Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 10.
The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 10.
The Jewish Quarterly Review. 1910. Volume 10.
http://www.archive.org/details/jewishquarterlyr10drop
THE
EW SERIES
EDITED BY
CYRUS ADLER
VOLUME X
1919-1920
PRINTED
IN
ENGLAND
DS
I0\
35
V.IO
CONTENTS
PAGE
Casanowicz,
I.
M.
:
Hopkins's
'
History of Religions
',
373
DuscHiNSKY, C.
The Rabbinate
1
London, from
756-1842
:
.....
.
445
Friedenwald, Harry
Hebrew Language
in
:
19
Greenstone, Julius H.
tian
'
The Hebrew-Chris.
. .
Messiah'
B.
:
-153
.
Halper,
Gaon
411
199
Hertz, Joseph H.
An
Explanation of Abot
:
VL
3.
HiRSCHFELD, Hartwig
graphy
The Dot
in
Semitic
Palaeo-
159
HoscHANDER, Jacob
of History
81
Macht, David
'Gourds''
/A Pharmacological Study of
Biblical
.185
:
Mann, Jacob
The Responsa
of the Babylonian
. .
Geonim
.121,
. .
309
Marmorstein, a.
The Takkanot
:
of Ezra
370
Marx, Alexander
Paetow's
.
Mediaeval History'
1.
529
Canticles
with the
.
.
377
Segal, M. H.
III to
203, 421
IV
CONTENTS
PAGE
Waxman,
Meyer
The Philosophy
of
.
Don
.
Hasdai
.
Crescas.
Chapters
to
:
VII
25, 291
Time
........
:
Zeitlin,
Solomon
Megillat
Taanit as a Source
in
for
the
Hellenistic
.
Chapters
IV
to
XII
.
49, 237
.
Solomon
The Takkanot
of Ezra
367
University.
of
time
reproduced
INIaimonides'
fifteenth
new
definition of his
'rMr\
own.
niny
It
'ntr
reads as
pna'
follows
ix
Nine' nsn'
JCD p23n
-iiyc.
'
n6i
nniion
nyijnn
nipmnn
The term
',
mpmnn
is
cohesion
and
contrasted with
'
nmann
',
or mpiDnn, which
as, e. g., in
mean
'disnr^D
creteness
and
'
disjunction
ntD3
the expressions
and
Stcopicr/J.ii'ou
in
Categories, IV.
Taken
to
in this sense,
would have
be translated as
follows
'
To
be
is
meaningless.
But
it
Gersonides'
2i).
Among
the several
tentative
interpretations
is
of
by Gersonides, there
one
which but
is like
for the
by Crescas.
It
reads somewhat
as follows
instants,
Time
is
mnyn
nyijnn
I'at;'
hd
s'ln
nyi:nn
n\n'
-lyc"'
"I'^'N
p^rn-i:'
-iJSNrL?'
dn
p3
TC-'S
"Viz'n
nM''L"3
uit2^
nn ,nyi:nn ip^n^
irx
onn ninyn.
Now, previous
VOL. X.
2
tion,
to
'
continuous quantity
"y^
"h
n'ii^"
'
bounded
nnsn
by
instants.
:niN-VDnc
cmv
nnyn-j*
nsno xim
. . .
mc^n
continuity of motion
in Crescas's definition
could be taken
',
to
mean
'
the term
njji:nn b'C\
to pnnnr^n nioan
or of rest
'
would thus be
by Gersonides.
the definition
is
It is
somewhat
that
taken by
jiidiscJien PJiilosophen
dcs Mittelalters,
p.
144.
'
Die
Ruhe oder an
;
der
Bewegung zwischen
Mass
fiir
die Zeit
ist
also das
fiir
die
nicht zusam-
some
that
raised
if
difficulties.
Were
this
its
meaning,
it
is
strange
Crescas
should
take
no notice
of the
objections
by Gersonides
Furthermore,
meaning of Crescas's
definition,
he has
failed to
of rest
'
in
is
for rest
an
it,
objection
is
insisted
upon, as
It
is
we
shall see,
by one of
his critics.
therefore
necessary that
the
term
nipannn
be
The
assumes
CRESCAS
S DEFINITION
OF TIME
WOLFSON
I
3
shall
origin.
It
can be
shown
known
and
'
to Crescas to
',
have
in
cohesion
'
duration
Thus
in
Or Adonai,
I,
i,
13,
Maiits
corresponding
Greek term
a-vvey^eia
it
likewise
Aristotle uses
in
\.\\e
in
one passage
Physics, VIII,
3 (260 b, 20-21).
In the
Hebrew
is
in
n^nvJ
and
in
in
The
motion
behind
definition
is
it.
of time
post-Aristotelian
philosophy
latter of
among
whom
tried to identify
Its
Crescas was
difference
Crescas
saw
clear
through
the
later definitions
of time,
is
and has
own
purpose.
It
definition,
and
to his
reliance
of
^
its
meaning.
is
This
The Ferrara
edition as well
^V"1*L^'
Paris
and
IN
TiDn panne.
B 2
The
of duration
found
in Plotinus.
7, 6,
some
identify
it
with
5/a(r-7;/za,
is
i.
e.
the interval
SidcrTrjixa
or extension of motion.
What
meant by that
The Latin
translation, however,
'.
adds
is
This gloss
by Plotinus
himself.
which he mentions
roaoi'Se,
i.
e.
and avrix^ia,
i.
e.
duration.
name
In
of the author of
un-Aristotelian
definition
of time.
But we gather
one place
in
information from
Simplicius.
his
Commentary on
it
(cf.
is
motion
Eng.
Zeller, S/o/es,
Epicureans and
2).
Tr., p. 197,
note
In another place,
Commentary
11 sqq.
on the Physics
libros
(cf.
comvientaria, ed.
786,
p.
1.
and
544).
first
Simplicius
mentions the
fact that
Jamblichus
in
the
book of
his
Commentary on
that
'
time
...
is
a certain
universal
A little further in
as the one
who interpreted the term 'extension' used by Archytas temporal extension duration To quote or to mean Time is the universal extension of the nature Simplicius
*
',
'
'.
'
it
is
And
as
he proceeds, he
CRESCAS
renders
it
DEFINITION OF TIME
WOLFSON
still
clearer, that
according to magnitude
duration of the ever*.
p.
7^<^^
1^'
[i.e.
Cf.
p.
787,
11.
33-4, and
18-20 KadoXov
ov fxovii^
Se
Sida-Trifia
r^?
tov TrauTot
^iVecoy.
on
Kii^ijadcos
dXXa Kal
rjpefiias
Kai
TrpoiXOcov iTL
aa(f)e<TT(.pov
kirotrjcr^v,
rrji/
on
ov Kara /liyeOos
a>pia TO SidaTTj/jLa,
dXXd Kara
the
Time
of
number
(:>j^)
it
celestial
sphere.
(iSx)
Or, again,
is
to
be a kind
duration
the
movement
Dieterici, text,
(Cf.
Es-Safd,
of
Arabic
German
is
translation,
pp. 14-15
&c.).
Book
these
V of
two
his series
Of
definitions,
clear,
the
first
represents the
un-Aristotelian.
The
his
latter
work
2).
is
(cf.
Horten,
iii,
ch. 4,
'
The term
JU-y^l.
'
duration
reproduces
similar
his
is
Makasid
He
that
says,
is
Time
motion
'.
(From
of Professor
Henry
'
Malter.)
'
The terms
consulted.
duration
and
'
extension
'
are differently
Hebrew
translations
which
have
In one (MS.
Mm.
(S.
rendered by
',
its
Hebrew
niDu'Snn
jlx;*l,
by
nvi^nn
mo^
is
tj^i
fcrn
'3).
In the other
^\^:u\
(MS.
idid.,
Mm.
6.
30), il-
rendered by ny and
by
^'n nyijnn
is
nyu
n^-^^n
;orn
3).
The same
definition
also reproduced
by Sharastani,
something having
It is this that
we
L
call
L^I
time.'
J^:l. j^9
^^Sjt^
j^.l!.
JS^
j:lk-
^"^j^
^Iji.
UaU
ills
The term
'
have translated by
duration
is Jl^l^)!,
word which,
and again,
like the
Hebrew
nip2"tnn,
used
'
to join
'to cohere',
like the
Hebrew mp^nnn,
But
is
ordinarily
light of
means 'cohesion'
or 'continuity'.
in
the
reproduced
by
of
Algazali, and
avvky^^ia
and the
Hebrew
'
nipannn,
'.
have taken
this
term here
translated
in the sense
duration
Haarbriicker,
who
Sharastani
into
this peculiar
meaning
He
ordinary sense
WOLFSON
attributes
to
be that of Crescas,
in his definition
if
'
we were
to translate the
'.
term
mpmnn
in
by cohesion
Saadia defines
time as being
'
(cf.
Einnnot,
II, i
J
,
j* Wll
ijlojJl
^jlS.
iXo,
which
in
trans-
m:^ dn
I3i\^< joini).
The
'
essentially
characteristic
word
in this definition is
the term
duration
',
Einimot,
I,
4,
'
Its essence,
truly defined,
.
is
sIxj*
uub^ja^l
5^3.
U.jlj.
'Isj
Ibn
Tibbon
.
.
by
nnsL'Ti
!?3wX).
Now
of time
Die
RcligionspJiilosophic des
lacks the
being the
shall
number
see,
is
or measure of motion.
But Guttmann, as we
in identifying
Saadia's definition
as Platonic.
ficial
He
Dauer
'
would seem
to
feature.
(7;-.,
521,
'
Aus
diesen
Hirer Uvildtifc
'.)
BLdarrjiia
only
in the
it
Tiuiaciis (37-9)
doubtful reference to
in
we may
istic
its
connexion with
to the nature
As
is
a matter of controversy
among
totle,
the spheres,
itself.
it
(Cf.
Simplicius,
It is therefore
more reasonable
characterized
to
we have
'.
seen,
is
'
duration
He
defines time as DN
(cf.
^2
MT^fin
mr:yo
[mTN
to
^"33]nn''j:s
Hegyon ha-Nefesh,
the dubious reading
literal
p.
By changing
of [riT'ON
mD
we have a
Hebrew
trans^la>
rendered by
'I'^ipj;.
definition
whom
time
is
defined
(cf.
as
the
measure of motion
p. 115).
We
in the
un',
the term
'
extension
in
In Greek
In Arabic for
is
'
jIj^I,
which
translated
WOLFSON
^C^D^.
'\ii,
For 'duration' we
used by Saadia, and
Tibbon) or by
in
(2)
il-t
used
Hebrew by
mo
and ny.
is
(3)
the
The Hebrew
is
nipmnn, and
In
it
is
this
term which
used
as
here
by
Crescas.
seen, the
'
all
these definitions
is
of time,
we have
without
term 'duration'
'
motion
(Plotinus,
Arabic
authors),
or
(Archytas, Saadia,
',
Abraham
it
bar Hiyya).
The
used
term
'
motion
therefore,
is
un-Aristotelian definition.
for
used at
all,
it
is
some other
'
reason,
of
rest
',
Thus Crescas
it
is
the
(cf.
Simplicius's
un-
and how
it
differs
from the
Aristotelian definition.
To
well known,
His own
Time
is
it
is
conceived
only
in
real, for
motion implies
But
in so far as
time
is
it
being
lO
is
conceptual,
(cf.
measuring or numbering
is
mental
Physics,
IV, xv).
tion,
The
that time
is
purely ideal.
We
thus find that Crescas. after having stated this definition of time, derives from
'
it
Consequently
is
it
may
time
only
in
the soul'
nvn hnt
T^h^.
According to
this
view time
absolutely independent of
It
We
be taken
pi' II,
in
its
literal
sense.
-|3
mm'
'i -h:nd
ncNn* nth
mip
'ai (cf.
Morch,
XXX).
But time,
in
its
measurable.
It
is
an unqualified
It
is
the subject of
motion
(2)
the
medium
of motion and
may
itself,
which
is
And
thus
when there
the
velocit}-.
an object
in
a definite portion of
by
give
CRESCAS
rise to
S DEFINITION
OF TIME
WOI.FSON
we
II
time
it
are
own.
in
Time appears
op.
cit.
to us in
its
definite proportions
(cf.
only
Sharastani
and Algazali,
Hence
may
be
the
(discussion
different
from motion
ed.
tatiomnn,
'An tempus
Duns
in
re
distinguatur a
motu
'
cf.
also Annotationcs to
Scotus's
XV,
According to Aristotle's
;
definition time
materially they
the language of
are
both identical.
Or,
to
put
it
in
same
in subject
{hiroK^mivc^
X'C'ijn)
but
different in definition
{\6ya>=
"i?:x?:3).
IV, II,
p. 712,
11.
18-19 OlWcI
KOiV
T(J0
Their
common
this
the
moving
its
object.
When we
view
motion
in
space
we
in
it
with reference to
we
get time.
According
other
to the definition
adopted
by
Crescas,
on
the
hand,
time
and
motion arc
12
materially different.
purely conceptual.
In order to be measured,
space
is
distance
by
definitions
revolve,
as
have been
Averroes.
As we have
'
time
in
terms of
duration
Aristotle.
Now,
in his
Hapalat
I,
Algazali
makes
Passing by
is
itself is
time;
by
-inya
nnyn
nnt
'^
^nyi:nn
in
sin
inhn
.prn.
I,
To
as
it
this
Averroes
:
replies
his
is
Hapalat Iia-Hapalah,
follows
'
What he
Certain
says
we have
before
'
and the
motion as well as
This
is
in
(quoted in Narboni's
Commentary
Paris, Bibl.
n?:NL" n?
"2 /hz>r\r,
ni'ann n::n
icsi
hhy
nil
The
clear.
is
To
is
I3
WOLFSON
To
It
is
from motion.
Hence
it
is
ideal.
tlie latter,
time
is
therefore
in
in so far real.
by Narboni
his
Commentary on
the
JSIoreli,
XV,
Averroes makes
He
'
may
be termed
forn
'
eternity
nis"'Vo
T^'rrno nv^^D
^ny"i:nn
wirzh
|r:Tn
nr
,nr-i
\i
iCwSi
nm
ir^s"'
Nin
,nv:m
ny n^x
-i^"')^*"'
n?
ph
^myyijn?2n
ph
'3
;
,myyi:nD
^rhir\
nis*v?.:in
^::
niwX''VD
Di?rs*
Ti^'dhd
n!;^^D
p-iyn
-jt:>r:nn
n'jij
nrnn
nv?:)
nip^ ;DTn
x^nr'
sin
nDL'-oni ^nnpi?:
^i:>
myyi^ncn msvj:3n
ums'^:'
hh\2r\ ^prx-in
'3
-jan
"inro
iinxx
-jr?:.!
/I'poa
,n
ni:n'j'a
nrnn nvo
nip^ nvjni
^3
.jrrr
.n:nD'D nix^*f:2
xi?
nnox
;^\
mm
px
,jr:ij
ixin' x^ ix pnix^^kTo
omx^VD T^x
D3.
is
D^DL"n
Dnvna xin
p^Tnc' -inx
an appellative term
be conceived but
daJir in Arabic
in
is
an appellation
said
to have
no existence
is
By
this
he means to say
that time
duration, which
it
must be implicated
it
is
duration thereof
of the
first
for
time
is
other
changed
in the
same manner
is
another object
said to
14
Eternity, however,
It
to
be
has the
is
related.
in
the
De
The same
Aristotelian
un-
definition
again brought
out
by
Narboni
in his
Commentary on
irm
3vj'n^
^nm?:)
-a
ncn
p o
'a!?
n-jn
p
nn
ni^b N^
.
|?:Tn "iiyc"
m*.v
Nin
sine-'
i^nj^s-LT
Nin
|D:n
nyi:nn
idd
pw-i
pc'
"3
'
"number" used by
number
of
number
of duration which
He
to
common
CRESCAS
subject
[i.e.
DEFINITION OF TIME
WOLFSON
15
motion];
and
this follows as a
differs
consequence
from that of
motion
Though motion
of
it.
bears
some
relation to time,
it
is
not part
This
is
in contradistinction to
Averroes's view.
For
e.
in form,
not in substance].
out,
time
is
In
adopting
this
un-Aristotelian
definition
of time
The main
is
the
Motion comes
and
may do as
well as motion.
The
full signifi-
Isaac Ibn
Shem-tob
(fifteenth century),
who
like his
makes
several
disparaging
Taking Crescas's
definition to differ
'
from that of
',
rest
he argues
Since rest
is
still
existence of motion.
plicitly
this
particular
instance.
He
refers to
him only
'.
as a
'
certain scholar
from
among
the philosophers
It
is
clear,
however, that he
l6
refers there to
names and
criticizes in
niyi
nr
H'l HT
-i':x:i
N^*r:2
n\n^'i
nj2b
,rh
men
nyi^ni?
nvva
1200
nni^o!?
ins
no
nmjcm
iJvxc*
nyiinn
"lOons*
ina-j'
. .
m:3
,n''3n
.]
nr^N n^ nr
-inyc pddh
mnna msa
]':p
pson
idt
mnnn
nnns*
3''n* nri:'
xin |ct"
nm^oa
nnsi
im
ij-ivv
my^'osi
myn^
nyj'D pjpn
myn
TODr
prn
mn
nniirrn
np^nr
-.mpon
"isi
nn onpinn
nns ddh
TC'n
The discussion
literature,
of time
in
as
here outlined,
In
it
may
prove to be of some
find all the prob-
historical significance.
we already
by the
later Scholastics
it
the
problem as to the
in
its
definition
in
of time, whether
should be
terms of motion or
reality,
and as to the
have seen
is
We
It
how
interesting
to note that
Furthermore, Crescas's
historical
background
of
may throw
the
same problem.
Spinoza, as
2
the Cambridge
to
University Library,
Mm.
This worlc
have found
commentary on Averroes's
Iiitcniiediate Physics in
work
to Isaac
Albalag {Uebcrsetsniigeii,
internal
In
may
have proofs
that he
is
in Trinity College,
Cambridge, R.
8. 19,
which are
(cf.
,
52
c).
WOLFSON
Time
'
17
duration
'
'.
Duration
is
indefinite time.
is
only one
{cogitandi^
portion of time
(cf.
XXIXj.
Without
and eternity
as a whole,
it
is
freely
Jewish philosophic
it
literature.
To
may
tion
we have
discussed.
VOL. X.
Md.
practice
The
prominence
of
the Jews
in
is
the
well
of
Middle Ages
known.
As
high rank.
is
Yet a
large
Hebrew
that language.
in
The
in
to be found
Hebrew MSS.
of Berlin,
Munich, and
Hebrdische Uebersetztmgen.
The
in
relatively large
number
of
Hebrew medical
of medical
writings
Hebrew played
There
are
in
the
facts,
diffusion
knowledge.
similar
other
however,
which
bear
testimony
a striking manner.
(a)
May
30, 1497,
Ki"& Manuel
permission to
surgeons to study
conditions
'
:
And
is
our pleasure
that
as
such
physicians
and
surgeons
19
as
have
been
and
c a
20
shall
know
Latin,
;
may keep
this
is
Hebrew books
and
to
who
will
become Christians
in
(it is)
not
(b)
Another
more
striking evidence
is
of the importance of
Hebrew medical
writings
found
in
Leipzig
August, 1518.
August,
:
The copy
in
my
1519."-
On
p.
ment
Nunc
ut est
consiliariam
Haec
professio
omnium
gen-
The decree
:
is
to
be found republished
Kayserling's Geschicliie
in
The sentence
fisj'cos,
the original
as follows
'
e asy
mesmo
de artes
em
ebraico
e ysto sse
solorgiaes,
nenhus
2
nao.'
in
1493
in
He
became
rector.
He was
man
to
for
is
he died
when
An
account of his
found in
Allgeiit.
XXII,
p. 358.
HEBREW
tium
IN
MEDIAEVAL MEDICINE
FRIEDENWALD
21
hominibiKs sint
Hnguaium gcnere
non
?
Quae
bitur
et
fuerit
medico gnavo
rimaaliae
iucundissimum, commodissimumque
si
Qui autem
non ut omnes
linguarum
sit
imperitus?
An
omnium
?
Latet adeo
in
Hebraeorum
alterius
linguae
libris
Eum
citra
Hebraicae
grammaticae cognitionem
Hie mentior,
si
non
et gravissimi
homines
et inter Christia-
ct
maximus
est et cordatissimus,
medicos
quoque ludaeos
sibi asciscunt.
Quis enim
nescit,
Fridericum
Romanorum Imperatorem
quinquaginta vixisse
?
Non
Ouin
Pudet
et lulio
Secundo
Pontif.
Max.
ille
medicus prorogavit
et
non raro a
ad
ludaeos provocatur.
spectari
quod
in Christianis desyderetur.
si
nem ex ludaeorum
minus
felicis ingenii
fontibus hauserit
Et quid
vetat,
quo
dumque
satis est,
condiscate?
Doctissimus
ille
Origenes,
fere
sanctissimus
Hieronymus,
quamquam
iam
decies
Latinum sermonem
conversis,
ille
senex,
22
hie iuvenis
erubuerunt,
tanti,
et
qua non
Ergo
corum
si
in arte
sua cedere,
si
si
pudendum
in
non
intelligere,
inde-
iuvenes,
quotquot
huic ordini
nomen
dedistis;
quin
ad
omnia devitare
poteritis,
This
may
let
be rendered
in
English as follows
Now
the art
herself.
of nature
all,
This profession, as
it
is
it
depends entirely on a
knowledge of languages.
to
common
men of all nations, remedies for these have been handed down in various fashions according to the different nature
of languages.
And would
it
them out
art, like
if
he
is
unskilled in
And
all
other,
been learned
in
of
all
by the Jews
?
There
am
having called
my
attention to this interesting oration and to Professor David S. Blondfor aid in translation.
HEBREW
IN
MEDIAEVAL MEDICINE
FRIEDENWALD
if
23
without a knowledge of
into the light.
Hebrew grammar
And
among
all
am
mistaken
men and
in
those
the Christians
in
who
my
opinion, and
the chief
Who
is
ignorant
Emperor
of the
Romans, the
fifty
years
by
skill ?
And
to
also that
for
prolonged
life
Pope Julius
had almost
begun
mourn
for
him
shameful,
what
very
is
much more
if
doctor
same method of
prevents our
are destined
And what
who
from learning
this language, in a
for study, in a
few few
years, or
if
comprehending and
know-
to learn
the
of
this,
hesitate
24
medical
in
which no knowledge
is
neglected without
danger? ....
Therefore,
if it
is
own
in
art, if it is
shameful not
if it
own
his
profession,
is
own
metier,
what
many
of
your
what remains,
say, but to
which you
may
avoid
all
those things
CHAPTER V
Providence and Free Will.
Crescas
also to posits that the
providence of
is
God extends
uniform.
is
particulars,
yet
it
not
entirely
It
It
in
some
some way
individual.
The
general
is
the perfection
included, and
into a special
is
kind where
into
the
perfection
of the
unit
in
consideration.
in the
form
There
is
some kind
is
in
individuals
in
not
Crescas goes
is
on to exemplify
his division.
The
its
general Providence
composition, natural
Although these
and the
we
in as
a part
of Providence.
The human
species
an example of general
25
26
is
endowed with
reason.
it
alike,
is
Thus he goes on
to
unnecessary details.
The
an
particular
spiricual
Providence, in his
ethical
and
life
or the
opposite.
This kind of
Providence
in
and
it
is
arranged and
observe
will.^^"'
We
here
from
the
theories
of the Jewish
who emphasized
special providence,^'^^
man
ascends
in
on the other
over the
value
The problem
by
Crescas.
It
is
taken up next
religious
for its
thinkers,
removal.
Of these
The
first is
the
for
the purpose of the good, and the good of the wicked for the purpose of
^^^
evil.^^^
Both
possibilities are
objected to
nnpn imnn
p.
b2:v2)
n-moo
is
isud
Nim,
Or Adomit,
destined.
186
35
a.
Dnp
here
to
point.
'*'''
Or
Adoiiai, p. 35 a.
i'* Ibid., p.
35
b.
WAXMAN
27
The
fact
is
that
we observe
at times that
the
man when he acts righteously, and again when same man turns to the wrong path he succeeds. This
a
gives
turn of events
status,
for
whatever the
man
really
not
ought
at
least to
On
the
contravened by
with
we
find
many
no purpose
for the
its
origin in
matter
and has
simply
to
do with God,
admit
to
is
leads
to
shrinkage
this
God's
in
power.
Gersonides
manner.^*^^
tried
solve
question
a peculiar
scale.
Man
and so
other
the
is
On
the
of
hand,
the
is
one
that
neglects
the
cultivation
intellect
is
forsaken.
The purpose
the
of the
special
Providence
to
provide
deserving with
adequate
may be may
As
for the
influence of the
though
a whole
i^
in particular cases it
it
nVpD 'some
of"
our
sages'.
Or
Ado)!ai, p. 2s^-
28
way they
tried to
solve the
problem of
how
The
evil is
God.
It befalls
man when
or
forsaken
spherical
to
the
natural
order,
caused
by
sidereal
influence."'^
is
is
man can be
is
by
virtue of his
which
Again, the
undue influence
providence.
It is
own
solution.
actuated
by a deep
same
to
is
autonom\\
evil,
It
by the
soul
this
of a tendency and
inclination
if it
to virtue,
and surely
tendency
a
is
strengthened
was there
before.
The more
when the
for
man
practises virtue
follows then
that
righteous suffer
it
is
own good,
is
by
this
and
their inclination
deepened,
which
>
is
36
a.
mijiyanu'
n''"i:p
m'oixn nonpnn
nnr^snrLi' "ins*
*c'"di
djjdn rcA
nm
dx nnix
iptiTL"
c'2n
n^'\2.\>
moi
^y
fjoij
nyob'U njp
~i3d
r\:ir\
i:vdj2 nvoyw'n
dvj'"!
hv^2 nDUDHL^
xbc
n\n
DX1 nin
"Tir^Nn
"Ca^n
bv2in
Xin,
ynn n:n
.t.-i-l:'
i\si
....
imoiju'
OyAdond.
37
b.
WAXMAN
forth
29
such as liave
been
put
by previous
wrongs
^^-
or other causes.
why
the wicked
He
resorts to the
by
is
predecessors.
He
for the
purpose
it
The
world.
is
We
in
these philosophers
evil
which abounds
much
discussions upon
arise
human
events,
may
sufficiently.
The bad
things
shown
to be for the
How
Is
it
can
we say
extends to
man ?
not a belittling of
in
God
to speak of
this,
Him
*'-
as
being interested
man
In
answer to
to the ancient
bj'
Greeks.
The whole
trilogy of
Sophocles
is
Oedipus and
wrong
of their own, but because of the ancient curse on the house of Laius.
30
We
cause
will is the
But
no
will in
by that
will.
a love of
God
be provided
is,
actual
causal
relation
whether
is
God which
strictly
all,
permeates them
and
no
belittling in
saying that
to
God
takes interest
man.
This love of
God
This remark
is
intended against
made
speculation
an important step
in
the
ladder
of Providence.
The
God, which
is
ethical,
is
strictly intellectual,
has been
The
in
which resembles
some
POTEN'CE.
Since
it
is
incapacity
is
is
a defect in God,
all
infinite
in
respects,
in
may
conceive
its
borate
in
it.
He
is
om.nipotent, for
we have
II.
38
a.
i" Chapter
WAXMAN
respects
',
31
When
saying
'
infinite
it
in
all
Crescas
explains that he
means by
of
infinite. '^^
There
may
be,
he says, an
infinite in
time
and an
is
infinite in
strength,
As
it
was mentioned,
this infinity of
potence
is
bounded by
reason.
We
God
time.
same
Such a
limitation
is
really
not
of such potence
that
not a defect.
contradict
Likewise,
first
we can
afiirm
God cannot
,
the
axioms, m73::^in
ni3"i5J'N"in
for their
He
is,
however, not
bounded by experience
do such things
as are
we cannot
assert that
God cannot
is
God and
the conception
of
it.
Aristotle,
he says,
God
pmvn
p.
of Aristotle
is
not
is
nc^
bo
b.
r\"22
inns
dj):ni
prna n"33
196
|DD
r\"22,
OrAdonm,
40
Ibid.
32
it
can move
it
may
is,
be
limited
by impotency.
is
no relation between
all
God and
the
acted
upon, for
He
is
necessarily omnipotent.
not only
is
The
attribute of potence
is
inde-
only
will,
and
it is
this that
meant by
^^"^
infinite,
determined.
we
language.
Spinoza, as well as
Crescas, conceives
God
to be omnipotent,
and understands
as Crescas,
by it,
that
same thing
He
liberty of
His
of
will
'.^"^^
It
reminds us directly
paragraph,
sentences
the
preceding
where
will
Crescas
and defines
which
will.^^^
liberty of
His
in several places
become
false
by God's potence.-
true
Or Adonai,
<
pp. 40
b,
41
a.
198
jvjog
dicimus
deum
at
decrevit ex
mera
eum
esse immutabilem,*
Ethics, Proposition
XVII.
;
200
Epistola XLIII.
WAXMAN
is
33
conception
of omnipotence
considerably
of
it
The impersonaHty
and
Crescas
God
could create
which
is
discussed
by Spinoza
propositions
book oi Ethics,
;
as he insists,
God
is
indeterminate and
infinitely perfect,
Him
from creating
to
that
other
world
we should
attribute
Him
imperfection.
logical
in
Chapter
II
;
concerning
he uses his
We
once again.
his
usual
method
in
analysing
the
points pro
and contra.
The
possible
of causes,
number
wanting, and
possible that
is
some do not
VOL. X,
34
Again,
many
not.
things
are dependent on
is
the
human
will,
and
it
will
them or
is
things as happen
is
by chance and by
and accident?
wherefore
displays
in
all
not exist,
that
all
the
endeavour
and
diligence
man
the
his
daily occupations, of
what
avail
way
human
On
many arguments
It
against
in
was established
the
into
Physics that
all
come
exist
must
is
by
possible
of existence,
we mean by
it
that
it
The
existence of
cause,
any
and
necessitated
by a preceding
until
we
arrive at the
exist.
cause.
The
possible, therefore,
does not
The
It
is
subject
may
another aspect.
realized
being
needs
some
follows that,
will
when
the
human
state
will
acts
has changed
p.
its
from the
-"1
Or Adonai.
45
b.
WAXMAN
35
The cause
of this change
must
is
will.
It is
when the
and
the
agreement
searching
necessitated,
for
we go on
we
shall
discover causes
arrangement, and so
that the
further.
On
we cannot assume
first,
mover
of the will
from the
secondly,
its
cause,
and
on religious ground,
extends to
particulars
events
are
possible
for
it
we can
it
to
may
It follows,
the
order of the
world.
comes
to the
in
some
it
only in regard to
that
it
is
itself.
means
when attended
a
"jan
to itself as an isolated
phenomenon
to
its
possible
s^^l^
event,
but that
Nin
when attended
]'\T\r\
22
nnb
pvin
Ninn
yjcr
nin -inNJEr::i
T]^r\
loi'yb y^JD
-imn
iTh-c'
Tnn''
nvnn
D''Jiv~i
2''nnM Dnip
p.
^s n^n
p
D
inN^vvi
n 33, Or Adonai,
^''S
Ibid., p.
47 a- b.
36
necessary.
He
first
regard to
its
it
The
possible that
all their
some do not
exist, is
we seek
to establish.
The
adduced that
common sense and for which man wills one thing or another,
it
is
one cause
that
that
remains will
mechanism,
for the
\vi\\
per
se
would probably
cause pushes
possibilities,
still
but
the
in
one direction
necessity.
facts of
The
other argument,
appealing to everyday
testify
sc,
man who
displays
them
any objection
from
the
religious
point
is
answered
manner
following
Or Adonai,
pp. 47 b, 48
y^^T^'j
a.
in the
words: niN-iVD
fvyn
ni^yun ^33
px'j*
inuo
sin rvh^
WAXMAN
37
last speculative
argument.
The
precepts and
commandments
Reward
of
the theory,
for
is
it
reasonable to speak
is
being
a kind of necessity
nevertheless
is
human
action
Crescas
not
If
we
effects of
is
no
a
no
in
man
is
scorched on
touching
is
accomplished
is
without any
wilful inclination.
In short, there
a strict
ment should follow from one or reward from the other with
the same force as any natural
its
cause.-*'*^
phenomenon
follows from
The view
and
free will
in
an
indirect way.
To sum
the
other.
to
necessary through
conflict with
their
and the
one
does not
The
matter, according
205 ,,n^
the Aristotelian
conception, serves
Dnmn
ibid,
dn ^as
niy^jD
nno
nn
ix^n rS'^rh
^3n*
D'^n'^'ss*
nn
-i:^n
nnai^,
ninuyno
a^a^nriD 'lioiym
^N
nmpn
rb'WI
;d
i^iy
uj-'Nc m
hy nnrn onn
DNI
s^nC'^C'
idx" n^ njn
nuon
in the
\'o
;\Xir\
inaip
nriM
page
nnon
p.
n^i,
OrAdonm,
48 a.
38
as an excellent
in
succession, but, in
regard
is
it
was
realized.
sc
Similarly, in
occurrence
it
is
necessary.
of such
in the
weapon
acts.
God, therefore,
directors
of
human
happiness.
human The
actions
founda-
to Crescas, lies in
man
is
human
will
and
On
is
it
when man
done
when a man
at least
by
which
is
was
absent.-'''^
A similar
is
human
consciousness
advanced by
Kant.-''^
As
we
in
in
regard
The
p.
science of
God
is
beyond
time, His
Or Adonai,
48 a-b.
ad loaitn.
WAXMAN
39
like
them,
some room
for
as endeavours
the knowledge
result
of God, for
in
may
He
beforehand. ^'^^
We
have seen
above that
same
by Saadia.
The
Crescas
consists
in
his
conception of the
by
great
in its first
view there
is
to be
noticed a kind of
his earlier
gradation which
writings,
apparent when
we compare
with
the
Cogitata
Metaphysica,
his
Ethics.
in
his
early
work he attempts a
In Cogitata Meta-
language.
If
we attend
to our nature,
we
are free
we wish
to.
many On the
other hand,
clearly
if
we attend
20J
to the Divine
nature
wc perceive
and
Or
Adoiiai, p. 48 b.
I,
21
ch. 3
'
Si ad nostratn
naturam attendamus,
nos
mode ostendimus
nisi
clare
quod
ab aeterno a
Deo decretum
40
that
it
should exist'.
He
to conceive
how both
and simply says that there are many things that escape
human comprehension.
in spite of his
Again,
in
how
the thing
is
We
see, in
there-
the
same
manner
as Crescas does,
se,
and
like
him assumes
that actions
same consistency
entirely,
it
as Crescas,
and
speaks
form.
name
trying to save
at least in a
shadowy
way
that
human liberty exists in spite of necessity to mean we conceive that human liberty does not exist.^^"
in reality these
He
said
in the
man
is
On
308.
the
II,
Spinoza,
p.
::
4I
Spinoza's conception
This
is
In his earlier
that were a
man
to die of hunger, he
On
same example
is
am
quite ready to
the
of hunger
and
thirst.
am
'.2^^
answer that
do not
Spinoza
know
ment.
XLIX.
The wicked, he
if
says, are
punished by a decree
of God, and
own
nature,
we may
reply,
Why
'
In his
given
letter to Oldenburg,-^'^
example
is
He who
is
goes
mad from
the bite of a
dog
is
excusable,
yet he
rightly suffocated.'
This
is
must
be burned.
'^1^
Si
si
fame et
XLIX.
'
II,
ch. 8
esse ut puniatur et
tantum
illi
quos non
XLT.
42
Man
is
is
its
laws and
regulations,^^^
and
free will
is
openly denied.
'The mind
on
to
also been
infinity
'.^'^
so
Yet
in
spite
of
all
this,
Spinoza does
maintain
it
not
all
want
to give
up freedom, and
tries to
by
means. The
from that
freedom a
way Spinoza reaches freedom, though different of Crescas who makes man's consciousness of factor in determining human action (a way which
human endeavour human act. Spinoza
his
it is
a cause
in
the determination of
principle of self-preservation.
itself
endeavours to persist
itself
',
in its
own
would not be
unless
we
man
is
animah and as
in
degree
The
persistence
man
in his
own being
will also
to be called virtue
it is it
'
Virtue in so far as
referred
man
is
has the
power of
of that
^^^
This
effort
for
self-preservation
in
is
',
nothing
else
question
it
writes Spinoza,
2'8
which
in so far as it exists
219 221
such as
is,
Ethics, IV, p. 4.
I.
Hid.,
II, 48.
22 Ibid., Ill,
Def. VIII,
Book
III.
WAXMAN
43
^^^
It
clear
man
of determination and
upon.
The
something external
it
own
laws
it
is
against
external
force
is
that
the
power of
self-preservation
battles.
This
well recognized
by Spinoza when he
is
says
'The
and
force
is
whereby a man
persists in existing
limited,
infinitely
^^^
surpassed
'
by the power
'
of
external
refer
causes.'
The term
infinitely
may
probably
to
its
own
it
is
impossible to conceive
how
man
Hence
his sub-
jection to emotions
external,
Where then
simply
to
the
way
of
to
freedom
This consists
in positing against
enslave
the
activities
man
-^*
It is
here
by means
we
to
in
know
true nature
It
unfoldings,
when
is
man
222
22=
is
on the path to
""^
22G
that he
/^/^/.^
demon.
Ibid., III.
76/^.^ 20.
IV, 5.
Ibid
6.
44
his
own
in
nature and avoid things which tend to sway him from that
or subject
detail
him to bondage.
the
is
way man
frees
and
his
ethical con-
ception
But
What we
wish to show
it is.
To sum
not
a free-willist's
freedom, but
This
What
interests us
mainly
in the
theory
is
the recogni-
power as a factor
in
by Crescas
to liberate
man and
him
As
His view
in evil
is
who saw
cannot be attributed to
God but
Spinoza denies
errorj-^*^ for in
is
and
it
so
any
not
evil,
the
badness of
comes only
in
is
only human.-^"
"7 Ethics, IV. 67.
"^^
228 230
Epist.
XXIII,
ed. Vloten.
II.
Epist.
XIX.
Cogitata Mctnph..
ch. 8.
WAXMAN
45
To
to
return to Crescas.
he
feels
concih'ating Divine
be discussed
more thoroughly.
between
He
endeavoured
to
necessity without
is
man
con-
being conscious of
scious.
It
it,
reward
and
effects
really
no reason
by consciousness
for
or not.
undermined,
both assume
Another
Religion
difificulty is
raised
requires
its
dogma ?
Crescas produces
may
be
which
it
either
man
wills
to believe or not,
;
and he
is
may
?
where then
the truth
mind as
it
if
so
if
have on the
is
especially
?
dogma
necessitated
by
proofs
It is
it.
What
dogmas
reiterates
his
human
231
actions.
Or
Adonai,
p.
49
b.
"2
//^-^r^
46
by God
as incitements for
actions,
But as
why
is
consciousness
committing of a certain
act,
it
will
be answered
doing good
is
God possesses absolute love and intensity the human intensity would therefore form of doing good It is evident, therelink in the human relation to God. a
will to
do good.
;
fore,
that
when
this
will
when wrong
it
for there
also a kind of
is
in
same
light
we may
dogmas
in
but they
may be
connected
some way.
not the
belief in the
dogmas
and
pleasure which
a religious
man
is
of the
matter.
may
be true and
man may
conceive
it
as such
3vnn
.
,
.
niDipD3
iiy^ nn
mam
d:in3 ij'nnn
n^'N*
^K^v
nion
'isn
n\T
nih
2it2n b'w^h
*L:':iyni
iwin
nmy
nhr inn
p.
ijrx'j'
cna
22)0^^
7j'?:n3
b'ir^yn
uoo, Or Adonm,
41
h.
WAXMAN
emotion,
as,
47
for
any
particular
there
is
the
from
this
point of view
Ibid., p.
50
a.
To be contimied.)
MEGILLAT
A SOURCE FOR JEWISH CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY IN THE HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN PERIODS
TAANIT
AS
By Solomon Zeitlin, Dropsie
College.
CHAPTER
IV
2.
differences
between
in the Megillat
Maccabean
The
Mac-
them
parallel to the
i
dates in
Maccabees.
Maccabees.
2 Maccabees.
A. S.
rusalem
(i.
20-24).
later)
he again
Antiochus
in
his
second
captures and
kills
Jews (1.39-35).
many On 15th
Jerusalem,
takes
the abomi-
1-27)
soon
after,
nation of desolation'.
On
49
VOL.
X.
Zeus to be
set
up
(6.
1-3).
the newly-
146 Mattathias
Judas's
dies
(2.
70).
victories
over
Apollonius
(.3-
and
Seron
10-25).
his
way
to
Judas
(8.
37).
Before
comes to Jerusalem
8-31).
orders Lysias to
make
32-5).
Lysias dele-
campaign
(3.
against
Judas
38).
them
Antiochus IV dies
28).
14-25).
(9.
i-
I4(S
Judea
(4. 28).
The Jews
ple
cleanse the
Temal-
The Temple
on the
altar
is
cleansed
and
sacrifice
on the
AntiochusV
(10. 9, 11).
36-61).
becomes king
War
Wars
of
bouring nations
bouring countries
ZEITLIN
51
49 Antiochus IV dies
16).
(6.
i-
Accession of Antio(6.
chus Eupator
17).
18-19).
Lysias's
expedition
and and
treaty (11).
Lysias
Antiochus send
letters of
More
about
wars
with
(12.
neighbouring nations
1-45).
150 Lysias's
tion
(6.
;
second
expedi-
149
Second expedition of
peace
with Jews
V;
28-54).
peace
made
with
Jews
(13. 1-26).
Accession of Demetrius
(14.
1-4).
Alcimus be(7.
1-2).
comes high-priest
22).
15-
comes high-priest
Nicanor
is
Nicanor
is
killed,
killed,
13th
13th
Adar
(7.
1-50).
Adar
list,
(15. 28-36).
As may be
also
differences
with
i
regard
to
the events
themselves.
of the
.
Thus, according to
Maccabees, the
purifying
According to
Maccabees
it
52
Temple
It
is
should also be
noted that
Maccabees reference
made
find
to letters
no mention
Maccabees.
Nevertheless,
it
seems to
me
that not
only are the seeming chronological contradictions reconcilable according to the theory explained above, but these
may
be satisfactorily explained.
As
will
ment each
sources,
two narratives
number
In the
fol-
lowing outline
shall
order of
make
We know from
(171-170
B. C. E.)
Mace.
(i.
war with
summer
70
v>.
Ep
According
to the
same
source, Jerusalem
of Antiochus
IV two
years later
It is this 2
event
first
Maccabees
this source is
i69-i68,'^'^
and therefore
Clinton,
Fas/i
Helleiiici.
Ill,
pp.
318-20.
between Antiochus IV and the Kgyjitians in the year 171/70 see Hitzig, Das Buck Daniel, p. 205 Wilckcn in Pauly-Wissowa's Rcal-Enc, II, 2470-6.
;
34.
in
Antiochus IV was
17
Egypt
in
comp. Polyb.,
XXVIII,
Hcnties,
;
XXV
^^1900), pp.
502-5
II,
Bevan,
II, p.
172
G. A. Smith, Jerusalem,
1908.
See
ZEITLIN
53
Maccabees, 145
a, s.
Following
Zeus
the
is
Temple was
This date
the
same
summer
the
of 145 A. S.-168
must
refer to Kislev
is
146
in
B. C. E.
This emendation
it
corro-
is
of Jerusalem and
Temple
(fier
ov ttoXvu \p6vov)?^
"^^
We
The
is
two
3'ears, i.e.
two
we
summer
of 168 B.C.
Now some
scribe thought that the setting up of the image next to the altar belonged to
the
it
Maccabees speaks.
to 2
Consequently
year 145.
But according
Maccabees, there
in the
Temple,
/xer'
ov ttoKvv ^(puvov.
was Apollyon who set up the image. See Niese, Geschichtc, III, p. 233 and note), and this should be three years before the cleansing of the Temple, so that the cleansing of the Temple took place in the month of Kislev, 165, and therefore the setting up of the
(According to 2 Maccabees
in Kislev, 168,
which
is
;
This
number 145 does not belong here read 'two years later', i.e. 145.
whereas our
Maccabees
in
at all
where we
text has
'
Codex Ambrosianus reads 'on the twenty-fifth of Kislev', which is certainly correct. Furthermore, the number 145 is represented in the Codex Alexandrinus by 45. All this goes to show that the scribe was
confused, and that the passage cannot be accepted in
it is
its
its
It
is
Mak.
i.
number 145
parenthesis
apparently he
is
belonged
to this verse.
54
is
now described, and his death is dated 146 (168-167 li.c.E.). The victory of Judas over Apollonius and Seron follows and Antiochus IV, who heard of the defeat of his generals,
in
humble Judas, but he needed money, and on that account went to Persia with half of his army the other half being
command
in
Judea.
147 (167-166)
to
fight
(3. 37).
person
evidently in the
1
same
year, 147.
Maccabees
generals,
slight variants.
Following again
Maccabees we
went
i.
in
tco
kyoiievca kvLavrS),
e. in
148 (166-165).
(165-164).
In 2 Maccabees the
order.
in a different
Immediately
Nicanor
fol-
and the death of Antiochus IV, and then comes the cleansing
of the
of Antiochus Eupator
nations,
to the throne,
and then
This order
incompatible
with
same
author's
we
are
assume that we
ZEITLIN
55
may
it
be attributed to the
fuller
manner
in
Thus
is
death of Antiochus
IV and
of the
succession of Antiochus V.
Acat the
cording to what
we have
IV
we have
repulsed
it
by Judas evidently
Now
all
is
would delay
which
is
and
fortify
if
Furthermore,
this expedition
it
Antiochus Eupator,
fails
to mention the
name
The
took
Finally, and
this
is
letter
ot
Antiochus
to Lysias ordering
him
Mer oXiyov
(ttI
Sk
-navreXws
av/yevrjs koi
"^
twv
Trpayfia.ruu (2
Mace.
11. i).
Bevan,
Tfie
House of
Seleitcus, pp.
J.
See also
56
chus IV.
definitely
dated 148."^
took place
Undoubtedly Jason's
in that of
Antiochus V.
The
in the reign of
Antiochus V,
where he
Thus
the narrative of
]\Iaccabees.
For according
to the latter,
Temple
is
IV.
This
in
the
autumn
of 165,'^ whereas
till
Temple
Kislev
superior to that of
Maccabees.
This
is
to be explained
authors.
The
"
to the Jews,
and also
Rome
to the
s.
The
us.
first letter is
dated 148 a.
month of
is
not
known
to
Syro-Macedonian month,
'
the
Second Tishri
III,
Appendix
J.
4.
"
Niese,
I.e..
pp. 473-6;
p.
See
ZEITLIN
57
IV
until after
and
this
impression
is
reproduced
that
Maccabees.
The statement
the date of
i
the
purification
in
of the
Temple
contradiction to
Maccabees according
to
my
theory of this
in
Maccabees
Kislev 148,
c. E.
But
this
fell in
166
i;.
c. E.
and not
in
165
B. C. E.
However,
crept
in
it
may
through
and
is
to be
emended
into 149.
plainly
Thus the Peshitta Codex Ambrosianus (ed. Ceriani) reads >^]^ ^A2:^io JUs l^^jji, the }ear one hundred and
forty-nine.
The
error
is
easily explained
on the ground
what we proved
to
be the
false
reading 145 A.
S.,
and
'"
It is
and the
purificae.
tion of the
*^
at the
n. 75.
same time
in the fall of
165 B.C.
(i.
See above,
and
According
to
Mace.
54) three
years elapsed between the defiling and the rededication of the Altar.
is
This
I,
also stated
7. 6,
and V,
9. 4, three
in
however, are
time
when Antjochus
year of 145
a. s.,
in the
in the
summer Temple
of 168
ii.
c.
Until
there
was
These two
58
may
6)
is
{Ant., XII,
7.
of
the
Temple
148 A.
S.,
and
in
addition the
also given.
As
the
of
the
place
Kislev of any
other year than 164, which contradicts not only our estab]
is
opposed to
his
own date
of
148 A.
S.
As
a result, scholars
Hanukkah
in
Kislev
164.*^"
As Unger ^*
respectively.
the
Olympiad
calendar, on
Olympiad
in
tomed
that
is,
also fixed
the
new year
of their
In
some
localities,
pre-
dcs
2.
Josephus.
p.
225
Reinach,
12.
(Etivres
completes
de Flavins Josephe,
Aiit..
XII,
4.
6,
p. log, n.
'^^
See Bevan,
c,
Appendix
J.
j).
**
300.
ZEITLIN
On
59
the
dated
I
of year 2 of
preceding
as a full year.
(Compare
given byjosephusin
corresponds to
this
connexion
Olymp.
154-1 really
Kislev 165
B. c. E.
clearly
shown
in his citation of
Castor in Co7itra
Apionem
fought
in
(I,
Gaza was
and
in
117 Olympiad.
is
Now
at
death of Alexander
Con-
in this
Olympiad the
2, in
autumn of 776 marked the beginning of year the Olymp. of 117 began in the autumn of 313
It
which
B.C. E.
uses the
Olympiad nine
it
times, but,
owing
becomes necessary to
''*
Rliiiii.
**'
*^
See Unger,
II.
I.e.;
Cestliiclitc
Beilage
^'^
Alexander died
May-June 323
II,
;
b. c. e.
Plutarch,
Alexander,
76;
pp. 176-8.
(2)
See above.
7.
XII,
6;
(3) XIII, 8. 2
j6.
^4)
XIV,
5.
1.
(5;
XIV,
3;
i6j
XIV,
14. 5;
f7)
XIV,
4;
^8)
XV,
i;
(9)
6o
We may
occurring
in
long
is
stated in
what
e.
<S).
is
described
Mace.
(6.
According to
year, but
after
c. E.).
in
the same
(163-162
r..
and he met
death
is
his
A. s. or 161 B. C. E., as
this
defeat in the
month
XVI,
(Nisan) of 152 A.
Comp.
s.,
161
B. C. E.''"
5. I.
S. Zeitlin, JF/ieii
to Aitiiochtts
vol.
XXVI,
27.
CHAPTER V
The Calendar System
As
in
in
Bellum Iudaicum.
fundamental problem
to determine the
chronology and
We
much
discussed problem
^^
whether
Bellum hidaiaun the Syrian names of the months are used to represent the Jewish months, Xanthicus approximately
for
they represent the Julian (Solar) calendar proper, in which case Xanthicus corresponds to April, Artemisius is May, &c.
The
hid?'(i)
following
is
in Bell.
in
the
month Artemisius
(2)
On On
broke out
in
Jerusalem
of
month
Lous an
assault
See
Ideler,
I,
400-2
Wieseler, Chronol.
{Sitzuttgsberichte der Synapse, p. 448; Unger, 'Die Tagdata des Josephus' Munchener Akademic, philos.-philol. u. hist. CI., 1893 B., II, pp. 453-92)
;
Schiirer, Geschichte,
92
I,
pp. 755-6o.
This outline
was
given by Hofl'mann,
De
62
(4)
On
king's
On
On
month Hyperberetaeus
(II. 19. 4).
Cestius
(6)
made an
upon Jerusalem
month of Dius,
in
the
took place
(7)
On
month Artcmisius,
On
the twentieth
assault
(9)
On
was captured
(10)
On
month Daesius
On
the
first
day
of the
by the Romans
(12)
(III, 7. 36).
On
the fourth
returned to Ptolemais
(13)
On On
On
beretaeus
(15)
Gamala
before the
Romans
(IV,
month Hyperfirst
beretaeus
Gamala was
(IV,
I.
10).
(16)
On
the fourth
^ZEITLIN
63
On On
the second
pitched his
(i8)
camp by
the
fifth
month Xanthicus
in
On
month Apellaeus
Vitellius
was
(21)
On
On
Temple
(V,
3. i).
Romans
(23)
On
the twelfth
Romans began to raise their earthworks and the Temple (V, 11. 4).
(24)
this
On
was completed
(25)
vast
number
to the
month Xanthicus,
(V, 13. 7)(26)
first
On On
the
first
month Panemus
of the
the
Romans attempted
Antonia (VI,
(28)
i. 6).
take possession
tower of
On
month Panemus
2. i).
On
month Panemus
the
Romans
64
(30)
On
month Panemus
(VI,
3. i).
fire
On
the eighth
had completed
(32)
On
On
the eighth
come
3).
On
month Artemisius,
phenomenon appeared
{2,s)
On
the
twentieth
day
of the
(VI,
8. I).
(36)
On
the seventh
their
Romans brought
{'^j)
On
month Gorpiaeus,
in the
by the Romans
(38)
(VI,
8.
10. i).
On
the fifteenth
(in
Masada was
taken (VII,
7. i
9. i).
^^
Scaliger^^
and Usher
in
Roman,
e.
= April
and Artemisius
May.''"'
Ac-
tentporiini, lib.
I,
ii.
Genevae, 1629.
Novi
'^
/.
c,
and Scaliger,
ZEITLIN
65
shown
have
Ab
^^
could not
fallen
and Ideler^*
makes use
the Jewish
of the
same calendar
as in Antiquities,
i.
e.
Calendar,
only substituting
Syro-Macedonian names of
for
Nisan^
Artemisius for lyyar, Daesius for Sivan, Lous for Ab, &c.
They
illustrate
this
the
calendar
from Josephus's
fuller
Xanthicus, which
in
Bell. lud.
Josephus states
of Lous, on the
first
refers
Ab
it
Jeremiah that
month,
quoted
i.e.
is
Another proof
frequently-
celebrated
Lous,^^'^
which seems to
is
Wood -Festival
is
it is
fixed
a difference recon-
by assuming
Annus
day before a
Yom Tob
1696.
'^
^'^
Noris,
et
Epoclme Syro-Macedointii),
p. 14, Lipsiae,
H.
Appendix
98 99
101
Ideler,
Handbuch,
5
;
Ibid.
5.
Ant.
Ill, 10,
XII,
4 and
7. 6.
i'2
12.
5. 8.
VOL. X.
66
Yom
Tob/" or by assuming
a scribal error
read instead of
in
14.^"^
By
similar lines of
argument many
for the
Jewish names.
who
in a
in
in
Syro-Macedonian.
is
particularly favourable
months
refers to
31.
Hoffmann
hid.,
except
where mention
made
of Jewish
festivals, is
Niese furthermore
writes,
where Josephus
On
according to the
lunar calendar
(/cara
aeXrjurji/)
that Josephus
knew of
Giaetz,
III, p.
472
Derenbourg, Essai,
/.
p. 109, n. 2.
'<J5
Otto A. Hoffmann,
Schlatter,
c, pp, 4-17.
J06 1"'
Zur
Topographie
und
Niese,
ZEITLIN
67
But Xicse does not agree with Hoffmann that the months
in
Bell.
Iiid.
it
are
Roman.
For
if
they
months
would be hard
to understand
Roman names
Bell. lud.
was not
Roman, but
days.
in this
that Josephus
must have
calendar when he
for
it
is
Ill,
by assuming
For
it
only
in
falls
To
the authority
of Niese
may
who
is
identifi-
of Josephus's
is
Tyrian calendars.^^
The Tyrian
calendar
(i)
herewith subjoined.
Hyperberetaeus
68
(5)
ZEITLIN
cp.
69
affairs.
I, 3.
Gen.
7.
11,
to
tell
the
Hebrews
to
make ready
the
the
month
is
called
by
by
it
Xanthicus.
H,
6; cp. Hxod.
They
(the
Hebrews)
left
Egypt
in
the
month
n,
15. 2
cp. above,
No.
2,
and Exod.
12. 1-43.
(4) In the
it,
month Xanthicus,
call
it
Nisan, on the
IH,
(S.
Concerning
the
Festivals:
call
The
month,
month
1-6
the
month of Xanthicus,
by us
the
called Xisan,
lunar month.
(6)
HI,
10.
Num.
IV,
29. 1-39.
On
first
Miriam the
(7)
sister of
4. 6
cp.
Num.
20.
1.
Aaron
died on the
day
of the lunar
month
called
cp. Tal.
Taanit
(8)
is
9.
first
IV,
49
cp.
is
Moses' death
of Adar.
(9) In
the second
call
70
lyyar,
cp,
i
Solomon began
6. i.
to
VIII,
Kings
is
the
seventh
month which
called
by our
God
Temple.
VIII,
4. i
cp.
Kings
(S.
2.
(11)
On
is
which
called
by
us
XI,
4.
cp.
Ezra
15
(12)
On
the
is
feast
of unleavened
bread, in
the
first
month, which
called
according
to
to
the
all
Macedonians
the people
us
Nisan,
purified
the
festival,
having
themselves, ac4. 8
;
XI,
cp.
Ezra
19-22.
(13) All the
Jews of the
tribes of
Hebrews
is
called
cp,
Ezra
10. 9.
the twelfth
a
called
Adar,
6. 2.
Artaxerxes made
(15)
wedding
XI,
on the thirteenth
the letter
Adar (from
8. 12.
XI,
6.
12
cp.
Esther
On
the thirteenth
called
XI,
6.
13
cp.
Esther
9.
They
(the Jews)
ZEITLIN
1-18.
9.
its
month Hyperberetaeus.
day
XII,
(19)
On
the twenty-fifth
is
called Kislev
Antiochus erected an
XII,
5.
altar.
4 and XII,
7.
cp.
Mace.
i.
59
4. 52.
(20)
On
month
Kislev,
XII,
7.
cp.
Mace.
4.
On
the twentieth
day
of that month,
which
is
called
the
I
victory over
7.
XII,
10. 5
cp.
Mace.
49 and 2 Mace.
it
Furthermore,
exception
occur
in
^^"
all
first
the dates
the Antiquities
the
This
exception
is
fully
explained
by the
fact
that
his
source
was, as he himself
states,
Jewish month.
Also
in the
that
document.
In
Romans,
too,
he gives
Roman
drawn
months, April,
Names
of
months
were
from
his
sources.
Comp.
also
Atit.
VIII, 13,2,
72
concerning
Roman
calendar could
conflict with
this
would
who
December
Hebrew
third
calendar
is
corresponds to Kislev
Kislev.116
of
by
Ideler regarding
the
Hebrew
is
which
known
far
to the
Mishnah
been generally
who oppose
is
drawn from
For, as
this
by
Ideler,
open to serious
is
we
shall
show
none other
and
if
our
"* Tacitus,
^^*
The
third of Apellaeus
Sacri, p. 354,
was
in
69 c.
e.
Lewin, Fasti
AweWaiov
should read
K (20)
in
fell
was
the 20th of
December
As Gumpach observes
was a leap year.
believe
that
Kalender, Tabella
I,
But
this
's
(68-69
Those who
the
Calendar
used
in Bell.
where they do
not exist.
Hence, Lewin
who
we
Mishnah mentions 15th of Ab as a Wood-Festival, are determined on mentioned in Bell. lud. as a Wood-Festival to
= Ab,
all
graphy of
this
work
of Josephus.
ZEITLIN
Ab
73
Lous with
must
be completely abandoned.'^'
"
It
is
of Xanthicus
makes no reference
in
to its
being Passover.
fall
Apparently
i5th of the
in this year,
72
c. e.,
on the
/.
month Nisan.
72
c. e.,
see Niese,
c,
p. 655,
regnorum
et
CHAPTER
VI
that Josephus
impracticable
we determine
of opinion
The consensus
main-
war began
in
6^
c. E.
Josephus twice
twelfth year of
refers to the
:
Revolt as beginning
in the
Nero
in
defeat,^^^
and
in
how
out against
Romans and
Florus
on
the
17th
of
critical
examination
of these
For
if
month of Artemisius
for
it
is
known
that
thirteenth
day
of October 54 c.
11^
See
Schiirer,
I,
600
11^
Leipzig, 1911,
pp. 14-16.
1^0
H,
p.
121 Bell.
19,
9 TaZi
fxtv
oySuji
fi~f(fxovias.
123
63.
74
ZEITLIN
75
Roman
calendar,
May and
Dius to November,
was lyyar and Dius was Heshvan, or whether was the Tyrian, Artemisius preceded Dius
Nero's reign.
in
his calendar
in the
year of
Artemisius
the
difficulty
is
satisfactorily
by
Unger.'^'^
year (January
i),
or from the
day
(December
10).
described as Tribun.
IV.^-^
Now
p.
the reckoning of
1-^
Niese already
felt
Hernus, 18Q3.
21 1^
this difficulty,
and he
explained that Josephus counts the year of Nero's reign not from the date
of his accession to the throne, but from the
first
day of Nisan, 55
for
c. E.
in
66
c. e.
is
his
theor\' that in
the Bell.
months
is
not Jewish
but Tyrian
{I.e.,
202-41
Furthermore,
in his
would be
counted
in
For, according to
Jewish calculation, the period from the 13th of October, 54 c. e., when Nero ascended the throne, until Nisan 55 c. e., would be reckoned as a full year.
125
Unger,
11.
'
Zu Josephus
hist. CI.,
',
Sitztiitgsberichte der
Milnchener Akndeitiie,
PItilos.-philoI.
^^^
Hermes,
II,
755, n.
i.
See
also Stobbe,
Die Tribu-
Pliilologtts,
XXXll,
76
13,
54
c. E.,
January 60
Imper. VI.
c. E.
If,
year of
his
reign ended
i,
C. E.,
^j
C. E.
of the
or,
likewise,
first
10, 54,
then January 60
This
is
also borne
Nero
(60 c. E.)
whereon we
According to
day of Artemisius
November 25
is
year 6^
c. E.,
and not 66
c. E.,
as
is
consequently Vespasian's
in
command
67
'''"
c. E.
but
in
66
c.E.'^o
Eckliel.
p.
264.
Accordingly they calculated the years of Vespasian, not from his ascending
the Emperor's throne, which, according to Tacitus and Suetonius, took
place July 69
c. E.,
see further,
Mommsen,
Etnpcrettts,
showing that
Cappel, too, heeds the view that Josephus counted the years of Nero's reign not from the day of his ascending the throne, but according to the jears
of his consulate, and hence that the revolt began, not in 66
c. e.,
I
but in
65
c. E.
As
is
quote
'Joseph
[s'il
que
la
commenca
au mois de
quel
May
fut
I'an 12
de Neron
Neron
declare
Empereur,
il
ZEITLIN
77
in also
it
occurred
in the
For
it
was
Herod
II
(of Chalcis),^"'' in
is
the eighth
year of Claudius,^-^^
that
E.,
at
the close of
48
C. E.
or the beginning of 49 C.
to give the
kingdom
to Agrippa,
it
which he did
in
the
may
be assumed, counted
'''
(DO^r:!?
r\yc'ri
'ca^
JD^a
nns3,
Rosh ha-Shanah
of Nisan, 50
i),
New Moon
so that the
c. E.
'*,
That the
revolt
broke out
65
is
n'3 nni'D
nxQ Dnmn.
The dynasty
rule,
''
of
early in 37
shortly
which occurred
in
January
37
E. c.
eJ'"''
According
to
cstoit
la
12 e annee de ce Prince.
Selon
le
premier, la guerre a
commence en 65
et c'est le
(p. 121).
sentiment
Tillemont,
'Notes sur
la
Ruine des
p.
Juifs'.
See
also Scaliger,
13'
I'l
Emend. Temp.,
I
;
468-70.
Tacitus, Atitiales,
XII
(in
the year 49
c.
e).
Ant.,
XX,
5.
p.
32
"* About his similarly computing the years of Herod, see below.
1^*
'32
b.
piiv
dvfiKfv
'
AvTiyorov
iTTj
78
four years.
at the close of
Adar 4
B. C. E.^"^
Now, from 37
to
B. c. E. there is
only a period
of thirty-three years.
for the reign of
Herod
the beginning
Consequently the
New
Moon
of
Nisan 37
From the beginning of 37 B. c. E. until the close of the summer or autumn of 6j c. E. when the Jews threw off the Roman yoke, and soon after
ning of the second
year.^^'^
also the
27, 28),
a period of 103
years.^''^
By
this
we
are to
the
The
same
is
Olam
Romans and
n^3n ^i^i ibx
o^rj*
the Jews.
^j*
D'ln^iD
i""
ny
Dir''DDs ^z-
di?o^12?o
Dit2\"5
d"':b'
[y]"2
DVj^p
nrj'
X2^n3
D''j:y
r.Dn^ro
ny
Vc did^isdi
i"i
nvnci
[ni^^ro]
ru:n^r:i.
From
the
i.
e.
^^"
Schiirer,
I,
pp. 415-18.
if
in
Adar,
of
103 years for the throne of the Hasmonean house, see below in note 235. 140 By emending DII^IIDN, we get the only intelligible reading,
Dl"in
F.
I
7-'
DID/'S
'.the
expedition of Varius)
so
all
;
scholars read,
e. g.
p. 17
Schiirer, Geschichte,
Derenbourg, Histoiic,
in
p.
194.
Icitmtg
die
Apokryphen,
I,
Tiibingen,
of Sabinus
who was
ZEITLIN
79
B. C. E.,
summer
c, E.,
of 66, there
Similarly,
is
chronologically a period
of seventy years."^
Vespasian, 66
there
elapsed
chronologically
fifty-two
years,
i.
e.
by
1^^
/.
In place of
'
seventy' years.
I.e.,
So Westberg,
That
in this
c.
Schiirer, I.e.
Derenbourg,
80 to 70
I.e.
Volkmar,
p. 84.
passage
we must emend
at the
we
When
R. Akiba,
revolution, he
now was
the favourable
called
moment
for
it,
Ben
in this
(2.
6-9), (Sanhedrin 97 b
D"'i:n
it
CiyiD
.
.
''JS1
N\"l
DVO
is
ns "ns^m
b
:
nx T.c'yim
'
|nsn nsi
while
',
D'-D^'n.
to
Now
say,
thus
Yet once a
little
that
it \vill
be
only a
njtJ*,
while,
first
DTitJ'"!
w^^n
H":.'
niD^ci
nitJ>
i.
the
c. e.,
when
and
they threw
off the
Roman
yoke,
power,
The second
dently
the time
this
when
in
was
But
shall
shake
all
House
shall
be
filled
with glory
',
i.
e.
Rashi did
comment of R. Akiba
own
times,
this.
This shows clearly that the insurrection at the close of Trajan's reign
included Judea as well as the Diaspora, though Renan, Lcs Evatig., p. 509,
in
Jews
of Palestine took
8o
of Quietus, 117
Cocheba),
132
c. E.,
By
c. E.^*^
Why
did Trajan take Quietus, his best general, from the most
hotl3'
contested
to
a peaceful spot?
Evidently the
residents being
Holy Land,
its
thereby.
called
DltD^p
7'"
DtlOPID, the
expedition of
Quietus.
See H.
562
406
Tlieol,,
1857.
Graetz,
ibid., finds
to these expeditions.
He
Temple
70
c. e.
(for his
understanding of the
c. e.
com-
putation produced neither seventy nor eighty years from the Polemos of
it
of
Herod)
to the
Polemos of Vespasian
the
Polemos of Quietus
117
c. e.
But when
we
in
regard
c. e.,
Polemos shel
the chronology
66
See Schilrer,
I,
pp. 668-70.
IN
THE LIGHT
OF HISTORY
Dropsie College.
CHAPTER
Ahasuerus' identity with Artaxerxes
IV
II,
Mnemon Plutarch's
Life
of
Artaxerxes
His relations to the Greeks The Peace of Antalcidas The rebellion of Cyrus the Younger The date of the battle of Cunaxa Artaxerxes' celeHis domestic life Quarrels between his queen and bration of his victory his mother The rule of the harem The queen's disobedience Her degradation and murder Her name Artaxerxes' concubines Artaxerxes' His palace at Susa The name Ahasuerus suspicions against his grandees in the Hebrew version A comparison between Xerxes and Artaxerxes II The resurrection of the Persian empire The Arsacides alleged descendants
of Artaxerxes
II
His
proper name
The
in the
Greek
version.
The
by the
facts
on
their
own
merits,
may
for
some
reason.
The modern
exegetes of the
these premisses.
Book
Having
this
Book could
latter,
under
is
the reign
fictitious.
of the
they
is
This conclusion
We
these
events
actually
is
beyond the
limits of consideration, as
we have shown
in
But
this fact
We
indeed
82
in the present
Hebrew
Book
of Esther
is
fictitious.
In the course
events
Mnemon
king's
doubt
The
latter
in
the
or after him,
political affairs,
we have abundant
life,
our story.
But
written
by various Greek
upon, being
The
who
with
Deinon of
lost,
All later
this subject
description of the
upon
drew
also
from
Heraclides and
other sources.
the
first
he was
He
His
testi-
mony
1
For the
pp. 7ff.
Ed.
Meyer^
Gesch.
Ill,
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
in
83
him,
his
had indeed
liar
undeserv^ed reputation of a
his history
is
and
forger.
Deinon wrote
Achaemenian
worthy.
rely
period, and
upon Plutarch.
his Artaxcj'xeSy
we
We
shall
demonstrate by
surprising
Justi,'-
to
see
our
modern
historians, like
Ferdinand
our times,
many
:
statements of
analysis.
Plutarch, without
subjecting
them
to a critical
We
call attention to
(1)
II
reached the
age of ninety-four
Both
Justi*
If this be true,
at the
time of
But the
II
They
had,
whom
Artaxerxes
was the
eldest,
As Cyrus
in
the
Oncken's
'
Allgemeine
Plutarch's Artaxerxes,
XXX,
4*^9.
9.
was
Ar:axerxcs,
I,
2.
84
demise of his
have been
lusty
sons after
an intermission
fact,
of
twenty-nine
As
a matter of
He must
have been
campaign against
he could bear
all
Howas the
in this case
;
not as
much
to
blame
modern
historians
for
rightly
reject
as
unhistorical,
Plutarch's
is
date
of
Artaxerxes'
reign,
mentioned
is
above,
given by
from
'
Deinon,
is
according
to
The
latter
There
Artaxerxes
I,
who
was
wss undoubtedly born in the purple. As throne 484, and was murdered 465, Artaxerxes could
at the
Now
if
old
I
when he became
p. 2)
must have
at
the age of
that
thirt}'.
incredible
most thirty-six
j-ears old.
XXIV,
11.
Ibid.
XXX,
9.
10
ForscliHHgen, p. 489.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
how such an
85
error
admits that he
unable to explain
He
age of ninety-four
the stories about
It is also possible
is
the basis of
all
Eusebius gives
Africanus gives
Artaxerxes
Hence
it
is
This date
must
have
been
Plutarch
tells
named
Aspasia,
prisoner
in
the
battle of
But
his
soon afterwards
whom
in
chastity.^^
Darius, incensed
life
of
father
and intended to
assa.ssinate
him
in his
bed-
chamber.^^^
When
was
Aitaxcr.xes,
Ibid.
XXVI I,
1-
XXIX.
a Jewish author.
the
difticult
may congratulate himself that he was not The commentators on Esther concern themselves with
Plutarch
question
how
Esther,
who
been
captivate the
heart of Xer.xes.
more
incredible,
and
p. 137,
accepts
it
literally,
without expressing
believe that
in
any doubt
(see
as to
its
historicity'.
Some commentators
harem beauty
Paton,
p.
the
lasts to
an extreme age
just the
Bertheau-Ryssel,
p.
400, and
170).
However,
86
that they
happened
in
At
according
to
Plutarch's
'
chronology.
'
Accordingl}',
con-
him
in
mind
'.
(4)
Plutarch further
telling
him
to
make
her his
the
wife,
laws and
opinions of
Greeks.^"
own
father, since
is
her
said to
to
make her
his queen, in
case she
would
way.^*
assist
him
in
But according
years of
fifty
age
the
throne, and could hardly have been alive towards the end
of his reign.
Historians
attach
too
much importance
to
Persian
We
ought to
bear
in
No
:
'
outsider could
the
know
women
Justi,
/.
c, p. 125, observes
The charms of
The
new
harem
is
From
we
understand
why
there
were
from time
5.
to time.
i
Ibid.
XXVI,
3.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
87
The
upon
first-hand information.
It
should also
in
telling
The Greek
most
likely better
harem.
who
is
fond of giving
where
his
own ambition
histories.
in
many
life
stories
of
is
mixed with
fiction.
There
may
some
of Artaxerxes
in the first
part.
Who
in
some conspiracy
Ed. Meyer,
who
in his
History gave
lost
full
seems to have
faith
in
in
(nth
Edition),
writes
He
dotage.
by marrying
his
own daughter
his father
Atossa.
At
his succession.
One
of them,
Ochus, induced
to
condemn
way.
is
who
stood
in his
This
in
all
^^
It
different
probabihty eunuchs (see Chapter VII), and therefore were better acquainted
S8
that
at the order of
We
of
salt,
who
in his
to Plutarch's description in
It is
years at
queen of
Who
was queen
in the
meantime?
If there
had
in all probability
all
and Greek
her.
There seems
know
Some
historians,
amongst
However, the
latter
Atossa by
a few years
for
Plutarch
tells
he should have
his
whom
by
he married.^^
own
all historians,
Artaxerxes,
Ibid
XXX, 28.
7-9.
"
Ibid.
XXIII,
6.
18
XXVII,
ESTHER
is
IN
HOSCHANDER
89
rather doubtful.^^
We
other
Persian
Sassanids.
Artaxerxes
a queen
whose
said to be Atossa,
others, Amestris.
religion
writers,
astray
Ed. Meyer describes Artaxerxes II as being a goodnatured monarch, but weak, capricious, readily accessible
to personal influences
in
his favourites
his
time
the
baleful
of
the
harem made
as
appalling progress.'-^
The
character
of Ahasuerus,
represented in the
Book
of Esther, could
not
be more
However,
II was, without
the
It
is
greatest
monarch
of
the
Achaemenian
dynasty.
his
power.
own
personality nor to
in all parts
Cf.,
Gesclt.,
III, p. 41.
He
The
:
latter
'
his us in connexion with Artaxerxes' marriage to his own daughter leprosy which affection for Atossa was so strong, that though she had a
spread
itself
it
'.
This statement
is
139,
who
It is
daughters, and Esther should be almost identical with those of his two married. Atossa and Amestris, he is said to have Brit., nth ed., and 21 See his article 'Artaxerxes', in the Encychp.
Ccscliichte,
V,
p. 181.
90
to the discord
and
having
the humiliating defeats at Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale, the Persians, this proud nation which considered
itself to
be greatly superior
in all
by
whom
Ed. Meyer
observes
'
In
many
Persians
may have
of
I,
the
brave
garrisons
in
Thrace.'
'""
Both
Artaxerxes
were
in their
II,
own
dominion.'-*
rule of
Artaxerxes
up
their
What
spectacle
it
many
I
glorious battles
him
divine
honours
-^
The aim
for
which Darius
and
his successor
Xerxes had
subdued,
by Artaxerxes
recognized
this king's
II.
Greece was
suzerainty.
Persia's
There
is
no doubt that
memory was
held
by
" Herodotus
-*
I,
134.
^
in
freeing
itself
from Persia
XXII,
8.
ESTHER
later times.
IN
HOSCHANDER
why Ochus,
9I
the
:
successor of Artaxerxes
peace, the
decreed
that
-''
all
succeeding kings
unhistorical
Such an
and
oriental source
the
it
memory
of Artaxerxes II was
still alive.
We
consider
Artaxerxes
of Asia.
II
I,
incontestably king
The
(C'lJ
defined in the
: '
Book
Esther
T. I
;
8.
Ethiopia*
nyi nmt:).-*'
was fortunate
Minor
lost
in
of Asia
reign
by
his
great-grandfather Xerxes.
ended
its
hegemony over
cities,
Plutarch states
every-
it
the leading
men
in
XV,
2.
^ See
28
Egypt.
The
latter
its
independence
.
Chapter
I, n.
92
cities
Artaxerxcs deprived
in
The Peace
of his
own making.
and
the
to
all
tJic
Greek
cities
of Asia
its
ivJiicJi
are reckoned
among
dependencies^
this Peace.'^
be field as tributaries', as
stipulated
by
It is
describing the
signal
same expression.
The
passage
'
:
And
isles
which became
by
was concluded
our story.
five
years
after
the events
narrated
in
that Ahasuerus
came
by means of
Being
conquest.
He was
and knew
he was
justified in saying:
'And
all
power
These
and of
his
might
book of
Artaxerxes
II
By
its
his
famous 'Royal Peace', he freed his empire from " Arlaxcixes, XX, XXI, 6.
ESTHER
IN
93
Greece of
its
independence,
left
so that
the
Greeks
for.
worth fighting
But from a Greek point of view the Greek was right who exclaimed Alas for Greece, when the Lacedae'
:
"
'
iJ.c.E.
He had
This
in
accord
his
with
the precedent of
he was born
the purple.
According
had
had become
king."^
It
was
also well
known
of
that
Parysatis, the
all-powerful
queen,
the
mother
in
both
her
favour of
younger
son.
Hence Artaxerxes
II,
at the beginning of
the throne.
He may
how Xerxes
II,
his
months,
fratricide
own father Darius H. Thus was not unusual among the members of his
Cyrus, indeed, at the accession of his brother,
dynasty.
frustrated
by Tissaphernes.
and he
his
The
sent
and entreaties of
his
him
back to Lydia."-
Soon
despising
such a dangerous
conspire
against
enemy
so
escape,
Ibid,
xxn,
4.
iiid
II
^_-
32 iii^i iii_
94
him.
his
designs, being
warned
Parysatis
picions.'^"
his
it
movements
by Tissaphernes.
But
made
for assistance,
making
that he
being instructed
in
This character-
Artaxerxes
by
his brother
Cyrus
is
of the
of
Book
He
senses."''
Having made
designs, Cyrus
all
preparations for
his
carrying out
his
began
numerous
arm)',
He
found
one pretence
;
an armament on foot
but
For
Tissaphernes went
in
Therefore on the march Cyrus openly declared his intentions to overthrow his
^'
^*
Artaxerxes, IV,
3.
would
willingly assist
**
''''
him
in his enterprise.
3c 38
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
life.
95
in
which
his
army was
This
battle occurred in
October 404.
is
Now
latter
it
is
well
known
The
reckoned as the
civil
first
with the
reign.
Accordingly Artaxerxes
Cunaxa
in
the fourth
The
year
in
is
given to his
reign begins
year of his
own
with the
first
of Nisan, on the
New
Year
festival, in
which
in
order to
be recognized as legitimate
king.^^
The Book
in
of Esther
in
which Artaxerxes
the
throne
his
was
and
own
battle of
II
at length firmly
Esther
^*
He
could
now
in perfect security
festivities,
~ ^*
coronation
and
at
the
in
It
was done
life
and
The
^^
therefore
by no means exaggerated,
Cf. Ed.
as
all
modern commentators
437-502.
Meyer,
Foisclntiigeit, pp.
96
contend.*'^
The
battle
of
Cunaxa
occurred, as
lasted from
we have
festivities
October to April.*^
nobles,
Satraps
parts
and
governors,
grandees and
from
all
of the
departed
after
sojourn
of a
few days.
Many who
have hastened
may
Plutarch states
'
who
of such a magnificent
so
not be supported
*-
Besides these
'
the
army
of Persia
and Media
warriors
It
(nr^i
012
to
b'n),'^'-^
that
is
who came
by Xenophon,*^ and
four
evidently exaggerated.
After these
festivities
were over,
feast of seven
^^
nobles from
improbable.
*^
According
to
Xenophon
^Cyropaedia, VIII,
2. 6),
"
**
we
have
to
read
'"It^l
7.
11-12.
*5
Pgrs. 41
Diod.
XIV,
5.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
day
of the
It
97
to say, each
week
was
invited.
may
New Year
the
month of
On
when not
in a
sober condition,
beauty
for
she was
fair
to
look on.
I.
Esther TO-I3
commandment by
we again
refer
For the
to Plutarch
who
tells
us
*
:
to his
many
vailed
tears
and
much
life,
difficulty, pre-
but to excuse
Ctesias
who
gives a
more
on
account of Teriteuchmes
the
and murder.^^
We
must bear
in
mind,
that
by opposing the
Artaxerxes might
have easily
claim, as
which
his
we have
for
seen,
was questionable.
to
let
It
was very
dangerous
Parysatis
exerted
II,
all
Artaxerxes,
2-3.
"
Pers. 29.
VOL. X.
98
Plutarch
'What
afforded
the
women
salute
her.
This
queen and her mother-in-law detested each other, and When Cyrus rebelled, the queen quarrelled continually.
openly upbraided her mother-in-law
for her intercession
life,
the
latter.^^
When
Par}'satis
executed
king
in a
most
way
who
injustice
in
who was
naturally vindictive
and
barbarous
in
Deinon
that
this
cruel
purpose was
was
after
it.
And
it
is
who was an
eye-witness
it
though
and loves
to give us
of
It
first,
that she
embarked
in
so cruel
design.
Ar/axerxes, V, 6.
60 Ibid.
XVII,
9.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
mother
;
99
depended only on
whereas
by
fidelity.
The
was
difficult,
make one
that
after
desperate
effort.' ^^
Plutarch
states
Parysatis had
inquired
into
managed
the
Artaxerxes
principal
affair,
and
executed
her
attendants
who
But
'as for Parysatis, the king did not reproach her with the
by sending her
lived.' ^^
However,
'
not
anger, but was reconciled to his mother, and sent for her
to court
;
spirit
enough to
now
between them.'
^*
The queen
represented in the
Book
Hydarnes.
Only a woman
would act
like
pardon
The queen
of Artaxerxes
But
method of her
assassination
We
"
XIX,
1-2.
63
Ibid.
XIX, 8-10.
64
7^/^,
XXIII,
2.
lOO
to
whom
love,
latter
short
time.
queen
off
by
own
'
But
it is
Would
Parysatis,
for
by whom he had
Hence,
if
""^
we should
undertake
'
so
horrid
and dangerous an
we must assume
had
that
to a certain
Parysatis,
seeing that the love of the king for his queen was no longer
so strong as before, and being afraid
lest
The
in
her reasoning.
to
the king of Persia's table but his mother and his wife
the
former of which sat above him and the latter below him.
This statement
shows that
55
it
Artaxerxes,
y,
5.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
actions
lOI
was
great
vanity, claiming
which he
He
was desirous
killed
Cyrus was
by
himself.^*
When
Cyrus, to
whom
and throne,
in
Artaxerxes
also
put
many
grandees
to
death, because
of
we
attention
also
to
another
point.
We
have
mother and
his wife,
is
quoted by Paton,
proof that
'
Stateira
was not Persian custom to seclude the women, in observing was present at the table of Artaxerxes Paten's quotation of
it
'.
in
banquets,
just as incorrect.
Amestris was
at the
latter did
it is
to
in
Even
own
brother,
is
Rawlinson {ad
that
the Persian
in
women.
to
atone with their lives for their conduct, as Alexander, Amyntas's son, well
knew
women,
to,
that capital
punishment
is inflicted,
who
approaches
i).
or
passes
their
chariots
on
the
road' {Aiiaxcrxes,
XXVII,
e Ibid.
XIV,
5.
53
Jbi'd.
XV, XVI.
Ibid.
XXV,
3.
102
made
appalling progress.
The
rule of the
Persian empire.
of his favourite
fell
The king was a mere tool in the hands The most meiitorious grandees wives.
No
if
moment
him
secure,
ill
will.
Such a man,
was
the
The
patriotic statesmen
must
We may
also
reasonably
example
to
all
Persian families.^^
in
wrong
in
believing
a remedy for
man
of
weak
character,
be he king or beggar,
will
always yield to
good or
:
evil.
We
return
seen,
now
The
king, as
we have
was deeply
love
Lacedae-
The absurdity
right,
if
Talmud
in
'.
The
latter
remarking that
'
But
they were
fact that
decidedly wrong.
the royal edict does not say anything about the obedience of the wives to
their husbands, but merely contains the fundamental principle,
'
that
every
man should bear rule in his own house power also over his wife. Such a
ridiculous, since
in
it
',
general principle
by no means
Roman
life
were
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
I03
monians we learn that Artaxerxes II did not possess the Persian virtue of being able to consume great quantities
'
'
the guests
a virtuous lady
',
rightly
refused
show
herself
in
the presence
of
an
intoxicated
crowd.
Artaxerxes, exceedingly
vain,
and
his
ashamed
wife,
'
to
anger burned
in
him
'.
The
his
own palace, how could he expect the people to obey commands? The queen's disobedience could not pass
Then
the king said to the wise
. .
with impunity.
'
the
Esther
I.
13-22.
of Persia and Media, which saw the king's face and which
sat the
first in
the
kingdom
"
What
shall
we do unto the
she
queen Vashti
hath
not
"
'
The
royal councillors to
whom
this question
the king's character and with his love for the queen.
in a
most embarrassing
situation.
Yet
to defend
The
if
the queen
I04
should be acquitted.
was the
if
it
latter's
duty
in
to
comply
was not
if
accordance
believe
Besides,
we may
was an ancient law decreeing that the king of Persia might do whatever he pleased.''- Moreover, it was
not for the councillors to decide the guilt of the queen.
The
them was merely concerning the punishment that should be meted out to her. This was a very difficult problem. They did not want to condemn
question put before
her to death,
for his
lost
lest
after a short
They
feared
as
her
divorce,
he
still
power,
in
would soon regain her former influence with the king, without the royal rank, and again would not fail to avenge
herself
evil
upon them.
Yet the
latter course
was the
lesser
this
dilemma.
Therefore, the
councillors
condemned her
But
to the
punishment of degrada-
this queen, as
It
we have
seen,
was
Artaxerxes' administration
Herodotus
III, 31.
The Targumim indeed say that after sleeping off his wine-debauch and having grown sober, Ahasuerus executed the councillors who advised
63
him
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
105
wisli
by
wrong
and
Ahasuerus.
For
this
unto
all
women, so
when
in their eyes,
it
Ahasuerus
commanded Vashti
but she came not.
Likewise
all
and
Media say
too
this
day unto
Thus
wrath.'
The
councillors, therefore,
advised
queen by a decree,
there go a royal
proposing
If
it
among
be
came not
Ahasuerus, the
another that
is
king shall
give her
royal
unto
have the
effect
more peaceful
is
at home.''^
The
The
have
I,
**
clause IDi?
pCv3
~I3TC1
: '
and
',
is
We
it,
already mentioned that the Greek version omitted this clause (see Chapter
n. 8).
with
Hitzig, to
IGy r\W 72
;'
what
suits him').
they
We
may assume
I06
councillors
And when
be published throughout
the wives shall give to
great
it
is
great, all
their
and
small
'.
This
affair
undoubtedly caused an
The former
were manuscripts
in
in the following
iJiC'i'a
Dyi
Dy ^ni nnn^i
mnoi nono
^n*
.l^DH
n^n ivja
rb^T\
nnmn
ins*
"IJIC^D
We may
or
further
DVl
to
made
means handy
erase them, wrote the same words again underneath in the following line,
after the
words
"in''32 "T^lti'
C^X
l53
first
and second
chapters there
was
in all probabilit3' a
Subsequently, some
passage to mean
'
own
language
'.
seem
to give a
proper sense, he
the
words
1JVJ'?3
and by
way
of interpretation, added
Haupt
whole clause a
I.
Talmud
22
is
no reference
But this
fact is
no proof
discuss
it,
know
They
did not
because
it
seemed
to
them incomprehensible.
We
cannot expect
them
was
a gloss or corruption.
Moreover,
the
was added
in post-talmudic times,
when
Book
is
of Esther had been already for hundreds of years one of the most esteemed
canonical books, deserves no consideration whatever.
Finally, a gloss
all.
this clause
has none at
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
I07
to his wife
We
is
reads
i^DH
|n^
nmsbroi
('
c'mcns i?Dn
^:^b 'n^)
Ninn ab
ntJ'N
that Vashti
come no more
before king
Ahasuerus, and the king shall give her royal estate unto
another that
is
').
was actually divorced and not However, merely degraded from the rank of a queen.
distinctly states that Vashti
by a
critical analysis
of this passage
slightly
we can demonstrate
corrupted.
If the
must be
women
'
we
in this edict
written
among
Medes
',
the cause
of her punishment.
passage
for
is
quite superfluous,
the king to
choose
another queen,
Vashti
was
why
should
such
trivial
fact
Medes
Nor can
it
The
original
like
{bv)
n^cn
jn^
nn^D
::^m:rnN
>jd^
^^\'C'^
nai ab
na'N
moo
naiDH
nniyn^
king Ahasuerus, the king shall give her royal estate unto
another that
is
'
8^
latter
in
animosities, and
to visit
and eat
at
XIX,
Io8
xian N7
TiTwS
In
either
case,
our emendation,
in
and be
agreement
There
is still
The name
Plutarch
is
no doubt right on
who
name
are
of that queen.
all
As
far as the
concerned,
Ctesias,
of them are
more or
dependent
this
upon
from
queen
the
latter.
The name
of the queen
was indeed
Stateira, but
as
'
ago,''"
means
beauty
In the
memory
in
name
was displaced by
of such a
this epithet.
We
name
have a
classic
example
phenomenon
lived in
the
woman who
Her
real
Egypt under
name was
DoricJia, yet
by her
epithet Rhoddpis,
the rosy-
cheeked
',
by her
real name.^*
likewise have
known
name was
Stateira,
and nevertheless
epithet Vashti.
15, note, is
by the widely-known
Renan,
the
only historian
who
conjectured that
'.
'
possibly there
is
some reminiscence of
166; Cassel,
Cf.
Richardson's Leber
f.,
p. 27,
and
under 'Wasti*.
'*
Herodotus
134-5, and
cf.
G. Rawlinson, n. 2,
ad locum.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
is
109
However, the
Vashti
a hypocoristicon
Sta-teira
'
Asta-teira
Washta',
ought also to be
considered.''^
is
We
silent as to
Ctesias
nothing about
it,
fact
that
Stateira
sta
compounded
of the
two elements
and
The
latter
element
is
evidently identical
with
names
which
Naba).
name of
the
identical
with
The same
first
divine element
we may
teira, Baeshat-ieira,
and
sia.
Pairish-teira.
Doubtful, however,
the meaning
of the
element
The
the
IjaixivT)^
and
'XrafiaKijs,
meaning of which
according
to
Justi,
doubtful.
We
name
name
'AffTii'
Vashta-teira.
The name
which the
found also
Vasliii is
first
rendered
is
in the
Greek version
into
and
'Acrri, in
is
radical
represented by a vowel.
The
same rendering
Vindafarna =
'ClUiaos,
in
'iSepvrjs,
'h'Ta(pfpvT]s,
Va/iuk
= '^Hxos,
&c,
Ovaanv and
that of Josephus
this
Persian name.
Now
'AariPaaas,
and
'AffTrjs.
The same
that
find
element
we may
side the
the
name
OuaoTo/SaAoy.
We
further find
;
as prothetic
so
we
by
names
'Aanaf^iTp-rjs
'Sirafiirprjs, "TaTraffii'rjs
and
^naatvrjs,
Afrndsha and Frudsha, Amirchvand and Mirchvand, Vardaii = 'Po5avT]i and Considering all these points, we may well assume that the 'Op5avT]s.
Persian
name
Vashta-teira
first
was rendered by
by treating the
vowel as prothetic, was also pronounced Sta-teira. The Babylonians, however, shortened this compounded name by omitting the second element and by attaching to the shortened name the Babylonian
hypocoristic termination
''^
;.
His departure from the court may have had some connexion with the
banishment of Parysatis,
who was
a friend of Clearchus
whom
Ctesias so
The
latter
her protege.
no
somewhat seems
chapter of Esther
sixty
concubines,
all
women
'.'^^
the
Now,
it is
true,
Diodorus
Siculus
all
tells
us exactly the
III."-
And
But
number
royal
of concubines.
of the
chapter
is
erroneous.
The
either
by
of the subjects.
From
The
advice about the gathering of the virgins was not an innovation under the reign of Ahasuerus, as such gatherings
were customary
in
The author
of
The
latter,
when
his
remembered
Remembering now
that she
was unjustly
of his harem,
condemned and
Among
the
women
there was none the equal of his lost wife in beauty and
other qualities,
who could
replace her.
Nor was
there
among
whom
Therefore
" "
Ar/axerxes,
XXVII,
5.
''^
Diodorus XVII,
in
8.
See
n. 12.
to
such gatherings
saying that
women were
ESTHER
IN
III
the courtiers
such a customary
now
it,
need
may
not have
was by no means
woman
was a
she succeeded
in
completely obliterating
memory
The
courtiers
saying
' :
may have
ment of Darius
marry outside of
this
their
own
since
agreement,
;
invalid
Of
is
Plutarch's
account of
'
:
his
return from
the campaign
He
had
lost
many
his
losses
and the
of the expedition,
he became
to
Many
'^*
of them he put
death
anger,
Though
the expedition
character.
'*
king
who
XXV,
puts to death
5.
many
Artaxerxes,
112
grandees
fear,
of executing his
partizans, for the
this
sons
and
of
same
reason.
No
less characteristic
king
is
his
treatment of Tissaphernes.
at
The
all
latter
had
saved his
life
the move-
him
thus,
'
the
most
implacable
enemy of the
final
Greeks',"''
and
His
against
him
by
his
greatest
enemies,
the
Greeks and
Parysatis.'*^
identical with
Artaxerxcs
the following
fact.
of Susa, and
Book
to
of
Esther
this
is
absolutely correct."^
refers
II.
is
which
of
his
scholar
not
that
in
Xerxes
but
that
Artaxerxes
The
palace
which
Xerxes and
fire
by a
and was
by Artaxerxes
us."^
II.
informs
Who
dating from
different
many
points
our story
"^
We may
Hebraeus
" "
"* "^
in
CJironicles:
i.
Artaxerxes, XXIII,
IM.
m^.,
p. 45.
2.
p. 65, also
Esther,
Mnemon,
as excavated
by
Dieulafoy at Susa.
'
ESTHER
Hebrews
IN
HOSCHANDER
113
call
wwd^oa^s)?).^**
upon some
(c.
tradition
still
preserved
in
the days of
Bar-Hebraeus
1250
C.E.).
On
and
for
this
story a similar
phenomenon
is
that the
Ahasuerus
called
of
the
Hebrew
text
in
the
Greek
version
Artaxerxes.
Having now
described in the
sufficiently
Book
of Esther
was Artaxerxes
text
II,
we
be
have to explain
a
fictitious
why
The
the
Hebrew
should contain
name.
may
and Artaxerxes
events
in
II.
and by taking
account historical
Persian empire.
No
it
was humiliated.
detested
by the Persians
of the
their opinions
in
conse-
the Greek
cities
of Asia Minor,
By
put
VOL. X.
114
The
only
by laying
on Xerxes,
command
of an incapable
ruler.
The
in
dis-
its
source of information
if
the
Orient.
No
Xerxes was
represented as a
weak
of
character.
The
condition
the
Persian
empire,
as
far
as
its
The memory
of the former,
who humiliated
the hereditary
its
honour,
the Persians
decreed
that
all
his
successors
its
should
bear
the
name
when the
iiucceeded
who
But
Artaxerxes
II
were sunk
in
oblivion.
Artaxerxes
forgotten.
The
by
Alexander the
name,
Parthia.
The
II,
it
their claim
heirs
to
the
See
'j
Justi, Iran.
Nameub.,
28.
Ed. Meyer
{Ettcycl.
Brit.,
under
Arsaces
says
ESTHER
though
IN
II5
this
claim
may have
alleged
no
real
foundation.
The
of
representation
of the
the
Parthian kings as a
weak
character,
details
recital
about
sacred*
him
of
uncomplimentary
the
Jewish
in
writings,
for the
Jews
the East,
We
must bear
in the
in
The
culture.
When
assumed
of the
Arsaces
the
conquered
Babylon,
hostile
he
epithet
Philhellene.^^
The
in the
in the
attitude
in the
West under
the Seleucids.
The presumption
memory
of the
very
likely.
Therefore the
Book
the
it
festival of
Purim, or to change
in
way
that
it
They
II.
But
this
has
This historian
is
no doubt
right, if
he
means
is
without
historical foundation.
be scarcely any doubt that the Arsacids did claim to be the lineal descendants
of Artaxerxes
II.
It
would
(tbid.)
and Justi,
Geschiclttc, p. 148.
I
Il6
in
the
name
of Artaxerxes, the
name
of Ahasuerus
(=
impunity.
The
natural.
substitution
names
of
name Ahasuerus was quite Besides, the Jews had no other choice among the Achaemenian kings. Those of Cyrus and Darius
of the
name they
substituted
is
remarkable, as there
reason
II
was
Ahasuerus.
true,
it
is
Jewish leaders
them
credit for.
not a
title,
he whose
empire
II, III,
on their accession to
From an
who
is
Artaxerxes'
wc
name
was Arshic.
named Arsicas (or Arsaces), though Deinon asserts that his original name was Oarses. But though Ctesias has filled his books with a number
Artaxerxes
at
first
was
it is
Brit.,
hav.
Natnenb.
''^
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
II7
and his
children'.*^
know that both names, Oarses and Arsaces, are identical. The name Arshu = Arses = Oarses = man.' The sufifix ke(ka) is a Persian hypocoristic termination.^'*^ Thus Arsaces
'
(Arsicas)
is
a hypocoristicon of Arshu.
as
But hypocoristic
to
terminations,
names.^"'
rule,
are
affixed
only
shortened
name
of Artaxerxes
What may have been the original compounded The name Xerxes = Persian Khsha?
Khi-sha-ar-shti
It
;j/arj//<?
Babylonian
'.
means *a
like
mighty
was not a
title,
Artaxerxes,
In antiquity, especially
among
'
the
The
its
bearer of a
had
to live
up to
Both Darius
and Artaxerxes
may have
example and
first
named
Khshaydrsha.
But the
the
royal
fate
bearer of this
When
this
this
same
it
name,
may
have
become unpleasant
Hence Darius
Artaxerxes,
ibid.
I, 4.
**
" See
was
It is quite
name Arsaces
But
treated like
hypocoristic signification.
called
Arshu
in the
no doubt that Arsaces was a hypocoristic formation. Cf. H. Ranke, Die Personemtamen i. d. Urkimd.
dynastie, 1902, p. 2.
d.
Hammiirabi-
Il8
may have
and
in official
name Khshayarsha
to
Arsha
But
affixed to
documents
suffix.**"
hypocoristic
name was written without the The Jews who had many eunuchs
leaders in Israel,
details
stories
whom some appeared to have been may have been better informed of these
writers.
These court
may have
name
of Artaxerxes II was
later.
known
in
in
the second
the
Book
of Esther.
The
rabbis,
who
Therefore
had no
Hence
But
name Artaxerxes.
the
made towards
Josephus
Hebrew
as
text and
*A(Tvi]pos.
follows
usual
the
"
We
title
even possible that the very name of the founder of the Parthian empire
was assumed
land Parthia.
">
in
The former
it
ruled only
two
was
insignificant, as
was
Cf.
Chapter
I, n. 9.
ESTHER
IN
HOSCHANDER
19
Josephus may or may not have known that the name Ahasuerus
text
the
Hebrew
was due
to
'
'
(D''"1D1D
ppO).
But
is
Xerxes
is
This error
no
doubt due to his wrong identification of the king of Esther with Artaxerxes
Longimanu?.
The
latter, in
according to Ezra
7,
inclined
seemed
years
five
and he concluded
To
be continued.)
Jews.
After
made
in this
chapter to
light
In the
responsa furnish,
we
shall con-
and to
either
by the
full
Geonim,
continued to have
act entirely in
The Gaonic
responsa,
show
that
the
occasionally
more
or
less
communal
The
first
innovation the
Geonim had
to
make not
in all
probability
(p. '>,^
Geonim
See
vols. VII,
121
122
R.
office after
woman, who
defied
the
divorced at once.
the divorce for
The Talmudic
was to defer
and wife
(see
Ketubot 64
a).
Geonim were
'
make
order
this
to
These
'.^^^
had
in
some
IV, 8-9
and note
Muslim
authorities
could force the Jews to grant divorce in such cases, and in order to prevent such enforced divorces, which according
to
the Talmudic
law are
null
and void
(niJ'iyD
c:),
the
Geonim ordained
was
also
mTO
the husband
will
and
bound
to
The
131)
objections
of Rabbinowitz
Heb.
ed.,
Ill,
against
this
D"'1J3
The same
phrase
Sherira where
must
or
also
mean
by a Muslim court
i
by some
a,
influential
Arabs
to a
Jew
rn,
No.
15:
m^hn
is
NT'K'
HS
. .
nyi nn"in!p
^NIB''
nm
(
to the same.
i ff.
Cp. also
,
U'^yil pB' ^3
n3Kw"i Ki'j^i
n"^'\s
n'^nrtj'
pts^aa
^in\>r:in
id^:n'K' vj'npnJB'.
MANN
I23
The
a
Jew
for
committed
some
to
transgression
on
the
Sabbath
is
which he was
some
influential
Arab
No.
(''13
T'a
1?D^*y
npfT'l,
see
a^n,
135).
'
defiant
to this
country only.
it
We
made
amount
of taxes that
was imposed
upon
it.
organizing
(ajJ*-),
new
certain
burdens
in
connexion
with
the
quartering
of
Muhammedan
see
soldiers,^^^
I,
(^Iji,
Aug.
Miiller, ibid.,
state
their
As
regards
Babylon, Graetz assumes that the Exilarchs were responsible for the taxes
it
appears
Arab
n\
" npTnn
tw^\S(.
'n,
4": bxT^^
ann
D^2n3n onis
itDSi'a
n^ji
nioipon
1**
I.
ana
responsum
in
TtJTl, H, 20,
12:
nai'-a
nnioi, based on
Besah, 21a.
274.
124
the Jews.
Sel.
of Sura (before
'
looo
689
responsum that
if
the ruler or
pronouncing of a ban
in his interest,
and
it
is
impossible
was
they
is
not binding.
But
if
to administer
the
person concerned
'.^^*
This responsum
by the Bet-Din
for their
thus
in
upon
a Jew
is
The Gaon
to
whom
this
responsum
and we
may
to the conditions
that
existed
is
in
these countries
alone.
The Gaon's
opinion
that
the
enforced
oath
and void,
authorities.
in
order to
The
sum were
certainly
non-Jews.
Had
they been
Jews
\b
V2:^rh "iiDN
D30 hv2
Cp. also
IS*
pD^'K''
;
IN
,
"ji^n
I,
]}'2c^u
nvu^ bin
1"a,
'h c^in^
"T'BTl
40.
49, No.
13;
No.
father of the
capacity as a scholar to
Gaon 'Amram (856-74) of whose official whom questions were addressed nothing is known
note 15).
T'm, 9,
MANN
125
Gaon would
against them.^''^
The whole
In the
same responsum
is
also
that
his
Thereupon the
authorities enjoined
communal
leaders to announce a
order
handing
it
over to
of Sura
the
authorities.
In
the
time of R.
Nahshon
(874-82)
we
On
a question, that
came probably from some community abroad, whether the scholars should be asked by the community to contribute
their share to the
to the governhis
burden
still
community
',
here
especially
during
the
period
of
the
decline
of
in
the
'Abbasid
(see
dynasty
after
I,
842
Aug. Muller,
ibid.,
^1^
ff.).
Spain, and
southern France,
we
learn
from the
Cp.
J0""ID3,
No. 10
when
of the
J86
members declared
n":, No. 537:
was
adjured.
niirm mt^i
"jbon
p::''b:yD::'
cyxa'
wm
'''^n
Dl73- About the great number of taxes that existed under the Abbasid caHphs, cp. Kremer, I.e., I, 278, and II, 488
. . ft".
126
member
of their
community
communal
in
first
every charitable
community '.^^"^
as to
in the
communities
or
who should contribute the most, whether the traders the people who owned landed property, as we learn
(see Jo'ic:,
and Hai
it is
In
n'lroj.
No. 165,
to
collect an
not to expose
the
district
of
No. 346
(cp.
in his place of
town
as his wife
in
a similar way.
write a bogus
to
document of divorce to
187
Ninr Vn^l
hT\\>r\
10
r\i':,:,r\
nosni
B'jiyn
pa npivn pa
im bi?
ptyxm
See
myn
py
:
ti'Jiy,
'fine',
0"1t23,
No. lo
ps
~ir:x
"^rh
^i^y\.
Dn^^yo
p-kjDiri
189
iT-yo
xyi''
T\^r\^y\
p^l^^j-jm
"lyts^-a
^^^ piNi
ms*
"':a
nvpD imvy
e^iiyn
T\'cr\)2
.nnis
pny^'?:'!
icipr^a iriB's
nx
MANN
I27
people used to avail themselves of such devices in order That such to escape the impositions of the governor.
devices had
position to
be used
is
sufficiently
districts.
eloquent of the
of the
Jews
in
those
The screw
of
taxation was
tight, so that
people
were
case
A similar
No.
7).
II, 58,
in
another
place where they were taxed by the Jewish community. But now the members of their former community bring
forward claims against them, because they had undertaken In the responin common the responsibility for the taxes.
sum
it is
number
members
of the community.'^^"
taxation
to
In
letter
Ephraim
of
gogue
Fustat, the
'
Jerusalem
suffer the
burdens
'
upon them.
c-i
Though
p
. .
]'\^)v^ i''yn
.
nnix ':2d
ns
ilD^^BTi
C'JIi/'D
|Di*y riX
n''-\2r\b
in
179,
note
i\
It
is
interesting to
man's estate on his departure from the town. Further, the document of divorce, D3, seems to have had legal recognition in the eyes of the authorities, and the v^rife was allowed to take possession of her
confiscate this
in
precedence to
'hbr]
bv
Sy
pn"'330 jni-po
n^i'ijnB'
1^3 DO
bt3"l31
nniJB'.
This responsum
note
one preceding
it.
(last line)
without any
128
in
community had
compatriots in
to
find
the
their
Egypt
for
money and
cases
it
property belonging to Jews, and with other kinds of interference on the part of the authorities.
In
some
may
(see
have been
inflicted
upon
individual
v'B',
of the country
;
i":,
No. 3;
o"3,
No. 189).
a
list
Some
in-
teresting
points
are
contained
in
of headings
of
^'^^
note) from a
Parma
MS. Non-Jews
young people
upon these
official
a commission of
evil
rampant
which
many
Jews while causing still further material loss. Accordingly the Bet-Din and the communal leaders dealt very severely
with informers.
Anybody
o'lC:,
J91
JQR- XIX,
D"'3t^Vn
pp. 107-8,
and
l"'nX
-i^j,a
also
H, 171:
Q^mn
.
DD
D^i:n ^iy
whz^o
nyhv^ n^n
.
c'lipn
D^j:inn
nrc'
vn nxrn njc'a
^yhv
"ib'n
n->io
D-'DCiyi
ba
(r.
t^Jiyn
n^
^^^
vh
im^^'ap -ik'xi
nsDcn uyo
ny
)nK
^32)
-i3n
.
Nxoj N^
. ,
2j;-in
nacn
ini^' ij3Ni
-it^'N
n:55>
Dion fo
DnniQ
dtib'^s
MANN
I29
end).^^^
One
"2
of 'Omar's
No
indication
is
to be found in the
Gaonic Responsa, as
to
far as
they
were sentenced
leaders.
communal
The responsa
contemporary
It is
therefore
among
The
(see R.
first
authority mentioned
is
R. Joseph Ibn
disciple of Alfasi
Juda
'<^br^
b.
"""i
Asher
in
pi3T
mm-'
f.
55
n:D''^iNa
nnx noD^
'c^y^D
p
in
bpc^ ^:v^m
in
nWi
ni'^Z
Maimonides, writing
Egypt,
West'
(2"iyDn
^"iy3),
e.
n% p^DI ^3in
'H, VIII,
i).
Highly important
is
in
where
nV'K'
he also discusses
pp. 217-28).
K'"N"in,
this question of
Jewish informers
in the
Middle Ages on
in
XVII,
On
the whole,
show
that chiefly in Spain informers paid the penalty of death for their denunciations.
to have
leaders
seem
to
even
punishment
in
some cases
a fact that
to settle in Toledo,
ni"JJ',
he writes
in
XVII,
8.
Whether
diaspora,
It is is
in the
in the
very doubtful.
communal
leaders.
*
No. 137
Wl
C"D
nniC^Tl
Npm
b":
.
on^a
.
.
nr^n
.
.
nv^i pa
'in
"inin^
nns' iDist' no
\:>''\
i:-nn!? -lin
iTN-in nSl
nm
pn-^i
in
mo p
^PV
it
mm.
p.
with conditions
Germany, where
and 317).
in JD"j, 182,
D31DD IDlDn
VOL. X.
130
suffer capital
disparagingly of
Muller,
Muhammed
and
his
religion (see
Aug.
was
ibid.^ I, 273).
member
who was
denounced
penalty.^ ^^
From
a responsum
we karn
further
that
if
another
On
some
the whole
it
may be assumed
that a
Jew found
This was
Christian
by non-Jews.
more or
both
in
Muhammedan and
countries.
The responsa supply proofs for this assumption. Thus we read in a responsum of R. Semah (probably of
Pumbedita, 872-90) about a Jew that traded
in
Egyptian
When
living
by the
had
up
for fear
N^
.
. .
r\i'-\r\
D^cya n^jprn
n nnm
N^oniDa T\\:hrh
-iyt:vDi
bxisr""
h^
\s
.
nniD
hy\v^ no
idiot
ryo n^n
"ij"'n
xr\Th "inio
likely not
^33
^y ^2n, is very by a Babylonian Gaon but by a Spanish scholar. Report of Nathan the Babylonian (Neub., 11,82-3) jnixn N'i'OJ N^l
"o
:
p^ m^r v^y
px irunn
n\it:>
ICl^^
''13
''J30
n^n
:"i nvn^
'ini ^^TJ'
n:i
D^o^n
nns
Dy DDipnjty -im
yi^NC' ny ini^ro^
ip>2Dn
n^i
ptvj2
jinji ^iD2n
nN
'r^V^
vby
iT-yni piB'a.
c. k.
:
pxi
Dw'^
.
.
inn DNB'
iniN pnin.
\^vi'y\''
^ant:^
iniwS
pT^ntt
MANN
lest
131
the
this
Jew.
As
Christian
countr}-,
we
in
see
that R.
Meshullam
No.
i88,
decided
a case where
estates, fields,
and
robbers their
whom
by not taking
legal proceedings
and allowing
But frequently
in
disturbed
times
the
authorities
were
and robberies.
Two
interesting material.
32
a,
something
was
robbed
much below
his
their value.
Now
the
argument which the owner of the stolen or plundered goods uses, three characteristic
alternatives are
make good
non-Jewish courts.
"5
Or he
strikes
bargain
with
the
yn,
No. 27
'^ b'2p
. .
,
nS
d^ij
b^
niND-iyi
^^:
Nan
inrO
:^N''^n:1
n^nj
^'HN*
ff.).
^hnX.
b.
132
likewise.
The
Though
stealing
and
robbing
as
'
well
against
buying such
goods,
it
seems that
this
trade
flourished considerably.
the
owner
recover
it
after
paying back
to
all
expenses.
common
com-
munities
thefts
in that district,
must have
the
been
of
From
answer
the
in
Gaon we
Babylon.
conditions
gather
that
this
institution
was unknown
refers
Accordingly the
outside
responsum
bably
in
to
the
Trak, prothe
district.
In
other
responsum
Miiller,
Eijilcit.,
note)
we
find
Jewish
business-men
nj p lynuN
ijnj nr
^'nc^ai
.nunDa pn
i^d^i
n^D-ina pa
on
dv hyi
nuno
nijpn
""T^
pwsm OiTTan po
also D"3,
onnx
n^^i. See
niSu'?^
No. 42:
minDn
nrsD
NNnn
^c*
nmnoi
ann vni
d'^j'-'^ito
pljd''^
n^^y isx*
is*
'i:
nnaoi
c'>
^xi::'^
m^n
o^^ynn
X?
IX.
(cp.
Muller, Einlcit.,
quoted
?n"3L'', II,
'''Xn
148,
fol.
167 a
px:
i:"'m
nUICTl.
For the
reference
am
MANN
133
own
liands
in
who
constantly spolia-
'A Jew
said to a co-religionist,
The people
have robbed
Now
you
reside,
for
business
purposes.
rulers of
your town, do
and
let
I
me have
the spoil.
able to
it
make
should do
myself, because
have also
lost
At
length
happened that
fleeced
them
after
^^*
The Jew
seeing
against each
for
other,
had
himself.
Several responsa
lived
tell
Jews
of whole communities
or of individual Jews.
R. Meshullam must
to
some upheaval
in
places
when he
(P"3,No. 61),
distress
198
'May God
mercy
relieve us in
us,
our
^>.;j^^^j;.i
^x
ox
vj'n^
cniN
^3"
b'lb'C'h
^3in
."ii^y^
n-nnob
.
\'2b\r\
Tiyn nnis
^iu
bbrz'
pn:nni
Ti'^'n
DN
'b
fni
dhd
onix
"jT'y
"'iw'
n^i
?i?:?o
c^bb''':"\
.
n?3D
DC'
^mosn
'3N
rL^ novy^
'n''\n
d'j*
i^i^rj*^
iwa
vj-sj
la^^nc'ai
pr:rD3
134
we had
Another responsum
us of an Arabic
commander
of an
a town
Jewish.
(o'lOJ,
(p":,
and
captured
many women,
i).^*'"
non-
ransomed
Another responsum
Eitilcit.,
No.
25,
all
away
From
the responsum
it
we
district.
Jewish community
in that
town.
The
appears
Perhaps
this
responsum
in
refers to the
c. E. (see
banishment of the
Jews of Limoges
loio
this
was of no
avail,
had
them
Wc
learn further of
li'^np
2"
':301.
Asheri,
XXXII,
5.
quotes
"i"n t"
this
responsum as follows
-ic^a
'd2
NC'ci'ino
'i^n
^nidc
'\y,
nn;^ nnnn
D'':;'^.
was among
Responsa
of R. Moses Alashkar.
nt).
151 b).
MANN
135
become
possessions
No. 33 and
The next
point to be considered
is
the relations
Jews and
This
many
business
corroborated by
many
Thus
will
be shown
in the
next chapter.
many
cases
friendly
relations
R. Nahshon,
a responsum,
a non-Jew
No.
26).
to
Some
between Jews
in the Judicial
and Christians
by Sachau,
Syj'ische
The people
Timotheos,
Jesubarnum,
16).
The
Catholicos
Jesubarnum
'eat and drink with Jews and to keep friendship with the
'
{I.e.,
p. 170, U.
13-14:
)*** *j/ \I
l^aii)
i^
yi.iw
isa-).
marry
in
Die
syrischcn Rechtsbncher u.
136
Sitznngshericlitc dcr
vol.
'i^'^)-
among
his
been
precarious
and
exposed to dangers.
We
find
maxim,
is
as found in the
(sin
Talmud,
nd:n
^1:
that 'a
an extortioner'
n":,
R. 'Amram;
Jews).
Kairowan
Characteristic
in
pity
It
such
light.
Thus
Jews
it
is
fear
of
preferred to live
by themselves
in special
quarters.
This tendency helped to erect the Ghetti which were made obligatory
that
if
on the Jews.
his field
Jew
sold
neighbours
harm
their
This law we
Gaonic period as
several responsa
r:":,
show
(cp. v"u',
33
a,
No.
19,
by
R. Semah to Kairowan;
tell
responsum
mentions that
all
Another
Pardes 24
i''X
|V3 ^NTC'^
W'
JICDI
NIH D3N
';cp.
^"13
DHD IDNT pO
117 a).
nyjn Dn^
D^ivn
moix
t'3 bsitr
b.
kamma
MANN
(jTn)
137
us of a case of a Reader
who was
man
as their reader
in
the
synagogue
;
No,
17,
see also
in
above, p.
i2<S).
We
Jews who
trying
by violence
their
instruct
them
to
waylay
(o"ioa,
demanded
No. 23,
by Saadya
All these
in
n"j,
39, note).'^"^
the
responsa
relations
{c)
these times.
court.
n"3,
generally
distrusted
;
the
Bet-Din
(see
Moses).
Likewise
Jew had to summon a non-Jew before the secular courts. The Bet-Din had certainly no power of coercion over
rD"ic:,
849-53
C.E.
communal
instead
of the Jewish
ecclesiastical
affairs
court,
the so-called
Bet-Din.
that
could not
be
The screw of
manuscript:
n^H
^STj'"'
c"i2n^
Ti)!?
pH
n"'i3
'{lyv:,^
niiT
138
made
tighter,
by Jews would
have
such
monetary lawsuits
Jew found
Wc find
same
Muslim
courts.
licos ]\Iar
Timotheos (about
courts.^^''^
The Geonim
cepts.
in
first
century, c. E.)
(see
was
88
b,
against
v.
l.
non-Jewish
n:'V2
courts
Gittin
'n n'n
R. Meir) nisnixs
nnNC'
y^"i ->r:ix
paiD
N^jm
In a responsum (quoted by
note
a
4,
end,
from a
declares that
if
Jew hands
regarded as an informer
("ilDD).-*
On
disputes
Thus
Rcclitsbiiclicr,
Berlin,
1908,
IkJ
p.
56,
11.
1314:
JJclX
;
<o^
^^
Vm^^ oA
qX ^^(
/.
oN^vn o
ff.
^aJ^vIK^^O
2"
-1j
so
Mar Timotheos;
cp. further,
(pp. 168-9).
"^''D^
VDV
^^ ^^
"poy
11'^^
P""^
"'"'''^'^
^^
-IDIC^
'^
:^"':l
s^ nifs:
by
"nor:;
xnpj p?:d.
See
also n"j.
No. 491, by
Alfasi.
MANN
139
summon him
if
before
non-Jews had
goods.-''"'
non-Jewish courts.
Genizah Fragment
by
Poznariski, REjf.,
b.
us of a Jew,
b.
'Amrun
Elijah of Sicily,
Ephraim
officials in
Shemaryah
arrested
before a
claims.
IMuslini
Muslim court
The
arrested
Jew
justifies
himself before
a court of their
the
own
Jew
all
In a responsum
R. Moses
Hanok (^*"l", 30 a, No. 9) decides in the who had his co-religionist arrested that he
C"ic:,
case of a
should pay
No. 210).
spiritual
leaders of
Jewry against
practice.
In a Cambridge
Genizah
JSIonatsschrift^
we
read of an institution
in
community
that
non-Jewish court
ynr
is*
^i:nu
*i^Da:i i3r2D
nmx it3^i D^byn iNn> N^:^' nnijpi? i:''\-i n^ i-icn-j' nmx pnpih Dsvj'n \s i^cn ^j^^ pin ijn\s* pimni \Th
.nmin ^i^
^^ir,r\
jnis^ .thji
Ty^-r^
ijjiod
\^2
ns
inv
ITa
^vx
,11.
'h'-nt
pu
D'
.
i^sl"
xi''mt\
D'ljn
2"6
ynn^
^i3v
iy
*j'^i
iJn:N
oninv
140
should pay a
(in
find
Nagid enjoining
that
The
V'alue in
transaction
drawn up
in
Jewish courts
frequently asked
;
to legalize such
documents
No.
(Ss
r2""i?2J,
Nos. 94
and
199).
Some
by
way
the Muslim
great disrepute
by the Jews
at the
end
R. Moses
of a
Arab
authorities
no
justice
less
how much
when Jews
are con'.^^^
They
The
by
Rabbi
criticizes
The
nacn
207
]':j22)
nnna
b'c^
:6i^n nnci n^
*
^y:^
b'c^
(1.
niNDiyn
fjDD
;?)-ins'
Y'n
bv^
"bv moy::'
b^::'
bnpn
b
xbi
23)
="'
b^p
D^iyn
^2
mrDixi?
:-idi
nyn
n'^ib
ir:^xi
n^iyn
See
nious^
also 12":
,
:-ir^
nnnsp^N
pmnn?^^^ pn
p-ibi
nnii*n.
No. 166:
i^^^ ]'ip2
vbv
bzpr^n.
209
pn DH^rn ox "i^n
^bi^pi
imn pNC
ii^sn id
\sivj'
^ba-i^'
.
.
ir^vy^
cn'ii
|n
'^sni
-ip*j'
':n
sh
pn Qnrn px
bv p^r^iDi.
NVJ'
131
Tj'X
ny c^d cm cnny
MANN
courts
I41
the
Arab
was
among
we
Nos. 237,
and 324).
still
more scathing
note
criticism
find in
of that
time
(ry'icj,
Miiller,
i).
The
Rabbi maintains
in
Secondly, the
rely
on
identifications the
Muhammedan
we
shall
knew
that in
some
tion of justice
Jahrhitndei'ts, p. 6 in the
Babylon.
jurisdiction
of efficiency
by the
school
which had as
(d.
its
Abu
Hanlfa
766
c. E., see
Kremer,
ibid.^ I,
This
for several
testifies
that
in
his
time the
courts of
selves
in
care
exhibited
in
in
administering
justice.
N^N Nin
ij:>n:;'
D"yxi
nan
hv
r?:mm
'ji^s
nn
*ji^s
^jn
noiNi
142
there were
villages
did not
come up
cordingly
documents
from
such
courts
found no legal
courts.'^^^
We
thus
fanatics,
the co''2,
In monetary lawsuits,
leaders
found
Correspondents
from Kairowan
to
("";,
No.
2^^^ in
inquire
the
Gaon with
reference to the
Din to pay
to
Jew A, who was sentenced by the Beta. sum of money, but does not obey the
Those witnesses that were accepted
by Hai since n"J, No. 239, a similar
in all probability
:
responsum,
by
him;,
nriDQ
o^i:
nNTH njnnn
''2
D^hn:i
pyiv?:K'i
niKanya 'fiip^ px
N*h
^r:
mm
pNnp:i
t^'^i
WTH
pan
N*\-n
nxi^n IN
cn-'j'yi
iba
paa
cma
1121:^
imxn
i^n-pi
pbiy
p
;i'""i
-[2
. .
irny^
.
]'2'^^r]
ci:,-!
n^y^r 'd
b^)
nvj'
nnnxn
p:"'i^'D
ip'^
nano
p-j'
nana
frx'j*
p:::
-inrnb
panDi
|ma
jn
jna
.
.
nyn^
.
ni:3T3i
ninp"j>
i;x
x^x in
px
li^x
c^'^moi
d^ddi moipo
p^ci:i.
p'nnD'j' pTU'st:
jn'nvnyD p:n:i
No. 4
in
;
Harkavy,
{bid., p.
156, note 8
84
b,
1";,
No. 51.
MANN
143
will
community may go
to the
give evidence on the strength of the sentence of the BetDin, in order that justice should be carried out of the secular authorities.
especially
if
The Gaon
is
going to escape.
similar responsum
we have
in v"c,
In the
but the
communal
between Jews.
If their ruling
Gaon
may
we
be pro-
In a Genizah
Berliner's Festschrift,
Hebrew
difficult
Part,
112)
find
the
Dayan
justly
ruler
Elijah
the majority of
our congregation
is
to recover
anything un-
appropriated,
unless
through
the
power
of
the
'.-^^
This
letter
Schechter maintains;
passed through Egypt
139,
11.
RE J.,
community.
Probably Sahl
^xi
0^133
ninn
'
pai:
^xiw'^
i^wn
psc'
mp?23i
n^Sn.
Cp. further
Gaonic
S., vol.
Decrees and
IV, p. 27
;
Documents'
(published
:
by
.
.
Aptowitzer, JQR., N.
V (NnamK)
"ID
!?:d1
D^iyn.
Dn'.T''?^,
I,
12 (beginning)
bx-iLV'
'j-'n
imJ-iDTiTC*
nO
Vi\n ID
h^ nisoiyn ix^nn^
^i3^
'jd!'
xni? 3-id?:;i
"3 imD^j2
mn
N'i;in!?jD
am.
144
Dinai
"-n^ja
Dr^'bv
D^i^jnoi, in
Pinsker, 'nip^
the
who
did
evil
deeds, while
'
and
communal
leaders.-^'
The
communal
but one.
(d)
We
shall
now
discuss the
slave-trade (see
I,
Heyd,
GescJiichte d.
Levante-handels im Mittelalter,
139,
Jewish Life
in the
Middle Ages, 96
ff.).
noteworthy
number of responsa
R.
slaves in the service of Jews, only a few refer to slave-trade as a trade carried on
by Jews.
Nahshon
of
Sura (874-83)
'
slave-trade.
In
our place people are used to buy slaves cheaply, and there
is
this.
May we
his
sell
them
at
once
rites,
of a hundred
abide
profit
in
newly accepted
trade ?'^^^
:
from this
The Gaon
X'13''
NP DX1
n*j*
pn
.
v^y n^cynb
v^y Dn^yoi
fo'-jn
nst:^,
ed.
Firkovitz,
2a
bottom
216
\^r\''^'i
^^
^"ah^ pj n's*
nsyc^
.
. .
NJ^^D^
N^i
r\'\'^
pn
pc'^n \^^y\-i
iSri inn.
>6 -iO'c,
26
b,
No. 27
pNi bna
onny
nijp^
iJDipm
\h''T\ nn^N'^'in
MANN
145
Had
out
to
(Yebamot
slave-trade
48 b)
been
carried
full
extent,
This Talmudic
law requires that every Jew should have his male slaves
circumcised and his female slaves initiated into the
of Judaism.
rites
With
their acceptance of
to non-Jews.
Some Geonim
Thus
strict
'Amram
{)i"i^,
25
b,
month
slave consents to
become a Jew.
poned
the
for a
Only circumcision
a) a
allowed to be postb).
According to
Talmud
44
Jew who
by the
fine
This
find
26
a.
or of Pumbedita 926)
S'ty,
27
b,
No.
37,
by R. Natronai
in
see
23
a,
No.
3,
end).
The
Catholici
'Irak
likewise
their Christian
members of another
77, in
and Timotheos,
that the
Sachau,
But
it
seems
Geonim had
the
and
temptation was
Several Jewish
sell
to non-Jews.
in
Jew
urb
^NiK'''
p^D^
inn nnvo^
n-nno
nnin
mn
;
other references
if"ii',
to slave-trade as
;
carried on
be found in
'^''^,
8i
b,
No. 17
Geon., II,
150 'p"T\)
See also
27
b,
VOL. X.
T46
whose slave
Thus,
Jews.
in
the
by Sprenger, Journal of
519
ff.,
^
1
of Jewish business
F" ranks
men
of the
who on
their
way back
by a Talmudic law
to castrate their
and
this could
In Jewish
in
In Arabic-speaking countries
slaves
Muhammedan.
An
interesting
question
where Jews
is
These a Jew
Muhammedan
great danger.
and
at
Now
at
slave-girls
accept
Judaism
once, others
The
correspondents
describe
is
how
a Jewish
household
V'.l
No. 16
n:pN
'JKl
DD1D
1^
w'^2'
''13^
lOS'J'
a,
^NTJ'"'
xin
mc:
-)n\-!i
di^jj
cp. x"tr, 23
No. 3:
MANN
I47
from the
wells,
Jew would have to fetch water wash the linen by the side of the river, and
go to the baker's.
They
will
thus
come
and
disgrace.
these Jews to
retain
of Judaism.
He
employ
their slaves
on the Sabbath.^^*
This interesting
shows
Jews
is
Muhammedan
slaves.
This
by
j"n,
Halberstamm's MS.
told his master
'
(see
Einleit.^
27,
note
3).
slave
Either liberate
my
son or
I shall
become
a
eo
convert
',
i.
e.
^"-IK'^I
non^^N N7
We
to
from
Tlemsen
R.
in
Muhammedan
become
Especially
Jews.
This
is
218 >^n.^
22
b,
6=
n":,
No. 431:
pxi*i?D
jni
D^mnM
pNU' mDipro
ninQ'^:'
D-iiani ni''iVD
ijoipna
)*in
pn^jrD
px
po
b:iN
D"'nri\i
nx
n^jn^
p3-ii*:
jn-'sriD
niDipD trnxn
^y
\''^\-\-^r\
^n-Iw-m
^b
c'^i
jct nn^
jo
d^o ^^^.rh
in-j's*
D""!:
ix
rni^ai vja
s^c' "im-'a
^NTJ'''
niNvroji
p'^inn
piPDi
as
nina'.:'
oy ^niD^ nsv^i
mr-'yrrn
nj^Oai
"IJ
niXa.
closely
nVli'D
to
in the
are put so
in 'i"'C\
No.
p.
13).
In i*"ky 2 b, No. 17
is
The abbreviated
responsum
in n"3,
No.
148
and
v"u*,
23
a,
No.
i).
But as regards
female slaves
who
Jewish
rites
we
find
cases of forcible
Sherira
{"i"'^,
25
b,
No.
16, nb^aum
D::ir\b
novy bv
rihip
ab'C^
nnviJ nnz'^
has no
effect,
849-53)
's
of a different opinion
3"n,
No.
16).
It
should
be kept
in
mind that
for a
The
slave
could neither cook, nor prepare the food, nor touch the Jew's wine, nor perform other domestic duties
23
a.
(see ^"'C,
No. 3
n""i:'.
No. 254
2"n,
No.
15).
In
some
places
who
On
treated
the whole
we may assume
in
humanely
Jewish households.
The very
fact
that they
became
and
to elicit
sympathy from
Thus they
In
v"::',
= 6^r^;/.,
slave,
11.
183,
1.
9)
there
to
is
who pretended
have
We
=9
mpD3l
mo
ab^
^n
fnit< pt^'^pC
pS:- ^Xni
MANN
("i"^,
I49
26 b,
(see
No.
29,
by Sherira
;
27 b, No. ^6,
by R. Nahshon
But
it
Geonim
disliked
this
Sometimes
were
management
b,
of their masters'
10,
vV, 26
b,
No. 29; 73
No. 79
;
No.
by R. Natronai
which
Mliller,
p":,
No.
50,
vogue
among
mistress
would
(see v'sy, 27 a,
No. 31
Female
slaves were
frequently included
their marriage
(v''^',
in
45
No.
7,
by Samuel
b.
Hofni
5^ b,
No.
8,
probably by Sherira;
the Bet-Din
affording
^"^ci,
No. 320).
Generally
of the
the
we
find
interests
slaves
and
them
protection.
Following
force, for
example,
free
his
death,
to
carry out
a,
the will
of the
b,
testator
(see
No. 14; 27
Once R. Sadok
ICxilarch to
member
v6
The
]'0
Christian eccle-
"0 Geon..
"Tins::'
83
n3
\r\l
irD'iTI
HN-'-tiO
-^3
"ii^si
'nny
"di^s
it^Ni
nivi
rwSim nay
vm iNnnB'
150
siastical
heirs,
to fulfil the
V
' :
Jesubarnum,
66
Sachau,
op. cit.).
tions in a
responsum
in
27 b, No. 33
slave swore
of the oath with Jews, the slave wanted to gain his liberty
in this
manner.
On
we
Din imposing
certain people
flagellation
(i"w',
29 b, No.
If a slave of a
was allowed to
sell
him
to non-Jews.
(see
^'X 23
431,
a,
No.
3,
but
cf.
d"ic:i,
No. 49;
n"j,
;
by Sherira
as regards the
Sabbath
v'V, 27 a,
No. 30,
by R. Semah).
Likewise
if
slave sold to
15).
non-Jews
{^"^,
No.
All
17, cp.
25
a,
Nos. 13 and
the
responsa discussed
in
this
paragraph,
when
However
in those times,
Jewish
nnn
n^yrr-j*
in:n
i-nv^
n''''Q3"i
ps'j
\>v\^
nc
i:^j'"y
mso
ia
Nnn'm
similar case
we
have
ibid., p. 14).
See Aptowitzer,
ibid.,
12
MANN
151
Sabbath and
Further, their
made
their
lot
more
tolerable.
They were
?":,
more
consideration.
In
writes that the well-known prayer for the dead, the Kaddish,
DncK'*:^:'
D-nnyn bv i^^dm).
In
another responsum
a slave
23
b,
No.
5)
we
whom
his
who on
was personally
free
Yet Dozy
iGeschichie der
Maurcn
in Spanieii,
II,
Jews,
who
sexes and brought them to ports where Greek and Venetian ships called to transport them to the Saracens. Other slaves, destined for attendance at
the harems,
for
large establishments
1877, 219, 4)
rightly remarks,
tor the
the
reason
Muhammad
are brought to
486, note 32)
in
whose
them
there.
{To be continued.)
152
CORRIGENDA
p. 148, note 105, P. 151, note 120,
1.
IN VOL,
Sel. = 998
IX, 139
3I*.
ff.
I.
316 read
1.
2.
/or 310
1.
= 999
c. E.
Pp. 156,
P. 160,
P. 165,
I.
1.
21,
and 167,
27.
/or part
Joshua.
read
Hebrew
part.
9.
1.
14.
/or Juda
1.
rfrtrf
8.
For
in
Sam.
4.
3 read ^. 13.
18.
15.
1.
/or become
MS. rend
are styled.
MESSIAH
The
Hebrew-Christian
Messiah,
or
The
Presentation
St.
of
the
Matthew,
Lectures
delivered
before
the Honourable
of Lincoln's
Warburton
in the years
By A. Lukyn Williams,
+ 425.
They
are in the
The
place to offer an
in
of the leading
their relation to
ideas contained
the book of
Matthew,
in
the apostle
in
his
Jewish surroundings;
seek
to
Matthew
for
their
new
faith
and
to provide
Hence
the
book might
its
main ideas
last
two purposes
to affect the
is
exe-
and
find an
echo
although
it is
his intention to
be purely
153
scientific.
Our author
154
and
he wishes
them
to
make
to others,
and
this
reader.
critical
and
exact,
and frequently
back
and a
concerned he
falls
on
He
shows a considerable
he
is
on the
subject, although
not
which he draws
his information.
The
first
appearance
The
is is
indeed appealing,
far
though
a scientific basis
from successful.
The
at
Commonwealth
fully discussed
in
Christians.
The opinion
ment of early
of Jesus in
it
is
made
but
The Sadducees
and lack of
spiritual insight.
The main
them
in
same
period.
modern Jewish
used
in
authors,
who
term
is
'
hypocrite
to
'
connexion
Matthew
'
WILLIAMS
HEBREW-CHRISTIAN MESSIAH
it
GREENSTONE 155
The
Pharisees were
now.
God and
his
ways of salvation
'.
The
difficulty
it,
and appreciate
his
may
be inclined
if
there was
comprehend
comprehend the
[^Pharisaism, p. 170).
Our author
to
treads
consider the
miracles
Jesus
in
the Gospels.
Assuming the
our author
He
classifies
them
with
modern
designations,
comes
is
his
and
their
In connexion
as
several
specific
'
teachings
of Jesus,
',
the
'
Lord's
Prayer
compared with
also
In
enters
the
discussion
regarding
the
permanence of the
Jewish
Law
156
of the
is
Law.
given
Here
Jesus
broad and
ritual
Paul
and
legal aspect of
it.
This leads
it
is
possible
the
Church,
the
members
should
be adherents of the
at the
same time
good
Christians.
in
The
and discussed
in
new
and
im-
The
some
of the formulae
explained on the ground that they were not meant for the
who
feel
themselves
poor in
spirit'
and maintain
their
The
in
seventh, eighth,
designated
Matthew
the Son of
for the
God.
Not content
to take the
term
'
as
a synonym
to
In the term
'
the
Son of
first
Man
'
our author
it
In the
place,
implies
its
use
the
book of
Ezekiel.
On
it
human
on
soul 'akin to
God and
there-
earth,
'
and
to be
made supreme
refuses to see
hereafter
'.
In the
title
'
mere
orthodox Christian
that he
he takes
it
WILLIAMS
and a
spiritual,
The
human form
implies
is
is,
according
real
and the
meaning of such a
belief
and
all
that
it
fully
appreciated
The
chapter.
relation
of early Christianity
is
to
the
apocalyptic
and
pseudepigraphic writings
given
full
recognition in a separate
as to
Our author
in
is
the
manner
be
?
Kingdom
to
fulfilled in
him.
Has
in
the
?
Kingdom come
is
it
ance
will
it
come
very soon
or
to
?
be delayed to a remote
Passages are found
in
future,
as
indicated
that
these
books
Matthew
may be
these suppositions.
While
this
exceedingly improbable
',
he
his teachings.
Jesus
his return
on the
supposed
Kingdom would be
is
While
it
is
was not
to
Dr. Williams lays the blame for the crucifixion of Jesus both
alike.
The
not only pleased with the execution, but probably also helped and
abetted
it.
'
The shame
is
most enlightened
Tlie
above
all
was and
is
something radically
best representatives
love.'
race,
when
truth
its
embodiment of
158
Jews
will
because of
many centuries,
of Jesus.
The
sins of those
who
His advent
in
the world.
for
The change
shirk
it
and proves
that
Matthew
certainly believed in
Our author
Jesus, as narrated in
this resurrection
Matthew and
And
was
many moot
points
for
His
way
and
It is
this
intelligent
much because
of
his
lack of understanding
its
and
strivings.
His
zeal arouses
and
do not
persuade.
Still,
volume
much
that will
be of value and
interest to him.
Julius H. Greenstone.
Gratz College.
;^7
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
Ry Hartwig Hirschfeld,
London.
The
dot
is
Without
Had
an ancient
to
the Jewish
would
for ever
is
Ample
proof of this
furnished
by the Semitic
inscriptions
correctness.
When
reading
Arabic,
Syriac,
signs,
and
Hebrew
and reading
we
The
dot, so to speak,
It is also
on
tiny shoulders.
of psychological interest, as
show^s
means
to
and
sections
to indicate the
sounds
to
appertaining to characters
the variations
of
uniform
shapes
characterize
arising
from the
nouns, as well as to
letters of identical
groups of
VOL. X.
159
l6o
appearance.
dot.
It
no exag-
dot
employed
its
in
our present
a direct descendant of
I.
The Dot
oldest
Disjunctive.
Semitic inscriptions known,
If
we compare the
viz.
KLMU
the
first
on the
other,
we
at
once
perceive
marked
two others
bend
letter.
left, i.e.
This
is
common
character-
of these inscriptions
is
by
dots.
of metal,
has no dots.
The Moabite
divides sentences
by perpendicular
From
all
this
we may gather
tions
just
mentioned
were
so
the
arise
coming
in
contact
with
its
neighbour.
We
tion
viz.
also find dots between the words in the Siloam inscripas well as
in
the
Aramaic
inscriptions
of Zenjirli,
later
These are of
III,
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
l6r
the
others.
is
As
to
the
mentioned
it
probable that
as the
the
inscription as well
whole
interrupted
before
it
was
finished,
because
it is
ages.
contemplation
to
there
was no purpose
in
carving
it.
inscriptions
memory
of priests.
nian lion weights, but they are of metal, and the words
are separated
by
space.
No
calendar"^ which,
The
dots which
.Aloabite
The
epigraphy.
all
If justified,
the same
suspicion
would apply to
Are they
all
falsifications?
we must
also include
26 sqq.
ZDMG., LIX,
l62
feature."^
The
lines
and dots
in
favour of
authenticity.
In the
home
Marseilles,
no dots
were used.
Cyprus.
word.
The bulk
I,
In CIS.,
Phoenician
and Cypriote
texts.
It is,
In
some
two
one dot.
is
The employi.e.
ment of dots
kings
in
Malkiyaton and
son
Pumiyaton,
between
we compare
all this
it,
home country we
although
Now
we
distinct
purpose of serving
seems that
theii-
hand
in
writing towards
cursiveness.
Not
in
CIS.
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
For
HIRSCHFELD
I,
163
Latin
143)
letters of
is
abridged
The
intentional
omission
of dots
first
peculiarly
noticeable in
the
half
lid
of the of the
Eshmun'azar
inscription, the
An
118,
and
of the
famous
96
B. C.
wreath
It
'
inscription
dated
may seem
Thugga
inscription
by the
a mixture of Punic
inscription, CIS.,
I,
149,' has
many
been put
in as
cursive writing.
to put
the dots
It is
in,
make
a brief
We
some Carian
is
it
inscriptions
This
but
*
was
The second
oi
the sarcophagus,
'
words.
p 31.
164
in the
Double and
and Cypriote
in
On
The same
The
ancient manuscripts.
custom,
made
of
There
dot,
are,
indeed,
many
any
as that
is
Abu
There
no
must be
inferred,
to specialists.
parallel to the
same
phenomenon
in
Semitic palaeography.
The most
punctuation
is
found
in
mark
paragraph, or section.
in
the sixth
full
survey of which
is
given
the
That
this
was
we
other.
This
may
be
for
by two reasons
first,
CIA.,
I,
8, 34, 44,
1
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
165
those discovered
by Rueppell
^^
;
side,
made
it
necessary to
This view
may
be supported
inter-
by the
vening dots.
abounds
in
the
body
of various consonants.
In Nabataean, Palmyrene,
is
unknown
on the
common.
amount
we
find letters of
was the
writing,
result of a
correctly.
in
Hebrew
differs
this
respect
entirely.
When
the
artificial
the
rabbinical
was done
in
The
practice
became
so strict that
it
nature.
Hebrew
of the Bene
II (Atlas).
l66
are
to
The wisdom
of the
of this rule
in
is
seen in
Hebrew manuscripts
Middle Ages,
which the
its
it
many
helps
determining the
home and
manu-
permitted.
The words are separated by space or vacant half lines. The division of the verses by double dots was introduced later when biblical books were copied in volume form. The oldest specimen known at present is the famous Codex
PetropoHtanus of the
practice
latter
This
As
verses in
many
fre-
II.
The Dot
made
Diacritical.
first
The
diacritical dot
its
in
from the
dot
use
i.
ddlctJi.
It
is,
however, a notable
is
not found
in
come
into
till
the end
e.
inscriptions
had been
In
Nabataean
not exist at
As
Palmyrene dot
it
except that
was probably
the
brain
of
some
resourceful
person
who found
it
The absence
Dots before
silltiq,
of dots
see Kahle,
in
the preamble
p.
of the
ZDMG., LV,
194 rem.
THE DOT
Palmyrene
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
137,
167
tariff,
must
as, e. g.
and
rcsli
stand
in close
proximity
Thus
in contradistincit
Palmyrene
assists in
employment did
not,
however, become
inscriptions of the
many
is
which
it
is
From
Palmyra
it
manuscripts
It is absent,
fifth
century.
however, from
In manuscripts
Syriac
it
inscriptions of the
same
period. ^^
is
also used to
mark
letter.
double dot
of using these
rcsJi
To whom To
due
is
was probably
the outcome of the exigencies of teaching the young. the same cause
it is
we may
above 3 whenever
equivalent to Greek
In
diacritical point
sliln.
it
is
The
period
when
this
was introduced
very early.
is
The
left
dot
placed on the
its
side, as in the
Cod. Petropolit.
letter.
it
it
has
the
place over
the
central
head of the
is
In
made, but
must not be
The
inscription
published
in
ZDMG., XXXVI,
p.
159,
bears the
date 494.
l68
tiiictions
made by
the various
Semitic
nations
in
the
same
inscription.
The same
sin
was
'^'
in all
placed above
in
and on the
left
symmetry.
The
of
is
made
in
Arabic
Moslim
times.
show
is
any distinguishing
as
Arabic palaeography
in
not
yet very
far
advanced
spite
still
t'f
extant, and
much
later
uncertainty
prevails.
The Arabic
seems
to
Zebed
^'^
have
been added
abridged
What
might be taken
line
.^"
over
in
the second
inthe stone
At any
See
Nestle in Tiaiis;
actioiis
nth Congress,
'C
The
latter
is
wrong
in
is
right in
^'.
demanding
that
should have
e.g.
"l''y
= ^.
in
If,
See ZDMG.,
p.
XXXV,
p.
530.
See Schroder
ZDMG., XXXVII,
011
530 rem.
{ZDMG., XXXV,
p.
we assume
the
we
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
the other hand
169
tivelftJi
century.^^
On
we
and
is
A. H. 82
(701)
^^
In
its
system was
far
from being
fixed.
This
90
a. h.
(709),-^ in
in a slanting direction,
Also
diacritical
in
points
are
Cufic characters
(MS.
Berlin,
N.R. 37
a),
^ are written
known,
in a
row.
As
which
its
is
is
well
has
j only one
In Cufic
for vowels as
we
In several of these
seem
to have been
added
later. ^^
it
As
is
XXXI,
p. 135
miss.
arch. 18(^4.
''"
St. L. Poole,
I,
p.
sqq.
^^
22
ZDMG., XXXIV,
^ See
2^
in Gofha, tables
170
beyond doubt
Arabic
and
^_;i.
As
for
the
latter,
it
may
we have
seen, stand
C'
in
Nabataean and
We
was probably
As Arabic
vice
^J:>,
as a rule, correfurther
sponds to Hebrew
suggest that
i_p
b',
and
versa,
we might
had
originally
In Cufic
Qorans
head,-'^
whilst cu
is
parallel strokes.
The
two consonants.
The hard
<_?
lh.-
has there-
two
dots.
The
dots below
it
is
the
first
steps
initial
tentative.
As
soon as the
amount
of free
many groups
of consonants
by
force
of circumstances
for.
which
by
the
way can be
by
this
easily accounted
uniformit}\
How many
The
Ooran
fluently?
dots over ^,
^,
is>,
and under
25 Jbiei.,
table VIII, 3.
"^ Ibid.,
tables
VI and VIII.
THE DOT
tj
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
I71
in
afterwards.
They were
full
numbers and
positions of dots, to
letters
posterior
seems to be the
calculated
alphabet
for
such modified
close
in
Arabic.
diacritical
The
relationship
between the
best
shown
in
Karshuni,
e.
Arabic
in
system prevails.
Whilst
many
plan.-''
my
possession
more elaborate
Arabic
Hebrew square
Especially letters
see
also
Arabische
Berlin, 1900.
'*
Even
page
in a letter
Gyammaire
arabe. 2
is
me
ed.,
pp. 11 sqq.
^^
The
title
seventeenth century.
The following
1
p.
^^=?--j
:zz
Jo
o and
0=^^;
I,
= 0;
;
'^^iC'
With dot
dot =r>
J=c,;
n=o.
172
and v
As
it
this
afforded
written documents.
felt
the necessity of
ambiguity
of different out
of
of words
reading and
difficulty
meaning.
An
ingenious
fifth
way
the
century by placing
;
and below
is
for
r, /.
and
u.
Whence
this idea
was derived
first
Actual
difficulties
to
which called
for
adjustment.
to a complete system
latter
comprising
all
by
five
Greek vowels.
by
side.
For
details
grammar books.
mixed system was evolved
There are
in
A
mixed
peculiarly
in
Hebrew,
a double sense.
f>f
Exactly the
same
is
There exists
another
if it
I
it
am
not aware
seems to point
to a
common
origin of both.
real
vowel
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
173
vowels by dots.
for short
a and long a
As
is
manifest in
the
their invention
may Howboth
the
may
be. dots or
in
systems
and toneless
segJiol.
As
first
to
below
in
the
Syriac
system,
it is
The double
dot
in sere is
More
difficult is it to
in the
Tiberian seghol.
is
In the
not distinguished
is
The
As
them
We
see in
it
them
no room
lectionis
it
when used
one
The
in
late Prof.
the tenth
made between
which
The
precision with
later
grammarians
174
some
laxity in
treatment
why
by
This
Hebrew
poets
of
the
liberties
ambiguity found a
fitting
same
Its origin
was probably
(^,
but in
prevent
it
Hebrew
the
vertically to
them being
is
At
but
is
omitted
it
in
is
manu-
a horizontal stroke, but in connexion with the two horizontal dots of sere
It
it
Red
the dot
This again
is
from
New, however,
in this
tamvin with dainma or kesra, whilst placed horizontall}they are meant for tamvin with fatha, and occasionally
for kesra.
In
many
but
it
many fragments
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
The
size
I75
These
of the
lines,
make
it
word
belong.
connexion between
beginnings,
expanded
manifold ramifications.
also
The
question
alphabet.
far as
is
now whether
No
we know them,
The
marked by small
strokes, hooks,
Now
De
Sacy's
any foreign
influence, especially
on
styled
'.
their
He
was
in
I.e.,
/.
tables III
I,
and VII.
52
c,
3*
VOL. X.
176
Now
this
seems to
me
to be contrary to all
we know
the
As
is
well
known
indirectly
an offspring of ancient
Semitic writing.
in
existence
The Syriac system of dots had long been when Ethiopic began to be written, and since
certain."^
It is also in
system was
existence
to
produce a written
literature.
likewise an
acknowledged
notably
much
common
with Hebrew.
It is therefore in
admissible that
Syriac and
Hebrew were
by them
as
known
models.
origin
to early
unmistakably.
for i in
Syriac,
twenty-four
in
Only
two
and L)
it
is
In this
manner
which Dillmann
whilst
considered
ornamental,
represent the
vowel,
the
are
little
suited to
signs.
They
latter
it
for their
own
The
Some
mere matter
speculation,
See
sqq.
Fell,
but
this
is
not
in
without a basis.
Siidarabien
',
'Die Christenverfolgung
ZZ)J/G.,
XXXV,
pp.
THE DOT
IN
SEMITIC PALAEOGRAPHY
few suggestions.
it.
HIRSCHFELD
177
letter
following are a
carries plain
The unadorned
its
a with
when
alf
(/%)
vowel.^^
As
is
This looks
like
with T
this
down
in
the
is
middle of the
bent
(at
letter.
right angles)
The
its
sign for u
origin
in
shureq.
left,
is
because Ethiopic
written from
little
left
to right.
Long
top corner
is
Hebrew.
Now we
u,
o in Ethiopic
is
either
a modified a or
letters o
is
In fourteen
left foot,
but in one
down near
the
the middle.
We
same
is
The
^ in
might therefore
letter
carrying plain a
It
was attached
was preserved
for
long
a.
employed
Rueppell
originally
we
see
the
In
the
Rueppell
inscriptions
alf strongly
resembles
the
ancient
Canaanite aleph.
^^
I.
c.
/.
c, plate A.
178
and a small
(h)
circle
Kaf
lengthened, and in
in
As
it
to the
is
either
but written
in
Regarding
to refer
we may be permitted
as
vowel
sign.
Even
if
be
little
and that
languages.
it
falls
IV.
The galaxy
is
still
considerabl}-
surpassed
in
importance, by a
new
grammatical functions.
first
We
mark
the consonants
with
double
values
by placing a
dot,
generally of somewhat
above the
letter.
The
In
by a dot below.
some manuscripts,
red
The two
dots denoting
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
179
mentioned before.
Another dot
placed
is
the so-termed
person.
of feminine gender
often so marked.
The
in
difficulty of
avoiding confusion
scripts the
is
obvious.
Fortunately
is
many manu-
restricted to cases
of ambiguity.
The Nestorians
for short e
(-r^-).
Finally,
ct
in
Hebrew
to be
pronounced as
full
consonants.
letter,
as
is
the
body of the
letter
was
in
order to
prevent
Now
Hebrew
for
of opinion.
classes are
name
of ddgcsh.
One
in
of these classes
is
number
but
of subdivisions,
unknown
mere
to
classified
our
grammar books by
labels
list
of Latin
names which
in reality are
The
general
^^
description
l8o
a better name.
There
is
Yet
in
there are
in the
Old Testament
which
this
marked by a dot
inside,^
exceptions to the
many hundreds
means are
attempt
What we must
the cases
first,
If
we examine
of ^
we can
n^3
divide
them
when preceded by
e. g.
(Ezek.
i6. 4),
"^^
{ibid.),
ri^iD
so-called
(Judges
g.
20.43);
(Prov.
'n'!l"'"'?.y'?
am
first
group,
because the other two are somewhat doubtful, and not even
recognized
(Norzi).
by some important
I
authorities
in
on
Masorah
Now
the instances
all,
of the first
ab ovo no dagesh at
but
show
syllable
("I3;
a short vowel
spoken long.
nantic
force.
^
The
"i
conso-
Arabic,
well
known,
insists
upon
doubling the
If the real
"i,
as suggested
There
is
ample evidence
^^
22
s.
THE DOT
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
HIRSCHFELD
Some
l8l
instances
As
to Arabic,
kamza, madda,
In the
a similar origin.
MS.
Cod. Berlin Or. qu. 680 (dating from the eleventh century),
which
is is
frequently expressed
by a small
^^
letter.
In
other Babylonian
dot placed
inside
of the
euphonic
'
ddgesh, as digested
in
Although
it
this
classification
method,
does not
Graetz
artificial,
replaces these
less
in early
',
Hebrew
is
speech.
Evi-
dence of
the
'
virtualing
which
is
nothing but an
at least
one guttural
which
in this
emergency
is
considerably strengthened.
So complicated a
It is surely
much
sim.pler to
it
was
it
in
maintaining
its
This was
"1
first
of
all
the soft
^
'**'
in particular,
and a small
Kahle,
/.
Monatsschrift
Judenthums, 1887,
l82
is
nothing ob-
subsequently shrank
to a
mere
dot.
It
is,
d. f. firmativiLin.
In reality
The
could
and there
is
really
no reason
why
even
the
owe
same
procedure.
from
texts,
;.*^
Now
we
system, whence
It
is
found
its
way
to the eastern
codices.
true that
exists in the
many
Some
provided with the Tiberian vowel system, but not showing a single ddgesh of either
class.
of these manuscripts
is
It
difficult
to
it
find
so.
if
we
As
on
books by Yepheth
b. Ali,'*^ it
seems probable
we may
use
of the
ddgesh was
still
in
an
This
is all
c, p. i68.
*2
^^
See mj- Yepheih b. All's Arabic commentary on Nahum, p. 12. The peculiar employment of dots in the specimens of shorthand
IN SEMITIC
PALAEOGRAPHY
arises
HIRSCHFELD
183
question
now
why
may be
Hebrew
one gram-
the
syllable;
the other,
ritual,
it
having proved
in
Law
For
As
to
found
in
The author of this glossary seems to have been a Falasi who had some knowledge of Hebrew grammar, and perceived the appropriateness of the ddgesh forte to mark
double
dots
in
both
languages.
He
for
placed
his
dots,
letters,
is
probably
Hebrew
As
there
is
no need to
Finally,
there remains
be mentioned that
ZAW., XXI,
Published in
JRAS., 1919-1920.
sqq.
Two Hebrew
Authorized
words
and
are
rendered
of
'
gourd
are
'
in
the
Version,
both
these
of
great
'
kikayon
'
is
translated
is
'
gourd
'.
many
ot
authorities,
the
name
of
In 2 Kings 4. 39
'
pakku
'
is
rendered
wild gourds
',
and
this plant
is
The
it is
writer has
been interested
some
The
particular
passage
to
which we
are
referring
band
of prophets
their
leader, the
prophet
:
combating
it.
The
land
;
pot,
him and seethe pottage for the sons of the prophets." 'And one went out into the field to gather herbs, and found a wild vine, and gathered thereof pakku'ot his lapful, and came and shred them into the pottage for they knew
before
;
'
to Gilgal and there was a famine and the sons of the prophets were sitting and he said unto his servant, " Set on the large
for the
men
185
to eat.
And
it
came
to
l86
pass as they were eating of the pottage, that they cried out,
and said, " O thou man of God, there is death in the pot!" and they could not eat thereof. But he said, " Then bring meal." And he cast it into the pot; and he said, 'Pour out for the people that they may eat." And there was no harm in the pot.' (2 Kings 4. 38-41.)
*
The
rind
'
by
calling
'
elucidation are,
first,
what
is
meant by
what
pakku'ot
;
its
pharmacological proof
all,
prties
and
most
interesting
can we
modern science
it
and analyse
number of
original
results
The
we
shall
now proceed
to
On
The
the
Mcajiing of Pakkiiot.
is
rendered
in
the
Authorized Version
wild gourds
',
which, of course
biblical
may
and
mean anything
that the
or
nothing.
All
scholars
word
'
pakku'ot
fruit.
'
must mean
or the clateriiim
The etymology
root
'
paka'
',
may
apply appro'
squirting
its
cucumber
fruit
',
owes
its
name
the seeds
mixed
ripe
The
colocynth fruit,
when
and dry,
is
open
'
MACHT
',
187
Professor
Haupt suggests
'
paka'
to burst or
may
well
to
may produce vomiting (cf. the German word vomit). The Septuagintal rendering roXvivq
fruit
(cf.
'
refers to the
round
of Citridhis ColocyntJns.
The Vulgate
has Colocynthides
pakku'ot
'
may
there
is
common
could
a vine, for
it
it is
destitute of tendrils.
vrilles
According to
'
Baillon,
is
'
decumbent herb,
on the other
without tendrils.hand,
is
The
Citrnllits Colocynthis,
trailing
by means of
This plant
is
its
herbs.
also
common
for
in
but
is
Ephraim
or
so that the
men
who gathered
family,
mistook
it
the
in
Qiciunis
PropJietarum,
cucumber,
common
Still
Samaria.
'
pakku'ot
',
or
we
find
to the architectural
ornaments menIn
Kings
6.
word
'p'ka'im', or colocynths,
is
mentioned
of
a.
woodwork
II, p.
King
250
2, p.
493.
l88
Solomon's temple
and
in
Kings
7.
is
Holy Temple.
The
elegant
well
orange-shaped
for
fruit
itself
fruit
Ecballmm Elaierium
'
is
b}'
no means so beautiful
or attractive.^
What do we know
in
Before proceeding to
it
may
be well to
Pharmacognosy.
to
pumpkin
famil\-.
The
colocynth
fruit,
FrncUm
bitter apple,
regions in the
Old World.
It is
found
in
grows
immense
also found
quantities in
in
some
The
and
well-
it
to trail over
in
other
plants.
The
fruit,
which
is
globular
shape,
resembles an
diameter.
*
*
fruit
Jewish Encyclopedia,
PHARMACOLOGICAL STUDY OF
is
'
GOURDS
is
'
MACHT
189
the market.
is
The pulp
is
containing numerous
It is
brown
seeds.
purgative in
nature.
The
in
seeds
some
The
two
colocynth
which colocynthein
other
is
may
be obtained by hydrolysis
the
a closely related
body named
colocynthitin.
Both
Theelaterium
fruit
comes from
\}!\q
EcballiiLinElatcri2im,
tendrils,
also
common
The
fruit
white elongated
is
attached
fleshy
when matured.
when
numerous
in
The
ripe separates
slightest jarring,
by
the
'.
detached peduncle.
'scjuirting
cucumber
principal
"^
Husemann und
I90
body with
described
CjoHggOg.
Other
constituents
are hydroelaterin,
prophetin,
and ecballin or
elateric acid.^
by
ancient writers
Pliny,
others.^"^^
Toxicology.
in
therapeutics
and
still
poisons, leading to
death.
The poisonous nature of these drugs was well known in C. M. Doughty {Travels in Arabia Dcseria, the Orient.
Cambridge, 1888,
Colocynthis
:
vol.
I,
p.
132) says of
it is
the
Citridlns
'
To human
it
nature
of so mortal bittei'ness
is
that
little
leaf,
a most vehement
half-dead, and he
purgative.
They say
will leave a
man
may
Poisoning with
reported
"
colocynth
has,
more
frequently
than with
po:5sibly
Husemann und
Fliichiger
und Hanbury,
1"
11 '' '^ 1*
286.
PHARMACOLOGICAL STUDY OF
'
GOURDS
'
MACHT
19I
The symptoms
elaterium described
chiefly
of poisoning
by various authors
of
from
irritation
stools,
the
gastro-intestinal
Vomiting, bloody
vulsions, followed
con-
by
of the intoxication.
In some cases,
symptoms
referable
The
exudates with
adhesions.
In
more protracted
with matting
kidneys,
of the
liver,
cases,
more
of
the
intestines
and
congestion
of
the
The lumen
by
the
intestines
may
actually
be
obliterated
fibrinous exudate
intestinal walls.
Toxicological Experiments.
In
order to study
the
symptoms
in
of colocynth
and
on dogs.
In
connexion with
these experiments,
is
it
was
symptom, which
not mentioned
suffi-
it,
and which
is
especially
In
my
experiments
made
VOL. X.
192
market.
cut
up or ground up,
in
ordinary tap
little
common
table salt.
After the
The symptoms
striking
may
be
The most
salivation
coming
in
contact
produce
foaming at the
The salivation was very intense; the animals mouth more than after a dose of pilocarpin.
little
emphasized by other
waiters,
victims,
There
is
'
colocynth.
An
stomach.
symptoms
until
of colocynth or
come on
an hour or two
by
bloody
and depression.
dead
At
PHARMACOLOGICAL STUDY OF
'
GOURDS
:
MACHT
193
of the
stomach and
especially the
and
In view of the
just described,
it
marked
irritation
is
tion
now
to the
namely, the antidote administered or employed by the prophet Elisha to antagonize the
effects of the poison.
On Flour
as an Antidote.
method employed by
series of experiments.
number of dogs
is,
In the
flour.
The
results of these
may
Exp. V, October
7.
7-1 kilos.
was boiled
to
500
cc.
It
was
then strained through coarse cheese-cloth and one-half of the infusion, or 250 cc, were given to the animal through the stomach-tube, about 2 p.m. Immediately after the
194
1'HE
salivated,
removal of the stomach-tube the dog became most violently foaming and frothing at the mouth so that the
little of the whole cage was bespattered with saliva. Two infusion plus stomach contents was vomited out. hours later, the animal was violently and repeatedly purged, the stools being fluid and tinged with blood. During the
and assumed a much more bloody character. On the following morning the animal was found dead. The autopsy revealed a violent
night, the frequent stools continued
The
some
intestines
places,
liver
The
were filled with a bloody exudate, and, in were stuck together by fibrinous adhesions. also was congested and the kidneys to a very
marked degree.
7.
6 kilos.
Forty grammes of colocynth apples were cut up and mixed with 60 gm. of flour (equal parts of wheat and corn) and 1000 cc. of tap-water. The mixture was boiled until It was then the total volume was reduced to 500 cc. strained, in order to remove the seeds and debris, through a coarse cheese-cloth, and 250 cc. of the broth were administered to the dog through a stomach-tube exactly
On in the preceding experiment, about 2.15 p.m. removal of the stomach-tube, there was no vomiting and About two hours later, practically no salivation noted. animal passed several normal stools, but no blood was the
as
noted
in
in
the
On
still
was lying
slightly depressed
it.
and
On
On comparing
will be seen that in the case of the dog to which the pure
PHARMACOLOGICAL STUDY OF
and the
later
'
GOURDS
'
MACHT
95
from those
pro-
more marked
by the author
by
the animal
died
dog
to
the
so
striking.
at
all
any
in
experiments with
Discussion.
To
in that
destructive critics
who
are prone to
own
personal
above investigations
may To
does
appear unexpected
the truly unbiased
not
condemn
or
demands
facts
just
Recent advances
in
those
196
physiological
so-called
'colloid' substances.
of colloidal
and inactive
may
profoundly influence
and their
action.
and Lewis ^^
in a
is
On
the
such as
minerals,
&c., to
vaseline,
bone-ash,
filter
paper,
cork,
is
agar-agar,
diet,
the curve
entirely changed,
and the
such cases
is
greatly delayed.
^'''
Again, F'antus
of kaolin
and other
matter
may
therefore, not
aid
maxim
to give flour in
many
What
is
are
in
;
involved
first
the
phenomenon.
The
broth,
the
place,
hinders the
absorption
of the
poison
the
intestinal
walls
and
this
substance
effect
by
XVI,
1913, vol.
p.
19.
IS
M. A..
1913, vol.
LXVII,
p.
1838.
PHARMACOLOGICAL STUDY OF
'
GOURDS
'
MACHT
be,
197
mechanism of
hardly
flour as
an antidote
as
to
may
there can
be
any
doubt
the
plausibiHty
of
the
of the ex-
if
wisdom and
Bayliss,
General Physiology,
1915 (chapter on
Colloid Solutions).
'
AN EXPLANATION OF ABOT
By Joseph H. Hertz, London.
This passage
is
VI. 3
in
]'':p,
so familiar to us,
difficulties
It
which some
failed to notice.
reads^
'He who
single
rule,
chapter, a
a single
single
expression, or even
ought to pay him honour, for so we find with David, King of Israel, who learnt only two things
a single
letter,
(1272
Dnan
^:y
iSa ^sn^nso
ir^b s'^C')
yet regarded
friend, as
it is
him
said
But
it
my
not
guide, and
my
who
Now,
is it
things
from Ahitophel,
rule, verse,
ught one who learns from his fellow expression, or even a single letter,
Now
version,
in
the current
the
'
two things
'.
is
!
As the text
is
stands,
it is
really a bp)
"ir^in
Equally puzzling
'
o/ify
two things
'
(13^3
nnan
^r^ aba).
felt
The commentators
this
logical
irregularity
and
109
200
obstacle.^
explanation that
his subject
because
David,
man
from him,
is
hardly satisfactory."
it
to be
now
stands, which
by the very
nature of a
"icini
bp
self-ev^ident.
A
me
name
nn>3j'*
name
of
cannot
recall,
restores
The
had
0^1"!?'^
in the course of
Q""!?"] Ty'.
as familiar
;
and
the
still
all
respect
how
one
much
more
be
the
case
when
He who
learns
from
his
fellow
a single chapter, a
'^i5th cent.^
^J?
'3
n"p Y^v
answer
njD
nnx
T\\vh in nns*
im!) ^nx
T'p
"j"
nnx.
His mystical
fails
R. Haj'yim of Walosin.
Abet commentary
^JK'
D''''n iTil,
Wilna, 1858,
remarks
fs niiND^ 13^3
bv pnn?.
Dnm
pi ^Din^nxo
'^^d? x^tj'
ino
YpTyo
nnx
'
mX
We
of ihe difficulty.
b.
Isaac of
Ufeda
known
iM
c-nD
T\'n
a.
I.
vh'Z' '"Qb
nno
yc>-i
V'p
i:"'"n -]''x
. .
pnnS
[I'l^*] "i"^^
i?:!?
nrn in
ijj'-i''2
n"'"j'n2?:n"i
m33
in
:m3
ni >3
oyi
^sin^nxi
i^xTj"*
"1123 13
'''^nn nciSTi:*
'"^x.
Tiy
i"3i
*
^inp ^X
:j'\S
n^nj
TX
Wekilta Bo,
^HwD DVj
/j;
1?:y
. .
(n"3pn) innj X^
.
HD
^JD1
fjx
"irn
-jin.
'
AN EXPLANATION OF ABOT
single
rule,
VI.
HERTZ
we
20I
a single verse, a
single
expression, or even
for so
him honour,
find with
David King of
nn^n),
him
is
^v
said
But
it
mine
equal,
is
it
my
not
guide, and
my
Now,
David, the
King of
learned
nothing
from
regarded him
and familiar
friend,
ought one who does learn from his fellow a chapter, rule, expression, or even a single letter, to pay him honour ?
verse,
original reading
and
its
current form
some comment
Ps. ^^. 14, cited in the Baraita,
is
to be taken in
'We
took sweet
in
Also
D'''}3'!3;^
The
usual reading
it
(Q''"!?1
""P.^)
is
very old.
It
is
of
is
who
c.
had the
which
The Gemara
Abot,
c.
viii,
identical with
vi.
3,
in
question f^i
Nm
-i?:s'
?inrj
.Qnzn
^rj'
n^n*.
Thus,
Our Baraita
vi. 3, is
in
is
anonymous.
b.
Abot
^
by R. Joshua
Probably
202
read
that
'inD
it
b2^
(instead
of
n?^^n
^d),
which impHes
it
is
is
really
i.
its
author.
Thus Bacher
In ]\Iidrash
among
c.
-j^
Levi.
Ps.
Buber,
p. 146)
there
indeed attributed
to
problematic, as a comparison
8).
Agadah
to
as to the relations
It
of
is
be of an early date.
Yohanan
a
it
contemporary
Sanh. 106
b.
who
amplifies
in
David called
Yohanan
David regarded
and
finally as his
him
disciple.
of an earlier date.
The
usual
to
bave been
or
may
^lishna was
tradited
its
uncanonical
Palestine
to
('extraneous')
Mishna found
Babylon
in
a written form.
Only
in a ivrittcn text
could
n.n2"i3;j'.
could hardly
account for
*^
it
in
an oral transmission.
nvtc'
^mabnn nx -non
moD
^ii?
yj-in' 'i
ics*
.^^^lya
inc
td^t
r:'r:z' 'S'li'X.
Oxford.
BUDDE
in ver. 7,
n:D''y3n
much
of
its
As
by Hannah. The
b.
phraseology of
7.
again in ver. 16
is
'
would
suggest that
in
nc'y
used
to
here as an
'.
impersonal verb
happen
This
MT
which rightly
makes both
8.
Hannah.
The
. .
and read
clause
is
.
"h
The
in
according to
in his
3, 4, 5, 6, 8,
16 characteristic of the
narrative
'
(Budde
Notes to
his
Polychrome text
"'::n
Haupt's SBOT.,
p. 52).
is
generally
in
only
answer
some
distance,
and
is
altogether unsuitable
sat at the
same
is
table
The
addition in
LXX
merely
yT
is
certainly correct.
I
36;
203
204
The
(cf.
reading of
LXX
which
thou
H.
P.
Smith
?
'
(p. 8) prefers,
'why
art
remorseful
24. 6,
her
sins,
her children.
how
could he have
refer
bvbl
T\2
to
Give
me
proach
'
(D"'^3n
S7).
nD"in^
(cf.
Joel
2.
17
and
Budde and
far
LXX
"j^m.
But
if
Hannah went
only as
For vn
LXX
is
probably a parain
The phrase
MT,
though without
parallel elsewhere,
may
nevertheless be as
Gen.
4.
6.
n^"'Sn,
citing
'
to display vindic-
The
1909,
p.
438
f.).
The
pointing
fact
by the
tense,
SEGAL
205
i-io.
1.
and
LXX
ia-Tepecodrj,
J'DN*,
This points
to
an original reading
ybv.
MT
'2
For
''lb )'0S'
forms a
nm
than n^
ybv.
Similarly
poem we have
made
^nnD:r
IV jn^l
\\
]'^p
m^i.
Further,
"i::,
|Vy
two clauses
are practically-
identical.
also
Aptowitzer,
II,
Das
Schriftivort in dcr
ni.T'i
rabbinischen Litcratnr,
4.
we
should read
Cf.
^^^^*n,
as
in
many MSS.
px
i;d
LXX
and Vulg,
Aptowitzer,
2.
I, '^'].
suspect that
"Xthl
is
a gloss.
The
line
is
lines of the
poem. Further,
For
there
is
is
impossible to other
beino-.
institute a
poem spoken
of
in
written in the
margin, and
directed
the
inference
which might be
poet's
may
be
in existence a
holy being or
deleted as
ditto-
the same
number
is
of
words
as
most other
into nny.
lines of the
I
poem.
This ny
usually
emended
2o6
Q'<r2\:'2
)bv
on:
W^'K)
into
.
.
QVy
.
"C'2
The
i
last
two
lines
of the
poem
by
;n^1
the
first
two
/3 y.-
So already
been
Cheyne,
Origiii
of the Psalier,
57.
may have
We
are
now
in a position to
construction
strophes.
of our poem.
I
The poem
are
of four
Strophe
first
a tetrastich
of which the
three lines
mous
verse
Strophe
II
The
first
line
is
synonymous
to the fourth
first
synonymous
couplet
(ver. 3).
first
The second
is
verse
is
a tetrastich
line,
first
in
which the
line
antithetical
to
the
fourth
line,
the
(vv.
couplet
a)-
being
third
4-5
The
The
first
verse
is
a tetrastich in
which
the
first
line
is
synonymous
the fourth
synonymous
synonymous
verse
is
to
the
first
couplet being
The second
lines,
likewise a tetrastich of
is
is,
synonymous
first
but the
second couplet
synthetic to the
couplet
(ver. 8 a).
The
last
verse
two previous
however, synthetic
I,
of but
two
Cf. this
Review,
vol. VI, p.
557
( 34).
SEGAL
207
tristichs.
In the
line,
first
verse the
first line is
In
hne
is
is
synonymous
to the second
a).
h"ne
recapitulatory (ver. 10
The
lines in the
poem
two verses
in
strophe IV,
stresses.
We
arranged
will
in
now
set
out
of the
poem
I.
n^n':^
nvrrj
r\)r\'
i.
ni,Tn "2^
)*dn*
i.
nsyr^ D^PD
2.
_^^^,^
.^^P
.^nn nn^i^y
nL"^i
(nn3j)
nnx
nmn
innn-PN
r-.
jV.
L 101^ ^:^'^3 "yL-ni
22^3"^
pny
sv
ar.n on^:
nin'
2.
n'^'p
2.
innD inn'
^'^
^"i'!^
D'^"i:'3:i
^"^-"^"^
"^^
'^'2-"
.ps
'DN*
pT mn'
ry
'^'[p
i3^D^
.[in"j'D
in'i]
nvi
nam
r
VOL. X.
208
2, 29.
LXX
critics
offers
:
no justification
"JT'IV
. .
.
reading
of
some
I2^2<i
piyo
ni:an
no^
is
The phrase
altogether un-
piyo
Hebraic.
as in
The
only
original
in
Hebrew
disorder,
of the
LXX
MT,
;^6.
some
as D*2n,
Nl^iv
Ci'C'N*)
'':n2D
LXX
necting
with
'.
n'SD
(Lev.
seed
poured
out
involuntarily
4.
2.
after
LXX
(/c.
e/cXirei/)
it
Dm.
conveys no
intelligible idea.
The
MT
is
no doubt correct.
Book of Roots
with
para-
(Hebrew
itself
edition
'.
by W. Bacher,
take
p.
it
303)
out
It is better to
in a transitive sense
an
implicit
object,
viz.
the
warriors, as
ic-'^Dixi.
correctly
Cf.
phrased by Targum,
t?n-ip
nny
the passive
and
and
H 5.
18,
22
Judges
7.
with the
Targum ad
The word
loc.
The
original reading
(isa
= )w
of
'en
ks*
nn^^N D^^^vS.
MT
through haplography
(an^^s
D^n^s).
The
fear
the Philistines was not due to the mere fact that the Deity
had come
The
LXX
'on
bs*
cn''i?x
isa
chm^n h^n
certainly wrong.
The
'What
is
the
Ark?'
who have
the cause
come unto
them.'
?
'
The
question was,
What
is
(ver. 6 a),
and
to this the}'
have already
SEGAL
D'n^N as in
209
The reading
MT
in
supported by
ver. 8.
the
mouth of the
a god.
dealing
God but merely Further, we have to remember that we are really with the words of a Hebrew writer, though they
Phih'stines the absolute
',
(6
^eo?) avroov in
LXX, L
is
"imon
is
difficult.
it
deliberately
into
the
mouth of the
to
show
their ignorance.
The emendation
to be noted that
in
R. Isaiah and
LXX
'^'h
and Pesh.
13.
The
correct reading
in
is
with
all
moderns
here with
"ly'u'n
Tinn navo as
in
LXX
cf.
also
Targum
meant
Targum
P.
II
18.
4.
loc.
is
H.
Smith
{ibid.
35)
Sanctuary
1.9):
for, if it
then Eli would have received the tidings before the people
within the city.
But
this
shows a
total
misunderstanding
of our passage.
(N3
.
The
news
(.
njm
N3'"i).
But
the
messenger
evidently had not the heart to break the sad news to the
old priest, and so he passed
city
(.
, .
into the
S3
c'\xni).
Eli,
man
owing
thus be
P a
2IO
6.
contains a doublet.
The
truth
is
is
an
and
intended to indicate
to repeat his
who had
clear.
words
in
order to
make
his
meaning
consummate
We may
movement of
up to a climax
i(S.
at the
yiani.
of wild animals
21.
cf.
Job
39. 3,
is
The
subject of N'lpm
Had
in
the
women around
Ruth
Smith
(p.
writer
would no doubt
ver.
To
argue from
20
b,
become unconscious,
narrator.
to misapprehend the
is
meaning of the
What
he means to convey
catastrophe.
6. 2.
nr\sn
'
in
what
If
manner?'; so Vulg.
Philistines
quoinodo?
cf.
Judges
16. 3.
the
accompanied with a
gift
SEGAL
211
'
wherewith
',
as the
moderns explain
it
Dpn
The absence
D''"k:'t:n
proves
that
C'^N
is
a variant reading of
n^^l^
After
^i^s*
this variant
some
sense, but
luckily failed to
n"'EJ'n.
So
also in
42.
The
ancients
already noted
that
extreme Southern
a,
2.
town of Beersheba.
;
cf.
Samuel did
at
He
may be
8.
sanctuary,
Gen. 46.
Amos
8.
14.
The moderns,
following
LXX,
is
insert
'h
after
"h
\m
1^
between
this
and
But
demand
in
for a
king
the
is
not a rejection of
Samuel.
It
is
better to
"ji?
retain
reading of
"joy,
MT
and
to take with
Kimhi
the sense of
and to interpret
the comparison as being between the people's conduct in the past and in the present
:
212
Targum
Cf. the
(yisi)
for
L*'J'l
25. 20.
remark of R. Tanhum
(ed. Haarbriicker,
The
nnrn
is
original reading
was probably
The
n in
for n) at the
end of the
last
tion of this n.
24.
"'??f ,
For -ism
read, with
H.
P.
:n
word
j
^^^
= ?n).
is
Or,
perhaps,
we
should
read
"iL*'2n,
the
being a corD"'w
ruption
passive
of 2 and X inserted
participle
to
make
24. 21.
sense.
as
in
Num.
For Dyn
"iCN7
LXX
TJ'N
'
is
D"'"'inx7.
Hence
propose
"Tixip
Gesenius-Kautzsch,
is
Hch.
Gram.,
155
f scq^.
thou
(first),
for
unto
and afterward
these words
have
invited.'
In
Samuel
whom
him
he has placed at
cf.
ver.
D^xnpn >,bx'
with Rashi.
p nnx
48
b,
LXX
reads
Dnr?.
;
It is
cf.
perhaps
14. 28.
;
For
2
Dn'':}X
Targum
&c.
has
]'^^'y^,
viz. in
a spiritual sense
cf.
Kings
2. 12,
25. T\y?^r\
in relation to
t23"j'D
is
them the
sanctity
of a
solemn
SEGAL
n^ii?*;,"!
2T3
covenant
critics
made by David on
assert
his anoint-
ment, II
is
The
that this
DDC'O
But
the
it
is
incredible
that
invest
The enumeration of those royal imposts was away the people from the institution
n
mr^sj
si?.
13.3.
MT
;
correct.
Israelites
who
This class
is
also referred to
below
also
ver.
7,
to ^X"i-" C"S'
of ver.
p. 6.
6.
Cf.
The proposed
b.
pointing of
n!?
as ^_
= ^b (cf. Driver's
note)
is
improbable, as proved
Further,
by
phrase in ver. 14
it is
would
fail
to state
categorically at
'
or 'filing', parallel to
"ii'3
It is
a verbal noun of
of 'to
file
'.
in its
sense
'
press'
is
(Gen. 19.9),
and hence
'
to sharpen
^pw*
or
'
to
D"'D
an old Hebrew
For
The meaning
of the verse
Cf. further
paper
in
the
Quarterly
Statement
f.,
of the
and E.
J.
Pilcher,
ibid.,
may
name
of the tree
214
n:D.
it
',
possibly connecting
with
5.
*JSD>3
'
boots
'.
pi\'D is
absent from
LXX,
:
it
as a dittography of paVD.
Targum
cit.
JlSi'D
HDVD
21).
On
omission
LXX
is
rendering of the
to haplography,
and the
in clause b is
X"^
no proof of
its
repeated.
As
for its
may
106)
5;
B.
me SI
a, 7. 10).
14.
For
njyro cf.
Mishnah
Ohalot, 17.
i.
^r^T]?].
16. It
would be better
as
suggested by Smith.
The reading
is
of
LXX
njnton,
which
may
used
in ver.
19 in a slightly different
',
Here
'
but
in ver.
19
it
means
the
tumult
of the crowd.
25-26
a.
The text
is
:
here certainly
in disorder,
but the
emendation of the
is
critics
nm
li'n
or
Vim
ni?n for
it
^21
is
"j^n
much
Further,
writer
ex-
Hebrew
would have
in ver.
29a), to insert
b,
'honeycomb' before
in ver.
is
t^m
:
in
Uc'n
ver.
25
and
to point
']bn
26 as a participle
in the
^T'1
which
:
only found
sense
of guest
'
'
or
'
wayfarer
!?s'
'
m\rr\ "Z^ bv
cm
"ly^
(ver.
25
b).
ran
"iiSn
njm
-ii;\t
SEGAL
t:'l"
215
or
For
y^:^"!''
vvc
ti'''"}i\
48. IHDu^
S/iassu,
is
synonym
Amalek.
It is
the Egyptian
;
the
cf.
Sayce,
op. cit..
15. 7. n7"'ino.
There
is
text.
The
frontiers
They
onl}' serve
as one
who
habitually
roamed about
the
vast
area
lying
between
For the
active form
i^?'!',
we should perhaps
"i^^'^n
point
"i^'r"!^,
the
word
or JiopJi al
',
to allow oneself to
'
be urged
to be
',
no.
ninyo.
32.
We
should
'in
chains
of the
;
'
cf.
The omission
of the
may have
D.
due
to
haplography
The rendering of LXX rpenoav, according to which many moderns point JTiiiiyip is not in accord with the light-hearted temper of Agag as displayed
graphically similar
,
by
his
contemptuous remark
in clause b.
16. 5.
NniT'Ei'^,
Targum
renders
in
ver.
it
by
renders
NC^Tip non:^.
for
This
to the
seems very
The
divine revelation
sacrifice,
came
and
in his fear
when he
made
new
king.
JdpJiil 3p3
in
2D:
should
be pointed as a
ac-
2l6
cf.
Mishnah Berakot
&c.
12.
The emendation
of
nb]!
for Dy
is
very improbable.
first
adjective
Further,
it is
more probable
is
;
So
LXX
/xeToc
KciXXov?
cf.
here.
Targum
were, as
in 17. 42.
17. 19.
This verse
is
If
it
some moderns
David
brothers, its
?31 hxL^'
Dy noni.
mouth
of Jesse.
in his Notes'-, p.
34. Driver's
remark
reading
nr for ntr
nT
incorrect.
(fl.
The reading
1340).
(:iD3
1280-
Cf.
his
nx^
Ton nr .Tnc
msj invn
40.
The genuineness
by
ver. 49,
of n''yin
hyi
is
is
proved conreferred to as
Dlp7''11
is
clusively
'^DH,
Hence,
suspect that
gloss.
48. HDiycn
'
battle array
',
but the
its
Such
is
obviously
meaning
19. 24,
cf.
*
Targum
renders
D"iy
IC"13
Ui*,u 'demented';
D'ly
*
Rashi.
',
=
'.
Di"'y
prudent
and regarded
it
as a
euphemism
for
:
mad
20. 20.
LXX
D^vnn ^h'Z^^
its
'3X1
nnix
n'ni;
'
And
will
shoot to
side with
SEGAL
217
',
Hebrew
is
e.
including,
Hebrew
ver.
usage,
the day on
M''i,
Cf.
35:
ip22
viz.
the
As
by
new
moon
third
described in ver. 19
day
by
:;7w'N.
It
is,
therefore,
the
reading of
MT, and
The
to
explain
nni*,
accent
must be taken
literally.
LXX
and the
which
Vipb^)
in ver.
3<S,
The form
in vv. ;^6,
D''Vnn,
^y must there-
or as a contraction
of "vnn.
21. I3np
lad, as the
moderns
interpret after
flous
after
for
.
it
the comm.and
it
NVD.
I3np
was
in the
iJiip
next verse.
We
is
addressed to David.
explains, to the lad.
The
suffix refers, as
Kimhi
rightly
See
last
note.
Further, there
is
'
The meaning
the
is
You need have no fear to show yourself you may actually come back to me in
the lad.
to anybody, but
company
of
2l8
cannot be an error
is
Doeg
The
use of
T2S
for
1'^'
or w'NI
{viiioov
may
-a?
Doeg
himself.
LXX
seems to have
The verb
nyj'
'
to
See above
on
9.
24.
I.
22.
The moderns
But
it is
assert
that
myc
in
is
a scribal error
for m!>0.
been repeated
in
II 23. 13
and copied
Chron.
11. 15
and
in all
Xo doubt
nnyo
is
right.
As
The
to
II 23.
latter
14 implies,
mVD
have been a
on the
hill,
The
Thus
nnyo,
danger.
mTiVr.
all
in
24.
we
find
David dwelling
in
the
David and
4).
his
men
On
Cf.
men
return to the
nv?.:,
nmVD
270
f.
(24.
23).
p.
The
is
is difficult.
The rendering
n^"'yp
of
LXX
difficulty of
MT.
(n'^nx)
The
best solution
is
to omit
as
with
Targum
24. JiyD
nnin
for
it.
for, as is
cannot be right,
to
verse,
David went
Ma'on only
after Saul
Ziph.
The
reading with
LXX,
SEGAL
219
remove the
difficult}-.
It
is
for
1)]!^.
The
latter
has crept
in
where
it is
found twice.
is
26.
Q'''\'^V
correct.
Yalkut
"l
"ikdn
and
in
the
Hebrew commentaries
literally in
V7y
'\Zi''pr\
n3S
mt3j?3.
So
Vulg.
is
iu
unlikely.
difficult
band.
Targum
renders
Cf.
P3?^3,
which
may
perhaps point to
a reading
Cnx.
Tanhum's note ad
Notes (second
loc.
ed., p. 191)
expresses
(= Ma'on)to 'EngedJ
is
situated
is
some 3,560
ft.
below Ziph.
be more
Conv^ersely
Ti""
is
and
arrival.
Cf.
23.
19,
:
25;
25. i;
26. 2, &c.
Cf.
;
and Exod.
is
-^^i.
Sin
In 27. 8
rh'9
12. 3,
D"'y7Dn
&c.
Targum seems
to
have read
loc.
(=
n"'D''d)
for
D'^yM.
4.
riN "ion? is
idd'J'
no^D
nry^^s* "i
ncN.
As
to the
is
general agreement
among
it
purgare; so Vulg.
a-D b^n'on ^21
it
. .
cf.
by Kimhi)
r^3n
ns*
iDcn
^3.
here as
Dv:;
pri'i^'n!?,
: ; :
220
vb'jl
Kings
i8. 27
(Kere).
So Rashi
in
Babli Ycbamot, 103 a s.v. lDn>, but here Rashi gives the
first
25. 14.
20.
"ly;""!
for
oyi
rendered
by Targum
~ii:D3,
no doubt
through assonance.
22.
V*iD yT'
cf.
pn^i'JD
is
rendered
by Targum euphemistically
i.
= any
e.
Rashi
and Kimhi.
however, Jacob
in
Levy
{Chald.
right
interpreting the
Targum ic phrase
intercourse.
23-24.
first
^2ni
^Dni
Our
text
may
be right
a sign
feet as
she prostrated
herself at
a distance as
of
respect,
suppliant.
29.
Qi^'l
is
correct.
It is
incorrect to take
it,
as
many
moderns do,
as a conditional,
and to point
Qi?^l
or to read
a hard
C'TiH in
fact.
For
cns' cf.
24. 10.
. . .
With
r\y^,-^''
n^^nn -in*
cf.
"12D
Exod.
32. 32,
&c.
For
in
best
Ps. 38.
12
Amos
it
3: 'Far
away from
the Lord's
presence', where
might
avenge me.
28. 13.
The
reading
b^i^'y
instead of
b^vc'Z"
found
in
some
MSS.
is
of
LXX
certainly wrong.
The
"i^Di,
instead of xim.
n'NI ~^
'2
SEGAL
221
of
Saul's
identity
known passage
nh"^
in
cited here
61.
by
II,
DN"i^N,
cf.
Driver's note.
The
ancient
spirit
4 b,
and Tanhtima,
woman
used
who
cf.
Joshua
17.
11-12
Judges
27.
30. 5.
Budde
to
reason.
The wives
of David's
importance
be lumped
together
with
the
nameless
special
women
(ver.
men.
in
Hence
the
is
they
receive
account of
the
rescue
is
in
disorder,
in
:
inoy onmjni
ver.
ivj'3n
is
out
10 should have
. . .
been
:r^N
first
dtind nr^yi
order,
TWi^'O
nn
^nTi,
Budde adopts
this
and
of this
gloss.
It
is
:
possible,
however, that
C'^s
the
fiTT'i
noy onm^ni
and
mxo
iB'N.
By some
order to
make
it
J^'^s
cnXD
Y\'OVi^\,
as
we have
in
our text.
Or, again,
readinsrs
it is
had before
him two
222
)nr:v
Dnn"i:ni
;
j-'n*
mxD
-ivi:'3n
^m
'm
in:3 TJ'N
(ii)
^121
^11')
(ver. to):
^m.
inferior,
The
though
reading
because
number
whence
it
eventually-
9.
'mn'^i?, i.e.
on the
morrow
pedition.
set
So Targum
Cf.
^"Innm N0V2
and apparently
cif.,
LXX
D
is
and Vulgate.
also Aptowitzer,
<?/.
65.
The
word comincnnm.
10. 11)
next word
31. II.
(D
11).
Cf. 15. 3
''2'^
nNT~5nsDinni
(i
= nsi
Instead of
the chronicler
Chron.
has h^.
'35;'''
must have
Samuel
sense
To make
is
The
The
combine
in logical
David
He,
have recourse
That
this
it
clause
is
not a parenthesis
is
shown by the
fact
that
ver.
forms
the
antecedent
(p.
to
the
opening words of
2.
H. P. Smith
verse was:
256)
2'c"')
form of the
'i3l
*in
niDHD
nn
is
ap;
nns
^T'^,
and that
an
editorial
adaptation
But
it
is
to begin
the
SEGAL
223
Wellhausen's explanation
of
D^'tJ'nDn
is
"bv^
is
too
ingenious to be true.
the phrase as Dn^^y
No
doubt Kimhi
right in explaining
So
LXX i-mroipxaL.
See
h'91
For a
parallel
in
No.
62, 10.
also found
45, 9.
''a
.
in
the Punic
phrase D-|33y
9.
'iTin
^'3. ibid.,
No.
The ungrammatical
expression
Tiy bn is
most
probably a colloquialism.
12.
in b^'-\^^ n^n
bj?l
'n
DV by
'i"Mn,
is
who remarks
nin^
nn
epexegetical.
't\
But there
really no difficulty at
all,
for
men who
Lord
(cf
fell
in
I 2fj.
JT'l
combatants, particularly
slain
women and
children,
who were
men
?X"iu^''
by
cities (I 31.
also
n^a
in vcr. in
this sense
the
comment
:
of Mekilta on
Exod.
19. 3
(cited
2.
by Rashi,
15.
ibid.)
CuOn
The
The
luaiv in 'C"nvT
ceding
final luin.
So
also in
''w:s*3T
below.
16.
critics,
much
or
D''l"ifn.
puzzled over
D''"i2fn.
Some
Others
Others,
LXX
lie
;
Q''1^'l'
did neither
in
zvait
nor
one another.
propose
again,
D"'"ilfn
emend
C^V'j,
VOL. X.
224
most
from
but
The
it,
field
was so named
it,
originally
the presence in
after the event
or beside
of certain sharp
flints,
name
D"'"tvri
young men.
23.
n'':nn
Cf.
The
nnw.
25.
The
"""inNn,
may
be removed
by pointing
most
as in
is
Targum
"'"insa.
nns
nya:
correct.
if
ny3J
is
unlikely.
For
hill
stood on the
mentioned
ny3:n.
the
last
verse,
he would
.5.
nn
nc'N
I
may
be a
an original
as in
list
Chron.
3. 3.
The names
in
the
descriptive adjective.
was
wrote
inc'N,
which a
later scribe
as in our text.
7.
I
Her name
written
^IV")
flw'l,
also
~|V"impb?ob,
Cooke,
op.
cit.,
pp. 56-7
is
and
No. 150,
5.
name
n'N
only found
among
the Horites,
Gen
36. 24.
5. 6.
Accordingly we
of the 5
may
final
perhaps emend
The omission
may
6. 3.
The
pointing of vhsi as
vrixi
is
improbable.
The
name
of Uzza's brother.
a caritative
SEGAL
in^'c*^
225
^yac'-
Cf.
re-''
"Vl:'^
(I
14. 49)
7. II.
The moderns,
Dvn
following
LXX,
"in"'
i"^in
"iB'N
)^t^
1^:3
im;y^ n^iy
'n
id^dv
n^c
from
it
But
this
is
And
which
refers to the
conquest of Canaan,
is
obvious that
^Jl:^^s^a
must
Israel
had acquired a
territory of its
;
own.
cf.
Hence
it
is
necessary
is
.
vnyt::i
^nrotri
^n^B^yi
' :
will
show thee
modern
an ex-
by
the birth of
Solomon
i
that
He
will
thee a house'."
The reading
emendation
of
Chron.
17.
10:
or
the
T'ici
19. niin is
perhaps an error
for nnin
is
this,
pression of gratitude
by means
offer to
of words,
all
the thanks
God
(ver. 20),
but even
my
Lord
and
Thy
as
in
LXX
Chron. 17.
cannot be
right.
for himself
ment
in ver.
23.
The words
vnrsi
seem
in
Targum from
vnpx
is
Hebrew
Cf.
Kimhi's comment,
lacking also in
Chron.
17. 21.
^
Cf.
Review,
vol. IX,
p.
47f
Q3
226
8. I.
however, Sayce,
explanation
op. cit.^
p.
414,
who
offers
an
excellent
of
the
baffling
phrase.
3.
Targum
(iT'Oinn
IT^
nx::^x^)
may have
sign.
as a
boundary
The name Tiia may perhaps be connected with Aramaic nn3 = Hebrew 'CV\1. LXX {koI kK Ta)v eKXcKTcou)
connects
it
= mn
P~iN
(cf. I
17. 8
is
n2).
It
10. 13.
The emendation
for
ny
unhappy.
for
Joab to
of God.
Ark
Had
the
the
Ark been
army
the Ark.
following Lucian and thePeshitta,
The moderns,
vol.
XVI,
p. 156) actually
makes
For
i.
this
of the text.
if
David
invited
Uriah
e.
his arrival
=
in
inpC'N "inai,
after the
fact
Jerusalem.
The
order
in
(ver. 13)
he
failed to
go home
to
David,
king's
household
his fatal
him back on
SEGAL
227
14
of ver. 12).
12. 6.
The change
of N? into
is
bad.
The
fact that
the rich
for
man had
pity on his
i'cn
a reason
punishing him.
in ver. 4,
may
bi^m
but
is
not parallel to
31.
Targum
= NVVJ'3
nnn^ 1^31,
is
found
i''2yni
in Jer. 43. 9.
The emendation
of
for n"'3ym
p. 36)
:
was
CiyDn
already suggested
n''33^
by R. Joseph Kaspi
(oj?. cit.,
nic'y^ nw'i^.
13. 9-10.
culties.
The
critics
diffi-
as an old corruption
in
the
Targumim
Yerushalmi
it
6.
14;
7.
Kzek.
4.
Hallah
sufficient to protect
ns*
critical
'
scepticism.
The emendation
to see the
xnpni
for mr'r:n
ns* npni is
The
all
damsel do
work
an
herself
and
in his presence,
ni.C'n,
and
ver. 10,
and therefore
of relegating
the
(cf.
interpolation
They argue, if the food was already why does he ask her to bring it into the chamber ? And how could the sick man move from one room into another ? The answer is, taking the
Smith,
p. 330).
set before
him
(ver. 9 a)
'
'
second question
first,
that
Amnon
be
sick,
of getting
228
Tamar
his dissimulation.
As
as
Amnon
in
asked
order to
his
be removed as
attendants,
far
possible
He
just
been emptied of
his friends
18.
'
The
object
'
to
U'h^'a'O
and emend
'
D^Jiyo
from eternity
h^V'O
;
(I),
or D''77iyD
distinct
from babes
(!).
They argue
2cS.
that the
was
(Exod.
4).
it
Exactly so
how
upper garments.'
14. 14. It
is
best to
emend
3"^^''
for
Nw'"'
'.
A.nd we
regathered
for
God
devise plans,
is
not to
^^^^
banish
2'^T\,
banished.'
is
:
u'2J
Kings
17. 31.
life
The meaning
back
so
re-
stored to
again,
will bring
Amnon
?
why
Absalom
also
by
banishment
Zu'ni
refers to
The omission
supplied, however,
rise to
by Lucian from
may have
given
b,
Hebron was
SEGAL
229
Jerusalem.
12.
It
is
generally
17.
so
already by
Kimhi on
and Ralbag on
16.
23, that
father
Eliam
(11. 3)
is
But
is it
likely that
man
like
Ahitophel would
for
making
his
harem ?
Solomon,
made
that
it
to
Nay,
it
is
v^ery likely
was
to rebellion.
It
should
have thought
necessary to take
such violent
in
the
For
it is
Davids
Seder
reign,
^Olaiii,
his decline
(cf.
Why,
the
heir-apparent and
friends
The
fact
is
that
the
son of his
that wife would surely not have taken the leading part in
young
son.
We
must therefore
was
not
230
Ahitophel's son.
also probable
in
that
the
narrator
him
further to such a
famous
personality as Ahitophel.
(1905), vol. II, p. 27, note.
p.
Cf
258,
note),
with
more
his
usual
display
of
cynical
I
scepticism, remarks
K.
I, 13,
den.
da
I,
er
und
alle
Welt
nichts
critic
Vgl.
]
14
y~^2.-[
ns
"Tixbcv'
But the
recalls
Kings
I.
30,
where David
his
solemn oath
to
Bath-sheba.
Nathan speaks
no
in vv.
25-7.
There
is
in
Nathan's words
name
TIN
is
Similarly
other personal
names ending
in
"'^
may be
'''\r\)2
caritatives of
element
n^-,
as
""'in
is
= n-j^in.
parallel to
=
f.)
;
r\^-\ni2
(23. 28).
But
cf.
this latter
more
108
-nn (23. 9)
nnn, akin
innn
"innn (2
;
cf Lucian,
(i
nnn"
"an"
;
Chron.
II. 46)
also
^'y
= iT-TT, = ri'"^\
cf
"2B'
parallel to bvil'
and ^yano
in
and, perhaps,
''^, like
"3w'
So
also
2.
names ending
ri'^y^',
(17. 27).
(Ezra
42)=
"^^
23.
16,
&c.)
further
16)
others.
SEGAL
23I
14.
bxiL*"'
D'"'X
72)
is
obviously to be distinguished
from
bSTJ-'^ ^:pf
?3 in ver. 4 above.
The mass
of the people
were, like
tive
Absalom
himself, captivated
elders,
by Hushai's decep-
eloquence.
The
Hence Hushai's
fear lest
Absalom should
Kimhi
confesses
his
inability
to
explain
.
the
also
rendering of y^n^ by
Targum
vb^
in
ND^D^
It
"Jnn''
Noh
Cf.
Levy,
that
CJiald.
Worterbuch, 202 b.
takes
its
Targum
ordinary
it
of
interprets
figuratively
Lest
',
Absalom, as does
is
also Rashi.
niD"in
rendered
by Targum p
similarly
Lucian
niisn
'
and
the
Theodotian naXada?.
'.
Perhaps
they read
fruit
in the sun.
18. 26.
"lyC'n
LXX
is
and Peshitta
the narrator
for "lyb'H.
is
certainly
^N*.
wrong;
for
l^^
Nor
the emendation of
Smith
(p.
36c)
"lyj'n
bv
more happy.
it
by
bv
^J^'^*
1^^^^.
why
earlier in ver.
25?
There
is
no doubt that
MT
correct.
is
performance
is
was
232
24
a).
We
first
man (ver. 25) was also made through the gatekeeper. So we also find the four lepers announcing important news to
the gatekeepers of Samaria, 2 Kings
29.
original.
7.
10, 11.
The text is, as already observed by Ehrlich, quite The incoherence of the reply of Ahima'as is a
great embarrassment.
19. 10.
There
It
is
is
but
Cf.
in
a passive sense
is
Mishna B. Kavinia
:
2.
Yadaivi
5. 6,
4. 3, particularly
with
a preformative hirek
Sanhedriu
&c.
See the
writer's
remarks
(
in
this
REVIEW,
First
Series,
XX, 701-702
King of
acts
To-day
I feel
again as
Israel,
and
of vengeance.'
11, 13.
Many
Do you
this
it
not
know that
and notjjw^
Dvn(''D)
;
But
does not
suit the
nor does
narrator
exclamation:
I'Di
ncv DIM.
. .
The
would have
VX^V N? Dvn.
passage
has given
much
trouble
to
modern
vv.
expositors.
The apparent
discrepancies between
3a
b,
34 b, 37
a,
"I3y as
further to delete
X^'^tx
in ver. 32,
and pTH ns
p"i\n
in
ver.
o^-]
or to take
P~M
as
nnTn, and
ni2y
ns as
pTH
^x
SEGAL
fact,
233
and
is
altogether unsatisfactory.
The
however,
did cross
Western
The above-mentioned
not
real.
Ver. 32
tells
a general
way
that
Barzillai
the
following verses
still
describe
the incident
river,
in
While
and
in
go up to
Jerusalem
(vv.
'3,^^
'3fi),
37
a),
39).
Kimham (ver. 38), which offer the When this conversation was over,
first
Barzillai
company.
leave of Barzillai,
and the
latter returned
home
in
Gilead
(ver. 40).
Having
more
Barzillai, the
narrator proceeds
another,
For
this
fact that
the king had crossed over and gone to Gilgal, taking the
in
promise to Barzillai
king to Gilgal
;
(ver. 39),
Kimham
relate,
accompanied the
the king had not
but, he goes
on to
him
234
for
gave
rise
to an inter-tribal quarrel,
which
cul-
minated
41.
The Kethib
in
The reading
of
is
LXX
inad-
cnny, which
missible.
already represented as
be conceived
20. 3.
The
pointing after
'
LXX
right.
'
Living widows
'women
I
whose
husband
is
u'^'T}
is
yet alive
'
'.
ni:rpl5X
widows
or,
for the
less
whole term of
""n
their
life
'
lifelong
living
widows,
'.
likely,
niJDpX
in
'
widows of a
husband
The
corrupt ending
nvn
may be due
word
niJ?o^N.
is
cf.
note on
9.
propose to read
movn
"li^n
is
nin
i^yi
)y2 i^jn
3N"i'i.
is
a dittography of
"ii^C,
since
the
is
important
fact
convey
military cloak.
The
was
point in this
is
that
the
not,
as
usual,
hanging down
his
loins
horizontally, so as to facilitate
falling out of
who would
in
quite
naturally
stoop to pick
in
it
up
naked sword
his
hand without
the mind of
Amasa
STUDIES
piay
with
(ver.
IN
SEGAL
235
10
a).
we must,
of course, read
LXX
T'n,
the sword
up with
to
hand
(= axv
beard
ver. ic),
so
as
not
for
hand
12.
'^^m^
nsn
'y:?^-^
as an
Dyn.
^3 ny
*3 L^'''Nn
NT1
The
ayn ^3 noy
"'3
xnM.
Targum
oi:s-
renders n:n by
also
is
n''j2S,
pointing nih^^npin;
active
so Pesh.
LXX
This
sense
ecpOacrei/.
Janah
(cited
26.
by Kimhi), and of R.
nx^^
P'or
Targum
with
has
the
yipn
;?^T
nwS-|\s\
thus
identifying
23. 26.
this
N"i^y
one
mentioned below,
It is
possible, as Rashi
the interpretation
and
the
regards
it
as
synonymous
oil
with
because
is
of
abundance of
in
in
made
in
Bad/i Menahot
cSj b.
of the Southern
name
the North.
23. 32.
to delete
;
'':a
as a dittography
inJin^
to join
to the next
after
6
\^^,
and to
insert
''?12l'
Towi.
for
of
Chron.
11.
34.
^Jijn
is
identified
;
with the
26. 48.
all
Num.
This identification
other heroes are
is,
the
was
settled
in
Instead of
""JlMn
in
236
Chronicles,
would read
1
'':"iic:n,
from
28.
all,
iTttJ
near Ajalon on
Chron.
after
18.
r\yi:o
On
in
the
ver.
same
0,6
is
ground
doubt
whether,
correct, since
Zobah was
inhabited,
addition
was
would
seem,
exclusively
by
Arameans.
MEGILLAT
A SOURCE FOR JEWISH CHRONOLOGY AND HISTORY IN THE HELLENISTIC AND ROMAN PERIODS
TAANIT
AS
By Solomon Zeitlin, Dropsie
College.
CHAPTER
VII
ab
^"i
NT?:n Dpins"'
n'-n
fjiD
[n'^jdh
nyi]'*^ p'-^n
xnT
-en ;q
I.
\x:n
amnx'*' xiyn^
ny
[i]'^"
.T3
N^:?:nDi
:[pnn] "^iddjd^
^'''
'
Megillah
;
',
Leipzig,
Palestine,
p.
1896
Derenbourg,
1867, p.
Essai
Vhistoiie
et
la
geogiaphie de la
2,
&c., Paris,
442
559
Paris, 1897,
section,
p.
199,
Dr. A.
Marx's views,
in
Sedah la-Derek by Menahem ibn Zerah, 247 b-248, and also both the Talmud-Babli (in the Munich MS., and also photographs of MSS. of the
British
Museum and
is
The
in the
Megillah
mentioned
Halakot Gedolot,
p.
Siddur of Rab
p.
I
Amram Gaon
first
Vitry,
fasts.
concerning
Rabba and the Seder 'Olam Zuta and Seder ha-Kabbalah Mantua, 1513. It was again
printed with the Seder '01am
this time
in
1711, and in
Hamburg
de
Joh.
Meyer,
Tractaius
teinporibtts
festis
diebtts
Hebraeorum,
etc.
Accedit JT'jyn
Tw^O
Volumen de
ieiunio,
Amstelaedami, 1724.
Besides
237
238
nyaiNn
nsDo^ i6
'i
D^K'n^
ivj'
II.
TC'y"' nc'ona
p-itj>y2
''^
:
'voa Tj-y
'^c^jH
nynnsa
Tj-y
'-''^
III.
nnypn
n^a
)b:
.T-n
nnD'ai
nn
[rnsDJD^N^ n]"'^
Nmn:
"i2d
sny nona
[T^ry] nyais'3"'^
IV
this
editions.
Scholars
most work
as mentioned above
mid
liistorischen
P. Cassel, Messianische
An
in
is
Life
pp. 698-700.
See Steinschneider's
iiber
graphy
Gcsclnchtsliteratitr
des Alien
Testaments
Megillatli
I
Berlin, 1885.
A
r
full list
of scholars
cite
shall
give wherever
it is
essential.
"5 Parma,
!<"
wynS^.
to
According
the
Jcrushalmi
(Taanit 66 a,:
N?
N"'DV
)V''X
'i^r-i
N^oynn!? ah
''^
''*'
Not found
Not found
in
Jerushalmi Megillah 70 c:
;
Jerushalmi Taanit 66
a,
a.
Jerushalmi Taanit 66
ipJin.
i'-'
Jerushalmi.
b.
'^i
150 '5^
in Babli
Taanit 17
p_
>^^pr\ii,
in
Parma MS.
Njn anin^sn DVJ*n nD^ abi.
Sedah la-Derek. On 17th of
129
b.
'53
151
ir.o
M. MS.
is t-yi3'>:'T
;
In P. fifth of lyyar
in
Ij-yar.
Not found
in Babli Hullin
'6 M. adds
1515*'
ny:nn^ n^ti.
Sedah la-Derek, Xip''D.
;
M.
In
i3\S"ipn; in
Isl.
not found
;
in
this day.
150
i 162
P. nV2'C'2
P.
-li"
;
M.
-\'y.
-lD"'3"ISn.
r\^2
M.
-iDn^:^'^
na iD''Dn3.
;
Babli Sanhedrin 91 a
:
On
Sedah
la-
Derek
le-!
P. ii?t:j.
165 166
P.
nyaiSn;
In P. not found.
ZEITLIN
239
nsDob ab
'
d^j-it
-ivl."
n3:n [dv]
[ipa:]
""
^i^sn
ny3-i:'n
'"^
VI.
D^'iTD
[1
minn:)]'"
won
()^''Uins) "'
.Tn
Ti:'y
nyarn
jxnuK^
pns^'ya
:
xniry
n^3
p mmo
nyau'i
'
xn^D nan
pii^yn
pirx' rn-nr]
nTinx
n-ia
m'r^m
po^r^b
:xn3TO bv
dy]
'"^
n^3 nyac>a
xnm p
n]''"'
pnc'ya
:[nDDot'
x^
nvn: in
di^
n^2
nm^" pncyn
x>:r:ni
:[2D
:nDD?D^ xb
:
pr.-)r
x^jrrn
'"-
na^n"' dv
n-n r,c>t:m
x:n ^y
xn-^^'-'ja
[a]
'^'
na'-n''
nnoa
pncya X.
pna'yD
rnaoo^ xb
xi':3''n^
nxn''n^
:D^L*"n> [o [xabr:^]"^
n"'3
'iK'y
p-inn
n'-n
x-io?2
nynn nv mxa
:
nB'Dnni
n'3 TJ'y
!'
i'58
nc^y nyn-ixa
nijpj
nv
n-n
ncy n^na
xniD
X''i?2n'l.
pn'^t:
'^^
di^
""nnc'a :n3D?^^ x^
[pyx]'*"
nn03.
Sedah la-Derek.
P. *.p2J.
1^2
1^'
^''^
In P. ny2"lX3, likewise in
I'O
''s
Not found
in P.
Not found
in P.
''*
some
editions
by mistake Xn^lTX.
:
'
On
the 22nd
".
^'g i'
^^t
j^ p.
"
i"3
M.
Not
in P.
'On
it
180
Not found
in P., but
Babli
b, p3''X
1^3
H'':^n
Yoma n^ljm
c,
69 a
'DIV
'^
P. X3"'n\
in
in
So
in P.
Not found
Babli
In B.
in P.
^^ So
Jerushalnii
Megillah
this
70
Taanit 66 a;
Taanit r8 b,
Dimija;
"lonnn.
^^^
Sedah la-Derek
MS.
it
reads
So
in Babli
in
Taanit 18
b,
Megillah 5 b
1" Not
Jerushalmi,
Md.
p_ {^rTi^'a.
VOL.
X.
240
s^
nb'^"i-\'
ivj*
n33d^"' vnir
jnt^'ya
[pnb nroi
'^^]
n^a pnu-ys
iDK^*''
[wn
nmp
l-jn
|nb
''
[rnsDo!?
200
.
ab
,L^.3
is
not allowed to
fast,
and on some
I.
of
them
it is
(a)
From
mourning
is
forbidden.
From
it is
which
II.
forbidden to mourn.
(a)
On
On
Passover, on which
^*5
forbidden to mourn.
;
So
in
Jerushalmi Taanit 66 a
J.
Megillah 70c.
is
190
'91
Not
in
Jerushalmi Taanit 66
a,
but
;
so in J. Megillah 76
c.
So
in Jerushalmi Megillah 70 c
c.
P.
013^3.
'^ So in Jerushalmi 70
"^ So
*'*
'^5
in
J.
Megillah,
ibid.
Not
It is
in P,
nor
in
in
Jerushalmi,
ibid.
d,
found
Jerushalmi Taanit 66
NOy bS
ilDX-
Not found
Neither
in
in B. J.
1'*
Taanit
66a nor
in
J.
Megillah 70c
passage there.
'^9
So
in Jerushalmi, ibid.
"o
of the History
0/ Biblical
A ic/iaeology,
reprinted
March, 1894),
is
"MUl
TJ'y
HJICK'n
Nin DIpvD
This
is
Megillah.
is in
however, acceptable.
is
The reference
to this holidaj'
entirely in Aramaic.
ZEITLIN
241
On On
the
departed from
Jerusalem.
(d)
payment of
On
was captured
(l?)
(see
No. XXI).
On
On
removed
On
(a)
Tammuz
On
day of Xylophoria,
it
is
forbidden to mourn.
(/;)
On
(a)
we returned
on which
to our
Law.
VI.
On
is
forbidden to
mourn.
(^)
On
and Jerusalem.
(c)
VII.
On the 22nd thereof we began to slay the wicked. On the 3rd of Tishri were removed the 'mentions
(a)
'
on documents.
VIII.
On
the 23rd of
On
tured.
{c)
On
(a)
upon the
altar.
IX.
On
On
(a holiday).
242
(c)
On
it is
which
(d)
On On
(a)
is
the day of
Hanukkah
eight
days
it is
forbidden to mourn.
the
X.
28th
of
Tebeth
the
Sanhedrin
sat
in
judgement.
XI.
is
On
is
a holiday, whereon
it
On
commanded
(c)
not
allowed to mourn.
On
from Jerusalem.
XII.
(a)
The
8th and
9th of
Adar they
supplicated
and sounded
(d)
No.
On the 12th thereof is the day of Tyrian XXIX. (c) On the 13th thereof is the day of Nicanor. (d) On the 14th and 15th thereof (are the days
it is
see
of)
Purim, on which
(e)
On
wall of Jerusalem
it
is
forbidden to
mourn
thereon.
(/)
On
(to the
Jews)
see
No.
XXX.
(^)
On
it
descended).
(/i)
On
Law.
not permitted to
mourn
thereon.
is
It is
arranged
ZEITLIN
in
243
chrono-
To
between
the events
these,
it
commemorated
is
a chronological setting.
The
following diagram
an
scribed
in
which
fall
into
four main
periods
A.
B.
C.
Roman
Period
till
6^.
CHAPTER
A.
I.
VIII
The Pre-Hasmoneax
the
Period.
From
New Moon
established.
this holiday
commemorates
when
it
offering
(Tamid) should be
for out of
opposition
it
to
the view
of the
This
is
however,
why
the
it
fete
should be
and
commemorate
passes
The
Scholiast
t:"r
lightly
over
fnisr',
by
assuming
ended
in that victory
the
first
in
Dalman
is
^"-
commemorated
Wilderness.
not mentioned
the setting
in the
is
This
at all
in the Megillah.
In
-'1
my
memory
p.
444.
Schwab, Actes
Section
!02
4,
pp. 235-6.
p. 32.
244
ZEITLIN
is
245
The
.
dedication
n-i'-^
described in
Ezra
6.
15
':a
iiayi
r\^2
mx
Nnii>3
nn^n ny
nN-^i'i
nn
nn^n a^^i'm
^wS">*fc:'\
nnna nn nh^n
najn
'jii
N'^ii^i
s^jna
'And
Adar,
this
.
.
And
Levites,
and the
kept
God
with joy.'
It is clear
The
latter
7. 5,
is
found
in
and Antiq.,
XI,
4.
7.-''^
ments of Exod.
''D^,
days of Consecration.
This
is
of the
Talmud, which
of
Adar
reads:
:T\^i2
""DV
'c^a
'
"b
'\T'-\'pT\
R. Judah
says
This passage
destined to be interpreted
by
Elijah.
sacrifices of
in
The passage
by R. Judah
Ezek. 45.
8,
^^npi^n.
sacrificing of a sin-offering un
To
this
of the sin-offering
days as
New Moon,
to say, just as in
Guthe, Gesch.,
p.
ed. D.
W. Nowack.
246
so in the time of
Temple
after
Temple
It
was on
this
day
Tamid was
Tamid was
established, or re-established,
is,
and
was
observed as a holiday.
In this connexion, the following passage in Seder
<ch.
Olam
'h^nT\r\
VII)
|D^33.
is
^32
D^Ni^?:n ^rs^
'1)
^xh^
One
is
whence did R.
Olam, derive
on the 23rd
explicitly
(cp.
day
^y1r^
of Adar',
when
nx
in
Exodus
cnn^ nnxa
it
is
stated
bnx
p:^'D
D'-pn
iic'snn
cnnn dv3
Exod.
is
40, 2)
described
pL*\s-in
mn3
Ni^i
The view of R. Jose becomes even more perplexing when it is taken into account that Rabbi Akiba, who was R. Jose's teacher, was of the opinion
pc^on Dpin ^"wb that the D\si^
v::"'
ist of Nisan, in
other
Adar.-^^"'
If then
;
Lev.
205
ed.
Friedmann
Dnx
:;'23i?
D\Xi:D VH IC'N
"':^':N
^l'^
pno^
w^y
if
'i
vn >d
nDD
2"iy3
we
consider
commenced on
da^'
the
first
of Nisan and
his sons
Aaron and
began to
ZEITLIN
247
teacher,
it
is
strdiige
which he was
in
It is
my
Mishkan
for
Talmud
the terms
interchanged. ^"~
on the 23rd of Adar and the seven days of Milluim connected therewith ended by the
of Nisan. In Seder
lliis corruption
relied
on the
in
Seder Olain,
in
days
of
Milluim
From
it is
which
forbidden to mourn.
Scholiast
that
it
Sadducees,
Pentecost.
The
why
this period of
appears
me
who had
e\'e
two cousins,
fell
on the
of
Passover.
"^"^
difficulty (^Shemijii,
it
IX,
i) is
shown from
T'^ifC
UV2
in
\T1, where
says
nnS
made
HT
^T\?
'^D'.J'n
Q^3nDn
for
the
apparent
DV
is
to
day of Milluim.
:
Shebu'ot 16 b
Erubin 2
44.
a.
2"*
Comp.
Sifre
Numb.
248
celebrated as a
hoHday following
induced to remain
in
On
:
and
it
is
forbidden to
mourn
thereon
The
is
mentioned
in
the time
2.
27).
Graetz
-'"
was
finished
by the
when
the
city
of Jerusalem
was
re-
peopled.^'^
^"^ Ezra 6.
p. 21.
19-22
Dalman,
ibid.,
me
that this
Yom Tob
can be traced
to the
Hasmonean period
festivals.
The
in a position to
dedication
in
Passover found
many
Judeans
be fought.
unclean
Being
the
seven da\s between the eighth and the fourteenth, and for this cause they
made the whole seven daj-s a Yom Tob in remembrance of the seven days whereon thej- had purified themselves before the Passover in order to keep
the festival
thing that
tlie3-
to
do while Antiochus
See
Graetz, Gescliichte,
Graetz,
III, 2, n. i.
Geicliiclite, III, 2, n. i,
and
II, 2,
pp. 143
o-
CHAPTER
B.
IX
IV.
On
23rd
(22iid)
tore
away
By
Sorega
-^-
which the
Greeks built
sacrifices.
in
To
Maccabees
(4.
after describing
it
how Judas
it,
tells
in order to rededicate
they
first
and
the altar.
The
stones
Although
what
it
Mace,
still
does say in
and
is
To
doubtless refers
D"ix^:>"in]
when he says
Vm mryn
;-jo
mu
QY
.... innnm
[nui2.^'^-'
V.
On
the 27th of
to bring
According
212 2'^
commemorates
See 'Aruk,
See further
Derenbourg,
pp.
60 2
Schwab, Ac/es
4,
dti
Onziane
pp. 213-15.
249
250
the victory of the Pharisees over the Sadducees in a controversy concerning the disposition of flour that used to
sacrifices,
sacrifice,
by the
priest.
The explanations
He
when he has no
If the
Pharisaic victories
were celebrated
in
by the Scholiast
it
in
Water
Libation,-^''
we
in
debates.
None
of the
holidays there
enumerated comAll
From
Mace.
4.
after
Temple he chose
were qualified to
priests
Temple
According to Lev.
to
13,
the
who were
offer the
meal-
The High
holida)'
Priest, in particular,
had to
up the meal-offering
daily. -^^
This,
we may assume,
and
II,
pp. 244 8.
'
"'^
Sukkah
" ;
48.
Dl^
bl3D
see S. Zeitlin,
The
^1^
JOR., N.
14.
ZEITLIN
25
of fine flour,
letters
is
is
alluded to in the
which
Mace,
Mace.
VI.
I. 8).
On
:
is
the day of
Hanukkah
This
in
I
forbidden to mourn.
is
but a terse
2
way
and
c. E.),
and made
VII.
it
an annual
the 28th
festival.--^
On
mourn thereon.
The
commemorating
have
his colleagues to
c. E.
not have
been
instituted so late
in
was recorded
in the Megillah.
Thus
as
the Megillah
Cbcr Mcgillalh
Taanit, p. iii.
2'9
7.
7)
calls this
p.
holiday ^wra
(i.
e.
Feast of
;
Lights).
227
;
and 10
Schi'rer, Gcscli
p. 209.
of this
n. t,
252
Still
Temple.
earlier, in
the days
were no longer
in
Lydda, where
and
it
is
be added
Shammua*, a
have already
sanctity.
Derenbourg's
-^-
plausible,
that
this
holiday belongs to
Maccabean
period
liberty.
when
Antiochus
epistle,
granted
the
Jews religious
The
senate
Jewish
on
this
15th of
{1
Mace.
Derenbourg
fails to
month Nisan.
however,
we adopt
the
next to the
in
Law
'.
in
15.
c. E.-^'^
On
from Jerusalem.
"22
Derenbourg, Essai,
Usher,
p. 59.
et
223
De Macedonttm
this
^2*
I,
About
Handbuch der
p.
Chroit.,
p.
Hclknici, III,
Appendix IV.
ZEITLIN
253
day commemorated an
incident recorded of
his
their
food
supplies
were
exhausted.
to surrender
to Antiochus.
Then
at the advice
Jews.^^*^'
This
is
what
it
says,
'
On
the 28th of
Such
refers
it
is
also
the
opinion
of Herzfeld.--'
Graetz'^^^
and
inter-
mean
died there.
that the
with
^^LDiDJwS*
fO
and
this
fits
in
The
is
to
be
V
in
conthe
I.^^^
The
E,,
from
year.^-'
is
On
"5
'^^
'^'^^
Mace.
6.
28-62
Herzfeld, Geschichte,
-^^
1
I,
p. 280.
2,
i.
Maec.
7.
1-4.
*^'
254
The commentators
the Pesah
instituted for the
all
is
identical with
Sheni mentioned
benefit of
',
being
'
on a distant way
by
They were
seems to
me
Katan has an
for the
The
to be connected
by the
wars.
Owing
to the
Hasmothe
neans,
who were
away from
not be offered up
in its season,
sacrifices
had
this
On
in
commemoration
X.
On
the 13th of
Adar
is
The
I
victory of
mentioned
in
Maccabees
:
a holiday
dyew
49
Mace.
Maccabees that
victory
was
in the
;
year
152 A.
it
S.,
corresponding in the
162/1 B. C. E.
in
being in Adar,
161
-^1
p,.
C.E.-"2
Derenbourg, Essai,
III, 2, n.
p. 444.
='-
See Derenbourg,
p.
63
Schwab,
565
255
On
the
14th
^^^^
day
of
Tammuz
the
book of
The
origin
of this
also
the
SchoHast seeks
the
in
the
Sadducees.
mentioned
Cassel's view
com-
and that
and
Demetrius
of the
whereby
(i
all
the
decrees
Mace.
XII.
io).233
On
See
Mace.
10. 45,
money from
possibility
is
own
it
Another
that
which we find
Tov TeXecraL
this reference in
rei^r]
Mace.
13.
ra,
'lepovcraXijfj.,
koI
avrrju
XIII.
On
tribute from
is
the equivalent of
i
'
crown-money
Jews who
which according to
II in 170 A.
S.
by Demetrius
(143 B.
to the
^^^'^
See above,
Cassel,
/.
n. 165.
2^'
c, p. 107.
/.
^^^
See
further, P. Cassel,
c,
p.
104.
VOL. X.
256
had paid
By
Jews
XIV. On
from Jerusalem,
Mace.
(13. 51)
in
its
account of Simon's
activities.
of the second
month
in the 171st
year (143
XV. On
Mt. Gerizim.
and
in
XIII,
9. I.
In
Talmud
Babli
is
attributed to Alexander of
it is
well
170 a.
known
s.
that the
c. e.)
Temple on Gerizim
they began to count the
From
this year,
(144-3 b.
later,
i.
e. in
was resolved on
to confer
of Israel.
c. e.).
Kat
fvSuKTjaav
(li
Kal
ol
lepeis
dpxifpfd
rov
alSjva,
i
This statement of
office to
Simon and
this
his descendants.
b. c. e.,
(Comp. Ezra
63; Neh.
7. 65.)
And from
year 140
dynasty.
To
this allusion is
made by
when he
of the
HXO
"'^*J10l^'^
;
m3^D,
the
Hasmoneans
in the
p.
See Marzbacher,
See
See Graetz,
c.
Schwab,
/.
c, p. 222.
ZEITLIN
it
257
until
Hyrcanus destroyed
in
the year
the inhabitants
children
captured Scythopolis
and
Josephus
in
connexion
with
this
victory.
While
the
sons
of
John Hyrcanus were carrying on the war with Antiochus IX, as he offered up their father was officiating in the Temple
;
Holies,
'Thy
sons
Leaving
the Sanctuary
he told
it
to the people
proved to be
tell
true.^^
This
is
similar
iTC^yo
us
jna
pnr vo^^
D"'^ipn
tj'ipro
nx^fr
hp nn bn:
239 [oiavDJS'n]
s^3djn3 snip
^^^
Graetz,
III,
p. 566.
According
to
was
built.
Now
built
Josephus
and XI,
8. 4, 6,
that the
Temple was
by Sanballat
in the time
is to
And
that
was
when Alexander
b. c. e.
oTt.
was
in Syria,
j-ears.
i.
e.
333-332
b. c. e.,
which
238
128
Yaffil'
7ap,
Ka6'
rju
ol
wv apxupivs
vaov iraVTi
239
Here, no doubt,
p. 74.
we
should read
D13"'D:Sa
instead
of N'"3L:JX,
Derenbourg,
S 2
258
nvJ
There
is
XVII.
captured.
On
According to Josephus
10. 3)
{Bell. Iiid.
it
I,
he destroyed
at the time
Midrash-rabba on Canticles
ibid., 13.
8.
lo
Jer., ibid.,
IX, 24 b; Tosefta,
2*1
Schiirer,
I, p.
II, 2,
566-7.
CHAPTER X
The Roman
XVIII.
Period.
On
a-qfxaiai,
meaning
images.
We
the squares
of
Jerusalem.
cct
arjfxaTaL
KaXovvTai
{Bell,
hid.
The
XVIII,
up to
this
demonstration are
described
by Josephus both
I.
and Antiq.
3.
When
the
forbidden
up any image.
Pilate
would not
listen to
them and
summoned
act.
Then
commanded
the Jews proclaimed once more that they preferred death by the sword to violating
command
weakened
in his resolu-
tion
vTTip6av\id(Tas Sh 6
kKKOfiia-aL
p-lv
UiXdros rb
ttjs SeicriSai/j.oi'ias
aKparou
KeXevet.
avTLKa ras
;
(rrjfiaLas 'lepocroXv/xoou
Ant., ibid.)
On
that
259
26o
made
*
as the
Megillah says,
'.-^^
On
XIX. On
the
enemy commanded
Temple
is
{Bell.
5).
pression
tion
xmuy
n^'ua
of that
great
pomp
Cavivi, ed.
Cahn
et Reiter).
We
of those
know
that
Petronius,
desiring
to
give
Caligula
who wished
entirely
work was
took
The
Scholiast,
though
He
p. 33.
tells
us
it
was the
"3
n^c'i"
dv
DanyiD
dv any
pN-Li'
o^^'c^n-'i'
b^o nnx
/-inoDa
n*kJ'2
mn
P'2i
ina d^d:
13^
twt
"ini -in
-ir:is
n'^w
n^2^
nin
D^-j'ipn
'j'np
hp v^^
nsi'^
[i.
Dp-'^i:
dvj] ^"'DPn
rhyrh Nnn!?
vnt:'
D-^
ynirj'2
ons'i;*
ny nn^
-it:N
n^^-j6
p:jnnf:i
n^pvn
[p^i?]
\vy
y^:n ^<^
nasn
^yi
d-pib'I
pi^taiD
rntj'
1^
mx
nN3'i^
"-jn
hni
1*12^
li'DZi
.
i2:^pD:
n^3:^
.
mjN*
dn.
ny DimjN*^
nvn
iniNi
n'^rzb'^rt
26
sent
by
Caius Caligula
')
up
in
the
Temple.
Report
(of the
come
to pass.
He
who
He
heard a
Holy
work
was stopped which the enemy commanded to bring into the Temple; Gaskolas is killed and his decree is nullified.
And when
Go
But
'We
images to be set
legate (Petronius).
fore cry
They
cried
and pray ye
(to me),
When
in
He had
(Caius
made
a holiday.-^*
XX. On
The
the i6th of
of Jerusalem.
commemorate
the
walls
dedicatory
connexion
with
of
Jerusalem, while on
2 Graetz,
III, 2,
we
are told
Derenbourg,
p. 207, n. i
Schwab,
262
'
Graetz sees
was made on
Parva by Agrippa
I in
42-3
He
'
Hence the
'.2*
They commenced
III
b^
nSmn'L^
''3D0
2" See
n, 6
Graetz, III,
2, p.
575.
CHAPTER
XI
The
T"
H'n'C^
DHX nn nDp n
j''3
mayj'Di
n^JV
"D'-a
nyn
nn''
bsn*^'"^
!?NnE^'
'
u^-j^ini
DV
iniNt^y nVi:a3L:'.
This
Caesarea, daughter of
It
Edom,
dwelling
among
the castles.
was a thorn
in
the side
and deported
its
midst.
The day on
explanation
Scholiast's
showing that
to be inhabited entirely
It
was
Herod who
settled
Jews
that city.
Graetz therefore
Simon
read
"11^*
r\^2
It
appears to
me
connected with
first
outbreak, the
(Be/l.
Jewish
As Josephus
hid.
II, 15. 6)
us,
263
264
was compelled
to give
up Jerusalem.^*^
calls
Baris
(/Sa/Di?),^*^
phonetically allied to
Hebrew
desig-
nation
nn''3n,25o ^ri(i
Q^ly later
it
when
in
by Herod, he named
Antony.
Antonia
honour of
his patron
The
with the date which Josephus assigns to the capture of Antonia, and thus significantly corroborates our interpretation.
swarmed
about the
army
of Florus.^^^
Not long
after,
the priests
Romans, and
They
the
the
Temple and
In 65
Emperor
c. E.
Nero, and, as
-^
c'l
we have proved,
5-6 Oi
was 65
c. E.
See
Se araaiaaTai
Sdaavres
/xt)
7rdA.1i'
enekOuv
dva^avres
Avrajviav
Stiicotpav.
e(piefJ.evos
'AvTOJviau,
Kot ^tTatnixipdixiVos
l3ov\fji'
auros
lud.
330-2.
II. 4
XVIII,
145.
4.
Bell. hid.
I,
3-
5- 4-
See Graetz,
II, 2, p.
Kara
hi
r7]v
eiifpicfjs
(TfTeixiaro
Sidipopos ixvpuTT}Ti.
Tore
5'
dacpaKeia
'PaifJ.a'tQii'
Se dpxovTi
(Ant,
XV,
11. 4).
See
ZEITLIN
265
on the loth of
of
and according
happenings of the
(21st) of
The
the
drian legend.
When
Egyptians made
common
cause against
the Jews,
belonged
to Canaanites, &c.,
Gebiha ben
proofs from
won
his case,
and that day was immediately deGraetz-^^ has rightly pointed out
clared a
Yom
is
Tob.-^*
Roman
publicans or tax-farmers.
The holiday
defeat of Florus and his retreat from the city the people
This fact
is
mentioned
by Josephus
-^*
Ginzel, Handhiich
Tafel III.
The beginning
Moon, according
20-21 b
444.
(^<^3:)
i!?^ 'd
.
.
nox
[mc^n
nn^^oi D^^:y33
myn
.
ninacro
nd'-dd
onTin) in^jn
nnny
jnN'i
i:in]
D^oan^
"ic'yi
nn\n
t\''V^2^ ^^'^
nnix ....
Derenbourg,
p. 46, n.
Graetz, III,
2,
pp. 573-4.
See
also
Schwab,
pp. 246-7.
266
Caesar:
dXXa
to.
t/jya,
ecp-n,
ovre
yap KaiaapL
are
rrjs
SeSco-
Kare rov
[Bell. lud.
(jiopov
Kal
tcc?
aroa?
0.77 eKoyjr
Ap'tooulus
in
II,
16. 5).
it
the
Megillah,
we
see that
pay
day
thereof.
Graetz
-'''^
rightly
with the
Great Revolt.
But he
Roman army
to the
{Bell.
17.
lo).
According
Metillius,
to
who saved
by becoming a Jew)
left
left
to Josephus,
take place
this
until
after
year
fell
on
Graetz
fell
into error
Syro-Macedonian
latter
Ab
and the
in
Elul.
This
II,
256
Graetz, p. 574.
"^^
01
;x(v
ovv ouToi?
dificvs
diiawaav novov.
See below,
XXV,
p. 269.
ZEITLIN
rji/
267
rfj
8'
6^779,
is
TTCi'TeKaiSeKarr] 8'
Acoov
yU7;i'o?.
This wood-festival
that of the J5th of
identical with
Ab, which
mentioned
in
the Mishnah
There
is
is
this this
and there
even
for
forced emendation.
in
known
in
as wood-festivals.
Thus
Taanit 26
As
have demon-
months
Bell. htd.
The month
of Lolis therefore
(in Bell,
htd)
might be either
Ab
men-
be that
We
may, however,
fell
year 6^
B. c. E.
on September 2^^^
and
is
the Mishnah.''^^^
in
The event
mentioned
the
week
of Lolis, which was none other than the defeat which the
Jews
inflicted
15th of Loiis.
On
this
occasion
the city, which the Jews allowed, and they departed {Bell.
hid., ibid. 8)
*'^
:
oi 8\ '4v8o0ei> rrpos re
;
Graetz,
et
;
See Noris,
Annus
p.
epochae Syro-Maccdontun,
I, p.
p. 51
448
260
Schiirer,
757.
XXV,
p. 269.
261
also British
Museum MS.
26S
k^dp\ovTas
(TTTOvSoL,
ardaeco^
fJ.6l/OL9
'iir^inrov,
d^Lovi/re?
e^eXOew
viro-
KOi SoOev
ol
fxev
e^fieaau.
it
This, then,
'
refers
to
when
says,
'
On the
Romans evacuated
Jerusalem
(Agrippa's troops).
the 22nd day thereof they began again to
XXIV. On
slay the wicked.
-'^-
Hasmonean
era. It
is
of the
These are
his
words
DU-.m.
(gentiles)
were staying
in
Judea,
among them.
After
they departed, however, the Jews waited three days for the
When
any event
is
not
acceptable.
The
'
happened
less
than
The
wicked
'
Roman
soldiers
who
to the Jews.
The Jews
still
the
Romans were
the
Romans,
tovs
KaraXeccpdii'Ta^
fxovovs
vneXa^^v
ovre
yap
ovetdos VTTiXdjx^avov,
Tno-reveiu el SlSoito.
KaraXiTroyre?
2^2
S63
Sr)
to
o-TpaTOTreSoi'
co?
evdXooTOV
kirl
tovs
Graetz,
/.
c, p. 566
Derenbourg,
/.
c, p. 69.
Accordine: to
Parma MS.
ZEITLIN
269
'Ittttikov
KaXovjx^vov
8).
Kal Tov ^aa-drjXov Kal rov Mapidfz/xrjv {Bell. hid. II, 17.
XXV. On
ing
'
'
mention-
from documents.
this
Hasmonean
mentioned
period.
When
the
Hasmoneans conquered
Name
should be
documents, that
all
documents should
in
&c.
would be exposed to
regained independence.
It is
my
belief,
the incidents of
pelled to flee
army on the 17th of Elul and after Elul 22nd, when the Romans were comfind refuge in the fortresses of the king,
and
and
in
exterminating the
off the
enemy.
of the
It
yoke
Romans
King Agrippa.
Until then
'
to write in all
documents,
in
such
Graetz,
III, 2, p.
572
p. 34, n. I.
270
at
Rome
victory
over the
palace, they
nhsJ^
festival,
a Sukkah.2G5
That our
identification
is
correct
is
who
OL Se
(f)6dcravTas
eKSpa/xeli^
8ie(f)6eLpav,
Koi
ras
dnoaKeva^
SLaprrdaavres
eKTT]
kviTTpr^aav to arparoTreSoi'.
firjvbs
TopinaLov
errpd^Oj],
The
6th of Gorpiaeus
Tishri.^^*^
that the
23 days (174-6),
is
also 23
days
In this connexion
it
may
that
265
260
all
Graetz,
-ji-^Q
year 65
c. e.
was 22nd
of
II,
may have been due to the popularity of this man Menahem who threw off the yoke of Rome and the Herodian dynasty from the Jews that they gave the name Menahem to the Messiah, or it is even possible that
It
the
name
of Messiah
b,
is
Menahem, son
in Midrash
of Hezekiah,
(to
DIIJD,
Sanhedrin 98
and
Rabba
Lam.
i)
is
is
name
Jer.
is
Menahem
5.
Hezekiah.
Comp.
also
Berakot
ZEITLIN
27I
namely by refusing
rule
of any
Se rov (X^v-
rjye/j.6i'a
rfj,
kuI
SeaTTorrjv
rov
dvota re
ei'Tevdei'
rji',
ijp^aTO iwcreir
rfj
TO eOi^o?
TecrcTLov
^Xdopov, 09
ifyeixoov
e^ovcrta rov
aTroa-rfji'ai
'Pcofiaicov
(Aut.
XVIII,
]. 6).
Judas
had
in
time
of
Ouirinus
of
the
taunted
the
Jews
the
because of
their
recognition
authority
of
to
his
God
alone
i).
So now
C.E.) the
Menahem
to
e.
Rome
programme,
abolish
the
Emperor
issue
is
now becomes
D^cns
D2''H' ^*x
^mp
-'''^
'h'hi
"i?^n*
=*'''d:3
orn oy
^L-v^n
D-nmn
Menahem
Hezekiah.
in
Josephus's
record was
the
Zeitlin,
'The
last
da3's
of
In copies of the
it
Talmud
Here,
certainly, either
the Pharisees.
p. 161.
^69
Derenbourg, Essai,
7\'\l"t2
UV
If
^L,"1Cn
DV
7t^"lJ2^ is
and
we
read
Moses
',
becomes
illogical, as
Moses
',
VOL. X.
272
t]n2
pania cnxK'.
Thus
said
[Judas]
the Galilean,
Pharisees, because
ruler,
you
inscribe
in
the
Name,
i.
e.
ments according
dynasty, you
than God.'
thee,
The
Pharisees replied,
'
We
protest against
name
of the ruler on
Divine Name,
i.e.
when
in
the
Law
}'ou write
XXVI. The
reason for this
is
a holiday.
The Megillah
commemorated
tion
this
the
it
holiday.
The
the death of
Herod
shows
it
For
can be proved
the date of
King Herod's
death.
From
it
Antiq. XVII,
8. 3. 9. 3,
and
Bell. hid.
II, i.
1-3,
is
Passover.
The
7th of Kislev
is
seventeen weeks
Graetz
in
Name.
The original reading must have been word t33 led the compilers and others
it
m3
and there-
the
Dy
^l^'1JD^.
But here
ZEITLIN
^"^^
273
is
the
second of Shebat
]\Iegillah
in
iiz
which
designated
the
DV
without
other
qualification,
'
and he substitutes
found
in the
This substiis
tution
not of
much
2nd of Shebat
fully
Moreover from
Herod's
we
learn
March
12-13.^"^
on April
in the
iith.^"'
This proves
Herod died
Graetz,
/.
c, p. 571.
^71
6, 4.
-^ Ginzel,
ibid.
See also
Schlirer, Geschiclite,
is
I,
p. 416.
in
itself,
who
whom
said,
Matt.
(2.
i) states to
in
Herod's reign.
As we have
witnessed
in
moon
Jerusalem
;
u. c.
(4 b. c. e)
according
to these scholars
750
A. u.
c, 4
c. E.
at
least
Some
Bell. hid.
I,
33. 8, that
;
Herod
ruled
b. c. to
thirty-
but from 37
b. c.
thirty-three 3'ears.
Josephus habitually adds one year, and that he deduces from Josephus's
statement that the interval between Pompey's capture of Jerusalem and by
it
But
i.
e.
he counted fractions
be thirty-four j'ears
he
274
To
holiday,
in
it
is
necessary to
consider
why
in this
and
chronicler
of the IMegillah
refrained
from
making any
Undoubtis
in
these instances
due
to
The
to
known
to
all,
it
The
first
drawn
unnecessary
It certainly
incidents.
Now
these
men were
con-
revolt against
Rome.-''^
Their
the Temple.
We
may
be readily identified.
describes the victory of
<Sth
of Dius
12th year of
Emperor
Nero.^"^
65
C.
E.^"
Now
which
in that
Jerusalem
until the
which
b.
end of Adar 4
About the
tru
XVII.
*^
TdSe [Taura]
(^Bell.
ovf
tvpa-)(6r]
Atov
ni-jvus uySoT],
f^yefiovias
"^"^
Ind.
II, 19.
9.
see also note 253.
p. 74.
;
2'*
From
25
Gorpiaeus
Sept.
24
to
the
eighth of Dius
""ItJ'n
Nov.
there
to the seventh of
now
sixtj'-four days.
This discrepancy
is
275
the
apparently
enigmatical
reference
is
of the
tantamount
The
is
minds.'
is
the
we adduced from
Bell.
hid.
by
Roman
Hebrew
calendar,
and that the Jewish victory over Cestius on the 8th of Dius
corresponded
in
fact to
For
in
men owing
to their having
gone
to
Now
the
Jerusalem.
be accepted as the
Lydda and
coming
to Jerusalem.-'^
It is therefore
the months which occur in Bel. Ind. are really the equivalents
of the corresponding months in the Jewish calendar, that
the
name Dius
is
employed
to designate the
is
Hebrew month
H-Tl and
pt^TI
d.
2^ Westberg, Zur
iicittestanienilichcii Cliroiologie.
276
this theory
is
based does
not at
Cestius's arrival in
Lydda need
to
On
come
Lydda
in
the
beginning of the
the place
empty
of men.
to
would prefer
in
to
remain
in
Jerusalem
in
order to engage
defeni>ive
and offensive
Romans.
01
Se 'lovSacot KariSoi'Te^
TT\rj(TLd(ovTa
rfj
Of
we have
a reminiscence
Aboth
di
When
tells
'
Ye
are fools,
why
will ye bring
this city
and
this sanctuary
what
go
do
(evidently a sign of
send
it
to
me, and
shall
The Jews replied to him, 'As we vanquished the two generals who preceded thee and killed them, so will we go out against thee and kill thee.' The
away from
you.'
Cestius.^*^
As
to the
nn ns
nnN
I'n
fiiTj6
is
niyn
ns annn^
'C'\>i^2
o'L-par:
n?2 '21
dhn
nnx
XV^
nrj-nL"
wV^wS
djc
^:wX
-jnpi:.!
i:"in:"l '\'hv
m:;ini y^lh.
p. 284.
ZEITLIX
277
XXVII. On
sat in
month Tcbet
the Saiihedrhi
judgement.
used
in
the days
(Beth-din ha-gadol)
which
met
in the
Chamber
of
Hewn
Stones.
According to
Sanctuary to
Josephus,
leading
men assembled
at the
in
the
same time
in
the\'
proceeded
up a republican government
that had
XXV).
were
Upov
20. 3).
There
(Jose|)h.
tlic
son of Gorion,
administration
heads of
action
is
Jerusalem.
This
Hewn
Stones (Lishkat
and to meet
in
niJn,-*^^
to take
up
is
its
old
abode
And
that
it
there
we
ny
find
them
nnnn
a,
htj"!
pmn;D rnb
8 a.
rr-an
mn
;
^:>*
r\vz-
D'yais,
Shabbat 15
-83
Abodah zarah
D"iy^-\^^
Now we
Mishnah
i)
Sanhedrin
.TJ'i'?:).
chap. V,
pini
The Talmud
examine
explaining this
I\Iishiiah, to
was very
the
witnesses in
minuteness
when
the
fig
tree
testified
killed
27B
in session again
matters pertaining
to the law
by
their
command.-^*
in
the iMegillah to
On
the
24th
It
judgements.'
that through a
This
is
suggested by a comits
parison of the
in
parallel
the
Talmud
Ab
is
explained as commemorating
a Pharisaic victory
in
The manuin
variant.
MS. Munich
Ab
place of
the 24th.
The
Samuel
thereof
b.
(.T3),
Evidently,
event which
in
Megiilah
stems were
is
Ab
to be ascribed
fine or thick,
perplexed by
this
when
forty
said to have
its
Hut now as
(i. e.
we
Temple
in
the
Hewn
is intelligible
that
Johanan ben
Indeed, after
the
proceedings of the
Sanhedrin.
all
when
power from
the Sanhedrin, they had to gather a tribunal of seventy to judge and sentence a certain Zachariah ben Baruch to death
28*
Bell. Ltd.,
IV,
5. 4).
Bed.
3-4
ZEITLIN
it
2/9
As
the
copyist
to
corrupt
If our
the
talmudic
interpretation
R. Samuel
b.
Meir
Thus,
too,
we
Talmud which
records
to the event
-^^
of Shebat
(p.
is
Yom
Tob.
As was
285
suggested above
With reference
to the
word n^2
tlie
following:
'
If the
Rashbam had
on the
is
difficult to
see
what
This
W2
in
the
Talmud
as referring to Tebet.
the
more surprising
it
as the
the
month
e. g.
to in
which
is to
refer
by name,
Ab (where may
the
name Ab
in
given in the
connexion with
which
is
not
to that
month.
We
must therefore
assume that
Munich MS.,
the
n^3
^<''JJ^J^*
DH-T^,
he
felt
it
word
n"'3,
right or
to
month
in the
true
that R. S. quotes
this reading
may be due
the
to copyists
or editors,
coarse,
who wished
harmonize
his text
Of
n"'3
all this
difficult^'
why
Talmud quotes
instead of
HDm. We
it is
an inaccuracy, or that
in
was
still
See A. Schwarz,
La Victoire des
pp. 51-6.
28o
Statement
so well
is
known
no
specification,
and that
it
marked an event
when
great Revolt.
may
XXV). Xo striking events are known to have occurred then. It may be conjectured, therefore, that the day marked It is also possibly the inauguration of the new officers.
No.
possible that the
as to
who
figured therein.
Here
XXIX. On
The
narrative
:
the 12th of
Adar
is
the
Day
of Tyrion.
by the following
ddh-j'
^"'p'Tii'a
Dirnu dv
dx icx
t^is n^D
bi^'C"i2
mivi ^s-j^d
n-'jjn
b'c
"cyj^
nt:x
r,M
ivn3U3
\):r\
n^jjn^
^^.tj'
HM
^',xm
]b^2
Tn2u:"i
vn
p-i'j'3
]'P'>n'^
nniyi
bv d:
pn-'^n
-i^?j
nnx bin
,-\t
nrj'j;^
D'':"i'n
r]2'\ri
):'j-\',r\
i::-i',n
nr.x
px nxi nn'D
lyj^-L.
i:xi
it
yan^
25
"r]2pr\
tdv
D'an
r]2~tr]
x^?o^x:r
irDL" n^-5in
[p
;
n:>^xi
3ic^
rwn
p.
^XPTn^ ">BD
T333
X'.n
;Shabbat
13b
Dercnbourg,
295.
even
Shammai and
n31?;{J',
'
known
and
to
to us as
DV2
this
tribunal.
Les
Dix-huit
Mesures
'.
RJ.,
281
rbzvi
pi'y nsa:;'
ny D'Co vdj n^
ns
in^o iroi
nvvp331
pnmn
imiD.
The Day
of Tryanos;
in
he captured
Said he to
Laodicea.
them
'
:
If
Azariah, your
as
God
will
hands of Nebuchadnezzar.'
They
replied:
'Hananiah,
men and
fit
through thee.
slay us,
kill
We
.
us,
God hath many other agencies through which to many bears but if thou killest us the Lord will
. .
hand.'
The
story
is
told that he
moved from
and they
the spot
when a
rescript-'^'
came
Rome
killed him.
in
the
Talmud
Babli,
and Pesikta
Emor
(p. 62).
recorded as having
Roman
It
is
generally
in
refers to
and that
holiday.^^^
The
Trajan
death.
version
of the
Scholiast
cannot be applied to
^^^
Nor can
the 12th of
Adar
month
Or
dinXfj
SiTrXaijxa.
See
also
Semahot,
8.
2***
Graetz, IV,
;
p.
411.
289
p.
34
282
of
Trajan's
return
from
the
Parthian
War.^^*^
The
the
1
made
tliat
it
was the
name
is
unacceptable.
For while
in
confusion
in
in
names
is
possibly conceivable
the
Scholium or
the
Talmud where
no
justification for
in
the text
proper.
The
I^D nnx
Thou
art
a wicked
Quietus was
too well-known a
name
Cp. DiD'p
killed
7'l:'
DIDPIS.
I'inally.
is
known
in
that Quietus
was
late
in
the
summer
or
early
the
autumn of
118 c.E.-2
P. Cassel
-''
thinks that
jn'-O
commander.
Were
is
this so,
to indicate
in
the
Hasmonean
failed
struggle against
Seleucids,
to record the
day
Comp. Dio
Cliroii.
Pasc/i., p.
253
2, p. 502,
p.
102.
ill
die
-^-
Apokryphen,
I,
pp. 90-100.
Pannonia to
Reisen
Rome, and
this
this
was about
c. e. (Diirr,
At
was
killed
was
in the
Gescliichte der
23
romischen Kaiserseit,
2,
pp. 615-16).
Taanit, pp. 84-6.
p, Cassel,
Anmerktinqcn
sit Megillatli
283
commemorating
the defeat of
vSeron.^'-'''
We
must therefore
in
the
])'^'^D
in
recruit,
When
for
the
government
Romans, many
of the Jewish
service,-^''
the
young
in these
words
rjv
Trpoy drccKTOi? Se
II,
[Bell. Ind.
22.
1).
instituted,
then,
either
in
honour of the
soldiers^
somewhat
as
military festivities
honour
in
of those
among the Romans,-''' or, perhaps, in warriors who followed Josephus to Galilee
it
for Josephus's
in
p.
500.
1517
265.
JII'D in the
:
new and
^^^
inexperienced
n::'n
to
h>v
man
is
found
in the
Midrash
i.
T^liZ'^
HNinn
i96
nt^'D
jiT't:
"napn
rbi^\y (Exod.
latter
i)
'
when
the
Moses, the
was new
in
prophec3\'
III, 2, p. 470.
'What
this
war
against
in the
Rome
only a suggestion.
is
Babylonian Talmud
is
more
correct,
D13'''''TlD
meaning 'king',
a transliteration oi rvpavvis
rvpawia.
Roman
Josephus
Antiq.
XV,
11. 6)
which Herod received the kingdom, and so the holiday became great
avvfKwtnTWKfi yap t^ irpoOtaixia tov wepl riv vaov tpyov Kal
rfjy fifxipav
rai
^aatXu
rrjs dpxyj^,
'fjy
e^oi/s twpra^ov
h
11,
ap.<poiv rfju
(opTTjv yeviaOai
{Ant.
XV,
6\
As we have
said above, he
284
XXX. On
this
is
Megillah
contained
nT:r3
labni
(M. O.
v'f
Dip
"b?)
Dip^^Dip n:n?:2
sniob
nr\b
^n:
c-^'
i?3i
Dipro
)nMi2y
nr^^bv
d^^inh
idhi
i3C"i
nu^^a cnn
n\s"L:'ni
''3-1
nm
nrn onn
nns3 nrh
nois min^
D'k^r^
in-121 nDC'nc'
ny
"
HD'^'n
iy incM niH'
iniN'j'y
pn'j*
nxn
Nine'
31U Dv
D:^c
mini.
kill
When Alexander
fled
Jannaeus descended to
the Sages,
in
they
the
province of Chalcis.
was and
says
left
them a remnant.
fled.'
R. Judah
They had
whosoever saw
was no Jew
within.
(Obviously reference
had
for a horse.j
when
they
It
made
their escape
was declared a
'"'
alluded to
loth of
Tebeth\ which
makes
it
made
that
day a
holidaj'.
Some
years
later,
to insure
being kept, he held the dedication exercises of the Temple on that day.
D13"'''"11D
The name
the
was given
In
of
name Herod.
299
day
See Graetz,
III, 2. n. i. pp.
570-71.
See Graetz,
ibid.
ZEITLIN
night,
285
by Josephus {Ant., XIII, 14. 2) when he narrates thousand men of war fled from Judea in one
in exile until
that eight
by
he died.
This view
is
Megillah
itself specifies
by
N^s:cy (Gentiles)
It
is
and no mention
made
of a Jewish
king.
clear that
by the
Sages)
word
N"'"iD
in this
instance
is
the
name
the
novS
occurs
indicates
in
Sepphoris.
in
The name
oMJaS,,
Talmud
X^niSV,-'*^^
Syriac
and
in
Aramaic
xniD 123
in
is
taken
by many geographers
be
the city
of
Sepphoris.^^^
As
is
for its
being situated
in the
province of
Chalcis,^*^* this
from 44
it
Claudius gave
I,
as a present to
whence he
derived the
name Herod
11.^"^
He
was succeeded
in
by Agrippa
^'"
the Lebanon
3436,
77;fsrt/<n<s S)r/na<s, p.
p.
303
195
Baedeker, Palestine
and Syria,
^''*
Sepphoris,
is
true,
was
owing
to
which he received
\vas king
8. 4),
of a
at the
part of Galilee,
was
of Chalcis, which he had from Claudius after the death of Herod, king of
Chalcis
in the
35
(J5f//.
',
kingdom of Chalcis.
^Mtiq.
XIX,
8. 8.
I
I
:
XX,
I. 3.
306
Jutiq.
XX,
286
We
It
are
now
in
position
to
identify this
holiday.
clearly
of the
Great Revolt.
In
victor}-
Rome,
against
the Jews
{Bell,
hid.,
II,
XX,
Vita, 6).
In
all
most of the
citizens
belonged
in
war
against
Rome
were
reduced to
slaver}'.
;
change
the Jews of
which Josephus
is
harmony with
this interpretation
the
expression
ip"l2
This
is
"flpfirjai ye
'IcocrrjTTO?
knl
rrji'
ttoXlv
(Sepphoris)
avros npiv
(XTroa-rrivaL
TaXiXaiccv erei-
wLa^v
el)?
Kol
'^Pco/jiaLois
SvadXcorop eluat.
d(prjfiapTei'
pixa^
do-devicrrepo?
kirl
Trapco^vfef
Se
/j.dXXoi'
rov
TToXip-OV
opyfj rfj?
ireSia
ovre fied'
i-jp.kpau
eni^ovXrj^
kol
Kreivovres
del to
rj
/xd^^^Lnoi^,
di'SpaTToSL^o/xei'Oi
Se
tov9
dadeyei?
nvpl 8e
FaXiXaia Kal
Trd6ov9 T ovSepbs
rj
fxia
yap Kara-
rja-av {Bell.
SO'
hid. Ill, 4.
7.
i
;
i).
Bell.
hid. VII,
sec
Schiirer,
I,
Beilage
I,
pp.
722-5, and
Marquardt
Neubauer,
and
p.
Mommsen.
;
Rbiiiisclie
p. 337.
Sfaafsve>walttiiig,
IV, pp.
400-1
295
Baedeker,
ZEITLIN
287
The
date of the
7th of
the period
memorial
day associated with the Judean war against the Romans. For this Josephus was the man to whom the eyes of all
Israel turned with the
into parties,
was
loss of national
VOL, X.
CHAPTER
XII
Miscellaneous.
XXXI. On
of the priests
(i.
the 15th of
e.
Ab
is
wood
we
during the year when the people and the priests brought
wood
for
In the Jerushalim
takes upon himself
fast
man who
wood
is
forbidden to mourn, to
is
or to
to
him a
Yom
Tob.'
of
to
wood
made a
therefore
necessary to understand
stress on the 15th of
why
Ab making
a general holiday.
This
is
who were
Ab
all
those
who had
altar,
would atone
In time
it
came
to be recognized
by
Jews
the
the
Mishnah
states
'
in
name
of
Gamaliel that
Israel
Taanit, IV, 26
a.
288
289
Ab
the
and the
Day
as to
of
Atonement
'.'''
The answers
Talmud
so distinguished a
why the fifteenth of Ab became Yom Tob are of late origin, and possess
8th and the 9th of
no
historical value."^"
solemn prayer
for rain.
which occurred
in
different
years.
For to say that these two days comand sounding the Shofar on
the eighth
of
is
not allowed.
nns
nyi:'D.
nr.:'o
'J-'DB'
x^n
"y^c'na
lynnn
r\):h
^t'O'ci
lynnn
in
dn*
n~inN
This
is
indeed logical.
The
^DV),
expression
the
Megillah, NIDD
of another memorable
for
rain
the
20th of Adar.
:
there had
for
three years.
As no
rain
appeared even
Cp. Taanit
nyat'.
23
a,
^jycn
"'jini?
\xh^ xi^^om
n-i"
xh
i-in
2.
1),
nn xr nnx
states that
Similarly, Josephus
{Antiq.
XIV,
once
in
God and
VH N^
b.
Taanit, IV, 26 b:
Dr:Dl.
ibid.
2X3
"IC^y
Htt'Dna ^XTJ'''!?
310
CaiD
pp.
D^D"
OniDDn
See Taanit 30
1
3" Graetz,
(See
further
Derenbourg,
ibid.,
12-13,
and
'
290
XXXV. On
of Esther.
There
(9.
17-19)
we
Jews of
whereas the
Jews
there
in unfortified cities
is
In 2 Maccabees
feast of
Purim
in
the
of Mordecai
(Trpo
//my
rjfxipa?
Maccabees,
when
it
This fact
in
many
hypotheses.
Some
think that
was
However,
as
Adar
in
this year
is
why
is
not mentioned, as
was
celebrated in
Adar
2.
In 2 Maccabees,
Cyrene, written
statement
may
ist
was
killed in the
Adar.
these festivals
on consecutive days.
CHAPTER
VI
There
of
may
be the goal
is,
human
the
which
is,
may
all
is
be
(c)
The
object
while
may be
one
which
the highest of
eliminate some.
of as a
final
end
final
end must
how
great,
is
may be
it
eternal.
It
follows that
As
for the
cannot be viewed as a
final
end.
the
means
to
helps
it is
a subsidiary one.
who showed
spirit,
292
good deeds,
to speak of
It
may be
toll
and contemplation
as a final end.
Some
known
that
it
the mind
perceives.
the
conceptions
means
of the
conceptions,
(njpjnbDC)
and so we have
is
finally
an
acquired
different
mind
which
to
a certain degree
Aristotle called
is
it,
or, as
different
is
only potence,
calls
Gersonides as well as
hiiulian,
Crescas
i'A?/,
in
exposition
that
It
is
after
analogy of
of being
it
matter, potential.
it
eternal in spite
generated, for
has no cause
of destruction since
contemplation
and reason,
for
it
is
this
The
'33
the
degree
nioi^'w'
n:i2t:>
of
^nn
'ud!?
JT'Dvy
d^ixi
-idhi
nn'c^
nsjpn nvNno
mxonro
p.
nns!?]!
nr
h^ IK'N
miN
(perhaps
nnnpn nuD
nn ni^jaricn
-3^
r\v)in,
Or Ado7tai,
from
whom
it.
See
Zeller,
i, 2.
Greek
by Gersonides,
sect, i, chs.
DDW3
W'lp'^
"ini'',
Or A dona
I,
p.
52 b; also Milhaiuot,
293
Hfe
and
that
of
happiness.
Even during
we
experience pleasure
after
death, when,
rods)
and
range of conception
is
increased,
and
in
the
same
that
In
theory
a
there
are
be
distinguished
religious.
two
tendencies,
more
rationalistic
and a
The
first
says that
may
be,
the
the spiritual
world.
Against
this
If,
it
life.
Otherwise,
of a
we should have the anomalous phenomenon being striving for an end which is really not its own
which
is
quite distinguished
from
itself.
It
to
do with the
them.^^^
one who
full
of contradictions, since
hiiulian,
is
has no subject
Qy jldonai,
p.
53
a.
294
out of which
is
generated
it
it
is
contradictory to
all
Again, there
is
Which
?
reason
its
is
meant here
is
Shall
it
we say
given
;
the hiiulian
But
essence
not acquired,
is
is
something
;
but
it
is
impossible to speak of
as yet.^^^
It
is
as reason since
it
tellectualistic
theory
untenable.
shall
It
remains
for us to
find
serve
This Crescas
by
all
may
and
be a useful ingredient
in
it.
It
is
best understood
of
is
three
propositions.
human
soul which
The
is
good and
intensity
perfection,
and
it
as well as
possesses.
for
The
establishment of these
first
three propositions
239
proposi-
^^y^2i2
Dvynro b^^prc
^2
"ic-'dj
iniD
r\'\r\
-i^ndhc' dhci
h-2\:'rvy
nn
^'^hvp.n b:i'n ia
niinn pN
r\^r]
invr
mip svdj
53
b.
\r\
2"" Ibid., p.
p.
53a.
WAXMAN
295
The
soul
is
we
sec that
on
its
Again,
it
is
spiritual, for
it
possesses
memory, and
it
reason.
is
It is potential of
it is
con-
evident that
is
the subject
related to the
body by means
of the soul.
Crescas
is
then
endeavours
But as
it
is
a form
it
of the body.^'*-
This theory
primarily Aristotelean
differs in the
in its
concept of immortality.
proposition treating of perfection and the love
:
The second
of good
is
God, who
is
the
here we
good
',
reality
is
which
play an imis
and
all
through
is
His
will, it is
good
an
essential conception
of His perfection.
It follows,
then,
and
God
possesses strongest
The
third
It is all
yuDi
-iipo
Tinn"'
D'l^'n'c
im*'
Nine
'^b
nr^xr.n 'an
DvSI
296
independent of
Will
is
reasoning,
is
relation
imaginative
is
different
from
mortality and
premises.
that the
after
its
Since
soul
is
in
it
the
first
proposition
a spiritual being,
may
it
be
immortal
has no factors of
corruption.
love of the
The second
good
is
evident,
love
of God,
who
is
infinitely
good,
the
As
for
independence of
exercise,
it
of the soul
is
and that
there
is
is
the
God.
Since
we have seen
soul,
that
man
except his
and
^li^n
nans
msnn
Or Acionai,
p.
54
b.
nanxn
Nini
c^a^n r\)Db'C'b,
ibid., p.
55
a.
297
God
love,
it
is
the end
life.
God
as an end of
human
life
God
its
is
God
The
is
mind
warm
is
man.
It
is
not
the contemplative
side that
for
simply keeps
is
in line
with the
is
pure Jewish
ethics,
but what
interesting in Crescas
he sees
in
it
ends
it
though
this
statement seems
consistent.
first,
yet
can be
made
The
word
in
'final'
different aspects,
in
respect to
human
life
respect to
God.^'*^
end
is.
As As
for the
first,
we have
must be the
of does not
distribution of good.
refer
only to the
universe as
in
a whole.
There
is
spite of
niii*on
nrnnn
r\:r\
^2
nis^nriD
mon nspn
nih
pinxn
n'-^ann n^^-on,
OrAdoum,
p.
s6h.
298
is
one
in
genus
in
regard
to
man and
the
universe."^^
But
'
purpose
'
clearly, a little
is
more discussion
necessary.
It is
as regards the
accepted
tliat
the universe in
manifoldits
It is
known
and since
God
is
the
of
absolute
simplest
being,
multitude
composite
beings?
The
answers
insufficient.
The theory
inadequate,
is
problem
is still
there.
Whence
by being caused,
emanations
it
by being
is
also
also
is
is
weak.
A thing
may
be composite
regard
to
in
regard to
its
existoffers,
essence.
Crescas
if
It is true
that
the process of
is
that
it
is
a voluntary one.
all
the will of
God
that
is
the cause of
beings, and
is
through
it
arises.
How
we
shall
have to see
'
WAXMAN
The
299
To
it is
VII,
it
is
only brought
in
here casually).
one.
a cause.
The conception of
according to Crescas,
will
is
The
is
of
God
is
the will
do good.
Existence or reality
its
goodness.
within
Hence the
it.
own purpose
God
(of
= for)
we cannot
is
help
a vast
There
assert
is
much
that
discussion on
in
the
subject,
by those who
of
his
Spinoza
this
important
teaching
was
greatly
influenced
by
his predecessors,
first,
deny such
Joel,
influence.
Of the
who
expression,
'The
intellectual love
'
of God',
*
is
borrowed
intellectual
in his
is
from Maimonides.^^^
sertion,
far
as-
and that
strict
evident
investi-
from a
comparison.
However, a thorough
beyond the
limits of our
work
we
ourselves to Crescas.
niu
jnnn''
^^^
niN^VD
nvn^i nauna nm
p.
p^iin
nnnN* nnxn''
r\:n
d:
60
a.
X.
300
God
in
Spinoza forms
strictly
of
The freedom
man and
by
inculcating in the
mind a kind
power.
to
But
in
referred
more
objects, so
more frequent
or
more
often vivid,
It follows, then,
that the
the exact order of the universe, and through which conceives himself clearl}- and distinctly ,^^^
is
man
such an idea
which
may
chief place in
of understanding
termed
is
by
definition
In this conception of
is
God we have
and
God we
reality
perfection, that
more of
in
its
and
Again, we
the
fullest aspect.
It is also
conception
is
power or mans
essence.-^*
God which
is
eternal, for
God
is
eternal,
hence
*'''
^^" Ethics,
'^^ Ibid.,
V, proposition XI.
XV.
6, II.
proposition XVI.
def.VIII,
4, p. 28.
Definition of Emotions,
^5^
Etltics, III,
Scholium
to proposition
XLI, Book
II, p. 32.
WAXMAN
is
301
knowledge of
through
Him
it
it
which
arises
is
eternal.
the quality of
love of God,
the
There
there
something eternal
in
the
human mind,
for in
God
is
The
increases the
accomplished
the
it
love of
God
and
is
blessed, for
it
perfect, since
eternal.-^^
is
conceives,
and
Such
From the foregoing it is evident that there is very little common between the Crescasian and the Spinozistic love of God as far as the contents are concerned, and that
in
a part of
it
from
Crescas.
The
is
first
is
voluntaristic,
laid
love.
The second
intellectualistic
we remarked on previous
for their basis.
occasions,
in spite of their
God
intimately
perfect a
man
God
in
both
Again,
a
God
it
is
means
reaching
by
a religious
"6 V,
p. 23.
=>"
V, p. 39.
258
p_ 28.
-'
p. 39.
302
ethical
the
second
by
kind
of
thought
absorption.
of
God from
human
is
life,
to that of Crescas.
force.
It
a glowing emotional
for the sake of
a strong desire to do
good
God,
way
there
is
the
hanging over
it.
and while
it
may endow
self-sacrifice,
a
it
man
for
more
That there
no purpose
in
He who
necessitatis
stringent
antagonist
in
Spinoza
accordingly
expresses himself
of
who
is
God works
Such a con-
it
arose
He
is.
in
merel}- an
and
is
As
such
all
it.
Spinozistic arguments
short of
Crescas, strengthened
by the theory
of purpose,
makes
ciple.
The purpose
*
'
of Crescas,
examined thoroughly,
WAXMAN
303
CHAPTER
VII
who maintain
the
Maimonides and
We
of
thought
it
necessary to
are
omit
all
these
based on a
limit
false
and
to
view
nature.
We
shall
ourselves
own
those
philosophical value.
In
introducing
his
view, Crescas
produces a general
the
God
Peripatetics
Gentile
latter.
as
If.
well
as
Jewish,
he sa}s, as we have
is
to
necessary of existence,
follows that
all
other beings,
whether
and
related to
God
as a fact to cause in
some way.
We cannot
it
by necessity or
Crescas
He
does
304
outside
Him
nothing
exists.^''"
There
is,
however, a great
difference whether
for in the first case
in the other finite.
we assume
we assume
God
infinite,
is
also
eternal,
it
and
necessarily.^^^
in
a two- fold
effect flows
will.
from
cause
in
a natural
way, or through
Crescas
may
is
Since
we conceive God
follows
of that
desires,
it
we
Moreover,
Since
we have
God
is
a menacing
We
will.
to the
theory of
the
as far as
it
is
good
it
is
simple.
it
is
good and
God
in so far as
He
is
good
^b,
Or.idoum,
p.
69
a.
262
Fiirtiier
iNUt:
n':"j-'
nu'1
oVw'2
npN 2M2
WAXMAN
and
in
305
sophically clear
relation
it
created,
what
stands to God.
makes
it
dependent upon
it
in
what way
was brought
To
all
difficulties
was through
in
will
meets the
expressed
will
itself
not explained.
itself in
To one form
who
is
the
is
God
the
God
the
is
good, reality
is
produced a like
the
question,
for
result.
how matter
arose
still
remains.
He
seems to
religious
conception that
God
as omnipotent can
do everything.
absolutely
is
noticed
his
According to
follows, since
God
Him and
;
dependent on His
is
will
and that
eternal.
own
conclusions, and
ruD^^'j'
nnv
sin
pi-i3
in^ys'>c3
aiun bv^'^'2
3iDn
iJDvyn
ps*^
injn
'
Nip
p^n
nbira
in^ys'^c'D
niyc
li"
^y
n'^n-'B'
n"'nn^
a.
:ki'o
niN^von, OrAdona2\p.6ga.
Or
Adoiiai, p. 70
306
'
After
all,
is
as
it
is
handed over
in
tradition, that
a certain time.'
at
its
He
hesitates,
however, at accepting
it
it
is
possible
in tradition
At any
rate,
he does not
all
consider
dogma
of faith.
such
own
logical conclusions
by being
inconsistent.^"*
we
ment.
which
created
things
are
is
presupposed but
definition
is
God.-''"'
What Spinoza
in
intends
by
this
a
It
final,
is
as he
himself explains
the same
chapter.^'''''
conceives
creation, as
though named
tries
niJiilo,
and,
exists
has
been
shown,
in
the
sense
is
that
nothing
outside
God and
construe
that
matter
not
co-existing,
niJiilo
because
who
use
it
it
as
if
the
niJiil is
a subject out
strain writes
In the
same
in
quae ad existendum
II,
Deum
X.
Ibid., p. 495Ibid., p.
494 'Quin
illi
to nihil
non
ut
negationem oinnes
realitates
WAXMAN
that nihil
307
is
mean
The
fact that
exclude
it,
Spinoza combats
is
in the essence of
but
little
his nature.
potence of God.-"^
Spinoza,
was not
as
is
much of God
is
eternal.
'-'^^
found
is
Crescas, as was
shown above.
Again, a similarity
and intelligence
of
God
as a creative power.
It
above
^'^
of reasonable act.
in
XXXII
the First
Book
God
He
could not be different from what they are, for then God's
As
very
little
ought to be
said, for
It is
only a
carries with
a necessity,
j^Qg illam
Epist.
LVIII.
Chapter IV.
3o8
immanent
no room
just this
God
is,
acts according to
is
there
It is
creations.
creation
by
asserting that
God is essentially good, and that he will of God in the way that we speak
is
tries to escape.
The
fact
is
that
it
is
intimately connected
God
in
the same
way
two
He, like
meaning,
for
it
to prove the
possibility of miracles.
Up
two
an
earlier thinker
may
when
name
we
expressed
in
De Creatione
similar,
',
and those
it
of Crescas,
them decidedly
and
is
possibility that
former.
III.
The Economic
The Geonim
the
account of
occupations
Jews of
their
time.
Yet from
religious
them concerning
good idea of the
law
it
is
possible to form a
in
of the
Jews both
This
pp. 124-7).^--
^^^
{ibid., p.
469).
In four pages
dcs
LevanteJiandcls,
I,
'.
beyond the
See
vols. VII,
457-90; VIII, 339-66, IX, 139-79, X, 121-51. in the Byzantine Empire, see
now
3IO
tion of the
of agriculture.
great
gardens, and,
themselves
or
by means
in
of
(D'cns)
as
Babylon.
persecutions
became frequent
in
maritime, carried on
by Jews
The
played
as
in
the
considerable,
the
the
Responsa proves.
Heyd,
regards
ibid.,
not
the
participation
the Jews
in
the Le\antine
trade as problematic.
{a)
Agriadtiire.
I.
Geonim
conjunc-
of the
in
tion
with the
from
The
clearly given in a
C. E.)
R. ]\Ioses (832
223
who
11.
Sherira
(Z-f/Z^r, p. 36,
9-10) states:
nnrO
-12
""i^n
Dpi
;?2
nainDi n"j;3
"'Cn"'
"-arci?
pn:^''
no
no
1098
vt2?t20?D
Sel.
',cp.
p. 37,
lo-ii;.
The
institution
was made
end.
in
787,
c. L.,
nii"l3ii' ''"lyC,
MANN
3II
known
this
well
the motives
institution.
The
Gaon
a
states that
woman's dowry,
movable
the districts
fields,
whereas
fields,
We
change
in the
result
in
of a long development.
762, which soon
became a
and
attracted
many
contributed to
this that
whole
the
Jewish
communities
the author
in the
of the
Venet. 20
all
a,
77 b)
states.
But
i^*
this
yn,
''bi^burzjD 'ex
.
pm irpn
"ypipo
dvj'?3
xnm
p^a:
ncDx ahi
x^
^x
n"y3i
ncx nmn^
i6 ^nicni
"'nn
p::n2?D
'V'plpOD.
some North-African
seems
to
to
2in% and
p2p"lD Pj"I3D
312
same conditions
Certainly
its
if
acceptance by
the Jews
in Israel.
to
agriculture.
The
latter
was
was frequently
Omeyade dynasty
it
was supplanted by
the 'Abbasids (661-749), 'Irak was the hotbed of opposition against the ruling dynasty.
/lardj,
any regard
to
its
real
produce.
'Irak.
fifty
In the
i.
e.
about
fell
years after
from 100 to 40
of Meso-
Dirhems per
year.
its
potamia, on which
depended,
was much
neglected
during
these
fifty
years.
Some
of
Hajjaj,
the
governor
ment
of agriculture in 'Irak
of the 'Abbasids.
The
first
/lardj- system
at
We
can
Geonim
in
the
ibic/.,
I,
I,
ft".
467
Kremer,
il>id..
276
MANN
313
Yet there must have been a considerable number of Jews in 'Irak who possessed landed property even after 787.
imposing oaths connexion with claims put forward on estates and fields though the Talmudic law, as laid down in the Mishna
in
We
find the
Gaon R. Sadok
(Shebuot
6^), is
As the Geonim were very careful not to change a Talmudic law unless the requirements of the time were pressing, we
may assume that lawsuits about estates and fields amongst Jews were frequent, and the Geonim found out that people
took dishonest advantage of the fact that no oaths were
imposed
in
Gaon R. Sadok
(cp. also
Weiss,
in
-in,
IV, 38-9).
We
possession of the Jews in Babylon must have been quite a common occurrence even in later times. In an appeal
for the
it is
made
b\^
Gaon
in in
953
need
academy were
landed property.^^^
Very
likely
who took
produce as
it
Babylon,
I,
15).
This
is
by a question
Geonim
(998-1038), which
state
.
The correspondents
i:o?^
r\i'^^^-
y'n,
No. 22
(cp.
\>"i,
No. 43j:
^loan
mbpi
xh
^^D^DD3
^v^'\^'o i?y
^jiK'n
nn
ijhjt (sc.
\>\'\'i
'n
irniypnpi ij^2DD
p.
1DDX
i3^!?y
nny^'
403,
'-'
fol, 42).
y'l, No. 65
-i"::'n
ii.
57,
no. 3:
no:
ui?
^> ijx
314
which some
may
irrigate
whenever they
may do
of the produce
and do
part
in
all
the cultivation
This probably
refers to the
it
was practised
On
refer to
the
responsa
that
their
Jews cultivating
and especially
tell
vineyards.
The
us to
we may
in
likely they
Spain
They cannot
in that
to
Babylon
But some
country.
many
in
responsa
forces itself
sion of
the posses-
poor Jew
n'';'i?2npn
''"'d
mar sh
]''?^D
nr\b
ij^
11,
ps*
no
22
b
ff.
pc'iyi
tm nn^^n
pnpi^tr
D""i:
pd^n
-c)
263,
noixD
1.
D?:y
yT"
ab nn^bvi
a
''^1n^-1
n*>nL".
229
The following
is
list
in this
a, b,
chapter
10.
R. Natronai
R. Sheshna
Jf"t^',
46
46
Nos. 9 and
)S"l^,
No.
14.
MANN
it
-^l^
invested in
No.
13CS,
by R. Hai).
(v"*^,
62 a, No. 35, by Saadya 67 a, No. ss, by R. 'Amram -|":;'n, 11, 28, No. 5 = n"lD:, No. 138; d"icj, No. 87) and were inherited from generation
;
dowry
to daughters
to generation.
dowry
tronai
in
fields
newly married couple would invest their (d"ioj, No. 91). A responsum by R. Naof the
tells
us
majority of a
whole community
themselves.^^o
Many Jews
were occupied
in
in
the wine-presses,
Talmudic law
this
could not be
Some
North Africa.
But even
owned
Thus we
find
landed property
(o"ij:j,
n":,
Hai), of
(v"tt^,
Kabes
-6
a,
(n":,
Nos. t6
and
17, cp.
An
interesting
R. Nahshon: Y'^JTl,
^"o-
^'L", 53 a.
53
:
note
R. Sam.
b. Ilofni
i*":;',
45
b.
No.
48
a,
No. 24.
Anonymous
^"'C%
39
a,
No. 14
39
b,
No. 15
46
a,
No. 21.
vj>jx
f;.^
N'^N
inx
;v:d
nrh pN Dipcn
n'"^, No. 211
p^^.^,
'^'
^":, No.
6,
by R.
Paltoi ,842-58
Sar Shalom,
(T'Vpn).
3l6
lenders
employ
in
order
to
fields in
Yet
in
investing in
commerce which
and
flourished there.
Kairowan
was an important
ports for the maritime trade with the above two countries.
Thus
no
it
Geonim
fields.
a considerable
number
When
power of attorney
which
in Palestine as
by usurpers.^"^
That such
a considerable
number
but
of Jews in
Kairowan possessed no
solely
landed
property
occupied
themselves
with
commerce and
3.
trade.
Above
(p.
314)
it
of the
Bab\-lonian
36
Geonim
i32
^"2',
a,
2nj?0
n\'i
vpnpn
nrh
.
.
p-iaiu'
vni
niypipn
hv niyo
nr
c^i^o
d^*j':s
vnij'
isn^p^sa
ncN"")
nij'npn
^\>'\'^t\
xnTnr^o
hv nnnni
mc
N^^ky n?:rD
mnsa
niyca
,-]//
^
-'S3
nrni n"'m pns Niny'. Nos. 199-200, by R. Hai. The correspondents from Kairowan
io?^!?
state:
^2)2^ \T\T\ .Tm v?'V QH^ pxK^ D^iTivni ni:ncn 'hvy:^ ncai
ymx
bv
nny
nj?i
Ciic^x-in
ir:3
D^c^n
;'nN3
|niN
D^:vj'xnn
c'r.xjn
nnvwyna isvcc^
i"N"iD"
nnxi
y"3 ;iS3 \^!'^n "lO JO Dn\inN. According to this statement this legal device goes back to the time of R. Hilai (either the Gaon of Sura
. .
in
in
825-9
p. 90.
a.
and
Harkavy, H"",
359, note to
MANN
317
or southern France.
In addition there
we
We
property
It
the most
common
and particularly of
in
more frequent
in
Spain and
France than
Vineyards as a part of
usual
thing.
the
So we
find
R. Meshullam in a responsum which was probably sent to southern France dealing with the case of a man who married three wives in succession and each had vineyards
for her
dowry
(p":,
No.
132). -3*
It
seems as
if
the only
A Jew having to
another case a
to
pay an imposition
No. 201, anonyin
(?^"lD3,
mous).
obtain
Likewise
in
woman
debt
to
trying to
money
in
order
{ibid.,
pay
non-Jew,
and
only.-'^^
responsum
^3<
Jews of a comall
As regards Spain,
of Cordova).
cp. 0'"1?^J,
by
R.
Hanok
HN
ly^'D
D^J3n
I^JnrC'D
m:^^N
D-13
n2^ yuj
nnix
lyDJi
nx^
^^^'i^rvc m:.'n
to
nx m;i
fields
n\-|B'
IV.
and
vineyards, see by R.
(cp. above, p. 314),
Meshullam:
^"Z\ 40
i), 197,
b,
No. 23
by Spanish scholars
(by R. iMoses
b.
D'")1D3,
,
Hanok
3l8
animals required
and
vineyards.-"*^
This naust
in
We
eleventh
century both
Spain and
themselves
much
with
der spanischen
LeJircr
dcs lo.
JaJirhnndcrts,
pp.
6-7).
fre-
Germany
384-7) and
in
France, and
find
it
money
commerce
the Jews
France
is
best illustrated
took place
in the
method of taxation
Jewish communities.
the tax evenly
The
earlier
for
sponsible
fields in
to
the
government
on
we
two responsa.^
note to
'"
But
in
the
23"^
[?";.
(,cp.
25,
No. 93):
l?X"^t^"'
n^SiJ'B'l
y\r\:h>
"luvn
3n
pi^i^'
j\si
in^n
ima
i:n3*j'
iV3
\r\b
iiDNiji
(.see
D^ai^
Mailer,
IZnrn nnan^w'
21. note;
\2t"\Cl,
IM
"|1D\X 13.
.Cp. n"L",
No. 214
Eiiileil,
237
Dnaan
W
,
No. 165
community)
ni'iD
iblpf
bT\\>r',
\\'2
bya \hb2y\
^jn
urvhv
mo
"ib "1221
~\il2
b
note
^y
b''urb'\
d^o
C'lCJ
a contemporar\' of R. Moses
Hanok. see
Miiller.
i)
13^31
MANN
fields
319
was no
munal leaders
Ronfils,
to contribute the
whole amount.
scholar,
in
well-known
French
responsum
to the
Jews of Troyes
in justifying this
in
change explains
that
his
entirely unprofitable,
them
to
tenants
who took
v.-ere
other
of fields to dwindle.
in
profits
be
witli-
peculiar
change
in the
:niDo
. . .
ir^r^
ib r-'C' no in
"b
D^JVj'x-in.
"^^
This responsum
is
{Q"~\T\J2
nmCTl,
liKl
ed. Prague,
b]}
481): ^n^N"l
anac
^ivd
d^j?
nnin
-ISC'
bv v:3 niL"n
-^ycn
m^
ns^
b'C'
n^oian
nm: n^t
-pns-in
N-Drrp-ia
nninon b^i pNl^ nin lozn x^a tcdn t2 imicn ix iddji nnb)iD)
pi n'lii vod
ono
-ix'jo
iK'sx
"INI
^U'Dm
.
.
Diyno ix
2n
i^
ix
ncn
nn k2
x^nnn^
Dn^bv n'2Dr\b px
.
.
ni?3
p^ ppn p DXT
i^toy
[nif:-j']
nit'yh
x^Drrpnsj ixi-^
VOL. X.
320
(b)
commerce from
Caravans could
Like-
was
in
the
possession
of the
Handel
u.
Gewerbe).
was
strictly
prohibited
to
transported
(Kremer,
ibid., I,
Only
later
on
in
up into
was
this
freedom of trade
only natural
Jews that
lived in large
commercial centres
Bagdad and
Above
(VII, 465
ff.)
we have
seen
how
in
Bagdad there
to
the con-
Often they
let
these to non-Jews
who could
carry
also to the
by R. Hai)
'J'^r
^332
pLITJ
DV
^2
D^li'^DI
Paltoi
or by R.
164.
Natronaij
D"1C:, No. 15
(anonymous).
See
also
)2)"'\'Cl,
No.
MANN
;
32I
in addition public
ovens
J2")i2:,
cp.
p":,
No.
the
no
by R. 'Amram).
like
preparation
by themselves
show
that
thus
we
find the
Geonim having
good
made.-*'^
Several responsa
travelled
The Geonim
Similar
questions
were asked
in
how
the
caravans (D"n,
a,
No. 27
In
^"B',
12
No.
11, see
note).
come
in
in
Jews used
to
and wide
their
business
enterprises,
which
v''^',
often kept
their
P":,
homes
17).
76b, No. 26
2*"
;"n,
No. 49;
No.
See 0"10J. No. 155; yn, Nos. 113-17; P"3, Nos. 33 and 46;
, ^
n":, No. 5 (to Kairowan); p"3 No. 127, by R. Meshullam; T\"^ No. 33a. 2" \>"l, No. 61 (.probably to Egypt by R. Hai) HT JHJO l\\\h lilD
:
>j3i
....
sh
Dn-iD
h'^}
Di^':i
'^iv,^:
n-121
n^n
T\yo
Dni'B'
Di^-n nion
-iid^x
ijyo*;:'
vn nna^i
.
(probably Fustat)
'2n?D
.
. .
irni2N0
^
(p.
lis
myn
nnnja
No. 45
17 b
760-64);
i,by
In
cnyn
^'i'T
pw
"-n
N^ntT Nj^i
pi
. . .
H^j? i5':^n^x
Nini5
p:ni:B'
i^'nc'
xhdij xin
in
Y 2
322
entailed
many
hardships
left
left
their
homes
for
away
when
From
the
responsa
we
learn further of
partnerships
and that
in
many
by ship from
:i"L'>,
the place
8,
78 b, No.
13,
II, 34,
No.
by Hai).
No. ig by R. Semah
in
partners,
Spain
n"j,
No. 59,
Kabes
=
It
n":,
from Tlemsen).
No. 49,
who came
to Ifrikiya
2"
yn,
No. 8r:
i6'C'
nv-'nn
dn
. . .
^1^n1:^J
^irsD
in^-'B'
din
n""'a
-:n
Y'2
"l1Tn? to a
jnvc-12
iNv^
^531
DN bin
p^nzb
also
2f"CJ',
|nn
ninroi?
I'H'cn
pN
iitni?
\n'bv
:
ninh
a
See
b,
No. 2
woman,
left for
document of divorce.
No.
I^Din
. . .
who
n'^J,
her.
Cp. further,
1n'.^'K
ii?
n-iDXi
L"pn"j'
*a
ims Nnn ab
trnanN.
di^'J'i
on
dn:^
ynp
pib
c:
^b
ainantr
MANN
323
abroad
(D'n nnyp),
where he traded
Another responsum
left
Spain
for
some
No. 224;
)i"u,
93
a,
No.
P":,
No.
51).
On
all
money
in
lives.^^*
struggling of the
made him
emergency.
the
versatile
every
of
decisions
courts.
Yet even
fragments of the
In addition to
Geoii.,
II,
150 (3"pn)
Y'i, No.
JD"1W
No. 213
Jews while
travelling
to Spain,
No. 66 by R. Meshullam
yn,
No. 27 by R.
Semah
letter,
in
Arabic,
from ^)bn
pD^H
to
DHinN 13 pnX\
ff.)
He went
from D^^nOX^N
XVI, 573
tells
Kabes whose
members
Kairowan,
and 'Akko.
324
One
respon-
sum
in c"i?r3,
No. 216,
tells
us
how
used to travel to
would be
On
town.
an
official.
At
they
for
When
had to go back
the
money which he
officials-^^""
The
after
other responsum in
93
a,
No.
i,
tells
us
left
how A,
for a
several
at
years with
last,
much
success.
Wanting
to
return
home
this
soon foundered
in a storm,
There
^*^
this
Jew
is
{ph
imino
fpriD
n\T
\T\'h
pixm dm nnc^
i^k*
.TnL-
\'\')i\y:}
pipe*
mnn
nr
^3
ims^
1N1T1 xh^z'
luy
oy
nxjpc' po^
N^DDpnan i^n
'h n^^jpn
D^pcn
Dprnnnai
-iB'^
x^'^'^^
Q^^JK'
Tna
nnx
in'in
DJir20
DM nsc
"iny
1^5
^y nn^^t:
ivy^nj
nnx
dc^
i^y^
Dsn^i
nnix2
di^'^c
"j^'-b
Dnvnai
dm
nr-io^ o^ni
in^
d:idd
dc
no
iiK'yi
pyDc6
"idni
n^son
^:stD
na^^
mn^d n^
pyoti^
f3iN-ii
nrno nniN
. . .
ponn xvm
poo ^y
i^ni ^3inc>
'^
JT'B'yB' ni33i
mnn
to
nny
n^ pn:
^i?
y^joB'
oaon
^3.
It
seems
that they
had
country to a foreign
state.
MANN
325
Of
Jews
among
Jewish business
all
men could
the diiTerent
always find
countries friends
among
their brethren
who
could supply
Further, a
trading
tection
with his
co-religionist
pro-
and redress
at
the
hands
the
Bet-Din
or
of the
visited
communal
on
and wide.
their
affairs
knows no
;
difference
is
between
Jews of
different countries
right.
every Israelite
(o"iDJ,
entitled to the
same
In a responsum
:
'
indignantly writes
If a stranger
?
comes
it
to a
town do we
!
money
Far be
! '
from that
Such
'^^
Jews of that
development
to the
The
religious
Thus
states
in
a responsum
(n"j,
the
Gaon
that 'as
script' (nny
'*^
.).
From being
S3i"
rfr\n
xb
mb^bn
?i3"ido
nxi
imx pncpD
-\^vb
wd3K
326
able
to
down
the
same
letters
only
small
step,
Hebrew
script.
Thus
it
in
Hebrew
script
is
script.
Hebrew
Jews
of
well known.
in
Arabia even
pre-Muhammedan times
number of by
later
V*, 77
f.).
There
responsa,
origi-
both by
earlier as well as
Geonim, written
Hebrew
305-
339-41 ).
who
lived apart
responsum
(v"r,
74
b,
probably by Saadya)
tells
us of a
Jew who
ask
died
and
his heirs
They
'
now
their
in
accordance with
men
'
(onniDn
2*"
See
further, n"J
i)
:
in
1015 to Kabes.
would
.
.
Vnc
]V2
Tn3^y'!3"kJ'
.
131133
pyJO'J'
continuation
.
of this
ba r.r pama*.;' nn:''N3 p:niJi ps'j^i: py?:tyi |n^ -Q1 nrb pyr:B' ba pIS^; see especially the responsum from a Bodl. MS. (in JQR., VI, 24)
n]
:
p3K'm HNV^n
i^^i?
u'M
M^'D
''3wS
b^
T\\vc:c'n
12d nni
MANN
327
All these factors enabled the Jew to travel far and wide
in
his
business
enterprises
stand
how Jewish
the
business
men
country of
Jewish merchants,
Ibn-Kordadbeh
Persian,
writes,
called
Radanites,^*^
who speak
Sicilian (Italian)
by boat
their
to
Farama, loaded
for five
days to
Kulzum
Once
Red
downwards
this
stream to
On
same
route.
But
some
When
Geott.,
II,
151,
1.
ff.
tbtd.,
iT'pn
by R. Meshullam; ?2"1DJ, No. 4 = b"i. No. 5; ID"1t3J, No. 2; 12" i No. 3B '^^ Perhaps these Jews were from the district of the Rhone, so that their
proper name would be
to p. 203).
'
Rhodanici
'
328
in
Farsistan, and
to India
and
via
China.^*^
their
way
and the
like products.
on the commercial
activities
shows
China, journeys
Many
women making
money was
cp.
expensive gloves,
When
in
silk
invested in expensive
furs {?":,
wares
p"j.
No. 150,
Rapoport, Introd. to
?":,
7 b).
France
No.
141).
In spite of
find a
all
Church Councils we
of
Jew
in the service of
the Bishop
Narbonne acting
in
caravan journeys.
MANN
When
329
We
banker
latter
in
Duke
of Anjou.
the
captured the
Duke
of Aquitania
ransom
in
;
-'-'-
(cp.
No. 151
a.
49
n"ir:j,
No.
174).
whom
they advanced
prohibited
the
money they
required.
The Bet-Din
client
belonging to another
fiyt:^' ns*
imo
ymriw*
pisn
D^ijD
n3L"
n'":pn
p^::nn
"-pD^yn
is*
-i3n:i'j
dn
rr-mi poc
iJir:^
sii^^n
n'hn
^bu D^poyo
ipv3 iTDym
pDjn
hn
ann ^D2
Tj^f/ztui',
dn
is
hrn iTcyni.
banker of the
expression in
b}' this
leader)
was
the
Hebrew
Tn
nsiv
b'c
oian ocra^'a
wnc'
.
, .
^'3B>3 \)nb^n
(r.
>y) 1^
nn
p?:?3
imN ^3p^
ini^DINn
nnO.
capture of either
WiUiam
41.
Geoflrey of Anjou in
same
in 1045,
j^ia-iyo
seems
to
me
to
Mark
See
7 b,
N^DiyO
is
never mentioned by
Babylonian Geonim, only by Spanish and French scholars (see also Muller,
DiD''j"i!?p
'1
'Jinj
.
ninvw'n,
xxxvii}.
Rapoport connects
this
s^c,
this
i"-,N,
proper meaning.
The
nature of
t"-!
N^D^yO
is
explained
in
28: MJ b^'^Z'h iS
\a\"'S}h
DM^DC
b'^yyi?
niNiSn iniNi
i^^nn^
r\i'-\m
.
.
-ins*
b^-^^h
nnn
^'nn
h^
^''liy^Vi^
^NnL'-^D
ip^oh i^^n
'n'':3C'
33
Jew's firm.
was strengthened
by a ban
rnxn
|niN*
(cp. "io3,
b'^'
No. 174; (?) nnapn n-^n ann yjn:iy niyi nanyc^ d'^n di:3^ abz', see Muller, note 6).
Above
(p.
317)
we have
seen that
The
in
the hands
of Jews
Coming back
we
Babylon and
in a
in
Geonim,
in
by Jews
responsum
''1:2
D^hy?D
cnjn
ix).
it
In
is
another responsum
: '
(o"i?r:,
No.
149,
by R.
Paltoi)
stated
Germans
(?)
usually
come
the
summer and
rarel>' in
of another
buy
all
the required
silk-wares.
Saadya
in
a responsum
large
(n";,
sums of money
One
(a
partner contributed
Dinar
about
^os.),
sum
in
Tlemsen).-^^
^*'
From Kairowan
silk trade
a business transaction
p.
is
About the
II,
65
(n"ip): n^^p^D
^ND
^C'rO
'CC Cy
nj-'-J*
pISI.
DliS*
16 a ^Xo. 6I;
iJ3
bv
bi
''21
bii'>^':^
331
reported of a Jew selling to another Jew a large quantity of pepper on board ship (nc^tr n^np, ed. Wertheimer, 71 a, 'n). We find further casual references to trading in wheat
animals, and property
R. Nahshon).
(v"l", 77 b and 78 a, Nos. ^-j, by Several responsa deal with cases of Jews
coined.
buying bullion which they used to give to the mint to be In those times no standard and uniform coinage
For example, the various provinces of the Muslim Empire had different standards. The Dinar of Yemen was
existed.
much
about
Dinar of
the
'Irak.
This brought
different
is
exchange-business
in
coins
of the
countries.2'-i
mentioned the case of a Jew who possessed a grindstone for grinding the dust of gold and silver (n":, Xos. 370-1).
Many
business
existed
between Jews
and non-Jews.
and landed property which required to be carried on also on the Sabbath, Jews would enter into partnership
lan^ n:pn
'lai
"^*
with
tr\i
>'sj2
-j-nv^
niJp>N ini-
^i:yi
DT,in
nup^
n:Dinn
p^j^n vns?
nb)vb xn
ab-c^
nm
316
n^po
mx
,
px nn^bv pyu^
a,
b^v ab^.
Harkavy
^'^
34
No.
4,
by Sar Shalom
(cp. Em/eif.,
note)
credit;
those
who
from B, the banker, on a month's No. 52: the Gaon Sar Shalom is against lend defective coins and ask in return coins of full weight,
bullion
-_
bought gold
in
V':,
lend
silver in bullion
silver,
because this
is
usury
possessing silver in bullion and being afraid that the coinage at the mint would be delayed, asks another Jew who was held in
great honour
in his
in
Jew
by the master of the mint to give the bullion to the mint Mu.addasi ^boni at Jerusalem in 946, began his work
name.
985) writes:
' In the province of Syria also, for the most part, the assayers of coin, the dyers, bankers and tanners are Jews, while it is most usual for the physicians and the scribes to be Christians (cited by Le Strange, Palestine
'
332
"i"c>n,
11,57,
;
No. 5
196,
1.
194,
ff.
s"n.
Xo.
10).
money
to
non-Jews
b":,
for business
the responsa
Shalom (849-53)
^NlC'^i'
-iidni)
N^o.
nv n^^nvy
life.
^J'y''*L^'
out in actual
The responsa
of the Spanish
Jews on
interest;
Characteristic
is
the
question in
)i"'",
^q
Xo.
from a non-Jew
in the
should be excommunicated.
place
it is
was
sent.
From
the
responsa
we
learn
further
of
capitalist
Saadya,
in
responsum
96
b,
Xo. 12)
Two
in those
money
invested
being 6 to
business
to
7.'^^
4,
man
Reference
2f"tJ',
also
made
in a
responsum to the
;
^^ Cp. further
93
No.
3,
by Nalronai
MANN
333
pedlars used to
They used
Jews
wool,
and
spices.
When
articles
which the
of
their
latter
would bring
them
it
later
on
in
payment
debts.
At
times
articles
would
to
rise
money was
due, so that
it
amounted
Talmudic
civil
law.
made
of the interesting
responsum
in
Arabic
n'O
V'3,
No. 43
98
b,
See
also
Jfty,
96a, No.
travel twice
by ship
Bagdad.
80-81
niNDn:
p-i^iDi
nnsDm nniyn
^^-^np^)
^"iv^'
p-imo nnniD
nm*i
|n::'2"i
Dnm
D^nL"3i
bv ^^'yno
pD
pnaioi
nr
npo
pjipi
334
The Gaon maintains that according to the principles of the Talmud ic civil law no legal claim can be brought forward should money sent in this way be lost in transmission.
However, the Bet-Din began to deal with such claims
because they saw that
orders,
in
many
the
way
of
316)
U'NI
"JD
Dn:nn
t:2i"t:D
na
])ib i:^3pi
D^i^JNn pn
nnnacn.
MANN
335
IV.
spiritual leaders of
Jews submitting
courts.
On
the whole
followed
may be assumed
injunction
settle their
of the people
leaders,
the
of their spiritual
and preferred to
judges
the eyes
We
and commerce.
Thus
for
the
common
real
welfare
of the
efficient
need of an
The Jewish judges usually worked hand in elders of the community (l^yn ""JpT), who,
responsible
for
the
taxes.
communal
leaders found
their co-
their assistance in
ff.).
(see above,
p.
142
In religious
It is true
that
VOL. X.
336
dergo
this
But
of excommunication
It
is
fcp.
also
above,
p.
129, note
192).
to
make
The
little
too freely
made
transgressions in
handled
this social
weapon
own
purposes, either
Geonim
(as
Yet a
strict
necessary when
bilities
we review
in
that rested
We
find
Catholicos,
could
enforce
of
his
will
on his co-religionists
only by
means
refusal of sacraments,
same way
The
Hen^nisho
show
and
their
subordinate
local
ecclesiastical
courts on one
MANN
13
:
337
religionists.
the
to
disobeyed
13-14;
2.
The
tion
Babylon
is
to
be found
in
85-6).
The Geonim
also
in the districts
under
81
and
S.,
83,
JQR.^ N.
is
IV,
in
The diploma
preserved
they were
comSuch
distant
mandments,
-58
religious
laws,
It is b.
Khalaf
11.
9-1 1
fj^i)
r\yii
onss*
na ^nv
-pry
^jei
"5^ ibid.,
note 4):
pjXn p^DD
nvi:n
JH
b^n
'
T"2L" ^333
'h
in:^)^^^
''3
iT'onN
N3X''n
'h'"C)
\ych2
'Ji^D
invs
-i3
pN-iipi
m:s* ;xn^
p-j-iDD
i''3m3i
1^21 iSd
^ji^D^
n"'j''3D
NjnjNi
pi
xnijxm Npna
'Ji^a
b
}D
^y nNTnn\xh
^n
bi
^3
p^'^^
,^^oi^'
Nnicn
n^^
N:3^T'^
N-invS'3
bv
N:n bpro
xh
jn
n^irm
NTnm
N-no^Nm
Nns'ivrri
n^-j-aj.
'K^r^-L^
3^^m pis^n
nm
T\"'C,
\xd
np layo^
xnVkj'-i n^^
n\s
No. 217).
Z 2
338
had to
of the
the
first
three
members, but
chiefly
the
purpose
of
being
informed of the
long standing.
affairs
of the
elders
community by members of
of
The
the
demand from
the
Exilarch, or the
Geonim
respectively,
deposal
of
unworthy judges.
The
Bagdad
Exilarch
had
we have
of MansLir.
in
n":,
mentioned
Xo. 555:' in
nu
D'^n
xan^n
sni^:
t^xi
nnyo
to
mm "mon wn
it
n''2^
is
snaTiron.
If the
Exilarch happened
be a scholar,
Thus
in
n"3,
No.
5,55,
we
find the
expression
that
'
the
Exilarch
(David
b.
Zakkai)
gave
clear argut^'N-l
nhi^j
pdsi
learned and
owed
merely to their
minent
sch^)lar
presiding
over their
High Court.
We
High Court,
have attained
He must
b.
nHH
Dukes
DD1C HT
ravc'nrt
li'n
nov 21
I'^'cn-c
MANN
339
asked
local
Probably the
judges
in
the
jurisdiction
cases.
in a lawsuit
could
and
demand
Court.
witzer,
by
the
High
From
JQR., N.
1,^62
we know
that this
probability the
in force at the
of each of the
also
by an eminent
This
II,
note 4;
Aptowitzer,
ibid.,
35-8).
president of the
in
VII, 468
It
Exilarch's
by the High
in n"3,
No. ^jj,
it is
quoted above,
p.
Moreover,
b.
well
known
that the
quarrel
between David
Zakkai and
docu-
amn
inb't
D"':pii
D^o:3n
on^oijn.
pf
N3'n mentioned by R. 'Amram at the beginning of his Siddur y^, No. 56). In 'i"^ 3 a, No. 17, there is mentioned "W^n 21 10 N221 XJXn who after the death of Bustanai issued a deed of freedom
,
N3n
to the exilarch's
in
the status of
freedmen.
2-
7.
%h
ynin ^a
pan
'^^122
i^^y
v'0\:?^'^
Ti^n yan;.
cp.,
/6k/., p.
32.
340
ment
by the
former's
Xeub.,
II,
80-8 j).
had
fixed
member
also
his
II,
of his
community above
all
legal
none but
in
was allowed to
draw up (Nathan
Neub.,
85-6)
As
regards the
that
in
may assume
under
Egypt the Nagid generally had the power of appointing judges over the communities
his jurisdiction.
But
in
other
its
countries
each community
used to elect
a judge of
own
accord.
We
find references to
com-
In such
settle
the
elders
of the
community used
amongst Jews.
to
by
re-
Thus the
sponsum
in )i"^,
84 b,
No.
4,
where the
elders,
the
'.^""
Likewise
in
90
a,
No.
29, the
Gaon mentions
'
are
fit
to settle disputes
(D"'J3i!3C'
D''trJNn
pxc
n'\pJ22
nyn pa DDcb).
to
On
b,
several
responsa
refer
90
No.
^;^).
The Geonim
were careful
-''3
in
u"c' vd
ksnc"o
ijsb
c^i yinp
pn
pNc-* aipron
u^''m
.
Dnn:)S-)m
n^jptn
i^Dni
r\i^')i'
in
:
'f^ipEn
in
.
\'in |D
'3:
vbv
^''C
no
)b
]r\^^ iniN.
'N1
D'jpr
.
. .
ND^''^
N-n3n"'Nn
y'yx an^rn
n-'D^n n^i
n^t
'a
ayb
D^ai^^'n.
MANN
34!
their authorization
in
communities abroad-
Jew who swore not to attend at the Bet-Din, though the members of the community
disputes to
decision.
The Gaon
in his
answer
Whereas
in the case of
(n"3,
the
latter,
be enforced
No.
180).
to R.
who would
be taken as
(n"::',
Tahnudic law
No. 86).
The Gaon
to
do everything
in
their
power
in
some
Academy had
outside
Geonim demand
is
courts
countries
Babylon
that
they should
be
eminent and
definition of
command
21L^'^
"i""'n
in n":,
cp. n"3,
No, 14
funds
in
the
maintenance
of
its
Bet-Din.
responsum
No.
who bequeathed
synagogue.
The communal
342
("'CT
No.
7).
On
For
was
whereas
in in
administered.
But
Din
in
disposal,
All
was
in
use in Talmudic
From
the
Gaonic
responsa, however,
we obtain
Corporal P?iinshincnt.
Biblical
No.
The
former,
well
stripes.
But there
R. Natronai
2"n,
responsum
(^"\y,
91b, No. 39
No. 89;
n^o had
till
flagellation
of mp^o was
no longer practised
whereas the
niTiJO
no fixed number of
stripes,
the
it
is
was
''^
in practice still
in their
time (see
n":,
x!?
r.ipt^Di
ny
"IS
nj^x
nnno
n^Di
/n*
ncn
'o
Iti'DJ
Nifnti'.
responsum (quoted
who
:
343
Kairowan
6).
in
It
41, No.
997 cp. ibid., p. 235, note 2) = seems that this punishment was
;
-i"cTi, II,
inflicted
be repaired,
e. g.
desecra-
tion of the Sabbath. Whereas for the purpose of enforcing the ruling of the Bet-Din, the flagellation went on till the
culprit acquiesced.
However,
fUC'n
xb nmo
;
n^'r
is
men-
tioned by R. Ychudai (760-4) for transgressions that could not be repaired (cp. -^''^r^, I, 39, and TI, 18 see also n"c^,
During the flagellation corresponding verses from the Bible were recited, and the
1.5,
No.
and
culprit
= n":^n,
II,
41,
No.
It
seems'aLso
No.
note
=
7,
was adjured not to repeat his sin (n>, and the responsum quoted by Miiller, Einleit.,
6,
4).
Quite a
new
distinction
between
DIp^^JD
and niTlD
n30
is
introduced'
D'i?nj
p.
yy ira
67,
d.
Hebrew
mpf^D
part,
No
,pD-inncni
pjji^TM^p-i^j^ 'o
mp^o
nr
As the responsa of the Babylonian Geonim, which we have know of this distinction, the above summary
the Palestinian
(in
Jahrbuch,
vol.
summary of
Geonim than those of the Babylonian scholars. J. N. Epstein VHI, 450; could not find what was 'obscure' in the
D^^JH:
yy
1C'3 'D
to 'similar'
responsa
(^'B'. V, 7 (91 b)
No
to a
39,
15
are hardly
(cited
question.According
responsum by Saadya
by
Poznariski,/0/?., N. S., HI, 427; nmtD HDO consisted of thirteen stripes for the transgression of a traditional precept, such as hair-cutting on \:>"rm or wearing shoes during the days of mourning. This must have been the lenient side of DDO for slight transgressions. This number of thirteen stripes is also ordained by R. Hai, unnoticed by Poznanski (in a
'
nmo
Einldt., 6, note,
from i?n"a5r,
11,
150),
nan nip^n^
ijnji
nmo
^K rem oic-D
.
.
344
was accompanied
by shaving the
culprit's
Thus
in
^i"^,
we read
his hair
that
if
Jew be found
guilty of having
committed
shaved
ofl".
a married
woman, both
off (i"c'n,
hair shaved
29,
among
R. Yehudai
^''c'n,
of R. Natronai),
II, 18, 1, 11, among the responsa The same punishment was inflicted for
("1"^^!,
desecrating the
Sabbath
II,
20).
This strange
is
punishment, which, as
far as
my
knowledge goes,
not
found
in the
One
of the decrees
^^'^s
that the
be punished
by a hundred
stripes, cutting
CarO; Social-
ti,
der Juden,
73).
This punishment
in
the Middle
'
Ages
in
many
(in
countries.
Das
Wiener Zeitschrift
91
ff.).
filr die
Kunde
des
Mor-
genlandes,
XIX,
It
of communal
266
Perhaps a reference
1
this kind of
punishment
supposed
v;h
V''T\
is
to
be found in
Sanh.
10 a top,
:
is
to
husband
N*n213
all
l^!?
i^^JDMOl
'l3''^irD^
myi
he (Moses)
the stocks'
shaved you
(to
in
XnSO,
NDEID).
a different explanation.
MANN
345
at
the Bet-Din.
Thus,
if
Jew committed
for that
or on the Festivals,
flogged, he
was imprisoned
(r^"vr:.
No. 146, by
Paltoi of
Sherira
No.
iJSi,
-.
and
2"n,
No.
135,
by R.
n"L",
No.
1S2, cannot be
it
by Sherira,
In
all
is
expressly men-
communal
it
prison
("iriDn
n"'3).
Likewise, in the
Prankish Empire
Thus
his
in
the
576
C. E.,
we
Germanus on
the
journey
in
found
Jew Amantius
Jewish
ziir
Geschichte dcr
Juden
frdnkischen and
year 576).
However, confinement
by
in a
(cp.
Sanh.
9^,
pD^jnn
iniN, as
whom
there are
in
flagellation,
see Frankel,
in
Der
note 85).
Oath.
The proper
was accompanied
Law
(n~iin nSD),
The
reason
to take
much
No.
consideration,
upon perjury
(j"n,
22,
by R. Natronai
73a, No.
9,
'^"^y,
346
continuing to
i?":,
No.
lo).
As
to be
in
evidence
monetary
In order to
make
these curses,
in
were pronounced
the synafind
two respoiisa
76
a,
{?":,
No.
lo,
by
Paltoi,
842-58, and
the
-^"ly,
No.
22,
by R. Hai).
The
scroll of
Law was
A
feet
bier
was brought
to the synagogue,
and
on
it
lay the
under
the
the
person
concerned, and
The
candles were
lighted
present.
Then
of the
to
the
accompaniment
of
horns,
the
delegate
case he
was
making
so
false
statements.
strange
and
gruesome
they appear
to
us,
had
symbolical
making
his
"'''
iN>:^'r
iN'-n-'i
"iH'i^i'rh
nn
ps'i^'irw"
hdd
^J;oL^
nia ynnJD^'Z)
ij^^"-!
ni^^pn hv ims*
nn'^
n^'o
dtiid
D^b
ri>bv
vj-i-:''')
i"'2 nros-'i
nt2r:n ':^b
in
nn
"Nn ns ;nv^y?:i
.
.
.
-i^x
pN^n?2i
nn;
pp'-hci
n'''>nnru'.
pi'i:Jnn
pN^3i "bbn
Some
of these details
MANN
347
take place
in
the synagogue on
Mondays and
Thursdays
No.
to
9,
probably by R. Hai).
cere-
mony
in
public
()l"^,
69
a,
No.
72,
b":,
in the
name
of
R. Semah).
married
women
publicity,
in the presence of three Jews p":, No. 9). Another kind of adjuration was administered in cases of suspicion. For example, if a Jew suspected another Jew
adjured privately
authorities,
he could,
after
having substantiated his suspicions, obtain from the BetDin the permission of having a ban or curses announced
in
him harm.
(n":,
anybody that caused This permission, which was called xnsiD^T NpriD
and
:^$^),
Nos.
the
?2"iUJ,
(cp. fn, No. i;^'j, by R. Hai No. 193, by R. Joseph Ibn Abitur of Cordova; p":,
No.
13).
The same
demand
Din, on the
and giving
his
IV, 28,
"ISOn
DlUn
Pes.
pyn'.^'n
HD
'JDD
U"X
3"!
"lOS
]b:>D
p-l
R.
c.
22 (ed. Fnedmann,
13 b ;
nipn on
VD33 ^30
i>c^3yi
nrovyi pn^j
121D
ps-^?:)
hnnjc
nr^i^
nnaicn o^ypim
Dpn nsv^
n^n^
']p'c^r\
bv vy^'rc ^d
b p
oh:)-.
348
would grant
it
money
and
father.^''
Excoinmunication.
all
To
enforce
obedience to
acquiescence in
the ban at
its
disposal,
by means
of
The Geonim, as the spiritual leaders of Jewry, were anxious to make the ban as effective as possible. The ban announced against
entirely separated from Jewish society.
The
excommunicated, especially
almost exclusively moved
in
in
those times
when a Jew
Jewish society.
is
full
de-
given in a responsum
by R.
in
Paltoi,
7,5 a,
842-58
(^'J,
No.
10,
V"r^,
No.
14).--'^
=68
fn''^
\h'''r\
nS i^mN
-idx^i
1J^?
ps:^
pynr iim
lana
nn
ij^pi
ns*
nnnis'
iniN
n?2Ni
^y
in
pi in^na
nns mon
iN3*ir
ns^rn
,i:i:i"i3
nn^c^
oisnosN
22, end,
an njyoa
xi^'owc
by Saadya.
is
The
in
text in
y'J
more
correct.
Thus the
parallel to
terrible
phrase llpyi
\2T\T\.
VniJTO
y'l,
\"^
reads
in \>"l
:inmO npyi
Vm^i'
With
No. IV.
(flSti'D
ibid.,
26,
The
was
likewise stringent.
in"'3a, 2 a bottom)
\'hh\>i:i
xh
i?o"ibcQ
^Ntt'3
N^ loy
D^:n^: ^^;
riv^2
'i
n"a3
349
the
excommunicated.
The
this
document
effect,
called
Nn^ns,
issued
by the Bet-Din
to
was
by
R. Hai;
n"j.
p.
3^? "ote to
p.
84; Gaonic
ibid.,
Document, No.
If
published by Aptowitzer,
26).
the
excommunicated
remained
obstinate,
the
more
was used.
if
The
effect
in
of this ban
all
its
crushing,
carried
out
severity.
the
synagogues of the neighbouring communities the ban was announced, declaring the food and drink of the
culprit to
be like that of a non-Jew and forbidding, under penalty of excommunication, any Jew from keeping company with
the excommunicated person, or to circumcise his son, or to teach his children in the public schools, or,
finally, to assist
'
at the burial
on the death of a member of his household. Sometimes the ban went so far as to declare those who
ventured to talk to the person under the ban, a^ being eo ipso in his position (n>. No. 42, by R. Hai, and t"v::,
No. 217).
It
would be unjust
to attack
R. Paltoi
IV,
p.
V'm,
R. Paltoi was not the inventor of this form of excommunication. It must have been in practice
him (see also Gr. V^ 139, note 4). The ban was handled with as much severity also by the contemporary Christian ecclesiastical authorities in Babylon.
fact,
it
long before
In
was
in the
general
way
nm
ai^u^
35
not being
The
Gaon
the
is
that
if
man
should be buried
those affected
weight.
No.
41).
It
by the ban
strict
However, a
means of coercion
the
communal
leaders,
for the
preservation
of
the
of
the
authorities.
This
ends
in particular the
attain.
The
in
Bet-Din
chief branches.
justice in
The one
monetary
lawsuits,
by
upon
refractory people.
(a)
Monetary
Affairs.
The procedure
fully
a,
of the Bet-Din
in
in
money
No.
15.
case the
in
debtor
insolvency
in in
^''c',
is
described
responsum by R. Natronai
the
86
Naturally,
as
procedure described
for
the
in
Talmud
served
an
example
nowhere
the
Bet-Din
is
the
Gaonic period.
But
in the
Talmud
Gaonic responsa.
To
MANN
35
money from
all
those people
To
this
effect
the
creditor a
people
who bought
pay
to
the creditor his due, the milder form of the ban would be
declared against
after this
them
If
in
them
same time
Bet-Din
of thirty days.
If
this
had no
to
the
finally
allowed
the
creditor
enter
perforce
amount
of his loan.
To
this
~id::'
Nnsmx
nt2'j'
was destroyed.
when already
of the
in possession of the
by the Bet-Din
procedure was
in
in lieu
sn^itx
lo::'.
The same
he
left
and Dociunents published by Aptowitzer, JQR., N. S., IV-VL 25-8; n"3, No. 234, by R. Hai). Several other
instances of coercion
by means
84
of the
ban
in civil lawsuits
;
are discussed in several responsa (cp. n"3, Nos. 184 and 233
V'B',
77
a,
No. 32;
b,
No.
4,
and 87
to
a,
No.
17).
In
just
short,
the
Bet-Din endeavoured
safeguard
the
An
interesting case
is
reported in Geon.,
II,
154,
1.
ff.,
his debts
by
.
A a
352
who
in
all
iiusband
creditors.
for
in
this
way
outwit
the
for
In
case
again,
the
Of
special
The Bet-Din
is
styled
'
'.
court had to
demand from
the guardians
No. 178
= nV3,
No.
5,
n"j,
r^")^:,
No. 217).
No
Bet-Uin {Geon.,
trustee
II,
loi (VIIIj).
the
appointed
b}-
testator,
Bet-Din
would
the
Gaonic
ibid.,
Document Nsnt22N
29.
"IDD",
published
by
Aptowitzer,
No.
IX).
The Bet-Din
If a
further
credibility
of witnesses
who
witness was
found out as having given false evidence, he was excommunicated, flogged, and publicly declared
witness (see
'i"\L\
to
be a
false
;
Ci"ij:3,
No.
87
88,
end
p"j.
;
No.
b,
3,
by R. Nahshon
;
85
b,
No. 13
;
a,
No. 16
45).
88
No. 22
89
a,
No. 25
92
a,
No. 42
92
b,
No.
In
all
in
the
communities.
^,b)
Religious
In this sphere
of activity
we
by the Bet-
'na
!?:!a
t:"vm mn2*^3
-ipui
any ms^'C'n
D-inn''^i
n^rrj^^i
MANN
353
We
shall,
became the
and
two opposing
parties of Rabbinites
Karaites.
The
became the
criterion o a
could
showed the
to Rabbinism, as conceived
As
is
well
known
Jewry were
home
as high as possible.
were relentless
illegal
These
offspring
humanity
responsum of R. Natronai
in v'V,
24 a and
Nos.
and
of Jewish sectarians
who
body
have
We
1.
seen above
(p.
out
in cases
of adultery
29).
On
cast a slur
on the respectability
No
investigation
persistent
in
Sometimes,
:
^"K^, 27 b,
D^H
.
r."IK'3
.
.
i:nix i:pTnn
7.
nn^-j-yDm
nS D'-aiLD ]yii'^> onnia pjno vbv pjno Dyn rn xi't^a Ti:'^ a^nuA
a 2
354
would
Talmudic principle of
bv ppPD
in
such matters.
this principle
be applied to a woman,
children (see
n"::',
by R. Natronai
Pardes, 35
b).
malicious
anybody
that
came
singl}'
No.
8).
According
man
mony
The
and many-sided.
who
searched
whether
people
[Y^n)
did
not
hide
the
an}thing
festival
containing
Passover.-"^
leavened
bread
during
of
Owing
the
Geonim adopted
some
inter-
minor transgressions.
Thus
for
excommunication
culprit. ^^^
well as flagellation
272
j^"-c',
'JH
]''12vb
"j^^H
ininr^-c
nsinn
isriwxic^-i
'nbm
273
"'DiDtJ'
nn*c6
pi^^n
x^cnp pon
n"t^j
to
whom
niN
group of responsa,
D):pb iB'DN ^Nt'
"It^SN
^NSJ'
Dnns^ h^n^d
ptj'iy
nnr*
ix t^-^n
pw
D):pb
MANN
355
inflicted
hn
{t\"^.
cut
on
o"nin, or
^
days of mourning.^"
To
eat
warm
food on the
njJDDn,
Sabbath, prepared
the traditional
manner of
This
Gaon was
the
particularly
vehement
in
his
opposition
in
i;"nD
his
against
(ed.
Karaites.
b),
In a passage
find
preserved
Warsaw, 37
we
who
shorten the
reading of the
Hagada
of Passover
so,
Agadic
portions.
By
doing
is
Whoever changed
Gaon
a heretic
Njn
-'^
See above,
n"):;',
D^JD
mpxH^
"in
i:nJ1
'>
-"5
No. 34
imx
"st?
tr"
na.-a pen
bus
irxw-
-ja^n
nijno
inm
nih ^nj
(i.
e. r]:i]2\2n)
^mn
n^s
nnni
"innx
p'^\>-h
'\-b
-c'^i
^xn*ii'"'
-'
V'tzn n3"i3
"i^^nDn^i
-12131
N'n 2b pi^m
Nin p2
ivoirni
rrj'n'C'
hr\\>i2
inn:^
pj^i
m^npn
pn^^ni
t;'^c'
nju*'D
^^"i^-ini
.
b nm
. .
nm
n:h
-101^
pvn
nih pi^m
annb
pj^c
xro
s^n
I'-nN
^nt^^
n^D^m
y'rn
nm
prni
i-rybi
i^^n
V:^'
nin^ni nrii'D
"iD't:^
^n^jt
'':3n
ap-c py
mobm
r\TZ'i2
nm
.
u^y vins*
.
.
Q"'Jirni
cyinn
'^l^'d
b^
bsnn?
.
.
.
s'b'::'
onnj^ panv
i^^'^yi
QniyL23
jn
pnyi
mroi^n
note
356
rampant
in
religious
communities.
foible.
Even
the
free
from
this general
On
For desecrating
and the
cp.
^*"c',
culprit
(n"::',
No.
45,
by Hai
91b, No.
(fnr)
women
prohibited to
;
him
by Sherira
11.
2"n,
No.
(S8,
by R. Samuel
the
priest
Hofni
"i"c'n,
II, 7,
11-15).
Even
if
renounced
until
his
priesthood,
he would remain
R. Hai's responsum
he repented.
From
in
his
many
who married
illegall}-
From
a responsum
in
n":^',
No. 103
b":,
(this detail is
missing both
in
No.
^6),
it
to a
non-Jew
name of God.
For further
:"n,
;
No.
2"n,
15,
by R. Natronai
26.
Gcoii., II,
;
by R.
II,
Semah
(II),
No.
by R. 'Amram
and Gcon.,
26
by
^''^
Surprising
is
who
married a
woman
that
iTT'
DnS'-i?
N^n ^^D1D
nu
pynpl nTiynVS.
Had
the Bet-Din in
MANN
Geonim
357
in
The
well
:
summed up by
mr::' Nin njiONi
5.
order.
Cases of insults
in
and
the Talmudic
term of niDJp
settled only
cp. ^"'^,
affairs
by Jewish courts
a,
Palestine (Baba
kamma
84
29
Nos.
and
2).
However, such a
state of
became dangerous
in
in
Babylon as well as
since
by being
scot-free, violent
violence.
Geonim had
rule of hill
to find
n"iD:p ''Jn
by means
The Bet-Din could not impose the fine on account to. Thus they left it to the
come
to an
whom
The
he made
agreed
first
to suffer.
As
to,
29
a,
by R. Natronai
:"n,
No.
60,
and \\\ 31
882-7).
a.
No.
14,
by R. Semah, probably
practice
of Sura,
^- Sadok's
was followed by
his successors.
Several responsa,
injur\-,
show us
(D^n
of the
Geonim
after R.
Sadok
top,
by
Amram,
v"C',
2ya^
358
Xo.
cp. i*V, 29 b,
"'J^l
Xo.
4).-'*
In
Bet-Din even
in
The Jewish
of
From
responsa by R.
MeshuUam
Lucca we
to
and France,
which
countries R.
Meshullam
seems that
of
'7222
in
maxim
niDp
whereas
Geonim understood
and
Thus,
in
it
to include
'
Babylon
pc' 72^,
(nivnx
"^N*;:'
V'B',
Xos.
3).
Italy
and
in
France,
duced by R. Sadok.
insults.
There used
to
be fixed
fines for
insult
and
damage were
2^8
'/']!
-t^a
'D
{!.
c,
No. 22)
Vc
nu"::"'
^-iK'a ;nj?2
n^'j-j
iniN
^222
c:p
;\n:"
2"i\s:^
(?^nhj
^D
'yn
\x
\rb ]yV^^
N.
S.,
2'"
Cp.
12
ff.
fiirtlier,
I.lefes b.
Yasliah, ed.
V, 100,
Cp.
II,
lf"w',
30
^'o.
'{\'2
a,
No.
No. 13 =
Y'BTl,
34.
15:
^"^2 JTIDJP
jyvj
cs*
D^.pOni
Pardes 24 d
. . .
^jn
p:n
y^'^
-ir:xi
^'i
pnv jna
""gv
i?:n 'sni
)"inn
niD:p
"':n
p:~i
n'si"^'
'"xi?
'jn
bv2
n^^*'
)ns^
niDjp
pn^'cr:. p";,
No.
135
i*"u',
^3n*j' 'c
also i":,
^2inn
Ta
"i:n;i
See
No. 44.
MANN
359
Din imposed
its
decision
To
Bet-Din,
e. g.
in
the
case of a
husband
those days
of poly-
gamy
added
as a rival to
it
67
b,
No.
60).
Sometimes
life
would
became
intolerable,
his wife
renounced
her
claims
upon
cp. n":,
the
Ketubah
(v""J',
15
In
a,
all
No. 27
the
divorce.
Moreover,
husband
left
for
abroad
sell
6^
h,
No.
38,
by R.
Paltoi).
by a ban not
to divulge
people. ^^^
On
the
its
prestige, the
(p.
Bet-Din usually
made
the
Above
341), mention
was made
to
e.g., a
obey
summons
we
community, he would
Howon
the
some communities
its
the
Bet-Din was
of the
unable
to
enforce
(cp.
ruling
members
community
rD"v^:,
The
last
will
deal with
Babylon as well
Sherira
communal
tells
;
31
T\"'^\
nn
Din3 nn3
'J'll
360
Persians the
The Exilarchs
retained
influence
It
for
Muslims.
was only
Yehuda
much
by being
What
in
this reduction
power amounted
to, is
explained by a statement of an
869), published
ff.
states that
the right
in
the Muslim
Empire
to
condemn any of
their
They
it
But
pages
the
preceding
(p.
342
ff.)
ment of
time
flagellation,
last
of the
Geonim
also
Weiss
in
ni^-Pn n"'3,
V, 26 (S).
its
decisions
times,
even
in
religious
matters.
Whereas
in
later
p.
122-3).
Thus
it
means of coercion
at the disposal
culprit
would remain
x^w'jn
. .
.
v.i.
miiTi \s3r
p in
in 825.
'^''n
D-'^Nyr^u*"
""d^
yv?2N3i
f.
D'^hnj
to
X3^m
Nni3DS*J' fD ')^2nw''N.
this
Cp.
According
Barhebraeus
813-33-
happened
Maamun,
MANN
361
by
the Jewish
As
we
David
b.
Zakkai
by the Caliph's
In view of
all this
Othman
Very
little
is
known
in
of
the
procedure
in
the
Jewish
communities, both
Babylon and
communal
Whereas
it
is
known
is
example,
his
communities
',
to
occupy the
office of
''L^Nl
Pnpn,
whom Nathan
Interesting
in
mentions
is
his
Report (Neub.,
a certain
II,
85-6).
the
fact
that
Nagid of
Egypt
by
But
in
holding
Palestine or in
Egypt.
There
at
present no further
ijnjs "ic^N n^-ijn cs'i ijjiin fVL'na vnns* 'n nya nviy '^x
^y\
nytrai
pN
\-i^Na
nnn
D^s*a
^siC'" ^21
in
DOTT"
iniX''JJ'J.
general,
See
362
In
the
ing"
communal
order
'
:
the scholars,
heads of the
scribes,
pupil-
Graetz
(V'*,
was
in
(nVD''33 ''DJia)
communal
in
to take ima/l,
mentioned
:>''C'
to
mean the
'
electors'
of the
to
in
accordance
parallel
Series,
with some
2^*
unknown system
of
The
IV,
Gnome Documents published by Aptowitzer, JQR., 26, Nos. Ill and IV [>3 'jni] CJn ''3'1) NHK'^J^ ''t^NII
:
New
'"^'''''Tl
ii:22-h
in
''pTil
npVri
nn
:
The
parallel
)i"^
75
a,
No. 14 reads
piinh
Ben
1.
IJ-inN
DlSlp
(llOn
b^b
nuN
'131
-nni
nro^^
'-L^'N-n
D^:pn
D^:)2"in
lyx" n:ncn
amn
biii^''
'c'' u^nN -in^i D^^rni ono^rii c^mni Dy nnni -ii3^* ^d:"idi. Of interest is the document of appointing a president (ti'SI) of a community
note
7).
It
seems
Brit.
to
me
document already
Saadya's work.
M us.
Add. 27,181,
26
a,
n^nyD
'^n
^
-innn
i;Nvr:i
pnyn nv:vb
ij
]n>:'":v'\
nnt:^'
. . .
VD pn
(ed.
Halberstam
fSVOI nilOt^'n
:
n''t'X-ini D'-Jpin
L}r\b
nupn
i-iii*
ynr
nuDp nnns
vdv'-
27 a bott.
iJ^^^Jr
-id'l^
ib
c'"'i
^npn
pT-inu' n^n
m:nni
niNu'JO
ii?
D'isnD2s*
nnx
no-j-a D'':nK'Nn
"1DDID
innn^r
syNi "idk'
mx
nvp2
nn 'im
xrc"*^
noc
p.
s'bN n-ipj
i^n DiDnoax;
nnuL'-n
i:nxoi
-luc
.
. .
\xn^
;
inn
'S
:
a^n^n
N'p'-ny
nDu'3
"'2^
niDsnD-ss*
NnoiJn nvo::;'
jsa
ini^nn^
n^n
MANN
reads
363
nsiDl
Aptowitzer's
it
Gaonic
Docinnents
is
which
makes
more usual
p"i?37i
"^ba?),
the
internal
organization of
the Jewish
{jfQR.,
community
8^4
in
Egypt
in
are
given by Gottheil
XIX, 499-501)
(d.
extracts
from
the
work of
as
his
al-Kalkashandi
authorities
a.H.)
who
in
writers
in
of the
eighth century a. H.
As
the
al-Kalkashandi's
fully.
I
statements
cannot
be
discussed
here
al-Kalkashandi draws
be well versed
in
between the
'
Hazzan, who
'
'
must
preaching
and who
(i.e.
i.e.
the
Imam who
in
them
in
prayer',
not
borne
e.g.,
Egypt.
Thus,
Maimonides
an Arabic responsum
S.,
(published
by Friedlaender, jfQR., N.
and
^''tJ*
V,
ff.)
uses
the terms
ITn
On
leaders
Geonim
invested the
communal
com-
with great
authority.
(cp.
When
the Jewish
munity of Nefusa
after the
demanded
This gave
each
the
for particular
many
disputes as to the
amount of dowry
woman
amount
in
estimated
Ketubas.
communal
dowry according
to the
36+
Likewise,
of
the
purpose of obtaining a
true
in
estimate
each
this
way
a just dis-
those
that
made
false
statements
about
their
economic position
Usually
in
(cp. r:"v^3,
Xo. 205).
the
Bet-Din, conjoint
be
taken
by the
In places where no
settled
order.
deal
b^P
;
communal
84
b,
No. 125
No. 217
in
v"l",
No. 4;
Kairowan
there
is
991;
note
No. 82,
before the
spoke heresy.
One
of the
suspected
2=
nononn
f^i3
':p]
iv^pn^'J'
imn
vy;
r\:pn N\n is
ipin^i
"D^
T*i:'yn
n''jpTn
i^np^i
.
'zb
?n
|.TmmnD!?
'th
nns*
ni^^y
ij:"*^^!
n-iri
fn-c*
n^
'zb
D'':irnni
"^yni
ybv
xi?
"^'^'x
^^1
od^^'c^i p^nb
iri\x
"ii:ri
nn^^y -imn
)r\)':T
nx
mx-ipcD
pjiDh
.
. .
3'jiJ2^
n"i:n''*j'
imonn-'i
D^:prn
pn
m^y
upnty
Tyn
^:pT
n^3 nvznii^
nch
i^^n nn'it:B'i
T'y
'':3
nx.
MANN
365
accordance with
its
contents.
above,
p.
341).
In
t:"iDJ,
the
poor
in
. .
their
.).'^'^
Q^^:yn
piDD3
D'p^p^
Yn^ Dm nny^
is
binding
communal
that
Sometimes
could
;
it
would happen
new
institution
not
be followed by the
take the second case,
the immediate use
or, to
of the
communal
funds.
Geonim
were consulted as to
how
munity
in
question
decision
in
accordance
n"i:^,
b":,
No. 41
D"n,
No. 116;.
communal
community
83 a, No. 22).
{Co7i eluded.)
CORRIGENDUM.
Vol. X, p. 134, note 200,
1.
It
is
well
known
that
some of
Talmud many
Amoraim
However,
Erech Millin,
p. 238).
Modern
no need
critics
There
is
to
expert
interested in them.
There
to object
to Dr. Zeitlin's
new
although he
before
is
authorized explanations.
Yet,
we
we have
to con-
do
so.
mean
Dr. Zeitlin's
fifth
Takkanah.
discussion of
this
Takkanah, however,
Dr. Zeitlin
gives
iv,
should
his
like
to raise another
point
b,
too.
as
i, p.
sources B.
a.
Baba Kamma, 82
\rb
and
Pal. Megillah,
75
He
fp^n
N"^fy
nnin
nJC'n
njc'03'j'"i
tJ'NT
mvy
Dnrp D^'n:D
is
ni!?^p
jmp
i.tc^
^^-y^h
ur\\>.
There
mean
the
Rabbenu ha-Kadosh, X.
Lemberg,
c.
7 (see
Schoenblum,
DnSD
T\^h\^\
VOL.
367
we read B b
368
''B'''cnai
Nnry
ip^n
^jB'n
nnm
pn
mcrj;
{y"j;n
**i3
naiNi h^idc'd
"^''^n
m'n
NnnL"i
in'-::'!
III
.-c'-'onai
.D''^jy^
i.Tan
II
mnn:;'
dic'
pbiN
iv
.tivo
na ^^^n^ ^d
nnsDD
ppnni
Nnn:;'i
D"^: VrT^^i
.n:iy ni^'c
rhnn nsDin
nirs N.nnfi
,nj2b'C'
VI
.j.T:^a
ms
hd
VIII
sn^ ab'^ n3
n^aiDi nrovy
.]'''^'\p
3n"''a3
VII
mnun
n^yn^
ppiTn'C'
ViT'J'")
npnm
ni^^D
nrs*
IX
.niT'yn p-iino
pbn
"^bv^b
nnnn
mn^^i
nac'v
n-c-s*
N^n>^^
iron mjin
nn-n::^
maDci mniy
nnx
From
mentioned
in the
Talmudim.
r\2\:'2
On
we have
to
to
Ht'Dnn
and the
institution
The
order seems
have been
(i)
Sabbath,
(2)
Mon-
day,
Takkanot
for the
women.
interpretation given for the fifth
First
The
good.
of
all
we
moistened
it
with water.
3,
This Halakah
based on Tosefta
1.
Makshirin, III,
are
ed.
Zuckermandel,
p. 675,
19
f.
Now, how
we
of garlic (''337y3
(x?27ya
DIJJ') ?
garlic generally
Nm:D3^SD
Surely
niX3n
Q'^Dii,
where
fear exists ?
p DN
it
who do
'if
cases:
Thirdly,
so that they
moistened
do with
we may ask for a reason, what has the eating of garlic to the Eve of the Sabbath ? Now Dr. Zeitlin informs us
:
makes thereof a
strange,
grotesque
many
should ascribe
eve the n:iy Really
?
it
making of Sabbath
por
The
source
TAKKANOT OF EZRA
MARMORSTEIN
AND ZEITLIN
369
Wien, 1879,
I,
I,
p. 118).
The Book
of
Jubilees,
what party he
:^"'DD'n
Wort zum
Is
fifth
Takkanah
The Samaritans
p. 289).
Abraham
Geiger's Nachgelassene
That explains the Mishnah Nedarim without unnecessary force and violence. It seems that the
Zadokite Fragments share the view of Samaritans and Jubilees
(see,
however, Ginzberg,
later
MGWJ.
19 13,
p.
401).
The
prohibition
it
was
on revived by the
2
1
Karaites.
Anan
derives
from
Exodus
34.
Jewish Literature,
faithfully
Dor Dor,
this
IV,
62
and
75.
Halakah see
On the my article
Rabbanite opposition to
in the Festschrift for
Karaite
Schwartz of Vienna).
origin
Takkanah.
!
One
in
Mishnah
D'ImL:?;:
never obscure at
piVJn
it,
nx
"iiQn
body
is
used to interpret
pIVJ, as the
commentaries put
the case.
The answer
is
Is the
not inn piVJ, and does there exist a Sadducee in the whole world who would not use the water thereof? There is no need to mix Pilpul with history, especially when the Peshat is so near. We
must avoid
and answers,
A. Marmorstein.
Jews' College, London.
B b 3
370
Dr. A. Marmorstein,
me
that
bound
gation
Mishnah and
Baraita,
it,
and
that
we may, when
critical
demands
differ,
me
in
my
interpre-
Takkana
it
Talmud
to
Ezra), differing as
My
proofs
not acceptable
is
Mishnah Nedarim
QTllsa.
III,
lo liDNl i^STJ'^n
sects
The Mishnah,
if
we accept the reading as QTinn mCN we are confronted by the fact that the Takkana of Ezra was directed against all those
sects,
Why
then
,
D^-ina "IIDN?
If
we
why
does not
this
Mishnah
DVJ"'i'3*SJ^,
which would
as distinguished
why does it simply say who on principle eat garlic from those who on principle do not eat it ? The
specify nnu' h'h,
signify those
from
Di::',
particuto
on Friday
is
opposed
on Sabbath,
it
him
explicitly to sanction
it
with the
mvo,
or he
and declared
|0T
everybody, laying as
much
stress
Sadducean views.
be
effected
by
The
'
frequency of njiy
it is
among
',
differing
classes,
TAKKANOT OF EZRA
against
C'D'tiTl
is
37I
on Sabbath
Mishnah Ketubot V,
It
is
6,
where no
mention
made
made
only
we can
find traces
my
explanation of the
p1!i''J,
differ-
He
247
Derenbourg, Essai,
p. 134.
Any Talmudic
is
bound
to tradi-
Mishnah
this
impossible of acceptance,
fail
as,
Mishnah, we
question.
to see
declare
clean?'
The
retort
'
Why
that issues
from
a cemetery?'
The Sadducees
Torah
it is
iT'.T D''D
mpD
"IDI pyro.
It
requires
Mishnah.
I
By my
theory,
however,
all
'
difficulties
vanish.
As
equivocal expressions
students,
in
equivocal expressions
is
pIVJ, which
places
Solomon
Zeitlin.
By
E.
Washburn Hopkins,
:
Ph.D.,
history of religions
'
is
part of the
Religious Science
Literature Series
editorship
of E.
and
universities.
is.
The
in
present
manual,
such
are
accordingly,
begins
of
to
ab ovo, that
Professors
distinction
from
works
largely
as
those
Moore and
Barton, which
confined
among
which underlie
religious
phenomena from
'
Adopting the
the roots
study
age-
which through
its
earth-drawn sustenance
higher not
only
is
has
was already
germ
'
Next
to this
and
their con-
and
spiritual values,
may be
independence and
critical
373
374
Professor
Hop-
and animism
as
ihe.
priiis of religion, as
body
is
man.
'
The
neither
god nor
devil,
as a person
(p. 1 8).
it
or orenda
'
man
universal
and inanimate.
To
fear, entreaty,
spell
'.
and memorial
stones,
prototypes of churches
The
shaman-
in all of
Thus summing up
religions
spiritual
of primitive
he says
Preface
Taboo
invested
with
power the
;
moral
command,
made
for civilization
fetishism confinned
man depends on
totemism linked
right
and wrong
and
man
in
communion
with the
divine
worship founded
stability.'
Then
follows in
succession,
Religion
;
Peoples
the
Religions of India.
From
Vedas
Buddha
Buddhism
Hindu
Sectarian Religions
:
Confucius, Tao-tse,
Taoism
Buddhism
;
Baby-
Zoroastrianism
;
the Religion of
;
the Religion of
Mohammed
Greek Religion
the Reli-
casanowicz
religion
375
left literatures
Zoroaster
made
ethical
is
and
God
(p.
is
spirit,
is
God
and
'
good'
'Zoroaster
382).
'
first
make
religion
'
Mohammed
was the
'
!
(p. 452).
The
value of
Mohammedanism lies in its influence with rude races. As it represented God to the Arabs, so to-day it is an effective means of betterment to those who stand on a low intellectual and
ethical level ...
its
'
monotheism stands
(p.
Hindu polytheism
the
'
481 f ).
superstition but
on philosophy, not on
moral element
faith
'
but on
logic, yet in
(p. 514),
while in the
'
Roman
religion the
is
pointed out,
The Roman
at all times
and
The
istic
religion of Israel
many
The
author does
not even conceal his misgivings that the conclusions of the higher
criticism with regard to the divisions of the
Old Testament
(p.
stories
may
not be conclusive
While
after
it
is
by conquest
. . .
'
',
it
seems
Moses
united various
in that
and made
Israel
real
he gave
its
(p. 418),
and
'
a pronounced ethical
(p.
415).
'The purely
even as
natural
tion),
phenomena
(this last,
remains
guess-work
We
must
at least
'
and incapable of
verification
(p.
41 8).
respectively, as
376
p.
447-
Haggadah
in the Tahiiud, in
the Babylonian
one-third of
its
Talmud, which
contents,
the authoritative,
more than
and
in
Talmud about
Ibn Ezra
is
one-sixteenth,
Sifre,
and Mekilta.
Abraham
it
Nor does
seem
any
or
Talmud
the Jewish
'
community
as
the
Hannukah
'
or
Chanuka
now
(p.
45o\
What
is
here meant by
enlightenment
',
and who
is
the authority
The few
p.
misprints noticed,
;
p. 48, n.
x,
for latrio
2
read
latria
p.
238,
n.
aqas,
read aquas
;
p.
318
vi,
an, read2^X.; p.
63,
;
348 Ninevah
;
{pis),
i
rcois?
Nineveh
p.
359,
Ps.
strike the 3
p.
446,
n.
theans
p.
p.
471,
n.
i,
'halaika,
read
'alsiika.,
and
effected,
read affected.
is
a valuable contribution
It
is
to the
on comparative
religion.
a good repertoriuvi of
sifted facts
and well-considered
interpretations of
them
for the
phenomena.
each chapter and
at the close of
I.
M. Casanowicz.
THE TARGUM TO CANTICLES ACCORDING TO SIX YEMEN MSS. COMPARED WITH THE
'TEXTUS RECEPTUS'
(Ed.
DE Lagarde)
The Targum,
in
its
stage
of
oral
transmission
it
was not
and
still
mooted questions.
This
much
we have them
Aramaic, to Ezra.
b.
to-day, bear in
Cf.
Meg. 3
a,
where
Ned. 37
b,
Jer.
Meg. 74
d,
^ The earliest official written Targum may probably be traced to Babylon, where the Onkelos T. was the first to receive the authority of the Rabbis. This Targum must have been written about the third century, since its Masorah dates from about this time. Cf. Bacher, JE.^ XI, 58 A. Berliner,
;
Die Masorah
sum Targum
earlier
I,
Onkdos,
Leipzig,
1877
S.
Landauer, Die
ot
There
are,
however, traces
written
Targum
than that,
although
Targum
to the
circulation.
II.
Tosephta
MGIVJ.,
1877, 87,
who
made
Targum.
VOL. X.
377
C C
;;
378
their content
The
official
Targum on
is
by the
but
name
of Onkelos,'
dialect,'*
its final
about the
where, as
some
believe,
its
is
Targum
^
of
a
is
mixed
Palestinian
in
and
Meg. 3
PRE.^,
Babylonian
a,
arose in the
post-Talmudic
through confusion
Aramaic translation of
Ill,
Cf.
106
JE.,
XII, 58
-
Buhl,
Kanon und
III
Cf.
108
F.
Rosenthal, Beth
also F.
Talmud,
and
Berliner,
Targum
Onkelos,
it
p. 107.
See
Hommel,
who
maintains
to
be a product of Babj'lon.
in
;
Cf. Berliner,
Targum
"
Onkelos, passim
PRE.^,
32
Die
alttest. Lit.,
1868,
p.
257
"
Manddische Gramiiiatik,
Xl'l, p. 59.
is
'
p.
xxvii
Dalman, Aram.
Gram
p.
13
Bacher, JE.,
This Targum
now known
generally as Jerusalem
'.
bears the
name
its
of
Pseudo-Jonathan
It
was
not universally
the early Middle Ages, the following apparently- being the only ones
who
knew
29
c),
Sar Shalom Gaon {Sefer Sha'are Teshubah, 1858, Hai Gaon (Harkavy, Teshubot hageonim, 124 f., 6 f., Berliner, Targum
of
existence
Onkelos,
II,
173
(cf.
ff.
Citations from
it
are to be found in
the Aruch
Dalman, Gram., 29 and 30), while Judah ben Barzillai and R. Meir of Rothenberg also speak of it cf Dalman, ibid., and Bacher, y'.,
called
it
XII, 60). After the fourteenth centurj', this Targum was erroneously Targum Jonathan, Menahem Recanati being the first to ascribe
to
(cf.
JE., XII, 60
wrong
(I,
''"n
= ^Dbw'"IT
D13in).
Zohar
it
is
I.e.;
mean
the entire
'.
REJ., XXII, 46, but that it was Bible, and hence the Pentateuch also
p. vii).
Ginsburger
'
Pseudo-Jonathan
Cf
Vor 80
,
ff.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
dialect,^
MELAMED
in
era,'-*
379
Palestine,
final
the
nucleus
of
which
originated
but whose
Targum
I,
are
Jerusalem Targum*
glosses.^^
III in
Dalman,
ed.
I.e.
We
Wilna,
p. 127) that
named
the the
32.
respectively
Uzziel
this
'
The
first
editio princeps
wrong name.
There
is
Cf Dalman,
Gratiint.,
p.
Targum Onkelos exercised some influence over it. ^ Diverse opinions prevail among scholars as to
On
it is
Onkelos.
p. 18
r
;
Cf.
Noldeke, Die
alt.
Lit.,
p.
M. Ginsburger,
Jiid. Monatsschrift,
I,
XLI,
p. 349,
note 2; Schiirer,
E.
Kfinig,
f.
Volkes,
p. p.
AT., 1893,
ZDMG., XXVIII,
to
59
On
it is
be traced back to
was
more, that the redactor of the Jerusalem Targum, while he used a recension
of Onkelos current in Palestine, did not have access to a version of this
Targum
Targuni
specific to Palestine.
Jiid.
Bassfreund,
Monatsschrift,
c,
ff.
I,
68
f.
ibid..
Das
Fragnienten-
sum
The
Christian and
Muhammedan
fall
An
African
Cf.
p.
Dalman, Gramni.,
33;
Bassfreund,
Das Fragmenteu-Targum
sein Verhhltniss
su den
Targtunim, Breslau,
1896;
Ginsburger, Pseudo-
Jonathan, 1903
^-
Dalman, Granim.,
p.
29.
C 2
380
5.
in
the
Targum
to the Prophets,
its
which received
final
official
century.^^
6.
An
official
Targum
to the
in origin
and character.
In content,
''JD/'C'TI''
'ri.
;
in
and
14. 21
are also
found
in the
Mahzor VUry,
305
ff.)
Pentateuch, 1896,
cf.
further,
I,
H. Seligsohn,
ft".
;
De duabus
pp. 44-51).
13
1858, p. 37
,
Perles, Jud.
1876,
p.
368
f.
A.
Epstein,
REJ XXX,
Dalman,
Graiitin., p. 16.
to be the
this
Luzzatto identifies
As
Amora, Joseph bar R. Hiyya, it was generally accepted, and quoted with great frequency in the Academies Hai Gaon apparently considered (cf. Bacher, Ag. Bab. Amor., p. 103).
early as the time of the Babylonian
R. Joseph
Aruch,
II,
to
be
a,
its
author, but he
a).
293
308
is
more paraphrastic
and
free
p. 308).
But
this
view
is
prophetic books which are more didactic than the Pentateuch, and from the
total
in
the
Babylonian schools
(cf.
Dalman,
c).
this
"
22. 5
It
26 with Deut.
21. 25, 29)
;
Num.
but opinion
hand.
and obviously
I,
polations
be found
580).
cf.
Eichhorn, Eiuleitung,
sec.
217
Berthold,
Einlcitung,
15
II, p.
is
There
naturally no
Targum
to
381
literalness
in
to
amplified
Mid rash,
the
Targum
to Proverbs,^''
Scrolls.^'
and on the
other, in
the
Targum
to the Five
^^
and
their
combined with
later
between the
Canticles,
fifth
and eighth
is
centuries.
The Targum
to
which
probably written
being traces of
Arabic influences.
7.
Finally, a Jerusalem
also
Targum
to
Hagiographa
some
time,
^6
in
which
II,
probably shares a
;
common
ff.
246
ff.
Baumgartner, Etude
;
critique
sur VStat
texte
du
livre
des
It
is
Codd.
MSS.
is
Bodi,
I,
p.
432
Eichhorn,
is
p.
437) on the
Targumim Book
6.
(cf.
Catal.
of Esther
to this
book
which
that
Targum
on Esther
;
is
first.
Chrest. Targ., ix
^^
Dalman,
I.e.
Targum
XXI,
XX, 208
who
seeks to
;
make
fourth or
fifth
century
455 ff. Rosenberg and Kohler show that the ground-work of the Targum on Chronicles is as early as the fourth century, although its redaction did not
take place until the eighth century";
cf.
f.,
135
f.,
263
f.
It is
Targum
and
II
are quoted
in this
^3
Targum
Dalman,
cf.
PRE?,
High
Ill, p.
no.
of the precious stones in
p. 35.
Cf. 5. 14,
Cf
ff.
See
505
382
of
present
only
fragments
and
glosses
are
known.^'^
8.
With the
Hebrew
original,
locally
prevalent.
to
Three
have
types of
;
vocalization
are
now known
existed
(i)
known
prior to 1839;
(2)
the Babylonian-'^
;
and
(3)
the
--
Codex.
Prophetae
Cliald.,
1872,
pp. vi-xlii
Judges. Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Amos, Jonah, and Zechar., are
Some
cf.
further, Bacher,
ZDMG.,
XXVIII,
the
ff.
p. 12.
According to Kohut,
Prophets and Hagiogr.
Targum Jerushalmi
80
ft".
to the
they
21
may be
It is
29
f.
446
ff^.
22
by no means
names used
for the
vowel S3-stems
are accurate.
their origin.
They
Cf.
Neubauer,yO/?.,
II,
Barnstein,
Targum
^ Three
this
distinct types
:
in the
development of
system
(i)
;
shown
in
p.
'
Targum M3S. and Neoxv Margoliouth, Proceed. Uber das Babylon. Punkt.
;
Hebrew
texts
cf.
XV,
p.
165
ff.
Praetorius,
des Hebr.',
(2)
ZDMG.,
LIII,
181-96;
Friedlander, Monatsschr.,
1894, 215.
The complex
MS.
1896, pp. 86
Kahle,
'
Stade's Zeitschr.,
2<
XXI, 273
Until
all
material shall be
made
available,
the
varying stages of
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
9.
MELAMED
383
It is
some
the form
of punctuation,
texts.'^''
it
seems, was
Hence
it
is
Targum
Some
to
points
this
Targum,
as
contained
the
Sabbioneta
edition,^*^
with
MS.
common
source of origin.
it
Notwithstanding the
many
corrupt forms
The same
12.
Parma MS. de
Rossi, No.
is
7.^^
found
in
it
the
Codex de
No.
12, of the
Parma
Library, that
was
fixed.
It
may
be assumed,
An
intermediate stage
in the text of
was published
the
XXI,
27
273. the
Ibid., p. 204.
y^tfl!.
Targum
ff.,
Oiikelos,
I.
Kahle, p. 205
Berliner,
f.
Targum
Onkelos.
II.
3" Ibid.,
31
Berliner, p. 132
H. L. Strack,
Berliner,
Zeitsclinft f. d. Liith.
TheoL u. Kirche,
XXXVI,
1875, P- 622.
Targum
Onkclos, 134.
384
13.
is
the
Targum
texts,
and
one
common
now.^^
to inaccuracies
multiplied
in
pro-
portion to the
number
new manuscripts
written and
new
editions published.
Targum
which
in vocalization
then existed.
to bring
some order
texts
to
on the basis
extent,"'*
of Biblical Aramaic."'
some
value.^^
15.
state of
Targumic
texts
until
the
discovery of the
this
research therein.
^2
It is
at present impossible,
to
come
to
final
judgement
in this matter.
may
that
this
Targum
where
it
prevailed for
Hebrew, and
But
we
all
And even
if
(,cf.
Kahle, 204),
texts is
nevertheless,
Aramaic
Berliner,
p.
185
f.
Merx,
',
Chrest., viii
idem,
Bemerkungen
iiber
die Vocalisation
der
Targume
Orientalisten-Congresses, 1881,
I,
159
ff,
Targum on the
3^
35
basis of Syriac.
Idem.
Merx, Chrest.
T., viii
ff.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
aid in the
MELAMED
385
its
reconstruction of the
Yemen MSS.
number of excerpts from
Merx
in
published a goodly
MSS.
of Mordecai
(2)
'.^^
Pratorius
Targum
to
Joshua
^"
Dalman used
for his
MSS.
Museum.^^
Barnstein
Genesis a
MS.
of the British
Museum,
a Montefiore codex,
Gaster.^'^
to
the
Yemenite
with
vowels
the
sublinear system.^^
(6)
Wolfson published
first
Targum
the
Silvermann issued
to Ezekiel from the
ten chapters
of the
Targum
(8)
same
source.^^
Targum
to
Koheleth
a Gaster codex."*^
1888.
"^"^
3^
Das Targum su Josiia in Jemcnischer Uberlieferung, Das Targiun sum Biich dcr Richter, Berlin, 1900.
Aramdisch-Neuhebniisches Wdrierbuch, Frankfurt
a.
Berlin, 1899.
3^ ^^
^^
*"-
M., 1897-1901.
to Genesis,
London, 1896.
^^
386
The
text contained
The
texts,
hitherto
princeps, issued
by Romberg
and
Venice
in
numerous
errors
corruptions
While
the
Lagarde edition
text,
re-established
Bomberg consonantal
to
compare
effort
this
any
vocalization.
in
The
following
A.
18.
MS.
is
in
the
possession of
fols.
the British
Museum.
b.
The Targum
is
of Canticles covers
154 a-iS6
of the original
College.''^
size,
the
The
four
5"j"
writing
to
is
in
clear square
characters,
twenty-
lines
page, and
3l"-
The Hebrew
by the
and
Targum, an Arabic
*5 *^
translation of the
Hebrew
verse,
my
MSS. A,
B, E, and F.
also
wish to express
my
indebtedness to the
Museum, and
am
I
likewise
to
under obligation
Dr. A. E.
to the
secured
these reproductions.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
by an Arabic commentary.
MELAMED
Hebrew
387
In the
Raphe
n
D 1
a.
w' is
diacritically
marked.
B.
19.
is
a photo-
graph of which
in
in
the the
Dropsie College.
photograph, the
There are
seven of
thirty-eight leaves
the original
The
writing
in
square
characters,
covers
The Hebrew
Raphe
critical
verse
is
by
a,
as well as a dia-
mark over
the
Zf.
In the
is
Hebrew
Raphe
used.
The MS.
20"^,
contains
many
On the
margin of 13^
text are
and
21'^^
found.
e.
20.
MS.
C,
century,'*^
who
presented
it
to
the
It
consists of thirty-one
heavy paper
x 5f ", written
on both
*7 *^
sides.'^^
Of.
I
A. Marx, JQR.,
New
Series,
I,
65, 66.
388
in clear
6x4j"
reduces
lines
to
page, ocare
The edges
off
by wear.
in reverse order.
at
<S.
after giving
two
lines
of the
On
29a
some
later
Hebrew
verses of the
book,
9-14, with a
massoretic
One leaf in the middle, which contained the Hebrew and Targum of 7. 9-12 inclusive is also missing. The Hebrew and Targum of 3. 2 having been
note on the margin.
omitted
in their
3. 5. 3. 2
Some
in
the
margin
after 3.
i.
i'',
Pages 1%
written
and
2'-^
contain
an Arabic introduction
verse
is
by a
different hand.
Each Hebrew
followed
by
its
Targum and
are
literal
Hebrew. There
scriptions
is
numerous
marginal
readings
and super-
by two or
in
a bad scrawl.
number
The
inner
margins
in
number
last
of places, and
the
The Hebrew
the following one at
Raphe
my
disposal.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
letters
is
MELAMED
the
389
n a D n
3.
D'
both
in
the
Hebrew and
Targum
diacritically
marked.
Hebrew words.
original scribe,
These were
sometimes by the
hand.
and sometimes
by a
later
later
many
of the
Hebrew
verses.
nana
Raphe
sign,
while
occasionally
dagesh
is
also found.
D.
21.
MS.
Seminary of America.
Each
hand that
is
clear,
The fragment
I. T,
Targum
of
and continues to
to this
in the
Targum
resume
from
verse are
given,
when
it
breaks off to
7. 9.
Continuing
verse of
8. 2.
reaches the
Hebrew
Each Hebrew
diacritical points
verse
is
followed
by
its
Hebrew word
of any kind.
Cf.
JQR.,
New
Series,
I,
65.
390
MS.
E,
is
British
Museum.
The Targum
covers
foil.
168^-184^.
The
writing
in clear,
square characters,
in
double
On
the margins
is
a massora parva,
and
at the
bottom of
The Hebrew
A
N.
n indicates the
Raphe
'C>
which
line
and
likewise disis
tinguished
by a
in the
diacritical point.
The dagesh
constantly
Hebrew and Aramaic text. The Hebrew verse is followed by the Targum, and by an Arabic translation of the former. The ]\IS. frequently
used both
begins a word at the end of a
line,
F.
23.
MS. F
is
Museum,
is in
and covers
foil. 1^^-27''.
photographic reproduction
Except that
this
MS.
is
in
many
is
The
An
difference between
the
hand, and
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
the Lagarde text on the other.
MELAMED
391
These
varia-
include
independent
readings,
morphological and
syntactical differences.
25.
While
it
outset, that,
on
the
MSS. which
26.
establish
beyond question a
different
While
all
the
selves as
their readings.
among
several of them.
into
The
groups,
origin,
six
all
MSS,
divide
themselves
four
distinct
common
its
but each
peculiarly
own.
Thus,
A and
and
are likewise
other.
Of
and B and
and
group
all its
The frequency
to to
with which
it
EF
that
more intimately
likewise
related
And
C and
.stronger affinities
with
AB.
any
If
The fragmentary
positive conclusions.
we
represent
as
the
original
Yemen
te.xt,
as
392
distinct
MSS.
And
if
T^
is
made
Targum
of
Canticles and
L^
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
MELAMED
393
CHAPTER
TEXTUAL VARIANTS
A.
27.
Independent Readings.
for
Convincing testimony
of
is
sions
the
to
L(agarde)
and Y(emen)
for
mentioned
above,
be found,
readings in
4. 12, in
accounted
versions.
for,
L, poi yuD3
pn pTim
p^-iaiiNn
\v::^^
itod
i-n^inn'j
inn:
'en
mnno
p^sn
p^n.
While
all
of the
Yemen MSS.
would be expected
MSS. coming from the hands of different scribes. 28. In 4. II, we also have what appears to be
inde-
pendent readings of
L and
Y.
Nmiyn
2^n3
x^:n3
p^v?:n p^yjl
pjn^iN
nn3
Y.
I'ln^
'"^f^2b
nm dm
L
\rhl
pp^no
"inncirii
is
pT'C'.
'to distil'
better than
pnh
in
has
pn?').
There
did
not
common
pnpi for
it.
Then again
'
Hebrew
'
texts
in
',
to distil
or 'to drip
would seem
to
require in
its
such word as
ni'r.
The
text of Y, however,
clear,
and
A further illustration
VOL. X.
D d
394
and
Y
p
is
found
in 4. 9.
L n
p:;
^nns'
TDD^nn
':ib
mb
bv
yup
niTi 'zb
ii'2br2
m^
'ar:^
ab^nm
n^m.
the
bn'^^^'i
Nnc:3
nn3i
]mn:D
'22'^
"i^n
n
text
i:2iT
n-nn^* bv
The
of
is
apparently defective
first
here,
all
Yemen MSS.
13^
omitting the
''^"'nan^,
clause.
The Hebrew
m^
^y ynp.
The
his
Yemen
eye to wander
and inserted
the
omitted clause,
j':3 "T
the
in
wrong
place.
The reading
of
was corrupted
The
it is
text of
Y may
and the
uniformity
the
MSS.
of
show
same
31.
There
are,
Thus
in 5.
4 the variations
Thus:
rrril^
t3-inc^
pv i6
It
is
i-xnc*"
n-n
sj^yn
n)n''
nip
"biiMi
is
na
arr'r^h.
difficult to
to
be
preferred.
sense, but
seems to connect
5. 3, slightly
8,
better than Y.
the
N^y2N
It
is
possible that
L
is
seems
more
more
original
reading.
scribal
The variants in L can then be accounted for through Ton? was probably "'JrnDb and a later hand error.
;
found
it
I'iib.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
;^^.
MELAMED
i.
i
395
L
i
and
\)rb):3
TilDy
i.
n-i^'J'
;''
ar^bv^
i
n^snx
])p?:'i
stit'C;
mcNi
2.
riwS^^vi
i.
xni^jD
pnyn an^b:
|tj;3
;
"^3
5 Np^oy
2.
H ^s-ic"' n^i
5.
5. i
jd
in^ nnynxn
34. In
x::iu
5.
14
and
order
in
in
the
(5) l^u'C*^, (6) f^UT, (7) p, (8) >^nD3, (9) i:, (10) TiTN."
The names
those of
29.
of the
precious
stones
differ
almost
text
in
entirely,
Hebrew
in
(i)
''^
Exod.
17
ff.
and
10
fif.
The names
are
ir^riN^"
psyr
]?-\2
(5)
(9)
nnoiN
nxan
C^j.j),
(6)
nm:
(^*_^), (7)
N^Ta
(8)
iisdn (jJ),
(12) mDJDs*.
^n) ^anc,
ABC
AB
have
has
all
its
EF
have no
corrections.
36.
A
T
I
and
is
to be
bv
fp'b:
noted in:
60 cf.
51
14
2. i
nn
bv
\^'b:
;*^^'
Sam.
m?^N"i
nsnj nnn.
(12)
Ii
and
Y
(3^
(2)
pyny',
(4)
po^ja.
It is
c,
however,
and
;6)
ISC'C' of
in
Y.
noteworthy that
ff.,
names given
in
J Exod. 39. 10
but
Y agrees
the Pentateuch.
Cf. S.
AB AB
agree with
D d
; ;
396
NrT'f'no
-iDV
6.
3 -^^nn
xr^^y
N^^^3^
n^nryi.
37.
The
differences cited
in individual
and
Y
1.
2.
nxDJ nna
z. i xn^:ij:
^'^
;
son
'"ID
I.
>j:3 ;''
5 ninn
^^:jn3
;
5 i^'sc
^
2.
8 nhd^:^
;
2.
14 T^^n
;
2.
16
N''pn^;
p-i3i:
^^
-in"j"':3
'n
4. 2
;
pis*'
nD3
4. 1 2
;
pn^nu'D
Twh
5.
;
"hihina. ;"
;
5.
10
P''yicr'
^-
5.
11 "2^x2
5.
14
p-l^|J
n''::'u'y3
6. 2 pj^p'OwSi
7.
I
"
6. 8
pD::n
;
6, 8 p^T^ry
7.
N3^o om^D^^K
7.
Nti'-n^
p33^D HDi
7. 2 pl.TiJ^
6 n^mpn^;
pyj^-,
.
II
^''^u'T
8. I
8.
Nnna
l^^i^DT
; (^2
84
8.
p2,^t, .63
N^-l
8_ 7 pj^>j-j
3_
pD:2no
\si
'^^
;
N^DDD
^N 1/^2X1.^^
B.
Fuller Readings.
than Y.
sions
to be additions or
expan-
made by a
hand.
J.
of
1.
10
N-iin
^y;
i.
13
mn''
ncx
n^dd
;
x^^
;
"nj
2.2
iT-yaiJ
Ni-^xi
ii:\>m
xmix
2. 7 'c-tn
[xin] ^3
Na-ip;'=<5
^5
3.
3. 7
'janxn]
pnn x^rnpiD
(excepting
nn
Curiously'
enough
X3mT
Nti'iPT which
It
reverses in
probably was originally a gloss which later crept into the text of L.
later
Some
50 5^ 5^ o
61
hand corrected
text.
from L.
"^^
Cf.
Hebr.
Y nearer
Hebr.
'''i-IJ
17. 6.
\'n^12U, Cf. 8. 4
Cf. 6. 2.
unusual
pi.
correct form
2
is
XnyJl^i* or SnnyD::'.
" L
"
better
cf.
Hebr.
65
Cf.
Hebr.
; ;
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
[nn
-\2
nj2b'C'
MELAMED
pn
Nn^^om
397
N3^i:3 ^n> ^y
[n^
3.
10
r^'c^D
[minn;
pr:r
3.
u
;
nmh
loy
nyms
Nnij^taoi N:n;'''
"^s
[Nn::'^:^]
;
^mm
13
[l't:yui]
ppnpT
6. 8 [n^^j::'^^i]
8. I
x>ccy
pno^M
7.
;
2 [NiUDon]
8.
phjon
r^si
7.
10
N^n^JD
['3Dn];
[n^^]
'^^
11
r,'i2]}''>
39. In
the
following-
passages
it
is
difficult
to
say
whether the
original or
fuller
readings of
L
:
-lOS^i?
Nnp"-
[n''j?or]
sTIwn;
16 [ninn]
NJiy ["aij];
;
3.
3.
ni.T
nip
[^^JVi]
n^D
4. 16
idd
w^i'u [mn]
7.
Nom;
5.
16
;
[?id3i]
amo;
in
6.
12 pp^oyi [ppn:J
[n-'db'
noijj Nnx:p
7.
8 [i^vn] pi-n\
40.
which
:
Y
i.
is
fuller
*
' '
than
L.
xc^y
n-j'^
2.
They are mostly of little consequence b p^n [mp]; 1.5 i'Ni-j" n^n [scy];
[p-i3^Ki]
;
nCN
1.8.
^NTC'n
2.
Nn'w-::)
iiih
12
Nt:b [b]3
2.
14
^NTJ"' [n^n]
;
Ncy;
15
16 nn^:
;
[s-n] ^pnv
^cDin
[nTt:']
3.
5 [nc^03j
n^i2>^p
n:x;
3.
i?N-i-j'^
[n^a]
4.
14
9
5.
3 [m^iSi]
i^N-ic^^n
xncj^ njy;
6.
[soi^yi]
nno^.
C.
Explicit Readings.
in
41.
is
more
that preserved in Y.
hardly
1
mp
^"ys
az'pn
[nin"-];'!
3.
1.
2.4
^rr-
nu^
^^
[mn^];
14 pnnDD [pin]
2. 16, 5.
10 [mnn] n-ip^
^^
be a gloss.
9
smoother.
^1
Isa. 30.
29
!?Nlim
NE^tin Sip.
"
Cf. 7. 9.
398
2.
17 [samnj N^:y
nay,
2.
17 [nnaj
pn^*^
8.
0x^0
number of
;
tained in L.
I.
1.6
'f\bii
1.8
;
pr ny
;
14
[n"iid
p]
n^j'O nn:)
pan nh
2.
n"-
12 [pains] Dn-ins*^
[Niynn] n^^np
;
4. i
-iDr:i
[^NTi:>n] N-'D'an
5.
T-cDn nniDp
["-t^nj;
5. 2
pnn^
[^'"'J;
5. II
HTinix
7.9 [mux]
onnns*.
titles,
43.
full
and
for
localizations
2.
;
which
almost consistently
]
omits.
9 [?iiDi] Nn"*;
15 [wi3n] ipv
3.
4,
5
;
^:^oi)
[nu3]
[ji:
3.
[finm]
;
n::'Dn
3.
3.
6
;
-in]
yu'in^
3. 7
[^N"i:;'n]
s*3^d
4. i
;
nobc* [nd^dJ
5.
5.
14 xn^n nnax
[Nci?yn]
8.
6.
2 [i^N'n^N'j' ia]
bnnn
6.
12
nro^c' [x3^?d]^.
44.
Y
;
pre8.
serves fuller
[n''''23]
than L.
[^NiC'H
'i'ira''^]
nc'JO
13
nro^^D*.
D.
45. In
Order.
the
the
following passages
order of
in
certain
phrases in
differs
Y.
Most
in
i.
Y.
12
"^
1.
\n"i::'iDi
^-n3^m Mini^'^^m;
3
'i'ir^'yi
n
n;N*
pannn-'yi nr,m
by nnyi
4.
2.
N;nns
^nt^:^"'!
r\2'C'i2)
'xn;
5.
2.
iTj'Di?
nnim
nivl:
bv,
16 nicN
5.
Nnc-'^in;
;
Nuv
15
pn^i^y
^c-'-ii
pDnn
6. i lyc'ti'
na
noN
"3 's '^
pi;
Nanp pnn;
cf.
7.
]^:'c^
pnT;
''^
7.
6 Nnuin bv
Y nearer
C
Hebr.
Exod.
;
32. 15.
Y uses NJnt2r3
it
which
wrong.
full
text.
fARGUM TO CANTICLES
N^Dmn;
7. 7
MELAMED
399
pnyi
nc^B' nij^d
8.
12
^1x1
n^b'c onp |d
E.
46. In the cases cited
Verbs.
below
and
in i. 16,
reads
|"'*L^"'''^.
Pael pt. In
6.
act.
of
while
has
Itrs
from root
'B'S.'^^
has
&c.),
'3J,
meaning,
meaning
'
to be devoted to
',
in
found
as
NT'n"'"!
Suffixes.
differs
from
in
having
nouns
suffix.
4.
in
Thus
;
in
5. 2
i.
3 b^-\\y'
;
nn
x?:ub
i. 6,
;
4.
16 a^nba
N^^b^<
;
^^
;
10 pj?oDU
;
Nmbn
6. 2 N?D^n-i
nnn
7.
8.
N2DD
8.
II NDia^ T'DJ.
omits.
4.
Thus
6 p^ni^LD;
Q^K^i
;
i.
13
']r2V
;''''
^ ^nniN;
'lyipD
;
4. 7
loyT;
10 TP'i^*^ ^^
6.
;
4-
12
T'*^':i
5. I
n^^jns
n'2;
5. 13 ^in^^n;
5 T^iuyr;
n^cyb.
7.5
t^^'T;
7. 8
8. I
'yns
8.
4 >oy
8.7
G.
48. In the
Number,
it
is
immaterial
whether we read
in
differs
from
;
number:
1.4
2.5 ^CjnD
2.9 pTt221
4.12
NJ^J^N; 4.
16 Nrvia;
7.
8 N^anN3; 7. 13
wjsna;
8. 7 xn:n.^'^
'^ 78
Although
Cf. 7. 6.
h.is
pC'D and
from
''li'D.
Cf.
Onk. Exod.
32. 7.
refers to
X~inn,
Y to
''10^.
400
GRAMMATICAL VARIANTS
49. Difference in orthography, phonetics, morphology,
and Y.
While
significant,
sum
that the
Yemen MSS.
A.
issue
The Orthography of
orthography of
It writes no
l.
is its
decided
in-
n.
occasionally
we
find
''^
a final N, as in N*y3B>,
to
"'
Further,
prefers to use
x-n:, n-nnii'D.
thus
we have
I^Ja,
p''in%
B.
1.
Phonetics.
Consonants.
51.
The
following consonantal
differences
are
^i
;
to
7. 6,
be
noted between
L and
;
Y
L
8. 5,
p3n,
pnn
N^Dmn,
2.
N'D-13
4. 12,
p^^2JN3,
p^^D^NZ.
J'oiucls.
is
changed to
as,
2. 5,
^Dn^N,
ABE
by
or 5
^bns
8.
11,
L
1
n^aTyz,
Y
14,
n^iinya.
When
followed
a labial
is
becomes
u, as, i. 7,
L L
NnrDina,
N"T'D,
xnbn5.
changed to
in
4.
Nni'o or x-flb.^^
In
5. i'^, likewise,
has
XTCD
and
*i
Y
C
Niibn.
erroneously pointed the word pin.
is
probably correct;
cf.
hereafter abbreviated
is
'
Gr.
'.
Probably N~|1D
2. 5.
cf.
play on "'3T1J3
= ''3T NIO,
2 Esther
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
C.
1
MELAMED
401
Morphology.
Verds.
:
52. Peal
Pf. 3
m.
s.
number of
instances of forms
i.
:
with
"
are found in
6. 8 1"'^J3l
;
which
omit:
f.
14
13
^"'Opl
;
3.
10
cnDi
8. 7
a^n\
Pt. act.
s.
8.
ntw.
)"]}
Inf.:
without c:
verbs:
nn^D^I;
7 N3^n[c]^i;
2.
9 N/an[D]^.
Inf
and
;
>"y
L
7.
without:
s.,
i. 7 3n"'C7
5,
4
;
9 Op'^b.
Pael
pf.
3 m.
6. 2,
L
;
bnp,
Y
L
b'2p
Aphel
8. 4,
pf. 3 pi. 5. 7,
L
;
n^n^ l^^nisi,
s.
n^Jibisi
suff.
impf
3 m.
s.
'\)21\
inf.
;
i5t
impv. m.
with
2. 14,
8.
"^''''rns*,
Y Y
pf.
^rmx;
snpiN^
3. 6,
5. J2,
xamx!?,
10,
Nno\y^;
6,
NTpIN^,
Ishtafal
7. 3,
Ithpeel
inf. i.
N3\TnN^,
Nan^ns^.
nvnc'NI,
DrJili'Ni.
nnanc,
2.
D'nsriD.
Nouns.
S^.
The form
pJ0D13
'
spices
'
is
to
be found only
&c.
in L,
while
uses pCDU.^^
too,
is
The
15
form pCD^3,
found only
cf
7. 17,
and
in 2.
we
find in
DDn(^), while in
In the majority of
as
N".;np10,
cases
writes the
word
'
sanctuary
it
and
in
few instances as
is
N::'npr2.
While
in
is
alone has an
u vowel
word.
3. 6,
^^
'.
Y
&c.
'
Cf. I. 8, 17
in
I.
2.
14;
8 ND^yi for
Y Nniiyn
shepherds
and
in 2.
15 Nnnsa
^^
for
Y
D
xmi^a
4.
'
first-born
^^
In
10
**
HH,
cf. p.
two nouns.
170
a.
Jastrow gives
this
form
402
54.
between
cited
L
i.
;
and
Y
is
in
:
their
noun forms.
The
first
of the
passages
crowd;
16
2.
pan-iy(l),*
mixed
NJniiK'N,
NnN^'wJ'N,^^
frame wall
N^'aaJT,
14
ivn, f"vn
2.
3.
w^2o,'-*
;
species of cedar
3.
;
11
Nn^^om, N^^uon,
nnDvO), nnsj^n),^^
14
piNi^N
i''DpN(l),
booths
4. 6 4.
demons
4.
8
,^^
]''\M,
im/-
gifts
plNlbxb "pDKO)
^.
5.
15
of cedar
6.
6 nd^jk
niD^jN
7.
6.
mi?n3(i),
x^^r^O)
;
''^
;
6.
Nnt^^i^c^, snbb"t:s
perfect
5 prDpnD(D), pj^p-i3(3)
3.
8.
Relative Pronoun
'i.
55.
Relative
as a separate
word
consequently we have a
joins the particle to the
4.
i, 4,
number
of passages in
cf.
i.
which
12
;
following word;
^^
9,
3.
10;
&c.
Cf.
paim-y,
T.
Num. n.
suff.
it
Levy,
in the
Thalamus' (290
Jastrow 1146 b
(so
'our lot'
Rashi
:
1J?"T1J2).
But
MS. "imiSa
(.vocalized
NJ^^l^a
'
a sort of Keri),
in
our bed
'
so
Kohut, Sup.
translation.
88
16,
note
Cf. also
Mid. R.,
is
Hebrew
"iJvriD.
is better.
Beit., 143,
"9
so
'-
note
It is
probable that
is
Cf. apxojv.
is
better.
Cf. Swpof.
^3
The
Ar.
reads as
Cf Jastrow, 113
a,
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
4.
MELAMED
403
Preposition p.
56. In a
|0 to
number of passages L
as a separate
word.
There
are,
in
2,
which
9;
2.
L
i,
does 14;
not assimilate
6. 2,
p, while
does;
cf
i.
&c.
5.
Adverbs.
the adverb pnDn
writes fn^N
3. 7,
57.
prefer
\'':ir{.
= so,
while the
MSS. MSS.
write pri^N or
little,
In
writes
In
8. 4,
writes
pT no, while
6.
Conjunctions.
58.
writes
also
',
sis*.
D.
1.
Syntax.
59.
for
nouns
in
Y which
in
form;
5. I
;
cf. i.
6. 2,
11 N2D3
&c.
Though few
wanting
in
which
i.
has the
4.
determinate,
;
and
2.
the
absolute form.
7. I;
9 mix;
poDU
cf further
17; 4. 16;
8. 6;
2.
14,
&c.
Periphrastic Genitive.
(rt)
60.
There
is
a large
number
of passages in which
where
omits the
relative.
Apparently
has adopted,
Cf.
404
while
There
are,
how;
cf.
'H^ b]};
2.
3 rr'niNT ^D^nsi
7.
and
;
2. 12,
14
5. 10,
15
6.
5;
8. 8.
But
6 ND
b]}
n^
7.
13
n'^'^ arhnb.^''
{b)
L
I.
suffix
in
to
noun
places
it
the absolute.
Thus
'''"n
nn:n
3.
DmaxT
nTii^n;
and
5. 7
;
8. 7. 7- 1
is
found
in
3.
Relative
"i.
61.
L
7.
substitutes a preposition
i.
pronoun
n of Y.
Thus
N''3N^?03,
is
NOS^OT;
reversed,
10 ^t^bv
""l^^,
XO^y non.
In
13 the case
''S'J^yi
WpllD,
^ovb x:ip"n2.
4.
S71 fixes.
62. In a
number of
cases
employs pronominal
5.
Thus:
pn^
''i:r.
5. 7 n^n^ l!?^21N1
5. 7 "h 1p''mS;
12
NJinh
n^;
8. 6
5.
Pronoun.
^^.
and
is
differ in several
pronoun
Thus: L,
inns*.
6.
.TD1D
nnS;
8.
12
in\s "iniD^
Y,
4.
n^^N
Ethical Dative,
In
2.
3,
64.
differs
from
in
omitting an ethical
dative;
"^
N3"'rD
"'^ns.
Cf. Margolis,
ff.
1910, p. 63
^^
Cf BA, Ezra
12
6.
9, 10.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
7.
MELAMED
405
Particle n\
6^.
in
3-
The
in
;
objective particle
n"'
is less
frequently omitted
L
4
;
than
5-
Y.
7J
;
of the latter, in
i.
4, 6,
14
0^.
'>,\
7-^,6;
8.
8. 5.
66. In the
Y
:
junction
to
p
16
or of the adverbial
pj^Nl
.
"inaiDl
2.
14 m?:xi
2.
9.
Gender.
67.
The noun
it
JT'j;
being of
common
gender,
L and Y
;
construe
8. 8.
as feminine
cf. 6,
Likewise Drnj of
common gender
it
is
taken by
In
as a
masc, while
writes the
pf.
takes
"la
as a fem.
cf.
fj:T3,
,
8. 6.
i. i,
fem.
rh
nTHTiST
apparently being
influenced
by the
indirect object n^
while
writes the
direct object.
Verbs.
L
In
writes
an impf.
act. pt.
D^i'B'
:
^''3pi,
b^np^l.^'s
an
:
m3y,
S'l^y.
8. 12,
writes a
an impf
\T, Di^tr^
In
4. 8,
and
Y
i,
differ as to the
person:
n^y^n,
r^y^n.^3
In 4. 13;
8.
L
In
has
In
pt. pass.,
8. 13,
pt.
act.: p?2^mi,
inf.,
|v:n-n;io^
ntddi,
^^idoi.
uses the
the impf.:
ID'-dI' .^^^
ID^n.
4. 15,
and
In
use
3. 10,
the Ithpeel
^^
D^c^^<^.
In In
8. i,
^^:nrD.i"-
Y
L
is
better.
^'
is
more
consistent in
its
person, though
is
is
not in error.
102
"" Act.
pt. better.
"i
somewhat
better.
is
better.
406
Ithpeel
pf..
the Ithpaal
pf.
noyns,
:
in^yns'.
In
8. 4,
uses Ithpeel
pt.,
Ithpaal pt.
P"i:nD,
:
p:nD.
In 8.4,
L L
has an Ishtafal
pV'l^'n, pv^n'j^'n.
II. Prepositions,
differences are to be
noted between
7
L and
In
Y.
In
i.
6,
requires
but
reads xmiyD^
n^ib'-j;,
3. 10,
uses
pleonastically before
while
Y Y
writes
\"T)^y.
Although
unnecessary, in
2. 7,
omits
it:
thus
-"0122 nn2,
In
2.
16,
by
its
to that of
Y:
thus
writes
mm
Y
c;ns3, Y^^*
mm
In
5.
D^nsi?.
In
3. II,
while
uses a 3 in a
4,
;vvn xcyi,
;n'm
NJ:yi.
7;
12,
uses
to indicate
direction toward,
thus:
5.
4,
5. 7,
L L
^^^nixi
'''''
n^nnb n>n^
7. 12,
xynxa
s*y-iN^
pnn"
"'^:s.
In
6. 12,
and
p^TiD, while
6.
Y uses
7.
13
NJaiiij
l^^nr:,
Y^^^
njdijd p^^nT;
12,
li
Dn-i3N7
pcm,
Dn-i3X3
pi:-n.
After a
verb
uses no preposition,
while
6cn,
Y Y
makes use of a
N"^"-|^
h\ thus
7. 6,
N^bn.
In
7. 12,
N3^D
pre-
by the
In
same
7.
verb, while
is
Y
3.
14 the case
10*
reversed.
Thus
"'^
7.
12,
''3^231
xni^J ''np3
Cf.
BDB., suk
Cf.
"^V.X^^
T Num.
3"niwS1
21. 24
3-|m DJnS^.
^wS'TC'^
ir*
"'i'^N'!
105 Cf.
2 Kings 17. 6
jn:
n^nb3
TjINP
n?o
^'^
"""iTpi
inj Ti3n3i.
incorrectly write ^{33'lJ3.
C and D
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
N*oDy,
^Di5Di
'')-]p2
;
MELAMED
407
Nnmx,
Y N'Dy xnih 7. 14, l n^jnai Nnso ^j::n2n Y snniN ^wnsai xnao ^c:ns3. In 7. 10; 8. 1,4, L and Y use different prepositions to express the same nxn^m, Y n^oiD riNnjm; 8. idea: 7. 10, L L Njoy, Y nib 8. 4, L D^Ej'n'i?, Y 'crn^
* * * *
i,
l^y.
12. Miscellaneous.
70.
noun,
so close as to
10 differing
different
:
in
*
d-id
'ijri
ERRORS
A.
71.
Lexical.
As
in
much
All of the
Homoeoteleuta.
72.
in
by Y:
17 [p
pn^
wriT::'!
pyn
xnm
N:^y]
;
pnx] p;
4. 8 -inj
2.
^^v:!
l^^TQ. Di^c'^
nm
8.
N-J'^n
^y]
pann
xcr^
ic-i
[pan^^n
n^m
;
njdxt
8.
^N'n::'n
;
Nynx^ s-im?D
jn npi^on]
[Nnv3 NHiD
[isi'-i
^nn-i ^y pp:sniDi
8.
1
nM\n nn
i^'
;
t^i^t^'^D^
N^ocy^]
n>h
8.
13
f|iDn]
^N-|t^'^
2.
Omissions.
73.
The
2.
108
Y:
|y3i
2.
;
2 oi'D
2.
[''^''3]
N^y
[Tyr]
10^
lo**
3
2.
pn^Dj
T\^i'2r\'\\>
2.
12 nnyn^ [^n^nv]
14 xcnpiiD
17
n^
[pn] nnp
3. 3 [^NTiJ'n NnD':^
rncx]
Cf,
Hebrew
text.
Cf.
nX
^ryV:L'V
;:
4o8
[^snD-n
^''
;
[NJTi^
n^
;
inayni]
3. 8
Di^n^n
3.
Nnain
N\inni]
;
Di
mc:'3
[pn^ N-inoo
[^an^]
;
Nnmx
;
4. i
;
;nin:D
4.
2 r:ii
[^m]
4-
10
1'P^"ivn
[nn]
Ditri
5. 2
-I3J3
5.
may
ipnvx;
nsi
Tirac*
;
n^p''^D]
123
n'^ip
6.
6.
xn^^a-i:'
["I^'^d]
[^2]
inDnii-n
5 [^n^] .TnnD;i^i
6 p^an
6.
;
nD3\n
[11m]
^^o
;
6.
;
7
7.
[p] nn
1
[pn^i^ro] rpn)i;
10 nn^y
7-
[pjniir nro^]
^^'^'"^^
sbp^
P^^t
;
[nxn:];
8. 7
7.
nya^'s;
[p?om]
13
[s^-iip^sj
n^nn^D'n [p]
8. 11
i.
i
;
"inriD
2.
5 pns [^s]
;
2. 7 p3cr
2.
[Nim]
xnm
3.
6 .To^y
[Nnnu] hn&'xn
4.
4 la^Nni
[n^a] p-oy
3.
sim Nnnis.
Doublets.
74. Errors that appear to be doublets are found once in Y, 5. 4 L, 4. i bx'i:^'' n>3N0y^ ND^^ and once in Y.
:
4.
Scribal Errors.
75.
1.
The
;
12
N-i^33
7-
8 nyn-iN.
many more
5 pns
^s-
scribal errors.
;
N^bm ;"^
2.
3 i^^ncJD
2.
hi^?
2.
om
2.
14
'3
nn: ^ipn
"'32^
n^^bsno.
cf.
also
jems. sh.
Cf.
Hebrew
add
text.
CE
mm,
it
'im after
T\'Oy'T\.
A
L
verb
is
necessary, but
all
the
manuscripts have 1" Cf. Gn, 232 and 6. 8. "2 C corrupts "imi to nDT;.
in the
wrong
place.
It
is
interesting to note
that
the Ar.
TARGUM TO CANTICLES
n:n'
;
MELAMED
7
;
^09
6.
3.
;
nnom;
7.
5.
;
15 Nin
8.
'n^
6.
Nn^nv3;
8.
11
'^rN,
piTah
^^^
5 Nby
3 mc'p, xni?n
'::'n\
B.
1
Grammatical.
Verds.
76.
in
The
3. I
8.
L:
^^^
;
5.
3 pj^DIDN
''n\
^^^
;
5. 7
IDVDI
5.
13
fol-
'>3"iJD;ii7
PT3?d;^^^
in
8.
14. HTIS
:
contains the
lowing errors
3-iyo; 2. 16
2.
verbal forms
8.
2. 8
NQtOI (SDCi
EF)
2.
mn;
ii itbj.^"
Suffixes.
77.
The
Y
2.
where
L
2.
6
6.
piS'^i's*
^^^
;
JWDIO
8.
mps
i
2. 1 7 N^J3-|1p
TinDN
5 |n0X
8. I
-J^.
Gender.
I. I,
78. In
writing the
'c', 'c'
masc. nNn''^n
nsy^tJTl, for
'v,
nsynn
''c,
nx-tr-ton
%\
nsn'Tic'
'c nxy^ncr
'tr
Nn^vn-i, &c.
In
6. 4,
Y
pi.
'u nyaix.
In
I.
and
5. 3,
f.
P'T and
r^liT
for the
8.
masc. of
'^^rw
In
I.
4 and
10,
'r,
incorrectly takes
N*:oT
X''nn3"i.
S]j:t
to be a fem.
in 6. 3
it
and
Likewise
2v3?, which,
of course,
is
the
120
121
incorrect forms.
VOL. X.
E e
; :
41
takes
is
to be fern., writing
NOV
N*nn3"i.
Incorrect also
the gender of
;
L
5.
7.
in the following
;
passages:
;
i.
8 Ninrai
Nni3T
1.
15 limy
;
pw
4. 2
(my)
jp^oi
4.
6 xnp" nr^c
mm
'D^rim
5. I (Nnc"'N) ^3X1
7. 2 (^NTJ'") iP^D
14
fn'-nv
n::'D)
|n^^i
xjT'bnD
;
4 (pnxi
jpoyn
in
jij^non
7.
14
xm
jynp,
and
8.
9 H'py
nn
NnniN
niDT
(double error).
;
Errors of gender
in
I.
these occur
n"'3
;
>n^ ''^Si:)
i.
14 nn Nno^s
8.
1.
17 n'x^ Nc^npo
2.
11
^Tion "x-ivo
4.
nnoi
14 j^vc x:mx
^N"V^n snc'^jn
^ao.
Number.
79.
L
7.
of nouns
"iua:^
;
in
12 pn''nn
2.
15 pT
5. i
pn*nm
7.
and the
2. 7 p3ins*;
3 NT1J1.
:
Y
N-imo
in
2.
14
4. 2
6, 7
:
plurs.
place of sings.
7.
xjvd:
8.
9 Nnnix
pn-TiDT
5. Prepositions.
80. In 4. 3
3,
in
xnvvn
'^^^'il ;
and wTites 1
6.
for 3 in 6.
4 xcr3
6.
10 xn^np^.
Conju7tctions.
81.
L
;
conjunction
X3ip"i
it:
2.
;
2. 7 jci
;
2.
14
=1^-) 131
10 cnsi
5.
5 |nX3
^22
6.
9 Xp^Dyi
'^n^X;
and
7.
"i
omits
In
13 X3^a
10 XDD
8.
:
2 n''3
8.
II "inn.
5. 16,
writes conj.
for relative T
pX3JnD1,
Y incorrectly
1
^hvt^\
and omits
it
in
4.
1 '["ri'h
8. i
8. i
"ir^yx.
122
cf. J II,
Gen. 49.
5,
xnip
''JnVJ.
Halper, Dropsie
College.
Few
light
of the
Hebrew manuscripts
at
recently brought to
as the
Dlwan secured
in
ivi
of
London,
1898,^
work
in
Babylonische
Geoniin
is
nachgaondischeii Zeitalter,
which an attempt
life
made
is
in
Babylon
upon
this
Dlwan.
As
this
poems by
Brody,
some specimens of
this
At
name
jectures
made need
not be
repeated here.
By
a careful
portion
of the
entire
find the
name
of the
Eleazar
b.
Jacob.*
ff.
;
Brody
Many Lands
pp. 150
ff.
pp. 34-5.
"
IV, p. 23.
4"
E e
'
412
short
of
poem addressed
to
first
line
which reads
flDV "1^35
::\s-i
bv
'
Behold the firmament of song zvhich the meditatioJis of Eleazar the son of Jacob have spread over the head of the nobleman Joseph.' This line in itself is conclusive, and no
further evidence
is
necessary.
a riddle
in
The
riddle
:
is
about the
name
~iTy?N,
The
(that
first
line
is
quite clear
is
God's name
is
(^N)
'the
mother of
2. 18).
all
living'
Eve who
'
help,' iry
see Gen.
line
'
But the
is
obscure.
Brody
it
;
line
I
as follows
If
it
the name),
am
the whole of
iJ^^i?'?1
unintelligible.
"iT,
His
is
which
">Ty?N, is far-fetched, as it
adopt Islam.
the
is
based
is
too fragmentary to
as to the riddle,
^?^^
admit of any
it
definite conclusion.*^
Now
is
certain that
the word
is
correctly
is
vocalized.
The
un-
usual
the reader
*
who knows
the author's
name
is
actually
Poem
See
HALPER
the
413
is
whom
,
name
is
not
known
in
receives
no additional information.
It
possible
"'3N*
and he
Arabic
and
is
its
parts.
this
Nothing
known about
Eleazar
b.
Jacob, except
first
century.
This fact
is
definitely established
by
the
poems
He
death of
to have
Samuel
b. 'Ali,
Gaon
of
Bagdad, who,
Whether
Eleazar
b.
Jacob
is
one mentioned
by Zunz
in his
p. 505, is a
it
Zunz
It is to
be regretted
publication
importance of
reason
or
this
Diwan,
its
another
since
is
been delayed.
it
was brought
still
exists
in
proof and
fragment which
to
am
herewith publishing,
make
use of the
poems
book
^
inserted
by Poznaiiski
the
third appendix of
first
his
in
now
at the
College.
my
review of Poznaiiski's
p. 36.
book,^
Babylonische Geoniin
Ibid.,
pp. 61-77.
pp. 416
ff.
414
I
and hazarded
b.
poem
is
by Eleazar
is
Jacob, and
b.
lamented
Daniel
Abi
any
al-Rabi\
my
conviction, and
am
unable to
offer
should like to
call atten-
Dlwan and
a
in
the fragment.
Of
course,
it
must
at the
same
is
minor poet
',
and both
in
His deis
This
is
fact that
polished
'
of that period,
and
it is
for imitators.
is
made
for the
fragment to Eleazar
Jacob.
of Adler's
them.
Poem
line 5
has
11.
^^V b^]
nim
^nD".
^^S|.
This should be
the sentiment
in
compared with
expressed
in
7, 8 of
our fragment.
frequently
9,
1.
Then
1.
14
in
is
repeated
Adler's
1.
manuscript, as
poem
23;^"
poem
179,
16;^^
"
HALPER
415
poem
P-
180,
1.
18
;^'-
poem
203,
1.
20
^^
(quoted by Poznaiiski,
75).
the death of
a son of Daniel, and the author laments the fact that Daniel
Gaon is no longer alive to punish the arrogant Now, from the poems addressed to this Daniel,
that our poet was an intimate friend of
his,
plagiarists.^^
it is
obvious
and
this
it
seems
in
is
Gaon
manuscript.
link.
the missing
The poems
manuscript do not
note
i),
and
it is
was put
at the
yet.
The
external
aspect
of this
a narrow strip of
It
was
originally a marriage
twenty-first
The bridegroom's
is
name
is
named
13
rnnx oy pyn
ip^n
m-i
14
DnM''
^B'jiy
ISDN:
'3
nnx
D^mvn y^D
f\*yDD dh^jd
^jinj
ninx vn tck in
D''3:n3
orya
m:i
n^
iK'N
npy
pxJi ^N^J"t3
canyD
inica
Dvn p33
(H-
13-15
4l6
Sitt
daughter
of
Isaac.^^
Subsequently
this
entirely
for writing
down
the dirge.
dirge
is
for a
marriage document.
The
dirge
by a pro-
fessional
This
may
be
professional scribe
side.
At
first
the possi-
suggests itself
in
is
was copied as
an exercise
penmanship.
But
this
seems unlikely on
we have here an
auto-
This fragment
used
by him
Diwan.
afterwards
This conjecture
is
to
15
The meaning
of this
name
is
Lady, or Mistress of
the
House.
riD
is
in
of jj,-^--'
and Dozy,
In
scripts in the
documents
(P 2821,
in
DD
DD
16 d) occur.
by the authors of
that Catalogue.
mNObN DD
means Lady, or
It
is
we have
the spelling
'IH
in^Xp
which proves
is
entirely wrong.
HALPER
417
On
of being the
This
is
especially evident
b.
the last
few
lines.
Now
time
Eleazar
at the
long.
The
that he
question
now
arises
at the
this dirge
Brody takes
it
for
granted
Bagdad.
Now
our fragment,
in
1063
in
Bagdad
seem
disprove
my
in
conjecture.
But no matter
this
Diwan
resided permanently, he
as he
had
number
As
his
matter of
Steinschneider,^^
'
:
stating
reasons, says
of this author
He
Alexandria,
this
Even
Eleazar
would be no conclusive
in
Bagdad
or
Babylon.
It
is
unvocalized
is
except
liable
in
to be mistaken.
verses, that
to say,
is
if
a verse ends
in
the middle of a
line.
another verse
is
started in the
same
The
i
orthoplene^
graphy
"
not consistent.
20, 34.
Thus
iTilcsna in line
^*
is
/Q^-, XII,
p.
115-
4l8
while
it is
defective.
The
spelling
D"'^"'''N*3
(line 7 b)
n^ni (line
I
4a) and
did not
n^n^ (line
5b),
As
all
supplied
the vowel-points,
deem
it
ad-
In
other respects
my
emendations
in the notes.
^--\^TZ>)
vnicDm
rnij^ni
25Qimnnn
D"'D"'y
nn njm
1^
The metre
poets.
b.
is
Wafir, which
is
Hebrew
Eleazar
- ^^
the
poems
in the
Diwan of
"O.
like the
metaphors
Mediaeval
22
abundance or
',
liberality
see
my
essay
The Scansion of
Hebrew Poetry
is
So
it
in the
We
should, however, expect the Kal pi'^D^ as in Prov. 5. 16, though the Hifil,
too, is
2^
sometimes intransitive
It
is
see Exod.
5.
12
Sam.
13.
grammatically
-*
should be nilJfp, as
it is
in the
absolute state.
This plural of
it is
HNQ
is
In the Bible
^^
niSS
is
37. 13).
This form
^mn
tertiae
The
it
root
to
nm
He
class,
HALPER
419
n^bp'?''
vninn
^3ej'^
-\pii
^Y^^)
D\^js:3
CKD^n
-''^n-iQ^
D''D^Dy
i?:^^
psi
VD^3
ni?D3
T^x
ni-nb
^iN"!
niDK^3n
3'
Jinx
^x iSDn
i^'^inj)
i^3E^'^lb
^^^y.^
^l'P'?^'
nn"'Dnn
32
^^pm
^'^
These
letters,
distinct in
the manuscript.
be ^ii")
NTlK'.
For the
2.
vocalization N"*!!!^,
3. 18.
^^
which
is
Eccles.
22;
For ni3,
I. 7).
in the
(Yoma
2*
This word
is
and niSN.
This word
very clear
would be more
appropriate.
It is,
the
lengthened.
^^
Daniel
is
The
is
14.
We
Sam.
3. 30),
by Arabic ^^^1.
'1
This foot
is
short of a syllable.
We
or supply P3
^^
Assembly, category
new
signification akin to
420
nina ip'-annb
V :-:a
t:
^D^Ni-i
px cinB sTQnnipni
I
^'
This word
is
read 73 because
it
suits
the sense, although the last letter, which seems to have been trimmed,
syllable,
and
we
^*
like TJ-'N
If
was crossed
The
line as
stands
is
complete.
my
conjecture that
we
are dealing
with an autograph
is right, it
would seem
in a different
way.
should, perhaps, read npTiyi.
is
not appropriate.
We
That
is,
the patriarchs.
slip of the
"
^^
This seems to be a
pen
Compare Num.
The
plural is probably
general, but
may
A third possibility,
is
correct,
and
Moses and
Eleazar.
The
culable.
services of the
Jews to
Hebrew
critical
with valuable
apparatus
obtain
general
understanding
of the
sacred
text.
of
Hebrew
and
Modern scholarship
sciences,
Nevertheless
in
their fundain
the
Only
in
claim to have
viz. in
made an
in
This contribu-
tion
consists
the
discovery and
422
the Versions.
this
unmixed
blessing.
in
Freedom from
Massorah has
some
some
away from
their Massoretic
in the eddies
lost
it
is
by modern non-Jewish
by name predecessors
of
scholars
feel
to
ancient
in
Jewish exegesis.
bound
honour to
cite
make
in
writings
an
acknowledgment
of this
fact.
In
the
in
modern
rule,
conspicuous
by
their
the
monopoly
of
Protestant
And when
'.
mentioned
*
them with a
just
sneer at their
Rabbinic conceits
Even
so
late Professor
'
Driver
the Jews
with a contemptuous
Sam.
to
i8. ai).
'The Jews'
in this
happen
who
is
reproduced by
Driver
in his
passages in
his
least acknowledorment.
SEGAL
is
423
its
The outstanding
faith, into
it
when
proved to be
They
This would
by such mild
eu-
phemisms
as ivp
omon
But we
whether
or not, such
explanations do
in
judgement
textual questions.
numerous
cases
scholars
anticipated
the
emendations of modern
critics,
by no means exhaustive,
to point
D"'rit3"in
The proposal
'
of
'
some moderns
D^nroin
as
D"'nO">n
the Ramathites
:
who remarks
no "13 c^a'^vn
pl^n nipj
IL'^N*
DTirDin
. ,
nM''
1K
D''5^Jx^
n\-i
Nine'
nn p^nm
with
I'^Tin
nnn.
D^D"i!
liv,
9. i.
So
also
to
Series.
424
R. Isaiah
commentary printed
renders
Dy3.
in the
Rabbinic Bible,
Warsaw, 1862.
5.
The Vulgate
it
D"'2S
tristis^
evidently con-
necting
with
5lx =
tation of R. Joseph
Kimhi
a,
commentary.
Buber,
Pesikta Rabbati,
ed.
ed.
Friedmann, 182
loc.
ad
II.
The
addition in
LXX
TTLeraL
agrees
5,
Nazir, IX,
who
Samson;
Ben
cf.
Judges
b;
'n
Num.
Tn,
of
6.
3a.
Likewise
Sira calls
20.
Samuel nsun
46. 13.
Gesenius's interpretation
the
name
is
^NID^',
already
.
. .
in
Rashi ad
"iK'so
loc.
i'SlDtJ'
jh^^
also
rh
i3nj
^d bs*
loc'
mr:D.
.
Cf
Abrabanel ad
n^2
D^mn b
Budde
Nin ^niob'
'n'n'p'n
isnp^ d^p^nh.
2. 10.
The
pointing by
of
DyT
as
Dp^ was
by
R.
Tanhum Yerushalmi ad
is
loc.
(ed.
Haarbruecker,
Leipzig, 1846).
33. n''1N^1
n'^Nnn^i.
^""INvl
= n''l?i =
Ibn
Janah
his
So
cf Onkelos on
mnno =
avrov.
Lev. 16.
inpl20
16.
is
4. 18.
rendered by
{op.cit.,
LXX:
So
vu)Tos
414).
also R.
Tanhum,
Midrash
of the
in
by
Ark
Dagon's temple,
STUDIES IN THE BOOKS OF SAMUEL
Samtiel:
.niks*
t'VN*
SEGAL
. .
425
'n
m:r^i
ni!?N
Nin^
ni^'j
noN
nviji> nnyrm^'i
mvj
nu'* nvij
nn
nr
nos
-idix ^"3:^'n1.
7. 16.
voL^;
cf.
Driver's note
So Estori ha-Parhi
nnsi (ed.
p. 398),
remarks:
12. 15.
is
that
D33!?Dni
LXX.
They endeavour
is
to
by the supposition
that 2S
here a
title
The
Vulgate's interpretation of
i'VSin
iuravit
is
also given
13. I.
Tanhum
had
p.
is
145): nn^
r^^'nn^
nnynn
p:yn ^2^.
D"'J3
The
precise
n^n
(cf.
the
Oxford Gesenius, 318) was already indicated in the remark piriD nrsn nx n^v hb'o f^nn. of Midrash Rabba, Exod. 32. 1 1
;
14. 3.
The
identity
of
n''nN
with
"]^o''nx
was already
21. 2:
p p
n^ns xin
must of course be
nio^ns
.T^ns
corrected as follows
ainan i^D^ns
t<"in
Nin
18.
The reading
rest
niaxn
nti'^jn
for 'nh
pix
'jn,
cited
I,
VI, seems to
The
X.
na''"!
in a literal
'
VOL.
by Rashi F f
426
and
I3n3
nrr^N
'n "iioN
in^Nnsi nnr.
15. 4.
is
The
cf.
also
Kimhi.
Kimhi's explanation of
(cf.
3"i"'l
as being a contraction
of
n-|N''i
the rendering of
22.
LXX
kol lurjSpevaev.
zuaza in a"'snm to be otiose
as in
n^^<1,
He
its
regards
genitive,
as
QOp ns'on.
77
Symmachus,
moderns
17. 18.
di'ofifa
which most
The explanation
Driver's note)
welfare' (cf
Satmiel:
39.
larly
\'\t\1'''\
a;n
Cf
also Babli
^{<^"i
Shabbat 56
a.
a?'').
LXX
renders
' :
Kal eKonLaaeu
Simi-
R.
Tanhum
Meo
quod
11.'
of the copiUa in
i^'in.
oipp''3l
was already
reading by
LXX of nJ
for
s"'J
is
also advocated
by R. Tanhum.
19. II.
tially like
LXX,
Cf.
be
otiose.
nns*
Ralbag:
"srvt^rh
^3
n:^'o
nv^
^z' rytyS
vn3yD
n" ^y
"ip33
v^s
inis.
n''ij3
22.
Raba
in
Temple
He
thus connects
',
JT'i:
with
'"iJ
'beauty,' not
op. cit., II,
:
with
ni:
habitation
as stated
by Aptowitzer,
fru'in''
40.
20. 25.
R. Isaiah explains
opn as follows
in:in*
op
SEGAL
n^'^i
427
l"m
hxD'
^L3^i
n^na idi
.mwd
n\n
D-Lr-j'
v:d^
vax nvo
LXX
'IcovaOdv,
'
Jonathan was
in front
'iT
mp^l.
31. 6.
in ancient
Cf. Aptowitzer,
the existence
22. 4.
navo of ver.
adopted by
remarks on
23.
for
^'^^SJ
.
many moderns.
:
ver. 3
iTasiD
nn''n'tr
nn
"jdo
orfi?!;
iddi.
.
The emendation
. .
of the
moderns,
""Cs:
"jC'DJ
^"C's:,
remarks
24.
"ic'SJ
nx
cpn^
^::*):
Vt;nDi5
:^'''1
II.
Ralbag explains
"iDXi
n^nn
''2^
ics*.
This
'.
Vulgate,
'
et cogitavi
R. Isaiah supplies
in Miklol,
''y]}
as subject to Dnni,
So
also
Kimhi
the
52
'
a.
Vulgate
sed pepercit
oculus
b.
meus
'.
Cf. also
comment
14.
in
Babli Bevakot 62
The emendation
is ''oy
already
suggested by R. Tanhum,
2
who compares
1373
'
it
with
=
'
DVoy,
Sam,
22. 44.
25. 3.
Targum's explanation of
a Kalebite
is
also
given in MidrasJi Sanmel, ad. loc, and in Yeriishalmi Sanhcdrin, II, 3, where the reading
cf.
is
^31^53
as in
Chron.
2.
Aptowitzer,
is
The
interpretation of
LXX,
The
b"^
KvvLKos,
also
:
found
in
former observes
n''33 "131
yrb^
xvoMO
nbxDtt
6.
^i3N^
y-i:''
DinT nS
'':3
D\x3i::'^
n^c' D"yxi.
On
^n^
R. Isaiah remarks:
"nx!?
This agrees
wi-th the
Vulgate
'
:
fratribus meis
428
II.
is
The
in
interpretation of 'O'D as
*J"
given by
LXX
also found
p"
Midrash Samuel
"iroNrj*
Nin
D^D.
So
also R.
Jonah
58.
in
Rikmah
(ed.
Goldberg, 175).
I,
in
is
already found
R. Jonah
(cited in Miklol.
that TiX^ni
26. 6,
was an error
for \xnni.
On
the question
brothers
Zeruiah,
of
the
Responsum
nurj'n,
No.
12 (Lyck, 1864),
and also
Kimhi
Sam.
3. 39.
28, 3.
The omission
:
of the
in^
l"'in.
copula
in
if
n"'j:31
is
also
suggested by R. Isaiah
But
;
so
n?D"i2
should
have followed
yy'^il
as in 2
Sam.
is
15. 12
Judges
8. 27.
I,
As
60
given by Aptowitzer,
citation.
The
transposition
of
D''"j':x
before
:
Dninn
was
who remarks
of
LXX
and Vulgate of
^n"")
cf.
the
comment
II I. I.
v^^'^T\\
nn*n' ^'7\r\, as is
9.
(T(f)LyKTTJp (cf.
Driver's note)
may
who
also connects
it
with the
/iV)i)
in
Exod.
28. 39,
which he interprets as
"1121^
'^iv-i
nopi
nn nsN^DJ
CJ^y n''yv
in
i.e.
embroidery work
of loophole formations.
He
adds
explanation of our
passage: nonbcn
"'^'iN
SEGAL
bn'i'C''
429
^nvn
R. Isaiah says:
i'Nnc'''
n'^^:^'.
many moderns.
:
yni^n
nn
is
paraphrased by Rashi
yiai'J35i'
Dnn
exactly as
LXX, B.
yu^jn
nn im which
two
rival
LXX,
L, and
Vulgate.
The
^':^?^
interpretations
by the
moderns
of
i?n
Rashi and
R. Isaiah
^"IS'C^
Ralbag
refers
b)::r]b
it
to Saul himself:
i!?
iTn
ab 1^\S3 uhn:)
nn'i:'Dn
po
inn'-K^c
mcy nS
^Nit^c^
inc'DC'
lotrn
mtJ'o.
So Vulgate:
oleo'.^''
Kimhi
offers
The moderns
seek in
D''iny
some
or
article of dress,
It
is
LXX
viz.
; ;
D'^ny,
D-jno.
D''jny
:
in-
to be equal ^y
Dnjy by metathesis,
r\bj2U id3
bands, sashes
also ninyo,
i
Dnjy
15.
1jd3
nd?^
Nim TTinnj
cf.
Sam.
for
32
Job
cited
38. 31.
An
U2'
ny
D"':ny
is
by Aptowitzer,
2. 4.
On
-ki'JN
''ly^a,
&c.,
Kimhi remarks:
[")N^]
^1S.-I
Nin ix
nap ITT
6.
-it^'N,
LXX.
:
riNTn
naian
explained by Rashi
nxin naiDn
[jioj
modern emendation
'in
naiDn nnn.
Kimhi
explains the
name
njDN*
by the remark
The connexion
i.e.
with Nabal
(cf.
^^
Barnes
of
""iifn
vol.
XVI,
in
396.
His explanation
found
43
Peshitta),
is
Yalkut,
Kaspi
(siD3 "^nx,
31): u^3
n>,Tj>
bih
Nnpj.
Cf.
^'C^
W:^
The
by
nb:y is
meant Michal
2ia.
13.
'yX'ir\
'JD^
On
IS
'':2^
DX
^1
R. Isaiah remarks:
i^.
n\n"r
xin
ijiD3 \rJ7
ninn^
18.
R. Isaiah comments on
VJ'lTai
In contrast to
Chron.
in
14.
12,
Targum, and
in
the
literal
zarah 41 a
cf.
Kimhi.
So
also
Kaspi,
7.
II.
On
\rh'\
iTi^ l"nn
^J3
csiB' pac'
D''DDi5J'
'n''ii'
Dvn
|c v^rj;^
im
im:y^ rh\^
id-dv
amx
this
D'':yr3
vn dsib'^.
LXX,
our note on
passage
8. 7.
Review,
vol.
X,
p.
225.
Our
po.
commentators
^to^B'.
are
divided
on
the
exact
meaning of
D^::cn
':"'CD
D^vnn ona
c:;!!:**:'
51.
11.
So R.
Isaiah.
Sym-
LXX
in
Ezek.
27. 11.
'^'"310
interpretation of
yiib
wxa
cf Rashi's
comment
18.
[Vj'wX-i
ipDis^
p-ii'Nn
pi nrN t-dtd.
'JTis
of 'npai
was
antici-
SEGAL
:
431
icrT's]
231)
""^ya
D3W
i
ninDCO
'n'C'
\yh^ "^vx
;
n^yS'^i
D'^*n,
and he
refers to
^nan
Sam.
30. 14, 16
Zeph.
2.
^nx
it:3
D'^b'^n
nnpm
10. 7.
R.Isaiah comments
mn'' N*nvn
;
7U'
cf.
with Targum,
LXX, L,
and Vulgate
Chron. 20. 8
Kimhi explains
'-2
N3i*n as in
oppo8. ii,
nronij^n oyn,
is*.
Joshua
This
is
the view of
-inya
is
explained by
Kimhi
R.
iTnB'3 ib^r^
inyn
nov
'n.
So
LXX
LXX,
and Vulgate.
S'ln
Jonah, however,
remarks
{op. cit.,
with Targum,
30. D37D
Milkom
Ammonites
cf.
also Rashi,
and Aptowitzer,
13. a.
'3
backwards.
point forwards
'131
nsvv
nj\s*i
nnn
is
xi'S'"!
"yy^
"in?.
This
also the
nno
nr
mc^n
n^yis
14. 10.
imn
^<1^
as the
.
moderns do
t\>t\.
nrsx^ 1^
26.
The
in
ancient
a
;
religious
cf.
significance
Absalom's shearing of
n^iy TT]
his hair
;
Bad/i
A'azir
4h:
n-n
cf.
also
Kimhi
and Ralbag.
15. 12.
Kimhi proposes
432
19.
^as
is
read
the
modems.
^3X Nin
T-'in.
"jnay
hmx
"^1
diidd snpD
Similarly
and further:
i-JT'
pinsni
|VJ'snn
^C'
The emendation ^"Jyn for '3iy3 is also suggested by Menahem ben Saruk of Aptowitzer, III, 50. 17. 28. The repetition of X^^P is thus explained in Badli
16. 12.
;
"Adoda/i sarah 38 b
the
first
cf.
first
by
polenta^
and the
explained by R. Jonah
{op.
cit.,
322),
12; cf Kimhi).
of the Versions.
viz.
an
infinitive
final
like
in 12. 14.
Similarly
it,
as an
infinitive,
emending
however, into
20. 4.
Tw7^
with clause b
6.
cf Driver
note.
Rashi explains
: '
li^""!;
V'iv^.
Similarly
Vulgate
8.
et effugiat nos
{op. cit.,
'.
Kaspi
[njxv''
\\)
comments on
X,
N^*^
xim
rm
Cf
^an
also
myn
fo
nnnni
-ir:ii?3
nnn^, exactly as
vol.
LXX.
our note ad
14.
loc. in this
Review,
p. 234.
i?31
with
what
follows.
The former
nnN3.
identifies
inhabi-
tants of pc^n
21. 4. R. Isaiah
remarks: iJNlcn
C'^N
So
LXX, L, and
Vulgate.
SEGAL
it
433
The
b,
strange that
Cf. Babli
Tna.
Berakot 12
14.
and
also
The reading
y^JVn is also
found
in
Rabbinic authorities,
16. HDin is
explained by R. Jonah
484) and
i
Kimhi
ao.
as equal to NSnn
= n\SD~in
cf.
Targum, and
b,
Chron.
a.
4 (Ketib).
Sanhedrin 95
Kimhi and R.
the Vulgate
23. 5.
:
ense
novoP
already takes
|'sn
R.
Tanhum
est in iT
to be equivalent
est
to
''i'sn
Scribendum
factum
erat 'VSn,
sed_jWomissum
ny,
quemadwhich
modum
mon
Exod.
15. 2.
D'C',
II. n'-n^ is
D"':'Tiro,
cf.
Babli 'Abodah
ibid.
interesting
jini'j
D''3:ir,cn
Tim
nnn^r:n ^bD
^i'U^b
linn: ovn
'
inixt:'
nn
was
riN
initiated
nian^ idn^i i^^ dc' ni^p^ oairn Dvn mia:") That day he to carry arms, and it is the custom of the initiated to
initiation, in
perform an act of triumph and heroism on the day of their order to acquire fame therefore " he said to smite David " '.
;
434
V
The Chronology of
The
both at
reign of
David's Reign.
home and
in strict
Book
of Samuel
is
not always
arranged
chronological order.
This circumstance
first,
may
the
deficiency
as the
proper
historical
perspective
secondly,
is
the
composite
thirdly, the
summary
character
5, 8),
which necessitated
in respect
of the
The result is that a good deal of among writers on the period as to the
We
may,
accordance with
some of the
Studies.
as
The
(2
length
5.
of David's
reign
is
given
40 years
is
Sam.
Kings
2. 11).
That
this
number
meant
round
is
to be taken literally
indefinite
number
like the
number 40 years
Book
of Judges,
proved by
number between
7
Jerusalem.
years
SEGAL
40^
435
in
spent at
years, but
some months
actually
less
than
^:^
years.
2
It
may
be noted that
5. 5,
LXX, L
In
i
Sam.
months
in place of
^^ years of
MT.
is
Kings
2. 11,
however,
the residence at
Hebron
Mahanaim
(2
Sam.
in
2. 10).
Israel
of
cf.
Seder '0/am,
ch.
XIII: n^D3
^NltJ'^
ni3i?D
is,
nNVD3
ut^n.
So
also
Kimhi
in 2
Sam.
2. 11.
It
however,
fully
empowered Abner
as
to
make
that
Sam.
Another alternative
on 2 Sam.
is,
Ralbag remarks
that a period of
2. 10),
of Saul and the 5 years had passed between the death But while it may be conceded Ishbosheth. appointment of
that
Israelites
had
interregnum
lasted
between
and
have
taken
in Israel
Again, some
critics
seek
The
reign of Saul
is
is
(i
13, i),
which
certainly an error.
In
fact, 2
Sam.
would
436
seem
assumption that
Ishbosheth reigned
than 2 years.
we have no
by
irrefutable proofs, as in
the difficulty
to be found in the
Israel.
little
consideration
show that
this
view
the
expressly
by the
historian (2
Sam.
5.
17
a),
War
and
as king
Israel.
This
war
characterized
by much heavy
(cf.
which at
15-21
;
first
went
against David
It
is
Sam.
5,
17b;
22.
23. 9-17).
evident that
some
time,
have elapsed
We
really
therefore
lasted
throne of
David
murder of Saul's
David continued
had
to reside at
Hebron
for
some years
and to make
longer, until he
him
to capture Jerusalem
it
his capital.
It is
Sam.
2.
11
5.
5 seems to imply
to
Judah
alone.
It
wording too
i^'^'i^''
literally.
b]}
may
min'' bv,
n'^
are to be
SEGAL
437
The
Hebron was,
Judah
which was
Again,
it
may
be that a year
Israel.
of David's rule at
Hebron
4 years
was spent
forced
to
evacuate
in the
Hebron and
Adullam
borderland of Judah
Sam.
5.
would seem,
by the men
of
Judah, with
little
Israelitish tribes, as is
proved by the
of heroes in 23. 8
ff.
(see our
remarks
in this
some 3^ years
he
3^ years
to Judah, as stated
5.5.
We may
now enumerate
first
in their
after the
was
followed
by
the
proclamation
later
of
Ishbosheth at Mahanaim.
the
came
death
of
i\bner at
438
all
Israel,
by the
out-
Philistine
war
17-21).
After the
Ba'al Perazim
came
thither
removal
p.
this
Review,
vol.
IX,
46,
91)-
and the
royal residence
(5. 11).
Then came
by the
8. i)
(6. i
final
22
ff.
Next
ff.,
the
Ark
to Jerusalem
cf.
Review,
loc.
cit.,
p. 47),
capital
became established
nation.
as the
great
centre
is
of the
The concluding
7,
the incident
described in chap.
which occurred
time of profound
(7. i).
and fighting
As shown
the
in
Review,
ibid.,
92)
expression vn^N
strict
literalness, since
predicted,
(cf. 7.
i,
e.
before the
/S,
outbreak of the
Ammonite war
first
10
a,
11 a
12-13).
We next get
of which
the
Mephibosheth and
Jerusalem (chap.
9).
We may
plausibly
the other hand that he would not have delayed the per-
memory
of his friend
was
absolutely necessary.
The
SEGAL
in
439
Ark
Jerusalem,
7),
after
but
Now we
MephiBut
at
bosheth was
his
five
coming
to
(9. 12).
old
when he came
coming
event
we reckon
to
21. 7,
ibid.,
fallen
19. 30).
Absalom's
calumny. But
cf.
it is
this
Review,
ibid.^
Famine was
by the Census.
4)
and that
it is
it
was confined
men
of
He
and
religious capital of
440
spirit
be
was necessary to
for a
war abroad.
?
whom
was
this
war to be directed
Not
for their
against the
Ammonites and
Nor Ammonite
finally,
Nor,
Edom,
for the
to
We
conclusion that the war for which the Census was a preparation
matter of
the
list
follow immediately
upon the
8.
Philistines in
We
do not
know
with which
was conducted
it
is
Moab
It is
most successfully
plausible to
(see this
Review,
it
ibid., p.
51, 95).
assume that
was
this
conduct of David
Ammonites with
designs
against
fear
and suspicion
and
of
David's
secret
their country,
impelled
them
to
Israel.
They
felt,
for
their king
their
country
when
convenient
to
do
so,
any
more than
house of
Moab
SEGAL
and
44I
their
We
of
Some
writers,
:
however,
who
LXX, L
in 24. 6
ndp
of the
But
it
is
was confined
strictly
conquered nations.
is
The
reading
of
LXX, L
note
in ver. 6
ad
loc).
may be
other
asked
why
the itinerary
of the
subject
nations
such as
As
a matter of
marked
who had by
that time
stock.
become more
The war
with
taken place
great
in
Ammonite War.
The exact
VOL. X.
G g
442
will his
to
Solomon
at to
According
Seder
on
I
XIV
But
Kings
obtained by a purely
7, 8)
implies
But
it
is
incredible that
Kings
2.
23-46).
^^^.
his
him D3n
On
Kings
3.
is
much
too high.
Solomon
calls
himself
plays a
some time
He
anointment
(i
Kings
i.
5-49).
And,
finally,
the con-
fident
in
claiming the
satisfactorily
only by
We may
thus con-
ment.
Now Solomon
sin with
27 and
The
sin
after the
outbreak of the
Ammonite War
in
(cf.
Sam.
ti.
his
Samuel^ 317 f
See also
Kimhi ad
that he
loc).
Hence Solomon's
Ammonite War.
Assuming
the
ZATW.,
II,
312-14;
III, 185.
SEGAL
443
same year
and
as,
but subsequently
to,
This
wars against
Ammon
War was
Edom
(of. 1
Kings
the Moabite
We may
now
set
down
:
First
the
their
battle
with
the
combined
;
forces
of
Ammon
Aramean mercenaries the battle at and Helam against the Arameans alone (2 Sam. chap. 10) the invasion of Ammon and the siege of Rabbah (11. i ff.) the fall of Rabbah (is. 26-31) the invasion of Zobah and Damascus (8. 3ff. cf. this Review, ibid., p. 92, 96) and
;
finally the
embassy of To'i
(8.
9-10).
The
last
of the
foreign wars
(cf. 8.
Edom
2.
Kings
II,
11.
15-16
Ps. 60.
See also
W.
Jawitz, ^NTtT'
nn^n,
167-9).
The
last series
Some
of these events
sin
Thus the
with
the
of
birth of Bath-sheba's
first
child
came
after that.
of
Rabbah
murder of
(13.
Tamar came
to
the
Absalom
Geshur
23
a).
two years
return (14. aS), and four years later his Rebellion (15.
G g
44+
we must read with LXX, L and Peshitta Thus the Rebellion of Absalom took place CJu' ynnx). If we assume eleven years after the violation of Tamar,
For n:^
the latter ev^ent to have occurred one year after the sin with
Bath-sheba,
i.e.
in
e.
The age
3 b that
of
Absalom
at his death
years.
For we
learn from
3. 2 a,
Hebron.
Now
Judah.
Thus
at the
The
number
following
Chronological Table
summarizes
the
The
:
756-1842.
Duschixsky, London.
n.
Schijf.
Hirschel Lewin left London for Halberstadt in the spring of 1764, and the London community was not long in finding a successor, for in 1765 we see R. Tevele
Schiff already installed as
in
Duke's Place.
election
of
the
whom
his
uncle, a certain
He
he
is
styled
to
by Rabbi Tevele
his
wrote
brother
I).
R.
Meir
on Adar 21,
1776
(App. V,
Letter
certain
Rabbi
Meir
his
Hanover
cause
was
likewise
one
of
those
who helped
^'^
by
writing to
friends in
London.
We
only
know
of one
competitor,
that
who
tried
was
his
Rabbi
Jacob Emden
of Altona,
who
London
Auto-
R. Jacob
Emden
month
in his
He
says
' :
In the
of Nisan of
the
my
See
letter
in
Appendix V.
*^
12D
Tw'^yO, ed.
Kahana (Warsaw,
1896), p. 209
ff.
445
446
was elected
Rabbi
Hamburger con-
my
activity
and
after I nearly
gave up
(!)
was, how-
all
opposition placed
election.
my
son's
Even
after
me
letters threatening
him.
"
man
Laze
man "
who made
so
special
efforts
and wrote
me
letters, full of
with
the
intention
of frightening
me
that
should
con-
prevent
my
The
warned
gregation of the
Hamburg Shool
have
him, and
(Synagogue), however,
was anxious
beforehand
to
to
they had
me
ly
take
letter,
He
visited us here,
festival,
and
all
men
(Hamburg, Altona, and Wandsbeck) gave evidence of the He left us and entered upon respect they felt for him.
his duties in
London
at the
have since
his
now become
May God
grant that he
children.'^*
rise
both
' ;
DUSCHINSKY
Emden had
447
in the
same way
as
both
offices simultaneously.
deavoured to secure
for
Duke's Place.
Emden's
Emden's
note,
who
in
lived
in
London
for
until his
death
Emden may
refer to
a pupil of 'that
man
'.'^"
We
cannot
tell
him an annuity of
;^ic.'^^
Also another
is
member
Abraham
in
of Nancy,
benefited
The
Falk's
man Laze
is
often
mentioned
MS.
interesting
of
Shtadlan of Kalisch
Zevi
b.
',
This
man
'
or yiN^
nnn
(the
secret missions to
Germany and
whom Emden
for the
. .
mean
E3'beschutz.
often calls
^*
iniN.
:
may
be,
Shillings annually
.'
p. xlviii.
To Mr. Abraham
the
Nancy.'
He
signs,
the
Elul
See
Appendix V.
448
London
called
Hamburg.
various
Whole pages
sums.
of the
MS.
are devoted
to the debts
servant
Jacob Emden,
to be a bitter
in
London on August
28,
1915), p. II,
Hamburger's
p. 10) this
'
{ibid.,
Eleazar Leiza
was known
to
as
Lazarus Joseph.
refers
which he
does not
"if^
"iiy^N, i.e.
in
cabbalist Falk.
refers,
The
letter of
an undertaking by Asher
without
leaving
issue.
Neither
of
these
brothers,
Samuel ben
community, and
They address
formerly
in
the document to
is
The
great Rabbi,
in
who was
namely. now Rabbi Rabbi Meshullam Zalman Emden. As time went on, the
Podhaice and
London
',
Emden
and
Meshullam
to
leave
DUSCHINSKY
449
We
brother, dated
1780,^^ in
R.
him
remain
upon
he
is
week
'.
He
appears to have
gone to Stary-Constantinow
**' in Russia.
well-
community.
4.
He was
Cf. also
is
'
my Jacob
an
'
Buzaglo,
20 (London, 1914).
There
Order of Service
extant,
in the possession of
of the
is
',
The
title
Page
^L:''tr
a
jT'U'ri
Dva
inin
on^
ibizn
i^^jns
ni!i-j'
dv^
n^nn ino
Page 2 a
'
Form
Rabby
Meshulam Solomon D.D. Rabby of the Jews Synagogue in MagpyAlley Fen-Church Street and of the New Synagogue in Leadenhall Street.
Israel
To be used on Friday the 13th d&y of December 1776. For success of His Majesty's Arms according to His Majesty's Proclamation. Faithfully translated by Alex. Alexander, Printer, and sold by the Translator No. 78 White Chapel High Street.' The booklet consists of sixteen pages in 8vo. The sermon preached on that occasion was likewise printed by A. Alexander and consists of twelve paragraphs which fill twenty-seven octavo pages. The title reads A Sermon Preached On Friday the 13th of December 1776 by the Reverend
:
|
Israel
Meshulam Solomon
Rabb}' of the
Jews Synagogues
[
in
Church
|
Row
|
a Moral Discourse
Suited
|
For
|
a General Fast
translation
To pray for the Success of His Majesty's Arms. A Free from the Hebrew Printed by A. Alexander &c. (as on the
.
]
Order of Service).
Jacobs
:
cp.
Wolf-
Bibl.
Angl. Jud.,
450
of Rabbinical scholars.
Schiff of
Fulda, author of
^I'tr
D"i"nD
who
family.^*
this family
Frankfort,
the
Beifus
(died
17 14. Isaac,
R. Tevele
who
lived
famil}'
name
house
Schiff),
and died
Schiff,
in
the year
1656.*^-'
Meyer
called
'
zum
griinen Schild
in
11)."'^
The well-known
York,
is
philanthropist, Jacob
H. Schiff of
Xew
namely of Joseph
death of Solomon
Moses,
'
called
Josbel
Schild
flayer Schiff,
".
zum
griinen
After the
Schiff, his
Rabbi
their
in
Frankfort, sold
the
interest
Rothschild family.
The minute-book
of the
Frankfort
payment
minz
;
'
money
need
i.
in
Meir Rothschild
*^
insisted that he
Gesc/i.
d.
onl)-
pay
p.
in
See Loewenstein,
Jiid.
d.
;
Kiirpfalz,
153
Dietz,
Stammbuch d. Frank/. Juden (1907), p. 258 Horowitz, Frank/. Rabb. (= FR.), vol. HI, pp. 38-40, and Frank/urter Grabinschri/ten (= FG.^.
^*
''*
Tammuz
1660.
is
stjied
the venerable.
Dietz states as his birth date 1730, which cannot be correct, as in 1777 his
see later^.
DUSCHINSKY
451
There was
ground rent
(called
actually
it
ance for
The minutes mention that half of the property of the London Rabbi Tevele
Schild
'
was already
in existence
Merklist
wurdigkeiten,
147),
and
it
is
also in
his
of
{ibid.^
London.
n''3N,
"i"n
referring to
to the
his old
age
reverence and
in
gratitude.
brother written
the
year
1776,
feeble
when
his father
and unable to
brother should
to
read,
the
father,
lest
he should
be disappointed,
in
case
Meir to the
the
letter,
Rabbinate of
Copenhagen,
realized.
referred
to
in
would
his
not
be
mother's
could not
1787, he says:
'He
letter of
letter) as their
night
and
'
fasting
154); see
Hiertz
zum Gruenen
(p.
also
Appendix VII.
452
all
it
was
to her that
"
the wine
and
oil
enabled him to
In another letter of
the
2 and,
because that
his
fast
father,
man who
trained his
make
'jn,
religious
Jews learned
in
the Law.
We
a
know
and of
his successor,
one
of the classical
works
of Fi'ankfort
a.
His father-in-law
of
the Beth-Hamidrash
in
Worms;
life
of the Jewish
to the
community
treated
b,
Solomon
(baths)
Referring
saying of R. Hanina,
the
warm water
is
and
the
oil
with which
my mother
',
me
in
it
my
me
strength in
my
old age
see Hullin 24
where
Hanina
when
'^ '^
"'^
eighty years old could stand on one leg while he slipped off his shoe
it
and put
Frankfurt
M. 1702.
Died 1756.
/7?., vols. II
and
III.
About Solomon
Baumgarten-Kaufmann,
DHID
FlbiD, Intro-
DUSCHINSKY
453
Meir
Schiff,
and
(3)
Moses,
who
in this
way was
R. Meir.
The
letters
printed
the appendix
furnish
in
his
England
'
Papers, p. 285),
Solomon
R.
[Transactions
The Hazkarah-Book
of
Worms
Soon
'^^
Beth-ha-Midrash
Sinzheim,
p. 18)
Worms, of which
founder.
fact that
is
Leb
Ill,
was the
Horowitz {FR.,
R. Tevele lived
for
some time
No.
of
1
This
evident from
MS.
Adler,
160.
This
MS.
Halaka and
Haggadic
by R. Tevele
is
Schiff,
duction, p. 5.
given by Loewenstein,
Solomon Sinzheim except the grandfather of the same name, while Baumknow of Sol. S.'s two daughters. Mate Schift" died 21st Kislev 1817. See FG., No. 4899. Cp. also L. A. Frankel, Ltschri/ten,
T6
See ni ^y p"ip,
49:
n^nin
nyiJi-n
naicn
n'^'^n
nn^sm
n^"'nn
,njiyi
ny
bn
'^^jy^
n::'-iD
,nji3ni
[r\]v^:^
nnvn
^53
nu'sj
\>"'P2
nrnh m:
"inr
-i\stii
r\-\'c^v
'"pl^s*
rh
m^i
^m^^rn
injn\s*
7^-^-^-:^
p"5yD pJi^
mD2jJ
"b
cj^b'
,nnuyn
Dnx
'23
nxnpji
n^^pn
>byD
-\'\"\r\^
nn
n-k^N
454
delivered in
London.
latest
The
date given
is
J"r:pri
1783.
in
From
this
MS. we
was
as
in
Vienna
acted
Maggid
month
Hanukkah, 5519.
eleven years.
Worms
for
about
His son
Sabbath
\T1
note written in
London was
Sabbath of the
year 1765."
In Frankfort he acted as
Dayyan under
the celebrated
Rabbi Abraham
Joshua
a few
who
in the
Get of Cleve
affair.
The
in
senior
R. Tevele's life-long
Maas.'^
friend, the
Rosh-Yeshibah R. Nathan
his
He
acted
as
Dayyan
native town
this
Yeshibah of
his
the
One
of his
The
following
is
list
Worms:
n"pn
rb'C'
'2, p. 142 b;
p.
D'pn
'2,
p.
141
3"vn
52a; T'-pn
\rcr\,
p.
cmro
n'"^, p.
|d^j
177b;
n"-i,
C'^pn
p.
bibvS
a.
p.
:
194 a;
t:'"'pn
bibs y'\
p.
196 a;
2"pn
179
Vieyiiia
n"'pn,
181 b
p.
;
p.
p.
WOn
3X
'3,
183a;
Cmo
p.
V'^, p. 176a.
y'2pn pp,
p.
p.
188 a; :"3pn,
p'j'n,
p.
200b.
166 a;
V'pn
p.
192b; n"bpn
82a; t2"bpn
:n"c',
173b; NC'pn,
"*
786;
'ycpn
II, p. 18.
DUSCHINSKY
455
Nathan Adler
in
Moravia, and
known
as the author of a
inj
entitled
'n
nrti'D (ed.
work
R. Tevele
Schifif
gave
in his
work
nnr \)^h,
and he suggests
Tevele."^
was R.
in
the
same
Rabbi
year as
Zalman
title
Emden
Hambro Synagogue,
Ab-beth-Din.
We
Meshullam Zalman
for
both con-
London and
the Provinces
'
in
same way
as
in
'
Provinces
'.
R. Tevele soon
won
London, and
as
own congregants
He seemed
him.
Emden and
great, that
p.
39
ff.
My
Tr.,
VII, p.
&
Co.,
accordingly.
456
Emden
'
the
High
Priest
'.
Tevele's
Jewish world.
well
known
in
the
business connexions
and
in
inquiries reached
relations of
London Jews
relating
to
questions
in
He
similar kind
w-e
Rabbis residing
he wrote to
on the Continent.
Thus
have a
letter
intervene
Leb
of Maineck, near
Burgkundstadt
Bavaria,
now
living in
London.
His
man
messenger
(n''7*J'j.
Interesting
woman, the
in
wife of
Nathan Harris
London, recorded
n""'3:,
App. V, XXI),
year 1783.
left
for Jamaica,
anchored at Port
As
Solomon
Cp.
my
edition of Buzaglo's
DUSCHINSKY
457
who
house
of Harris's death.
There being
also other
by Abraham Simson
woman
to re-marry.
Another
Rabbi Saul of
Amsterdam
Appendix (No. V,
Among
Talmudic
dicta.
Berlin,
critics
of the
Talmud
in
the eighteenth
He
among which
nx^an
to
the
JoiyT^r^^;
'Z')i'n,
now
be
found
nearly
every later
his
edition
of
the
Baby-
lonian
Talmud, and
Prof.
Gaon
by
excelled
and genial
spirit,
R. Isaiah was
a storehouse in which
His knowledge
He
i'D''"!"!,
cp.
App. V. No.
21.
8'
^^
Vol.
Wien,
1855.
Dyhrenfurt, 1786.
II
VOL. X.
458
We
to
are
now
17
in
the
happy
Appendix
con-
(V, Nos.
R. Tevele Schiff
the
years
1785 and
1787,
Talmud.
He
addresses R. Tevele as 2^
'
relative
',
on account of
R. Isaiah's father,
R. Loeb Mohiah
Eisenstadt,
having
known
as the
'
Maharam
Schiff '.^^
offices of
R. Bend it
b.
Leb Halfan
Amsterdam, one
for
Leb
to
Pressburg,
Aaron Goldschmidt's
are
to
Responsa
R. Isaiah
of R.
Tevele
Schiff,
pp.
10 a and 30
a.
Other
whom
in
R. Nathan he sends a
Frankfort, to
whom
Synain the
II,
pp.
35-40; Berliner,
ibid.^
p.
7;
p.
cp.
also
''33S
p. 32,
241.
R. Isaiah was born in Eisenstadt, Hungary, in the year 1719, and died
as Rabbi of Breslau on the 13th of
May
1799.
;
Ill,
p. 79,
where
8*
is
given as 1725
J ubelschrift
p. 263,
and
I.
Zunz pnjfH
T"!?, p. 163.
The Order of Service to this Consecration is Museum, but Mr. E. N. Adler is the fortunate owner which I know. The title pages read:
Page
I
one copy of
n^nn
ncj^n
n^m
n-'^n
n2"i:n
T:r
hr\p
S^N
'^"2
'j-j'n
d-j'h
on^^ir^x
:;mp
DUSCHINSKY
459
many
years.**'*
(p.
29
The Rabbi
of Livorno had
woman
in
from India.
Most of R. Tevele's
4095
are,
letters
which
found
MS, Adler
owing
They
and homely
style,
attachment, and
we
see the
true
brotherly love
which
London with
to
the
Dayyan
of Frankfort,
to
who was
also
bound
him by other
referred.
ties,
which
reading
circumstance
these letters
Rabbi
led in
we have already we can well imagine the complacent life our London, but we are also enabled to see some
life
When
phases of Jewish
in
general,
how member of
in:i^
the
Jew
lived, his
his Kehillah or as
p"p
nc^cna
"^nyo
ni^brrn
n"'i?D
nn
(:)DiDnj
in
n")
'"j
hiin
\\^ir\
ij^nm
imo
"ij^hn
i"-ij
d-'di^nh
'"y
r>"^'y
n"ns*
mm
nros
(!)iDi*in
nnro
I
\>v
Nmni
i":;^
ij^n'^npn npii*
Page
This Prayer used
at the
b
in
Duke's
J.
Mr
Gent. Stewart.
his Assistants.
8
See Horowitz,
and
ir\\
V<^^
vol.
I,
pp. 6 and
26;
h 7
460
who
7?D,
letters of this
history.
in especially
favourable light
Jew who had gone wrong by getting into bad company. The boy's associates were waylayers, who, having been
caught redhanded, were condemned to death
with the law of those days.
in
accordance
himself that
penalty,
described
result of the
Rabbi's endeavours,
The
letter is
addressed
Michael Speyer,
(see
banker
to
in
address
Letter
Speyer's
permanent
residence
was
in
Jewish community.
When
address of
homage on
Oct.
i,
1790,*"
later,
"
p. 68.
recorded
in
who
acquired
it
92
a.
Speyer died
in
years of his
life,
DU3CH1NSKY
461
3 Kislev5568
1807
daughter of Gedalyah
is
The following
latter
on
p.
93 of the
in^Dn
n-L'yi
njioN2
f):
p'\'C''
ima
nit^^y^
vj2>
i^nc'
nny
ny
.i'\''
"I"33 P"p3
npn>;h
r":iT
XsV'S
invnn
yn:n
tj'ni
.n:)]})
ba
^jd
mvD
nm
^3^
hm
li'CD
D\^<npn
hdij
bS ^iii
nnnx
.n^n^ Sa^
niyi
Dnnn
Dip?o in^3
n^'pb)
ptrh
ej-'Dinc'
hnt
n":h
.v^n
mo^
pnnnb
^jab
'n!;>
"n
'nt
nnn
.mm
noibb
3"j
:n2-t
nbpi "n"a
^<t^"''^P
>a::'v
HB'ibc^
Vt^-I1''
E^^nbnbi
ijnrj*
no!?bi
nr:i'b
.
n"m
nrj'
i^^-iun
'T'D^no
njno
niDiai
niDTn
njc>i
.
^33 n"n
nnya
:
ntj'yc' nipn!>*i
n^^r]i::!n inc*j'3
nn^!? npnvb
ir:K
jvbyn
":i
py pnc
hnc
>"yi
vSd^
trnip nmsr
nny mjsb
m:^n
m"t;'b
pnv^
n:-^i
hbpn
p^^X n"^
,
ms b
'zi Nnpji
ri3
n7lK"lS
-\^3)n
rinn noD"n3?2n
nnojn
naVkj'n
ni'-'sn
n?3C'J
ns
p^;pn
DDiisOT
pvpn nJD^s
y'!ii
nsT
nc\s*
nriM'^'
"i"inD
ba
462
tion.
it
He had
great influence in
official circles,
and exercised
The
principal
Shtadlan
HB'yjB'
in
Pressburg, son-in-law of
.T-j^y
s'^i
nnn
-2:3
^sn^'i
bv nimps
T-r^n
'"m
r\'2r\
nnpy
ij^n
I'^n pn rn"iyn
nj^'-iD
r\r\'2
'jijyn
"n nsT'ai
nnc'Di
':^':v
^y ny irr'n n^:w"n^
nn^a ni3>bn
nn^:;'
h'div
'^Ta "n
ns may
DJ
.nnin nci^b
Diam
'-jvas^
fiNi
nn^i "jy^
.nT'c'yi
n^an n
a!?^^^
-it^;*:
mnyi
n^ n^
n?^3
.N3n nN
D'j:nna
^^ann^ n^tJi
D^yi
n-j'sj
nanxro
jniN
nbpi onoi
Tinn ns^n
p^jn^
d'-jj'P
'mDUi
.njip^
'"s^na
D'-rir
n-ax
b'c
o^nia
"ID
dj
pa
D*iDr3
n:iDCD
DVivn
pai
n^ya hv)
D"'p'Tivi
J'":!?
D^niD
-jD
D'iDD
"ni"s
la'k^'ni
p"pn
"^^jy
nan
"^jy
nr nati'a
.nncr'j n^yin^
niijni naoN^
nnyo^ nmo pn
.p"s^
.PN V"y:i^
pnriNi
5'"i^'
ns-c
:y"i iSS^J^
d:;'2
V5< ^'y
mosj
nn3p:i
xypn
iTsiN p"p HD
anjO y^ xm
"^<
"va
mno^
Thej' had three sons and one daughter who was the wife of Isaac Speyer's brother Lazar Michael Speyer. (See letters of R. Tevele and his son Moses, who send greetings Ufim "ITIN? to your brother and son in
'
fl. 480,000 (about ^40,000), while at that time the fortune of Meir Rothschild was only fl. 60,000 {Stammbuch, p. 290). Michael Speyer offered hospitality to Rabbi Hayim Joseph David Azulai. the famous cabbalist and bibliographer, when he was, in 1755, on his mission in Frankfurt (cp. Azulai's intiiierary '2)D 7iV^
law
'.)
left
a fortune of
one of the latest volumes of the Mekize Nirdamim Society, of which, so have only seen the proof-sheets. The reference is under date Ab 27). Eliezer, son of Michael Speyer, and Isaac Michael Spej'er"s, his brother's son-in-law, died as a young man on the 7 th ot Ijjar 5549 (1789) his death was attributed by Leb Wetzlar in his book D''yinyn HK'yD (Frankfurt a. M., 1789), a work directed against Rabbi Nathan Adler, the cabbalist, and his adherents, to the threats of Moses Hoelleschau, one of Adler's followers, who had harassed Speyer with the description of terrible dreams which he purported to have had about him (cp. Hcbr. Bibliographie, vol. IV, 1862, p. 78). The Memorbook of the Offenbach Community' (MS. Adler, No. 950, p. 48 a,
in
far, I
;
463
of the leaders as
Lyon de
banker
in
R. Leb who,
in
the
then on a circuit
in
him
in
was
probability
he who
came
into
touch
with
foreign
Graf Kognek
well as
(or
Konnek) and a
certain
Baron
t'v (?),
as
the
among
those
who took
and signed
the petition.
R. Tevele
for per-
be quite
sufficient,
and he asks
The Rabbi
this
is
letter (dated
in
mind.
He
great
anxiety
'
No. 480) mentions Rabbi Kalonymus Kalman, son of Rabbi Kalman Posen, who brought up the late Eliezer Speyer '. The entry reads as follows
:
Dv
.1210
FG., No. 3993). We can thus 2""J understand why R. Nathan Maas, Rosh. -Beth-Din of Frankfurt, was a bitter opponent of R. Nathan Adler the Cabbalist (A. Geiger in Hebr. Bibl., V, Maas was a son-in-law of Michael Speyer, and thus brother-in-law^ p. 77). of Eliezer Speyer, whose untimely death was attributed to a follower of His wife Jutle, daughter of Michael Speyer, Adler as mentioned above. died on the 6th of Tebet, 1754 (,Horowitz, FG.., No. 2813, and FR., vol. IV, Sir Edgar Speyer is a descendant of this family. p. 21). ^* R. Tevele mentions his engagement to Goldschmidt's daughter in a letter to his brother R. Meir in 1781 Letter V). ^^'^ Samuel Pressburg or, as he was called, Samuel Simon was an uncle Cp. D. Kaufmann of Simon de Geldern, great-uncle of Heinrich Heine. AhneHsaal, pp. 36 ff. and H. Adler in /. H. S. E. Trans., vol. V. p. 168.
N'^Dpn V^D^
also Horowitz,
:
464
him
may
no
His anxiety
is
rest in
at night,
and he writes
is
which
added
to
the
letter,
would
where
it,
it
I
(marriage)
negotiating
sum
it
in
even
if
would
I
many and
long letters as
had
do
in this matter.'*^
Another
one
whom
R. Tevele gives
of "inn
pir\'C',
and
basis of
JHSE.
Transactiojis
VHI,
Misc.,
by Mr. H.
S.
Q. Henriques.
Cosman
Lehman, an admirer of
estate
invested in
an injunction
out to the
legacy, one
paid
legatees.'''-'
of
whom
Simon Boas
of the
Hague
to
Herz
money
is
R. Jacob
Emden is proud of the fact that while Rabbi of Emden he never tried to make money in this wa}-. See 120 n!?JD, p. 112. *" Cosman Lehmann was son of Herz Lehmann of Vienna and nephew
of the famous Hoffactor
Cp. Grunwald
Sam.
DUSCHINSKY
refuse to
465
all
He was
sure
do
he
could, especially as
many
If
The Jews
of
altered
much
since the
The study
been advanced,
for
R. Tevele complains
words
as R. Hirsf-hel of having
friends with
whom
and
^^
have no pupil
whom
in
the Shulhan
Communal
Dayyanim being Eleazar Lieberman, who lived in London His full name was Eliezer
of Halberstadt, for thus he signs in the
It is
Lieberman Speyer
document
the
same R. Eliezer
^'^
who wrote to R. Hirschel after his departure from London. Other Dayyanim were Simon b. Meshullam of Prague, Abraham Hamburger of Nancy, called Abraham Nancy,
and Jacob
b.
Rabbi
Eliezer.
It
is,
Dayyanim, but
whom
when he wanted
form a Beth-Din
Halizah ceremony.
5"^
I,
p. 22,
and Letter IV of
App. V.
^1
Letter
of App. V.
^^
Zevi, Laz., p. 71
466
^200
In a letter written
on
ist Ijjar,
he had to do
it.
all
the
work without
in all
Although,
proba-
some contribution
and as they
from the
Hambro Synagogue
^0
let
officiate
on such occasions,
It
was on
account of
at the
this
Hambro Synagogue
Leb
for
was scarcely
time, and
own
had he not
better
times invested a
little
money
in
little
In
And
'far
'
London
explain
is
it
a Kehillah
all
',
he writes,
it
from
cannot
if
in a
letter,
told personally.'
Letter IV,
The
proposals for
salaries
a reduction
of the
Rabbi's
and other
official's
DUSCHINSKY
467
done on account of
my
of
my
it, I
friends here.
nobody can
as
little
fully
as
other countries
now
The
land,
and
in the
same way
is
which no one
else
Two documents
life
in
of
London Jewry
in
Mr. Zangwill,
his
Children of the
when he
who
in jest
According to Jewish
anything that
is
law,^*
if
a
'
man
gives to
woman
(small coin) in
I
herewith
wed
',
my
Law
of
Moses and
Israel
sufficient to
make
it
a valid marriage.
This was
money from
a rich
man by marrying
'
his
daughter
in this
Get
'
(divorce).
In Zangwill's
is
different, as the
p. 51,
Talm. B. Kid. 5
b.
27.
i.
468
is
we
as Nos.
b.
19 and 20 of
testifies
Appendix V.
that
In one instance
Judah
Joseph
girl
now
place.
The
other
Simon
was Mindel
himself
d.
of Samuel.
Hayyim Levi and the girl's name The fact that the bridegroom
came forward
girl
to indicate that
we have
same
class,
and
that, in case
I,
the
would be unwise
of morality
to
as to the
among
incidents,
which
may have
in his quiet
Official functions,
to
give
When
teachers to help
him out of
difficulties.
Although
it
is
Synagogue
94a
When Tevele
Schift"
was Rabbi
in Israel
Square' Zang-will,
95
ibid).
He
says, e.g.,
;
favourable
-\S<Sp''t3"lK2
for
'to
oblige';
^nXipiND =
DUSCHINSKY
469
Duke's Place,
'
in
appointment, the
their Majesties
High
for
English instead
sufficient
of in
Hebrew
as
was usual
',^'''
he never acquired
fluently.
in
At
Synagogue
',^^
Her name was Mrs. Judith Levy, widow of Elias Levy, son of Benjamin Levy, who had been her father's partner in
of rebuilding,
offering ^1^4,000 for this purpose.
by
business.
The
who
says on
p. 7,^^
right noble
and virtuous
p. 141.
dictionary pub-
"
'*
first
(1690-1752).
The
full title
is
praise to be performed at
St.
Jame's Duke's Place London, on Friday March 26th 1790 composed in Hebrew by the Rev. David Solomon Schiff, High Priest of the said Synagogue and translated
Jews Synagogue,
into English
London
Printed by
W.
Justus No. 35
Shoemaker Row,
1903.
Blackfriars,
article of
to
at
Levy's tombstone
bears the short
Esq.'.
seems
to
it
onlj'
inscription
'
Elias
Levy
He
died,
i8th
Shebat,
1750
p.
26
;.
is still
Hebrew
concerned.
It
reads
470
a footnote
" Mrs.
Levi of Albermarle
sum
will
to exalt
In the gate
father's
:
we
rehearse her
"
The
at his sole
Synagogue on
this site").'
The
and anthems
special skill in
Hebrew poetry
nn, but neither
donor, Judith,
,
own name
(on pp. 4
and
6)
]nDn
r]'!2b'^
''212
blessing
"]"i3ti'
''O
for
the
daughter of Moses
n^^.o
'i r\2
no"'
come up
to the
standard
of his
writings.
in
He
by
and by
his learning
which made
Thus we
in their
community
of Portsmouth stipulated
members should be brought before R. Tevele, Chief Rabbi Haham Moses Haof the Great Synagogue, London '.^^
cohen d'Azevedo
refers to
him
in friendly
and respectful
nijon
r\2
nn''
mro nTn:n
mjon
nito^N*
^'r
'-i^N
'2
D^iD
r\2\2
f-]
p"t:'y
m3p:i
?"6
The English
on the
for the
'^
(?)r":pn
inscription
is
no more decipherable.
to hers
left is
name
is
See
DUSCHINSKY
was generally
47I
liked
We
There he shows us
his
unassuming simplicity,
'
his upright
',
'
and answer
me
you know,
am
a lover of orderliness'.
The
On
reprieve,
he
says,
'You know
my
nature,
like
to
be
my
His modesty
is
who
You
ask
me
whether
my
Hidushim
on the Talmud.
do not approve of
if
it
anything that
to
refers
.
You
who
is
my
studies,
my
will
do not
mind
should
that at all
God
know.
As
for the
purpose
of leaving a
I
name behind after 120 years (after my death) print a book who will read long deliberations ?
it,
To my mind
would
and
let
MS.
to
two or three
real
scholars
them examine
am
sure in this
gain great
As
a matter of
fact,
he
who
and not
for his
in
Ijn
pN
472
own imaginary
his
among
little
the great
is
said in
man
this
in
greatness
(riches) are
combined would
in
end of
then
even the
fall
suspicion
honours would
himself to be
away.
Only he who
free
may do
in
his
preserving
and
editing
minute-books of
congregations,
nviN,
vol.
II,
(nnsDn
many
to be found in
some
cases they
The
by and addressed
which we print
in
the Appendix.
Though
of later origin
Landau and Bernhard Wachstein under the Privatbriefe atis dcm JaJire i6ig (Wien
191
1),
title
:
Jiidische
Braumiiller,
letters
the
in
same
qualities
may
as
be attributed to the
the
editors
'
:
printed
Appendix V,
apply to their
publication.
They say
in
the Preface
human docu-
DUSCHINSKY
'.
473
(Einleitung,
XV.)
As
this
far
is
as
Anglo-Jewish
first
historical
records go,
believe
the
publication
of
Yiddish
letters
and
in
Hebrew
all,
private
letters.
Meir
Schifif are
We
hear the
story of the
Hazan
Isaac Polak
and was
its fate
The community
its
'
to have to
do without
many speak
',
well of
office
Moses
'
Schiif,
They say that whatever wrong he has done was not of his own free will, but he did it being misled by that man As is usual in Jewish communities, they Hayyim (?). follow the way of their forefathers what the one loves, the other hates, and some are quite indifferent, do not care
;
foe.
R. Isaac
liberation
difficult
It is
such
is
and
it
will
be
it).
to get
them
(to
agree to
seemed
appeared
but
God
community advised R.
his post,
Isaac
present a memorial to
really punished
on account, of
received.'
some one
So
far
474
an engraving of him
in
the
possession
of Mr. Israel
Solomons
in
London.
made
travelling
more
R. Tevele
who had
the intention of
coming
to
London, to bring
in
left
on
arrival
We
of
London
They
in
dealt
who
like
had correspondents
a suburb of
Copenhagen which, he
says,
is
Hamburg,
R. Meir
Indian
wares.
made some
suggestions
to his
became
sister,
his brother-in-law
by marrying R. Meir's
wife's
as commission agent.
Ijjar,
1780, that only East Indian goods are worth while dealing
in,
but to deal
in
woollen merchandise
is
not profitable
these goods
To be an
are sold
necessitate having
here
bills.
(securities)
the goods
on
six-monthly
profit
Besides, there
it.
attached to
Moses Schiff
became agent
have already
for
Isaac
Speyer of Frankfort,
whom we
mentioned.
On
20
P21ul,
1782 (Letter V)
Moses
Schiff
thanks Speyer for what he has done for him, and asks
for
further
opportunities
to
act
for
him.
R.
Tevele's
DUSCHINSKY
^"^
475
^"^
who
Leb Haas
and
J.
Schuster
of Frankfort.
&
relatives
his
native
town, to which
his brother
he remained attached
Through
in
he
London and
their
lottery stakes
'
Munk
III).
in
Falk
insure
it
',
obviously
referring
the
Baal-Shem
Among
Meir and of
Abraham
Giessen, and
Platz.
Trumm
and Moses
certain
who lived in London, Moses b. Leb let his stepmother know he was astonished
Zunz,
satisfied with the
was not
however,
his other
brother,
who
is
any
and
is
Reference
made
fire
to
astonished the
in
greatly
is
like
cedar-tree',
is
dn.^"*
Abraham
Emmerich
ii
mentioned
11, 1789.
MS. Adler
Died Adar
'0^
Ibid., p. 273.
103
Hameln.
1"*
Glilckel v.
of a
London
named Brown
&
a great
many
people,
476
He
in
buys a seat
1780
{ibid.,Tp.
in the
114b).
His brother Meir had some dispute with the DUi:, the
treasurers
of the
in
signatures
several
members of
M.
Frankfort community
who, he
:
memorandum.
J.
the
children of
Scheyer;^'''
Kulpa;^"''
Lima
;
b.
^*^
Zalman
Hirsch
(?)
Haas
^'^"
;
David
the Levi;
Madl
and
had complained
had come
their
membership
in
community
to join
am
my
ancestors
It
is
not
Nathan
Adler who, a year or two previously (1779), had been excommunicated, and in the year when this letter was
written (1782)
in
left
Rabbinate
Boskowitz.
'
references,
However,
his
duty to see to
it
'"^ Moses Scheyer, who died i Ijjar 1775 Hon, FG., 3530. "s JudaC?, died 1785. Cp. Dietz, p. 176; Hon, FG., 3887.
;
'''
Died 1789.
Dietz, p. 136.
C?).
108
103
Died 18 12
Hon,
FG
4682.
FG., 4203
"" Jacob
p. 164.
Low
Haag
No. VII.
Cp. Dietz,
ibid.
DUSCHINSKY
for this reason
477
community should
he
community
to lapse
On
It
is
Rabbi
in
I).
then that
Tevele's patrons at
his election in
writes to his
nephew Jacob
b.
Mendele Kik
in
Hamburg,
who has
assisted
him greatly
mend
his cousin
in
spondents
Copenhagen.
to his
fact
He
Dayyan, should
Rabbi
not be regarded as a
fault.
only Dayyan
'
in
Frankfort
when
elected
as
to
'.
satisfied
letter to
him to obtain
and was by
this a
means
him
as
Dayyan
in
Frankfort.
direct
In
London
there
R. Tevele, and
Hamburger (Hambro)
To approach
the
for
man would be harmful to his cause, as the family of Haham Zevi would certainly try to obtain the post one of their own family. He had, however, approached
Probably Kiik
;
cp.
Grunwald, Hamburg's
deutsclie
Juden,
p. 270.
47^
a certain R.
no
result, as
Dayyan
Frankfort
till
Before he obtained
this post
he was Dayyan
'^'^,
p. 13).
we can
HI) he
change
his position.
In 178
(Letter
doing anything
for
him
in this matter.
The Rabbi
stacles in
of
his
Emden
family, the
The Rabbi
Emden had
been elected.
R. Tevele.
later
intentional, says
Half a year
(Adar, 1782) he
was anxious to
he wrote was
letter
although
'
it
rests
with
God what
R. Levi
good
for
me and my
b,
p.
body and
in
soul'.
Panto
(cp. ny
6a),
Dayyan
Prague,
had been
did not
News
DUSCHINSKY
479
of this
He
Moses
Rofe
(in
was that
the
late or for
some other
reason,
to entertain an
ofifer
if
made
{ibid).
Of
a
interest
is
a reference in the
same
letter to
Jew who had lived in England somewhere in among non-Jews, and gave up all his property
he lived with,
for
the country
to the
man
an annuity.
When
still
alive
he wrote to him
obtaining aid
Some time
nephew
and he
came
England, the
place,
Only
by
R. Meir Schiff
in
We
He
did
not consider
'
it
D":
480
C'^))
pn
"iny^ip n:>y^N*
t:''JD)
caps',
We
'.
domestic
postscript
trifles.
The same
writes a very
by
daughter of Solomon
Sinzheim,
who
This
lady acted to
all
VHI, which
is
dated
(p^nnn)
servant.
In Letter
XI
which
letter
bears the
date 15 Ab,
1785,
so
that the
1782-5.
Hebrew
childless,
and
Moses
do
the
R. Tevele. Before his death R. Tevele asked his son to have some
of his manuscripts published, and Moses sent the manuscript
of the book anr pt^? to his uncle, R. Meir, to prepare
publication.
this
it
for
We
print in the
he intended this
name
Another manuscript
in
Tractate B.
menlost.
by R. Tevele
in
DUSCHINSKY
(Fiirth, 1798),
481
in
3^n
n-'^N
im
was
man when
his brother
make
it
ready
2,
1808^^^
of R. Tevele (his
sister),
but
in
print.
and on
was entrusted to
his sons
at
1822, the
in
Leshon Zahab
Golden tongue
'.
It consists
haggadic lectures.
not embodied
script
is
in
the book.
The
manu-
Horayot, which
to 19
b,
identical with
all
who knew
p. 37.
JltJ^
Hor.,
FR., IV,
See, however,
MGIVJ.,
Vol.
contains 32 leaves
vol. II,
44 leaves.
482
away on
was buried
day of Kislev, 5552 (Dec. 17, the ground at Mile End, which
1791),
is
and
also the
by Ashkenazim
and Sephardim
represented
alike.
by the
all
Haham,
wardens, while
sentatives.^^'
His death
is
Book
'.^^^
of
Worms, where he
versed in
all his
days
See
11*
Hazkarah-Book of
?i"'*c'
Worms
V'r
f2
ici?!
''m
d"-ii
inuoiN iniin
mD-'^a n^cnc
ni^yci niT'o
n"nx ''m
nivw'
^nmo
'\n
nn "nmc jprn yrf'n jn*' hm vd'' h>2u nuya id^so rvo2 u ^^1 min mna ^pn
c^'l:'^^?^
D''ibpn
"ini
[.
is
. .
iJ^u'KD
inr pji^
D^rj'
\>"p2
m-j'y
.
i:n:
'n:ii?
it
vtrivi
p"p3
pn 'm
d;i
-I'^yo
inv
vn
p"p3
D""j'n
-i3p:i
:
-11:2^]
nnyn
npnvi?.
The date
missing, and
should be added
See Kobez-al-Jad,
His grave
Mile End.
Tombstone inscription of Rabbi Tevele Schiff. is next to that of his son Moses in the burial-ground
.//_
at
liJiTN*
n??2
nro nn::
men
nn
-nine DD-nsDon
nijon
y^'T
x'-2
fi^'iT
ncs'n
D't^'i
t:n"a
rr\\T\2.
\>"\r\
Nj^ni
't-^^d
(?v:3-i3) ^yi
nr-yi
DStJ'o x^sin
(?
n^-in) ''n^c^n
-in^j
ihjn:
rhnrs
nnn
}^ani
n-iTT' nj"':na
. . .
nn*.:'y
mjnin
yvan
nini)
. .
j'-ixn
'oy^
i^^in!?
.
n\T nsiv
.
.
(?;'yr^)
n^:'
(.?in"'23)
n\-i
'pinm o'-nnp^
'n
i^ya
-i-j'xs
rrnna (Pt-dd
nnr \\zh p^^i
mini
'
DUSCHINSKY
me
483
a copy
The
leaflet,
printed
by
their uncle,
Abraham Keyzer
Amsterdam,
J
date,
791, while
is
Abraham
dated
The
versatility in
Hebrew
quite remarkable,
',
exclaims Isaac,
who appears
and
piety, their
shepherd
Woe
London
so
where
lost
?
?
to be found a
man, a scholar
sin, that
thy punishment
of a
in
great
boy of
thirteen
show
at least
by
his
community.
yn^i j::"n^na n""i
(mm)
n'C'i"
iiT
1^)
en n^si
p3*j'
.
2"j;n n:L"D
mo
Y22
(?D''Xjn) ^c>yjn
rcye bv
-iap:i
vbo^
ain
(i^i^hn*
in
.... (n^n
"**
The
leaflets
are
reprinted and
translated
in later
in
App. VIII.
Isaac
called Eleazar,
who
Norden.
him as
wedding present a copy of the book ^NHX fJIl by of Amsterdam. The inscription on the cover of the book
lettering,
)":'
uncle R. Saul
printed in golden
and reads:
2PV^
mj?2n ]2
^''^
"^vb n'n
'('''^pn
]^1'\'\2
'^'\"r\2 ^''-ID
fnm
^'r
IV? P^N
n'3 ?3"1D.
The book
is in
484
III
R. Solomon Hirschcl.
BORX
in
London on
London
He
years old
when
were spent.
The
Berlin
community was
then on a not
much
Mendelssohn and
his circle
in Berlin,
Mendelssohn's
his son
German
It is
Solomon
than Rabbinics.
possessed the
title
Solomon never
period of his
later).
title
He became
father and
Hebrew
Prussia.
style.
He
and
in
The
years.
number of
There
is
no
Solomon
1803,^^^
Hirschel's election.
Sketches, p. 307.
DUSCHINSKY
'
485
Thanksgiving
by Joshua
this was, as
office
is
R. Solomon's accession to
'.^-^
tombstone inscription
He
is
described as
Rabbi of
Berlin, formerly
Rabbi
of our
congregation,
Solomon'.
alive
As
and was
still
as indicated
by the
letters
(= may
Solomon
Hirschel must have come to London prior JQR., N. S., vol. IX, p. 408). One of his which made him particularly recommendable
to 1800 (cp.
qualifications
for the post
was the
fact of his
in
London.
The Rabbinical
in
Synagogue were
the
interval
discharged
New
seem
to have
Synagogue to another.
The
new
^c,
result,
achieved through
the
influence
of the
See
Tlie
by Solomon Bennett.
No. 475 Strand, i8r8,
^^^
^22
London, printed
p. 66.
for
and published
b^'
the author.
See Voice of Jacob, II, p. 68. In 1805 R. Solomon gives an approbation See
vol.
Wolf
Heidenheim's Mahzor.
IX (Shabuot), Rodelheim
1805.
486
These
a
treaties
fiv^e
somewhat
Ashkenazi congrega-
tions
Rothschild.
them
into
its
United
Synagogue, as
each
congregation
retained
independence.
The agreement
chiefly referred
Board of Guardians.
Synagogue,
is
its
development being
very
the most
marked.
He
in
London.
He
who
is
by
little
pleasantry.
a religious
The
story
who became
man through
like this,
On
Sabbath R. Solomon
silk robe,
way
to
The Jewish
prizefighter
his rescuer's
On
way shown
to all
appreciation of one
'
open
'.
It
is
prizefighter
of a different
in circulation,
showing
that,
Law
and orthodox
DUSCHINSKY
principal
487
members
Law
on Atonement
a present of
for
every Succot.
On
Yom-Kippur
buy The
fish,
fish,
an ornamental box
it
would
gives the
names
his suc-
N. M. Adler, the
to
latest date
give the
following
undertaking:
my
that
shall
not slaughter
even for
my own
I
use
shall not
if
do
so.
At any
I
time,
shall
obey him
any place
may
be.
my
in
wine that
Some
of the
names mentioned
interest.
Symonds
5).
in Cincinnati,
Ohio, United
of
States of
America (No.
In 1788 Mr.
Abrahams
Van
Demons
p''"Iiv
'3j
p. 177,
note 21.
488
b.
Jacob
Hazan
in
The
is
hst of places in
especially
interesting,
list
the
Appendix
in the
the whole
of the 152
Shohetim mentioned
Some
is
of
written in English
others
name
otherwise than
in
English.
The
was
in
most cases
g.
Moses
b.
Leb Deutz
of
in
Frankfurt
called
25)
Dover (No.
in
Michael Zalman
(No.
10),
b.
Plymouth
and Moses
'from Schoenlanke'.
Michael Elijah
b.
R. A. hails from
b.
Jacob came
Posen (No.
well as
Shelomo
Zalman
b.
represented, but
50), Galicia
we
find
and
question
in
Jacob
b.
to
officiate
we
must
then
or
at least infer
in the
from
it
three Jewish
p.
25,
mentions
Oxford
DUSCHINSKY
official,
489
I
and
was
In
that,
M. Adler.
of
The Beth Din in K. Solomon Hirschell's time consisted two Dayyanim and a Sofer (scribe). MS. Adler 2257
(5 Tishri,
contains the short minutes of the Beth Din from the years
1833
is
recorded
[D~n2D/"'3 mL:?03
ywip]
by Isaac
b.
David
to his wife
officiating
styled
'1 "nm).
who
now
called
Gallin
[^'t
P^^N3
^i^Nll
nj<T
ni"o
(or
in
I'^^-NJ ?)]
the cases
Azriel
Dayyanim were R.
Hanoch ZundeP^^
sixty-five
said R.
(p. i a).
is
The manuscript
is
a quarto
volume of
leaves fol. 9
missing
Dayyan) R. Aaron
signed the book.
125
The signatures of neither R. Solomon Hirschell be found there, but generally the Dayyanim
at
Page 5 b
.
is
'
London'
\)12)b
XnO^ llOOn
c':yn
D'jya
mum
pnnn
i"ypn
pnji^
nra
3": "'nc'
3a
is:
m"D
2-\r[2
^131! J.^U
lLIS:
VOL. X.
Kk
49
In case
5^^''
figures as
one
of
the assessors,
instead of
He
occupied
the
R. Azriel
b.
833 and his signature as well as that of David Levi (who always signs first and appears
Aaron
MS.
R. Aaron acted
(p.
in the
years 1841
31 a) to
1845
(p.
39
a),
when R.
in
The minutes
cases, of
mostly to divorce
mostly
to
which
if
by writing
deny any
shall
Holy Trinity
to be
in
God
St.
'a'1>
11212
ro"n
b"t
13^32^
""hn
b2p nxi^* ny
ni"D
o'-Dn
'isn
Nin
in
mjona bn'^v
p"n
'in:
b")i^
ND^^D
128
n"2 pna
His signature
His
nc^o
ijniin
3''^
mi
pn b2
xniiT dinj.
NTin"'
is: 1]!2
^^t^'t^'^
n"1D
2^b
'nN
24
'1XJ
PtJ'NDNIpJO.
father,
R. Issacliar Beer,
son puts
T'^'T
DUSCHINSKY
491
and
the
remains
{ib.
Law
office
of England
p, 18).
a non-Jew
who
desired to convert to
London
^^^
p.
^J
b)J'^
The majority
to the
some
from Paris
Sarah,
1
also recorded.
'
to
'
in
to
book states she was obliged to come London from Dublin to undergo again the ceremony of
(p.
29
a).^"^
who
acted as Mohel
in
The MS.
129
is full
m^H^
D'^DH
mx
'^^
nr^
"r^^b
nr:)nD
ot:'
^id^j.
-i"d
'n
cv :fVD
nDn?o"i
ihn^
n^n
myvD
x\ti
inxD p"a
dil-dh
xu^ nDivvn
nyo
....
b.
mmO
David, R.
Aaron
Lisser, R. Arjeh
Kk
492
to the
have
items.
all
it
printed in
To mention
only a
few
The names
Levy,
anglicized,
19b',
21 bj,
Butcher
Jones
I\Ir.
(p.
20b),
Lyons
b),
{ibid.),
^klarks,
Lewis
^^^
(p.
(p.
(pp.
33
of
and 40
43
b).
Levy
his
daughters
]\Iinky, Polly,
27 b).
The
certain
Hindele, daughter
of Jacob,
p.
lives
b),
in
10
Most
End and
* :
some
of
them
Haim
b.
Isaac in
]\Iarks of
London',
girl
Alexander
record
in
1838
(p.
21 bj.
Of
in
special
interest
is
the
(P"12:^)
'
houses called
New Buildings
families,
'.
'
'
Green, built by A. L.
men and
were
their
houses the
like of
which never
built before
learn
'
there
(n"'2~iy
Torah every
n?Dn
D"np).
before
is
the
evening
prayer
N3
Notable
"pi
U
^JD^J
'1 '1'^
1^03 IJTpn
"Js!?.
'Jew boy-
V]
SjDV T\1
nU'SH V"n3
DUSCHINSKY
''2)1''i})
493
for
them
to carry
for
which
the
Rabbi
appeared
'
and addressed
the
hearts
',
the
new
with words
entering
impressing
holiness of the
Sabbath
made them promise not to carry outside that The ceremony took place on the 6th of 23).
cases of less pleasant character called
Mention
for
in
is
made
of
of
people
years,
who
are transported
to
Sidney
number
the meantime.
times.
Civil
cases,
which as a
form
the
Beth Din's
activity,
were
it
London Rabbinate,
in
unless
On
p.
29 b
we
{i?XDun)
of Cologne
{''M\>
New
Synagogue,
bag of money containing ^T^. Raphael had given him a sack in which were two bags, but only
for the return of a
Kazan
money handed
and would
Raphael confirms
In order
parties
agree that
^315 by monthly
b).
instalments of
each (27
Tammuz,
1840, p. 29
494
MS.
are to be mentioned
of Posen,
a copy of a
in
Responsum
of R.
matters of a Get.
The
was
received
is
by R.
nuab
Solomon on Friday, 3
as nn:i^ n2"N
(p. 7 b).
'":
Kislev,
1H35,
and he
addressed
^n^an
nc^-j'
pwn
Responsum by R. Solomon
in
answer to a question
in
a scroll of I^aw
is
found on
p.
22
b,
is
Simon
b,
b.
Reuben, Parnas
Abraham
Hebra Kadisha
Eliezer
b.
Abraham
The
the conversion
in
Rotterdam of
of the
lady, who,
accompanied by
i.e.
Isaac, son
warden
Abraham
Franklin,
Dr.
I.
Franklin, went to
Rotterdam
th-ere to
Rabbinic Law.
of his days.
We
His whole
life
was devoted
congregants.
Even
were furthered
of help to them.
We
have, fortunatel}-, in
number
of
letters
an account of the
last
DUSCHINSKY
495
and
activity.
Hebrew and
official
dealing with
correspondence.
The MS.
fols.
consists
a,
in
39-95, 98
blank,
100
a,
160
165
iHya,
half
189
a,
are
entirely
while
others
are only
filled.
The
dates
The
till
5600 (1840).
He
signs mostly
his resi-
dence
given as
'
Bury Court
Jews
The MS.
represents a
Government
in
written on Nov.
18,
'
addressed to
p.
'
163
b),
may
be quoted
... In the
place
my
in
life in
study
having officiated
I
for a
that country,
several congre-
163
a)
this
important metropolis,
all
it
is
those
London
apply to
me
regulations, a considerable
correspondence
is
necessarily
imposed on
me
496
me
with letters
far
which
in
beyond
my means
to supply,
and from
my
unwillingness
to return letters
unknown,
for
am
in
possession of a
considerable
I
number
neither
which
know whom
be repaid.
content to
Great as this
sacrifice all that I
may
many wretchedly
this point
and on
request
more minutely
number that
expense.
It is
regulations,
letters
sent
in great
number of
to be
is
it
where so much
in
respect
destination
whether the
for
money
letter
it is
received
for
I
postage
unaccounted
and the
destroyed
if
will not
that
transit
it
has
this
number of
letters arriving
with
such a guarantee
to
in this
is
whom
such letter
DUSCHINSKY
lost
497
many imporI
my own
family
whom
have
for-
many
of
and 23
b),
letters
cumatious
The
forbidding the
parties to register
source, the
number
new and
some
for
strange correspondents.
The
relief
evil
of which
complain and
hope
for
my
comprehending the
the charge
made
by the London
passes
the
this
Office for
I
postage.
am
to
the possible
opening
may form
for fraud,
under
my
observation are in no
consist of enquiries
our
or
professional
letters
in
respecting
instances
am
aware that
many
where
but
sent
wish
it
to
be understood that
consquence.
actions.
The
Office
its
own
.'
Where a
me
should be
. .
What
like
better proof
is
kind heart, and at the same time for the honest, business-
manner
of our
Rabbi than
this his
own
letter,
which,
498
I
believe,
to
he himself says
one of these
letters.
Office authorities
handed out
letters
from
for
R. Solomon Hirschel,
in
non-Jewish quarters.
Of
this
we have
MS.
The Duke
of
Solomon Lyon
Cambridge, and
in
the grand
',
old
language
which
it
says
p. 286).
with him, as
in
we
see
from
Duke
The
letter reads
ic6
a,
middle)
:
May
I
it
please
respectfully crave
to offer
my
humblest apologies
my
humble duty
to
Your
as
felt
I left
That
it
may
Lord of
all
humanity and
Highness
the
sincere
.
and obedient
the
Duke
of Sussex,'
DUSCHINSKY
(1840),
499
We
At
Sir
Damascus
when
East
splendid
the
in general,
human blood in connexion with any of their copy of a letter adceremonies. The MS. contains a
ever used
'
in
its
and
spirit
as
am
satisfied
it
is,
may
not go
farther than
gists in
you contemplate.
or
when the L
his
by
G d
Isaac,
seed
G d's
rite
;
peculiar people, he
appointed circitmcision
your
admit
I
literally
it
correct
but
submit
'
to
your consideration.'
Permit
me
of
to
I
to add,
no use
human blood
in
any human
rite ", I
which
Christian,
people, of
whom
more than
.
.
pardon
me
bad
We
The
writer's
faith
was apparent,
rites,
500
at
itself is
not
used, but
washed
off
and dried up
in
way.
The Rabbi
best not
of other faiths.
conflicts
The
135
b),
Rev. T. Smith
(p.
him
to peruse the
sermon
sent,
and
still,
spirit,
of
publication
imperious
between
religionists.
5 Bury Court
(1H31).'
'
The Rev. T. Smith was probably in league with the London Society for Promoting Christianity among Jews,
'
founded
unfolded
in 1808,
which
at the
feverish
activity
among
the Jews,
and not
did not
among
efforts.
I
his
own
Among
MS. (between
pp. 105-6)
in
DUSCHINSKY
501
I feel
you
this
most unpleasant
affair
perhaps
more than
is
in
her 2 children.
But what
is
Father
America and
in
feel
my
for so
many
up to our
the strictest
there greater
do what
them.'
lies in
your power to
is
Father to keep
Equally important
member
letter
146
b).
is
The
22, 1827.
but no
name
mentioned.
well as from
Sir,
my
Office as
my
in
places where
it
done by attending
of the
at a
London
Society, where
the Jewish
reason
best
The
presence of any
in
itself,
it
Jew
at
such
not only
improper
but gives an
'
502
preaching has
to appear at
effect.
Let
me
therefore caution
it
you not
any
should appear
as
if
and
let
me
direct
chapter of
Nor member
wisely
{ibid. c.
let
any personal
figure
(feeling
?)
against
any
merely
i.
opposition
to
them
npb
in
pidvi
D^n
V^^''
V. 5).
hope you
will
take this
believe
it is
by your
sincere friend.'
Other
203, 235
a,
on pp. 201,
On
to
have repented
Synagogue
and
he
in
should be received
his efforts to
in a friendly
again
become
member
'
London
(p.
Society',
' :
and R. Hirschel
201)
my
best wishes
my
power
will
be readily aftbrded.
would recommend
Metropolis, a
list
of which
add.
"
DUSCHINSKY
503
London Society
is
with,
another
"
may
us.'
tempt
many
to identify
many
friends
among
all
appearances an apostate
an interview
(p.
letter,
but
feels
it
is
as
it is
incongrous
{sic !)
should
vation Mr.
writing.'
W. may
The
in
position of the
Jews
in
Palestine,
last
of
century.
in the
all
and Amar-
formed
in
Amsterdam under
(i
Hirsch Lehren
(i
795-1876), and a
was formed
in
London
in
1827
(cp.
J. E., vol.
Vn,
pp. 668-9).
made by
the
Rabbi
at a
504
at St.
up
purpose.
letter
them
for help
'.
The Committee
consisted
of
J.
name
'
in
America. In
New York
'
Geo. A.
Flirst, Esq.'
was Secretary
asking
in
him
which
him'
(p.
187b;
also p. 204b).
In
Society
(p. 191,
p.
204 b,
is
Jan. 4, 5597,
sent
collected at Charleston
by Mr.
S. C.
Levy
Mr. D. Davis of
New York
London
thanks
Permit
me
to
in
am happy
G d
by our
'
fathers.
all
to render
your
will
they are
hereafter
of,
Dear
Sir,
truly.'
Yours very
DUSCHINSKY
505
in
Jamaica addresses
On
on
letter to
'
Messrs. P. Lucas, H.
5590.'
He
writes
'
:
ult.
have
by the
polite
mode
in
which
my
official
actions are
acknowledged and
in return
must
the
English
letter
and
German Congregation
letter
at
Kingston.'
The
to
Phillips.
Another
(p.
235
a)
is
Messrs.
Lawrence,
Jacobs,
and
Lyons,
&c., Kingston.
most cordial
letter to
is
found on
p.
113
b.
for the
in
English as
answered
fully
on three pages
'Dr. Hirschell
The
letter concludes,
is
indisposed.
He had
why
'
(March
20,
A
(p.
'
friend
of
Israel
'
receives
the
following answer
to
letter
you addressed
call
friend
VOL. X.
me
506
with afford
me
among your
people,
him
filled
to hasten the
day
"
shall
be
To
us the scat-
tered
Remnant
"
conviction
that
neither a son of
man
that he
",
should He.
the perfect
in his
should repent
behoves us to place
sacred promise
has
afforded
constancy un-
we
hand
inflicts
and
duty.'
The
come from
re-written).
first
page
is
whom
'
not disclosed.
Laws
work.
Hebrews
',
receives
a letter
copy
of
this
The Rev.
Dr.
will
take
the
earliest
opportunity
Maimo-
to acquaint
is
Mr.
on
that,
till
much
truly
philantropic
of
his
Nation, enlisted
the
5 Bury Court
'
May,
5598.'
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON
DUSCHINSKY
507
Among
to Sir
letters
to individuals
(p.
Moses Montefiore
218), to
Solomon Heine
Hamburg, Dr.
less
fill
by
far
the
ritual
when
and
quarrels
among
a
the
individual
members
most trouble
130
261
(p. a,
a).
in
this
respect (pp.
a,
99a-io7b, ii6b,
a,
119,
b,
231
223
a,
229
a,
244
One passage
in
letter
in
to
this
congregation
'
our days.
Do
not
let
selfish
way
of unanimity and
Concord.
offices
of
congregation.
And
who do
remember
entitled
feeling
by the majority
are
to
respect
and obedience.
Do
will
this
and good
soon be restored
Peace.'
:
among you
will
Among
(p.
Bath
166 a);
Birmingham
;
(pp.
196b,
b,
Canterbury (pp.141
181 a)
Chatham
Glasgow
(pp.
(p.
208
a,
252
a)
Edinburgh
(pp. 126 a,
179b);
348
b,
179a);
Ipswich
(pp. 115 a,
Samuel,
James'
Street,
194
a,
Ll3
5o8
(pp.
1
195
b,
251 b)
a,
256
b)
Jersey
198 b);
1
Plymouth
a,
215
a,
259 a);
Portsea (pp.
18 a, 206
249
b,
250
a).
a)
Swansea
(pp. 225 a,
244 b);
personal
Southampton
motive
is
(p.
178
Letters
which the
illus-
trating to
show
life-picture of
our Rabbi.
In this
connexion one
said
it
letter,
of which
',
my
'
friend
Mr. E. N. Adler
in full.
',
was
'
quite classical
a) is
is
worth quoting
Master Elias
The
I
letter (p.
l6S
addressed to
who,
ven-
ture to suggest,
had
to
resign
his
position
on
p. 333).
The Rabbi
'
writes
but that you would carry these faults to the extent you
do, I did
not expect.
your
situation.
member
of society rests
Do
if
this
and
will still
be your friend as
have been
but
you
will
in
your
ill
conduct,
for you.
must decline
You know what trouble and anxiety I have had on your and now I devote money and time for your account
:
welfare
yourself worthy of
my
by proper behaviour to your Master. If you quit him the money paid for you is lost, and I shall certainly not do
any thing whatever
reflect
for
you.
;
on your situation
DUSCHINSKY
it
509
If
on
my
It
it
when
too late.
am
we
like the
words of a father to
his
son that
we
read these
lines.
Amongst
all his
and
in the
boy whom he
befriends.
And
care.
this
whom
he took
under his
On
copy of a
dated Feb.
letter to Messrs. B.
9, A. M, 5597, written
and
W. Levy
at Portsea,
named Elkin
of Messrs.
who was to be placed under the care Levy. The Rabbi would have liked the youngest
Gollin,
'
Mrs. Gollin
in
I
answer
beg to
is
and
trust that
do as
well.
You
and
kindness
may
conversation
points
to
explain
many
me.
.'
The
rest
may
allow the
with the
reservation
clearly
that the
state
contract
between
the
partners
must
that
the profits
made on
Another document
(p.
6, 5.596
(1836)
5IO
reveals the
'
in
affect
I
a reconciliation between
have and
am
yet willing
my
power
to
it
make
is
Peace, in the
mean time
The
letter is
do not think
it is
a coincidence
He was
had the
result
hoped
for,
if,
assume^ the
letter following
dated
June
same people.
This
letter is
a dispute
letter
am happy
effect,
to find that
my
has
me more
I
among my
hope
of teaching
happy
effect
am
acting from the impulse and passion, and not attaching that
im.portance to the sacred
name which
this
in
as
human
beings
How
to dwell together in
harmony ".
little
my
increased
men ought
to
do.'
DUSCHINSKY
;
51I
same
names
of this
shall only
'
N.B. This
I
letter will
be handed you
tell
by Mr. Cohen
to
whom
have instructed to
is
you that
on your
in
you
will
call
have written
unfriendly
them
all
feelings
immeyour
them and
also to
The beginning
'
I this
day received a
by which
I
letter
that
your
respected father
likely to
hope
to
your happiness
all
my
efforts to
produce
this
I feel it
now my duty
to call
on you religiously
on our
we must do our
last
part to merit
.'
it.
think
is
almost forgotten.
the
To
to
enter
in
perfect
all
purity of heart
sins
forgives
is
them
their
That
the reason
why both
till
after
is
that both
with the
full
confessional prayers.
Among
the
professional
Rabbinical
letters
we
find
512
several addressed to R.
whom
he
sent
money
for
distribution to relatives of
London Jews
living in Poland, to
to the
Rabbi of Lemberg
(p.
we
shall
hear
later.
He had
and brandy
him
by a wine merchant
:
of Bordeaux.
bay^
Events
of.
in the
On
:
p.
228 a we read
Copy
of the Cornwall
Royal
Gazette
graciously pleased,
by
Leman
St. to
in
ordinary at Truro.'
Copy
'
by
of
the
'
Wherry
in-
the
third call
30.$-.
per share
the
now made', dated Nov. 27, 1H37, discloses that Rabbi must have had some interest in these shares.
A
him
letters received
Poland.
On
Rabbi nearly
lost
1 1
;^i04 in these
b).
While
their
in order to strengthen
and Jewish
THE GREAT SYNAGOGUE, LONDON DUSCHINSKY
tradition
his
513
call
congregation
lines'.
developed
on
what we
nowadays 'modern
by
several
members
managing committee.
The
petitioners
were anxious to
They
call
the
for
which
is
'.
This was
in
the establishment
841
of
Although most
of
felt
R.
1841,
Solomon Hirschel
stating that
licly
'
issued
and
',
in their published
'
book of prayers
reject the
Oral
Law
of the Oral
Law
munion with
act.'
us Israelites in
'
any
Picciotto tells us on
the
signed the above paper with the greatest reluctance, knowing that
'
it
',
&c.,
and
document, he wished to
recall
it.
The
some
time'.
in
On
the
Saturday,
principal
1842,
it
was
read
publicly
Synagogues
only of the
{Sketches, p. 380).
first
Picciotto apparently
knew
and
514
was a second
1 841). ^22
one,
dated 9
Heshvan, 5602
all
read in
the Synagogues,
except
which
worth noting
read.
Herem was
M. Adler
by the
late
Dr. N.
The
stand taken
by R. Solomon
the public
life
in
connexion with
this
of the
London com-
His whole
From
early
till
folios of
Of
time
scholar,
for
writing works.
No
after
nothing
He was
to
rather
tall
and of commanding
appearance
in his
way
it
He
lived
an ascetic
life,
and
is
to Sabbath,
year.^^^
of Faith
in
by
by
The
See
ft.
W.
pp. 311
134
DUSCHINSKY
515
'It
necessary
',
bation (dated
Kislev,
S575
1814), 'to
make
much approve
Hirschel
for
of
recommending
in a
were attacked by a
man
pamphlet
1827).^^^
Yomtof Baneth,
after
a native of Polotzk
in
came
London
Royal
1799.
He
He
claimed to
possess
a patent
as
in his profession as in
'
As orthodoxy
mine
\ he says of himself,
particularly as a foreigner
all
and a
single
abide by
was then
'
He found
friends
he took a
lively interest in
munal
affairs,
He
Solomon Hirschel
135
him
in his
bosom
title
in
'The Axe
Root', or
'
in the in
High
Priest of the
Jews
in
England,
him on occasion of
be
End Road.'
Alexander
136
p. 4.
am
indebted to Rev. M.
for calling
my
5l6
since his
of
some dissension
losses of
money
what
',
of his portrait'.
to discover
Tene Bikkurim
the English
title
of which
'A
Collection of Rabbinical
accuses the
Rabbi
contain
'
the
'
elements of faith
(p. 16).
',
but
many
instances
elements of unbelief
In answer to this
pamphlet
INIayer
in
Elements of Faith
It is
quite possible
At
least
Bennett says so
title
'
in the reply
The
in
displayed
Rabbi
I
'
know
he
is
the
mind
of
he
says,
a Zaddik
who
is
He
man
(?2Dn
N*cn3)
praises,
blamed,
cannot, however,
by and
attacked.'
Bennett's
account
of
R.
Solomon
is
naturally quite
any
literary
work.
His
517
of
London Jewry,
ho\ve\er,
may
be
of
some
When
he arrived there, he
tells us,
'
It is
a theme
in
on the
all
he
is
".
Would
have
in
an
Italian, a
French or German
I
song, would
might
to
such
a
fineries
'.
The
further
statement, that
brethren
'
entertained
an
That
'
proud
government
and
all
intercourse
among my
nation
'
this
'.
entitled
Tcne Bikkurim
like a tiger,
He
and
among
the
nmo =' Avenge Offer', The anathema was by the Rabbis, the Haham Raphael Meldola, and
'
One wretched
and from
hireling Afr.
Muday
of the
this
and
'
51
R. Solomon Hirschel
vindication entitled
(if
15 years
of Rabbi
learning,
made any
display of
of rabbinical
books,
He
presented an inventory
Rabbinical
library with
possessing
Zalman Bahur,
It is
Mr. Witherby
(cp. Picciotto, p.
284
ff.;
Wolf-Jacobs: Bibl.
Hirschel's
He
Why
is
seeing that
all filled
The
on the
Rabbi
is
also
and
zvare-Jiouses
many
'
of them,
Jewish picture
public
sales
all
.
.
without blushing
before the
community
"^
Ibid., p. 19.
DUSCHINSKY
sufficient
519
doing
so.
And why?
it
We
have
reason to
conjecture, because
his purpose,
or
frown.'
Better
still
ments
in the
man of
high station in
when speaking
call "
whom
they vulgarly
the
High
Priest". ... In
my
country, viz.
Poland
of "grand Rabbi"
I
quite a
hesitate
do not
on an average,
07ie
men
and
of letters
sufficiently
their brethren so as to
of Israel.
own
Israelitish
But
different
is
rites,
their
liturgy
in
The Rabbles,
&c.,
functions
all
viz.
Nor
is it
in this
stocked
with
difficult
learning,
as
and
Law
courts.
With vehemence
literature
is
exclaim Alas
with
That
the whole
Hebrew
p.
at stake
my
people
works
'2^ Ibid.,
56.
Sol.
following
;
Constancy of
Israel,
1812;
^J"lin
Cm,
Theological
and
Critical Treatise
;
on
the
Holy Language, 1835 The Temple of Esekiel with engravings by About him cp. Mathias Levy in Jewish Chronicle, July 31, 1903.
520
in this
64).
Rabbi
in
this
country
is
introduced
by favour than by
is
merit,
and good
for
recommendations of merchants
importation.
quite
enough
instal the
his
Adding
to this, they
who
Rabbi,
are. unfortunately,
have not
which
rich people.'
All this
is
applied to
'Now
for
the
London
some
acordingly
Rabbi
at Berlin,
recommended
such
;
Rabbi of Prentzlow,
London.
Among
;
the eminent
were
as
Goldschmids
Sic.
did
little
all
little
clearly inspired
by personal
motives, and
mattered
him
statements
of
Bennet
in
order
preserve
the
names
day
this
Anglo-Jewry, and
in
in the
community
says,
as they appeared to
him
part, at least,
of
what he
must
ha\"e
been
in
facts.
R. Solomon Hir-^chels
mode
of
life
;/^i4,ocOj
the
amount of
on
his death.
fell
and broke
-DUSCHINSKY
521
Two months
caused
and broke
his
his collar-bone.
The
Oct. 31,
by ten
years.
who had settled in Sandomishel province of Posen, was in London on a visit to his parents. Saul fell ill during the week of mourning, and died shortly afterwards in London at the age of thirty-three. He was Of his wife the one of the Rabbi's youngest children.
Rabbi always speaks with great respect and
his
affection,
and
married
life
On
was
not have answered his letter had not his mother said a
good word
in his
p. 256).
He
had four
The sons were David Tevele, Saul, The daughters were Golde, and another who apparently remained
Isaac, son of
Jonah
in 1827,
and
100
to
him 500
wedding expenses.
in business,
and
sends the
money
to his son-in-law,
it
Samuel
Zeliker, in
Warsaw
with
from
letter
and, in addition,
VOL. X.
Mm
522
The
in
his
own
position
nnsi
. .
London
n'bin bin
t:yr:n
51D3 'bn
::'iDnn
njni
,nm^
sic'
on-'S
ntj'x
^bn
o^iyn
^ns'^j
\2vr2:i
^!?y?D
ybcrh) ;b ne'N
-^is-ino
^pis^o
i"yn
pidi:
[i^bn]
D^J'^y^
mx.
'.
have already
they speak
silver
I
falsity.
I
See the
little
possessions
have
I
in
and books,
wish
could afford to
sit
and should
have enough to
live
on from
amount of
laxity and
trouble, apart
I
my weak
state of health
Is
it
not
as
if
we
(MS. 4160,
p.
26 a; cp.
7Q^', N.
S., vol.
ff.).
On
Rabbi writes
(p.
reference
to his
fame as a
rich
man
13b).
'I
am
not a Roth-
money
David
left for
do
possess, not in
in Thaler.'
Jerusalem.
When
he
father gave
him recommendations
to
Messrs. Hilbe
Heugh &
The
DUSCHINSKY
523
is
London
in 1827.
The
lived in
third
son
called
himself Ephraim
London, and
Tysmeni9a
in Galicia.
The youngest
his father in
settled,
P-
Hirsch.
he was a wine-merchant
13 a); afterwards he
Laz.,
like his
^11)-
The
son of
in
was married
to
Samuel,
Nahum
Zelliker in
to have been
good circumstances.
They
were,
as
mentioned, the
Jews to
received
relatives in Poland.
On
the
complaint from
in
much
were
Warsaw
for a transmittance,
gr.
gr.
The Rabbi warns his children not to do it in future, and appends some very sound morals as regards behaviour in business. They should not try to make too much out of one transaction, and in the case of transmittance of
interest of
money from
is
done
in the
Who
in
such matters,
life,
it
is
better
always to spend
little
by
little.
liberal
man should
more than
.M
how much
less justified
anybody
to spend
524
It is true I lost
money, (otherwise)
I
idea to
merchant
but
at
I
time when
live
had
Rabbinates,
I
wanted to
on
my own
earnings, although
could
my own among
Din"'''
Hebrew
families)
and
also
among
people of
(ancient
it
said
should
be (and so
My
opinion has
will
hope he
enable
for the
me
to live a retired
life,
so that
can serve
Him
have.'
rest of
letter
my
days with
all
my
soul
and
all
This
There
are
several
written
to
this
son-in-law and
27 b-31
a).
Rawa).
not
in
great
On
fl.
and
that
is
not enough
her husband and his father should also give her something
The
him anxiety
married
in
and trouble
many
years.
In 1827
she
(p.
13
b).
The name of
her
husband
is
we know
that he was a
whom
R. Solomon
d. Jitd. in
Lissa, p. 246.
DUSCHINSKY
525
letter to
some one
in
the
He
mentions
in
Hamburg
like
but
we cannot gather
father
lived.
The
that
{ibid.,
would
place
son
Hirsch of
In 1836
34
a).
we hear
become
insane.
The Beth
is
Rabbi
London
writes to the
mentioned)
on the 22nd of
him
all
were also
need of help
from him
{ibid.,
p. 123).
The
on
has
Rabbi
of Posen
(p.
212
b),
212
a).
said
the
them
atmosphere.
This explains
why none
of his
Voice of Jacob,
II, p.
58.
526
Wednesday, Nov.
2,
1842
ground
funeral
at
Mile End.
all
funeral
The
The Order
'
lamented Chief
Rabbi Rev.
Solomon Herschel,
consists
title:
of
pages
nro^-^'
8,
D''piD3
y"j
n"v2
nnnp ova
nos^'i:^
cinirorci
a""in
pB'n-i!^
is
(cf.
Zedner,
in
p.
477.
copy of
this
Order of
Service
also
The
Portsmouth on the
under
St.,
the
is.).
title
'
Position
of
'
the
Jews
'
(Green,
Newgate
great
'
Know
ye not that a
man
shall
Israel?' (2
Sam.
3.
38).
Who
?
'
say
?
how
of his people
And
him
was a plea
rights of
English citizenship.
The
estate
of R.
as
in
mentioned, at about
The
effects
were sold
February, 1843,
prised
t>y
many an
silver
interesting
mentioned
cup with
the
medal
Vespasianus,
For
is
whom
the
'
Voice of Jacob
'
not
DUSCHINSKY
Two
\is.
527
curious
Two Hannuccah
The
lamps fetched
loi".
6d.
and
per ounce.
New
Some
total
elegantly
much
as "]
The
sum
of ^1,400.
The
library
was not
money bequeathed by Mr. Solomon Arnold for the BethHamidrash and the i4(S MSS. were later catalogued by
Dr. Neubauer
In
in 1866.^*'
memory
One
side of this
medal
while the reverse gives the record of his age, date of death,
and term of
office.
It
medallist of Cornhill,
who
last
of the
Rabbinical school.
it
man who
was, at
who
the
same
man
of classical
and
will
him.^'^^
The
choice of the
community
fell,
after nearly
two years
of deliberations, on
of Hanover.
"1 Cf. above,
1^2
p. 51.
^
See preface
ibid.
to the
Catalogue.
and
Libraries.
sity OF
'
+ 552.
parts.
The Guide by
(pp.
Prof.
The
first
Middle Ages
and the
third (pp.
333-483) a syllabus of
Mediaeval Culture
in twenty-eight chapters.
A
last
very
full
index
The
at the University of
gives a very
followed by
recommendations
for reading
on the
The author
articles
books and
by the order
in his
bibliography.
book of
student
who
is
constantly compelled to
developments
a
in the
Jewish world.
As he cannot possibly be
specialist in the
various
periods he
may have
to study,
an
on the important
me
to review a general
is
book
the
like
fact
Quarterly Review
529
530
do
full justice to
time.
with the
Hebraica sunt,
but
we
have a
publications in
to
of
when we find an equal neglect of modern languages on our subject. It is gratifying find that Prof. Paetow has made extensive and intelligent use modern Jewish works in his lectures and in the book based
cause for complaint
In examining the book I looked over a considerable part of
upon them.
the recommendations for reading
for the periods with
which
am more
note any
Prof.
Paetow.
The book
in
every way
as
fulfills its
may be
me
book.
They mostly
first
In the
especially
make some
list
corrections here
is
and
there.
No.
62.
Besides Freidus'
there
No. 850.
The
last
volume of Graetz
It
(5th) to be issued in
and appenit
book
its scientific
has
is
No. 854.
Volkes,
article
is
Henne am Rhyn,
in
Kuliurgeschichte
des judischen
S.
On
Cassel's
27,
still
'Juden'
Ersch loid
Griiber,
vol.
deserves recommendation.
'
PAETOW'S
No. 857.
originally
'
'
MARX
531
The Jews
the
',
Oxford Essays (1857), p. 204-38; compare also [Cracroft, Bernard] The Jews of Western Europe
appeared
'
in Westminster in his
Review,
428-70, reprinted
1-70.
of
read
Karpeles
Literatur
instead
Neumark
in
Die
der jiidischen
appeared
1886,
second
edition, 1909.
1857
(with
Index,
brief
Frankfurt,
infinitely
more
reliable,
though
very
and
dry.
and
3,
mentioned.
excellent.
The
Of
articles
No. 865.
I,
No. 867.
is
mentioned
on the
'
Intellectual Life
of Mediaeval Jews
tioned on
p.
The
376 are
far superior.
Of the
first
of these a second
volume appeared
No. 868.
richtsivesen
in 1914.
Among
tvdhrend
Das Jildische
Epoche,
Unter-
spanish-arabischen
Vienna,
No. 871.
Rom,
found
in
some
respects preferable
is
Chwolson's book
in spite of
its title
and
first
falls
No. 881.
A
'
1895; add
die
Konrad Eubel,
added
Juden
',
should have
book
Languedoc,
1881,
or
532
Marseille an
also perhaps
P7incipie7i
der Juden-Gesetzgebung
i7i
Under
following
Isl.
Geschichte der
Juden
in
iti
1888-98.
Gottlieb
in Bohffien,
J^jS,
Bondy and Franz Dworsky, Zur Geschichte der Juden Mdhren und Schlesien von go6 bis 1620 I, ^06 bis Prague, 1906, containing 763 documents, published more or
:
less in extetiso.
Quellen
Oesterreich,
i?i
Deutsch-
Pedro III
et
I,
2,Jaijne I, Paris,
191 1
n,
I,
Bartolomeo
Judei di
Fidel
Pedro III, 19 14 (reprinted from the J.) e Giuseppe Lagumina, Codice diplomatico degli
RE
Sicilia,
I-IH,
2,
Palermo,
Hebrea,
Fita,
La Espana
I-H, Madrid,
las
Hebreos mallor-
de Barcelona,
The
first
Prolegomena zur
altesten
W,
1-146,
in this chapter.
PAETOW
P. 321.
'
'
MARX
Jews
533
Add
in Spain
and
Portugal,
still
useful
on account
of the large
Coimbra,
Pp. 375 and 376. Mediaeval Jewish Philosophy should rather be dealt with together with Mohammedan Philosophy. Several
latter
Mathematik
might be mentioned.
is
connexion
main source
is
for the
based entirely on
of
Hebrew geometry
Abraham Bar
Hiyya.
The
mann
P. 408.
Joel,
Moses
der Philosophie,
J.
I,
1876).
deserve
mention
place.
important works on
Of
p. 21,
misprints correct,
145,
Hanau
for
Hannover
Dei
p. 250, The Inquisition of Maimoun instead of Alaimom. The preceding notes may be
;
and
p.
379
of
some value
If
which ought
useful
to
appear
a
at regular intervals in
order to keep so
and important
book up
to date.
any of these
titles
534
book,
may
say that
have
tried to limit
myself as
much
as possible,
my
opinion
be any doubt.
large,
it
is
only
at
the
Alexander Marx.
Jewish Theological Seminary of America.
DS 101
J5
New ser.
v.lO
PLEASE
DO NOT REMOVE
FROM
THIS
CARDS OR
SLIPS
UNIVERSITY
OF TORONTO
LIBRARY