Front Matter Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005) Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131806 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
VOLUME29, NUMBER 1
REV
THE
APRIL, 2005
IE
W
JOURNAL
OF
THE
ASSOCIATION
FOR
JEWISH
STUDIES
AJS Review ASSOCIATIONFORJEWISHSTUDIES NEW YORK,NEW YORK EDITORS
Hillel J. Kieval, WashingtonUniversityin St. Louis MartinS. Jaffee, Universityof Washington,Seattle EDITORIAL BOARD
Michael Alexander,Universityof Oklahoma YaakovElman,YeshivaUniversity TalyaFishman,Universityof Pennsylvania Susan Niditch, AmherstCollege Derek Penslar,Universityof Toronto ChavaWeissler,Lehigh University BOOK REVIEW EDITOR
JeffreyRubenstein,New YorkUniversity MANAGING EDITOR SarahMassey The AJS Review(ISSN 0364-0094) is publishedtwice annually by the Association for Jewish Studies Manuscriptsfor considerationshould be sent to AJS Reviewc/o Prof. Hillel J. Kieval, WashingtonUniversityin St. Louis, Busch Hall 15, Box 1121, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO. 63130. Books for review should be sent to Prof. JeffreyRubenstein,New YorkUniversity,53 WashingtonSquareSouth, Room 100, New York,NY 10012. ? 2005 by the Association for Jewish Studies Publishing, Subscription, and Advertising Offices: CambridgeUniversityPress, 40 West 20th Street,New York,NY 10011, U.S.A.; or CambridgeUniversityPress, The Edinburgh Building, ShaftesburyRoad, CambridgeCB2 2RU, England. Annual subscriptionrates for Volume 29, 2005: Institutionsprint and online ?75/$119; institutions online only ?63/$99; institutions print only ?68/$105; single part ?36/$56, payablein advanceor on receiptof invoice; institutionalcheck or credit cardonly. Special ratesexist for membersof the Association for Jewish Studies;membershipinformationcan be found at http://www.brandeis.edu/ajs. AJSReviewand all otherCambridgeJournalscan be found at http://journals.cambridge.org/ Photocopying Information (for users in the U.S.A.): The Item-Fee Code for this publication (0364-0094/05 $12.00) indicates that copying for internal or personal use beyond thatpermittedby Sec. 107 or 108 of the U.S. CopyrightLaw is authorizedfor users duly registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) TransactionalReporting Service, providedthat the appropriateremittanceof $12.00 per article is paid directlyto: CCC, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers,MA 01923. U.S.A. Specific writtenpermissionmust be obtained for all other copying; contact the nearestCambridgeUniversity Press office. Postmaster:Send address changes in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico to: AJS Review, JournalsDept., CambridgeUniversityPress, 100 BrookHill Drive,WestNyack, NY 109942113, U.S.A. Sendaddresschangeselsewhereto:AJSReview,JournalsDept.,CambridgeUniversityPress,The EdinburghBuilding,ShaftesburyRoad,CambridgeCB2 2RU,England.
AJS
Review
THE JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES
VOLUME29, NUMBER1
APRIL 2005 TABLEOF CONTENTS
ARTICLES
W. David Nelson OralOrthography:EarlyRabbinicOraland WrittenTransmissionof Parallel MidrashicTraditionin the Mekhiltaof RabbiSimon b. Yohaiand the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael .............................................................
1
Martin Jacobs Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean-A Sixteenth-CenturyVenetian Rabbi on Muslim History ..........................................................33 Alyssa Quint "YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"?A Reconstructionof Who Read What in Jewish EasternEurope .............................................................. 61 Arnold Franklin CultivatingRoots: The Promotionof ExilarchalTies to David in the MiddleAges..........91 Jane Hathaway The Mawza Exile at the Junctureof Zaydi and OttomanMessianism............................111 Ariel Furstenberg Restitutionof Lost Propertyin the Tannaiticand AmoraicHalakhah:A Preliminary PhilosophicalStudy of the Formingof a Conception(Abstractof HebrewArticle) ......129 REVIEWESSAYS
Baruch A. Levine ScholarlyDictionariesof Two Dialects of JewishAramaic ....................
....
131
Joel E. Rubin "Music is the Pen of the Soul":Recent Workson Hasidic and Jewish Instrumental Klezmer Music .......................................................................145 BOOKREVIEWS BIBLICALSTUDIES
Ziony Zevit. TheReligions ofAncient Israel:A SynthesisofParallactic Approaches. BENJAMIND. SOMMER...............................................
.............
Israel Knohl. TheDivine Symphony:TheBible 'sMany Voices. MARVINA. SWEENEY.................................... ...... ............
........
.............160
Ithamar Gruenwald. Rituals and Ritual Theoryin AncientIsrael. JONATHAN
...........................163 KLAWANS........................................
159
RABBINIC STUDIES
Yair Lorberbaum. Image of God, HalakhahandAggadah. JOSHUAKULP ...............................................
......................................165
MEDIEVAL
Aaron W. Hughes. TheTextureof the Divine: Imaginationin MedievalIslamic and Jewish Thought. KALMAN P. BLAND ...................................
....
......................
.............
167
Marc B. Shapiro. TheLimitsof OrthodoxTheology:Maimonides'Thirteen Principles Reappraised. GIDONROTHSTEIN.............................................
169
Pinchas Giller. Reading the Zohar:TheSacred Textof the Kabbalah. M ARK VERMAN ....................................................
................171
............
Dean Phillip Bell. Sacred Communities:Jewish and ChristianIdentitiesin Fifteenth-CenturyGermany. ELISHEVA CARLEBACH
..................
.......................................
173
MODERN
Marc Shapiro. Between the YeshivahWorldand ModernOrthodoxy:TheLife and Worksof RabbiJehiel Jacob Weinberg,1884-1966. GERSHON GREENBERG
.......................
...................................75
Ronald Schechter. ObstinateHebrews:Representationsof Jews in France, 1715-1815. ALLANARKUSH ..........................................
............
177
Michael Gluzman. ThePolitics of Canonicity:Lines of Resistance in Modernist HebrewPoetry. CHANITA GOODBLATT
...................
..............................................179
Elliot Dorff. Love YourNeighbor and A JewishApproachto Modern Personal Ethics. Yourself. PETERJ. HAAS............................................................
................
181
Steven Nadler. Spinoza'sHeresy:Immortalityand the Jewish Mind. JULIE R. KLEIN
..
................................................
............................183
Marvin Perry and Frederick M. Schweitzer.Anti-Semitism.Mythand Hate from Antiquityto the Present. RICHARDS. LEVY ..............
........
...............................
185
Jody Myers. SeekingZion: Modernityand MessianicActivismin the Writings of TseviHirsch Kalischer ARIEH SAPOSNIK
.........................
.........................
........................................................
186
Marcia Reynders Ristaino. Port of Last Resort: TheDiaspora Communities of Shanghai. BERNARD WASSERSTEIN
............................................................................................
Joshua D. Zimmerman. Poles, Jews, and the Politics ofNationality: TheBund and the Polish Socialist Party in Late TsaristRussia, 1892-1914. THEODORE R. WEEKS ......................... ..............................
......................190
188
Ehud Luz. Wrestlingwith an Angel: Power,Moralityand JewishIdentity. DAVIDBIALE....................................... .............................
..... 192
...................
Seth Farber.An OrthodoxDreamer:RabbiJoseph B. Soloveitchikand Boston 's MaimonidesSchool. MOSHESOKOL...
.............................................................................
...................... 194
......
Karsten Krieger, ed. Der 'BerlinerAntisemitismusstreit' 1879-1881. Eine Kontroverseum die Zugeh6rigkeitder deutschenJudenzur Nation.
...............
HARTWIG WIEDEBACH........................................................................
195
Hasia R. Diner and Beryl Leiff Benderly. Her WorksPraise Her: A History of Jewish Womenin Americafrom Colonial Timesto the Present. DIANNEASHTON........................................................................................
......................197
Lloyd P. Gartner. History of the Jews in ModernTimes. ......... ROBERTM. SELTZER
.................................................
................... ........199
Azariah de' Rossi. TheLight of the Eyes. LESTERA. SEGAL.........................
...............200
.....................
Michael E. Staub. Tornat the Roots. The Crisis ofJewish Liberalismin Postwar America. ELI LEDERHENDLER ......................................
................................203
HEBREWARTICLE ..........................................................
'N
Oral Orthography: Early Rabbinic Oral and Written Transmission of Parallel Midrashic Tradition: In the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon B. Yoḥai and the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael Author(s): W. David Nelson Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 1-32 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131807 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 1-32
ORAL ORTHOGRAPHY:EARLYRABBINIC ORAL AND WRITTEN TRANSMISSION OF PARALLELMIDRASHICTRADITION in the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonB. Yohai and the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael
by W. David Nelson Throughoutthe past two centuries,the corpusof rabbinicwritings,called either tannaitic midrashimor halakhic midrashim,has served as a pivotal foundation upon which scholarshave based their historicalreconstructionsof the development of rabbinic Judaism. The reasons for this dependence are manifold. Predatedin redactionby only the Mishnah,these documentscontain a wealth of traditionsattributedto the foundersof rabbinicJudaismwho flourishedduringits nascency.Moreover,these texts differsignificantlyin rhetoricalstyle, logic, scope, and concern not only from those rabbinicdocumentswhich precedethem (Mishnah), follow them (Palestinian/BabylonianTalmudsand amoraicmidrashim),or are, perhaps,contemporaneouswith them (Tosefta),' but also among themselves as a corpusof writings.Finally,these documentsarethe earliestcollections of rabbinic biblical exegesis ("Midrash")and,were it not for a small numberof examples of exegesis preservedin the Mishnahand Tosefta,they would also represent the earliest examples of rabbinicbiblical interpretationknown today.Forreasons
1. Over the past two decades, both the chronologicaland literaryrelationshipof the Toseftato the Mishnahhave attractedsignificant, new scholarlyinterest,resultingin virtuallyevery conceivable hypothesisof relationship.Insightful,representativeefforts includeA. Goldberg,"TheTosefta:Companionto the Mishnah,"in Literatureofthe Sages, Part One,ed. S. Safrai(Philadelphia:Fortress,1987), 283-302; J. Hauptman,"MishnahAs a Response to 'Tosefta,"'in TheSynopticProblem in Rabbinic Literature,ed. S. Cohen (Providence,RI: BrownJudaicStudies,2000), 13-34; J. Hauptman,"Pesikah lehumr'bemishnatgitin,"in Proceedings of the TenthWorldCongress of Jewish Studies:Division C, Jewish Thoughtand Literature(Jerusalem:WorldUnion of Jewish Studies, 1990), 1:23-30; S. Friedman, "UncoveringLiteraryDependencies in the TalmudicCorpus,"in Cohen, TheSynopticProblem in RabbinicLiterature,35-57; S. Friedman,"ThePrimacyof the Toseftato Mishnahin Synoptic Parallels,"in IntroducingTosefta:Textual,Intratextualand IntertextualStudies,ed. H. Fox andT.Meacham (Hoboken,NJ: KTAV,1999), 99-121; S. Friedman,Tosefta"catikta':masekhetpesah r'shon:makbilot hamishnahvehatosefta'ufirushanbezeirufmavo khelali (Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University,2002); P. Schiifer,"ResearchInto RabbinicLiterature:An Attemptto Define the StatusQuaestionis,"Journalof JewishStudies37: 139-52; andY.Elman,Authorityand Tradition:ToseftanBaraitotin TalmudicBabylonia (Hoboken,NJ: KTAV,1994).
1
W David Nelson such as these, the tannaiticmidrashimhave figured prominentlyin researchconducted over the past centuryon the historicaldevelopmentof RabbinicJudaism. A review of scholarshipon the tannaiticmidrashimfromthe nineteenthcento tury the presentreveals, however,that a common patternof assumptionsabout the natureof the textualevidence has, to variousdegrees, fueled and guided these efforts. Beginning with the initial "modern"inquiries into the corpus by Wissenschaft scholars such as Meir Friedmann(1831-1908), Israel Levy (18411917), and David Zvi Hoffmann (1843-1921), and including the efforts in the mid-twentiethcentury of scholars such as ChanochAlbeck (1890-1972), Jacob Nahum Epstein(1878-1952), and EzraZion Melamed(1903 -94), and culminating in the presentwith the immensely influentialand voluminousoutputof Jacob Neusner,we can perceive a chain of scholarshipon the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus that has been influenced strongly,and often primarily,by "documentary," "compositional,"and "canonical"considerations.That is, from the nineteenthcentury to the present,scholarshave regarded,examined,and evaluatedthe individualtextual componentsof the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus as carefullyauthoredcompositions, replete with authorialintentionand crafted so as to express meanings and convey messages that transcendthose of the texts' individual traditions.In the interest of brevity,I will illustratethis point with referenceto two of the abovementioned scholars. On one end of the historicalspectrumis David Hoffmann,who arguedthat the paralleltextual componentsof the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus were rightfully divided into two groups: one that stemmed from the tannaitic"School of Rabbi Ishmael b. Elisha,"and one that stemmed from the contemporaneous"School of RabbiAkiba."2Hoffmannbased this conceptualizationon a numberof criteria,including patternedappearancesof named sages, usage of technical terminology, and employment of hermeneuticaltechniques.3 However, at the core of Hoffmann'sschematizationwas a distinctionhe believed existed between the exegetical preferencesof Ishmael and Akiba: Ishmael, along with his disciples, understood the Torahto speak in plain human language, and therefore preferredto employ "straightforward" exegetical techniquesto drawmeaning from the biblical text. Akiba and his students,however,believed that the Torahcommunicated in a divine, transrationallanguage.As a result,they favoreddrastic,"complex"exegetical techniques.4Having perceived this distinction in the exegetical prefer2. See D.Z. Hoffmann,Zur Einleitung in die halachischen Midraschim(Berlin: M. Driesner, 1886-87), particularly1-20; Mechiltade-RabbiSimonb. Jochai: ein halachischerund haggadischer Midraschzu Exodus(Frankfurtam Main:J. Kaufmann,1905), Introduction,5-13; and,MidraschTannaim zum Deuteronomium(Berlin:H. Itzkowski, 1908/9), Introduction. 3. See D.Z. Hoffmann,ZurEinleitungin die halachischenMidraschim,5-12. 4. Knowledge of the purportedexegetical preferencesof Ishmael and Akiba is commonplace among scholars of RabbinicJudaismtoday; thus, I have refrainedfrom adducingspecific examples. There certainlyis no dearthof scholarshipon this subject,and should the readerdesire this information, s/he shouldturnfirst to Hoffmann,ZurEinleitungin die halachischenMidraschim,5-12. Thereafter, I would recommend:J.N. Epstein,Mevo'otlesifrut hatan'im(Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1957), 521-35; E.Z. Melamed,Pirkei mavo'lesifruthatalmud(Jerusalem:Galor, 1973), 170-80; and,Encyclopedia Judaica, (New York:Macmillan, 1972) s.v. "Hermeneutics,"by M.D. Herr,8:366-72.
2
Oral Orthography ences of IshmaelandAkiba, Hoffmannthen extendedthis distinctionto the entire corpus of the tannaiticmidrashim,arguingthat the differencesin these sages' interpretivetechniques eventually led each of them to produce their own "set" of midrashim. Thus, for Hoffmann,the tannaiticmidrashimwere much more thanrandom agglomerationsof tannaiticinterpretationorganizedaccordingto the sequence of the biblicaltext. Rather,in his opinion, each text was composedwith intention,authoredas they were by the schools of either Ishmael or Akiba. In authoringtheir respective texts, these two programmaticallyselected from the vast wealth of midrashictraditionsthey had at their disposal. Each text of the corpus was governed by a coherence that served to bind togetherits constituentand individually disparateinterpretiveelements-an agendathat reflectedthe thoughts,concerns, and beliefs of each text's authors. Moreover,Hoffmannoperatedunderthe assumptionthatthe individualtexts of the tannaiticcorpus as they existed in his day (i.e., as reconstructedfrom various manuscripttraditionsor accordingto various printededitions) were accurate and reliablerepresentationsof the very same texts that circulatedwithin tannaitic and amoraicrabbiniccircles. Hoffmann'semphasis on the historical reconstruction of the "twoschools"of tannaiticteachingdemandedthis understandingof the literaryevidence availableto him. It was not sufficient for Hoffmannto assume only that the individual traditionscomprisingthese texts were representativeof traditionsthat actuallyflourishedand circulatedamong the earliestrabbis;rather, he had to assume as well thatthese traditionswere attributed,gathered,organized, placed,juxtaposed,and arrangedin the same manneras they came to exist in the editions of the texts with which he worked. It was this assumptionthat allowed him to perceive the variety of distinctionsthat he claimed delimited the various texts into the purported"sets"that stemmed from the purported"schools"(e.g., exegetical affinities, preponderanceof certain named sages, differences in halakhic pronouncements).Withoutthis assumption,therefore,it would have been impossible for him to advancethe argumentof intentionedauthorshipmentioned above. In constructing his paradigm, Hoffmann also presupposed a chronologically linearproductionof the texts of the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus.Namely, for each text of the corpus there was a temporallyprecise and determined"beginIn spite of its widespreadscholarlyacceptance,the notion that IshmaelandAkiba (or their respective schools) actuallydisagreedover acceptedexegetical norms and techniqueshas been revealed to be entirelyunprovenand erroneous.In particular,see the excellent refutationin Jay Harris,How Do WeKnowThis?Midrashand the Fragmentationof ModernJudaism(Albany:State Universityof New YorkPress, 1995), 25-72. Nonetheless, scholarly interest in the hermeneuticaldistinctionsbetween the purportedly"Ishmaelean"and"Akiban"corporaof the halakhicmidrashimremainsstrong,as highlighted by the recent effort by Azzan Yadin,Scriptureas Logos: Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash(Philadelphia:Universityof PennsylvaniaPress, 2004), which focuses on distinctionsin legal hermeneuticalapproachesbetweenthe MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael and SifreNumbers.Althoughhe acknowledges the infeasibility of ascribing certain texts or heremeneuticaltechniques to specific tannaitic individuals,Yadinfinds useful and worthyof investigationthe patternedhermeneuticalpreferences that, in his opinion, each corpus displays.
3
W David Nelson ning"-a momentof absoluteorigin when the pristine"original"version (Urtext) of each text came into existence. Thereafter,the "original"versions were transmittedandrecopiedovertime by scribeafterscribe,each of whompotentially"sullied"the Urtexta bit by meansof eithercreative/intentionalor accidentaladdition, deletion, or manipulationof its parts.This linearunderstandingof the corpus'creation and transmissionwas crucial for Hoffmann,because it providedhim with a much needed explanationfor the significantly largenumberof instanceswhen elements of the varioustexts did not conformto his schematicgeneralizations. It was assumptionssuch as these aboutthe natureof rabbinictextualityand textual authorshipthat allowed Hoffmannto advancehis arguments.By conceiving of the tannaiticmidrashimas intentionalcompositions,the productsof authorial agendas, and subjectedto a relativelyreliable and static scribaltransmission (minor "errors"notwithstanding),Hoffmanncould then advance the proposition that these texts stood either in opposition to or in agreementwith each other.Finally,this conceptualizationof the textualevidence facilitatedthe historicalthrust of Hoffmann'sexplanatoryscheme, enabling him to argue that from this corpus one could reasonablyreconstructthe internaldevelopmentand intellectual concerns of the nascent rabbinicmovement that producedthe traditionscontained within the texts. At the otherend of the scholarlyhistoricalspectrumis JacobNeusner,who produced an impressive body of scholarshipon the tannaitic midrashic corpus from 1985-90 as a subset of his broad and incorporativeresearch agenda.5 Neusner'sapproachto the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus is best describedas "docuIn his view, each text of the corpusis a discrete mentary"or "canonical-historical." and independent document, produced by anonymous redactors or "framers" throughtheir purposefuland programmaticselection and reshapingof tradition. Far from being random agglomerations of tannaitic midrashic tradition, in Neusner's opinion, each text (i.e., "document"or "book")was the productof an authorshipdeterminedto express certainpoints and convictions by adheringto a Thatis, as each documentwas pre-determinedcompositional"planandprogram."6 produced,the authorsof thatdocumentallowedtheirselection and shapingof ma5. J.Neusner,Sifra:TheRabbinicCommentaryon Leviticus:AnAmericanTranslation(Atlanta: ScholarsPress, 1985); Sifre to Numbers:AnAmericanTranslation,2 vols. (Chapters1-115 only) (Atlanta:Scholars Press for Brown Judaic Studies, 1986); Sifre ToDeuteronomy:An Analytical Translation, 2 vols. (Atlanta:ScholarsPress for Brown Judaic Studies, 1987); SifrdToDeuteronomy:An Introductionto the Rhetorical,Logical, and TopicalProgram(Atlanta:ScholarsPress for Brown Judaic Studies, 1987);Sifra:AnAnalyticalTranslation,3 vols. (Atlanta:ScholarsPressfor BrownJudaicStudies, 1988); Sifra in Perspective:TheDocumentaryComparisonof the Midrashimof AncientJudaism (Atlanta:Scholars Press for Brown Judaic Studies, 1988); MekhiltaAccording to Rabbi Ishmael:An AnalyticalTranslation,2 vols. (Atlanta:ScholarsPress for BrownJudaicStudies, 1988); MekhiltaAccordingto RabbiIshmael:An Introductionto Judaism'sFirstScripturalEncyclopaedia(Atlanta:Scholars Press for BrownJudaicStudies, 1988); Unitingthe Dual Torah:Sifraand the Problemof the Mishnah (Cambridgeand New York:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1989); The CanonicalHistory of Ideas: ThePlace ofthe So-Called TannaiteMidrashim(Atlanta:ScholarsPress ForUniversityof SouthFlorida, 1990). This delineationof Neusner'sbody of work is representativeand not exhaustive. 6. See Neusner,Sifra in Perspective, 13ff.
4
Oral Orthography terials for inclusion to be guided by their theological and intellectualtenets and agenda.7 In Neusner'sopinion, the completion of each text or documentof the rabbinic corpusrepresentedan official additionto the rabbiniccanon-an authoritative new book on the rabbinicbookshelf, so to speak.8Therefore,in orderto understandthe historicalandideologicaldevelopmentof RabbinicJudaism,one must identifythe concernsof each text'sauthorshipon a text-by-textbasis, accordingto their linear,chronologicalpublication.Given, however,the fact thatrabbinictexts not only lack specific, reliable authorship,but also fail to express theirplans and programsin an overtmanner,Neusnerdevises an alternativeanalyticalmechanism for discerningeach document'sgenerativeconcernsandprinciples.Ratherthanrelying upon blatantattestation,Neusner turns, instead,to the texts' "taxic indicators"-that is, to the literarytraits(rhetoric,logic, and topic) of each text. It is Neusner'sconvictionthatby identifyingand analyzingin minute detail each text's recurrentmodes of expression (rhetoric),propositionalor syllogistic principles (logic), and thematic concerns (topic), the ultimate interestsand convictions of each text's authorshipbecome apparent.Stated differently,the final redactorsof each text articulatedtheir plan and programin the way they worded their exegesis, the way they formulatedtheirthoughtpatterns,and the issues they chose to address. Neusner'stheoreticalapproachto the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus is revolutionary in a numberof respects. He refuses to acknowledgeboth the veracity of the putativeexegetical differencesbetweenthe schools of IshmaelandAkiba, and the notion that such a distinctioncan be used to explain the patterneddifferences among the tannaiticmidrashim.In fact, Neusner'sapproachto the corpus is distinct from those of his predecessorsin that it does not presupposeto any degree a corpus divided into two groups. Rather,in his opinion each text is to be viewed as an entity in and of itself, and the attemptto pigeonhole the texts into a preconceived theoreticalframeworkof dividedauthorshipascribesan orderto the corpus thatNeusnerbelieves cannotbe substantiated. Nonetheless, in developing his uniquemethodologicalapproachto the tannaitic midrashim,Neusner clearly relies to a great (if not greater)degree on the same presuppositionsaboutrabbinictextualitytaken for grantedby Hoffmannat the turnof the century.Forexample,he presumesthatthe tannaiticmidrashimwere composed with authorialintention.Farfrom viewing them as randomagglomerations of tannaitictraditionsorganizedaroundthe flow of the biblical text, Neusner clearly believes that each text was craftedwith care; that each was the result of a programmatic and ideological selection and reshaping of inherited tradition. WhereasHoffmannbased this assumptionupon patternedoccurrencesin the texts of named sages and methodsof exegesis, Neusnerperceives authorshipfrom patternedoccurrencesof rhetorical,logical, and thematictropes.
7. See Neusner, The CanonicalHistory of Ideas, 19-39. 8. See Neusner,Judaismand Scripture:TheEvidence of LeviticusRabbah(Chicago and London: Universityof Chicago Press, 1986), 98.
5
W David Nelson Neusner also assumesthatthe reconstructedcriticalversionsof the tannaitic midrashimrepresentwith a high degree of accuracyversionsof these texts thatcirculated in the late tannaiticand early amoraicperiod.Neusner'sreconstructionof the ideological and theological developmentswithin early rabbinismrequiresthis presumption;it is not sufficient for him to assume merely that the individualtraditions containedwithin these texts are accuratereflectionsof traditionswith tannaitic provenance.Rather,Neusner advances global argumentsbased upon his global documentaryanalyses and comparisonsof the tannaiticmidrashim.Thus, he bases his conclusions upon the evidence he adduces from the entiretyof the texts-the sum of the parts of the individualunits of tradition.As such, he presumes that the versions of these texts availabletoday reflect with precision the same texts that circulated in early rabbinic circles. Or, to borrow Neusner's metaphor,the books of the tannaiticmidrashimon the modern historian'sbookshelf are simply reprintingsof those on the bookshelves of the early rabbis. Finally,Neusner'swork on the tannaiticmidrashim(as well as on the entire corpus of classical rabbinicliterature)is foundedupon a chirographicand literary conceptualizationof early rabbinicpedagogy. Within his methodologicalworld, the rabbisare viewed primarilyas readersand writers,and are entirelydisassociated fromthe dialogical,developmental,and socially interactiveprocess of talmud torah.Moreover,Neusner'sunderstandingof the textual evidence is informedprimarilyby moderntextualsensibilities.The rabbisproducedandtransmittedto subsequentgenerationstheirauthoritativebooks, within which they carefullystressed theirparticularbeliefs and authorialagendas.Upon completion,these books were added to the rabbiniccanon. It follows that it was the rabbis'intentionthat these books be readas we readbooks today,in theirentiretyfrombeginningto end. Otherwise, the message of each document,discernableonly when one takes into account the entiretyof the work,would elude its subsequentaudience. Thus,the theoreticalframeworksdevisedby bothHoffmannandNeusnerfor the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus were based primarilyupon documentaryand compositionalpresumptionsaboutthe natureof the textualevidence andearlyrabbinic textuality.Moreover,as statedearlier,these scholarsare located on opposite ends of the historical spectrum of scholarship on the tannaitic midrashim.Indeed, throughoutthe twentiethcentury,preeminentscholars such as ChanochAlbeck,9 JacobNahum Epstein,' and Ezra Melamed"Iattemptedto devise their own systematic frameworkswithin which to situateand understandthe individualtextual components of the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus, and in doing so, maintained,fostered, and built upon similar compositional conceptualizationsof the individual 9. C. Albeck, Untersuchungeniiber die halakischen Midraschim(Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1927); and Mavo La-Talmudim(TelAviv: Devir, 1969). 10. J.N.Epstein,"Mekhilta'usifrei besifreiharambam,"Tarbiz6 (1934-35): 343-82; Mevo'ot lesifrut hatana'im(Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1957); J.N. Epstein& E.Z. Melamed,Mekhiltad'Rabbi Sim'onb. Jochai: Fragmentain Geniza Cairensi repertadiggesit apparatucritico, notis, praefatione instruxit(Jerusalem:Mekitze NirdamimPublishers,1955), Introduction,13-58. 11. E.Z. Melamed, Midreshei halakhah shel hatan'im betalmud bavli (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1943); Hayahas shebein midresheihalakhahlamishnahvelatosefta'(Jerusalem:Da'at, 1967); Pirkei mavo' lesifruthatalmud(Jerusalem:Galor, 1973).
6
Oral Orthography tannaiticmidrashim.As with Hoffmannand Neusner,these efforts have generalized and championedthe overall,chirographiccharacteristicsof these texts, to the virtual neglect of any substantialconsiderationof how these texts either alternatively or concurrentlymight reflect, exemplify, or preserve aspects of the dynamic, fluid oral-performativesocial climate of early Rabbinic pedagogical instruction, within which these texts and their constituent traditions played a fundamentalrole. Recent scholarship on rabbinic literature,however, has attemptedto approachthis literatureanew by examiningthe functionand role of both the written and spoken word in earlyrabbinicsociety. Stronglyinfluencedby nearlya century of interdisciplinaryscholarshipon the influence exertedby speech and writing on the transmissionof culturaltradition,12"Orality"studies in rabbinicliterature consider the influence exertedby written,oral, and auralfacets of rabbinicpedagogy on the creation, transmission,and preservationof early rabbinictradition. These orality-informedapproachesto rabbinicliteraturehave begun to examine the frozen, chirographictextual evidence of rabbinicdocumentsin a new light.13 Insteadof appealingto rabbinictextualcompilationsas "authored"documents,or as pristine,verbatimtranscriptionsof an ancient,anteriorlydevelopedand verbal12. Interdisciplinaryscholarshipin the theoreticalstudy of orality and literacyhas a long and rich history.Its roots are in the researchconductedby Milman Parryamong Serbo-Croatianfolktale performers,in orderto shed light on stylistic peculiaritiesin the Homericepics. His researchwas unfinished at the time of his death, and was subsequentlycompleted and publishedby his student,A.B. Lord in TheSinger of Tales(Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress, 1960). Importantrecenttheoreticalmodels includeW.J.Ong, Oralityand Literacy(London and New York:Routledge, 1982), and E "MedievalTextsand the TwoTheoriesof Oral-FormulaicComBiiuml, position:A Proposalfor a ThirdTheory,"New LiteraryHistory 16 (1984-85): 31-49, andR. Finnegan, Literacyand Orality:Studiesin the Technologyof Communication(Oxford:Blackwell, 1988), andJ.M. PerformanceandTradition,"JournalofAmericanFolklore 105 (1992): 275-30 1, Foley,"Word-Power, and M. Calinescu,"Oralityin Literacy:Some HistoricalParadoxesof Reading,"YaleJournal of Criticism 6 (1993): 175-90. Foran excellent discussion of the history of theoreticalscholarshipon orality and literacy see J.M. Foley, The Theoryof Oral Composition:History and Methodology(Bloomington and Indianapolis:IndianaUniversityPress, 1988). Applicationsof theoreticalmodels of oralityand literacyto specific culturalexamples abound. An excellent applicationacross a broad spectrumof culturesis J. Goody, The InterfaceBetween the Writtenand the Oral (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1987), and B. Stolz and R. Shannon, eds., Oral Literatureand the Formula(Ann Arbor:Centerfor the Coordinationof Ancient and Modern Studies, 1976). Forapplicationsin the field of Classics, see R. Thomas,Literacyand OralityinAncient Greece (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity,1992), and K. Robb,Literacyand Paideia in Ancient Greece (Oxfordand New York:OxfordUniversityPress, 1994). Forapplicationsin Medieval Studies, see B. Stock, The Implications of Literacy: WrittenLanguage and Models of Interpretationin the Eleventhand TwelfthCenturies(Princeton:PrincetonUniversity,1983), and M. Carruthers,TheBook ofMemory:A StudyofMemory in Medieval Culture(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1990). 13. Although flawed in many respects,the work of B. Gerhardsson,Memoryand Manuscript: Oral Traditionand WrittenTransmissionin RabbinicJudaismand Early Christianity,trans.E.J.Sharpe (Lund:Gleerupand Copenhagen:Munksgaard,1961) is commonly regardedas one of the earliest applications of oralitytheory to rabbinicliterature. Scholarsof rabbinicliteratureare now realizingthe potentialoffered by Oralitystudies for insight into early rabbinicpedagogy and creation/transmissionof tradition.To date, the most programmatic, sophisticated,and developed program of research is the work of Martin Jaffee. His works
7
W David Nelson ly transmittedOralTorah,this currentwave of scholarshipattemptsto peer "behind"the words frozen on the parchmentin orderto gain insight into the complex interactionbetween the written and spoken word in early rabbinicsociety. Produced by an increasinglywidening varietyof scholars,and somewhatdisparatein nature,all of these latestscholarlyeffortsarealike in once crucialrespect-namely, they are all founded on the convictionthat, by preservingfor posteritya momentary glimpse into the ever-changing,fluid, and dynamic world of rabbinictraditional instruction,the texts have preserved,additionally,characteristicremnantsinternalevidence-of the very social climate from which this literatureemerged and within which it played such a crucialrole. In this paper,I will examine parallelportions of midrashiccommentaryto the biblicalbook of Exodus in two tannaiticmidrashiccompilations-the Mekhilta of RabbiShimonb. Yohaiand the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael-in orderto reexamine and reevaluatethe relationshipbetween these two texts in the light of these contemporaryscholarly insights.14My intentionis to develop furtherthe small, but growing, body of Orality-informedtheory on early rabbinictextuality.In doing so, I hope to begin to refocus the methodologicallens throughwhich scholars view not only these texts, but also the entiretyof the tannaiticmidrashiccorpus. Insteadof appealingto these texts for particularitiesabouthistoricaland/or ideological developmentswith the nascent rabbinicmovement,or as consciously and programmaticallyauthored"books,"I hope to show thatit is more valuableandjudicious to utilize these parallelsourcesto investigatethe particularitiesof rabbinic talmudtorah and the culturalprocess thatwas the transmissionof OralTorah. I will focus on selectedportionsof the midrashiccommentaryof the Mekhilinclude: "How Much Oralityin OralTorah?New Perspectiveson the Compositionand Transmission of EarlyRabbinicTradition,"Shofar 10, no. 2 (1992): 53-72; "FiguringEarlyRabbinicLiteraryCulture:Thoughts Occasioned by Boomershine and J. Dewey,"Semeia 65 (1994): 67-73; "Writingand RabbinicOralTradition:On MishnaicNarrative,Lists andMnemonics,"TheJournalofJewish Thought and Philosophy4 (1994): 123-46; "A RabbinicOntology of the Writtenand SpokenWord:On Discipleship,TransformativeKnowledge,andthe LivingTextsof OralTorah,"Journalof theAmericanAcadContextof the TalmudYerushalmi:GrecoemyofReligion 65, no. 3 (1997): 525-49; "TheOral-Cultural RomanRhetoricalPaideia,Discipleship, and the Conceptof OralTorah,"in TheTalmudYerushalmiin Graeco-RomanCultureI, ed. P. Schdifer(Tiibingen:Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 27-61; "OralTraditionin the Writingof RabbinicOralTorah:On TheorizingRabbinicOrality,"OralTradition14 (1999): 3-32. The culminationof Jaffee'sresearchon this subject is his recently publishedmonographTorahin the Mouth: Writingand Oral Traditionin PalestinianJudaism,200 BCE-400 CE (New Yorkand Oxford: OxfordUniversityPress, 2001). Otherimportant,recent contributionsto the body of Orality-informedscholarshipon Rabbinic Literatureinclude:Y. Elman,Authorityand Tradition:ToseftanBaraitotin TalmudicBabylonia(Hoboken, NJ: KtavPublishingHouse, Inc., 1994);Y. Elman,"Oralityandthe Transmissionof ToseftaPisha in TalmudicLiterature,"in Fox and Meacham,IntroducingTosefta,123-80; S. Fraade,FromTradition to Commentary:Torahand its Interpretationin the MidrashSifre to Deuteronomy(Albany:StateUniversity of New YorkPress, 1991); S. Friedman,"Lehithavotshinui hagirs'otbetalmudhabavli,"Sidra: A Journalfor the Study of RabbinicLiterature7 (1991): 67-102; andY. Zussman,"Kitveiyad umesorot nusah shel hamishnah,"Proceedings of the Seventh WorldCongress of Jewish Studies: Talmud, Halakha, and Midrash(Jerusalem:WorldUnion of Jewish Studies, 1981), 215-50. 14. I note particularindebtednessin this effort to the insightfulfindings of S. Fraadein From Traditionto Commentary.
8
Oral Orthography ta of RabbiShimonb. Yohaiand the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmaelto a single verse of Scripture-Exodus12:1:"TheLordspoketo Moses andAaronin the landof Egypt, saying."Contextuallyspeaking,this verse marksthe beginningof a numberof divine commands,of both immediateand eternalconcern,to Moses andAaron,and thus indirectlyto the entire congregationof Israel. Of immediateconcern are the instructionsthatfollow,directingthe Israelitesin theirpreparationforthe tenth,and final, plaguebroughtby God uponthe Egyptians.The Israelitesare commandedto set aside a perfectlamb on the tenthday of the month(Nisan), eitherone to a family or one sharedamong manyhouseholds,and to guardit closely until twilight of the fourteenth.At thattime, they areto slaughtertheirlambs,andplace some of the blood on their individualdoorpostsand lintels, thus demarcatingtheirhouseholds and identifyingthemto God,who thatnightwill pass overthem while slayingeach Egyptianfirstborn.The Israelitesare also commandedto roastthe sacrificiallamb that very night, eat it with bitterherbsand unleavenedbread,and burnany thatremains until dawn. In such fashion, God declaresto Moses and Aaron,will the Israelitesreceive their long-awaitedrescue frombondage. Of eternalconcern are the commandsthat follow concerningthe ritualobservanceof this occasion throughoutsubsequentgenerations.Forin additionto the particularitiesofthe moment,God instructsthe Israelitesto repeatthis sacrifice at the same moment on an annualbasis as a commemorationof their exodus from Egypt. For seven days they are to refrainfrom their daily labor, eat unleavened bread,and rid themselves of, and abstainfrom eating, that which is leavened. However,we shall soon see thatboth of our texts, in typical midrashicfashion, atomize the biblical text, re-readingour verse in a mannerthoroughlydevoid of attentionto its largercontext. In fact, in their exegetical treatmentof Exodus 12:1, both texts are fixated entirelyon the specific words of the verse-"spoke," "Moses andAaron,"and "in the Landof Egypt"-and as such, devote their entire interpretiveattentionto these clauses, regardlessof the biblical narrativethat follows. We begin with the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai.'15 15. All translationsof midrashictexts aremy own; however,when translatingthe excerptsfrom the MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael I freely consultedthe fine translationof J. Lauterbach,Mekiltade-Rabbi Ishmael (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1933). Translationsof biblical verses are eithermy own, or were taken from Tanakh(Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 1985). This section of the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaibegins on p. 7, line 10 and ends on p. 8, line 16 of the criticalversion of the text producedby Epstein and Melamed,Mekhiltad'RabbiSim'on b. Jochai: Fragmentain Geniza Cairensirepertadiggesit apparatucritico, notis,praefatione instruxit (Jerusalem:Mekitze NirdamimPublishers,1955). This portionof the text is gleaned entirelyfrom Midrashha-Gadol, Berlin manuscript.On the reliabilityof Midrashha-Gadol as a source for this tractate(Pisha') of the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimon b. Yohaisee Epstein& Melamed,Mekhiltad'RabbiSim'on b. Jochai, Introduction,46-58; and,W. D. Nelson, "The Reconstructionof the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai:A Reexamination,"Hebrew Union CollegeAnnual 70-71 (1999-2000): 261-302. Finally,a referencemust be providedto the invaluablescholarshipproducedrecentlyby Menahem Kahananot only on the entiretannaiticmidrashiccorpus,but also on the comparativerelationship specifically betweenthe MekhiltaofRabbi Shimonb. Yohaiandthe MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael.As perhaps the foremostauthorityon this earlycorpusof rabbinicbiblical interpretation(and,particularly,on the manuscriptevidence availablefor this corpus), Kahana'sresearchcompels the scholarlycommu-
9
WDavid Nelson MEKHILTAOF RABBI SHIMON B. YOHAI
[Al] "The Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt" (Exodus 12:1): This teaches that before the Land of Israel was consecrated [as the exclusive location for divine speech] all lands were suitable for divine speech. But once the Landof Israelwas so consecrated,there was no divine speech with the prophetsanywhere[outsideof the Landof Israel], except next to water.'6 [A2] As it teaches in Scripture,"The word of the Lord came to the priest Ezekiel son of Buzi, by the ChebarCanalin the Landof the Chaldeans" (Ezekiel 1:3).And it teaches furtherin Scripture,"AndI was by the Ulai river"(Daniel 8:2). And it teaches furtherin Scripture,"whenI was on the bank of the greatriver,the Tigris"(Daniel 10:4). [A3] And likewise with Jonah, [God] only spoke with him next to water. [A4] R. Judahsays, "Evenat first [God] only spoke with the prophetsnext to water.17 (to the [A5] As it says in Scripture,"Theword of the Lordcame ["inn ,rn1"] priest Ezekiel son of Buzi)" (Ezekiel 1:3).18 [A6] R. Nehemiah says, "[Rather,it is the case that]even at first [God] spoke with the prophetsanywhere.What [therefore]does the verse 'The word of the Lordcame to Ezekiel' teach?This teachesthatthe Holy Spiritwas not frequentlyupon him." [Bl] "(TheLord spoke to Moses andAaron) in the Landof Egypt"(Exodus 12:1): One might think [thatGod spoke] within the [boundariesof] the city. Scripturestates [however],"in the Land (of Egypt)."[God] did not speakwith him [evenwithin] a field [withinthe city.'9 Rather,]He spoke with him outside of the city. [B2] And so did Moses say to Pharaoh,"As I go out of the city (I shall spread out my hands to the Lord)"(Exodus 9:29). And just as with prayer[as thereliabilityof thecurrenttextualeditionsof thesetexts,andas a result,thecomnityto reconsider M. Kahana, betweenthetextsthatconstitutethiscorpus.See, in particular, plex,mutualrelationship Hamekhiltotlefarashata'malek:leri'shoniyotahshel hamasoretbemekhilta'derabiYishma'el behashva'h lemakbiltahbemekhilt'derabi Shimon ben Yohai(Jerusalem:The Magnes Press, 1999); M. Kahana, "TheTannaiticMidrashim,"in The CambridgeGenizah Collection:TheirContentsand Significance, ed. Stefan Reif (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 2002), 59-73; and M. Kahana, "MehadorothamekhiltaderabiYishm"l leshemot ber'i kit'ei hagenizah,"Tarbiz55 (1986): 489-524. 16. Only next to water,presumably,because of its purificatorycapabilities. 17. That is, it was the case even before the consecrationof the Land of Israel that God only
spokeoutsidetheLandof Israelnextto placesof water. 18. The scripturalemploymentof the seemingly doubledinfinitiveabsoluteis understoodto indicate a twofold natureof the divine speech, i.e., the divine speech that occurredbeforethe consecration of the Landof Israelwas like the speech thatEzekiel receivedafter the consecration,in thatit was received next to water. 19. Note M. Arakhin9:5: "Whateveris within the city wall is considered 'a dwelling house in a walled city' (ref. Lev. 25:29) except for the fields. R. Meir says, 'Even fields.'"
10
Oral Orthography indicatedin Exodus9:29],whichis less significant,[it is thecasethat Moses]wouldnotpraywithinthecity,thenis it notall themoreso [the casewithregardto]themoresignificantdivinespeech?Andwhywould He notspeakwithhiminsidethecity?Becauseit was fullof idols. [B3] ButstillI mightsay,"HespokewithMosesoutsideof thecity,butwhen Mosesspoke[thedivinemessage]to Aaron,he wouldnotspeakto him "TheLordspoketo Moses outsidethecity."Scripture states[however], andAaronin theLandof Egypt"(Exodus12:1).Thisequatesthedivine speech[to]Aaronwiththedivinespeech[to]Moses.JustasMoses'was outsidethecity,likewiseAaron'swasoutsidethecity. beginning [B4] Justas Moses[wouldrelatethedivinecommandto Pharaoh with]"Thussaid,"likewiseAaron[wouldbeginwith]"Thussaid,"Just as Moseswas a judge overPharaoh,speakingwithoutfear,likewise Aaronwasa judgeoverPharaoh, speakingwithoutfear.Justas Moses wastreasurer fortheRedHeifer,thelight,theanointingoil andtheinfortheRedHeifer,the censeof spices,20likewisewasAarontreasurer states,"The light,theanointingoil andtheincenseof spices.Scripture Lordspoketo MosesandAaron"(Exodus12:1).Thisequatesthegreatness of Aaronwiththegreatnessof Moses. Exodus 12:1 mentionsthreethings: 1) thatGod spoke;2) thatGod's speech was directedto Moses andAaron;and 3) thatGod spoke in the Landof Egypt.Our commentarybegins by focusing upontwo of these threeaspects;namely,thatthere was divine speech, and that it was delivered in Egypt. At [Al], the commentary sets forthits initialpremise:althoughat one point in historyGod would speakwith the prophetsanywhere,once the Landof Israelwas designatedas the prime location for divine communication(presumably,afterthe conquest of the Land of Israel and its distributionto the various tribes), God would only speak outside the Land of Israel to the prophetsbeside a naturalbody of water.In [A4]-[A6], the commentarydiscusses whetheror not the consecrationof the Landof Israelserved as the historicalturningpoint for divine speech outside of the Landnext to a body of water.In [A4] an opinionattributedto R. Judahclaims thateven beforethe consecrationof the Landof Israel,God would only speak outside of the Landnext to a body of water.As supportfor his claim, in [A5] Judahstates that the "unusual" scripturalemploymentof the infinitive absolute in Ezekiel 1:3 indicates that the divine communicationdirectedto Ezekiel outside of, and after the consecration of, the Landwas identicalto the divine communicationoutside of, and beforethe consecrationof, the Land.In [A6] R. Nehemiahdisputesthis interpretationof the infinite absolute,allowing its usage to signify only the rarityand wondrousnature of divine speech with Ezekiel. In [B 1]-[B4] our text's exegetical attentionremainsfocused on the issue of the location of God's communicationto Moses and Aaron. However,the concern now is to determinewith precision where this divine communicationtook place within the boundariesof the Land of Egypt. Because our verse states that God 20. See Leviticus 6:9ff and Numbers 19:1ff.
11
W David Nelson spoke to Moses andAaronin the indefinite,broadlywordedLandof Egypt,in [Bi] our text determinesthat this means that God only spoke to Moses and Aaron outside of the city limits. [B2] providesnot only the rationalefor this claim-that the cities of Egypt were repletewith idolatry-but additionalsupportfor it as well, in the form of an argumentafortiori fromthe supplicationof Moses in Exodus 9:29. The commentary,however,refuses to concede that this point is resolved, proposingin [B3] that,perhaps,only the divine communicationbetween God and Moses took place outside of the city limits, but when Moses relayedGod'swords to Aaron, he would do so within the city's boundaries.However,by drawingattention to the clause "to Moses and Aaron"in our base verse, the text concludes thatdivine communicationto both of these men (be it director conveyed)was confined to areas outside of the idolatrouscity. This conclusion serves as a segue to the topic of [B4], namely,the juxtapositionand comparisonof the greatness and honorof Moses andAaron.Once again,using the base verse as proof, ourtext concludes thattherewas parityin the statureof both of these leaders. If we take a step back to view this unit from a distance,we see some interesting aspects of this commentary.We note, first, thatthis unit of text has magnificently incorporatedall threeof the generativeclauses of ourbase verse ("TheLord spoke";"to Moses andAaron";"in the Land of Egypt")into a cohesive, thematically flowing exposition.Thatis, by midrashicallyatomizingthe biblicalverse, the commentarycreatesa new readingof the biblicaltext thatintegratesall threeclauses of the verse. The atomizedclauses of the verse, therefore,speak to each other, and combine to producean entirelynew renderingof the meaning of the biblical text. The one who encountersthis midrashic traditionof interpretationon this seemingly benign biblical verse, will, thereafter,alwaysassociate this verse with, and understandit through,this series of atomized,midrashicinterpretations.The individual clauses of the verse now automaticallyevoke inextricablyassociated midrashic"questions"thatpoint to the midrashic"answers"delineatedin the text above:"TheLordspoke.. ."evokes "Whatis the natureandvalueof divinespeech/ prophecy?";". .. to Moses and Aaron"evokes "Whatdoes this teach about the equality of Moses and Aaron?";and, ". . . in the Land of Egypt" evokes, "What does this teach aboutthe uniqueholiness of the Landof Israel?" However,we cannotfail to note the ratherodd twist in the commentaryfound at the beginning of [B3]; specifically, the text there declares quite unexpectedly that, in fact, God did not speak directlyto both Moses andAaron.Rather,according to ourtext, God spoke to Moses, who would subsequentlyconvey God'swords to Aaron: But still, I mightsay,"Hespokewith Mosesoutsideof the city,butwhen Mosesspoke[thedivinemessage]to Aaron,he wouldnot speakto himoutsidethecity. Is this a questionor an assumption?This notionis entirelyundevelopedin ourcommentarypriorto this moment;nonetheless, the text states it in almost matter-offact fashion. Adding to the peculiarityof this exegetical shift in our commentary is its resolutionat the end of [B3]: 12
Oral Orthography Thisequatesthedivinespeech[to]Aaronwiththedivinespeech[to]Moses. Justas Moses'wasoutsidethe city,likewiseAaron'swas outsideof the city. This resolution,althoughabsolutein its conviction thatboth Moses andAaronreceived God's words outside of the city, still fails to clarify whether the divine speech was given directly to the two of them, or if, indeed, it was given directly first to Moses, who would then convey it to Aaron outside the city's limits. Thus, as the readerencountersthis portionof the commentarys/he is unableto perceive with certaintywhat its majorpoint is. Is the text assumingall along thatMoses received God's words directlyand conveyed them to Aaron?The point of our commentary,then, would be to clarify whetheror not even this conveyancetook place outside the city's boundaries.Or, perhapsour text wishes to question whetheror not both Moses and Aaron received the commands directly from God, in which case, the point of ourcommentarywouldbe to stressthat,indeed,this was the case. Both meanings can be supportedby the ambiguouswording of the commentary. We shall returnto this point later in this paper,in our examinationof the parallel text from the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael. Ourtext continues: [Cl] (TheLordspoketo MosesandAaronin the Landof Egypt,)saying that (Exodus12:1):R. Eliezersays,"Howdo we knowfromScripture theorder[of thetransmission] of the divinespeechin thewilderness wasjust like the order[of transmission] of divinespeech[as it occurred]in the Landof Egypt?[Perhaps]you don'tneed [scriptural proof,becauseit canbe deducedby meansof logical]analogy: [C2] Theword"spoke"is saidhere,21andtheword"spoke"is saidin the wilderness.22 Justas withthe "spoke"saidin the wilderness,Aaron heardit firstandrepeatedit [backto Moses]first,likewisewiththe "spoke"mentionedhere,Aaronheardit firstandrepeatedit first. [C3] However,I mightretortthatwhenAaronprecededthe [i.e., his] sons [in receivingdivinespeech]in the wildernesshe hadbeenanointed withtheanointingoil. Shall[weassume]thatAaronprecededthesons here[i.e., in theLandof Egypt],whenhe hadnot [yet]beenanointed withtheanointingoil?23 states,"AndtheLordspoketo MosesandtoAaron. .."(Ex[C4] Scripture odus12:1).ThisteachesthatAaronprecededthesons. thatthesonsprecededtheelders? [C5] AndhowdoweknowfromScripture youdon'tneed[scriptural [Perhaps] proof,becauseit canbe deduced means The word of] analogy. by "spoke"is saidhere,andthe word is said in the Justas withthe"spoke"saidin the wilderness. "spoke" 21. Thatis, to Mosesin theLandof Egypt. 22. SeeLeviticus11:1. to refer 23. Thus,logicwill notprovethepointstatedin [C2],andoneis compelled,therefore, to Scripture forproof.
13
W David Nelson wilderness,the sons precededthe elders,likewisewith the "spoke" mentionedhere,thesonsprecededtheelders. [C6] However,I mightretortthatthesonsprecededtheeldersin thewilderness,whentheylikewiseprecededtheminascendingMount[Sinai].24 Shall[we assume]herethatthe sonsprecededthe elders,whenthey hadnot [yet]preceded[them]in ascendingthemountain? states,"andhe spoketo his sons"(ref.Leviticus21:24).This [C7] Scripture teachesthatthesonsprecededtheelders. thattheeldersprecededIsrael? [C8] Andhowdo we knowfromScripture [Perhaps] youdon'tneed[scriptural proof,becauseit canbe deduced by meansof] analogy.Theword"spoke"is saidhere,andthe word "spoke"is saidin thewilderness.Justas withthe"spoke"saidin the wilderness,theeldersprecededIsrael,likewisewiththe"spoke"mentionedhere,theeldersprecededIsrael. [C9] However,I mightretortthatwhenthe eldersprecededIsraelin the wilderness,theylikewiseweresanctifiedwiththe HolySpirit.Shall [we assume]herethatthe eldersprecededIsrael,whentheyhadnot [yet]beensanctifiedwiththeHolySpirit? states,"AndMosescalledto alltheeldersof Israel"(Exodus [C10] Scripture 12:21).ThisteachesthattheeldersprecededIsrael. In this section, our commentaryis concerned with the sequence in which God's commandwas transmittedfrom Moses to the people of Israelat large.This entire unit is attributedto R. Eliezer, whose goal is to prove that the sequence of transmissionof God's word in Egypt was the same as the sequence used to transmit the variousLevitical commands;that is, Moses to Aaron first, then Moses to Aaron'ssons, then Moses to the Eldersof Israel,and finally Moses to the Israelites at large.At issue here is the meaningof orderin Scripture,and impliedin our commentary,of course, is that the sequential order of Scriptureis indicative of sequentiallevels of importanceand grandeur. This unit is a perfectlybalancedseries of "appealto logic versus Scripture" arguments.That is, for each step in the sequence, Eliezer proposesthat one could try simplyto appealto logical reasoningto provethe properorderof the sequence: [C1], [C5], and [C8]. In each instance,the logical argumentis presentedin the form of a gezerah shavah,25using the word "spoke"from our base verse: [C2], [C5], and [C8]. In each instance,however,the appealto logic is shownto be faulty:[C3], [C6], and [C9]. Ultimately,Eliezer arguesthat, since logic has failed to provethat the sequence in Egypt was identical to the sequence in the wilderness, one must appeal directlyto Scripturefor proof: [C4], [C7], and [C10]. 24. See Exodus 24:1. 25. An interpretiveploy, which notes that a word or expression is used in two scripturalcontexts. The contextualmeaningof its usage in one instanceis used to shed light on its context in the other instance.
14
Oral Orthography Of particularinterestin this unit is [C2], where it states that in the wilderness Aaron "heardit first and repeatedit first." Our text here appearsto be assuming, as in the section above, that, in fact, it was Moses who received God's words directly,and who thereaftertransmittedthem to Aaron.26However,also as in the section above, the commentaryhas stopped short of stating it directly,and in doing so, appearsto assume it as common knowledge, expecting that the reader also knows this to be the case. Having completed our examinationand analysis of the textual portions of the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohaithat addressExodus 12:1,27we direct our attentionnow to the parallelmaterialsfound in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael.28 As in the earlierexamination,we shall workourway throughthe materialin a unitby-unitmanner,in orderto become intimatelyacquaintedwith the materials.This will allow us, in the end, to make some global comparisonsand observations. MEKHILTA OF RABBI ISHMAEL
[1A] "TheLordspoketo MosesandAaronin theLandof Egyptsaying"(Exodus 12:1):I mightunderstand thattherewas divine [fromScripture] whenit says,"Andit hapspeechto [both]MosesandAaron.[However] penedthatin the daythe Lordspoketo Mosesin the Landof Egypt," to Moses,but (Exodus6:26)[itprovesthat]divinespeechwas[directed] notto Aaron. [IB] If so, why does Scripturestate," .. to MosesandAaron... ?"This teachesthatjustas Moseswasworthyof [receiving]divinespeech,likewisewasAaronworthyof [receiving]divinespeech.Andwhywasn'tit spokenwithhim[i.e.,Aaron]?Becauseof Moses'honor.Consequently, Aaronis excludedfromall divinespeechin theTorah,exceptforthree to speakingwithAaron]is impossible. places,where[analternative Ourcommentarybegins in [1A] by questioningwhether,in fact, God spoke directlyto both Moses andAaron, as is statedin our base verse. The commentary immediatelyadducesa prooftextthatwould seem to indicatethe opposite, and,indeed, our text deduces from it that God chose to communicateonly with Moses. Since this is the case, [IB] proceedsto questionthe purposeof ourbase verse stating thatGod spoke "to Moses andAaron."The conclusion, of course, is thatAaron was every bit as worthy as Moses to receive divine communication;however,in 26. I acknowledgethat one could argue here that when the text says "Aaronheardit first,"it means thatAaronheardit first fromthe mouthof God, along with Moses. I feel this not to be the case, however,because the text specifically states here only Aaron, and not Moses, with the implicationbeing thatAaronheardit first from Moses, and repeatedit first back to Moses. Foradditionalproof, see B. Eruvin54b, which discusses the orderin which Moses transmitted mishnah.Thereit states definitively that Moses heardit first from God, and then repeatedit to Aaron, who in turnrepeatedit back to him, and so on to the sons, elders, and common Israelites. 27. I note that I have excluded from considerationhere the very brief interpretivecomment in the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaito the final word of our base verse-"saying." In the Mekhilta of RabbiIshmael there is a considerableamountof interpretationto this word,however. 28. Textual excerpts taken from H.S. Horovitz & I.A. Rabin, Mechilta D'Rabbi Ishmael (Jerusalem:WahrmannBooks, 1970).
15
W David Nelson considerationof Moses' honorablestandingbefore God, God chose to communicate directlyonly with him. What we have, therefore, is a traditionclaiming that God spoke only to Moses, even in the face of explicit, contradictoryscripturalproof. Directing our attention,for the moment, back to our paralleltext in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai,we rememberthatin two instances-[B3] and [C2]-we noticedthat the text, in effect, seemed to take this notion for granted,indirectlyclaiming it to be the case withoutexplicitly statingso. Clearly,the foundationaltraditionfor this concept is our excerpt above from the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael. Moreover,it is clear that the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohaiassumes that its audience is familiarwith this tradition.All thatis lacking is for the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaito have statedit overtly,or to have includedthe traditionwithin its own interpretiveframework. Although we can never state with certaintywhy or how this traditioncame to be excluded,butnonethelessassumed,by the MekhiltaofRabbiShimonb. Yohai, we can, at the very least, begin to explore whetherexplanationsretainplausibility when confrontedwith this scenario. One very common explanationwould claim that this "predicament"was simply a by-product of the distinct redactional processes thatultimatelyled to the productionof these two separate,but parallel, texts. Somehow,and for some unknownreason,the "editors"or "authors"who selected traditionsfromthe vast arrayat theirdisposal andarrangedthem into "compositions"made differenteditorialdecisions. In the case of the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Ishmael, the decision was made to include the traditionabout God speaking directly only to Moses; in the case of the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,the decision was made to exclude it. Such an explanation,however, fails to reconcile how the redactorsof the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,in theirpurportedendeavorto createa coherent, thematically-flowing"work,"could justify their exclusion of this crucial tradition, particularlysince they includedothertraditionsthatovertly(thatis, in their very language) took such knowledge for granted. Or, stated differently,if the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon b. Yohairepresentsa carefully and programmatically edited document,one possessed of internalcoherence and thematicunity that enables the readerto move fromunit to unit in an informedmanner,then the text fell short of its goal in the section we examinedabove. I do not deny that these texts are the end productsof separateredactional processes, or even thatthey are the culminationof writtenendeavors.To claim the opposite would be naive and misguided. I deny neitherthe redactionalfoundation of our texts nor the chirographicaspects of such redactionalprocesses. However, I doubt that the amoraicauthoritiesresponsiblefor our texts were motivatedprimarily by the desire to arrange traditionsin accordance with compositionalconcerns. For if this was the case, they did a ratherpoorjob in this section from the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai! The Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael continues: [2A] Anotheropinion:"(TheLordspoke)to Moses andAaron"(Exodus 12:1).Whywas [thisverse]stated?Becauseit states,"TheLordsaidto 16
Oral Orthography Moses,'See thatI haveplacedyou in the role of judge29 to Pharaoh (withyourbrotherAaronas yourprophet)"'(Exodus7:1).[And]from this [verse]I mayonlyconcludethatMoseswasa judge30to Pharaoh. [2B] Howdoes one knowfromScripture[thatthis was also the case with] Aaron?Scripture states,"(TheLordspoke)to MosesandAaron"(Exodus 12:1).[Scripture] equatesAaronto Moses.Justas Moseswas a Justas Moses likewiseAaronwasajudgeto Pharaoh. judgeto Pharaoh, wouldspeakhis wordsandwasnotafraid,likewisewouldAaronspeak his wordsandnotbe afraid. This unitof commentary,presentedas an alternativeinterpretationto the unit above, focuses once again on the clause "to Moses andAaron"in our base verse. In this instance,ourcommentaryjuxtaposesourbase verse with Exodus7:1, where it states that God designatedMoses as a judge over Pharaoh.Ourcommentaryargues thatthis verse might (quitereasonably)lead one to presumethatMoses alone was a judge to Pharaoh;thus, our base verse, by stating"to Moses andAaron"instructsus that, in fact, Moses andAaronwere equal in this regard,andboth served as judges to Pharaoh.In this unit, therefore,the specific wordingof the base verse is utilized to stressthe ultimateparity betweenMoses andAaron,in the face of alternativescripturalevidence that could lead one to the opposite conclusion. This is the exact oppositeof the section immediatelyprecedingit in the MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael.The precedingunit emphasizesan essential inequalitybetweenAaron and Moses, and considersthe specific wordingof the base verse to be the source of potentialmisunderstanding,which requiresthe rectificationof alternativescripturalevidence. Of particularinterestis the correspondenceandrelationshipof this unit with its parallelin the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,unit [B4]. Thereare various degrees of similaritydisplayedbetweenthe parallelportionsof these two texts. At times, the parallelportionsare nearlyidentical;however,more often than not, the paralleltraditionsdisplayboth significantsimilaritiesanddifferences.Units [2A][2B] of the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael and [B4] of the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohaiare indicativeof such imprecise affinity. We note, for example, that our unit in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael is exegetically independentfrom the unit thatprecedes it, as well as from the unit that follows it. In effect, it stands alone; it is "anotheropinion." Its parallel in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai,however,is integratedas partof a largerunit, and fulfills a specific, subordinatefunctiontherein:to provideillustrationsof parity and equity in the statureof Moses andAaron,a theme developedpreviouslyin [B3]. Therefore,our parallel in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohaifulfills a wholly subsidiaryrole.
29. The word used here in the biblical text forjudge is 'elohim, which also means God. Thus, Exodus 7:1 could be translatedeither "See that I have placed you in the role of judge to Pharaoh"or "See that I have placed you as a god over Pharaoh." 30. Hebrew:dayan(1'p).
17
W David Nelson Concomitantwith the differentrole each parallelunit fulfills within its larger literarystructureis the difference in its shape, structure,and substance.In the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael, we notice how the unit, in effect, revolves aroundthe juxtapositionof Exodus 7:1 with Exodus 12:1. In fact, it is Exodus 7:1 that introduces the concept of Moses serving as judge to Pharaoh,which, in turn,"sets up" the equationof Moses with Aaronas judge in [2B]. As an independentunit, therefore, [2A]-[2B] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael is reliantupon Exodus 7:1 for thematiccontext and coherence. Finally,we point out that this unit illustratesthe equalitybetweenMoses andAaronin only two ways-as judge to, and in freedom of speech before, Pharaoh. The parallelin the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohaiis remarkablydifferent in these respects.Forexample, since the notion of equalitybetweenMoses and Aaron is introducedin [B3] throughthe example of divine speech outside of the city, there is no need for our text to introduceExodus 7:1 into the equation.That is, since this traditionfulfills only a subordinaterole in the MekhiltaofRabbi Shimon b. Yohai,and since the text in [B3] has alreadydeveloped the thematiccontext of equalitybetween Moses and Aaron in an alternativeway, the commentary only needs to mention our traditionin [B4] succinctly and referentially. Despitethese differencesin theirstructureandsubstance,ourparallelsdisplay thematicaffinity.Each tradition,be it explicitlydevelopedand spelled out or mentionedonly brieflyin passing,stressesthe sametheme-the equalityin the statureof Moses andAaronas displayedby the factthatthey bothservedasjudges to Pharaoh. Whatwe see here,therefore,is the malleabilityof traditionin the handsof the rabbis, wherebya well-establishedtraditioncan be shapedand reshaped,dependingon the needs of any particularexegetical moment. In the case of the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Ishmael,the contextdemandeda lengthy,explicitretellingof this tradition.However, in the case of the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,the contextrequiredonly the briefest articulation.The rabbinicreader,upon encounteringthis traditionin the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,wouldrely uponhis resonantmemoriesof other encounterswith this traditionto understandits fullermeaningandbasis in Scripture. Our commentarycontinues: [3A] Anotheropinion:"(TheLordspoke)to Moses andAaron"(Exodus 12:1).I mightunderstand [fromthisversethat]theonewhoprecedesin whenit says,"Itis the takes Scripture actually precedence.[However] sameAaronandMoses"(Exodus6:26),this declaresthatthe two of themareequalto eachother. "InthebeginningGodcre[3B] Similarlyto thisyoustate[fromScripture]: atedtheheavensandtheearth"(Genesis1:1).I mightunderstand [from thisverse]thattheone whoprecedesin Scripture actuallytakesprecedence.[However]whenit says,"Onthe daythatthe LordGodmade earthandheaven"(Genesis2:4),thisdeclaresthatthetwoof themare equalto eachother. "Andhe said,'I amtheGod [3C] Similarlyto thisyoustate[fromScripture]: of yourfather,Godof Abraham, Godof Isaacandthe Godof Jacob'" 18
Oral Orthography (Exodus3:6).I mightunderstand [fromthisverse]thattheone which in is more thanhis companion.[However] precedes speech important whenit says,"'AndI will remember mycovenantwithJacob,andalso my covenantwith Isaacandmy covenantwithAbraham' " (Leviticus 26:42),thisdeclaresthatthethreeof themwereequal. "Honoryourfatherandyour [3D] Similarlyto thisyoustate[fromScripture]: mother"(Exodus20:12).I mightunderstand [fromthisverse]thatthe one who precedesin Scriptureactuallytakesprecedence.[However] whenit says,"Youshalleachfearhis motherandhis father"(Leviticus 19:3),thisdeclaresthatthetwoof themareequalto eachother. "AndJoshuathesonof Nun [3E] Similarlyto thisyoustate[fromScripture]: andCalebthe son of Jephunneh" (Numbers14:6).I mightunderstand [fromthisverse]thattheone whoprecedesin Scripture actuallytakes precedence.[However]Scripture states,"'noneexceptCalebsonof JephunnehandJoshuasonof Nun'" (Numbers32:12),[and]thisdeclares thatthetwoof themareequalto eachother. Ourtext offers yet anotherinterpretationof the clause "toMoses andAaron" fromourbase verse. Employingreasoningthatis identicalto thatused in [lA], the text arguesin [3A] that this clause in our base verse could lead one to assume erroneouslythatthe orderin which names are listed in Scriptureis indicativeof sequentiallevels of grandeuror importance,thus causing one to believe that Moses was superiorto Aaron.As evidence to the contrary,our commentaryadducesExodus 6:26, which mentionsAaronbeforeMoses. The text concludesthat,by specifically mentioningAaronfirst on one occasion and Moses first on the other,Scripture indicatesthat both men were "equalto each other."Then, in [3B]-[3E], our commentaryadduces numerous,identical scripturalexamples of this point. Focusingfor the momenton [3A], it is interestinghow the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Ishmael attemptsto portraythe relationshipbetween Moses and Aaron as one that was simultaneouslyequal and unequal.In both this section and in unit [l A][IB], our text emphasizesthat Moses' honorwas superiorto Aaron's.This stands in sharpcontrastto unit [2A], which stresses the parityof grandeurbetween the two. We saw a similar,althoughless pronounced,portrayalof the statureof these two men in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai:[B 1]-[B4] claims that Scripture"equatesthe greatnessof Aaronwith the greatnessof Moses,"whereas [CI][C10] implies that Moses was the first (and only) person to receive divine commandsdirectlyfromGod,because of his greaterprestige.Thus, in treatingourbase verse, both texts incorporatetraditionsthat appearto be mutuallycontradictory. We will give this point additionalconsiderationbelow. We must also ask if it is accurateto claim thatthere is a paralleltraditionin the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohaito this section. It certainlyappearsto display some affinity with [C1]-[C10]. Both unitsarealike in thatthey areconcerned with the meaning of sequentialorder;in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael, the concernis withthe orderof scripturalwording,whereasin theMekhiltaofRabbiShimon b. Yohai,the concern is with the orderof transmissionof divine communication. 19
W David Nelson Both sections are also alike rhetorically,in thatthey both repeatthe exact same argument over and over again to illustratetheirpoint. Despite these affinities,however,we cannotfail to notice even strongersigns of dissimilarity.For example, althoughboth of these units are preoccupiedwith the significance of the word orderof Scripture,they reach diametricallyopposite conclusionsaboutsuch significance.The unit in the MekhiltaofRabbiIshmael determinesthatone may not assume thatthe orderof wordingin Scriptureis indicative of importance.In fact, if the word orderof Scripturesignifies anything,it is, as the text declares,the equalityof Moses andAaron.However,in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai,the commentaryrelies upon the orderof scripturalwording to determinethe importanceof Moses over Aaron, as illustratedby the order in which they received and transmitteddivine communication.Thus, for the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,word ordercan signify actualprecedence. The correspondenceand relationshipbetween these two units of traditions is, therefore,difficult to describewith precision.On the one hand,they do sharea common interestin the meaning of sequentialorder.On the other hand,they display their concern with reference to differentmodels of order (i.e., the order of scripturalwording and the order of transmissionof divine communication),and the texts reachdiametricallyopposite conclusions aboutwhat such ordersignifies. Whatwe have in these two units can, at best, be describedas thematicparallelism. Ourbase verse triggeredin both commentariesa common thematicimpulse;however, each text preserves distinctly differentexegetical reactionsto this impulse, with each version following a separateexegetical pathand reachingdistinctlydifferent conclusions. Moreover,these reactions should not be understoodas stemming primarilyfrom authorial,compositionalimpulses,but rather,primarilyfrom oral-performativeones. Thatis, whatthese two texts preservein writtenformatare not separately"authored"or "edited"versionsof a common core of tradition,each of which was consideredby its rabbinicauthorshipto be authoritativeor exhaustive. Rather,they are written/textualexemplificationsof equallyvalid interpretive options availableto the rabbinicsage in his employmentof this thematiccore of exegetical tradition.Moreover,when takentogetheras a whole, these versions are representativeof the free and fluctuatingoral-performativeemploymentof tradition that characterizedthe fluid engagement with tradition,which served as the very basis of the pedagogical setting and system of early Rabbinism. We continue in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael: [4A] "(TheLordspoketo MosesandAaron)in the Landof Egyptsaying:" (Exodus12:1)[ThismeansthattheLordspoketo them]outsidethecity. Yousayoutsidethe city.Wasit not,rather,withinthe city?[However] whenit says,"AndMosessaidto him,'WhenI haveleftthecity(I shall spreadmyhandsto theLord'" (Exodus9:29),[then]doesn'tlogicalreasoningapply? [4B] Justas with the prayer[in Exodus 9:29], Moses would prayonly outside
of the city,thenin regardto divinespeech,themoreimportant [of the two],it is logicalthatit wouldbe spokento himonlyoutsideof thecity! 20
Oral Orthography And why wasn't it spokento him within the city? Because it was full of abominationsand idols! Our commentary shifts its attention to the clause "in the Land of Egypt" in our base verse. Whereas the parallel relationship of the unit discussed above was opaque and difficult to define, section [4A]-[4B] corresponds quite closely to [B 1]-[B2] in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai. Both units of tradition are thematically alike, employ the same exegetical ploy, share similar rhetoric, and reach the same conclusion. Only minor differences in wording prevent these two units from corresponding in exact fashion. As we shall see below, however, the strong parallelism between these two units of tradition does not preclude each text from reacting in distinctly different ways to the shared theme they both discuss.
The Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael continues: [5A] Before the Landof Israelwas designated,all the lands were suitablefor divine speech. Once the Landof Israelwas designated[however],all the other lands were eliminated. [5B] Before Jerusalemwas designated,all of the Landof Israelwas suitable for sacrificialaltars.Once Jerusalemwas designated[however],[therest of] the Landof Israelwas eliminated.As it says in Scripture,"Be careful, lest you offer up your burntofferings in any place you like; rather only in the place which the Lordyour God will choose (in one of your tribalterritories)"(Deuteronomy12:13). [5C] Before the Temple was designated,all of Jerusalemwas worthy of the Divine Presence.Once the Templewas designated[however,the rest of] Jerusalemwas eliminated.As it says in Scripture,"Forthe Lordhas chosen Zion. (He has desiredit for His seat)"(Psalms 132:13).And it teaches furtherin Scripture,"'This is my resting-placefor all time. (Here I will dwell, for I desire it)"' (Psalms 132:14). [5D] BeforeAaronwas designated,all of Israelwas suitableforthe priesthood. OnceAaronwas designated[however],all of Israelwas eliminated.As it says in Scripture,"'(All the sacredgifts that the Israelitesset aside for the Lord I give to you, to your sons, and to the daughtersthat are with you, as a due for all time.) It shall be an everlastingcovenantof salt before the Lord(foryou andforyouroffspringas well)'" (Numbers18:19). And it teaches furtherin Scripture"'It shall be for him and his descendantsafterhim (a pact of priesthoodfor all time)'" (Numbers25:13). [5E] Before David was designated,all of Israelwas suitablefor the kingship. Once David was designated [however],all of Israelwas eliminated.As it says in Scripture,"'Certainlyyou know that the Lord God of Israel gave David kingship (over Israelforever)'" (2 Chronicles 13:5). The placement of this unit of tradition here is most probably due to the text's discussion in [4A]-[4B] about the unsuitability of the Egyptian city for divine
21
W David Nelson communication.Picking up on this topic, [5A] discusses the suitabilityof lands other than the Land of Israel for divine speech. [5B]-[5E] follows, providingadditional examples of similar delimitations.Despite this association, however,the repetition31of this section is somewhatdisjunctiveand incongruouswith the unit thatprecededit. When we comparethis unit to its parallelin the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai,we can make a numberof interestingobservations.First, the parallelto this unit is [Al] in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai,and as such, it is not only considerablysmaller,but also situatedin an entirelydifferentcontext within that text's commentary,where it serves as the overall startingpoint for its interpretationof this base verse. Thus,whereasunit [4A]-[4B] in the MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael has triggeredan association with this thematic tradition,we see that such an associationis entirelyabsent in the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaiafter [B1]-[B2]. In fact, we have already discussed above the correspondenceof [B3]-[B4] with an entirelydifferentportionof the commentaryin the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael. Moreover,we must note the brevityof the parallelin the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb.Yohai,comparedto the protracteddiscussionin [5A]-[5E] of the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael; in actuality,[Al] is more precisely described as a parallel specifically to [5A] in the MekhiltaofRabbiIshmael.However,even betweenthese two sections, we cannotfail to notice some blatantdifferences.Forexample, even though both of these units sharea common theme, [Al] in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohaibuilds upon this sharedtheme, by using it as a segue to what follows in [A2]-[A6]: ButoncetheLandof Israelwas so consecrated, therewasnotdivinespeech with the prophetsat anyplace [outsidethe Landof Israel],exceptnextto water. Such a thematicdiversionis entirelylacking in [5A] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael, which is followed insteadby additionalillustrativeexamplesof the same thematic point. In fact, due to its markedrepetition,whereinthe same point is made over and over again in precisely the same way,but throughdifferentexamples and prooftexts,it is difficult to view [5A]-[5E] as an integratedportion of our commentary.Although we shall be able to discern thematic continuitybetween [5A] and the unit immediately following this section, the numerous illustrationsin [5B]-[5E] serve only to disruptthe flow of our commentary,by introducingmultiple, repetitiveexamplesthathave little, if any,connectionto the text'simmediate interpretiveagenda.The inclusion of these numerous,repetitiousexamples compels us to view this unit as an awkwardinterjectionof a separatecollection of tradition into the text's overalltreatmentof our base verse. 31. As broughtto my attentionby the anonymousreaderof this paper,the repetitivesequence of 5A-5E is intentionallyprogrammaticin thatit progressesfrom a broad/outermostgeographicallocation (Landof Israel)to a narrow/innermostlocation (Temple),and then from an inclusive model of priest and king (all of Israel)to a most restrictivemodel (Aaronto David). As a result,the text both legitimizes and connects the Aaronidepriesthoodand Davidic monarchy.
22
Oral Orthography Because of these characteristics,this section is most plausiblyunderstoodas a self-contained,independentunitthatwas interpolatedin its entiretyinto our commentaryat this juncture,presumablybecause of the thematicunity it displays at [5A]. As such, this unit appearsto preservein writtenform a varietyof rhetorically similarillustrationsof a common thematicpoint.Therefore,ratherthanattemptto perceive this unit as an integrallycomposed portionof our commentary,I suggest it is betterto understandit as an example of an independentlytransmittedexercise in rabbinicrhetoricalexegeticalpresentation.32The rhetoricalpatternof this exercise is: BeforeX wasdesignated, allY weresuitableforZ. OnceX wasdesignated, allY wereeliminated, As it saysin Scripture [prooftext(s)]. Accordingly, what we have in [5A]-[5E] is a mnemonic frameworkinto which one could place an arrayof examples andprooftextsto illustratea common, thematicpoint: the gradualdelimitationof holy boundaries.The rabbinicdisciple would memorize this framework,using it to increase his facility with its various examples, and to hone his oratoricalability to illustratethis point in a variety of ways andwith a varietyof accompanyingscripturalprooftexts.In this manner,the rabbinicdisciple could incorporateany suitableexample fromthis frameworkinto his orationwith apparentease and lack of effort. Additionally,I suggest thatin the parallelto this unit in the MekhiltaofRabbi Shimonb. Yohaiat [Al] we arepresentedwith an illustrationof how a single excerpt could be extractedfrom this mnemonic frameworkand seamlessly incorporated into a momentaryexegetical setting to suit its immediate needs. Such an understandinghelps to account,as well, for the slight variationsin style, phrasing, andwordusage thatexist betweenthese textualparallels.Thus, we can perceive in these paralleltextualunits a glimpse into the oral circulatorysystem withinwhich they functioned,along with an example of the interactionbetween writtenpreservation of rabbinictraditionand their oral-performativesetting. Of course, neither of these two units shouldbe viewed as "primary"or "secondary,"but rather,as simultaneouslyindependentand interdependent,for both texts preserve, at best, a brief, fleeting glimpse of this tradition'sbroademploymentin earlyrabbinicliterary culture. Returningto ourcommentaryin the MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael,the text continues: theissueof divinespeechin andoutside [5F] If you wereto say [regarding theLandof Israel]:I canclaim[thecaseof] theprophets,to whom[divinespeech]wasspokenoutsideof theLand,[thenit couldbecountered that]eventhoughit wasspokento themoutsideof theLand,it was[still] onlyspokento thembecauseof themeritof theforefathers. 32. My understanding of thisunitis stronglyinfluencedby,andindebtedto, the conceptual modelcreatedby M.Jaffeein "TheOral-Cultural in Schtifer, The Contextof theTalmud Yerushalmi," TalmudYerushalmiin Graeco-RomanCultureI.
23
W.David Nelson "So saysthe Lord,'A cry is heardin Ramah, [5G] As it says in Scripture, bitter (wailing, weeping,Rachelweepingforherchildren.Sherefuses to be comfortedforherchildren,whoaregone.)'So saystheLord,'Restrainyourvoicefromweeping,youreyesfromsheddingtears.Forthere is rewardforyourlabor.'declarestheLord"(Jeremiah31:14-15). [5H] Andtherearethosewhosaythateventhoughit wasspokento themoutit was [still]only sidetheLandbecauseof themeritof the forefathers, "AndI wasby spokenat a pureplaceof water.As it saysin Scripture, theriverUlai.. ."(Daniel8:2).Andit teachesfurtherin Scripture, "And I wasbesidethegreatriver,theTigris"(Daniel10:4).Andit teachesfurtherin Scripture, "Thewordof theLordcameto Ezekiel,son of Buzi thepriest,besidetheriverChebar" (Ezekiel1:3). [51] Andtherearethosewhosaythat[divinespeech]wasspokento him(i.e., Ezekiel)insidetheLand,andwasspokento himoutsidetheLand.As it "Thewordof the Lordcame("ron saysin Scripture, (Ezekiel ,rr'7")" "non": it wasspokento himin theLand; Because Because 1:3). it was",•r,•": spokento himoutsidetheLand. states,'Arise!Go outto [5J] RabbiEleazarb.Zadoksaid,"BeholdScripture theplain!'(Ezekiel3:22).Thisdeclaresthattheplainwas suitable(as well fordivinespeech). As I mentionedabove,ourtextresumeshere in responseto [5A]. Challenging the assertionin [5A] thatonce the Landof Israelwas designatedas the specific location for divine speech, all such subsequentcommunicationtook place only within its borders,[5F] adducesthe example of the prophets,to whom God obviously spokeoutsideof the Landduringperiodsof exile. However,the text notes that,even in the case of the prophets,God only spoke with them outside the Landdue to the specialmeritaccruedby the forefathers(or more precisely,in view of the prooftext fromJeremiah,foremothers)on behalfof Israel.Forproofof this assertion,the commentaryturnsto the prooftextfromJeremiah,which, in its opinion,portraysRachel crying out to God to save the exiled Israelites.God respondsto Rachel'splea, and, becauseof her intercession,God communicateswith the prophetsin exile. [5H] presentsa slightly different(but very familiar)alternativeto the challenge in [5F]; namely, that even when God spoke to the prophetsoutside of the Landof Israel,such communicationtook place only neara body of water.The text produces threeprooftextsin supportof this point, the final of which comes from Ezekiel. HavingmentionedEzekiel, the text in [5I] focuses on the usage of the absolute infinitive in Ezekiel 1:3.The text concludes thatthis "unusual"form is employed by the biblical text to indicate that God spoke to Ezekiel both inside and outside the Land of Israel. Finally,in [5J] Rabbi Eleazarb. Zadok challenges the claim in [5H] thatall divinecommunicationoutsideof the Landof Israeltook place next to a body of water,understandingEzekiel 3:22 to indicatethat the plain was also a suitablelocation. [5F]-[5J] clearly representsa continuationof the topic first raised in [5A], thus deepeningour convictionthat [5B]-[5E] is a disjunctiveand incongruousin24
Oral Orthography clusion in our commentary.We have already discussed the close correlationbetween [5A] and [Al] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai.Moreover,we can easily perceive in the brief outline of [5F]-[5J] above a high degree of parallelism to sections [A2]-[A6] in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai.Thus, by disregarding the inconsonant unit [5B]-[5E], we have two distinctly parallel units: [Al]-[A6] in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimon b. Yohaiand [5A], [5F]-[5J] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael. An analysisof the correspondenceandrelationshipbetweenthese two units reveals a type or degree of parallelismthatwe have alreadyobserved:the two units simultaneouslydisplay some striking similarities and some pronounceddifferences. Forexample, [Al]-[A2] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaiis virtually identicalto [5A], [5H] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael, so much so thatthey even adduce precisely the same prooftexts. However,in the midst of this correspondence we are presentedwith [5F]-[5G] in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael, which is entirely unparalleledin the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai.We also discern a strong degree of parallelismbetween units [A4]-[A6] and [51],both of which addressthe usage of the infinitive absolutein Ezekiel 1:3. Nonetheless, we see, as well, that the two texts reach entirely differentconclusions about the significance of Scripture'susage of this verbalform.Finally,therearesections in both texts that are unparalleledin their counterparts:[5J] in the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael has no parallel in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai,and [A3] in the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Shimonb. Yohai,which we discussed at great length above, is (at least for the moment) unmatchedin the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael. It is evident, therefore, that both versions share a common thematic and exegetical framework.To conclude otherwise would require that we ignore an overwhelmingamountof corroborativeevidence. Concurrently,however,the distinctions between the two versions reveal a frameworkthat is both fluid and flexible, readily adaptedto suit the exegetical whim and fancy of its many tradents. Representedin these two parallelpresentationsare dual manipulationsof a common body of tradition,a sharednucleus of lore frequentlyassociated exegetically with this particularpoint in Scripture.Our base verse serves to trigger these mutual associations in the collective memories of those who have encountered previously versions of these traditions of interpretation,bringing to mind this shared frameworkin correlative and distinctive fashion. Both texts rely on this thematic core as they present their exegetical treatmentsof our base verse, but their reliance is not absolute, because the core of traditionitself is not absolute. Neither version can be declared definitive or authoritative,because such a version simply never existed. To declare that the differences between these two presentationsof parallel materialsare simply the result of separatecompositionaleditorialprocesses oversimplifies the complex relationshipbetween the textual units, and overlooks the literaryincoherencethatthey both display.Rather,whatwe see here is the written residue and representationof the oral culturewithin which these traditionsdeveloped and flourished.Or stateddifferently,the writtenpreservationsof these traditions chirographicallymirrorand mimic the oral milieu within which these traditions thrived. 25
W.David Nelson The Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael continues: [6A] Know this! Thatthe divine presence is not revealedoutside the Landof Israel!As it says in Scripture,"AndJonahrose to flee from before the Lordto Tarshish"(Jonah 1:2). And was it really possible for him to flee from before the Lord?For wasn'tit alreadystatedin Scripture,"Wherecan I escape fromyourspirit? If I arise to heaven, there you are If I rise up on the wings of dawn (thereyourhandwill be)Yourrighthandwill be holdingme fast"(Psalms 139:7-10). And it is written,"Thosearethe eyes of the Lord,rangingover all the Earth"(Zechariah4:10). And it is written,"Theeyes of the Lord are everywhere,seeing good and bad"(Proverbs15:3). [And it is written,] "Ifthey burrowdownto Sheol. If they hide on top of Carmel.If they go into captivity"(Amos 9:2-4). And it statesfurtherin Scripture,"Neitherdarknessnor gloom (a hiding place for evildoers)"(Job 34:22). Rather,Jonahsaid, "I will take myself outside the Land,[to a] place where the divine presence is not revealed, since the Gentiles [in Nineveh] are quick to repent, [I do not want] to implicate Israel!" [6B] A parableabout a servantof a priest who fled from his master.He said, "I'll take myself to the cemetery, to a place where my master cannot come afterme." His mastersaid to him, "I have [other]Canaanite(servants) like you [who can chase afteryou for me]!" Likewise,Jonahsaid,"Iwill takemyself outsidethe Land,[to a] place where the divine presence is not revealed, since the Gentiles [in Nineveh] are quick to repent,[I do not want] to implicateIsrael!"God said to him, "Ihave [other]agents like you!"As it says in Scripture,"Butthe Lord flung a great wind into the sea" (Jonah 1:4). [6C] Consequently,you say there were three types of prophets.One who insisted on the honorof the father(i.e., God) andthe honorof the son (i.e., Childrenof Israel), one who insisted upon the honor of the father,but not the honor of the son, and one who insisted on the honor of the son, but not the honor of the father. Jeremiahinsisted upon the honor of the fatherand the honor of the son. As it says in Scripture,"Wehavetransgressedandwe have rebelled, but you have not forgiven [us]!" (Lamentations3:42) Thus, his prophecy was doubled.As it says in Scripture,". .. and addedunto them were words"(Jeremiah36:32). Elijahinsisted on the honorof the father,but not the honorof the son. As it says in Scripture,"'I am moved by zeal for the Lord,the God of Hosts (for the Israeliteshave forsakenYourcovenant,torndownYouraltars, and have put your prophetsto the sword. I alone am left, and they areout to takemy life'" (I Kings 19:14).And whatis [also] statedthere?: "The Lord said to him, 'Go back upon your way to the wilderness of Damascus and anoint Jehu son of Nimshi as King over Israel, and Elisha son of Shaphatas prophetto succeedyou'" (1 Kings 19:15-16).And Scripturestates "asprophetto succeed you" only [in orderto imply that God meant] "I am not pleased with your prophecy."
26
OralOrthography Jonahinsisteduponthehonorof theson,butnotthehonorof thefather.As it saysin Scripture, "AndJonaharoseto flee"(Jonah1:2).What (else)is written?:"Thewordof theLordcameto Jonaha secondtime, saying"(Jonah3:1).(Thismeansthatthedivinespeech)wasspokento hima secondtime,butnota third. [6D] R. Nathansaid,"Jonahfledonlyin orderto kill himselfin thesea."As it saysin Scripture, "Andhe saidto them,'Takemeupandthrowmeto thesea!'"(Jonah1:12).Andlikewisewill youfind[that]thepatriarchs andprophetswouldgive themselves(i.e., give theirlives)forthe sake of Israel! "Whatdoesit sayin Scripture Moses?:"'Andnow,if you concerning will forgivetheirsin [good].Andif not,pleaseeraseme fromthebook whichyouhavewritten!'"(Exodus32:32)."'Andif suchyoudoto me, killmepleaseif I havefoundfavorin youreyes,andletme see nomore of mywretchedness!'" (Numbers11:15). "Whatdoesit sayin Scripture concerningDavid?:"'Behold!I have sinned!I havedonewrong!Butthesesheep,whatdidtheydo?Letyour handfalluponme andmyhouse!'"(2 Samuel24:17). andprophetsgave "Thus,you find everywherethatthe patriarchs theirlivesforthesakeof Israel!" Ourtext's commentarytakes an intriguingturnin this lengthy section. Having dealt extensively with the topic of the location of divine speech, the Mekhilta ofRabbi Ishmaelnow exploresthe same interest,but in termsof the revelatorylocation of the divine presence. The nomenclatureis, in fact, synonymous;the divine presence can only be revealed throughspeech. Moreover,the exclamatory term ("Knowthis!")thatis employedto begin this section certainlyappearsto link this unit with those immediatelypriorto it. As such, it seems thatthe text uses this unit to bringto a conclusion the topic of divine speech in and outside of the Land of Israel that it first raised in [5A], and chooses to find little significance in the fine distinctionbetween the revelationof the divine presence and divine speech. In [6A] the text declaresthatthe divine presence is not revealedoutside the Land of Israel,relying on the case of Jonahas illustrativeevidence. The exegetical assumptionhere is that Jonah chose to ignore the divine imperativeto go to Nineveh, because he knew that the Ninevites would quickly repentin response to the divine admonitionhe would deliver.In Jonah'smind,this would be an embarrassmentto the Childrenof Israel,who so stubbornlyrefusedto acknowledgeand rectify theirdisobedientbehavior.Thus, by relying on the fact thatthe divine presence wouldnot be revealed(throughspeech) outsideof the Land'sboundaries,and by fleeing to a location outside the Land of Israel, Jonah was confident that he could ultimatelyescape God's commandand protectthe Israelitesfrom the concomitantshame. By interpretingJonah'smotives in this manner,our text subtlyredefines his characteras it is portrayedin the biblicalnarrative.In the biblicaltale, Jonah'sstubborn refusal to obey God's command is motivated presumablyout of ego. He knows that if he travelsto Nineveh and proclaims its impendingdestruction,the 27
WDavid Nelson Ninevites will repent and subdue God's anger, and he will appearto be a false prophet.The rabbinicrepresentationof Jonah,as displayedhere in ourtext, depicts a prophetwho acts out of blindlove for his people, choosing even to disobey God's imperative,ratherthanimplicatehis fellow Israelites.In this manner,ourtext manages to reinterpretJonah as a heroic character,one who sacrifices his own wellbeing for the good of others. Following the parablein [6B], the commentaryproceeds to a related discussion of the three types of prophets("sons")and their correspondingrewards andpunishments.Jeremiah,the ideal prophet,insisteduponthe respectdue to both the Childrenof Israel and God, by acknowledgingboth the indiscretionsof the Israelites and God's failure to forgive them. As a result, his prophecy increased. Elijahignoredthe fate of the Israelites,focusing solely upon God'shonor.Consequently,God readiedElisha as Elijah'ssuccessor as a sign of displeasure.Finally, Jonahprotectedthe honor of the Childrenof Israelto the detrimentof God's honor; therefore,God ceased communicationwith him once and for all. Finally, in [6D] R. Nathanintensifies the portrayalof the heroicactionsof Jonah,arguingthat he was actuallywilling to martyrhimself for the benefit of the Israeliteshe so desperatelywished to protect.Accordingto Nathan,Jonah'sactions place him on par with the foremostIsraeliteleaders-Moses and David. We are presented,therefore,with a carefully craftedunit of interpretation, one thatincorporatesa varietyof subjects,while simultaneouslybuildingupon the common theme of the heroism of Jonah.As we mentionedabove, this unit shares a thematicconcern with the unit beginning in [5A]: the topic of divine speech in and outside of the Land of Israel. However,the relationshipis somewhatdisjunctive, due to the differentnomenclatureused to expressthis interest.Moreover,what we do not have in this unit is a core of traditionaboutJonahthat is concernedwith emphasizingthatthe divine speech to Jonahoutside of the Landof Israeloccurred next to water.This adds an additionaldisjunctiveelement to the thematiclink between this unit and the priorunit, where such an emphasis is found in [5H]. Having examinedand comparedthese two paralleltextual sections, we will now distanceourselves from the minute details, in orderto gain a broadperspective on the material,and to make some global observations.Ourtourof these units has revealed an extremely complex, multifaceted parallel relationshipbetween these units, one thatdefies a simplistic or conceptuallycrudecharacterization.On the one hand,our comparisonof these two units has revealedhow, to a limited extent, these two parallelunits of traditiondo sharecompositionalcharacteristics.To some degree, it is possible to surmise that these units of traditionhave been incorporatedinto the versionsof these two texts we have come to possess todaywith considerationplaced on each text's largereditorial frameworks.Or stated differently, both versions display some evidence of an editorialwillingness to shuffle and arrangeportions of these units of traditionin differentways, in orderto suit an editorialdesign and purpose that is independentof, or greaterthan, the traditions themselves. Both versions also employ unique technicalterminology,which is also evidence of separateeditorialinfluences. On the otherhand,however,we have seen concurrentlyaspects of these two parallelunitsthatappearto defy compositionallogic andintentionality--instances 28
Oral Orthography whereinit is difficult, if not impossible, to perceive any conscious attempton behalf of these texts' editors to arrangethe units of traditionat their disposal in accord with a cogent and systematic literarystructure.For example, we pointed out instancesin bothtexts of baffling,disjunctiveinterpolationof textualmaterialsthat apparentlyserves only to disruptthe texts' thematicdevelopmentand flow. Oftentimes, therefore,the arrayof traditionin either text is, at best, episodic and haphazard,devoid of any signs of systematicintentionality. Due to this bifurcatedattentionto compositionalcoherence in these texts, we are precludedboth from proclaimingthese texts to be full-fledged "compositions" or "essays,"and from summarilydismissing either text as a simple hodgepodge of tradition.Regardingthis phenomenon,common in variousdegrees to all early rabbinictexts, MartinJaffee states: tojustifytheposThereis enoughcoherencein manyRabbiniccompilations tulateof somesortof governingplanthatinformsthecollectionof intermewholes.Yetthesewholesarejustdisjuncdiateunitsintolargerdocumentary themto hermeneutical tiveenoughin structure to cautionusagainstsubjecting somesortof compretorturein orderto securetheirconfessionof harboring hensiveredactional intentionality.33 In order,therefore,to acknowledgeboth the compositionaland disjunctiveaspects of rabbiniccompilations,Jaffeeproposesadoptingthe model of the "anthology":34 Thecompilations arecollectionsof materials-ourpreviouslymentionedinunitsor Schaefer'smicroforms-knownwidelyfromantecedent termediate historiesof tradition. Theywerebroughttogether,aftercomplextransmission in theirown, in diversenew constellationsdependinguponthe framework intervenwhichtheywereanthologized andthediversedegreeof redactional is a kindof tionemployedby theircompilers.Thedocumentary compilation of the stilledby the intervention of thattradition,temporarily freeze-frame compilational activityitself.Butthatactivitywas not conceivedas theproductionof a finished"work."35 The advantageof this model is the flexibility it provides to account for both the compositionaland ad hoc characteristicsdisplayedin various degrees by all rabbinic textual compilations. On the one hand, rabbinic authorialtendencies can come to the forefront,and we can allow for the fact that,oftentimes,the rabbisdid "compose"as they arranged,alteredand preservedtraditionin writing. However, on the otherhand,we allow as well for the fact thatsuch "compositional"impulses 33. Jaffee, "OralTraditionin the Writingof RabbinicOralTorah,"38. 34. Jaffee is carefulto point out the coincidentalaffinities betweenhis workhere and the work of M. Bregmanin "MidrashRabbahand the Medieval Collector'sMentality,"Prooftexts 17 (Winter 1997):63-76, andE. Segal, "AnthologicalDimensionsof the BabylonianTalmud,"Prooftexts17 (Winter 1997). Currentversions of both of these efforts appearin D. Stern,ed., TheAnthologyin Jewish Literature(New York:OxfordUniversityPress, 2004). 35. Jaffee, "OralTraditionin the Writingof RabbinicOralTorah,"39-40.
29
WDavid Nelson were often not the primarymotivationof rabbiniceditorswho, at times, appeared concernedonly that traditionsbe preservedin writing as they producedtheir textual compilations,and who often showed little or no considerationof fixed literary context. Finally,and most importantly,this model refuses to ascribe "primacy" to any rabbiniccompilation,acknowledgingthat every writtenrepresentation of rabbinictraditionis, at most, only a momentary"snapshot"of the traditionit preserves.Rabbiniccompilations,therefore,preserveonly fleeting glimpses of traditions thatwere otherwise fluid, dynamic, and ever changing. When we attend,therefore,to an evaluationof the compositionalcharacteristics of our paralleltexts from the Mekhiltaof RabbiIshmael and the Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohai,we are well servedby such a conceptualmodel. Moreover, one can easily arguethatthe very functionof these tannaiticmidrashictexts-to preserve, associate, and affix rabbinictraditionto the flowing words of the biblical text-is at its very core primarilyan anthologicalendeavor.We desire, however,to move beyond an evaluationof only the compositionalaspects of our texts, andto examinethem for clues and insights into rabbinicoral culturein which they flourishedand functioned.36However,in doing so, we must remainfocused upon these compositionalcharacteristicsof the texts we examined immediatelyabove. That is, given the fact that we have no writtenevidence of the prior existence of the traditionswe study in these texts, we have only these amoraicwritten representationsto turnto for such insight into theiroral tannaiticprovenance.Thus, we are forced to appealto amoraicwrittenrepresentationof tannaitictradition,in order to gain knowledge of this tradition'santeriororal existence. A more appropriate lens, therefore,though which to examine and evaluatethe relationshipof our paralleltexts fromthe Mekhiltaof RabbiShimonb. Yohaiandthe MekhiltaofRabbi Ishmael is one that attendsto both the compositionalcharacteristicsof the literature,while simultaneouslyattendingto the dynamic,performativeworldof early rabbinicpedagogical instructionthatmade usage of this literature. We saw above the complex natureof the relationshipbetween the two textual excerpts. In some instances, portions of these units correspondedwith near exactitude,whereasat othertimes the texts displayedonly the slightestcorrelation. The two units often hovered arounda common theme or topic, but reached opposing exegetical conclusions or followed separateinterpretivetangents. Oftentimes, both texts possessed paralleltextualmaterialsplaced in differentexegetical settings, or included interpolationsof self-contained,but entirelyunrelated,units of tradition.In some instances, we perceived in one text the "echoes"of themes absent in thatparticulartext, but fully developed in the other. Whereas such a convoluted relationshipbaffles the imaginationinformed solely by compositionalconsiderations,it gains clarificationwhen viewed in ac36. Mention must be made here of the valuable work of Steven Fraade on the tannaitic midrashim.Fraadehas arguedconvincinglythatthe earlyrabbinicchoice of scripturalcommentaryfor the preservationof traditionfor the tannaiticmidrashimis, in itself, highly indicativeof the discursive world within which that very traditionflourishedand functioned.See, in particular,S. Fraade,"Sifre Deuteronomy26 (ad Deut. 3:23): How Conscious the Composition?"Hebrew Union College Annual 54 (1983): 245-301; S. Fraade,"InterpretingMidrashI: Midrashand the History of Judaism,"Prooftexts 7 (1987): 179-94; and S. Fraade,FromTraditionto Commentary.
30
Oral Orthography cordancewith, and situatedas a part of, the oral employmentof writtentradition that formedthe basis of the Palestiniantannaiticand amoraicrabbinicmaster/disciple performativepedagogicalrelationship.37Rabbinicdisciples, in theirquest to benefit from the religiously transformativepower of rabbinic learning, aligned themselves with rabbinicmasters,from whom they learnedto masterthe complex substance,thoughtand processes of rabbinicoral discourse. Of fundamentalimportancein this relationshipwas the ability of the disciple to declaim rabbinictradition from memory, in both a homiletical and extemporaneouslydialogical setting. Withinthis culture,rabbinictraditionon the page was theologicallyimpotent; it was only when spoken aloud that the words of rabbinictraditionrealized their efficacious potential.As statedby Jaffee: Thosewhomightreadthetextsof rabbinicteachingin isolationfromthediscipleshipexperiencehadneitherthecompletetextnoranytorah,forproperly transformative knowledgecouldnotbe gainedbydiscursiveunderstanding of anytexton its own.... Fortorahto be present,the Sagemustbe present as its unmediated in wordanddeed.38 sourceandembodiment Situatingour excerpts from the Mekhiltotwithin this pedagogical context, the early rabbinicstudentof tradition,upon encounteringeither of these textual passages in the course of his study,would immediatelyrecognize and recall their, sharedfundamentalthemes, majoremphases, invokedprooftexts, and exegetical ploys frominnumerableencounters-both oralandwritten-with this body of tradition in the past. Eitherone of our textualpresentationswould resoundpositively in the memory of those who populatedthe earlyrabbiniccommunitiesof learning-both masters and disciples-who over the course of time had become familiarand comfortablewith its integralcommonalitiesof scope, topic and context. They would readandrereadnumerousparallel,but different,presentationsof this sharedbody of tradition,and learnto associate these fundamentalthemes and topics, along with their accompanyingcollection of biblical prooftexts,with this specific scripturallocale. After time, the associationwouldbecome commonplace for both teacher of traditionand his student,both of whom would eventually be unable to encounterExodus 12:1 without immediatelyinvoking this body of exegetical tradition. The membersof early rabbiniclearningcommunitieswould never come to view any single presentation-be it writtenor oral-of this collection of lore as authoritativeor decisive, but would, rather,learn to shape and alter it to suit their immediate exegetical needs. Having committed its basic rubric and features to 37. Forexcellent discussions and descriptionsof earlyrabbinicmaster/disciplepedagogicalrelationships,and the role of memorizedtraditionwithin that relationship,see M. Jaffee,EarlyJudaism (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997), 213-43; M. Jaffee, Torahin the Mouth, 126-52; L. Levine, TheRabbinicClass of RomanPalestine in LateAntiquity(Jerusalem:YadIzhakBen-Zvi and JewishTheological SeminaryofAmerica, 1989), 98-133; C. Hezser, TheSocial Structureof the Rabbinic Movementin RomanPalestine (Tiibingen,Mohr Siebeck, 1997), and D. Goodblatt,RabbinicInstruction in Sasanian Babylonia (Leiden, The Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1975).
38. Jaffee, Torahin the Mouth, 152.
31
W David Nelson memory,they would mold it freely,takingtheircues not only fromthe oral culture in which the traditionflourished,but also from the writtentexts from which they mastered their craft. Both master and disciple, therefore, were constantly surroundedby an oral/auraland chirographicculturethatmutuallyreinforcedsuch a dynamic and dialogical transmissionof tradition. Moreover,the rabbinicmaster or disciple would presentthis body of tradition performativelyto an audienceequally familiarwith its multifacetedsimilarities and variationsof theme and topic. As a result,the rabbinicperformerof tradition could allow his uniquepresentationof the materialto echo and resoundwith previous,differentpresentationsin the very same way ourtwo parallelexcerptsoften subtly echoed each other. Such a knowledgeableaudience affordedthe performer the luxury of subtle reference and oblique innuendo as he reshapedand representedtraditionin a performativesetting,just as our paralleltexts often presumed priorknowledge or context in their presentationof the materials.We see, therefore,how the chirographicaspectsof rabbinictexts mimic the oralculturethat producedtheirconstituenttexts.39 Our parallel texts from the Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon b. Yohaiand the Mekhiltaof Rabbi Ishmael are but two examples of such transformativetextuality, two "snapshots"taken of an otherwise eternallymalleable mass of exegetical traditionas it traveledalong its performativepaththroughthe learningcommunities of the earliest rabbis.Indeed,our examinationof these two excerpts was not entirelyunlike the talmudtorahundertakenby rabbinicdisciples in their study of these texts, in that it has producedfor us many of the same transformativeand associative qualities.As a resultof our comparisonof these two texts, Aaronwill always strugglewith Moses for equality of stature,God will eternallyspeak somehow only to Moses, and yet also to Aaron, and the order of scripturallists will endlessly signify both nothingand everything.These themes will foreverresound in our consciousness, particularlyin association with our seemingly benign base verse. As a result, we not only familiarizedourselves with a significant body of earlyrabbinictradition,but also acculturatedourselves-attuned our literarysensibilities-to the paradoxical,dialogical, and dynamic ways of rabbinic talmud torah. W. David Nelson Texas ChristianUniversityand Brite Divinity School FortWorth,Texas
39. I am indebtedhere to the insightfulthoughtof S. Fraadein FromTraditionto Commentary, 19: "Wegain here a glimpse of the literaryface of an otherwise oral circulatorysystem of study and teachingby whose illocutionaryforce disciples became sages, and sages became a class thatcould extend theirteachings,practices,and view of the world into Jewish society more broadly."
32
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean: A Sixteenth-Century Venetian Rabbi on Muslim History Author(s): Martin Jacobs Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 33-60 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131808 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 33-60
EXPOSEDTO ALL THE CURRENTSOF THE
MEDITERRANEAN-A SIXTEENTH-CENTURY VENETIANRABBI ON MUSLIM HISTORY*
by Martin Jacobs The Westernperceptionof Islam as a belligerentreligion owes many of its stereotypesnot only to the Crusades,but also to the early modernrivalrybetween the Ottoman Empire and ChristianEurope. Heated debates about the "Turkish menace"dominatedEuropeanpolitical discourseuntilthe (second) Ottomansiege of Viennain 1683, as documentedby the innumerableTurcicathatcirculatedboth swiftly and widely thanksto revolutionaryadvancesin printing.Sixteenth-century Christianauthorsprovidedtheireager readerswith constantlyupdatedversions of Ottomanhistory,as did some of theirJewish contemporaries.Probablythe first Jew to make the Ottomansthe majorsubject matterof his work was Elijah Capsali of Candiain VenetianCrete,who in 1523 completeda Hebrewchronicletitled Seder 'EliyahuZuta ("MinorOrderof Elijah").' There was little that was new in Capsali's way of writing history. Even thoughthe Candioterabbioccasionally makes use of contemporaryrhetoricaldevices, his writing style has more in common with that of medieval Jewish chronicles, which ultimately go back to biblical and rabbinicliterature,than with humanist historiography.2What is unprecedentedin this Jewish chronicler'swork is *This article is an expandedversion of a paperpresentedat the 36th annualconference of the Association for Jewish Studies, Chicago, December 19-21, 2004. I also reconsiderand develop some of the ideas outlinedin my shorterarticle,"Das ambivalenteIslambildeines venezianischenJudendes 16. Jahrhunderts:Capsalis OsmanischeChronik,"Judaica 58, no.1 (2002): 2-17. The translationsof Biblical verses are based on TANAKH, A New Translationof the Holy Scripturesaccording to the Traditional Hebrew Text(Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 1985), but are often modified to accommodatethe way these quotes are used within the context of Capsali'swork.All othertranslations are mine. 1. While the manuscriptshave no headline, this title occurs towardthe end of the prologue, see Seder 'EliyahuZuta (hereafterSEZ), accordingto the critical edition Seder 'Eliyahuzuta le-rabbi 'EliyahuQapsali,ed. Aryeh Shmuelevitz,Shlomo Simonsohn,andMeir Benayahu,3 vols. (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute,1975-83), 1:20.Capsali'stitle alludesto B. Ketuvot,106a;it is also a captatio benevolentiae, as it can be readtoo as "Orderof the MinorElijah."Not until three and a half centuriesafter the completionof the manuscriptwere excerptsof SEZpublishedby Moses Lattes,Likutimshonimmisefer divre 'Eliyahu(Padua, 1869). The first complete edition did not appearuntil 1975. 2. Sixteenth-centuryJewish historiographyin general has been the subject of lively scholarly debate. In a provocativeand highly readablesurvey,Yosef HayimYerushalmirelates this literatureto the expulsionsfromthe IberianPeninsula(gerushSefarad), a traumaticexperiencewhich-according
33
Martin Jacobs his subjectmatter,or to be moreprecise, the extentto which he writes on non-Jewish history.His lengthyand detailedaccountof Muslim history in generaland Ottoman history in particularhave no parallelin earlierJewish literature-and only a few among later Jewish historians.3What is also strikingabout Seder 'Eliyahu Zuta is the contrastbetweenthe polemical tone of the introductorychapterson the early history of Islam and the idealized portrayalof the Ottomans,Venice's primaryMediterraneanrivals,in the chaptersthatfollow. It is these ambivalencesand juxtapositions-medieval writing style and early modernsubjectmatter;distinctively Rabbinic worldviews and contemporaryVenetianperspectives;polemical debates on the origins of Islam and idealized admirationof the currentrulers of the Islamic world-that make Capsali such a fascinatingfigure of study.
to him-gave rise to a renewedJewish interest in history,therebybreakingwith a centuries-oldrabbinic disinterestin historiography.(Y.H.Yerushalmi,"Clio and the Jews: Reflections on Jewish Historiographyin the SixteenthCentury,"Proceedingsofthe AmericanAcademyofJewish Research46-47 [1979-80]: 607-38; idem, Zakhor:Jewish History and Jewish Memory[Seattle:Universityof Washington, 1982], 60-75). However,Ivan Marcus (among others) strongly questions the notion that the traumaof 1492 served as a catalystfor Jews to abandonold traditionsand open up to "modern"worldviews in fields like historiography.(I.G. Marcus,"Beyondthe SephardicMystique,"Orim 1 [1985/86]: 35-53.) Probablythe most outspokencritic of Yerushalmi'sis RobertBonfil, who questionswhether there was any "rise"in Jewish historiographyat all in the "earlymodern"period.As he points out, the literarymodels of the very few extantsixteenth-centuryJewish books dealing with historicaltopics do not differ from thatof medieval (Jewish or Christian)chronicles.It is for this reasonthat Bonfil refers to sixteenth-centuryJewish historiographyas the "swan song" of the Middle Ages." (Bonfil, "How Golden Was the Age of the Renaissancein Jewish Historiography?"in Essays in Jewish Historiography, ed. Ada Rapoport-Albert,2nd ed. [Atlanta:ScholarsPress, 1988]:78-102, here:90; cf. idem, "Esiste une storiografiaebraicamedioevale?,"in Aspetti della storiografia ebraica,Atti del convegno di studigiudaici della associazione italianaper lo studio del giudaismo4 [ 1983 (Rome, 1987)]: 227-47; idem, "JewishAttitudestowardHistory and HistoricalWritingin Pre-ModernTimes,"Jewish History 11 [1997]: 7-40.) For a survey of Jewish historiographyafter 1500 with special attentionto Jewish writings on the Ottomans, see my comparativestudy of sixteenth- and seventeenth-centuryJewish chronicles of Muslim history in which I discuss Capsali among others: Martin Jacobs, Islamische Geschichteinjiidischen Chroniken:HebrdischeHistoriographiedes 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts(Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 36-57. 3. Threedecades later,in 1554, Josephha-Kohen(1496-after 1577) of Genoa would publish his Seferdivreha-yamimle-malkheZarefatu-vet Otomanha-Togar("Chronicleof the Kings of France and of the Kings of the Dynasty of 'Othman the Turk");for a recentstudy,see MartinJacobs, "Joseph ha-Kohen, Paolo Giovio, and Sixteenth-CenturyHistoriography,"in CulturalIntermediaries:Jewish Intellectuals in Early-ModernItaly, ed. David B. Rudermanand Giuseppe Veltri(Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania,2004), 67-85; idem, Islamische Geschichte, 82-108, 185-220 (including additionalbibliography).AnotherHebrewchronicle comparableto Capsali'sis Yosef Sambari'sSefer divre Yosef("Book of Joseph'sWords"),writtenin Cairo in 1673; it contains a history of the Jews in Islamic lands, including an extensive frameworkon Muslim history; see the critical edition by Shimon Shtober,Sefer divreYosefle-rabbiYosefbenrabbiYizhaqSambari(Jerusalem:Ben-Zvi Institute, 1994) (including an introduction);Jacob Lassner, The Middle East Remembered:Forged Identities, CompetingNarratives, ContestedSpaces (Ann Arbor:University of Michigan, 2000), 341-85; Jacobs, Islamische Geschichte, 109-27, 221-258; for Shtober'sarticles on Sambari,see below notes 88 and 105.
34
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean CAPSALI'S CULTURAL BACKGROUND
Elijah Capsali4(c. 1485-1555) was born in Candia(present-dayIraklion), the capitalof Crete,which in the aftermathof the FourthCrusade(1204) had been incorporatedinto the VenetianEmpire (it would remainunder the bannerof St. Markuntilthe Ottomanconquestof 1669).5By Capsali'stime, Candiahadbecome a thrivinghub of Venetiantradeand commerce in the easternMediterranean.Although the Jewish community in Candia profited greatly from this commercial prosperity,their legal status was, like that of the native Greek Orthodoxpopulation (regardedas schismaticby the RomanCatholics),far below thatof the Venetian colonialists (to say the least). Unlike the Greeks,the Jews of Candia(and other Cretantowns such as Chania)were confined to a segregatedquarterof the city called Zudecca (i.e., Giudecca) in the Venetiandialect, and were forced to wear a yellow badge when in public. Despite these discriminatoryrestrictions,however, Jews had one significantadvantageoverothernon-Latinlocal communitiesin the Venetiancolonies: they enjoyedtheirown communalorganizationandinstitutions, the autonomyof which saw little interferenceby the authoritiesapartfrom the fact that the condestabulo(i.e., contestabile,"responsible"),the civil head of the Jewish communityof Candia,had to be approvedby the signoria. The reason for this was obvious:the Jewish representativeswere "responsible"for the paymentof the collective taxes. Up to the time of Capsali-to be exact, until 1541-Venetian legislation officially excludedJews fromparticipationin internationaltrade.Still, they were not alone in being excluded since all foreigners,as well as most of the populationof the VenetianEmpire,were barredfrom the commerceflowing throughthe lagoon city; the Levanttradewas regardedas the sole prerogativeof Venetianpatricians and upper-classcitizens.6 Since the fourteenthcentury,however,there had been mention of CretanJews in the sources aboutthe commercialintercoursebetween Venice and the easternMediterranean.7 This was because the legal statusand eco4. The name Capsali appearsto be of Greekorigin (Kapsali):for the etymology, see Meir Benayahu's,Rabbi'EliyahuQapsali 'ish Qandiah(TelAviv:Tel Aviv University, 1983), 11. 5. For the history of Crete underVenetianrule, see the classic study by JohannW. Zinkeisen, "Die Insel Candiaunterder Herrschaftder Signorievon Venedig,"in Geschichtedes osmanischenReiches in Europa, vol. 4 (Gotha, 1856), 582-729; E. Gerland,"Kvetaals venetianischeKolonie,"HistorischesJahrbuch20 (1899): 1-24; S. Borsari,II dominio venezianoa Cretanel XIIIsecolo (Naples, 1963); FredericC. Lane, Venice:A MaritimeRepublic(Baltimore:JohnsHopkins, 1973), 43, 94, passim; Dionysios Hatzopoulos,"Veniceand Crete:Documents from the XVI to XVIII centuries,"Fontanus 4 (1991): 55-68. 6. See BenjaminRavid,"An Introductionto the Chartersof the Jewish Merchantsof Venice," in TheMediterraneanand the Jews II: Society, Cultureand Economyin Early Modern Times,ed. E. Horowitz and M. Orfali(RamatGan: Bar Ilan University,2002), 203 -46 (reprintin idem, Studies on the Jews of Venice,1382-1797 [Aldershot:Ashgate, 2003], chap. 4). ' 7. See David Jacoby,"Lesjuifs Venise du XIVe au milieu du XVIesi~cle," in Venezia,centro di mediazionetra Orientee Occidente (secoli XV-XVI):Aspetti e problemi, vol. 1, ed. H.G. Beck, M. Manoussacas,andA. Pertusi(Florence, 1977), 163-216 (reprintin idem, Recherchessur la Miditerrange orientale du XIIe au XVesidcle [London, 1979], ch. 8); BenjaminRavid,"Jewsin International Trade:The Emergenceof the Levantinesand Ponentines,"in TheJews of Early Modern Venice,ed. RobertC. Davis and BenjaminRavid (Baltimore:Johns Hopkins,2001), 73-96.
35
Martin Jacobs nomic activity of the Jews from Cretedifferedin many respects from that of their coreligionists in the metropolis or the Venetian terrafirma.8 While the city of Venicedid not issue a charterlegalizing the residencyof Jews until 1513,9and only in 1541 grantedJewish merchants(who were Ottomansubjects)the rightto reside in the citta lagunare,10the Jewish communitiesof Cretehad roots going back to Byzantinetimes. Moreover,they activelyparticipatedin the regionaltradethatwas not consideredthe exclusive domainof Venetiancitizens. The multilingualtalents of the CretanJews, manyof whom were equallyfluentin GreekandItalian(as well as in Hebrew)madethem ideal middlemenin the commercialexchangeof the eastern Mediterranean.In addition,they enjoyed preferentialbusiness relationswith Jewish merchantsliving underOttomanrule.11 Although Capsali'sinterestin Ottomanaffairs was certainlya result of his living in one of the majorport cities throughwhich flowed much of the Levant trade,the multiculturalatmosphereof a commercialhub does not fully explainwhy he wrote Seder 'EliyahuZuta. By composing a chronicleof the Ottomanshe not only picked a fashionabletopic but also a typicalgenre of contemporaryItalianliterature.However,as he nevermentions-or admits-to havingreadany non-Jewish literature(see following discussion),12one may easily underestimatethe extent to which he was acquaintedwith the Italianculturaltrendsof his time. Elijah Capsali was first exposed to Italian influences during his youth in Venetian-ruledCandia.His father,RabbiElkanahCapsali,served as condestabuin Gli ebrei 8. See David Jacoby,"Veniceand the VenetianJews in the EasternMediterranean," e Venezia:secoliXIV-XVIII, ed. GaetanoCozzi (Milano, 1987), 29-58 (reprintin idem, Studieson the CrusaderStates and on VenetianExpansion [Northampton:Variorum,1989], ch. 10). 9. It was only in 1509 that Jews-in this case refugees from the armies of the League of Cambrai-were admittedto Venice;the first, so-called "new"ghetto was establishedin 1516. For a recent study,see BenjaminRavid,"TheVenetianGovernmentandthe Jews,"in Davis and Ravid,Jews of Early Modern Venice,3-30; idem, "On Sufferanceand Not as of Right:The Status of the Jewish Communitiesin EarlyModernVenice,"in TheLionShall Roar:LeonModenaand His World,David Malkiel (Jerusalem:Magnes, 2003 [Italia, Suppl. 1]), 17-61. 10. Althoughthe decreerestrictedthe residenceof so-called Levantinito limitedperiods,it subsequentlylet to the permanentestablishmentof the "old ghetto"(ghetto vecchio) in Venice; see Benjamin Ravid, "The Establishmentof the Ghetto Vecchioof Venice: Backgroundand Reappraisal,"in Proceedings of the Sixth WorldCongressofJewish Studies (Jerusalem, 1975), 267-76; MinnaRozen, "Strangersin a StrangeLand:The ExtraterritorialStatus of Jews in Italy and the OttomanEmpirein the Sixteenthto the EighteenthCenturies,"in Ottomanand TurkishJewry:Communityand Leadership, ed. Aron Rodrigue(Bloomington:IndianaUniversity,1992), 123-66, esp. 128-34. The admissionof OttomanJewish tradersto Venice in 1541 was intendedto revive Venetianprospectsin the Levantine trade,which had sufferedsignificantly as a result of changing economic conditions and the VenetianOttomanwar of 1537-40. See BenjaminD. Cooperman,"VenetianPolicy towardsLevantineJews in Its BroaderItalianContext,"in Cozzi, Ebrei e Venezia,65-84. 11. See BenjaminArbel, "Veniceand the Jewish Merchantsof Istanbulin the SixteenthCentury,"in The Mediterraneanand the Jews: BankingFinance and InternationalTrade(XVI-XVIIICenturies), ed. Ariel Toaff and Simon Schwarzfuchs(RamatGan: Bar Ilan University,1989), 39-56, updatedversionin idem, TradingNations:Jews and Venetiansin the EarlyModernEasternMediterranean (Leiden:Brill, 1995), 13-28. 12. Cf. n. 115.
36
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean lo andas such was familiarwith the Venetianauthorities.•3While the Capsalishad Romaniote (Greek-Jewish)roots, Elijah was related through his mother to the Ashkenazic Delmedigos, who despite residing in Candiamaintainedstrong ties with Italyand were well knownfor theirgreaterudition,bothTalmudicandphilosophical.14 Capsali'sItalian "acculturation"was later furtheredby his own studies on theVenetianmainland.In 1508, he went to Paduawhere,like his fatherbeforehim, he studiedat the famousyeshivah of JudahMinz.'5 Nine years later,he would incorporatesome of his experiences in Paduainto his first historicalwork, Sipure Venezia("Storiesof Venice"),also known as Divre ha-yamimle-malkhutVenezia ("Chronicleof the Venetian Empire"),16 a title that echoes Venetian municipal chronicles.17 In adaptingan Italian genre of historiographyto Jewish tradition, Caspali made a remarkableculturaltransfer,which he was to repeat again in his Ottomanchronicle.ThoughCapsaliwas primarilyconcernedwith chroniclingthe historyof theyeshivot in NorthernItaly,'8he openedhis SipureVeneziawith a survey of Venetianhistory from its legendaryorigins to the year 1516. In so doing, he echoed the widespread"mythofVenice,"aspectsof which were articulatedby such sixteenth-and seventeenth-centuryJewish intellectualsas IsaacAbravanel,David de Pomis, and,most notably,Simone Luzzatto.19 When in 1509 the League of Cambraioverranthe Venetianmainland,Capsali fled Paduato Venice, which for the first time was allowing Jews to stay in the city.20Not long afterwards,however,he returnedto Candiawhere from 1518 he served as rabbiand was appointedseveraltimes as the civil representative-condestabulo-of the Jews to the Venetianauthorities,once again following in the 13. In this position, ElkanahCapsali oversawthe relief work for Jewish refugees after the expulsions from the IberianPeninsula;see Capsali'sdescriptionin chapter73 of SEZ, 1:218. 14. See Benayahu,Qapsali, 17. On the most famous scion of the family, ElijahDelmedigo, see n. 25. 15. See Capsali'sown account in SippureVenezia,SEZ, 2:249-54. Although he did not study studia humaniorain Padua,but ratherengaged in Talmudicstudies,Capsalireflects on his own youthful longing for wisdom in metaphorsreminiscentof Humanistself-portraits.See Ann Brenner,"Portrait of the Rabbi as Young Humanist:A Reading of Elijah Capsali's Chronicleof Venice,"Italia 11 (1994): 37-60. 16. Firstpublishedby N. Porges, "Elie Capsali et sa Chroniquede Venise,"Revue des Etudes Juives 77 (1923): 20-40; 78 (1924): 15-34; 79 (1924): 28-60; new edition in SEZ, 2:215-327; cf. Shlomo Simonsohn,"Gli ebrei nell'Europacristianasecondo il Seder ElijahuZutadi ElijahuCapsali" (Hebrew), in Scritti in memoriadi Leone Carpi: Saggi sull'ebraismo italiano, ed. Daniel Carpi e.a. (Jerusalem, 1967), Hebrewpart,64-71; Brenner,"Portraitof the Rabbi,"37-60. 17. On the Venetianchronicle tradition,see Eric Cochrane,Historians and Historiographyin the Italian Renaissance (Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1981), 62-65. 18. Formore details, see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte,80-82. 19. See AbrahamMelamed,"TheMythofVenice in ItalianRenaissanceJewishThought,"Italia Judaica 1 (Rome, 1983): 401-13; BenjaminRavid,"Betweenthe Myth of Venice andthe Lachrymose Conceptionof JewishHistory:The Case of the Jews of Venice,"in TheJews ofltaly: Memoryand Identity, ed. BernhardCoopermanand BarbaraGarvin (Maryland:Universityof MarylandPress, 2000), 151-92 (reprintin idem, Studies on the Jews of Venice,ch. 9). 20. See Capsali'saccountin SippureVenezia,SEZ, 2:284-5; cf. n. 9.
37
Martin Jacobs footsteps of his father. During the plague of 1523 he was one of the officials in charge of the quarantineregulations.When the epidemic got completely out of control and the authoritiesimposed a curfew on the Zudecca,21 Capsaliwas confined to his house for more thanthreemonths.It was duringthis time thatCapsali wrote his Ottomanchronicle "in orderto expel the fear of the bitternessof death and to focus the mind on otherthings, 'thatwe may live and not die, and that the land may not become a waste' (Genesis 47:19)."22 Capsali'sdramaticaccount of the circumstancesin which he composed his chronicle, however,accords with contemporaryliteraryconventions,23and may have been intendedprimarilyas an apologia auctoris for writing such a detailed account of non-Jewishhistory.In any case, Capsali seems to have felt the need to justify his choice of subjectmatter,since even as he writes aboutnon-Jewishhistory,he explicitly rejects "non-Jewishwisdom" (hokhmotnokhriyot).24Although Capsali made use of certainthemes and stylistic devices of contemporaryItalian literature,he was no Jewish "Renaissanceman."Unlike his elder relative,Elijah Delmedigo (c. 1460-97),25 Capsali rejectedAristotelianmetaphysics and in so doing reflects the gradualshift among some Jewish thinkersfrom scholastic philosophy towardsthe study of the Kabbalah,the beginningsof which can be traced back in Candiato the second half of the fifteenth century.26Nevertheless,in tackling a populartopic of Italianhistoriography,Capsali could not help but absorba certainamountof "foreignwisdom." We come now to the centralquestionposed by this study:Why and for what audiencewould a conservative-mindedrabbiliving in a Venetiancolony compose a detailedchronicleof Muslimhistory?Giventhathe wrotehis Seder'EliyahuZuta in highly stylized Hebrew,interspersedwith innumerableallusions to the Hebrew Bible and rabbinicliterature,the workmust have been intendedfor a traditionally trainedJewish audience.But whatbenefit could a pious Jew be expected to derive 21. SEZ, ch. 165, 2:107; see Benayahu,Qapsali, 121. 22. SEZ, ch. 166, 2:109. 23. The closest parallelis Boccaccio, who linkedthe compositionof his Decameronto the Florentineplague of 1348 (althoughhe was out of town at this time); see GiovanniBoccaccio, Decameron, Filocolo, Ameto,Fiammetta,ed. E. Bianchi, C. Salinari,and N. Spegno (Milano, Naples, n.d.), Novella 1, 7-9; for more details, see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte,79-80. 24. Capsali complains that "almostall of our contemporariesare inclined towardsnon-Jewish wisdom (hokhmatnokhriyot),"(see SEZ,chap. 138, 1:376) therebyalludingto the rabbinicadvice not to teach ones son "Greekwisdom"(hokhmahyevanit, B. Sota, 49a). 25. For the life and work of Elijah Delmedigo, see David Geffen, "Insightsinto the Life and Thoughtof ElijahMedigo Based on His PublishedandUnpublishedWorks,"ProceedingsoftheAmerican AcademyofJewish Research41-42 (1974-74): 70-86; KalmanP. Bland,"Elijahdel Medigo's AverroistResponse to the Kabbalahsof Fifteenth-CenturyJewry and Pico della Mirandola,"Journal ofJewish Thoughtand Philosophy 1 (1991/92): 23-53; idem, "Elijahdel Medigo, Unicity of Intellect, and Immortalityof Soul,"Proceedings oftheAmericanAcademyofJewish Research61 (1995): 1-22. 26. See Aviezer Ravitzky,"The God of the Philosophersversus the God of the Kabbalists:A Controversyin Fifteenth-CenturyCrete,"in Historyand Faith:Studies in Jewish Philosophy(Amsterdam: Gieben, 1996), 15-53 (English translationfrom Tarbiz58 [1989]: 453-82); reprintin Joseph Dan and Klaus Herrmann,eds., Studies in Jewish Manuscripts (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999), 139-70.
38
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean from an Ottomanchronicle-albeit clad in a Jewish garb?In a kind of a prologus de rationeoperis (to use the contemporaryLatinterminology)in which he outlines his authorial"intentions"(Hebrew: sibbot kavvanati), Capsali responds to just such anticipatedobjectionsand arguesfor the usefulness of his work.27In prefacing his workwith a detailedexposition of how and why he came to write it, which is, as Bonfil has noted,a common featureof medievalChristianchronicles,28Capsali betrays the extent to which he has incorporated"foreign wisdom" into his thinking. Capsaliinformsus thatthe first ratio (i.e., Sibbah) of his work is: Thatmanmaylearnwisdomandunderstanding in hearingthestories... that we will tell of thekingsof gentilesandtheTurks(Togarmim), andespecially of the wisdomof the greatking, SultanSelim,whoselike has neverbeen "Thewiseman,hearingthem,will amongthekingsof thegentiles.Certainly, gain morewisdom;the discerningmanwill learnto be adroit"(Proverbs 1:5).29
The desireto teach his readers"wisdomandunderstanding"recalls the classical definition of history as magistravitae (Cicero). In depicting Sultan Selim I (1512-20), underwhom the OttomanEmpirehad vastly extended in size, as an unparalleledexample of wise leadership,Capsalifollows the common use in contemporarynon-Jewishhistoriographyof the lives of certain "illustriousmen" as moralexempla.30In so doing, however,the rabbiof Candiawas not expressinghis agreementwith the ideals of humanisthistoriography;Capsali had little in common with the seculartendencies of contemporaryItalianhistorianssuch as Paolo Giovio (1486-1552), to mention one of the most prominentnames.31That Capsali's understandingof history followed insteadthe "medieval"traditionis documented by the way he articulatesthe second ratio of his work: The secondreasonis that"allthe peoplesof the earthshallknow"(Joshua 4:24)"thattheLordaloneis God"(Deuteronomy 4:35.39)and"thatthereis divinejusticeon earth"(Psalm58:12).Forwhoeverwill readmystories,my 27. See Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte,65-67. 28. Bonfil, in his "JewishAttitudestowardHistory,"17-18, writes:"Capsaliengages in an almost scholastic exposition of the fourAristoteliancauses of his work." 29. Prologueto SEZ, 1:9-10. 30. Cf. Cochrane, Historians and Historiography,396-98; Jacobs, Islamische Geschichte, 24-25. 31. The humanisthistorianPaolo Giovio dealt with the Ottomansin two of his works, one of which was a "commentary"(Commentariode le cose de' turchi[Venice, 1531]) that, as can be seen in its dedicationto CharlesV, was intendedas a short instructionin preparationof a possible war against the Ottomans.(See note 127 for more on the genre of the commentario).In addition,Giovio included extensive chapterson the Ottomansin his multivolumeHistoriaSui Temporis(Florence, 1550-52). On Giovio, see T.C. Price Zimmermann,Paolo Giovio: TheHistorian and the Crisis of Sixteenth-Century Italy (Princeton:PrincetonUniversity, 1995); Cochrane,Historians and Historiography,366-77; for his works on the Ottomans,see Jacobs, Islamische Geschichte,23-27; on Joseph ha-Kohen'suse of Giovio's commentario,see ibid., 90-91; idem, "Josephha-Kohen,"70-8.
39
Martin Jacobs wordsandmydeliberations, will fear(God)andwill accepttheyokeof heaven on himself.Thenall this(Jewish)peoplewill knowthat"theeyes of the thebadand Lordarescanningthewholeearth"(Zachariah 4:10),"observing the good"(Proverbs15:3),"soas to repayeverymanaccordingto his ways, andwiththeproperfruitof his deeds"(Jeremiah32:19),andthatHe watches (mashgiah)overthenationsto overthrow one peopleandto raiseanother one.32 In the spiritof medieval historiography,both Christianand Jewish, Capsali regardedit the task of the historianto teach his readersto fear God and strengthen theirbelief in divine providence(hashgahah).Accordingto Capsali,the history of non-Jewishpeoples, their rulers and their wars, provided evidence for the claim "thatthere is divinejustice on earth"(Psalm 58:12), and he interpretedthis history accordingto Biblical patternsaccordingto which the fall and rise of empires follows a divine masterplan: Perusethe chaptersof thisbook... ,have a lookat its stories,payattention andsee thatin His wisdomandunderstanding the Lord... has madethese Turksa strongandmightypeople,"Heblessedtheireffortsandspreadtheir possessionsin theland"(cf. Job1:10).TheLordbroughtthemfroma distant and landandblessedthemexceptionally. TheTurkis the"rodof' His"anger" the"staffof' His "fury"is in their(i.e., theTurks')"hand"(cf. Isaiah10:5), so thathemaystrikewithhishandthenations,people,andnoblestates,whose measurehasbeenfilled."FortheLordis anall-knowing God;by Himactions aremeasured" (1 Samuel2:3).33 ForCapsali,the migrationof the Turksand theirrise to empirefollowed the biblical model of Isaiah 10:5-11: just as the rise of Assyria was a rebuketo the Biblical kingdom of Israel, so were the Turksempoweredto punish Christianity. The fact thatCapsalireplaced"Israel"with Christendomhints at the Christianorigin of this typology: after the conquest of Constantinopleby Mehemet II (1453), Christianexegetes often associated Isaiah 10:5 with the Turks,althoughthe sin they regardedas having provokedthis severe punishmentdiffered depending on theirparticularreligious affiliation.RomanCatholics,for example, saw the fall of Byzantiumas a divine verdict on the Greek Orthodox"schismatics"and warned Protestant"heretics"of an even more severepunishment.34Capsalitranslatedthis Christianinterpretationinto a Jewish context. In his view, the Ottomanconquest of Constantinoplewas Christianity'spunishmentfor the injusticethe Jews had suffered underits rule,just as the fall of the ByzantineEmpirecould be attributedto the persecutionof Judaismby the malkhutYavan,"thekingdomof Greece."More32. Prologueto SEZ, 1:10. 33. Ibid. 34. Cf. Robert Schwoebel, The Shadow of the Crescent: The Renaissance Image of the Turk
(1453-1517) (Nieuwkoop: de Graaf, 1967), 17-18, 20-21; C.A. Patrides,"'The Bloody and Cruell Turke':The Backgroundof a RenaissanceCommonplace,"Studiesin Religion 10 (1963): 126-35, esp. 129-30.
40
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean over,in calling Byzantium"thekingdomof Greece"he evokes the memory of the forced programof Hellenization by the ancient Seleucids that led to the Maccabeeanrevolts of the second centuryBCE, an event that had a lasting impact on the Jewish perceptionof "the Greeks": Onthe 19th dayof Aprilof theyear1453of theChristian calendar... "came thedaysof punishment, camethedaysof requital(shilum)"(Hosea9:7),and sincethe peace(shalom)departedfromhim (i.e., the ByzantineEmperor); as LordinspiredSultanMehemetto succeedhim(i.e.,theByzantineEmperor the rulerof Constantinople). wicked of the the measure For, kingdomof Greece(malkhut wasfull,becauseof all theevil theyhadinflictedon Yavan) JudahandIsraelsincethey(thatis, the"Greeks") hadbecomea people.Then "withthe theLordspoketo Himself:. .. "Iwill blowupon"Constantinople, fireof mywrath"(Ezekiel21:36)andconsumeit. "Iwill marchagainstit and setit onfire"(Isaiah27:4).Becauseof theevilthattheGreeksinflictedonmy intothehandof the people,on mynation,I will give it (i.e., Constantinople) executorof mybanandwill pouroutmywrathoverthem.35 To furtherlegitimate the historical mission he associated with the Turks, Capsaliopens his accountof Ottomanhistorywith a dreamascribedto the eponymous founderof the Ottomandynasty,'OthminnI (c. 1300-24):36 In thosedays,'Othmdnhadan important andpowerfuldream:TheLordlet 'Othmdn seethatfromhisheada smalltreebeganto grow,andit becametaller branches untilfinallyit becamea verytall andmajestictreethat"produced andsentoutboughs"(Ezekiel17:6).... Inthe morning,'Othminwas agitatedandsentforhis friends,advisors,andrelativesandtoldthemhis dream. Theytoldhim:Thiscertainlymeansthatanempirewill arisefromyourloins andwill ascendto heavenandto thestars.37 The dreamvision recountedhere echoes one of the famous foundinglegends of the OttomanEmpire,well knownfromofficial Ottomanchronicles,where it occurs in severalversions.38This legend projectsthe imperialambitionsof the sultans back into the time of theirorigins and depictstheirrise as partof a divineplan that was alreadyrevealedto the dynasty'sfounder.Accordingto the Ottomanver35. SEZ,ch. 11, 1:65;formoredetails,see Jacobs,IslamischeGeschichte,153-54. inhis 36. Capsali,however, givesno datesforhisreign.Indeed,thefirstdatethatis mentioned chronicleis 1453-the conquestof Constantinople. 37. SEZ,ch. 5, 1:42. 38. SeeJosephHammer vol. 1 (Paris,1835),67; vonPurgstall, Histoirede 1'Empire Ottoman, A. Gibbons,TheFoundation A Historyof theOsmanlisupto theDeath Herbert of theOttoman Empire: of BayezidI, 1300-1403(London,1916;reprinted1968),23-24; VL. Menage,"Onthe Recensions of Uruj'sHistory of the Ottomans,"Bulletin of the School of OrientalandAfrican Studies 30 (1967):
314-22; ColinImber,"TheOttomanDynasticMyth,"Turcica19 (1987):7-27; GottfriedHagen, als Sinnstiftung: Denkenbei denOsmanen(zu zu Traumundhistorischem Uberlegungen "Triiume ed. Hans zum100.Todestag, Pertsch,OrientalistundBibliothekar, Gotha,Ms.T 17/1),"in Wilhelm Stein(Gotha:Landes-undForschungsbibliothek Gotha,1999),101-22.
41
Martin Jacobs sion, however,it was not from eOthman's head but from his navel or loins thatthis greattree grew.This discrepancywould suggest thatthe Jewish chroniclerdid not dependon an Ottomansource:apartfrom the fact thathe probablycould not read Turkish,his many historicalerrors39indicatethatCapsalidid not make use of Ottoman historiography.40 It is likely thatCapsaliwas drawnto this well-knownOttomanfoundinglegend because it employed literarymotifs that could be also found in the Hebrew Bible: for example, Ezekiel 31:3-9, uses the tree metaphorfor the Assyrian Empire, and in Daniel 4 Nebuchadnezzar'sdreamvision containsimagerythatis very similarto thatof the Ottomanfoundationmyth.41In otherwords, this famous Ottoman legend fit extremelywell into Capsali'sview of history,accordingto which all futurehistoricalevents are alreadypredicted,if indirectly,in the HebrewBible. The belief in the divine origin of monarchicalpoweris certainlynot unique, and can be found in many culturesand religions. Capsali,however,goes so far as to claim the divine investitureof the Ottomansfor a specific historicalmission. To strengthenhis point, he even allows himself an excursusinto the mythicaldomain with the descriptionof a heavenly assembly on the New Year,42at which God reveals His plans for the Ottomansto the host of angels: Andtheangelsandtheentireheavenlyhostresponded: Praisedbe thename of theLordof theworld,"whochangestimesandseasons,removeskingsand installs kings" (Daniel 2:21).
At the sametime,"avoicecamedownfromheaven:It hasbeendecreed" thata strong,mightyandnobleempirewillbe given (Daniel4:28),'Othmdn,
to you, thatwill collect taxes on the land and divide the sea ... ; it "will be as
39. Forexample,Capsalireversesthe orderof MurddI (1360-89) and Blyazid I (1389-1403), see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte, 146-49. 40. It is also doubtfulthatCapsaliwas familiarwith any Ottomanchroniclewrittenin Hebrew, as his spelling of Turkishnames usually follows the Italianrendering.In contrast,comparethe text of the Oxfordmanuscript(HebrewE 63) that gives quite an exact Hebrewtranscriptionof the OttomanTurkishtext (tevarFkh-idl-i 'osmdn)of the so-calledAnonymousChronicles(FriedrichGiese [ed.], Die AltosmanischenAnonymenChroniken[Breslau, 1922]). This ms. was first noted by Adolf Neubauerin his Catalogueof the HebrewManuscriptsin the Bodleian Library(vol. 2 [Oxford,1906], col. 357, no. 2866), and lateridentified by FranzBabinger,"EineAltosmanischeAnonymeChronikin Hebrliischer Umschrift,"ArchivOrientclni4 (1932): 108-11 (includinga facsimile). Babingerdates the Sephardic scriptof the ms. to the sixteenthcentury. 41. Daniel 4:7-9: "Inthe visions of my mind in bed I saw a tree of greatheight in the midst of the earth;the tree grew and became mighty; its top reachedheaven, and it was visible to the ends of the earth. Its foliage was beautiful and its fruit abundant;there was food for all in it. Beneath it the beasts of the field found shade, and the birds of the sky dwelt on its branches;all creaturesfed on it." It is probablethat the Ottomanlegend indirectlyechoes the biblical motif. On dreamsin the Islamic context, see AnnemarieSchimmel, Die Trdumedes Kalifen: Traumeund ihre Deutung in der islamischen Kultur(Munich:C.H. Beck, 1998); on dreamsas literarymeans of legitimation,see Leah Kinberg, "LiteralDreamsand PropheticHadithsin Classical Islam:A Comparisonof TwoWaysof Legitimation,"Der Islam 70 (1993): 279-300. 42. In the context of Capsali'schronicle, this element of fiction is differentiatedfrom the historical narrativeby its use,ofAramaic, includingallusions to the book of Daniel, the Targum,and the Zohar.
42
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean strongas iron;justas ironcrushesandshatterseverything-andlikeironthat smashes-so will it crushandsmashall these"(Daniel2:40).43 The biblical quotes that Capsaliuses in this passage show thathe identified 'Othmdtn'sdynasty with the "iron"or "fourthkingdom"of the vision of Daniel, the last worldkingdombefore the redemption.MedievalJewish and Christianexegetes alike often associatedthis "iron"kingdom with Rome or the rule of Christendom. In identifying it with the Ottomans,Capsaliwas, however,following the precedentset by the twelfth-centuryJewishexegeteAbraham'Ibn 'Ezrawho, having lived underboth Christianand Muslim rule, held that Christendom(malkhut 'Edom)was only the "third,"that is, penultimate,empire44and that the last kingdom of world history was the Islamic empire (malkhutYishma'el).45 In 1523, the yearCapsalicompletedhis chronicle(almostfourhundredyears after 'Ibn 'Ezra), the Ottoman Empire would certainly seem to fit Daniel's descriptionof the "ironkingdom"extremelywell: it had alreadyconqueredmuch of the Islamic world and expandedfar into southeasternand centralEurope.In fact, Capsaliprovidesa detailed descriptionin Seder 'EliyahuZuta of one of the most importantOttomanwars of expansion,the campaignof Selim I againstthe Mamluks (1516-17) that subjectedSyria,Palestine,and Egypt to the SublimePorte.46 Accordingto Capsali,it was God Himself who inspiredSelim I to wage waragainst the MamluksultanQansawhal-Ghawri(1501-16): In the year(5)276(afterthe creation,i.e., 1516CE),the LordcalledSellm, thekingof kings... andinspiredhimto destroy... thekingdomof thesultanwhorulesthekingdomof Egypt(i.e., theMamluksultan)... .47 And later,the text continuesthe same biblical style: Andthe Lordspoketo Himself:'Behold,I summonmy servantSelimto set of goldandsiluphisthronein Egypt;"andhewillgaincontrolovertreasures verandoverall thepreciousthingsof Egypt"(Daniel11:43).48
43. SEZ, ch. 6, 1:43. 44. In orderto achieve this goal, 'Ibn 'Ezrahad to unite "Greece"and "Rome"into one empire; see 'Ibn'Ezra'scommentaryto Daniel 2:39, TheShortCommentaryon Daniel: A CriticalEdition(Hebrew),ed. A. Mondshine(M.A. Thesis, Bar-IlanUniversity,RamatGan, 1977), 12,7-9: "Thethirdempire is a western empire, i.e., the empire of Greece (Yavan)and of the Kittim.For Kittimwas among the sons of Yavan,as it is written:'The descendantsof Yavanare ElishaundTarshishundKittim'(Genesis 10:4), and Rome is Kittim;"cf. Gerson D. Cohen, "Esauas Symbol in Early MedievalThought," in Jewish Medieval and Renaissance Studies, ed. AlexanderAltmann(Cambridge:HarvardUniversity, 1967), 46-48, andibid., note 96; Yosef Yahalom,"TheTransitionof Kingdomsin EretzIsrael(Palestine) as Conceivedby Poets and Homilists"(Hebrew),Shalem 6 (1992): 1-22, esp. 12. 45. See 'Ibn 'Ezra,Short Commentaryon Daniel, ed. Mondshine, 13,5: "Thefourthempire is the malkhutYishma'el." 46. See Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte, 171-76. 47. SEZ, ch. 109, 1:312-13. 48. SEZ, ch. 109, 1:314.
43
Martin Jacobs Using yet anotherquote from Daniel, Capsalithen equates Selim I with the prophesized"kingof the north,"who "atthe time of the end"(Daniel 11:40)would conquerPalestineand Egypt. Capsali went much furtherthan 'Ibn 'Ezra, who had simply identified the malkhutYishmacelwith the "fourthkingdom"withoutengagingin any specific historical detail. And unlike his predecessor,the sixteenth-centurychroniclercombined this exegesis with a promise of messianic redemption,as evidenced by his interpretationof Isaiah 19:1: "Mountedon a swift cloud, the Lord will come to Egypt; Egypt's idols shall tremblebefore Him."Readingthis verse allegorically, Capsali equates the "swift cloud" with Selim I49and then goes on to explain the second half of the biblical quote as follows: Themeaning(kavvanah) hereinis thatafterSultanSelimhasruledin Egypt "theidolsshallvanishcompletely" (Isaiah2:18).Theidolsthatarethere(i.e., in Egypt)will be destroyed, andthiswill happenin thetimeof redemption; (... ) forsoon,speedily,ourtruemessiahwill come.... Sincethetimeof theexpulsionfromSpain(gerushSefarad),theLordhas thedistheexilesof Israelandhe will ingather undoubtedly begunto ingather the earth.50 of Judah from the of four corners persedpeople For Capsali, Selim's I campaignagainst the Mamlukswas a preludeto the ingatheringof the exiles and the coming of the messiah. By making a connection between the Ottomanconquestof Syria-Palestineand the gerush Sefarad,he was able to interpretthe expansionof Ottomanrule over the Middle East as the paving of the way for the repatriationof the Jews to the Landof Israel.Thus,he includes in his chapterson the reign of Bayazid II (1481-1512), the contemporaryof the Spanish expulsion, a lengthy section on the history of the Jews of Spain (sippur Sefarad), and even claims to quote a "copy"(patshegen) of the originalexpulsion edict "signed with the name of the king and the queen,"5'that is, Ferdinandof Aragon and Isabella of Castile. Capsali'squotationis so differentfrom its known Spanishversions, however,that it is doubtfulthat he had access to any such official document.52Rather,his informationwas based in parton the works of Abravanel,53and in part on the oral histories of Sephardicrefugees coming through 49. SEZ, ch. 134, 1:366. To this aim, he makes use of gimatria, arguingthat the Hebrewword for "swift"(QL = 130) has the same numericalvalue as the name Selim. This, however,makes it necessary for him to claim that Sellm is spelled Samekh,Lamed,Mem (= 130) "in Turkish,"while Capsali usually transcribesthe name with the lettersSin, Lamed,Yud,Mem (= 380). 50. SEZ, ch. 134, 1:367. 51. SEZ, ch. 68, 1:206-07. 52. See Haim H. Ben Sasson, "The Generationof the Spanish Exiles on Its Fate"(Hebrew), Zion 26 (1961): 23-64, esp. 57-59. See also the English translationin Joseph Dan, ed., Binah: Studies in Jewish History,vol. 1 (New York:Greenwood,1989), 83-98. 53. See Ben Sasson, "Generationof the SpanishExiles,"23 n. 4; 26, 32-33; CharlesBerlin, "A Sixteenth-CenturyHebrewChronicleof the OttomanEmpire:The Seder Eliyahu Zuta of Elijah Capsali and Its Message,"in Studiesin Jewish Bibliography,Historyand Literaturein Honor ofl. Edward Kiev, ed. CharlesBerlin (New York, 1971), 21-44, esp. 23.
44
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean Crete,to some of whom Capsalihimself gave shelter.54Despite this demonstrable lack of accuracy,however,Capsali'schroniclehas often been takento be a reliable accountof the Iberianexpulsions.55In any case, its highly stylized andtendentious charactershould cautionagainstusing Seder 'EliyahuZuta as a primarysource of history,whetherJewish or Ottoman. By insertingthe story of the expulsion of the IberianJews into his description of Bayazid II's reign, Capsalicreatesthe impressionthatthe two were directly relatedto each other.Actually,as Henry Kamen shows in his criticalreassessmentof the Sephardicmigration,56most Iberianexiles first went to geographically closer places of refuge such as Provence or Italy, and only when expelled from these places did they migrateto the East. Thereforethere was often a gap of one or moregenerationsbetweenthe Iberianexpulsionsandthe arrivalof the sefaradim in the realmof the sultans.57 Moreover,the account of Capsali accordingto which Bayazid II explicitly invited the Jews to settle in his reign cannotbe substantiatedby any extant document.58Capsali'swordingof this "invitation"is a literarycreationmadeup of biblical allusions and modeled on the edict of Cyrus accordingto Ezra 1:1: "HadnottheLordof Hostsleftus somesurvivors" (Isaiah1:9),andletus find mercywithSultanBiyazid,thekingof Turkey,-sothathe receivedtheJews withfriendshipandissued"aproclamation his realmby wordof throughout mouthandin writingas follows"(Ezra1:1):'Whosoever wishesto dwellin and shall not realm come and delay'-(if that My kingdom My maygladly hadnot happened)"Weshouldbe like Sodom,anotherGomorrah" (Isaiah 1:9).59
By linking the Iberian expulsion(s) with the reign of Bayazid II, Capsali gives the impressionthat there was a lineardevelopmentfrom one to the other,a 54. See the prologueto SEZ, 1:11. 55. Forthis reason,only Capsali'schapterson SpanishJudaismhave been translatedso far;see the English translationof chapters55-60, 67-83, and 97 of SEZ, in TheExpulsion 1492 Chronicles: AnAnthologyof Medieval ChroniclesRelating to the Expulsionof the Jewsfrom Spain and Portugal, ed. David Raphael(NorthHollywood:CarmiHouse, 1992), 1-50; and the Frenchtranslationof chapters 66-82 by Simone Sultan-Bohbot,Capsali, Elijahou, Chroniquede l'expulsion: Seder Elijahou Zouta (Paris:Cerf, 1994), includingan introduction;the unpublisheddissertationofYolanda Moreno Koch, Eljudaismo espaiol seguinla cronica de RabbiEliyahu Capsali: Traducciony estudio del seder Eliyahuzuta (capitulos40-71) (UniversidadComplutensede Madrid,1985), offers a Spanishtranslation of a slightly largerspan of chapters;a similarapproachis to be found in idem, "Figurasantisemitas seg6fnlas cr6nicashebraico-espafiolas," Proceedingsofthe SeventhWorldCongressofJewish Studies, vol. 4 (Jerusalem, 1981): 93-100 (reprintedin Maguen-Escudo 103 [1997]: 51-58); idem, "Sefarady las narracioneshist6ricasde R. EliyahuCapsali,"in Society and Community:Proceedings of the SecondInternationalCongressfor Researchof the Sephardiand OrientalJewishHeritage 1984, ed. A. Haim (Jerusalem, 1991), 3-9. 56. Henry Kamen, "The Mediterraneanand the Expulsion of Spanish Jews in 1492,"Past & Present 119 (1988): 30-55. 57. Formore details and bibliography,see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte, 11-18. 58. See ibid., 165-66. 59. SEZ, ch. 83, 1:239.
45
Martin Jacobs line that he then extends to include Selim I's conquest of Syria-Palestine,which (in Capsali'sview) establishedthe political conditions for a returnof the Jews to the Landof Israel. In his glorificationof Selim I, by whose conqueststhe empirehadbeen vastin size, Capsaligoes so faras to comparehim withAlexanderthe Great increased ly and otherworld rulersof antiquity: If heavenhadenabledhimto live a littlelonger... ,he wouldhaveruledthe worldas did Cyrus,Darius,Alexanderthe Macedon,andotherkings,who ruledfromoneendof theworldto theother.Butheavendidnothelphim,and in theprimeof his life he lefthis armyto others(to lead).60 In comparingSelim I to Alexander,Capsaliis echoing contemporaryChristian authorssuch as TeodoroSpandugino,who often makethe same analogy.In his collection of short biographiesof the Ottomansultans (Paris, 1519),61 which in many ways bears some similarityto Capsali'schronicle, Spanduginoclaims that the sultan"constantlyreadthe works and deeds of Alexanderthe Macedonand asAs was typical in sixteenth-century pired to surpasshim in fame and celebrity."62 historiography,Spanduginodepictedthe sultanas an educatedmonarchwho studied the ancient classics in orderto derive from them exempla useful for his own political strategy. As Capsali stresses, it was only his prematuredeaththat preventedSelim I from ruling "fromone end of the world to the other."But why then did "heaven not help" Selim I, given thathis campaignagainstthe Mamlukswas for the divine purposeof enablingthe ingatheringof the exiled Jews? Capsalidrawson theological argumentsto explain this problem, arguing that because Selim had grown haughtyand bloodthirstyas a result of his militarysuccesses, he was unfit to rule duringthe time of redemption.Forthis reason,the coming of the messiah hadbeen postponeduntil the reign of Selim I's son SiileymdnI.63 This kind of argumentation clearly echoes the narrativeof the biblical Chronicles, according to which Solomon (the eponymof Siileyman)was allowedto build the Temple,an honordenied his father,David,who hadbecome "amanof battlesandbloodshed"(1 Chron-
icles 28:3).64
As Capsali completedSeder 'EliyahuZuta in 1523, the last chaptersof his chronicleonly cover the first years of SiileymanI's (1520-66) reign:it concludes 60. SEZ,ch. 93, 1:266. 61. Spandugino,who had a Byzantine-Italianbackground,authoredthe first Italianversion in 1503 on the occasion of his journey to Constantinople.The Frencheditioprinceps of 1519 was probably the first book on the Ottomansto be printed.On Spanduginoandthe differentversionsof his work, see FranzBabinger,Die Aufzeichnungendes Genuesenlacopo de Promontorio-deCampis iiber den Osmanenstaatum 1475 (Munich:C.H. Beck, 1957), 14-18; Schwoebel,Shadowof the Crescent,20911; StephaneYerasimos,Les voyageursdans l'empire ottoman (XIVe-XVFesidcles) (Ankara:Societe turqued'histoire, 1991), 124-25; Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte,20-21. 62. See Spandugino,"De la origine deli imperatoriottomani,"180, 184-85 in Documents inidits relatifs d l'histoire de la Grice au moyendge, ed. C.N. Sathas(Paris, 1890), 9:138-261. 63. See SEZ, ch. 145, 1:397-98. 64. Formore details, see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte, 177-78.
46
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean with a detaileddescriptionof the fall of Rhodes in 1522,65which he saw as an important step towards the final Ottomanvictory over Christendom("Rome").A closer look at this descriptioncan help us understandmore fully his theological interpretationof history and his sources of information. Capsalidescribesthe landingof the Ottomantroopson the islandof Rhodes from the perspectiveof the Knightsof St. John-whom he calls Rhodiani-thereby hinting at the source of his information: It happenedon the25thof Giugno1522,on theholydayof theRhodiani,the feastof SanGiovanni-whoamongallthesaintsis theonewhomtheRhodiani haveelevatedoverthemselves:theydepictedhimon theirbanner(which feast,in the flew)abovetheirtroops.On the eveningof the aforementioned twentiethhour,theRhodianilifteduptheireyesand,behold,theysawa convoyof shipsthatfilledthesea.66 Ourchroniclercalls attentionto the fact thatthe Ottomanentry into the city of Rhodes,which had been evacuatedby the Knightsaftera long siege, took place on the "feastof the Christians(goyim)called natale (N'ZL), which is the birthday of theirgod."67ThatCapsaliviewed Christianityas a form of idolatryis evidenced by his expressionsof joy over the pillage of the Churchof St. John: ThentheTurksenteredtheprayerhouseof SanGiovanniandsmashedall the idols of the Christians(zalmeha-goyim)and crushedthem.Theyalso exhumedallthecorpsesof theGrandMasters(of St.John)thatwerethereinand dismembered them.Theyemptiedthebuildingof all thatwas in it, andtook everythingout,sparingneithergoldnorsilver. Thencamethe king(Siileymin),who stoodin the city square,the aforementionedprayerhousebehindhim,andprostrated beforetheGodof Heaven, whohadgivenhis enemiesintohis hands.68 The difference in Capsali's attitudes towards Christianityand Islam expressedhere is quite striking:while he regardsthe religious practicesof the Order of St. John as idolatrous,he portraysthe sultanas a pious man thankingthe God of Heaven(that is, the God of the Jews) for grantinghim victory.The rabbi'spartiality standsout even morewhen comparedto anothercontemporaryaccount,The WarofRhodes (La Guerradi Rhodi)by JacquesFontaine(lacopo Fontano),which relates how after his victory, Siileyman converted the church of San Giovanni 65. It stretchesover SEZ, ch. 154-162, 2:25-45. 66. SEZ, ch. 158, 2:35. Cf. the descriptionof the fall of Rhodes by Jacqes Fontaine(lacopo Fontano),La guerra di Rhodi, reprintedin FrancescoSansovino,ed., Historia universaledell'origine et imperiode turchi2(Venice, 1568), 234b-273b. On page 248a of the reprintedition, Fontainereports that on the morningof June 24 una grandissimaarmata came into view; on Fontaineand his work on the Ottomans,see Cochrane,Historians and Historiography,333. 67. SEZ, ch. 161, 2:44. The same date is mentionedin Fontaine,Guerradi Rhodi, in Sansovino, Historia, 250b ("il di del natale del Signor nostro");and Spandugino,"Origine,"in Sathas,Documents inddits, 186, 17-18. 68. SEZ, ch. 161, 2:44.
47
Martin Jacobs Battista into a mosque, which he calls tempiodi Maometh.Like Capsali,Fontaine also reportsthat the sultan took away "the relics of the Saints"and orderedthe GrandMasters'tombs to be opened. In contrastto the Jewish chronicler,who portraitsthe Muslim ruleras a believer in the "God of Heaven,"Fontainebetrayshis ignoranceof Islam when he claims thatthe sultan"prayedto Maometh,whom the barbariansbelieve to have been sent by God in Heavenas the most perfectprophet of all times."69 Capsalino doubt felt confirmed in his pro-Ottomanattitudeby the fact that after their victory, the conquerorsliberatedJews (and Turks)who had been enslaved by the Knights on their Mediterraneanraids: Onthisday,all theTurkishslaveson Rhodeswererescued,fortheking(i.e., the sultan)hadcometo an agreementwiththeRhodianinotto kill them(on theirwithdrawal). TherewerealsomanyenslavedJewson Rhodeswhowere savedby the Lord'scompassion.Also all the Jews who had apostatized, whethervoluntarily orforcibly,on occasionof (their)expulsionfromRhodes to theirformerreligion.TheyreopenedthesynagoguethattheChrisreturned tians(goyim)hadclosed,andenteringit, gavethanks,praisedthe Lordand "sanghymnsto theLordtheGodof Israel"(Judges5:3).70 In Fontaine'schronicle, there is also mention of the fact that the Ottomans allowedJews who hadbeen forciblyconvertedto Christianityto "returnto the Law of Moses."7'ForCapsali,this providedstill more proof thatthe Ottomanconquest was in the interestof the Jews. He was aware,however,of the possible repercussions the fall of Rhodes might have on Venetian Crete. Thus he notes that the Knights of St. John had sent a ship (for which he uses the loanwordfusta) to ask the help of Gabrieleda Martinengo,who was in Candiaexecutinga Venetiancommission to strengthenthe city's fortifications.72He also knew thata Venetianfleet had sailed to Candia under the command of the capitagno general Domenico Trevezanto protectCrete against a possible Ottomanattackon the Venetianoutpost.73It may seem surprisingthat Capsali-who served as the Jewish representativeto the Venetianauthorities-would not only criticize Martinengofor agreeing to come to the aid of the Knightsof St. John,but even more disturbingly,voice such enthusiasmover the fall of Rhodes. His jubilanttone is even more problematic given the fact thatsome of the Knightshadbroughtthe plague with themwhen they pulled out of Rhodes and took refuge in Candia.74It is against this gloomy backdropthatCapsalidaresto celebratethe fall of Rhodes in rhymedprose, com69. Guerradi Rhodi, in Sansovino,Historia, 262b. 70. SEZ, ch. 161, 2:45. 71. Fontaine,Guerradi Rhodi, in Sansovino, Historia, 262b-263a (defective pagination).In the following, however,Fontaineclaims that "the slaves were forced to sacrifice to Maometh"(sic!). 72. SEZ, ch. 159, 2:38; the name is spelled Martilengo.According to Marino Sanuto, Martiin Candiaas "governorof the infantry"(governadordi lefantarie) in 1521; see, I Diarii, served nengo vol. 30, ed. E Stefani (repr.Bologna, 1969/70), 372. 73. SEZ, chap. 159, 2:39; Capsali'sspelling reflects the Venetianpronunciation"Domenego." 74. Capsalimentions this in SEZ, chap. 165, 2:106-107.
48
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean paringthe conquestto a lawful "wedding"of a "bride"(Rhodes)and "groom"(Siileymdn I).75 The only explanationfor Capsali'spanegyricson the Ottomansis thathe believed the coming of the messiah to be imminent.Thus, at the beginning of his chapterson Siileymdn,he writes: He is thetenthking(sultan)of theTurks,and"thetenthone shallbe holyto the Lord"(Leviticus27:32)."Inhis daysJudahshallbe deliveredandIsrael (shalldwellsecure"[Jeremiah23:6])"anda redeemershallcometo Zion" (Isaiah59:20).76 Capsali'sconvictionthatthe coming of the messiahwas imminentwas based on the speculations of the SephardicKabbalistAbrahamben 'Eli'ezer ha-Levi, who had predictedthat the messiah would appearin the Jewish year 5290 (1529/ 30).77 At the conclusion of his chronicle,Capsalieven expressesthe wish not only that he will be able to witness personallythe redemption,but that he will also be in the position to make a writtenaccountof it (sic!): "OnethingI askof the Lord,onlythatdo I seek"(Psalm27:4):As we were allowedto writean accountof theseevents,so we maybe allowedto write aboutallthegood(thingsto come),thattheLordhasforetoldthroughhisservants,theprophets,fortheLordhasspokengood(tidings)forIsrael."Letour eyes gazeon Zion"(Micah4:11)andon therebuildingof Ariel.Mayall Israeltakepartin theingathering of theexilesandin thecomingof themessiah....78 We do not know Capsali'sreactionto the disappointmentof his expectations whetherhe simply postponedhis hopes or was totally disillusioned.As he neither updatedhis chroniclenor revised the computationof the year of redemption,one may assume the latter. CAPSALI AS A CHRONICLER OF MUSLIM HISTORY
Seder 'EliyahuZuta does more than simply try to convince its readersthat the Ottomandynastywas raisedby God to repatriatethe Jews in the mid-sixteenth century.A closer look at the materialassembledby Capsalileads to the conclusion that, notwithstandingits theologically motivated view on history (a standpoint 75. These allegoricalpieces have been added to SEZ as ch. 162-64, 2:46-106. SEZ,ch. 163, 2:67-86, deals with the handing over of the Dodecanese islands that Capsali calls the "numerous daughters"of Rhodes. 76. SEZ, ch. 148, 2:7. 77. Mesharekitrin(Constantinople,1510; reprintas facsimile, Jerusalem,1977), 16b-17a; cf. the introductionby GershomScholem, 26; on ha-Levi'smessianic speculationsandtheirrelationto the Ottomans,see idem, Major Trendsin Jewish Mysticism(New York,1941), 247; Haim H. Ben Sasson, "Exile and Redemptionthroughthe Eyes of the SpanishExiles" (Hebrew),in YitzhakE Baer Jubilee Volume,ed. Salo W. Baron e.a. (Jerusalem, 1960), 216-27, esp. 225. 78. SEZ, ch. 148, 2:7.
49
MartinJacobs sharedby many contemporaryChristianhistoriographers),his work has to be regarded as a serious attemptat writing historiography.His use of the stylistic devices of contemporaryItalianwriting on the Ottomansshows that his messianic expectationswere not the sole reasonbehindhis turnto historiography. Capsali, like Spanduginoand other sixteenth-centuryItalianwriterson the Ottomans,79authoredshortbiographicalportraitsof the sultans, from the eponymous founderof the dynastyup to the sultanruling at the time of his writing.Like otherItalianwritersof thatgenre,he enrichedthese biographicalsketcheswith battle accounts,descriptionsof weapons,80storiesaboutdynasticintriguesand life in the harem,as well as many otherdetails which he thoughtto be eitherinformative or entertaining.Anotherindicationof Capsali'shistoriographicalambitionsis his decision to open his Ottomanchroniclewith an historicaloverview of the origins of Islam.A close readingof these introductorychaptersrevealsthatin his attempt to write a "serious"chronicleaccordingto contemporarymodels, Capsali sometimes ended up contradictinghis own agenda, as exemplified by his chapterson early Islam. Capsali'sknowledgeof the origins of Islam was based on earlierJewish and Christianpolemical traditions.The Christianbackgroundof much of his material is best illustratedby the versionof the life of Muhammadthathe offershis readers: men wasa Christian ManysaythatMuhammad8• (goy),oneof theimportant orprincesof Rome,oneof thedistinguished of thePope cardinals (GRDYNLY) andsuccessfulwar(papa).WhentheRomanssawthathe wasa courageous sent him out in to roam the of theEastin orabout and wander Land rior,they derto subjectit to theirrule(literally:"hands"). Andtheytookan oathand sworethatif he succeededin this,theywouldmakehimPopeon hisreturn.82 79. See VJ. Parry,"RenaissanceHistoricalLiteraturein Relationto the Near and Middle East," in Historians of the MiddleEast, ed. BernardLewis and P.M.Holt (Oxford:OxfordUniversity,1962), 277-89; Schwoebel, Shadow of the Crescent, 147-75; Agostino Pertusi,"I primi studi in occidente sull'origine e la potenza dei turchi,"Studi Veneziani12 (1970): 465-515; Cochrane,Historians and Historiography,324-37 (on Italians in the East); for more details and bibliography,see Jacobs, Islamische Geschichte, 19-27. 80. Aryeh Shmuelevitz,"Capsalias a Source for OttomanHistory, 1450-1523," International Journal of Middle East Studies 9 (1978): 339-44, sees in Seder 'EliyahuZuta a source of special importance for the history of Ottomanweaponry.According to Shmuelevitz, Capsali acquiredspecific informationin this field due to his contacts to Spanish-Jewishrefugees. However,the impact of sefaradim on the Ottomandevelopmentof weapons has been largely overestimated.See S.O.T.Christensen, "TheMarranosas Gunrunners:A DistortedTopos of the ClandestineEuropeanExpansion,"in Dimensoes da alteridade nas culturasde lingua Portuguesa-o outro,Actas de 1o SimposioInterdisciplinar de EstudosPortugueses,vol. 2 (Lisbon, 1987), 111-32; Gilles Veinstein,"Note sur les transferts technologiquesdes sefaradesdans l'empire ottoman,"in 1492: L'expulsiondesjuifs d'Espagne, ed. RolandGoetschel (Paris:Maisonneuveet Larose, 1996), 83-92; Capsali seems to echo a Western topos, accordingto which the Jews were to blame for the Ottomanconquests, see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte, 151, 170, 208-09. 81. Spelled here MHMYTlike the Latin Mahumet,yet anotherindicationof the Christianorigin of Capsali'smaterial.The editor'sclaim (SEZ, ch. 4, 1:36 n. 37) that Capsali follows the Turkish usage is misleading,as-contrary to modernTurkish-Ottoman Turkishwould readMehemed 82. SEZ, ch. 4, 1:38.
50
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean Muhammad,havingsubjected"theentireEastto the Romans,"returnedvictorious to Rome only to find that the Romans had no intention of keeping their promiseto make him Pope. It was for this reasonthatMuhammadwent backto the cities he had conqueredin the East and became theirruler. This explanationof the origins of Islam can be tracedback to widely circulated legends, accordingto which Muhammadwas influencedby Christianteachers-legends thatwent so far as to suggest the fantasticalidea that he had started out as an ambitiousCatholic cardinal.83The story first emerges at the end of the thirteenthandbeginningof the fourteenthcenturyin the Italianversionsof Brunetto Latini'sTesoro84and in a collection of legends aboutMuhammadknownunder the title LiberNicolay.85 In depicting Islam as nothing more than a Christianapostasy, Capsali is echoing a viewpoint characteristicof medieval Westernpolemics against Islam. His interestin this version, however,was primarilythat it questionedthe revealed characterof Islam. We see this as well in some of the other stories he tells about Muhammadbeing a charlatanand impostor: decidedto establisha newreligionintheworldin orderto be seen Muhammad as important masses('amha-'are;)andto abrogatethereby theuneducated ligionsthathadbeenin existencepriorto him.Hewasa veryshrewdmanwho knewto deviouslyobtaintheconfidenceof people:hewasverycunning"and whereverhe turnedhe worsted"(things)[1 Samuel14:47]). Inanyevent,he tooka doveand"guided" it "inknowledgeandshowed"it "thepathof wisdom"(Isaiah40:14).WhenMuhammad wassittingin frontof thepeopleandtheprinces,thedoveflew(to him)andcameto whisperin his earsin thepresenceof allthepeople.... Andallwhosawit werestunnedand askedhim:"Whatis that?"Andhe repliedto them:"(Word of himwhohears God'sspeech),who beholdsvisionsfromtheAlmighty"(Numbers24:4).86 Accordingto this story,Muhammadhadtraineda dove to makeit appearthat it was whispering divine words into his ears. The legend questions the revealed characterof Islam and is obviouslyusing Christianimagery,wherethe dove serves as a symbol of the Holy Spirit. 83. This motif would appearto go back to the Christianlegend, according to which one of Muhammad'sadvisors was a monk, who is often called Bahiri (on the Bahirdlegend, see notes 109, 112, and 113). In one version of this legend, it is said that Muhammad'sadvisorwas a hereticalhermit who wantedto become Patriarchof Alexandriabut was rejectedfor his unorthodoxviews. This motif of the ambitiousheretic is latertransposedonto Muhammadhimself who, in a Latincontext, is represented as a cardinalratherthan a hermit. 84. Accordingto both versions of the Tesoro,the originalname of the cardinalwas Pela(s)gio; see the quotes in Alessandrod'Ancona, "La leggenda di Maomettoin occidente,"in Studi di critica e storia letterariadi Alessandrod'Ancona2,vol. 2 (Bologna, 1912), 165-306, esp, 168-69. 85. See Augusto Mancini,"Perlo studio della leggenda di Maomettoin occidente,"Rendiconti dellaAccademiaNazionale dei Lincei, Classe di scienze morali,storicheefilogiche, Ser.6, 10 (1934): 325-49, esp. 327-28, n. 4; d'Ancona, "Leggenda,"210-15; KennethM. Setton, WesternHostility to Islam and Prophecies of TurkishDoom (Philadelphia:AmericanPhilosophicalSociety, 1992), 2-3. 86. SEZ, ch. 4, 1:36
51
Martin Jacobs The same motif occursin the LiberNicolay87as well as in the SpeculumHistoriale by Vincentof Beauvais(died 1264), which containsan extensive collection of polemic texts againstIslam(book 23, chapters39-67).88 Vincenthimself refers to an anonymouslibellus de Machometifallacis ("Booklet on Muhammad'sDeceptions") said to have circulatedin partibus transmarinis("in the overseaterritories"), as the Levantwas called by the Crusaders.It is in this booklet that Vincent claims to have found the following version of the legend of the traineddove: As he (Muhammad) wasspeakingto thepeople,a dovethatwasnearbyand thathe had surreptitiously trainedto this purpose,cameandlandedon his shoulderand,peckingatthegrainthatwashiddenin (Muhammad's) ears,apwithhimwordsof theLaw.89 pearedto be prompting While Capsali'sway of weaving his text out of biblical quotes and allusions tends to obscure the meaning, here, the alleged trick finds a kind of rationalistic explanation:the dove is peckinggrainsof wheattuckedawayin Muhammad'sears. Whereasthe above-quotedlegends areof Christianorigin,Capsalialso drew fromJewishpolemics againstIslam.The following paragraphfromSeder 'Eliyahu Zuta is based on Jacob of Venice's letter against the apostate Pablo Christiani90 (dating from the thirteenthcentury): didmanythingslikethis;butthe miracleshe performed were "Muhammad created(by)opticalillusions,andhe wouldperformthesegreatwondersby meansof deceitandtrickery."91 Inthiswaywasmostof theEastdeceivedby his trickery... ; andtheybelievedthathe wasa prophetof GodandHismessengerandthathe hadbeensentby thespiritof GodandHispower.92 Although it is difficult to pinpoint any one particularsource for Capsali's polemicaltraditionsof Christianorigin,one can assumethatthese traditionswould 87. See the Latintext in Mancini,"Studiodella leggenda,"343. 88. See d'Ancona, "Leggenda,"198, 269-70 n. 71. The parallelbetween Capsali and Vincent of Beauvais has alreadybeen recognized by Shimon Shtober,who refers to Capsali in the context of his researchon Yosef Sambari;see Shtober,"Muhammadand the Beginningof Islam in the Chronicle Sefer Divrey Yoseph,"in Studies in Islamic History and Civilizationin Honour of Prof David Ayalon, ed. Moshe Sharon (Jerusalem, Leiden: Brill, 1986), 319-52, esp. 334; idem, "Reshit ha-Islam be'aspeklariyahyehudit:sippuroshelYosef Sambariba'al sefer divreYosef,"Pe'amim61 (1994): 83-108, esp. 94. 89. Speculumhistoriale 23, 39. My translationis based on the edition Douai, 1624: Vincentius Bellovacensis, Speculumquadruplexsive speculummaius (facsimile reprint;Graz, 1964), 912b. 90. Publishedby J. Kobakas Iggeret vikkuah,Jeschurun6 (1868): Hebrewpart, 1-34; accord' ing to JacobMann,"Une source d'histoirejuive au XIII siecle: La lettrepolemiquede Jacobb. Elie Pablo Christiani,"Revuedes EtudesJuives 82 (1926): 363-77, the authorwas from Spain. Before his conversionto Christianity,the DominicanfriarPabloChristianiwas known as Sha'ul and belonged to the disciples of Jacob b. Elijah; see Jeremy Cohen, The Friars and the Jews: The Evolution ofMedieval Anti-Judaism (Ithaca, NY: Cornell, 1986), 108-109.
91. Up to this point, Capsali is quoting Jacobof Venice; cf. Iggeret vikkuah,ed. Kobak, 13. 92. SEZ, chap. 5, 1:41.
52
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean have been knownto him as partof his Venetianculturalbackground.As the rise of Venice had been closely linked to the Crusades,93and the FourthCrusadeserved Venice as a welcome pretextto expand its commercial activities and colonies in the eastern Mediterranean,much of the Crusadertraditionwas preservedin the VenetianEmpire.Even after the fall of the Crusaderstates in the Levant,Venice continued to provide for the transportationof Christianpilgrims to the Holy Land.94Thus, much of the Christianpolemics againstIslamthathad originatedin partibus transmarinis, polemics such as the libellus de Machometifallacis quoted
by Vincentof Beauvais,lived on in the partsof the easternMediterraneanruledby Venice. In this milieu, Capsaliwill have also learnedof Christiantraditionsregarding the compositionof the Qur'an,as we can see fromthe following story fromthe life of Muhammadthat Capsaliincludes in the Seder 'EliyahuZuta: orderedhis friend'All to writedownhis lawsand A) Andhe (Muhammad) instructions (torotav);he woulddictatethemand'Ali wouldwritethemin a bookwithink,whileTurzemdn wouldbe "standing at his rightto admonish him(lesitno)"(Zechariah 3:1);"thereby daubingwithplasterthe flimsywall thathe wasbuilding"(Ezekiel13:10).Inthiswaywasbroughtto completion theworkproducedby Muhammad thattheycall ilfur'an(i.e., al-Qur'an).95 the unityof Godin comB) In thisbook,he (i.e., Muhammad) proclaimed plete unity (yihed ha-'el be-takhlit ha-yihud). He collected from here and
therealltheversesthatspeakabouttheunityof Godin thetwenty-four books themintoit (theQur'an)in their(own) (of theHebrewBible)andtransferred writingandtheir(own)language. didnotknowhowto write.Andso, when C) However,thismanMuhammad he wantedto writesomething,he wouldnotsignin his ownhandwriting but woulddiphiswholehandwithits five fingersintoinkandwouldmakea print insteadof his signatureas a signforthepeopleof Ishmael.96 The traditionaccordingto which Muhammadwas illiterate is well known from Islamic sources, especially from the biographical(sfra) and exegetical liter-
93. WhereasduringtheFirstCrusadeGenoaandPisasuppliedmuchof thenavalpower,later it wastheVenetians whowerethemostsuccessfulin securingforthemselvesspecificterritorial and commercial inA Historyof theCrusades,vol. 5: grants;see L.B.Robert,"VeniceandtheCrusades," TheImpactof theCrusadeson theNearEast,ed.NormanP ZacourandHarryW.Hazard(Madison: of Wisconsin,1985),379-451;DonaldE.QuellerandIreneB.Katele,"VeniceandtheConUniversity StudiVeneziani 12(1986):15-43. questof theLatinKingdomof Jerusalem," 94. SeeEliyahuAshtor,"Venezia Archie il pellegrinaggio inTerraSantanelbassomedioevo," vo StoricoItaliano143,no. 2 (1985):197-223;UgoTucci,"Iservizimarittimi venezianiperil pelleStudiVeneziani 9 (1985):43-66; DavidJacoby,"Pelerinage grinaggioin TerraSantanel Medioevo," mfdi-vale et sanctuaires de TerreSainte:la perpective v ,netienne,"AteneoVeneto 24 (1986):27-58 States,ch.4). (reprintin idem,Studieson theCrusader 95. Thespellingilfur'dnis probably a corruption of Latinalchoranus. 96. SEZ,ch.4, 1:37.
53
MartinJacobs ature (tafsTr).97In Islam, Muhammad'silliteracy served as an affirmationof the belief that the Qur'anwas not authoredby a man but ratherrevealedby God. In contrast,Christianpolemics used this traditionto question the originalityof the Qur'anby depictingMuhammadas an ignoramuswho plagiarizedthe Bible under the influence of Jewish or Christianadvisers. Similarly,Capsaliattributesleading roles in the composition of the Qur'anto two companionsof Muhammadcalled cAli and Turzeman(i),whom he characterizesin the following way: wasjoinedbytwomen,whowere"cleveratdoingwrong, D) He(Muhammad) butunableto do right"(Jeremiah 4:22);onewascalled'All andtheotherone Turzemdni. 'Al wasveryclever,andsomesaythathe was(originally)a Jew whohadbeenbaptized98 .... 99 Already in the early Judeo-ArabicQissat ashdb Muhammad("Story of Muhammad'sFriends")preservedin the CairoGenizahthereis mentionoften wise Jewish men who accepted Islam "to preventevil from Israel"and composed the Qur'anon Muhammad'sbehalf;100however,this traditionwas unknownto the Candiote rabbi.ThatCapsalidependedon Jewishtraditionsoriginatingfrom Christian lands is substantiatedby the fact that 'All ('Ibn "AbiT-alib,the cousin and sonin-law of the prophet)is here said to be a baptizedJew.Accordingto this polemical tradition,'All's (alleged) apostasyis the explanationfor his bad influence on Muhammad. The second companion, Turzeman(i),'•ois probablyto be identified with cUthman bin al-'Affan,underwhose caliphate(644-56 CE) the official version of the Qur'anwas promulgated.This would explain Capsali'suse of Zechariah3:1, accordingto which Turzeman's job was to supervise'All's writing,which is comto a wall" that needs to be plastered(A). Capsali,however,was not pared "flimsy interestedin a historical critiqueof the Qur'dn,but in making a polemical statement. As a closer look at the quotedverse reveals, the "admonitioner"mentioned in Zechariah3:1 "standingat his rightto admonishhim (lesitno)"is none otherbut satan. In equating'Uthmln with Satan,Capsali is declaringthe Qur'dnto be Satanic verses; and later in the text, he refers to Muhammadas the "companionof 97. See IsaiahGoldfeld,"TheIlliterateProphet(NabTUmmT): An Inquiryinto the Development of a Dogma in IslamicTradition,"Der Islam 57 (1980): 58-67; Norman Calder,"The UmmTin Early Islamic JuridicLiterature," Der Islam 67 (1990): 111-23; K. 'Athamina,"Al-Nabiyyal-Umiyy:An Inquiry into the Meaning of a Qur'anicVerse,"Der Islam 69 (1992): 61-80. 98. Literally:"he broughtabouthimself the malicious (or: stormy)waters." 99. SEZ, ch. 4, 1:36. 100. See Jacob Leveen, "Mohammedand His Jewish Friends,"Jewish QuarterlyReview 16 (1925/26): 399-406; Jewish QuarterlyReview 17 (1926/27): 237; the Genizah fragment,Ms. JTS ENA 2541, fol. A, is publishedin Jewish QuarterlyReview 16, 402; cf. M. Schwabe, "Mohammed's TenJewish Companions"(Hebrew), Tarbiz2 (1931): 74-89 (with parallelsin the worksof the Byzan-
HebrewUnionColtinechronicler JacobMann,"AnEarlyTheologico-Polemical Work," Theophanus); legeAnnual 12-13 (1937-38): 411-59. 101. This name may perhapsbe explained as a conflation of the Ottomanterjuman(deriving fromArabicturjuman,"translator," familiaras "dragoman"in Europeanlanguages,and "interpreter"), Uthman.
54
Exposed to All the Currentsof the Mediterranean (the archdemon)Ashmadai."'02Despite these polemical undertones,Capsalidoes acknowledgethe monotheisticcharacterof Islam,103a concession made by Christian polemicists as well.104 However, he explains away the uniqueness of the Qur'dnicproclamationsof the One God with his claim thatall of the relevantverses were actuallycompiled from differentpartsof the HebrewBible. anothertraCapsalialso retells a polemical version of the Bahira-legend,105 dition aboutthe life of Muhammadthatgoes back to the classical biographicalliterature(sira) of Islam and thathad an extensive afterlifein Christiananti-Islamic polemics: A) In the chronicle (sefer divre ha-yamim)of Muhammad,the deceiver and
it is written,thatAbfiBakrand Hayyawere companionof Ashmadai,'06 of Muhammad's covenantandreligionandamongthose amongthesupporters whoobservedhis commandments andhis teaching(torah). B) Abti Bakr was of Jewish origin, the son of the exilarch (rosh ha-golah).
Whenhe sawthatMuhammad wasrisinghigherandhigher(in theranks)he to that fear began (Muhammad) mightcometo hatehimandremovehimfrom his (own)highrankand"dragthedignity"of his office "inthedust"(Psalm 89:40).Andso he tookoff hiscleanclothesandputondirtyones,adoptedthe andhis "conductof sinfulmen"(Numbers32:14),andjoinedMuhammad wentandlisteningto his speeches. friends,goingwherever(Muhammad) C) This man Hayya who was a Christian(nozri) became Muhammad'sadvi-
sor andbosomcompanion, joininghim in his bedroomandon his bed.Becauseof this,Muhammad's friendsbecameenviousof him(... ) andplotted to slayhimwiththesword.107 The story goes on to relate how Muhammad'sChristianfriend arrangesa banquetin the course of which everyone falls asleep except Abii Bakr,who takes 102. SEZ, 5, 1:38; there again, Capsali quotes the polemical letter of Jacob of Venice, see below. On Ashmadaias inspiratorof Muhammad'sJewish teachers,see a sourcepublishedby B. Cohen, "Une lgende juive de Mahomet,"Revuedes EtudesJuives 88 (1929): 1-17. Forthe attributionof the Qur'5nto Satan,anothertopos of Christianpolemics, see d'Ancona, "Leggenda,"262, n. 58; Norman Daniel, Islam and the West:TheMakingof Image, 2nd ed. (Oxford:One World,1993), 362, n. 86. 103. Capsali echoes here Maimonides' wording in his response to the proselyte 'Ovadya; see Teshuvotha-Rambam,ed. JehoshuaBlau, vol. 2, 2nd ed. (Jerusalem, 1986), 726, No. 448: "These Muslims (Yishmacelim)are no idolaters at all . . . and they proclaim the unity of God (meyahedim la-'el ... yihud) ... properly." 104. See Daniel, Islam and the West,60-62. 105. On the following, cf. Shimon Shtober'sarticles on Yosef Sambari'suse of the Bahiralegend, "Muhammadand the Beginning of Islam,"329-31; idem, "The Monk Bahira,the Counselor of Muhammadand the Jews: Between Polemic and Historiography"(Hebrew), Proceedings of the TenthWorldCongressofJewish Studies, vol. 2, 1 (Jerusalem, 1990), 69-76; idem, "Reshitha-Islam," 92-94. 106. Here again, Capsaliquotesthe polemical letterofJacob ofVenice, see Iggeretvikkuah,ed. Kobak, 13. 107. SEZ, ch. 5, 1:38-9.
55
Martin Jacobs Muhammad'sswordand kills Hayya. The next morning,Muhammadwakes from a drunkensleep to discoverthathis friendhas been murdered,and,seeing the blood on his own sword,believes that he himself was the one who killed him. Heartbroken, he then issues a decree prohibitingthe drinkingof alcohol. While it is correctthatAbdiBakrwas among the first supportersof Muhammad,nowherein the Muslim traditionis he describedas havingbeen the son of an exilarch (rosh ha-golah, i.e., the representativeof the Jews in Babylonia).8osThe story that 'All and Abil Bakr were Jews who had convertedto Islam, however,is to be foundin the Judeo-Arabictraditionoriginatingfromthe Landsof Islam'09 although,again, Capsali could not have been awareof this. Although he refersto a "chronicle(sefer divreha-yamim)of Muhammad,"the source of his banquetstory is the polemical letter by Jacob of Venice mentionedabove." 0 It is from this source as well thathe took the name Hayya;,' however,there is no questionthat this figure is to be identified with Bahira,aboutwhom there are many legends in both Islamic and Christiansources. According to Muslim tradition,Bahirawas a Christian monk who had recognized Mulhammad'sfuture mission when the prophetwas still a youth." 2 Whereasin IslamictraditionBahirdserves as a Christian witness to the authenticityof Muhammad'sprophethood,in Christianpolemical literaturehe is a Christian heretic who exerts considerable influence on Muhammadand the composition of the Qur'dn."13 The story that connects the Islamic prohibitionof alcohol to the murderof Bahirdcan be tracedback to the Crusaderstates of the Levant,from which it was broughtto the West in the thirteenthcentury by William of Tripoli. 14It would thereforehavebeen familiarto Jacobof Venice,whose polemical letter,as we have 108. The "son of the Rosh ha-Golah"(Arabic:ibn rds al-djaliut)is, however,a knownfigure in Muslim literature;see Moshe Gil, "The BabylonianEncounterand the ExilarchicHouse in the Light of CairoGeniza Documentsand ParallelArab Sources,"in Judaeo-ArabicStudies:Proceedingsof the Founding Conferenceof the Societyfor Judaeo-ArabicStudies, ed. Norman Golb (Amsterdam:Harwood, 1997), 135-73, esp. 157 and n. 47 (Hebrewversion in Tarbiz48 [1979]: 35-73). 109. See Moshe Gil, "The Story of Bahiraand Its Jewish Versions"(Hebrew) in Hebrew and Arabic Studies in Honour of Joshua Blau, ed. Haggai Ben-Shammai(Hebrew) (Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, 1993), 193-210, accordingto whom the Judeo-ArabicBahiratraditioncan be tracedback to Sa'adyah Ga'on; see also the selected sourcestranslatedby Shtober,"Reshitha-Islam,"347-52. 110. This sourcehas been identifiedby Shtober,"Reshitha-Islam,"332, wherehe refersto Capsali as a source of Sambari'swork. 111. Iggeret vikkuah,ed. Kobak, 13: Hayya. 112. See Alois Sprenger, "Mohammads Zusammenkunft mit dem Einsiedler Bahyra," Zeitschriftder DeutschenMorgenldndischenGesellschaft12 (1858): 238-49; TheodorN61deke,"Hatte MuhammadchristlicheLehrer?,"ibid., 699-708; and the entry "BahTir,"The Encyclopediaof Islam, New Edition, vol. 1 (Leiden, 1960), col. 922-23 (A. Abel). 113. See MoritzSteinschneider,PolemischeundapologetischeLiteraturin arabischerSprache zwischenMuslimen,ChristenundJuden(Leipzig, 1877), 160; C. de Vaux,"Lal6gendede Bahira,"Revue de l'Orient Chretien2 (1897): 439-54; RichardGottheil,"A ChristianBahiraLegend,"Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie 13 (1898): 189-242; 14 (1898): 203-68; 15 (1900): 56-102; 17 (1903): 125-66; Daniel, Islam and the West,109-10, 262-64; S. Gero, "The Legend of the Monk Bahird:The Cult of the Cross, and Iconoclasm,"in La Syrie de Byzancea I'Islam,VIF- VIIFsiecle, ed. P Canivetand J.P. Rey-Coqais(Damascus, 1992), 47-58. 114. See d'Ancona, "Leggenda,"200-04; cf. Daniel, Islam and the West,110, 373 n. 33.
56
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean seen, was Capsali'ssource. Here again we get an idea how Outremertraditionsbecame known to the authorof Seder 'EliyahuZuta. Although (so far) it has not been possible to identify a specific non-Jewish source used by Capsali,the legends he includedinto his accounton the origins of Islampoint at Crusadertraditionsthatwere still accessible in the VenetianEmpire of the sixteenth century.His depiction of Ottomanhistory,which to some extent resembles Spandugino'saccount, has to be understoodin the context of the contemporaryVenetian-Ottomanrivalry.However,it is still an open questionwhether Capsali drew on written sources for his descriptionsof the dynastic and military history of the Ottomans,given that he himself, like a good classical historian,115 firmly believed that oral sources constitutedthe most reliablematerialof historiography: thatmytonguewill tell the Amongstthetribesof Israel,I firmlyannounced truth:InallthestoriesI willtell,I willnottakethepathof liars.Behold,I have receivedthe stories(sippurim)aboutthekingsof Turkeyfromthe mouthof venerable(zekenim) andknowledgeable Turks.'16 Like Spandugino,who claimed to have enteredinto conversationwith "two gentlemenwho were close to Bayazid II,5'117 Capsali, however,does not disclose the namesof his informants,the "venerableandknowledgeableTurks"-a fact that may cause the modernreaderto questionhis honesty."18Yet,in the case of his account of the Ottomanconquestof Egypt, Capsalidoes mention a specific eyewitness: Forthestoriesof Egypt(sippureMizrayim), I reliedonthetestimonyof many belovedandhonorable (people)whowerethereatthattime,especiallyon the andmostcourageous RabbiYizhaqal-Hakimwhowastheredurtrustworthy ingtheperiodof thewar,fromits inceptionuntiltheend.... I wrotewithink in a bookwhathe relatedto me ....119 Capsalialso tells us thathe learnedaboutthe "warof Constantinople"from his father'suncle, Moses Capsali.120Born in Candiaabout 1410, Moses Capsali must have settled in Constantinoplesometime around1445, afterwhich he served 115. Accordingto Bonfil ("JewishAttitudes,"19-20, and30), Capsalimade use of stories contained in writtensources but purposefullyattributedthem to oral eyewitnesses, especially Jews, in orderto "Judaize"his subjectmatter.However,Bonfil makesno suggestionwhich sourcesCapsalimight have used. For a detailed discussion of this, see Jacobs,Islamische Geschichte,72-80. 116. Prologueto SEZ, 1:11. 117. Spandugino,"Origine,"in Sathas,Documentsinedits, 138,4-6: Dui gentilhuominimolto intimidello imperatorede turchi. 118. See n. 115. 119. Prologueto SEZ, 1:11. Shmuelevitz,"Capsali,"340 (cf. SEZ, 1:11 n. 114), assumes that he was a physician(as suggestedby his Arabicsurname,al-Hakim)or merchant,who accompaniedthe sultan throughouthis campaign through Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. Judging from Capsali'swords, however,it seems more likely that,because of the war,he had to remainthe whole time in Egypt. 120. Prologueto SEZ, 1:11.
57
Martin Jacobs as the rabbiof the city's Jewishcommunityboth before and afterthe Ottomanconquest of 1453. Giventhe generationalgap, however,ElijahCapsalicould only have learnedabouthis great-uncle'slife from his father,Elkanah.Familypride, moreover, led him to exaggerateMoses Capsali'sstandingat the Ottomancourt, a fact thatputs into questionsthe reliabilityof the relevantsections.121 In any case, Capsali's repeatedreferenceto Doges and otherVenetiandignitariesas well as his use of Italianloanwords122would indicatethat he probablydrew on Venetianknowledge of Ottomanaffairs. This is not surprising,given that Crete was one of the main hubs of Venetian-Ottomanintercourse. In Candia and other major centers of the eastern Mediterranean,the Maritime Republicmaintaineda networkof permanentrepresentatives(baili) andconsuls, all of whom reportedback to and kept in constanttouch with the government of the Serenissima.123Capsali explicitly mentions the bailo Antonio Giustiniani, who in 1513 had traveledto Istanbulto renewVenetian-Ottomanagreementsafter Selim I's accession (1512). On his way back, Giustinianistopped over in Candia where Capsalihad the chance to listen to the bailo's report.'24Capsalialso refers to the Venetianemissary MarcoMinio, who passed throughCandiaon his way to Constantinoplewhere, after the fall of Belgrad (1521), he was sent to renew the peace agreement between the Ottomans and Venice.'25 Capsali's acquaintance with these diplomatscan be explainedby his positionas condestabulo,which made it necessary for him to be in close contactwith the Venetianauthorities. Given that there are very few historical dates in Seder 'EliyahuZuta-the first date mentionedis that of the beginningof the siege of Constantinople'26-it is unlikely that he had access to any comprehensiveaccount of Ottomanhistory. He may have reada shortcommentarioon the origin of the Turks'27(but if so, he omitted certaindates and other details in his own account) or a few of the battle descriptions(avvisi) that circulatedwidely in the form of leaflets. It seems much 121. On the basis of Seder 'EliyahuZuta,previousscholarshipassumedthatMoses Capsaliwas the first "Chief Rabbi"of the OttomanEmpire,a claim that can no longer be supported;see Joseph (R.) Hacker,"TheChief Rabbinatein the OttomanEmpirein the 15th and 16th Centuries"(Hebrew), Zion49 (1984): 225-63; on Capsali'sportraitof his great-uncle,see also Jacobs,IslamischeGeschichte, 138, 156-57, 163-64. 122. For examples, see ibid., 144, 159-61, 169, and 174. 123. On the diplomaticrelationsbetween Venice and the OttomanEmpire,see LucetteValensi, Veniseet la SublimePorte:La naissance du despote (Paris:Hachette, 1987); PalmiraBrummet,OttomanSeapowerand LevantineDiplomacy in theAge of Discovery (Albany:State Universityof New York, 1994); MariaP. Pedani-Fabris,"OttomanEnvoys to Venice (1384-1644)," ArabHistorical Reviewfor OttomanStudies 13-14 (1996): 111-15. 124. SEZ, ch. 100, 1:282-83. 125. SEZ, ch. 152, 2:19-20. 126. Some of the succeedingchaptershave a date accordingto the Christiancalendarothersaccordingto the Jewish computation"afterthe creation";this may hint at Capsali'srespectivesources of information. 127. On Giovio's Commentario(which was certainlyunknownto Capsali), see n. 31. On the differencebetweenthe two genresof historiography,the shortcommentarioandthe more elaboratehistoria, see A. Pirnit, "Gattungender humanistischenGeschichtsschreibung:Historiaet Commentarii," in Geschichtsbewuf3tsein und Geschichtsschreibungin der Renaissance, ed. August Buck, TiborKlaniczai, and S.K. N~meth(Budapest,Leiden:Brill, 1989), 57-64.
58
Exposed to All the Currents of the Mediterranean more likely that his major source of informationwas diplomaticreports,stories told by Jewishmerchants,and otheroralaccountsthatwere readilyavailablein the port city of Candia. CONCLUSIONS
As the previousdiscussion has shown, Capsaliis a figure not easily categorized. Serving as a rabbion the island of Crete,which was then a Venetianoutpost in the easternMediterranean,he was exposed to multiple influences. By upbringing, he was both multilingual(fluent in Greek, Italian,and Hebrew at least) and multicultural(his family was of Romanioteorigin, he studiedat a famousAshkenazicyeshivah in Padua,andhe correspondedwith Sephardicrabbisin Egyptl'28). Perhapsthe most puzzling aspect of his historical work is the fact that although Crete(as most of the Venetianoverseasterritories)lay within the areaof Ottoman expansion,Capsaliglorified the Ottomanconquests-an even bolderpartisanship when keeping in mind thathe was also serving as the representativeof the Cretan Jews to the Venetianauthorities.A closer look at Capsali'schroniclereveals that his work is full of contradictionsand ambiguities.On the one hand,he was deeply rooted in the culturaland social world of the VenetianEmpire;on the other, he wrote eulogies on the Ottomans,Venice'sprimaryMediterraneanrival. This partisanshipwas certainlynot withoutany risk given thatCapsalicomposed his work afterthe fall of Rhodes (1522), when an Ottomanattackon Crete seemed to be imminent.129Whereas Capsali had expressed his admirationfor Venice in an earlierchroniclehe hadwritten,his later(intellectual)siding with the enemy may reflect the lack of integrationJews experiencedunder a government that subjectedthem to residentialsegregation and other restrictions.130The demographicpressure created in the Jewish segregated area during the plague of 1523 had been disastrous,a fact thatmay well have contributedto Capsali'sreadiness to place all his hopes in the rivalof the MaritimeRepublic. Despite his idealizationof the sultans, however,Capsali did not hesitate to adoptpolemical traditionsaboutthe rise of Islam that are of Christianorigin and can be tracedback to the Crusaderstates of the Levant.To some extent, this can be explainedby his historiographicalambition:like certainChristianwritersof his time, Capsalifelt that it was necessary to introducehis chronicle of Ottomanhistory with an account of the origins of Islam. This made even more sense to him 128. See Benayahu,Capsali, 88 n. 10; Haim H. Ben-Sasson, "Kavvimli-temunat'olamo haruhanive-ha-hevratishel khronistonyehudi be-shalheyeme ha-benayim,"in Essays in Jewish History and Philology in Memoryof GedaliahuAlon, ed. M. Dorman and S. Safrai (Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: HakibutsHameuchad,1970), 276-91, esp. 277, 290-91. On the connectionsbetweenCandiaand Egypt, see M. Littman,"Ha-kesharimshe-benMizrayimle-Kandiyaba-me'otha-shesh'esrehve-ha-sheva-'esreh,"Sinai 88 (1981): 48-59. 129. When the Ottomanfleet under Khayral-Din BarbarossathreatenedCandiain 1538, the Christianpopulation accused the Jews of hiding Turksand the mob looted the Jewish quarter;see JoshuaStarr,"JewishLife in Creteunderthe Rule of Venice,"Proceedings of theAmericanAcademy ofJewish Research 12 (1942): 59-114, esp. 111-12. 130. On residentialsegregationof the Jews of Crete and otherVenetiancolonies, see Jacoby, "Veniceand the VenetianJews,"37.
59
Martin Jacobs given thathe regardedMuhammadandthe Ottomansas representativesof one and the same empire,the malkhutYishma'el. The highly polemical tone of Capsali'schapterson early Islam is partlyto be explained by the materialhe used. Moreover,a sixteenth-centuryrabbicould not be expected to take a sympatheticapproachto Muhammad'spropheticclaim. Last but not least, the Jewish chroniclerdid not have to adopt a positive attitude towards Islam-or to "turnTurk"as Christianpolemicists would have put itsince his primaryaim was to show that the Ottomanswere being used by God to defeat Christendom.As we have seen, Capsali determined,on the basis of Isaiah 10:5-11, thatalthoughAssyria hadbeen chosen as God's"rodof anger,"therewas nothingpositiveto say aboutAssyria'sreligion. In the same way,he interpretedthe visions of Daniel as propheticproof that the Ottomanswere in fact the "fourth" empire,whose sole purposewas to overthrowthe rule of Christianityandto set the stage for the returnof the Jewish exiles to their land. Ambiguitymarksnot only Capsali'sattitudetowardsIslam,but his historiographicalapproachas well. In choosing to write aboutthe historyof the Ottomans, he was selectingone of the most fashionabletopics of sixteenth-centuryItalianhistoriography,a fact that in itself reflects the author'sawarenessof contemporary trends.In addition,his treatmentof primarilynon-Jewishhistorycan be saidto have opened up new horizonsin Jewish literature.However,neitherCapsali'sviews on history nor his writing style had very much in common with contemporaryhumanisthistoriography. Althoughhe occasionallymakesuse of contemporaryrhetorical devices, in most of his text, he models himself aftermedievalchronicles,which ultimatelygo backto biblicalandrabbinicliterarypatterns.In his detailedaccounts of the Ottomanconquests,he combinesa keen interestin contemporaryeventswith his rabbinictrainingin readingscripturesas a key to the understandingof history. However,it wouldbe wrongto concludethatCapsaliwas unusualin his continuedrelianceon the stylisticdevices of religiouslyfoundedhistoriography.In fact, therewere quitea few Christianchroniclescomposedin cinquecento-Italythatcontinuedin formand conceptthe medievaltradition.'31 When it came to descriptions of the Turksor Islam, there was a generaltendencyto reappropriatecliches going back to the time of the Crusades,and causal explanationsfor momentousevents such as the fall of Constantinoplequite frequentlyrevertedto God'swrath. Like manyof his Christiancontemporaries,Capsaliwas obligedto a religiondefined worldview;yet, in expandingthe historicalhorizonto include otherpeoples andcultureshe followedan impulsecharacteristicof earlymodem times. Capsali's ambivalentattitudetowardsIslam-oscillating betweenpolemics againstthe "false"prophetMuhammadand panegyricsto the Ottomansultans-mirrors the ambiguoussituationof a Jewishauthorliving at an easternoutpostof the Christian world and facing the Muslim world on the othershore. MartinJacobs WashingtonUniversityin St. Louis St. Louis, Missouri 131. See Cochrane,Historiansand Historiography,382-89.
60
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? A Reconsideration of Who Read What in Jewish Eastern Europe Author(s): Alyssa Quint Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 61-89 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131809 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 61-89 "YIDDISH LITERATURE FOR THE MASSES"? A Reconsiderationof WhoRead Whatin Jewish EasternEurope*
by Alyssa Quint INTRODUCTION
In the early 1880s, the staunch Hebraistand bibliophile EphraimDeinard (1846-1930) became a reluctantwitness to the fast-pacedgrowthof modem Yiddish culturethatbegan in his hometownof Odessa.At the time, Deinardowned a Hebrew bookshop that had been sliding towardbankruptcyuntil he grudgingly adaptedhis waresto betterreflect the marketforces of the Jewishreadingculture. In Memories of My People (Zikhronotbat cami), he briefly accounts for (in his view) the ill fortuneof being forced to sell the Yiddish books that his customers demandedof him ratherthan the Hebrew literaturehe held so dear.Although he mentions a host of nineteenth-centuryYiddishwriterswhom the readerwill come to know in the following pages, for our presentpurpose, it is sufficient to remark upon the catalytic agency he assigns to the Yiddish romance novelist Nakhum Shaykevitsh(aka Shomer) (1849-1905) and AvrahamGoldfaden (1840-1908), best known as the fatherof the Yiddish theatre.Deinardwrites: Zederbaum [Alexander] [1816-1893],[Israel]Aksenfeld[1787-1866],and that crazy [Isaac Joel] Linetzky [1839-1915] ... began to spreadYiddish in
SouthernRussiawhile in Lithuaniaonly one man,IsaacMeirDik [1814who 1893],inVilna,wrotesmall[Yiddish]bookletsfortheRommpublishers, to suchbookpaidhimtworublesforeverybooklet.Butno onepaidattention lets .... And[YankevSholem]Abramovitsh [akaMendeleMokherSeforim 1836-1917] did not enlightenthe masses,no mandaredevento touchhis books... untilGoldfaden andShomerarrived[inOdessa]ontheirreturnfrom Rumaniaafterthe Russo-Turkish war[1877-78].Andbothof themcameto since Odessaknowingthatin a waveof garbage(spreadbythedonkey-drivers Dik)maggotswouldbreedandmultiply.... Bothof thembroughtthousands of dollarstheycollectedduringthewarandhadno ideawhatto do withtheir established a theatreandlosthismoneybutat leastsawhis money.Goldfaden dramasrealizedon thestage.... And,withoutknowingthecraft,Shomerbeand ganto writebooksfullof vanities,manyof theminYiddish("zhargon"), discovered abookshopinOdessaownedbya coupleof shoemakers whobought in the fellowshipprogram"JewishHistory *Manythanksto my colleagueswhoparticipated andCulturein EasternEurope"(2002-2003)at the CenterforAdvancedJudaicStudiesat the Unifortheircommentson anearlierversionof thispaper. versityof Pennsylvania
61
Alyssa Quint hispenvomitedbecausetheydidnotreadYiddishandcouldnotuneverything derstand thegarbagethatShomerwrote.It wasenoughforthemthatthefilth wouldbe sold,paidin full.Andbuyersgathered in Berdichev wherehisbooks werealso sold.Andseeingthathe hada captiveaudience[Shomer]sat and wrotebooksalldayandhisnamebecamewellknownamongthemasses.There wasnotonemaiden,onewagondriverfromOdessato Berdichev, fromWarsawto Vilna,whodidnothaveShomer's nameon his orherlips.' In his view of the rise of modernYiddish culturein Russia, colored by his pungently expressedresentmentof it, DeinardpinpointsGoldfaden'sreturnto Odessa in 1879 as a kind of beginning. But a beginning of what?As Deinardmentions, Yiddish writers like Aksenfeld and Abramovitshhad alreadybegun writing and publishingtheirwork.And Isaac Meir Dik was alreadymakinga living as the first professional Yiddish fiction writer since he began producing tradition-cloaked chapbooksin the late 1840s. ModernYiddishlettershad also, by this time, seen its firstYiddishperiodical,Kol Mevaser(A HeraldingVoice,1862-1871), which created a communityfromYiddish writerswho resided in Odessa and those in more far-flungcities within or beyond the RussianEmpire.Whatwas thereto begin? Remarkably,theYiddishnovelist JacobDinezon (1859-1919), in one of the earliest historical accounts of modernYiddish literature,"Diyidishe shprakhun ir shrayber"("TheYiddishLanguageand its Writer,"1888), corroboratesthis version of events and does so with a comparableantipathyto that of Deinarddespite his otherwisefirm commitmentto Yiddishculture.He, too, isolates the late 1870s as a beginningpoint of a kind: Yiddish Suddenlyaroundtenyearsago,around1878,therebeganblossoming writersof novelsandsongsin largerandsmallerbooksandbookletsthatinundatedtheworldlikea flood[ ... ] Manyprolificauthorswiththeirnovels andstoriesraineddownuponthemassesof Yiddishreaderswiththeiruseless books[ ... ]. Butinsteadof a springrainthatenablesthelandto bringforth fruit,thesenovelscamelike a rainafterSukkotin autumn,onlyto produce mudandmirefromtheJewishstreetsandpathways. thetime Theysquander of thepoorandsimplereadersandcorrupttheirappetites,so theywill never learnto do goodworks,andtheywill neverreadof usefulthings.2 Together,DeinardandDinezon describethe rapidincreasein modernYiddishpublishing thatbegan at the beginningof the 1880s. They noticedthe industrybecause it now includednot only religious ethical literatureand prayerbooks but also, finally, European-modeledYiddish literaturewritten by Enlightenmentintellectuals. The growthin decidedly modernYiddish publishingwas due to the common readerdiversifyinghis readingto includebooks of folksongs and romanticand/or 1. Ephraim Deinard, Zikhronotbat 'ami: le-korot ha-Yehudimveha-Yahadutbe-Rusya bemeshekhkarovle-shiv'imshanah (St. Louis: Defus Moineshter, 1920), 59. Translationsmine unless otherwisenoted. 2. JacobDinezon, Der hoyz-fraynd:a historish-literarishesbukhredagirtfunM. Spektor.(Warsaw: Progres, 1888), 1, 17.
62
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? melodramaticpotboilers. Publishinghouses soon began profferingcommissions for novels by Shomer-by far the most popularmaskilicwriterof such workswho in turninspiredimitators.In short,what "began"was an audience-drivenliteraryindustryso conspicuousthateven those who did not wantto take notice, like Deinard,were forced to pay attention. A widely acceptedconventionofYiddish literaryscholarshipis thatall modem Yiddish literaturewrittenfrom the turnof the nineteenthcenturyuntil around the late 1880s was writtenas "a literaturefor the masses."We are all familiarwith observers of nineteenth-centuryYiddish literaturewho have trumpetedthe turn from Hebrewto Yiddishby writersof this era as a shift from elitism to an embrace of the folk. Such descriptionsare especially conspicuous in the prodigiousscholarshipof the SovietYiddishcritics.Aron Gurshtein,for instance,writes of Sholem Aleichem's careerthus: In 1883,SholemRabinovitsh (knownbestas SholemAleichem)publishedhis firstworksinYiddish.Theauthorunderstood thatto reachthemasseshe had to engagethelivinglanguage,notHebrew,whichis accessibleonlyto a very narrowcircleof readers.Fromthatmomentonward,SholemAleichemhad foundhis truecalling,andhis namegrewmoreandmorepopular.3 MeirVinerlikewise praisesMendele [Abramovitsh'snom de plume] for "his deep closeness (farbundkayt)with the downtrodden,impoverished,andhard-working."4 Not only subscribersto Marxist ideology adheredto such a typology. The great critic SamuelNiger arguedthatAbramovitsh'searly works triggeredthe awakening of the Jews' collective social consciousness.5Of course, critics were taking at their word such authorsas Abramovitsh,who insisted that his Yiddish careerwas inspiredby his "desireto be useful to his people.""I decided,"he writes, "I shall havepity onYiddish,the outcastdaughterof my people."6Writersof the pre-1880s era who wrote strictlyin Yiddish (and never in Hebrew), like Isaac Joel Linetzky (1839-1915) and Shlomo Ettinger(1803-56), along with the scholarswho study their works, write about their Yiddish careers in similar terms. Historian Saul Ginzburgwrites that for IsraelAksenfeld (1787-1866), "theprimaryobjective of his literarywork was not artisticnor the personal satisfactionthe authorhimself derives from his work, but above all the ethical educationand benefits offered to the readerin raising his culturalstandardsand refining his concepts." 3. Aron Gurshtein,SholemAleykhem(Moscow: Der Emes, 1946), 18. 4. See his discussion of Abramovitsh,Shomer,and their contemporariesin Dertseylers un romanistn,vol. 1 (New York:Bikherfarlag, 1946), 73-99. 5. Samuel Niger, Tsu der geshikhtefun der yidisher literaturin 19tnyorhundert(NY: YKUF, 1945), 2:12. Niger concedes that Shomerwas the only one of his generationto inheritDik's large audiences. Still, when comparingAbramovitshwith Shomer,Niger arguesthatboth of them enlargedthe Yiddish-readingaudience while Abramovitshalso contributedto the advancementof Yiddish letters. 6. Quotedin Sol Liptzin,A History of YiddishLiterature(MiddleVillage, 1985), 42. 7. Ginzburggoes on to write thatAksenfeld'scareerwas "theproductof strivingto carry out a
63
Alyssa Quint Althoughacknowledgingmore nuanceandcomplexity,Dan Miron'sA Traveler Disguised, the most authoritativescholarlywork on this era of modem Yiddish literature,leaves us with a similarimpression.8Much happierto write in Hebrew though they were, maskilimgrudgingly prevailed on their own prejudices against the Yiddish language and wrote literatureto amelioratethe conditions of the EasternEuropeanJewish masses-to producea literaturethatpointed out the flaws in theirlifestyles andproddedthemtowardsmorewholesome social andeconomic behaviorthatwould entitlethem to full rightsin the RussianEmpire.While a numberof scholarshave gesturedtowardsome distinctionin audiencebetween, for example,Abramovitshand Shomer,they still tend to think of "Yiddishliteraturefor the masses"as a defining characteristicapplicablemoreor less to all works producedduringthis first maskilic period of Yiddish culture.9Moreover,according to convention,this period ends at the belated date of 1888, when SholemAleichem inauguratedhis canonizingDos yidishefolksbibliotek,set a respectablelineage for Yiddish literature,and encouragedhis high-mindedcolleagues to enjoy its fruits without self-consciousness. Only in 1888 did Yiddish become normalized, as authorswidened its appealto attracta variegatedaudienceincludingreaders of highbrowtastes.'l But if all nineteenth-centuryYiddish literaturewas consumedby the masses, more or less, how do we make sense of the novels and booklets that Dinezon claims had begun "rainingdown upon the masses" only in the late 1870s and of Deinard's observations about the beginnings of the popularYiddish activity in Odessa he attributesto Shomer and Goldfaden'sarrivalaroundthe same time? I propose a hypothesisof the evolutionof modernsecularYiddishliteraturethat accommodates their observationsas it turns on its head the received scholarly typology: insteadof two stages, I believe thereare, roughly,two discretebeginnings of modernYiddish literature.The first initiateda traditionof refined,"highbrow" Yiddish literature,which was generatedthroughoutthe first three quartersof the nineteenthcentury.The second, beginning in the early 1880s, markedthe rapid growth of the "lowbrow"modernYiddish book industrydescribedearlier." The wider andmorecomprehensiveenlightenmentof the masses andto help thembecome more respectable and more educated."From"New MaterialRegardingIsraelAksenfeld,"YIVOAnnualofJewish Social Science 5 (1950): 172-73. 8. Dan Miron,A TravelerDisguised: A study in the rise of modernYiddishfiction in the nineteenth century(New York:Schocken, 1970). Miron does not occupy himself with the questions with which I am concernedin this paper.Aside fromhis study of Abramovitsh,he focuses on the development of aYiddish literaryestablishment.Nonetheless, he does assumethatthe masses were readingfar more than I believe they were reading.This is clear, for instance,on p. 161, when he calls Kol mevaser a "popularsuccess."In a supportingfootnoteto this he quotesnewspapermanAlexanderZederbaum on page 295 n. 54. See my analysis of the same passage, following. 9. Niger, Tsuder geshikhtefun deryidisher literaturin 19tnyorhundert,2:12. 10. Miron,A Traveler,29-32. 11. Generally, I apply the term "highbrow" to works of lasting value that appealed to a relatively
small audienceand "lowbrow"to popularliteratureof the momentthat appealedto a large group.Following, I shall suggest that Goldfaden'sworks complicatedthis schema in the same way producersof Shakespearedid in nineteenth-centuryAmerica. See LawrenceLevine'sclassic studyHighbrow/Lowbrow:TheEmergenceof CulturalHierarchyin America(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress, 1988).
64
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? two streamsof literaturedevelopedindependentlyand the implicationof this mutual independence is that each cultivated,by and large, its own readership,according to its own prescriptions,aesthetic and otherwise.12Publishing records would go far in determiningwho read what;but in the absence of such a historical record-at least until the belated year of 1888-anecdotes, memoirs, and the works themselves serve to reconstructan impressionof who in fact bought these works and who was able to navigatetheirpages. I posit the existence of roughlytwo audiences:one thatconsumedhighbrow Yiddish literatureand a second that bought literaturethat offered purely popular appeal. In assuming that all modern nineteenth-centuryYiddish literaturewas "popular,"a crucial fact has slipped from our attention:that as late as the 1860s and 1870s, most of the four million potentialYiddishreadersdistributedthroughout the Russian Empire continuedto thirst for decidedly "traditional"literature, including religious and ethical literature,homiletic commentary on the Bible called Tsenerena(Come Out and See, 1622), and mayse-bikhlekh(literally,story books or chapbooks).13In the 1850s they had also begunto reada modernversion of the mayse-bikhlby writers like Dik, who injected lessons into his writing intendedto prodhis readerto adoptthe habitsof bourgeoislife but also includedtraditional ethical teachings and otherwise abided by his readers'notion of acceptable literature.Dik was an adherentof the Haskalah,which much of RussianJewry considered heretical.Nonetheless, he reached hundredsof thousandsof readers with his piously titled, anonymouslypublishedchapbooksbecause these readers believed his stories to be continuouswith the post-biblicalethical literaturethey trusted.14Shomer inheritedDik's mantle of popularitywith romance novels imbued with an even more modern and secular tenor. Meanwhile, most Jews were oblivious of much of the Haskalahliteraturewe have come to identifywith this period-works written by Abramovitsh,Aksenfeld, and Linetzky, along with the plethoraof writerswho publishedregularlyin what is celebratedas the first modem Yiddishnewspaper,Kol mevaser. Who read such literature?Often overlookedin the history of Yiddish literature is a second and far tinier communityof Yiddishreadersthat had begun crys12. Of course, such a schema is abstract.Historically,there was much more fluidity between the "two readerships"and we might even imagine several representativereaderswho distinguished themselves from one anotherby such factorsas their readingability,their level of culturalsophistication, and theirexposureto differentsorts of books. 13. David G. Roskies, A Bridge of Longing: TheLost Art of YiddishStorytelling(Cambridge: HarvardUniversityPress, 1995). See Max Erik'sdescriptionof the origins and content of the maysebikhlekhin Di geshikhtefun deryidisher literaturfundi eltste tsaytnbiz der haskole-tkufe(1928; New York:Alvetlekhnyidishn kultur-kongres,1979), 353-63. 14. Roskies,Bridge ofLonging, 56. See his chapteron IsaacMeirDik's storiesandhow he made them palatableto the commonYiddishreader,"TheMasterof Lore,"56-98. Therewere other indications readersknew they could trust Dik's chapbooks.They were a product of the Romm publishing house that publishedalmost all of the religious literatureand, as Roskies explains, the appearanceof the book from the typeface to the "old-fashionedcoverings"were clues to the readerthat it was what it seemed (Roskies, Bridge of Longing, 67-68). For other popular chapbook writers see Nakhum Oyslender,"Varshevermekhabrimin di 1850ers-1860er,"in Diyidishe literaturin naytstnyorhundert, ed. ChavaTurniansky(1928; Jerusalem:Magnes, 1993).
65
Alyssa Quint tallizing much earlier,at least by the mid-nineteenthcentury.'5It includedmiddleclass and self-describedenlightenedJews scatteredthroughoutthe cities of Eastern Europe,many of whom learnedor taughtthemselves to read literaturein other languages(Hebrew,German,Russian,or Rumanian),but whose mothertongue was Yiddish.Also flooding theirranks,I suggest, were Jews benefiting from a socioeconomic Haskalah.'6Their socializationto a bourgeois lifestyle opened their eyes to more modern and refined culturaltastes not matchedby their knowledge of anotherlanguage beside Yiddish. I argue that this group alone read the Europeanized Yiddish literaturethat veered away from the strict formula of the potboilers;the Yiddishpoetry,novels, and dramasthat we most closely identify with this period. Often, they read these works in manuscriptcopies that authorscirculated among friends and colleagues and, I believe, were the chief consumers of most publishedmaskilicYiddishliteratureas well."7We are forcedto considerthe importanceof this relativelytiny audiencewhen outliningthe evolutionof Hebrew literature.And yet we have paid it scant attentionin discussing the origins of an analogous,"highbrowYiddishliterature"-probablybecausewe have,thus far,not come to terms fully with such a category'sexistence.'8 In the following pages, I shall examine this highbrowYiddish literature,its authors'inclinationtowardthe drama,the natureof this literature'spopularity,and, finally, the business of Yiddish publishing. Playwrightand populartheatreman AvrahamGoldfaden (1840-1908) allows us a unique vantagepoint from which to open a more general discussion on the nuancesof theYiddishaudience.Unlike his drama-writingcontemporariesand predecessors,he alone would eventuallyparlayhis skill as a maskilic playwright into founding a theatrethat served a popularaudience. In consideringthe commercial side of Yiddish culture,we shall revisit Kol mevaser,and modem Yiddish literature'sfirst classic anthology,Dos yidishefolksbibliotek (1888-89), and ex15. Dan Mironrecognizesthis groupof readersin A TravelerDisguised but never speculatesas to what percentageof the overallreadershipthey comprised. 16. In Steve Zipperstein'sdensely informativearticle, "Haskalah,CulturalChange, and Nineteenth-CenturyRussianJewry:A Reassessment,"JournalofJewish Studies34, no. 2 (1983), 191-207, the authorpoints to the plethoraof factorsbesides the ideological one (which is the focus of so much scholarship)thatcontributedto the pace of modernizationand acculturationof EasternEuropeanJewry. He calls attentionto the relativelyacceleratedpace such processes underwentin the cities and cites statistics on Jewish literacy (including of Yiddish) that would be directly relevantto a more in-depth study of what most nineteenth-centuryEasternEuropeanJews were able to read. 17. This paper benefits from and hopes to contributeto a revised and more complicated understandingof the Haskalahas a movement in all its dimensions that correctsthe mostly ideological reading of it we have been left with until recently.For an excellent sample of such scholarshipsee MordechaiZalkin'srecent study of the EasternEuropeanHaskalahwith a particularfocus on its regional, economic, and social gradations,Be-alot ha-shakhar:ha-haskalahha-yahadutbe-imperyeharusit be-meyaha-tsha esre (Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 2000). See also Tsviya Nardi, "Temurotve-tnuot ha-haskalahbe-rusyahha-shishimve-hashiv'imshel ma'ahha-19,"in Ha-dat ve-hahayim:tenu'at ha-haskalahha-yehuditbe-mizraheropah (Jerusalem:The ZalmanShazarCenter, 1993), 300-27. 18. See Dan Miron'sstudy of readershipof turn-of-the-centuryHebrew literaturein Bodedim be-mo'adam:la-diuknashel ha-republikaha-sifrutitha-'ivritbe-tehilatha-me'ahha-cesrim(Tel-Aviv: Oved Publishers,1987).
66
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? amine what these publicationsreveal aboutthe maskil'scomplicatedrelationship to Yiddish literatureas writerand reader.Dos yidishefolksbibliotekoffers us the earliest survivingpublishingrecordsof Yiddish literature,which supportthe conclusions I drawin these pages. The suggestionthatunderliesthis discussion is that many maskilimwho wroteYiddish literaturedid so-albeit with varying degrees of consciousness-for themselves and for their educated contemporarieswhom they knew to be avid readersof their work.They wrote for their fellow maskilim, all the while insisting on a Yiddish literature"forthe masses." I. THE CASEOF GOLDFADEN ANDTHEPREPONDERANCE YIDDISHDRAMA OFMASKILIC
Before establishingthe Yiddishtheatrein Rumaniain 1876, Goldfadenhad publishedthreeitems: a collection of Hebrewpoetry entitledBlossoms and Flowers (Tsitsimuferakim1865); the anthology of Yiddish songs The Little Jew (Dos yidele, 1866); and TheJewess (Di yidene, 1869), a Yiddish-languagemiscellany containingpoetry and dramaticwritings.The latterincludeda four-actEnlightenment closet dramaentitledAuntSosya (Di mumesosye) and a librettofor a second dramaentitled The Grandmotherand the Granddaughteror Bontshe the Layer of Wicks(Di bobe mitn eynikl oder bontshe di kneytlekhlegerin).Together,these works seem to chart Goldfaden'smovement, first towardYiddish in general and then towardproducingYiddishtheatre.Indeed,previousscholarshave considered AuntSosya in theirquest for the theatre'sbeginnings.But thereis no evidence that his careeras playwrightfloweredorganicallyinto his careeras a theatreproducer. To the contrary:Goldfadenstumbleduponthe opportunityto produceYiddishtheatre accidentally,in 1876, on what was intendedas a brief visit to a colleague in Rumania.Scholarshave not adequatelymade sense of why Goldfadenwas moved to writeYiddishdramayearsbeforehe hadeven contemplatedproducingmassYiddish theatre.Nor have they reckonedwith the discrepancyof qualitythat is so obvious when comparinghis pre-theatredramaswith the staged productionsof his popularmelodramasfor which he came to be known. Goldfaden'searly cultivationof his writingin both HebrewandYiddishwas part of a largertrendof nineteenth-centuryJewish bilingualism.19As the official Jewishnationallanguageof the EasternEuropeanHaskalah,Hebrewcommanded the artisticdevotion of its followers, notwithstandingthe small numbersof Jews who read it. A pictureemerges of what the maskilimintendedwould come of the two literatures:a culturallyuncompromisedHebrew literaturewould serve their elite audiencewhile the Yiddish that flowed from theirpens would be readby the masses of otherwiseunletteredRussianJews. In otherwords,Enlightenmentleaders tried to cultivatea Hebrew literaryrevival withouta mass reading base while producingthe Yiddish-languageliteraryculturestrictlyfor the masses-and expecting it to vanish afterits readerslearnedenough German,Russian,or Hebrew. 19. InA TravelerDisguised, Mironarguesthatthe natureof the bilingualismwas suchthatthose who wrote in Yiddishpersistedin writingor translatingtheirwork into Hebrew(or had begun theircareers writing Hebrew first) because they felt Yiddish was "not altogethera naturalliterarymedium." 10-11. Miron,A Traveler,
67
Alyssa Quint If this is indeed how the literaturesproceededto develop, samples of early modern Yiddish works should provide a unique opportunityto investigatethe quality of a literaturethat had no elevated literaryaspirations.In contrastto most other buddingmodem literatures,which were drivenby a range of writerswho openly addresseda diverse audience that, in turn, sustaineda literatureof wide-ranging sensibility and sophistication,Yiddish was, according to convention, cultivated only for a simple audiencethat was unschooled in any modernEuropeanliterary trend. Two decades before Yiddish literaturewas supposedly normalized in the 1880s, so this reasoninggoes, the only impulseto writeYiddishthatexisted among maskilimwas to addressa mass audience. For this reason, a folksy and traditionlaced worklike Goldfaden'sTheLittleJew exemplifies the burgeoningYiddishliteratureas its chroniclershave imaginedit. By those terms, Goldfaden'shigh-mindedanthology TheJewess, especially the dramaAunt Sosya, presents quite a conundrum.20The literaryhistorianLeo Wienerinsists thatAuntSosya is the single best comedy of Goldfaden'sprodigious comic oeuvre, in which the authorflaunts his technical mastery of the genre and drawscharactersof refinedpsychologicaldimension.21The questionof the work's aestheticworth,however,is only secondaryto the question of its author'sliterary aspiration.AuntSosya-with its complexity of plot and battalionof subtlydrawn characters-is of a piece with earliermodernYiddishdramasthat are equally and puzzlingly highbrow.The relative sophisticationof these works is especially palpable when comparedto the quaintand crudely drawnstories of Dik or, for that matter,the Yiddish folk songs Goldfadenhad publishedthreeyears earlier.22 Not only,then, did certainYiddishworks, like Goldfaden'sAuntSosya, contain a technical sophisticationbelying its reputation.But Yiddish maskilic works did not uniformlyindulge an attitudeof "destructiveexposure"towardtheYiddish language, nor did it consistently target Hasidism, the archetypalenemy of the Haskalahand the supposed raison d'etre of the literature.23On the contrary,the Yiddish language was sometimes explicitly championed. In Aksenfeld's drama Man un vayb, shvester un bruder,for instance, an orphanedJewish girl escapes 20. Fora close readingof AuntSosya andits importancesee "TheBotchedKiss: Love andDeath on the Yiddish Stage" in Jews and the Creationof Modern Culturein Eastern Europe (Philadelphia: Universityof PennsylvaniaPress, forthcoming). 21. Leo Wiener,TheHistoryof YiddishLiteraturein theNineteenthCentury(NewYork:Charles Scribner'sSons, 1899), 236. 22. For a selection of Dik's works see Samuel Niger's edition of his work Ayzikmeir dik: geklibene verk(New York:CYCO-BicherFarlag,1954). Niger's introductionoffers useful historicalfacts about Dik's success as a popularYiddishwriter.Bear in mind, however,Niger did take liberties as an editorand smoothedout some of the crudeareasof Dik's texts. Also see Dan Miron'sdiscussion of the chapbookgenre and their implied readersin "Folkloreand Antifolklorein the Yiddish Fiction of the Haskala,"in TheImage of the Shtetl and OtherStudies of ModernJewish LiteraryImagination(New York:SyracuseUniversityPress, 2000), 49-80. 23. This is Miron'susage in A TravelerDisguised. He quotes Dik who explained his Yiddish writing thus: "Anold building is not to be wrecked with the prick of a needle, but with the pounding of sledgehammers."Quoted in Miron,A Traveler,56. There was, in general, much more ambivalence aboutthe Yiddishlanguageeven among the most stalwartmaskilimlike Dik. See Zederbaum'sexpression of admirationforYiddish in n. 45.
68
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? anti-SemiticPolish captorsby identifyingherself as a fellow Jew to a bandof Jewish beggars.She does so by rememberingthe few Yiddishwords she learnedas an infant.TheYiddishlanguageprovesa protectivelinguisticbuffer,a system of shibboleths in an unforgivingand anti-Semiticworld.Withthe non-Jewishfamily with whom she grewup, the orphanlearnedPolish,German,andFrench-languages that the Haskalahheld out as keys to Jewishself-betterment-but onlyYiddishsaves her life.24Ettinger'sSerkelepromotesas its heroa money-grubbingJewishtavern-keeper whoseYiddishspeechis only madeworseby his sibilatingLithuanianaccent.But as an explicitresponseto TheMerchantof Venice,the tavernkeeperis actuallya vindicationof Shakespeare'sShylock-a vindicationof his financialconservatism,his legalism, and his rightto be respectedin all his religiousand ethnic difference.He emergesas the financialbedrockof the drama'snew society and is rewardedwith a brideand a casketof gold as her dowry.25In bothplays,Yiddishis the strongboxof Jewishculturaldifferencein a worldvulnerableto the demandsof culturalassimilation. Since suchplays thematizeissues ofYiddish languageandmakeno mentionof Hasidism,they are only the most obvious challengeto the notionthatthis literature functionedpurelyto extinguishtheYiddishlanguageandaspectsof traditionalJewish life masklimthoughtimpededprogress.26But there are many more works that abideby the aestheticprinciplesof Enlightenmentliteraturewithoutconformingto the politicaland social prescriptionsof the Haskalah.27 The existence of such dramas,I believe, suggests that writing a literature "strictlyfor the masses" is a far thornierproblemthan most maskilimand schol24. Aksenfeld,Man un vaybshvester un bruder:an emese mayse bearbetin teatershtikin 2 akten (Odessa: 1867). In a letter to a Russian official, Aksenfeld claimed to be a maskil invested in the literarycrusadeagainst Hasidismbut only some of his works even make mention of Hasidism. I suspect he believed thatbashingHasidism would furtherthe chance thatthe official would force the arm of a Jewish publisherto publish his work. See Shlomo Ginsburg,"IsraelAksenfeld,"YIVOAnnual of Jewish Social Sciences, ed. KoppelS. Pinson,5 (1951): 175. Foran analysisof Man un vayb see Alyssa Quint, "TheBotched Kiss: AvrahamGoldfadenand the LiteraryOriginsof the YiddishTheatre"(PhD diss., HarvardUniversity,2001). My impressionis thatAksenfeld believed his works to be accessible to the common reader,howevermisguided such a view was, and believed thatthe drama(not just performance)was particularlyeffective in engaging the masses. This view was pervasive in the maskilic community.See ch. 14 of his novella"Dos shtern-tikhl,"in Dos shtern-tikhl,der erstheryidisherrekrut, ed. Shmuel Rozhanski(Buenos Aires:YIVO, 1971), 102-104. 25. See Alyssa Quint,"TheCurrencyof Yiddish:Shlomo Ettinger'sSerkeleand TheMerchant of Venice,"Prooftexts24, no. 1 (2004): 99-115. 26. Miron,A 51-58. Traveler, 27. In the realm of Yiddish dramafrom the 1860s and 1870s see for instanceHirshRaytmen's Der zivug oder vos iz bashertdos iz bavert,YeshayahuFinkelshteyn'sDi drayshvesterkinderDer kolboynikoder difarbitene khosn kale, and Mondrish.See Weinreich'sdiscussion of the dramasin "Fir umbekanteteatershtikfun mitn 19tnyorhundert,"in Yivoarkhivfarder geshikhtefun yidishn teater un drama (Vilna;New York:Yidishervisnshaftlekherinstitute,Teatermuzey, 1930), 175-203. Also consider Israel Meir Wohlman,Di vayberishekniplakh:eyn teater shpil (Vilna: 1881); UlreykhKalmus, Di geshikhtefun a zeltene bris un a genarte khoseneoriginallypublishedin 1871 (Warsaw:1882); and Di komisioner-tararamshik (Vilna:Romm, 1880), which is addressedspecifically to those who deal in "theworldof commerce"and includespassages in Russianand German;S.S. Bernshteyn,Rebyakhtse del gaya, originallypublished in 1871 in Kol mevaser (Kishinev: 1884); and MarkusEpshteyn,Der geshmisener epikoyres(Warsaw:Alapin, 1878).
69
Alyssa Quint ars ofYiddish literaturebelieved it to be. The maskilic"dilemma"might havebeen best summedup by journalistand writerJoseph JudahLerner(1849-1907), who adoptedNikolai Chernyshevsky'swordsin writingto his fellow maskilimin the introductionto his Yiddishtranslationof UrielAcosta:"Workandmultiply,for therein lies our strength;if you didn't exist I would not be able to write, but if all Jews were like you, I would not have to write."28The latterpart of Lerner'sstatement dovetails nicely with what has alreadybecome commonplacewhen considering the Yiddishliteratureof this era:if all Jews were like Lerner'smaskilicfriends,educated in languagesotherthanYiddish,he would not botherto writeYiddish.And yet the firstpartof his statementcommentson an elementof the sociology of maskilic writing that we have not probeddeeply enough:Yiddish writersneeded each other-they thrivedwith the support,attention,and camaraderieof fellow writers andonly undersuch circumstancesof mutualsupportwerethey ableto pursuetheir literarycareerswith seriousnessand commitment.Whetheror not they were actually published,the Yiddish plays penned by Goldfaden'sforerunnersachieved a well-documentedcurrencywithin the maskiliccircles thatdottedthe RussianEmpire.29Doubtless it was this currency,along with an attendantsense of a burgeoning literarytraditionthat reflected and drove the strong appeal of Yiddish drama writingamong Goldfadenand his friends.30Such artisticcircumstancesconduced and encourageda literaturethatquicklybecame somethingdifferentfromthe "literaturefor the masses"that at least some maskilimhad intended. 28. JosephLerner,Uriel akosta: a tragedyeinfinfakten (St. Petersburg:1888). Lernerlifts this quotationfromNikolai Chernyshevsky'sprefaceto Shto delat? (Whatis ToBe Done?), in which he addresseshis commonreaderswith "arrogance"but singles out a "particulargroupof people"thathe "respects" and withoutwhom he could not write. 29. Of course, that they were not publishedensuredthat they could never attracta broadaudience. But thereis no evidence thatthoseYiddish authorswho were fortunateenoughto see theirworks publishedever attracteda wide audience. 30. Historicalrecordshows thatthe firstYiddishEnlightenmentdrama,Di genarte velt, inspired Ettingerto write his Yiddish worksand also fell into the hands of Aksenfeld. Similarly,Ettinger'splay achievedwell-documentedfamiliarityamongthe tightlyknitcells of maskilimas friendsand colleagues circulatedhandwrittencopies of Serkele. EfraimFiszelson, dedicatedhis satire, Teaterfun khsidim, (Hasidic Theatre,1839) to Ettinger(this was also circulatedin manuscript).Evidence of Ettinger'sliterarypresence extends to his fast friend,AvrahamGottlober,who wrote his Yiddish comic opera The Bridal Veilor TwoCanopiesin OneNight a year after"Dr.Ettinger"presentedhim with his literaryexperiment.Similarly,GalicianmaskilimYeshayahuGutmanand Hirsh Raytmanpenned bourgeoisdramas thatwere found in manuscriptboundtogetherin a single volume with Ettinger'sSerkele.Serkele's most celebratedemulatorwas Goldfadenwith his play AuntSosya. Maskilim,similarly,read and circulated Aksenfeld'sworks, earningthe mostly unpublishedYiddish writera brandof quiet celebrity. "Themost educatedof men readhis work with great delight,"Zederbaumwrote in his obituaryof the authorin Kol mevaser.Moses Lilienblum,anothermaskilicpersonalitywho would flirt brieflywith the Yiddish theatre,was also reportedlystirredby Aksenfeld'sliterature.As early as the 1860s, signs appearedof "a sense of literaryaccumulation,"somethingMirondates to the late 1880s. We may notice palpablesigns of this in the explicit homageby lesser-knownplaywrightYoel Berish Falkovitsh(18??1868) to Aksenfeld in his play Rokheledi zingerin (1888). Attentivenessto Aksenfeld is obvious, too, in the writing of playwrightJudah-JosephLerner,who publishedan analysis of Aksenfeld's work in Russian, Kriticheskiirazbor:na evreisko-nemetskomzhargon (Odessa: 1868) that claims the distinction as the first piece of literarycriticism on a work of Yiddish literature.
70
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? When the maskilimpennedthese EuropeanYiddishdramas,with or without their full awareness,they turnedawayfromthe audiencethey had officially hoped to addressaccordingto their own ideological prescriptions(the mass reader)and addressedeach otherinstead.Or,in the wordsof reader-responsetheoreticians,the "impliedreader"of these dramasreveals the attributesof an "ideal reader,"possessing of the tastes and skills of the authorhimself ratherthanthose of the semiliterateYiddishrube.More concretelyput, the "impliedreader"is capableof reading the author'swork; able to fill in its gaps or "indeterminacies"with his own learnedexpectationsof the genre.31Forthe demandsof the Yiddishplaywrights' texts imply a readersufficiently acquaintedwith Europeanliteraryconventionto navigateit. As JonathanCullerexplains, andmeaningbecauseit is readin a particular way.... [A]workhasstructure Toreada text as literature is not to makeone'sminda tabularasaandapone mustbringto it an implicitunderproachit withoutpreconceptions; standingof the operationsof literarydiscoursewhichtells one whatto look for."32 This is not simply a theoreticalargument:it is impossibleto imagine a mass Yiddish-speakingaudience capable of navigatingdramatictexts before Goldfaden's theatrepopularizedmodern Europeandramaticconventions in the early 1880s. Abramovitsh,probablystill too optimisticwith his dramaTheTax(Di takes, 1869), was alertto the problem.He made an effort not only to make his workmore palatable or "kosher"by introducingit to his audienceby way of an avuncularand traditionalbook-peddlerbenignlynamedMendele.He also has Mendeleslyly explain to his targetedcommon readerthe institutionand practicalityof the dramatispersonae thatuniformlyappearbefore the first scene of a modernplay."I have made for you a separatepiece of paper (a tsetl) of all the charactersthat appearin the story so you may keep all of them before your eyes, and you may alwaysremember them."33Even with such efforts, the playwrights'works were far too literary 31. Reader-responsetheory is, in generalterms, a critical approachthat assumes that the existence of the readeris a decisive componentof any meaningfulliteraryanalysis and thatconsideration of how the reader"completes"the text must be examinedwhen accountingfor the meaningof a literary work. See Reader-ResponseCriticism:FromFormalismto Post-Structuralism,ed. Jane P.Tompkins (Baltimore:The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress, 1980). 32. Cullercontinues,"Onecan thinkof these conventionsnot simply as the implicitknowledge of authors.... The activity is made possible by the existence of the genre, which the authorcan write against,certainly... but which is none the less the contextwithin which his activitytakesplace."From Culler,"LiteraryCompetence"in Tompkins,Reader-ResponseCriticism,102. Consider,even, the way in which the words are organizedon the page of a dramaticwork:with the speakers'names on the farright marginand their lines next to them. How would a typical Yiddishreaderunderstandhow to read a text organizedin such a way based on their diet of chapbooksand prayerbooks? 33. Abramovitsh,"Di takse" in Ale shriftnfun mendele moykhersforim (New York:Hebrew PublishingCompany,n.d.), 5. Dinezon claims that "themasses"read TheTax,but my sense is that he confuses here a writer'sevident effort to relate to a common reader(and thereby to eschew the condescension that Dinezon detected in early maskilic literature)with the actual existence of a common readership.
71
Alyssa Quint for most Yiddish readersof the time to understand.34How could a provincial,pious woman who is used to readingher tsenerenaunderstandeven the very organization of the words and names on the pages of a modem drama?Withoutacquaintancewith the conventions of a drama most Yiddish readers were simply bereft of the literaryproficiency needed to "completethe text." II. BOURGEOIS READERS VERSUS COMMON READERS Until now, certainequationshave organizedour understandingof the maskilic Yiddish literaturethat was generatedbefore Sholem Aleichem's public relations campaignin 1888. A work penned in Yiddish duringthis period means ipso facto that (1) it was primarilya tool of Enlightenmentpropaganda;(2) it was financiallylucrativeowing to its potentialmarket;35(3) it was intendedfor the masses; and (4) if it was published,it was readby the masses. But I proposethatthe relationship among such dimensions of a given work is far more complex and deceptively unstable. Khone Shmeruk draws our attention to the possibility of flaws in this neat bit of empiricalreasoningin his discussion of Enlightenmentliterature, "Between Hasidism and Haskalah."36Shmeruk argues, generally, that maskilim had to set aside their aversion to the Yiddish language to write antihasidic Yiddish literaturethat warned of the religious sect's deleterious effects. And yet, he also concedes that such a propagandisticfunction cannotaccount for the anti-hasidicliteraturewe know to havebeen writtenin Hebrew-most notably Joseph Perl'sMegale tmirim(Revealer of Secrets), a work that demonstratesthe enjoymentmaskilimtook in imaginingthe demise of their ideological enemies.37 Thatis-and this is rathertypical of "bourgeoisculture"in general-maskilim as readersgravitatedto literaturethatpreachedtheirown values and animateddilemmas or intriguesthatwere particularto theirclass. Accordingto the prevailingwisdom, maskilicwritersreasonedthatthe common Jew'sneed to learnthe lessons of the Haskalahwould correspondwith their eagerness to readYiddish maskilic literature.Hadn'tthey themselves hungeredfor Enlightenmentwhen they were mere 34. See Miron'sA TravelerDisguised for a full discussion of Abramovitsh'sMendele and his prefaces.The occurrencesof an artist"aimingtoo high" in trying to write for a popularaudience are myriad.A good example is that of Bertolt Brecht,who believed that populararthad to "representand validate"the progressivesection of the people and tried to create a popularcultureto respondto this need. But he "misunderstoodthe cultureof the people" and his plays only appealedto, by and large, an educatedand bourgeois audience. See John Fiske's article "PopularCulture"in Critical Termsfor Literary Study, ed. Frank Lentricchiaand Thomas Mc Laughlin (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1995), 326. 35. We shall considerYiddish literature'slucrativenessbelow in our discussion of Kol mevaser and Dos folksbibliotek. 36. Khone Shmeruk,Sifrutyidish: perakimle-toldoteha(Tel-Aviv:The PorterInstitutefor Poetics and Semiotics, 1978), 198-261. Shmerukremindshis readerthatmost of the anti-hasidicliterature writtenbefore the 1860s was not published and was thereforenot availableto "the masses" that most of the authorsintendedto reachwith it. But he does not make this argumentaboutpublishedworks as I am, here, arguing(see p. 241). 37. Shmeruk,Sifrutyidish, 253. He also writes on p. 259, "Thereis no room to doubtthe primarymotives thatthe maskilimbroughtto Yiddishin theirbattlefor the soul of the nation,but one may find clear signs that the masses were not the single addresseesof this literature."
72
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? Yiddish-speakingshtetl-dwellers?But, in fact, thereis no proof thatYiddish literaturewas an exception to the generalrule thatthe championsof bourgeoisvalues were themselves the greatestconsumersof bourgeoisliterature.Forthose readers alreadyfamiliarwith its lessons, the literature'sdidacticstreakwas more thanoffset by the amusementand self-affirmationit offered. If maskilimimmersedthemselves in the pleasuresof a Hebrewdidacticculture that reinforcedlessons in which they were alreadyschooled, why should we doubtthat they came to appreciateYiddish literaturepenned by the same authors that preachedthe same values? True, Hebrew could satiate the soul of an ardent maskil.But whatif he soughtlighterentertainmentthatmaybe enjoyedby his wife, daughters,or less learnedneighbor?Referencesto literarysalons in whichthe middle class attendedreadingsand recitalsin Yiddishgive dimensionto the pictureof maskilicenjoymentof Yiddish.38In a studyregardingthe ameliorationof the conditions of Russian Jewry penned in 1868, Russian-Jewishjournalist Joachim Tarnopolsuggests the ubiquityof such gatherings.Surprisingto studentsof Russian-Jewishintellectualhistory is Tarnopol'smentionof Yiddish-not Hebrewas the favoredlanguage of entertainment.That is, in fact, the only consumersof earlymodernYiddish dramaticwritingwe know of (when we know of them) were the maskilimthemselves.Tarnopolwrites: In manytownsof ourfatherland, for instance,Warsaw, Vilna,Odessa,Moandthe like,therearewholegroupsof culturedJewsand ghilev,Berdichev, thereexistsin theseenlightenedcirclesa specialkindof literaryentertainment:peoplepassthetimein readingaloud,in thecommonPolish-Yiddish jargon,stories,dramaticscenes,wholepamphletsin verseor prose.In these booklets,whicharedeclaimedbeforetheentireassemblage, manyfoolishcusandfalse Hasidicideasareridiculedin an extoms,obsoletesuperstitions, tremelysharpfashion.39 [emphasismine] Reportsof such gatheringsof maskilimor bourgeois Russian Jews surface in the memoirs of men like Yiddish novelist Dinezon and the Hebrew critic Avraham Paperna.40 38. Althoughthe salon cultureamong Jewish Enlightenmentproponentshas not been systematically documented,its existence should be of no surprise.A lively salon culturein the privatehomes of Russianaristocratsand intelligentyrepresenteda vital culturalmeetingpoint in Russiansociety and was the first venue for scores of works which governmentcensors prohibitedfor publicationor from the public stage, most famously Pushkin'sBoris Godunovand Griboedov'sWoefrom Wit.For a discussion of the literarysalon in ImperialRussia see William Mills Todd III'sfascinatingstudy,Fiction and Society in theAge of Pushkin:Ideology,Institutionsand Narrative(Cambridge:HarvardUniversity Press, 1986). See Dinezon's casual descriptionof a readingof Abramovitsh's(Yiddishnovel) The Nag he attendedat a bourgeois home while living in Moscow in 1877. See Dinezon, Zikhroynesun bilder(Vilna: 1877), 186-190. 39. JoachimTarnopol,Opytsovremennoii osmotretel'noireformyv oblasti iudaizmav Rossii: razmyshleniiao vnutrennemi vnieshnembytie russkikhevreev(Odessa: 1868), 68. 40. Dinezon mentions a gatheringof Jews in a Moscow household discussing Abramovitsh's The Nag. See Paperna'sreminiscence of his attendanceat the Zhitomir seminary of a rendition of Serkeleperformedby Goldfadenand his friends for a coterie of acquaintances,"Der ershteryidisher
73
Alyssa Quint As in the case of bourgeois culture,popularliteraryculturerefutes the theory that audiences seek out a literaturethat challenges and pushes them toward self-betterment.I am arguingthatpopularaudienceswere largely oblivious or resistantto maskilicliterature;but even when maskilimmanagedto infiltratea mass audience,it is doubtfulthatthe audiencesaw in such didacticliteraturethatwhich its authorsintendedfor it to imbibe.As the popularculturetheoristJohnFiske explains, "Inpopularculturethe text is a culturalresourceto be plunderedor used in ways that are determinedby the social interestsof the reader,not by the structure of the text itself, nor by the intentions(howeverwe may discern them) of its author ..."41 In other words, common readers,who were pious Jews, read Dik despite, not for, his carefully placed moral tangents. They had more authoritative sources of moral instruction.Dik came to learn this bitter lesson later on in his career: I amsurethata greatnumberof myreadersdonotsuspectmygoodintentions, andreadmystories... forpastimeonly,andwill accuseme,thewriterof the same,as beinga merebabblerwhodistractstheirattentionfromseriousstudies, andof writingforthemoneythatis in them.I knowthatfullwell,andyet I keepon doingmy duty,forevengreatermenthanI havebeentreatedin no betterwayby ournation... .42 Dik might have been the exception in the degree of awarenesshe broughtto the problemof audience. But I doubt there were not otherswho consideredthe audience questionjust as thoughtfully. Unlike the popularwritingsof Dik, Yiddish dramas,along with most maskilic Yiddishliterature,I speculate,were not reachingthe "audienceof the masses" we associate with pre-1880sYiddish literature.In contrastto the recordof bourgeois enjoymentof highbrowmodernYiddishliterature,thereis no such recordon the partof a commonor once-commonreader.This maybe chalkedup to the dearth of such testimonials.But there is evidence to supportthe very opposite possibility in the memoirs of Menashe Halpern(1871-1960), who had little educationas a boy in Russia, and who publishedan account of his early years late in life. After coming to appreciatethe breadthof Yiddish literarytalent, Halpernwrites: Lookin TheLexiconof Yiddish Literature andyouwill finda numberof writersbelongingto Shomer's anda numberwhoprecededhim,some generation, greaterandsome lesser.Butthatdoes not changethe pictureetchedin my becameveryillustrious; memory.[Shomer's contemporaries] Yiddish-writing able to readthem-and wrote Yiddish. But were not also the masses they in thecaseof thosewhodidreadthem,thenumberof readerswasa tinyone. dramaun der ershteryidisher forshtelung:mayne zikhroynesvegn avromgoldfadn,"Pinkes: aferltyoriker zhurnalfar yidishe literargeshikhte 1 (1927): 185-189. Also, on the Russian-Jewishwriter GrigoriiIsaakovichBogrov'sinterestinYiddish literaturesee GabriellaSafran'sRewritingtheJew:Assimilation narrativesin the RussianEmpire(Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress, 2000). 41. JohnFiske, "PopularCulture,"331. 42. Cited in Wiener,The History of Yiddish Literature,169-70. Originalsourceunknown.
74
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? [ ... ] Puttingasidethe chargesfairlyorunfairlyleveledagainstShomer,he hasretainedthe distinctionof havingtaughtthemasseshowto readandfor havingmadefromthema largereadingcircle.Hewasthefirstto altertheface of his generation....43 Halpernshows that, except for Shomer,the readinglife of his shtetl remainedimpervious to most Yiddish Enlightenmentliteraturethat has, nonetheless, come to representthis era of Yiddish culture. III. THE BUSINESS OF YIDDISH LITERATURE If, as our theory goes, most Yiddish literatureattractedonly a small pool of readers,then why was it so lucrative?In fact, it was not. In 1862, the year the governmentlifted the publishingmonopoly it had imposed in 1835, the complexion of Yiddishpublishingchanged surprisinglylittle.44If one were to espouse the notion that censorship impeded the beginnings of Yiddish literature,1862 should have been a watershedyear; the unpublishedYiddish works that enjoyed the admirationof only a tiny audience-works by AvrahamGottlober,Ettinger,andAksenfeld, alone-warranted immediatepublication.Why then, when the floodgates were lifted,was thereno flood?45Perhapsthe press in Odessawas too poorto make 43. MenasheHalpern,Parmetn(Buenos Aires:Altveltlekhnyidishn kultur-kongres,1952), 58. Halpern writes furtherapropos of Shomer: "The book peddlar'smodern merchandiseconsisted of Shomer'sbooks,"p. 47. Elsewherehe writes, "Thecommon man was attractedto Shomer'snovels like a magnet. He was pulled to his books. He ran to heara readerin someone's home. Withtime, this listener was pulled to learn how to read a Yiddish novel himself. I rememberwell tens of such middleaged, toiling Jews. They would say, 'Who knew it was so difficult to readYiddish?'They wondered since they [already]knew how to pray [in the more elite languageof Hebrew].... In such a way, the numberof Yiddish-readersrose,"p. 27. See also his observationsabout Shomer as a westernizingor modernizingforce among his readers,p. 30. 44. See Shmeruk,Sifrutyidish, 198-261. Also, David Roskies, "Ayzik-MeyerDick and the Rise ofYiddish PopularLiterature"(PhD diss., BrandeisUniversity,1974), 33. Fora descriptionof the five points of the ukase see pages 33-34 and David E. Fishman,"The Politics of Yiddish in Tsarist Russia,"in FromAncient Israel to ModernJudaism: Intellect in Quest of Understanding:Essays in Honor ofMarvinFox, ed. JacobNeusner,ErnestS. Frerichs,andNahumM. Sarna(Atlanta,GA: Scholars Press, 1989), 151-70. 45. Fishmanmakesthe "censorship"case best;see Fishman,"ThePolitics of YiddishInTsarist Russia,"in Frerichsand Sarna,FromAncientIsrael to ModernJudaism, 151-170. Aksenfeld illustrates this point. Aksenfeld entrusteda copy of his works to his friendL. Moreinosof Odessa before he departedfor Paristo spend the rest of his years therewith his sons. In 1870, a brief article in the Odessabased Yiddishperiodical,Kol mevaser,advertisedthe efforts of some of Aksenfeld'sadmirersto publish his works.They call on readersto send money in advance."Wewould like to thankall those who have helped with money,effort,and hope and all those who wish the best for theirpeople, and who will not refuse to help with money . . . to print all of [Aksenfeld's]writings including the largernovels, Friedlander(12 parts),Mikhlder ozerkes(6 parts)Elka di kvatke,Di shpiges, Sefer khsidimas well as others."See Kol mevaser2 (1870): 15-16. His supportershad approachedthe St. Petersburg-basedorganizationSocietyfor the Promotionof Jewish Enlightenmentfor funding, but were refused because Aksenfeld's works were not in Hebrew.For a copy of this correspondencesee B. Gorin,Di geshikhte fun yidishn teater (New York:M.N. Mayzel, Idisherfarlagfar literaturun visenshaft, 1923), 102-104. By the time Sholem Aleichem sought them out to publish them they could not be found. This is
75
Alyssa Quint the initial investment,or did not believe thatthe investmentwould pay off.46Possibly, publisherscame to understandthat such works would attractthe same narrow segmentof the populationwhetherthey were publishedor they were circulated in manuscript.We cannotknow for sure.The existence of a circumscribedclass of Yiddish readersthat we are hypotheticallyconsideringwould explain such peculiaritiesof the publishingindustry. It would make sense, for instance,of the progressof the Yiddish community's first literaryorgan,Kol mevaser,a window onto the cultureof maskilicYiddish-writing in general. Though its editor, Alexander Zederbaum,intended the newspaper"forthe masses,"thereis little historicalevidence thatit reachedan audience beyond an enlightened and urban rising middle-class readership.This would, doubtless,contradictZederbaum'sinitial claims.47He writes: Weseeaccordingto thesubscribers, thatthepeopleareverysatisfiedwithus, andI myselfamconvinced,as we arealsotoldby others,thatmiddle-income old peopleandwomen ("mitele") peopleandthe uneducated ("prostakes"), or Fridaynightat home,or wagonsittingin theirstallsin the marketplace nootherlanguageandreadKol drivers,andcraftsmen, peoplewhounderstand mevaserwithunusualhunger,putit to theirearandtheirmouth,andexact greatpleasurefromeverything theyread. It would also contradictthe impressionof all the scholarswho have studied the journal, including, most recently,AlexanderOrbach,but also A. Malachi, Israel Zinberg,and SamuelZitron.48 indicatedby an announcementhe includedin the first volume of his Folksbibliotek(1888) in which he calls upon his readersto reportto him if they know the whereaboutsof Aksenfeld'slost manuscripts. If the censor had been the only thing standingbetween the publisherand the audience,then his works would have been published.I suspect other works would have been too. 46. The question demandsfurtherattention.A completely differentpicturepresidedin Vilna, where Dik could not write enoughYiddish chapbooksfor the Romm PublishingHouse. The discrepancy between the expectationsof the young Odessa-basedpublishinghouse and the long-established Romm family business is probablydue, in part,to the fact that the Romms commandeda well-honed distributionnetworkthat reachedthe book peddlerswho traveledamong lower classes of Jews in the cities and the markettowns. 47. On Kol mevaser see Israel Zinberg,"Der kol mevaserun zayn tsayt,"in Kultur-historishe shtudies (New York:GrenichPrintingCorp., 1949), 159-89. Zinbergoffers a good discussion of the newspaper'scontents and some of its history but offers nothing as to the newspaper'scirculation. Malachi also offers an interestingdiscussion. See "Kol mevaser"[Yiddish] in Jewish Book Annual (1962): 84-94. See also Khone Shmeruk'smore recent chapteron the early Yiddish press in Sifrut yidish, 261-94. 48. SamuelLeib Zitron,Di geshikhtefun deryidisherprese 1.fun yor 1863 biz 1889 (Warsaw: Ahisefer, 1923), 43. Dinezon is curiouslydefensive aboutthe newspaper'srole. He writes,"Kolmevaser surelyhad a largenumberof readersandplayeda largerole in the lives of those who readit andwere awoken by it-although few people would dare admit it now,"in Dinezon, Di yidishe shprakhun ir shrayber,17. In general,the "success"in termsof readershipof any maskilicjournalof this time would be a difficult thing to assess given the financial subsidies that we know kept some of them running.I am assumingthatZederbaumexpectedhis Yiddishnewspaperto be financially self-sufficient because of the existence of such a large numberof potentialsubscribers.
76
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? But then, why did the only newspaperof its kind,with millions of potential readers,fail as early as 1871? If assessed against the founding principle of Kol mevaser,its need to shut down might have been the stuff of celebrationsince it would suggest thatits Yiddishreaderswere knowledgeableenough in German(or Russianor Hebrew)to rendertheYiddishnewspaperobsolete.49However,in 1871, this was hardlythe case. Scholarsattributethe collapse to the poor editorialstaff that took over the newspaperafterZederbaumrelocatedto St. Petersburg,but the staff would come to include the figures ofjournalist and writerMoses Lilienblum andpublisherand writerMoses Eliezer Belinson-hardly the pictureof incompetence. Besides, Zederbaum himself touches upon the newspaper's imminent demise due to financial problems in an editorial he penned even before he quit Odessa: Andso we survivedforeightyearsin suffering,troubles.Andevenunderthe in sacrificing threatof deathI couldn'ttell you howmuchwe accomplished ourtime,oureffort,andourtalentto be an uninviteddo-gooderforthe People of Israel.Weneverconsideredearninga literarynamein literaryYiddish and,in anycase,ourwork[towardthatend]hascertainlynotbeenrewarded. Wehavealreadylivedto see the daythatall the classes,eventhemosteducated,exceptforthosethatarenotinterested[sic] agreethatKolmevaseris the most useful newspaperto those Jews whom it has influenced [ ... ] You
havenothingto be suspiciousof, wearenotexpectingto makeanyprofitfrom this,we wouldonlyliketo payfortheprinting,paper... andotherexpendituresas wellas ourremarkable staff.Ourowneffortwe do notaccountforas the as is maintained.50 long newspaper Here, Zederbaumis undoubtedlyaddressinglike-minded maskilim-those who were never part of the paper'sexpressly acknowledgedconstituency--instead of his purportedmass audience. With distress and palpableambivalence,he admits to the newspaper'sliteraryaspirationsandthe masses' rejectionof his good works. In fact, the more likely explanationis that the typicalYiddish readerwas not acquaintedwith the newspaper,not that it took pains to reject it.51 In any case, the 49. Accordingto his statedprogram,Zederbaumintendedto wean his readersfromYiddishto German,a languagefavoredby maskilimand close to Yiddish. 50. Kol mevaser 51 (1870): 39. If the informationon the newspaper'smastheadis any indication, Kol mevaserwas regularlysold to a customerwho also boughtHa-meliz.Fromthe beginning,advertisementsreflecta bourgeoissemi-Russifiedreadership:all-Russianads;ads for fashionableclothes, Russianand Hebrewbooks, andpianos;and ads promotingwhereto get a koshermeal in St. Petersburg (a city still highly restricted).Somejournalistsassumedthattheiraudiencewas similarto themselvesin havingattainedproficiency-if not fluency-in Russian.PopularhistorianShmuelResser,for instance, explainedin 1864 thathis Yiddishbooks were intendedfor childrenand adultswho know no otherlanguage butYiddish"eventhoughthereare so few of such [people],"Kol mevaser40 (1864): 610-61. A bibliographicalnotice publishedin Kol mevaserin 1870 advertisesa songbookof Yiddishsongs in the following way: "[I]f [the songs] have any worthat all-even thoughwe are all capableof readingRussian (khotshmen layentshoyn bay undzfil rusish)--we see thatwhen a good song is writtenin the language, it travelsfrom mouthto mouthand is sung by everyonefrom big to small." 51. Shortlyafterthe newspaper'sdemise, Zederbaumwrote an articlethatrepeatedhis motivations in publishing a Yiddish newspaper but also included an impassioned defense of the Yiddish
77
Alyssa Quint strong likelihood that the newspaperdid not reach much of the mass audience it apparentlytargetedraises not the question"Whydid Kol mevaserfail?"but rather "WhatsustainedKol mevaserfor its almost ten-yearrun?" The experiences of playwrightsYoel Berish Falkovitshand AvrahamBer Gottlobershed light on this question along with aspects of the historicalrealities of Yiddishreadershipduringthis era. In 1864, Falkovitshwrote his lengthydrama Khayimlder katsin (Chaim the Magnate), in which his intentionto reach a Yiddish-speakingand distinctly female audience is clearly recordedin the foreword addressedto "pious rabbis'wives and knowledgeablewomen."52The well-intentioned Falkovitsh,who resided in St. Petersburg,a city restrictedto only a small numberof qualifying Jews, was in every respect out of touch with his audience. But he would not be for long. The forewordto his next dramaRokheledi zingerin (Rachel the Songstress), colored by embarrassmentand defensiveness, registers the author'srude awakening.Insteadof addressingpious women in his prefatory remarks,he is forcedto addresshis fellow maskilimfor the ratherparadoxicaltask of advising them thathis work is not meant for their eyes: to My educatedandlearnedfriends,if oncein a whileyoushouldcondescend reada bookletinYiddish,andthisdramadropsintoyourlap,I begyounotto mockitbecauseI wroteit,notforlearnedmen,butfora simpleaudience. I know thata learnedaudiencehasreadfarbetterin livinglanguages andneednotderivethelessonsthatthisbookoffers.I onlywroteit forourunlettered masses.53 It was the last piece Falkovitshwrote in Yiddish.Gottlober,on the otherhand,was well awarethat most Yiddish readerswould never read his literatureand that his Yiddish workswere more likely to "dropinto the laps"of his colleagues. So Gottlober openly marketedhis Yiddish works specifically for an audience that consisted of educatedand multilingualreaders.This is the only way of explaininghis advertisementin the HebrewHa-meliz,in 1862, announcinga collection of his Yiddish writingsin which he concludedby stating:"Theseworksof mine have already acquiredrenownandthey areknownto manymaskilimandpoets."54Among masklanguagealbeit in the name of "others"who defend and even advocatethe necessity of theYiddishlanguage. He wrote, "Those who cling to the old, cherishYiddish as an ancient inheritance,behold it as somethingholy and protectit jealously [ ... ] It is to them a treasureof all that is precious in Judaism, and without it, believe, that a Jew cannotbe a Jew,withoutit he cannotreachthe eruditionin studying the Talmud,and believes that none other than it can sustainthe spiritthatprevailsamong the families of Israel and within its community."Published in Ha-meliz 6 (1873) and quoted in Shmeruk,Sifrut yidish, 285. 52. Falkovitsh,Reb. Khayimlder katsin eyn teater in 4 akten (Odessa: M.A. Belinson, 1866). At 166 pages, Falkovitsh'sYiddishbooks were far lengthierthanthose of Dik, which usuallynumbered at aroundforty pages. 53. Falkovitsh,Rokheledi zingerin (Zhitomir:A.S. Szadow, 1868), 5. 54. Quotedin Zinberg,History ofJewish Literature,trans.and ed. BernardMartin(Cleveland, OH: Case WesternReserve University,1972-78), 12, 69. Similarly,Zinbergremarksin a footnote that in a letterto his friendPinhasBernstein,Gottloberwrote:"Say my fellow-maskilim,when did you not satiateyour souls whetherI sang in Hebrewor Judeo-German[Yiddish]?"There are, likewise, examples of Hebrewmaskilicliteraryworksadvertisedin Yiddish literarynewspapers.But even the bulk of
78
"Yiddish Literature for the Masses"? ilic writersofYiddish literature,some knew who theirpotentialaudiencewas, and others, like Falkovitsh,remainedvery much unenlightened. Forourpurposes,Falkovitsh'sprefaceto Rokheledi zingerin'sforewardis particularlya historicalgem. Although I have not found any publishedreview of the drama,the above-quotedprefacebetrayshis colleagues' open disparagementof it. It is unlikelythathis criticstook issue withthe book'sideologicalcomplexion,which is aglow with Enlightenmentinstruction.Aesthetically,however,his writing was mediocre and unoriginal.In other words, to Falkovitsh'sbefuddlement,his colleagues evaluatedhis Yiddishworkwith the expectationthathe buildupon andsurpass the literaryachievementsmodernYiddishliteraturehadaccumulatedto dateand they made no allowancesfor the fact that,by definition,as a Yiddishwriterhe was aiming his work at a common audience.What should artisticstandardshave matteredto them as they relateto Yiddishletters?By the late 1860s, so it becomes clear,high-mindedYiddishreadersadoptedthe high-mindedliterarystandardsthey absorbedfrom other languages.Workspenned by Goldfaden,Abramovitsh,and many of theircontemporariesonly confirmthe existenceof suchhigh expectations. Elevatedliterarystandardshadalreadyfounda home in the realmofYiddish letters. As we approachthe 1890s, Sholem Aleichem openly attests to such standards in his famous diatribeagainst the middling literatureof Shomer,Shomers mishpet (The TrialofShomer, 1888), in which he famouslypronouncedShomer's romancesto be a scourgeon theYiddishreadership.In his eyes, his books were no more thanfacile translationsof foreign stories that,he argued,dulled the tastes of the Yiddish-speakingpublic. And he backed up his words with pages of analysis of Shomer'snovels. Scholarsmore or less agree with Sholem Aleichem's assessment.To use the categoriesof the literarycritic NorthropFrye, Shomer'swork indulged in the "deliberatelynaive appeal"made by all other popularfiction: "superficially complicated,"it resorted to "obvious and obtrusive convention"and "told his readerslittle that was credibleabouttheir own lives.""55 Shomerhimself had no illusions aboutwhere the powerof his work resided: Novelsarelike all otherobjectson the earth.Theycannotpleaseeveryone equally.Someseekin novelsrealtypesandtruescenesof reality.Othersonly wantscenesof tragedythatbreakourheart.Butthevastmajorityof thepublic demandonlystoriesof extraordinary events.56 Kol mevaser'sadvertisementsfor belletristicworks(pennedin Yiddish) demonstratethatauthorswere not partof the more general book-selling industry;they often sold their own books from their homes. For an evaluationof Gottlober'swork as a bilingualwritersee AharonZeitlin, "Di yidish-yerushefun di tsvey haskole-shraybersY. L. Gordonun A.B. Gotlober"[TheYiddishlegacy of two Enlightenment writers:Gordonand Gottlober]Yivobleter XXI (1952): 99-112. 55. This is how NorthropFrye characterizespopularliteraturein A NaturalPerspective: The Development of Shakespeare'sComedyand Romance (New York:Columbia, 1965), 4-5. Shomer's greatestchampionwas the Soviet scholarA. Vevyorke.See his Revizye(Kharkov:1931). See also Meir Viner'scritiqueof this work "Tsuder problemfun literarisheryerushe(di teorye vegn di 'gute sofn' in A. Vevyorke'sbukh 'revizye,'" in Problemesfun kritik(Moscow: Emes, 1933), 175. 56. Quoted in Meyer-Isser Pines, Di geshikhte fun der yudisher literatur bizn yor 1890 (War-
saw: B. Shimin, 1911), 165. Originallywrittenin Di zisenefrau oder dosfarkoyfte kind: eyn vundersheynerroman(Vilna: 1882), 8.
79
Alyssa Quint The same elementsthat,in SholemAleichem'seyes, indictedhis literature,Shomer knew were essential to his success as a writerof popularfiction. Moreover,as it pushed its readersto learnYiddish, to imitatethe mannersof its heroes, Shomer's novels spreada kind of Enlightenment. As the editor and publisherof the Folksbibliotek,which included the very best modernYiddishliteratureso far produced,SholemAleichem came to discover that its audiencewas a relativelytiny one. In its second volume, which Sholem Aleichem published in 1889, he wrote a two-page article lambastinghis fellow maskilimfor ignoringthe appreciablegulf that divided the common reader(or as he put it, "the marketplace")and the cosmopolitanYiddish reader/writer(whom he labeled "Odessa").Their oblivion was shamefully in evidence in an article penned by Linetzky(in the first volume of the Folksbibliotek),in which he hadjubilantly describedthe currentYiddish literarycultureas one in which the reader was finally allowed to taste from the choicest of Yiddish literaryworks increasingly availableto him by way of such efforts as the Folksbibliotek. 57 It is truethatone of the goals of the Folksbibliotekwas to circulateworks of Yiddish that had been neglected by previous publishersand hold them out to the masses of Yiddish readers.Worksby some of Yiddish'smost prestigiouspioneer authorshad not yet made it into printby 1888. Therewas much to celebrate.But, at least accordingto Sholem Aleichem's angry rebuketo Linetzky'sstatusreport entitled"Afnliterarishemark"("Atthe LiteraryMarketplace"),Linetzkywas sadly ill-informed.In his response,the refined Russified editor sardonicallyadopted the voice of a provincialresident: It is sunnyhereat themarket,so sunny!Theshuttersareopen,thebookpeddlers'handsarefull ..,.the bookpeddlerspackupbooksbythepound,everyone runs,grabs,buys,reads,andwantsmore(lickingtheirchops)whilethe writerssit withsleevesrolledup, scratchingout sentencesabouteverything underthemoon.Inoneword:ourliterarymarketis sunny! Howniceit mustbe to be anoptimist![ ... ] HowI envymygood-hearted friendMr.Katsin[Linetzky's whowantsto convincehimselfthat pseudonym], Yiddishliterature hasbegunto shedits swaddlingclothes!HowluckyKatsin is! He sits in "beautiful Odessa"by thegreatBlackSeaanddreamsa sweet dream.Butlethimtakea tripdownto us, intheprovinces,in thesmallshtetls, andhe will see whatthe"people"read,whattheyareravingabout.[ ... ] Oh is stillbarefoot!Sheis naked Yiddishliterature friend,whatareyoudreaming? andbarefoot!Andyou insistthatshe is alreadybeginningto throwoff the swaddlingclothes!58 57. Linetzky'sDos poylishe yingl might be anotherexception to the general rule I am laying out; it was artisticallyinnovative(unlike Shomer) and allegedly quite popular.But it is even unclear how popularthis work was in the late 1860s when it first came out. See David Goldberg'sdiscussion of this question (includinghis study ofY. Reminik'sarticle on Dos poylishe yingl) in "YiddishSatire and the Haskalah:The case of Dos poylisheying" (MA diss., ColumbiaUniversity,1985), chapterone. Also, see MenasheHalpern'smemoirs,in which he describesLinetzky'spopularity,as he initiallycame to know it, as stemmingfrom an oral folk cultureratherthanone associatedwith his writtenwork. He compareshim to the famous Hershl Ostroplier.Halpern,Parmetn,19. 58. Sholem Aleichem, ed., Folksbibliotek,(Kiev:YakovSheptil, 1888), 1:351-52.
80
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? Have no doubtthat in these lines Sholem Aleichem is describingthe puerile state of the literature'saudience.If his bitternesswasn'tenoughto defuse his colleagues' optimism, an accompanyingledger of books published duringthe previous year no doubtexertedits soberingeffects. No comparisonmoretellingly revealsthe gap between "Odessa"readersand the rest of the "literarymarketplace":Sholem Aleichem published3,200 copies of the Folksbibliotek,comparedto the 96,000 copies of Shomer'sworks printed in the same year by various publishing houses. The ledger also indicatedthat similarly high-mindedtitles were published in limited numberssimilarto the figure of the Folksbibliotek,thatis, of one thousandcopies or fewer.59And, though Sholem Aleichem invested a great deal of money in the Folksbibliotek,offering as he did substantialremunerationto its contributors,he was bankruptbefore he could issue the third volume.60 His literary endeavors alone mightnot havebankruptedhim-Sholem Aleichem had a penchantfor risky financialspeculation-but at the very leastthey failed to generatefinanciallyprofitable returns. The dominanceof the literarylandscapeby a fashionerof low-gradeliterature was not peculiarto Yiddish and,in fact, resembledthe Russianpopularliteraturemarketof the same period, describedby JeffreyBrooks in his study, When Russia Learnedto Read.61As Brooks puts it so well, despite Marxistcritics who arguethatpopularliterature"signifies a spurioussystem of values imposed upon the common people by a bourgeoisie"and despite the "additionalbarrierof the censor,the studyof popularpublishing... shows the unusuallyclose ties between the industryand its lower-classaudience,and the popularcommercialauthorsrevealed theirindependencefrom the censor in manyways."62Likewise, to the cha59. See appendix. Sholem Aleichem, ed., Folksbibliotek(Kiev: YakovSheptil, 1889), 2:13539. These are the only seemingly comprehensiverecordsof Yiddishpublishingpost-1862 that I know to exist. Comparethe very small quantitiesin which Sholem Aleichem publishedpartof the Folksbibliotek (in denominationsof fifty and a hundred),whereas Shomer is published in at least 1,000 to up to 6,000 copies. Folk songs (see Klibonov)are also publishedin largedenominationsand probablyappealed to "both"classes of readers,in so far as they existed. Thereis less of a discrepancybetween the number of Shomer's works published individually versus, for instance, Abramovitsh'sDi kliatshe (5,000 copies published),but this is attributableto Sholem Aleichem's skewed perceptionof the marketplace.WhereasShomer'sworks had been publishedin great quantitiessince at least the beginning of the decade (and so his numbersmay be relied upon to be respondingto marketdemand), Sholem Aleichem is publishingDi kliatshe for the first time (in Yiddish) since it was originallypublished in 1873. In general,I believe SholemAleichem overestimatedin his publicationof some partsof the Folksbibliotekeven as he was adjustinghis appreciationof the marketplacereality.Anotherhypothesisabout Di kliatshe'slargenumberof copies maybe assignedto its popularityamongassimilatedJews, of which there were enough of to supportsuch a large publicationrun. Though this article organizesthe nineteenth-centuryreadersinto two pools, we must keep in mind thattherewere more gradationsin the actual readership. 60. See Ken Frieden,Classic YiddishFiction:Abramovitsh,SholemAleichem,and Peretz (Albany: State Universityof New YorkPress, 1995), 245. 61. JeffreyBrooks, WhenRussia Learnedto Read:Literacyand PopularLiterature1861-1917 (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1985). 62. Brooks, WhenRussiaLearnedto Read, xvi. Brooksalso drawsa helpfuldistinctionbetween "commercial"and "non-commercial"publishinghouses, a distinctionthat may roughly describe the maskilic publishinghouse based in Odessa (non-commercial)versus the other publishinghouses of,
81
Alyssa Quint grin shared by Deinard, Dinezon, and Sholem Aleichem, the common Yiddish readerread accordingto his own tastes and his own tastes alone. However momentous it might have seemed, Sholem Aleichem's Folksbibliotek was an extension of the highbrowliteraryculturethat had already existed since the second decade of the nineteenth century.The author'sindictment of Shomer-his turningup his nose at what the people wanted-likewise represented a continuationof a hardenedmaskilic attitudetowardsYiddish literature;few maskilicwriterswere willing to lowerthe standardor qualityof theirwriting,even if it meantthatthey would neverreachthe masses they so magnanimouslyclaimed to be writing for! Dinezon observes as much in the careerof Abramovitsh: Abramovitsh hasdistinguished himselfmanytimeswithhisYiddishwork,for who does not know of The Nag (Di kliatshe, 1877) and The LittleJew (Dos
wouldexcuseme, I shallsayso openyidele,1875)?But,if Mr.Abramovitsh ly: in boththeseworkshe hasnotachievedhis goal.Thepeoplewerenotyet at the levelto understand andread[theseworks].[T]hesetwoworks... did notmaketheirnameamongthe masses,but,instead,amonghis friends,the maskilim andHebrewwriters.Thepeopledonotbuythesebooksorreadthem. Oneoutof a thousandof themunderstand whattheyareabout.AndI do not believethatAbramovitsh wasso misledas to believe. .. thathe waswriting themforthemasses.Thequestionremains:forwhomdidhe writeTheLittle JewandTheNaginYiddish?I writeaccordingto whatmyeyessee andwhat afterhistriumphwithTheTax,ceasedbeingsemyheartfeels:Abramovitsh, riousaboutwritinginYiddishandaboutthe languageitself.In all of his latest worksthehumorandsatirearetoo muchandtoo thicklypaintedandnot evennecessary.... I getthefeelingthattheauthorplaysandjokesaboutartistic deformities mocks,laughs,anddanceson a stringforhis (kunstgebrekhe), friendsandfellow-writers themselvesandconcernshimselflittlewithitsbenefits to thepeople.63 Miron notes that TheNag was the most popularof Abramovitsh'sworks and was read "notonly among the masses but even among the intelligentsia."64But such a statementwhitewashes importantquestions of audience with which we are here trying to come to grips. TheNag appearedto be "popular"because it appealedto Russifying Jews of every shade of culturalassimilation, from the radicallymaskilic and firmly observant Hebraist to the "Russian-on-the-street-and-Jew-atlet'ssay,the Rommsin Vilna:"Theconnectionbetweenthenoncommercial andtheirinpublishers tendedaudiencewas alwaystenuous.Thecommercial on the otherhand,hadlinkswith publishers, readersas solidas therubles,ormoreappropriately, thekopecks,thatchangedhandsin exchangefor theirwares,"xv. 63. Dinezon,Di yidisheshprakheunireshraybers, 9. WhenDinezonasks,"forwhodoesnot knowof TheNag andTheLittleJew?"it is evidentfromthe contextof his wordsthathe posesthis rhetoricalquestionto his fellow maskilim. 64. Miron,"Pirkeimavo le 'Susati' le-Abramoviz,"Ha-doar 51 (1972): 606. In it, Mironoffers a comprehensivediscussion of the book's literaryand critical context. See the other segments of this discussion in his serializedarticlesunderthe title "Sifriyale-meturafim-harek'ale-yitzirat'susati' leAbramoviz,"Ha-doar 51 (1972): 682-83, 698-99.
82
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? home" living out the triumphantexistence of a bourgeois, St. Petersburgresident. It did so because it playedout the very compelling anxiety of the breakdownof the Russian-Jewishsymbiosis on which these Russian Jews stakedtheir lives. Such a theory would explain why the second time it was issued, in 1886, the novel was publishedin Polish translation.TheNag was popularnot "even"among the intelligentsia, but, I would say, exclusivelyamong the intelligentsia.65
V CONCLUSION Fromthe beginning,the modernsecularYiddishliteraturethatwe most idenwith this era was shaped,to a substantialdegree, by a stratumof readerscomtify of prised bourgeoisJews anxious to read abouttheirworld and theirpeople in inventive andchallengingforms in theYiddishlanguage.This audience-not a mass audience-supported a robustbranchofYiddish literaturethateventuallyclaimed more and more readers,who, in return,inspiredmore writers,as we approachthe end of the nineteenthcentury.The theorythatthereexisted a stratifiedYiddish audience is not a "magicbullet"theory that explains every peculiarityof the beginnings of Yiddish literaryculture-to the extent it was peculiarat all. The censorship argumentexplains why Abramovitsh, for instance, was not permitted to publish a Yiddish newspaperwhen he wanted to do so in the 1870s. (The theory might, however,imply thatAbramovitsh'splan to reacha mass audiencewith such a journalwould not have succeeded.)As well, censorshipexplains why Dinezon's first novel was not published-although his second novel was, and it was a commercialsuccess.66In general,however,I believe censorshipto be a distractionfrom 65. Abramovitsh'seffort to publishworks intendedfor a mass readershipwas a failure,possibly a casualty of the conservatismthat characterizedthe entrenchedcommercial Jewish publishing houses. Leo Wienerreportsthat in the 1870s, the book firm Eisenstadtand Schapirocommissioned Abramovitshto write a trialtranslationof the Psalms as well as an updatedversion of traditionalSabbath prayersand hymns.The translationof the Psalms was neverpublished(and laterlost) and the editions of his recraftedSabbathhymns were "keptout of circulation"by the Romms, "who were afraid that such an excellent translationmight seriouslyinterferewith their sale of theirold, stereotypedform of the prayer-book"andAbramovitsh"was made to desist from finishing the meritorioustask that he had begun."According to Wienerwho was in contact with Abramovitsh,none of his early efforts to writeYiddishwere successful on a popularand financial level. See, Wiener,History of YiddishLiterature, 97. On the same note, recall that C.N. Bialik andY.H. Ravnitzskyhad difficulty in publishinga "complete works"edition of Abramovitsh'swork in the early twentiethcentury,a situationthat suggests that he still did not command a popular audience by this point. See Halifat 'igrot ben shai Abramovizu-ven h.n. byalik ve-y.h. ravnitskyba-shanim 1905-08. Annotatedand edited by Khone Shmeruk.(Jerusalem:ha-akademyahha-le-umitha-yisreelitle-madaim, 1976). 66. Dinezon was convinced that Shomer'ssuccess was his fault since he wrote one of the first successful potboilers, Der shvartseryungermantshik(1870). According to Leksikon,it sold 10,000 copies. Still, we know fromDinezon'smemoirsthatat least partof his readershipbelongedto the bourgeoisie. He recountstrying to find a copy of his own book in Moscow shortlyafter it was published. After he trackeddown a seller of Yiddish books, he discoveredthat the vendor had sold out his 400 copies of the book. I believe that Dinezon's audience, at this early stage of his career,was neither entirelyhighbrownor as accessible as Shomer.In any case, Dinezon did not write anothernovel until after he became acquaintedwith Y.L. Peretz in 1885, and it is unclearwhy this is. I doubt, however, that Dinezon's fear about triggeringShomer'ssuccess had much basis in reality. See his Zikhroynes un bilder On Dinezon see Shmuel Rozhanski's YankevDinezon: di mamnetsvishn undzereklasikers
83
Alyssa Quint the significant historicalfactors outlined above; factorsthat had a far greaterimpact on the early developmentof modernYiddish literature.67My broad-brushed discussion, I hope, will raise more questions:How much of writingfor the female readeror for the masses was a matterof literaryconceit?68When did largeraudiences "catch up" to the more sophisticated literary heights of such writers as Abramovitsh,Sholem Aleichem, or Linetsky? For Goldfaden'saudience"catchingup" was not necessary,for no one ever read his work;insteadthey saw it performed.Needing to reada dramamade it far more inaccessiblethanwatchingit on stage. This distinctivefeatureof the theatre forced Goldfadeninto a face-to-face encounterwith the "mass audience"he and his maskilicpredecessorshad only imagined seated at their writing tables.While it was by no means a happy occasion, his very first encounterwith "the masses" was crucialto his success as a popularizerof a distinctlymodernbrandof Yiddish culture.His very first live audience respondedto his performancewith dumb silence-a deathsentence for any performerat the time-as Goldfaden,a practiced performer,declaimedhis famouspoem "Dospintele yid." They were silent, he recalls in his autobiography,even as he adheredstrictlyto the dictates of the art of declamation: Buttheaudiencewashushed. I movedto exitthestage.Theaudiencewasquiet. I exited.Theaudiencewassilent. I thought,eitherI don'tunderstand thisaudience,or it hasno passion forseriouspatrioticpoetry... I trottedoutmypoem "Dialteneshome"["TheAgedSoul"] buttheaudiencecontinuedits silence. By thispoint,thesilencewaspainful.I movedto exit-and theywhistled! Andit wasanangrywhistle! I imaginedthatnightshouldbefallthataudience! Oh,themisfortunes My dreamswerecrushedby thisdaftaudience["deroylemodergoylem"]; drainedfrommyheadin oneblow.
(1856-1919) (Buenos Aires: YIVO, 1956) and Leksikonfun der nayer yidisher literatur(New York: Congress for Jewish Culture, 1958), 2:514-16. 67. Fishmanasksthe question:why was the developmentofYiddish literatureso belatedor stunted. I am still not convinced,however,that it sufferedfrom any "delay."See Fishman,"ThePolitics of YiddishIn TsaristRussia,"in Frerichsand Sarna,FromAncientIsrael to ModernJudaism, 151-70. 68. Much has been made of the connectionbetweenYiddish and the EasternEuropeanJewish female reader.In general,this paperseeks to de-emphasizethe genderfactorin looking atYiddishreading duringthis era. My impressionis that, by and large, male and female readershad similarreading habits and thatthe differencesbetween them surfacewhen consideringmiddle-class readersand readers of Hebrew and other languages.According to the memoirs of Menashe Halpern,common male readerslearnedto readYiddish in orderto readShomer'sbooks andthis is probablytrueof female readers as well. For a study of female Jewish reading in EasternEuropesee Iris Parush,Nashim kor'ot: yitronahshel shuliutbe-khevraha-yahadutbe-mizraheiropahbe-me'ah-tsha'esrei(Tel-Aviv:Am ovad, 2001). Parushdemonstratesthat nineteenth-centuryJewish women'ssocial and educationalmarginality generallyincreasedtheir opportunityto learn how to read.
84
"YiddishLiteraturefor the Masses"? whostoodin thewings,emerged [Thepopularentertainer, Israel]Grodner to his familiaraudienceandit showedhiminstantrespect.... (Hewas well acquainted withthe animalsandknewwhatappeasedthem).. .69 Seldom is Goldfadenknown to have taken the stage after that fateful day. But on that same day, undeterred,Goldfadenbegan assembling a cast of Yiddish entertainers,formerbadkhonimand folksingerslike Grodnerwho knew how to drawa crowd.Goldfaden'srigid declamatorystyle was done awaywith as the actors'performancesabsorbedmusic, dance, and generalbuffooneryenough to compensate for-or elide completely-the morecomplex or sophisticatedaspectsof the maskil's dramatictexts. The libertiesthey took did not suit every playwrightthat tried his hand at the craft,but Goldfadencould see past his ego to the bottom line and was, in any case, addictedto the world of entertainment.70 Finally,the encounter's achievement in he not knowhis customer was that did Goldfaden greatest showing as well as he thoughthe did for all the years he was writing EnlightenmentYiddish literature.Finally,Goldfadenunderstood.It might be no accident that while Abramovitshpities himself for turningto the feeble language of Yiddish, Goldfaden pities himself for having to panderto the Yiddish masses. The close-up appreciationof the commonYiddish culturalconsumerthat the theatreforced upon Goldfaden,and then his collaboratorShomer,ensuredthe sustainedsuccess of the Yiddish theatreuntil the governmentshut it down in 1883. As well, it accountsfor Shomer'ssuccess as a pulp-fiction writerwhen he gave up producingtheatrefor writing novels in the late 1870s.71 Was, then, the maskilic Yiddish literary project that spanned most of the nineteenthcentury,"until Goldfaden and Shomer arrivedin Odessa in 1879," a failure?Not really. Despite itself, it eventuallyproducedenough writers in men like Shomer who were enormously successful in attractingreadersand opening their eyes to a worldbeyond shtetl limits, even if it was a worldplated with fantasy and adventure.Not only did their eyes open, but Shomer'sbooks inspiredhis readersto learnhow to read.In theirquest (howeversecret)for literaryexcellence, in engaging Yiddish with a sense of culturalauthenticityand creative ambition, 69. GoldfadenpursuedYiddishtheatrefor the hope of staging more sophisticatedproductions eventuallyand, more immediately,for its financial promise. See "Goldfaden'sotobiografishematerialn mit a hakdomefun Dr. Shatski,"in Goldfadenbukh (New York:TheatreMuseum, 1926), 40-68. For quotationsee pp. 54-55. Goldfadenrarelyacted on the popularstage afterthatnight. 70. Lilienblumwas angry on discoveringthat the immenselypopularactor SigmundMogulesco wrote songs, dances, and comedy routinesinto his seriousplay, TheBigamist."Mogulescolearned his tradein the earlytheatreof Goldfaden,"JacobAdler recalls in his memoirs."He saw no reasonto stick to a text."Lulla Adler Rosenfeld, TheYiddishTheatreand Jacob PIAdler (New York:Shapolsky PublishersInc., 1988), 103-104. Lilienblumstoppedwriting for theatrebecause of this incident,ac-
cordingto Adler.I couldnotfinda publishedormanuscript copyof TheBigamist. 71. As Shomer'sdaughterstell it, Shomer(who had publisheda couple of short novels in the mid 1870s but then gave it up) attributedthe rediscoveryof his metier as a pulp-fiction writerto his friendshipwith Goldfadenand his efforts to produceYiddish theatrewith him towardthe end of the Russo-TurkishWar (1878). See Rose Shomer-Bachelis and Miriam Shomer-Zunser,Undzerfoter shomer (New York:IKUF, 1950).
85
Alyssa Quint maskilic writersadvancedthe art of Yiddish storytellingso much so that Sholem Aleichem's proposalthata high-gradeYiddish literaturebe built in the late 1880s turnedout to be redundant;such a literaturehad been in the making all along. Alyssa Quint New York,New York
86
.trov-
?-q t
-?u
Sooo .......
..
sooo...........
. btV pq
100o.( aoo s
1*P
.
.'
. .. .
,p*'
1
.
a..
, .
.
V"'Tt6pin.l
5
1-w1 •., •.-p
' (I.rl,. "• no' enwgma.•. yg 4 60, o '4. .•.) ..(d
W bt
I ID .
"19
4 5 7
to1
P
AH IT
) pp
at~ 'l,'10 KP • 3 .?. 0 . -13pv 1 'IV. 1q~• .3 0012- .0 3. 1 .40
100010 .o9
2500.
.
17 pB5
.
...
R-. ,~
sooo.. 1000......." 1000'. ( .
..
..1
0oo0.... ..
*1Iv
r
r .
.. * .
3006
'
."
o . . . . . 100oo ...
. .symptt
. (100 as z o.- .'ipol'•
too.......
1000
-
, • Oe•0Yw •
2000 . . . . . . . .
00 --
-
.
. .
. . . . ... 9 7 .}l V9
:
1
14
F CH
137
. . .. . loo ... . . 3000
1000
. New - .o
.
-oo ..
.........
.
.
.'
.
. ..... *? ? 1000 .... ....
.
.
.
2000.
.
.
..
00
. ,;
* * .
..n
-I 7U' ~'
1'*,O s
... .
. ? .
737.2
'.. ...',
o00..
1000 .
7
29
,
. ,W .= 0oo00
?
.
4*
14
p
2000
1
p'11
*N T1 1477 12," ,7 .,
4")P
1..•,7
..
1200loI72
42
j1
4'1'
1 ,'
1
*
.
soo . . .
00
W...
000
.
... .
10
. .. 25/•ooo
4000
.
vooo
..
-in -
. . . .
'?" *
7i,
*
0( x p7 Ip
0 p'7
7?'r
'm''3l
3000 ,,,
31
48
agg-4a
' '1o ,
9
' M3? ••. • y7 .1 V ..R
57
. .8'0 F 5
....... 3000*5
.......
2000............. ,
,
32712P773
.ly 11?7,
.t
.... 00ooo . . .
. s.ooo . .
.'
51 77$
t p 'z
h,4 7 1; 5 ,"?-
nt--)1m3,11 .7)
3000 -.' 3000
12000.
...3
(y. o000 00(. . 7oo
F
13 . pynV"p 52
7 P,
O ' 7rn7I
56
.
..... 7I7
.
0
?
-v. ?.p.V
2500.. .. .000
4mn
'M1 nir. Or-1v3N-1 14
........ .tD.i b3.)
b,.14
V125
7
50
')Jr)
50
2000...... 2000 .
2000 .....
1000 .......
1tooo ......,1 500.
71Y'?1 ?
s~p
..
.
,r
i99
2o00 .........
. 0.2..15'.•
2000
....
.2
10.000.,
2
....
in"
R5 "
L•,
7
45000.......
,Oo
""
5
1000 ................
...... 6000 .. . . 1000oo . sooo t
. 0oo0. ...... 60000.
..... 3000 s000 ooo . 3000 ooo. . . ... .t 3000 .
11-
.0000
00
.......
00oo. o
. .... *.
.(e
0ooo .
...
1000 ...
1000 ,.r.,,. 6000 1000 ,..t w .
3000..................... o00oo.... .KIM
1000
.p 3000 o . 3000
. .
. P( 1000 looo1000 .
.
Cultivating Roots: The Promotion of Exilarchal Ties to David in the Middle Ages Author(s): Arnold Franklin Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 91-110 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131810 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 91-110
CULTIVATING ROOTS: THE PROMOTIONOF EXILARCHAL TIES TO DAVIDIN THE MIDDLE AGES
by Arnold Franklin Jewishsourcesemanatingfromthe Islamicworldof the MiddleAges abound in referencesto individualsbearingthe title nasi' ("prince";plural,nesi'im).In the unique religious and culturalworld of the medieval Near East this biblical designation signified, with rareexception, descent from King David throughthe line of the Babylonianexilarchs.While at one time the title was restrictedto incumbents of the exilarchate,by the eleventhcenturyCE it had been appropriatedby a broader circle of individualswho claimed descent from David but were often only distantlyrelatedto occupantsof thatoffice.1 These nesi'imenjoyeda measureof status in the Jewish communities of the Near East that was informed by the importanceof noble ancestryin Arabic society in general and Islamic veneration for King David in particular. The impact that conceptions derived from Islamic culture had on Jewish thinkingaboutDavidic ancestryin this period can be observedmost clearly in the greetings included in a letter sent either by a relative or a close associate of the nasi' Solomon ben Jesse, circa December 1236.2The missive addressesSolomon as "thesayyid (chief) of the Davidic faction, andthe sharif (noble one) of the Jew1. On nesi'imin the Islamic world,see Jacob Mann, TheJews in Egypt and in Palestine under the FdtimidCaliphs,2 vols. (1920-22; reprinteded. [2 vols. in one] New York:Ktav,1970), 1:171-78, 251-54, 271-72; idem, "Misratrosh ha-golah ve-hista'afutahbe-sof tekufat ha-ge'onim,"in Livre d'hommagea la mdmoiredu Dr. Samuel Poznanski(Warsaw,1927), Hebrew section, 18-32; idem, Textsand Studies in Jewish History and Literature,2 vols. (1931-35; reprinted. New York, 1972), 1:394-411; Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine, 634-1099 (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1992), 540-45; idem, Be-malkhutYishma"'elbi-tekufatha-ge'onim, 4 vols. (Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, 1997), 1:81-114, 431-446. A dynasty of nesi'im claiming descent from David also existed amongKaraites.On them see Mann,Textsand Studies,2:43-49, 128-55; HaggaiBen-Shammai,"BetweenAnanites and Karaites:Observationson EarlyMedievalJewish Sectarianism"in Studiesin Muslim Jewish Relations 1 (1993), 19-29; Gil, History of Palestine, 790-94. The presentarticle will focus on Rabbanitenesi'im. 2. See Bodl. Ms. Heb. a 3, f. 24, line 3 in Gil, Be-malkhutYishma'el, 2:246-51. Cf. S. D. Goitein, "Nesi'ei Mosul ve-hurbanbateihembe-re'idat'adamah,"in Sefer YosefBraslavi,ed. Y BenShem, et al. (TelAviv, 1970), 495ff. Goitein assumedthe contentsof the documentin questionto comprise a single letter,but Gil convincinglysuggests thatit is a copy of four separatelettersthatwere transcribedserially.The passage cited in the body of the text comes from the first of these four letters,and the date "December1236" appearsat the end of the last one.
91
Arnold Franklin ish nation,"employing two Arabic terms that were commonly used in Islamic society to designatethe descendantsof Muhammad,who, by virtue of their venerable lineage, were accorded special rights and privileges.3Not only do such formulationspoint to the articulationof Davidic privilege in an Islamic idiom, but, more broadly,they suggest Islamic society's ability to restructureJewish notions of authorityand legitimacy. In certaincases Muslimgovernmentalauthoritiesreinforcedthe statusof the nesi'imby grantingthem official recognition.A Mamluk-eraletterof appointment for the office of head of the Jews in Egyptcontainsa clause in which the appointee is charged,inter alia, with protectingthe privileges of those "who have a kinship relationship(luhmatnasab) to David,peace be uponhim, andpossess throughhim the nobility of lineage (hurmatnasab)."4 Nesi 'imand exilarchsactively soughtto cultivatepopularbelief in theirDavidic ancestry.They reinforcedthis idea through a variety of publicly oriented strategies,amongwhich we may enumeratethe recordingof elaborategenealogies, a preferencefor Davidic names, and the use of symbols with a popularlyunderstood Davidic significance.An ancienttraditionpreservedin rabbinicliteratureassociates the family of the exilarchs with the Davidic line, but the connection became far more pronouncedin the centuriesafterthe adventof Islamicrule andthe Arabizationof the Near East. Indeed,the very expansion of the title nasi' in the Middle Ages to include non-office-holding membersof the exilarchalfamily attests to a rethinkingof the significance of exilarchalstatusalong lines thatbegan to privilege the dynastic component over the political. In what follows, the medieval emphasison the Davidic ancestryof exilarchsand nesi'imwill be explored along with the various ways in which it was given public expression.This analysis suggests thatperceptionsof one of the most importantinstitutionsin medieval Jewish history evolved duringthe Islamic period,adaptingto a vocabularyof authoritycharacteristicof the surroundingIslamic society. Rabbinic texts predatingthe Islamic era attest to an establishedbelief that the exilarchs were descendantsof King David.5According to a ruling of Rabbi Yose ben Bun, an exilarch called to read from the Torahis not obliged to go over to it, but is insteadhandedthe scroll while seated"becauseDavid'sseed is infused in him, and he is treatedaccordingto the custom of his ancestors."6A statement 3. On the statusof the ashrdf,see Encyclopediaof slam, NewEdition(Leiden:E.J.Brill, 1954present), s.v. "Sharif'"by W Grahamand C. VonArendonk. 4. See RichardGottheil, "An Eleventh-CenturyDocument Concerninga Cairo Synagogue," Jewish QuarterlyReviewo.s. 19 (1906-07): 530. 5. See David Goodblatt,The MonarchicPrinciple: Studies in Jewish Self-Governmentin Antiquity(Tiibingen:Mohr, 1994), 147-69, 280-90. On the exilarchatein the rabbinicperiod,see Jacob Neusner,History of the Jews in Babylonia, 5 vols. (Leiden:E.J.Brill, 1965-1970), 1:50-57, 97-112, 2:92-125,
3:41-94,
4:73-124,
5:45-59,
95-105,
124-27,
248-59;
Isaiah Gafni, Yahadut Bavel u-
mosdotehabi-tekufatha-talmud(Jerusalem:ZalmanShazarCenter,1975), 53-77; Moshe Beer,Rashut ha-golah be-Bavel bi-yemei ha-mishnah veha-talmud (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1970).
6. Y. Sotah 7:6.
92
CultivatingRoots attributedto the BabylonianamoraSamuel also appearsto accept thatview when it urges Mar cUqbathe exilarch to "executejudgment in the morning,"echoing words the prophetJeremiahused to chastise the biblical House of David.7 Other passages confirm the widespreaddisseminationof that ancestraltraditioneven as they call its legitimacy into question. One such passage relates a comment made by the sons of Rabbi Hiyya while they were sitting at the table of Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. Cleverlyplayingon a numberof stylisticallysimilarstatements,they proclaim that "the Son of David (i.e., the Messiah) will arriveonly after the disappearanceof the two ruling houses in Israel, the exilarchatein Babylonia and the partiarchatein the Landof Israel."g If the Davidic descent of the exilarchswas firmly establishedbefore the seventh century,the Islamic period witnessed an intensification and broadeningof that ancestralclaim as well as a new andprofoundconcernwith its demonstrability.9The most explicit evidence of this shift can be observed in the numerousgenealogies that begin to appearin the tenth century,which trace the ancestry of membersof the exilarchalfamily back to King David in as many as 60 and 70 generations.The first such genealogical list directlylinking the Babylonianexilarchs with the Davidic kings appears in the medieval chronographSeder 'olam zuta, compiled in the late eighth or early ninth century.'0The first part of the text enu7. See B. Shabbat55a, with referenceto Jeremiah21:12. 8. B. Sanhedrin38a. Comparesimilar statementsin B. Sanhedrin98a, each of which begins with the formulaicphrase"TheSon of David will arriveonly after ... ."Rabbi sons' comment is an ironic inversionof these that not only accuses the exilarchateand the patriarchate .Hayya'sof corruption, but also implicitlyrejectswhatevermessianic claims may have been associatedwith those offices. For evidence of messianichopes pinnedon RabbiJudahha-Nasi, see MosheAberbach, melekh Yehudahve-rabiYehudahha-nasi':heksherimmeshihiyim,"Tarbiz53 (1984): 353-71. ".Hizkiyahu 9. I am positing a distinctionbetween the vague assertionsof descent found in rabbinicliterature and the more precise genealogies that were producedin the MiddleAges. This point is also noted in AbrahamIbnDaud, TheBook of Tradition(Seferha-Qabbalah)byAbrahamIbnDaud, ed. andtrans. Gerson Cohen (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1967), 51. Fora similardistinction betweenthe vague genealogicalclaims of Iraniansand the more precise genealogies producedby Arabsin the early Islamicperiod,see Roy Mottahedeh,"TheShu'~ibfyah and the Social Historyof Early Islamic Iran,"InternationalJournal of Middle East Studies 7 (1976): 172-74. 10. For the text, see Adolf Neubauer, ed., Mediaeval Jewish Chronicles and Chronological Notes, Editedfrom Printed Books and Manuscripts,2 vols. (Oxford, 1887-95), 2:68-73; Solomon Schechter, "Seder Olam Suta" Monatsschriftfir Geschichte und Wissenschaftdes Judentums 39 Jahrbuchfur (1895): 23-29; and the partialedition in FritzLazarus,"Die Haupterder Vertriebenen," judische Geschichteund Literatur10 (1890): 157-70. There is little consensus regardingthe provenance of this text or the agendaof its editor(s).A critical edition of this short,but extremelyimportant text is a majordesideratum,as is a fresh evaluationof its contentsand agenda. In particular,attention should be given to the tension between what has commonly been seen as the work's generally proexilarchalpostureon the one hand,and elements of the story of MarZutra,which appearsnearits conclusion, on the other.In its extantform the latterstory is explicitly concernedwith chroniclingthe decline of the Davidic family, and begins "In those days an end came to the House of David."On this point see HanokhAlbeck's observationin Leopold Zunz, Ha-Derashotbe-Yisra'elve-hishtalshelutan ha-historit,ed. and trans.HanokhAlbeck (Jerusalem:Mosad Bialik, 1974), 308. See also the view of Rabbinowitzin HeinrichGraetz,Divreiyemei Yisra'el:mi-yomheyot Yisra'elle-'am 'ad yemei ha-dor ha-aharon,8 vols., ed. and trans.Saul Rabbinowitz(Warsaw,1890-1902), 3:387, accordingto which Seder 'olam zuta seeks to deny the existence of legitimateheirs to the Davidic line in Babylonia.The
93
ArnoldFranklin meratesthe generationsfromAdam to Jehoiachin,the last king of Judah,exiled to Babyloniabefore the destructionof Jerusalemin the sixth centuryBCE. The next part of the work gives the names of Jehoiachin'sdescendantsin Babyloniaalong with names of theirrabbiniccontemporaries.The list begins with Jehoiachin'sson Shealtiel,andcontinuesdownto MarZutra,the son of MarZutrathe exilarch,who, according to the chronicle, left Babylonia and settled in Palestine.The most inventive section connects the biblical Zerubbabel,active duringthe Persianperiod and here identified as the son of Shealtiel, with Huna, an exilarch known independentlyfromrabbinicsources.This abbreviatedsegment,which purportsto cover a period of over five hundredyears, is a reworkingof the list of Zerubbabel's relatives and offspring as given in 1 Chronicles3 interspersedwith the names of exilarchsappearingin rabbinicliterature." It is thus a highly imaginativegenealogy designedto bridgethe gap betweenthe biblical andpost-biblicalDavidic lines, and,in the judgmentof many modernscholars,an attemptto provethatthe Babylonian exilarchs were the rightful heirs to the biblical House of David. The genealogy it sets forththus servedto bolsterthe legitimacyof the exilarchateby providing it with a demonstrableDavidic pedigree. The genealogy of the exilarchaldynastypresentedin Seder'olam zuta was widely accepted duringthe MiddleAges, and was reproducedin the personallineages of numerousmembersof the Davidic family.'2Scholarshave arguedthatthe exilarchatesatisfied a psychological need for medieval Jews, at once reminding them of a glorious past and promisingthem a futureredemptionin the messianic era. 3 The same may be said for exilarchalgenealogies, which reified for medieval Jews the attenuatedlines thatconnectedthemwith the biblicalpast.To be sure,exilarchalgenealogies were, first and foremost,credentialsfor those who possessed them, validatingtheir claim to membershipin the Davidic family.Indeed,we will have occasion below to observe a numberof instancesin which medievalDavidic genealogies functionedin precisely this fashion. But on a broaderplane, they also attendedto a society-wide preoccupationwith explicitly chartingthe continuities between medievalJewish society and antiquity.As such, they shouldbe viewed as responses to a challenge not altogetherdifferent from the one that inspiredmedieval "chainof tradition"works.These works soughtto refuteChristian,Islamic and Karaitechallenges to the historicalvalidity of medieval rabbinicJudaismby establishing, in elaboratedetail, that the latter was heir to an unbrokenand authentic tradition,originatingin the Bible and continuingthroughthe rabbisof the Talmudandtheirsuccessors.In similarfashion,exilarchalgenealogies, whichproMar Zutrastory is clearly set off from the rest of the chronicle by its use of Aramaicand its narrative form.Accordingto Rabbinowitzand Moshe Gil ("Ha-mifgashha-bavli,"Tarbiz48 [1978-79]: 45) the story of MarZutrais indebtedto an earlierstory aboutthe exilarch Bustanai,referencedlater in this article. 11. See Zunz,Ha-derashotbe-Yisra'el,63-65, 307-09; JacobLiver,Toldotbet David: mi-hurban mamlekhetYehudahve-cad le-ahar hurbanha-bayit ha-sheni (Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1959), 42-45. 12. See the sources mentionedin Liver, Toldotbet David, 42 n. 18. 13. AvrahamGrossman,Rashutha-golah be-Bavel bi-tekufatha-ge'onim (Jerusalem:Zalman ShazarCenter, 1984), 78.
94
Cultivating Roots vided explicit proof of the direct continuitybetween King David and the contemporaryfamily of the exilarchs,enabledmedievalJews to traversethe chasmof time separatingthem from the biblical past. Thus even those with no personalstake in their claims understandablyfound exilarchalgenealogies to be objects of tremendous interest. Genealogicaltexts capturedthe attentionof medieval authorsas diverse as Jewish biblical commentatorsand travel writers.That they did reveals both how importantandwidespreadthey were in medievalsociety.14TheAndalusianexegete AbrahamIbn Ezra (d. 1164) is remindedof the genealogical recordskept by the exilarchatein his commentaryon Zechariah12:7, which refersto the "theglory of the House of David."Ibn Ezranotes that"theHouse of David lives in Baghdadto this very day,a greatand largefamilypossessing a family tree (sefer ha-yahas)going back to antiquity." The genealogical records of membersof the Davidic family are also mentioned frequentlyin the accountsof Jewishtravelers,who consideredthem among the more notabletreasuresin the possession of the communitiesthey visited. The late-twelfth-centurytravelersBenjamin of Tudela and Petahyahof Regensburg took interestin the genealogical recordsof the exilarchsand nesi'imthey encountered while visiting the Near East."1Moses ben Samuel, a Karaitefrom Damascus, mentions meeting a nasi' named Sar Shalom in Cairo whose lineage "goes back to the tribe of Judah."16 And a centuryand a half later,anothertraveler,the famousMishnahexegete ObadiahbenAbrahamof Bertinoro(d. ca. 1509), learned of the existence of a Davidic genealogy in Cairowhile visiting that city. In a letter to his fatherwrittenin 1488 he reports: Theytoldme of one of theKaraitesin Cairo,namedZedakah,a wealthyand uprightman,whowas certainlyrelatedto KingDavid.Andtheybidhimto showmethegenealogy(seferha-yahas),signedby witnessesin everygeneration.ButI didnotsee it becauseof theconstraints of time."7 In similarfashion, IsaacAkrish (b. 1530) mentionsviewing a Davidic pedigree in Damascusthathad been passed down from fatherto son for ten generations.'8For medieval Jews these genealogical records possessed a relic-like importancethat simultaneouslyderived from and reinforcedthe special significance associated with membershipin the Davidic family. As the IraqibiographerandhistorianeAbdal-RazzaqIbnal- Fuwati(d. 1323) 14. For an analysis of a numberof actual genealogies that have been preserved,see Gil, BemalkhutYishma"el,1:93-101. 15. See, for example, Benjaminof Tudela,TheItineraryof BenjaminofTudela, ed. and trans. M. Adler (London, 1907), 39, 48 (English);AvrahamDavid,"SibuvrabiPetahyahme-Regensburgbenusah hadash,"Kovezcalyad n.s. 13 [23] (1996): 259, 261. 16. Berlin MS Or. Heb. Oct. 517, f. 64b, cited in Mann, Textsand Studies, 2:254. 17. Me-'Italyahli-Yerushalayim:'igrotavshel rabi 'Ovadyahmi-Bartenurame-'ErezYisra'el, ed. M. HartomandAvrahamDavid (RamatGan: Bar Ilan University,1997), 56. 18. See the passage fromAkrish'sMacasehbet David cited in ChaimTykocinski"Bustanairosh ha-golah,"Devir 1 (1923): 162.
95
ArnoldFranklin demonstrates,even Muslimstook an interestin the genealogicalrecordsof the Davidic family.In his biographicaldictionary,Ibn al- Fuwatimentions that while in the city of Tabrizhe made a copy of the genealogy of Ddn-iyl ibn Dawild,a pediWhile gree "thatextends back to David,the son of Jesse, without interruption."19 thereIbnal-Fuwatialso transcribedthe ancestorlist of HarfinibnYiisufibn Diniyild al-Dawfidi,which also continuedback to David and was "more complete (muttasil)" than any otherhe had seen among the Jews.20 Davidic genealogies were not only objects of popularfascination,however; they could also be used to legitimatepolitical power.A letter from the Cairo Geniza that has been datedto the first half of the eleventh centurydescribesthe exploits of an individualwho appearedin a town in northernPalestineand attempted to pass himself off as a nasi'.21According to the letter'sauthor,the unnamed impostorpresentedthe townspeople with a fraudulentgenealogical recordin order to substantiatehis claim to noble status. Excited about the prospects of welcoming a scion of the Davidic family into theirmidst, the residentsof the town apparently took him at his word and entrustedhim with wide-rangingcommunal authorityuntil his deceptioncame to light some two years later.The letter writer reports: Ourbrothers, certainlyyouareawareof theterriblethingsthatbefellourcomandall of theLandIsrael,atthehandsof munityandyours,Egypt,Jerusalem thatmancallednasi', whoacquiredforhimselfa goodreputation andhadin his possessiona genealogy.He passedjudgments,causedvexations,designatedassistants,appointeddeputies,wroteletters,dispatchedrunners,collectedtaxesandwentfromplaceto placejudgingIsrael.All thewhileyoupossessedinyourlanda Sanhedrin withhaverim,scholars,andstudentswhowere morevaliantin Torahthanall others;yet theysubmitted to his authorityand treatedhimwithhonorandrespect,failingto checkhislineageproperly. They imbibedhis wordswiththirst,praisedhim,eulogizedhimbeforethenations andextolledhiminfrontof kingsandprinceseverywhere hewent,fromEgypt to Kalneh.Neitherscholarnorroshnorstudenthinderedhim;his banswere beforeall. Butaftertwoyearsit came upheldandhis rulingswereregistered hadfailedto recogto lightthathe wasnota nasi' andthatthecommunities nizethatthelineagehe claimedwasuntrue,yettheystillremainedunabashed in theirrespectforhim,insistingthathe wasa scholar.22 While Davidic genealogies did not automaticallytranslateinto political power for their bearers,this incident illustrateshow considerablythey could supportclaims to authorityin a society so heavily invested in the symbolic meaning of the Davidic family. 19. See 'Abd al-Razzdqibn Ahmad Ibn al-Fuwati al-Baghdadi, TalkhTs al-majmacal-addbfi mujam al-alqdb, ed. M. Jawwdd(Damascus, 1962-68), 5:607. 20. Ibid,3:220. See also AvrahamBen-Jacob,"Mekorothadashimle-toldot yehudei Bavel bame'ot ha-12 veha-13,"Zion 15 (1950): 61-62. 21. See the letter,TS 13J35.1 + TS 20.94r, in Moshe Gil, 'ErezYisra'elba-tekufahha-muslemit ha-rishonah(634-1099), 3 vols. (Tel Aviv:Tel Aviv University,1983), 2:37-40. 22. Ibid,39, lines 42-54.
96
Cultivating Roots The special statusaccordedto membersof the Davidic family dependedin on part the individual'sability to prove and display his ancestrypublicly.The author of the letter discussed above complains that no one botheredto inspect the self-styled nasi"s lineage, implying that had they done so they would have surely discernedhis true identityand thus sparedthemselves his manipulations.We have alreadynoted various situationsin which the genealogical recordsof nesi'im and exilarchs were viewed privatelyby curious individuals.In other settings the genealogies of nesi'imand exilarchswere publiclyviewed. A poetic composition written in honor of the fourteenth-centuryIraqi exilarch Sar Shalomben Pinhas illustratesthe public use of genealogies as a mechanism for legitimatingauthority.23 The poem refersto Sar Shalom'sappointmentto a position of power-quite possibly the office of exilarch-and compareshim to a newly crownedking: "Behold Sar Shalomour nasi' ... a king who ascendedthe steps of dignity."Severallines laterSar Shalom'sancestryis introducedas a cause forjoy and a markof his nobility:"Be merry,Adina (i.e., Baghdad),and rejoice in him; sing unto God with drums and cymbals! For one related to the lord (gevir, i.e., David) has been crowned,the beloved of comely appearanceand beautiful eyes."24Severaldamagedlines referringto Sar Shalom'spedigree accompanythe poem and describethe occasion for its composition:". .. his name is Sar Shalom ... the son of... Pinhas .... Theirgenealogy atteststhatthey are descendantsof Solomon and David,andjust as the veracityof theirgenealogy was confirmedbefore the assembledcongregation,so was it verified before the writerwhose name appearsat the end of these lines ... "25 It is difficult to determinethe precise circumstancesalludedto in this composite text. Mann'ssuggestion that the poem and the accompanyinglines referto a ceremonyin which the BaghdadcommunityconfirmedSar Shalom'sright to use the title "nasi"'is problematic,as thereis no indicationthat nesi'imever soughtor obtainedsuch authorization.26 If, as seems likely,the Sar Shalommentionedin the text is identical with the exilarch of the same name, it may be surmisedthat the coronationceremonyis connectedwith Sar Shalom'sappointmentto the office of exilarch. Regardlessof the precise circumstances,however,a numberof general observationscan be made. First,the text envisions a public ceremonyin which Sar Shalom'sgenealogy was rehearsedand admired.The text also raises the issue of verification;genealogies, as we have seen, could be falsified, and the public display of a "true"genealogy is treatedhere as an occasion for celebration.Finally, the text offers insight into the overall purpose of exilarchalgenealogies, namely, to provethatone is a descendantof King David.Muchmorethanfamily heirlooms, Davidic genealogies served as credentialsthatplayed a significant role in shaping 23. See the text, TS 13J25.21, in Mann,Jews in Egypt, 2:207-208. 24. Ibid,lines 3-4, 12-13. For a similaruse of gevir as an epithet for David see EzraFleischer, "Kavimhadashimli-demutoshel rabiDani'el ben Ezrah(sic), nasi' ve-ga'on,"Shalem 1 (1974): 69, line 132. This usage does not appearin YonahDavid, Leksikonha-kinuyimbi-leshon ha-payetanim (Jerusalem:Rubin Mass, 2001). 25. See Mann,Jews in Egypt, 2:208. 26. Ibid, 1:174.
97
ArnoldFranklin public perceptionsof nesi'im and exilarchsas membersof a vibrantand flourishing House of David. Memorialservices for deceasedrelativeswere the most commonpublic setin ting which genealogies were recited. Many ancestorlists, hastily compiled for such occasions by synagoguereaders,have been preservedin the Geniza and constitute a greatly underutilizedsource for exploring societal attitudestowardsthe family.27Thoughmost lists include only a few generationsof ancestors,they neverless reveal a desire to locate those being memorializedin relationto a significant forebear,in some cases who is also a biblical figure. Thus, individualsfrom the family of the priestlyge'onim who controlledthe Palestinianyeshivah during the eleventhcenturywere memorializedas membersof the "Houseof the Priest," that is, the dynastyof the biblicalAaron.28In similarfashion, a Karaitememorial list begins with a commemorationof deceased nesi'im designated as "the noble The family (ha-mishpahahha-meyuhasah),the family of the House of David."'29 regularattendeeof the synagogue,the primaryarenafor communalgatheringsin which societal values were enacted,was thus presentedwith a view of Jewish society structuredaroundkinship groups that descended from and were defined by ancestralfigures. In the case of nesi'imand otherelite groups, social prestige was thus manifestedand legitimatedthroughthe regularrehearsalof an ennoblingbiblical lineage. Davidic genealogies were not only recordedin ancestorand memoriallists; they were also incorporatedinto verse compositionsintendedto flattera nasi' patronor friend.The poet who producedsuch a panegyric,however,was not obliged to review his recipient'sentire genealogy; instead,he might recall fifteen or sixteen of his ancestors, giving greaterweight to the forebearsand descendantsof King David mentionedin the Bible. Yetin explicitly mentioningeven so many ancestors, these abbreviatedgenealogies were clearlyinformedby prevailingcultural attitudesthat elicited the productionof much longer and more complete lists. The celebrationof distinguishedancestryforms the centraltheme of a 243line poem dedicatedto the nasi' Daniel ben 'Azaryah (d. 1062), who assumedthe headshipof the Palestinianyeshivah in 1052.30 The poem, composed in 1057 by 'Eli ha-Kohen,utilizes Daniel ben 'Azaryah'sdescent from King David in orderto situate him within the epic sweep of Israel'ssacred history.The poem's first one hundredlines closely imitate the introductionto a classical Cavodah,a genre of liturgicalpoetry that describes the sacrificial rite for the Day of Atonement, reviewing biblicalhistorydownto the appointmentof Aaronand his offspringto the high priesthood.After a lengthy introduction,cEliha-Kohen'spoem describesthe creationof the universe(lines 56-64), the lives of the patriarchs(lines 64-78), the 27. See the preliminaryobservationsin S.D. Goitein, A MediterraneanSociety: The Jewish Communitiesof the Arab Worldas Portrayedin Documentsof the Cairo Geniza, 6 vols. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1967-94), 3:2-15. 28. See Gil, 'ErezYisra'el,2:9-10. 29. See TS 8K22.2 in Mann,Jews in Egypt, 2:210. 30. See the text of the poem in Fleischer,"Kavimhadashim,"and Gil's correctionsin History of Palestine, 660 n. 125.
98
Cultivating Roots exodus from Egypt (lines 78-91), and the giving of the law to the Israelites(lines 96-100). Like an 'avodah, the poem then focuses on the tribe of Levi (lines 10104) and the selection of Aaron, who is "exalted above his fellows in love, who atones for sins and causes them to vanish"(lines 105-09). But while an avodah would then proceed to describe the Templerite performed by Aaron'sdescendantson the Day of Atonement,'Eli ha-Kohen'spoem abruptlydrops Levi and focuses on anotherof the Israelitetribes. The poem announces that"thefourth(of Jacob'ssons) was victoriousin his deeds, a leaderand commanderby destiny."Whatthen follow are forty lines of praise for the tribe of Judah,opening with an enumerationof Judah'sdescendantsand concludingwith four stanzasof panegyricsfor the most famous of his offspring,King David (lines 110-45). The poem then briefly mentionseight of David'srighteousbiblical successors, culminatingwith "Zerubbabelthe exilarch"(lines 146-53). Considerably acceleratingits review of the Davidic line, the poem next mentions the much fabled exilarchBustanaiand then proceedsto its truehero and the subjectof the remainderof the composition, Daniel ben 'Azaryah himself. His ancestralworthiness amplydemonstrated,Daniel's otherattributesareadmired.He is comparedto the sun in his righteousness,extolled for his learning,and praisedfor eradicating impiety and condemningimmoralbehavior. With the exception of the exodus from Egypt and the revelationat Mount Sinai, sacredtime is recountedin the poem not accordingto momentsof national historicalsignificance, butthrougha succession of divinelychosen ancestors.And lying at the very heartof this vision of the Jewishpast, tinged with messianic overtones, is the Davidic family.In additionto structuringthe panegyric,the recitation of Daniel's genealogy has overt political significance. In portrayingDaniel ben 'Azaryahas the directsuccessorto a continuousline of descendantsof King David, the poem dramaticallysuggests thathis assumptionof the post of ga'on be viewed as partof a divine plan extendingback to creationitself. Not everyone, however, saw things in precisely this manner. Daniel ben CAzaryah's appointmentas ga'on of the Palestinianyeshivah was, in fact, fraught with controversy,for it entailed an unusualdeparturefrom the customarysystem of progressionwithin the ranksof the institution,as well as the displacementof a candidatefroma familyof priestslong associatedwith the leadershipof theyeshivah. 'Eli ha-Kohen'scomposition,with its heavy emphasison the chosen natureof the Davidic family (and,by implication,its superiorityto Aaron'spriestlydynasty), was partof a broadcampaignaimedat rescuingthe gaonateof Danielben 'Azaryah from its disputedstatus.Thoughpreservedfor posterityin writtenform, this work, like most medieval panegyrics, was originally intended for oral performance.31 The public celebrationand rehearsalof genealogy,albeit in abbreviatedform, thus assumed a critical role in clarifying Daniel ben cAzaryah'spublic identity as a memberof the Davidic family. A similaruse of a genealogy can be found in Sefer tahkemoni,the collection of Hebrew prose-poems by the medieval Spanish poet Judah al-Harizi (11701235). In a long encomium to Josiah ben Jesse, a nasi' in Damascus, al-Harizi 31. Fleischer,"Kavimhadashim,"57.
99
Arnold Franklin makes much of his subject'sancestry,variouslydescribinghim as "the offspring of kings" and as "one who meriteda noble lineage and a good reputation."On a more profoundlevel al-Harizidrawsattentionto his subject'slineage by weaving scripturalverses connectedwith the Davidic family into his panegyric,creatingthe imaginativeimpressionthattheirfulfillment is to be foundin Josiah.But al-Harizi does not limit himself to indirectallusionsto Josiah'sancestry;he also reproduces an abbreviatedgenealogy tracingthe nasi"s connection to King David in sixteen generations.32 The notion thatthe recitationof one's noble ancestorsconstituteda form of praise is reflected as well in the elaborate introductionto a letter addressedto Daniel ben cAzaryah'sson, David (d. 1094). Like his father,David posed a threat to the usurpeddescendantsof the Palestinianga'on Solomonha-Kohenben Joseph (d. 1025), thoughthis challengecame not by way of an appointmentto a post within the yeshivah, as in Daniel's case, but throughDavid'sactivities in Egypt. Ultimately David ben Daniel's arrogationof such prerogativesas maintaininga high court,appointinglocal officials and collecting taxes-privileges normallyassociated with the geonic yeshivot-laid the groundworkfor EgyptianJewry'spolitical autonomyfrom the Palestinianyeshivah. Despite the very differenttrajectoryhis careertook from thatof his father,David,like Daniel, found both opportunityand legitimacyin his Davidic ancestry,audaciouslyproclaiminghimself exilarchin or about the year 1091.33 After learningof this, a loyal supporterliving in Tyrewrote to the newly declaredexilarchto convey his congratulations.His mood was ecstatic:"Whenyour servant learned that you attainedthe prestigious rank of your ancestors, having been designated exilarch and crowned with rule, I prostratedmyself and gave thanksto God for your success in being broughtinto His assembly and adorned with the mantleof your forebears."The letterincludes an alphabeticacrosticcomprising a series of alliterativeepithets for David that cleverly enumeratehis biblical progenitors.To give only a few examples, he is hailed "thedescendantof Boaz (ben beri Bodaz),""the bannerof David (degel David)," "the seed of Zerubabbel (zera' Zerubavel),"and "the offspring of Hezekiah (hanit Hizkiyah)."As in the poem for his father,the list of David'sprogenitorsis abbreviated,yet it still reviews individuallyno fewer than sixteen generations. Genealogieswere thus not mere curiosities;they were objects of fascination for medievalJews in partbecause they were understoodto be a complementto and a verification of the historical continuity embodied by members of the Davidic family.Such notions were nourishedby the highly publicuse to which genealogies might be put as nesi'imandexilarchssoughtto locate themselveswithin a network of respect for the Davidic family.Yet, as we have alreadynoted, such public displays of one's ancestryalso entaileda certainamountof exposure.As credentials, genealogies could be forged by individualswho sought to capitalize on the wide32. Tahkemoni,ed. Y. Toporovsky(Tel Aviv, 1952), 24ff. 33. See MarkCohen,Jewish Self-Governmentin MedievalEgypt: The Origins of the Office of Head of the Jews, ca. 1065-1126 (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1980), 196-212.
100
Cultivating Roots spreadrespect shown to such records.34Recognition of this situation,and an attempt to grapplewith it are evident in the text of an excommunicationissued by the late-fourteenth-century nesi'imDavid ben HodayahandYedidyahben Jesse on behalf of Samuel ben Aaron of Schlettstadt,an Alsatian rabbiwho fled to Iraqin 1376 afterbecoming embroiledin a disputewith membersof the Jewish community of Strasbourg.The Babyloniannesi'imissued a ruling supportingSamuel and insisting thathe be permittedto returnto Strasbourgand compensatedfor his suffering and financial losses. In affixing theirnames to the harshlywordedtext both nesi'im provide elaborategenealogies that contributeto the gravity of the ban. David ben Hodayahtraceshimself back to King DavidthroughJudahha-Nasi and Hillel the Elder,while Yedidyahben Jesse lists ancestorsgoing back throughthe familiarexilarchalline. Afterthe genealogies we find the following warning:"Out of fear of forgerywe herebydecree a ban, an excommunicationand a curse upon anyone who copies this lineage, writtenwith (all of) its links ... and the (scribe) who has copied our letterhas heeded our decree and omittedone name from each of the genealogies."35 The importanceof Davidic ancestryas a means of attainingsocial prestige is also reflected,albeit negatively,in a version of the story of the exilarchBustanai discoveredin the Cairo Geniza. The text, which can be read as a reactionagainst the widespreadprivileging of descent from King David, was copied in 1041, and may have been distributedin orderto bolsterNathanbenAbraham'sclaim to leadership of the Palestinianyeshivah. Unlike other stories about Bustanaithat circulated in the Middle Ages, the Judeo-Arabicversion is a satire intendedto undermine the social statusassociatedwith Davidic ancestry.36 The story,which is set in the first half of the seventhcentury,describeshow Bustanaiand anotherman, each seeking appointmentas exilarch,came before the caliph 'Umar ibn al-Khatt~b.As Bustanai,the last living memberof the Davidic line, arguedhis case, a mosquitobit him, causing his face to bleed. Out of respect for the Muslim sovereign Bustanaidid not flinch, very much impressing cUmar, who decided in his favor,appointedhim exilarch,andgave him as a gift the daughter of the recentlycapturedPersianemperor.In commemorationof this auspicious incident,the text explains, the family of David engravedthe image of a mosquito on its seal. Bustanaibore childrenwith his Persianconcubine but "eitherout of ignoranceor baseness"did not free her beforehand.His offspringthereforehad the status of slaves. The text points out that, with the possible exception of certainindividuals in farawaylands known as benei marvata ("men of authority"),no one fromthe Davidicdynastyis free of this genealogicalblemishbecause Bustanaiwas 34. On the criminalityof falsifying one's genealogy accordingto Muslimcommentatorsandjurists, see Mottahedeh,"The Shu'iibiyah,"166-67. 35. NahmanCoronel,Hamishahkuntresim(1864), 107b--11 la. 36. Fora recentreview of the relevantprimaryand secondarysourceson Bustanai,see Gil, BemalkhutYishma"el,1:58-80. For the Judeo-Arabictext, see ibid, 2:4-10, with references to earlier editions and publications.See also idem, "Ha-mifgashha-bavli,"and Tykocinski,"Bustanairosh hagolah."
101
Arnold Franklin the last remnantof the Davidic line and he "didnot marryanyone else, nor did he bear childrenwith any other."The story concludes by affirmingbelief in the Davidic Messiah, "theanticipatedone (al-muntazar)."Born on the very day the Temple was destroyed,he alone is "freeof this taint and will come from the pure line, unsullied by contamination."37 This story representsa directchallengeto the ancestralclaims of the exilarchal dynasty,portrayingtheir widely respected lineage as cause for embarrassment.The centralityof ancestryis apparentfromthe text's opening line, which introduces the story that follows as "the genealogy of the Davidic family (nasab This theme resurfacesat the end of the story when the text reflects al-d'nwiidiya)." on the meaning of the events describedand concludes that, aside from the far-off benei marvata, "no one from the line of David remains unaffectedby this incident."If membersof the exilarchalfamily sought to promotethemselves through noble lineage, this version of the story of Bustanaisquarelychallengedtheirclaim by insisting that the Davidic line was in fact irreparablymarredby the shameful behaviorof one of its ancestors.This line of argumentis, however,delicatelybalanced with the normativebelief in a Messiah descended from King David in the text'sconclusion.Invokinga rabbinictraditionaccordingto which the Messiahwas born on the very day thatthe Jerusalemtemple was destroyed,the text succeeds in upholdingthe traditionalnotion of a Davidic Messiah even as it impugns the legitimacy of all contemporaryclaimantsto the Davidic legacy. The propagationof Davidic genealogies is only the most explicit illustration of the way membersof the medieval House of David laid claim to an historical, andprimarilybiblical, legacy. Furtherevidence of this process can be seen in their preferencefor the namesof biblicalfigures associatedwith the Davidic family.Examiningthe onomasticcustoms of the Geniza society generally,Goitein concluded thatfamily cohesiveness andvenerationfor previousgenerationsguidedthe decision to name male childrenafter their forebears.38The extent to which naming practiceswere bound up with the process of identity formationis particularlyapparentin the case of members of the Davidic family, for whom personal names served as an additionalmeans of fostering the common belief in their ancestral connectionto King David. Between the eleventh and fourteenthcenturiesfamilies of nesi'im and exilarchs exhibited a strongpredilectionfor biblical names associatedwith the Davidic dynasty.39Forillustrationwe maypointto the ancestriesof threedescendants of the late-ninth-centuryexilarchZakkai:1) the eleventh-centurynasi' David ben 37. Fora considerationof the specific context in which the story was copied, see Gil, "Ha-mifgash ha-bavli,"39-41. Foran entirelydifferentvaluationof Bustanai,one thatcelebrateshim as a noble ancestor, see the poem, discussed above, in honor of Daniel ben 'Azaryah (Fleischer, "Kavim hadashim,"70), in which the nasi' andga'on is enthusiasticallydescribedas "a sparkof Bustanai." 38. See Goitein, MediterraneanSociety, 3:6-8. On the significance of women's names, see ibid., 313-19. 39. Both Mann and Goitein noted the recurrenceof Davidic names in the ancestor lists of Karaitenesi'im.See Mann,Jews in Egypt, 2:215; Goitein,MediterraneanSociety, 3:427 n. 32. The observationis also true for Rabbanites.
102
CultivatingRoots Daniel, whose ancestorswere "Azaryah,Solomon, Josiah, and Zakkai;40 2) the eleventh-centuryexilarch Hezekiah ben David, whose ancestorswere Hezekiah, David,Hezekiah,Judah,David,and Zakkai;413) and the fourteenth-centurynasi' Yedidyahben Jesse, whose ancestorswere Solomon, Hezekiah,Yedidyah,Josiah, Judah,Solomon, 'Azaryah,Solomon, Josiah and Zakkai.42Even allowing for the commonpracticeof recycling names within a family,these threeancestriesreflect an unusuallystrongpreferencefor naming after Davidic figures and suggest that there was indeed a deliberatecommitmentto naming sons after biblical figures connectedwith the Davidic line. Recognitionof the powerof namesto shapean individual'spublic image can be found in the so-called "Scroll of Zuta,"Abrahamben Hillel's account of the downfallof a corruptEgyptianJewishleadercomposedin 1197.43 The scroll'sevil protagonist,identified simply as Zuta("thelittle one"), soughtpopularsupportby appealingto the messianic expectationsof the Jewish populationand proclaimed himself the heraldof the Messiah: "Comfort,o comfort, my people, for the light of salvationwill come forthin my lifetime, and fromme you will receive the Messiah."44Significantly,Zuta'sposturinginvolved the adoptionof a new name, one better suited to his aspirationsand with deep messianic resonance.According to the scroll, "hisparentscalled himYahya,but he changedhis name to Sar Shalom." Abrahamben Hillel gives voice to widely held attitudesaboutthe ability of names to express both personalambitionand ancestralentitlementwhen he has Zutafurther declare:"Is not authority(misrah,on the basis of Isaiah9:5) firmly set in my name-my inheritancefrom fatherand mother?"45 Given a culturalenvironmentin which Jewish and Muslim rulersexpressed their religious and political ideologies throughcarefully chosen titles, the impor40. See Gil, History ofPalestine, 545. Forthe rabbinicview that Daniel was from the Davidic family,possibly on the basis of 1 Chronicles3:1, see B. Sanhedrin83b. 41. See Gil, Be-malkhutYishma'el, 1:109-14, 431-33. 42. See the genealogy in Coronel,Hamishahkuntresim,110a. 43. See Zvi Malachi,Sugyotba-sifrutha-'ivritshelyemei ha-benayim(TelAviv:Nophet, 1971), 42-51. On the identityof Zuta see MenahemBen-Sasson, "Maimonidesin Egypt:The FirstStage,"in MaimonideanStudies, ed. ArthurHyman (New York:YeshivaUniversity Press, 1991), 2:3-30, with referencesthereto earlierviews. 44. See Malachi,Sugyot, 46. Corroborationof this chargecomes in a letter (TS 16.272) from Alexandria,writtenaround1180, in which it is reportedthatZuta"calledhimself the Messiah."Forthe most recentdiscussion of this document,with referencesto earliercitations, see MordechaiFriedman, Ha-Rambam,ha-mashiahbe-Temanveha-shemad(Jerusalem:Ben-Zvi Institute,2002), 23. 45. Malachi,Sugyot, 46. Consideralso the name of Menahemben Solomon Ibn al-Rfiji(or alRiih!), anothertwelfth-centurymessianic pretenderdescribedby Obadiahthe Proselyteand Samaw'al al-Maghribi.See NormanGolb, "Megilat'Ovadyahha-ger,"in Mehkerei'edot u-genizah,ed. Shelomo Moragand IssacharBen-Ami (Jerusalem, 1981), 100-01; Samaw'alal-Maghribi,Ifhdmal-yahiid,ed. Moshe Perlmannin Proceedings of the AmericanAcademyfor Jewish Research32 (1964): 88. Scholarly opinion is divided on the possible identification of Ibn al-Riiji/Rfilt with the messianic figure David al-Ro'i describedby Benjaminof Tudelain his Itinerary,54 (English). See Jacob Mann, "Hatenu'otha-meshihiyotbi-yemei masa'ei ha-zelav ha-rishonim,"Ha-Tekufah24 (1928): 341ff; Gil, BemalkhutYishma"'el,1:420ff. For the latest discussion of this movement,with referencesto earlierliterature,see Friedman,Ha-Rambam,19-21.
103
Arnold Franklin tance of the exilarchal dynasty'suse of Davidic names cannot be discounted.46 Througha variety of mechanisms nesi'im and exilarchs appealedto a deeply ingrainedlonging for the restorationof the biblicalmonarchy.Theirdiscerniblepreference for Davidic names reinforcedpopularperceptionsthat they were indeed scions of a living House of David. If the conferralof personalnames by family membersreflects an attemptto construct a particularsocial identity,titles, i.e., the designations used by others when referringto nesi'imand exilarchs,indicatethe degree to which that identity was publicly affirmed. Widespreaduse of the Arabic term al-dadwidi("the descendantof David")in place of the Hebrewtermnasi' suggests thatthe exilarchal family'sattemptsto shape an identityorientedtowardsthe biblical monarchlargely coincided with popularsentiments.Al-ddw4idfis in the form of anArabicnisba, or noun of relation,establishinga connectionbetween a subject and, in this case, an ancestralgroup-appellation and ancestryare thus intimatelyinterwoven.The substitutionof a generalHebrewdesignation(nasi') with an Arabicterm with explicit genealogical significance (al-ddwidT)points to the convergenceof internal and externalperceptionsof the exilarchalfamily that centeredon the primacy of its connectionto David. Davidic ancestrywas also popularizedand articulatedthroughthe representationof a lion on seals used by at least severalmembersof the exilarchaldynasty. While only a few actual examples have been preserved,seals are mentioned frequentlyin medieval Jewish sources from the Near East, reflectingtheir important societal function as visual symbols of power.47Their prevalencein Islamic lands is furtherindicatedby a clause in the so-called "Pactof Umar"specifically prohibiting the dhimmipopulationsfrom inscribingtheir seals with Arabic.48 The connection between the Davidic family and the image of a lion has its textual inspirationin the blessing that Judah,the patriarchalprogenitorof King David, received from Jacob:"Judahis a lion's whelp; on prey, my son, have you 46. On the messianic names used by ge'onim, see Goitein,MediteranneanSociety, 5:618 n. 28. For the Abbasids, see BernardLewis, "The Regnal Titles of the FirstAbbasid Caliphs"in Dr Zakir Husayn Presentation Volume(1968), 13-22. For rituals associated with the names of the Fatimid caliphs, see PaulaSanders,Ritual,Politics, and the City in FatimidCairo (Albany:StateUniversityof New YorkPress, 1994), 27. 47. In additionto the sources cited below, see TS 13J35.1 + TS 20.94r in Gil, 'Erez Yisra'el, 2:37-40, which mentionsthe arrivalof"a large lettersealed with the seal of the exilarchate(hatumbetaba'at nesi'ut)."Seals borne by exilarchaldynasts are also mentionedin the travelaccounts of Benjamin of Tudelaand Samuel ben Samson, both of whom recognize them as a special dispensationof the Muslim authorities.Samuel ben Samson speaks of a nasi' who served as his guide in Hebronwho had "a seal fromthe rulerand from Muhammad."See ShragaSchultz,"Mikhtavme-RabiShemuelben Rabi Shimson,"Ha-zofehle-hokhmatYisra'el14 (1930): 73. Benjaminof Tudeladescribesthe exilarch's turban,fromwhich the "sealof Muhammad"was suspended.See Itinerary,40 (English).Consideralso Joseph Sambari'sinterestin the signatureof the nasi' Judahben Josiah in Sefer divrei Yosef,ed. Shimon Shtober(Jerusalem:Ben-Zvi Institute,1994), 82, 141, 219. 48. Forthe seal of the ga'on Nehemiahben KohenZedeq (fl. mid-tenthcentury),see the letter (Mosseri VIII 479.9) publishedin Igeret rav Sheriraga'on, ed. BinyaminLewin (Haifa, 1921), 13334. Unlike the seals of Davidic dynastsconsideredhere, Nehemiah'swas not adornedwith images and bore only the legend ga'on ben ga'on." "Neh.emiyah
104
CultivatingRoots grown. Like a lion he crouches,lies down, like a lion-who daresto rouse him?" (Genesis 49:9).49Medievalexegetes, interpretingthe lion as an allusion to David or the Messiah, imaginedthat its image adornedthe bannercarriedby the tribe of Judah in the wilderness and similarly appearedon the pennants of the Davidic kings.5?Not only, then, did the representationof a lion on the seals of medieval exilarchsandnesi'imrecall scripturalpassages connectedto the Davidic line, it recapitulatedan iconic practicethat medieval Jews attributedto the Davidic kings themselves. The earliest physical evidence of a lion's image being used to promotethe ancestryof a memberof the exilarchalfamily is foundon a tenth-centuryseal bearthe ing the following circularHebrew inscription:"Hemanthe son of in nasi' 'The Lordis my allottedshareandmy cup' (Psalms 16:5)."51Depicted .Hanamelthe its frontlegs. a below star and center of the seal is a lion with its head to the right The scion of a family with recognized ties to David, Heman ben Hanamelcelebratedhis ancestryon his seal througha combinationof text and image.52The ancestral pride signaled by the inclusion of the title "nasi'" is repeated,visually, throughthe depictionof a lion, producingoverlappingassertionsof Heman'smembershipin the Davidic family.53 49. Consider also the description of the lions that adorned Solomon's throne in 1 Kings 10:19-20. 50. For the connection between the "lion's whelp" and David, see, e.g., Rashi's comments on Genesis 49:9. Forthe suggestion that a lion's image appearedon the bannerof the tribe of Judah,with reference to Genesis 49:9, see the sources cited in Louis Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 7 vols. (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 1968), 3:234, 237, 6:82. The view thatthe kings of Judah also had pennantsbearingthe image of a lion is found in IbnDaud,Book of Tradition,59 (English). On the lion as a symbol for the exilarchatein the medieval ItalianchronicleMegilatAhima'az,see Robert Bonfil, "Mitus,retorikah,historiyah?:'iyun be-MegilatAhima'az,"in Tarbutve-hevrahbe-toldotYisra'el bi-yemei ha-benayim:kovezma'amarimle-zikhroshel HayimHillel Ben-Sasson, ed. Menahem Ben-Sasson, et al. (Jerusalem:ZalmanShazarCenter, 1989), 109-14. 51. The seal, which is part of a privatecollection, is describedin Shaul Shaked,"Jewishand Christian Seals of the Sassanid Period,"in Studies in Memory of Gaston Wiet,ed. Miriam RosenAyalon (Jerusalem, 1977), 25-26, 31. A photographof a modernimpressionof the seal is providedat the end of the book, plate 4, #3. Shaked'sreservationsin that article about dating the seal to the Sassanid period are amplified in his "EpigraphicaJudaeo-Iranica,"in Studies in Judaismand Islam Presented to ShelomoDov Goitein, ed. Shelomo Morag,et al. (Jerusalem:HebrewUniversityof Jerusalem, 1981), 67, wherehe notes the late featuresin the seal's wordingandarrangementand suggeststhat it dates from the tenth century.See also the concurringview of YitzhakNaveh cited in Moshe Beer, "Sheloshahhotamot shel yehudim be-Bavel u-zemanam,"Tarbiz52 (1983): 441 n. 35, though Beer himself prefersan earlierdating. 52. For Heman's ties to the exilarchal family, see Neubauer,Mediaeval Jewish Chronicles, 2:82-83; MenahemZulay,"PiyuteirabiNehemiyahben Shelomo ben Hemanha-nasi',"Studiesof the ResearchInstitutefor HebrewPoetry in Jerusalem4 (1938): 197-246. 53. It is instructiveto compareHeman'sseal with that of anotherexilarchaldynast, Hunabar Nathan, also discussed in Shaked,"EpigraphicaJudaeo-Iranica,"(a photographof the seal's impression is providedat the end of the volume, plate 5-a). Unlike thatof Heman,HunabarNathan'sseal can be dated with confidence to the Sassanid period. Engravedaroundits top are the words "Hunabar Nathan,"and below are depictedthreerelativelycommon motifs in Sassanid-eraJewish iconography: a palm branch,an etrog, and an incense shovel. Neitherthe seal's simple legend, nor its accompanying imagery, speaks to Huna'sDavidic ancestry.It is temptingto conclude that the incorporationof Da-
105
Arnold Franklin A documentissued by the Iraqiga'on Hayyaben Sherira(d. 1038) similarreflects the use of a lion's image to publicize Davidic ancestry.In his famous ly to Jacob ben Nissim Ibn Shahinof Qayrawan,composed in the year 986/ Epistle 7, Hayya'sfather,Sheriraben Hananiah,twice recordsa traditionabouthis family's descent from the exilarchal dynasty.This ancestralclaim is visually represented on a courtrecordon which Hayya'ssignatureis accompaniedby the image of a lion.54 Such a finding bears out the claim of AbrahamIbn Daud (d. 1180), who writes in Seferha-kabbalahthathe saw an impressionof Hayya'sseal and that a lion was engravedon it. In 1286 the nasi' Jesse ben Hezekiah of Damascus issued a ban against the critics of Moses Maimonides'Guidefor thePerplexed,to which he affixed his personal seal. Although the original documenthas not survived,we have a copyist's descriptionof the seal impression,which includedthe image of a lion with an arm raisedto its head.The copyist does not specify whetherthe seal also bore a legend, but below the seal's impressionthe nasi' addedthe following: Thisis mydecreeandmyseal,I, JessebenHezekiahbenJessethenasi',along withthe endorsement of my colleagues,thejudges,andwiththem[theendorsement of] thenotablesandscholars,mayGodblessthem.He wholistens willbemindful,butthefoolwillforbear. As Davidgavewarning,saying,"Listento me, my brothersandmy people(1 Chronicles28:2)!"Oursagessaid: "If [theyare]'mybrothers'why [doeshe also say]'mypeople,'andif [they are]'mypeople'why[doeshe say]'mybrothers?' [Themeaningof theverse butif notyou are'mypeople' is:] If you listento me you are 'mybrothers,' andI will ruleover(erdeh)you withthescepter(ba-shevet)[B. Sotah40a]." As it is written:"Thescepter(shevet)shallnot departfromJudah(Genesis 49:10)."55 Like Hemanben Hanamelon his seal, Jesse ben Hezekiahhere combines the image of a lion with othercarefullychosen cues to his Davidicancestry.At first blush, his referenceto David'swarningin 1 Chronicles28:2, along with its interpretation in B. Sotah40a, seems unremarkable.Jesse, however,modifies the wordingof the rabbinicpassage-substituting "scepter"(shevet) for "rod"(makel)-with significant consequences. In so doing, he foreshadowsthe citation of Genensis 49:10 vidic markersin Heman'stenth-centuryseal reflects a societal recognitionof Davidic ancestryabsent in Huna'stime. Iconographicevidence, then, would seem to correlatewith the shifts noted in connection with namingpracticesand genealogies, shifts thatpoint to Arab-Islamicculture'sinfluence on the significance and meaning of Davidic ancestry in Jewish society in the Near East. Such a conclusion conforms,in broadstrokes,with Shaked'sclassification,which distinguishesbetween"early,"i.e., preIslamic, Jewish seals bearingonly the owner'sname and in certaincases a conventionaliconographic image, and "late,"i.e., Islamic-era,seals, which tend to be more embellishedand personalized. 54. Dropsie 156, cited in ShragaAbramson,7Inyanutbe-sifrutha-ge'onim(Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1974), 107 n. 20. Anothercopy of the same court document,Mosseri L 10, has the word aryeh (lion) afterthe ga'on's name. See Jacob Mann,"GaonicStudies,"in Hebrew Union College Jubilee Volume(1875-1925), ed. D. Philipson, et al. (Cincinnati,1925), 257-58. 55. See Kovezteshuvotha-Rambamve-igrotav,ed. AbrahamLichtenberg(Leipzig, 1859), section 3:21-2.
106
Cultivating Roots that immediatelyfollows, a verse thatis not partof the discussionin Sotah40a but does includes the word "scepter."This simple word substitutionallows Jesse ben Hezekiah to move effortlessly ("As it is written ... ") from the rabbinicinterpretation of 1 Chronicles28:2 to Genesis 49:10, a connection not anticipatedby the talmudicpassage itself. The significance of Genesis 49:10, which directly follows Jacob's characterizationof Judahas a lion, derives from its interpretationin rabbinicliterature: "The scepter shall not departfrom Judah-this refers to the exilarchs in Babylonia who rule over (she-rodin) Israel with the scepter (ba-shevet)."56During the Middle Ages this interpretationcontinuedto serve as a compelling textual basis for Davidic privilege, and it is thereforenot surprisingthatGenesis 49: 10 was cited both by and about exilarchs and nesi'im.57We can be certain that Jesse ben Hezekiahhad this interpretationin mind,for only by means of it is the connection he makesbetween Sotah40a and Genesis 49:10 comprehensible.The referenceto Genesis 49:10 would have also triggeredassociations with the messianic role assigned to David's family on the basis of rabbinicinterpretationsof the last words of the verse:"untilShiloh comes."Throughimageryandtext, then, Jesse'sseal impression and accompanyingsignaturearticulatean ideology of authoritybased on ties to the Babylonianexilarchs,King David, and the Messiah. A relatedexample of the representationof Davidic ancestryby means of the lion of Judahcomes from a letter sent sometime in the early-eleventhcenturyby "the communityof Gaza and those who were displacedthere"to the court of the Palestiniansin Fustat.58The lettercomplainsof the difficulties thatMevorakhben Nathanof Gaza encounteredas he triedto collect the estate of his brotherAmram, who died in the town of Fayyumin Upper Egypt. The leaders of the Gaza community delicately urge the Egyptiancourt-headed by Ephraimben Shemaryah, himself a Gazan-to reconsidertheir position. The letter bears the signaturesof fifteen communitymembers,including the local representativeof the Palestinian yeshivah, Yeshu'ahha-haverben Nathan, who claimed to be a descendantof the Davidic line.59Yeshu'ah'ssignatureis embellishedwith tiny letterswrittenabove and below his name, a commonpracticein documentsfromthe Geniza.These letters, often written in code, spell out a motto of personal significance, and functioned like a handwrittenseal.60The letterswrittenaroundYeshu'ahben Nathan's name spell the wordsnin gur aryeh ("scion of the lion's whelp"),alludingto Genesis 49:9. The same phrasealso appearsin conjunctionwithYeshu'ah'sname in the colophon to a collection of liturgicalpoetry, followed by the words "The scepter 56. B. Sanhedrin5a. 57. See, for example,Fleischer,"Kavimhadashim,"68; SimhaAssaf, Kovezshel igrotshel rabi Shemu'elben 'Eli u-venei doro (Jerusalem:Makor, 1970), 130; Naftali Wieder,"Shaloshderashotleta'anit geshamim min ha-genizah-shetayim be-'aramitgelilit," Tarbiz54 (1985): 58; Benjamin of Tudela,Itinerary,40 (Hebrew). 58. See the letterin Gil, 'ErezYisra'el,2:405-07. 59. See MenahemZulay,"Piyutimle-zekherme'ora'otshonim,"Studies of the ResearchInstitutefor HebrewPoetry in Jerusalem3 (1936): 176-83. 60. On this practice see MordechaiAkiva Friedman,"'Itureihotmim ve-shitahmeyuhedetleziyun ta'arikh,"Tarbiz48 (1978): 160-63.
107
ArnoldFranklin shall not depart."61Here, too, lion and scepter reinforce one another,expressing and celebratingYeshu'ah'sDavidic ancestry. The extent to which the lion's image was perceived by medieval Jews as a markerof Davidic lineage is apparentin AbrahamIbn Daud's comments about Hayyaben Sherirathatwere briefly noted above: Of thegeonimbeforehimtherewasnonelikehim,andhe wasthelastof the geonim.He wasof theHouseof David,of the royalline,of the descendants of Zerubbabel the son of Shealtielandof theprinces(nesi'im)andexilarchs whocameafterhim.I haveseenhis seal affixedto documentswhichhe issued,anda lionwasengravedin itjustas therehadbeenonthepennantof the campof Judahandon thepennantsof thekingsof Judah.However,sincethe beginningof Muslimrule,the exilarchsdid not exercisetheirauthorityfittingly.Theyusedto buytheirpositionwithlargesumsof money,likepublihis ancestorsdidnotwish cans,andwereworthlessshepherds. Consequently to becomeexilarchs,andtheyturnedto thegaonateinstead.He wasalso descendedfromRabbahbarAbbuha.62 Ibn Daud's informationis based on two unrelatedpassages in the famous Epistle of Hayya'sfather,Sheriraben Hananiah.Early in the text, which outlines the history of rabbinictradition,Sherirawrites thatthe BabylonianamoraRabbah barAbbuha"was from the exilarchalfamily, and we have a traditionthat we are fromthe exilarchalfamily and also are the descendantsof RabbahbarAbbuha."63 Later,describing the relations between the geonic yeshivot and the exilarchate, Sheriraadds: Theexilarchate wieldedgreatandsternauthority duringthereignof thePerto exilarchs siansandtheIshmaelites, forthelatterwouldsell (appointments) forgreatsums,andtherewereamongthemthosewhocausedgreatdistressto therabbis.Ourancestorswerefromthefamilyof theexilarchs,buttheyabandonedthedeplorable andjoinedtherabbisof theacadwaysof theexilarchate emy,seekingmodestyandhumility.64 Clearly,Ibn Daud has rearrangedthe materialfrom the Epistle, but he has also refocusedit, addinggreateremphasisto the ancestralconnectionbetween the ga'on's family and King David. Sheriranotes thathe is relatedto the family of the exilarchs, and, like all medieval Jews, he also knew that the exilarchs, in turn, claimed to be descendantsof King David.65But Sherirastoppedshortof boasting of his descent from David. Apparentlyof far greatersignificance to him were his ancestralties to the BabylonianauthorityRabbahbarAbbuha,which he mentions twice in the Epistle. It is Ibn Daud who connectedthe dots, as it were, producing 61. See Zulay,"Piyutim,"176. 62. Ibn Daud,Book of Tradition,59. 63. Sheriraben Hananiah,lgeret rav Sherira,60, cf. 82. 64. Ibid., 92. 65. Ibid., 73.
108
Cultivating Roots a new portraitof the ga'on's family that foregroundsits Davidic lineage. Crucial to this transformationis Ibn Daud's discussion of Hayya's seal, which serves as "proof'"of the Davidic ancestryof the ga'on. Moreover,the rareirruptionof Ibn Daud'svoice in this passage, one of only a handfulof times in Sefer ha-kabbalah where he conveys personalinformation,suggests the thrillthatmedievalJews experiencedwhen they laid eyes on a symbol infused with such profoundreligious and historicalsignificance. EnthusiasmaboutHayya'sDavidic ancestryis not unique to Ibn Daud, and may in fact be reflectiveof broaderAndalusianinterestsin chartingthe biblicalgenealogy of contemporaryJewish society.66"Gone is the lamp that remainedof David,"laments the Malaga born Solomon Ibn Gabirol(d. ca. 1055) in a eulogy composedafterHayya'sdeathin 1038, going on to urgethe "sonsof David"to carry out the rites of mourning.And in anothercompositionin honorof thega'on, Ibn Gabirol wonders "who shall wear the crown of Jesse's son?"67Rapture over Hayya'sDavidic ancestryreacheseven greaterheights in Seder ha-dorot,a chronicle by the Granadanative Se'adyahben MaimonIbn Danan(fl. second half of the fifteenth century)that is heavily indebtedto Sefer ha-kabbalah.Accordingto Ibn Danan,Hayya wasthelastof thegeonimin Babylonia,thefamousHayya... fromtheexilarchsandthedescendants of RabbahbarAbbuha,fromthelineof ZerubbabelandShealtiel,theroyalline,thelineof Solomonthesonof ourlordDavid, theanointedoneof theGodof Jacobandthesweetsingerof Israel.Andwith hissealhewouldmaketheimpression of a lionjustasthekingsof Judahdid.68 Forboth Ibn Danan and Ibn Daud,the lion's image on Hayya'sseal was an unambiguous statementabout genealogy with an obvious precedentin the seals of the Davidic kings. Their perceptions,indicativeof those of medieval Jewish society generally,underscorethe effectiveness with which individuals claiming descent from King David could articulatetheir lineage throughvisual cues, much as they did with genealogies and names. The significance of the lion's image and its ability to convey in iconic form the ancestralclaims of medievalDavidic dynastscan also be inferredfromthe story of Bustanaidiscussed earlier.The mosquitothat, accordingto the text, became the symbol of the Davidic family is a crucial satiricelement in the parody of the 66. See, for example, Cohen's discussion of the genealogical traditionemployed in medieval "chainof transmission"histories in Ibn Daud,Book of Tradition,1-lvi. 67. See Dov Yarden,Shirei ha- hol le-rabi ShelomoIbn Gabirol(Jerusalem, 1975), 1:302-03. However, compare the long eulogy by Samuel ha-Nagid (d. 1056), which makes no reference to Hayya'sancestry,in idem, Divan Shemu'elha-nagid(Jerusalem:HebrewUnion College Press, 1966), 1:231-36. 68. C. del Valle and G. Stemberger,El Orden de las Generaciones = Seder ha-dorot, (Alcobendas:Aben EzraEdiciones, 1997), 56 (Hebrew).See also IbnDanan'schronologyof Jewish kings, Ta'arikhmalkheiYehudahve-Yisrael(History of the Kings of Judahand Israel). In a digression Ibn Danan lists several generationsof descendantsof Zerubbabelin Babylonia,and then concludes: "and from this noble line (came) the Babylonianexilarchs, and our master Rabbi Hayya Gaon the son of Rabbi SheriraGaon."See David Ovadiah,Fas ve-hakhameha,2 vols. (Jerusalem, 1979), 2:25.
109
Arnold Franklin dynasty,and one that has not been sufficiently appreciatedby scholars.69To suggest that the exilarchatechose a mosquitoas its figural representationis an obvious mockeryof the royal,messianic, and historic significance that medievalJews ascribedto the lion on exilarchalseals. If a lion's image evoked strength,historical continuity,and a divine right to authority,the mosquito signified the very opposite. Overlypreoccupiedwith ingratiatinghimself with the temporalauthorities, Bustanaiis humbledand scarredby an insect. In fact, Bustanaiis twice taintedby his intimacywith the caliph, once by the mosquito and a second time throughhis relationswith the Persianprincess.The importanceof the exilarchate'sseal as an articulationof Davidic lineage explains why it should be singled out for lampooning in a text concernedwith discreditingthe ancestryof medieval exilarchs and nesi'im. The sources discussed above suggest that by the eleventh century the exilarchaldynasty had begun to identify itself with its biblical ancestorwith a new and greaterurgency.The disintegrationof caliphal authorityin Baghdad in the tenth century set in motion forces that conspired to underminethe statureand scope of exilarchalauthority.In certain cases the beneficiaries of these developments were the geonic yeshivot, which slowly expandedtheirrangeof activitiesto includeresponsibilitiespreviouslyadministeredby the exilarchs.The exilarchate's redoubledefforts to identify itself with David may thusbe viewed as a responseto destabilizationand decline. Confrontingthe erosion of its traditionalsphereof influence in Jewish society and its replacementby institutionsfoundedon scholarly credentials,the exilarchatedeveloped an alternatebasis for legitimacy in an ancestralclaim that appealedboth to Jewish longings for the biblical past and hopes for the messianic future. But these sources also suggest that duringthe tenth and eleventh centuries something was changing in the mentality of ordinaryJews living in the Islamic world as well. The appearanceof nesi'imthroughoutthe Near East,the production and circulationof Davidicgenealogies andthe deliberateassociationof nesi'imand exilarchs with King David throughnaming patternsand iconic imagery-all of this suggests a new interestin, and receptivityto, the value of kinship ties to the biblical monarch.While groundedin ancient rabbinictraditionsaboutthe family of the exilarchs,this fascinationwith the House of David was no less a productof the vigorous interactionbetween Jewishand Islamic culturein the MiddleAgesand Islamic society not only provideda nurturingenvironmentfor the cultivation of ties to Davidthroughits high regardfor the Qur'dnicDawild,it also offeredJews a ready-madeparadigmof an ennoblinglineage in its venerationfor the family of Muhammad. Arnold Franklin of University California,Davis Davis, California
69. See, for example, EncyclopediaJudaica (Jerusalem, 1972), s.v. "Seals,"where it is taken as a statementof fact that the exilarchate'sseal bore the image of a fly.
110
The Mawza 'Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism Author(s): Jane Hathaway Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 111-128 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131811 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 111-128
EXILE ATTHE JUNCTURE THE MAWZAK OF ZAYDIAND OTTOMANMESSIANISM*
by Jane Hathaway Among scholars of Jewish communities under Islamic rule, Yemen has gained a poor reputationfor treatmentof its ancient Jewish minorityin comparison with other predominantlyMuslim societies. Although Yemen had, until the 1950s, a sizableJewishpopulationwhose presencedatedback centuriesbeforethe advent of Islam, variousMuslim rulersof key partsof Yemenenforcedthe sumptuarylaws andotherrestrictionsstipulatedin the Pactof cUmarwith unusualstringency, and the Jews' history underIslamic rule was marredby sporadicinstances of outrightpersecution.' In this context,the Zaydi Shiite imam'sexpulsionofYemen'sJews in the late 1670s from the highlandregion centeringon Sanda,where the Jewish population has historicallyconcentrated,to the town of Mawza' in the coastal plain known as the Tihamaappearsto be an unusuallysevere instanceof persecution,but one that is unquestionablypart of an historicalpatternpeculiarto Yemen.Geographyand sectariandoctrinearguablycontributeto this pattern.Yemen'sisolation relativeto the centralIslamic lands has historicallymade it an attractivehaven for sectarian offshoots of normativeSunni Islam; S.D. Goitein has assertedthatthe fortunesof *Note on transliteration:Forthe sake of accessibility,I have omitteddiacriticalmarkings,apart from Caynand hamza, in transliterationsof Arabicand OttomanTurkishnames (with the exception of Ismail, which is commonly spelled without diacriticalsin English-languagetexts). Diacriticalsare retained in titles of Arabic and OttomanTurkishliteraryworks and in the names of Arab publishing houses. TransliterationsofArabic andOttomanTurkishfollow the InternationalJournalofMiddle East Studies. 1. Foran overview,see, e.g., Yosef Tobi, TheJews of Yemen:Studies in TheirHistoryand Culture (Leiden:Brill, 1999); idem, lIyunimbi-MegilatTeiman:kehilatZan'a, shabta'ut,mishpahat IIraki, MaHaRI"Z(Jerusalem:The MagnesPress,The HebrewUniversity,1986);idem, ed., Toldotyehudei Teiman:mi-kitveihem(Jerusalem:Zalman ShazarCenterfor the Furtheranceof the Study of Jewish History and DinurInstitutefor Researchin Jewish History,HebrewUniversity,1979); Bat-ZionEraqi Klorman,TheJews ofYemenin the NineteenthCentury:A Portraitofa Messianic Community(Leiden: Brill, 1993); ReubenAhroni, YemeniteJewry: Origins, Culture,and Literature(Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 1986). The Pact of 'Umar--supposedly the peace treatybetween the second caliph, 'Umaribn al-Khattab(r. 634-44), and the Christiansof Jerusalembut probablydating,at least in part, from a considerablylaterperiod-is the templatefor the treatmentof non-Muslimmonotheistsunder Muslim rule before the nineteenthcentury;essentially,it pledges the ruler'sprotectionin exchange for certainrestrictionsin publicbehavior.Forthe text, see Muhammadibn al-Walidal-Turtushi(1059/601126/27), Sirdjal-mulik (The Lamp of the Kings) (Cairo:Al-Maktabaal-Mahmiidiyyaal-Tij~iyya, 1935), 252-53.
111
Jane Hathaway Jews tendedto decline underthe rule of sectarianMuslims,by which he means the various Shiite sects.2 Indeed,Maimonidespenned his famous Epistle to the Jews of Yemen,which has perhaps done more than any other literary work to seal Yemen'sunsavoryreputation,in responseto the forcible conversionof Jews by an Ismaili Shiite messianic figure who emerged duringthe chaos following the collapse of the Ismaili Sulayhiddynasty in the late twelfth century.3 To many scholars, the Mawza' exile seems every bit as lachrymose as the persecutionshalf a millennium earlierthat promptedMaimonidesto pen his famous epistle. In this instance, Jews were not forcibly converted,but ratherwere forced from their homes and drivento the southwesternYemenitown of Mawza', inlandfromthe Red Sea portof Mocha. Evidently,the strategywas to corralthem there, then to encouragethem to departon whateverships happenedto be available at Mocha;since Yemenhad no ship-buildingindustryof its own, these would probablyhave been Indianmerchantvessels.4 In the event, most of the Jews lingered in Mawza', where many died of starvationor disease broughton by overcrowdedliving conditionsand the torridclimate.5Meanwhile,their absence from Sandaand the inlandhighlandregions devastatedthe handicraftindustries,particularly silver working,in which Jews had concentrated,and disruptedsociety generally.Finally,afterat least a year,they were allowed to returnto theirhomes.6 On the surface,this incidentappearsto conformto the familiarlachrymose Yemenipattern,coupled with the patternarticulatedby Goitein of Jewish suffer2. S.D Goitein, Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts through the Ages, 3rd rev. ed. (New York: SchockenBooks, 1974 [1955]), 73, 80. Goitein was a pioneeringresearcherof the history and folklore of Yemenite Jews; see, for example, idem, Ha-Teimanim:historyah, sidrei hevrah, hayei ha-ru'ah: mivhar mehkarim,ed. Menahem Ben-Sason (Jerusalem:Ben Zvi Institutefor the Study of Oriental Jewish Communities,1983); idem, Fromthe LandofSheba (New York:SchockenBooks, 1947); idem, ed. and trans., Vonden JudenJemens: Eine Anthologie(Berlin: SchockenVerlag, 1934). 3. Moses ibn Maimon(Maimonides)(1135-1204), "Maimonides'Epistleto the JewsofYemen," trans.NormanA. Stillman,in TheJews ofArab Lands:A History and SourceBook, ed. N.A. Stillman (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1979), 233-46. The originalArabictext can be found in AbrahamS. Halkin,'lgeret Teiman:ha-makorha-carviu-sheloshetha-tirgumimha-civriyim, with an English trans.by Boaz Cohen (New York:AmericanAcademyfor Jewish Research, 1952), 1106. In his editorialnotes to Maimonides'letter(Jews ofArabLands,234 n. 4), Stillmanclaims thatthe "leader"(qa'im)whom Maimonidescites was al-Malikal-Mu'izzIsmail,a nephewof Saladin,the ruler of Egypt;however,al-Mu izz's reign of terrorin Yemenoccurreddecades afterMaimonidespennedhis epistle. The correct identificationmust be al-Sayyid Ali ibn Mahdi ibn Muhammadal-Himyari;see Abu'l-Ziyya'Abd al-Rahmanibn 'Ali ibn al-Dayba'(1461-1537), Kitdbqurratal-'uyfinbi-akhbaralYamanal-maymfin(The Book of the Delight of the Eyes: Annals of Yementhe Fortunate),ed. Muhammad ibn 'Ali al-Akwa'al-Hiwali,2 vols. (Cairo:Matba'atal-Sa'da, 1977), 1:360-65. 4. Even the Ottomantroops evacuatingMocha in 1632 had to departon an Indian merchant (YemeniteAnnals,1666-67), Istanbul,SfileymaniyeLibrary,MS ship; see Hajji'Ali, Ahbdriil-Yamdna Hamidiye 886, fol. 220r. Portugueseships are also a possibility; see P.S. van Koningsveld,J. Sadan, and Q. al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities and Jewish Messianism:Ahmadibn Nasir al-Zaydi'sAccount of the SabbathianMovementin Seventeenth-CenturyYemenand Its Aftermath(Leiden: Leiden University,Facultyof Theology, 1990), 114 n. 163. 5. HayyimHabshush,"GalutMavza,"'in Yalkutshirei Teiman,ed. YehudaRatzaby(Jerusalem: Bialik Institute,1968), 94-97, esp. 96. 6. See n. 37 on the debateover the dates and durationof the expulsion.
112
The Mawza' Exile at the Junctureof Zaydi and OttomanMessianism ing undersectarianrule. For at the time of the expulsion, most of Yemenwas under the sway of the Zaydi Shiite Qasimi dynasty,which had emergedin 1598. The Jewish context of the expulsion has been articulatedin a numberof primaryand secondaryworks:notablythe chronicleof the YemenihistorianHayyimHabshush (or Hibshush,d. 1899), excerptedin HebrewtranslationbyYehudaRatzaby;7in the Hebrewpoetry of the Yemenipoet Shalem (or Shalom) ben Yosef Shabazi(161986), publishedby RatzabyandYosefTobi;8in variousothercontemporaryYemeni Jewish sources publishedby Ratzabyand Tobi;9and in Ratzaby'sseminal article on the subject, which incorporatesmany contemporaryprimarysources.10More recently,P.S.van Koningsveld,J. Sadan,and Q. al-Samarraihave detailedthe Zaydi responseto the movement.1"Both local Jewish and Zaydi sources demonstrate that the expulsion occurredseveral years after a wave of messianism inspired,or at least reinforced,by the movementof SabbataiSevi sweptYemen'sJewish community,provokingsocial upheaval.12 Here, however,I wish to place the expulsion order,as well as the Qasimi imamate'sresponseto this wave of messianism,within a broadergeopolitical and religious context. It is useful to returnto the circumstancesof the Epistle to the Jews of Yemenfor justification. Acknowledging that both Rabbaniteand Karaite Jewish elites enjoyed extraordinaryinfluence underboth the Sulayhidsand their Fatimidallies in Egypt, Goitein concludes that "it was not the deviation from orthodox Islam itself or particularracialelements which decided the attitudetoward non-Muslims,but the actual tenets and beliefs held by the sect concerned."'3In 7. Habshush,"GalutMavza',"94-97, 118-21. See also Habshush,Maslot Habshush:hezyon Teiman:targumcivriu-makorarvi, additions,translation,andintroductionby S.D. Goitein(Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institutefor the Studyof OrientalJewishCommunities,1983 [Judeo-Arabictext publishedin 1941 and Hebrew translationpublished in 1939, with additions and index]). Yosef Tobi rendersthe chronicler'sname Hibshushin TheJews of Yemen:Studies in TheirHistory and Culture. 8. See, for example, Ratzaby,ed., Yalkutshirei Teiman,122-23, 124-25; idem, ed., Mi-zimrat Teiman(TelAviv:Ha-KibutzHa-Me'uhad,1981), 18-40; idem, Be-ma'gelotTeiman:mivharmehkarim be-tarbutyehudeiTeiman(TelAviv:'Am 'Oved, 1987), 158-203; Shalom Shabazi,"Ha-Yehudimtahat shilton ha-Turkimbe-re'shit ha-me'ahha-17," in Tobi, Toldotyehudei Teiman:mi-kitveihem,45-46. 9. Forexample,YehudaRatzaby,ed., ShiratTeimanha-,ivrit(TelAviv:,Am 'Oved, 1988), 22765; R. Yihye Bashiri, "Gerushha-Turkimmi-Teiman(1629)," ed. with Hebrew translationby Yehuda Ratzaby,Zion 20 (1955): 34-38; reproducedin Tobi, ToldotyehudeiTeiman:mi-kitveihem,47-50; the works of R. Sa'adyaha-Levi, R. Shalom Shabazi,Me oded ben Shalom,and R. Abrahamal-Naddaf in Tobi, Megilat Teiman,117-43; see also Tobi, Toldotyehudei Teiman:mi-kitveihem,51-52. 10. YehudaRatzaby,"GalutMavza',"Sefunot5 (1961): 339-95. See also idem, "GalutMavza', 1679,"Zion 37 (1972): 203-07, reproducedin Tobi, Toldotyehudei Teiman:mi-kitveihem,53-57; EncyclopaediaJudaica (hereafterEJ) (Jerusalem:EncyclopaediaJudaica;New York:Macmillan, 197172), s.v. "Mawza',"by Ratzaby. 11. VanKoningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities,esp. 11-19, 41-117. 12. YosefTobi arguesthatthis messianic wave was not directlylinkedto SabbataiSevi's movement but was the culminationof a steady patternof local messianic movements. See his "Me'ora'ot 1667 be-Teiman:tenu'ah shabta'it'o pe'ilut meshihit mekomit,"in Ha-Halom ve-shivro:ha-tenu'ah ha-shabta'itu-sheluhoteiha:meshihiyut,shabta'ut,u-frankizm,ed. Rachel Elior,vol. 1 (Jerusalem:Institute of Jewish Studies, HebrewUniversityof Jerusalem,2001), 113-28, esp. 118, 126, 128; idem, Jews ofYemen,49, 82; Klorman,Jews ofYemenin the NineteenthCentury,48, 53. 13. Goitein,Jews andArabs, 82-83. The epitome of this influence is the KaraiteAbu Sa'd al-
113
Jane Hathaway this case, however,it was not the Sulayhids'Ismaili sectarianismthatwas to blame but the turmoilengenderedby their collapse, notablythe frenziedideological and geopoliticalcompetitionamongvariousMuslim splintergroups.14By the same token, the Mawzacexile occurredduringa period when the Qasimi dynasty of Zaydi imams, despite having expelled the OttomansfromYemennearlyhalf a century earlier,"5faced a renewed threatfrom the newly expansionist policies of the Ottoman sultan Mehmed IV (r. 1648-87) and the grand viziers of the Kipriilii family. Moreover,the Ottomansthemselves at this time were heavily influenced by a wave of zealous Sunni orthodoxy. Like the forced conversionsof the late twelfth centurythat promptedMaimonides' epistle, the Zaydi imam'sexpulsion of the Jews, as well as his reaction to the messianic events of 1667, was colored not simply by the peculiaritiesof Muslim sectarianismbut also by the Zaydis' position in the broadergeopolitical scene, in particulartheir ideological and geopolitical competition with the OttomanEmpire.A contributingfactoruniqueto Yemen,however,was the resonance of the ancientJewish presence in Yemenicollective memory,as attestedby popular oral narratives.Here, then, I will attemptto demonstrate:(1) that the Qasimi imamatewas galvanizedby a form of messianic zeal centeredon emulationof the ProphetMuhammadand that treatmentof non-Muslimswas a centralelement of this emulation;(2) thatJewishmessianisminYemensharedkey featureswith Zaydi messianism as propoundedby the Qasimis and resonatedall the more because of the popularmemory of Jewish leadershipin Yemen;and (3) thatthe Qasimi rivalry with the Ottomanscontributedto the Mawza' exile, the more so because the Ottomanswere themselves in the throesof a heightened,quasi-messianicreligious zeal informedby theirown responsesto the messianicmovementof SabbataiSevi. ZAYDI IMAMS AND ZAYDI MESSIANISM
The Zaydis are the smallest surviving recognized subsect of Shiite Islam, third in number behind the majority Imamis, also known as Ithna', cAsharis (Twelvers),and the Ismailis (Seveners).Not coincidentally,they are also the most poorly researchedof the three major Shiite subsects. They take their name from Zayd ibn 'Ali (d. 740 CE), the Prophet'sgreat-greatgrandson,whom they initially regardedas fifth in the line of Shiite imams,or successorsto the Prophetas leadTustari,who servedthe Fatimidsas vizier, and his brotherAbu Nasr, a wealthymerchant;see Stillman, Jews ofArab Lands, 52, 204, 207. 14. Ibn al-Dayba', Qurratal-'uyiin, 1:241-48, 372-83; Yahya ibn al-Husayn ibn al-Qasim akhbaral-qutral-Yamdnm (1625- 89), Ghdyatal-amcnTfi! (The UtmostSecurity:Annalsof the Yemenite Region), ed. MuhammadMustafaZiyada,with introductionand notes by Sa'id 'Abd al-FattahcAshur, 2 vols. (Cairo:Dir al-Kitib al-'Arabi li'l-Tibd'awa'l-Nashr, 1968), 1:322-25. Yemen'sterritorywas dividedamongthe rivalZaydiShiite imams,variousIsmailisplintergroups,anda forceunderthe brother of Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi (Saladin), founderof the Sunni Ayyubid dynasty that had displaced the Fatimidsin 1171. 15. Tobi argues convincingly that the expulsion of the Ottomansplayed a major role in the Qasimis' messianism;see "Me'ora'ot1667 be-Teiman,"113; see also Jews ofYemen,50. His assertion that the Qasimis' movementwas "nationalist"is, of course, anachronistic.See also Ahroni, Yemenite Jewry, 122-23.
114
The Mawza' Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism ers of the Muslim community.Ultimately,they came to recognizeas imamany descendant of Ali's son Hasan-or, less frequently, Ali's son Husayn-who was learnedin Islam and could protectthe community.Theirimamdiffers fromthe occulted imam of the Twelversand certain Ismaili groups in that he is very much alive and present in the community,and from the imams of the Twelversand Ismailis generallyin thathe must provehis ability to defend the community,by military force if necessary.What this has meant in Yemen over the centuries is that severallines of Zaydi imamshave competedfor authority,sometimesto the extent of attackingeach othermilitarily. A Zaydi imamateexisted in Tabaristan,in what is now northernIran,from the ninththroughthe eleventhcenturies.'16It was inYemen,however,thatZaydism took permanentroot. The imamYahyaal-Hadi (d. 911), a grandsonof the imam whose followershad establishedZaydismin Tabaristan,migratedfrom Medinato Yemen in the ninth century CE to battle the militant Ismailis known as Carmatians.'7 The Zaydi strongholdin Yemenwas always the inland northernand central highland region, including Sanca.Apart from the Sulayhid interlude,the Ismailis were concentratedin the centralhighlands,while the coast was the preserve of SunniMuslims of the Shafi'i legal rite. In 1538, an Ottomannaval force under the Hungarianeunuch admiralKhadim Siileyman Pasha conqueredYemen from the local Shafi'i ArabTahiriddynasty.18 OttomangovernorsofYemen cobbled together a working relationshipwith the Shafi'i and Ismaili populationsbut faced near-constantresistancefrom one line of Zaydi imams or another.In the late sixteenth century,a majorrebellionerupted,led by Imamal-Mutahharibn SharafalDin, which was finally crushedby Sinan Pasha in what one chroniclerhas christened the "secondconquestof Yemen."'9 At the end of the sixteenthcentury,however,a new line of Zaydi imams, led Imam by al-Qasim al-Mansur,came to power.Al-Qasim's son, al-Mu'ayyadBillah Muhammad,finally ousted the OttomansfromYemenentirelyin 1636.20This dynasty,the Qasimis, were rulingYemenwhen the Jews were expelled. The third Qasimi imam,al-Mu'ayyad'sbrotheral-Mutawakkil(r. 1644-76), enjoyeda position of authorityin Yemenarguablyunequaledsince the height of the Sulayhiddy16. See WilferdMadelung,Religious Trendsin EarlyIslamic Iran(New York:The PersianHeritage Foundation,BibliothecaPersica, 1988), 87-90; BertoldSpuler,Historyof the MuslimWorld,vol. 1: TheAge of the Caliphs, trans.FR.C. Bagley, paperbacked. (Princeton:MarkusWienerPublishers, 1995 [1960]), 66-67; FarhadDaftary,The Ismailis: TheirHistory and Doctrines (Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress, 1990), 339, 371, 373, 448-49. 17. Ibn al-Dayba',Qurratal-'uyin, 1:167-69, 199-202; Madelung,Religious Trendsin Early Islamic Iran, 87-88. See also Yosef Tobi, "The Attitude of the Imam al-Hadi, Founderof the Zaydi Kingdom,to the Jews of Yemen,"in Tobi,Jews of Yemen,8-33. 18. Qutbal-Din Muhammadibn Ahmadal-Nahrawalial-Makki(1511-82), Al-Barqal-YamanT (The YemeniteLightning:TheOttomanConquest),ed. JasirHamad(Riyadh:Dar fl'l-fath al-'UthmdnT al-Yami~ma,1968), 70, 80-84; Yahyaibn al-Husayn,Ghdyatal-amdni,2:667-68, 684-85. 19. Al-Nahrawali,Al-Barq al-YamdnT,167-430; Rumuzi, Tdrh-ifeth-i Yemen(History of the Conquestof Yemen,to 1568), TopkaplPalace Library,MS Revan 1297, fols. 33r-90v;Yahyaibn alHusayn, Ghayatal-amani, 2:730-36. 20. Hajji'Ali, a continuatorof al-Nahrawaliin OttomanTurkish,gives a wrenchingdescription of the Ottomandefeat; see Ahbhriil-YamanT, fols. 202v-223v.
115
Jane Hathaway nasty. Building upon his brother'sgeopolitical accomplishments,al-Mutawakkil expandedhis territoryuntil it nearly equaled that controlledby the Sulayhids.21 His expansionism combined the traditionalZaydi imam al-difaca(imam of defense), who defends his community by armed might if necessary, with a new geopolitical assertiveness. ZAYDIMESSIANISM AND JEWISHMESSIANISM
In a Muslim ruler'sattemptto follow the example of the ProphetMuhammad, the treatmentof non-Muslimpopulationswas frequentlythe linchpin, particularlyin the Arabianpeninsula,where the Prophetcarriedout his mission. Zaydi chroniclerYahyaibn al-Husaynnotes that in 945 AH/1538-39 CE, the time of the Ottomanconquest of Yemen,debate raged as to whetherthe Jews could continue to live as protectednon-Muslims (sing. dhimmi)in Yemen.22In 1568, the Qasimis' predecessoras anti-OttomanZaydimilitant,the rebelliousImamal-Mutahhar,hadpersecutedthe Jewsof Sanda,whom he accusedof aidingthe Ottomans, and also antagonizedYemen'sSunnipopulationby orderingthe cursingof the first three caliphs recognizedby Sunni Muslims in all of Yemen'smosques duringFriday middayprayers.23 Given this precedent, it is perhaps not surprising that emulation of the Prophetformedthe core of the Zaydi responseto the messianic "waves"of 1667, unquestionablyone of the most intenseoutbreaksof millennialexpectationever to engulfYemen'sJewishcommunity.This outbreakoccurredin the wake of and was probablycoloredby (even if it were not directlya partof) the messianicmovement of SabbataiSevi. Sevi, the son of a merchantin the Ottomanport of Izmir,which at that time was coming into its own as a cosmopolitan,rathertumultuousentrep0t,24 in 1665 had declaredhimself the long-awaitedJewish messiah. The proselytizing mission that ensued promptedthe Ottomanauthoritiesto imprison him first in Istanbul, then in Gallipoli, where he ultimately converted to Islam in 1666.25 Egypt received news of SabbataiSevi's mission from the lettersof his inde21. R.B. Serjeant,"The Post-Medievaland Modem History of San't' and the Yemen,ca. 9201382/1515-1962," in San'd': An ArabianIslamic City, ed. R.B. Serjeantand Ronald Lewcock (London: The Worldof Islam FestivalTrust, 1983), 79-81; FranqoisBlukacz, "Le Y6men sous l'autorit6 des imamszaidites au XVIIe siecle: Une 6phemereunite,"in Le Yemen:Passe etpresent de l'unit?, ed. Michel Tuchscherer,special issue of Revuedu MondeMusulmanet de la Mediterranee(Paris:Edisud, 1994), 46-49. 22. Yahyaibn al-Husayn, Ghdyatal-amdnT,2:685; see also van Koningsveld,Sadan, and alSamarrai,YemeniteAuthorities,21-22; Tobi,Jews of Yemen,77-78. 23. RaphaelPatai,TheSeed ofAbraham:Jew andArabin Contactand Conflict(Salt LakeCity: 184, 188, 289. Universityof Utah Press, 1986), 111; al-Nahrawali,Al-Barqal-YamdnT, 24. Antoine Galland,Le voyagea Smyrne:Un manuscritd'AntoineGalland (1678), introduction, transcription,and notes by Fr6d6ricBauden, preface by Andri Miquel (Paris:Editions Chandeigne, 2000), 105-83 (see his commentson SabbataiSevi, 143); Daniel Goffman,Izmirand the Levantine World,1550-1650 (Seattle: Universityof WashingtonPress, 1990), esp. chs. 3-7. 25. GershomScholem, SabbataiSevi: TheMysticalMessiah, trans.R.J.Zwi Werblowsky,Bollingen Series XCIII (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1973), 603ff.
116
The Mawza' Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism fatigableapostleNathanof Gaza,who spreadglad tidingsof the adventof the messiah and,of particularconsequenceto Yemen'sJews, of apocalypticbattlesagainst the Muslim authorities.Nathan's letters were in turn transmittedto Yemen by Rafael Joseph Chelebi, banker to the Ottoman governor of Egypt and head of Egypt's Jewish community,an early supporterof SabbataiSevi who became the amanuensisof his proselytizingeffort.26Although Sanda'sJews knew of Sabbatai Sevi's mission by 1666,27they were apparentlyunawareof his conversionto Islam until severalyearsafterthe event.Thus,the outburstsof 1667 would have occurred in responseto SabbataiSevi's presumedmessiah status,not to his apostasy.28 The first of these outbreakstook the form of a "typical"Sabbatianecstasy: the Jews, believing the messiah's appearanceto be imminent, hailed the end of Muslim rule andbeganto sell theirproperty,apparentlyin preparationfor theiringatheringto Jerusalem.This promptedImamal-Mutawakkilto summonthe leaders of the Jewish communityto his capital at al-Suda, northwestof Sanca,where he detainedthem and consideredexecutingthem as rebels before releasingall but one, Sulaymanal-Naqqash,whom he imprisonedon KamranIslandin the Red Sea. He also issued a decree forbiddingJews to wear turbans,a sign of respectable rank.29Shortlythereafter,the Jews of Sandaanointeda communityleader,Sulayman (Shlomo) Jamal,messiah; as van Koningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrainote, it is possible thathe was regardedas the messiah of the house of Joseph (mashiah ben Yosef), who is supposedto precedethe Davidic messiah (mashiahben David). Sulayman then marched to the palace of the Zaydi governor of Sanca,al-Mutawakkil'snephew 'Ali ibn al-Mu'ayyadBillah, and proceededto demand,apparently in eitherHebreworAramaic,thatthe governoryield his place of authorityto him. Sulaymanwas ultimatelyexecuted.30 The consequencesto the Jews of Sancaandvicinity fromthese incidentsfollowed an intense discussion among Yemen's leading ulema, Zaydi and Shafi'i (though not, apparently,Ismaili), regardingthe changes in the Jews' legal status wroughtby this upheaval.Imamal-Mutawakkil,adheringto the Propheticcustom of legal consultation,exchanged written opinions with the ulema; a number of these havebeen preservedin Zaydichronicles.The Muslimauthoritieswithoutexception regardedthese incidents as a rebellion against Qasimi rule and against Muslim rule in general.Al-Mutawakkilagreedwith the majorityof the ulema that 26. Scholem,SabbataiSevi, chs. 4-5 passim. (on the lettersin general);177-78, 330-31,64145 (on Rafael Joseph);651-57 (on Yemen specifically). See also Jane Hathaway,"The GrandVizier and the False Messiah:The SabbataiSevi Controversyand the OttomanReform in Egypt,"Journal of the American OrientalSociety 117, no. 4 (1997): 665-71; Habshush,"BesuratShabataiZvi be-Teiman"in Ratzaby,Yalkutshirei Teiman,118; Tobi, Jews .Hayyim of Yemen,50, 55-57; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,31-32; Ahroni, YemeniteJewry, 102-03. 27. Tobi, "Me'ora'ot1667 be-Teiman,"114. 28. Scholem (SabbataiSevi, 651-52) is rathercrypticon this issue. See, however,Tobi,"Me'ora'ot 1667 be-Teiman,"120; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,33. 29. Van Koningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 121-26; see also 41-61; Tobi, Jews of Yemen, 67-68,
71-72; Klorman, Jews of Yemen in the Nineteenth Century, 33, 37-38;
Ahroni, YemeniteJewry, 111; and above, n. 9. 30. Van Koningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities,126-31; see also 61-77; Tobi,Jews of Yemen,69-70, 73-74; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,41.
117
Jane Hathaway ifYemen'sJews hadeverhada covenantof protection(dhimma)withYemen'sMuslim rulers,theirlate actions had unquestionablyviolated and thereforeannulledit. They were thus no longer dhimmisbut slaves of the imam.The imam confiscated Jewish-ownedland,forcing many Jews out of agriculturealtogether,and imposed an indemnityon the Jews.31After a numberof months, al-Mutawakkilabolished the indemnity and returnedthe land on condition that the Jews remit half their crops to the state; this was in keeping with the penalty that the Prophethad imposed on the Jews of Khaybar,an oasis town in the Hijaz, after he besieged and defeatedthem in 628 CE.32 Even Jewish chroniclersacknowledgethatthe imam,underIslamic law,had the prerogativeof executing those involved in the messianic outburstas rebels againstMuslim rule;by the same token, he could have attackedthe Jews militarily. The measureshe took, in this light, seem lenient.33Shortlybefore his death in 1676, however,al-Mutawakkiltransmitteda legal opinion (fatwa) that the Jews should be expelled from Yemen. In this, he believed he was again imitating the Prophet,who pronouncedthe saying, or hadith, "Akhrijfial-YahiadminjazTratalCArab"("Expel the Jews from the Arabian peninsula [literally 'island of the Arabs']")on his deathbed,accordingto a traditionacceptedby the Zaydis.34Giving new vitalityto the imam'sduty,againas representativeof the Prophet,to "commandright and forbidwrong"(al-amr bi'l-ma rifwa'l-nahy canal-munkar),35alMutawakkilexercised his power of ijtihad, or independentlegal reasoning, to reinterpretthis saying. It had long been the consensus of most Muslimjurisconsuits, both Sunni and Shiite, thatjazlrat al-'Arabin this hadithwas synonymous with the Hijaz, and thatthe Hijaz, in turn,constitutedthe westerncoastal plain of Arabia, including Mecca and Medina but excluding Yemen.36Al-Mutawakkil, however,insistedthatYemenwas included,and thatthereforeits Jews must be expelled. Al-Mutawakkil'sopinion was not translatedinto action until at least a year afterhis death,when the new imam,his nephew al-MahdiAhmad,issued a formal orderof expulsion.37In carryingout his uncle's dying wish, he was likewise car31. VanKoningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 131, 139-43, 93-96; Tobi, Jews of Yemen,68; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,45. 32. VanKoningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 132, 30, 97-98; Tobi,Jews of Yemen,76. See also Muhammadibn Ishaq (d. ca. 768), The Life of Muhammad:A Translationof STratRasiilAlldh,ed. 'Abd al-Malikibn Hisham(d. 834), introductionandnotes by AlfredGuilIshaqs's laume (Karachi:Oxford UniversityPress PakistanBranch, 1955, 1968, 1970), 510-23; Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. (hereafterEI2) (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1960-2002), s.v. "Khaybar,"by L. Veccia Vaglieri. 33. On this point, see Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,38. 34. Van Koningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 133-35, 103; Tobi, Jews of Yemen,77; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,45-46. Interestingly,the tradition in question was transmittedby 'Aisha, the Prophet'sfavoritewife, whose transmissionsare typically not acceptedby Twelveror Ismaili Shiites because of her oppositionto the caliphateof Ali. 35. Blukacz, "LeY6men sous l'autorit6des imams zaidites,"46. 36. Yahyaibn al-Husayn,Ghayatal-amant, 2:817; van Koningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai, Yemenite Authorities, 104-05.
37. Thereis some disputeon the date of the ordervs. thatof the actualexpulsion, as well as on
118
The Mawza' Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism rying out the Prophet'sdying wish. As describedabove, the Jews of San'a and the northernand centralhighlandregions left their homes and decampedto Mawzae, where the imam supposedly expected them to await transportationto a "safe but where many of them sufferedhorriblyand even died. The orderwas haven""38 rescinded or lapsed by 1681 at the latest, at least in part because of the gap the Jews' departurehad left in the manufactureof handicrafts,in which the Jews had concentratedfollowing the appropriationof their land in 1667.39Their dhimma, annulled in 1667, was ultimately reinstated,as well. They did not recover their homes, however,which had been occupied by Muslims, nor did they returnto the land. In sum, the series of events that followed the messianic waves permanently alteredthe social and economic status of the Jews of Yemen, althoughthe community survived.40 JEWISH INYEMENI MEMORY MESSIANISM COLLECTIVE While the Zaydi reactionto the 1667 events was unquestionablyinformed by the desire to follow the example of the ProphetMuhammad,it was also imbued with a Zaydi messianic fervorpeculiarto the Qasimi dynasty.In keeping with the concept of the imamal-difaca,the activedefenderof the community,a prospective Zaydi imam does not automaticallysucceed to the imamatebut launchesa "call" (da'wa) to which the communitymustrespond.InYemen'shistory,one line of Zaydi imams has succeeded anotherby means of an effective da wa, particularlyat a moment of crisis. The Qasimi imams came to power duringa period of disarray amongthe Zaydipopulationfollowing the Ottomandefeatof al-Mutahhar'srevolt; al-Mutahhar'ssons had occupiedthemselveswith theirown infightinguntilthe Ottomangovernorof Yemenexiled them to Anatolia.41As the decidedlypro-Qasimi chroniclerYahyaibn al-Husaynreports,before al-Qasim al-Mansurlaunchedhis dacwa in 1598, a cry had been heard in the night for two months:"YaImam alQasim!" ("O Imam al-Qasim!"),as if the Zaydi communitywas itself awaitinga deliverer.42 Not coincidentally,this brandof Zaydimessianismfinds echoes in the meshow long the exile lasted. Ratzaby,mainly on the basis of Jewish sources,places the orderin 1678 and the initial expulsion (of the Jews of San'a) shortlythereafterthat same year; he has the expulsion decree lapsing only afteral-Mahdi'sdeathin 1681. See Ratzaby,"GalutMavza',"Sefunot5, 343 -44, and, in contrast, idem, EJ, s.v. "Mawza'."Van Koningsveld, Sadan, and al-Samarrai,based on a Zaydi source, place the orderin 1677 and the initial expulsions the same year;theirdiscussion implies, however, that the governorof San'a postponedthe expulsion from that city until 1679, after a theological consultationhad been completed;see YemeniteAuthorities,22-23, 104. 38. On this point, see VanKoningsveld,Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 112-13. See also Tobi,Jews of Yemen,79; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,46. 39. Tobi,Jews of Yemen,79-80; Goitein,Jews and Arabs, 74; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,46; Ahroni, YemeniteJewry, 132. 40. Aviva Kleine-Frank,"Die Judenim Jemen,"in Yemen:3,000 YearsofArt and Civilisation inArabiaFelix, ed. WernerDaum(Innsbruck:Pinguin-Verlag;Frankfurt:Umschau-Verlag,1987), 259; idem, "ZumRechtsstatusderJudenim Jemen,"Die Weltdes Islams 37, no. 2 (1997): 183-84; van Koningsveld, Sadan,and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities,112-17. 41. Yahyaibn al-Husayn, al-amanf,2:736-65. Ghnyat 42. Ibid., 2:769.
119
Jane Hathaway sianic expectationsofYemen'sJewishcommunityduringthe same period.As a later Zaydichroniclerrecounts,the Jews expectedthat"avoice will be heardby every living soul on earth"to signal the coming of their (false) messiah-whom the chronicleridentifies with the Dajjal, the "antichrist,"who in Muslim eschatology is supposedto appearshortlybefore the messianic figure known as the Mahdi.43 Both noises echo the cries, on the one hand,and the shouts,horns,andthunder,on the other, prophesiedby the biblical prophets Isaiah and Jeremiahas signs, respectively,of Israel'sdevastationand subsequentredemption.44As for the expulsion itself, Habshush,writing in a quasi-biblicalidiom, describes Imam al-Mahdi's wrathas descending like an earthquakeon the heads of the Jews.45 The analogy between Jewish and Zaydi messianism in Yemengoes deeper still. SulaymanJamal,the Jewish community leader who took the role of protomessiah, publicly declared that Jews would displace Muslims as the rulers of Yemen-as they would throughoutthe entire Muslim world. When he made this declarationon the steps of the governor'spalace in Sanda,he was garbed all in white, which wouldhaveregisteredwith the Zaydiauthoritiesas the traditionalcolor of Shiite rebellion and martyrdom.46In Yemen, furthermore,this declaration had singularresonance, for Yemen'srulers had once been Jews, as most Yemeni Muslims, even the common people, were aware.The ancient Himyaritekings of Yemen, subject of countless popular legends, including the well-known epic of Sayf ben Dhi Yazan,47had convertedto Judaismsometime in the early centuries of the CommonEra.Modern-dayscholarsdisagree on the exact date, but popular traditionmaintainsthatthe fabledthird-centuryruler,or tubbac,As'ad al-Himyari, also known as Madi Qarib, was the first to convert.48As'ad was a familiarfigure to Muslimsof all sects. Ibn Ishaq'swell-knownlife historyof the ProphetMuhammad (STratRasiilAlldh) begins with As'ad, whose monotheismprefiguresthat of Muhammad,as does his venerationof the Ka'bain Mecca:As'ad,accordingto tra43. Van Koningsveld,Sadan, and al-Samarrai,YemeniteAuthorities, 123-24, and 122; Klorman, Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,35-36. 44. See especially Isaiah27:13, 66:6; Jeremiah25:30, 31:15, 48:5, 49:21, 51:48. 45. Habshush,"GalutMavza',"in Ratzaby,ed., Yalkutshirei Teiman,94. (The text is the Hebrew translation.) 46. On this point, see, for example, Julius Wellhausen,TheArab Kingdomand Its Fall, trans. MargaretGrahamWeir(Beirut:Khayats, 1927), 533 n. 1; Heinz Halm, TheEmpireof the Mahdi:The Rise of the Fatimids,trans.Michael Bonner(Leiden:Brill, 1996), 186, 413-14. On the otherhand,the Himyaritecolor was red (hamra'),whence the Himyaritessupposedlyderivedtheir name; see Robert L. Playfair,A History ofArabia Felix or Yemen,reproductionof 1859 Bombay ed. (Amsterdam:Philo Press; St. Leonards:Ad Orientem,Ltd., 1970), 47. 47. LenaJayyusi,trans.andnarrator,TheAdventuresofSayfBen Dhi Yazan:AnArabFolkEpic, introductionby HarryNorris (Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress, 1996). 48. On the Himyarites,see Muhammad'Abd al-QadirBafaqih,L'UnificationduYWmen antique: La lutte entre Saba', Himyar,et le Hadramawtdu Ier au IIIme sidcle de l'ere chritienne (Paris:LibrairieOrientalistePaul Geuthner,1990), ch. 2. Madi Qaribis, in fact, a corruptionof the title muqarrib (literally,"one who drawsnear,"evidently referringto a federator),borne by the rulers of ancient Saba'. The title appearson a bronze statue from Ma'ribin the sixth centuryBCE: National Museum, San'a,catalogue24, in the exhibit"Queenof Sheba:TreasuresfromAncientYemen,"BritishMuseum, 6 June-4 October2002.
120
The Mawzac Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism dition, was the first person to drapethe Ka'ba in a kiswa, or ceremonialcloth.49 This traditionwould be adoptedby Muslim dynastiesup to the presentday,when the Saudigovernmentsupervisesannuallythe hand-weavingof a new kiswa,which is put in place duringthe annualpilgrimage.50 Ascadal-Himyarienjoyednot only the statusof a Jewish,or at leastmonotheistic, precursorto the Prophetbut also thatof a messianic figure. Popularbelief in Yemenheld thata Himyariterulerwould returnat the end of time, ratherlike King Arthurin British folk eschatology.The Ismaili messianic figure whose forcible conversionof Jews to Islam promptedMaimonides'Epistle to the Jews of Yemen styled himself "al-Himyari,"evidently playing on this messianic expectationby posing as a Himyaritedescendant(see n. 3). In 1578, earlyin the twenty-five-year tenureof the OttomangovernorHasan Pashaibn Husayn,accordingto Yahyaibn al-Husayn,a man from Bilad Anis, in the northernhighlands, claimed to be the resurrected"MansurHimyar."By Yahya'saccount,manypeople followed him until he was seized and broughtto Hasan Pasha, who promptlyput him to death.51 The Qasimi dynastywas born in the midst of Zaydimessianic expectations, and Imam al-Mutawakkilclearly meant to exploit, if not to fulfill, these expectations. If his fatherhad been the great delivererand his brotherthe vanquisherof the Ottomans,he was the recreatorof the ideal Muslim community;his efforts to emulatethe ProphetMuhammadare noteworthyin this regard.As the exposer of the false Jewish messiah, whom the Zaydi ulema identified with the Dajjal, the "deceiver"who appearsjust before the Mahdi, al-Mutawakkilhimself took on the attributesof a Mahdi-like figure. But had he not imprisonedthe Jewish community leaders, executed their false messiah SulaymanJamal,and,ultimately,elected to expel the Jews entirely,Jewish"false"messianismwould have compromised the triumphof the correct Zaydi variety.The expulsion decision thus capped his attempts to recreate in Yemen the Prophet'soriginal community at Medinaa purely Muslim utopia-with himself as a quasi-messianic successor to the Prophet. OTTOMAN EXPANSIONISM
The exile of Yemen'sJews to Mawzactook place in the shadow of the Ottoman Empire,which was still an undeniableforce in the Arabianpeninsulaand 49. IbnIshaq,Life of Muhammad,6-12; Ibnal-Dayba',Tuhfatal-zamanfifadd'il ahl al-Yaman (The Gift of the Era: The Virtuesof the People of Yemen),ed. Sayyid KusrawiHasan (Beirut:Dir alKutubal-'Ilmiyya, 1992), 29; anonymous,Ta'rtkhSancd'[al]- Yaman(HistoryofSanda), Siileymaniye Library,MS Ayasofya 3048, fols. 165r, 167v--168r; ReynoldA. Nicholson, A LiteraryHistory of the Arabs,2nd ed. (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1969), ch. 1. See also Tobi,"Me'ora'ot1667 be-Teiman,"117 n. 17, 127. 50. An instructionalfilm that describesthis process is "TheGuests of God"(1991), Bray Film Studios, Windsor,Berkshire,UK; MeridianInternationalCommunications,Los Angeles; distributed by Islamic InformationService. 51. Yahyaibn al-Husayn, Ghayat al-amanT,2:749. On Bilad Anis, see 'Ali ibn al-Hasan alKhazraji(d. 1410), ThePearl-Strings:A History of the ResuliyyDynasty of Yemen,3 vols., trans.,introduction,annotations,index, tables, and maps by Sir. J.W.Redhouse;ed. E.G. Brown, R.A. Nicholson, andA. Rogers (Leiden:E.J.Brill; London:Luzac and Co., 1906), 3:75 n. 438.
121
Jane Hathaway the widerRed Sea regionandwhose ruler,furthermore,claimedthe statusof leader of the Muslim community in opposition to the Qasimi imams. Although the Qasimis had expelled the OttomansfromYemen in the 1630s, the Ottomansstill held the Muslimholy cities of Mecca and Medina,and outfittedtwo enormouspilgrimage caravansevery year that providedthe ceremonialcovering for the Kacba and distributedlarge amountsof grain and money to the poor of the holy cities. That the Ottomanswere keenly awareof this rivalryis attestedby the fact that in the very yearthatthe last OttomangovernorofYemenwas expelled, a bey of Egypt rebuiltthe Ka'ba,which had been badly damagedin a flood.52 Indeed,Yosef Tobi asserts that the Qasimi imamatederived legitimacy and ideological fervor from its success in expelling the OttomansfromYemen(see n. 15). By the same token, we can arguethat Imamal-Mutawakkil'sfatwasanctioning the expulsion of the Jews, as well as his nephew'simplementationof thefatwa, were triggeredin partby renewedOttomanmilitancy in the region. This was not the first time thatQasimitreatmentof the Jewishminorityhadbeen influenced by Ottomandesigns onYemen.The debateover the Jews'dhimmain 1538-39 had occurredjust as SiileymanPashawas claimingYemenfor the Ottomans,who had conqueredEgyptandthe holy cities only twentyyearsbefore,while the Arablands were still absorbingthe influx of SephardicJewry from the Spanishexpulsion in 1492. It was the Ottomanswho ultimatelyrenewedthe YemeniteJews' covenant of protection,in keeping with their earlierpolicy of allowing refugees from Spain to settle in Ottomanterritory.53 By 1667, however,the Ottomanadministrativeelite had espoused the religious, social, and political agenda of the Kadizadelis,a puritanicalSunni movement thathad attainedunprecedentedinfluence at the courtof SultanMehmedIV (r. 1648-87). Like the Qasimi imams, the Kadizadelis strove to emulate the ProphetMuhammad,not least in theirtreatmentof non-Muslims.Their Sunni fervor colored the Ottomanresponseto SabbataiSevi's messianic movement,which had originatedin Ottomanterritoryand whose repercussionsaffected first and foremostthe OttomanEmpireitself. Indeed,SabbataiSevi was convertedto Islam by the leader of the movement at the time, the sultan's spiritual advisor Vani Mehmed Efendi, whose chamberlainSabbataiSevi (now called CAziz Mehmed Efendi) became. (I should hasten to add that the Sabbatianadherentspopularly 52. Hajji Ali, Ahbdr iil-Yamdni,fol. 218r; Yahya ibn al-Husayn, Ghdyat al-amdnT,2:839; (The Book of the History of Cairo in Anonymous,Kitdb-itevdrih-iMisr-i Kdhire-ihatt-i Hasan Papa the CalligraphyofHasan Pasha, to 1683), Istanbul,Sfileymaniye Library,MS Haci MahmudEfendi 4877, fols. 37v-38r; SuraiyaFaroqhi,Pilgrims and Sultans: TheHajj under the Ottomans(London: I.B. Tauris,1994), 114-16. 53. Yahyaibn al-Husayn,Ghdyatal-amdna,2:684; van Koningsveld,Sadan, and al-Samarrai, YemeniteAuthorities,20-21. The order that Sultan Bayezid II issued to his provincialgovernors in 1492, forbiddingthem to hinder the movement of Jewish refugees, is probablyapocryphal;indeed, Bayezid seems to haverestrictedJewishsettlementin Istanbul.See MarkA. Epstein,TheOttomanJewish Communitiesand TheirRole in the Fifteenthand SixteenthCenturies(Freiburg:Klaus SchwarzVerlag, 1980), 29-31, 46-47, 59-60, 119-22, 153-54, 159-60; AvigdorLevy, "Introduction,"in The Jews of the OttomanEmpire,ed. AvigdorLevy (Princeton:Darwin Press, in cooperationwith the Instituteof TurkishStudies,Washington,D.C., 1994), 11, 22.
122
The Mawzac Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism knownas D6nmes believe thatit was actuallySabbataiSevi who convertedVani.)54 Ratherthan expelling non-Muslims,the Kadizadelissought to encouragethem to convertto Islam;in so doing, they hopedto makeIstanbula replicaof the Prophet's Medina:a purelyMuslim community,devoid of unbelievers. Indeed,the Kadizadelis'attemptsto emulatethe ProphetMuhammadby recreatingthe originalMuslim communityat Medina bear an obvious resemblance to those of al-Mutawakkil.It would not be farfetchedto describethe religioustenor of both OttomanIstanbuland Zaydi Sandain the later seventeenthcenturyas eschatologically charged.While the Kadizadelis struggledto root out innovations, notablySufism, thatthey felt preventedOttomansociety fromreturningto the pristine stateof the originalMuslimcommunity,MehmedIV hadfoundin the K6priilii family of grandviziers renewersof the empire'smilitaryprowess againstthe infidel enemy, both Christianand sectarian Muslim. Under KdpriiliiFazil Ahmed Pasha,who held the grandvizieratefor an astonishingfifteen years, from 1661 until his death in 1676, the Ottomansat long last forced the Venetiansto cede the fortressof Candiaon Crete,which they had defendedfor twenty-five years.55The disappearanceof the last Christian(more specifically RomanCatholic)toehold in the easternMediterraneanwas a substantialblow to Venice;to this day,an icon of the VirginMaryrescued from Candiastandsin Venice'sBasilica SantaMariadella Salute as a memorialto the defeat.56 Ultimately,Mehmedwould set his sights on the bastion of Roman Catholic might in Europe:the Hapsburgcapitalof Vienna,which the Kipriilii nephew Kara MustafaPasha,encouragedby VaniMehmed Efendi,besieged in 1683, only to be routedby Polish relief forces assisted by rain and mud. Vienna is often identified with the mysteriousKizil Elma, or "Red/GoldenApple,"the city whose conquest representsan eschatological watershedin early Ottomanlore.57In the fifteenth century,Constantinoplewas the obvious candidatefor the title. The conquest of Constantinople,moreover, bears similarly eschatological overtones in certain Prophetichadiths, in which the city's captureby Muslims is predictedto precede the appearanceof the Dajjal.58By the seventeenthcentury,the Hapsburgshad replaced the Byzantinesas the Ottomans'chief rival;thus, theircapitalat Vienna assumedthe statusof coveted,almost sacrosanct,prize.59Morebroadly,the fact that 54. Hathaway,"The GrandVizier and the False Messiah,"esp. 666-67. See also Madeline C. Zilfi, The Politics of Piety: The OttomanUlema in the PostclassicalAge (1600-1800) (Minneapolis and Chicago:BibliothecaIslamica, 1988), 153-57. 55. On the taking of Candia,see, for example, Molly Greene,A Shared World:Christiansand Muslims in the Early Modern Mediterranean(Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 2000), 13-22, 45-46. 56. Personalvisit to Venice, June 1995. 57. EI2, s.v. "Kizil Elma,"by PertevNaili Boratav.Intriguingly,myths that, accordingto Boratav,"probablycome fromthe oral traditionof the Janissaries,"link the KizdlElma to a Christianking woundedby 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and slumberinguntil the day he can take revenge-a possible conflation of Arthurianlegend with the extensive lore of 'Ali. 58. Stephane Yrrasimos, Ldgendes d'empire: Lafondation de Constantinople et de Sainte-So-
phie dans les traditionsturques(Istanbuland Paris:InstitutFrangaisd'itudes Anatoliennesand Jean Maisonneuve, 1990), 187-88. The conquestof Medina(Yathrib)is also mentionedin the same terms. 59. Pil Fodor, "Ungarnund Wien in der osmanischen Eroberungsideologie(im Spiegel der
123
Jane Hathaway the conquest of two venerable Catholic bastions was championed by the Kadizadelis signals thatthe OttomanEmpirehad resuscitateditsjihad againstChristian Europe. In this scheme of things,Yemenemergedas the southernextremeof the reinvigoratedOttomanjihad.SultanMehmedwas painfullyawareof the Ottomanloss of Yemenunderhis uncle, MuradIV, in 1636--ironically, only two years before MuradreconqueredBaghdadfrom the TwelverShiite Safaviddynastyof Iran.As I have noted elsewhere, the Ottomandefeat by the Qasimis was a draining,demoralizingaffairthat leads one to suspect thatthe sultanand his grandvizier had elected to let Yemengo. The Ottomangovernorfled to the Hijaz, leaving a provincial grandee(bey) from Egypt to hold the southernport of Mocha againstthe final Zaydi assault.This bey's pleas to the governorof Egypt for reinforcementsfell on deaf ears. Meanwhile, his remainingtroops fell victim to disease, starvation, and desertionto the Zaydi imam.60 OttomancontactwithYemendid not end with this militarydisaster.The discovery of coffee in Ethiopiain the fifteenth century,its cultivationin Yemen,and its exportthroughthe Yemeniports of Aden and Mocha had given rise to a lucrative coffee tradethroughthe Red Sea to the Mediterranean;indeed,the revenues generatedby this tradewere a key incentive for the Ottomansto retainYemen.61 Even aftertheirouster,the coffee trade,largelyOttoman-carried,continuedapace. Towardthe middle of the seventeenthcentury,in fact, Egyptian grandee households began to form aroundthe coffee tradeand grow rich off it.62Regrettablylittle is known aboutthe alliances thatthe grandeesof Egypt must have forged with the (primarilyIsmaili)tribesof the coffee-growingregionsinYemen'scentralhighlands.We gather,however,thatOttomangrandeescompetedwith the Zaydi imam for coffee revenues.The eighteenth-centuryDanish surveyorCarstenNiebuhrnoted that the Qasimi imam of his day took one quarterof the retail price of all coffee sold.63 Coming a few decades after the Ottomanouster fromYemen,al-Mutawakkil's own territorialaggrandizementwas a source of concern to Mehmed IV and to Fazil Ahmed Pasha.A powerfulZaydi imam had historicallyposed a threatto the holy cities, as the Mamluksultan al-Nasir Muhammadhad realized when he Tdrih-iBeg krhil- 17. Jahrhundert)," JournalofTurkishStudies 13 (1989); reprintedin Fodor,In Quest of the GoldenApple: ImperialIdeology, Politics, and MilitaryAdministrationin the OttomanEmpire (Istanbul:Isis Press, 2000), 51-60. 60. Hajji'Ali, Ahbdriil-Yamant, fols. 209v ff.; Jane Hathaway,"The Egyptian-YemeniSymbiosis as Reflected (or Unreflected) in Ottoman-EraChronicles,"in The Historiographyof Islamic Egypt (c. 950-1800), ed. Hugh Kennedy(Leiden: Brill, 2001), 217-18. 61. On the discoveryof coffee and its diffusion, see RalphS. Hattox,Coffeeand Coffeehouses: The Origins ofa Social Beverage in the MedievalNear East (Seattle:Universityof WashingtonPress, 1985), 1Iff., 26-41, 76-81; Yahyaibn al-Husayn,Ghdyatal-amdnf,2:689. 62. Jane Hathaway,The Politics of Households in OttomanEgypt: The Rise of the Qazdaglhs (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress, 1997), 134-38. 63. CarstenNiebuhr, TravelsthroughArabia and Other Countries in the East, trans. Robert Heron(Edinburgh:R. Morrisonand Son, Booksellers,Perth;G. Mudie,Edinburgh;andT.Vernor,London, 1792; reprintBeirut:Librairiedu Liban,n.d.), 88.
124
The Mawza' Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism besieged Imam Muhammadibn al-Mutahharin Mecca in 1323.64The Ottoman sultanderivedgreatprestigeas the khadimal-Haramayn,the custodianof the two holy sanctuaries,responsible for safeguardingthe pilgrimage caravansand providing for the poor of Mecca and Medina. Mehmed IV's reign witnessed an upsurge in pious endowments(sing. waqfin Arabic;valafin Turkish)benefiting the holy cities by the women of the Ottomanfamily. In particular,Mehmed'sfavorite concubine(hasseki), Rabi'aGiilnu$Emetullah,in 1678 foundeda huge waqfproviding for a soup kitchen and hospital in Mecca, as well as the shipmentof grain from Egypt to the holy cities; the revenuescame from four Egyptianvillages and the Nile port of Bulaq.65Mehmed IV simply could not risk al-Mutawakkil'sadvancingnorthwardinto the Hijaz;the sharifof Mecca, a descendantof the Prophet who administeredthat city on behalf of the Ottomans,kept a garrisonat Hali, the northernmostoutpostin Yemen,borderingthe Hijaz, to preventjust such an eventuality.66For not only would al-Mutawakkilbe challenging Ottomanterritorial controlof the Hijaz;he wouldbe threateningthe sultan'sstatusas khadimal-Haramayn and,indeed,his claim to leadershipof the Muslim community.We know,in any case, thatMehmedcontemplatedan attackon Yemenin 167267--hoping, perhaps, to catch al-Mutawakkiloverextendedand vulnerable. Had a few things gone a bit differently,MehmedIV might have found himself ruling an empire that stretched from Poland to the Indian Ocean, with no Catholic or Shiite rival to threatenhim. He might then have earned a place in Ottomanannalsas sahib-i kbran,literally"masterof an auspicious[astrological]conjunction,"a title bestowedby Ottomanmen of letterson the likes of Alexanderthe Great,Tamerlane,and Genghis Khan.68He might conceivablyhave been a candidate for a more eschatologically-ladenstatus:thatof mujaddid,or "renewer."Sunni eschatologygives considerableweightto a figure who appearsduringeach Muslim (hijri) centuryto "renew"the Muslim community,as opposed to the Mahdi, 64. Yahyaibn al-Husayn,Ghayatal-amani, 1:500;R.B. Serjeant,"TheMosques of San'a':The YemeniIslamic Setting,"in Serjeantand Lewcock, San"d',312. Muhammadibn al-Mutahharwas supposedly the last Zaydi imam to wield Ziilfikar,the double-bladedsword of "Aliibn Abi Talib (ibid.). 65. A lengthy series of documents concerning this waqf is housed in the TopkapiPalace archives underE 33. See also Hathaway,Politics of Households, 150 n. 41. Although this waqfis cited in the archivaldocumentsand some chronicles as the Hassekiye waqf because of Giilnu?Emetullah's standingwhen she founded it, it later came to be known as the Valide (sultan'smother)waqf On the role of imperialwomen in founding waqfs benefiting the holy cities, see Leslie P. Peirce, TheImperial Harem: Womenand Sovereigntyin the OttomanEmpire(New Yorkand Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press, 1993), 203-10. 66. Niebuhr,TravelsthroughArabia, 242-43. 67. Evliya Celebi (1611-82), Evliya (elebi Seyahatnamesi(Evliya Qelebi'sBook of Travels), vol. 10, ed. Mehmed Zillioglu (Istanbul:UfqdalNegriyat, 1966), 711; Serjeant,"Post-Medievaland Modern History of 81. Serjeantgives the date as 1674-75; this may have been a second ocSan','" casion, thoughEvliya does not mention it. 68. Cornell H. Fleischer, Bureaucratand Intellectual in the OttomanEmpire: The Historian MustafaAli (Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress, 1986), 279-80. See also idem, "TheLawgiveras Messiah:The Making of the ImperialImage in the Reign of Siileymin," in Soliman le Magnifiqueet son temps:Actes du Colloque de Paris Galeries Nationales du GrandPalais, 7-10 mars 1990, ed. Gilles Veinstein(Paris:La DocumentationFrangaise,1992), 162-63.
125
Jane Hathaway who appearsat the end of time. The title had been bestowedon SiileymanI and,by one prominentstatesman,on Selim I, the conquerorof Egypt.69Admittedly,this is a ratherdifferent view of Mehmed IV from the entertainment-loving"Avcl Mehmet"(Mehmedthe Hunter)describedby OzdemirNutku,or the melancholic brooderdescribedby J.H. Kramers.Such an achievementwould have been largely the doing of K6prilii FazilAhmed.70 This distinctionwould havemade little difference to the Qasimi imam, however. CONCLUSION: THE INTERSECTIONOF THREE MESSIANISMS
Al-Mutawakkiland Mehmed IV must have taken these eschatologicallychargedmeasures in some degree of conscious opposition to each other.Al-Mutawakkilwas well awarethatthe Ottomansconstituteda perennialthreatto Yemen. Among other things, the Ottomans excelled at exploiting the divisions among Yemen's various Muslim populations. During their lengthy struggle with the Qasimis, they employedat least one son of the defeatednon-Qasimiimam al-Mutahharas a spy while keeping four sons, to say nothingof severalIsmailigrandees, on theirpayrollas salyane (salaried)emirs.71Al-Mutawakkil'sassertiveness,both territoriallyand doctrinally,aimed,at one level, to provehis legitimacyin the face of the similarlyassertiveOttomansultan. The statusofYemen'sJews was a potentialflashpointfor the competingZaydi and Ottomaneschatological visions. If Mehmed IV had succeeded in re-conqueringYemen, then Yemen'sJews would have become Ottoman subjects once more. Jerusalem,the eschatologicaldestinationof those Jews sweptup in the messianic fervor,would have been far more accessible to them: a district in another province of the same empire.Thus, Mehmed could have served as a facilitatorof the Jews' messianic vision comparableto the Achaemenid emperor Cyrus the Great,who invited the Jews of the Babyloniancaptivityback to Jerusalemto rebuild their Temple (2 Chronicles 36:22-23; also Isaiah 41:2-3, 44:28-45:5, 46:11). (Two centuries later,in fact, manyYemeniJews would take advantageof the second Ottomanoccupationof Yemen,which lasted from 1872 through 1918, to emigrateto Jerusalemand otherpartsof OttomanPalestine.)72It is even worth 69. Fleischer,"The Lawgiveras Messiah," 160-74; Cemal Kafadar,"TheMyth of the Golden Age: OttomanHistoricalConsciousnessin the Post-SiileymdnicEra,"in Siileymdnthe Second [sic] and His Time,ed. Halil Inalcikand CemalKafadar(Istanbul:Isis Press, 1993), 38-45; BarbaraFlemming, "PublicOpinionunderSultanSiileymhn,"in Inalcikand Kafadar,Siileymdnthe Second, 53-57; Halil Inalcik,"State,Sovereignty,and Law duringthe Reign of Siileymdn,"in InalcikandKafadar,Siileymdn the Second, 59-69, 76. The formergrandvizier Liitfi PashadescribedSelim as the "renewer"of the tenth hijri century;see Fleischer,"TheLawgiveras Messiah,"163-64. 70. OzdemirNutku,IV Mehmet'inEdirneSenligi (1675) (MehmedIV's Celebrationat Edirne [1675]) (Ankara:TiirkTarihKurumuBasimevi, 1972, 1987), 36-41; EI2, s.v. "MehemmedI,' by J.H. Kramers.Kramersnotes that FazilAhmed Pashavirtuallyranthe empirehimself. 71. BasbakanhkOttomanArchives (Istanbul), Maliyeden Miidevver 7555 (1009/1600-01), 248 (the spy), 17, 49, 72, 81, 99, 107, 108, 111, 160, 172, 197, 221, 228. The spy was Ibrahimibn alMutahhar;his brotherswere 'Abdullah, Mustafa,and Mutahhar(called "Mutahharibn Shuway',"or "Mutahhar,son of the [wretched]little Shiite,"in this document).This documentcontradictsthe claims of the chroniclerRumuzithatal-Mutahharleft only two sons; see Rumuzi,Tdrih-ifeth-iYemen,fol. 90v. 72. Goitein, Jews and Arabs, 76-77. See also Tobi, "The Yemeni Jewish Communityunder
126
The Mawza' Exile at the Juncture of Zaydi and Ottoman Messianism consideringthat the imam regardedthe latest wave of Jewish messianic fervor as a dangerousimportfromenemyOttomanterritory-although, like the anonymous Zaydi chroniclerunearthedby van Koningsveldand company,he can hardlyhave gleaned the precise natureof Sabbatiandoctrine,he may well have been awarethat the stimuluscame from Egypt, the largestOttomanprovince, from which attacks on Yemenhad historicallybeen launched. This wave of messianic zeal washed over Yemen at a particularlycritical juncturein the fortunesof the Qasimi dynasty.Having itself come to power in an atmosphereheavy with messianic expectation,the dynasty,in the personof Imam al-Mutawakkil,was undertakingan unprecedentedsurgeof territorialexpansionterritorialexpansion colored, however,by these very messianic expectations.AlMutawakkiland his nephew al-Mahdiappearedto be ferventlystrivingto recreate in Yemen a mirror image of the original Muslim community that the Prophet Muhammadhad establishedin Medina.Their efforts towardthat end resonateall the morebecause Medinaitself was in the handsof the Ottomans,a competingand, in Zaydi eyes, illegitimateMuslim authority.In such circumstances,an outburstof militantJewish messianism provokeda severe response, but a response carefully craftedafterexhaustivetheological debate and deliberatelybased upon Prophetic precedent.Even the notorioustreatisein supportof al-Mutawakkil'sopinion and al-Mahdi'sorderby the ZaydijuristAhmadibnAbi'l-Rijal(1620-81) bases its arguments almost solely on the Koranand hadith.73 Al-Mutawakkil'sand al-Mahdi'smeasures against the Jews become even more comprehensiblewhen we recall the heterogeneityof Yemen'sreligious environment,with significant Sunni/Shafi'i andIsmailicommunitiesin additionto the Zaydi population.No one ever ruled "all"of Yemen;even if the Zaydi imam managed to garrisonand collect taxes from most of the territory,he could never hope to win the heartsand minds of his Sunni and Ismaili subjects.Any disturbanceby a non-Muslimreligious minority was a potential source of social disruptionthat could shatterthe imam'stenuous grip on territorialauthority.If we add to this the imam'swarinessof the Ottomansat a time when the Ottomansultanwas reinvigorating the jihad on all fronts, we can easily see that no disturbanceof the kind provokedby the messianic fervorof 1667 could be tolerated.It is easy to see, furthermore,why such a disturbancewould have been regardedas outrightrebellion, even if SulaymanJamalhad not verballychallengedZaydi authority. The Mawza' exile, then, resultedfrom the intersectionof a distinctregional brandof Jewish messianism with the geopolitical confrontationbetween an exTurkishRule (1872-1918)," in Jews of Yemen,96ff.; Klorman,Jews of Yemenin the NineteenthCentury,ch. 6; EJ, s.v. "Yemen,"743 (by Haim Z'ew Hirschberg),751 (by YehudaRatzaby). 73. Ahmad ibn Abi'l-Rijal, "Al-Nusiisal-zlhira ff ijlh' al-Yahuidal-fajira"("The Plain-Sense Texts on Expelling the DebauchedJews"), ed. with an introductionby 'Abd al-Hadi al-Tazi,Majallat al-Majma'al- 'Ilmi al- 'Irfdq(Journalof the Iraqi ScientificAcademy)32, nos. 3 -4 (1981): 378-400 (Ibn Abi'l-Rijal'stext is on 388-400). A partial(and occasionally questionable)English translationof the partof the text extending from the bottom of p. 396 to the top of p. 399 appearsin Bat Ye'or,The Dhimmi:Jews and ChristiansunderIslam, prefaceby JacquesEllul, trans.David Maisel, PaulFenton, and David Littman(Rutherford,NJ: FairleighDickinson University Press; London:Associated University Presses, 1985), 339-40.
127
Jane Hathaway pansion-mindedempire and a south Arabianjuggernautunderthe sway of competing Muslim messianic visions. Although the Zaydi traditionof a living imam who renderedindependentjuridical decisions clearly expedited the reinterpretation of the hadiththatjustified the Jews' expulsion,no particulardoctrinalelement of Zaydi Islam-or, for thatmatter,Sunni Islam of the Hanafi rite as practicedby the Ottomans-determined the Qasimi imam al-Mahdi'sexpulsion order.Rather, the expulsion was conditionedby this particularconjunctionof Ottomanrevivalism and Qasimi militancy.When rival sects of Islam, or interpretationswithin a single sect, collided,emulationof the Prophetwas often the focus of doctrinalcompetition, and in this context, treatmentof non-Muslim minority populationsbecame a key public manifestationof such emulation.The tribulationsof Yemen's Jews in the years following the Sabbatianmovementcan be understoodin terms of this broaderstruggle. Jane Hathaway Ohio State University Columbus,Ohio
128
English Abstract Restitution of Lost Property in the Tannaitic and Amoraic Halakhah: A Preliminary Philosophical Study of the Forming of a Conception Author(s): Ariel Furstenberg Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), p. 129 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131812 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJSReview 29:1 (2005), 129
ENGLISH ABSTRACT RESTITUTION OF LOST PROPERTY IN THE TANNAITICAND AMORAIC HALAKHAH:A PRELIMINARY PHILOSOPHICAL STUDY OF THE FORMING OF A CONCEPTION
by Ariel Furstenberg This paper explores the development of a particulartalmudic halakhic theme-the restitutionof lost property-through the philosophical prism of HilaryPutnam'sdistinctionbetweenconceptsandconceptions.This distinctionholds that one can affirm a set of concepts without commitmentto the underlyingconceptions from which they are drawn.The focus here is upon substantialdiscrepancies between tannaitic and amoraic authoritiesin the presentationof the halakhot of restitutionof lost property.These discrepanciestestify to a significant change in the underlyingconceptualframeworkof tannaiticand amoraichalakhic thinkingon this topic. Briefly,the primaryaxis aboutwhich the tannaitictreatmentrevolves is the obligationto come to the aid of one's fellow, making every effort to reversea potentiallydeleterioussituation.The amoraicposition, on the otherhand,focuses on the concept of rightfulownership,with its goal being the restitutionof propertyto its legal owner.The paperproposes that in the laws of restitutionof lost property, the amoraicrabbisunderstoodfull well the tannaiticconcepts-using them and "playing"with them-yet without internalizingthe tannaiticconceptionunderlying their deliberations.
129
Review: Scholarly Dictionaries of Two Dialects of Jewish Aramaic Author(s): Baruch A. Levine Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 131-144 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131813 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 131-144
REVIEW ESSAY SCHOLARLYDICTIONARIESOF Two DIALECTS OF JEWISH ARAMAIC
by BaruchA. Levine Michael Sokoloff, A Dictionary of Jewish PalestinianAramaic of the Byzantine Period. Second Edition. RamatGan, Israel:Bar Ilan UniversityPress; Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. 847 pp. (1st ed. by Bar Ilan UniversityPress, 1990) Michael Sokoloff, A Dictionary of Jewish BabylonianAramaic of the Talmudic and Geonic Periods. RamatGan, Israel:Bar Ilan UniversityPress;Baltimoreand London:The Johns HopkinsUniversityPress, 2002. 1582 pp. The two dictionariesunder review representthe productof decades of assiduousresearchandpersistenteffort on the partof ProfessorMichael Sokoloff of Bar Ilan University.Previoiusly,he has contributedmajorworks in the Aramaic field in collaborationwith otherscholars.Thereis, first of all, A Corpusof Christian Palestinian Aramaic (Gr6ningen: Styx Publications, 1997), a multivolume edition of texts preparedin collaborationwith ChristaMiuller-Kessler.This was followed by a Hebrewwork, 'own - nia m' [JewishPalestinianAramaicPoetry from LateAntiquity](Jerusalem:IsraelAcademy of the Sciences and Humanities, 1999), preparedin collaborationwith JosephYahalom.However,the dictionaries reviewedhere, which representhis most ambitiousprojects,bear his name alone, with only technical and electronic assistance in their actualpreparationprovided on the partof others. Sokoloff has also publishedA Dictionary of JudeanAramaic (RamatGan:Bar IlanUniversity,2003), coveringsources from 150 BCE to 200 CE, which includes the rich materialpreserved in the Aramaic papyri from the JudeanDesert. The immense scope of Michael Sokoloff's scholarly productivity,most clearly exemplified in the publicationof the two dictionaries,strainsthe limits of comprehension.All studentsof the Judaicheritageowe him a special debt for facilitating the mastery of talmudic and related texts, Palestinianand Babylonian. All Semitists, of whateverarea of interest,are indebtedto him for affordingthem betteraccess to the rich treasuresofAramaic. The presentdictionariesare affiliated with the ComprehensiveAramaicDictionaryProject,whose editoris Professor StephenKaufman,a noted Aramaiston the faculty of HebrewUnion College. In the Prefaceto the second edition of the Dictionary of Jewish PalestinianAramaic 131
Baruch A. Levine of the ByzantinePeriod (DJPA)Sokoloff lists reviews of the first edition of that volume, publishedin 1990, includingthe penetratingpiece by StephenKaufman.1 Another brief, largely descriptivereview of DJPA by Siam Bhayro has just appeared.2 Sokoloff's two dictionariesare part and parcel of the currentsurge of new compendia, a developmentdriven by computertechnology, which now makes it possible to process the vast, requisite data in less than a full lifetime! In this regard, Bar Ilan University deserves much credit for its pioneeringefforts in computerizingarchivesof Judaica,most notablythe responsaliterature;andthese technical facilities were of great help to Sokoloff, as well. It is also importantto recognize that behind Michael Sokoloff standgenerationsof scholars who pored over manuscripts,discovered buried epigraphy and edited their finds, and advanced our understandingof linguistic phenomena.Theirefforts enabledMichael Sokoloff to compile dictionariesbased on the sound readingspreservedin talmudic and othermanuscriptsratherthan on the often corruptreadingsof the printed editions that had been utilized in previous dictionaries.New discoveries expanded the lexicographicalcorpusbeyond its earlierlimits, andresearchin Aramaicdialectology clarified long-standing problems in Aramaic lexicography.Because both of the dictionariesunderreview follow the same methodology,are the work of the same scholar, and cover relatedAramaic dialects and textual collections, they will be reviewedjointly. THE EXPANDING CORPUS AND DIALECTAL INTEGRITY
In his respectiveintroductions,Michael Sokoloff sets forth his purposeand methodology against the backgroundof extant dictionaries,the best of which is Jacob Levy's four-volume dictionary, W6rterbuchiiber die Talmudimund Midraschim, first published in 1875, with a second edition published in 1924 and reprintedin 1963. (Levy also contributeda principallytargumicdictionaryentitled Chaldaisches W6rterbuchtiber die Targumimund einer grosser Teildes rabbinischenSchriftthums[2 vols., Leipzig, 1867].) Levy's talmudicdictionarycontains both Hebrew and Aramaic entries, so that the same root, if common to Hebrew andAramaic,will be listed twice, once as Hebrewand once as Aramaic. As for the Aramaicentries,themselves:they are undifferentiatedby dialect, as between Palestinianand Babylonian.One can be guided only by the textual sources that are cited. Sokoloff often refers to the well-known dictionaryby MarcusJastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim,the TalmudBabli and Yerushalmiand the MidrashicLiterature(New York,1903). Levy's dictionarieswere nevertranslated into English, whereasJastrow'sdictionarywas widely used in NorthAmerica and elsewhere. The basis for inclusion in Levy's talmudic dictionarywas textual, namely, the attestationof a lexeme in the literarysources.This is not to say thatLevy failed to register linguistic informationpertainingto the textual entries. In fact, he did 1. Journal of the American Oriental Society (1994): 239-48. 2. Journal of Biblical Literature 123 (2004): 382-85.
132
Review Essay very well at this, providingsuggestedcognatesin Syriac,Biblical Hebrew,Arabic, and of course listed loanwordsfrom Greek and Persian.It is just that by purpose, and within the limits of criticalprogressin the mid-nineteenthcentury,his corpus of referenceconsisted entirelyof the traditionaltextualsources. Indeed,the virtue of his dictionaryis that it is textuallycomplete. The two present dictionaries are language-dialectbased. Two dialects of Aramaichave been defined, JewishPalestinianAramaic(JPA), andJewish Babylonian Aramaic (JBA), on an ethno-linguisticbasis. This is to say that JPAis the Aramaicdialect of the Jews of Palestine duringcertainperiods, which differed in identifiable respects from the Aramaic dialect employed, for example, by Christians of the same periods who were living in the same or nearbyareas. Similarly, JBA is the dialect of Aramaic employed by Jews in Mesopotamiaduringcertain periods. We can identify additionaldialects, in both Palestine and Mesopotamia, for example, in SamaritanAramaic, Nabatean Aramaic, Syriac, and Mandaic. Such demarcationsare not only real in linguistic terms, but also reflect the realities of group existence in the Near East of late antiquity.Religious and ethnic communities lived closely together,creatinga social construct;they were bound by intersectingreligious, economic, and historical factors, all of which impacted the distinctiveness of their respective languages to the dialectal level. Furthermore, their various canonical literaturesexhibited distinctive features.There are, of course, elements that the various dialects have in common, and much can be learned from the overlappingof dialects. There was also interactionamong the largercommunitiesthemselves, and considerableculturalborrowing.In broader perspective,all communitieswho spoke and/or wrote Aramaic sharedaspects of common culture.Often, dialects formed as a result of political and demographic changes, with sub-groupsbranchingoff from the parent community and going their separateways. Adopting a dialectal approachrequiresthe lexicographer,in this case, the lexicographerof Aramaic,to include in the corpusof sourcesall writtenmaterials emanatingfromthe designatedgroups,withinthe specified periods,whatevertheir status in canonical terms or their genres. Sokoloff carefully lists his sources for both dictionaries,many of which are of recentdiscovery,being the resultof archeological excavationand archivalresearch.The provenanceof a given noncanonical source, as to whetherit is Jewish or not, can usually be establishedon the basis of reliable criteria.In lexicographicalterms, the value of a verb, or term of reference occurringin a noncanonicaltext for our comprehensionof a talmudic verb or term, may be considerable.Henceforth,our perceptionof talmudic language will change from what it was, because we can now view a word or phrase in its ethno-linguisticcontext and often in its quotidianusage. The extra-talmudicsources that Sokoloff cites for Jewish PalestinianAramaic arefromthe Byzantineperiodin Palestine,which he dates fromthe thirdcenturyCE untilthe Arabconquestin the seventhcenturyCE. He does not stop at that point, however,but goes on to include sources fromthe Geonic, post-talmudicperiod. Sokoloff has utilized the sixteenth-centuryVenice manuscriptof the PalestinianTalmudand otherpartialmanuscripts,and has cited manuscriptsof similar
133
Baruch A. Levine authenticity for midrashic and targumictexts. Sokoloff has included all of the Palestinianmidrashimof the period,and Palestiniantargumictexts, includingthe TargumNeophyti(TN), which is of recentpublication.3 He also cites Geonic halakhic literature,inscriptions(including amulets), ketubot(Jewish marriagecontracts),papyrifrom Egypt, evidence from the Tiberian masorah,and even Aramaicliturgicalpoetry.The dictionaryrepresents,for the first time, an impressive exercise in dialectal completeness, especially in its inclusion of Geonic literature,which is a rich source of Aramaic. The sourcesthatSokoloff cites for the DictionaryofJewish BabylonianAramaic of the Talmudicand Geonic Periods (DJBA) are equally authentic.In addition to the BabylonianTalmud,cited from preferredmanuscriptsof the various tractates,the dictionaryincludes dataprovidedby the more extensive Geonic literatureof Babylonia,which is of several genres: responsa,legal compendia,formularies and documents, historical and lexical texts, and liturgy. Sokoloff also countedamonghis sourcesthe exegeticalwritingsofAnan ben David(ca. 800 CE), the founderof a precursorof the Karaitesect. Also included are some Masoretic texts. Of great significance are the hundredsof Aramaicmagical texts, most inscribed on the insides of bowls (known as "magicalbowls"), from Iraqand Iran, datingfrom the fifth to the eighth centuriesCE. Therearemany more where these came from,yet to be published.Not only Jews utilized such bowls, but also Christians and Mandaeans,using theirrespectivedialects of Aramaic.It is usually possible to identify Jewish provenance,althoughargumenton this issue continues to occupy specialists in the field. The assemblingof a dialectalcorpusfor bothJPAandJBA is a greatachievement, in itself. Michael Sokoloff's two dictionariesareunprecedentedin kind,and introducea new model of lexicographyapplicableto two majordialectsof ancientto-early MedievalAramaic.If it is a propergoal of the humanitiesin higher education to assurethat every Semitistbe knowledgeablein the languagesof the Talmud, and that every Talmudistqualify as a Semitist, then Michael Sokoloff has made the attainmentof these goals possible for more and more scholars. METHODOLOGY
AND MEANING
Ultimately,a dictionaryis only as good as the meanings ("glosses") it provides. A corollaryto determiningthe meaning of a given lexeme is the sequence in which multiple meanings are listed. Sequencing is the usual way of indicating the relativeroles of such meanings,lendingspecial importanceto the meaninglisted first. In the case of the presentdictionaries,which provideEnglish translations of Aramaiclexemes, determinationsof meaning and sequence requirenot only a thoroughknowledge of the Aramaicdialects themselves, but also of the English languageandits usage.The lexicographeris, afterall, a translatoras well, andmust find the most felicitous rendering.Greateffort is requiredto resolve the inevitable tensionbetween fidelity to the originallanguageand comprehensibilityin the language of translation. 3. TheNeophytiTargumof the Pentateuch,ed. A. Diez-Macho(Madrid-Barcelona,1968-1978) (correctedfrom a photographof the HebrewUniversity).
134
Review Essay Every lexicographerhas an approachto the phenomenonof meaning,itself, even if this approachis not articulated.One who operates with the concept of Grundbedeutung"basemeaning"will registerdifferentmeaningsto startwith, and will undoubtedlydevelop a differentsequence for listing the meanings than one who has less interestin etymology than in contextual,or functionalconnotation. In the lattercase, sequence might be determinedon the basis of the frequency,or distributionof one meaningover another.Therearefurthertranslationissues: How far can one stretchthe semanticfield of a given lexeme? How prevalentis polysemy, and how frequentare homonyms? The advantageof a base-meaningapproachis thatit can lead to a bettersense of the etymology and semantics of the original language, as to how lexemes extend their meanings within a given language.This is especially true of agglutinative languages,like the Semitic languages,which are based overallon a relatively small numberof roots, whose meaningsare modulated,in turn,by morphological and phonetic alternations.One who can trace a given form back to its root, and who knows the patternsof change affecting it, is on the roadto discerningmeaning in all of its diversity.The disadvantageof the etymological approachis that it may not do justice to functionalmeaning in immediatecontext, which is what the user of the dictionaryis seeking.Withacumen,a way can be foundto balancethese competinginterests. Regardingthe "lemma,"or the given form in the entry,Sokoloff has chosen "themost basic form of the lexeme, e.g. the triradicalroot of a verbor the absolute state of a noun"(DJPA6: in DJBA 22-23, "an emphaticform of a noun."[Actually, Sokoloff often lists absolute noun forms in DJBA, as well]). Regarding "gloss,"here, the English translationof the lexeme, Sokoloff states:"The English gloss is intendedto convey a general meaning for the lexeme, whereas its more specific nuances are detailed in the lexical section"(DJPA6). In DJBA 23 this is merely reformulated:"TheEnglish gloss given at the beginningof the entry is intended to give a general idea of the meaning of the lexeme, while more exact nuances are given in detail in the semanticsection."In otherwords, Sokoloff is more attunedto etymology in his presentationof the Aramaic lemma, which provides "the most basic form,"thanhe is with respectto the English gloss, where he first lists "a generalmeaning"or "a general idea of the meaning."As will become evident in the discussion to follow, it is my sense that Sokoloff's policy on meaning can potentiallydetractfromboth the precision and the utility of the two dictionaries. It might be preferableto list the most basic meaning first. Anotherfactoraffectingthe determinationof meaningis the lexicographer's view of the interrelatednessof the Semitic languagesand the significance of cognates.A corollaryto this is the presumedrelationshipof dialects andphases within Aramaic.Sokoloff conformsto the currenttrendawayfrom emphasison "common Semitic" derivations,and he clearly seeks to identify the most applicable usage within the specific dialect coveredby each of the presentdictionaries.This is as it shouldbe, but if he were to weigh alternativemeaningssolely within a given dialect, or even within Aramaicas a whole, withoutreferenceto the largerlinguistic environment,such a policy would shut out relevantevidence. Now, Sokoloff consistentlyprovides comparativereferencesto other dialects of Aramaic, 135
BaruchA. Levine and selectively does the same for Hebrew,especially the contemporaryMiddleHebrew.On occasion he cites Akkadianand othercognates,as well. And yet, it is my sense that at times he fails to factor in relevantcomparativeevidence that would be useful in determiningthe contextualmeaning. Decisions regardingwhich informationshould be presentedin a given enand which need not be, involve both synchronicand diachronicfactors.A dictry, tionary,unless it is intended to be an historical dictionary,is synchronic in its thrust.Its primaryobjective is to explain the words of a languageor dialect in use duringthe designatedperiod. In the process it is often useful, however,to provide data from earlierperiods so as to be clear as to how a given meaning developed. In this respect, as well, Sokoloff might have been more inclusive. In evaluatingthe present dictionaries,so vast in their content, it would be best to take up the issues just discussed by citing specific examples that illustrate them. Here are a few: FormatandApparatus Formatis all-importantin presentingdata,because it determineswhathits the eye of the readermost directly.As an example,the recentDictionaryof theNorth- West Semitic Inscriptions,by J. Hoftijzer and K. Jongeling (2 vols. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1995) is comprehensivein its coverage and masterfulin its lexicographicaldeterminations. It is a boon to scholarship,reliably directingthe researcherto diffuse sources.Yet,its formatis so cumbersomethatat times it comes close to obscuring the glosses themselves in a mangledthicketof profuseabbreviations,fragmentary citations,and bibliographicaldata! In this respect, Sokoloff has done an excellent job of standardizingsigla, of using bold-face type and other helpful formatting mechanisms,and of organizingthe data comprehensibly.In his introductions,he clearlyexplainsthe scope of the lexicographicdatahe providesin each entry.There is an immense variety of collateralinformationcrammedinto small spaces without impedingreadercomprehension. Thereis one improvementin formatthatI would have liked to see: an initial registerof all attestedmeanings, listed accordingto their occurrencein the several stems. Let'slook at a sampleentry:DJPA477: vb. to sanctify, betroth, dedww•p icate. These glosses are followed by the lexical section, which lists all of the attested forms derivativeof this verbalroot. Only then do we find all of the glosses registeredby stems. SomewhatalteringSokoloff's translationsin form,thoughnot in substance,I would rearrangethe opening section as follows in JPA)Pa. 1. to sanctify,consecrate.2. to sanctify trvj,vb. Pe. (unattested the hands and feet (beforea sacredact).3. to proclaimthe new (=wash) moonas sacred.4. to betrotha woman.Af. to dedicate.Itpa.1. to be sanctified.2. to sanctifyone'sself by washingthe handsand feet (beforea sacredact).3. to be proclaimedas sacred(saidof thenewmoon). This rearrangementprovidesan immediateoverview of the full role of the verb in JPA.A similarrevisionof formatwould applyto the same verbin JBA (DJBA987136
Review Essay 988). The resultingformatwould resemblethe system employedin TheAssyrian Dictionary of the Universityof Chicago, which I have always found helpful when searchingfor derivativemeanings. As the matterstands, one reading an entry in either of the present dictionariesis not immediatelyinformedas to which stems attesteach of the given meanings. Translationand Sequence We will examinea sampleentryin which accuratetranslationandpropersequence constitutethe primaryissues: DJPA138-139: vb. to take, lead, move.[Completelist of meaningsas n1a, givenin DJPA:Pa.to lead,guide.Itpe.to be taken.Itpa.1. to move,travel. 2. to be guided.] Critique:The case for registering"totake"as the first meaningis, presumably,that Aramaic~ifrtranslatesHebrewnwp5 in TN, which is a majorsourcefor defining usof the in verb JPA. This age renderingis not consistent,however,because elsei•1r whereTN rendersHebrewnphby theAramaicverbmm3, whose primarymeaningis, indeed,"to take."An examinationof the citationsshows thatTN consistentlyemin the Pe'al and Itpe'el stems in cases where BH nip5means "to ploys Aramaic take out, away;1•ia to bring"in context,but where BH nrij means "to take hold,"it is more appropriatelyrenderedby nui. Contrastthe following in TN: (a) Gen 24:7: "YHWH,the Godof heaven,who led me out / took me out from(-n,an*p)the household of my father."TN: -1m%i'1.Here, as in most of the cited instances,the BH syntax is modulatedby prepositions,such as In "from,"or %x"to."In some instances, motionmaybe signified by the locativeaccusative.(b) Gen 43:15: "Andthe double portionof silver they took (innp/TN: ui.2) in theirhand,togetherwith Benjamin" (DJPA352-353). In this case, BH ntp indeedmeans "to take in one's hand."Such sensitivityto nuancein TN accordssurprisinglywell with Englishusage, where"to take,"by itself, morepreciselymeans "tohold, seize, take to one's self." The base-meaningof Aramaic is "to lead,"hence: "to bring forth, lead "1"r out, conduct,take out, away"and so forth.The core image is that of shepherding, of tending flocks-an image that is translocatedto the human sphere. In fact, Sokoloff lists "to lead"as the first meaningof the Pac"elof JPA 1:2 (= dabbir).He cites a PalestinianTargumfragmenton Gen 48:15, with reads (in my translation): TN:[rCmq]u pm'ri i inl "TheGodwhohasbeenshepherding/tending me frommybirth" TN:"whohasguidedme sincemyyouth." One of Sokoloff's citations for Itpa"al (perhaps Itpe'el), meaning 1 "to move, travel" furtherillustratesthe pastoralmatrixof the verb 1-'r. TN on Exod 12:42. presentsa brief excursuson the Exodus theme, taking its cue from the reference to large flocks and herds earlieron in the biblical passage (Exod 12:38). Exod 12:41-42 read in part: 137
Baruch A. Levine All of the ranksof YHWH( nrl x) departedfromthe Landof Egypt. nr•n~ Thatwas forYHWHa nightof vigil themoutfromthe to (n,'rw f) bring Landof Egypt. Here is how TN describesthe scene:
Sokoloff'stranslation:"Thisonewillmoveattheheadof thesheep,andthat one will moveat the headof the sheep,andhis memarwill movebetween them." Proposedtranslation:"Onewill takethe leadat theheadof (someof) the flocks,andanotherwilltaketheleadattheheadof (someof) theflocks,while his Logostakestheleadbetweenthem." The Itpae"al(possibly Itpe'el) -i-3r is assimilatedfrom [I would opt "i:rn'. in immefor the Itpa"al,which would yield an iterativesense that is appropriate diate context.]A vigilant God, identified as the memar"theWord,Logos" (DJPA 305), leads the flocks from his forwardposition between them. In JBA, usage of the verb -m-7is less linked to translationsof Scripture,and consequentlyyields more nuances. One who consults DJBA 312-313 will note that Sokoloff lists for the verb citno. a to "1-T meaning apply (meaning 4), which, ing MorrisJastrow,he regardsas a calque of MHarm.As realizedlong ago, an aspectual change occurredin usage of Hebrewan-. In BH, verbal forms are transitive "to lead, drive, conduct"whereas in MH the force is stative/reflexive:"to conduct one's self, to behave."In fact, one could combine Sokoloff's meaning number2 to act with his meaning number4 to apply. Thus, the citation from B. cEruvin45a: u~KiYn 'Y7x nn i1n; "Go out and see how the people conduct (themselves)/behave." It is entirelypossible, however,thatthe above analysishas it in reverse!The stative/reflexivemeaning "to behave, conduct one's self' in MH may, itself, representa reflex of Aramaicana"tobehave,conductone's self,"an aspectualchange likewise expressedin the noun [x]an-n"custom,practice"(DJPA317; DJBA68586), most likely original to Aramaic. If so, Aramaicana (DJPA342; DJBA 731afterall. In any event, thereis a semanticre32) may not be denominativeofm-nan, lationship,perhapseven an equivalencebetweenAramaic"ixiandHebrewana,and this, in additionto all else, arguesfor a first meaning:"to lead,take out"in the PeCalstem. It may be relevantto note thatTargumOnkelos regularlyrendersBH -73 by Aramaic-•-r. Finally,Aramaicand West-Semitic[x]••'•i "desert"(DJPA291; DJBA642) is, etymologicallyspeaking,the place where flocks are "led,driven"x to graze, as we would gatherfrom Exod 3:1b: -rininrn inxK xn-rnrnu , "He drove the flocks into the steppe."On this basis, the Pac"elof extendsthe base-mean"•m3 ing, yielding the sense: "to guide, direct." In summary,the verb "to take,"if not modulatedsyntactically-for example "totakeout, away"-clashes with properEnglishusage andalso skews the precise importof the translationsof BH np' in TN, and othersources.The first gloss 138
Review Essay of Aramaic should be the English verb "to lead," and the translationsof all 1•1r forms of this verb can, and should be formulatedso as to reflect this base-meaning, which was undoubtedlyunderstoodby ancientwritersof Aramaic. Polysemyversus Homonymy Very often, the issue in the translatingprocess is one of semantictheory:Polysemy finds a multiplicity of meanings in a single root, whereas homonymy acknowledges the presence of separateroots within a given languagewith different meanings, which are orthographicallyidentical ("homographs")or phonetically identical ("homophones"),or both. Judgmentsin this regardare unavoidablysubjective. It is my sense that Sokoloff does well on polysemy; he doesn't usually strain the semantic range. I have, however, found numerousinstances where he may have assumedhomonymsunnecessarily,andhas, as a result,generatedtwo or more entrieswhere only one was called for.This tendencyon his part is undoubtedly relatedto his preferencefor contextualover etymologicalmeanings.The root may serve as an examplewhere polysemy is more likely thanhomonymy,pace uaa Sokoloff: a) DJBA729-730: 1#va3.vb.to touch,dealwithsomething.2#.xa vb.to be afflictedwith leprosy.DJBA747:mra,x~mn.m.a sore. b) DJPA341: = n.m.plague;va vb.to touch,strike. Critique: Therewas a widespreadbelief in Near Easternantiquitythatdisease, injuries to the body, plagues, and other misfortunes resulted from the "touch"or "strike"of a deity.This notion is reflectedin the narrativeof Jacob'sbout with the angel of YHWH, where we read that the angel "touched,struck"(-n van) Jacob's hip socket, with the result thatJacob was incapacitated(Genesis 32:26). Most interesting is the fact that the Akkadianverb lapdtu "to touch" also means "to afflict," with the derivednouns, lipittu and liptu connoting"disease."4Hebrewand AramaicYni would seem to exhibitthe same semanticfield as Akkadianlapdtu.If so, Sokoloff's JBA 2# ma"to be afflicted"would derive from the same root as 1# vn "to touch."Furthermore,with regardto Sokoloff's 2# =n, it is more likely attested only in one stem, contraryto the way it is registeredin DJBA, as occurring in two stems. Thus, we have an Itpe'el or Itpa"alparticiple, inima (assimilated from ) "is afflicted,"and an Itpe'el or Itpa"calperfect, ma~K(assimilated from ,irvna "was afflicted."Actually,Sokoloff notes that the verbal stem in evuma~nx) idence is uncertain.The associationwith leprosy (if that'swhat it was) is contextual, resonatingwith BH nyri-a3 (Lev 13:2).The same would be true of the JBA noun xyla "sore,"which is simply a contextualconnotation(DJBA747). In view of the above analysis, I would subsume Sokoloff's JBA 1# v and his 2# vm under one entry,and would also reject the notion that the latteris denominativeof nominalKxa73"a sore,"which seems forced.This analysiswould yield the following rearrangements: 4. TheAssyrianDictionary of the Universityof Chicago L: 87, s.v. meaning 1; 199, 201-202,
s.v.meaning2.
139
BaruchA. Levine a) JBA:va vb. Pe. 1. to touch,2. to touchupon (a question),to deal with. Af. to bringinto contact.Itpe./Itpa.to be afflicted.n.m.xyin3sore. b) JPA:v.a . vb. Pe. 1. to touch,2. to strike;Af. to strike. mnn.m.plague, lit. the "touch"of God. A second case wherepolysemy is more likely thanhomonymyis the root'1.. According to Sokoloff, we have the following separateentriesin JPAand JBA: a) InJPA(DJPA412-413): 1.*v vb.to answer,respond.2. 'avvb.to be late. 3. ,13vb.to afflict. 4. ~ayvb.to be poor. b) InJBA(DJBA871-872): 1. aYvb.to respond,answer,2. vb.to becomepoor,3. '3yvb.to afflict, ,yi torture,delay. Critique: We know a great deal about the root ~~y(variants:;my and ay) from West-Semitic, including Old Aramaic and other Aramaic dialects, Moabite, Phoenician-Punic,BH and Ugaritic.Therearetwo undisputedhomonymousroots in the West-Semiticlanguages:(1) "to address,sing, respond,answer"(in the simple stem and its reflexes) and (2) "to be reducedto poverty,be poor"(in the simple stem and its reflexes); D-stem and its reflexes: "to subjugate(BH 'to rape'), oppress,reduceto poverty,afflict."Both roots areof wide usage, andattesta broad range of meanings. In comparativeperspective,thereis good reasonto conclude thatthe notions of "poverty"on the one handand"affliction,subjugation"on the otherderivefrom the same root, and yet Sokoloff separatesthem in both JPAand JBA. The notion of povertyand deprivationis a stativefunctionof the simple stem and its reflexes, whereas the Pa"el generates an active-transitiveaspect, conveying the notion of subjugation,of afflicting, or oppressingothers.This mutuallyexclusive distribution of aspects in the respectivestems is complementary,and is normalfor the semantic rangeof a single root. The meaning"tobe late" (Pe'al)and "todelay,postpone" (Pa"el) is another matter.Sokoloff lists the meaning"to delay"under#3 'i3 in DJBA,togetherwith "to afflict, torture,"whereas in DJPAhe lists the same meaning as a function of #2 %7v"to be late,"attestedin the Pecalstem and its reflexes, and separatelyfrom #3 '3i "to afflict,"attestedin the Pa"el. Confusingthe registrationis a relationship with the MH legal term 'pin m7iy "thepostponementof a verdict,"or "thedelaying of judgment"(Mishnah,cAbot5:8). Sokoloff apparentlydisassociatedthis set of meaningsfromthe noun nax, det. rna• time (DJPA412), where Sokoloff refersto MH n;n "periodof time." The fact is thatthe lexeme nvy, though indeed cognatewith Hebrew-nms,is much at home in Aramaicitself! In the Nahal Heverpapyrifrom Palestineof very the late first and early second centuries CE5 an unusualAramaic and Nabatean 5. Judean Desert Studies, III: The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave ofLet-
ters, ed. Y Yadin,J.C. Greenfield,A. Yardeni,B.A. Levine, (Jerusalem: Israel ExplorationSociety, 2002): III:6,95-96, 218.
140
Review Essay Aramaictermwas encountered:m nransy, also l-a7-y, literally"timesof water,"and functionally"assignedtimes of irrigation."A Hebrewterm, probablya calque of NabateanAramaic,namely,t~n inalu,is attestedin the Tosefta.6Now, the comas in Judean Desert Studies, III,7 a posited masculine ponent rmYand, suggested form *IY:,are the very elements encounteredin the Aramaicenclitic particlemlp as of now, now (DJPA266; DJBA594), femininenasa (cf. ImperialAramaic;Biblical Aramaic).I was not fully awareof all of these connectionsuntil the preparation of this review. I now proposethatthe JPA/JBAverb's~ is denominativeof niY "time"(masculinep1), andthatits meaningis: "to exceed the time, to be late;"Pa"el:"to postT fY,and relatedverbalforms, pone, delay."On this basis, the MH legal term ,'in would reflect the Aramaicmeaning,not vice versa. In any event, the meanings"to be late; to postpone"would be unrelatedto the root thatmeans "to be poor;to afflict, oppress." where several A more complex case is that of the Aramaicverbal root iar, entries come into play: 1) In JPA:a) DJPA 132: nm. linfcompletion.; vb. -iva. to complete, destroy. b) DJPA131: rinnadj.perfect,complete;nvrnadestruction.
2) In JBA: a) DJBA 290-292: "in vb. to finish, learn, decide; vb 1. Pe. intr. to be finished, completed. Af. to teach. b ) DJBA 289: irnn adj. complete. c) DJBA289:xnim'nm.one who has learnt.d) DJBA292:x•na,iiuxn nm. tradition, gemara, completion; , entirely, completely; xna 11 •lbn ns'xb
entirely,completely.
Critique: The issue here is whether (a) "to finish, complete" and (b) "to learn, study,"Af'el "to teach, train,"can be regardedas sharingthe same semanticfield, in which case they can all be derivedfrom a single root.The othergiven meanings can be reconciled.Thus, "to destroy,annihilate"is to bring to an end, "to decide" is to conclude, finalize. (As for the meaning"toripen,"it probablyexpressesa differentroot, a conditionedsound shift: lamed <>resh). Can we say, 'rl, assuming however,that "to learn, study"is "to complete"-a process? Does the Af'el "to teach"mean to bring someone to completion?How are we to accountfor the JBA which is the equivalent termxna "corpusof knowledge/interpretation/tradition," of Hebraic [x]Mrnn'"corpus of instruction,"likewise occurring in JBA (DJBA 1209-10), andeven once in JPA(DJPA583)? The only differencebetweenthe two terms is that Hebraic rnnEn,with tau-preformative, means "what has been taught,instruction"whereasAramaicx•am means "whathas been learned,knowledge."It would be forced to conclude thatthe term Kina means "thecompletion," namely,what was addedon to the Mishnah,or the oral tradition(pace Ben-Yehu-
6. Mo'ed 1:2; see Saul Lieberman, Tosefta ki-feshutah: A Comprehensive Commentary on the Tosefta (Hebrew), (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America): 5:1228-29. 7. Judean Desert Studies, III: The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave ofLetters, III:6.
141
Baruch A. Levine dah: 605-806, s.v. nljn),8 because such a meaning would not parallel Hebraic as we would expect it to do. -r1n•n, Complicatingthe problemis the fact thatthe meaning"to finish, complete" is well attested outside of Aramaic. BH attests the stative meaning "to be at an end"9and West-Semiticprovidesonly sparseevidence,'0 butAkkadiangamdru" is a frequentverb, realizedin many forms, and which sharesthe semanticrangeof Aramaicminto a remarkableextent.Aramaic is also cog"tofinish, "ina finished"complete" nate with Arabic kamala "to be complete, entire, (stative); II-form"to perfect,to make complete, to finish".12 It is less clear,however,thatArabicjamara "to put away,aside":II-form"to collect together,assemble, to knot, or plait the hair"" is cognate with the Aramaic and/or the Akkadianverb under discussion. In contrast,the notion of "learning,studying,"unless it can be connectedsemantically with the notion of "finishing, completing,"seems to be restrictedto JBA, and to infrequentattestationsin PalestinianHebrewsources of the talmudic period,andas such is listed in the CompleteDictionaryofAncientand ModernHebrew (Hebrew)'4as a separateentry.Sokoloff lists only two attestationswith this meaning in JPA,which are probablyJBA forms, after all. The case is very weak for classifying finite, and certainnominalforms of Aramaicina as denominatives of x-Ia, the corpus of traditionand law, as if to say that they mean "to learn the xma" (pace Levy, 1:343, and with Ben-Yehudah:805, s.v. c., and note 1, by N.H. Tur-Sinai).15 This derivationwould put us back whereinra, we started,unsureof whatthe term mna,itself, means. (Thereis one clear homonym,namely,the noun tmia [DJPA123], xmini~ [DJBA269] live coal, and similarforms in SA.16 Compare Akkadiangumaru ember in The Assyrian Dictionary of the Universityof ChicagoG:133, wherereferenceis madeto theAramaiccognates,andalso to Arabic jamratun"a live, or burningcoal.""7Also note MH "incense placed on "llnrf need not coals to fumigate"[Mishnah,Berakot6:6, etc.]. These lexemes concern us here.) 8. CompleteDictionary ofAncient and ModernHebrew (Hebrew),by E. Ben-Yehudah,Jerusalem: Rafael Hayim Hakohen, 1958 (reprintby ThomasYosseloff, New York, 1960): 605-806, s.v. 9. L. Kohler,W.Baumgartner,J.J.Stamm,HebraischesundaramaischesLexikonzumAltenTestament(Leiden:E.J.Brill, 1967-1995): 190. 10. Dictionaryof the North-WestSemiticInscriptions,by J. Hoftijzerand K. Jongeling(2 vols. Leiden:E.J.Brill,1995): 226-27. 11. TheAssyrianDictionary of the Universityof Chicago G: 24-32, and see derivedforms. 12. ManfredUllmann, ed., Wdrterbuchder klassischenarabischenSprache(Wedibaden:Otto Harrassowitz,1970): 358, and following. 13. AnArabic-EnglishLexicon, by E.W Lane (London:WilliamsandNorgate.ReprintBeirut: Librairiedu Liban, 1080): 452-54. 14. Complete Dictionary of Ancient and Modern Hebrew (Hebrew), by E. Ben-Yehudah (Jerusalem:Rafael Hayim Hakohen, 1958; reprintby ThomasYosseloff, New York,1960): 805. 15. JacobLevy, W6rterbuchiiberdie Talmudimund Midraschim,first publishedin 1875, second edition in 1924 (reprintedin 1963), I:343; and with the CompleteDictionary ofAncient and Modern Hebrew (Hebrew),by E. Ben-Yehudah,805, s.v. ima,c., and note 1, by N.H. Tur-Sinai. 16. A. Tal,A Dictionary ofSamaritanAramaic(Leiden: E.J.Brill, 2000): 151. 17. AnArabic-EnglishLexicon:453.
142
Review Essay Theremay possibly be a semanticbridge linking the two sets of meaningin the notion of "deciding,concluding,"but there is always the pervasive notion of "totality"in one set of meanings, whereasthis notion is not endemic to the other set. I confess thatI cannottracethe origin of the meaning"to study,learn."It may turnout to be a spinoff of 1# i~, after all, and not a genuine homonym.Perhaps furtherinvestigationwill clarifythis issue. Fornow, I would,in the interestof clarity, opt for two entries in DJBA, and classify the principalmeanings as follows, somewhatdifferentlyfrom Sokoloff: 1#*m.vb.Pe.1. intr.to be finished,completed.2. tr.to finish,complete,decide. Pa.to destroy,bringto an end. adj. complete.adv.nmb, nxKm "•nm entirely;x•m•"o to completion,entirely. 2# -n=vb.Pe.to be knowledgeable, to study,learn,interpret;derivea law to to Af. teach, hermeneutically. engenderan interpretation.Itpe.to be relearned.nm.xili a learnedperson.nm.xiw, xci• interpretation, ceived tradition,body of interpretation;As a propernoun:the corpus knownas the Gemara. CONCLUSION
The presentreview has hardlydonejustice to the vast scope of the two dictionariesproducedby Michael Sokoloff. My intentionwas to convey somethingof the historic significance of his contribution,which cannot be overestimated.By focusing on several cases in point, I sought to addresssome basic issues that face the lexicographerof an ancient language,one with a very long history and which embodies numerousdialects and phases. Second to Hebrew,Aramaic is the Semitic languagemost intimatelyassociated with Jewish traditionand culture,and it has been drawnupon extensively in the modernrevival of Hebrewas a spoken and writtenlanguage. In anotherdimension, the treasuresof the JewishAramaic dialects representif not the greatestthen surely one of the greatestrepositoriesof writtenAramaicin existence, a repositorythat is rapidlylosing its erstwhileesoteric image thanksto the persistentefforts of Michael Sokoloff. BaruchA. Levine New YorkUniversity New York,New York
143
Baruch A. Levine ABBREVIATIONS Af. Af6el, the parallelof Old Aramaic/ HebrewHaf'el/ Hif il BH Biblical Hebrew DJBA A Dictionary ofJewish BabylonianAramaic DJPA A Dictionary of Jewish PalestinianAramaic Itpa. Itpa"al, reflex of the Pa"el in Aramaic Itpe. Itpe'el, passive reflex of the simple stem in Aramaic JBA Jewish BabylonianAramaic JPA Jewish PalestinianAramaic MH Middle Hebrew Pa. Pa"cel,the AramaicD-stem Pe. Pe'al, the Aramaicsimple stem TB Talmud,Babylonian TN TargumNeophyti
144
Review: "Music Is the Pen of the Soul": Recent Works on Hasidic and Jewish Instrumental Klezmer Music Author(s): Joel E. Rubin Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 145-158 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131814 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:14 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 145-158
REVIEW ESSAY
"MUSIC IS THE PEN OF THE SOUL":1 RECENT WORKS ON HASIDICAND JEWISH INSTRUMENTALKLEZMERMUSIC
by
Joel E. Rubin Ellen Koskoff.Music in LubavitcherLife. Urbanaand Chicago:Universityof Illinois Press, 2000. xviii, 225 pp. YaakovMazor. The KlezmerTraditionin the Land of Israel: Transcriptionsand Commentaries.YuvalMusic Series 6. Jerusalem:The HebrewUniversity,The Jewish Music Research Centre,2000. 276 pp. (Hebrew and English; accompanying CD). MarkSlobin. Fiddler on the Move: Exploring the KlezmerWorld.AmericanMusicspheres. New York:Oxford University Press, 2000. 154 pp. (Accompanying
CD).
Henry Sapoznik.Klezmer!Jewish Musicfrom Old Worldto Our World.New York: SchirmerBooks. 1999, xviii, 340 pp. (AccompanyingCD). Despite the focus by the popularmedia on the revivalof Jewish instrumental klezmermusic duringthe past decades, surprisinglylittle of a scholarlynature has been written until recently about either the klezmertraditionor its revival. Since 1999 a relativelylarge numberof new book publicationsof both a scholarly anda popularnaturehaveappeared.Besides the fourvolumesunderreviewhere, they include books by Rita Ottens and Joel Rubin, Moshe Beregovski, Seth Rogovoy, MarkSlobin, Zinovij Stoljar,andYale Strom.2It is hoped thatthe publica1. R. SchneurZalmanof Lyady(1745 -1813). 2. Rita Ottens and Joel Rubin, Klezmer-Musik(Kassel/Munich: Birenreiter/dtv, 1999) [accompanying CD: Oytsres (Treasures):Klezmer Music 1908-1996 (Mainz: Wergo, 1999)]; Moshe Beregovski, Old Jewish Folk Music: The Collectionsand WritingsofMoshe Beregovski,trans.and ed. MarkSlobin (Syracuse,NY: SyracuseUniversityPress, 2000); Moshe Beregovski,Jewish Instrumental FolkMusic: The Collectionsand WritingsofMoshe Beregovski,trans,and ed. MarkSlobin, Robert Rothstein,and MichaelAlpert with annotationsby MichaelAlpert and forewordby Izaly Zemtsovsky (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2001); Seth Rogovoy, The Essential Klezmer:A Music Lover's Guide to Jewish Roots and Soul Music,from the Old Worldto the Jazz Age to the Downtown
145
Joel E. Rubin tion of these four works (and the otherrecent works not reviewedhere) will open a broaderdiscussionof the complex of issues surroundingklezmerandhasidicmusic and stimulatefurtherresearchin these areas. The publicationsdiscussedherespanseveralinterrelatedtopics, most prominently hasidic musical traditionsand klezmermusic. As the mostly hereditarysocioeconomic group of professional instrumentalistswithin Yiddish-speaking, EasternEuropeanJewry,klezmorimperformeda ritualand entertainmentfunction at weddings and othercelebratoryevents. In this capacitythey functioned,among otherthings, as mediatorsbetween the varioushasidic courts and between hasidic and non-hasidicJews. A numberof well-known klezmorimwere hasidim or had been raised in hasidic families, including the popularNew Yorkimmigrantclarinetists Naftule Brandwein(1884-1963) and Dave Tarras(1895-1989), whose music has been canonizedby the klezmerrevival.3Withinthe scope of this interaction, klezmermusic has been consideredby some to be a subset of hasidic music (i.e., comprising the instrumentalrepertoire associated primarily with the events surroundingthe traditionalwedding); others interprethasidic dance tunes (nigunim)as a subset of klezmermusic (i.e., as constitutinga portion of the total repertoireof klezmorim). Ellen Koskoff'sMusic in LubavitcherLife is the first monographin English dealing with hasidic musical traditions,and the first in any language to focus on music withina single Americancourt-that of the Lubavitcheror Chabadhasidim. It is based on field work carriedout intensively from 1973-1976 and on and off through 1995 in three Lubavitchercommunities in the United States: Crown Heights in Brooklyn, Pittsburgh,and St. Paul, althoughthe primaryfocus is on musical life in the group'sspiritualand administrativecenter in Crown Heights. Many readersinterestedin Jewish life may not realize how central a role music plays in Hasidism. In fact, one could argue that Hasidism cannot be understood withoutit. Building on previouswritingson hasidicmusic, in particularby Yaakov Mazor andAndre Hajdu,4Koskoff looks at the relationshipbetween Chabadphilosophy andits performancethroughmusic, as well as at societal changesthathave occurredin the United States duringthe past severaldecades and the Lubavitcher response to them. These include the "backto the roots"movement(as evidenced by the absorptionof non-hasidicreturneesor ba'alei teshuvah),the women'smoveAvant-Garde(Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 2000); Mark Slobin, ed., AmericanKlezmer:Its Roots and Offshoots(Berkeley/Los Angeles/London:Universityof CaliforniaPress, 2002); Zinovij Stoljar, AyiddisheDoyne:Jiidische Volksmusik in Osteuropa.LiederundMelodien,herausgegebenundergdnzt von I. Loberan,trans. ElisabethMartirosian-Mayr(Vienna: MandelbaumVerlag, 2000); Yale Strom, TheBook ofKlezmer: TheHistory,the Music, the Folklore(Chicago:A CappellaBooks, 2002). 3. See Joel E. Rubin,"TheArt of the Klezmer:Improvisationand Ornamentationin the Commercial Recordingsof New YorkClarinetistsNaftule Brandweinand Dave Tarras1922-1929" (Ph.D. thesis, City Universityof London, Departmentof Music, 2001) (Ann Arbor:Universityof Michigan, 2003). 4. Andr6HajduandYaakovMazor,"TheMusical Traditionof Hasidism,"in EncyclopediaJudaica (Jerusalem/NewYork:Keter/Macmillan,1971-72), 7:1421-32; AndrI HajduandYaakovMazor, Hassidic Tunesof Dancing & Rejoicing (New York:FolkwaysRecords/TheHebrewUniversityof Jerusalem,Jewish Music ResearchCentre,in collaborationwith The Jewish National and University Library,1976 [now SmithsonianFolkways]).
146
Review Essay ment, and the increaseduse of technology.At the same time, it is a work of what Koskoff terms "self-reflexive ethnography."Following the current trend in anthropological and ethnomusicological writing, she includes herself in the discourse, bringing in her own changing attitudesas a secular Jew and feminist towards OrthodoxJudaismand her process of personalgrowth. In this extremely well-organized study, Koskoff systematicallybuilds her case, moving from the general to the specific. It first sets the scene with a descriptionof afarbrengen (hasidic gathering)with the now-deceased Lubavitcher Rebbe MenachemMendel Schneersonand his followers in the early 1970s (chap. 1), followed by a short analyticalframework(chap. 2). Here, Koskoff places herself within the anthropologicaltradition of Anglo-American ethnomusicology foundedby Alan Merriamin the 1960s; at the same time she has been influenced by the more recentpostmodernistwritingsof the 1990s. Withinthe studies of Jewish musical traditions,she has also adoptedMark Slobin's work on the music of AmericanJewishimmigrantsas a model for the presentstudy,"becauseit attempts to integratemusical sound with social structureand religious ideology."She also aligns herself with recent studies (such as the work of William Shaffir and Janet Belcove-Shalin) concerned with the hasidic response to modernization,secularizationandassimilation.In addition,Koskoffdrawsuponcurrentstreamsof scholarly thoughton gender and performancetheory. Koskoff elaborateson the context of her study by reviewing first the history and philosophy of ChabadHasidism (chap. 3) and then surveying contemporarylife among the Lubavitcherhasidimin Brooklyn(chap. 4). Chapter5 looks at Lubavitcherconceptions of music and melody. In it, she introducesthe concepts of "music as process" (72-74) and "musical tikkun."By music as process, she means that Lubavitchersview music as "inherentlyneutral."It is through the process of performingthatthe individualis pulled towardthe divine soul or toward the animalsoul (both of which reside in every individual).Musical tikkunrefersto the four-stage transformationmade to melodies borrowed from outside of the Lubavitcheror hasidic sphere-the primaryform of Lubavitchermusical composition (77)-from the identificationof a "holy spark"hiddenwithin the melody to its release and returnto its proper(i.e., holy) place. Such melodies "hadto undergo a considerablespiritualtransformation.They hadto be removedfromtheirnonJewish performancecontexts, changed significantly, and reinterpretedwithin a Lubavitchercontext to take on their new form as nigun" (93). The chapterconcludes with an analysis of the Sefer Ha-Nigunim,the codification of core Lubavitcherrepertoirecompiled by Rabbi Samuel Zalmanoff.5 Chapter6 looks at musical structures,first in terms of traditionalEastern EuropeanJewish music in general ("Jewishmusical codes"), and then in the core Chabadnigun repertoire,focusing in particularon the ten pieces attributedto R. SchneurZalman(incorrectlycited by Koskoff as comprisingthirteenpieces). It is here that Koskoff's book is least convincing. It does not sufficiently differentiate between the musical characteristicsof Eastern EuropeanJewish music, hasidic music as a subsetthereof,and Lubavitchermusic as one streamwithin hasidicmu5. SamuelZalmanoff,SeferHa-Nigunim(New York:MerkosL'inyoneiChinuch, 1948-1965).
147
Joel E. Rubin sic. This is likely due to the fact thatthere have been too few detailedarea studies of EasternEuropeanJewish musical traditionsup until now with which Lubavitcherstyle could be comparedandcontrasted,andbecauseLubavitchermusic was first documentedin printonly in 1948 and in recordedform in 1960-some 150 years after the creationof the style and a numberof its melodies. Two important points that tie Lubavitchermusical structuresto Chabadphilosophy are brought out: (i) that the numberfour (an importantnumber in many aspects of Chabad thought)appearsto play an importantrole at the level of the length and numberof individualmusical phrasesand sections of compositions;and (ii) thatmany of the nigunimfollow a kind of "risingpattern"in which "each stanzaeither extends its range upwardor is placed at a higher range,"which correspondsto the "upward trajectory of the process of devekut and resonates with the core Lubavitcher metaphorof movementfromthe heart... to the head"(93). Furthermore,Koskoff establishes that the vocables used in textless nigunim, which have often been assumedto consist of "nonsense"syllables, are"phonemicallyconsistentwith Hebrew,Russian, andYiddish, the languages spoken by a majorityof EasternEuropean hasidim," and, further, that the vocables "carry much meaning for Lubavitchers"and "arebelieved to symbolize the four lettersof God's name." Chapters7-10 move on to actualcase studies of music as it is performedin contemporaryLubavitcherlife and how the performanceof music serves in the performanceof various aspects of Lubavitcheridentity.Chapter7 examines music-making at the farbrengens and on Lubavitcherrecordings ("Performingthe Past in Music"), emphasizingthe core Lubavitcherbelief that "truespiritualityis irrevocablylinked to the past" (105). Chapter8 deals with gender issues in contemporaryLubavitcherlife, containinga detailed accountand analysis of the various interpretationsof the dictumkol 'isha cervah("awoman'svoice is a sexual incitement"). One response to the prohibition of males' hearing the singing of women has been the creationof occasions, such as women'sfarbrengens(chap. 9) and conventions (chap. 10), during which women perform music with and for women only. Chapter9 looks at "performinglineage in music,"dealing with the spiritualhierarchyin the Lubavitchercommunityfrom the standpointof the relationshipto music-makingof the differentgroups,fromthe Rebbethroughthe people born into the Lubavitchercommunityon down to the variouslevels of ba'alei teshuvah.Chapter10 examines differing musical responses to modernitywithin the Lubavitchercommunity. One of the great strengthsof this book is that it managesto show the many internaltensions and differentlayerswithin Lubavitchersociety and music-making withouteverlosing sight of the core conceptsandthe core music thattie Lubavitcher society together.These are "a basic conceptualizationof music, a stablehierarchyof musical genres, a strictadherenceto correctperformancecontexts and behaviors,and a solid bedrockof religious and social structureson which to hang the flexible and always changingmusical choices made in real life" (194). Like any focused study,Music in LubavitcherLife raises perhapsas many questionsas it answers.The readermight wantto know,for example,whatthe role of music is in other importantLubavitchercontexts such as in the Chabadliturgy at weddingsand holidays.Koskoff also does not look at the interaction,musical or 148
Review Essay otherwise,of Chabadwith otherhasidicgroups.It is not clear-other thanthe core of the songs attributedto the five LubavitcherRebbes andtheircourtmusicianswhat exactly differentiatesChabad music from other hasidic music. One final point, andthis was apparentlythe publisher'sdecision: this majorworkcould have been greatly enhancedby the inclusion of an accompanyingcompact disc, especially since much of the music Koskoff discusses is based on her own field recordings or is not widely availablecommercially.Music in LubavitcherLife is a profoundworkthatshouldbe requiredreadingfor anyoneinterestednot only in Judaic studies,but also in ethnomusicology,anthropology,andAmericanstudies,as well. YaakovMazor'sshort monographTheKlezmerTraditionin the Land of Israel is the result of thirtyyears of researchand fieldwork on hasidic musical traditions in Israel. It, too, is the first monographon its subject, and is additionally the only one of the four publicationsunderreview to deal with the interrelationship between hasidic and klezmermusic. Mazor'sapproachtends to be more historicallyandmusicologicallyorientedthanKoskoff's.The adoptionof a more selfreflexive approachcould have benefited the presentwork, as Mazorwas raised as a hasid and knows the hasidic world intimatelyfrom the inside. TheKlezmerTradition in the Land of Israel is organizedthematically,beginning with shorthistories of the klezmertraditionin Jerusalemand Galilee, and in Jaffa and the southern moshavot.The informationis basedprimarilyupon oralhistoriesconductedby Mazorand others,as well as accountsfromthe memoirliterature.As Mazorpoints out, knowledge of the Israeli klezmertraditionis "highlyfragmentary"(15)-indeed, beyond two musical generations,not much is known about it. The discussion beginning in Chapter2 ("HistoricalBackground")reveals a numberof differencesbetween the klezmertraditionas it developed in Israel and the more familiartraditionsin EasternEuropeand North America.6It may therefore make sense to consider the klezmertraditionsas they developed in Eastern Europe,North America, and the Land of Israel from the mid- to late-nineteenth century and later to be relatedtraditions,which had points of contact but which also developedto a large extent separatelyfrom one another. For example, the klezmertraditionas it evolved in EasternEuropeand as it continuedin the United States was a professionaltradition;in Israel,there are no accounts of fully professionalmusicians priorto the 1990s. This appearsto have been the result of poor economic conditions as well as the Ashkenazicrabbinical ban on instrumentalmusic in Jerusalem,which has been in effect since the 1860s (18-19). The instrumentationof the ensembles in the Land of Israel developed along differentlines than Europe or America. While the turn-of-the-centuryensembles in Europe consisted of seven to twenty instrumentalistsusing various 6. For a discussion of the developmentof klezmer music in Eastern Europe and the United States,see: JoachimStutschewsky,Ha-Klezmorim:Toldotehem,'orakh-hayehem, ve-yezirotehem(Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1959); James B. Loeffler, A Gilgul fun a Nigun: Jewish Musicians in New York
1881-1945 (HarvardJudaicaCollection Student Research PapersNo. 3) (Cambridge,MA: Harvard College Library,1997); Ottens and Rubin, KlezmerMusik, 67-284; and Beregovski,Jewish InstrumentalFolk Music, among others.
149
Joel E. Rubin string,woodwind,brass, and percussioninstruments,the typical Israeliensemble comprisedonly two to threeinstruments,usually clarinetandpercussion,less frequentlywith the additionof trumpetor violin. In EasternEurope,it was traditional for klezmorimto accompanynumerousritualsand celebrationsassociatedwith the Jewish wedding with instrumentalmusic, from the ceremonialsigning of the tnoim(engagementcontract),to escortingthe brideto the mikvahon the eve of the wedding, to nocturnalprocessions through the streets after the various festive meals. In Israel,the performanceof instrumentalmusic at such occasions continued into the 1920s, whereas, in the United States, the role of klezmer music appearsto havebeen largelylimitedto performancesin the weddinghall itself on the day of the wedding ceremony from the very beginning of immigrationin the late 1800s. In additionto continuingto accompanythe same ritualsas had been done in Europe,new contexts arose in Israelfor the performanceof klezmermusic, in particularthe annualhillulot (folk festivals) of Lag Ba-Omerand the 7th of Adarboth of which involve pilgrimagesto MountMeron,near Safed. In the Landof Israel, klezmorimwere (and still are) "deeplyobservantpeople who obeyed the rabbis without question"(20), and klezmermusic was strictlythe provenienceof the people known today as haredim.The Israeli repertoirecomprisedprimarilywhat Mazor terms "Romanian-Wallachianmelodies" or Eastern European klezmer tunes (22), instrumentalversions of Yiddishsongs, Turkishtunes fromthe Turkish army orchestra,and Arab-derivedtunes. The lattertwo parts of the Israeli repertoire were completely unknownto both EuropeanandAmericanklezmorim. Perhapsthe most significant difference between the klezmertraditionas it developedin the Landof Israeland its Americanvariantis thatthe Israelitradition is today almost exclusively the productof traditionalJudaism.Otherthan a few commercial events such as the annual InternationalKlezmer Festival in Safed, klezmermusic simply does not exist outside of haredisociety and,moreperipherally,the NationalReligious movement.InAmerica,on the otherhand,klezmermusic enjoyed a brief period of more secular development,especially between approximately1910-1950. The second partof Mazor'swork (chaps. 3 and4) consists of case studies of the two most influentialIsraeliclarinetistsof the past seventy years:AbrahamSegal (1908-1993) and his protege, Moshe "Musa"Berlin (b. 1938), who served a diverse clientele of hasidim,mitnagedim,and membersof the National Religious movement.These studies are based largely upon interviewswith Berlin and with Segal's surviving relatives. While the Europeanklezmorimconsisted almost entirely of families of musicians, in which the traditionwas handeddown from father to son over the course of at least several generations,the evidence that Segal and the othermusicians stemmedfrom such musical dynastiesis scant. Berlin, at least, did not. They learnedratherfrom diverse sources:in the early years directly frommusiciansandparticipantsat weddingsandothercelebrations,andlaterfrom radio and recordings,as well. In Europe,America, and Israel, many talentedand musically literate klezmorimand especially their children began to leave the klezmermilieu and enterthe musical mainstream,either in the classical or entertainmentmusic fields, or sometimes both. Yet a limited numberof members of 150
Review Essay klezmerfamilies emigratedto Israel duringthe interwaryears or as survivorsof the Shoah and continuedto performklezmer music there in the postwarperiod. Because of the sacred-secularsplit in postwarIsraeli society, their more "worldly" form of klezmermusic, which includedpopularPolishand Russiantangos,was largely not accepted by haredi society, and non-haredisociety was not interested in klezmermusicianswith their-from a Zionist perspective-"negative 'Diaspora' image" (33). It is unfortunatethat these musicians have not been included in the presentstudy. The remainingchaptersdeal with musical-technicalaspects,includingrepertoire (chap.5), "genres"(chap.6), "musicalmorphology"(chap.7), "klezmorimas creativemusicians"(chap. 8), and the meticulousannotationof the transcriptions of the 73 pieces includedfromthe Israeliklezmerrepertoire.Again, the text brings out importantdistinctionsbetween the Israeliand the othertwo main klezmertraditions. It appears, for example, that unlike their Europeanand American colleagues, who were known for being both composers and performers,Israeli klezmorimdid not and do not compose new pieces. They are known,rather,for being compilersandarrangersof existing melodies.This is not to say thatthe Israeliklezmorimarenot creativemusicians.One interestingprocessbroughtout by Mazoris the adaptationof traditionalmelodies from EasternEuropeto new functionsin Israel. For example, so-called gas nigunim(street processionals),which in Europe had servedto accompanyimportantweddinggueststhroughthe streets,wereadopted for the processionwith the Torahscroll as partof the Lag Ba-Omerfestival. Mazor'smonographis a substantialcontributionto the literatureon klezmer music and fills importantgaps in our knowledge of how this traditiondeveloped and continuesto develop in Israel. It serves two main functions:it providesa history of klezmermusic in pre-IsraeliPalestinein the periodpriorto the mid-1930s, and it offers case studies of the two most prominentIsraeli klezmorimof recent memory.Whatit does not do is look at the changes takingplace in Israeliklezmer music today.This is partlybecause the work was ten years in the making. Musa Berlin is today 67 years old, and there are two or three generationsof hasidic instrumentalistswho began their careers after he did and have played or are today playing importantroles in haredi musical life.' It would have been fascinatingto include these younger generationsof musicians into the study, but perhapsthat would have been beyond the scope of the presentwork. In addition,it would have been very interestingfor the readersto learnwhat differences,if any,exist between the music peformed in hasidic, mitnagedic,National Religious, and even secular contexts, as well as how the music of klezmorimsuch as Berlin differs from that of the singer-drummerswho performat harediweddings within Jerusalem,where the playing of instrumentsis still forbiddenby Ashkenazimtoday.Also interesting would be more about the meaning of the music for both the musicians and their variousaudiences,includingmore contextualizationof the position of the klezmer in contemporaryIsraeli society.
7. See Joel Rubin,"Rumenisheshtiklekh:Klezmermusic among the hasidimin contemporary Israel,"Judaism,no. 185, vol. 47, no. 1 (Winter 1998): 12-23.
151
Joel E. Rubin Mark Slobin's Fiddler on the Move is the culmination of many years of thoughton the klezmerrevivaland Euro-Americanrevivalmovementsin general. In his introductorychapter,Slobin points out what he sees as the essentialAmerican-ness of the earlyklezmerrevivalandplaces it within the overallsphereof the new multiculturalism,which arose in the wake of the bicentennialcelebrationsof 1976 in the United States.An early observer of the klezmerrevival, Slobin analyzes here the unpredictabledevelopment of the revival from a relatively small groupofAmericanJews in the late 1970s andearly 1980s to an internationalmovement with thousandsof followers by the late 1990s. The fieldworkthat forms the basis of this book was carriedout mostly in 1997-1998, and this book is best understoodas a snapshotof the transatlanticklezmerrevival at that time. In a continuationof his thoughtson subculturalmusic-making,8the presentwork is based largely on an ethnomusicologicaladaptationof culturaltheory and is most concerned with developing a loose but comprehensivetheoreticalframeworkfor the understandingof what has provento be a very elusive topic. As Slobin remarks, "Thingswere so molten in the mid-1990s thatit was hardto find my methodological footing."He found himself faced with the challenge of "how to study a constantlymorphingand expandingmusical system with no surviving homeland,as played by insiderswith outsidermentalitiesand outsiderswith uncannyintuitions about how the music works"(5). Whereashistorically,klezmorimformed a community in the literal sense, a "continuouschain of overlappingmusical and family links in a spread-outsystem of town-basedmusical professionalism"(67), the complexities of communitylife in the klezmerrevival require"differenttheoretical models than classic ethnography...." (72). Based largely on interviews-the book focuses in particularon the experiences of fourfemale violinist-informantsas case studies-but also on his own participation in the klezmermovement as a violin student, Slobin spins his theory arounda set of key concepts:klezmeras a heritagemusic (chap. 2: "musicthathas been singled out for preservation, protection, enshrinement, and revival");9 klezmeras an urge (chap. 3: "whatmoves musiciansand excites audiencesto embrace klezmer?"[5]); klezmeras community(chap. 4); klezmerstyle as statement (chap. 5); and,finally, issues of identity(chap. 6). Slobin weaves a shiftingmatrix of terms onto these basic concepts, which he spends considerablespace defining and expandingupon. Slobinsees a "klezmercore"at the centerof all of these overlappingmatrices, which "remainsuntouchedby comparativism.The overlapsprovidebridgesto the core thatbothoutsidersand insiderstraversein searchof nostalgiaor novelty,tradition or trade"(35). Yethe also points out the significantlevel of diversitywithinthe "klezmerumbrella."Slobin sees what he terms "nostalgic diasporism"(i.e., expressingnostalgiaforYiddishlanguageand culture[29]) as being the primarysetting forthe music of the klezmerrevival,a tendencyinheritedfromthe legacyof Fiddler on theRoof-which had forthe firsttime "provideda safe place for visitingthe 8. Mark Slobin, SubculturalSounds: Micromusicsof the West(Hanover:University Press of New England,2000). 9. BarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblett, "Soundsof Sensibility,"in Slobin, AmericanKlezmer, 133.
152
Review Essay Europeanpast .. ." (23). At the same time, he identifies the klezmermovementas partof the "generaldrivefor reaffiliationwith Jewishnessthathas snowballedsince the 1960s to become the most importanttrendin Jewish-Americanlife" (30). In Chapter3, Slobin brings the experiences of his four informantsinto the discussion. Here it becomes particularlyclear that this is not a comprehensive treatmentof the klezmerrevival(which it does not claim to be), but rathera set of interlockingessays centeredaroundthese four case studies. Based upon the differing experiencesof these fourmusiciansand his otherinterviewpartners,Slobin sums up thus: "'Klezmer,'a shifting, multilayeredassemblage of contexts and items, exists because many people have a stake in it for a huge varietyof reasons, often severalat once" (64). Chapter4 includes a discussion of the problematicklezmerrevival in contemporaryCentraland EasternEurope(83-90). Chapter5 looks at certainstylistic aspects of the "core"repertoireof the Americanklezmerrevivalists,in particularthe "canon"of the two AmericanimmigrantclarinetistsBrandweinandTarras as it is being reinterpretedby the currentgenerationof musicians.He uses a comparativeapproach,takingthree tunes as case studies, which he combines with the commentsof his informantsto "illuminatethreequestions:How do modernplayers understandthe older repertoirethathas now become a moderncanon?How do they conceptualizetheirtechnique?How do they arriveat personalstyle?"(94).10 Finally,in Chapter6, Slobin tackles issues of identity,the "knottedcentral term that has been noticeablyabsent throughout"his discussion (133). It is clear thatidentityis at the core of the klezmerrevivalmovement.This has been expressed in the numerousinterviewsin Slobin'sbook, and independentlyin articlesby BarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblett, Alicia Svigals, and FrankLondon,I' among othersand is corroboratedby my own experiencesboth as a participantin and observer of the klezmerrevivalmovement.Thatparticipationin the revivalis so close to the heartof manyparticipants-be theyAmerican,German,or Polish-is evident,for example, in the vehemence of the ongoing debatescarriedout on the Internetdiscussion list "Worldmusic from a Jewish slant."'2The debate about the futureof klezmermusic representsnothing less in the eyes of the participantsthan the future of Judaism,or the formationof a new Germanor CentralEuropeannational identity. Fiddler on the Move is an extremelycompactand dense extendedessay, and it has been possible to touch on only a few of the issues raisedin it. It presentsthe complex intersectionof conflicting approachespresentin the klezmerrevivalin its many facets. Its very complexitymay leave the readermore confusedthanbefore, but will ideally lead to a contemplationof the many contradictionsshown and to 10. The CD insertcontainsmultipleversionsof the threetunes discussed in ch. 5, consisting of both historicalandcontemporaryperformancesandincludingone previouslyunpublishedfield recording and two previouslyunpublishedlive recordings. 11. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, "Soundsof Sensibility,"in Slobin,AmericanKlezmer,129-73; Alicia Svigals, "Why We Do this Anyway: Klezmer as Jewish YouthSubculture,"in Slobin, American Klezmer, 211-19; and FrankLondon, "An Insider'sView: How We Traveledfrom Obscurityto the Klezmer Establishmentin TwentyYears,"in Slobin,AmericanKlezmer,206-10. 12. Archivedat: http://listserv.shamash.org/archives/jewish-music.html.
153
Joel E. Rubin a broaderunderstandingof the motivationsof the various types of people drawn to participationin klezmer. One problemwith such an all-inclusivetheory as the one developedhere by Slobin is that it can tend to obscure fundamentalsets of oppositions, such as differences between the klezmer traditionas it developed in Europe (and later in America)overthe course of severalcenturiesandthe music performedby klezmer revivalists of all stripes;13differences between the Americanparticipantsin the klezmerrevival,who are predominantlyJewish and for whom it may generallybe said that the creation of a new American Jewish identity is the core issue involved,14 and the almost exclusively non-Jewishparticipantsin the Germanklezmer movement, for whom the klezmerrepertoireserves as a forum for so-called and the buildingof a new Germanidentity;'"and difVergangenheitsbewdltigung ferences between contemporaryIsraeliklezmermusicians,who are predominantly haredi, and non-Israeliparticipantsin the klezmerrevival,who are virtuallyall non-Orthodox.16 In this sense, perhapsit would make more sense to look at the klezmerrevival as a set of mini-revivals,as arguedby Julia Phillips Randel with regardto the revival of Sephardicsong.17 Furthermore,placing the klezmermovementwithin the largerdiscourse of the Yiddish-languagemovementsince the 1960s and the currentJewish Renewal movement(as exemplified by Lisa Schiffman'sGenerationJ) would show its centralityas an indicatorat the popularculturelevel of much of what is going on in contemporaryAmericanJewish society.'8 One should also place the klezmerdis13. See Joel Rubin, "'Can'tYou Play AnythingJewish?'Klezmer-Musikundjiidische Sozialisation im Nachkriegsamerika," in JiidischeLiteraturundKulturin Grojfbritannienund den USAnach 1945, ed. Beate Neumeier (Potsdam:UniversittitPotsdam/Wiesbaden:HarrassowitzVerlag, 1998), 189-219. 14. See Svigals, "WhyDo We Do This Anyway." 15. See Rita Ottens and Joel Rubin, "'The Sounds of the Vanishing World': The German Klezmer Movementas a Racial Discourse,"in Sounds of TwoWorlds:Music as a Mirrorof Migration to andfrom Germany(Madison, WI: Max Kade Institute,University of Wisconsin-Madison,2004) [web-based conference proceedings]. http://csumc.wisc.edu/mki/Resources/OnlinePapers/Music ConfPapers/MusicConfPapers.htm. 16. See Rubin,"Rumenisheshtiklekh." 17. JuliaPhillips Randel,"MusicalConstructionsof History:PerformancePracticesin Recent Recordingsof Judeo-SpanishSong,"in Studies in Jewish Musical Traditions:Insightsfrom the Harvard CollectionofJudaica SoundRecordings,ed. K.K. Shelemay(HarvardJudaicaCollection Student ResearchPapersNo. 7) (Cambridge,Massachusetts:HarvardCollege Library,2001), 113. 18. Lisa Schiffman,GenerationJ (San Francisco:Harper,1999). See, for example,the continuing debates on the Mendele: Yiddish Literatureand Language internetdiscussion list (archivedat http://shakti.trincoll.edu/~mendele/arc.htm) regardingthe life or deathof theYiddishlanguage,which were sparkedin particularby articlesby Michael Chabonand JanetHadda(Michael Chabon,"Guidebook to a Land of Ghosts,"Civilization [June/July 1997]: 67-69; Janet Hadda,"Yiddishin Today's America,"Jewish Quarterly,no. 170, [Summer 1998]). Hadda'spsychoanalyticstudy of the "Yiddish phenomenonin Americanculture"was coined a "'desertion'" from the Yiddishist cause and "causesensationelle"(JoshuaA. Fishman,"A Decade in the Life of a Two-in-OneLanguage:Yiddishin New YorkCity [Secularand Ultra-Orthodox],"in Can ThreatenedLanguages Be Saved?: ReversingLanguage Shift, Revisited:a 21st CenturyPerspective,ed. JoshuaA. Fishman [Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters,2001], 80).
154
Review Essay course within thatof responsesto the Shoah. In a parallelto klezmeras a possible response to Haim Soloveitchik's"end of self-evident Jewishness"postulatedby Kirshenblatt-GimblettI9-theotherpossible responsebeing contemporaryharedi life-the klezmerurge could be seen as one possible secularway of mourningthe Shoah (i.e., the loss of Yiddish language and culture),the other end of the spectrumbeing representedby the Boboverhasidimpiremshpiylas describedby Shifra Epstein.20 Fiddler on the Move provides an excellent foundationfor the study of the klezmerrevival.What is needed now more are concentratedarea studies, such as Abigail Wood's recently completed dissertationon the Yiddish song revival in NorthAmericaand the one in progressby Rita Ottenson the klezmerandYiddish music movementin Berlin.21
Henry Sapoznik'sKlezmer!JewishMusicfrom Old Worldto Our Worlddoes not live up to its promisedtitle. Sapoznikis a well-knownactivist who has played a key role in the popularizationof American-Yiddishpopular music culture throughhis organizationof the performinggroup Kapelye, the Yiddish Folk Arts Program("KlezKamp,"originallysponsoredby theYIVO Institutefor JewishResearch), and the Yiddish Radio Project, among others. This does not necessarily give him the requisitetools to producean authoritativehistory of klezmorimand their music, however.The book may be divided into three sections. The first section (chap. 1) comprises a short history of klezmermusic in Centraland Eastern Europe-surprising in its brevity given the many centuries of developmentthe klezmertraditionunderwenton Europeansoil before it was broughtto the United States in the immigrationwave beginning in the 1880s. Yet the subheading of Chapter1, "TheEuropeanRoots of KlezmerMusic,"shows its intentionallyAmerican orientation,as if everythingthat happenedbefore emigrationwere a kind of prehistoryto the brief floweringthe music now known as "klezmer"experienced in America. The second section (chaps. 2-5) covers American-Yiddishpopular music-of which klezmeractuallyoccupies/forms a small subsection-from the beginningof emigrationuntil approximately1960. The final section (chaps. 6-9) deals with the revivalof interestinYiddishandklezmermusic since the mid-I 970s, focusing on the careerand accomplishmentsof the authorhimself. 19. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, "Soundsof Sensibility,"131. 20. "The Bobover,who do not have their own commemorativeevents for the Holocaust, have combined in a folk dramain Yiddish elements of PurimandYom Kippurto create a ritualtranscending the Holocaust .... Througha series of inversionsand reversals,from the frivolousto the serious and vice versa,the piremshpiylprovidesthem with the opportunityto confrontand come to termswith the abyss, theirown experiencewith the Holocaust"(Shifra Epstein,"TheBoboverHasidimPiremshpiyl," in New WorldHasidim. EthnographicStudies ofHasidic Jews in America,ed. JanetS. BelcoveShalin [Albany:State Universityof New YorkPress, 1995], 251-52). 21. Abigail Wood,"YiddishSong in ContemporaryNorthAmerica,"(Ph.D. thesis, Cambridge University,2004); Rita Ottens,"TheFunctionofYiddish Music in Germanysince 1989: Issues in CulturalIdentityand Ideology"(workingtitle; work in progress,City Universityof London,Department of Music).
155
Joel E. Rubin The book containsnumerousfactualerrors,and,more important,many historical misinterpretations,only a few of which can be pointed out here.These are exacerbatedby its casual,journalisticpatter,which makes it additionallydifficult to accept Sapoznikas a reliablesource.Withregardto the flute and xylophonevirtuoso Yosef-Michel Guzikov,for example, Sapoznik writes: "Havinghoned his parlorskills in the provinces he crashedthe big time and, with the help of some sophisticated advance advertising perked up the otherwise dull 1836 Viennese summer season in which everyone who was anyone was elsewhere" (3). The "provinces"to which he appearsto be referringare Cracow,Lemberg(Lviv), Kiev, and Odessa; the "sophisticatedadvance advertising"refers to an article in the WienerTheaterzeitungby the theatercritic and humoristMoritz Gottlieb Saphir. Contraryto the informationon page 5, Guzikovdid performin Parisin the winter of 1836-1837, and he did not die-as the legend will have it-on the stage in Aachen, but severalmonthslater.22By most accounts,Guzikovdoes not appearto have been the "friendly,deracinatedJew,amenableto the genteel"(3), but a hasid who traveledandresidedwith otherorthodoxJews. His role as the leadingklezmer in the Belorussionregion of Mogilev is not mentioned,and the manyquestionsregardingthe music he performed-which included many of the popularclassical works of his day-and its relation,if any,to the klezmertradition,are not raised. Sapoznik credits Guzikov with having "popularized"a "domesticated"form of klezmermusic (5), yet the natureof his klezmerperformanceremains a mystery until today,as none of his instrumentalklezmercompositionsappearto have been notated or otherwise preserved. Sapoznik credits the influential violin teacher LeopoldAuer with havinghelped Mischa Elman,JaschaHeifetz, and EfremZimbalist "makethe transitionfromshtetl to stage"(25), despite the fact thatHeifetz's birthplacewas Vilna and Zimbalist's,Rostow-hardly justifying the use of the term shtetl. Even the section on Yiddish-Americanmusic, which is more familiarterrifor the author,is replete with errors.On page 31, the clarinetistDave Tarras tory is creditedwith havingarrivedin the United States in 1923, whereashe arrivedby his own account in 1921; the singer Sophie Tucker'sgiven name was Abuza, not Kalish (35); the Dora Cherniavskyreferredto on page 54 was named LaraCherniavsky;page 103 identifies the clarinetistNaftule Brandwein'sbirthplaceas Przemysl, althoughhe came from Przemyslany,a differenttown southeastof Lemberg in Austro-HungarianEastGalicia;the JimPankowermentionedon page 163 refers to the Bar-Ilan Tanakhprofessor and former saxophonist JordanPenkower-to mention but a few. As well, the cellist, composer, and conductorJoseph Cherniavsky (1894-1975)-who stemmed from one of the most importantUkrainian klezmerfamilies, trainedat the St. Petersburgand Leipzig conservatories,and was an importantfigure in the New YorkYiddish theaterand,later,in Hollywood-is reducedto being "a failed playwright"(110). Cherniavskywas reputedto be the grandsonof the legendaryBerdichev violinist Yosele Druker(1822-1879), who 22. See Dov Sadan,Ha-menagenha-mufla: Chai YosefMichelGuzikovu-svivehem(Tel Aviv: M. Newman, 1947).
156
Review Essay served as the role model for Sholom Aleichem's characterStempenyu.23The cellist with the Zimro Ensemble,a sextet that popularizedthe chamberworks of the St. PetersburgSchool of Jewishnationalcomposersin the late 1910s, Cherniavsky took a position with UniversalPicturesCorporationin Hollywood in 1928 as its general musical director.He thus incorporatedin one person many of the diverse strandsin the lives of klezmorimin the late-nineteenthand early-twentiethcenturies, from playing weddings in the Russian Ukraine to studying at a Czarist music academy, to writing, performing, and recording music for the YiddishAmericanpopulartheaterand vaudeville,to Hollywood. More disturbingthan the numerouserrorsand misinterpretationsis the usage of unattributedquotes fromunpublishedinterviews.Forexample,the quote of clarinetistMax Epsteinon pages 119-20 ("Iquit myjob andboughtmyself a saxophone .. .")is takenvirtuallyword-for-wordfrom an interviewI carriedout with Epstein in Plantation,Floridaon January17, 1991; an interviewwith Dave Tarras from September11, 1975 carriedout by BarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblett and Janet Elias (Cassel) is quotedon severaloccasions (see, e.g., 113-114) and is eithernot properlyattributedor cited as "interviewwith author,fall 1975" (306; only once, on page 303, is it properlycited); and quotes from an interview made by Peter Sokolow with the drummerIrving Gratzon April 4, 1988 are also not attributed (153). The autobiographicmaterial,particularlyin Chapters6-9, is in the nature of a self-hagiography.Sapoznik'sapparentneed to have the klezmerrevivalmovement center aroundhis own person leads him to a most unfortunaterevisionism. This is foreshadowedin the foreword,in which he claims: "whatbegan as a personal questblossomed into an internationalmovement"(ix), which leads the reader to believe thathis personalquest led to klezmermusic becomingan international movement.Yet Sapoznik'sfirst recordingsfrom 1981 were predatedby those of Giora Feidman (as early as 1971), the Berkeley group, The Klezmorim (1977; 1978), and Andy Statmanand Zev Feldman (1979), as well as a documentary recordingof Dave Tarrashimself (1979), and were contemporaneouswith the first recordingby the KlezmerConservatoryBand. Despite having been contacteddirectly by someone representinghimself as Schirmer'sfact checker,my own work documentingthe music and careerof Max Epstein has been changed to make it appear that I first met him in December 1991 at the YIVO and Sapoznik's KlezKamp:"Afteryearsof Sokolow'scoaxing Max Epsteinto come to KlezKamp, the veteranclarinetistfinally attendedas a teacherin 1991. There clarinetistJoel Rubin, also on staff, met Epsteinfor the first time .. ."(278). In fact, I had begun my fieldwork with Epstein one year earlier and independentlyof Sapoznik or KlezKamp. Similarly,the late Mira Rafalowicz is described as having founded Amsterdam'sInternationalYiddish Festival after having attendedKlezKamp for the first time in 1995. In fact, she foundedthe festival in 1991. 23. Zalmen Zylberzweig,Zalmen, Leksikonfun yidishn teater,vol. 2 (New York:HebrewActors Union of America, 1934), 904.
157
Joel E. Rubin While the kindsof inaccuraciesandunsubstantiatedopinionsmadeheremay be typical of Hollywood autobiographies,they have no place in a purportedwork of scholarship.It is thereforesurprisingthat SchirmerBooks allowed the book to be published in its present form, and all the more surprisingthat it received an awardfrom the Association for RecordedSound Collections in 2000. As very little original scholarshipon klezmermusic was publishedbefore the mid-1990s, it was possible for lay people andjournaliststo establishthemselves and dominate the field up until that point. Sapoznik is at his best when treatingthe subjects closest to his heart, such as Yiddish-Americanrecordings,radio broadcasts,and novelty numbers-all of which are actuallyperipheralto the centralissue, that of klezmermusicians and their music-yet even here one questionswhetherthe basic facts are reliable.The accompanyingCD of the same name containsno documentationon the artistsor discographicalinformation;only the titles, years of issue, andthe names of the artistsaregiven. Most of the twenty-twopieces areculled from Sapoznik'sotherpreviouslyissued reissue recordings. Klezmer!Jewish Musicfrom Old Worldto Our Worldis lacking in any of the methodologiescurrentin Judaicstudies, historiography,or ethnomusicology.Too manykey worksby such writersas Moshe Beregovski,BarbaraKirshenblatt-Gimblett, andMarkSlobin24are missing fromthe bibliography-to mentionbutthree. In addition, Sapoznik'sbook contains little reflection regardingimportantquestions, such as why Guzikovwas such an importantfigure in Europeanconcertlife in the mid-1930s, what factors led to the Americanizationof the traditionalJewish weddingandhow thatmay have affectedthe musiciansandtheirmusic, or what did the fact thatYiddish-Americanculturewas "in a tail-spin"afterWorldWarII (154) mean for the American Jewish community.The misinformationin such a work has the potential to be recycled and passed on by otherjournalists and by scholars as well. This is the kind of journalistic mythologizing-which garbles facts and cannot differentiatefact from fiction-against which historians,Judaic studies scholars, ethnomusicologists,folklorists, and others will have to struggle in orderto get to the core of the world and the music of the klezmorim. Joel E. Rubin SyracuseUniversity Syracuse,New York
24. Moyshe Beregovski,"Yidisheklezmer,zeyer shafnun shteyger,"Sovetish 12 (Moscow:Farlag Der Emes, 1941): 412-50; Kirshenblatt-Gimblett,"Sounds of Sensibility;"Mark Slobin, "The Neo-Klezmer Movement and Euro-AmericanRevivalism,"Journal ofAmerican Folklore97, no. 383 (1982): 98-104; MarkSlobin, "KlezmerMusic:An AmericanEthnic Genre,"1983 YearbookforTraditional Music (New York:InternationalCouncil for TraditionalMusic, 1984), 34-41.
158
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Benjamin D. Sommer Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 159-160 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131815 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
AJS Review 29:1 (2005), 159-205
BOOK REVIEWS
Ziony Zevit. TheReligionsofAncientIsrael:A SynthesisofParallacticApproaches. New York:Continuum,2001. xx, 821 pp. This set of interrelatedstudies is full of closely reasonedanalyses and bold but careful speculation. Several of these studies provide a model, almost unique within biblical studies, of how to integratebiblical and extra-biblicaldatawithin a frameworkdeeply informedby theory.The book is intendedfor specialists with expertise in technical details the book addressesbut rarelypauses to describe. This work'sbreadthis noteworthy.It containslengthystudiesof Israelitecult places uncoveredby archaeologists(not only familiarones such as Aradand Beersheva, but also smallerand less well-knownenclosuresand tumulithroughoutthe areas in which ancient Israeliteslived), cult items (altars,figurines, cult stands), inscriptions,as well as historiographicandprophetictexts fromthe HebrewBible. Zevit emphasizes that there were many forms of religious practice in ancient Israel, that various gods were worshipped in motley settings, that worshipersof YHWH may often have worshippedotherdeities as well, and-most significantly-that one can appreciatethe varietiesof religious experiencein ancient Israel only by coordinatingthe datathat come from the full rangeof texts, artifacts,and perspectivesthis study utilizes. New insightsregardingspecific issues abound.Spacepermitsonly a few examples. Zevit'sdiscussion of the origin of the Israelites(pp. 84-121) is one of the finest treatmentsof this controversialissue available.His mastery of archaeological andtextualdatais perhapsunmatchedby otherscholarswho write on this subject, most of whom focus on one type of evidence and are embarrassinglyunfamiliar with responsible use of the others. Zevit concludes that a significant discontinuitybetween the Late Bronze and IronAge populationsof the highlands of Canaanemerges from severaldifferenttypes of evidence. It follows thatthe Israelites did not originatein Canaan,though significant elements of the Canaanite populations were absorbedinto Israel early in the period of the monarchy.The range of evidence used by Zevit and the methodologicalself-consciousness with which he analyzes it renderthis discussion one of the most convincing ever published. The lengthy analysis of Hebrew inscriptionsis full of new readingsand interpretations,which cannotbe treatedhere.The most significant suggestion Zevit makes is that phrases like lyhwh wl's'rthin the Kuntillet cAjrudand related inscriptionsrefer not to YHWH and His partner,the goddess Asherah (which is, as he notes in his painstakingreview of the literature,grammaticallyimpossible),nor to YHWH and His cult-pole, but to YHWH and the goddess named Asheratah, whose relationshipto YHWH is not spelled out in the phraseitself. Zevit proposesa startlingnew view of the Elohistic Psalter(Psalms 42-83). Most scholarsbelieve that the tetragrammatonhas been replacedthroughoutthis 159
Book Reviews collection by the appellation'elohim,perhapsdue to the tendency of post-exilic Judeansto avoid pronouncingthe former.Zevit rejects this explanationbecause the tetragrammaton's occasional presence in these psalms suggests that it has not been systematicallyremoved. Because some texts found in the Book of Psalms seem to have existed outside Israel as prayersto other gods (for example, Psalm 20 occurs in an Aramaic version as a prayerto Baal/Horus), Zevit proposes that the divinenamesremovedfromthe Elohistic Psalterwerenamesof gods otherthan YHWH who were worshippedin Israelitesanctuaries.As polytheisticworshipbecame more problematicfor some Israelites,the replacementof these names by the vague term 'elohimallowed these psalms to continuein use in a less controversial way, and ultimatelyallowed them to be read as monotheistictexts. Unfortunately,severalfactorswill limit the usability,and hence the impact, of this work. In spite of its subtitle,this anthologydoes not synthesizethe conclusions of the many individualstudies it contains. It remains,rather,a collection of highly detaileddiscussions, unitedby their insistence on utilizing a wide rangeof material but never achieving the unity a book has. (One might contrast, say, YehezkelKaufmann'seight-volumehistoryof Israelitereligion or RainerAlbertz's two-volume history. Both contain extraordinarilydetailed treatmentsof specific issues, but they marshalall these details on behalf of a largerthesis, so that the whole is greaterthan the sum of the parts.)Aggravatingthis lack of synthesis is the absence of a detailedtable of contents. It will be difficult for readersto know where topics thatinterestthem in this encyclopedicworkare located. (How would a studentof Psalms know that the chapterentitled "IsraeliteReligions: A Parallactic Synthesis"containswhat amountsto a twenty-pagearticle on the origin of the Elohistic Psalter?How would a person researchingsocial structureknow that the same chapterbegins with a forty-pagearticleon tribalism?)Moreover,the absence of a detailedtable of contents makes it difficult to discern whetherthere is any overalltrajectoryto the work,muchless whatit is. This difficulty is mademore acute by Zevit's fairly consistent refusal to include anythingresembling a thesis statementat the beginningof most chapters,sections, and sub-sections.Each hits the groundrunning,butwhere we are runningis rarelymade clear.This workcontains impressiveamountsof data,but the point of the datais not often articulated. Sometimes it is not evident that there is a specific point at all: parts of this work belong to the genre of antiquarianresearchratherthanhistoriography. This workprovidesa fine example of how to pursueresearchin the history of ancientIsraeland its religions.Alas, it does not providea model of how to publish the results. BenjaminD. Sommer NorthwesternUniversity Evanston,Illinois
Israel Knohl. TheDivine Symphony:TheBible's Many Voices.Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 2003. xv, 207 pp. 160
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Marvin A. Sweeney Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 160-163 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131816 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews collection by the appellation'elohim,perhapsdue to the tendency of post-exilic Judeansto avoid pronouncingthe former.Zevit rejects this explanationbecause the tetragrammaton's occasional presence in these psalms suggests that it has not been systematicallyremoved. Because some texts found in the Book of Psalms seem to have existed outside Israel as prayersto other gods (for example, Psalm 20 occurs in an Aramaic version as a prayerto Baal/Horus), Zevit proposes that the divinenamesremovedfromthe Elohistic Psalterwerenamesof gods otherthan YHWH who were worshippedin Israelitesanctuaries.As polytheisticworshipbecame more problematicfor some Israelites,the replacementof these names by the vague term 'elohimallowed these psalms to continuein use in a less controversial way, and ultimatelyallowed them to be read as monotheistictexts. Unfortunately,severalfactorswill limit the usability,and hence the impact, of this work. In spite of its subtitle,this anthologydoes not synthesizethe conclusions of the many individualstudies it contains. It remains,rather,a collection of highly detaileddiscussions, unitedby their insistence on utilizing a wide rangeof material but never achieving the unity a book has. (One might contrast, say, YehezkelKaufmann'seight-volumehistoryof Israelitereligion or RainerAlbertz's two-volume history. Both contain extraordinarilydetailed treatmentsof specific issues, but they marshalall these details on behalf of a largerthesis, so that the whole is greaterthan the sum of the parts.)Aggravatingthis lack of synthesis is the absence of a detailedtable of contents. It will be difficult for readersto know where topics thatinterestthem in this encyclopedicworkare located. (How would a studentof Psalms know that the chapterentitled "IsraeliteReligions: A Parallactic Synthesis"containswhat amountsto a twenty-pagearticle on the origin of the Elohistic Psalter?How would a person researchingsocial structureknow that the same chapterbegins with a forty-pagearticleon tribalism?)Moreover,the absence of a detailedtable of contents makes it difficult to discern whetherthere is any overalltrajectoryto the work,muchless whatit is. This difficulty is mademore acute by Zevit's fairly consistent refusal to include anythingresembling a thesis statementat the beginningof most chapters,sections, and sub-sections.Each hits the groundrunning,butwhere we are runningis rarelymade clear.This workcontains impressiveamountsof data,but the point of the datais not often articulated. Sometimes it is not evident that there is a specific point at all: parts of this work belong to the genre of antiquarianresearchratherthanhistoriography. This workprovidesa fine example of how to pursueresearchin the history of ancientIsraeland its religions.Alas, it does not providea model of how to publish the results. BenjaminD. Sommer NorthwesternUniversity Evanston,Illinois
Israel Knohl. TheDivine Symphony:TheBible's Many Voices.Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety, 2003. xv, 207 pp. 160
Book Reviews In this wide-rangingoverview of biblical literature,IsraelKnohl arguesthat the HebrewBible does not presenta consistent or monolithic viewpoint concerning ancient Israel's or Judaism'sunderstandingof God, itself, and the world in which it lived. Rather,Knohl contendsthatthe Bible presentsa pluralismof viewpoints thatto a greatdegreeanticipatesthe pluralisticoutlookof RabbinicJudaism. This will hardlycome as a surprisingthesis to anyonefamiliarwith modernbiblical andtheologicalscholarship.Indeed,it takesup the classic questionof unityand diversitywithin the HebrewBible that might be illustratedby Gerhardvon Rad's well-known Old TestamentTheology.Von Rad recognized the diversity of traditions that informedthe variouswritingsand viewpointsnow gatheredin the Bible while simultaneouslytrying to systematizethem into a general concept of Heilsgeschichte, that is, "salvationhistory"or "sacredhistory."Such Heilsgeschichte moved inexorablyto what von Rad believed would be the ultimateculminationof humanhistory.Knohl'scontributioncomes not in relationto the model of pluralism in the Bible per se, but in relationto his argumentthat so much of the priestly literaturethatengages in pluralisticdebatewith otherbiblical worksis rootedin the monarchicperiodof ancientIsrael's(or Judah's)history.In this respect,Knohl's own work-although originalin its own right-owes muchto an earliermodel advocatedby YehezkelKaufmann,one of the foundingfathersof modernIsraelibiblical scholarship. Knohl'sworkis rootedin Kaufmann'sfundamentalchallengeto JuliusWellhausen'sliterary-criticalmodel for the formationof the Pentateuch.Wellhausenargued that the priestly source representedboth the final stage in the literaryhistory of the Pentateuchand the rise of the Templepriesthoodto full leadershipover the Jewish people in the post-exilic period. In Wellhausen'smodel, the priestly source representeda distant,all-powerfuland holy God, who relied on law to enforce social andtheological uniformity.Oldermodels of a more approachableand flexible God in the J, E, andD sourceswere suppressedwhen the P sourcewas employed to systematize the presentationof the Pentateuchand meld these other viewpoints into a single literarywork. Knohl argues instead that the so-called priestly literatureof the Pentateuch displays a great deal of diversitywithin itself, and that this diversitypoints to the variety of viewpoints found within the P literature,the setting of significant portions of the priestlyliteraturein the monarchicperiod,and its interactionwith other monarchicperiod works. He begins his study by arguingthat the editing of the Torahrepresentsthe first stage in the formationof the Bible. In his view, such an editorialprocess entailedthe gatheringof materialconcerningcreation,the patriarchs, the Exodus, the wilderness wandering,festival observance, etc., that had been known by the Templepriesthoodbut not by the populationat large. To support his view, he points to statementsin Nehemiah 8 to indicate that the people were unawareof the observanceof Sukkotor other observancesand to inconsistencies withinthe Torah(e.g., the meansby which the Passoverofferingis cooked) thatpoint to the varietyof viewpoints found within. Knohl'smodel for the chronologyof editing the Pentateuchthus resembles Wellhausen'sto a certain degree, but it differs by pointing to democratizationin the study of Torahratherthan a legalistic suppressionof Jewish thoughtand reli161
Book Reviews giosity. Knohl arguesthatthe crucialproblemfaced by the P writerswas the problem of evil, and he maintainsthatthe P writersdemythologizedearliernotions of diversegods associatedwith natureby positing a model of primordialevil thathad been suppressedby the orderof creation.Nevertheless, evil continuedto reinfuse the world of creation,and it would be the task of the priestly writersto develop a system for moral conductby which humanbeings might resist the continuinginfluence of evil in the world. In orderto supporthis contentionthatthe priestlytraditionengaged this debate in the monarchicperiod, Knohl first points to Isaiah's(and other prophets') critique of Templeritual in which the prophetdecries ritual observancewithout moral foundation.To a large degree, his viewpoint concerning Isaiah and the prophetsoverlooksthe rhetoricaldimensionsof the text, that is, to what extent do the prophets'caricaturizethe objects of theircriticism?Did Templeritualtrulyeschew moral concerns (see, e.g., Psalms 15; 24), or was that Isaiah'sway of discreditingthe priesthoodto make way for his own understandingof God and human responsibility? Knohl contends that Isaiah's critique prompted a reaction within the priesthoodthat came to expressionin the Holiness Code now found in Leviticus 17-26, which articulatesa combinationof ritual and moral concerns. The Holiness School thus representsan earlyattemptwithin the priesthoodto collect early tradition,to reflect upon it, and to develop a synthesis betweenthe practices andbeliefs of the priesthoodandthe people at large.Accordingto Knohl, the Holiness School calls for all Israelto be holy, notjust the priests, and therebybegins the processby which the studyof Torahis democratizedamongthe entireJewish people. Althoughthe debatewithin the priestlytraditionemerges within the monarchic period,it influencesthe developmentof Judaismthroughoutthe SecondTemple period as well. The demise of Israelite/Judeankingshipopens the way for the priestlycontentionthatonly God is king and thatthe divine royalrepresentativeis no longer conceived as a humanking but as a quasi-divinemessianic figure. Older views of humansacrifice reemergedas calls for animalsacrifice andhumanservice to God. Ezekiel reflects a debate among the prophetsconcerningdivine determinism and human freedom and responsibility. Second Isaiah conceives of Israelas the high priest among the nationswhose task is to expiate the idolatryof the nations. Job points to such freedom and responsibilityamong the nations as well. A concluding chapterpoints to the origins of Second Templesectarianism, insofar as the Phariseeswere the heirs of the Holiness School and the Sadducees were the heirs of a distantand removedPriestlySchool. These divisions emerge in RabbinicJudaismas the schools of Hillel and Shammaiwith their very different approachesto halakhah. One may note the degree to which Knohl is actuallydependenton the Wellhausenianmodel of a legalistic and detachedpriesthood.Yes, the priestsmay have been cloistered,but were the people so ignorantof priestlyteachingsandthe priesthood so aloof as Knohl contends?Why then would the people ever have supported the Temple in the first place? Likewise, we may ask to what extent the early priesthood eschewed moral concerns and sought to suppress earlier traditions. 162
Book Reviews Does not the incorporationof earlier traditionpoint to an inherentadaptability within the priesthood?Nevertheless,Knohl remindsus to reconsiderour own tendencies to systematizebiblical literatureandour own penchantfor identifyingconsistent biblical, priestly,or even propheticviewpoints. MarvinA. Sweeney ClaremontSchool of Theology and ClaremontGraduateUniversity Claremont,California
IthamarGruenwald.Rituals and Ritual Theoryin AncientIsrael. The Brill Reference Libraryof Judaism. Leiden:Brill, 2003. xii, 278 pp. IthamarGruenwald'srecent book brings togethervarious essays the author has publishedover the last few years, each seeking to rethinkaspects of ritualtheory, especially as applied to the rituals of ancient Israel.' After introducinghis themesandapproachin the first chapter,Gruenwaldaddresses(in Chapter2) what he calls the "economicethos"of ancientIsrael, speculatingthat "in the history of ancientIsrael,the transitionfromethos to religion is connectedto the passage from nomadic lifestyle to an urbanone" (p. 67). The thirdchapterreexaminesthe relationshipbetween myth and ritual.The last threechaptersare devotedto ritualtheory as it pertains,respectively,to rabbinichalakhah(Chapter4), biblical sacrifice (Chapter5), and the "Lord'sSupper,"as relatedprimarilyin the writings of Paul. Throughoutthe book, Gruenwaldemerges as an emphatic spokespersonfor the non-symbolic natureof rituals in general, and of biblical sacrifice in particular. While this book is wide-rangingin scope, a significant portion of chapters2 and 6 are devoted to the statedtheme of chapter5: biblical sacrifice. Because Gruenwald himself believes that"sacrificesconstitutethe core of religion"(p. 189), perhaps the best way to review his complicated book briefly is to examine his approachto this particularritualstructure. With regardto ritualin generaland sacrifice in particular,Gruenwaldmaintains thatritualscreate,or establish,theirownmeaningin the very act of doing andin thelogicthatconstitutes mannerin whichtheyaredone theprocessual 1. Theessays-which arenot citedin thebibliography-include: "Formsof RitualEthosin Ancient AncientIsrael:TheCaseof SacredEconomics," in ReligiousBeliefandEconomicBehavior: IrelandandAfrica,ed. Jacob IslamandJudaism,and Contemporary Israel,ClassicalChristianity, Neusner(Atlanta:ScholarsPress,1999),207-240;"Halakhah andthe Studyof Rituals:InQuestof New Perspectives in ReligiousStudies," in TheAnnualof RabbinicJudaism: Ancient,Medieval,and WilliamScottGreenandJacobNeusner(Leiden:Brill,1999),3-28; Modern,ed.AlanJ.Avery-Peck, "Sacrificesin BiblicalLiterature andRitualTheory," Reviewof RabbinicJudaism4, no. 1 (2001):110 and11,"inAn44, and"PaulandRitualTheory:TheCaseof the 'Lord'sSupper'in 1 Corinthians Presentedto HansDieterBetzon tiquityandHumanity: EssaysonAncientReligionandPhilosophy MohrSiebeck, His 70thBirthday,ed. AdelaYarbroCollinsandMargaret M. Mitchell(Tiibingen: intochapters 2, 4, 5, and6 of thepresentwork. 2001), 159-187.Theseessayshavebeentransformed
163
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Jonathan Klawans Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 163-165 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131817 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews Does not the incorporationof earlier traditionpoint to an inherentadaptability within the priesthood?Nevertheless,Knohl remindsus to reconsiderour own tendencies to systematizebiblical literatureandour own penchantfor identifyingconsistent biblical, priestly,or even propheticviewpoints. MarvinA. Sweeney ClaremontSchool of Theology and ClaremontGraduateUniversity Claremont,California
IthamarGruenwald.Rituals and Ritual Theoryin AncientIsrael. The Brill Reference Libraryof Judaism. Leiden:Brill, 2003. xii, 278 pp. IthamarGruenwald'srecent book brings togethervarious essays the author has publishedover the last few years, each seeking to rethinkaspects of ritualtheory, especially as applied to the rituals of ancient Israel.' After introducinghis themesandapproachin the first chapter,Gruenwaldaddresses(in Chapter2) what he calls the "economicethos"of ancientIsrael, speculatingthat "in the history of ancientIsrael,the transitionfromethos to religion is connectedto the passage from nomadic lifestyle to an urbanone" (p. 67). The thirdchapterreexaminesthe relationshipbetween myth and ritual.The last threechaptersare devotedto ritualtheory as it pertains,respectively,to rabbinichalakhah(Chapter4), biblical sacrifice (Chapter5), and the "Lord'sSupper,"as relatedprimarilyin the writings of Paul. Throughoutthe book, Gruenwaldemerges as an emphatic spokespersonfor the non-symbolic natureof rituals in general, and of biblical sacrifice in particular. While this book is wide-rangingin scope, a significant portion of chapters2 and 6 are devoted to the statedtheme of chapter5: biblical sacrifice. Because Gruenwald himself believes that"sacrificesconstitutethe core of religion"(p. 189), perhaps the best way to review his complicated book briefly is to examine his approachto this particularritualstructure. With regardto ritualin generaland sacrifice in particular,Gruenwaldmaintains thatritualscreate,or establish,theirownmeaningin the very act of doing andin thelogicthatconstitutes mannerin whichtheyaredone theprocessual 1. Theessays-which arenot citedin thebibliography-include: "Formsof RitualEthosin Ancient AncientIsrael:TheCaseof SacredEconomics," in ReligiousBeliefandEconomicBehavior: IrelandandAfrica,ed. Jacob IslamandJudaism,and Contemporary Israel,ClassicalChristianity, Neusner(Atlanta:ScholarsPress,1999),207-240;"Halakhah andthe Studyof Rituals:InQuestof New Perspectives in ReligiousStudies," in TheAnnualof RabbinicJudaism: Ancient,Medieval,and WilliamScottGreenandJacobNeusner(Leiden:Brill,1999),3-28; Modern,ed.AlanJ.Avery-Peck, "Sacrificesin BiblicalLiterature andRitualTheory," Reviewof RabbinicJudaism4, no. 1 (2001):110 and11,"inAn44, and"PaulandRitualTheory:TheCaseof the 'Lord'sSupper'in 1 Corinthians Presentedto HansDieterBetzon tiquityandHumanity: EssaysonAncientReligionandPhilosophy MohrSiebeck, His 70thBirthday,ed. AdelaYarbroCollinsandMargaret M. Mitchell(Tiibingen: intochapters 2, 4, 5, and6 of thepresentwork. 2001), 159-187.Theseessayshavebeentransformed
163
Book Reviews .... Let me repeatthat,to say thatthereis meaningin ritualsis nottantamount-as manyscholarsthink-to sayingtheyaresymbolicexpressionsof ideas.The meaningis containedin the performedessence of the rituals (pp. 198-199). Putmorebriefly,Gruenwaldelsewherestatesthatrituals"shouldbe understoodby whatthey aim to accomplish,ratherthanby whatthey standfor"(p. 69). In its emphasis on what ritualsachieve, Gruenwald'sapproachcan be called functionalist. But unlike Mary Douglas, CliffordGeertz, VictorTurner,and many others operating in the functionalisttradition(broadlyconceived), Gruenwaldresists recognizing that symbols play a key role in how ritualsshape or reflect societies. There are some importantcontributionsin this work. Gruenwaldis correct to be disappointedwith the currentlevel of involvementin ritual studies by Jewish Studies scholars(thoughto be fair to the field, it is also importantto note that Gruenwald'sbibliographyis hardlycompletein this regard).The authoris also correct to recognize that much work on ritualin general (and sacrifice in particular) is "theologyin disguise" (p. 236; cf. pp. 3, 5, 160-161, etc.). Gruenwaldcorrectly criticizes the late-nineteenth-centuryevolutionist theories (189-190). Moreover, he is correctto step away from FritsStaal'sextremereductionistposition on the non-symbolicnatureof rituals(p. 198).YetGruenwald'soverallthesis does not convince.The shortcomingsof his analysesillustratewell the difficulties involved in trying to escape from eithersymbolism or theology when discussing rituals. Gruenwaldseems to think that his turn away from symbolism supportshis effort to liberateritual studies from theology (pp. x, 5-6). But the assertionthat ritualis non-symbolicis not theologicallyneutral.To the contrary,this move is suspiciously reminiscent of rationaliststrains in Jewish philosophy (such as Maimonides and Mendelssohn)thatcontinueto have influenceparticularlyin modern Orthodoxcircles (cf., p. xi). These approaches,in turn, have their precedentsin some rabbinictexts, includingthe famoustraditionattributedto Yohananben Zakkai to the effect that the red heifer ritualhas no known symbolic or even rational basis.2The Jewish theologianswho have maintainedthe non-symbolic approaches to ritual-from Yohananben Zakkai (or whoever composed the traditionattributedto him) throughMendelssohnand beyond-have by no means articulated non-theologicalapproachesto ritual.Gruenwald'sapproach,therefore,does not truly escape theology, but rathertakes a side in long-standingtheological debates concerningthe role of ritualin religious systems. In the study of rituals,symbolismmay well provejust as inescapableas theology. Even while he steadfastlymaintainsthatritualsare in essence non-symbolic, Gruenwaldstates repeatedlythat ritualshave meaning. For Gruenwald,rituals are "expressions"(p. 159): they "communicate"(p. 162), "speak"(p. 176), and "represent"(p. 205). Curiously,though Gruenwaldspurns theology, he adopts Rene Girard'sneo-gnostic approachto the meaning of sacrifice, so that offerings "mimeticallyassume the victim statusof a person or group"(pp. 217, 259-260). But the ritualprocess is still not a symbolic one: sacrifice is a "realevent"(p. 217). 2. Pesiktade Rav Kahana,Parah7 (ed. Mandelbaum,1:74).
164
Book Reviews Clearly,Gruenwald'sunderstandingof symbolism is rathernarrow:most scholars who view ritualsas representingthings would not be so reluctantto speakof symbols. His evaluationof symbolism is also rathernegative: rituals achieve things while "meresymbolism"is powerless (pp. 259-260). The trick to understandingwhat Gruenwaldis getting at is to keep in mind thatthe authorhas a tendencyto redefinethe termsof debate.Ritualsbecome "behaviourallyautonomous... expressionsof the mind"(p. 2). Myths constitute"the reality configured to establish a functionalrelationto ritual"(p. 68). Gruenwald similarlyredefines "existence"(p. 24), "ethos"(p. 41), "cosmos"(p. 69), andeven "reality"(pp. 69, 195), among a numberof otherterms. Curiously,the term "symbolism,"is left undefined,at least as far as I can tell (unfortunately,the book lacks a generalindex).Then,towardthe end of the book the readerdiscoversthe author's positive evaluationof the anthropologistStanley J. Tambiah'sdefinition of ritual as a "culturallycoded system of symbolic communication"(pp. 242-243). One can surely ask at this point whetherGruenwaldhas really demonstratedthat ritual is not symbolic or whetherhe has just redefined all the terms in such a fashion that "symbolism"no longer means for him what it does for Tambiahor most other scholarsof ritual. Scholars surely should reserve the right to redefine terms-I could hardly advise otherwise. However,scholarlyredefinitionsof common terms ought to be restrictedto cases where previous definitions have led to serious misunderstandings. Gruenwaldhas not made this case. His approachis to work in the other direction:he redefines the terms, and then complainsthatotherscholarshave failed to put things in precisely the way he would prefer.There are some serious issues discussed here, and thatis what to admirein a broadlyconceived,theoreticallyinformed,bold rethinkingof ritual in ancient Judaism.But when a work redefines nearlyall the terms of the debate,it becomes unnecessarilydifficult to evaluateor appreciateits particularcontribution. JonathanKlawans Boston University Boston, Massachusetts
YairLorberbaum.Image of God,HalakhahandAggadah.TelAviv: SchockenPublishing House, 2004. 544 pp. The centralthesis of Lorberbaum'sbook is that accordingto the rabbis,the meaningof imago dei is thatthere is tangibledivine presencewithin every human being. This concept impacted primarilyupon two areas of halakhah:the death penalty and procreation.Since humansare physical representationsof God, execution is equivalentin some ways to deicide. Conversely,procreationis strongly mandatedbecause it increasesGod'sphysical manifestationin the worldby creating more vehicles in which to embody God's presence. Importantly,as "images" of the divine, humanbeings functionas icons in a mannersimilarto the way idols 165
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Joshua Kulp Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 165-167 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131818 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews Clearly,Gruenwald'sunderstandingof symbolism is rathernarrow:most scholars who view ritualsas representingthings would not be so reluctantto speakof symbols. His evaluationof symbolism is also rathernegative: rituals achieve things while "meresymbolism"is powerless (pp. 259-260). The trick to understandingwhat Gruenwaldis getting at is to keep in mind thatthe authorhas a tendencyto redefinethe termsof debate.Ritualsbecome "behaviourallyautonomous... expressionsof the mind"(p. 2). Myths constitute"the reality configured to establish a functionalrelationto ritual"(p. 68). Gruenwald similarlyredefines "existence"(p. 24), "ethos"(p. 41), "cosmos"(p. 69), andeven "reality"(pp. 69, 195), among a numberof otherterms. Curiously,the term "symbolism,"is left undefined,at least as far as I can tell (unfortunately,the book lacks a generalindex).Then,towardthe end of the book the readerdiscoversthe author's positive evaluationof the anthropologistStanley J. Tambiah'sdefinition of ritual as a "culturallycoded system of symbolic communication"(pp. 242-243). One can surely ask at this point whetherGruenwaldhas really demonstratedthat ritual is not symbolic or whetherhe has just redefined all the terms in such a fashion that "symbolism"no longer means for him what it does for Tambiahor most other scholarsof ritual. Scholars surely should reserve the right to redefine terms-I could hardly advise otherwise. However,scholarlyredefinitionsof common terms ought to be restrictedto cases where previous definitions have led to serious misunderstandings. Gruenwaldhas not made this case. His approachis to work in the other direction:he redefines the terms, and then complainsthatotherscholarshave failed to put things in precisely the way he would prefer.There are some serious issues discussed here, and thatis what to admirein a broadlyconceived,theoreticallyinformed,bold rethinkingof ritual in ancient Judaism.But when a work redefines nearlyall the terms of the debate,it becomes unnecessarilydifficult to evaluateor appreciateits particularcontribution. JonathanKlawans Boston University Boston, Massachusetts
YairLorberbaum.Image of God,HalakhahandAggadah.TelAviv: SchockenPublishing House, 2004. 544 pp. The centralthesis of Lorberbaum'sbook is that accordingto the rabbis,the meaningof imago dei is thatthere is tangibledivine presencewithin every human being. This concept impacted primarilyupon two areas of halakhah:the death penalty and procreation.Since humansare physical representationsof God, execution is equivalentin some ways to deicide. Conversely,procreationis strongly mandatedbecause it increasesGod'sphysical manifestationin the worldby creating more vehicles in which to embody God's presence. Importantly,as "images" of the divine, humanbeings functionas icons in a mannersimilarto the way idols 165
Book Reviews function in the pagan world;they drawGod's presence into themselves, blurring the bordersbetween representationand form. Finally,the drawingof God's presence into the humanbody dictates that humanbeings are embodied with significant theurgicpowers. This thesis rests upon two components:anthropomorphismand anthropology. The Tannaimhad an anthropomorphicconception of God. Their deity was a God with a concretephysical form and a complex personality,similarto the biblical conception of God. The tannaiticconception of humans as createdin God's image is also an expression of their anthropology,which takes into account both the humanintellectual/spiritualcapacities and the body's concretedimensions. In the first two of threeintroductorymethodologicalchapters,the authorsurveys previous scholarly work on imago dei and anthropomorphismin rabbinic thought.Lorberbaumdemonstrateshow deeply scholarshave been influencedby both the Maimonideantranscendentand incorporealdeity and by their own rational biases. Rabbisof the mishnaicandtalmudicperiods,accordingto Lorberbaum, rarelyconceived of God as being incorporealbut ratherineffable.God'sbody may be hiddenfrom humanbeings, but God does have a form.The thirdmethodological chapterdeals with the intimateconnectionbetweenhalakhahandaggadah. For Lorberbaumnot only does aggadah impacthalakhah,buthalakhicrulingsandbiblical exegeses arethe sourcethroughwhich rabbinictheosophycan be deciphered, for the rabbisshapedand expressedtheirtheosophythroughhalakhahas much as aggadah. A large portion of the book is dedicatedto demonstratinghow the concept of imago dei affected the death penalty and modes of execution. The Tannaim shapedthree out of the four modes of execution-strangling, burning,and stoning-so as to cause as little damageto the body as possible, for the body is an icon of God. They limited post-mortemhangingto a bare minimumof time and its applicabilityto only a few crimes. Decapitationis the exceptionthatprovesthe rule, for it is the punishmentfor the murderer,the very crime which diminishesthe image of God. The Tannaimimposed radicallystrictrequirementsforjudicial procedure and criminalconviction,which made executionvirtuallyimpossibleto carry out. Theirconcept of imago dei led to an outrightoppositionof executionas punishment, despite its prevalencein the Bible. Lorberbaum'swork on the deathpenalty is familiarterrain.This is the third book to be published in less than a decade that deals with the rabbinicprescriptions for carryingout execution.WhereasMoshe Halbertalin InterpretiveRevolutions in the Making (Jerusalem:The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 1997) claimed that the rabbisshapedthe deathpenalty to express the dignity of the human body (a moral value), Lorberbaumattributesthese exegeses and halakhotto tannaitictheosophyand theurgy.Anotherdifference is that Lorberbaumanalyzes the outrightopposition to the death penalty whereas this topic is not covered in Halbertal'swork. In contrastto both, Aharon Shemesh in Punishmentsand Sins: From Scriptureto the Rabbis (Jerusalem:The HebrewUniversityMagnes Press, 2003) emphasizes the rabbinicmidrashicimpulse as being a much greatercontributorto the shaping of halakhah. The close appearanceof these three books makes for fertile comparisonbetween their differentapproaches.The debateover 166
Book Reviews the propersetting for rabbinichalakhah,exegesis (Shemesh), encryptionof values/morality (Halbertal)or theosophy/theurgy(Lorberbaum)is a debateover the very identityof the rabbisthemselves, a debatethat is at the heartof modernrabbinic scholarship. Thereare two issues barelytouchedon in the book that deserve mention.At the end of his conclusion, Lorberbaummentions only briefly the concept of Israel as God'schosen people, an exclusive conceptionof Israelwhich conflicts with the universalisticconcept of imago dei. Most of Lorberbaum'sbook deals with Rabbi Akiva's first statementin M. Avoth3:14, "Preciousis adam for he was createdin the image [of God]"RabbiAkiva'snext statement,"Preciousis Israelin that they are called childrento the Omnipresent,"seems to proposea genealogicalrelationship with God,one exclusive of otherhumanbeings. The reconciliationof this second statementwith the first deserves deeperexploration,and indeed the authoris currentlyworkingon a book on this very topic. Similarly,the book does not deal with issues of gender.Whenconceiving of an embodiedGod,did the Tannaimconceive of God as engendered,gender-neutral,or perhapsdual-gendered? Lorberbaum'sbook is in the process of being translatedinto English andwill hopefully be publishedby 2005-06. In translation,it shouldhave impactnot only on scholarsof rabbinics,but also on scholarsof earlyChristianityandGnosticism, as well as on a wide range of scholars of religion and religious history. Lorberbaumdiscusses the shift in concepts of holiness fromthe Second Templeperiodto the post-destructionera. He also very briefly surveys other post-70 CE Jewish groups for whom the idea of imago dei was also central.However,since the book is aboutthe Tannaimand not ancientJudaism,he does not developthese ideas. The ideas that the presence of God is representedin every humanbeing and that the humanbeing is the seat of holiness are rich concepts in the study of the various forms of ancientJudaism,includingearly Christianityin its variousforms. When translatedand availableto a broaderrangeof scholars,Lorberbaum'sbook should serve as a new and critical startingpoint for inquiryinto the relationshipbetween early Christianity,Gnosticism,Neoplatonism,and rabbinicJudaism. JoshuaKulp The ConservativeYeshiva Jerusalem,Israel
AaronW.Hughes. TheTextureof the Divine: Imaginationin MedievalIslamic and Jewish Thought.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress, 2004. x, 273 pp. Three texts are scrutinizedin this monograph:Hayy ibn Yaqzan(Alive son of Awake),the Epistle or philosophic "Recital"composed in Arabic prose by the Muslim sage ibn Sina (Avicenna,980-1037); Hayy ben Meqitz,the closely related Hebrew poem composed by the Andalusian Jewish sage Abrahamibn Ezra (1089-1164); andHayy ibn Yaqzan,the more loosely relatedArabictreatisecomposed by the AndalusianMuslim sage Abu Bakribn Tufayl(1116-1185). Each of 167
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Kaiman P. Bland Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 167-169 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131819 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews the propersetting for rabbinichalakhah,exegesis (Shemesh), encryptionof values/morality (Halbertal)or theosophy/theurgy(Lorberbaum)is a debateover the very identityof the rabbisthemselves, a debatethat is at the heartof modernrabbinic scholarship. Thereare two issues barelytouchedon in the book that deserve mention.At the end of his conclusion, Lorberbaummentions only briefly the concept of Israel as God'schosen people, an exclusive conceptionof Israelwhich conflicts with the universalisticconcept of imago dei. Most of Lorberbaum'sbook deals with Rabbi Akiva's first statementin M. Avoth3:14, "Preciousis adam for he was createdin the image [of God]"RabbiAkiva'snext statement,"Preciousis Israelin that they are called childrento the Omnipresent,"seems to proposea genealogicalrelationship with God,one exclusive of otherhumanbeings. The reconciliationof this second statementwith the first deserves deeperexploration,and indeed the authoris currentlyworkingon a book on this very topic. Similarly,the book does not deal with issues of gender.Whenconceiving of an embodiedGod,did the Tannaimconceive of God as engendered,gender-neutral,or perhapsdual-gendered? Lorberbaum'sbook is in the process of being translatedinto English andwill hopefully be publishedby 2005-06. In translation,it shouldhave impactnot only on scholarsof rabbinics,but also on scholarsof earlyChristianityandGnosticism, as well as on a wide range of scholars of religion and religious history. Lorberbaumdiscusses the shift in concepts of holiness fromthe Second Templeperiodto the post-destructionera. He also very briefly surveys other post-70 CE Jewish groups for whom the idea of imago dei was also central.However,since the book is aboutthe Tannaimand not ancientJudaism,he does not developthese ideas. The ideas that the presence of God is representedin every humanbeing and that the humanbeing is the seat of holiness are rich concepts in the study of the various forms of ancientJudaism,includingearly Christianityin its variousforms. When translatedand availableto a broaderrangeof scholars,Lorberbaum'sbook should serve as a new and critical startingpoint for inquiryinto the relationshipbetween early Christianity,Gnosticism,Neoplatonism,and rabbinicJudaism. JoshuaKulp The ConservativeYeshiva Jerusalem,Israel
AaronW.Hughes. TheTextureof the Divine: Imaginationin MedievalIslamic and Jewish Thought.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress, 2004. x, 273 pp. Three texts are scrutinizedin this monograph:Hayy ibn Yaqzan(Alive son of Awake),the Epistle or philosophic "Recital"composed in Arabic prose by the Muslim sage ibn Sina (Avicenna,980-1037); Hayy ben Meqitz,the closely related Hebrew poem composed by the Andalusian Jewish sage Abrahamibn Ezra (1089-1164); andHayy ibn Yaqzan,the more loosely relatedArabictreatisecomposed by the AndalusianMuslim sage Abu Bakribn Tufayl(1116-1185). Each of 167
Book Reviews the texts is well known to specialists in medieval intellectualhistory.Editions and criticaldiscussions abound,almost all of them listed in the bibliography(pp. 24565). The Arabic texts have long been accessible in reliable English translations. Thanksto AaronW. Hughes, the same can now be said for ibn Ezra'sless familiar narrativepoem. In the appendix(pp. 189-207), the poem is renderedinto English based on the original Hebrewtext publishedin 1983 by IsraelLevin. The translation is enhancedby referencesto the biblical idioms employedby ibn Ezrawho ingeniously transformedibn Sina'sprofoundlyIslamicoriginalinto an equally stunning Hebrewgem. The value of Hughes'smonographfar exceeds the welcome offering of an annotatedEnglish translationof ibn Ezra'spoem. Levin'seditorialagendadid not include the investigationof ibn Tufayl'sclassic. Levin also preferredto stress major differencesbetween ibn Sina's"Epistle"and ibn Ezra'spoem. On both counts, to ourbenefit, Hughes departsfrom Levin. Havingnoticed numerousstylistic and doctrinalaffinities among these three diverse texts, Hughes arguesthat they constellate. First,he contendsthat the three medieval texts sharea common origin in ancient propheticrevelationsand apocalypticascents to heaven. Second, he proposes thatthe medievaltexts belong to the same literarycycle or genre.This genre is distinguishedby an elaboratefusion of technical philosophy with imaginative literature.Third,he maintainsthat the genre serves as literarysurrogateto living psychopompswho lead theirdisciples to philosophicallyinformedhumanperfection. Hughes names the genre Neoplatonic "initiatorytales"(p. 19). The monograph'stitle is thereforemore alluringthan informative.Readers ought not expect to find a discussion of imaginationin all of medievalJewish and Islamic thought, especially its treatmentamong Sufis and Kabbalists.By "medieval thought,"Hughes strictlymeans the eleventh- and twelfth-centuryNeoplatonic philosophers,amongwhom he problematicallyincludesMaimonides(p. 227 n. 61). Hughes apparentlymiscalculatedMaimonides'scritique of positive attributes and Neoplatonic aesthetics (pp. 103, 150). Readerswill also not find a discussion of imaginationin medieval Islamic theories of prophecy and political philosophy (p. 129). By imagination,Hughes strictlymeansthe "innereye,"the humancapacitythatproducescataphaticimages of the apophaticdivine.Neoplatonicimagination,accordingto Hughes,forges stirring symbols of spiritualbeing out of the raw materialof corporealmultiplicity and evanescentbecoming. These symbols simultaneouslyaffirm the physical order and enable human transcendenceof that order as the prerequisiteto soteriological "permanence"(p. 150). Neoplatonism, at least in its medieval Jewish and Islamicguises, thereforeemergesin Hughes'sexpositionas less ascetic thanscholarly conventiontraditionallyassumes. More so than the title, chapterheadings indicatethe true scope of authorial intentionand accomplishment:"Readingthe Divine: A User's Guide to the Initiatory Tale"(pp. 13-47), "ReadingBetween the Lines: Text as Encounterwith the Divine" (pp. 49-81), "Polishing a Dirty Mirror:The Philosophic Imagination" (pp. 82-114), "The Initiationof the Philosopher:RitualPoetics and the Quest for Meaning"(pp. 115-145), and "'God is Beautifuland Loves Beauty':The Role of Aesthetics in Medieval Islamic and Jewish Philosophy"(pp. 146-184). The clus168
Book Reviews tered reiterationof "reading,""tale,""lines,""text,"and "poetics"indicates that Hughes is less interestedin exploringthe tactile implicationsof the term"texture" than in mapping"the attemptto textualizethe ineffable"(p. 1). Hughes contends that the three texts record visionary journeys across the Great Chain of Being. Thesejourneys culminatein a trans-rational,religious encounterwith divinity,the Neoplatonic "flightof the alone to the Alone,"and that subsequentreadersempathetically undergo similarjourneys, attainingsimilar transformativeencounters. "This visionary experience of God,"accordingto Hughes, championof philosophizing with literature,"canonly occurwithin a rich narrativesetting such as that which the readerencountersin" these tales (p. 40, emphasis added).The exclusivity of his claim is open to challenge. Scrupulousas he is in Chapters1 and 3 to describe the historical circumstancesof the authorsandto locate the threetexts withintheircomplex literarytraditions, Hughes is less conscientious in specifying the gender and predisposition of the "reader... [who] is invited to experience the same journey as the [text's] protagonist"(p. 187). This is presumablythe same "reader[who] is transformed and emerges as a differentperson when he or she finishes the tale" (p. 145). Visionaryexperiencesand literarytexts arenot synonymous.Textsarenot machines infallibly producinguniform results; readersare not automatons.Not every medieval Jew or Muslim can be expected to have fancied Neoplatonic fictions. Confrontingthe texts, numerousmedieval Jews or Muslims might have been left cold or provokedto object. Like Odysseus before them, andmany modernsafterthem, including FriedrichNietzsche and MarthaNussbaum (p. 212, nn.13-17), they might have resisted the bookish invitationto "transcendhumanity."That Hughes seems unawareof these possibilities may be due to his exhilaratingand learned immersionin the realmof embodiedNeoplatonicaesthetics.His expositionof this relativelyignored,world-affirmingrealmwill providegreatpleasureto medievalists who love Neoplatonismand find aesthetics compelling. KalmanP. Bland Duke University Durham,North Carolina
Marc B. Shapiro.TheLimits of OrthodoxTheology:Maimonides'ThirteenPrinciples Reappraised.The LittmanLibraryof Jewish Civilization. Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress, 2004. 221 pp. Marc Shapiroputs an explicit contemporarycontext on this remarkablecollection of sources that disagreedwith one part or other of Maimonides'Thirteen Principles-the beliefs Maimonidesassertedwere absolutelynecessaryto be considereda believing Jew and to attainthe Worldto Come. By showingthe extent to which past authorsdisagreedwith those Principles, Shapiroseeks to debunk assertions by contemporarywritersthatplace those Principlesat the core of Orthodox belief. 169
Review: [untitled] Author(s): Gidon Rothstein Source: AJS Review, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Apr., 2005), pp. 169-171 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131820 . Accessed: 21/07/2011 02:15 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected].
Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews tered reiterationof "reading,""tale,""lines,""text,"and "poetics"indicates that Hughes is less interestedin exploringthe tactile implicationsof the term"texture" than in mapping"the attemptto textualizethe ineffable"(p. 1). Hughes contends that the three texts record visionary journeys across the Great Chain of Being. Thesejourneys culminatein a trans-rational,religious encounterwith divinity,the Neoplatonic "flightof the alone to the Alone,"and that subsequentreadersempathetically undergo similarjourneys, attainingsimilar transformativeencounters. "This visionary experience of God,"accordingto Hughes, championof philosophizing with literature,"canonly occurwithin a rich narrativesetting such as that which the readerencountersin" these tales (p. 40, emphasis added).The exclusivity of his claim is open to challenge. Scrupulousas he is in Chapters1 and 3 to describe the historical circumstancesof the authorsandto locate the threetexts withintheircomplex literarytraditions, Hughes is less conscientious in specifying the gender and predisposition of the "reader... [who] is invited to experience the same journey as the [text's] protagonist"(p. 187). This is presumablythe same "reader[who] is transformed and emerges as a differentperson when he or she finishes the tale" (p. 145). Visionaryexperiencesand literarytexts arenot synonymous.Textsarenot machines infallibly producinguniform results; readersare not automatons.Not every medieval Jew or Muslim can be expected to have fancied Neoplatonic fictions. Confrontingthe texts, numerousmedieval Jews or Muslims might have been left cold or provokedto object. Like Odysseus before them, andmany modernsafterthem, including FriedrichNietzsche and MarthaNussbaum (p. 212, nn.13-17), they might have resisted the bookish invitationto "transcendhumanity."That Hughes seems unawareof these possibilities may be due to his exhilaratingand learned immersionin the realmof embodiedNeoplatonicaesthetics.His expositionof this relativelyignored,world-affirmingrealmwill providegreatpleasureto medievalists who love Neoplatonismand find aesthetics compelling. KalmanP. Bland Duke University Durham,North Carolina
Marc B. Shapiro.TheLimits of OrthodoxTheology:Maimonides'ThirteenPrinciples Reappraised.The LittmanLibraryof Jewish Civilization. Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress, 2004. 221 pp. Marc Shapiroputs an explicit contemporarycontext on this remarkablecollection of sources that disagreedwith one part or other of Maimonides'Thirteen Principles-the beliefs Maimonidesassertedwere absolutelynecessaryto be considereda believing Jew and to attainthe Worldto Come. By showingthe extent to which past authorsdisagreedwith those Principles, Shapiroseeks to debunk assertions by contemporarywritersthatplace those Principlesat the core of Orthodox belief. 169
Book Reviews As a potpourriof ideas, the workis astonishingin its range. Shapirouses his dauntingbibliographicalabilities and his considerableskill as a writerto present his material-well-known and obscure-cogently and entertainingly.To the reader interestedin the limits of the theological imaginationof Jews, it is not likely to be soon rivaled.What he has not done is offer intellectualhistory or made a relevant theological argument.For history, Shapirowould have at least had to place each idea cited in the context of the time andplace in which it developed.Whatwe have insteadis a large amountof undigesteddata,which would need much fleshing out to become history. Space considerationspreventcritiquingth
