Association for Jewish studies 2003-27(1)

Front Matter Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003) Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131766 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

VOLUME 27, NUMBER I

APRIL, 2003

REV IE

W

OAS

THE

JOURNAL OF

THE

ASSOCIATION

FOR

JEWISH

STUDIES

AJS Review ASSOCIATIONFOR JEWISHSTUDIES WALTHAM,

MASSACHUSETTS EDITOR

Jay M. Harris,HarvardUniversity ASSOCIATE EDITORS

Nehama Ashkenazy,University of Connecticut,Stanford YaakovElman,YeshivaUniversity Rela Geffen, BaltimoreHebrewUniversity SaraHorowitz,YorkUniversity MarshaRozenblit, Universityof Maryland JeffreyRubenstein,New YorkUniversity BOOK REVIEW EDITOR

Marc Saperstein,George WashingtonUniversity MANAGING EDITOR

Angela Jaffray The AJS Review (ISSN 0364-0094) is publishedtwice annually by the Association for Jewish Studies Manuscriptsfor considerationshould be sent to Prof. Hillel Kieval, Washington University in St. Louis, Busch Hall 106, Box 1062, St. Louis, Mo. 63130 and Prof. MartinS. Jaffee, Jackson School of InternationalStudies, Universityof Washington,Box 353650, Seattle, Wa. 98195. Books for review should be sent to Prof. JeffreyRubenstein, New YorkUniversity,53 WashingtonSquareSouth, Room 100, New York,NY 10012. ? 2003 by the Association for Jewish Studies Publishing, Subscription, andAdvertising Offices: CambridgeUniversity Press, 40 West 20th Street,New York,NY 10011. U.S.A.; or CambridgeUniversity Press, The Edinburgh Building, ShaftesburyRoad, CambridgeCA2 2RU, England. Annual subscriptionrates for Volume 27, 2003: Institutionsprint-plus-electronic$99/f64, payable in advance or on receipt of invoice; institutionalcheck or credit card only. Special ratesexist for membersof the Association for Jewish Studies;please contactthe association for membershipdetails. Postmaster:Send address changes in the U.S.A. Canada, and Mexico to: AJS Review, JournalsDept., CambridgeUniversityPress, 110 MidlandAvenue,PortChester,NY 10573.

Review

AJS

THE JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES

APRIL2003

VOLUME 27, NUMBER1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARTICLES

MarcBrettler Issues TheCopenhagen School:TheHistoriographical ........................................

1

Ram Ben-Shalom Between Official and PrivateDispute: The Case of ChristianSpain and Provencein the Late Middle Ages .............................23 Glenda Abramson No WayOut: Brennerand the War ...........................................

...............73

REVIEWESSAY

Jonathan Klawans RethinkingLeviticus and RereadingPurity and Danger ...........................................89 BOOKREVIEWS

Isaac Kalimi. The Book of Chronicles:Historical Writingand LiteraryDevices MARCZ. BRETTLER ...........................................................

...........

...................103

Judith M. Hadley. The Cult of the Asherahin Ancient Israel and Judah: Evidencefor a Hebrew Goddess

105

GARYBECKMAN ...............................................

Abraham Tal. A Dictionary of SamaritanAramaic

106

...............

GARYA. RENDSBURG ......................................................................

Nili Sacher Fox. In the Service of the King: Officialdomin Ancient Israel and Judah HERMANNMICHAELNIEMAN.............................................

Lee I. Levine. TheAncientSynagogue: TheFirst ThousandYears STEVENFINE .......................................................................................

112

.... ...................

Eric H. Cline. TheBattles ofArmageddon.:Megiddo and the Jezreel Valley from the BronzeAge to the NuclearAge ....................... NEILASHERSILBERMAN

......

114

...............................

Eleazar Kallir. Qedushta'otfor Shavu ot [HymniPentecostales] WOUTJAC.VANBEKKUM ...............................................................

....................

Alon Goshen-Gottstein. TheSinner and theAmnesiac: TheRabbinicInventionof Elisha Ben Abuya and Eleazar ben Arach JEFFREYRUBENSTEIN................................... .......

15

117

. ....

Avi Sagi and Zvi Zohar. Circles ofJewish Identity:A Study in Halakhic Literature MARC B. SHAPIRO .......................................................................

109

...

120

Zefira Entin Rokeah, ed. and trans. Medieval English Jews and Royal Officials: Entries ofJewish Interest in the English MemorandaRolls, 1266-1293 WILLIAM CHESTER JORDAN ................ .....................122 ............. .................................... Robert Chazan. God, Humanity,and History: TheHebrewFirst CrusadeNarratives 124 DAVIDMALKIEL .................................................................................. ............................ Nathan Katz. Whoare the Jews of India? BRIANWEINSTEIN ........................................

...

...............

........................

126

Sara Japhet. The Commentaryof Rabbi Samuel ben Meir (Rashbam)on the Book of Job MORDECHAI 128 Z. COHEN................................. . ................ ................ Moshe Halbertal. Between Torahand Wisdom:Rabbi Menahemha-Meiri and the MaimonideanHalakhists of Provence GREGGSTERN ..... .. ............ ................ .................... ........................... Moshe Hallamish. TheKabbalah in Liturgy,Halakhah,and Custom JOELHECKER............................................................

..............

32

136

Diana Lobel. Between Mysticismand Philosophy: Sufi Languageof Religious Experience in Judah Ha-Levi' Kuzari . DANIEL J. LASKER ............................. ................. ... .................137 Michael Walzer, Menachem Lorberbaum, Noam J. Zohar, editors. TheJewish Political Tradition GORDON M. FREEMAN .................... 140 ...................................... Elinoar Bareket. Fustat on the Nile: TheJewish Elite in Medieval Egypt ARNOLD FRANKLIN ...... .... ...................142 .. ... ........................................................................ Vera Basch Moreen. In Queen Esther's Garden:AnAnthologyofJudeo-Persian Literature HERBERT H. PAPER.................... ....... ....................144 ....... ............................... Immanuel Etkes. Ba'al Hashem: TheBesht-Magic, Mysticism,Leadership ALLAN ......... ............ 145 NADLER...................................... ........... Daniel M. Swetschinski. Reluctant Cosmopolitans: ThePortugueseJews of Seventeenth-CenturyAmsterdam M IRIAM BODIAN ......

...............

..............

...............................

.....................

149

Jeffrey A. Grossman. TheDiscourse on Yiddishin Germany.From the Enlightenment to the Second Empire NEILG. JACOBS .....................151 ........................................... Gulie Ne'eman Arad. America, Its Jews, and the Rise ofNazism DANIELSOYER........................................

.....................153

Marc Gopin. Between Eden andArmageddon: TheFutureof WorldReligions, Violence,and Peacemaking MOSHECOHEN ................................................................................... Sidra DeKoven Ezrahi. Booking Passage: Exile and Homecomingin the Modern Jewish Imagination . ... JAMESS. DIAMOND ....................... . .. ... ........................157

55

Yael S. Feldman. No Room of TheirOwn: Gender and Nation in Israeli Women'sFiction NEHAMAASCHKENASY.................................................

..........................159

Gershon Shaked. ModernHebrewFiction A LAN M INTZ

16 1

....................................................................................................................

Leora Batnitzky. Idolatry and Representation:ThePhilosophy of FranzRosenzweig Reconsidered ZACHARY BRAITERMAN ..........................................................165

Harold I. Saperstein. Witnessfrom the Pulpit: TopicalSermons, 1933-1980 JEFFREY S. GUROCK ........................................................

......

...

....................

167

Susan Sered. WhatMakes WomenSick? Maternity,Modesty,and Militarism in Israeli Society Susan Martha Kahn. ReproducingJews. A CulturalAccountofAssisted Conception in Israel RUTIKADISH.........

.............................169

........................................

Mitchell B. Hart. Social Sciences and the Politics of ModernJewish Identity IRA KATZNELSON..........................

...........................................

173

Hadassa Kosak. Culturesof Opposition:Jewish ImmigrantWorkers,New YorkCity, 1881-1904 M AXINE S. SELLER ..................................

..............................

....................

175

Michael Berkowitz. TheJewish Self-Imagein the West RICHARDI. COHEN..........

.

....... ..........................

...............

177

HEBREW ARTICLE

x............. 07

,'W TU?,1 fl'mm =p Tin q 1: mom Tv

OK j? Rn

orrn nnit

,tr T 21.'5

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues Author(s): Marc Brettler Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 1-21 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131767 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

AJS Review 27:1 (2003), 1-22

THE COPENHAGENSCHOOL: THE HISTORIOGRAPHICALISSUES*

by Marc Brettler A bit more than a quarterof a century has passed since the publication of ThomasThompson'slandmarkTheHistoricity of the PatriarchalNarratives,' inauguratingwhat has been called the CopenhagenSchool, typified by the works of Thompson and Niels Peter Lemche, who now both teach at the University of Copenhagen. Few works have changed the face of biblical scholarship so completely. In conjunctionwith JohnVan Seters'Abrahamin History and Tradition,2 Thompson'sbook sounded the deathknell for those who insisted on the historicity of the patriarchalperiod, a relatively common position up to that point, especially in America. By illustratingthatdetails of the Genesis narrativesreflect first ratherthansecond millenniuminstitutions,contraryto the claims of Albright,Gordon, Speiser,3and others,Thompsonbegan a revolutionin biblical scholarship. A parallelrevolutionwas fosteredby Lemche, whose Danish work of 19724 precedesthatof Thompson.Lemche, however,only became well known following his publicationin 1985 of EarlyIsrael:Anthropologicaland Historical Studies on the IsraeliteSociety Before the Monarchy.5 Lemche, too, was iconoclastic, disman*This is a revised version of a paper delivered at a conference on the Copenhagen School at NorthwesternUniversity in October 1999. I have not attemptedto updatethis paper; see esp. the recent critiquesof the school, including the extensive criticisms found in William G. Dever, WhatDid the Biblical WritersKnow and WhenDid TheyKnowIt? WhatArchaeology Can Tell Us about the Reality of AncientIsrael (GrandRapids,MI/Cambridge,UK: Eerdmans,2001), and Lee Levine andAmihai Mazar,eds., TheControversyover the Historicityof the Bible (Jerusalem:YadBen Zvi and the DinurCenter,2001; Hebrew).I would like to thankmy studentsAlan Lenzi and SarahShectmanfor helping with variousdrafts of this paper,and ProfessorGregory Nagy of HarvardUniversity,who discussed many aspects of this paper with me. Abbreviationsfollow PatrickH. Alexander et al., eds., The SBL Handbookof StyleforAncient Near Eastern,Biblical, and Early ChristianStudies (Peabody,MA: Hendrickson, 1999). 1. Thomas L. Thompson, The Historicity of the PatriarchalNarratives (BZAW 133; Berlin / New York:de Gruyter,1974). 2. John Van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975). 3. See esp. E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB; GardenCity, NY: Doubleday, 1964), in particularhis claim that the Bible's misunderstandingof the brother-sisterstories in Genesis suggests their antiquity (pp. xxxvii-xli). 4. Niels Peter Lemche, Israel i Dommertiden (Copenhagen: Institut for Bibelsk Eksgese, 1972). 5. Niels Peter Lemche, Early Israel: Anthropological and Historical Studies on the Israelite Society Before the Monarchy (VTSup 37; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985).

1

Marc Brettler tling in his early work the notion thatIsrael'shistory in the period of judges should be understoodon the basis of the Greekamphyctiony.This theory,promulgatedby AlbrechtAlt and his student,MartinNoth, in 1929-1930, suggestedthatIsraelwas joined togetherin the periodof judges througha rotatingcentralsanctuary(the amphictyony), which was fundamentalin creatingIsrael.6This theory was extremely influentialfor almosthalf a century,especially withinGermanscholarship,because of its power to explain why the Pentateuchincorporatessuch a diversityof traditions: they originated in different groups assembled around a central sanctuary. Lemche was one of several scholarswho pointedout the fundamentalproblemsof this model, importedfrom classical studies;he noted, for example, that the classic Delphic amphictyony,the model typicallyused by biblical scholars,only came into being in the eighth pre-Christiancentury.7Like Thompson,his emphasiswas uncovering anachronismsin the scholarlyreconstructionsof the premonarchicperiod. He observed concerning the period of judges: "Accordinglyit must be concluded that it is irrationalto believe that we in the Book of Judges find historical documents in the proper sense of the word."8Lemche's findings concerningthe non-existence of the amphictyonyin ancient Israel, as well as his observationsin his 1985 book, EarlyIsrael, concerningthe highly problematicnatureof the "period of judges,"have been embracedby most mainstreambiblical scholars. These early seminal worksof the CopenhagenSchool were by and largepositively received,and they helped to revolutionizethe field of biblical scholarship.9 More recently,these scholarshave takenthe methodsand conclusions of theirearlier works and applied them to later and later biblical periods; these more recent works have been quite controversial,both within biblical scholarship and in the popularpress. In terms of large-scaleworks, 1992 is a fundamentaldate.Thatwas the publicationyear of Thompson'sEarlyHistory of the Israelite People Fromthe Writtenand Archaeological Sources, which concludes: "The linguistic and literary reality of the biblical traditionis folkloristicin essence. The concept of a benei Israel ... is a reflection of no sociopolitical entity of the historical state of Israel of the Assyrian period...." o That year also markedthe publication of the first edition of Philip R. Davies' In Search of 'AncientIsrael,'wherethe words"Ancient Israel"of the title are in quotationmarks, suggesting that the search yields negative results. A complete overview of the Copenhagen School is infeasible in this context." Even a comprehensive examinationof the work of two core membersof ABD 1.211-216. 6. See A. D. H. Mayes, "Amphictyony," 7. See his "The Greek 'Amphicyony'-Could it be a Prototypefor the Israelite Society in the Period of Judges?"JSOT4 (1977), pp. 48-59. 8. Niels Peter Lemche, "The Judges-Once More,"BN 20 (1983), p. 51. See also his Early Israel, esp. p. 384. 9. Positive reviews of these earlyworksby mainstreamscholarsin mainstreamjournalsinclude J.C. Greenfield in IEJ27 (1977), pp. 185-187; Aelred Cody in Bib 57 (1976), pp. 262-265; J.A. Emerton in JTS 27 (1976), pp. 155-158 and J. W Rogerson in BibOr48 (1991), pp. 616-619. 10. Thomas L. Thompson,Early History of the Israelite People From WrittenandArchaeological Sources (Studies in the History of the Ancient Near East 4; Leiden: Brill, 1992), p. 422. 11. In addition to other scholars located in Copenhagen,such a survey should include at least Philip Davies and Keith Whitelam of Sheffield.

2

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues the school, Lemche and Thompson,is impossible, since much of their work is extremely dense-Thompson's Early History of the Israelite People contains over 1100 footnotes and a bibliographyof 31 single spaced pages and Lemche'sEarly Israel"2has almost 50 pages of bibliographyand over 1500 notes. Instead,this essay will focus on a seminal article of Lemche, and on two recent summariesthat indicate that this school has come of age: Lemche's TheIsraelites in History and Tradition,3 publishedin 1998, andThompson's 1999 book, TheMythicPast: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel,'14 published in Englandas The Bible in History: How WritersCreatea Past. The maintheme of these worksis alreadyevident in theirtitles. TheIsraelites in Historyand Traditionis a play on JohnVan Seters'Abrahamin History and Tradition,15 which, along with Thompson'sThe Historicity of the PatriarchalNarratives, removedthe patriarchalperiod from modern histories of Israel. In this new work, Lemche approachesthe entire Bible with a similar perspective.The use of "myth"twice in Thompson'sAmerican title highlights its objective. Thompson's preferredtitle, preservedin the Britishpublication'6--The Bible in History: How WritersCreatea Past-is a polemicalplay on one of the best-sellingbooks thatinsists on the basic historicityof the Bible: WernerKeller's TheBible as History.'7 Before examining these two very recent books by Lemche and Thompson, it is useful to focus on a seminal article that articulatesin a concise form many of the points made in these largerworks:the 1993 article by Lemche, "The Old Testament-A Hellenistic Book?"'8 The oeuvre of Lemche and Thompson may be examined from many perspectives;the focus here will be on historiographicalissues. Forthis reason, it is importantto establish how biblical historicaltexts were written.The following observationswould garnergeneral assent:I"(1) History,in the sense of the events themselves, does not write texts. People write texts. (2) Especially in the pre-modernworld,people did not write about the past for its own sake-there was little intrinsicinterestin the past. This is reflected in the many recent academic discussions on history and memory, which consider memory, in contrastto history,to be more typical of the pre-modernera. (3) The rise of modern historiography,with its interestin the past as it actuallywas, is a relativelyrecent development,connected to the rise of the modern Germanuniversity.Before that, history tended to be national history. (4) If pre-modernhistory was not interested in "the objective"past, it was primarilyinterestedin its author'spresent. (5) Ideology is a significant componentin all history writing. 12. Niels PeterLemche, Early Israel (VTSup 37; Leiden: Brill, 1985). 13. Niels Peter Lemche, The Israelites in History and Tradition(London: SPCK; Louisville, KY:WestminsterJohn Knox Press, 1998). 14. Thomas L. Thompson, TheMythicPast: BiblicalArchaeology and the Mythof Israel (NY: Basic, 1999). 15. See above, n. 2. 16. PersonalcommunicationfromThomasThompson. 17. WernerKeller, TheBible as History (NY: Morrow, 1981). 18. Niels PeterLemche,"TheOldTestament--A HellenisticBook?"SJOT7 (1993), pp. 163-193. 19. See the literaturecited in MarcZvi Brettler,The Creationof History inAncientIsrael (London: Routledge, 1995), esp. pp. 8-19.

3

Marc Brettler These assumptionsleave contemporaryhistoriansof ancientIsraelcautious; most would acknowledge the point made frequentlyby Lemche and Thompson, that it is improperto write biblical history simply by paraphrasingthe biblicaltext, and replacingdivine with humancausality.Biblical "historical"texts were written by people, who were religious ideologues (theologians), and they were predominantly interestedin the present and the future,ratherthan in accuratelytranscribing the past. This is epitomized by Yosef HayimYerushalmi:"Israelis told that it must be a kingdom of priests and a holy people; nowhereis it suggested thatit become a nation of historians."20This does not mean, however,that the biblical authors never got their facts right, and that the Bible is useless or nearly useless, as a source of the history of ancient Israel. Cartographyoffers a useful analogy to history writing. We expect a map of the Chicago area, let us say, to be similar to the actual city in significant ways. It should reflect the city, but obviously it cannot be the city. Depending on scale and goal, it will emphasize certaincharacteristics,and de-emphasizeothers. Maps are judged based on their goals: a physical map that left out Lake Michigan with its various depths would be judged grossly deficient, but a human population map need not include this information.A Departmentof Public Worksmap should indicate the water mains; this would not be expected of a culturalmap of the city. All would agree that pre-moderncartographerscould not use Global Positioning System data and satellite photos to drawtheir maps, and as a result, these old maps are less accuratethan contemporaryones. However,are they all fundamentally wrong, even when their primarygoal is ideological? Forexample, most scholars acknowledge that the Medeba Map, a mosaic from the floor of a sixthcentury Jordanianchurch, is in many respects quite accurate, although its artist probablydid not travel the entire area, but used Eusebius as his main source. As well, this artist was highly ideological, placing Jerusalem at the center of the world.21 Granted,this map depicts the area poorly, compared to a modern map made using space-age technology, but is it totally differentin kind from the modern map? Returningto reconstructingbiblical history: scholars grant the Copenhagen School's fundamentalpoint that the biblical sources cannotbe paraphrased by the modernhistorianin an attemptto createhistory,since they map out the world in a pre-modernfashion. But, mightthese texts nevertheless,like pre-modernmaps, be used with care to recreatethe past thatthey purportto depict, or do they reflect only their author'sideology or theology? There is a general sense among ancient historiansthat the closer the text is to the events, the more reliable it may be. An eyewitness account certainlyneed not be reliable: it may be seriously taintedby theology, ideology, or poor observation. The Chinese accounts of what we call the TiananmenSquare massacre of 1989 illustratethis; compare, for example, the pro-studentaccounts to the offical account.22As well, accounts which are subsequentto the events depicted are even 20. Y. H. Yerushalmi,Zakhor.Jewish Historyand Jewish Memoiy (Seattle:Universityof Washington Press, 1982), p. 10. 21. For a summarysee Michelle Piccirillo, "Medeba,"ABD 4.656-58. 22. Forpro-studentaccount see J. F.Harrison,Voicesfrom TiananmenSquare(Montreal:Black Rose Books, 1990), pp. 173-203; for the official account see M. Oksenberg,L. Sullivan,and M. Lam-

4

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues more prone to "poormapping":each reportermay have, intentionallyor accidentally, changed a source, blended togetherconflicting sources, or created new material to fill gaps in or between sources. Thus, one of the first questions typically asked by historians concerns the distance of the text from the event. Proximity need not assureaccuracy,nor need distance assure inaccuracy,but this is often the case. This is why the date of biblical historicaltexts is a crucial issue for the modern historianof the biblical period.23 For these reasons, Lemche's "The Old Testament-A Hellenistic Book?" n. (see 18) is very important.Until the 1970s, small sections of the Bible, for example, partsof Daniel, were recognized as Hellenistic, but these were considered to be anomalous.The earliest of the narrativesources, J (the Yahwist), was consideredby most to be a tenth-centurywork,reflectingthe periodof realkings named David and Solomon.24 Over the last few decades, this position has eroded.25 Source criticism has begun to fall apart,thanksto the work of some Scandinavian scholars26and others, like the GermanRolf Rendtorff27and the British scholar R. N. Whybray.28A new position had begun to develop by the late 1970s, which saw relativeunity in much of the Torahand viewed it as a reflection of the trauma of the Babylonianexile. Forexample, David J.A. Clines observed:"whereverexilic Jewryopens the Pentateuchit finds itself."29This type of position, which tends to view the Torahas a unity that is the product of the exilic period, has been influential, and Lemche'sposition may be seen as an extension of this view. Lemche suggests thatthe majorityof the OT30is Hellenistic, althoughthere bert, eds., Beijing Spring, 1989: Confrontationand Conflict. TheBasic Documents (Armonk, NY: M. Sharp, 1990), pp. 55-88. Note the reflective analysis in "Afterward:History, Myth, and the Tales of Tiananmen,"in Popular Protest and Political Culturein Modern China: Learningfrom 1989, eds. J. Wasserstromand E. Perry(Oxford:Westview Press, 1992), pp. 244-280. 23. This is especially so in contemporaryscholarship,where the old assumptions concerning the fundamentalconservatismof texts that eventuallybecame partof the Bible, and of oral traditions, has been questioned. Concerning the latter,the work of the ScandinavianLemche has been instrumental in questioning the work of the ScandinavianSchool of Epic, which had emphasized the fundamentalreliability of epic tradition;see his Early Israel, pp. 380-383. The study of folklore would confirm these observationsconcerningthe variableaccuracyof oral audition. 24. See the literaturecited in TheodoreHiebert, TheYahwist Landscape:Nature and Religion s in Early Israel (New York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1996), p. 204, n. 5. 25. See the discussion and critiquein Ernest Nicholson, ThePentateuchin the TwentiethCentury:TheLegacy of Julius Wellhausen(Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1998), pp. 132-160, esp. concerning the work of Van Seters, Schmidt, and Rose. 26. See Douglas A. Knight,Rediscoveringthe Traditionsof Israel (SBLDS 9; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1975), index s.v. "sourcecriticism." 27. See Rolf Rendtorf,TheOld Testament:An Introduction(Philadelphia:Fortress, 1986), esp. pp. 157-163. 28. See R. N. Whybray,TheMakingof the Pentateuch:A Methodological Study(JSOTSup 53; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989 [1987]). This anti-source-criticalmovement is sharply critiqued in Nicholson, ThePentateuchin the TwentiethCentury. 29. David J.A. Clines, TheThemeof the Pentateuch(JSOTSup 10; Sheffield: JSOTPress, 1982 [1978]), p. 98. 30. I use this term as shorthandfor "OldTestament"to reflect Lemche's writing and his preferences; see Lemche, The Israelites in History and Tradition, p. 171, n. 1.

5

Marc Brettler is "no reason to exclude ... that we here and theremay possess general historical recollections" of an earlierperiod" (p. 182). On the other hand, he suggests that the Bible is really post-Hellenistic, since "in its present shape-[it] is a JewishRabbinic collection of writings no earlierthan the 2nd Century CE" (p. 163). A particularunderstandingof canon is crucial to this viewpoint; Lemche (implicitly) rejects the argumentoften voiced these days for a canon within a canon,31and understandsthe canonization of the Bible as a unified event, caused by the destructionof the Second Templeand the Hadrianicpersecutionsof the second century CE (p. 163). In addressing possible counter-evidenceto this hypothesis, in particular,the fact that the Samaritancanon comprisedof only the Torahreflects an earlierstage of canonization,he suggests thatthe Samaritancommunitydid not like the Jerusalem-centeredideology of biblical books other than the Torahand this is why these non-Torahtexts were not canonized. Lemche'sposition is not absolutelyimpossible, but is quite unlikely.Various pieces of evidence that he has not addresseddo suggest thatthe Torahwas canonized first, and that we should not speak of a CE canon.This is conceded by Philip Davies, who in a recent importantbook on canonizationnotes that the Pentateuch likely existed before Nehemiah or Ezra.32A recent debate has emerged concerning nevi'im and ketubim,the second and thirdparts of the Hebrew canon, namely, were these two sections originally a single section, divided only later,33or do they reflect historicallydistinctdivisions, with nevi'im precedingketubim.34However, citations of Torahmaterialin Chroniclesand elsewhere using a formulalike "kakatuv"("as is written"),35 as well as evidence fromthe Dead Sea Scrolls, where 4QMMT,one of the earlierscrolls, refersto "sefermoshe" ("thebook of Moses") alongside "sifreiha nevi'im " ("the books of the prophets")and "David,"36seem to suggest that the canon was not emergentas a single unit only in the aftermath of the destructionof the Temple,but, rather,it emerged in stages. Canon is a notoriouslydifficult and importantconcept; the many recentobservations of Philip Davies in his Scribes and Schools: The Canonizationof the

31. This model is the basis for inner-biblicalinterpretation;see esp. Michael Fishbane,Biblical Interpretationin Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985). Sid Z. Leiman, The Canonizationof Hebrew Scriptures: The Talmudicand Midrashic Evidence (Hamden, Conn: Archon Books, 1976), makes a strong argumentthat the tripartitecanon representsdistinct stages of canon formation. 32. Philip R. Davies, Scribes and Schools: The Canonizationof the HebrewScriptures(Louisville: WestminsterJohn Knox, 1998), p. 101. 33. This is the position of John Barton, The Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Israelite Prophecy in Israel after Exile (New York:Oxford University Press, 1986), pp. 35-95. 34. This was the traditional,pre-Bartonposition. For a critiqueof Barton, see R. T. Beckwith, "A Modern Theory of the Old TestamentCanon,"VT41 (1991), pp. 385-395. A useful, recent summary of issues concerning the canon is found in John Barton,"The Significance of a Fixed Canon of the Hebrew Bible," in Hebrew Bible/Old Testament:TheHistory of Its Interpretation,ed. Magne Saebo (G6ttingen:Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht, 1996), 1.67-83. 35. See the model developed by Fishbane,Biblical Interpretationin AncientIsrael. 36. 4QMMT C 10; see Elisha Qimronand John Strugnell,QumranCave 4 V:MiqsatMa aseh Ha-Torah(DJD 10; Oxford:Clarendon, 1994), pp. 58-59; there are some restorationsin this text, but they are not at all controversial.

6

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues Hebrew Scriptures37 have, if anything,complicated the picturestill more.Yet,the brief attemptby Lemche to create an alternateunderstandingof the canon, an understandingthat only takes into account a small part of the available evidence (pp. 164-168), is not sufficient to underminethe notion of a canon that in part predatesthe Hellenistic period. Stateddifferently,theories must be judged on the basis of evidence, which is weighed, and Lemche, in offering his new understandingof canon, has not weighed all the evidence, explaining,for example, why Joshua-Kings, but not Ezra-Nehemiah are part of nevi'im-one of the most importantpieces of evidence for a tripartitecanon that reflects a historicalprocess.38 Old theories may certainly be wrong, but they cannot be proven to be wrong by showing that one element used to supportthem is wrong. As well, although it is proper to muddy that which is often presented too simplistically,that also is not enough evidence to disprovean existing theory (in this case, plausible, though unlikely, scenariosconcerningthe relativedevelopmentof the Hebrewand Greekorder of the Bible have been presented[pp. 164-165]. Old theoriesarerevised when it is shown that the preponderanceof evidence used to buttressthem, as well as other,new39 evidence, is best explainedthrougha new theory-but this is not the case here. Otherevidence adducedby Lemche, such as the fact that the first complete OT is found in Greek, is highly problematic.Although Lemche is correct in noting that we must place the traditionsfound in Samuel between the 11th century BCE, the scholarlydate for the prophetSamuel, and the "first half of the 4th century CE,"the date of the earliest complete Samuel manuscripts(p. 169), his conclusion that within this period, "we should, of course, startwhere we are best informed,"is problematic.It is silly to be so insistent on a 4th-centuryterminusad quem, based on the earliest complete Septuagintmanuscripts.Lemche seems to relish italicizing the word "fragments"in reference to the Dead Sea Scrolls (e.g. p. 170), indicatingthat these might not be reflective of the book as a whole. It is correctthatthere was not a single book of Samuel in the libraryof Qumran,since the text hadyet to be established;indeed,one of the copies of the book differs from the laterMassoretictext, incorporatingan episode laterlost throughtextualerror.40 But here is the evidence: We do not have the entire book preservedat Qumran.We have four differentmanuscriptsof Samuel that contain pieces, some largely identical to the book as it is laterknown from the Septuagint;41 only much later,in the first millennium,do we have complete Hebrewmanuscriptsof the book. But there is little reason to doubt Samuel's existence as a book at Qumran:The fragments 37. See n. 32 for full citation. 38. See Leiman, The Canonizationof Hebrew Scriptures. 39. In the case of biblical studies, new evidence may be archaeological,or may reflect the development of a new theory that succeeds in explaining a wide variety of texts more successfully than previously. 40. See Emanuel Tov, TextualCriticism of the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), pp. 342-344. 41. See the summaryin JamesC. VanderKam,TheDead Sea Scrolls Today(GrandRapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994), pp. 129-130 and the discussion of Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), pp. 28-29.

7

Marc Brettler largely overlapwith the largerbook as it was laterpreserved,andmost likely come from some form(s) of the book of Samuel. In otherwords, the Qumranfragments are not like the separateSumerianGilgamesh stories, which were laterjoined together to form an Akkadianepic and which differ in many details and in structure from the epic.42 Lemche is correct that "no absolute proof exists that these books must be older"than340-350 CE (p. 169), the date of theVaticanusSeptuagintmanuscript. However, "absoluteproof" is rare in the study of antiquity.For example, classicists do not claim that Herodotusis medieval because the earliest complete manuscript of TheHistories dates from the 9-10th century.43Furthermore,if we acknowledge Lemche'sposition, we would have to datethe HebrewBible to 925 CE, the approximatedate of Aleppo,44 the first time a complete Bible was copied in a single codex.45 Or perhaps we should be suspicious of the stories surrounding Aleppo, which is no longer completely preserved,and should date the Hebrew Bible to 1008-1009, the date of Codex LeningradB 19A, the earliest completely preserved Bible in a single volume. Lemche's suggestion thatwe "startwhere we are best informed"when finding the historicalbasis of a text is furtherproblematicbecause we are ill-informed about so much of the biblical period,especially the early pre-exilic period,thanks to Lemche, Thompson, and others. We are somewhatbetter informed in the Hellenistic period, as a result of Josephus,Philo, and some Greek and Romanauthors who noticed Jews and wrote about them, but this is irrelevant.Much of this Hellenistic material, especially that found in the great apologist Josephus, must be used with great caution;46the same skeptical rules used by Thompson and Lemche of the biblical authorsmust be appliedto these ancient scholarsas well.47 Furthermore,let us imagine thatwe had a consensus concerningthe reconstructionof the Hellenistic period, alongside a consensus that the earlier Persianperiod can hardlybe reconstructedand an agreementthatoffering any detailed surveyof still earlier exilic and pre-exilic periods is impossible. In addition, let us imagine that, in some details, the outlines of the biblical story fit that independentlyreconstructed Hellenistic period. This would still not suggest that biblical literature should be assigned to thatperiod. History is writtenby balancing variousalterna42. See Jeffrey H. Tigay, The Evolution of the Gilgamesh Epic (Philadelphia:University of PennsylvaniaPress, 1982). 43. This is the LaurentianusLXX, the A manuscriptof the edition of Haiim B. Rosen, Herodoti Historiae (Leipzig: Teubner,1987); see his descriptionon p. lxxi. This point was raised in a discussion of the Copenhagen School at the InternationalSBL Conference in Finlandin summer2000. 44. Tov,TextualCriticismof the Hebrew Bible, p. 46. 45. See M. H. Goshen-Gottstein, "The Aleppo Codex and the Rise of the Massoretic Bible Text,"BA 42 (1979), pp. 145-63. 46. The literatureon Josephus as a historian is immense; see the literaturecited in Lester L. Grabbe,"TheCurrentState of the Dead Sea Scrolls:Are There MoreQuestions thanAnswers?"in The Scrolls and the Scriptures:QumranFifty YearsAfter,eds. StanleyE. Porterand CraigA. Evans(JSPSup 26; RoehamptonInstituteLondon Papers3; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), p. 57, n. 13. 47. A significant numberof problems in Thompson'sreconstructionof the Hellenistic period are noted in Lester L. Grabbe,"Hat die Biblel docht Recht?A Review of T. L. Thompson'sTheBible in History," SJOT 14 (2000), pp. 122-126.

8

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues tives, and this would be a case where we have only one alternative,as the others have disappeared-we know too little about most of the periods involved to say, for example, whetherthe narrativeof the Joseph story fits the early pre-exilic period, the late pre-exilic period,the exilic period in Babylon, the exilic period in Israel, the Persianperiod in Israelor in one of the diasporas,or the Hellenistic period. Because of the paucity of evidence, we cannot see in which period it best fits, and thereforeit is methodologicallyincorrectto say thatbecause it may fit the Hellenistic period,as opposed to otherperiods, which are "blackboxes,"48we should date it to the Hellenistic period. A specific example concerningLemche's Hellenistic dating may be seen in his observationconcerning the creation story in Genesis 1: ... we shouldhavea look at the storyof the creationof the fourelements, lightanddarkness,waterandearth,froman ancientpointof view,thenit is obviousthatGod'creates'theseelementsas if he wishedto be in accordance withsomeideascurrentamongGreeknaturalphilosophers fromthe6thcenturyandonwards(p. 171). First of all, the parallels between Genesis 1 and the Greek material adduced by Lemche are vague and general. Furthermore,it is crucial to ask: What other creation myths in antiquitycould the biblical authorshave known, and with which of these does the Bible have the closest parallels? Most scholars would see certain Mesopotamianparallelsas stronger,49andit is thereforewrongfor Lemcheto posit a Greek connection without a detailed comparisonillustratingwhy these parallels are betterthanthe Mesopotamianones. In addition,as noted earlier,Lemche treats most biblical texts as a unified whole, anddoes not sufficientlydistinguishbetweentheirideologies and likely date of composition.Forexample,most biblicistswould agree with his contentionthatis it is "a fact" that the "tales [in Joshua]have nothing to do with historicalcircumstances at the end of the late Bronze Age and in the beginning of the Iron Age" (p. 174).Yethis deductionthatthe textswere createdin the post-exilicperiod"tocreate a raciallypure Israelitenation"(p. 174) is quite far-fetched,as so little of Joshua deals with the issue of racialpurity,and because thereis a huge differencebetween the presentationof a "pure"Israelin Joshuaand clearlypost-exilic sentimentssuch as Ezra9:2, "theholy seed has become mixed with the nationsof the land."50 The methodology of Lemche may be characterizedas creeping skepticism, wherein he has become more and more skeptical of the outlines of various biblibiblical text is cal narratives.It may also be characterizedas rrnrn3m-rp p,•x-no early.Thompsonis similar-in TheMythicPast he notes thatin "Thepast twentyfive years, [we] have seen this biblically oriented history of Israel deconstructed 48. This was the termused by several scholars at the 1999 InternationalMeeting of the SBL in Finland. 49. See the classic exposition of this view in Speiser, Genesis, pp. 9-11. 50. See Bob Becking, "Continuityand Community:The Belief System of the Book of Ezra," in The Crisis of Israelite Religion: Transformations of Religious Tradition in Exilic and Post-Exilic

Times,eds. Bob Becking and MarjoC. A. Korpel (OTS 42; Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 268-275.

9

Marc Brettler step by step" (p. 236). Lemche begins by doubtingthe historicityof the period of judges, then moves to the united monarchy,the period of David and Solomon (p. 175), and creeps forward,suggesting, for example, that "the Josiah of 2 Kings need not be a historical figure at all" (p. 179), "as no external source ever mentions Josiah" (p. 178). However, this criterionused to evaluate the historicity of Josiah is too stringent-modern historiansof ancientIsrael cannot follow the admonition of Deuteronomy 17:6 and 19:15 that two or three witnesses are needed to decide a case. Instead of insisting on direct witnesses, Lemche should consider what indirect internalevidence might help evaluate a text's date or historicity. For example, many scholars suggest that the first edition of the Deuteronomistic History, the books from Deuteronomyto Kings, dates from the reign of Josiah. This is reflected in various structuralelements in Kings, and in the fact that Josiah is idealized even though he dies in battle (see 2 Kings 23:29-30)-this suggests that much of the account of Josiah was writtenbefore he died.51Thus it is unlikely that the depiction of his reign is fabricatedto the extent suggested by Lemche. Although the suggestion that an original version of the Deuteronomistic History was composed during Josiah's reign is only a theory, this theory is buttressed by significant evidence, and it is problematicto assert instead that Josiah was created as a reformingking in a much laterperiod. As he moves towarda conclusion, Lemche suggests severalpoints that"may speak in favourof a hellenistic date of the Old Testament"(p. 182): haslittle 1) "Itis a factthatthehistoryof Israelas toldby theOldTestament if anythingto dowiththerealhistoricaldevelopments in Palestineuntilatleast the laterpartof the Hebrewmonarchy" (p. 182). This may be true, but does not make the HB into a Hellenistic book. 2) A mainthemeof GenesisthroughJoshuais "themoreor less utopianidea in thata majorJewishkingdom-even empire-should be (re-)established thisideacannotbe early(p. 183).Itis, however,uncertain whether Palestine"; this shouldbe characterized as a majorthemeof thebeginningof the Bible. this ideacouldhavedevelopedin thepre-Hellenistic Furthermore, period,as and Israel,withan inferioritycomplexin relationto thegreatMesopotamian Egyptianempires.52 This scenario for certain elements of the biblical foundationmyth is at least as plausible as that suggested by Lemche. 51. See the literaturecited in Steven L. McKenzie, "DeuteronomisticHistory,"ABD 2. 160168; the lengthy defense of the two-editor theory by MarkA. O'Brien, The DeuteronomisticHistory Hypothesis:A Reassessment (OBO 92; Freiburg:UniversitatsverlagFreiburg, 1989) should be added to his bibliography. 52. See PeterMachinist,"The Question of Distinctivenessin Ancient Israel:An Essay,"in Ah, Assyria: Studies inAssyrian HistoryandAncientNear EasternHistoriographyPresentedto HayimTadmor (ScrHier 33; Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 1991), pp. 196-221, reprintedin Essential Papers on Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. FrederickE. Greenspahn(New York:New YorkUniversity Press, 1991), pp. 420-442.

10

The CopenhagenSchool: The HistoriographicalIssues 3) "Thewriterswhoinventedthe'historyof Israel'seemto havemodeledtheir (p. 183). historyon a Greekpattern" As noted earlier,detailed evidence is not providedto supportthis claim. 4) SuchGreektextswereunknownto Jewsin the Persianperiod(p. 184). Since Lemche has not provenhis thirdpoint, this observation,while likely correct, is irrelevant. Lemche anticipatestwo of the strongestlikely objectionsto his position, noting that scholarswould feel thattoo much diverse literatureis being pushed into a single period, and that the linguistic evidence might dispute the Hellenistic age (pp. 187-188). The first objection is not serious-following RainerAlberz and others,ancientIsraelmay be viewed as a "synchronicallycomplex society,"which can, in a single period, incorporatea wide diversity of ideas, as Lemche indeed does suggest. The second objection is more serious. Lemche, like Davies, is heavily dependenton an articleby Knauf that suggests thatbiblical Hebrewwas an artificial language, and thus what most scholars see as diachronicdevelopment really representssynchronicdifference.53This position, however,has been criticized, with good reason,by otherlinguists.54As shown most recentlyby Avi Hurvitz,the "traditional"diachronicmodel, suggesting that over time Aramaicinfluenced biblical texts such as Chronicles,more satisfactorilyand completely explains the evidence of the biblical texts that we have.55This model offers a better explanation than does Lemche's of why Chronicles has so many Aramaisms, whereas the DeuteronomisticHistory has so few: the Deuteronomistic History predates the PersianPeriod,in which Aramaic was the lingua franca.56 Lemche's theory also does not explain why Daniel is replete with Greek words like nrr'ianit(3:5, 15),57 a type of musical instrument,58but these are lacking elsewhere in the supposedly Hellenistic Hebrew Bible. Nor does it explain why Hezekiah's name is spelled in Chronicles,"coincidentally"allowing Kings, which in Kings, but inr'prnm in-;PTm most scholars agree is pre-exilic throughexilic, to agree with the name's spelling in cuneiformsources of the very late eighth century,while the Chronicler'sspell53. See Philip R. Davies, In Searchof 'AncientIsrael'(JSOTSup 148; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), pp. 102-105; the articlein question is E. A. Knauf,"War'Biblish-Hebraisch'eine Sprache?"ZAH3 (1990), pp. 11-23. 54. Ian Young, Diversity in Pre-Exilic Hebrew (FAT 5; Tiibingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1993), pp. 203-205; Martin Ehrensviird,"Once Again: The Problem of Dating Biblical Hebrew,"SJOT 11 (1997), pp. 29-40; ArianJ. C. Verheij,"Early?Late?A Reply to F. H. Cryer,"SJOT 11 (1997), pp. 4143; and the study of Avi Hurvitz, cited in the following note. 55. Avi Hurvitz, "The Historical Quest for 'Ancient Israel' and the Linguistic Evidence of the HebrewBible: Some MethodologicalObservations,"VT47 (1997), pp. 301-315. 56. In this connection it is noteworthythat Thompson explicitly admits as a fact that Aramaic became especially importantin the post-exilic period (TheMythicPast, pp. 215, 267-268), so we would not be disputingthe basic backgroundassumptionof this linguistic evidence. 57. On these words, see John J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), p. 20. 58. On the borrowingof this word, and its possible exact meaning, see HALOT5.1937-8.

11

Marc Brettler ing agrees with the great Isaiahscroll from Qumran,59which generallyupdatesthe Hebrew of the Bible to make it more contemporary.60 These facts concerningthe systematic distributionof certain words, spellings, or phrases in particularbooks or corpora are best explained by diachronic development, and the relatively sketchy and undeveloped synchronic explanationof Knauf is extremelyunlikely. To take an example adducedby Avi Hurvitz,it cannotbe provenwith certaintythat the authorof the DeuteronomisticHistoryavoidsthe Hebrew-Aramaictermmax, "letter,"because he didn't know it, and thus naturallyused lno, "scroll,"instead. However,the model which suggests that sections of the Bible are writtenand preserved in pre-exilic Hebrew is much more compelling, suggesting that the Bible cannot be a Hellenistic book. In sum, although Lemche's suggestions are not absolutely impossible, the evidence he ignores suggests thatthey areunlikely.The parallelshe drawsbetween the Bible and Hellenism are weak and schematic.That we know somethingabout Hellenism, and that we can easily situate texts there on relativelybroadthematic grounds, does not mean that most biblical texts originatedthere. Finally,big theories must be able to incorporatesmall pieces of evidence, and the model of Lemche is extremely unlikely given the many small pieces of evidence that he dismisses in a summaryfashion or ignores. Thus, this seminal article does not prove that the OT is a Hellenistic book. Lemche'sbook, TheIsraelitesin Historyand Tradition,has the same strengths and weaknesses as the shorterarticle. His claim that "Toassume the historicityof a biblical narrativein advance is unscholarly.. ." (p. 30) is fundamentallysound, as is his observationthat most "modernscholars, in spite of the sophisticationof their biblical studies, were entangled in a networkof biblical concepts and ideas. Only to a certain point have they been able to liberatethemselves from the pressure of the biblical tradition"(p. 133). He is correctin chastising most historians for "the usual habit of paraphrasingthe biblical text" (p. 163) and in presuming that "everythingmust be defended as long as possible"(p. 151). He is also correct to note that we may not simply convertbiblical stories into modernhistoriography by shifting from divine to human causality (p. 151). To the extent that this book may furtherthe adoption of these principles by the mainstream,it should be applauded. 59. This point concerningthe spelling of Hezekiah'sname was pointed out by NadavNa'aman during the InternationalMeeting of the Society of Biblical Literaturein Finland in 2000. On the spelling in the scrolls, see EduardYechezkel Kutscher,The Language and Linguistic Backgroundof the Isaiah Scroll (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1959; Hebrew), pp. 78-79; in English, EdwardYechezkel Kutscher,TheLanguageand LinguisticBackgroundof the Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa)(Leiden:Brill, 1974), pp. 104-106. 60. On this type of orthography,see EmanuelTov,"Groupsof Biblical Texts Foundat Qumran,"in Timeto Prepare the Wayin the Wilderness:Papers on the QumranScrolls by Fellows of the Institutefor Advanced Studies of the Hebrew University,Jerusalem, 1989-1990, ed. Devorah Dimant and Lawrence H. Schiffman (Leiden: Brill, 1995), pp. 94-96, and the critiqueof Tov by Eugene Ulrich, "Multiple LiteraryEditions: Reflections towarda Theory of the History of the Biblical Text,"in CurrentResearch and TechnologicalDevelopments on the Dead Sea Scrolls: Conferenceon the Texts from the Judean Desert, Jerusalem, 30 April 1995 (Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 20; Lei-

den: Brill, 1996), pp. 93-96.

12

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues His main thesis, however,suggested already in the book's title, that there is a (near) total distinction between the Israelites of real history and those of biblical tradition,is less compelling. Much of this has to do with the very narrowstrictureshe uses for reconstructingthe Israelitesin history.For example, in his investigation of the archaeologicalevidence he is very narrow-he does not analyze, for example, certainartifactsthatmight bear on this issue, such as the many seals, signet rings and bullae.61His bar of proof is too high; it is unclear what type of evidence might have convinced him of a separateIsraeliteethnic identity. Forreconstructinghis historyof "real"Israel,Lemche often stresses the significance of primary,ancient sources discoveredin situ versus secondarysources, like the Bible. These primarysources are outlined and analyzed carefully in the chapter"Israelin ContemporaryHistoricalDocumentsfromtheAncientNear East" (pp. 35-64). The paucity of referencesitself is significant, suggesting the relative insignificance of Israelin the eyes of its contemporaries,markinga sharpcontrast betweeninternalandexternalperceptionsof Israel.Formethodologicalreasons,he interpretsthese inscriptionsas if the Bible did not exist, so thatthe Israel of history is not taintedby the Israelof tradition.Lemche ignores the possibility,even the strong likelihood,that in places the Bible does reflect relativelyaccurateinformation aboutthe pre-exilic period that deserves to be correlatedwith archaeological finds. Forexample, Lemche nowhereexplores the implicationsof the fact that all the kingsof Israelmentionedin AssyrianandBabylonianinscriptionsarealso mentioned in Kings62--this has some bearingon the value of (partsof) Kings as a historicalsource.Nor does he discuss the ways in which 2 Kings 18:13-16 agrees with the Assyrianaccountof Sennacherib'sthirdcampaign,and the fact thatotherverses like 18:15-16, aboutHezekiahpayingAssyria fromtempleandtreasuryfunds,may be found elsewhere in the Bible, suggesting the strong likelihood that the Bible, a secondarysource, in places preserves archivalmaterial.63This neglect skews his perceptionof the Bible as a relevantsource for the history of ancient Israel. Lemche'scritiqueof the value of Kings as a historicalsource might be seen as a reasonableextension of the CopenhagenSchool's much earliercritiqueof the patriarchalnarrativeand the period of judges, yet Lemche does not take into account that much of the materialin Kings seems to be different in kind from the 61. See the comprehensivecorpus now publishedby NahmanAvigad and Benjamin Sass, Corpus of WestSemitic StampSeals (Jerusalem:IsraelAcademy of Sciences and Humanities, 1997). For some cautions concerning the propermethod for using such material, see Bob Becking, "Inscribed Seals as Evidence for Biblical Israel?Jeremiah40.7-41.15 Par Example,"in Can a 'Historyof Israel' Be Written?"ed. Lester Grabbe(JSOTSup245; EuropeanSeminarin HistoricalMethodology 1; Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), pp. 65-83. 62. See the list of these in Gershon Galil, The Chronology of the Kings of Israel and Judah (SHANE 9; Leiden: Brill, 1996), pp. 153-54. Much of this materialis reproducedin a more narrative form in Lester L. Grabbe,"AreHistoriansof Ancient Palestine Fellow Creatures-or Different Animals?"in Can a 'Historyof Israel'Be Written?" ed. Lester Grabbe,pp. 24-26. 63. See JohnVan Seters,In Searchof History: Historiographyin theAncient Worldand the Origins of Biblical History (New Haven:Yale University Press, 1983), pp. 299-301. A more extreme position concerning the use of sources is developed in Menahem Haran,"The Books of the Chronicles 'Of the Kings of Judah'and 'Of the Kings of Israel':What Sort of Books WereThey?" VT49 (1999), pp. 156-64.

13

Marc Brettler materialfound in these earlier sources. As noted by Nadav Na'aman,64the house built concerning the lack of historicity of the patriarchswas ultimately accepted by scholars because of an impressive list of anachronismsassembled in Genesis by Thompson and others. No similar list exists for Kings. This does not mean, of course, thatKings is historicaland contemporaneouswith the events it depicts, and may be used uncritically as a historical source, as some pre-CopenhagenSchool scholars might have done--verisimilitude need not imply historical truth.However, given that Kings lacks anachronisms,largelylacks the signs of Late Biblical Hebrew, has signs that it incorporatesarchivalmaterial, and some of the kings mentioned in it are confirmed by Mesopotamiansources, it seems inappropriate to view it as a secondarysource of little value andto treatit like Genesis or Judges. Additionally, Lemche's chapter "Israel in ContemporaryHistorical Documents from the Ancient Near East"is overly eagerto show thatarchaeologicalmaterial that might fit the Bible could not possibly do so. Sometimes this is reasonable, as in the observation that the Siloam inscription65 does not mention Hezekiah, thus it cannot be simplistically used to confirm the Bible's accounts of Hezekiah's tunnel in 2 Chronicles 32:30 (p. 47). However, Lemche's suggestion that the prominence of Omri ratherthan Ahab in the Mesha inscriptionsuggests that Omri was "the apical founder of the kingdom of Israel"(p. 45) reaches well beyond the evidence, especially given that"Ahabthe Israelite"is mentionedin the monolith inscription of Shalmaneser III.66 Lemche's skepticism concerning the mentioning of King David in the Tel Dan inscriptionis not unique.67 The interpretationof "nrmnin that inscriptionas the Davidic dynasty is the most reasonable interpretation,especially after additional pieces of this inscription were found. Lemche's proposalthat the inscriptionis a likely forgery,and has been improperlyjoined by the Israel Museum, where "thejoint is presentedas a fact and coveredwith a 'protective'plaster"(p. 150, n. 17), is absurd.The many protestsby Lemche and others concerning this inscriptionand its interpretationrecall the bad joke concerning the individualwho is confrontedby a friend,asking why he didn't returna watch he had borrowed.He answers:I neverborrowedit; I returnedit and you misplaced it; it is the very watchyou arewearing.Lemche similarlysays about this inscription:it doesn't refer to David; it is not a single inscriptionanyway; it might be a forgery. This type of overly skeptical attitude typifies much of the analysis of this crucial chapter,68and only by discountingso much biblical inter64. Oral comment at 2000 InternationalSBL conference. 65. See ANET,p. 321. 66. See Galil, The Chronologyof the Kings of Israel and Judah, p. 32, n. 1, for literatureon this inscription. 67. The literatureon this is immense. The original publicationsare A. Biran and J.Naveh, "An Aramaic Stele Fragmentfrom Tel Dan,"IEJ43 (1993), pp. 81-98 and idem, "TheTel Dan Inscription: A New Fragment,"IEJ45 (1995), pp. 1-18. JSOT64 (1994), pp. 3-32 containsthree importantessays on the reading. More recent bibliographymay be found in Nadav Na'aman, "ThreeNotes on the Aramaic Inscriptionfrom Tel Dan,"IEJ 50 (2000), p. 92, n. 2. 68. For a more stridentcritiqueof this skepticism, see WilliamW. Hallo, "The Limits of Skepticism,"JAOS 110 (1990), pp. 187-199. I do not share all of his reservations,especially as they are voiced in his earlier"Biblical History in its Near EasternSetting:The ContextualApproach,"in Scrip-

14

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues nal evidence, as well as archaeologicalevidence, can Lemche conclude that "The Israel(s) of the Old Testamentshowed itself to be a productof a literaryimagination" (p. 129). The Copenhagen School is often incorrectlystereotypedas totally destructive. Especially in the chapter"The People of God" (pp. 86-132), Lemche is interestedin describingwhat the Bible is, noting: "Insteadof a reporton what really happenedin Palestine in the Bronze throughIronAges in antiquity,the history writersre-createdthe past as a tragic dramaabout Israel,as being underthe curse, and at the same time respectively the blessing of God" (p. 130). This is too flat a descriptionof the Bible, ignoringits richness and variegation.It is overly simplistic to say that "everypart of the history is seen and should be seen from this perspective" (ibid.). A counter-hypothesismight see the Bible as a more complex work, from variousperiods, reflecting various degrees of historicity,and having a multiplicityof purposes, one of which might be depicting an Israel simultaneously underblessing and curse. Thompson'sTheMythicPast is very similar to Lemche's recent book. Like Lemche,Thompsonconsiders the Bible to be "secondaryevidence,""knownto us first from the Hellenistic period"(p. 8). He is generally skeptical of reconstructing early Israelite history; concerning the tenth century, he states: "One cannot speak historicallyof a state without a population.Nor can one speak of a capital without a town. Stories are not enough" (p. 165). He too is critical of the interpretations of the Tel Dan inscription that find mention of a real King David (pp. 203 -205). At places, his rhetoricis more stridentor sarcasticthan Lemche's. Forexample, he comparesthe Maccabees to the Taliban(p. 199 and elsewhere),69 and concerningthe book of Kings' suggestion thatthere are two kings named Jeroboam, he quips "Whatharman extra Jeroboam?"(p. 23) Thompson goes beyond Lemche, suggesting that we must seek a GrecoRoman backgroundfor the Hebrew Bible: "Textsdo not give direct evidence for the constructionof a history of any world of the past assertedby their authors,but ratherfor the history and perspectiveof the author'sown world as implied in the texts' projections.This world is ratherGreco-Roman than Hellenistic" (p. 254). In terms of specifics, he suggests that "It was Antiochus IV of Syria who was the Ahab of history" (p. 208) and "The stories, for instance, of the building of the temple by David or Solomon, Cyrusor Nehemiah (and the mirroringof these stories in the ark and tent of the wilderness wanderingsand in the altarsbuilt by the patriarchs),were narrativesthatestablisheda patternof fitness and proprietysurroundingthe restorationof temple services in 164 BCE" (p. 209). As noted earlier, for linguistic reasons, it is difficult to believe that these narrativeswere composed at such a late period. In addition, Thompson does not adduce the type of detailed proof needed,noting for example, very specific ways in which Ahab mirrors Antiochus, or how the various temple episodes reflected the events of 164 BCE. In fact, if the structuresof David, Solomon, Cyrus, Nehemiah, and the tent ture in Context:Essays on the ComparativeMethod, eds. Carl D. Evans et al. (PTMS 34; Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1980), pp. 1-26. 69. In fairness it must be noted that his book was publishedbefore the events of 9/11/01.

15

Marc Brettler of the wilderness all mirrorthe temple of 164, why are these structuresdepicted so differently?Thompsonalso suggests that "If we wish to define the community that is implicit in the creation of a book like the Bible's Psalter,it helps to turn again to the Dead Sea scrolls" (p. 239). This is troublingon several grounds.The language of the Psalterand that of the hodayot, a genre of prayersfound at Qumran, is quite different, as is their theology-the type of dualism and religious determinism found throughoutthe hodayot is largely absent from the psalms.70 Furthermore,the Psalter itself contains relatively clear internalindications that it developed over time, and should be studied as such-this is evident fromboth the sophisticated editorial work completed by GeraldH. Wilson,"7but also from the simple fact that Psalm 72 ends with the words ,wl 1 -rntr mnrin i, "theprayers of David son of Jesse have ended." It would seem that such evidence, like other evidence for editions of the DeuteronomisticHistory,or stratawithin the Pentateuch,is largely ignoredby the Copenhagen School because it is conjectural.But such theories about the editing of Psalms are strong theories, with great explanativepower; they have garnered general scholarly assent and should not be totally ignored.Thompson, like Lemche, is searching for absolute certainty.He claims that "judgmentsthat events are plausible, likely, or even probableare hardlyever good tools for an historian.History doesn't requirethe plausible. It requiresevidence" (p. 229). But is his long, detailed, and interestingreconstructionof ancient near eastern history, based on archaeology and evidence of climate change (pp. 103-225) any less conjectural than many of the theories developed concerning biblical texts and their development? Rather than looking for the absolutes insisted upon by the Copenhagen School, other scholarsare willing to speak of "tentativehistory,"72Orto use methods such as "triangulation"73 from varioussources to recreatehistory.In the words of Lester Grabbe,"If we accept only what we can be absolutelycertainabout,we might as well give up the historical task ab initio because extremely little falls in that category."74Similar observations have been made by classicists concerning the reconstructionof Greek and Roman history.75 This book by Thompson,like Lemche'sAncientIsrael, presentsitself as positive, as an explorationof how the Hebrew Bible should be interpretedas a constructivemyth of Greco-Roman Judaism: 70. See Emile Puech, "Hodayot,"Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. Lawrence H. Schiffman and James C. VanderKam(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 1.365-9. 71. Gerald Henry Wilson, TheEditing of the Hebrew Psalter (SBLDS 76; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985) and the various studies in TheShape of Shaping of the Psalter, ed. J. Clinton McCann (JSOTSup 159; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993). 72. So Bob Becking, "Ezra'sRe-enactment of the Exile," in Leading Captivity Captive, ed. Lester L. Grabbe,pp. 40-61. 73. So Lester L. Grabbe,"'The Exile' underthe Theodolite:Historiographyas Triangulation," in Leading CaptivityCaptive, ed., Lester L. Grabbe,pp. 80-100. 74. Lester L. Grabbe,"AreHistoriansof Ancient PalestineFellow Creatures-or DifferentAnimals?"pp. 29-30. 75. See W.KendrickPritchett,TheLiar School of Herodotus(Amsterdam:J. C. Gieben, 1993), esp. p. 351, "Whatthe modern scholar has to do is to estimatethe likelihood of genuineness againsta broadbackgroundof historicalprobability."

16

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues Theproblemis not thatthe Bibleis exaggeratedor unrealistic,andit is cerretainlynotthatthe Bibleis false.Thewritersof the Biblearesurprisingly alisticandtruthful.In theirownterms-which arenot the termsof critical historicalscholarship-theyexpressthemselveswell aboutthe worldthey know... . Theywritehoweverwith ideas,thoughtsandimages,metaphors andmotifs,perspectivesandgoalsthatarequiteat a tangentto thoseof the presentday(p. 104). It does this by "using old traditionsaboutthe past as parables"(p. 189) since "It is a tool of philosophy and moral instruction"(p. 99). Depending on how "myth"is understood,Thompson may be correct. However, he ignores the possibility that even a mythological text that is not primarilyinterestedin giving us the real past may, at points, when analyzedclosely, offer us useful informationabout this past. In addition,like Lemche'sreading,Thompson'smythological readingis relatively flat and monochromatic because the historical and ideological depth that traditional biblical scholarshipsees in these texts is lost in Thompson'smodel of a Greco-Roman composition. Thompsonadmits that sometimes the biblical authorsused "old traditions" (p. 189) or included "survivingfragments of the past" (p. 295), but he shows little interestin uncoveringwhich specific fragmentsthese might be. This is because he deals with large blocks of materialas wholes, ratherthan as comprised of material with a long and complicatedhistory.Forexample, in his treatmentof Kings as a source, he points out the historicallyproblematictreatmentof Elijahand Jonah (p. 59). However,it is generallyconceded that the Elijah materialis secondary to the book, and eitherwas incorporatedas a whole into the book by the Deuteronomistic Historian,76or is a late addition to the book;77 in either case, it does not bear on the historiographicalnatureof the rest of Kings. Thompson'sdiscussion of Jonah is confusing-he mixes up the Jonah who is swallowed by the big fish of the book of Jonah with the short notice of "Jonah son of Amittai" found in 2 Kings 14:25. Whatbearingdoes the Jonahstory, which is markedas fanciful,78 and found in a separatebook, have on the historicityof Kings, which mentions the same prophet?Does the existence of tall tales about certainAmerican presidents suggest that any source that mentions these individualsis ahistorical? Thompson'sreconstructionsof the real history of Israel are often as problematic as those he critiques.Forexample, he suggests: "Thereis also evidence of a few minordeities such as Azazel in the scapegoatritualof Leviticus 16 and Lilith, the goddess of the night and motherof Cain"(p. 172). Since the book is popular, and is thus not extensively footnoted,it may be assumedthatthe referenceto Lilith is based on Isaiah 34:14, "Wildcatsshall meet hyenas, Goat-demons shall greet each other; There too the lilith shall repose And find herself a resting place" (NJPS). This verse certainlydoes not suggest the existence in the states of Judah 76. Those who advocate this position are discussed in Steven L. McKenzie, The TroubleWith Kings: The Compositionof the Books of Kings in the DeuteronomisticHistory (VTSup 42; Leiden: Brill, 1991), p. 84. 77. McKenzie, The TroubleWithKings, pp. 81-100. 78. See Brettler,The Creationof History, pp. 47 and 174, n. 170.

17

Marc Brettler and Israelof "Lilith,the goddess of the night andmotherof Cain."Firstof all, the dating of materialin all of Isaiah is now hotly contested,as there is an increasing tendency to see the mark of the exilic Deutero-Isaiahon greaterand greaterportions of the book.79 Secondly, on what basis may Lilith of this verse with certainty be equated with the Mesopotamiandeity of the same name?80Third,though there is a post-biblicaltraditionthat Lilith was Adam'sfirst wife, there is no tradition that disputes the biblical text, and states that she, ratherthan Eve, was the mother of Cain. Finally,Lilith is not explicitly identified as Adam's first wife until the Alphabet of Ben-Sirah, a post-Talmudicwork.81While late works may sometimes preservemuch earliertraditions,it is doubtfulthathere earlierJudaean and Israelitepracticeshave been preservedaccuratelyfor morethan a millennium. A similar carelessness is evident elsewhere in this work, particularlyin Thompson'streatmentof certainHebrewtexts. This might suggest thatthis book's focus on archaeology,ancientneareasternhistory,generalissues like the impactof climatic change, and broad metaphoricalreading of the biblical text is caused by Thompson'slack of precise engagementwith the Hebrewtext. Such an engagement would surely suggest problemswith the ratherflat picturehe presentsof the Bible as a mythas a synchronic,Greco-Romantext. Forexample,Thompsonsuggeststhat the name Noah refers to "relief" and "reconciliation,"and connects these both to "nah"(p. 25); however,the root for "relief" in Gen 5:29 is nnr. In discussing the biblical etymology of Israel,with a sin, Thompsonimproperlyconnects it to txw, of the with a shin (p. 27). Following a common error,he mistranslates u~rwn "u', of the definite artiof Job as "Satan" even the though presence prologue (p. 172), cle there militates againstthis translation,82 and suggests that Satanper se did not exist in the world-view of Job's author.He has, accordingto a note on p. 3, translated biblical texts himself; it is thus unclearhow he might rendernmarn of Joshua 1:8 as "love"(p. 241)-it means "to read in an undertone."The same issue is seen i in his translationof Psalm 1:2, b ti nrar rnirr ninna nt as '• •r',rinni••xn "butis one who has his joy on Yahweh'storah;who loves Yahweh'storahand studies it day and night"(p. 224) and "He rejoices in Yahweh'storahand loves the tradition day and night"(p. 229). Although the exact meaning of the rareroot vx is as "Keep awake and uncertain,his translationof Micah 6:8, 1nrTxt ni v•arnm walk with your God" (p. 69), is very unlikely. He is also careless in his reference to the evidence that is, and is not, found in the Bible, speaking, for example, of "the Elohe Shamayimthat we find in Isaiah"(p. 318); this phrase is never found in that book. These errors,taken together,reflect on Thompsonas a readerand interpreterof biblical texts. 79. See H. G. M. Williamson, TheBook Called Isaiah: Deutero-Isaiahs Role in Composition and Redaction (Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1994) and several of the essays in Roy F. Melugin and Marvin A. Sweeney, eds., New Visions of Isaiah (JSOTSup 214; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996). 80. See DDD, second edition, pp. 520-521. 81. On this work, see Eli Yassif, TheTalesof Ben Sira in the Middle-Ages(Jerusalem:Magnes, 1984; Hebrew). 82. Joiion ? 137b and Edouard Dhorme, A Commentary on the Book of Job (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1984), p. 5.

18

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues At least one of his translationsreflects a specifically Christianreading. He translatesIsaiah 40:3, as "A voice cries in the wilderness: prepareYahweh'spath; make straightthe way of God throughthe desert"(p. 219), which fits the NT depiction of John the Baptist in all four gospels,83 ratherthan the usual translation of "Avoice rings out:"Clearin the deserta roadfor the LORD! Level in the wilderness a highway for our God!" (so NJPS). This may hint at a wider Christianagenda. Throughhis re-datingof the HebrewBible, the Old Testamentis broughtcloser and closer to the New, and significant continuity is seen between the two. This is the opposite of the type of typical Protestantsupersessionism,where significant discontinuitiesare found between the Old and New Testaments,and thus the Old is supersededby the New; instead,the Old becomes subsumedinto the New. This is illustratedby the many cases where the New Testamentis adducedto illustrate how the Old Testamentfunctions as a myth. Lemche's suggestion that the OT be understoodin terms of Israel underblessing and curse,84a theme which is quite reminiscent of Galatians 3:13-14, likely also reflects a reading of the Hebrew Bible througha Christianlens. Given that both Lemche and Thompsonteach in a Facultyof Theology that is very Christian-centeredin terms of its offerings, their Christianbent is not entirely surprising. Given that both Thompson and Lemche suggest a Hellenistic or GrecoRoman date for much of the Bible, it is appropriateto tie these thoughts together with an analogy from that world concerning the use of Homer in reconstructing the Greek past.85 This analogy is appropriate-there certainly was a stage of Homeric fundamentalismor romanticism;this even motivated the excavation of Troy,86which has close parallels to the use and abuse of biblical/Syro-Palestinian archaeology.The earliest complete manuscriptof Homer dates from the early tenth centuryCE,87which, just as with the Bible, is many centuriesafter its putative date of composition. Finally,scholars continue to debate issues of historicity in TheIliad and The Odyssey. Some of the conclusions of contemporary Homeric scholarship are remarkablylike those of the Copenhagen School. Hans GiinterJansen, writing in Jack Sasson's Civilizationsof the Ancient Near East, notes that: "It must be stated clearly:an evolution of the epic with respect to its potential historical content 83. Matt3:3;Mark1:3;Luke3:4-6; John1:23. 84. Seep. 15. 85. By concludingwiththisexamplefromHomer,I do notmeanto suggestthatGreek,rather I merelywantto meetthe thanancientneareasterntexts,shouldbe ourprimarypointof comparison; Schoolon its ownterms.In contrast,forexample,to JohnVanSeters'In Searchof HisCopenhagen evidencefromtheancientNearEastto drawits Schoolrarelyusescomparative tory,theCopenhagen analogies;yet,as noted,amongothers,by HansM. Barstad,"TheStrangeFearof theBible:SomeReinLeadingCaptivity inRecentAncientIsraeliteHistoriographies," flectionsonthe'Bibliophobia' Captive,ed. LesterL. Grabbe,pp. 120-127, a reasonable workinghypothesisis thattheBibleshouldbe viewedas anancientneareasterntext! in Civilizations in HansGiinterJansen,"Troy:LegendandReality," 86. Seethesummary of the AncientNearEast,ed.JackM. Sasson(NewYork:Scribner's, 1995),2.1121-34. 87. This is the Ms. VenetusMarcianus454, also called VenetusA; see Michale Haslam, "Homeric Papyriand the Transmissionof the Text"in A New Companionto Homer,eds. Ian Morris and Barry Powell (Leiden: Brill, 1997), p. 61.

19

Marc Brettler throughthe removalof its poetical exaggerations,its folkloristic elements, and all its implausibleevents and then the acceptanceof the rest as truthwould be a gross The word "epic" could be remisunderstandingof what legends can provide.""ss placed with "theBible,"and the quote would be indistinguishablefromThompson and Lemche. Yet most classicists trace the development of The Iliad and The Odyssey, and use evidence to discern the prehistoryof these epics.89 Classicists generally believe that the final stage has not obliteratedall traces of earlier dialects;90indeed, Homer as we now have it incorporatesmany working featuresof non-Ionic dialects involved in the earlier stages of the evolution of Homericdiction. Nor has the final work recast all of its earlier traditionsinto IronAge patterns.91 For example, a reference to the "silver-studdedsword"in Iliad 14.405 is typically seen as fitting a sixteenth- and fifteenth-centurymilieu.92Furthermore, although these two great works are considered myths, most classicists would not a priori discount their value for reconstructingsome aspects of ancient civilization that predatethe time of the final "composition"of these works.93 Thus, the contemporaryunderstandingof Homer negates the three main claims of the Copenhagen School: (1) works must be read only in terms of their final date of crystallization;(2) linguistic and internalevidence may not be used for discerninglayers within a text; (3) mythological texts may not be used for recreatingancient history since the genres of myth and history are mutuallyexclusive. This analogy also suggests thatthose who oppose the methodsof the CopenhagenSchool should not be automaticallycategorized as fundamentalistsor neo-Albrightians,but may well be working from a differentnotion of how ancienthistory is created,a notion that is well-accepted within the world of the study of classical antiquity. In sum, the sentimentsof Thompsonand Lemchethat"Wecan say now with considerableconfidence that the Bible is not a history of anyone'spast"94are ex88. Jansen, "Troy:Legend and Reality,"2.1131. 89. For one such reconstructionof these stages, see Gregory Nagy, Poetry as Performance: Homer and Beyond (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 1996), pp. 107-206, and a summaryin Gregory Nagy, Homeric Questions (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996), p. 42. 90. Geoffrey Horrocks,"Homer'sDialects,"A New Companionto Homer,pp. 193-217. I cite Horrocksin particular,since he tends to be a minimalistconcerningthe retentionof pre-Ionicelements in Homer. 91. The literatureon this is immense; see for example, E. S. Sherratt,"'Reading the Texts':Archaeology and the Homeric Question,"Antiquity64 (1990), pp. 7-24; Jan Pal Crielaard,"Homer,History and Archaeology: Some Remarkson the Date of the HomericWorld,"in Homeric Questions,ed. Jan Paul Crielaard(Amsterdam:J. C. Gieban, 1995), pp. 201-288; and John Bennet, "Homerand the Bronze Age," in A New Companionto Homer, pp. 511-533. The summaryin MartinLitchfieldWest, "Homer,"in OxfordClassical Dictionary, ed. Simon HornblowerandAntony Spawforth(thirdedition; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 719 is quite apposite: "Only fossilized memories of the Mycenean age survive in his work"-but they do survive! 92. Jansen,p. 1131. Foran additionalexample wherethe Iliadreflects second millenniumpractices, see R. Janko, The Iliad: A Commentary(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 1992), 4.213 on Iliad 14.402-408. 93. The composition of the Homeric epic poems may be even more complicated than that of biblical texts; if anything,this strengthensmy analogy. 94. Thompson, TheMythicPast, p. xv.

20

The Copenhagen School: The Historiographical Issues aggerated.Yes, the Bible may be seen as a literarycomposition,95but the distinction between history and literature,which has become so fundamentalto the study of biblicaltexts, is a misplaced distinction.96Certainly,both Lemche and Thompson are correct that the Bible is fundamentallya myth, and does not have interest in the real past as its focal point; yet, there are places where the Bible likely reflects antiquarianinterests,97and even a myth thatis not interestedin the past may, in places, accurately depict the past. Finally, the premise of the Copenhagen School, thatthe Bible is a Hellenistic book, is doublyfaulty:it ignores the evidence of linguistic dating of biblical texts, and it treatsthe Bible as a monolith. Thompsonwas correct when he noted that "Writingis an exercise of influence and persuasion"(p. 375). Unfortunately,general historical method suggests thatthe approachof the CopenhagenSchool, especially as it relatesto the late date of the Bible and the total ahistoricityof the text are not persuasive.A school that concentrateson the need to "expandon our ignorance"98ultimatelybecomes tiresome, as it is more useful to expend scholarly energy on what we can say. Marc Brettler Brandeis University Waltham,Massachusetts

95. For the problemswith using the term "literary"for the Bible, see The Creationof History, pp. 14-17. 96. It has its origin in modern critical scholarshipwith Johan Huizinga, "A Definition of the Concept of History,"in Philosophy and History: Essays Presented to Ernst Cassirer, eds. Raymond KlibanskyandH. J.Paton(Gloucester,MA: PeterSmith, 1975), pp. 1-10. Huizinga'sessay is critiqued in Brettler,The Creationof History, p. 11. 97. This is the main point of BaruchHalpern,TheFirst Historians: TheHebrewBible and History (San Francisco,CA; Harperand Row, 1988). Even though he exaggeratesthe extent of these "antiquarianinterests,"he does show their presence. 98. Thomas L. Thompson, "The Exile in History and Myth: A Response to Hans Barstad,"in Leading Captivity Captive, ed. Lester L. Grabbe, p. 101.

21

Between Official and Private Dispute: The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages Author(s): Ram Ben-Shalom Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 23-71 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131768 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

AJS Review 27:1 (2003), 23-72 BETWEEN OFFICIAL AND PRIVATE DISPUTE: The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late MiddleAges

by Ram Ben-Shalom Literaryandhistoricalevidence of religious disputesthattook place between Jews and Christiansduringthe MiddleAges exists in a varietyof sources. Hebrew manuscriptsand Latin documents concerning such encounters survive from the disputationsthatwere held in Paris(1240), Barcelona(1263), andTortosa(14131414). Some of these were writtenby participantsthemselves after the events described. Some were producedby Christianauthorsas protocols, either during or after the disputations.Significant discrepanciesconcerning the same dispute are to be found between the Christianand Jewish accounts.' Other material on this subjectexists in the literatureof the ChristianAdversusIudaeos (dating from late antiquityand the early Middle Ages) and in the Jewish polemical literature(dating from the twelfth century). Pioneer studies have also recently appearedusing the records of the Spanish Inquisition, in which much evidence was found concerning such disputes.2 Amos Funkensteinmadean importantpreliminaryclassificationof Christian argumentsused in the MiddleAges againstthe Jews.3 His distinctionbetween the "old polemic"and varioustypes of "new polemic" was acceptedby scholars, who neverthelessmade distinctionsor took issue over questionsof periodizationand of the aims and identityof the groups and institutionsthatadoptedthe new polemic.4 Jeremy Cohen formulateda complementaryclassification presenting four cateI would like to express my gratitudeto ProfessorOra Limor for her critical suggestions in the preparationof this article. In addition, I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the Open University of Israel. 1. See Y. Baer, "Towardsa Critiqueof the Disputes Between RabbiYehiel of Paris and Rabbi Moses ben Nahman,"(Hebrew) Tarbiz,2 (1931), pp. 172-187; Baer, A History of the Jews in Christian Spain (Philadelphia:Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1966), II, pp. 176-181; H. Merhavia, The Talmudin the Eyes of Christianity:the View of Post-Biblical Jewish Literaturein the Medieval Christian World,500-1248 (Hebrew)(Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute, 1970), pp. 227-348; R. Chazan, Barcelona and Beyond: TheDisputation of 1263 and its Aftermath(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), pp. 1-80; J. Riera I Sans, La Cr6nica en Hebreu de la Disputa de Tortosa (Barcelona:Fundacio SalvadorVives Casajuana,1974). 2. See E. Gutwirth,"Gender,History and the Judeo-ChristianPolemic,"in O. Limor and G. G. Stroumsa,eds., ContraJudaeos (Tiibingen:J. C. B. Mohr, 1996), pp. 257-278. 3. A. Funkenstein,"The Changes in the Religious Dispute between Jews and Christiansin the TwelfthCentury,"(Hebrew), Zion, 53 (1968), pp. 125-144; Reprintedin A. Funkenstein,Image and Historical Consciousness

in Judaism and its Cultural Surroundings (Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved,

1991), pp. 82-102. 4.

See J. Cohen, The Friars and the Jews: The Evolution of MedievalAnti-Judaism

23

(Ithaca and

Ram Ben Shalom gories of Jewish argumentagainst Christianity,showing that at each stage Jewish figures respondedto new tactics adoptedby theirChristianopponentsandthatthey themselves adoptedChristianmethods in order,in turn,to attackChristianity.5 In locating Jewish testimony of these religious disputes,one shouldnot only look to the polemic genre.6 Other sources should also be consulted, for instance, the Responsa literature7and Jewish thought,which includes philosophy,8Kabbalah,9biblical interpretation,'0moralprecepts,'' andhomiletic literature.This study addresses the religious dispute as it unfolded in reality (in contrastto its literary expression) in Spain and Provenceup to the end of the fifteenth centuryas manifest in the Jewish sources. The first section describes two privatedisputes,whose traces were left in biblical commentaryand the homiletical literature.Both took place in Spain, one duringthe fourteenthcentury,the other in the fifteenth century.The second section is a study of the general characteristicsof religious dispute in Spain and Provence. It makes a distinctionbetween the official dispute and the privateone, with special attentiongiven to the latter.Throughan examinationof numerous examples, we will see that private disputes were a common, dynamic phenomenon,part of the regulardiscourse between Jews and Christiansup to the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and Provence.The two disputes studied in part one will be seen to be part of a more general practiceas we ask what they add to our understandingof religious disputes in the Middle Ages. I The philosopher and biblical scholar,Joseph ibn Caspi, wanderedthroughout his life between southernFranceand Spain. He often polemicized in his works London: Cornell University Press, 1982), esp. 19-32; R. Chazan,Daggers of Faith. Thirteenth-Century ChristianMissionizing and Jewish Response (Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1989). 5. J. Cohen, "Towardsa FunctionalClassification of Jewish anti-ChristianPolemic in the High MiddleAges," in B. Lewis and F.Niew6hner,eds., Religionsgesprdcheim Mittelalter(Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz, 1992), pp. 93-114. 6. See Y. Rosenthal, "Anti-ChristianPolemics from its Beginnings to the End of the 18th Century" (Hebrew), Aresheth:An Annual of Hebrew Booklore, vol. II (1960), pp. 130-179 (Jerusalem: Mossad HaravKook); P. Browe, "Die Judenmissionin Mittelalterund die Pipste," Miscellanea Historiae Pontificiae, VI (1942), pp. 99-108. 7. See n. 108. 8. See D. J. Lasker,Jewish Philosophical Polemics Against Christianity in the MiddleAges (New York,Ktav PublishingHouse Inc., Anti Defamation League of B'nei Brith, 1977). 9. See M. Idel, "The Attitude TowardsChristianityin Sefer ha-meshiv" (Hebrew), Zion, 46 (1981), pp. 77-9 1;Y. Liebes, "ChristianInfluenceson the Zohar"(Hebrew),JerusalemStudiesin Jewish Thought,2, 1 (1983), pp. 43-74. 10. Rabbi David Kimhi, for instance, withheld polemical remarksregardinghis interpretations of the Scriptures,and in particularthe Book of Psalms. They were laterpublishedseparatelyunderthe title "Teshuvotha-Radakla-Nosrim"(first printedin 1664 as an appendixto Sefer ha-Nisahonof Rabbi Yom-TovLipmannMuehlhausen).See F.E. Talmage,"R. David Kimhias Polemicist,"HebrewUnion College Annual 38 (1967), pp. 213-235; A. Gross, "Satan and Christianity:The Demonization of Christianityin the Writings of AbrahamSaba,"(Hebrew),Zion, 58 (1993), pp. 91-105. 11. See, for instance, Bahya ben Asher, Kad ha-kemah,Geulah, 1, in Kitvei RabbenuBahya, ed. C.B. Chavel (Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1970), pp. 118-119; Geulah, 2, p. 122.

24

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages against Christian interpretationsof the Bible and theological principles. This polemic was not divorced from his actual activities. Twice he testifies to having participatedin religious disputes. The first instance, to be examined below, was with a bishop in Provence,andconcernedthe relationbetween the original Hebrew scriptureand the Latin translationsof the Old Testament.'2The second dispute, which was describedin ibn Caspi's interpretationof Genesis 49:10, took place in 1332, when ibn Caspi resided in Valenciain the Kingdom of Aragon.'3 Ibn Caspi writes thathe engaged some Christiansages in debatebut he does not describe the details of this dialogue, beyond noting its subject-the extent of Jewish guilt for the deathof Jesus-and recountinghis own answerto the Christians.14 Jewish guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus is a venerable motif in Christian theology.The idea was born in the Gospels, and was carriedon in the writings of the Churchfathersand theologians of the Middle Ages. JeremyCohen pointed to the change thatoccurredin the twelfth century in the perceptionof the Jews as the murderersof Jesus. The ancient tradition,resting principallyon Augustine, posited that the Jews had harmedJesus out of ignoranceof his messianism and divinity.After the twelfth century,however,the Jews were accused of malicious intent. This new view of Jesus' deathwas furtherdeveloped duringthe thirteenthand the early fourteenthcentury in the theological writings of the Mendicant orders.'5 Jean Delumeauhas describedhow this "theologicaldiscourse"fed the developing trendof popularanimosity towardsthem in the medieval theaterand in the stoning practicedduring"holy week."'" Ibn Caspi noted two kinds of apologetics that were common responses to Christianaccusations concerning Jesus' death, rejecting both completely. In answer to those Jews who denied their guilt by claiming that neitherthey nor their childrenhad taken any part in the said actions, Ibn Caspi insisted that he considered himself to be a participantin Jesus' death,and would behave in the same way today."' In answerto those "vain sophists"who arguedthat responsibility for Je12. See B. Mesch, Studies in Joseph Ibn Caspi, Fourteenth-CenturyPhilosopher and Exegete (Leiden: Brill, 1975), p. 57. 13. See B. E Herring,Joseph IbnKaspi s Gevi'a Kesef A Studyin MedievalJewish Philosophic Bible Commentary(New York:Ktav, 1982) p. 12. 14. Joseph ibn Caspi, "Masref La-Kesef,"p. 107, in MishnehKesef, I. (Cracow,Fisher, 1905), 2. The debate that will be analyzedbelow is found there on pp. 107-109. 15. See J. Cohen, "The Jews as Killers of Christin the LatinTradition,FromAugustine to the Friars,"Traditio,39 (1983), pp. 1-27. See n. 23 below concerning Melito of Sardis. In Al-Harizi's Tahkemoni(Tel Aviv: Mahbarotle-Sifrut, 1952, 28, pp. 247-248), we find the claim that Jews were banishedfromJerusalembecause they were seen as Christkillers.Alreadyin the twelfth centuryJoseph Kimhi rejectedthe accusation.JosephKimhi, "Sefer ha-Berit,"in Sefer ha-Berit and the Radak'sDisputes with Christianity,ed. E. Talmage(Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute,1974), p. 65: "It was not at all their intentionto kill the son of God, only their intentionto kill a person born of a man and woman, and there is no sin in this for them because the intention is the heart of the matter." 16. See J.Delumeau,Lapeur en occident (XIVe-XVIII siecles) (Paris:Fayard-Librairie Arthbme Fayard,1978), pp. 280-281. 17. The claim thatJesus' deathwas justified was not new. It is found in the Talmud,in the book TheLife of Jesus, and in the polemical literaturethat predatedibn Caspi. See Sefer Nisahon Yashan,in D. Berger, The Jewish-Christian

Debate in the High Middle Ages. A Critical Edition of the Nizzahon

25

Ram Ben Shalom sus' death should not be laid at the feet of the Jews because Jesus wantedto die,'8 Ibn Caspi counters with the Christianresponse: Jewish intentions were bad, and were not at all concerned with satisfying the wishes of Jesus.19 It should be emphasized that claiming Jesus' death at the hands of the Jews to be just could be quite dangerous;still, this is no reason to doubt the credibility of ibn Caspi'saccount. There were other Jews in Aragon duringthese same years who did not hesitate in making similar claims in privateencounters.20 Before beginning his response to the Christiansages, ibn Caspi first reviews the characteristicdivisions of society in the Holy Landin the time of Jesus. Jesus' followers were divided between Jews and Gentiles (Greeks, Romans, and others). Accordingly, ibn Caspi continued,the Christiansare of the same blood of either the Jews or the non-Jews who followed Jesus, whereas the Jews are descendents of those Jews who rejectedJesus and refused to embracehis faith. For the sake of argument,he presumes the Christiansages to be descended from the Jewish believers in Jesus while he and his fellow Jews are descended from those who attacked Jesus. Ibn Caspi has two points to make: (A) Jesus grew up with the Jews. He played,ate, drank,andperformedall his otherbodily functions,like any otherperson.Whenhe maturedhe began to wander the streets and the synagogues and suddenlyclaimed that he was none otherthan God,while continuingto live and workas a mortal.Thus,not withoutreasondid the Jews persecutehim. BothJew andChristianbelieve, as theTorahproclaims,thatGod is a "devouringfire,"21accompaniedby chariotsof fire, fearfulwinged seraphs. If, on the one hand,Jesus had appearedin such an awesome manner,his persecution would no doubt be a great sin on the partof the Jews. On the otherhand, Vetuswith an Introduction,Translation,and Commentary(Philadelphia:The Jewish PublicationSociety of America, 1979), p. 160 (paragraph151). 18. This is one of Kimhi'sanswers, "Sefer ha-berit,"p. 64; and RabbiHayyim ibn Musa, Sefer magen va-romahin Sefer magen va-romah,and A Letter to his Son (The National and UniversityLibrarymanuscript).Hebrew University,p. 47. 19. This response is found,for instance,in a section of an essay found in the CairoGeniza(written in Arabic letters) containing responses to anti-Christianarguments.In reference to the claim that Jesus' killers fulfilled his own wish, the writercontends that Godjudges the feelings of the heart.The killers of Jesus sought to destroy him and, hence, will not escape their punishment in hell. See S. Stroumsa,"The Polemic and its Ruin,"(Hebrew)Pe'amim, 75 (1998), p. 99. The claim concerningthe pernicious intentions of the Jews in the crucifixion of Jesus, vis-ai-visthe heavenly plan of redemption and the necessity of the crucifixion, already arose at the end of the eighth century in a religious polemic between Muslims and Christians.See S. H. Griffith, "Jews and Muslims in ChristianSyriac and Arabic Texts of the Ninth Century,"Jewish History, III (1988), p. 76. 20. This was the instanceof VitalisAfraymin the village of Villanovade Cubells in Aragonduring "HolyWeek"of 1367. He passed one of the Christianyouthswho was engagedin readingthe Passion andthe latteraccusedhim of bearingthe Jews'guilt forthe crucifixion.Vitalisrespondedthathadhe been presentduringthe crucifixionhe would have acted the same way himself.The reportof this disputeis in E Baer,Die Juden im ChristlichenSpanien(Berlin:Akademie-Verlag,1929), I, n. 285, p. 407. See too D. Nirenberg,Communitiesof Violence:Persecutionof Minoritiesin the MiddleAges (New Jersey:Princeton UniversityPress, 1996), p. 220. And see the sermonof Josephibn ShemTov,deliveredin the Segovia synagoguein 1452, which addressedthe Jews' guilt for the crucifixion,in M. Saperstein,JewishPreaching, 1200-1800,

An Anthology (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1989), esp. pp. 177-179.

21. Deuteronomy4:24; 9:3.

26

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages if we assume that Jesus was indeed God, but altered his form to appearlike any otherpitiableJew,then the Jews could not be blamed for persecutinghim since he himself had misled them. Ibn Caspi offered a moral:if a king in today'sworld disguised himself as a Jew, entered a synagogue, claimed to be the king, and railed against the Jews, the latterwould be obliged to attack him with a sword and kill him, and would be fully justified in doing so.22 (B) In ibn Caspi's second response he argues accordingto the Christianassumptionthatthe Jews had indeed intendedto injureJesus.Yet,given that the deed was ultimatelygood (even as the intentionwas bad) the action of the Jews should be consideredjust.23Twobiblical examples explicate his position. One is the sale of Joseph into slavery by his brothers.Joseph told them that, while they intended the worst for him, the deed actuallyreflected the good will of God. Consequently, the brothersdid not assume any guilt, having been directedby providence so that the day would come when the multitudeswould be saved by Joseph.24Thus it was with Jesus as well. The wrong done him turned out for the good in the eyes of Christians,and thus Jews could live among the Christianstoday.25It followed that 22. Similarremarkswere made in the dispute in the court of the bishop of Sens (perhapsGualterusCornutus,who died in 1241) which was edited in the presence of "manybishops and priests."See R. Josephb. R. NathanOfficial, Sefer YosefHamekane,ed. Y. Rozental(Jerusalem:Mekize Nirdamim, 1970), 52, 1 [fromthe marginsof the Hamburgmanuscript],pp. 63-64; see also p. 39, 43, pp. 136-137 for two otherperspectiveson the absenceof Jewish guilt for the crucifixion of Jesus.The parableis also to be foundin Kimhi,"Seferha-Berit,"pp. 29-30, and in TheNizzahonVetus,233, p. 157. However,there the aim was to show thatthe Jews should not be punishedfor theirdisbelief in Jesus. See Berger'scommentaryin NizzahonVetus,p. 338 (relatedto p. 222). A similarparablewas attributedby the Jews to one of the Popes,who soughtto use it to convincethe king of Francethathe should protectthe Jews. See the additionto the Parmamanuscript402, to the text by Solomon bar Moses barYekutiel,"'Edut 'Adonai ne'emana,"in Y. Rosenthal,Studiesand Sources (Jerusalem:RubinMass, 1967), 1, p. 420 (Hebrew). 23. Thus ibn Caspi soughtto counterthe Christians'claim, mentionedabove,concerningthe evil Jewish intentionto murderJesus, in spite of the fact that Jesus himself wanted to die. The Jewish answer,justifying Jesus' death,was knownalreadyfrom the "On Pascha"sermonof Melito, the bishop of Sardis,frombetweenthe years 160-170. See Melito of Sardis,OnPascha and Fragments,ed. andtrans. S. G. Hall (Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1979), p. 41; see also J. Cohen, "Introduction,"in J. Cohen, ed., EssentialPaperson Judaismand Christianityin Conflict,FromLateAntiquityto the Reformation(New Yorkand London:New YorkUniversityPress, 1991), pp. 9-10. See also: D. J. Laskerand S. Stroumsa, ThePolemicof Nestor the Priest: Qissat Mujddalatal-Usquf and SeferNestor Ha-Komer,I (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute,1996), pp. 137-138, n. 7. It should be pointed out that the intentionwas not to justify the deathof Jesus on the basis of Jewish law (see, for instance, Sanhedrin43a and above n. 15), but to claim thathis deathwas considerednecessary on the basis of Christiantheology. Ibn Caspi'sinnovation was in the use he made of Christianviews of the evil intentionsof the Jews. 24. See Genesis 45:5-8. 25. The reference here was apparentlyto the Augustinianview of the Jewish question, which was usually accepted by the Papacy.On one hand, blame on the Jews for rejecting Jesus and for his death;on the other hand, acceptanceof their presence in the Christianworld. See S. Simonsohn, The Apostolic See and the Jews, (Toronto:Pontifical Instituteof Mediaeval Studies, 1991), pp. 4-6; K.R. Stow, Alienated Minority: The Jews of Medieval Latin Europe (London: HarvardUniversity Press, 1992), pp. 17-20; B. Blumenkranz,"Augustinet les Juifs, Augustin et le Judaisme,"Recherches augustiniennes, I (1958), pp. 225-241; P. Fredriksen,"Divine Justice and Human Freedom:Augustine on Jews and Judaism, 392-398", in J. Cohen, ed., From Witnessto Witchcraft:Jews and Judaism in Medieval ChristianThought,Wolfenbiitteler Mittelalter-Studien,11 (Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz,1996),

27

Ram Ben Shalom no guilt should be leveled at them. It shouldbe notedthatthe story of Joseph'ssale was well known to Christians,being interpretedby Christianscholars (Isidoreof Seville and Bede) as a prefigurationof Jesus' death.26Thus ibn Caspi offers an ironic interpretationof Joseph's sale as a prefigurationof the crucifixion; it accorded with providentialdesign, and thus should rescue the Jews from any evil intent on the part of Christians. Ibn Caspi's second example from the bible is taken from the anonymous prophet sent by God to announceto Ahab that he was to die for having disobeyed him and letting the king of Aram, Ben-Hadad,go free. The prophetasked one of his companions to strike him in the name of God. The companion refused,upon which the prophetannouncedthatbecause of his refusal to obey the word of God he would encounter a lion that would strike him. And this indeed happened.Afterwards,the prophetmet someone else who agreedto carry out God's command, and who struck him and injuredhim.27 In regardto the biblical passage describing the injury sufferedby the prophet,ibn Caspi comments thatthe second person was overzealous in carrying out the sentence since he understoodthat injurywas the intent of God.28This tale is a parablefor the Jews' injury of Jesus. Ibn Caspi tells the Christiansthatthey are comparableto the first person in the story who refused to strikethe prophetandwas subsequentlypunished,andthatthe Jews played the role of the second figure who agreed to strikethe prophetand exaggeratedhis blows (which is analogous to the "malicious intent"with which the Jews were charged).Jesus, who was God's messenger, or was God himself, is comparedhere to the same prophetwho was struckand about whom it was said that he disguised himself so thatAhab would not recognize him:29 esp. pp. 29-30, 51-54; J. Cohen, Living Lettersof the Law: Ideas of the Jew in Medieval Christianity (Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 1999), pp. 35-41. 26. See Berger, The Nizzahon Vetus,p. 247, note on p. 57, line 3. In Gottfried Reeg, ed., Die Geschichte von den zehn Martyrern:synoptische Edition mit Obersetzungund Einleitung (Tiibingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1985), pp. 10-17, the Roman EmperorHadrianjustifies the killing of the ten with the crime of Joseph's being sold into bondage by his brothers.Later(pp. 32-33), a voice in the heavens expresses this justification. See I.G. Marcus,"The Santificationof the Name in Ashkenaz andthe Story of RabbiAmnon of Magenza"(Hebrew),inY. Gafni andA. Ravitzky,eds., Sanctityof Lifeand Martyrdom:Studies in Memoryof Amir Yekutiel(Jerusalem:The ZalmanShazarCenter, 1992), (Hebrew), pp. 137-138, who interpretsthe midrashas a Jewish counterclaimto Christiandenunciations,noting that the atoning death of the ten scholars ("thecollective image of Jesus")means that the Jews should no longer have to suffer for the sale of Joseph and the crucifixion of Jesus, even if they were deserving of such from a Christianpoint of view. 27. I Kings 20:35-7. 28. It is interestingto consult, in this context, the rabbinicmidrash,which David Kimhicites in his commentaryon I Kings, 20:37: "Andin the midrashicinterpretation,that drop of blood that came out of the just one was an atonementfor Israel so that they would not die in the war of RamotGil'ad, for the prophettold him (verse 42): 'and thy people for his people,' for they deserve the deathpenalty; but [they were sparedas] this same drop of blood was an atonementfor them."And so it is possible to find a connection between the idea of the injuredprophet'sblood, which brings atonementto the people of Israel, and the Christologicalidea of Jesus' blood which atones for the original sin. 29. I Kings 20:38. This correspondsto the Lord (Jesus) who disguised himself and assumed the figure of a man.

28

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages rusein orderto be crucified.Since Thushe [Jesus]pursuedthisremarkable he was Godhe arousedus andorderedus to [do]this;he showedgraceand honorto us, wholovehim.Thatis, he bestowedgraceon us by allowingus to andhonorin thathe didnotwanttheother, do thishonorablecommandment, to torment uncircumcised him;thus,notyoubutonlywe, sonsof the peoples honorablesect,areso honored.It is comparable to the waysof ministersand themselvesonlyto kingsor sons kingswho,whencapturedin war,surrender of kingslike us, as the Lordtoldus at MountSinai,you shallbe untoMe a kingdomof priests[Exodus19:6],andif he is indeedGod,he will continue to do us moregoodturns,on accountof the good we do forhim,andAs the Lordliveth,he hasdoneus manygoodturnsfromthenuntilnow,andwill continueto do so, amenandamen.30 The assumptionthatJesus was God thus raisednumerousproblemsfor those who sought to blame the Jews for his death.According to ibn Caspi, the Jews' attack on Jesus was an act of grace, as were the blows and injurydone the prophet, both actions coming at the behest of God. Ibn Caspi emphasizes the honor Jesus bestowed on the Jews in choosing them to put him to death, illustratinghis point with the practice of kings in surrenderingonly to those of equal rank. He also claimes, in closing, that if Jesus is indeed God, then the Jews were deserving of furtherfavorsfor theirrole in his death,of the kind they had enjoyed since the crucifixion. Ibn Caspi'sirony is obvious. The difficulties and degradationsufferedby the Jews in exile duringthe Christianera were centralto Christianvilifications of Jewishunbelief, and were consideredby them to be proof thatGod had abandoned his chosen people.31 Ibn Caspi's remarksare, thus, a way of underliningthe absurdityin the deification of Jesus and exposing the logical difficulties in the system of Christianbelief. The positive role played by the Jews in the crucifixion of Jesus (as explained by ibn Caspi), the acceptance of Jesus as God, assigning the blame for his death on the Jews, and the actual condition of the Jews in exileeach of these situationscontradictedthe others.Assuming Jesus to be God undermines any Jewish blame for his death, and even credits the Jews with an act of grace. But in terms of reciprocity,the degradationof the Jews in exile was inconsistentwith theiractions, leading one to the conclusion thatJesus was not God. Like Joseph ibn Caspi, the biblical interpreterand preacher Isaac Arama (who lived approximatelyfrom 1420 until the Expulsion in Castile and Aragon) polemicized frequentlyagainst Christianity.Only in one instance, however, does Aramareportengaging in an actual dispute.32This took place in the second half 30. Masref la-kesef, p. 109. 31. See O. Limor,Jews and Christiansin WesternEurope: Encounterbetween Culturesin the MiddleAges and the Renaissance (Hebrew)(TelAviv: The Open University of Israel, 1993), 3, pp. 57,

87-90; see textnearbelown. 142,concerningthe claimof the disputingpriestin the disputewith Jacobben Reuben;Y. Rosenthal, "A Religious Dispute between A Scholar named Menachem and the

3 (1974),p. 71: "The DominicanMonkConvertPabloChristiani" beAmerica, (Hebrew),HagutWIvrit heretic[min]said,[thisis] greatproofof ourfaith,sincethereis no nationmoreabjectthantheJews." 32. S. Heller-Wilensky,RabbiIsaac Arama and his Beliefs (Hebrew) (Jerusalem and Tel Aviv:

describesthe literarypolemicsof Aramaas actual TheBialikInstitute,1956),pp.27-28, mistakenly in thedisputewiththeChristian concerningthedivorceof disputes.Aramahimselfdidnotparticipate

29

Ram Ben Shalom of the fifteenth century,with a Christianpreacher,apparentlyfromAragon. Since the thirteenthcentury,the Jews of Aragon had been occasionally requiredto attend sermons delivered by Christian missionaries in the aljama and the synagogue.33In the fifteenth centurymanywillingly attendedthese sermons,drawnby their philosophic content.34Arama'sdispute was, apparently,stimulatedby such a sermon, preached by a Christiansage to a mixed Christianand Jewish audience outside of the Jewish aljama.35 One of the subjectsraised in the sermon was predestination.As biblical corroborationof his views, the preacherquoted the passage "YetI loved Jacob;But Esau I hated."36He claimed that,in contrastto acceptedopinion, God did not love man because of the latter'sintegrityor right. Rather,the integrityof the just man is derived from the love of God for him. Wicked persons, on the other hand, are not predestinedto be so. Their evil issues from within themselves. The preacher provideda long explanation,one supportedby biblical examples and proofs.37He gave expression to a Christian philosophical approach intended to resolve the moral difficulties inherentin the praedestinatio duplex, according to which God assigns good and evil, meaning that the punishmentof the wicked is determined ahead of time. According to the less extreme philosophicalunderstandingof predestination, evil exists not because of God's will, but because of his permission (permissio). Augustine,38for instance,utilized Neoplatonic philosophyto explain that there was no reason for evil's existence and that, therefore,God plays no part in man's original sin. Additional theologians, such as Anselm of Canterburyand Thomas Aquinas, recognized only predestinationfor the better.39 The preacherin Aragon presented a view close to that of Thomas' in SummaTheologica and Super ad Romanos.40 No dispute developed directly during the sermon. Afterwards,however, a numberof Christianand Jewish scholarsmet.41 Aramadesiredto commenton the a convertedJew (see below p. 57) but addressedthe issue only afterthe dispute. Heller-Wilensky'sobservationon Arama'sneed to respondin his homilies (or his biblical interpretations)to the subjectsthat had arisen already in the Tortosadisputation,and which in his opinion were not properlyansweredby the disputing Jews, is worthy of comment. 33. See below pp. 37-41. 34. Isaac Arama,Aqedat Yishaq,I (Fresburg,1849), Introduction,1, la. 35. See IsaacArama,Hazut Qashah, 4:1, from 'AqedatYishaq,6 (n.p.), where he notes thatthe Jews were "called"to heara sermonbefore a greatassembly.It follows fromhis remarksthatthe Christians constitutedthe majorityof the audience;this, and the use of the phrase"called us," indicatesthat this was probablynot a forced sermon. 36. Malachi 1:2-3. 37. Arama did not recordthe continuationof his remarks. 38. On Augustinianpredestinationsee M. J.Farrelly,Predestination,Grace,and Free Will(New York:Burns & Oates, 1964), pp. 79-96. Free will and the source of evil were the subjectof a dispute between Augustine and Fortunatus.See Fredriksen,"Divine Justice,"esp. pp. 32-44. 39. See Farrelly,Predestination,pp. 112, 119-121; D. Fluser,"Predestination"(Hebrew)in the Hebrew Encyclopedia, 10 (Jerusalem:EncyclopaediaPublishingCompany, 1962), pp. 581-585. 40. See ThomasAquinas, Summatheologica, I, 23, 5; Super ad Romanos, IX, lect. 2, in Opera omnia, 5 (Milano, 1980), pp. 474-475; consult Farrelly,Predestination,p. 120. 41. Hazut kashah, ibid.: "In anotherassembly [be-pumbi]of some of their scholars and a few of our People's wise ones."

30

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages sermon'scontents. Its public setting had apparentlykept him from respondingearlier. But Arama felt able to initiate debate in this more restrictedforum of intellectuals. The first thing he did was praise the preacher'sremarksin general.42He then remarkedthat if the Christianhad intendedto assert that the love of God is prior to humanity,that is, prior to his giving all persons their consciousness--so that man could freely choose to worship God-that he could accept such a claim. But one would also have to include the wicked in such a generalization, for they were also given free choice. However, if the intent was to suggest that the goodness of a specific individualperson is derived from God's love for him, then he couldn't accept it since thatperson must then necessarily choose good. In this instance,only evil is done fromfree will; thejust personis, thus, unworthyof reward. The Christianrespondedthat his intentionwas indeed to claim that predestination affects each and every person: Forno manwouldbehavebetterthananyoneelse, unlesshe is firstconscious of God'sgreatpassionto bringhimcloseto him... Andall goodflowsfrom God'slove,blessedis he;thatlovemustprecedewhatis right,asthecauseprecedestheeffect.43 On the surface,this disputewas purely philosophical,without connection to disagreementsbetween Judaismand Christianity.Such dialogue between philosophers of the two religions was a well-known practicein the MiddleAges, particularly so in the Mediterraneanworld.This comes as no surprisein light of the common range of interests shared by Christian and Jewish scholars seeking to harmonizeand compromisebetween revelationand knowledge.44The logical conflict betweenpredestinationand free will was a subjectfor both Christianand Jewish philosophysince it had far-reachingsocial andmoralramificationsin monotheistic cultureswith concepts of rewardand punishment.A varietyof solutions to the problemwere proposed,andtherewere differenceswithin each camp.45IsaacAra42. These remarksdo not exhibit empty civility. Aramahad great respect for Christiantheology and he did not hesitateto express that in his writings. See, for instance, Hazutqashah, eighth chapter: "Forhere is everyone [Christianityand Islam], although they are the last to receive religion, they chose the pathof faith and maintainedtheirreligion without allowing philosophy to overturnanything in it. This is especially so regardingthe Christians,who entirelyrefutedthe words of the philosophers, despite the [Christians]being great intellects and grandmastersin [philosophy]." 43. Hazutqashah, ChapterFour.The entire dispute appearshere. 44. See the introductionof JacobAnatoli to his translationof the "Prefaceto Porphyryto Aristotle's Logic,"in B.Z. Dinur, Yisraelba-golah:A DocumentaryHistory of the Jewish People From Its Beginningto the Present (Hebrew),II, 6 (Tel Aviv and Jerusalem,Duir andThe Bialik Institute, 1972), pp. 255-256; and Moses Narboni'sremarksin "Commentaryon Al-Ghazali'sIntentionsof the Philosophers"(Hebrew),in M. Steinschneider,"AbrahamBibago'sSchriften",Monatsschriftfir die Geschichte und Wissenschaftdes Judentums,32 (1883), p. 81, n. 5. See also, J. Shatzmiller,"Contactset 6changes ' entre savantsjuif et Chretiens Montpeliervers 1300," Cahiersde Fanjeaux, 12 (1977), pp. 337-344; M. Giidemann,Torahand Life in the Medieval West(Hebrew)(Warshaw,1899), 2, pp. 83-85. 45. See S. Pines, Between the Thoughtof Israel and the Thoughtof the Nations: Studies in the History of Jewish Philosophy (Hebrew) (Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 1977), pp. 182-185, 217220, 253-262; Julius Guttmann,The Philosophy of Judaism (Hebrew) (Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute, 1983), pp. 217-220;

C. Sirat, A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages (Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress, 1985), pp. 282-322, 364-367.

31

Ram Ben Shalom ma addressedthis question in several places.46 Predestinationand the questionof theodicy stood at the center of scholarly and popularreligious disputes since the second half of the fourteenthcentury,as becomes apparentin the polemic between Abner of Burgos and Isaac Polgar,47 and in the responseof Moses Narbonito Abner in Ma'amar Habehira.48It is even likely that the question of predestination played an importantpart in the conversion of Solomon Halevi (Paul de Santa Maria),the rabbiof Burgos who became the bishop of Burgos.49 After the riots of 1391 and the beginning of mass conversionin Spain,this questionhad directramifications on the theoreticaljustification given to conversion,and this was the context for HasdaiCrescas'work'OrElohim.HasdaiCrescas'innovativetheoryof free will was meant to show, accordingto Yishaq Baer, "thateven if the edict of God led manyto be overwhelmedby the risingwatersof baptism,responsibilityfor their actions was not rescindedfrom them, andthey had to answerfor it."o5JosephAlbo, Isaac Arama, and Isaac Abravaneleach, in his own way, took issue with Crescas' view on the question of determinism.5"Even Josephben Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov (who died around 1460), wrote a work (since lost) entitledDa'at 'Elyon opposing the deterministicargumentsput forwardin Abner of Burgos'Sod ha-Gemul.52 The idea of predestinationwas alreadyevidentin the New Testamentandhas been the subject of Christianthought since the Greek Churchfathersand Augustine.53The Christiansermonreportedby Aramaaddressed,like mosttheologianshad since the Churchfathers,the teachingsof Paul in Romans(9: 11-24), based in part on the verse thatappearsin the Book of Malachi.54Paulties the passage"YetI loved Jacob;But Esau I hated"to the prophecyspokento Rebeccah:"Twonationsare in thy womb, And two peoples shall be separatedfromthy bowels;And the one people shall be strongerthanthe otherpeople;And the elder shall serve the younger."55 46. See Heller-Wilensky,Arama,pp. 149-165, andon the disputewith the Christiansee pp. 153155. See too S. Feldman,"A Debate Concerning Determinismin Late Medieval Jewish Philosophy," PAAJR,51 (1984), pp. 40-44. 47. Isaac Polgar, ?Ezerha-dat, ed. J. S. Levinger (Tel Aviv: The Chaim Rosenberg School of Jewish Studies, Tel Aviv University, 1984), 3, pp. 105-153; Y. Baer, "Abnerof Burgos' Sefer Minhat Kenaot and its Influence on Hasdai Crescas,"(Hebrew) Tarbiz,11 (1940), pp. 204-205; and see Baer, A History, 1, pp. 333-334 on religious conversion and predestinationin Abner'sMorehsedek. 48. See Z. Graetz,History of the Jews (Hebrew) (Warsaw:Ahisefer, 1890), 5, pp. 396-397. 49. See Baer, A History, 2, p. 143. Baer accepts the Christiantraditionregardingthe decisive influence of Thomas Aquinas on the conversion of Solomon Halevi, and argues that his belief in predestination broughthim to adopt the name Paul the Apostle. Like Abner of Burgos, Solomon Halevi was also interestedin the Kabbalah.According to M. Glatzer,"BetweenJoshuaHalorkiand Solomon Halevi: Towardsan Examinationof the Causes of Conversionamong Jews in Spain in the Fourteenth Century,"(Hebrew) Pe'amim, 54 (1993), p. 115, the Kabbalahbroughthim closer to Christianity. 50. Baer, "Abnerof Burgos' Sefer MinhatKenaot, p. 206. See N. Ofir, "A New Reading in Or Adonai of Rabbi Hasdai Crescas and the Problem of the Conversos,"(Hebrew) Proceedings of the Eleventh WorldCongress of Jewish Studies, (Jerusalem, 1994), 3, 2, pp. 41-47. 51. See Feldman,"A Debate,"pp. 15-54. 52. M. N. Zobel, "Ibn Shem Tov, Joseph ben Shem Tov,"EncyclopaediaJudaica, VIII (Jerusalem: Keter, 1972), p. 1197. 53. See Farrelly, Predestination, pp. 46-106.

54. Malachi 1:2-3. 55. Genesis 25:23.

32

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages According to Paul, before Rebeccah's sons are even born, and before they could do either good or evil, God had chosen the preferredone. The election was "not of works, but of him that calleth."56This is the Paulinenotion of election in gracethatwas given commonexpressionin his epistles.57This is how Paulandthose theologianswho came afterhim58illustratedGod'spreferencefor the Christiansand his abandonmentof the Jews. The Jews are perceivedas Esau and the Christiansas Jacob, and on the basis of the prophecy,the Jewish people (the "elder")will worship the Christians(the "younger"),who were predestinedto superiority.59 In light of the Christianuses of the belief in predestination,as expressed or insinuatedby the preacher,and in light of the role thatpredestinationplayed in arguments designed to convert Jews, it is clear why Arama was quick to reject the claims made in the sermon.Aramaobserved that the Christianconsidered his arguments, quoted above, to be a model of reasoning that could not be refuted. In his argumentsagainstthe Christian,Arama,using the syllogistic style of Christian disputants,adopted four opposing arguments.They were: (1) A philosophical argument:In his Ethics, Aristotle had alreadydiscussed man'sfree will to choose good or evil. If he occasionally raiseda certainargument against free choice, it was only in regardto evil deeds, while insisting that good actions are always the productof free will.60 (2) A theological argument:The sermon's startingassumption casts aspersions on God'sintegrityand paintsa pictureof an "unjust"God since the man who is unloved by God must commit evil. Arama claims that this assumption cannot standthe test of religious logic which posits the integrityand righteousnessof God as a crucial tenet.61 (3) A claim from reality:The sermon'sreasoning does not allow any possibility for man to improve his ways. One's righteousness or wickedness is predetermined.Yet,Aramabelieves that [if all is predestined]people are fated to remain in theirmoralstate, with no possibility of change. In reality,however,this does not seem to be the case. Instancesof importantmen discoveringthe truepath are well known to all. What'smore, the Christianview of "angelsbecoming devils"62suggests that such change is possible. 56. Romans 9:11. 57. See, in particular,Romans, 8:30; Farrelly,Predestination,pp. 52-70. 58. G. Cohen, "Esauas Symbol in EarlyMedieval Thought,"Studies in the Varietyof Rabbinic Cultures(Philadelphiaand New York:Jewish Publication Society, 1991), pp. 251-255; R. Radford Ruether,"TheAdversusJudaeos Traditionin the ChurchFathers:The Exegesis of ChristianAnti-Judaism,"in Cohen, Essential Papers, pp. 179-180; Limor,Jews and Christians, 1, pp. 7-13; and on the opposing Jewish views see Cohen, "Esau,"pp. 255-261. 59. Romans 9:24: "Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles." 60. See Aristotle, NicomacheanEthics, 3, 5, R. Crisp edition (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 2000), pp. 45-48. On the importanceof the Nicomachean ethics in Arama'sthought concerning determinismsee Feldman,"A Debate,"p. 42. 61. On the discourseconcerningthis subjectfromAnselm of Canterburyuntil the fifteenth century see Farrelly,Predestination,pp. 111-132. Isaac Polgarmade a similar claim. See the response of Abner of Burgos in Baer, "Abnerof Burgos' MinhatKenaot,"pp, 193-196. 62. Christianinterpretationto Genesis, 6:2-4 is to be found alreadyin the New Testament.See,

33

Ram Ben Shalom (4) A biblical claim: Arama cites verses contradictingthe sermon'sreasoning, such as what is said of Abrahamin Genesis 18:19: "For I know him, that [lema'an] he will commandhis childrenandhis householdafterhim, andthey shall keep the way of the Lord,to do justice andjudgment;thatthe Lordmay bringupon Abrahamthat which he hath spoken of him."At first glance, this passage seems to supportthe sermon'sassumptionconcerninghow God'sknowledgeprecedesthe way of the righteous. But Arama, according to Rashi, interpretsthis knowing of God to mean God's love, which is dependenton Abraham'sintegrity,the latternecessarily preceding the former.63Anotherverse is taken from Deuteronomy10:12: "Andnow, Israel, what doth the Lordthy God requireof thee, but to fear the Lord thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul." Here Aramaargues that if the preacher's assumption is true, then why does God ask man to do that which is not underhis control: "He will love him [man] and his requestwill be given."That is, God's request seems absurdsince he is able to love him in advance,which would thenmean that no request is necessary. Arama contends that this absurditycan be demonstratedusing numerousother biblical passages. This marks the end of Arama'sdescription of the dispute. Aramarefrains from presenting the Christian'sanswers, noting only that his argumentsbecame entangled and confused and that he was unable to demonstrate any concrete point.64 In the analysis of the two disputes presentedabove, methodological issues arise relatedto how to understandliteraryaccountsof religious confrontations.In each case we have only the Jewish side of the argument.In addition,ibn Caspi left out the points made by the Christianscholarswho engaged him, andAramaquotes only portions of the preacher'sarguments.It must also be noted that we cannot be certain that these disputes indeed took place in the mannerdescribed;these are for instance,The GeneralEpistle of Jude,6; The Second Epistle Generalof Peter,2, 4. Anselm of Canterbury'sdiscussion of the problemof predestinationand free will is found in his work concerningthe fall of the angels. See Anselm de Canterbury,De casu diaboli, 2, in: Opera omnia, ed. E S. Schmitt, 1 (Seckau 1938), p. 235. On Thomas Aquinas'perspective on the fallen angels see Farrelly,Predestination, pp. 119-120, and n. 28. RationalisticJewish commentariesin the Middle Ages did not, in general, consider the "childrenof God" to be the embodimentof Godly entities but to be personswho were called such because of their characterand personality.See, for instance, the commentariesof Rashi and of Abrahamibn Ezra,ad loc. By contrast,in Pirqe de-Rabi 'Eli'ezer,22 (Jerusalem, 1983), pp. 7172, the children of God are seen as fallen angels. Cf. Nahmanides in Perushe ha-Torahle-Rabbenu Moshe ben Nahman (Ramban),Chavel edition (Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1959), 1, pp. 48-50. R. Hasdai Crescas, Sefer bittul 'iqqare ha-Nosrim,translationof Joseph ben Shem Tov,ed. D.J.Lasker (Ramat-Ganand Beer-Sheva:Bar-IlanUniversityPress andBen-GurionUniversityof the Negev Press, 1990), 10, pp. 90-96, devoted an entire chapterto refutingthe Christianview concerning the change in the natureof the angels and their loss of divine choice as a result of the Fall. Aramawas well acquainted with Crescas' views of choice and fallen angels (See Heller-Wilensky,Arama,p. 42, 159160, 163 on the use Aramamade of Crescas'work, Sefer 'or 'Adonai,and on his differenceswith him. 63. See Rashi's interpretationof Genesis, 18:19. 64. Hazut qashah, Chapter4:4. The debates between Jews and Christiansnever restedentirely on pure logic; rather,logic andphilosophy served as polemical devices alongside argumentstakenfrom biblical interpretationand actual history. See Lasker,Jewish Philosophical Polemics, pp. 3-11, 166.

34

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages not official protocols and were written only much after the fact and as part of ideologically-driven,didactic commentaries.It can also be wonderedif the Jewish writerdistortedthe Christianside of the debate in orderto emphasize his own message and to establishthe superiorityof his argumentbecause this type of literaturewas also intendedto raise the spiritand strengthenthe resolve of its readers. Despite these reservations,there is no reason to doubt that this material is evidence of real disputes. Ibn Caspi and Arama both wrote for an audience that was fully conscious of the rules governing religious disputes and of the limits of the Jewish-Christiandialogue. Even if these specific disputes did not occur exactly as described-and there is a clear bias in favorof the Jewish, "winning"position-one can confidently assume that the setting and Jewish argumentsare reflected accurately.Any significant distortions on the part of the Jewish writer wouldprovokethe basic distrustof the contemporaryreader,thus underminingthe didactic aim of the project. The principal historical significance of these two reports is found in their descriptionsof the friendlyatmosphereandthe relativefreedomof expressionthat characterizedthe disputes.Ibn Caspi made claims that, in a differentsetting, could have been interpretedas blasphemous.One example of such was his assertionthat he would repeatthe crucifixion of Jesus. Similarly,Aramadescribedhow Jews living in a Christiancity came of their own accord to hear Christiansermons, and how free intellectualdiscussion between Jewish and Christianscholarstook place. We know about this phenomenon from other sources, and, what's more, about Christianscoming to hear Jewish sermons in synagogues.65These practices were apparentlyprevalentonly in the private disputes of the Middle Ages. Below we shall try to evaluate the scope of this phenomenon and its dating, and will show the differencesbetween it and the official disputation. II Religious disputes between Jews and Christiansin the Middle Ages were carriedout in two primarychannels.The first was the consciously initiatedand official public encounter.The second was private, either spontaneous or planned, sometimes taking place in public view, sometimes not. The latter is defined here as an event or a dialogue in which Christianand Jew meet and exchange opposing beliefs concerning religious and culturalissues. Since the thirteenthcentury,the Christianestablishmentdoubtlesspreferredthe public channel.Carefulplotting of the event, includingthe choice of the Christianrepresentative,the rules of debate, 65. This was the case, for example, with Cuellar,in the 1470s, when the Christianscame to the synagogueatRosh ha-shanahto hearthe sermonof "RabbiSamuel,the duke'sphysican."RabbiSamuel was thoughtto be a great philosopherwho sermonized on philosophical matterswhom the Christians were allowedto hear because he did not combine his remarkswith religious matters.See Baer,A History, 2, p. 251. It was also said of Soria in the 1470s (in an inquisitiontrialof 1502) that Christiansand conversosattendedsermons in the synagogue. See C. CarreteParrondo(ed.), Fontes IudaeorumRegni Castellae,II, El Tribunalde la Inquisicidnen el Obispadode Soria (1486-1502) (Salamanca:Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca, 1985), 140, p. 74. See also E. Gutwirth,"El gobernadorjudio ideal: Acerca de un sermon inedito de Yosef ibn Shem Tob,"Actas del III CongresoInternacionalEncuentro de las Tres Culturas (Toledo: Universidad de Tel-Aviv y Ayuntamiento de Toledo, 1988), pp. 73-74.

35

Ram Ben Shalom the agenda, and the selection of a jury, allowed them to supervise the contentsand control the results.66The Jews, on the other hand,preferredto debate in the unofficial channel.The results of most of the official disputesin the MiddleAges were, for them, disastrous.The need arose to preventsuch encountersahead of time, or to stop them in the middle. In the Paris disputationof 1240, the first of the official national disputes, the Jewish representativeswere subjectedto an Inquisition interrogation,after their Talmudicvolumes were confiscated and handed over to the Dominicans for safekeeping.67During the Barcelona disputation of 1263, Nahmanideswrote that the king of Aragon, JamesI, orderedhim to appearbefore Paul Christian(thatis to say,he did not come on his own free will).68 On the fourth day,Nahmanidessought to put an end to the debatebecause of the aggressivemissionary activities of the Dominicans in Barcelona,"who cast terroroverthe whole world."69In the Tortosadisputationas well (1413-1414) the Jewish representatives attemptedto stop the event before it had begun, trying to end it on the first day,and thereafteras well.70 It was alreadyclearto the Jewish scholarsin the summons to the disputationthat this would not be a confrontationbetween two equal sides, but a demonstrationof the validity of the Christianfaith accordingto the 66. Official disputationsbegan in the thirteenthcentury.However,the ideology of bringingthe Jews to convert througha forced religious dispute imposed by the state had already existed for many centuries.Traces of its origins may be seen in the legend of Actus S. Silvestri, accordingto which the EmperorConstantineinitiatedan official disputationbetween Silvester andtwelve rabbis.Silvesterdefeated his opponents and, as a result, Helena, the motherof the Emperor,convertedto Christianityand after her the Jewish participantsand their coreligionists. In contrastto the Jewish-Christiandiscourse that had existed priorto the legend, it was now expected thatthe forced dispute'sparticipantsand their coreligionists would accept the "judges'" decision (in this instance, the decision of Constantine,Helena, and two pagan philosophers)and convert.See A. Linder,"Ecclesia and Synagogain the Medieval Myth of Constantinethe Great,"Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire, LIV (1976), pp. 1051-1052; I. J.Yuval,"Jews and Christiansin the Middle Ages: SharedMyths, Common Language,"in: ed. R. S. Wistrich, Demonization of the Other:AntisemitismRacism and Xenophobia (Amsterdam:Harwood Academic Publishers, 1999), pp. 88-107. 67. Baer, "Towardsa Critique,"pp. 172-177; Cohen, TheFriars, pp. 62-63. 68. "Vikuahha-Ramban(MilamotAdonai),"in KitveRabbenuMoshe ben Nahman,Chavaledition (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1963), 1, p. 302. See H. Maccoby, Judaism on Trial:JewishChristian Disputations in the Middle Ages (Rutherford,N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1982), p. 39. On the Barcelona disputationsee Chazan, Barcelona; O. Limor, "Beyond Barcelona," Jewish History, IX (1995), pp. 107-112; D. Berger, "The Barcelona Disputation,"AJS Review, XX (1995), pp. 379-388. 69. "Vikuahha-Ramban,"82, p. 316. 70. See Baer, A History, 2, pp. 174, 204-205, 226; the remarksof Isaac Nathan in R. Ben Shalom, "TheTortosaDisputation:Vincent Ferrerand the Problemof the ConversosAccordingto the Testimonyof Isaac Nathan,"(Hebrew)Zion, 56 (1991), p. 26: "Andas the scholars almost were saved in escaping from the dispute, they were forcefully ignored."See also "A letter sent by the great scholar Abunastrukto the holy community of Girona,"in Solomon ibn Verga,Sefer Shevet Yehuda,ed. E. Shohat (Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute, 1947), p. 96. Also importantto mention in this context is the forced disputationthat took place in Praguein 1399 between the convert PeterandYomTov Lipmann Muehlhausen.In the wake of the disputationseventy Jews were murderedin August 1400, and in September anotherthree were murdered.See RabbiYom Tom LipmannMiilhausen, Sefer ha-nisahon,a photocopy of the Hackspanedition, Altdorf-Nuremberg,1644 (Jerusalem,The Dinur Center, 1984), pp. 191-195; see also Talmage'sintroductionto this volume, pp. 14-15.

36

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages Talmud.Jeromede SantaFe repeatedlyclaimed duringthe courseof the disputation thatit hadnot been the intentionof the Pope, BenedictXIII,to initiatea disputation, but to instructthem (andthe generalpublic) in the principlesof Christianity.71 Official disputations of a local and less organized nature took place in Aragon after 1242, once James I and other kings permittedthe Mendicantorders to preachin the synagogues.72About a week following the Barcelonadisputation, JamesI andthe Mendicantswantedto preach in the synagogue on Shabbat,before the entireBarcelonacommunity.Nahmanidesinsisted on replying, leading him to remainin Barcelonaan extraeight days. The king deliveredthe first sermon, seeking to proveJesus'messianismwhile referringto the holy Trinity.Nahmanidesrose and answeredhim. Then the head of the Dominican order,Raymondde Pefiaforte, gave a sermon on the holy Trinity.Nahmanides answeredhim as well. The last to speakon the Trinitywas PaulChristian,and he, too, received a response from Nahmanides. The Christianspreachedtheir creed from the synagogue's bimah while Nahmanidesapparentlystood among the audience.73 Descriptionsof these coerced sermons as attackson a passive Jewish audience74 is not exact. The Jews did often fear answeringthe Christianpreacherin the synagogue,75and James I even demanded that the Jews listen patiently ("et patienteraudiantpredicationemeorum").76This is not enough, however,to deny the Jews any kind of response. James did not necessarily want to repress debate between the Preachersand the Jews.77 Rather,in my opinion, the orderto listen patiently was intendedto preventoutburstsand argumentsfrom eruptingduring the sermons,but not to preventdebateto develop once the Christianpreacherhad finished. James' decree of August 29, 1263, following the Barcelonadispute which allowed PaulChristianto sermonizeamong the Jews, clearlystipulatedthathe was allowed to dispute with the Jews. The Jews were orderedto listen to him patiently, and then to answerhim with respect and admiration,and without deception or cheating.7"The next day (August 30) James restrictedMendicantsermons to the Jewish quarteralone, and decreed that the Jews could attend,if they wished.79 In October, 1268 James I restricted the number of escorts allowed the Christian 71. See Baer,A History, 2, pp. 175, 181-184. 72. See Cohen, TheFriars, pp. 82-84; Chazan,Daggers, pp. 44-48; Barcelona, p. 216, n. 33; G. Dahan,Les intellectuelschritiens et les Juifs au MoyenAge (Paris:Editionsdu Cerf, 1990), pp. 220225; M. D. Johnston,"RamonLlull and the CompulsoryEvangelizationof Jews and Muslims,"in ed. L. J. Simon, Iberia and the MediterraneanWorldof the Middle Ages. Studies in Honor of Robert I. Burns S.J. (Leiden:Brill, 1995), pp. 5-37. 73. "Vikuahha-Ramban,"pp. 319-320; see Baer'sremarksin "Towardsa Critique,"p. 182 on the possibility that the dispute did indeed occur in the way Nahmanidesdescribedit. 74. Chazan,Barcelona, p. 55. 75. See H. Hames, "Discoursein the Synagogue:Ramon Llull and his Dialogue with the Jews," Constantesyfragmentos del pensamiento luliano, Actas del simposio sobre Ramon Llull en Trujillo, 17-20 septiembre1994, E Dominguez And J. de Salas, eds., (Tiibingen 1996), pp. 101-102, 107. 76. See S. Grayzel, The Churchand the Jews in the XIIIth Century(New York:Hermon Press, 1966), p. 256. 77. This is Johnston'shypothesis in "RamonLlull,"p. 9. 78. Ibid.,p. 10; see also n. 31. 79. Ibid., p. 11.

37

Ram Ben Shalom preacherwho entered the Jewish aljama and synagogue to ten "decent persons" (probi homines).80He decreedthat the Jews did not have to reply to the preacher's accusationsthattheirbooks containedattackson Christianityotherthanthe insults directed against Jesus, the virgin, and the saints.81According to Yishaq Baer, the Jews thus succeeded in removingfrom the debatethe laws regardingidolatry[abodah zarah] and the attitudetowardGentiles [nokhrim,goyim], in additionto other problematichalakhot,as mattersunconnectedto Christianity.82But they could be forced to participatein religious debate over some issues. James II, the king of Aragon, also allowed the Mendicants to establish compulsory sermons (August 1296), issuing explicit approvalfor religious debates.83Rierai Sans estimatesthat this decree reflected the actualcharacterof the meeting between Christianpreachers and Jewish audiences.84 Similar events took place in the second half of the thirteenthcentury in Provence as well, as can be deduced from the dispute in the Narbonnesynagogue between Meir ben Simeon and a Dominican monk who preached to the Jewish community while accompanied by a group of Christians.85The Archbishop of Narbonne,Guilllaume de Broue (1245-1257), who sought to implementthe antiusury edicts of the king of France,Louis IX, first preachedhis views on usuryto the Jews of Narbonne and Capestang in a gatheringof the Jewish communities' scholars and leaders.86 The Jews were given an opportunityto respond,sometimes by explicit royal decree,87 thus turningthese events into a religious dispute.They 80. Ibid., pp. 12-13. 8 1. See J. R~gne, History of the Jews in Aragon.Regesta and Documents 1213-1327, ed. Y. T. Assis (Jerusalem:The Magness Press, 1978), 387, p. 69. 82. Baer,A History, 1, p. 160. 83. Johnston,"RamonLlull,"p. 24, n. 78: "predicando,disputando,conferendo." 84. J. Riera i Sans, "Les llicencies reials per predicaralsjueus i als sarrains(Segles XIIi-XIV), Calls, 11(1987), p. 18. 85. R. Chazan,"Confrontationin the Synagogue of Narbonne:A ChristianSermonand a Jewish Reply,"HarvardTheologicalReview, LXVII (1974), pp. 437-457. Paul Christianalso preachedin Provencepriorto the Barcelonadisputation,and later disputedwith Nahmanidesin Gerona.See Chazan, Daggers, p. 43; see too M. Saperstein,Decoding the Rabbis:A Thirteenth-CenturyCommentary on the Aggadah (Cambridge:HarvardUniversity Press, 1980), pp. 198-199. 86. See MilhemetMisvahshel R. Meir Hameili, Part 1, 3, in W.K. Herskowitz,Judeo-Christian Dialogue in Provence as Reflectedin "MilhemetMitzva"ofR. Meir Hameili, Ph.D. dissertation,Yeshiva University (New York,1974), p. 93. The archbishoprequestedfrom the Jews that they desist from then on in making usurious loans, and that they be satisfied with receiving the principle in repayment for past loans. Ben Simeon's replies in Herskowitz,Judeo-Christian,pp. 94-101, are a summationof all the disputes concerningusury.See R. Chazan,"Anti-UsuryEffortsin Thirteenth-Century Narbonne and the Jewish Response,"PAAJR,XLI-XLII (1973-1974), pp. 45-67, which locates the dispute in the year 1247 or 1248 (p. 48, n. 12). H. Merhavia,"The Time of the TractMilhemetMisvah (Parma Manuscript 155/2749)" (Hebrew), Tarbiz(1976), pp. 297-298, suggests placing the time of the dispute at a later date, the years 1254-1257. 87. See the authorizationwhich Raymond Llull received from the King of Aragon, James II (1299) to sermonize in the synagogues and mosques. M. Kayserling,"RaymondLlull convertisseurdes Juifs,"REJ, XXVII (1893), p. 149 Johnston, "Ramon Llull,"pp. 25-26 notes that, while Raymond Llull did ask to dispute with the Jews, the authorizationdoes not allow for religious disputes;only allowing sermons and elucidations of the Catholic faith. In his opinion, the reason was RaymondLlull's status as a laymanand the fact thathe did not belong to the Mendicantorder.At the same time, the fact

38

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provencein the Late Middle Ages were not the same as the official national debates such as those that took place in BarcelonaandTortosa,wherethe agenda,the rules, andthejury were chosen ahead of time. Even so, we should consider these official debates as a result of the royal license given the Christianpreachers to compel the Jews to attend their sermons.88However,they were more spontaneous,and sometimes dependenton the audience'swillingness to select a representativefrom the communityto answerthe charges,89or on the preacher'swillingness to so engage. Such spontaneityseems to be manifestin the confrontationsbetween Meir ben Simeon and the monk in the synagogue,andwith theArchbishopof Narbonne.It shouldbe noted thateven during the periodof the aggressive campaignby Vincent Ferrerin Castile andAragon (1411-1415), the Jews occasionally daredtry to respondto the accusations made by the preacher.In Perpignan(1415) guardsprotectedthe Jews duringthe time of the sermons. In a sermon delivered in the Churchof the Dominican Monastery Ferrerattackedthe rabbis'lack of understandingof biblical passages concerning the holy name of God. Some of the Jews in attendance(includingJaco Struchand Vidal Struch)rose and declaredthat they, in contrastto Ferrer,had a clear understandingof the meaning of the holy writings.Theirresponseprovokedpublic outcry and interventionby the guardswas requiredto restoreorder.90 Similardisputesalso occurredinAvila,when HenryII,King of Castile(13691379), allowedtwo convertsto orderthe Jews to attendany place of their choosing (includingchurches)to listen to theirpreaching.9'Moses ha-Cohenof Tordesillas describedtheAvila disputesin his book, 'Ezer ha-'Emunah(1375-1379): that the Jews received permissionto respondpoints to the existence of a semi-official dispute. See too Hayms, "Discourse,"p. 108; Cohen, TheFriars, pp. 199-225. 88. JoshuaHalorki(Jerome de Santa Fe), like Paul Christian,received permission to preach in the kingdom'scities following the Tortosadisputation.FerdinandI, the king of Aragon,orderedthe local authoritiesto force the Jews to hearhis sermons.Y. T.Assis, "Introduction,"TheJews in the Crown of Aragon.Regesta of the Cartas Reales in the Archivo de la Corona de Aragon.Sources For the History of the Jews in Spain-5, II (1328-1493), ed. G. Escriba(Jerusalem:The CentralArchives for the History of the Jewish People, 1995), p. XXIV 89. The authorizationLlull received from James II prohibitedthe use of force or compulsion in attaininga responsefrom the Jewish audience. Johnston,"RamonLlull,"p. 27; also see Stow,Alienated, pp. 266-267 on the edict Vineamsorec (1278) of Pope Nicholas III who encouragedthe Jews to participatein missionary sermons of the Mendicantsbut did not actually force them to do so. There are those who claim that it was requiredof the Jews in Aragon to respondto the sermons. H. J. Hames, "RamonLlull y su obrapolemica contralos Judios,"in: ed. C. Del Valle, La controversiaJudeo-Cristiana en Espata (Desde los origines hasta el siglo XIII (Madrid:Consejo Superiorde Investigaciones Cientificas, 1998), p. 342. 90. E Vendrell,"Laactividadproselitistade San Vicente Ferrerduranteel reinadode Fernando I de Aragon,"Sefarad,XIII (1953), pp. 96-97; M. Kriegel, Les Juifs a lafin du MoyenAge (Paris:Hachette, 1979), p. 219. The event ended with the imposition of fines on the Jews and with a mass conversion. Hayyimibn Musa, Magen va-romah,p. 41, also mentioned the danger facing Jews when one of them refuteda Christianpreacher,claiming, e.g., that the Christianshad no evidence linking Jesus to David's seed. 91. Y. Shamir, Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen of Tordesillas and his Book "Ezer Ha-Emunah" A Chapterin the History of the Judeo-ChristianControversy(Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), p. 13; and see the next quotedpassage. It can be surmisedthatHenry II fulfilled the requestof Pope GregoryXI from 1375, who had asked thatYohannes,a converted Jew, be allowed to give a forced sermon before the Jews. See Simonsohn, TheApostolic See, 6, p. 262.

39

Ram Ben Shalom In that same year two evil people, who convertedfrom our holy Torah... arrived here with a written decree of our Lord the King [Henry II], which authorized them, in every districtand region, to assemble all the Jews anywhere they wish and any time they wish, in orderto disputewith them overtheirfaith and religion. And at first they invited us to their cathedral ... He began with the prophesy of "A child will be born to us, a son given us,"92claiming that all the following names93 applied to Jesus: [he is] our messiah, he is our God, he is our father,he is our king, he is our savior; [he furtherclaimed that] the [letter] 'mem' from "le-marbehha-misrah,""That the governmentmay be increased"94is closed, alluding to his motherthe maiden who was closed and a virgin, in the end as in the beginning, in purityand cleanliness, from birthand from impregnation.95There were other sermons and disputes, that seemed sharp and dialectical, and they are as thorns cut down. As one of them was sharp and eloquent, and responded first, I responded to his arguments,and refuted all his proofs, four times in all, in the assembly of nationsand peoples, [with] all the public of Christiansandof Ishmaelites, and he [used] numerousriddles and parables,and each time I contradictedhis words, proofs, and remarkswith proofs and propheciesfrom the Prophets and the Writings and from our holy Torah, and from the Gospel, which is theirNew Testament.And the leaders [tovei ha-'ir] of the community and its scholarsentreatedme to write all fourdebatesfor them,to be in their hands as a keepsake, and a reminder.96 The four debates took place in Avila's cathedral, attended by Jews, Christians, and Muslims. As was often the case, the Church was represented in the official debate by Jewish converts.97 Moses ha-Cohen felt he succeeded in effec92. Isaiah9:5. of Isaiah9:5, "Andhis nameis calledPele-yoes-'el93. Thereferenceis to the continuation theRuler in counselis GodtheMighty,theeverlasting Father, ("wonderful gibbor-'abiad-sar-shalom" of peace").Thesenamesweregivento Jesusby theChurchfathers.Thedisputeoverthispassageappearsalreadyin Hebrewpolemicalworksfromthetwelfthcentury.See JacobbenReuben,Milhamot ha-Shem,Y. Rosenthal,ed., (Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1963), pp. 85, 89; Seferha-Berit,pp. 2223; and PetrusAlphonsi, Dialogus Petri cognomentoAlphonsi, ex Judaeo Christianiet Moysi Judaei, in: ed. Migne, Patrologia Latina, 157, col. 619.

94. Isaiah9:6 considered theclosedletter"mem"to beanallusiontothevirginityof Mary. 95. TheChristians See, for instance, A. L. Williams, AdversusJudaeos: A Bird's-EyeViewof ChristianApologiae Until

theRenaissance(Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress,1935),p. 413.Theclaimis alsoto be found inPugiofidei,andis supported fromtheBabylonian talmud,shabbat,104a. SeeLiebes, bya paragraph ChristianInfluences, pp. 54-61. 96. Rabbi Moses ha-Kohen,Sefer 'Ezer ha-'emunah, in Y. Shamir,Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohenof Tordesillasand his Book Ezer Ha-Emunah:A Chapter in the History of the Judeo-ChristianContro-

versy(CoconutGrove,Florida:FieldResearchProjects,1972),pp.6-7. 'Evenbohan,in N. E. Frimerand 97. See, forinstance,theremarksof ShemTovibnShaprut, D. Schwartz, Contemplation in the Shadow of Terror: The Life and Thought of Shem Tov ibn Shaprut

(Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 1992), p. 38: "Andbecause of our sins, apostates increased,

to disputewithus, [who]challengeus basedon thelit[who]pursuedus to pleadbeforetheChristians

40

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provencein the Late Middle Ages tively counteringthe argumentsof the two converts (despite the fact that one of them was sharpand witty) and was subsequentlyasked by community leaders to compose a polemical book summarizingthe debate.98The requestby the community that he describes was not unusual. In many disputes of the Middle Ages, the authornotes in the introductionthat his friends, students, or public leaders had asked him to write the work in orderto providethem with ammunitionin religious confrontations.99The impressioneven occasionally arisesthatthis is a literaryconvention, conformingto the rules of "accessus ad auctores"in justifying the work's composition.'00This was not usually the case though. Religious polemic was a common everydayaffairbetweenJews and the majoritysociety. Commentsby numerous Christians'0' and Jews102 attest to that, and sources outside the genre of polemics show that the Jewish public turnedto scholars to provide them with answers to Christianarguments.For example, in Lerida, in contrast to Avila, they could not find a disputantwithin the community to counterthe argumentsof the Christiansages. The Christianpreachedon the Christologicalinterpretationto the verse "The sceptre shall not departfrom Judah,nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come."l03His remarkssucceeded in provokingdoubtsamong the Jews, who then turnedto Rabbi Solomon ben Abrahamben Adret (the Rashba), the leading religious authorityin Aragon, and asked him to reply in writing to the preacher'sclaims.104 eral sense of Scriptureas well as the aggadot, some of which are cited in supportof their religion, and some are cited to defame us in the eyes of the Christians,our lords ... 98. See Shamir,RabbiMoses ha-Cohen, pp. 14-15. 99. See Sefer ha-berit, p. 21; Polgar,'Ezer ha-dat, 1, p. 30; ProfaytDuran,Kelimatha-Goyim, in ThePolemical Writingsof ProjicytDuran,E Talmageedition (Hebrew)(Jeru"Igeretha-hakdashah," salem:The ZalmanShazarCenterandThe DinurCenter, 1981), p. 3; Crescas,Sefer bittuliqqare, p. 34; Ibn Musa,Magen va-Romah,p. 3; "Die Briefe des PetrusDamiani,"ed. K. Reindel, I, MGH, Die Briefe der deutschenKaiserzeit,IV(Miinchen, 1983), pp. 65-66; GilbertCrispinin I. Levi, "Controverseentre un Juif et un Chretienau XIe siecle," REJ, V (1882), p. 240; D. Berger,"Mission to the Jews and Jewish-ChristianContactsin the PolemicalLiteratureof the High MiddleAges,"AmericanHistorical Review,XCI (1986), pp. 579-588; Abnerof Burgos in Baer,"Abnerof Burgos'MinhatKenaot,"p. 190. 100. See E.A. Quain,"TheMedieval 'Accessus ad auctores',"Traditio,III(1945), pp. 215-264. 101. See Berger,"Mission,"pp. 579-591; Levi, "Controverse," pp. 239-240; C. del Valle, "Notas historico-criticos"in M. Tchimino Nahmias, Declarante de los judios (Manuscrito 74 de la Biblioteca Xeral de Santiago de Compostela(Madrid:Aben Ezra Ediciones, 1996), p. 21. 102. See, for instance, 'Even bohan, in Frimerand Schwartz, The Life, p. 38: "There are also many Christianscholars among us who wish to dispute with us." Isaac Nathan, Meir Nativ which is called Concordance(Hebrew), Bomberg (Venice, 1524), unpaginated:"And I have been plagued all day by the vanityof some of the Franciscans[Ketaneihem= Minorites],with admonitionsof vain prefigurations[siyurim]and delusions and remarksof much vanity,and therewere strongthings here, like a solid mirror,that had no retort,[and] they daredme and enthusedme to respondto them." 103. Genesis, 49: 10. See A. Poznanski,Schiloh: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichteder Messiaslehre (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1904). 104. Tehsuvotha-Rashba(Hebrew),H. Z. Dimitrowskiedition (Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1990), PartOne, 1, 35, p. 108. See Poznanski,Schiloh,pp. 210-215; N. Roth,"ForgeryandAbrogationof the Torah:A Theme in Muslim and ChristianPolemic in Spain,"PAAJR,LIV (1987), pp. 225-226. The expression"filledtheirearswith his words"(basedon Ecclesiastes, 1:8)pointsto the success of the Christianpreacher,andto the penetrationof his thoughtto the heartsof the Jewishcommunityin Lerida.

41

Ram Ben Shalom Beyond these official disputationsand others like them (such as Valladolid 1336 andPamplona1379), anothertype of religiousdisputeoccasionallytook place during the Inquisition'strials of forced converts (anusim) and conversos who had returnedto Judaism.The trialswere biased againstthe accused,who knew that"victory"in the encounterwould lead to his demise. ThedisputebetweenBaruch(a German Jew forciblyconvertedin Toulouseduringthe Shephard'scrusadein 1320) and the Bishop of Pamier,JacquesFournier,lasted five weeks. In additionto the Christian notary,the dispute was attendedby several "new Christians"and a Jewish interpreterfromTroyesnamedMagisterDavid.The subjectsof debatewere standard ones (the Trinity,the messiah as both God and man, the virginbirth,the deaththat brings atonement,resurrectionof the dead, the sacraments,and revocationof the Jewish commandments),and Baruch'sgradual embrace of the righteousness of Christianitywas a requisitecondition for amelioratinghis sentence.At its conclusion, Baruch confessed that Catholicism was the true faith and that he had been broughtto believe in it, not as a resultof persecutionandforcedbaptism,"butrather throughthe Holy Scripturesas explainedto him by the Lord Bishop."'05 From the twelfth centurythe Churchsought to directreligious disputes into official channels. The means of doing this was a long series of rules and regulations which forbade religious disputes at the lay (laici) level, under the threatof excommunicaiton.' 6 Bartholomew,the Bishop of Exeter (1180-1184), warned against disputing with the Jews in the presence of non-believersor the inexperienced.'07 In the thirteenthcentury the prohibitionsincreased,now encompassing non-learnedpriests.o08As the king of France,Louis IX, announced:"No one, unless he is an expert theologian, should venture to argue with these people [the 105. See B. S. Albert, TheTrialof Baruch: TheFirst Protocol of theJudgmentof a ForcedConvert before the Inquisition[1320] (Hebrew)(RamatGan: Bar-IlanUniversityPress, 1974) pp. 90-95. See also S. Grayzel, "The Confessions of a Medieval Jewish Convert,"Historia Judaica XVII (1955), pp. 89-120; quote is from p. 119. For informationon relateddisputes, among them those of Valladolid and Pamplona, see Graetz, History, vol. 5, p. 397, and Frimerand Schwartz, The Life, pp. 15-16. See also Shevet Yehudah,pp. 87-90, 141-144. See B. Netanyahu,Don Isaac Abravanel:Statesman and Philosopher (Philadelphia:The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1972) pp. 270-27 1, note 55 for discussion of the authenticityof these disputations,pace Baer and A. Shohat. 106. See Limor,Jews and Christians,3, pp. 43-44. On the early Middle Ages see B. Blumenkranz,Juifs et Chritiens dans le monde occidental, 430-1096 (Paris:Mouton, 1960), pp. 162-164. 107. S. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews (New York:Columbia University Press, 1965), 5, p. 136. 108. See Grayzel, The Church,pp. 26-27, esp. n. 24. It should be noted that the prohibitionon non-learned priests to engage in disputationswas only pertinentwhen lay persons were present. See Grayzel, The Church,p. 318 for decisions from the Trierin 1227: "Itemprecipimusquod sacerdotes illiteratinon conferantcum Judeiscoramlaicis."Especially importantin the presentcontext is the edict issued by James I, in the ChurchCouncil in Tarazonain 1233, in Grayzel, The Church,p. 324, XXVII: "Irrefragabiliterstatuentesdecernimuset firmiterinhibemus,ne cuique laice persone liceat publice vel privatimde fide catholica disputare;et qui contra fecerit, cum constiterit,a propio episcopo excommunicetur,et nisi se purgaverittamquamsuspectus de heresi habeatur."See too Y. Rosenthal, "Introduction,"(Hebrew) in Sefer Yosefha-Mekane,p. 16. The Bishop Lucas of Tuy notes thatAlbigension heretics in southern Francepretendto be Jews in order to engage in disputes with Christiansand so spreadtheir heretical ideas. See L.I. Newman, Jewish Influenceon ChristianReformMovements(New York:Columbia University Press, 1925), p. 141.

42

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages Jews]. But a layman,whenever he hears the Christianreligion abused, should not attemptto defend its tenets, except with his sword,and that he should thrust into the scoundrel'sbelly, and as far as it will enter."'09ThomasAquinas also recommended avoiding disputes with Jews, unless they are organizedand administered in public by the Church. 10As OraLimor notes, the reason for the Church'sopposition was not only the lay Christian'sdisadvantagewhen confrontingthe superior knowledgeof a learnedJew."'IThe Churchwas also conscious that lay disputes representeda challenge to its absoluteauthorityto interpretthe holy scriptures.112 In Mendicantpractice, there was a difference between normal missionary activities, which might lead to a dispute but which did not requireany special internal sanction, and an officially initiated theological dispute. Dominicans who sought to engage in disputeswith Jewish religious scholars(as with Muslims) in Spainrequireda special license from the studia for oriental languages.'13 The Jewish attitudetowardprivatedisputes was ambivalent.On the surface, such disputesgave themthe opportunityto presenttheircase withoutfear of a reaction from the Christianestablishment.However,as Solomon bar Moses of Rome (who lived in the secondhalf of the thirteenthcentury)wrote in his guidebookto the disputant,Edut Adonai Ne'emanah,if the Jews win the encounter"the anger will be greatat the contemptand invalidationof the Christians'faith,"and if they should 14Consequently,Solomon bar lose "thetruthwill be disgracedandwill disappear."• Moses advisedthe Jews to avoid frequentdisputeswith the Christians.115 In contrastto the Churchcodes, Jewish communitylaws did not prohibitprivate disputationswith Christians,even though the Jews were fully aware of the problematicnatureof such disputes. Sefer Hasidim (dating from the second half of the twelfth and the beginning of the thirteenthcenturyin Germany),for example, instructsJews not to engage monks, priests, or convertsunless the Jewish disputantis particularlylearnedand shrewd.It also prohibitsTalmudicscholars seeking honorand unafraidof sinning, togetherwith Sadikimwho are not particularly learned,from participatingin disputes at all.' 16 Solomon bar Moses also argued 109. J. Joinville, TheLife of Saint Louis, M.R.B. Shaw,ed. (Harmondsworth,Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1963), p. 175; see Rosenthal, "Introduction,"p. 18. 110. See J. Guttmann,Das Verhdltnissdes ThomasvonAquinozu Judenthumundzurjiidischen Literatur(G6ttingen, 1891), pp. 5-6. 111. See, for instance,the remarksof the FranciscanpreacherBerthold of Regensburg(12201272) in Giidemann, Torahand Life, 1, p. 110; Rosenthal, "Introduction,"p. 19. See Grayzel, The Church,p. 26, n. 23. 112. Limor,Jews and Christians,p. 45. 113. See Johnston,"RamonLlull,"pp. 6-7, who notes also that the permit for a religious disputationwas distinct from authorizationgiven, every other year, for participationin academic theological debates.On the studia for languages see also Kriegel, Les Juifs, pp. 183-5. 114. 'Edut 'Adonaine'emanah,p. 378. 115. Ibid., p. 378. 116. RabbiYehudahhe-Hlasid,Sefer Hasidim, R. Margoliot edition, 236 (Jerusalem: Mossad HaravKook, 1957), p. 238. See also the minor changes in Sefer Hasidim, Wistinetzki-Freimannedition, 819, (Frankforton the Main: M. A. Wahrman,1924), p. 204. Rosenthal,"Introduction," p. 17 alreadyturnsto Sefer Hasidim. In my opinion, there is no reason to accept his adamantclaim that Rashi, too, warnedagainst engaging Christiansin disputes. See Rosenthal, Studies, 1, p. 106.

43

Ram Ben Shalom thatnot every Jew has the rightor is worthyof debating.Thatshouldbe left, rather, to those who are virtuous, careful in expressing themselves, knowledgablein philosophy, thoroughlyacquaintedwith the Bible (especially the Prophets),lucid in delivery, accustomedto scholarlygatherings,and fluent in the local tongue."17 He emphasizes that if a Jew must engage in polemic, he should choose his rival carefully. He recommends not debating with Christianlaity because of the Church's prohibitions,11" and because an efficient, orderlydispute in which each side fully understandsthe counterargumentsof the other would not be possible.119 He also opposes debatingwith enemies or foes who will then use the statementsof the Jew to attackhim and his coreligionists with false libels. No dispute should be entered into with those easily provoked;and it is best to avoid engaging with scholastics, who usually succeeded, using their invalid methods, to prove false claims.120 According to Solomon bar Moses, the ideal dispute is one held with "those knowledgeable of religion and law, possessing a calm disposition, lovers of truth and seekers of justice, in an appropriate,modest place, in the presence of attentive, quiet scholars, not in the marketsor streetswhere the loud, inferiorcommon people congregate and confuse."'21 Solomon bar Moses even seeks to limit the subjects of the disputationin orderto avoid a blasphemyof the Christianfaith and of Jesus.122 In contrast,David of Modena (after 1492) accuses the Spanish Jews of having transgressed the scholars' prohibition against debating questions of faith, and claims that because of this sin many were killed and many others converted in the pogroms of 1391. 23 It is possible that his views reflected the image 117. 'Edut 'Adonai ne'emanah, p. 378. See Limor,Jews and Christians, p. 45; Giidemann, Torahand Life, 2, pp. 207-208. 118. Fromthe thirteenthcenturythe prohibitionon disputationswith the laity was also directed against the Jews and not just the Christians.See B.Z. Dinur, Yisraelba-golah, part2, 1, p. 234, passage 42. 119. The same recommendationwas made in the fourteenthcentury by JohannesConversos; See Ginio, Mesudatha-Emunah'BesofMa'arav': The WorkofAlonso de Espina FortalitiumFidei and its Place in the Polemical Literatureof the MiddleAges (Hebrew) (Ph.D., Tel Aviv University, 1988), 1, p. 162; 3, p. 24, n. 210. 120. 'Edut 'Adonai ne'emanah, p. 378: "And if a Jew is forced for any reason to dispute, he should be careful not to dispute with those of impoverishedreason who do not know the religion, because the Lords of the Land [Christians]have already forbiddenthis .... He should also not dispute with his enemies and evil-seekers because they plot againsthim and againstus and will take advantage of his words .... Also he should not dispute with rash persons with a black humorwho easily anger, or those followers of errorcalled sophists who make truthfrom the lie." 121. Edut 'Adonai ne'emanah,p. 378. 122. He recommendsnot disputingover the Trinity,incarnation,the host, the saints,andmonastic morality.In contrast,it is recommendedto disputeoverthe coming of the messiah, the signs andportents of the messianic age, the commandments,and the words of the prophets.See ibid., pp. 378-9. 123. See A. Marx,Studies in Jewish History and Booklore(New York:JewishTheologicalSeminaryofAmerica, 1944), p. 81: "AndI heardthatthe seriouspersecutions[gezerot]thattook place in Catalonia in the year 1396 [shouldbe 1391] were because of a disputethatthe Jews sought to hold with the gentile scholars. Eventually,when they [the gentiles] recognizedtheir defeat they rose up againstthem and killed [manyof] them and very many,indeed,almost all, of the [survivors]convertedand violated theirreligion.And from thatpersecutioncame the persecutionin the year 1492 .... All this happenedto them because they had not kept the covenantof the forefathers[rishonim]and the decree [ma'amar]of

44

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages of SpanishJews, prevalentamong their Italianbrethren,as having a propensityto confrontthe Christians.It should be noted that the recommendationsto avoid religious disputescame from Germanyand Italy,pointing to the differentattitudeof Spanishand ProvengalJews towardthe question. An illuminatingexample of this attitudeamong Spanish Jewry is found in the literarywork,Ahituvve-Salmon,writtenby Mattathiasha-Yishari,one of the representativesof the Aragon community in the Tortosa disputation.In one of the book's scenes, a Christianand Jew debate the true faith before a pagan queen. The Christian,who at a certainpoint in the exchange feels that he cannot win, recalls the Church'sprohibitionagainst disputing with Jews and asks to put an immediate end to the debate.The Jew agrees to his demand,while first exploiting it to his advantageby claiming that the very existence of such a prohibitionon the part of the Churchreveals the Christians'fears of losing such disputes, and their apprehension thatthe Jews could simply destroythe entiretheological structurethey had built.'24 Ha-Yishari'sstory is, first and foremost, an indication of the awareness of SpanishJewry of the prohibitionby the Churchon privatedisputes,125 and of how it was possible to use this prohibitionto strengthendevotion to Judaism. Testimonyconcerningprivatedisputes is to be found in medieval polemical works writtenboth by Christians'26 and Jews.127 Many of the Jews who labored the Sages who said not to dispute over mattersof religion."Ram Ben Shalom, "Qiddushha-Shem and Jewish Martyrdomin Aragon and Castille in 1391: Between Spain and Ashkenaz"(Hebrew) in Tarbiz, LXX (2001), esp. p. 271. It is interestingin this context to pointto the Jewish historiographicaltradition thatconnectsthe causes of the Shepherds'crusadeagainstthe Jews in 1320 to the religious disputation which they held beforehandwith one of the Jews. Once the shepherdsrealizedthatthe Jew was aboutto defeat them in the confrontation,they killed him and beganthe pogrom. See ShevetYehuda,p. 23. 124. Mattathiasha-Yishari,"Ahituvve-Zalmon"(Oxford manuscript,Bodleian Library 1913/ 3), in A. Darshan,"Rabbi MattathiasHa-Yishari:the Man and his Age" (Hebrew) (Thesis, Bar Ilan University,RamatGan, 1998), p. 118 125. The Jew who disputedwith RaymondLlull in Genova(between the years 1302-1305) attempted to evade the dispute by claiming that such activity was prohibitedby the Pope. See Hames, "RaymondLlull,"p. 343. 126. See Berger,"Mission,"pp. 579-582; 586-591. On GilbertCrispin,see Levi, Controverse, p. 240; Williams,Adversus,pp. 375 -376; Cohen,LivingLetters,pp. 180-185. AlthoughCrispin'swritings do not reflect the actual disputation,one should not doubt the reality of his declarationconcerning the friendlyrelationswith the Jewish scholar and concerningthe religious discussions which took place between them in the presence of an audience. See R.J.Z.Werblowsky,"Crispin'sDisputation," TheJournal of Jewish Studies, XI (1960), pp. 69-77; A. SapirAbulafia and G.R. Evans, The Worksof Gilbert Crispin,Abbot of Westminster(London:Oxford University Press, 1986), pp. XXXVII, XXX, n. 5. The polemical work of Jaime Civeroso fromAragon was composed, accordingto him, for the heir to the throne,Peter,the brotherof King Alfonso IV,in orderto serve him in his disputes with the Jews. See Kriegel, Les Juifs, p. 193. 127. Berger,"Mission,"pp. 588-9 mentionsthe disputesof Jacobben Reuben,Meir ben Simeon, and Moses of Salerno but emphasizes principallynorthernEurope as a typical region of dispute. On the disputes discussed in the book "Josephha-Mekaneh"see Rosenthal, "Introduction,"p. 23. On Germanyin the fifteenth and sixteenth century see H. H. Ben-Sasson, "Jewish-ChristianDisputation in the Setting of Humanismand Reformationin the GermanEmpire,"Harvard Theological Review, LIX (1966), pp. 369-390. On Spain and Provence,beyond the disputes to be discussed below, see for instancethe dispute with "one of the Christianscholars"in JosephAlbo, Sefer ha-'iqqarim, Ma'amar 3:25 (Tel Aviv: Mahbarotle-Sifrut, 1964), pp. 472-491; on this see Lasker,Jewish Philosophical

45

Ram Ben Shalom to write a defense of the Jewish religion and to attackChristianityhad actualexperience with privatereligious disputes. Some never alluded to such experience; othersnoted thatthey had debateda certainChristianscholar.Some gave shortdescriptionsof such events. Especially remarkablein this context is the case of Profayt Duran,who, in the wake of the 1391 pogroms, composed the most important polemical works in Spain, 'Iggeret al tehi ka-'avotekha(1394 or 1395) and Kelimat ha-Goyim (1396). In these works Duran developed the methods of philosophical argumentsagainst Christianityand of criticism of the New Testament. The readerof the now standardTalmage edition of Kelimat ha-Goyim (based on seven manuscripts)will find no mention of actualdisputesin which the authorengaged. It would seem, at first, that Durannevertook partin a religious dispute,or that at least no evidence of such has survived. However,according to one of the manuscripts of Kelimat ha-Goyim (Budapest, the HungarianAcademy of Sciences, Kaufman 299), sections of which were printed in the old edition of Poznanski, there is an extant reportof one dispute Duranengaged in with a Christian scholar whose name was Juan.128This reportrevises completely the previous assumptionconcerningDuran'snon-participationin disputes,andeven indicatesthat the phenomenon of private dispute was far more common than what is reflected in the polemical literature.David Berger, for example, points to the challenge posed to Christiansby Jewish disputantsas an explanationfor the large numberof Christianpolemics written in the twelfth century.129 Several instances will be examined below, in an attemptto understandthe circumstancesand the particularatmospherecharacteristicof each dispute.As the examples of ibn Caspi and Aramamade clear, one of the more notable aspects of the privatedispute was the use of polemical argumentsnot raised in official disputations.There is good reason, then, to study these less conventionalarguments. Shield and Sword:Jewish PolemicsAgainst Christianityand the Polemic, p. 50; H. Trautner-Kromann, Christians in France and Spainfrom 1100-1500 (Tiibingen:J. C. B. Mohr, 1993), pp. 168-174. See also Sefer MilhemetMisvah, parttwo, of RabbiMeir bar Simeon from Narbon,the authorof Sefer haMe'orot,found in M.Y. HacohenBlau, TheAncientMethodon Tractates, zevahim,arachinu'tmunazir, rah and the book milhemetmitzvah (Hebrew) (New York:S. Deutch, 1974), p. 334-335; Milhemet Misvah 1:3, Hershkowitzedition, p. 104. 128. ProfaytDuran,Sefer Kelimatha-Goyim, 7, in Ha-Sofeh Le-HokhmatYisrael,4, 1 (1914), p. 40. "Justas I respondedto one of the nations' scholars, named Juan,who came to me anfilis and told me about the verse [Deuteronomy,29, 27], "andthe Lord rooted them out of their land in anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation,and cast them into anotherland, as it is this day,"thatthe same big lamed [in the words "cast them,"vayeshalhem]is the signal and the sign of Jesus as a king. I told him that, actually,from this passage we can understandwhy they were cast into anotherland. It is because they crowned Jesus and called him: God, king of the world."It is difficult to accept Poznansky's speculation in his note on this passage (n. 1) thatthe meaninglessandpossibly mistakenexpression"an filis" indicates Montpellier.It is perhapspossible to entertainthe possibility that this is aboutthe Carnavalperiod (Fallas)which is still practicedin severalplaces (includingValencia)duringthe week preceeding the nineteenthof March. 129. Berger, "Mission,"pp. 578-579. On the relation between the literary debate and actual disputationssee too B. Blumenkranz,"Anti-JewishPolemics and Legislation in the Middle Ages: Literary Fiction or Reality?" The Journal of Jewish Studies, XV (1964), pp. 132-140; see especially pp. 134-135 on ProvengalJewry,and on "Summade QuaestionibusArmenorum,"the workof the Primate Archbishopof Ireland,RichardFitzralph,which was written in Avignon in 1344-1338.

46

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages The first written account of a private dispute is to be found in Jacob ben Reuben'sMilhamot ha-Shem (1170). However, it should be noted that religious disputes between Jews and Christians already took place in Muslim Spain (AlAndalus) in the first half of the eleventh century. 30 Jacob resided among Christians in "MoradGasikuyya."'31He befriendedand became the pupil of one of the priests, a monk for three decades,132who was "one of the city's leading citizens and the generation'sgreat scholars, well versed in logic [hokhmatha-ma'amar] and prudentin inner wisdom."'33At one point, the priest presentedJacob with a generalreligiousproblem:how long would the Jews continueto reject Christianity as they diminished in numberand lived abject lives, in contrastto the greatness and glory of Christendom.As proof of the Christiantruth,and as an opening salvo in theirdebate, the priestpointed to the books of Paul, Jerome,Augustine, and Gregorythe Great.He asked Jacobto abandonJudaismif he was unable to refute his arguments,and emphasizedhis willingness to answerany and all questions Jacob asked without apprehension.134It is impossible to know how accuratelyMilhamot ha-Shemreflects the dispute that actually took place. Jacob ben Reuben's book containsa vigorous critique,includingan attackon the Gospels andthe tenets of Christianity.This might be explainedby its unprecedentednatureand by the period in which it was written:priorto the aggressive missionaryactivity of the Mendicants.135It is also to be ascribedto the friendlyrelationsthatexisted between Jacob and the priest, and to the explicit agreement on the part of the latter that he give voice to anythingthat came to mind. All these factors might have informed the aggressiveness of the writing. At the same time, Jacob was apprehensive enough of public disclosure of his claims against Christianitythat he was careful not to publisheverythingthat was on his mind.136 Differentconditions characterizedthe series of debates and general discus130. The grammarianand biblical interpretorJonah ibn Janahtestified about these disputes. See WilhelmW. Bacher,ed., Sefer ha-Shorashim.hu ha-helekha-sheni mi-mahberetha-dikdukhibero be-leshonAravRabbiJonah ben Janah, translatedby RabbiJudah ben Tibbon(repr.Amsterdam:Philo Press, 1969), p. 372: "ha-'Almah-the young woman, and it may be that she would be a virgin or not a virgin,as it was said aboutone who is not a virgin, 'the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son' [Isaiah 7:14] ... and I made a lengthy explanationof this matterbecause the Christiansconfuse the saying 'the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son,' and interprether to be a virgin, and I already argued with every one of them who had spoken with me about thatproof" (my emphasis). 131. ApparentlyGascogne in southernFrance. See Y. Rosenthal, "Introduction,"in Milhamot ha-Shem,pp. ix-x; and see D. Berger,"GilbertCrispin,Alan of Lille, and Jacob ben Reuben:A Study in the Transmissionof Medieval Polemic,"Speculum,XLIX (1974), pp. 34-47. 132. Milhamotha-Shem,p. 10; Rosenthal, "Introduction,"ibid., p. xix. 133. Milhamotha-Shem,pp. 4-5; Rosenthal, "Introduction,"ibid., p. ix. 134. Milhamotha-Shem,p. 5. Among the Christianswhose opinions were given expression by the priestduringthe disputation,therewas a friendof the priest'sby the name of Paul.D. Bergershowed that these were Cathar'sopinions. See D. Berger,"ChristianHeresy and Jewish Polemic in the Twelfth and ThirteenthCenturies,"HarvardTheologicalReview, LXVIII (1975), pp. 298-303. 135. Because of the new realityin Spain, Shem Tov ibn ShaprutcriticizedJacobben Reuben for the excessively sharptone of his book. Fromibn Shaprut'swork, Even bohan (1385-1405), in RosenMilhamotha-Shem,p. xix: "Thoughindeed [he] spoke a great deal without limit in thal, "Introduction," a florid style of blasphemy,which we could never have."See Frimerand Schwartz,TheLife, p. 38. 136. Milhamot ha-Shem, 11, p. 141. See Berger, Nizzahon Vetus, p. 21, n. 53.

47

Ram Ben Shalom sions that took place between Meir ben Simeon of Narbonne and the two archbishops of Narbonne,Guilllaumede Broue (1245-1257) and Gui Fulcodi (12591261), who laterbecame Pope Clement IV (1265-1268). The Archbishopof Narbonne was also the feudallordof one partof the Jewishcommunityin Narbonne.'37 Thus, religious debates over such issues as the lending of money, interest,and the Jewish badge had direct relevance to the daily lives of the Jews. Guilllaume de Broue sought to implement the prohibitionagainst interest imposed on the Jews by the French king, Louis IX. In one of his three disputes with him, Meir ben Simeon arguedthat no society could exist without interest-carryingloans. He illustratedhis point with the actions of the king himself, who was compelled to borrow at high interestfrom Narbonne'sJews in orderto relieve some of his fortified cities in war (apparentlyagainstthe baronof Toulouse,RaymondVII). Why,asked ben Simeon, don't the feudal lords understandthat, like them, the majorityof the population also requiredJewish loans. Claims similarto ben Simeon's were to be heard in Louis IX's court, expressed by those opposed to his program.'38 Gui Fulcodi sought to implementthe decision of the FourthLateranCouncil (1215) regardingthe identifying sign Jews were requiredto wear on theirclothing.139 Officially, his reasonwas the rumoraboutJews havingsexual relationswith Christianprostituteson the roads. Meir ben Simeon did not deny the accusation. He noted thatimplementingthe decision would put Jews in gravedangerfrombandits, and that honest Jews should not be punishedfor the deeds of the sinners. He furtheradded that those immoral Jews would not be deterredfrom contact with Christianprostitutesby an identifying badge: they dress like Christians,commit crimes with prostitutes,eat non-kosher foods in the company of Christians,and drinkforbiddenwine. As well they act in this way also in largetowns, andnot only on the roads, as the archbishophad been informed. 40 In the disputes, Fulcodi attackedissues raised in the Talmudas partof the general polemic waged againstthe Talmudin the thirteenthcentury.His arguments were taken from the convert Nicholas Donin, who representedChristianityin the Parisdisputation.141Otherscholarsfrom his entouragealso participatedin the disputes. They intervenedon various issues, presentedtheir opinions, and demanded answers.'142In addition,the archbishopsought to bring the Jews closer to conver137. See J. Regn6,Etudesur la conditiondesjuifs de Narbonnedu Veau XIVesiecle (Narbonne: E Caillard, 1912), pp. 59-106. 138. See Chazan,"Anti-Usury,"p. 49, n. 9, n. 61. 139. For the Council decisions see J.D. Mansi, Sacrorumconciliorum nova et amplissimacollectio, (Graz, 1961), XXII, col. 1054 ff.; R. Chazan, "ArchbishopGuy Fulcodi of Narbonneand his Jews,"REJ, CXXXII (1973), pp. 590-591. 140. MilhemetMisvah, 1, 3, Herskowitzedition, pp. 139-140. According to Ben Simeon, the Bishop was convinced and desisted from enforcing the adoptionof an identifyingbadge. See S. Stein, Jewish-Christian Disputations in ThirteenthCenturyNarbonne:An Inaugural Lecture Delivered at University College, London, 22 October 1964 (London:UniversityCollege, 1969), pp. 16-17. 141. See Chazan, "Archbishop,"pp. 591-592; Stein, Jewish-ChristianDisputations, pp. 1821; See Funkenstein,"The Changes in the Religious Dispute." 142. "MilhemetMisvah le-RabbenuMeir ben Simeon ha-Me'ili of Narbonne"(p. 214 of the manuscript), in Sefer ha-me'orot le-Rabbenu Meir bar Simeon ha-Me'ili of Narbonne on Tractates

Eruvin ...

HalakhotKetanot,M.Y. Ha-Cohen Blau edition (New York:S. Deutch, 1967), p. 384.

48

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provencein the Late Middle Ages sion throughargumentstaken from contemporaryreality.Thus, for example, he pointed to the changing social and intellectual characterof the class of converts. In the past, only those on the marginsof Jewish society converted.Now, the community'sintellectualsand wealthywere converting.This phenomenonshould open the eyes of the Jews and show them that those same converted scholars had chosen the fruit(Christianity)and now wished to throwout the peel (Judaism).143 Despite the feudal dependenceof the Jews on the archbishop,and despite the deteriorationin the attitudeof the rulersin Narbonnetowardthe Jews, Meir ben Simeon praisedthe governmentof the ArchbishopGui Fulcodi and his willingness to accept andimplementJewishdemandspresentedin meetingsand debates.144 He even claims that his replies to the archbishopwere a source of pleasure to the latter.145 Meirben Simeon engaged otherChristiansin dispute as well. To one of these disputeshe devotes the second half of MilhemetMisvah.146 It addressedthe classic issues such as the Christologicalinterpretationof Biblical prophecy,the Trinity, Incarnation,the virginbirth,andJewish exile. Anothersection of the workpresents a critique of the New Testament.As in the dispute with the archbishop of Narbonne,here, too, argumentswere based on historical events or on contemporary reality:the crusades and their failure,147 the split in the Christianworld between the Latinand Greek churches,148 the religious debate between Christianity and Islam,149 and Christianheresy and the sects that had brought about a weakening of the Catholic faith.'50 He employed these same argumentsin his dispute 143. Chazan,Archbishop,p. 593. 144. Ibid., p. 589. In my opinion the partialsatisfaction by the ArchbishopsDe Broue and Fulcodi of the requestsof the Jews, and theirdefense they providedthem, is to be explained by the lengthy struggle between the archbishopsand the Viscount in Narbonneover the jurisdiction over the Jews in Narbonne.See Regn&Etude, pp. 106-114, especially pp. 108-109 for the confrontation(in December, 1251) betweenGuillaumede Broueand the Viscount, which reachedthe point whereAmauriI was excommunicated. 145. Milhemetmisvah, in Sefer ha-Meoroton 'Erubin, Blau edition, p. 388: "And after I had interpretedeverythingfor him, it pleased him." 146. Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, pp. 305-357. In the beginningof the chapter,on page 305, it is said: "A Christianscholar asked one Jewish scholar,"but at the end of the chapter,on page 357, it is discoveredthat this scholar is none other than Meir ben Simeon himself. No dialogue exists in the chapter,and it is devoted to the argumentsof Meir ben Simeon, apparentlya summaryof several disputes. Only occasionally is a Christianvoice to be heard,as happenson page 317: "One of their scholars repliedto this."The argumentsmade on pp. 346-357 were writtenwithout any direct connection to the dispute. See Herskowitz,Milhemetmitzvah,p. 85 on copying errorsin the Blau edition. 147. See below, p. 64. 148. Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, p. 321. 149. Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, p. 330 See also the next note below. R. Chazan,"Polemical Themes in the MilhemetMizvah,"in G. Dahan, ed., Les Juifs au regardde l'histoire: Melanges en l'honneurde BernardBlumenkranz(Paris:Picard, 1985), p. 182. 150. See Milhemet misvah, Blau edition, pp. 346-7: "Andif you say that you were strengthened in your faith, are there not also among you those who do not believe as you [do], such as the heretics and the sectarians;also not the Ishmaelites, nor we, the House of Israel";Milhemet Misvah, Blau edition, p. 353: "Formost of the childrenof the Earthdo not acknowledge him as Lord, such as the Ishmaelites,the Tatars,and the People of Israel. Also not many of the Christianpeople [believe], for there are amongst you divided faiths."

49

Ram Ben Shalom with the monk ("ha-Kadesh"),adding also the struggle between the Germanemperor and the Pope.151 Meir ben Simeon also attackedthe Christianrite of confession, which had been made an obligatorysacramentat the FourthLateranCouncil (1215). While acknowledging that confession was necessary to everyone, he took issue with the way it was instituted.He had two reasons. Continuedconfession to the same priest leads to a situationin which shame will inhibitpeople from confessing all their sins; as a consequence, accordingto the Christianview, that person's soul will be lost. Secondly, the priest, who is often young and in his prime, learns of sins from those confessing, sins he might then commit himself once his impulses are awakened.If marriedwomen confess their adulteryto him, those impulses may lead him to have sexual relations with them, which could result in the birth of children. As a result, Christian society suffers from the moral failings of illicit sexual behaviorandthe loss of propertyto illegitimate siblings.' 52 Of particular note here are the pointed accusations concerning the immoralityof priests and suspicions of their adultery.Such a claim could easily provoke Christianire, as indeed occurredaroundthis time in Manosque(1265). A Jew by the name of Mancippusdisputed over the subjectwith several Christians.He defended the superiorityof the Jewish system of repentance,andpresentedthe defects of the Christianconfession which pretendedto atone for all types of sins, including murderand adultery.His mention of the possibility of sexual relationsbetween a priest and loose women brought about an accusation against him in Manosque's court on charges of vilification. Joseph Shatzmillerhas noted the close similaritybetween a passage in the work Sefer Nisahon Yashanand the case in Manosque, demonstrating the relationship between actual debates and the polemical literature.'53 The subject of confession also arose in the disputebetween Meir ben Simeon and the ArchbishopFulcodi, in which ben Simeon emphasizedthe importance of daily confession over confessions made only duringa certainperiodof the year, as was the Christianpractice.154 Ben Simeon also attackedthe differentforms of atonementimposed by the priest on the sinner in cases of serious transgressions, 151. See Milhemet misvah, 1, 3, Herskowitz edition, pp. 110-111. Meir ben Simeon shows himself to also be conscious of the methodsthe Churchused in its struggleagainstthe Catharistheresy. Chazan,"Anti-Usury,"p. 66; J. Shatzmiller,"TheAlbigensianHeresy as Reflected in the Eyes of ContemporaryJewry,"(Hebrew) in R. Bonfil, et al., eds., Cultureand Society in Medieval Jewry: Studies Dedicated to the Memoryof Haim Hillel Ben-Sasson (Hebrew) (Jerusalem, 1989), p. 342. On Jacob of Venice (from Provence), who expresses sympathy for the Dominican point of view vis-a-vis the Catharsin his polemical missive, see R. Ben-Shalom, "The Image of ChristianCulturein the Historical Consciousness of the Jews of Twelfth-to Fifteenth-CenturySpain and Provence"(Hebrew)(Ph.D. dissertation,Tel Aviv University, 1996), 1, pp. 79-82. 152. Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, pp. 307-308. See Chazan,"PolemicalThemes,"pp. 180181. 153. See J. Shatzmiller,Recherches sur communautI la juive de Manosque au Moyen-Age, 1241-1329 (Paris, 1973), pp. 123-127; and see also Sefer ha-Berit, p. 28: "Andeven your priests and bishops who do not marrywomen, it is known that they commit adultery." 154. MilhemetMisvah, Blau edition, p. 383.

50

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages arguing that they were too lenient,155and criticized the practices of Christian courts'56and the rules for prosecution.157 His argumentstestify to a close familiarity with Christianpractices and the laws of the Churchand the Christiancity, and his criticismsof the legal institutionsindicateda developed grasp of legal and moral issues. At the turn of the thirteenthcentury,Solomon ben Abrahamibn Adret (the Rashba)held a series of disputationswith a Christian.The Rashba responded to argumentsthat were partof the "new polemic" developed at the time by the Mendicants of RaymondMartini'sschool. The Rashba later made a record of the debates in a polemical work.'58 Jeremy Cohen's claim that the Christianwho disputedwith the Rashbawas RaymondMartinihimself is convincing. Cohen based his conclusion primarilyon an analysis of the Rashba'sargumentsthat were a response to an attack on Judaism found in Martini'swork Pugio fidei.159 No detailed descriptionsof the Rashba'sdisputant'sargumentsexist (the Christian'sargumentsare abbreviatedwhile the Rashba'sanswersare providedat length), but it is importantto note that no mention is made of hostility or treacheryon the part of Martinior the Dominicans. It can be assumed that the debates'60 were part of the Mendicants'missionary programwhich, alongside physical and psychological pressure on the Jewish communities, sought to hold debates with important Jewishfigures who, once convincedof the Christiantruth,would bring aboutmass conversion.However,it seems that in this case outside pressures(such as the activities of the Dominicans in the streets of Barcelonain 1263) were not involved, nor was there any official compulsion on the Jewish representativeto appearand debate. Martinipresentedharsh challenges whose purpose was to representmedieval Judaismas a new religion, wholly distinct from that which God had commandedat Mt. Sinai. This was an attemptto establish Judaismas heresy, and the Rashbadevotedthe greaterpartof his polemic to counteringthese claims. He also went on the offensive, attackingthe concept of the Trinity in philosophical language. Martinihad difficulty answeringthese attacks,and his rebuttal-that philosophy is not to be used in establishingreligious truths,since it raises difficulties 155. On incestuous sinners,Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, p. 308: "Andthey go to many holy places, close and far, and the sinners are told to stand there one night, and to give a candle of wax or one pashut [a form of currency]and their sin will be atoned,even though it [the sin] is severe, worthy of karet,or death." 156. Milhemetmisvah, Blau edition, p. 308. 157. Ibid. 158. Teshuvotha-Rashba,37, pp. 159-221. The tenth chapterof this work gives expression to anotherdispute involving the Rashba and Raymond Llull concerning mattersconnected to the Kabbalah. See H. J. Hames, TheArt of Conversion:Chritianityand Kabbalah in the ThirteenthCentury (Leiden: Brill, 2000), pp. 246-283, 289-292. 159. See J. Cohen, "The Polemical Adversary of Solomon ibn Adret,"JQR LXXI (1980), pp. 48-55; Cohen, TheFriars, pp. 156-163; Chazan,Daggers, pp. 137-158; R. Bonfil, "The Image of Judaismin the Work'Pugio fidei'," (Hebrew) Tarbiz,40 (1971), pp. 360-375. 160. See too Teshuvotha-Rashba,35, pp. 108-114. The Rashbasent as a response to the communityof Leridaa recordof one of the disputeshe engagedin with a Christianscholar.See n. 104, above andM. Orfali,La cuesti6nde la veridadel Mesias en un "responsum"de RabbiSelom6 ibnAdretal Cahal de Lbrida,Helmantica,XLIII(1992), pp. 203-220.

51

Ram Ben Shalom for all religions, and not just for Christianity'61'-is particularlyinteresting.From this it can be concluded that Martini,known fromPugiofidei for his demonic perception of Judaism,'62still considered Judaismto be a positive religion, if only for argument'ssake. His rejection of philosophical rationalismas a language relevant to such religious discussion diverges from the polemical methods of such thinkers as Anselm of Canterbury,Gilbert Krispin, and PeterAbelard.163 On the other hand,it accords with ThomasAquinas' standon the matter. 64 It was an authentic theological position and not an ad hoc tactic for dismissing the Rashba's arguments. Indeed, Martini advanced a similar argument in a dispute held in Tunisiawith SultanAl-Mustansir,as can be seen from RaymondLlull's attackson him.165 At the same time, it is also possible that Martiniacted on the basis of his awareness of the Rashba's views concerning the dangers of philosophy; such views would find expression a few years later in the ban imposed by Rashba and otherBarcelonascholarsin 1305 againstradicalphilosophicalallegory.166 Be that as it may, Rashbatried at one point in the dispute to reach agreementwith Martini, at least regardingJudaism'sand Christianity'sneed to reject heresy.'67 An entirelydifferentatmosphereprevailedin the disputebetween Moses haCohen of Tordesillasand a Christianstudent of the converted scholar,Abner of Burgos (Alphonso de Valladolid),who arrivedin Avila at the same time the four official disputes had been held in the cathedral.Moses ha-Coheninitially refused 161. Teshuvotha-Rashba, 37, 7, p. 204. See Cohen, TheFriars, p. 162. 162. See, for instance, R. Bonfil, "The Jews and Satan in Medieval ChristianConsciousness," (Hebrew) in S. Almog, ed., AntisemitismThroughthe Ages (Hebrew) (Jerusalem:The Zalman Shazar Center, 1980), pp. 119-121. 163. Cohen, Living Letters, pp. 167-218; Funkenstein,Image, pp. 86-95. Amongst the followers of Anselm, Funkensteinquotes, on p. 89, an anonymous authorof a dispute (written between 1123 and 1148), which is mistakenlycreditedto William of Champeaux.The workopens with the author'sdeclarationthat he was unsuccessful in convincing the Jew by the acceptedpracticesof disputation, that is, throughproofs from the scriptures,but only with argumentsof logic. On this work, associated with the school of Laon, and on the rationalizationof the Jewish-Christiandisputationsee A. Sapir-Abulafia,"Jewish-ChristianDisputationsandthe Twelfth-CenturyRenaissance,"Journal of Medieval History, XV (1989), pp. 105-125. On the failed attemptby Gilbert Krispinto compose a disputation,sola ratione, see A. SapirAbulafia, "AnAttemptby Gilbert Crispin,Abbot of Westminster, at RationalArgument in the Jewish-ChristianDebate,"Studia Monastica, XXVI (1984), pp. 55-58. 164. See Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, 61 vols. (London: Blackfriarsin conjunction with Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964-1981), 2a2ae. 10, 7. 165. See H. Hames, "Approachesto Conversionin the Late 13th CenturyChurch,"StudiaLlulliana, XXXV (1995), pp. 79-81. 166. See Ram Ben-Shalom, "Communicationand Propagandabetween Provence and Spain: The Controversyover ExtremeAllegorization (1303-1306)," in S. Menache, Communicationin the Jewish Diaspora: ThePre-Modern World(Leiden: Brill, 1996), pp. 171-225; idem, "The Ban Placed by the Community of Barcelona on the Study of Philosophy and Allegorical Preaching-A New Study,"REJ, CLIX (2000), pp. 387-404. 167. Teshuvotha-Rashba, 37, 6, p. 197: "Andthat was my response. Tell me, who would tell this story [ Joma, 9b], a Jew, a Christian,or a heretic who behaves like a Jew and believes like a Christian. If he was a Jew, he did not really say this in the way you say, because if so he would not be a Jew. And if [he was] a Christian,I do not have to believe in what he said aboutthis, and he can say what he will say. And if [he was] a heretic, neither we nor you have to believe in what he would say, and one does not bring testimonyfrom the heretics."[my emphasis]

52

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages to engage the Christian.But the lattercompelled ha-Cohento do so by threatening to join one of the two other convertsand compel the entire Jewish community to returnto the cathedral,for a fifth time, to hear Christianpreaching.168He further indicatedthathe intendedto include a forceful anti-Jewishmessage in his sermon, one that could inflame the feelings of the Christianaudience. These threatsultimately convinced ha-Cohen to agree to a private dispute. It took place in haCohen's home, before an audience of his students,169and was reported in 'Ezer ha-Emunah.170The Christian,who was well-versed in the Old Testamentand in Talmudiclegends afterhavingreadAbner of Burgos' work,More ha-Sedek,made use of the same potent attacksagainstthe Talmudconcerningthe Jewish insult of Jesus and the Jews' negative attitudetowardChristiansthat were, in part, known from the Parisdisputation.Ha-Cohenhoped to use the privatedispute to avoid the public airing of these claims. He understoodthat even if he were to triumphantly rebutthem, the very existence of the official dispute caused automaticdamage to the Jewish community since Christiansociety comprehendedand internalizedin particularthe points made againstthe Jews and paid less attentionto the defense. Among the various argumentsand counter-argumentswe find the anonymous disputant'sefforts to refute ha-Cohen'sresponse concerning the verse "For unto us a child is born" (Isaiah 9:5) by invoking a midrashic interpretationthat seems to have been unknownto the polemicizing convertswho participatedin the earlierpublic disputes.17 This is interestingtestimony to the impact of the official disputations,as the argumentsraised in public laterserved as a basis for continuing polemics in privatedisputes. The site of the dispute-ha-Cohen's home-and the fact that the Christian was not accompaniedby an entouragedistinguish this case from an official dispute, even as it took place underthreat.It should be noted that several years earlier, in 1305, RaymondLlull had alreadyissued a call to hold religious disputes in the homes of Jews.172 Religious disputationsbetweenJews and convertsbecame increasinglycommon as the numberof conversions increasedduring the second half of the fourteenth century,and in particularin the wake of the pogroms of 1391, the Tortosa disputation,and the sermonizingcrusadeof Vincent Ferrerto Castile and Aragon in 1411-1415. Reverberationsfromthese disputes areevidenced in the workZelus Christi contra Judeos, Sarracenos et infidels, written by the convert Pedro de la Cablleriaaround 1464.'73 The disputes continued right up to the eve of the Ex168. See above,pp. 39- 41. On the coercionof convertssee Riera,Les Llicencies, pp. 121, 124126. 169. 'Ezer ha-'emunah,p. 127. See also, Shamir,Moses ha-Cohen, p. 16. 170. See D. Berger, "Christians,Gentiles, and the Talmud:A Fourteenth-CenturyJewish Response to the Attack on RabbinicJudaism,"in Lewis and Niew6hner,Religionsgesprdcheim Mittelalter (Wiesbaden:Harrassowitz,1992), pp. 117-130. 171. 'Ezer ha-'emunah,pp. 129-130 172. See Johnston,"RamonLlull,"pp. 29-30, and n. 98 fromLiber define: "et cum Judaeiset in eorum domibus disputarent." 173. See J.Amadorde los Rios, Historia social, politica y religiosa de los Judios de Espaha y Portugal (Madrid:Fortanet,1876), III, pp. 104-112.

53

Ram Ben Shalom pulsion, reportsof which are to be found in the protocols of the Spanish Inquisition.174 The conversion phenomenon renewed the practice of privatereligious disputes being carried out throughthe exchange of epistles and letters. The epistle was alreadyknown as a genre of literarypolemic from the first century in its use by St. Paul, and duringthe Middle Ages by such writersas PeterDamianand Samuel of Morocco.175However,now we witness this genre being put to use in an actual dispute between two, or more, persons respondingto each other'sarguments, often referring to real events of religious significance. This, too, is not entirely new, as in Islamic Cordobaduringa much earlierperiod(aroundthe year 840) epistles had been exchanged between Paul Alvarus and the proselyte Diacon Bodo (Eleazar).

176

In the fourteenthcenturyAbner of Burgos sent three polemical epistles addressing various subjectsto threeJews. They were answeredby the mathematician Joseph Shalom, underthe instructionof the physician, Hayyim Israelbar Isaac of Toledo. Abnerrepliedto Shalom'sepistles in a specific workentitled TeshuvothaMeshuvot.177 In addition, he sent epistles to several of the elders of the Toledo community,in which he accused them of eating leavenedfood and not matzahduring the first and second days of Passover in 1334. The implication was that they were heretics as they had wantonly transgressedagainst Jewish law without ac174. See, for instance,A. MeyuhasGinio, "Self-Perceptionand Images of the Judeoconversos in Fifteenth-CenturySpain and Portugal,"TelAviverJahrbuchfiir deutsche Geschichte, XXII (1993), pp. 143-144. Gutwirth,"Gender." 175. See O. Limor,"The Epistle of Rabbi Samuel of Morocco,"in Limorand Stroumsa,ContraJudaeos, pp. 177-194, and especially p. 191;A. Echevarria,TheFortressof Faith: TheAttitudetowards Muslims in Fifteenth-CenturySpain, (Leiden: Brill, 1999), pp. 72-78. 176. Alvarus sent four epistles to Bodo in an attemptto convince him to returnto Christianity. Threefragmentsfrom Bodo's responsehavebeen preserved.See Williams,AdversusJudaeos, pp. 224227; A. Cabaniss,"Bodo-Eleazar:A FamousJewish Convert,"JQR, XLIII(1952-1953), pp. 313-328, especially pp. 313-314, n. 2, 325-326; B. Blumenkranz,"Les auteurschr6tienslatins du moyen age sur les Juifs et le Judaism,"REJ,CXIV (1955), pp. 37-45; idem, "DunouveausurBodo-El6azar,"REJ, CXII (1953), pp. 35-42; idem, "Un pamphletjuif m6diolatin de pol6mique antichretienne,"Revue d'histoire et de philosophie religieuses, XXXIV (1954), pp. 401-413; idem, Les auteurs chrietiens latins du MoyenAge sur les Juifs et le Judaism (Paris:Mouton, 1963), pp. 184-191. 177. See Y. Rosenthal,"From'Sefer Alfonso'," (Hebrew)in M. Ben-Hurin,et al., eds., Studies and Essays in Honor of AbrahamA. Neumann (Hebrew) (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962), pp. 1-34; idem, "The Second Epistle of Abner of Burgos,"(Hebrew) in S. Belkin, et al., eds., Jubilee Volumein Honor of Rabbi Dr. Abraham Weiss(Hebrew) (New York:Shulsinger Bros., 1964), pp. 483-510; idem, "The ThirdEpistle of Abner of Burgos,"(Hebrew) in Studies in Bibliographyand Booklore,V (1961), pp. 42-51; idem, Studies and Sources, 1, pp. 324-367. The first Epistle of Abner of Burgoswas sent to a scholar by the name of Rabbi Abner Ab Seregna;the second Epistle was sent to Rabbi Moses Hazan; the addressee of the third Epistle is not known. The Castilliantranslationof the Epistles, apparentlymade by Abnerof Burgos himself, was publishedby C. Del Valle, "Laterceracartaapologetica de Abner de Burgos,"Miscel6nea de EstudiosArabesy Hebraicos,XXXVII-XXXVIII (1988-89), pp. 353-371; A. Alba Cecilia and C. Sainz de la Maza, "Lasegundaepistulade Alfonso de Valladolid," Sefarad, LI (1991), pp. 391-416; A. Alba and C. Sainz de la Maza, "La primeraepistula de Alfonso de Valladolid,"Sefarad, LIII (1993), pp. 157-170.

54

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provencein the Late Middle Ages cepting Christianity.178 Isaac ha-Israeli replied, in the name of Toledo's Jewish scholars.179 The dispute between Abner and Isaac Polgar, a childhood friend, was also conductedthroughthe exchange of essays and epistles. Following conversion,Abner sent Polgaran essay he wrote explicatinghis messianic thought.Polgarreplied in an tract entitled by Abner 'Iggeret ha-Harafot. It contained personal attacks againstAbner.The epistle was also circulatedamong the Jewish communities in Spain, with Abner replying to it in his book Teshuvotle-Meharef'180In his work, Minhat Kena'ot, which was also written against Polgar,Abner complained about the former'sdelaying tactics in announcingthathe is composing replies to Abner, but then not sending them to him. This was, in his opinion, an internalpropaganda device used by Jews to presenta veneer of internalstrengthtowardthe external world that had no basis.'18 Despite the severity of Abner'sclaims against the Jews and Judaism,it appearsthat, on a personal level, he remained interested in the companyof Jewish scholarlycircles, respectingJoseph Shalom'sattemptto return fire.182Indeed, it is because of Shalom's wisdom that Abner expects him to understandhis argumentsand convert.183 Following the pogromsof 1391 a religious disputetook place througha cor178. A section from the Epistle of Abner of Burgos as quoted in the work "Yesod'olam" of Isaac ha-Israeli, in Rosenthal, Studies and Sources, 1, p. 363: "And as you do not revere this commandmentand you renderit void, so too you will be able to void all the commandmentsand accordingly you make a new law [nova lex], and you annul all the commandments ... And you say that the messiah still has not come, that he is a teacherof righteousness.You must wait for him and not innovate at all until he will come, but given thatyou have already begun to change the Toraheach one of you will continue tofashion a new law according to his opinion; but we do not do so. There is no force great enough to lead us to make a change in the Torahother than that which our messiah, who is the teacherof righteousness,did" [my emphasis]. Stow, in AlienatedMinority,pp. 258-259, dismisses the long-termimportanceof these accusationsby the Popes GregoryIX (1239) and Clement IV (1267) accordingto which the talmudis "anotherlaw."He notes that such accusationswere not made again, and thus the question of the deceitful rabbinictraditionswas wisely put aside. The denunciationby Abner of Burgos suggests that GregoryIX's accusationsreceived an attentiveresponse in Spain. 179. Isaac ben Joseph ha-Israeli,Sefer yesod 'olam (Berlin, 1848), pp. 36, 36a-b; Rosenthal, Studies and Sources, 1, pp. 262-366. 180. See Baer, A History, 1, p. 336. Baer rejects Abner'scontention that he received "Iggeret ha-Harafot"only ten years afterit was written.Rather,accordingto Baer,only then did Abner find suitable political conditions for renewingthe polemics. See IsaacPolgar,'Ezer ha-dat, Part 1, ChapterSeven, p. 60: "Once I associated with a man, may my soul be redeemed,[who was] quick and knowing of the ways of religion and also philosophy ... His name previously was rabbiAbner ... And he said to me if you seek the faith of the sages, and not to perverttheir ways, I will show you from their sayings and illustratefrom theirevil counsels how the religion of the Jews which is importantand deep in your heart, is worthless and mortal,like a woman divorcedfrom her man, and that we need a new law [torahhadashah]."Abner of Burgos sought to prove the absurdityof the Jewish faith on the basis of talmudic legends. In response Isaac composed a general introductionwhich would allow him to avoid answeringeach point individually.See Isaac Polgar,'Ezer ha-dat, pp. 60-65. 181. Abner of Burgos, MinhatKenaot, inN. Baer, A History, I, p. 337. 182. Abnerof Burgos,Seferteshuvotha-meshuvot,in Rosenthal,Studiesand Sources, 1, p. 326. 183. Ibid. See also Baer,A History, 1, p. 334, who notes that "Abner'sfriends spoke truthfully when they said that he remaineda Jew at heart."

55

Ram Ben Shalom respondence (around the years 1394-1395) between the converso physician En David Bonet Bonjorn and Profayt Duran. Bonjorn attackedDuran for the latter's devotion to Judaism and his attemptsto convince Bonjorn to returnto Judaism. Duranreplied to Bonjornin the famous epistle, 'Al tehi ka-'avotekha.184 Thatdocumenthas recentlybeen reinvestigatedand,alongsidethe ironictheologicalpolemic against Christianity,an intimate,personal critique of Bonjorn for abandoning central values (such as lineage) of high Jewish society in Spain-and especially the circle of courtiersin Perpignan-is also to be discerned.'85 Paul of Burgos and Joshua ha-Lorki also exchanged polemics. Paul composed a letterto Don JosephOrabuena(the majorrabbiof the kingdomof Navarre) in which he announced his acceptance of the fact that the messianic prophecies had been realized by Jesus. Ha-Lorkisaw this letter,which was possibly intended from the beginning for public distribution.He wrote his friendan epistle containing four possible explanations for converting, sixteen objections to Christianity, and a question aboutman'sduty to search for the true faith.'86 In his reply Paul of Burgos did not provide rebuttalsto all sixteen objections.Apparently,he was not ready to answer in such detail so soon after his conversion. He composed more complete answersyears later (1434) in his work ScrutiniumScripturarum.'87 These epistolarydisputescontinuedamong the circle of Jewish poets whose leadersconvertedafterthe Tortosadisputationin the first half of the fifteenth century.Astruk Rimokh (Francescde St. Jordi)wrote an epistle to EnshaltielBonfos after his conversion seeking to convince the latterto convert as well. Enshaltiel's reply has not survived. However,Solomon Bonafed, who remainedfaithful to Judaism, found flaws in his reply ("Mild things are said and not understood")and composed a severe reply to Rimokh that included a discussion of Christologyand of redemption from original sin, and mocked transubstantiation,the cult of the saints, and the notion of confession.'88 He added a poem to the epistle which included an attackon Christianityfor being an irrationalreligion."89 In addition,the exchange of poems betweenBonafed andthe convertedpoet IsaacAdret,although primarilyclashing over the natureof their poetry, also contains allusions to religious disputations.190 As a rule, Bonafed kept on friendlyterms with the groupof convertedpoets, particularlywith Solomon da Piera and Don Vidal ben Lavi, and he tried to maintain,as much as was possible, their professionalties as poets. 184. Profayt Duran,"'IggeretAl Tehi ka-'avotekha,"in Polemical Writings(Hebrew), pp. 7383; E. Talmage, "Introduction,"in Polemical Writings,pp. 13-14; Baer,A History, 2, pp. 150-156. 185. See E. Gutwirth,"Religion and Social Criticism in Late Medieval Rousillon: An Aspect of ProfaytDuran'sActivities,"Michael, XII (1991), pp. 142-145. 186. See Baer, A History, 2, pp. 143-150; Glatzer,"BetweenJoshua,"pp. 103-116. 187. Glatzer,"Between Joshua,"pp. 110-111. 188. See E Talmage, "The Francesc de Sant Jordi-SolomonBonafed Letters,"in I. Twersky, Studies in Medieval Jewish History and Literature(Cambridge,MA and London:HarvardUniversity Press, 1979), pp. 337-364; and Baer'sanalysis of the epistle in Baer,A History, 2, pp. 218-223. The epistle evidences a strong influence from Duran'sepistle, "AlTehi ka-Avotekha." 189. See A. Gross, "The Poet Solomon Bonafed and the Events of his Generation,"(Hebrew) in B. Walfish, ed., The Frank TalmageMemorial Volume(Haifa: Haifa University Press, 1993) (Hebrew), 1, pp. 38-39, 49-50. 190. See Gross, "The Poet,"pp. 41, 51, 53.

56

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages The complex social relationsthat took shape in fifteenth-centurySpain between Jews and conversos was not unknownto old Christians,and certain aspects of those relationsfound expressionin religious disputes.An anonymousChristian scholarenquiredof a Jewish scholar why the Jews demandthat a convert divorce his wife if she remainsa Jew.He addedthatthe Jews must consider converts to be dead, and therefore their wives should be considered widows. The first then respondedby saying that a Jew could not alter his substance as a Jew, and that conversion is a mere accident, with only an external expression such as a change of name or even a change in the divine presence (shekhina) that dwells within him. The subjectsunderdispute were laterbroughtby the Jew to the attentionof Isaac Arama.Aramaremarkedthat,while his answerwas a correctone accordingto the Jewish world view (in light of the prevailing interpretationof the talmudic statement, "Eventhough he has sinned he remains a Jew"),191 it would not be acceptable to the Christian.The latter could then reply that a person's substance and essence is religion, and once he has left his original religion he could no longer be considered a member.Arama then offered his own response to this question, for future disputes. He insisted that divorce from the convert be justified not on the basis of the couple's religion, but on their very humanity-they were, after all, people with an intimateconnection (hibbur)between them that needed to be annulled. 92 This event sheds light on the dynamicof the Jewish-Christiandiscourse and on the effects of the privatedisputes in the Jewish communities. The Christian argumentswere seriouslyconsidered,and the engagementwith the issues continued after the specific dispute was over. Disputants occasionally turned to authorities in Torahand polemics in order to clarify whethertheir argumentsstood the test of Jewish religious law and philosophy.The ongoing discussion led them to formulatemore convincing answers for futureencounters. 93 One of the most importantpolemicists of the fifteenth centurywas Hayyim ibn Musa, who frequentlyengaged Christiansin discussion and debate.194In his work, Magen va-Romah (1456), he describes two private religious disputes that took place in a tolerant atmosphere. In the first, he encountered a priest and a knight.The priest asked: If you Jews really do follow God's Bible, why have you not been restoredto your country?Ibn Musa replied that the Jews lost their country because of the sins of previous generations,and that they presently await redemption,accordingto the promises of the prophets.In addition,he exhorted:You Christians,who claim that the confession cleanses you and absolves you of sin, 191. Sanhedrin,44a. See J. Katz, Exclusiveness and Tolerances:Studies in Jewish-GentileRelations in Medieval and ModernTimes(New York, 1973), pp. 71-73; Katz, "AlthoughHe Has Sinned, He Remains a Jew" (Hebrew), Tarbiz,27 (1958), pp. 203-217. 192. Isaac Arama,'Aqedat Yishak,5, 79, 89a-b. See H. H. Ben-Sasson, "The Generationof Spanish Exiles About Themselves,"(Hebrew) Continuityand Variety(Hebrew) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1984), pp. 209-210. 193. Arama,'Aqedat Yishak,89b: "Itseemed appropriateto me to respondin kind in orderthat the words will find listeners [kedei she-yikansuha-devarimbeozneihem]." 194. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 3: "Also in the ongoing disputes with many of their scholars. And the Lord God gave me the tongue of the learnedto respond... And the truthis that the habit of disputingwith them brings one to look into the verses, and to respondto them appropriately."

57

Ram Ben Shalom why is not the grave of Christ,your messiah, in your hands, but is, rather,in the hands of Islam?According to your doctrineand views, you are deserving of possessing the messiah's grave and the sites of the Passion where Jesus sufferedto redeem you from hell.195 The knightthen gave an answerthat startled,and silenced, both ibn Musa and the priest: Wherein the landof the Christians hondidyou eversee Jewsor Christians oringtheirhousesof worshipas the Ishmaelitesdo, in purity,withtheTemple of Solomon[TemplumSalomonis;or theAl AqusaMosque],andall the placeswhichwe value?Rather,inthechurches,duringthenightsof vigil,they will lie withwomen,andtheyhosttheremurderers andthievesandevil-doers, andfromtherethe gentilesshootarrowsandprojectiles[ballistraot]at one another,andtheretheymurderoneanother,liketheJewsoncedidin theTemple.196TheJewstoo degradethehonorof theirhouseof worship,andbecause of thistheblessedholynamewantedthatall wouldbe in thehandsof theIshmaeliteswho valuethese[places],andmaintainthem... andthatwas also whyGoddidnotwantit to be inourhands.Thenwewerebothsilent,thepriest andI.1"7 The knight's statement,as recordedby ibn Musa, is unusualboth in Jewish and Christianpolemical literature.Its source was an unlearnedlay channel,based not on the Holy Scripturesor verses of the Prophetsbut on personal experience and "popular"wisdom. This was precisely the type of disputationthat the Church sought to preventthroughits regulations,as we saw above.198The knight'sclaims contained a pointed social critiqueof both Christiansand Jews. His testimony to the manner in which the Muslims respect the holy places was based on what he himself had witnessed duringhis pilgrimage in the companyof the same priest.199 It is possible that his statementalso reflected some measureof tolerance,since, in condemningboth religions, he accordedJudaisman equal-if negative-position. The various aspects of the knight'sanswercan be comparedto otherpolemical argumentsthat circulated in unlearned channels, as recently studied by Ora Limor.The knowledge of laymen, such as merchants,concerning issues of faith was inferior to that of churchmen,and they preferredto focus on more narrow, everyday issues. The general tone of their disputes was calm, and at times friend195. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 103. The question posed by ibn Mussa to the knight was not a new one. It served Jewish polemicists since the thirteenthcentury.See, for instance, the despute in Y. Rosenthal, "A Religious Dispute,"p. 65: "Since you are redeemedwhy doesn't he [Jesus] redeem his pit [the Holy Sepulchre]from the Ismaelites and deliver it into your hands, for you do not have any authority [rashut] over it." On this work see R. Chazan, "A Medieval Hebrew Polemical Ml1ange,"Hebrew Union College Annual, LI (1980), pp. 89-110. 196. The allusion is to the Civil Warin Jerusalemduringthe revolt against the Romans, as described by Josephus Flavius, The Jewish War5, 1, H. St. J. Thackerayedition (Cambridge,MA and London: HarvardUniversity Press, 1979), 3, pp. 201-215. See also the speech by Amitai in Sefer Yosiphon,81, D. Flusser edition (Jerusalem:Zalman ShazarInstitute, 1978), pp. 379-380. 197. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 103. 198. For the regulationsand the response of Louis IX, see above pp. 42-43. 199. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 103.

58

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages ly. In severalinstancestheysoughtto showthatthe differencesbetweenthe religions were not great,recognizingthe advantagesmutualtrustgave in tryingto convince the other side.200The Genoese merchantInghetto Contardo,for example, made light of the importanceof Christiansymbols such as the cross and figures in orderto creategoodwill andopennessamong his Jewishdiscussants.201 It would seem thatthe knight'sstatementfits nicely into this type of polemic conductedby merchants,for its openness, the type of argumentit presented,and the attemptto encompassin it both religions. Even the freedom he felt in stronglycriticizing the Churchwas not unusualamong lay scholars in Europe,as evidenced, for instance, in the stories of the Decameron.202 Ibn Musa's second dispute was also characterizedby an atmosphereof tolerance.The encountertook place in the home of a Christian"lord"whom ibn Musa apparentlyserved as a physician.His opponentwas "oneof theirwise scholars."203 The Christianopened by attackingthe lack of interestthe Jews show in theology: "Do you know thatthe Jews have but one book of theology, whose name is Moreh Nevukhim,while we have so many books of theology that a large palace could not fit them all."204Ibn Musa chose to keep silent until the lord asked him to reply. In response he claimed that the Jews have no need for many works of theology, but can make do with just one page, on which are recordedthe thirteenprinciples of Jewish belief, as determined by Maimonides.205 Most of these principles, ibn Musa continued,are sharedby the Christians.Two or three provoke "some dissonance [safeq]"between the religions, and over the idea of unity there exists "complete dissonance."As for the unity, the Christiansdivided the substance of God into three.On the principleof insubstantiality,they declaredthat"theson was substantiated,but after his death all returnedto one God." On the non-changing na200. See O. Limor, TheMajorca Disputation, 1286. A Critical Edition with Introduction(Hebrew) (Jerusalem:Publicationsof the School of GraduateStudies, The Hebrew University, 1985), 1, pp. 17-28; idem, "ThreeAnti-Jewish PolemicalWritings from Medieval Genoa,"(Hebrew) Proceedings of the NinthWorldCongressof JewishStudies,(Hebrew),2, 1 (Jerusalem, 1986), pp. 83-84; idem, Jews and Christians, 3, pp. 159-163; idem, "Missionary Merchants:Three Medieval Anti-Jewish Worksfrom Genoa,"Journal of MedievalHistory, XVII (1991), pp. 35-51; idem, Die Disputationzu Ceuta (1179) und die Disputationzu Mallorca (1286); Zwei anti-jiidischeSchriftenaus dem mittelalterlichenGenua. MGH, Quellen zur Geistesgeschichtedes Mittelalters(Miinchen, 1994). 201. Limor,"ThreePolemicalWritings,"p. 84; "MissionaryMerchants,"p. 50, n. 12. 202. See Limor,Jews and Christians,3, pp. 164-166 for an analysis of GiovanniBoccaccio's story in the Decameron(Sunday,second story) of Abrahamthe Jew who answeredthe requestsof Gannoto (the Christian)and traveledto Rome; upon his seeing all the wicked deeds of the monks he returnedto Parisand became a Christian.Paradoxicallyit was the corruptionof the Churchwhich convinced Abrahamto convert. 203. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 133. 204. Ibid. 205. Ibid., pp. 133-135. These are the principles: the existence of God, his unity, his insubstantiality,his primordialness,his state of being worshipped,his omniscience, the gift of prophecy to the prophets,the uniqueness of Moses' prophecy,the gift of the Torah,the permanceof the Torah,the rewardingof good and evil, the redemptionof the messiah and the resurrectionof the dead. Compare the Mishnah with Maimonides' Commentary,Y. Kapah edition (Jerusalem, 1963), vol. 4 (Nezikin), pp. 210-216; M. Kellner,Dogma in MedievalJewish Thoughtfrom MaimonidestoAbravanel(Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress, 1986), pp. 10-65.

59

Ram Ben Shalom ture of the Torah,they arguedthat Jesus had come to add to it ratherthan subtract from it, at the same time that it is written in the Torah,"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish out from it."206As to the salvation mission of the messiah there are no disagreements,only as to the question of whetherhe had alreadycome or not.207 In each one of these subjects, ibn Musa finds a legitimate issue over which to debate religious scholars.These are, after all, rooted in differences over the interpretationof the Bible. On one series of issues, however,he believed that no rational debate could take place: TobelievethatGodcannotatoneforman'soriginalsinexceptthroughhisown in thebellyof a woman;andthathe didnot death;andthathe wasincarnated findthewisdomto atoneforthissinexceptthroughhis death;andthathe sufferedso muchdisgraceandpainuntilhe died;anddespiteall thisall sonsof theearthdie,andgo to hell,theChristians andthewicked.All thebooksinthe worldwill notplacethisatall in thescholars'minds,andespeciallythosewho havegrownupin theTorah,[whichis] farfromallthosebeliefs,andis perfect in its human,domestic,andcivic leadership. AndthereforetheJewdoesnot needbuta singlepageof theology,sinceall his faithagreeswithreason.208 In keeping with polemical traditiondatingto the time of Judahha-Levi, ibn Musa rejectedthe Christiandoctrineon the groundsof its illogic.209And here the dispute ended. It is told that the two disputantsfell silent, and the lord, who was strongly affected by his answer,asked that they cease since it may provokedoubts in his faith.210 The phenomenonof Jewish courtiersparticipatingin disputeswhile serving in the court as physicians, scientists, or administratorswas common in Spain.The physician--astrologer Shemaryaof Negroponte came to the court of the king of Castile, Alphonso XI, and engaged the scholars of Salamancain debate on esoteric issues relatedto alchemy and the secrets of physics.21 1 This was probablythe backgroundto the dispute that took place before King JuanII of Aragonbetween the philosopherAbrahamBibago and a Christianscholar;212it is also the context 206. According to Deuteronomy,4:4. 207. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 135. 208. Sefermagen va-romah,p. 135. The text was translatedand analyzedby Trautner-Kromann, Shield and Sword, pp. 177-178. 209. See Lasker,Jewish Philosophical Polemics, pp. 26-27. See also pp. 28-43 on the significance of the accusation of illogic. 210. Sefer magen va-romah,p. 135. 211. See the testimonyof Jacobben David ProvenCali,"Responsaregardinglimudha-hokhmot" in A. Ashkenazi, Sefer divrei hakhamim(Metz, 1849), p. 69: "RabbiShemaryastood up in Spain and was favoredby the king Don Alfonso because he was a great astronomerand expertphysician,and the king gave him many presents and lovely garments on the day he disputed with the scholars of Salamanka about the hidden wisdom [hokhmahne'elemet]." My interpretationof the concept hokhmah ne'elemet rests on the remarksof Provengali,p. 68. It is not clear why Baer,A History, 1, p. 448, n. 43a, doubts the credibility of accounts concerningthe aforementioneddisputation. 212. See AbrahamBibago, Derekh emunah (Constantinople,1521, photocopy edition, 1969),

60

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages in which to best understandthe disputes of Isaac Abravanel.213Similarly,Joseph ben Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov disputedat royal courts a numberof times over Aristotle's Ethics and matters of faith.214 An outstanding literary expression of the It can courtierdisputantis found in Solomon ibn Verga'swork,ShevetYehudah.215 be assumedthatthe disputeswere often initiatedby the authorities,who sought to convince the Jews of the truthof Christianity,but who were also curious in regards to the culture and religion of the "other"and viewed these disputes as a kind of knightlytournamentof the intellect and faith.216 The questionarises, consideringthe misgivings expressedby ibn Musa'slord aboutthe threatto his faith, whetherthe disputes had any real effect on one or the other of the sides. Few cases of the conversion of those born as Christianstook place in Spain,217 and fewer still in Germany,England,and France.218 There is no 99a: "Whathappenedto me with one amazingscholarin my youth at the table of the king, Don Juan,in the kingdomof Aragon."The Christianopenedthe disputeand asked Bibago if he consideredhimself a philosopher.Bibago respondedthathe was not a philosopherbut a Jew who believes in the Torah,which has a considerableelement of philosophicalwisdom. If that is so, asked the Christian,then why do you not believe in incarnationof God and in the deathby crucifixion, which atones. Bibago respondedthat this conceptionis impossible."Andthereis no faith in what is impossible."The Christiansought to show, accordingto the Aristotelianview, thatthe Jews believe in a different"impossibility,"the creationof the world,whichcontradictstheAristotelianproofof eternity.Therefore,in his opinion,they mustalso believe in the Christological"impossibility," or absurdum.Bibagorespondedthataccordingto Maimonides'view the Aristotelianeternityof the worldis not a proof but an assumption.Likewise,the Christological"impossibility"spoils the perfectionof God,andthe "impossibility"presentedby the Christianconcerningthe creationof the worldpresentsthe perfectionof God. See Lasker,Jewish PhilosophicalPolemics,pp. 41 Shieldand Sword,pp. 183-184. On AbrahamBibago see A. Lazaroff,TheTheol42; Trautner-Kromann, ogy of AbrahamBibago: TheDeoenseof the Divine Will,Knowledgeand Providencein Fifteenth-Century SpanishJewish Philosophy(Ph.D. dissertation,Universityof Alabama, 1981) and below nos. 256, 259. 213. IsaacAbravanel,Perushle-Devarim,24, 1 (Jerusalem, 1964), p. 221: "And I spoke about it with some of their scholars, and I respondedto their argumentsthatdivorce is not opposed to nature but is partof the orderand the naturalpractice." 214. See S. Regev, "Doubts ... Over the Story of Jesus the Christian,"(Hebrew), Kiryat Sefer 63 (1990), p. 264; idem, Theologyand RationalisticMysticismin the Writingsof RabbiJoseph ibn Shem Tov(Ph.D. dissertation,HebrewUniversity, 1983), pp. 18-19; see also below n. 258. 215. See K. Kaufmann,"Disputations,"TheJewish Encyclopedia(New Yorkand London:Funk andWagnallsCompany, 1916), IV,pp. 617-618. 216. On a similarphenomenonin the disputes between Muslims and Christiansin Spain in the beginningof the fourteenthcenturysee P.S.van KoningsveldandG. A. Wiegers,"ThePolemical Works of MuhammadAl-Qaysi (Fl. 1309) and their Circulationin Arabic and AljamiadoAmong the Mudejars in the FourteenthCentury,"Al-Quantara,XV (1994), pp. 179-184, especially p. 182, which makes mention of the Jew who was present duringthe dispute, before the Christianruler,between Al-Qaysi and a Christianmonk from Lerida. 217. See Baer, A History, 1, p. 417, n. 79; 2, p. 10, n. 3, 234; Regn6, History, p. 140, n. 3419, p. 194, n. 2952, p. 196, n. 2966. The writ of the "courtaction for a female foreigner who converted" (apparentlyfrom the second half of the fourteenthcentury) is found in M. Ben-Sasson, "Sources for the Historyof the Jewish Communitiesin Spain in the FourteenthCentury,"(Hebrew) in A. Mirsky,et al., eds., Exile and Diaspora: Studies in the History of the Jewish People Presented to Professor Haim Beinart on the Occasion of His SeventiethBirthday (Hebrew) (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 1988), p. 326, and could have been directedat a Muslim. 218. See B. Z. Wacholder,"Cases of Proselytizing in the Tosafist Responsa,"JQR, LI (1960-

61

Ram Ben Shalom evidence of any conversions to Judaismoccurring as a result of a religious dispute. Anyone seeking to convert risked a sentence of death.219The statementof CardinalPedro de Luna, as attributedto him by ibn Shaprut,seems to have reflected the general Christianview: "I knew you would make me wiser with your answers, and that I have no winning argumentin response to yours. Still my faith is true, accordingto our tradition,and my faith is not diminishedif you do not believe."220At the same time, one cannotrule out the possibility that Jews succeeded in raising doubts among Christians,221 just as Christiansermons and disputes had a not-insignificant success among the Jews. We have seen how the preacher provokeduncertaintiesamong Lerida'sJews.222In addition,both IsaacAramaand JosephYa'avesnoted the greatattractionthe Christiansermonshad.223Jewishconversions in the wake of official disputes, such as that of Tortosa,224 are knownto have happened, and there were probablyothers that followed private disputes as well.225One of these was the converso Bonit Bonjorn,who apparentlyconverted 1961), pp. 288-315, which studies approximatelyforty cases of conversion,and estimatesthatthe extent of the phenomenonreachedinto the hundreds.See Grayzel, TheChurch,pp. 22-23; E. E. Urbach, The Tosqfists:TheirHistory, Writings,and Methods,4th edition (Hebrew) (Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute, 1986), 1, pp. 130-, 236; A. C. Skinner," VeritasHebraica:ChristianAttitudesTowardthe Hebrew Language in the High Middle Ages," (Ph.D. dissertation,Universityof Denver, 1986), pp. 305321. The remarksof an anonymouswriterare noteworthy,as quoted in A. Marmorstein,"DavidKimhi apologiste. Un fragmentperdudans son commentaire,des psaumes,"REJ, LXVI (1913), pp. 250-251: "The four gospels that they have from four of his disciples contradicteach other in many things.And I have alreadyseen pious [hasidim] Frenchproselytes,wise in theirways [nimuseihem],who were converted because of this." See N. Porges, "Sur un fragmentde polemique anti-chretienne,REJ, LXVII (1914), pp. 128-131. See also the section concerning converts in "Sefer NitsahonYashan"in Dinur, Yisraelba-golah, 2, 6, pp. 307, 457-458, n. 146; 2, 6, pp. 334-336. On the reconversionof a convert in France, in the wake of a religious dispute with the Rabbi Joseph Bechor Shor see Urbah, The Tosafists,p. 135. On the early middle ages see Blumankrantz,Juifs et Chritiens, pp. 159-171. 219. Grayzel, The Church,n. 1; Dinur, Yisraelba-golah, 2, 1, p. 234, paragraph45. 220. Shem Tov ibn Shaprut,'Even bohan, in Frimerand Schwartz, TheLife, p. 16. 221. See for example, the remarksof the knight who had beaten the Jewish disputantin the monastery of Cluny, as Joinville heardfrom Louis IX. Joinville, TheLife of Saint Louis, p. 175: "Because there were many good Christianstherewho, before the discussion ended,would have gone away with doubts about their own religion throughnot fully understandingthe Jews."See also aboven. 108. On proselytizing as a polemical claim, see VetusNitzachon, 211, pp. 144-5. 222. See above p. 41. 223. On Arama see above n. 35. On JosephYa'avez see Ben Sasson, "Generation,"p. 223. See too Berger, "Mission,"p. 586 and J. Cohen, "The Mentality of the Medieval Jewish Apostate: Peter Alfonsi, Hermannof Cologne, and Pablo Christiani,"in T.M. Endelman,ed., Jewish Apostasy in the ModernWorld(NewYorkandLondon:Holmes & Meier, 1987),pp. 30-32, on the influenceof the Christian sermons of Bishop Ekbertof Miinsterand the religious dispute with Rupertof Deutz on the conversion of Hermannof Cologne. 224. See Baer,A History, 2, pp. 210-224. 225. It was said about the ItalianJewish convert Guglielmo RaimondoVI Moncada(or, as he was laterknown, Flavius Mithridates)thathe had disputedwith Jews duringhis visit in Aragon(14741475), and had succeeded in converting several of them. See S. Simonsohn, "Some Well-KnowJewish Converts during the Renaissance,"REJ, CXLVIII (1989), P. 21. In Gilbert Crispin's epistle to Anselm of Canterburyhe notes that a Jew who was present at the religious dispute convertedand became a monk. See Werblowsky,"Crispin,"p. 73.

62

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages to Christianityas a result of debatingwith the convert, Paul de Santa Maria (Paul of Burgos).226Thoughdirectevidence of such conversionsresultingfrom disputes is rare,accordingto the philosopherAbrahamShalom (a physician living in Cervera),227it was one of the majorcauses of conversionto Christianity.228 One can conclude that most of the private disputes under discussion took in place a relatively tolerantatmosphere,one which made it possible to raise unconventional arguments, or pursue learned confrontation free from official restrictions.Especially interestingin this context are those argumentsreflective of contemporaryreality,which were completely absentfromthe official disputesthat centeredaroundinterpretationsof texts. Examples would include the remarksof ArchbishopGui Fulcodi concerningthe changed economic-intellectual stratum of Jews who were convertingto Christianity,and the argumentsof Meir ben Simeon regardingthe interest-bearingloans takenby Louis IX and aboutthe attitudeof the Churchtowards heresy. Isaac Arama sought to refute the deterministic perception of the Christianpreacherby pointing to the reality of repentanceby certainprominentpeople. The bishop who debatedibn Caspi in Provenceattackedthe Jewishpracticeof exhibitingthe Torahin receptionsheld for Christiandignitaries (kings, popes, and bishops) enteringthe city. He contendedthatChristianreligious implementswould suffice, and that if they so much wanted to include a Torahin the reception, it should be in a Latin translationused by Christians.The Hebrew languagein his eyes was no holier a source for the bible than was Latin. This led ibn Caspi to argue for the superiorityof the Hebreworiginal over the Latin translation. He providedan example from the lives of Jews and Christiansin the Middle Ages, pointing to the privileges Jews received from kings. The Jews make copies of the privileges ("vidimus");howeverthe value of these copies in the royal court is much lower than that of the original. They suffer a special devaluation if translatedinto a language differentfrom that spoken by the king. These differences between original and copy demonstrated,in ibn Caspi's opinion, the superiority of the Hebrew Bible.229The monk who engaged in debate with Jacob ben 226. See Joseph ben Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov, "Perush'al zot ha-'iggeret,"in Profayt Duran, "'Iggeret 'al tehi ka-'avotekha,"Photocopied edition of the manuscript, National and University School, Heb. 8' 757 (Jerusalem, 1970), p. 18. I see no reason to doubt the remarksby ibn Shem Tov concerningthe dispute of Bonjornwith Paul de Santa Maria,while there is reason to question his story about a secret meeting between Bonjorn and Profayt Duran. See E Talmage, "Introduction,"(Hebrew) in Polemical Writings,p. 13. The connection between Bonjorn and Santa Maria (the "teacher") is emphasizedby ProfaytDuranin "'Iggeret"pp. 81-82. 227. See Baer,A History, 2, p. 246; also H.A. Davidson, ThePhilosophy of AbrahamShalom (BerkeleyandLos Angeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress, 1964); H. Tirosh-Rothschild,"PoliticalPhilosophy in the Thought of AbrahamShalom: the Platonic Tradition,"(Hebrew)Jerusalem Studies in Jewish Thought(Hebrew)(AnniversaryVolume in Honor of Shlomo Pines on his Eightieth Birthday), 9 (1990), 2, pp. 409-440. 228. See AbrahamShalom,SeferNeve Shalom(Venice, 1575), chapternine of articlenine, 169a. 229. See Joseph ibn Caspi, Shulhan 3-4, H. Kasher edition (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Instikesef, tute, 1996), pp. 58-60. A second reason for the superiorityof the Hebrew Bible is found in the differences in translationin various places. The continuationof the answer which covers most of the first section of Shulhankesef5-39, pp. 60-100, is a scholarlydevelopmentof the shorteranswergiven in the disputation.See also above p. 25 and n. 12.

63

Ram Ben Shalom Reuben pointed to two new phenomenain the twelfth century:crusadesto the holy land that fulfilled Moses' prophesy of "Mercifulto his land, and to his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43);23oand knights' abandonmentof the life of the sword and their dedicationto God's work in churchesand monasteries.231 The success of the crusades was apparentlya highly effective argumentused in religious disputes in the twelfth century.However, in the thirteenthcentury,after the scale of the crusades' failure became known, Jewish disputantssuch as Meir ben Simeon used it to illustrate the gulf between biblical prophecy, which was applied to the Crusaders, and the Muslim victories. He emphasizedin particularthe surrenderof the King of Sidon,232the sinking of crusaderships,233and, more than anything,the fall of Antioch (1268), which had been the symbol of Crusaderrule in Syria.234 He believed that the crusades and the wars in the holy land were testimony to the non-fulfillment of the redemptionthe Christianssoughtto claim.235He also pointed to the deaths of Christiansin the wars and to the vast sums of money spent in redeeming prisoners from the Muslims.236He believed, in addition,that the crusades were the cause of moral flaws in Christiansociety, such as the postponement of the repaymentof the loans, leading them to take false oaths.This transgression caused their failure in war.237 ibn Musa also attackedChristianity,by describing Muslim control over the Churchof the Holy Sepulchreand other Christianholy sites, and Joseph .Hayyim ibn Caspi discussed contemporaryknightlylaws when he describedhow kings and aristocratswere supposed to surrenderonly to those of an equal social stature. The religious dispute was sometimes mistakenly considered by modern scholars to be fossilized, with each generationmerely recapitulatingthe same arguments. However, the testimony examined here underlinesthe dynamic quality of the privatedispute and its relationshipto daily life. 230. Milhamotha-Shem, ChapterTwo, p. 60 231. Milhamot ha-Shem, chapter five, p. 85, and the response of the Jew in chapter5, p. 90: "we see that for each one who casts off his instrumentof fury and entersthe cloisters, there are a thousand thousands more who do evil and corruption."Also see chapter 11, p. 146 in which the Jew describes the corruptionin the Church. 232. Milhemet misvah, Blau edition, p. 354: "Andthe king of Tyrewas capturedby them [together] with all his troops."The reference is apparentlyto the request for a ceasefire directed from Philip de Montfort,ruler of Tyre,to the MamlukSultan Baybars.See J. Prawer,A History of the Latin Kingdomof Jerusalem (Hebrew) (Jerusalem:The Bialik Institute, 1984), 2, pp. 467-468. 233. Milhemet misvah, pp. 339-354. The reference here, in my opinion, is to the Crusadeorganized by James I, the king of Aragon, in 1269. The fleet embarkedfrom Barcelonato the Holy Land; however a storm forced the king to request shelter in Aigues-Mortes in southernFrance,close to the residence of Meir ben Simeon. See Prawer,A History, p. 481. 234. Milhemetmitzvah,p. 354. See Prawer,A History, p. 471. 235. Milhemetmitzvah,pp. 328-9 236. Ibid., p. 352. 237. Ibid., p. 309. And in the disputewith the bishop of Narbonne,Milhemetmitzvah,1:3, Herskowitz edition, p. 101: "Youare greatly punished for your annulment[of the oath] of each one who crosses over the sea ... to rob and plunderin orderto pay his debts .... And it would have been better if the sinner and wrongdoer had not gone over there, because he is the cause of defeat for himself and for many of his people." On this issue see, D. J. Lasker,"The Impactof the Crusadeson the Jewish-ChristianDebate,"Jewish History, XIII (1999), pp. 23-36

64

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages Forexample, the monk who confrontedJacob ben Reuben describedhis asceticism, his black wool clothing,the harshweatherhe encountered,and his participationin the midnightchantingof the monks as an ideal life thatpersonifies and fortifies the faith in the Trinity.238Further,when possible he pointed to areas of agreementbetween the two religions.239It seems that locating such a common groundbetween the religions was one of the characteristicsof the privatedispute. This tendencyto minimize the differenceswas both an effective means of persuasion and an expressionof the personalrelationshipbetween the disputants,which was missingin the official disputes.This phenomenonwas to be found in Spain.For example,it was attestedby the Christiandisputant,the authorof "Declarantede los judios,"andwas alreadydescribedin accountsof disputesinvolvingMediterranean merchantsand in accountsof the religiouspolemic in theDecameron.240The Christian who engaged Meir ben Simeon in debatewas allegedly swayedby the strength of the argumentsof his opponent,consequentlyreachingthe conclusion that every man must live accordingto his own beliefs, and that the Lord will repay each accordingto his actions.241 His remarksaccordwith those of ben Simeon concerning the recompenseappropriateto each person (be he Christianor Jew) for his actions both in this world andthe next.242Ben Simeon often emphasizedthe importanceof the universalnatureof Judaism,andJudaism'sconcernfor the materialand spiritual well-being of humanity.243Ibn Caspi pointed to a common basis for the Christian and Jewish conceptionof God: both believed in an awesome and magnificent God, in the companyof a retinueof frighteningseraphimand angels. RaymondMartini'sargumentsconcerningthe threatposed by rationalphilosto ophy all positivistreligionsalso deviatesfromthe venomouspolemic foundin Pugiofidei in thatit places Christianityand Judaismon an equal footing, if only to argue againsttheircommonenemy.His interlocutor,the Rashba,fully identifiedwith condemnationof heresy.Hayyimibn Musanarrowedthe pointsof disChristianity's agreementbetween Jews and Christians,contendingthat in most of the articles of faith(dogmas)therewas no differencebetweenthe religions.The knightwith whom he disputedplacedChristianityandJudaismon the sameplane,if only to criticizethe respectiveneglect of synagoguesand churcheswhile pointingto Islam'ssuccess in the Holy Land.The silenceof bothibnMusaandthe priestwas a deafeningone when juxtaposedto the knight'spreaching.It was particularlydramaticin light of the knight'sforciblemoralattackon Christiansand the Church,common in contemporaryChristianlay circles.The Churchsoughtto silence such claimsby forbiddinglay personsfromengaging in disputes.However,they could not be entirelysuppressed. 238. Milhemotha-Shem,Chapter1, p. 10 239. Ibid., ChapterOne, p. 11: "Andalreadyit became clear to us that there is no disagreement between us thatas the creatorsmites he will heal, and [those] actions [we] see every day." 240. Tchimino Nahmias, Declarante de losjudios, p. 22; see above, p. 59 and n. 200; Limor, Jews and Christians,3, pp. 160-163, 167-170. 241. MilhemetMitzvah,p. 357. As mentioned,the possibility should not be discountedthatthis is a literarydenouementthat ben Simeon wrote for the disputation,and not an actual account of the dispute itself. 242. Ibid., p. 606. 243. Stein, Jewish-Christian Disputations, p. 9.

65

Ram Ben Shalom Ibn Caspi'sview of the crucifixion was also unconventionalsince he sought to establish the positive role played by the Jews by using Christiantheology and its ways of interpretation.His words are ironic, extending Christianassumptions to their absurdend. It goes without saying that he could not have presentedsuch argumentsin an official dispute such as that held in Barcelonaor Tortosa. In many courtierdebates the thin line distinguishingprivateand public disbecame blurred.The site of the dispute-and it did not matterwhetherit was putes the king's court or a nobleman'shome-together with the specific rulingauthority supervisingand even participatingin the disputecreatedunwrittenrules thatput the Jew in a more difficult position thanwhen the disputewas held in more neutralsurroundings,for instancein the home of Moses ha-Cohenof Tordesillasbeforehis students, or in a gatheringof ChristianandJewishscholars,as in IsaacArama'sdispute. In many of the written accounts of the disputes, the Jewish participantpresented his Christian rival as a great scholar, sometimes praising his wisdom in vivid imagery and words of praise. Something similar is to be found in Christian works.244 Wasthis a literaryconventionby which the greaterthe praise given one's opponent, the greaterone's own wisdom in overcomingsuch a talenteddisputant? While such reasoning cannot be dismissed out of hand,it is also likely that there was an element of authenticityhere, as scholars of the same intellectual milieu conversed and debated each other.Thus the physician and translatorLeon Joseph of Carcassone attests, in 1394, in his description of the disputes that took place in Provencebetween Christianphysicians and Jewishphysicians.He notes, on one hand, that the physician was the only Jewish figure to be accordedsignificant respect in Christiansociety. On the other hand,and perhapsbecause of that fact, an ongoing conflict developed with Christianphysicians, the lattersearchingfor any possible way to dishonor their Jewish colleagues. To confound such efforts, Leon Joseph sought to translateinto Hebrew the latest developments in medicine that had been publicized among the Christians,particularin the faculty of medicine in Montpellier. He tells of the difficulties he encounteredin acquiringthe works (in Montpellier,Avignon, and other places known to be centers of learning) because of the small amount of extant copies in existence, but principallybecause of the prohibition declared by Christianscholars against anyone selling medical texts in Latin to Jews.245The Christianprohibitionon the sale of books to Jews can be explained as partof the professional struggle waged both in academiaand in practice.246The struggle revolved aroundthe acquisitionof the most exact pos244. See Levi, "Controverse,"p. 240. 245. See "The introductionof Leon Joseph of Carcassoneto the commentaryof Gerardde Solo to book nine (pathology) of Al-mansuride Rdzi"in E. Renan,Les &crivainsjuifsfrangaisde XIVe sidcle (Paris, 1893), pp. 427-428. See J. Shatzmiller,"itudiantsjuifs a la facult6de medecine de Montpellier, dernierquartdu XIVe siecle,"Jewish History, VI (1992), pp. 248-253. 246. Part of the conflict was over those same restrictions(usually ignored) that prohibited Christiansfrom being treatedby Jewishphysicians. See, for instance,L. Stouff,"Chr6tienset Juifs dans l'Arles du bas Moyen Age: Leursrelations,"Les societies urbainesen France m#ridionaleet en peninsule ibirique au Moyen Age, Actes du colloque Pau, 21-23 septembre 1988 (Paris, 1991), pp. 525-

528. And see Shatzmiller,"itudiantsjuifs," p. 255, n. 39, for the prohibitionfrom Perpignan(1394) on teaching Jewish studentsthe various sciences.

66

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages sible medical-scientific knowledge and on impeding the spread of the achievements of university researchto the Jews. A practical expression of the competition over this knowledge is to be found in the medical polemics which were carried out between physicians from both sides. The encounters were over such neutralissues as science and medicine; however,victory or defeat in scientific debate had a directrelationto the respectivereligious communityof the participants. Leon Josephwrote thatreadingthe two importantworks (Gerardde Solo and Jean de Tournemire)which he succeeded in acquiring after great effort and considerable expense would help "to standup to Christianphysicians in struggles and debates."247 He estimatedthat"withthose books the Christianpositions will become as nothing.. . if [the Jews] readthem often . .. they will not fear the voice of the driverwho strikes them with the staff of medicine. Because they will be able to fight their battles, they will not fear the crowd of physicians, although they include [their]sages."248 Studyingthe "other's"holy writings (the Talmudand rabbinicaltexts, on the one hand,the New Testamentand the ChurchFathers,on the other), while largely intendedas an aid in preparingone's own polemics but also deriving from cultural curiosity,249 informedthese disputes.250 As seen above, the Jewishdisputantoften engaged a learnedpriest, a preacher, bishop, or cardinalwhile in other instances, such as the dispute between Hayyim ibn Musa and the knight,particularlyunorthodoxargumentswere to be heard. I believe that these accounts can be trusted,and that most of the privatedisputes documentedby Jewish sources were scholarly encounters.This was also apparently one of the reasons for the absence of defamationsand slurs characteristicof Jewish-Christiandisputationsin NorthernEurope,as expressed in such books as Sefer Nisahon Yashanand Sefer Yosefha-Mekane.251 The dispute between Isaac Aramaand the Christianpreacheris an instance of a privatephilosophicalengagementover questions of faith. In official disputes, such as that held in Tortosa,the philosophical syllogism was a potent weapon in the handsof the Christianrepresentative.According to what was writtenin Shevet Yehudah,the Jews soughtto end the disputeby claiming thatthey did not subscribe 247. Leon Joseph, "Introduction," p. 428. 248. Ibid. 249. See Berger, VetusNizzahon,p. 30; Ben Shalom, TheImage, 1, pp. 323-324. 250. See the anonymouspassage that was published by Marmorstein,"David Kimhi,"p. 250: "It is also writtenthere that Jesus ate the Passoveron the eve of his crucifixion, and that in that year the Passoverwas broughton a Fridayand he was crucified the next day (i.e., Saturday);this is a complete falsehood,for they would not kill a man on a holy day.And so in the Talmudthey say that it was not even on the evening before the evening of Passover,and I had already asked one of them who is knowledgeableof the Gospel[s] and he told me that he does not understandthis [my emphasis]." 251. See Berger, VetusNizzahon,pp. 21-22; Rosenthal,"Introduction," p. 28 makes note of the popularcharacterof "SeferYosef Hamekane"in contrastto the philosophical discussion in Milhemot ha-Shem of Jacob ben Reuben; and D.J. Lasker, "Jewish Philosophical Polemics in Ashkenaz," in Limor,ContraJudaeos, especially pp. 197-198, 210-213. However,learneddebate was not absent in Ashkenaz.See Lasker,pp. 203-212; theprivatedisputationbetweenChristianandJewishscholarsin Germany in the fifteenth and sixteenthcenturieswas discussed by Ben-Sasson, Jewish-ChristianDisputation, pp. 380-385, and see n. 45.

67

Ram Ben Shalom to "theways of syllogism and logic."252As earlyas 1311, RaymondLlull had suggested that sermons imposed on Jews adopt syllogistic reasoning so that they be betterunderstood.He emphasizedpersuasionthatappealedto the intellect,253and also demandedthatselected Jews be compelled to studyLatingrammar,logic, and Christianphilosophy in orderto make it possible to persuadethem in religious dispute.254Already in the thirteenthcentury,as we saw above, Solomon bar Moses had proposed that Jews avoid disputes with Christianscholastics. Similarly,Hayyim ibn Musa, who had internalizedthe lessons from the Tortosadisputation,repeated the warning againstparticipatingin a scholastic disputebased on logic; he recommended adhering to the literal interpretationsof the verses instead. Ibn Musa even advocated to disputantsthat they condition their participationon the non-appearanceof philosophical knowledge (hokhmothisoniot).255 Even Abraham Bibago, in the second half of the fifteenth century,and JosephYa'aves,from the generation of the Expulsion, acknowledged the superiority of Christian philosophers.256At first glance, this is an odd phenomenon.The Jews of Spain and Provence were learned in philosophy and, as Daniel Laskerhas shown, while preferringto not directly confront Christianscholastic thinkers such as Thomas Aquinas and Anselm of Canterbury,they knew how to adoptphilosophicalpremises in religious disputes.257An impressiveexample of Jewishknowledgeof Aristotelian philosophy and scholastic discourse is found in the privatepolemic over the Trinity that was held in Castile between Joseph ben Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov and a great Christianscholar.258 252. See Shevet Yehudah,p. 96. 253. Johnston,"Ramon Llull,"pp. 31-32, and n. 105, accordingto Petitio Raymundiin Concilio generali: "et quod sermones reducanturad syllogismum et ad intelligibile ... quia intellectus magis se delectat et se impraegnatper intelligere, quamper credere."Compareto Augustine, who responds to claims made of him, "Intelligamut credam"in his answer"Immo crede ut intelligas."See E. Barker,"Introduction,"in Saint Augustine, The City of God (De Civitate Dei) (London and New York:J. M. Dent & Sons and E. P. Dutton& Co. Inc., 1945), p. x; B. Stock,Augustinethe Reader:Meditation, Self-Knowledge,and the Ethics of Interpretation(Cambridge,Ma.:The BelknapPress of Harvard University Press 1996), pp. 176-181. On the significance of "logic" as an instrumentof debate in religious disputes, particularlyby Raymond Llull, see G. Dahan, "L'usage de la ratio dans la polemique contre les Juifs: XIIe-XIVe siecles," in Dialogofilosofico-religioso entre Cristianismo,Judaismo e Islamismo durante la edad media en la Peninsula Iberica, Actes du colloque international, El Escorial, Juin 1991 (Tutnhout:Brepols, 1994), pp. 289-308. 254. See Kriegel, Les Juifs, pp. 186-7. 255. Magen va-romah,pp. 8-9. of Aristotle'sMetaphysics(basedon the middle commen256. AbrahamBibago, "Interpretation taryto ibn Rushd)"(Hebrew)in Steinschneider,AbrahamBibago,pp. 139-140; he relatesthathe agreed to interpretAristotleas a result of Chrisitansuperiorityin the dispute,and in responseto the requestof colleagues. (My thanksto Prof.E. Gutwirthfor pointingme to this source.)JosephYa'avetz,Sefer'or hahayyim,3 (Warsaw,1871), p. 4: "Andit is known that all the scholarsof Israelwho philosophize [haMithakhmim]in this perioddo not reachthe ankles of the scholarsof Edom [i.e., Christians]." 257. See Lasker,Jewish Philosophical Polemics, p. 163; Baer,A History, 2, pp. 173-174; See in J. Reinharz,et al., eds., MysD.J.Lasker,"TheJewish PhilosophicalCritiqueof Transubstantiation," tics, Philosophers, and Politicians: Essays in Jewish Intellectual History in Honor of AlexanderAltmann (Durham:Duke University Press, 1982), pp. 99-118. 258. Joseph ibn Shem Tov,Perush 'al zot ha-'iggeret, pp. 50-54. On ibn Shem Tov'smastery of logic and his attitudetowardeschatology see Rosenberg,"Logic,"pp. 44-46.

68

The Case of ChristianSpain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages At least a partialanswer to this riddle is to be found in an importanttestimony concerning religious disputes held in Spain by AbrahamShalom, the Hebrewtranslatorof MarsiliusAb Inghen'sSuppositionesmagistriMarsilii Parisiensis.259 Like other Jews of the age, Shalom treated the religious dispute as a common event.260He claimed that the Jews usually found themselves helpless when faced with the superior (in his opinion, the perfect) debating method of Christian polemicists who utilized philosophy and particularly logic. Shalom aimedhis remarksto the generalJewishpublic ratherthanto a select group of Jewish philosophers such as Hasdai Crescas, JosephAlbo, Joseph ben Shem Tov ibn Shem Tov,AbrahamBibago, and IsaacArama.These last were versed in Christian scholasticism, and knew the intricaciesof Aristotelianphilosophy.261 The gap between those acquaintedwith scholasticism and logic and those who were not was to be found in the second rung of intellectuals, who were sometimes even asked to representJudaismin privatereligious disputes.Many of them, as Shalom pointed out, preferredthe Kabbalahto philosophical studies. Othersconsideredphilosophy to be an Averroisticheresy.262This left the Christianswith the advantagein religious disputes as Jewish scholars lacked the requisite knowledge to effectively engage them. As a consequence of the crisis in the study of the new philosophy that was also noted by Solomon Bonafed,263 several Jewish scholars, principally from Aragon, worked in the second half of the fifteenth century alongside Abraham Shalom in order to improvethe situationby bringing Latin scholasticism to their readership.264 Abraham'sgrandfather,Judah ben Samuel Shalom, had already translatedSummulaeLogicals of Peter Hispanus (in 1449), and noted the Christians' pridein their innovationsin logic as the motivationfor his translation.265Eli 259. Adolf Jellinek, ed., Hakdamatha-ma'atikha-she'elot ve-hateshuvot'al mevo ma'amarot u-melisahle-hahakhamMarsilio, (Wien, 1859), pp. 6, 9-10. 260. While there exists a gap of severaldecades between textual testimoniesto the privatedisputes,the overallimpressionthatemergesfroma reviewof the evidence is thatthey were common events. See above,notes nos. 103, 106. Joseph ibn Shem Tov,for instance,alludes to severaldisputes which he had with Christians.See Perush 'al zot ha-'iggeret,p. 26. Like ibn Caspi and others,ibn Shem Tov did not recordthe disputeas it actuallyhappened,but edited it to suit his literaryneeds. In the royal courthe engaged in disputewith Christianswhom he referredto as priests,governors.See Regev,"Doubts"(Hebrew),pp. 263-264; and aboven. 204. See also below n. 285 on the same phenomenonin Italy in 1423. 261. See Pines, Between the Thoughtof Israel, pp. 178-276, especially pp. 220-222. 262. Hakdamatha-ma'atik,pp. 5-6. 263. It seems thatdecline in the studyof logic in Spainand Provencebegan in the second half of the fourteenthcentury.It can be attributedin partto the encounterwith the new Chrisitanlogic, which underminedthe foundationsof the Arabic-Hebrewtradition.Bonafed,who studiedthe new logic with a Christianscholar,testified to its superiorityand to the urgentneed of Jews to learnit. He also noted the superiortranslationsto which Christiannow had access. See S. Rosenberg,"Logicand Ontologicin Jewish Philosophyin the FourteenthCentury(Ph.D.dissertation,HebrewUniversity,1974), pp. 32, 37-39; Gross,"ThePoet,"pp. 35-36; H. Schirmann,TheHistoryofHebrewPoetryin ChristianSpainand Southern France (Hebrew), E. Fleischer, ed., (Jerusalem:The Magnes Press and Ben-Zvi Institute, 1997) pp. 636-37, and notes 24-26. 264. Shalom also translatedPhilosophia pauperum of Albertus Magnus. See Sirat, History, p. 392; see Tirosh-Rothschild,"PoliticalPhilosophy,"p. 416. 265. See the introductionof JudahShalomin S. Rosenberg,"BarbaraCelarentin HebrewDress

69

Ram Ben Shalom ben Joseph Habillo translatednumerousscholastic texts from Latin,includingthe innovationsemanatingfromthe University of Pariswhich found expression in the works of JohannesVersoris.266 Habillo was explicit aboutthe superiorityof Christian philosophy (especially ThomasAquinas)vis-a-vis Jewishphilosophy.267Similar expressions were made by Abrahamibn Nahmias (Ocafia, 1490), the translator of Aquinas' commentaryon Aristotle'sMetaphysics, who extolled with superlatives ThomasAquinas, "thegreatphilosopher,"andthe "foremostspokesman."268 In addition to JudahShalom, AbrahamShalom, Habillo, and Nahmias, Abraham Bibago and Isaac Abravanelwere active in this period.269 They were precededby Azariah ben Joseph ben Abba Mari of Perpignan,who found refuge in Italy (apparentlyin the wake of the Tortosadisputationand the crusadeof Vincent Ferrer) and who translatedBoethius' work, Consolationes Philosophiae, in 1423, after having been impressedby the effective use Christiandebatersmade of it.270 (Mnemonic Hebrew Signs in the Method of Logic)," (Hebrew) Tarbiz,48 (1979), p. 92: "WhenI saw thatthe book, which is called in their language Tractati,is good in the methodof logic and shorterthan the works of Aristotle, and also contains some new matters introducedby the Christianscholars of which they are proud,my spirit was awakenedto translateit." 266. Habillo translated, for instance, Quaestiones de anima and Quaestiones disputate of ThomasAquinas, and Summatotius logices and Quaestionesphilosophicae of Williamof Occam,and perhapsDe universalibusof Vincent de Beauvais. He also translatedseven commentariesof Johannes Versoris,among others. See J.P.Rothschild,"Questionsde philosophiesoumises par'Eli Habilioa Sem Tob Ibn Sem Tob, v. 1472,"Archivesd'histoire doctrinale et litterairedu MoyenAge, LXI (1994), esp. pp. 106-118, 131-132. 267. See Eli ben Joseph Habillo, in the introductionto the translationof "Quaestionesin Physicam" of Johannes Versoris, ManuscriptParis, national library,heb. 1000, 4a-5a: "For among them [the Christians]there are very subtle mattersthat are unknownto the philosophersof our nation, although many [of the Jewish philosophers] hold their apostate notions." See E. Gutwirth,"Actitudes judias hacia el cristianismo:Ideariode los tradutoreshispano-judiosdel latin,"Actas del II Congreso Internacional "Encuentrode las TresCulturas" (Toledo:Ayuntamientode Toledo, 1985), esp. p. 194. 268. Gutwirth,"Actitudes,"pp. 194-195. 269. In his corpus, IsaacAbravanelquotedthe worksof Thomas,De spiritualibuscreaturisand De creatione, Nicholas of Lyraand others. See A. Jellinek, Thomasvon Aquino in derjiidischen Literatur(Leipzig 1853), pp. 3-17; S. Gaon, "Don IsaacAbravanelandthe ChristianScholars,"TheAmerican Sephardi, VI (1973), pp. 17-20; Rosenberg, Logic, pp. 110-111; E. Lawee, Isaac Abarbanel's Stance TowardTradition:Defense, Dissent, and Dialogue, Albany,StateUniversityof New YorkPress, 2001, pp. 39-40. On Bibago see Steinschneider,AbrahamBibago, pp. 88-89, 133-134; Pines, Between the Thoughtof Israel, pp. 273 -274, n. 30; and the review essay of A. Nuriel, "The Theology of RabbiAbrahamBibago" (Hebrew), Tarbiz,52 (1983), p. 157, especially n. 11 on Lazaroff, The Theology of AbrahamBibago, which makesmentionof Alexanderof Hales, Duns Scotus,ThomasAquinas, JohannesVersoris,Peter Lombard,William of Occam, and others. 270. Boethius, Consolationes Philosophiae, translated by Azaria ben Joseph ben Abba Mari called Bonfos BonfilAstruk (1423) (Jerusalem:Instituteof Jewish Studies and RabbinicalSeminary: Margaliot-Diznei, 1967), pp. 27-28: "When I arrivedin the region of Italy [I saw a few outstanding people from the holy communities of Rome] ... and one pleasantyoung man who stole my heart ... and his name was Rabbi Joseph Avigdor ... and each and every day he arguedon behalf of our holy Torahto enhance its splendorand its eternity;[and the Christiansrush to bring] their proofs from this book [Consolationes Philosophiae] which is the sum of their wisdom and knowledge ... and I was zealously driven to translateit for him from their language to our language, so much did I love him." See Rosenberg, "Logic,"p. 46 on AbrahamFarissol'slogic and the connection to religious disputes.

70

The Case of Christian Spain and Provence in the Late Middle Ages The Jewish-Christianpolemic, it can be concluded, was, inter alia, an importantinfluence on the directionof Jewishknowledge andwisdom in the fifteenth century.271 The official encounterwas not necessarily the most importantfactor here. After Tortosa in 1413-1414, such disputes almost ceased to take place in Spain.Rather,it was the privatedisputewhich was common alongside coerced sermons, and which often broughtaboutdemoralizationin the Jewish camp, that also hadthe effect of invigoratingJewishlearning,as Jewish spokespersonssoughtnew ways of defending their ancient tradition. It seems thatthe privatedisputesmay also have served as an effective means of reducing the social tensions prevailing between Jews and Christians. Each groupcould emerge victorious in its own eyes, and could presenttheirtriumphsto their respectivepublics. This dynamic, alongside additionalsocial mechanisms in medieval society, might also have contributedto decreasing Christianviolence againstthe Jewish population.

271. An importantexpression is found in the course of study preparedby Rabbi Judah ben Josephibn Bolat, an exile from Spain, in his work "KelalKasar."Among the requiredsubjectsof study he includes the polemical literatureof the Christians.Likewise, he places special emphasis on Aristotelianlogic as a requisiteinstrumentin disputationswith Christians.See Judahben Joseph ibn Bolat, Kelal qasar, in A Memorial for the Gaon ha-Sadik Rabbi Abraham Isaac ha-Cohen Kook, a Biblical-

Scientific Collection, (Hebrew)(Jerusalem:Mossad HaravKook, 1937), pp. 26-31, 44-45.

71

No Way out: Brenner and the War Author(s): Glenda Abramson Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 73-87 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131769 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

AJS Review 27:1 (2003), 73-88

No

WAY OUT: BRENNER AND THE WAR

by Glenda Abramson The second Aliyah broughta large numberof Hebrew authorsto Palestine, some of them among the greatestHebrewwritersof all time.' Those who remained enduredthe privationsof the FirstWorldWar,which became particularlysevere throughoutits final year, but few of them wrote about it. In fact, within the large corpus of belletristic writing in HebrewandYiddish at the time, there is little devoted to the Jewish experience in the FirstWorldWar.Many critics and scholars of the period,in additionto latercommentators,affirmed(and some lamented)that the output of Jewish war writing was modest in Yiddish as well as Hebrew.2 Nonetheless there exists a substantialbody of such work about which little is knownto this day.At the time, it seems, Hebrewliteraturehadto serve greateraims than the individual responses of soldiers in a foreign war soon after the Balfour Declaration.The most powerful responses were, with some notable exceptions,3 writtensome time after the events or by writers, such as Y. H. Brenner,who were not combatantsbut were victimized by the war nonetheless.4 Brennerrarely avoided incorporatingpolitical and social realities into the microcosmof his stories, and Palestinein 1918 offered him an opportunityto use the warperiod to furtherhis literarypreoccupations.He wrote seven stories about conditionsin Palestineduringthe war,only one of which, Hamosa, is well known. The others are four tersely titled sketches (written in 1917 and 1918): Gazlanim (Robbers),Asonot (Tragedies),Seva'ah (A Will) and Mazal (Luck), which Brenner collected underthe title Zeeirsham (Here andThere).They were first published in Hapo'el Hasa'ir in 1919. The fifth story, Avlah, which does not belong to the group, was first published in Ha'adamah in 1920, and added to Zecirsham by a publisher a few years later. The longest and most accomplished of the stories, 1. U. N. Gnessin (1907), David Shimoni (1909), S. Y.Agnon (1907), Y. H. Brenner(1909), and Dvora Baron (1911). 2. See AvnerHoltzman,AvigdorHameirivesifruthamilhamah.Ma'arakhot,1986, p. 33; Hanan Hever, ed., UZ Greenberg:ta'arukhahbamil'at shemonim. Jerusalem:Beit hasefarim hale'umi veha'universita'i, 1977, p. 17. 3. Notably,Uri Zvi Greenberg,Tchernichowski,and Hameiri and their works 4. Comparativelylittle has been written in any literarygenre about the overall Jewish experience in the FirstWorldWarwhen comparedto the body of writing aboutthe Jewish civilian experience in Europe and the yishuv at that time. For example, the consequences for the Jews of occupation in EasternEuropewere noted by very few authors.Of the 32 or so known Hebrew authorswho participated in the war in any capacity,not more thana dozen devoted space to the war in their work. In contemporaryand later anthologies of Hebrew andYiddish verse, the war poetry even of canonical poets is absent,replacedby their more generally Jewish work.

73

Glenda Abramson Hamosa, was published in Ha'aretz veha'adamahin 1919. A seventh,Hage'ulah vehatemurah,was publishedposthumously. Withinthe vast corpus of Brennerscholarshipall but one of these storiesare ignored.Yet they are not without importancewithin his corpus.They provide, on the one hand, a clear illustrationof his particularmethodology of realism and on the other an insight into life on the yishuv duringthe closing stages of the war. It is difficult to separatethe fictional from the historicalbecause, as usual, Brenner drew heavily on documentedevents and eyewitness recordswhich, togetherwith his own experiences at this time, providedhim with a wealth of political and existential material. However,his primarypurpose in writing these war stories was not to provide a sociological accountof the effects of the waron the Jews in northern Palestine or to offer an historical review of its progress. It was to write the "truth"in which the war is less an event than an abstracttriggerfor his subjective considerationof Jewish response. In other words, he uses the war situationto express his pessimistic view of diasporaJewry,albeit transplantedto Palestine, and the negative, self-immolating responses of the displaced Jews to their new catastrophe. In these stories he offers an ironic composite portraitof Jewish destiny: even in the Promised Land,Jewish fate is unchanged.Ultimately the war stories serve as an example of Brenner's"symbolic realism"5--the baring of the inner natureof life andhumanselfhood. In keeping with his aestheticphilosophy,6Brenner representsthe grim realities of Jewish life even in the Holy Land. In a letterto Fischel Lachover,he writes:"I have my own truth,which is one andthe same, both in the 'diaspora'and in Eretz Israel."7Also, as I demonstratein this paper,his stories provideus with a detailedaccountof life caughtbetweenthe two warringsides and provide one of the few examples of fiction in Hebrewdirectlyaboutthe First WorldWar. The frameworkof the stories is the final year of the war afterthe expulsion from Jaffa and Tel Aviv,when the British armywas approachingfrom Egypt to the south of Palestine, with the northernarea still underTurkishrule. In October 1917 the Turkisharmy evacuatedTel Aviv, Jaffa, and the southernregions of Palestine, forcingtheirJewishpopulationsto flee. Most of themmovednorthwardto PetahTikvah (from which they were laterexpelled), Kfar Saba, and Hedera,among others. 5. In his formulation,realism is not a matterof simple mimesis but something more profound, struggling for the truthof life that literatureis able to reveal. "[Hauptmann]demonstrates-in the way in which he elevates people from a known and limited environmentand puts into the mouthsof every one of them his own words, the absolutetruth,an echo of the heart-what profoundtrue reality is, in which day-to-day lives are exalted to become a symbol to the point of the essential revelationof life and its sources."("Yefet,"Kol kitve, HakibbutzHameuchad, 1960, p. 274.) See Ada Zemach, Tenuah banekudah.:Brenner vesippurav.Tel Aviv University, 1984, pp.76-69. See also Iris Parush,Kanon sifruti ve'idiologia le'umit. Jerusalem:Mossad Bialik, 1992, p. 325-326. Brennerdiscussed this formulation in his play Me'ever legevulin (1907) whose protagonistYohanandelineates "symbolic realism" as both a technique and a philosophy of artistic creation. 6. Brenner'sview transcendssimple definitions of both realismand nationalism.The greatness of literatureis derived from its awarenessof reality "as it is," ratherthan the sentimentalidealization of it. He deems bad literatureto be thatwhich distances itself fromrealityandthereforeimplicitlyfrom the life of the nation. See Parush,p. 270. 7. Nurit Govrin, Alienation and Regeneration. Tel Aviv, MOD Books: 1989, p.107.

74

No Way Out: Brenner and the War The Old Yishuv, already impoverished, was further decimated during the war throughstarvation,disease and neglect. Some 10,000 Jews with foreign citizenship who had not been "ottomanized"were forced to leave the country.By 1918 the numberof Jews in Palestine had been reduced to about 56,000 from approximately 90,000 at the startof the war.A Refugee Committeewas establishedto assist the evacuees, but by all accounts it was largely ineffective. As always in times of catastrophe,profiteers and black-marketeersexploited their own people to amass wealth, and the authorities'indifferencecompleted the dismal picture. By December 1917, Jerusalemand Tel Aviv were in British hands, as was the southernregion of the country, including Gaza. The northernsettlement remained under Turkishrule, and many of the Jewish refugees found themselves close to the front lines.8 After severe fighting, in which the Turksoften held the upperhand,at midnighton September19, 1918, the Britishartillerybombardment began. GeneralEdmundAllenby resumedthe northwardoffensive that had ended a year earlierwith the captureof Jerusalem,and his armyadvancedrapidlynorthwardthroughthe coastalplain.The RoyalAir Forceand RoyalAustralianAir Force bombed the Germanand Turkishinstallationsat Afula, Nablus, and Tulkarm.For a week, as Allenby's cavalryprogressed,the bombing of roads, railways,and troop concentrationsdisruptedall the Turkishand Germandefences.9 In October 1918 the entireyishuvcommunitywas liberatedfromTurkishrule, to come underBritish militaryadministration. There was no one in Palestine whose life had not been affected by the war one way or another.Newspapers reporteddaily about the various fronts and presented"telegrams"fromaroundthe world.' Leadingarticles debatedthe progress of the war and reportedon the British victory with apparentand perhaps necessary impartiality.When the orderof expulsion came to PetahTikva, the situation worsened.The rainyseason was approaching,makingit impossible to continue living in tents. Those who refused to move away had their houses and propertydestroyed or looted. Soldiers would burst into homes, load household goods onto camels or carts and haul them off to the train station.1' Duringthis periodof the war,Brenner,with his wife and small son, had manto aged rent a room in a farmer'shouse near Hedera,but they were requiredto vacate it for the wealthy family of one of the members of the Refugee Committee12 and moved to Gan Shmuel.At the time of composition of his war stories (19191920), Brennerwas living in TelAviv.He had separatedfrom his wife and she had taken their son, leaving Brenner unsettled and unhappy.He sold his furniture, moved out of his apartmentin Tel Aviv, and took a small room in Jaffa where he eked out a living by teaching. He was killed by Arabmaraudersin an orange grove at Abu Kabirin May 1921. The four original stories of Zecirsham are themselves metonymies both of the yishuv and of the war. They contain little psychological dimension and are, 8. AharonZisling, "Behadera,bime hamilhamah,"YosefHayyimBrenner:mivhardivrezikhronot, HakibbutzHameuchad,1971, p. 207. 9. See MartinGilbert,First WorldWar.London:HarperCollins,1995, p. 463. 10. See Ha'ares veha 'adama 1917, 1918. British Library, London.

11. "Mehayamimha'aharonim"in Ha 'ares veha'avodah, no.1, September, 1918, p. 61.

75

Glenda Abramson moreover,detached from the Hebrew literarytradition.This may perhapsbe because generallytellers of warexperiences,like witnesses to the Holocaust,areconscious of the discordanceof their subjectmatterand its resistanceto shapingand sense making.13 Because Brennerwas not a combatanthe was able to keep an emotional distancebetween himself andthe experienceandto retainhis sense of space and time. It seems, therefore,that because of the great disparityin style and finish between Zecir sham and Hamosa, written almost contiguously,the stories of Ze'ir sham served as verbal cartoons for Hamosa in their settings and characters, many of which are recapitulatedin the longer story. The four original stories of Ze'ir sham reflect the point of view of the most vulnerablemembers of society, the women and children.Throughnarrativesakin to nineteenth-century melodrama, the stories present an almost Dickensian panoply of cruel adults; poor, starving, or dead children;rich, greedy managers; loss and separation;orphanshaving to fend for themselves in the face of indifferent, often harsh,authority.As if to underlinethe hardship,adults and childrenare ill with malariaand typhus.Also in Dickensian style,14 these stories include a certain element of social criticism and satireand an ironic confirmationof the quirkiness of human nature.While Brennerfocuses on the effect of the war on Jewish society in Palestine ratherthan on individualpsychology, there is still a strongelement of pathos, more effective for his emotional restraint. The first tale in the series, Gazlanim,tells of a grocer from Jaffa who suffers greatly after the expulsion to PetahTikvah. His wife lies ill with malariaand his daughterpines for her old school in Herzliya,refusingto attendschool in Petah Tikvah. The formerly prosperous grocer now has to earn his living by moving goods on a donkey cart,andto replacehis helpless wife in takingcareof the household. He speaks to his daughterin Hebrew,but in times of great stress revertsto Yiddish. By serving one customer,the grocer has to breakhis wordto anotherand compromise his honor. Each of the characters,in his or her own way, is a gazlan, but victimized by the greatergazlanut of the war. Food in the settlements and towns is unobtainable,and previously comfortable families are close to starvation.The grocer in Gazlanimhas had to move his family from a three-roomhouse in Jaffa to a stable in PetahTikvah.There is no money to buy supplies or to pay a doctor to tend to the sick wife. Permitsare requiredto move from city to city. In Asonot the exiles fromTelAviv to Tiberiaslive in squalor on balconies and in cellars. Among them is a housewife who is cruel and selfish in her lack of understandingof the problemsof the time, demanding the household standardsof more prosperousdays in Tel Aviv. She employs as a 12. Brenner,Mivhar divre zikhronot,p. 207. Y.H 13. In his study of the English literatureof the First WorldWar, The Great Warand Modern Memory (Oxford University Press, 1975), Paul Fussell comments that the problemfor the writertrying to describe the elements of the GreatWarwas its utterincredibility,which made it incommunicable in its own terms. p. 139. 14. BrennermentionsDickens once in his correspondence:in a letterto SarahMirmerhe writes: "I won't be able to come for breakfastbecause I'm going to accompanyBerkowitzto WaterlooStation ... I'll come in the late afternoon or in the evening to read Dickens."(2-8-1907). In Y H. Brenner, Kol Kitve, vol. 3, p. 314.

76

No Way Out: Brenner and the War washerwomanan ignorantTiberiangirl who is tornbetween the need to earn a living and tending to her dying father.The girl recounts: TherearemanyrefugeesfromJaffain Tiberias,oh, a lot. She'sfromTiberias, sheis. It'sverybadfortheTelAvi[sic]peopleinTiberias.Theyhaveno food. Theyhaveno lodging... Theylivelikedogs.Sick,dying,droppinglikeflies. A catastrophe! (456) A contemporaryaccount by an anonymouswritercorroboratesher depiction: InTiberiasthereis overcrowding, choleraandotherdiseases.Theydon'tlet come here and people [PetahTikvah] therethere'snowhereto go. The situationis dreadful.The publicdidn'twantto go, theysay:"It'sbetterforus to die in PetahTikvah.Letthemkillus, letthemdo withus whattheywill,butwe're notmovingfromthisplace."15 In Hasava'ah, perhapsthe most touching of the stories, a child has lost his motherand sister to privationand illness underthe Turks,while his fatherhas escaped to the comparativecomfort of the British side. The boy, Nahum, now entirelyalone, appearsone day at a library,seeking a particularbook. The overworked and harassedlibrarianpays little attentionto him, but the boy returnsagain and again, asking for a book about dwarfs and a stepmother.Eventuallyhe shows the librariana letter he has found from his sister, Hannah,written to their mother. It describes the girl's life with a relative in Haifa, a woman not unlike the Tel Aviv housewife in the previousstory.Hannahis forced againsther will to do housework and is deprivedof food and shoes. She has come across a storybook about dwarfs and she imploresher brotherto read it. She describes a moment of her life: Shecomesupto me andsaysWashthedishesbecauseit wasaftera mealand I wasreadingthisbookandI putthe bookdownsadlyandI tookthe dishes andI wentbecauseI couldn'tanswerherbecausetearsfell frommyeyes,and Mother,you'llthinkI'm lazybutI wasn'tlazy,onlyjust thenI couldn'tread thiswonderful bookbutit'snothing,thereareworsethingsthatI can'ttellyou aboutin a letter... (p. 458) Both Hannahand the motherare dead by the time Nahum discovers the letter. As in fairy-tales,the adults in these stories are heartless and heedless, from the shrewishrelative in Haifa to the librarian,to the book borrowerswaiting impatiently in line at the library.Brenner'sstory is a tour de force of restraint,allowing the situationto speak throughthe cruel world of a fable. The allusion removes Hasava'ah from the realm of history to that of folktale, with evil external forces separatingthe family,and the appearanceof a wicked substitutemother.To the childrenthere is no cause and effect: the dire events take place in a distorted world where little is comprehensibleto them. In most of these stories there is a negative relationshipbetween mother or 15. Mehayamimha 'aharonimin Ha 'ares veha 'avodah, no.1, September,1918, p. 61

77

Glenda Abramson mother-figure and child. In Gazlanimand Mazal, circumstanceshave driventhe child out of control. In the latterstory,a group of Jewish refugees is crowdedinto a single unhygienic dwelling in ZikhronYaakov.Many of them are ill with malaria. A woman cooks cholent, wipes the sweat from her face with a rag with which she then covers a bowl of fresh water. In her fever-inducedmania, her young daughter,Shifra,incites the otherchildren,all of whom are ill or weak.Among the group is the area supervisorwho is also a memberof the Refugee Committee.The story does not give reasons for his presence there,but clearly describesthe attitude of the refugees to him: they conspire to keep food and water from him, and characterize him as "an enemy of the Jews."By her irresponsibleand selfish actions Shifrawastes all the availablewater.Wateris generallyscarce, and on the Sabbath, as Brenneremphasises in the story,the standpipesand faucets are closed by official decree. A tailor,ill with malaria,blames the officials, the "brainlesspeople ... who have decided the faucet will be closed on the Sabbath."The narrativeis terse, based predominantlyon dialogue, but the nightmarishatmosphereof waterless heat, both internalfrom the disease, and external,is mercilessly conveyed. Avlah (Injustice) is entirely different,with no referenceto Dickensian indigence or illness, and cheerful in tone. It is a roundednarrativewith a definite conclusion, less of a sketch than a well-realized short story in which, again, the characters' responses are motivatedby the war.This story is an example of Brenner's manipulationof real events to accordwith a preconceivedpurpose:in this case to caution the Jews that the long-awaited British "friend"may ultimately not be a friend at all. At this time (1920), JosephTrumpeldorand six of his comradeshad been killed in an Arab attackat Tel Hai, which furtherdepressedBrenner.He was worriedby the Arab disturbancesin Jerusalemand condemnedthe Britishfor failing to deal adequatelywith them. He wrote both bitterly and prophetically,"Perhaps tomorrowthe Jewishhandwritingthese wordswill be stabbed,some 'sheikh' or 'hadj'will stick his daggerinto it underthe gaze of the Britishruler. .. andthis, this handwill not be able to do anythingto the sheikh or the hadjbecause it doesn't know how to hold a sword."'6 The story tells of the arrivalat a small, isolated kevusahof an officer initially thoughtto be German.Most of the membersof the groupgreet the exhausted and rain-drenchedforeign officer with some awe and offer him theirmeagre hospitality.However,once they have determinedthatthe man is Britishandan escaped prisoner-of-war,some of them fear reprisalsfrom the Turksfor hiding an enemy soldier. After shelteringhim for a night, duringwhich they debate the problemin a parody of the popularsihah of the time, 7 they eventuallydecide to give him up to the authorities,They then suffer agonies of remorse and shame for their cowardice and betrayal.Brennerpresents their changes of mood with the best of his satiricalpen. 16. In Adir Cohen, Yesiratohasifrutitshel YosefHayyimBrenner.Guma:TA, 1976, p. 80. 17. One of the characteristicactivities of some of the early kevusotwas the sihah or 'discussion', which frequentlybecame a confessional group session consisting of monologues andpublic confessions where membersbaredtheir innermostsecrets. See Kehiliyatenu(a collection publishedby kibbutz HashomerHatzair), 1922.

78

No Way Out: Brennerand the War The rain stopped, the air was pure, but we didn't think about going out to work. We were grieving, in mourning. The noble face of the Englishman was like an hallucinationto us. There was no fire in our house that day, food was an abominationto our souls. At noon one of us tried to chew on a piece of dry bread,but it stuck in his throat.A man came from the moshavah and told us that the moshavah is abuzz, everyone is blaming us for our treachery (pahazut), everyone is streaming to the commandant's house to see the English officer; that the prisoner spoke in French and no one protested; and mainly that he said to one of the people: "Now I know all about the Jews. .. " Yes, his verdict is true, we are the lowest! We deserve to be torn from life! (p. 461) They then learn thatthe officer has lost his watch, and they suspect a Turkishsoldier of stealing it. When they are told that the officer has blamed them they are able to relinquishtheir guilt at having surrenderedhim. "Antisemitic gentile like all the gentiles!" Our religious comrade opened his mouth for the first time in a day and night. "Good,good."We all suddenly felt better. "Now-it's good ..." As if a weight had been lifted from us. (p. 461) Brenner's version is particularly interesting for having been closely based on a true event. The officer himself, Major A. J. Evans, Commanding Officer of the 14th Squadron of the Royal Flying Corps in Palestine, described the events that Brenner was later to immortalize in his story, as "sheer comedy."'8 After an arduous three-day walk to the south from Caesarea, he reached a house where he decided to seek shelter. I banged on the door and after a minute or two it was opened by a small dark man in trousersand shirtandbarefeet. He appearedratherfrightened,and said some words which I did not understand.I tried him in German,saying that I wantedshelterand food. As I hadhadpracticallynothingto eat for sixty hours, and was drenchedto the skin, he had no difficulty in guessing what I wanted, if he did not understand.He went back into the room and put on some boots and a coat. The room seemed almost completely bare except for a numberof people who were sleeping, rolled in blankets, on the floor or on very low beds.19 Evans persuaded the frightened group of Jewish settlers to shelter him by agreeing that they could send for the Turks in the morning. They gave him food and a bed. Evans remarked on their kindness, their food, which he found to be almost inedible, and their poverty. During the night he was arrested by the Turks. When he complained to the Arab guard that his feet and shoes were in no condition for 18.A. J.Evans,TheEscapingClub.London:JohnLane,TheBodleyHead,1921. 19.Evans,p. 227.

79

Glenda Abramson walking , "whetherat his orderor out of kindness-the latter,I think-one of the Jews broughtme a pair of old boots ."20He continues: .... sentwordto theTurks,I feel no violentreThoughtheJewshadimmediately sentmenttowardsthem,as theywereobviouslyfrightenedout of theirskins at my presencein thehouse.In otherwaysI thinktheydidtheirbest forme, andweresorryforme;owingto theirextremepovertytheycouldnotdomuch. I supposetheyjusthadlicenceto live fromtheTurks,andthat'saboutall ... Justbeforewe marchedoff the Jewsgaveme somemoreof theirdisgusting meatand,whenI reproached themforsendingfortheTurksso soon,theyansweredthattheywereterrifiedandcouldnothelpit.Whenwe hadgonea few hundredyardsfromthehouseI sawsuddenlythatmy wrist-watch was missing. I madetheArab[soldierguardinghim]understand by signs,andlet him knowthatI wantedto go backandfetchit. He refused,andwhenI showed signsof obstinacy,beganto fingerhis revolver.So we continuedthemarch.I madesurethenthatthebrutehadstolenit.21 Without knowing Evans' comment about "sheer comedy" (his accountwas published in 1921), but with a startlingfidelity to the details of his story,Brenner gave 'Avlah a comic tone that contrastedstrongly with the tone of the otherwar stories. He added a female to the all-male group of settlers, in orderto providea hint of romance and a dissident voice in the argument.The English officer's accusation of the Jews, the eponymous "injustice"of the story, does not appearin Evans' account. The incidentof the watchgives Brennera narrativeopportunitybothto highthe settlers' comic guilt at theirbetrayaland to resolve it in a satisfactoryfeat light of closure. He also mocks the diasporaJews' negative self-image and theirneedful assumption of victimhood. More significantly, however,this incident allows him to make a pointed comment by reinforcingthe stereotype of the antisemitic British. Brennersuggests that throughaccusing the innocentJews of betrayal,the English officer himself, despite his gentility and his representingthe liberating force, is not to be trusted.In the face of the yishuv s expectations of the British, Brennerprovides a negative assessment of them andperhapseven a warningin the aftermathof the war and the beginning of the Mandate. In the ironically titled Hage'ulah vehatemurah(Salvation and [Its] Price), which is more a documentaryobservationthan a story,Brennerreinforceshis negative view of Britain by his depiction of the British army.This story was found among Brenner'spapers, edited and ready for publication, and it was first published in Hatekufah in Warsawin 1921. The setting is a cooperative farm (Merhavia) in Emek Yizrael. The central character,an old man, Leyzer-Nahman,detests the German soldiers, considering them little better than swine, intent only on drinking. He awaits the British ("Dod Yankel"in the settlement's code) and watches their arrivalas if they were a heavenly host: "He lifted up his eyes and saw riders approachingfrom the mountainsfrom the south east, their unsheathed 20. Evans, p. 228. 21. Ibid.

80

No Way Out: Brenner and the War swords glittering in the sun."At first he mistakes them for Bedouins, but on discovering that they are British, "tearswere in his eyes and he nodded his head at one of the forwardhorsemen in amazement,with an acknowledgementof appreciation, with joy.. ." However,he is soon disillusioned. Headdressed thehorsemanin a Germanbro"Whydidn'tyoucomesooner?" kenby his intenseemotion."We'vewaitedso longforyou..." TheScottishhorsemanaskedforCognac.(p. 463) Events go frombad to worse.The settlersaremarchedoff to a military camp and forcedto wait for hours in the sun without food or waterbefore being allowed to returnto their farm. Leyzer-Nahman,exhaustedand deprivedof food or drink, becomes ill, reminiscentof the old teacher in Hamosa. No doctor will visit him because of the need for a travelpermit.The old man sadly mutters,"Youwill live by the sword ... why does it have to be me?" and then, presumably,dies. LeyzerNahmanis sketchedin outline, as if in pen and ink, but with a certain pathos.Yetthis character,and otherperipheralcharacters,are no more than devices to provide an illusion of fiction for Brenner'spointed descriptionof the British forces,includingan Indiancavalryregiment,who areas indifferentto the local populationas were the Germans.The story offers a view of the realitiesof war, devoid of the romanticillusions fosteredby LeyzerNahman.Duringthe course of the tale, Brennersubtly alters the perceptionsof the British and the Germans:from being drunkenhazirim,the Germansoldiersarethenportrayedas patheticprisonersof war, thinandtired,andlater,in LeyzerNahman'smemory,as courteousandcultured.The Indianforces, on the other hand,are scarcely betterthan the Turks.Over all is the chaotic,incomprehensibledisorderof war,void of considerationfor its innocentvictims.Alcohol defines both sides:the ScottishsoldiersdemandCognac,theirofficers searchthe houses for wine abandonedby the Germans. The most complex short story and the culminationof this series is Hamosa, a structuredand evocative work.Writtenin 1919 at the same time as the others, a shorttime afterthe events it describes, it seems to have shakenoff the sympathetic but ratherwry attitudeof the sketches to delve more deeply into the conditions of the time and the lives of the war'svictims. In total contrastto Zecirsham, the style of Hamosa is the naturalismof the period, a profoundlypessimistic, entirely Brennerian,delineationof desperatetimes. It also contains a bittercomment on the obduracyof officialdom in times of great human suffering. It is the outcome of the sketches in Zeeirsham, including almost all the charactersbut above all in its Manicheanview of the worldof the refugees andtheirantagonists,the officials in the settlement. The specific event that seemed to have been the basis for Hamosa, was described in detail by an eyewitness, Aharon Zisling, a young acolyte of Brenner's, and confirmed by others. Zisling wrote a vivid account of the events Brennerlater fictionalized in the story.22While this accountconfirms Brenner'sfidelity to ac22. Daniel Ben Nahum, Reshut haza akah: hazarah el Brenner, Sifriat Poalim, 1972, p. 130ff.

81

Glenda Abramson tual events, at the same time it revealsthe small but very significant manipulations of reality that typify his writing. In 1918, as a boy of about 16 or 17, Zisling happened to be in Hederawith Brennerwhen a large group of refugees was concentrated in a camp near Kfar Saba, close to the borderdividing the country into its two opposing forces. Not only was the Refugees' Committeegenerally unsympathetic to the displaced population,but the Hederafarmersalso raised the price of wheat, which greatlyaggravatedthe refugees' situation.KfarSabacontainedabout 10 houses and about 1,000 people fromTelAviv and Jaffa campingwhereverthey could. Since their camp was adjacentto a logging station, they constructedhuts made of branchesand cloth, and also found living space in stables, cowsheds, and tents. In the cold, damp winter, many of them died of illnesses such as malaria, and typhus caught from brackishwater, and they fared no better in the hot summer. One memberof the Refugee Committee,appalledat whathe was witnessing, complained,in a public notice appendedto the wall of the committee house, about the indifference of the people of Hederato the fate of the refugees. It is possible that this action gave Brennerthe idea of a single voice of opposition to the complacency of the members of the settlement. Brenner actively campaigned for help. As an invited member of the committee, he pleaded on behalf of the refugees, he assisted individualsamong them without a thought for the dangerto himself of infection, he gave away what little food he had, he would carry sacks of bread,sweep the yards, organise carts. He was, in Zisling's words, "totallyalight with the affairsof the refugees andhe knew everything about them."Anotherwitness reports: OnedayBrennercameto me withsomeof hisshirtsandhe askedmeto make garmentsfromthemforthechildren.Manyof therefugeechildrendidn'tactuallyhaveclothingfortheirbodies.ThenI sawhimtakingcareof one family-a fatherwho was not in his rightmindandhis daughterwhosemother hadrecentlydied.Everydayhe wouldbuymilkandbringit to the littlegirl, feedherandteachherhowto keepthe"room"clean:a darkcornerof thecowshed.He himselfcleanedthe dwellingeverydayandtoldthegirlto lookafterherfather,andtoldheraboutorder,andin thiswayhe wouldentertain her. Thisfamilywasnottheonlyonehe lookedafter,becausewhenhe finishedin this cowshedhe wentto a secondyard,fromfamilyto family,everyhourin the afternoonandin theevening.23 Against the settlement'sregulations, those assisting with the disinfection of the refugees allowed a young woman and her sick child to take refuge in the camp's ablutionarea.The child died duringthe night, andaYemenitewas summonedfrom a nearby farm to bury her. Brennerhimself carriedthe child to its grave. It has been said thatHamosa foreshadowsthe Holocaust, and, indeed,many of its descriptionsof conditions in the refugee camp, the dehumanizationof its inhabitants, and even its language have an eerie resonance. In the story the word "transport,"for example, is a transliterationof the English word.However,the sto23. Ahavah Remez, cited by Cohen, p. 76.

82

No Way Out: Brennerand the War ry is not a propheticprolepsis;Brenneris describingthe well-known global corollaries of war: displaced civilians driven from their homes, gathered together in harshconditions. Brenner'sdelineationis all the more shocking, given other optimistic, "naive,simple, simplistic and direct"24fiction aboutlife in the new yishuv. As a naturalist,Brennermight have exaggeratedthe refugees' privations,but even allowing for this, his quasi-documentaryportrayalis farremovedfromZionist propagandaor the "EretzYisraelgenre."25 This story is, again, both a historicalaccount and a didactic allegory. Brenner universalizesHamosa by omittingplace names, that of the moshavah, for example, which was HIedera.The story can be read as a criticism of the attitudeof the moshavotto the refugees, as a criticism of the refugees themselves, as an autobiographicalfragmentin which the authoris representedby a workers'teacher, or as a general portrayalof people in conditions of upheavaland catastrophe. It depicts a group of evacuees who have been gatheredin a camp, called only "that place" afterthe expulsion from theirhomes. Fromthat place, whose earthwas desolate,its trees hewn down and its fromthatplacewherefouror five farmerspaidthe soldwellingsdestroyed; of theiralmondtrees dierslivingin theirhousesto cut downthe remainder andbringthemfor heating;fromthatplace,whereungroundmilletwas the onlybread,to fill thebelly,to staveoff hunger;fromthatplacewheredamp hutsfilledwithvermin,miceandinsectsandthestenchof manymonthsgave a sadshelterto womenandchildrenfrozenby thecoldof winterandtwisted byillness;fromthatplacewhereeverydayfourorfive soulsoutof a hundred werebroughtdeadoutsidethecamp;fromthatplacewheretherewasnothing on whichto laythetensof newpatientsarrivingdaily,no garmentin which to dressthemandno sheetto spreadbeneaththem;fromthatplace whose dwellersdidnothing,didn'tlifta fingerfortheirowncomfort,andtheironly effortswereto listenfortheshots,to argueaboutthetacticsof thewarandto groanandcomplain:"Woe,theRefugeeCommitteehascausedourtroubles! Ithaskilledus!"Fromthatplacewherepeoplewhoknewhowto stealandrob anddo businessgatheredwealth,collectedNapoleons,andgroupsof healthy youngmenfromthenorthate eggs andjam,playedcardsdayandnightand waitedforsalvationthatwastakingits timeto come(p.). The refugees' situation is desperate. Incapable of fending for themselves, they quarreland cheat each other, deprivingthe community of spirit that might have 24. Govrin,p. 105. 25. Brenner's dismissalof theso-called"EretzYisraelgenre"stemsdirectlyfromhis ideathat Hestronglyopwritingrelatesmoreto theinnerthanto theouterlife, andthatit demandstruthfulness. thelivedsituationas a kindof unwarrantposedthetendencyto seekan"easyescape"by portraying and ed utopia.This,in his view,is onlya pretenseof normalityspringingfrommendacity, "arrogance an attemptto give of life on theyishuv.Thisfalsificationof realityrepresents fraud"in theportrayal theyishuvwas the readera misleadingimpressionof revivalandtheyishuvwhile,on the contrary, he wrote,imputedfalsenora continuation of exileThegenre"spractitioners, smallandinsignificant, sincetherealitywasfarfromidyllic(Brenmalitytotheyishuvwhich,inhisview,was"merepretense," Kolkitve,vol.2,pp.268, 269). ner,"Hagenre ha'eres-yisraeli va'avizrayhu,"

83

GlendaAbramson brought mutual benefit. They have lost all vestiges of humanity,each individual concerned only about himself, placing the responsibilityon others, includingthe "committee."Brenner spares no one: those who do nothing to help themselves, wasting time and energy,and those who amass fortunesat others'expense. It is not a clear-cut portraitof victims and victimizers as one might imagine from Brenner's frenzied espousal of the victims' cause, but a sharplook at responses to victimhood with the war as a catalyst. Brenner's emphasis on the refugees' unpleasantnessis exemplified by a young woman who sends a boy to bringwaterfrom a fetid marshbecause it is nearby ratherthan fetching pure water from the settlementa little furtheraway.When anotherof the people leaves the camp, others quarrelover his hut until they destroy it altogether.These scenes transcendnaturalismto adoptthe brutalityof expressionism.The refugees squabblefor places on a heavily-ladencart,but achieve nothing. "Afterthe great fuss, cries, curses, gnashingof teeth, complaints,claims, advice, suggestions andjokes, most of the convoy stayedput in the field that day too." On the didactic level the story emphasizesBrenner'sphilosophyof Zionism. According to Boas Evron, The most acidicingredientin [Brenner's] portrayalsis disgustwith Jewish thehelplessineffectuality andtheirinweakness,theimpotent,lachrymosity, evitableattendant evils:self-piety,cowardice,slyness,twistedmentality,garstale self-importance, rulity,the compensatory necessarilyby accompanied flinchingin encounterwiththefirm,hardrealworld,theworldof actionand power of the goyim ... it is no accident that both Brennerand Borochov be-

camespiritualfathersof theZionistlabourmovement. .. only [their]merciless analysis,theirunflinchinggaze at the darkestaspectsof reality,their readinessto adopttheprinciplesof Marxistcriticismandpraxis,couldachieve thetransformation of weaknessintopower.Anda precondition forpowerwas thepowerto recogniseanddescribeweakness.26 One of Brenner'sconvictions was that even in Palestine,there was little change in Jewish characterand life, for the Jew broughtexile with him to the new land.27Accordingto Brenner,the Jews were a nation"devoidof the talentfor executingwhat they wanted to execute ... . Any crowd of Jews assembled in Jerusalemwas no different from a Jewish crowd in any other ghetto and in any other part of the world."28 An old workers'teacher takes mattersinto his own hands, and struggles to find food and aid for the people, and to infuse into them some modicum of selfreliance. It is not difficult to see a self-portraitin this character,and the fact that he is an old man may indicate Brenner'ssense of his own helplessness. The un26. Boas Evron, Jewish State or Israeli Nation? Bloomington and Indianapolis:IndianaUniversity Press, 1995, p. 169-170. 27. Brenner'sattitudeis reminiscentof the views of OttoWeininger,whose treatiseon the Jewish character,Sex and Character,had been publishedin 1903. 28. See Govrin,p. 112.

84

No Way Out: Brenner and the War named teacher rushes about searching for food, he shares the refugees' physical discomfortby sleeping with them underthe stars despite his malaria,he implores the committeeofficials to renderassistance.The bleak factualitygives way to satire in Brenner'sportraitof the self-satisfied, well-fed Jewish apparatchiks,one of the most effective in the story. "Inthatcase,is it possibleto buythemillet?"askedthe Chairman. majidsforeachvessel!" "Theywantthirty-nine "wemustbuy.They'renotpayingattencriedtheChairman, "Really," tionto pricesrightnow." "Itseemsyouhavea few vesselsof milletto sell?" thehousewas filled withwheattradersandbrokers.The Immediately puthis handsintohis trouserpocketsandpulledoutfistfuls deputychairman of goldnapoleons.Thevoice of one brokerwas heardjoking,"Nevermind. Therefugeesaren'tpigs-they'll eatthismillet... " "Halfof it is soil." "Nomatter.""29 The committee'sindifference is equivalentto the attitudeof the military leaders describedin English warpoetry,the opposition of a cynical "them"and "us,"their victims. The teacher in Hamosa fails to achieve any relief for the refugees and the tragedy of a baby's death from starvationdeeply affects him, signaling the onset of a kind of madness. He attemptsto persuademembersof the camp to help him bury the child, but no one comes forward.Finally,a Turkishsoldier, as tatteredand poor as the Jewishvictims, digs the grave and sympatheticallyremainsfor the burial. The teacherrewardshim with some cigarettes, a piece of cheese, and a coin. At the end of the story the old man seems to be dying of an injury,an equivocal one because, despite its seriousness,it has releasedhim from his obligations to the sufferingrefugees. Thena greatsorrowcameintohis heartbecausehe hadleft a loaf [of bread] behindandhe hadnottakenthetwowholeloaves."Apity,a pity,"he thought, "everysliceof breadnow. . "Butit wasa passingsorrow,andagainstit there wasa greatrelief in his heart.At a distanceof ten minuteswalk,a hard,unof refugees.Sixty-nine pleasantnightspreadits wingson the thirdtransport soulswhohadarrivedatnoon,notthedesignatedtime.Heknewthis.Thestuhadtoldhimon theway.Butnothingtouchedhim.He didn'tgo dent-labourer out.He couldn'twalk.It wasrelief. This is the teacher'sway out: hamosa, his physical inabilityto do anythingmore.30 He has not lost the battle but has been forced to retirewounded. It is, at least, an in Hederasoldwheatandmilletfortwice or threetimesthe normalpriceset by 29. Farmers bimehamilhamah," otherfarmersin thecountry.SeeZisling,"Behadera p. 208. whileitsrootis obviously"y-s-a,"(go out) 30. YosefEvenwrites(207)abouttheword"mosa": it could also be "m-s-a"(find) as the opposite of " 'a-v-d" which Brenneruses often. The teacher's

85

Glenda Abramson honourabledefeat. Yet the ultimate absurdityof his story is that as a moral hero who battles valiantly against oppression, he dies not dauntlesslyor by the sword, but by stubbinghis toe. His "way out,"an infected toe, is undignified, with Brenner'sundercuttingany idea of his heroism.The story is, therefore,entirelyanti-romantic in its treatmentboth of the putativehero andhis sufferingcharges.In keeping with his didacticpurpose,Brennerhas subvertedanypossibility of realpathos. In fact his irony has subvertedany possibility of stereotypingin the story:the hero is not heroic, the victims contributein some measure to their own suffering, and those designatedto renderaid are more inimical thanthe hero'sonly friend,a representativeof the force that brought about the dreadfulcircumstances!This soldier, agent of a great empire, is poor and ragged.The victims await salvationfrom the official enemy, and listen eagerly for his gunfire. According to Yosef Even, the question of the survival of the refugees has been turnedinto the personaland existentialquest of an individualhero who is not a victim himself.31Despite its factualbasis, the story thereforerepresentsa battle between positive and negative, the weak against the mighty, good and evil, as in the stories of Zecir sham. It becomes a question of individualmorality,in which the external historical situation is internalized.The teacher acts on behalf of the oppressed,without any thoughtof reward,as a force of good for its own sake. As in Zecirsham, there is a certain Manicheanelement to the story: the "committee" is the classical evil antagonistwhose task is to nullify the hero'srighteousefforts. Once again, there is a fairy-taleopposition of right and wrong, innocence and the exaggeratedgrotesquerieof the villains. In reality-while there was a certainresistance on the partof the settlers-there were many handswilling to help the unfortunateevacuees, both from within the camp and outside. In the story the struggle becomes a mythological one, between one righteous man and the forces opposing him. The hero-teachersets out in the morningto do battle, and returns, defeated, at sundown. His mission on behalf of humanityfails utterlybecause of the natureof humanityitself. Despite the seriousness of his plight and its outcome, the teacher is in many ways a comic figure because of his constant failure to be heard,his energetic but fruitless efforts to help the helpless evacuees. Yet Brenner adds to his .characteran element of pathos that is intensified by the teacher's strange isolation, particularly marked in the scene of the child's burial. Towardsthe end of the story, he is at a physical and emotional distance from the refugees as if no longer associated with them. His actual detachmentfrom them is emphasized by his living on a farm ratherthan on a collective settlement, which places him in a different category from that of the city dwellers or agriculturalworkers. His frenzied activity on their behalf stems from his own need for a moral quest and a personal challenge: a war for justice, which he loses. When he hears news of a new transporthe says: "then I was lost" [my emphasis], a comment more indicative of his own fate than of those he is trying to help. The refugees them"found"solution is thereforeironic.Yosef Even, Omanuthasippurshel YH Brenner.Jerusalem:Mossad Bialik, p. 207. 31. Even, p.205

86

No Way Out: Brenner and the War selves have little partto play in what ultimately becomes a battle that transcends their specific fate. Yosef Even criticizesBrenner'sportrayalof theTurkas inaccurate.He should, he writes, be a representativeof a ruling power duringwartime,32but in fact he is an illiteratepeasant,the stereotypeof the noble savage, and the point of Brenner's story.Withhis torn clothing and tassle-less tarbushthe soldier is representativeof an empirein decay.Brenneris makinga point aboutthe instinctivecompassion of this simple Turkcontrastedwith the self-centerednessof the refugees. Despite the fact that a Yemenite Jew had performedthis selfless service in the true circumstances, in his story Brennerrhetoricallyfeaturesthe naturalhumankindness of a more primitiveTurkishsoldier to shame his unfortunateJews. This point had already been made by his portrayalof the carters, the Jew who refused to take a greaterload on his cart, and the Arab who agreed to carry an increasing number of people and their possessions.33 This paper has discussed Brenner'spresentationof the FirstWorldWarand has also shown thathis preoccupations-even obsessions-remained unchanged; on the contrary,he used the extraordinary,almost apocalyptic,circumstancesfurtherto reinforcethem.All war literatureis a renderingof true experience into fictive form,when "literarytraditionand real life notablytransect."34Brenner'smtVier was the exploitationof this transection,in this case using not the war itself but the crisis it engenderedto express not only his idcefixe but also certain moral or didacticideas, and allowing us, by the way,to have an idea of what it was like there and then. Consequently,the war becomes a frameworkfor his preconceived ideas even while he portraysits real effects on the community of which he is part. GlendaAbramson University of Oxford Oxford, U.K.

32. Even, p. 205. 33. This incident is confirmed in Zisling's account. "Behaderabime hamilhamah,p. 208. 34. Fussell, The Great Warand ModernMemory,Preface.

87

Review: Rethinking Leviticus and Rereading "Purity and Danger" Author(s): Jonathan Klawans Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 89-101 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131770 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

AJS Review 27:1 (2003), 89-102

REVIEW ESSAY RETHINKING LEVITICUS AND REREADING PURITYAND DANGER

by Jonathan Klawans MaryDouglas. Leviticusas Literature.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress, 1999. xv, 280 pp. Hyam Maccoby.Ritual and Morality. The Ritual Purity System and Its Place in Judaism.Cambridge,England:CambridgeUniversity Press, 1999. xii, 231 pp. These are good times for those who are fascinatedby the book of Leviticus. While denigrations of the Israelitepurity system and priestly traditionsare still to be found,there seems to be an increasingwillingness to give Leviticus the benefit of some doubt, considering it to be something other than a dry, rigid, ritualistic, and hierarchicalcode. These two books argueforcefully,convincingly-and quite many previous misunderstandingsof Leviticus. What differently--against is more, we can perhaps even begin to speak of an emerging consensus on one importantissue thatboth books deal with: the natureof ritualimpurity.More and more scholars seem to be saying what these two are: that ritualimpurityis a complex ritual structure,not a blunt instrumentof social control. But if the evaluation of Leviticus in general (and ritual impurityin particular)is positive in both of these books, they share little else. It is difficult to conceive of two scholarly books with as many overlappingconcerns, published in the same year and country, which differ so much with regardto scope, structure,and method. They differ too, in the end, with regardto both quality and importance. In the early 1990's, Mary Douglas embarked on a project that involved rethinkingmany of the major tenets of her earlier classic, Purity and Danger.I She read up on biblical studies, learned some Hebrew, and took on the daunting task of understanding better the books of Leviticus and Numbers. Douglas published a number of articles,2 and devoted a volume to the book of Num1. Purity and Danger:AnAnalysis of the Conceptsof Pollution and Taboo(London:Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966; second impressionwith corrections, 1969). 2. These studies include: "Atonementin Leviticus,"Jewish Studies Quarterly 1.2 (1993/4): 109-130; "ABird,a Mouse, a Frog,and Some Fish:A New Readingof Leviticus 11,"in LiteraryImagination, Ancient and Modern: Essays in Honor of David Grene, ed. Todd Breyfogle (Chicago: Uni-

versity of Chicago Press, 1999), pp. 110-126; "The ForbiddenAnimals in Leviticus,"Journalfor the

89

Jonathan Klawans bers.3 Thus, Leviticus and Literatureis the crowningachievementof nearlya decade of work. To those familiar with Purity and Danger but unfamiliarwith her recent work, Leviticus as Literaturemay come as something of a shock: gone is the functionalistconcern with boundarymaintenance,gone is the symbolic importance of anomalies, and gone, too, is the assumptionthatthe puritysystem of Leviticus is-at least functionally-akin to the puritysystems of peoples of Africa or India.Douglas now believes thatthe ritualimpuritysystem of ancientIsraelwas something ratherunique:a puritysystem thatdoes not serve to subordinatecastes or to channel accusations(p. viii). What is even more strikingis not the rethinking of ritual impurity,but its displacement. Gone is the overarchingconcern with ritualpurityaltogether.Although concernswith purityappear(see ChaptersSeven throughNine), otherritualstructuresimportantto Leviticus-such as sacrificereceive equal attention.But despite all this, some familiaraspects remain:Douglas is still concerned with the comparativeenterprise,as evidenced by her discussions of Chinese and Greek science and literature(ChaptersTwo and Three). She still looks for and finds symbolic explanationsfor ritual structures,as evidenced by her discussions of sacrifice and food laws (ChaptersFour,Seven and Eight). She still rejects "itemized"(p. 22) or "piecemeal"solutions, preferring,instead, more structural,holistic explanations.4And she remainsan anthropologist:Leviticus as Literatureis liberally pepperedwith practicalinsights derived from fieldwork anthropologistsand, closer to home, consultationswith butchersand bakers (see below). To those who feel that commentarieson Leviticus can seem rather bookish, Leviticus as Literatureis a welcome respite. Douglas' concern in the presentwork is to commenton Leviticus as a whole and to "reintegratethe book with the rest of the Bible" (p. 1). If in her previous works on purity systems, Douglas set out to comment on complete ritual structures,here the structurethatmost captivatesourauthoris thatof the book of Leviticus itself. Just as in her recent analysis of Numbers,Douglas believes thatthe key to understandingLeviticus is knowing how the book is to be read.But if Numbers can be read as if its chapters form a straightforwardring (as she argues in In the Wilderness),Leviticus cannot:it is a ring with a rathersubstantialtwist.5YetDouglas withholds describingthe precise natureof this twist until the penultimatechapStudy of the Old Testament59 (1993): 3-23; "The Glorious Book of Numbers,"Jewish Studies Quarterly 1.3 (1993/4): 193-216; "Holy Joy: RereadingLeviticus:The Anthropologistand the Believer," ConservativeJudaism 46.3 (1994): 3-14; "Poetic Structurein Leviticus,"in Pomegranatesand Golden Bells: Studies in Biblical, Jewish and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literaturein Honor of Jacob Milgrom, eds. David P.Wright,David Noel Freedmanand Avi Hurvitz(WinonaLake, Indiana:Eisenbrauns, 1995), pp. 239-256; "Sacred Contagion,"in Reading Leviticus:A Conversationwith Mary Douglas, ed. John F. A. Sawyer (Sheffield, MA: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), pp. 86-106; and "The Strangerin the Bible,"Archives Europeennesde Sociologie 35.1 (1994): 283-298. 3. In the Wilderness:The Doctrine of Defilement in the Book of Numbers, eds. David J. A. Clines and Philip R. Davies (Sheffield, MA: JSOT Press, 1993). 4. See Leviticus as Literature,pp. 20-25, which largely reformulatesthe methodological insights of Purity and Danger. For the term "piecemeal"see Purity and Danger, p. 41. 5. Thus, Douglas articulateshere a position quite differentthanthat which she espoused in her 1993 article, "TheForbiddenAnimals of Leviticus,"where she views Leviticus as a simple ring (p. 11).

90

Review Essay ter of the book (pp. 221-223). Herbook, in turn,takes on something of Leviticus' structure-both books using the technique of "delayed completion" (pp. 151, 193). Just as Leviticus is an elaborateriddle, so, too, is Leviticus as Literature.In his recentintellectualbiographyof Mary Douglas-to which the interestedreader ought to refer for a discussion of Douglas' rich life and remarkablywide-ranging work-Richard Fardonhas demonstratedhow difficult it can be to extractfrom or even attemptto summarizea complete book by Mary Douglas.6 What follows, therefore,is a ratherstraightforwardreadingof a book that, at times, I fear I have misread. In her first chapter,"TheAncient Religion," Douglas sets out some of her basic assumptions.Ancient Israelitereligion, as it developed fully, can be distinguished from what came before by virtue of the fact that it has eliminated the ritual roles once playedby monarchs,deceased ancestors,demons, and diviners. Fully developed Israelite religion-what Douglas calls the "Levitical resynthesis" (p. 5)-has three "planks":(1) divinejustice, (2) the covenantwith its promise of fertility,and (3) the symbolic expressionof said covenant,circumcision. She then situatesLeviticus in the post-exilic period (p. 7), though one suspects that she really wishes to side-step the issue altogether:she grants that Leviticus must have had somethingof a substantialpre-history,and she latergrantsthe possibility that Leviticus and Deuteronomy were composed contemporaneously (p. 14, 29).7 Douglas' concern is not to solve or even to take a clear side on the question of Leviticus' date. Her real concern is to set the stage for a sympathetic reading of Leviticus, and in orderto do so she must reject the "moralevolutionism"which characterizesthe way in which William Robertson Smith (and even more recent biblical scholars) date literarystrandsin the HebrewBible. Typically,when scholars date biblical strands,Leviticus (or "P") is usually judged to be morally challenged. The hardand fast distinctionbetween the priestly strand(P) and the Holiness Code (H) drawn by some scholars serves this purpose all too neatly by assigning to the latterall that seems morally uprightin Leviticus. Douglas is right to dismiss such approachesas "P-baiting"(p. 129).Yetthere is somethingof a troubling double standardin Douglas' approach,for our author has nonetheless endorsed an evolutionism of her own, whereby the religion of Israel is seen as uniquely "modern"among ancient religions, parallel to Christianity(p. 11). To those who are familiarwith the ways in which Leviticus (and its main themes of purity and sacrifice) are treated in contemporaryNew Testament scholarship, Douglas' book is a welcome change.Yet I wonderwhether she has pushed too far. It is one thing to view Leviticus with sympatheticeyes. It is quite anotherto see it as a uniquedevelopment,somethingthat can, suspiciously,be comparedto things that came much later. Havingset her understandingof ancientIsraelitereligion in-and againstan ancient near easternbackground,Douglas' next move is to separateLeviticus from Deuteronomyby showing how differenttheir literarystyles are.This must be 6. RichardFardon,MaryDouglas:AnIntellectualBiography(London:Routledge, 1999), pp. 756, 80, 83-4. 7. Elsewhere in the work, Douglas plays with the possibility of assigning Deuteronomyto the post-exilic period (pp. 105-6).

91

Jonathan Klawans done, first of all, because Douglas believes that traditionalapproachesto Leviticus have been characterizedby the imposition of Deuteronomy onto Leviticus (pp. 13, 25, 64).8 Second, this must be done because the Leviticus-Deuteronomy contrasthighlights distinctive aspects of Leviticus that are sharedby both P and H (pp. 33-40). Thus, pitting Leviticus against Deuteronomyjustifies treatingthe former holistically. Over the course of ChaptersTwo and Three, Douglas distinguishes between two types of thought and writing. Never one to read, think, or write with blinders on, Douglas here builds on the work of classicists (e.g., Marcel Detienne), philosophers(e.g., ErnstCassirerand SuzanneLanger),sinologists (e.g., A. C. Graham),sociologists (e.g., Basil Bernstein), and other anthropologists (especially Claude L6vi-Strauss). Douglas develops a distinction between "analogical,"and "mythopoetic"thought (and writing) on the one hand, and "rational"and "discursive"thought(andwriting)on the other.In Douglas' understanding of these matters,Leviticus is a perfect example of the former,and Deuteronomy of the latter.Douglas here continues to reject any evolutionistic implications of these distinctions (pp. 16-17, 29, 33). The point is not to put Leviticus and Deuteronomy into some chronological sequence, but to put them in different, though possibly contemporary,social milieux. Yet Douglas remains frustratingly vague about the precise milieu of either.9What results from all this is the following: Leviticus is a highly structuredsymbolic expression of an archaizingpriestly elite living in some closed world. Deuteronomy,on the other hand, is an extended sermon, a transparentand emotional work, expressed in plain language, with clear political concerns, and overt coercive interests (ChaptersThree and Five). What precisely is the natureof Leviticus' mythopoeticthought?The central idea of Douglas' work is that "Leviticus exploits to the full an ancient tradition which makes a parallel between Mount Sinai and the Tabernacle"(p. 59). So, as we find out towardthe end of her book, the twist in Leviticus' ring results from the fact that the book's structuremaps out the Israelitetabernacleas describedin Exodus. Leviticus 1-17 forms the first ring (p. 192), which conforms to the outer court (pp. 221-222). Leviticus 18-24 then maps out the inner court, and Leviticus 25-27 conforms to the Holy of Holies (see chart on p. 223). As we find out throughouther book, each set of rules laid out in Leviticus-sacrifice, food laws, purity laws, the Holiness Code-can be understoodin light of this overarching analogy. In ChapterFour,we find the very best of whatLeviticusas Literaturehas to offer. If Leviticus tends to fare badly in contemporaryscholarly approachesto ancient Israel, sacrifice tends to fare even worse. The literaturehere is vast, but suffice it to say that the few pages she devotes to counteringanti-sacrificialideologies in contemporaryscholarshipoughtto be requiredreading(pp. 66-67). Sac8. This is actuallya highly questionableclaim, one that is hardlysupportedby the fact thatboth the Sifra on Leviticus and the Sifre to Deuteronomy were, possibly, composed by "Akiban"schools (p. 13, n. 2). Indeed,both the Temple Scroll (1lQT) and the Sifre providenumerousexamples of precisely the reverse: Deuteronomybeing read (or revised) in light of Leviticus. 9. A good numberof her discussions of chronology are phrasedin the subjunctivemood (e.g., pp. 104-8); cf. her general discussion pp. 6-7.

92

Review Essay rifice is typically vilified in the west by the religious and the secularalike, with the resultthatfew are interestedin uncoveringthe symbolic meaningof sacrificial rituals.'0 All such uncoveringwould require,actually,is taking the methods laid out decades ago in Purity and Danger and applying them to Israelite sacrificial rituals. Although this has been done successfully with regardto other religious traditions, I biblical scholarshave generallychosen not to entertainthe possibility that the HebrewBible's sacrificial rules can be analyzedas symbolic systems. In Chapter 4 of Leviticus as Literaturewe have, finally, Douglas' own treatmentof sacrifice, and it is characterizedby all that is good in her approachto rituals. She operates underthe assumptionthat ritual structuresconvey meaning: even sacrifice is "philosophyby enactment"(p. 68). She eschews itemized solutions, and searches for "integrated"(i.e., systemic) ones. She breaks down boundaries,and draws on the full resources of the Hebrew Bible in orderto figure out what that philosophy being enacted by sacrifice might have been. The central insight here-and it is a good one-is that the same tripartite scheme involved in the analogy between Sinai and the tabernacle(p. 62) can be mappedonto the carcass of an animal offered for sacrifice (p. 79). The beauty of the theory is that everythingfinds its place: the prohibitedfats serve to mark out the boundariesbetween three zones of the carcass, each of which correspondsto one of the three zones of the tabernacle.Typically,her theory is quite comprehensive. Her interestin animalpartsextends as far as to the lobe over the liver (e.g., Lev. 3:15), to which she assigns a meaning by drawingan analogy between sacrificial remainsand the propheticdoctrinesof the remnantof Israel(pp. 71-72, 8186). She eventually works into her theory the prohibitions of leaven and honey (pp. 163-166). One idea sure to raise some eyebrows is her suggestion (pp. 77is as78) thattarn, usually translatedas "legs,"really means "genitals"(and "nwp signed a sense similarly associated with fertility). Douglas' method is not for the squeamish (p. 82 of this chapteris where her consultations with a butcher come to play)-but how else will Leviticus ever be understood?The commentatorswill no doubt question many of her specific claims, but taken as a whole, this single chapteris probablyas importantas any thathas been writtenon Leviticus, perhaps since the thirdchapterof Purityand Danger Justas thatchapterhas had a substantial and lasting impact on the ways people look at Leviticus 11-15 (would anyone now try to analyze these taboos one by one?), ChapterFourof Leviticus as Literature deserves to have the same impact on the ways people look at Leviticus 110. Perhapsmore scholars will now entertainthe possibility that ancient Israelite sacrificial rules were as symbolic and expressive as the food laws are commonly believed to be. The rest of the book proceeds along these same lines. Douglas is treadingin more familiar waters when she reanalyzes the food laws (Chapters Seven and 10. See Klawans,"PureViolence: Sacrifice and Defilement in Ancient Israel,"HarvardTheological Review 94.2 (2001):133-155. 11. See, e.g., Luc de Heusch, Sacrifice in Africa:A StructuralistApproach,trans.Linda O'Brian and Alice Morton (Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press, 1985); cf. Marcel Detienne and JeanPierreVernant,eds., TheCuisineof SacrificeAmongthe Greeks(Chicago:Universityof Chicago Press, 1989).

93

Jonathan Klawans Eight) and the purity laws (ChapterNine). But the solutions suggested here will not always be familiarto her readers.Douglas rethinksher own views as much as she rethinks others', and as a result we have yet anothernovel take on the food laws,12 and even more new food for thought on otherpurityregulations.13 Douglas' anthropologicalinstincts also bringus an interestingchapteron oracles, which raises a ratherpractical question: in the absence of divination (banned by both Leviticus and Deuteronomy),how would one know when one ought to bringa sacrifice for sins unwillingly-or even unknowingly-committed? What was said above regardingsacrifice could be said regardingeach of these chapters:we see throughoutthe productsof a fertile mind. Of course, a numberof Douglas' ideas may not withstand the test of time. They may not even withstandher next book. But nonetheless, the book is fascinatingand provocative:precisely what we would expect from Douglas. Those who devote the time to grapplingwith her volume will be better for it. In the end, I have few qualms with the ways in which Douglas sets out to read Leviticus. Though not all will be convinced by her take on the structureof Leviticus, her case is both compelling and important.Despite what one thinks about distinctions within Leviticus-between the priestly stand (P) and the Holiness Code (H)-a very cogent case can be made for readingthe book of Leviticus as a self-contained whole, precisely as we have it.14 Whatis more, a good case can also be made for putting chronological questions-both relative (i.e., Leviticus' relationto Deuteronomy)and absolute (i.e., Leviticusas pre- or post-exilic)on the back burner.And Douglas herself has made the case here (p. 1) and elsewhere" that a full understandingLeviticus must drawon the full resourcesof the Hebrew Bible. I do howeverhave serious reservationsaboutthe way Douglas readsDeuteronomy. In her passionate defense of the third book of the Pentateuch,she has turned the tables completely, resulting in a work that can justly be accused of "D-baiting." If both Leviticus and Numbers have elaborate (and not obvious) structures,is it not possible that Deuteronomyhas one?16 If Leviticus can only be 12. Chapters7 and 8 of Leviticusas Literaturediffermarkedlynot only from Chapter3 of Purity and Danger (the predominantconcern is no longer the categories of creation),but even from her more recent treatmentsof these laws. In "The ForbiddenAnimals" (pp. 18-23), Douglas drawsa connection between priestly rules on blemishes (Lev. 21:18-24) and the lex talionis (Lev. 24:19-20), and suggests that the food laws serve, at least in part,to protectthose animalswhose bodies are characterized by something superfluousor something lacking. Thus the dietarylaws are an enactmentof divine justice. (See also "Holy Joy.")In Leviticus as Literature,however,Douglas suggests that the primary concern of the dietarylaws is to enact God'sblessing ("be fruitfulandmultiply")by not eatingthe most fertile of creatures.What these two newer theories share, against Chapter3 of Purity and Danger, is that the prohibitedanimals are not abominableat all; what is abominableis to eat these creatures. 13. Again, those who have readthe articles cited in n. 2 above should not assume thatthey know what Douglas will say in these chaptersof Leviticusas Literature. 14. See Rolf Rendtorff,"Is it Possible to Read Leviticus as a SeparateBook?" in Sawyer,ed., Reading Leviticus, pp. 22-35. 15. "SacredContagion,"p. 106. 16. Granted,scholars have not yet found one (pp. 50-52), but as Douglas herself grants,until recently, many scholars never discernedmuch of a structureto Numberseither.

94

Review Essay properlyunderstoodby drawingon the full resourcesof the Bible, can it really be the case that Deuteronomyis fully self-contained?" And even if it is, does it not containarticulateexpressions of many of the concerns that Douglas holds dearcovenant,fertility,andjustice? Can a text thatdutifullyrelates not only all that,but also the food laws in all their detail really be "theologicallysuperficial"(p. 174)? I fear thatone of two things is true. One possibility is that our authorhas let herself get carriedaway.In her zeal to ascribe all the compassion to Leviticus, she's left with little of her own to spare for Deuteronomy.The other possibility is that I have misreadthe book. Perhapswe're not supposedto readLeviticusas Literature as if it were Deuteronomy,but as if it were Leviticus. Just like Leviticus is supposed to be read only by drawingon the full resourcesof the Bible, is Leviticusas Literaturesupposed to be read only by drawing on the full resources of Mary Douglas' own work?Is Leviticusas Literature,like Leviticus itself, some form of "restrictedcode" (p. 38)? Consideringthe strengthof her convictions and the novelty of her ideas, I suspect thatDouglas has left unstatedher criticism of others of us-I would have to include myself here-who have been struggling with some of the same questions. What is more, I suspect that Douglas has left unstatedher wish thatwe readLeviticusas Literaturealongside her otherwork(even Purity and Danger), not againstit. But as a reviewer,my task can only be to comment on what is there,not to speculate on what is not. Some two decadesago, G. S. Kirkpublishedan importantevaluationof Mary Douglas' methodology as it pertainsto sacrificial rituals in general (and to Greek ritualsin particular)."8Though the article is in some respects dated now, one key issue raised by Kirk deserves to be noted here. While endorsing Douglas' structural insights, Kirk calls for some middle ground between the "piecemeal"solutions thatDouglas rejects and the single-principletheories that she often espouses instead.What Kirk would like to see is: thecarefulre-statement of functionalism in relationto thoseaccidents,confusions,syncretisms,andhistoricalchangesthatmakereligionin particular, includingits ritualsandthepracticeof animalsacrificenotleastof all, such a multifarious andoftencontradictory affair(p. 54). From Purity and Danger throughLeviticus as LiteratureMary Douglas has frequentlychampionednew and fascinatingideas that she then-at least so it seems to many of us-pushes too far.Can the dietary laws of Leviticus 11 be explained any more on a one-by-one basis? Probablynot. Can they all be explained by the single elegantidea thatthe abominationsof Leviticuscohere perfectlywith the categories of creation laid out in Genesis 1? Again, probablynot. Or, now, can the rules of Leviticus 11 be explainedby the single idea thatGod has, out of kindness, prohibitedIsrael from eating the most fertile of animals (p. 174)? Again, probably 17. In one rathersurprisingpassage (p. 147), Douglas even resorts to DeuteronomyChapter7 in her elucidationof Leviticus' conception of impurity. 18. See G. S. Kirk, "Some MethodologicalPitfalls in the Study of Ancient Greek Sacrifice (in Particular),"in Olivier Reverdin, BernardGrange, and Jean-PierreVernant,eds., Le Sacrifice dans L'antiquitd:huit exposds suivis de discussions (Geneva:FondationHardt, 1980), pp. 41-80.

95

Jonathan Klawans not. Is Douglas well awareof this? I suspect thatto be the case, but to argueit one would, again, have to read Leviticus as Literaturein the way that Mary Douglas reads Leviticus. One final matter:In her preface, Douglas repeats a point she has made ofin ten recent times: themorethatpollutiontheorydeveloped,andthemorethatpollutionwasseen themoreI wasboundto acas thevehicleof accusationsanddowngradings, knowledgethatit doesnotapplyto the mostfamousinstanceof theWestern tradition,thePentateuch (p. viii).'9 Then she goes on to state: "Generalpollution theory still stands, but its application to the Bible is limited."Presumably,what she means here is thatwe are indeed still to read and learn from Purity and Danger, and we are to assume that all other puritysystems functionin ways more or less akinto what is describedthere.The biblical system, however,is unique. Purity and Danger remains an importantbook, and those who are drawnto read Leviticus as Literaturewould do well to (re-)readDouglas' earlierwork, too. But the importanceof Purity and Danger lies more in its overall methods (particularly its fusion of functionalismand structuralism)and its advocacy of the symbolic value of ritual structures,and less in its specific descriptionsof the social functions of purity systems. Leviticus as Literature-along with all of Douglas' recent work-demonstrates quite clearly that Purity and Danger does not adequately describe the functions of the biblical purity rules. But the implicationto be drawnfrom this is not, and cannot be, that the puritysystem of the Pentateuch is unique in this regard.What of post-biblicalJudaism?Are those New Testament scholars who apply Purity and Danger to their (mis-)understandingsof the Pharisees correct?And what of Islam? Shouldn'tnearlyall of what Mary Douglas has written of the biblical system in her newer work apply equally to the morallyneutral purity system(s) of the Islamic tradition?20Shouldn'tritual structuresbe explained by their culturally-specific social functions and culturally-specific symbolic meanings?Some thirty-sevenyearsafterthe publicationof Purityand Danger, we arepoised to reevaluatethe specific comparativeclaims of thatimportantwork. Ironically,it is Douglas' own Leviticusas Literaturethathas broughtus much closer to that point of reevaluation. Hyam Maccoby's book is quite different from Douglas', though he is also too focused on a single idea. Maccoby'sprimaryinterestin Ritual and Moralityis to drive home the point that, as far as Judaism is concerned,ritual is completely separate from, and ultimately subordinateto, morality (pp. viii, 193-208). The problem with this claim-at least as far as Maccoby'sbook is concerned-is that 19. For similar statements, see "Atonementin Leviticus,"pp. 112-113; "The ForbiddenAni-

mals,"pp.5-8; In theWilderness, pp.239-240; and"SacredContapp. 150-159;"PoeticStructure," gion," pp. 95-96. 20. See A. Kevin Reinhart,"Impurity/NoDanger,"History of Religions 30, no. 1 (1990): 124.

96

Review Essay his real interestlies in only a small aspect of this large (and important)question. We cannotevaluatebriefly both this claim and his book in the same essay, for the fact is thatMaccoby does very little-other thananalyzethe ritualpuritysystemto substantiateJudaism'sseparationof ritualfrom morality,or its subordinationof the formerto the latter.There are few discussions of Jewish ritual in general, and practically none concerning Jewish morality in general. Nor are there really discussionsof Judaismas a whole, even in antiquity.Maccoby'sinterestsaremuch more selective: he's interestedin the purity system, as expressed in biblical and thenrabbinicsources. Philo, Josephus,and a few of the Dead Sea scrolls (4QMMT and the TempleScroll) come up periodically,but the interestin these works is not sustained.Otherworksthat, one would think, are importantto the history of ritual purity in ancient Judaism-Jubilees, the Damascus Document, the Testamentof Levi, the CommunityRule, the HabakkukPesher-are not discussed at all. It is a curious conception of ancient Judaismwhich can exclude all this literature,and still claim to speak authoritatively,even on ritual impurity specifically, let alone on mattersas broadas ritualand morality. Maccoby'smore limited goal-one at which he is much more successfulis to describethe history of the ritualpurity system, as it develops from the Bible into the system of the rabbis(vii). He quickly (andjustifiably) excludes the dietary prohibitionsof Leviticus 11 from his focus (vii)-despite the fact that the terms "pure"and "impure"are used-except insofar as animal carcasses become a source of ritualimpurity(Lev. 11:24ff.; pp. 67-80). His interest is in those purity rules which do not concern prohibitions:the laws laid out primarilyin Leviticus 12-15 and Numbers 19. Here Maccoby agrees with Douglas and many other scholarsin advocatingthatritualimpurityis not aboutthe problematizationof sinful behaviors.As Maccoby emphasizes quite frequently,many behaviors consideredrituallydefiling arenatural(e.g., childbirth)or even meritorious(e.g., burial). But unlike Douglas, Maccoby's interest is not just in the Pentateuch,but in how the few biblical chaptersturninto the fully developed system of the rabbis.This is the historythatMaccobysets out to trace.Yetin somethingof a throwbackto James Frazer, Maccoby's book is structured encyclopedically, with little regard for chronology.Each of the first 12 chapters(out of 16) is devoted to the history and developmentof a single aspect of purity law: ChapterOne: The Corpse; Chapter Two:The tent; ChapterThree:Menstruation;and so forth. Within these chapters, Maccoby'sscope is indeed quite broad:he reaches back into the prehistoryof biblical law, and then looks forward into rabbinic and New Testament literature (though, as noted above, there are some significant omissions). In a number of these chapters, Maccoby raises important correctives to current scholarly approachesto ritual impurity,in particularto the work of Jacob Milgrom and Jacob Neusner.In the end, Maccoby'sbook is practicallythe mirrorimage of Douglas'. If her devotion to a single good idea leads her to confuse or jumble some of the details, Maccoby,on the other hand,is most helpful in the realm of details. Regardingthe natureof ritualimpurity,Maccoby has some interestingand importantthings to say. In additionto emphasizingthe points noted already,Maccoby helpfully suggests that ritualpurityregulationscan be understoodby analogy to palace etiquette(pp. 8-9, 206-208): just as there are certainthings that one 97

Jonathan Klawans simply would not do in the presence of an earthlymonarch,so to therewere things that ancientIsraeliteswould not do in the presenceof the God whose presencethey wished to maintain among them. Ritual purity is about awe, not disgust (pp. 48, 66).21 Maccoby also correctly rejects the populartheory (advocatedby Milgrom and Emanuel Feldman)22that states that the common denominatoramong all the sources of ritualimpurityin the Hebrew Bible is death.Maccoby is rightto doubt whetherthe concernwith deathreally explains all of ancientIsrael'sconcernswith purity,especially since the only bodily fluids which defile aregenital/sexual in nature (pp. 30-31, 49-50). As Maccoby puts it, the ritual purity system is one in which "both Eros and Thanatosare inextricablyentwined"(p. ix). Maccoby also raises some helpful criticisms to the work of Jacob Neusner, underscoringhow Neusner frequentlyfails to see biblical bases or precedentsfor rabbinicrules (e.g., pp. 96-100) and how Neusner has overemphasizedthe Sifra'salleged "anti-logic" ideology (pp. 59-60). These and other discussions in Ritual and Morality are marredmerely by the fact that Maccoby tends to cite scholars only when he disagrees with them. Maccoby thus seems to claim here as his own points also made recently by a numberof other scholars.23 Maccoby is justified in taking a particularinterestin the work of JacobMilgrom, yet in at least one instance, his assessment of Milgrom tells us less about Milgrom than it does about Maccoby.One aspect of Milgrom'swork which Maccoby completely rejects is the "DorianGray"theory concerning the hattat sacrifice. In a nutshell, Milgrom believes that the sacrifice commonly referredto as a "sin-offering"does not serve as a ritual of atonement,but ratheras a ritual of purification. Further,what is purified, in Milgrom's view, is not the sinner who brings the sacrifice, but the altarof God, which is subjectto defilement by sin.24 Maccoby criticizes Milgrom's understandingof things, citing a lack of evidence (p. 166). Of course, as Maccoby later grants (p. 167), Milgrom does have some evidence for his claim. But Maccoby's critique of Milgrom here ultimately fails because his own reconstructionsof things are often based on little or no evidence. 21. Curiously, Maccoby leaves uncited the biblical text that best articulates the purity-asetiquette view: Malachi 1:6-14. 22. Emanuel Feldman,Biblical and Post-Biblical Defilement and Mourning:Law as Theology (New York:YeshivaUniversityPress, 1977), pp. 13-30. JacobMilgrom,Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation with Introductionand Commentary(AnchorBible, vol. 3; New York:Doubleday,1992), pp. 766, 1001-1002. 23. For example, in believing thatritualimpuritycan be explainedby both deathand sex, Maccoby has been preceded by, among others, Tikva Frymer-Kenskyand David P. Wright. See FrymerKensky, "Pollution,Purification,and Purgationin Biblical Israel,"in The Wordof the LordShall Go Forth:Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedmanin Celebrationof his SixtiethBirthday,CarolL. Meyers and M. O'Connor,eds. (WinonaLake:Eisenbrauns,1983), pp. 399-410, esp. p. 401; and David P. Wright, "Unclean and Clean (OT),"in TheAnchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman(New York:Doubleday, 1992), vol. VI, pp. 729-741, esp. p. 739. See also HowardEilberg-Schwartz,The Savage in Judaism:AnAnthropologyof Israelite Religion andAncientJudaism(Bloomington:Indiana University Press, 1990), pp. 182-186. The importantworks by these scholars are not cited anywhere in Maccoby's analysis. 24. Milgrom, "Israel'sSanctuary:'The Priestly Picture of Dorian Gray',"Revue Biblique 83 (1976): 390-399;

cf. Leviticus 1-16, pp. 253-292.

98

Review Essay When it comes to explaining various curiosities in the Israelite ritual purity system Maccoby speculatesas he wishes, presentingelaboratereconstructionsof the early history of scapegoatrites (pp. 81-93), the red cow rituals(pp. 94-117), and the purificationsfrom leprosy (pp. 118-140). In each case, building on his earlier work, The Sacred Executioner,25Maccoby decides that certain features of the Israelitesystem are "vestiges of an ancient earthreligion of generation,death and resurrection"(p. ix). These discussions are evolutionistic and neo-Frazerian,leaving this readerwith the wish that Maccoby would rereadthe first two chaptersof Purity and Danger. Even when attemptingto explain less remote issues-such as the essence of the Jesus-Phariseedisputein Mark7:1-23-Maccoby is free to theorize as he wishes, creativelycontendingthatthe Pharisees'rules abouthandwashing were concerned not with ritual purity,but with hygiene (pp. 155-161). Yet when it comes to evaluatingMilgrom'shypothesis aboutthe hattatoffering, Maccoby drawsthe line on speculation.He will not even grantthe possibility that Milgrom's reconstructioncould shed light on the pre-historyof Israeliteritualpurity laws. It cannot be speculationper se that bothers Maccoby. What bothers him is any speculationthat violates his intent to keep separateritual from morality,and to subordinateritualto morality. Which brings us to one final question. What are we to do with Leviticus 18:24-30? How is Maccoby to make sense of a text which, after laying out a series of sexual sins (18:6-23), explicitly describes the prohibited activities as abominationsand impurities(18:20, 22, 24), having the capacity to defile the land (18:25)?26 Leviticus 18 raises serious problems for Maccoby's entire project, so towardthe end of his book (pp. 200-201) he takes a few swipes at some of my own work and the view that the there was, alongside the "ritual"purity system, a second system, which can be called the "moral"purity system. Maccoby's first mistake is to presentthis suggestion as my idea, which it is not. Some sort of distinction betweenritualimpurityon the one handand the ideas expressed in Leviticus 18 on the other has been articulatedrecently by Tikva Frymer-Kenskyand David P. Wright, and was described generations ago by David Z. Hoffmann and Adolph Biichler.27Maccoby's second mistake is to follow in the line of Jacob Neusner(whose workis not cited here), anddismissjuxtapositionsof impurityand sin as metaphor.28Maccoby justifies this move by arguing (this is his third mistake) thatsince land is personified in Leviticus 18:25, 28 ("lest the land vomityou out") thatthereforethe entire passage must be metaphorical.Now even if it were clear that land is being personified in these verses-I'll argue against that claim 25. TheSacredExecutioner:HumanSacrifice and the Legacy of Guilt (New York:Thames and Hudson, 1982). 26. My own work has tried to show the degree to which the impact of the ideas articulatedin Leviticus 18 and elsewherewere felt in subsequentancientJewish literature,from Jubilees to the Sifra. See, "Notions of Gentile Impurityin Ancient Judaism,"AJS Review 20.2 (1995): 285-312, and Impurity and Sin in AncientJudaism (New York:Oxford University Press, 2000). 27. See Frymer-Kensky,"Pollution,"andWright,"Unclean and Clean (OT)."Cf. Adolph Biichler, Studiesin Sin andAtonementin the RabbinicLiteratureof the First Century(London:OxfordUniversity Press, 1928), and David Z. Hoffmann, Das Buch Leviticus, 2 vols. (Berlin: M. Poppelauer, 1905-6). Again, none of these works are discussed in Maccoby'sbook. 28. See Neusner, The Idea of Purity in Ancient Judaism (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973), esp. p. 108.

99

Jonathan Klawans in a moment-it does not necessarily follow that the thrustof the entirepassage is metaphorical,any more than the use of the euphemism"revealthe nakedness" in the rest of Leviticus 18 means that the prohibitionsare meant tongue-in-cheek. Individualterms can be used metaphoricallyor figurativelyeven in sentences that need to be taken literally.29But the fact is that there is no personificationof the land in Leviticus 18.30 The verb translatedby Maccoby as "to vomit" (xprr5) is indeed used elsewhere in the HebrewBible to referto people (e.g., Prov.23:8). But the term is also used of animals (Jonah 2:11; Prov. 26:11) and animals are, of course, fully capable of vomiting. There is certainlyno personificationin Jonah 2:11 or Prov.26:11. Thus, we ought not, strictlyspeaking,describeLeviticus 18:25 as an instance of personification at all, but ratheras a case of animification(cf. p. 201). And this is a meaningful descriptionof the usage in Leviticus 18:25 only if Israelites generally conceived of land as inanimate.But did Israelitesconceive of land as inanimate?I doubt it. Ancient Israelitesknew well of earthquakesand volcanoes and they probablywould have used termssuch as the verbused in Leviticus 18:25 to describe such phenomena,without intendingto be figurativeor poetic. All things considered, the NJV and the REB have it better: "and the land spewed out its inhabitants."This is a better translation,one which does not force the readerto think that land is being personified in the passage. It is Maccoby who has put the cart in frontof the horse (p. 199). He has asserted the absolute independenceof ritualand morality,and assumedthe absolute subordinationof the formerto the latter.Anythingthatviolates eitherof these two views is to be dispensed with, and this can be achieved in one of two ways. He can ignore the texts altogether(e.g., Jubilees, the CommunityRule), or he can dismiss as metaphortexts which, if taken at all seriously at all, challenge his claims. The metaphorissue remains, to be sure, subject to discussion. However,even if these texts were metaphorical,they must be discussed and accountedfor. It is certainly not a simple thing to determinewhat is and what is not metaphorical,but only a facile and unsophisticatedapproachto metaphorcan allow one to believe thatthe determinationof some passage as metaphorallows one then to dismiss any and all discussion of that text from the subject at hand. Even if Leviticus 18 were entirely metaphorical,the history,nature,and meaningof thatmetaphorwould still need to be discussed in a book that sets out to analyze eitherritualpurityspecifically or morality more generally. Maccoby does not do this. In the end, his blanket assumptions that Jews and ancient Israelites,whereverand wheneverthey lived, distinguished ritual from morality and always subordinatedthe latterto the former cannot be maintained. Those interestedin Leviticus and purity will find reading Douglas' Leviticus as Literaturea rewardingexperience, especially if they are able to overlook Douglas' take on some of the details and focus on appreciatingthe significance of 29. This is frequentlytrueof ourown ways of discussing sexual matters.See Eilberg-Schwartz, The Savage, pp. 115-140, especially the examples on p. 118. 30. Maccoby is not alone in claiming that land is personified in Leviticus 18. The KJV,RSV, and NRSV translateour Hebrewterm as "to vomit."See also EverettFox, TheSchockenBible, Volume 1: TheFive Books of Moses (New York:Schocken Books, 1995), p. 599 and n. to Lev. 18:25.

100

Review Essay her method.Reading Maccoby'sRitual and Moralitywill provide a more frustrating experience,as one will have to overlook much of what he leaves unsubstantiated in orderto find those aspects of his argumentthat are well supported.But if either book is to be read, each can perhaps be most rewardinglyread alongside Mary Douglas' Purity and Danger, a work that trulydeserves reading and rereading. JonathanKlawans Boston University Boston, Massachusetts

101

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Marc Z. Brettler Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 103-104 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131771 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

AJS Review 27:1 (2003), 103-180

BOOK REVIEWS Isaac Kalimi. The Book of Chronicles:Historical Writingand LiteraryDevices. The Biblical Encyclopedia Library,vol. 18. Jerusalem:Mosad Bialik, 2000. ix, 477 pp. (Hebrew). This work is an updatedrevision of Kalimi'sZur Geschichtsschreibungdes Chronisten,published in 1995 in the BZAW series, which in turn is based on his Hebrew University dissertation.Kalimi begins by outlining his (mainstream)positions on central questions concerning Chronicles, such as its date, unity, and genre: issues that are crucial before developing his thesis. The bulk of the book comprises nineteen chapters,each dealing with a particularliterary or historical principle,such as harmonization,measurefor measure,chiasm, inclusio, and use of literarypatterning.A final chapterdeals with inconsistenciesof various sorts, and an "Afterward" discusses how the book has advancedscholarshipon Chronicles. The materialpresentedin the core nineteen chaptersis often quite technical, but it is presentedclearly and is easy to follow. It is not obvious why there should be nineteen ratherthan eighteen or twenty-one literary principles, but the categories used as chapterheadings by Kalimi are quite functional. Most of the examples he offers are convincing, and afterfinishing this section, any readerwould have a good sense of the range of techniques used by the Chroniclerin revising earliermaterial. As might be expected,not all of the several hundredexamples adducedare equallycompelling.Forexample,I do not agree with Kalimi'sclaim (p. 96) thatthe i tnwaxunwar nn~n in~y-ra, Chroniclerleft out 2 Sam 7:14b, nawu rtx'n•n,•• because it reflected poorly on Solomon; Solomon is not punished either by staff or afflictions, and some otherreasonmust be sought for why the Chronicleromits this half-verse from Samuel. Perhapsthe Chroniclerwas more sympatheticto, or was influencedby, the type of Davidic promise narratedin Psalm 132, which likewise lacks this punishment.(For additionalpossibilities, see Sara Japhet,I & II Chronicles[OTL;Louisville, KY:Westminster/JohnKnox, 1993], p. 334.) Althoughthe collection of examples is rich and valuable, I wish Kalimi had been broaderin his perspective.This is true on several levels. He often notes cases wherea device in Chroniclesis foundin laterrabbinicliteratureor in Josephus(e.g., pp. 39, 77, 141). Thereis no systematicoverview of this issue; it would have been valuable to note how Chronicles' rhetoric fits chronologically and typologically between the earlierhistoricalwriting and that found in the early post-biblical period and rabbinicwritings. Such a discussion would have enrichedthe book greatly, and would have been an importantcontributionto the history of early Jewish historiography. Similarly,insufficient attentionis paid to continuitybetween the Chronicler andearlierbiblicalworks.Forexample,the first chapter,which touches on chronological rearrangement,would have benefited from David A. Glatt, Chronological Displacement in Biblical and Related Literatures(SBL Dissertation Series 139; 103

Book Reviews Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), which even discusses some of the examples that Kalimi adduces.The discussion of measurefor measurewould have greaterdepth if the study of PatrickD. Miller, Sin and Judgmentin the Prophets (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1982) were brought to bear. The chapter on names changed to equivalent names would have benefited had it been connected to Talmon'smodel of synonymous readings (ShemaryahuTalmon, "Synonymous Readings in the TextualTraditionof the OT,"Scripta hierosolymitana8 [1961]: 335-383). The result of these deficiencies is that too often the book reads like a set of lists, lacking a broaderperspective. Kalimi's final chapter,on contradictionsand inconsistencies eitherretained by the Chroniclerfrom his sources, or createdby him, is typical of the gold mine of informationcollected in the volume. Yet here, too, I wish he had gone further, examining the implications of this material for imagining what the Chronicler's notions of consistency might have been, or even the extent to which we might expect consistency in any ancient text such as the Bible. Similarly,Kalimi does not fit the specific categorieshe develops into a larger conceptual framework.Whatdo they imply for our understandingof the Chronicler as a historian?How do the literary and the historical urges fit together?In what sense are these changes literary,or are they best seen as rhetorical?Less detailed studies, such as Elias Bickerman'squick survey of the Chroniclerin From Ezra to the Last of the Maccabees, address such crucial issues in a much broader and more engaging fashion. Additionally,although the book claims to be updated,relatively few works cited were written after the mid-1980s, when Kalimi's doctoral dissertationwas completed. It is very surprising,for example, thatRodney K. Duke's ThePersuasiveAppeal of the Chronicler.A RhetoricalAnalysis(JSOTSup88; Sheffield,MA: Almond Press, 1990), which explicitly addressesthe literarystatus of the Chronicler, is never cited or discussed. Similarly,almost all of the essays in the importantcollection TheChronicleras Historian,ed. M. PatrickGrahamet al. (JSOTSup 238; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997) are ignored,as is the two-volume Chronicles commentaryby William Johnstone,publishedin the same yearas Sara Japhet's magisterial Chronicles commentary of 1993. These works would have added depth to Kalimi's observations, and may have forced him to re-categorize some of the texts he did explore. Despite these structuralandbibliographicaldeficiencies, TheBook of Chronicles: Historical Writingand LiteraryDevices is a very importantbook, one which enriches our understandingof the Chroniclerand begins to systematize the methods that he used. It is indispensable for anyone engaged in studying Chronicles, particularlyfor anyone interested in understandingin detail how the Chronicler worked with his sources. Marc Z. Brettler BrandeisUniversity Waltham,Massachusetts

104

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Gary Beckman Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 105-106 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131772 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews JudithM. Hadley. The Cult of theAsherah in Ancient Israel and Judah.-Evidence for a Hebrew Goddess. University of CambridgeOrientalPublications 57. Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press, 2000. xv, 262 pp. Did the God of Israelhave a wife? Posed in the context of monotheisticRabbinic Judaismand Christianitythis is, of course, a nonsensical question. However, even in the heavily edited Masoretictext of the Hebrew Bible there remaintraces of an earlierstage of belief in which Yahwehwas accompaniedby other beings. Among these para-humanfigures is Asherah,the form of whose name clearly indicates her feminine gender.In recentyears numerousscholarshave addressedthe ticklish question of the original relationshipbetween this lady and the Lord of Hosts, a problemthatinvolvesprobinginto the prehistoryof the Hebrewscriptures. The volume here under review, a reworked 1989 Cambridge dissertation, thoroughlyconsiders the textual and archaeologicalevidence bearing on the matter of Asherah.The authorcommences with an exhaustivereview of earlierwork on the topic, presenting the argumentsof contributorsto the discussion in such specificity that she even reportsthe numberof footnotes that appearin a certain work!While this excessive detail constantlyremindsthe readerof the book's origins as a doctoralthesis, it nonetheless gives one an excellent basis on which to decide whetherto consult a particularsecondary source. There can be little doubt that Asherah of the Hebrew Bible was originally the goddess known at Ugarit as Athiratand in cuneiform sources of the second millenniumas Ashratum,and thatshe once stood in a close relationshipto the God of Israel. Later editors of the scriptures,however, so thoroughlydepersonalized her that she appearsin the received text as an inanimatewooden pole, part of the furnishingsof a shrine. Asherah'searlieridentitycould be recoveredonly afterthe documentsof Israel's ancient neighbors-both contemporariesand predecessors-had become accessible to scholarsin the twentiethcentury.Several archaeologicaldiscoveries, capablydiscussed by Hadley,have added supportto the work of the philologists. The most sensationalof these was the unearthingat Kuntillet'Ajrudin the northern Sinai of the ruins of a caravanseraifrom the ninth-eighthcenturiesB.C.E. (see ChapterFive). Among the graffiti incised into storagejars at this site areblessings by "Yahweh of Samariaand his Asherah"(on pithosA) and by "Yahwehof Temanand his Asherah"(on pithos B). Also presenton the first vessel are crudely drawnfigures that some authoritieshave sensationallyinterpretedas images of the divine couple. Hadley carefully sifts the iconographicevidence and demonstratesconvincingly that the drawingsin fact representthe Egyptian fertility/jester god Bes and a musician, and have no necessary connection to the benedictions. However,the problemremains:was theAsherahevokedhere a deity or merely a cultic object?While this mattermay be of great moment theologically, from the viewpoint of the historianof religion it is a distinctionwithout a difference. If a symbol-in this case a shaft of wood representingthe ancient Near East's sacred tree of vitality and fertility-may be invokedto provideboons, then it is imbued with both a personality and para-humanpowers. Functionally,therefore, it 105

Book Reviews stands for a divinity, if perhapsa minor one, whetheror not labeled with the term "god(dess)."One is remindedof the optionaluse of the divine determinativewith various pieces of temple equipment in Mesopotamianand Hittite rituals.As for the pairing of Yahwehwith a goddess, Tikva Frymer-Kensky(In the Wakeof the Goddesses [New York:Free Press, 1992) has emphasizedthe difficulties that arise when a monotheistic religion assigns humanlikecharacterand gender to its sole god. Aspects of life more naturallyattributedto beings of the excluded gender (e.g., motherhoodin the case of the God of Israel)can be accommodatedonly awkwardly in conceptions of the universal deity. The evidence from ancient Israel strongly suggests that this problemhad not yet arisen in the pre-exilic period. Gary Beckman University of Michigan Ann Arbor,Michigan

AbrahamTal. A Dictionary of SamaritanAramaic. Handbuchder Orientalistik. Leiden: Brill, 2000. 2 vols. xxxiv, n, 967 pp. The field of Aramaicstudies has witnessed a steady streamof majordevelopments in recent years. Importantnew volumes include M. Sokoloff, A Dictionary of PalestinianJewishAramaic(Ramat-Gan:BarIlanUniversityPress, 1990); J. Hoftijzer and K. Jongeling, Dictionary of the North-WestSemitic Inscriptions, 2 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1995); and T. Muraokaand B. Porten,A Grammarof Egyptian Aramaic (Leiden: Brill, 1998).' Two classics have been reprintedby Eisenbrauns: J. Payne Smith, A CompendiousSyriac Dictionary (Oxford, 1903; repr. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1998); and T. Nildeke, Compendious Syriac Grammar(London, 1904; repr.WinonaLake, IN: Eisenbrauns,2001). In addition, the ComprehensiveAramaic Lexicon web site has been launched (http://call.cn .huc.edu/index.html), with various databases currently available and with the promise for more online resources. To this bounty of material,especially in the area of Aramaic lexicography, we now may add the work under review,AbrahamTal'sA Dictionary of Samaritan Aramaic. Professor Tal has been the most active researcherin the field of Samaritanstudies for severaldecades, having inheritedthatposition fromhis venerable teacher,the doyen of all Samaritanstudies, Ze'ev Ben-ayyim. Tal'sdictionary is the crowning achievementof a lifetime of study into the language and literatureof this tiny yet importantreligious community. The body of this dictionary is written in Hebrew.Thus, for example, each Aramaicword is glossed with its modernHebrewequivalent;each text cited is followed by a Hebrew rendering;additionaldiscussion of specific points is in Hebrew; sources and bibliographicinformationare presentedin Hebrew;and so on. 1. For my reviews of the first two of these works, see, respectively,AJS Review 17 (1992), pp. 296-99; and Journal of the American OrientalSociety 118 (1998), pp. 96-97.

106

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Gary A. Rendsburg Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 106-109 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131773 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews stands for a divinity, if perhapsa minor one, whetheror not labeled with the term "god(dess)."One is remindedof the optionaluse of the divine determinativewith various pieces of temple equipment in Mesopotamianand Hittite rituals.As for the pairing of Yahwehwith a goddess, Tikva Frymer-Kensky(In the Wakeof the Goddesses [New York:Free Press, 1992) has emphasizedthe difficulties that arise when a monotheistic religion assigns humanlikecharacterand gender to its sole god. Aspects of life more naturallyattributedto beings of the excluded gender (e.g., motherhoodin the case of the God of Israel)can be accommodatedonly awkwardly in conceptions of the universal deity. The evidence from ancient Israel strongly suggests that this problemhad not yet arisen in the pre-exilic period. Gary Beckman University of Michigan Ann Arbor,Michigan

AbrahamTal. A Dictionary of SamaritanAramaic. Handbuchder Orientalistik. Leiden: Brill, 2000. 2 vols. xxxiv, n, 967 pp. The field of Aramaicstudies has witnessed a steady streamof majordevelopments in recent years. Importantnew volumes include M. Sokoloff, A Dictionary of PalestinianJewishAramaic(Ramat-Gan:BarIlanUniversityPress, 1990); J. Hoftijzer and K. Jongeling, Dictionary of the North-WestSemitic Inscriptions, 2 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1995); and T. Muraokaand B. Porten,A Grammarof Egyptian Aramaic (Leiden: Brill, 1998).' Two classics have been reprintedby Eisenbrauns: J. Payne Smith, A CompendiousSyriac Dictionary (Oxford, 1903; repr. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1998); and T. Nildeke, Compendious Syriac Grammar(London, 1904; repr.WinonaLake, IN: Eisenbrauns,2001). In addition, the ComprehensiveAramaic Lexicon web site has been launched (http://call.cn .huc.edu/index.html), with various databases currently available and with the promise for more online resources. To this bounty of material,especially in the area of Aramaic lexicography, we now may add the work under review,AbrahamTal'sA Dictionary of Samaritan Aramaic. Professor Tal has been the most active researcherin the field of Samaritanstudies for severaldecades, having inheritedthatposition fromhis venerable teacher,the doyen of all Samaritanstudies, Ze'ev Ben-ayyim. Tal'sdictionary is the crowning achievementof a lifetime of study into the language and literatureof this tiny yet importantreligious community. The body of this dictionary is written in Hebrew.Thus, for example, each Aramaicword is glossed with its modernHebrewequivalent;each text cited is followed by a Hebrew rendering;additionaldiscussion of specific points is in Hebrew; sources and bibliographicinformationare presentedin Hebrew;and so on. 1. For my reviews of the first two of these works, see, respectively,AJS Review 17 (1992), pp. 296-99; and Journal of the American OrientalSociety 118 (1998), pp. 96-97.

106

Book Reviews To aid the English reader,each entry includes an English gloss as well; furthermore, many (though not all) of the cited texts include English renderingsalongside the Hebrew renderings.2The detailed Introductionis presented in both English and Hebrew,though, quite oddly, slightly differentinformationis conveyed in the two versions. Tal describes in clear terms the majorproblemfacing the compiler of a dictionaryof SamaritanAramaic.As with the Jews, so with the Samaritans:the contact betweenAramaicand Hebrewthroughoutthe centuries creates a very thorny problemfor the lexicographer.Are Hebrewwords in Aramaicto be consideredtrue loanwords,andthereforefodderfor a dictionaryof Aramaic;or arethey to be treated as pureHebrewwords invokedby the authorof a particularcomposition, sometimes even subconsciously?Talnotes two differentperiods of contact between the two languages.The first is the Second Templeperiod,when both HebrewandAramaic were "living languages, coexisting as vernaculars"among the Samaritans (p. xii). The second is the medieval period, when both languages no longer were spoken-the SamaritansadoptedArabic as the vernacularby the eleventh century C.E. Tal arguesconvincinglythatHebrewwords borrowedinto Aramaic during the first period should be includedin the dictionary,just as loanwordsinto any living languageshouldbe includedin a dictionaryof said language.Forthe medieval period,however,generallyTal opts not to include Hebrewwords that appearwithin Aramaiccompositions,especially lexical items which appearrandomly.He presents such examples as an occasional attestationof nai for Aramaic pv~, for •aum for Aramaicinx. In these cases, the Hebrewterm does not Aramaic iTn,and jrnp displace the Aramaicterm, nor is it used for a special nuance, but ratherit simply occurs in a poem or hymn written by an authoror copied by a copyist at a time when "no solid distinctionbetween Hebrew and Aramaicwas made" (p. xiv). To a lesser extent, the same problemarises with the occasional Arabic word that appears within an Aramaic composition. Again, Tal is conservative in his judgment, choosing typically not to include such words. Tal notes anothercomplicating factor:thatour oldest Samaritanmanuscriptdates to 1204 C.E. Thatis to say, even for our oldest Samaritantexts, such as the Targumto the Torah,clearly authoredin late antiquity,we possess very late copies in which occasional Arabisms appear.Obviously,these lexemes cannot be considered truly representative of SamaritanAramaic. This is not to say, however, that Tal excludes all Arabic words.Whenin his judgmentanArabismwithin SamaritanAramaicis determined to be a loanword,Tal includes the word,with referenceto the dictionariesof either Lane or Dozy for furtherinformationon the lexeme. In the fourteenthand especially the fifteenth century,a great renaissanceof Samaritanliteratureoccurred,with the resultantnew literarylanguage, "a kind of artificially constructedconglomerateof Aramaic and Hebrew with heavy traces of Arabic"(p. xiii). Given the even greaterproblems inherentin sifting Aramaic materialfromtexts of this period,Talutilizes sources from only the thirteenthcentury and earlier. 2. Talinformsthe reader(p. xxv, p. Ka)that Steven Fassbergof the HebrewUniversity checked the English materialfor greateraccuracy.

107

Book Reviews The main sources for this dictionary,accordingly,are a) the Targum,b) the great midrashiccomposition known as the TibatMarqe(or MemarMarqa),c) the liturgy (prayers,etc.), and d) chronicles such as the book of Asatir andthe Tulida. In all cases, Tal utilizes the best manuscriptsavailable,especially those published duringthe past sixty years by Ben-ayyim, Tal, and Moshe Florentin(representing three generationsof Samaritanistsin Israeliacademe).In addition,as wouldbe expected, Tal cites the great late medieval Samaritanmultilingual dictionaryHaMelis whereverrelevant. Note, however,thatTal has not included Samaritaninscriptionsin his database; it is not clear to me why this is so. I was able to identify at least one lexical item attested in an inscriptionthat is not included in Tal'swork, namely,the loanword ruopns (< Greek rcp6o"vog)"patron,benefactor"appearingin line 3 of the RamatAviv synagogue inscription.3 The dictionary also includes propernames, for which Tal has providedthe traditionalSamaritanpronunciationin transliteratedform, e.g., nrwnmfhJi. The appearanceof a majorreferencework such as this dictionaryof Samaritan Aramaic is by itself a significant contributionto the world of scholarship. Samaritanistsand Aramaicists obviously will use this dictionary for decades to come. But one should not think that scholars in other fields cannotbenefit from it as well. Thus, before concluding, I want to presentone small example of how I as primarilya biblical scholaralreadyhave put Tal'swork to good use. I recentlywas ponderingthe difficult verse of Ps 32:9, in particularthe obscurephrase *:I?1,1-TY with the hapax legomenontaa. The first wordnormallymeans "his ornament"(cf. Ezek 7:20), and probablyit can mean that here, too, with referenceto the preceding phrase luon inn "bit and bridle."The second word is known from variousAramaic dialects and means "stop, block."Presumablythe phrase refers to the manner in which the rider utilizes the mouthpiece to halt the horse's progress. But I would go furtherand propose that a complex wordplayis present here. The first word also can be taken from the homonymous root nrryt I "pass, move" (and not = thus "his and the 1ty II "bedeck"); movement," phrasealso means "toblock ri'-v his movement."Furthermore,in SamaritanAramaic-and only in this dialect of Aramaic,as far as I can determine-the root cm?has a second nuance,namely"be foolish," as noted by Tal on p. 100. The evidence comes from the SamaritanTargum to Deut 32:5 whereabais used to renderHebrewwpb "beperverse,"andfrom Ha-Melis which glosses the root with Hebrewrnw "be stupid."When one recalls r 'x ("do not be that the main thought expressed in Ps 32:9 p,'n p1,rx -n• oneomo nn the like the horse and the mule without understanding"), appreciates delightful wordplay inherent in this verse. I am employing here the comparativephilological method,with the assumptionthatboth senses of the rootaM?existed in ancient Hebrewas well. Clearlythe poet selected this rareverb intentionally,in order to evoke both meanings, "stop,block"and "be foolish."Note, moreover,thatwhile polysemy is a characteristicof all Hebrewpoetry (and much prose as well), there 3. For a recent treatmentof this inscription,see R. Pummer,"SamaritanMaterialRemainsand Archaeology,"in A. D. Crown, ed., The Samaritans (Tiibingen:J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1989), pp. 144-145.

108

Book Reviews is an even greaterpropensity for multiplicity of meaning specifically where the readeris chargedto be intelligent.My treatmentof these few words in the book of Psalms is hardlya majorissue in biblical scholarship,but it demonstratesthe point nonetheless. Without Tal's Dictionary of SamaritanAramaic at my disposal, I would not have encounteredthn "be foolish,"whose applicationto Ps 32:9 allows the readerto marvel at the ability of the ancient Israelitewordsmith. I must registerone criticismof this dictionary,namely,the unpleasingnature of the visuallayoutof the entries.Thereis insufficientdistinctionin the variousfonts, sizes, and styles of the Hebrewcharacters,especially between the SamaritanAramaic text citationsand the Modem Hebrewrenderings.This lack of variationprevents the readerfrom easily scanningan entryto locate the desiredinformation. We congratulateProfessorTal on this major accomplishment,two decades in the making. GaryA. Rendsburg Cornell University Ithaca,New York

Nili SacherFox. In the Service of the King. Officialdomin Ancient Israel and Judah. Monographsof the Hebrew Union College 23. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 2000. xvi, 367 pp. Fox'sobjective is "to refine currentdefinitions of titles of royal functionaries and theirroles in the monarchicstate-organizationand to create a tentativereconstruction of the government structure"(p. 269). Secondarily, she questions whether "Israeliteofficialdom and administrativepractices were modeled after foreign prototypes"(p. 276f). Fox considers the Bible "the most substantialand comprehensiveaccount" (p. ix) for the evaluationof Israelitesocial history, consisting of authenticdocuments and ideology-oriented interpretations.Construing Israel's social history means, accordingto Fox, to supplementthe Biblical texts with extra-biblicalepigraphicevidence. Her approachis Bible-centered,Israel-centered,and traditionsoriented. This approachis not universally shared any longer (Edelman, 19911; Grabbe,19972; Niemann, 20013; Knauf, 20014). 1. Edelman,D. V (ed.) 1991: TheFabricof History.Text,Artifactand Israel 'sPast. JSOT.S127, Sheffield. 2. Grabbe,L. L. (ed.) 1997: Can a 'Historyof Israel'Be Written?,JSOT.S245 = ESHM 1, Sheffield. 3. Niemann, H. M. 2001: 'Von Oberfliichen,Schichtenund Strukturen.Was leistet die Archiologie flir die Erforschungder Geschichte Israels und Judas?' In: Christof Hardmeier(ed.), SteineBilder-Texte.HistorischeEvidenzausserbiblischerundbiblischerQuellen.ArbeitenzurBibel und ihrer Geschichte, 5. Leipzig: EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt:79-121. 4. Knauf,E. A. 2001: 'History,Archaeology,andthe Bible.' TheologischeZeitschrift57/2: 26268.

109

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Hermann Michael Nieman Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 109-111 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131774 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews is an even greaterpropensity for multiplicity of meaning specifically where the readeris chargedto be intelligent.My treatmentof these few words in the book of Psalms is hardlya majorissue in biblical scholarship,but it demonstratesthe point nonetheless. Without Tal's Dictionary of SamaritanAramaic at my disposal, I would not have encounteredthn "be foolish,"whose applicationto Ps 32:9 allows the readerto marvel at the ability of the ancient Israelitewordsmith. I must registerone criticismof this dictionary,namely,the unpleasingnature of the visuallayoutof the entries.Thereis insufficientdistinctionin the variousfonts, sizes, and styles of the Hebrewcharacters,especially between the SamaritanAramaic text citationsand the Modem Hebrewrenderings.This lack of variationprevents the readerfrom easily scanningan entryto locate the desiredinformation. We congratulateProfessorTal on this major accomplishment,two decades in the making. GaryA. Rendsburg Cornell University Ithaca,New York

Nili SacherFox. In the Service of the King. Officialdomin Ancient Israel and Judah. Monographsof the Hebrew Union College 23. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 2000. xvi, 367 pp. Fox'sobjective is "to refine currentdefinitions of titles of royal functionaries and theirroles in the monarchicstate-organizationand to create a tentativereconstruction of the government structure"(p. 269). Secondarily, she questions whether "Israeliteofficialdom and administrativepractices were modeled after foreign prototypes"(p. 276f). Fox considers the Bible "the most substantialand comprehensiveaccount" (p. ix) for the evaluationof Israelitesocial history, consisting of authenticdocuments and ideology-oriented interpretations.Construing Israel's social history means, accordingto Fox, to supplementthe Biblical texts with extra-biblicalepigraphicevidence. Her approachis Bible-centered,Israel-centered,and traditionsoriented. This approachis not universally shared any longer (Edelman, 19911; Grabbe,19972; Niemann, 20013; Knauf, 20014). 1. Edelman,D. V (ed.) 1991: TheFabricof History.Text,Artifactand Israel 'sPast. JSOT.S127, Sheffield. 2. Grabbe,L. L. (ed.) 1997: Can a 'Historyof Israel'Be Written?,JSOT.S245 = ESHM 1, Sheffield. 3. Niemann, H. M. 2001: 'Von Oberfliichen,Schichtenund Strukturen.Was leistet die Archiologie flir die Erforschungder Geschichte Israels und Judas?' In: Christof Hardmeier(ed.), SteineBilder-Texte.HistorischeEvidenzausserbiblischerundbiblischerQuellen.ArbeitenzurBibel und ihrer Geschichte, 5. Leipzig: EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt:79-121. 4. Knauf,E. A. 2001: 'History,Archaeology,andthe Bible.' TheologischeZeitschrift57/2: 26268.

109

Book Reviews The main part of the book is devoted to the study of the titles borneby civil servantsin the Bible. These are arrangedaccordingto a new classification: four "Status-Related-Titles"(bn hmlk, bd hmlk, zqnym, yldym); eleven "FunctionRelatedTitles" (' r 1lhbyt, spr,mzkyr,rchhmlk, m'nh, yw's lmlk, '~r 'l hms, nsb/ nsbym, 'sr heyr, Ar, ppt,S'r); and four "Miscellaneous Designations" (skn/sknt, n r/nerh, SAr,srys) (pp. 43-203). Some recent studies on the titles of state employees discussing these officials within the context of social history and governmental structuralcontrol are not discussed, nor is the question of when Israeland Judahbecame full-blown states, which by definition requiredadministrativestaff (Jamieson-Drake 19915;Niemann 19936; 19977;recently Knauf 20008). The results of Fox's enquiry are somewhatpredeterminedby the use of such traditional terms as "beginningsof a bureaucracy,""a more sophisticatedadministrativeapparatus"and "centralizedcomplex governmentalsystem" for the reigns of Saul, David and Solomon (p. 5). On the other hand,Fox's analysis of seals, bullae, and other administrativeartifactsas ostracaand inscribedweights revealsa respectable acquaintancewith currentepigraphicalresearch. Fox takes as historical the ideological presentationof, for example, David and Solomon's "United Kingdom" with its "provinces"and "districts"read by some modern scholars into the Biblical narrative.Fox does not apply or conceive empirical tests for categories such as "general taxation," "district prefects" (p. 273), and "empire-buildingphase of Solomon'sreign"(p. 278), or for "twelvedistrictdivision ... an Israeliteinnovationestablishedfor efficient governingof a complex system" (p. 279). Nor does she reflect the compass of these notions. "Highly centralizedgovernmentorganization"is used to describe Hezekiah'srule (p. 234, 275). Such a traditionalapproachleads to an understandingof the royal administrationin Israeland Judahthat has been bypassedby new insights put forward in the past ten years (Jamieson-Drake 1991; Niemann 1993; 1997; 20009). The most importantresourcefor the reconstructionof social and politicalhierarchiespresentlyat our disposalhas not been consideredat all: settlementarchaeology. The sociopoliticalimpactof spatialorganizationhas been made accessibleto the non-specialistby works like Kempinskiand Reich 199210;Herzog 19971. Fox relies on Deuteronomistictextual supportto claim that "the archaeologicalpicture of the IronAge IIA ... indicatesthe existence of a stateexhibitingthe characteris5. Jamieson-Drake,D. W. 1991: Scribes and Schools in MonarchicJudah.The Social Worldof Biblical Antiquity Series, 9 = JSOT.S 109. Sheffield: SAP. 6. Niemann, H. M. 1993: Herrschaft, K6nigtum und Staat. Skizzenzur soziokulturellenEntwicklungim monarchischenIsrael, Forschungenzum AT,6. Tiibingen:Mohr. 7. Niemann, H. M. 1997: 'The Socio-political ShadowCast by the Biblical Solomon,'in: L. K. Handy (ed.), TheAge of Solomon. Scholarship at the Turnof the Millennium,SHCANE 11, Leiden: Brill, 1997: 252-299. 8. Knauf, E. A. 2000: 'Jerusalemin the Late Bronze and EarlyIronAges.' TelAviv 27: 75-90. 9. Niemann, H. M. 2000: 'Megiddo and Solomon. A Biblical Investigationin Relationto Archaeology.' TelAviv27: 61-74. 10. Kempinski,A. & Reich, R. 1992: TheArchitectureof AncientIsraelfrom the Prehistoricto the Persian Periods. Jerusalem: IES. 11. Herzog, Z. 1997: Archaeology of the City. Urban Planning in Ancient Israel and Its Social

Implications. TAU.MS 13. Tel Aviv: Emery and ClaireYassArchaeology Press.

110

Book Reviews tics of economic and political centralization"(p. 16). The gradualdevelopmentof powerand administrationin Israeland Judah(Niemann 1993) is thus leveled out. The last chapteris the most innovativeone: "Aspectsof AdministrationRevealed in Inscriptions:Land Grants,Supply Networks and Regional Administration"(pp. 204-68). Fox favorsA. E Rainey'sinterpretationof the SamariaOstraca. The reviewerhas tried to integratethe SamariaOstracain a more comprehensive social and political context (Niemann 1993: 75-86, 274-5; 2000: 71, n. 11). Fox does not enter into this discussion, but she offers a new hypothesis to understand the Imlkstamp seal impressions:the jars with Imlkstamps plus private seals impressionsbelong to royalestates, handedoverto membersof the rulingelite whose name appearson the handle. Fox interpretsthe Imlkstamps plus privateseals not only in the context of war preparations,but also as an indicatorof the economic developmentunder Hezekiah. However,when the seal impressions are interpreted as signs of a "highlycentralizedgovernmentorganization"(p. 234, 275), I think that Fox stretchesthe possible implications of this single type of archaeological evidence too far;the integrationof more archaeologicaldata is badly needed. The impressivecorpus of 1716 seal impressionsrecordedup to now does, in any case, reveal an increasing interest of the eighth century'sJerusalemitedynasty in economic organization.Fox understandsthe "Rosette stamp seals" as symbols of an increasinglycentralizedstate-economy.At the same time these seals might underline nationalindependencein Josiah'stime. Finally,Fox deals with "Systemsof Accounting:HieraticNumeralsand other Symbols" (pp. 250-268) with particularcare. The large majorityof stratified finds come from the seventhand sixth centuriesB.C.E.; few come fromthe eighth. These dates match the development of state organization in Israel and Judah, which I presentedin 1993 on the basis of archaeological,epigraphic,and textual evidence. Differences of forms, uses, and individualscribaltraditionsbetween Israel and Egypt lead Fox to conclude that "conscious borrowingof a foreign phenomenon never actuallytook place" (p. 268; see p. 279). According to her, since the earlymonarchyor even earlier(sic!), the Israelitebureaucracymade use of local andregionalcounting-systems.The differencesbetween Israeland Egypt show an early Israelitizingprocess and the independenceof the Israeliteadministration from earlierforeign administrativesystems (p. 279). Few "foreignterms and features" in state organizationand in bureaucraticterminology, according to Fox, point to the same direction.Vis-•a-visthe world-systems approachpresently gaining groundin AncientNear Easternstudies,these resultsrecall a periodof research that was dominatedby ethnocentricparochialisms. These critical remarksdo not intend to detractfrom a welcome addition to the scholar'slibrary.One would have wished, though, that centralEuropeanscholarshiphad been consideredbeyond the late 1980s. HermannMichael Nieman University of Rostock Rostock, Germany

111

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Steven Fine Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 112-113 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131775 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Lee I. Levine. TheAncientSynagogue:TheFirst ThousandYears.New Haven:Yale University Press, 2000. xiv, 748 pp. TheAncient Synagogue: The First ThousandYearsserves as a kind of handbook for the study of the synagogue in antiquity.It discusses every majorsite, every major text and most major issues and secondary sources. It is indeed a worthy successor to Samuel Krauss'SynagogaleAltertiimer(Berlin and Vienna), published in 1922. Comparisonof this volume with that of Krauss shows the intention of each authorto be inclusive of all that was known about the synagogue in an encyclopedic fashion. This comparisonalso shows how much more we know of the ancient synagogue than Kraussdid. This is crudely expressedby sheer numberof pages in each volume. While Krauss produced a book of 470 pages in length, Levine's magnumopus is a whopping 748 pages. Archaeologicaldiscoveriesin Israel and the Mediterraneanbasin, as well as texts discovered or published (most significantly from the Cairo Genizah) have greatly increased our sources for the history of the synagogue. In addition, new methods for the study of ancient Judaism, its literature,and its materialculturehave facilitateda complete rethinking of the history of the synagogue. Unlike Krauss' importantvolume, however, Levine's work has a very specific thesis. Levine, who for purposes of due disclosure it should be noted served as my dissertation advisor, argues that the synagogue's "primary importance throughout antiquity was as a communal center" that was "fundamentallycontrolled and operatedby the local community"(p. 3). While there was great diversity amongst ancient synagogues, "the institutionexhibited a remarkableunity as well" (p. 3). Levine sees continuity in "the range of activities and types of religious functions conductedtherein,as well as orientation,ornamentation,symbolism, and sanctity,were in varying degrees common to synagogues throughoutantiquity,"and is expressed in both literaryand archaeologicalsources"(p. 4). With the destruction of the Temple, Levine argues, the synagogue "evolved" greatly, particularlyin its religious aspect. "The synagogue had become-according to Rabbi Isaac, borrowing a phrase from the prophet Ezekiel (11:16)-a miqdash me at, a 'lesser' or 'diminished' holiness" (p. 4). Levine attributesthis transformation "first and foremost"to internalJewish developments,but "no less important"to the "evolving"Empire-widesocial contexts in which the synagogue functioned, and particularlyto growing Christianinfluences. The remainderof the volume is dedicatedto fleshing out this thesis, which in general terms reflects the currentconsensus of scholarsthat Levine has done so much to form and inform. The book is divided into two parts and nineteen chapters. PartI, "The HistoricalDevelopment of the Synagogue,"includes:"Origins," "Pre-70 Judaea,""The Pre-70 Diaspora,""The Second Temple Synagogue-Its Role and Functions,""Late Roman Palestine,""ByzantinePalestine,"and "Diaspora Synagogues." The chapter on synagogue origins reflects well the structureof the book. Levine is cautious to representall majorprimaryevidence and scholarlypositions on this and indeed on every issue in the book, positing also his own interpretation.

112

Book Reviews On this question of synagogue origins, Levine believes that the Biblical city-gate was the forerunnerof the synagogue. The synagogue at Gamla is a bridge for Levine between the Biblical city gate and the later synagogue, as Gamla was constructednear the gate (p. 34). Levine considers this to be a "fortuitousindication of a synagogue setting continuingthe earliercity-gate tradition."While this is by no means the last word on a very opaque subject, Levine's theory certainly provides food for thought. A book of this breadthis bound to include interpretationsthat scholars in the field might not find to their liking. I am not satisfied, for example, by Levine's interpretationof Tosefta Sukkah4:6, the description of the great "double stoa" of Alexandria. Levine considers this text to reflect closely a synagogue building and communitythatexisted in late-first-centuryAlexandria.To my mind, this text is reflective of a Second Templeperiod synagogue, and in at best a very general way. There was surely at least one large synagogue in Alexandria, and this text may reflect real knowledge of a large synagogue there. The text that stands before us, however, has been molded by Tannaiticconceptions, reflecting aggadic and halakhicmotifs that arewell documentedin Tannaiticliterature.The Tannaim used Temple motifs in "constructing"this fantastic description of the Alexandriansynagogue. The immediatepurpose of this text is to exemplify the "glory"of AlexandrianJewry and its synagogue. The use of Temple forms in this text was undoubtedly stimulated by the developing use of Temple imagery within their own synagogues. While I am not in any way committed to the notion that Rabbinic sources cannot be used to illustratethe first century (an approachthat is often taken to extreme), it has long been my contention that this text is best seen as a projectionof Tannaiticvalues upon a distant, apparentlydestroyed,synagogue. The second part of the volume, "The Synagogue as Institution"includes chapters on "The Building," "The Communal Dimension," "Leadership,""The Patriarch(Nasi) and the Synagogue,""The Sages and the Synagogue," "Women in the Synagogue," "Priests,""Liturgy,""Iconography:The Limits of Interpretation,"and, finally, "Diachronic and Synchronic Dimensions-the Synagogue in Context."Many of the themes that Levine discusses here have been the subject of his own preliminary specialized studies, though in the current volume one may sense continued reflection. Levine's discussions here supersede his earlier articles. The chapter on iconography, a subject that Levine has not previously discussed in a sustained manner, is mainly descriptive of current research. Lee Levine's The Synagogue is a truly monumentalundertaking.It is destined to be the standardhandbookon the ancient synagogue and its history. Steven Fine The University of Cincinnati Cincinnati,Ohio

113

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Neil Asher Silberman Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 114-115 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131776 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Eric H. Cline. The Battles of Armageddon:Megiddo and the Jezreel Valleyfrom the BronzeAge to the NuclearAge. Ann Arbor:The Universityof Michigan Press, 2000. xv, 239 pp. The Battles of Armageddonis a meticulous chronicle of the dozens of milclashes over the centuriesthat have given an auraof apocalypticexpectation itary to a small patch of valley in northern Israel. Television-evangelistsand Biblethumpersall over the world continue to whip up their followers with nightmarish visions of nuclear disaster and divine judgment linked to the ominous word "Armageddon."But for those who care to dig a little deeper, Eric H. Cline of The George WashingtonUniversity masterfullyshows us that a long, violent, and tangled history lies behind that name. Cline systematicallyreveals the millenniumlong steps by which certain arbitrarytopographicrealities, unchanging military technologies, andthe relativegeographicalpositions of the greatNear Easternempires made the site of Megiddo-and indeed all of the JezreelValley-a tragically tiresome cockpit of war. Beginning with a solid introductionabout the world's fascination with the mystique of Megiddo-Armageddon and aboutthe historicalbackgroundbehind it, Cline presents a series of chronologicallyarrangedchapters,each highlighting a particularbattle of Megiddo, the political background,the clashing culturesand of course the eerie replayof the same movements,the same mistakes, and the same outcomes again and again. It is not simply that the military leaders through the ages have failed to learn from the past; Pharaohs,Canaaniteprinces, Israelite warriors,biblical kings, invadingRoman armies, rival Muslim dynasties, modern Palestiniansand Israelis, and global strategistslooking into the cloudy futurehave learnedall too perfectlythatMegiddo could not be avoidedif one was to gain military control of whateveryou wish to call it: Canaan,Israel, Palestine, Southern Syria, the Levant. In this book, Cline's researchon all periods in which there is any shred of recorded or archaeologically-inferredcombat at Megiddo is painstakingand impressive. While many historiansof the militaryhistory of Israel/Palestinetend to concentrateon either the ancient or modern periods, Cline offers a historicalnarrative with no bumpy transitionsor selective omissions. In the vast span of time covered by the book, he naturallyanalyzes the most famous of the Biblical and classical battles,the campaignsof the Crusaders,andthe modernwars of the State of Israel.Yet because he also includes some encountersthat all but the most specialized scholars would never have heardof, his descriptionsof the medieval battles for Megiddo between rival dynasties are especially enlightening. The book's style and attitudeis thoroughlypositivist. Except for the overarching intentionto de-mystifyArmageddon,readerswill find little evidence of deconstructionismhere. Nor will they find evidence of recentcriticalbiblical scholarship. In his chapteron the wars of Deborahand Barakdescribedin the Book of Judges, for example, Cline takes the narrativequiteliterallyas a fairlyreliablemilitary report.Whetherit was, or for that matterwhetherthe boasting triumphalinscriptions of the various expansionist pharaohscan similarlybe taken as reliable without a large grain of Dead Sea salt, is also a question. But at the same time, 114

Book Reviews Cline does not completely ignore these thornyhistoriographicalproblemsin constructinghis largernarrative. Cline provides a concluding look at the term "Armageddon"and its relationshipto the long, bloody historyhe recounts.Whereotherhistoriansmight have been content in simply bringingthe story up to the present, Cline offers the reader some thought-provokingreflections on the development of "Arnageddon"as a concept and what its continualuse suggests about the social and religious preoccupations of the West.Yet Cline wisely does not seek to make a sweeping, simplistic judgmenton how and why the battles of Armageddonhappened.Such a reductionist conclusion would probablyimmediately arouse dissenters and would probablynot be fully satisfying in any case. That'swhy Cline's concluding summary offers a well-advised ending to a wide-ranging, yet ominously repetitive book: to quote the words of Santayanaabout the tragic futility of not remembering history. TheBattles of Armageddonis a significant and welcome contributionto the military history of Israel. It seeks to resolve a number of specific, long-debated issues relatingto Megiddo'smilitaryhistory.Its historicalcoverage is impressively wide and its text is accompaniedby clear and effective maps of the most importantbattles from the Bronze Age to the 1973 Yom KippurWar.This book will undoubtedlymake an importantadditionto the librariesof those scholars, institutions, and interestedlay-people involved in the study of both the ancient and modern Near East. Neil Asher Silberman Center for PublicArchaeology East-Flanders,Belgium

Eleazar Kallir. Qedushta'otfor Shavu'ot [Hymni Pentecostales]. Edited by Shulamit Elizur.Jerusalem:Mekize Nirdamim,2000. 336 pp. (Hebrew). The religious poetry of Judaismturneda cornerwith a prolific hymnist from seventh-centuryPalestinecalled EleazarbirabbiKallir (or Killir). Modern studies of medieval Jewish liturgicalpoetry, or Piyyut, have increased considerablyand many manuscriptsand fragmentshave been discovered in several Genizah collections, offering new materialon the traditionof classical hymnists from the period of late antiquity and early Islam. Yosse ben Yosse, Yannai, Shimeonbar Megas, Yehudah,Kallir, andYohananha-Kohenare the outstandingnames of synagogue poets who composed their hymns for the weekly sabbath and the festivals, predominantlyin Palestinian-Jewishcommunities. Kallir was the greatest poet for having reshapedthe traditionof Piyyut itself. His influence on the classical and post-classical school of Hebrew religious verse was far-reaching.In his numerouscompositions (intended exclusively for holidays) he shows thatreligious awarenessneeds a new language to be adequately expressed. His linguistic creativityled to innovationsthat came not only from 115

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Wout Jac. van Bekkum Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 115-117 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131777 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Cline does not completely ignore these thornyhistoriographicalproblemsin constructinghis largernarrative. Cline provides a concluding look at the term "Armageddon"and its relationshipto the long, bloody historyhe recounts.Whereotherhistoriansmight have been content in simply bringingthe story up to the present, Cline offers the reader some thought-provokingreflections on the development of "Arnageddon"as a concept and what its continualuse suggests about the social and religious preoccupations of the West.Yet Cline wisely does not seek to make a sweeping, simplistic judgmenton how and why the battles of Armageddonhappened.Such a reductionist conclusion would probablyimmediately arouse dissenters and would probablynot be fully satisfying in any case. That'swhy Cline's concluding summary offers a well-advised ending to a wide-ranging, yet ominously repetitive book: to quote the words of Santayanaabout the tragic futility of not remembering history. TheBattles of Armageddonis a significant and welcome contributionto the military history of Israel. It seeks to resolve a number of specific, long-debated issues relatingto Megiddo'smilitaryhistory.Its historicalcoverage is impressively wide and its text is accompaniedby clear and effective maps of the most importantbattles from the Bronze Age to the 1973 Yom KippurWar.This book will undoubtedlymake an importantadditionto the librariesof those scholars, institutions, and interestedlay-people involved in the study of both the ancient and modern Near East. Neil Asher Silberman Center for PublicArchaeology East-Flanders,Belgium

Eleazar Kallir. Qedushta'otfor Shavu'ot [Hymni Pentecostales]. Edited by Shulamit Elizur.Jerusalem:Mekize Nirdamim,2000. 336 pp. (Hebrew). The religious poetry of Judaismturneda cornerwith a prolific hymnist from seventh-centuryPalestinecalled EleazarbirabbiKallir (or Killir). Modern studies of medieval Jewish liturgicalpoetry, or Piyyut, have increased considerablyand many manuscriptsand fragmentshave been discovered in several Genizah collections, offering new materialon the traditionof classical hymnists from the period of late antiquity and early Islam. Yosse ben Yosse, Yannai, Shimeonbar Megas, Yehudah,Kallir, andYohananha-Kohenare the outstandingnames of synagogue poets who composed their hymns for the weekly sabbath and the festivals, predominantlyin Palestinian-Jewishcommunities. Kallir was the greatest poet for having reshapedthe traditionof Piyyut itself. His influence on the classical and post-classical school of Hebrew religious verse was far-reaching.In his numerouscompositions (intended exclusively for holidays) he shows thatreligious awarenessneeds a new language to be adequately expressed. His linguistic creativityled to innovationsthat came not only from 115

Book Reviews complicated allusions, but also from the use of rarebiblical words and the introduction of Aramaismsor new expressions with little regardfor what is normative in classical and rabbinicHebrew.Kallir as well as otherhymnists creatednumerous forms of the verb throughanalogical conjugationand formation,often forms of expressiontakenover frommidrashicliteratureor the spokenlanguage,strengthening the tendency in contemporaryliteraryHebrewto mix grammaticallyacceptable forms with novel kinds of derivation. Kallir succeeded in presentinghis poetry as a mediationof religious sense in his time throughhis personal understandingof piyyutic language and themes; for this he was the object of public admirationand criticism. Saadiah Gaon and Abraham ibn Ezra representtraditionalobjections to Piyyut that survived until quite recently.Today,Kallir'ssignificance must not be judged from what the ancient grammarianssaid of him, because the moderncriticalestablishmentof new texts gives a differentidea of his art. Moreover,laterPiyyuttraditionsin Italy and Ashkenaz echo many features of Kallir's poetry, demanding a reassessment of Kallir's lasting contributionto the qualities of piyyutic language and style. Among the new hymns that emerged from the Genizah were his qedushtot for Shavuot,the nine-parthymns which end with a recitationof Is. 6:3 and aredesigned to adornthe benedictions of the 'amidah duringthe morningservice on the festival. On Shavuot,the anniversaryof the giving of the Torah,the composers of liturgicalpoetry were specifically attractedto a versificationof the numerousaggadoth about the Sinai event and the Ten Commandments.Kallir is creditedparticularly with having made extraordinaryembellishments for the requiredTorah reading for Shavuot. Some of the hymns have remainedpartof the Shavuotliturgy to this day, but ShulamithElizur has re-edited these texts on the basis of Genizah manuscriptstogetherwith a numberof unknownfragments.Elizur is at her best when she traces the qedushta parts through Genizah materials and reconstructs the best textual witnesses. Her detailed commentariesare impressive and her analysis of poetic structuresis most accurate.However,her discussion of the ideas and concepts prevailingin Kallir'shymns is often too narrow. Kallir'sqedushtotare essentially poetic commentaries,introducinga wealth of talmudic-midrashictraditionsin connection with the holidaytheme. He did not, however, draw his inspirationonly from the subjects of the Bible or Midrash;he also used popularlegends and developed their themes, thus breakingnew ground. Kallir enlarged the biblical and aggadic images, for instance, by presentinga description of world history up to the Sinai event includinga personified Torahwho refused to be offered to Adam, Noah, or the Patriarchs.The earliest association of the Torahwith a (female) personalityoccurs in Proverbs,but Kallirelaboratesthis motif and designatesthe Torahto be a daughterof God who was proposedto many grooms until she chose to be marriedto Moses. Such an embellishment,giving the Sinai story its epic character,is preservedin Piyyut but not in rabbinicsources. Elizur discusses this specific aspect of Kallir'snarrativerange extensively, but related features of his religious temper and lyrical power are underappreciated. Kellir's hymns communicatewith strong involvementa sense of intensity in a language and throughmetaphorsthat extend beyond the standardrhetoricof the synagogue poets. He created for himself a highly particularand yet not eccentric 116

Book Reviews idiom for renderingthe spiritual-ecstaticmeaning of Shavuotwhile accepting the practicalsignificance of the commandmentsof the Torahfor Jewish existence. It is necessaryto stressthe value of Kallir'sliturgicalpoetry in orderto place his oeuvre in its propertemporaland spatial setting in seventh-centuryPalestine. Elizur's book will prove to be an indispensableaid for reaching more definite conclusions about Kallir'shymnography. WoutJac. van Bekkum RijksuniversiteitGroningen Groningen,The Netherlands

Alon Goshen-Gottstein.TheSinner and the Amnesiac: TheRabbinicInventionof Elisha Ben Abuya and Eleazar Ben Arach. Contraversions:Jews and Other Differences. Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press, 2000. xii, 416 pp. In TheSinner and theAmnesiac,Alan Goshen-Gottsteinreturnsto the question of rabbinicbiographywith a comprehensivestudy of all traditionsabout Elisha ben Abuya, also known as Aher, "the Other."(One chapteris devoted to the few traditionsof R. Eleazarb. Arakh,a sage who reportedlyforgot all his knowledge of Torah.)Goshen-Gottsteinalso provides a thorough summaryof the secondary literatureon Elisha, whom scholars variously have portrayedas a mystic, gnostic, apostate, philosophical atheist, and heretic. He appends a complete Hebrew version of the main Bavli story of Elisha including all manuscriptvariants. This book is both frustratingand brilliant.It is frustratingbecause GoshenGottstein'sultimate goal is to probe behind the rabbinictraditionsin orderto recover the historicalElisha b. Abuya. Goshen-Gottsteinis well awareof the contributions of Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green,YonahFraenkel,and others who haveconvincinglyshownthatrabbinicnarrativesaredidactictalesbetterapproached as fictional literaturethan history-he begins with a superb methodological introductionsummarizingthis scholarship and the current state of the question.' Nevertheless, Goshen-Gottsteinexamines each source in order to determine to what extent the historical kernel can be separatedfrom literary,ideological and hermeneuticalfactors. Over and again, Goshen-Gottsteinfinds thatvery little history can be recovered(pp. 47, 75, 132, 139, 177, 191, 198 etc.). He identifies but one or two authentictestimonies (pp. 38-39), which do not tell us much, and con1. JacobNeusner,Developmentof a Legend:Studieson the TraditionsConcerningYohananben Zakkai(Leiden:Brill, 1970); William Scott Green,"What'sin a Name?-The Problematicof Rabbinic 'Biography',"Approaches to Ancient Judaism: Theoryand Practice, ed. William Scott Green (Missoula, Montana:Scholars Press, 1978), pp. 77-96; Yonah Fraenkel, "HermeneuticProblems in the Study of Aggadic Narrative,"Tarbiz47 (1978), pp. 139-172 (Hebrew). Readers should be awarethat the revieweris authorof a study of Elisha ben Abuya: "Elishaben Abuya:Torahand the Sinful Sage," Journal of Jewish Thoughtand Philosophy 7 (1998), pp. 141-222, revised and expanded in Talmudic Stories: NarrativeArt, Composition,and Culture(Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), pp. 64-104.

117

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Jeffrey Rubenstein Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 117-120 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131778 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews idiom for renderingthe spiritual-ecstaticmeaning of Shavuotwhile accepting the practicalsignificance of the commandmentsof the Torahfor Jewish existence. It is necessaryto stressthe value of Kallir'sliturgicalpoetry in orderto place his oeuvre in its propertemporaland spatial setting in seventh-centuryPalestine. Elizur's book will prove to be an indispensableaid for reaching more definite conclusions about Kallir'shymnography. WoutJac. van Bekkum RijksuniversiteitGroningen Groningen,The Netherlands

Alon Goshen-Gottstein.TheSinner and the Amnesiac: TheRabbinicInventionof Elisha Ben Abuya and Eleazar Ben Arach. Contraversions:Jews and Other Differences. Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press, 2000. xii, 416 pp. In TheSinner and theAmnesiac,Alan Goshen-Gottsteinreturnsto the question of rabbinicbiographywith a comprehensivestudy of all traditionsabout Elisha ben Abuya, also known as Aher, "the Other."(One chapteris devoted to the few traditionsof R. Eleazarb. Arakh,a sage who reportedlyforgot all his knowledge of Torah.)Goshen-Gottsteinalso provides a thorough summaryof the secondary literatureon Elisha, whom scholars variously have portrayedas a mystic, gnostic, apostate, philosophical atheist, and heretic. He appends a complete Hebrew version of the main Bavli story of Elisha including all manuscriptvariants. This book is both frustratingand brilliant.It is frustratingbecause GoshenGottstein'sultimate goal is to probe behind the rabbinictraditionsin orderto recover the historicalElisha b. Abuya. Goshen-Gottsteinis well awareof the contributions of Jacob Neusner, William Scott Green,YonahFraenkel,and others who haveconvincinglyshownthatrabbinicnarrativesaredidactictalesbetterapproached as fictional literaturethan history-he begins with a superb methodological introductionsummarizingthis scholarship and the current state of the question.' Nevertheless, Goshen-Gottsteinexamines each source in order to determine to what extent the historical kernel can be separatedfrom literary,ideological and hermeneuticalfactors. Over and again, Goshen-Gottsteinfinds thatvery little history can be recovered(pp. 47, 75, 132, 139, 177, 191, 198 etc.). He identifies but one or two authentictestimonies (pp. 38-39), which do not tell us much, and con1. JacobNeusner,Developmentof a Legend:Studieson the TraditionsConcerningYohananben Zakkai(Leiden:Brill, 1970); William Scott Green,"What'sin a Name?-The Problematicof Rabbinic 'Biography',"Approaches to Ancient Judaism: Theoryand Practice, ed. William Scott Green (Missoula, Montana:Scholars Press, 1978), pp. 77-96; Yonah Fraenkel, "HermeneuticProblems in the Study of Aggadic Narrative,"Tarbiz47 (1978), pp. 139-172 (Hebrew). Readers should be awarethat the revieweris authorof a study of Elisha ben Abuya: "Elishaben Abuya:Torahand the Sinful Sage," Journal of Jewish Thoughtand Philosophy 7 (1998), pp. 141-222, revised and expanded in Talmudic Stories: NarrativeArt, Composition,and Culture(Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), pp. 64-104.

117

Book Reviews cludes that the later traditionsare completely unreliable:the Amoraic traditions "are devoid of historicalworth"(p. 199). While this conclusion is surely correct, it is exactly whatwe would expect, andhardlywarrantsalmost threehundredpages of analysis. Goshen-Gottsteintries to justify his project by arguingthat Elisha b. Abuya was "outsidethe collective,"hence "his teachings and traditionmay therefore not be shaped in accordance with collective concerns" (p. 13). But this explanationis insufficient. Why should traditionsof outsidersbe preservedmore reliably? If anything, we should assume the opposite-that storytellerscould take more liberties in embellishing the stories of "outsiders"as their audience would be less likely to know the "truth,"much as we find with Romans, Christians,and other non-rabbis.In any case, the currentthinkingis that to excavaterabbinicstories for historicalinformationin this way is to mistakethe genre, and thatthe genre is the same regardlessof whetherthe charactersare leading sages or outsiders.In sum, Goshen-Gottstein'sconclusion should have been his point of departure,and the literary analysis should have been pursuedfor its own sake, not to isolate the historical core. However, if Goshen-Gottsteinbeats a dead horse, it must be said that he beats it well. This book has value for anyonenot absolutelyconvinced thatthe pursuit of the historical or biographicalkernel of rabbinic stories is futile. GoshenGottstein systematically treats each passage, cogently demonstratinghow every twist and turn in the plot is motivatedby other factors. He does not rejectthe historicity of stories on the grounds of general skepticism, or using simplistic arguments that the lack of possible verification rendershistorical conclusions inherently suspect. Here is a scholar awareof every methodologicalconsideration,one who has masteredthe secondary literature,who even attemptsto develop new criteriaby which the historicityof traditionscan be evaluated(pp. 34-36)-and who nevertheless comes up empty-handed.For those alreadyconvinced of the futility of isolating a historical core, the repeatedassessment after treatingeach passage that this source, too, yields no historical informationis distracting. The book is brilliant because Goshen-Gottsteinis an extremely sensitive reader.His careful analysis of the sources constitutesa majorbreakthroughin the scholarshipon the Elisha traditionsthat all futurescholarsmust take into account. Goshen-Gottsteinshows, for example, thatmany of the Bavli andYerushalmistories of Elisha (yHag 2:1, 77b-c; bHag 15a-b)aregeneratedthroughexegesis of the "Pardespassage" of Tosefta Hagiga 2:3. Thus the Tosefta'scryptic statementthat Elisha "cut the shoots" is interpretedby the Yerushalmiin terms of Elisha killing young students of Torahand by the Bavli as Elisha plucking the radishwhich he presents to the harlot(pp. 81-88, 93); the "mistake"and the "angel"mentionedin the verse applied to Elisha in the Tosefta (Eccles 5:5) generate Elisha's mistaken utterance before the angel Metatron in the Bavli (pp. 90-91); and so forth. Goshen-Gottsteinhas identified the motivationfor the strangescenariosdescribed in both Talmuds.It turnsout thatthe Amorite storytellerswere as perplexedby the Toseftanpassage as modernreadersand spun out their stories, in part,to interpret that tradition.Exegesis, not history,produces biography. YetGoshen-Gottsteinis not satisfied with an explanationof the origin of the stories' elements. He continueswith extremelycompelling literaryanalyses of the 118

Book Reviews storiesas coherentwholes, alwayssensitive to the use of motifs, stock phrases,and commonrabbinicthemes. Goshen-Gottsteinsuggests thatboth stories addressfundamentalproblems of rabbinicideology. The Bavli story wrestles with the question of sonship:can a Jew cease being consideredone of God's children (bneiyisrael) due to sin? The heavenly voice, "ReturnO backsliding children, except for Aher,"excludes Elisha from this status. In the continuation of the story, however, his merits accrued throughTorahstudy and the efforts of his disciples save him from perdition.The main Yerushalmistory focuses on the identity of Elisha as a masterof Torahby exploring his relationshipwith his disciple R. Meir. Despite his sins and rejection by the voice heard from the Holy of Holies, Elisha retainsthis identityandR. Meir retainshis obligationstowardhis master.Both stories testify to the power and indestructiblemerit of Torah in the storytellers' ideology.These analyses are a delight, and replete with penetratinginsights. They are essential reading for anyone interested in the workings of Talmudic narratives. The one weakness of the literarydimension of Goshen-Gottstein'swork is the lack of perspective on the general narrativetechniques of the Bavli and Yerushalmi(though there is copious and excellent use of parallels and thorough awarenessof rabbinicforms). This leads to severalerrors,in my opinion, in Chapter Seven, which compares the versions of the two Talmudsand attempts to reconstructthe history of the tradition.Goshen-Gottsteinargues, for example, that the mainYerushalmistory postdatesthe Bavli's version. His evidence includes the observationthat the heavenlyvoice appearstwice in the Bavli story but only once in theYerushalmi,which suggests thattheYerushalmihas conflatedtwo voices into one, and therefore comes later (p. 208). A broaderview of Bavli stories reveals that the Bavli frequentlydoubles an element of its source.2This observationsuggests ratherthat the Bavli is the laterversion and has duplicatedan element of its source. Goshen-Gottstein also attributesthe Bavli story to the students of R. Yohananon the grounds that R. Yohananappearsin a favorablelight in the Bavli, though not in the Yerushalmi(p. 215). However, R. Yohananis a general hero of Bavli narrativesand the protagonistof numerous(fictional) stories, and there is no evidence that these stories should be attributedto his students, at least not in their currentforms. These conclusions are not persuasivewithout a broaderview of narrativein both Talmuds. Goshen-Gottstein'sconcluding chapter,"Collective Torahculture and individual rabbinicbiography,"offers interestingand significant reflections on the nature of rabbinicbiography(pp. 267-276). He points out that in collective works such as the Talmuds,the individualityof any sage tends to lose significance in relation to the ideological concerns of the group.Torah,the primaryconcern of the rabbis, is the true hero of rabbinicbiographicaltales. As with the midrashic recasting of biblical figures, rabbinicstorytellersfreely used rabbinicfigures to express their own attitudesand ideological interests.And like midrash,rabbinicbiographicaltraditionsare shapedby the continuedexegesis of earlier stories in the face of changing ideological needs. In The Sinner and the Amnesiac, Goshen2. See Talmudic Stories, pp. 258-59.

119

Book Reviews Gottstein has made a significant contributionto our understandingof the nature of rabbinicbiography. Jeffrey Rubenstein New YorkUniversity New York,NewYork

Avi Sagi and Zvi Zohar.Circlesof Jewish Identity:A Studyin Halakhic Literature. Heilal ben Hayim Library.Tel Aviv: HakibbutzHameuchad,2000. 249 pp. (Hebrew). Avi Sagi and Zvi Zohar have, in recent years, made great contributionsto Jewish studies, in particularthe study of halakhah. In their many individualpublications they have mined the often ignoredhalakhicliteraturein orderto offer perspectives in a varietyof areas.They have also jointly publisheda numberof works, including a very learned study on conversion (Giyur ve-Zehut Yehudit).In their latest work, Circles of Jewish Identity:A Studyin HalakhicLiterature,they follow the path set out in their previous work by asking what the assumptionsand conclusions of halakhic literaturetell us about issues of Jewish identity,such as how to define it; whetherit is immutable;and, if not immutable,whetherone's Jewish identity can be removedagainstone's will. Theirdiscussion proceeds from the relevant talmudictexts, throughthe medievalperiod,up until the most recentresponsa. This chronologicalapproachis helpful in chartingthe developmentof concepts. Just as modern man struggles with the issue of identity,with some putting the focus on ethnicity and others on religion, the authorsshow how the halakhists also had to confrontthis issue. Although the halakhistsobviously never formulated the problem in the way moderns do, many of their concerns were similar,and, from their halakhic arguments,the criteriathey used, and their conclusions, it is possible to understandtheir perspectives. Sagi and Zoharfocus on one halakhicissue thathas had manyrepercussions throughoutJewish history: the Sabbathviolator.As is well known, according to the Talmuda Sabbathviolator is placed on an equal footing with a idolator.But is this to be taken literally? In other words, does this mean that a Sabbathviolator cannot marry a Jewish woman or that he can be chargedintereston a loan? If the answeris yes, then Jewish identity is clearly a functionof religion only. If no, then despite what the Talmudwrites, there is also an ethnic component,which is not so easily severed. To provide especially clear illustrationsof this issue, the authorsdiscuss in detail the statusof wine handledby a Sabbathviolator.If a Sabbathviolator great is really no differentfrom an idolator,then his wine is undrinkable.As the authors show, there are many halakhists,even in moderntimes, who believe this. Thereare some who go even further, and very shocking is the view of Rabbi Hayyim Shloush, the currentchief rabbiof Netanya.Accordingto Shloush, one is not permitted to save the life of a Sabbathviolator on the Sabbath,adding that "perhaps 120

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Marc B. Shapiro Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 120-122 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131779 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Gottstein has made a significant contributionto our understandingof the nature of rabbinicbiography. Jeffrey Rubenstein New YorkUniversity New York,NewYork

Avi Sagi and Zvi Zohar.Circlesof Jewish Identity:A Studyin Halakhic Literature. Heilal ben Hayim Library.Tel Aviv: HakibbutzHameuchad,2000. 249 pp. (Hebrew). Avi Sagi and Zvi Zohar have, in recent years, made great contributionsto Jewish studies, in particularthe study of halakhah. In their many individualpublications they have mined the often ignoredhalakhicliteraturein orderto offer perspectives in a varietyof areas.They have also jointly publisheda numberof works, including a very learned study on conversion (Giyur ve-Zehut Yehudit).In their latest work, Circles of Jewish Identity:A Studyin HalakhicLiterature,they follow the path set out in their previous work by asking what the assumptionsand conclusions of halakhic literaturetell us about issues of Jewish identity,such as how to define it; whetherit is immutable;and, if not immutable,whetherone's Jewish identity can be removedagainstone's will. Theirdiscussion proceeds from the relevant talmudictexts, throughthe medievalperiod,up until the most recentresponsa. This chronologicalapproachis helpful in chartingthe developmentof concepts. Just as modern man struggles with the issue of identity,with some putting the focus on ethnicity and others on religion, the authorsshow how the halakhists also had to confrontthis issue. Although the halakhistsobviously never formulated the problem in the way moderns do, many of their concerns were similar,and, from their halakhic arguments,the criteriathey used, and their conclusions, it is possible to understandtheir perspectives. Sagi and Zoharfocus on one halakhicissue thathas had manyrepercussions throughoutJewish history: the Sabbathviolator.As is well known, according to the Talmuda Sabbathviolator is placed on an equal footing with a idolator.But is this to be taken literally? In other words, does this mean that a Sabbathviolator cannot marry a Jewish woman or that he can be chargedintereston a loan? If the answeris yes, then Jewish identity is clearly a functionof religion only. If no, then despite what the Talmudwrites, there is also an ethnic component,which is not so easily severed. To provide especially clear illustrationsof this issue, the authorsdiscuss in detail the statusof wine handledby a Sabbathviolator.If a Sabbathviolator great is really no differentfrom an idolator,then his wine is undrinkable.As the authors show, there are many halakhists,even in moderntimes, who believe this. Thereare some who go even further, and very shocking is the view of Rabbi Hayyim Shloush, the currentchief rabbiof Netanya.Accordingto Shloush, one is not permitted to save the life of a Sabbathviolator on the Sabbath,adding that "perhaps 120

Book Reviews today we don't have to kill them"(my emphasis). The authorsquote a numberof otherhalakhistswho, while not as extremeas this, are also explicit that even a contemporarySabbathviolator is, in certain respects, no different from an idolator. This position is the basis for the special hashgahot on wine stating that it is produced by Sabbath-observantJews. The authorsquote authoritiesthat come down on the other side of the question and put the focus on the ethnic element of Judaism.Withoutdownplayingthe importanceof the Sabbathor the seriousness of its violation, some halakhistsargue that the negative consequences recorded in earlier literatureconcerning one who violates the Sabbathreferonly to the brazenviolator.However,one who does not know any better and who shows in various ways that despite his Sabbathviolation he still wishes to be connectedto the Jewish people is not removed from his ethnic connection. In focusing on the issue of identitythe authorsare also able to illuminatethe concept of deviance in the eyes of the halakhists.In some Jewish societies, communal identity formationrequiredan almost complete removalof the Sabbathviolator from the Jewish collective. In others, such as nineteenth-centuryGermany, where Sabbathviolation was widespread,such a tactic was thoughtto be counterproductive.Therefore,halakhistssuch as Jacob Ettlinger,Esriel Hildesheimer,and DavidZvi Hoffmannfoundways to justify keeping the Sabbathviolator in the Jewish collective. The authorsarecarefulto stressthattheirstudy should not be comparedwith sociological studies, since theirs is an inner-halakhicstudy.They are not speaking of how society judged the Sabbathviolator.They are speaking of the rabbis'judgments, which might be very differentfrom thejudgements of their congregants.It is only in the last chapterthatthe authorsattemptto connect the rabbinicopinions with various theoreticalmodels of Jewish society. According to the authors,how the halakhistrelatesto these models will determinein large measurewhetherSabbath violation is thought to remove someone from the Jewish religious or ethnic collective. It is only in this chapterthat the authors focus on issues discussed in modern sociology. Those who appreciatethis type of analysis will find the discussion helpful, but it is not essential to the majorthemes of the book. By way of criticism,one must express surprisethatthe authors,in discussing medieval views, include a passage from Z. B. Auerbach'sedition of the Eshkol, supposedlyauthoredby R. Abrahamben Isaac of Narbonne.There is a scholarly consensus that this edition is a forgery.I can do no betterthan cite the words of a reviewerfrom these very pages: "Auerbach'sEshkol appearsas a clear forgery,incorporatingarguments found in sixteenth-, seventeenth-, and even eighteenthcenturywritings ... [The work] should not be used for historical purposes."' 1. Haym Soloveitchik,review of EricZimmer,Olam ke-MinhagoNoheg,AJS Review23 (1998), pp. 227-228. Israel Moshe Ta-Shema,perhapsnot knowing about other accusationsof forgery leveled againstAuerbach,believes thatthe Eshkolis a fourteenth-centuryforgerythatAuerbachinnocentlypublished. See RabbiZerahyahha-LeviBa'al ha-Maoru-VeneiHugo (Jerusalem,1992), pp. 40-4 1, and my Between the Yeshiva Worldand Modern Orthodoxy (London, 1999), p. 77 n. 8. The manuscript that Auer-

bach claimedto have used has neverbeen found. For a rareexample of a halakhistwho refuses to grant Auerbach'seditionof the Eshkol any validity,see Isaac Ratsaby,Olat Yitzhak(Bnei Brak, 1989), p. 410.

121

Book Reviews A more serious criticism of their work is that Sagi and Zohardo not always distinguish between the categories of codes, where "pure"halakhahis recorded, and responsa, where in the rough and tumble of the real world the pure halakhah cannot always be applied. Thus, it is well known that codifiers, including Maimonides, wrote responsa that contradictwhat appearsin their codes. The kelalim literaturedeals with this issue in great detail. This is relevant for an example discussed on pp. 70-72, dealing with the opinions of Joseph Karo and Moses Isserles regardingthe statusof wine touched by a Sabbathviolator.In the Shulhan'Arukhboth Karoand Isserles agree that one may not drinksuch wine. The authorsraise an apparentcontradictionbetween this strict opinion and Isserles' well-knownjustification for the widespreadpracticeof consuming Gentile wine. The authors claim that Isserles' lenient opinion in this case is a recognitionof the changes in the religious world of Christianscompared to the idolators of years past. The authorsthen ask why Isserles did not also adopt a lenient approachto wine handledby Sabbathviolators, and they suggest a sociological explanation. Here, however,the authorsare comparingapples and oranges. Isserles' lenient opinion with regardto Gentile wine is found in a responsum.He makes it very clear that his role in the responsum is not to recordthe law for posterity,as he does in the Shulhan'Arukh,but ratherto find some justification, howevertenuous, for a widespread apparentviolation of halakhah.Not surprisingly,in the ShulhanArukh, Isserles does not offer this leniency, a point not noted by the authors. Had Sabbathviolators been prevalent,and had the general populationbeen accustomed to make use of wine handled by them, there is no reason to assume that in a responsumon this issue Isserles would not also have attemptedto justify the practice, These caveats aside, Sagi and Zohar have given us an importantand readable book which provides conceptual orderto the vast halakhicliterature.Its significance is not simply in collecting and explaining all of the major texts concerning an importantissue of Jewish religious history, but in showing how the debates between the rabbisreflect differentviews of the natureof Jewish identity. Marc B. Shapiro University of Scranton Scranton,Pennsylvania

Zefira Entin Rokeah, ed. and trans. Medieval English Jews and Royal Officials: Entries of Jewish Interest in the English MemorandaRolls, 1266-1293. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2000. xxxvii, 514 pp. The title MedievalEnglish Jews and Royal Officials whets the appetitefor a rich exploration of the general policies of the English crown towardsthe Jews. What were the contradictionsin royalpolicies from the Conquestto the expulsion, the relation between policy and implementation,and the capacity of the Jews to 122

Review: [untitled] Author(s): William Chester Jordan Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 122-124 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131780 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews A more serious criticism of their work is that Sagi and Zohardo not always distinguish between the categories of codes, where "pure"halakhahis recorded, and responsa, where in the rough and tumble of the real world the pure halakhah cannot always be applied. Thus, it is well known that codifiers, including Maimonides, wrote responsa that contradictwhat appearsin their codes. The kelalim literaturedeals with this issue in great detail. This is relevant for an example discussed on pp. 70-72, dealing with the opinions of Joseph Karo and Moses Isserles regardingthe statusof wine touched by a Sabbathviolator.In the Shulhan'Arukhboth Karoand Isserles agree that one may not drinksuch wine. The authorsraise an apparentcontradictionbetween this strict opinion and Isserles' well-knownjustification for the widespreadpracticeof consuming Gentile wine. The authors claim that Isserles' lenient opinion in this case is a recognitionof the changes in the religious world of Christianscompared to the idolators of years past. The authorsthen ask why Isserles did not also adopt a lenient approachto wine handledby Sabbathviolators, and they suggest a sociological explanation. Here, however,the authorsare comparingapples and oranges. Isserles' lenient opinion with regardto Gentile wine is found in a responsum.He makes it very clear that his role in the responsum is not to recordthe law for posterity,as he does in the Shulhan'Arukh,but ratherto find some justification, howevertenuous, for a widespread apparentviolation of halakhah.Not surprisingly,in the ShulhanArukh, Isserles does not offer this leniency, a point not noted by the authors. Had Sabbathviolators been prevalent,and had the general populationbeen accustomed to make use of wine handled by them, there is no reason to assume that in a responsumon this issue Isserles would not also have attemptedto justify the practice, These caveats aside, Sagi and Zohar have given us an importantand readable book which provides conceptual orderto the vast halakhicliterature.Its significance is not simply in collecting and explaining all of the major texts concerning an importantissue of Jewish religious history, but in showing how the debates between the rabbisreflect differentviews of the natureof Jewish identity. Marc B. Shapiro University of Scranton Scranton,Pennsylvania

Zefira Entin Rokeah, ed. and trans. Medieval English Jews and Royal Officials: Entries of Jewish Interest in the English MemorandaRolls, 1266-1293. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2000. xxxvii, 514 pp. The title MedievalEnglish Jews and Royal Officials whets the appetitefor a rich exploration of the general policies of the English crown towardsthe Jews. What were the contradictionsin royalpolicies from the Conquestto the expulsion, the relation between policy and implementation,and the capacity of the Jews to 122

Book Reviews parry injuriouspolicies or to encourage more generous ones? Unfortunately,the book thataddressesthese issues in a sophisticatedcontemporaryway still remains to be written.The subtitle of the book underreview here, Entries of Jewish Interest in the English MemorandaRolls, 1266-1293, more accuratelydefines its content. Zefira Entin Rokeah calendars-that is, she provides summaries, paraphrases, and, very rarely,full translationsof-the official notes of English governmentclerks on mattersrelatedto royal finance. The numberof survivingmemorandais immense. Those of Jewish interestconstitutea miniscule proportion,but still come to 1329 entries in the years covered. "Of Jewish interest"is defined broadly.A debt left unpaid by a convertedJew and unrelatedto his former Jewishness is of Jewish interest;a long list of outstandingobligations pertainingto a monasteryor noble is of Jewish interestif one of those obligations ever had anything to do with a Jew.This broaddefinition helps to situatethe Jews in the wider fiscal concerns of the English crown. The introductionto the volume is brief but serviceable. Scholars have written so much and so well on medieval English law and governmentthat it is perfectly reasonablefor Rokeah to summarizewhat is known and refer the readerto specialized works. A notable featureof Rokeah'sannotationis her descriptionof the (bored?)governmentclerks' pictorial graffiti on the memorandarolls-little pen drawingsof scowling monks, disgruntledbishops and caricaturedJews that clutterthe marginsof the manuscripts.Unfortunately,but understandablysince she has published elsewhere on these images, no representationsare reproducedexcept for two on the cover of the book. The moderncover artisthas taken the liberty of touching up these two with yellow in orderto highlight in the one case the caricatureof a Jew, the badge or tablets of the Law, and in the other, a drawingof the king, the gold of the crown. In fact, the drawingsdo not face each other in the originalor even appearon the same roll. No artist,that is, actually expressedsome sense of balance or counterpointby means of color-coding Torahand Corona. The memorandathemselves are mostly routine: X, a Jew, owes such-andY such; broughta packetof Jewishbonds to the treasuryfor examinationand needs reimbursementfor his trip; Z purchaseda house in the former Jewry of this-orthat town. As one reads throughthese monotonous records, one comes to recognize why the clerks doodled so much. Then, suddenly,a surprisingentry will appear.A touch of compassion (no. 181, year 1269): "Because impoverishedJews can be burdenedbeyond their resourcesconcerning this fine unless it be assessed properly,the king [HenryIII]ordersthatthe richerJews not be exemptedfrompaying their fair share and thereby over-burdeningthe poorer Jews."A hint of fear aboutthe possible breakdownof civil orderon the deathof the king (no. 430, year 1272): The Christiandebtor"shouldhave paid the 36 marksto the Jew ... [and] had the money readyto pay, but the Jew was in hiding at the tower of London because of the king's death."Even a surprisingname (no. 528, year 1273): "Toni[in another manuscriptmemorandumof the same matter,Tony] son of Aaron, Jew." Finally, uncertaintywhether the Jews were gone for good with the expulsion of 1290 (no. 1321, year 1293): "Should the aforesaid Jews returnto England hereafter (Et si contingetpredictos Judeos in Angliam in posterum redire) . . ." 123

Book Reviews With nuggets of informationlike these and with the routine but useful information in most of the othermemoranda,one can only lamentthe absence of a first-rateup-to-datebook on the Jews of medieval Englandandtheirrelationswith the state. Rokeah's calendarwill provide an invaluableresource for anyone who undertakesto write that book. Do it for Tony. William ChesterJordan PrincetonUniversity Princeton,New Jersey

Robert Chazan. God, Humanity,and History. The Hebrew First CrusadeNarratives. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 2000. xi, 270 pp. As crusaders swept through the Rhineland in 1096 en route to the Holy Land,they broughtdestructionto Ashkenazic Jewry,throughdeathor forced conversion. Record of this violence has survived in Latin and Hebrew chronicles as well as in Hebrewdirges.These chronicles have been the subjectof intense scrutiny since their publication in 1892. Attention has focused on accounts that in Worms, Mainz, and elsewhere Jews killed their family members and then themselves when the enemy was at the door. The Hebrew sources glorify these acts of self-destruction as the embodimentof the religious ideal of martyrdom,Kiddush Hashem. Two decades have witnessed a shift in methodological focus, from what the chronicles say to the way they say it. In 1982 Ivan Marcus questioned the assumption that the narrativesprovide a reasonably accuratereport of the events. He argued that the texts attest to the concerns of their authors,ratherthan those of the protagonists, and that they represent "fictions of a particularreligious imagination."' Similarly,JeremyCohen has devoted several studies to the cultural context of images and symbols employed by the narrators.Symptomaticof the decline in the credibility of the chronicles is the assertion, which has enteredthe mainstream of scholarship, that many, if not most, Jews chose apostasy over death, despite the fact that the chronicles depict martyrdomas the predominant response. Robert Chazanhas been one of the leading figures in this field of scholarship. His European Jewry and the First Crusade (Berkeley, 1987) is a thorough scholarly treatment;In the Year1096 (Philadelphia, 1996) is a more popularsurvey of the subject, with an innovativediscussion of its place in modernhistoriography.In these works, and in a dozen articles, Chazanhas consistently defended the "facticity"of the chronicles, though he, too, has been attentiveto issues concerning the needs of the narratorsand their literarytechniques. God, Humanity, and History (GHH), Chazan'slatest contribution,addressesthe fundamentalquesin theHebrewNarratives 1. IvanG. Marcus,"FromPoliticsto Martyrdom. ShiftingParadigms of the 1096CrusadeRiots,"Prooftexts2 (1982):42.

124

Review: [untitled] Author(s): David Malkiel Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 124-126 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131781 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews With nuggets of informationlike these and with the routine but useful information in most of the othermemoranda,one can only lamentthe absence of a first-rateup-to-datebook on the Jews of medieval Englandandtheirrelationswith the state. Rokeah's calendarwill provide an invaluableresource for anyone who undertakesto write that book. Do it for Tony. William ChesterJordan PrincetonUniversity Princeton,New Jersey

Robert Chazan. God, Humanity,and History. The Hebrew First CrusadeNarratives. Berkeley: University of CaliforniaPress, 2000. xi, 270 pp. As crusaders swept through the Rhineland in 1096 en route to the Holy Land,they broughtdestructionto Ashkenazic Jewry,throughdeathor forced conversion. Record of this violence has survived in Latin and Hebrew chronicles as well as in Hebrewdirges.These chronicles have been the subjectof intense scrutiny since their publication in 1892. Attention has focused on accounts that in Worms, Mainz, and elsewhere Jews killed their family members and then themselves when the enemy was at the door. The Hebrew sources glorify these acts of self-destruction as the embodimentof the religious ideal of martyrdom,Kiddush Hashem. Two decades have witnessed a shift in methodological focus, from what the chronicles say to the way they say it. In 1982 Ivan Marcus questioned the assumption that the narrativesprovide a reasonably accuratereport of the events. He argued that the texts attest to the concerns of their authors,ratherthan those of the protagonists, and that they represent "fictions of a particularreligious imagination."' Similarly,JeremyCohen has devoted several studies to the cultural context of images and symbols employed by the narrators.Symptomaticof the decline in the credibility of the chronicles is the assertion, which has enteredthe mainstream of scholarship, that many, if not most, Jews chose apostasy over death, despite the fact that the chronicles depict martyrdomas the predominant response. Robert Chazanhas been one of the leading figures in this field of scholarship. His European Jewry and the First Crusade (Berkeley, 1987) is a thorough scholarly treatment;In the Year1096 (Philadelphia, 1996) is a more popularsurvey of the subject, with an innovativediscussion of its place in modernhistoriography.In these works, and in a dozen articles, Chazanhas consistently defended the "facticity"of the chronicles, though he, too, has been attentiveto issues concerning the needs of the narratorsand their literarytechniques. God, Humanity, and History (GHH), Chazan'slatest contribution,addressesthe fundamentalquesin theHebrewNarratives 1. IvanG. Marcus,"FromPoliticsto Martyrdom. ShiftingParadigms of the 1096CrusadeRiots,"Prooftexts2 (1982):42.

124

Book Reviews tion of why the Hebrew narrativesources were written, an issue Chazan links to basic historicalquestions regardingthe Hebrewtexts. The thrustof GHH is Chazan'scharacterizationof the messages of the narrativesas "time-bound"and "timeless."The formermotif is intended "to provide guidance for that time when the next threatof anti-Jewishhostility would develop" (p. 112). Chazantermsthis approach"time-bound,"because he claims thatthe MainzAnonymous,in his view the earliest and most importantHebrew narrative, was writtenon the eve of the Second Crusade,when "guidance"would have been particularlyhandy. The idea of studyingthe past behaviorof the enemy in orderto preparefor an approachingconfrontationseems anachronistic;a mode of thought characteristic of modern(American?)culture,ratherthan of medieval Europe.A more fundamentalproblem is that the narratorsdo not explicitly mention any immediate practicalpurpose.Nor is it clear what the readerscould have learned,even in theory, from the behaviorof the assailants and victims of 1096. Chazan is awareof this last problem.We read,concerning the behavior of bishop Engilbertof Trier: "Clearlythere was not a lot to learn from all this for the future"(p. 116). He also makes the general remark:"no clear-cut messages can readily be distilled" from the narratives(p. 117). The terms time-bound and timeless are also problematic. The narratives scarcely seem time-bound if, centuries later, Jews could have continued to draw upon them for strategicguidance. Moreover,subsequentgenerations, too, would havebeen profoundlymovedby the memorializationof the victims, a second timeboundmotif identified by Chazan.Conversely,concerns that Chazandeems timeless were obviously as importantto the Jews of 1096 as they were to those of other eras. If time-boundmessages arealso timeless, and vice versa, the classification scheme appearsunhelpful. Theodicy is the quintessentialtimeless issue. Chazan explains that one approachto this problemin the narrativesis thatthe persecutionswere, simply, a divine decree (i.e. no explanation).Another view, located in the chronicle of Solomon bar Simson, sees the horrors of 1096 as retributionfor the Golden Calf episode. The latterexplanationis derivedfrom the narrative'sstatementthat there existed a decree from "the day of my accounting,"a phrase found in the Golden Calf story.This explanationis questionable, for the medieval narratormay have used the phraserhetorically,to indicate generallythatthe violence was retribution for past sins-not necessarily for the Golden Calf. The primary timeless motif is that God will-and must-reward the supreme heroism and devotion of the martyrs and exact retributionfrom the assailants.This, says Chazan,is a novel view of God's role in history, the innovative contributionof these writings. I would emphasize the delicate relationship between "will"and"must":The expressionsof certaintymay representpositive thinking, ratherthan absolute conviction, for the petitionaryelement betrayslingering, pervasive anxiety. Chazanis at his best when he tackles the thornyproblems of the chronology and authorshipof the differentchronicles, andthe relationshipof the narratives to one another.His analysis of their structureand literarycharacteristicsis sensi125

Book Reviews tive and path-breaking.For example, he portraysthe MainzAnonymousas tightly organized, and therefore the work of a single author,contrasting this with the chronicle of Solomon bar Simson, which he characterizesas a clumsy compilation of earlier sources. Novel and intriguing,too, is Chazan'ssuggestion that the reportsin the latterchronicle of the Cologne persecutionsand of the events at Trier are independentnarratives. The final chaptersare an ambitiousand enlighteningcomparisonof the Hebrew narrativeswith medieval Hebrew storytellingand with the Gesta Francorum, a contemporaryLatin chronicle. Chazanmaintainsthatthe Hebrew narrativesare unprecedentedin Hebrew literature,but strongly resemble the Gesta Francorum. In particular,the Hebrew and Latin texts emphasize the centralityof human action, ratherthan the divine manipulationof history, an idea that Chazan reasonably sets in the context of the twelfth-centuryRenaissance. GHH greatly advances the study of the 1096 catastropheand its immortalization throughthe author'sthoroughandtrenchantanalysis andhis thoughtfuland creative insights. It provides a much-needed springboardfor furtherresearchinto an endlessly relevantchapterin Jewish history,one that is both painful and fascinating. David Malkiel Bar-IlanUniversity Ramat Gan, Israel

Nathan Katz. Whoare the Jews of India? The S. MarkTaperFoundationImprint in Jewish Studies. Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress, 2000. xv, 205 pp. If there is a contemporary"dean"of Indo-Judaicstudies, it is NathanKatz, professor and chair of religious studies at Florida InternationalUniversity.He is helping revive the field of study inauguratedby WalterFischel, who died in 1973. Katz first made his mark with several articles and a book about one of the three IndianJewish communities, TheLast Jews of Cochin (1993); he edited Studies of Indian Jewish Identity (1995) with chaptersabout the Jews of Cochin, the Bene Israel of Bombay and Maharashtra,and the Baghdadisof Bombay and Calcutta. He subsequentlyfounded and currentlyco-edits the Journal of Indo-JudaicStudies. Katz contributesto comparativeJewish studies by synthesizing in this book a new wave of publications from the period of 1985 to 1995, which he calls "a groundbreakingera for the study of IndianJewish communities"(p. 6). His purpose here is to explain generally how these Jews, who never suffered discrimination at the hands of the Indianmajority,maintainedtheir identities and theircommitment to Halakhah while acculturatingto Indianand English ways. Because Katz did his field work in Cochin, located in Kerala,on the Southwest or MalabarCoast of India,he devotes more than half the book to the Malayalam-speakingCochinis or Cochinites. They numberedabout2,500 at the time of Indianindependencein 1947 but are now unableto providea Sabbathminyanbe126

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Brian Weinstein Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 126-128 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131782 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews tive and path-breaking.For example, he portraysthe MainzAnonymousas tightly organized, and therefore the work of a single author,contrasting this with the chronicle of Solomon bar Simson, which he characterizesas a clumsy compilation of earlier sources. Novel and intriguing,too, is Chazan'ssuggestion that the reportsin the latterchronicle of the Cologne persecutionsand of the events at Trier are independentnarratives. The final chaptersare an ambitiousand enlighteningcomparisonof the Hebrew narrativeswith medieval Hebrew storytellingand with the Gesta Francorum, a contemporaryLatin chronicle. Chazanmaintainsthatthe Hebrew narrativesare unprecedentedin Hebrew literature,but strongly resemble the Gesta Francorum. In particular,the Hebrew and Latin texts emphasize the centralityof human action, ratherthan the divine manipulationof history, an idea that Chazan reasonably sets in the context of the twelfth-centuryRenaissance. GHH greatly advances the study of the 1096 catastropheand its immortalization throughthe author'sthoroughandtrenchantanalysis andhis thoughtfuland creative insights. It provides a much-needed springboardfor furtherresearchinto an endlessly relevantchapterin Jewish history,one that is both painful and fascinating. David Malkiel Bar-IlanUniversity Ramat Gan, Israel

Nathan Katz. Whoare the Jews of India? The S. MarkTaperFoundationImprint in Jewish Studies. Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress, 2000. xv, 205 pp. If there is a contemporary"dean"of Indo-Judaicstudies, it is NathanKatz, professor and chair of religious studies at Florida InternationalUniversity.He is helping revive the field of study inauguratedby WalterFischel, who died in 1973. Katz first made his mark with several articles and a book about one of the three IndianJewish communities, TheLast Jews of Cochin (1993); he edited Studies of Indian Jewish Identity (1995) with chaptersabout the Jews of Cochin, the Bene Israel of Bombay and Maharashtra,and the Baghdadisof Bombay and Calcutta. He subsequentlyfounded and currentlyco-edits the Journal of Indo-JudaicStudies. Katz contributesto comparativeJewish studies by synthesizing in this book a new wave of publications from the period of 1985 to 1995, which he calls "a groundbreakingera for the study of IndianJewish communities"(p. 6). His purpose here is to explain generally how these Jews, who never suffered discrimination at the hands of the Indianmajority,maintainedtheir identities and theircommitment to Halakhah while acculturatingto Indianand English ways. Because Katz did his field work in Cochin, located in Kerala,on the Southwest or MalabarCoast of India,he devotes more than half the book to the Malayalam-speakingCochinis or Cochinites. They numberedabout2,500 at the time of Indianindependencein 1947 but are now unableto providea Sabbathminyanbe126

Book Reviews cause most have migratedto Israel and elsewhere. The largest sub-groupamong them are the black and brownMalabari.Although they claim they arrivedafterthe destruction of the Second Temple, empirical evidence goes back only to the eleventh century when chartersand honors from the Indian maharajasassured them a high status. The less numerous white Cochinis, who came from Spain in the sixteenth century and fromYemen and otherArabic speaking countries, are called Paradesis, or foreigners.They were never more than about 300, but they are famous because of their beautiful synagogue built in 1568 and because some, such as the Rahabis, were the middlemen between the Dutch East India Company and Indian pepper producers during the eighteenth century. Their contacts with Dutch Jews ensured their access to mainstreamSephardic Judaism.They also adapted to the Indian context. Their exaggerated concerns about purity during Passover reflected brahmincustoms. It is not clear from this book whetherall Jews of Kerala celebratedthis holiday in the same way, however.Paradesisemulated "the Indian caste system by developing subcastes"(p. 59), relegating the darker-skinned older settlers, Malabaris,and their own manumittedslaves, who were practicing Jews, to inferiorstatus. In additionto his own research,Katz depends on Barbara Johnson, Orpa Slapak, J. B. Segal, and Paradesis such as the Koders and Halleguas. The Marathi-speakingBene Israelnumberedabout20,000 at the time of Indian independenceand have reached50,000 in the world. About 5,000 still live in India. Bene Israel say their ancestors, fleeing Assyrian persecution after the destructionof the FirstTemple,surviveda ship wreck off the Konkancoast. By the eighteenth century their Jewish identity was tenuous. After making contact with otherJews they became more observantand most moved to Israelafter 1948. Distinctive to their practices is a particularreverence for the ProphetElijah. During the "Malida"ritual the Bene Israel make a food offering to Elijah in connection with a vow (p. 103). Katz's discussion depends here on Shirley Berry Isenberg, JoanRoland,ShalvaWeil, as well as Haeem Samuel Kehimkar,a Bene Israelhimself. Baghdadis,the Arabic-speakersfrom Baghdad,Basra,Aleppo and even from Persia and Afghanistan, arrivedin the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenthcenturies.A few, such as the Sassoons, came with considerablecapital,which they invested in trade,real estate, and the new industriesof Bombay and Calcutta.Baghdadis in Bombay rejectedthe Bene Israel. Katz asserts that the cause of the break between the communities was the 1857 Indian uprising against the British, after which Baghdadisstrivedto become Englishmenand Englishwomen.This does not explain why, twenty-one years before the revolt, the Baghdadis requested that a wall be built in the Jewish cemeterybetween their graves and those of Bene Israel, or why they would not intermarrywith Bene Israel. Sometimes it seems that the Jews got along betterwith Indians,who were never anti-semitic,thanthey did with other Jews. In this section Katz depends on Joan Roland, Tom Timberg, and the CalcuttaBaghdadissuch as RabbiEzekiel Musleah, Jael Silliman, Sally Solomon, Mavis Hyman, and Esmond Ezra. For years, WalterFischel workedalmost alone on Jews of SouthAsia. This impressive book shows that a new generation of scholars and memorialists, in127

Book Reviews spiredby the relativelyhappyhistory of the Jews of Indiaand led by NathanKatz, is writing excellent works about them today. Brian Weinstein HowardUniversity Washington,D.C.

Sara Japhet. The Commentaryof Rabbi Samuel ben Meir (Rashbam) on the Book of Job. Publications of the Perry Foundationfor Biblical Research in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 2000. 487 pp. (Hebrew). Our knowledge of the Frenchschool of biblical interpretationhas benefited in the last two decades from much original scholarship,includingnewly published texts and groundbreakingstudies. SaraJaphethas alreadycontributedin both areas, with her edition of Rashbam on Qohelet (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985, with a translationby R. Salters)and studies of this school's hermeneutics.Hernew book, likewise, representsa two-fold advance in scholarship.It featuresthe (unattributed)Job commentaryin MS Lutzki 778, which she identifies as Rashbam's, preceded by an analytic introduction,divided into seven chapters,two appendices and a bibliographythat itself is a most valuable, up-to-date study of Rashbam's exegesis. After demonstratingthat this commentarywas, indeed,writtenby Rashbam (ChapterOne), Japhetoutlines his concept of peshat (ChapterTwo), system of beliefs (ChapterThree), literaryinsights (ChapterFour),and linguistics (Chapter Five). M. Banitt contributeda study of Rashbam'sOld Frenchglosses (Chapter Six), which is followed by Japhet'sdescriptionof her edition (ChapterSeven). Apart from offering an importantnew commentaryby Rashbam,critically edited and annotated,Japhethas produced the most comprehensivepublished study on this exegete since the pioneering work of Rosin over a century ago. Building on the substantial advances in our understandingof the interpretivetraditionsince that time, Japhethas createda lucid, nuancedpictureof Rashbam'shermeneutical thought and practice. Japhet'sgreatestcontributionis her thorough,insightfuldefinition of Rashbam's concept of peshat as embodied in the Job commentaryand its relationto his other writings. In his Torahcommentary,Rashbammakes a point of interpreting Scripturewithout resorting to Midrash. Though his anti-midrashicstance is not statedopenly in the Job commentary,Japhetidentifies the same endeavorby showing how the label "peshuto"implies a rejectionof the midrashicreading (pp. 5575). She suggests that his muted tone on Job indicates this commentarywas written late in his career,when Rashbamwas confident in his peshat method and no longer needed to defend it polemically. (Alternatively,we might suggest that the midrashimon Job were simply not as well known as those on the Torah,and that Rashbam did not need to address them directly.)The idea that Rashbamavoided 128

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Mordechai Z. Cohen Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 128-132 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131783 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews spiredby the relativelyhappyhistory of the Jews of Indiaand led by NathanKatz, is writing excellent works about them today. Brian Weinstein HowardUniversity Washington,D.C.

Sara Japhet. The Commentaryof Rabbi Samuel ben Meir (Rashbam) on the Book of Job. Publications of the Perry Foundationfor Biblical Research in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 2000. 487 pp. (Hebrew). Our knowledge of the Frenchschool of biblical interpretationhas benefited in the last two decades from much original scholarship,includingnewly published texts and groundbreakingstudies. SaraJaphethas alreadycontributedin both areas, with her edition of Rashbam on Qohelet (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1985, with a translationby R. Salters)and studies of this school's hermeneutics.Hernew book, likewise, representsa two-fold advance in scholarship.It featuresthe (unattributed)Job commentaryin MS Lutzki 778, which she identifies as Rashbam's, preceded by an analytic introduction,divided into seven chapters,two appendices and a bibliographythat itself is a most valuable, up-to-date study of Rashbam's exegesis. After demonstratingthat this commentarywas, indeed,writtenby Rashbam (ChapterOne), Japhetoutlines his concept of peshat (ChapterTwo), system of beliefs (ChapterThree), literaryinsights (ChapterFour),and linguistics (Chapter Five). M. Banitt contributeda study of Rashbam'sOld Frenchglosses (Chapter Six), which is followed by Japhet'sdescriptionof her edition (ChapterSeven). Apart from offering an importantnew commentaryby Rashbam,critically edited and annotated,Japhethas produced the most comprehensivepublished study on this exegete since the pioneering work of Rosin over a century ago. Building on the substantial advances in our understandingof the interpretivetraditionsince that time, Japhethas createda lucid, nuancedpictureof Rashbam'shermeneutical thought and practice. Japhet'sgreatestcontributionis her thorough,insightfuldefinition of Rashbam's concept of peshat as embodied in the Job commentaryand its relationto his other writings. In his Torahcommentary,Rashbammakes a point of interpreting Scripturewithout resorting to Midrash. Though his anti-midrashicstance is not statedopenly in the Job commentary,Japhetidentifies the same endeavorby showing how the label "peshuto"implies a rejectionof the midrashicreading (pp. 5575). She suggests that his muted tone on Job indicates this commentarywas written late in his career,when Rashbamwas confident in his peshat method and no longer needed to defend it polemically. (Alternatively,we might suggest that the midrashimon Job were simply not as well known as those on the Torah,and that Rashbam did not need to address them directly.)The idea that Rashbamavoided 128

Book Reviews Midrash,of course, is hardlynew; M. Greenberg,'for example, defined this as the key featurethatdistinguishesRashbam'snotion of peshat from Rashi's.But Japhet refines this distinction by showing that Rashbam's debate was with midrashic methods,not midrashicreadingsthemselves, which he accepts when they meet his criteriaof peshat (pp. 55n, 63, 75-78). As Japhet shows, a peshat reading, accordingto Rashbam,is one thattakes into account (a) the literarycontext (pp. 5565); (b) derekhleshon ha-miqra("themannerof biblical language"),i.e., biblical stylistic conventions(pp. 65-69); and (c) noheg she-ba-'olam ("themannerof the world"),i.e., typical humanbehavior,societal norms, and the naturalorder(derekh eretz ["the way of the world"] in Rashbam'sTorahcommentary;pp. 148-149). Rashbamappliesthese principlesin conjunctionwith the ein le-daqdeq("one must not scrutinize")rule to undercutelaborate, fanciful and supernaturalmidrashic readingsand offer a more reasonablepeshat interpretation. Japhet'snew book is related in importantways to her earlier studies of the so-called compilatory genre,2 which have changed our perception of northern Frenchexegesis. As earlierscholarshave noted, many Frenchcommentariesoriginatedas marginalglosses on the biblicaltext or Rashi'squntres,which made them susceptibleto being compiled into largerworks that representa school of thought ratherthan individualauthorship.(One need only compare the varied collections of Tosafoton the Talmudwith Maimonides'Mishneh Torahor Mishnahcommentary,both of which bearhis unmistakablesignature.)A primeexample of the compilatory genre, according to Japhet, is the Job commentary attributedto Joseph Qara,recentlypublishedby M. Ahrend.3That work includes much materialidentical to the Job commentaryin MS Lutzki 778, which forces scholars dealing with either one to define the relationshipbetween them. Ahrendhimself noted that his text often incorporatesRashi'sglosses and midrashiccitations, the latterbeing especially surprising in light of Qara's otherwise staunchly anti-midrashictone. Japhet'ssolution:Ahrend'salleged "Qaracommentary"is a compilatoryworkthat drawsupon Qara'soriginal glosses on Job among other sources, including Rashbam's commentaryas attested in MS Lutzki 778. Ironically,Japhet'sinsight has come back to haunther, as some scholarscontinue to maintainthe integrityof the Qaracommentaryby arguingthat MS Lutzki 778 is the compilation. Japhetdevotes her first chapterand an appendixto refuting this view, presentedmost fully by M. Rosen in his Ph.D. dissertation(Universityof London, 1995). The dialogue continues in M. Lockshin'sreview of Japhet'sbook, in which he defends Rosen's position (JSQ 8 [2001]: 80-104). In the end, Lockshin (p. 103) admits that this commentaryreflects the imprintof Rashbam and may have been written by his 1. "TheRelationshipBetween RashiandRashbamto the Pentateuch"[Hebrew].Isaac Leo Seeligmann Volume,eds. A. Rof6 andY. Zakovitch(Jerusalem:E. Rubinshtain,1983), vol. II, pp. 559-67. 2. "The Nature and Distributionof Medieval Compilatory Commentariesin Light of Rabbi JosephKara'sCommentaryon the Book of Job,"TheMidrashicImagination,ed. M. Fishbane(Albany, 1993), pp. 98-130; "Hizkuni'sCommentaryon the Pentateuch"[Hebrew], Rabbi Mordechai Breuer Festschrift:Collected Papers in Jewish Studies, M. Ahrendet al., eds. (Jerusalem:Akademon, 1992), vol. II, pp. 91-112. 3. M. Ahrend,RabbiJosephKara s Commentaryon Job (Jerusalem:Rav Kook, 1988) (Hebrew).

129

Book Reviews students,much as Japhet(pp. 305-306) admitsthat interpolationsmay have crept into the MS. Despite its importance,the issue of authorshipshould not deflect attention from the more central questions of hermeneuticalmethod that Japhetaddresses in her comprehensiveanalysis. Having described what I consider to be the most importantfeatures of Japhet's work, I would like to select a few points where an alternativeperspective might be helpful. Japhetappropriatelydescribes Rashbamagainstthe backdropof his own intellectual milieu, in which Rashi and midrashicworks were prevalent. Yet when we place Rashbamin a largerculturalpicturethat includes the Spanish exegetical tradition(of which he was largely unaware),a differentresult emerges. For example, in light of the modern literaryreading of Scripture,Japhetemphasizes Rashbam'ssense of biblical poetics. She points to his well-known insights aboutbiblical parallelism,a conventionhe notes in the Job commentary(pp. 17087) and regards as a means of enhancing Scripture'selegance (tiqqun milat hamiqra;p. 173). Rashbamalso discernedScripture'sproclivityfor metaphor(pp. 68, 76, 87, 148-51), an exegetical concept he invoked in conjunctionwith the ein ledaqdeq principle to avoid elaborate midrashic readings. While it is evident that Rashbammanifests literarysensitivity, it must be distinguishedfrom the literary awarenessof exegetes in Muslim Spainwho were exposed to Arabicpoetics. Lacking such training,Rashbam'sliteraryintuitionis remarkablebut his isolated stylistic observationsdo not matchthe aesthetic sense manifested,for example, by the great Hebrew poet, Moses ibn Ezra, who analyzed biblical parallelism and metaphor (which he distinguishedfrom simile and allegory) as part of an overallendeavorto identify biblical precedentsfor twentyArabicpoetic techniques.4A similar observationperhapsapplies to Rashbam'slinguistics, which lacked the benefit of the numerousimportantworks in this field writtenin Arabic. Japhet,however, does arguethatRashbamwas awareof Hayyuj'swork andpromisesto addressthis question elsewhere (pp. 51n, 228). A comparisonwith the Andalusianschool also sheds light on the rationalist tendencies Japhetdetects in Rashbam.As she notes, he at times reinterpretsanthropomorphicdepictionsof God (pp. 127-135), an endeavortypical of the philosophical exegetical traditionpioneered by Sa'adia.5 But Rashbamdid not have a philosophical outlook thatwould militateagainstanthropomorphism,which might explain why he does not reinterpretit consistently.A similar issue arises with respect to Satan in Job 1-2. The existence of a heavenlybeing capable of influencing God was theologicallyuntenablefor Sa'adiaandMaimonides,who bothadopt4. See M. Cohen, "TheAesthetic Exegesis of Moses ibn Ezra,"chap. 31.2 of HebrewBible / Old Testament:History of its Interpretation,ed. M. Sxebo(Gbttingen:Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht,2000), vol. 1/2, pp. 282-301. 5. Japhet(p. 127n) points to the Targumimas a precedentfor this endeavor.While Sa'adiaand Maimonides both made this claim, it has been challenged by M. Klein, Anthropomorphismsand Anthropopathismsin the Targumimof the Pentateuch[Hebrew](Jerusalem:Makor, 1982). Citing numerousTargumicpassages thatdepict God anthropomorphically,Klein arguesthateven those passages that avoid anthropomorphismdo not reflect a philosophical stance. Sa'adia and Maimonidesmay have been compelled to projecttheiranti-anthropomorphic theology onto the Targumim;but Rashbamwould have had less reason to do so.

130

Book Reviews ed decisive exegetical strategiesto nullify this inference.Rashbamdoes not address this problemexplicitly; but Japhetinfers from his comments that he takes Satanto be an imaginarycharacter,employed by Scriptureto hypostasize God's infliction of pain on humanbeings (pp. 136-137), an interpretationarticulatedby M. Weiss (TheStoryof Job 'sBeginning [Jerusalem:Ha-SokhnutHa-YchuditLe-EretsYisrael [Hebrew], 1983], pp. 38-39). While Japhet'sreadingof Rashbam'slanguage is itself not unreasonable,it seems questionableto me whether he really had this sophisticatedexplanation in mind. After all, Rashbam accepted the existence of demons and other supernaturalentities (pp. 142-46) and might have expressed himself more clearly if he really intended to claim that Satan is an imaginary character,something Maimonides does with great fanfare in Guide III:22. As Japhetherself notes (p. 56), a mythological text should prompta peshat readerto suspend his rationalism and convey the plain sense of the text, a directive that would have led Rashbamto avoid the heavy-handed,philosophically drivenreading and accept Satan'sheavenly existence. NorthernFrenchbiblicalcommentaries,includingRashbam's,havebeen characterized in earlier scholarship as collections of glosses on words and phrases, ratherthan analyses of largerliteraryunits. Japhet,however,argues that this generalizationdoes not apply to Rashbam'sJob commentary,which includes a structuralanalysis of this biblical book (pp. 98-99, 101-9, 162-70). Rashbamshows, for example,thatchapters12-14 form an integratedspeech thatconcludes the first round of dialogues; he addresses the incomplete structureof the third round, in which Zophar'spart is missing; and he identifies the internalstructureof the Elihu speeches. Yet Rashbamdoes not address meta-textualissues; i.e., he explains whatthe narratorand characterssay and mean, but he does not evaluatetheirviews philosophically,as the medieval Spanishexegetes, like modernreaders,tend to do. Abrahamibn Ezra, for example, whose textual glosses otherwise resemble Rashbam's,composed a lengthyepilogue in which he abstractsa theoreticalstance from the speeches of each interlocutor,culminating in the ultimate philosophical response to evil utteredby God Himself. The lack of such explicit analysis in Rashbam raises a question, in my opinion, aboutJaphet'sview (pp. 125-27) that Rashbam identified the correct philosophical solution to Job's suffering in Elihu's words. Ibn Ezra (comm. on Job, introductionand epilogue), Maimonides (Guide III:23),and Nahmanides (comm. on Job 33:17, 36:14) all make this claim explicitly; but Rashbamnever evaluatesthe analytic merit of Elihu's arguments.Japhet drawsher inference from Rashbam'sreadingof Job 42:7, in which Elihu is spared from the divine wrath directed at the other three friends for "not speaking that which is right (nekhonah),as my servantJob [had done]."This verse, no doubt, is an importantkey for unlockingthe book of Job and was, indeed,takenby the Spanish exegetes as evidence that Elihu offered the correct view and thereforewas not scoldedby God. But why is Jobnot scolded for his blasphemy?In fact, God'swords imply that "my servant Job" spoke "thatwhich is right"! Ibn Ezra, Maimonides andNahmanidesall answerthatJobmeritsthis statusbecause he retractedhis blasphemy and accepted the philosophical truthhe received from God. When we turn to Rashbamagainst this backdrop,it becomes evident thathe reads 42:7 quite differently.He explains that Job was spared from God's wrathbecause his blasphe131

Book Reviews my was mitigatedby suffering(as suggested in the Talmud[p. 125]), and that Elihu was sparedbecause he spoke to Job in a consoling manner(as Rashi on 36:9 argues), unlike the three friends who criticized Job.According to Rashbam,then, God's wrath indicatedthe interlocutors'moral and religious flaws, not philosophical errors.Just as Job'sblasphemouswords were excusable (but, presumably,not correct) in light of his despair,Elihu was exceptional among Job'sfriendsbecause of his moral virtue, not his philosophical insight.This readingof 42:7 comes closer to the modern view that the book of Job teaches that there is no philosophical solution to the problemof evil, and thattruefriendsmust respondto a suffererwith compassion and sensitivity.6 MordechaiZ. Cohen7 YeshivaUniversity New York,New York

Moshe Halbertal.Between Torahand Wisdom:Rabbi Menahemha-Meiri and the Maimonidean Halakhists of Provence. Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 2000. 239 pp. (Hebrew). In this exciting book, Professor Moshe Halbertalof the Hebrew University and the Shalom HartmanInstituteuncoverswith brilliantconceptualclaritythe religious world of the philosophically inclined rabbinicscholarsof southernFrance. With impressive erudition,Halbertalsurveys most of the relevantthirteenth-and fourteenth-centuryprimarysource material,both in printand in manuscript,with an emphasis on the writing and thought of Menahem ha-Meiri of Perpignan(d. 1315). Meiri was the leading talmudist of a proud and self-consciously independent southernFrenchJewish community at the turn of the thirteenthcenturyand the author of an encyclopedic commentaryon the Talmud,Bet ha-Behirah.Halbertal argues that the history of medieval Jewish thought has been impoverished significantly on account of an inadequateappreciationof the impressivedegreeto which southernFrenchtalmudists,like Meiri, integratedphilosophyandhalakhah in their writing and thought.In this Halbertalis undoubtedlycorrect,andhis book is therefore an unusually importantcontributionto Jewish intellectualhistory.(A conceptual core of Halbertal'swork appearedas "R. Menahem ha-Me'iri: bein Torahle-Hokhmah,"Tarbiz63 (1995): 63-118, but issues andthemes treatedthere are examined here with much greaterscope and depth.) In brief introductoryand concluding essays, Halbertalclearly frames his topic both conceptually and historically,and powerfullystates the case for its im6. See, e.g., A. Cooper, "The Sense of the Book of Job,"Prooftexts 17 (1997): 227-244. 7. This review was written while I was a Fellow at the Centerfor Advanced Judaic Studies at the Universityof Pennsylvania,to which I am gratefulfor providinga congenial atmospherefor my research and writing. I wish to thank Prof. Adele Berlin for her insightful comments on an earlierdraft of this review.

132

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Gregg Stern Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 132-135 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131784 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews my was mitigatedby suffering(as suggested in the Talmud[p. 125]), and that Elihu was sparedbecause he spoke to Job in a consoling manner(as Rashi on 36:9 argues), unlike the three friends who criticized Job.According to Rashbam,then, God's wrath indicatedthe interlocutors'moral and religious flaws, not philosophical errors.Just as Job'sblasphemouswords were excusable (but, presumably,not correct) in light of his despair,Elihu was exceptional among Job'sfriendsbecause of his moral virtue, not his philosophical insight.This readingof 42:7 comes closer to the modern view that the book of Job teaches that there is no philosophical solution to the problemof evil, and thattruefriendsmust respondto a suffererwith compassion and sensitivity.6 MordechaiZ. Cohen7 YeshivaUniversity New York,New York

Moshe Halbertal.Between Torahand Wisdom:Rabbi Menahemha-Meiri and the Maimonidean Halakhists of Provence. Jerusalem:Magnes Press, 2000. 239 pp. (Hebrew). In this exciting book, Professor Moshe Halbertalof the Hebrew University and the Shalom HartmanInstituteuncoverswith brilliantconceptualclaritythe religious world of the philosophically inclined rabbinicscholarsof southernFrance. With impressive erudition,Halbertalsurveys most of the relevantthirteenth-and fourteenth-centuryprimarysource material,both in printand in manuscript,with an emphasis on the writing and thought of Menahem ha-Meiri of Perpignan(d. 1315). Meiri was the leading talmudist of a proud and self-consciously independent southernFrenchJewish community at the turn of the thirteenthcenturyand the author of an encyclopedic commentaryon the Talmud,Bet ha-Behirah.Halbertal argues that the history of medieval Jewish thought has been impoverished significantly on account of an inadequateappreciationof the impressivedegreeto which southernFrenchtalmudists,like Meiri, integratedphilosophyandhalakhah in their writing and thought.In this Halbertalis undoubtedlycorrect,andhis book is therefore an unusually importantcontributionto Jewish intellectualhistory.(A conceptual core of Halbertal'swork appearedas "R. Menahem ha-Me'iri: bein Torahle-Hokhmah,"Tarbiz63 (1995): 63-118, but issues andthemes treatedthere are examined here with much greaterscope and depth.) In brief introductoryand concluding essays, Halbertalclearly frames his topic both conceptually and historically,and powerfullystates the case for its im6. See, e.g., A. Cooper, "The Sense of the Book of Job,"Prooftexts 17 (1997): 227-244. 7. This review was written while I was a Fellow at the Centerfor Advanced Judaic Studies at the Universityof Pennsylvania,to which I am gratefulfor providinga congenial atmospherefor my research and writing. I wish to thank Prof. Adele Berlin for her insightful comments on an earlierdraft of this review.

132

Book Reviews portance. His book contains six chaptersthat investigate the intersection of philosophy and law in rabbinicculture in southernFrance from a variety of angles. The first chapter establishes Meiri's commitments as a Maimonidean scholar, demonstratingthat Meiri's views on a wide range of issues-including the role of intellectual comprehension,the nature of God, immortality,and prophecy,as well as Meiri'sbiblical exegesis and understandingof magic-are all thoroughly Maimonidean.The second chapterexplores Meiri's relationshipto the legacy of Samuel ibn Tibbon of Marseilles, the great philosophic translatorand bible commentatorwho flourished in the first quarterof the thirteenthcentury,and whose work had become, in Meiri'sday,emblematicof the southernFrenchsynthesis of philosophy and Jewish tradition.The third chapteris a major contributionto the understandingof Meiri's celebrated innovationthat Christiansbeing "bound by religion" are not to be considered idolaters but brothers.With penetratinglearning and insight, Halbertaleliminates the hypothesis that Meiri's categorizationof Christiansis apologetic in nature,clarifies the conceptual basis of Meiri's notion of "religion,"andpersuasivelyidentifies the exegetical sources out of which Meiri fashioned this striking innovation.The fourth chaptergives the readera sense of the characterof the rationalisticcommitmentsof southernFrenchrabbinicscholars in the generationsproceedingand following Meiri, and containspath-breaking work on the talmudist and polemicist Meir ben Simeon ha-Me'ili of Narbonne, and Meiri'steacher, Reuven ben The fifth chapter presents the controversy over philosophic study that.Hayyim. gripped Languedoc (1304-6) as an abruptintensification of a decades-long conflict over the natureof the Maimonideanlegacy that bifurcatedthe moderaterabbinicelite, with some moderates, like Meiri, moving to defend the radicalphilosophertranslators,and others, like Abba Mari ben Moses of Montpellier,taking an active critical stand against them. The sixth chapterbreaks new ground with a study of the work of David ben Samuel haKokhavi,the authorof Sefer ha-Batim and one of greatest Jewish legal scholars to follow Meiri in the southernFrenchtradition.Withimpressivelearningand sensitive reading,Halbertalshows how ha-Kokhavidaredto go furtherthanany of his southernFrenchpredecessorsin the philosophic spiritualizationof halakhah. Driving much of Halbertal'sanalysis is a vision of the moderate and radical interpretativestreams of southern French Jewry as historical expressions of a profoundduality immanentwithin Maimonideanthought.The validity of Halbertal's work therefore depends to a great extent on the validity of this vision. Halbertalargues, for example, that the southern French rabbinic elite adopted a moderate interpretationof the Maimonidean legacy, while the region's philosopher translatorstended to read Maimonides along radical lines. However, a significant numberof southernFrenchphilosophertranslators,like Kalonymousben Kalonymous, among others, were quite conservative in orientation,while several southern French talmudists like David ben Samuel ha-Kokhavi stood just a hair'sbreadthfrom the most radicalphilosophic positions. Further,Halbertaldescribes Meiri as a moderate Maimonidean "critic"engaged in a passionate "internal"conflict with a radical philosophic wing. However, Meiri held the works of philosophers like Samuel ibn Tibbon and Jacob Anatoli as the very fonts of southernFrenchJewish culture and appearsto have given them a rathermoder133

Book Reviews ate interpretation.In a similar vein, Halbertalarguesthat were it not for the "protection" bestowed upon the philosophically radicaltranslatorsby a fundamentally opposed and potentially hostile moderaterabbinicelite, philosophic culturein southern France "would have collapsed" in the face of the "systematic"attacks against it. However,the closeness and mutual dependence that characterizedthe relationship between the philosophic translatorsand their rabbinic supporters from the earliest days of southern French Jewish philosophic culture renderthis presentationratherdifficult. Finally, Halbertalpresents the southernFrenchconflict over philosophic study as a virtual "hypostasis"of immanentMaimonidean dualities. However,it is unlikely that any living community ought be describedin such reified terms, as if its culturewere abstractlydeterminedaccordingto a particular interpretationof Maimonides'challenging and multivalentliterarycorpus. Despite his extraordinarygraspof the relevantmaterial,Halbertaldrawsthe knotty complexities of thirteenth-and early-fourteenth-centurysouthernFrenchJewish thought into a conceptually brilliantbut historically inaccurateand untenable picture. Similarly,on the issue of the religious valuationof Talmudstudy,Halbertal casts the differencebetween Meiri and his southernFrenchphilosophercolleagues a bit too harshly.In Halbertal'sintriguingpresentation,Meiri's decision to write Bet ha-Behirah on the Talmudconstituted a conscious and unequivocalrepudiation of the southernFrenchphilosophers'desire to eliminate the Talmud,with its impracticaldialectic, as a source for Jewish legal study.However,Meiriwas as disdainfully adverse to impracticaltalmudic discourse as the exclusive philosopher, as his practicallyorientedencyclopedia of talmudicinterpretationconsistentlyexecuted over such a vast terrainclearly shows. The philosophertranslators,on the otherhand,maintaineda keen interestin the deepermeaningof rabbinicliterature. They surelywould have been fascinated,for example, by the allegorizationof specific halakhot by Meiri'syounger contemporaryha-Kokhavi.Furthermore,scriptural exegesis was the philosophers'principalmedium.They did not simply wish to move on to Averroes'commentarieson the works of Aristotle, as Halbertalimplies. Conversely,powerful,creativetalmudiststook-and, today,still take-very little interest in Meiri's light and breezy discussions of the talmudic sugyah. The greatJewish legal minds of the thirteenthand fourteenthcenturies,Ramban,Rashba, and Ritva, dealt extensively with the writing of the twelfth-centurysouthern French talmudists Rabad and Zerahyah ha-Levi. They did not, however,cite the work of the succeeding generationsof southernFrenchtalmudists,many of them rationalists, at all. Halbertalacknowledges that much of this southernFrenchlegal writing was simply not of the caliber necessary to engage the attentionof the great Cataloniantalmudists.Nevertheless, Halbertalsuggests thatthese important Spanish talmudists consciously abandonedsouthern Frenchhalakhic writing on account of the rationalisticorientationof its authors:a fascinatingbut completely unsubstantiatedhypothesis. The utter lack of interestof the importantSpanish talmudists in the vast halakhicliteratureof contemporarysouthernFrance,nevertheless, remains intriguing. A notable gap in Halbertal'sstudy is his cursorytreatmentof the Mezoqaq

134

Book Reviews Shivcatayyim,a massive talmudic work, comparablein scope to Bet ha-Behirah, by a late-fourteenth-centurysouthernFrench scholar Joseph ben Saul. (Professor Israel Ta-Shma of the Hebrew University identified the unique manuscriptof MezoqaqShivcatayyima few yearsago.) In his fourthchapter,Halbertalbriefly establishes the Maimonideancommitmentsof Joseph ben Saul, but concludes with the descriptionof Mezoqaq Shiv'atayyimas "a work that has yet to be studied." Writtenin 1380, the existence of this majorwork rendersproblematicHalbertal's claim thatthe expulsion of the Jews of Languedoc in 1306 fundamentallyundermined their distinctive culture.The terminusad quem of the southernFrenchreligious and culturallife that Halbertalso marvelouslybrings to light thereforerequires furtherclarification. Curiously,Halbertalsuggests that Meiri and his teacher Reuven ben of .Hayyim, held "esoteric"views on a numberof major issues, including the creation the world. Indeed, a numberof Meiri's formulationsregardingsuch sensitive issues are extremelycautious and compressed,and Meiri can be caught contradicting himself on these same delicate topics. It seems most unlikely, however, that either Meiri or his teacher turnedto modes of esotericism-deliberately contradicting themselves or elaboratelyconcealing their true views, for example-as a strategiesfor scholarlycommunication.PerhapsHalbertaluses the term "esoteric" more loosely. In any case, this issue requiresclarification. Finally,two relatively minor observations deserve mention: Halbertalpuzzlingly perpetuatesthe legend that Meiri'sBet ha-Behirahwas "discoveredentirely by accidentin the nineteenthcenturyin one complete manuscriptafterall traces of the work had vanished over the course of aroundfive hundredyears" (p. 17). The manuscriptin question-which lacks Meiri'sintroductionand commentaryto 'Avotand,hence, is not complete-was written in Avignon in the 1450s and identified independentlyby the HebrewbibliographersH. J.Azulai and G. B. De-Rossi not much laterthan 1750. Both scholarsimmediatelyrecognizedthis manuscript's importancebecause of their acquaintancewith Bet ha-Behirah from sources already known to them. Lastly,Halbertalconsistently uses the term "Provence"for the Southof France.This designationfor the region, while justifiable in a Hebrewlanguagework,probablyshould have been introducedwith some qualification, as almost none of the places where the scholars treated in this book lived-Montpellier, Lunel, B6zier, Perpignan,and Narbonne, for example-are in Provence. Most are in Languedoc,while Perpignan,where Meiri himself lived, is in Rousillon. The absence of this clarification may confuse the general medievalist, who probablywould experienceuncertaintyand perhapseven a sense of historicaldislocation in attemptingto place the Jewish community under discussion in its social, political, and economic context. Gregg Stern Smith College Northampton,Massachusetts

135

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Joel Hecker Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 136-137 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131785 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Moshe Hallamish. TheKabbalah in Liturgy,Halakhah,and Custom.RamatGan: Bar-IlanPress, 2000. 686 pp. (Hebrew). In Kabbalah in Liturgy,Halakhah, and Custom,Moshe Hallamishasks the seminal question:Fromwhere does the kabbalist,whose sourcesareheavenly,or at best heard from a teacher, gain the ability to speak into the halakhic tradition (p. 118)? Presumably,the principleof "lo ba-shamayimhi" shouldprevail,excluding any kind of kabbalisticprivilege. He asks further,Is there a historical point where thereis a suddenpenetrationor was it throughprogressiveprocess?Does the Kabbalahcreate new forms to exert its influence or does it use the halakhicforms in existence? This collection of thirty-one articles is the most comprehensiveattempt to assess the relationshipbetween kabbalahand halakhah,prayer,and custom, and as such marksa significant milestone in this importantarea of research. The book is divided into three sections: "FoundationalIssues,""Personalities and Approaches,"and "Halakhahand Minhagunderthe Influence of Kabbalah."The first chapterof the book, "Problemsin ResearchingKabbalah'sInfluence on Prayer,"is a considerationof the parametersof the question, and the methods and methodologies required.Hallamish frames the questions of influence as follows: Given that all religions are conservativeby nature,and that prayeris an emphatic carrierof that value, how can change occur?Are the changes due to internal or external developments? Hallamish shows how the Kabbalahjumps over the traditionalistichurdles of minhag avot and minhag ha-makomthroughthe proliferationof printedtikkunim and migrationsof populations.Mysticism's appealto a higher authorityled to the famous principle attributedto David ibn Abi Zimra (1479-1573) that one should follow the kabbalisticpracticeif it is a stringencyanddoes not conflict with the rulings of the Talmud. In this manner,the normal channels of due halakhic process were not contravened.Hallamish suggests that the key to success of the Kabbalah-practicerelationshipis humrahand hiddur, stringencyand beautification. In otherwords,by appealingto spiritually-mindedpeople, the Kabbalahcould exercise leverage on the traditionwithout necessarilymakingdemandson the populace as a whole. The call for properkavvanah,before and duringprayer,and before the performance of commandmentsremains a primarypopularlegacy of the Kabbalah. We witness the advent of "prayerbefore prayer,"to use Hallamish'sphrase,in the form of verbal or mental kavvanot.An interestingramificationof attemptsto inspire spiritualdirectednessthroughthe utteranceof a verbal formula such as the le-shemyihud formulawas thatthey raisedfurtheranxieties aboutthe lack of proper fulfillment. Objections arose from Yehezkel Landau(1713-1793) and others, who declared it arroganceto imagine that his contemporariesmight be in possession of an essential formulathat previous generationslacked. The middle section of the volume treatstexts and personalitiesconsidering, for example, "The HalakhicAuthorityof the Zohar,""The Status of the Ari as a Jurist,"and "NorthAfrican Songs in Honor of R. Shimon barYohai."One of the strengths of this section and, indeed, of the book as a whole, is Hallamish'sexpertise in the Halakhahand customs of the North African Jewish communities. 136

Book Reviews Among the valuable contributionsthat Hallamish makes is to correct the prevailing assumption,purveyedby R. J.Zvi WerblowskiandJacobKatz, regardingYosef Karo's(1488-1575) guardedreliance on kabbalisticteaching and experience. He demonstratesin "TheKabbalahin the Jurisprudenceof RavYosef Karo"thatthere are more than a few instances in which Karo'sexperiences with his maggid also left impressionson Karo'shalakhicrulings. The third section contains studies dealing with a variety of focussed topics: times to give charityin the prayerservice, the liturgicalcustom regardinglove for one's neighbor, familiarand perennialbattles over mundane conversationsin the synagogue, and a series of blessings that fell in and out of practice as a result of the influence of kabbalah. In "The Place of Kabbalah in Minhag," Hallamish points out thatkabbalisticminhagimhave a prestige thatrises abovetime andplace inasmuchas they are more portablethan other minhagim,appealing as they do to a sense of authority. In readingthe entiretyof the collection, one gleans an historicalnarrativeof the Halakhah-Kabbalahrelationship:the Zohar as early innovatorof kabbalistic praxis and mindset, Karo integratingKabbalahinto normativehalakhic practice, the turningpoint coming with the plethoraof practices introducedby Isaac Luria and his disciples that soon became widespread.This popularizationwas facilitated throughpopularkabbalistic-ethicalmanuals such as Reishit Hokhmahof Elijah de Vidas (d. ca. 1593), the Shnei Luhot ha-Brit of YeshayahHalevi Horowitz (c. 1570-1630), Seder ha- Yomof Moshe Makhir,the Magen Avrahamof Avraham Gumbiner(c. 1637-1685) which conferredlegitimacy on Lurianickabbalah, and the influentialworks of the Hida, HayyimYosef David Azulai (1724-1806). Hallamish'scollection will be an invaluableresourcefor all those interested in the nexus of Kabbalahwith Jewish practice of the last 500 years. His vast researchentailedinvestigationof kabbalisticta'amei ha-mizvotliterature,halakhah, minhag, siddurim,and the tikkunimliterature.As a collection of discrete articles the book inevitablylacks some unity,but Hallamishassertsthat,in any event, many more detailed studies are first requiredbefore a comprehensivehistory of kabbalah's effects in these areascan be written(p. 16). The bibliographicalplenitude of a numberof the articlesmakes them a valuableresourcefor furtherresearch;moreover, this voluminous compendium of detailed studies will provide those who studythe evolutionof liturgy,Kabbalah,or Halakhahmuch with which to be sated. Joel Hecker ReconstructionistRabbinicalCollege Wyncote, Pennsylvania

Diana Lobel. BetweenMysticismand Philosophy: Sufi Languageof Religious Experience in Judah Ha-Levi'sKuzari.Albany: SUNY Press, 2000. x, 277 pp. The academic study of medieval Jewish philosophy began in the nineteenth centurywith a comparisonsof classical Jewish texts (e.g., Saadia Gaon'sBeliefs 137

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Daniel J. Lasker Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 137-140 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131786 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Among the valuable contributionsthat Hallamish makes is to correct the prevailing assumption,purveyedby R. J.Zvi WerblowskiandJacobKatz, regardingYosef Karo's(1488-1575) guardedreliance on kabbalisticteaching and experience. He demonstratesin "TheKabbalahin the Jurisprudenceof RavYosef Karo"thatthere are more than a few instances in which Karo'sexperiences with his maggid also left impressionson Karo'shalakhicrulings. The third section contains studies dealing with a variety of focussed topics: times to give charityin the prayerservice, the liturgicalcustom regardinglove for one's neighbor, familiarand perennialbattles over mundane conversationsin the synagogue, and a series of blessings that fell in and out of practice as a result of the influence of kabbalah. In "The Place of Kabbalah in Minhag," Hallamish points out thatkabbalisticminhagimhave a prestige thatrises abovetime andplace inasmuchas they are more portablethan other minhagim,appealing as they do to a sense of authority. In readingthe entiretyof the collection, one gleans an historicalnarrativeof the Halakhah-Kabbalahrelationship:the Zohar as early innovatorof kabbalistic praxis and mindset, Karo integratingKabbalahinto normativehalakhic practice, the turningpoint coming with the plethoraof practices introducedby Isaac Luria and his disciples that soon became widespread.This popularizationwas facilitated throughpopularkabbalistic-ethicalmanuals such as Reishit Hokhmahof Elijah de Vidas (d. ca. 1593), the Shnei Luhot ha-Brit of YeshayahHalevi Horowitz (c. 1570-1630), Seder ha- Yomof Moshe Makhir,the Magen Avrahamof Avraham Gumbiner(c. 1637-1685) which conferredlegitimacy on Lurianickabbalah, and the influentialworks of the Hida, HayyimYosef David Azulai (1724-1806). Hallamish'scollection will be an invaluableresourcefor all those interested in the nexus of Kabbalahwith Jewish practice of the last 500 years. His vast researchentailedinvestigationof kabbalisticta'amei ha-mizvotliterature,halakhah, minhag, siddurim,and the tikkunimliterature.As a collection of discrete articles the book inevitablylacks some unity,but Hallamishassertsthat,in any event, many more detailed studies are first requiredbefore a comprehensivehistory of kabbalah's effects in these areascan be written(p. 16). The bibliographicalplenitude of a numberof the articlesmakes them a valuableresourcefor furtherresearch;moreover, this voluminous compendium of detailed studies will provide those who studythe evolutionof liturgy,Kabbalah,or Halakhahmuch with which to be sated. Joel Hecker ReconstructionistRabbinicalCollege Wyncote, Pennsylvania

Diana Lobel. BetweenMysticismand Philosophy: Sufi Languageof Religious Experience in Judah Ha-Levi'sKuzari.Albany: SUNY Press, 2000. x, 277 pp. The academic study of medieval Jewish philosophy began in the nineteenth centurywith a comparisonsof classical Jewish texts (e.g., Saadia Gaon'sBeliefs 137

Book Reviews and Opinion, JudahHalevi's Kuzari;Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed; Gersonides' Warsof theLord)with classical Islamictexts (especially those of theAristotelians al-Farabi,Avicenna, and Averroes;and the anti-Aristotelianal-Ghazali). The possibility that Jewish thinkerstook their inspirationfrom, or should be seen in the context of, Islamic thinkers(such a Shi 'ites or sufis) and Christianphilosophers (especially scholastics vis-a-vis late medievalJewishthought)was rarelyentertained,partiallybecause of lack of availabilityof texts and partiallybecause of preconceived notions. The last few decades have seen a reversalof this trend:as the chances fade of finding more parallelsin the well researchedAristoteliantexts, more attentionhas been paid to alternatecontexts of Jewish philosophy.This excellent book, a much revised and updatedHarvardUniversitydissertation(1995), is a very welcome additionto this growing tendency. Diana Lobel is not interestedsolely in the search for parallels between Judah Halevi's Kuzari and Sufi (and other) texts. Rather,her study is intended to show the ongoing dialogue in the Kuzaribetween Halevi's Jewish spiritualityand that of his Islamic contemporaries,both the philosopher (who is mentioned explicitly in the text) and the mystic (whose presence is solely implicit). Lobel accomplishes this by concentratingon key Arabicterms, many of them used both by the Aristotelians and the Sufis, which were undoubtedlywell known to Halevi's Arabic speaking Jewish audience.Assuming that the poet Halevi's choice of language was not arbitrary,Lobel demonstrateshow Halevi repeatedcentralterms in differing contexts in orderto employ them in an ongoing, but subtle, debatewith Sufism, which parallelshis unambiguouscriticismof philosophy,Islam andChristianity (parts of which are also analyzed here). Lobel's study,which is not solely philological but also literary,placing the terminological parallels inside a larger context (cf. p. 10), is particularlywelcome since it shows the indispensabilityof using the original text of the Kuzari.No currentHebrew(or English) translations of the Kuzariconsistentlyrenderthe underlyingArabicterms, and, since terminological exactitude is so importantfor understandingHalevi's thought,these translations are quite misleading to readerswho rely solely upon them. The terms at the center of Lobel's study are those concerning relationship (connection or union); human striving;perception;prophecy;and intimacy,longing, and love. Lobel ably demonstratesthat all of these topics were of concern to Halevi's Islamic sources, especially the Sufi ones, and that a full understandingof Halevi's philosophy requirescomparison with Islamic precedents.Also of interest is Lobel's demonstrationthatHalevi often gives the familiartermsnew nuances as part of his ongoing dialogue with competing Islamic models. One example of Lobel's exposition of Halevi's methodology will have to suffice: Although one does not need the original Arabic to know that the experiential truthof prophecy is a centraltheme of the Kuzari,by analyzing the Arabic terminology,Lobel explicates both the experientialandpropheticaspects of Halevi's thought. Halevi's term for the collective experienced of Israel at Sinai is mushihada, or witnessing, a common Sufi term for religious experience. Forthe Sufi, however,witnessing is a result of much psychic preparationand is an individual, not a group, phenomenon. By constantly using the term mushahada and many of its cognates, Halevi emphasized that the collective Sinaitic experience, 138

Book Reviews for which Israel did not need special preparation,is a much more reliable source of truththan Sufi mysticism (or philosophy,which assumed that prophecy needs intellectual preparation).Furthermore,Halevi's contrast of Israel's mushdhada with the philosopher'suse of logical deduction (qiyds) is intended to emphasize that unmediatedwitnessing can be trustedmore than logic. In terms of prophecy itself, Lobel demonstrateshow Halevi is careful to distinguish between different levels of propheticexperienceby his use of distinctArabicterms.Thus,the theophany at Mt. Sinai was perceived by all Israelites as an act of wahy (real prophecy), and not ilhdm (inspiration)or ta'yid (divine assistance). By focusing on the repeateduse of variousArabictermsin the Kuzari,Lobel convincinglyarguesthatHalevi was respondingto specific Islamic views that were currentin twelfth-century Spain. If one has any methodologicalbone to pick with the authorit will concern the question of Halevi's consistency. Previous readers have pointed out possible contradictionsbetweendifferentpassages in the Kuzariandhave offeredvariedexplanationsof this phenomenon,such as developmentsin Halevi'sthoughtthrough the years of the Kuzari'scomposition;the dialectical natureof the work, or a general lack of consistency. By dealing with the Kuzari as a seamless whole, even when a warof possible contradictions("Ha-Leviis thus far from systemically consistent"[p.47]), Lobel risks readingmore into the terminology than there actually is. If Halevi was not always concernedwith reconciling differentpassages in the Kuzari for whateverreason, how can one be sure that he used his Arabic terminology consistently?Thus, while the term qiyds (logical analogy) generally has negative connotations,this is not always the case. Similarly,sometimes the author uses qiyds to mean rationalproof; in other passages the term seems to be istidldl (logical demonstration;see, e.g., pp. 73-74, 81-82). Is this terminologicalchange purposeful,or does it perhapshave anotherreason, such as the differentstages of composition of the Kuzari?As noted, while Lobel's terminological exegeses are generallyconvincing, at least the possibility of inconsistency should be taken into account. One can also quibbleconcerningsome of Lobel's interpretations.She is understandablyuncomfortablewith what is anachronisticallyreferredto as Halevi's racism (notice her paraphrase:"Every Israelite of pure heart" [p. 20], when the original refers to native-born[or pure, sarih] Israelites, to the exclusion of converts; but cf. p. 194, n. 61). Further,Lobel's distinction between natureand nurture is a valuable one, and her non-racistexplanationof Kuzari 1:27 (pp. 35-37, andnotes) is convincing.Nevertheless,her understandingof safiva (chosen, elect) as non-genetic because of the Shi'ite use of the term, and her statementthat "HaLevi appearsto deliberately leave the precise nature of Israel's status as safwa ambiguous"(p. 38), ignore the many statementsin the Kuzariaboutthe relatively inferior status of the proselyte and the intrinsic natureof native-bornJewish superiority.Even if Halevi's sources did not use safiva in a biological/genetic manner, this is no proof that Halevi'sunderstandingwas similar.After all, the central focus of Lobel's book is Halevi's appropriationof pre-existing Arabic "vocabulary of religious experience"by "creativelyadapting[it] to the Jewish experience" (p. 159)! 139

Book Reviews Despite these caveats, there is no doubt that Lobel's study is the most importantbook on JudahHalevi's philosophy currentlyavailableand deserves both a wide audience and close attention.It is indispensablefor all futurediscussions of the Islamic context of medieval Jewish philosophy in general and of Judah Halevi's thought in particular. Daniel J. Lasker Ben-GurionUniversity of the Negev Beersheba, Israel

Michael Walzer,MenachemLorberbaum,Noam J. Zohar,editors. TheJewish Political Tradition.VolumeOne:Authority.New Haven:Yale UniversityPress, 2000. Ivii, 578 pp. That the Jewish people has a distinct political traditionshould not at all be surprising.Yet, it has been only aboutthirtyyears since the process of its recovery has begun. Majorpolitical thinkers,including Leo Strauss,AaronWildavsky,and especially Daniel Elazar,have made significant contributionsto understandingthe major impact that Jewish political thought has had on the Westernpolitical tradition. With the increasingsecularizationof political thought since the seventeenth century,there had been a markedreluctanceto understandthe Bible as a resource for political discussion. However,it has been demonstratedthat the consent/contractbasis of authorityis deriveddirectly from federalisttheology of the fifteenth through seventeenth centuries in WesternEurope. "Federal,"after all, is derived from the Latin,foedus, which means covenant.' Protestantchurchessearchingfor a basis of polity that was not based on Catholic hierarchicalsacramentalauthority returnedto the HebrewBible. Their clergy studiedHebrewwith rabbinictutors who most probablyemphasized the Jewish mutual concept of covenant over the Christianunilateralcovenanttheory. We can readlate medieval city managers,such as Althusiusin Germany,who described the "perfectJewish polity" as a model for city government.2Frequent references to biblical sources in Westernpolitical thought were not unusual. Indeed, Michael Walzer,one of the editors of the volume underreview, has demonstratedin his Exodus and Revolutionthe political significance of the book of Exodus on political revolutionarymovements.3 TheJewish Political Tradition:Authorityis the first of four volumes on the subject, the others being: Membership,Community,and Politics in History. If the first volume is any indicationof the future,we can expect works of great quality. This work lets the traditionspeak for itself by presentingprimarytexts, beginning 1. Daniel J. Elazar,Covenantand Commonwealth(New Brunswickand London, 1996) p. 25. 2. JohannesAlthusius, The Politics of Johannes Althusius,translatedby FrederickS. Carney (London, 1964). 3. Michael Walzer,Exodus and Revolution (New York, 1985).

140

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Gordon M. Freeman Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 140-142 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131787 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Despite these caveats, there is no doubt that Lobel's study is the most importantbook on JudahHalevi's philosophy currentlyavailableand deserves both a wide audience and close attention.It is indispensablefor all futurediscussions of the Islamic context of medieval Jewish philosophy in general and of Judah Halevi's thought in particular. Daniel J. Lasker Ben-GurionUniversity of the Negev Beersheba, Israel

Michael Walzer,MenachemLorberbaum,Noam J. Zohar,editors. TheJewish Political Tradition.VolumeOne:Authority.New Haven:Yale UniversityPress, 2000. Ivii, 578 pp. That the Jewish people has a distinct political traditionshould not at all be surprising.Yet, it has been only aboutthirtyyears since the process of its recovery has begun. Majorpolitical thinkers,including Leo Strauss,AaronWildavsky,and especially Daniel Elazar,have made significant contributionsto understandingthe major impact that Jewish political thought has had on the Westernpolitical tradition. With the increasingsecularizationof political thought since the seventeenth century,there had been a markedreluctanceto understandthe Bible as a resource for political discussion. However,it has been demonstratedthat the consent/contractbasis of authorityis deriveddirectly from federalisttheology of the fifteenth through seventeenth centuries in WesternEurope. "Federal,"after all, is derived from the Latin,foedus, which means covenant.' Protestantchurchessearchingfor a basis of polity that was not based on Catholic hierarchicalsacramentalauthority returnedto the HebrewBible. Their clergy studiedHebrewwith rabbinictutors who most probablyemphasized the Jewish mutual concept of covenant over the Christianunilateralcovenanttheory. We can readlate medieval city managers,such as Althusiusin Germany,who described the "perfectJewish polity" as a model for city government.2Frequent references to biblical sources in Westernpolitical thought were not unusual. Indeed, Michael Walzer,one of the editors of the volume underreview, has demonstratedin his Exodus and Revolutionthe political significance of the book of Exodus on political revolutionarymovements.3 TheJewish Political Tradition:Authorityis the first of four volumes on the subject, the others being: Membership,Community,and Politics in History. If the first volume is any indicationof the future,we can expect works of great quality. This work lets the traditionspeak for itself by presentingprimarytexts, beginning 1. Daniel J. Elazar,Covenantand Commonwealth(New Brunswickand London, 1996) p. 25. 2. JohannesAlthusius, The Politics of Johannes Althusius,translatedby FrederickS. Carney (London, 1964). 3. Michael Walzer,Exodus and Revolution (New York, 1985).

140

Book Reviews with the Bible and rangingthroughoutthe Jewish experience to moderntimes. The texts are presentedwith sagacious introductions.The book includes several commentarieswrittenby contemporaryscholarsthat engage in a dialogue with the text in a most stimulating manner. The commentaries critically address the texts, demonstratingtheirsignificance. They arewell writtenand invite the readerto participate in the dialogue. YaleUniversity Press has done a magnificentjob in publishingthe book. Its design is sumptuous,the layoutwelcoming. The volume's look reflects the serious natureof its content. Michael Walzerpoints out in his introductionthat the integrity and unified natureof the Jewish political traditionis based on its "intertextuality"(p. xxii), that is, biblical literaturehas been regardedas the foundationtext. The task of this four-volumeseries, Walzerwrites, is to retrieve appropriatetexts from the tradition, integratethem-that is, provide a context for them in the world of political thoughtin general-and providecriticism in orderto be fully engaged in the messages of the tradition.The editors and contributorshave succeeded in this ambitious task. The work on covenantis excellent in regardto its relationto consent issues. Covenantis probablythe unique contributionof the Jewish political traditionto political thought.It would have been helpful, especially since this concept has had such an enduring influence on Westernpolitical theory, to include a descriptive analysisof how biblical covenantsfunctioned,the differenttypes of covenants,and the mechanismstherein. This readerwould have appreciateda commentary on the Spinoza extract. Spinoza is such a pivotal thinkerin so many ways-between the holy and the secular,between the ancient and the modern, between theocentric and anthrocentric conceptsof authorityandbetweencommunaland individualidentity.He also lived duringa time and in a place where biblical concepts of covenantwere widely discussed as a basis of authorityfor Protestantchurches. It would have been interesting to read an analysis of Spinoza'sthought in the context of the federal theologizing that was the rage in the Netherlands.It was the secularizationof federal theology that led to the consent theories of Locke and Hobbes. Unfortunately,the limited space allottedto this review does not allow for any extension of these comments. The selection of texts is marvelous.Especially remarkableand generallyunavailableto the generalreaderarethe medieval texts such as Gerondiand the texts reflectingreal issues aboutthe scope and source of authorityragingin variousJewish communities. Especially telling was the piece by Jacob Sasportas,a communal rabbicompeting for authoritywith lay leadership. In this context it would have been useful to include early on the concept of the threediffering,sometimes competing,traditionaljurisdictionsof authorityanalyzed by StuartCohen: liturgical(keter kehunah),adminstrative(keter malkhut) and divine (keterTorah).4In this vein, anothertext that should have been included in ChapterFour,on priests, is that of Numbers 8: 9-12, which demonstratesthat 4. Daniel J. Elazar and Stuart A. Cohen, The Jewish Polity (Bloomington, IN, 1985), pp. 16-20.

141

Book Reviews the Levites were not only authorizedby God but also by the people. This reflects the biblical concept of authorization:divine authorizationis never sufficient. The king, too, is not only designatedby God but also must be acceptedby the people. It would have been importantto note a paradox in biblical authority:The tribe of Levi was not allowed to own land. This preceptwould seem to be a source of a proto-system of checks and balances, that is, the role of this tribe was powerful because of its liturgicalauthorityacting as the gatekeepersbetween the people and God. At the same time it was totally dependenton the people for sustenance and the sacrifices thatthe priestperformed.This interdependencywould act as a check against aggrandizingpower. The prophets,who claimed to representGod, had no institutionalsupport. This seems to be yet anotherexample of checks and balances. God's representative stands alone and must depend on persuasion and the power of his word.The prophetcannot back up his claims with physical force. Finally, one importantprimary source for understandingauthorityhas not been includedin this otherwisecomprehensivevolume.Thatsourceis Jewishliturgy, which contains not only a model for authority-constituentrelationshipsbut an active consent exercise that illustratesthe engagement of people in governance. Jewish liturgy continues to be utilized. Liturgyprovidesa political vision of governance. The constituency is actually engaged in proclaimingits consent. Hence, its placement in the context of Jewish political traditionneeds to be examined. GordonM. Freeman WalnutCreek, California

ElinoarBareket.Fustat on the Nile: TheJewish Elite in MedievalEgypt.The Medieval Mediterranean,vol. 24. Leiden: Brill, 1999. xvi, 295 pp. 8 plates. Originallypublished in Hebrew under the title ShafrirMitzrayim(Tel Aviv, 1995), this thoroughlyresearchedmonograph,based on some 800 documentsfrom the Cairo Genizah, illuminatesan obscure and overlookedchapterin the historyof the Jewish communitiesthat flourished in the medieval Islamic world.As the author notes in her foreword,previous studies of Jewish leadershipin Muslim lands have discountedthe importanceof local political activity,emphasizinginsteadthe dominantrole of the centralauthorities,that is, the Exilarchateand the yeshivotof Babylonia and Palestine. Barekettakes up the question of local leadershipby focusing on the careersof nine individualswho headedthe Palestinianand Babylonian congregationsin Fustat'sJewishcommunityduringthe first half of the eleventh century.While these leadersformallyrecognizedthe sovereigntyof the centralauthorities,they neverthelessexercisedconsiderableautonomy,establishingin Fustat a local school (midrash)forTorahstudy,issuing theirown responsa,imposingbans, and correspondingwith Jewish leaders outside of Egypt. Bareket'sdecision to concentrateon the first half of the eleventh centuryis

142

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Arnold Franklin Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 142-144 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131788 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews the Levites were not only authorizedby God but also by the people. This reflects the biblical concept of authorization:divine authorizationis never sufficient. The king, too, is not only designatedby God but also must be acceptedby the people. It would have been importantto note a paradox in biblical authority:The tribe of Levi was not allowed to own land. This preceptwould seem to be a source of a proto-system of checks and balances, that is, the role of this tribe was powerful because of its liturgicalauthorityacting as the gatekeepersbetween the people and God. At the same time it was totally dependenton the people for sustenance and the sacrifices thatthe priestperformed.This interdependencywould act as a check against aggrandizingpower. The prophets,who claimed to representGod, had no institutionalsupport. This seems to be yet anotherexample of checks and balances. God's representative stands alone and must depend on persuasion and the power of his word.The prophetcannot back up his claims with physical force. Finally, one importantprimary source for understandingauthorityhas not been includedin this otherwisecomprehensivevolume.Thatsourceis Jewishliturgy, which contains not only a model for authority-constituentrelationshipsbut an active consent exercise that illustratesthe engagement of people in governance. Jewish liturgy continues to be utilized. Liturgyprovidesa political vision of governance. The constituency is actually engaged in proclaimingits consent. Hence, its placement in the context of Jewish political traditionneeds to be examined. GordonM. Freeman WalnutCreek, California

ElinoarBareket.Fustat on the Nile: TheJewish Elite in MedievalEgypt.The Medieval Mediterranean,vol. 24. Leiden: Brill, 1999. xvi, 295 pp. 8 plates. Originallypublished in Hebrew under the title ShafrirMitzrayim(Tel Aviv, 1995), this thoroughlyresearchedmonograph,based on some 800 documentsfrom the Cairo Genizah, illuminatesan obscure and overlookedchapterin the historyof the Jewish communitiesthat flourished in the medieval Islamic world.As the author notes in her foreword,previous studies of Jewish leadershipin Muslim lands have discountedthe importanceof local political activity,emphasizinginsteadthe dominantrole of the centralauthorities,that is, the Exilarchateand the yeshivotof Babylonia and Palestine. Barekettakes up the question of local leadershipby focusing on the careersof nine individualswho headedthe Palestinianand Babylonian congregationsin Fustat'sJewishcommunityduringthe first half of the eleventh century.While these leadersformallyrecognizedthe sovereigntyof the centralauthorities,they neverthelessexercisedconsiderableautonomy,establishingin Fustat a local school (midrash)forTorahstudy,issuing theirown responsa,imposingbans, and correspondingwith Jewish leaders outside of Egypt. Bareket'sdecision to concentrateon the first half of the eleventh centuryis

142

Book Reviews significant. The later decline of the Palestinian yeshiva as a result of internal struggles,followed by its relocationto Tyreafterthe Seljuk conquest of Jerusalem (summerof 1073), has been viewed as a critical antecedentto the emergence of a fully maturelocal leadershipin Egypt. Bareket'sfindings, however,indicate that a strong traditionof local rule was found in Fustat even before the Palestinian yeshiva'sgrip on Egypt was loosened. Furthermore,beginning at a time when the Palestinianyeshiva'sauthoritywas still strongallows her to challenge the view that the Palestiniangeonim were uniformlyopposed to such manifestationsof autonomy by local leaders. The first two chaptersexamine the Jewish community of Fustat following the Fatimidconquest of Egypt in 969. In the first, Bareket demonstratessensitivity to the vibrance of local political life with her descriptionof Fustat'scomplex Jewishpopulation,which comprisednumeroussmallergroupsand factions (Palestinians, Babylonians,Maghrebis,Karaites,etc.). These overlappingloyalties form the crucialdemographicbackdropagainstwhich the occasionally erraticbehavior of Fustat'scongregational leaders must be evaluated. Bareket'ssubsequent discussion of the community institutionsillustratesthe broadrange of responsibilities that fell to Fustat'sleaders, as well as the various opportunitiesfor independent action open to them. Perhapsthe most importantof these institutionswas the local court,throughwhich the heads of Fustat'sJewish community exercised considerableindependencein religious and political matters. ChapterThree introducesthe biographicalsketches that close out the book. Bareketdemonstratesthat Fustat'slocal leaderswere exceptional individualswho broughtto their posts experience, wealth, and a network of family connections. They were also learned:all of her subjectscomposedpiyyut, and manywrote commentarieson sections of the Bible andthe Talmud.Bareketcontendsthattheircontrol over the local Jewish population,and over Egyptian Jewry generally,was far more centralizedthan has been recognized.Thus she convincingly argues, contra the earlierview, that Fustat'sPalestinianand Babyloniancongregationsconstituted a single, unified rabbaniteJewish community.A numberof the congregational leaders-Babylonians Shemaryaben Elhananand Elhananben Shemaryaand the PalestinianEphraimben Shemarya-appear also to have headed up this united rabbanitecommunity.Moreover,at the height of Ephraimben Shemarya'scareer(1040s) even importantEgyptiancities like Alexandriaacknowledgedthe preeminence of Fustatand its leader.Bareketshows that a few of these leaders were also in close touch with Jewish communitiesoutside of Egypt. Elhananben Shemarya, for example, visited numeroustowns in Palestine, Syria, and Iraq,renewing contactswith supportersand cultivatinghis image as a regionalfigure. Bareket insists, however,that despite their extensive authority,none of these individuals intendedto underminethe Palestinianyeshiva; they remainedloyal to the institution and its geonim. The English translationis at times clumsy, and,unfortunately,also lacks the judicious selection of skillfully edited primary documents that accompanies the Hebrewtext. Nevertheless, the book's appearancein English is an auspicious sign that scholarshipon the documentarymaterialsfrom the Cairo Genizah has found

143

Book Reviews a wider audience among historians. It is to be hoped that the burst of interestin the Genizah witnessed in recent years will carry this trendfurther. The emergence in Muslim lands of local Jewishleadershiphas long been associated with the decline of the Exilarchateand the yeshivot of Babylonia and Palestine. Fustat on the Nile compellingly arguesthat a precedentfor local political leadershipexisted even as these institutionsexperiencedrenewedvigor during the first decades of the eleventh century.It is a point both well-taken and sure to stimulate furtherresearch. Arnold Franklin New YorkUniversity New York,New York

VeraBasch Moreen.In QueenEsther'sGarden:AnAnthologyofJudeo-PersianLiterature.YaleJudaicaSeries. New Haven:Yale UniversityPress,2000. xxiv, 392 pp. This book is, without a doubt, a major contributionin the field of JudeoPersianStudies. Judeo-Persianliterature,which extends for about eight centuries, has been severely neglected except for the work of a small number of scholars. There are only four scholars in the United States who have dealt with any aspect of this field, and not many more elsewhere. The existing Judeo-Persiantexts are a vast collection of all sortsof materialanddeserve muchmore attention.VeraBasch Moreen has made a great step forwardby providingtranslationof a wide variety of literarytexts. Especially valuableare her commentaries,explanations,and bibliography. Jews who have lived in Iran,Afghanistan, and CentralAsia and for whom Persian is their spoken language have, until fairly recently,been able to read and write the language only in the Hebrewalphabetand not in Arabic script.It is clear, however, from the varied Judeo-Persiantexts in this book and in others that Jews must have heard Persianpoetry recited in public and have had many texts read to them. The texts representedin this book are a clear indication of their generally detailed familiarity with non-Jewish texts. Moreen's commentary and footnotes make this abundantlyclear. A listing of the chaptersprovides a good survey of the Judeo-Persianliterature represented:1. EarliestJudeo-PersianTexts;2. Biblical Epics; 3. An Apocryphal Epic; 4. Didactic Poetry; 5. Mishnah and Midrash;5. Biblical Commentaries; 7. Religious Festivals in Sermon, Commentary,and Poetry; 8. Historical Texts; 9. Polemics and Philosophy; 10. Mysticism; 11. Religious Poems; and 12. Panegyrics, LyricalPoems, Quatrains. Moreen's translationsare masterful and accurate.Her notes and commentary are especially useful and provide enormously interestinginformationon Islamic, historical, and all sorts of textual backgroundand information.Just reading through the footnotes and other explanations gives the reader fascinating informationon the culturalcontext of the Persianworld in variousperiods. 144

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Herbert H. Paper Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 144-145 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131789 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews a wider audience among historians. It is to be hoped that the burst of interestin the Genizah witnessed in recent years will carry this trendfurther. The emergence in Muslim lands of local Jewishleadershiphas long been associated with the decline of the Exilarchateand the yeshivot of Babylonia and Palestine. Fustat on the Nile compellingly arguesthat a precedentfor local political leadershipexisted even as these institutionsexperiencedrenewedvigor during the first decades of the eleventh century.It is a point both well-taken and sure to stimulate furtherresearch. Arnold Franklin New YorkUniversity New York,New York

VeraBasch Moreen.In QueenEsther'sGarden:AnAnthologyofJudeo-PersianLiterature.YaleJudaicaSeries. New Haven:Yale UniversityPress,2000. xxiv, 392 pp. This book is, without a doubt, a major contributionin the field of JudeoPersianStudies. Judeo-Persianliterature,which extends for about eight centuries, has been severely neglected except for the work of a small number of scholars. There are only four scholars in the United States who have dealt with any aspect of this field, and not many more elsewhere. The existing Judeo-Persiantexts are a vast collection of all sortsof materialanddeserve muchmore attention.VeraBasch Moreen has made a great step forwardby providingtranslationof a wide variety of literarytexts. Especially valuableare her commentaries,explanations,and bibliography. Jews who have lived in Iran,Afghanistan, and CentralAsia and for whom Persian is their spoken language have, until fairly recently,been able to read and write the language only in the Hebrewalphabetand not in Arabic script.It is clear, however, from the varied Judeo-Persiantexts in this book and in others that Jews must have heard Persianpoetry recited in public and have had many texts read to them. The texts representedin this book are a clear indication of their generally detailed familiarity with non-Jewish texts. Moreen's commentary and footnotes make this abundantlyclear. A listing of the chaptersprovides a good survey of the Judeo-Persianliterature represented:1. EarliestJudeo-PersianTexts;2. Biblical Epics; 3. An Apocryphal Epic; 4. Didactic Poetry; 5. Mishnah and Midrash;5. Biblical Commentaries; 7. Religious Festivals in Sermon, Commentary,and Poetry; 8. Historical Texts; 9. Polemics and Philosophy; 10. Mysticism; 11. Religious Poems; and 12. Panegyrics, LyricalPoems, Quatrains. Moreen's translationsare masterful and accurate.Her notes and commentary are especially useful and provide enormously interestinginformationon Islamic, historical, and all sorts of textual backgroundand information.Just reading through the footnotes and other explanations gives the reader fascinating informationon the culturalcontext of the Persianworld in variousperiods. 144

Book Reviews In going throughthe pages of this remarkablebook, I am remindedthat in 1973, Amnon Netzer published in Tehranan anthology of Judeo-Persianpoetry transcribedinto Arabic script. Soon afterthe book appeared,a review writtenby a very prominentTehranUniversityprofessorof Persianliteraturewas published in a literaryjournal in Tehran. "Hereis an anthology of Judeo-Persianpoetry of almost 1000 years, of which we have knownnothing,"he began. He then praisedthe book and marveled at the natureof the texts provided in the anthology. VeraMoreen'sbook, too, is trulyto be welcomed as a most useful source for this marvelous but relatively unknownJewish literature.Perhapsit will sparkan upsurgeof interestand researchin this field. HerbertH. Paper HUC-JIR Cincinnati, Ohio

ImmanuelEtkes, Ba'al Hashem.:TheBesht-Magic, Mysticism,Leadership.Jerusalem: MerkazZalman Shazar,2000. 327 pp. (Hebrew). During the past two decades, many importantworks have been publishedmostly by Israelischolars-on virtuallyevery aspect of Hasidism.The writings of David Assaf, Rachel Elior,Zeev Gries, Moshe Idel, GedaliaNigal, Ada RapaportAlbert, and Moshe Rosman, to name only the most prominent contemporary scholars of Hasidism, range from sweeping critical re-evaluationsof earlier Hasidic historiographyand theology to close studies of major sects within the Hasidic movement. In the course of this outpouringof Hasidic scholarship,the pioneeringwork of Scholem and his disciples has been demolished and rehabilitated several times over. Beyond even more detailed studies of later and minor Hasidic sects, it would have seemed, at this late date, that there was little left to add to the discussion of the origins and theology of classical, or "Beshtian,"Hasidism.Thus the appearance,in the year 2000, of a new book by ImmanuelEtkes dedicatedto the "Founderof Hasidism,"R. IsraelBaal Shem Tov,could hardlybe greeted without the question with which the authorhimself begins his introduction:"Whyanother book on the Besht? What can this book hope to add to all that has already been writtenand publishedon this topic?" (p. 9). The answers that Etkes' new study of the Besht provides to these selfimposed questions are, as it turnsout, both substantialand rewarding.While Baal Ha-Shem:Ha-Besht-Magiah, Mistikah,Hanhagah does include much material with which Etkes has already dealt in previously published articles and reviews, the book presents a clear, comprehensiveand delicately balanced overview of the earlierscholarship-in itself not an easy task-as well as the author'sown compelling view of the "historical"Baal ShemTov.Among the key questionsthatEtkes addressesare: (1) What can we know aboutthe Besht based on the limited primary source materialavailable,and (2) how are we to evaluate the Besht's disputed role in the emergence of the Hasidic movement in the decades immediately fol145

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Allan Nadler Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 145-149 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131790 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews In going throughthe pages of this remarkablebook, I am remindedthat in 1973, Amnon Netzer published in Tehranan anthology of Judeo-Persianpoetry transcribedinto Arabic script. Soon afterthe book appeared,a review writtenby a very prominentTehranUniversityprofessorof Persianliteraturewas published in a literaryjournal in Tehran. "Hereis an anthology of Judeo-Persianpoetry of almost 1000 years, of which we have knownnothing,"he began. He then praisedthe book and marveled at the natureof the texts provided in the anthology. VeraMoreen'sbook, too, is trulyto be welcomed as a most useful source for this marvelous but relatively unknownJewish literature.Perhapsit will sparkan upsurgeof interestand researchin this field. HerbertH. Paper HUC-JIR Cincinnati, Ohio

ImmanuelEtkes, Ba'al Hashem.:TheBesht-Magic, Mysticism,Leadership.Jerusalem: MerkazZalman Shazar,2000. 327 pp. (Hebrew). During the past two decades, many importantworks have been publishedmostly by Israelischolars-on virtuallyevery aspect of Hasidism.The writings of David Assaf, Rachel Elior,Zeev Gries, Moshe Idel, GedaliaNigal, Ada RapaportAlbert, and Moshe Rosman, to name only the most prominent contemporary scholars of Hasidism, range from sweeping critical re-evaluationsof earlier Hasidic historiographyand theology to close studies of major sects within the Hasidic movement. In the course of this outpouringof Hasidic scholarship,the pioneeringwork of Scholem and his disciples has been demolished and rehabilitated several times over. Beyond even more detailed studies of later and minor Hasidic sects, it would have seemed, at this late date, that there was little left to add to the discussion of the origins and theology of classical, or "Beshtian,"Hasidism.Thus the appearance,in the year 2000, of a new book by ImmanuelEtkes dedicatedto the "Founderof Hasidism,"R. IsraelBaal Shem Tov,could hardlybe greeted without the question with which the authorhimself begins his introduction:"Whyanother book on the Besht? What can this book hope to add to all that has already been writtenand publishedon this topic?" (p. 9). The answers that Etkes' new study of the Besht provides to these selfimposed questions are, as it turnsout, both substantialand rewarding.While Baal Ha-Shem:Ha-Besht-Magiah, Mistikah,Hanhagah does include much material with which Etkes has already dealt in previously published articles and reviews, the book presents a clear, comprehensiveand delicately balanced overview of the earlierscholarship-in itself not an easy task-as well as the author'sown compelling view of the "historical"Baal ShemTov.Among the key questionsthatEtkes addressesare: (1) What can we know aboutthe Besht based on the limited primary source materialavailable,and (2) how are we to evaluate the Besht's disputed role in the emergence of the Hasidic movement in the decades immediately fol145

Book Reviews lowing his death?Etkes notes that he had alreadybegun his researchon the Besht before the appearanceof Moshe Rosman'sgroundbreakingbook, Founderof Hasidism: A Questfor the Historical Baal Shem Tov', and indicates that it was his sharp disagreement with many of Rosman's methodological assumptionsabout the unreliabilityof Hasidic sources (mainly the Shivhei Ha-Besht), as well as his conclusions aboutthe Besht'splace in history,thatstirredhim to completehis work (p. 13; see also Etkes' detailed critiqueof Rosman'sbook on pp. 245-249). One of Etkes' strengthsas an intellectual historian is his ability to use his erudition to clarify ratherthan obfuscate complex matters that have long been mired in scholarly dispute. In reviewing the mass of previous scholarshipon the Besht and early Hasidism, he paves a clear path throughthe thicket of books and articles that have sproutedin recent years. His conclusions are not only well argued and meticulously rooted in a sober analysis of the sources; they are, for the most part, very compelling. The first chapter ("Magiah U-VaaleiShem Be-YamavShel Ha-Besht"), in many ways the most original part of the book, examines in rich detail the development in seventeenth-and early-eighteenth-centuryEast EuropeanJewish society of an elaborate culture of folk-superstitionrooted in the fear of the tangible evil and demonic forces at work in the world. The most significant aspect of the widespreadsuperstitiousbeliefs of the Jewish masses in the forces of evil, for our understandingof the life of the Besht and the subsequentemergence of Hasidic leadership,was the importantplace it allowed for the emergence of a new class of religious professionals in Polish Jewish society, the Baalei Shem. Etkes analyzes a rich selection of primarytexts that documentthe activities of these Jewish magicians and healers, focusing in particularon the careerof R. Joel Baal Shemwho, in many ways, typified the pre-Beshtianmodel (pp. 41-51). He shows thatby the middle of the eighteenth century,Baal Shemism had become a surprisinglywelldefined profession, characterizedby magical practicesconsisting mainly of a variety of exorcisms directedat combatingan arrayof evil forces thathad takenroot in individuals,properties,and sometimes entire communities.What is most striking about the work of the Baalei Shem-and what differentiatesit from the path later taken by the Besht-was its self-imposed limitations.These men were, essentially, contractorswho respondedto calls for their services to heal individuals of demonic possession or to cleanse homes thathad become hauntedby hitsonim, or the forces of evil. They had a limited repertoireof tricks, the most common of which were the writing of kamei'ot(amulets);prescriptionof lehashim (magical incantations);and performanceof segulot (voodoo-like ceremonies) directed at combating the various agents of the SitraAhra, or. In ChapterTwo ("YisraelBaal Shem"), Etkes describes the ways in which the Besht conformedto the earliermodel of the Baal Shem and,more significantly, how he expanded that role and broke with its self-imposed limitations.While he, like R. Joel, responded to individual calls for exorcism, the Besht had a far grander perception of his role and powers. Thus, the Besht addressed issues of much broadercommunal concern than his predecessors,reflecting his own self1. Berkeley, 1996.

146

Book Reviews assessmentas the spiritualleader-though never chosen or formally appointedby any Jewish community-of the entireJewish people. One of the strikingfeatures of the Besht's personalitythat emerges here is his astonishing grandiosity,boastfulness regardinghis supernaturalpowers, and arrogantsense of superiorityvisA-visotherrabbis and Baalei Shem. The Besht harboredabsolutely no self-doubt when it came to his divine calling to minister to East EuropeanJewry as a whole or his powers to fulfill that formidablemission. Among the majorproblems facing the Jewish communities of the Ukraine duringthe Besht's lifetime were violent anti-Semitic persecutions by the Haidameks, the economic crisis that faced many Jewish leaseholders of Polish estates, and the declining standardsof shehitah. Skillfully using the Hasidic sources that he deems reliable, most notably Sefer Shivhei Ha-Besht, Etkes demonstratesin ChapterThree ("Manhig Shel Klal Yisrael")how the Besht uniquely addressed these majorcommunal concerns. In additionto extending his mandatebeyond responding to calls from individualsdesiring the benefits of his magical services, the Besht also used mystical prayerand ecstatic experiences (most notably heavenly ascents)to solve problemstackledby earlierBaalei Shemthrougha more limited repertoireof magical techniques. Havingestablishedthe Besht'sboldnessandself-confidenceas a BaalShem andhis expansivevisionof bothhis mysticalpowersandcommunalmission, Etkes goes on in ChapterFour("He-Besht Ke-MistikanU- VaalBesorah Be-

AvodatHa-Shem)to re-visitin impressivedetailhis innovations as a mystic. While,as Etkespointsout,therehavebeenmanyfine studiesof earlyHasidic mysticism-mostlyby Scholem'sdisciples,suchas RivkaShatzandJoseph Weiss-none havefocusedexclusivelyon theteachingsof theBeshthimself. Whatwe knowof "Beshtian" Hasidismis mostlygleanedthroughthe writsuch as the of ings keydisciples Maggidof MezeritchandR. JacobJosephof as a mysticis lostintheforestof their Polnoe,thus,theBesht'sownoriginality writings(p. 128).Etkespointsto severalkeyelementsof theBesht'smystical theologythat laterbecamesalientfeaturesof Hasidism.Most important amongthemis his deepfaithin theabsoluteimmanenceof Godin thematerialuniverse,outof whichflowedtheBesht'sdenialof tangiblerealityto evil andhisrejectionof asceticreligiouspractice.And,Etkesinsists,unlikemany earlierKabbalists, theBesht'smysticismgrewoutof his life experience: It seems to me thatit was the Besht who clearedthe path for the revolutionaryconception of Divine immanencein Hasidism.Moreover,it would seem that this new conception did not emerge from the perplexities of a theoreticianbound by the four cubits of theosophical speculation,but that it reflects the actual mystical experience enjoyed by the Besht (p. 146). The final chapterof this fine book ("SeferShivheiHa-Besht Ke-MakorHistori")deals with methodologicalquestionsaboutEtkes' sources for reconstructing the life of the Besht, most importantly,the degree to which the historiancan rely on the tales in Shivhei Ha-Besht. Etkes here expands on his devastatingreview of Rosman'saforementionedbook ("Ha-BeshtHa-Histori:Beyn RekonstruktsiaLeDekonstruktsia"Tarbiz,66 [1997]: pp. 425-42), in which he compellingly argued 147

Book Reviews that one need not believe in the truthof the details of these tales in orderto accept their authenticityand value as sources for understandingthe life and times of the Besht and his impact on the subsequentdevelopmentof Hasidism. Etkes demonstrates how these tales can be parsed and used analyticallyto great advantageby the historianwho is sensitive to their linguistic and theological nuances. There are times when Etkes' study slips into a somewhatpedanticreadingof seminal Beshtian texts that have already been overanalyzedby scholars of Hasidism. One conspicuous example of such excess is his exhaustivetreatmentof the famous letter of the Besht to his brother-in-law,R. Gershonof Kutov.At the end of his thirteen-pagediscussion (pp. 88-100) of this alreadyoverworkedtext, Etkes has not added much to its understanding,beyond elaboratingupon Scholem's denial that it bears an urgent messianic message. Then again, Etkes certainly succeeds in presentinga convincing case-Scholem's many subsequentinterlocutors notwithstanding-that the Besht did not see himself as a messianic figure at all. Quite the contrary,his entirecalling was based on the strugglewith an unredeemed world, and the conversationwith the Messiah during his ascent of soul showed clearly that messianic redemptionwas not expected by the Besht in his own lifetime. Howeverthoroughand clear the pictureof the Besht that emerges from this book, he remainsone of Jewish history'smost clouded figures. Even for those who accept all of his methodological assumptions and historical conclusions, Etkes' book raises new ambiguities and paradoxes.I shall deal with two of the most conspicuous examples. First,centralto Etkes'argumentaboutthe Besht'soriginalityas a mystic was his denial of any reality to evil forces that had hithertobeen confrontedwith utmost seriousness by Kabbalistsand by Baalei Shem.Yet, in his discussion of the Besht's practice of Baalshemism, Etkes recounts several tales in which the Besht seems indeed to take demonic forces with utterseriousness, includingone case in which he deals with a rathercute couple of hitsonimwho had been conceived and born in a synagogue as the result of an arrogantbaritoneHazzan's vanity during prayer.At the end of the day,sensing the need to get them out of the shul, the Besht finds them alternatehousing near a desertedwell (pp. 59-60). It is unclearhow to reconcile such accounts of the Besht's engagement with hitsonimwith his denial of reality to netherworldlyand evil forces at work in the world. Second, throughoutthe book, particularlyin the long chapteron the Besht's "circle,"Etkes presses the point that the Besht consciously and deliberatelycultivated a group of followers who were meant to continue his work, thus spawning the Hasidic movement.At the same time, Etkesdemonstratesclearlythatthe Besht was possessed of a belief in his uniqueness, suggesting the impossibility of any competent spiritualheirs. In fact, Etkes devotes a long discussion to whathe terms the Besht's bil'adiyut, or total singularity,as a mystic and Baal Shem (pp. 78-87), but he never quite resolves the inherenttension between that self-perceptionand the Besht's allegedly self-conscious role as the harbinger,if not the direct founder, of the Hasidic movement. These problems notwithstanding,Immanuel Etkes has produced a major, highly erudite re-evaluationof the Besht that both clarifies and clearly contextu148

Book Reviews alizes the work of many earlierscholars, and as well presents a well-documented and deeply learnedportraitof the still-mysteriousIsraelBaal ShemTov.This book is essential reading for those working in the field of East EuropeanJudaism,as well as for anyone interestedin the origins and early history of Hasidism. Allan Nadler Drew University Madison, New Jersey

Daniel M. Swetschinski.ReluctantCosmopolitans:ThePortugueseJews of SevenLondon:LittmanLibraryof JewishCivilization,2000. teenth-CenturyAmsterdam. 380 xiv, pp. When Daniel Swetschinski'sdissertationappearedin 1980, it immediately became an indispensablework.It was a wide-ranging,clearly-orderedsynthesis of scholarshipon the Portuguese-Jewish community of Amsterdamin the seventeenth-century,incorporatingsome importantoriginal research. It surveyed the community'slegal, demographic,economic, and institutionalhistory,with a brief chapteron certain aspects of its culturallife. Its most original contributionwas a detailedstudy of demographicdatagleaned from the Amsterdampuyboecken,the municipal registers of intended marriages.On the basis of these records, Swetschinskichartedin detail the immigrationto Amsterdamof ex-conversos with origins in the IberianPeninsula.His examinationof the community'sinstitutionallife relied to a considerableextent on existing studies in Dutch, but also incorporated his own archivalwork, and it raised importantquestions aboutthe structureof the community.Moreover,at a time when this was the exception ratherthan the rule, it dealtwith the PortugueseJews in an unsentimental,unromanticizedfashion.The dissertationwas far fromexhaustive-a task beyond the reachof any young scholar-but it was a valuablecontributionto Jewish communal history. Reluctant Cosmopolitansdrawsheavily in structureand contents from this dissertation.To be sure, the book reflects an effort to rethinkand update,but it is not a new work, and does not seriouslytake into accountthe scholarshipof the last two decades. This is not entirely apparentfrom the bibliography,which lists importantrecent works, however, in the text itself, Swetschinski tends to draw on these works (if at all) only vaguely, and without attribution. The first chapter,on the historyof tolerationin seventeenth-centuryNetherlands, is a simplified treatmentof a complex topic. Much has been done on this topic since Joseph Lecler and Henry Kamen wrote their seminal books in the 1960s. Thanksto recent work in this area by scholars like JonathanIsrael, Nicolette Mout, Martin van Gelderen, and Benjamin Kaplan, we possess a relatively nuancedand ramified view of the vicissitudes of tolerationin the Netherlands,in opinion and practice. None of this work is cited in Swetschinski'sfootnotes, nor does he make use of it to refine the chapterconceptually. The core of ChapterTwo, an examinationof immigrationto Amsterdam,is 149

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Miriam Bodian Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 149-151 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131791 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews alizes the work of many earlierscholars, and as well presents a well-documented and deeply learnedportraitof the still-mysteriousIsraelBaal ShemTov.This book is essential reading for those working in the field of East EuropeanJudaism,as well as for anyone interestedin the origins and early history of Hasidism. Allan Nadler Drew University Madison, New Jersey

Daniel M. Swetschinski.ReluctantCosmopolitans:ThePortugueseJews of SevenLondon:LittmanLibraryof JewishCivilization,2000. teenth-CenturyAmsterdam. 380 xiv, pp. When Daniel Swetschinski'sdissertationappearedin 1980, it immediately became an indispensablework.It was a wide-ranging,clearly-orderedsynthesis of scholarshipon the Portuguese-Jewish community of Amsterdamin the seventeenth-century,incorporatingsome importantoriginal research. It surveyed the community'slegal, demographic,economic, and institutionalhistory,with a brief chapteron certain aspects of its culturallife. Its most original contributionwas a detailedstudy of demographicdatagleaned from the Amsterdampuyboecken,the municipal registers of intended marriages.On the basis of these records, Swetschinskichartedin detail the immigrationto Amsterdamof ex-conversos with origins in the IberianPeninsula.His examinationof the community'sinstitutionallife relied to a considerableextent on existing studies in Dutch, but also incorporated his own archivalwork, and it raised importantquestions aboutthe structureof the community.Moreover,at a time when this was the exception ratherthan the rule, it dealtwith the PortugueseJews in an unsentimental,unromanticizedfashion.The dissertationwas far fromexhaustive-a task beyond the reachof any young scholar-but it was a valuablecontributionto Jewish communal history. Reluctant Cosmopolitansdrawsheavily in structureand contents from this dissertation.To be sure, the book reflects an effort to rethinkand update,but it is not a new work, and does not seriouslytake into accountthe scholarshipof the last two decades. This is not entirely apparentfrom the bibliography,which lists importantrecent works, however, in the text itself, Swetschinski tends to draw on these works (if at all) only vaguely, and without attribution. The first chapter,on the historyof tolerationin seventeenth-centuryNetherlands, is a simplified treatmentof a complex topic. Much has been done on this topic since Joseph Lecler and Henry Kamen wrote their seminal books in the 1960s. Thanksto recent work in this area by scholars like JonathanIsrael, Nicolette Mout, Martin van Gelderen, and Benjamin Kaplan, we possess a relatively nuancedand ramified view of the vicissitudes of tolerationin the Netherlands,in opinion and practice. None of this work is cited in Swetschinski'sfootnotes, nor does he make use of it to refine the chapterconceptually. The core of ChapterTwo, an examinationof immigrationto Amsterdam,is 149

Book Reviews Swetschinski's study of the puyboeken-a painstakingand valuable piece of research. But here, as elsewhere, in the book, the failure to use a wider range of sources leads to problems of interpretation.For example, Swetschinski infersthough he has no data on unmarriedmen and women-that there was a shortage of marriageablewomen in the early community, and concludes that the Dotar dowry society was established"forthe specific purpose"of furtheringthe migration of single women to remedy the imbalance(pp. 85-88, 100, 180). However,a look at the Dotar records-not to mention existing research-would have shown that the society was not designed to do this, nor did it furthersuch an aim. Of the 68 young women who received dowries in the first twenty-five years of the society's existence, 38 were already living in the Amsterdam/Hamburgarea. Only a very few of the other 30 migratedto Amsterdam,if they migratedat all. (At least one recipient migratedout of Amsterdam,to Izmir).When data is so abundant,it is risky to draw conclusions based on inferences. ChaptersThree through Six deal with topics that have been studied extensively by a handful of competent scholars in the last two decades: PortugueseJewish commerce, the institutionalhistory of the community,conflict within the community, and Portuguese-Jewishcultural formation, respectively.The author makes some use of notarialand communalrecords,and wide use of indispensable older secondary works, but without a persuasivenew perspectiveor an attemptto integrate new research and/or secondary literature,these chaptersare of limited value. Especially problematic is the somewhat bewildering Conclusion, which deals with issues of identity,ethnicity,and memory. Here, Swetschinski chooses to locate his own thinkingin relationto thatof otherscholars-or rather,of an unlikely few. I hope it does not detractfrom the respect due to Carl Gebhardt(Die Schriften des Uriel da Costa, 1922) and Yitzhak Baer (Galut, 1936) to point out that their work has long been supersededon such matters.In any case, Swetschinski's conclusion, ratherthan providing a satisfying ending to the book, seems a half-heartedattemptto move into a new arenain which he is not very comfortable. There are occasional misstatementsthat suggest an uncertaingrasp, or that may simply be careless generalizations.Let me mention a few. It was not "to interrogate [the] converts"that the Inquisitionwas established(p. 4). Amsterdam's PortugueseJews were surely not "the first Jews to create a significant body of religious and secular literature"(p. 5). The knowledge of "mattersreligious"among conversos in the Peninsulacannotbe characterizedas "probablyperfunctoryacross the board,"nor does it make sense to cite Jean-PierreDedieu in supportof such a generalization(p. 174 n. 26). Moses Mendelssohnwas fartoo sophisticatedto have regardedthe PortugueseJews collectively as "in some sense exemplary"(p. 318, and cf. p. 316; no sources cited). Swetschinski does not explicitly referto his book as a social history,though he strongly suggests it belongs in that category (pp. 5, 271). It would betterbe described as communal history, a venerable genre in Jewish historiography.To do him justice, Swetschinski offers occasional glimpses of his ability to use archival data imaginativelyto illuminate social life. He uses the puyboecken,for example, to obtain figures on female illiteracy(p. 89); he tells a story of richesse oblige with 150

Book Reviews his dataon refusalto serve on the Mahamad,and its penalties (pp. 192-94); he extracts from the puyboecken and notarialrecords indirect evidence about Sabbath observance (pp. 215-16). But we have still seen only the tip of the iceberg, and the archivesawait. Miriam Bodian PennsylvaniaState University Merion Station, Pennsylvania

JeffreyA. Grossman.TheDiscourse on Yiddishin Germany:From the Enlightenment to the Second Empire. Studies in German Literature,Linguistics, and Culture. Rochester,NY: CamdenHouse, 2000. x, 258 pp. This is a fine book, one which constructs its tasks with seriousness and depth. Grossman'sbook is all about the place of Yiddish in Germanculturaland intellectual contexts. The shortcomings are more a product of the limitations of the discipline than of the author. The introductorychapter"TheReturnof Yiddishand OtherConsiderations" sets the parametersfor the book. Grossmanbegins by noting the "currentvogue" interestin Yiddish and seeks to put this into culturalcontext. This is followed by a statementof his generaltheoreticalapproachto "discourse,"and his specific task: to relatethepresentation of Yiddish... to variousfieldsof knowledge(such as language,philosophy,linguistics,andJewishhistory,literaryforms... ) andto ideologiesof GermanandJewishculture,conceptionsof peoples,nations,andnationallanguageandto variousstrategiesresortedto ... forcontrollingtheimageof Yiddish"(p. 5).' ChapterOne, "Herder,Humboldt,and the Language of DiasporaJews," is a well-organized discussion of German Enlightenment views concerning language, Jews, and Jews' language. ChapterTwo, "Yiddishand the Inventionof the GermanJew,"discusses Jewish discourse on language and culturewithin the new paradigms.This chapterincludes detailed discussion of Moses Mendelssohn and of the individuals and writings associated with the Verein ffir Cultur und WissenschaftderJuden(founded 1819). Grossmanprovidesvaluablediscussion of the scholarly agenda set by Zunz and others, for example, of Zunz' efforts to set the terms for "Re-defining the Canon of Jewish literature"(pp. 101-108). Chapter Three,"Languageand Control:The Pedagogyand Performanceof Yiddish in Linguistic and TheatricalLiterature,"deals with the rise of German studies of Yid1. Grossmancites his work as owing to two earlier works on Jewish speech in Germanliterature: MarkGelber,"Das Judendeutschin der deutschen Literatur:einige Beispiele von den friihesten Lexikabis zu GustavFreytagundThomasMann,"in Juden in der deutschenLiteratur(1986), pp. 162178; and MatthiasRichter,Die SprachejiidischerFiguren in der deutschenLiteratur.:Studienzu Form und Function (Gdttingen:Wallstein, 1995).

151

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Neil G. Jacobs Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 151-153 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131792 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews his dataon refusalto serve on the Mahamad,and its penalties (pp. 192-94); he extracts from the puyboecken and notarialrecords indirect evidence about Sabbath observance (pp. 215-16). But we have still seen only the tip of the iceberg, and the archivesawait. Miriam Bodian PennsylvaniaState University Merion Station, Pennsylvania

JeffreyA. Grossman.TheDiscourse on Yiddishin Germany:From the Enlightenment to the Second Empire. Studies in German Literature,Linguistics, and Culture. Rochester,NY: CamdenHouse, 2000. x, 258 pp. This is a fine book, one which constructs its tasks with seriousness and depth. Grossman'sbook is all about the place of Yiddish in Germanculturaland intellectual contexts. The shortcomings are more a product of the limitations of the discipline than of the author. The introductorychapter"TheReturnof Yiddishand OtherConsiderations" sets the parametersfor the book. Grossmanbegins by noting the "currentvogue" interestin Yiddish and seeks to put this into culturalcontext. This is followed by a statementof his generaltheoreticalapproachto "discourse,"and his specific task: to relatethepresentation of Yiddish... to variousfieldsof knowledge(such as language,philosophy,linguistics,andJewishhistory,literaryforms... ) andto ideologiesof GermanandJewishculture,conceptionsof peoples,nations,andnationallanguageandto variousstrategiesresortedto ... forcontrollingtheimageof Yiddish"(p. 5).' ChapterOne, "Herder,Humboldt,and the Language of DiasporaJews," is a well-organized discussion of German Enlightenment views concerning language, Jews, and Jews' language. ChapterTwo, "Yiddishand the Inventionof the GermanJew,"discusses Jewish discourse on language and culturewithin the new paradigms.This chapterincludes detailed discussion of Moses Mendelssohn and of the individuals and writings associated with the Verein ffir Cultur und WissenschaftderJuden(founded 1819). Grossmanprovidesvaluablediscussion of the scholarly agenda set by Zunz and others, for example, of Zunz' efforts to set the terms for "Re-defining the Canon of Jewish literature"(pp. 101-108). Chapter Three,"Languageand Control:The Pedagogyand Performanceof Yiddish in Linguistic and TheatricalLiterature,"deals with the rise of German studies of Yid1. Grossmancites his work as owing to two earlier works on Jewish speech in Germanliterature: MarkGelber,"Das Judendeutschin der deutschen Literatur:einige Beispiele von den friihesten Lexikabis zu GustavFreytagundThomasMann,"in Juden in der deutschenLiteratur(1986), pp. 162178; and MatthiasRichter,Die SprachejiidischerFiguren in der deutschenLiteratur.:Studienzu Form und Function (Gdttingen:Wallstein, 1995).

151

Book Reviews dish language and the portrayalof Yiddish in Germantheater.Grossman'sdiscussion of Germaninterestin the studyof Yiddish,while helpful, is not new;much derives from knownYiddish scholarship.However,Grossman'slengthy discussion on the portrayalof Yiddish in Germantheatricalliteratureis valuable in two significant ways. First,he presents data and analysis. Second, he goes beyond much German-centeredscholarship by systematically distinguishing between Yiddish andYiddish-influencedGerman,2and between the (German)portrayalof Yiddish andYiddish itself. ChapterFour,"TheThreatto GermanCulture:The Function of Yiddish in German Realism after 1848," discusses historical, cultural,and economic developments in the nineteenthcentury and provides detailed case-study and analysis of Freytag'sSoll und Haben (1855), Raabe'sHungerpastor(1864), and Franzos' works. Grossman's comparative analysis of these works, authors, and times is nuanced and solid. A concluding chapter,"Beyond the Nineteenth-CenturyView of Yiddish,"brings discussion up to the present, including the rise of a GermanJewish "Re-discoveryof Yiddish";a run-throughof currentapproachesto nation, nationalism, and culture;and an appeal for mutualrespect among diverse groups in the modern world. Grossman'sbook presents a full, multi-facetedtreatmentof precisely what he sets out to examine: the "role"of Yiddish in Germancontexts. Grossmanappropriately subjects issues, ideological positions, and data to critical scrutiny. What is missing, however, is a sense of a Jewish internal dynamic, outside the German context. In this Jewish dynamic, Jews may contextualize, react to, or modify their views about, or use of, Yiddish, Hebrew,and indeed even German, on Jewish terms. To be sure, the Jewish internaldynamic interactswith external forces; however, a recognition of (Jewish) agency all too often receives short shrift in German-centeredscholarshipdealing with Yiddish.3To his credit,Grossman uses significantly more primaryYiddish scholarshipthan is the norm in Germanistic scholarship. Scholarshipin one discipline typically reduces and simplifies when incorporatingthe scholarshipof another.Still, it is problematicto this reviewer (writing from the perspective of Yiddish and Ashkenazic Studies) that Germanistic scholarship dealing with the rise of modern European Jewry typically focuses on the same limited cast of Jewish figures (Mendelssohn, Friedlinder, Lewald, Heine). Clearly, Enlightenment (both Aufklirung and Haskala/ Haskole) and post-Enlightenmentdebates about the natureof language, culture, and nation are partof a Europeanelite discourse of the times; thus, the same cast of Jewish figures will repeatedly surface in academic discussion. However, it would be useful to provide a basic mapping of the Jewish-internalintellectual 2. See Neil Jacobs, "On the investigation of 1920s Vienna Jewish Speech: Ideology and Linguistics."AmericanJournal of GermanicLinguistics and Literatures8:2 (1996): 177-217. 3. See Max Weinreich,"Thereality of Jewishnessvs. the ghetto myth:The sociolinguistic roots of Yiddish,"in Tohonor RomanJakobson: essays on the occasion of his seventieth birthday,11 October 1966 (The Hague:Mouton, 1967), 3: 2199-2211. See also Neil Jacobsand DagmarC. G. Lorenz, "If I were king of the Jews: Germanistikand the Judaistikfrage,"in DagmarC. G. Lorenz and Renate Posthofen, eds., Transforming the Eroding the Margins: Essays on Ethnic and Cultural BoundCenter, aries in German-Speaking Countries (Columbia, SC: Camden House, 1998), pp. 185-198.

152

Book Reviews landscapeof the times as well, where, for example, Mendelssohn'sviews are put into (Jewish-internal) context vis-a-vis those of the Khasam-Soyfer (17621839), a contemporaneousadvocate for Yiddish.4 Grossman uses Sorkin's term "invisible,Jewish subculturein Germany."5It must be asked: invisible on whose radarscreen? Finally,Grossmanrightly holds many issues up to critical light, yet he leaves unproblematizedhis use of Haskala, mitzvot,etc. (vs. Ashkenazic pronunciationHaskole, mitsves, etc.). The issue is not that Grossmanuses forms reflecting modernIvrit.Rather,what is lacking is some overt contextualizationconcerning the use of one Hebrew model over the other. Grossman could, for example, merely declare that the canonized forms in English are borrowed from Ivrit. In a book that deals so finely with issues of nuance and perspective, some statementis necessary. Neil G. Jacobs The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio

Gulie Ne'eman Arad. America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism. Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press, 2000. x, 314 pp. With America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism, Gulie Ne'eman Arad has placed the AmericanJewish responseto the rise of Nazism within its political and social context, therebymaking an importantcontributionto the growing literature that seeks to historicize America'srelationshipto the Holocaust. At first glance, the book seems to exonerate American Jews from the chargethat they did not do enough to save EuropeanJewry. In her tightly argued introduction,Arad offers a corrective to some of the commonplace assumptions about the American Jewish reaction to Hitler. She challenges, for example, assumptions that "exceptional circumstances will elicit exceptional responses" (p. 3), and that responses should be measuredby the extent of the victims' needs ratherthanby the bystanders'means to intervene effectively. She argues that critics of American Jewry have ignored the political context that severely limited its ability to act. In the end, however,AmericanJewry does not come across particularlywell in Arad'srendering.For the most part she agrees that Jewish leaders failed to react appropriatelyto the growing crisis, but thatthe untenablecondition of modern DiasporaJewrymade it impossiblefor themto do so. AmericanJewryis thus guilty as chargedof inaction, but must be excused because of its inherentdisability. 4. See Max Weinreich,History of the Yiddishlanguage, translatedby Shlomo Noble, with the assistance of JoshuaA. Fishman (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980), p. 283. (Partialtranslationof his: Geshikhtefunderyidisher shprakh:bagrifn,faktn, metodn(NewYork:YIVO Institutefor Jewish Research, 1973.) 5. David Sorkin,Thetransformationof GermanJewry, 1780-1840 (OxfordandNew York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1987), pp. 72-73.

153

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Daniel Soyer Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 153-155 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131793 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:27 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews landscapeof the times as well, where, for example, Mendelssohn'sviews are put into (Jewish-internal) context vis-a-vis those of the Khasam-Soyfer (17621839), a contemporaneousadvocate for Yiddish.4 Grossman uses Sorkin's term "invisible,Jewish subculturein Germany."5It must be asked: invisible on whose radarscreen? Finally,Grossmanrightly holds many issues up to critical light, yet he leaves unproblematizedhis use of Haskala, mitzvot,etc. (vs. Ashkenazic pronunciationHaskole, mitsves, etc.). The issue is not that Grossmanuses forms reflecting modernIvrit.Rather,what is lacking is some overt contextualizationconcerning the use of one Hebrew model over the other. Grossman could, for example, merely declare that the canonized forms in English are borrowed from Ivrit. In a book that deals so finely with issues of nuance and perspective, some statementis necessary. Neil G. Jacobs The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio

Gulie Ne'eman Arad. America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism. Bloomington: IndianaUniversity Press, 2000. x, 314 pp. With America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism, Gulie Ne'eman Arad has placed the AmericanJewish responseto the rise of Nazism within its political and social context, therebymaking an importantcontributionto the growing literature that seeks to historicize America'srelationshipto the Holocaust. At first glance, the book seems to exonerate American Jews from the chargethat they did not do enough to save EuropeanJewry. In her tightly argued introduction,Arad offers a corrective to some of the commonplace assumptions about the American Jewish reaction to Hitler. She challenges, for example, assumptions that "exceptional circumstances will elicit exceptional responses" (p. 3), and that responses should be measuredby the extent of the victims' needs ratherthanby the bystanders'means to intervene effectively. She argues that critics of American Jewry have ignored the political context that severely limited its ability to act. In the end, however,AmericanJewry does not come across particularlywell in Arad'srendering.For the most part she agrees that Jewish leaders failed to react appropriatelyto the growing crisis, but thatthe untenablecondition of modern DiasporaJewrymade it impossiblefor themto do so. AmericanJewryis thus guilty as chargedof inaction, but must be excused because of its inherentdisability. 4. See Max Weinreich,History of the Yiddishlanguage, translatedby Shlomo Noble, with the assistance of JoshuaA. Fishman (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980), p. 283. (Partialtranslationof his: Geshikhtefunderyidisher shprakh:bagrifn,faktn, metodn(NewYork:YIVO Institutefor Jewish Research, 1973.) 5. David Sorkin,Thetransformationof GermanJewry, 1780-1840 (OxfordandNew York:Oxford UniversityPress, 1987), pp. 72-73.

153

Book Reviews In orderto understandAmerican Jews' actions in the 1930s, Arad argues,it is necessary to understandtheir political history going back to the 1840s. Beginning with the Damascus Affair, she concentrateson instances in which American Jews attemptedto influence U.S. foreign policy, rightlypointing out the limits of ethnic grouppower.Most importantly,while the United Statesalwayswillingly accepted membersof white minoritygroups into the polity as individuals,it was generally hostile to group claims. Arad sometimes overstatesher case. She portraysthe Jewish experience in America as an ordeal of persistentanti-Semitism.She arguesthat Jew-hatredfirst croppedup in the mid-nineteenthcenturyand grew steadily strongerfromthen on. By the interwarperiod American Jews were in no shape to react effectively to events in Germany.Not only was the community in a "profoundmood of disarray"(p. 72) at the end of WorldWarI, but the conditionof "statelessness"had had a "profoundeffect" on the "collective Jewish psyche" (p. 58), inducing an attitude of deference towardthe state and a fetish for citizenship. Because AmericanJews recognized their own precariousposition as citizens, they were seldom willing to rock the boat. Because they had internalizedmany anti-Semitic stereotypes,they were afraid to engage in activities that seemed to bear out those stereotypes.But if "for many AmericanJews, the first thirty years of the centurywere the painful unravelingof a dream"(p. 69), things only got worse in the 1930s. Not surprisingly,the American Jewish response to the rise of Nazism was insufficient. For a variety of reasons, communal leaders at first downplayedthe threatposed by Hitler.When events in Germanyfinally madeAmericanJews face up to their own illusions, some turnedto Zionism, and others to despair,but most chose to emphasize the principle of universalism.Arad arguesthat, ironically,the presence of unprecedentednumbers of Jews in influential positions within the Roosevelt administrationcontributednot to Jewishpower,but to the cooptationof the Jewish leadership.By the late 1930s, after a series of unsuccessful struggles over immigration policy, Jews were in a "state of existential turmoil"and their leaders were "paralyzed"with fear over the "terrifying"mood in the country (pp. 203, 205). In any case, Arad argues,therewas little thatAmericanJews could really do to help their Europeancounterparts.The unfortunatetruthwas thatthey were right to see the unhelpful Roosevelt as their only political hope. America, Its Jews, and the Rise of Nazism focuses primarilyon a relatively small cohort of importantcommunal leaders in the American Jewish Committee and the American Jewish Congress (mainly StephenWise), as well as on Jewish advisors to the presidentlike Felix Frankfurterand Louis D. Brandeis.She seldom discusses Jewish mass politics, except as it occasionally served to pressureRabbi Wise to take more vigorous action. Indeed,there is little discussion of the public actions thatAmericanJews did take. Frequentmass rallies in Madison SquareGarden, for example, are mentioned mainly for the anxiety that they elicited in some sectors of the Jewish community. Gulie Ne'eman Aradhas made an importantcontributionby opening the discussion of how the prewarpolitical and social context influenced the American Jewish response to the rise of Nazism. Arad is rightthat the vastly changed ethnic political climate of recent decades provides a faulty lens throughwhich to view 154

Book Reviews the actions of the prewargeneration.Clearly,as Aradargues,there is room for still more studies on the Americanrelationshipto the Holocaust. Daniel Soyer FordhamUniversity New York,New York

Marc Gopin. Between Eden andArmageddon:TheFuture of WorldReligions, Violence, and Peacemaking.New York:Oxford University Press, 2000. viii, 312 pp. Marc Gopin believes that religion can play an importantrole in forming a global society committedto peace and moralprinciples. He bases his belief on the fact that in most religions there is a "commitmentto peace and elimination of violence" (p. 30) expressed in a broad range of values. Through the "internal hermeneuticdynamics of the tradition"(p. 60)-that is, througha textual investigation of how traditions have changed-he believes that Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others can contributeto promotingpeace. Although Gopin deals with other religious traditions,I will concentrateon the relationshipbetween Judaismand Islam. Gopin arguesthat there is a common denominatorin the literatureof Islam and Judaismthatcould result in a resolution of the Middle East conflict. He shows that in the course of centuries of legal and religious reflection, in both traditions,there are trendsthat emphasize alternatives to conflict and promotionof ethical values relatedto "coexistence, peacemaking, and even pacifism" (pp. 66-67). As Gopin points out, in classical Jewish literaturethere is a tension between the pursuitof peace andof war.Inthe books of Deuteronomyand Kings, the Mishnah, the Talmud,and Rabbinic literature,there is permission and even the requirementto go to war, althoughthe first preference is "when coming close to a city to fight you have to call for peace" (Dt. 20:10). Commandmentsto the Hebrew people not to make alliances with the nations in their midst nor to allow a soul amongthem to live (Dt. 7:1-5, 20, 15-18) were in realitynot fulfilled and indeed were negated in the Talmudicliterature. In a similarvein, Gopin suggests, later sources in Islam modify the original conceptions of war and peace. "The Quranicuses of the term Jihad are only the first level of analysis of the Islamic approachto war.There are later distinctions between state Jihadand religious Jihad,"he writes (p. 66). However,Gopin'sdiscussionof traditionalandcontemporaryMuslimthought is not supportedby other modern scholars. Several examples that are particularly relevantto theArab-Israelconflict contradictGopin'sideal of a symmetrybetween Judaismand Islam. In eight of its chapters,the Koranenjoins the faithful to follow the path of Jihad, the aim of which is to bringthe world underIslamic control. IbnTaymiyah, a jurist and philosopher of the thirteenthand fourteenth centuries, described a world divided into two parts,Dar al-Harb, the territoryof war, andDar al-Islam, 155

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Moshe Cohen Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 155-157 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131794 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews the actions of the prewargeneration.Clearly,as Aradargues,there is room for still more studies on the Americanrelationshipto the Holocaust. Daniel Soyer FordhamUniversity New York,New York

Marc Gopin. Between Eden andArmageddon:TheFuture of WorldReligions, Violence, and Peacemaking.New York:Oxford University Press, 2000. viii, 312 pp. Marc Gopin believes that religion can play an importantrole in forming a global society committedto peace and moralprinciples. He bases his belief on the fact that in most religions there is a "commitmentto peace and elimination of violence" (p. 30) expressed in a broad range of values. Through the "internal hermeneuticdynamics of the tradition"(p. 60)-that is, througha textual investigation of how traditions have changed-he believes that Muslims, Christians, Jews, and others can contributeto promotingpeace. Although Gopin deals with other religious traditions,I will concentrateon the relationshipbetween Judaismand Islam. Gopin arguesthat there is a common denominatorin the literatureof Islam and Judaismthatcould result in a resolution of the Middle East conflict. He shows that in the course of centuries of legal and religious reflection, in both traditions,there are trendsthat emphasize alternatives to conflict and promotionof ethical values relatedto "coexistence, peacemaking, and even pacifism" (pp. 66-67). As Gopin points out, in classical Jewish literaturethere is a tension between the pursuitof peace andof war.Inthe books of Deuteronomyand Kings, the Mishnah, the Talmud,and Rabbinic literature,there is permission and even the requirementto go to war, althoughthe first preference is "when coming close to a city to fight you have to call for peace" (Dt. 20:10). Commandmentsto the Hebrew people not to make alliances with the nations in their midst nor to allow a soul amongthem to live (Dt. 7:1-5, 20, 15-18) were in realitynot fulfilled and indeed were negated in the Talmudicliterature. In a similarvein, Gopin suggests, later sources in Islam modify the original conceptions of war and peace. "The Quranicuses of the term Jihad are only the first level of analysis of the Islamic approachto war.There are later distinctions between state Jihadand religious Jihad,"he writes (p. 66). However,Gopin'sdiscussionof traditionalandcontemporaryMuslimthought is not supportedby other modern scholars. Several examples that are particularly relevantto theArab-Israelconflict contradictGopin'sideal of a symmetrybetween Judaismand Islam. In eight of its chapters,the Koranenjoins the faithful to follow the path of Jihad, the aim of which is to bringthe world underIslamic control. IbnTaymiyah, a jurist and philosopher of the thirteenthand fourteenth centuries, described a world divided into two parts,Dar al-Harb, the territoryof war, andDar al-Islam, 155

Book Reviews the already conqueredterritoryof Islam.' In November 1914, the OttomanEmpire used IbnTaymiyah'sviews on Jihadin a religious ruling in orderto justify the war. Similarly,the Mufti and leader of Palestine duringthe 1930-1940s used Jihad not just as an expression of religious intolerance,but also to justify political terrorism.2Likewise, SheikhAl-Rukabi of twentieth-centuryDamascusconnects Jihad to national liberationmovements. Both al-Husseini and al-Rukabiused the term Jihadto describe war against the "Zionist entity"in Palestine,making resistance against Israel therefore obligatory for Muslims everywhere.Their Syrian contemporary,Muhammadal-Bayuti, follows the four legal schools, emphasizing thatthe purpose of Islamic sovereigntyis to turnthe land to Dar al-Islam,whether its inhabitantsare Muslims or not. Palestine underthe control of Jews is Dar alKufr, the land of the infidel; therefore Muslims have an obligation to release it from the hands of its "occupiers."3 Sheikh EkrimaSabri,the presentMufti of Jerusalem,said threeyearsago in an interviewthat Muslims embracedeathwhile Israelis a selfish society thatloves life, and they arenot people who areeagerto die for theircountryandtheirGod. He addedthatJews will leave this landratherthandie, but the Muslim is happyto die.4 So it would seem thatin Islam, unlike in Judaism,the issue of war andpeace is almost monolithic, directedtowardmakingthe whole worldDaral-Islam.Mainstream Islam does not supportcoexistence with non-Muslim countries,although Islamic governmentshave historicallytoleratedforeigncommunitiesin theirmidst so long as their members behaved as subordinates,paying taxes in exchange for the opportunityto follow their religious laws, maintaincommunalautonomy,and enjoy propertyrights. Gopin's analysis of Israeli internalunity and search for ways to solve conflicts is comprehensive.Certainlyit is true that "creatinga climate and a futurevision which is not violent ... can be done only by creating a nonviolent vision on both sides" (p. 209). This is difficult to accomplish, however,when Islamic religious parties base their legitimacy on religious concepts such as Jihad, Dar alIslam, and Dar al-Harb. Using religion as a main means of solving conflicts also poses the risk that leaders will interprettheir sacred literaturein ways that leave little room for compromise. After Camp David, Hani al-Hasan,a majorfigure in the Fatahgroup ob1. Paul Fregosi,Jihad in the West.Muslim Conquestsfrom the 7th to 21th Centuries(Amherst, NY: PrometheusBooks, 1998), pp. 400-410. 2. Fregosi, 409. 3. MuhammadSaid Ramadanal-Bayuti, al-Jihadfi al-Islam: kayfa naJhamuh?Wa-kayfanumararusuh? (Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 1993). See also western writers like Rudolph Peters,Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam (Princeton:MarkusWiener, 1996), who amplifies the differentkinds of Jihad and emphasizes writers who think that putting an emphasis on the peace side of the Jihadcan lead the Muslims to divergefrom the main fight. Fregosi specifies the continuationof Jihadin Europe, Asia and Africa when it continues till today.The Muslims, he claims, "see in the Crusadesa starting point of long military disputebetween the west and the Islam, and Humeinisays, 'The Jihadmeansthe conquest of non-Muslims' territory,the domination of Koranic law from the end of the earth to the other'" (pp. 13-23). 4. Al-Quds, March3, 1999.

156

Book Reviews served:"Barak'smistakewas to focus on Jerusalemas a religious issue. The roots of the Fatahare in the Muslim Brethren.From the beginning they were debating whetherto fight a religious war or to fight as a national liberationmovement.We have chosen to act as a national liberationmovement because it allows us to accomplish compromise,but as soon as the issue of Jerusalembecame religious we cannot leave al-Akza."5 Despite the reservationsexpressed here, Gopin's book and its suggestions and challenges illuminatesignificant initiatives and thoughts to be pursuedin the near future. Moshe Cohen Achva College of Education Negev, Israel

Sidra DeKoven Ezrahi.Booking Passage: Exile and Homecoming in the Modern JewishImagination.Contraversions.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress,2000. xii, 358 pp. The post-Zionist perspective is a commonplace in political and social discourse these days, and with this book it seeks to ensconce itself in the literarydomain. SidraEzrahi,who teaches at the Hebrew University,situates herself here in an existentialstance antipodalto YehudaHalevy's:her heartis in the West even as she sits at the edge of the East. Manifestly Ezrahi,in readingsof nine writersand poets, has constructeda literarytriptychthat seeks to rationalizethe post-Zionist momentand narrative.What it boils down to is a book that is essentially a detailed gloss, in literaryterms, on one of the seminal articulationsof Diasporism as the anodyne to the moral ambiguitiesof political Zionism: George Steiner's 1985 essay "OurHomeland,the Text." The basic questionout of which the book proceeds is "howthe reacquisition of the spatial dimension has affected the Jewish literaryimaginationin the twentieth century... " (p. 19) WhatEzrahimeans is: Whathappenswhen secularZionism precipitatesan apparentJewish eschalon by re-establishingJewish sovereignty in the ancestralhomeland,and a place that over the millennia was idealized and romanticizedbecomes an accessible, conflict-ridden reality? Ezrahi studies this questionin literaryterms,examiningit underthe twin rubricsof "Jewishjourneys" and "Jewishgeographies." Jewish journeys, i.e., fictional travel narratives,are treated longitudinally. Fourare discussed. Though poetry and not prose, Halevy's "Songs of Zion" constitutefor Ezrahi"theearliestand most enduringmodel" of "thetensions between desire and fulfillment as they begin to play themselves out in a poetics of exile and return"(p. 38). Mendele's Travelsof Benjamin the Third,a latterday Jewish Don Quixote, parodies, in Ezrahi's reading, the Zionist project of repatriation.Ben5. Ha'aretz, March26, 2001.

157

Review: [untitled] Author(s): James S. Diamond Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 157-159 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131795 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews served:"Barak'smistakewas to focus on Jerusalemas a religious issue. The roots of the Fatahare in the Muslim Brethren.From the beginning they were debating whetherto fight a religious war or to fight as a national liberationmovement.We have chosen to act as a national liberationmovement because it allows us to accomplish compromise,but as soon as the issue of Jerusalembecame religious we cannot leave al-Akza."5 Despite the reservationsexpressed here, Gopin's book and its suggestions and challenges illuminatesignificant initiatives and thoughts to be pursuedin the near future. Moshe Cohen Achva College of Education Negev, Israel

Sidra DeKoven Ezrahi.Booking Passage: Exile and Homecoming in the Modern JewishImagination.Contraversions.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress,2000. xii, 358 pp. The post-Zionist perspective is a commonplace in political and social discourse these days, and with this book it seeks to ensconce itself in the literarydomain. SidraEzrahi,who teaches at the Hebrew University,situates herself here in an existentialstance antipodalto YehudaHalevy's:her heartis in the West even as she sits at the edge of the East. Manifestly Ezrahi,in readingsof nine writersand poets, has constructeda literarytriptychthat seeks to rationalizethe post-Zionist momentand narrative.What it boils down to is a book that is essentially a detailed gloss, in literaryterms, on one of the seminal articulationsof Diasporism as the anodyne to the moral ambiguitiesof political Zionism: George Steiner's 1985 essay "OurHomeland,the Text." The basic questionout of which the book proceeds is "howthe reacquisition of the spatial dimension has affected the Jewish literaryimaginationin the twentieth century... " (p. 19) WhatEzrahimeans is: Whathappenswhen secularZionism precipitatesan apparentJewish eschalon by re-establishingJewish sovereignty in the ancestralhomeland,and a place that over the millennia was idealized and romanticizedbecomes an accessible, conflict-ridden reality? Ezrahi studies this questionin literaryterms,examiningit underthe twin rubricsof "Jewishjourneys" and "Jewishgeographies." Jewish journeys, i.e., fictional travel narratives,are treated longitudinally. Fourare discussed. Though poetry and not prose, Halevy's "Songs of Zion" constitutefor Ezrahi"theearliestand most enduringmodel" of "thetensions between desire and fulfillment as they begin to play themselves out in a poetics of exile and return"(p. 38). Mendele's Travelsof Benjamin the Third,a latterday Jewish Don Quixote, parodies, in Ezrahi's reading, the Zionist project of repatriation.Ben5. Ha'aretz, March26, 2001.

157

Book Reviews jamin's "ultimatereturnto his point of origin thus is as much a returnto the logocentric cultureof the EuropeanDiasporaas it is an eschewal of political activism or religious messianism" (p. 66). Agnon's In The Heart of the Seas becomes, by default, the ur-textof which Benjamin the Thirdis the parody,or the epic that the earlierwork mocks" (p. 89). "It does more than explicitly performthe masternarrative of the Zionist century,for it proceeds by incorporatingand supersedingits own subversive subtexts"(p. 102). Sholem Aleichem's Motl the Cantor'sSon exemplifies a permutationof the Jewish travelnarrativeinto a "third,non-epic model" where the journey arrivesnot in Zion or Galut but, quite simply, in Diaspora (p. 103). Ezrahi insightfully connects this narrativeto such seemingly disparate works as Kafka'sAmerikaand Kazin'sA Walkerin the City. In "Jewishgeographies"Ezrahireprisesher long-standingengagementwith the Holocaust by studyingmodalities of literaryresponsesto the destructionof the East EuropeanJewish culturalhomeland. Here she proceeds latitudinally,noting that "overthe last fifty years, what was destroyedhas become an authenticoriginal that can be representedbut not recovered"(p. 138). And so we see in the latetwentieth-centurywriters she studies-Celan, Pagis, Appelfeld, I.B. Singer, and Philip Roth-the same andseparation fromtheholysites,andthenof subprocessof disengagement andmimesis,thatevolvedin thecenturiesfollowingthe stitution,reinvention, destructionof ancientJerusalem. Althoughthe streetsof Lodzarenot sanctified in collectivememoryas werethe hillsof Zion,theybecameaccessible to pilgrimagesrealandimagined,ritualandliterary,as an unredeemable and indestructible ruin(p. 139). Space prevents me from outlining the details of the readings. Suffice it to say that in doing them, Ezrahimakes good on the warning she issues in the very first sentence of her introduction:"This book ... has a tendency ... to wander off." The discussions pick up and incorporatea diffuse surfeit of issues, narratological and cultural,and everywhere show that Ezrahi is not only at home in the variouswesternJewishliterarytraditions,but thatshe has readenormouslyon each of the figures and subjects she treats. If anything, she has read too much, or she has used too much of what she has read.At times supportingmaterial from other critics and sources tends to overwhelm and drownout her own voice. Stylistically the writing is often given to turgidabstractions,as in: WhatPhilipRoth'slatefictionsuggestsis less a culturalrevolution thana refromwithintheAmericanpurview,of the dichotomybetween configuration, asreal,andtherefore 'original'and'imitative' space-betweenplacedesignated andplacesdesignated asspotsonblueprints thatareinfinitelynenonnegotiable, gotiable.It is Diasporaas polemicoptionandaestheticprocessratherthanas a culturalcanonora 'wayof life'thatI wantto considerhere(p.222-223). Come again? There are, however,more fundamentalproblems.To really appreciatewhat 158

Book Reviews Ezrahiis tryingto do with a given writerthe readerwould have to have read all the works she discusses, and in the original, even though the texts are cited in her English renderings.Further,I question her method of showcasing one work from an author'scorpusthat is congenial to her largerthesis ratherthan seeing that work in the context of the whole corpus, especially when the corpus in its totality serves to qualify and even subvertwhat she is holding up from the one work.1The effect is to place the works and writers she discusses into a Procrusteanbed. The selection of writersdiscussed fosters the impressionthat it is arbitrary,in the service of what is essentially a privatecanon. Celan is fine examplarof literaryDiasporism, but why not Jabes?Roth fits too, but what about Malamud?And what about writers andworksthatwould call her notions of Diasporainto question,like Kafkaand The Castle? And, most tellingly, why not treat some Israeli writers who contend fictively with the quotidian reality of the unrealized promises of the Promised Land from out of their lived Israeli experience? These and otherconceptualand theoreticalproblemsabound,and they have been pointed out elsewhere (see Prooftexts 20:3 [Autumn2000]). They combine to make this a book of prodigiousresearchand limited utility. James S. Diamond PrincetonUniversity Princeton,New Jersey

Yael S. Feldman.No Room of TheirOwn: Genderand Nation in Israeli Women's Fiction. New York:Columbia University Press, 1999. xiv, 337 pp.; Tel Aviv: HaKibbutzHameuchad,2002. 304 pp. (Hebrew). Rarely is there such synergy between literary texts and a critic's personal convictions as there is in Yael Feldman'slatest book. Strong positions and emotionalties often provea double-edgedsword,especially when ideology dictatesthe interpretation.In the presentcase, the deep bond between the fictional narratives and the scholar is mostly beneficial, lending Feldman'swriting exceptional verve and drama. Feldman skillfully synthesizes modern feminist theories and critical tools with her deep knowledge and understandingof psychological, cultural, and so1. This is particularlytrueof Ezrahi'streatmentof Agnon andPhilip Roth. In the case of Agnon she is awarethat works like TemolShilshom subvertthe implications of Bilvav Yamimbut she veers away from the implications of this fact, probablyfor fear of damaging her claim for the latter.And though she has read much, she seems not to have taken into account BarukhKurzweil'sseminal treatment of shivah me'uheret(late return)and how he reads Bilvav Yamim.Kurzweil notes that there are many kinds of "return"in Agnon, certainlymore than Ezrahiobserves, and the conclusion to his study of the journey in Agnon bears citing here: "Anyattemptto reduce [or confine, JSD] the topos of 'departure/arrival'and 'home' in Agnon's fiction to the sphere of religious traditionis testimony to a total misunderstandingof Agnon'sepic enterprise"(Masot calsippureishai 'agnon, TelAviv,4th enlarged edition, 1975, 228.)

159

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Nehama Aschkenasy Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 159-161 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131796 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Ezrahiis tryingto do with a given writerthe readerwould have to have read all the works she discusses, and in the original, even though the texts are cited in her English renderings.Further,I question her method of showcasing one work from an author'scorpusthat is congenial to her largerthesis ratherthan seeing that work in the context of the whole corpus, especially when the corpus in its totality serves to qualify and even subvertwhat she is holding up from the one work.1The effect is to place the works and writers she discusses into a Procrusteanbed. The selection of writersdiscussed fosters the impressionthat it is arbitrary,in the service of what is essentially a privatecanon. Celan is fine examplarof literaryDiasporism, but why not Jabes?Roth fits too, but what about Malamud?And what about writers andworksthatwould call her notions of Diasporainto question,like Kafkaand The Castle? And, most tellingly, why not treat some Israeli writers who contend fictively with the quotidian reality of the unrealized promises of the Promised Land from out of their lived Israeli experience? These and otherconceptualand theoreticalproblemsabound,and they have been pointed out elsewhere (see Prooftexts 20:3 [Autumn2000]). They combine to make this a book of prodigiousresearchand limited utility. James S. Diamond PrincetonUniversity Princeton,New Jersey

Yael S. Feldman.No Room of TheirOwn: Genderand Nation in Israeli Women's Fiction. New York:Columbia University Press, 1999. xiv, 337 pp.; Tel Aviv: HaKibbutzHameuchad,2002. 304 pp. (Hebrew). Rarely is there such synergy between literary texts and a critic's personal convictions as there is in Yael Feldman'slatest book. Strong positions and emotionalties often provea double-edgedsword,especially when ideology dictatesthe interpretation.In the presentcase, the deep bond between the fictional narratives and the scholar is mostly beneficial, lending Feldman'swriting exceptional verve and drama. Feldman skillfully synthesizes modern feminist theories and critical tools with her deep knowledge and understandingof psychological, cultural, and so1. This is particularlytrueof Ezrahi'streatmentof Agnon andPhilip Roth. In the case of Agnon she is awarethat works like TemolShilshom subvertthe implications of Bilvav Yamimbut she veers away from the implications of this fact, probablyfor fear of damaging her claim for the latter.And though she has read much, she seems not to have taken into account BarukhKurzweil'sseminal treatment of shivah me'uheret(late return)and how he reads Bilvav Yamim.Kurzweil notes that there are many kinds of "return"in Agnon, certainlymore than Ezrahiobserves, and the conclusion to his study of the journey in Agnon bears citing here: "Anyattemptto reduce [or confine, JSD] the topos of 'departure/arrival'and 'home' in Agnon's fiction to the sphere of religious traditionis testimony to a total misunderstandingof Agnon'sepic enterprise"(Masot calsippureishai 'agnon, TelAviv,4th enlarged edition, 1975, 228.)

159

Book Reviews ciopolitical currents in modern Israel. The detailed discussions of two feminist precursors,VirginiaWoolf and Simone de Beauvoir,may be needed more in the Hebrew edition of the book than in the English. To feminist critics in this country, the works of these two writers are well-troddenfields, underlyingmuch of feminist scholarshipof the 1970s and early 1980s. The undeniablenecessity of this discussion in the Hebrew edition is in itself a culturalcomment, proving that Israeli feminist criticism, as well as feminist fiction, has lagged behind Europeanand American trends. Feldmanhas set out to correctthis obvious gap with a study focusing on the fiction of five Israeli women writers: Shulamit Lapid,Amalia Kahana-Carmon, ShulamithHareven,Netiva Ben Yehuda,and RuthAlmog. Her researchagenda is ambitious: she scrutinizes the Hebrew works in the light of recent Europeanand Americantheories of genderand literarycreativity,attemptingto find out whether and how the Israelifiction conforms to paradigmsset forthin other social and cultural climates. She examines the extent to which the Hebrewexamples, bred in an environmentplagued by a geopolitical and psychological state of siege, add a new wrinkle to these theories. She also uncoversthe feministintertextsin some of these writings, which Israeli criticism has failed to recognize. Women'sliberationas a political movement has had its roots in the modern ideas of enlightenmentand progress. On the face of it, modern feminist writings should be enhanced by both modern egalitarianideas and the postmodernspirit, which is committedto re-readingWesternhistory and literarycanon from an offcenter vantage point, giving voice to the rejectedand the marginal.But things did not work out as neatlyas these formulaswould suggest. First,as Feldmanexplains, postmodernismalso postulates the fictiveness of the autonomoussubject and as such the feminist claim for autonomywithin the postmoderncontext is problematic in itself. Secondly, in the particularcontext of Zionist and Israeli mentality,the plot thickens: the suppression of the individual voice in preference of the collective "we,"part of labor Zionist ideology and the pressing needs of a nation-building process, has been a problem encounteredby both male and female Hebrew writers. But it has especially complicatedthe dilemma of women writersstrugglingto emerge from both a long traditionthat silenced the woman'svoice and a new ideological and political reality,which demandsthe surrenderof individualcreativity to the nationaleffort andthe sharedcollective destiny.Feldmanasks why women writers such as ShulamitLapid or Amalia Kahana-Carmonwere unable to create a female Kiinstlerroman,"a portraitof the artistas a young woman."The answer, she says, lies in a combination of the marginalrole of women in Jewish history and literarytradition,which has producedan insecure female artisticego, and the overwhelming national narrativewhich has been the driving force of both male and female writings. The writer RuthAlmog, who publishedthinly veiled autobiographicalstories in 1969 and 1979, felt guilty thatshe allowed herself to become immersed in her own internal life when "larger"issues of national importance dominatedpublic life and discourse. In her study of ShulamitLapid'swidely popularnovel Gei Oni (the story of the Galilean settlementRosh Pinah) Feldmanidentifies the strategyemployedby 160

Book Reviews the novelist to correct the gender imbalance in Israeli historical narrative.The welding of two genres, she says, has enabledthe writerto reconstructnostalgically an eraimprintedin the nationalmemorywith heroic masculinityand at the same time insertthe female voice andpresence and thus speakto a more "feminist"age. Feldmanplaces RuthAlmog's Roots of Air (ShorsheiAvir)within the modern criticaland literarycorpus, which has rereadand rewrittenCharlotteBront 's Jane Eyre with a feminist twist. She sees Jean Rhys' novel, WideSargasso Sea (in which the heroine is Mr.Rochester'sinsane first wife, a marginalcharacterin Jane Eyre) as a direct influence on Almog's novel, especially in its treatmentof female madness. Feldmanraises many importantissues, too numerousto discuss in this review. She meticulously maps out the diverse theories and sub-theoriesof gender and creativitythat have sprungup in the past several decades. Her extensive discussions of literaryparadigmsand critical theories are nicely balanced by direct interpretiveencounterswith the fiction itself. Finally,one cannot but reflect on the leap that modern Israeli criticism has made from BaruchKurzweilto Yael Feldman.Kurzweil'scritical essays, brilliant, often groundbreakingand polemical, showed disregardfor any system of scholarly documentation,referencing,and attribution.Yael Feldman'sstudy is a model of painstakingcanvassing and classifying of a large body of theories pertaining to questionsof genderandthe creativeprocess;chartingtheirphilosophical,sociohistorical, and psychological roots; and uncovering their universalityas well as limitationswhen appliedto women's fiction in Hebrew.No Room of TheirOwn is a majorcontributionto boththe studyof Hebrewfiction and criticaltheory.It deals masterfullywith fascinatingstorieswithin theirlocal environmentwhile also placing them within an internationalculturalframeworkand critical discourse. Nehama Aschkenasy University of Connecticut Stamford,Connecticut

Gershon Shaked. Modern Hebrew Fiction. Translatedby Yael Lotan, edited by Emily Miller Budick, Jewish Literatureand Culture.Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000. xiii, 286 pp. We live in the age of the scholarly monographand the multi-authoredhisThe tory. shifting and contentiousnatureof literarystudies provides little encourto agement senior scholarsto devote decades of theirwork to takingthe long view and acceptingresponsibilityfor renderinga comprehensiveaccount of the developmentof a whole field overa substantialperiod of time. Ourepistemological uncertaintyis such that we suspect that fairness and truthcan be approximatedonly if we breakup the whole among divers hands and listen to different viewpoints. There is, then, something bracingly old fashioned about Gershon Shaked's imposing five-volume Hebrew work, Hasipporet ha'ivrit 1880-1980 [Hebrew 161

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Alan Mintz Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 161-165 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131797 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews the novelist to correct the gender imbalance in Israeli historical narrative.The welding of two genres, she says, has enabledthe writerto reconstructnostalgically an eraimprintedin the nationalmemorywith heroic masculinityand at the same time insertthe female voice andpresence and thus speakto a more "feminist"age. Feldmanplaces RuthAlmog's Roots of Air (ShorsheiAvir)within the modern criticaland literarycorpus, which has rereadand rewrittenCharlotteBront 's Jane Eyre with a feminist twist. She sees Jean Rhys' novel, WideSargasso Sea (in which the heroine is Mr.Rochester'sinsane first wife, a marginalcharacterin Jane Eyre) as a direct influence on Almog's novel, especially in its treatmentof female madness. Feldmanraises many importantissues, too numerousto discuss in this review. She meticulously maps out the diverse theories and sub-theoriesof gender and creativitythat have sprungup in the past several decades. Her extensive discussions of literaryparadigmsand critical theories are nicely balanced by direct interpretiveencounterswith the fiction itself. Finally,one cannot but reflect on the leap that modern Israeli criticism has made from BaruchKurzweilto Yael Feldman.Kurzweil'scritical essays, brilliant, often groundbreakingand polemical, showed disregardfor any system of scholarly documentation,referencing,and attribution.Yael Feldman'sstudy is a model of painstakingcanvassing and classifying of a large body of theories pertaining to questionsof genderandthe creativeprocess;chartingtheirphilosophical,sociohistorical, and psychological roots; and uncovering their universalityas well as limitationswhen appliedto women's fiction in Hebrew.No Room of TheirOwn is a majorcontributionto boththe studyof Hebrewfiction and criticaltheory.It deals masterfullywith fascinatingstorieswithin theirlocal environmentwhile also placing them within an internationalculturalframeworkand critical discourse. Nehama Aschkenasy University of Connecticut Stamford,Connecticut

Gershon Shaked. Modern Hebrew Fiction. Translatedby Yael Lotan, edited by Emily Miller Budick, Jewish Literatureand Culture.Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2000. xiii, 286 pp. We live in the age of the scholarly monographand the multi-authoredhisThe tory. shifting and contentiousnatureof literarystudies provides little encourto agement senior scholarsto devote decades of theirwork to takingthe long view and acceptingresponsibilityfor renderinga comprehensiveaccount of the developmentof a whole field overa substantialperiod of time. Ourepistemological uncertaintyis such that we suspect that fairness and truthcan be approximatedonly if we breakup the whole among divers hands and listen to different viewpoints. There is, then, something bracingly old fashioned about Gershon Shaked's imposing five-volume Hebrew work, Hasipporet ha'ivrit 1880-1980 [Hebrew 161

Book Reviews Fiction 1880-1980], which appearedbetween 1977 and 1999. (The work under review, which I will discuss below, is the one-volume English abridgementof this larger endeavor.) Shaked'sproject is genuinely ambitious. Within this great hundred-yeararc, Shakedseeks to establishthe place of each of the scores of writers who wrote serious fiction in Hebrew;to map out the networksof traditionsand counter-traditions;to connect aesthetic developmentsto largersocial and ideological transformations;to rendera critical descriptionas well as an evaluationof all the key individualworks;and,finally, to gauge the degree and qualityof influence that strong authorshave had upon later writers.The aspirationto mount such an undertaking-which Shaked pulls off with astonishing success-is founded on the refreshing assumptionthat the fruits of generationsof literarycriticism form a body of knowledge and that this research can be culled, utilized, summarized, and advanced ratherthan remaining merely a mass of ideologically drivenmisreadings. Although the beneficent ghost of positivism may be looking over Shaked's shoulder,there is nothing musty about his literaryhistory. His critical practiceis founded on some of the key developments of literary criticism in our time. Shaked'sbackgroundin New Criticismmakes him supremelyattentiveto varieties of narrators,strategiesof narration,and techniquesof characterization.His training in genre theory accounts for his passion for locating writers and their work within-and at odds with-the generic conventionsof romanticism,realism,naturalism,modernity,the comic-grotesque,andothermovements,trends,andmodes of writing.An interestin stylistics promptsShakedto trackthe changes in the way Hebrew is used to constructnarrativediscourse. A Lukacsiancommitmentto the organic nexus between history and literatureleads him to see fictional characters as complex representationsof social forces and class consciousness. Finally,reception theory explains his acute interest in how works of literaturewere understood by contemporaryaudiences and by readersat laterremoves of time. It bears keeping in mind that althoughthe five volumes of Hebrew Fiction cover a hundred-yearperiod,they themselves appearedover a period of more than twenty years. This means that just as the subject under scrutiny was in motion, forming and reformingitself, Shaked'sappetitivemind was at the same time also in motion, rangingwidely and bringingdifferentcritical emphases to the fore. An attentive reading of the whole Hebrew work would notice, for example, how issues of receptionbecome more centralin latervolumes and how Shaked'smanner of engaging his materialmoves from a monographicaccount of a single author's work to a series of thematic essays that returnto the same works in differentcontexts. There is a similar dynamic relationshipbetween Shaked'ssubject and his own life. His situation is decidedly not like that of Leopold Zunz, the great nineteenth-centuryWissenschaft scholar,who is supposed to have said when a young Hebrewpoet appearedat his door, "Whatcenturydid you live in?"Shaked'sscholarly career,and especially the years he workedon HebrewFiction, coincided with an unparalleledboom in Israeliprose writing that gives little sign of abating.And he has been an actor in the enterprisewhose history he is writing.As a studentin Jerusalem in the fifties, Shaked was part of a circle centered aroundthe journal 162

Book Reviews Likr'a-together with YehudaAmichai, Natan Zach, Amos Oz, A. B. Yehoshua, and Dan Miron-which challenged the social reBenjaminHarshovski-Harshav, alism and pathos of the Palmah Generationwriters. Even though Shaked is not himself a novelist, he has been inextricablyand intimatelyinvolved in the critical receptionof the fiction of his contemporaries,the writers of the New Wave, including AharonAppelfeld, andAmalia Kahane-Carmon,as well as Oz and Yehoshua. Yet unlike Oz and Yehoshua,Shaked is not a sabra. He was born Gerhardt Mandelin Vienna and was broughtto EretzYisraelby his parents,who came more as refugees than as settlers. The ordeal of immigration gave Shaked an unusual empathyfor the experiences of uprootedness,dislocation, and exile at the center of the great works of Hebrew literaturecreated at an earlierperiod in Europe. There is a great deal to admire in the objectivity of Shaked's scholarship. He has read everything and attemptsto locate everything in a complex and multi-strandnarrativeof the developmentof Hebrew fiction. Each writer,even those who playeda role in theirtime but whose reputationsand influence have faded out of sight andeven those whose literaryachievementsobviously do not stir Shaked's sympathies, receives his considered attention. He puts them in context, reminds us of the substanceof the books they wrote, offers a critical descriptionof the poetics of their fiction, and assesses the imprintthey made upon later Hebrew writers. Yet despite the project'sanalytic comprehensiveness,it is impossible to write serious and ambitious literaryhistory without at the same time engaging in the creationof an implied canon of modern Hebrew literature.(Despite all the drivel written about the hegemony and the evils of canon formation, let it be stated clearly that making argumentsfor the importance of strong works of art-the main business of literarycritics of which canons are a byproduct-is a chief responsibility that intellectuals discharge toward their culture.) At the center of Shaked'scanon, their place markedby the ample attentiongiven them and by the vigor of his arguments,stand the works of Mendele (Abromovitch), Berdichevsky, Brenner,Gnessin,Agnon, Hazaz, Shamir,Oz, Appelfeld andYehoshua.Their centralityis purchased,in Shaked'seyes, by the nexus effected in their work between the embroiled investigationof the fate of the Jewish collective and the artful practiceof literarymodernismin its many forms. Like all greathistoricalscholars, Shakedjudges and analyzes with his feet plantedfirmly in his time and place. The writingof HebrewFiction was begun when this nexus, the Zionist "metaplot," still held together and had achieved greatness in the works of Shaked'scontemporaries,the membersof the Dor hamedinah,the State Generation.Shaked'sproject was broughtto a close, on a note that is both elegaic and anxious, at a time when thatnexus had been attenuatedby the assertions of post-Zionism and postmodernism. Likeall abridgementsof greatmulti-volumeforeign-languageworksof scholarship,the English volume underreview is more useful than it is successful. It is as if some grandBalzaciancharacterwas forced to submitto the ravagesof a Draconian diet. The face remainsrecognizableand all the limbs are still there,but the flesh hangs on the bone and the sheen of vitality is gone. Gone, too, is the vast apparatusof endnotes and referencesto the history of Hebrew literarycriticism that makes the Hebrew volumes an indispensable compendium as well as a work of 163

Book Reviews original critical thought.This is entirely comprehensiblein a work intendedto be an introductionto Hebrew fiction for the English reader.Yet if that is indeed the aim, it is entirely incomprehensiblewhy there should be no mention of any critical literaturewrittenin English.Thereis no referenceto the worksof ArnoldBand, Robert Alter, Anne Golumb Hoffman, Naomi Sokoloff, Gilead Morahg,and other American critics of Hebrew literature,not to mention the hundredsof articles in Prooftexts and HebrewStudies over the years.Whatremainsis Shaked'schronicle of the developmentof Hebrew fiction and the bibliographyof primaryworks (translationsduly noted). While this is certainlyvaluableenough, the utility of the volume would have been greatly augmented if readers-and students-could have been directedto secondaryreadingstakenfromthe seriousenterpriseof commenting on Hebrew literaturethat has grown up on these shores. The sterling accomplishmentthat remainsundiminishedin the English volume is the contours of the map Shaked draws of Hebrew fiction. Making a map is, in a sense, at odds with making a canon. The greatauthorsin Shaked'spantheon are mostly known to us and well representedin translation.Less familiarare the dozens of contemporaneousHebrew writers in each generation whose serious works provides a context and counter-contextfor the achievementsof the canonical writers. So, for example, we know the writings of Oz, Yehoshua,and Appelfeld, and our conception of contemporaryIsraeli fiction is fashioned around their work. Yet, as Shaked points out, there a numberof strong authorsfrom this period, including BenjaminTammuz,Pinhas Sadeh,YitzhakOrpaz,andYehoshua Kenaz, whose work cannot be easily assimilated to the paradigmscreatedby the dominantfigures of the time. Ratherthan simply describingthe workof these others writers, Shaked takes responsibility for drawing a complex map which can make sense of these achievementsin relationto one another.It is in the attemptto see things whole that Shaked'sintellectual imaginationshines. On this score I was particularlygratefulfor Shaked'schapteron Hebrewfiction between the two world wars.This period is a kind of interregnumbetweenthe earlier breakthroughsof Brenner and his generationand the new literaturethat arose after the creation of the state of Israel. For most of us, Agnon is the great eminence that presides over these years; to a lesser degree, Hazaz. Yet Agnon is precisely the example of the great canonical writer who flies above his contemporaries and, sharing very little with them, blots them out, so that by knowing Agnon we may know a great deal but not aboutthe intensivefictional activityduring the twenties, thirties, and forties. In addition to the center in Palestine, there was David Vogel writing in Vienna and Parisand Shimon Halkinand ReuvenWallenrod writing in New York.(Shaked'schapteron Hebrew literaturein America is the only such account I know.) In EretzYisrael itself there was rivalryamong the journals Ketuvim,Moznayim,and Gilyonot and the writers allied with them. Fiction grounded in the realities of the Yishuv was being written by Israel Zarchi, Avigdor Hameiri,YehudahYaari,and Yitzhak Shenhar,while the standardof the Europeannarrativewas being upheld in the novels of Eliezer SteinmanandYaacov Horowitz. Taking in the lay of fictional landscape for the first time, with Shaked'shelp, I have resolved to revisit these writers,some of whom I haveknown only glancingly. 164

Book Reviews Takenas a whole, the map Shakedhas drawnof developmentof Hebrewfiction, togetherwith the rich insights about individualwriters found in the Hebrew volumes, make this workan enduringachievement.Formany years to come, it will be instinctive for studentsto check what Shaked has to say before embarkingon any task of criticism. Like the great synthesizing and summarizingwork of other eminences of his generation,his magnumopus is just as likely over time to have its paradigmspoked, challenged,and revised. Who would wish it any other way? Alan Mintz Jewish Theological Seminary New York

Leora Batnitzky.Idolatry and Representation:The Philosophy of Franz Rosenzweig Reconsidered.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 2000. x, 281 pp. This is a fantasticbook, certainto stimulatemany debates,andnotjust about its subject,FranzRosenzweig.At the heartof Batnitzky'stext is an argumentabout religious truthandthe form it takes in the modernworld,about"idolatry"and "representation."As understoodby the author,the law against idolatry did not mean for Rosenzweig what it meant for Maimonides and HermannCohen; it does not reflect the epistemological conundrathat go into the presentationof a God who outstrips all sensual image and mental representation.Instead, Batnitzky takes idolatryto mean the act of fixing upon one single image, thereby limiting God's freedom to appear in different forms. In this light, the term representationgets pulled awayfrom the GermanVorstellung(i.e. with the presentationof an abstract truth)and aligned with the verb vertreten(suggesting how one representsthattruth throughone's very being, one's own physical existence and image). Batnitzky situates Rosenzweig-but perhaps more importantly,the larger German-Jewishtraditionof ethical monotheism-within an expanded field that includes art and politics. Some readersmay want to quibble with this or that detail, with the author'sportraitof Rosenzweig, or with her understandingof politics andmodernart.However,Batnitzkyhas gotten Rosenzweig so rightin so many ways that it hardly mattersthat the problem of idolatry did not directly exercise him nearlyas much as it does her.Idolatryand Representationpersuasivelyhighlights the importanceof carnality,community,and the harsh and dissonantjudgments that these entail in Rosenzweig's work. Great bracing tonic, this image of Rosenzweig will advancenotjust Rosenzweig scholarshipbut also the very types of argumentupon which the largerproject of contemporaryJewish thought depends. It does so, in large part, by combining the insight of two recent voices in contemporaryreligious thought: the post-liberal Protestant theologian George Lindbeckand the modern orthodoxMichael Wyschogrod. The emphasis on community demonstratesBatnitzky'saffinity with Lindbeck, the authorof Nature of Doctrine-who has sought to move Protestanttheology away from individualexperience and its expression and towardsthe cultur165

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Zachary Braiterman Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 165-167 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131798 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Takenas a whole, the map Shakedhas drawnof developmentof Hebrewfiction, togetherwith the rich insights about individualwriters found in the Hebrew volumes, make this workan enduringachievement.Formany years to come, it will be instinctive for studentsto check what Shaked has to say before embarkingon any task of criticism. Like the great synthesizing and summarizingwork of other eminences of his generation,his magnumopus is just as likely over time to have its paradigmspoked, challenged,and revised. Who would wish it any other way? Alan Mintz Jewish Theological Seminary New York

Leora Batnitzky.Idolatry and Representation:The Philosophy of Franz Rosenzweig Reconsidered.Princeton:PrincetonUniversity Press, 2000. x, 281 pp. This is a fantasticbook, certainto stimulatemany debates,andnotjust about its subject,FranzRosenzweig.At the heartof Batnitzky'stext is an argumentabout religious truthandthe form it takes in the modernworld,about"idolatry"and "representation."As understoodby the author,the law against idolatry did not mean for Rosenzweig what it meant for Maimonides and HermannCohen; it does not reflect the epistemological conundrathat go into the presentationof a God who outstrips all sensual image and mental representation.Instead, Batnitzky takes idolatryto mean the act of fixing upon one single image, thereby limiting God's freedom to appear in different forms. In this light, the term representationgets pulled awayfrom the GermanVorstellung(i.e. with the presentationof an abstract truth)and aligned with the verb vertreten(suggesting how one representsthattruth throughone's very being, one's own physical existence and image). Batnitzky situates Rosenzweig-but perhaps more importantly,the larger German-Jewishtraditionof ethical monotheism-within an expanded field that includes art and politics. Some readersmay want to quibble with this or that detail, with the author'sportraitof Rosenzweig, or with her understandingof politics andmodernart.However,Batnitzkyhas gotten Rosenzweig so rightin so many ways that it hardly mattersthat the problem of idolatry did not directly exercise him nearlyas much as it does her.Idolatryand Representationpersuasivelyhighlights the importanceof carnality,community,and the harsh and dissonantjudgments that these entail in Rosenzweig's work. Great bracing tonic, this image of Rosenzweig will advancenotjust Rosenzweig scholarshipbut also the very types of argumentupon which the largerproject of contemporaryJewish thought depends. It does so, in large part, by combining the insight of two recent voices in contemporaryreligious thought: the post-liberal Protestant theologian George Lindbeckand the modern orthodoxMichael Wyschogrod. The emphasis on community demonstratesBatnitzky'saffinity with Lindbeck, the authorof Nature of Doctrine-who has sought to move Protestanttheology away from individualexperience and its expression and towardsthe cultur165

Book Reviews al and linguistic types of thought made possible by community.Lindbeck is the unnamed presence supportingan argumentregardingthe logical and axiological priorityof communitythatdominatesChaptersThreeandFive of Batnitzky'stext. She insists that, in Rosenzweig's thought, individualexperience "can only be understood"from the perspective of community (p. 64); that structuresof community are "epistemologicallyprivileged"over experience (p. 67). Reading TheStar of Redemptionbackwards,Batnitzky arguesthatthe intense expression of revelation and redemptionin parttwo of Rosenzweig's text is "onlypossible" and "only because" of the Jewish and Christiancommunitiesdescribedin partthree (p. 71). It is a bold claim with a lot of merit, but it is one-sided.After all, the argumentthat one cannot think or value "I" without already presupposing"you/he/she/it/we/ they" works both ways simultaneously.Formy part,I thinkit makes more sense to argue that, logically and axiologically, the community and the individual are always already co-present, neither one before the other,but all at once. This yields a more tensed dynamicthat I think comes much closer to the one that Rosenzweig sharedwith Buber-who has been turnedinto the romanticand individualisticantipode of a Rosenzweig made to look too much like ... George Lindbeck. In my view, the book's far greatercontributionlies in the way it supportsthe claim thattruthis embedded.This idea resonateswith those expressedby Michael Wyschogrod in Body of Faith-a book dedicated to the carnality of Jewish life and thought, to a deeply embodied Jewish people, its land and cult, and a personal God who comes quite close to assuming corporeal dimension. In Batnitzky's view, Rosenzweig's thoughtassumes the same fleshy presence.As she reads him, an expansive carnalfield mediates truth.This field takes shape qua Jewish being, calendar-life,blood community (sexual procreation?),scripturalword-forms,the act of translation,and the image of God. The revelationof truthruns the gamut from ethics, art, and politics-parts one, two, and three of Batnitzky'stext. The very structureof Idolatry and Representationshould clearly generate great conversation.Should ethics assume thatprivilegedcenterpoint aroundwhich pivot art and politics? Or does she wantto have ethics dependupon art-which turnsin turn aroundpolitics? Or does she intend to hold all three points together at the same time, without privileging one or the others?Those at least are some of the questions that I would ask. Delighting in the author'slead, one reads Batnitzky'sbook back in reverseorderto get a sense of how it all moves: Politics: In the conclusion and in ChapterEight respectively,Batnitzkyconsiders "the futureof monotheism"and Rosenzweig's thoughtin light of American pluralism, the memory of the Holocaust, and the creation of the State of Israel. ChapterSeven looks to the challenge and risks involved in maintaininga separate Jewish identity in the Diaspora. Chapter6 goes against the easy ecumenism that often attendsthe Rosenzweig scholarship.The dialogue between Jews and Christians requires asymmetry and judgment, not mutualityand tolerance, in orderto preserve the difference. Art:ChapterFive shows how Rosenzweig soughtto maintainthatJewishdifference in his Bible-translationwork, retainingthe particularnuance of Hebrew language in order to sustain the shock and abiding strangeness of God's word. 166

Book Reviews ChapterFour lays out the idea of the Jewish uncanny, one suggested by Susan Shapiro.In this view, the Jewish people as understoodby Rosenzweig resembles a modernwork of art:uncanny,self-contained,and other;itself an embodied sign. Ethics:ChapterThreepicks up Daniel Boyarin'sphrase"carnalIsrael"in order to advancea strongimage of Jewish and Christiancommunity,one that insists upon the logical and axiological priorityof its structureover against the individual subject.In ChapterTwo,this carnalsign reorientsthe modernperson vis-a-vis the past, opening humanity to those communal and historical structureswhich alone provide "meaning"in the modern world. In ChapterOne, the authorpersuasively defends the philosophicalcoherence of biblical anthropomorphism,the image of God meeting with a carnalperson imbeddedwithin community. Full of verve, broadin reachand consequence, analyticallysharp,and clearly written,this fresh and importantreadingof Rosenzweig is a must-readtext for those who want to work modern and contemporaryJewish thought and philosophy of religion aroundcommunity,the uncanny,and other embodied signs. Zachary Braiterman Syracuse University Syracuse, New York

HaroldI. Saperstein.Witnessfrom the Pulpit: TopicalSermons, 1933-1980. Edited with Introductionsand Notes by Marc Saperstein. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2000. xiv, 365 pp. In Witnessfrom the Pulpit, Marc Saperstein,a leading expert on the art of Jewish preachingin medieval and modern times, took on the personally rewarding and professionally challenging task of assembling, editing, and commenting upon the sermons of a twentieth-centuryAmerican Reform rabbi, of "mid-level" nationalleadershipstature,who had "a ratherextraordinarypersonal involvement ... in twentieth-centuryJewish history."The rewardwas to make available for scholarly considerationthe homiletic messages that Harold Sapersteindelivered during his forty-seven years (1933-1980) as spiritualleader of Lynbrook,New York'sTempleEmanu-Elas a source for understandinghow a rabbicommunicated with, and educated,his community about the great crises that the Jewish people faced in that tumultuoustime-span.The challenge was to present and analyze objectively what his own fatherhad done, without an almost understandabledegree of filiopietism. Happily,Sapersteinfils chose well in documentinghow one rabbiattemptedto raise worshipperconsciousness about the destructionof European Jewry,the rise and perils of the State of Israel and the struggles for Soviet Jewry,as well as centralpost-warAmericanissues like the battle for Civil Rights, McCarthyism,civil unrest and the tragedy of Vietnam, and more. Harold Saperstein's views are introducedwith calm, dispassion, and clarity. Of course, a compendiumof sermons, by its very nature,allows us only to "listen in" on a preacher and not really to determine how his/her message was 167

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Jeffrey S. Gurock Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 167-168 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131799 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews ChapterFour lays out the idea of the Jewish uncanny, one suggested by Susan Shapiro.In this view, the Jewish people as understoodby Rosenzweig resembles a modernwork of art:uncanny,self-contained,and other;itself an embodied sign. Ethics:ChapterThreepicks up Daniel Boyarin'sphrase"carnalIsrael"in order to advancea strongimage of Jewish and Christiancommunity,one that insists upon the logical and axiological priorityof its structureover against the individual subject.In ChapterTwo,this carnalsign reorientsthe modernperson vis-a-vis the past, opening humanity to those communal and historical structureswhich alone provide "meaning"in the modern world. In ChapterOne, the authorpersuasively defends the philosophicalcoherence of biblical anthropomorphism,the image of God meeting with a carnalperson imbeddedwithin community. Full of verve, broadin reachand consequence, analyticallysharp,and clearly written,this fresh and importantreadingof Rosenzweig is a must-readtext for those who want to work modern and contemporaryJewish thought and philosophy of religion aroundcommunity,the uncanny,and other embodied signs. Zachary Braiterman Syracuse University Syracuse, New York

HaroldI. Saperstein.Witnessfrom the Pulpit: TopicalSermons, 1933-1980. Edited with Introductionsand Notes by Marc Saperstein. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2000. xiv, 365 pp. In Witnessfrom the Pulpit, Marc Saperstein,a leading expert on the art of Jewish preachingin medieval and modern times, took on the personally rewarding and professionally challenging task of assembling, editing, and commenting upon the sermons of a twentieth-centuryAmerican Reform rabbi, of "mid-level" nationalleadershipstature,who had "a ratherextraordinarypersonal involvement ... in twentieth-centuryJewish history."The rewardwas to make available for scholarly considerationthe homiletic messages that Harold Sapersteindelivered during his forty-seven years (1933-1980) as spiritualleader of Lynbrook,New York'sTempleEmanu-Elas a source for understandinghow a rabbicommunicated with, and educated,his community about the great crises that the Jewish people faced in that tumultuoustime-span.The challenge was to present and analyze objectively what his own fatherhad done, without an almost understandabledegree of filiopietism. Happily,Sapersteinfils chose well in documentinghow one rabbiattemptedto raise worshipperconsciousness about the destructionof European Jewry,the rise and perils of the State of Israel and the struggles for Soviet Jewry,as well as centralpost-warAmericanissues like the battle for Civil Rights, McCarthyism,civil unrest and the tragedy of Vietnam, and more. Harold Saperstein's views are introducedwith calm, dispassion, and clarity. Of course, a compendiumof sermons, by its very nature,allows us only to "listen in" on a preacher and not really to determine how his/her message was 167

Book Reviews heard. Still, Marc Sapersteinmakes a valiant effort in his notes to begin to evoke the generalAmericanand specifically the Lynbrookmoods that"triggered[ his father's] messages." For example, in introducing"TheAmericanDream, in Color," he did an outstandingjob in noting the tenor of local town attitudesin 1963 toward the busing designed to ensure school desegregationin Malverne,where Saperstein lived, even if he could not tell us how Temple Emanu-Elpeople reactedto his father'sstrong advocacy of equality for all Americans.All told, Marc Sapersteinhas produced a highly accessible volume that, if analyzed with comparablesources from similar times and locales, will afford us importantvistas into how Jews in pre-war and post-war suburbiaviewed the external Jewish and American worlds aroundthem. There is, however,a remarkablelacuna in the range of themes documented and discussed in this compendium,which will frustratestudentsof AmericanJudaism. Arguably,Harold Saperstein,part of that first generationof Neo-Reform rabbis produced at Rabbi Stephen S. Wise's Jewish Instituteof Religion, had to have presided over and participatedin the reorientationof that denominationtowardsJewish traditionand ancient ritual.And, as a rabbiin suburbia,for morethan two generations,he had to have faced up to such weighty "internal"Jewish issues like the challenge of assimilationin social environswhere Jews were acceptedand the ongoing battleto find ways and means of attractingthe disaffectedbackto Jewish identification.Yet,this compendiumsays little aboutwhat Emanu-El'srabbia self-described"pioneerin what is now called the 'creativeservice' "-said to his flock abouthis feelings concerning "the deep-seatedproblems"Judaismfaced "in a non-religiousage."Only two sermons-including the one fromwhich I havejust quoted briefly-even begin to addressthese questions.The one sermonpresented here where Sapersteinspoke extensively about the challenges and frustrationsof the rabbi'smission to reachdisinterestedAmericanJews took place "off campus," when this senior rabbiwas invited to speak at the 1972 HUC-JIROrdinationCeremony at New York'sTemple Emanu-El.There, in front of that class of new rabbis-including his son and futureeditor,Marc-he implicitly addressedthe findings of that year's famous Lenn study (Rabbi and Synagogue in ReformJudaism) and asserted candidly that "our generationhas in large measure lost the sense of necessity and value of prayer"(p. 297). One wonders whether and how often Harold Sapersteinspoke so openly "athome" aboutthe meaningfulnessof prayer in Lynbrook'sTemple or of the efficacy of new forms of worship as a means of reaching out to the unaffiliated within his own midst. Such comments-if they were offered-would have helped us bettergauge how Judaismwas then doing on the frontiersof suburbia.And it would have made Witnessfrom the Pulpit an even more valuable source for studyingAmericanJewish life in the mid-decadesof the twentieth century. Jeffrey S. Gurock YeshivaUniversity New York,New York

168

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Ruti Kadish Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 169-173 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131800 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews Susan Sered. WhatMakes WomenSick? Maternity,Modesty,and Militarismin Israeli Society. Brandeis Series in Jewish Women. Hanover,NH, and London:University Press of America for BrandeisUniversity Press, 2000. x, 194 pp. Susan MarthaKahn.ReproducingJews. A CulturalAccount of Assisted Conception in Israel. Body, Commodity,Text:Studies of Objectifying Practice.Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000. viii, 227 pp. In recent years, there has been an abundanceof feminist scholarshipin the field of Israel studies. Notably,much of this scholarshiphas been in the form of articles.Dafna N. Izraeli,et al, in Sex, Gender,Politics: Womenin Israel (TelAviv: HakibbutzHameuchad,1999) (Hebrew),providea comprehensivebibliographyin this regard,both for Hebrew and English publications. Sered and Kahn's booklength studies are welcome and necessary contributionsto the field. Both anthropologists demonstrate,in overlappingyet different ways, the daily and material ways in which Zionist practiceand ideology manifest in andthroughwomen'sbodies. Susan Sered'swork, as her evocative and declarativetitle suggests, posits an ostensiblybroadthesis. Initially,I anticipatedreadinga theoreticalexaminationof maternity,modesty and militarism,interpretingSered'suse of "sick"metaphorically. Sered'sintroduction,however,clarifies her intent: "Israeliwomen are sicker and die youngerthen theircounterpartsin otherwesterncountries.Over the past decade the life expectancyof Israeliwomen has rankedin the vicinity of thirteenth to seventeenthin the world-trailing afterGreece and Ireland,whereasthe life expectancyof Israelimen has remainedamong the highest in the world-ranked second or third,following only Japanand Sweden" (p. 1). Sered then demonstrates how the issues of maternity,modesty,and militarism-issues that feminist scholars of Israeli culturehave long identified as lynch pins in the constructionof Israeli gender identity-shape "the culturalpolitics of somatization"(p.1). Sered's scholarshipbuilds on the earlier work of feminist scholars such as NiraYuval-Davis,who is creditedwith the terms "womenandchildren"and "women as bearersof the collective,"enlisted in a demographicwar. Sered takesYuvalDavis' termsand the theoreticalanalysis underpinningthem furtherby interfacing the examinationof public policy and Knesset debates, for example, with an ethnographic study of birthingmothersand women soldiers. In ChapterOne, "Collective Representationsof Motherhood,"Sered maps out the trajectoryby which Israeli female citizenship came to be conferred through motherhood.Citing Nitza Berkovitch'silluminating examination of the passage of the Equal Rights Law (1951), Sered delves furtherinto Knesset debates on the issue of "Government Means for EncouragingNatality in the State" (p. 23). One means of encouragement was the institution of grants given to birthing mothers. The discussion of birth grants in and of itself is not new among feminist scholars. Sered's discussion, however,demonstratesthe complex and variegatedpolitical motivationsexpressed in the Knesset debates surroundingthis issue. There was considerable political pressureto condition the grant on a hospital birth, thus giving the statesponsoredmedical authoritiescontrolover the birthingprocess. Underlyingthe in169

Book Reviews sistence on hospital births and medical superiority,presumablyfor the sake of the health of the mother and child, is a fundamentalmistrustin the ability of women and their bodies to "do it right."The state must take over, in essence, because what is at stake are the state'schildren. The following four chaptersflesh out, quite literally,the corporealcomponents of Sered's argument:"The ReproductiveBody," "The Militarized Body," "The Ritualized Body," and "The Scrutinized Body." The titles foregroundthe theme that runs throughthe book: Israeli women's bodies as the nation. In other words, women are objects of the nation, never subjects, and as such, women, by definition, are never ideal citizens. As bearersof the nation, women have the responsibility of producing the next generationbut have neither political nor personal power to determinehow this could or should be done. As soldiers in the IDF, largely relegatedto auxiliaryroles with little ability or opportunityto provethemselves in a militarycapacity,women soldiers are evaluatedpredominantlyas symbols of control and orderliness,called upon to beautify and soften the harshmilitary environment.Women have responsibilitywith little or no authority. Sered'sattentionto the Israeliwomen's level of responsibilityvis-a-vis their lack of political, social (i.e., membershipin decision-makingbodies), andpersonal authorityis noteworthy.As Sered notes, psychological researchhas demonstrated that physical and psychological well-being correlateswith social status. "Women soldiers," writes Sered, "neithermothers nor true warriors,are in a problematic liminal state. It seems to me that the intense concern with the neatness and sexuality of women soldiers is an expression of that liminality.The 'proper'sexuality of the neat and attractive'CHEN' [the recentlydisbandedWomen'sCorps] soldier signifies that she is on the appropriatepath to suitablemotherhoodwithin the collective" (p. 86). I assigned Sered'sbook in two recentJewish/women'sstudies classes. While most studentsfound the book illuminating,severalJewish studies studentsargued that Sered's prose suffered from hyperbole, a fact that made it difficult for those studentsto evaluateher claims on their merit.While the chargeof hyperbolemay, unfortunately,ring true in some instances, I sense that the students'resistanceto Sered'sbook lies more in the fact thather indictmentof the enlistmentof women's bodies in the Zionist cause is not easily heard by the mainstreamJewish studies student.The difficulty my students had is demonstrativeof the failure of Jewish studies both to incorporategender as a category of analysis in Jewish and Israel studies and to expose studentsto feminist analysis. Sered'sexaminationof maternity, militarism, and modesty exposes these failures, calling into question assumptions generally held by the averageJewish studies studenton Americanuniversity campuses. Susan Kahn'sstudy on assisted conception is in many ways a continuation of Sered's examination of the meaning of maternity in Israel. Kahn, however, delves deeper into the meaning of Jewish identity vis-a-vis assisted conception. Ever-developingreproductivetechnologies make it possible, and for some necessary, to consider the Jewishness of sperm, womb, and ova. Such determinations and distinctions are importantin differentways, as Kahn demonstrates,to Ortho170

Book Reviews dox and non-OrthodoxIsraelis.Yet all share an adulteratedand enthusiasticembrace of reproductivetechnologies. "A word about Israeli pronatalismis crucial here,"writes Kahn, "for the overwhelmingdesire to create Jewish babies deeply informsthe Israeli embraceof reproductivetechnology" (p. 3). If Jewish women, then, are "bearersof the [Jewish] collective," Kahn'sbook explicates the ways in which assisted conception and its widespreadand growing use is an outgrowthof this attitude. The "objective"field of Kahn'sresearchis compelling. Kahn writes that in the mid 1990s, "therewere more fertility clinics per capita in Israel than in any other countryin the world (twenty-fourunits for a populationof 5.5 million, four times the numberper capita in the United States). Moreover,Israeli fertility specialists have emerged as global leaders in the researchand development of these technologies.... [A]ll the new reproductivetechnologies, including artificial insemination,ovum donation,and in-vitrofertilization,are subsidized by Israelinational health insurance"(p. 2). In ChapterOne, entitled "The Time Arrived and the FatherDidn't: A New Continuumof Israeli Conception,"Kahnenumerateseight stages of assisted conception, from choosing to use assisted conception, throughenteringa relationship with a fertility clinic and choosing sperm, to post-natal concerns of "narrating" the absence of a father.This chapteraddresses the use of artificial insemination among non-marriedwomen, heterosexualand lesbian, in Israel.Throughher descriptionof the process, well chosen selections from her narrators,and insightful analysis of both, Kahn demonstratesthe primacy of childbearingamong Israelis in general and how Israeliwomen have internalizedthe belief that motherhoodis an Israeliwoman'sduty and mission. "If you're not a mother,you don't exist in Israeli society,"Kahn quotes a social workerin a Jerusalemfertility clinic (p. 9). Whatis strikingin Kahn'sdescriptionof the inseminationprocess is the degree of control exercised by the fertility clinics in this case. For example, Israeli Ministryof Healthregulationshave held that single women must first be screened before being "approved"for artificial insemination. According to Kahn most women are "approved"and yet the very process of screening positions the clinics, and hence the state, in a paternalisticrole vis-a-vis the women seeking insemination. (This exercise of controlby various medical or mental health authoritiesrecursthroughoutKahn'sresearchas well as in Sered'swork and is demonstrativeof the state'spolicing of women'sbodies). The way in which women "choose"a spermdonor is at once outrageousand profoundlytelling of Israelistatepaternalism,attitudestowardrace and class, lack of respect for individualchoice, and the supremacyof the collective interestin reproducingJews. From the personal accounts providedby Kahn, it becomes clear thatultimatelythe women have very little choice, and it often comes down to the nurse sitting across the table from the client saying in a maternalvoice something to the effect of, 'Don't worry,I'll find someone just right for you.' Kahnnotes that women were encouragedto choose someone who resembledthem, "whichin most cases meant 'light' or of Ashkenazi origin" (p. 37). "Certainly,"writes Kahn, "thereis no official policy thatmandatesthe matching of Ashkenazi donor sperm with Ashkenazi unmarriedwomen, but the informal practice of sperm selection 171

Book Reviews seems to suggest that it is desirableto observe and maintainethnic difference in this process. That the long simmering tensions between Jews of differentethnic origins in Israel shouldbe played out in the realm of assisted conceptionis not surprising, for this is the realm in which culturaldramasbecome most vivid" (p. 37). Kahn'sprose is mellifluous and her adaptationof alternativemodels of kinto ship the particulardynamics of Israelicultureis scintillating.Departing,for example,fromKathWeston'smodel of kinshipin FamiliesWeChoose:Lesbians,Gays, Kinships, Kahn arguesthatunmarriedIsraeli women bearingchildrenthroughartificial inseminationhave no intention of challenging either so-called traditional family structuresor the biological relationshipbetweenparentsandtheiroffspring. "The social consequences of their reproductivechoices," explains Kahn, "are much less ambitiousin theirorigin andmore profoundin theirresult:for whatthey have done is reveal inadvertentlythatheterosexualityand marriagehaveneverhad a monopoly over reproductionin the Jewish imagination;in the Jewish imagination it is Jewish childrenborn to Jewish mothers who have conceptualmonopoly over reproduction,regardlessof how they are conceived" (pp. 44-45). Over the course of the next three chapters,Kahn discusses the legal and religious elements in these cultural dramas. In ChapterTwo, Kahn discusses the Nachmani case, wherein an Israeli couple, Ruti and Dani Nachmani, underwent fertility treatment,resultingin eleven frozen embryos.As RutiNachmanihad previously undergone a hysterectomy,the couple hoped to use the frozen embryos with a surrogatemother.Before brokeringsuch an agreement,however,the couple divorced. Ruti Nachmani wished to proceed with a surrogateagreement,but the fertility clinic housing the embryos refused to release them because Dani Nachmani denied his consent to Ruti'suse of the embryos,arguingthatthis would force him into fatherhood.Ruti Nachmaniturnedto the Israeli SupremeCourt.In its initial decision, the court held in favor of Dani Nachmani'srightnot to become a parent.Subsequentlythe court agreed to hearthe case again with wider panel of judges, at which time it ruled in Ruti Nachmani's favor."In a surprisingreversal of its earlier decision," writes Kahn, "the court ruled that Ruti'sright to be a parent is more importantthanthe rightnot to fatherchildrenandruledthatshe should be given custody of the embryos. In the words of Judge [sic] Tsvi Tal: 'the interest in parenthoodis a basic and existential value, both for the individualand for society as a whole. In contrast,there is no value to the absence of parenthood'" (p. 67). The Court'slanguage is somewhat disturbingwhen considered in the context of the abortiondebate, both here and in Israel, and women's right and ability (in terms of social acceptance) to choose not to bear children. Moreover,it suggests that women have an inalienableright, as it were, to mother,while women in Israel lack equal civil rights in general.As Kahn,notes, however,the religious authorities (rabbinicwritings on the issue), the civil courts, and public opinion are each heavily informedby an thatmotherhood is thedeepest imageso deeplyimbeddedit is unquestioned: desireof all womenandshouldbe pursuedat all costs.... Consentforthe newreproductive state technologiesis all butuniversalin Israel,a pronatalist 172

Book Reviews wherethe despairof the barrenwomenhas deepculturalroots.Indeedone couldarguethatRutiNachmani's battleformotherhood echoesthatof thebiblicalmatriarch Rachel,wholamented:'Giveme sonsorelse I amdead'(Genesis 30:1)"(p. 70). Kahn'sdiscussion in Chapters3-5 of rabbinicapproachesto reproductive technology is revealing. She demonstratesthat rabbis, like anthropologists,ask questionsaboutkinship, and hence the analyticaltools of anthropologyare useful for the examinationof rabbinicdeliberationson kinship. Interestingly,the development of reproductivetechnologies in concert with the deepest concern for the "reproduction"of Jews has all but vacated the relationshipbetween Jewish kinship and Jewish biology in the rabbinicimagination.What is most illuminatingin Kahn'sbook for those concernedwith the relationbetween Israel as a Jewish state and Israelas a democraticstate is the connection and confluence Kahn finds between rabbinicunderstandingsof kinship and reproductivetechnologies, and the approachto these by the largelysecular,or non-orthodox,Israelipublic. The state, for example, could not support, either theoretically or financially, reproductive technologies that produced babies not deemed halakhicly legitimate by the rabbinic authorities.The rabbiswould preferthat single women not use artificial inseminationat all, but their choice to do so does not raise significant halakhic difficulties for the rabbis. However,rabbinicauthoritiesconcur that marriedwomen resortingto artificial insemination(in cases of male-factorinfertility) should use spermdonationsfromnon-Jewishdonors,thus avoidingthe problemof mamzerut, among otherhalakhicproblems.(A child born from a sexual union between a married Jewishwoman and a Jew not her husbandis illegitimate, "mamzer,"and is not permittedto marryanotherJew.A union between a marriedJewish woman and a Gentile does not make the resultingchild illegitimate). In conclusion, both Kahn and Sered'sbooks provide a captivatingread,but more importantly,they are requiredreadingfor any scholar of Israeli culture,and eminentlyuseful for courses on Israelicultureas well as those addressingJudaism and gender. Ruti Kadish University of Maryland College Park,Maryland

Mitchell B. Hart.Social Sciences and the Politics of ModernJewish Identity.Stanford Studies in Jewish History and Culture. Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press, 2000. viii, 340 pp. This is a book about the junction of Europeanmodernity,Jewish life, and new forms of social knowledge. Illuminatingthe intellectualhistory of Jewish social science primarilyin CentralEuropefrom 1880, but especially afterthe turnof the century,to the thresholdof catastrophein the waning moments of Weimar,So173

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Ira Katznelson Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 173-175 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131801 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews wherethe despairof the barrenwomenhas deepculturalroots.Indeedone couldarguethatRutiNachmani's battleformotherhood echoesthatof thebiblicalmatriarch Rachel,wholamented:'Giveme sonsorelse I amdead'(Genesis 30:1)"(p. 70). Kahn'sdiscussion in Chapters3-5 of rabbinicapproachesto reproductive technology is revealing. She demonstratesthat rabbis, like anthropologists,ask questionsaboutkinship, and hence the analyticaltools of anthropologyare useful for the examinationof rabbinicdeliberationson kinship. Interestingly,the development of reproductivetechnologies in concert with the deepest concern for the "reproduction"of Jews has all but vacated the relationshipbetween Jewish kinship and Jewish biology in the rabbinicimagination.What is most illuminatingin Kahn'sbook for those concernedwith the relationbetween Israel as a Jewish state and Israelas a democraticstate is the connection and confluence Kahn finds between rabbinicunderstandingsof kinship and reproductivetechnologies, and the approachto these by the largelysecular,or non-orthodox,Israelipublic. The state, for example, could not support, either theoretically or financially, reproductive technologies that produced babies not deemed halakhicly legitimate by the rabbinic authorities.The rabbiswould preferthat single women not use artificial inseminationat all, but their choice to do so does not raise significant halakhic difficulties for the rabbis. However,rabbinicauthoritiesconcur that marriedwomen resortingto artificial insemination(in cases of male-factorinfertility) should use spermdonationsfromnon-Jewishdonors,thus avoidingthe problemof mamzerut, among otherhalakhicproblems.(A child born from a sexual union between a married Jewishwoman and a Jew not her husbandis illegitimate, "mamzer,"and is not permittedto marryanotherJew.A union between a marriedJewish woman and a Gentile does not make the resultingchild illegitimate). In conclusion, both Kahn and Sered'sbooks provide a captivatingread,but more importantly,they are requiredreadingfor any scholar of Israeli culture,and eminentlyuseful for courses on Israelicultureas well as those addressingJudaism and gender. Ruti Kadish University of Maryland College Park,Maryland

Mitchell B. Hart.Social Sciences and the Politics of ModernJewish Identity.Stanford Studies in Jewish History and Culture. Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press, 2000. viii, 340 pp. This is a book about the junction of Europeanmodernity,Jewish life, and new forms of social knowledge. Illuminatingthe intellectualhistory of Jewish social science primarilyin CentralEuropefrom 1880, but especially afterthe turnof the century,to the thresholdof catastrophein the waning moments of Weimar,So173

Book Reviews cial Sciences and the Politics of ModernJewish Identityoffers a keenly researched, thoughtful study both of the social consequences of Emancipationand the manner in which these consequences were assessed by Jewish social scientists trained in modern tools of statistics, anthropology,public health,and sociology. Astute in its selection of institutions(including the VereinfiirjiidischeStatistik);key scholars (includingArthurRuppin,Hugo Hoppe, and Leo Motzkin);and subjects(population, health, physical anthropology,and economic issues), the study invites attention to vexing issues for studentsof Jewish life and history and,more broadly, the development of the social sciences. The uneven process by which Jews gained entry afterthe FrenchRevolution into political, social, and economic Europe without having to undergo Christian conversion posed unprecedentedquestions about assimilationand identity;population trends and health; normalcy and exceptionalism; race and nation. As it turnedout, in this period,unparalleledJewish heterogeneityin the West,as well as traumaand emigrationin the East and the extension of world Jewry in space and imaginationto the United States and Palestine, coincided with the growthand development of new forms of academic social inquiry.Putativelyobjective,neutral, and scientific, discipline-basedtools in anthropology,sociology, demography,and public health offered a cohort of urbane and well-trained Jewish scholars the means to know and representmore accuratelythe Jewish condition in the heartof modern Europe and to deploy systematic evidence to ask whetherJewish life in the Diaspora could thrive in the long-termunderconditions of emancipation. Breaking with insular and elite-focused historiographicaltraditions,these social scientists, Hart shows, did more than record key features and patternsin post-EmancipationJewish life. Their studies of physiology, marriagepatterns, crime, morbidity and mortality,schooling, and work, among other subjects, also recast Jewish identity by answering such questions as: Who are the Jews? What marks their coherence and cohesion as a people? Which traits and abilities mark their distinct orientationsand capacities?Whatdefines the boundarybetweennormal and pathological? How can a plethora of trends in Jewish life be arrayedto shape coherent analyticalnarrativesof social change? Social Science and the Politics of Jewish Identitythoroughlysurveysa wide range of empirical studies and conceptual debates conductedby the first generation of secular Jewish scholars to take possession of methodical social studies of theirpeople. Twothemes dominatethe book. The first highlightsthe split between the regenerativeand nationalistimpulses of Zionists, who utilized the new social science to demonstratethatintegrationof Jews into the WestthreatenedJewishdegenerationas much as did oppressionand povertyin the East, and a diversegroup of scholars Hartcalls "diasporists,"who believed in the possibility of a decent and normal future for Jews outside Palestine. Focusing mainly on Zionist social science, Hart persuasively demonstratesaffinities linking their purposes, research, findings, and advocacy.This portraitof Zionist hegemony may be disproportionate. What was the actualbalance between the two tendencies within the Jewish social science community?This weighing-upis a bit elusive in the text. Where,moreover, shall we place the many scholars who sought to transcendthese options via "scientific neutrality"? 174

Book Reviews The second central theme concerns the mutual constitution of Jewish and general social science. In a perceptive sociology of knowledge, Hart focuses on the deeply contradictoryposition of the Jewish social scientists. Theirdisciplines, concepts, research language, and broad orientationto social inquiry were drawn fromgeneralEuropeansocial science. They utilized sources of data and key ideas thatoriginatedoutsidetheirJewishmilieu. Thoughmodernand cosmopolitan,they were embedded,nonetheless, within the Jewish world by choice and necessity. In chartingpatternsof conversion and intermarriage;writing counter-narrativesto combat dominantvisions of Jewishness and disease; measuringthe anthropological distinctivenessof Jews; and assaying their affinity for capitalism, Jewish social scientists producedquestions, designs, and strategiesfor the disseminationof knowledge geared to affect Jewish choices and possibilities. In pursuing these goals, general social science proved liberating. It facilitated fresh, even unprecedented,modes of inquiry.Even today,data and analyses generatedby Jewish social scientists in the early-twentiethcentury are still used (often credibly,Hart reminds us). But the utilization of the period's general social science by Jewish scholars also imprisonedthem within unfortunatedebates, categories, and conceptions, especially dealing with key issues in biology and physical anthropology.Often, Jewish scholars found themselves uncomfortably reinforcingwidespread prejudices about Jewish distinctiveness, even pathology, differing only in the spin they put on this information. Hart is to be applaudedfor not writing a history of his actors and their period that imposes on them what we know about their eventual fate. His stance is prospective,seeing choices and possibilities from the perspectiveof the actors on the basis of the information they possessed. His decision to frame the book in terms of quite recent discussions in the United States concerning intermarriage as measuredby Jewish Federation-sponsoredsample surveys introducesa slightly jarring quest for relevance. These extraneous pages do not detract, however, from this compelling treatise. Ira Katznelson Columbia University New York,New York

HadassaKosak.Culturesof Opposition:JewishImmigrantWorkers,New YorkCity, 1881-1904. SUNY Series inAmericanLaborHistory.Albany:SUNY Press, 2000. x, 220 pp. This is a book about "politicalculture,"a concept which, accordingto Hadassa Kosak "encapsulatesthe culturaland social characteristicsof a group and the way these traitsare demonstratedthroughpolitical action"(p. 5). Kosak'sbook describesthe political culturedevelopedby Jews who left the small towns (shtetls) of easternEuropefor the United Statesbetween 1880 and the Russian Revolution of 1905. Unaccustomedto large-scalewage laborin an urban,industrialeconomy, 175

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Maxine S. Seller Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 175-177 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131802 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews The second central theme concerns the mutual constitution of Jewish and general social science. In a perceptive sociology of knowledge, Hart focuses on the deeply contradictoryposition of the Jewish social scientists. Theirdisciplines, concepts, research language, and broad orientationto social inquiry were drawn fromgeneralEuropeansocial science. They utilized sources of data and key ideas thatoriginatedoutsidetheirJewishmilieu. Thoughmodernand cosmopolitan,they were embedded,nonetheless, within the Jewish world by choice and necessity. In chartingpatternsof conversion and intermarriage;writing counter-narrativesto combat dominantvisions of Jewishness and disease; measuringthe anthropological distinctivenessof Jews; and assaying their affinity for capitalism, Jewish social scientists producedquestions, designs, and strategiesfor the disseminationof knowledge geared to affect Jewish choices and possibilities. In pursuing these goals, general social science proved liberating. It facilitated fresh, even unprecedented,modes of inquiry.Even today,data and analyses generatedby Jewish social scientists in the early-twentiethcentury are still used (often credibly,Hart reminds us). But the utilization of the period's general social science by Jewish scholars also imprisonedthem within unfortunatedebates, categories, and conceptions, especially dealing with key issues in biology and physical anthropology.Often, Jewish scholars found themselves uncomfortably reinforcingwidespread prejudices about Jewish distinctiveness, even pathology, differing only in the spin they put on this information. Hart is to be applaudedfor not writing a history of his actors and their period that imposes on them what we know about their eventual fate. His stance is prospective,seeing choices and possibilities from the perspectiveof the actors on the basis of the information they possessed. His decision to frame the book in terms of quite recent discussions in the United States concerning intermarriage as measuredby Jewish Federation-sponsoredsample surveys introducesa slightly jarring quest for relevance. These extraneous pages do not detract, however, from this compelling treatise. Ira Katznelson Columbia University New York,New York

HadassaKosak.Culturesof Opposition:JewishImmigrantWorkers,New YorkCity, 1881-1904. SUNY Series inAmericanLaborHistory.Albany:SUNY Press, 2000. x, 220 pp. This is a book about "politicalculture,"a concept which, accordingto Hadassa Kosak "encapsulatesthe culturaland social characteristicsof a group and the way these traitsare demonstratedthroughpolitical action"(p. 5). Kosak'sbook describesthe political culturedevelopedby Jews who left the small towns (shtetls) of easternEuropefor the United Statesbetween 1880 and the Russian Revolution of 1905. Unaccustomedto large-scalewage laborin an urban,industrialeconomy, 175

Book Reviews these often poorly educatednewcomers had to develop new ways of dealing with the difficulties and injustices they encounteredin a highly stratified,urban,capitalistic America. Kosak demonstrateshow they did this. Her work is especially valuable because it focuses on late-nineteenth-centuryimmigration,while most historians of East EuropeanJewish immigrationfocus on the larger,more politically sophisticatedpost-1905 immigration.Her work is also valuable because of the breadthof its definition of what is "political."It deals with the political life of women as well as men andwith political activityin privateas well as publicspaces, including food riots and paradesas well as strikesand unions. As Kosakacknowledges, Culturesof Oppositionbuilds on the culturallyoriented perspectives of pioneer labor historians E. P. Thompson and HerbertGutman. Looking beyond social class, Kosak untanglesthe web of religious and cultural traditions on which the immigrantsdrew in constructingthe new political culture. Like many recent historiansof immigration,Kosak finds the roots of immigrantbehaviorin America in "old country"traditions.Eschewing romanticization of Jewish life in the shtetl, she describesthe privilegedposition of the wealthier Jews and their dominance in both the religious and secular spheres. Always present in Jewish communities,social stratificationand class conflict within these communities grew in the mid-nineteenth-centuryas the economic policies of the Czarist government reduced increasing numbers to poverty.The sense of economic and social grievance against"unfair"use of economic privilege in east EuropeanJewish communitieswas partof the baggage immigrantscarriedwith them to America and one source of the political culturethey developed there. Kosak documents other sources. Religious or not, immigrantsdrew on the biblical traditionsembedded in their culture;they identified oppressive working conditions in America with the slavery the Jewish people had enduredin Egypt. They also drew on the Marxist ideologies of nineteenth-centuryEurope.Finally, they drew on traditionsand ideas associatedwith the United States.They had come to the United States because they believed that it was a place of freedom where they could earn a living and be treatedwith fairness and respect, and they intended to stay.Therefore,they were willing to invest time and energy in makingAmerica, at least the part of it they encountered,live up to their expectations. In urbanAmerica, as in Russia, social andeconomic stratificationin the Jewish community produced"unfairness."Kosak identifies the AmericanJewish behavior that the newcomers saw as unfair-economic exploitationby the more establishedand acculturatedGermanJews (and laterby EasternEuropeanJews also) as landlords,employers, shopkeepers,and dispensersof charity.More importantly, she documents the immigrants'resistance. The immigrants'protestagainst sweatshopconditions and low pay involved not the disciplinedbargainingadvocatedby the AmericanFederationof Labor,but rather"anarchical,"often spontaneousstrikes;boycotts of offending manufacturers; and harassmentand even mob violence against employers and scabs. Labor protest,and indeedthe entirecultureof opposition,was a family affair,with housewives and children as well as working men and women participating.Consumer as well as workplace issues aroused protest. Housewives organized rent strikes against "unfair"landlordsand led boycotts against "exploitive"merchants.Dur176

Book Reviews ing the "koshermeat riots,"women paradedthroughthe streetsdestroyingmeat to break what they called the Rockefeller kosher meat monopoly. Kosak provides vivid descriptionsof these and other sites and forms of protest. She emphasizes the communaldimension of the new political culture,the fact that popularprotest againstperceived injustice was supportedby a wide range of community institutions, including synagogues, lodges, and the Yiddish press. Kosak'sbook is clearly within the ranks of the newer historical and sociological works about minorities that, while acknowledging oppression, emphasize coping mechanisms,strengths,and"agency"among the oppressed. She moves beyond documenting isolated incidents of resistance to developing the idea of a working class culture of resistance. She argues-convincingly-that this culture was more democratic and participatorythan the labor movement representedby the American Federationof Labor,and that its motivation was a desire for "fairness" and not for immediateeconomic gain. Despite the strong, sometimes repetitious, theoreticalframeworkthat runs throughCulturesof Opposition, the book is a "goodread."Using well selected quotationsfrom immigrantlettersand diaries and from the American and Yiddish press, Kosak brings dramaticincidents and fascinatingpeople to life. Culturesof Opposition is a welcome additionto immigranthistory,laborhistory,andthe historyof the AmericanJewishcommunityand should be of interestto the political scientist as well. Maxine S. Seller University at Buffalo Buffalo, New York

Michael Berkowitz. The Jewish Self-Image in the West.New York:NYU Press, 2000. 176 pp. Images are popularthese days, and even scholars of the Jewish experience are turningto them seeking to find anotheravenue to gain furtherinsight into the historicalpast.A spate of recent studies has given more credence to this direction. One hopes that soon, authorswill not have to begin their work, as has traditionally been the case, by rejecting the perceived implications of the adherenceto the Second Commandmentfor Jewish creativity.Michael Berkowitz has contributed to this developmentin his various studies on Zionism, in which he has argued for the centralityof iconographyto the movement,in particularthe images of Theodor Herzl, for the emerging sense of a national consciousness. In the present study, Berkowitz places visual material of sixty years (from 1880) at center stage and widens his scope and trajectoryto show how Jews "perceivedrepresentationsof themselves"and "appropriatedmodernmedia to exert a greatercontrol over their lives as well as to realize theirhumanitymore fully" (p. 11). This is certainlya tall orderto achieve in an introductionand two additionalchapters("The Gallery of Zionists"and "GreaterDeviations"). This, then, is not an easy book to review.I admitfrom the outsetthatthe book 177

Review: [untitled] Author(s): Richard I. Cohen Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 177-179 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131803 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Book Reviews ing the "koshermeat riots,"women paradedthroughthe streetsdestroyingmeat to break what they called the Rockefeller kosher meat monopoly. Kosak provides vivid descriptionsof these and other sites and forms of protest. She emphasizes the communaldimension of the new political culture,the fact that popularprotest againstperceived injustice was supportedby a wide range of community institutions, including synagogues, lodges, and the Yiddish press. Kosak'sbook is clearly within the ranks of the newer historical and sociological works about minorities that, while acknowledging oppression, emphasize coping mechanisms,strengths,and"agency"among the oppressed. She moves beyond documenting isolated incidents of resistance to developing the idea of a working class culture of resistance. She argues-convincingly-that this culture was more democratic and participatorythan the labor movement representedby the American Federationof Labor,and that its motivation was a desire for "fairness" and not for immediateeconomic gain. Despite the strong, sometimes repetitious, theoreticalframeworkthat runs throughCulturesof Opposition, the book is a "goodread."Using well selected quotationsfrom immigrantlettersand diaries and from the American and Yiddish press, Kosak brings dramaticincidents and fascinatingpeople to life. Culturesof Opposition is a welcome additionto immigranthistory,laborhistory,andthe historyof the AmericanJewishcommunityand should be of interestto the political scientist as well. Maxine S. Seller University at Buffalo Buffalo, New York

Michael Berkowitz. The Jewish Self-Image in the West.New York:NYU Press, 2000. 176 pp. Images are popularthese days, and even scholars of the Jewish experience are turningto them seeking to find anotheravenue to gain furtherinsight into the historicalpast.A spate of recent studies has given more credence to this direction. One hopes that soon, authorswill not have to begin their work, as has traditionally been the case, by rejecting the perceived implications of the adherenceto the Second Commandmentfor Jewish creativity.Michael Berkowitz has contributed to this developmentin his various studies on Zionism, in which he has argued for the centralityof iconographyto the movement,in particularthe images of Theodor Herzl, for the emerging sense of a national consciousness. In the present study, Berkowitz places visual material of sixty years (from 1880) at center stage and widens his scope and trajectoryto show how Jews "perceivedrepresentationsof themselves"and "appropriatedmodernmedia to exert a greatercontrol over their lives as well as to realize theirhumanitymore fully" (p. 11). This is certainlya tall orderto achieve in an introductionand two additionalchapters("The Gallery of Zionists"and "GreaterDeviations"). This, then, is not an easy book to review.I admitfrom the outsetthatthe book 177

Book Reviews suffers from the author'sinflated promises of its contributionto our understanding of the modern Jewish experience. Much more is expected than is offered. Its contours are revealing:There are 105 illustrations,16 pages of references,and 19 pages of bibliography,leaving very little room for interpretivetext. Even if pictures are worth a thousandwords, the minimal text can hardlyattemptto answer seriously the wealth of questions posed in the introduction(pp. 11-52). Though we are told that the book is also meant to be "an interpretationof applicationsof art, graphicsandphotography,over time, which accompaniedand fosteredthe ethnic mobilization of WesternJews in the realm of popularculture"(p. 11), Berkowitz leaves much to be desired in creating the links between the visual material and the social and political framework. How does Berkowitz show the contributionof the visual sphere to the political and "ethnicmobilization"and what form does the "interpretation" of the visual imagery take? I will begin with the latterquestion,as it relatesto manyof the author'smethodological comments in the introductionand elsewhere on the significance of visual material and its use for historical research. Berkowitz has broughttogethera wide arrayof photographs,paintings,drawingsand othermedia from archives,journals, postcardsand other ephemera.They focus on Zionist personalities, Jewish athletes, and political figures of an anarchistand Yiddishist bent, and on various paintings and drawings. His purpose was not, I presume,to reveal unfamiliarimages, as most have been published,and many are well known to scholars of Zionist history and iconographyand to studentsof AmericanJewish history. Berkowitzcould have easily expandedthe corpus by consulting a fine catalogue dealing with Zionism, where he would have found some less common images that provide unique insights into Zionist iconography,the place of Herzl in the imagination of Jews from different countries, and the role of symbols in modern Jewish discourse.' Berkowitz rejects a "formalistanalysis of Jewish iconography,"preferring "to illuminatethe historicalprocesses thatare accessible throughJews' public selfrepresentation"(p. 19). What this means is not perfectly clear and one is hardpressed to find a definite method to his use of the visual imagery.The images, though centralto the raison d 'tre of book, aretreatedin an unsystematicandcareless manner.Many are brought without reference to their date or context, others are left without any comment or discussion, and hardlyever are we offered an insight into the resonance (or reception) of the work mentioned.The failure to deal with reception is all the more surprisingwhen one of the goals of the book is to give substanceto the claim that"thevisualizationof Jewishpolitics" (p. 51) made ethnic politics possible. Berkowitzmay prefera non-formalistanalysisbut one still expects some basic informationon the sourcesthatconstitutethe heartof the book. Thus, for example, we are shown an interestingportrayalof Herzl by Max Kurtzweil (p. 59), but told nothing about the artist, or whether it was done before the Zionist leader'sdeath, or what the work was meant to convey. In other cases, we are left wanting either because we are providedwith erroneousinformation,as in 1. Rachel Arbel, ed., Blue and White in Color: Visual Images of Zionism 1897-1947

Cat. of Beth Hatefutsoth, 1996).

178

(Tel Aviv:

Book Reviews the captionto illustration42 where both the year and Hebrewtranslationrendered are incorrect,or because his remarkson the illustrations(as in the case of nos. 5254 and in many othersas well) provideonly minimal or partialinformation.Moreover, except in the cases of Herzl (where Berkowitz is at his best) and Albert Einstein, the authorrarelyprovidesus with a sustained interpretationof a visual image while taking into considerationimagery that challenges that interpretation. Just as it requires a detailed argumentto prove that Herzl's visibility and representationenabled Jews to feel a sense of belonging to an emerging nation, so it seems importantto addressthe way images of socialist figures facilitated ethnic politics. I am thus regrettablyunclear why certain visuals were chosen, how they communicatethe social and political messages attachedto them, and what underlies the method of interpretation. Has the authorsucceeded in showing the contributionof the visual sphere to the political and"ethnicmobilization"?In "GreaterDeviations,"he treatsa wide spectrumof Jewish political movementsin the United States, Britainand Western Europe (pp. 94-129)-anarchism, Jewish communism and radicalism, trade unionism and workers'associations-and a wide gallery of individuals, some of whom arevisually representedin the book. Berkowitzfinds thatthese movements and individuals showed a clear desire to integrate into the surroundingsociety while assertinga uniquely Jewish sense of pride that manifested itself in the images appendedto the chapter,but how these connections are made escaped me, like the caption to the image of Meyer London of New York, stating: "Unquestionablya favouriteson of New York'sLower East Side, he did not need a beardto be identified as Jewish" (p. 116). The other figures and movements brought together here, almost at random,help Berkowitz make the claim that they were all engaged in a new form of ethnicpolitics. Hardly,I daresay,a radicalthesis for anyone who has read the work of Chimen Abramsky,Jonathan Frankel and Ezra Mendelsohn,to name but a few scholars of the Jews and of the political left. Visual imagery has much to offer historiansof the Jewish past, however,its usefulness depends upon the way it is processed and interpreted.In this work we are treated to many images but left wondering what guided the author in this book-the illustrationsor the themes he wished to explore. Incorporatingimages in historicalwriting is not an end in itself but a means to widen our historical understandingand throughhistoricalinterpretationto furtherthe meaning of the visual material. RichardI. Cohen The Hebrew University Jerusalem,Israel

179

‫ המשנה‬，‫ טומאה והיחס ﬥגוף באסכולות ההלכתיות בימי בית שני‬，‫צﬥ דס‬ ‫<והתלמוד‬PDF> Author(s): ‫<ﬡיﬥ רגב‬PDF> Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003), pp. 181-202 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131804 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

a1

2D

54H

th1 13pi

17WD'

WIWI

.M11M

"Ty

l

m3plirl

0-'nly37--9

51

X?171r

in 15

Wi

(-'3D'0

'7110

43.9-r3

n30n.-I

*tp

T MYI'

3n1I

111273

5v

ovi-imm

n 7i nl3 e nMo7n1h3 ]

n3p4

tv N

7

13 0n

,1252 N

?21 n

7nt

01

7n-)

00020

19

,

11v

ly I'

17

9K

13H1

1T

71mn

1f

03

Y-7-9 T'W

.-M5371

I

Mln5n,MMT-IM71 -l

nomena 1 130

, ilqV13MK

,p-1-1-30D5Mn

7-I70=3 p1E

,;r13n7

01211''m

M

JE3

iyDv'

E19-23

l -91an

.l lt75nlln

00n093'81n0

rD17n1202 -UM589

l7DM0

rv*

-Y:)

KgMp ir

910:2

.'In

MmiloD-vin

il*-i

,nC= emla nrVp~m1 -

' 1 7')TIMD

,372

lur7l 55100.'l7 ulyzv7'

wnorrn

1n=3 1n151*1

131-T:

179'3

1 1Z)

In

.1*51wl 7mo0',:

11Y'2-p

l'lltin8n.lmmTpln

ny;vyx

p1 10

1311=n17

o713723

?D

11=710

Ilm7-121

nmim

5X171

102

970'

-9n0n

nOVMn 61

01 mw1nr

roo0l0i3n1n' .IN:

nlv1.0130 13YYY-IV7

011171MI

r1mury

on-rn DNy

}r n 5V

MMD-m1n

5Y

,NWl-r Tro 02900

-I

1

T 1 7 -liniO5

-

D

1p i

w

15X

.rx;I

VND

00-1-7

61

nr1m9

No 'In11K21

'unitol

an-gril

91 5

?y

C37

1""121 l r-11 , OnIn01-'121K ,D'3211101 .1019 3110nrrK'lIn?1071'

,(0l

M.G manh nrYmrn

1987ia 151070 I9DI58T'12

ofm Clas 1 JdaCbg pp.1-9 lng

137D1 711D f 511'I? V Ir1f31 .1H7oaNHea9lingiS'con1 the Tempel [sic] Peiod,7 G1ingI=n 199'2 -11 1011'13"Drm'rK1v '?mKI(47 rm1,'134n ourn'11'u r nn man1i .'3Trin i59 im 15'X 12 S03n 1"-' f1l 11713 DI.ErGeR17li Oo 198 09100-10 pp INDPlI

i A18 H7 Jewish Gynaecol o1gica Tets i fly'r' 'th Leide 19T9 ,O't ,7O1K1 fl1,2snn1p 19r'In fl1'~1y1'T' 11a OI'fl1~ lK~~ Bar7ka Agesn Mid1Dl ofn X1~jtn2"p7~1K 1 .] 1 L 3 1'l D'Tii t~-rlnSn 1 1 ti nt 0 0 }'K. 16 60,"I,(7 1l 6 V1' 2 720 11'3 T rm~; 3 100 74 I nsYnl }'2 =ny r7n1n0'011000 'tni'D '810101y7T'bn'31T300KK '% fllY' OO'? fbl ? i~grSrrI OKI~ OIt~,f'1'71T'Zlnflnl .;~~ fl1'flIK1D O'?2~1~ fl1nf 31 n12 -1 0 ,M5 .17Z 13-1-p '0 '1 0' 1N11 1010 'Y-1-9 5'Y ;3TV Si ~~3a'37a n'2 nip2 'tpan 00'hY X 5 7 ' 1 T ) 1 1 103.2 5 V 9 7 0117)l Y132 DWnn7 nn=XV1 - yY3 31YDI r1n'9M mr11--71715 1

1

1

np

,D'2-11-72ND D'W1

ON

DIV

xnv

1-7

M.

S.S.

The

Medicine

a51

th'xn7 1

5V7

'11nlMnID

MI'M

1D 'IM

1X

Clas

Ruling Hygiene

and

of

F3'9

the

in

Healing

KnU

1987,

105-107

[sic]

,(47

7DO

X

Pollution

Miasma:

Parker,

vor710n

R.

n

"3j

i1ni'

ry .(mnop

n19pnw

Barkai,

1 1-93V7

A

t0n-

inn3:2

1 17

,I-nlt

and

V-1"-)"n

1iSl -

:jKw

I7tu History

UltID'T

1 -93

rrilXlr1m1

n

P'1 0

,.1X-

031'Y'I'1

11ti5

1 0n0

,If-w-Tinn

0"011'01

R.

,9'9 )

ilyn

1 101w=

:U-1

=12-1

19 4;

Period,

Gottingen

Purification n1Xn3TD

5

of

Jewish

-9own

131

.Early n

'VA

Gre k

5y

-

-in

Texts

Gynaecological .67

Kxnv) in

'nY,(47

the

-y

100-103

p.

y-14: Leiden

Ages, ,5')Y5)

o D0,117PMIX

v>n993-

ripajtn

Middle

.129-62 nnnnn

UV33

1983, Irn

15-N-12

in

59

9K 1-)3

01I'3

Oxford

Religion,

10n

.1

:

,*Wl

5 'W9

,

5Y

cr

im

;-1 19 2

51y

10011XV

,71

aqn'*

rp'ni

*247-229

in

1"31 37

y- T'

-1Y)DY

L.P.

1 Y-7t

5Yy

DplD'1

UDiTnTt5l1

1I07 D m

,

58

Leiden

mtyn

-')t7rin

11105

4Z

-112YD

p.

Tempel

.(cT'Y53'Y)

-17T0 10M7

.52

'tY

pYn5

-M

19 8 60

7 1

'IX

1 I.

n~x abba be annoo

Josephus,

Second

1

5N'Y

9011rIMM

Cambridge of Flavius

Works

.1

-1i7-

10'

IT209

15 y

MM-l1

n117oi

j-1j?4'YZ

ir7

rivin0 0

O

31Y-10'9213V

n17Yn

I7

Judaea,

the

in

1=5.Hogan,

M1

:'3'T1

5Y inny

om

131-1 ?1VY

Goodman,

Kottek,

,INIM-p

VV5

nX

1K;

n-*in' ON.

V

1

1-25

171

13-K

m181th-

O.M)11*-1

1 1 P5b'lP-D-9

In 13

n131330

5Z3

n119-9

071'11311n

nsYbeO n170nwa173my~nn5f ?122f~

Myl72'

.'C"-j?3

1 71

1nomI01

1

X5

Y23

It

0 25

nlr7np . 1'i n

'01-

.I'Z4'D 13'E

ID1X.-i

1151-9.9D1'

'1 N5

nly-'9'1

MR-13

1=7

'121-17

m(T'r) (mrPmKn) ,17:V

01=n71

im3n

o'155:

bylDa o'weel~nt as~x; on 19

n

Q-)55:'T5 "IVPUM3 'l

1N

7 717

f13'-9-

ON

In

1

OMV75Z

5Y

M5=2

O;I

YTS

HIM

ninrl

N

135

In OM

1

INK810

nr151-T'

1V

1-1-

IDIN

,m1214111'TD

41151-9TD

'IM

I

IXID-m

XNM 5 .11177n

13M

r-1irin

5V71YD

.91 .71

0402

1 51

N

'951

3i1pyn

}'2

1M

'171'-

1:5

IV

H' 1 T'1 :K " l"1NRWriti.ngLeidenN n 551r '1•.?I y Judaism', Journal for the .112Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period, 31

7S. Ste1, Jewish Identity

l 1 K1 1 V7l : n -13 n 1211' o nn 21Py mr 15-) 11-'1-~ 111'.I , 0lnV',5 'a17 "'n1e 56 91,n1tf ,'l IM0131'i N 102) 5n6.,vp tV' ,n me-5a ,••aDn;'17

'y ,(D;"lI 9K

.7831

S.S.n

r9mv

0

?1zvru

-Y1xr1v

37ti

?;l'

i

In=

lx

11-1-711-1

KI

7

Y-71,

K 0m

x

rtfo'-53-13m'vin

tr0 31

3

110v7

-7D

i'w1-1gTriD

-311T3mm00Ki

inxr

w

rwy=

1K0

x11p1

p

Alexandrian Medicine in the Talmudic Corpus', 80-9022 Korot, 12 (1996-1997),

pp.

Athnes to Jeruslaem: Medecine in Hellenied Jewish Lore and in Early Christian Literature,

11-2";

DMn IN=P

5tT ,0•m"v1

"In0)

T y K7;0I"18,,"'17t , 1,•w'p

Dy~n ,I","•

'713 2000,i 7 p9p.33-48 7-9:Rotterdam 2t,31i517=31oll

c3-75 -P'iv ia7 0'171133 O1,•"n

.(510E ti "115I-D1,'1 '01;83

,'Er ",

;31t

n'K3Di

,

.6-6•D.i-

.',

S. Stern, Jewish Identity in Early Rabbinic Writings, Leiden :7,1NX ,"Tn 5V911.-1nom)!n 5Y 19 4, Judaism', F.

E.

51-71;

p.

the

Journalfor Medecine

Rosner,

in

Individualism:

'Pure

Regev,

Judaism

of

Study the

the

in

and

Bible

Idea

The

Non-Priestly

,'Wi

and

0.11nlY7'7

5y

917p4

the

'ny

)'

,(0"13M701

S.

Kottek,

,

1,V-1

:DA01

.'Alexandrian T.

91

/nTrm

.7 in

'Halakhic

Limiatations

Athnes

to

n

in

Slaves

Hellenized

IN:

5X-1VI'Y

IM;1 unn'n

Physical

in

ninmm

310-2 =

rilp Examination', Jewish

pm

'ty

W-1

,0-7ID-1i

,511-713

1-

Itp) 5VI

IT

5ry

;60-59

,-

;T

'tY

3

,15'W'12

'01 1

'tY

;48-38 -Wi

,

,1V

S.

Kaottek

in

Early

-7$'1n11

51-1p3'X)

.78-31

80-90

p.

From

(eds.),

Christian

Literature,

20 0, 7-1

33-48

p.

,1

57

7t1-

y .67-66'ty

,1V .57

YnPV

ln

al.

et

;nl')=

,15"X`12

-V1l

n5yPY

r

Rotterdam

;(64

56

13V

nir

197

'1t

(1996-1997),

mp

and

York

')

-T)D-1'5325

in:

202-186

p.

, 75N

31

Period, New

Talmud,

12

n'>191pra Lore

Roman

.(2000),

nXIDK1n

0011M0

Korot,

Corpus',

x'

Medecine

Jeruslaem:

TI VD

Talmudic

n

of

Use

in

Onn

the

:nxr

the

on

0131

!

1t0=

157bV

Medicine

Meachan,

,'n1l90

55 Ancient

in

Purity

Hellenistic

Persian,

01 D

;(13V)

of

1•"1

,n

'Yi

,115}W-1 ,47

'tY

,1

0-9

91 5

1 -7T

I1X

5n

IT -32

y1

,w

5z

i7DD Win

5v

jinun

vvnn

01

.71'')11

i-'

n7$3

,-in-'Tn

sior

El-K

UYN110

-717 7O

]WTX3117i

mly-

i

'tT

-'3

'95=

19in

-f-ini .1'

iiz

-s-5y

7t-93

ii-3vvp03Srn

10 01

Trr 3n

1TYXlI

OXYM

U-7

57

lTir?

1 mm

on

mn y n r nrxi

nimm

5x

51 ?n

D

5YC

YD

0 171

min0

vr m~;n~lnn

?=

ymn

01

1twnitl

135rmia nam

ix

.,;rm

-71y

'911-15

ET

5Y

n

-imbt1o1

on'gr1

3

9

na-rinn

mi-pi

lnn~zin

nto-Im

11-Igr3

1

nx n3

0

yn nvyn

0 n.n 1 7 n 14Tv i -17 0713 ]-r Ta wh i 1ri 'll% 0737'n3pn17 07709~rnT nm1Ttl ;rplilt"Ty 'oC~p3 71=n .;n90 ;It73;lrtYn p

m,

-

aevenanD;

5by

Impn7u -93

n1150DKOI

Dtr11

n17itv

nt

nirnw7n 1-7-92

1z

nK 1n1,

YT)5Y

,jwinilp

n:

,rr1x*

ow1n

arr3'rnu in

1?5

npl

K9x 8

m11nana

wnnin5vt

D0

n

111Y112

?I71'iD10

x5

3

1i

o'wn

1-95xv

D

n

,CI'III*'0I

n

mplyn

C313-1IV.-

-95--1

11noil1

P1a

-)Dpm v'KN

I

nnxy

13"11PDD1 in

178

I-T10'

yt'

x91

5y

a-pon

niw11 ayn

ivvn

111'191'71TS-9

irni

11-Ktll n

-rWioi5-9D5

DT'93Wn oyrx

,nin

Iryn1"i ,,'31iiwvn1

1

1

OW

-in-in

nywi

3

-)

n

131-7-W

0171"ID.-I

1-9:v

:,'=71 5viri

n11uD

DIMn-l

10.-0I

onvi

vniv mnixnti

nnnr

n1Dgi0n

trop'lI

5v

amnn

-m-gri

-1) 1x

MT1N

5v

1=

wv

zx

7v4 pD

opy2 .Orxn .-minni

?4X1915TE

-Il

Ine

.b5Y 'y

ow

5-9Y5

131H

n

i

l

71 yL

aqnhnit

101M

n

5v

1'3r

nbz

18

N

i

nin-an 17

on-'9npyn

'1r731

m

,.n-in 43-1-: i'T2

nvpn'

,1 1K

1-21

IN

-9

03Wx

'104p"

1-In

V-'

Ina

5

Dt-im

3imf

.-W

5 5"Tn

71 '9

aln.nn

111Y2211n

n92p

I-qnrb

7n

-11nnnl

25n -1

WIWI

Y1

np

5

nv

r

i

.

nI

nir-r1n

in

I

p

m

?mTrx'N'91

5V

1X

10 '2

0C

i'2191

'TY151T'3

1.97

YT'

113 ?1NKnm3 83irm0

n-1793

,

311372n

Knrr

wTn3

.

o7mn

:117915

IMMOP"21N

D0"9VY

13

1T;1

OW1

,71

.23,-TI

nX

-r

0

311700

M-9115-1'2391

7ID

00251

5Y

-r09ivy77

1 3r-

9

'MY-yP

-71T

,nint

y

1i

0y

n 'qT

Dtr1

nt-13

r3-7

noin

,75

1i

oll-I

1 m.9n

5v

Iyl '

On

and

'D

-I

Talmudic

.5"YY

.

1

11W=5

- ln

n

AK mmyl-71

1.

Ta-Shema,

mntln

-

10

X"y

l'3 'Niddah',

;X-

olT'3

1'IYD.I

E/,

12

,32

i,

.

7

0

"1I

54

:U'I

Northvale

113-128 p.

18

111ni010

Rosner), p.

(1971),

v

D

ni-mon

,1329

,1-

.1993,

5Y

1

p7

.,1'nmy

F.

by

Y'7'9

-txg'z 1rn

m3nix

edited

121n

.'915-1-

p

n-q-iinnnn n80

-Ynzn

and

;In

5SYD 7,1.'vn

'my,

D

nrvnn no

7-n- I'mi

-):

(translated

1=7

trT 1 :

5"tn

-TIn~ti

Medicine 1

virmn

1m

13913YI71

gi'nlyst'M

ni-89m3'ilm

Biblical

n-rpi

IT=

12

n

niyl-

11'alil'Tq

43--1

Dawnn

Preuss,

ninlion

ny11mv

7a ,Tr2 0

:;nivi J.

own

nymn5h arb

1-95M

'3

,PpnnrKunm

03

*

,rn t

1n

?,1

54.

10'TD

71D101

'30 0 ;r1mnu5ow 7111209

NJ

375-379 1 43

f

:M1 V7,70

1 p7 ,m,•nm1n .l*1'p nm

?mni,ms'Knn, n•

•

• nm, nmp

312ri• ,' I' '•3 .186p-183 ,176-174 ' •it'I ,n'i~wo ;'111t1 1' 1 3 . 13 ' IY 31 5'1I10 ' n1Y,I0': O3n 0, '4 1I31'•] '1371 1nn n'1, ,1'•'ai1-? 2 Y , 1 f n.6-47 '03 n ,.;nT,' K11,1, :in m",n125 •nT1 oIDV M-n n21,PMn nBn ,•?n3 ,n'11f - 71" 7-9301 ,13' 12-K1- 1'z'1 K'2p1n: 2 1 11510n 1-9 10 '171 nD1I'n1n,7113 1't3 5V Klp' ,lOT'11' ;WIDI,•Y

Al' ,Y

1'0

' ')1 -nI1 '03 ;1281 7y 13 n ;351 .'X '03?,12?p n11Ti ':M1= '33':M13K1 ;36 ',1, '13r1 .(MK1 10 ;"71, 'o"pi ) , fl1 ,m1112M ,ol' 'b m'l01 ;278 'Y 11n11"1 ;(1" l) Ky,1 ,m 1M'• ,"•1 ,712V m5 i rim norl n , .7yinn 53I n l r' m, n7nnm ,m n crip r) wri• mxno•-957m I I 11 . 1T5 5V7 0:1 1317 371"0 .1NM1T11 0o-11In11 ,3111K7127 M13?0 O'nfl 1n1' .721-1-'271 '1'37 29 011 11'71-

13V1M-1 0' 11 31M JK 1119101 .11n-7-12 021m m-1-10 i'1105 ': Ill-IMNo C1171' mv'Y1'o0

'5V

MIM-

x1NDxi

mr

Dt3

InSiv

,1 -y

7 7i 92-50'03? M11?210571n= ,10'V1m-)5 T ?x ,V

3'i7)

53

(r1r1 un3nV

,n il

,5.'9y)

mnnon

limn1

p

'9

ljnnni Inm -)Dix n'

3

IV=7

31 12

.71

'nY

,(0"=W11)-I

ntnmirr

n-Y5 n

r n.-

w

5y

ITVKINI"I

moix

1m1l13

,mr7

X

.1001

,5.Y'Y)

Int'3D

5X

.r ran

5y

1yDin

111-IDo-I

myo

mmi

ID tr

In ,

'

onz

p13

i

q1 1

n

-

"W l .n

nimp:l

jimn

oS

j`n1*

,(18

5V

x5

im3

-intoD

-IM1

4D

-1iN

nnnnnn3

n1n'5

5V

tfny-7 ,-IX o

na

P-j?31y12V

0n-'M

1151112131

?v

,o"2

13

i"l

.(q51-')1 13-15

-1 .710n

1n

P'- i5

mvi73

p

03v

n-ra

,n90n

'

1Y

m

mcrs

,

31-P1

n7i 1 81

0

0'"713

:v117z

11

12

vD-9

;K"Y

InTn

71971rb

m-'119n

flin x -ri w

.D0,13MT

-

1

,'tn

'tjY

,Pnrinx NTommlr

11n

1271 p

*36

I n7n18n

imtt01

11=001

,or'13

Is'1 =1

,1 4D

rin -T

-1-1 1

'VY

ymw i2 valm

3

"

'ty

111112

,min n

rluni;

-1 n111

310

m0

k

ntD

;281

,952-950

13

Itm 3

5 3ynom w1907n

"S'niT" 1 nmm1

.55

'3-o

N9T

1

tY-9 0

WR

;M

5-rin3

11-9011f nM,131'3V'Vy .53 ,44'ty ,V"lph ;935 ,1•, .

,'N/?

2"N'110"X1IDN

.NIW-iv

nizvr

ril10 n"n X,71"M :;1XI r ,285-284 ,281 ,f'03? ,1K1 ,I11 K2,"1z l1;'"t .nn12011~pY ,n'y'on i 3111-123 'tY oInx) ,281 ,285-284 ,1 ,11'tD1 yT5 .1-"1n t-1 Dp7

)

i

tPhipm

W137M

mir7i)

1 10

5D

Inn".710-111

x

1.7

njipn ,l71p'y1 ,'?'?) l0'1t'n ';,•K 21Dn lp

ainT3z

ln1P

n,?

100

1-13 1,1MbnV

1 '- ill2D 1'7$3 1'i'w,

JIM1

ri 3 DT'3

'

1W

1N

,176-174

mr;

,NIX'1

,'l

.IVDW15V

-rI

=

.186-183

lT'Yt

n11Nir

iKix-

nK

.10 -1 0oNo

5Y

0"171

,4"3TI

n

n

y

MP

'tY '1ftj

1 1*

'

53

rly3m

71'13)

.1*

.023M,17.1

.-K'I 1K

.0-p

10

,3-10M

T-S-1

.62-47

5:)5

7-12-T

-in

.(X"y

x-s.-N7x

M115Ibl

1n3nnln

5n

-I=

10K

In

Kwr' itM1

:13

131Y15

V

=011.71.071 21151K 14 21'1 u7vi imn 5y i'3 ' L;r m 5in nnnnl 7 5v nv3 7ln bin 1nn

) tWr71n

pou

m1 13

'n1

;T-

.0'ti

:* rl

X15n

'973"

P

-3'T

-W19wi1Dmm

r151

n10

,t'riwy

081n7

1X

1n-T9 t1

5x-iv 3

i3

,In

l .-

,ny

;Dpo

x

n)

-75 9

1K ?1H

'7111p13 :1-

) 1ri-nwi

y

m

;(t"y

1 13

,DnX9't-

7-M715

.I7 ,1"2

5tD

;278'ty

,D'XI' wp1P'1

:11175M

-SK1D

-Y 1 0111a tr ,2nVn zy 1'?K17 ,

IM 1 3

71 T YI-7-1

wim

amo

511 ;ry1

T

;K"y 1

0

,miv?:

:n1x-

.575

I1'3 n-'ra9

imm

J(4

It

i119

.57)yY

13 1n:

1

-1y7

,1

n

'P,17

y

3*

ma11tm

r 1ini

'V

.(3

9 nym

1 731

5

wn3r1 -17i-Y

,5-75

T-9

'mW1)0330821 ~r "73,1 n nT.,In 71"no nf*,bX 1M01',,•m1 .11M: 1-71M ? Y 100:371 ,, MUM 11*191DT 4(5,7* Y-M 1 13 Il 1 0DOt

1

11131W

13'E

MlY

0

,0AY11M19

x9x

,m7n2i

M-120n:,11-11-

73-7

nn 7',MM153n ",,p 0MU113742

X

03

1

y

13-7

,

bV3)

i':,n3n 1173)071

'932 181 n12'n13ryianm,a,-nn7111DOM8 '1V n D'nl 1.'MAn OM -9?1371 Yy 7t-930 .91 ? MV11 ItaIn M-7r93M Yp3 l pf

try 3n13-IY3 ,vnnh*x 1:

M uilm

0 wl

quA

111-933 riumm0

aqmrin

0orm

tD'ro On"mD

quW0

31191514 and R LaW' : 90 nU.?y .i 1YnyM. iman, ?y 9M nyl

e

T 1e ea .),1 Ye71.0

o

1

-M

aY Scr1ols FotD yY

1)971 X51D

039217i

C021

,D34T1?

IN

(11-110n

JX-Ij

1nReac tITT"M

-12V7nnI

I 137 :atK~r ytaz~ "•: 1-13 11Z15 4n1VM741, 5Y n('1;1' 7,'•on ;n'n'nral) ,*1:X07 -212-10 71p3 192 73'a nK~r,• P T~~5r IM•n7X ,";',•r ,•aa1M= ,olz ."nrorn'•a~n: n,',.x'• DOpT 1K

D213

0 C-31"IZ7Y1-731-Kim

OTjI1 by

n10;r

P'3"T

00390r

'9M

31

D'Y303

3- :TH.

m1000

010 Mi"11,

U

9

70

13M

411YMM

vinni 1*1YD 113x* 03209 On.3 00'2 1310 n ,183201nh~ n09170 nmlia

$DW 18

RsmiQrn5IN J.L.Ruinrstein,'Nominaism an nn T;I~C nl~l~l~~9 n~nlE o~rt-rn n5~y 6: nsnn' nn:•Pnn ma abmn nntomn ,nx nly 52A n7nt:v •,,pa; e sn Law:O .Rabbinic DSD, P~r.n.,L/ n 2 my (9)p.51 115 ",,s'n

*1 M

7

111MV in.1

051M

I=

NX

.n' nno•nr ,,

?

"M

M7171T'9311 1011-1.-

.T-IIIVI

7

743V7

M-1 1

5V7

5

'31-71yo-i 113-700n

3511M

OY

n ,bon

,

181M

mnn

1310.)3

1"DI13

X1M

,131-111-

0-910n•-V7p M1371 -1= 1M-t14Ptm1n11113 1"510 ,")•= .L"TM ,2o1 ,,0 01,*= D'min~ ;I317819

1381

a'ynl17

,00'910

'Ali

Irtu1

2122

.'*"%T1

in:

Law',

D.

and

Dimant,

min n*r nr0rni1a7 1Srnmon J.L.

U.

1",7:5-9p0' hD w t Inyn ,(i",n-' .00n1- 'nym

'Nominalism

Rubinstein,

Y20V-'7

Yft

MYMV

Sea

I 5Y

7'

Scrolls,

IMnot

=2

MY1i

Forty

Years

.Leiden

Y-1 1

Qumranic

rl-lV

:;l1n110

Research,

of

19 2,

,'xf•5 v'•lol' ,••57n' nn and -in in MM1

y

M-71--

1) '

Realism

and

Dead

The

(eds.),

Rappaport

nriya-Ir,

i

118900

n11'31DWnx 0810nmnt

9

229-240

p.

Dy-y "l ,m'r 5V 1a11-ponn

.RabbinicLaw:A Reassessment',DSD,6 (1999),pp. 157-183 J"TM nYate Ibanmr21e,'The"O3X217 M n1 1 D5X"It 131. 'M-13MM b'177 ,-rivy t .it nrivu' 1111DK VIM MT 0 T1 MY1213 ,8ON 9M 1 1M ' ' . -5V11 11 111V D0'" mp3,u 1n13 O ,IXZ03171 m 5N 1o ~117y V1,• , 'PT97 97 0110'9 0175 Mn 930 I-106 0312; ,n :110351 'Alb 5 ,-DM V :-"tM 13.11X ,50 ,T)DIM3 "1'T 1 3 012 ;T1'31 '701 "n y 57

.(DxW3v

D2"tw5

mrr-)

oyr

5y in t ynnP mTn1 ,-,1n91,11, n5n7 lnu•N1 111,•D ,•,•,,n 1 1113nnK n 5v 1 $1n i5.n ,,5 .nin3nIn: C'3'2)

Dryop3 M-'5 J.M.

Baumgarten,

O'"OTTV

PC "'NU

r3man

5V

nU

Din

-

a'lp-i

myrimn0

n1

'The

Dt310n I-ID*

n

,71m1irPD 517

91 3

4QZadokite '-10'

,"ni-vil

Fragments ,

,pil vo-935M.In

:n1x

17971I.i'l

m

,(

(n0n

W-1MY)

41

(1990), 4Q560

1-9

l'inN

5y

n-ni

J S,

Disease',

7101)azln

.jivitr M51

Skin

on

rnain

iT

ny-iri 5v13

'm1'2

qu3v

nTami

1-yn

nv-)v

Dinn

-l'9

'1nM 52 1nM17 n,, 1•11 ,n v i = A jiri IxPT m1n1

'

"o133>D1N1'N

rbm l1

pvna1

nW

p.

:;,I7

.('Irlnil

9X

YL71-7

:11130

.153-165

,'atP

'13

n n5r , .465-453'ty ,V1"=•1CTI'1',710V U9011 'nyin n1t ,-)Op'3V n 7 ,1Nb71n7 ,ann .75.715, ' OW3 " :nxv1 'l1 21-)35 5V M OD 7'1:2 1r:1''1; .'1v00 0-p-M 7lntip •8atX 31o "v1 nn ,'"ID , D ,lD-E12 ) ,'M59 ,y'31 12j(,,1" ,1 I1W'0 pl171 ..26-18'8y 9

31

TO

WW

7 1-9110 NnDTT nira mol n M-)rwn5 n 5vDM3INrmn1 rr1i13 1- .'1"Tf3 '. i5VIT i3=7 D'1IM-'yoYfM0010'1 'TH,5"Trirrim0 -17=-'Ti -

'3rKiimpi.

;1

.(510 r'0y2 ' pKrmim'i 0132t l=75 n1 m;i ;vn 'nTn" l ''t3o-7roi i m r n.i in '-i'l' rnIn 1'ni'v ,rw737

1 niP' il o 11ii5 n',iy

198 :18idtem Sf11dnn, PP1.P

DeaTtio d

11071311

C307 D

11711

S117 'The rip'Ntua Foation 190

,Dnam

1=2

1N

-MI3

.0712-11

mnI'ini niy'i9

'

'pnu

IY

-

ft

o2 5fPuriy i1nn0

Ilimbil

5V7

n')

-1 5 and Hsry in the Ddecl TemleScroll t1-i13i1n:L.H.iSifm nxn(.) Archaeg io o'~~rpr'~nim~;r~~ o'yri' o ,mi: ur "' o1r mi'y irnt~mi i;r'x~~ n~L '9yl~ 0 09 ;r)~ 710 n'T3'E Sh1f3 ~ f11i3 1990,1 mp.83-9 -T132 n~ t15DN1 " 1 .1 D 1 1 of : Truth: O ShT3 Qmn3 d dua 7a Views ,t,'-la "Rabni 1n9Y YD- Di$~ $"TR7rIni5 $'' i 18 nls130282t~l~ 129p'"11 yt' ;ImWl r~ nlm$ "~fi;~D3 in?;'"tn m0192

,oWnu1 7

M

KII

V7

5rin

n

,1011 1 1

13112

DN7ly'T0

,-371

7IW=

,jVniftl:

5 Dn

wqxri5

1m

9m K

1 8n

-inim

071 10

I- T

107M

.5"TM-017 03')X7

?Dfool2'

1imw

q

0 YD -W:

rnmri

n

nnni D' l

1371 W-173 lnl

1

M5

qI'Ty'.1

0-9=17

-120

M15=71

M5

Y23

i1urm

n31v

07M

n r1rpn

5Y

m1'8101712191'7'9

p1=5

n

ainxim

TIM

]1-1

5V7

0-937111

Y-rT

M'f

11M

?13

2n-13

-1 m

0709

3151D

1n79=7

1125 TlYix)

11H002

UnU17 111"nD ol"IMM11

1M10"M7 M

5y

'21ID

oTrA

9102

1n

.7iT

I 1 =5)3

c('9p-125

In'

rrun

I-ntwKI115

mriv

5Y

11131--1Y

tr

1

In '92

,"M7

05

1=7M0

1-

m11

MV7 .

D n

EW

.1 1-

71 3

-1-12111

MMnl'i

'IMMM

INT

131 H

In

nt1-1 1

71-711113-12

R2711-7

i-ID171m1

0nln

MIMMr

In

In

-17

avrEDiv

n 1

0

?1071 0

-1 1

MR-13

n

Y

nown 1?1, nobn;-xen ,'anPY L912n2 12nat w nnwanKnx 51pabf13133n7Ke nobanr~ 1

M'M

.1n301N)372VM 1313nnll

1N1

,M')DM7Wi

0 1I

D0'D

0n2XM

IJn D

n

,nKT

k

IMn

"1.137n

'The

Cult:

Qumran

Sheffield,

1983,

Scroll',

Temple

Its

Exegetical

p.

165-180;

in:

L.H.

'The

idem, Schiffinan

11-0 1-71n

Scriptural (ed.),

Archaeology

History

Schwartz,

'Law

and

Truth:

On

Qumran-Sadducean

and

Rabbinic

M31V

of the

Views

M1M

Scrol

Temple Deviations in

X11i

'pin

,13mun

(ed.), and

ID

n-10S053IM1

0-93Y10

Brooke

and

,-111V

*9735

mllo"101D

71NMUMV7

G.J

01 0

1100217M

Il-My

Foundations

p

5V7

Sheffield D.R.

n

n

5Y M-12

'7-1

in:

7

11I-IN-

.J7I'3"yI

Principles',

-iDnnEaD'tml

13N13 Nn8131t1 V13M.-I

OM14

0'l10 1N

.I'9Y5

m123VV11

X72511-M

1-3

13

xw

7P11-73il

"13:

.=IK=5W

T

ON

1

K0-M17 9

5MI-1

MIMI0'E1

n117.7

nz

H1m1v1p

1

017101

KIM

u5i

oPvirs-n 5v1'N

.st'r

n1y-T

Dead

Studies, of

Purity Sea

19 0,

of:;1

Scrolls, 83-90

p. 51

the

ilol'-

11112nO i5 Tp 30n12

'=11

'T71

iX1iT0'

D"ip?

IK

l

i'i1

vflpm '2 ?ny2ll I=TK '2py ?y

7ripy

x?

1itmmNo

nml a012r7s

jw1nv

,IM31-nIV70

121377

'-9:)

t7'

07

,1KT

1y -:Inam ', nn9n

93 ( inznw 'n 791-nn' "I'-rrwrn n ? 11 J 7n I7D X7111 1 75X 'M YInr ' 'MN8=R ?nf InDnn 5n Y1" .1ON.nnronnmlvia

T IM.

ET ,xaegesis of Mikra

111and B6id, 'Use, Authority

in: Samaritan Tradition',

1 I1 ,fDl3;"l

Mulder, M.

.9n'i1r-mirl

OV0013

n57

`IVt

Mpjnn

07

D'95-11-

,XN - 137M

n~nlV

VT

.7'17-3M

IX13n

1

7*nnn

5Y

ar? 1z

12'•0

rivy

n

-Tn-

,

47 XnTD

17-

niki

p(1nv0

r9

1

079=5

Iz

' .542, 1128 '

,T •,n

,n mlnI

r

'l

IN.41l.13im'11 X1 -1

TD1n.9v

min@m

z ni Di lp fn ,1,n , rt ,n,'nn L. :inrn5vf 'or13

n

fm1•

087 ,M7

Tn7

-21D In •

5

'ITO-22

121nm

))nvtn

AssenMaastrinht-Philadelphia

- "1T

vo7

Kwlp5

,(Y

th 11Y

(ed.) 1Mikra,CRNT,1,

I nn tIrlp'T1•1 r~ - (• v1' "'7 ,'•)k

.11-915-1

712

mi

r

1

a and Theology and Pre-Tannaitic 1989, pp. 595-633; A.D. Crown, 'Qumran, SamaritanHalakhr 5 5v 1 i 1 tn n MY1 91:5 '~ 3:l jVOt K.181 t ;4261I ;480 ,'i , .(227 'rrt10• V nKV 48p 11 11M8 i 5-rm -x 7 D139-13 137 VM17 7WM12 71x 7ly ' t.ny126 49,21rn 5y.I nTI ,niv-7 -)zrym •381•ir "-7v1ni 'y10o-

J-ab Migrn

'91=0)

-IM

,Xh51

0OY

`15X

l'i

A.D.

in:

Judaism', 7tn,

17I1313

H.G.

Liddel

L.

:*(n3IMM

:21 n

'ty

in:

Tradition', 595-633;

p.

Lubetski,

M.J.

'Qumran,

A

Scot ,

m1nr131-

n

1=3031

21-)n

'Tn

(V-Tin

YV0t

ni1n

5vW

Gre k

Oxford 17xi

In:

47

nnytin ?y .542,

inivDnn

Science,

5=7

DaWm

nutw

'931 -1'

-imnn

.181

1

;426

T

1t

;480

C3

,10D

.(2 7

"W"I

n

'n n)

Milgrom,

:V17nl

n

'Xn

5Y

tribin

5v

input

nym1n

rinmpon

,215 ':)

rnn

't1 .264

1 28

94-101 n3

1".3

,92-91

'3"

Fgg'ijvotq

48

,71011177

49

't7Y

I

9213n

19 4, ivoviN

ainxi

yovatmov .260

420-441

p.

:5:2170

p.

Tribute

A

World,

19 8,

nyDYnP

-1 70tn

1968,

Classical

in

nimn

Eastern

Sheffield

'-t9inn

In '

Bodies

Near

Gordon,

London

n'DNp

13'11Tx

-

gynvoq

Lexicon,

Jim)

Ancient

H.

"IM5D)

Greek-English

27913

the

of

Assen/Maastricht-Philadelphia and Pre-Tannaitic Theology

and

.(181

J.

11Sm5 m1y3nim

.;1rrzy

W2

D110

I,

Halakha

Cyrus

to

Womenls 1y

1

CRINT,

Samaritan Boundaries

nlon"Nl

.Dean-Jones,

My VTT

Mikra,

(ed.),

(eds.),

-

-1*n

57 R.

al.

et

n1'1Pt5nk

(

Mulder, Crown, M.,

-InIT

and

,IXT r13T)

5:

.1y

.4

,==5179

5"Tn

'Use,

Bbid,

1989,

'n

lo

T3

12193

.Dean-Jones, Womenls Bodies in Classical Greek Science, Oxford 1994, 94-10 1 in of Mikra the and NDon Authority Exaegesis 1 -'win ,( Jimvp) :;tX1 Ilim

,I1"T

Samaritan

P'Y

0102

so.r11=D1 1.R.M.

1'9'Y5

l1121"10?

1'-= ;mrr

3DV

50

a1l 1

m-

2'1

rlmn f'7' 31i Ct '170 f7l3?271 0n M 1yl7 o4 = 1 in'?A17720fl"72 0.:jjMr 0"n 1 ,7K70 1'.

' '=n=1 =1

fn

1:*iy

p'0

1Kt

,77"-771'9 n lp2ni 2 -n-Im17'1.1T

7713?"D

(2) ,o1mnS (m):n0'i,mp~'1nm min"-11mp n1'721•,r1' 0n"3ma n,m' .1-m8-1m2n - 01' nylI71 r (),(r1) 117 , n 'In7 :0' 17K! '0 K 7 131Il tYX ',3 nn11 .11n W' , ,' ) 71 K 0 '72 1 ' 3 i71 771'7131 1'0312 ,7' ' .0 3''11 12• n n'7 i 3n7"'" :2lK1p'nm ,,,,1 r'0•n,"l my ovn'n 1M Y7 5y .nmlri JIn',n.b ',-T 1 In",r ,,•?1 02 1 ,)11V7l ,E311-Wl7i .0'213 -1?3127 ,}81=1? ' 111WI r h7 13 T N i-179MM 0712V 01-71 7 MI,1171 7

'D ?V 13fU7. Tn111" "Xi' 13-11n

0371V

I IY02

2 273

1'31210

IV

*1

-

.-i

13D-9=N

131,71

: V ) ,K 1I3?197 ' 10K 11'? ip 71371'I'3 7"3371.:1111m 13,01 *I(17 '117n' ,7" M11 17Y1"102'2*IV46:. 7i0'172171D51 I'71V 0 3y? 4y 17419 1.11 77p2 17i01Y 4T "710.7K1 sn1771 '717232D'K17K f 17'7T7D'71' 07'5 ' ,'O71ma 71T 711 '3 i'? 7713','2 30 11v ,1137 1 ' .011'1 KID31,'3' 1' m 03 N' i' 7710' .193 77 17'?K' 1pi7-T2 ')7nV175V11'KI I 0'21.D0iN 11072 15yx D 1 'in?1'1'8n i 1D ,i .n nv '3 ID- 7mm n ymnr ~y .(3-H ,N 11')n -T V71D ,n9 m 1n0l ny: NO,•,N nO'n1n 1,Vn,#, 11'3NX 00XV) ,5 In n m ?1 y1p "Tyina yvimnmnnn n l't "0'c t1rTmy l nnnn19W: n10151l=1 7 3 y 711 ny1t517Ti ny nx nm n' :0117z n .(plnnn~,livt , ,,ynn ,lmm T"r ;:3"Y n'r3 n;11 ;-3"Y 1 1 7: 715ix-in ,i3v10on31n ]I- ,Tiny -00-) 5v -rn1 1'-Iniv ,-1107T1111 nin'innn n 1r ,N"1X1 'ny In'i1t9

.1]'Nl 218 -'-3 M ~y .172-144'1ty,M'17'D13p1 ,34 ,26 111-Yn ,7' 'Y 44 "In117'=2 ,1 , -n1 ,-I:'•T ,' 1Vn1mmin '011 1noinnymnI ;T,'111,t'3 ,It3 , ' rinjn "Ia'T vl ,,I ;Ml'T;Il 1,7'3 t-NI 'r ,~91t•pl'"l "r) ,njo1,71rl " ' in it 5V n -i 3 r m1111-mm tDi-inx'1N1

nvy"T-m

cuNTn ('`T'Tnn1v n1T

My=7

71i 1nnu n,,nl my ,C1iHmSn t13 "11Titn nyOn lio

pnr a "3 ":ilnn onrrr M'VIT

0-911D0

" ,'KI , 5pvt

-Tyin$

D'Olt')1

,"n

1 DI

fly

"237

7m

i)

3

'ty

.(650

1 313VX-l* 0313111n0Ma 11m1nnrn2,t TrrnnlL,i'MinN [3,

m 71i1x t mntx "i N n mmzina nr n ,(nIln-)D5 .72"T 2'-11 Sg y"Tn XXI-3913

n:1'

11'902

T

n n11,1n~1Y1-I) 0 T '1kiNi

.,n2 'Cn, .nTa•,:ANnon l,:an0n01 nnnIn~;n "fnl'y)n11"l'0 l73 xqa rim My .1 -mi ny,-2 n14:25 10"11I3 11nmi" 121n11' 010 rnlhmm

,0rim mlt•": lan ,1 T

DniinD"i

"l mn y , ,,:71n•3n IDm!11011n ,"l1s'1 n,9yD

t'

A,1 ,

D"nst

121 1 5V"iY n20.71 ,70VV13 n ';,` ,,"m1n

'lPI1 ,,rn m,'l'l2I,",11011J-l

;il

•;17'11

J: my 'n=n n) '3 li'1Y5 ,(p .'!trh .148-125 t•,i', l"-11n

; ' l:1 .

n1711

,"

1•

446

210: ;1 1,-nI 11'Tl-tT1 nmISnnlz 'I3 ,(19 nn5, ,:'1,") mn,• *5v m•nn'l, 27in'imtvIi l,: onn i 5z? 11931-1 111 .193-185 n3 irh ,('i: o)•,•' m-TimPi'I 5V ' 7p1,11 n7W5` V -130n n,1nDI n MInn 1,

12 0'lXpn131trxa91Pt 5Y

X9 s' ?DT',%:,•07r,'1 mt

-r ri

13rm

5n3

tri

n oinin

qz

n' :=,-.n1 'orm

u"1

ny

(w"y

3

INWn10 nU'7 ,y-n

X-1m:

ranm)

,T

Ir't"

01OltIVDn V ,-W1 0372XV7 D'nt 7-M-W-W IZD 17'9N 0t -7' T l 1 ,TK 7 '1 N18 I ,l"nW "I8 ;IIM ', 0-f T'i71•J "111i1T ,"1"0 ,I" 1,7 ,,"II , M-01 = "J1,M 22'O 9-1nl '?YM l# ,73tni m;I " lr" .'1•0170 l7',MM =','-~33 .r'r1O ,,, 111 MIt D 7151 5V'11 nr, 5V101111'93M Ir'1, l,1''1 7 t ON in•,'I 40,"1"•M., 9',:•,'11 OK D 9013 '.T V'1') '3N 7 •P -i.-"y 41'•"11 01Il3"n-111 M K5H

03V'

0-931V

'9X'

M5M

,3 .V7 tr11p S' X2,115MV "t ')13V'2713 ': 7 'l-:7 'r,13T;1'7n 'D'3" I11" nMK1,17r ,ID"1 .)K 15 mn5 ..iT n l im-11 lY .'1pt t'DlX5 0 W8 t 11-) pi 'i9 t:at1n' ,"n =7 0-TD ,.(l7 0.19 DW31' n 5' 2 . 7 1 MI ' D 1 MUM M-WMM-1 OnO 11:1' 1'-2 Ml-pj 13'N

Ip

Pt

In'3

705 '11-32 rnl '"912 j 13"'"ID2 "t"1 ,41 .5"nla•I 1" :R,"' , .-b, ,' 1311MV.71" M MT011W22 Q-510-7-11 11Mm11') M1151V1-kl171";1n1• 7K ('1 13-pn ,ni im•313•,•y , 1123 01m 11-120nn315N113M '1'I;7• 21 7911511D 'num1117D 42I1M"7 'n1 M"4 M

,

.21n=Vnn V70%oZ MK 1.75714,xoMI ,17n3 Inn Xc-,13 pownn ,,te1v1r ,r1yO 1n5.7•5 -'rm:~ D'olyM n 013 0'.0V1-" n3 11•N••

m5 mn-gi

7pm3 iOn30

5V7

.23%'27

n-7 nM1371MIX 712.71 15HU7 , -1-9M.7

')32H

710171

5v lIM 7-1-'917113-7 21-1-71 IV1121n: 74-gKu 1013 '"' M5 'V'X5inDW 37" ,,7?1Y '"P 0'• 11M,'3 ,lt ;? ,,' ,'rT'.3) 5 V7) VV", 7-10 nt 0 n ,tov 17=71r 7=D23 orl M547-6 '3 2-,1* ;777 '"73 .(':t" ,3 M3',;)•71 ,' I .7 n7 l4 7l-3 ?,7 "11Tn D-~•y 7-7l" 15MTm •5, .7,y ;m61'7I -iPrrm 1 -1-

=In0

'9W

.10101M

-137

1 03

0-rI ,=0 :• '1nyb

5-y5n,

,

31

11MOn , ,71 )7513)I7X1ID,3 0"n (136 '1y MV)1371'3.(2 T-1,"1:2-73 7"5 7 01,71 11261 2 010X31 mmmmb2 ,11Dn '011gx oNu nr1nnm :*M .m71vimimn-' Y31I'MX

0

9M

7

.(!)

'

YD

3

.K"Y

5

D7

70' 3

1-1 71

9H

15991371

0'3$1

:mo1

alp-mn

r1or171m

.[M'n'B

,'o*T

-npaln

W11 71

5D

m-tion')

0713N

.13-'5y

5Y .(x

'TM) M173Y

CNOW

1 '"3) "

,3DW

'1'IT

,1ix

D m1331

52H

'ny

1' 2

3i

myyt

5:' 01577

DT

V

,i i Dt 13

In

,YV

i

.3"y

7-931i

]I-Tin

42

j1:

9H1

;(651

jri191rmD

'l7n'

n

,'mK1 i13

own3

nx i1)

w pr,w;i1-

Xn,

x11l1517PD

17yl

;

nMm

,51=Dl171

'nY .1

51D

511'3y

]1o5

1211'3DA3

un

n

2mmri:)(x

x

-qx=5)55n

7-

9n-9tronn

Dt'3

my

.(x1i1ir ,091

-r 3

,:1

:071

41

,x120

a00

,01

;t

019'Dl

,;1 plt

.i1x

,X1P71 1012n

'9

l-

,p'-1'-1

,M

V-1

N ]m

1mv

f"T

'tY

,761

:-71 lZ-

7;l

n

w'v

1711n)V ' rt)

3

,

.7ib1-nT133

-

trDom-D

anm

'97X1-

o-1209' r 11MI

3"y

IM

'V1X112

't

1-ro'3

121.10.19

,1

ninnp'3

-gn.)9

,1 I

'n1

Algasia 3

,nlI2Tt

n7im-grb

'p75-7 )-TD

1

.2"y

0X

.

-1

10

To

5y

OMtMn

N

)

17-9

Epistle

0'915V

0o'nim

ct

Nm

.1

40 L3,-y5 ':)lIm 1 31

1-

't1

,5-r3n171 1'-9

KNIn)

,0"nVD1

7n3r5

OV37

ot

rr21D1

o

,- li 7

-W'

,=013:3u

'ny

V3-71

1(644-643

0

07

'ty

;(64

'M

0 03NW1

32

-yo1Hx31

7-

jilmn

1 ":13

'01

D

183-176

15715

Y11'115D

'13'nro

,0

't

-1 .-HO

01113rim2

'ID

n1S5117M1pI

,0

3-)'

Y

I'91

-

O"N"71

'1 "

,MV

X72 5

,292

'1 37&

Dt

,Z

,

1 YM

.(I

11nA2 , I' r 'T T flor imn ,;14N'~1;I21;Ilh

I-M

3)

;(2"Y-N"Y

"" 1,'01 3mo-

i -Dpi

ri.-I

il

1

43

-T'932

3'1

?lm

.1

ivy:

tr1r

mmin

.T1Mti

1:5 01

D

'ptT

J-t)

12V

W

;1PfDl

HM011

M21 n

1K

n517

M 031-1

1-M1

0?1

1 -'-01-9

Y.1'

I03

iV

-1111171711110'997

73n

5V-t171

X.7=203

0'171-T

P9IN

X

21

13.71-31.1'0

'95-1-1 .1111-i

I

1B

11-215M-1

Y13:2

091I0

VM5

9

YIM

I-IV71-2

712

IM7

17

7-9XV-

C711-71

Il -711171

1MDin

7-D92

15

W.'193D

18n

1317

-i4

134-IM

9X

rM5 11-blYM ID'

-11:2

o=Yn

25

In-

'91-9nn

5V7

=71

17150

=1

71

'32

41

n"Y'im

p1nrnimm

31712

n

'Xi

5y

i

71791

9111"M

71-7-93

M50

11=2 38

KS

.2371"S"I

IM M4271 1 '5M 1-97 12=5 0-9515Y 'yn 0P4lt1 D-'V 0171-D 0'pn 1 .0132~1~1 CV19 pil Optir n 1Map' 00'3'17~PPtl00 ,W11~pl011272198K ,03nl1N

12-10)

911V5

-51YD

.TIMp13 70

UP07lSi;

7.9

xW12nrlInJ XNW

1K

711504

;1

r~nl

3

njinvi-a

M5-71437

V-7-1=71

,1x1ip~~ 7X'ln72i In

1

'nY

,

,012 .18

M7-1

,3"2'

0i115 170

;T-1

:i'l

,IN011T

,575) ,0X1-p11m0 711 1-0.M ,;1 WD110 ,575 1 D'971-l ,t3'15Vl u1071,4I3'31M- :111ll 21

i 3

1311341=2

"A1

M`'

D

5

n7

1 5.)In

Il $'DN

;

.C'9Dy

T ln

8m1

y31;

l71 N

),

1'p

$SN ?.1

02 M

-10

PnX ?1

'x1

1-9x

"H

5y

101 1710

Inv mx17l 1:):0 '

l1ril

n I7nV

1

:-1 12

.78-61

'

171500

,t"ly11

711.71

0

0n

018

,l

:M

D'9711itr'vYr

,V

.268'ny

5V7

.l

l(VID03

z

nlon10

39

1113'V T

zr1nym

:5Y

W

1 13n) 1

1190','5-1V

93

'T-1

1TY'3I-

,mn7

,(Mml

N-

i

1-

38

7D15fnlxnll-;lv5

,I

l

'Vy

"T3'011

i

17213

Vtn

'l 9XNTI-bV'1

I J Uln IV111V

.15')1X935 .140-135

13pm11:2-117n M

37

5y

9

1 -1205

1D

1

'1DOpt

n1'3n-

5y100

71390

IDT1

iftil i'2-

1nvD5

O'15M1

..0-P71 11-a

'

W

17nn

nllpi~lan i

' n I) A

,1)311i

.1 1-p12

pnrnrn

nX

lnl1

31N

tI

'ny

7-yn

mmov5lDow

Y-17-1

5Y

M'2

31 3

1"'M

0Y

,',-I N'WTAN 1 1*1

11541n'5

1KT1VIn'3

lIO1N' 4X E

M13

71N-10

f15SY

Mt

07117'2i.7

3

"D13y

11-MY

7 1-D

tlo ,'i73X71 ,y'n1 n Irm p5 nmmbi

1)

In "!)5:

:1 0

D.-I

13

"

10wnm

.MOnt

:#f1 D7"

,I1-m

nk

n~l

,(V

.387-386'ay

M'1D

.w'h1o"n1112.0

5120

l

115NM1

1-:10

'ty

.Afn 113

IT

9

,t3XN

DD3

N7D

IY;I

DO'TIV

N11-T5-3

J71n0 M

mnu

il1y 71

7133

In

mir1m

1Il '3-

1

1827

5=0K

Y1'TV

1$1n=3:35.;1

.1m1ix 1

;

.(645

31 1m17

P07'13M23

Yxn2 1=M nN1

t'Y

yti-pm

,

1n10oY

1212

$31v0 M33W'311

=7717

5V7D

1-m-in

In'n

r1o0n

wienn

itiftlM

131"14111.1

rx39n Tl 1 7117

x

Kw

-TE13:15

o: 1170'mi39X-

,70

'

-IDX

0471inn

-)DO

T1119't

,

an

I~Y -15'9;~

15H

.1

13'17

,i 5m

3

-inonLrm5

M1i'mbn

3

nx

lz

,IT

13.71

71 3

An

-n9m

ntob T

0-DTI-M-11

.I8n1I

nNnit 10

Y-P1

15-MVn77

,1 1-1

CY97

ON

S7

M

:0-1M

5y

'n)I

ID1

Yl13D

-11.15

I'm

N0-9MMM

3 Yln

Uyn3

.-17n71i

-in

'1"I

P-DIt

I.ltO 11-117iM-1

111133

01- ,1'30

7nn10

3

1

1311171:2V

M5 71 7

pnm

5Y

1 api

KXit

1

.tP-

w

X5OV

5:

TM-

NI17

71 71

0.7-921

tin x)Ptl

1:5

DS13"V71-V

5H

1

CMMM-

37

7171M

qilmW 1-1177V

":

1'713,7151

W'l

7 T'3 1N

'P-9'-1

017na

1K7

179M00

Mn

7px

-Wtyn

JDOU

11=715

,IIpI7I') 7 TI

1 5x-'ir

r-',

'i

IVn17

1m

m

mm

NX

0n'1

91 5~

ri•n

;'5.T

l

,2115nn 71 $01

p013y

X5

-9:

M 1-12

'51Y

4Z inn

3b=n

P )IT

a1' 7

1Y' ,

71

1 2617

VI m7K

78, ,I"a 3XV ,

97 1p ,1f71f ~9~7 M ';IVM '"07 ,'t D311-1 5V7 71 -

13171-M'1

,ni-no,

-1'9-7 1 2~H

,'31S .(T15-1

.

D~i 171"TV

1XM

5VD*C0

n ,n,

tatr v=nDn

n',=

n I1-ri pin

wrt) X.(193(10

awyn1

tri TI

36,•.n

111271,1'ni'T "D2711

'?31,(T"N)

J35.M.;1;I 712'

21rv01 '1

'-

5t

781=0113-7

1 'p"

17r 'n~,

71-S W1-2

5y

18

3

'035 ,`-1

K71

cn

trpr7%

1980), pp. 157-170

DllMY

18

71

IMlifV

JMMI-

0"17,1-71 -n97D ,-nD1n IX' I-135 'T3 ,11n~,r01,oIn'TOhn,7, n7n,12 ?15,V011m71n 97 77 '103 9 ' 1'9t313? '9D i 17 .0T 1 11-7 111K S.J.D. :r 111',1, ,'rn' 'n 'n 'rs7 ;'i21 .(mt 13-' ) I•"ir•p 1f,-" 21" Cohen, ;(" 'The 'N ' a'orr,O ."r7 1, .n"n .xfl?

:,r711n•7

?1

K 1 , 5 1K '13= K"K7 ' ,1017?0 "'"nl ,rni nr nm D'3•"i;' 'In ;"m9 3 :i7'IM0•1 1-T Controversies about ,1'l0 ,nI.Qumran"m7 'The Pharisaic-Sadducean '1Baumgarten, Purity and the Texts', JS

5V 15X53&7 10 a

'T11-' '1'12 1K 1' Y2p-15 W1fln2 18 IN)01'1f

D`I

DA31)3

7=1

-711201

M1lM

72VT

DW111-=

of

113 ,','n

Yayneh:

Pharisees,

(1984)

and

Rabbis, S.

32-34;

p.

;76-11

,(5"X

0-

'The

Pharisaic-Sadducean

')=

Baumgarten,

TV

)

Schwartz,

of

End

the

and

Josephus

,'iTni'

,1"Dn

MVC51

.2"y

myT011 O"Y trmynA

,t"nwn 5t3n11

m

705.MI71 fI

,"JYM71=

'w0"n1

,nminyni

orni'1-12

1 '07 '7'nOr -01:11 :

,'A'>191N

TI7YZ-

" mT

1N7 w

-b- ry

1)

nvi

n-9171nan Controversies

.(19 03W'

-

mix: D

.D~rnma "x

Jewish

jx:

Judaeen

Politics,

1

x,'

n1:2v

.134 ,23 '?•

g

3-1

,23

nl-13

,

n

i

in-K aN

N"8 :;IM

'D

1

07Cn

=5

.38-11

,1"71

Dr'rr

1-n

98 -')

;45-44

'ny

157-170 36

o1-

-7

5vI

10 D ,INWI'DOV

,ln

JS

Texts',

(rc'T

p

34

35

p.

ID"

n a

1 34

M1

(1980),

D'iqn-17ra

-'r3

5,

TAN

-111137=7* 'V7

19-'i-na

107

p.

M11

.Qumran .31

1 t-1

r r'i

*tv

the

19 0,

:;

(15.-b

and

Purity

HUCA,

11T

,• ,11'-I

't~Y

nt5opn'

n

about

,5'y5) vn 1 , r'nm1 ly :mKlDom ,x21N1:2-li

Leiden

'qy

(mnn"•

Sectarianism',

.134

J.M.

1700ip

M

( m-71 v xI 1 -im'nD 5"npD' -"onnI,6;45-,7 -vn3 , , v nna ,1 '9w n -y inPn

•1lTnM" ID'3T 11Ix=15• "D:I) ,"V1 x5 o7 'The Cohen,:5Y

.S.J.D. Significance

J1

PoV

' ,'0;4544'3101 2276 1

I

,262

,76

,(anr7ll)

'ty

.101 -9

101-MI

'2000'9

131301-nl

MI17TI

2r:t0

ji

m

$" ,Tri

i

iE11m0n

ilyn-ri

0'1 n111p7il ,Wl "tn n,'9311Mvn1 n-n? nM1H01-M-nn 1"0%79

,MT -

s-1

3

1 XM

-7Y?5Cln9-

i-71115

J.1tPI71

037

1

4MEP7

01:2D'

C

M

IM

s-7

39VO-jD'

'2T'N

MO-91

1.n 11-n1 nM1v

9Xn '

MD'3"Ti

013-1120V 31"1

0.1171,9317

r-M1

D

C1-9 Q

*M-in

'9XV

101*

7

17

8

3071

7 1 ,"TY7-9.n 71-7 1'31nl[n[173n71D MN 3nnn-1En I• t'13pn .nr11'3 -l2, 'X'1220 93-99-7 5ZT K5K 0 7 5 lorm -ulnv n33.9mro DaT Ty ;m1Ki;tpn a'b11017 K173 09000lD; 7fSN I3 ,nrK 011M0-779178 T}2113mm I N p 1 .122721) 01'T2.Thib2'0 15M

.5"Tn

5V7

"IM0D

5V7WID

0131V-7

1

171I~~l-

l311:-071'

C3DID

-?n110""InIM-D'

131=7

1

9'TE11--1,1

5Y y

5VO17911

79-i'T

7

D9311MV7. 2

)3

il5V

7DIV7

1 3.

1 n X' 3371l; 5V7nImM 1 Om1 =77 n: Ynn,9• nDv l-F .nS'1nDI 0~'131V11•79, n9115 1-1 nl Ilr Ol"n.-I ~ f31- ;1M Y11-13 VI; -17Tln .7515 110IM-131777i 12.nj,nimna 3 ,mram,,•: ,m'I nv• 1n 'm1-9.7 ,;•"•, tInl,7 :'n9,Zv .317,293 5 1 X D10 T n -~1 n I-jnjV,-j

-91 V

11]NI3

Mnln ,11M•) -M1'7

57,1731 V M-1113V

9Dnin

1 'P1YMMt'1' 75' 0171-37

11

7121

0-

110-.nIm

n3D5 M14 -ID51'

l

tDl3lnt1t

W7X

.(18

5'lY5 iy

,

MV7r

Kmn

1013

v

nYNx'

0o

rqx*9

v'

gK

13 t0v n

1 ny1

13')Y

')01')

,Tln

$"Ti

y213

,v5)y)

;3"Y

71 5N

1N

1I

nl-7Tn3

.(x

,T ,01

819011YMV 7

M15n

151`l'

:013011M 5"Tm

71 m

WD9O

namDM

Ylna

IT

70?D

'1

In7

5Y13

1-913-

57D

1J

17 '

,L/9~13Dip5

'Tit)

.(645

,M3

7

3T'aDn X 1 D01

1il

'T2`7t)

,915-IplX

'Vy .J11'Dn

10

1,:

71irlWI

,Dx

01170M-

, 1111-71-7'r1-3

[Y)Vn.ftlib3

v

)D-5y

1po

D

pli Ym

ny

n1

;m

,prnnn

-3 in

3

7'1"9

8-in)TY5V. 0 1

V-)

-inx?

w a~rimmi~

-rn

,t

iaw

1 7n

t3,31

1K

nin .3

7073

plTE7MD

M70

W-:211

nt1im1i0

r3

5v mt

'01 1

-3D

,W3pt

31nfl n

M'131-1=71

1M

aq

xmznn MN

-7:17)

5y

im,23 trl-p IX)

;n5 32 JIX rlNT

0`7

MY

'sD

Dn'09i

5"m

D

51170

-n-ina

1Mr

'15D wvm17wI 0

1X

9

XMIPD3

-T"T

1"'l

1=

13 -.1-1110V

1710

Dtl

rimq111poD

) '-MI-lwl I

5v

n

wirmi

.-0

,I7

5 Dn5

3-

"In1N 'I

051Y5

71

Kn0

5"Ytn

'91 .

17-1112M

I"M5

.('.-IY3V7

-

'9215

5X'•IV7')D

ln ?91 H

jv=

1 W.

mi'nm;v

(aqvrari

pg0=

,1 1nmn

'yin

D'i'n

:7-93

.71

t'

t D'n'7rw

-,?Do

t0ln

5vW

15

-I

'91-

'TY

11-MY5

nimno

1i

r

M55rpq

;M"y

n9m

,tKx)

m-rn

DT

,T'P3 U-)IIIV70

2

O"T

1- 7`

,ri-Tgr

'Vy '

jil1n

11

9

,(18

5v

7]I

1- 1

7

~~ 3~1fDI

,293

11ri31n

p

101-9

01M3171i

1 132

.Tl3'1I'D:

171D

N1t351

nVmprmn

Y1;103

'min

091211

1ID5

1-

30 -1-M.105ln

'939T1= 7,t

TInplnT20

M5n71=

11"M5

l'p

0M 'Vi

;160

M'"17

.586'ty

l "D

'n'U

.7-1

017

1i 17DO

.317

'O1V!DN

5V

,115191,71

I7.-rty

iDI OMKi

'I

131"'M

"D

I'D-Y

in xl

:t1

1 3.1'

5X-V7'9'711. 3;

n :It(inM1

1H

1-

ri-9Titn~il

0-

01-7171-71

7n

,'1• 0'3V',13 92I

5y

5"Tn1Y5V7n Rp y,•pg7VD1 mnt~o 7T2 ~~ 3'7rmK

.1,71

'31-InIV770

agown

7')2

7709177

32

MR1 3 131

IM

IllY

" n',7X:VnT Mn.in

')Z

V'1-1D

,ji217

prTi

.M17'

1'.-1

n

"t "Mi;• l .65.71,101-'1-01'-mt7 ]'2 1219 ,00nl5D AnY

0910

7-925

11-1-71-11-1

mx

9pil m

r

W

?v

11131-17pYI

rvln1v?

-9n-12-a

11-931-In1m71

-1 X?

133:131

*M

cr-YrIMIN14.-1

1 Jim

0"9013112i7yv

Jim=

111 3ii 29n~'n '?i rn'ff?1K'n,1 ,, 310512t31?'?1 I311K 31'31 011 13- 51 5Y 01y 1M n1vr 1-t1-71 1 Inn11.13I311017V0 31-735M ,

71-1y

,1 101

nJ

-a1=5 '2 1i I11212

ntrmi

ilny

I'M

-91*In

1

0f1 ,11?5'?31;1

31D1p32

31'

1 ,o'f~n ? 0'fl '1 I3n '? nrlr0'3110I' -3

5"Tr

-i-TrlADW sln 310 1tn2

1-

-14D5

.np11n

1rnirK 11171

I1 80

1

71-1- lIMT 1?4Y

-rn

Y

31 In'nK 2"Jr

n03

033nim.13-93nv

1

iv

13.931-lnivr

nx

'.11ym

5Y

n K 31 pyn pn 1L= l1D' 1n' InK'- '1T3,1t 311110' n'r10 w o5'V9 n3'D'1 nliV nn-g

3' 31ll n-1n Ina2 iKx15 Ir'

1'.11

5:

0"1?9?31n11 137111, 1221'2j) *:-li

l'Tn' D'1W7j731n? D9ll?'ml Jy D102 1 .11'-It?-n0i 1M11V 2vpm

kuJnDti

Onnil

91 5

I3n

-7inn

z11ivinn

K'?7 01 1I"K1'2mIn1

M-7

mJn5

MV

1H

I'm.-b =On

TN 9K31KT3112?pY21

0 'V M-9'12KMM11312M2 "77V .T'n 01127KKMi T0133101 t"y-3 1120 KX?0'311n17. ' I "1.) 0'?' 21?7 1M '2 It K1'72T.1 o30.( ,1 ) '-131-31Y KM52'21 7110M.

1101DO:

5n

'0-11-1

X5V

1 MTI

5Y

0121"'

M*M-l

II31-1MV.-I IIII31-1MV.-

1I-

In

M715V

1113-127?Y

5Y

1-1215

5"Mn

MI

,.-IVyn5 11-915117

DIptin

9M

-1=5

0171 30I ,55D2 ,01.71 10731 1-9 -p 1 7n :t15X 9 I ,K 'D'YO0)11T?5 Y1212ip , 11K' .('?'Y'- ,M 7T 5` 11Ty.nlp'75 1'92'0131-1=1 " 31mv '2n nx-1u,3KT '2'210 i iT2 MD0'112 3111= 1K?131f1" ;1*-1r92 ' v 0"11Tflm ' 1'K1,n1MKM1'7 0'1'1 D1120' 712'?12n1N13"KD15K 04'2'1nn p'1p75 '2 :715Z

A211

13M.-I

V`-1=770

-171tI

Inta

D'MDT;'1M 07

9 1-

m1-Dv

no010

M'li 'I'1-1Ti=Yn125 y 1T1 3111D02 ':T10'1 fl7

".0 ,0tY

;2"y-X"y

71 -9p

,-1)

DII311017Z

101

0-

2:9 ,1

,1I81

1-7-17py3

.I07-IM

sIT

"3mn i1

5'911-b

'9Y12

31?

0-1-9

MIM

M51y

' 7"Tn M'-p32 31151-1'2 MI 1VM71i5'r ' im ,172'T1 1'l2'"M oi'M ' I02'2 0'p'0O 1IK3KT .110 .10 11-PY'yy 002310nn 1'Tn l

3 Ml '

O-I5

MI

IlOltx l"Dn

([Y"l1]

0-7.-l

D'31-31-17

.;1r71i

,IDV

I ,(n101) 11T1irn 0'05 -Tr=? CI1-

111-1012n2

,12"71

15

O"311MV.-I

xK' 7

MM

1S1

041-7tE

'? 1'mI 03135 9m "?1K1,1 K?3cr il "94

0-7

13

3 mIusb

n-vin)

5V7

M-1-T

1=

31

0no

?Y 1y

?D

,'0/1 miX'

:1;IM

,'YV3

79

."M7

Nx 01931

-7371

2-1p?7

fI.-IV',"Tn

n1MV719

t3

.5"yy

1

5'j

1VXI-

lNp

N"y

-7 ' ft V7Oil ' 137 I3DY 29 XVT0n n1 1fiv)a M"M3 1 lll)'?f U917?1m.i S. Lowy, ThePrinciplesof SamaritanBible Exegesis, :I111= ,Do fin p5V n=117701i -nMYIK Leiden,1977, pp. 109 ff., 500 ff .8 y1i ,5')Y5m11M-30

9?V5 31'13Y

r1")

arpin

riyv

nx

n1

5v

-m-inr'Do

:aq3vinivi

1-)35

5l?

1,T

1: jou

5-wi?

wo3

5"t?

31

?8 1K K1I D7, K31 (, ,, r7'53:;m;1n) nrl; J?• 'n7'

5'

1

:01 :1,

(K 7 , •UR2 - 01rl -jlnjM -1"ly,- (2

22.t3-;- 3:"•

-

0,T1'2

'or 1'131'D i•1V7Kin K1i f'21Y2 1=1.011-1 ,1K 1l1

Y2~ l n 'o7'rv' " 22-71 7•iT•i 07fPl1T3 71110 n7nT .?11-r n'1' 0172 7t'3 0t .11Tr7

"(2

0'1tvmm 1 n y irr-1niv mrmv'n'f 8 'z-qB5 .('rT7 ';10R fl7'7'1 1? 0o') l vamoi oDT'urm 7-1n nDrl"ti 371=7 pir" 12i,,31rrni n" 0•0I'.tn7'2' l1r,"l i',n1 flKo, 0 -TTI 01551i3 T 1-1t V,7 ,1-15115V77717W 31=1 -7}/ n11-31-n ;n7 7}24.-01 Kin jK~ ' 25Kn , ,121T

31m

nion"n

'2. 0 5V700 ,,N 0'n:, ,11K3i ,"3y (2 , ,1301i,1 ,1721 0'ly. :i 5vi i2p -11,mr 'L"Tn f11•012'" 11:iT5 '1 .'rinnl ny•l,' na'on' -ry819914 r2 ,i y.8 431-5 26nlT',n 710' noin W2'T

-T-9

1 D37

7T'9W

71 M1

5

-Yt

.1K,iin3

-1Tim D11=77 7 n 0-y5Y1n

1D-

mann

ir 13'i

015-'1.2-77

-01

13'-17277

OITT7=7

75

o-11

mno vD

017nlnn

DT

032

ft

O"31"V778

45 D

1 0-9,'7

1i

i

07

03'KX

DIUK

11

.0-9-Ix

090lopo0 1t

13-11 07 -11?7n

OP-'I7

(71

rb-95ri

1111XTD

trivinim0

y

-)z-7ir

0-75

.' D

n1

-mn

D

"Mr

27.5, n qilim 10-1

7n

I=

m1M817'

0 13 71:20y"t

''713'D"31fl?1 1D'ln31f31 .285-286 ,199 ,141 'V ,Dt 23 K01to) 1,3' ",ln1313D'Y31'm1r'1 ,(:)"1 In

,1

.n1

.rm7-rT'r1125 Tzr 24 r7".1 37 i .11701.293 'ty,7r'1 '0TI .285 'V3Y,IDM 25 .(18 ,9'Y)) 1n"-Y 1l112 lit Tr17•O DR .03I ;iy;1 1'T3m "1"3, KIM -T5MQ 771 -1 121n((nD•Y 13n1,•031 )'31v17l ,` 11n5 '3n) 15'•, 7l,V3 ?3 l n '-1YD, D 1PO'zpm1 NXV I1Kfl TH1 Z371H D1K .r1:T oDr 1im .Ii*1oXvT 1K1nl DlD' $1'1 DT'3 D''ylot 15my 5P D ff ?f 3 ;.133K " 1.7'31V1? 88 T'Krr' ti f17. N ,1 IflKtlti27 1710-7 11011"3l 11"i)C DTln 111-Ol-7i'5 .n-f1-3 ly•m2 5) 1:1 - 1n ,V ,tV ;O -XI l ,587'ay ,(18 5'7 . ,X 0'73 :t:5=5 26 ,9,7 nn1 n ;'l 1-3 ,n tPST,m713 K7i;(XN"Y ,N' 1 :XID U71T "I"o n y 27 DO;X-'7"Y ,01 T~ " '• 3) 1 X)DI -n117n3 .375 'Vy ,(Dt) P1725 P :1reril .(XN"Y3,1V)

9 '1-i•' mfu il'p:Q r"My 13"m•0 Dl1 ' .r'V3 I'".1 m I 7w D.i iV7X 10'YIN wn 01n61 1,1 1 -15DN -Ti o9 P9155:) 7t- 1

-11-Tin)

0t'

1'13DW1-XPI

,31'Ti".7miralg1n 015-12n

vr9m '1717'71

lIN

73 -73' 1'2

71

xI 0-

0131-01nW0I

73rium

vx0111

11=20

-1:20V7 M Cr-lo a'rX'1 17 I3 1'l

o0

8 -MI-M

5y

.-loin01 ;-T"y

0'"Tti

'-)

D([T"Din]

28

n 'l1trn1I1 5R r3N ,'7TY

111"31

1'

mW

5TD

x"bW11

tr3nn0

,N1 97

an3

rl'v '"

,;lT`3

I'l1) '):

13?

' 31-72 ?.'?fl 4) 0'1l830m

?X

.33 H"T

-10M

IN

M)?,-b ?,,T~;r~~"n ONE

1 7-131- InIVn7 O 1 -92 $IDI1211n 1"M7 '4 2I1n8'2?0 1 Cw f13 ," qrzn '?' n ' 1 3 o3310 ,1KT . -i-'jy IntNnxr

7

=

,P.1

M -

D11-l

;1

I-):

DA

D

4 *1

071V0

-i-rinin

32

,=T

1 3-Y

:cr9rwrri

OV'

177xn1u

c-75

2I'1K73? 1'y

i1 M

131121' '3 5 1:n71

'n.114 n

11"1i,1 I

7h

nyn

,

v

n'an

1 H0

-r ri

-9?21-1?tnr

13MM.I .117*?37 D'2M7n7 '?r1rpi1 tnrwjm

OnD1i

143D

5y

.I-rri p'2'21

'Tflaq3i'

slnD

min3101

l5y

5y

O-3im*

75

M18

1-

n3

NJ =17

'M

'11

1K1 -M1331 S]I 2'1

102'7

51 7n

-1r1l

7=27

MIM13

3 5'21 011O'K i

011291

TD

n-y

-b=2900

T

-iriDulyIn 1'7

73

id 12n , 11 1'e ofS1amritan Han=h11'31

-'In

OM

12=

1 2VI'

K'ny ( '1M T1Vp

1*1#1.07'1C

I'M

w31ri17ti

r R"3Mi1ri1nip

.Y'IN

7

x

i r mn

?y

V

*112- I-ran 4t4- 5y rin'-71n55 Im3 -1nit .93n 1nIp

h] 2"'-" 11-1-2 ,p1'9N 0-1nvi

wimi-

Tn37

'01

70

01

?:

DT

ihn17f 2 1mr-'1' ;1* I-

-1 1 P'Yf13n111 nnyz

.'M-1

m11

,I11=

"T

1pD- 12B

iT7217

IMV7

3112-9VIru

'9D

0171-1

1;11-931-1M

IM

D

1

IV7nt'

131-T

O-T

Pn'

1 10

-E

MR=nD

7H

01

OINZ.-I

n811M02

m

o0r mil

quk

T

13V ID2 21vilpn ?$"Tnnn000 Kh'itnP'00%~ it~ 71 3 '"n'71 N 51y)3 1317'T

X11n1y7t.

nx

'Ei'3 '3'T3 ;bly N'VIW 11'37713'1-7 7 f Review Leszensky, Dier41addu55.erJR, B.3Ravel, on1R. n ' l 'YD 1-in-yn 2=1 VXinOT mOW MX3 'an(2 mnnv -n=51 916-17),p.4335a)1 Jnim pVl 7, (1mu 1Yn n 5ypr ,1-xn -9 ' p ,, A 'Dn15 n 20T r2f '1 =1K0W. 71. n.31610 111' ,-IT x711n1 P'rim rx (21)13 D1,ONj7K .001120 D'3DDn10;V19 737 213H711019 l~f1110D}'12;313001017 b ,T't nin~ll'3

'slD

D' 9'972 p'01 miW .p'I;LDX n131100 }018 181a~nr 5~r~ 0129'T03n3N1 m7nti 73130198 P 3 2 I.' M. 9 S7amri H11'arc t-

5Y

'317Leid17enil,

.[T012

rin'3ipe of0 Bpno 00 '3npl'2 9716 0'3nmp :$"T ia t17pn97t n1980111p3 Win'I1nJ'3

D'DD 3 17917'),03D1K1 .131593 .29 ,24 mnynr Digit~11WlD'17DT~y ,JIk M;Il;H ,TnH l~i S17nltlp nawn a 5"mn nblyN'; 1expe1,l"3rltan ansimph I ,nxTny .nmen33 PsnUoman3 navelor tnx na~p2 lmm 1I- 3

'T

IN

:;1K7l

.E

M-1n

m-)D

1'T111311 i~b

0

/"Tmq3 Pn1$'Im

,101'

1$1~

W

"3"Wl

IOV

i

'3

,0

10

-MWIV

01Oi

13910

fl~yp

DD

5Z

r

P

(20iD uTA

n'9t'

")1

1019

.N

'1 70

53j

,PVT

.~l.0201

DieSadduziier, B. Ravel,Reviewon R. Leszensky, JQR,7, (19101917),pp.431f.

I.R.M.B6id,Principles Leiden,1989 19 Halachah, ofSamaritan byT alip'th.[T' - Irl39] i)Vi ,211'K :081N $"TiA~f~ N an77i7t1' 712 tDi n'717 130 nSn31D;IA030 ;1 by; L~'iST '17 31313'11 ,1JSW 712D'D12'3W,110pllr nf127,$'37S DD~ 5'i~t~ y87N13 ntT ;1312"injv D'plXi nybrl .5 'Yi,161't;y ,3 'yrl,159 'gy ,D3"370n 309 '139,Ir12x17 20 ,(57-51 mnlW)?5'n$N3KED ntlyir 07311 'mbn~; DPmP.719W1 t nNI=)Vf'3 WW1'~ ;lT'3DWW Pt) 1370 I bca y ~110WI'3 1N3 ,(22 'ty ,07o)3"W~~lnf 77N@17N1)nDB 00" (20 3''1)'111 01 939 .160'tlY,DtD 'ay ,bV3,;711D'9013 00039~ ,17Et1 .iWWAN~ ;InKxW ;1ll;IIN .300

ni1

1

?IW

7n1 9:y 9 111

O'11 O~; n'rl T .'vp'n11 ,71r1 T'nrII0vn 'j1n 'n-l; ?n'1•n 3r•3

MM,• WHI,nv11-InI v rT n1,,1n .n•nn*: m'rw (1n) 5"TMnym -11.0 -W-W-7

112372W

=1

.?2xn Wrnbr;i13 '0n 011711 Y20215ZV-121

.4

nYr5

0-W3117n1

,-131=7

"I

' -IT

ao K it m' '7ln1i7 5ypi Y"10 nrizx

0"011 O ? M' ITK3 l"T137'IWol

m101vr

ir'n"Y

'9W0 TO1t

K10K1 ' 11-9Y 077-'5 3?=703,K T

fK01-7n110

.(p1rv)

1012" 1'1 m31-11 18 1'0'137=7 0 10

18.,81

710"Ty

"' , " l1, 'n ,' o,11nlm l' 21 pn,3'1 by 15 L.H. Schiffman, 'The :13 n3"Tn J'lin in Tn"I Tanaitic 75 Halakha', (1984-1985), JQR, pp. 323-350 1OW11 .Samaritans "13 ImTJn,3i"1niv7 ' ? ' nD 0n'1'y,=n31rn n,17 Kn1x': . ,'l '3 ,11,) '3O? ,137 '1 n%12K10•rmm ,3 111mK11n 12,n1 U' 13 ,nx 112p" ' ?170V28 '13? 1-1n1331v'17v by ,'''1T ,,(M10'311•3,• 1'31•373 '13-'n '1V ,1nn1p7n1 i rmn ,(TD'0! ,01 ) j W •,13,0 ]" 15, by 1m 'tr , 0 . 11ll-Y31-i-mv ly •, i2mrml, ,'1,' B. Hall, 'From John : 1120 1=5 Kp 17 I 'on' by -D31vby llY .nX " *Ml13,'31"ImeV-n,'n7 1'•T A.D. Crown (ed.), The Samaritans, T 1989, pp. 32-54 Hyrcanus to Baba Rabbah', in: Tbingen ."y •15--13 16 ,K 7,fl 1')X 1 IT'3'01n1117 .(645' '] ,T;] ''n l)713 10 1 '"TV1 372 4918 : ;386 1't-' 'nYp,11 7 ,"'1TO nl Y•'1'l-2"l01 ,~ • 'l7 74i '0? ,p-N13 ~'n02a'11•17 *;'n mnnnl -D '3 'nrhb =33'15.151•b ,n'xmnl r b7 a 1 n 7xnD 1713"p .,-ibit 1",•",r "y =1172

?

20

'3 'v

z'0' ]D R 117'RinD v',-9 ny T U931mM"11V r' b r". n f1 -ivu1 ,i'0-yn'liniDm '13,10100 ,]l'rTb im 95 0n n u125vb -rrr'i ' •p0t 71-r 101 .(15 0'pn 1'0n1f117 ,17M 'Y ) nI-yn

7

n11- ; •' M017n

' 1Kn n3i1fn'

nix1v

O"'1"1vI ',0'i1 r'Dvby t m 'nt'D"ryp•

I pnn0171: 12Ti O1r 11n vn3 n .&"'1i1" ,1M7'

tri-95 yn*t t,3121-ptm'N; ,'i n 1p3bnn n~Tr1:n m,' ,-,,i 'r 1•nym nj 11imixi n NI1Ptinxn-on a Il'n-mnvari 15.-'1 Tll:1D-Y2 .30-28 'Y- ,(i" n-nnn n11); ,r /mnn5 ,'nnab nril n nmn ':a. 1 L. Finkelstein,ThePharisees:TheSociologicalBackgroundof TheirFaith,Philadelphia, Vol. II, 1n2o 0 ,Mnnn-1.11n1bn 1y -nIM 5Yb1 by ,'Wnn,-MV' n5 b l3p0.,nn o bDo ,Y0011y* .pp. 736-739 "3 -T 15'"l 101511,7101 m 11-111 '131y3T,1 '1T"1•,' 1013•"07lY ,(749-748 'ny ,1P1, 01 - '5 :,117n n "nD,n 1 Nntnb'n7nW5y '3 DMblM,(71'10) ,I,," Cn0111 o13E 11"nnO' ,tnb7v nn 1 15M 7 0n110 1n ,7110 '11 ,n'n7l-n 111 trewzvamYlinv,pnx n-$ innt, O,/'aT011 (,nt11 xin }1;,• l 'aa' ) n~o10n , ?•: 1T tYD)K ,-n150 UnTN21n15 ,1,, M ,2iTx m in:) ,ar=5x b u"ma,on,,mnXTm71217:.n00nv -Tn

M nx 1R•ll 01=,i,"l 1.~' ?"T1 -in*: inny ~"n

i ton ixrn,"•311 .Iv nr

,o"mm

D'DTiE

nDv-?ri'100

MWM' ;"W T1 lI "iT L3

"1

,la'r .;I *1'9X "Tr ,y0"T•

lr;'

v 1171 01 1311 n, Ini

nDn

019;1 ,1"LrI D

RIM nI3n' T'7 H3 7-9-M ,-i pi n 3 •-r, 1 ,'IrToM 3*: r' II-nT"',1*3 133'X

1

. 12 12V0'•r

"T "117

7

03

Inv? nin niv, ,711 , "ln ',•', t-,nn

i'3"n1n7

ran1 EW

grom 'vl1"7 n ,mrT ,1inn •yt7 ,y Dn0 '

0-711

rimmil

qu?

0

1 1J" -1313Ti7;0'"

,7l2l 7't

'

i

Pi ,rn131.Ir '"Iw n 'i-n V"l

1'3 Dmnn

Dnn 0iv3W

13111= *'1Vnt2lr;~.0% 7 ,1 17)- The 1 111V Hebre nM-;1-10 r d.o1 n 21Dis11diMer s; 1 -9 1812' 2-l 1npin Snpiria -1st wSriisD Onlpin a1xindn 1'MT'1'93Y 13D 13""Ixn"n D.R. Schwartz Priests TempleM03•,l 3n, , 0ri 0vW jilmnu :101f }372 010n1on 30131 12 .310; 0113T1DkI-1 210'yn 'DIM=

n 9 "3111015,nlut• ~nL"•" '77"•l 01'A '3 211'1t5Y I1vil IT3;'r IMV1n ~rl 537 'l"T;'l Un0T 117rive1rity 1"13I 0 D'l ~l-l," :,'11•, ,rl%'l ,rl1"•l~l'l;'I ,rl•Dl erusalem19,1 pp. 34.2

,nnn"nrl' ,''";'i1"rl

1Y'75 Mou .":370.-M 0 ,W"nAn .(113Z65"Tn53 X-71 DOn-Mtil Pl'1N1 J13M

1n7

[3-17 n-r'

13-93yl

0,1=117

*

9y

n5v

01 7

.01-1

;1*I

rn1'7

i

M13

M3

Invt'

'4 Wi 0 Inn*D:W

5)'301

nnyu

351H13-7

DT 12

2 : inl'l 3H1VD5) YWiM ;0117'Mr:1113

031-MYTO WM".•3i•-Mt-y "T i1T) 11127 , , ,;1I1 '

.0113YU

u .01

nW

3

MV'5Z

17

tInl

,r1193

In

5.-;

5Y 11771vi.

7 '3

31 UI

:MY'3 mmun2

I

5Y f0 01

0'-1

n171In9M

1

4

a ,-9'5iv.

nrivr'3

vil W

IM

1

D311-111-

M-111

V=I103

r1l

:.-I

01'31131P7

'9

bYnnu1271',71')110DTrby pr ;rnt D'37110 D'mnnl ,~1190.(15hib;IK11,'DT1DT7L93 0 9"biY?18180 m'3nr~r 0181 70 13;nnn0 ;r090 m10p~~l3 'M ;ntyB by) !f"Tn511170 v-

pI91

,Ibynn1

n

nun-

.(T*

,15

'Tn'

DIMND

011351I

D.R.

Schwartz,

Sacrifices:

123 1Dnru

ni-7-n 1

Inin.:

i

a

m1v-1m 8WN

1

N5bY3

V.-35=7 Opposition

Im

j n:5 '17

17 ,ri-i

Temple and

1081'

nDTn

-

x097

,n-

limv

n

-15*

nxim 17

ann-r

trntrm

n-t9-

yn5

Dagrn

'ty

,51=13

1

't17)

doctoral

X

,.

D1I5V7

1'

1anan.

nN

Hebrew

The

1979, :71 V7I

;X

p.

,1

W

,-r7i

dissertation, '01

nv=

Wi

P7

Jerusalem ,10V

13

15nIlm

n-in

aEtrmomn

University, .(645

nx

-im-m

nirbi 1

min

trnr

110my

,1"T1

-laxi5Y

ag

r

ip-pn5=

unpublished

Spiritualisation,

iY

n9-nnynn

,x-)1:.i

.,1y3I7

:s1IV1D1

nx1

Invx-griD'31711

1V1

or

ynlp .(tnynf5

n

tann

vn17

rimmuLn;1inmV

Priests

-):

77im

5nm'0

in n1no1

tr

:ni17n)

nin

7'3

f

34 14

,

82

W 211~ WS

i

rSino nn11M113Y12C"i 1i'2i n nJ'-)-7n'Yn

1P-D9N 1T npn V .-IN13X 8 .12-12nn I 11MMlO WPT-i=7 ;pxw nlimnlo l80nvin I=n n 103D3 0-102 MM ln150102 TKtPM? nn0onn0 mnrz• nnanIm7,nu 9.n1n• p-1n i m . 1 : s = 5 n ' n owl : n t i 5 z 1 i r 1 i 1 n an 17 Tmi'K K' D'3"~lTy ;a [rC']ln 11t-7-931

?1'3'11

01201

13n

1*=0

KX

z

]17372

1Y213

71=1 1P,1t :111riv

71-1.Ini-I

"In3

C3-75

C3-

n

1

Tin

1t0Y [ 5 971 tr1nI

l01,(n ,T 't)'-r)~T5Cl3•' I12'I 7aa Inn5

I=HI

-1?VPCT

O'071D0=l

I= ,7Z ,IN

.(','r

.

-1.

'71'912 MIN

MIMI

O

3

OM

M03 nnnriz

rl17375

0n

"airIN

n ,Rin i 'Dill

0B

5V7f

?nDi9iTn 17-TI

1T 7-1DP nn T1.-I

o0K.t0

97

i

17nKIW

rin

,-10l

n

,'11-'Ito

Tin? Nnon '•1,'0o 7'31 n~ -1 to

V

15M

OniY7

U13

5-r.xvi

mix xl0

:4v1*00 '' ,1)'pl,•

-Im30T n1 a nr713Y Dip=1"1tn

,pr

Tin in' rr2

OM

-9:

.1 M0

O-Tn

031179

0i:

1

m

IMn2-i.2100,3E MM'0

i.t

001'21nn

D

.0-1=75

111035 X5XInU1X1 03X nxv 0-1,D10= t Lv In'n xm ,imnnm l2175nwl rTnmn nx5n • -iP nl•'nn)3 1315Y12, ? nn

1r

inr1,'-r: ,5' ,) v ,' '131i, '.lpin ?•n7",' nrb , ',1r3Dmoan, n, DY 29 nion5ant K"n;1n1T 71i n'nKK " m nunn ,it1~T5I rou (nxT 'i;n ,Judaism', )r DED ,n nrnlI fa ,1D' FTSJ, :'i 21-713V (1998), H pp41-4 V-71n ."n 13-9-72 D-53'E'7 'IV7n PYMM070 pa-r n3llnn9 ,•, n ,y'n 12. 1- 71 nlt)5 X-,n lp i l , .V1,0 , n1111 12

.

2 5V7-IMn 31• •.-1 na•n m ,,79 1 : :Ve n2n1o,*nn ,nx ev-)5 avinvi r rxl 1im) 5vD nim ni-ri .(&"Ti vM13'nlY7'0 prv7

'pryt: '?nnm ',D

ro1'rm

1101 1 np'l

,1311111V

mwxi1

-

3ny17-' '11 111ifyfN t-711373 1-11D " •'I) .r'tn R"e 11-9min Dea,1d Sa Sr107 111s ,(' ,'1 ,XY Il 15XV7 '"On Dn i x o ' l i i-: win OMY V'm1 P MIl' ,y1-an . ( [ x " Y n] , t " 1 ,n m'it Dl1 -7K3 1 MM-1 i1713MNM'MYt 91217 KID , VX-n 1 2 Mr3 T71 ip 0In15 nXr ] Onll=T1)1V 1 01

1 1roDS01

1 171 3

1 7iy

1110V.-l

11131V7.711';i

7)

K011191-

.

Klawans,

J.

.1

and

Incest,

'Idoltary,

Impurity:

9

T

Defilement

Moral

in

ib

157l1

71013

-TY112

1-9

.n-yTn

'1 15

WTi1

,71y*9

-I?

NX5

i1n'r3 1

Dtr

'-132

Ancient

or :-01110nv)

5y

12.7

9

,Mw81x

Nnn or y -w'5 ,o',nlS'lin nio rrnryz17mn2nl" ,Judaism',JSJ, 29 (1998),pp. 411-413 rizri K lJ I Kn8 O' X iV7 '92 -7n n 1v 7iriM17 ,,y . ln X51) n lt rnmi 11'N 111r V1t7-71i c(11'9815 .1-Dm

'Tft1n)

=2

71

7'-

.Tin

,I'm1

0 "l 71i

DI

=117

on

O

-IE

Schiffinan,

,nrnn

n

jiT31-1

"o0 l

y5

2 ,TD n-rin7x13 ,lo ,'111 lWminvi bimpnnl

Iln

I

'

"1

,l

.(N"y

:-nium)

"1

2)

n

vit7)10 1:

Scrolls, ,5')Y5)

t ,3

71

no0wl1n

:0"b'WO-

Sea M17y-

,)I' nan

D

onl)

Dead

,(7

(r

l

a'qvy

the 3701p-

vT

1 nin

ji7a

Reclaiming I -I

0

-T'r

ol n

(D'Kayn

1 1W1in

01*

D-in

-b-lnrb

-

2101

1

:7I1X-

3i155D

1-9:1

01531-7

'17Dt=`1

L.H.

0

D012MI"7

2317

11rI1

I1qt

Ila

%1

711151115'

IlY-

-17nn 5v "1yinnll"i

l

1

b

'I

.s-lr

:I7n

,12-11

'ny

10 n1 m

N1n'Y

vi-r!0

l;(205

,

'ty1

-*, =

"BllVDi)t

51 ,

1

xp1

,1v0'o'p .Philadelphia

Vti-pn

1 wi1n

,til

,12

-b-a-07'

;17-15

05I-IXn

12in-In

,nS

n

f1v21

n1

,(T"bnV1)

19 4,

p.

,r'2111 249-252

12 vvpnn m I3 'N 2156-13 .156-133 ,(I"3V11) 'ny

A

qu

1 -'9V111n1 "117T 12Vp0' 1 ,'i np"7y"

-Imul

t3-T

5y

7 71IINT .1"'31V '10p70 VVI1-, linnr•1',

,"

. 1988, pp.4047,187-255;nl Ch.N rtBlood ,11 f Clture Relations: IMensuatinan e Ori ' I' 991 3? Hv'en1andLno912 '11 24i4,1.'D' 3T ,212 1012n 1s. ;; 17N • 115, 1•n"r , 7 '911 1 0G7n1-11,1An nknonr JewisSet, New York 1976pp 23, 158, 295; 6 17hf111L.

M .-Vil6-7-7p171=11112 D'3Knmp n

7'1-1'?~' (01512n .9417

071-1

,:Ti'

aI

-12.. l'nnr

oou1m31271ns, nZ p i n,nTh

W-XI178 5'-12n D077 '73?,K1 ,"';1'?1 Pseude igr1h ,l 5$"%)

VRII

apha• ;oth

nX

Ord 6-7",11p ;D'l7 9T1

.9-1101H MY 1' Oxford 5y 0pKnpn ent, II :;7'31 1913, p.810 ldT•tamT . M-1

T. Buckleyand A. :nllvtr1 'i la1•v"N;mipnin -i"• n•Tnn7 •1n1 mnonn•1~,':1i 5y 5

Gottlieb (eds.), Blood Magic: The Anthropology of Menstruation, Berkeley and Los Angeles,

and the Originsof Culture, 1988,pp. 40-47, 187-255;Ch. Night,BloodRelations:Menstruation 5V 1in-12M V)3-'15 pni .New Havenand London1991, esp. pp. 37 f, 212-215, 244-249 ,'0i -i ran nixi 1 nr1in-i .x131 vi In 6 L. Ginzberg,An UnknownJewishSect,New York1976,pp. 23, 158, 295; :'1K 1•,7] yWi'11V7p59p'2 14= .Ch. Rabin,TheZadokiteDocouments,Oxford19582,p. 19 1113'• ;[Xt'aSX 5:I n-11TI.17,13 :InKI', ,Im211414V7 7115 oil, "111oil, 1n11n yx .("X11t JIM=p: :7, 11MV11nn #IT -10K 13=3 051H .115 n-93 nnO -1-IVpj-) 1lrmnn ,1T:D 2nlnr 7,I 1N1'mn.1n1ln ,nKIImIM R.H. Charles,'Fragmentsof a ZadokiteWork',in: idem.(ed.), TheApocryphaand :N1 7 .941 'DY,KIp'1,m701b'11 of the Old Testament,II, Oxford1913,p. 810 ;Pseudepigrapha :,1117,' S. Schechter,Documentsof JewishSectaries,I: Fragmentsof ZadokiteWork,Cambridge1910, p. xxxvi;A. Biichler,'Schechter's"JewishSectaries"',JQR,3 n. s. (1912-1913),pp. 446 f ' 8 D'' nyPV3737T-2T 13M'-'1 137=17 [fl]N t7[n...]2 11[1321m171n [.71?D 51Tn] -D?1:VQ ii 4 J.M.Baumgarten, Cave 9-7 XIII,:K,'~ Qumran n11 ,1 (4Q272)4QD iPE31211"1 .'0m3n[...] .The Damascus Document (4Q266-273), DJD, XVIII, Oxford 1996, p. 190 (1426604Q3n' ) ; lt (4Q274)4QTOHORAa ; ~nn .6''i ,KIp'1 ,•7~,) .••.90-86 P00LO=lDV :,lK1 ii (4Q266) ,6 4QDa 'tY11 ,0113t-',940-938 '1t DlP On9"-n" ,'i7IT •V ,'3T1,117,011 (56-55 17Y-I7l3 bY -'IM1][;n]N' 1y1NF5][]][] ,1 ' 1: 'Vg ,AD)10-11=21 ~0P• 112

:n 117n ln,•ti '7 1: 5XIVI 5: K xnwri o,•, ny,=:7[;nip] [Yy:] i• n•,i VnV'.n lV7771-5n [1:]II rn N

oEiy] nnn om

?4x

In

a

-IT !Ki'3 .*T1 9 07' 8 9 :-IMK51 VD l'. NsW71

JT ,'1ny@ VD1l

.'1"TfNl l

D1Klt' 0218 ,e?? 0

i

11V! 1'

30

1 13

m i m1' N'2 DOl 1'V1100 173'Dn0K.15 00!?33m t '3211N m xn'n7 1025 371 1 K'7,32itm n1Wv) 7K5= .'i1IT Y 1115'Y zT ,7'12 31.041' 0-9t 11?' I7 ?K2I 131 T ,PI'

'v 'ln '22

1KD 2' mr'sD~.T

' 11-9 M1 10:11?2

i

71131-bC31-11 D5

"707111)' 1'711K 3'?

'1?? mr J11'2 1 K2TrT DY ,l

1''T n

X11K KIIZ'TI 'lJ1-13.

NOp2'71'Df 1

3T .-"Tn 51VMrr31 i' 13-n t1v1"1 70110Ii110 ,?11711 'Vilflf1 r11i7D11 tftlP1 ' 5 J. -),fv MigrmLe ,Iti .nn's 1-16m(A3) newYrk911, pyp.952if. irni 3 5m.7-6' y'13 n131rD mm1't jl3v vi -l' n1.0l j 013'311'' ID N- 115314 I')Y3.-'3f 1'. ,V113m 158 .1V91yix33.2-1 '15-7n xnK ' 133? 0111 .40-383 MIT

JTKhifl

y

07:-U3l xTr

I3tD7 .'inny

nx

inito

nnrbiv3n1

Y f1t7 5$HN

ininx

I1V-K 2=5279

DW'K

1Y

mnTfn-'I

ph 7?15

n'n

;wn 'K

0-75

,WW2

t

1 InX

1

1

0

n12 Y-i7?i

,DnXh-b)

-

5

11YM-

'2911TV.

XVI

171--11m

J.

1}715]

-9n

Yl-95'711

11213121

lz

jlj'Dnulr

'ln5

Inin

I

1.957

2=71

Kn

'? 'l CM ,0'?f?17

l

3DVD

5.-)1

,-1'31-7

n, 'n

rI

1-

5.t' 151V

nnY

xTKt

-1n

pv

IpV'

'71my

IDVDp

CY

t110WIX5

r1 2370

07

'nY

D'9W11

,O1l' ,1317?

,W11pi

.

,;1X

1raTT .JIXT

1t

nxn N11=1

QW

1'D 0

C31

a

X

-1:)73

,-in

-IT

'Olt2

'

X0 3

nn

70

nlXpn,

Is

0

nyln

f .:nx1

3

?.N'1

515'

n)

4

OPVi111 n3

"'1

93

01

,0'=

15Y

1

? 1

7lt

,0

'In31 5V

15,rK

571910'DNA

'la

,OV

y

D17pn1

952

p.

5v

'toil"31

'nY

5 imm

.-1-71VI

19 1, 1

:IX-l

,139-138

l

']1

,'i'1

'""2

,fI

.221-219

-w-110

York

New

.'77XnlT

Y

lnarin

a W.11-711

/117

,MV

m11

1I ,in"nY'13V 1'T'W"13

im

l yn

3),

(AB

'ty

1-9:

in-i

t-yV

NIOsdl

1-16

il r-93

r110

7ninn

X=5IVID77

PH

7

3ivn

rm

Leviticus

Milgrom,

,tU"3Vn

'ny

5m I'30

1

-lDm 03'3"M11

K'71W

5 J-1-7,-1

,

1037

-

Vn'm1

.27-26

.40-38

12Y

0'T4Dn

l'n21%

C-1D7-9.1

.746-744

nVIW

:.-ml

-: Omim

5y

nlm

:1

' 1

ImX-l32

1

1 5Y

,';IW1pnPt30'n

mt0

;176va

.

1

5ml,

1D-'11I7

1$2T

l

U-1 )

53y

l yv

'11

p'7TM

2DV'.G1'T'? CH7 VT'2 IK1 01' 012f21 3-i7 T7

.'Ixnt

5Z5

(ED

"1m1

1

4

79

'97

TYID

17 H0V'

201~f 71H =71 13-91710D

-7'

7'-9n2

tr nr

,'013nx t

agn-

=71

1 5Y

1 732 1

303 rufIr'n

;KnU9

x5immul

i

.707'377

I75H

D'1n l ;K1

oK

,y0

n10"31 5 2

IDWWI

5:1

Y1-1

h

npi 1

5:1

3m

y309Ci" i73 lET i'22 2l MIIX

i 1'9'13 ?'T'10n ,1l'?22Xnil 'TT 1173V 01301 5v

y

v 1137

"'12

,OU

'm

3I'0732==

-112

-1T

'm:lnX3

; -170

1

T17l

ofIl

"D

N'Ml n

-1NIn

155.-?-inK

1

.f13

P l17

1 i p1

Dt'3 X5

V-1-T

14v r m

3 r•',Tnt1p f•y1, n?1'O

n, '?rm jmnlrxn

.1?3 r •:•

*,

fnl?

"r n *pn 1

l

I3,rlfln7",1 br7rn

'x ,t

• 7,•7/

'nO',m'f

*

D? 011 '" 1 ;324-302 ,5",r '73 ,(0"1p11) ,",111",'011n791nr17,p 1Tri' f.K"111 ',U?1.','1, 1 Y"D 5l5n' 1n'1a0O,'pnit) T1"yn1 ,(o,•'ny) '•0n1lD,'iC :7n11,'••1Y 17pm 11"I'a ,", W11pn , 5 S ;37-17 '1y' ,X"•W1-1 $"T 1175"l51"1ni 7 ", ",K ,('pTn, ,IND1-1 .1"1N'X •1,3 ,1030 .11 ,1"311n1.1"7/11 ,1350-1000 y"a ;287-280 'DP 5WIN ,D"1KX;I T'la,1 1pm213' ,D•t',• 113•,'tl 1 O57/1"i ''7 U11 TI/DWN3 fl'fl ;21-1 '?y? ,Mimonidean Studies, 1 (1990) :l•l2 ,'?1p '31r• 0'1"1 "1•2if 1 ''Y

S.J.D. Cohen, 'Menstruantsand the Sacred in Judaism and Christianity', in: S.B. Pomeroy (ed.), - 19?1]Women'sHistory andAncients History, Chapel Hill and London 1991, pp. 272-299 ;[}313 idem, 'Purity and Piety: The Separation of Menstruantsfrom the Sancta', in: S. Grossman and R. Haut (eds.), Daughters of the King: Women and the Synagogue, Philadelphia-New York 1992, pp. 103-115 J. Neusner, 'From Scripture to Mishnah: The Origins of TractateNiddah', JJS, 29 :1i' 2 (1978), pp. 135-148; H.K. Harrington, The ImpuritySystems of Qumranand the Rabbis, Biblical H. Maccoby, Ritual and Morality: The Ritual Atlanta 1993, ch. 6 ;[11p"l,'i 1M,1]Foundations, Purity System and its Place in Judaism, Cambridge 1999, pp. 30-46 p .[Co'h 1M],]

K

AJS Review 27/1 (2003):

.X-K

Back Matter Source: AJS Review, Vol. 27, No. 1 (Apr., 2003) Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Association for Jewish Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4131805 . Accessed: 19/07/2011 03:28 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and Association for Jewish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to AJS Review.

http://www.jstor.org

Rebuilding the House of Israel

Architecturesof Gender in Jewish Antiquity

JEWISH

STUDIES

from Stanford

IN JULY2003 FORTHCOMING

The Jew, the Arab A Historyof the Enemy GILANIDJAR This bookarguesthat in "ChristianEurope," the questionof the enemyhas formillenniabeen9tructured by the Araband the Jew,that is to say,by the historicalrelationof Europeto both ArabandJew.It providesa philosophicalunderstanding of the background of the currentconflictin the MiddleEast. $21.95paper $55.00cloth

The Regal Way

The Life and Timesof Rabbi Israelof Ruzhin

DAVIDASSAF A poineeringstudyof the 19th centruyHasidicmovementas shownthroughthe life of one of its mostcontroversialand influentialleaders,RabbiIsraelFriedmanof Ruzhin(17961850). The dramaticepisodesof his life areechoedby the andhighlycriticalopinionsof his personal contradictory characterand leadership. $65.00cloth

Israel, the Impossible Land JEAN-CHRISTOPHE BENBASSA ATTIASand ESTHER Translated bySUSANEMANUEL "Basedon a vastbodyof scholarlymaterial,this is an engagandthoughtfuloverviewof the multiplicityof ing, absorbing, Jewishimagesof the landof Israeloverspaceandacrosstime." -Derek J. Penslar,Universityof Toronto $22.95paper $65.00cloth

The Politics of Canonicity

Lines of Resistancein Modernist Hebrew Poetry

MICHAELGLUZMAN "An outstandingbookthat ... will be essentialfor anyfuture discussionof modernistHebrewpoetry. Well written... it will be invaluableto scholarsin the field. Insofaras it theoriesof nationengagesin a dialoguewith contemporary buildingandcanon formation,it is boundto appealto literarycriticsin otherfieldsas well." -Ilana Pardes,HebrewUniversityof Jerusalem $49.50cloth

CYNTHIAM. BAKER Investigatesthe mappingsof ideasaboutsexualandethnic differencein Galileeduringthe centuriesfollowingthe last Jewishrevoltagainstthe RomanEmpire. $60.00cloth

The Chosen Body

The Politicsof the Body in IsraeliSociety MEIRAWEISS Examineshow the socialandculturalparadigms of contempoa raryIsraelarearticulated throughthe body,constructing viewof how the Israelibodyis chosen,regulated, panoramic caredfor,andultimatelymadeperfect. $49.50cloth

Physician of the Soul, Healer of the Cosmos

IsaacLuriaand his KabbalisticFellowship LAWRENCE FINE This is a studyof IssacLuria(1534-72),one of the most remarkable andinfluentialfiguresof late-medieval andearlyat Luriaas a real modemJewishmysticism.It looksprimarily historicalfigure,in the contextof his relationshipwith his circle of disciplesin the Galileancity of Safed,the greatcenter of kabbalisticthoughtand teaching. $24.95paper $65.00cloth FORTHCOMING IN JULY2003

The Laborof Life Selected Plays HANOCHLEVIN Editedby BENJAMIN HARSHAV, HARSHAV Translated by BARBARA The firstbookpublicationin Englishof the playsof Hanoch Levin,one of the most importantIsraeliplaywrights. $75.00cloth IN MAY2003 FORTHCOMING

Identity Theft

The Jew in Imperial Russia and the Case of Avraam Uri Kovner HARRIETMURAV This is the firstfull-lengthEnglish-language biographyof AvraamUri Kovner,a fascinatingandpeculiarRussianJewishwriterand criminalwho lived at the end of the nineteenth century.It is also an examinationof Russo-Jewish identity in the modemperiodand of largerquestionsof hybridityand performativity. $60.00cloth

Stanford

Visitourwebsite formoreinformation on theseendother Press University titlesfromStanford www.sup.org Press. University 800.621*2736

A Man of A

N1V\k)

Publications of The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Project Worlds Samuel Pallache,StephenA. Kaufman,ProjectEditor a Moroccan Jew inCatholic and A Dictionary of Jewish Protestant EuropeBabylonian Aramaic of the Mercedes Talmudic and Geonic Periods

Three

Garcia-Arenal

and Gerard Wiegers

'~$SIRYAI~SYK?Y~~ translated by Martin Beagles

Michael Sokoloff The firstnew dictionaryof Jewish BabylonianAramaicin a century,this toweringscholarlyachievementprovides a completelexiconof the entire vocabularyused in both literaryand epigraphicsourcesfrom the Jewish communityin Babylonfrom the third centuryC.E. to the twelfthcentury. AuthorMichaelSokoloff'sprimary sourceis, of course,the Babylonian Talmud,one of the most importantand influentialworksin Jewishliterature.

"Usinga microhistoricalapproach, MercedesGarcia-Arenal and Gerard Wiegersreconstruct-thecomplicatedlife of SamuelPallache,a 'stateless'Jewof Sephardicoriginwho used his considerable linguistictalentsto become an internationalarms-dealer, double-agent, merchant,smugglerand spy as he moved regularlybetweenMorocco,Spain, Publishedby TheBar-IlanUniversityPressand Portugal,Englandand the Low Countries The Press ...

This is a fascinating book."--Richard

L. Kagan,The JohnsHopkinsUniversity $40.00 hardcover

Now in paperback Theatrical Performance during the Holocaust Memoirs Texts, Documents, Alvin Goldfarb

Jewish Book Council National Jewish Book Award Finalist

"Thisexcellentand meticulously assembledvolume is the only work I know to restorethe crucialrole art, theatre, poetry,and literatureactuallyplayedin the livesof those internedin the ghettos and concentrationcamps."-James E. Young,Universityof Massachusetts, Amherst, author of The TextureofMemory

$18.95 paperback

A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period second edition MichaelSokoloff

edited by Rebecca Rovit and

PAJBooks:BonnieMarrancaand GautamDasgupta,SeriesEditors

JohnsHopkinsUniversity

$160.00 hardcover

Since the MiddleAges, lexographiesof Talmudicand other rabbinicliterature havecombinedin one entryBabylonian, Palestinian,andTargumicwordsfrom variousperiods.Scholarsnow realizethe need to treateach dialectseparately,and in A Dictionary offewish Palestinian

Aramaic,MichaelSokoloffprovidesa completelexiconof the dialectspoken and writtenby Jewsin Palestineduring the Byzantineperiod,from the third centuryC.E. to the tenth century. Pressand Publishedby TheBar-IlanUniversity Press TheJohnsHopkinsUniversity

$109.00 hardcover

The Johns Hopkins University Press

1-800-537-5487 * www.jhupbooks.com

Significant. Entertaining America Jews, Movies,and Broadcasting

J. Hoberman &JeffreyShandler lookat oneof thelongest-running America is a captivating Entertaining inAmerica: therelationship andmostprovocative publicdiscussions media.Thiscolorfully betweenthenation's Jewsandits entertainment illustrated booksurveyshowJewshaveparticipated written, lavishly in-and beenidentified with-American movies,radio,andtelevision fromthenickelodeon erato thepresentday.

INIAI

Published in association with The Jewish Museum, New York. 336 pages. 126 halftones. 190 duotones.

Paper$35.00 ISBN0-691-11302-5 Cloth$49.95 ISBN0-691-11301-7

Saracens, Demons, and Jews MakingMonstersin MedievalArt

DebraHiggsStrickland

thecrusades,"Ethiopians," andMongols were Jews,Muslims, During HereDebraHiggsStrickland branded enemiesof theChristian majority. revealstheoutrageously socialgroups waystheserejected pejorative wererepresented-often as monsters, demons,orfreaksof nature. Thisis thefirststudyto elucidate theartisticmeansbywhichboundarieswereeffectively monsters andrejected blurred betweenimaginary socialgroups.

)Non.?lcl

.IY "aki" I

AliH(.(,SII(KA% I

16 color plates. 139 halftones.

Cloth$60.00 ISBN0-691-05719-2DueMay

BETHIRWINLEWIS

Art for All? TheCollisionof ModernArtandthe Publicin Late-Nineteenth-Century Germany

BethIrwinLewis

TW

CLI'I-CD

anddiversified Thisbooktellsthestoryof Germany's rich,flourishing, worldof artinthelastdecadesof thenineteenth century. Basingher andlavishly narrative ona closereading of contemporary periodicals, itwithcartoonsandotherillustrations, BethIrwin complementing Lewisprovides thefirstsystematic, comprehensive studyofthatworld.

orALLU

226 halftones. 8 color plates.

Paper$29.95 ISBN0-691-10265-1 Cloth$60.00 ISBN0-691-10264-3DueMay

Princeton 800--?-17/7-4,-/1-26

University *

\N\jVVV.PURPRINCETON.EDU

Press

New

Contribution Studies

Jewish

to

Surviving Freedom After the Gulag JANUSZ BARDACHand KATHLEEN GLEESON

"Auniqueexplorationof the identitythatcomes ....Bardachis one of only aftergreat suffering the few to havewrittenso eloquentlyaboutthis transition." Wiesenthal --Simon $27150HARDCOVER

Tales of the Neighborhood JewishNarrativeDialoguesin LateAntiquity GALITHASAN-ROKEM

"Hasan-Rokem bringsexcitingnew lifeto the rabbinictexts....This workis sure to stimulating makerabbinicliteraturemore accesible and relevantto a wideraudience." -Charlotte Fonrobert, author of MenstrualPurity inJewish Taubman Lectures Studies $49.95HARDCOVER

Obstinate Hebrews Representationsof Jews in France,1715-1815 RONALDSCHECHTER

"Astartlingnew look at boththe Enlightenment and the Jewishpresence in eighteenth-century France. -Natalie Zemon Davis, author of Womenon the Margins Studies ontheHistory ofSociety andCulture $60,00

At bookstores

HARDCOVER

or order 800-822-6657

UNIVERSITY

OF

* www.ucpress.edu

CALIFORNIA PRESS

Illuminating

one of history's darkest periods

TESTAMENTS

TO THE HOLOCAUST

From the Wiener Library,London, the unique and rare historical documents contained in Testaments

destruction of the European Jews; rare propaganda materials produced by and for the Nazi regime;

to the Holocaust offer students and researchersa wealth of materials -

thematic press cuttings from an enormous range of newspapers and journals published between 1933

lished

and 1945; 48,000

many previously unpubfor studying Nazi Germany and its crimes against the Jews. In three series spanning 30 years, this wide-ranging collection features materials that report on events

documents and six photo albums from the Jewish Committee for Relief Abroad; and much more.

in Germany and Europe as they were unfolding-

For more information on this and other Jewish Studies collections, including Archives of the

testifying to Jewish efforts to resist the onslaughtas well as valuable secondary literature.

Destruction and The Jewish Biographical Index (K.G. Saur), please call your Primary Source Sales

Included

Representative

are 1,200

eyewitness accounts; 4,000 photographs documenting the unpublished

INFORMATION

at

1-800-444-0799

or visit

www.gale.com/psm.

INTEGRITY

THOIVISONC3 PRIIVIARY

SOURCE

IVICROFILIVI GALE

0364-0094(200304)27:1;1-T