Hebrew Studies Research Articles

Word Order and Information Structure in Ruth and Jonah: A Generative-Typological Analysis

The relationship between syntax and information structure is an increasingly popular subject of research within Biblical Hebrew studies. However, there exist two asymmetries within current approaches taken as a whole: first, the only theoretical linguistic frameworks employed are situated somewhere within the functional approach to linguistics (in contrast with formal, and specifically, generative approaches); second, a Verb-Subject typological classification for Biblical Hebrew is assumed without empirical justification. Yet, the relationship between syntax and semantics, on the one hand, and pragmatics, on the other, is primarily unidirectional; in other words, pragmatics necessarily accesses the syntactic and semantic features of a text, but not vice versa. It stands to reason, then, that any model of information structure can only be as accurate as the syntactic and semantic model upon which it builds. This study presents a typological and generative linguistic analysis of the data in Ruth and Jonah, an Subject-Verb classificiation for Biblical Hebrew and an Subject-Verb based model of information structure.

Hebrew Studies at Fifty

Welcome to Golden Anniversary Edition of Hebrew Studies: A Journal Devoted to Hebrew Language and Literature] Hebrew Studies is journal of National Association of Professors of Hebrew (NAPH). Hebrew Studies publishes scholarly articles and book reviews on all aspects of Hebrew language and literature from antiquity through present. Hebrew Studies has a rich history of publication beginning with first volume of journal, then known as Hebrew Abstracts, in 1954. One of my predecessors as editor of journal, Keith N. Schoville of University of Wisconsin-Madison, provided an overview of history of journal in Silver Anniversary Edition from its inception through publication of Hebrew Studies 25 (1984).1 Following founding of NAPH in 1952 under leadership of Abraham I. Katsh of New York University, first issue of Hebrew Abstracts appeared in 1954 in conjunction with The Shane Quarterly of Butler University School of Religion. The first editor of journal was Katsh, and he was assisted by Toyozo W. Nakarai as associate editor together with an editorial board of four scholars. The purpose of initial eighteen-page journal was to provide English-speaking scholars sum maries and reviews of books and periodicals published in Modern Hebrew and other languages containing research on the Hebrew language, literature, philosophy, exegesis, bibliography, and methodology. Abraham Katsh remained as editor of journal through volume 12 (1968-1969) as it grew in length and scope. Associate editors during this period included Israel T. Naamani, Shlomo Marenof, Toyozo W. Nakarai, David Rudavsky, and Aaron S. Citron. A change in editorship of journal took place with volume 13 (1972) for which Israel T. Naamani began his service as editor with Werner Weinberg of Hebrew Union College? Jewish Institute of Religion as associate editor and Abraham I. Katsh as chair of board of editors. During Naamani's term as editor from volume 13 (1972) through volume 19 (1978), journal changed its focus and name. Following publication by NAPH of The Journal of Hebraic

שערי לשון: מחקרים בלשון העברית, בארמית ובלשונות היהודים מוגשים למשה בר-אשר (Sha'arei Lashon: Studies in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Jewish Languages Presented to Moshe Bar-Asher) (review)

REVIEWS MyCgwm Mydwhyh twnwClbw tymrab ,tyrboh NwClb Myrqjm :NwCl yroC rCa-rb hCml (Sha‘arei Lashon: Studies in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Jewish Languages Presented to Moshe Bar-Asher). Volume 1: Biblical Hebrew, Masorah, and Medieval Hebrew. Edited by A. Maman, S. E. Fassberg, and Y. Breuer. Pp. wn + 344 + vii + *184. Jerusalem: The Bialik Institute, 2007. Cloth, $37.83. Sha‘arei Lashon is a remarkable collection of articles in all areas of the Hebrew language, in all its periods and traditions, as well as in Aramaic and Jewish Languages. The studies in these three volumes contribute a wealth of knowledge to the study of the Hebrew language. The authors of the articles are colleagues, students, and friends of an outstanding scholar and teacher, Professor Moshe Bar-Asher to whom this book is presented in honor of his retirement from the Hebrew University after forty-four years of research and teaching. The wide scope of the studies in Sha‘arei Lashon is a fitting tribute to Moshe Bar-Asher, who is acknowledged as one of the foremost authorities on the Hebrew language, Aramaic, and Jewish languages. The first volume of Sha‘arei Lashon deals with Biblical Hebrew, Masorah, and Medieval Hebrew, the second with Rabbinic Hebrew and Aramaic, and the third with Modern Hebrew and the Jewish languages. The first volume of Sha‘arei Lashon begins with speeches in appreciation of Moshe Bar-Asher expressed by his colleagues Zeev Ben Hayyim and Mordechai Breuer, who talk about their personal friendship with Moshe Bar-Asher and discuss his scholarly contribution, his multifarious interests, and his personal attributes. Also included is a survey of Professor BarAsher ’s impressive publications. There are twenty-nine articles in this volume: nineteen in Hebrew, six in English, and four in French. Space does not permit this reviewer to thoroughly examine every article. Therefore, only several studies will be briefly discussed. This volume is divided into three parts. The first part is entitled, “Biblical Hebrew and the Language of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Articles in this part deal with Biblical Hebrew morphology, phonology, semantics, and lexicography, as well as the language of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Joshua Blau (“Some Morphological Problems Concerning the Infinitive in Biblical Hebrew,” pp. 3–9) discusses the two forms of the infinitive in Biblical Hebrew: absolute and construct. Blau claims that these two forms of the infinitive were used originally in similar syntactic functions and only later developed in different directions. However, Blau also shows that, although their functions were similar, they are two distinct forms with dif- Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 390 Reviews ferent origins. In a very methodological manner, Blau provides convincing evidence that the infinitive construct is not a transformation of the infinitive absolute as argued by some scholars. Two studies on the language of the Dead Sea Scrolls analyze phenomena in that language and shed light on its origins. Scholars have debated whether the language of the Dead Sea Scrolls developed directly from Biblical Hebrew or was one of a few dialects that existed side-by-side. These two articles are: “The System of Independent Pronouns at Qumran and the History of Hebrew in the Second Temple Period,” by Matthew Morgenstern (pp. 44–63), and “Nominal Clause Patterns in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” by Tamar Zewi (pp. 64–80). Morgenstern collected and studied all independent pronouns in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in good manuscripts of Rabbinic Hebrew. Based on the study of the different forms and their occurrences in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Biblical Hebrew, in the Samaritan version of the Torah, and in Rabbinic Hebrew, Morgenstern concludes that the language of the Dead Sea Scrolls may not be described as a direct development from classical Biblical Hebrew. He does not accept the approach of Kutscher, who had argued that the language reflected in the Tiberian tradition is the standard, whereas other traditions represent the sub-standard language of the Second Temple period influenced by Aramaic and other languages (p. 45). Morgenstern’s data is summarized in a table on page 56. He found that the distribution of the first person singular forms, yˆnSa and yIkOnDa, is the only one that can be said to reflect...

Ezekiel: A Commentary (review)

Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 409 Reviews EZEKIEL: A COMMENTARY. By Paul M. Joyce. LHBOTS 482. Pp. xi + 307. New York: T&T Clark, 2007. Cloth, $140.00. In this relatively short commentary, Paul Joyce—noted Ezekiel scholar and chair of the Society of Biblical Literature’s section on “Theological Perspectives on the Book of Ezekiel”—has given readers an eminently readable , balanced, and useful study of what is arguably the Hebrew Bible’s most disturbing and perplexing prophetic book. To be sure, Joyce’s commentary does not contain the detail and breadth of discussion found in some previous major commentaries, such as the multi-volume works by M. Greenberg (1983, 1997), W. Zimmerli (1979, 1983), K.-F. Pohlmann (1996, 2001), or D. I. Block (1997, 1998), but scholars seeking the most in-depth treatments available of any given passage in Ezekiel will no doubt consult all of these sources anyway. Rather, Joyce sets out to combine a number of techniques, such as close literary readings, sensitive theological analysis, and historical reconstruction, and he does so in such a way as to provide both a solid base of information for the novice as well as some more rigorous commentary for advanced scholars; thus, the book will prove to be just as at home on the shelves of graduate students and clergy as it will be on the shelves of seminary professors and seasoned theologians. Specifically, Joyce’s book exhibits several strengths that set it apart from previous efforts. Perhaps the most valuable aspect of the commentary is its introduction (pp. 1–62), wherein Joyce deftly weaves his way through many topics, summarizing and explaining the most important historical and theological issues in the book and providing a fascinating summary of over two millennia of interpretive efforts. The introduction is both succinct and (at least relatively) comprehensive at the same time, a difficult and noteworthy achievement, and is worth the price of the book (if indeed one can find a copy of it for under $140.00). For example, the section on theological themes (pp. 17–32) is a very thorough and compelling introduction to Ezekiel’s theology. Here, Joyce takes issue with several longstanding (but now mostly abandoned) attempts at characterizing Ezekiel as a champion of individual responsibility and harbinger of the demise of the antiquated concept of “group identity”; rather, Joyce views Ezekiel’s statements on the topic as “typical of the Hebrew Bible as a whole” (p. 25), that is, Ezekiel sees a place both for corporate and individual responsibility. The son may not be doomed to suffer for the sins of the father (Ezek 18:20), but Joyce is surely correct to point out (pp. 25–26) that the vision of the sword wielding deity in Ezek 21:6–10 (who will destroy “both the righteous and the wicked”!) is less than encouraging in terms of the “individual responsibility” theme (or any theme) (see also Joyce’s brief discussion on p. 156). Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 410 Reviews Following Zimmerli, Joyce’s most persistent theological emphasis involves a recognition of the motif of “radical theocentricity” in Ezekiel, best exemplified by Ezekiel’s frequently used “recognition formula” (with variations ), “and you (or they) shall know that I am YHWH” (pp. 27–29). YHWH fears his name has been tainted, and must act out of “divine selfinterest ” (p. 29) to correct the misconception; the deity does this for his own reasons, superseding all human attempts at either righteousness or infidelity. At other points, Joyce introduces new theological possibilities, such as in his brief discussion of “grace” as a key (even if only implicit) concept of Ezekiel’s vision of YHWH’s actions (pp. 26–27, 57). On the historical level, Joyce is mostly content to defend the authenticity of the book of Ezekiel as the product of a sixth century, Babylonian prophet Ezekiel; while he is not reluctant to allow certain facets of editorial activity (p. 10), and he is willing to acknowledge the circularity inherent in the attribution of certain dates (p. 12), Joyce clearly defers to the idea of a primarily authentic collection of oracles attributed to the man Ezekiel himself (p. 6). While this may be less than satisfying...

Enoch and the Messiah Son of Man: Revisiting the Book of Parables (review)

Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 417 Reviews Angel does not note any significant differences between the employment of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition in wisdom literature or Jewish historiography versus its use at Qumran or in apocalyptic literature. Yet based upon his own presentation, it seems evident that apocalyptic literature is much more explicit in its use of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition, with its fantastic beasts and heavenly battles, while its appearance in wisdom literature is usually confined to brief, veiled allusions to chaos or to the Divine Warrior (at best). One wishes that Angel would attempt to address the implications of these differences or to explain why they exist. The above critiques notwithstanding, Angel has produced a valuable study worthy of attention. I heartily recommend Chaos and the Son of Man as a helpful collection, analysis, and explication of Second Temple period texts which include the Chaoskampf tradition. David P. Melvin Baylor University Waco, TX 76798 David_Melvin@baylor.edu ENOCH AND THE MESSIAH SON OF MAN: REVISITING THE BOOK OF PARABLES. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini. Pp. xv + 539. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2007. Paper $50.00 This volume brings together main and short papers presented at the third Enoch Seminar held at Camaldoli monastery, Italy, June, 2005. The Enoch Seminar is an ongoing research initiative led by Gabriele Boccacini, bringing together international scholars to focus on major documents of “Enochic Judaism,” or, at least, Jewish writings associated with and inspired by Enochic tradition. This includes the collection preserved as 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and 2 Enoch, the theme for 2009. The subtitle more adequately reflects the book’s theme and significance: “Revisiting the Book of Parables,” namely, 1 Enoch 37–71, the section of 1 Enoch not preserved at Qumran. Much interest in the past has been on its potential relevance for the evolution of Christology, but its significance is much wider than that and this is reflected in the contributions. Thus of the six parts, only one deals with the “Son of Man.” The work begins with an introduction to previous research, which was characterized by concern with dating, absence from Qumran being taken as an indicator of later origins. Pointing to the conclusions of Sacchi and Nickelsburg, that the work was produced around the turn of the era, Boccaccini reports: “After the Camaldoli meeting, it can now be confidently said that the position of Nickelsburg and Sacchi is confirmed and supported by the overwhelming Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 418 Reviews majority of specialists in the Enoch literature and Second Temple Judaism” (p. 15). None dated it prior to the Roman period or beyond the end of the first century C.E. This is a major outcome of the seminar. Part one addresses “The Structure of the Text.” In “Discerning the Structure(s) of the Enochic Book of Parables” (pp. 23–47), George Nickelsburg identifies the threefold structure based on the three parables as reflecting the early shape of the work, which includes some rewriting of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36), conflated with material from elsewhere . He proposes some rearrangement of the material especially in the first parable around the account of Wisdom’s descent. The work underwent a Noachic redaction, identifiable in four interpolations, which depicts Noah as recipient of the Book of Parables and is possibly also responsible for Enoch’s identification as Son of Man in 1 Enoch 71. Michael Knibb similarly addresses the “Structure and Composition of the Parables of Enoch” (pp. 48–64), concluding that 70–71 “are a secondary addition” (p. 63) because of their surprising identification contrasted with chapters 37–69, and that the loose structure of the work facilitated the inclusion of Noachic but also other material “on an ad hoc basis over a period of time” (p. 64). Loren Stuckenbruck then notes agreement and disagreement between the two on composition and raises questions for further discussion (pp. 65–71), including on the language of the original. In reviewing both papers on structure (pp. 72–78), Benjamin Wright argues that Nickelsburg’s placement of the account of Wisdom’s descent still leaves problems (pp. 73–74) and underlines the problem of dealing with a work which has survived only...

Problems of the Content Clause in Hebrewp

A content clause is a subordinate clause usually describing the content of a word existing as an antecedent in the main clause. In this paper, we present an overview of the Hebrew studies devoted to content clauses since this structure was first recognized and described until a recent paper from 2008, where a multitude of examples from all periods have been gathered. A special section describes Jespersen's contribution to the topic, even though this great linguist did not directly investigate this issue per se. The content clause as an adjectival clause is the most interesting point. It differs from other adjectival clauses in some essential features. A conclusive investigation should also reveal the source of these differences. Such a review might clarify the essential features of the content clause. It also shows how the science of linguistics is developing by discussions and mutual criticism. We will not refrain from criticism where it may clarify details in order to achieve better understanding. This paper also demonstrates the efforts to formalize semantics, that is, to incorporate semantic features or even certain dictionary entries within syntactic rules. Here we can define new sets of features of nouns and verbs serving as an antecedent followed by a content clause. These lists of words may be considered a part of the syntax. They share not only semantic features but syntactic features as well.

Chaos and the Son of Man: The Hebrew Chaoskampf Tradition in the Period 515 B.C.E. TO 200 C.E (review)

Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 414 Reviews prophet or via Yahweh’s statutes). In addition, the book of Ezekiel shows how gracious God is: obedience, when accompanied by the spirit, “transforms the people by affecting Yahweh’s word in their experience,” Robson writes (p. 266). Let us now consider some technical aspects. The bibliography is thorough and outstanding (pp. 277–292). Robson’s writing requires a close reading because it is a technical book. There is ample white space on the margins for note taking and interaction. As the prophet Jeremiah represented a model for what his community should be in a siege time, Ezekiel models as well the ability to question Yahweh about why Jerusalem fell and why Yahweh judged it (p. 273). Furthermore, Ezekiel, by his obedience and his ability to listen to the spirit of Yahweh, models for the exiles the answer to their question, how should we now live (p. 274)? Robson has written a rich book that summarizes earlier work on Ezekiel (Allen, Zimmerli, Blenkinsopp, Clements, Greenberg, and Block) and adds his own significant contribution. He presents a credible argument that Ezekiel is the model Yahweh provides for how to follow Yahweh in a new season in Israel’s life. In addition, Robson sees an emphasis on Yahweh as a creator. He mentions the connection between Isaiah and Ezekiel in terms of Yahweh as a creator, and perhaps that should be a topic for another book. Robin Gallaher Branch Crichton College Memphis, TN 38111 North-West University Potchefstroom, South Africa rgbranch@crichton.edu CHAOS AND THE SON OF MAN: THE HEBREW CHAOSKAMPF TRADITION IN THE PERIOD 515 B.C.E. TO 200 C.E. By Andrew R. Angel. LSTS 60. Pp. xiii + 261. New York: T & T Clark, 2006. Cloth, $168.00. Andrew R. Angel’s work, Chaos and the Son of Man: The Hebrew Chaoskampf Tradition in the Period 515 B.C.E. to 200 C.E., represents a revision of his 2004 doctoral thesis from the University of Nottingham. Angel conducts a sweeping review of Jewish and Christian literature from the Second Temple and Tannaitic periods in order to discern whether or not there is evidence for the continuation of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition, Hebrew Studies 50 (2009) 415 Reviews the battle of the Divine Warrior, usually portrayed as the storm god, against the waters of chaos or the chaos dragon, in post-biblical times. Following a brief review of the history of scholarship, in which he notes that relatively little work has been done on the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition in the Second Temple period since Gunkel’s pioneering (but dated) work, Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895), Angel proceeds to identify and analyze appearances of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition in Qumran texts, wisdom literature, apocalyptic literature, and Jewish historiography from the period 515 B.C.E. to 200 C.E. His methodology in considering references to the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition consists of satisfying a number of criteria: secure dating within the time period under consideration, culturally Hebrew (Jewish or Christian) provenance, geographical provenance, similarity in imagery to other known examples of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition, reference to acts of God which are familiar from other references to the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition , creativity in the employment of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition which suggests that the author(s) had access to a living Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition, and the appearance of the Hebrew Chaoskampf tradition in a significant number of texts written by different authors across the span of the time period (pp. 30–34). Following the approach described above, Angel sifts through the literature of the period. He consistently adduces references to the waters of chaos, dragons, and the Divine Warrior, although not all of these elements are present in each reference. A representative example from Angel’s textual analyses is his handling of Dan 7:2–14. The sea from which the four beasts arise is identified with the chaos sea of ancient Near Eastern mythology and the beasts themselves with the chaos monster/dragon. The descriptions of the “one like a Son of Man” as one who comes on the clouds and the Ancient of Days are...

Elijah Levita: a Jewish Hebraist

Elijah Levita’s (c. 1469–1558) study of Hebrew was part of the longtime Jewish occupation with the language of Scripture. Yet much of Levita’s scholarship was at odds with prior Jewish approaches to Biblical language and the transmission of the Biblical text. In his many works, Levita provides a critical account of the development of Hebrew, Aramaic, and the masoretic scribal traditions. This article examines the relationship between Levita’s critical approach to the Bible and the Christian context within which he worked. With the rise of Christian Hebraism, an increasingly sophisticated and sustained discourse on Hebrew developed outside of Jewish circles. This created an alternative setting within which Levita could produce scholarship that challenged prior Jewish notions of language and the Bible. The viability of Levita’s scholarship was no longer contingent on Jewish reception alone, allowing him to express critical ideas without fear of internal censure and without assuming the hermeneutical posture typical of pre-modern Jewish scholarly expression.

On the relation between structural case, determiners, and verbs in agrammatism: A study of Hebrew and Dutch

Background: This study explored the relation between the production of determiners and case markers and the production of verbs and verb inflections in agrammatism. Determiners and case markers require case and therefore depend on the existence of case‐assigning constituents. The project on case assignment in Dutch has been carried out under auspices of the Graduate School of Behavioral and Cognitive Neurosciences in Groningen (BCN) and the Center for Language and Cognition in Groningen (CLCG). Naama Friedmann was supported by a university grant for the encouragement of research. We are grateful to Roel Jonkers for providing the Dutch data, and to Roelien Bastiaanse and Aviah Gvion for their comments on a previous version of this paper. Aims: Since verbs and verb inflections are case assigners, and are impaired in agrammatism, we tested whether the presence of verbs and verb inflection affects the production of determiners and case markers in Dutch and Hebrew agrammatism. Methods & Procedures: A total of 11 Hebrew‐speaking and 8 Dutch‐speaking individuals with agrammatism participated in picture description and sentence elicitation tasks, and their spontaneous speech was analysed. Outcomes & Results: The production of case‐related morphemes was closely connected to the presence of a case assigner in the sentence. In Hebrew, object case was produced correctly 98% of the time, and always when a transitive verb was present in the sentence. In Dutch the production of determiners on the subject was related to the presence of a finite verb. The production of complete object noun phrases related to the presence of a transitive verb. Conclusions: The results indicate that case itself, as well as determiners and case markers, which depend on case, are not impaired in agrammatic production. The apparent deficit is rather tightly related to the deficit in verbs and verb inflection. This suggests that the production of determiners and pronouns should be treated within sentence context, in which a special emphasis should be given to the production of correctly inflected verbs.

In Spite of Partition: Jews, Arabs, and the Limits of Separatist Imagination (review)

In Spite of Partition: Jews, Arabs, and the Limits of Separatist Imagination, by Gil Z. Hochberg. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007. 192 pp. $35.00. Ostensibly, Gil Z. Hochberg's richly comparative study of Hebrew and Arabic writers bears a certain resemblance to previous works such Ammiel Alcalay's oft-cited After Jews and Arabs: Remaking Levantine Culture (1993) and more recently, Rachel Brenner's important Inextricably Bonded: Israeli and Writers Re-Visioning Culture (2003). But Hochberg's over-arching perspective leads her toward strikingly different conclusions than any previous work. Rather than stress the values of coexistence or evenhybridity, she attempts to demonstrate the need to free both Arab' and from their current status markers of fully separable . . . identities. . . . I am interested in the passage between the Jew and the (p. 16). Brenner and Hochberg examine some of the same figures (Israelis and other writers of North African descent) well Arab-Israeli writers such Emile Habiby (The Pessoptimist), Atallah Mansour (In a New Light), and Anton Shammas (Arabesques), each of whom has written in Hebrew or published their works for Israeli readers in translation. But In Spite of Partition is distinguished by its insistence that, rather than polarities, Arab and Jewish must be reevaluated inseparable identities. This book's greatest strength resides in its compelling close readings of literary narratives. Hochberg begins by noting the expressed antipathy toward the East in the discourse of early Zionist statesmen and ideologues, in the following: Ben Gurions statement: 'Israelis will not become Arab-like' . . . not only expresses Israeli antagonism toward anything Arab; it also attests to a terror at the very heart of the Israeli nation's enterprise, haunting it from within. . . . It is only by establishing a connection between these threats that we can fully uncover the internal phobia operating within the Israeli society still today (p. 14). In pursuit of this dynamic's complex reverberations, Hochberg finds ingenious ways to structure her chapters around dialogues, real or imagined, between North African, Israeli (Jews, Christians, and Muslims), and Palestinian writers. These include works by authors that will likely be unknown to most English readers, such Jacqueline Kahanoff and Albert Swissa, well more familiar figures such Albert Memmi, Ronit MataIon, and Anton Shammas. At the heart of In Spite of Partition's idealistic yet rational approach is the sober reality of two peoples whose lives and destinies are utterly inextricable due to the complex territorial, economic, and demographic circumstances in which they are rooted. In this respect, Hochberg's favorite trope seems to be that of traces-in Derrida's sense that one's subjectivity or identity always already bears traces of the other. Thus she maps out ways in which 'Jew' and Arab,' rather than representing two independent identities, are in fact inevitably attached (p. 2). She finds a tremendous range of illustrative examples that demonstrate the profound impact this essential paradigm has on the writer's imagination. For example, both the Palestinian novelist Sahar Khalifah and the Israeli writer Orly Castel-Bloom experiment with the ways that bilingual narrative can stimulate the reader's understanding of the illusion of homogeneous national identity: calling attention to the 'familial' (Semitic) relationship of [Hebrew and Arabic], and further implying . . . that the two Semitic people might in fact be closer to each other than they realize, or wish to realize (p. 6). Besides offering a particularly astute reading of Anton Shammas' widely-translated and acclaimed novel, Arabesques (1989), Hochberg argues that the subsequent controversial cultural debate between A. B. Yehoshua and Shammas (over the latter's presumption in claiming the Hebrew language the natural provenance of Israel's writers) should be seen as an opportunity for rethinking the limits of national separatism and ethno-cultural segregation (p. …

Renaissance England's Chief Rabbi: John Selden (review)

Renaissance England's Chief Rabbi: John Selden, by Jason P. Rosenblact. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. 314 pp. $99.00. The impact of Greek and Latin upon English Renaissance culture continues to be examined intensely, but apart from studies of King James Bible and Milton, little concerted attention has been devoted to contribution of Hebrew studies to that culture. Hence exceptional importance of Jason Rosenblatts new study: Renaissance England's Chief Rabbi: John Seiden, a work deploring and correcting that neglect. Rosenblatt s volume swirls around Seiden, but is more broadly dedicated to the cultural influence of and especially talmudic on some early modern British poets and intellectuals as mediated principally by (p. 3). The sweep of volume is large. Rosenblatt opens with divorce proceedings of Henry VIII. Lacking adequate authorities in England, Henry sent inquiries to Jewish scholars abroad concerning incest laws and critical biblical texts concerning levirate marriage. This discussion illuminates impoverished state of Hebrew studies at outset of English Renaissance and curious responses of rabbis themselves, and likewise shows how an understanding of that theological controversy leads to a richer understanding of Hamlet. From that point, Rosenblatt focuses upon Seiden's intense exploration of and Talmudic material and impact of his studies upon a wide spectrum of English figures, ranging from Ben Jonson to Sir John Vaughan Among English intellectuals of his rime, only placed rabbinic thought at centre of his scholarship (p. 105). The focus of Rosenblatt's study is thus two-fold: (1) character and direction of Selden's explorations of wisdom; and (2) his transmission of that learning to his friends and to his culture at large. Rosenblatt documents that Selden's fascination with materials was already well advanced by time of writing of De Diis Syris (1617) (p. 2), and continued to explore these materials until end of his life, producing six substantial works resting upon that scholarship. By time of his death in 1654, Rosenblatt affirms, Seiden would have been most learned scholar in country, an accomplishment leading one Christian Hebraist in 1641 to address him as Rabbi (p. 4). Selden's reputation, moreover, as most learned man in England led students of every stripe to pore over his volumes, to such an extent that he in essence became a primary text himself, study of generally substituting for study of actual works. Once Selden's influence weakened, tellingly, so did quality of Hebrew learning itself in England. As important as study of Hebrew texts themselves, however, was Selden's orientation. Rosenblatt shows that Selden's works constitute a notable exception to those products of English Renaissance that emphasize otherness and difference (p. 161). In midst of an age of prejudice, he insists, Seiden transmitted an uncommonly generous view of Judaism (p. 9). So influential were Selden's views, in fact, that Rosenblatt argues that his promulgation of ideas drawn from ancient writers as well as post-Talmudic rabbis created conditions leading to reintroduction of Jews into England in 1650s (pp. 277-8). Such is larger portrait of Seiden. The chapters themselves have a divided emphasis. The first half of volume brings learning (largely mediated by Seiden) to bear on literary matters. Selden's learned correspondence with Ben Jonson over issue of cross-dressing is particularly interesting, as are Rosenblatt's two chapters detailing Selden's influence upon Milton's creations. …

The Hebrew Liturgical Poetry of Byzantine Palestine: Recent Research and New Perspectives

Over the past few decades there has been a striking growth of interest in the study of Hebrew (and Aramaic) liturgical poetry, or pjyut, in Byzantine Palestine. Scholars have published a substantial number of texts and studies and have started to produce several translations. The issues and observations presented here reflect the main current research themes and perspectives, thereby disclosing a state of the art in the study of ancient piyyut. This fascinating topic is attracting an increasing amount of fresh attention from scholars and students whose positive contributions question some of the traditional ways of describing and defining the phenomenon of synagogue poetry. Applying ideas of cultural, historical, and literary comparison, previous approaches are reconsidered and new means of viewing piyyutic and paytanic concepts and values are suggested. Jewish hymnography of Late Antiquity will continue to be an insightful and enriching source for the understanding of Jewish society at the time.

Shaked Symposium: From the Association for Jewish Studies 2007 Conference

SHAKED SYMPOSIUM: FROM THE ASSOCIATION FOR JEWISH STUDIES 2007 CONFERENCE Marvin A. Sweeney Claremont School of Theology The following essays were originally presented at a special symposium dedicated to the late Israeli literary critic, Gershon Shaked, lz, at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Jewish Studies, Toronto, December 16–18, 2007. Special thanks go to Schachar Pinsker, Hebrew Studies Book Review Editor for Modern Hebrew language and literature, and to Smadar Shiffman, Hebrew Studies Associate Editor, for their efforts to bring this symposium to publication. The symposium includes: 1. Gershon Shaked’s History of Hebrew Narrative Fiction: A Zionist Enterprise (Avner Holtzman) 2. The Challenges of Writing a Literary History of Early Modernist Hebrew Fiction: Gershon Shaked and Beyond (Shachar Pinsker) 3. Reb Gershon and Reb Yudl: Thoughts on the Achievement of Gershon Shaked on the First Anniversary of his Death (Alan Mintz) 4. Inter-Generational Portraits: Agnon, Shaked, Gender and Narrative (Anne Golomb Hoffman) ...

The First Book of Samuel (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 352 Reviews pages for results from the study is a rather meager haul for an entire book of 200 pages. The methodological questions relating to use of the data from Mesopotamian , Egyptian, and Greek temples should have been debated. The positions taken and interpretations offered should have had more discussion in many cases. Each individual chapter should have had a concluding synthesis of what the chapter had demonstrated, and the final conclusion could have been of sufficient length and detail that it was clear what had been demonstrated by the book as a whole. There are many useful data here, but readers will have to analyze it for themselves. Lester L. Grabbe University of Hull Hull, England l.l.grabbe@hull.ac.uk THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. By David Toshio Tsumura. NICOT. Pp. xxii + 698. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2007. Cloth, $50.00. David Tsumura has given us a modern philological and literary commentary which addresses a number of issues that are not normally part of scholarly discourse. A comprehensive introduction reviews modern theories of the history of the text (including the latest publications on the texts from the Judean Desert), recent literary-historical and literary-structural/semiotic (‘holistic’) scholarship, historiography, historical and religious background, and questions of grammar and syntax. The present reviewer was happy to note chapters on discourse analysis, including an expose of Longacre’s approach and a note of viewpoint (though not from a literary angle). A chapter on prose and poetry discusses the structure of parallelism, poetic prose, different forms of repetition and brachylogy. The keys include an index of Subjects, Modern Authors, Scriptural references, and Foreign words (Hebrew, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Phoenician/Punic, and other ancient languages). 1 Samuel is considered to serve two purposes: the establishment of the monarchy and the preparation of David for the role of the king, all through the prophetic authority of Samuel as God’s messenger. The author’s critical position is fairly (and rationally) conservative. The final redaction of the book of Samuel is attributed to the late tenth century, in view of the note on the Judean crown possession of Ziklag which seems to refer to the period before the campaign of Shishak, and in any case does not make sense after the Assyrian conquest of the entire Philistine area Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 353 Reviews (1 Sam 27:6, pp. 11, 612). The author rejects the assumption of such blocks as a comprehensive “Ark Narrative” (1 Samuel 4–7; 2 Samuel 6) and the “History of David’s Rise” (1 Samuel 16–2 Samuel 5), and tends to prefer smaller frames, such as the “Ark Narrative” (1 Samuel 4–7only), embedded within the Samuel History (1 Samuel 1–7), followed by a “Story of Saul” (1 Sam 9:1–15:35), and a “Story of Saul and David” (1 Samuel 16–31). Of these blocks, the Ark Narrative is tentatively attributed to the pre-Davidic era, in view of the lack of allusions to a royal cult in Jerusalem (pp. 11–12). The Saul-David Story is considered to reflect the political tensions in the time of David’s rule, and is intrinsically linked to the “Story of King David” (2 Samuel 1–20), in particular by means of the report of Saul’s death and David’s elegy in the opening chapter (pp. 13–16). The framework of 2 Samuel 21–24 is viewed as an epilogue that provides a thematic closure for the David tales, and in which the tale of the offering at the threshing floor of Araunah marks the transition to the account of Solomon’s Temple building. The author regards Solomon’s accession narrative (1 Kings 1–2) as an interface of David and Solomon tales (pp. 67–68). In Tsumura’s view, the contrast between the alleged pro-monarchic and anti-monarchic passages has been exaggerated (pp. 11, 248), seeing that in biblical context the human king always is considered the regent/deputy of God, as the heavenly king (pp. 249, 275, 282; following to a certain extent M. Tsevat). Instead of an anti-monarchic division, the author locates the tale on the “Transition to...

In Search of Genre: Hebrew Enlightenment and Modernity (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 373 Reviews IN SEARCH OF GENRE: HEBREW ENLIGHTENMENT AND MODERNITY. By Moshe Pelli. Pp. 361. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2005. Paper, $45.00. There is no way whatsoever to underestimate the importance and prominence of the Haskalah (Enlightenment) movement in the evolution of modern Hebrew/Jewish thought, culture, and literature as well as the evolution of Jewish nationality. Like the Bible, the Mishnah, and the Talmud, the Haskalah movement that budded in Italy, Germany, Austria, and later in Russia and Poland at the end of the eighteen century, blazed a new trail in the Hebrew/Jewish world. That new trail introduced modernity to the Jewish world in the broadest meaning of the term. Indeed, modern Hebrew literature that commenced with Mendele (Sh. Y. Abramowitz) and later with Ch. N. Bialik and S. Tchernichowsky at the commencement of the twentieth century could not evolve and thrive without the pioneering and daring work of the early Haskalah writers. The Haskalah was not limited, however, to belle letters only. It produced a bountiful yield in fields such as science, philosophy, education, Hebrew linguistics, biblical commentary, history, pedagogy, and much more. Like the Bible, the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Responsa literature in their times, the Haskalah molded and dictated the spiritual portrait of the Jewish people for numerous years to come. In his comprehensive and insightful book under review, Professor Moshe Pelli does the most worthy justice to the nature of the early Haskalah and its role in sculpting the new secular world of the Jewish nation after hundreds of years of being “besieged” by religious thought and scholarship only. Although no one aims to undermine that stupendous value of Jewish religious scholarship, it eventually acted in the capacity of a stumbling block that dammed modernity and secular knowledge and creativity upon the part of the Jewish people. In this respect, the Haskalah movement operated as a harbinger that knocked down the suffocating walls of the Jewish mental/spiritual ghetto and heralded modernity and freedom of thought and creativity in the new world of the Jewish people. Pelli’s book introduces the commencing evolution of the Hebrew/Jewish Haskalah movement in the late eighteenth century in Prussia with both elucidating attention and penetrating insight. The book casts a valuable light upon the Haskalah’s agenda and accomplishments: the rebirth of Hebrew letters, the revival of the Hebrew language and the rejuvenation of the Jewish people. The first Hebrew periodical, “Hame’asef” (The Gatherer) was established at the dawn of the Haskalah in Germany. That periodical heralded and advocated the ideology, credo, and practice of the Haskalah. The Maskilim (the enlightenment/Haskalah seekers) focused on Jewish/ Hebrew issues. They desired to bring modernity to the Jewish world and to establish Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 374 Reviews a bridge between the past and the present. Hence the Haskalah brought the long period of Jewish passivity and sole religiously-oriented inclinations to an end by revitalizing the Jewish concept of “ge’ula” (redemption) in the most vigorous fashion. One of the cultural-national proclivities of the Haskalah was reviving the Hebrew language as a language that could unite the Jewish nation in times of modernity. As a linguistic model for the latter, Haskalah chose Biblical Hebrew, although Mishnaic Hebrew is more “modern” and rich. Nevertheless , as the orthodox rabbis opposed both bitterly and blatantly Haskalah (that promoted the departure from the Jewish religious-mental ghetto) and as the Mishnah (as well as the Talmud) are associated with Jewish orthodoxy, the Maskilim “by-passed” Mishnaic Hebrew and inclined to Biblical Hebrew. That was a time of awakening upon the part of the Jewish nation. It is quite customary that national inclinations go back to the glorious national past in order to nourish and fortify the budding nationality. Upon the part of the Jews, the biblical past was the very vertex of national might, thriving, and pride. When the Maskilim endeavored to revive Jewish nationality, they naturally went back to the biblical past and revived its language. That revival , however, was not only of the Hebrew language but of Hebrew literature as well (next to numerous fields of study from geography to...

The So-Called Deuteronomistic History: A Sociological, Historical and Literary Introduction (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 344 Reviews Archeology: Reassessing Methodologies and Assumptions [ed. J. K. Hoffmeier and A. Millard; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2004], pp. 193– 232). There follow sixty-three documents, chosen because they shed light on the nomadic way of life, their institutions, the difficult issue of sharing the grazing territories, and their role in the army. Overall, Moshe Anbar’s book is a successful and comprehensive presentation of the documents relating to his chosen themes and, as such, provides an invaluable and inviting gateway to primary sources for the non-specialist Hebrew reader. Philippe Abrahami Université Lyon 2 Lyon, France philippe.abrahami@univ-lyon2.fr THE SO-CALLED DEUTERONOMISTIC HISTORY: A SOCIOLOGICAL , HISTORICAL AND LITERARY INTRODUCTION. By Thomas Römer. Pp. x + 202. New York: T & T Clark, 2007. Paper 29.95. Anyone interested in the Deuteronomistic History will be grateful that this book (originally published in 2005) is now available in a much less expensive paperback edition. Römer provides the reader with a survey of scholarship on the Deuteronomistic History from before Martin Noth to the present and then explores a compromise between the two major theories of the composition of the Deuteronomistic History. Römer reviews the many notions about the composition of the Deuteronomistic History and notes that “a student of the Hebrew Bible might wonder how he or she should handle these conflicting positions” (p. 41). He unfolds the main positive and negative aspects of the two main theories. The “Crossian model” (Römer’s term) postulates an edition of the Deuteronomistic History during the reign of Josiah, later updated during the exile. It explains why some texts (e.g., 2 Samuel 7) reflect optimism about the monarchy and the future of the state but does not adequately provide for the prevalence of passages concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the exile , which point to more than an exilic updating of a Josianic document. The Göttingen school postulates three exilic editions of the Deuteronomistic History and rightly emphasizes how the exile permeates the Deuteronomistic History, but the multiplication of redactional layers undermines the evident unity of the whole. Römer hopes to chart a compromise between these posi- Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 345 Reviews tions. He suggests a Josianic edition, significantly revised during the exile, and again during the Persian period. After reviewing the content of the Deuteronomistic History (chap. 1) and reviewing the development of various theories about its composition (chap. 2), Römer provides (chap. 3) a summary of his position through an analysis of “the foundation myth of the Deuteronomistic School” in 2 Kings 22–23 and an application of his theory to Deuteronomy 12, in which he finds evidence for the three proposed redactions. In the remaining three chapters, he articulates each of the three redactions, providing a general idea of the differences between them. He grounds his argument for the first edition of the Deuteronomistic History during the reign of Josiah in scholarship that finds significant parallels between Deuteronomy and Neo-Assyrian treaty language, between Joshua and Neo-Assyrian conquest narratives, and between the royal narratives in Kings and Neo-Assyrian royal chronicles. He argues that the Josianic Deuteronomistic History consisted of a form of Deuteronomy (mostly laws), an early version of Joshua 5–12, a story legitimizing David’s rise (parts of 1 Samuel 1; 9–11; 13–14; 16–27; 29; 31; 2 Samuel 2–5), an account of Solomon focused on the temple, and a brief narrative of the divided monarchy without the many prophetic and battle narratives added later. The conclusion of the work with the praise of Josiah in 2 Kgs 23:25a echoed the beginning of the story in Deut 6:4–5. In Römer’s view, this Josianic edition “was merely a work of literary propaganda,” without the chronological framework added later and therefore not “a unified literary work” (p. 71). During the exile, this Josianic collection of scrolls was edited into a more coherent history. This reworking of the Deuteronomistic History was associated with intellectuals and high officials attempting to make sense of the exile as the consequence of national sin. This exilic edition is “the first attempt to...

Mel Gibson's Passion: The Film, the Controversy, and Its Implications (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 379 Reviews about literature in spatial metaphors, referring for instance to the work of Lefevre, Foucault, De Certeau, and Boyer. As she states from the outset, Mann reads space as discursive in the first place: “space, in this view, is a discourse; it is neither given nor transcendent, but ‘produced’” (p. 1). This exciting exchange between space and language concludes with the modernist Gordian knot between the urban space and poetry. Mann shows that the usual connection between poetry and the city gains further intensity in the case of Hebrew poetry and Tel Aviv. The modernist poetic project is consonant with the national Zionist project of Tel Aviv. Each aims “to suggest a transcendent, imaginative space built from the ordinary, even profane details of the city down below” (p. 252). But unlike the more traditional critics, Mann does not subscribe to this enthusiastic nexus between the modernistpoetic project and the urban-nationalist one. She prefers, instead, to take a critical stance and see this, in fact, as the source of a blind spot in the discourse about Tel Aviv in which “concrete history” takes to the background in favor of transcendence. A very important contribution, this book adds a crucial layer to the discussion of the city of Tel Aviv in its local, national, and historical context. I would even venture to claim that it offers the most complex and multilayered view to date, a Renaissance text in which the author/flâneuse strolls, researches, interprets, writes, and even makes photographs, all at the same time. Hanna Soker-Schwager Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer Sheva, Israel soker@bgu.ac.il MEL GIBSON’S PASSION: THE FILM, THE CONTROVERSY, AND ITS IMPLICATIONS. Edited by Zev Garber. Shofar Supplements in Jewish Studies. Pp. 184. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press, 2006. Paper, $14.95. In this book, Zev Garber presents twenty essays by different authors focusing upon The Passion of the Christ (USA, 2004; director: Mel Gibson), a movie attempting to portray the trial and crucifixion of Jesus. Some of the essays in the book are based upon a 2004 symposium held at Purdue University, which analyzed the movie based upon biblical, historical, and sociological perspectives. The various authors in this book present their material from the position of Jewish, Christian, and interfaith viewpoints. The authors comprise a wide range of respondents from the United States and Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 380 Reviews abroad and demonstrate a serious approach to this difficult and controversial topic. The essays are presented in three separate sections. The first section is entitled “Reflections on the Film.” Irving Greenberg, “Review of The Passion of the Christ,” states that Gibson created the “most successful Passion play of all time” (p. 7). This statement by Greenberg should be understood in the context of the media’s obsession with horrific, gory, and exaggerated details concerning the death of Jesus. Furthermore, similar to the Passion plays of the Middle Ages, the movie is a highly subjective interpretation by Mel Gibson of some aspects of the end of the life of Jesus. Greenberg asks disturbing theological questions, for example, whether or not this movie is premised upon “the teaching that God demands the tortured death of God’s son as the price of forgiveness of human sin” (p. 11). Based upon Greenberg, we may ask why the God of Love of the New Testament is absent from the movie? Incidentally, a fact often unknown to some Bible teachers, as well as lay people from diverse backgrounds, this God of Love is also found in the Hebrew Bible Penny Wheeler, “Gibson at the Crossroads,” clearly states that this “celluloid passion” (p. 13) is as much about Gibson’s differences with his own Roman Catholic Church as it is about the sufferings of Jesus. Gibson incorporates sources that are not part of the canonized Gospels. She closely examines some of the sources utilized by Gibson, especially the visions of the obscure Anna Katharina, a German nineteenth century mystic, whose visions were recorded by the German romantic poet and translator, Clemens Brentano. Bypassing the Gospel versions, Gibson introduces the voice of Satan into contrived scenes of the Passion in...

Avot De-Rabbi Natan: Synoptische Edition Beider Versionen (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 363 Reviews AVOT DE-RABBI NATAN: SYNOPTISCHE EDITION BEIDER VERSIONEN. Edited by Hans-Jürgen Becker and Christoph Berner. Pp. xxvii + 409. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006. Cloth, 279. $361.00. A new scholarly edition of Avot de-Rabbi Nathan (Avot R. Nat.) marks a new chapter in the long publishing history of this rabbinic text. Avot R. Nat. was first printed in 1550, in Venice, as part of M. A. Justiniani’s Talmud Bavli. Justiniani placed it after Nezikin among other so-called “minor tractates .” The editors of the Vilna print of the Talmud Bavli at the Romm press (1880–1886) used the Venetian editio princeps of Avot R. Nat. and amended it according to the version of the Tummat Yesharim (Venice, 1622). Equally placed after Nezikin, the Vilna Avot R. Nat. became the textus receptus. In 1887, Solomon Schechter published a critical edition of Avot R. Nat. that stands as a landmark in the history of scholarship on this text, and of scholarship in general: as far as I know, it was the first truly critical edition of any rabbinic text (Aboth de Rabbi Nathan: hujus libri recensiones duas collatis variis apud bibliothecas et publicas et privatas codicibus edidit, prooemium notas appendices indicesque addidit Salomon Schechter, London, Vienna, and Frankfurt, 1887 [Hebrew]). Schechter identified two distinct versions of Avot R. Nat., dubbing them a ajswn and b (S. Schechter, Aboth de Rabbi Nathan, pp. xx–xxiv), henceforth commonly called ARN A and B. While Schechter used the textus receptus in the Vilna print of the Bavli as his basis for ARN A, he argued for ARN B to be a more original form of Avot R. Nat. (S. Schechter, Aboth de Rabbi Nathan)—an insight most emphatically endorsed by M. B. Lerner (in Sh. Safrai, ed., The Literature of the Sage, First Part: Oral Tora, Halakha, Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud, External Tractates [Maastricht and Philadelphia: Van Gorcum and Fortress Press, 1987], p. 376). In his edition, Schechter sought to present version A and B alongside each other, giving the false impression of a structural compatibility of the two. Schechter furthermore, following the trends of New Testament scholarship of his time, presented an eclectic text of each of the two versions without allowing the reader fully to reconstruct the respective manuscripts he used. Menahem Kister reprinted Schechter’s edition in 1997, along with useful additions and a detailed commentary on Schechter’s editing techniques (Avoth de-Rabbi Nathan, Solomon Schechter Edition with References to Parallels in the Two Versions and to the Addenda in the Schechter Edition, Prolegomenon by Menahem Kister [in Hebrew; New York and Jerusalem: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1997]). In 1998, Kister published a detailed study of the textual and reception histories of Avot R. Nat. (M. Kister, Studies in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan: Text, Redaction, and Interpretation [in Hebrew; Jerusalem: The Hebrew University and Yad Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 364 Reviews Izhak ben-Zvi, 1998]). Kister included a description of the extant primary and secondary text witnesses, that is the manuscripts and editions of Avot R. Nat. proper, and the citations and parallels of the text in other medieval sources. Partially based on the secondary sources, Kister identified a more complex transmission history within ARN A. He emphasized the independent status of the work’s division and wording in Ms. New York (JTS) Rab. 25, as compared to Ms. Oxford (Bodleiana) Opp. 95 (Neubauer 408) and Ms. New York (JTS) 10484 (Epstein), which are closer to the textus receptus (M. Kister, Studies in Avot, pp. 23–80). Suggesting a new critical edition based on his insights, Kister expressed his concern that on the one hand, any conventional critical edition would cause “twasryg ypwlyj lC Kbs” (A thicket of parallel readings; M. Kister, Studies in Avot, p. 79) in the critical apparatus. On the other hand, however, his own unpublished creation of a full synopsis of Avot R. Nat., including all secondary witnesses (see M. Kister, Studies in Avot, p. 6), led him to believe that such a format would necessarily be “srk-bo” (corpulent; M. Kister, Studies in Avot, p. 79). Instead, Kister called for a separation of ARN A...

Saul in Story and Tradition (review)

Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 355 Reviews discerns a connection between Jonathan’s name and his expression of confidence in the divine victory (1 Sam 14:10, p. 361). Tsumura’s commentary, then, is a very welcome addition to a worthy series of modern commentaries on the Book of Samuel. Although his commentary cannot be said to supersede more strictly critical commentaries, of the kind of McCarter’s or Campbell’s, it provides an indispensable complementation of them. We are looking forward to the volume on 2 Samuel. Frank Polak Tel Aviv University Tel Aviv, Israel frankha@post.tau.ac.il SAUL IN STORY AND TRADITION. Edited by Carl S. Ehrlich with Marsha C. White. FAT 47. Pp. viii + 358. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006. Cloth, 84,00. $111.78. King Saul plays a prominent and pivotal role in the history of ancient Israel as presented in the Bible. One would, therefore, expect a book about him to provide some sense of who he was. However, that is the one thing that those who work their way through the papers in this volume will leave without, and that may be precisely the point—that the memory of Israel’s first king has been preserved in ways that make him ultimately unknowable. We can explore how he was understood, both in the Bible and after, but not capture the reality of who he was. And this book does precisely that, examining numerous portrayals of Saul, mostly within the Bible, but also from a wide variety of other works, both ancient and modern, without trying to grasp “the historical Saul.” Six of its chapters are devoted to post-biblical portrayals, ranging in time from Josephus and the Qur}an to Rembrandt and Handel. For the biblical period, there are six chapters on the Deuteronomistic History (i.e., the book of Samuel) and one on the book of Chronicles. Two others explore imagery associated with the ark and with swords. That leaves only two papers, which examine the historical situation during the period in which the Bible places Saul. Even these do not address Saul himself, but rather the circumstances that led to the rise of the Israelite monarchy. As little as the actual Saul figures in this volume, it is not devoid of historical interests. Avraham Faust and Siegfried Kreuzer describe the situation in Benjaminite territory during the early Iron Age as one of population concentration and urbanization. They attribute much of this to the presence of Hebrew Studies 49 (2008) 356 Reviews the Philistines. But as important as those developments may have been for Israelite history, they tell us nothing about Saul. Still, there is one presumably historical figure who does come up repeatedly in these studies, even if it is not the one named in the book’s title. Instead , it is David, for whom the authors of several of these papers consider Saul to have served as a foil. In order to accomplish that, Saul’s heroic features must be turned into negatives and his flaws emphasized. That approach is particularly noticeable in the work of the deuteronomistic historian. According to Gregory Mobley, even the depiction of Goliath is intended to evoke and thereby critique Saul in a way that redounds to David’s advantage . The negative portrayal of Saul continues in the book of Chronicles and then the work of later writers, such as Pseudo-Philo and the rabbis, not to mention the more recent compositions of Voltaire and Handel. To be sure, Yairah Amit sees the Deuteronomistic historian’s portrayal as more positive than that of the Chronicler; however, Louis Feldman observes that only Josephus presents Saul positively, magnifying his traits and giving him more space than any other biblical figure. One might speculate that the lack of historical information about Saul made him a kind of blank slate, which could be used to promote any number of agendas. For example, Gary Knoppers suggests that the Chronicler’s treatment reflects political circumstances in post-exilic Yehud. Christophe Nihan goes further, finding traces of both positive and negative attitudes towards the Persian period’s non-institutionalized spirit possession within the various strata of the stories about Saul in the...

The Budding of Modern Hebrew Creativity in Babylon, and: The Collected Essays of Rabbi Shelomo Bekhor Hutsin (review)

Reviewed by: The Budding of Modern Hebrew Creativity in Babylon, and: The Collected Essays of Rabbi Shelomo Bekhor Hutsin Yair Mazor The Budding of Modern Hebrew Creativity in Babylon, by Lev Hakak. Or Yeudah: The Babylonian Jewry Heritage Center, 2003. 372 pp. (in Hebrew). The Collected Essays of Rabbi Shelomo Bekhor Hutsin, by Lev Hakak. Tel Aviv: Hakibbutz Hameuchad, 2005. 281 pp. (in Hebrew). Numerous scholars, students, and even laypersons who display interest in Hebrew literature are well acquainted with Haskalah/Enlightenment Hebrew literature and scholarship from the late 18th through the 19th century, first in Italy and Austria, and later in Russia and Poland. That literature and scholarship (in various fields of study, such as Hebrew philology, biblical commentary, science, history, poetry, prose, drama) has been justly considered the bedrock of modern Hebrew literature and scholarship. As much as this statement is undoubtedly valid, however, it does injustice to the Hebrew poetry, epistolary writings, and periodicals produced in Babylon/Iraq during the Enlightenment. In other words, very few Hebrew poets, writers, and scholars have been acquainted with this treasure of Hebrew writings which greatly enrich the body of Hebrew Enlightenment literature. In this respect, the two books here, besides their scholarly worthiness per se, blaze a trail in Hebrew literature study and call attention to an enormous portion of Hebrew literature (notably poetry) that has been regretfully neglected. The Budding of Modern Hebrew Creativity in Babylon casts a novel and insightful light notably on poets who were prolifically active during the Enlightenment period in Babylon. The vast majority of Haskalah Hebrew literature in Babylon is associated with the Jewish religion, the laws of the Jewish culture, Biblical commentary, and liturgical poetry. During the Enlightenment [End Page 207] period over 2000 poems were written; these were fruitfully influenced by the Hebrew poetry of Spain during the middle ages as well as by Biblical texts. The great merit of The Budding of Modern Hebrew Creativity in Babylon is the author's capacity to discuss poems aesthetically while simultaneously presenting the biographical, social, scholarly, and ideological backgrounds in which the poems are rooted. It may be quite cogent to argue that the second book, The Collected Essays of Rabbi Shelomo Bekhor Hutsin, complements the previous book. This book contains two parts. The first addresses Rabbi Hutsin's educational and cultural background—his activities, his publishing house and bookstore, the periodicals in which he published his writings in conformity with Haskalah/Enlightenment ideas, his relations with Jewish scholars and writers in Eastern Europe, and the style and structure of his epistles and liturgical poetry. The second part of the book introduces Rabbi Hutsin's epistles in the way they were printed in a variety of periodicals that endorsed Haskalah. Dr. Hakak's two books may be justly considered highly valuable works of scholarship that bring to light worthy poetry and poetic periods without which the story of the evolution of Hebrew literature and culture would not be complete. Yair Mazor Hebrew Studies Program University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Copyright © 2007 Purdue University