PROCEEDINGS OF THE

THIRTEENTH BRITISH CONFERENCE

ON JUDEO.SPANISH STUDIES
(7-9 September,2003)

Types of PassoverHagadothin Ladino

Edited by
oRA EODRTGUE)SCHWARZSTALD HII-ARY POMEROY
Bar-Ilan Uniuersi4t

INTRODUCTION
sp'f r'-:,!'tr!t nrpi uu$ orr'iljli ptp? .O)tp n ppitl p$ .t
Nineteen Ladino translations of the Hagadab in Hebrew letters glhi Di mtp t u4rorrz! yvn:i:u . pic#;n
provide the basis fot the following classifications based on extemal p nl'rit'! tllo'cctt i! fm.5 'hl n (r:.J) pl'p ritild ]tiD t'ii, I't
.t.r',t riey.re
and internal criteria. The external criteda ^te: (") shape; O) i:il l:?'tu D 9t'trI DpD DDrh ? ?*r ,rfr'tro o$ 'l it ilr n E?D !i fi }'DEF
orthogtaphy; (c) translated sections of the Hagadah into Ladino; (d)
-:'6 ci rh frt)'r'6 ? E;p !t t'i r'lt:tn r!'6 r:ll )l irpt lDtt t?.rilO.tlg nrO
-:'cDn;ilcrt crp.!. ri'! orit*'.! rnlr?ir.,r ,r'i fC. f"3 tno h Brtl it 1lrp t gttrt!
correspondence of the Hebtew and the Ladino instructions for
rtfll t r:0 !t i;pi nm n0 h 'r'r f,nm 16 , gtrli ", lrttlb lo0 i.t t0| tt P!r, tlb
conducting the Seden (e) language and style used in the capdons -Gt o'utlt i DrpCrIp$ rr rru !t 'n S l!$ r;:rup r! . p'lrl flttD'ni D?.!t 'fitf
accompanying the illustrations; (Q end of the Hagadah. The internal -? . irrDD) n EDrr h p'cco'rDF.t t00 f! Srtu h p,?ru6 otrtir pn) "r il!;! Fi otrl
criteria are: (a) Hebrew component of the Ladino translation; ft) ltrrrtp D)rp pcp:r! or4{ urr}lr Di D+D .pfil tni I
lexical and gtammatical differences.
The various features are grouped into clusters that reflect the
different communities in the Sephardic Diaspora. The variations will
be explained by factors such as and date of publication.
".igtn

THE CORPUS

The Ladino Hagadotb in Hebrew script in our sample were published

in the following cities: Belgade, Budapest, Constantinople, Leghorn,
Pisa, Salonica, Tel Aviv, Venice, and Vienna ffaari 1921; Yodlov
l ) c p r r r t n r co
n lt' I l i s ; ' x r r rSi ct r r d i c s
appearedas part of 'SederNashim'
1997).'I'hc oldest of these Haggadoth ( . ) r r c cMn i r r v .I I r r i v csri t yo l ' | . o t t t h l r
l ( l ( f( r

In the following section I shall tefer to the various external
and intemal features in order to show how the Hagadoth could be
classified. In the last section a sociolinguistic explanation will be
given, accounting for the taxonomy of the transladons.
THE EXTERNALFEATURES
^. Shape
The average size of rJr,'eHagadoth from Italy is larget than the ^ver ge
size of the othet HaggadothQ35 cm x16 cm vs. 19 cm x12.5 cm). All
the Hagadoth fuom Italy include numerous illustrations, except for
Leghorn 1794 thzt includes interpretations in addition to Ladino
translation.o The other Hagadoth are either illuminated sporadically
@udapest, Vienna 1900x2; Salonica 1895 has a relatively large
number of pictures and maps), or do not have illustrations at all
(Salonica pre-1568, 7826, t876, 1905, Belgrade, Vienna 1851,
Constantinople).
b. Orthography
A distinction must be made between the Ladino orthography of the
Hebrew text translation, the Ladino instructions for conducting the
Seder,and the captions that appeat with the illustrations'
In all the Hagadoth from Italy, the Ladino text translation
appeafs in squate Hebrew script, and the letters are vocalized using
the traditional system (Niqad1.sThe other Haggadathvary: Salonicau
and Vienna 1900a also use vocalized Hebrew square letters, whereas
Belgrade, Budapest, Vienna 1841, 1900b, and Constantinople use
Rashi script, with no vowel signs in the Ladino text translations.
The orthogtaphy of the Ladino instructions varies among the
versions. Hebrew square vocalized letters are used in Venice 1609,
Leghom 1885, Vienna 1900a, Salonica pre-1568 and 1905. Hebrew
square unvocalized letters only appear in Leghom 1794. Either
unvocalized Rashi script ot Hebrew square lettets occur in the same
a This translation is unique in other respects, as will be seen later.
5 Some of these Hagadxh have tlle Ladino text unvocalized in R/pe adhaftaliSeru
rn
Birkat Hanmaqon.
6 Salonica 1826 uses Rashi script for Ladino fuorn Sifox bamatxa to the end.
( )l(.\ (l(( r I(l(,( r 1 . . ,) ( _ t l w . . \ t ( / . \ \ ' / \ r . t ,
that had been published in Ladino befote 1568 by the same
'anonymous'
author of ShulhanHapanin. The identity of the author,
Rabbi Meir Ben Benist from Salonica, has been cladfied recently by a
detective-like study of Dov HaCohen (2001). In the early seventeenth
century a Hagadah was published in Venice in 1609 (5369). Two
Hagadoth wete also published in the eighteenth century in ltaly:
Venice 1716 and Leghorn 1794. Most of the Hagadoth in this study
are from the nineteenth century: Pisa 1801, 1806, Leghorn 7822,
1847, 1885, Salonica7826,7876, 7894,'Belgrade1841, Vienna 1851,
7900x2, Constantinople 1860, and Budapest 1894, 1900. 2 The
Hagadoth from the twentieth century in our sample are from Leghorn
1904, Salonica 1905 and Tel Aviv 1965. Most of the Hagadoth were
published as independent booklets, though Constantinople 1860 and
Salonica pre-1568 and 1876 appeared as part of the Siddur (prayer
book) ot Mabqor ftoliday ptayer-book). In all the Haggadol excluding
Salonicapre-l568, the Ladino translation appearsnext to the Hebrew
text. Salonicapre-1568 includes just the ttanslation.
After studying these Hagadoth linguistically, I found that
Budapest 1894, 1900, and Tel Aviv 7965 are, in fact, textually
identical, therefore, I refer to them as Budapest without indicating the
yezt. I have not included Hagadolh published in Roman script in this
study, the oldest of which appeared in the Fenzra Mahzor 7552. Late
Hagadoth in Roman script ftom the t'wentieth century are either
transliterations of the Hebrew script into Roman characters or free
translations that do not follow Ladino nofins as known from other
texts, e.g. thetranslations from Tanger 1912(?),1922e), Tetuan 1940
(Alvar 1986).'Also, the new translation in Hebrew script recendy
published in Israel has not been included in this study, because it
attempts to modernize and modi$ the traditional Ladino translation
(Refael & Behar 2002).
I This version was copied in 1970 in Salonica and translated into Greek. The Ladino
has two versions: one in Hebrew script based on Salonica 1895; the other in Roman
script based on another version.
2 From this point onwards, the year is not provided if there is only one version from
a given location. Furthermore, if all the renditions from the same location are
similar in the feature presented, only the location will be indicated.
I I am grateful to N{r. Eliyahu Nlarciano from HaRaSHam Institute in
Jerusalem
who showed me the Hagadolh. They were pnnted without date of publication, but
were listed in the List of Books from Tanger. The translation is into modern
Spanish. Apparently, they are the basis for Alvar's (1986) edition with no teference
to the date either.
 ]YPTJSOITI'ASSOVIiRIIAGGADO]I1 IN I,/\I)INO
Maggtd (H): hakkot iedt uuagbiah haqqd'ara me'al
$nalh
haiialhan uilomar
Trans: Will Fdl (sg) the glass again and will raise (sg) the
plate above the table and will say (sg)
0-) iniiran lot uaqot fu tino i tomara ensuntafio elpkto dela
meqal d,irantl
Trans: Will fil (pl) th. glasses with wine and will take
(sg) in his hand the plate from the table and w.ill
say (pl)
In the following Hagadotb Hebrew instructions always appear next to
the Ladino ones: Leghorn, Pisa, Salonica 7876, and Venice 1609.
However, in other Hagadotb the Hebrew and Ladino instructions
appear before Magtd, but the instrucdons ftom RaltSaforward appear
only in Ladino (n Birkat Hammaqononly in Hebrew), as in Budapest,
Constand.nople, Salonica1895,Vienna 1851, 1900b,and Venice 7716.
Instrucdons are g'iven only in Ladino in Belgade, Salonica pre-1568,
1826,1905,and Vienna 1900a.
e. Language and style of the captions
The illustradons are based on Biblical znd Midrashic tales, most of
them related either to the Exodus of the Jews from Eglpt or the
content of the Hagadah itself. The captions are written only in
Ladino, sometimes in thyme in the Italian Haggadoth.For instance:
lo qaeacontesio
a Nbi Ekryr i src companiemr
bhatever happened
to Rabbi Elazarand his companions'
Mirian qaeueestagran uiftoria, cottlat y.tscompanierat
a el Dio gloria
'Miriam who seesthis big victory, u'ith her
companionsto God
shegivesglory'
la maia afvision i kryia i apretamiento ke en eglptoles dauankon
grandrtormiento The much hunger and work and oppression
that in Egypt they were given with much suffering'
rrThe Ladino is transcribed following standard pronunciation. Where orthography
is relevant, it is provided h angled brackets.
t09 l0tJ ( ) l { , \ ( l t ( ) l ) l { l ( ; t I l 1 ) S (. 1l V ' , \ l t l . W A L I )
text in Venice 7776, Leghorn 7822, 7847, and Pisa, and unvocalized
Rashi script alone appears in Salonica 7826, 7876, 1894, Belgrade,
Vienna 1851, 1900b, Constantinople, and Budapest.
The Ladino captions appear in square vocalized Hebrew script in
the Italian Hagadoth. They appear in Rashi script in the other
Hagadoth.
c. Translated sections of the Hagadah text into Ladino
There is a basic difference between the HagadolD depending on the
sections of the Ilaggadahthat were translated. The ftanslated sections
rn all the Haggadothinclude only the Mo1gtd'and the fust verses of the
Hallel 6fu* fiamatxa),e.g. Salonica pre-1568,t 7826, 1895, Belgrade,
Vienna 1851, Constantinople, and Budapest. However, additional
sections of the Hagadah such as Birkat Hammaqon(grace after meals)
and the endre Hallele were translated in the following Hagadotb:
Venice, Leghorn, and Pisa.
Salonica pre-1568. 1876, 1905, and Vienna 1900 (x2) include the
translation of Maggidand the whole Ha//el, but not Birkat Hammaqon."'
The Hagadah of Leghom 1794 resembles them, though it does not
include either the original Hebrew text or a translation of Birkat
Hammaqon; however, it has the whole Kddash (ceremonial blessing
recited ovet the wine). The Kddush in Ladino also appears in Salonica
pre-1568.
d. Relation between the Hebrew and the Ladino instructions for
conducting the Seder
Altlrough in most Hagadoth the Hebrew instructions precede the
Ladino ones, the Ladino is not a true translation of the Hebrew
instructions, as can be seen in the following example ftom Budapest:
1T\e Magid is all the text of the Haggadah ftom HaL^ahma'anlaup to Ca'alIsrael
fust before RahSa'laing of the hands').
8 In the women's Haggadah from Salonica pre-1568 rhe Maggid is shortened. It
includes the first three paragraphs (Ha l-.ahma,the four questions and their response
Audim haju); Vihi Se'anda and ,fa ilmad; fronr' VaAnSibnu to Vd'auarti, the list of
the ten plagues; and from Dayent to the end of Maggid. All the history and the
Midra:hic tales are omitted.
'Tll.e Hatlcl ncludes chapters 113-136 from the book of Psalms recited on tfre new
moon and festivals.
rt Birfut Ilammaion appears in Salonica pre-1568 in another section, not as part of
thc I latgadah text.
 'IYPF]S 111
OF PASSOVI']I\ILAGGADOTFI IN L\DINO
110 oR (RODRrcUIr.)SCHWARZ\yALI)

Table t The distdbution of the final parts of the Hagadah actoss the
vefsions
This style of captions exists in Venice, Leghom 1822,7885,1904, and
&fint Vayhi Va'emzrtem Adir EIesaI 'chad FIad Pisa.
Title I{a'omcr babagi Zeuah Bimluxe Siddut Mi Gadya
Version IJallewla Pesah Pesah Yodea' The rare illustrations outside ltaly are described in just a few
Veruce, Ladino words, e.g. fz/7ila de sauiosrcskoudados 'Shape of the sages
Leghom
1794,12Pisa reclining', in this case appearing next to the Hebrew version, e.g. $ural
1801,Salonica ltaxamim mesubimbiune bdraq umisapim bisi'at nisrajn kol hallaja'-Ihe
pre-1568,1826,
1905,rrVienna shape of sagesrecline in Bene Berak and tell of the Exodus from
19(X)ata Egypt all night long'. In most casesthe captions are either in Hebrew
Pisa1806, + + + + -r T
or in Ladino, €.g. E/ palaciodepar'o seinie de ranas 'Pharaoh's palace is
Leghom 1822,
'anat)na
19851s filled with frogs' - Ladino, lefxax balltauin lehodot lehalel
Belgrade T T T T + 'Therefore we give thanks and
f
praise'- Hebrew (e.g. Budapest and
Budapest,
Constantinople,
f + -l-
+ + -1- T
Vienna 1900b). Vienna 1900a either has only Hebtew capdons or
Vienna 1851, none at all.
19t)0b'6
Salonica1876 f + +
f. End of the Hagadah:
All the Hagadoth include the texts up to the end of Hallel Nzrga and
Budapest and Vienna 1900b have the Song of Songs rn Hebrew 'fhey
the blessing over the wine. vary regarding the additions (which
immediateiy following the text of the Haggadab.In Leghom 1885 it
were adopted by Sephardic communities relatively late when
appears before Sefrat Ha'omer (counting of the Oner). In Sephardic
compared to the Ashkenazi ones).
conrmunides it is customary to read the SongofSongsimmediately aftet
the Haggadahand on the Shabbat that follows rhe Seder,explaining its Table 1 describes the distribution of the various versions regarding
occurrence in the Maltryrin ftom Constantinople and Salonica 1876. the Frnal parts of the Haggadah:
Salonica 1895, copied in 1970, contains only the Ladino song of Had
Gadla in Roman scipt (Un canvtikl qile /0 merconi Padft por dosa4 pzr
dosaqbai; seen.13 below).

INTERN{EDIATESUMIV-{RY:
The above classifications show that the various Ladino versions differ
from each othet according to specific clusters of features.The maior
difference exists between the Haggadothfrom Italy and those from

12The blessing over the wine is not cited rn thts Hagadah eithet
tl"Ii!r.a*n appearsin fi-rllafter the Hebrewopeningline only in its Ladino
ra It is identical to Salonica 1905 in this respect.
15There is an addition of 'ana bixoalt gidalatlaminexa after Sifrat Ha'omer.
t6 Sefrat Ha'omerappears before Eh ad Mi Yodea'rather than before all the other
songs.
 .|YPES 113
OF PASSOVERHAGCADOTH IN LADINO 112 oRA (RODzucUE)SCH\?ARZ.WALT)

The sample of versions below lists the Ladino transladon of the

areas foffnedy under Ottoman control. The frst type is referred to as
paragaph about the Rasha'The evil son',tt three from the west and
Westetn Hagadoth, the latter as Eastem. Table 2 summarizes the
tllree from the east:
differences.

l. H: taia ma hu 'omet. Ma ha'avoda hazzot laxem Table 2: Summary of the external differences
a. ma/a ke el di{cn. IG el setvisio el eile dt)os (Venice1609).
External West East
b. nab ke el di$en. k el seruisio el e$e a uos (-eghom 1794).
c. mab ke el di{en. k el setrisio el ette a alr (Pisa1806). Feature
d. malo ke el di{en. Ke el setvimiento el efie at)os @udapest1894). Sue Larqer Smaller
e. malo ke el di{en. Ke el setvisio el eile aaos (Salonica1826). lllustrations Manv Few
f. nato ke el diien. k el servimiento el ute ato! @elgrade1841). Orthography Hagadah text Square, Either square
vocelizsd vocalized or
Rashi
2. Ht laxem vilo Io uIfi iehogi 'et 'agmo min hakkilal I<afar ba'ikkat
Captions Square, Rashi (if in
t. atos i non ael i porke sako ati mesmo de la konkluzioa kafto en la ley.
vocalized Ladino)
b. a uosi no a el i por ke sako ari mismo de la konHuzion niego en el
prensipal f'ranslated text Most of the text Mogtd + Sefox
c. a aot i non a el i porke sako ari mizmo de la konkluzion niego en et (includingBirkat (rarely the Ha//el1
prinsipal. Hammazon\
d. auosi non a el i porke sako asimizmo de el kelal kafto en el ikat Hebrew-Ladino Parallel - Pisa, Either parallel
e. aaosi non ael i porke se sako ati mezmo de h konHuision kafto en la raiz. instructions Leghom, up to RahSa
f. aaot i non a el i porke sako ati mizmo de el kelal kafro en el ikat 1 Venice (Venice 1716,
(1 Salonica) other Leghom),
tet Jinnav
or onlv Ladino
3. H: taf tatta haqhe
Captions Detailed, Laconic, not
a. tanbien l,/ fas louiir asu dientes.
thvmins alwavs in Ladrno
b. tanbien tu as krciit a ys dientes.
c. tambien tn fas kroSer a sss dientet. End of Hagadab End after NirSa Include the final
d. tanbien ta as lauiir ast dientet. (-3; +3 Eastem) songs(-3; +3
e. tanbien tu az eslauiit asrc dientes. Western)
f. tanbien tu as esltuiir asrc dientet

In terms of other features discussed above, no clear difference exists

4. H: vitemot Io ba'avut ze 'asa H' Ii bigeti between the eastem and westem Hagadotb, e.g. in the translations of
a. idi ael para amor de este lizo YY ami en mi ulir de a$ifto. the instructions for conducting rhe Seder.
b. i di ael por esto izo YY a ni en mi ulir de aifto.
c. i di a el pot esto izoYY a mi en mi salir de e$ipto.
d. i di a el por atnot de este izo H' ami er misalir de aifto.
e. i di ael por esto izoYY ami en mi slr deaifto. THE INTERNALFEATURES
f. i di a el pata modre esto izo H' ami en mi nlir de aifto.
The internal criteria zte linguistically oriented and include the
following features: (a) The tate of the Hebrew component in the
rTTranslation: 1. The wrcked one, what does he say? aX&at is this service to you?!'
'to Ladino transladon; 0) The lexical and gtammatical differences
2. you', but not to him! By thus excluding himself from the community he has
between the various versions.
denied that which is 6.rndamental. 3. You, therefore, blunt his teeth 4. and say to
'for
him: 'It is because of this that the Lord did for me when I Ieft Egypt'; 5. me -
but not for him! If he had been there. he would not have been redeemed!'.
 ,ryPES
OF I'ASSOVI.]RTLAGGADOTFIIN I,ADINO 115
114 oRA (RODRIG Utr) SCI{WARZWALI)

esto.The name of God is spelled as YY or FI. There are spelling and

vowel differences in kntfir, kmler, and eskntiir, etc.
It is interesting to note in this example that in some respects 5. H: Ii vdlo Io vi'illu haya iam Io haya nign.
L. Amt i non aeL i :i fuera afii non fucta rcgmido.
Venice 1609 resembles the eastern versions, whereas Salonica 1826
b. ani i no a e/. i i era afii ,ro cta redemido.
fesembles the westem ones. These similarities exist in external c . a m i i non a el i si fucra ali non fueta tedemido.
features regarding the final sections of the Hagadab as well (see d. ani i non a e/. isi fuera ali no fueta
section f. above). Salonica 1826 from the east is one of the eadiest e. dmt i non ael i si fuera afyi no fueta rigmido.
f. ani inon a el i si fuera a i non fuera rexmido. <ryhn1dw>
versions, and perhaps this is the reason for the resemblance to the
western ones.
The discussion here was based on one example taken from six The above example demonsftates how close the Ladino transladon
vetsions. Other phenomena similar to those described above can be remains to the Hebrew structure. Nevertheless, after eliminating the
found thtoughout the Hagadoth, e.g. general sakarversus only eastern minor spelling variations, such as aaos-o aoJ, ael-a el, asimismo-asi
kitar for the translation of Hebrew- l{hoSi'to bring out'. The pronoun mi4no, ami-a ni, porke-por ke, ill-non, a/1i-a i, and tambien-tanbien,
'tn
nls 'us' may occur nossako or sakonos'He brought us out' in many there are clear linguistic differences between the versions' The verb
versions, whereas moskito is typical only of eastem vetsions. kafm'dented' of Hebrew origin occurs in all the eastem versions and
in Venice, but not in the other western versions that choose niego.The
SUN{MARY
AND DISCUSSION verb is conjugated as a Spanish verb, and in all the versions it is
spelled with a Kof and an Alepb, instead of Hebrew spelling <kfr>
The description of the various external and intemal factors above
with a Kaf and no Aleph. Only in eastem versions do we find the
revealed some differences between the venions of the Ladino
Hebrew integrated wordstt kelal'pubhc' and ikar'pinciple, dogma'
Haggadothpublished in the east and the west. In this secrion an
$lebrew'iqa).
attempt will be made to explain these differences. Although exceptions do exist, the lexical differences can be
The differences in size and illustrations stem from a diffetent
demonstrated through words such as sertrisio'service'in the west and
tradition of publications in general. The Ladino Haggadabfrom Venice 'public' and eithet le1 ot
seruimientoin the east, konklzi{ot-konklu{oa
1609 was published in the sarne format inJudeo-Italian and Yiddish.
Pinsipal'principle, dogma' in the west, but kelal, ikar and rail in the
The same letter sets and illustrations were used in all these editions
east. The eastern versions always use the word aifto'Eglpt' (ftequently
and were followed later for three hundred years by other printers in
aiatoin Salonica pre-1568), whereas in the westem versions it is more
Italy. Most of the Hagadoth from ltaly are therefore large in shape and colilnon to find the word elipto. Pisa and Leghorn use rcdemido
nicely omamented. The eastem versions did not have this tradition. 'redeemed' instead of the corrunon regnido used by most eastem
There are few illustrations, and they are not large in shape. The versions (phonetic nxmido in Belgrade).
functional rather than the aesthetic value prove to be of more The above example demonstrates differences in phonology
importance, which explains the size and lack of illustations.
between the east and the west as well. Only in the west do we find
The captions beside the illustrations follow the Italian 'to
initial/in the coniugation of the Spanish verb hacer do', e.g'-fr<o
tradition as well. It is not originally Judeo-Spanish. The Italian 'dld',fas 'do!', while an initial/is not found in the east.
Haggadothset the model for the use of Judeo-Spanish in the captions. Some other differences do not show any systemadc variadon
If they rhymed, the Judeo-Spanish captions followed suiq if they 'because of this' is
between east and west, e.g. Hebrew ba'aaur 1a
described the Midrasb or legend, so did the Judeo-Spanish. The
translated as para amor de esto,por amor de esto,para modrc esto, and por
publishers of the eastem Hagadoth were probably not aware of this
tradition, hence the captions are short, and not necessarilyin Judeo- rB Intcgrated words are those absorbed grammatically and semantically in Judeo-
Spanish. Spanrsh (l\lorag 1985, 1992, 1995). Weinreich (195a) formedy used merged (fused)
I Iclrrcu,to tlcscnbc thc slmc fcature.
 .I'I1)L)S
OF PASSOVERTIAGGADO?fJ IN LADINO 117
from the fact that all the songs were late additions to the Sephardic
traditjon. They started in Ashkenazi communities and gradually
spread to otler communities. In the Judeo-Italian Hagadah from
Venice 1609, it is speciFrcallywritten at the end of the Hagadah that
the Ashkenazim have the habit of adding certain songs, and a Yiddish
song is cited. In the Yiddish Venice 1609 Hagadab a few of the songs
are included.
The target population also explains the linguisdc differences
between the Hagadoth. Mote Hebrew words occur in the eastem
communides where the Hebrew-Aramaic component is quite heavy in
spoken Judeo-Spanish, while few occur in the western ones. The
users of the western Hagadolh maintained closer ties with Spain and
Portugal after the expulsion from Spain and continued speaking
Spanish and Portugueseratler than Judeo-Spanish.Their knowledge
of Hebrew was minimal, so whenever possible they would replace
regular Hebrew words with Spanish ones. The lexicon and
grammatical structures of the westem communities ate closer to
Iberian Spanish than those of the easterncommunities who were not
h close contact with Spain. Many more local vernacular forms ^ppear
in the eastern Hagadoth than in the western ones that are more formal
and accord with normative Spanish.
In Schwarzwald's study (1989) of Pirke Auot, z more clear-cut
difference between western and eastem versions was found. The
Hagadoth do not show these differences in a transparent way. There is
more resemblance between eastem and western texts and between
late and early translations than the translarions of the Blble or Pirke
Auot. The Haggadothform a unique text with many common fearures
between west and east along the time axis, more than the other
translatedLadino texts, as explained in Schwarzwald(1999).
WORKS CITED
ALVAR, Manuel, 1986. L,a l-.eynda d.ePascua:tradici1ncaltural1 arcaiimo
lixico en una 'Hagadd de Pesah' en judeo-espaiol @arcelona:
Editorial AUSA).
a\CoHEN, Dov, 2001. 'Lezehuto iel mehaber Sulhan hapanim
beladino fthe Identity of the Author of SulhanHapanin n
Ladinol', paper read at the Thirteenth World Congress of
Jewish Studies, Jerusalem (forthcomin g n H i spanica J udaica).
116 SCHWARZWALI)
olrA (RODRTGUb,)
The difference in orthography is more striking. Only in the
east do we find all Ladino text in unvocalized Rashi sctipt. In the west
and in some eastern texts, the Ladino is printed in square vocalized
Hebrew letters. Naturally, printed texts in this script have been used
for genetations for the ptoduction of liturgical texts. The use of this
orthography in the translation has a double impact: it makes the text
easier to read, and it demonstrates the sanctity of the text. The
differences in orthography can be explained by the sociolinguistic
backgtound of the target population. The western Hagadoth were
published for and by ex-conue,"J,corffnunities, that returned to
Judarsm after leaving Spain. Their knowledge of Hebrew was not very
good, and the use of the vocalized Ladino texts facilitated their
reading. Rashi script had been in common use among the Sephardic
Jews since the Middle Ages. The many renditions in Rashi script
reflect this old habit of writing Ladino texts by Jews with no Christian
assimilation.
The knowledge of the Hebrew tradition and the lack of
understanding of the Hebrew text can also explain why so many
sections of the Haggadahare ftanslated in the western versions. The
aim of making the whole text understandable to the Sudeo) Spanish-
speaking members of the ex-coflt)erslfamily led the translatots to add
Ladino translations to some sections of the Hagadah not usually read
in Ladino by the Sephardic Jews. This explains why we only find
Ladino translations of the Kiddush and Birkat Hammalon in the west
and in the women's Siddur. Also, as a rule, the Hallel is rarely
translated in the east, but it is systematically translated in the west and
in the womenrs Siddur.
Ladino instructions for conducting the Sederappetred already
in old Mabqoin from medieval Spain (lvlinervini 1992; Quintana &
R6vah 2004). Their occurrence in the Hagadoth is not surprising. In
the eastern Hagadoth the Ladino instrucdons ^re not always
accompanied by Hebrew instructions, and if they are, it is mosdy at
the beginning of the Haggadah. The parallel Hebrew-Ladino
instructions appear in the westem venions throughout the Hagadah,
probably with the intention of conforming to the tradition of the
Ladino text translation. The custom falls in line with the other Venice
Haggadoth published in 1609; the later versions from the west
continued the same practice.
The fact that the final parts of the HaggadahapPeat only in late
versions of the Hag4adoth,and more in the east than in the west, stems
118 ( )lt/\ (R( )I)ltl(; LJI :) S(lI IW/\ll7.W1\l.t)

I\[INEI{\/INI, Lzura, 1992. Testi Ciadeoqagno/iMedieaa/iI-II (I\apoli:

T.iguoriEditore).
I\I()R-\G,Shelomo, 1985. 'Ha'ivrit kelaSon 'ilit 5el tarbut - tahalike
gibui umsira bime habenayim be'artsot hayam harikon
[Hebrew as a Cultural Elite f.anguage around the
Mediterranean in the Middle Ages]', Pe'amim,23:9-21,.
-t 1992. 'Hamilim ha'ivriyot bilSonot hayehudrm - mrspar
hebetrm klaliyim [Hebrerv Elements in Jewish Languages:
Some General Aspects)',Miqqedemumjlam, v: 101-14.
_r 1995. .Hamigba5 hameiulav Sel ha,ivrit: behinot iel tsura
velel ma5ma'ut [th" Amalgamated Crystallization of
Hebrew; Examinations of Form and Meamng]', Te'uda IX:
Stadiesin Flebreu lttnguage ir Memory of E,lieier Rabinstein, ed.
Aharon Dotan & Abraham Tal (Iel Aviv: Ramot), pp. 183-
208.
'A
QUINTANA, Aldina & Israel S. nsv.\H (posthumous), 2004.
Sephardic Siddur with Ritual Instructions in Aragonese
Romance, Ms. Oxford, Bodleian Library 1133 (Opp. Add. 8"
l8)', HispaniaJudaica,4:138-51.
RF,FAEL,Shmuel & Moshe BEH.\R, 2002. Hagadat /adino keninhag
hayhadin hasfaradim[tdino Hagiadah accordingto lhe Customsof
theSephardic Jewslf el Aviv: Eked).
scHwARzwALD, Ora (n<torucuE), 1989. TagumeHaladinolefrke Auot
'Pirke
[The l-ndino TranslationsoJ- Aboth], E,da Vel-nshon, 13
flerusalem:Magnes).
-, 1999. 'Hierarchy among the Hebrew Elements in Ladino
Translations as Determrned by Geographical, Textual and
Religious Factors', in l/ena Habraicain JudaeorumLinguis, ed.
Shelomo Morag, Moshe Bar-Asher & Maria Mayer-Modena
(N4ilano: Universit6 degle Srudi di Milano, The Hebrew
Univ. rn Jerusalem),pp. 183-202.
wEINREICH,Max. 1954. 'Prehistory and Early History of Yiddish:
'tn
Facts and Conceptual Framework', The f-ield of Yiddish, l,
ed. Uriel Weinreich (lrJew York: Lrnguistic Circle of New
York), pp. 73-101.
Y-{ARI, Abraham, 1921. BibliograJiaiel Hagadot PesaltfBihliograph.y ol
the Passouer Hagadah) (ferusalem: Bamberger & Wahrman).
\1)Dl.(rt', Isaac, 1997. 'otsarHahagadot:Bibliografa iel Hahagadoliel
Pcsah [The IIu4gadolh Thesauras:A Bibliograp$t of the Passouer
I Itugulol|tl(fcnrsalcm:N{aunes).