popular with them.
This establishment
was not quite in accordance with the principle of equality, the

basis
of the Mosaic legislation,
nor with the declaration that

of priests
'.
Israel should
become a kingdom
'
But Moses may
have had an outlook beyond that of his people, and clearly

perceived the
interest
immense value
of a priesthood which in
its
own
might become the guardian and preserver of the religion

it
he established, as
actually did.
Those who on etymological

for the priestly order of the
ground advance the theory that the Levites were of non-Hebrew

origin
do not consider
that
we have
Levitical tribe a complete parallel in the tribe of the
Magi among
the
the
Iranians.
that
Critics
ought
to
take
into
consideration
possibility
the
Hebrew
priestly
organization
possessed from the very beginning a sacred
may have book of its own

laity,
which fundamentally differed from that of the

tained
all
that
it
conthe
the
ritualistic
laws,
and
especially
dealt
with
BIBLICAL
institutions
LITERATUREHOSCHANDER
sacrifices, besides
483
laws,
concerning
the
common
and
thus might not be inaptly designated as the Priestly Code.
Chapters
of
IX-XVII
fall
deal with the period between the death
Solomon and the

in
of Jerusalem.
Though being
the most
important period
the history of Israel,
we need not discuss
the views advanced there, as on the whole they are identical with
those generally held by
modern
critics,
but here and there the
author
is
somewhat more moderate.
As, for instance, he admit>
that the practical
monotheism with which the Writing Prophet^
begin was already a tenet of the spiritually-minded thinkers of

Israel, as
it
appears in the Jahvistic and Elohistic narratives and
in the legislative
codes embodied in these narratives.
But on
this point, as well as
on
others,
whenever he
tries to
deviate from
the views of the radical critics the author gets into difficulties out of which he cannot extricate himself.
Israelite compilations
Both the Judaean and
condemn
if
the setting up of the golden calf
by
Israel (p. 203).
But
those documents antedate the period

explain the fact that neither
of the Writing Prophets,

Elijah
how can we
nor Elisha, and not even Amos, protested against the
worship of the golden calves in the sanctuaries of Beth-el and
Dan ?
Further, the author does not accept Wellhausen's opinion,
generally shared by
modern
critics, that
the
Book
of
Deuteronomy
it,
was composed by those who pretended to have found

sees
and
no reason
it
to
doubt that
it
was found as described, but
considers
the work of the followers of Isaiah.
The
it
author's
opinion
is
scarcely less repugnant than the former, as
simply
means
that
the high priest Hilkiah was imposed
upon by the
composers of that work.

Chapters
XVIII-XXI
discuss the theology of Ezekiel, con-
ception of holiness, the exile, and the restoration.

that Ezekiel was profoundly affected
is
The
assertion
by the
religion of Babylonia
rather daring,
that
in
and without the
least justification.
The
state-
ment
the
Code of
Holiness,
moral,
ceremonial, and
is
ecclesiastical laws are placed
on the same
for
footing,
inaccurate.
Penalty of death
was imposed
incest,
the transgression of
bestiality,
many
moral laws, as adultery,
sodomy,
murder, witch-
484
craft,

blasphemy, cursing of the parents, but not upon trans-
gression of ceremonial
to state
:
and
ecclesiastical laws.
Nor
is it
accurate
'
The
inadvertent touching of an unclean thing of which
he
is
not himself conscious,
may
render him unclean, and bring

'
calamity upon him or upon the whole nation

final
evil,
(Lev. iv-v).
The
chapters deal with a variety of subjects, the problem of

the development of the law in Babylonia, the
New
Religion,
the Temple, the Synagogue
and the
Scribes,
Persecution and
National Revival, Messianic

the
Hope and Future

in
Life.
Considering
Israel's
author's critical attitude,
he presents a survey of
a
clear
religious
development on the whole
and masterly
critical
manner, though now and then we miss independence of

judgement.
(2)
More
radical
and therefore more consistent
is
H.
P. Smith's
is
book, The Religion of Israel.
The
object of the work

Israel's religion
to give
its
an account of the
rise
and progress of
from
beginnings in the nomadic period
down
to the event that put
an
end
to the Jewish state
by the Romans, and proceeds upon the
supposition that the results of higher criticism are fairly certain.
The author modestly

itself
is
declares that
all
that the
book claims
;
for
that
it
represents
our present knowledge
what the
as this
future has in store for us
we cannot
it
forecast.
Modest
that
declaration seems
to
be,
plainly
proclaims
any other
subjects
presentation that assumes a

is
more moderate view of those
not in accordance with our present knowledge.
We
need not
look to the future for the discovery of new factors which might
modify or refute altogether the author's extreme views.

unto the day
is
Sufficient
our present knowledge, which the author, how-
ever, evidently ignores.
He
frankly states that he avoided conin positive
troversy,
and expressed
is
his opinions
terms.
rely
Such
a treatment
very convenient, but then
we must
upon the
author's authority that he
examined the opposing opinions from

However, though the theories and
an unbiassed point of view.
(2)
The Religion of Israel.
An
Historical Study,
by Henry Preserved
pp.
Smith.
New
York
Charles Scribner's Sons.
1914.
x + 369.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
suggestions contained
certain
it
',
HOSCHANDER
means
and
it
'
485
fairly
.
in
this
work are by no
and ought
to
have been expressed with some

is
reserv.
must be admitted that the presentation

excellent reading.
It
is
brilliant
striking,
and makes
by
so alluring that
impresses
the reader that the views presented are original, and the author
his ingenuity
succeeded
in
outdistancing the advanced position

is
of the
modern
critics.
But
this
by no means
is
correct, nor
is
it
the claim of the author.

radical views
His book
compendium
of extremely
which, however, had already been suggested by
other scholars.
The book
surveys
the
consists of twenty
chapters.
The
first
chapter
former methods of Old Testament studies which

literature teach a theology,
is
made
the
Hebrew
what
is
and points out
that
Biblical theology
requisite
an
historical science that
demands
as a pre-
known
the
as higher criticism.
It
warns against the
temptation to
make
Law
of
Moses the
starting-point of Israel's
latter
is
history, as with
such a presupposition the
unintelligible,
and
briefly outlines the actual
process of Israel's development.

the history of Israel, and the prewill
:
It distinguishes four stages in
sumption
stages.
is
that
the
religion
correspondingly show four
These four
divisions are
Nomadic
Religion, Agricul-
tural Religion, Prophetism,
and Legalism.
divisions, presupposes the critical
The
fiction.
author, in
making these
view which ignores the patriarchal narratives, considering them pure
The Old Testament
not only does not
make
the
Law
of
Moses
the starting-point of Israel's history, but actually presupposes

if
a pre-Mosaic religion, which,
divine,
Moses could not have
abolished, as seen by the blessing of Isaac by the Lord, because
Abraham obeyed his voice and kept

his statutes,
his charge, his If
commandments,
and
his laws
(Gen. 26. 3-5).
we
ignore the critical
view,
we
shall find that the
Old Testament
First
is
actually distinguishes
four stages in Israel's history.
comes the nomadic
stage in
the period of
in
Abraham.
It
followed by the agricultural stage

the stage of being united into
it
Canaan and Egypt.
Then came
a nation under the leadership of Moses, though

realized until the establishment of the
was not
fully
monarchy.
The
last stage
486

Corresponding to these
stages,
was that of corruption.
we
find
the nomadic religion of Abraham,

the
influence
the agricultural religion
under
of the Canaanites
finally
and Egyptians, the legalism
under Moses, and
prophetism.
logic.
The
author's arrangement
is
shows a certain want of
Prophetism
certainly not a
natural consequence of corruption, but a
be explained only as a protest of those
phenomenon which can who remained undefiled

adhered to the
is
by the common corruption and

Moses.
faithfully
Law
to
of
That legalism precedes prophetism

chapter, which deals with the
far
testified
by
Amos
(2. 4).
The second
certain.
nomadic
from
religion,
fairly
contains not a few assertions which are
being
As
for instance, the variety of
names
that are used for
God
is
presented as convincing evidence for the polytheism of the
patriarchs.
But
in the
Old Testament, El
of course true of
is
it
purely of appellais
tive signification,
and not a proper name, as

is
used also with

less
the article.
of
The same
El Elyon, and no
is
El
Shaddai, the second element of which
plainly identical
with
Babylonian
'
s/iadu,
'mountain', and the

'.
name
is
evidently
certainly a
means
proper
the
God
of the mountains
But
JHVH
name
of the
God
of Israel, though of doubtful meaning.
The
third chapter discusses
Moses and
his work, in
which the
existence of
Moses
is.
is
not denied, though the fact that he taught

fourth describes the period of transition.
is
monotheism
The
The worship
homage
of the bull in the desert
presented as the plainest
evidence for the syncretism, as nomads would not think of paying

to a bull.
However,
left
it
may
also
be taken as evidence
In the
fifth
that the Israelites
who
Egypt were not nomads.
chapter, which deals with religion in the early literature, the J
and
strata are placed in the ninth century, evidently to

rise of the early prophets,
make them
though
it is
contemporaneous with the
admitted that a considerable literature existed

time of Solomon at
prophets,
least.
in
Israel
from the
Chapters
Isaiah,
VI-IX
discuss the earlier
Amos,
Hosea,
and Jeremiah.
The author
This view
is
agrees with the well-known view that the writings of the prophets
have undergone extensive revision by
late editors.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
it
487
writings
a pre-requisite of the higher criticism, as
makes these
untrustworthy, unless
we look
to
the infallible tribunal of the
higher criticism for a decision as to what portions

with
we may accept
some confidence.
Any
prophetic testimony for the tradilate post-exilic editors.
tional position
can easily be ascribed to
In the tenth chapter, entitled the Beginnings of Legalism, the
Book
of
Deuteronomy
its
is
discussed.
it is
Its
composition
its
is
placed
about the time of
discovery, but
admitted that
contents
give no indication that the report of

is
its
being found in the Temple
fiction.
The
eleventh chapter deals with Ezekiel,
who
is
characterized as one of the least sympathetic of the
Old TestaLegalism
ment
characters.
in
The
which
twelfth
chapter
is
is
entitled,
Triumphant,
after
Leviticus
dated about two centuries

rite
Ezekiel.
The
is
statement that the

is
of circumcision
is
punished with the penalty of death

thirteenth chapter
entitled
of course incorrect.
Bias,
The
Dogmatic
and describes the

chapters
literary activity of the priestly writers.
The remaining
bear the
titles,
the Messianic
Hope (XIV),
the Spiritualization of
the Messianic
Hope (XV),
the Sceptical Reaction (XVI), Legal-
ism and Practical Problems (XVII), Apocalyptic Development

of the Messianic
i.e.
Hope (XVIII),
the Treasure of the
Humble,
which one
the Psalms (XIX),
and the Final Stage (XX).

Dogmatic
is
Space forbids
to
us to point out the
immense number of statements

bias,
may
reasonably take exception.
of which the
author accuses the priestly writers,
indeed a chief feature of the
modern method.
with them.
The
critical
views are settled dogmatically, and
the development of the religion of Israel must be in accordance
(3) Largely as a digest of the views presented in the
two
last
volumes may be characterized H. Th. Fowler's book, The Origin
and Growth of the Hebrew

Israel's
Religion, which
is
designed to
offer a
guide for study rather than a new treatise upon the history of
religion.
It
is
divided into twelve chapters.
After an
(3)
The Origin and Growth of the Hebrew Religion.

Biblical Literature
Fowler, Professor of
By Henry Thati her and History in Brown University.

pp. 190.
The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, 19 16.
488
introductory chapter entitled General Survey, there follow chapters
on the Deliverance and the Covenant

(III),
(II),
the
Wars of
of Justice
Jahveh
Religion and National Life (IV), the
God
and Love
(V), the Exalted
God
of Nations (VI), Religion
and
Law
(XI),
(VII), the Discovery of the Individual (VIII),
from the Exile (IX), Legalism Triumphant (X), the
Two Ideals Two Hopes
and
Israel's
is
Contributions
to Universal
for
Religion (XII).
Each chapter
and
headed by references
study in both the Old

is
New
Testaments, and at the end of each chapter
given the
parallel discussion in the

ing.
books assigned
for
supplementary read-
The book
and
contains also two chronological outlines of
Hebrew
history
literature,
and two Appendices, Reference
Literature,
and Outline
for Students' History.
As
the author does not claim to present

enter into details.
new
points of view,
The arrangement of the material shows good pedagogical sense. But we doubt whether such a guide should be offered for study. The author is evidently deeply solicitous for the spiritual welfare of the Bible students who might
we need not
fall
into the error of seeing in the
Old Testament accounts
truth
to
instead of fiction,
and therefore provides them with a guide

pitfalls that
guard them against the

to lead
beset their
truth
way of study and
them
safely
on the path of
is
paved with extremely
radical views.
in declaring in
'
:
Authority
invoked versus the Biblical authority
Five generations of minute and painstaking study,

to the
which the work of each scholar has been subjected

all
most searching criticism and
available evidence
has been
constantly re-examined, have resulted in a general consensus of

scholarly opinion as to the growth of the
(p. 6).
Old Testament writings
'
One may approve
or disapprove of a statement calculated

in relying
to prejudice the
minds of the students
on the authority
doubt.
of previous investigators.
We
is
are not concerned with the quesexact,
tion whether that statement
which we may
fairly
Nor do we blame
to a view of his
the author for his endeavour to convert students
own
conviction.
However, we may question

to
whether
it is
fair
and broad-minded
tary reading
exclusively books of
recommend for supplemenauthors who hold extremely
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
critical
HOSCHANDER
assigned for
489
views and none of those whose views are more moderate.

think
that
in
We
should
the
literature
reading
students ought to be
made
acquainted with both modern and
conservative views in order to be able to judge for themselves.
There
is
but
little
choice between the

students
are
critical
opinions recomScylla
mended, and
Charybdis.
1
thus
placed
between
and
:
Text-books of
theory
is
this
kind
illustrate
Johns' statement
The
critical
now
so firmly rooted in the

to
minds of
all
scholars
tive'
who are ?iot The chronology (17).
allowed in youth
is
imagine a?iy alterna-
rather inaccurate.
We
especially
wonder on whose authority the author relied in placing Ikhnaton (Amenophis IV) about 1440, which is of course impossible, as
there can be no doubt that Thutmosis III died in
1447, an d
between the
latter's
death and the accession of Ikhnaton there
were three rulers with rather long reigns.
III. (4)
History.
Israel's religion
While the
last
volumes reviewed deal with
in the light of history, Is. J. Peritz's book,
Old Testament History,
deals with the history of Israel in the light of Israel's religious
development.
for the
The book
is
one of a
series of Bible study texts
purpose of religious education, and therefore the emphasis

reli-
has been placed upon the distinguished personalities, the

gious, moral,
and
social ideas,
and fundamental
institutions of the
;
Old Testament rather than upon mere

latter
historical events
and the
have been dealt with only
in so far as they are
needed to
explain the historical background of the former.

the Biblical text which
the
is
In each section
is
the basis of discussion

is
indicated in
parts
:
margin.
The
material
presented
in
three
the
formative period (from the beginnings to the death of Solomon),

the period of the Prophets (from the division of the
kingdom
to
the restoration under Cyrus), and the period of the priests and
(4)
Old Testament History.
By Ismar
J.
Peritz, Ph.D., Pro ressor of

of the English
Biblical
Languages and Literatures and Willard Ives Professor

University {Bible Study Textbook Series^.
pp. 336 and 5 maps.
Bible, Syracuse
Thb AbinGTON
Press,
New
York, Cincinnati, 1915.
VOL. XL
490

Herod), and
in
scribes (from Cyrus to
an introduction.
The
whole
is
divided into fourteen chapters, which are separated into
subdivisions.
for study.
At the end of each chapter are given suggestions The book contains also a map of the Old Testament
world,
and a selected bibliography.

author certainly succeeded in producing a scholarly and
The
is
highly instructive work.
The
presentation of the critical views
very sympathetic, as they are
expressed with a certain

is
re-
serve,
and the
possibility of
for instance,
more moderate views

it is
often freely
admitted.
As
admitted as reasonable that what

revival
Moses had experienced among the Kenites was a

ancestral religion, forgotten in the foreign
of
and adverse Goshen
environment, and
instinct with a
now once more brought to the Hebrew tribes' new enthusiasm. Further, it is conceded tnat
first
there
is
not sufficient ground for denying that the
great
expression of the laws contained in the seven distinct codes for

Israel
was by the inspired wisdom of Moses, though
it
is
no
longer possible to determine exactly which parts go back to his

time.
The
objection that the
Book
is
of
Covenant
reflects a
conthat
siderably advanced state of society
met by the argument

at
when
the semi-agricultural
mode
of
life
Kadesh
is
recognized,
more of
that code will find a suitable origin in
Mosaic times.
From
this point
of view
it is
considered as possible that the three

It is
harvest festivals in an early form belong also to this time.

further
assumed
that with the institution of the
new
religion
came
that of the priesthood,
who should perform
the functions con-
nected with the

literary
sacrifices, the
Ark, and the oracle.
As
to the
it
and
historical character of the
patriarchal stories,
rest
is
admitted that there are elements in them that

tial
upon substanfor their
facts of history,
though allowance must be made
shaping and embellishment.
However, these deviations from the current

remnant of the moderate
critical
opinions
should by no means be taken as evidence that the author belongs

to the small
critics.
Nor
is
there any
reason to imagine that the author has toned

current views in deference to the
religious
down some
of the
sentiments of the
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
societies
HOSCHANDER
series
491
his
under whose auspices the

is
to
which
book
spirit
belongs
published.
This book
is
a true product of the

critical
of our age
and abounds with extremely
views.
The
reli-
results of higher criticism are enthusiastically
accepted and
giously upheld.
is
The author
ventures even to declare that there
practical religious value in Biblical criticism.
But on several
points the author shows

clearly
more independence of judgement and
perceives
the defects of the

resting
modern methods
that
is
in
con-
verting
mere theories
upon evidence
facts.
far
from being
conclusive into undeniable historical
However, there
judgement.
is
one point on which we regret

:
to see
poor
He
observes
'When one
reads the regulations as to

ethical passages in
how and when

the
to recite
one of the sublimest

:
Old Testament, containing the words

is
" Hear,
Israel
Jehovah our God, Jehovah

thy
One
and thou
all
shalt love
Jehovah
all
God
with
all
thy heart, and with
thy soul, and with
thy
might" (Deut.
6. 41),
and notices the rabbinical quibbling over

it is
the question whether
to be recited standing or lying, audibly
or inaudibly, as early in the
morning when one can distinguish

referall,
between the colours of sky-blue or leek-green, and finds no

ence to
its
ethical
import, one realizes

interest in
how
shallow, after
(p.
must have been the
keeping the law'
329).
Did
the author not consider that the very existence of Israel

to the Jewish
testifies
sublime conception of the ethical import of these

the
words?
Were not
same Rabbis who quibbled over

millions of Jews
that
question willing to undergo unspeakable martyrdom for the truth

of these words?
The numberless
who under-
went the most atrocious persecutions and sacrificed

their
their lives for
adherence to these words during a period of more than two

in these
thousand years ought to show that their interest
words
was anything but shallow.
The Rabbis
quibble over the question
because of the sublime import of

(5)
5)
this confession of faith.

strictly critical
Of
more moderate though
tendency
I
is
The Biblical History of the Hebrews.
By
F. J.
Foakes-Jackson. D.
>.,
Fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge, and Hon. Canon of Peterborough.
Cambridge:
W. Heffer &
Sons, Ltd.. 19:7.
pp. xxxii-f 440 and 4 maps.
492

The Biblical History of the Hebrews,
F. J. Foakes-Jackson's book,
which
is
primarily intended for students in theology,

tell
and endeaThis
vours to
is
the story of Israel from a Biblical standpoint.

reprint of the third edition of 1909.
not a
new book but a

it
The
it
success
is
gained on
its
former publications
is
well merited, as
scientific
in every respect
an excellent work, thoroughly
and
well adapted to
problems of
less
make the student acquainted with the current modern criticism, which, however, are presented with
is
confidence than
customary
at present,
and on points where
the evidence against the Biblical accounts appears to be
somewhat
doubtful, the Biblical authors are given the benefit of the doubt.
Concerning the
tion
is
historical value of the Biblical records, the posiis
taken that the Bible

for
is
practically the sole source of infor-
mation
most of
Israel's history,
and
its
testimony even on this

theory
it
ground
of the highest importance.
The documentary
critical
furnishes scope for a certain
amount of
discernment, as
.
continually suggests
certain events
is
the
question
whether the view taken
of
that of the age in which they occurred or in
some subsequent
deal of conjecture
period.
is
Under
these circumstances
its
a good
allowable, but
results
can never take the
place of historical facts.
That there are
difficulties in the Biblical
narrative cannot be denied, but the presence of contradictions

real
or apparent need
not
make
tradition valueless,
and
it
is
frequently the
case
that
the
discovery of fresh
evidence has
re-established a tradition which has been

to
pronounced by experts
any
be incredible.
it
Unless there
is
positive evidence against
tradition
should meet with respect, and
this rule applies with
special force to the Scriptures of Israel.
Notwithstanding
theory,
the
full
acceptance of
there
is
the
documentary
the
author admits
that
no reason why the
Hebrews from the

tioned as famous for
there
is
patriarchs
downward should not have had

Israelitish tribe
is
a literature of their own.

its
An
especially
men-
scribes in a very early
poem.
But while
litera-
no presumption against the possibility of an early

no
proof of
its
ture, there is
existence
till
the ninth and eighth

to
centuries.
Those who hold a
conservative view ought
be
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
satisfied with
HOSCHANDER
it
493
criti al
such a concession coming as

displays
docs from a
is
scholar
sides
who
sound judgement and
able to see both
of the questions under consideration.
In assigning the
the
Book
of
Deuteronomy
to
the
is
days of Manasseh,
author
candidly confesses that there

attribute
a most natural repugnance to

spiritual
one of the most earnest and
Books of the
of
Scriptures to one
who used
opinions,
the venerable
name
Moses
to
advance
escaping
his
own
and believes
is
that the only
way of
from
this
dilemma
the
presumption that such a

it
literary artifice is
not as abhorrent to Orientals as
would be
to us.
As
to the fact that miracle
and prophecy play an important
part in the history of Israel, the author admits that the whole
question
is
one of extreme
difficulty,
and though the human

greatest
diffi-
mind under the influence of modern ideas has the

one has been able
place.
is
culty in believing in an interruption in the course of nature, no

to
prove that such interruption has never taken
purely rationalistic account of such a people as Israel
not likely to give a correct impression.
Of
special interest are
the following observations of the author, which are worthy to be
quoted
itself
'
:
Indeed, the wonderful story of the chosen people
is
in
it
a greater miracle than any exhibition of Divine power

It is
records.
absolutely unique in the history of humanity.

it.
No
nation can show a record resembling

their full share of
That a people possessing
human
frailty,
not naturally given to idealism,
nor easily touched by appeals to their better nature, with apparently
no
special aptitude for religion, but hard-hearted

their teachers describe
and
stiff-
necked as
them, should have existed
for
ages without country or sanctuary, or any external coercion, simply

for
an idea, would be incredible
if it
were not a
fact.
That the
extraordinary tenacity with which the Jews have clung to their

religion
was due to a discipline which probably began

century
B.C.
in
Egypt
in the thirteenth
or earlier,
and ended not much
more than
beyond
a century after the foundation of
Rome,
.
is
almost
belief,
and
yet
it
is
sober truth.
its
All these things
point to the fact that throughout
long, eventful,
and painful
494

been upheld by some external power not
its
story Israel has
own
and
that
the
ancient races
Jew has outlasted so many proud empires and is a miracle beside which the mere drying-up of the
need hardly
Red
Sea, that his ancestors might escape from Egypt,
cause more than a passing feeling of surprise.'
The
able,
subject
is
treated
in
fourteen chapters, as far as the
sources of the Canonical Books of the Old Testament are avail-
and
in several appendices, in
which the extra-Biblical sources

is
are discussed.
The
introduction
very instructive.
Not the
to each
least valuable part of the
book are the numerous notes
chapter given at the end of the book, which contain an abundance

of information, and are highly suggestive.
truly a Biblical History,
It
is
on the whole
to those
and may be
safely
recommended
who want
to study Israel's history in

is
connexion with that of the
Old Testament, and

suggestions.
at the
same time a storehouse of valuable
Of quite a Manual of Bible

(6)
different character
is
W. G.
rise
Blaikie's book,
History, which
Israel's history
is
a strictly Christian-orthodox
work that presents
and the
and establishment Old and
of Christianity in accordance with the sources of the
New
Testaments, which are considered from the point of view
that the Scriptures are given
by the inspiration of God, and

all
therefore the accounts
they give are beyond
doubt and
all
argument.
or the
There
is
not the least reference to
critical
methods
results of
is
documentary theory.
criticism
However, though the

ignored,
modern
means
are totally
the
treatment
by no
It
indifferent
toward other results of
scientific research.
constantly refers to
parallel history
modern
discoveries,
and
also considers the
and progress of the leading nations of the world,

Throughout the whole book there are
It
showing what was going on elsewhere while the history of the

Bible was being enacted.
constant references and allusions to the rise of Christianity.

(6)
Manual
>y
of Bible History, in connexion with The General History of
the
World.
Rev.
revised and enlarged.
William G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D. London: T. Nllson & Sons, 1912.
New
pp.
edition
viii
+ 504
and 12 maps and plans.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
is
HOSCHANDER
495
not so
much
a Bible history in the true sense of the term as an
historical interpretation of the Biblical events
and a commentary
view, which
is
on the Scriptures from a purely Christian point of
intended to be used in connexion with the study of the Old and
New
very
Testaments.
usefulness of this work for Christian
The
Bible student.-,
is
little
impaired by
its strictly
traditional tendency,
if
it
though
its
value would have been greatly enhanced

ignore the attitude of the
history
critical
did not entirely
school.
full
presentation
of
on
traditional lines
ought to take
cognizance of the
critical views,
and argue
in favour of the traditional conception
in
exposing the weak spots in the former conception.

to state that in recent times
in
But
it
is
fair
we very seldom meet with books

critics are
by conservative authors
seriously considered
which the views of the
not
and thoroughly discussed, and, on the other
hand, there
the
is
a growing tendency
attitude
among
the latter to disregard

is
conservative
of
altogether.
However, there
criticism,
no
in-
scarcity
works that expound the higher

is
and
formation on this subject

very few books
easily accessible,
but in recent years

treat
made
their
appearance that
this
the
Biblical
accounts as real history.
Thus
book, which gives the Bible
history from a purely Biblical point of view, frequently in the light
of the information furnished by Assyrian and Egyptian monu-
ments, besides
being decidedly useful to Bible students
who
denounce
views
all critical
doubts concerning the
facts
recorded in the
different
Scriptures, might also be instructive for those

in
who hold
becoming acquainted with the Christian
traditional
conception of the Biblical history.
The book
deal with
the
is
divided into sixteen chapters, of which I-X1II

history,
Old Testament
XIV
with
the
last
interval
between the Old and

with the
History.
rise
New
Testaments, and the two

:
chapters
of Christianity
falls
Gospel History and Apostolic
Each chapter
into several sections.
The
infer-
ences drawn from the extra-Biblical sources are on the whole

reasonable.
discussion of the author's views would be quite

available.
impossible within the space
But we may mention
496

It
is
a few characteristic points.

statement,
'
rather
curious to find the
It is
till
now
the general belief that the
Book of Job was

Darius of
course
in
his
not written
the
about the time of Solomon'

is
(p. 87).
Book
of Daniel
identified with Cyaxares,
never existed, and

Cyropaedia,
as
is
a pure
invention
of
who of Xenophon
we
know from
Nabunaid's
inscription
that
Astyages, the last king of the Medes, was overthrown by Cyrus.
Nebuchadnezzar
which
is
represented as the conqueror of Egypt,

Ezekiel's
presumption purely based upon

is
prophecies
(29-32),
will
of course unhistorical.
But the book as a whole
prove a source both of information and edification for those

share the author's point of view.
list
who
The maps and

useful.
plans and the
of Biblical
(7)
names
will
be especially
To the works which deal with Hebrew history archaeologically may be assigned Laura H. Wild's book, The Evolution of
the
Hebrew
People^ which, though outlining the
Hebrew
history
from the
earliest
period
down
to
the
establishment of Chris-
tianity, is less
a history than an introduction to Biblical history.

is
Its
main object
to point out
how
far
Hebrew
ideas contributed
is
to the present civilization.

in
The
historical conception
thoroughly
accordance with the
critical views.
Its starting-point is the
tracing of the development of pre-historic
man, the great
racial
groups,
and of
religious ideas before
the rise of the Hebrews.
Its leading idea is that the principle
of evolution must be applied
human knowledge. Society to-day is the product of the past, and indebted to many sources for the influences that have made communal life at present what
to Bible history as to every branch of
it is,
and not the
least of these influences
is
the influence that
has
come from the social and spiritual ideals The Bible is of tremendous importance people.
ts
of the
Hebrew
national,
to-day, because
social
programme, touching
is
directly
upon
political,
and
international policies,
not a cut-and-dried effort of

their Influence
some
(7)
The Evolution of the Hebrew People and
on Civilisation.
in
By Laura
H. Wild, Professor of Biblical History and Literature
Mount
pp. xi
Holyoke College.
New York
Ciiari.es Scribner's Sons, 1917.
+ 311 and 2 maps.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
person's brain superimposed
out,
HOSCHANDER
racial
4'y7
upon
society, but the gradual
working
through the terrible birth pangs of
development, of
vital racial truths.
The book
one chapters.
life,
consists of five parts, which are divided into thirty-
Part
gives the cultural
background of Hebrew
and describes the discoveries of ancient monuments, the four stages of man's development, the four main groups of men, and
the three groups of the Caucasian races, and the highest type
among each
of these groups.
It also
examines the reasons

races,
for
the early supremacy of the
Mediterranean
the
place of
Semitic thought in the development of the Western races, and

points out the differences between the Indo-European and Semitic
ways of thinking.
Part II gives a sketch of the development of
religious ideas, describing the various kinds of early beliefs, as
animism, fetichism, totemism, ancestor-worship, &c, the philosophic basis

of
early
theology,
polytheism,
henotheism,
and
monotheism, and discusses traces of early

in the Bible,
beliefs
and customs
and the gradual development of prophetic concepPart IV, under the
tions.
Part III considers the influence of physical environment

race.
upon the development of the Hebrew

caption
'Israel's
Economic and
Social
Development', surveys
the whole
final
Hebrew
history from the patriarchal period
down
to the
destruction of the Jewish state.
Part V, entitled
'The Place
World Thought of the Great Prophetic Hebrew Teachers', points out the more enduring messages of the Old Testament proin
phets,
and the conceptions of jesus and Paul.

is
This book
a highly-interesting and stimulating work, as
it
frequently exhibits keen

is
and discerning judgement, the subject

attractive style,
treated in a clear
and
for
and there
It
is
a ring of
sincere
enthusiasm
the
Biblical
ideals.
also contains
a great
amount of information
generally
not
considered
in
connexion with Biblical studies.

is
Though
the teaching of Jesus
presented in terms of boundless admiration, the book shows

It
is
a remarkable degree of tolerance toward his opponents.
relief to be spared at least for once the stale accusation against
the
hypocrisy
of
the
Pharisees
and
their
dead formalism.
498
Interesting

is
the remark
is
'
:
The
striking characteristic
all
of the
Hebrew
persist
race
that,
notwithstanding
centuries
apostasy,
early
there
did
throughout
the
from
nomadic
days
a nucleus of people so loyal to their ideals that
hardship and
persecution of the severest kind that history records could not
break up and dissipate the truth they had to bring to the world
(p. 289).
Does the author
refer to antiquity or to the Christian
era
The economic
for
it is
conceptions of the
of
'
Talmud and
its
regula-
tions
the
welfare
the
masses are highly appreciated,

of these
though
admitted that
some
'.
numerous laws seem

like,
'
to
deal with very trivial matters
An
opinion
the
more we
Con-
study the Rabbinical

(p. 261), is rarely
Code
the
more we admire
its
provisions
encountered in contemporary
literature.
cerning the principal theme of the book, the thought of evolution

as applied to Bible history,
to say
(8)
we
shall see
what the next book has
on
this subject.
That a thoroughly
full
scientific
treatment of Biblical history

tradi-
can be brought into

tional
agreement and harmony with the

position
conceptions
is
the
taken in
S.
Jampel's book,
Vorgeschichte Israels
und
seiner Religion.
The
well
author, an orthodox
Rabbi and a pre-eminent Talmudist, and
known
as a Biblical
scholar by his previous works, in which he demonstrates that
Hebrew
result of
tradition
is
not in danger of being overthrown by the
modern
discoveries
and
scientific
methods, pursues the
same tendency
the pre-history
in this
work.
It is
a popular presentation of both
and the
religion of Israel in
accordance with the

inscriptions.
ancient
Its
Hebrew
traditions
is
and the contemporary
leading idea
that the cuneiform inscriptions furnish the
real material for the pre-history of the
Hebrews and
their reli-
gion, of
which the framework

traditions.
is
presented in the Biblical and

is
Talmudic
tion
Its starting-point
that the idea of evolu-
and development
holds
true
of other
nations,
as
they
in
dissolved
themselves into separate tribal bodies while
still
a primitive stage, and from the outset of their separate existence

(8)
Vorgeschichte Israels
Jampel, Schwedt a/O.
und seiner Religion. Von Rabbincr Dr. Sigmund Frankfurt a. Main: J. Kauffmann. 1913. pp. 259.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
had
ever,
HOSCHANDER
Israel,
499
howall
to
work out
their
development independently.
infant, as
it
was not born an
were, but had gone through
stages
of infancy, while
being an embryo in the body of the

it
Babylonian people, before
had a separate existence

had
as a people.
When
the
first
Hebrew
the
culture
all
families
detached themselves from the

already
attained
its
Babylonian
maturity,
race,
its
latter
to
its
full
and
had already reached
zenith.
The
of
separate existence of
other nations preceded by centuries or

religions.
millenniums
Israel
first
their characteristic
its
But the
religion
preceded
national existence.
The
separation of the
Hebrew
families from
the
main body of the Babylonian

religious sect
people was caused by differences of religious conceptions.
Hebrew
tribe in its beginning
was merely a
The among
The author might have illustrated the condition of the first Hebrews who left Babylonia due to religious differences by that of the Puritans who left England for the same
the Babylonians.
reason.
Therefore, the principal objection to the Biblical account

is
of the early history of the Hebrews, which

ethnological law that
based upon the

because
it
it
no people knows
its
real origin,
must pass through a period of infancy, during which

sense for historical recollections, while in
of this early period are already obliterated,
Further, the critics
its
is
has no
maturity the events

refuted.
who cannot
see any reason
why
the patri-
archs of Israel should be treated differently from the legendary

ancestors of the Grecian tribes, as Dorus, Ion, Achaeus, &c., ought
first
to prove the unhistorical character of the latter
At present
we
possess
numerous
I,
inscriptions
and monuments of the Babythe Assyrian
lonian king Sargon
the Egyptian king Menes,

rulers
queen Semiramis, yet these
were not long ago generally
held to be merely mythical figures, and experiences like those ought

to
teach
us to be
It
is
more cautious
in
the treatment of ancient
heroes
absurd to deny their existence because of the

It
is
legends woven around their memories.

to see, with
more reasonable
nations a later
Euhemerus,
in the
mythology of
all
deification of ancient heroes than to regard
ancient history as
past
pure mythology.
If Israel
preserved
its
memories of the
500
more
in
its

clearly
and
it
in a
more
correct form,
it
is
due
to the fact that
infancy
attended a better school
among
the Babylonians
than other nations
among
the
their
more
primitive ancestors.
The
fifth
is
subject
is
treated in twenty-four chapters, of
which the
Chapter
I
missing in
copy before the reviewer.
discusses the beginning of civilization according to Biblical

extra-Biblical traditions, in
and
which Babylonia
It
is
regarded as the
deals with
cradle of
all
Oriental
It
civilizations.
is
largely
the
Table of Nations.
pointed
out that
Biblical
tradition
knew
that
the original
inhabitants of Babylonia were
neither
Semites nor Aryans, and assigned them to the Hamitic group

of nations, in tracing their descent from Kush, the
first
son of
rulers
Ham, and we know

formation
sources.
at present that the earliest
Sumerian
belonged to the dynasty of Kish.

of nations
Chapter II deals with the

Biblical
according to
and
extra-Biblical
The
opinion advanced that the nations of Abyssinia

in
and Nubia, which
the
inscriptions
are
called
Kash and
Kesh, are identical with the Kassites
will
hardly be accepted.
Chapter III investigates the origin of the Hebrew Palestinian

civilization.
The non-Semitic
origin
of the
is
Phoenicians and
their close relationship to the Egyptians
demonstrated.
But
the arguments for this view are rather doubtful.

treats
Chapter
IV
of the origin of the
Israelites.
The arguments
of the
critics against
the Biblical accounts of this period are thoroughly
discussed.
Chapter VI investigates the Biblical and pre-Biblical
conceptions of God.
Among
the early Babylonians there
may
have been some whose religious conceptions were not inferior

to those of
Melchizedek.
We may
surely
assume that other
Palestinian priests shared the latter's religious conceptions.
The
opinions of
many
Assyriologists that the
Hebrews
are indebted
to the Babylonians for

full
many
of their religious conceptions are in
agreement with the Jewish traditions that the patriarchs
acquired their religious training in 'the Schools of

Eber'.
Shem and
the
Chapter VII demonstrates the influence of

civilization
old
Semitic
upon
that
of
the
Aryans.
Chapter VIII
discusses the influence of the Sumerians
upon the Semites, and
MIIiLICAL
LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
501
IX, the relation of the ancient Hebreiv civilization to that of the

other Semites, and especially deals with the West
Semitic or
In
Hebreiv proper names, and with the Code of Hammurabi.
order to understand the author's arguments, we must explain that

the
West Semites who entered Babylonia
are
designated as
ancient Hebrews.
Of
special importance are Chapters
X-XIII,
rela-
which investigate the pre-Mosaic laws of the Hebrews, the
tion of the ancient-Hebrew laws to the oral traditions of Judaism,
the connexion between the Biblical
and
pre-Biblical laws,
and the
connexion between the ancient- Hebreiv laws and the

tions.
oral tradi-
The view
still
is
taken that the pre-Mosaic laws are on the
whole identical with those of the Code of Hammurabi, some of

which
survived in the oral traditions
;
the former for the

laws,
;
most part were incorporated into the Biblical
though some
were modified and others distinctly abrogated

cases
and
in
many
we can
plainly see that the oral traditions
date from a
pre-Mosaic period, and thus

the Biblical laws.
may
claim a higher antiquity than

chapters are
:
The remaining
Religious Con-
nexions
Biblical
between the Ancient Hebrews and the Bible (XIV),
and Ancient Semitic
New
Years (XV), Israelitish and
Ancient Semitic Allegories (XVI), Ancient Semitic Paganism (XVII),

Biblical
and Ancient Semitic Angelologies (XVIII),
Religious Poetries of the Bible and of the Ancient Semites (XIX),

the Biblical and the Noachian
Commandments (XX),
Biblical
and
Pre-Biblical Festivals (XXI), Biblical
and Old-Semitic
Festivals
(XXII), Biblical and Pre-Biblical Sacrifices (XXIII), Conclusions
(XXIV).
is
This book
one of the very few

ideas,
in recent Biblical research

will
which abound with original

provoke dissent.
though not a few of them

it
Within the compass of a review
is
quite
impossible to give even an indication of the salient points of this work.
Many
of the views presented deserve the most serious
consideration.
However, the author on many points
falls
into
the error of the
modern
critics, in stating his
opinions in positive
facts.
terms and presenting mere suggestions as
There
is
no
need
to establish the. truth of the Biblical accounts but to
show
502

Another defect of
that the critical objections are inconclusive.

his
methods
is
that he does not verify each of his statements by
notes referring to the literature bearing on the subjects under

discussion.
The
references given in the
'
Anhang
'
are
more of
a general character and do not serve this purpose.

chapter which
is
Finally, the
author ought to have discussed the documentary theory, unless

this subject
was treated
in
the
fifth
is
missing.
But notwithstanding these omissions, the book

contribution to Biblical research.
an excellent
IV. Archaeology.
(9)
While the books hitherto reviewed deal with the
religion
and
history of Israel in the light of extra-Biblical
sources, the
following works deal chiefly with the latter sources as far as they
illustrate
strictly
the Biblical subjects.

is
An
Was
archaeological work of a
conservative tendency
Naville's book, Archaeology of the

the
is
Old Testament, with the

in
sub-title,
Old Testament written

to
Hebrew ?
The
object of this work
defend the Mosaic
authorship of the Pentateuch and to account for the objections of

the critics to such a belief by a very remarkable theory that the
Books of the Old Testament,
as
we know them
in their
Hebrew
form, are not in the original language written by their authors.
Against the current assumption that the Books of the Old Testa-
ment
are in the language used by their authors,

script,
and
that they
went through one change only, that of the

forward the following facts
:
the author puts
Before Moses, and after his time,

in Palestine for official
Babylonian cuneiform was used

contracts,
documents,
and anything connected with
law.
In a later period
Aramaic was the book form of the Babylonians and Assyrians.
The Jews who
settled
in
Egypt wrote and spoke Aramaic.
Finally, the script peculiar to the

9) Archaeology of the
in
Hebrew language
Was
D.C.L.,
the
is
not derived
written
Old Testament.
Naville,
Old Testament
Hebrew?
Geneva.
By Kdouard
LL.D., F.S.A., Foreign
Associate of the Institute of France, Professor of Egyptology at the University of
New
York, Chicago
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1913
pp.
xii
+ 212 {Library of Historic Theology).
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
He
503
thinks
from the Canaanite, but from the Aramaic alphabet.
that the historical value of these facts has not been fully grasped
by the
critics,
and
that history,
and not
philological criticism,
is
the point of view from which these discoveries have to be studied.
Considering the fact that the written language
in
the whole
Western Asia, was cuneiform, the author concludes that Moses wrote in the latter language, which was pre-eminently that of laws,
though he may have spoken with
his
countrymen the
dialect
they had brought from Canaan, which, however, was not a written
language, but the popular idiom.
The
comes
objections of the critics that in the Pentateuch nothing

directly
from
is
Moses,
written
the
author refutes by reviewing

Egypt,
Joseph's
all
life,
historically
what
about
the
Exodus, and the Tabernacle, and points out that
these things
could not have been so exactly described by various authors

living in different parts of Palestine
and
at different
epochs
and
that especially the story of Joseph could not have been written
down
except by a
still
man who was

vivid,
in
Egypt
at the time
still
when
in
the
tradition was
when
the
Hebrews were
Egypt,
and while they knew whose action had induced them

there.
to settle
The
author contends that
all
these narratives were written not
as a running book, but
on
tablets,
and
that this fact changes
completely the character

repetitions as the
tablets.
of
the
composition,
as
it
explains
summaries of what has been said

the
tablets
in previous
We
can further distinguish
which were
book, like
written separately
and afterwards joined together

closely linked together.
in a
the beginning of Genesis, from those which were to form a series
and are accordingly more

style of
Therefore the
to
composition
set
is
no longer
a
to
be judged according
believes
that a
the
rule
down
for
in
book.
He
copy of
Deuteronomy was put
the foundation of Solomon's Temple,

last
and
that this
book bears the character of the
words of Moses,
Canaan, when
settle,
and of a time when the people were
in sight of
they could see better in what country they were going to
who were
the inhabitants,
and what
their customs.
504

The author
thus holds that the Pentateuch was written by
Moses
mation
in
cuneiform on tablets and continued to be in the same

to the exilic period.
form from Moses down

it
The
to
first
transforthis
went through was to be put into Aramaic, and
he
attributes to Ezra, as such
an enterprise seems
be
in accor-
dance with
his character,
it
and with Rabbinic
tradition concerning
it
him
and
agrees also with the circumstances of his time, as
was the epoch when cuneiform was being more and more aban-
doned
for the
popular language.
And
it
is
quite possible, as the
tradition of the
Rabbis
alleges, that
Ezra also settled the Canon of
the Scriptures for the

sifted the writings
it
Old Testament, and may have collected and

to
which were
form the sacred volume, but as
came out of
if
his
hands the volume was entirely Aramaic.
On
the other hand, the
Books of the Prophets and the didactic Books,

language before
even
they were not originally composed in Aramaic, as perhaps

in that
some of the Psalms, must have been put

the time of
LXX.
This change of form and script cannot be

;
called a real translation
it
was only a
dialectical modification.
for the
Having established an Aramaic form

and
Old Testament,
the author finally explains the transition to the

script, as
Hebrew language
the Rabbis
these two changes were simultaneous, which were

'
:
effected at the time of the Christian era
When
wished to give to their

life
religion, to their laws, to their national
which
rests entirely
on
their
Books a thoroughly exclusive

;
character, they
made
a dialectal modification
they turned their
Books
into the language
spoken
at
Jerusalem
but since that had
no
script,
they had to invent one, and they adopted a modified

real
form not of the Canaanite but of Aramaic, the one

language which they already knew.
book-
Between the new
script
and
the old one there was no greater difference than between the two
idioms.'
The book
tablets,
consists of two parts, each of
which deals
chiefly
with the results of one of the two great discoveries, the
Amarna
and Aramaic papyri of Elephantine, and

:
is
divided into
seven chapters
the Language
(III),
(I),
Genesis before the Sojourn in
Egypt
(II),
Egypt
the Journey to
Canaan
(IV), the Papyri
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHAN bilk
is
o u :>
from Elephantine (V), Aramaic (VI), and the Present Form of

the Old Testament (VII).
ing to the subject-matter.
views, there
is
Each chapter
Having given a
subdivided accord-
digest of the author's
no need
to enter into the details, which, however,
are exceedingly instructive.
Before expressing any opinion on

the next volume, which
subject.
the author's theories,
we must consider
later
was published two years

(10)
and deals with the same
The same
the
theories are upheld in Naville's second book,

lectures
The Text of
Old Testament, which contains three
delivered before the British
Academy.
In the
first
lecture the
author points to the changes brought about in our views in regard

to
ancient history by archaeology, and to Israel's influence on

that
is
mankind
the
history
rests
exclusively
due to
its
books, to whose study

in the study of Israel's
same methods must be
applied.
But
we
are confronted with two contrary conceptions, one that
on
tradition,
and the other of the higher

is
criticism, in
which
the destructive part
predominant.
In discussing the methods examines the

lines of eviits
and
results of the latter, the author

it
dence upon which

principles.
relies,
and
tests its results
according to
In the two other lectures, the author on the whole
upholds his former views.
Leaving aside
for the
moment
the author's theories, there
is
no doubt a great deal of

lightly dismissed.
truth in his arguments which cannot

is
be
This
especially true of the part that inves-
tigates the historicity of
many
narratives in Genesis
is
and Exodus.
an authority
The
in
author, being an Egyptologist of high repute,
on the question whether these narratives are even

accordance with what
is
in small details
known
of ancient Egypt.
This
is
an
immensely important
point, far
more than the problem whether

certainly correct in
these narratives were actually written by Moses, in which the
author
is
chiefly interested.
The author
is
sharply criticising the radical views of the
modern
critics,
but
goes too
(10)
far in
condemning Pentateuchal
the
criticism altogether.
The Text of
Old Testament.
By douard
viii
Naville. D.C L..

.
LL.D., D.Litt., F.S.A.
The Schivcich Lectures, 1915 {The British Academy

1916.
pp.
London: Humphrey Milford,
82.
VOL.
XI.
506

Without considering the philological aspect of the problem,
we cannot see any reasonable objection
to the author's views that
many
of the narratives of Genesis were originally written in cunei-
form, and that
Moses himself used this script for his legislation. We say intentionally 'script' and not 'language'. His theory would have been less revolutionary, and might have been more
favourably considered,
if
he had insisted that Moses used the

for the
Hebrew language, and we If actually possess examples of this kind in the Amarna Glosses. other Asiatic nations used this script for their own idioms, why But his own view could be readily accepted not the Hebrews ? The principal while insisting upon the documentary theory.
cuneiform script as a
medium
reason
for
the
assumption that both the Jahvist and Elohist

is
recorded oral traditions
the current belief that the Phoenician
alphabet had not yet existed in an early period.

of such a theory,
But
in the light
we might assume
that both these early writers
translated cuneiform tablets of the

to his
Mosaic period, each according

rejected by
those
tives.
own style. Such a view would of course be who insist upon the non-historical character of
those narra-
But these extreme views are becoming more and more
untenable in the face of archaeological evidence, to which also

the author
made
it
a notable contribution.
However,
in
must be confessed that the author's books are
a high degree uncritical in

is
many
of their positions.
We
wonder whether the author
well acquainted with the language
of the Mishnah, which according to his theory must be contem-
porary with the rendering of the Scriptures into

idiom.
the
Hebrew
No
scholar ever paid a greater compliment to the Rabbis
than the author in crediting them with the rendering of the
Aramaic Bible
into the classic
Hebrew
of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Job,
Lamentations, &c.
We wonder whether the author has thoroughly

Targumim and
the
compared
the present
Peshitta
with
the
Hebrew
text,
so as to have a clear conception of the gigantic
task of rendering an
Aramaic version
in the present
Hebrew
form.
style
We
further wonder whether the author has investigated the

Biblical
and language of the various
books,
whose
peculiarity
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
could scarcely have been retained
HOSCHANDER
if
is
507
they had passed through
a translation, unless he should hold that this peculiarity
due
to the distinct style of the several Rabbinical translators.
We
to
may
also
doubt whether the author has given due consideration

style of the
to the
clumsy and awkward
Amarna
letters
and
the beautiful form of the Pentateuch, unless he should assumethat the
knowledge of the cuneiform language of Moses and the
other Biblical writers was also a part of divine inspiration, and
thus far superior to that of their contemporaries.
However, we cannot see how the author's theory
in its entirety
would account
for the difference in style
and usages of
certain
words and expressions

which
is
in the various parts of the Pentateuch,

its
the main evidence for
composite character, unless
he should attribute
this difference either to the
work of various
translators under the direction of Ezra, or
to that of the various
Rabbinical translators.
But we
is
regret to state that very frequently

far
the author's argumentation
from being
of view
it
strictly
is
scientific.
From
the
purely
historical
point
quite irrelevant
whether the Biblical narratives referring to the early history of
Hebrews were
have a
it
written by
Moses
or
by another author
as long
Israel's
as they
religion
real historical basis.
For the history of

in
its
matters not whether the Pentateuch
present
form was written by Moses, but whether the laws embodied there
are of Mosaic origin.
If the author
used the
historical
method,
he ought to have considered the remarkable phenomenon that
Moses should have presented
his laws to Israel not in the
form
of a code, but in that of an history or biography which certainly

stands without an historical parallel.
case,
This may have been the
but
we have no argument
error of the author
against those
who deny
that
Moses should have deviated from the usage

But the main
advanced
is
of other legislators.
that he argues against the
critics
and
entirely ignores the position of those
who
recognize the documentary theory, but do not deny the Mosaic

origin of the
narratives.
Biblical
laws nor the historicity of the Biblical
M m
508

(n) Another
archaeological work of a strictly conservative
i?i
tendency
Palestine,
is
J.
Politeyan's book, Biblical Discoveries

is
Egypt,
furnish
Biblical
and Mesopotamia, the object of which

Biblical
tradition.
to
evidence in support of the

history
is
The
interpreted not only in the light of the archaeological
remains, but also occasionally in accordance with the results of

natural science.
As
for instance,
it
points out that the broad

i,
outline of the facts of the Creation narrative, Gen.
though not
written in scientific terms,
is
in
harmony with
science,
and
this
chapter has evoked even the admiration of Prof. Heackel, whose

observation
is
quoted.
Concerning the unity of the human

quoted who hold that there
is
race,
several anthropologists are
nothing
in the diversity of the various races inconsistent with the belief
that all
men have descended from
a single pair, because
man
has
developed diversely under the influence of

climatic surroundings.
is
social, physical,
and
quoted that there
As to the unity of language, an authority are some 170 ancient monosyllabic roots
main groups of languages.
which are
common
is
to the three
The book
in
the results of lectures given to a
'summer school'
of six
connexion with the London Jews' Society.
It consists
chapters,
and contains a chronology of the Old Testament, a

chart,
chronological
and a bibliography.
Leaving aside the
numerous
letic
is
interpretations,
which are somewhat forced and of homi-
rather than of exegetical character, the
book on the whole

is
interesting
style,
and and
valuable, as the subject-matter

it
dealt with in
a brief
It is
contains a large
amount of
useful information.
not intended for the student, but for the general reader, to
it
whom
will
no doubt prove both

is
instructive
and
edifying.
Though
matters,
there
no
first-hand information, the author has con-
sulted a large
number of authorities on archaeology and other and understands how to apply this knowledge to Biblical
subjects in a rather original way.

(11) Biblical Discoveries in Egypt, Palestine,
and Mesopotamia.
By
the
Rev.
J.
Politeyan, B.A.
Girdlestone, M.A.
With Foreword by the Rev. Canon R. B. London Elliot Stock, 1915. pp. x + 194, 2 maps,
:
and 14
illustrations.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
(12)
IIOSCHANDER
is J.
509
Bail.
is
similar
work of a conservative tendency

Jlible,
book, Lands and Feoples of the
the aim of which
to
provide a background upon which to project the Scripture narrative,
and
to enable the reader to
form some conception of the

the
great lands
and nations with

to present in small
whom
Hebrews had
this work, as
to deal.
its
The
author lays no claim to be original in

is
main
function
compass
facts for
which the student

treatises.
might otherwise have to seek through large and costly
The book
consists
of three sections, which

It
are
divided
into
fourteen chapters.
seems that the
interest of the author in

is
is
the archaeology of the
Old Testament
This
only so far as
it
lies at
the basis of the Christian faith.

first
especially true of the
section,
which deals with the leading features of Palestine

Southern Palestine, Samaria and Galilee,
and
their significance,
and the peoples of
Palestine,
and which may

the subject
rightly
is
be termed
Christian archaeology.
As a whole,
presented from
the point of view of the
New
Testament, and the chief interest
centres in the condition of Palestine at the rise of Christianity.
The author judges
the character of the people of Judaea by their
attitude toward Jesus,
which accordingly
is
painted in dark and

in this section
unsympathetic colours.
But there are other points
of more general interest, especially the chapter which deals with

the ancient inhabitants of Palestine
the Amorites,
the
Horites, the Hittites,

illustrated
and the
Philistines,
whose characters are
by the recent excavations
in Palestine.
The
treatment would be
more sound
and not
if
the views
expressed were given as suggestions
as absolute facts.
Thus,
for instance,
it is
wrong
to state
that the Israelites
knew next
to nothing
about the Horites, since
according to the Biblical traditions, in which the author firmly

believes, the Horites
still
existed at the period of the Patriarchs.

identified with the pre-
This
fact alone
'
shows that they cannot be

'.
historic
cave-dwellers
is
Their identification with the Hittite-
Mitanni Harri
more probable.
Nor
is
there any reason for
(12)
London
Lands and Peoples of the Bible. Adam and Charles Black, 1914.
By James Baikie, pp. xii + 288.
F.
R.A.S.
510
the

emphatic assertion that the invention of the
This was
first
Phoenician
suggested by
alphabet was due to the Philistines.
Macalister for the purpose of vindicating the honour of the Aryan

Philistines,
whose name has become a byword
for
common and
stupid people.
Highly interesting
is
the discussion of the religious customs of

'
the Canaanites as revealed by the excavations.

iniquity'
The charge
of
made
against the Canaanite races in the
Old Testament
has
been proved by absolutely unimpeachable evidence that

;
comes from the hands of the Canaanites themselves it vindicates the morality of the Old Testament, which commanded their
destruction.
In
all
the arguments directed to prove the defective
morality of the Old Testament, this

to the front.
command
'
:
never
fails to
come
ever
The author
observes
There are some dreadful

;
things which are in reality merely sanitary measures
and
if
carnage was " God's daughter
"
it
was when the
Israelites
swept
away, not half thoroughly enough, the abominations with which

the iniquity of the Amorite had cursed the land of promise
(p. 67).
'
But we may add that the human
sacrifices to
which the
author refers could not have been native to the religion of the
we might otherwise have found them among the Babylonians, and cannot have been due to Egyptian
Palestinian Semites, as
influence either.
of
But there can be no doubt that the practice

distinct features of the
If the
human sacrifice was one of the religion down to the sixth century.
influence
Greek
Aryans exercised any

Canaanite practice
upon the Canaanite
civilization this
may be due to them. The second section deals with the Assyrians and Babylonians. The description is fairly accurate, but the chronology is obsolete. The third section deals with Egypt and the less-known nations.
Special
religion
points
of interest are
the
references
to
the
is
Biblical
and
history.
As
for instance, the question
discussed
whether the Egyptian religion modified that of the Hebrews,
and and
it is
pointed out that the Hebrews did take something from

it
the Egyptians, but

practices.
was not ideas they borrowed
only
forms
However, we may add that the very
fact that the
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
forms and
511
praai< es
Hebrews borrowed
testifies
from
the
Egyptians
to the influence of
Egypt upon the Hebrews, though

"\Ye
they did not take over religious ideas.

in
have an exact parallel
the Alexandrian period.
The book
in
contains also an appendix

dis-
on the Date of the Exodus,

cussed.
which the various views are

if
The
author
is
of the opinion that
the
Hebrews had
been
fairly
established in Palestine
by the end of the eighteenth
dynasty we would have found in the

to
Hebrew
records references
of Seti
I
the
great
II
losses
caused
by
the
invasions
and
Raamses
of the
and Merneptah, and therefore thinks

at the
that the date

latter's
Exodus might be placed

raid
end of the
reign.
But the statements of Egyptian
rulers are far
from being exact,
and a mere
is
frequently presented as an important campaign.

it
The book
tions
is
very interesting, as
contains
many
valuable sugges-
and inferences which show
historical
is
acumen.
(13)
work of
similar contents
Ch. L. Bedale's book, The

is
Old Testament and Archaeology, the aim of which
to
give
examples, by selecting some of the most important discoveries, of

the
way
in
which our knowledge of the
political, social,
and
reli-
gious
four
life
of Israel has been increased.
The book
consists of
chapters.
Chapter
I,
entitled
Israel's
Predecessors
and
Neighbours, describes the palaeolithic and neolithic periods, the

aborigines,
and
the
coming
of
the
Semites
and
Hittites.
Chapter
material
II,
entitled
the Civilization of Canaan, deals with the
and
'
religious
elements.
Of
interest
is
the following
remark
trades
It
was inevitable that the
Israelites
should adopt the
and occupations and many of the habits of the people

they dwelt.
among whom
able
peril.
But the
situation
was one of considerelements of

the
The
material
and the
religious
Canaanite civilization was so closely bound together that
the
adoption of one was almost certain to involve the adoption of

the other, and to a very large extent, in the case of the majority
of the Israelites, that
is
what actually happened.'
Chapter III
(13)
The Old Testament and Archaeology.
{Manuals for Christian Thinkers),
London
By Charles L. Bedale. M.A. Charles H. Kelly, pp. 134.
512

monuthe
gives an outline of the history of Israel in the light of the
ments, from Solomon to the

is
fall
of Jerusalem.
Of
It
special value
Chapter IV, entitled
Israel's
Triumph.
is
deals with
question
how
Israel's
importance
its
to
be explained.
Notwithstate Israel
standing the close of
career as
at this
an independent
triumphed.
as
Our wonder
phenomenon grows even
greater
we recognize her comparative poverty and

Some, finding the marvel too great
Israel's religion,
failure in
other
respects.
for their acceptance,

its
have maintained that
like
material culture,
was borrowed, and on the ground that there are numerous points
of contact between the religious beliefs
lonia
and
practices of Babyits
and
Israel,
have pointed to Babylonia as
home.
The
author proceeds to show the superiority of

that of Babylonia
stories.
It
is
Israel's
religion to
by the incantation
texts,
the creation and deluge
the abiding glory of Israel of having
produced
a religious literature surpassing not only the Babylonian, but also

that of every other nation in the world.
The book
is
a very useful archaeological manual, as
it
presents
within a narrow compass the archaeological knowledge absolutely necessary for the study of the Old Testament.
is
The
information
accurate, the inferences are reasonable,

is
and show an unbiassed

Its
judgement, the style

is
crisp, clear,
and
attractive.
tendency
on the whole conservative, without

Lugal-zaggisi
7
insisting in
is
each point upon
the traditional view.

tion of two dates.
The chronology
is
correct with the excep-
rightly placed
2800, while
Sargon
2650.
I,
who overthrew the latter, is dated 150 years later, about Hammurabi is dated 1958-19 16, which is quite immore comprehensive,
possible.
(14) Similar, but
book, The Bible in the Light of Antiquity.
W. Cruickshank's The modest appearis
ance of
this small
volume does not suggest
its
high value, for
it is
actually an excellent
(14)
handbook of
the
Biblical archaeology,
and
pre-
The Bible
in
Light of Antiquity.
Handbook
of Biblical
Archaeology by Rev. William Cruickshank, B.D., KinefF {Guild Textbooks).
London: A. and
pp.
viii
C.
Black
Edinburgh: R. and R. Clark, Ltd.,
1913.
146.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
sents an exact
HOSCIIANDER
in
513
and succinct account of the whole mass of archaeounderstanding of the Bible
logical material for the proper
present state of our knowledge.
The
work, as the author say-,
merely intended as a review of the results of explorations and

excavations in Bible lands, and as this work
there can be no finality in a
is
being continued,
book which
professes to deal with
the results of these operations.

as
He
points out that discover

at
sensational
as
any hitherto
made may
and
any time
be
announced from some place

modification or
in the East,
this
may
lead to
for this
abandonment of views
presently held;
reason one must exercise caution in expressing opinions.
The
author
is
not concerned with the prehistoric remains of Palestine,
but confines his attention to the period that coincides with Biblical
and
especially
Old Testament
times.
While interested
in every
discovery from any quarter in the East that casts light upon the
Bible, he chiefly deals with the discoveries relating to the land
with which the latter
is
most
clearly connected.
The book
chapters.
tine,
consists of five sections divided into twenty-seven

I
Section
describes
the
general
its
features
of
Pales-
the
excavations
it
conducted
there,
inhabitants,
is
and the
entitled
powers with which

Society,
came
in
contact.
Section II
and deals with the position of the
king, with war, law,
family commerce, money, weights
and measures.
arts
Section III
shows the condition of
agriculture,
and
crafts,
and gives
a description of housing, food, dress and ornaments, games and
amusements.
language and
The two
literature,
last sections,
which deal with education,

beliefs,
traditions,
and
doctrines,
and
many
other subjects, are of special interest.
There are constant
references to Biblical passages
have some bearing.

greatly facilitates
jects
its
on which the subjects discussed pleasing feature of this work which

is
use as a book of reference

in large type,
is
that the sub-
under discussion are printed
and so are the

to discuss the
headings of each paragraph.
There
no need
to
views presented, as they contain very

exception.
little
which one may take
514

(15) While the information on the excavations of Palestine
given in the last two volumes

student, those desirous of being
this subject will
is
quite sufficient for the Bible
made thoroughly acquainted with

Handcock's book,
do well
to consult P. S. P.
The Archaeology of the Holy Land, the object of which is to give an account of the arts, crafts, manners, and customs of the
inhabitants of Palestine from
the earliest
times
down
to
the
Roman
part
period.
It is
a highly scientific work based for the most
on Macalister's Excavations of Gezer, but the treatment on the whole is rather dry, and numerous facts dwelt on are of
interest for the archaeologist rather than the Bible student.
It
would make more congenial reading

here and there, and especially
if
the subject-matter were

is
presented throughout in the light of the Scriptures, as

in
done
the last chapter.
But the
author himself does not believe that the results of these excavations are of
'
immense value
for Biblical studies, as

little
he observes
On
the whole, archaeology throws
new
in
light
on the
religious
practices
and customs which obtained

Semitic
periods.
Palestine during the
pre-Christian
filled in
The
excavations
have indeed
some of
the details
and
intensified the colours, but they
have not made any material alteration in the picture which we

already had.
The
prevalence of foreign
influence
Egyptian,
be readily
still
Mycenean, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Greek

exotic influences
could
is
inferred from the Biblical records, but the precise effect of these
on the
religion of the country

(p.
largely
a matter of speculation'
372
f.).
However, the very
fact that
the Biblical records are being confirmed by the archaeological
remains
is
matter of no small importance for the question

reliable,
whether the Biblical authors are

trust also
whose testimony we may

But on
disproved
on matters not connected with archaeology.

is
one point the author claims that a Biblical statement by archaeology

:
'
None
of the fortification works at Jericho shows

to the extent that a reader of
any sign of having been destroyed

^15)
The Archaeology of the Holy Land.
By
P. S. P.
With coloured frontispiece, 25 plates, 109 figures in plans. New York The Macmillan Company, 1916.
:
text,
Handcock, M.A. and 2 folding
pp. 383.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
Joshua 6 would naturally suppose
'
HOSCHANDER
No
515
(p. 101).
However, the wh
is
lengthy discussion of Sellin's view that the wall excavated

Israelite origin
is
of
gratuitous.
is
The author
observes
'
reason-
able person
who
not blinded by prejudice or biassed by a
desire to bolster
as to the
up an unsupportable theory can have any doubt

6. 20.
meaning of Joshua
The
writer obviously
meant
that as the result of the blowing of the trumpets
and the procesBut
sional
march of the
fall
priests, the wall of the city collapsed as a

(p. 102).
if
zvhok, the
being in the nature of a miracle'
the latter was indeed the case, there was no need for encom-
passing the city seven days in succession, and on the seventh
day seven times.
These long and weary

must be
religious
ceremonies
could not have been without a reason.

reasonable Bible student
it
Furthermore, to any
clear that in the Biblical
conception miracles happen only when
human agency
effort to
is
at the
in
end of
its
power; yet the Biblical author does not indicate
the least that the Israelites had

city in
made any
conquer the
a natural way.
Finally, if Jericho fell

all.
by a miracle, there
Therefore we
was no need
for the Israelites to fight at
may
just as emphatically state that
no reasonable person, who under-
stands the Biblical
mode
it
of thought
and
expression, can have any

city for
doubt as to the meaning of the encompassing the
many
and many
times, that
was
in the nature of a stratagem
by which
the vigilance of the defenders was naturally relaxed

garrison might be deceived in the
any modern
fun of these
same way.
naturally
Seeing the besiegers
day
after
day performing these religious ceremonies instead of

city,
attacking the
the defenders
made
proceedings and became tired of watching them.

well imagine that just at a
Thus we may
moment when some

Israelites
it.
parts of the wall
were free from defenders, the

the wall
rushed amid shouting to
and
effected several breaches in
We may
rest
assured
that the besiegers did not merely 'shout', but attacked the wall
at the
same
time.
It
is
very likely that the record of the con-
quest of Jericho was taken from the
Book oijaskar^
just as that
of the battle against the five kings (Joshua 10), and records of this
kind, while substantially true, ought not to be taken literally.
516

The book
consists of nine chapters.
After an introductory
chapter on the pre-Semitic, the various Semitic and the Hellenistic
periods, there follow descriptions
of the caves
and
rock-
cuttings of the
Troglodytes
(II),
the Architecture (III), Flint,
Bone, Ivory, and Stone (IV), Metallurgy (V), Pottery (VI), Terracotta (VII), Burial
Customs (VIII), and Worship and Places of

general
interest are the
last
Worship
(IX).
Of
two chapters
Peculiar
is
which contain many references to Biblical customs.
the author's view that the pig was not regarded as an unclean
animal.
He
observes
'
:
In spite of the abhorrence with which

it
that animal was subsequently regarded,
was sometimes used as

65. 4
;
sacrificial
victim by the Semites
(cf. Isa.
66. 17).
This
it
practice hardly seems reconcilable with the prevalent view that
was an unclean animal'

which the author
abomination
is
(p.
'
361).
But
Isaiah's very
flesh,
words to
refers
which eat swine's

'
and broth of and the
in their vessels
',
'
eating swine's flesh,
abomination, and the mouse

pig, like the
leave no
room
for
doubt that the

an unclean
mouse, was regarded by the

is
Israelites as
animal, and that this conception
not due to a later 'authoritative
priesthood
of
fact,
',
which the author so unjustly arraigns.
As a matter
the pig was from the earliest period considered unclean the Semites and the Egyptians.
It is
among
noteworthy that in
the Carthaginian laws of sacrifices the pig does not occur as a

sacrificial
animal, while the sacrifices mentioned are on the whole
identical with those of the
Hebrews.
(16) Comprehensive
logical
beyond comparison with the archaeoreviewed
volumes
in
hitherto
and of quite
different
character
the
is
presentation
and treatment of the archaeothe

in
logical material
Bible.
George A. Barton's book, Archaeology and

this
There can be no difference of opinion that

its
book
is
every respect, in
form of presentation,
brilliant
its
contents, accuracy,
and
fullness, a
most
and
work.
Here
for once, as far as
we
(16
Archaeology
the Bible.
By George
17".
A. Barton, Ph.D., LL.D.,

Br3'n
Professor of Biblical
Literature and
Semitic Languages in
Philadelphia
:
Mawr
College {Green
Fund Book,
1016.
No.
American Sunday
illustrations.
School Union,
pp.
xiii
+ 461, 9 maps, and 302
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
can
is
HOSCHANDER
517
see,
we have
a Biblical archaeology, in which the material
presented in an impartial way, and the author does not intrude
his
own particular opinions upon the reader, but gives both the modern and conservative inferences, and maintains throughout
need of such
felt
a neutral attitude on controverted points.
a work was long
among
students of the Bible.
As
far as the
translations of the cuneiform texts are concerned,

first-hand information, as the texts
we have here
have been on the whole freshly
translated by the author especially for this work,
and the author's
name, well known as an eminent Assyriologist and authority on

Sumerian,
is
full
guarantee
for
their accuracy.
Though
the
work
is
especially written for the use of the pastor

is
and Sunday-
school teacher, the treatment

bias,
thoroughly free from any religious
and
it
ought to be consulted by religious teachers of any

It
is
denomination.
a standard work on Biblical archaeology,
and
will
very likely maintain this prominent position for

Its
some
infor-
years to come.
object
that
is
to present the
most valuable
mation of
all
sorts
excavation has brought to
light,
the
wealth of illumination for Biblical
study that exploration has

in the
produced, and an outline of the history of the exploration
Bible lands sufficient to enable the reader to place each item in

its
proper perspective.
No
attempt has been
jects to
which exploration has contributed

consists of two parts.
made to treat subno new knowledge.

I,
The book
resultant light
Part
divided into fifteen

the
chapters, treats of the
Bible lands, their exploration, and

history,
on Bible land
and Part
II,
divided into
twenty-seven chapters, presents translations of ancient documents
which confirm or illuminate the Bible.

deal concisely with
civilization of Egypt,
In Part
I,
Chapters I III
history,
the discoveries,
archaeology,
and
Babylonia, and Assyria, and the Hittites.

is
A much
Chapters
more detailed treatment
given to Palestine, to which

its
IV-XIV
are devoted, which deal with

cities,
exploration,
pottery,
archaeological
utensils
history,
roads
and
agriculture,
and personal ornaments, measures, weights and money, high places and temples, tombs, Jerusalem and the Decapolis
(the ten cities
in
which Greek population was dominant and
518

Chapter
light
which formed a federation).

in Asia
XV presents
New
the discoveries
Minor which throw
on the
Testament
In
Part II the translations of ancient documents are arranged in the
order of the Biblical books which they illuminate.

lation
is
Each
its
trans-
accompanied by a
is
brief discussion in
which
chief
bearing on the Bible
pointed out.
In these discussions the
author maintains a neutral attitude, and in each case reports

impartially the principal inferences
drawn by the most important
group of scholars, that the reader may know something of the

latitude of opinion that prevails.
is
He
observes
'
The
temptation
always strong to declare that the interpretation of an ancient
record which accords with one's
own view must be
right.
But
unfortunately problems in ancient history that are thus dogmatically settled,
do not remain
settled.
deeper
faith,
confident in
the final triumph of truth patiently awaits further light' (p. 233).
It is sincerely to
be regretted that
this attitude is not
shared by
the largest
and most
influential part of the

first
modern
are
critics.
Of
the second part, the

of
two chapters contain the two
Babylonian accounts
Creation, which
compared with
In the
Gen. 1-2.
The
third discusses the Babylonian Sabbath.
fourth, the legend of
The
fifth
patriarchs.
Adapa is compared with the Fall of Man. treats of the Hebrew and Babylonian antediluvian The attempt to prove that the names of the former
is
are identical with those of the latter

fetched.
decidedly forced and
far-
But there can be no doubt that the names of the

patriarchs are Babylonian, either iVkkadian or Sumerian.
Hebrew
An
the
attempt to explain these names independently of those of the

is
Babylonian antediluvian kings
not
difficult.
As
for instance,
'
name
of Abel might correspond to cuneiform aplu,

(cf.
son
',
which in Babylonia was evidently pronounced ablu

A?/-adan, but
tiller
1
Merodach'
Tiglath-///-eser).
',
The name
Cain,
who
was a
of the ground
'.
might be connected with Sumerian gan,
field
In Seth we
may perhaps
is
see Sumerian shitim,
'
skilled
workman'.
Enoch, which
also the
name
of a city, might be
a rendering of Sumerian hen-uku,
'abundance of the people*.

'
Methusael of course corresponds to cuneiform Mntu~sha-ili<,
the
BIBLICAL
LITERATURE HOSCHANDER
with
the
519
city-nai
man
of
Clod'.
Irad might be identical

city'.
EridUi'* the good
Lantech might possibly correspond to

place'.
'
Lam-ki perhaps, 'the splendour of the
Jared might
servant
'.
perhaps be the Hebraized cuneiform word warad,
Chapters VI-VII contain Babylonian accounts of the Deluge.
We
notice that Hilprecht's fragment of the Deluge story

to.
is
not
referred
Chap. VIII contains an account of the origin of
a city and the beginning of agriculture from a tablet written in
Nippur before 2000, which Langdon published under the

The Swnerian Epic of Paradise,
Philadelphia, 19 15.
the Flood, a?id the Fall of
title,
Man,
The
author does not share Langdon's view
that this text deals with those subjects.
Chapter IX
is
entitled
Abraham and Archaeology, and contains some contracts from Babylonia, in which an Abraham (Abarama) was one of the
contracting parties, but this
man was
not the Biblical patriarch.
In this connexion
it
is
worth mentioning that while the name
Abarama corresponds
Early Babylonian
the
to
to Biblical Abrani, Lutz, in his publication
Letters,
New
Haven, 19 17, called attention
to
name A-ba-ra-ha-am (No
15, 13),
which perhaps corresponds

14.
Abraham.
This chapter contains also a discussion of Gen.
Chapter
deals with the archaeological material that has a bearing
on the
tale
stories of
Jacob and Joseph.

the legend
Chapters XI-XII give the

inscription
of Sinuhe,
of Sargon, and the

is
of
Merneptah.
the laws of
Highly instructive
Chapter XIII, which presents
Hammurabi and
in
the Biblical parallels.
The author
goes decidedly too far in declaring that the laws of the Old
Testament are
lonian laws.
no
essential
way dependent upon the Babythat the laws of the pre-Mosaic
JampePs opinion
Hebrews were,
as far as they could
be applied to
of
their circum-
stances, identical with those of the
Code
Hammurabi, and
legislation,
is
that
cer-
many
of
them were embodied
in the
Mosaic
tainly very reasonable,

traditions.
and
in full
accordance with the Biblical
The author's opinion is more in accordance with that of S. A. Cook in his work, The Laws of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi, who attempts to show the originality of the Mosaiclaws.
But as Johns,
in
the following
book reviewed,
rightly
520
observes
' :

For such
critics
it is
vital to
maintain the exclusion of
external influence.
There
is
no
criterion of date for
them
if
the
orderly
continuous
evolution along well-known
lines
can
be
supposed to be overwhelmed by a catastrophic influence from

without.'
Chapter
XIV
gives an alleged parallel to Leviticus, a Cartha-
ginian law concerning sacrifices.

latter to the
The
it
striking similarity of the
former
is
significant, as
would show that a
consi-
derable
number
of the regulations of the ritual go back to an early
period before the foundation of Carthage by the Phoenicians.
Chapters
period,
to the
XV-XVI
contain
Palestinian letters
of
the
Amarna
and the report of the Egyptian Wenamon who was sent
Lebanon
to fetch cedar
woods.
Chapter XVII, entitled
Archaeological Light on the Books of Kings, gives

the Egyptian
list
among
others
of the Asiatic cities
conquered by Shishak,
Assyrian references to Palestine, the Moabite and the Siloam

inscriptions, and
some Neo-Babylonian references. Chapter XVIII

end of the
Captivity,
deals with the
and gives
inscriptions
of
Nabunai'd and Cyrus which have a bearing on Biblical statements

regarding Belshazzar, the
Jews.
Book
of Daniel,
and the return of the
Highly
important
is
Chapter
is
XIX, which
discusses
the
Elephantine papyri.
It
strange that
the author in dealing
with the problem of the origin of the Jewish colony in Egypt

entirely ignores the
account of Jeremiah concerning the immigra-
tion of the
Judaeans into Egypt.
The temple
at
Jeb may well

have
have been built by these immigrants, of
whom some may
entered as soldiers in the service of the Egyptian king.
Further,
the author omitted to mention the fact that there are indications
that the Jewish colony at
Jeb were not pure Jahveh-worshippers.
From such
what
a point of view the inferences would have been some-
different.
Chapters
XX-XXIV
present Babylonian
poems
of affliction, which show similarities to the
Book
of Job, psalms
from Babylonia and Egypt, parallels to Proverbs and Ecclesiastes,

Egyptian parallel to Canticles, and illustrations of passages in the
Prophets.
The
three remaining chapters give reputed sayings of
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
The
301
52
Jesus found in Egypt, archaeological light on the enrolment of

Quirinius,
and on the Acts and

add
Epistles.
beautiful
illustrations
to the value of this work.

all
Considering the author's liberal attitude toward

opinion,
shades of
we
shall
not enter
into
a discussion
of the various
inferences concerning Biblical subjects.

a few points in
the.
We
confine ourselves to
outline of the Babylonian history, as

Biblical
some
of them have an important bearing on the
accounts.
We
notice that the author unreservedly adopted

first
Eduard Meyer's
and
view that the Semites were the

valley, which,
to arrive in the Euphrates

is
however, has very
little justification,
scarcely
in
fall
accord with Biblical tradition.
The
statement that after the
of the First Dynasty of Babylon 'the Hittites appear to have
ruled the country for a short time,
when they were driven

we know
'
out by
the Dynasty of the Sea-Lands, which so far
controlled
the country for the next hundred and

exact, as
fifty
years
(p. 59^, is
not
we have no evidence
Second Dynasty.
that
Akkad was
is
ever under the
rule of the
This view
scarcely
more than
last
an assumption based upon the opinion that Ea-gamil, the

king of this dynasty, was a contemporary of Kashtiliash,
third
the
king of the Kassite dynasty.
But there may have been
another king bearing the same name, since

as
among
the Kassites,
among
the Assyrians
and
others,
we
find various rulers bearing
the
same name.
There indeed were two kings of the name

In the Kassite dynastic
list
Kashtiliash,
and why not a third?
there
filled
is
a lacuna of one hundred years at least that cannot be

it
out by other sources, comprising
would seem the kings
of the sixteenth century.

in
Therefore, the Kassite king Kashtiliash,

to this
for
whose time the Second Dynasty terminated, may belong
period.
This would well accord with Kugler's lowest date
the year of accession of Ammi-zaduga, the year 1857, as the date
of the Second Dynasty, which was established in the twelfth year of
Samsu-iluna,
and
lasted
368
years,
would be
942-1 574.
The acceptance
in
of this date would solve two important problems

Firstly,
it
Babylonian
history.
would explain the absence of

I
any archaeological evidence of the rule of the Second
Hnasty
VOL.
XI.
N n
522
in

Secondly,
it
Akkad.
would show that the Kassites did not
wait 150 years for the conquest of Babylonia, but entered into
its
possession a comparatively short time after the downfall of
the
Hammurabi Dynasty.
It
is
highly probable, as generally

relations
suggested, that there were
some
between the Hittites

possession of
who overran Babylonia and

this country.
the Kassites
who took
But of more importance
is
the bearing that this date would

14.
have upon Biblical chronology and incidentally upon Genesis
The
incident narrated there could have occurred only before
the thirty-first year of the reign of
Hammurabi, and not
later.
Notwithstanding the
identification of
difficulties
pointed out by the author in the

insist
Amraphel with Hammurabi, we must

to the current date of that king,
upon
that
all
the circumstances of that incident point to the latter's
reign.
But according
2123-2081,
in
agreement with Kugler's second date
for the accession-year of
Ammi-zaduga, Abraham could not have been a contemporary

of
Hammurabi. The
former, according to the Biblical chronology,
entered Canaan 645 years before the Exodus.
As
to the latter
it
assumption held by
before the
it
many
conservative scholars that
occurred
Amarna
period, under the powerful Eighteenth Dynasty,
may be
safely dismissed as out of consideration.
The modern
of the Judges.
current view that the Israelites entered
Canaan about 1200 would
not be in accordance with the account of the

It
Book
would be almost impossible
to
crowd
all
the events narrated

if
there into the brief space of about 150 years, even
some of
II, in
them occurred simultaneously.

work The Store-City of Pithom,
this
Naville's evidence for a later
date and that the Pharaoh of the Oppression was

his
is
Raamses
of
little
value, as
we know
that
vain king appropriated
many
earlier
works, and the
building
of the cities Pithom and
Raamses may have begun

his reign.
in the interval
under the Eighteenth Dynasty and was finished under

Therefore, the
the Eighteenth
Exodus must have occurred
between
We
and the Nineteenth Dynasties, thus about 1350. need not dwell upon the conditions of this period, and how
But we
favourable they were for the liberation of the Hebrews.
BIBLICAL
LITERATURE HOS< HANDER

is
523
may
point out, by the way, that there
reason to assume that

sup-
the Exodus was incidentally due to
Amenophis IV, who

Disc,
pressed not only
all
the cults of the Egyptians in establishing the
monotheistic religion
of the Solar
but also that of the

for religious liberty.
Hebrews, and the
latter first
clamoured merely
From
had
the Biblical account
we may indeed gather
that the
Exodus
in
its
starting-point in a purely religious
movement.
Thus,
accepting Kugler's lowest date, the year of Hammurabi's accession
would be 2000, and about the same time we may place Abrahams
departure from
(17)
Ur
of the Chaldees.
A
is
work that deals with one of the most important phases
of archaeology to which
reviews,
we have already
referred in the former

betiveen the
C.
H. W. Johns' book, The Relations
La:cs
of Babylonia and the

the
Code
of
Laws of the Hebrew Peoples. In comparing Hammurabi with the Mosaic laws, the author takes
same group of ancient
Hebrew, and that both are compromises between
one of primitive Semitic custom,
the view that the former belongs to the

legislation as the
two
distinct types of law, the
and the other of a

the
settled
to
community.
Both the
Israelites
and
West Semites,
whom Hammurabi
belonged,
previously
obeyed primitive laws, and forming as they did the ruling races
in
Canaan and Babylonia, clung with Oriental conservatism

But the West Semites found
in
to
their primitive customs.
Baby-
lonia the laws of a settled community, which
may have been

Israelites
evolved through long ages.
Similarly, in
in possession
Canaan the
found a long-settled people
who were governed by
laws similar to those of the settled Babylonians.
Much
that
is
common
tion
to the laws of the
two settled communities may have

Israelites
arisen independently.
As the
became a
settled popula-
many
of their
nomad customs must have become
inappro-
priate,
and they might have taken over the laws of the Canaanites,
as far as they were innocent, or not too obnoxious to

(17)
Hebrew
the
The Relations between

Peoples.
the
Laws of Babylonia and
the
Laws of
1912
Hebrew
St.
By
the Rev. C.
H.W.Johns,
M.A., Litt.D., Master of

K
Catharine's College,
Cambridge.
:
The Schtveick Lectures,

1914.
pp.
Thc
British
Academy).
London
Humphrey Milford,
xv + 96.
II
524
prejudices.

Thus
the
be due to one of the
common material of the two Codes may two common sources, primitive Semitic law
The author
thus thinks that
and the law of
settled communities.
both legislations are compromises between the two types of law, that they show different degrees of preponderance of one or the
other type, and that the laws of
development strongly
Moses manifest an independent influenced by the Code of Hammurabi.

three
lectures
The book
British
consists of
delivered
before
the
Academy.
of
The
first
deals with the external features of

chiefly
the
Code
Hammurabi, dwelling
on those that are useful
for a
comparison with the

its
Israelite legislation,
and describes the
discovery of the Code,

several copies, the
form and
society
script
and the fragments of

laws.
state of
and
its
The author
itself is
points out that the state of society bears surprising likenesses

to
that of
Europe
in the
Middle Ages.
replaced
The law
full
no
is
less
advanced.
if
Justice
has
vengeance.
is
Self-help
restrained,
not suppressed.
There
protection for the
weak, the widows, and orphans.

of freedom
Women
their
are placed in a position
and independence of
husbands.
Education
that every
was
at
such a high pitch that
Hammurabi assumes
for
injured person would
come and read
himself the laws that
applied to his
own case, or at least find a neighbour who could do so. In many respects we find the most extraordinary medley The extraordinary confidence in of ancient and modern laws.
the power of the oath to secure truthful witness
is
remarkable.
The
the
tenure of a Babylonian retained of the king reveals strange
likenesses to the feudal system.

will,
We
have here the institution of
the invention of which has been usually ascribed to the
Romans.
The second
the Babylonian
lecture points out the types of likeness
between
contrasts.
and Hebrew
laws,
and the associated

that
Notable
tions
:
'
is
the author's reference to the Rabbinical interpretaare sometimes assured

all
We
the discussions of the
Jewish
Rabbis embody
the
results
of
modern
criticism.
Certainly they
tion of the
do contain an amount of material

is
for the elucida. .
Mosaic laws which
almost bewildering in extent.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
In fact
it
HOSCHANDER
it
0^
may Our
but
.
seems
to be the case that the later Jewish interpretation
of the Mosaic law so closely follows Babylonian law that
be regarded
task
as
no
less a
commentary on
if
that legislation.
would soon be
at
an end
we could be
sure that this tradiexile,
tional view
was not strongly influenced by the Jewish
really represented
what the old Jewish law was intended

said than
that
to be.
Very
little
more need be
the Jews with
their
wonderful adaptability to the customs of the land of their adoption which has always rendered
them the best of

and
citizens, readily
assimilated
all
that
was good
in
Babylonia while preserving also

jealously guarding whatf.).
the best things in their ancient law
ever was sacred by
its
religious value' (p. 15
The
author's
arguments are evidently directed against views as advanced by
Jampel
in his
still
work reviewed above
(8).
Of
1
more
to
interest
are
the author's
views
of
modern
referred
:
scholarship,
which we
have
already
repeatedly
Modern
scholarship has succeeded in fixing and separating out

different sources or docu-
of the
Books of Moses a number of

.
. .
ments.
We
must accept these
results, so far as
we can
get a
notion of them, and refer to the separate codes rather than to

a single
body of laws known

and and
it
as those of Moses.
No
one can
venture to dispute these decisions on pain of being reckoned

reactionary
authority,
ruling.
obscurantist.
These scholars hold the
seat of
would be rash presumption

I
to question their
it
may be hoped that they will pardon a sigh of regret on our part that we are now unable to compare the Mosaic law as a whole with the Code of Hammurabi. It would be so much easier for the lecturer, and the indebtedness of Moses to Hammurabi so much more convincing to you. Sadly as many have lamented the tearing of the
any wish
to
Nor have
do
this.
Yet
great law-book into pieces as rendering
it
a mere thing of patches

its
and
shreds,
it
they
may
take comfort that
present condition
o\~
renders
much
harder to recognize the characteristic texture
the Babylonish garment' (p. 16).
But while the author
is
far
from
being convinced of the
modern
views, though granting for purposes of comparison thai
526
the

Book
of the Covenant
is
the sole relic of the earliest
Hebrew
legislation
and
that the rest
may be regarded
If
as later develop-
ment, he cannot accept the traditional view

tion itself imports
either, as
here tradiat his old
many
difficulties.
we
set
Moses
place in history and accept the traditional synchronism of Abra-
ham and Amraphel, and the modern identification of the latter with Hammurabi, the Hammurabi Code is thus as much older than the Mosaic law as Abraham is before Moses. On the
authority of
Moses himself
that
means 340
years.
But the
Babylonians reckoned 550 years from the death of

to the death of Kadashman-Ellil, a
Hammurabi
contemporary of Amenophis
while that king was

before Moses.
still
sovereign of Palestine and therefore
The
author goes on to attack the identification

incidentally
of
Amraphel with Hammurabi, and thereby

14,
the
authenticity of Gen.
though he asserts
'
:
This
fact neither
confirms nor contradicts the
Hebrew
narrative' (pp. 17-20).

is
However, on these points the author

ing to the
utterly wrong.
Accordat least
Hebrew
version
not LXX we find 650 years
between the departure of Abraham from Ur and the Exodus.

the latter tcok place shortly after the death of
If as
Amenophis IV,
the present writer suggested above in his review of Barton's

(16), the date of
book
of of
given by the
Abraham would be author to Hammurabi.

it
in full
agreement with that

the author
is is
Further,
course wrong in denying that Biblical Shinear

Babylonia, though originally
the
name
may have
designated only the
southern part Shumer.

call
We
cannot expect the Biblical writer to

as to
Amraphel king of Babel or Akkad,

cities situated in the
him these were the

As
to the corrup-
names of
about
land of Shinear.
in
tion of the
it.
names mentioned
Gen.
14, there is
nothing strange
We
must bear
in
mind
that the Biblical writings have
undergone frequent
transliterations
fifth
from the Phoenician into the
Aramaic characters of the
century and from the latter into

all
other modifications of this script, and that the copyists in

likelihood had not the slightest idea of the
meaning of those
names which thus may have become

instance, in the
easily corrupted.
in the fifth
As
for
Aramaic characters prevailing
century
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
in
HOSCHANDER
and lamed
is
527
frequently
Egypt, the distinction between

it
waw
name Atnrapu may have become is AmrapeL Moreover, we must remember that those names may have become corrupt long before the narrative of Gen. 14 was
very slight,
thus the original
committed
frequently.
to writing, as corruptions of foreign
names occur very
We
have only to think of the name Shulmanu-asharid

Sharru-kenu
which became Shalmaneser, or

bani-pal
Sargon, Ashur-
Osnappar,
Nabu-kudurri-usur =
transliterations of the
is
Hebraized Nebuchad-
nezzar, of the
kings,
Greek
names
of the Persian
writings of
none of which
correct,
and of the various

if
these
names
in cuneiform.
Further,
the
name
generally read
Arad-Sin was pronounced Eri-Akit
Arioch, the
name Rim-Sin
may have been pronounced Riw-Afai, which might likewise correspond to Arioch. The people in the Westland may not
have had the
succeeded by
it
least idea of the fact that the king
Eri-Aku was
his
young brother who bore a

was
similar
name.
But
seems that both Arad-Sin and Rim-Sin were merely the nominal
their father,
rulers of Larsa, while the real sovereign
Kudur-
mabug.
The
likely or
author's further question: 'At what period of
Hammu-
rabi's reign
was an alliance with
his
life -long
enemy Rim-Sin
even possible?'
(p. 19), rests
on the current misconcep-
tion
of the
Babylonian history of that period.
A
the
thorough
father
investigation
would
show
that
Sin-muballit,
of
Hammurabi, was decidedly defeated by Kudur-mabug, Rim -Sin's

father
lost
and guardian,
life
in the last year of his reign,

battle-field.
and may have
his
on
the
He
evidently
came
to
the
his
assistance of Isin,
suzerain.
Isin
whose king Damikilishu may have been
was conquered, and Hammurabi on
his accession
was forced
his part
to recognize the suzerainty of
Kudur-mabug, who on
it
may have been

after the
the vassal of the overlord of Elam, and
was only
death of the former that
Hammurabi could
make himself independent and encroach upon the dominion of Rim-Sin. The 30 years of the Isin era correspond to the first
30 years of
Hammurabi's
reign.
His dominion must have

as seen
been rather
insignificant in his twenty-third year,
from
528

Ungnad
'
:
the Sippar building inscription, published by A.

publication Babylonian Letters of the
Philadelphia, 1915, p. 30
f.
in his
Hammurapi Period (BE. VII),
The
author's final question
When
did either
of Elam?'
make an expedition
is
to the
West under the
suzerainty
no
less a
misconception.
We know that Hammurabi

it
was king of Amurru, as he styled himself, and
is
generally
admitted that his empire included Syria and Palestine, and yet
we may ask when did Hammurabi undertake an expedition to the West ? As to the rule of Elam over the West, the present writer has some suspicion that Rim-Anum may ultimately prove Rim-Anum may to be identical with the Biblical Kedorlaomer.
:
have been the adopted Babylonian name of
this
Elamitic king
and a
translation of his Elamitic

essential
name.
this
The
upon
importance of
work
lies in
the third lecture,
which discusses the extent of dependence of the Mosaic laws

that of
Hammurabi.
There
is
no need
to
enter into a
discussion of the author's views, which are so obvious as to be
almost beyond any doubt.
We
can only express our regret that
the author submits under protest to the critical views the Mosaic laws from that point of view.
and
treats
is
Sane scholarship
deeply indebted to the eminent scholar for this splendid mono-
graph that must be read to be
fully
appreciated.
The book
contains also an immensely valuable survey of the bibliography
of the literature relating to the

(18)
Code
of
Hammurabi.
Another work dealing with
Israel's laws as well as those

is
of other
Semites from a social anthropological aspect
H.
Schaeffer's book,
The Social Legislation of the Primitive

it
Semites.
This
is
a notable contribution to Semitic studies, as

is
contains
a great amount of information which
investigated
is full
and presented
to find
in a scholarly way, the subject-matter

is
of interest, the style
clear,
its
and
it
makes pleasant reading.

is
But we regret
that
treatment
predominated by views of the most advanced

It
critics
(18)
which as a rule are almost indiscriminately accepted.

The Social Legislation
of
:
the
Primitive
Semites.
By Henry
London
:
Schaeffer, Ph.D.
New Haven
1915.
Yale University Press.
Humphrey Milford,
pp. xiv-f 245.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
(I),
.
I
529
Patri-
contains fourteen chapters which deal with Matriarchy
archy
(II),
Agnation
(III), Next-of-kin (IV), Slavery
Enter
(VI), Pledges
and Security (VII), the
Social
Problem as viewed
by the Prophets (VIII), Poor Laws (IX), Sabbatical
Yeu
(X), the
Year of Jubilee (XI), Ezekiel's Plan of Allotment (XII), Taxation
and Tribute (XIII), and the Development of Individual

ownership
in Israel
I
Iând-
(XIV).
In Chapter
the author discusses the evidence for the e
tence of matriarchy
among
names
is
the early Hebrews.

as
The
evide:
from female
tribal
Hagar and Keturah, Leah and

it
Rachel, Bilhah and Zilpah
rather naive, as
means
the basing
of one hypothesis upon another.
The ceremony
of adoption by
which Bilhah's children are acknowledged by Rachel as her own

is
no indication of the presence of matriarchy,
as Bilhah was
Rachel's hand-maid and her children rightly belong to the mistress.
Laban's insistence upon his right to retain the wives and
the children of Jacob as his

telligible,
own
property does not remain uninof beena marriage, of
even
is
if
we do not assume a type
which
viewed
this
supposed to be a remnant.
Laban's claim must be
in the light of the laws relating to slavery in the so-called

is
Book
of the Covenant (Exod. 21. 2-4), which, on the whole,
evidently pre-Mosaic, as Johns and Jampel
and others contend.

latter
Jacob sold himself twice
to
Laban, and the

slave,
claimed that he
gave his daughters as wives to his

children rightly belong to him,
if
and thus the wives and
the slave goes out after his time
of servitude expired, in accordance with the
common
Semitic law,
for
while
Jacob claimed,
'
served
thee
fourteen
years
thy
daughters' (31. 41), and that he married as a free man.
Thus
Laban's claim was merely a

evidence presented
'
legal fiction.
While, however, the
is
in the
main rather of a suggestive than
convincing character', as the author admits, he might have mentioned a fact which
to
is
rather convincing.
yet
The words
is
of
Abraham
is
Abimelech
'And
indeed she
my
sister:
she
the
daughter of
she
my father, but not the daughter of my became my wife' (Gen. 20. 12), leave scarcely
that
mother
and
for
any room
the
doubt
the
real
kinship
was only through
mother.
530

if
Abraham could not have married Sarah

permitted
she had been the

sister
daughter of his mother, as the marriage of a real
was not
sister
among
the Semites.
The
permission to marry a
from the
father's side
may have been
a survival from the period
of matriarchy.
that
it
This practice seems to have been so
common
we
could not be abolished by the Mosaic legislation, as seen
from the story of
Amnon and Tamar

that
(2
Sam.
13. 13), unless
hold that the prohibition of Lev. 18. 9 dates from a later period,
or
assume with the Talmud
Tamar was
David's step-daughter.
In Chapter II the author advances reasons that brought about

the change from matriarchy to patriarchy.
We
is
do not
believe in
any of the views suggested.

the author imagines.
The problem
more simple than

peoples.
The system
of matriarchy originally was

primitive
due
to
the
low
moral
standard of
No
his
husband could with any probability claim the children of

wife as his own.
Characteristic in this connexion
is
the Talmudic
question
since
'
How
If
can a
man be
executed for striking his father,

?
we have no guarantee
1 1
that the culprit was the latter's son
(Hulin
the
b ).
we may
c. e.,
believe the testimony of the Rabbis of
third
century
who were
well
acquainted with
the
Arabians and had no special reasons for any animosity against
may assume that the moral standard of the latter pre-Mohammedan period was decidedly low. The opinion
them, we
in the
of the
Rabbis concerning the morality of the Arabians

the following saying
:
is
illustrated in
'
Before giving the
Law
of
to Israel,
God made
of
attempts to give
it
to
any of the other nations, but
all
them
declined as each found faults with
some
its
provisions.
:
He
is
went
at
least
to the
?
Ishmaelites.
But they asked

:
What
this
written
adultery.
(Siphre).
there
and the answer was

replied
Thou
shalt
not
commit
Then they The system
we have no use
for
Law*
of patriarchy was a natural consequence
of a higher standard of morality.
Hence
of
it is
quite in order that

allusion to
we should not
matriarchy.
find in the
Code
Hammurabi any
Concerning the
the
levirate marriage, discussed in
Chapter
III,
author ought
to
have shown more independence than to
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHAND
it
531
repeat critical views which have not the least justification.

for instance,
he observes: 'Leviticus seeks to destroy
altogether
to
by forbidding marriages between persons closely related

other.
(p. 62).
each
1
This of course precludes marriage with a brother's wife
But the author of P must certainly have known
I),
and
the critics ought to have given
him more
credit for
common
sense
than to believe that he plainly contradicted the legislation of the

latter.
The law
the brother
is
of Leviticus of course refers to general cases

left
when
children and
no
levirate
is
necessary.
The
more
law of levirate
exceptional case
based upon that of Leviticus and forms an

the brother dies childless.
when
But
it
is
noteworthy that the Jewish practice of levirate does not quite
conform
to the law of
Deuteronomy.
The
latter
decrees that
issue,
levirate takes place if the
deceased brother leaves no male

is
while in the practice no levirate

issue.
permissible
if
is
there
is
female
is
But the Deuteronomical law, which
pre-Mosaic,
inherit.
based upon the principle that only males can

however, the
latter
Since,
law was repealed, and

heirs,
it
women
in default ot
male issue are recognized as

levirate
issues.
is
plain that concerning
no
distinction should
be made between male and female
In Chapter X, the author's remark: 'It

that the year begins in the spring,
pre-exilic period' (p. 162),
is
is
taken for granted

fall,
and not
in the
is
as in the
incorrect.
There
not the least

year
trace in the
Old Testament
even
if
that
in
pre-exilic times the

all
began
in the fall,
we
assign with the critics
the Biblical
dates reckoning from
Nisan to
post-exilic writers.
In the prefall,
Mosaic period
this
in
Egypt the year evidently began
in the
and
beginning of the year was preserved by oral tradition

1,
down
to the present, as, notwithstanding Exod. 12.
the year begins in the Ptolemaic
the
fall
with the
month of Tishri. The Seleucid and

Another remark
in
periods
may have
largely contributed to the preservation of this
non-Biblical reckoning.
distinction
Chapter XII
'
:
The
drawn by Ezekiel between

to
priests
is
and Levites was

wrong.
In the
wholly
unknown
Deuteronomy'
(p. 201),
latter the priests are called
Levites, but the Levites are
nowhere
53 2
called priests

(cf.
12. 12, 18,
19
14.27,29;
15. 11,
is
26. ir, 12, 13) just as every
Pennsylvanian
13 ; 18. 6-9 \ an American, but
not every American

(19) Another
is
a Pennsylvanian.
archaeological
monograph
of importance for
Hebrew and Semitic
religious institutions
which are considered
from an anthropological point of view, and especially for the

institution of the Sabbath,
is
H. Webster's book, Rest Days. The

civili-
author takes the view that the great institutions of modern

zation have their roots in the beliefs
superstitions, of savage
and customs, and often

society,
in the
is
and barbarian
and
that
it
the
task of social anthropology,
by an impressive accumulation of
fact.
evidence, to demonstrate the truth of this

this view,
Starting from
rest
he makes a thorough inquiry into the
days so
commonly observed
later ages,
outside of the Semitic area in antiquity

light
and
which
shed
on the Jewish Sabbath and the

from
labour on
Christian Sunday,
and on the assumed Babylonian prototype of
these
institutions.
is
certain occasions
The custom of not unknown to
refraining
peoples in the lower stages
of culture.
survey of the evidence indicates that such obser-
vances do not have a rationalistic basis, due to man's need of

relaxation
chiefly,
if
and idleness
as a relief from daily
toil,
but have arisen

last
not wholly, as pure superstitions, and are, in the

fear.
analysis,
based primarily on
'
They
find their clearest expresfirst
sion in the
tabooes
',
or prohibitions,
noticed
natives of the South Seas, but
now known
to exist in
among the many other
regions of the aboriginal world.
comparative study of the
taboos indicates that originally things or persons were tabooed
because they were considered dangerous, mysterious, abnormal,
and uncanny, but the

of taboos are
fact
must be recognized that the majority

animistic beliefs of a
now supported by
is
much more
precise character.
The book
divided into nine chapters, the
first
four of which
deal with tabooed days at critical epochs, after a death and on

191
Rest Days.
Study
in
Early
Law and
Morality.
By Hutton
of
Webster, Ph.D., Professor of Social Anthropology in the University Nebraska. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1916. pp. xiv + 325.
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
related occasions, holy days,
HOSCHANDER
days.
533
and market
To
indie
numerous points of high

lead us out of the
part they
subjects.
is
interest in the material presented
would most
way of Semitic archaeology,
as for the
have merely an incidental bearing on Biblical or Sen.
But there are also references

remark: 'The
to the latter.
Noteworthy
the
following
Day
of
usually considered a very late institution,
Atonement has been unknown in the time of
Zachariah and even in the age of Nehemiah not employed for the
special
purpose of a national humiliation.

is
What seems more

Judaism from a
probable
that
the
Day
of
Atonement was taken over and

post-exilic
adopted into the Priestly Code of
popular and primitive sin-riddance, doubtless of high antiquity

(p. 82).
Neither the
critics
nor the author seem to know that
there
is
unimpeachable evidence that the Day of Atonement,

fast
notwithstanding the
enjoined by the Law, was never observed
as a day of national humiliation,
and therefore could not have

fast-days
been mentioned by Zachariah among the

have been employed by Nehemiah
nor could
for this special purpose.
We
have
for this
contention the good authority of Rabban Simeon, son
of Gamaliel,
who
says
'
:
There never were Good Days

the
.
. .
in Israel
like the fifteenth of
Ab and
:
Day
of Atonement, in which the

in the vineyards
daughters of Israel went out
and danced
lift
and what did they say ?
Youth,
up thine
eyes,
and look
26
').
whom
thou
of
art
choosing
is
for thyself,
&c,
&c.' (Taanith
The Day
the ritual
Atonement
indeed
still
considered as a
festival, in
if it
and
in the practice.
Just like any other festival,
occurs within days of mourning, they need not be further observed

after this
festival.
The
author's further remark that this day
'appears to have marked, originally, the beginning of the new

year
that
',
is
likewise totally wrong.
The
reference to Ezek. 40.
shows
the author repeated the current misinterpretation of that
passage.
least
But a survey of the dates

for
in this
book leaves not the

is
room
T2. 2.
doubt that Rosh Hashanah mentioned there

first
the designation of the
month Nisan,
in
accordance with
special
Exod.
That the tenth day of this month was of some

for
importance and therefore especially suitable
Divine inspiration
534
is

3.
seen in the same chapter, verse
Besides, the tenth day of
this
month
is
no exception, as
first, fifth,
all
the visions of Ezekiel occurred
either
on the
tenth, or fifteenth of the months.
We
may
well imagine that
author's
we have here sacred numbers. Finally, the statement that New Year's Day 'was also a shabbath
',
shabblthon
bathon.
is
obviously an oversight, as
it
is
merely called shab-
Only Sabbath and the Day of Atonement are designated

is
shabbath shabbathon, on which complete rest
enjoined, not,
however, the
is
New
Year's Day, on which the preparation of food
permitted.
Chapters
V-IX
deal with lunar superstitions

,
and
festivals,
',
lunar calendars and the week
the Babylonian
'
evil
days
and
the Shabbatum, the
Hebrew Sabbath, and unlucky
mass of evidence presented

was commonly regarded as
To the by the author, that the waxing moon favourable and the waning moon as
days.
sorts,
unfavourable for the transactions of business of various
we
may add
wane.
the fact that according to the Shulhan
Arukh no mar-
riages are to be
performed
at the
is
time
when
the
moon
is
on the
But
this prohibition
in
many
countries disregarded.
Buxtorf, that
The
statement, given
on the authority of
J.
'among
the Jews there were formerly
many who abstained from food on

Arukh knows nothing
the day of an eclipse of the moon, which they regarded as evil

(p. 135), is
hardly correct, as the Shulhan
about
it.
But
it is
true that the eclipse of the
as an evil
portent for Israel according to

is
moon was regarded the Talmud The

:
'
eclipse of the sun

eclipse of the
an
is
evil evil
portent to the
gentiles,
;
and the
former
moon
an
portent to Israel
for the
reckon by the sun and the
latter
by the moon' (Succah 29 a ).

various nations in connexion
To
with
the
many solemn
'
rites
among
the
disappearance of the moon, which
by the Babylo-
nians was called
day of sorrow
still
',
the author might have added

fast
the Jewish custom
observed by many pious Jews to
on
the day before the re-appearance of the moon, which as fast-day

is
called Yon:
Kippur Jul /on,
'
Little
)ay of
Atonement
'.
The
author obviously never heard of the general Jewish custom to

recite prayers in the
presence of the new moon, as a rule outside
BIBLICAL
LITERATURE HOSCHANDI1R
535
of the synagogue, in the evenings between the seventh unci fifteenth
of the month, the performance of which

tion of the
is
called 'the Sanctii.

i
Moon
The knowledge
of this fact has an
mportant
bearing on the problems discussed by the author.
In the treatment of the Babylonian and
main object of the author
is
to prove that
Hebrew sabbaths, the among both the Hebrews

full
and the Babylonians the term shabbath was the technical

pression for the fifteenth day as the time of the
moon.
But,
though holding that the Hebrew shabbath originally designated

the full-moon day, he objects to the opinion that until the age of
Ezekiel the
Hebrews employed no weeks

weeks
in
at
all,
and
that con-
tinuous
Ezekiel's
seven-days'
influence
last
were
introduced
times,
largely
through
post-exilic
and
hence that the

post-exilic
sabbath as the
institution.
day of the periodic week was a

that the
He
insists
Hebrews employed
exile
;
seven-days'
weeks perhaps several centuries preceding the

is,
weeks, that
which ended with special observances on the seventh day, but

less tied to the
none the
moon's course.
The change from such
cycles to those unconnected with
the lunation would not have
involved so abrupt and sudden a departure from the previous
system of time-reckoning as that from a bi-partite division of the

lunar
month
to a
week
that ran continuously through the
months
and the
years, as formerly held

is
by
scholars.
This book
points
certainly an excellent work, though

dissent.
there are
enough which provoke
The
subjects discussed
is
are throughout highly interesting, their treatment

dical,
lucid,
metho-
and could not be
better,
and
it
contains a vast
amount of
scholarship of diverse character.
In the treatment of Biblical
subjects the author's course might have been

his
more smooth and
conclusions less forced

lest his
if
he had not been so exceedingly
apprehensive
results of
views might
It
is
come
into collision with the
modern
criticism.
scarcely possible to maintain

festivals
that the observances of sabbath

their roots in hoary antiquity
and other Hebrew

still
have
and nevertheless
adhere to the
opinion that they were
post-exilic
institutions.
Whatever the
of this
meaning of Babylonian shabaht may
be, that
Hebrew
536

is
root 'to rest'
beyond any doubt.

assert that the
there
is
is
a cessation of labour
Then any day on which may be called shabbath. Thus

term shabbath was a special
Jastrow's opinion,
'
there
no reason to
designation of the full-moon day.
on which
after
the author largely based his contention, that
the
its
morrow
the sabbath' (Lev. 23. 15)
is
here used not in
later sense of
a seventh day of
rest,
but as a survival of the designation of the
sabbath as the full-moon day, has scarcely any justification, as the

identical
passage
;
distinctly
states
'
:
Seven sabbaths
shall
be
complete
even unto the morrow of the seventh sabbath shall

fifty
ye number
days
'.
If the
term shabbath designates only the
how could it be applied to every seventh day on which the moon was not full ? That the month itself was called after the new moon is no analogy to the latter case, as each period If we in which the moon is renewed may be called Hddesh.
full-moon day,
disregard the view that Gen.
1
is is
post-exilic, there is
no
vestige of
proof that the periodic week
not Mosaic or even pre-Mosaic,

with the lunation,
though
as
originally
it
may have been connected
among
the Babylonians.
Considering that the author especially refers to the Rabbinical
works devoted to the provisions
for
:
sabbath observance, we were

'
surprised to find a curious remark
The march
of the Israelitish
host around Jericho on seven successive days,, one of which must
have been the sabbath,

then
if
that institution as a weekly rest
day was
known
to them,
would be a profanation of the sabbath

.
according to later ideas.
But
this
account may contain a
reminiscence of a period of Hebrew history when the week, either

lunar or periodic, had not
become
established in Israel' (p. 256).
We
readily admit
that
the
Rabbinic
prohibition
of
blowing
a trumpet on the sabbath, or the non-Pentateuchal prohibition of

carrying a load on that day, were
unknown
to Joshua,
far as
and
there
see.
was no other profanation of the sabbath, as
we can
The author ought

which he referred
'
not to have suggested so far-reaching a con-
clusion without consulting on those points the Rabbinic treatises

to.
'
Another remark that the length of a
sabbath day's journey
had not been determined
at the
time of
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
HOSCHANDER
(p.
537
gratuitous.
Elisha or at that of the compiler of Kings
25
1,
1) is
The Rabbis themselves

(20) Another
assert that
it is
not a Biblical provision.
monograph which may be included among the

is
works on Biblical archaeology
A. Smythe Palmer's book, The
Samson-Saga (and
author's aim
in
is
its
Place in
Comparative Religion).
is
The
to
prove that the story which

is
told of
Samson
to
the
Book of Judges
to a large extent of legendary character,

tradition well
and contains many elements of popular

the student of folk-lore.
known
Though
this fact
had long been recog-
nized by scholars, especially by Steinthal, they laboured under

the serious disability of having taken the subject
in
hand
at
a time
at
when much of the Babylonian and other evidence placed

But
our disposal by modern research was not yet available.
the author with his greater advantages brings further light on the
subject,
like
and attempts
to turn
in
mere guess-work
into
something
certainty.
However,
endeavouring to substantiate the
views of former scholars, the author does not deny the historicity
of Samson.
historical
He
in
observes
'
There
is
no reason
to
doubt that an
personage bearing
the
fields
this
name
actually lived,
and fought,
and
rioted
of Palestine in an early period, and
enjoyed a widespread reputation as a popular hero

Israelites.
His fame, handed down by
tradition,
among the was much altered
and magnified by accretions of a mythical character which got

attached to his memory.'
For the explanation of the origin of
this legend,
the author
folk-stories
advances the suggestion that among the very ancient
which the
Israelites
found current among the Canaanites was
one concerning a famous wonder-working brigand of superhuman

strength, who, as
we now
discover,
was ultimately a personification
of the mighty of this
Sun
himself,
and
that the peculiar characteristics
solar hero in
process of time seem to have coalesced

figure of the popular free-lance
and
crystallized
around the
and
champion of the Hebrews.

(
His name Samson or Shimshon
(20) The Samson-Saga and its Place in Comparative ReligionV By A. Smythe Palmer, D.D. London Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons. Ltd.. 1913.
:
pp. xii
+ 267 and
3 illustrations.
VOL. XT.
538

around
it
naturally lends itself to the gathering
of such mythical
elements.
The same
thing has
happened
in various lands,
and
in various stages of civilization,
down
is
to quite recent times.
The author
points out, as has been frequently
done by other
scholars, that the story of
Samson
unique
in the Bible record,
standing out as a heterogeneous patch in the sober, prosaic history

to
which
it
has been very imperfectly assimilated.

like every other people,
The Hebrews
in stories of
had a childhood,
adventure, and
which they outgrew,
a period in their early history
when they delighted
some
traces of such early folk-tales have survived
and been preserved

of
in the literature of the Israelites.
The
story
Samson
is
a naturalized form on Canaanitish soil of an ancient
solar legend
earlier.
which passed current in Babylonia many centuries

is
Samson
the direct heir
and representative among the

by
Hebrews, as Heracles was among the Greeks, of the famous Sunhero Gilgamesh.
a vast
The author
substantiates his suggestions
number
of illustrations out of the mythology, folk-lore, and
poetry of the most diverse peoples, ancient and modern.
These
he regards as the staple of the book, which are adduced under

the conviction that
man
everywhere and at
all
times formulates
nature,
much
the
same ideas about the cosmic phenomena of

striking resemblances of details.
and often with the most
The
chapter
subject
is
treated in eighteen
chapters.
to
In the
first
the
author
apologizes
for
venturing
handle
the
Scriptures in a spirit of critical investigation,
and
largely dwells
on the strange episode of Samson.
Chapter II shows the migra-
tion of folk-tales, the growth of legends
around the
figures of
distinguished heroes, and solar ideas in mythologies.

describes popular heroes, solar names,
Chapter III
and legendary elements.
Chapters
IV-VI
deal with Samson's hair that represents the rays
of the sun, his seven locks that represent the seven solar rays,
and with the sun as a hero and judge.

trate
Samson's actions as sun-hero,
VII-XV illusand XVI-XVIII discuss the

Chapters
meaning of Manoah, Samson's

in the story,
father, the mythological
numbers
contains
and the
figure of Gilgamesh.
The book
:
also
an appendix, consisting of four chapters
Heroes Mytho-
BIBLICAL LITERATURE
logized,
HOSCHAND1
the
539
Celtic
Heracles,
the
Greek Samson, Cuchulainn,
Samson, and Gautama and other sun-heroes.
Though
the
principal
ideas
of this
book,
the
legendary
character of Samson's personality and his career, and his proto-
type Gilgamesh, are by no

repeatedly points out,
means
original, as the
author himself
we must
nevertheless admit that the author

is
has
succeeded
in
producing a work that
full
of absorbing
interest
from the beginning to the end.
It is written in
a popular
and the investigation of the material shows good sense and sound scholarship. The deductions are fairly reasonable, and
vein,
there can scarcely be any weighty objections to the conclusions

arrived at by the author.
His assertion that
'
even
if
some of
the
comparisons made should be only coincidences, the weight of

the
I
sum
total of the
converging and cumulative evidence

fairly conclusive',
will,
think, to a candid
If
mind prove
may be
readily
endorsed.
we
see in Gilgamesh,
who
is
doubtless an historical
person, a sun-hero, the
same may hold
true of Samson.
How-
ever, the very fact that the
Gilgamesh legend represents a sun-
myth
is
nothing but a mere assumption.

in this
But whether the suggestions given

not, there
book are
true or
is
can be no doubt that the story of Samson, which
quite out of
harmony with the
Biblical conception of a hero
and
is
judge in Israel requires some explanation.
Samson's conduct
more
in
accordance with that of a votary of Astarte than that of
a Nazirite
and a servant of
JHVH.
is
It
has been rightly pointed
out that his character as libertine
not in agreement with the
annunciation of his birth by an angel from heaven.
But man
is
determined by
acter
his
environment.
To
understand Samson's char-
we must consider
conceptions
that of his people, the tribe of Dan,
whose
religious
throughout the whole period of
Israel's
history were
more Canaanite than Hebrew.
Though nominally
The
worshippers of JHVH, they were hardly better than idolators.

sanctuary of
Dan may have

In
differed very
its
little
from those of other

it
Canaanite inhabitants.
main
features
may have been
identical with the sanctuary of the former inhabitants of Laish,
who seem
to
have been closely related to the Sidonians, which
O02
54-0

that of Astarte.
may have been
Moreover,
if
we
find
under the
corrupt kings of Judah the institution of hierodouloi (Kadeshlm
and Kadeshoth) connected with the Temple of Jerusalem, we may rest assured that such an institution was not wanting in the
sanctuary of Dan.
tions,
Among
a people of such religious concep-
fornication was far from

it
being considered immoral.
On
the contrary,
was a holy
rite,
performed
in
the service of the
goddess Astarte.,
tious
Thus among his own conduct was fully in harmony with

Samson's
tribe,
people, Samson's licenhis sacred character as
a Nazirite.
religion of
Considering the syncretic character of the
JHVH
we
well understand the belief that his
birth
was announced by an angel from heaven.
From
this point
of view
we need not accept Budde's
view, as the author does, that
the birth of
Samson was the

i
last part
',
of the story to be written.

actually
The term
nazir,
consecrated
may
be considered a
synonym of Kadesh, which has the same meaning.

translation of the latter term,
The
current
'Sodomite',
is
absolutely unwarto the
ranted.
Both Kadeshoth and Kadeshwi were dedicated
service of Astarte, the former

latter
had intercourse with men and the

of fact, Astarte, as goddess of
lust.
with
women.
As a matter
fertility,
was not the goddess of unnatural
Thus Samson
This story may
may have been

were
in
a Kadesh of the Danite sanctuary, and his actions
accordance with his priestly character.
have been written by the priests of
this sanctuary,
who
of course
considered his licentious conduct in the light of their religious

conceptions.
The who
Biblical compiler
may
not have understood
them
at all.
These points have not been
fully
considered by any
of the scholars
(2t)
dealt with this subject.

interest as
Of immense
is
an exhibition of ingenuity and
originality
C.
J. Ball's
brief treatise,
Shumer and Shem.
Years
ago when Jules Oppert and Joseph Halevy and their adherents
had
their
famous quarrels over the existence of the Sumerians,
they never imagined that there will

(21)
come
a time
when
the Semites
Shunter and Shem.
Some
Philological Coincidences and Sequences.
By
C. J. Ball, D.Litt., Fellow of King's College,

.
London {The
British
Academy
London
Humphrey Milford.
pp. 35.
BIBLICAL
will
LITERATUREHOSCHANDER
_
541
en the
I
not only be deprived of the honour of hav
inventors of the cuneiform script and language, but almost

all
is
credit for the
development of
their
own
various idioms.
This
the intention of the author in the present thesis.
After refer-
ring briefly to the indebtedness of the Semites to the culture of

their
Sumerian predecessors, the author observes

even more
'
:
The evidence
than any
of language, however, though only partially available at present,
seems
to indicate certain affinities
startling
yet generally recognized,
and
to point to
an intimate intercourse
between the two races

millennium
one, as
I
c. c.
at a period
if
long anterior to the fourth
Nay,
Semite and Sumerian were not originally
sometimes incline to think, a comparison of the two

from the material and
Semitic
the formal
so
in side,
languages, both
may
other
suggest that as the
nomads borrowed
many
elements of civilization from their predecessors
the plain of
Shumer-Shinar, so they derived at least a very substantial portion

of the stuff of articulate speech from the
(p.
1 f.).
same mysterious source
His principal aim
is
to demonstrate the fact that
what
we know
of the Sumerian language throws considerable light upon
the analysis
and
origin of Semitic roots,
and even upon some of
the principal formative elements of the Semitic verb and pronoun.
He
points to the biliteral stage which preceded that of triliteralism,

as examples the Semitic
and takes
words
for
father and mother,
which he derives from Sumerian

demonstrates the
Asiatic idioms.
affinity of
ABBA
and
UM.
He
further
Sumerian
to Chinese,
and other East
The
will
latter
precludes of course the assumption
that the Sumerians
borrowed these words from the Semites.

suffice
few examples
to
illustrate
the
author's
method.
Semitic shaku, 'to give drink',
may be derived from Sum. NAG. Shumu, 'name', may be directly connected with NAM, SIM, The 'to call'; el, god, may be compared with EL, 'bright'.
III-IX
are
Semitic numerals
derived from
Sumerian.
XI.
The
pronouns
is
shi,
sha correspond to Sum.
NA, NE,
:
Interesting
is
the derivation of the Divine

I,
name
JHVH
its
etymon
to
be
recognized in the Sumerian
IA, 'to be high, exalted', with

u,
addition of the Semitic case-ending
thus Jan, 'the Lofty One'.
542

The
author's theory
is
certainly original, but will scarcely find
acceptance by Assyriologists.
With the methods employed, the
assumption of transition from n to a sibilant sound, throwing off

initial
and
final
consonant, the interchange of numerous consovalues, there

is
nants,
and equation of many Sumerian
nothing
that an ingenious
mind
like that of the
author could not prove.
He
evidently does not share the current conception that a large

of cuneiform values are directly derived from
number
roots, as
Semitic
incense
',
EL
from
ellu,
'
bright,
pure
',
RIK, from
rikku,
'
&c.
According to his conception, the Semites on
their entrance
into the Euphrates Valley

infancy,
if
must have been
in a very early stage of
they had to learn the expressions {or father and mother

But,
is
from the Sumerians.

general
as a matter of fact, the
Sumerian
is
name
but
for father
not
AB
'
but
rely
AD, and
is
that for mother
not
UM
The
DAGAL,
if
we may
upon the Sumerian

'
classic
inscriptions.
Sumerian
UM =
mother
certainly a loan-word
i
!
from the Semites, and perhaps also

relations
AB = shibu
old
man
'.
between Shumer and Shem constitute indeed
the fundamental
problem of Hebrew Religion,

its final
History,
and
Archaeology, and
fall
solution will ultimately prove the
downthe
(17),
of
the
higher criticism, and
vindicate
the
truth of
Hebrew
observes
assigned
full
:
traditions.
i
Johns, in
his
book reviewed above
But that a leader
in the position to
which tradition
code of laws as
for a
Moses could
perfectly well promulgate a
and complete
as the
whole Mosaic law, even

is
people in
a primitive state of society in which Israel

been at the
often supposed to have
Exodus
is obvious.
He
had only
to avail himself of
the knowledge of cuneiform, available at that time both in
Canaan
and
in Egypt,
if
and import copies of the Hammurabi Code from

they were not at hand where he then was.
Babylonia,
He
could exercise his judgement what was suitable for his people,
add what he chose, and

is
reject
what he
that
it
disliked.'
Certainly this
obvious, but
we cannot expect
is
should be perceived by
bias.
those whose vision
obscured by the modern dogmatic
Jacob Hoschander.
Dropsie College.
JKWISH MEDICIXK'
We
and
have here 112 small octavo pages chock
full
of
int-
even when erroneous instructive comment, upon the health

The
author bases himself upon
excludes from his pur-
legislation of the Pentateuch.
translation
the
Revised Version
and
view
all
questions of higher criticism.
The work
is
written from
the viewpoint of
modern science
especially that
of the Military
is
Health
Officer.
this,
The
angle of approach, however,
somewhat
unusual, and
as well as the author's general attitude, can
perhaps best be shown by quotation from the preface

is a product of the Great War. It had its origin broken-down village in Macedonia, when having to give a lecture on sanitation to the officers of his battalion, the author recorded in Exodus chanced to think of the plague of flies and as he read through the whole series of plagues with his mind fixed on the subject of his lecture, a new meaning seemed to light The seed thus planted went on growing up these events. ripening to maturity in various in many bivouacs and villages
'This book
in a
camps
in
France.
Again, but for the
War
the author could not
have gained an insight into the problems and difficulties which have beset every army in the field, from the six hundred thousand footmen who followed Moses out of Egypt down to the expeditionary forces of the last few years. Many readers will perhaps miss the word "taboo". ... It has been purposely omitted. It would be futile to deny the cultus of taboo among many primitive tribes, and ... to suppose that the primitive Israelites were entirely free from it. But the various "prohibitions" taboo. referred to in this book have not been set down to
.
has seemed preferable to say that Moses taught and prohibited No claim is made to feelings. originality in the assertion that Moses was the founder of Preventive Medicine. All that is new is the method of displaying wares
It
by way of appeal to religious
Biblical
Studies.
Moses, the
,
Founder of Preventive
Medicine.
:
By
Percival Wood. M.R.C.S
L.R.C.P., Capt. R.A.M.C.
London
Society
for Promoting Christian Knowledge.
New
York: The M.uMiiian
Company,
1920.
pp. xi
116.
543
544
that are as old as the hills, in comparison with modern experience. There is no intention of denying the divine purpose that is stamped upon every line of the history of these old Israelites, there is only an added interest in demonstrating how natural
.
were the agencies through which that purpose was wrought. is nothing to lose, but much to gain in every shred of evidence ... to prove that this is not merely a story written for our learning, but that it tells of living realities, of men of flesh and blood who underwent the same hardships and faced the same problems that confront us to-day (and have especially confronted us during the last five years), and who in so large a measure anticipated our own modern attempts to find their solution.'
There
After a general
'
Introductory
'
upon the
principles
and methods
of sanitary science, the author discusses the plagues of Egypt.

finds a serial
He
connexion among them, and points out how con-
tamination of water and food, destruction of food supplies, spread

of infection by
flies
and vermin, and

and
spirit,
is
similar calamities, can break

in the
down
power.
national health
and
in
end destroy national
While the discussion

the general
some
respects
more ingenious
from
its
than convincing,
special application
is
lesson
enforced
apart
;
is
one of high importance
and the author

obedience
'
perhaps justified in finding some reminiscence of the events of

(7. 15) that
Exodus, in the promise of Deuteronomy

to the laws delivered
by Moses
will
preserve Israel from

',
the evil
in
diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest
and maintain him
possession of the promised land.

is
Less
likely to
command
assent
the further suggestion that 'this long run of tragedies would
present to [the] trained
mind
[of
Moses] a great picture of cause

'
and
the
effect
'
in relation to the
dangers of
bad
sanitation
',
and
'
that
many
edicts
on these subjects which he gave out
later,
drew
their first inspiration
from these impressive object-lessons
\
'
When
edicts of
Captain
'
Wood
proceeds to the detailed study of
the
Moses he
treads
upon firmer ground.
While the
is
later
development and expansion of Mosaic ordinances
conceded,
the author
and and
in
some
places the
work of the Rabbis
is
alluded
to,
deems it simpler to consider the Pentateuchal health legislation only,

as a whole.
He finds evidence
that
much
of
it
originated in the
necessities of a large
body of people on the march or encamped
JEWISH MEDICINE
the
principles
COHEN
:
thus established
being later taken over

If,
government of permanent settlements.

his analysis of the plagues, the
however, he
is
right in
<
escape of the inhabitants of voshen
would indicate an
tions,
earlier origin for
many
of the sanitary regulato
which would then have been carried over from Goshen

note that this new experiment in what
'
the wilderness.
It is interesting to
may
be termed
'
institutional exegesis
leads to one result quite parallel
with those of Judge Sulzberger in detecting beneath an apparently
common
phrase the existence of an

'
office with very special

is
functions.
The
clean person
'
(is/i
tahor)
seen to be a
'
sani-
tary inspector' (e.g.

tant duties
Num.
19) charged with definite
and imporofficers of
under the
priests,
who
are the
'
medical
health
'.
To
the reviewer this seems
more than probable and a
further confirmation
if
any be needed
'
of
the
value of the
'.
method
of Biblical study inaugurated in
'Am Ha-Areh
It is clearly
The
chapters on the control of infectious diseases form indeed
the most important section of the book. the Biblical legislation for this purpose
systematically attempted in
is
shown
that
far in
advance of anything
until
less
modern
states
than ico
years ago.
Stress
is
laid
upon the provisions not only
for the isolation
and quarantine of those having communicable

for the
disease, but also

'
detention and frequent inspection of suspected
conta'
and
for the disinfection of
both the sick and the
'
contacts
before
they could again mingle freely with the mass of the people.
rigorous disinfection of contaminated materials,
tion
The
and
their destruc-
by
fire
is
when cleansing was

likewise a
insufficient, is also
'
emphasized.
There
that
is,
good chapter on
Legislation on
Hygiene
the preservation of health, as contrasted with the mere
restriction of
'I.
communicable
disease.
Three points are taken

II.
up.
Preservation of water and food.
Disposal of decompos-
able material, which

of food.
III.
means prevention
of flies
and of contamination
first
Personal hygiene.'
As
to the
of these, M<
could provide only against macroscopic contamination, and
meant
principally 'by
dead bodies, animal and human
'.
Particular
546
emphasis
vessels
therein,
'

is
laid
upon the
In
rule that
contaminated earthenware
if
must be broken, and that

it is
any drink be contained

every open vessel which
unclean.
a
this
connexion also the author stresses

.
the law
when
man
dieth in a tent
it
hath no covering bound upon

thus
is
unclean'.
Food and drink

flies.
exposed would quickly be contaminated by

flies
is
But
prevention of
the disposal of
also attempted in the strict provisions for
all sorts
;
of
decomposable
refuse,
even that
result-
ing from the sacrifices
while the avoidance of latrines within the
camp, the order
for burying all excrement,
and the covering with

further pro-
earth of the blood of slaughtered birds
and animals,
'
vided against the multiplication of insect
carriers
'
and
against
contamination of water supply.
The
cision
other subjects considered, including the cleanliness of

rite
person and habitation, the dietary laws, and the

(both
of
of circumas
which
last
the
author
rates
high
health
measures) are studied with equal thoroughness.

Collating
many
scattered but related passages,
and comparing
Extant data
science,
the whole with

infers
modern
sanitary regulations, the author reasonably
that
all
there are
many gaps
in our records.
embody
1
the principles of sanitation
known
'
to
modern
soundly conceived and effectively applied
but they also point

civil
to the existence of a
more extensive code,
'
both in the
and
military spheres,
which had
'.
for its general object the preservation
of the public health

'
He
concludes thus
Enough has been
said to indicate that, scattered
amongst the
different sections of this code, there are

fairly
many fragments which

to the existence of a
when gathered together point unmistakably
It is indeed one complete system of preventive medicine. remarkable pieces of work ever accomplished, so of the most remarkable that it is amazing, except for the reasons given in Chapter I, 2 that for thousands of years it should have been lost sight of. It was an anachronism and suffered the fate of But we in these later anachronisms, for it was not understood. days can better appraise the value of Moses' achievement. Having traced its genesis and development, it is possible for us to appreciate at their true worth the depth and breadth of the
2
Being a separatist and religious
ritual
other nations refused to adopt
it.
JEWISH MEDICINE
COHEN
547
knowledge and the acuteness of the observation that could al< It must have been uphill work for have produced such a result. him all the way through, and, as has been shown before, thereso were failures at times. But his fundamental principli sound, as sound now as they were then, his laws so clear, hU attention to detail so marked, and his spirit so undaunted to the end, that when there was failure, the blame should rather be laid at the door Of the congregation ' surely the most unpromimaterial with which a zealous administrator ever had to deal. The code of Hammurabi, about eight hundred years older than the Mosaic code, deals only with civil and criminal matter-. There is no preventive medicine mentioned in it. Doubtless the Egyptians, for all their superstitions, had some rudimenthygiene. Doubtless the diagnosis and treatment of disease and injury had been practised since the dawn of the human race, but preventive medicine, however unconsciously it was inaugurated, began with Moses.'
'
One cannot
especially
quarrel with the author's exaltation of

'
Moses
and
but he underrates the
congregation
After
all,
no
law,
no prohibitory
in
law, can be enforced
upon
great bodies
after
of
men
defiance
Israel
of
public
sentiment.
Moses died
still
governing
but forty years
and
Israel
lives, largely
because of obedience to Mosaic law for nigh forty centuries.

laws of
The
in
Moses and
his predecessors, coadjutors
and successors,
their sanitary as well as their
moral and economic aspects, are
thus additional evidence of the high state of intellectual civilization
and
spiritual
development early attained by the nation whose
constitution
and
statutes they
became.
The
table of Biblical passages referred to in the

its
book and the
comprehensive index materially enhance

It
value.
is
not a pleasant picture that Dr. Masterman
draws of
Palestine.
present sanitary
or
will
rather insanitary
'
conditions
is
in
The author points new Government

3
out that
among
the responsibilities which the
have to undertake, none

in Palestine in
more urgent
With
Hygiene and Disease
Modem and
Biblieal Times.
two appendices.
a Preface
By
E.
W.
G. Masterman.
l\. E.R.C.S..
D.P.H.
With
Fund,
by Alexander Macalister, M.D.. F.R.S., Professor of Anatomy.

of
University
Cambridge.
London
Palf.>tinf
Exploration
pp. xviii + 70.
548

'.
than improved sanitation

preface
:
Professor Macalister, too, says in his

is
still,
'
That the Holy land
as
it
was in the Biblical

lost
period, a hot-bed of
many
diseases,
which have
none of
is
their
virulence during the post-Biblical centuries of misrule,
not a
matter of surprise to any one
who knows
all
the almost total absence

latter portion of
that,
of respect for hygienic precautions

its
through the
to
history.
But there
is
no reason
doubt
given the
it
enactment and enforcement of modern hygienic regulations,

might
become one of the

area.'
healthiest
countries in the Eastern
Mediterranean
The book is divided into three parts. Part I, on Diseases of Modern Palestine and Syria, contains chapters on Race, Habit, and Food as bearing on Disease Climate and Water Supply the Common Diseases of Palestine and Syria Ideas among the
;
;
Natives regarding Disease

Early Times.
in the
Conditions of Life and Health in
Part II, on Diseases of the Bible, treats of Hygiene

;
Old Testament
Disease and Medicine in the Old Testa-
ment
Disease and Medicine in the
New
Testament.
Part III
consists of
two appendices, one upon the water supply of Jerusalist is
lem, and the other giving a

in
of British medical establishments

also a
the
Holy Land.
There
good bibliography and a
special index of Biblical references.
In the
tropical
first
part,
the author points out that practically
all
and
sub-tropical diseases are rife in Palestine.

in origin,
Most
work
ot
these are
parasitic
It
and malaria probably works the

that the
of
greatest ravages.
may be remarked, however,

that malaria
is
Gorgas
control
at
Panama has shown
readily brought
that
under
by comparatively simple measures
need not here be

discipline.
particularized, but
which must be enforced with iron
One may hope

first
that the health administration of Palestine will at
be entrusted to the Medical Corps of the British Army, and
later to
an
efficient
Health Department with ample powers.

is
Typhoid
occurs
in
fever
always endemic in Palestine, and at times

It
is
epidemics.
particularly
fatal
to
Europeans.
epidemics.
Typhus,
typhoid,
influenza
and dengue, occur
in
Plague has not appeared in Palestine in epidemic form since the
JEWISH MEDICINE
first
COHEN
Tuberculosis
disease
is
third
of the
nineteenth century.
is
on the
increase.
classes.
Leprosy
not a
common
is
but
it
infects all
Skin diseases and diseases of the eye are

very frequent.
full
common.
Infestation with intestinal parasites

It
is,
however, unnecessary to cite in

ills
the
list
of potential
and
existent
recorded in the book, some more or less peculiar
to the country, others
found
in all lands.
It is sufficient to
note
that most of discipline

;
them
are preventable by strict
and
intelligent sanitary
in other
words by Mosaic methods.
Dr. Masterman's discussion of the diseases mentioned in the
Bible
is
hampered by the lack of exact descriptions and

others dealing with the subject.
:
definite
equivalents for technical, or perhaps popular terms, that has been

felt
by
all
endorse the words of Professor Macalister
'
One may, however, The short, popular,
but comprehensive account of the Diseases of the Bible which we
have here from the pen of Dr. Masterman (than
whom no man
is
knows the medical

and most
less
history of the country better)
a well-timed
interesting contribution to knowledge, which will doubtall
be read and valued by
who
desire the latest
and most
'.
trustworthy account of the identification of Palestinian Diseases
Less satisfactory
is
the chapter on
'
Hygiene
in the
Old Testa-
The subject is dismissed in four pages, and its general tendency may perhaps be best characterized in the statement that
ment
'.
Masterman and
Wood
see things exactly reversed.

is
According to
the former, the Mosaic hygienic code
largely a system of taboo,
some of which has

and
accidental sanitary value.
The
dietary laws, in
is
especial, are a senseless conglomerate.

useless.
Circumcision
barbarous
Nevertheless, the author says: 'As a whole there
can be no question but that these laws, by inculcating temperate
and moral
and by
habits,
by encouraging labor
six
days a week only,
their
great
annual feasts which involved a thorough
cleaning of the house, healthful pilgrimages and change of habit,
did
much
to
promote the
vitality of the
Hebrews.
The
is
survival
and steady increase of

cutions
this race, in spite of privations
and
perse-
and of continual
loss
by religious defection,
abundant
proof that even the cumbersome legislation of Talmudic Judaism
550
is

life.
on the side of good health and long
It
is,
however, the
ritual
moral and religious teaching rather than the mere

that has
laws
made
this
people prosperous.'
himself, reiterating
legislation
The
reviewer
expressed
may add a word for conclusion. The hygienic

'
an
oft-
of Bible
and
Talmud most probably

Captain
originated in what has been called by

',
Wood
the religious motive

'
the essence of which was,
and
is,
the preservation of
holiness
'
the essentials thereof being
and remaining
cleanliness,
cleanliness,
health-preserving value of cleanliness

evident,
sanitary
The must soon have become

and
cleanliness.
and
its
ritual
was doubtless extended with deliberate

that
motive.
The requirement
armament, a
'
every soldier should

',
carry as part of his

destruction,
paddle
is
not taboo.
of
if
The
and
regu-
or
removal
materials, as
beyond the camp,

is
infected
decomposable
lations
not
it
taboo.
is
And
least
other
originated
taboos,
at
to
be remarked
to
that
on the whole, only such as experience has shown
be of
distinct health value
have been preserved and elaborated.

is
That
the scientific explanation of their effectiveness

clear,
not yet entirely

It
may be admitted
until
without destroying the empiric proof.
was not
1882 that science could demonstrate why Peruvian
bark cures malaria, yet the healing power of the wood has existed
since
its
appearance on earth.
still
There are many other things

;
in
empiric medicine
unsolved
is
and
if
the value of the prohibi-
tion of blood, for instance,

least inklings of
it
not demonstrable to-day,

rise to
we have
at
that
may
demonstration in the near

tradi-
future.
Meanwhile, Jews and others may benefit by the
tional rules of kashrut,
even as the Countess of Chincon did by
the Indians' traditional remedy for ague, without explanation.
What
lines,
is
needed
is
enlargement of the bedika on modern

stricter supervision.
scientific
and a somewhat
4
Dr. Neuburger
all
4
has industriously and intelligently collated
the
references to medical
and
allied
topics in the extant
Die Medizin im Flavins Josephus.
Von
Dr. med. et phil.
Max Neu:
burger, O. O. Professor an der Universitat

4
in Wien. Buchkunst' Druck- und Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.
Bad Reichenhall
H., 1919.
pp. 74.
JEWISH MEDICINE
writings of Josephus
COH1
While he points out verbal
he has simply gathered form easy to understand
divi.-.ion-^
and compared or contrasted these with the
parallel passages in Bible or
Talmud.
or material discrepancies
between Josephus and the source-texts,

;
he has no theory to propose or uphold
and
classified the material
and put
it
in a
and convenient
for reference.
'
There are two main

Medizinisches aus
'),
the work, entitled respectively
dem
Zeitalter
der Bibel
'
('
Parallelen
und Divergenzen
'.
and
'
Medizinischebut
the
aus der nachbiblischen Zeit

interesting
The
Essenes.
latter includes a brief
excursus on the
The
and
author adopts
attributes to
etymology N'pN
for the title of the sect,
them
as
serious study of the remedial properties of plants

well as mystic practices
and minerals,
and
faith healing.
There are many other

those upon 'The
the
interesting sections,
Pathologic
among which may be cited Tendencies of the Asmoneans and

Knowledge'
;
Herodean
'The
Status of Pharmacologic
'Magical Healin_
'Medicinal Springs';
'
'Mosaic Hygiene, personal, and social';

is
Psychotherapy
'.
Finally, there
a brief discussion of
'
medical
allusions in the writings of Josephus'
as, for
example, his com-
parison of political disturbances with inflammations and fevers, and

his likening of the spread of fanatical ideas to that of pestilence.
Dr. Neuburger's style
is
clear
and
his language (for a
German
book, especially) remarkably simple.
He
has done a good and
useful piece of work, for which he deserves
many
thanks.
Spinoza
is
shown by the author
to
have studied anatomy and
physiology as well as optics, and to have been in

in
many
respects
advance of the time on these subjects.
The
to
influence of his
physiological
.
knowledge
in
leading
him
oppose Descartes*
it
theory of the localism of the soul in the pineal gland (to put
more crudely than

Jewish sources
accurately)
and the
part which his studies of

J
Mishna, Kabbala, and the udeo- Arabic philosophilosophy, phers and physicians took shaping of the
in
final
his
are well brought out.

5
Incidentally to a discussion of his relations
Spinoza en dc Genceskuude.
pp. xi + 74.
B^ Mozes Herman Cohen.
Amsterdam
Bussy, 1920.
552

and with
Leibnitz, the author
with the English anatomist Glisson
seems
to
insist
that
Kabbalism, despite Spinoza's ridicule of

as did also Philo
Kabbalists, affected
Neo-Platonists.
him profoundly,
and the
It is interesting to
note that Leibnitz addresses

et
Spinoza as
Medecin
13).
tres
ce'lebre
philosophe
tres
profond a
Amsterdam (page
The argument turns on the conception of the it is thus, relation of the human body to the spirit
soul,
and the
in a measure,
biologic.
Indeed,
it
is
biology,
not
medicine, that
interested
Spinoza and forms the theme of
this
book.
at least
The
parallels
between Maimonides and Spinoza show
attentive reading
by the
latter,
is
of the former.
Especially interesting
the account of seventeenth-century

;
Jewish physicians in the Netherlands (pp. 37-51)

criticism of the
with incidental
this
inadequacy of the Jewish Encyclopaedia on
and
like topics.
The author shows an

and
references.
excellent knowledge of
the history of the Jews in the Netherlands,

of valuable allusions
and
his
work
is
full
Solomon Solis Cohen.

Philadelphia.
SOME NOTES TO MAHZOR YANXAI

The
genda to
notes, I
following notes are in the nature of
Addenda
et
Corri-
my
edition of
it
Mahzor Yannai.*
Together with
my own
deem
proper to take under consideration some of the
suggestions and corrections of the various reviewers of this book,

as well as suggestions received in private
communications.
The
notes are arranged in the order of the passages which are affected
by them.
P.
xii,
note 18
"]SV"l
:
For the expression
"W
*B1 comp. Gen. R.,
chap.
P|W1 "]E2n
man where
*)")
has the meaning of "in.
P. xvii
In regard to the Edict of Justinian against the study

',
of
'
Deuterosis
comp. now Krauss, Studien zur byzantinisch(Vienna 19 14), pp. 57-62.

to the theory that the cryptic language of the
I
jildischen Geschichte
Pp. xix-xx
As
Piyyutim was the result of persecution,

language
raised
is
must admit
that
my
in
need of modification.
reviewers
'
In view of the objections
by
my
it
seems
to
me much
es
safer to
assume
with Zunz, that
es
gab damals, wie
im achten und neunten

einfachen
Jahrhundert ein kiinstliches
Latein gab, einen

'. 2
und
einen Kunststil, in Prosa wie in Poesie

I
This remark, which

unnecessary to stress
as well as
my
critics
overlooked, makes
far.
it
the persecution theory too

*
Mahzor Yannai.
liturgical
work
of the seventh century, edited from

Israel Davidson,
Genizah fragments, with notes and introduction by

additional notes
1
and
by Louis Ginzberg.
N.Y. 1919.
2,
Comp.
Israel
Abrahams
in
the Jezvish Guardian, Jan.

ibid.,
1920: also the
communication of Professor Krauss.

reply,
ibid.
.
March
26,
and Dr. Abraham's

ibid.,
April
I.
2,
as well as the note of A. Mishcon,

in
April
16.
Comp.
vol.
2
also
Elbogen
Z./.H.B., XXII, 50-52, and B. Ilalpcr in
D7pD,
I,
No.
4. pp. 141- 5.
p.
1
Synagoga/e Poesie,
1.
19.
Comp.
also
Harkavy, C'-VJ'S"^
p"l-*, v.
p.
139, note
VOL.
XT.
553
554

Pp. xxi-xxiii
:
In connexion with the triennial cycle, reference

to
should be
made
Dr. Gaster's
study,
The Biblical Lessons,
London, 19 13. Whatever force there may be to his argument, that if the Sedarim stood in direct connexion with the public
reading of the Torah in the Synagogue
graphic trace of such
of
it
is
surprising that
in
no
a division
(p.
is
found
the
any manuscripts
whatever age and place
45),
Kerobot of Yannai
are sufficient evidence to refute his oft-repeated statement that
the
Sedarim had no connexion
whatsoever with the Liturgy
(pp. 46, 54, 57, 73).
The
passage cited from tipbn S 73E> likewise
upsets his remark that no writer, excepting the author of the

1
En Hakoreh
',
has identified this division with any liturgical

73).
is
purpose (pp. 53, 68, 72,
The
close relationship of the
Sedarim with the Liturgy
further confirmed
by a
series
6,
of
eleven Shib'atas, preserved in the Bodleian
MS. 2714,
which
were expressly written Nos. 20-30).

1
for eleven
corresponding Sedarim (Genesis,

that the statement that
Incidentally I
is
may remark
no weekly lesson
known
to begin in the
middle of a section
'
(p.
44) meets with an exception in the weekly lesson TPl.
It is
also
not quite correct to say that
it
is
rarely a
noinD which
separates one weekly lesson from the other (p. 30), since there are
13 out of 53 (not counting TPI just mentioned) which do. 4

P.
xxiv
Elbogen
objects
to
my
p.
statement that Yannai's
Kerobot were mainly halakic

for the
in character,
because his Shib'ata
New Year (Mahzor

this is
Yannai,
30) shows
no
trace of
it.
But perhaps
a
one of the characteristic differences between

Shib'ata, that the latter
is
Kerobah and a
is
haggadic while the
former
halakic in character.
:
P. xxvii
The purpose
:
of the no^nn
is
undoubtedly to comply
with the talmudic dictum

\T\WT\xb (b.
"pED JDETin py
a).
new fl* nwnn bl

is
Pesahim 104
Ordinarily, this
complied with
"]^
by such phrases as pi JWU21 nny , or rrnoi rvoo

3
4
and
In preparation for the Schcchter Studies.
These are
"OW,
H1PB, fopl,
pS>3.
PllVn,
xhvi,
KTW,
03*1,
WT1,
nvd, endow, nan, pnriNi,

5 I.e..
pp. 51-2.
SOME NOTES TO MAHZOR YANNAI

the
like,
DAVIDSON
these
555
but since the liturgic
poems
separate
phi
from the ends of their respective Benedictions, the

inserted in their stead.
rtDWI
is
In making his 'conclusions' of three
phrases each, Yannai perhaps followed the structure of the Eighteen

Benedictions, most of which (4-16) consist of three clause
P. xxviii
:
Further corroboration that NJ ta

that the insertion of the
as a rubric
is
and
pnp nnNI was used phrase 7Hn& m^nn 2'jt

in the fact that in the
a corruption of later times
may be found
the
Kerobah of
there
is
Kalir, published in
Zunz
Jubelschrift (p.
202),
likewise
no word between
if
VT\\>
nnKl and NJ ta.
The
now
editor inserted dots as
to indicate 'an omission, but Firkowitz'

it
copy of the
in
MS
from which
was published, and which
is
the library of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America,
shows no trace of any dots, or any omission.

P. xxxii, note
59
The
opinion as to the authorship of
i>N
f*iym nbiyb, cited here in the
name
of Rapoport, was already
expressed some years previously by Luzzatto. 7

P. xxxiv,
1.
It
should be stated here, that the sixth part of
the
Kerobah
P. xxxvii
:
is
usually
headed by the word

D^ninro
"iriN.
The poem
fol.
Yl "1HK occurs
8
in
tPJOn "1THD
(Const. 1574,
P.
xlvii:
70 b) as a Yozer.
with
Read
9
Halper
*a
nMI.
*B3
Comp.
"TIJ31
also
Judah
Halevi's verse:
mSD Wiai
p. 2,
1.
TO
^33,
Hebrew Part,
P. 5,
P. 6,
veins,
1.
Read
ni>nD
tMn
&W1 (Halper).
rather
38
Read
to
"piroHi.
1.
Halper suggests that DDT has the meaning of D*TJ,

the expression
and
refers
lpm TnET, which

rhyme
is
a novel interpretation of Job 17. 11.

P.
8,
1.
20:
Brody suggests
10
that the
requires the
reading of ruon m"i CND.

6
7
Comp.
also Jewish Enc. XI. 278. 149.

*
Comp. T3Dn, V,
It
is
I.e., p.
145.
,J
the last verse of the
poem beginning
fiS^MO
iPffiDM "J'X, which
was erroneously
D :i^N"l^,
s
ascribed to
Samuel Ha-Nagid.
March
Comp. Harkavy, pTOI
I,
p. 154.
10
In a private communication of
9, 1920.
556
1.

22
1.
:
Read
ijrca
pn iron
tyvn pyi (Brody).
P.
9,
34: Read DTPC3 D^lt

31
: :
m (Poznanski)
(Idem).
11
.
P. 15,
1.
1.
Read
D^7
Sin
^n
1.
The rhyme requires that mVK be transferred from 36 b to 36 a. Read IWK D2^, TDn "WK IKS? (Idem). 61 b Read BPBflP (Brody). P. 17,
36
1.
:
P. 20,
P. 22, P. 23,
1.
22
Read
mn
D^CPTV
(Brody and Halper).
1.
40 b: Read D"3n T?j5 m'.L^ niK (Brody).
1.
4b: Read nn nS nmra (Idem).

14
:
P. 24,
justly
1.
Read yu
JJHS
(Brody and Poznanski).

is
Brody
remarks that the phrase mttD no N1H
an explanatory
marginal note on the preceding phrase, which crept into the body
of the text. P. 27,
P. 32,
this
1.
19 b
1
Read Vvbf nbw\ comp.

:
p. 28,
1.
25 (Brody).
note
Further proof of Rapoport's suggestion that

for the first
Kerobah was intended
day of Passover may be

is
adduced from the

12. 29,
fact that the first biblical verse cited
Exod.
showing that the Kerobah was composed
in
connexion
with the biblical lesson assigned for that day (see Mahzor Yannai,
p. xxvi,
1).
The
:
original heading of this
Kerobah, therefore,
undoubtedly read
P. 35, note 16
n^bn
:
i^rQ
vn
KTHsmp.
:
Comp. Gen.
to
E., chap. 50
rf'lpn
^ Y
p
the
bmw
nivm
nx p
ww
nn^yn
own?
nyca
nWs
t6n yifix n
also
pplDytr
references in
P. 37,
1.
nyea nV2 fc6fit Theodor ad loc.

:
(Poznanski).
Comp.
On
1
:
account of the rhyme read
niTD3n nnPP
"]T
ni3 ypn (Brody).

P. 41, note
The word CIDTT

p.
is
not a synonym of Kftyat?,

'.
but of
nBVH.
It is
the Greek Spoyuos, meaning 'runner

69,
Comp.
Zunz, Syn. Poesie,

Albrecht,
and
It
Litg.,
p.
24,
note 4
Brody and
poem,
X.
WPI
ny&>, p. 19.
should also be noted here that the

in the
word
11
CWP,
which Wertheimer puts
heading of
this
Comp.
rTTOn
vol.
II,
Nos. 2-4;
reprinted
in
*~\2)in,
vol.
Nos. 9-10.
SOME NOTES TO MAHZOK YANNAI

is
DAVIDSON
r.,
557
according to a photograph of MS.

it,
2708
from which he
published
nowhere
I
to be found.
In conclusion
Dr. Brody of Prague,
may state that through the suggestion I came upon further liturgies of Yannai
27 14
5
of
in
the Oxford
MS.
Or.
(Heb.
d.
41).
This MS. contains
a Kerobah for the Sabbath falling within the week of Passover
and a ShWata
of part
for the
same day.
Of
the
Kerobah only the end

It
VII and
liturgies
'
parts
VIII and IX have been preserved.
also
contains a Kerobah by Yannai for the second day of Passover,

besides
of Samuel,
'.
who
is
very likely identical

in
with
the
Samuel
the third
All
of these are
preparation
fqr
Schechter Studies.
Israel Davidson.
Jewish Theological Seminary of America.
CORRECTION
To JOR.
Page 381,
,,
(N. S.) vol. XI, No. 3.
line 13
from bottom and
383, line 8 from top
for Braunschweig read Halberstadt
BINDING L
DS 101
J5
The Jewish quarterly review.
New ser.
v.ll
PLEASE
DO NOT REMOVE
FROM
THIS
CARDS OR
SLIPS
POCKET
UNIVERSITY
OF TORONTO
LIBRARY

The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 11.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 11.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

&&%<&

JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

CYKUS ADLER :y^

PHILADELPHIA THE DROPSIE COLLEGE FOR HEBREW AND COGNATE LEARNING

AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cohen, Solomon Solis

Jewish Medicine (Reviews)

of the Great Synagogue,

London, from 1756-1842.

i\uthor of the Yigdal

of Esther in the Light

Hoschander, Jacob Biblical Literature (Reviews) Hyamson, M. Husband's Prosecution of Jesus

The Essenes and

the Apocalyptic Literature

History of the Jewish Question

Baron's 'The Jewish Question at the

Explanation of Abot VI. 3

Menorat Ha-Maor, Time

and Place of Composition

Nathan (Abu Ishak Ibrahim

B. 'Ata), Nagid of Kairowan

Hebrew Incunabula (Reviews)

Melamed, Raphael Hai

The Targum to Yemen MSS. Compared

Textus Receptus' (Ed. de Lagarde). Chapters II-V

Early Karaite Critics

By Raphael Hai Melamed, New York.

stated above, the

are not uniform

While forming a group

from L, they nevertheless diverge one from the

other in text, in orthography, and matters of morphology

Each of the manuscripts has

and best preserved of these texts

contain the least

number of textual and

and seem to preserve the more original

being the better written of the two,

as the basis of this edition.

following independent readings are to be noted

NT3T NDTC NTPn^n KTVTO

dih^d mrta inns

THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

rrn p*Dy nvtt

There are a few instances

however, art of any material significance

Oppiyi] K^WI DJ1N

There are three instances where

[ayu2K 12] pini;

instances of transposition of words occur

one instance of inverted order

The Orthography of AB.

have a strong preference for d against

THDy, n^cd, but

Likewise they express consonantal

always write the Tetragrammaton thus:

and abbreviate not infrequently

were probably influenced by the recurrence of the phrase

30. 37, 38.

Shewa and patah change

places in the beginning of

In the group of nouns

&n:n, Knmo, wapo, and

C W35, R Wiix. 1. 17 C 3tanm, R 53rrtn