Google 


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world’s books discoverable online. 


It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover. 


Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 


Usage guidelines 


Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 


We also ask that you: 


+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 


+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 


+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 


+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 


About Google Book Search 


Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 


atthtto: //books.gqoogle.com/ 


es 


Jewish Encyclopedia 


A DESCRIPTIVE RECORD OF 


THE HISTORY, RELIGION, 


LITERATURE, AND CUS- 


TOMS OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE FROM THE 
EARLIEST TIMES TO THE PRESENT DAY 





Prepared by More than Six Hundred Scholars and Specialists 


UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE FOLLOWING EDITORIAL BOARD 


Cyrus ADLER, PH.D. (Departments of Post- 
Biblical Antiquities ; the Jews of America). 

WILHELM BACHER, PH.D. (Departments of the 
Talmud and Rabbinical Literature). 


GOTTHARD DeEvTSCH, Pu.D. (Department of 


flistory from 1492 to 1906). 

RICHARD GOTTHEIL, PH.D. (Departments of 
History from Ezra to 1492; History of Post- 
Talmudic Literature). 


Emit G. HirscuH, Pu.D., LL.D. (Department of 
the Bible). 


ISAAC K. FUNK, D.D., LL.D. 
Chairman of the Board 


JosEPH Jacoss, B.A. (Departments of the Jews 
of England and Anthropology; Revising Editor). 


KAUFMANN KOHLER, PH.D. 
Theology and Philosophy). 


(Departments of 


HIERMAN ROSENTHAL (Department of the Jews of 
Russia and Poland ). 


ISIDORE SINGER, PH.D. (Department of Modern 
Biography from 1750 to 1906). 


CRAWFORD H. Toy, D.D., LL.D. (Departments 
of Hebrew Philology and Hellenistic Literature). 


FRANK H. VIZETELLY, F.S.A. 
Secretary of the Board 


WILLIAM PopPpER, M.A., PH.D. 
Associate Revising Editor; Chief of the Bureau of Translation 


ISIDORE SINGER, Ph.D. 
Protector and Managing Editor 


ASSISTED BY AMERICAN AND FOREIGN BOARDS OF CONSULTING EDITORS 


COMPLETE IN TWELVE VOLUMES 


EMBELLISHED WITH MORE THAN TWO THOUSAND ILLUSTRATIONS 


FUNK AND WAGNALLS COMPANY 


NEW YORK 


AND LONDON 





ee Google 


oped) Google 





MeE | FAS) Ra oe mein. <peaionen 


i os | 4 ne WSN : phn Seale | 
Lae VOU) 


ee ae I 












ay and Tendon, 


goalls Company. New York 


VEIT. Copyright, 1904, ty Funk & W 


ILLUMINATED PAGE PROM MALMONIDES’ “YAD’? 


(FROM A MANUSCRIPT iN THE BRITISH MUSEUM, 
DATED 1472) 


ee Google 


ee Google 





THE 





Jewish Encyclopedia 





A DESCRIPTIVE RECORD OF 


THE HISTORY, RELIGION, LITERATURE, AND CUS- 
TOMS OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE FROM THE 
EARLIEST TIMES TO THE PRESENT DAY 


Prepared by More than Four Hundred Scholars and Specialists 


UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE FOLLOWING EDITORIAL BOARD 


Cyrus ADLER, PH.D. (Departments of Post- 
Biblical Antiquities ; the Jews of America). 

WILHELM BACHER, PH.D. (Departments of the 
Talmud and Rabbinical Literature). 


GOTTHARD DeEvuTscH, PH.D. (Department of 


History from 1492 to 1904). 


RICHARD GOTTHEIL, PH.D. (Departments of 
flistory from Lara to 1492; History of Post- 
Talmudic Literature). 

Emit G. Htirscu, Pu.D., LL.D. (Department of 
the Bible). 


ISAAC K, FUNK, D.D., LL.D. 


Chairman of the Board 


JosEPH JAcosBs, B.A. (Departments of the Jews 
of England and Anthropology; Revising Editor). 


KAUFMANN KOHLER, PH.D. 
Theology and Philosophy). 


(Departments of 


HERMAN ROSENTHAL (Department of the Jews of 
Russia and Poland ). 


IsIDORE SINGER, PH.D. {Department of Modern 
Biography from 1750 to 1904). 


CRAWFORD H. Toy, D.D., LL.D. (Departments 
of Hebrew Philology and Hellenistic Literature). 


FRANK H. VIZETELLY, F.\S.A. 
Secretary of the Board 


WILLIAM Popper, M.A., PH.D. 
Associate Revising Editor ; Chief of the Bureau of Translation 


ISIDORE SINGER, Ph.D. 
Projector and Managing Editor 


ASSISTED BY AMERICAN AND FOREIGN BOARDS OF CONSULTING EDITORS 


VOLUME VIII 





LEON—MORAVIA 







FUNK AND WAGNALLS COMPANY 


NEW 


YORK AND: LONDON 





COPYRIGHT, 1905, 1909, 1912, BY 
FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY 


All rights of translation reserved 


Registered at Stationers’ Hall, London, England 


[Printed in the United States of America] 


LITERARY DIRECTORATE 


EDITORIAL BOARD 


CYRUS ADLER, Ph.D. 


(Departments of Post-Biblical Aitiquities and the Jews of 
America.) 


president of the American Jewish Historical Society; Libra- 
rian, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. 


WILHELM BACHER, Ph.D. 
(Departments of the Talmud and Rabbinical Literature.) 
Professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary, Budapest, 
Hungary. 

GOTTHARD DEUTSCH, Ph.D. 
(Department of History from 1492 to 1904.) 


Professor of Jewish History, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, 
Ohio; Editor of **‘ Deborah.” 


RICHARD GOTTHEIL, Ph.D. 


(Departments of History from Ezrato 1492 and Histori of 
Post-Talmudic Literature.) 
Professor of Semitic Languages, Coluinbia University, New York ; 
Chief of the Oriental Department, New York Public Library. 


EMIL G. HIRSCH, Ph.D., LL.D. 
(Department of the Bible.) 


Rabbi of Chicago Sinai Congregation, Chicago, [l.; Professor of 
Rabbinical Literature and Philosophy, University of 
Chicago; Editor of ** The Reform Advocate.” 


JOSEPH JACOBS, B.A. 
(Departments of the Jews of England and Anthropology: 
Revising Editor.) 
Formerly President of the Jewish Historical Society of England ; 
Author of ‘* Jews of Angevin England,” ete. 


AMERICAN BOARD OF 


BERNARD DRACHMAN, Ph.D., 
Rabbi of the Congregation Zichron Ephraim; Instructor in 
the Bible and in Hebrew Grammar, Jewish Theological 
Seminary of America, New York. 

B. FELSENTHAL, Ph.D., 

Rabbi Emeritus of Zion Congregation, Chicago, Ill.; Author of 
* A Practical Grammar of the Hebrew Language.” 
GUSTAV GOTTHEIL, Ph.D. 
(DECEASED), 

Late Rabbi Emeritus of Temple Emanu-El, New York. 


HENRY HYVERNAT, D.D., 

Head of the Department of Semitic and Egyptian Literatures, 
Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C. 
MARCUS JASTROW, Ph.D. 
(DECEASED), 


Late Rabbi Emeritus of the Congregation Rodef Shalom, Phila- 
delphia, Pa.; Author of * Dictionary of the Talmud.” 


| 


KAUFMANN KOHLER, Ph.D. 
(Departments of Theology and Philosophy.) 
President of Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio; Rabbi 
Emeritus of Temple Beth-El, New York. 


HERMAN ROSENTHAL. 


(Department of the Jews of Russia and Poland.) 
Chief of the Slavonic Department, New York Publie Library. 


ISIDORE SINGER, Ph.D. 
MANAGING EDITOR. 
(Department af Modern Biography from 1750 to 1904.) 


CRAWFORD HOWELL TOY, D.D., LL.D. 
(Departments of Hebrew Philology and. Hellenistic 
Literature.) 

Professor of Hebrew in Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.:; 
Author of ** The Religion of Israel,”’ ete. 





I. K. FUNK, D.D., LL.D. 
(Chairman of the Board.) 
Editor-in-Chief of the STANDARD DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH 
LANGUAGE, etc. 


FRANK H. VIZETELLY, F.S.A. 
(Secretary of the Board.) 
Associate Editor of the STaNDARD DicTIONARY, “The Colum- 
bian Cyclopedia,” ete. 

WILLIAM POPPER, M.A., Ph.D. 
(Associate Revising Editor; Chief of the Bureau of 
Translation.) 

Gustav Gottheil Lecturer in Semitic Languages, Columbia 


University, New York (1908-5); Author of “* The Censorship 
of Hebrew Books.” 


CONSULTING EDITORS 


MORRIS JASTROW, Jr., Ph.D., 


Professor of Semitic Languages and Librarian in the University 
of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.; Author of ** Re- 
ligion of the Babylonians and Assyrians,” etc. 


J. FREDERIC McCURDY, Ph.D., LL.D., 


Professor of Oriental Languages, University College, Toronto, 


Canada; Author of ** History, Prophecy, and 
the Monuments.”’ 


H. PEREIRA MENDES, M.D., 


Rabbi of the Shearith Israel Congregation (Spanish and Portu- 


guese), New York; President of the Board of Jewish 
Ministers, New York. 


MOSES MIELZINER, Ph.D., D.D. 


(DECEASED), 


Late President of the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio: 


Author of ** Introduction to the Talmud.” 


vi LITERARY DIRECTORATE 





GEORGE F. MOORE, M.A., D.D., 


Professor of Biblical Literature and the History of Religions 
in Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.; Author of 
‘*A Commentary on the Book of Judges,”’ etc. 


DAVID PHILIPSON, D.D., 
Rabbi of the Congregation B'ne Israel ; Professor of Homiletics, 
Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio; President of 
Hebrew Sabbath School Union of America. 


IRA MAURICE PRICE, B.D., Ph.D., 
>rofessor of Semitic Languages and Literatures, University of 
Chicago, Iil.; Author of “ The Monuments and 
the Old Testament,” etc. 


SOLOMON SCHECHTER, M.A., Litt.D., 


President of the Faculty of the Jewish Theological Seminary of 
America, New York: Author of ‘Studies in Judaism.”’ 


JOSEPH SILVERMAN, D.D., 


| President of Central Conference of American Rabbis; Rabbi of 


Temple Emanu-F], New York. 


JACOB VOORSANGER, D.D., 


Rabbi of the Congregation Emanu-El, San Francisco, Cal.; Pro- 
fessor of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Uni- 
versity of California, Berkeley, Cal. 


EDWARD J. WHEELER, M.A., 
Editor of ** The Literary Digest,’”’ New York; Author of ** Stories 
in Rhyme,” ete. 


FOREIGN BOARD OF CONSULTING EDITORS 


ISRAEL ABRAHAMS, M.A., 


Coeditor of ‘* The Jewish Quarterly Review ”’; Author of “ Jew- 
ish Life in the Middle Ages,” ete.; Reader in Talmudic, 
Cambridge University, England. 


M. BRANN, Ph.D., 


Professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary, Breslan, Ger- 
many; Editor of “* Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und 
Wissenschaft des Judenthums.”’ 


H. BRODY, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Nachod, Bohemia, Austria: Coeditor of ‘* Zeitschrift fir 
Hebraische Bibliographie.” 


ABRAHAM DANON, 


Principal of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Constantinople, 
Turkey. 


HARTWIG DERENBOURG, Ph.D., 


Professor of Literal Arabic at the Special School of Oriental 
Languages, Paris ; Member of the Institut de France. 


Ss. M. DUBNOW, 


Author of ‘‘ Istoriya Yevreyev,”’ Wilna, Russia. 


MICHAEL FRIEDLANDER, Ph.D., 


Principal of Jews’ College, London, England; Author of ‘The 
Jewish Religion,” ete. 


IGNAZ GOLDZIHER, Ph.D., 


Professor of Semitic Philology, University of Budapest, 
Hungary. 


M. GUDEMANN, Ph.D., 


Chief Rabbi of Vienna, Austria. 


BARON DAVID GUNZBURG, 


St. Petersburg, Russia. 


A. DE HARKAVY, Ph.D., 


Chief of the Hebrew Department of the Imperial Public Library, 
St. Petersburg, Russia. 


ZADOC KAHN, 


Chief Rabbi of France; Honorary President of the Alliance 
Israélite Universelle; Officer of the Legion 
of Honor, Paris, France. 


M. KAYSERLING, Ph.D., 


Rabbi, Budapest, Hungary; Corresponding Member of the 
Royal Academy of History, Madrid, Spain. 


MORITZ LAZARUS, Ph.D. 


(DECEASED), 
Late Professor Emeritus of Psychology, University of Berlin: 
Meran, Austria. 


ANATOLE LEROY-BEAULIEU, 


Member of the French Institute; Professor atthe Free School 
of Political Science, Paris, France ; Author of 
** Israél chez les Nations.”’ 


ISRAEL LEVI, 
Professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary ; Editor of 
** Revue des Etudes Juives,” Paris, France. 
EUDE LOLLI, D.D., 
Chief Rabbi of Padua; Professor of Hebrew at the University, 
Padua, Italy. 
IMMANUEL LOW, Ph.D., 


Chief Rabbi of Szegedin, Hungary ; Author of ** Die Aramaischen 
Pflanzennamen.”’ 


S. H. MARGULIES, Ph.D., 
Principal of the Jewish Theological Seminary; Chief Rabbi of 
Florence, Italy. . 
H. OORT, D.D., 
Professor of Hebrew Language and Archeology at the State 
University, Leyden, Holland. 
ABBE PIETRO PERREAU, 
Formerly Librarian of the Reale Biblioteca Palatina, Parma, 
Italy. 
MARTIN PHILIPPSON, Ph.D., 


Formerly Professor of History at the Universities of Bonn and 
Brussels ; President of the Deutsch-Israelitischer 
Gemeindebund, Berlin, Germany. 


SAMUEL POZNANSEI, Ph.D., 


Rabbi in Warsaw, Russia. 


E. SCHWARZFELD, LL.D., 
Secretary-General of the Jewish Colonization Association, Paris, 
France. 

LUDWIG STEIN, Ph.D., 


Professor of Philosophy, University of Bern, Switzerland; Editor 
of ** Archiv fir Geschichte der Philosophie,”’ ete. 


HERMANN L. STRACK, Ph.D., 
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Semitic Languages, 
University of Berlin, Germany. 

CHARLES TAYLOR, D.D., LL.D., 


Master of St. John’s College, Cambridge, England: Editor of 
* Sayings of the Jewish Fathers,”’ etc. 


SYSTEMS OF TRANSLITERATION AND OF CITATION 
OF PROPER NAMES* 


A.—Rules for the Transliteration of Hebrew and Aramaic. 


1, All important names which occur in the Bible are cited as found in the authorized King James 
version ; ¢.g., Moses, not Mosheh; Isaac, not Yizhak; Saul, not Sha’ul or Shatil; Solomon, not 
Shelomoh, etc. 


2, The spellings of names that have gained currency in English books on Jewish subjects, or that 
have become familiar to English readers, are generally retained ; cross-references are given when 
topics are treated under forms transliterated according to the system tabulated below. 


3. Hebrew subject-headings are transcribed according to the scheme of transliteration ; cross-refer- 
ences are made as in the case of personal names. 


4, The following system of transliteration has been used for Hebrew and Aramaic: 


x Not noted at the beginning or the end of a word ; otherwise’ or by dieresis; e.g., pe’er or Meir. 


3b tz 5 1 B (with dagesh), p vw sh 
1 9 nh ym 5 (without dagesh), f ys 
td b ? 3” ¥ 2 nt 
nh YY bs p & 
1 w 3k ys a 


NoTE: The presence of dagesh lene is not noted except in the case of p. Dagesh forte is indi- 
cated by doubling the letter. 


5, The vowels have been transcribed as follows; 





—~ (kamez) a —4U —~a —= eé 5 o 
~ (kamez hatuf) o 

“=a 6 se =: O 4 

1 =e = a 3. Uu 


The so-called ‘‘ Continental” pronunciation of the English vowels is implied. 


6. The Hebrew article is transcribed as ha, followed by a hyphen, without doubling the following 
letter. [Not hak-Kohen or hak-Cohen, nor Rosh ha-shshanah.] 
B.—Rules for the Transliteration of Arabic. 


I. All Arabic names and words, except such as have become familiar to English readers in other 
forms, as Mohammed, Koran, mosque, are transliterated according to the following system : 


4 See x above C kh Pa sh a gh we 
Kb vd ues wif sh 
a f gy ah yeod G4 > 
Wy th jr L ¢ ue) ie ws Y 
Ti 3? Lb: J! 
t # Ls c | ‘aes 


*. Only the three vowels —a, i, u—are represented : 
a ao ea 
No account has been taken of the imalah; i has not been written e, nor u written o. 


. In all other matters of orthography the spelling preferred by the StanparD Dictionary has usually been followed. Typo- 
graphical exigencies have rendered occasional deviations from these systems necessary. 


vili SYSTEMS OF [TRANSLITERATION AND OF CITATION OF PROPER NAMES 





De 


A, 


3. 


The Arabic article is invariably written al, no account being taken of the assimilation of the / to 
the following letter; e.g., zibu al-Salt, not Abu-l-Salt; Nafis al-Daulah, not Nafis ad-Daulah. 
The article is joined by a hyphen to the following word. 


At the end of words the feminine termination is written uh; but wh-n followed by a genitive, 
at; e.g., Risalah dhat al-Kursiyy, but Hi'at al-Afiak. 


No account is taken of the overhanging vowels which distinguish the cases; ¢.g.. “amr, not ‘Amru 
or ‘Amrun; Yatkub, not Ya‘kubun; or in a title, Kitub al-Amanat wal-L'tikudat. 


C.—Rules for the Transliteration of Russian. 


All Russian names and words, except such as have become familiar to English readers in other 


forms, as Czar, Alexander, deciatine, Moscow, are transliterated according to the following system : 


Aa a Il u n Lu shch 
B 6 b Oo O bs mute 
BB v Il a v0 DI Yy 
I'r h, v, or g Pp Y bB half mute 
Aun ad Ce 8 BB ye 
Ee e and ye Tr t 99 e 
erento: 
dH, 3 zh Yy u YO 10 yu 
3 8 z P tS Sl 4 ya 
Yuli z XX kh 00  &£F 
Kk k TT 1 tz Vr oe 
A x } Uy ch Ui d 
Mm m IU m sh 


Rules for the Citation of Proper Names, Personal and Otherwise. 


Whenever possible, an author is cited under his most specific name; e.g., Moses Nigrin under 
Nigrin; Moses Zacuto under Zacuto; Moses Rieti under Rieti; all the Kimhis (or Kamhis) 
under Kimhi; Israel ben Joseph Drohobiczer under Drohobiezer. Cross-references are freely 
made from any other form to the most specific one; e.g., to Moses Vidal from Moses Narboni ; to 
Solomon Nathan Vidal from Menahem Meiri; to Samuel Kansi from Samuel Astruc Dascola; 
to Jedaiah Peninit from both Bedersi and En Bonet; to John of Avignon from Moses de 
Roquemaure. 


When a person is not referred to as above, he is cited under his own personal name followed 
by his official or other title; or, where he has borne no such title, by ‘‘of” followed by the place 
of his birth or residence; e.g., Johanan ha-Sandlar ; Samuel ha-Nagid ; Judah he-Hasid; Gershom 
of Metz; Jsaac of Corbeil. 


Names containing the words a’, de, da, di, van, von, y, of, ben, ha-, ibn* are arranged under the 
letter of the name following this word; e.g., de Pomis under Pomis, de Barrios under Barrios, 
Jacob d’Illescas under J/lescas. The order of topics is illustrated by the following exampies : 


Abraham of Augsburg Abraham de Balmes Abraham ben Benjamin Aaron 
Abraham of Avila Abraham ben Baruch Abraham ben Benjamin Zeeb 
Abraham ben Azriel Abraham of Beja Abraham Benveniste 


* When Inn has come to be a specific part of a name, as Ipn Ezra, such name is treated in its alphabetical place under “I.” 


Notre TO THE READER. 
Subjects on which further information is afforded elsewhere in this work are indicated by the 


use of capitals and small capitals in the text; as, ABBA ARIKA; PUMBEDITA; VOCALIZATION. 


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 


[Self-evident abbreviations, particularly those used in the bibliographies, are not included here. ] 


Abot, Pirke 


re TR Noseew tains Abot de-Rabbi Natan 

tAD Zaral..cccovves *Abodah Zarah 

rae aa cute anigee seek at the place; to the passage cited 
geithowads in the year of the Hegira 


aie Jew. Hist. Soc. American Jewish Historical Society 


Am. 
Am. Jour. Semit. American Journal of Semitic Languages 


anglodew. ‘Assoc... Anglo-Jewish Association 
ree lonisuersacets Apocalypse 

at Sere Apocrypha 
.-Apostolical Constitutions 
‘Arakin (Talmud) 


“Ar sls sscsenks Archives Israélites 
; ten { Aronius, Regesten zur Geschichte der Juden 
Aronius, Regest€n 5“ in Deutschland 
Be Di dutaisdes coun Das Alte Testament 
Ae Veccavvectesasces Authorized Version 


esveceeeerer 


Rael: Ag. Bab. | Bacher, Agada der Babylonischen Amoraer 


AMOFP...-66 --- 
Bacher, Ag. Pal. 4 Bacher, Agada der Palastinensischen Amo- 


AWMOC i s20 9h 5085 rier 
Bacher, Af Tan....Bacher, Agada der Tannaiten 
Bo Bicraviassseeceee Baba Batra (Talmud) 
B. ae ig Sie aoig ttc ieincacelat before tbe Christian era 
Sues Sesal ees Bekorot (Taimud) 
peered Arch....Benzinger, Hebraische Archaologie 
Ber... -ceeeeee cess Berakot (Talmud) 
nee it CF che Festschrift zum 70ten Geburtstag Berliners 
Berliner’s | Berliner’s Magazin fiir die Wissenschaft des 
Magazin. ...... Judenthums 
Bibl. Rab........ ... Bibliotheca Rabbinica 
Bik...... ‘iene Os . Bikkurim (Talmud) 
Be Risks ee auiees , Baba Kamma (Talmud) 
BoM cctasnoneeeex pate Mee eed) seen aie 
: F oletin de la Real Academia de la Historia 
Boletin Acad. Hist. } (Madrid) 
Brit. Mus..........-. British bd betetee o - é a 
199, Brill’s Jahrbticher fur Jiidische Gesehichte 
Briill’s Jahrb..... ; ee 
Bulletin All. Isr.... Bulletin of the Alliance Israélite Universelle 
Lees Si eee about 
Canti costa eee use’ Canticles (Song of Solomon) 
Cat. Anglo-Jew. {Catalogue of Anglo-Jewish Historical Ex- 
Hist. Exh...... { hibition 
Cazés, Notes ae Cazés, Notes Bibliographiques sur la Littéra- 
mic nie ture Juive-Tunisienne 
CUE cao tseisee esses common era 
Cliccieae ha ataean sae chapter or chapters 


Cheyneand Black, ; Cheyne and Black, Encyclopedia Biblica 


Eneye. Bibl.. - eas ae ee 
eciieil des Travaux Rédigés en Mémoire 
ree ubilee | du Jubilé Scientifique de M. Daniel Chwol- 
ie ge son, 1816-1896 
Cols Avstossaicecens Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum 
OT NG ee a crns oss Corpus Inscriptionum Grecarum 
CoD iva vane daseys Corpus Inscriptionum Hebraicarum 
Cole io wsidereiy esx Corpus Inseriptionum Latinarum 
Cole Peat ans eaiees Corpus Inscriptionum Peloponnesi 
Co LeRoy eisthese eek Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum 
COUP cic ba unsaaces compare 
Curinier, Diet. {E. E. Curinier, Dictionnaire National des 
Dis ecei Pet es } Contemporains 
Qt cairn ts esas died 
SY timite a Giactintatsls dae Deuteronomist 
De Gubernatis, {De Gubernatis, Dizionario Biogratico degli 
Diz. Biog....... § Scrittori Conteniperaner 


De Roi a le Rol. Geschichte der Evangelischen 
Mission ........ Juden-Mission 
CI ht seca ee ee wens Demai (Talmud) ; tla Gé 

: Derenbourg, Essai sur l’Histoire et Ja Geo- 

Derenbourg, List. ; graphie de la Palestine, ete. 

De Rossi, Dizio-) De Rossi, Dizionario Storieo degli Autori 
Dario. .......... Ebrei e delle Loro Opere 

De Rossi-Ham-) De Rossi-Hamberger, Historisches Worter- 
berger, Hist.>+ buch der Jiidischen Schriftsteller und 
Worterb, ...... Jhrer Werke 

mee Introduc- a R. Driver, An Introduetion to the Liter- 


whee ae elles ature of the Old Testament 
See es eS utiealty pve eee Elohist 
0 Ecclesiastes 
Ecclus, (Sirach).... Eeclesiasticus 
CO ec ete rae eemek edition 
POU osecs, escent 3 aust ot {1 Talmud) 
Eis udwig Eisenberg'’s Grosses Biographisches 
ree Biog. 1 Lexikon der Deutschen Bikhne im XIX. 
i ae Jahrhundert 
oe Brit......... Encyclopedia Britannica 
| 0): a English 


Pheer ues Heres. Epiphanius, Adversus Hereses 
‘Erubin (Talmud) 


Enoch and ) Ersch and Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie 
Gruber, Encyc..{ der Wissenschaften und Kitnste 
Ce Doreerer ie eeeecas Esdras 
CURE O sie enor ate tp eas and following 
Eusebius, Hist. Eccl.Eusebius, Historia Eeclesiastica 
Ewald, Gesch..... Ewald, Geschichte des Volkes Israel 
Frankel, Mebo..... Frankel, Mebo Yerushalmi 


First, Bibl. Jud.... First, Bibliotheca Judaica 
Furst, Gesch. des t First, Geschichte des Karaerthums 


Gaster, Hist.of la, ; ai e : 
Bevis Marks.... § Gaster, Bevis Marks Memorial Volume 
Geiger, Urschrift und Uehersetzungen der 
Geiger, Urschrift. Bibel in Ihrer Abhangigkeit von der In- 
e neren Entwicklung des : serge ee 
Santa Ti , eiger’s Jidische Zeitschrift fir Wissen- 
Geiger’s Jud, Zeit.) “ cchatt und Leben 


Geiger’s Wiss. 1 Geiger’s Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift fir 
Zeit. Jiid. Theol. f Jtidische Thevlogie 

SS OSC sakes aaweees Geschichte 

Gesenius, Gr....... Gesenius, Grammar 

Gesenius, Th....... Geseninus, Thesaurus 


Gibbon, Decline Spennae History of the Decline and Fall of 
and Fall........ the Roman Empire 


: %o Di Ginsburg’s New Massoretico-Critical Text 
Ginsburg’s Bible.. } of the Hebrew Bible 
C7 | eee ee Gittin (Talmud) 
Graetz, Hist........ Graetz, History of the Jews 
Gratz, Gesch....... ee aes er dl use ‘ 
zudemann, Geschichte des Erziehungs- 
aa wesens und der Cultur der Abendlindi- 
eoerereeveere schen Juden 
Se ects eees Haggai 
1G 621: ana See cea Hagigah (Talmud) 
Bal oy cheswae mene Hallah (Talmud) 
Hamburger, puain burner, Realencyclopidie ftir Bibel 
BR: Be Teves vans und Talmud 
pee Bs, . ay | Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible 
|G Ce ¢ eae re rere Epistle to the Hebrews 
H@Disse vc So veewe ees Masoretic Text 


Herzog - Plitt 
Herzog - Hauck, 
Real-Eneye.... 


Hirsch, Biog. Lex. | 


klopidie fiir Protestantische Theologie und 

Kirche (2d and 3d editions respectively) 
Hirsch, Biographisches Lexikon der Hervor- 

ragenden Aerzte Aller Zeiten und Vélker 


or Herzog-Plitt or Herzog-Hauck, Real-Ency- 


HOP aeesse sti se aus Horayot (Talmud) 

UT eee oik ss aeetce Hullin (Talmud) 

We scarewa awd ded doe’ same place 

POEM cs8k wees eas same author 

Isr. Letterbode.....Israelitische Letterbode 

Dd isle cteenes seen ss Jahvist 

Jaarboeken........ Jaarboeken voor de Israeliten in Nederland 


$ Jacobs, Inquiry into the Sources of Spanish- 

1 Jewish History 

Oy rea t Jacobs and Wolf, Bibliotheca A nglo-Judaica, 

Jahrb. Gesch. der | Jahrbuch ftir die Geschichte der Juden und 
UIs aesue dee eee § des Judenthums 

Jastrow, Dictionary of the Targumim, Tal- 
mudim, and Midrashim 


Jacobs, Sources.. 


Jellinek. B. H...... Jellinek, Bet ha-Midrash 

Jew. Chron......... Jewish Chronicle, London 

Jew. Encyc ........ The Jewish Encyclopedia 

Jew. Hist. Soc, Eng. Jewish Historical Society of England. 
Jew. World ........ Jewish World, London 

Josephus, Ant...... Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews 


Josephus, B. J......Josephus, De Bello Judaico 
Josephus,Contra Ap.Josephus, Contra Apfonem 


WOSH oohsoeee rhe oes Joshua 
Jost’s Annalen...... Jost’s Israelitische Annalen 
Hs Bib. Lit...... Journal of Biblica) Literature 
a ADs Miers yas. vareleees Jewish Quarterly Review 
J. BR. A. Sees. sec eee Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 


ae Cun! Justin, Dialogus cum Tryphone Judzeo 

Kaufmann Ge-l Gedenkbuch zur Erinnerung an David Kauf- 
denkbuch mann 

Kautzseh, Apo- /! Kautzsch, Die Apokryphen und Pseudepi- 
kryphen haa eee y graphen des Alten Testaments 

Kayserling, Bibl. | Ka yserling, Biblioteca Espafiola-Portugueza- 
Esp.-Port.-Jud.. Judaica 


Kavyserling Die 
: Kayserling, Die Jiidischen Frauen in der 
Jiidischen Frau- rt Geschichte, Literatur und Kunst 


Relates usecase Keritot (Talmud) 
Keeton cea eee Ketubot (Talmud) 
4 Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum alten Testa- 


ee eve soere 


peeoee ! 


RL. Co. sees / ment, ed. Marti 
Wid 5034 vatiS aay ys Kiddushin (Talmu@) 
6 ere ee Kilayim (Talmud) 
RID cae seetaescas Kinnim (Talmud) 


x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 





OTe One! | Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut 


Volume...... 

Krauss, Lehn- ' Krauss, Griechische und Lateinische Lehn- 
worter . ... 4  Wérter im Talmud, Midrasch, und Targum 

Kuenen, Einlei- | Kuenen, Historisch-Kritische ‘Finleitung in 
TUG ook os ue es j i die Bitcher ey Elieds faa pore ~ 

er { Larousse, Gran ictionnaire Universel du 

Larousse, Dict.... \ XTXe Sidele 

Lbs geval ceteiakes in the place cited 

Levy, Chal. i Levy, Chaldaisches Wdorterbuch iber die 
Worterb........ § ‘Targumim 


\ Levy, Neuhebriisches und Chaldaisches 


Levy, Neuhebr.  / “"Wrterbuch uber die Talmudim und Mid- 


Worterb........ = riccWiln 
ie ysohn, Z. .. Lewysohn, Zoologie des Talmuds 
6 ee Ae tale e nations literally 
a Lebensulter ! Low, Die Lebensaiter in der Jiidiscben Li- 
1 teratur 
TOK ca ciee eeaiale ae Septuagint 
V1 6 is iesb So ie ateek eas married 
MA AS:.c4 so cwintseen Ge Ma‘aserot (Talmud) 
Ma‘as. Sh.......... Ma‘aser Sheni (Talmud) 
Macc. . Maccabees 


Maimonides, } Morch.Maimonides, Moreh Nebukim 
Maimonides, Yad ..Maimonides, Yad ha-Hazakah 


Ma eo renadicne so feend Makkot (Talmud) 
Maksh...... errs Makshirin (Talmud) 
MAS 25 os 5 cee nek Mascrah 

Massek .............Masseket 


j McClintock and Strong, Cyclopedia of Bib- 


McClintock and lical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Liter- 


Strong, Cyc.... ] atur 
Mee fe ciaceveeedsas Megillah (Talmud) 
MOTs esa ec edtvncewe Me‘ilah (Tatmud) 
MON sicatiovate tea tas Mekilta 
MON saa iets eee ea Menahot (Talmud) 
MiG tactics concn ae Middot (Talmud) 
NOE oseetSorpeie ke Midrash 
Midr. Teb.... .....Midrash Tehillim (Psalms) 
MIK <6. iivex eens Mikwa/’ot (Talmud) 
Me Meese Bo Meciocks Mo‘'ed Katan (Talmud) 


piope se fiir die Geschichte und Wis- 
senschaft des Judenthums 

. Mortara, Indice Alfabetico 

Fragmenta Historicorum Greco- 


Monatssehrift.. 


Mortara, Indice... 
Miller, Frag. iist. ¢ Miller, 
GRC oe ceed ke 4 rum 
P }Munk, Méianges de 
Munk, Mélanges . + et Arabe 
Murray’s Png. Dict.A. H. Murray, A New English Dictionary 


Philosophie Juive 


NGZ cases ees eiiee es Nazir (Falmud) 
Tes tad eae bi 2 no date 

NOC Besos S Savatod siecede edarin (Talmud) 
INOW calstata tras srettinweee: Mcga’ im 


Neubaucr, Cut. ¢ Acubauer, Catalogue of the Hebrew MSS. 
Bodl. Hebr.MeS. 40 in the Bodleian Library 

Neubauer, (. 'T. alee wer, Géographie du Talmud 

Neubauer, M. J. ©. ubauer, Medizval Jewish Chronicles 


TeDe eee cecece seen ees ‘ni ; place of pnubtication stated 
ge De ied Sita alee une Ncw Testament 

Oest. Wochenschrift.Qesterreichische Wochenschrift 

OM elexreceeaea ies Ohalot (Talmud) 

QIK acd seeesrare tie cig iews Onkelos 

Orient, Lit.. ,.Literaturblatt des Orients 

i ad Seema arte ea ere ere ae Old Testament 

SP: id eeu ore eae eee Priestly Code 


§ Pagel, Biographisches Lexikon Hervorragen- 
Pagel, Biog. Lex. 7" der aerzte des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts 
Pal. Explor. Fund..Palestine Exploration Fund 
Pallas Lex........65 Pallas Nagy Lexicon 
Pauly-Wissowa, t Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopidie der Clas- 
Real-Encyc..... sischen Altertumswissenschaft 


POS a ttuceeedees eeu Voeenin (Tatmud) 

POS oes ese on tek Peshito, Peshitta 

PeSIE 6 ciwcacecesiaes Pesikta de-Rab Kahana 
Pe@SIK. Ricca siensaas Pesikta Rabbatt, 

Pirke R. E}......... Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer 
PLO visa cs eacieawans Proceedings 

Publ...... Hees Pacis Publications 

i ree re Rab or Rabbi or Rabbah 
Rahmer's Jud. | Rahmer’s Jitdisches Litteratur-Blatt 
a aad pa sePaewee es Regesty i Nadpisi 

Rie Wis devs ceewsbec Revue des Etudes Juives 
Rev. BIb.........05 Revue Biblique 

Rev. Sém.......... Revue Sémitique 

Bic Haein fenGesee Se Rosh ha-Shanah (Talmud) 


: ‘ Amador de los Rios, Estudios Histéricos, 
Rios, Estudios... } Politicos y Literarios, ete. 


§ Amador de los Rios, Historia ... de los 


Rios, Hist. ....... } uaies de Fepane y Portugal es 
Ritter, Die Erdkunde im Verhaltnis zur 
Ritter, Erdkunde. ; Natur und zur Geschichte des Menschen 
Robinson, Later t Robinson, Later Biblical Researches in Pal- 
Researches estine and the Adjacent Regions ... 1842 
Robinson, Re- t Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, 
searches Mt. Sinai, and Arahia Petreea ... 1838 
Roest, Cat. eget Catalog der Hebraica und Judaica 


Rosenthal. Bibl. aus der L. Rosenthal’schen Bibliothek 


) ee, are ee ree Revised Version 
Salfeld, Martyro- | Salfeld, Das Martyrologium des Nirnberger 


logium beat tui wi { Memorbuches 
Sanh...............Sanhedrin (Talmud) 
Wy dhe Disha ong eae s Sacred Books of the East 
S.B.0.T § (Sacred Books of the Old Testament) Poly- 
Paar aEa e 1? chrome Bible, ed. Paul Haupt 
geet aiGh | Schaff-Herzog, A Religious Encyclopaedia 
Schrader. ‘Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions and the 
CIO. Tee ( Old Testament, Eng. transl. 


Schrader, K. A. T. § Schrader, Keilinschriften und das Alte Tes- 


i tament 
Sehrader, kh. B.....Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek 


Schrader, K. G. F. ; Schrader, Keilinschriften und Geschichts- 


forschung 
Schiirer, Gesch..... Schiirer, Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes 
Sie wis swe S ek cease Semahot (Talmud) 
TPA Sct lec dale odie Shabbat (Talmud) 
SHOU ih cts ees cls Shebi‘it (Talmud) 
SHOU hh cee cacees Shebu'‘ot (Talmud) 
SUCK gio Seeds nade se Shekalim (Talmud) 
Sibyllines.......... Sibylline Books 


Smith, Rel. of Sem..Smith, ene on Religion oO the Semites 
, Transact ons of the Society of Biblical Ar- 
Soc. Bibl. Arch.. 4 chology 


Stade’s Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestament- 
Stade’s Zeitschrift hi liche Wissenschaft 
Steinschneider, $Steinschneider, Catalogue of the Hebrew 
Cat. Bodl....... t Books in the Bodleian mapEary 
: Steinschneider, Catalogus Codicum Hebre- 
Steinschneider, orum Bibliothece Academiz Lugduno- 
Cat. Leyden.... / Batavee 
i 8 ; Steinschneider. Die Hebréischen Hana- 
nce Ga ‘: schriften der K. Hof- und Staats-Biblio- 
aoe ech thek in Miinchen 
le er aee ra ie t Steinschneider, Hebriische Bibliographie 
eee. fs Steinschneider, Hebraische Uebersetzungen 
: Strack, Das Blut im Glauben und Aber- 
Strack, Das Blut. } glauben der Menschheit 
Buk4c scares Sukkah (‘Talmud) 
SU lee reas anor wenes under the word 
TA AN essa akscs oadan Ta‘anit (Talmud) 
VONs os csktieea en dae Tanhuma 
AYE oe ace ae a ee cane Targumim 
Targ. OK. 2.65. .i54 Targum Onkelos 
Tare: YOrs.cs.: o298 Targum Yerushalmi or Targum Jonathan 
TOING codacuss onan Temurah (Talmud) 
TOP essed cae Terumot (‘lalmud) 
Test. Patr.......... Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs 
f NG) | ae een Tohorot 
POS si Sawa eea nce bosafot 
"LOSE s448i-ves es aet Tosefta 
NT a ahs 4 eters aia owls Transactions 
EVANS) 5004 4aien ae translation 
Tristram, Nat. Hist.Tristram, Natural History of the Bible 
de reer ee eee Tebu) Yom (Talmud) 
PUK ee coulecteeaaed ‘Ukzin (Talmud) 
Univ. Isr........... Univers Israélite 
Virchow’s Archiv fiir Pathologische Anato- 
Virchow’s Archiv mie und Physiologie, und fir Klinische 
Medizin 
MUG eee sass Bes Vulgate 
Weiss, Dor .. Weiss, Dor Dor we-Dorshaw 
Wellhausen, “ Wellhausen, Israelitische und Jtidische 
Dede Sa es cates Geschichte 
Winer, B. R........ Winer, Liblisches Realwoérterbuch 
Wisdom ..........0: Wisdom of Solomon 
Wolf, Bibl. Hebr...Wolf, Bibliotheca Hebreea 
W.Z.K.M $ Wiener Zeitschrift fir die Kunde des 
Sera eiaa ( Morgenlandes 
be eee ree eee Yadayim (‘l'almud) 
ie ¢:(: Gee eee Yad ha-Hazakah 
VAK osc sti sec ou sa ses Yalkut 
i MOD iace ade wid Selects Yebamot (Talmud) 
Bde) emer eee enn ne Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud) 
WW eeu oo 4%-esece Yahweh, Jehovah 
BED oc be ecsas tents Zabim (Talmud) 
Z.D.M.G one der Deutschen Morgenliindi- 
Bete ne] eee eee schen Gesellschaft 
Z.D.P.YV..... .,.. Leitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins 
LOD ic pica eadues Zebahim (Talmud) 


Zedner, Cat. Hebr. ( Zedner, Catalogue of the Hebrew Books in 
Books Brit.Mus.j the British Museum 

Zeit. fiir Assyr..... Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie 

Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl.Zeitschrift fir Hebraische Bibliographie 

Zeitlin, Bib]. Post-) Zeitlin, Bibliotheca Hebraica Post-Mendels- 


Mendels........ { sohniana 
Zunz, G.S8.......... Zunz, Gesammelte Schriften 
Zunz, G. V......... Zunz, Gottesdienstliche Vortrage 
Zunz, Literatur- Aone Literaturgeschichte der Synagogalen 
PESCD oes haves Poesie 
Zunz, Ritus..... eee Ritus des Synagogalen Gottes- 
ZunzZ, 8. P......0-. Zunz, Synagogale Poesie des Mittelalters 


ZunZ, Z. Georeesy se BUDZ, Zur Geschichte und Literatur 


CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VIII 


A. .seeeeeeees Cyrus Adler, Ph.D., 
President of the American Jewish Historical 
Society; President of the Board of Directors 
of the Jewish Theological Seminary of Amer- 
ica; Librarian of the Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington, D. C. 

A. B..... ... A Biram, Ph.D., 
Berlin, Germany. 


A. Bu........Alexander Bichler, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Keszthely, Hungary. 


Author of ** Eldad ha-Dani* and of other works 

on rabbinical subjects; contributor of the ar- 

ticle **Gaon”’ in Volume V.; Vienna, Austria. 
A. Fe........ Alfred Feilchenfeld, Ph.D., 

Principal of the Realschule, Fiirth, Bavaria, 


Germany. 

A, Gooeeeeese Adolf Guttmacher, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Baltimore, Md. 

A. Ga....... Abraham Galante, 


Editor of ““La Buena Esperanza,’’ Smyrna, 
Asia Minor. 

A. H.R.... A. H. Rosenberg, 
New York City. 

A. H.S...... A. H. Sayce, D.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Assyriology, Oxford University, 
Oxford, England. 


A. Ke........A. Kecskemeti, 
Rabbi, Makow, Hungary. 
Bis Bi ecscaeuss Alexander Kisch, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Prague, Bohemia, Anstria. 
yas ee ere Alfred Lévy, 
Chief Rabbi, Lyons, France. 
A.M. F..... Albert M. Friedenberg, B.S., LL.B., 


Counselor at Law; Correspondent of **The 
Jewish Comment,’ Baltimore, Md.; New 
York City. 

A. M.4#..... A. M. Hyamson, 
London, Engiand. 

A.P..........A. Porter, 
Formerly Associate Editor of ‘‘The Forum,” 
New York; Revising Editor ‘* Standard Cyclo- 
pedia,’’ New York City. 


A. Pe..... .. A. Peiginsky, Ph.D., 

New York City. 
AP lscices: . A. Plaut, 

Rabbi, Detmold, Lippe, Germany. 
ye. as ee Abram S. Isaacs, Ph.D., 


Professor of German Literature, University 
of the City of New York, New York City. 


A.S.W.....A.S. Waldstein, B. A., 
New York City. 


A.S.W. R..A.S. W. Rosenbach, 
Philadelphia, Pa. 


Chief Rabbi, Strasburg, Alsace, Germany. 


A.V. W.J..A.V. W. Jackson, Ph.D., Litt.D., 
Professor of Indo-Iranian Languages, Colum- 
bia University, New York City. 


4.W........Albert Wolf, 
Dresden, Saxony, Germany. 


.....Benzion Hisenstadt, 
New York City. 


B. Ei.... 


B. Fr........B, Friedberg, 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, Germany. 


B.L. B......B. L. Benas, 
Liverpool, England. 
C.D.S......C. D. Spivak, M.D., 
Denver, Col. 
C.1.deS....Clarence I. de Sola, 
President of the Federation of Canadian 
Zionists, Montreal, Canada. 
O. L..........Caspar Levias, M.A., 
Instructor in Exegesisand Talmudic Aramaic, 
Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
C.L.S.......Cyrus L. Sulzberger, 
President of the Jewish Agricultural and In- 
dustrial Aid Society, New York City. 


Os Desass ....,Charles Taylor, D.D., LL.D., 
Master, St. John’s College, Cambridge, Eng- 
land. 

b 2 Dee bees ocues Gotthard Deutsch, Ph.D., 


Professor of Jewish History, Hebrew Union 
College, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

D. Ba........ David Bachrach, 
Baltimore, Md. 


De 1. owen D. I. Freedman, B.A., 
Rabbi, Perth, Western Australia. 
OP awake David Philipson, D.D., 


Rabbi, B’ne Israe} Congregation ; Professor of 
Homileties, Hebrew Union College, Cincin- 


nati, Ohio. 

Bes, © ae rare Executive Committee of the Editorial 
Board. 

E. G. H...... Emil G. Hirsch, Ph.D., LL.D., 


Rabbi, Sinai Congregation: Professor of Rab- 
binical Literature and Philosophy, University 
of Chicago; Chicago, Ill. 

E.I.N.......B. 1. Nathans, 
Philadelphia, Pa. 

E. J.......... mil Jelinek, 
Vienna, Austria. 

E. K.......... Eduard Kénig, Ph.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Univer. 
sity of Bonn, Germany. 

Wy Saves eces . zude Lolli, 
Chief Rabbi; Professor of Hebrew, Univer- 
sity of Padua; Padua, Italy. 


EK. Ms...... _..Edgar Mels, 

New York City. 
E.N.......... Eduard Neumann, Ph.D., 

Chief Rabbi, Nagy-Kanisza, Hungary. 
E.N.S...... Elvira N. Solis, 


New York City. 
E. Schr..... KE. Schreiber, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Emanu-E! Congregation, Chicago, Il. 
E. Sd........B. Schwarzfeld, LU.D., 
Secretary of the Jewish Colonization Associa- 
tion, Paris, France. 


....49. Slijper, 
Rabbi, Amsterdam, Holland. 


E. Sl...... 


F. C..........2rank Cramer, B.Sc., 


New York City. 


¥F. H. V..,...Frank H. Vizetelly, F.S.A., 
Associate Editor of the STANDARD DICTION- 
ARY, and of the “Columbian Cyclopedia”; 
New York City. 


xii 


CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VIII 





F. K.S..,...Frank Knight Sanders, Ph.D., D.D., 
Professor of Biblical History and Archeology 3 
Dean of the Divinity School, Yale Univer- 
sity, New Haven, Conn. 


Cec. Francis L. Cohen, 


Principal Rabbi, Sydney, N. S. W., Australia. 


F.N.L......Florence N. Levy, 
New York City. 

F. T. H......Frederick T. Haneman, M.D., 
Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Qeseiiees . michard Gottheil, Ph.D., 
Professor of Semitic Languages, Columbia 
University, New York; Chief of the Oriental 
Department, New York Public Library; New 
York City. 

G. A. B......George A. Barton, Ph.D., 
Professor of Biblical Literature and Semitic 
Languages, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, 
Pa. 

G. A. K......George Alexander Kohut, 
Formerly Rabbi in Dallas, Texas: Assistant 
Librarian of the Jewish Theological Seminary 
of America, New York City. 


G. D. R......George D. Rosenthal, 
Electrical Engineer, St. Louis, Mo. 


(o ae 0 eee Goodman Lipkind, B.A., 
Rabbi, New York City. 

G. M.........G. Margoliouth, 
Assistant Custodian, Oriental Department, 
British Museum, London, England. 


G. Mo....... Godfrey Morse, 
Counselor at Law, Boston, Mass. 


G.W........Gabriel Weiss, 
New York City. 


G. We....... Gotthold Weil, 
Berlin, Germany. 
..H. Brody, Ph.D., 
Rabbi; Coeditor of the ‘* Zeitschrift fiir He- 
briiische Bibliographie”’; Nachod, Bohemia, 
Austria. 
H. E. C.....Herbert E. Choate, 
Athens, Ga. 
H.G.........Hubert Grimme, Ph.D., 
Professor of Semitic Languages and Litera- 
ture, University of Freiburg, Switzerland. 


Be Bains 


H, Gut....... H. Guttenstein, 

New York City. 
AP ts: Hartwig Hirschfeld, Ph.D., 

Professor, Jews’ College, London, England. 
H.M......... Henry Malter, Ph.D., 


Assistant Professor, Hebrew Union College, 
Cincinnati, Ohio. 

H. P. M.....H. Pereira Mendes, M.D., D.D., 
President of the Union of Orthudox Congre- 
gations of the United States and Canada; 
Rabbi of the Spanish and Portuguese Congre- 
gation, New York City. 


H. R......... Herman Rosenthal, 
Chief of the Slavonic Department of the New 
York Public Library, New York City. 

BRM eivsaces Hermann Vogelstein, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, K6nigsberg, East Prussia, Germany, 

I. A.......... Israel Abrahams, 
Reader in Rabbinic, University of Cambridge ; 
Coeditor of ** The Jewish Quarterly Review ”’ ; 
Cambridge, England. 

I. Be.......... Immanuel Benzinger, Ph.D., 
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Uni- 
versity of Berlin, Germany; Jerusalem, Pal- 
estine. 


I. Bl..........2. Blumenstein, Ph.D. (deceased), 
Late Chief Rabbi of Luxemburg, Luxemburg. 


I. Br..........d8aac Broydé (Office Editor), 
Doctor of the University of Paris, France; for- 
merly Librarian of the Alliance Israélite Uni- 
verselle, Paris, France; New York City. 


I. Co.........2. Cohen, 
London, England, 


I. D..........Israel Davidson, Ph.D., 
New York City. 


I. Da......... Israel Davis, 
Barrister at Law, London, England. 


I. E..........2smar Elbogen, Ph.D., 
Instructor at the Lehranstalt fiir die Wissen. 
schaft des Judenthums, Berlin, Germany. 


Eo Ge De cs2s3; I. George Dobsevage, 
New York City. 
Ce E, cevoadees Isidore Harris, A.M., 
Rabbi, West London Synagogue, London. 


England. 
I. Kra..,.....I. Kracauer, Ph.D., 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, Germany. 
Ll. L. Bril, 
New York City. 


I. Lev........Isaac Lévy, 
Chief Rabbi, Bordeaux, France. 


Tt. DBs 


I. Lo......... Immanuel Low, Ph.D., 
Chief Rabbi, Szegedin, Hungary. 

I. M. C......I. M. Casanowicz, Ph.D., 
United States National Museum, Washington, 
D.C. 

Ey Me 2B sins Ira Maurice Price, Ph.D., LL.D., 


Professor of Semitic Languages and Litera- 
ture, University of Chicago, Chicago, Il. 


a Or — Fis > Here Isidor S. Beaumache, 
New York City. 


I. Sch........Isaac Schwab, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, St. Joseph, Mo. 


I. Wav.......Isidor Warsaw, 
Rabbi, Woodville, Miss. 
b a4 eae Izrael Ziony, 
New York City. 
A Pere ..... Joseph Jacobs, B.A., 


Formerly President of the Jewish Historicat 
Society of England; Corresponding Member 
of the Royal Academy of History, Madrid; 
New York City. 

J.D. E...... J.D. Eisenstein, 
New York City. 

J. F, McC...J. Frederic McCurdy, Ph.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Oriental Languages, University 
College, Toronto, Canada. 


J. F. McL...J. F. McLaughlin, M.A., B. D., 
Professor of Oriental Languages and Litera- 
ture, Victoria College, Toronto, Canada. 


Jy BoB iceses J. F. Schamberg, M.D., 
Philadelphia, Pa. 
nen © ae Oper J.G. Lipman, Ph.D., 


Assistant Agriculturist, New Jersey State Ex- 
periment Station, New Brunswick, N. J. 


J. Be Giicss: Julius H. Greenstone, 
Rabbi, Philadelphia, Pa. 


J. H. Ho....J. H. Hollander, Ph.D., 
Assistant Professor of Political Eeonumr, 
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. 


J.H. M......Julius H. Meyer, 
Milwaukee, Wis. 


De FLY fas o30% J. Hyams, 
Bombay, India. 
J. Ka........ Jacques Kahn, 
Rabbi, Paris, France. 
J. L. La..... J.L. Lait, 


Journalist, Chicago, Tl. 


J.S..........Joseph Silverman, D.D., 
Formerly president of Central Conference of 
American Rabbis: Rabbi of Emanu-E] Con- 
gregation, New York City. 


CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VIII 


xiii 


jn EEEEEEIETEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEDSnTEEEEEEInT DERE 


, Joseph Sohn, 
Contributor to ‘The New International En- 
eyclopedia”’; formerly musical critic on the 
New York ‘*‘ American and Journal’; New 
York City. 

J. SP. ccereees Jacob Spiro, . | 

Rabbi, Mihrisch-Ostrau, Moravia, Austria. 


J. S. R.......J- 8. Raisin, 
Rabbi, Gemilut Chesed Congregation, Fort 


Gibson, Miss. 


J. Vicscesviees J. Theodor, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Bojanowo, Posen, Germany. 


J. Wo....... Josef Wohlstein, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Malmé6, Sweden. 


J.Z.L.......0. Z Lauterbach, Ph.D. (Office Editor), 
Rabbi, New York City. 


K......0...-.Kaufmann Kohler, Ph.D., 
Rabbi Emeritus of Temple Beth-E!, New 
York; President of the Hebrew Union Col- 
lege, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

L. B..........uudwig Blau, Ph.D., 


Professor, Jewish Theological Seminary; Edi- 
tor of ‘‘Magyar Zsidé-Szemle,’’ Budapest, 


J. So,.ece-s 


Hungary. 
We C; H eeonse I. Cc. Harby, 
New York City. 
fae EBD. .00 cee L. Errera, Ph. D., 


Professor of Plant-Anatomy, Plant-Physiol- 
ogy, and Botany, University of Brussels, Bel- 
gium. 
eee, © errs ... Louis Ginzberg, Ph.D., 
Professor of Talmud, Jewish Theological Sem- 
inary of America, New York City. 
.... Louis H. Gray, Ph.D., 
Assistant Editor of the ‘** Orientalische Biblio- 
graphie”’; formerly on the editorial staff of 
“The New International Eneyelopedia” ; 
Newark, N. J. 


L. Hi....... L. Hthner, A.M., LL.B., 
Counselor at Law, New York City. 


1 CS Open L. Lowenstein, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Mosbach, Baden, Germany. 
a Oe be: eee Laura Landau, 


New York City. 
. eo M, Franklin, B.L., 
Rabbi of Temple Beth-El, Detroit, Mich. 


L.M.F... 


L. Mu.,...... L. Munk, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Marburg, Germany. 
L.N.D......Lewis N. Dembitz, D.H.L., 
Counselor at Law, Louisville, Ky. 
Lis Wicca enxsion Ludwig Venetianer, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Ujpest, Hungary. 
L, Wy....... L. Wygodsky, 


St. Petersburg, Russia. 
M.A.N.L..M. A.N. Lindo, 

London, England. 
M. Bu........ Moses Buttenwieser, Ph.D., 


Assistant Professor of Exegesis, Hebrew 
Union Coilege, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
M.Co........ Max Cohen, 
Counselor at Law, New York City. 
M. Fi......... Maurice Fishberg, If.D., 


Surgeon to the Perth Isreei Hospital Dispen- 
sarv; Medical Examine: to the United He- 
brew Charities, New York City. 


Principal, Alliance Israélite 
School, Demotiea, Rumelia, Turkey. 


Vienna, Austria. 
M. Gr... Grunwald, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Vienna, Austria. 


M. 4H. H.....M. H. Harris, Ph.D., 
New York City. 


Tniverselle 


ME BE ecsceye Meyer Kayserling, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Budapest, Hungary. 
M. Kn....... M. Kuafo, 


Rabbi, Mogador, Morocco. 

M. L.B......Moses L6b Bamberger, Ph.D., 
Rabbi; Lecturer in Rabbinic, Jewish Semi- 
nary, Wiirzburg, Bavaria, Germany. 

M. N. ¢toateaee Max Nordau, M.D., 


Paris, France. 

M.R......... Max Rosenthal, M.D., 
Visiting Physician, German ['ispensary, New 
York City. 

M. Sa........ Max Samfield, Ph.D., 
Memphis, Tenn. 

M. Sc........Max Schloessinger,Ph.D., 

Librarian; Lecturer on Biblical Exegesis, 
Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Otis. 

M. Sel.......Max Seligsohn (Office Editor), 

Doctor of the University of Paris, France; 
New York City. 

M. W.L.....Martha Washington Levy, B.A., 
Contributor to “The New Internationa) En- 
cyciopedia,”’ New York City. 

M. W.M....Mary W. Montgomery, Ph.D., 

New York City. 

...M, Zametkin, 

New York City. 

N.. Divscescus. Newell Dunbar, 
Newark, N. J. 

N.R.........N. Rashkovski, 
Odessa, Russia. 

N.S1.........NW. Slouschz, 

Doctor of the University of Paris; Lecturer: 
on Neo-Hebraic Literature, University of 
Paris, France. 
WN. De Devise N. T. London, 
New York City. 
...O. J. Simon, 
London, England. 
P. B..........Philipp Bloch, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Posen, Germany. 


YW. Yon 


0. J.8.... 


Be Wiwiesscks Peter Wiernik, 
Journalist, New York City. 
eee ....-. LSidore Singer, Ph.D., 


MANAGING EDITOR, New York City. 
.. Samuel Baeck, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Lissa, Posen, Germany. 


S. Be.........Simon Bernfeld, Ph.D., 
Formerly Chief Rabbi of Servia: Berlin, Gir- 


Se Bb ctecess 


many. 
Ss Gscasect es S. Gundelfinger, Ph.D., 
Darinstadt, Germany. 
S. Hossa: S. Horovitz, Ph.D., 


Professor, Jewish Theological Seminary, Bres- 
lau, Germany. 


a eee S. Janovsky, 
Counselor at Law, St. Petersburg, Russia. 
S.J dieses S. J. Levinsohn, 
Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Se ats. S. Kahn, 
Rabbi, Nimes. Franee. 
Ss Rriciiccs Samuel Krauss, Ph.D., 
Professor, Normal College, Budapest, Hungary. 
S. Led....... Sampson Lederhandler, 
New York City. 
Se Mshckss S. Mendelsohn, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Wilmington, N.C. 
S. Man...... S. Mannheimer, B.L., 
Instructor, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, 
Ohio. 


S.M.G......S. M. Goldstein, 
Assistant Professor, Archeological Institute, 
St. Petersburg, Russia. 


Xiv 


CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VIII 





Ss. Mu........S. Mtihsam, Ph.D., whe 
Chief Rabbi, Gratz, Styria, Austria. 


S. Miin...... Sigmund Minz, Ph.D., 
Vienna, Austria. 


S.N.D......S. N. Deinard, 
Minneapolis, Minn. 


S. S.......... Solomon Schechter, M.A., Litt.D., 
President of the Faculty of the Jewish Theo- 
logical Seminary of America, New York City. 


S.Sa......... Sigismund Salfeld, Ph.D., 
Rabbi, Mayence, Hesse, Germany. 


S. Wo........Simon Wolf, 
Counselor at Law; President, Independent 
Order B’nai B’rith, Washington, D. C. 


T............. Crawford Howell Toy, D.D., LL.D., 
Professor of Hebrew, Harvard University, 
Cambridge, Mass. 


1 Brean © Umberto Cassuto, 
Editor of “*La Rivista Israelitica,’? Florence, 
Italy. 


V. C..-......Vittore Castiglione, 
Chief Rabbi, Rome, Italy. 


-..... Victor Rousseau Emanuel, 
Laurel, Md. 


V. E.. 


WW Bicicvcens Wilhelm Bacher, Ph.D., 
Professor, Jewish Theological Seminary, Buda- 
pest, Hungary. 


W.4H.C..... W. H. Cobb, 
Boston, Mass. 
W.M........ William Milwitzky, 


Cambridge, Mass. 
..W. Max Miller, Ph.D., 
Professor of Bible Exegesis, Reformed Episco- 
pal Theological Seminary, Philade)phia, Pa. 
W.N........ Wilhelm Nowack, Ph.D., 
Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Uni- 
versity of Strasburg, Germany. 


W.P.........William Popper, M.A., Ph.D., 
Gustav Gottheil Lecturer in Semitic Lan- 
guages, Columbia University, New York City. 
W. Pe........ W. Perkowski, 
New York City. 
W.R......... William Rosenau, Ph.D., 
Rabbi of Eutaw Place Temple, Baltimore, Md. 
W. Wi.......W. Willner, 


Rabbi, Meridian, Miss. 

fis Bie iswawes Zadoc Kahn, 
Chief Rabbi of France: Honorary President of 
the Alliance Israélite Universelle; Officer of 
the Legion of Honor; Paris, France. 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII 


N. B.—In the following list subjects likely to be sought for under various headings are repeated under 
each heading. Cross-references in this list are to other items in the list, not to articles in the Ency- 


clopedia. 

PAGE 
‘‘Abudarham,” Page from the, Lisbon, 1489. ...... 00... ccc cc ce ccc cece eet r ne ee te eereenees 105 
Alexander I., Medal Commemorating the Emancipation of the Russian Jews by........ ee Oe ee 403 
America; see MICHIGAN. 
Archeology: see Corn; Lunas; MoapirE Stone; Moiocu; ToMBSTONES. 
Architecture: see JEw’s House; SYNAGOGUES; TOMBSTONES, 
Ark of the Law of the New West End Synagogue, London.............. 20.0005 Linge son taeesaceec LOD 
—_—. —— Representation of an, on a Glass Dish Found in the Jewish Catacombs at Rome............ 205 
Anns olor Georee: Henry: Lewis acu netauaad a are pee se teehee Gs aonk oa centeue desis eases enews 69 


Art; see ARCHEOLOGY; ARCHITECTURE; Livy, ALPHONSE; LILIEN, EPHRAIM Mosres; MANTLE OF 
THE Law; MANuscRIPTS; MizraH; TyPOGRAPHY. 

Autographs: see MAIMONIDES, Moses; MANASSEH BEN ISRAEL; Marx, Kart; MENDELSsOBN, MossEs; 
Mo.Kko, SOLOMON; MONTEFIORE, Str MOSES. 


Babylonian Cylinder Representing Sacrifice of a Child... ... ccc ccc eee ee cece ee eee eens ence 653 
Bar. Kokba,: Comeot, Bearing a ulabi3 ocak sso o oe doh die RAG SGG 4 CR s4 Oo Naas ae Oke eS 205 
Baths, Jewish, of the Sixteenth Century .... 0.2.22... cc cee eee ee ee eects Een errr er 588, 589 
Bible: see LEVITICUS; MasorauH; MEGILLOT. 

“Blessing of the New Moon.” From a Drawing by Alphonse Lévy........... cece cee ce cece ee eee 57 
Board of Guardians, Jewish, Building of the, London... .... 0... cece ce cece tere cece eee ee eeene 164 
Breslau Wilhelmschule, Medal Commemorating the Founding of the...... eee ee eer ee 403 
Candlestick, Golden: see MENORAH. 

Catacombs at Rome, Jewish, Glass Dish with Jewish Symbols Found in the...........ceseeeeeeeeees 205 
Cemetery, Cypress Hills, New York, Showing Tombstone of Uriah Phillips Levy ................06- 65 
—— of Mayence, Ancient Remains of the Jewish. .......... cc cece eee ee cee erence ences cesses eeees 386 
=> == Modern Je Wish nous gonger on nascdnas we anes Ue s ees ae eee een ieee Bese's 387 
—— Spanish and Portuguese, Mile End Road, London.......... ee eT nn Tere ee ee fio.) 


——. see also TOMBSTONES. 
Ceremonial: see BLESSING OF THE NEw Moon; LuLas; Magen Dawip; MANTLE OF THE Law; 


MarriaGE; MazzoT; MeEzuzan; Mizran. 


Coin of Bar Kokba Rearihp & Gulab..3- 2. 2sds2ndeuennsonasese ada te ages ieee aaddsauseavenoutes 205 
Constantinople, Page from Midrash Eleh Ezkerah, Printed in 1620 at... 2.00... ... cece eee ee ee eee 577 
Costu me Galiciaitc.\.:.ccc.0aaairnodarse Sa dred gudeend dane hee mer coos baekin peaanees See plate facing 346 
> German, Miahteentl Century s.cv. caus aac reseteaninn Ocdetesa tae Swumteetiutien enemies 348, 345 
Cracow, Marriage Sone ats snds cake fie imnres braked eee wnasaad mot mok swieade irene ceew ae ases 346 
Crown of the Law. In the United States National Museum, Washington, D.C... ...0.cesaesin sc sewes 300 
Cylinder, Babylonian, Representing Sacrifice of a Child..... ee ee ere vee er ewe . 658 
Date-Meridians Accordin g to Rabbinical Sources, Map of the World on Mercator’s Projection, Showing 498 
Delatas, Elias and Rica, Medal Struck in Honor of............. 0. ecccccecucccuceecuccueuuceceuaees 402 
Detroit, Mich., Temple Beth El at............. Lean SEs Cennaw Basar tah tqed eeu aa aeenamen es aeaans 542 
Duke’s Place Synagogue, Exterior of the, London. .............. 00.02 s cece eee e ences Padeeeeoeaet 160 


Pane MNCEIOr-OL the. LONG: kere duet e ceetoe one Soom eos ws ee tauren seeeaed nae oe eeeeues 159 


xvi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII 


























PAGE 
England: see Lincotn; Lonpon; RAMSGATE. 
Esther, Scroll of, Dutch, Early Eighteenth Century................ 0. 00- ieee aurea piaeun<aiag cue 429 
== SILVEE Cases TOP. ins Mall eee Wh whe Os BE Ss be ee eh wae hee ewe es 430 
Europe; see LIncoLN; LirHuaniA; Lonpon; LUBpeck; Marspture; MAYENCE; METZ; RAMSGATE. 
First Editions: Page from the “ Abudarham,” Lisbon, 1489.2... 00.0... 0 cee cece ee cece eee ee erees 105 
—— —— Page from Levi ben Gershon’s Commentary to the Pentateuch, Mantua, Before 1480....... 27 
—— —— Page from the Malhzor, Printed at Soncino, 1485... ....... cc cc cc ccc cece c cect eee eenens 265 
Title-Page from Elijah Levita’s “ Tishbi,” Isny, 1541... 0... 00.0... c ee ec ce ec eeeeeee 47 
Frank fort-on-the-Main, Medal Commemorating the Conflagration in the Ghetto of, in 1711........... 402 
Galicia, Jewish Marriage Scene in... .. cece ee eee ees one deee etd oY item aesee es plate facing 346 
Germany: see Lipeck; Marsure; Mayencre; MEtTz. 
Graves: see TOMBSTONES. 
Great Synagogue, Duke’s Place, London, Interior and Exterior.......... 0.00. cc ec ce cec ee eer ees 159, 160 
Herz, Markus, Medal Struck in Honor:0l oi ssc o005.0555 34 ¥oknd sd eee i wena see eahsaces otace eaeSeenaes 403 
Hospital, Jews’, and Orphan Asylum, West Norwood, London............eee eee Pe ey er ere 161 
Host: see Micrococcus PRopiciosus. 
Huppah or Wedding Baldachin. From a Passover Haggadah, Amsterdam, 1695........... err ree 341 
see also MARRIAGE. 
Incunabula: see Lisson; MANTUA; SONCINO. 
Inscriptions: see Corn; Moanire Stone; TOMBSTONES, 
“Tsaiah.” From the Drawing by Ephraim Moses Lilien ......... 0. ccc cece cee cnc eee taeteeeececer &5 
Italia, Salom, Portrait of Manasseh ben Israel by... 2... 2... ce cee ee cee eee eee enees 283 
Itzig, Daniel, Medal Struck in Honor of the Seventieth Birthday of, 1798... 0.0.0.0... cece ee ee eee 403 
Jerusalem, Plan of. From the Mosaic Map of Palestine, Probably of the Fifth Century, Found at 
Mee iicsa tated ite et oh hare cok cose bues Cee toa pee eee ee ees telnwaaw es 407 
Jewry. F e.20F Jon Or 1 12906 os seen das wea tee coo aha ta de SESS omer ARS Aw ONES Ce eee eRe Tee 157 
sews College, Queens. SqQuarc: ONO . arn cue aie, a aunt ode te ewe ep hase ce aes Bawah Semdaceae 162 
“ Jew’s House,” Steep Hill, Lincoln... 2... ccc ce cc ce cece a cans raw adda eae eae 91 
Joseph II., Medal Commemorating the Edict of Toleration Issued by, 1781.....................2.205- 402 
“Judenoasse’ OF Marpure-in- Hesse. 2 is gcs tiated a heed aee ee ome cate Meenas ¢ Hadnk SAN eewd dese eee Lek aes 323 
Leon, Judah Aryeh, of Modena, Italian Scholar, Rabbi, and Poet........... 00... cece eee cee eee 3 
Templo, Jacob Judah Aryeh, Dutch Mechanician.............. Bhat Abd apes Sacer accel nia Bees Se a 2 
Letteris, Meir Halevi, Austrian Scholar and Poet........ 0.0.0.0 0 ccc cc ee eee eee te eee eeees 17 
Levi, David; Enelish Hebraist and Author cci5004 oN ncsa oe SSSA geo tas wr BN ee rhe Bae ESS 94S 20 
== = += Itahan Poet and Critie i. acdacecdas din yt ta eed eweed ecs oeee kha ves Coweta we wees enwaees 25 
—— ben Gershon, Page from the First Edition of the Commentary to the Pentateuch, Mantua, 
DeLOLe 1490 sae eos Benes esa oa hee a hecho eae Se daa sae asad aoa ated S Beas 27 
—— Leo Napoleon, American Lawyer and Communal Worker.........000.0 00... ccc cee ee eee eee 34 
Levin. Mirschel, German apo. ce cv eos) eee eee tone eet ed Dues waoo de Kes Oa wa eee ees 40 
aC AACE RIAU, WV ITCE sg jell co toase pw it ariedink ga gerne Cele hush el hui end ee on ieee 1 lid acces lee eae 42 
Levinsobn, Isaac Baer, Russian-Hebrew Writer and Scholar. ...... 00.0.0. 00. ccc cee ee ee ene eee 43 
Levita, Elijah, Title-Page from the First Edition of the “ Tishbi,” Isny, 1541..................0..... Al 
Leviticus, Iiuminated Page of. From a manuscript formerly in the possession of the Duke of 
SSS SEI cri tie Sorat pena bed oes aeons“ 055 So eee aoa Aedents oR NG icaca yt say ah tan Ee emeeitereh A nace an ee tases et 51 
Lévy, Alphonse,“ Blessing: of ‘the Moon.” DY. 206408 avaas tae eeea tend sa ee hese ahead eae aness sys 
bevy; Uriah Phillips; American Naval Omeers ccs .2ecc bs340 30444005 ese te wi alee haa eadede end 64 
Tombstone of, Cypress Hills Cemetery, New York... 0.0.0.0... 0... cece ee ccc eee eee 65 
Lewandowski, Louis, German Composer of Synagogal Music. ........ 0.0... cee eee ce eee 66 
Lewis, Sir-George HCirys ATMS Ol 2... Sea chacnten tent ese tia sel oui nee ea Ghee ate see euas 69 
Library of Parma, Alcove Containing the De Rossi Collection of Jewish Books in the ............... Ti 
Liebermann, Max, German Painter. ....... 0.0... cc ccc ccc ce cee en te eee cence ene seneaessegeeene &1 


Lilien, Ephraim Moses, “ Isaiah,” from the Drawing DY... 2.6.0... ccc eee ete tee e ee eneee 85 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII XVii 





AGE 
Lilienblum, Moses Lob, Russian Scholar and Author. .......... 0... c cece ccc cece eee nee eteeneee 86 
Lilienthal, Otto, Experimenting with His Flying-Machine ........ 0.0.0... cee cee ee eee enee 8? 
Lincoln, The J CW isl QUArtely. CEC 1200 es sinc asc eaters eens te un snail wand en da ate eek deeb. aR eae 90 
__—. “Jew’s House,” Steep yok aa orate acre carvers gi ata gh ah eet wave need Bhinseie Ault tals eaten, Sina gent Maan ts 91 
Lion, Representation of, ona Glass Dish Found in the Jewish Catacombs at RNome.................. 205 
Lippold, HP XOCULIOINOL, 19182 3.37 od aetna Oh. tee oa nites el ecco eee ae Bee BOO eee 101 
Lisbon, Page from the “ Abudarham,” Printed in 1489 at... 00.000. ec ce ce ee cece eeaees 105 
Lithuania, Map of the Grand Duchy, at Its Greatest Extent, Showing Cities Where Jews Lived.... 120 
Loeb, Isidore, French DehOlan nc soso ban Sede oaeae seca uae new tw caadun an eseN eds wee aten eee .- 149 
Loewy, Maurice, FPPCNCIy ASI OOM Taine erated nme Bt acres Wiens ania lr rae oe Ae Rear eon 151 
Lombroso, Cesare, Italian Alienist and Criminologist. 2.0.0.0. 00 occ ccc eee te eee teenies 154 
London, Exterior of the Great Synagogue, Duke’s Place. .... 2.0.0.0... net ens 160 
__ Exterior of the New West End Synagogue........ 000.0000 ccc ccc cc ccc ce ete nee teenie eens 168 
___. Interior of the Great Synagogue, Duke’s Place 2.0... cc cc eee eee eee ne nee 159 
__— Interior of the New West End Synagogue......... 00... c ccc ccc ccc ce ce een cece eens eeeeen 169 
is = Jewish board of Guardians Bundinwso.35 oss. oi i oso s bu ae ied bx Dots l deerad ou eda mh elo ach eae 164 
sees ows COMete. QUben 8 DGNATC. 45% eae ti hohe covey iveud ens ccde veo adencbes aetweees 162 
——. Jews’ Hospital and Orphan Asylum, West Norwood......... 0... ccc ec cee cere teen ne tenes 161 
__— Map of, Showing Localities of Jewish Interest... 0.0... ccc cee eee cece ee eee e tee e ees 175 
_—_- —— Showing Relative Proportion of Jewish Population ........0..0..0.0 000. ccc cee cee 165 
sie PlgmOl LUC CWIY Ol 1e00 sna meta c ad Ween as Ge aust ales aiieS adh ewan balla ainBae een aus 157 
<= Spanish and Portuguese Cenictery, Mile: End Road..s..5.2.5 occcqedss oeysuew)avecaa eles y eo taaes 158 
—— Wentworth Street, Formerly “Petticoat Lane”. ....... 0.0... ccc coc e cee cee teeta enneeteens 166 
Lopez, Rodrigo, Conspiring to Poison Queen Elizabeth... ......... 0... cee cee eee ene ees 182 
Lot’s Wife Turned into a Pillarof Salt, From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the Fourteenth Century.... 186 
Low, veopold.. tiunearign: avon a viciwted voice aca Chak yet cewek otal a edhe as eee erates Meta 192 
ubeclk; NeW BY MUG OLUC Atos er ant ante ei, Hee cde ae dwads ct abo saed Sree ke net tewudn ne eewedes 198 
Ludwig X., Medal Presented by the Hessian Jews to Landgrave, 1790... .... 0. ce cece eee eee eee eee 402 
Laliby. Atter a. Drawine by. Picart.5.4s044000sNaevonawe none setadesenwehes A Gaeeadine amewaRe as 206 
= Comot ar Moka Dealing Hise oe noc eect a wore ew Aguas ee een ne Ree eee nea Caer sed 205 
—— Representation of a, on a Glass Dish Found in the Jewish Catacombs at Rome................. 205 
Luzzatti, Luigi, Italian Statesman and Political Economist........... sichals eA Risiiehaiad maaiin see Saaate 220 
uzzatto, Samuel David. italan-pcholar: ..6.%.4260.84 5% Sec ie ts eb ea 458 Ba ehh eo 6 Os 224 
maa een, Dawid. roma MIATA lie.c4 ao5 wate otea Nt nantsia tose ea. aaa ORE YE GO Rh ee Sane oe eke nies 252 
Mahzor, Page from the First Edition of the, Soncino, 1485...... ee er ere ne ee eee 265 
-— Page from a Folio, of the Fourteenth Century. ...... 0... ccc cece eee eect eae en etenees 263 
— Dare trom a: Printed ab. Pravue, love. c sc cros.seevetusu rr owelAGoes cewtdas ah ievekieweseeadds 267 
Maimon, Solomon, Philosophical Writer. ...... 0.0.0.0. ce cece ce eee ce cee eet e ent ee tenet neenees 266 
Maimonides, Moses, Autograph of (No: 88) ..02 sa.cnceussser eased ie ee ieee bea ie Peete cae eben adel 309 
= Illuminated Page from the “Yad” of. From a Manuscript in the British Museum, Dated 
Ds eee ete ecae beck uated erie amie GG ose nO er ER ow Reese De ae aaa tah oa oo. Lrontispiece 
Malbim, Meir Lob, Russian Rabbisci.ccdecesices ound dadecdrcedaceaeliclddaeus ieeee adeesdeedeks 276 
Manasseh ben Israel, Dutch Rabbiand Champion of Jewish Rights. From an Engraving by Salom 
MUMS sty hie nioe 6 «Gc athe tiniate Bee ee Seale Aa lted sie Siate ghd tou cha Sia A ey ade penser aaa eee ied 282 
——~ — (Portrait with Autograph). From the Mezzotint by Rembrandt................. eens ees 283 
Mandelkern, Solomon, Russian Poet and Author....... Sy ciiah a aptics co Bee aes eee Tee owe Geis saresisint alt ese Send ncaneaseeers 288 
Mandelstamm, Max, Russian Oculist and Zionist... .......00006 coe e cece cece cece veceeceeeecnceees 290 
Manna, Israelites Gathering, in the Desert. From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the Fourteenth Century.. 298 
Mannheimer, Isaac Noah, Jewish Preacher............... Te ee ee ee eee 295 
Mantle of the Law, Holland, Eighteenth Century..... Ee ee ee ae ne Pe eR em ae em Ree ree 299 
ee IO TIGA Los hese bts ce ich nc tts asaareesta ld ta he Sahm a oe eg gran alte ae aia Siig Seah ue eng SS aL tie Salts 4 East ese 300 
= - == badua, Bighteenth Century. 4). sasuie tun iane op Suse eee ee eden ade iines peas eeeaaaauts 299 
“= ===Small:: In the British. -Museutt.....wsssuases <onawse ce deka oleae ka ewes oad Petes 88S 801 
a == Velvet, ‘Seventeenth: CONUIY: +a.c84 su 25, saced She ade ees oarae chap neds deakouraad arcane 298 
Mantua, Page from the First Edition of Levi ben Gershon’s Commentary to the Pentateuch, Printed 
Before 1480 at... 0.0... cece cece eee ee sid elec Sahnd Matra eid aac shetee eh aks wee Rae wren cater 27 


xviii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII 














PAGE 
Manuscript: Dluminated Page from Maimonides’ “Yad,” Dated 1472... 0.0... 00... ee cece eee Frontispiece 
—— Page from a Folio Mahzor of the Fourteenth Century... 0.2... 0... cece ee eee rete teens 263 
—— Page from a Fourteenth-Century Bible, Containing Masoretic Notes.......... 0.2... ee ee ee eres 369 
—— Page from a Thirteenth-Century (?) Bible, Bearing Masoretic Notes Written to Form Ornamental 
DeGOTatiOnGs ax. Sete eet cs See ta haeedad ss motion Gates ase ed cee Bees GEG ahs eee 367 
=< Types or llebrew Ser ptisck ots cutest espa sniey aw acta Sa Senewa en Rk aewe A Meares 808-811, 313 
see also MEGILLOT; MEzUZAH; PINKES. 
SMS OZ: 001, VISIO OF 125 Sn Ueno ee hoy kee tis eco Sie a See SE Ee Gwe ee Uwte ee eel besa uat ede ee een 316 
Map of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania at Its Greatest Extent, Showing Cities Where Jews Lived..... 120 
<== OL MONON OW EVGA COU ssn totes att eae sew eae ernie bes Ge oud udreddy mene ca Ned oe aes 157 
—— of London. Showing Localities of Jewish Interest. ...... 0.0... ce cece ee ee eee eeeee 175 
—— of Palestine. From the Mosaic of the Fifth Century (?) Found at Medeba...................4. 407 
see also PLANS. 
Mapu, Abraham, Russian-Hebrew Novelist......... 0... cece ce cece cee cece ee ee tetra tee recente et eeees 317 
Marburg, Fhe: Judensasse OF os 2 tacsis tues pegs wh es Gee Beas Saris WE ae See EME Ra ues tet who enteee 323 
Marriage Ceremony, Among German Jews, Early Eighteenth Century.......... 0... ee cece ec ee eee 343 
—— —— From a Passover Haggadah, Amsterdam, 1695. ......... 0... ccc cee ce cee cee tenn cee e ents 341 
—— Processions Among German Jews, Eighteenth Century. ...... 20... 0... cece cece eee ce ee eee ees 345 
I SCONE Al ClACO Ways eee tind bocce eet sain eed Cee cloes HAS oh ee Re eure seu seas 346 
—— —— at Galicia. From the painting by Stryowski............ 0.0.0... e cee cece ees plate facing 346 
Marx, Karl, German Socialist and Political Economist... ........... 0... cece cece ee eee ence eensccnces 308 
Wass da: MOUnt. An PUG C Aceon teint SEO 8 ie cel ate bn ate ara ok ata weed omy Sid psc wooa ace ace Rakes 363 
Masorah, Page from a Manuscript Bible of the Fourteenth Century Containing Masoretic Notes..... 369 
——— Page from a Thirteenth-Century (?) Manuscript Bible Bearing Masoretic Notes Written to Form 
Ornamental Decorations. .......... 0... cece ee eee ee eee eeees ie Nis ala Sia enn ett Sake he 367 
Mayence, Ancient Remains of the Jewish Cemetery at... 0.0.00... cee cece n tect teeter eteeees 386 
—— Cemetery of the Jewish Community of..... 2.0... ccc ccc ce cece cree ee teen rete e eee eee teens 387 
—— Interior of the Gemeinde Synagogue at... 2... 0... cece cee ene eee ween tenes ceteteeens 389 
—— Interior of the Synagogue of the Israelitischen Religionsgesellschaft at............. 0.02.0 c0ees 388 
Mazzot, Implements for Stamping... 2... 0... ccc ce cee eee ce eee tee eee tenet eeteeares 396 
——- From Leusden, “ Philologus Hebreo-Mixtus,” Utrecht, 1657.......... 0.0.0 ccc ccc ce cee ce eens 395 
—— Making. From a Passover Ilaggadah, Amsterdam, 1695.......... 0... ccc cece cece ee ee te eenes 393 
Preparation of. From Kirchner, “ Jiidisches Ceremoniel,” 1726. ......... 0. cc ccc cce cee ee eeces 394 
Medals of Jewish Interest ¢ 34 9: G56 see 5:0 3.o cde ok sare He We CSGdS We aA OS OE ES EA ERR ES 402, 403 
Medeba, Mosaic Map of Palestine, Probably of the Fifth Century, Found at...................20.46. 407 
Megillot Esther, Dutch, Early Eighteenth Century.......... 0... ce cece cece eee eee e ee eee anaes 429 
—— = Bilver Case Contaiming co. weds Kesemigks drakede bow bois erring whee dew een salen waws 6S aaa 430 
= liver isu: MOrmins Case re icine oy oa wigk eee Tome Sed aeewetueeh.e SERIE Se ewes eu ee 430 
Meir, Interior of the Alleged Tomb of, at Tiberias... 0.0.0... 0... eee cc cee ete ee eee en eens 433 
—— Synagogue Near the Alleged Tomb of, at Tiberias......... 0... 0.0 eee ee eect cence enene 482 
Meisel, Mordecai, Tombstone of, at Prague... ...... 0-0. cc ccc w ee cee cece cece eens sent eeeestresnes 442 
Meldola, Raphael, Haham of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews of Great Britain..................... 453 
Mendelssohn, Felix, German Composer, .......... ccc cee ccc cee c cece cece ev eee sees tees ease eeneee 477 
=~ Moses; German: PhilosOphetis. cot a.nd tioned eee eede baka oeeeGeeuleedadgeeees sek ee alae oeees 479 
——- —— Medal Struck in Honor of the * Phédon”. 2.2... cc ccc cc ce ce cee ee cee nent eeenes 481 
———- —— Tombstone of. From the Drawing by Daniel Chodowiecki..................... 0. 0eeeee. 484 
Mendesia, Gracia, Medal Struck in Honor of Her Eighteenth Birthday. .......... 2.0.0... cc cee cee eee 402 
Menorah as Described in Rabbinical Literature. ......... 0... cc ccc cece ce een ee teen ene eens eanees 493 
WOGEIN ig 2 Gens Gadce aa Shei as i yet tiie Moen ae ait Urn ae ee ee eee ene rte ee 494 
—— Representation of, on a Glass Dish Found in the Jewish Catacombs at Rome................... 205 
Meridians, Date-, According to Rabbinical Sources, Map of the World on Mercator’s Projection, Showing 498 
Metz. ANGCiCue SV NACOS NCE inh o 2 Got ey as Seed Maine ane tee eee ate mn ewe chao rene estes §22 
= Interior Of an:Old Sy nasooue ats sic) ic ot be Se dele ea eaee eee cawe ee ese heussnkees 523 
Meyerbeer, Giacomo, German Composer......... 0... cc cee reece eee en ee ee nett eee eee tase cents 528 
Mezuzah Case. After Picart......... 0.0... cece eee eee Bho whine teat teetindiane Ap wis nate Bee a we ae os Seong 533 
—— Glass Cylinder Comiaining 5. 44-'ss2cun Siw eteri te aciiasweuneskeoheseney seta euaeeuureeeeee eu oe Doe 
= SOTO 3 is ono ob aeeaaeearee ead dee eet aren ids Rane ae oe Oe et eee ean oot aye awesiex 531 


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII xix 





PAGE 
Michigan, Temple Beth El, Detroit. Penn eee neat eee eee ee ete n nee e ects nen teen et eet tees saeions 542 
Micrococcus Prodigiosus, Cultures of, pine Ae Poor Stttees Pee e reece tee ee cnet teen ne ete et eens 543 
Midrash Eleh Ezkerah, Page from, Printed at Constantinople in 1620.......... 00... cee cece cence eee 577 
Mielziner, Moses, American aD bi cieudc niente eget erdne teeta a once tanta diate neeweme sails 581 
“Mi-Kamokah,” Music uf. eee sai aBee ra lochiale Meanie ean 586 
Mikwell: Jewish Baths of the: Sixteenth: Century ncsch 6654 ocdeebgaetedes £44 oedavadewiorass 588, 589 
Miriam. From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the Fourteenth Century... ............- 00 cece cece ee eee 608 
“ Mizmor loc Dawid.” Musi¢: fo. 10. cow cieiuis w.59 o4% dS eee er er ee re eer re 624, 625 
« Shir le-Yom Ia- shabbat.” Music Ole 005554 Mae Sete net Bare toine aie eats eos bt a heatncwee eles 625-627 
Mizrab. Typical sm serge Or caNin cau me aagndier ws alana toe AA ta pce Aah, Wee sat ips Me Iie secret ice cipal nT e Ooa ceren oh Be, Ul eda wo ee ae ntans Leesan, Sie 629 
Moabite Stone, THSCH PON ON- ING cp cet eke ee tots 62a eer ad des Scene ba Oe CAR OH 635 
Mocatta, Frederick David, English Philanthropist. 2.0.0.0... 00.0 c ccc ccc ce ee ce cee tee e eee eteeees 637 
Moghilef, Russia; Interior of a. Synagogue ate. is .cueteaesuws bokwe oieeeie bvc baeseaae Sasa sada ks 643 
sess TO UC ON 2 ea Sis cei 2 She tie einded caries esas boa chal ewig Colt canals seated Ae eeintnd 642 
Mohilewer, Samuel, Russian Rabbi... ... 2.0.0... e eee cece cece cence eee e cette te eeneneeeenaes 648 
Molko, Solomon, ANLOR TA DIOR, sae hcl encanta: ae oa Wide ace ms gee Famine io wb ae wae ae RaW OS OR 651 
Moloch, Babylonian Cylinder Representing Sacrifice of a Child to..... 0.0.0... eee ec eee ee ee ees 653 
Montefiore, Sir Moses, English Philanthropist. From a sketch by Dighton in 1818.................. 668 
__ —_— Synagogue and Tomb of, Ramsgate; England oo )...4 0-0 esses oeeuidc tov a eenteuwesreodetass 670 
fin i Whew One tuundred: ears Ol, oss) shu die Auecaatadee hug Gaal waeeat coewaekeaey enews 669 
Monuments: see MoaBirE STONE; TOMBSTONES. 
Morais, Sabatto, American Rabbi............... 0... cece eee ere sieaatewiiens ee iSeha oat wi atatars anes 680 
Moravia, Page from the Minute-Book of a Meeting of Congregations Held in 1713 in............. woo. 683 
Mosaic Map ot Palestine, Probably of the Fifth Century, Found at Medeba......... Meeeuwhes <eeeece a AUT 
Mount Masada in Judea...... cece ee cere caer eacees se a ne Darema coe ‘ce alicnanet oa, Savers eset ewwSaaur Oto 
Music,“ Ma O2 Bur cae deen teense eases ie acune seis Ba are oe he acne dy eee wees Wieaneere sole 
© Mi iCamoKal si ccais cad won ee enae eee ae ewido A ee ee ein Seana etaes Gng iowa eed alae ces 586 
==“ Mizmor le-Da wid ” s2.é2s2.e24e0s000ieas Shain ean iy So iiacdan auaos Wee DOL eae alee eee 624, 625 
——- “Mizmor Shir le-Yom ha-Shabbat ”..... .. ee tes- Gens Re ee ee Beta Bac ettacey ae ua ante 625-627 
Napoleon, Medal Commemorating the Sanhedrin Convened by, 1806.... ......... cesses erwie sunita 408 
New York, Cypress Hills Cemetery, Showing Tombstone of Uriah Phillips Levy at................. 65 
Orphan Asylum and Jews’ Hospital, West Norwood, London... ....-... ccs c ccc eee eee e eee n cones 161 
Palestine, Mosaic Map of, Probably of the Fifth Century, Found at Medeba.................0.000- 407 
-—— see also MasapaA; TIBERIAS. 
Parma Library, Alcove in the, Containing the De Rossi Collection of Jewish Books................. 72 
Passover: see Mazzor. 
“Petticoat Lane,” Now Wentworth Street, London... .... 00. cc ccc cc eee eee cence sees ecesecees 166 
Pinkes (Minute-Book), Page from the, of a Meeting of Moravian Congregations Held in 1718........ 683 
Plan of the Jewish Quarter, Lincoln, 1200............cccccce seer coset acc eneceeeessesenesane ou es 90 
—— of the Jewish Quarter of London, Showing Proportion of Jewish Population................... 165 
== OF the London Jewry; 1290 sss cack nein setae we dneelenee ve eeeawsal tebe yer eases Saul cabig a ibarei gn 157 
Portraits: see 
LEON, JUDAH ARYEH. LIEBERMANN, MAX. MANDELSTAMM, MAX. 
LEON TEMPLO. LILIENBLUM, MOSES LUB. MANNHEIMER, ISAAC NOAH. 
LETTERIS, MKEiR HALEVI. LOEB, ISIDORE. MAPU, ABRAHAM. 
LEV!1, DAVID (HEBRAIST). LOEWY, MAURICE. MARX, KARL. 
LEVI, DAVID (POET). LOMBROSO, CESARE. MEYERBEER, GIACOMO. 
LEVI, LEO NAPOLEON. Low, LEOPOLD. MIELZINER, MOSES. 
LEVIN, HIRSCHEL. LUZZATTI, LUIGI. MOCATTA, FREDERICK DAVID. 
LEVIN, RAHEL, LUZZATTO, SAMUEL DATID, MOHILEWER, SAMUEL. 
LEVINSOHN, Isaac BAER. MAIMON, SOLOMON. MONTEFIORE, SIR MOSES. 
LEVY, URIAH PHILLIPS. MALBIM, MEIR LOB. MoRAis, SABATTO. 
LEWANDOWSKI, LOUIS. MANASSEH BEN ISRAEL. 
Prague, Medal Commemorating Edict of Exile from, 1745................ ee eee ere dviewedues 402 
——— Page from a Mahzor, Printed in 1525 at.......0..cccccccccecceecceccececees Ssteatare a Oe 267 
—— Tombstone of Mordecai Meisel at..........cccececcccecscccececvcccuccunvsecneesens eiaiaseesreacaies “AES 


XX LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VIII 





PAGE 
Ramsgate, England, Synagogue at Tomb of Sir Moses Montefiore at.... 0... 0... ccc cee cee eens 670 
Rembrandt, Mezzotint of Manasseh ben Israel by ....... 0. cc ccc ce cee eee cence es eee snes eeeenes 283 
Sanhedrin, Medal Commemorating the, Convened by Napoleon, 1806................00.e cece eeees 403 
Sarajevo Haggadah, Illustrations from the, of the Fourteenth Century............... 0.0 eee eee 186, 298 
Script. Fy pes of Hebrew oie isn d seas esd cee Gunes Sieid iis sine whe Sed enmane as bene 308-311, 313 
Scroll of Esther, Dutch, Early Eighteenth Century...... ghee yadhem eg Rius iene tea) t ote ais bin erate re 429 
—— —— Silver Cases for... ... ccc cecc es cceeccsceees SNe nea eGe ey oueel ane euumesns yea venuye ws 430 
——— —— see also MEZUZAH. 
== of the Law, Mantles for the...3<\4.24s645ecwttia we Oi eee Red ow ansas ses teses cehw ddan dues 298-301 
Soncino, Page from the First Edition of the Mahzor, Printed in 1485 at....... 0.0... cece cece ce ceees 265 
Spanish and Portuguese Cemetery, Mile End Road, London........... ccc. ccc cece ee eee ees eeWears 158 
Synagogues: see Lonpon; Lispeck; MAYENCE; Metz; Micaigan; MoGHILeF; RAMSGATE. 
Templo, Jacob Judah Aryeh Leon, Dutch Mechanician......... cece cece cece cette te ecneees seicaas 2 
Tiberias, Interior of the Alleged Tomb of Rabbi Meir at... 2... cece cece cece cect cece teen ceceseccece 438 
—— Synagogue Near the Alleged Tomb of Rabbi Meir at... 0... 0... cece cee ccc cece eee eee ee ee eeene 432 
“Tishbi,” Title-Page from the First Edition of Elijah Levita’s, Isny, 1541......... 0... ce eee cece 47 
“Pou le-Hodot, Music OF 2.si ws wi ace wes oo acreauens Oe Per ere ee re ee er ee ee 626 
Tomb of Rabbi Meir at Tiberias, Interior of the Alleged... ccc cece ccc cee teen eee e ee eteeees 433 
——— of Sir Moses Montefiore at Ramsgate, England... ....... ccc cece eee c cece ett e cer eeereseesenee 670 
‘Tombstone of Mordecai Meisel at Prague... ......cccccccccce ccs ecccncecarsnecseesenseneespecsees 442 
—— of Moses Mendelssohn. From the Drawing by Daniel Chodowiecki........... ccc cece ee ences 484 
— of Uriah Phillips Levy, Cypress Hills Cemetery, New York............. ccc cece cree ceet econ: 65 
Typography: see CONSTANTINOPLE; Isny; Lisnon; Mantua; PRAGUE; SONCINO, 
Westphalia, Medal Commemorating Emancipation of the Jews of, 1808....... cece eeceee cece acces 408 
Writing: Types of Hebrew Script ......ccccccsccecsccccnccsseceves putaiveaters saiians%s'a erasers Gx 308-311, 3138 


*¢ Zaddik ka-Tamar,” Music OF 500s oS SO Oo URNA 0 Oe OS 8e SHS SONS TA Nba hee Sane ee bene eseve 625 


THE 


JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


“ e 

LEON (LEAO): Spanish-Portuguese family hav- 
ing branches in Italy, Holland, Germany, England, 
southern France, the Orient, the West Indies, espe- 
cially Jamaica, and Surinam. 

1. Abraham Judah Leon: Assistant rabbi of 
the Spanish-Portuguese congregation in London 
from 1685 until his death in 1707. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gaster, Hist. of Bevis Marks, p. 40. 

29, David de Isaac de Leon: Lived in Amster- 
dam in theeighteenth century, He published “Ser- 
mio da Boa Fama” (Amsterdam, 1767), an address 
in Portuguese delivered June, 1767; also some He- 
brew verses in honor of his father’s “ Avizos Espiri- 
tuaés,” printed with that book. 

3. Elijah de Leon: Son of Michael Judah de 
Leon (d. March 3, 1658) and nephew of Jacob 
Judah Leon. He was hakam of the benevolent 
society Gemilut Hasadiin in Amsterdam and cor- 
rector for the press 1656-66. The Hebrew Bible 
printed by Joseph Athias in 1661 was corrected and 
provided with a preface by Elijah de Leon and Sam- 
uel de Caceres. Some Hebrew verses of Elijah’s are 
given in the Spanish translation of the Psalms by 
his uncle Jacob Judah Leon. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cal. Bodl. p. 2879 and exxx.; 
Roest, Cat. Rosenthal. Bibl. Supplement, No. 2366; Kayser- 
ling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud,. p. 37. 

4. Isaac de Leon: Son of Eliezer ben Solomon 
ibn Zur; born probably in Spain; lived in Ancona; 
died there most likely. He was the author of “ Me- 
gillat Esther”—a commentary on Moses b. Mai- 
mon’s “Sefer ha-Mizwot,” written in the latter’s 
defense against the attacks of Moses ben Nahman 
(Venice, 1592; Amsterdam, 1660). He wrote also a 
rabbinical decision in the dispute between Solomon 
de Lolli and Jacob Catalano (Rome, 1546). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 105: Nepi-Ghi- 

rondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 134; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 

231 (who wrongly ascribes the decision to another Isaae de 

Leon); Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 383. 

5. Isaac de Leon: Talmudist, and director of a 
Talmud school in Salonica about 1630 (Conforte, 

Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 46a). 

6. Isaac de Leon: In conjunction with Sam- 
uel Athar, he published a collection of stories from 
the Midrashim and Haggadot (Venice, n.d.). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Flirst, Bibl. Jud. ii, 232. 


@. Isaac de Leon: Grammarian and teacher in 
Amsterdam. Together with Jacob de Solomon 
VIIlI.—1 


i a A I SS 


Hezekiah Saruco, he wrote “Avizos Espirituaés 
e Instruccoéns Sagradas, para Cultivar o Engenho 
da Juventude no Amore Temor Divino” (Amster- 
dam, 1766), containing twenty-four dialogues on 
Biblical history, the articles of faith, the ritual, the 
feast- and fast-days, and the special Sabbaths, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 57. 


8. Isaac (de) Leon Templo: Son of Solomon 
Raphael Judah Leon Templo; printer and publisher 
in Amsterdam 1727-88. He edited his father’s 
“ Masseket Halakah le-Mosheh mi-Sinai” (Amster- 
dam, 1784). See No. 20. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ersch and Gruber, Encye. section ii.. part 28, 

p. 733 Kayserling, Bibl. Fsp.-Port.-Jud. p. 59. 

9. Jacob de Leon, and (9a) Jacob Rodriguez 
de Leon: Both probably of Amsterdam; lived in 
Jamaica, W. I., in 1698. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. v. 88. 


10. Jacob Judah Aryeh Leon Templo: Ha- 
kam, translator of the Psalms, and heraldic expert; 
of Marano descent; son of Abraham de Leon; born 
in 1603 at Hamburg, where he taught Talmud for 
several years; died after 1675. He became hakam in 
Middelburg and, after 1643, in Amsterdam, where 
he was engaged also as teacher in the Talmud Torah, 
He vocalized the entire Mishnah which was printed 
in 1646 at the establishment of Manasseh ben Israel, 

Jacob Judah caused a great stir by a plan, drawn 
by him, of Solomon’s Temple, which was exhib- 
ited before Charles II. of England and of which the 
author published a short, comprebensive descrip- 
tion in Spanish entitled “ Retrato del Templo de Se- 
lomoh” (Middelburg, 1642). This was translated 
into Dutch in the same year; into French in 1648; 
and by himself into Hebrew in 1650, with the title 
“Tabnit Hekal.” Duke August of Brunswick, and 
more particularly his wife Elizabeth, wished a Ger- 
man translation of this description and entrusted 
the task to Prof. Johann Saubert of Helmstidt. 
Some one else published such a translation in 1665, 
and Saubert therefore wrote a Latin translation in 
that vear. An English version appeared in 1778, 
done by M. P. Decastro, a relative of Templo’s, and 
in whose possession the plan was then held. 

In 1647 Jacob Judah wrote “Tratado de la Arca 
del Testamento” (Amsterdam, 1658), His treatise 
on the cherubim, their form and nature, written 
in Latin in 1647, appeared in Spanish under the 


Leon 
Leon, Edwin de 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


2 





title “ Tratado de los Cherubim ” (Amsterdam, 1654); 
and his description of Moses’ tabernacle, written in 
1647 in Dutch, was published under the title “Re- 
trato del Tabecrnaculo de Moseh” (Amsterdam, 
1654), and in English (1675). His last work was a 
Spanish paraphrase of the Psalms, which was printed 
with the text, under the title “Tas Alabancas de 
Santitad” (Amsterdam, 1671), and, as is stated in 
the introduction, was written in seven months. 
The work was dedicated to Isaac Senior Teixéyra, 
financial agent, in Ham- 
burg, of Queen Christina 
of Sweden, and was ex- 


community in Hamburg. After forty years of 
active service he was pensioned in 1656, and his son. 
in-law, Isaac Namias, was appointed his successor, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Grunwald, Portugiesengrdber auf Deutscher 
iirde, p. 106. 


15. M. (P.) de Leon: Lived in Surinam. In 
collaboration with others, he wrote in 1791 “ Ge- 
schiedenis der Kolonie van Suriname ” (Amsterdam, 
1791; 2d ed. 26, 1802). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. iv. 6. 

16. Manuel de Leon 
(Leo): Marano; writer 
of Spanish and Portu- 





tolled by many hakamim, 














guese poems; born in Lei- 


























scholars, and poets in He- 
brew, Latin, and Spanish 
verses, 

Jacol Judah wrote also 
a dialogue (“Colloquium 
Middelburgense”) be- 
tween a rabbi and a Chris- 
tian scholar on the value 
of the Christian dogmas; 
and he left in manuscript 
* Disputaciones con Difer- 
entes Theologos de la Cris- 
tiandad.” Fle wasa skilful 
draftsman. The coat of 
arms of the English Grand 
Lodge of Masons with the 


motto mn wap. now 
“Toliness to the Lord,” is 
the work of the “famous 
and learned Hebrewist, 
architect, and brother, 
Rabi Jacob Jehudah Le- 
on.” He drew also more 
than 200 figures and vign- 
ettes to illustrate Talmudical subjects, which his 
son Solomon gave to Surenhusius for his Latin 
translation of the Mishnah. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Rossi-Hamberger, Hist. W6rterh. pp. 176 
et sey.; Koenen, Geschiedenis der Joden in Nederlaiid, p. 
337; Jost, Geseh, des Judenthums und Seiner Sekten, iii. 
233; Gratz, Gesch. x. 24,210 et seg.; Transactions Jew. Hist. 
Soc. Ling. ii. 156 et seq.; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 232 et seq.; 
Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. pp. 58 et seq. 








11. Joseph de Leon: Rabbiin Jerusalem about 
1587. 
12. Joseph de Leon: Rabbi in Venice in 1694. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frumkin, Eben Shemuel, p. 73: Nepi-Ghi- 
rondi, l.c. p. 170. 


13. Judah de Leon: Rabbi; died about 1830. 
He went to Rome about 1792 as emissary from He- 
bron, and at the desire of the community remained 
as rabbi. In 1811 he was chief rabbi of the Jewish 
consistory in Rome. Judah's is the first signature 
to a document protesting against the charge that 
religious reforms had been introduced into Italy. 
This document appeared inthe “ Letters of the Chief 
Rabbis in Italy ” (Leghorn; German transl., Altona 
and Hamburg, 1796). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nepi-Ghirondi, lc. p. 166; Vogelstein and 
Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii. 400 et seq.; Zedner, 
Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 39t. 


14. Judah Hayyim Leao (Leon): Hakam and 
leader in prayer in the synagogue of the Portuguese 





Jacob Judah Aryeh Leon Templo. 











ria; died in Amsterdam 
after1712. His published 
works are: “Triumpho 
Lusitano Aplausos Fes- 
tivos .. . Nos Augustos 
Desposorios do Incly to D. 
Pedro Segundo com @ Ser. 
Maria Sofia Isabel de Ba- 
viera, Monarcas de Portu- 
gal” (Brussels, 1688), a 
poem consisting of nine- 
ty-three verses, with a 
description of festivities 
held at Lisbon Oct. 11-25, 
1687, and dedicated to D. 
Geronimo Nufiez da Cos- 
ta, Portuguese agent in 
Amsterdam; “El Duelo 
dejos Aplausos, y Trium- 
pho de los Triumpbos, 
Retrato de Guilielmo HIT., 
Monarcha Britanico ” (The 
Hague, 1691); “Examen 
de Obrigacoens, Testitica 
hum Filho, que os Pays Engendraio, Amado, Dou- 
trindo os Filhos por Dependencia. Discursos Mo- 
rales Deduzidos da Sagrada Escritura ” (Amsterdam, 
1712); “Gryfo Embicmatico, Enigma Moral. Dedi- 
cado a Diego de Chaves” (#. 1712). His * Certa- 
men de las Musas en los Desposorios de Francisco 
Lopes Suasso, Bariéio de Auverne” is extant in manu- 
script in Amsterdam. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Barbosa Machado, Bibl. Lusit. iii. 293: Kay- 
serling, Sephardim, pp. 315 et seq.; idem, Bihl. Esp.-Port.- 
Jud. p. di. 

17. Meir de Leon: Livedin Amsterdam; trans- 
lated Verga’s “Shebet Yehudah ” into Spanish under 
the title “La Vara de Juda” (Amsterdam, 1640; 2d 
ed. tb. 1744). 

18. Samuel de Leon (Lido): Member of the 
colicge Keter Torah in Amsterdam. He was theau- 
thor of the “ Questoins [Questoés] com Suas Repos- 
tas, que Propor na Academia de Queter Tora,” 
Ilamburg, 1679, and of a writing preserved in manu- 
script, under the title “ Libro de Diver-as Questoins 
e Suas Repostas, Comp. por my . y Respond. 
em Yesiba.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Catalog der Hebréiischen 
Handschriften in der Stadtbibliothek zu Hamburg, p. 1673 
Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 59. 

19. Samuel Judah Leon Templo: Brother of 

Solomon Raphael Judah (No. 20), mentioned by 























THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


3 


iel Levi de Barrios. In 1682 he was teacher at 
ete chool founded by Abraham da Fonseca, of the 
ae Maskil el Dal in Amsterdam. 
’ 20. Solomon Raphael Judah Leon Templo: 
Hakam, preacher, and press-corrector in Amsterdam ; 
died ¢. 1783. He wasason of Jacob Judah Leon 
(No. 10); and a pupil of Isaac Aboab da Fonseca. 
Together with David N ules Torres, he corrected 
the enlarged edition of Maimonides’ “Yad ha-Haza- 
kah” which appeared in Amsterdam in 1703. His 
nublished works include, besides several sermons in 
Portuguese: “ Resit Hohma, Principio da Sciencia, 
ou Grammatica Hebrayca por hum Methodo Breve, 
Facil e Distincto para Uzo das Escolas” (7b, 1708) ; 
“Qrden de las Oraciones y Rogativas Compuestas 
para Pedir Piedades Sobre las Enfermedades. Tradu- 
zido por Selomoh R. J. Leon Templo” (7b. 1727). 

After his death his son Isaac published a little 
book by him entitled “ Masseket Halakah le-Mosheh 
mi-Sinai *» (Amsterdam, 1784), on the hermeneutical 
rules of the Talmud, at the end of which the regu- 
lations for the Passover feast are given in rimes of 
four lines. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 58. 

D M. K. 


LEON DE BAGNOLS. See LEVI 8s. GERSHON, 


LEON, DAVID CAMDEN DE: American 
physician and surgeon; born in South Carolina in 
1813; died at Sante Fé, N. M., Sept. 3, 1872; 
brother of Edwin de Leon. He was educated in 
South Carolina and at the University of Pennsyl- 
vania (M.D, 1886). Shortly after graduation he en- 
tered the United States army as assistant surgeon 
(1838) and served with distinction in the Seminole 
war. For several years afterward he was stationed 
on the Western frontier. He served throughout the 
Mexican war, and was present at most of the bat- 
tles. At Chapultepec he earned the sobriquet of 
“the Fighting Doctor,” and on two occasions led a 
charge of cavalry after the officer commanding had 
been killed or wounded. For his distinguished 
services and for his gallantry in action he twice re- 
ceived the thanks of Congress. He was then as- 
signed to fronticr duty, and in 1856 he became 
surgeon, with the rank of major. 

De Leon was personally opposed to secession; 
but, like most Southern officers in the regular army, 
he resigned his commission at the outbreak of the 
Civil war and tendered his services to the Confed- 
eracy. De Leon organized the medical department 
for the Confederate government. and was its first 
Surgeon-general. At the close of the war he went 
to Mexico, but soon returned to New Mexico, where 
he had been stationed for several years, and where 
he owned property. Hecontinued in practise there 
until his death. He was a man of considerable gen- 
eral culture and was esteemed ag a writer. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : American Annual Encyc. 1872, p. 627, New 
New ee Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biog. 
ed ork, 1894; Wolf, The American Jew as Patriot, Sol- 
we ue Citizen, p. 114, New York, 1895; idem, in Pudt. 
York: Tae Boe a, 34; American Biography, iii., New 

+s Rais r) 10g. A oe i Z $ 
ii. 416, Boston, 1 on ict. of U.S. edited by John H. Brown 


- L. Hi. 
LEON, EDWIN DE: American diplomat and 
journalist; born at Columbia, S. C., 1818; died in 


Leon 
Leon, Edwin de 


1891; brother of David Camden de Leon. His 
father, a physician, removed to Columbia, &. C., 
and was mayor of that city for several years. De 
Leon graduated from South Carolina College and 
studied law, but soon turned to Hterature and poli- 
tics. He became an active collaborator on the 
“Southern Review,” the “ Magnolia,” the “ Southern 
Literary Messenger,” and other periodicals. Re- 
moving to Savannah, Ga., he took editorial charge 
of the “Savannah Republican” and made it a polit- 
ical factor in the state; his next charge was the 
Columbia (8. C.) “Telegraph,” a daily. 

At the invitation of a committee of Southern 
members of Congress, De Leon established, in Wash- 
ington, D. C., “The Southern Press,” which soon 
became the organ of the Southern people and se- 
cured a large circulation during the early fifties. 
For his services during the Picree campaign, that 
president appointed him consul-general to Egypt, 
which position he filled for two terms with marked 
success. At the commencement of the Crimean war, 
an order was issued by the Porte expelling all Greeks 
from the Ottoman dominion. The Greeks in Egypt 
appealed to De Leon, who took them under the pro- 
tection of the American flag, guaranteed their good 
behavior, and insisted that they should not be inter- 
fered with. The home governnient approved his 
course, and Congress paid him the compliment of 
ordering the printing of his despatches. The King 
of Greece tendered him the grand cross of the Order 
of San Sauveur, but Leon declined on the ground 
that it was antirepublican. 

De Leon rendered conspicuous services in protect- 
ing American missionaries at Jaffa, and for this he 
received for the second time the thanks of the State 
Department. Through his influence American com- 
merce with Egypt was largely extended and Amer- 
ican machinery introduced into that country. It 
was during his incumbency of the consul-general- 
ship that he heard of the secession of his native state 
from the Union. He at once forwarded his resigna- 
tion. Returning home, he ran the blockade and 
made his way to New Orleans. Thence he pro- 
ceeded to Richmond and reported to Jefferson Davis, 
volunteering for military duty. Davis sent him in- 
stead on a confidential mission to Europe to secure 
the recognition of the Southern Confederacy by for- 
eign powers. De Leon refused any salary or remu- 
neration for his services, but advanced from his own 
purse considerable sums for the use of the Confed- 
eracy. He again ran the blockade, reached Nassau, 
and arrived in England in July, 1862. As diplo- 
matic agent he was received in the highest circles, 
both in England and in France, and personally 
pleaded the cause of the Confederacy with Lord 
Palmerston and the emperor Napoleon. 

His despatches to the Southern government were 
intercepted, however, and were published by order 
of Lincoln’s secretary of state, Seward. 

Through his friend Thackeray, De Leon became a 
member of the Garrick Club and a contributor to the 
“Cornhill Magazine.” After the Civil war De Leon 
returned to America and settled in New York. He 
frequently contributed to the leading magazines, 
chiefly on Eastern topics. Among his works are: 
“Thirty Years of My Life on Three Continents”; 


Leon Joseph of Carcassonne 
Leon of Modena 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


4 





“The Khedive’s Egypt”; “Under the Star and 
Under the Crescent”; “ Askaros Kassis, the Copt,” 
a novel, republished in England. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : American Biography, iii., New York; Oscar 
Fay Adams, 4A Dictionary of epeienicay. Authors, p. 93, 
New York, 1901; Lamb, Biog. Dict. of U. S. edited by John 
H. Brown, ii. 416, Boston, 1900; Allibone, “Dict. of Authors, 
suppl. vol., p. 473. 

A. L. Ho. 

LEON JOSEPH OF CARCASSONNE: Phy- 
sician; lived toward the end of the fourteenth cen- 
tury and at the beginning of the fifteenth. He de- 
voted himself to the translation from the Latin into 

Hebrew of medical works. Among his numerous 

translations three are still extant in manuscript: (1) 

a commentary on the ninth book (Pathology) of 

Razi by Gerard de Solo; (2) “ Meyashsher ha-Mathi- 

lim,” a manual of medicine by Gerard de Solo; (8) 

a chapter on the relation between astronomy and 

medicine, attributed to Hippocrates. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Munich, p. 209; idem, 
Hebr. Uebers. p. 794; idem, Hebr. Bibl. viii. 48; Renan-Neu- 
bauer, Les Ecrivains Juifs Frangais, pp. 424 et seqg.; Gross, 
Gallia Judaica, p. 616. 

G. I. Br. 

LEON, LEONTIN. 
KOouEN. 

LEON HA-LEVI: Provencal Jew who wrote 
a Purim parody under the pseudonym Labi ha- 
Levi because he feared that the Orthodox Jews 
would condemn his work. The treatise, called 
“Megillat Setarim,” on “Midrash ha-Nabi ha-Labi 
ha-Lewi” (Venice, 1552), contains three sections, en- 
titled respectively “Perek Habakbuk,” “ Hakkol 
Hayyabin,” and “ Mi-she-Niknas Adar,” and is simi- 
lar in plan to a Talmud treatise with so-called Rashi 
and Tosafot. It isfull of humor. Another work 
of his, “Sefer Habakbuk ” (¢6. 1552), is a parody of 
the Pentateuch and the prophetic style, represent- 
ing a contest between “ Karmi” (wine) and “ Be’eri ” 


See JUDAH BEN MEfR HA- 


(water). This work was likewise intended for 
Purim. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 202; First, 


Bibl. Jud. ii. 215; idem, Die Purim- Titan in Orient, 
Lit. 1849, p. 157; Sommerhausen, Die Purimliteratur, ib. 
1850, p. ghhe Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 580; idem, Pur Ut 
und Parodie, in Israetietische Letterbode, vii. 7, No. 1s. 


G. MM. bp. 


LEON LEVY BRUNSWICH (LHERIE). 
See Brunswicu, Lion Livy. 

LEON, MESSER DAVID BEN MESSER 
(known also as David ben Judah): Italian rabbi; 
flourished in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. 
He studied at Naples in the school of his father, 
Messer Leon, author of “ Libnat ha-Sappir,” and re- 
ecived at the age of cighteen his rabbinical diploma 
from German and French Talmudic authorities. 
Soon afterward he went to Padua, where he studied 
under Judah Minz, who granted him a new rabbin- 
icaldiploma. He then betook himself to Turkey, and 
while sojourning at Salonica, where he prepared for 
publication his “ ‘En ha-Kore,” he was called to the 
rabbinate of Avlona at a salary of 70 florins a year. 
The community possessed three congregations of 
various nationalities, and Leon officiated successively 
in the three synagogues on every third Saturday. 
In the very first year of his rabbinate dissensions on 
account of a ritual question arose which caused the 


re SS A A a A 
ene ane ere 


separation of the Portuguese and Catalonian Jews 
from the Castilians. Toward the end of his second 
year in Avlona a quarrel broke out among the 
Sephardim and the Portuguese. Leon, who sided 
with the Portuguese, had for antagonists Abraham 
Harbon and Abraham de Collier, Excommunica- 
tions were launched by both parties even on the 
Day of Atonement. 

Leon was a prolific writer, and produced works 
in many branches of secular science, as well as on 
distinctively Jewish subjects. With 
the exception of two, all remained un- 
published. Most of them are no 
longer extant, and are known only 
from quotations. Leon preferred to clothe his phi- 
losophy in the garb of the Cabala, in which he was 
an adept; but he was too much of a philosopher to 
become involved in the abysses of mysticism. In 
his cabalistic work “Magen Dawid,” still extant in 
manuscript, he freely quotes the Greek and the 
Arabic philosophers. For him Plato was the great- 
est cabalist. This philosopher, Leon claimed, lived 
at the time of the prophet Jeremiah, who was his 
teacher, 

Leon wrote also the following works: “ Abir 
Ya‘akob,” on medicine and other sciences; “Sefer 
ha-Derashot,” sermons arranged in the order of the 
sections of the Pentateuch (according to Neubauer, 
it is identical with the “ Tif’eret Adam” quoted in 
Leon’s commentary on Lamentations); “Menorat 
ha-Zahab,” also extant in manuscript, probably a 
haggadic commentary on Lamentations; ““En ha- 
Kore,” a commentary on the “Moreh Nebukim,” 
criticizing the commentary of Isaac Abravancel; 
“Miktam le-Dawid,” a cabalistie work mentioned in 
the “‘En ha-Kore”; “Sod ha-Gemul,” in which he 
shows that the Israelites, unlike other nations, are 
not under a special sign of the zodiac; refutations 
of Albo’s criticisms of Aristotle; “Shebah ha- 
Nashim,” still extant in manuscript (according to 
Steinschneider, “ Hebr. Bibl.” xix. 83, identical with 
the commentary on Prov, xxxi.); “Tehiliah le- 
Dawid” (published by the author’s grandson Aaron 
le-Bet David, Constantinople, 1577), in three parts: 
(1) on the excellence of the Law; (2) on the elements 
of faith, which latter is superior to speculative rea- 
soning; (3) on the principles of God, the divine at- 
tributes, providence, free will, etc.; a halakic de- 
cision on the ritual question which caused the 
division of the various congregations of Avlona, 
published by 8. Bernfeld, under the title “ Kebod 
Hakamim,” Berlin, 1899 (Mekize Nirdamim). 

Leon was considered asa high Talmudic author- 
ity, and was consulted on halakic questions. Two 
of his decisions have been preserved (Elijah Mizrahi, 
Responsa, No, 47; Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. 
MSS.” No. 834). In one of his works Leon men- 
tions a commentary of his own on Moses of Coucy’s 
“Sefer Mizwot Gadol” (*“Semag”). Parma MS. de 
Rossi No. 1895 (“ Cat. Perreau,” No. 19) contains a 
scientific treatise by Leon. In the introduction to 
this treatise Leon says that he wrote many poems 
in Hebrew and in the “Christian language,” mean- 
ing thereby Latin or Italian. Shabbethai Bass, 
without indicating any source, gives, in his “Sifte 
Yeshenim,” the following titles of works attributed 


His 
Works. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


5 


“Bet Dawid”; “Kisse Dawid”; “ Nefesh 


Leon: ; 
Be “Kol Adonai ba-Koah”; and “ Nahal 


Dawid”: 
. 3° 
-Adanim. Bie ee een tat 
sRAPHY: Rossi. izionario, 3V. Nepl-Ghiron 1, Tole- 
BiB ule Visrael. p. 783 Steinsehneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 
cei it 7 


Aiur fophr. Bibl, viii. 64; idem, in Letierbode, xii. 5¢ 
sees idem. Hebr. Bibl. viii. 645 idem, | vote, XM 
a De Neubauer. ib. x. L0b et seq.; Schechter, in R. £. J. 
ra ¢ oa 


-iv, LIS él 8G. Michael. Or ha-Hayyim, No. 7275 Carmoly, 
*ristoire des Médecins Juifs, $ cli; 8. Bernfeld, introduc- 


tie to Rehod Hakamin. L Br. 

LEON (JUDAH ARYEH) OF MODENA: 
Italian scholar, rabbi, and poet; son of Isaac of 
Vodena and Diana Rachel; born April 23, 1571, at 
Venice: died there March 24, 1648, He was a cle- 
scendant of a prominent French family. His grand- 
father Mordecai became distinguished both as a 

-sician aud as a philanthropist, and was raised by 
Charles V. to the rank of Knight of the Order of the 
Golden Fleece. Leon was a precocious child. His 
father, who was then in good circumstances, gave 
him a complete education, not neglecting even such 
worldly accomplishments as singing and dancing. 
Leon's masters were successively Azriel Bassola, 
Hezekiah Galico, Hezekiah Finzi, and Samuel Arche- 
volti. At the age of twelve Leon translated into 
Hebrew verse the first canto of Ariosto’s “ Orlando 
Furioso,” and about a year aud a half later he wrote 
his dialogue against gambling, which passed through 
ten editions and was translated into Latin, French, 
German, and Judwo-German. Even at this early 
ave he was not only well versed in Hebrew and rab- 
binical literature, but was conversant with the 
classics and possessed a fair knowledge of mathc- 
matics, philosophy, and natural history. 

There was, however, one thing that nature had 
denied to this highly gifted youth—a stable char- 
acter, Like all poets, he lived upon his emotions. 
By the irony of fate, Leon, who had fulminated 
against gambling, developed a passion for all games 
of hazard, and, being too weak to overcome it, 
attributed the fault to the astral influences under 
which he had been born. This passion, which is 
probably accountable for his inconsistencies, had a 
large share in the misfortunes which filled his life. 
He had scarcely reached maturity when his father 
became impoverished, and Leon had to seek his own 
livelihood. In 1590 he married, and won a living by 
teaching, After the death of his father, in 1592, he 
settled at Venice, where he was appointed (1594) 
member of the rabbinate and preacher. In the lat- 
ter capacity he was especially successful; his ad- 
dresses in Italian attracted large audiences, inclu- 
ding Christian priests and noblemen. Leon’s suc- 
Cesses as an orator and poet won for him the con- 
sideration of the Christian scholastic world, and 
admitted him to the highest Venetian circles. He 
had among his pupils Louis Eselin (a nobleman of 
the French court), the Archbishop of Lodéve, John 
Plantauit, Jacob Gaffarelli, and Giulio Morosini. 

Besides preaching and teaching, Leon exercised 
not less than twenty-six professions (press-corrector, 
notary, bookseller, etc.); but all his resources were 
Swallowed up in gaming, and his material condition 
Was rendered thereby a source of perpetual anxiety. 
To his monetary troubles was added a series of 
family disasters. Of his three sons, Mordecai, who 
Was endowed with great ability, died at the age of 


pls 


Leon Joseph of Carcassonne 
Leon of Modena 


twenty-six; Zebulon was killed in a braw] with 
his comrades; the third, Isaac, after having led 
a life of dissipation, emigrated to Bra- 


Family  zil, and was never thereafter heard 
Misfor- from. Of his two daughters, one died 
tunes. during his lifetime; the second lost her 


husband, and she and her family be- 
came thereby dependent upon Leon for support. 
In 1641 Leon’s wife became insane, and remained in 
that state until her death. Amid all these trials 
Leon continued to study, write books, compose 
poeins, relieve the distresses of others, so far as that 
was in his power, and—gamble. This last occupa- 
tion involved him, in 1631, in a struggle with the 
leaders of the community, who launched an excom- 
munication against any that should play cards, or 
take part in any other game of hazard, within the 
period of six years. On this occasion Leon wrote a 
brilliant dissertation, in which he demonstrated that 
the leaders had acted against 
the Law; the excommuni- 
cation was accordingly re- 
voked. 

The community of Ven- 
ice in the seventeenth cen- 
tury must have been ani- 
mated by a spirit of toler- 
ance, for Leon continued to 
remain a member of the 
rabbinate until his death, 
although no doubt could 
be entertained as to his 
anti-Talmudic sympathies 
after the publication, in 1635, of his “Bet Yehudah ” 
(known also under the title “Ha-Boneh”). This 
work contains all the haggadot omitted by the “‘En 
Ya‘akob”; in the accompanying commentary Leon 
points out the differences between the religious cus- 
toms of the Jews of Palestine and of those living in 
other countries, showing thereby that the rabbis and 
scholars of any period have the right to modify 
Talmudic institutions (Shab. i.). He derides the 
haggadot, although he coneedes that some of them 
contain salutary moral teachings. In the “Bet Ye- 
hudah,” Leon went no further than to show his 
preference for religious reform; but he attacked 
traditional Judaism in a pseudonymous work en- 
titled “Kol Sakai”; this work, either because in the 
meantime he had actually changed his views, or be- 
cause he desired more thoroughly to conceal its 
authorship, he later endeavored to refute in another 
work entitled “Sha’agat Aryeh,” which remained 
unfinished. 

The “Kol Sakal” comprises three treatises, sub- 
divided into chapters. In the first treatise the 
author deals with the existence of God, the Crea- 
tion, the purpose of the world, reward and punish- 
ment, and the divine origin of the Law. In the 

second treatise he criticizes rabbinical 






Mie a 
bi 


it 





Leon of Modena. 


_ Attacks interpretation of the Law. He con- 
Tradition- tends that, like the Karaites, the Rab- 
alism. bis often followed the letter of the 


Law to the neglect of its spirit. He 
asserts that the use of phylacteries is not com- 
manded by Biblical law; that the operation of cir- 
cunmcision is not performed in the mauner pre- 


Leon of Modena 
Leontopolis 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 6 





scribed; and that rabbinical interpretation is often 
in direct opposition to the Law. That there was 
no traditional interpretation before Antigonus is 
seen from the existence of various sects during 
the time of the Second Temple. The third treatise 
enumerates the laws which must be reformed in 
order to bring the later Judaism into harmony with 
the Law, and render it spiritual and Biblical. The 
author proposes the simplification of the prayers 
and synagogal service, the abolition of many rites, 
the relaxation of Sabbath festivals, of Passover, and 
even of the ritual of the Day of Atonement. Fast- 
ing should not be carried beyond the ordinary 
physical and spiritual powers of the individual con- 
cerned. The dietary laws should be abrogated, or 
at least simplified; the prohibition against drinking 
wine with those of other creeds, obedience to which 
exposed Jews to derision, should be abolished. 

The “Kol Sakal” and “Sha’agat Aryeh” were 
published by Isaac Reggio under the title “ Behinat 
ha-Kabbalah ” (G6ritz, 1852). A discussion arose at 
the time of its appearance as to whether the “ Kol 
Sakal” was written by Leon himself or whether, as 
is pretended in the “Sha’agat Aryeh,” it proceeded 
from a certain Amittai ibn Raz of Alkala. It has 
even been suggested with some plausibility that 
both these works, instead of being written by Leon, 
were nierely attributed to him by I. 8. Reggio (see 
Deutsch, “Theory of Oral Tradition,” p. 39; “Ep- 
ochs of Jewish History,” pp. 23 et seg., New York, 
1894). Buta comparison between the ideas ex pressed 
by Leon in his “ Bet Yehudah” and elsewhere and 
those expounded in the “Kol Sakal” leaves little 
doubt as to his authorship. Indeed, several of the 
criticisms, as, for Instance, those concerning circum- 
cision and the second day of festivals, are found 
expressed in the same terms in Leon’s “ Magen we- 
Zinnah” (published by A. Geiger, Breslau, 1856), 
which contains answers to eleven objections to the 
rabbinical interpretation of the Law brought, ac- 
cording to Leon, by a Marano of Hamburg. 

Though brilliantly written, these works are of 
comparatively little value; neither criticisms nor 
refutations are profound enough to 
survive thorough investigation. Far 
superior is Leon’s “ Ari Nohem ” (pub- 
lished by First, Leipsic, 1840), which 
contains an attack upon the Cabala. It is divided 
into three parts, comprising altogether thirty-one 
chapters. Leon first demonstrates that Cabala can 
not be considered as a science, and then shows that 
the Zohar, on which it is based, is a modern composi- 
tion. In addition to the works cited, Leon wrote: 


Attacks 
Cabala. 


Sur me-Ra‘’. A dialogue between Eldad and Medad on games 
of hazard. Venice, 1596; Prague, 1615: Leyden, 1656. Trans- 
lated into Latin by Aug. Pfeifer (Wittenberg, 1665) and by 
Thomas Hyde (Oxford, 1698, 1702, 1767); into German, with the 
Hebrew title ‘* Zahkan Mellumad we-Mitharet,’’ by Fr. Abb. 
Christiani (Leipsic, 1683’; Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1713; Firth, 
123); into Judwo-German, with the Hebrew title “ Zahkan 
Mussari,”’ by Asher Anshel (Amsterdam, 1698); into French by 
Carmoly (Paris, 1841). 

Sod Yesharim. One hundred enigmasand remedies. Venice, 
1594; Verona, 1647; Amsterdam, 1649: Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
1702. Another edition gives neither date nor place of publica- 
tion, 

Zemah Zaddik. An ethical work, translated from the Latin, 
with moral sayings taken from Bible and Talmud. Venice, 
1600; Wilna, 1855; New York, 1899. 


Midbar Yehudah. Twenty-one sermons. Venice, 1602. 

Galut Yehudah. Explanations, in Italian, of all the difficult 
expressions found in the Bible, in the sayings of the Fathers, 
and in the Haggadah of Passover; preceded by a number of 
grammatical rules. Venice, 1612. Republished at Padua and 
Venice in 1640, with an Italian-Hebrew vocabulary entitled ‘‘ Pj 
Aryeh.”’ 

Leb Aryeh. A method of mnemonics applicable in all sei- 
ences, With the 613 commandments according to Maimonides, 
Venice, 1612; Wilna, 1886. 

Bet Lehem Yehudah, An index of the sources of all the pas- 
sages found in the “** En Ya‘akob.’? Venice, 1625; Prague, 1705, 

Zebi Fsh. An abridgment of Isaac Abravanel’s cominentary 
on the Haggadah of Passover, with an Italian translation. 
Venice, 1629, 1664, 1695; Sulzbach, 1774, 1834; with a German 
translation, Fiirth, 1804. 

Tefillot Yesharim. Prayers and selihot for all occasions. 

Ben Dawid. Controverting the doctrine of metempsyechosis, 
Included by Eliezer Ashkenazi in the ‘“‘Ta‘am Zekenim.” 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1859. 

Magen wa-Hereb. Attacks upon Christian dogmas. Pub- 
lished in part, together with the ** Magen we-Zinnah,”’ by A. 
Geiger, Breslau, 1856. 

Ha-Abot bi-Yehudah. Commentary on the Pirke Abot. 

Commentaries on the Pentateuch, the Five Scrolls, the books 
of Samuel, Proverbs, and the Passover Haggadah. 

Rashi’s commentaries on Proverbs and the books of Job and 
Daniel. Included in the ‘* Biblia Rabbinica.°’ 

Pitron ha-Millot. Explanations of the special terms used in 
logic and philosophy. 

Hibbur. Models of Hebrew composition ; a Hebrew transla- 
tion of Ecclesiastes and the books of Maccabees, ete. 

Derashot. Four hundred sermons. 

Commentary on the Haftarot. 

Mibhar Yehudah. The nature of the work is unknown. 

Pesakim. Halakic decisions on synagogal music. Venice, 
1605; Vienna, 1861. Published as a supplement to “ Ben Cha- 
nanja,’* 1861, No. 27. On the excommunication launched by the 
leaders of the community of Venice against all games of hazard. 
Venice, 1631. Contained also in ** Pahad Yizhak,” s.v. an. 
On the use of ordinary straps for phylacteries, Included in the 
responsa “* Debar Shemuel,”’ of Samuel Aboab, No. 19. 

Leket Yehudah. Collection of halakic consultations. 

Shire Yehudah. Collection of Hebrew poems. Neubauer, 
** Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.”’ No. 2185. 

Hayye Yehudah. Autobiography; published in part by Isaac 
Reggio, in the introduction to the **‘ Behinat ha-Kabbalah,” and 
in part by Geiger. 

Historia dei Riti Ebraici, Vita e Osservanze degli Hebrei di 
Questi Tempi. Paris, 1637: Venice, 1638, 1673, 1678, 1687, 1715. 
Written, at the request of an English nobleman, for James L.; 
transiated into English by Ed. Chiimead (London, 1650) and by 
8. Ockley (ib. 1707, 1753); into French by Recared Simon (Paris, 
1671, 1681, 1710); into Dutch by Aug. Gedaret (Amsterdam, 
1683); into Latin by J. Val. Grossgebauer (Frankfort-on-the- 
Main, 1693); into Hebrew, under the title ‘“*Shulhan ‘Aruk,” by 
Solomon Rubin, with notes by A. Jellinek (Vienna, 1867). 

Zikne Yehudah. Responsa, cited by Moses Hagiz in his ‘* Le- 
ket ha-Kemah.” Itis, perhaps, identical with ‘* Leket Yehudah.” 

Ozar ha-Hayyim. On the Cabala. 


The following are of doubtful authorship: “Or 
Tob,” explanations of difficult Hebrew words (Am- 
sterdam, 1675 [Venice, 1681, under the title “Or 
Luz”; 2. 1701, under the title “Or Lustru ”]), and 
“Parashot ha-Kesef,” a commentary on four see- 
tions of the Pentateuch (Neubauer, “Cat. Bod. 
Hebr. MSS.” No. 2549). Steinschneider attributes 
alsoto Leon the work on chess entitled “Ma‘adanne 
Melek.” Leon edited a great number of works, 
which he provided with prefaces, poems, and ap- 
probations; and he assisted the musical composer 
Solomon de Rossi in the publication of his work on 
synagogal music. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim: De Rossi, Dizio- 
narto, p. 23L; Geiger, Leon de Modena, Breslau, 1856; Luz- 
zatto, Iggarot, i. 288-293; Joseph Almanzi, Higgayon be-Ki- 
nor, p. 70, Venice. 1839; Isaac Reggio. Iggarot, ii. 74 et seq.s 
idem. in Kerem Hemedad, ii. 156-158; Jost’s Annalen, 1841, p. 
68; Orient, No. 5; Soave, in Corriere Israelitico, 1863-65; 
idem,in Arch. [sr. 1877, p. 73; Steinschneider. Cat. Bodl. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


i351. dem, in Monatesschrift, xliii, 811; Neubauer, in 
CO ade, iii. 99-109; idem, in R. E. J. xxii. 84; Zunz, 
Lette fiydesch. p. 420; Libowitz, Rabbi Yehudah Aryeh 
Bites 4. Cienna, 1896; 2d ed., New York, 1901; Simon Stern, 
ee des Rabbiner’s Gegen den Talmud, Breslau, 


Do etnels Or ha-Hayyim, pp. 489-444; Simonsen, in 


Rote Festschrift, pp. 3387 ef seq.; M. H. Friedlander, in 
Be ith ixche Woehensehrift, 1902, p. 87. 
oe I. Br. 


LEON, MOSES (BEN SHEM-TOB) DE: 
Cabalistic writer; author, or redactor, of the Zo- 
har; born at Leon, Spain, about 1250; lived in 
Guadalajara, Valladolid, and Avila; died at Are- 
valo in 1305, while returning to hishome. He was 
familiar with the philosophers of the Middle Ages 
and with the whole literature of mysticism, and 
knew and used the writings of Solomon ibn Gabi- 
rol, Judah ha-Levi, Maimonides, etc. He knew how 
to charm with brilliant and striking phrases without 
expressing any well-defined thought. He was a 
ready writer and wrote several mystical and caha- 
iistic works in quick succession. In the comprehen- 
sive “Sefer ha-Rimmon,” written in 1287 and still 
extant in manuscript, he treated from a mystical 
standpoint the objects and reasons for the ritual 
laws, dedicating the book to Levi ben Todros Abu- 
latia. In 1290 he wrote “ Ha-Nefesh ha-Hakamah,” 
or “ Ha-Mishkal ” (Basel, 1608, and frequently found 
in manuscript), which shows even greater cabalistic 
tendencies. In this work he attacks the pbiloso- 
phers of religion and deals with the human soul as 
“a likeness of its heavenly prototype,” with its state 
after death, with its resurrection, and with the trans- 
migration of souls. “Shekel ha-Kodesh ” (written 
in 1292), another book of the same kind, is dedicated 
to Todros ha-Levi Abulafia. In the “ Mishkan ha- 
‘Edut,” or “Sefer ha-Sodot,” finished in 1298, he 
treats of heaven and hell, after the apocryphal 
Book of Enoch; also of atonement. He wrote as 
well a cabalistic explanation of the first chapter of 
Ezekiel, 

Toward the end of the thirteenth century Moses 
de Leon wrote or compiled a cabalistic midrash to 
the Pentateuch full of strange mystic allegories, and 
ascribed it to Simeon ben Yohai, the great saint 
of the Tannaim, The work, written in peculiar 
Aramaic, is entitled “Midrash de R. Shimeon ben 
Yohai,” better known as the ZoHar. The book 
aroused due suspicion at the outset. The story 
runs that after the death of Moses de Leon a rich 
man from Avila offered the widow, who had been 
left without means, a large sum of money for the 
original from which her husband had made the copy, 
and that she then confessed that her husband him- 
self was the author ofthe work. Shehad asked him 
several times, she said, why he had put his teach- 
ings Into the mouth of another, but he had always 
answered that doctrines put into the mouth of the 
miracle-working Simeon ben Yohai would be a rich 
source of profit. Others believed that Moses de 
Leon wrote the book by the magic power of the 
Holy Name. At any rate the contents of the book 
have been accepted and approved by all cabalists, 
and can by no means be regarded as mere inven- 
Hons and forgeries of Moses de Leon. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ahimaaz Chronicle, ed. London, pp. 95 et 
Verhab em, Moses b. Sehem-Tob de Leon und Seine 
ree Gantss zum Sohar, Leipsic, 1851; Gratz, Gesch. vii. 231 
"84.5 Geiger, Das Judenthum und Seine Geschichte, iii. 


Leon of Modena 
Leontopolis 


19 et seq., Breslau, 1871; De Rossi-Hamberger. Hist. Worterh, 
p. 177; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodi. cols. 1852 et seq.; idem, 
Hebr. Bibl. x. 156 et seq. 


K. M. K. 


LEON, THOMAS COOPER DE: Lecturer, 
journalist, author, and playwright; brother of Ed- 
win de Leon; born at Columbia, 8S. C., 1889. He 
served in the Confederate army from 1861 to 1865, 
and after the Civil war edited “The Mobile Regis- 
ter” (1877), and “The Gossip” and the “Gnilf Citi- 
zen” (both Mobile papers; 1873-96). He is the 
author of a number of works, among them being 
“ Creole and Puritan” (1889), “ The Puritan’s Daugh- 
ter,” and “ Four Years in Rebel Capitals ” (1893). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lamb, Biographical Diet. of the United 
States, Boston, 1900; Allibone, Dict. of Authors, Supple- 
ment; Who’s Who in America, 1908-5. 


E. C. L. Ht. 

LEON DI LEONE. See Jupan Leon DI 
LEONE. : 

LEONE EBREO. Sce JupAn LEONE B. [SAAC 
SomMo. 


LEONTE (JUDAH) BEN MOSES: Roman 
rabbi; died in 1216. In the name of the commu- 
nity of Rome he sent a halakic decision to Judah ben 
Kalonymus of Speyer for approval (“Shibbole ha- 
Leket,” ii. 75; comp. Buber’s introduction, note 
87). The Roman manuscript Mahzor contains eleven 
selihot which bear the signature of Leonte. One of 
these, beginning with ‘77"s 1193 O'7FIN, for the sev- 
enteenth day of Tammuz, is included in the Roman 
printed Mahzor. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, p. 68; Zunz, Li- 
teraturgesch. p. 314; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Ju- 
den in Rom, i. 372, 


G. I. Br. 


LEONTOPOLIS (Greek, Agcévrwy wéaic = “lion 
city”): Place in the nome of Heliopolis, Egypt, 
situated 180 stadia from Memphis; famous as con- 
taining a Jewish sanctuary, the only one outside of 
Jerusalem where sacrifices were offered. Aside from 
a somewhat uncertain allusion of the Hellenist Ar- 
tapanus (in Eusebius, “ Preesparatio Evangelica,” ix. 
23), only Josephus gives information of this temple 
(more explicitly in his“ Antiquities” of the Jews than 
in his “Jewish War”). The Talmudic accounts are 
entirely confused. The establishment of a central 
sanctuary in Egypt was not due to the disorders that 
arose in Palestine under ANTIOCHUS IV., EprPHANES, 
to the desecration of the sanctuary at Jerusalem, to 
the supplanting of the legitimate family of priests 
by the installation of ALcImus, nor to the personal 
ambition of Onras IV., but to the vast extent of 
the Jewish diaspora in Egypt itself. 

It would appear from the account of Josephus in 
the “Jewish War” (i. 1, § 1), and more especially 
from the fact that Onias is called in the same work 
(vii. 10, § 2) “the son of Simon,” that the temple of 
Leontopolis was built by Onias III., who drove the 
sons of Tobias from Jerusalem, and who fied to 
Egypt, Syria’s ancient rival, when Antiochus IV. 
attacked that city. But this account is contradicted 
by the story that Onias III. was murdered at Anti- 
och in 171 B.c. (II Mace. iv. 33). Josephus’ account 
in the “Antiquities” is therefore more probable, 
namely, that the builder of the temple was a son of 


Leontopolis 
Leprosy 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 8 





the murdered Onitas III., and that, a mere youth 
at the time of his father’s death, he had fled to the 
court of Alexandria in consequence 


Founded of the Syrian persecutions, perhaps 
by because he thought that salvation 
Onias IV. would come to his bene from Egypt 
(* Ant.” xii. 5, $1; 26.9, $7). Ptolemy 


VI. Philometor was King of Eeypt at that time. He 
probably had not yet given up his claims to Cale- 
Syria and Judea, and gladly gave refuge to such a 
prominent personage of the neighboring country. 
Onias now requested the king and his sister and wife, 
Cleopatra, to allow him to build a sanctuary in 
Egypt similar to the one at Jerusalem, where he 
would employ Levites and priests of his own race 
(4b. xiii. 8, § 1); and he referred to the prediction of 
the prophet Isaiah (Isa. xix. 19) that a Jewish tem- 
ple would be erected in Egypt (“ Ant.” Ze). Jo- 
sephus then quotes two documents: Onias’ letter to 
the royal couple, and the king’s answer to Onias. 
Both of these, however, appear spurious, on the fol- 
lowing grounds: Onias refers in his letter to his mili- 
tary exploits in Coele-Syria and Phenicia, although 
it is not certain that the general Onias and the priest 
Onias are identical. His assertion that a central 
sanctuary is necessary because a multiplicity of 
temples causes dissension among the Jews evidences 
imperfect knowledge of the Jewish religious life; 
and, finally, his request for the ruined temple of the 
goddess Bubastis, because a sufficient supply of 
wood and sacrificial animals would be found there, 
seems unwise and improbable for a suppliant who 
must first obtain compliance with his principal re- 


quest. Itseems strange, furthermore, 

Spurious- that in the second letter the pagan 
ness of _ king points out to the Jewish priest 

the Onias that the proposed building of a temple 
Letters. is contrary to the law, and that he 


consents only in view of Isaiah’s 
prophecy. Both letters were apparently written by 
a Hellenistic Jew. Only this can be stated asa, fact, 
that the temple of Leontopolis was built on the site 
of a ruined temple of Bubastis, in imitation of the 
temple at Jerusalem, though smaller and less elabo- 
rate (bd. xiii. 8, § 3). The statement in “B. J.” vii. 
10, § 2 of Onias’ argument that by the building of 
this temple the whole Jewish nation would be 
brought, to turn from the Syrians to the Ptolemies 
seems very plausible, and may have given rise to the 
assertion made in the letters that there were dissen- 
sions among the Jews, The “fortress” (oxt:pwua) 
of the temple of Bubastis may be explained by the 
statement, which seems credible, that Onias built a 
fortress (gpovpov) around the temple in order to pro- 
tect the surrounding territory, which now received 
the designation “Oneion” (“B. J.” vii. 10, § 8). 
The Onias temple was not exactly similar to the 
Temple at Jerusalem, being more in the form of a 
high tower; and as regards the interior arrange- 
ment, it had not a candelabrum, but a hanging 
lamp. The building had a court (c*evec) which 
was surrounded by a brick wall with stone gates. 
The king endowed the temple with large revenues 
(th.\—a fact that mav have suggested to the writer 
of the letters mentioned above the wealth of wood 
and sacrificial animals, 


The reputation which the tempie of Onias enjoyed 
is indicated by the fact that the Septuagint changes 
the phrase “city of destruction ” (Isa. 


Sacrifices xix. 18) to “city of righteousness” 
Made (xoA¢ aosdéx), It may be taken for 
There. granted that the Evyyptian Jews sacri- 


ficed frequently in the temple of Leon- 
topolis, although at thesame time they fulfilled their 
duty toward the Temple at Jerusalem, as Philo nar- 
rates that he himself did (“De Providentia,” in 
Eusebius, @.c. viii. $$ 14, 64). 

In the Talmud the origin of the temple of Oniaas ig 
narrated with legendary additions, there being two 
versions of the account (Men. 109b). It must be 
noted that here also Onias is mentioned as the son 
of Simon, and that Isaiah’s prophecy is referred to, 
In regard to the Law the temple of Onias ("314 7, 
handed down in the name of Saadia Gaon as 9)f) 
was looked upon as neither legitimate nor illegiti- 
mate, but as standing midway between the worship 
of Yuwwrand idolatry (Men. 109a; Tosef., Men. xiii, 
12-14); the possibility of the priests of Onias being 
admitted to officiate at Jerusalem was explicitly 
stated, while one passage even expresses the view 
that sacrificial worship was permissible in the tem- 
ple of Onias (Meg, 10a). The opinion was prevalent 
among the Rabbis that the temple of Onias was 
situated at Alexandria—an error that is repeated by 
all the chroniclers of the Middle Ages. This temple 
is also sometimes confounded with the Samaritan 
temple on Mount Gerizim (“ Yuhasin,” ed. London, 
pp. ilb, 18b; Azariah dei Rossi, “ Mc’or ‘Enayim,” 
ed. Mantua, xxi. 89a; Gans, “Zemah Dawid,” ed. 
Offenbach, ti. 10; Heilprin, “Seder ha-Dorot,” ed. 
Warsaw, 1891, i. 116). 

According to Josephus, the temple of Leontopolis 
existed for 843 years, though the general opinion is 
that this number must be changed to 243. It was 
closed either by the governor of Egypt, Lupus, or 
by his successor, Paulinus, about three years after 
the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem; and the 
sacrificial gifts, or rather the interior furnishings, 
were confiscated for the treasury of Vespasian (“B 
J.” vii. 10, § 4); the emperor fearing that through 
this temple Egypt might become a new center for 
Jewishrebellion. No ruinshave so far been discov- 
ered of this temple, once so famous; perhaps the 
present Tell al-Yahudi marks its site (Ebers, “ Durch 
Gosen zum Sinai,” pp. 497 et seq.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 4th ed., iii. 27 ef sey.; Weiss, 

Dor, i. 1380: Willrich, Juden und Griechen, pp. 146-150: 

Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., iii. 97; Btichler, Tobiaden und Oni- 


aden, pp. 289-276, V ienna, 1899 (this author’s opinion, that 
originally a Samaritan temple was referred to, is not tenable). 


a. S. Kr. 


LEOPARD (Heb. “namer”): A ferocious car- 
nivorous mammal. Several allusions are found in 
the Old Testament to this animal and its character- 
istics; e¢.g., its flerceness, Isa. xi. 6; its agility and 
swiftness, Hab. i. 8; its cunning, Jer. v. 6 and Hos. 
xiii. 7; its unchangeable spots as a type of immuta- 
bility, Jer. xiii. 23; as an emblem of one of the 
“great monarchies,” Dan. vii. 6. The leopard (Felis 
pardus) is still met with in the forest of Gilead, 
round the Dead Sea, and in the mountains: the che- 
tah (Gueparda jubata) is of less frequent occurrence 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


a 


Palestine. The former es) cupuaettandee tactic Oh ANE es eae | Alevels ead eiatese andi element ae aise of the leopard 
ae may perhaps be inferred from the place-names 
. Beth-nimral” (Num. Xxxii. 3, 36) and “ Nimrim” 
(Jer. xlviii. 34), the latter perhaps identical with 
rhe modern Nimerah (comp. also the “mountains 
of leopards, ” Cant. iv. 8). 
In the Talmud the namer is classed with the wolf, 
lion, etc., for dangerousness and ferocity (Sanh. 2a 
and parallels). Following the ancient conception 
of the leopard as a hybrid between a panther or 
pard and the Honess (hence the name “ leo-pardus ”), 
some of the rabbis believed if to be the issue of the 
boar and ao (comp. Bartenora to the admoni- 
tion of Ab. ¥. 5: “Be firm like a leopard to do the 
will of thy ee in heaven”), The namer is a 
type of immodesty (Kid. 70a). Its term of gestation 
is said to be three years (Bek. 8a). 


sRAPHY: Tristram, Nat. Hist. p. 111: Lewysohn, Z. T. 
PAs come. also W. R. Smith, Kinship and Marr iaye in 


Early Arabia, p. 204. 
E. G. H. I. M. C. 


LEPROSY (nyny): Chronic skin-disease charac- 
terized by ulcerous eruptions and successive desqua- 


mations of dead skin.—Biblical Data: According 
to the Levitical text, the characteristic features of 
leprosy were: (1) bright white spots or patches on 
the skin the hair on which also was white; (2) the 
depression of the patches below the level of the sur- 
rounding skin; (3) the existence of “quick raw 
flesh”; (4) the spreading of the scab or scall. 
There are two forms of modern leprosy—the tu- 
bercular, or nodular, and the anesthetic, or nervous; 
generally both forms are present. The 
Comparison nodular form begins, as a rule, as 


with round or irregularly shaped spots, 
Modern commonly of a mahogany or sepia 
Leprosy. color. These often disappear, and 
are followed by the appearance of 

nodules. In an advanced stage the face is covered 


with firm, Jivid, nodular elevations: the nose, lips, 
and ears are swollen beyond their natural size, the 
eyelashes and eyebrows are lost, and the eyes are 
staring; the whole producing a hideous disfigure- 
ment. As the disease progresses, insensibility of 
the skin and paralysis ensue, and the fingers and 
toes may rot away. 

In the Biblical description, one is immediately im- 
pressed by the absence of all allusion to the hideous 
facial deformity, the loss of feeling, and the rotting 
of the members. If such conspicuous manifestations 
had existed they could not possibly have escaped 
observation. The Levitical code prescribed that the 
several examinations of the person suspected should 
be made at intervals of seven days, thus enabling 
the priest to note the progress of the disease. Lep- 
Tosy is an exceedingly slow disease, particulariy in 
the beginning, and a fortnight would show abso- 
lutely no change in the vast majority of cases. 
Moreover, the “ lepra Hebreorum” wasacurable dis- 
ease, When the leper wascured the priest made an 
atonement before the Lord, and expiatory sacrifices 
in the form of a sin- -offering and a trespass- offering 
Were made also. Modern leprosy is, except in iso- 
lated instances, ine urable. 

The probabilities are that “ zara‘at” comprised a 
number of diseases of the skin, which, owing to the 


Leontopolis 
Leprosy 


undeveloped state of medical science at that period, 
were not distinguished. The white spots, upon 
which so much diagnostic stress was 
Nature of laid, were in all likelihood those of 
“‘Zara‘at.” vitiligo, a disease quite common in 
tropical countries, and characterized 
by bright white spots, the hairs on which also become 
white. Vitiligo begins as small patches, which 
slowly spread, often involving ultimately large areas 
of the body’s surface. The disease is harmless, but 
most disfiguring in those of swarthy complexion. 
In the Septuagint * ‘gara‘at” is translated by 
“lepra.” It is reasonable to assume that the He- 
brews attached the same meaning to “zara‘at” that 
the Greeks did to “lepra,” which is derived from 
“lepros” (= “rough” or “scaly ”). According to 
the medical writings of Agineta, .Etius, Ach: 
arius, Oribasus, and others, lepra was uniformly 
regarded as a circular, superficial, scaly eruption 
of the skin; in other words, their lepra was the 
psoriasis of modern times, There isabsolutely noth- 
ing in the Greek description of lepra that suggests 
even in a remote manner the modern leprosy. The 
Greeks, in speaking of true leprosy, did not use the 
term “lepra,” but “elephantiasis.” It is evident, 
therefore, that they meant by “lepra” an affection 
distinct and apart from the disease of leprosy as now 
known. The confusion and obscurity that have en- 
veloped this subject for centuries have resulted from 
the use of different terms in successive ages to desig- 
nate the same disease, and from the total change in 
the meaning and application of the word “lepra.” 
There is mnch reason to believe that the segrega- 
tion of lepers was regarded, at any rate at certain 
periods, more in the light of a religious ceremonial 
than as a hygienic restriction. Za- 
ra‘at was looked upon as a disease in- 
flicted by God upon those who trans- 
gressed His laws, a divine visitation 
for evil thoughts and evil deeds. Every leper men- 
tioned in the Old Testament was afflicted because ot 
some transgression. “ Miriam uttered disrespectful 
words against God’s chosen servant Moses, and, 
therefore, was she smitten with leprosy. Joab, with 
his family and descendants, was cursed by David 
for having treacherously murdered his great rival 
Abner, Gehazi provoked the anger of Elisha by his 
mean covetousness, calculated to bring the name of 
israel into disrepute among the heathen. King . 
Uzziah was smitten with incurable leprosy for his 
alleged usurpation of priestly privileges in burning 
incense on the golden altar of the Temple ” (Kalisch). 
It would have been quite natural for the people by 
a posteriori reasoning to have regarded persons af- 
flicted with zara‘at as transgressors; they bad vio- 
lated the laws of God and their transgressions hak 
been great, else they would not have been so afflictes. 
Writers who hold the view that the exclusion of 
lepers had chiefly a religious significance conclude 
-from these facts that lepers were obliged to remain 
outside the camp because they were regarded as 
likely to morally infect others. As long as the 
signs of the disease remained upon them they were 
obliged to live outside the camp. It is reasonable 
to believe that, although Biblical and modern lep- 
rosy are, in all probability, not the same disease, the 


Segrega- 
tion. 


Leprosy 
Lerma 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 10 





present custom of segregating lepers had its origin 
and stimulus in the Biblical example of segregating 
those athicted with zara‘at. Had the Bible never 
been written it is probable that lepers would to-day 
be permitted to go in and out among their fellows 
unhindered, for leprosy is a much less actively com- 
municable disease than several other weil-known 
affections in the case of which segregation is not 
practicable. 

The Biblical description of leprosy of garments 
and houses is strikingly analogous in its wording to 
that of leprosy of persons. The passages in Leviti- 
cus (xiii. 47-59) are at present inexplicable in the 
light of modern science. ‘The probabilities are that 
the description refers to stains upon garments pro- 
duced by pus and blood from boils and ulcers of va- 
rious kinds. Thus alone could the greenish and 
reddish stains be accounted for. That the descrip- 
tion in Lev. xiv. 38-48 could not have applied to a 
leprosy of walls of houses is beyond reasonable 
doubt: such conceptions may possibly be ascribed 
to Oriental fancy and love ot metaphor. Chemical 
incrustations and mildew were doubtless in this man- 
ner endowed with the symptoms of a living and 
spreading disease. 

E. G. H. J. F.S. 
——In the Talmud: The subject of leprosy is 
treated chiefly in the treatise Nega‘im. The Talmud 
maintains that Lev. xiii. 1 e¢ seg. refers generally 
to any disease that produces sores and eruptions on 
the skin (Sifra 60a). The following epitomizes the 
Talmudic treatment of leprosy: 

1. Leprosy was not considered contagious. While 
all peoples ofantiquity, from earliest times up to some 
centuries after the Talmudic period, held (as at the 
present day; Katzenelenson, in “ Ha-Yekeb,” p. 75, 

| St. Petersburg, 1894) that leprosy was 
contagious, the Talmudic writers trea- 
ted it as not contagious, The follow- 
ing evidences this: (1) The Mishnah 
does not consider a leprous pagan or an unnatural- 
ized proselyte (* ger toshab ”) ritually unclean (Neg. 
iii. 1, xi. 1). (2) If a bridegroom, on his wedding- 
day, observes symptoms of leprosy on his skin, he 
is not required to submit himself for examination 
at once, but he may postpone it until the seven days 
of his nuptials are over. Similarly, one who is af- 
fected with it during the holy days may postpone 
examination until they are over (Neg. iii. 2). Under 
other circumstances, one afflicted with leprosy is 
forbidden intercourse with his wife (Hul. 141a). 
(83) The Mishnah says that doubtful cases (with 
two exceptions) are not to be considered unclean 
(Hul. 9b et seq.). (4) The Bible commands that if 
the priest finds white hair on the parts affected 
he shall declare the subject unclean, for the white 
hair isacertain symptom of leprosy. But the Mish- 
nah says that if the hair is plucked out before the 
examination takes place the person is clean (Neg. 
viii. 4). It was not, then, fear of contagion that led 
to regarding the leper as unclean. 

2. Talmudic tradition, basing its definitions on 
the etymology of the Biblical terms used, knows of 
four different degrees of white in cases of leprosy, 
but not of “netek” (Lev. xiii. 80). “Baheret” is 
of the whiteness of snow; the second degree recog- 


Not Con- 
tagious. 


nized is of the whiteness of lime; “se’et” is of the 
color of the white of anegg; and the next degree 
of whiteness is that of white wool. The Mishnah 
adds, also, some intermediate shades; but it calls 
“bahak ” all those beyond the four shades in ques- 
tion (Neg. i. 1-3). 

3. Whilethe Bible divides the disease into “ white 
leprosy ” and “ulcerous leprosy” (“mihyah”), the 


Mishnah divides it into “limited” 
Limited (‘ketannah”) and “extended ” (“ gedo- 
Leprosy. lah”) leprosy (Neg. viii. 9). Accord- 


ingly it expounds Lev. xiii, 9-11 as 
referring to “limited” leprosy, and Lev, xiii. 12 e¢ 
seg. as applying to “limited” leprosy which has ex- 
tended, and as such has become clean. 

Leprosy if “ extended ” at the outset is to be treated 
as limited leprosy (Neg. viii. 7); extension does not 
render leprosy clean, uuless following upon a dis- 
ease which has shown suresymptoms of real leprosy 
(Neg. viii. 3). Leprosy should, moreover, be con- 
sidered extended only when it invades the face 
(Neg. x. 9) and, if the individual is bald and beard- 
less, the scalp and chin (Neg. vi. 8, viii. 5). If, after 
the scales of leprosy have spread over nearly the 
whole body, a bleeding and scaleless ulcer (mih- 
yah) is observed, the subject is unclean. Simi- 
larly, if the scales, having covered almost the whole 
body, fall off in one place and uncover an old bleed- 
ing ulcer, the subject is unclean (Neg. viii. 2). 

The bleeding ulcer must be of the size of a lentil in 
order to render one unclean, in cases both of “lim- 
ited” and of “extended” leprosy. In case the ulcer 
develops on the extremities of the body, as on the 
tingers or toes, or on the ears, nose, breast, etc., the 
person is not considered unclean (Neg. vi. 7). But 
if this ulcer had once been covered with scales and 
had then become open again, the person is unclean, 
unless the remaining scales are smaller than a 
“eruel” (“geris”; Neg. viii. 1). Finally, the mih- 
yah does not make a person unclean if it invades 
a place previously affected by a “shehin” ora burn, 
or if it develops ou the hairy parts of the body, or 
in the recesses and cavities (Neg. vi. 8). When it 
settles on parts from which the hair has fallen out, 
or on parts previously affected by shehin or a burn, 
but which have become entirely healed before the 
appearance of the leprosy, two cases are to be dis- 
tinguished, according as the mihyah has previously 
been covered with scales or not; in the latter case it 
does not render the subject unclean. 

4, In regard to leprosy consequent upon shehin 
or a burn (Lev. xiii. 18-28), the Mishnah maintains: 

(1) If the shehin or the burn has not 
Consequent been healed before the appearance 
on Burns. of the scales of leprosy, the person is 
clean (Neg. ix. 2). (2) Where these 
affections have become completely healed before the 
appearance of leprosy, only that is to be considered 
as leprosy which invades parts of the body never 
before diseased (70.). (8) Finally, leprosy conse- 
quent upon shehin or a burn is not rendered unclean 
by the development of a mihyah, and oneso affected 
can be isolated for seven days once only, not twice, 
as in the case of an ordinary leper (Neg. iii. 4). 

5. In regard to leprosy on the scalp and chin (Lev. 

xiii. 29 et seg.), the Mishnah contains the following: 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


11 


Leprosy 
Lerma 





1) The symptoms of leprosy here (7.é., leprous 
scales) may present any color; but Iu any other part 
t the body only one or more of the four degrees of 
che can be presented (Sifra 60a). (2) Asthe Mish- 
listinguishes a “ limited ” and an “extended ” 
Jeprosy, so it distinguishes a “ limited "and an “ex- 
rended ” netek (Neg. x. 9) (8) The netek docs 
not become unclean in consequence of thie pres- 
ence of a mibyah, but through the presence of fine 
white or yellow hair, and through the extension of 
the disease (“pisyon”; Neg. x. 1). (4) Finally, if 
the hair of the head or of the chin has fallen out, 
those parts are to be treated like other parts of the 
body (Neg. X. 10). us 
In the Talmud the classification or definition of 
leprosy and of its symptoms seems to be determined 
not by medical ideas, but by a literal and indiscrim- 
inating adherence to the letter of the Levitical law ; 
Talmudic sages were satisfied merely with commu- 
nicating the Biblical decisions. The Rabbis appear 
at times even to confuse true leprosy with eczema. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Rabbinowicz, La Médecine du Thalmud, pp. 

107 et seq., Paris, 1880 

J. A. 8. W. 
__—_In Modern Times: Leprosy among Jews is sel- 
dom mentioned in modern medical literature. Zom- 
bacco (“‘ Bul. de la Société d’ Anthropologie de Paris,” 
Oct., 1891) states that the disease is very frequent 
among the Jews of Constantinople. Buschan, quot- 
ing this statement (“ Globus,” Ixvii. 61), argues that 
the predisposition of the Jews to leprosy is a racial 
characteristic hereditarily transmitted from the an- 
cient Hebrews to the modern Israelites. In support 
of this he mentions that the Karaites of Constantino- 
ple have not been observed by Zombacco, during his 
twenty years of medical practise among them, to 
suffer from leprosy. These Jews Buschan considers 
Jews only by religion, not by virtue of blood-rela- 
tionship to the Semites. Ethnically he considers 
them as derived from the Chazars and other peoples 
of “Finnie” blood. On the other hand, the Rab- 
binic Jews of Constantinople, who are derived from 
“Syro-Arabic Semitic” race, have been often ob- 
served by Zombacco to suffer from the disease. He 
further states that the Mohammedans, Christians, 
Greeks, Armenians, and other non-Jews in Con- 
stantinople are free from it, notwithstanding the 
fact that they come in contact with the Jews. All 
this tends to show that the alleged predisposition of 
the Jews to leprosy is an. ethnic trait. 

This allegation, based as it is on very scanty evi- 
dence, is not confirmed by any other observer. In 
Russia, where in some provinces leprosy is endemic, 
the Jews are not observed to be frequently affected, 
while in some Oriental countries the evidence avail- 
able tends to show that, on the contrary, the Jews 
are peculiarly free from leprosy. Thus, Nicholas 
Senn, Speaking of leprosy in Jerusalem, says: 
* Most of the lepers are Arabs; and the Jews are 
singularly free from this disease. . . . Among the 
47 inmates [of the Jesus Hilfe Hospital] there is 
only one Jew. Dr. Einsler, during his long and ex- 
tensive practise in Jerusalem, has seen only five Jews 
affected with leprosy; and of these one came from 
Salonica and of the remainder two from Morocco. 
It seems that the J erusalem Jews have in the course 


nah ¢ 


of time acquired an immunity from this disease, 
notwithstanding the increase of poverty and unsani- 
tary surroundings” (N. Senn, “The Hospitals in 
Jerusalem,” in “ American Medicine,” iv. 509-512). 
J. M. F1. 


LERIDA (Catalan, Leyda; Ilerda): City in 
Catalonia, which as early as the fourteenth century 
had an important Jewish community possessed of 
several privileges. Thus, it was exempted from the 
general obligation to provide the royal court, during 
its presence in the city, with beds and the necessa- 
ries of life. Again, the Jews of Lerida, at the car- 
nest request of the representatives of the congrega- 
tion, were not compelled to attend the conversion 
sermons of Maestre Huesca and other Dominicans. 
In 1806 the congregation was granted permission by 
the king to receive into its membership ten Jewish 
families driven from France. The Shepherd perse- 
cutions brought great affliction to the community. 
Seventy Jews surrendered their possessions to the 
commander of the city, “so that he might bring 
them in safety to Aragon; but when they got out- 
side the city he slew them with his sword.” Eight 
years later the Jews had to defend themselves against 
attacks upon their lives. The hatred of the Chris- 
tians was a constant source of menace to them. In 
1325 the right to prepare Passover cakes was re- 
fused to them, so that they had to turn to the king 
for assistance, 

The Jews of Lerida engaged in industry and car- 
ried on an extensive commerce; they had one large 
synagogue and several small ones. In 1269 “ Nasi 
Azday ” (Hasdai) was appointed as rabbi, whom in 
the following year the king presented with a build- 
ing-plot. In 1275 the communal! laws (“ takkanot ”) 
were sanctioned by the king. The ominous year 
1391 was for the Jews of Lerida one of great calam- 
ity. The massacre occurred there Aug. 18; seventy- 
cight Jews being killed, while most of the survivors 
accepted baptism. The neophytes transformed the 
synagogue into a church under the name “8S. Maria 
del Milagro”; in the fifteenth century it was still 
almost exclusively attended by neophytes. With 
1391 the real “aljama” in Lerida ceased; Jews in 
scant numbers probably continued to live in the 
city, enjoying the old privileges, but they no longer 
constituted a congregation. The city soon felt the 
decline of the taxes formerly paid by the Jews. 
In 1410 the city council entered into negotiations 
with the Jews for the purpose of reimposing part 
of these taxes; but this led to no result. 

The poet Joseph bar Sheshet ben Latimi (1808) 
and the physician Abraham, who, Sept. 12, 1468, 
performed an operation on King Juan of Aragon for 
cataract, lived in Lerida. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Joseph ha-Kohen, ‘Emek ha-Baka, pp. 60, 
67; Rios, Hist. ii. 155, 158, 380, 402; iii. 88: José Pleyan de 
Porta, A puntos de Historia de Lerida, Lerida, 1873; Jacobs, 
Sources, Nos, 756, 941, 1062. 


G. M. K. 


LERMA, JUDAH BEN SAMUEL: Spanish 
Talmudist; flourished in the middle of the sixteenth 
century. He was the author of “Lehem Yehudah,” 
a commentary on Pirke Abot, and of “Derush ‘al 
ha-Neshamah,” a treatise on the soul, published to- 
gether under the former title (Sabbionetta, 1554) 


Lerner 
Lesser 


In the preface Lerma laments the burning of the 
Talmud in Italy, which occurred in 1554, under 
Pope Julius III. According to Zedner (“ Cat. Hebr. 
Books Brit. Mus.” p. 551), the 1554 edition is the 
second; in that case either the whole preface or the 
part relating to the burning of the Talmud is an 
addition. Judah ben Samuel Lerma must not be 
confounded with Judah Lerma, rabbi of Belgrade (as 
seems to have been done by Steinschneider and other 
authorities), who was a pupil of Jehiel Bassani and 
belonged, therefore, to the seventeenth century. 
Lerma was the author of a large number of re- 
sponsa, which, with the exception of thirty, were 
destroyed by fire; these thirty were rescued from 
the flames by Lerma’s pupil, Simhah b. Gershon ha- 
Kohen, who published them, adding a preface, un- 
der the title “ Peletat Bet Yehudah” (Venice, 1647). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, pp. 40b. 51h; Fuenn, 
Keneset Yisrael. p. 408; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 2383; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1337. 
J. M. SE. 
LERNER, HAYYIM ZEBI: Russian gram- 
marian and teacher of Hebrew; bornat Dubno 1815; 
died at Jitomir 1889. His early education in Bible 
and Talmud he received from his father. At the 
age of thirteen he was married. In 1888, when Wolf 
ADELSOHN went to Dubno and gathered around him 
a circle of Maskilim, to whom he taught Hebrew 
grammar and philosophy, Lerner became one of his 
disciples. THe went to Odessa in 1885 and entered 
the model school of Bezalecl Stern, where Simhah 
Pinsker was his teacher in Hebrew grammar. In 
the same school he also acquired a thorough knowl- 
edge of the Russian, German, French, and Italian 
languages. In 1888 Lerner returned to Dubno and 
became a teacher of Hebrew; from 1841 to 1849 he 
taught in Radzivilov; on Nov. 16 of the latter year 
he was appointed government teacher of the Jewish 
public school of Berdychev; and in 1851 he was ap- 
pointed teacher of Hebrew at the rabbinical school 
of Jitomir, in which position he remained until the 
school was closed by the government (July 1, 1878). 
Lerner’s reputation among Hebrew grammarians 
was founded on his “Moreh ha-Lashon.” It is 
written in a pure, popular Hebrew, and follows 
the system of grammar of European tongues, en- 
abling the student to acquire the language more 
easily than did the works of his predecessors. The 
first edition appeared in 1859; six eclitions were is- 
sued during Lerner’s lifetime; and many more have 
appeared since his death. Lerner was criticized for 
having adopted his methods from his teacher Pin- 
sker; he himself acknowledged his indebtedness in 
the second edition of his work (p. 136, note), 
Besides this grammar, Lerner wrote “ Dikduk La- 
shon Aramit ” (Warsaw, 1875), an Aramaic grammar; 
“Ma’amar Toledot ha-Dikduk ” (Vienna, 1876); and 
a translation of 8. D. Luzzatto’s “Dikduk Leshon 
Talmud Babli” (St. Petersburg, 1880). He left in 
manuscript: “ Yalkut,” a collection of commentaries 
on the Bible and Rashi, together with critical and 
literary articles; “ Arba‘ Middot,” on the Baraita of 
the thirty-two Middot; and a Hebrew translation of 
Young’s “ Night Thoughts” and other poems. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Meliz, 1889, Nos. 76-79; Sokolov, Sefer 
ha-Shananh, i. 62; idem, Sefer Zikkaron, p. 66. 
H. TR. M. R. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


SAS SSE el Ro etn 
TA rt re EME 
Prt le 


12 


LERNER, JOSEPH JUDAH (OSSIP): Rus- 
sian journalist; born Jan. 1, 1849, at Berdychev; 
educated at the gymnasium of Jitomir. In 1866 he 
went to Odessa, where he studied law for a year, 
and then entered upon a journalistic career. He 
served for ten years on the staff of the “ Odeski 
Vyestnik,” acting as war correspondent for that pa- 
per during the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78. In 
Bucharest he published during the wara daily paper, 
“Zapiski Grazhdanina.” In 1880 he founded at 
Odessa a Jewish theater, for which he wrote many 
plays in Judeeo-German. The years 1883 and 1884 he 
spent in Germany and France as correspondent of 
the Moscow daily “ Russkiya Vyedomosti,” writing 
articles for other Russian papers also. In Hebrew 
Lerner published: a short sketch on the Chazars 
(Odessa, 1866); “Ma’amar Bikkoret” (7b. 1867), a 
criticism upon Gottlobers; “ Yamim mi-Kedem ” (¢. 
1868), a tale of Jewish life in Russia; and articles on 
various topicsof thetime. Of hisdramas in Judo- 
German may be mentioned “ Zhidovka,” “ Hanuk- 
kah,” and “ Der Fetter Moshe Mendelssohn ” (War- 
saw, 1889). 

Lerner wrote many articles in Russian on the 
Jewish question, a list of which is to be found in 
“Sistematicheski Ukazatel,” etc., St. Petersburg, 
1898. Tu 1902 Lerner published “ Yevrei Novoros- 
siskavo Kraya,” a historical sketch of the life of the 
Jews in South Russia, which, however, is rather a 
memoir than a history. 

Lerner, who has recently become a convert to 
Christianity, is now (1904) residing in Odessa, 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sokolov, Sefer Zikkaran, p. 66. 

W. R. M. R. 


LERNER, MAIER: German rabbi: born in 
Galicia 1857. He studied in Berlin under Hildes- 
heimer, became rabbi at Winzenheim, Alsace (1884— 
1890), and preacher for the Federation of Synagogues 
in London (1890-94), and, since 1890, has been chief 
rabbi of Altona. He wrote “Anlage und Quellen 
des Bereschit Rabba ” (Berlin, 1882) and _ has contrib- 
uted to various periodicals (“Berliner’s Magazin 
fir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums,” “Der 
Israelit,” “ Jiidische Presse,” “Jewish World.” etc.). 
Tlis literary work is devoted almost exclusively to 
the defense of Orthodox Judaism. Lerner married 
a daughter of Hirsch Plato, a son of Samson R. 
Hirsch. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dukesz, [woh Lemoschaiw, Cracow, 1903. 


D. 


LEROY-BEAULIEU, HENRI JEAN BAP- 
TISTE ANATOLE: French Christian historian; 
born at Lisieux in 1842. His first work was en- 
titled “ Une Troupe de Comédiens ” and was followed 
by “Essai sur la Restauration de nos Monuments 
Historiques Devant PArt et Devant le Budget” 
(1866). In 1867 he went to Russia to study the po- 
litical and economic organization of the Slavie peo- 
ples, the result of his studies being published under 
the title “ L’Emonire des Tsars et les Russes * (3 vols., 
Paris, 1882-89). In 1881 he was appointed pro- 
fessor of contemporaneous history and of Oriental 
affairs at L’Ecole Libre des Sciences Politiques. and 
in 1887 he became a member of the Académie des 
Sciences Morales et Politiques. From 1883 to 1891 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


13 


Lerner 
Lesser 





_— 


he represented the canton of Auberive in Seg Con- 
epi} General of the department of Haute-Mat ne, 

~ In 1879 Leroy-Beaulieu published a critical analy- 
-. of the political situation under the Second Em- 
ae autitied “Un Empereur, Un Roi, Un Pape, 
stauration,” and in 1884, under the title “ Un 
Homme d’Etat Russe. Nicolas Milutine,” a histor- 
coal novel vividly depicting the great reformation 
due to the emancipation of the Russian serfs by Al- 
oxander II. Of his other political writings may be 
mentioned : “Les Catholiques Libéraux, VEglise et 
le Libéralisme de 1880 a Nos Jours” (Paris, 18835) ; 
“La France, la Russie et l'Europe” (7d. 1888); “La 

* Le er 7 ” £4 . 

Révolution et le Liberalisme” (2. 1890) 5 La Pa- 
pauté, le Socialisme et la Democratie” (2b. 1892); 
“TP Antisémitisme ” (7b. 1897) 7 “Les Doctrines de la 
Haine, l’Antisémitisme, )'Antiprotestantisme, 1’ An- 
ticlericalisme” (26. 1902). Of chief interest to the 
Jewish world, however, is his work “ Israél chez les 
Nations ” (1898). In this work the author embodies 
the result of a thorough study of the conditions 
governing the Russian Jews, and, while he is not 
lavish of his praise of the oppressed, he is emphatic 
in maintaining that nothing but emancipation can 
improve them mentally and morally. “All the vir- 
tunes that the Jews possess are their own, while their 
vices are largely due to persecutions by Christian 
nations.” 

In the beginning of 1904 Leroy-Beaulieu went to 
the United States to deliver a series of lectures at 
some of the Amcrican universities (Harvard, Penn- 
sylvania, etce.). The Jewish community of New 
York, during his sojourn in that city, tendered him 
a testimonial of appreciation of his vigorous war 
against anti-Semitism in France, and of his scholarly 
defense of Jewish character and traditions. Leroy- 
Beaulieu is a chevalier of the Legion of Honor. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Eneyelopédie; Meyers Konver- 

sations-Levikon: Nouveau Larousse Illustré; Curinier, 

Dict. Nat.; American Hehrew (New York), May 6, 13, 20, 

1904; Jewish Comment (Baltimore), April 29, 1904. 

LESSEE. See LANDLORD AND TENANT. 

LESSER, ADOLF: German physician and 
writer on medical jurisprudence; born at Stargard, 
province of Pomerania, Prussia, May 22, 1851; grad- 
uated from Berlin University in 1875. From 1877 
to 1884 he was assistant in the pharmacological in- 
stitute of that university, and from 1879 to 1886 
physician at Klinnsmann’s lunatic asylum. In 1881 
he became privat-docent in pharmacology at the 
university. In 1886 he was appointed physician-in- 
chief (* Stadtphysikus”) to the board of heaith of 
Breslau, at the university of which city he was ap- 
pomted assistant professor in 1887, 

Of Lesser’s numerous essays contributed to the 
medical journals may be mentioned: “Experimen- 
telle Untersuchungen tiber den Einfluss Einiger Ar- 
senverbindungen auf den Thierischen Organismus.” 
tn Virchow’s “ Archiv ”; “ Ueber die Localen Befunde 
beim Selbstmorde Durch Erhiingen” and “Ueber 
die Wichtigsten Sectionsbefunde bei dem Tode Durch 
Ertrinken in Diinnfliissigen Medien,” in the “ Vier- 
teljahresschrift ftir Gerichtliche Medizin.” 

Lesser is the author also of the well-known “ Atlas 
der Gerichtlichen Medizin,” 1884-92, and “ Zur Lehre 
vom Abort,” “Zur Lehre von den Kopfverletzungen 


pire, 


Une Re 


Neugeburener,” and “Erkrankungen Sowie Pre- 
und Postmortale Verletzuugen des Halses,” in Neis- 
ser's “Stercoskopischer Medizinischer Atlas.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Levikon, s.v., Vienna, 1901. 

S. F. T. H. 

LESSER, ALEXANDER: Polish painter; 
born at Warsaw 1814; died there 1884. He was 
cducated at the Warsaw lyceum and studied art at 
Warsaw University, at the Academy of Dresden 
(1833-35), and at Munich under Cornelius and 
Schnorr (1842). He devoted himself mainly to 
painting scenes from Polish history; and in search 
of historical material he made extensive tours 
through Germany, France, Belgium, and England. 
Among his historical paintings the best known are: 
“Wincent Kadlubek,” “Skarbek Habdank,” “The 
Young Boleslaw,” “The Wry-Mouthed,” and “* Wan- 
da and Jadwiga.” For his “forty portraits of Polish 
kings ” (reproductions published at Warsaw in 1860) 
he was elected a member of the Cracow Academy of 
Science, 

Lesser was also active as an art critic and as 
a writer of historical sketches, contributing to 
the Polish periodicals “ Klosy,” “Tygodrik DTlustro- 
wany,” and others. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Orgelbrand, Bneyklopedja Powszchia, ix. 
H.R. G. D. R. 
LESSER, EDMUND: German physician; born 

at Neisse May 12, 1852; educated at the universities 
of Berlin, Bonn, and Strasburg (M.D. 1876). He 
became assistant at the dermatological clinic at 
Breslau; in 1882 established himself as privat-docent 
at the University of Leipsic; was appointed assist- 
ant professor in the University of Bonn in 1892; 
in 1896 became chief physician of the syphilitic 
department at the Charité Hospital at Berlin; and 
in 1897 was appointed chief of the newly founded 
dermatological and syphilitic dispensary of the uni- 
versity in that city. 

Of Lesser’s works may be mentioned, besides his 
“Lehrbuch der Haut- und Gesclilechtskrankheiten ” 
(10th ed. 1899): “Ueber Syphilis Maligna”; “ Bei- 
trige zur Lehre vom Herpes Zoster”; “Ueber Ne- 
benwirkungen bei Injectionen Unldéslicher Queck- 
silberverbindungen”; “Ueber Syphilis Insontium ”; 
“Ueber Ischias Gonorrhoica”; “ Die Aussatzhiiuser 
des Mittelalters”; and “Zur Geschichte des Aus- 
satzes.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biog. Lex. 

8. F. T. H. 

LESSER, LOUIS: German soldier; born at 
Neustadt about 1850; served inthe Second Branden- 
burg Dragoons in the Franco-Prussian war. On 
Nov. 18, 1870. while on patrol work between Sens 
and Villeneuve, his comrades being dispersed, he 
was surprised by six of the eneany le stood his 
ground, and on the return of his comrades he cap- 
tured the captain of the francs-tireurs who had 
attacked him. He died May 19, 1911. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Deutsches Heldenbuch, p. 304: Juden als 


Soldaten, p. 103. 


S. al 


LESSER, LUDWIG: German poet, editor, and 
publicist; born at Rathenow, province of Branden- 
burg, Prussia, Dec. 7, 1802; died at Berlin Dec. 2, 
1867. When very young he went to Berlin, and 


Lessing 
Letter-Writing 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 14 





became a regular contributor to ost of the literary 
periodicals of that city (often under the pseudonym 
“Ludwig Liber”), The humorist Saphir was at- 
tracted by Lesser’s work and personality, and se- 
cured him for his literary staff. The two became 
very firm friends, and in 1827 they founded the 
Literarische Sonntags-Verein, Lesser wrote “ Chro- 
nik der Gesellschaft der Freunde in Berlin zur Feier 
lhres Fiinfzigjaihrigen Jubiliums” (Berlin, 1842). 

A selection of Lesser’s poems was published under 


the title “ Ausgewiihite Dichtungen,” Berlin, 1870; . 


and the gold medal for art and science was conferred 
upon him by King Frederick William III. <A char- 
acteristic epigram by him, of which the following 
is a free translation, gives some measure of his 
power: 
One thing to Life you owe: 
Struggle, or seek for rest. 
If you're an anvil, bear the blow; 
If a hammer, strike your best. 


Lesser was devoted to the interests of the Jews: 
he was one of the founders of the Jiidischer Kultur- 
verein, of a society for the aid of Jewish teachers, 
and of the Berlin Reform congregation. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. Lesser, in preface to Ausgeiwdhite Dicht- 
UNGEN. 


S M. Co. 


LESSING, GOTTHOLD EPHRAIM: Gcr- 
man poet aud critic; born Jan, 22, 1729, at Kamenz, 
Upper Lusatia; died Feb. 15, 1781, at Brunswick 

Toleration and a striving after freedom of thought 
led him to condemn all positive religions in so far 
as they laid claim to absolute authority, and to rec- 
ognize them merely as stages of historical develop- 
ment. A natural consequence of this principle was 
his sympathetic attitude toward the Jews; for he 
deemed it inconsistent with the dictates of religious 
liberty to exclude for religious reasons a whole race 
from the blessings of European culture. 

In his comedy “Die Juden,” one of his earliest 
dramatic works, he stigmatized the dislike of the 
Gentiles for the followers of the Jewish religion asa 
stupid prejudice. He went herein further than any 
other apostle of toleration before or after him. The 
full development and final expression of his views 
on this problem, however, are found in his drama 
and last masterpiece, “Nathan der Weise” (1779), 
Lessing thus beginning and ending his dramatic 
career aS an advocate of the emancipation of the 
Jews. 

The figure of Nathan, modeled in the main on 
that of his friend Moses Mendelssohn, was bound to 
convince the world that the tenets of toleration and 
humanity could be enunciated even by a repre- 
sentative of the race so bitterly hated by the world. 
The legend of the three rings, in which Christianity, 
Islam, and Judaism are allegorically represented as 
brothers, each deeming to possess the original magic 
ring, but all of them having, in reality, been cheated 
of it, clearly indicates that Lessing wished to repre- 
sent the Jew asa man, and not Judaism as a dogmatic 
system. The prize of supremacy is not awarded 
to this or that confession, but to humanity and mo- 
rality, which are not bound to any particular faith. 

Lessing’s “ Nathan ” had a liberating effect on the 
Jews in more waysthan one. In the first place, the 


mere fact that he chose the Jew Nathan as his mouth- 
piece could not pass unnoticed, and was sure to act 
as a hindrance to persecution; and, secondly, he 
stimulated the ethical consciousness of the Jews 
themselves, who could not fall below the standard 
set up by a noble non-Jew. 

While Lessing condemned the belief in positive 
revelation, he accepted its general concept, secing 
in the dogmatic teachings of both the Old and New 
Testaments etlicient educational instruments for the 
moral elevation of mankind. 

In short, Lessing raised Judaism in the esteem of 
the European nations not only by showing its close 
connection with Christianity, but also by demon- 
strating the importance of Mosaism in the gencral 
religious evolution of humanity. It was really 
Lessing who cpened the doors of the ghetto and 
gave the Jews access to European culture. In a 
certain sense heawakened Moses Mendelssohn to the 
consciousness of his mission; and through Mendels- 
sohn Lessing liberated Judaism from the most heavy 
chains of its own forging. 

As a Biblical critic Lessing is equaled by none 
of his contemporaries, and by very few of his prede- 
cessors. 

Ss. M. Frre. 

LESSMANN, DANIEL: German historian and 
poet; born at Soldin, Neumark, Jan. 18, 1784; com- 
mitted suicide at a place between Kropstadt and Wit- 
tenberg Sept. 2, 1831. He attended the Joachims- 
thal’sche Gymnasium in Berlin, and had begun the 
study of medicine when the war of the allied pow- 
ers against Napoleon broke out in 1813, He fought 
in the ranks, was wounded at the battle of Liitzen 
(May 2, 1818), and on recovering remained in the 
field until the end of the war. When peace was re- 
stored he resumed his medical studies. Te went as 
private teacher to Vienna, and removed later to Italy, 
remaining some time in Verona. 

In 1824 he settled in Berlin and devoted himself 
to literary work, contributing to various periodicals 
sketches of life in southern countries, historical 
studies, short stories, and poems. <A collection of 
his poems was published under the title “ Amathu- 
sia,” Berlin, 1824. Jn1826 his“ Zw6lf Wanderlicder 
eines Schwermiithigen ” appeared in Berlin, and four 
years later another volume was issued under the title 
“ Gedichte,” 7. 1880. In his poetry there is easily 
discernible the influence of Heine, with whom he 
was on friendly terms, and in whose letters to Moser 
there are frequent references to Lessmann. 

Lessmann’s contributions to imaginative prose 
literature include the novels “Louise von Halling,” 
2 vols., 2. 1827, which attracted the attention of 
Goethe, and “Die Heidemithle,” published in two 
volumes seven years after his death. To Lessmann 
belongs much of the credit for the introduction of 
modern Italian literature into Germany through his 
translation of Manzoni’s “I Promessi Sposi,” and of 
“La Monaca di Monza,” by Giovanni Rossini. 

His important historical work was the “ Mastino 
della Scala: Ein Beitrag zur Gesch. der Oberita- 
lienischen Staaten im Mittelalter,” 7b. 1828. In 1829 
and 1830 appeared successively the two volumes of 
“ Biographische Gemiilde,” which included historical 
studies of Philip the Beautiful, Alfonso Albuquer- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


15 


Innocent III., and Prince Michael Glinski. 
ae bof the “ Nachlass,” 2 vols., 2. 1837-38, is de- 
Muc ; ce valuable historical work. Lessmann left 
ve anuacriDt a voluminous “ Weltgeschichte des 
iterthums, ” syhich has never been published. 

His seven years of literary activity were years of 

‘ofound melancholy. Lessmann had high aspira- 
rp and great ambition. He dreamed of securing 
a osilion of eminence; and it appears, from the 
nee of Moser to one of Heine’s letters, that in 
“934 Lessmann adopted Christianity in order that he 
aaigivt realize his hopes. Nothing came of all his 
efforts jn this direction ; and he fell into a state of 
despondency, which 1s refiected in his poctry and 
in his “ Wanderbuch eines Schwermiithigen, ” 2 vols., 
jb. 1831-22. One day Lessmann left Berlin on the 
pretext of taking a pedestrian tour to Leipsic and 
Dresden, and was found hanged by his own act. 


RAPHY: Godeke, Grundr. der Deutschen Literatur, 
eB T 3: Gubitz, Hrrinnerwngen, iii. 1-7, Berlin, 1869; L. 
Geiger, Daniel Lessmann, in Allg. Deutsche Biog. xviii. 
451-493; Strodtmann, Heine, i. 319; Brammer, Dichterlexi- 


kon. 

S. M. Co. 

LETTER-CARRIERS, JEWISH: Jews car- 
ried letters to their coreligionists, apart from the 
regular post. In those business centers where a 
large Jewish population existed, such as Hamburg, 
Prague, Gross Glogau, Polish Lissa, Breslau, and 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, Jews, and at times even 
Jewesses, are found acting as letter-carriers under 
state control. It was necessary to employ them 
in the postal service, as it was almost impossi- 
ble for Christian letter-carriers to deliver letters ad- 
dressed in Hebrew. Another reason may have been 
the fact that the Jews, in their relations with the 
post, were subject to exceptional laws. 

The only detailed notices of Jewish letter-carriers 
are furnished by the archives of Breslau and Frank- 
fort; but the position of the letter-carriers in these 
places was no doubt typical of their status else- 
where. The Jewish lJetter-carrier, or “ Post-Jude,” 
in Breslau, is first mentioned in a document dated 
Dec. 13, 1722, which, however, allows the inference 
that the office had existed for many years before 
that date. It was maintained until the Silesian 
wars, after which time Breslau was no longer in- 
cluded in the imperial postal district of Habsburg. 

The Jewish letter-carrier of Breslau, as he aeither 
took any oath of office nor received any salary, 
was not really a government official. His whole in- 
come consisted merely of the postage paid by the 
recipients of the letters. As, however, there were no 
fixed postal rates, the amount received was so small 
that the letter-carrier had to pursue in addition 
some other occupation. ‘That the postal authorities 
tolerated this state of affairs is shown by the fact 
that When the letter-carrier was absent on other 
business, his wife was allowed to take his place. 


The first mention of a Jewish letter-carrier in | 


Frank fort-on-the-Main occurs in a decree dating from 
the middle of the eighteenth century, and setting 
forth the regulations which the Jews must observe 
in their relations with the Thurn and Taxis post; 
but in Frankfort, too, the office had existed before 
that time. From 1748 until 1846 it was held by 
Members of the same family, and it was abolished 


Lessing 
Letter-Writing 


owing to altered conditions. The nephew and as- 
sistant of the Jews’ letter-carrier who was then in 
office remained in the Thurn and Taxis service with 
the same rights and duties, and in 1867 was taken 
over into the Prussian service. 

In Frankfort, as in Breslau, the Jewish letter-car- 
rier received no pay, but two kreutzers were collected 
from the addressee for every ordinary letter, and six 
kreutzers fora registered letter. In proportion as 
international commerce developed and the Jewish 
interests therein increased, the income of the letter- 
carrier became correspondingly larger. The last in- 
cumbent of the office had a yearly income of 5,000 
gulden, out of which, in very busy times, he had to 
pay his assistants 159 florins each. Besides, when 
other posts, such as that of Hesse-Cassel, became 
united to that of Thurn and Taxis, he was required 
to pay Count Thurn and Taxis 400 gulden yearly. 
He ultimately retired on a pension of 1,600 florins. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kraeauer, Die Judenbrieftriiger in. Frank- 
furt-a.-M. in Frankfurter Zeitung, 1890, No. 109; Lands- 
berger, Juden im Dienste der Kaiserlichen Post. zu Bres- 
lau, efe. in Braun’s Volkskalender, 1901, p. £3; Kaufmann, 
Die Memoiren der Glickel von Hamelin, p. 1093; Grunwald, 
Portugiesengritiber auf Deutscher Erde, p. 98. 


G. J. Kra. 


LETTER-WRITING AND LETTER- 
WRITERS: The art of conveying information 
by letter (““miktab,” “iggeret,” “sefer”) was un- 
known to the Hebrews in the first stages of their 
history. From the times of the Patriarchs to those 
of King Saul the Bible mentions only messengers 
who transmitted orally the communications en- 
trusted to them (comp. Num. xxiv. 12; Judges xi. 
18; I Sam. xi, 9). The first letter recorded is that 
written by David to Joab and sent by the hand of 
Uriah (II Sam. xi. 23, 25), David and his succes- 
sors had special secretaries (“soferim”) charged 
with the writing of letters and circulars; and these 
secretaries occupied an exalted position in the state. 
The Kenites living at Jabez were noted for their 
skill in writing (comp. [ Chron, i. 55). As among 
the Greeks and Romans, it seems to have been cus- 
tomary among the ancient Hebrews to seal a letter 
sent to a prominent person. To show his slight re- 
spect for the prophet’s personality, Sanbailat sends 
an open letter to Nehemiah (Neh. vi. 5). 

With the expansion of commerce in Talmudic 
times the use of letters became a necessity, and 

nearly every town had its official letter- 

In writer abq5 = “libellarius”). The 
Talmudic Rabbis forbade a scholar to reside in 
Times. a city where there was no such func- 
tionary (Sanh. 1%a). The Talmud has 

preserved the origina! text of two letters: one was 
addressed by the community of Jerusalem to that of 
Alexandria and refers to the sojourn of Judah ben . 
Tabbai in the latter city; the other was sent by 
Gamaliel I. to the Jews of Upper and Lower Galilee 
and treated of the intercalation of an additional 
month in the year (Yer. Hag. ii.; Sanh. 11b). Be- 
sides letters of information or of friendship, there 
are traces in the Talmud of consultatory letters 
dealing with scientific subjects (comp. Hul. 95a). 
To this class belongs that important branch of rab- 
binical literature which is known by the hame 
“She’elot u-Teshubot” (Responsa), and which de- 


Letter-Writing 
Levanda 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 16 





veloped after the geonic period (see Joel Mivller, 
“Briefe und Responsen in der VYorgaonischen Jtt- 
dischen Litteratur,” in “Jabresbericht der Lehran- 
stalt fiir Juidische Wissenschaft,” Berlin, 1886). 

The epistolary style varied according to the coun- 
try. Inthe East it was modeled after that of the 
Arabs, who exercised care in the elab- 
oration of their letters, The first, 
often the greater, part of the letter, 
usually written in rimed prose and 
adorned with Biblical quotations, 
formed a kind of introduction in which the writer 
attributed to his correspondent all the virtues con- 
ceivable to the imagination of an Oriental. In 
western countries expression was more moderate; 
the use of titles, however, was general, as it still is 
among the conservative Jews in Russia, Poland, and 
Galicia. The least important rabbi is addressed as 
the “ Great Gaon,” “Great Light,” “Wonder of the 
Generation,” “Pillar of Israel,” or with similar ex- 
travagant epithets. Like the Arabs, the Jews in the 
Middle Ages neglected to place the date at the head 
of their letters; in modern times the custom was 
established of giving, after the formula 9"3 (=“* With 
the help of God”), with which the letter began, the 
day of the week, the Sabbatical section (sometimes 
also the day of the month), and the place. “ Fri- 
day ” was usually followed by the abbreviation p"wy 
(= “eveof the holy Sabbath”). The secrecy of let- 
ters Was assured in the tenth century by R. Gershon 
(Me’or ha-Golah), who declared under the ban any 
one who should open without permission a letter not 
addressed to him. 

The most famous letters in Jewish literature—be- 
cause of both their contents and the prominence of 
their writers—are: that of Hasdai ibn Shaprut to 
the king of the Chazars; “Iggeret R. Sherira Gaon,” 
on the sequence of tradition and the redaction of 
the Talmud; the various letters of Maimonides in- 

serted in the “ Pe’er ha-Dor”; the let- 
Celebrated ters exchanged between the French 
Collec- rabbis and scholars and those of Spain 
tions. on the study of philosophy (“ Minhat 
Kena’ot”); “Iggeret al-Tehi ka-Abo- 
teka,” addressed by Profiat Duran to En Bonet; the 
collection of letters on Shabbethai Zebi published 
by Zebi Ashkenazi (Hakam Zebi), Moses Hagiz, and 
Jacob Emden. Asacuriosity, mention may be made 
of the letter addressed by the rabbis of Jerusalem to 
the alleged descendants of Moses (“Bene Mosheh,” 
Amsterdam, 1731). The most noteworthy Ictters 
of modern times ‘are: those of Moses Mendelssohn 
(“Iggerot RaMaD,” Vienna, 1792); of Naphtali 
Herz Wessely included in the “ Megalleh Tamirin ” 
(#>. 1819); of J. Perl written in the style of “ Epistole 
Obscurorum Virorum”; “Iggeret YaSHaR,” by 
Isaac Samuel Reggio (7d. 1884); “Iggerot ShaDaL,” 
by Luzzatto (Przemysl, 1883); and “ Miktabe 
YaGeL,” by Judah L6b Gordon (Warsaw, 1894). 

From the sixteenth century Jewish literature was 
enriched with a number of formularies of Hebrew 
and Judo-German letters. The first of this kind 
was the “Iggeret Shelomim,” published at Augs- 
burg in 1534 and republished with a Latin trans- 
lation by Buxtorf the Younger at Basel in 1608. 
The characteristic features of this formulary, as 


Style and 
Composi- 
tion. 


of all the others published until 1820, were the 
stilted and bombastic style, the misuse of Biblical 
and Talmudical quotations, and the ex- 


Formula-  travagance of the headings of the let- 
ries for ters. In the “ ‘Ittur Soferim” (sce the 
Letters. list below), for instance, there is such 


a heading; which, rendered into Eng- 
lish, it reads thus: “ His [the correspondent’s] cheeks 
are as a bed of spices [Cant. v. 13], a Jadder on which 
angels of God are ascending and descending [Gen. 
XXviii, 12]. He is of a reliable character; keeps 
secrets; shows power to Jew and Gentile; he is a 
righteous man upon whom the world is based.” As 
a model of a business letter, in which the writer has 
to inform his correspondent that some salt which had 
been purchased is on the road, the “Zahut ha- 
Melizah ” (see below) gives the following: “And he 
looked back from behind him and became a pillar of 
salt on the road,” etc. (comp. Gen. xix. 26). A new 
era in letter-writing was inaugurated by Shalom ha 
Kohen. In his formula “Ketab Yosher” (see below, 
he endeavored to do away with the obsolete forms 
and to cause the young, for whom his formulas 
are intended, to adopt a modern style of writing. 
He was followed in this endeavor by many writers 
of talent who produced formularies of real literary 
value. The following is a list of formularies pub- 
lished up to the last years of the nineteenth century: 


Doiby D74N, anonymous. Augsburg, 1534; Basel, 1603, 

spobyawepna, in Judso-German, by Judah Léb Liondor. 
Wilna, 1820, 1844, 1846. 

apaay> ppaa, in Judeeo-German, by Hirsch Liondor. Wilna, 

OD, 


“s27, by Mordecai Aaron Giinzburg. Wilna, 1844; 2d ed., 
1835. 

(pd 33935, by Abraham Israel Kukelstein. 

NaN Mipdon, by H. Baueli. Wilna, 1866. 

oy1 7, by Tobias Shapiro. Wilna, 1891. 

wy) 3205, by Shalom ha-Kohen. Vienna, 1820; Wilma, 1858. 

VIN AwyY AND, anonymous. Warsaw, 1869, 1871. 

Gyrw? ans, by Israel Segal. Sudilkov, 1796. 

M33 273, by Moses of Lemberg. Cracow, 1659; Prague, 1705. 

D> pw, by Eliakim Mellamed. Amsterdam, 1686. 

pd nan, by Eliezer Beér Silbermann. Johannisberg, 1854. 

ny man, in Hebrew and Judeeo-German, by Azriel Selig 
Galin, Warsaw, 1889, 

Dvy37 yas anor, by Baer Friedmann. Berdychev, 1890. 

wown anon, in Hebrew, Judwo-German, and Russian, by 
Feigensohn. Wilna, 1882. 

VANA MUN pra oy wown anor, by Abraham Jacob Pa- 
perna. Warsaw, 1884. 

o7pP %33 \3MDn, by M. Letteris. Vienna, 1867. 

DWI YIN, by Israel Beer Riesberg. Warsaw, 1887, 

MAQy sansa, in Hebrew and Jud#o-German, by S. Nelmann. 
Vienna, 1815, 1884. 

mesnay an a2, in Hebrew and Judeeo-German, anonymous. 
Lemberg, 1869. 

meray oanst, by Israel Busch. Vienna, 1547. 

meaay cana, by Israel Knopflemacher. Vienna, 1853. 

ep raw alar, by Emanuel Bondi. Prague, 1857. 

3ep3 3b°3nsn, by Lazar Isaac Shapiro. Warsaw, 1&7]. 

3an%> oansn, by Naphtali Maskileison. Warsaw, 1876. 

Down sanor, by Abraham Markus Pjurko. Warsaw, 1872. 

Dana Na wr, by Paradiesthal. Warsaw, 1853. 

313 M3 mNbX, by David Zaimose. Breslau, 1823. 

mye pean, in Hebrew and Russian, by A. J. Paperna. 
saw, 1874, 1876, 

“bi oy, by Moses Cohen. Fiirth, 1691. 

pn oy, by Zemah Landau. Wilna, 1880, 1833. 

WANA 3D Uy, by Zemah Landau. Wilna, 1835, 1844, 1848. 

say oy, by Tobias Shapiro. Warsaw, 1878, 

D°759D 7743, by Moses Landsberg. Hamburg, 172], and many 
other editions. 

assSon mons, by Wolf Buchner. 

Danan Msp, by Hayyim Wittkind. 


Wilna, 1895, 


War- 


Prague, 1805. 
Warsaw, 1873. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


17 


ion ron, by J acob Lapin. Berlin, 1857. 
see nian, by Mordecai Aaron Gitnzburg. 


=D J CP ld yore 

“55% rarsaw, 1837, 1883. : a 7 

seg ae by Mendel Dolitzky. Vienna, 1883. 
—aw 9 . 


Bp : mde 
cae yan, anonymous. Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1736. 
een 5 . le : T B 
7 . : R,. 


ETTERIS, ME{R HALEVI (MAX): Aus- 
- ceholar and poet; born Sept. 15, 1800, at Zol- 
a aa at Vicnna May 19, 1871. He was a mem- 
7 ‘ family of printers that ori ginally came from 
Amsterdam. At the 
age of twelve he sent a 
Hebrew poem to Nach- 
man Irochmal, who 
was then living at Zol- 
kiev, Subsequently he 
made the acquaintance 
of Krochmal, who en- 
couraged him in his 
study of German, 
French, and Latin liter- 
ature. In 1826 he en- 
tered the University of 
Lemberg, where for four 
years he studied philos- 
ophy and Oriental lan- 
guages. In 1881 he 
went to Berlin as THe- 
brew corrector in a 
printing establishment, and later in a similar capac- 
ity to Presburg, where he edited a large number of 
valuable manuscripts, and to Prague, where he re- 
ceived the degree of Ph.D. (1844). In 1848 he set- 
tled finally in Vienna. 

Letteris’ chief poctical work in German, “ Sagen 
aus dem Orient” (Carlsruhe, 1847), consisting of 
poetic renderings of Talmudic and other legends, 
secured for him, though for a short time, the post of 
librarian in the Oriental department of the Vienna 
Imperial Library. His reputation as the foremost 
poet of the Galician school is based on his volume of 
poems “Tofes Kinuor we-‘Ugab” (Vienna, 1860), 
and especiaily on his Hebrew version of “Faust,” 
entitled “Ben Abuya” (2. 1865). He has exerted a 
considerable influence on modern Hebrew poetry. 
One of lis best poems is his Zionistic song “ Yonah 
Homiyyah,” which has become very popnlar. His 
numcrous translations are ot incontestable value, but 
his original poems are as a rule too prolix. His He- 
brew prose is correct, though heavy. 

Besides the works already mentioned the following 
deserve special notice: “ Dibre Shir” (Zolkiev, 1822) 
and” Avyelet ha-Shahar ” (zd. 1824), including trans- 
ations from Schiller and Homer, and poems by Let- 
teris’ father; * Ha-Zefirah” (Zolkiev and Leipsic, 
1223), a selection of poems and essays; “Palge Ma- 
yim ” (Lemberg, 1827), poems; “Gedichte ” (Vienna, 
1829), German translations from the Hebrew ; “ Geza‘ 
Yishai : (Vienna, 1835), Hebrew translation of Ra- 
“mes “Athalie”; “Shelom Ester” (Prague, 1848), 
Hebrew translation of Racine’s “Esther”; “Spino- 
Za's Lehre und Leben” (Vienna, 1847); “ Neginot 
ee Hebrew rendering of Frankel’s“ Nach der 
fi ” (t, 1856): and “Bilder aus dem Bi- 

‘chen Morgenlande ” (Leipsic. 1870). 

He was the editor of “Wiener Vierteljahrs- 
VII.—2 


Wilna, 1835, 1847, 


G, 


L 





Meir Halevi Letteris. 


Letter-Writing 
Levanda 


schrift.” with a Hebrew supplement, “ Abne Nezer ” 

(7. 1858), and of “ Wiener Monatsblatter fir Kunst 

und Litteratur ” (7. 1853). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: First. Orient, Lit. 1849, pp. 683 ef seq.; idem, 
Bibl. Jw. ii. 234; Zikkaron ha-Sefer, Vienna, 1869 (autobio- 
graphieal notes by Letteris); Ally. Zeit. des Jud, 1871, p. 
692; G. Bader, in Ahiasaf, 1903; N. Slousehz, La Renais- 
sadnee de la Littérature Hébraique, pp. 51-33, Paris, 1902. 


N. SL. 


LETTERS IN EVIDENCE. See EVIDENCE. 


LEVANDA, LEV OSIPOVITCH: Russian 
author; born at Minsk 18385; diced at St. Petersburg 
1888. Levanda graduated from the rabbinical school 
in Wilna in 1854; was appointed instructor in the 
government school of his native town; and held the 
position of adviser on Jewish affairs (" learned Jew ”) 
to the governor-general of Wilna. He began his 
literary career early in life. In the fifties he was a 
contributor to the * Minskiya Gubernskiya Vyedo- 
mosti”; in 1860 he published in “ Razsvyet,” edited 
by Osip Rabinovitch, his “ Depo Bakaleinyikh Tova- 
rov”; in 1861 he began to publish in “Sion” his 
“Drug Bernar.” [le contributed to many period- 
icals, among them * Vilenskiya Gubernskiya Vyedo- 
mosti,” of which he was the editor; “St. Peterburg- 
skiya Vyedomosti”; and “ Vilenski Vyestnik.” In 
the last-named appeared his story “Samuel Gim- 
pels.” In 1876 he published a collection of sketches 
under the titie * Ocherki Proshlavo,” followed later 
by anumber of stories, suchas * Chetyre Guvernera,” 
“Lyubitelski Spektakl.” “Iz Dobravo Staravo Vrye- 
meni,” ete., in “ Russki Yevrei.” “* Yevreiskoe Oboz- 
renie,” and “ Voskhod.” In 1876, also, he took active 
part in the publication of Landan’s * Yevreiskaya 
Biblioteka.” Tothis period belong lis * Goryacheye 
Vryemya,” “Gnyevi Milost Magnata,” and “ Avraam 
Yosefovich.” In the eighties Levanda continued 
his literary activities with great zeal, publishing 
many letters and articles bearing on the Jewish 
question, besides two novels, “Ispovyed Dyeltza” 
and “ Bolshoi Remiz,” and other stories in “ Ned- 
yelya” and elsewhere. 

Most of Levanda’s writings deal with Jewish life 
and Jewish problems. He took a deep interest 
in everything that concerned his coreligionists, and 
rendered many a service to the Jews of Lithuania, 
He exposed (1863) the false witnesses in a trial of 
several Jews of the government of Kovno on the 
charge of ritual murder. He was at first a warm 
advocate of assimilation, and upbraided the Jews 
for their apathy and ignorance, stating his views in 
a series of novels and belletristic sketches. Later, 
his views underwent a change, and Levanda began 
to see that the salvation of the Russian Jew was not 
in assimilation. Levanda was a keen observer, a 
skilful but dry narrator, and possessed an intimate 
knowledge of Jewish life. His best novels are those 
which have no object, as “Ocherki Proshlavo ” 
(1875), * Tipy i Siluety ” (* Voskhod,” 1881), “ Avra- 
am Yosefovich ” (“ Voskhod,” 1885, 1887), ete. In his 
novel “Goryacheye Vryemya” (Yevreiskaya Bi- 
blioteka, 1871-73), which treats of the Polish insur- 
rection, the author combats the idea of assimilation, 
which had for a while carried away the Jews of 
Poland. After tha riots of 1881 Levanda became an 
advocate of the Palestinian movement. His works 


ft 
° 


Leven 
Levi 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 18 





are enumerated in the “Sistematicheski Ukazatel,” 
etc., St. Petersburg, 1892. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Entziklopedicheskt Slovar, xvii. 428; N. &. 

Rashkovski, Sovremenniye Russko-YVevreiskiye Deyateli, 

p. 46, Odessa, 1899. 

H.R. J. G. L. 

LEVEN, MANUEL: French physician; born 
in 1831. He studied in Paris at the Lycée Henri lV., 
and in 1851 entered the Institut Agronomique at 
Versailles. In the following year this institution 
was suppressed on suspicion of republicanism, and 
Leven, while lecturing on science at the Lycée 
Bonaparte, began his medical studies (M.D. 1860; 
his thesis, “Rapports de lIdiotie et du Créti- 
nisme,” gained a gold medal from the Société Médi- 
copsychologique of Paris). In 1863 he was ap- 
pointed physician to the Compagnie du Chemin de 
Fer du Nord, and in 1870-71 was ambulancc-sur- 
geon of the ninth arrondissement of Paris and of 
the Bataillon du Chemin de Fer du Nord, receiving 
the military ribbon of the Legion of Honor in 1871. 
From 1871 to 1878 he was a member of the Board of 
Health of Paris, and from 1873 to 1889 head physi- 
cian of the Hopital Rothschild. Leven is especially 
noteworthy for liis work in gastric pathology. He 
is the author of “ Traité des Maladies de ? Estomac,” 
1879; “L’Hygitne des Israélites,” 1883; “ Estomac 
et Cerveau,” 1884; “La Névrose,” 1887; “Systeme 
Nerveux et Maladies,” 1898; and “La Vie, Ame, 
et la Maladie,” 1902. . 

Leven is Known also as a philanthropist. To- 
gether with Eugéne Manuel he founded, in 1848, 
the first night-school for Jewish apprentices, which 
developed into a manual-training school; and he has 
been the president of its administrative council 
since 1879. Heis also one of the founders of the 
Alliance Israélite Universelle, vice-president of the 
Comité des Ecoles Israélites, member of the Comité 
de Refuge du Pilessis-Piquet (an agricultural 
school), and chevalier of the Order of Isabella the 
Catholic. 

S. J. Ka. 

LEVEN, NARCISSE: French lawyer and 
communal worker; born at Urdingen, on the 
Rhine, Oct. 15, 18388; educated at the Lycée Henri 
IV. and at the Faculty of Law in Paris. For five 
years he was the secretary of Adolphe Crémieux, 
and he was an active member of the group which 
opposed Napoleon III. and which included Jules 
Ferry, Spuller, and Hérold. During the Franco- 
German war he was general secretary of the Ministry 
of Justice, but he resigned on the retirement of its 
minister, Adolphe Crémicux, and has since refused 
all government positions. From 1880 to 1887 he 
was a member of the Municipal Council of Paris, of 
which he became vice-president. 

Leven took an active part in the founding of the 
Alliance Israelite Universelle, becoming successively 
its secretary, vice-president (1883-98), and, after 8. 
Goldschmidt’s death, president. Heis, in a certain 
sense, the historian of the Alliance, both through 
his clear and exhaustive reports and through the 
orations he has delivered at the funerals of his col- 
leagues. For thirty-six years he has been a member 
of the Jewish Consistory of Paris, becoming its vice- 
president on the death of Michel Erlanger. He is 


a member also of the committees of the Rabbinical] 
Seminary and the Ecole de Travail, and is president 
of the Jewish Colonization Association, 

g 


J. Ka. 


LEVENSON, PAVEL YAKOVLEVICH:; 
Russian lawyer; born at Kamenetz, Podotia, 1837; 
died at St. Petersburg Jan. 16, 1894. In 1868 he 
went to St. Petersburg, where he devoted himself 
chiefly to law. In 1871 he graduated at the uni- 
versity there, and in 1877 became an advocate in the 
circuit court of justice. 

Levenson contributed articles on Jewish subjects 
to the “ Voskhod ” and to other journals, was oue of 
the editors of the “Suebny Vyestnik,” and was editor 
of the department of criminology of the “Journal 
Grazhdanskavo i Ugolovnavo Prava.” He wasalso 
the author of the biographies of Boccaria and Ben- 
than in “Pavienkovs Biografii Zamyechatelaykh 
Lyudei.” His brother was Osip Levenson, advo- 
cate in the circuit court of Moscow (d. 1895). Osip 
was the musical critic of the Moscow daily “ Russki- 
ya Vyedomosti”; his articles were afterward pub- 
lished in Moscow under the titles “V Kontzert 
Zalye” (1880-81) and “Iz Oblasti Muzyki ” (1885). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brockhaus and Efron, Entziklopedicheski 

Stovar, xviii. 488, St. Petersburg. 1895. 

H. R. A. S. W. 


LEVENTRITT, DAVID: American lawyer 
and judge; bornat Winnsboro, South Carolina, Jan. 
31, 1845; A.B. 1864, Free Academy (now College of 
the City of New York), and LL.B, 1871, University 
of the City of New York. He practised law in New 
York, acting as special counsel for the city in im- 
portant condemnation proceedings; and since Jan. 1, 
1899, he has been a justice of the Supreme Court of 
the state of New York. 

Leveutritt was for a number of years vice-presi- 
dent of the Aguilar Free Library, and is associated 
with many of the Jewish charitable institutions in 
New York city. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Bench and Bar; Who's Who tn Amer- 

ica, 1903-3. 

A. 


LEVERTIN, OSKAR IVAR: Swedish poet 
and critic; born at Gryt, East Gotland, July 1%, 
1862; educated at the University of Upsala (Ph.D. 
1882), where, in 1889, he was appointed docent; 
four years later he became professor of literature 
at the University of Stockholm. His early work, 
“From the Riviera: Sketches from the Coast of the 
Mediterranean,” and the collections of stories, “Sm§- 
mynt” and “Konflikter, Nya Noveller” (1885), 
though realistic in tendency, are distinguished for 
exuberance of imagination. “Lifvets Fiender” 
(1891) marks a change in manner, and in “ Legender 
och Visor,” a volume of poems, he appears as a 
pronounced romanticist. These poems attracted 
much attention by their sentiment and finished form, 
and the succeeding volume, “Nya Dikter,” placed 
Levertin in the front rank of Swedish romantic 
poets. His novel “Magistrarne Osteras” appeared 
also in Germany. He was aiso acritic and essayist, 
his principal productions in this field being: “ Teater 
och Drama Under Gustaf JII.”; “Gustaf IIT... som 
Dramatisk Foérfattare”; “Johan Welander ”; “ Fran 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


19 


“Svenska Gestalter”; “Dik- 
h Drémmare”; etc. He died Sept. 22, 1906. 
oe sae J. Wo. 


LEVETUS, CELIA (CELIA MOSS) : English 
writer; born at Portsea 1819; died at Birmingham 
1873; daughter of Joseph and Amelia Moss of Port- 
sea At the age of eighteen Celia, in conjunction 
with her sister Marion, published a volume of 

oems bearing the title “ Early Efforts. By the 
Misses Moss of the Hebrew Nation ” (1838 ; 2d ed. 
1839). The work was dedicated to Sir George Staun- 
ton. The next joint work in which the sisters en- 
gaged Was the “ Romance of Jewish History ” (1840). 
This was published by subscription, among the sub- 
scribers being Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, to whom 
the work was dedicated, and Lord Palmerston. The 
“Romance” was followed by “Tales of Jewish His- 
tory ” (1848). 

The above-mentioned works were written in Lon- 
don, where the two sisters had settled in order to 
take up the profession of teaching. Besides pub- 
lishing various poems and short stories, the two 
sisters founded “The Sabbath Journal” (1855), 
which, however, had only a brief existence. Sub- 
sequently Celia Moss married Lewis Levetus of 
Birmingham, to which city she removed, and for a 
time her literary efforts ceased. Her last work, 
“The King’s Physician” (London, 1878), was writ- 
ten during the long and painful illness which ended 


in her death. 
J. I. H. 


LEVI (5).—Biblical Data: Third son of Ja- 
cob by Leah and one of the twelve Patriarchs of the 
tribes of Israel; born at Padan-aram (Gen. xxix. 
34, xxxv. 28; I Chron. ii. 1). The name is derived 
from mb (= “to be joined”; “Now this time will 
my husband be joined unto me,” Gen. xxix, 34). 
Levi joined Simeon in the destruction of the She- 
chenites to avenge the honor of their sister Dinah, 
for which both were severely censured by their 
father (Gen. xxxiv. 25-30). When Jacob called his 
sons together to bless them, Levi and Simeon, not- 
withstanding their plea that they had acted in de- 
fense of their sister, were again condemned (Gen. 
XXxlv. 31, xlix. 5-7). Levi had one daughter, Joch- 
ebed, the mother of Moses, and three sons; he emi- 
grated with them to Egypt with his father and 
brothers, and died there at the age of 187 years 
(Gen. xlvi. 8, 11 e¢ seg.; Ex. i. 1-2; ii. 1: vi. 16, 20). 

J. M. SEL. 


——In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera- 
ture: Levi, as ancestor of the priestly tribe chosen 
to guard the Sanctuary and the Law, appears promi- 
nently in both apocryphal and rabbinical literature. 
At variance with Gen. xxix. 34 and Num. xviii. 2, 4, 
the name “Levi” is interpreted as “the one who 
Jjoius the sons to their Father in heaven” (Gen. R. 
Ixxi, 5; see another interpretation in Ex. R. i. 4). 
He was “separated ” by his father, Jacob, in accord- 
ance with the latter’s vow (Gen. xxviii. 22), as the 
tenth son, either by counting from the youngest up- 
ward or by some more complicated process, and so 
Bp crated to the priesthood (Book of Jubilees, xxii. 

10; Targ. Yer, to Gen. xxxii. 25; Gen. R. Ixx. 7; 


Gustaf III. Dagar”; 


Leven 
Levi 


comp. Epstein, “Mi-Kadmoniyyot ha-Yehudim,” 
p. 97; comp. Pirke R. El. xxxvii., according to which 
he was consecrated by the archangel Michael). In 
the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Levi, 1-9) 
are described two visions Levi had—before and 
after he had avenged the crimes perpetrated by 
Tamor, the son of Shechem. In the first vision he 
saw the seven heavens with all their mysterious 
contents, and after the secrets of the Messianic time 
and the Judgment Day had been dis- 
closed to him he received a sword and 
a shicld with which to make war 
against the Amorites. In the vision following the 
extermination of the Shechemites he beheld seven 
angels bringing him the seven insignia of the priest- 
hood, of prophecy, and of the judgment, and after 
they had anointed him and initiated him into the 
priesthood they disclosed to him the threefold glory 
of his house: the prophecy of Moses, the faithful 
servant of the Lord; the priesthood of Aaron, the 
high priest, and his descendants; and the possession 
of the royal scepter and the priesthood together (in 
the Maccabean dynasty) after the pattern of Mel- 
chizedek: high priests, judges, and scribes. His 
grandfather Isaac instructed him in the law of God 
and in the statutes of priesthood. In Jubilees, xxxi. 
12-17, also, Levi is told by Isaac, with reference to 
John Hyrcanus, of the future greatness and three- 
fold glory of his house (see Charles, “ Book of Jubi- 
lees,” p. 187; comp. Targ. Yer. to Deut. xxxiii. 11). 

The twofold réle in which Levi is represented in 
Deut. xxxiii. 8-11 (verse 11 originally followed verse 
7, Judah’s blessing) appealed with special force to 
the age of John Hyrcanus, who was both high priest 
and warrior-king, victorious over the Gentiles. Ac- 
cordingly, in the war of the sons of Jacob against 
the Amorites, which forms a parallel to the war of 
the Maccabees against the surrounding tribes, Levi 
also took part (see Midr. Wayissa‘u in Jellinek, 
“B. H.” iii. 1-5; “ Chronicles of Jerahmeel.” p. 83, 
Gaster’s transl. 1899; Jubilees, xxxiv. 1-9; Test. 
Patr., Judah, 3-5). In the Prayer of AsENATH 
Leviis described asa prophet and saint who fore- 
casts the future while reading the heavenly writings 
and who admonishes the people to be God-fearing 
and forgiving. He was entrusted with the secret 
writings of the ancients by his father, Jacob, in order 
to keep them in his family for all generations to 
come (Jubilees, xlv. 16). 

The epithet “thy pious [A. V. “holy ”] one” given 
to Levi, and the whole passage of Deut. xxxiii. 8- 
10, furnish the haggadic support for the characteri- 

zation of Levi, as well as of the tribe 
The Tribe. of Levi, as superior to the rest in 

piety. Accordingly it is said (Sifre, 
Deut. 349-351; Sifre, Num. 67; Tan., Beha‘aloteka, 
ed. Buber, p. 18; Midr. Teh. to Ps. i. 14; Ex. R. xv. 
1; Num. R. iii., vii. 2, xv. 9) that in Egypt and 
in the wilderness the Levites observed the Abra- 
hamitic rite and the whole Law; in the Holy Land 
they even abstained from work in order to devote 
themselves to contemplation (Gewpia) and to prayer 
(Tan., Wayera, ed. Buber, p. 4; Num. R. v. 1). 
In other words, they were the ancient Hasidim, the 
elect ones (Num. R. iii. 2. 4, 8, 11; xv. 9). Levi, 
the father of the tribe, accordingly displayed this 


Visions. 


Levi, Tribe of 
Levi II. 


spirit of piety in his own household; he married 
Milkah, of the daughters of Aram, of the (holy) seed 
of the Terahites (Jubilees. xxxiv. 20: Test. Patr., 
Levi, 11). The names he gave to his sons—Gershon, 
Kkehat, and Merari—are interpreted in the sight of 
their future destiny (7. Levi, 11; Num. R. iii. 12). 
When his daughter Jochebed (“God giveth glory ”) 
was born to him he was already “the gloritied of 
God ” among his brethren (Test. Patr., Levi, 11). 

J. K., 


LEVI (45), TRIBE OF.—Biblical Data: 
The tribe of Levi was descended from the patriarch 
Levi, the third son of Jacob and Leah (Gen. xxix, 
34). Levi shared in Simeon’s treachery toward the 
men of Shechem (Gen. xxxiv. 25-80), in consequence 
of which, it was thought, his descendants were scat- 
tered in Israel (Gen. xlix. 5-7). At the time of 
the descent into Egypt there were only three sons of 
Levi (Gen. xlvi. 11); these had become at the time 
of the Exodus a numerous tribe, which then was 
chosen for the priesthood and the service of the 
sanctuary (Ex. vi. 16 et seg.; Num. i. 49-54, iii. 6 
et seqg.). According to Leviticus and Numbers a 
wide distinction existed at this time between the 
house of Aaron, which constituted the priesthood, 
and the remainder of the Levites, to whom the more 
menial duties of the religious service were assigned 
(comp. Num. xvi. 8-11, and LEVITEs). 

In the blessing of Moses, Levi is mentioned only 
in connection with priestly functions (Deut. xxxiii. 
8-11). At the settlement the Levites are said to 
have received no definite domain (Josh. xiii. 14), 
but scattered cities were assigned them in territory 
belonging to other tribes. From the portion of 
Simeon and Judah they received Hebron, Libnah. 
Jattir, Eshtemoa, Holon, Debir, Ain, Juttah, anc 
Beth-shemesh; in the territory of Benjamin their 
cities were Gibeou, Geba, Anathoth, and Almon; 
from Ephraim they took Shechem, Gezer, Kibzaim, 

and Beth-horon; from Dan, Eltekeh, 

Cities of Gibbethon, Aijalon, and Gath-rimmon 

Levites. (comp. [ Chron. vi. 69, where two of 

these cities are ascribed to Ephraim 
and two are not mentioned); from the tribe of Ma- 
nasseh, Tanach, Gath-rimmon, Golan, and Beeshte- 
rah; from Issachar, Aishon, Dabareh, Jarmuth, and 
En-gannim; from Asher, Misha], Abdon, Helkath, 
and Rehob; from Naphtali, Kedesh, Hammoth-dor, 
and Kartan; from Zebulun, Jckneam, Kartah, Dim- 
nah, and Nahalal; from Reuben, Bezer, Jahazah, 
Kedemoth, and Mephaath; and from Gad, Ramoth 
in Gilead, Mahanaim, Heshbon, and Jazer (Josh. 
xxi. 11-39; comp. I Chron. vi. 55-81). When these 
cities are compared with those said to have been left 
to the other tribes, one is impressed with the fact 
that, if the Levites received all these, together with 
their suburbs, they must have had a better and 
more commanding inheritance than had any of their 
brethren. 

In striking contrast with this splendid inheritance 
attributed to the Levites by Joshua and the Chronicler 
is the non-appearance of the Levites in any impor- 
tant réle during the period of the Judges. They are 
not mentioned in the Song of Deborah, nor do they 
appear elsewhere in Judges until the appendix, where 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 20 


two individual Levites are mentioned (comp. Judges 
xvii. 7, xviii. 80, and xix. 1). Under David and Sol- 
omon, according to the accounts in 
In Early Samuel and Kings, the Levites exer- 
Sources. cised the priestly functions, though 
not to the exclusion of others from 
such functions, For example, Samuel, an Ephra- 
imite (I Sam. ix. 18), and the sons of David (II Sam. 
viii. 18) offered sacrifices. From this time to the 
Exile the Levitical priests held much the same 
position as they held in the timeof Sclomon, They 
exercised their priestly functions, but were by no 
means, except in rare instances, the dominating in- 
fluence. In the post-exilic period. as Chronicles, 
Ezra, and Nehemiah show, they became a domi- 
nant element in the Jewish community. 
——Critical View: The problem presented by the 
Biblical data isthis: What is the relation of the clan 
mentioned in such passages as Gen. xlix. 5-7 to the 
priests of a Jater time? In seeking a solution of 
this problem it should be noted that in J, the oldest 
source, the patriarch Levi merited his father’s curse, 
in consequence of which the tribe was divided and 
scattered (comp. Gen. xxxiv. 80, 31). In narrating 
a crisis In the life of Moses the same writer men- 
tions the “sons of Levi” (Ex. xxxii. 26-28), but in 
such a way that the phrase may refer cither to the 
descendants of the patriarch or to men who pos- 
sessed the qualities of a “ievi.” Later, a narrative 
that is ascribed to J by some critics (¢.g., Moore, 
in “S. B. O. T.”) tells how a Levite of Beth-lehem- 
judah became a priest at the shrine at Dan (Judges 
xvil. 9, xvi. 80). This representation of J would 
seem to mean that misfortune overtook aclan Known 
as that of Levi, that its members became scattered, 
and that they were held in such high esteem as 
priests that they gradually appropriated the priestly 
offices. 
E has almost nothing to say of Levites. Accord- 
ing to him, apparently, Moses and Aaron were of 
one of the tribes of Joseph, and he uses 


In the “Levite” to deseribe not the member 
Source E. of a clan, but a man especially cligi- 


ble to the priesthood, distinctly stating 
that one such man belonged to the clan Judah 
(Judges xvii. 7; comp. “S. B. O. T.”). Tf the 
patriarch Levi was mentioned in this source, the pas- 
sage In question has not been transmitted. E, ap- 
parently, knew no such patriarch, and supposed that 
@ priest might come from any tribe and that he re- 
ceived the designation “Levite” for other reasons 
than those of descent. 

P, the latest of the sources in the Pentateuch, dis- 
tinctly connects the tribe of Levi with the priest- 
hood, bridging all the gaps with extensive genealo- 
gies, dividing the various services of the sanctuary 
among the different descendants of the patriarch, 
and assigning to each class of descendants its re- 
spective cities in Canaan (Josh. xxi.). Of these 
three representations, P’s can not be correct. The 
whole tenor of the history in Judges and Samuel 
contradicts P’s assertion that the Levites received 
all these cities at the time of the conquest, as well 
as his view that the religious office was, in any ex- 
clusive sense, in the hands of the Levites. Gezer, 
for example, was not in Israel's possession until the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


21 


Solomon (I Kings ix. 16). Recent explora- 
shown it to have been the site of a great 
f Astarte (* Pal. Explor. Fund, Quarterly 

Statement,” Jan., 1908, pp. 23 et seq.). 

Not in This temple, too, was on the level of 
Possession the pre-exilic Israelitish city, and may 
of Gezer. have been used by the Hebrews of the 
period. Other Levitical cities in the 
list, like Kadesh in Naphtali, Ashtaroth in Bashan, 
and Hebron, can be proved to have been old shrines 
which in the pre-exilic period were still in use. If 
the information contained in the sources known 
were more complete, it probably could be shown 
that P’s whole system of Levitical cities is a post- 
exilic explanation of the fact that important sanc- 
tuaries had existed at these points in pre-exilic 
times, and that they had thus become the centers 
where Levites resided in large numbers. 

P’s whole conception is, therefore, untrustworthy. 
Recent critics are divided in opinion, some believ- 
ing, with J, that there was actually a tribe of Levi, 
which became scattered and gradually absorbed 
the priestly office, others adopting the apparent 
view of E that “levi” was a general term for a 
priest, and then supposing that the existence of 
the clan Levi was assumed in order to explain the 
origin of the priestly class. Lagarde (“ Orientalia,” 
ii. 20: “Mittheilungen,” i. 54), Baudissin (“ Priest- 
erthum,” p. 72), and Budde (“Religion of Israel to 
the Exile,” pp. 80 e¢ seg.) may be cited as critics 
who have advocated this latter view. If Hommel 
and Sayce were consistent, they might be placed in 
the saine class, for if the term came from contact 
with the Minzean Jethro, as they believe, it would 
not be found in Israel before the time of Moses. 
This inference, however, they do not draw. The 
former view (which has been called the view of J), 
that there was an actual tribe of Levi, has the sup- 


time of 
tion has 
temple 0 


port of Wellhausen (“Ilistory of Israel,” pp. 141- | 


147: “Prolegomena zur Gesch. Isracis,” 5th ed., pp. 
137-145), Stade (“Gesch.” i. 152-157), Dillmann 
(“Commentary on Genesis,” ii. 458; “ Alttestament- 
liche Theologie,” pp. 128 ef seg.), Nowack (“Lehr- 
buch der Hebriischen Archiologie,” ii. 92 e¢ seg.), 
Cornill (“ Hist. of Israel,” p. 46), Marti (in Kayser’s 
“ Alttestamentliche Theologie,” 3d ed., pp. 72, 95 et 
seq.) Guthe (“Gesch. des Volkes Israel,” pp. 21-47 
ef seq.), and Holzinger (“ Genesis,” in Marti’s “Kk. 
H. C.” p. 257). 

It is probable that there was an old clan which 
Was overtaken by misfortune and scattered. Sayce 
points out (“ Patriarchal Palestine,” p. 289) that the 
“Lui-el” of the list of Rameses ILL. is parallel to 
“Joseph-el” and “Jacob-el” of Thothmes III.’s list. 
and somay point toa habitat of the tribe of Levi. 
It is quite possible that the priestly order originated 
quite independently of this tribe, however, and 
afterward was erroncously identified with it. In 
the present state of knowledge it is impossible to 
tell whether the view of J or of E more nearly rep- 
resents the truth. 

The origin of the name “ Levi” has been quite vari- 
ously explained. (1) In Gen. xxix. 34, J regards it 
: Trom the stem nb (“to join”), and explains it by 
ae S hope that her husband would now be joined 

Over. (2) Lagarde (l.c.) derives it from the same 


Levi, Tribe of 
Levi II. 


stem, but explains it as referring to Egyptians who, 
like Moses, attached themselves to the Israelites when 
they left Egypt. (8) Baudissin (2.¢.) derives it in 
the same way, but refers it to those who were at- 
tached to, or accompanied, the ark. (4) Budde 
(4.c.) gives it the same derivation, but applies it to 
those who attached themselves to Moses in some 
great religious crisis. (5) Hommel (“ Aufsiitze und 
Abhandlungen,” i. 30; “Siid-Arabische Chrestoma- 
thie,” p. 127; “Ancient Hebrew Tra- 
Origin of dition,” pp. 278 et seg.) derives it from 
Name. the Minzxan “lawi’a” (= “ priest”); 
with this Mordtmann (“ Beitrage zur 
Miniischen Epigraphik,” p. 48) and Sayce (“Early 
Hist. of the Hebrews,” p. 80) agree. (6) Well- 
hausen (“Prolegomena,” 5th ed., p. 141) suggests 
that it is a gentilic name formed from the name of 
Levi's mother, Leah; in this opinion Stade (“ Gesch.” 
i. 152), Gray (“Hebrew Proper Names,” p. 96), N6l- 
deke (hesitatingly ; in “Z. D. M. G.” xl. 167), Gunkel 
(“Genesis,” p. 301), and Luther (Stade’s “Zeit- 
schrift,” xxi. 54) concur. (7) Jastrow (“Jour. Bib. 
Lit.” xi. 120 e¢ seg.) connects “Levi” with “ Laba” 
of the Kl-Amarna tablets. “Laba” he connects with 
the word sod (“lion ”), thus making Levi the “lion ” 
tribe. (8) Skipwith Gn “J. Q. R.” xi. 264) connects 
“Levi” with “leviathan,” making it refer to the 
coils of the serpent. This variety of opinion illus- 
trates and emphasizes the present uncertainty con- 
cerning the origin and existence of the tribe, which 
results from the scanty evidence. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: In addition to the works already cited, see 
Graf, Geseh. des Stammes Levi, in Merx, Archiv, i. 68-106, 
208-236; Hiimmelauer, Das Vormosaische Priesterthum in 
Israel; Eduaid Meyer, Gesch. des Altertums, i. 317 et seq. 


E. G. IL. G. A. B. 
LEVII. See Levi Bs. Sist. 


LEVI II.: Palestinian scholar of the third cen- 
tury (third amoraic generation); contemporary of 
Ze‘era 1. and Abba b. Kahana (Yer. Ma‘as. 111. 51a). 
In a few instances he is quoted as Levi b. Lahma 
(Hama; comp. Yer. R. H. iv. 59a with R. H. 29b; 
Yer. Ta‘an. ii. 65a with Ta‘an. 16a; see Rabbino- 
viez, “ Dikduke Soferim,” to Ber. 5a, Ta‘an. J.c., Zeb. 
58b). In later midrashim the title “Berabbi” is 
sometimes added to his name (Pesik. R. xxxii. 147b; 
Num. R. xv. 10; Tan., Beha‘aloteka, 6; comp. 
Pesik. xviii. 185a: Tan., l.c. ed. Buber, p. 11; see 
LEVI BAR Sist). He quotes balakic and homiletic 
utterances by many of his predecessors and contem- 
poraries; but as he quotes most frequently those of 
Hama b. Hanina, it may be conjectured that he was 
the latter’s pupil, though probably he reccived in- 
struction at Johanan’s academy also. In this acad- 
emy he and Judah b. Nahman were alternately en- 
gaged to keep the congregation together until 
Johanan’s arrival, and cach was paid for his services 
two “selas” a week. On one occasion Levi ad- 
vanced the theory that the prophet Jonah was a 
descendant of the tribe of Zebulun, deducing proof 
from Scripture. Soonafter Johanan lectured on the 
game subject, but argued that Jonah was of the 
tribe of Asher. The next week being Judah’s turn 
to lecture, Levi took his place and reverted to the 
question of Jonah’s descent, proving that both 
Johanan and himself were right: on his father’s 


Levi II. 
Levi ben Abraham 


side Jonah was descended from Zebulun; on his 
mether’s, from Asher, This skilful balancing of 
their opposing opinions so pleased 


Views Johanan that he declared Levi capa- 
About ble of filling an independent lecture- 
Jonah. ship, and for twenty-two years there- 


after Levi successfully filled such an 
office (Gen. R. xcviii. 11; Yer. Suk. v. 55a). This 
incident seems to indicate that Levi’s earlier years 
were spent in poverty; later, however, he seems to 
have been better circumstanced, for he became in- 
volved in litigations about some houses and con- 
sulted Johanan on the case (Yer. Sanh. iti. 21d). 

Levi’s name but rarely appears in halakic litera- 
ture, and then mostly in connection with some Scrip- 
tural phrase supporting the dicta of others (see Yer. 
Ber. i. 2c, 3d et seg.; Yer. Ter. iv, 42d [where his 
patronymic is erroneously given as “Hina”]). In 
the Haggadah, on the contrary, he is one of the 
most frequently cited. In this province he became 
so famous that halakists like Ze‘era I., who had no 
special admiration for the haggadist (Yer. Ma‘as. 
iii. 51a), urged their disciples to frequent Levi’s lec- 
tures and to listen to them attentively, for “it was 
impossible that he wouid ever close a lecture with- 
out saying something instructive” (Yer. R. H. 

iv. 59b; Yer. Sanh. ii. 20b). In these 

Fame as_ lectures he would frequently advance 

Hagegadist. different interpretations of one and the 

same text, addressing one to scholars 
and the other to the masses (Gen. R. xliv. 4; Eccl. 
R. ii. 2). Sometimes he would discuss one subject 
for months in succession. It isreported that for six 
mouths he lectured on I Kings xxi. 25—“ There was 
none like unto Ahab, which did sell himself to work 
wickedness in the sight of the Lord.” Then he 
dreamed that Ahab appeared to him and remon- 
strated with him: “Wherein have I sinned against 
thee and how have I offended thee that thou 
shouldst continually dwell on that part of the verse 
which refers to my wickedness and disregard the 
last part, which sets forth the mitigating circum- 
stance — ‘whom Jezebel his wife stirred up’?” 
(nnon = “instigated,” “incited”). During the six 
months following, therefore, Levi spoke as Ahab’s 
defender, lecturing from the same verse, but omit- 
ting the middle clause (Yer. Sanh. x. 28b). 

Levi divided all haggadists into two classes: those 
who can string pearls (¢.e., cite apposite texts) but 
can not perforate them (7.e., penetrate the depths of 
Scripture), and those who can perforate but can not 
string them. Of himself, he said that he was skilled 
in both arts (Cant. R. i. 10). Once, however, he so 
provoked Abba b. Kahana by what was a palpable 

misinterpretation that the latter called 

String of him “liar” and “fabricator.” But it 

Pearls. is authoritatively added that this hap- 

pened once only (Gen. R. xvii. 9). 
He and Abba were lifelong friends, and the latter 
manifested his admiration for his colleague’s exe- 
gesis by publicly kissing him (Yer. Hor. iii. 48c). 

To render Scriptural terms more intelligible Levi 

frequently used parallels from cognate dialects, 
especially from Arabic (Gen. R. lxxxvii. 1; Ex. R. 
xlii. 4; Cant. R. iv. 1); and to elucidate his subject 
he would cite popular proverbs and compose fables 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 22 


and parables. Thus, commenting on Ps. vii. 15 
(A. V. 14), “He . . . hath conceived mischief, and 
brought forth falsehood,” he says: “The Holy One 
having ordered Noah to admit into the ark pairs of 
every species of living beings, Falsehood applied, 
but Noah refused to admit him unless he brought 
with him hismate. Falsehood then retired to search 
foramate. Meeting Avarice, he inquired, ‘ Whence 
comest thou?’ and on being told that he too had 
been refused admission into the ark because he had 
no mate, Falsehood proposed that they present 
themselves as mates. But Avarice would not agree 
to this without assurance of material gain; where- 
upon Falsehood promised him all his earnings, and 
Avarice repeated the conditionagreed upon. After 
leaving the ark Avarice appropriated all of False- 
hood’s acquisitions, and when the latter demanded 
some share of his own, Avarice replied, ‘ Have we 
notagreed that all thy earnings shall be mine?’ This 
is the lesson: Falsehood begets falsehood ” (Midr. 
Teh. to Ps. vii. 15; Hamburger [“R. B. T.” s.2. 
“Fabel ”] erroneously ascribes this fable and several 
others to Levi bar Sisi). Levi became known among 
his contemporaries as NHPYOws Nw (= “master of 
traditional exegesis”; Gen. R. Ixii. 5). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. ii. 296-436; Frankel, 


Mebo, p. 11la; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii.,s.v. Levi b. Sisi, 
tase whom he erroneously identifies Levi II.; Weiss, Dor, iii. 


S. 8. S. M. 


LEVI, AARON. See MONTEZINOS, ANTONIO. 


LEVI, ABRAHAM: German traveler; born at 
Horn, in the principality of Lippe, in 1702; died at 
Amsterdam Feb. 1, 1785. At the age of five he 
was sent to Brog, near Lemgo, for the sake of his 
studics, and he stayed there till 1714, when he re- 
turned home. Hethen acquired a passion for travel- 
ing, and in 1719, when only seventeen years old, he 
definitely left the parental home in order to execute 
his plan. 

Levi traveled through Germany, Bohemia, Mora- 
via, Hungary, Austria, and the whole of Italy. Full 
of youthful ardor, he did not leave unnoticed the 
most trivial circumstance. He mentions among 
other things the synagogues of Frankfort, and the 
riches of his relative Samson Wertheimer of Vi- 
enna. He wrote an account of his travels in Judso- 
German (published by Roest in “Isr. Letterbode ”), 
adding a Hebrew poem describing ten of the most 
noteworthy events and giving an acrostic on his 
name. The poem is followed by explanatory notes, 
also in Hebrew. Levi’s narrative is interesting in 
that it gives statistics and customs of the Jews in 
small localities not mentioned by other historians 
or travelers. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Roest, in Isr. Letterbode, x. 148 et seq. 
Ss. 8. M. Set. 


LEVI BEN ABRAHAM BEN HAYYIM: 
French encyclopedist; champion of the liberal party 
in Provence in the struggle for the study of secular 
sciences; born at Villefranche-de-Confluent, Rous- 
sillon, between 1240 and 1250; died at or near Arles 
soon after 1815. He was descended from a schol- 
arly family. His father, ABRAHAM BEN HayyiM, 
was a synagogal poet, and rabbi in Narbonne, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


23 


nich place he left about 1240 to settle finally in 
acne: Levi’s uncle Reuben ben Hayyim, 
as like his grandfather, was a scholar. A son of 
a ys Reubed ben Hayyim was, probably, Samuel ben 
oa ben of Beziers, who took Levi’s part, although 
ee in his conflict with the orthodox party in 
ees Levi himself was the maternal grand- 
Faiat of the philosopher Levi ben Gershon of 
eee Abraham was instructed in Bible and 
mud, and in secular sciences as well, and was 


Tal : ae 
soun drawn into the rationalistic current of the 
time. One of his teachers was a certain R. Jacob, 


whom he cites as his authority for an astronomical 
tion, and who may have been Jacob ben 
Machir ibn Tibbon. It is probable, 
also, that Levi was instructed by 
his uncle Reuben ben Hayyim, from 
whom he quotes an explanation of Gen. i. 3 (Vati- 
can MS. excii. 560). 

Levi left his native city (probably on account of 
poverty, which oppressed him almost throughout 
his life), remained for a short time mn Perpignan, and 
then went to Montpellier, where, in 1276, he was 
engaged in literary pursuits, and earned a scanty 
living by teaching languages and lecturing. Dur- 
ing the heat of the controversy over the study of 
secular sciences he was at Narbonne, in the house of 
the wealthy Samuel Sulami, who was prominent 
both as a poet. and a scholar. Levi enjoyed his 
hospitality until, yielding to the pressure of the 
opposing party, represented especially by Solomon 
ben Adret, Samuel Sulami asked his guest to leave. 
The latter then sought shelter with his cousin Sam- 
uel ben Reuben in Beziers (see “ Minhat Kena’ot,” 
No. 41), but was persecuted, apparently, even there. 
He was excommunicated by the orthodox party, 
yet, after the conflict was over, in 1315, he found 
rest and quiet at Arles, where he remained until his 
death. He has been identified by some with Levi 
of Perpignan, whom Judah Mosconi, in his super- 
commentary to Ibn Ezra, characterizes as one of the 
most prominent of scholars (see Berliner’s “ Maga- 
zin,” iii. 148 [Hebr. part, p. 41]). 

Steinschneider points out that a large portion of 
the scientific works written in Arabic were made 
accessible in Hebrew translations in 
the first haif of the thirteenth century, 
and that the entire realm of knowledge 
began to be treated in encyclopedias in the second 
half of the same century. Levi ben Abraham wrote 
two such encyclopedic works, which show the 
Tange of knowledge of an educated rationalistic 
Provencal Jew of that period. The first of these is 
the “Batte ha-Nefesh weha-Lehashim,” the title of 
which is taken from Isa. iii. 20. It is a rimed com- 
pendium, didactic in tone, of the various sciences, in 
ten chapters and 1,846 lines, with a few explanatory 
notes and a preface, also in rimed prose. In the 
Preface to this work, which is frequently found in 
manuscripts, Levi demonstrates the usefulness of 
his compendium by pointing out the difficulties 
ee those who are not well acquainted with gen- 
ae elds must surmount in order to acquire a 
th edge of the sciences, which are scattered 

rough all sorts of books. He had long cherished 


explana 


Life. 


Works. 


Levi Il. 
Levi ben Abraham 


the thought of compiling an encyclopedia, but had 
always been deterred by the fear that the task 
would prove beyond his power; at last, in 1276, 
strength was promised him in a vision, whereupon 
he began the work at Montpellier. 

Levi was compelled, by the nature of the work, 
to limit himself to giving the conclusions of the 

chief authorities, particularly of Mai- 
His Ency- monides, whom he follows step by 
clopedia. step. Ch. i. treats of ethics. In the 
paragraphs treating of the history of 
the diffusion of learning, the author expresses the 
view that the Greeks and Arabs derived almost 
their entire scientific culture from the ancient 
Hebrews, a theory which justified the reading of 
Greco-Arabic ideas into the Bible (Steinschneider). 
The following chapters treat of logic (ii.), the 
Creation (ili.), the soul (iv.), prophecy and the Mes- 
sianic period (v.; the coming of the Messiah will oc- 
cur in the year 1345), the mystic theme of the 
“'Merkabah,” the divine throne-chariot (vi.), num- 
bers (vii.), astronomy and astrology (viii.), physics 
(ix.), and metaphysies (x.). After the author him- 
self had found it necessary to provide the difficult 
verses With explanatory notes (which are not found 
in all the manuscripts), Solomon de Lunas, proba- 
bly identical with Solomon ben Menahem Prat (or 
Porat), wrote, about 1400, a commentary to the 
“ Batte ha-Nefesh weha-Lehasbim.” 

The second work of Levi was the “ Liwyat Hen ” 
or “Sefer ha-Kolel,” a “comprehensive book” (en- 
cyclopedia). The dates of its beginning and com- 
pletion are unknown, but it must have been written 
before the outbreak of the controversy mentioned 

above. Itis divided into two “ pillars,” 
His called “Jachin” and “ Boaz” (after I 
‘‘Liwyat Kings vii. 21), the first containing five 
Hen.” treatises, and the second one. Since 
no complete manuscript of this work 
has yet been discovered, any analysis of its contents 
is naturally uncertain. According to Steinschneider, 
its six treatises are as follows: (1) logic or arithme- 
tic (?); (2) geometry; (3) astronomy and astrology; 
(4) physics (7), psychology, and the “theory of intel- 
lect”; (5) metaphysics; (6) theology, prophecy, the 
mysteries of the Law, and belief and the Creation. 
In the third treatise, the most complete (Paris MS. 
No. 1047; Vatican MS. No. 3883; Neubauer, “Cat. 
Bod]. Hebr. MSS.” No. 2028, and additamenta), the 
astrological writings of Abraham ibn Ezra are sla- 
vishly followed, and the prediction is made that the 
Messiah will appear in the year 1845. The last, or 
theological, treatise, which is extant at Oxford 
(Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” Nos. 1285, 
2023), Parma (MS. de Rossi No. 1846), and Rome 
(Vatican MS. No. 2893), naturally had a greater 
circulation, and, on account of the author’s ration- 
alistic interpretation of the Scriptures, aroused much 
more opposition than the other sections of the work, 
which aimed at nothing original and included only 
what could be found elsewhere. 

The teachings which Levi ben Abraham promul- 
gated, both by pen and by speech, although not 
original with him, naturally aroused the anger of 
the orthodox. Inhis hands Abraham and Sarah be- 
came symbols of “ matter” and “intellect”; the four 


Levi ben Abraham 
Levi, David 


we 


kings against whom Abraham went to war repre- 
sented the four faculties of man; Joshua's miracles 
were symbolically interpreted: they were not ac- 
tual occurrences; the possibility of a supernatural 
revelation was doubted; and there were other aud 
similar doctrines that poisoned the naively credulous 
and religious mind. 

Orthodox resentment was first shown at Narbonne, 
where Levi was residing in the house of Samuel 
Sulami. It mattered little that Levi “was in general 
very reserved and was communicative only to those 
who shared his views” (“Minhat Kena‘ot,” No. 

121), and that it was not known with 
Opposition certainty whether he was to be reck- 


to His oned among the orthodox or among 
Views. the heretics; nor yet that he always 


put off Don Vidal Crescas, who, al- 
though he opposed his teachings, was his personal 
friend, and had often, but vainly, asked him for his 
writings. Equally unavailing were his observance 
of the ceremonial law and his pretense that he occu- 
pied himself with philosophical questions only for 
the sake of being able to cope with heretics (¢). No. 
14). Poverty compelled Levi, “who was born un- 
der an uvlucky star,” to teach at this dangerous and 
critical period and thereby spread his doctrines. 
Solomon ben Adret, therefore, then the champion 
of the orthodox party, felt constrained to attack 
this “arch-heretic, condemned by the voices of all.” 
“ A Mohammedan is dearer far to me than this man,” 
he wrote (26. No. 14; see J. Perles, “Rt. Salomo ben 
Abraham ben Adereth,” p. 25), “ whois not ashamed 
to say openly that Abraham and the other patriarchs 
have ceased to exist as real personages and that their 
places have been filled by philosophical concepts. 
. . . Levi and his adherents are enemies not only of 
Judaism, but of every positive religion.” In his re- 
ply to Levi’s letter, in which the latter endeavored 
to clear himself of the charges brought against him, 
Solomon ben Adret advised Levi in friendly terms 
to confine himself to Talmudic sciences; this Levi 
plainly did not wish to do, and thus he brought ex- 
conununication upon himself. 

Levi expanded and revised his “Liwyat Hen? in 
Sept., 1815, at Arles, and the manuscript (Vatican 
MS. No. cxcii.) was discovered by Steinschneider 
(“Hebr. Bibl.” 1869, p. 24). 

In addition to these works Levi wrote three others 
—“Sodot ha-Torah,” “Sefer ha-Tekunah,” and an 
astrological treatise. The “Sodot ha-Torah ” (Paris 
MS. No. 1066), which probably was an exposition 
of the mysteries contained in the Ten Command- 
ments, and which was written before 1276, is said 
to be lost, but it was probably incorporated, in a 
revised form, in his “Liwyat Hen.” The “Sefer 
ha-Tekunah,” on astronomy and chronology, con- 
sisted of forty chapters and was written in 1276. 
The treatise on predictive astrology is entitled 
“Sha‘ar ha-Arba‘im be-Kohot ha-Kokabim,” “the 
fortieth chapter” of the preceding book, although 
it forms a separate work. They were edited at the 
same time. The great dependence on Abraham ibn 
iizra’s astrological opinions shown in this treatise 
would suggest that it may be the compendium 
which Levi is said to have made of Ibn Ezra’s 
works, All these smaller treatises seem to have been 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 24 





merely preparatory to the “ Liwyat Hen,” in which 

they are used. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, La France Israélite, p. 46: A. Gei- 
ger, in Ozar Nelimad, ii. 94 et seg.; idem. in He-Haluz, ii, 
12 ef sxey.; Gratz, Geseh. vii. 219, 223: Gross, in VMonats- 
schrift, 1879, p. 428; idem, Gallia Judaica, pp. 53, 199, 329, 
465; Renan-Neubauer. Les Rabbins Frang¢ais, pp. 628 et seq., 
658 et seq.; J. Perles, R. Salomo ben Abraham ben Adereth, 
pp. 13, 22 et sey., 10; Steinschneider, in Ersch and (ruber, 
Aneye. section ii., part 48, pp. 294 et seg. (where all the pre- 
vious literature on the subject is given). 


J. M. Se. 


LEVI, BENEDIKT: German rabbi; born at 
Worms Oct. 14, 1806; died at Giessen April 4, 1899; 
son of Samuel Wolf Levi, a member of the San- 
hedrin of Paris and rabbi of Mayence from 1807 
until his death in 1818. Benedikt Levi, who was 
destined for a rabbinical career, received his carly 
Talmudic education from Rabbis Gumpel Weis- 
mann, Ephraim Kastel, and Léb Ellinger. Hlav- 
ing prepared himself under the tuition of Michael 
Creizenach, he entered the University of Wiirz- 
burg (1824) and attended at the same time the lec- 
tures on Talmud of Abraham Bing, rabbi in that 
city. Three years later he entered the University 
of Giessen, where he took the degree of Ph.D. 
When A. A. Wolf was called from Giessen to Copen- 
hagen, Levi was appointed (1829) his successor, re- 
maining in that rabbinate for sixty-seven years. 

Levi, who was an advocate of moderate Reform, 
published, in addition to various addresses aud ser- 
mons, the essays “Beweis der Zulissigkeit des 
Deutschen Choralgesanges mit Orgelbegleitung 
beim Sabbathlichen Gottesdienste der Synagoge” 
(in Weiss’s “Archiv fiir Kirchenrecht,” 1833; re- 
published separately, Offenbach, 1888) and “Das 
Programm der Radicalen Reformgemeinde Gicssens 
Beleuchtet” (Giessen, 1848). Several minor trea- 
tises by him appeared in “ Allg. Zeitung des Juden- 
thums,” “ Der Volkslehrer,” and other periodicals. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibliothek Jtid. Kanzelredner, 
li. 25-39; Allg. Zeit. des Jad. pp. 63, 172 et sey. 
M. K. 


LEVI, BORACH (Joseph Jean Francois 
Elie): Convert to Christianity; born at Hagenau 
in 1721; son of a Jewish commissary. He went to 
Paris in March, 1751, to follow up a lawsuit, and 
while there became a convert to Christianity, and 
was baptized Aug. 10, 1752. He attempted to win 
over his wife, whom he had left behind at THagenau, 
but she refused, though she was forced by the law 
of the time to surrender her two daughters; they 
were baptized ten years afterward. He endeavored 
to gain permission to marry again, though he re- 
fused to give a Jewish bill of divorce to his wife. 
He obtained from the bishops of Verdun and Metz 
canonical opinions that a baptized Jew might marry 
a Christian if his wile refuses to be converted with 
him, and he attempted to get the curé of his town 
to cry the banns for his marriage with one Anne 
Thaevert. The curé refused, and a long series of 
lawsuits ensued, The whole question of the valid- 
ity of a Jewish marriage was raised, and the tech- 
nical difficulty which presented itself to the canonical 
Jawyers was the possibility of Levi’s wife becoming 
Christian after he had married a Christian woman. 
Parliament refused to give him relief (Jan. 2. 1759) 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


25 


fiat EES 
No more is known of him, though several legal 
memorials were written on the curious case. 
n 
: Isi in Annuaire de la Société des 
GRAPHY: Isidore Loeb, in 
BT des Juives, i884, pp. 275-334. ; 





LEVI, CARLO: Italian physiologist ; born at 
Genoa March 26, 1866; educated at the University 
of Modena (M.D. 1889). In 1888 he was appointed 
tutor, and later assistant professor, of experimental 
physiology at the University of Modena; in 1893 
he assumed charge of the classes in special physiol- 
owy, and in 1897 of the classes in histology, at the 
veterinary college connected with the same institu- 
tion. In 1904 he was appointed editor of “L’Idea 
Sionista”; he is also vice-president of the Modena 
chapter of the Dante Alighieri Society. He has 
written papers on Jewish medical statistics, on phys- 
ical culture, and on other scientific subjects for va- 
rious periodicals, including the “Congresso Medico 
Internazionale di Roma” (1894) and the “Congresso 
Internazionale di Fisiologia a Torino” (1901), and 
has published lectures on experimental, technical, 
and veterinary physiology. 

S. Unc, 


LEVI, DAVID: Italian poet and patriot; born 
at Chieri 1816; died at Venice Oct. 18, 1898. Edu- 
cated at the Jewish schools of his native town and 
Vercelli, he for a short 
time followed a mercan- 
tile career. In 1835 he 
went to the University of 
Parma, and later to that 
of Pisa, but he had to leave 
the latter on account of a 
duel in which he wound- 
ed a fellow student whom 
he had challenged for hav- 
ing made an insulting re- 
mark about the Jews. 
Having passed his exam- 
ination as doctor of law, 
he went in 1839 to Paris. 
The university ideals of a 
united, free Italy had 
found a strong follower 
In Levi, who had become a member of the Tre- 
dentist society La Giovane Italia. In Paris he be- 
longed to the circle of Italian patriots; and, on 
returning to Italy, he soon became one of the lead- 
ers in the political movement for the secession of 
northern Italy from Austria and for the union of all 
the Italian states, 

Settling in Venice, Levi took part in the Lom- 
bardie rebellion against Austria of 1848-49. Jn 1850 
heremoved to Turin. After the Franco-Italian-Aus- 
trian war of 1859, when the Italian provinces of 
-\ustria were united with the Italian kin gdom (1860), 
he was elected to the Italian assembly at Florence, 
Where asa member of the Liberal party he cham- 
Ploned the cause of equality of rights and religious 
freedom. He was a member of the National As- 
sembly until 1879, when, being defeated, he retired 
from politics. 

» ie wrote many poems, especially during his 
ay at Venice, and a large number of political and 





David Levi. 


Levi ben Abraham 
Levi, David 





war songs, among these the well-known ode to Pope 
Pius IX., who in 1846, upon his clection to the 
papal chair, was hailed as liberator, but who in 1849 
changed his political views and became strongly re- 
actionary. Through all Levi’s works his great love 
for Italy and for Judaism is evident. 

Levi was the author of: “Patria ed Affetti” 
(Venice, 1849), a collection of poems; “Gli Martiri 
del 1799” (Turin, 1850), a drama; “ Martirio e Re- 
denzione” (2b, 1859); “Del Navarra a Magenta” (dd, 
1866; revised ed., 1884, with a fantastic allegorical 
dialogue as a second part); “Vita di Pensiero” 
(Milan, 1875); “Vita d’Azione” (Turin, 1882); “II 
Semitismo ” (7b. 1884); “La Mente di Michelangelo” 
(th. 1890); “Giordano Bruno” (zd. 1894). 

Levi's principal work, however, is the great 
drama “Tl Profeta.” Its theme Levi describes in his 
introduction as follows: “I intend to hold a mirror 
before my contemporaries, in which they may see 
their errors, faults, and mistakes, and thereby learn 
to despise them; at the same time placing before 
them a high ideal, which they should strive to live 
up to.” To this end he selected the story of Jere- 
miah. The drama treats in five acts of the war be- 
tween Zedekiah and Nebuchadnezzar. Jeremiah 
foresees the fall of Jerusalem, if the people do not 
give up their worship of Baal, repent of their sins, 
and return to the only true God. Jeremiah the 
prophet and Ananias, the priest of Baal, respect- 
ively exhort and try to persuade the king and 
the Jews to follow them. Ananias is successful; 
Jeremiah is thrown into prison; and Jerusalem falls 
when attacked by the invading army. The Temple 
is destroyed, and the Jews are led into captivity. 
Jeremiah’s prophecy is fulfilled. 

When Jeremiah is thrown into prison his daughter 
Rachel falis into the hands of Ananzas, who tries to 
win her for himself. Tis suit proving unsuccessful, 
he orders her to be sacrificed to Moloch, when God 
intercedes. Lightning kills Anandas, and Rachel is 
liberated by her lover, Emanvel. The last words of 
Ananias are: “Uno Infinito hai vinto” (end of Act 
3). Amanuel joins the ranks of the defender of Je- 
rusalem, is mortally wounded, and dies in the arms 
of his beloved. Spiritually Jewdom has conquered 
over heathendom, and Rachel has returned pure 
to her lover; but physically Jewdom is defeated. 
Rachel loses her lover and must go into exile; this 
exile will, however, purify not the Jews alone, but 
through them the world, and will prepare man for 
a better future, 

The dialogue which follows the drama in the 1884 
edition has very little connection with it. It is sus- 
tained by Hmanzuel, the representative of prophet- 
ism, and by Akasuerus, the representative of man- 
kind, and treats mainly of Rome. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. H. Margulies, Dichter und Patriot, Berlin, 


18%; Levi's own works, Vita di Pensiero and Vita @’Azi- 
one, as above. 


s. FY oP 


LEVI, DAVID: Mebraist and author; born in 
London 1742; died 1801. He was destined by his 
parents for the rabbinate; but the design was aban- 
doned,.and he was apprenticed to a shoemaker 
Subsequently he set up in business for himself as a 
hatter; but, meeting with considerable losses, he 


Levi, David 
Levi ben Gershon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 26 


pee a SSS SS ee ae ee 


abandoned this business and turned his attention to 
dressing the material for men’s hats. Meantime he 
continued to pursuc his studies in Hebrew, especially 
in the Prophets. 

From 17883 to 1797 Levi was busily engaged in 
issuing a series of works (a list of which is given be- 
low) dealing with Jewish theology, grammar, and 
ritual. He rendered great services to the London 
Jews in translating their prayers into English and in 
vindicating their faith against the onslaughts of Dr. 
Priestley and Thomas 
Paine. His works pre- 
sent a remarkable in- 
stance of industry and 
perseverance under ad- 
verse conditions. Dur- 
ing the latter part of 
his life he followed the 
business of a printer. 

Among Levi’s liter- 
ary works were: “ Rites 
and Ceremonies of the 
Jews” (London, 1788) ; 
“Lingua Sacra” (8 
vols., 1785-87), a He- 
brew dictionary and 
grammar; letters to 
Dr. Priestley (1787-89) 
in reply to the latter's 
“Letters to the Jews”; “The Pentateuch in He- 
brew and English” (1789). He wrote also “'Trans- 
lations of the Hebrew Prayers and Services into 
English” (1789-93), which he undertook at the re- 
quest of the representatives of the Portuguese Jews; 
“ Dissertations on the Prophecies” (vol. i. 17938). In 
controversy with believers and unbelievers he wrote 
“ Letters to Mr. Halhed on the Subject of the Proph- 
ecies of Brothers” (1795) and ‘‘ Letters to Thomas 
Paine, in Answer to His ‘Age of Reason’” (New 
York, 1797). Here he attempts to show that the 
divine mission of the Prophets is fully established 
by the present dispersion of the Jews. In 1794 
he published a translation of the Seder service. 

Levi was also poet in ordinary to the synagogue, 
and furnished odes when required on several public 
celebrations, as, for instance, on the king’s escape 
from assassination in 1795. 





David Levi. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jew. Chron. Sept. 3, 10, 1896; Lysons, Fnvi- 
rons of London, Supplement, pp. 4380-431; European Maga- 
zine, May, 1799; Memoirs of B. Goldsmid; Pieciotto, 
Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History. pp. 228, 229; Dict. Nat. 
Biog. 
ae G. L. 


LEVI, EUGENTIA: [Italian authoress; born 
Nov. 21, 1861, at Padua; educated in that city, and 
in Florence and Hanover. In 1885 she was ap- 
pointed professor at the Royal High School for 
Young Ladies at Florence. 

She has written many essays and studies for the 


Italian journals and has published the following 


works: “ Ricorditi,” anthology of Italian prosaists 
and poets from Dante Alighieri to Giosué Carducci 
(Florence, 1888; 5th ed. 1899); “Dai Nostri Poeti 
Viventi” (Florence, 1891; 2d ed. 1896); “ Dai Gior- 
nale di Lia” (Rome, 1892); “Rammentiamocci ” 
(Florence, 1893); “Dante . . . di Giorno in Giorno” 


(2b. 1894; 3d ed. 1898), a collection of quotations 
from Dante; “Pensicri d’Amore” (, 1894; 3d ed. 
1900) ; ‘ Fiorita di Canti Tradizionali del Popolo Ita- 
liano” (4b. 1895); “ Deutsch,” a translation of stand- 
ard German works (2d. 1899). 

s. Ff... He 

LEVI BEN GERSHON (RaLBaG, commonly 
called Gersonides; known also as Leon de Bag- 
nols, and iv Latin as Magister Leo Hebreeus): 
French philosopher, exegete, mathematician, and 
physician; born at Bagnols in 1288; died April 20, 
1344, Abraham Zacuto (“ Yuhasin,” ed. Filipowski, 
p. 224) states that Levi died at Perpignan in 1370; 
but the exact date of his death is given as above by 
Petrus of Alexandria, who translated in 1345 a note 
by Levi on the conjunction of Saturn with Jupiter 
(see Steinschneider in “Hebr. Bibl.” vil. 88-84). 
“Gershuni,” the Hebrew equivalent of “Gersoni- 
des,” was first used to designate Levi b. Gershon 
by David Messer Leon (¢. 1500). Levi was a de- 
scendant of a family of scholars. According to 
Zacuto (i.c.), his father was Gershon b. Solomon, 
the author of “Sha‘ar ha-Shamayim ” (but see Stein- 
schneider, “ Hebr. Uebers.” p. 9, and Gross, “Gallia 
Judaica,” p. 94); according to Zacuto (/.c.), Ibn 
Yahya (“Shalshelet ha-Kabbalah,” p. 83, Warsaw, 
1889), Conforte (“ Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 19a), and Azu- 
lai (“Shem ha-Gedolim,” i.), Nahmanides was Levi's 
maternal grandfather, As Levi himself, in his com- 
mentary on the Pentateuch (on Ex. xxxiv. 9), quotes 
Levi ha-Kohen as his grandfather, and as Levi b. ¢ 
Gershon is not known to have been a priest, this 
Levi ha-Kohen was apparently his mother’s father. 
It was therefore suggested by Carmoly (Jost’s “ An- 
nalen,” i. 86) that Nahmanides was the maternal 
grandfather of Levi’s father. Levi was doubly re- 
lated to Simon b. Zemah Duran. Besides being a 
cousin of Judah Delesfils, Duran’s grandfather, he 
married the latter’s sister (Duran, “Tashbez,” i., 
No. 184; see Steinschneider, “Hebr. Bibl.” @.c.). 

Very little is known of Levi's life beyond the fact 
that he lived now in Orange, now in Avignon, now 
ina town called in Hebrew 333NFA Vy = “the city 
of hyssop” (comp. Isidore Loeb in “R. E. J.” i. 72 
et seg., who identifies the last-named town with 
Orange). In spite of Ben Adret’s ban on those 
who taught philosophy to the young, Levi was 
early initiated into all its branches; and he was 
not thirty years old when he began to write the 
“ Milhamot Adonai,” the philosophical work which 
brought him so much renown. Isaac de Lattes 
(Preface to “Sha‘are Ziyyon”) writes: “The great 


-prince, our master Levi b. Gershon, was the author 


of many valuable works. He wrote 

His Versa- a commentary on the Bible and the 

tility. | Talmud; and in all branches of sci- 

ence, especially in logic, physics, meta- 

physics, mathematics, and medicine, he has no equal 

onearth.” Though a distinguished Talmudist, Levi 

never held a rabbinical office. He earned a liveli- 
hood most probably by the practise of medicine. 

In his commentary on the Bible, Levi makes 
frequent comparisons of Hebrew and Arabic 
words, while he speaks of Latin as the language 
of the Christians (commentary on I Sam. xvi. 6). 
Neubauer (“Les Ecrivains Juifs Francais,” p. 249) 





a ors 77 Sere HDD ones ‘ ee OE 


opt re i ym 


| 2m peo é omesyanan enaenash nae wey ss 
a mp0 a9 eae nh 5 TOE 7 nina 30> en Ae 2 Pee 


oe a egies 


Fs) sane 2 
2 ee, 


“on mn ays pefeo’ 
B30 “y 7273 Es 





PAGE FROM THE FIRst EDITION OF LEVI BEN GERSHON’S COMMENTARY TO THE PENTATEUCH, MANTUA, BEFORE 1480 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Levi ben Gershon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 28 





coucludes, contrary to the assumption of Isidore 
Weil (“ Philosophie Religieuse de Lévi-ben-Gerson,” 
p. 15, Paris, 1868), that Levi knew Latin well, but 
not Arabic. 

Although Levi lived in Provence, where, under 
the protection of the popes, the Jews suffered less 
than in other provinces of France, yet he sometimes 
laments over the sufferings of the Jews, which, he 
says, “are so intense that they render meditation 
impossible” (Preface to “Milhamot”). In an epi- 
logue to his commentary on Deuteronomy written 
in 1388 (Paris MS. No. 244) he says he was unable 
to revise his commentary on the Pentateuch at 
Avignon, as he could not obtain there a copy of the 
Talmud. 

Levi was the author of the following philosoph- 
ical works: (1) “ Milhamot Adonai” (Riva di Trenta, 

1560), mentioned above, begun in 1317 
His Works. and finished in 1329 (see below). (2) 

Commentary on the Pentateuch (Man- 
tua, 1476-80). (3) Commentary on the Earlier 
Prophets (Leiria, 1494), The philosophical essence 
of these two commentaries was published separately 
under the title “To‘aliyyot ” (Riva di Trenta, 1550 
and 1564 respectively). Commentaries (4) on Job 
(Ferrara, 1477), (5) on Daniel (n.d.; n.p.), on Prov- 
erbs (Leiria, 1492), (6) on Canticles, Esther, Ecclesi- 
astes, and Ruth (Riva di Trenta, 1560); (7) “Sefer 
ha-Hekkesh ha-Yashar,” a treatise on syllogisms; (8) 
commentary on the Middle Commentaries and the 
résumés of Averroes, all of them finished about 1321 
(the part of this commentary which refers to Por- 
phyry’s Isagoge to the categories, and to the treatise 
on interpretation, was translated into Latin by 
Jacob Mantino and published in the first volume of 
the works of Aristotle with the commentaries of 
Averroes); (9) “Sefer ha-Mispar,” called also “Ma- 
‘aseh Hosheb,” a treatise on algebra, which Levi fin- 
ished in 1821, when, he says, he was thirty-three; 
(10) a treatise on astronomy, originally forming the 
first part of the tfth section of the “ Milhamot,” but 
omitted by the editor, who considered it a separate 
work (see below); (11) commentary on the introdue- 
tion te, and books i., iii.-v. of, Euclid, probably the 
work referred to by Joseph Solomon Delmedigo 
(see Geiger, “ Melo Hofnayim,” p. 12, Hebr.). (12) 
“ Dillugim,” astrological note on the seven constella- 
tions, in which Levi refers to his “ Milhamot”; (18) 
“Meshihah,” on a remedy for the gout (Parma MS. 
De Rossi No. 1189; Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. 
MSS.” No. 2142, 37). Levi wrote also the follow- 
ing rabbinical works: (14) “Sha‘are Zedek.” com- 
mentary on the thirteen hermeneutic rules of Ish- 
macl b. Elisha, printed in the “Berit Ya‘akob” of 
Jacob b. Abrahain Faitusi (Leghorn, 1800). (15) 
“Mehokek Safun,” commentary on the haggadah in 
the fifth chapter of Baba Batra, mentioned by Solo- 
mou b. Simeon Duran (* Milhemet Mizwah,” p. 28). 
Neubauer (/.¢. p. 253) considers it doubtful whether 
the authorship of this work can be correctly as- 
eribed to Levi. (16) Commentary on Berakot, men- 
tioned by Levi in his commentary on Deuteronomy. 
(i7-18) Two responsa signed by Levi b. Gershon, 
one concerning “Kol Nidre” and mentioned by 
Joseph Alashkar of Tlemcen, the other mentioned by 
Isaac de Lattes (Responsa, i. 88), and its authorship 


declared doubtful by Neubauer (/.c.). The Parma 
MS. No, 919 contains a liturgical confession begin. 
ning *Hwv3 vtbys and attributed to Levi.. 

The following works are erroneously attributed 
to Levi b. Gershon: commentary on Averroes’ “De 
Substantia Orbis,” which seems to have been writ- 
ten by Moses of Narbonne; “Awwat Nefesh,” 9 
commentary on Ibn Ezra’s commentary on the Pen- 
tateuch (comp. Benjacob, “ Ozar ha-Sefarim,” p. 31), 
“Magen Yeshu‘ot,” a treatise on the Messiah: “ Ye. 
sod ha-Mishnah ” (Wolf, “ Bibl. Hebr.” iii. 650); rit- 
ual institutions (“takkanot”; Parma MS. De Rossi 
No. 1094); commentary on Bedersi’s “Behinat 
‘Olam.” 

Some description may be given here of Levi's astro- 
nomical treatise, It has been said that this wag 
originally included in the “ Milhamot.” 
It is probably the one referred to 
under the title “ Ben Arba ‘im le-Binah” 
by Abraham Zacuto (“Tekunnat Ze- 
kut,” ch. vi.), in allusion to Levi’s being forty years 
old when he finished it. Steinschneider (in Ersch 
and Gruber, “Encye.” section ii., part 43, p. 298) 
calls it simply “Sefer Tekunah.” It consists of 186 
chapters. After some general remarks on the use- 
fulness of astronomy and the difficulties attending 
its study, Levi gives a description of an instrument 
which he had invented for precise astronomical ob- 
servations and which he calls “ megalleh ‘amukkot.” 
In the ninth chapter, after having devoted to this 
instrument two poems (published by Edelmann in 
“Dibre Hefez,” p. 7), he exposes the defects of the 
systems of Ptolemy and Al-Bitruji, and gives at 
length his own views on the universe, supporting 
them by observations made by him at different times. 
He finished this work Nov. 24, 1328, but revised it 
later, and completed it by adding the results of ob- 
servations made up to1840. The ninety-ninth chap- 
ter includes astronomical tables, which were com- 
meuted on by Moses Botarel. This work was 
highly praised by Pico de Mirandola, who frequently 
quoted it in his “ Disputationes in Astrologiam.” 
Its importance is also apparent from the fact that 
the part treating of the instrument invented by 
Levi (ch. iv.-xi.) was translated into Latin by order 
of Pope Clement VI. (1842). Later the whole work 
was translated into Latin, and the beginning was 
published by Prince Boncompagni (“ Atti dell’ Aca- 
demia dei Nuovi Lincei,” 1868, pp. 741 e¢ seg.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., vii. 315-822; Gross, Gallia 
Judaica, pp. 94 et seq.; Munk, AWélanges, pp. 497-301 ; De Rossi, 
Dizionarto, i. 126 et seq.; Renan-Neubauer, Les Ecrivains 
Juifs Frangais, pp. 240-298: Steinschneider, Cat. Borl. cols. 
1607-1615; idem, in Ersch and Gruber, Hneye. section ii., part 

— 43, pp. 295-301; idem, in Berliner’s Magazin, xvi. 187 et seq.: 
idem, in Mi-Mizrah umi-Ma‘arah, iv. 40 et seq.; idem, 
Hebr. Uehers. p. 27 et passim. 


His As- 
tronomy. 


M. SEt. 


As Philosopher: The position of Levi ben 
Gershon in Jewish philosophy isunique. Of all the 
Jewish Peripatetics he alone dared to vindicate the 
Aristotelian system in its integrity, regardless of the 
conflict existing between some of its doctrines and 
the principal dogmas of Judaism. Possessed of & 
highly developed critical sense, Levi sometimes dis- 
agrees with Aristotle and asserts his own views 1D 
opposition to those of his master, Averroes: but 
when, after having weighed the pros and cons of 4 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


29 


elieves it to be sound, he is not afraid to 
ae even when it is directly at variance with 
rofess it, eve ‘ js] heol “Th 
epted dogma of Jewish theo ogy. (‘The 
au ey he says, “can not prevent us from consider- 
me . true that which our reason urges us to be- 
We 2 Introduction to the “ Milhamot,” p. 6). 
mes ang after Maimonides, Levi treated only of 
: shilosophical questions which the author of 
EiOaE the «Moreh Nebukim,” because of his 
3 Unique orthodoxy, either solved in direct op- 
position to Aristotelian principles, or 
explained by such vague statements 
student was left in the dark as to Maimon- 
opinion on the subject. These questions 
are: the immortality of the soul; prophecy; God’s 
omniscience } divine providence; the nature of the 
celestial spheres ; and the eternity of matter. To the 
eplution of these six philosophical problems Levi 
7, ted his “ Milhamot Adonai.” The work com- 
prises SIX muiin divisions, each subdivided into chap- 
ters. The method adopted by Levi is that of Aris- 
totle: before giving his own solution of the question 
under discussion he presents a critical review of the 
opinions of his predecessors. The first main divi- 
sion opens with an exposition of the theories of Al- 
exander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, Averroes, and of 
certain philosophers of his time, concerning Aristot- 
le’s doctrine of the soul. Aristotle’s own treatment 
of this subject is, indeed, very obscure; for while 
asserting (* De Anima,” ii. 1) that the soul is the first 
entelechy of the organic body, and consequently can 
not be separated from it any more than form can be 
separated from matter, he maintains (2d. Hi. 5) that 
of the two elements of the soul, the passive intellect 
and the active intellect, the latter is immortal. To 
reconcile these two conflicting statements, Alexan- 
der of Aphrodisias, in his paraphrase of Aristotle’s 
book on the soul, makes a distinction between the 
material intellect (vor tZ1x0c), which, like matter, has 
ouly a potential existence, and the acquired intel- 
lect (voig éxixrn7ée), which latter is the material intel- 
lect when, by study and reflection, it has passed 
from potentiality into actuality, and has assumed an 
effective existence. The cause of this transition is 
the universal intellect, which is God Himself. But 
as the relation between God and the soul is only 
temporary, divine intervention ceases at death, and 
the acquired inteHect lapses into nothingness. This 
psycholegical system, in which a mere physical 
faculty of a substance that has nothing spiritual 
In its essence may by a gradual development. be- 
come something immaterial and per- 
manent, is rejected by Themistius. 
For him the intellect is an inherent 
disposition which has for its sub- 
Stratum a substance differing entirely from that 
= the body. Averroes, in his treatise on the intel- 
Pa the two systems, and enunciates the 
ae ; se the intellect is a mere potentiality so 
peer ae 2 In the body, but that 1t becomes an 
ee Stance as soon as it leaves the body.  Ac- 
es ie en contemporaries of Levi the intellect 
y which is self-existent. 
Ras eee criticism of these various opin- 
inteltect ie ls OWn View on the nature of the 
. e mtellect, he says, which is born with 


doctrine. he b 


His Un 
Position. 


that the 
ides’ real 


devo 


Views on 
the Soul. 


Levi ben Gershon 


man, is but a mere faculty that has for a substratum 
the imaginative soul, this latter being allicd to the 
animal soul. This faculty, when put in motion 
by the universal intellect, begins to have an effect- 
ive existence by the acquired ideas and conceptions 
with which it identifies itself; for the act of thinking 
can not be separated from the object of the thought. 
This identification of the intcllect with the intelligi- 
ble constitutes the acquired intellect (“sekel ha- 
nikneh ”), which is to the original faculty what form 
isto matter. But does the acquired intellect cease to 
exist with the death of the body? This question is 
closely connected with that of the nature of univer- 
sals. If, as asserted by the realists, universals are 
real entities, the acquired intellect, which consists 
of conceived ideas that have a real existence, may 
survive the body; but if, as maintained by the nom- 
inalists, nothing exists but individuals, and univer- 
sals are mere names, immortality is out of the ques- 
tion. In opposition to Maimonides (“ Moreh,” iii. 
18) Levi defends the theory of the realists and main- 
tains thereby the principle of immortality. 

The second division of the * Milhamot” is devoted 
to philosophy. It was intended to supplement and 
correct some statements made by Aristotle in his 
unfinished work “ De Sensu et Sensibili,” which con- 
tains two chapters on divination. While Maimonides 
(2.¢e. ii. 82-48) treated only of the psychological side 

of the problem, “ What are the requi- 
On sites of prophecy?” Levi considered 
Prophecy. also the metaphysical phase, “Is 
prophecy possible?” ; “Is the admissi- 
bility of prescience not absolutely incompatible with 
the belief in man’s freedom of will?” ‘To answer the 
first question there is, according to Levi, no need of 
speculative demonstrations. That there are men 
endowed with the faculty of foreseeing the future 
is, he considers, incontestable. This faculty is found 
not only in prophets, but also in soothsayers, vision- 
aries, and astrologers. He cites the case of a sick 
man personally known to him, who, though with- 
out any medical knowledge, dreamed of the remedy 
which would cure him. Levi himself claimed to 
have received in dreams, on many occasions, solu- 
tions to puzzling metaphysical problems. 

But prescience implies also predestination. This, 
however, seems to conflict with freedom of the will, 
To refute this objection, Levi endeavors to de- 
monstrate that, though all sublunary events are 
determined by the celestial bodies, man may by his 
freedom of will and his intelligence annul such de- 
terminations. After having reconciled prediction 
with the principle of free wil], he defines the nature 
of prescience and establishes a distinction between 
prophecy and other kinds of divination, In pro- 
phetic visions, he says, it is the rational faculty 
which is put into communication with the universal 
intellect, and therefore the predictions are always 
infallible; while in divination the receptive faculty 
is the imaginative power, and the predicticns may 
be often chimerical. Thus, like Maimonides, Levi 
holds that the origin of prophetic perceptions is the 
game as that of ordinary science—the universal in- 
tellect. But, while the author of the “ Moreh” 
counts among the requisites of prophecy a fertile 
imagination, Levi maintains that the greatness 


Levi ben Gershon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 80 





of the prophet consists precisely in his faculty of so 
checking the exercise of imagination that it may not 
disturb the dictates of reason. Another point of 
disagreement between Maimonides and Levi is the 
question whether intellectual and moral perfections 
are alone sufficient to insure to their possessor pro- 
phetic vision. For Maimonides the special will of 
God is the sine qua non for prophecy; for Levi 
moral and intellectual perfections are quite sufficient. 

The most interesting part of the “ Milhamot” is 
the third main division, which treats of God’s 
omniscience. As is known, Aristotle limited 
God’s knowledge to universals, arguing that if 
He had knowledge of particulars, He would be 
subject to constant changes. Maimonides rejects 

this theory, and endeavors to show 
God’s Om- that belief in God’s omniscience is not 
niscience. in opposition to belief in His unity 
and immutability. “God,” he says, 
“nerceives future events before they happen, and 
His perception never fails. Therefore no new ideas 
can present themselvesto Him. Heknows that such 
and such an individual will be born at such a time, 
will exist for such a period, and will then return into 
‘non-existence. The coming into existence of this 
individual is for God no new fact; nothing has hap- 
pened that He was unaware of, for He knew this 
individual, such as he now is, before his birth” 
(“ Moreh,” i. 20). 

As to the objections made by the Peripatetics to 
the belief in God’s omniscience; namely, how is it 
conceivable that God’s essence should remain indi- 
visible, notwithstanding the multiplicity of know]- 
edge of which it is made up; that His intelligence 
should embrace the infinite; that events should 
maintain their character of contingency in spite of 
the fact that they are foreseen by the Supreme Being 
—these, according to Maimonides, are based on an 
error. Misled by the use of the term “Knowledge,” 
men believe that whatever is requisite for their know]- 
edge is requisite for God’s knowledge also. The 
fact is that there is no comparison whatever between 
man’s knowledge and that of God, the latter being 
absolutely incomprehensible to human intelligence. 
This theory is severely criticized by Levi, who affirms 
that not reasou but religion alone dictated it to Mai- 
monides. Indeed, Leviargues there can be no doubt 
that between human knowledge and God’s knowl- 
edge there is a wide difference in degree; but the 
assumption that there is not the slightest analogy 
between them is unwarranted. When the nature of 
God is characterized by means of positive determi- 
nations, the soul is taken as the basis of reasoning. 
Thus science is attributed to God, because man also 
possesses it to a certain extent. If, then, as Mai- 
monides supposes, there is, except in name, no like- 
ness between God’s knowledge and man’s know]- 
edge, how can man reason from himself to God? 
Then, again, there are attributes which can be pred- 
icated of God, as, for instance, knowledge and life, 
which imply perfection, and others which must be 
denied to Him, as, for instance, corporeality and mo- 
- tion, because these imply imperfection. But, on the 
theory of Maimonides, there is no reason for the ex- 
clusion of any attribute, since, applied to God, all 
attributes necessarily lose their significance, Mai- 


monides is indeed consistent. and excludes all pos}. 
tive attributes, admitting only negative ones; but 
the reasons given by him for their distinction are nox 
satisfactory. 

Having thus refuted Maimonides’ theories both of 
God’s omniscience and of the divine attributes, Levj 
gives his own views. The sublime thought of God, 
he says, embraces all the cosmic laws which regu. 
late the evolutions of nature, the general influences 
exercised by the celestial bodies on the sublunary 
world, and the specific essences with which matter jg 
invested; but sublunary events, the multifarious 
details of the phenomenal world, are hidden from 
His spirit. Not te know these details, however, ig 
not imperfection, because in knowing the universal] 
conditions of things, He knows that which is essen. 
tial, and consequently good, in the individual. 

In the fourth division Levi discusses the question 
of divine providence. Aristotle’s theory that hu- 
manity only as a whole is guided and protected by 
a divine providence, admits the existence of neither 
prophecy nor divination. Nor can every individual 

be the object of the solicitude of a 


Divine special providence; for this is (1) 
Provi- against reason, because, as has been 
dence. demonstrated, the divine intelligence 


embraces only universals, and it is in- 
admissible that evil can proceed from God, the source 
of all good; (2) against experience, because one often 
sees the righteous borne down by miseries, while the 
wicked are triumphant; (8) against the sense of the 
Torah, which when warning men that their rebel- 
lions will be followed by disasters, because God will 
hide His face from them, implies that the calamities 
which will overtake them will come as the conse- 
quence of their having been left without protection 
from the vicissitudes of fate. Levi, therefore. ar- 
rives at the conclusion that some are under the pro- 
tection and guidance of the general providence. and 
others under a special, individual providence. It is 
incontestable, he says, that a general, beneficent 
providence cares for all sublunary beings. Upon 
some it bestows certain bodily organs which enable 
them to provide themselves with the necessaries of 
life and to protect themselves from danger; to others 
it gives a nature which enables them to avoid that 
which would harm them. It is also demonstrated 
that the higher a being stands in the scale of crea- 
tion the more organs it possesses for its preservation 
and defense; in other words, the greater is the solic- 
itude and protection bestowed upon it by the Crea- 
tor. Those species of animals which more nearly 
resemble man participate in the solicitude of prov- 
idence to a greater extent than that part of animal- 
ity which forms the connecting-link between the 

animal and vegetable kingdoms. If, 


Relation then, the degree of participation by a 
to the _ being in the protection of the divine 
Intellect. providence is proportioned to the de 


gree of its development, it is obvious 
that the nearer one comes to the active intelligence, 
the more is he the object of the divine solicitude. 
Thus those who strive to develop the faculties of 
the soul enjoy the care of a special. individual provi- 
dence, while those who grope in ignorance are 
guarded only by the general providence. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


31 

There is however, one great objection to this 
peory; namely, there can be no question of a spe- 
tee sdence if God knows only generalities. To 


‘, pro vic P 
a this antinomy Levi defines the nature of the 
mi 


ecial providence. All the events, he says, all the 
*t nomena of this world, good as well as evil, are 
ee to the influences of the celestial bodies. The 
Dok effusions of these bodies are regulated by 
ace immutable laws; so that the demiurgic prin- 
: which knows these laws, has a perfect know]- 
edge of all the phenomena which affect this world, 
of the good and evil which are in store for mankind. 
This subjection to ethereal substances, however, is 
not absolute ; for man by his free will can, as stated 
above, annul their determinations. But in order to 
avert their mischievous emanations he must be 
warned of the danger. This warning is given by 
the divine providence to mankind at large; butas it 
is perceived only by those whose intellect is fully 
developed, the divine providence benefits individ- 


et 
ciple, 


uals only. Fag | 
The fifth division comprises three parts treating re- 


spectively of astronomy, physics, and metaphysics. 
The astronomical part, which forms 

Astron- of itself a considerable work of 186 
omy, Phys- chapters, was not included in the pub- 

ics, and lished edition of the “ Milhamot,” and 
Metaphys- is still in manuscript. As has been 

ics. said above, it was translated by order 

of Pope Clement VI. into Latin and 

enjoyed such a high reputation in the Christian 

scientific world that the astronomer Kepler gave 
himself much trouble to secure a copy of it. 

The second part is devoted to the research of the 
final causes of all that exists in the heavens, and to 
the. solution of astronomical problems, such as 
whether the stars exist for themselves, or whether 
they are only intended to exercise an influence upon 
this world; whether, as supposed by Ptolemy, there 
exists above the starred spheres a starless one which 
imparts the diurnal motion to the inferior heavens, 
or whether, as maintained by Averroes, there is none; 
whether the fixed stars are all situated in one and 
the same sphere, or whether the number of spheres 
corresponds te that of the stars; how the sun warms 
the air; why the moon borrows its light from the 
sun and is not luminous of itself. 

In the third part Levi establishes the existence 
first of an active intellect, then of the planetary in- 
telligences, and finally the existence of a primary 
cause, which is God. According to him, the best 
proof of the existence of an efficient and final cause 
1s the phenomenon of procreation. Without the in- 
tervention of an efticient intelligence there is no 
possibility of explaining the generation and organi- 
zation of animated beings. 

But is there only one demiurgic intelligence, or 
are there many? Afterreviewing the various exist- 
!0g Opinions on the subject, Levi concludes: (1) that 

the various movements of the heavenly 
The bodies imply a hierarchy of motive 

Spheres. principles: (2) that the number of these 
ee principles corresponds to that of the 
a a x 3) that the spheres themselves are animated 
tio um ligent. beings, accomplishing their revolu- 

08 with perfect cognition of the cause thereof. 


Levi ben Gershon 








Tn opposition to Maimonides, he maintaius that the 
various intelligences did not emanate gradually 
from the first, but were all the direct effect of the 
primary cause. Can not this primary cause, how- 
ever, be identified, as suppesed by Averroes, with 
one of the intelligences, especially with that which 
bestows motion upon the most exalted of the spheres, 
that of the fixed stars? This, says Levi, is impossi- 
ble, first because each of these intelligences perceives 
only a part of the universal order, since it is confined 
to a limited circle of influences; if God, then, were 
the mobile of any sphere there would be a close 
connection between Him and His creatures. 

The last division deals with creation and with 
miracles. After having refuted the arguments ad- 
vanced by Aristotle in favor of the eternity of the 
world, and having proved that neither time nor 
motion is infinite, Levi demonstrates: 
(1) that the world had a beginning; 
(2) that it has no end; and (8) that it 
did not proceed from another world. In the order 
of nature, he says, the whole earth was covered by 
water, which was enveloped by thé concentric 
sphere of air, which, in turn, was encompassed by 
that of fire. Was it, he asks, as Aristotle supposes, 
the absorbent heat of the sun which caused the 
water to recede and the land to appear? In that 
case the southern hemisphere, where the heat is 
more intense, ought to present a similar phenom- 
enon. If is, therefore, obvious that it was due to 
the action of a superior agent. From the fact that 
the world had a beginning one must not, however, 
infer that it will have also an end; on the contrary, 
it is imperishable like the heavenly bodies, which are 
its sources of life and motion, and of which the sub- 
stances, being immaterial, are not subject to the nat- 
ural laws of decay. 

Having thus demonstrated that the world is not 
eternal “a parte ante” and iseternal “a parte post,” 
Levi gives his own view of creation. He chooses a 
middle position between the theory of the existence 
of a primordial cosmic substance and that of a crea- 
tion “ex nihilo,” both of which he criticizes. Ac- 
cording to him, there existed from eternity inert 
undetermined matter, devoid of form and attribute. 
At a given moment God bestowed upon this matter 
(which till then had only a potential existence) es- 
sence, form, motion, and life; and from it proceeded 
all sublunary beings and all heavenly substances, 
with the exception of the separated intelligences, 
which were direct emanations of the Divinity. 

In the second part of the last division Levi endeav- 
ors to demonstrate that his theory of creation agrees 
with the account of Genesis; and he 
devotes the last chapters of the “ Mil- 
hamot” to the discussion of miracles. 
After having defined from Biblical inferences their 
nature, he demonstrates that the actual performer 
of miracles is neither God nor prophet, but the 
active intellect. There are, he says, two kinds of 
natural laws: those which regulate the economy of 
the heavens and by which the ethereal substances 
produce the ordinary sublunary phenomena, and 
those which govern the special operations of the 
demiurgic principle and by which are produced the 
extraordinary phenomena known as miracles. Like 


Creation. 


Miracles. 


Levi ben Gershon 
Levi, Jedidiah b. Raphael 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 32 





freedom of the will in man, this faculty was given by 
God to the active intellect as a corrective of the in- 
fluences of the celestial bodies, which are sometimes 
too harsh in their inflexibility. The supernatural 
as literally understood does not exist, since even a 
prodigy isa natural effect ofa primordial law, though 
it is distinguished from other sublunary events by 
its origin and its extreme rarity. Thus a man ofa 
highly developed intellect may foresee the accom- 
plishment of a certain miracle which is only the re- 
sult of a providential law conceived and executed 
by the active intellect. Miracles are subjected, ac- 
cording to Levi, to the following laws: (1) their ef- 
fect can not remain permanently and thus supersede 
the law of nature; (2) no miracle can produce self- 
contradictory things, as, for instance, an object 
that shall be both totally black and totally white at 
the same time; (8) no miracle can take place in the 
celestial spheres. When Joshua said, “Sun, stand 
thou still upon Gibeon” (Josh. x. 12), he merely ex- 
pressed the desire that the defeat of the enemy 
should be completed while the sun continued to 
shine on Gibeon. Thus the miracle consisted in the 
promptness of the victory. Nor is the going back- 
ward of tlie shadow on the dial of Ahaz (II Kings 
xx. 9; Isa. xxxviii. 8) to be understood in the sense 
of the sun’s retrogression: it was the shadow which 
went backward, not the sun. 
The conclusions arrived at in the “ Milhamot ” 
were introduced by Levi in his Biblical commen- 
taries, where he endeavored to recon- 
Philosophy cile them with the text of the Law. 
in His Com- Guided by the principle laid down but 
mentaries. not always followed by Maimonides, 
that a philosophical or a moral teach- 
ing underlies every Biblical narrative, Levi adopted 
the method of giving the literal meaning and then 
of summing up the philosophical ideas and moral 
maxims contained in each section. The books of 
Job, Canticles, and Ecclesiastes are mainly inter- 
preted by hiin philosophically. Jerusalem, accord- 
ing to him, symbolizes man, who, like that city, was 
selected for the service of God; “the daughters of 
Jerusalem ” symbolize the faculties of the soul; and 
Solomon represents the intellect which governs all. 
Kohelet (Iicclesiastes) presents an outline of the 
ethics both of Aristotle and of his opponents, be- 
cause morai truth can not be apodictically demon- 
strated. In opposition to the philosophical exegetes 
of his time, Levi, however, did not allegorize the 
historical and legislative parts of the Bible; but 
he endeavored to give a natural explanation of the 
miracles. 
Levi’s philosophical theories, some of which in- 
fluenced Spinoza (comp. “ Theologico-Politicus,” ch. 
ii, where Spiaoza uses Levi’s own 
Opposition. terms in treating of miracles), met with 
great opposition among the Jews. 
While Hasdai Crescas criticized them on philosoph- 
ical grounds, others attacked them merely because 
they were not in keeping with the ideas of orthodoxy. 
Isaac ben Sheshet (Responsa, No. 45), while ex- 
‘pressing admiration for Levi’s great Talmudical 
knowledge, censures his philosophical ideas, which 
he considers to be heresies the mere listening to 
which is sinful in the eyes of a pious Jew. Abra- 


vanel (commentary on Josh. x.) blames Levi in the 
harshest terms for having been sc outspoken in hig 
heretical ideas. Some zealous rabbis went so far ag 
to forbid the study of Levi’s Bible commentaries, 
Among these were Messer Leon Judah and Judah 
Muscato; the latter, applying to them Num. i. 49, 
says: “Only thou shalt not number the tribe of 
Levi, neither bring his Commentaries among the chil- 
dren of Israel” (Commentary on the “ Cuzari,” p. 4). 
Shem-Tob perverted the title “ Milhamot Adonai” 
(=“ Wars of God”) into “Milhamot ‘im Adonai” 
(=“ Wars with God”); and by this corrupted title 
Levi’s work is quoted by Isaac Arama and by Ma- 
nasseh ben Israel, who attack it in most violent 
terms. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Munk, Melangea. p. 498; Baer, Philosophte 
und Philosophische Schriftsteler der Juden, p. 118: Joél, 
Levi ben Gerson als Religionsphilosoph, Breslau, 18623 Re. 
nan, Averroes et Averroisme, p. 194: Weil, Philosophie Re- 
ligieuse de Levi ben Gerson, Paris, 1868. 


kK, J. Br. 


LEVI, HERMANN: Musical director; born at 
Giessen, Germany, Nov. 7, 1839; died at Munich May 
18, 1900. His mother was a pianist of distinction. He 
studied under Vincenz Lachner at Mannheim (1852- 
1855), and at the Leipsic Conservatorium, principally 
under Hauptmann and Rietz (1855-58). In 1859 he 
became musical director at Saarbriicken, andin 1861 
conductor of the German opera at Rotterdam, from 
which city he was summoned in 1864 to Carlsruhe, 
where in his capacity as court kapellmeister he 
aroused general aitention by his masterly conduct- 
ing of the “ Meistersinger” (Feb., 1869). 

In 1872 Levi received the appointment of court 
kapellmeister at Munich; and it was his thoroughly 
conscientious and excellent work herc—notably his 
production of “ Tristan and Isolde” in Nov., 1881— 
that induced Richard Wagner to select him as the 
conductor of “ Parsifal” at the Bayreuth Music Fes- 
tival of 1882. Appointed “ General-Musikdirektor ” 
at Munich in 1894, he resigned this position in 1896 
owing to ill health, and was pensioned by the gov- 
ernment. 

«is the foremost director of his time, Levi con- 
ducted the musical performances during the Bis- 
marck-Feier and also on the occasion of the tri- 
centenary celebration of the birth of Orlando di 
Juasso. He was the first to produce the trilogy “Der 
Ring der Nibelungen” after its performance at 
Bayreuth in 1876; and his masterly interpretation 
of the Wagnerian dramas contributed to make Mu- 
nich for many years a permanent musical center for 
these works. Levi was a convert to Christianity. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heinrich Porges, in Musikalisches Wochen- 

blatt, pp. 334-336, Leipsic, 1900. 

s. J. So. 


LEVI, ISAAC, YOM-TOB, and JACOB: Sons 
of Abigdor ha-Levi Laniatore of Padua; founded a 
Hebrew printing establishment at Rome in 1518, 
which received special privileges from the pope 
through the intercession of Cardinal Egidio di Vi- 
terbo. There Elijah Levita’s R3595N'p was printed 
within eighteen days(with imperfect letter-press, ow- 
ing to haste, as the colophon complains); this was 
followed by his tables of inflections, now lost, and by 
his“ Bahur.” The press soon closed. In 1525 Jacob 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


33 


EE zs 


at Trino in Piedmont a prayer-book ac- 


ished 
ae he Italian ritual. 


cording to t 


Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 2901; Vogel- 
Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii, 11d. 


I. E. 


LEVI ISAAC BEN MEIR: Russian rabbi of 
the first half of the nineteenth century. After hav- 
‘yr been rabbi at Selichow and Pinsk, Levi Isaac 
ee s culled to the rabbinate of Berdychev, where he 
ae ~ Kedushshat Lewi 2 (Berdychev, 1816), the 
first part of Which contains a homiletic commentary 
on the Pentateuch, with collectanea, the second 
being miscellaneous 1D character. He wrote also a 
commentary on the “Sefer ha-Zekirut,” a comptla- 
tion by Raphael b. Zechariah Mendel of ethical wri- 
tings, based on the Biblical passages beginning with 
~Zakor” (Wilna and Grodno, 1885). 

RaPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 156, 517; 
Bibl. Jud. ii. 248. 
M. SEt. 


‘ HY: 
BLIOGRAPH 
Psi and Rieger, 


J. 


BIslioG 
First. 
k. 
LEVI, ISRAEL: French rabbi and scholar; 

porn at Paris July 7%, 1856. He was ordained as 

rabbi by the Rabbinical Seminary of Paris in 1879; 

appointed assistant rabbi to the chief rabbi of Paris 

in 1882: professor of Jewish history and literature 
at the ParisSeminary in 1892; lecturer ou Talmudic 
and rabbinic literature at the Ecole Pratique des 

Hautes Etudes in 1896. 

During 1894-95 Lévi was director of “Univers 
Israélite.” Heis one of the leading spirits of the So- 
ciété des Etudes Juives. On its organization in 1880 
he was elected secretary and general manager of the 
“Revue des Etudes Juives,” and in 1892 took charge 
of its bibliographical section. Ife has contributed 
to this journal papers on the Haggadah, the Talmudic 
and midrashic legends, Jewish folk-lore, the relig- 
ious controversies between Jews and Christians, as 
well as on the history of the Jews in France. 

Lévi has published in addition the following 
works: “La Légende d’Alcxandre dans le Tal- 
mud et le Midrasch ” (1884); “Trois Contes Juifs” 
(1885); “Le Roman d’Alexandre” (Hebrew text, 
with introduction and notes, 1887): “Les Juifs ct 
VInquisition dans la France Méridionale” (1891); 
“Textes Inédits sur la Légende d’Alexandre” (in 
the “Steinschneider Festschrift”); “ Relations Histo- 
riques dans le Talmud sur Alexandre ” (in the “ Kauf- 
mann Gedenkbuch”); “Les Dix-huit Bénédictions 
et les Psaumes de Salomon”; “L’Ecclésiastique ou 
la Sagesse de Jésus, Fils de Sira,” original Hebrew 
text, with notes and translation ( part 1., ch. XxXxix,. 
15-xlix. 11; 1898; part ii., ch. iii, 6-xvi. 26; parts 
of ch. xviii., XIX., XXv., and xxvi.; XXXi. L11-XXXiiL 
3, XXXVv, 19-xxxviii. 27, xlix. 11 to the end; 1901; 
the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, on 
June 6, 1902, awarded to this Inst-named work one- 
half of the “Prix Delalande ”); “Ecclesiasticus,” 
class-room edition, Hebrew text, with English notes 
and En glish-Hebrew vocabulary in “Semitic Studies 
Series,” ed. Gottheil and Jastrow, 1903. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY ; Moise Schwab, Répertoire des Articles Rela- 


Bean 4 Histoire et dla Littérature Juives Parus dans les 
3" de 1783 41898, pp. 228-231, Paris, 1899 (Supple- 


ment, 1 
- J. Ka. 


VIIL.—3 


Levi ben Gershon 
Levi, Jedidiah b. Raphael 


LEVI BEN JAPHETH (HA-LEVI) ABU 


SA‘ID: Karaite scholar; flourished, probably at 
Jerusalem, in the first half of the eleventh century. 
Although, lke his father, he was considered one of 
the greatest authorities among the Karaites, who 
called him “ Al-Shaikh” (the master), no details 
of his life are to be found in the Karaite sources. 
There even exists confusion in regard to his iden- 
tity ; in some of the sources he is confounded with 
his brother, or his son Sa‘id (comp. Pinsker, “ Lik- 
kute Kadmoniyyot,” p. 119), and also with a Mo- 
hammedan scholar named Abu Hashim (Aaron ben 
Joseph, “ Mibhar,” Paris MS.). Levi wrote in Ara- 
bic a comprehensive work on the precepts, parts 
of a Hebrew translation (“Sefer ha-Mizwot”) or 
which are still extant in manuscript (Neubauer, 
“Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 857; Steinschneider, 
“Cat. Leyden,” No. 22; St. Petersburg MSS., Fir- 
kovich collection, No. 613). This work, which was 
used by nearly all the later Karaite codifiers, con- 
tains valuable information concerning the differences 
between the Karaites and the Rabbinites (in whose 
literature the author was well versed), and the dis- 
scensions among the Karaites themselves. Thus in 
the section dealing with the calendar, in which the 
year 1007 is mentioned, Levi states that in Irak the 
Karaites in their determination of New- Year, resem- 
bled the Rabbinites in so far as, like them, they 
took for their basis the autumnal equinox, while in 
some places the Karaites adopted the Rabbiuite cal- 
endar completely. 

Levi distinguishes between the views, in regard 
to the calendar, of the earlier and the later Rabbin- 
ites, and counts Saadia, whom he frequently at- 
tacks with the utmost violence, among the latter. 
In the treatise on zizit Levi says that he drew his 
material from the works of his father and of his 
predecessors. He excuses the inadequacy of treat- 
ment marking some parts cf the work on the 
ground of the Jack of sources and of the various 
trials and sicknesses he had suffered during its com- 
position. 

Levi’s “ Mukaddimah,” an introduction to the pe- 
ricopes of the Pentateuch, is no longer in existence. 
A fragment, on Deut. i., of the Hebrew translation 
of Moses ben Isaiah Firuz was in the Firkovich 
collection and was published by Pinsker, but was 
lost during the Crimean war. He wrote also a 
short commentary on the Earlier Prophets, a frag- 
ment of which, covering the first ten chapters of 
Joshua, stili exists (Brit. Mus. Or. No. 808). Stein- 
schneider believes it possible that Levi was also the 
author of the short commentary on Psalms found 
in the British Museum (No. 336). According to Ali 
ben Sulaiman, Levi made a compendium of the lexi- 
con “Agron” of David ben Abraham; however, 
this is contested by Abu al-Faraj, who asserts that 
the compendium was prepared by David himself. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pinsker, Likkkute Kadmoniyyot, p. 64 and In- 

dex ; First, Gesch. des Kariiert. ii. 143 ef seq.; Steinsehneider, 

Polemische und Apologetische Literatur, p. 336: idem, 

FHlebr. Uebers. p. 945; idem, Die Arabische Literatur der 

Juden, § 46. 

K. I. Br. 

LEVI, JEDIDIAH B. RAPHAEL SOLO- 
MON: Rabbi at Alessandria and Sienna: died 1790; 
author of hymns for the reconsecration of the syna- 


Levi, Judah 
Levi, Raphael 


gogue at Sienna 1786; these hymns were printed in 
“Seder Zemirot we-Limmud,” Leghorn, 1786. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1289; Mortara, 
Indice, p. 338. 
D L. E. 


LEVI, JUDAH: Influential Jew at Estella, 
Navarre, from 1880 to 1891. In 1880 and the fol- 
lowing years he was commissioned, with Samuel 
Amarillo, to collect the tax of five per cent oun all 
real estate in the district of Estella which within 
the preceding fifty ycars had been sold or rented 
by Jews to Christians or Moors without the 
permission of the king. In 1391 he, with Yuze 
Orabuena and Nathan Gabay, occupied the position 
of farmer-general of taxes. He was engaged also in 
banking and exchange. He appeared frequently at 
court in connection with business of the king’s, and 
always took the part of his coreligionists. He was 
utterly impoverished during the last years of his 
life, as may be seen from the letter of Benveniste 
ibn Labi (Vienna MSS. p. 205). The king, in view of 
Levi’s needy condition and in recognition of his serv- 
ices, granted him a yearly pension of sixty florins 
from the state treasury. After his death, which 
occurred about 1392, he was unjustly stigmatized as 
a heretic. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacobs, Sourees, Nos. 1458, 1477, 15338, 1536; 
Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Spanien, i. 57, 89; Gritz, 
Gesch. viii. 413. 

G. M. K. 

LEVI BEN LAHMA: Palestinian haggadist 
of the third century. He seems to have been a 
pupil of Simeon ben Lakish, whose haggadot he 
transmitted (Ber. 5a); but he transmitted some hag- 
gadot of Hama b. Hanina also (R. H. 29b; Zeb. 58). 
Ta‘an. 16a records three haggadic controversies be- 
tween Levi b. Hama and Hanina, the former being 
supposed by Heilprin (“Seder ha-Dorot,” ii.) and 
Bacher (“Ag. Pal. Amor.” i. 354, passim) to be 
identical with Levi b. Lahma. One of Levi’s own 
haggadot asserts that Job was a contemporary of 
Moses, inferring this from a comparison of Ex. 
xxxili, 16 with Job xix. 23 (B. B. 15a). 

8. 8. M. SEL. 

LEVI, LEO NAPOLEON: American lawyer 
and communal worker; born Sept. 15, 1856, at Vic- 
toria, Texas; died in 
New York Jan. 13, 
1904. Destined for a 
commercial career, 
Levi was sent to New 
York to take a com- 
mercial course, but 
manifesting no interest 
in his father’s business, 
he returned to Victoria 
in 1871, and in 1872 en- 
tered the University of 
Virginia at Charloties- 
ville, Va., to study 
law. He won the de- 
bater’s medal and the 
essayist’s medal in one 
year. Levi returned, 
after having finished 
his studies, to Texas, but being only slightly over 
twenty years old, he had to resort to proceedings to 





Leo Napoleon Levi. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


34 


remove his disabilities so that he could without de. 
lay be admitted to the bar. In 1878 Levi stumped 
the state of Texas on behalf of Gustav Sleicher, who 
was running for Congress and was elected, defeat. 
ing Judge Ireland. Although he refused to holq 
a political office, Levi aiways took an active interest 
in public affairs both in Texas and in New York, to 
which latter state he removed in 1899, establishing a 
law-office in New York city. 

His main activity, however, Was as a communal] 
worker, especially in his connection with the Byay 
B’ritu, of which he became president in 1900. [y 
{887 Levi addressed an “open letter” to the Ameri. 
can rabbinate, under the title “Tell Us: What Is 
Judaism?” The replies being unsatisfactory, he 
answered his own interrogation in the pamphlet 
* Judaism in America.” His last public act was in 
connection with the petition to the Russian gov. 
ernment drawn up in protest against the Kishinef 
massacre of April 19-20, 1903 (see “Report of the 
Executive Committee of the 1. O. B. B. for 1902-3”, 
Isidor Singer, “Russia at the Bar of the American 
People,” 1904, ch. iii.; Cyrus Adler, “The Voice of 
America on Kishineff,” 1904). 

A. 


LEVI, LEONE: English political economist: 
born in Ancona, Italy, in 1821; died in London May 
7, 1888. Levi went to England at an early age, was 
converted to Christianity, and became a member of 
the English bar (1859), He devoted much time and 
energy to the organizing of chambers of commerce, 
Th 185.) he published his “Commercial Law of the 
World”; in 1852 he was appointed to the chair of 
commercial law in King’s College, London. Levi 
was an active member of the council of the Royal 
Statistical Society, and contributed to its journal 
many papers bearing on the industrial occupations 
of the people. In 1887 he attended the congress of 
European statisticians at Rome. It was owine to 
Levi’s suggestion of the benefits which would re- 
sult from the possession of an international con- 
mercial code that the acts were passed (1858) where- 
by the mercantile laws of the United Kingdom 
were made uniform on many points. 

Levi was the author of: “Taxation, How It Is 
Raised and How It Is Expended ” (1860) ; “ History of 
British Commerce and of the Economic Progress of 
the British Nation from 1863 to 1870” (2d ed. 1878); 
“Work and Pay”; “War and Its Consequences.” 
He also delivered a number of public lectures and 
contributed many econonic articles to journals and 
magazines. He was created doctor of political and 
economic science by the University of Tiibingen 
in 1861, and was a fellow of the Society of Anti- 
quaries and of the Royal Geographical Society; the 
King of ltaly conferred upon him the rank of cav- 
alier of St. Maurice and St. Lazarus and the Order 
of the Crown of Italy. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Times (London), May 9, 1888; Boasé, 
Modern English Biography, s.v. Law Journal, 1888, 


J. G. L. 


LEVI, LEONE: Italian author and journalist: 
born at Nizza-Monferrato in 1828; died at Turia 
Nov. 8, 1876; educated at the Collegio Foa at Ver 
celli. Although a man of affairs and a lawver, he 


oF; 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


35 


eto devote himself to literature, his 
st important work being his “ Lampi della Societa 
oe poranea,” @ faithful delineation of modern 
Con 2 «“ Massime a Casaccio,” as well as his 
a Tempio di Torino” (his last work), was pub- 
lished in the “ Corriere Israelitico” of Triest. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY Corriere Israelitico, 1876-77, p. 185; Mortara, 
ae U. ©. 

LEVI, LIONELLO: Italian philologist; born 
at Triest June 28, 1869 ; educated at the gymna- 
siuun of Triest and the universities of Pisa, Rome 
(Ph.D. 1891), and Berlin. He has been teacher of 
literature, later of classical philology, at the gyim- 
nasia of Benevento (1891-98), of Rome (1898-95), of 
Modena (1896), and of Parma since 1896. In 1895 he 
became lecturer on Greek literature at the University 
of Rome, and in 1896 of Bologna. 

Levi has contributed to several journals essays 
on Greek and Latin literature, and is the editor of 
Lucian’s “ Peregrinus ” (Berlin, 1892) and of three of 
the recently discovered odes of Bacchylides (Parma, 


still found tim 


1899). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : De Gubernatis, Dizionario Biografico. 
¢ F. T. H. 


LEVI, MORITZ: American educator; born 
Nov. 23, 1857, at Sachsenhausen, Waldeck; edu- 
cated at the University of Michigan (graduated 1887) 
and at the Sorbonne, Paris. He became junior pro- 
fessor of the Romance languages at the University 
of Michigan in 1902. He has edited “L’Avare” of 
Moliére (1900) and “I Promessi Sposi” of Manzoni 
(1901), and has compiled (with V. E. Francois) a 
French reader (1896). A. 


LEVI, MOSE GIUSEPPE: Italian physician; 
bornat Guastalla 1796; died at Venice Dec. 27, 1859. 
He graduated as doctor of medicine from the Uni- 
versity of Padua in 1817 and settled in Venice, where 
he practised until his death. 

Levi was the author of: “Saggio Teorico-Pratico 
Sugli Aneurismi Interni,” Venice, 1822, which essay 
received the prize from the Royal Academy of 
Naples; “Dizionario Compendiato delle Scienze 
Mediche,” 24, 1827-82: “Dizionario Classico di Medi- 
cina e Chirurgia,” 2b, 1832-40 (the two last-named 
being translations from the French); “ Enciclopedia 
delle Scienze Mediche,” 23. 1834-47; “Ricordi In- 
terno agl’ Incliti Medici”; “ Chirurghi in Venezia 
Dopo 111740,” 7. 1840; “Encyclopedia Anatomica,” 
tb, 1847; “Dizionario Economico della Scienze Me- 
diche,” 25, 1856 (incomplete). He translated also: 
Albert’s  « Hautkrankheiten,” Venice, 1835; the 
works of Hippocrates, with Latin text, 7b. 1888; 
and Burdach’s “ Physiologie,” 2. 1845. He further 
wrote the following biographical works: “ Aglietti,” 
1836; “Ag. Ruggieri,” 1836; “G. Tommasivi,” 
1847; and «J. Penolazzi,” 1856. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hirsch, Biographisches Lexikon. 


8. F. T. i. 


LEVI, MOSE RAFFAELE: Italian physi- 
Mee born at Triest Aug. 9, 1840; died at Florence 
ais 10, 1886. After graduating from the Uni- 
G SIty of Padua (1862) he became assistant at the 
Cneral Hospital in Venice. In 1868 he was one of 


Levi, Judah 
Levi, Raphael 


the founders of the maritime hospital for screfulous 
children at the Lido of Venice, at which institution 
he was physician-in-chief till 1873; he then removed 
to Padua, where he became privat-docent at the uni- 
versity and practised medicine, treating especially 
the diseases of children. 

In 1878 he was appointed chief departmental phy- 
sician at the General Hospital at Venice, lecturing 
there upon pediatrics. This position he resigned on 
account of illness in 1881, and then left Venice, In 
1884 he was appointed professor of pediatrics at the 
University of Florence. 

Levi from 1864 was collaborator and from 1878 
to 1879 editor-in-chief of the “Giornale Veneto di 
Scienze Mediche.” He wrote many essays in the 
medical journals of Italy. Among his works may 
be mentioned: “La Patologia Cellulare Conside- 
rata ne’ Suoi Fondamenti e nelle Sue Applicazioni,” 
Venice, 1868 (German transl., Brunswick, 1864); 
“ Della Frequenza della Tenia per 1’Uso Medico della 
Carne,” etc., 72. 1865; “Due Case di Sifilide Cere- 
brali,” 2b. 1879; “Della Emiglobinuria ad Accessi 
Freddo,” 72. 1881. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cantani, in Hirsch’s Biographisches Lexi- 
on, 


8. F. T. H. 


LEVI, NATHANIEL: Australian merchant 
and politician; born at Liverpool, England, Jan. 20, 
1880. In 1853 he went to the gold-fields in Victoria; 
in 1858, having settled in Melbourne, he joined the 
firm of John Levi & Sons. In 1860 he was elected 
member of the Legislative Assembly for Mary- 
borough, being the first Jew elected to Parliament 
in Victoria. While in the Legislative Assembly he 
took great interest in the abolition of the tea and 
sugar duties, in the taxation of uncuitivated lands, 
and in the forming of labor loan-laws. In 1892 he 
was elected member of the Legislative Council. In 
1885 he founded “The Melbourne Daily News.” 
Levi was treasurer and president of the Melbourne 
Hebrew Congregation for many years, and was con- 
nected with all the chief Jewish communal institu- 
tions of the city. He died Sept. 11, 1908. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish World, June 7, 1901. 


J. 


LEVI, RAPHAEL: German mathematician; 
died May 17, 1779, in Hanover, whither his father, 
Jacob Joseph Levi, a poor pedler, had gone with him, 
then a boy of eight years, and had died a few days 
after their arrival. The orphan lad was provided 
for at the Israelitische Armenschule. At one time 
Leibnitz had occasion to hear some of his observa- 
tions in respect to building materials, and was 
struck by the strong intellectual power which they 
manifested. He became very much interested in 
him, and himself instructed him in the higher mathe- 
matics. A portrait of Levi has been preserved in 
the Leibnitzhaus. 

Of Levi’s published works the following may be 
mentioned: “Zwei Logarithmische Tafeln,” Han- 
over, 1747; “Vorbericht vom Gebrauche der Neu- 
erfundenen Logarithmischen Wechseltabellen mit 
Fortsetzung,” Leipsic, 1748; “Supplement zu dem 
Vorbericht,” etc., Hanover, 1748; “Tekunat ha- 
Shomayim: Ueber Astronomie und  Kalender- 


Levi ben Shem-Tob 
Leviathan 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


36 





kunde, Namentlich Commentirung der Talimad- 
ischen und Rabbinischen Ausspriiche Dariiber, um 
Hilkot Kiddush ha-Hodesh Maimuni’s zu Verstehen. 
Dazu Noten und Glossen von Mose ben Jeckutiel,” 
Amsterdam, 1756; and “Neue Compendidse Allg. 
Cours- und Wechsel-Tafeln,” ete. Several of his 
minor writings remained unpublished; but, from 
material contained in them, Simon Waltsch (Simeon 
ben Nathan Nata‘) issued a commentary on Maimon- 
ides’ rules for the calendar, Berlin, 1786. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brill, in Ally. Deutsche Biographie, xviii. 
505; Blogg, Sefer ha-Hayyim, p. 313, Hanover, 1848; First, 
Bibl. Jud, ii. 236, 
s. M. Co. 
LEVI BEN SHEM-TOB: Portuguese convert; 
lived at the end of the fifteenth century ; notorious 
for his hostility to his former coreligionists. Ac- 
cording to Abraham b. Solomon of Torrutiel (Neu- 
bauer, “M. J. C.” i, 118-114), it was Levi b. Shem- 
Tob (Shem Ra’) who advised King Emanuel of 
Portugal to close all the synagogues and forbid the 
Jews.to attend prayers. This order not proving 
effective, King Emanuel, on the advice of Levi, 
issued another (Apri, 1497), ordering the baptism 
of all Jewish children (Zacuto, “ Yuhasin,” p. 227, 
ed. Filipowski). Levi is identified by some scholars 
with a certain Antonio who was chief surgeon of 
King John II., and who wrote a pamphlet entitled 
“Ajudo da Fe Contra os Judeos” (Kayserling, 
Gesch. der Juden in Portugal,” p. 86). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, 3d ed,, viii. 381. 
G. M. SEL. 


LEVI, SIMHAH ARYEH BEN EPHRAIM 
FISCHEL: Russian Hebraist and author of the 
nineteenth century; born at Hrubieszow, govern- 
ment of Warsaw, He wrote a double commentary 
on Job, preceded by a preface and two poems (Lem- 
berg, 1833); and * Dibre Purim” (Zolkiev, 1834), an 
epic poem, the central figures in which are Ahasuerus 
and Esther. He began the compilation, on original 
lines, of a Hebrew dictionary entitled “ Memalle,” of 
which only the letter & appeared (Warsaw, 1859). 
Benjacob criticized this work severely in “ Pirhe 
Zafon ” (ii. 201-208, Wilna, 1844). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zeitlin, Bibliotheca Hebraica Post-Menlels- 

sohniana, p. 201. 

H.R. M. SE. 


LEVI B. SISI (SISYI; SUSYI): Pales- 
tinian scholar; disciple of the patriarch Judah L. 
and school associate of his son Simeon (‘Ab. Zarah 
19a}; one of the semi-tannaim of the last decades of 
the second century and of the early decades of the 
third. He assisted Judah in the compilation of the 
Mishnah and contributed baraitot (Yoma 24a). 
Many of Levi’s baraitot were eventually embodied 
in a compilation known as “ Kiddushin de-Be Lewi ” 
(Kid. 76b; B. B. 52b). In the Babylonian Gemara 
Levi is seldom quoted with his patronymic, and 
neither in that nor in the Jerusalem Gemara nor in 
the Midrashim is he quoted with the title of 
“Rabbi.” Keeping this in mind, the student of 
rabbinics will easily determine whether passages 
written under the name “Levi” without a patro- 
nymic must be credited to Levi bar Sisi or to a 
younger namesake who is almost always cited as 


nc a LA re A a A nen 


“R. Levi” (see Levi II). But although Levi bay 
Sisi is not given the title “Rab,” he was highly es. 
tcemed among the lcarned, and in many instances 
where an anonymous passaze is introduced with the 
statement DSN 1995 9995 (= “it was argued be. 
fore the sages”) it is to be understood that the argu. 
ment referred to was advanced by Levi before Ju. 
dah J. (Sanh. 17b; comp. Men. 80b; Me‘i. 9b; see 
Rashi and Tos. ad loc.), 

Judah fT. later spoke of Levi bar Sisi as of an 
equal. But the latter did not always succeed in 
impressing the public. At the request of a congrte. 
gation at Simonias to send ita man who could act 
at once as lecturer, judge, superintendent of the 
synagogue, public scribe, and teacher, and attend 
to the general congregational affairs, Judah I. sent 
Levi. When, however, Levi entered on office he 
signally failed to satisfy the first requirement, 
Questions of law and of exegesis were addressed to 
him, and he left them unanswered. The Simoniag 
congregation charged the patriarch with having 
sent it an unfit man, but the patriarch assured it 
that he had selected for it a man as able as himself, 
He summoned Levi and propounded to him the 
questions originally propounded by the congrega- 
tion; Levi answered every one correctly. Judah 
thereupon inquired why he did not do so when the 
congregation submitted those questions; Levi an- 
swered that his courage had failed him (Yer. Yeb. 
xii. 18a; comp. Yeb. 105a; Gen. R. 1xxxi. 2). A 
late midrash speaks of him as a Biblical scholar and 
good lecturer (Pesik. xxv. 165b). 

After Judah’s death Levi retired with Hanina b., 
Hama from the academy, and when Hanina received 
his long-delayed promotion Levi removed to Baby- 
lonia, Whither his fame had preceded him (Shab. 59b; 
see Hantna B. Hama), He died in Babylonia, and 
was greatly mourned by scholars. In the course of 
a eulogy on him delivered by Abba bar Abba it was 
said that Levi alone was worth as much as the 
whole of humanity (Yer. Ber. ii. 5c). 

BIBLIOGRAPITY: Bacher, Ag. Tan, ii. 536; Frankel, Welio, p. 


110b; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, ii. 60a; Heilprin, Seder 
ha-Dorot, ii.; Weiss, Dor, ii. 192. 


S. M. 


LEVI BEN SOLOMON: Galician Talmudist; 
lived at Brody in the first half of the eighteenth 
century. He was the author of “Bet Lewi,” ha- 
lakic novelle and explanations of the difficult pas- 
saves in Rashi and Tosafot (Zolkiev, 1732). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1616. 

8. 8, I. Br. 


LEVI, SOLOMON B. ISAAC: Rabbi and 
scholar of the sixteenth century. He was born in 
Smyrna, became director of the academy ‘Ez Hayyim 
at Salonica, and went subsequently to Venice. He 
was versed in philosophy, natural sciences, and math- 
ematics as well as in the Talmud and the Halakab. 
and was eminent as a preacher. He wrote a large 
number of devotional and halakic works, including 
the following: “Leb Abot,” commentary to Abot 
(Salonica, 1565 and 1571); “Dibre Shelomoh,” five 
sermons for each of the weekly sections and feast- 
days (Venice, 1596); “Lehem Sheiomoh,” commen: 
tary to the Talmud, the Midrash, and the Zohar (70 


S. 8. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


37 


597); responsa to the Tur and the Shulhan ‘Aruk 
ie 1652); “Leb Shelomoh,” similar in con- 
were to the preceding. 

Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 351 | 


Y: : : ee ae . ‘ 
Boo. Oza? ha-Sefarim, passim; Steinschneider, Caf. 
e . * . 
T. E. 


Bodl. col. 2363. 
G. 
LEVI, SYLVAIN: French Orientalist: born 

at Paris March 28, 1863. He received his education 

at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes, where he became 

, acrégé és lettres” in 1886. Here, too, three years 

later he was appointed “maitre de conférences” in 

sanskrit; and in the following year his duties were 
so extended: as to include lecturing on the relig- 

‘ons of India in the section for the science of 

religion, Of both these departments he is now 

(1904) the director. In 1889 Lévi was promoted to 

ne “chargé de cours” in Sanskrit in the Faculty of 

Letters; and the next year he received the degrec 

of “docteur és lettres,” presenting as his thesis 

“Quid de Grecis Veterum Indorum Monumenta 

Tradiderint.” The same year saw the publication 

of his “ Théatre Indien,” which is the standard work 

on its subject. In 1894 Lévi was appointed pro- 
fessor of Sanskrit in the Collége de France, a posi- 
tion which he still holds. 

In addition to the two works already mentioned, 
Lévi has edited and translated the first eight chap- 
ters of Kshemendra’s “ Brhatkathamanjari” (Paris, 
1886), and has published a treatise entitled “Ta 
Doctrine du Sacrifice dans les Brahmanas” (7d. 
1898). Heis also the author of numerous briefer 
studies, especially in the “Journal Asiatique,” as 
well as of many reviews of Oriental books; and he 
is d collaborator on the “Revue Critique” and “ La 
Grande Encyclopédie,” to which he has contributed 
alarge number of articles dealing with the litera- 
ture and religion of India. 

Lévi has been president of the Société de Lin- 
guistique de Paris and of the Société des Etudes 
Juives; he is alsoa member of the committee of the 
Alliance Israélite Universelle. In 1897 he was sent 
on a mission to India by the Ministry of Public In- 
struction. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : La Grande Encyclopédie. 


5. L. H. G. 


LEVI-CATELLANI, ENRICO: Italian law- 
yer; born at Padua June 12, 1856; educated at the 
university there. In 1885 he was appointed assist- 
ant professor, and in 1890 professor, of international 
law at the same university. Levi-Catellani is a cor- 
responding member of the Padua Regia Accademia 
di Scicnze, Lettere ed Arti and of the Regio Istituto 
Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, and a member of 
the Association for the Reform and Codification of 
International Law, at London, and of the Institut 
ae Droit International. He is the author of the fol- 
lowing works: “Le Colonie e la Conferenza di Ber- 
lino” (Turin, 1885); “Storia del Diritto Internazio- 
nale Privato” (4b, 1895) ; “ Della Riforma agl’ Istituti 
della Cittadinanza e della Naturalizazione,” a paper 
pias at the fourth congress of Italian lawyers; “La 
Mtn Platonica delle Idee e il Concetto di Societa 
f emazionale, ” in the Fr Schupfer Memorial Vol- 

me; “Realta ed Utopie delle Pace” (Turin, 1899); 


Levi ben Shem-Tob 
Leviathan 


and numerous articles in literary and scientific jour- 
nals. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Annuarto della R. Universita di Padova, 
1885-86 et seq. 


8, U. C. 

LEVI-CIVITA, TULLIO: Italian physicist; 
born at Padua March 29, 1873; educated at the uni- 
versity there (Ph.D). He was successively ap- 
pointed assistant professor (1898) and professor (1902) 
of applied mechanics, and professor of higher me- 
chanics. He is also (1904) instructor in applied me- 
chanies in the Regia Scuola ai Applicazione per gl’ 
Ingegneri connected with the university. 


RIBLIOGRAPHY: Annuario della R. Universita di Padova, 
1898-99 ef seq. 


S, Ui kt: 


LEVI-PEROTTI, GIUSTINA: A _ poetess, 
supposed to be of Sassoferrato, and assumed, until 
recently, to have addressed to Petrarch a sonnet be- 
ginning “Jo Vorrei pur Drizzar Queste Mie Piume.” 
This poem, to which Petrarch is said to have re- 
plied with his sonnet “La Gola, il Sonno, e l’Oziose 
Piume,” was published for the first time in 1504 by 
G. A. Gilio, who, however, attributed it to Orten- 
sia di Gugliehno of Fabriano. It was republished 
by Tommasini, who attributed it to Giustina (“ Pe- 
trarca Redivivus,” p. 111). Subsequently it was 
included in various collections of poetry, down to 
1885. Although Crescimbeni, Tiraboschi, and Zeue 
doubted the authenticity of the sonnet. scholars 
like Quadrio and, with some hesitation, Foscolo ac- 
cepted it. Morici concludes that the sonnet is the 
work of some cinquecentist, and that Giustina Levi- 
Perotti never existed. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Borgognoni, Le Rime di Francesco Petrarea, 
pp. 22 et seqg., Modena, 1711; Carducei, Rime di Fraicesrco 
Petrarea, pp. 3-4, Leghorn, 1876; Crescimbeni, Dell! Istoria 
detla Volgar Poesia, iti, 14 et seqg., Venice, 1730; Foscolo, 
Opere Edite e Inecdite, x. 409, Florence, 1859; Kayserling, 
Die Jiidischen Prauen; Morici, Giustina Levi-Perotti e le 
Petrarchiste Marchigiane, in Rassegna Nazionale, Aug., 
1899; Pesaro, Donne Celebri Tsraetite, in Il Vessitlo Israeli- 
tica, 1880, p. 376; Quadrio, Della Storia e della Ragione ad 
Ogni Poesia, iii. 187-188. 194, 195, Milan; Tirahoschi, Sto- 
ria della Lettcratura Italiana, v. 581, Florence; Zeno, Dis- 
sertazioni Vossianie, i. 257). 


J. Uc. 

LEVIAS, CASPAR: <American Orientalist; 
born in Szagarren Feb. 13, 1860; received his ele- 
mentary education in Russia and bis collegiate 
training at Columbia College, New York (A.M.), 
and Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore; he was 
fellow in Oriental languages at the former (1893-94) 
and fellow in Semitic languagesgt the latter univer- 
sity (1894-95). Since 1895 Levias has been instruc- 
tor at the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. 
His published works are as follows: “A Grammar 
of the Aramaic Idiom Contained in the Babylonian 
Talmud.” Cincinnati, 1900; “The Justification of 
Zionism,” 1899. Besides these, Levias has published 
a large number of essays, chiefly on philological sub- 
jects, in “The American Journal of Semitie Lan- 
guages” (in which his Talmudic grammar first ap- 
peared) and in the “ Hebrew Union College Journal.” 


abe 


LEVIATHAN AND BEHEMOTH: Names 
of gigantic beasts or monsters described in Job x1. 
The former is from aroot denoting “coil.” “twist”; 
the latter is the plural form of ™“behemah” = 


Leviathan 
Levin, Hirschel 





“beast.” —Biblical Data: Ever since Bochart 
(“ Hierozoicon,” iii. 705), “ behemoth ” has been taken 
to denote the hippopotamus; and Jablonski, to make 
it correspond exactly with that animal, compared an 
Egyptian form, “ p-ehe-mu” (= “ water-ox ”), which, 
however, docs not exist. The Biblical description 
contains mythical elements, and the conclusion is 
justified that these monsters were not real, though 
the hippopotamus may have furnished in the main 
the data for the description. Only ofa unique being, 
and not of acommon hippopotamus, could the words 
of Job x}. 19 have been used: “He is the first [A. 
V. “chief ”] of the ways of God [comp. Prov. viii. 
22]; he that made him maketh sport with him” (as 
the Septuagint reads, werompévoy éyxataracécta; 
A. V. “He that made him can make his sword to 
approach unto him”; comp. Ps. civ. 26); or “The 
mountains bring him forth food; where all the 
beasts of the field do play ” (Job xl. 20). Obviously 
behemoth is represented as the primeval beast, the 
king of all the animais of the dry land, while levi- 
athan is the king of all those of the water, both alike 
unconquerable by man (2). x1. 14, xli. 17-26). Gun- 
kel (“Schépfung und Chaos,” p. 62) suggests that 
behemoth and leviathan were the two primeval 
monsters corresponding to Tiamat (= “the abyss” ; 
comp. Hebr. “tehom”) and Kingu (= Aramaic 
“‘akna” = serpent”) of Babylonian mythology. 
Some commentators find also in Isa, xxx. 6 (“ baha- 
mot negeb” = “beasts of the south”) a reference 
to the hippopotamus; others again, in Ps. ]xxtiii, 
22 (“I am as behemoth [=“beasts”; A. V. “a 
beast”] before thee”); but neither interpretation has 
a substantial foundation. It is likely that the le- 
viathan and the behemoth were originally referred 
te in Hab. ii. 15: “the destruction of the behemoth 
[A. V. “beasts.”] shall make them afraid” (comp. 
LXX., “thee” instead of “them ”). 

E.G. H. K. 
—-In Rabbinical Literature: According to a 
midrash, the leviathan was created on the fifth day 
(Yalk., Gen. 12). Originally God produced a male 
and a female leviathan, but lest in multiplying 
the species should destroy the world, He slew the 
female, reserving her flesh for the banquet that will 
be given to the righteous on the advent of the Mes- 
giah (B. B. 74a). The enormous size of the levia- 
than is thus illustrated by R. Johanan, from whom 
proceeded nearly all the haggadot concerning this 
monster: “Once we went in a ship and saw a fish 
which put his head out of the water. He had horns 
upon which was written: ‘lam one of the meanest 
creatures that inhabit the sea. Jam three hundred 
miles in length, and enter this day into the jaws of 
the leviathan’ ” (B. B. é@.¢.). When the leviathan is 
hungry, reports R. Dimi in the name of R. Johanan, 
he sends forth from his mouth a heat so great as to 
make all the waters of the deep boil, and if he 
would put his head into paradise no living creature 
could endure the odor of him (2).). His abode is 
the Mediterranean Sea; and the waters of the Jor- 
dan fall into his mouth (Bek. 55b; B. B. Z.¢.). 

The body of the leviathan, especially his eyes, 
possesses great illuminating power. This was the 
opinion of R. Eliezer, who, in the course of a voyage 
in company with R. Joshua, explained to the latter, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 38 





when frightened by the sudden appearance of a 
brilliant light, that it probably proceeded from the 
eyesof the leviathan. He referred his companion to 
the words of Job xli. 18: “By his neesings a light 
doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the 
morning” (B. B. é.¢.). However, in spite of hig 
supernatural strength, the leviathan is afraid of a 
small worm called * kilbit ” (n353), which clings to 
the gills of large fishes and kills them (Shab. 7b). 

The leviathan is prominent in the haggadic litera- 
ture in connection with the advent of the Messiah, 

Referring to Job x1. 30 (Ilebr.), “and 

In the _ the pious ones [oO 3n] shall make a 

Messianic banquet of it,” R. Johanan says that 
Times. at the time of the resurrection a ban- 
quet will be given by God to the 
righteous, at which the flesh of the leviathan will be 
served (B. B. U.c.). Even the hunting of the levia- 
than will be a source of great enjoyment to the 
righteous. Those, says R. Judan bar Simon, who 
have not taken part in pagan sports will be allowed 
to participate in the hunting of the leviathan and of 
the behemoth (Lev. R. xiii. 3). Gabriel will be 
charged with the killing of the monster; but he 
will not be able to accomplish his task without 
the help of God, who will divide the monster with 
His sword. According to another haggadah, when 
Gabriel fails, God will order the leviathan to engage 
in a battle with the ox of the mountain (“shor ha- 
bar”), which will result in death to both of them 
(B. B. 75a; Pesik. p. 188b). Not only will the fiesh 
of the leviathan furnish food for the table of the 
righteous, but there will be a great supply of it in 
the markets of Jerusalem (B. B. @.¢.). From the 
hide of the leviathan God will make tents for the 
pious of the first rank, girdles for those of the 
second, chains for those of the third, and necklaces 
for those of the fourth. The remainder of the hide 
will be spread on the walls of Jerusalem; and 
the whole world will be illuminated by its bright- 
ness (20.). 

These haggadot concerning the leviathan are in- 
terpreted as allegories by all the conmentators with 
the exception of some ultraconservatives like Bahya 
ben Asher (“Shulhan Arba‘,” ch. iv., p. 9, col. 3). 
According to Maimonides, the banquct is anallusion 
to the spiritual enjoyment of the intellect (commen- 
tary on Sanh. i.). The name, he says, is derived 
from my (“to join,” “to unite”), and designates 

an imaginary monster in which are 

Symbolical combined the most various animals 
Inter- (“Moreh,” iii, ch. xxiii.). In the 
pretation. cabalistic literature the “ piercing levi- 
athan” and the “crooked leviathan” 

(Isa. xxvii. 1), upon which the haggadah concerning 
the hunting of the animal is based, are interpreted 
as referring to Satan-Samael and his spouse Lilith 
(*‘Emek ha-Melek,” p. 180a), while Kimhi, Abra- 
vanel, and others consider the expressions to be allu- 
sions to the destruction of the powers which are 
hostile to the Jews (comp. Manasseh ben Israel, 
“Nishmat Hayyim,” p. 48; see also Kohut, “ Aruch 
Completum,” ¢7v. “ Leviathan,” for other references, 
and his essay in “Z. D. M. G.” vol. xxi.. p. 590, for 
the parallels in Persian literature). The haggadic 
sayings obtained a hold on the imagination of the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


39 


sets, Who introduced allusions to the banquet of 
VE “> 


aathan joto the liturgy. 
the levine = ad I. Br. 


ae Tn Apocryphal Literature: Both leviathan 
and behemoth are prominent in Jewish eschatology. 
In the Book of Enoch (ix. 7-9), Enoch says: 

yn that day [the day of judgment} two monsters will be 


ae a female monster, named * Leviathan,” to dwell in 
Pre cone 


depths of the ocean over the fountains of the waters; but 
ie male is called ‘ Bebemoth,’ who occupies with his breast a 
Lee wilderness named * Dendain’ [read **the land of Naid” 
ee LXX., €¥ ¥0 Naié = 31) pia, Gen. iv. 16], on the east of 
ae garden, where the elect and the righteons dwell. And I] 
. sought that other angel that he should show me the might of 
ee monsters; how they were produced on one day, the one 
reine placed in the depth of the sea and the other in the main 
jand of the wilderness. And he spake to me: ‘Thou son of 
man. dost seek here to know what is hidden?’”’ (Charles, 
“ Book of Enoch,” p. 155; comp. ** the secret chambers of levia- 
than “ which Elihu b. Berakel the Buzite will disclose, Cant. R. 
i. 4). 

According to II Esdras vi. 49-58, God created on 
the fifth day the two great monsters, leviathan and 
behemoth, and He separated them because the sev- 
epth part of the world which was assigned to the 
water could not hold them together, and He gave to 
the behemoth that part which was dried up on the 
third day and had the thousand mountains which, 
according to Ps. i. 10, as understood by the hag- 
gadists (“the behemoth [A. V. “cattle”] upon a 
thousand hills”; comp. Lev. R. xxii.; Num. R. 
xxi.; and Job xl. 20), furnish behemoth with the 
necessary food. To the leviathan God gave the 
seventh part of the earth filled with water; and He 
reserved it for the future to reveal by whom and at 
what time the leviathan and the behemoth should 
be eaten. 

In the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch, xxix. 4, also, 
the time is predicted when the behemoth will come 
forth from his seclusion on land and the leviathan 
out of the sea, and the two gigantic monsters, 
created on the fifth day, will serve as food for the 

4 e y e 
elect who will survive in the days of the Messiah. 

Belemoth and leviathan form in the Gnostic sys- 
tem of the Ophites and others two of the seven cir- 
cles or stations Which the soul has to pass in order 
to be purged and to attain bliss (Hippolytus, “ Ad- 
versus Omnes Heereses,” v. 21; Origen, “Contra 
Celsum,” vi, 23). As if the meatof the “ wild ox” 
behemoth and the fish leviathan were not deemed 

sufficient for the great banquet of the 


Among righteous in the future, a fowl was 
the added, 7.e., the “ziz” (A. V. “the wild 
Gnostics. beasts” of the field), mentioned in Ps. 


l. 11 after the account of the bele- 
moth in verse 10, and understood by the Rabbis to 
signify a gigantic bird (B. B. 73b), Thus the Apoc- 
alvpse cf Simeon b. Yohai (Jellinck, “B. H.” iii. 76) 
as the three animals, the monster ox behemoth, 
the fish leviathan, and the gigantic bird ziz, pre- 
pared for the great banquet. This tradition, how- 
ever, indicates Persian influence, for it is of the 
Parsee cosmology that the existence of such primeval 
representatives of the classes of animals is a part, 
ae four such species mentioned in “ Bunda- 
peer an eae (1) “the serpent-like Kar fish, the 
Abur ) the water, the greatest of the creatures of 
< ene corresponding to the leviathan; (2) 

© three-legeed ass Khara, standing in the midst of 


Leviathan 
Levin, Hirschel 


the ocean (“ Yasna,” xli. 28); it is mentioned in the 
Talmud asthe“ unicorn keresh,” “ tigras” (z.e., “ thri- 
gat” = ‘three-legged ”), the gazel of the heights 
(Hul. 59b), and forms, under the name “ Harish,” in 
Mohammedan eschatology a substitute for behemoth 
and leviathan (see Wolff, “ Muhaminedanische Es- 
chatologie,” 1872, pp. 174, 181); (8) the ox Hadha- 
yosh, from which the food of immortality is pre- 
pared, and which forms the parallel of behemoth; 
and (4) the bird Chamrosh, the chief of the birds, 
which lives on the summit of Mount Alburz (comp. 
“ Bundahis,” xix. 15); compare also Simurgh (Aves- 
ta “Saena Meregha,” eagle-bird, griffin, Hebraized 
“Bar Yokneh ”), the fabulous giant-bird, which the 
Rabbis identified with ziz (Gee Windischman, “ Zo- 
roastrische Studien,” pp. 91-93; West, “ Pahlavi 
Texts,” in Max Miller, “S. B. E.” v. 65-71). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries of Dillmann, Delitzsch, and 
others on Job: Gunkel, Schépfung und Chaos, Gottingen, 
1895; Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judenthum, ii. 296 et seq., 
873 et seqg.; Weber, System der Altsynagogalen T heolagie, 
1880, p. 195; Hastings, Dict. Bible; Cheyne and Black, Kn- 
cyc. Bibl. 
E. G. H. K, 
LEVIN, EMANUEL BORISOVICH: Rus- 

sian teacher and communal worker; born at Minsk 

Dec. 15, 1820; educated at the Molodechensk school 

for the nobility (1836-41). Hetaughtin G. Klaczko’s 

private school at Wilna from 1842 to 1844, and at 

the public schools of Minsk from 1846 to 1851. 

Having passed his examinations in 1848, he received 

an appointment in the Jewish government school 

at Proskurov, Podolia (1851-62), and subsequently 

in the rabbinical school at Jitomir (1853-57). 

In 1859 Levin settled in St. Petersburg, where he 
became one of the first members of the Society for 
the Promotion of Culture Among the Jews of Rus- 
sia, of which he acted as secretary until 1872, when 
he became an honorary member. Since 1895 Levin 
has been a member of the historical committee of 
the society and one of the collaborators of the 
“Regesty i Nadpisi.” Levin was elected a member 
of the Imperial Russian Geographical Society in 
1870; and he is also a member of the Society for the 
Promotion of Commerce and Industry. In 1895 
Levin was made an honorary citizen by the Russian 
government for his “Code of Laws Concerning the 
Jews,” 

Levin’s other works include: a Russian grammar 
in Hebrew, Wilna, 1846; “Moiseyevo Brachnoye 
Pravo,” St. Petersburg, 1875, on the marriage laws 
according to the Talmud and the rabbinical litera- 
ture, translated from Hebrew sources: “Svod 
Uzakoneni o Yevreyakh, 7b. 1885; “ Perechen 
Ogranichitelnykh Zakonov o Yevreyakh v Yevre- 
yakh o Rossii” (24. 1890), both on the disabilities of 
the Jews in Russia; “Sboraik Ogranichitelnikh Za- 
konov o Yevreyakh,” 72). 1902, on the same subject. 
He published also the text of the Pirke Abot with 
Russian translation and notes, 2b. 1868. 


H.R, S. M. G. 


LEVIN, HIRSCHEL BEN ARYEH LOB 
(called also Hirschel Lébel and Hart Lyon): 
German rabbi; born at Rzeszow, Galicia, in 1721; 
died at Berlin Aug. 26, 1800. His father (known also 
as Saul Levin) was rabbi at Amsterdam; and on 
his mother’s side Hirschel was a nephew of Jacob 


Levin, Hirschel 
Levin, Poul Theodor 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 40 





Emden, Although he occupied himself also with 
secular sciences and philosophy, Levin paid special] 
attention to Hebrew grammar and literature, and 
composed several Hebrew poems. Levin was a dis- 
tinguished Talmudist, and in 1751, when he was only 
thirty years old, he threw himself into the struggle 
between Emden and Eybeschiitz, naturally siding 
with the former. His epistles against Eybeschititz 
made such an impression 
that in 1756 he was elected 
chief rabbi of the Loudon 
congregation of German 
and Polish Jews. In 1760 
Jacob Kimhi having pub- 
lished at Altona a respon- 
sum in which he charged 
the London butchers 
(“shohetim”) with negli- 
gence in regard to their 
duties, Levin warmly de- 
fended them. The ward- 
ens of his synagogue, 
however, refused him per- 
mission to make a public 
reply to Kimhi’s charges ; 
he therefore resigned in 
1763, and accepted the 
rabbinate of Halberstadt. It would appear, from 
the letter in which the community of Halberstadt 
offered him the rabbinate, that Levin’s resignation 
was occasioned by the neglect of Biblical and Tal- 
mudic studies by the Jews of London. He after- 
ward became rabbi of Mannheim; and in 1772 he 
was appointed chief rabbi of Berlin. He was a 
great friend of Mendelssohn. 

In 1778 Levin gave his approbation to Mendels- 
solin’s German translation of the Pentateuch. In 
the preceding year the Prussian government had or- 
dered Levin to make a résumé in German of the Jew- 
ish civil laws, such as those on inheritance, guardian- 
ship, and marriage, and to present it to the royal 
department of justice. Levin, not having a thorough 
knowledge of the German language, applied to 
Mendelssohn to do the work. Mendelssohn, accord- 
ingly, wrote his “ Ritualgesetze der Juden,” printed 
under Levin’s superintendence, 1778. 

Despite his toleration and enlightenment, Levin, 
instigated by the rabbis of Glogau and Lissa, began 
in 1782 to persecute Naphtali Herz Wessely for 
his “Dibre Shalom we-Emet” (Landshuth, “ Tole- 
dot Ansbe ha-Shem,” p. 85; Kayserling, “ Mendels- 
sohn,” p. 807). He prohibited the printing of that 
work, and insisted upon the expulsion of the author 
from Berlin. But Wessely’s friends prevailed on 
Levin to desist from attacking Wessely, while Men- 
delssohn at the same time gave Levin to understand 
that the press in Germany was free to everybody. 

Levin wrote: Epistles against Ey beschitz, printed 
by one of Emden’s pupils, in the “Sefat Emet u- 
Leshon Zehorit,” Altona, 1752; glosses on Pirke 
Abot, printed with Emden’s commentary to Pirke 
Abot, Berlin, 1884; notes to the “Sefer Yuhasin ” 
and “Sefer ha-Hinnuk,” some of which were pub- 
lished in Kobak’s “Jeschurun.” Some of his poetry 
was published in “ Ha-Maggid ” (xiv.) under the title 
“Nahalat Zebi.” Finally, three manuscript volumes 





Hirsche! Levin. 


of his responsa are to be found in the library of the 
London Bet ha-Midrash, bearing the numbers 24 
to 26. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gritz, Geseh. 2d ed., xi. 41, 89, 151: H. Adler, 
in Publ. Anglo-Jew. Hist. evhibition, 1887, pp. 2800 et seq. 
Landshuth, Toledot Arshe hha-Shem, pp. 72-78: Kayserling, 
Moses Mendelssohn, pp. 282, 291, 8il: Auerbach, Gesch. dep 
Tsraelitischen Gemeinde Hatherstadt, pp. 89 et seq.. Halber. 
stadt, 1866; Fuenn, Aeneset Yisrael, p. 204. . 

S. S. M. SEL. 

LEVIN, ISRAEL SOLOMON: Danish gram- 
marian and linguist; born in Randers 1810; died 
in Copenhagen 1883. He graduated from Randers 
high school, and afterward was employed as editor 
of a critical journal and as a translator of novels, 

Levin was the author of several works on Danish 
grammar, notably “Dansk Lyd og Kjénskere” 

(1844), and of two novels, “Krigsfortellinger for 

Menigmand” and “Nogle Trek af Livet i Hamw- 

burg ” (1848). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biogratish Lexicon. 


s. F.C, 


LEVIN, JACOB: Galician Hebraist; born at 
Brody in 1844. In 1865 he became coeditor with 
Werber on the Hebrew paper “‘Ibri Ancki,” in 
which he published a series of articles on the posi- 
tion of the Jews in Russia before Alexander IT. In 
1880 he produced a didactic poem entitied “ Hitpat- 
tehut Tebel,” on the evolution of religion and phi- 
losophy. Levin had previously translated into He- 
brew Schiller’s * Die Braut von Messina” under the 
title “ Medanim Ben Ahim ” (Brody, 1868), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Sokolov, Sefer ha-Zikkaron, p. 63, Warsaw, 

1889; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 202. 

s. M. SEL. 

LEVIN, JOSHUA HOSCHEL BEN ELI- 
JAH ZEEB: Lithuanian Talmudist and author; 
born at Wilna July 22, 1818; died at Paris Nov. 15, 
1888. After studying Talmud and rabbinics under 
Elijah Kalischer, Levin settled in Volozhin, where 
he lectured on Talmud and wrote several works. 
In 1871 he was called to the rabbinate of Praga, 
near Warsaw. Toward the end of his life Levin 
went to Paris with the intention of procecding thence 
to the Holy Land; but at the request of Israel Sa- 
lant he remained in the French capital and became 
preacher for the Russo-Polish community there. 

Levin was the author of many works, of which 
the following have been published at Wilna: “ Hag- 
gahot,” notes on the Midrash Rabbah; “‘Aliyyot 
Eliyahu” (1856), a biography of Elijah Wilna; 
“Ma‘yene Yehoshua‘,” a commentary on Pirke 
Abot, printed in the “Ruah Hayyim” of Hayyim 
Volozhin (1859); “ Ziyyun Yehoshua’ ” (1859), a com- 
plete concordance to both Talmuds; “ Tosefot Sheni 
le-Ziyyon,” glosses to the Mishnah; “ Peletat Sofe- 
rim” (1863), noveile and essays; “ Dabar be-‘Itto* 
(1878), discussions and explanations on halakie 
matters. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Univ. Isr. xxxix. 156; Ha-Meliz, 1883, col. 

1423; Ha-Asif, i., section 1, p. 141. 

Ss. 8. M. Set. 

LEVIN, JUDAH LOB (JEHALEL): He- 
brew poet; born at Minsk, Russia, 1845. He stud- 
ied Talmud under Rabbi Hayyim Selig and other 
prominent rabbis. At the age of sixteen he read 
through the entire Talmud. He was then married to 


41 


the daughter of a Hasid; and under the influence of 
his new surroundings he began the study of the 
Zohar and other mystical literature. In 1868 he 
went to Kiev as teacher in the house of Lazar 
Brodski, where he studied German and Russian. 
He was also made treasurer of the Brodski flour- 
ills. In 1887 he was appointed treasurer of the 
Brodski sugar-refinery in Tomashpol, Podolia, where 
he is now (1904) residing. 

Levin began to write Hebrew poetry at the age 
of ten; and he has contributed extensively during 
the last thirty years to the Hebrew periodicals “ Ha- 
Veliz,” “ Ha-Zefirah,” “Ha-Maggid,” “Ha-Asif,” 
and “ Ha-Shahar.” His first collection of verse, en- 
titled “Sifte Renanim” (Jitomir, 1871), contains 
mostly occasional poems. In 1877 his “ Kishron ha- 
Ma‘aseh ” appeared, first in “ Ha-Shahar ” (vols. vii., 
xviii.), and then in book form, It contains four large 
poems throwing light on the social condition of the 
Jews of Russia. They are socialistic in tendency. 
In another volume of “Wa-Shahar” (1xxx.) he pub- 
lished “ Elhanan,” an epic poem in three parts, also 
concerning the social condition of the Russian Jewse 
Levin’s style is affected and lacks brilliancy. In 
1883 he translated Disracli’s “Tancred” into He- 
brew under the title “ Nes la-Goyim.” The transla- 
tion was much criticized by Frischman in “ ‘AI ha- 
Nes,” Warsaw, 1883. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels.; Lippe, Biblio- 


graphisches Lericon; Klausner, Novo-Yevreiskaya Litera- 
tura; Frischman, Tohu wa-Bohu, Warsaw, 1888. 


H. R. J. G L. 


LEVIN, LEWIS CHARLES: American poli- 
tician and writer; boru at Charleston, 8. C., Nov. 
10, 1808; died in Philadelphia March 14, 1860. 
When still a youth he went to Woodville, Miss., 
where he became a school-teacher and studied law. 
After having been wounded in a duel he left that 
town and practised law successively in Maryland, 
Kentucky, Louisiana, and Pennsylvania. In 1888 
he settled in Philadelphia and was there admitted to 
the bar. There he edited the “Temperance Advo- 
cate,” and soon became known as a writer and 
speaker in the interest of the Temperance party. 
He was instrumental in the formation of the Na- 
tive American party in 1848, and founded in its 
support in Philadelphia the “Sun,” of which daily 
paper he became the editor. In 1845 he was elected 
to Congress, retaining his seat until 1851. He be- 
came a member of several committees and was 
chairman of the committee on naval affairs. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. Adler, in American Jewish Year Book, 
5661 (1900-1). ; 
A. Py 0. 


LEVIN, MENDEL (called also Lefin and 
Satanower) : Polish scholar and author; born in 
Satanow, Podolia, about 1741; died in Mikolayev, 
in the same province, 1819. He was educated for a 
Talmudist, but became interested in secular studies 
after reading J. S. Delmedigo’s “ Elim,” which 
opened for him the hitherto unknown world of 
Sclence, He went to Berlin, and there, being at- 
'racted by the brilliant circle of Jewish scholars of 
. hich Moses Mendelssohn was the central figure, he 
remained for several years. From Berlin he went to 

Tody, where he exerted much influence over Perl, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levin, Hirschel 
Levin, Poul Theodor 


—:.—_—— 


Krochmal, and other early representatives of the 
HAskaALan in Galicia. Later he lived in the pala- 
tial home of Joshua Zeitlin in Ustye, government of 
Moghilef, at the same time that BARUCH BEN Jacob 
resided there. He removed thence to Mikolayev, 
which belonged to the estate of Prince Adam Czar- 
toryski, who engaged himas teacher for his children. 
M. Letteris saw an essay on Kant’s philosophy writ- 
ten by Mendel in French for Czartoryski. 

Levin’s works are: “ Moda‘ la-Binah,” with an 
approbation by Mendelssohn (Berlin, 1789); “ Re- 
fu’ot ha-‘Am” (Zolkiev, 1794; 2d ed. Lemberg, 1851), 
popular medicine translated from the French by 
Tisot; “ Heshbon ha-Nefesh” (Lemberg, 1809; Wilna, 
1814; Warsaw, 1852), practical ethics, after Frank- 
lin; “Masse‘ot ha-Yam ” (Zolkiev, 1818), travels on 
the sea, after Campe. His paraphrase of 'Tibbon’s 
translation of the “Moreh Nebukim” in popular 
rabbinical Hebrew was published by M. Suchas- 
tover (Zolkiev, 1829), and his introduction to that 
work, entitled “Elon Moreh,” by H. 8. Slonimski 
(Odessa, 1867). Mendel was also the author of a 
Yiddish translation of Proverbs (Tarnopol, 1816), 
which innovation called forth a satirical work 
against him by Tobiah Feder (“Kol Mehazezim,” 
Berdychev, 1816), He translated also Ecclesiastes 
into the same dialect; but the work was not pub- 
lished till long after his death (Odessa, 1878). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, AKiryah Neemanah, pp. 247-278, Wil- 

na, 1860; idem, Safah le-Ne’emanim, p. 140, Wilna, 1881]; 

Ha-Meassef (Letteris ed., 1862), i. 96-97; Stanislavski, Men- 

det Levin, in Voskhod, 1881, No. 3, pp. 116-127; Zeitlin, Bibl. 

Post-Mendels. pp. 202-204. 

H. R. P. Wr. 

LEVIN, MORITZ: German rabbi; bdérn 1843 
at Wongrowitz, Posen. He studied at the Univer- 
sity of Berlin, and was prepared for his rabbinical 
career by private teachers. After officiating as rab- 
bi for a short time at Zurich, he went in 1872 in a 
similar capacity to Nuremberg. Since 1884 he has 
been preacher of the Reform congregation in Berlin. 

Levin is the author of: “Gott und Secle nach Jii- 
discher J.ehre,” Zurich, 1871; “ Der Gottesdienst des 
Herzens. Israclitisches Gebetbuch fiir Oeffentiiche 
und Privatandacht,” 2 vols., 1872; “Lehrbuch der 
Biblischen Geschichte und Literatur,” 83d ed., 1897; 
“Tberia,” Berlin, 1892; “Bar Kochba,” 1892 (2d 
ed., 1904); “ Lehrbuch der Jiidischen Geschichte und 
Literatur,” 3d ed., 1900; “Die Israelitische Reli- 
gionslehre, Systematisch Dargestellt,” 1892 (2d ed., 
1900); “Die Reform des Judentums. Festschrift 
zur Feier des 50-Jihrigen Bestehens der Jiidischen 
Reformgemeinde in Berlin,” 1895. S. 


LEVIN, POUL THEODOR: Danish author; 
born in Copenhagen June 17, 1869; educated at the 
University of Copenhagen (Ph.D. 1898). Levin, 
who has become widely known as a literary critic, 
has written two dramatic works—“ Antoinette” and 
“Sejr” (Copenhagen, 1895 and 1899). In 1894 he 
published “Dansk Litteraturhistoric i Omrids,” a 
history of Danish literature, followed later by sev- 
eral general essays in the same field, among which 
are “Ovid’s Ungdomsdigtning ” (1897) and Ene 
og Steeder ” (1899). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salmonsen’s Store Illustrerede Konversa- 
tions-Lexikon. 


s. F. €, 


Levin, Rahel 
Levinsohn 


LEVIN (ROBERT), RAHEL ANTONIE 
FRIEDERIKE: German writer; born at Berlin 
June 19, 1771; died there March 7, 1883. Her home 
life was uncongenial, her father, a wealthy jeweler, 
being a_ strong - willed 
man and ruling his fam- 
ily despotically. She 
was very intimate with 
Dorothea and Henriette, 
daughters of Moses 
Mendelssohn. Together 
with them she knew 
Henriette Herz, with 
whom she later became 
most intimately associ- 
ated, moving in the same 
intellectual sphere. Ra- 
hel’s home became the 
meeting-place of men 
like Schlegel, Schelling, 
Steffens, Schack, Schilei- 
ermacher, Alexander and 
Wilhelm von Humboldt, 
Lamotte-Fouqué, Baron Briickmann, Ludwig Tieck, 
Jean Paul Richter, and F. von Gentz. During a 
visit to Carlsbad in 1795 she was introduced to 
Goethe, whom she again saw in 1815, at Frank fort- 
on-the-Main. 

After the death of her father in 1806 she lived 
successively in Paris, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Ham- 
burg, Prague, and Dresden. This period was one 
of misfortune for Germany; Prussia was reduced to 
a small kingdom and her king was in exile. Secret 
societies were formed in every part of the country 
with the object of throwing off the tyranny of Na- 
poleon; Rahel herself belonged to one of these soci- 
eties. In 1814 she married, in Berlin, Karl August 
Varnhagen von Ense (b. Feb. 21, 1785, at Dissel- 
dorf; d. at Berlin Oct. 10, 1858), after having been 
converted to Christianity. At the time of their mar- 
riage, Varnhagen, who had fought in the Anstrian 
army against the French, belonged to the Prussian 
diplomatic corps, and their house at Vienna becaine 
the niceting-place of the Prussian delegates to the 
Vienna Congress. She accompanied her husband in 
1815 to Vienna, and in 1816 to Carlsruhe, where he 
was Prussian representative. After 1819 she again 
lived in Berlin, where Varnhagen had taken up his 
residence after having been retired from his diplo- 
matic position. 

Though not a productive writer herself, Rahel 
was the center of a circle of eminent writers, schol- 
ars, and artists in the Prussian capital. A few of her 
essaysappeared in print in “ Das Morgenblatt,” “ Das 
Schweizerische Museum,” and “Der Gesellschaf- 
ter,” and in 1880 her “ Denkblitter einer Berlinerin ” 
was published in Berlin. Her correspondence with 
David Veit and with Varnhagen von Ense was pub- 
lished in Leipsic, in 1861 and 1874-%5 respectively. 

Rahei always showed the greatest interest in her 
former coreligionists, endeavoring by word and 
deed to better their position, especially during the 
anti-Semitic outburst in Germany in 1819. On the 
day of her funeral Varnhagen sent a considerable 
sum of money to the Jewish poor of Berlin. 

The poet Ludwig Robert was a brother of Rahel, 





Rahei Levin. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 42 





and with him she corresponded extensively; her 

sister Rosa was married to Karl Asser. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Schmidt-Weissenfels, Rahel und Ihre Zeit, 
Leipsic, 1857; Mrs. Vaughan Jennings, Rahel, Her Life and 
Letters, London, 1876; Assing. Aus Rahels Herzensleben, 
ib. 1877; Kayserling, Die Jtidischen Frauen, pp. 208 et seq,, 
Leipsic, 1879’: Varnhagen, Rahel, ein Buch cles Andenkeng 
fiir Ihre Freunde, Berlin, 1833 ; idem, Galerie von Bild- 
qissen aus Rahet's Umgang und Brief wechsel, Leipsic, 1836; 
Berdrow, Rahel Varnhagen: Ein Lebens- und Zeitbild, 
Stuttgart, 1900. 

s. F. T. H. 

LEVIN, ZEBI HIRSCH. See Levin, Hir- 
SCHEL BEN ARYEH LOB. 

LEVINSOHN, ANNA HENRIETTE: Da- 
nish operatic singer; born in Copenhagen Jan. 8, 
1839; died there March 22, 1899. She made her dé- 
but at the Kongelige Theater in Copenhagen on 
Dec. 20, 1860, when she, as Nannette in “Den Lille 
Rédhette,” completely won the hearts of her audi- 
ence by her sympathetic impersonation of the guile- 
less girl. She became “royal actress” in 1866, 
and was, on her retirement in 1879, appointed 
court singer (“Kongelig Kammersangerinde”), 
Her repertoire included: Hostna in “ Barberen,” Su- 
senna in “ Figaro’s Bryllup,” Papagena in “ Trylle- 
fléjten,” Anna in “Jegerbruden,” Benjamin in 
“Joseph og Hans Brédre,” Szebel in “ Faust,” and 
Venus in “ Tannhiuser.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salmonsen’s Store Ilustrerede Ionversa- 
tions-Lexicon. 
8. F.C. 

LEVINSOHN, ISAAC BAER: Russian-He- 
brew scholar and writer; born at Kremenetz Oct. 18, 
1788; died there Feb. 12, 1860. His father, Judah 
Levin, was a grandson of Jekuthiel Solomon, who 
settled in Kremenetz and acquired considerable 
wealth, and a son of Isaac, who had married the 
daughter of Zalman Cohen, famed for his wealth 
and scholarship. ULevinsohn’s father was a wealthy 
merchant and was popular among Jews and Gen- 
tiles alike. He was a master of Polish, wrote fluent- 
ly in classical Hebrew (at that time a rare accom- 
plishment), and was a thorough Talmudic scholar. 
At the age of three Levinsohn was sent to the he- 
der, where he soon manifested unusual aptitude 
for learning; and at nine he composed a cabalistic 
work that elicited the praise of scholars and rabbis 
(“Bet Yehudah,” ii. 126, note 2). At ten he was 
versed in Talmudic lore, and knew the Old Testa- 
ment by heart. He also studied and mastered the 
Russian language, an unusual achievement for a 
Russian Jew of that time. Thanks to his great 
mental power and industry, he rapidly familiarized 
himself with the rabbinical literature. At eighteen 
he married and settled in Radzivilov, supporting 
himself by teaching and translating ; his married life, 
however, was unhappy, and he divorced his wife. 

Some of Levinsohn’s first literary efforts were in 
the domain of Hebrew poetry. Among others, he 
wrote a patriotic poem on the expulsion of the French 

from Russia, which was transmitted to 

His Verse. the minister of the interior by General 
Giers, the commandant of the Radzi- 

vilov garrison. Levinsohn himself regarded his 
verses aS mere literary exercises, did not attempt 
to print them, and the greater part of them were 
lost. Excessive study brought on nervous dis- 
orders, and Levinsohn journeyed to Brody, then the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


43 


of the Jewish Haskalah, in order to consult 
centel - 1 ener ee ae 
the local physicians. There the future reforinet a 
the Russian Jews found a congenial atmosphere 
in the circle of the Maskilim. He soon made 
acquaintance of Dr. Isaac Erter, the Hebrew 
and later of Solomon L6éb Rappoport. 
Though en gaged as a bookkeeper in the local bank, 
pe found time to continue his studies. Before long 
he passed the teacher’s examinations and was ap- 
pointed to teach Hebrew at the gymnasium of Tar- 
nopol. There he soon became intimate with the 
scholar Joseph Perl, through whose influence he se- 
cured an instructorship at the Hebrew college of 
Brody. dee 

Levinsohn’s new position brought him into close 
relations with Nachman Krochmal of Zolkiev, an 
authority ou all questions of rabbinical learning and 

Jewish custom. In 1817 he submitted 

His to Krochmal his first critical studies, 
Writings. entitled “Ha-Mazkir,” and Krochmal 
was so favorably impressed with the 

work that he offered to contribute toward the ex- 
pense of publication. Unfortunately, it was never 
printed, and only a part of it was incorporated in 
“Te uddah ” and “ Bet Yehudah.” In 1820 Levinsohn 
prepared, for the benefit of the Russian youth, the 
first Hebrew grammar, entitled “Yesode Lashon 
Russiya.” The necessary means being lacking, this 
was never published and the manuscript was lost. 

About this time he wrote a satire on the Hasi- 
dim entitled “ Dibre Zaddikim.” Returning to Kre- 
menetz in the same year, he began his “ Te‘uddah 
be- Yisrael,” a work destined to leave an indelible 
impression on a Whole generation of Russian Jews. 
Tt was finished in 1828, but was not published until 
1828. The book attempted to solve many problems 
of contemporary Jewish life in Russia. It urged 
the study of the Scriptures before the Talmud, and 
the necessity of studying secular languages, partic- 
ularly that of the Fatherland. It urged also the 
study of science and literature, and the great impor- 
tance for the Jews of engaging in agricultural and 
industrial work. It strongly counseled the abandon- 
ing of petty trading and of other uncertain sources 
of livelihood. 

Levinsohn’s good advice, however, did not please 
the Hasidim, who opposed him in many ways and so 
embittered his existence 
that he was compelled to 
leave Kremenetz.  Re- 
pairing to Berdychev, he 
became private tutor in 
the family of a wealthy 
Jew, and, gathering 
about hima circle of pro- 
Sressive friends, he or- 
ganized a society for the 
Promotion of culture. 
Regarding it as his spe- 
Clal mission to carry en- 
lightenment tothe young 
Sencration, he resided 
successively in Ostrog, 
Nemiroy, and Tulchin. On his way to the last- 
peers Place Levinsohn stopped at Kaminka, the 

ate of Prince Witgenstein, the Russian field-mar- 


the 
satirist, 


{Isaac Bauer Levinsohn. 





Levin, Rahel 
Levinsohn 


Shal. When the prince heard of Levinsohn’'s arrival 
he invited him to his house, assigned him a suite of 
rooms, and kept him there through the entire sum- 
mer. The ficld-marshal liked to pass his evenings 
in conversation with the learned Jew, and often fol- 
lowed the latter’s advice. 

In 1823 Levinsohn was compelled by failing health 
to return to Kremenetz. Soon after his arrival there 
he was confined to his bed by a sickness that kept 
him bedridden for twelve years. Notwithstanding 
this he never resigned himself to mental inactivity, 
and during these long years of suffering he made 
himself familiar with Arabic, Greek, and Syriac, 
and studied the classics, political economy, and phi- 
losophy. 

In 1827, a year before the appearance of “ Te‘ud- 
dah,” Levinsohn presented the manuscript, with an 
explanatory statement, to the Russian government, 
which accepted it with much favor, and awarded 
Levinsohn, on the representations of D. N. Bludov, 

a thousand rubles “for a work in He- 
Questioned brew having for its object the moral 
by Prince education of the Jewish people.” In 

Lieven. the same year the minister of public 

instruction, Prince Lieven, submitted 
to Levinsohn thirty-four questions on Jewish religion 
and history, among them the following: “ What is 
the Talmud?” “Who was the author of it?” 
“When, where, and in what language was it writ- 
ten?” “Have the Jews other books of such author- 
ity?” “Is there anything sensible in the Talmud? 
It is stated that it is full of improbable legends and 
fables.” “How could the authors of the Talmud 
permit themselves to add to, or detract from, the 
commandments of the Torah, which forbids that?” 
“What is the object of the numerous rites that con- 
sume so much useful time?” “Is it true that the 
Jews are the descendants of those Pharisees whom 
the lawgiver of the Christians had accused of lying 
and superstition?” “Is it true that the Talmud for- 
bids the Jews the study of foreign languages and 
science, as Well as the pursuit of agricultural occu- 
pations?” “What is Hasidism, and who was its 
founder?” “In what towns mainly do the Hasi- 
dim reside?” “Do the Jews possess schools or 
learned books?” “How do the Jewish masses re- 
gard their schools?” “Can the condition of the 
Jews be improved? and, if so, by what means?’ 
“What Messiah is it that the Jews are expecting? ” 
“Ts it true that the Jews expect to rule the entire 
world when the Messiah arrives, and that members 
of other religions will be excluded from partici- 
pation in the after-life?” “ITow can a Jew be ad- 
mitted into Christian society and be accorded full 
civic rights When he keeps himself aloot from the 
Christians and takes no interest in the welfare of 
the country where he resides?” Levinson referred 
the minister to his “Te‘uddah” and to other works 
in various languages, transmitted to him concise 
answers to his questions, and promised to write a 
book in which these questions would be discussed 
in detail. 

In 1828 “ Te‘uddah ” saw the light. “It was not the 
yearning for fame,” says Levinsohn in the preface, 
“that impelled me to write this book. . Friends 
seeking truth and light asked me to point out to 


Levinsohn ; 
Levirate Marriage 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


44 





them the true way of life; they wish to know what. 
learning, aside from the Talmud and its commen- 
taries, it is necessary for a Jew to acquire for the 
perfection and refinement of his nature as a man 
and a Jew.” 

Levinsohn now undertook his larger work, “ Bet 
Yehudah,” which was “to expose to Christian eyes 
the world of Jewish spiritual life founded on the 

principles of highest morality, a world 

Scope of then unknown to Russian Christians.” 

His ‘Bet He wished, also, to make his work of 
Yehudah.” educational value to the Jewish peo- 
ple, so that uninstructed coreligionists 
would see Judaisin in its trne light. At the same 
time he found himself obliged to exercise great care 
in the treatment of the subject in order to avoid 
creating undue antagonism. Levinsohn presents in 
his “ Bet Yehudah” a wonderfully clear and logical 
exposition of Jewish religious philosophy. Accord- 
ing to him the Jewish religion may be summed up 
in two principles of belief: faith in one God, which 
involves the negation of idol-worship; and love of 
one’s neighbor. He shows by numerous citations 
that the latter means the love not only of one Jew for 
another, but the love fur any neighbor, irrespective 
of faith. He presents a history of the various Jewish 
sects, enumerates the contributions of the Jews to 
learning and civilization, and at the end suggests a 
plan for the reorganization of Jewish education in 
Russia. He urges the necessity of founding rabbin- 
ical seminaries fashioned after the German institu- 
tions, training the Jewish youth in religious and 
secular learning, opening elementary Jewish schools 
throughout the Pale, abolishing the institution of 
melammedim, and establishing agricultural and in- 
dustrial schools. 

“Bet Yehudah ” exerted a powerful influence on 
the Jews of Russia and gave a plan of action to the 
progressive elements in the Russian Jewry. The 
book acquired renown outside of Russia also, It 
was trauslated into Polish, and the scholar Geiger 
read several chapters of it before an audience in the 
Breslau synagogue. But though “Bet Yehudah” 
was completed in 1829, it remained unpublished 
until 1838. | 

About this time the Jewish community of Zaslavl 
in Volhynia was accused of ritual murder; many 

families were imprisoned, and the en- 


Refutes tire community was in despair. Lev- 
Charges insohn’s opponents then laid aside 
of Blood their enmity and turned to him as the 


Accusation. only man capable of proving the fal- 

| sity of the accusation. In spite of his 
sickness Levinsohn began his “ Efes Dammim,” in, 
defense of the accused Jews. But the necessary 
means not being forthcoming, he was obliged to 
spend his own money in collecting material and in- 
formation. “The purpose of my book,” says Lev- 
insohn, “is to acquit the Jews before the eves of 
Christians, and to save them from the false accusa- 
tion of using Christian blood.” “Efes Dammim ” is 
written in the form of a dialogue between a patri- 
arch of the Greek Church in Jerusalem, Simias, and 
the chief rabbi in the Jewish synagogue there. The 
book shows the remarkable dialectic talent of the 
author. It was completed-in 1884, published in 


1887, republished three times, and was translated 
into English at the time of the “Damascus Affair” 
in 1840, at the instance of Sir Moses Montetiore and 
Crémieux, It was translated also inte Russian 
(1883) and German (1884; another German edition 
appeared in 1892). In another polemical work, 
“Yemin Zidki,” Levinsohn proves the absurdity of 
the accusations against Judaism and the Talmud, 
This work was left by him in manuscript. 

Other polemical works written by Levinsobn are 
“Ahiyyah Shiloni ha-Hozeh ” (Leipsic, 1841) and 
“Ta’ar ha-Sofer ” (Odessa, 1868). “ Ahiyyah Shiloni 
ha-iIozeh ” is directed against the work of the Eng- 
lish missionary McCaul entitled “The Paths of the 
World ” (London, 1839), and constitutes an introduc- 
tion to Levinsohn’s larger work “ Zerubbabel,” com- 
picted in 1858. This latter work was published, in 
part, by hisnephew David Bacr Nathansohn (Leipsic, 
1863); the entire work was published later in Warsaw 
(1876). This work, which occupied twelve years, 
and was continued through sickness and suffering, 
was not only a defense of Judaism, but also an ex- 
position of the value of traditional law in the Jew- 
ish religion, and of the great wisdom and moral 
force of its expounders and teachers. The “Ta‘ar 
ha-Sofer” is directed against the Karaites, 

In addition to these, Levinsohn wrote on Hebrew 
etymology and comparative philology. In this field 

he published * Bet ha-Ozar,” the first 
Levinsohn and second parts of which appeared in 
as a Wilna in 1841; the first part is entitled 
Philologist. “Shorashe Lebanon,” and includes 
studies of Hebrew roots; the second 
part comprises articles on various subjects, and 
“Abne Millu’im,” a supplement to “Bet Yehudah.” 
After Levinsohn’s death Nathansoln published 
“ Toledot Shem” (Warsaw, 1877) and “ Ohole Shem” 
(Warsaw, 1893), both containing philological studies 
arranged in alphabetical order, and also corrections 
of Ben Zeb’s “Ozar ha-Shorashim,” which was re- 
published by Letteris. Levinsohn left a number of 
works in manuscript, including “ Pittuhe Hotam,” 
on the period of the Canticles; “ Yizre El,” miscel- 
laneous essays; “Beer Yizhak,” correspondence 
with contemporary scholars; “ Eshkol ha-Sofer,” 
letters, poetry, and humorous papers. 

Levinsohn jabored assiduously for the well-being 
of his coreligionists in Russia. He worked out and 
submitted to the government various projects for 
the amelioration of the condition of the Jews, such 
as the plan he.submitted to the crown prince Kon- 
stantin in 1828, his memorandum to the minister of 
education in 1831, his project in regard to the cen- 
sorship of Jewish books in 1833, and his plan for 
tle establishment of Jewish coionies in 1837. Nicho- 
las I. gave the last careful consideration. It is 
known, also, that the emperor wrote Levinsohn a 
personal letter in regard to this plan, but its contents 
are not known. The establishment of Jewish agri- 
cultural colonies in Bessarabia in 1838-39 and later 
and the organization of Jewish educational institu- 
tions undoubtedly owed much to Levinsohn’s sug- 
gestions. The government appreciated his services, 
and, besides monetary rewards, offered him impor- 
tant positions, which he declined. The failure of 
his health compelled him to decline also appoint- 


45 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levinsohn ; 
Levirate Marriage 








ment as member of the J ewish commission that sat 
in St. Petersburg in 1843, and in 1853 he again re- 
fused an appointment as member of the special com- 
mission On Jewish affairs. The folowing words 
were inscribed, at his own request, on his tomb- 
stone: “Out of nothing God called me to life. 
Alas, earthly life has passed, aud I shall sleep again 
on the bosom of Mother Nature, as this stone testi- 
fies. I have fought the enemies of God not with 
the sharp sword, but with the Word. That I have 
fought for truth and justice before the Nations, 
‘Gerubbabel’ and ‘Efes Damim’ bear witness.” 
Levinsohn has been called “the Mendelssohn of 
Russia.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 633, Warsaw, 1886; 
ginberg, Isaae Baer Levinsohn, in Galereya Yerrciskikh 
Dyeyatelei, No. 3, St. Petersburg, 1900; Nathansohn, Bio- 


graphical Notes on Levinsohn ; Hausner, I. B. Levinsolin; 
‘Alabin, in Russkaya Starina, 1879, No. d. LR 


LEVINSON-LESSING, FEODOR (FRANZ) 
YULYEVICH: Russian geologist; born 1861. He 
graduated trom the physico-mathematical faculty 
of the University of St. Petersburg in 1888, was 
placed in charge of the geological collection in 1886, 
and was appointed privat-docent at St. Petersburg 
University in 1889. In 1892 he became professor, 
and the next year dean, of the physico-mathemat- 
ical faculty of Yuryev University. Aside from his 
work on petrography he published also essays in 
other branches of geology, the result of scientific 
journeys throughout Russia. In various period- 
icals more than thirty papers have been published 
by him, the most important being the following: 
“Olonetzkaya Diabazovaya Formatziya” (in “ Trudy 
St. Peterburgskavo Obschestva Yestestvovyede- 
niya,” xix.); “O Fosforitnom Chernozyome” (in 
“Trudy Volnoekonomicheskavo Obschestva,” 1890) ; 
“Q Nyckotorykh Khimicheskikh Tipakh Izvyer- 
zhonykh Porod ” (in “ Vyestnik Yestestvoznaniya,” 
1890); “ Geologicheskiya Izslyedovaniya v Guberlin- 
skhikh Gorakh” {in “ Zapiski Mineraluavo Obschest- 
va”); “Die Variolite von Yalguba” (“Tscherm. 
Mineral. Mitt.” vi.); “ Die Mikroskopische Beschaf- 
fenheit des Jordanalit” (¢2. ix.); “Etudes sur le 
Porphirite de Deweboyu” (in “Bulletin de Société 
Belge de Géologie”); “1 et 2 Notes sur la Structure 
des Roches Eruptive ” (¢b.); “ Note sur les Taxites et 
les Roches Elastiques Volcaniques” (72.); “Les 
Ammonée de la Zone &Sporadoceras Munsteri ” (2d.); 
“Petrographisches Lexicon” (2 parts, 1893-95); 
“Tablitzy dlya Mikroskopicheskikh Opredeleni 
Porodoobraznykh Mineralov.” The last was pub- 
lished in English by Gregory. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Entziklopedicheski Slovar. 

H.R. J.G L. 

LEVINSTEIN, GUSTAV: German manufac- 
turer and writer; born in Berlin May, 1842. After 
staduating from the Kéilnisches Gymnasium in Ber- 
lin he went to England, where he and his brothers 
founded an anilin-dye factory at Manchester. Re- 
turning to Berlin, he entered the university and 
Studied philosophy. He owzs factories in southern 
F Tance, though living in Berlin. He has at. various 
times taken up his pen in behalf of Judaism and 
Jewish rights, Of his works the following may be 
Mentioned: “Wissenschaftlicher Antisemitismus,” 


directed against Paulsen (Berlin, 1896); “ Der Glaube 
Israels” (cd. 1896); “Die Taufe” (bd. 1899); “ Pro- 
fessor Paulsen und dic Judenfrage ” (2. 1897); “ Die 
Forderung des Sonntag -Gottesdienstes: Antwort 
auf das Gutachten des Rabbinats und den Beschluss 
der Reprisentanten-Versammlung,” in support of 
supplementary Sunday services (7b. 1898); “ Ueber 
die Erlésung des Judenthums,” against Benediktus 
Levita (7+. 1900); “Professor Ladenburg und der 
Unsterblichkeitsgedanke im Judenthum ” (zd. 1904). 
S. M. K. 


LEVINTHAL, BERNHARD LOUIS: Rus- 
sian-American rabbi; born at Kovno, Russia, May 
12, 1864. He was educated at the rabbinical schools 
of Kovno, Wilna, and Byelostok, and received rab- 
binical diplomas frem Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Spector 
and RabbiSamuel Mohileverin 1888, He emigrated 
to the United States in 1891, and shortly after his 
arrival there was appointed minister of six Russian 
congregationsin Philadelphia. Levinthal helped to 
found various communal institutionsin Philadelphia 
and is vice-president of the Union of Orthodox 
Rabbis of America, and honorary vice-president of 
the Federation of American Zionists. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: American Jewish Year Book, 1903-4, p. 74. 


A. F. H. V. 


LEVIRATE MARRIAGE (Hebr. “yibbum”): 
Marriage with a brother’s widow. This custom is 
found among a large number of primitive peoples, 
a list of which is given by Westermarck (“ History 
of Human Marriage,” pp. 510-514). In some cases 
it is the duty of a man to marry his brother’s widow 
even if slhe’has hac children by the deceased, but in 
most cases it occurs when there are no children, as 
among the Hindus (“ Institutes of Manu,” v. 59-68). 
Among the Hebrews marriage with a brother’s wid- 
ow was forbidden as a general rule (Lev. xviii. 16, 
xx. 21), but was regarded as obligatory (Deut. xxv. 
56) when there was no male issue, and when the two 
brothers had been dwellmg on the same family es- 
tate. The surviving brother could evade the obli- 
gation by the ceremony of Hattzau. The case of 
Ruth is not one of levirate marriage, being connected 
rather with the institution of the Go’EL; but the 
relations of Tamar with her successive husbands and 
with Judah are an instance (Gen. xxxviii.). If the 
levirate union resulted in male issue, the child 
would succeed to the estates of the deceased brother. 
It would appear that later the levirate marriage 
came to be regarded as obligatory only when the 
widow had no children of either sex. The Septua- 
gint translates “ben” (son) in the passage of Deute- 
ronomy by “child,” and the Sadducees in the New 
Testament take it in this sense (Mark xii. 19; comp. 
Josephus, “ Ant.” iv. 8, § 28). 

By Talmudic times the practise of levirate mar- 
riage was deemed objectionable (Bek. 13a), and was 
followed as a matter of duty only. To marry a broth- 
er’s widow for her beauty was regarded by Abba 
Saul as equivalent to incest (Yeb. 89b). Bar Kap- 
para recommends halizah (Yeb. 109a). <A differ- 
ence of opinion appears among the later authorities, 
Alfasi, Maimonides, and the Spanish school gener- 
ally upholding the custom, while R. Tam and the 


Levisohn 
Levita 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 46 





Northern school prefer halizah (Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
Eben ha-‘Ezer, 165). The marriage was not neces- 
sary if the brother left a child by another marriage, 
even if such a child were on the point of death 
(Z.c, 157). A change of religion on the part of the 
surviving brother does not affect the obligation of 
the levirate, or its alternative, the halizah (Isaac 
b. Sheshet, Responsa, i. 2), yet the whole question 
has been profoundly affected by the change from 
polygamy to monogamy due to the takkanah of 
Gershom ben Judah (see MARRIAGE). 

The Samaritans followed aslightly different course, 
which may indicate an earlier custom among the He- 
brews; the former practised the levirate only when 
the woman was betrothed and the marriage had not 
been consummated (Kid. 65b). The Karaites appear 
to have followed the same practise, and Benjamin 
Nahawendi, as well as Elijah Bashyazi, favored it 
(“ Adderet Eliyahu, Nashim,” p. 98a). 

It has been suggested by Kalisch (“ Leviticus,” ii. 
362-363) that the prohibition in Leviticus is of 
later date than the obligation under certain condi- 
tions in Deuteronomy, but it is equally possible that, 
the Leviticus prohibition was a general one, and the 
permission in Deuteronomy only an exception when 
there was no maleissue. J. F. Maclennan (“Studies 
in Ancient History,” i. 109-114) suggested that the 
existence of levirate marriage was due to polyandry 
among the primitive Hebrews, and has been followed 
by Buhl (“Sociale Verhaltnisse,” p. 34) and Barton 
(“Semitic Origins,” pp. 66-67); but this is rather 
opposed to the Hebraic conditions, for it would be 
against the interests of the surviving brother to al- 
low the estate to go out of his possession again. 
There is, besides, no evidence of polyandry among 
the Hebrews. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Geiger, in Jiidische Zeitschrift, 1862, pp. 19-39. 
8. 8. e 


LEVISOHN, GEORGE (MORDECAI GUM- 
PEL LEIVE): German surgeon; born in Berlin 
of a family known as “Schnaber ”; died in Hamburg 
Feb. 10, 1797. He evinced an early aptitude for 
study, and attended the school of David Frankel, 
chief rabbi of Berlin. Levisohn chose the medical 
profession, to which he devoted himself with enthu- 
siasm. He left Germany for England, and, after 
studying under John Hunter, was appointed physi- 
cianat the hospital of the Duke of Portland. Being 
called to Sweden by Gustavus III., he occupied for 
some time the position of professor at the Univer- 
sity of Upsala. Gustavus thought highly of him, 
and he translated, at the king’s command, from 
English into Swedish his medical and polemical 
works. Levisohn left the court in 1781 and re- 
turned to Germany, where he published German 
translations of most of his English medical works. 
Three years later (1784) he went to Hamburg, and, 
being well received, settled there and followed his 
profession with remarkable success. 

The large number of his daily patients did not 
prevent him from prosecuting with zeal his medical, 
philosophical, and theological studies. In 1785-86 
he published two medical journals, and during the 
following years labored at his great work on relig- 
ious philosophy. He was then engaged for five 


years in physical researches. His works are; 
“Ma’amar ha-Torah we-Hokmah” (London, 1771), 
a philosophical treatise (this work caused its author 
to be regarded in the light of a dangerous innova- 
tor); “An Essay on the Blood ” (2d. 1776); “ Epidem- 
ical Sore Throat” (2b. 1778); “Beschreibung der 
Londonischen Medicinischen Praxis den Deutschen 
Acrzten Vorgelegt . . . mit einer Vorrede von T. C, 
A. Theden” (Berlin, 1782); “The Passions and 
Habits of Man, and Their Influence on Health” 
(Brunswick, 1797-1801); “Derek ha-Kodesh ha- 
Hadashah,” a Hebrew grammar. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Schréder, Hamburgische Schriftsteller ; 
Carmoly, Les Médecins Juifs, pp. 217, 219 ; Picciotto, Sketches 
ey anal History, p. 147; British Museum Cata-~ 


J. G. L. 


LEVISOHN, MORDECAI GUMPEL. See 
LEVISOHN, GEORGE. 

LEVISON, ESAIAS: Danish educationist and 
author; born in Copenhagen April 22, 1803; died 
there March 23, 1891; educated at the University of 
Copenhagen (B.A. 1823). In 1824 Levison was ap- 
pointed tutor at the Jewish school in Copenhagen, 
in which position he remained till within two years 
of his death. He published several religious edu- 
cational works, of which the following may be men- 
tioned: “Kortfattet Forklaring over Lerebogen i 
Religionen for Ungdommen af den Mosaiske Troes- 
bekjendelse” (Copenhagen, 1825); “Bibelske For- 
tellinger” (¢b. 1827); a Jewish prayer-book, with 
Hebrew text and Danish translation (2d. 18838), 
Levison translated into Danish Bulwer Lytton’s 
“Paul Clifford.” For two years (1837-88) he acted 
as coeditor of “ Borgervennen,” a Danish political 
periodical, to which he contributed several articles. 
In 1837 the University of Kiel conferred upon him 
the honorary degree of Ph.D. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ferslew’s Forfatter- Lexicon. 


S. F. C. 


LEVISON, FERDINAND EMANUEL: 
Danish physician; born in Copenhagen Nov. 9, 
1843; educated at the University of Copenhagen 
(M.D. 1868). He was successively assistant physi- 
cian at Frederik’s Hospital, the Lying-in Hospital, 
and the Almindeligt (Communal) Hospital in Copen- 
hagen. In 1887 he was appointed guardian of the 
poor, which position he still (1904) occupies. Levi- 
son is an energetic advocate of cremation; the 
first Danish society for cremation was founded 
(1881) at his initiative, and he has ever since offici- 
ated as its president. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon. 


Ss. F.C. 


LEVITA, ELIJAH (known also as Elijah 
ben Asher ha-Levi Ashkenazi, Elijah Bahur, 
Elijah Medakdek, and Elijah Tishbi): Gram- 
marian, Masorite, and poet; born at Neustadt, near 
Nuremberg, in 1468; died at Venice Dec., 1549. 

From his childhood Elijah showed a predilection 
for Biblical studies and Hebrew grammar. He set- 
tled early in Venice; but in 1504 he was at Padua, 
earning a livelihood by instructing Jewish children 
in Hebrew. At the request of his pupils he wrote 
a commentary to Moses Kimhi’s “ Mahalak ”; but a 





TITLE-PAGE FROM THE FIRST EDITION OF ELIJAH LEVITA’S “ TISHBI,” ISNY, 1541. 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Levita 
Levites 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


48 





certain Benjamin Colbo, to whom Elijah had given 
the manuscript to transcribe, published the work at 
Pesaro under hisownname. Colbo interspersed the 
annotations with excerpts from another work; and 
in this form Elijah’s first production was most in- 
correctly printed. In spite of this, however, it 
became the favorite manual for students of the He- 
brew language, both among Jews and Christians. 
It was soon reprinted several times at Pesaro, and 
made its way into Germany and France, where aiso it 
was reprinted ; it was translated into Latin by Sebas- 
tian Miinster (Basel, 1531, 1586). It was not until 
1546 that Elijah, urged by his friends, claimed the 
authorship of the work and published a corrected 
edition of it at Venice. During his stay in Padua, 
Elijah published in German a version of the Baba 
BUCH. 

The relatively happy circumstances enjoyed by 
Elijah at Padua did not long continue. In 1509 the 
city was taken and sacked by the army of the League 
of Cambray, and Elijah, losing everything he pos- 
sessed, had to leave the place. He betook himself 
to Rome, and having heard of the scholarly and 
liberal-minded AAcIpIus OF VITERBO, general of the 
Augustine Order, who was studying Hebrew, he 
called upon him. This prelate, In exchange for 
Hebrew lessons from Elijah, offered to maintain him 

and his family. For thirteen years 


Gram- = Elijah remained in the palace of the 
marian. cardinal, writing works which spread 


his reputation, giving lessons in He- 
brew, and, in turn, taking Jessons in Greek from the 
cardinal. During this period Elijah produced the 
“Sefer ha-Bahur,” a grammatical treatise written at 
the request of the cardinal, to whom it was dedi- 
cated, and first published at Rome in 1518 (2d ed. 
Isny, 1542, and many subsequent reissues). As the 
author explains in his preface, he called the work 
“ Bahur ” because that was his surname, and further 
because the word denoted both “youth” and “ex- 
cellent.” The treatise is divided into four parts, 
each of which is subdivided into thirteen sections, 
corresponding to the thirteen articles of the Jewish 
creed; while the total number of sections, fifty-two, 
represents the numerical value of “ Elijah,” his name. 
The first part discusses the nature of the Hebrew 
verbs; the second, the changes in the vowel-points 
of the different conjugations; the third, the regular 
nouns; and the fourth, the irregular ones. 

In the same year (1518) Eiijah published tables of 
paradigms for beginners, entitled “ Luah be-Dikduk 
ha-Po‘alim weha-Binyanim”; and a work, on the 
irregular words in the Bible, entitled “Sefer ha- 
Harkabah.” Desiring to explain every intricacy 
and anomaly in the Hebrew language, but fearing 
that too many digressions might prevent his gram- 
mar from becoming a popular manual, he in 1520 
published dissertations on various grammatical sub- 
jects under the general title “ Pirke Eliyahu.” This 
he divided into four parts: the first. “ Perek Shirah,” 
discussing in thirteen stanzas the laws of the letters, 
the vowel-points, and the accents: the second, “ Perek 
ha-Minim,” written in prose, treating of the differ- 
ent parts of speech; the third, *Perek ha-Middot,” 
discussing the various parts of speech; and the 
fourth, “ Perek ha-Shimmushim,”™ treating of the ser- 


| 


vile letters. Like his preceding works, it was trang. 
lated into Latin and published by Sebastian Mitnster, 

In 1527 misfortune again overtook Elijah; he wag 
driven from his studies when the Imperialists sackeg 

Rome, and Jost all his property and the 

Proof- greater part of his manuscripts. He 

Reader and then returned to Venice, and was en. 
Tutor. gaged by the printer Daniel Bom. 
berg as corrector of his Hebrew pregg, 
To the income derived froin this employment wag 
added that earned by tuition. Among his pupils 
was the French ambassador George de Selve, after. 
ward Bishop of Lavaur, who by generous pecuniary 
assistance placed Elijah in a position to complete 
his great Masoretic concordance “ Sefer ha-Zikronot,” 
on which he had labored for twenty years. This 
work, which De Selve, to whom it was dedicated, 
sent to Paris to be printed at his expense, has for 
some unknown reason never been published, and ig 
still extant in manuscript in the Bibliothéque Na- 
tionale, Paris. An attempt to edit it was made by 
Goldberg in 1875, but he got no farther than ‘wy, 
The introduction and the dedication to it were pub- 
lished by Frensdorf in Fraenkel’s “ Monatsschrift ” 
(xii. 96-108). Still the “Sefer ha-Zikronot,” to which 
Elijah often refers as his chef-d’ceuvre, made a 
good impression in Paris, and Elijah was offered by 
Francis I. the position of professor of Hebrew at the 
university there, which he declined, being unwilling 
to settle in a city forbidden to his coreligionists, 
He declined also invitations from several cardinals, 
bishops, and princes to accept a Hebrew professor- 
ship in Christian colleges. 

Two years after the completion of the “Sefer ha- 
Zikronot” Elijah published his Masoretic work 
“ Massoret ha-Massoret ” (Venice, 1538), divided into 
three parts, respectively denominated “ First. Tables,” 
“Second Tables,” and “ Broken Tables,” each with an 
introduction, The “ First Tables” is divided into ten 
sections, or commandments (“ ‘Aseret ha-Debarim ”), 
dealing with the “full” and “defective” writing of 
syllables. The “Second Tables” treats of the “kere” 
and “ketib,” “kamez” and “patah,” “dagesh,” 
“mappik,” “rafe,” etc. The “Broken Tables” dis- 
: cusses the abbreviations used by the 
Masorites. In the third introduction 
Elijah produces an array of most pow- 
erful arguments to prove that the 
vowel-points in the Hebrew Bibles were invented 
by the Masorites in the fifth century of the com- 
mon era. This theory, although suggested by 
some Jewish scholars as early as the ninth cen- 
tury, provoked a great outcry among the Ortho- 
dox Jews, who ascribed to the vowel-points the 
greatest antiquity. They were already dissatisfied 
with Elijah for giving instruction in Hebrew to 
Christians, since the latter openly confessed that 
they studied the Hebrew language with the hope of 
finding in the Hebrew texts, especially in the Cabala, 
arguments against Judaism. To this Elijah replied in 
the first introduction to the “ Massoret ha-Massoret” 
that he taught only the elements of the language 
and did not teach Cabala at all. Moreover, he 
pointed out that Christian Hebraists generally de- 
fended the Jews against the attacks of the fanatical 
clergy. Elijah’s theory concerning the modernity 


‘¢ Was- 
soret.”’ 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Levita 


49 


Levites 





of the vowel-points caused still greater excitement 
among Christians, and for three centuries it gave 
occasion for discussions among Catholic and Protes- 
rapt scholars, such as Buxtorf, Walton, De Rossi, and 
others. The “ Massoret ha-Massoret ” was so favor- 
ably received that in less than twelve months after 
its “appearance it was republished at Basel (1589), 
In this edition Scbastian Minster translated into 
Latin the three introductions, and gave a brief sum. 
mary of the contents of the three parts. The third 
part, oF the * Broken Tables,” was republished sepa- 
rately at Venice in 1566, under the title “ Perush ha- 
Massoret we-Hara Shemo Sha'are Shibre Luhot.” 
This part of the book was again republished, with 
additions, by Samuel ben Hayyim at Prague in 1610, 
The three introductions were also translated into 
Latin by Nagel (Altdorf, 1758-71). In 1772 the 
whole book was translated into German by Chris- 
tian Gottlob Meyer, and in 1867 into English by 
Christian D. Ginsburg. 

In 1588, also, Elijah published at Venice a treatise 
on the laws of the accents entitled “Sefer Tub 
Ta‘am.” Meanwhile David Bouiberg’s printing- 
office had ceased to exist, and Elijah, although at 
that time seventy years of age, left his wife and 
children and departed in 1540 for Isny, accepting 
the invitation of Panl Fagius to superintend his He- 
brew printing-press there. During Elijah’s stay with 
Fagius (until 1542 at Isny and from 1542 to 1544 at 

Constance) he published the following 
Lexi- works: “ Tishbi,” a dictionary contain- 
cographer. ing 712 words used in Talmud and 
Midrash, with explanations in German 
and a Latin translation by Fagius (Isny, 1541); 
“Sefer Meturgeman,” explaining all the Aramaic 
words found in the Targuin (¢.); “Shemot Deba- 
rim,” an alphabetical list of the technical Hebrew 
words (Isny, 1542); a Judeo-German version of the 
Pentateuch, the Five Megillot, aud Haftarot (Con- 
stance, 1544); and a new and revised edition of the 
“Bahur.” On returning to Venice, Elijah, in spite 
of his great age, still labored on the edition of several 
works, among which was David Kimhi’s “ Miklol,” 
to which he added notes of his own (“nimukim ”), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Wolf, Bibl. Hehr. iii. 973 Azulai, Shem ha- 
Fedolim, s.v.; G. B. de Rossi, Dizionariv, s.v.; Orient, Lit. 
1848, Nos. 4-6; Frensdorf, in Monatsschrift, xii. 96 et seq.; 
Gesenius, Gesch. der Hebrilischen. Sprache, Leipsie, 1815; 
Brili’s Jahrb. viii. 188; S. Buber, Toledot. Eliyalus, 1856; 
Steiuschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 984; idem, Bibliographisehes 
Handbuch, Nos. 1159-1167; Gritz, Gesch. viii. 199; Kahana, 
in Ha-Siahar, xii. 498 et seq.; C. D. Ginsburg, The Masoreth 
ha-Masoreth of Elias Levita, London, 1867; I, Davidson, in 
Modia‘ la-Hadashim, ii. 21 et seg. J. Levi, Elia Levita, 
Breslau, 18588; Bacher, in Ersch and Gruber, Encie. s.v. 
Levita ; idem, Elija Levita’s Wissenschaftliche Leistungen, 
In Z. D. M. G. xiiii, 206-272; idem, Zur Biographie Elija 
Levita's, in Monatsschrift, xxxvii. 398 et seq. 

J. I. Br. 


LEVITAN, ISAAC (ISAAC ILYICH): Rus- 
Slan painter; born near Bidtkuhnen Aug. 18, 1860; 
died at Moscow Jul y 22, 1900. His father, who 
farmed a livelihood by giving private tuition, re- 
Moved to Moscow when Levitan was still a boy and 
fave him a good home training. About 1875 Levi- 
tan entered the Moscow School of Art, where he fin- 
‘shed the course. Living in great poverty, and at 
times in actual want. he still continued his work, and 
a the age of nineteen displayed considerable talent 
Inhis“An Autumn Day at Sokolniki.” This pic- 

VIII.—4 


ture Was purchased by the well-known connoisseur 
Tretyakov. In 1880 Levitan exhibited “* The Plowed 
Field,” which attracted much favorable comment. 
As late as 1886, notwithstanding the reputation 
which he had acquired, he still continued to derive 
only a very small income from his profession. 

The period 1887~97 was the most happy of Levi- 
tan’s life, and to it belong his best works. He was 
a tireless worker and painted a very large number of 
pictures. Twenty-five of his paiutings are to be 
seen in the Tretyakov gallery alone. He probably 
produced in all about 1,000 paintings and studies, 
most of them in the decade 1887-97. In 1892, when 
Levitan was already widely kuown and after the 
award fo him of the first prize for his picture “ Twi- 
light” at the Art Lovers’ Exhibition, the notori- 
ous May Laws were enforced in Moscow, and he 
was permitted to remain there only owing to the in- 
fluence of powerful friends, His nearest relatives, 
however, were compelled to leave the city, their 
business was ruined, and Levitan had to render them 
Inaterial aid to the end of his life. In 1897 Levitan 
was elected an active member of the Munich society 
Secession, and the Academy of Art selected him an 
academician. 

Levitan’s paintings are marked by a thorough 
knowledge of Russian scenery and types. They 
possess a decided originality; at the same time they 
convey an expression of sadness. In his funeral 
oration Count A. E. Lvov said of Levitan: “He was 
an artist-poet. He not only painted pictures—in his 
paintings there was something besides; we not only 
saw his pictures, we also felt them. He knew how 
to interpret Nature and her mysteries as no other 
man.” Eventhe “Novoye Vremnya” (July 29, 1900), 
an organ decidedly anti-Semitic in its policy, ad- 
mitted that “this full-blooded Jew knew, as no 
other man, how to make us realize and love our 
plain and homely country scenes.” 

Among the works of Levitan may be mentioned: 
* Over Eternal Rest”; “The Neglected Graveyard ” ; 
“A Tatar Graveyard”; “Relics of the Past—Twi- 
light in Finland”; “The Golden Autumn”; “ Vladi- 
mirka”; “Mareh”; “After the Rain”; “Forest ”; 
“Evening”; “The Peaceful Retreat”; "The Hay 
Harvest ”; and two lake scenes. A picture by Levi- 
tan, entitled “ A Convent on the Eve of a Holiday,” 
was exhibited at the Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 
in 1893. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: §&. Vermel, Voskhod, xxii, 34, 

H. R, J. G. LL. 

LEVITES (Temple Servants). — Biblical 
Data: Of the Levites, Aaron and his sons were 
chosen for the priestly office (Ex. xxviii. 1 e¢ seq.); 
the menial services of the Tabernacle were assigned 
to the rest of the tribe (Num, i. 47 e¢ seg.). The 
Kohathites were to bear the sacred furniture of the 
Tabernacle; the Gershonites, its curtains; and the 
Merarites, its boards, pins, and poles (Num. iv. 
4-16, 22-28, 29-33). It is distinctly stated that the 
Levites shall not approach the most holy things 
(Num. iv. 19)—that is, they shall not act as priests, 
a function which the context reserves for Aaron and 
his sons. 

In Deuteronomy the representation is quite differ- 
ent; “priests” and “ Levites” are there synonymous 


Levites 
Leviticus 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 50 





terms, and the one is regularly placed in apposition. 
with the other. In Deut. xviii. 1, apparently, every 
Levite is a potential priest. In Joshua, as in Num- 
bers, the Levites consist of the clans of Kohath, 
Gershon, and Merari, and to each clan a large num- 
ber of cities is assigned (comp. Josh. xxi.; see 
LeEv1, TRIBEOF). The Levites, as the servants of the 
Temple, appear next in I Chronicles, where David 
is represented as dividing them into “courses” 
to wait on the sons of Aaron by doing the menial 
work of the Temple because they were no longer 
needed to carry the Tabernacle (comp. I Chron. 
Xxiii., especially 26-28). He also appointed some to 
be doorkeepers of the Temple, some to have charge 
of its treasure, and some to be singers (I Chron. 
XXV.-XXVI.). 

Ezekiel, however, gives a somewhat different im- 
pression of the personnel of the Temple service in 
pre-exilic times. In ch, xlv. 9-18 he declares that 
in future no uncircumcised foreigner shall enter the 
Temple, and that the Levites who have served at 
idolatrous shrines shall be deposed from the priest- 
hood and perform the menial services of the sanctu- 
ary, such as keeping the gates and slaying the offer- 
ings. This seems to imply that before the Exile 
this service had been performed not by Levites, but 
by foreigners (an impression which Josh. ix. 23 
deepens), and that those who were accounted Le- 
vites in this subordinate sense had formerly exercised 
a priesthood, of which Ezekiel did not approve. 

After the Exile the Temple organization, as re- 
flected in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, is the 
same as that portrayed in Chronicles. The plan of 
Ezekiel was not altogether carried out, for the Ne- 
thinim, who were descended from slaves whom 
David had given to the Temple (Ezra viii. 20), 
shared with the Levites the subordinate work of the 
sanctuary (Ezra vii. 24). In later times it would 
seem that the distinction between Levites and Ne- 
thinim gradually disappeared; present information 
on this point consists solely of the fact that the 
Nethinim were given genealogies along with the 
Levites (Hizra ii. 40 et seqg.). At the beginning of 
the common era the Levites were an important class 
of religious officials (comp. Luke x. 32; Johni. 19). 
——Critical View: The Biblical data thus present 
two inconsistent views. According to Leviticus, 
Numbers, the greater part of Joshua, and Chroni- 
cles, the priestlhlood was confined to the house of 
Aaron from the first, and the Levites existed asa 
menial class for the performance of the subordinate 
work of the sanctuary from the timeof Moses. The 
portions of Leviticus, Numbers, and Joshua which 
contain this point of view are all from the P stratum 
of the Hexateuch—a post-exilic document, as the 
Graf-Wellbausen school believes. Chronicles, too, 
is a work written some time after the Exile. 

In the older books of Judges, Samuel, and Kings 
the priestly offices are represented as not exclusively 
performed by Levites, who, however, were from the 
first preferred for these services and gradually 
monopolized them (see Levi, TRIBE oF). These 
services were not confined to any one sanctuary, but 
were performed in temples all over the land (comp. 
Judges xviii. 80). This condition of affairs appar- 
ently continued until Josiah, in 621 B.c., instituted 





a reform on the basis of the Deuteronomic law; 
(II Kings xxiii.), when all sanctuaries except that 
at Jerusalem were abolished. This 
left a large number of priests with- 
outa vocation, and they were conse- 
quently recommended to the charity of 
their brethren along with the widow, the fatherless, 
and the resident alien (Deut. xii. 18,19; xiv. 27, 29. 
xvi. 11, 16). In this code every Levite is still re- 
garded as a possible priest, however, and it is dis- 
tinctly stipulated that if one of them goes to Jeru- 
salem he shall have the same privileges in the exer- 
cise of the priestly office asare enjoyed by any other 
Levite (Deut. xviii. 6-7). But the influence of the 
Jerusalem priesthood seems to have been so vreat 
that even Josiah could not enforce this provision, 
and the provincial priests were never accorded in 
fact the privileges in the Temple on Zion which 
Deuteronomy had granted them (comp. I1 Ixings 
xxiii. 9). Ezekiel’s plan for the reorganization of 
the Temple services proposed to utilize these men 
for the menial work of the sanctuary; this pro- 
posal was actually embodied in the legislation of P 
and became a part of the post-exilic religious organi- 
zation. 

The view of the Graf-Wellhausen critical school 
ig that last outlined—that the cleavage between 
priests and Levites was not begun until the time of 
Josiah, that it received a further impetus from 
Ezekiel, and that it became a real feature of the 
permanent religious organization after the return 
from Babylon. This view is strengthened by the 
fact that J in Josh. ix. 23 represents 
Joshua as presenting the foreign Gibe- 
onites to the Temple as slaves, “ hew- 
ers of wood and drawers of water,” 
and that Ezekiel shows that foreigners continued to 
fill the menial offices down to the time of the Exile. 
Van Hoonacker (“ Le Saccrdoce dans la Loi.ct dans 
l’Histoire des Hébreux,” 1899) contends that Chron- 
icles records pre-exilic conditions (comp. Baudissin 
in “ Theologische Literaturzeitung,” 1899, cols. 309- 
363). The picture of the Levites given in Leviticus, 
Numbers, the P portions of Joshua, and Chronicles 
is thought by others to be a projection by the writers 
of the institutions of their own times into the distant 
past. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wellhausen, Prolegomenazur Gesch. {xraels, 
5th ed., 1899, ch. iv.; Baudissin, Die Gesch. des Alttesta- 
mentlichen Priestertumes, 1889; H. Vogelstein, Der ICampf 
Zwischen Priester und Leviten seit den Tagen Ezechiels, 
1889; Nowack, Hebréiische Archdologie, 1894; Benzinger, 
Hebritische Archdologte. 

G. A. B. 


E.G. H. 


LEVITICUS.—Biblical Data: The English 
name is derived from the Latin “Liber Leviti- 
cus,” which is from the Greek (70) AewriKér (1.6, 
BB2iov), In Jewish writings it is customary to cite 
the book by its first word, “ Wa-yikra.” The book is 
composed of laws which treat of the functions of the 
priests, or the Levites in the larger sense. It is in 
reality a body of sacerdotal law. The various laws 
comprising this collection are represented as spoken 
by YHwH to Moses between the first day of the first 
month of the second year after the Exodus and the 
first day of the second month of the same year 
(comp. Ex. xl. 17 and Num. i. 1). There is no note 


Earlier 
Accounts. 


After 
Josiah. 












Wot 


ILLUMINATED PAGE OF LEVITICTS. 


(From a manuscript formerly in the possession of the Duke of Sussex.) 


Leviticus 


of a definite time in Leviticus itself, but from the 
references cited it is clear that in the continuous 
nalrative of the Pentateuch this is the chronological 
position of the book. 

Ch. i.-vii.: A collection of laws relating to sacri- 
fices. It falls into two portions: (1) ch. i-vi. 7 
(Hebr. i.-v.) and vii. 22-34 are laws addressed to the 
people; (2) ch. vi. 8-viil. 21 (Hebr. vi. [-vii. 21) are 
addressed to the priests. Ch. i. contains laws for 
burnt offerings; ch. ii., for meal-offerings; ch. iii., 
peace-offerings; ch. iv., sin-offerings; ch. v. 1~vi. 
7 (Hebr. ch. v.), trespass-offerings; ch. vi, 8-13 
(Hebr. vi. 1-6) defines the duties of the priest with 
reference to the fire on the altar; ch. 
vi, 14-18 (Ilebr. vi. 7-11), the meal- 
offering of the priests; ch. vi. 19-23 
(Hebr. vi. 12-16), the priests oblation; ch. vi. 24-30 
(ebr. vi. 17-28), the trespass-offering; ch. vii. 
1-7, trespass-offerings; ch. vii. 8-10, the portions 
of the sacrifices which go to the priests; ch. vii. 
11-18, peace-offerings; ch. vii. 19-21, certain laws of 
uncleanness: ch. vii. 22-27 prohibits eating fat or 
blood; ch. vii. 28-84 defines the priests’ share of 
the peace-offering. Ch. vii. 85-38 consists of a sub- 
scription to the preceding laws. 

Ch. viii.-ix.: The consecration of Aaron and his 
sons; though narrative in form, they contain the 
precedent to which subsequent ritual was expected 
to conform. , 

Ch. x. contains two narratives: one shows that it 
is unlawful to use strange tire at YHWH’s altar; the 
other requires the priests to eat the sin-offering. 
Between these narratives two laws are inserted, 
one prohibiting intoxicating drink tothe priests, the 
other giving sundry directions about offerings (8-15). 

Ch. xi. contains Jaws in regard to clean and un- 
clean animals, and separates those which may from 
those which may not be used for food. 

Ch. xii. contains directions for the purification of 
women after childbirth, A distinction is made be- 
tween maie and female children, the latter entailing 
upon the mother a longer period of uncleanness, 

Ch. xiii. and xiv. contain the laws of leprosy, 
giving the signs by which the priest may distin- 
guish between clean and unclean eruptions. 

Ch. xv. contains directions for the purifications 
necessary in connection with certain natural secre- 
tions of men (2-18) and women (19-80). 

Ch. xvi. contains the law of the great Day of 
Atonemeut. The chief features of this ritual are 
the entrance of the high priest into the Holy of 
Holies and the sending of the goat into the wilder- 
ness (see AZAZEL). 

Ch. xvil.-NxvVi. contain Jaws which differ in many 
respects from the preceding and which have many 
features in common. They are less ritualistic than 
the laws of ch. i.-xvi. and lay greater stress on in- 
dividual holiness; hence the name “ Holiness Code,” 
proposed by Klostermann in 1877 for these chapters, 
has been generally adopted. Ch. xvii. contains 
general regulations respecting sacrifice: ch. xviii. 
prohibits unlawful marriages and unchastity; ch. 
xix, defines the religious aud moral duties of 
Israelites; ch. xx. imposes penalties for the viola- 
tion of the provisions of ch. xviii. In ch. xxi. reg- 
ulations concerning priests are found (these regula- 


Contents. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


52 
Se ee a eae 
tions touch the domestic life of the priest and re. 
quire that he shall have no bodily defects): eh, 
xxii. gives regulations concerning sac. 
rificial food and sacrificial animals; ch. 
xxiii. presents a calendar of feasts ; ch, 
XXiV. contains various regulations 
concerning the lamps of the Tabernacle (1-4) and the 
show bread (5-9), andalaw of blasphemy and of per- 
sonal injury (10-23); ch. xxv. is made up of laws 
for the Sabbatical year and the year of jubilee (these 
laws provide periodical rests for the land and se. 
cure its ultimate reversion, in case it be estranged 
for debt, to its original owners); ch. xxvi. is a hor- 
tatory conclusion to the Holiness Code. 

Ch. xxvii. consists of a collection of laws conctern- 
ing the commutation of vows. These laws cover 
the following cases: where the vowed object is a 
person (1-8); an animal (9-15); a house (14-15); an 
inherited field (16-21); a purchased field (22-25); a 
firstling (26-27). Then follow additional laws con- 
cerning persons and things “devoted ” (28-29) and 
concerning tithes (80-83). Verse 84 is the colophon 
to the Book of Leviticus, stating that these laws 
were given by YHWH as commands to Moses at 
Mount Sinai. 

E. G. H. G. A. B. 
—— Critical View: In the critical analysis of 
the Pentateuch it is held that Leviticus belongs 
to the priestly stratum, designated by the symbol 
P. To this stratum the laws of Leviticus are at- 
tached by their nature and also by linguistic af- 
finities (comp. PrENTATEUCH, and J. Estlin Car- 
penter and G. Harford Battersby, “ Wexateuch” 
[cited hereafter as “Hex.”], 1. 208-221). This 
priestly stratum was formerly regarded as the 
“Grundschrift,” or oldest stratum of the Penta- 
teuch, but by Graf and Wellhausen, whose views 


Holiness 
Code. 


now receive the adherence of the 

Latest great majority of scholars, it has 

Stratum been shown to be on the whole the 
of Penta- latest. Leviticus as it stands is not, 
teuch. however, a consistent code of laws 


formulated at one time, but is the re- 
sult of a considerable process of compilation. It 
has already been noted that chapters xvii. to xxvi. 
have a distinct character of their own and a distinct 
hortatory conclusion, which point to an independent 
codification of this group of laws. Within this 
same group many indications that it is a compilation 
from earlier priestly sources may also be found. 
Ch. xviii, 26, xix. 87, xxii. 81-88, xxiv. 22, xxv. 58, 
xxvi. 46, and xxvii. 34 are all passages which once 
stood at the end of independent laws or collections 
of laws. Similar titles and colophons, which are 
best explained as survivals from previous collec- 
tions, are found also in other parts of the book, as 
in vi, 7 (A. V. 14); vii. 1, 2, 37, 88; xi, 46, 47; xiii. 
59; xiv. 54, 55; xv. 82, 838. It is necessary, there- 
fore, to analyze these laws more closely. 

It will be convenient to begin this analysis with 
ch. viii.-x., which are, as previously noted, narra- 
tives rather than laws. Ch. vill. relates the conse- 
cration of Aaron and his sons to the priesthood. 
That consecration is commanded in Ex. x1. 12-15, 
just as the erection of the Tabernacle is commanded 
in Ex. xl. 1-11. As the erection of the Tabernacle 


53 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Leviticus 


_ CO 


js described in Ex. xl. 17-88, it is probable that Lev. 
recounting the consecration of Aaron and his 
sons, immediately followed Ex. xl. 

Chapters Ch. i.-vii. have by editorial changes 

viii.-x.: been made to separate this narra- 
Narratives. tive from its context. Lev. viii. is 

based on Ex. xxix., relating its fulfil- 
ment, just as Ex. xxxv.-xl. is based on Ex. xxv.- 
xxviii, and xxx., Xxxi, It has been shown (comp. 
ExoDUs, Book or, CriticAL View I.) that Ex. 
xxxv.-xl. isa later expansion of a briefer account 
of the fulfilment of the commands of xxv.-xxxi.; it 
follows accordingly that Lev. viii. probably belongs 
toa similar late expansion of a shorter account of 
the fulfilment of the commands of ch. xxix. Lev. 
yjii. is not so late as Ex. xxxv.-xl., since it knows 
but one altar. 

Ch. ix. resumes the main thread of the original 
priestly law-book. It relates to the inaugural sac- 
ritice of the Tabernacle—the real sequel to Ex. xxv.- 
xxix. Probably it was originally separated from 
those chapters by some brief account of the con- 
stiuction and erection of the sanctuary and the con- 
secration of the priesthood. The editor’s hand may 
ge detected in verses 1 and 28. 

Ch. x. 1-5 is the continuation of ch. ix. and is 
from the same source, The regulations in verses 
6-20 are loosely thrown together, though verses 6, 
12-15, and 16-20, are, as they stand, attached to the 
main incident in verses 1-5. Verses 10, 11 are allied 
to ch. xvii.-xxvi., the Holiness Code (comp. Driver 
in “S. B. O. T.” ad loc.), Verses 16-20 are a late 
supplement, suggested by the conflict between the 
procedure of ix. 15 and the rule of vi. 24-30. 

Ch. i.-vii., as already noted, consist of two parts: 

i-v. (A. V. vi. 7), addressed to the 

Ch. i.-vii.: people, and vi.-vii. (A. V. vi. 8-vii, 

Laws of 36), addressed to the priests. It is not 

Offerings. a unitary, harmonious code: the two 

parts have a different order, the peace- 

offering occurring in adifferent position in the two 
parts. : 

Ch. i-iii. were compiled from at least two 
sources, and have been touched by different hands, 
Ch. iii. should follow immediately after ch. i. 

Ch. iv., which graduates a scale of victims for 
the sin-offering according to the guilt of the sinner, 
is later than i.-iii. It is regarded by all critics asa 
late addition to the ritual. The altar of incense, v. 
7, is unknown to the older ritual (comp. Ex. xxix. 
10-14); and the ritual of the high priest’s sin-offer- 
ing is much more elaborate than in Ex. xxix. 10-14 
or Lev. ix, 8-11. The sin-offering, which in other 
laws isa goat (Lev. ix. 15, xvi. 8, and Num. xv. 
*4), is here a bullock. The ritual is throughout 
heightened, perhaps beyond all actual practise. 

Ch. v.~vi. 7(A. V. v.) afford no indications of so 
late a date as ch. iv., although it is clearly a combi- 
ation of laws from various sources (comp. verse 14 
and v. 20(A. V. vi. 1). The oldest nucleus seems 
to be v. 1-6, in which there are no ritual directions. 

€rses 7~10 and 11-18 are later and perhaps succes- 
Sive additions. Though united later, they are prob- 
ably genuine laws. 
he rules for the guidance of the priests (vi. [A. 
‘Vi. 8-vii.]) are also compiled from previous col- 


yiil. , 


lections, as is shown by the different headings 
(comp. vi. 1, 18, 18 [A. V. vi. 8, 19, 24]). They 
also are genuine laws from an older time. 

Ch. xi. defines the clean and unclean animals. 
Because several of these laws are similar to the Ho- 
liness legislation (comp. verses 2-8, 9-11, 20, 21, and 

41, 42), it has been inferred by many 


Ch. xi.: critics that ch. xi. is a part of that 
Clean and legislation, that it is in reality the law 
Unclean whichxx. 25implies. Others, as Car- 
Animals. penter and Harford Battersby, regard 


it as an excerpt from a_ body of 
priestly teaching which once had an existence inde- 
pendent of the Holiness Code. The chapter is nota 
unit. Verses 24-31 seem to be an expansion of v. 8, 
while verses 82-38 appear to be a still more recent 
addition. 

Ch. xii. contains directions for the purification of 
women after childbirth. In v. 2 reference is made 
to ch. xv. 19. As the rules in xii. are cast in the 
same general forni as those of xv., the two chapters 
are of the same date. It is probable that xii. once 
followed xv. 80. Why it was removed to its present 
position can not now be ascertained. For date see 
below on ch. xv. 

The extreme elaboration of the rules for LEPRosy 
has led some scholars to regard the compilation of 

ch. xiii, and xiv. as late, especially as 


Ch. xiii. it hasbeen inferred from Deut. xxiv. 8 
and xiv.: that when Deuteronomy was compiled 
Laws of the rules concerning leprosy were all 
Leprosy. still oral (comp. “ Hex.” ii. 158, note). 


Moore, on the other hand (in Cheyne 
and Black, “ Encyc. Bibl.”), points out that the rit- 
ual of xiv. 2-8 is very primitive (comp. Smith, 
“Rel. of Sem.” pp. 422, 428 [note], 447), and that 
there is no reason to doubt the early formulation of 
such laws. ‘These chapters are not, however, all of 
one date, The original draft of the law included 
only xili. 2-46a, xiv. 2-8a, and the subscription in 
57b; xiii. 47-59, which treats of leprosy in garments, 
was codified separately, for in verse 59 it has a colo- 
phon of its owu. Ch. xiv. 10-20 is clearly a later 
substitute for 2-8a. Ch. xiv. 33-58, which treats of 
fungous growths on the walls of houses. is often 
classed with the rules for leprosy in garments; but 
since it has a new introductory formula (83) it is 
probably independent of that section. Since it 
adopts (49) the mode of cleansing of xiv. 2~-8a, it 
is also independent of xiv. 9-32. Asit makes men- 
tion of atonement while xiv. 2-8a does not, it is also 
later than that. Thus three hands at least worked 
on these chapters. 

The rules for purification after the discharge of 
secretions of various kinds (ch. xv.) are often re- 
garded as late. The language is tediously repeti- 
tious. The sacriticial ritual (verses 14, 29) is parallel 
to that of the sin-offering in ch. v. It is probable 
that a shorter earlier law on the subject las been ex- 
panded by a later hand; butit seems impossible now 
to separate the original from the later material. 

Much discussion has been expended upon the ac- 
count of the great Day of Atonement (ch. XVi.). 
Its opening words connect it with the incident of 
Nadaband Abihu (x. 1-5). These words are regarded 
as editorial by some, but the subsequent material, 


Leviticus 
Levy, Aaron 





tuary, makes such a connection fitting. Not all 
of the chapter, however, treats of 


Ch. xvi.: this subject. With various prohibi- 

The Day tions against enteving the holy place, » 

of Atone- there iscombineda curious ritual con- 
ment. cerning the sending of a goat into the 


wilderness to AZAZEL. AS this ritual 
is given before the directions for the observance of the 
day, Benzinger (in Stade’s “ Zeitschrift,” ix. 65-89) 
has argued that in verses 4-28 two accounts have 
been combined, one of which dealt with entrance into 
the sanctuary, and the other with the Azazel ritual. 
The former of these consisted of verses 1-4, 6 (or 
11), 12, 13, and 34b, which were perhaps followed 
by 29-34a. This original law prescribed a compar- 
atively simple ritual for an annual day of atone- 
ment. With this verses 5, 7-10, 14-28 were after- 
ward combined. This view has not escaped chal- 
lenge (comp. “Hex.” ii. 164, note); but on the 
whole it seems probable. 

The Day of Atonement appears, however, not to 
have been provided for by the priestly law-book in 
the time of Nehemiah; for, whereas the celebration 
of the Feast of Tabernacles, beginning with the fif- 
teenth of the seventh month (Neh. viii. 14 e¢ seq.), 
which was followed on the twenty-fourth by a con- 
fession of sin (7b. ix. 1 et seg.), is described, no men- 
tion is made of a day of atonement on the tenth. 
Probably, therefore, ch. xvi. and other passages de- 
pendent upon it (eg., Lev. xxiii, 26-32 and Ex. 
xxx. 1-10) are of later date (comp. “ Hex.” i. 156 e¢ 
seg.). Even if this ritual be a late addition to the 
Book of Leviticus, however, there is good reason to 
believe that it represents a primitive rite (comp. 
Smith, “Rel. of Sem.” 2d ed., pp. 411 ef seg., espe- 
cially p. 414, and Barton, “Semitic Origins,” pp. 
114, 289). 

Ch. xvii.-xxvi., as already pointed out, form a 
group of Jaws by themselves. Ch. xxvi. 3-45 con- 

tains an address of YHwH to the Israel- 
Ch. xvii.- ites, setting forth the blessings which 
xxvi.: The will follow if these laws are observed, 
Holiness and the disasters which will ensne if 
Code. they are violated. The character of 
the discourse and its resemblance to 
Deut. xxviii. prove that Lev. xxvi. once formed the 
conclusion of a body of laws. The peculiar phrase- 
ology and point of view of this chapter recur a 
number of times in earlier chapters (comp. xviii. 
1-5, 24-80; xix. 2, 36b, 87; xx. 7, 8, 22-26; xxii. 31- 
83). Ch. xvili.-xxvi. are therefore bound together as 
one code. Recent criticism regards ch. xvii. as origi- 
nally a part of the same legisiation. As the “Book 
of the Covenant,” Ex. xx, 24-xxiii, 19, and the 
Deuteronomic Code, Deut. xx.-xxvi., each opened 
with a law regulating the altar ceremonies, it is 
probable that the Holiness Code (H) began in the 
same way, and that that beginning now underlies 
Lev. xvii. The regulations of this code sometimes 
resemble those of Deuteronomy, sometimes those of 
P; and as it traverses at times the legislation of 
both, there can be no doubt that it once formed a 
separate body of laws. 

This code was compiled from various sources by 

a writer whose vocabulary possessed such striking 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 54 


a i a i tee 
which denies the priests free approach to the sanc- . 


characteristics that it can be easily traced. Some 
of his favorite phrases are, “I YuHwu am holy”; “] 
am YHWH”; “my statutes and ordinances”; “who 
sanctifies you [them]”; “I will set my face against 
them”; ete. (comp. Driver, “ Leviticus,”in “S. B. 
O. T.” p. 88, and “Hex.” i. 220 e¢ seg.). As the 
work now stands the laws have been somewhat in. 
terpolated by P; but these interpolations cau for the 
most part be easily separated. 

In ch. xvii, P has added verses 1, 2, 15, and 16, 
and all references to “the tent of meeting” and “the 
camp ” in verses 3, 4, 5, and 6; probably, also, the last 
clause of verse 7, The original law required every 
one who slaughtered an animal to bring the blood to 
the sanctuary (comp. I Sam. xiv. 33- 
35), a thing perfectly possible before 
the Deuteronomic reform had ban- 
ished all local sanctuaries. This law 
is, therefore, older than the centralization of the 
worship in 621 B.c. (comp. II Kings xxiii). As P 
by his additions has left the law in Lev. xvii., it 
could have been observed by only a small commu- 
nity dweHing near Jerusalem. 

In ch. xviii. P has transmitted H’s law of pro- 
hibited marriages and unchastity, prefixing only his 
own title. 

Ch. xix. contains laws which are, broadly speak- 
ing, parallel to the Decalogue, though the latter por- 
tion, like the Decalogue of J in Ex. xxxiv., treats 
of various ritualistic matters. P’s hand is seen here 
only in verses 1, 2a, 8b, 21, and 22. 

Ch. xx. opens with a law against Moloch-wor- 
ship. Verse 3 is contradictory to verse 2. Proba- 
bly the latter is the old law and the former is from 
the pen of the compiler of H (comp. Baentsch in 
Nowack’s “ Hand-Kommentar,” 1903). In verses 
11-2i laws against incest, sodomy, approach to a 
menstruous woman, etc., are found. They are par- 
allel to ch. xviii. and from a different source. H 
embodied both chapters in his work. P prefixed 
verse 1 to the chapter. 

Ch. xxi. contains regulations for priests. Origi- 
nally it referred to all priests; but P has interpola- 
ted it in verses 1, 10, 12b, 16a, 21, 22, and 24, so as 
to make it refer to Aaron and his sons. 

The laws of sacrificial food and sacrificial animals 
have been modified by many glosses. Some of these 
are anterior to H. P has added the references to 
Aaron and his sons in verses 1, 2, 38, 4, and 18. In 
this chapter two originally independent calendars of 
feasts have been united. From P came verses 1-9, 
21, 23-38, 39a, 39c, and 44; from H, verses 10-20, 
39b, and 40-48. A later hand added verse 22, and 
perhaps other glosses (for details comp. “Hex.” and 
3aentsch ad loc.). 

Ch. xxiv. 1-9, which treats of the lamps and the 
showbread, belongs to the P stratum, but is out of 
place here. Verses 10-13, 23 deal with blasphemy. 
They are quite unrelated to verses 15-22 except as 
a partial doublet, and belong, perhaps, to a sec- 
ondary stratum of P. Verses 15-22 are a part of 
the Holiness Code. 

The law of the Sabbatical year and of jubilee in 
ch. xxv. is now composite. The earlier portion was 
a part of the Holiness Code. Driver sees this portion 
in verses 2b-9a, 10a, 18-15, 17-22, 24, 25, 85-39, 43, 


Interpo- 
lations. 


55 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Leviticus 


Levy, Aaron 


peace ay Crp gS ae a a ed ee ee ee a ee ts = ee ge 


47, 53, 55. Phas added the portions which intro- 
duce complicated reckoning, viz.: verses 1, 9b, 
10u-12. 16, 23, 26-34, 40, 42, 44-46, 48-52, 54 (for 
other avalyses comp. Baentsch and “ Hex.” ad loc.). 

Ch. XXVi., as already noted, is the hortatory con- 
clusion of the Holiness Code. It has escaped serious 
interpolation from later hands, except perhaps in 
verses 34 et seg., Where references to the Exile may 
pave been inserted. 

Leviticus now concludes with a chapter on vows, 
which belongs to a late stratum of P. It is later 
thay the institution of the year of jubilee, and intro- 
duces a law, not mentioned elsewhere, concerning 
the tithe of cattle. 

From what has been said concerning the absence 
of ch. xvi. from the Pentateuch of Nehemiah it is 
clear that some of the material of Leviticus was 

added to it later than Nehemiah’s 

Date and time. It is probable that P in its 

Place of main features was in the hands of 

Composi- Ezra and Nehemiah. Leviticus is, 

tion of P. however, not the work of the P who 

wrote the account of the sacred insti- 

tutions, but of an editor who dislocated that work 

at many points, and who combined with it the Hoh- 
ness Code and other elements. 

It is commonly supposed that the priestly laws 
were collected in Babylonia and were brought back 
to Palestine by Ezra. Haupt goes so far as to claim 
that the Levitical ritual is influenced by Babylonian 
institutions (comp. Haupt, “ Babylonian Elements 
in the Levitical Ritual,” in “Jour, Bib. Lit.” xix. 
55-81), and that a number of the words are Babylo- 
nian loan-words. Any deep Babylonian influence 
may well be doubted, however. It has been seen 
that the laws of Leviticus were collected little by 
little in small codes, and that they were united into 
their present form after the time of Nehemiah. If 
any of these collections were made during the Exile, 
it must have been the desire of the priests who col- 
lected them to preserve the sacred ritual of the 
Temple at Jerusalem. Like Ezekiel, they may have 
proposed reforms, but it is hardly likely that they 
would deliberately copy heathen practises. The 
Levitical terms which are identical with Babylonian 
ho more prove borrowing from Babylouia than the 
Similarities between the code of Hammurabi and the 
Hebrew codes prove a similar borrowing there. All 
that is proved in either case, when radical differ- 
ences are given propcr weight, is that in both coun- 
tries the laws and the ritual were developed from a 
common basis of Semitic custom. 

It is generally held that the Holiness Code is 
younger than Ezekiel, though this is opposed by Dill- 
mann (“Exodus und Leviticus ”) and Moore (in “ En- 
cye. Bibl.” s.v.). That there are many resemblances 

between H and Ezekiel all agree. 

Date and Ezekiel dwells again and again upon 
Place of offenses which are prohibited in the 
Composi- code of H. Compare, ¢.g., the laws of 
tion of the incest, adultery, and of commerce with 

Holiness a woman in her uncleanness (Lev. 

Code. xviii. 8, xx. 10-17, and Ezek. xxii. 10, 
11). A list of such parallels will be 

found in “Hex.” i. 147 et seg. Thesame writers point 
Out (7, pp. 149 e¢ seg.) that there is a similarity be- 


tween Ezekiel and the hortatory portions of H so 
striking as to lead Colenso to regard the former as 
the author of those exhortations. Equally striking 
differences make Colenso’s theory untenable; and it 
remains an open question whether Ezekiel influ- 
enced H, or H influenced Ezekiel. Those who re- 
gard IZ as the later (Wellhausen, Kuenen, Baentsch, 
and Addis) lay stress on the references to exile in 
xxvi. 34-44, while Dillmann and Moore regard such 
phenomena as the work of later hands. When one 
remembers how many hands have worked on Leviti- 
cus it must be admitted that the references to exile 
may well be additions; and if the antiquity of the 
law of the altar in ch. xvii. be recalled—a law which 
is clearly pre-Deuteronomic—the probability that 
H is really earlier than Ezckiel becomes great. 
Comparisons of the laws of H with those of Deu- 
teronomy have often been instituted, but without 
definite results. Lev. xix. 35, 36 is, it may be urged, 
more developed than Deut. xxv. 18~15, since the 
measures and weights are more definitely specified ; 
but the point is not of sufficient significance to be 
decisive. On the other hand, the implication of 
many sanctuaries in ch. xvii. points to H’s priority 
to Deuteronomy. At any rate it seems probable 
that H and Deuteronomy were collected quite inde- 
pendently of each other. The hortatory form of 
each is similar. This, together with resemblances 
to the language and thought of Jeremiah, points to 
the same general period as the date of their compo- 
sition. Whether H is not the older of the two must 


{ be left an open question, with a slight balance of 


argument in favor of its greater antiquity. This 

view makes it probable that the Holiness Code was 

compiled in Palestine. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dillmann, Exodus und Leviticus, 3d ed., 1897 ; 
Graf, Die Geschichtlichen Bticher des Alten Testaments, 
1866; Néideke, Untersuchungen zur Kritik des Alten Tes- 
taments, 1869; Colenso, The Pentateuch and the Book of 
Joshua, 1872, vi.; Kuenen, Hexateuch, 1886; Wellhausen, 
Die Composition des Hexateuchs, 3d ed., 1899; Driver, In- 
troduction, 6th ed., 1897; idem, Leviticus, in Haupt, S. B. 
O. T. 1898; Bacon, Triple Tradition of the Fxodus, 1894; 
Addis, Documents of the Hexrateuch, 1898; Carpenter and 
Harford Battersby, Hexateuch, 1900; Baentsch, Exodus- 
Leviticus-Numert, in Nowack’s Hand-Koummentar, 1903; 
Paton, The Original Form of Lev. xrvii-xix. in Jour. 
Bib. Lit. xvi. 31 et seq.; idem, The Original Form of Lev. 
rxvi.-vcriti. ib. xvii. 149 et seq.; Haupt, Babylonian Elements 
in the Levitical Ritual, ib. xix. 55 et seq. 


E. G. H. G. A. B. 


LEVY. See EXECUTION. 


LEVY, AARON: Revolutionary patriot; 
founder of Aaronsburg, Pa.; born in Amsterdam in 
1742; died in Philadelphia Feb. 23, 1815. He went 
to America at an early age and settled in Pennsyl- 
vania, his name appearing in the first tax-assessment 
lists of Northumberland county. He engaged in 
trade with the Indians and furnished supplies to the 
proprietary government, and, during the war of the 
Revolution, to the colonial army. In 1778 Levy 
signed a memorial of the inhabitants of Northumber- 
land county asking help on account of the British 
and Indian ravages in the vicinity. In the same 
year he removed to Lancaster, engaging in business 
with Joseph Simon. Hespeculated in land in Penn- 
sylvania, and soon became one of the largest landed 
proprietors, owning immense tracts in nearly every 
county in the state. During the war he released to 
the state twelve tracts in Luzerne county; later he 


Levy, Abraham Hirtzel 
Levy, Asser 


petitioned the government requesting that they be 
either paid for or returned to him (see letter dated 
Aug. 26, 1801, in Pennsylvania State Archives, sec- 
ond series, xviil. 347, 442). 

Robert Morris, the financier of the Revolution, 
was Levy’s partnerin many of these specuiations, 
and borrowed considerable sums of money from 
him, acknowledgment of the indebtedness being 
made at the time of Morris’ bankruptcy. Through 
the influence of Morris, Levy loaned a large amount 
of money to the Continental Congress for the pur- 
pose of carrying on the war. This money was 
never fully repaid (sce Jetter in reference to these 
loans in the Journals of Congress, March 29, 1781). 
It was after the war that he engaged in his greatest 
speculation in Jand, with which his name will al- 
ways be connected. In 1779 he bought a large 
tract of land in Center county, Pa., upon which he 
laid out the town of Aaronsburg, the earliest town 
in the county, the plan of which was recorded at 
Sunbury on Oct. 4, 1786; it is the first town in the 
United States that was planned by, and named 
after,a Jew. Aaron Levy was one of the original 
members of the Congregation Mickvé Israel, Phila- 
delphia. Iledied without issue. See AARONSBURG. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isabella H. Rosenbach and Abraham &. Wolf 

Rosenbach, in Publ. Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. No. 2, 1894, pp. 


157-163; Pennsylvania Colonial Records; Pennsylvania 
Archives; John Blair Linn, History of Center County. 


AL. A. 8. W. R. 


LEVY, ABRAHAM HIRTZEL: Alsatian 
martyr; born at Wittolsheim; executed at Colmar, 
Alsace, Dec. 31, 1754. He was accused with three 
other Jews of having stolen property amounting to 
three thousand livres from the house of a widow 
named Madeline Katin. Notwithstanding that they 
all proved an alibi, he was condemned to “ the ordi- 
nary and extraordinary question.” Ie did not con- 
fess and was broken on the wheel the next day. 
The chief Jews of Alsace, convinced of his inno- 
cence, brought the case on appeal before the Privy 
Council of Paris, which reversed the verdict and 
proclaimed Levy innocent June 16, 1755. His re- 
mains were removed from the gallows, enveloped in 
a tallit, and buried in the Jewish cemetery of Jung- 
holtz. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: I. Loeb, Annuaire de la Société des Etudes 

Juives, i. 123-161. 

Dd. J. 

LEVY, ALBERT: French sculptor; born at 
Paris May 4, 1864. A pupil of Etienne Leroux, he 
exhibited for the first time in 1886, his work being 
@ portrait medallion. 

Lévy’s sculptures include: “Réverie,” 1887; “La 
Pri¢re” and “ Fillette,” 1888; “Etude d’Enfant,” 
1889; “Jeune Pavsanne 4 Ja Source,” 1891; “La 
Chanson,” 1892; “ Jeune Trouveur,” 1898; “ Portrait 
de Simon,” 1894; “Eve,” 1895: “Jean de Rotrou a 
Vingt Ans,” 1896; “Sans Permis,” 1898. He has ex- 
ecuted also busts of several well-known persons. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Curinier, Dict. Nat. ii. 126. 


S. F. T. H. 


LEVY, ALFRED: Frenchrabbi; born at Luné- 
ville Dec. 14. 1840. He studied at the Collége de 
Lunéville and centered (1860) the Paris Rabbinical 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


56 





Seminary. On leaving it in 1866 he was appointed 
rabbi at Dijon, where he remained for two years, 
He then occupied for twelve years the rabbinate of 
his native town, and in 1880 became chief rabbi of 
the consistory of Lyons. Heisa chevalier of the 
Legion of Honor. 

Lévy has published the folowing writings: ‘‘ Le 
Deuil et les Cérémonies Funébres chez les Israélites,” 
Paris, 1879; “ Notice sur les Israélites du Duché de 
Lorraine,” 1885; “ Notice sur les Israélites de Lyon,” 
1894; “Les Doctrines d’Israel, Recueil de Sermons,” 
Lyons, 1896, S. 


LEVY, ALPHONSE: French painter; born at 
Marmoutier, Alsace, in 1843; educated at the Stras- 
burg lyceum. At the age of seventeen he went to 
Paris, where he studied under Géréme. As an illus- 
trator, Lévy has drawn for all the great. Parisian 
journals, devoting himself almost exclusively to 
scenes of Jewish life. Among his illustrations the 
most important are those for the Jewish stories of 
Sacher Masoch, his “Jewish Life,” and especially 
his latest collection of thirty drawings lithographed 
by himself. He is now (1904) engaged on a series of 
sketches of Jewish life in Algiers to parallel hig 
drawings of the Ashkenazic Jews. In the Salon of 
the Société Nationale des Beaux-Arts and at the In- 
ternational Exposition of 1900 Lévy won prizes, and 
the committee, Geréme, Dagnan, Bouveret, Henri 
Bouchot, and Gustave Geffroy, recommended him 
for the cross of the Legion of Honor. He has been 
made also an officer of the Academy. 

s. J. Iva, 


LEVY, AMY: English novelist and poet; born 
Nov. 10, 1861, in London; died there Sept. 10, 1899. 
Verse written by her before she was eight years of 
age gave evidence of high literary talent. By the 
time she had entered her teens she had produced 
a considerable number of verses, essays, plays, and 
short stories characterized by a steady and rapid 
increase in significance and power; one of her poems 
written at the end of that period was published in 
the quarterly known as the “Pelican.” In 1876 the 
family moved to Brighton, where she attended the 
high school. It was while at school that she wrote 
“ Xantippe,” a scathing defense in verse of Socrates’ 
spouse from a modern standpoint—a remarkable 
achievement for a school-girl in her teens. 

On leaving school Amy Levy spent two years at 
Girton College, Cambridge, working fitfully at the 
prescribed studies, but doing much reading and 
writing. During her first term there a story of hers 
came out in “Temple Bar,” and a little Jater “ Nan- 
tippe and Other Poems” was published in tliree vol- 
umes. Then came a winter in Dresden, and on her 
return to London she occupied herself with teaching 
and writing. “The Minor Poet,” published in 1882, 
is tinged with sadness and with suggestions of auto- 
biography. The thirdand last volume of her poems, 
“A London Plane Tree,” appeared after her death. 
As pure literature all three volumes have a distinct- 
ive charm. Her first novel, the “Romance of @ 
Shop,” andashort story, “Miss Meredith,” were pub- 
lished in 1886, after a winter spent in Florence; and 
in 1888 “ Reuben Sachs” appeared. The last-named 
work presents some of the less pleasing aspects of 


57 | THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levy, Abraham Hirtzel 
Levy, Asser 


ea gay ee eg eS a ee a a eee age ay 


the Jewish character, and the vivid writing of the 
exquisitely imagined story makes regret more keen 
that the author’s outlook on her people was so 


limited. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dietionary of National Biography. 
J. 


LEVY, ARMAND (ABRAHAM): French 
mathematician and mineralogist; born at Paris 
1794; died there 
June 26, 1841. 
He was a grad- 
uate of the Ecole 
Normale, where 
he became teach- 
er of mathemat- 
ics (1814 — 15). 
He went to Eng- 
land, where he 
lived till 1828, 
and then to Bel- 
cium. Here he 
was lecturer at 
the University 
of Liége, and be- 
came a member 
of the Academy 
of Sciences at 
Brussels. Re- 
turning to 
France in 18380. 
he was appoint- 
ed professor of 
mineralogy at 
the Collége 
Charlemagne. 

Lévy pub- 
lished essays in 
the “Corre- 
spondance Ma- 
thématique” of 
Quételet (1828- 
30), in the “ An- 
nals of Philos- 
ophy,” and in 
the “ Philosoph- 
ical Magazine,” 
and was the au- 
thor of: “ De Dit- 
férentes Propri- 
étés des Sur- 
faces de Second 
Ordre ” “Our 
une Nouvelle 
Maniére de Me- 
surer la Pesan- 
teur Spécifique 


des Corps”; “Sur Quelques Propriétés des Sys- - 


témes de Forces.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : La Grande Encyclopédie, Nouveau La- 
rousse Illustré., 


8. | peed aes 

LEVY, ASSER (ASSER LEVY VAN 
SWELLEM): One of the first Jewish settlers of 
New Amsterdam, as New York city was known 
Under the Dutch; probably born in Amsterdam; 





“Blessing of the New Moon.” 


(From a drawing by Alphonse Lévy.) 


died in 1680. He is first mentioned as one of the 
Jews who went to New Netherlands in 1654, proba- 
bly as refugees from Brazil. From the start Levy 
was one of the champions of his people, never per- 
mitting an injury, however slight, to pass without 
protest. In 1655 Peter Stuyvesant, the governor 
of the colony, was ordered to attack the Swedes on 
the Delaware, and accordingly issued orders for the 
enlistment of all adults. Several Jews. among 
whom was Asser 
Levy, appear to 
have been ready 
toserve; but the 
governor and 
council passed 
an ordinance 
“that Jews can 
not be permitted 
to serve as sol- 
diers, but shall 
instead pay a 
monthly contri- 
bution for the 
exemption.” 
Levy and_ his 
comrades at once 
refused to pay, 
and on Nov. 5, 
1655, petitioned 
for leave to 
stand guard like 
other burghers 
or to be relieved 
from the tax. 
The petition was 
rejected with 
the comment 
that if the peti- 
tioners were not 
satisfied with 
the law they 
might go else- 
where. Levy 
successfully ap- 
pealed to Hol- 
land, and was 
subsequently 
permitted to do 
guard duty like 
other citizens. 
As Levy ap- 
pears also as a 
prominent  tra- 
der at Fort Or- 
ange (Albany), 
it is likely that 
he was respon- 
sible for the rebuke given to Stuyvesant by the di- 
rectors in Holland during the same year because of 
his refusal to permit Jews to trade there. Levy 
was also one of the first licensed butchers in the col- 
ony. In 1657 the burgher right was made abso- 
lutely essential for certain trading privileges, and 
within two days of a notice to that effect Asser Levy 
appeared in court requesting to be admitted as a 
burgher. The officials expressed their surprise at 


Levy, Asser 
Lévy, Gustave 


r 


such a request. The record reads: “The Jew claims 
that such ought not to be refused him as he keeps 
watch and ward like other burghers, showing a 
burgher’s certificate from the city of Amsterdam 
that the Jew is a burgher there.” The application 
was denied, but Levy at once brought the matter 
before Stuyvesant and the council, which, mindful 
of the previous experience, ordered that Jews should 
be admitted as burghers (April 21, 1657). 

As early as 1661 Levy purchased real estate at 
Albany; he was also the earliest Jewish owner of 
real estate in New York city, his transactions there 
commencing in June, 1662, with the purchase of 
land on South William street. Within ten years of 
his arrival Levy had become a man of consequence, 
and when, in 1664, the wealthiest inhabitants were 
summoned to lend the city money for fortifications 
against the English, he was the only Jew among 
them: he lent the city 100 florins. 

It is asa litigant, however, that Levy figures most 
prominently in the Dutch records, his name often 
appearing for days in succession. He invariably 
argued his own case and was almost invariably suc- 
cessful. Only on two or three occasions did he tig- 
ure as defendant. No other Jew seems to have had 
so many dealings with Christians, or to have been 
on more intimate terms with them. As a litigant 
he is named also in the records of Gravesend in 
1674. Levy’s trading relations extended to New 
England, ana he frequently appeared as attorney 
for merchants in Holland. In 1671 he lent the 
money for building the first Lutheran church in 
New York. About 1678 he built a slaughter-house 
in the east end of what is now known as Wall street, 
where he appears to have been the owner of a fa- 
mous tavern. 

Instead of being unpopular on account of his 
many lawsuits, the contrary seems to have been the 
case. The confidence reposed in his honesty by his 
Christian fellow citizens appears frequently from 
the court records. Property in litigation was put 
into his custody; he is named as executor in the 
wills of Christian merchants, and figures as both 
administrator and trustee in colonial records. His 
influence was not confined to New York; in the co- 
lonial records: of Connecticut he appears as interve- 
ning to obtain the remission of a fine imposed upon 
a Jew there. The court remitted the fine with the 
comment that it did so “asa token of its respect to 
the said Mr. Asser Levy.” He left a considerable 
estate, over which there was a long legal contest. 
A second Asser Levy appears in the Connecticut 
records as late as 1725, and a third, presumably a 
grandson, was an Officer in a New Jersey regiment 
during the American Revolution. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Records of New Amsterdam, ed. B. 
Fernow, New York, 1897; Leon Hiihner, Asser Levy, in Pub- 
lications Am, Jew. Hist. Soc.; Thomas F. De Voe, The 
Market Book, i. 45, 46, 49, 54, 55; E. B. O’Callahan, Hist. of 
New Netherlands, ii. 286, New York, 1848; Calendar of New 
York Historical Manuscripts (Dutch), 1630-1664, pp. 151, 
155, 184, 310; Simon W, Rosendale, 4n Karly Ownership of 
Real Estate, in Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc.; Valen- 
tine’s Manual, 1865, pp. 691, 701; The Publie Recurds of the 
Colony of Connecticut, Hartford, 1872; Documents Relating 
to Colonial History, ed. Brodhead, xii. 96, xiv. 341, 351, Al- 
bany, 1877; J. Pearson, Harly Records of the City of Albany, 
passim; Daly. Settlement of the Jews in North America, 
New York, 1893; F. B. Heitman, Historical Register of Offi- 
cers of the Continental Army, p. 262. 


A. L. Ht. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 58 





LEVY, AUGUST MICHEL: French engi- 
neer, geologist, and mineralogist; born at Paris 
Aug. 17, 1844; son of Michel Lévy. In 1862 he en- 
tered the Ecole Polytechnique, and two years later 
the school of mines, becoming engineer in 1867, and 
engineer-in-chief in 1883. After 1876 he took ayn 
important part in the preparation of the detailed 
geological map of France published by the ministry 
of public works. In 1887 he became director of this 
important undertaking, and in the following year 
took charge also of the underground topographic 
survey. In addition to articles and notes scat- 
tered in various scientific periodicals, he wrote: 
“Mémoire sur les Divers Modes de Structure deg 
Roches Eruptives Etudiées au Microscope,” Paris, 
1876; “Mémoire pour Servir a VExplication de la 
Carte Géologique Détaillée de la France,” 7. 1879, 
“Introduction & TEtude des Roches Eruptives 
Francaises,” 7b. 1879; “Synthése des Minéraux et des 
Roches,” 2.1882 (the three preceding in collaboration 
with Foqueé); “Les Minéraux des Roches,” 725. 1888; 
“Etude Géologique de Serrania de Ronda,” 2d. 1888 
(with Bergeron), “Tableaux des Mineraux des 
Roches,” 20, 1890 (with Lacroix); “Etude sur la Dé- 
termination des Feldspaths dans les Plaques Minces,” 
2. 1894; “Structure et Classitication des Roches 
Eruptives,” 7d. 1899. He died Jan. 2, 1908. 

s. ' J. Ka, 

LEVY, BENJAMIN: Coloinal resident of 
Philadelphia. On Nov. 7, 1765, he signed, with 
other citizens of Philadelphia, the celebrated agree- 
ment not to import merchandise from England until 
the repeal of the Stamp Act. On Dec. 27, 1776, he 
was appointed, upon the recommendation of the 
treasurer of the United States, an authorized signer 
of the bills of credit (see “Journal of the Continen- 
tal Congress ”). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rosenbach, The Jews in Philadelphia Prior 
to 1800, p. 13, Philadelphia, 1888; Publications Am. Jew. 
Hist. Soc. i. 60, 86. 

A. A. S. W. R. 

LEVY, EDUARD CONSTANTIN: German 
musician; born March 3, 1796, at Sanct Avold, Lor- 
raine; died June 3, 1846, at Vienna. He reccived 
his first lessons in music from his father, a musician 
to the Duke of Zweibriicken. As the protégé of a 
Freuch officer he entered, at the age of fourteen, the 
Paris Conservatoire, where he became proficient in 
the bugle (which he chose as his favorite instrument), 
the cello, and the violin. He joined the French 
army in 1812, served with the Old Guard through 
the Waterloo campaign, and at the Restoration was 
appointed bandmaster and drum-major. After re- 
tiring from the service he went on concert tours 
through France and Switzerland, married at Ba- 
sel, and in 1824 went to Vienna, where he became 
soloist in the K. K. Hof-Oper. In 1834 he was 
appointed professor at the Vienna Conservatorium, 
and in 1835 became a member of the Imperial Hof- 
kapelle. 

Levy’s three children inherited his musical talent: 
Karl was a pianist, Melanie a harpist, and Rich- 
ard Eduard a cornetist. In 1838 they accompa- 
nied their father on concert tours through Russia 
and Germany. | 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Riemann, Musikalisches Lexikon. 
s. 


59 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levy, Asser 
Lévy, Gustave 





eae eg Se ee ee 
LEVY, ELEAZAR: Colonial resident of New 
york city prior to the Revolution. He fled from 
New York on account of the British occupation and 
took up his residence in Philadelphia, where he en- 
aged in business. On Aug. 26, 1779, he presented 
, memorial to the Continental Congress, claiming 
that the United States had erected fortifications on 
ands at West Point on which he held a mortgage, 
and asking for compensation for his loss. On May 
93, 1783, it is recorded that a congressional commit- 
tee reported that in its opinion “it is not convenient 
to take any order therein.” During the Revolu- 
tionary War Levy took the oath of allegiance to 
the state of Pennsylvania. In 1785 he acted as 
one of the administrators of the estate of Haym 
Solomon (see “Pennsylvania Journal,” Jan. 15, 
1789). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Friedenwald, Memorials Presented to the 


Continental Congress, in Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. 
ij. 128-126; Westcott, Test Laws of Pennsylvania, Philadel- 


ie A. 8. W.R. 

LEVY, EMIL: German philologist; born at 
Hamburg Oct. 23, 1855; educated at the universi- 
ties of Heidelberg and Berlin (Ph.D. 1880). The 
following two years he spent in Paris and Montpel- 
lier; he became privat-docent at the University of 
Freiburg-im-Breisgau in 1888, and was appointed 
assistant professor in 1887. 

Levy is known principally as the author of the 
great dictionary, begun in 1894 and still (1904) unfin- 
ished, entitled “Provenzalisches Supplement-Wor- 
terbuch. Berichtigungen und Ergiénzungen zu 
Raynouards Lexique Roman ” (vols. i.-iv. covering 
Ato L). Among his other works are “ Der Trouba- 
dour Bertolome Zorzi,” Halle, 1883, and “ Bemer- 
kungen zum Engadinischen Hiob,” Freiburg-im- 
Breisgau, 1895. 

s. cae Bais 

LEVY, EMILE: French rabbi; born at Mar- 
moutier, Alsace, Jan. 28, 1848. Educated at the 
lyceum at Strasburg and the seminary at Paris, he 
became rabbi of Verdun in 1876, which position he 
held until 1892; in that year he became chief rabbi 
of Bayonne. 

Lévy was a contributor to the “ Revue des Etudes 
Juives” and is the author of “La Monarchie chez 
les Juifs en Palestine,” Paris, 1885. In collabora- 
tion with M. Bloch he has written also “ Histoire 
de la Littérature Juive Depuis l’Origine Jusqu’a 
Nos Jours.” He died in December, 1907. 

8, F. T. H. 


LEVY, ERNST: German physician; born at 
Lauterburg, Alsace, March 5, 1864: educated at the 
universities of Strasburg, Heidelberg, and Paris 
(M.D. 1887). Settling in Strasburg, he became privat- 
docent in hygiene at the university there in 1891 and 
assistant professor in 1897. 

_ Levy has written several monographs and essays 
i the German and French medical journals, and 
‘8 the author also of the two following works: 

Grundriss der Klinischen Bacteriologie,” Berlin, 

1894 (2d ed. 1898); “Bacteriologischer Leitfaden,” 


Strasburg, 1897 (2d ed. 1901). 


PIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biog. Lex. 


Bot. A: 





| 


LEVY FAMILY (of America): The follow- 
ing is a genealogical tree of the family descended 
from Benjamin Levy of Philadelphia: 









<2) 
«3 
=) % 
3 : 
E Be = 
S —Eee 
SS el 
No rm ; 
io a) 
a". 9 
ze z —$ 
on fab) 
3 a as 
R 5s S 3 
= sm SG po 
= —>?.28 Sd wee" 
o— chad 
a mS =I 
~ <j 
a # 
= ~~ 
SD mm. ° 
e Suse oss = b= 
Bg 8 naa i Qe a 
Boe Se _ NG 3 
< a & w i ma be 
| a haa — = 
ad | S08 RS z= 
Mee ie _ 
Seo = s l = 
oD s=E a ous ms 
om tizs = ~ 
a iar 2 i q 
E=) as =r. * 
~ RES = e 2 
{| —— : < 
a Sos Aa 8 a 
Eb ger AS & = 
So Bae eae > 
4 ie mom S = 
© Om om 
g ages _se-8 x 
& Ron s 
a mos bt 8 
a teak P= 
Net Es ah 2 
ox cz fil = 
Ye : S =) 
= pice ae 
New 4 ~ 
Bee A 
— ase ARS 
SC fins so 
ox ond e5 i 
if aaa} “4 
}} = 
im 
a 3 
5 oS a 
AD Oe : fee 
r= a = 
os = 2 
ig ; : 
> Ce eae es = 
= £55 = ™ 
= —see | 
= tA 
— — 
= il = 
a Ee = = 
pon a s © 
css ie =} Se, 
so S28 aor = = 
r=] . ° <= fal ra 
co ad Se ee 3s 
ran) DG ey 2 <>) 
Sirwe Siew fax 2 = 
ax en it Ss . Rn 
-— 2 ase R2 rm MW 
o> «32S Pre be 
Hs 5. s = 
See 23 i > 
It tl ame ete 
aa ER ks) 
— ne ais _ 
qr 2 
mH 
ao 5t == 
z ae =o 
2 ne Faces 
ad ise <= 
3 ll 
& 
TS ee 
med 
m<AQVis 
SS 
aE=8 
Sascd e 
= i) 


LEVY, GUSTAVE: French engraver; born 
at Toul June 21, 1819; died at Paris in 1894; a pu- 
pil of Geille. He exhibited first at the Salon of 
1844, and engraved the portraits of Madrazzo, Ri- 
gaud, and a number of others. Special mention 
may be made of the following engravings by him: 
“The Family of Concina ” (from the Veronese in the 


Levy, Hayman 
Levy, Judith 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


60 





Dresden gallery); Raphael's * Sistine Madonua ” and 
“Diademed Virgin”; Caracci’s “ Madonna of Si- 
lence”; Couture’s “ Damocles”; and Rembrandt's 
“Good Shepherd.” Still more popular are his en- 
gravings of the King of the Belgians (from Winter- 
halter’s portrait), Béranger, the poet Ventura dle la 
Vega, and theengraver Wille. The plate of Lévy’s 
last engraving, “ The Fair Gardener,” was framed on 
his tombstone in the cemetery of Montmartre. 
8. J. Ka. 


LEVY, HAYMAN: Colonial merchant of New 
York; born in 1721; diedin New York in 1789. He 
engaged in business at an early age, and is men- 
tioned as the owner of a privateer and as engaged 
in the fur trade in 1760 (see “ New York Mercury,” 
Aug. 17,1761). In 1765 the signature “ Hayman 
Levy, Junior,” was appended to the Non-Importa- 
tion Resolutions drawn up by merchants in Phila- 
delphia, but it can not be said with certainty that it 
was the signature of the Hayman Levy treated here. 
In 1770 Levy signed in New York resolutions of a 
similar but more stringent character. In 1768 he 
failed in business, but soon recovered his losses. 
The occupation of New York by the British caused 
him to remove to Philadelphia. On July 20, 1776, 
he is mentioned in the Journal of the Continental 
Congress. Hayman Levy was one of the founders 
of the Congregation Mickvé Isracl, organized in 
1782, and served on the first board of trustees. In 
1784 he returned to New York and aided in the re- 
establishment of the congregation in that city. He 
was one of the most widely known merchants of 
New York, and was probably the first employer of 
John Jacob Astor. He had sixteen children, some 
of whom were prominent citizens of New York. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. i. 14, 60, 
88; ii. 8L; iv. 89, 210; vi. 180, 185; ix. 88: x. 13, 62; Daly, 
The Settlement of the Jews in North America, pp. 52, 58. 


A. A. S. W. R. 


LEVY, HENRI LEOPOLD: French painter: 
born at Nancy Sept. 23, 1840; pupil of the Ecole des 
Beaux-Arts and of Picot, Cabanel, and Fromentin. 
His first exhibit was “Hecuba Finding the Body of 
Her Son Polydorus on the Shore,” at the Salon of 
1865; at the following Salons he exhibited “Joash 
Saved from the Massacre of the Grandsons of Atha- 
liah” (1867); “Hebrew Captive Weeping over the 
Ruins of Jerusalem” (1869); “Herodias” (1872); 
“Sarpedon”; “The Sermon.” For the Church of 
Saint Merriin Paris he painted mural pieces of scenes 
in the life of Saint Denis; these were exhibited at 
the Exposition of 1878. His “ Coronation of Charle- 
magne ” is a mural piece for the Panthéon at Paris. 
At the International Exposition in 1900 Lévy won 
a gold medal for his "Eve Plucking the Appie,” 
“Deucalion and Pyrrha,” and “Samson and Delilah.” 
He died Jan. 2, 1905. 

Ss. J. Ka. 


LEVY, ISAAC: French rabbi; born Jan. 20, 
1835, at Marmoutier, in the old department of Bas- 
Rhin (Alsace). When sixteen years old he entered 
the rabbinic school of Metz, and was graduated 
thence at the age of twenty-three, receiving the di- 
ploma of a chief rabbi. In Feb., 1858, he was called 
as rabbi to Verdun (Meuse); in 1865 to Lunéviille 


(Meurthe): and in 1869 to Colmar as chief rabbi of 
the district of Haut-Rhin. 

When Alsace was annexed by Germany, Levy de. 
cided to remain a Frenchman; and the French goy. 
ernment created a new chief rabbinate for him at 
Vesoul (Haute-SaGne). Here he officiated for fifteen 
years, and then (1887) went as chief rabbi to Bor. 
deaux. Lévy isa chevalier of the Legion of Honor 
and an officer of public instruction. Besides a num. 
ber of single sermons he has published the following: 
“Veillées du Vendredi ” (2d ed., Paris, 1869); “ Récits 
Bibliques ” (2d ed., Paris, 1878); “ Défense du Juda- 
isme ” (2b. 1867); “ Histoire Sainte ” (23. 1869 et seq.). 
“ Alsatiana ” (¢b. 1873); “ Nathan le Sage” (Vesoul, 
1881); “Les Récréations Israélites” (2d ed., Paris, 
1899); “ Développement des 18 Articles de Foi” (7, 
1895); “Heures de Recueillement ” (7). 1898). 

Lévy edited also a supplement, entitled “ Le Foyer 
Israélite ” (1862-65), to the periodical for the young, 
“La Vérité Israélite.” S. 


LEVY, JACOB: German rabbi and lexicog- 
rapher; born May, 1819, at Dabrzyze, Posen; died 
at Breslau Feb. 27, 1892. Having received his Tal- 
mudic education from his father, Isaac Levy, who 
was district rabbi at Schildberg, and from Akiba 
Eger, he entered the Matthias Gymnasium at Breslau, 
after leaving which he studied philosophy and ori- 
ental languages at Breslau University, and received 
his doctor’s degree from the University of Halle in 
1845. 

He accepted a call to Rosenberg, Upper Silesia, 
where he officiated as rabbi until 1850. Wishing to 
live in an intellectual center, he moved to Breslau 
without any prospect of employment. In 1857 he 
became associate rabbi of the Breslau community; 
in 1864 he was appointed admonitor to the local 
court, his duty being to admonish the Jews who 
had to take the oath “More Judaico”: and in 1878 
he was appointed instructor at the Mora-Salomon 
Leipziger Stiftung, an office which he continued to 
hold till his death. 

Levy published in 1867-68 at Leipsic his “ Chal- 
diiisches Woérterbuch tiber die Targumim ” (8d ed., 
2b, 1881), with notes by Prof. H. Fleischer. In rec- 
ognition of this work the Prussian ministry granted 
him in 1875 the title of “ Kéniglicher Professor.” 
His chief work, however, is his “ Neuhebritisches und 
Chaldiiisches Worterbuch tiber die Talmudim und 
Midraschim ” (with notes by Fleischer; 4 vols., 22. 
1876-89). 

Levy was the first to apply modern scientific 
methods to rabbinic Jexicography; and he aided 
considerably toward rousing Christian scholars to 
au interest in rabbinical literature. All subsequent 
work in the field of Talmudic lexicography has 
been based on Levy’s labors (comp. “Z. D. M. G.” 
xlvii. 494 e¢ seq.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Schwab, Répertoire, s.v.; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 

1892, No. 11. 


S, C. I. 


LEVY, JONAS PHILLIPS: American met- 
chant; son of Michael Levy and Rachel Phillips: 
born in Philadelphia 1807; died in New York 1883. 
He was granted the freedom of the country by the 
government of Peru for signa! services rendered in 


61 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Levy, Hayman 
Levy, Judith 


I 


the navy of that country. Hecommanded the U.S.8. 
« America” during the Mexican war, and was as- 
signed to the transportation of troops to Vera Cruz, 
at the surrender of which port he was appointed its 
captain by Gen. Wintield Scott. He left three sons 
(Jefferson M., Louis Napoleon, and Mitchell 
A.C.) and two daughters, 
A. S. Wo. 


LEVY, JOSEPH HIAM: English economist ; 
porn 1838; educated at the City of London School 
and City of London College. He entered the Brit- 
ish Civil Service, was assigned to the Board of Edu- 
cation in 1862, and rose to the position of examiner 
of school accounts. He was one of the most impor- 
tant members of the National Liberal Club; he 
founded its Economic Circle, became its chairman, 
and edited its * Transactions.” Levy was lecturer 
and exaniliner in economicsat the Birkbeck Institute 
and City of London College. He was editor of 
“The Individualist ” and of “ Personal Rights,” the 
organ of the Personal Rights Association, and has 
written much on economic and social topics. He 
retired from the Board of Education in 1902. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Noy. 1, 1901; American Jewish 
Fear Book, 1904. : 


LEVY, JOSEPH LEONARD: American 
rabbi; born Nov. 24, 1865, in London; educated at 
Jews’ College and University College (B.A.), Lon- 
don, at Bristol University, England, and at Western 
University of Pennsylvania (D.D.). Levy was rabbi 
of the Bristol Hebrew Congregation (1883-89) and of 
Bnai Israel Congregation, Sacramento, Cal. (1889- 
1893); associate rabbi of the Keneseth Israel Congre- 
gation, Philadelphia (1893-1901) ; and, since 1901, has 
been rabbi of the Rodeph Shalom congregation, Pitts- 
burg. In 1898 he was elected chaplain of “ Keegan’s 
Brigade,” with which he served through the Span- 
ish-American war, Levy was the organizer of a 
number of charitable and religious societies among 
the Jews of Philadelphia. Te is the author of a 
translation of the tractate Rosh ha-Shanah of the 
Babylonian Talmud (Philadelphia, 1895). He pub- 
lished also “The Greater Lights” (2b. 1895); “Home 
Service for the Passover” (éb. 1896); “The Nine- 
teenth Century” (2b. 1901); “A Book of Prayer” 
(Pittsburg, 1902); “The Jew’s Beliefs” (c+. 1903); 
“The Children’s Service and Hymnal” (ib. 1908); 
“Text-Book of Religion and Ethics for Jewish Chil- 
dren” (7b, 1903); “Sabbath Readings” (7b, 1904); 
and eight volumes of Sunday lectures. Levy is the 
editor of the “ Jewish Criterion,” published at Pitts- 
burg, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: American Jewish Year Book, 1904. 


A. I. G. D. 


LEVY, JOSEPH MOSES: Founder and pro- 
Prietor of the London “ Daily Telegraph ”; born Dec. 
10, 1812: died at Ramsgate Oct. 12, 1888. He was 
educated in London and Germany. After spending 
the earlier part of his life in commercial pursuits he 
became the owner of a printing establishment near 

lect street. In this way he became connected with 
the + Sunday Times,” of which he was chief propri- 
ttor in 1855. The “ Daily Telegraph and Courier” 
Was founded in June, 1855, and by September had 


come entirely under Levy’s management, who re- 
duced its price. making it the first London penny 
daily paper; and it was through his genius that it 
becaine a great powcr in journalism. When he 
assumed the proprietorship of the paper its fortunes 
were at so low an ebb that the purchase-money was 
only £1,000. Levy worked in the interests of the 
paper with unflagging zeai, many members of his 
family also becoming connected with it: and he col- 
lected round him a band of able writers, including 

Sir E. Arnold and G. A. Sala. In politics the paper 

was Liberal until 1886, when Liberal-Unionist princi- 

ples were adopted. 

Levy left several children. Wis eldest son, Ed- 
ward, whoassumed the nameof “ Lawson,” became 
chief proprictor of the “ Daily Telegraph,” and was 
created a baronet in 1892, and a peer in 1902 with 
the title of Lord Burnham. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Daily Telegraph, Oct. 138, 1888; Jew. Chron. 
Oct. 19, 1888; Times (London), Oct. 13, 1888; Dict. Nat. 
Biog. 

J. G. L. 

LEVY, JUDAH: Tunisian rabbinical author; 
lived at Tunis and died therein the middle of the nine- 
teenth century; sonof Nathan Levy. He was orig- 
inally from Gibraltar. He published under his own 
name Only one Hebrew work, “ Mahane Lewiyyah.” 
This work consists of four parts; namely: (1) a 
commentary on the treatise “Hilkot Semahot” of 
Meir of Rothenburg; (2) a collection of rules on the 
duties of the “ Nezirim ”; (3) a treatise entitled “Ma’a- 
mar Nezirut Shimshon”; (4) a treatise on questions 
of Levitical impurities, “ Hilkot Tum’ah.” He pub- 
lished also, in collaboration with David Bonan, two 
works with the same title, “De Hesheb” (Leghorn, 
1857), responsa and studies on the treatise San- 
hedyrin. 

DIB LIQUHALE ES Cazes, Notes Bibliographiques, pp. 44-50, 28/- 


s. 8. M. Fr. 


LEVY, JUDITH: English philanthropist; born 
in London 1706; died there Jan. 20, 1803; a daugh- 
ter of Moses Hart, founder of the Great Synagogue, 
London; married Elias Levy, a weaithy finaucier 
and government contractor. This Tady, who lived 
to a great age, enjoyed after her husband’s death an 
income of £6,000 a year, and dwelt in great splen- 
dor at a house formerly belonging to Heydigger, 
master of the revels to King George II. She fre- 
quented many of the nobility’s social gatherings and 
played half-guinea quadrille with the Countess of 
Yarmouth, Lady Holdernesse, Lord Stormont, and 
other persons of rank. 

Judith Levy was a generous benefactress to her 
coreligionists, and in 1790 contributed £4,000 toward 
the cost of rebuilding the Great Synagogue. The 
last years of her life were spent in seclusion, now at 
Bath, sometimes at Richmond, and occasionally in 
Albermarle street, where she died. She died intes- 
tate, leaving a sum of £125,000 at her bankers; and 
was buried on Jan. 21 in the Jewish cemetery at 
Mile End. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lysons, Enviroius of London, Supplement, 
p. 68; Cat. Anglo-Jew. Hist. Exh. 1887; Notes and Queries, 
2d series, xii.; Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, 
p. 90. 

Te G. L. 


Levy, Louis 
Levy, Moritz 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 62 


FE ee PD es a Rg OO OO a 


LEVY, LOUIS (ASHER BEN MOSES): 
Poet and cantor of the Berlin synagogue; died Jan. 
25, 1858. He wrote “Tekufat ha-Shanah” (Berlin, 
1842), poems on the four seasons, in imitation of 
Thomsnn’s “Seasons.” The preface includes “ Na- 
‘al Yad,” a translation of Schiller’s “Handschuh.” 
He wrote also some songs for festivals. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1619; Fiirst, 

Bibl. Jud. ii, 242, 

S. M. Sc. 

LEVY, LOUIS EDWARD: American photo- 
chemist; born at Stenowitz, Bohemia, Oct. 12, 1846. 
He went to America in early life, and was educated 
at Detroit ; he studied especially mathematics and as- 
tronomy at Michigan University in 1866, and optics 
at Detroit. He was connected with the meteorolog- 
ical observatory of the United States Lake Survey 
District in 1866, and engaged in researches in micro- 
scopic photography during 1869and 1870. This led 
to his invention of a method of photochemical en- 
graving, the “Levytype,” which was patented in 
1875. He established a company in Baltimore, but 
removed to Philadelphia in 1877, in which year he in- 
vented the “ Levy line-screen,” which was perfected 
by his brother Max, For this he received the John 
Scott Legacy medal at the Franklin Institute in 
1897. He invented a new process of intagiio en- 
graving, the “photo-mezzotint,” in 1889. In 1896 
he invented a new method of etching, the “Levy 
acid blast,” for which he received the Elliott Cresson 
gold medalat the Franklin Institute in 1899. He was 
awarded a medal and diploma at the World’s Colum- 
bian Exposition in 1893, and decorations and di- 
plomas from the Imperial Photographic Society of 
Moscow and at the recent Paris Exposition. 

From 1887 to 1890 Levy was publisher and editor 
of the Philadelphia “Evening Herald,” and at the 
same time of the “ Mercury,” a Philadelphia Sunday 
paper. In 1896 he edited and published “ Cuba and 
the Cubans.” He is the author of “The Russian 
Jewish Refugees in America” (1895), an English ver- 
sion of Cabrera’s “Cuba y sus Jucces,” and “ Busi- 
ness, Money, and Credit” (1896), a brochure on the 
relations of exchange to the medium of exchange. 
He has contributed to many technical journals, and 
represented the Franklin Institute at the Scientific 
Congress of the Paris Exposition. In Jewish mat- 
ters he is associated with many communal organi- 
zations, and he was editor, author, and publisher 
of “The Jewish Year” (1895) and of other publi- 
cations, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jrho’s Who in Amertea. A 

LEVY, LUDWIG: German architect; born 
March 14, 1852, at Landau. After his return from 
Italy, where he completed his studies, he was en- 
trusted with the building of the new synagogue in 
Kaiserslautern. He was the architect also of the 
church at Olsbritcke near Kaiserslautern, of the 
synagogues in St. Johann, Strasburg (Alsace), and 
Kleinwilde near Kaiserslautern. 

Levy is at present (1904) professor in the Bauge- 
werkschule at Carlsruhe, 8. 


LEVY, MAURICE: French engineer and 
member of the Institut; born at Ribeauville, Al- 


sace, Feb, 28, 1888. Educated at the Ecole Poly. 
technique and the Ecole des Ponts et Chaussées, he 
became an engineer in 1863. During the Franco. 
German war (1870-71) he was entrusted by the Goy. 
ernment of National Defense with the control of 4 
part of the artillery. During the next decade he 
held several educational positions, becoming pro. 
fessor at the Ecole Centrale in 1875, member of the 
commission of the geodetic survey of France in 1879, 
and professor at the Collége de France in 1885, 

In 1888 Lévy inaugurated a system of Doat-trac. 
tion by means of overhead cables. A trial system 
was installed between Joinville-le-Pont and Saint- 
Maurice; it consisted of an endless cable which wag 
kept in motion by powerful steam-engines and to 
which boats were attached and thus kept at a speed 
of four kilometers an hour. The system proved un- 
satisfactory, however. 

Lévy was author of several works, of which may 
be mentioned: “La Statistique Graphique et Ses 
Applications 4 UArt des Constructions” (1874; 2d 
ed. 1887); “Sur Je Principe d’Energic” (1888); 
“Etude des Moyens de Traction des Bateaux: Le 
Halage Funiculaire” (with M. G. Pavie, 1894). He 
published also papers on kinematics, mechanics, 
physical mathematics, geometry, etec., in the 
“Comptes-Rendus de l’ Académie des Sciences,” the 
“ Journal de l’Ecole Polytechniyue,” and the “Jour- 
nal des Mathematiques Pures et Appliquées.” 

He was an officer of the Legion of Honor and of 
public instruction, and a member of the Academy 
of Sciences and of the Royal Academy of Sciences 
of Rome. He died Oct, 7, 1910. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Curinier, Dict. Nat. 


V. E. 


LEVY, MAX: American inventor; born at De- 
troit 1857. He invented the etched screen and the 
machinery for producing it now generally used in 
the half-tone process of photoengraving. After serv- 
ing an apprenticeship of three years with an archi- 
tect, he became chief draftsman in his brother’s 
(Louis E, Levy’s) photoengraving establishment at 
Baltimore during the early struggle to establish 
and perfect that branch of the graphic arts. He 
accompanied his brother to Philadelphia, and fora 
time was in charge of the entire business. After 
the introduction of the half-tone process he spent 
over two years of constant and close application de- 
vising and perfecting the mechanism of his new in- 
veution. Levy is also an inventor in other lines, 
and is a constant and indefatigable experimenter. 

A. D. Ba. 


LEVY, MEYER: German jurist; born in Woll- 
stein, province of Posen, Jan. 17, 1883; died in Ber- 
lin Oct. 18, 1896. After practising as an assessor in 
Berlin, he received the appointment of “ Rechts- 
Anwalt” in Fraustadt, where he at once began his 
literary activity, delivering lectures on lega] sub- 
jects. Among his writings of this period are to be 
noted: “ Der Staat und die Judenim Norddeutschen 
Bunde: Ein Mahnruf an das Norddeutsche Parla- 
ment,” Lissa, 1867, and “Die Zweite Instanz in 
Biirgerlichen Rechtsstreitigkeiten,” Berlin, 1871. In 
1872 he returned to Berlin and engaged in practise 
there, first at the Stadtgericht, then at the Land- 


63 | THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
pS ee ee i 


gericht, finally gaining admission to the Kammer- 

ericht. He secured a very large and influential 
elientage- Levy was president of the Berlin Bar 
Association. He was killed by a robber. 

Of Levy's works other than the above-mentioned 
may be cited the following: (with G. von Wilmow- 
sky) “Civilprozessordnung und Gerichtsverfass- 
ungsgesetz fiir das Deutsche Reich,” Berlin, 1877- 
1878 (2d ed. 1880; 6th ed. 1892); “Zur Practischen 
Anwendung der Deutschen Civilprozessordnuny,” 
jp. 1880; “ Handausgabe der Civilprozessordnung,” 
jp, 1884 (2d ed. 1889; 8d ed. 1894). 

, M. Co. 

LEVY, MICHEL: French publisher; born at 
Pfalzburg Dec. 20, 1821; died in Paris May 6, 1875. 
In 1886 he settled in the latter city, where, together 
with his brothers Calman and Nathan, he engaged 
in the publishing business. His firm soon became 
one of the most important publishing-houses in 
France and the center of modern belletristic litera- 
ture. The most noteworthy of its publications are 
the works of the elder and the younger Dumas, 
George Sand, Balzac, Alfred de Vigny, Lamartine, 
and Victor Hugo, and the scientific writings of 
Guizot, Renan, and Michelet. Lévy published also 
the collections “La Bibliothéque Dramatique,” “Le 
Théaitre Contemporain,” “La Bibliothéque Contem- 
poraine,” and “ La Collection Michel Lévy.” 

Of famous foreign authors whose works were 
published by the Lévy firm may be mentioned: 
Heine, Thackeray, and Macaulay. After Lévy’s 
death the business was continued by his brother 
Calman Lévy (b. in Pfalzburg Oct. 19, 1819; d. 
at Paris June 18, 1891), and since the death of the 
latter it has becn conducted by Calman’s three sons, 
Paul, Georges, and Gaston. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nouveau Larousse Iuustré; Meyers Kon- 
versations-Lerikon. 


8 F. C. 


LEVY, MICHEL: French physician; born at 
Strasburg Sept. 28, 1809; died at Paris March 13, 
1872; educated at the University of Montpellier 
(M.D. 1834). In 1836 he became professor of hy- 
giene at the Val-de-Grace in Paris; in 1845 he was 
appointed professor of pathology at Metz; two 
years later he returned in this capacity to the 
Val-de-Grace, of which medical school he became 
director in 1856. In the Crimean war he had for a 
few months charge of a hospital in Constantinople. 
He was the author of “Traité d’Hygiéne Publique 
et Privée,” Paris, 1843-45 (5th ed. 1869); “Sur la 
Rougeole des Adultes,” 73. 1847; “Histoire de la 
Méningite Cérébro-Spinale Observée au Val-de-Grace 
€n 1848 et 1849,” 76, 1850; “Sur l’ Hygiéne Militaire,” 
2. 1867; “Sur les Hé6pitaux-Baraques,” 2. 1871. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY - La Grande Encyclopédie; Nouveau Lea- 
rousse Tllustré, 
. EF. T. H. 


LEVY, MORITZ ABRAHAM: German Ori- 
€ntalist; born at Altona March 11, 1817: died at 
Breslau Feb. 22, 1872. Having received a rabbin- 
cal education, he became teacher in the Synagogen- 
Gemeinde of Breslau, where he was active for nearly 
thirty years, For his scientific labors he received from 
the King of Prussia, in 1865, the title of professor. 

Levy was preeminent in the field of Semitic pale- 


Levy, Louis 
Levy, Moritz 





ography. He was the first person after Gesenius to 
treat the subject in a comprehensive manner. In 
the deciphering and interpretation of Phenician, old 
Hebrew, Punic, Aramaic, Himyaritic, and later He- 
brew coins, seals, gems, and monuments his pecul- 
lar intuition guided him more surely than mere 
philological knowledge did others; such, for exam- 
ple, was the case with his deduction from the in- 
scriptions found on the Hauran that at the beginning 
of the Christian era an Arabic people lived there 
which used the Aramaic language aud alphabet. 

Levy’s first published essay, in 1855, was on the in- 
scriptions on certain Aramean bowls (“Z. D. M. G.” 
ix. 465 ¢¢ seq.). This was followed by the first. and 
second parts of his “ Phénizische Studien ” (Breslau, 
1856 and 1857); his decipherment of the Eshmunazar 
Inscription won him immediate recognition. He next 
published a study in Jewish history, “Don Joseph 
Nasi, Herzog von Naxos, Seine Familie und Zwei 
Jiidische Diplomaten Seiner Zeit” (Breslau, 1859). 
In 1860 and 1861 other essays by him appeared (“Z. D. 
M. G.” xiv. 365 et seg., 594, 710 e¢ seqg.; xv. 615 et 
seg., 623 et seg.; xvii. 75), dealing with Phenician 
numismatics. In 1862 was published “Die Gesch. 
der Jtidischen Mtinzen Gemeinfasslich Dargestellt ” 
(Breslau). “Kine Lateinisch - Griechisch - Phéni- 
zische Inschrift aus Sardinien” appeared in “Z. D. 
M. G.” (xviii. 53 et seg.). In 1868 he published the 
third part of his “ Phénizische Studien,” and in 1864 
his “ Phénizisches Woérterbuch ” (Breslau). In 1865 
Levy edited, at the request of the Deutsche Mor- 
genlindische Gesellschaft, the material which Osi- 
ander had left bearing on Himyaritic paleography 
and archeology (“Z. D. M. G.” xix. 159 et seg., xx. 
205 et seg.; an essay on Jewish gravestones in Aden 
appears in xxi, 156 e¢ seq.). His “Systematisch Ge- 
ordnetes Spruchbuch als Leitfaden fir den Jiidischen 
Religionsunterricht ” was published in Breslau in 
1867; “Siegel und Gemmen mit Aramiischen, Ph6- 
nizischen, Althebraischen, Himyarischen, Nabathii- 
schen und Altsyrischen Inschriften Erklart” ap- 
peared in 1869. In 1870 he published the fourth part 
of his “Studien,” and “Die Biblische Gesch. nach 
den Worten der Heiligen Schrift der Israelitischen 
Jugend Erzihlt,” both at Breslau. “Das Mesa 
Denkmal und Seine Schrift,” and various essays in 
“Z. D. MM. G.” (xxv. 429 e¢ seg., xxvi. 417), appeared 
in the following year, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Siegfried, in Allgemeine Deutsche Biogre- 
phic. 

s, PT. UM, 

LEVY, MORITZ MARCUS (CARL ED- 
VARD MARIUS): Danish physician; born in 
Copenhagen Sept. 8, 1808; died there Dec. 80, 1865. 
He graduated as M.D. from the University of Copen- 
hagen in 1883, having in 18380 won the university 
gold medal for a medical essay. 

From 1883 till 1836 Levy traveled abroad, making 
a special study of obstetrics, and upon his return to 
Copenhagen he became resident physician of the 
Nursery Institute (“ Plejestiftelsen ”). 

In 1838 Levy accepted baptism and assumed the 
name “Car! Edvard Marius,” thereby removing an 
obstacle in the way of his becoming a university 
professor. In 1840 he was appointed lector, in 1841 
assistant professor, and in 1850 professor at Copen- 


Levy, Nathan 
Levysohn 





hagen University ; and at the same time he became 
obstetrician to the city of Copenhagen. 

Levy was a prolific scientitie writer. Of Ins pub- 
lications the following may be mentioned: “ De Sym- 
podia seu Monstrositate Sireniformi, cum Anatomica 
Ejusmodi Monstri Descriptionc, ” Copenhagen, 1833; 
“Om Collisionen Imellem Perforation og Kaisersnit. 
Et Bidrag til Underségelsen: De Jure Vitw et 
Necis quod Competit Medico in Partu,” 2. 1840; 
“Udtog af Fédselsvidenskaben som Lerebog for 
Jordemoédre,” 7b. 1843. Levy was coeditor of the 
“ Journal for Medicin og Chirurgie,” to which he con- 
tributed extensively. A number of cssays and trea- 
tises from his pen have appeared also in the German 
and the English medical periodicals. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexieon ; 

Erslew’s Forfatter-Lexicon, 

8. F. C. 

LEVY, NATHAN: Founder of the first Jewish 
cemetery in Philadelphia; born in Feb., 1704; died 
in Philadelphia Dec. 23, 1753. He probably went 
there from New York, for in 1730 a merchant of 
his name was a member of the Shearith Israel con- 
gregation of the latter city. Upon his arrival in 
Philadelphia he engaged in the general commission 
business with David Franks under the firm name of 
Levy & Franks, and continued in that business un- 
til his death. According to a letter of Richard Pe- 
ters dated Sept. 20, 1788, there was Jaid out by Mr. 
Thomas Penn (“proprietary governor of Penusyl- 
vania”), “for a burying-place for Mr. Nathan Levy 
and family,” a plot of ground on Spruce street near 
Ninth street. Peters was evidently mistaken in the 
date, for it was on Sept. 25, 1740, that Nathan Levy 
obtained the first grant of thirty fect square; on 
June 27, 1752, he secured from the proprietary 
government the adjoining lot, thirty feet wide and 
sixty feet in depth. It was evidently the intention 
of Levy to permit the cemetery to be used by the Jews 
of his adopted city, and not to retain it for the use 
of his family alone. He had the ground boarded in. 
In 1751 he complained to the “Pennsylvania Ga- 
zette” that “unthinking persons had fired several 
shots against the Jews’ burying-ground”; he had 
therefore enclosed it with a brick wall. At his 
death, two years later, his remains were interred in 
the cemetery he had founded. It is now the prop- 
erty of the Congregation Mickvé Isracl (see Paria- 
DELPHIA). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Morais, in Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. 
1893, i. 20-21; Rosenbach, The Jews of Philadelphia Prior to 
1860, pp. 8-9, Philadelphia, 1883. 

A. S. W. R. 


A. 


LEVY, SAMSON : Colonial merchant of Phila- 
delphia. He was one of the originators, in 1748, of 
the City Dancing Assembly, a famous social organi- 
zation of Philadelphia. In Nov., 1765, he signed, 
with other merchants of the city, including six 
Jews, the celebrated resolutions not to import goods 
from England until the Stamp Act had been re- 
pealed. He had two sons, Moses and Samson. 
Moses Levy (b. Philadelphia 1757; d. there May 9, 
1826) was educated at the University of Pennsylva- 
nia, from which he graduated in 1776. On March 
19, 1778, he was admitted to the bar; from 1802 to 
1822 he was recorder of Philadelphia; from 1822 to 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





64 
Se eee a a gee a ere oe Paha ee en 
1825, presiding judge of the district court for the 
city and county of Philadelphia. At one time he 
was a member of the Pennsylvania legislature, ang 
he was a trustee of the University of Pennsylvania 
for twenty-four years. Samson Levy (b. Philadel. 
phia 1761; d. there Dec. 15, 1831) studied law with 
his brother Moses Levy, was admitted to the bar on 
June 9, 1787, and became one of the best-known 
lawyers of the city. He was one of the incorpora- 
tors of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Brown, The Forum; Martin, The Bench ang 
Bar of Philadelphia; Morais, Ihe Jews of Philadelphia. 
Rosenbaeh, Lhe Jews of Philadelphia Prior to 1800; Pub. 
lications Am. Jew. Hist. Suc. i. 60. 

A. S. W. R, 


A. 

LEVY, SARA: German philanthropist; born 
in Berlin June, 1761; died there March 11, 1854, 
She was a daughter of Daniel Irzta, and was well 
educated according to the fashionable French 
standards of her time. Her husband was Samuel 
Levy, one of the first bankers of Berlin. During 
the time following the battie of Jena she was much 
sought after by Bignon, the French ambassador to 
Berlin, and the other French officials. She retained 
her Judaism, though most of her relatives deserted 
their faith; at her death she left thirty thousand 
thalers to the Jewish Orphan Asylum of Berlin, 
and bequeathed her house to King Frederick Will- 
iam LY. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Jtidische Frauen, pp. 228 et seq. 
s. J, 
LEVY, SIMON: French rabbi; born in 1829 at 

Lauterbourg, Alsace; died at Bordeaux Nov. 29, 

1886. Tle studied first under Solomon ULMANnK, 

and then at the Rabbinical School at Metz, which he 

left in 1853 to accept the rabbinate of Lunéville. 

In 1864 he was called as chicf rabbi to Bordeaux, 

where he remained until his death. Besides a pam- 

plilet, “ Renan et la Synagogue,” Lévy wrote “ Moise, 

Jésus, Mahomet,” which work was published pos- 

thumously,. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Archives Israélites, Dee. 9, 1886, 


8. I. Lev. 
LEVY, URIAH PHILLIPS: American naval 


officer; born in Philadelphia April 22, 1792; died in 
New York March 23, 
1862. Levy was a 


cabin-boy before the 
age of cleven; he was 
apprenticed as a sailor 
in 1806; in 1810 he be- 
came second mate of 
a brig, and later first 
mate of another. He 
purchased a one-third 
interest in the schooner 
* George Washington,” 
of which he was mas- 
ter until 1812. On Oct. 
23, 1812, he received a 
commission as sailing- 
master in the United 
States navy, serving 
on the ship “ Alert,” and later on the brig “* Argus,” 
bound for France. The “Argus” captured several 
prizes, and Levy was placed in command of one, but 





Uriah Phillips Levy 


65 


the prize Was recaptured by the English, and Levy 
and the crew were kept as prisoners in England for 
-ixteen Mouths. In 1816 he was assigned as sailing- 
master to the “Franklin,” 74 guns, and in March, 
1817, he was appointed lieutenant, his appointment 
peng contirmed by the Senate. 

Levy had many difficulties in the navy, possibly 
due to anti-Jewish prejudice. He fought a duel, 
ijJled his opponent, was court-martialed six times, 
aud finally dropped from the list as captain, to 
which rank he had been promoted. He defended his 
conduct before a 
court of inquiry in 
1855, was restored to 
the havy as captain, 
and subsequently 
rose to the rank cf 
commodore. 

Levy always ac- 
knowledged his Jew- 
ish allegiance. He 
was a great admirer 
of Thomas Jefferson ; 
he purchased Mon- 
ticello, the home of 
Jefferson (still owned 
py Levy’s descend- 
ants), and presented 
to the United States 
government @ statue 
of Jefferson, which 
is now in the Capitol 
at Washington. The 
freedom of the city 
of New York was 
voted to him by the 
common council on 
Feb. 6, 1834, as a 
testimonial to his 
character, patriotism, 
and public spirit. He 
is buried in that por- 
tion of Cypress Hills 
Cemetery in use by the. Congregation Shearith 
Israel, and on his tombstone is recorded that “he 
was the father of the law for the abolition of the 
barbarous practise of corporal punishment in the 
United States navy.” 

BIBMIOGRAPRY : American Jewish Year Book, 1902-3, pp. 
Oo. 


A, S. Wo. 


LEVY-BACRAT, ABRAHAM: Rabbinical 
author of the beginning of the sixteenth century. 
Expelled from Spain in 1492, he settled at Tunis, 
Where in 1507 he wrote “Sefer ha-Zikkaron,” a su- 
Percommentary on Rashi. The manuscript remained 
unprinted till 1845, when it was discovered in a 
Jewish library in Tunis. The work has several 
Prefaces, one of which, written by the author him- 
self, tecounts his sufferings at the time of the expul- 
Sion from Spain. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Cazés, Notes Bibliographiques. 


8. 8. M., FR. 


LEVY-BRUHL, LUCIEN: French _philoso- 
Pher; born at Paris April 10, 1857; educated at the 
VIIL.—5 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Tombstone of Uriah Phillips Levy, Cypress Hills Cemetery, New York. 
(From a photograph.) 


Levy, Nathan 
Levysohn 


Lycée Charlemagne and the Ecole Normale Supi- 
eure. In 1879 he received the degree of “agrégé en 
philosophie,” and was at once called to a professor- 
ship in philosophy at the Lycée of Poitiers, which 
he resigned two years later for a professorship at 
Amiens. In 1884 he received the degree of Ph.D., 
and the year following was appointed professor of 
philosophy at the Lycée Louis-le-Grand, succeeding 
Burdeau, For several years he held the same chair 
at the Seminaire Israélite de France, which he re- 
signed in 1895 to become “ maitre de conférences ” at 
the Ecole Normale 
Supericure. In 1899 
he was appointed to 
a similar position at 
the University of 
Paris, where, in 1902, 
he became “chargé 
de cours” of the his- 
tory of modern phi- 
losophy. Since 1886 
Lévy-Bruhl has lec- 
tured, at the Ecole 
Libre des Sciences 
Politiques, on the 
history of political 
movements and on 
the development of 
public spirit in Ger- 
many and England 
during the last two 
centuries. 

Lévy-Bruhl has 
written: “L’Idée de 
Responsabilité” and 
* Quid de Deo Seneca 
Senserit” (Paris, 
1884; his two gradu- 
ating theses); “L’Al- 
lemagne Depuis 
Leibnitz ” (. 1890); 
“ Essai sur la Forma- 
tion de la Conscience 
Nationale en Allemagne” (2d. 1890); “La Philoso- 
phie de Jacobi” (db. 1894); “History of Modern 
Philosophy in France” (Chicago, 1899); “ Lettres 
Inédites de John Stuart Mill & Auguste Comte” 
(Paris, 1899; containing the answers of Comte); 
“Ta Philosophie d’ Auguste Comte” (¢). 1900); “La 
Morale et la Science des Mceurs” (7b. 1903). Lévy- 
Bruhl is a chevalier of the Legion of Honor. 


S. a: Ka. 


LEV YSOHN, SALOMON FREDERIK: 
Danish musician and critic; born in Copenhagen 
Oct. 14, 1858. He studied at the University of Co- 
penhagen and at the Polytechniske Institut until 
1878, when he decided to devote himself to the study 
of music. From 1884 to 1896 he was conductor 
of the Academical Song-Society (Studenter-Sang- 
foreningen); in 1891 he was appointed keeper of the 
archives of music at the Kongelige Theater in Co- 
penhagen. 

Levysohn has translated into Danish the texts 
of several operas, inciuding “Don Juan” and 
“Othello.” He has written also a number of crit- 


Lewald 
Lewin 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 66 


NE ge ee peg ee ee 


ical essays in “ Morgenbladet ” and in other Danish 
dailies. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salmonsen’s Store Illustrerede Konversa- 

tions-Lexicoi. 

g, F, C. 

LEWALD, FANNY: German authoress; born 
May 24, 1811, in Kodnigsberg, Prussia; died Aug. 5, 
1889, in Dresden. In her seventeenth year she 
entered the Evangelical Church. In 18381, in com- 
pany with her father, she made a tour through Ger- 
many and France, prolonging her stay in Breslau and 
Berlin. In 1834, to while away the hours of an in- 
valid sister, she wrote a book of fairy-stories. It was 
not, however, until 1841 that she entered the literary 
arena with a novel entitled “Der Stellvertreter,” 
published in serial form in the “ Europa,” a paper 
owned by a relative likewise named Lewald. Sub- 
sequently were published anonymously: “ Klemen- 
tine,” 1842; “Jenny,” 1843; “Eine Lebensfrage,” 
1845; “Das Arme Midchen,” 1845. In the spring 
of 1845 she made a tour of Italy, after which she 
settled in Berlin, where she married (1854) Adolph 
Stahr, the literary critic. In company with her hus- 
band she undertook a series of tours through Eu- 
rope, her mind storing a wealth of impressions which 
were later to be called into requisition. Her literary 
productiveness during the years following upon this 
extended tour knew no bounds. One book followed 
another in quick succession, astonishing the reading 
public by their variety of subject and fertility of 
resource: “Italienisches Bilderbuch,” 1847; “ Dio- 
gena Roman von Iduna Grifin H.-H.,” giving a 
humorous portraiture of the Countess Hahn-Hahn; 
“Prinz Louis Ferdinand,” 1849; “ Erinnerungen aus 
dem Jahre 1848”; “ Liebesbriefe,” 1850, previously 
publisbed 1845; “Dunen- und Berggeschichten,” 
1850; “Reisetagbuch Durch England und Schott- 
land,” 1852; “ Das Miidchen von Hela,” 1853; “ Meine 
Lebensgeschichte,” 1861; “Von Geschlecht zu Ge- 
schlecht,” a novel in eight volumes, 1863-65; “ Oster- 
briefe fiir die Frauen,” 1868; “ Erzihiungen,.” in three 
volumes, 1866-68; “ Villa Riunione,” 1868; “Sommer 
und Winter am Genfer See,” a diary, 1869; “ Fir und 
Wider die Frauen,” letters, 1870; “ Nella,” Christmas 
story, 1870; “ Die Erléserin,” a novel: 1873; “Bene- 
dikt,” 1874; “Benvenuto,” a novel from the world 
of art, 1875; “Reisebriefe aus Italien, Deutschland, 
und Frankreich,” 1880; “Helmar,” a novel, 1880; 
“Vater und Sohn,” a novel, 1881; “Vom Sund zum 
Posilipp,” letters of travel, 1883; “Stella,” a novel, 
1884; “ Die Familie Darner,” a novel, 1887; “ Zwdlf 
Bilder nach dem Leben,” 1888; etc. These are only 
a few of the productions of this versatile writer. 
In all more than fifty volumes can be accredited 
toa pen never idle. Fanny Lewald is remarkable 
for her keen observation of men and manners, 
for the firmness with which her characters are out- 
lined, for the grace and finish of her style; a harsh 
realism, however, pervades her works. This tend- 
ency to realism prompts her to seek an ideal in the 
dispassionate man of affairs, who according to her 
standpoint may be relied upon to solve the problem 
of liuman existence. Asa rule, this view precludes 
the possibility of frequent excursions into the world 
of the imagination, and except in rare cases is apt to 
stamp the work of the writer as devoid of that 


poetic charm so essential to the highest literary 

achievement. Her activity was not confined to liz. 
erature. She was one of Germany’s foremost, lead. 
ers in the movement for the emancipation and ad. 
vancement of women, favoring the opening to them 
of new fields of employment. Ss. 


LEWANDOWSKI, LOUIS: German compose; 
of synagogal music; born at Wreschen, province of 
Posen, April 23, 1828; died Feb. 4, 1894, at Berlin. 
At the age of twelve he 
went to Berlin to study 
pianoforte and singing, 
and became solo soprano 
in the synagogue. He 
afterward studied for 
three years under A. B. 
Marx and also attended 
the school of composi- 
tion of the Berlin Acad- 
emy, where his teachers 
were Rungenhagen, 
Bach, and Grell. Grad- 
uated with high honors, 
he was appointed in 1840 
choirmaster of the Berlin 
synagogue, In which ca- 
pacity he rendered in- 
valuable services in be- 
half of ritualistic music. His principal works are: 
“Kol Rinnah u-Tefillah,” for chorus; “Todah 
u-Zimrah,” for mixed chorus, solo, and organ; 40 
psalms, for solo, chorus, and organ; symphonies, 
overtures, cantatas, and songs. 

In 1866 he received the title of “royal musical 
director,” and shortly afterward was appointed 
choirmaster in the Neue Synagoge, Berlin, for 
which he composed the entire musical service. His 
arrangements of ancient Hebrew melodies for choir, 
cantor, and organ are considered masterly produc- 
tions, and are characterized by great simplicity and 
a profound religious sentiment. Many of Lewan- 
dowski’s pupils have become prominent cantors. 
Lewandowski was the principal founder of the In- 
stitute for Aged and Indigent Musicians, an insti- 
tution which prospered under his management. 





Louis Lewandowss1. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Mendel, Musikalisches Konversattons-Lert- 
kon; Champlin, Cyclopedia of Music and Musicians ; Rie 
mann, Afusik-Lexikon. 


S. J. So. 


LEWENTAL, FRANCIS DE SALES (SOL- 
OMON): Polish publisher; born at Wloclawek, 
Russian Poland, 1889; died at Wiesbaden Sept. 24, 
1902. In 1862 Lewental, the son of poor Jewish 
parents, bought with his accumulated savings the 
press of the Warsaw publisher John Glicksberg (d. 
1859), and began his career with the “Kalendarz 
Ludowy,” a popular almanac, which he continued 
until 1866. In 1865, in conjunction with others, he 
founded “Kuosy,” an illustrated weekly, which 
the next year became his exclusive property. Un- 
der Lewental’s management and under the editor 
ship of Adam Plug * Klosy ” became the most widely 
circulated illustrated weekly i in Poland, and contrib: 
uted in no small measure to the popularizing of 
Polish art and to the development of Polish wood- 


67 


engraving. In 1871 Lewental bought the “ Kolko 
Pomowe,” a home magazine, and transformed it into 
jpe popular “ Tygodnik Romansow i Powiesci ” (dis- 
continued in 1900). Lewental was the proprietor 
also of the * Swit,” edited for a few years by Mary 
Konopnicka. In 1871, also, he issued an edition of 
the works of Korzeniowski, which proved so popular 
that it led later to similar editions of the works of 
Kraszewski, Kremer, Rzewuski, Skarbek, Fredro, 
Syrokomla, Eliza Orzeszko, Kaczkowski, Balucki, 


ae 1874 Lewental commenced the publication of 
the best productions of European literature under 
the title “ Biblioteka Najcelniejszych Utworow Lit- 
eratury Europejskiej.” They were edited with the 
reatest care by Peter Chmielowski and, after him, 
by Stanislaus Krzeminski. The “John Matejko 
Album” and many other well-known works were 
issued from his press. In 1887 Lewental became 
one of the proprietors of the “ Kuryer Warszawski.” 
Though he avoided politics he did not succeed in 
escaping a conflict with the Russian government; 
he was arrested in 1900, was compelled to discon- 
tinue all his publications, and was sentenced to de- 
portation for three years to Odessa, After a year 
there he obtained a passport for foreign travel. 
Lewental enjoyed the friendship of many literati, 
among them being J. I. Kraszewski, for whose re- 
lease from imprisonment at Magdeburg he offered 
to furnish the bail required by the Prussian govern- 
ment. 

H. R. W. PE. 

LEWI, JOSEPH: American physician; born 
at Radnitz, Bohemia, Aug. 17, 1820; died at Al- 
bany, N. Y., Dec. 19, 1897; educated at the univer- 
sities of Prague and Vienna. After graduating from 
the latter university (M.D. 1846) he was appoiuted 
assistant at the Vienna Lying-in Hospital. In 1847 
he began to practise in Radnitz, but in the follow- 
ing year, that of the Revolution, emigrated to Amer- 
ica, settling in Albany in 1849. There he was ap- 
pointed on the staff of the Albany hospital, and be- 
came a member and later president of the Albany 
County Medical Society, and senior censor of the 
State Medical Society. Lewi was one of the forty- 
two citizens of Albany who organized, in 1863, the 
Union League in that city. 

Thirteen of Lewi’s fourteen children survived 
him. The oldest son is the journalist Isidor Lewi 
(b. Albany May 9, 1850). He was educated at the 
Albany Academy, became connected with several 
hewspapers, and is at present (1904) an editorial 
writer on the “New York Tribune” and publisher 
of the “New Era Illustrated Magazine.” Another 
son, Maurice J. Lewi(b. Albany Dec. 1, 1857), is a 
Physician in New York city. He graduated from 
the Albany Medical College in 1877. After a post- 
graduate course in Heidelberg and Vienna he began 
'o practise in his native town (1880). He became 
lecturer at the Albany Medical College and pro- 
“ssor of medical jurisprudence at the A!bany Law 

chool. In 1891 he was appointed secretary of the 
State board of medical examiners, which office he still 
— occupies. In 1892 he removed to New York 


A. F. T. H. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lewald 
Lewin 


LEWIN, ADOLF: German rabbi and author; 
born at Pinne, Posen, Sept. 23, 1848. Lewin was edu- 
cated at the Jewish Theological Seminary and at the 
University of Breslau. In 1872 he was appointed 
rabbi in Kozmin, later in Coblenz, and in 1886 was 
called to the rabbinate of Freiburg-im-Breisgau. 
He wrote: “Dic Religionsdisputation R. Jehiels,” 
a prize essay (Breslau, 1869); “Die Makkabiiische 
Erhebung,” a dissertation (2b. 1870); “Zur Juden- 
frage: Naturwissenschaft oder Judenhass” (2d, 
1880); “Juden in Freiburg-im-Breisgau ” (Treves, 
1890); “Das Judenthum und die Nichtjuden ” (2. 
1891); “Geschichte, Geographie, und Reiselittera- 
tur der Juden” (in Winter and Wtinsche, “Die Jii- 
dische Litteratur,” ii. 287-478). 

Ss." M. K. 


LEWIN, GEORG RICHARD: German der- 
matologist; born at Sondershausen April 25, 1820; 
died at Berlin Nov. 1, 1896. He was educated at 
the universities of Halle and Berlin, graduating as 
doctor of medicine in 1845, After a postgraduate 
course at the universities of Vienna, Wiirzburg, and 
Paris he settled in Berlin, where he practised as a 
specialist first in otology, and later in dermatology 
and syphilis. In 1862 Lewin was admitted to the 
medical faculty of his alma mater as privat-docent 
in otology. In 1865 he became chief physician in 
the department of dermatology and syphilis at the 
Charité Hospital, and in 1868 was appointed assist- 
ant professor. 

In 1880 Lewin became a member of the imperial 
department of health, and in 1884 received the title 
of “Geheimer Medicinalrat.” In the same year, 
through the influence of Bismarck, Lewin’s clinie 
was divided into two departments, Lewin retaining 
the class in syphilis, while Schweninger, Bismarck’s 
physician, was appointed chief physician for derma- 
tology. This action of the government aroused 
much indignation in the medical faculties of most 
of the universities of Germany, and much public 
sympathy was expressed for Lewin. 

Lewin was very successful in his profession. He 
introduced several new methods in the treatment of 
syphilis and in dermatology, among which may be 
mentioned the subcutaneous injection of mercuric 
chlorid and the spray application in diseases of the 
throat. 

He was an industrious writer, and contributed 
many essays to the medical journals. He was also 
the author of the following works: “Klinik der 
Krankheiten des Kehlkopfes,” 2d ed., Berlin, 1863; 
“Tnhalationstherapie und Krankheiten der Respira- 
tionsorgane,” 2d ed., 7b. 1865; “Behandlung der 
Syphilis Durch Subcutane Sublimatinjectionen,” 7d. 
1869. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex.; Meyers Konversatioens- 
Lexikon. 


8. F. T. H. 


LEWIN, LOUIS: German pharmacologist and 
toxicologist; born at Tuchel, West Prussia, Nov. 9, 
1850. He received his education at the gymnasium 
and the University of Berlin QI.D. 1876). The two 
years following his graduation he spent at Munich, 
in the laboratories of Voit and Pettenkofer. Re- 
turning to Berlin, he in 1878 became assistant at the 


Lewin 
Lewisohn 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 68 


Dep gee Tee ee Oe ao ee STO eign ere Op a ee OE Re eG oA age Sh gt ee ene ee ed or ge 


pharmacological institute of the university, which. 


position he resigned in 1881. In the same year he 
was admitted to the medical faculty at the univer- 
sity as privat-docent, and in 1897 he was appointed 
professor. 

Lewin is a prolific writer. 
says may be mentioned: 


Among his many es- 


** Ueber Morphium-Intoxication,” in ** Deutsche Zeitschrift 
fiir Praktische Medizin,” 1874, No. 26; ‘‘ Experimentelle Unter- 
suchungen tiber die Wirkungen des Aconitin auf das Herz,”’ in 
‘**Centralblatt fur die Medizinische Wissenschaft,’ 1875, No, 25; 
**Veber die Verwerthung des Alkohols in Fieberhaften Krank- 
heiten,”? in ‘“‘ Deutsches Archiv fiir Klinische Medizin,’ 1876; 
“Ueber Maximale Dosen der Arzneimittel,”’ in ‘* Transactions 
of the International Medical Congress,” ninth session, Washing- 
ton, 1887; ‘“*Ueber Allgemeine Hautvergiftung Durch Petro- 
leum,’’ in Virchow’s * Archiv,” exii., 1888; ** Veber Anhalonium 
Lewinii und Andere Cacteen,” in “* Archiv fir Experimentelle 
Pathologie und Pharmakologie,”’ 1894; ‘‘Die Behandiung der 
Lepra,”’ in “* Deutsehe Medizinische Wochenschrift,”’ 1898 ; ** Die 
Untersuchungen von Blutflecken,”’ i}. 1899; ‘* Die Vergiftungen 
in Betrieben,’’ ib. 1890 (also translated by Pannier in ** Bulletin 
Général de Thérapeutique,’’ 1902); ** Veber die Behandlung der 
Lepra,”’ tb, 1900. 

Lewin is also the author of: “Die Nebenwirk- 
ungen der Arzneimittellehre,” Berlin, 1881, 2d ed. 
1893 (translated into Russian); “ Lehrbuch der Toxi- 
cologie,” Vienna, 1885, 2d ed. 1897 (translated into 
French by Pouchet, Paris, 1902); “Ueber Piper 
Methysticum (Kawa Kawa),” Berlin, 1886; “Ueber 
Areca Catechu, Chavica Detle, und das Betelkauen,” 
Stuttgart, 1889. 

S. EK. T.. A 


LEWINSKY, ABRAHAM: German rabbi; 
author; born March 1, 1866, at Loslau, Upper Sile- 
sia. Ee entered the University of Breslau in 1884 
and from that time until 1887 he studied there, and 
was graduated (Ph.D.). At the same time he pur- 
sued his rabbinical studies at the Jewish Theological 
Seminary of that city. In 1890 he was called 
as district rabbi to Weilburg-on-the-Lahn; and 
two years later he took charge of the district rab- 
binate of Hildesheim, which position he still (1904) 
occupies. 

Lewinsky has published: “Beitriige zur Kennt- 
niss der Religionsphilosophischea Anschauungen des 
Flavius Josephus”; “Der Hildesheimer Rabbiner 
Samuel Hameln” Gin “ Kaufmann Gedenkbuch” and 
printed separately); and “Aus dem Hildesheimer 
Stadtarchive.” S. 


LEWINSOHN, JOSHUA: Russian teacher and 
writer; born 1833 at Vyeshiuti, government of 
Kovno. He received his Talmudical education at 
Zhagory, in the house of his uncle Simon Hurvitz, 
and graduated in 1865 from the gymnasium at 
Mitau, remaining there until 1874, when he was ap- 
pointed inspector of the Jewish school at Tukum, 
Courland. His first articles in Hebrew appeared in 
“ Ha-Maggid” in 1857; and since then he has con- 
tributed extensively to that paper and to “Ha- 
Meliz,” “ Ha-Shahar,” and other Hebrew periodicals. 
He was also for many years a contributor to the 
German “ Rigasche Zeitung.” 

Lewinsohn has published: “Erez Russia u-Me- 
lo’ah” (Wilna, 1868), a geography and topography 
of Russia: “Toledot Anshe Shem be- Yisrael,” biog- 
raphies of about fifty Jewish authors; and “Toledot 
Sehar ha-Yehudim” (in “Ha-Shahar”), a history of 


Jewish commerce. He has likewise written numer. 
ous articles on Jewish history which nave appeareg 
in various periodicals, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sokolov, Sefer Zikkaron, p. 64. 

H. R. J. G. U. 

LEWINSTEIN, JOSEPH: Russian rabbi ang 
author; born at Lublin, Russian Poland, 1840, ff,» 
is a member of a family of rabbis and Talmudistg 
which includes the author of the “ Lebushim ” and of 
“Pene Yehoshua‘.” At theageof twenty he became 
rabbi of Karol, in the government of Plotzk; jp 
1868, rabbi of Zaklikov, in the government of Lub. 
lin; since 1875 he has been rabbi of Serotzk, govern. 
ment of Lomza. 

Lewinstein has written “ Birkat Abraham,” op 
Pesahim, Bezah, and Hagigah; “Pene Abraham,” 
commentary on Genesis; a commentary on the Hag. 
gadah of Passover; “Dor Dor we-Dorshaw,” a col. 
lection of 6,600 names of the great of Israel of al] 
generations, with the dates of their deaths. He hag 
contributed biographical articles, which are of 
special genealogical value and which have won him 
recognition as an authority in this field, to “Ha. 
Goren ” (ed. Horodetzky), to “Ha-Eshkol,” and to 
other periodicals. He has written also appendixes 
to “‘Tr Gibborim ” and “ ‘Ir Tehillah.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: B. Z. Kisenstadt, Dor Rabbanaw ‘we-Sofe- 

raw, i. 36, Warsaw, 1895. 

H. R. A. S. W. 

LEWIS, DAVID: English merchant and phi- 
lanthropist; born in London 1828; died in Liver- 
pool Dee. 4, 1885. Settling in Liverpool in 1840, 
he by 1856 had accumulated sufficient capital to 
commence business on his own account as a boys’ 
clothier in Bold street. Subsequently he opened a 
second establishment; and thereafter he gradually 
developed one of the largest retail businesses of the 
kind in England, erecting an establishment of the 
“Universal Provider” or department store class. 
Similar ones were founded by him in Manchester, 
Sheffield, and Birmingham. No firm in the prov- 
inces did more than his to bring cheap and durable 
clothing within the reach of the masses. 

Lewis’ ample means were freely given in aid of 
charitable and philanthropic works. He headed the 
local subscription list for the persecuted Jews of 
Russia with a donation of £1,000 ($5,000), and gave 
large sums in support of the synagogue. For many 
years he held the position of warden and treasurer 
of the Old Hebrew Congregation, Liverpool. At 
his death he bequeathed very large sums (nearly 4 
half-million sterling) for the erection of hospitals and 
other philanthropic institutions, which constitute 
some of the most important in Liverpool. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Dec, 11, 1883; 
Liverpool Leader, Dec. 6, 1875, 


J. G. L. 

LEWIS, SIR GEORGE HENRY: English 
lawyer; born in London April 21, 1883; educated at 
University College, London. In 1850 he was arti 
cled to his father, James Graham Lewis (1804 
1869), founder of Lewis & Lewis, one of the best 
known firms of solicitors in the city of Londot. 
George was admitted in Hilary term in 1856, am 
was subsequently taken into partnership by bl 
father and unole. He first made his name in pros® 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


69 


cuting the directors of the Overend and Gurney 
Bank, who had caused the disastrous panic of 1866, 
and for a time he devoted special attention to finan- 
cial cases. In criminal cases he drew public atten- 
tion to himself by his cross-examination in the Bravo 
case in 1875, and from 
that time onward was 
connected with most 
criminal “causes célé- 
bres,” being conspic- 
uous in the prosecution 
of fraudulent persons 
like Madame Rachel 
and Slade the medium. 
Among other cases 
may be mentioned the 
Hatton Garden dia- 
mond robbery case; 
Belt versus Lawes; and 
the Baccarat case, in 
which the Prince of 
Wales’s name was men- 
tioned; and he was 
selected by the Parnell 
commission to conduct 
the case for Charles 
Stuart Parnell and the Irish party against the London 
“Times.” Lewis had by far the largest practise 
in financial cases of any lawyer in London, and was 
especially expert in libel cases, being retained by 
some of the chief newspapers. He showed himself 
especially skilful in exposing usurers. Lewis was 
knighted in 1898, and raised to the rank of baronet 
in 1902. He died Dec. 7, 1911. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Menand Women of the Times; Wha’s Who: 
Burke’s Peerage, Baronetage, and Knighthood, 1903. 





fiE-MEURS-OUJE-MATTACHE 
V5 a J 


Arms of Sir George Henry Lewis. 


LEWIS, HARRY §&.: English author and 
communal worker; born in London in 1861; edu- 
cated at King’s College School and St. John’s Col- 
lege, Cambridge (B.A. 1884). At Cambridge he 
was one of the earliest to take honors in the Semitic 
languages tripos (1886) and was Hebrew scholar at 
his college. After leaving college he took residence 
at Toynbee Hall, Whitechapel, aud devoted himself 
to social work among the Jews of the East End. 
Inconnection with this he published, with E. J. Rus- 
sel, “The Jew in London” (London, 1900). He 
edited “The Targum on Isaiah i. 5, with Commen- 
tary ” (25. 1889). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jewish Year Book, 5664 (1904). 


LEWIS, LEOPOLD DAVIS: English drama- 
lst; born in London 1828; died there Feb. 23, 1890. 
Lewis was educated at the King’s Collegiate School, 
London, and upon graduation became a solicitor, 
Practising as such from 1850 to 1875. In 1871 he 
translated Erckmann-Chatrian’s “Le Juif Polonais,” 
giving it the name “The Bells,” under which name 
It was produced by Henry Irving at the Lyceum 
Theatre, London, Nov. 25, 1871. Original plays 
from the pen of Lewis are: “The Wandering Jew ” 
(Adelphi Theatre, April 14, 1878); “Give a Doga 
Bad Name” (ib, Nov. 18, 1878); and “The Found- 
lings ” (Sadler’s Wells Theatre, Oct. 8, 1881). From 
February to December of 1868 he and Alfred Thomp- 


Lewin 
Lewisohn 


son conducted a monthly, “ The Mask,” which failed. 
In addition to the plays mentioned Lewis wrote a 
number of tales under the title “A Peal of Merry 
Bells ” (1880). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dict. National Biog. xxx. 191: The Times 
(London), Feb. 25, 1890; The Era and St. Stephen’s Review 
(ib.), March 1, 1890. 

J. E. Ms. 


LEWIS, SAMUEL: English money-lender and 
philanthropist; born in Birmingham 1837; died in 
London Jan. 138, 1901. Lewis began work when 
thirteen years old. He became a salesman of stecl 
pens, then opened a jeweler’s shop, and finally en. 
tered the business with which his name was most 
identified, that of money-lending. He became the 
most fashionable moncy-lender of his day. Nearly 
every noble family in Great Britain is said to have 
been more or less in business connection with Lewis. 
He left nearly twenty million dollars, of which 
five millions are to go to charity on the death of his 
widow, Ada Davis Lewis, a sister of Hope Temple, 
the composer. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Jan. 18, 1901; The Sketch (Lon- 

don), Jan. 23, 1901. 

J. E. Ms. 

LEWIS, SAMUEL A.: Americau politician 
and philanthropist; bornin New York city 18381. 
He early engaged in business, and was so successful 
that he retired with a competency in 1862. In 1868 
he was elected a member of the board of education 
of the city of New York, serving as school commis- 
sioner and chairman of the financial committee. 
When in 1869 the legislature changed the board 
from elective to appointive, Lewis was confirmed 
in his office of school commissioner, and in 1870 
was reappointed for a term of five years. Jn 1871, 
however, he was compelled to retire. One of his 
first acts as a school commissioner was to abolish 
corporal punishment. In 1874 Lewis was elected 
alderman at large, and later in the same year presi- 
dent of the aldermanic board, holding the presi- 
dency for two consecutive terms, 

Lewis is one of the founders of the Mount Sinai 
Ifospital, and has served, since its organization in 
1852, on its board of management as secretary, di- 
rector, aud vice-president, resigning the last-named 
office in 1873. He founded (1872) the School-Teach- 
ers’ Life Assurance Society, and was in 1874 chair- 
man of the relief association for the Ninth Ward. 
In 1851 the Ladies’ Benevolent Society presented him 
with a gold medal in acknowledgment of the valuable 
aid he had rendered that body. From 1868 to 1873 
Lewis acted as a trustee of the College of the City 
of New York. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: New York Publie School Journal, Feb. 18, 
1871, April 6, 1872; New York Herald, March 13, 1874; Jew- 
ish Messenger, April 17, 1874; Daily Graphic, Jan. 22, 1875. 


A. | ae 


LEWISOHN, LEONARD: American mer- 
chant and philanthropist; born in Hamburg Oct. 
10, 1847; died in London March 5, 1902. His father, 
Samuel Lewisohn, a prominent Hamburg mer- 
chant, sent him to the United States in 1863; about 
three years later he was joined by his younger broth- 
er, and they formed the firm of Lewisohn Brothers in 
Jan., 1866. As early as 1868 the firm turned its atten- 
tion to the metal trade, becoming prominent dealers in 


Lewita 
Libraries 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 70 


aA 


lead during that year. 
future of electricity and the need of copper for con- 
ducting-wires, Lewisohn specialized in that metal, 
and by 1879 was recognized as an important holder 
of “Lake Copper.” Thenceforward his firm occu- 
pied a leading position in the copper markets of the 
world. He was also president of the United Metals 
Selling Company. 

Lewisohn was equally prominent in the sphere 
of philanthropy. He contributed largely to the 
Alliance colony in New Jersey, founded in 1882, and 
to almost every philanthropic institution in New 
York, regardless of creed. He likewise acted as 
treasurer of the Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society 
in New York, to which institution he gave his 
counsel and large sums of money. He was one of 
the largest contributors to the Jewish Theological 
Seminary of America and to the Montefiore Sanato- 
rium for Consumptives. 

A J. 


LEWITA, GUSTAW: Polish pianist; born at 
Plock, Poland, 1855; died at Paris Feb., 1889. After 
graduating from the Vienna Conservatorium with 
distinction, he went to Paris, where he became a 
member of the orchestra of the Pas de Loup con- 
certs. In 1882 Lewita was called to a professorship 
in the Conservatorium at Warsaw, and in 1885 was 
invited to Vienna to give a concert at the court of 
the archduke Charles. He then went to America, 
where he gave concerts in the most important cities 
and before the Emperor of Brazil. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Asif, 1893, p. 1384; Eneyklopedja Po- 
wszechna, ix. 281, Warsaw, 1901. : 
+H. R. A. S. W. 

LEWY, BERGNART (BERNHARD) 
CARL: Danish chemist; bornin Copenhagen July 
5, 1817; died there Jan. 1, 1868. He obtained the 
degree of graduate of pharmacy in 1885, and then 
studied chemistry for three years at the polytechnic 
school. In 1889 he studied in Berlin (Ph.D.), and 
spent the winter of 1839-40 in Rome. He then ob- 
tained a position as assistant in the private labora- 
tory of J. B. Dumas in Paris. 

Lewy soon proved himself to be the possessor of 
great experimental ability; so that the Académie 
des Sciences in 1841 entrusted him with the task of 
studying the atinospheric conditions around the 
North and Baltic seas, as well as in Copenhagen. 
Later he made acomparative test of the atmospheric 
conditions in Paris and in the surrounding country. 

In 1847 Lewy was appointed professor of chemis- 
try at Bogota, New Granada, where he enjoyed 
great popularity and filled many honorary offices. 
He was decorated by the King of Denmark, and in 
1859 was awarded the gold medal of honor. His 
writings have appeared in “ Annales de Chimie et de 
Physique,” “Comptes Rendus ” of the French Insti- 
tute (Académie des Sciences), and in “ Forhand- 
linger ved de Skandinaviske Naturforskeres 4, 
Méde ” (1844). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon. 


8. F. C. 


LEWY, ISRAEL: German scholar; born at In- 
owrazlaw in 1847; educated at the Jewish Theolog- 
ical Seminary and the University in Breslau. In 


Recognizing the commercial - 


1874 he was appointed docent at the Lehranstalt fg, 
die Wissenschaft des Judenthums in Berlin, and jp 
1888, on the death of David Joél, he was called to 
the seminary at Breslau. Lewy’s knowledge of 
Talmudic literature is unusually wide; he ig ey. 
dowed also with an exceptionally acute and dispas. 
sionate critical spirit and with a faculty for stasping 
the proper importance of details. His first publicg.- 
tion was “ Ueber Einige Fragmente aus der Mischng 
des Abba Saul” (Berlin, 1876), in which he showeg 
that the Mishnah collections of the foremost teachers 
in the period before the final redaction of the Mishnah 
itself, including that of Abba Saul, agreed as regards 
all the essential points of the Halakah. “ Ein Wor 
tiber die Mechilta des R. Simon” (Breslau, 1889) jg 
likewise an authoritative work in the field of halg- 
kic exegesis. Lewy has published also “ Interpreta- 
tion des Ersten, Zweiten und Dritten Abschnitts des 
Palistinischen Talmud-Traktates Nesikin” (7b. 1895- 
1902), and “ Ein Vortrag tiber das Ritual des Pesach- 
Abends” (25. 1904). 
5. 

LEWYSOHN, ABRAHAM: Hebraist and 
rabbi of Peiskretscham, Upper Silesia; born Dec. 6, 
1805; died Feb. 14, 1860. He left a large number 
of manuscripts—several hundred sermons in Hebrew 
and German, novell on the Talmud, verses, a Ger- 
man work on Hebrew grammar, and a work entitled 
“Korot Tannaim wa-Amoraim,” a history of the 
Tannaim and Amoraim, the introduction to which, 
entitled “Parnasat Hakme ha-Talmud,” was pub- 
lished in Kobak’s “Jeschurun” (i., part 8, p. 81). 
His published worksare: “ Mekore Minhagim” (Ber- 
lin, 1846), a critical essay on religious customs ac- 
cording to the Talmud, Posekim, and Midrashim 
(this work was afterward plagiarized by Finkelstein, 
Vienna, 1851); “Shete Derashot” (Gleiwitz, 1856), 
sermons; “Toledot R. Yehoshua‘ ben Hananyah,” 
biography of R. Joshua b. Hananiah (in Keller’s 
“ Bikkurim,” 1865); “Toledot Rab,” biography of 
Rab or Abba Arika (Kobak’s “Jeschurun,” vi. and 
vii.). Lewysohn was also a contributor to “Ha- 
Maggid ” and to Klein’s “Jahrbuch.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ludwig Lewysohn, ee Ha-Maggid, vii. 364; 


Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. pp. 208-209. 
8. M. Sx. 


LEWYSOHN, LUDWIG: German _ rabbi; 
born April 15, 1819, at Schwersenz, Posen; died at 
Stockholm May 26, 1901. Graduating from the Re- 
algymnasium, Berlin, in 1848, he studied Orientalia 
in that city, and received his doctor’s degree from the 
University of Halle in 1847, his dissertation being 
“De Sacrificiis Veteris Testamenti.” In 1848 he 
became preacher at Frankfort-on-the-Oder. Three 
years later he was called as rabbi to Worms, where 
he officiated until 1858. He then accepted a call to 
Stockholm, where he labored from 1859 to 1893, in 
which year he resigned. Besides numerous contri- 
butions to Jewish periodicals (especially “ Ha-Mag- 
gid”), he published “ Nafshot Zaddikim ” (Frank fort- 
on-the-Main, 1855), on the epitaplis at Worms, and 
“ Zoologie des Talmuds ” (26. 1858). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Reines, Tableaux Historiques, i. 123 et sed 

Zeitlin, Kiryat Sefer, i. 209. 

8. M. L. B 


a1 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


LEX TALIONIS. See RETALIATION. 
LEX ICOGRAPHY. See DicTionsaRIEs. 
LEYDEN. See NETHERLANDS. 
LHERIE. See Brunswick, Lion Lévy. 


LIADY, BAR OF. See Lavrer, Dos BAR B. 
GHNEOR ZALMAN. 
LIBATION. See SACRIFICE. 


LIBAU: Russian city in the government of 
Courland. It has a population (1897) of 64,505, in- 
eluding 9,700 Jews. Among the latter are 3,225 ar- 
tisans (1,309 being masters) and 117 day-laborers. 
Among its educational institutions are a government 
school for Jews (105 pupils), a Jewish general school 
for girls (90 pupils), and a Talmud Torah (108 pu- 
pils). ‘The public schools have 333 Jewish children 
on their rolls. A Jewish loan and savings associa- 
tion was organized in 1901. 

H.R. S. J. 

LIBEL AND SLANDER. Sce SLANDER. 

LIBERTINES. See SLAVES AND SLAVERY. 

LIBIN, Z. See HurewirTz, [srakv. 

LIBOSCHUTZ, JACOB: Russian physician; 
porn in 1741; died at Wilna Feb. 10, 1827. After 
studying at the University of Halle he went to St. 
Petersburg. His religious belief, however, rendered 
it impossible for him to settle there, and he estab- 
lished himself at Wilna, where he became celebrated. 
When the famous physician Professor Frank was 
leaving Wilna and was asked in whose charge he 
had left the public health, he answered, “In the 
charge of God and the Jew” (“Deus ct Judeus,” 
meaning “God and Liboschtitz ”). Liboschtitz was 
celebrated also as a diplomat and philanthropist 
(Fuenn, “ Kiryah Ne’emanah,” p. 260, Wilna, 1860). 

H. R. A. S. W. 


LIBOSCHUTZ, OSIP YAKOVLEVICH: 
Russian physician; died at St. Petersburg in 1824; 
probably the sonof Jacob Linoscatrz. He studied 
medicine at Dorpat (M.D. 1806, his graduating 
thesis being “De Morbis Primi Paris Nervorum ”). 
He then settled at St. Petersburg, where he became 
court physician, and founded a hospital for sick 
children. Liboschiitz wrote: “Tableau Botanique 
des Genres de Plantes Observésen Russie” (Vienna, 
1811); “ Description de Mousses Qui Croissent aux 
Euvirons de St. Pétersbourg et de Moscou ” (St. Pe- 
tersburg, 1811; with Trinius); “Flore des Environs 
de St. Pétersbourg et de Moscou ” (i. 1811). 
shall sks : Eimntziklopedicheskt Slovar, xvii. 642, St. Pe- 


tersburg, 1895 
H.R. A. S. W. 


LIBOWITZ, NEHEMIAH SAMUEL: Rus- 
sian Hebrew scholar and author; born Jan. 8, 1862, 
at Kolno, government of Lomza (Lomzha). He 
Studied Talmud under R. Elijah Hasid and then un- 
der his own father, Isaac Libowitz; in addition 
he devoted himself to Hebrew literature, reading 
specially works on criticism. In 1881 he emigrated 
to the United States and settled in New York, where 
he still (1904) resides, devoting his time in part to 

usIness and in part to literature. 

Libowitz is the author of: “Togeret Bikkoret ” 
(New York, 1895), against I. H. Weiss; “Rabbi Ye- 


Lewita 
Libraries 


hudah Aryeh Modena” (Vienna, 1896; 2d ed., New 
York, 1901), his most important work, a collection 
of materials for a biography of Leon of Modena; 
“Ephraim Deinard ” (7d. 1901), a harsh criticism of 
Deinard; and several other pamphlets. Libowitz 
has also contributed to the Hebrew periodicals in 
the United States: “Ner Ma‘arabi,” “Ha-Modia‘ la- 
Hadashim,” and “ Yalkut Ma‘arabi.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benzion Eisenstadt, Hakme Yisrael be-Ame- 
rika, p. 62, New York, 1903. 
H. R. A. S. W. 


LIBRARIES: Very little is known concerning 
the methods employed by Jews in the collection and 
preservation of books. The Biblical writings are 
silent on this point. That there were royal archives 
in Jerusalem may be surmised with some show of 
reason, even though the terms “mazkir” (A. V. 
“recorder”; II Sam. viii. 16, xx. 24, and several 
other passages) and “sofer” (A. V. “scribe”; 72. 
viii. 17, and often elsewhere) do not necessarily point 
to the office of archivist. Nor does the place-name 
Kirjath-sepher (Josh. xv. 16; Judges i. 11-12), 
which the Septuagint translates Ilé/:¢ Tpaupdérwv 
(Vulgate, “Civitas Litterarum” = “Book Town”), 
afford any further evidence; though Quatremére in 
1842 deduced from it the existence of a library there, 
and Sayce in 1895 called it “the literary center of 
the Canaanites in the south of Palestine” (“* Patri- 
archal Palestine,” p. 220; “Higher Criticism and 
the Monuments,” p. 54). 

Nor is there any fuller information with regard to 
Talmudic times and the Middle Ages. The scrolls 
seem to have been kept in a cover or sheath of 

leather or of metal (pM; 47; see 
Preserva- passages in Krauss, “ Lehnwéorter,” ii. 
tion of 588), a custom which was observed in 

Books. Eastern countries for many centuries. 

Sambari (¢. 1672) speaks of the scroll 
in the synagogue of Al-Mahallah in a metal pn 
(Neubauer, “M. J. C.” i, 119, 10), which still exists. 
The old and much-venerated Samaritan Pentateuch 
at Nablus is likewise in a metal cover. The scrolls 
were kept in a case (73°), of which there were three 
kinds, 7 °w, AlN, and bsp. In the catacombs of 
Rome there have been found representations of Jesus 
with a case of scrolls at his feet. ‘The cases were 
usually made of wood, though sometimes of leather, 
glass, bone, or metal. It has been shown that such 
cases were the usual form of the Roman bookcase. 
That they were used by the Jews also is seen from the 
fact that the earliest representations of the Ark upon 
glass, dating from the third century, are in this 
form (see Blau, “Studien zum Althebriischen Buch- 
wesen,” pp. 176 et seg.; Jacobs, in “J. Q. R.” xiv. 
738). Sometimes the scrolls were placed in a sort 
of cupboard, which stood upon a pediment and had 
a cover. Openings were made at the top and at the 
side. See ARK OF THE LAw. 

That catalogues of collections of Hebrew books 
were drawn up in early days is evidenced by the 
recent finds made chiefly in the Fostat 
Genizah. Such catalogues were some- 
times sale-lists of book-traders—e.g9., 
the Adler manuscriptin Arabic (“ R.E. 
J.” xxxix, 199); the Adler manuscript containing 
a sale-list of a certain ‘Abd al-‘Aziz of the thirteentb 


Cata- 
logues. 


Libraries 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 72 





century (2d. xl. 56, 264); the list found on the back 
of the manuscript copy of Saadia’s “ Amanat” in 
Arabic (72, xxxii. 126); the Adler manuscript of the 
twelfth century giving a list in Arabic of over 100 
books (“J. Q. R.” xiii. 52, 824; Jew. Encyc. iii. 619a, 
s.v. CATALOGUES); and the Frankfort manuscript, 
also from the genizah (“J. Q. R.” xv. 76; for other 
lists see “ Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl.” vii. 181)—and some- 
times catalogues of real collectors, such as the geni- 
zah fragment containing a list of the books of 
Nathan b. Jeshuah (2, vii. 184; “J. Q. R.” xiv. 247) 
or the catalogue 
of the library of 
Leon Mosconi 
Coan. is: She 
xxxix. 242, xl. 
62; see also CAT- 
ALOGUES). 

That care was 
taken in the 
preservation of 
books is seen 
from the advice 
which ‘is given 
by various 
writers. The 
author of the 
“ Sefer Hasidim” 
(18th cent.) ad- 
vises his readers 
to pay particular 
attention to the 
manner in which 
their books are 
kept. Especial 
weight is laid 
upon the duty of 
lending books 
to those whose 
means do not 
allow them _ to 
purchase them. 
Books were 
scarce in those 
days; the want 
of them is be- 
wailed by such 
men as Isscrlein 
and J. Kolon 
(Gidemann, 
“Gesch.” ii. 191, 
lii, 65). Judah 
ibn Tibbon (12th cent.) gives much sage counsel 
to his son, to whom he left his collection of Arabie 
and Hebrew books. He bids him make his books 
his companions, and to take good care of his book- 
chests (T2948) and bookcases (A73°N) and his garden. 


‘Take good care of thy books; cover thy shelves with a fine 
eovering; guard them against damp and mice. Examine thy 
Hebrew books on the first of every month; thy Arabic ones once 
every two months; thy pamphiet-cases [D*1v'p ODD} once 
every ihree months. Arrange them ail In good order, so that 
thou weary not in looking for a book when thou needest it. ... 
Write down the titles of the books in each row [n*3] of the cases 
[ssriaN] in a separate fascicle [79x], and place each in its 
row. in order that thou mavest be able to see exactly in which 
row any particular book is without mixing up the others. 

**Do the same with the cases. Take good care of the indi- 





Alcove in the Public Library, Parma, Italy. 


(From a photograph.) 


‘ yidual leaves [o°y] which are in the convolutes [2°9"5] ang 


fascicles; ... look continually into the catalogue [M7517] in 
order to remember what books thou hast. . .. When thou lend. 
est a book record its title before it leaves the house; and when 
it is brought back draw thy pen through the Memorandum, 
Restore all loaned books on Pesah and Sukkot” (* Ermahnungs. 
schreiben des Jehudah ibn Tibbon,” ed. Steinschneider, pp. 6, 
12, Berlin, 1852; transl. in Giidemann, l.e. i. 28). 


This care in the binding and handling of books 
is inculeated by Profiat Duran (of Catalonia, 14th 
cent.) also, as is seen in the preface to his “ Ma‘aseh 
Efod ” (ed. Friedlander and Kohn, p. 19), and by Sol. 
omon <Alamj 
(1415): “ Take 
good care of the 
writing and the 
arranging of thy 
books” (“Igge- 
ret Musar,” ed. 
1854, p. 14). 

In earliest 
times the libra- 
ries weredirectly 
connected with 
the batte mid- 
rashot, each of 
such institutions 
having a collec- 
tion of its own. 
This practise 
continued down 
through the 
Middie Ages. 
At times books 
of especial value 
were kept in the 
synagogue in a 
sort of cup- 
board, a custom 
which prevailed 
especially in 
Egypt. The 
contents of these 
school libraries 
must have 
varied in cliffer- 
ent countries. 
In the western 
French and Ger- 
man schools of 
the Middle Ages 
they — probably 
contained _ little 
more than what was necessary for the almost ex- 
clusively Talmudic curriculum that was followed; 
but in Italy and Spain, where the curriculum em- 
braced also philosophy, mathematics, and the nat- 
ural sciences, the libraries must have been more va 
ried and much larger. 

The tradition thus begun hasbeen kept up. Such 
libraries of distinctively Jewish books are now at- 
tached to seminaries and to theological schools and 
serve as Jewish university librarics. The chief col- 
lections may here be mentioned: 


Austria: Library of the Israelitisch-Theologische Lehran- 
stalt, Vienna; Hungary: library of the Landesrabbinerschules 
Budapest (20,000 vols., of which 10,000 are Judaica: 41 incu 
nabula; 50 MSS.). 


ST en ome 


73 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Libraries 


Bie eee ea Se es ee ag a ee a ee oe 


England: Library of Jews’ College (in all 25,000 vols., made 
up of the original Jews’ College collection 4,000; the A. L. Green 
jibrary 7.000; the Montefiore Library 4,000; the A. Lowy Li- 
prary j0,G00; in addition 600 MSS., mainly from the Zunz and 
Halberstam collections), and that of the bet ha-midrash, London 
(the Herschel MSS.). 

¥rapce: Library of the Séminaire Isra€lite, Paris. 

Germany: Libraries of the Lehranstalt ftir die Wissenschaft 
des Judenthums and the Rabbinische Seminar in Berlin ; of the 
Jiidisch-Theologische Seminar (about 23,000 printed vols.; 248 
yss.) in Breslau. 

Holland: Libraries of the Portuguese Rabbinical Seminary ; 
of the Bet ha-Midrash ‘Ez Hayyiin (20,000 vols.; 1,000 paim- 
phiets ; 3d) portraits); of the Netherlands Israelitish Seminary. 

Italy: Library of the Rabbinical Seminary, Florence. 

United States: Library of the Hebrew Union College (about 
15,000 vols.), Cincinnati, and that of the Jewish Theological 
Seminary of America, New York (14,500 vols.; 750 M&S8.). 

In the course of time these libraries have not 
proved sufficient. They served, in the main, theo- 
logical purposes. Aun attempt at establishing a na- 
tional Jewish library was made in the ABARBANEL 
Liprary at Jerusalem, founded by Joseph Chaza- 
nowicz and now containing more than 20,000 vols. 
Next to this may be mentioned that of the Alliance 
Israélite Universelle in Paris, largely founded by 
Isidor Loeb and supported by donations and legacies 
from L. L. Rothschild (22,000 vols. ; 200 MSS.; made 
up largely of the collections of Isidore Loeb and 
Bernard Lazare); the Bibliothek des Deutseh-Israe- 
litischen Gemeindebundes (recently founded; 5,000 
vols.) in Berlin; and the library of the B’nai B’rith 
in New York (Maimonides’ Library; but this is not 
a solely Jewish collection). 

The Italian Jewish communities seem to have 
been the first to establish libraries for their own 
use; ¢.g., Mantua (in 1767; 4,500 vols.) and Pitilione 
jin Tuscany. In England the North London bet ha- 
midrash has its private collection; the Vienna com- 
munity possesses a children’s library; and Warsaw 
has its Synagogenbibliothek. Of late years the com- 

munal libraries have grown, especially 

Commural inGermany. Breslau hasits Bibliothek 

Libraries. der Synagogengemeinde; Dettmold, 

its Lehrerbibliothek and Schilerbi- 

bliothek ; Gleiwitz, its Jugendbibliothek ; Homburg, 
its Israelitische Gemeindebibliothek Mendelssohn; 
Carlsruhe, its Jidische Bibliothek der Israelitischen 
Genossenschaft; Kozmin, its Jiidische Gemeinde- 
bibliothek; Mayence, its Klingensteinische Biblio- 
thek fiir Hessische Lehrer; Neckar-Bischofshcim, 
its Israclitische Gemeindebibliothek; Nuremberg, 
its Bibliothek und Leseverein; Ratibor, its Israeli- 
tische Bibliothek; Scluwcrin, its Gemeindebibliothek ; 
Stettin, its Jtidische Bibliothek; Stuttgart, its Ge- 
meindebiblicthek; Parel, its Schul- und Germeinde- 
bibliothek ; and Wiesbaden, its Gemeindebibliothek. 

Few of the seminary librarics mentioned above 
can, however, rival the great collections gathered in 
the large national and public libraries. These ante- 
date the seminary libraries; and, having been the 
first in the field, and commanding larger pecuniary 
Tesources, have been able to progress much further. 
The leading public collections are here cited. In 
any cases they are dealt with in separate articles 
In this encyclopedia or are referred to in the articles 
treating of the cities in which the collections are 
located. 


Austria: Hofbibliothek. Vienna. 
England : British M useuin, London (15,000 vols.; 1,400 MSS.}: 


Bodleian Library, Oxford +2,900 MSS.); Cambridge University 
Library, 

France: Bibliothéque Nationale, Paris (1,390 MSS.). 

Germany: KOonigliche Bibliothek, Berlin (5,000 vols.: 300 
MSS8.); K6nigliche Bibliothek, Munich (2,000 MSS.); Stadtbi- 
bliothek and Universititsbibliothek, Leipsie; Stadtbibliothek, 
Frankfort-on-the-Maiu: Stadtbibliothek, Strasburg. 

Holland: Academy of Sciences, Leyden (15,000 vols.) ; Bibli- 
otheca Rosenthaliana in University Library. Amsterdam. 

Italy: Vatican Library, Rome: Bibliotheca Casanatensis, 
Rome; Public Library, Parma: Bibliotheca Palatina and Bibli- 
otheca Medicio-Laurentiana, Florence; Public Library, Turin; 
Bibliotheca Marciana, Venice; and Bibliotheca Ambrosiana. 
Milan. In addition there are smaller collections in the Biblio- 
teca Vittorio Emanuele and the Biblioteca Angelica, Rome, and 
in the University Library, Bologna. 

Russia: Friedland Library, in the Asiatic Museum of the Im- 
perial Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg (10,000 vols.; 300 
MSS.); the University Library and the Synodal Library in the 
same city; the collection of Karaitica belonging to the Odessa 
Society for History and Antiquities. 

United States: The Jewish collection in the New York Publie 
Library (Schiff foundation ; about 17,000 vols.), and thatin the 
Library of Columbia University (gift of Temple Emanu-El; 5,000 
vols.). 


Most of the foregoing collections are based upon 
the private libraries of Jewish book-collectors, which 
have either been given to or bought for the institu- 
tions. Thus the British Museum in 1759 acquired 
by gift from Solomon da Costa a collection which 
had originally been gathered during the Common- 
wealth, had fallen to Charles IL. at the Restoration, 
and had finally been purchased by the bookseller 
who sold it to Da Costa. The British Museum se- 
cured also (1848) the printed books in the library of 
H. I. Michael of Hamburg, which had cousisted of 
7,000 volumes, including manuscripts. The latter 
came into the possession of the Bodleian Library, 
which had previously (1829) been enriched through 
the purchase of the famous Oppenheimer collection. 
This consisted of 7,000 printed volumes and 1,000 
manuscripts, nearly all Hebraica; it had beeu 
founded by the court Jew Samuel Oppenheimer of 
Vienna with the aid of his patron, Prince Eugene, 
and had passed into the possession of Samuel's son 
David, then into that of Hirschel Oppenheimer, and 
finally into that of Isaac Cohen of Hamburg. Sim- 
ilarly many other private collections have been ac- 
quired by various public libraries; ¢.7., Michael Jo- 
seph’s went (1849) to Jews’ College, London, and 
Halberstam’s to the Judith Montefiore College and 
Jater to Jews’ College. The manuscripts of Joseph 
Almanzi went to the British Museum; his printed 
books, to Temple Emanu-El, New York, and finally 
to Columbia University in that city. Raphael Eman- 
uel Mendola’s books formed the basis of the Con- 
gregational Library at Mantua (1767); while the 
collection of L. Rosenthal of Hanover was presented 
by his son to Amsterdam University Library. A. 
Geiger’s library enriched the Lehranstait in Berlin, 
as did Saraval’s and Beer’s the sister institution in 
Breslau, and David Kaufmann’s large collection, that 
in Budapest. The collection of A. Berliner, con- 
taining many liturgical works, is now the property 
of the Frankfort Stadtbibliothek. The library of 
David Montezinos in Amsterdam, especially rich in 
Judzeo-Spanish productions and in incunabula, is in 
the Portuguese Seminary of that city, while the 
pride of Parma is the collection made by the Chris- 
tian scholar G. B. de Rossi. Samuel Adiler’s library 
was given to the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, 


Libraries 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 74 





and the collection of M. Sulzberger, so rich in in- 
cunabula, to the Jewish Theological Seminary of 
America, where it has been added to the David Cas- 
sel and Halberstam libraries already in that institu- 
tion. See Book-COLLECTORS. 
There is noinformation in regard to the classitica- 
tion of Hebrew books in olden times. In the above- 
mentioned genizah fragment of a cata- 
Library logue, published in “J. Q. Rt.” xiii. 52 
Classifica- et seg., the books are classified as fol- 
tion. lows: Bible, Mishnah, Talmud, The- 
ology, Halakah, and Liturgy. Some 
such general division as this must have sufficed. The 
first to attempt a classification upon a scientific ba- 
sis was Shabbethai Bass (1641-1718) in the introduc- 
tion to his “Sifte Yeshenim.” Though this was 
undertaken for bibliographic rather than for library 
purposes, it deserves a place here. He divides He- 
brew literature into two great categories, Biblical 
and Post-Biblical; and each of these into ten sub- 
divisions as follows: 


Biblical Literature: (1) The Bible. 

(2) Works Explanatory of the Wording of Scripture :—Bible 
Lexicography ; Dictionaries; Grammars; Explanations of the 
Text of the Targumim and of the Zohar; Commentaries on the 
whole Bible ; Commentaries on portions of tue Bible; Targu- 
mim; Cabalistic Commentaries on the Torah and on the Books 
of Ruth and Lamentations: Works onthe Zohar; Lexicography 
of the Zohar, Recanati, and Bahya; Philosophical Works Bear- 
ing on the Torah, the Megillot, Psalms, and Job; Grammar of 
the Torah ; Supercommentaries on Ibn Ezra; Supercommenta- 
ries on Mizrahi; Commentaries on Midrash Rabbot; Supercom- 
mentaries on Rashi to the Torah; Commentaries (‘* peshat’’) 
and Homiletic Explanations (**derashot”’) arranged according 
to the sections of the Torah ; Cominentaries on the Megillot as a 
whole, and upon each Separate Seroll; Commentaries on the 
Haftarot; Commentaries and Homiletic Expianations on the 
Prophets and Hagiographa as a Whole and upon the Individual 
Books: Homilies. 

(8) Books of Prayer and. Song for the Synagogue Service (Lit- 
urgy); Other Poetry ; Commentaries on the Liturgy ; Commen- 
taries on the Passover Haggadah ; Books Dealing with the Wri- 
ting of Pentateuchs and Mezuzot: of Legal Documents and 
Bills of Divoree. 

(4) Letter-Writing and Rhetoric; Biography and History; 
Geography ; Proverbs and Maxims. 

(5) Kawwanot in Connection with the Liturgy and Religious 
Ordinances ; Cabalistie Works Not Arranged According to the 
Sections of the Pentateuch. 

(6) Grammatical Works Not Dealing Directly with the Torah; 
Masorah ; Logic. 

(7) Works on Salvation, Redemption, and the Resurrection ; 
Books on the Future Life and the Soul. 

(8) Works on Variant Readings, Corrections, and Mistakes in 
the Bible; Similar Works Dealing with Post-Biblical Literature. 

(9) Ethics, Piety, and Religion. 

(10) Introductions and Reference Works on the Bible. 

Post-Biblical Literature: 

(1) Mishnab. 

(2) Commentaries on the Mishnah ; Explanations and Novellze 
to the Gemara, Rashi, and the Tosafot ; Commentaries on ‘‘*En 
Ya‘akob,” Other Haggadot, and the Yerushalmi ; Commentaries 
on Pirke Abot. 

(3) Mathematics (Arithmetic, Algebra, Geometry, ete.) ; the 
Calendar; Astronomy and Astrology; ‘Works on Philosophy, 
Not Arranged According to the Sections of the Pentateuch; 
Works on Chiromancy, ete. (Ayy757) VA (Hw); Works on 
Casting of Lots and Horoscopes; Works on Evil Spirits and 
Necromancy ; Dreams and their Interpretation: Music; Works 
on the Other Seiences. 

(4) Theology and the Thirteen Dogmas; Religious Discussions 
and Polemies. 

(5) Minhagim (Rituals); Introductions and Works of Refer- 
ence Regarding Minbagim and the Gemara. 

(6) Responsa on Ritual Matters; Responsa on Philosophical 
Matters. 

(7) Medicine (Humanand Animal); Lapidaries (8°3aN MIS 0 
5°31). 


- (8) Works on Initial Letters (* Rashe Tebot’’), Gematria, ang 
Notarikon. 

(9) Commentaries and Novellz According Either to the Ar. 
rangement of the Gemara or of Alfasi; Commentaries Accord. 
ing to the Arrangement of the Arba* Turim, Shulhan “Aruk, 
and ‘** Lebushim”’; Commentaries According to the Arrange. 
ment of the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides; Decisions and Ex. 
planations According to the (Sifre) Mizwot ; Decisions and Laws 
According to Various Arrangements; Decisions and Laws Ac. 
cording to Various Halakot in the Different Portions of the Tu- 
rim. 

(10) Talmudie Methodology; Works on the Building of the 
Tabernacle, on the Temple, and on its Vessels; Works Printed 
in the German Language (Judao-German}; Pedagogy. 


In modern gencral libraries the books on Jewish 
subjects are not always shelved apart from the main 
collection, special sections for Jewish subjects being 
provided for merely in the various general sections, 
As a type of classification that adopted by the Bod- 
leian Library may be cited. 


BODLEIAN LIBRARY, OXFORD. 


CLASSIFICATION OF BOOKS ON JEWISH SUBJECTS. 
[The system of spelling in this list is that adopted by the library authorities, ] 


Shemitic Mythology and Foik-Tales. 

Comparative Religion—Shemitie—General and Miscellaneous, 

Judaism: Ancient History; Modern History; Ritual; Tal. 
mud; Liturgies and Prayers; Devotional Poems and Hymns; 
Sermons; General or Mixed Treatises ; Encyclopzedias; His- 
tory, Biography, and Methodology of the Subject (Including 
Jewish Study of the Bible); Targums. 

Missions to Jews. 

Jewish Attacks on Christianity. 

Christian Replies to Them. 

Voyages and Travels: Syria and Palestine—Ancient and 
Mediseval—General and Miscellaneous; Jerusalem ; Modern— 
General and Miscellaneous; Jerusalem. 

Ethnography: ‘* Anglo-Israel ’’ ; Shemitie. 

Climatology and Topography of Health, Mortality, and 
Medicine: Syria and Palestine—Ancient and General; Medi- 
geval and Modern; Modern Jewish. 

General Descriptions and Statistics of Manners (nelu- 
ding General Antiquities) and Characteristics: Syria and 
Palestine—Ancient ; Mediseval and Modern ; Modern Jews Out- 
side Palestine. 

Chronology—the Hebrew Calendar. 

History —General Mediaeval ; Crusades. 

The Jews—In Palestine and General: History and Biog- 
raphy of the Study; Genera) Materials: General Histories— 
Ancient Writers (Josephus, ete.); Modern Writers; to the 
Entry into Canaan; to the Secession of Israel; Kingdom of 
Judah and Judah + Israel; Kingdom of Israel ; Later Samaritan 
History ; Captivity to the Rise of the Maccabees; Maccabees to 
A.D. 135; Since. 

The Jews in Dispersion: History and Biography of the Study 
(General and Special); General Materials and Histories; Asia 
K. of the Indies; Asia W. of the Indies; Africa; Spain (and 
Spain + Portugal); Portugal; Italy; France and Belgium; 
Switzerland; Austria-Hungary; Balkan Peninsula and Greece ; 
Slavonic Countries; Scandinavian Countries; Germany; Hol- 
land; United Kingdom ; America ; Australasia ; Works on Their 
Re-Migration to Palestine. 

Writing and lllumination : Moabite ; Old Israelite ; Samar- 
itan; Aramean and Palmyrene, etc., and Rabbinicat Hebrew. 

Bibliography: Bibliographies of Special Literatures (MSS. as 
well as printed books)—Hebrew ; Bibliographies of Special Sb- 
jects—History—the Jews; Catalogues and Histories of Libraries 
in Syria and Palestine; Law, Jewish. 

Miscellaneous Biography: Jews—-Ancient; Mediseval and 
Modern (general and special). 

Genealogy and Monuments: Ancient—Jewish. 

History, Biography, and Description of General Educa- 
tion: Ancient Jewish; Modern Jewish (general). 

Philosophy in General—History, Biography, and Critt 
cism: Kabala, 

Philosophy in General— Works: Kabalistic. 

Proverbs : Shemitic. 


The other great English library, that of the Brit- 
ish Museum, hasa special classification for its Jewish 
printed books, elaborated by Zedner ; they are divided 
into fifteen regular sections, with three extra ones 


a5 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Libraries 


Lc ee a ey ee aap a Ne ee ee ee 


dealing with works not considered directly a part of 
Hebrew literature, as follows: 

(1) Bibles; (2) Commentaries on Bible: (8) Talmud; (4) 
Commentaries on Talmud; (5) Codes of Law ; (6) Decisions ; 
(7) Midrash; (8) Cabala; (9) Sermons; (10) Liturgies; (11) 
pivine Philosophy; (12) Scientific Works; (13) Grammars; 
Dictionaries; (14) History ; Geography ; (15) Poetry; Criticism. 

In adGition : (1) Translations of Post-Biblical Hebrew Works : 
(2) Works in Arabic, Spanish, German, etc., in Hebrew Charac- 
ters: (3) Bibliography. 

The Vienna Kaiserliche Hofbibliothek has its 
manuscripts divided into the folowing categories: 

(1) Bible Editions; (2) Masorah; (3) Targumim; (4) Bible 
Exegesis; (5) Midrash; (6) Talmud; (7) Decisions; (8) Legal 
Literature; (9) Responsa; (10) Liturgy; (11) Religious Philos- 
ophy; (12) Ethics; (13) Cabala: (14) Grammar; (15) Lexi- 
cography; (16) Rhetoric; (17) Aristotelian Philosophy; (18) 
Platonic Philosophy; (19) Ghazali’s Philosophy; (20) History 
of Hai ibn Yukthan; (21) Medicine; (22) Astronomy; (28) 
Astrology. 

Some of the public libraries have, however, a spe- 
cial division for Hebraica and Judaica. As speci- 
mens. the classifications used in the Frankfort Stadt- 

bibliothek and in the Hebrew Union 

Frankfort College at Cincinnati may be cited. 

Scheme. In the following plan of the first- 

named library, where the rubrics are 
quite general, it will be seen that a special rubric is 
devoted to the history of the Jews of Frankfort. 

(1) Hebrew and Jewish Journals; (2) Hebrew Philology 
(General Works; Lexica; Grammars); (3) Hebrew Bibli- 
ography and History of Literature: (4) Old Testament in He- 
prew; (5) Anonymous Hebrew Works; (6) Hebrew Literature 
(“Auctores Hebraici Nominati”’?); (7) Judseo-German Litera- 
ture: (8) Jewish Synagogal Music; (9) Secular Music of the 
Jews; (10) Jewish Literature and History in Other Languages 
than Hebrew; (11) Literature and History of the Frankfort 
Jews. 

The scheme used by the Hebrew Union College 
contains a special rubric for manuscripts and rare edi- 

tions (No. xxiv.), and makes provision 


Hebrew also for a certain number of non-Jew- 
Union ish books which find their way by 
College. gift into the collection. The Roman 


numerals represent the alcoves into 
which the collection is divided. 


I. Bibles in Various Languages; Koran; Zendavesta, ete¢.; II. 
Exegetics and Biblical History; II. Talmud; IV. Casuistics; 
V¥. Responses and Calendars; VI. Commentaries and Critical 
Works on the Talmud; VII. Religious History; Theology; Re- 
ligious Philosophy: Ethics, ete.; VIII. Periodicals; IX. Phi- 
lology ; Literature ; School-Books; X. Pre-Talmudic Literature ; 
XI. Midrashim; Homiletics; Sermons; Zohar, ete.; XII. Spe- 
cial History; Philosophy of History; Biography; Travels: 
XIII. Universal, Oriental, Jewish, Grecian, Roman, and French 
History ; XIV. Lexicography; XV. Philosophy; Logic; Polit- 
ical Economy; Education; XVI. Catalogues and Works on Bi- 
ography; XVII. Law: XVII. Mathematics; Natural Sciences ; 
Music; XIX. Fiction; XX. Liturgy; Prayer-Books; XXI. Ori- 
entalia; XXII. Government and State Reports; XXIII. Reports 
of Colleges and Schools; Newspaper Almanacs; XXIV. Manu- 
Scripts and Rare Editions; XXV. Literature.. 


A peculiar system of designating the various 
Classes of books is followed by the Landesrabbiner- 
Schule in Budapest. The signatures (A, B, Bi, etc.) 
are taken from the actual word designation of each 
Class, as follows: 

(1) A=Agada (or Haggadah); (2) B= Bible; (3) Bi= Bib- 
liography; (4) C= Codices (i... of the Talmudic Literature); 
(5) Chr= Christian Literature; (6) D=‘“Decisoren” (i.e.. 
Codes); (7) Di =“Diarien” (i.¢e., Newspapers, Journals, and 
Collected Works in Non-Hebrew Tongues): (8) DI = ‘* Diarien” 


(ie., Newspapers, Journals, and Collected Works in Hebrew); 
) E= Exegesis; (10) G=Grammar of Hebrew and Aramaic 


Langnages; (11) H = Homiletical Literature in Hebrew; (12) 
HI = Historical Literature in Hebrew ; (18) Hi = Historical Lit- 
erature of the Jews, General and Special; Biographies in non- 
Hebrew Languages, Arranged According to Special Groups; 
(14) I= ‘“‘Isagogik’’ (i.e., Introductions); (15) L= Liturgy; 
(16) Lh = Hebrew, Aramaic, and Talmudic Lexicography; (17) 
Le=General Lexicography; (18) Nov= Talmudie Novelle; 
(19) Nh = Neo-Hebraic Literature; (20) O=Orientalia; (21) 
P= Jewish Religious Philosophy; (22) Pr= ‘*Predigt Litera- 
tur” (i.e., Sermons); (23) R = Talmudic Responsa; (24) T = Tal- 
mud, Mishnah, and Introductions to the Same. 


There is also a special signature, LG, for German 
and other literature, the books being arranged ac- 
cording to certain groups. Furthermore, the library 
of Samuel Léw Brill, presented to the seminary by 
the Jewish community of Pesth in 1897, is kept sepa- 
rate from the other books and is arranged according 
to the size of the books (duodecimo, quarto, octavo, 
etc.) and the alphabetical order of the authors’ 
names, This system, which can be seen also in the 
catalogues of the Berlin Royal Library, is said to 
have peculiar advantages. 

The most complete classification of works in a 
Jewish collection is, however, the following, made 
for the New York Public Library by A. 8S. Freidus, 
and reproduced by permission of the director, Dr. 
John 8. Billings. 


NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY. 
THE JEWISH COLLECTIGN—GENERAL DIVISIONS. 
{The system of spelling in this list is that adopted by the library authorities,] 
Manuscripts; Book Rarities; Works of Reference; Bibli- 
ography; Literary History; General Works; Hebrew Language 
and Aramaic; Hebrew Bible; Archeology; Pre-Talmudical 
Literature and Sects; Christianity; Talmudical Literature; 
Halacha; The Ritual; Homiletical Literature; Ethics; Doc- 
trinal Theology; Post-Talmudical Schisms and Dissensions; 
Philosophy ; Kabbala and Chasidism ; Folk-Lore ; Belles-Lettres ; 
Dialects and Their Literatures, and Languages; Secular Sci- 
ences; Geography, General History, and Biography; Jewish 
History; The Jewish Race Ethnologically and Sociologically ; 
Jews and Gentiles. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. LITERARY HISTORY. 

Periodicals; Paleography (see also Regulations for Scribes); Cata- 
logues of Manuscripts; History of Printing ; Catalogues of Book- 
sellers; Catalogues of Private Libraries; Public Libraries; 
Catalogues of Publie Libraries; Bibliographies: Countries, Au- 
thors (see also Biography), Subjects; Literary History: Special 
Subjects, Modern, Judeeo-German, Relation of Jewish Litera- 
ture to Otker Literatures. 


GENERAL WORKS. 

Periodicals in Hebrew; in Judseo-German (see also Judeco-Ger- 
man Literary Periodicals); in German; in English (American); in 
English (British); in French; in Other Languages; in Rus- 
sian; Societies’ Publications in Hebrew ; Societies’ Publications 
in Modern Languages; Collections (Polyglot); Collections in 
Hebrew (see alsu Literary Collections); Collecte@ Works of Individ- 
ual Authors in Hebrew (ee also Collected Literary Works); Collec- 
tions in Judszeo-German (see also Judeo-German Literary Collections); 
Collections in Latin: Collections in German; Collections in 
English: Collections in Other Languages; Collections in Rus- 


sian; Other General Works: Cyclopedias (see also Dictionaries of 
the Bible ; Talmudical Works of Reference), 


HEBREW LANGUAGE. ARAMAIC. 

Biblical: General Works; Elementary Readers; Chrestoma- 
thies (see also Elementary O. T. Histories; Catechisms; Manuals of Judaism) ; 
Grammars (in Hebrew; see also Grammatical Notes on the Liturgies) ; 
Grammars (in Other Languages) : Orthography (Including Al- 
phabet, Vowel-Points, Accents) (see also Masora), Parts of Speech, 
Syntax, Rhetoric and Prosody (see also Poetry of the Hebrew Bible) ; Dic- 
tionaries (see also Concordances); Names: Synonyms; Miscellane- 
ous. Post-Biblical: Chrestomathies; Grammar; Diction- 
aries; Foreign Terms (see also Dialects); Abbreviations. Modern: 
Letter-Writers (see also Legal Forms). Aramaic (see also Targums): 
Chrestomathies ; Grammar. 


HEBREW BIBLE. 


General Works; Criticism; Introductions; Dictionaries; 
Helps: Poetry (see also Prosody); Prophecy; Whole Hebrew Bi- 


Libraries 
Lichtenberg 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


76 





bles: Parts; Selections : Concordances ; Masora (see also Graminar) ; 
Textual Criticism, Various Readings; Targus (see also Aramaic); 
Other Versions; Exegetics (see also General Works on Homiletics) ; Col- 
lected Commentaries; Rashi; Ibn Ezra: Other Hebrew Com- 
mentaries: Commentaries in Modern Languages; Collective 
Biography ; Individual Biography; Old Testament History (only 
elernsentary works or such as have chiefly an exegetical interest go here; for works 
of historical interest see Pentateuchal Traditions; Eatire O. T. Period: see also 
Fiction Relating to Biblical Times). 


ARCH ZOLOGY. 
(See also Calendar; Education; Geography [Biblical and Talmudical}; Medicine 
Among the Jews ; Palestine ; Ten Tribes ; Woman.) 

Periodicals, Societies, Collections; General Works; Inscrip- 
tions (see also Epitaphs); Numismatics; Metrology ; Social and Eco- 
nomic Conditions; Slavery; Government (see also Jurisprudence) ; 
Sacred Antiquities (see also Ancient Judaism; Mythology; Idolatry of the 
Ancient Hebrews; Orach Chayim Laws; Prophecy ; The Ritual): Festivals, 
Sacrifices, Priesthood, Temples; Art; Music; Costumes; Other 
Special Subjects. 


PRE-TALMUDICAL LITERATURE AND SECTS. 
(See also History—Return from Babylon to Completion of Talmud.) 


General Works: Literature (see also Targums); Apocrypha: Ec- 
clesiasticus, Other Books; Pseudepigrapha; Philo Judzeus (see 
also Alexandrian School of Philosophy); Other Hellenistic Literature 
(see also Josephus). Sects (see also Post-Talmudical Schisms and Dissensions ; 
Sabbathai Zebi; Chasidism); Samaritans (see also Samaritan Text of the 
Bible; Samaritan Targuny) 5 Sadducees, Pharisees, Essenes, Thera- 
peute. 

CHRISTIANITY. 
General Works (see also The Messiah). Historico-Literary Sub- 


jects: Lives of Jesus (Jewish); Lives of Jesus (Christian) 
(for Jewish Contemporary History see Return from Babylon to the Close of the 


Talnud); New Testament; New Testament Parts; New Testa- 
ment and Jewish Literature; The Fathers and Jewish Litera- 
ture; Synagogue and Church. Theologico-Controversial Sub- 
jects: Missionary Periodicals; Missionary Societies; Christian 
Doctrine; Christian Liturgies; Jews in Christian Theology ; 
Restoration of the Jews (ee also Restoration of the Jews [in Jewish The- 
ology]; Zionism) ; Conversion of the Jews; Conversion of the Jews, 
Works Against ; Converted Jews (Missionaries); Converted Jews 
(Missionaries, Individual); Miscellaneous Missionary Writings $ 
Evidences of Christianity; Christian Polemics (see also Unfavorable 


Criticism of the Oral Tradition); Jewish Apologetics and Polemics (see 
also Apologies of the Jews [agaiust Auti-Semites]; Apologies of the Oral Tradi-« 


tion; The Messiah); Judaism and Christianity (see also Jews and Gentiles ; 
Judaism and Other Religions). 


TALMUDICAL LITERATURE, 


The Oral Tradition: Unfavorable Criticism (see also Anti-Semitic 
Writings ; Gentiles in Jewish Law and Literature ; Christian Polemics), APOlO- 


gies, Introductions, Essays, Methodology, Helps, Works of 
Reference (see also Dictionaries of Post-Biblical Hebrew; Indexes to the 


Agada), Collective Biography, Individuai Biography, History 
(see also Flistory ; Return from Bahyton to the Close of the Talmud); Mishna 
(see also Aboth): Commentaries; Literature of the Mishna Period ; 
Jerusalem Talmud; Babylonian Talmud: Parts, Minor Trea- 
tises, Translations, Selections (see also Agada), Textual Criti- 
cism, Commentaries ; Pilpul. 


HALACHA. 


General Works; The 613 Precepts; Codes of Law (to Maimon- 
ides) ; Maimonides; Jacob ben Asher (and other writers before 
Caro); Joseph Caro; Later Works; Codes of Special Laws: 
Orach Chayim Laws (see also The Ritual; Sacred Antiquities), Special 
Laws, Yoreh Deah Laws, Dietary Laws (for modern works see Diet- 
ary Laws, s.v. Jewish Race, Ethnologically and Sociologically), Purifica- 
tion (see also Codes in Jndewo-German), Regulations for Scribes (see also 
Massecheth Soferim, under Minor Treatises af the Talmud; Paleography), Other 
Special Laws; Eben ha-Ezer Laws (for modern works see Special Laws) : 
Divorce ; Choshen ha-Mishpat Luws (see also Government of the Ancient 
Hebrews; Non-Jewish Law): Modern Works, Special Laws (see also 
Slavery), Legal Forms (see also Letter-Writers); Codes in Judeo-Ger- 
man and Jud#o-Spanish ; Decisions of Several Authors; Deci- 
sions of Individual Authors. 


THE RITUAL. 
(See also Orach Chayim Laws; Sacred Antiquities.) 

General Works; Special Customs; Minhagim (see also Supersti- 
tions); Synagogue (see also Ecclesiastical Polity ; Synagogue and Church) ; 
Reading of the Law. Liturgies: Works on the Liturgy; Col- 
lections of Liturgies ; Daily Prayers (see also Christian Liturgies ; Kara- 
ite Liturgies): Commentaries and Grammatical Notes, Rite of Re- 
formed Jews; Saturday Prayers; Festival Prayers: Hagadah : 
Fastday Prayers: Lamentations; Benedictions; Occasional 
Prayers: Prayers for the Sick and the Dead (see also Folk-Medicine) ; 


Miscellaneous; Devotionals; Meditations; Private Hymnals; 
Readings; Synagogue Musie. 


HOMILETICAL LITERATURE. 
(See also Agada.) 

General Works (see also Exegetics), Widrashim: Collections of 
Midrashim; Midrash Raboth: Other Midrashim to Biblica) 
Books: Other Midrashimn (for Halachic Midrasnim see Literature of the 
Mishna Period ; for Kabbalistic Midrashim see Ear!y Kabbalistic Literature), 
Yalkutim. Sermons: Sermons in Hebrew; Judzeo-German; 
Gernian; English; French; Italian ; Other Languages; Slavic; 
Sabbath Sermons; Festival Sermons; Confirmation Sermons; 
Marriage Sermons; Funera! Sermons; Sermons on Other Occa- 
sions; Political and Patriotic. 


ETHICS. 


Works on Jewish Ethics; Aboth (ee also Minor Treatises of the Tal- 
mud): ‘Translations, Commentaries; Miscellaneous Writers; 
Judzo-German Writers; Judseo-Spanish Writers; Non-Jewish 
Writers; Special Subjects (see also Charity ; Gentiles in Jewish Law); 
Etiquette (see also Massecheth Derech Erez [Minor Treatises of the Talmud)); 
Poetical Works: Maxims (see also Proverbs); Ethical Wills; Asceti- 
cism; Hortatory Theology. 


DOCTRINAL THEOLOGY. 


General Works; Ancient Judaism (see also Mythology; Idolatry 
[of the Ancient Hebrews]; Sacred Antiquities); Modern Judaisin: Works 
in Modern Languages (see also Reformed Judaism); Manuals: Cate- 
chisms; Special Subjects: Eschatology (see also Sadducees; Pharje 
sees), Restoration of the Jews (see also Palestine ; Restoration of the Jews 
{in Christian Theology]; Zionism), The Messiah (see also Christianity); Jus 
daism and Other Religions (see also Judaism and Christianity ; Religions): 
Proselytism, Proselytes. 


POST-TALMUDICAL SCHISMS AND DISSENSIONS. 


General Works (see also Pre-Talmudical Sects): Works on the Karae 
ites; Karaite Literature: Liturgies; Minor Sects; Reformed 
Judaism (see also Assimilation; Modern Jewish History): Works Against 
Reform, Works for Reform, Special Subjects (see also Rite of Re- 
formed Jews) ; Dialogues, Irenics. 

PHILOSOPHY. 
(Works for and against the study of Philosophy go here.) 

Terminology; Logic; General Works; Non-Jewish Philos- 
ophers; Alexandrian School (see also Philo Jnd#us); Saadiah; Ga- 
birol ; Judah ha-Levi; Maimonides ; Other Philosophers; Spino- 
za: Modern Works; Psychology (for Modern Psychology see Psychol- 
ogy, 8.v. Secular Sciences) i Other Special Subjects. 


KABBALA. CHASIDISM. 
(Polemics against the Kabbala and works in its defense go here.) 
General Works; Collections: Sefer Yezirah; Other Early 
Literature; Zohar; Later Literature; Miscellaneous (see also 
Transmigration); Sabbathai Zebi; Eyoschuetz-Emden Controversy 5 
Frank. Chasidism: Chasidaic Works; Chasidaic Legends. 


FOLK-LORE. 


General Works (see also Prophecy); Religions (except Judaism 
and Christianity) (see also Judaism and Other Religions); Mythology, 
{dolatry (of the Ancient Hebrews); Agada Gee also Homiletical 
Literature); Indexes (see also Talmudical Works of Reference), Selections 
(see also Selections from the Talmud), Commentaries; Superstitions 
(see also Minhaginm); Transmigration, Magic, Folk-Medicine (ee 
also Prayers for the Sick), Other Special Subjects: Customs (see also 
Etiquette ; Minhagim: Orach Chayim Laws; The Ritual); Games: Legends 
(see also The Blood Accusation ; Chasadaic Legends): Wandering Jew ; Tales 
(see also Fiction); Fables; ProverbS (see also Maxims); Riddles; 
Other Popular Literature. 


BELLES-LETTRES., 
(See also Dialects and Their Literatures.) 

Hebrew: General works (see also History of Modern Literature); COl- 
leetions ; Selections (see also General Collections); Collected Works of 
Individual Authors (see also Collected Works of a General Character); 
Poetry (see also Ethical Poetry ; Liturgies; Poetry of the Hebrew Bible; Pros- 
ody): Collections, Individual Medizeval Authors, Individual 
Modern Authors: Drama; Fiction ; Humor and Satire ; Parody: 
Miscellany. Modern Languages : General Works (see also Anti 
Semitic Belles-Lettres; Delineation of the Jew in Literature); POetry : Drainas 
Fiction Relating to Biblical Times; Fiction Relating to Modern 
Times; Humor and Satire; Miscellany. 


DIALECTS AND THEIR LITERATURES. LANGUAGES. 


(See also Aramaic ; Foreign Terms Useil in Post-Biblical Hebrew.) 


Reserved for Dialects as yet Unrepresented in the Collections 
Judzo-French; Judzo-Spanish (see also Codes in Tudwo-Spanish) Jue 


a7 | THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Libraries 
Lichtenberg 


i a ee ee oe oe ia SR ee SE SD SS gS eS ee ee pp ee ee 


dgvo-German (for Bibliography see Bibliography, Subjects: for Literary His- 
tory and Criticism see Bibliogravhy and Literary History, Judao-German) ; 
pictionaries, Literary Periodicals (see also General Judwo-German Pe- 
rjedicals), Literary Collections (sce also General Judseo-German Collections), 
poetry (Collections), Poetry (Individual Authors), Fables, 
praia. Stage. Fiction, Humor and Satire, Parodies, Miscellanies 
(sve also Codes in Judeo-German; Devotionals for Women ; Judeo-German Eth- 
teal Writers). 
LANGUAGES. 
Russian; English. 
SECULAR SCIENCES. 


(Works on the cultivation of the sciences among the Jews go here.) 


General Works; Mathematics Among the Jews; Mathemat- 
jcal Works: Arithmetic; Other Mathematical Works; Astron- 
owy (fer Astrology see under Folk-Lore: Superstitions, Other Special Subjects) ; 
Works on the Calendar; Calendars; Natural Science; Natural 
History; Medicine Among the Jews; Physicians ; Medical Works 
(see also Folk-Medicine); Hygiene ; Psychology (for Metaphysical Psychol- 
ogy see Philosophy + Psychology) ; Music; Fine Arts; Useful Arts: 
Cookery, Book-Keeping, Commerce ; Sociology and Economics ; 


Socialism ; Government; Law. (Other non-Jewish subjects are : Chris- 
tianity ; Games; Geography ; History ; Jewish Literature and Other Literatures ; 
Judaism and Other Religions ; Languages ; Logic; Mythology ; Philosophy ; Re- 
ligions ; Travels; Wandering Jew.) 


GEOGRAPHY. GENERAL HISTORY. BIOGRAPHY. 
Geography: Biblical and Talmudical Geography ; Palestine 


(see also Archeology ; Jews in the Orient; Restoration of the Jews [in Christian 
Theology] ; Restoration of the Jews (in Jewish Theology] ; Ziouism) ; Travels. 
General History: Special Countries; America; United States. 
Non-Jewish Biography: Non-Jewish Biography (Individual). 
Jewish Biography: Epitaphs (see also Inscriptions); Genealogy ; 
Biographical Material (see also Bibliographies of Authors ; Ethical Wills ; 
Funeral Sermons ; Legends; Legends of Chasidim ; Names); Collective Biog- 
raphy (see also Converted Jews; O. T. Biography : Physicians; Talmudical 
Biography ; Woman); Collections of Portraits; Individual Portraits ; 


Individual Biography (see also Eybschnetz-Emden Controversy ; Frank 5 
Individual Converted Jews; Individual O. T. Biography ; Individual Talmudists ; 
Lives of Jesus; Proselytes ; Sabbathai Zebi). 


JEWISH HISTORY. 


Periodicals; Societies; Collections; Historical Miscellanies 
(see also Archeology ; Blood Accusation; Epitaphs ; Karaism ; Palestine ; Travels); 
Josephus: Chronicles; Greneral Jewish History. 


DIVISION BY PERIODS. 


Pentateuchal Traditions; Entire O. T. Period (for elementary 
works see Old Test. History, 3.t. Hebrew Bible; see also Ancient Judaisin; O. T. 


Biography ; Prophecy : Ten Trives); Return from Babylon to the Close 
of the Talmud (ee aJso Pre-Talinudical Literature and Sects ; Talmudical Biog- 
taphy and Histery); Middle Ages to the Latter Half of the 18th Cen- 


tury (see also Sabbathai Zebi ; Eybschuetz-Emiden Controversy); Modern (see 


also Chasidism ; Emancipation; Reformed Judaism ; Zionism). 


DIVISION BY COUNTRIES. 
(See also Bibliographies of Countries ; Epitaphs.) 

Orient (see also Palestine); Balkan Peninsula; Italy; Spain and 
Portugal (see also Judeo-Spanish); France (see also Judwo-French); Great 
Britain; Minor European Countries: Germany; Austria-Hun- 
gary; Poland; Russia; America; United States and Canada; 
Other Countries. 


THE JEWISH RACE ETHNOLOGICALLY AND SOCIOLOGICALLY. 


General Works; Anthropology ; Ethnology (see also Assimilation) ; 
Ten Tribes (see also History of the O. T, Period); Clreumcision (for the 
Halacha of this subject see Other Special Laws, s.v. Halacha; for the Liturgies 
see under Occasional Pravers) ; Dietary Laws (for the Halacha of this subject 
see under Halacha); Woman (see also Codes in Judezo-German ; Devotionals 
for Women; Eben ha-Ezer Laws; Purification); Statistics; Occupations ; 
Trades; Commerce; Agriculture (see also Social and Economie Con- 
ditions of the Ancient Hebrews); Trade Unions (ee also Socialism); Mu- 
tual Aid Associations; Communal Organization (see also Syna- 
gomue); Charity; Crime; Education (see also Hebrew Readers; Letter- 
Writers ; Post-Biblical Hebrew Readers; Eiementary O. T. Histories ; Elementary 
Works on Judaism); Educational Institutions (see also Libraries). 


JEWS AND GENTILES. 


(Works of this class relating to the Jews of a particular conntry go with the his- 
tory of the Jews in that country, an exception being made in the ith [Blood Accu- 
Sation] and last two sections in this division, which take @lZ works relating to those 
subjects.) 

General Works; Delineation of the Jew in Literature and 
Art (see also Belles-Lettres ; Jews in Christian Theology ; Wandering Jew) ; 
Works on Anti-Semitism; Anti-Semitic Writings (see also Unfavora- 
ble Criticism of the Oral Tradition); Anti-Semitic Belles-Lettres; Gen- 
tiles in Jewish Law and Literature: The Blood Accusation: 
Apologetic Writings (see also Apologetics of Judaisin Against Christianity ; 


Apulogies of the Oral Tradition); The Jewish Question: Various Solu- 
tious, Toleration, Emancipation (see also Modern Jewish History), 
Assimilation and Mixed Marriages (see also Ethnology ; Reformed Juda- 
ism), Zionism (see also Jews in the Orient; Palestine ; Restoration of the Jews 
{in Christian Theology]; Restoration of the Jews jin Jewish Theology]). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Vorlesungen tiber die Kunde 
Hebritischer Handschriften. in Beihefte zum Centralblatt 
fiir Bibliothekswesen, vii., Leipsic, 1897; Blau, Studien zum 
Althebriiischen, Buchwesen, Budapest, 1902: Schwab, The 
Library of the Alliance Israélite Universelle, in Jewish 
Comment, June, 1904 a 


LIBYA: District in the north of Africa. The 
name “Libya” was often used by the ancients, 
sometimes to designate the whole of northern 
Africa (with the exception of Egypt), sometimes to 
denote a single province west of Egypt. Accord- 
ing to Josephus (“ Ant.” i. 6, § 2), Libya was founded 
by Phut (comp, Gen. x. 6), and the eponymous hero 
Libys was a son of Mesraios, ¢.e., of Egypt. An- 
other old tradition says that Eofres (7.e., Epher; 
Gen, xxv. 4) conquered Libya and that the land was 
called “ Africa ” after him (Josephus, @.¢. i. 15; comp. 
Eusebius, “ Preparatio Evangelica,” ix. 20, § 2; 
“Chronicon Paschale,” i. 66; Suidas, 8.7. “Agpor; 
“Yuhasin,” ed. London, p. 238). 

The Biblical data are more historical. Shishak 
(Shoshank), whose name is claimed to be Libyan, 
had Libyansin his army (A. V. “ Lubims,” IT Chron. 
xii. 3); King Asa defeated a whole army of Cush- 
ites aud Libyans (2b. xvi. 8; comp. xiv. 11); and the 
celebrated Egyptian Thebes also had Libyans in its 
pay (Nahum iii. 9). In ail these passages the Sep- 
tuagint has AcBvec. In Dan, xi. 48, Egyptians, 
Libyans, and Cushites appear together. 

In the Greco-Roman period Libya coincided ap- 
proximately with Cyrene and the territory belong- 
ing to it. Jews lived there (“Ant.” xvi. 6,$ 1); 
and Augustus granted them certain privileges 
through Flavius, the governor of the province (2d. 
§ 5). The Christian apostles also prepared them- 
selves to extend their mission into Libya (Acts fi. 
10).. The great Jewish war of the year 70 had its 
aftermath in Libya; and the rebellious Jonathan 
was denounced to the governor of the Libyan Pen- 
tapolis (Josephus, “B. J.” vii. 11, $1). The Jews 
of Libyaalso took part in the rebellion under Trajan 
and Hadrian (see CYRENE). 

Modern investigation is inclined to connect Leha- 
bim (Gen. x. 13; I Chron. i. 11) with the Libyans, 
as did the Jerusalem Targum in rendering it by the 
Greek A:Svxoi, Many proselytes came from Libya 
(Yer. Shab. 7b; Yer. Kil. 31c); hence Judaism must 
have carried on its propaganda there. The Rabbis 
mention beans (Léw, “ Aramiiische Pflanzennamen,” 
p. 284) and asses from Libya (Bek. 5b; Shab. 515). 

The once flourishing province corresponds to the 
present Barka, which, under Islamic dominion, has 
become a desert. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Knobel, Die Volkertafel der Genesis, pp. 282, 
295-305, Giessen, 1850; Boettger, Topographisch-Historisches 
Lexicon zu den Schriften des Flavius Josephus, p. 163; 
Kohut, Aruch Completum, v. 5. 


G. 5. Kr. 

LICHTENBERG, CORNEL: Hungarian au- 
rist; born in 1848 at Szegedin; studied at Budapest 
and Vienna (M.D. 1878). On receiving his degree 
he returned to Budapest, where he established him- 
self at the university as docent. in diseases of the 
ear (1883). The same year he was one of the found- 


Lichtenberg 
Lieben 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 78 


a I a a 5 aa aa a a aS a 


ers of the polyclinic, of which institution he was 
appointed director in 1891. In recognition of his 
services he was decorated in 1895 with the “ Ritter- 
Kreuz” of the Order of Francis Joseph. 
Lichtenberg is the author of: “Az Ideges Stiket- 
ség ” (Budapest, 1879), on nervous deafness; “ Ueber 
Subjective Gehérsempfindungen” (2b. 1882); and 
“Ein Fremdkorper im Ohre mit Cerebralen Erschein- 
ungen ” (2b. 1888). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Lex.; Szinnyei, Magyar ee 
3. me 


LICHTENBERG, LEOPOLD: Violinist; 
born at San Francisco, Cal., Nov. 22, 1861. He 
studied under Beaujardin, and made his first appear- 
ance in concert when eight yearsofage. At twelve 
he became a pupil of Wieniawski, whom he accom- 
panied on a tour through the United States. Some 
time afterward he spent six months in Paris under 
Lambert, and then rejoined Wieniawskiat Brussels, 
where he studied unremittingly for three years. 
After winning the prize at the national “concours ” 
held at Brussels, he made a successful tour through 
Holland. Upon his return to America he played 
with Theodor Thomas’ orchestra in New York, and 
gave a number of recitals in other cities. After 
spending three years more in Europe Lichtenberg 
gave another series of concerts in America, after 
which he settled for some time in Boston, Mass., as 
a member of the Symphony Society. He next went 
to New York city to take charge of the department 
of violin at the National Conservatory. His fine 
technique and beautiful tone entitle him to high rank 
among violinists. 

BIL OG RAE: Baker, Biographical Dictionary of Musi- 


A. J. So. 


LICHTENFELD, GABRIEL JUDAH: 
Polish mathematician and author; born at Lublin 
1811; died at Warsaw March 22, 1887. He was a 
descendant of Moses Isserles, and, true to the fam- 
ily tradition, showed early ability as a Talmudic 
scholar. He later became familiar with Latin, Ger- 
man, French, and Polish, and made a special study 
of philosophy and mathematics. 

In the Hebrew periodical “Ha-Shahar,” vol. iii, 
et seg., there appeared a series of Hebrew articles 
by Lichtenfeld which attracted attention. His rep- 
utation was enhanced by his series of articles, in the 
Polish periodical “Izraelita,” on Jewish mathema- 
ticians. Lichtenfeld is known also by his polemics 
with Slonimski on mathematical subjects. 

Lichtenfeld was the author of: “ Yedi‘ot ha-Shi‘u- 
rim” (Warsaw, 1865); “Zofnat Pa‘neah ” (7b. 1874), 
a critical review of S. Slonimski’s “ Yesode Hokmat 
ha-Shi‘ur”; “Tosefot” (¢. 1875), polemic against S. 
Slonimski; “ Kohen Lelo Elohim” (2b. 1876), mathe- 
matical criticisms; “Sippurim be-Shir,” ete. (2. 
1877), a collection of poems and rimed prose by 
himself and by his son-in-law Leon Peretz. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sea cnene’ Yisrael, ii. 3563 Zeitlin, 
Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 2 
J. G. L. 


H. R. 
LICHTENSTADT, MOSES ABIGDOR: Po- 
lish Hebraist and Talmudist: born at Lublin, Rus- 
sian Poland, July 15, 1787; died at Odessa Jan. 17, 


1870. He was noted as well for his charities, espe. 


‘cially in assisting poor students, as for his Biblica] 


and Talmudic scholarship. He was one of the found. 
ers of the public school for Jewish children at 
Odessa. He contributed a number of articles on 
Biblical and Talmudic subjects to “Ha-Meliz,” 
“ Ha-Karmel,” and “Ha-Maggid,” and wrote “Mi. 
Mohorat ha-Shabbat” (Vienna, 1860), on Pentecost, 
directed against the Karaites. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Meliz, 1870, p. 19; Gottlober, in Ha-Mapg- 
gid, 1864, p. 212; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. ‘Books Brit. Mus. p. 436, 


H. R. A. S. W. 


LICHTENSTADT (LASH, from the Hebrew 
abbreviation w’S), SIMEON BEN JUDAH: 
Bohemian Talmudist; lived at Prague in the first 
half of the nineteenth century. He was the author 
of “Shesh ha-Ma‘arakah,” a commentary on the six 
Mishnaic orders, each order having a separate title 
as follows: (t) “Derek Emunah” (Presburg, 1840); 
(2) “Dabar be-‘Itto” (2d. 1841); (38) “Hosen Rab” 
(2b. 1848), preceded by a sermon delivered at Prague 
on the first of the Penitential Days, 1886; (4) 
“Ma‘yan ha-Yeshu‘ah” (2). 1846); (8) “Hokmat 
Adam ” (Prague, 1852). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 612, No. 1300; 


First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 245, s.v. Lichtenstaadt. 
8. 8. M. SEt. 


LICHTENSTEIN, HILLEL: Hungarian rab- 
bi; born at Vecs 1815; died at Kolomea, Galicia, 
May 18, 1891. After studying at the yeshibah of 
Moses Sofer he married, in 1837, the daughter of a 
well-to-do resident of Galantha, where he remained 
until 1850, when he was elected rabbiof Margarethen 
(Szent Margit). In 1854 he was elected rabbi of 
Kiausenburg, but the opposition of the district rabbi, 
Abraham Friedmann, made it impossible for him to 
enter upon the duties of the office; finally he was 
expelled from Klausenburg by the authorities. Hav- 
ing lived for some time at Grosswardein, he was re- 
called to Margarethen, where he remaincd until 
about 1865, when he was ealled to Szikszo. 
Thence he went, in 1867, to Kolomea, where he re- 
mained until his death. Lichtenstein was the out- 
spoken leader of the Orthodox extremists in Hun- 
gary: he not only resisted the slightest deviation from 
the traditional ritual, as the removal of the ALMEMAR 
from the center of the synagogue, but even vig- 
orously denounced the adoption of modern social 
manners and the acquisition of secular education. 
He bitterly opposed the Hungarian Jewish congress 
of 1868-69 and the establishment of the rabbinical 
seminary in Budapest. In 1865 he called a rabbinical 
convention at Nagy- Mihaly, which protested against 
the founding of a seminary and sent a committee 
to the emperor toinduce the government to prohibit 
its establishment. In his religious practise he sur- 
passed the rigorism of the most Orthodox Hungarian 
rabbis, even going so far as to keepashe ass in order 
to be able to fulfil the law of the redemption of the 
first-born of the ass (see Ex. xiii. 18). He kept a 
sheep also in order to be able to give the tirst fleece 
to a kohen (Deut. xviii. 4), from whom _  subse- 
quently he bought it back to make zizit from it. 
Lichtenstein was an ardent admirer of the Hasidim 
and made pilgrimages to the famous miracle-worker 
Hayyim Halberstam of Sandec. He offered hisown 


79 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lichtenberg 
Lieben 


ng ee ee ae Pe ee ee ee ee 


intercession through prayer to people in distress, 
put declined any gifts. 

Lichtenstein was a powerful preacher and a pop- 
ular writer, and the resistance to modern tendencies 
among the Jews of northern Hungary is largely due 
to his influence. He inveighed against the use of 
other than traditional Jewish names; he denounced 
not only secular education, but even the playing of 
musical instruments and innocent social games, like 
chess and checkers; and he condemned those who 
relied on reason, for the ideal Jew should live up to 
the principle of Psalm Ixxiii, 22, “I was as a beast 
pefore thee” (“‘Et la-‘Asot,” p. 118a, Lemberg, 
4881). Hewas a decided opponent also of all agita- 
tion for the political emancipation of the Jews, say- 
ing that it is the duty of the Jews to suffer the trib- 
ulations of the Exile until God finds them ripe for 
Messianic redemption. 

Of the numerous works which Lichtenstein wrote, 
some of them being in Hebrew and others in Judxo- 
German, the most important are “ Maskil el Dal” 
(Lemberg, 1867), “‘Et la-‘Asot” (2b. 1881), and 
“Abkat Rokel” (2. 1883), all of which have been 
repeatedly reedited. They are all devoted to the 
denunciation of liberal Judaism. In Hebrew Hillel 
signs his name y"b (Lash), which is an abbreviation 


for mHwayns*S (Lichtenstein). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hirsch Heller, Bet Hillel, Munkacs, 1898. 
§ 


LICHTHEIM, LUDWIG: German physician; 
born Dec. 7, 1845, at Breslau, where he was educated 
at the gymnasium. He then studied medicine at 
the universities of Berlin, Zurich, and Breslau, 
graduating in 1868. From 1869 to 1872 he was as- 
sistant in the medical hospital at Breslau; from 1872 
to 1873 in the surgical hospital at Halle; and from 
1873 to 1877 again at Breslau in the medical poly- 
clinic. He became privat-docent at Breslau Univer- 
sity in 1876; assistant professor at Jena in 1877; 
was called in 1878 to Bern University as professor 
of medicine and chief of the medical clinic; and has 
held a similar position since 1888 in the University 
of Kénigsberg. | 

Lichtheim has written many essays in the medical 
journals, among which may be mentioned: “Ueber 
Behandlung Pleuritischer Exsudate,” in “Sammlung 
Klinischer Vortrige,” 1872; (with Cohnheim) “ Ueber 
Hydrimie und Hydramisches Oedem,” in Virchow’s 
“Archiv,” Ixix.; “Ueber Periodische Haemoglobi- 
nurie,” in “Sammlung Klinischer Vortrige,” 1878; 
“Die Antipyretische Wirkung des Phenols,” in 
“Breslauer Aerztliche Zeitschrift.” 1881; “Ueber 
Tuberkulose,” in “Rapport des Kongresses fiir In- 
here Medizin,” 1888; “ Die Chronischen Herzmuske- 
lerkrankungen und Ihre Behandlung,” ¢. 1888; “Zur 
Diagnose der Meningitis,” in “Berliner Klinische 
Wochenschrift,” 1895. He is the author also of 
“Die Stérungen des Lungenkreislaufs und Ihr Ein- 
fluss auf den Blutdruck ” (Berlin, 1876). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. Vienna, 1901. 
S. F. T. H. 


LICHTSCHEIN, LUDWIG: Hungarian rab- 
bi; born in Komorn; died at Ofen in 1886, He 
Studied at Papa, and was rabbinical assessor of 
Austerlitz, Gross Kanizsa, and Esztergom. From 


1876 until his death he was rabbi at Somogy- 
Csurg6. 

Lichtschein was the author of the folowing works: 
“A Zsid6k Koézép és Jelenkori Helyzetdk” (Gross 
Kanizsa, 1866), on the condition of the Jews in me- 
dieval and modern times; “ Die Dreizehn Glaubens- 
artikel” (Briinn, 1870), a sermon; “Der Targum 
zu den Propheten ” (in Stern’s “Ha-Mehakker,” i.); 
“ Der Talmud und der Socialismus ” (7d. iii.); “ Kos- 
suth Lajos és a Satoraljavihelyi Rabbi” (in “ Magyar 
Zsid6 Szémle,” 1885), on Kossuth and the rabbi of 
Satoralja-Ujhely. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Petrik, Kényvészet ; Szinnyei, Magyar Irok : 

Lippe, Biographisches Lexikon, 1. : 

s. L. V. 

LICHTSTEIN, ABRAHAM B. ELIEZER 
LIPMAN: Polish rabbi and author; lived at the 
end of the eighteenth and at the beginning of the 
nineteenth century; grandson of R. Kalman of 
Byelostok. He was rabbiand preacher at Prassnysz, 
in the government of Plotzk, Poland. 

Lichtstein was the author of “ Kanfe Nesharim,” a 
commentary on the Pentateuch in several parts, each 
having a separate name, viz.: “Kiryat Sefer,” an 
introduction to each book of the Pentateuch; “To- 
‘aliv yot ha-Ralbag,” treating of the doctrines deduced 
by Levi b. Gershon from passages of the Torah; 
“Abak Soferim,” miscellanea; “Mahazeh Abra- 
ham,” consisting of sermons on each section of the 
Torah; “Ner Mizwah,” treating of the number of 
the precepts according to Maimonides; “Shiyyure 
Mizwah,” treating of the additional precepts accord- 
ing to Nahmanides, Moses b. Jacob of Coucy, and 
Isaac of Corbeil; “ Milhemet Mizwah,” on the dis- 
putes among various authorities concerning the 
numbering of the precepts by Maimonides; “Torat 
ha-Korbanot,” on the Levitical laws of offerings 
and on the order ofthe high priest’s service in the 
sanctuary on the Day of Atonement; and “Sha‘are 
Ziyyou,” orations on theological subjects. The 
whole work was published together with the text 
of the Pentateuch, Josefow, 1829, and republished 
without the text, Wilna, 1894. Lichtstein was the 
author also of a commentary on the “Sefer ha- 
Tappuah” which was published together with the 
text in the Grodno edition of 1799. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kanfe Nesharim, 2d edition ; Benjacob, Ozar 


ha-Sefarim, pp. 636, 660. 
S. 8. N. T. L. 


LICHTSTEIN, ABRAHAM JEKUTHIEL 
SALMAN BEN MOSES JOSEPH: Rabbi of 
Plonsk, government of Warsaw, in the eighteenth 
century. He was the author of a work entitled 
“Zera’ Abraham” (Dyhernfurth, 1811), a commen- 
tary on the Sifre, followed by Biblical and Talmud- 
ical indexes, and accompanied with the text. Licht- 
stein wrote also a preface and added a homily to 
his son’s “Shoshannat ‘Amakim,” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, i. 153 
Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 699; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. 
Books Brit. Mus. p. 487. 

Ss. 8. . M. S&u. 
LIEBEN, ADOLF: Austrian chemist; born at 

Vienna Dec. 3, 1886. He studied at the universities 

of Vienna, Heidelberg (Ph.D. 1856), and Paris, and 

subsequently held the positions of privat-docent at 
the University of Vienna (1861), and professor in 


Liebermann 
Liebreich 
the universities of Palermo (1863), Turin (1867), 
and Prague (1871). Since 1875 he has held the 
chair of general and pharmacological chemistry at 
the University of Vienna, and is a member of the 
Vienna Academy of Sciences. 

Licben has published many essays in “ Liebig's 
Annalen der Chemie” (“Ueber die Hinwirkung 
Schwacher Affinititen auf Aldehyd,” 1861; “ Ueber 
das Todbenzol,” 1869; “Ucber Festes-Benzoylchlo- 
rid,” 1875; etc.), “Sitzungsberichte den Kaiserlich- 
en Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien” (“* Un- 
tersuchungen tiber Milchzucker,” “ Einwirkung 
von Cyangus auf Aldehyd,” “Ueber den Formalde- 
hyd und dessen Umwandlung in Methylalkohl,” 
“Reduction des Exotonchlorals,” etc.), “ Monatshef- 
ten fiir Chemie,” “Comptes-Rendus de 1’ Académie 
de Paris,” “Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen 
Gesellschaft Berlin,” “Gazzetta Chimica Italiana 
Palermo,” etc. 

8. F. T. H. 

LIEBERMANN, AARON (ARTHUR 
FREEMAN): Russian writer; born at Wilna 
about 1840. Persecuted because of his participation 
in revolutionary movements, he fled to America, and 
died by his own hand at Syracuse, N. Y., Nov. 8, 
1880. He was the editor of “Ha-Emet,” a Hebrew 
monthly of communistic tendencies (Vienna, 1877), 
only the prospectus and two numbers of which ap- 
peared; and he was the first to organize socialist 
societies among the Jews in London. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 211. 
D. S. MAN. 


LIEBERMANN, BENJAMIN : German man- 
ufacturer; boru at Markisch Friedland Feb. 4, 1812; 
dicd in Berlin Jan. 15, 1901. In 1825 his family 
moved to the Jatter city; and Liebermann, after 
completing a school course, entered the employ of 
a firm in London, Uponhisreturn to Berlin he was 
taken into his father’s business, which he soon de- 
veloped into the largest calico-manufactory in Ger- 
many. That his ability was recognized is shown 
by the fact that he was elected to the presidency of 
the German merchants’ association (Deutscher Han- 
delstag). According to an anecdote he introduced 
himself to King Frederick William IV. as “the 
Liebermann who drove the Englishmen from the 
Continental calico market.” For many years he 
held the office of president of the Gesellschaft der 
Freunde, and he was treasurer of the Lehranstalt fiir 
die Wissenschaft des Judenthums at the time of its 
foundation. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ally. Zeit. des Jud. Jan. 25, 1901; Mitthei- 
lungen aus dem Verein zur Bekimpfung des Antisemitis- 
mus, 1901, p. 29. 

s. D. 
LIEBERMANN (LIBERMANN), ELIE- 
ZER: Talmudist of the first half of the nineteenth 
century. According to G. Wolf, in his biography 
of Isaac Noah Mannheimer (p. 10, Note), he was a 
native of Austria; Jost (“ Culturgesch,” iii. 24) says 
that he pretended to be a Hungarian rabbi; but in 
the preface to “Or Nogah,” Liebermann signs him- 
self “son of Zeeb Wolf, rabbi of Hennegau ” (prob- 
ably Hagenau, Alsace). He was the agent of the 
patrons of the Reform Temple at Hamburg, in de- 
fense of which he published “ Nogah ha-Zedek,” a 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 80 





collection of the views of Shem-Tob Samun of Leg. 

horn, R. Jacob Vita Ricanati of Pesaro, R. Moseg 

Kunitz, or Kunitzer, of Budapest, and R. Aaron 

Chorinof Arad. Theindorsement by the rabbinateg 

of Leghorn and Jerusalem, which was added to that 

of Shem-Tob Samun, was afterward declared to be 
fictitious. 

The “Nogah ha-Zedek” was followed by “Or 
Nogah” (Dessau, 1818), in which Liebermann gives 
a lengthy and learned exposition of his own views 
in favorof Reform. It is prefaced by two eulogistic 
poems, one from Chorin and another signed “ Ze’ebi.” 
In refutation of this book the Hamburg rabbinate 
published “ Eleh Dibre ha-Berit,” a collection of the 
views of prominent Orthodox rabbis, and contain- 
ing a declaration of Aaron Chorin revoking his 
former opinion (Altona, 1819). On the title-page of 
“Or Nogah” Liebermann claims the authorship of 
“<Tr Dammesek,” which work does not seem to have 
been priuted. 

In 1819 Liebermann traveled in Austria to propa- 
gate Reform ideas and, according to the statement 
of the chief of police Sedlnitzky, to found for that 
purpose a journal called “Syonia.” Nothing else is 
known of Liebermann’s life. According to Wolf 
and Graetz, Liebermann became aconvert to Roman 
Catholicism; but there is nothing positive to cor- 
roborate this assertion. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 2483 Gratz, Gesch. xi, 
420-424, Leipsic, 1870; Jost, Culturgesch. iti. 24-25, Berlin, 
1847; Schreiber, Reformed Judaism, pp. 76-77, Spokane, 
1892 ; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodi. col. 964; Moses Sofer, Re- 
sponsa, vi. 91. 

D. S. Man. 

LIEBERMANN, ELIEZER DOB: Russian 
writer; born in Pilvischok, government of Suwalki, 
April 12, 1820; died in Byelostok April 15, 1895. 
His father was a shohet and gave him the usual 
Jewish education. At theageof twelve he was sent 
to his uncle R. Elijah Schick (“ Reb Elinke Lider”), 
then rabbi of Amstibove, who instructed him in 
Talmud and rabbinical literature. Jn 1838 he went 
to Wilna and joined the Maskilim; about 1844 he 
settled asa teacher in Byelostok; in 1867 he removed 
to Suwalki, remained there about twenty years, and 
then returned to Byelostok. Liebermann is the au- 
thor of “ Megillat Sefer,” a collection of short stories, 
essays, fables, and letters (Johannisberg, 1854), and 
of “ Zedek u-Mishpat,” a Hebrew adaptation of S. D. 
Luzzatto’s “ Lezioni di Teologia Morale Israelitica” 
(Wilna, 1867). He wrote also “Ge Hizzayon” 
(Warsaw, 1889), several works still in manuscript, 
and a number of articles which he published in 
various Hebrew periodicals. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ahiasaf, vol. iii. (necrologies, in which he is 
erroneously called “ Jacob’); Sokolov, Sefer Zikkaron. pp. 
57-58, Warsaw, 1890; Zeitlin, Bibl. Hebr. Post-Mendets. 


p. 211. 
H. R. P. WI. 


LIEBERMANN, FELIX: German historian; 
born July 20, 1851, in Berlin. Destined for a com- 
mercial career, he began business life in a Berlin 
bank in 1869. There he remained for some time, 
but ultimately went to England, going to Man- 
chester in 1871. Not very long afterward he re- 
turned to Germany, where he devoted himself almost 
exclusively to the study of early English constitu: . 
tional history under Waitz and Pauli, at Gottingen. 


81 
a a 
On this subject he has published several mono- 
raphs, beginning with “Anglonormannische Ge- 
echichtsquellen” (Berlin, 1879) and culminating in 
his monumental edition of the “Gesetze der Angel- 
sachsen ” (Berlin, 1898-1903; published by the Sa- 
vigny Fund). Many of the essays contained in this 
reat work had been published previously by Lie- 
permann, either separately (é.g., “ Quadripartitus,” 
1393; “ Leges Edwardi,” 1896; etc.) or in journals, as 
the “English Historical Review,” “Transactions of 
the Royal Historical Society,” etc. He contributes 
an annual review of the publications on English me- 
dieval history to the “Jahresbericht fiir Geschichts- 
wissenschaft.” In recognition of his contributions 
to English history the University of Cambridge 
conferred upon him the honorary degree of LL.D. 
(1899), and the Prussian government the title of 
professor. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kirschner, Deutscher Literatur-Kalender j 

C. Gross, Sources of English History, 1900, p. 589. 

LIEBERMANN, MATTATHIAS BEN 
ASHER LEMLE: Rabbiand preacher in Prague 
in the second half of the seventeenth century ; died 
there 1709. He was the author of “ Mattat Yah,” 
a collection of sermons on the Pentateuch, reaching 
only to Numbers xxxiii. (Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 
1696). Another collection of sermons by him, enti- 
tled “ Peri Megadim,” is preserved in manuscript. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim; Benjacob, Ozar 

ha-Sefarim, pp. 390, 495; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 248; Stein- 

schneider, Cat. Bod. col. 1682; Hock, Die Familien Prags, 

p. 897, Presburg, 1892. 

D. S. MAN. 

LIEBERMANN, MAX: German painter; 
born at Berlin July 29, 1849. After studying law 
at Berlin University for a year, he abandoned it and 
took up the study of painting at Weimar in 1869 
under Thumann and Pawels. In 1872 he went to 
Paris, and during 1876-77 resided in Holland; after 
living for some time in Munich he finally returned 
to Berlin. 

His paintings include: “G&nserupferinnen ” ; 
*“Amsterdamer Waisenmiédchen”; “Das Tischge- 
bet”; “Strasse in Zand- 
voort”; “Kleinkinder- 
schule in Amsterdam ”; 
“Miinchner  Bierkon- 
zert”; “Die Spinnerin- 
nen”; “Die Konserven- 
macherinnen”; “Stille 
Arbeit” ; “ Die Schweine- 
familie”; “ Altménner- 
haus in Amsterdam”; 
“Trauergottesdienst ” : 
“Hollindische Dorf- 
strasse”; “Der Weber”; 
“Netzeflickerinnen”; 
“Spitalgarten in Lei- 
den”; “Biergarten in 
Miinchen”; “Flachs- 
scheuer in Holland”; 
sieve “Frau mit Ziegen”; 

Biirgermeister Petersen”; “Viehmarkt in Haar- 
lem.” Some of these works are in private collec- 
lions ; Others are in the Kunsthalle, Hamburg; the 

ationalgallerie, Berlin: the Neue Pinakothek, 

VITI.—6 





Max Liebermann. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liebermann 
Liebreich 


Munich; the Strasburg Museum; the Leipsic Mu- 
seum; and various other public galleries of Europe. 
Liebermann at first expressed the extreme tend- 
encies of the modern realistic school, and illus- 
trated the darker sides of life; his earlier works 
were exhibited in Paris in 1875, 1876, and 1877 
(* Runkelriibenernte,” “ Arbeitssaal im Amsterdamer 
Waisenhaus,” etc.), and at Munich in 1879 (“Jesus 
im Tempel”). In later years, however, he has 
turned toward the naturalistic school, producing 
anumber of genre paintings and expositions of 
Dutch rural life. He has excelled also as an etcher. 
Liebermann won medals at the Berlin, Munich, and 

Paris (1589) expositions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: hammerer, Mar Liebermann, Leipsic, 1898 ; 
Meyers Konversations-Levikon ; Augemeines Kiinstler- 
Levricon, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1898. 

8. F. T. H. 
LIEBERMANN’SCHE JAHRBUCH, DAS. 
See YEAR-Books. 


LIEBLING, EMIL: German pianist; born at 
Pless, Silesia, April 12, 1851. After a course in 
piano at the Neue Akademie der Tonkunst, Berlin, 
under Ehrlich and Kullak, he continued his studies 
with Dachs at Vienna and with Liszt at Weimar. 
In 1867 he went to America, where, until 1871, he 
taught music ina Kentucky seminary. In 1874 he 
revisited Europe and spent the summer at Weimar 
with Liszt. Upon his return to America he settled 
at Chicago, where he has since estabiished a high 
reputation as pianist, teacher, and composer. Lieb- 
ling has played in New York, Chicago, and other 
cities, and has made concert tours with Wilhelm, 
Miss Cary, Miss Kellogg, and others. 

The following are a few of Liebling’s principal 
compositions: “Gavotte Moderne,” Op. 11; “Flor- 
ence Valse,” Op. 12; “Albumblatt,” Op. 18; two 
romances, Op. 20 and 21; “Cradle Song,” Op. 23; 
“Canzonetta,” Op. 26; “Mazurka de Concert,” Op. 
80; and several songs. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Champlin, Cyclopedia of Musie and Must- 

cra ns, S.V. 


A. J. So. 


LIEBRECHT, FELIX: German folklorist; 
born at Namsilau, Silesia, March 13, 1812; died at 
St. Hubert Aug. 38, 1890. He studied philology 
at the universities of Breslau, Munich, and Berlin, 
and in 1849 became professor of the German language 
at the Athénée Royal at Liége, Belgium. He re- 
signed his chair and retired into private life in 1867. 
The following translations by him may be men- 
tioned: Giambattista Basiles, “Pentamerone,” with 
introduction by Jakob Grimm (Berlin, 1846); Jo- 
hannes Damascenus, “Baarlam und Josaphat” 
(Minster, 1847); Dunlop, “Gesch. der Prosadich- 
tung” (Berlin, 1851); an edition of Gervasius of 
Tilbury’s “Otia Imperialia” (Hanover, 1856). A 
collection of original essays by him was published 
at Heilbronn in 1879, under the title “Zur Volks- 
kunde.” 


Swiioeapurs Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. 
g, F, T. H. 
LIEBREICH, OSKAR MATTHIAS EU- 
GEN: German physician and pharmacologist; 
born at Konigsberg, East Prussia, Feb. 14, 1839: 


Liebreich 
Light 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 82 


eg ee Ee hep ee ee ep ee pe Ae eG Te Pee Fp ee a eS 


younger brother of Richard LirsreEicu. He studied 
first chemistry in Wiesbaden and Berlin and then, 
after nearly two years in Africa, medicine at the 
universities of Tiibingen, Konigsberg, and Berlin, 
graduating as doctor of medicine in 1865. In 1867 
he became assistant at the pathological institute of 
Berlin University, and in 1868 joined the medical 
faculty of the same university as privat-docent in 
pharmacology. He was elected assistant professor 
in 1868 and appointed professor and chief of the 
pharmacological institute in 1872. In 1891 he re- 
ceived the title of “Geheime Medicinalrath.” 

Liebreich has added many new remedies to the 
pharmacopeia. In 1869 he discovered the narcotic 
effect of chloral hydrate; in 1878 he introduced 
platin-iridium cannulas for the hypodermic syringe; 
he showed the anesthetic effect of ethylene chlorid 
and butyl chlorid, the use of hydrargyrum forma- 
midatum in the treatment of syphilis, the healing 
properties of lanolin (1885), of erythrophlein (1888), 
of cantharidin (1891), of creosol, tolipyrin, forma- 
lin, methylene blue, and many other drugs. He is 
a prolific writer, and has written many essays and 
monographs on his discoveries; especially notewor- 
thy are those on: the presence of protogon in the 
orain as the chief chemical compound of phosphorus, 
the examination of lupus through phaneroscopic 
illumination, the use of strychnin as an antidote for 
chloral hydrate, the oxidation of neurin and the 
synthesis of oxyneurin (both discovered by him). 
His writings are very diverse; they deal not only with 
chemistry and pharmacology, butalso with syphilol- 
ogy, dermatology, hygiene, and balneology. Since 
1887 he has edited the “Therapeutische Monats- 
hefte.” 

Liebreich is the author also of: “Das Chloralhy- 
drat, ein Neues Hypnotikum,” Berlin, 1869 (8d ed. 
1871); “ Encyclopidie der Therapie,” 2). 1895; with 
Langgaard, “ Kompendium der Arzneiverordnung,” 
5th ed. 2b. 1900. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lez. 

S. F. T. HH. 

LIEBREICH, RICHARD: English ophthal- 
mologist; born at Kénigsberg, East Prussia, June 
30, 1880; brother of Oskar Liebreich. He received 
his education at the universities of Koénigsberg, 
Berlin, and Halle (M.D. 18538). After a postgrad- 
uate course at Utrecht under Donders, and at Berlin 
under Briicke, he became assistant in the ophthal- 
mological institute of Berlin University from 1854 
to 1862. In the latter year he established himself 
as an ophthalmologist in Paris, whence he removed 
to London in 1870. There he became lecturer and 
clinicist in ophthalmology at St. Thomas’ Hospital. 

Since about 1895 he has given up his hospital du- 
ties and reduced his private practise, spending most 
of his time in researches in art, especially the tech- 
nique of the old masters. 

Liebreich has constructed two ophthalmoscopes, 
which are universally used—a larger one, more 
elaborate and heavy, anda portable one. The latter 
especially supplied a long-felt want. Following 
Helmholtz’s invention, Liebreich added two convex 
lenses to the small concave reflex mirror. 

Of Liebreich’s writings may be mentioned: “ Atlas 
der Ophthalmoskopie,” Berlin, 1863 (8d ed. 1885); 


“Ophthalmoskopische Notizen,” in Albrecht von 
Graefe’s “Archiv fir Ophthalmologie,” i., iv., y, 
vii.; “Ein Fall von Scheinbarer Myopie, Bedingt 
Durch Accommodationskrampf,” 7b. viii.; “Modif. 
cation des Schieloperation,” 7). xii. ; (with Laqueur) 
“Recueil des Travaux de la Société Médicale Alle. 
mande de Paris,” Paris, 1865; “Eine Neue Methode 
der Cataractextraction,” Berlin, 1872; “On the Use 
and Abuse of Atropin,” London, 1878; “ Clinica] 
Lecture on Convergent Squint,” 2b. 1874: “Schooj 
Life in Its Influence on Sight and Figure,” 7d. 1877 
(2d ed. 1878). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. 

J. F. T. H. 

LIEGNITZ. See SILesta. 

LIEN. See MortTGace or Hyporuec. 


LIFE.—Biblical Data: The word “hayyim” 
(= “life ”) denotes first of all the animal existence 
which, according to Scripture, begins when “the 
breath [or spirit] of God” (“ruah,” “neshamah,” 
or “nefesh”) is first inhaled through the nostrils 
(Gen. i. 30, ii. 7, vii. 22; Job xxxiii. 4), and ceases 
when God withdraws His breath (Ps. civ. 29, exlvi, 
4; Job xxxiv. 14; Eccl. xii. 7). Life is the gracious 
gift of God (Job x. 12; Ps. xxx. 6[A. V. 5]): with 
God is “the fountain of life” (Ps. xxxvi. 10 (A. V. 
9|). Physical life is valued by the Hebrew as a 
precious good, given that he may “ walk before God 
in the land [or “in the light”] of the living” (Ps. 
Ivi. 14 [A. V. 18], exvi. 9; comp. Isa. xxxvili. 11; 
Job xxxili. 30). A long life, in ancient times, was 
regarded as the reward of virtue and piety (Ex. xx. 
12; Deut. xxii. 7, xxxii. 47; Ps. xxxiv. 16; Prov. 
iii, 2, iv. 10, ix. 11, xii. 28, xxi, 21). The expres- 
sions “fountain of life” and “ tree of life” (Prov. xi, 
30, xiii. 12, xv. 4) point to the paradise legend (Gen. 
ii. 9-10) and possibly refer to a higher life. The 
brevity of life is a theme frequently dwelt upon by 
the poets (Ps. xxxix. 6 [A. V. 5], xe. 9-10, ciii. 15; 
Job ix. 5, xiv. 1~2). 

But it is the ethical view of life which is chiefly 
characteristic of Judaism. Life is sacred, and it 
should accordingly be guarded and treated with due 
regard and tenderness in every being, man or beast 
(Gen. ix. 6; Lev. xix. 16; Deut. xxii. 7, xxv. 4; see 
CRUELTY). The “righteous man regardeth the life 
of his beast” (Prov. xii. 10). The whole Law is 
summed up in the words: “I have set before you 
life and death, blessing and cursing ; therefore choose 
life” (Deut. xxx. 19); andthe law-of conduct toward 
others is stated in the words: “ Let thy brother live 
with thee” (Lev. xxv. 35-86, Hebr.). The entire 
object of the Law is the preservation of life: “ Ye 
shall keep my statutes and my ordinances, which if 
a man do he shall live by [A. V. “in”] them” (Lev. 
xviii. 4, Hebr.). 

——In Rabbinical Literature: Thesame appre- 
ciative view of physical, or earthly, life prevails 
also among the Rabbis. A long life is regarded as 
Heaven’s reward for certain virtues (Meg. 27b, 28a; 
Ber. 54b, 55a; Men. 44a; Yoma 8%a). “ He who per- 
forms only one meritorious act will have his life pro- 
longed” (Kid. i. 10, 39b). “The object of the Law 
is the preservation of life, and not its destruction”; 
hence, ordinarily, one should rather transgress @ 


_— “ A TT TOE SY. 
lat a ttn ee 
- 


Liebreich 


83 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Light 
Sh a ae 


commandment than incur death; only in regard to 
the three capital sins—idolatry, murder, and incest 
_-should man give up his life rather than desecrate 
God’s law (Sifra, Ahare Mot, xiii.). “Better to ex- 
tinguish the light on Sabbath than to extinguish life, 
which is God’s light” (Shab. 30b). 

“Hayye ‘olam” (eternal life; Dan. xii. 2; Enoch, 
xxxvii. 4, xl. 9) occurs often in rabbinical terminol- 
ogy as “hayye ‘olam ha-ba” (the life of the world 
to come; Tosef., Sanh. xiii. 3; Ber. 48b, 61b; M. K. 
Qa; Ket. 62a; Targ. I Sam. xxv. 29). Ata later 
time, oWing probably to the martyrdoms under 
Syrian and Roman persecution, earthly life was less 
esteemed (Wisdom iii. 17; iv. 7-8, 14; 
Philo, “De Abrahamo,” § 46). Char- 
acteristic are these rabbinic sayings: 
“The pious live even in death; the 
wicked are dead even in life.” (Ber. 18b). “ Life” for 
“eternal life” (Psalms of Solomon, ix. 9, xiv. 6; II 
Mace. vii. 14; comp. vii. 9). “Ten are called liv- 
ing,” that is, possess eternal life: (1) God (Jer. x. 
10); (2) the Torah (Prov. iii. 18); (8) Israel (Deut. 
iv. 5): (4) the righteous (Prov. xi. 30); (5) paradise 
(Ps. cxvi. 9); (6) the tree of life (Gen. ii. 9); (7) the 
Holy Land (Ezek. xxvi. 20); (8) benevolent works 
(Ps. Ixiti. 4 [A. V. 8]); (9) the wise (Prov. xiii. 15); 
(10) the fountain of waters in Jerusalem (Zech. xiv. 
8; Ab. R. N. xxxiv. [ed. Schechter, p. 108]). “Dost 
thou wish life? Look to the fear of God, which in- 
creases the number of man’s days; look for afflic- 
tion; look to the study of the Torah and observe the 
commandments” (comp. Prov. iii. 18, iv. 4, vi. 28, 
x. 27%). The Torah is called “medicine of life” 
(Sifre, Deut. 45; Yoma72b; seealso Book or Lire). 

K. 

LIGHT (Hebr. “or”): The primal element of 
Creation in all ancient cosmogonies; the first crea- 
tion of God.—Biblical Data: “God said, Let 
there be light”: and out of the primeval chaos 
there came forth “light” (Gen. i. 2-3). In the 
Creation psalm, God, before “stretching out the 
heavens like a curtain,” “wraps Himself in light 
as in a mantle” (Ps. civ. 2, Hebr.; whence “the 
Father of lights” of Jamesi.17). He is the Former 
of light and the Creator of darkness (Isa. xlv. 7). 
“No one knows the way to the light,” which has its 
seat in heaven (Job xxxviii. 19, Hebr.); it emanates 
from the face of God (Ps. iv. 7[A. V. 6], xliv. 4 
[A. V. 3], Ixxxix. 16 [A. V. 15]), whose whole being 
is luminous (Ex. xiii. 21, xxiv. 10; Ps. xxxvi. 10 
[A. V. 9]; Job xxxvi. 30, xxxvii. 3). Gradually 
this light of God assumed a spiritual or symbolical 
meaning, in such passages as “ God is light,” to those 
who walk in darkness (Isa. ix. 2; x. 17; lx. 1-8, 19- 
20; Micah vii. 8; Ps. xxvii. 1, xxxvi. 10 [A. V. 9]). 

The sun, moon, and stars, the luminaries placed in 
heaven to reflect their light upon the earth (Gen. i. 
14-17), are supposed to have received, or to still 

receive, their light from the heavenly 


Life 
Eternal. 


The light created on the first day. Proph- 
Heavenly ecy, therefore, speaks of the time when 
Light. “the light of the moon will be like that 


of the sun, and that of the sun seven- 
fold like the light of the seven days of Creation” 
(Isa. xxx, 26, Hebr.; the commentators who failed 
to understand this meaning wished to eliminate from 


the text the words “ke-or shib‘at ha-yamim”; but 
see Gen. R. iii. 6, xi. 2). Similarly, Isa. Ix. 19-20: 
“Not sun nor moon, but the Lord, shall be for thy 
everlasting light” (Hebr.). The Avesta also speaks 
of the “endless lights” in heaven in which the good 
souls shall dwell (“ Vendidad,” ii. 181; “ Yast,” xx. 
15; “Vistasp Yast,” 61). 

Light is often used as the symbol of life and 
joy (Job xviii, 5-6, xxxiii. 28; Ps. xlix. 20 (A. V. 
19], xevil. 11; Esth. viii. 16). It is likened to the 
word of instruction (Ps. cxix. 105; Prov. vi. 23). 

OK. 

——In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera- 
ture: Here also light takes a prominent position as 
a cosmic power. Wisdom isrepresented as the radi- 
ance of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror 
of the power of God, more beautiful than the sun, 
and superior to the light which it resembles (Wis- 
dom vii. 26, 29). God’s majesty being surrounded 
with light to make Him invisible to all beings (Meg. 
19b), the Rabbis speak of “the radiance of the She- 
kinah” (“ziw ha-Shekinah ”; Ber. 64b; Shab. 30a; 
B. B. 10a; comp. Hag. 14b and Heb. i. 3—“the 
brightness of his glory”). This was believed to be 
reflected in the new moon (Sanh. 42a, “ Keillo me- 
kabbel pene ha-Shekinah ” = “he who secs the new 
moon is like one who greets the Divine Majesty ”). 
The “radiance” (“ ziw”) of wisdom is reflected also 
in great men (Sotah ix. 15). According to the cos- 
mogony of Slavonian Enoch (xxv. 1-5) God made 
Adoel (Hadriel?), a fiery angel of great brightness, 
spring forth first as a visible being out of the invis- 
ible; and as Adoel burst asunder, there came forth 
a great light; and then God madea throne for Him- 
self, and sat upon it, and placed the light above the 
throne to be the foundation of all things on high. 

Similar is the “secret lore” of the Rabbis: The 
first act of Creation was when God robed Himself in 
light while the radiance of His glory (“ziw hadaro ”) 
illumined the world from one end to the other (Gen. 

R. iii.; Pirke R. El. iii). “The light 

Primitive of the first day was such that by it the 
Light. first man could see from one end of 
the world to the other; but, finding 

that wicked men would arise on earth, God removed 
this light to reserve it for the righteous in the world 
to come” (Hag. 12a; Gen. R. de.). The luminaries 
receive their light from the spark of that light of 
heaven, which is one hundred times as bright as 
the light visible on earth (Tau., Beha‘aloteka, ed. 
Buber, p. 10). According to Targ. to Isa, xxx. 26 
and Judges v. 31, the light of the future will be 343 
(7X 7X %) timesas bright as the sun. The righteous 
alone desire it, not the wicked, who are as the bat 
in the fable, of whom the cock demands, “ What is 
the light of day to thee, who preferrest the night?” 
(Sanh. 98b). Enoch (xlv. 4) speaks of “the eternal 
light” brought forth in the Messianic time: “The 
great light of heaven shone forth in splendor until 
Adam sinned; but on account of the Sabbath God 
would not withdraw the light before the day was 
over. ‘hen when darkness set in Adam became 
afraid: ‘Shall Satan henceforth overpower me?’ 
Whereupon God set before him two bricks, from 
which Adam drew forth sparks of light by striking 
one against the other; and he blessed God for the 


Light 
Lilienblum 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 84 





light which he thus obtained by his own hands” 
(‘Ab Zarah 8c; Gen. R&R. xii.; Pesik. R. xxili.; comp. 
Pirke R. El., where the story is somewhat differently 
rendered; see HABDALATI). 

God is in no need of light; the light kindled in 
the Sanctuary was to testify that the light of the 
Shekinah is in the midst of Israel (Men. 86b); there- 
fore in the Temple of Solomon the windows were 
narrowed from without to indicate that the light 
streams forth from within (Tan., Tezawweh, ed. 
Buber, p. 4). The light kindled before God was to 
be like the lantern carried by the blind for the one 
who sees; Israel is to aid in the spreading of the 
light of God on earth (Tan., Beha‘aloteka, ed. 
Buber, p. 5; Ex. R. xxxvi.). When Moses was 
born the house was filled with light; hence it is said 
of him, as of the light of Creation, “he was‘ good’ ” 
(“tob”; A. V. “goodly”; Ex. ii.1; Sotah 12a). In 
the ark Noah used a precious stone which iilumi- 
nated all the surroundings (Gen. R. xxxi.; Sanh. 
108b; comp. Meg. 12a). 

The righteous in the world to come shall shine 
like the ight of sun and stars, each in different lus- 
ter (Sifre, Deut. 10, 47; Midr. Teh. to Ps. xi. 6; 
comp. I Cor. xv. 41). God had in view the right- 
eous of the type of Abraham when He said “ Let 
there be light” (comp. Ps. xevii. 11; Ta‘an. 15a; 
Tan., Tezawweh, ed. Buber, p. 4); whereas the 
wicked of the type of Esau are sons of darkness 
(comp. Job xviii. 5; Gen. R. ii. 111). “The right- 
eous who have loved God’s name shall be clad in 
shining light” (Enoch, cviii. 12; comp, Dan, xii. 3 
and Targ. to Judges v. 381: “they that love Him 
shall be as the sun”; Shab. 88b). Accordingly, the 
righteous are called “the generation of light,” in 
contrast to the wicked, who are born (clothed?) 
in darkness (Enoch, cviii. 11); hence also the New 
Testament term, “sons of Hight” (Luke xvi. 8; 
John xii. 36; Ephes. v. 8; I Thess. v. 5; Col. 
i. 12). 

Light is the symbol of the Torah (Meg. 16b, after 
Prov. vi. 28), of God (Tan., Tezawweh, ed. Bu- 
ber, p. 5, after Ps. xviii. 29), of the soul (zd. 
ed. Buber, p. 4, after Prov. xx. 27). “God says: 
‘Tf you conscientiously keep My light burning in 
your soul, I shall keep yourlight; if you kindle My 
lights in the Sanctuary, I shall kindle the great light 
for you in the future’” (26. ed. Buber, pp. 2, 4-5: 
Ex. R. xxxvi.; Lev. R. xxxi.). In regard to Sab- 
bath lights see Lamp, SABBATH. K. 


LIGHT AND AIR. See NEIGHBORING 


LANDOWNERS, 
LIGHT OF TRUTH. See PERIODICALS. 


LIGHTFOOT, JOHN: English Christian di- 
vine and Talmudist; born at Stoke-upon-Trent 
1602; died at Ely 1675. He passed through 
Christ’s College, Cambridge, and later took orders, 
serving for the rest of his life as curate, rector, and 
canon. From 1650 till his death he was master of 
St. Catherine Hall (now College), Cambridge. He 
was parliamentarian, Presbyterian, and a leading 
member of the Westminster Assembly. It was 
through the influence of Sir Rowland Cotton (him- 
self a Hebraist) that Lightfoot entered on the study 


of Hebrew, to which, including rabbinical Hebrew, 
he thenceforth devoted his leisure. His first pub- 
lication was the tract “Ervbhin, or Miscellanjeg 
Christian and Judaicall, aud Others, Penned for 
Reereation at Vacant Woures” (London, 1629). He 
is best known by his “Hore Hebraice et Talmu- 
dice,” composed in Latin, giving Talmudic parallels 
on the Gospels and I Corinthians, Acts, and some 
chapters of Romans, which appeared at intervals 
from 1658 to 1674, except the part on Acts and Ro. 
mans, which was brought out later by Kidder, after- 
ward Bishop of Bath and Wells (1691). The work 
was reproduced at Leipsic by Carpzov, the “ Hore” 
on the Gospels in 1675 (2d ed. 1684), and the rest in 
1679; and at Oxford, in English, by Gandell in 1859, 
Lightfoot’s collected works were first published in 
English (London, 1684), in two folio volumes, the one 
edited by George Bright, and the other by John 
Strype. Afterward they were published in Latin at 
Rotterdam (1686), and at Franeker (1699). The latest 
edition of his works is by J. R, Pitman (London, 
1822-25). 

By some critics, as Simon, Lightfoot’s method 
in the “ Hore ” was disparaged as “ quelquefois trop 
rabbinique,” but in general it found favor; and it 
was adopted by later writers, as Schéttgen, Meu- 
schen, and Gill. He showed considerable acquaint- 
ance with Talmud and Midrash, greater perhaps 
than any non-Jew has shown before the present 
day. He corresponded with the younger Buxtorf, 
and helped Walton and others in their literary un- 
dertakings. He left his library to Harvard College, 
but nearly the whole collection was destroyed by 
fire in 1764. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dict. Nat. Biog.; Lightfoot’s Works, ed. Pit- 
man, as above. 


T. C. T. 

LIGHTNING, BENEDICTION ON: The 
Mishnah (Ber. ix. 2) prescribes, “At the sight of 
shooting stars or of lightning, and at hearing 
earthquakes, thunder, and storms, the benediction 
‘Blessed be He whose power and might fill the 
world’ should be recited. At the sight of great 
mountains, seas, and deserts one recites the bene- 
diction ‘ Blessed be He who hath made the work of 
Creation.’” The suggestion was made at the Baby- 
lonian school that the latter benediction is in place 
also on the occasions previously mentioned; and this 
was accepted by both Abbaye and Raba, who de- 
clared that both benedictions should be recited 
(Ber. 59a). However, Isaac Alfasi and Maimonides 
(“ Yad,” Berakot, x. 14) understand the Talmudic 
passage to mean that either benediction may be re- 
cited on the occasion of lightning and the other 
phenomena mentioned. 

This view is accepted alsc by Asheri and_ his 
son Jacob (Tur Orah Hayyim, 227); and by Jo- 
seph Caro (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 22%, 
1). General custom, however, decided that while 
for thunder the former benediction, expressive of 
God’s might, should be recited, the benediction for 
lightning should be, “Blessed be He who hath made 
the work of Creation ” (see “ Ture Zahab ” and “ Be'er 
IIeteb” to Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, Z.e.). Ac- 
cordingly, the ordinary prayer-books have this ar- 
rangement as a fixed rule. I. 


85 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Se Sage EE a a Se ee 

LILIEN, EPHRAIM MOSES: Austrian 
artist; born at Drohobicz, Galicia, in 1874. Lil- 
sen’s artistic inclinations became evident early in 
life. He was apprenticed to a sign-maker, with 
whom he worked in return for meager board, and 
subsequently attended the academies of art in Cra- 
cow and Munich. He later removed to Berlin, 
where he is at present (1904) residing. 

At first Lilien’s work was deficient in individual- 
ity. Even “Der Zélner von Klausen,” one of the 
most admired of his earlier works, is vague, col- 
orless, and feeble. Lilien began with the illustration 
of books and newspapers, but soon pushed himself 
to the front; a number of his earlier efforts ap- 
peared in the “Jugend” and in the “ Vorwirts.” 
SS A od AS 
HELE 


Ga 
AY 


iy A 
A) 
wile 
x 
aan er 


7 
‘ 
a OMS, 


“es 


Light 
Lilienblum 


LILIENBLUM, MOSES LOB: Russian 
scholar and author; born at Keidany, government of 
Kovno, Oct. 22, 1848. From his father he learned 
the calculation of the course of the stars in their re- 
lation to the Hebrew calendar (“ Hattot Ne‘urim,” 
i. 15). At the age of thirteen he organized a society 
of boys for the study of “‘En Ya‘akob” (7b. i. 14); 
aud at the age of fifteen he married and settled at 
Wilkomir. 

A change in the fortunes of his father-in-law 
throwing him upon his own resources, Lilienblum 
established a yeshibah in Wilna in 1865, and another 
in the year following (dd. i. 53-54), The advance of 
years, however, wrought a great change in the atti- 
tude of Lilienblum toward Judaism. He had read 


Se 
oe 


ae _— 


1 } aD as int ; a t¢ 2 PN 
FOZ NL ae a eli Se 





“ISAIAH.” 
(From the drawing by Ephraim Moses Lilien.) 


His later productions, though not overladen with 
sentiment, are rich in pathetic touches. The best 
and most characteristic of his work is to be found 
in the book “Juda” (1900), which contains his 
“ Jesaia,” “Passach,” and “Sodom’s Ruinen.” He 
illustrated also the “Lieder des Ghetto” of Morris 
Rosenfeld (1903). His “Gedenkblatt des Fiinften 
Zionisten-Kongresses in Basel” has attracted wide 
attention. Other notable illustrations are: “Ex 
Libris E. M. Lilien,” “Auf Zarten Saiten,” “Der 
Jiidische Mai,” “Ex Libris Ruben Brainin,” “Ex 
Libris D. Simonson,” “Ex Libris des Reichstagsab- 
geordneten R. Fischer,” “Ein Salomonisches Ur- 
theil,” “In Rosenketten,” “Heimatlos,” “Chanuka- 
lichter,” “Signet des Jidischen Kunstverlages 
Phonix,” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ost und West; Jtdische Ktinstler; The 

Maccaboean, March, 1904. 


S. S. LED. 


the writings of the Maskilim, particularly those of 
Mapu and M. A. Ginzburg, and these produced in 
him a feeling of dissatisfaction with Talmudic stud- 

ies and of abhorrence for the ignorance 

Changed and superstition surrounding him; he 

Views. decided, therefore, to combat these 

faults. In an article entitled “ Orhot 
ha-Talmud,” in “ Ha-Meliz,” 1868, he arraigned the 
superstitious beliefs and practises of his people, de- 
manded the reform of Judaism, and insisted upon 
the necessity of establishing a “closer connection be- 
tween religion and life.” 

This article, followed by others of the same nature, 
stirred up the Jewish communities in Russia, and a 
storm of indignation against him arose among the 
ultra-Orthodox ; he was denounced as a freethinker 
and continued residence in Wilkomir became impos- 
sible. He then went to Odessa (1869), where he in- 
tended to prepare himself for the university (“ Hat- 


Lilienblum 
Lilith 


tot Ne‘urim,” ii. 3), but after a hard struggle he was 
compelled to give up that design. 

The anti-Jewish riots of 1880 and 1881 aroused 
Lilienblum to a consciousness of the unsafe position 
of the Jews “in exile,” and he gave utterance to his 
apprebensions in an article entitled “ Obshcheyevreis- 
ki Vopros i Palestina” 
(in “Razsvyet,” 1881, 
Nos. 41, 42), in which 
he points to the reestab- 
lishment of the Jews in 
Palestine as the only 
solution of the Jewish 
question. This article 
did not remain without 
results; the idea was 
hailed as practical, and 
many set themselves to 
realize it. In 1883 a 
committee was organ- 
ized at Odessa for the 
colonization of Pales- 
tine, Lilienblum serving 
as secretary and Dr. I. 
Pinsker, author of 
“ Autoemancipation,” as 
president; at the famous conference at Kotowitz, 
where representatives of all European Jewries met 

and discussed plans of colonization in 

Zionism. Palestine, the foundation was laid for 

the Zionist movement, in which Lil- 
ienblum, as secretary, has taken the most earnest 
and energetic part (“ Derek Ja-‘Abor Golim,” p. 16). 

Lilienblum’s activity thus covers two distinct pe- 
riods in the history of Russian Jewry. In the pe- 
riod of the Haskalah he followed the example of the 
Maskilim in demanding the reform of Judaism; but 
he differed from the Maskilim in that he was 
much less extravagant, his style being free from 
the flowery “melizah” used by them, and his ideas 
being marked by soberness and clearness. His “ Or- 
hot ha-Talmud,” mentioned above, and his “ Hattot 
Ne‘urim ” (Vienna, 1876), a description of his mate- 
rial and spiritual struggles, both made a marked im- 
pression upon that period. His influence in the 
second period also, that of national reawakening, 
which he practically initiated, was due to his charac- 
teristic style. In his article on the Jewish ques- 
tion and Palestine, already mentioned, as well as in 
his “O Vozrozhdenii Yevreiskavo Naroda” (Odessa, 
1883), the latter including the former and other 
essays of a similar character, he clearly and so- 
berly presents the anomalous position held by Israel 
among the nations and logically demonstrates its 
hopelessness except through national independence. 

Lilienblum wrote also: “ Kehal Refa’im,” a poem 
describing the different types of Russian Jewry of 
the time, as they appear in the nether world (Odes- 
sa, 1870); “‘Olam ha-Tohu,” on some 
phases of Hebrew literature (in “ Ha- 
Shahar,” 1873); “Bikkoret Kol Shire 
Gordon,” on J. L. Gordon as a poet (in “ Meliz Ehad 
Mini Elef,” St. Petersburg, 1884); “ Zerubbabel,” a 
historical drama in Yiddish (Odessa, 1888); “ Derek 
la-‘Abor Golim,” a history of the Chovevei Zion 
movement up to the time of the ratification by the 


ea 





Moses L6b Lilienblum. 


Works. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 86 





Russian government of the committee for the colo. 
nization of Palestine (Warsaw, 1899); “ Derek Teshu- 
bah,” an addition to “Hattot Ne‘urim,” describing 
the transition of the author from the negative period 
of the Haskalah to the positive period of national] 
reawakening; “Pyat Momentov Zhizhni Moiseya” 
(in Russian; 2b. 1901), a psychological analysis of 
some important moments in the life of Moses. il. 
ienblum also edited “ Kawweret,” a collection of arti- 
cles in Hebrew (Odessa, 1890), and the “ Luah Ahia- 
saf,” 1901. He was the author of a number of 
other articles, of which the most important is “O 
Neobkhodimosti Reform v Yevreiskoi Religii” (in 
“Voskhod,” 1882-83). He died Feb. 15, 1910, 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lilienblum, Hattot Ne‘urim, Vienna, 1876; 
idem, Derek Teshubah. Warsaw, 1899; idem, Derek la-‘Abor 
Golim, ib.; Mordecai b, Hillel _ha-Kohen, in Luah Abiasaf, 
ib. 1893; Berdychevsky, Dor Dor, ib. 1901; N. Slouschz, Lit. 


térature Hébraique, pp. 166 et seq., Paris, 1903; Wiener, Yid- 
dish Literature, p. 238, New York, 1899. 
A. §. W. 


H. R. 


LILIENTHAL, MAX: Rabbi and educator; 
born at Munich Nov. 6, 1815; died at Cincinnati, 
Ohio, April 5, 1882; educated at the University of 
Munich (Ph.D. 1837). In 1839 he accepted the office 
of principal in the newly established Jewish school 
of Riga, where he was appointed preacher also. 
The school was opened Jan. 15, 1840. In recogni- 
tion of the sentiments expressed in the sermon with 
which Lilienthal opened the school the emperor 
Nicholas presented him with a diamond ring. In 
Dec., 1841, at the instance of Uvarov, minister of 
public instruction, to whom be was recommended 
by Count Maltitz, the Russian ambassador to Hol- 
land, Lilienthal was sent from St. Petersburg on 
an official mission. Jt was the intention of the 
government to establish Jewish schools for secular 
and religious instruction, and the duty assigned to 
Lilienthal was to determine the attitude of the Jews 
in regard to them and to quiet their fears as to the 
intentions of the government; for the plans of the 
latter were regarded with suspicion among the 
Jewish masses, who believed that the real pur- 
pose of the proposed schools was to lead the 
Jews gradually to conversion to Christianity. Lilien- 
thal repaired to Wilna, where the community, acting 
on his assurances, appropriated 5,000 rubles for 
school purposes, and promised Lilienthal that more 
money would be supplied when necessary. But 
notwithstanding Lilienthal’s assurances, the mistrust 
toward him of the Jews in Lithuania increased. At 
Minsk, whither he had gone at the invitation of the 
local kahal, he was given to understand that the 
Jews of Lithuania had no confidence in him. His 
stay in Minsk was rendered unpleasant by the re- 
sentment of the Jewish masses, and he even had to 
invoke the protection of the police. On his return 
to Wilna, Lilienthal found distrust of him growing 
there; thereupon, discouraged, he returned to St. 
Petersburg. 

After several months’ arduous work in the offices 
of the Ministry of Education and with Count Uvarov, 
he returned to Wilna and prepared a circular let- 
ter to the Jews of Russia, published under the 
title “ Maggid Yeshu‘ah.” When a council of rabbis 
and other prominent Jews was convoked at St. Pe- 
tersburg, consisting of Rabbi Isaac ben Hayyim of 


87 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lilienblum 
Lilith 


ee ee 


Volozhin, Rabbi Mendel Shncersohn of Lubavich, 
Bezaleel Stern of Odessa, and Israel Heilprin of 
Berdychev, Lilienthal was appointed 

His secretary of a senatorial committee 
‘‘Maggid of fourteen. During the sessions 
Yeshu‘ah.” Stern had many an encounter with 
Lilienthal and was even provoked 

to accuse him of ignorance of the Talmud. In the 
autumn of 1842 Lilienthal went to Odessa with let- 
ters of recommendation from Uvarov to Count M. 
S, Vorontzov. The Odessa community received 
him warmly, and appointed him their rabbi. Lilien- 
thal was soon convinced, however, that his efforts 
in behalf of the Russian Jews would not yield the 
desired results; as a foreigner it was difficult for 
him to gain a true insight into their traditions, hopes, 
aud aspirations. He did not understand them, nor 
they him; and he was placed in an awkward and 
delicate position by the distrust of the Jews on the 
one hand, and, on the other hand, by the efforts of 
the government to effect their assimilation without 
according them full 
rights of citizenship. 
Lilienthal left 
Russia suddenly in 
1844 and went to the 
United States. Set- 
tling in New York, 
he became rabbi of 
the Congregation An- 
she Chesed, Norfolk 
street, and, later, 
rabbi of Shaar ha- 
Shomayim, Attorney 
street. Hissomewhat 
advanced views led 
to considerable fric- 
tion. He resigned his 
position in 1850 and 
established an educa- 
tional institute with 
which he attained 
considerable success. 
In 1854 he became 
correspondent of 
the “ American Isra- 
elite,” and in the 
following year re- 
moved to Cincinnati and became associate editor 
of that journal andrabbi of the Congregation Bene 
Israel. His activity in Cincinnati extended over 
a period of twenty-seven years. He 
organized the Rabbinical Literary 
Association, serving as its president, 
and was at first instructor and later 
professor of Jewish history and liter- 
ature at Hebrew Union College. He 
was prominent, also, in the Jewish press as the 
founder and editor of the “Hebrew Review,” a 
quarterly, and the “Sabbath-School Visitor,” a 
weekly, and as a frequent contributor to the “Israel- 
ite,” the “Occident,” “Deborah” (founded by him), 
the “ Asmonean,” “ Volksblatt,” and “ Volksfreund.” 
He published a volume of poems entitled “ Freiheit, 
Frihbling und Liebe” (1857), several volumes of ad- 
dresses and sermons, and left three dramas in manu- 


Associate 
Editor of 
‘‘American 
Israelite.” 





Otto Lilienthal Experimenting with His Flying-Machine : 
Starting from a Platform. 
(From a photograph.) 


script—“ Die Strelitzen Mutter,” “ Rudolf von Habs- 
burg,” and “ Der Einwanderer.” 

Lilienthal took an active interest in the affairs of 
the municipality. As member of the Cincinnati 
board of education, and as director of the Relief 
Union and of the university board, he contributed 
much to the welfare of his adopted city. He wasa 
reformer by nature; he was instrumental in intro- 
ducing reforms in his own congregation in Cincin- 
nati, coustantly preached tolerance, and urged a 
more liberal interpretation of Jewish law. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Ehrlich, Bntwickelungsgeschichte der Is- 

raelitischen Gemeindeschule zu Riga, pp. 9-14; Leket Ama- 

rim, supplement to Ha-Meliz, 1885, pp. 86-89; Kayserling, 

Gedenkbldatter, p. 50; Ha-Pardes, pp. 186, 198; Jtidisches 

Volksblatt, 1856, No. 36; Lilienthal, My Travels in Russia, in 

American Israelite, vols. i. and ii.; Independent, New York, 

Xlviii. 8348; Wunderbar, Gesch. der Juden in Liv- und Kur~ 

land, pp. 14-15, Mitau, 1853; Morgulis, in Yevreiskaya Biblio. 

teka, i.; Yevreiskiya Zapiski, 1881, p. 9; Vyestnik Russ. 

kikh Yevreyev, 1871, No. 26. 

H. R. 


LILIENTHAL, OTTO: German mechanical 
engineer and experi- 
menter in aerial navi- 
gation; born May 28, 
1848, at Anklam; 
died Aug. 9, 1896, at 
Rhinow. Lilienthal’s 
theory was that arti- 
ficial flight must fol- 
low the principles of 
bird-flight. His ex- 
periments, which 
were made with the 
assistance of his 
brother G. Lilien- 
thal, extended over 
a period of twenty- 
five years; in the 
summer of 1891 he 
made, with a pair 
of curved wings de- 
signed forsoaring, the 
first practical demon- 
stration of man’s 
ability to fly. He 
made the flight suc- 
cessfully several 
times, but finally 
met death during an experiment at Rhinow. 
Lilienthal was a member of the German Society 
for the Advancement of Acrial Navigation. He 
was the author of “ Der Vogelflug als Grundlage der 

Fliegekunst ” (Berlin, 1889), in which he explained 

the theoretical reasons for the form of his aerial 

machine; and “ Die Flugapparate.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Chanute, Progress in Fiying Machines, pp. 
202-211, New York, 1899; Kohut, Berithmte Israelitische 
Miinner und Frauen, No. 15, pp. 246-247; Vallentine and 
Tomlinson, Travels in Space, pp. 252 et seq., London, 1902; 


Report of the Smithsonian Institution, pp. 189~199, \Wash- 
ington, 1893 g 


LILITH cmos: LXX. ’Ovoxévravpot; Symmachus, 
Aduwa; Vulg, “Lamia”): Female demon. Of the 
three Assyrian demons Lilu, Lilit, and Ardat Lilit, 
the second is referred to in Isa. xxxiv. 14. Schra- 
der (“Jahrb. fiir Protestantische Theologie,” i. 128) 


Lilith 
Limerick 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 88 


Oo nn _=_ ee in 


takes Lilith to be a goddess of the night; she is said 
to have been worshiped by the Jewish exilesin Baby- 
lon (Levy, in “Z. D. M. G.” ix. 470, 484). Sayce 
(“Hibbert Lectures,” pp. 145 e¢ seg.), Fossey (“ La 
Magie Assyrienne,” pp. 37 e¢ seg.), and others think 
that “Lilith” is not connected with the Hebrew 
“layil” (night), but thatit is the name of a demon of 
the storm, and this view is supported by the cunei- 
form inscriptions quoted by them. It must, however, 
be assumed that the resemblance to the Semitic 
“layil” materially changed the conception of Lilith 
amoung the Semites, and especially among the Jews. 
No definite conclusions can be drawn from the pas- 
sage in Isaiah, where it is said of the devastated 
palaces of Edom that wild animals shall dwell in 
them “and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the 
screech-owl also shall rest there, and find for herself 
a place of rest” (Isa. xxxiv. 14; see Cheyne’s note 
ad loc.). Baudissin connects Lilith with Zech. v. 9. 

Lilith is more fully described in post-Biblical lit- 

erature, where she appears as a demon of the night, 
as suggested by her Hebrew name. 

In Talmud Three classes of demons are mentioned : 
and spirits, devils, and “lilin” (Targ. Yer. 

Midrash. to Deut. xxxii. 24; Targ. Sheni 

to Esth. 1. 8; passtm). The first have 
neither body nor form; the second appear in com- 
plete human shape; the third in human shape, but 
with wings (Rashi to Sanh. 109a). Adam procreated 
all the spirits while he was under a spell (Gen. R. xx. 
11; ‘Er. 18b). Similarly, Eve bore demons to male 
spirits for the space of 180 years. This corresponds 
to the view that the demons are half human (Hag. 
16a). Hence an abortion which has the shape of 
Lilith may be a child, though it has wings (Nid. 
24b). Lilith is a seductive woman with long hair 
(‘Er. 100b); she is the Queen of Zemargad (Targ. 
Job i. 15; comp. Bacher and Kohut [see bibliog- 
raphy|); Ahriman is her son (B. B. 78a). She goes 
about at night, fastening herself upon any one sleep- 
ing alone in a room (Shab. 151b). “The Lord will 
protect thee” (Num. vi. 24) means, according to 
Targ. Yer., “. .. from lilin.” The meteor-stone 
is her arrow and is a remedy against disease 
(Git. 69b). Kohut’s assumption that Agrat bat 
Mahlat (“daughter of the dancer”), who roams at 
night with myriads of demons (Pes. 112b, bottom), 
is the queen of the lilin, is not verified. King Sol- 
omon, who commanded all spirits, had the lilin 
dance before him (Targ. Sheni Esth. i. 8). 

Kohut identifies Lilith with the Parsee Bush- 
yansta, and the Arabic translators render the 
word in Isa. xxxiv. 14 by “ ghul,” which is identical 
with the “lamia” of the Vulgate. In the Talmud, 

however, there is nothing to indicate 


Middle that Lilith is a vampire. The Ara- 
Ages and bians, on the contrary, are said to re- 
Modern - gard Lilith, under the form of Lalla, as 
Times. a “holy dame” (Schwab, “ Les Coupes 


Magiques et 1’ Hydromancie dans l’ An- 
tiquité Orientale,” p. 11). The name “Lilith” is 
found also on amulets with terra-cotta figures 
(tdem, “ Coupes a Inscriptions Magiques,” p. 62). In 
the later Middle Ages the mystics systematically 
amplified Gemonology on the basis of the traditions 
and the current European superstitions, and they 


also assigned a more definite form to Lilith (see the 
quotations in Eisenmengcer, “Entdecktes Judey-. 
thum,” il. 417 ef seq.). The superstitions regarding 
her and her nefarious doings were, with other super. 
stitions, disseminated more and more among the 
mass of the Jewish people. She becomes a nocturna] 
demon, flying about in the form of a night-owl and 
stealing children. She is permitted to kill all chi). 
dren which have been sinfully begotten, even from 
a lawful wife. Ifa child smiles during the night 
of the Sabbath or the New Moon, it is a sign that 
Lilith is playing with it. One should then strike 
the nose of the child three times and drive Lilith 
away by the prescribed rough words (Joseph Cohen, 
“*Kmek ha-Melek,” p. 84b; comp. Grunwald, “ Mit- 
teilungen der Gesellschaft fiir Jiidische Volks- 
kunde,” v. 62). Lilith likewise appears to men in 
their dreams; she is the bride of Samael (Schwab, 
“Angélologie”; comp. Zohar ii. 267b). It is said 
in a Judeo-German book (“ Hanhagat ha-Hasidim ”) 
printed at Frank fort-on-the-Main In the beginning 
of the eighteenth century that Lilith deceives men 
and has children by them; infant mortality is re- 
garded as a consequence of this miscegenation 
(comp. Grunwald, é@.c. v. 10, 62). Ina certain leg- 
end she appears as the Queen of Sheba, who in the 
guise of a beautiful woman seduced a poor Jew of 
Worms (Grunwald, f.c. ii, 30 et seg.). As she was 
eager to seize new-born infants, mother and child 
were provided with amulets, which since early times 
were regarded as an efficient protection against 
magic and demons; Lilith is the chief figure on the 
“childbirth tablets” still hung on the walls of the 
lying-in room in the East and in eastern Europe (see 
AMULETS). The name “ Lilith” occurs also in non- 
Jewish superstitions (Lammert, “ Volksmedicin,” 
p. 170; Grunwald, /.¢. vii., col. 2, n. 4). The concep- 
tion that she was Adam’s first wife (comp. Gen. R. 
xxiv.; Yer. ‘Er, 18b) appears to have been spread 
through Buxtorf’s “Lexicon Talmudicum,” 38.2. 
Lilith is a clear instance of the persistence of popu- 
lar superstitious beliefs. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: W.M. Menzies Alexander, Demoniac Posses- 
ston in the N. T. pp. 15-16, 26, 44, 55, Edinburgh, 1902; Bacher, 
Lilith, kénigin von Smargad, in Monatsschrift, 1870, xix. 
187-189; W. W. Baudissin, Studien zur Semitischen Reli- 
gionsgesch. i. 128, Leipsic, 1876; Bar Bahtlul's Syrisches Wor- 
terb.; G. Brecher, Das Transcendentale, etc., pp. 47, 50, 54, 
Vienna, 1850; Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judenthum, ii. 418 
et seq.; C. Fossey, La Magie Assyrienne, pp. 26, 37 et seq., 
Paris, 1902; M. Grunwald, Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft fiir 
Jiidische Volkskunde, ii. 68, 74; v.10, 62; vii. 104; F. Hom- 
mel, Vorsemitische Kultur, p. 367; idem, Die Semiten, ete., 
p. 368, Leipsic, 1881; A. Kohut, Ueher die Jiidische Ange- 
lologie und Ddmonologie, pp. 86-89, ib, 1866; M. Schwab, 
Vocabulaire de UV Angelologie, p. 162, Paris, 1897; idem, Les 
Coupes Magiques et V Hydromancie dans V Antiquité Ori- 
entale, in Tr. Soc. Bibl. Arch. April, 1890; idem, Coupes d 
Inscriptions Magiques, ib. June, 1891. 

E. G. H.—S. 8. Lb. Bi. 


LILY: Rendering in the Bible of the Hebrew 
word yw (I Kings vii. 19) or MavAw (II Chron. iv. 5; 
Cant. ii. 1; Hosea xiv. 5), which is probably a loan- 
word from the Egyptian “s-sh-sh-sh-n”=“lotus”; 
the white lily, Lilium candidum Linn., growing wild 
in the Lebanon and other regions of northern Pal- 
estine. Ina figurative sense the word “shoshan” 
is used of the capitals of the pillars and of the molten 
sea in the Temple (I Kings vii. 19, 26), and in the 
Mishnah of a nail-head and the knob on the Erro6; 
in the Targum it connotes “flower” in general. 


89 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lilith 
Limerick 


RI 


Sometimes, however, Targumic diction, followed by 
the Zohar, gives “shoshan” the meaning of “rose.” 

The first account of the lily is given by Ibn Ezra 
in hig commentary on the Song of Solomon (comp. 
Salfeld, “Das Hohelied Salomo’s bei den Jiidischen 
Erklarern des Mittelalters,” 1879, p. 68), and is one 
of the few descriptions of plants in Jewish litera- 
cure. It runs thus: “It is a white flower of sweet 

but narcotic perfume, and it receives 
Described its name because the flower has, in 
by every case, six [wy] petals, within 
Ibn Ezra. which are six long filaments.” The 
Midrash alludes once to the abun- 
dance of its sap, and David Kimhi says that it has 
no roots. Abravanel says that dew makes the lily 
ploom, but rain destroys it. The heart of this 
flower is directed upward, even though it be among 
thorns, thus symbolizing the trust in God which 
should be felt by Israel amid all afflictions (Lev. R. 
xxiii. 1; Cant. R. ii. 2). The Zohar speaks of the 
thirteen leaves of the lily which surround the flower 
as the thirteen attributes of God which encompass 
Isracl. This number is evidently derived from the de- 
scription of Ibn Ezra with its six petals, six stamens, 
and one pistil. Inthe “ Tikkunim ” (xxv.,end; xxvi., 
beginning) the theme is varied, the “shoshannah ” 
beiug taken as denoting both the lily and the rose. 
The lilies among which the beloved feeds (Cant. 11. 
16) are the morning and evening Shema‘; the five 
leaves of the rose are the first five words of the 
Shema‘; and the thirteen leaves of the lily the 
numerical equivalent of “ehad,” the last word. 

The identifications of the “lily-of-the-valleys” 
(ab. ii. 1) and the “royal lily ” of the Syriac transla- 
tion of Ecclus. (Sirach) xxxix. 14and the Mishnah 
(Kil. v. 8; “Tikkunim,” iii. 78, lL. 2) are uncertain, 
although the latter has been regarded plausibly as 
a species of Pritillaria. 

The lily as the chief of flowers seems to have been 
represented on the shekels and half-shekels ascribed 
to Simon the Hasmonean; and was common on coats 
of arms in medieval Spain and in modern times. 

About this flower a rich and abundant symbolism 
has gathered. The faces of the righteous are as the 
lily, and exist only for redemption as the lily for 
perfume; so that the later cabalists employ the 
flower as a symbol of the resurrection (Gamaliel di 

Monselice on Pirke Shirah, ed. Mantua, 


Typical  p. 96a). Yet most of all the lily typi- 
Applica- fies Israel. Asit withers in the sun- 
tion. light, but blooms beneath the dew, so 


Israel withers away except God _ be- 
comes as dew for her (Hos. xiv. 5), and she is re- 
nowned among the nations as the lily among the 
flowers. The lily among thorns is likened to Re- 
bekah, who remained pure amid evil surroundings 
(Bacher, “Ag. Pal. Amor.” ii. 248), and to the sons 
of Korah (Ps. xlv. 1 [A. V., heading]). While it 
was as difficult to save the Israelites from the Egyp- 
tians as a lily from the thorns (Bacher, é.c. ii. 76), 
yet they remained faithful among those that wor- 
Shiped strange gods, as the lilies keep their beauty 
despite gashes and wounds (Targ., Cant. ii. 1). 
The title o1 Ps. Ixxx. is supposed by Aha of Lydda 
to tefer to the lily; and the passage in Ps. cxxx. 1, 

Out of the depths,” is explained by him as an al- 


lusion to the lily-of-the-valley. The phrase “set 
about with lilies” (Cant. vil. 2) is applied by the 
Haggadah to the words of the Law; but it is more 
usually regarded as alluding to the seventy elders of 
the Sanhedrin. In a funeral oration R. Simeon b. 
Lakish (Bacher, /.c. i. 401) interprets Cant. vi. 2 
thus: “My beloved” is God, who has descended 
into “his garden,” the world, to the “ beds of spices,” 
Israel, to feed in “the gardens,” the nations of the 
world, and to gather the “lilies,” the righteous 
whom he removes by death from the midst of them. 
Similar allegorical interpretations are conimon, even 
as late as Enoch Zundel Luria in the middle of the 
nineteenth century. The symbolism of the lily has 
passed from the Jews to the Christians, so that the 
angel of the Annunciation is conventionally repre- 
sented as bearing lilies without filaments. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fonck, Streifziige Durch die Biblische Flora, 
pp. 53 et seq., Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1 
E. G. H. I. Lo. 
LIMA, MOSES B. ISAAC JUDAH: Lithu- 
anian rabbinical scholar, one of the so-called AHARO- 
NIM; born in the second decade of the seventeenth 
century; died about 1670. When a comparatively 
young man he successively occupied the rab- 
binates of Brest-Litovsk and Slonim. His fame 
as a scholar soon reached Wilna, whither he 
was called, in 1650, to fill the office of chief rabbi. 
Lima was of a retiring and diffident disposition, 
which probably accounts for the paucity of his wri- 
tings. He left a manuscript commentary on Shul- 
han ‘Aruk, Eben ha-‘Ezer, which his son Raphael 
published (1670) under the title of “ Helkat Meho- 
kek,” and which, while betraying profound erudi- 
tion, was so condensed that the editor deemed it 
necessary to provide it with explanatory notes. Lima 
did not carry even this work to completion: it covers 
only the first 126 chapters of the Eben ha-‘Ezer. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i, and ii., s.v. Hel- 
kat Mehokek: 8. Back, in Winter and Wiinsche, Die Jidische 
Litteratur, ii. 519; Gans, Zemah Dawid, p. 596; Gratz, 
Gesch. x. 61 et seq.; Jost, Gesch. des Judenthums und Seiner 
Sekten, tii. 244. 
H.R. S. M. 
LIMERICK: Seaport town in Ireland, in which 
Jews began to settle about 1881, after the Russian 
exodus. A synagogue was founded in 1889 in Co- 
looney street, and in the same year a bikkur holim. 
In 1901 it was found necessary to establish a Jew- 
ish board of guardians. On Jan. 11, 1904, Father 
Creagh, of the Redemptorist Order, delivered a vio- 
lent sermon against the Jews, accusing them of 
ritual murder, of blaspheming Jesus, and of rob- 
bing the people of Limerick. On the following day 
there was a riot in which the Jews were attacked by 
mobs, and this was followed by a general boycott 
by the local Roman Catholic confraternity, number- 
ing about 6,000 members. The chief ground for 
complaint against the Jews was the “ weekly-instal- 
ment plan” by which they sold their goods. The 
outburst against the Jews drew forth many pro- 
tests from Protestant and Roman Catholic clergy 
and laymen. The Jews of the locality suffered much 
from the boycott. Limerick has a population of 
45,806, of which about 300 are Jews. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Year Book, 1904; Jew. Chron. 1904, 
Jan. 22 and succeeding numbers, j 


Limoges 
Lindo 


LIMOGES. See FRANCE. 

LINCOLN: County town of Lincolnshire, Enug- 
land; formerly the second town of importance in 
the country, and on that account largely populated 
by Jews in the preexpulsion period. They appear 
to have settled on the Steep Hill, between the old 
Roman colony and the new castle and cathedral. 
The earliest mention of them occurs in 1159, when 
the sheriff of Lincolnshire renders count of £40 
for the Jews of Lincoln in the pipe-roll of that 
year. 

Aaron of Lincoln conducted his extensive opera- 
tions from this town as a center; and his house, 
though considerably “restored,” still remains as one 
of its earliest antiquities (see AARON OF LINCOLN). 
He took in pledge the plate of Lincoln Minster (Gi- 
raldus Cambren- 
sis, “ Opera,” ed. 
Dymock, vii. 
86). During 
the outbreaks 
against the Jews 
at the beginning 
of the reign of. 
Richard I. the 
Lincoln Jews 
saved them- 
selves by seek- 
ing refuge in the 
castle. The in- 
fluence of St. 
Hugh, Bishop of 
Lincoln, may 
have had some 
effect in re- 
straining the 
mob. <At any 
rate, Jews 
mourned his 
death sincerely 
in 1200 (Jacobs, 
“Jews of Ange- 
vin England,” 
p. 207). It would 
appear that 
Moses b. Isaac, 
author of the 
“Sefer ha-Sho- 
ham,” was the 
son cf a Lincoln 
Jew, his mother 
being Contessa 
of Cambridge. 
Much business 
was done not 
only by Aaron of Lincoln, but also by Bene- 
dict fil Isaac, as well as by Aaron’s brothers Senior 
and Benedict, and his sons Elias, Abraham, and 
Vives. In the Nottingham “donum” of 1194 
Lincoln comes second in point of tribute—£287 
4s, 11d., as against £486 9s. 7d. for London—but 
the number of Jewish names mentioned in Lin- 
coln is the largest. Aaron and his family possessed 
a considerable number of houses in the precincts of 
the Bail. Those belonging to Aaron himself es- 
cheated to the crown on his death, and were declared 


MARTINS RO 





The Jewish Quarter, Lincoln, Circa 1290. 
(From Jacobs’ * Jewish Ideals,’’) 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 90 


a oop eS TT 
to be above 60s. in value. The houses of his brothe; 
Senior also became the property of the crown; byt 
their value was only 10s. 

About 1220 a raid seems to have been made upon 
the Jews’ houses in Lincoln, Mosse de Ballio, as we}} 
as Sara, the wife of Deulacresse, having been mur. 
dered in that year. In the middle of the thirteenth 
century the most important Lincoln Jew was Rene. 
dict fil Mosse, who is undoubtedly to be identifieg 
with BEREcHIAH DE NIcoLE mentioned among 

the Tosafists. There is also a Joce de 
Thirteenth Nicole mentioned; and in the cele- 
Century. brated case of Hugh of Lincoln refer. 
ence is made to the schoolof Peitevin, 
from which it seems probable that there was a bet 
ha-midrash at Lincoln. Several Hebrew “shetarot” 
exist dealing 
with the trans- 
actions of the 
Jews of Lincoln, 
mainly with the 
Abbey of Neu- 
some. When 
Henry ITI. tail- 
aged the Jews of 
Lincoln, several 
men Were made 
responsible for 
the tallage, 
among them Leo 
of Lincoln, said 
to be, at the 
time, one of the 
six richest Jews 
in England. He 
was also con- 
cerned with the 
debts of the Ab- 
bey of Neusome, 
Leo was con- 
demned for some 
crime; and his 
house in the 
parish of St. 
Martin’s es- 
cheated to the 
crown in 1275. 
In 1255 occurred 
the case of HucH 
or LINCOLN, 
which resulted 
in considerable 
loss of life to 
the Jewish com- 
munity. Many 
of these victims are referred to in later deeds with 
the title “ha-kadosh ” or “martyr.” 

During the uprising of the barons in 1266 the “ dis- 
inherited ” attacked the Jewry of Lincoln, mainly 
for the purpose of destroying the deeds of indebt- 
edness which tended to put the baronage in the 
king’s power. It is probable that the chest of the 
chirographers of Lincoln was burned at this time 
(“Select Pleas,” ed. Rigg, p. 41). Berechiah de 
Nicole had a son, Hayyim or Vives, and a daughter, 
Belaset, probably identified with the Belaset of Wal- 


91 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Limoges 
Lindo 


OU 


jingford whose house is the better known of the two 
Jews’ houses at Lincoln. She was executed in 1287 
for clipping coin. The betrothal deed of her daugh- 
ter still exists, in which an elaborate written copy 
of the Hebrew Scriptures is one of the most impor- 
tant items of the dowry. 

At the expulsion in 1290 no less than sixty-six 
pouseholders of Lincoln left deeds, bonds for money, 
corn, or wool, aggregating in money £423 1ds.; in 
corn £601 9s. 4d.; and in wool £1,595 6s. All of 
these fell into the hands of the king, besides thirty 
houses the exact value of which can not be ascer- 
tained. Most of the houses were in the Braunce- 

ate or in St. Martin’s parish, where indeed the 
ghetto seems to have been. No Jewish community 
has been formed in Lincoln since 1290. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacobs, Jews of Angevin England, passim ; 
M. D. Davis, in Archeological Journal, xxxviii. 178 et seq.; 
Freeman, English Towns, p. 216; Trans. Jew. Hist. Soc. 


England, ii. J 


LINDAU, BARUCH BEN JUDAH LOB: 
German mathematician; born at Hanover in 1759; 
died at Berlin 
Dec. 5, 1849. He 
wrote: “Reshit 
Limmudim,” 
a text-book of 
natural science 
(part i., physics 
and geography, 
Berlin, 1789; 
Briinn, 1796; 
Cracow, 1820; 
part il., natural 


philosophy, 
with additions 
by Wolf ben 
Joseph [Joseph 
Wolf of Des- 
sau], Dessau, 
1810; complete 


ed. Lemberg, 
1869) ; “ Shir Ha- 
tunnah,” epitha- 
lamium in honor 
of Judah ben 
Solomon of Han- 
over (n.d., n.p.). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
First, Bibl. Jud. 
li. 250; Stein- 
Schneider, Cat 


at, 
Bodi. col. 1624; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 212. ~ 
D, S. Man. 


LINDO: One of the oldest and most esteemed of 
London Sephardic families; it traces its descent back 
to Isaac Lindo, who died in 1712. For eight suc- 
cessive generations a member of the family has 
been a sworn broker of the city of London. See 
family chart on following page. 


LINDO, ALEXANDER: English merchant; 
died in London in 1818. He was connected with 
the West India trade, and in this connection entered 
Into relations with Napoleon after the Treaty of 


Miens, arranging for the shipment of goods to the | 
Value of £260,000 to the French West Indies for the | 


Use of the troops cominanded by General Leclerc. 


The latter drew a draft on Paris for the amount, 
but this was dishonored on a frivolous pretext, and 
Lindo does not appear to have ever obtained his 
money. Hediedin financial difficulties; his bequest 
to the Bevis Marks Synagogue was never paid. His 
son Abraham Alexander Lindo wrote a pamphlet 
entitled * A Word in Season ” (London, 1889), but he 
was prohibited by the Mahamad from publishing 
anything more. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, 
pp. 273-328, London, 1875. 
J 


LINDO, DAVID ABARBANEL: English 
commuual worker; born in London Aug. 14, 1772; 
died there Feb, 26, 1852. He was an uncle of Lord 
Beaconsfield, whom he initiated into the covenant 
of Abraham, and was intimately connected with the 
Bevis Marks Congregation, representing the rigidly 
legal standpoint against the struggle for Reform. 
At its beginning in 1838 he helped to found and be- 
came chairman ofa society called “Shomere Mishme- 


i ret Akodesh,” formed to resist all innovations and 





Jew’s House, Steep Hill, Lincoln. 
(From a drawing of the eighteenth century, in the British Museum.) 


1865. 
island of St. Thomas, where he married and became 





, 


oppose Reform 
tendeucies; but 
the Yehidim 
ordered the dis- 
solution of the 
society as likely 
to lead to dis- 
union, Lindo 
had no less than 
eighteen — chil- 
dren, eight of 
whom married 
into well-known 
Sephardic fam- 
ities. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
Catalogue of the 
Anglo-Jewish 
Historical Exhi- 
bition, pp. 56, 70; 
Gaster. Hist. of 
Bevis Marks, pp. 


171-175, London, 
1902. 


LINDO, 
ELIAS HAY- 
YIM: English 
author and _ his- 


torian: born in 
1783; died in 
London June 11, 


He spent the first half of his life in the 


one of the leading merchants. He was president of 
the Hebrew congregation and acted also in the hon- 
orary capacity of mohel for many years. 

Lindo settled in England about 1832 and began 
a series of literary labors. He translated the “Con- 
ciliador ” of Manasseh ben Israel (London, 1842), In 
1832 he published his “Calendar,” a reissue of 
which appeared in 1860. The tables are preceded 
by an essay on the structure of the Jewish calen- 
dar; and appended is a collection of general infor- 
mation. His last published work was the “ History 
of the Jews of Spain and Portugal” (7). 1849), for 
which he visited the Iberian Peninsula and obtained 


“ATIWV A OCNIYT AHL wo HHUpPIaro 
“f 
‘uopuoy Jo Aq10 ay} JO B19HOIG WIOMS y 


*pouRqauqgy plaxq jo Uos ‘JaaueyIaN yIAs [VoWUapy ¢ 


opury urmefueg ‘a 











“TN CV IW 
iad 2 
: PAOJ[VH [OQeW ‘Ul AINE oY ‘We gover soUsIMVT (Z) qdosor 
(cost °q) UIXIA ATC *(6G8T “4) ‘(1GgT °G) «$ BOG Bp Tenweg (T) “WI *Y OBES] “UL *(9E8T. °a) 
SONUISUOD) CGRL) urenelgy pIABG ‘wun Lr ‘aus yeaa 
(ZO8T ‘Le [Lid ¥ “q) 
BSION Q20q1TY SOSOK] 
(GIST *P) | 
eys0;5 Tp SepuaW —- (LRT “P+ TH8T “) 
JaAdS WRIT (JOx]) “Ww JolouNY J9YIST 
BUNS (FORT) “UE CROAT “DP (T981) “We (LER *4) 
*(6ERT “G) JULY * -BG8t 4) Tantqey RBSION YdOSOl' x 
as eee 
J “IM ‘SBVUIOTLL 
Jopuvx9ly BIOIBY) ALUAH AAQ'T Opury BISOD ‘49 ‘AAO'T JOOLY aoA'T 
enysos “UL yeuuey ‘Wa = PUBAPY UI JaeqRsy ‘UL Bp UBIRS “UL «= JatIsy “Ul qyepne "al WeSNS “UL 
(QOBL “PD ! FIST °4) (6881 “P SOTST *9) s19U10 ‘(6T8T 4) “(OTST “G) =“ (FT8T “4) “(GIST 4) *(688T “P OTST 4) “(POST “a) “(B6BLE A) = *(96LT “A) 
OpUYT BISON Vp YeIRy (GEgT) ‘WE ‘TeeURTION 4 uel pues BUITOIOS jolueg yeseg i as [QOUBUION qooer QIBL) SBILT 
(481 “P (g9gT ‘P {FLT °) = 
'Z6LT °G) BSION [BOT (ETST) “Ul “BISON Vp SOSON 
(Gest “P) (2e8T “P) (ZG8T “DP = LLLT A) EES. “PD = SLLT “9) 
BISOY) BP SASOW, OP TRLVS (ERLT) “Ul “UGBILY ap SOSOM » VVIBOOW UIRYBIGY op YBueg (46/7) ‘UW ‘feueqldeqy PIABd 
f 
(G8LT “P) 


(8821 °P) 
SOW AP OSOLQUIN'Y BIBIN) (LGLT) ‘WL “SBITA 
| 


(LLT “P) (LOLT "P) 

[auequeqy wWreIqdy ap Bqoqs-TieVq (6BL[) “Ul ‘OBUST » 
(CCLT “D) (82LL “P) 
Bljalog SadoT joyoeyY (SOLT) “Ul ‘SPIT « 


(STLT “P) (SILL *P) 
Opur] Yee] ‘Ww ‘oBBS] 


93 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


much of his information from original sources; it 
still retains some value. He furthermore made man- 
nscript translations into English of some of the mas- 
terpieces Of Hebrew literature, including Bahya’s 
«Hlobot ha-Lebabot”; Judah ha-Levi's “Cuzari”; 
Jsaac Aboab’s “Menorat ha-Ma’or.” The manu- 
scripts are now in the possession of Jews’ College, 
London. 

Lindo was several times warden of the Portuguese 
congregation of London, and compiled a complete 
catalogue of all the works in its library, with bio- 
graphical memoranda of their authors. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron, June 23, 1865, 
J. 


G. L. 


LINDO, MARK PRAGER: Dutch writer; 
porn in London Sept. 18, 1819; died at The Hague 
March 9, 1879. He went to Holland in 18388 as 
teacher of English, first at Arnhem, and then at the 
Military Academy at Breda; and he studied Dutch 
literature at Utrecht University (D.Litt. 1854). He 
was inspector of schools in South Holland from 1865 
until his death. Lindo took a somewhat important 
position in Dutch literature as a mediator between 
Holland and England. MHe translated Dickens, 
Thackeray, Fielding, Sterne, and Scott in versions 
which were more distinguished for vigor than ac- 
curacy. He wrote a number of novels under the 
pseudonym “De Oude Heer Smits,” among them 
being “ Afdrukken van Indrukken ” (1854; his most 
popular work; written in conjunction with Lode- 
wyk Mulder); “Brieven en Ontoezemingen” and 
“Familie van Ons” (1855); “Typen” (1871). With 
Lodewyk Mulder also he published the weekly 
“Nederlandsche Spectator.” Lindo wrote a history 
of England in Dutch (2 vols., 1868-74). His col- 
lected works, edited by Mulder, appeared in five 
volumes (Amsterdam, 1879). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: foncyc. Brit. 10th ed., Supplement. 
8. 


LINDO, MOSES: Planter and merchant in 
South Carolina; born probably in England; died at 
Charleston, S. C., April 26, 1774. Heseems to have 
been considered one of the foremost experts in the 
cochineal and indigo trade in London. Becoming 
interested in the prospects of the indigo industry of 
South Carolina, he removed to Charleston in Nov., 
1756, and at once announced his intention of pur- 
chasing indigo for the foreign market. His adver- 
tisements appear repeatedly in the “South Carolina 
Gazette” for 1756. He soon became a wealthy 
Planter and slave-owner and ranked among the 
prominent merchants of Charleston. He did more 
than any other individual to encourage and advance 
the indigo industry of the colony, among the most 
Important industries in South Carolina in prerevo- 
lutionary times. His transactions were enormous, 
and in 1762 he was appointed “Surveyor and In- 
spector-General of Indigo, Drugs, and Dyes,” an 
office he resigned in 1772. 

Lindo seems to have been a man of scientific at- 
tainments, and his experiments with American dyes 
Commenced as early as 1757. He maintained a 
Correspondence with Emanuel Mendez da Costa, li- 

Tarian of the Royal Society and one of the foremost 
haturalists of his day. The “Philosophical Trans- 


Lindo 
Linen 


actions of the Royal Society ” (lili. 288, paper 37) 
contains “An account of a New Die from the Ber- 
ries of a Weed in South Carolina: in a letter from 
Mr. Moses Lindo dated at Charlestown, September 
2, 1763, to Mr. Emanuel Mendez da Costa, Libra- 
rian of the Royal Society.” 

An item in the “South Carolina Gazette ” (March 
16, 1778) states that Lindo purchased a stone which 
he believed to be a topaz of immense size, and that 
he sent it to London by the Right Hon. Lord Charles 
Greville Montague to be presented to the Queen of 
England. A number of Lindo’s advertisements and 
of items concerning him in the “South Carolina Ga- 
zette” have recently been collected by Rev. B. A. 
Elzas, and reprinted in the “Charleston News and 
Courier,” Jan. 18, 1903. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Zur Gesch. der Jiidischen Aerzte, 
in Monatsschrift, vii. 165; Hiihner, The Jews of South 
Carolina Prior to 1806; N. Taylor Phillips, Publications 
Am, Jew. Hist. Soe. ii. 51-52, 

A, L. Hi. 


LINEN : Cloth made of flax. The Biblical terms 
are “bad” (L.XX. Aiveog; A. V. “linen”), “shesh,” 
and “buz” (L:XX. Btiooo¢e or Btoowoc; A. V. “fine 
linen”). In the construction of the Tabernacle linen 
was used for the inner cover (Ex. xxvi. 1); the hang- 
ing or screen closing the entrance to the Tabernacle 
(Ex. xxvi. 36); the veil which divided the “ Holy” 
from the “ Holy of Holies” (Ex. xxvi. 81); and the 
hangings of the court together with the curtain for 
the entrance to it (Ex. xxvii. 9, 16, and parallels). 
It was used also in the priests’ vestments (Ex. 
XXVili. 42, xxxix. 27-29; Lev. xvi. 4). According 
to IL Chron. iii. 14 (comp. ii. 14), a curtain of buz 
also divided the Holy of Holies (“debir”) from the 
Holy in the Temple of Solomon; and from I Macc. 
(i. 22, iv. 51) and Josephus (“B. J.” v. 5, $§ 4 e¢ seq.) 
it can be seen that in the two succeeding Temples 
both the Holy and Holy of Holies were divided by 
curtains of byssus. 

From Ex. xxxix. 27-29, compared with Ex. 
xxvili. 42 and Lev. xvi. 4, it would appear that 
“bad” and “shesh,” the latter being identified with 
Coptic “shens” and first mentioned in connection 
with Egypt (Gen. xli. 42), are, if not identical, manu- 
factural varieties of the same substance. “Buz,” 
again, which oceurs only in later books, is assumed 
to be a later equivalent of “shesh” (comp. II Chron. 
ii. 14, iii. 14, v. 12 with Ex. xxv. 4, xxvi. 381, xxviii. 
42, etc.); in I Chron. xv. 27 it corresponds to “bad ” 
in II Sam. vi. 14. It may also be a different local 
name for the same fabric (comp. Ezek. xxvii. 7 
and 16), 

The view of many modern exegetes that the He- 
brew terms denote “linen” is supported not only 
by the Septuagint renderings of Aiveo¢ and fic- 


‘ g0¢, which latter generally means “linen” (comp., 


for instance, Herodotus, ii. 86; Thomson, “Mum- 
my Cloths of Egypt,” in “London and Edinburgh 
Philosophical Magazine,” 3d series, vol. v., p. 355; 
Budge, “The Mummy,” p. 190, Cambridge, 1893), 
but also by the facts that in the Temple of Eze- 
kiel the priests, while ministering, wore linen gar- 
ments (Ezek. xliv. 17), and that cotton is mentioned 
in the Old Testament under the name of “karpas” 
(Esth. i. 6). Still, as the ancients did not always 


Linetzki 
Lipkin 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 94 


Se Ee ee ee ee ae Se ye en ee 


sharply distinguish between linen and cotton, it is 
possible that both were used in the Sanctuary and 
that the terms designate in general “ white stuff.” 
It was enacted that garments should be made 
of only one kind of stuff (Lev. xix. 19), and later 
tradition (Josephus, “ Ant.” iii. 6, 8$ 1 e¢ seg. ; 7, 8$1 
et seg.; tdem, “B. J.” v.5,§ 7; Philo, “ De Vita Moy- 
sis,” ii. 101; adem, “ Duo de Monarchia,” ii. 226 [ed. 
Mangey]) and the Talmud have it that only wool 
‘for the variegated ornaments) and linen entered 
into the textiles used in the Tabernacle and Temple 
(comp. Yoma 34b; Kil. ix. 1; comp. also Ibn Ezra 
on Ex, xxv. 4). According to Josephus (“ Ant.” xx. 
9,& 6), Agrippa II. permitted the Levites also to 
wear linen garments (comp. II Chron. v. 12; see 
SHA‘ATNEZ), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: John Braun, De Vestitu Sacerd. Hebr.i., ch. 
vi., Amsterdam, 1680; J. R. Forster, De Bysso Antiquorum, 
London, 17;6; Haneberg, Die Religiésen Alterthtimer der 


Bibel, p. 536, Munich, 1869; Tristram, Nat. Hist. pp. 440, 465, 
London, 1867; Yates, Textrinum Antiquorum, London, 1848 


E. G. H. IL M. C. 


LINETZEKI, ISAAC JOEL: Russo- Yiddish 
humorist; born at Vinnitza Sept. 8, 1839, in which 
town his father, Joseph Linetzki, was a Hasidic 
rabbi. At the age of eighteen Isaac ran away from 
home and went to Odessa. Thence he intended to go 
- to Breslau to study at the rabbinical seminary, but 
was intercepted at the frontier by his father’s fanat- 
ical friends, who forced him to return home. Li- 
netzki then attended the rabbinical school at Jito- 
mir (1862-63); and while there he wrote his first 
poems, which were published in his “Beizer Mar- 
shelik” (Odessa, 1868). Zweifel and Slonimsky 
took a great interest in Linetzki, who on the latter’s 
recommendation obtained a position in the office of 
M. Weinstin at Kiev. 

In 1866 Linetzki became a contributor to “ Kol 
Mebasser,” a Yiddish weekly published in Odessa, 
and in 1868 he began the publication of his famous 
novel “Das Polische Jiingel.” The success of this 
work was unprecedented in Yiddish literature. Be- 
ing a true account of the life of a Hasidic youth 
and entirely based upon actual experience, “Das 
Polische Jingel ” is, in the opinion of the most emi- 
aent critics, one of the best humoristic works in 
Yiddish (LL. Wiener, “Hist. of Yiddish Literature,” 
p. 165). 

In 1875 Linetzki published at Lemberg conjointly 
with Goldfaden a Judseo-German weekly, “ Yisro- 
lik.” In 1876-77 he published his “ Pritshepe ” and 
“ Statek,” and the first number of his calendar, which 
he continued to issue for a number of years. Inthe 
period between 1882 and 1888 he published several 
works, including “Amerika zi Erez Isroel”; a 
geography of Palestine; and translations of Les- 
sing’s “Nathan der Weise” and Gritz’s “Gesch. 
der Juden.” His “Worem Chrein,” a sequel to 
“Das Polische Jiingel,” was published as a serial 
in the “Jiidische Volksbibliotek” (1888, vol. i.). 
Shorter sketches from his pen have appeared in the 
* Familienfreund,” in the “ Hausfreund,” and in the 
“Volksfreund.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Linetzki Yubileum, Odessa, 1891: Wiener, 

Hist. of cael Literature, New York, 1899; Voskhod, 


1884, No. 2 
H. R. M. Z. 


LION.—Biblical Data: There are several nameg 


for ine lion in oe Old Testament (comp. Job iv. 10 ¢ 


seq.): “aryeh,” or “ari,” which is the most genera) 
name; “labi’” fads ‘lebiyah,” for the old lion ang 
lioness; “kefir” and “gur,” for the young, Strong 
lion and whelp respectively ; while “layish” ang 
“shahal” occur in more poetic diction. 

The lion is one of the most frequently mentioneg 
animals in the Bible, which would indicate jt 
former abundance in Palestine. Its favorite hauntg 
were the bushy environments of the Jordau (Jer, 
xlix. 19, 1. 44; Zech. xi. 3), caves and thickets (Jey. 
iv. 7, xxv. 88; Ps. x. 9, xvii. 12), in general the 
woods (Jer. xii. 8; Amos iii. 8) and the desert (Isa, 
xxx. 6). Place-names which may be connected with 
the lion are: Arieh (II Kings xv. 25), Lebaoth ang 
Beth-lebaoth (Josh. xv. 82, on 6), Chephirah 
(Josh. ix. 17, xviii. 28; Ezra Gi, ; Neh. vii. 29), 
and Laish, the original name a northern Dan 
(Judges xviii. 29). 

Many habits of the lion are incidentally men. 
tioned in the Old Testament. The male assists in 
the rearing and training of the young (Ezek. xix. 2. 
Nah. ii. 18); it lies in wait in secret places (Deut. 
Xxxiil, 22; Lam. iii. 10); growls over its prey (Isa. 
xxxl. 4); breaks the bones of its victims (Isa, 
Xxxvili. 13), and carries them to its lair (Gen. xlix. 
9). It not only was the terror of flocks (Mic. v. 8), 
but also attacked men (I Kings xiii. 24, xx. 36; II 
Kings xvii. 25). It was, however, fought by shep- 
herds with sling and staff (I Sam. xvii. 34; Amos 
iii. 12), and was sometimes killed by daring men 
(Judges xiv. 5; II Sam. xxiii. 20). From Ezek. 
xix. 4, 8 it may be inferred that the usual manner of 
catching the animal alive was by pit and net. The 
custom of Oriental Kings of throwing those fallen 
into disgrace to lions which were kept in dens, is 
illustrated in Dan. vi. 8 et seg. 

The lion is the emblem of strength, courage, and 
majesty (Prov. xxii. 18, xxvi. 18, xxx. 30). Judahis 
compared toa lion (Gen. xlix. 9); so also are Gad and 
Dan (Deut. xxxiii, 20, 23), Saul and Jonathan (II 
Sam. i. 23), Israel (Num. xxiii. 24, xxiv. 9), and even 
God Himself (Isa. xxxi. 4; Hos. v. 14, xi. 10). Sim- 
iles are derived from its terrific visage (I Chron. 
xli. 9), and especially from its terror-inspiring roar. 
The latter is ascribed to enemies (Isa. v. 29; Zeph. 
iti. 8; Ps. xxii. 18; Prov. xxviii. 15); to false proph- 
ets (Ezek. xxii. 25); to the wrath of a king (Prov. 
xix. 12, xx. 2); to God (Jer. xxv. 30; Joel iv. 16; 
Amos i. 2, iii. 8). In the Psalter the lion is often 
the symbo! of the cruel and oppressive, the mighty 
and rich (¢.g., Ps. x. 9, xxxiv. 11, xxxv. 17). 

As an element of decorative art the figure of the 
lion entered into the design of the brazen LavER 
in the Temple of Solomon and of Solomon’s throne 
(I Kings vii. 29, x. 20, and parallels). 


E. G. H. I, M. C.- 
—In Rabbinical Literature: The Talmua 
states six names of the lion, namely: “aryeb,” 


“kefir,” “labi’,” “layish,” “shahal,” and “shahaf” 
(Sanh. 95a; Ab. R. N. xxxix., end). The most ss 
eral terms, however, are “are,” “arya’” (B. 

4a), and “aryeh”; for the lioness, “lebiyah ” R, 
K. 16b), “ uryata ” (Shab. 67a), and “Kalba” 
(Yalk. fi. 721); and for the young lion, “gurya” 


95 | THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


(Sanh. 64a). In Hul. 59b an animal called “tigris” 
ig defined as “ the lion of Be-‘llai ” Omdoy 35'S). By 
«Be-‘Ilai” is probably meant a mountain height or 
mountain forest, perhaps specially the Lebanon 
(comp. “bala,” 2, 80a, and see Goat); and if by 
«tigris” the tiger is meant, it would appear that 
the Talmudical writers did not know this animal 
from personal observation, and it was therefore en- 
dowed by them with fabulous proportions and qual- 
ities. Thus itis said in the same passages that the 
distance between the lobes of its lungs was nine 
cubits, and that its roar at a distance of 400 parasangs 
prought down the walls of Rome. Kohut (“ Ueber 
die Jiidische Angelologie und Diémonologie,” etc., 
p. 108; comp. also zdem, “ Aruch Completum,” iv. 
15) surmises that “tigris” is the Persian “thrigat,” 
4.¢., the mythical three-legged animal (comp. also 
Schorr in “ He-Haluz,” vii. 32). 

The lion is often enumerated among the danger- 
ous animals (B. K. 15b and parallels). It is espe- 
cially dangerous in rutting-time (Sanh, 106a). It 
begins to devour its prey alive (Pes. 49b), carrying 
part of it to the lair for the lioness and the whelps 
(B. K. 16b; Sanh. 90b). Sometimes, however, the 
lion will stay among flocks without injuring them 
(Hul, 58a); it attacks man only when driven by 
hunger (Yeb. 121b), and never two men when they 
are together (Shab. 151b). Though the lion can be 
tamed (Sanh. 15b; comp. the expression “ari tar- 
put,” B. K. 16b), it is, on account of its dangerous- 
ness, kept in a cage (Shab. 106b), and when so con- 
fined is fed with the flesh of wild asses (Men. 1038b). 
It is forbidden to sell lions to the pagans because 
the latter use them in their circuses (‘ Ab. Zarah 16a). 
In passing a lion’s den (“ gob”) one should recite a 
benediction of thanksgiving in memory of the mira- 
cle which happened to Daniel when he was thrown 
into such a den (Ber. 57b). The term of gestation 
of the lion is three years (Bek. 8a). Its tormentor 
is the “mafgia‘,” or little Ethiopian gnat (Shab. 
Vtb). For the medicinal use of the milk of the lion- 
ess see Yalk. 721. 

The Talmud makes about the same figurative 
use of the lion as does the Old Testament. The lion 
is the king of animals (Hag. 18b) and the symbol of 
true mental greatness; and in this regard it is con- 
trasted with the fox (Shab. 111b; Ab. iv. 15; Git. 
83b); it is the type of strength and awe (Pes. 112a; 
Shebu. 22b; B. K. 85a), The sound of God’s voice 
is likened to the roaring of the lion (Ber. 8a, b). 
The name of the lion is applied to God, Israel, and 
the Temple (comp. Isa. xxix. 1: “ariel”; Pesik. R. 
28 [ed. Friedmann, p. 188] and parallels). The 
lion also symbolizes the mighty spirit of tempta- 
tion and seduction to idolatry (Sanh. 64a; comp. 
I Peter v. 8). The Temple of Ezekiel is compared 
to the lion in its structure, both being broad in front 
and narrow behind (Mid. iv. 7). The lion is also the 
fifth sign (“Leo”) of the zodiac, corresponding to 
the fifth month, Ab (Pesik. R. 7.c.; Yalk., Ex. 418). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Tristram, Wat. Hist. p. 115; Lewysobn, Z. T. 
Pp. 68 and 70. 
S. §, I. M. C. 
LION, HENRI JULIUS: Dutch journalist; 
born March 23, 1806, at Elberfeld; died Oct. 19, 1869. 
Tn 1824 he entered the Prussian army, and in 18890 


Linetzki 
Lipkin 


that of Holland, In 1884 he went to India, and was 
honorably discharged as an officer at his own re- 
quest in 1841. After this he devoted himself to in- 
dustrial enterprises, having acquired a great practi- 
cal knowledge of Indian affairs. He was the Nes- 
tor of Indian journalism, being the founder of the 

“Bataviaasch Handelsblad.” To his great perse- 

verance must be ascribed the appointment of a com- 

mittee to consider the establishment of a railway in 

Java. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Van der Aa, Biographisch Woordenboek, 
XX, 

s. E. Su. 
LION, ISAAC JACOB: Dutch journalist; 
born at Amersfort Dec. 17, 1821; died at The Hague 

Aug. 27, 1878. Settling in Amsterdam, he occupied 

himself with literary work, and became in 1840 edi- 

tor of the “ Handelsblad.” In 1849 he applied him- 
self to stenography, and in the following year was 
appointed shorthand writer to the Second Chamber 

(Tweede Kamer der Staten Generaal). Jointly with 

the lawyer D. Leon he established in 1850 the 

weekly “De Gemeente Stem.” He was also corre- 

spondent for several weeklies and dailics. In 1856 

he became editor of the “Indier,” and in 1860 pro- 

prietor of the “’sGravenhaagsche Nieuwsbode,” 
which paper he combined with the “Indier” and 
published as the “Dagblad van ’sGravenhage en 

Zuid-Holland.” This paper is still (1904) in exist- 

ence, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Van der Aa, Biographisch Woordenboek, 
xxi. (gives list of works covering 3 pages); Dagblad van 
*sGravenhage, Aug. 28, 1878. 

8, EB. Su. 

LIPINER, SIEGFRIED: Austrian poet; born 
at Yaroslav, Galicia, Oct. 24, 1856; educated at the 
gymnasia in Tarnow and Vienna and at the univer- 
sities of Leipsic and Strasburg. In 1881 he was ap- 
pointed librarian to the Austrian Reichsrath, which 
post he still occupies (1904). In 1894 the title of 

“ Regierungsrath” was conferred upon him. Lipi- 

ner has written: “Der Entfesselte Prometheus” 

(1876); “ Renatus” (1878); “Das Buch der Freude” 

(1880); “ Totenfeier ” (1887), all published at Leip- 

sic. In 1883 he translated the “ Pan Thaddeus” of 

Mickiewitz, and in 1886 wrote the libretto for Gold- 

mark’s “ Merlin.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. 
s. F. T. H. 
LIPKIN: Russo-Jewish family which derives 

its origin from Dob Bar Lipkin, rabbi of Plungian 

in the first half of the eighteenth century (see Eze- 

kiel Katzenellenbogen, “ Keneset Ezekiel,” No. 7). 

The pedigree of the most important members of the 

family will be found on the following page. 


Israel Lipkin (known as Rabbi Israel Sa- 
lanter, after his place of residence, Salaty): Rus- 
sian rabbi; born at Zhagory at the beginning of 
the nineteenth century; died at Kénigsberg, Prus- 
sia, Feb. 2, 1888. He received his first training from 
his father, Zeeb Wolf, who was rabbi at Zhagory. 
After his marriage Lipkin settled at Salaty, where 
he continued his studies under Rabbi Hirsch Broda 
and Rabbi Joseph Zundel (died in Jerusalem 1866). 
Zundel exerted a deep influence on the development 
of Lipkin’s character: and the latter showed his ap- 


Lipkin 
Lipmann-Mulhausen 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


96 


. —— 


preciation of his teacher by referring to him in the 
preface to his periodical “Tebunah” as the light 
which he followed all his days. 

In 1842 Lipkin was called to Wilna as head of the 
yeshibalh Tomeke Torah. During his incumbency 
he established a new yeshibah at Zarechye, a suburb 
of Wilna, where he lectured for about three years. 

Lipkin’s great service lay in his insistence on the 
practical application of the moral teachings of Ju- 
daism and in his emphasis of the necessity of manual 
labor on the part of the Jews. He established socie- 
ties for the study of religious ethics, with but little 
regard for worldly affairs; and at his suggestion the 
works on religious ethics of Moses Hayyim Luz- 
zatto, Mendel Lefin, and Solomon ibn Gabirol were 
reprinted at Wilna. 

When, in 1848, the Russian government established 
the rabbinical school at Wilna, Lipkin declined an 
invitation to become instructor in Talmud and rab- 
binical law. He settled in Kovno and established a 
yeshibah, connected with the bet ha-midrash of 
Hirsch Naviazsky, of which he retained charge un- 


leaders urging them to keep lists of recruits so ag to 
leave po pretext for the contention that the Jewg 
shirked such service. He was considered one of the 
most eminent Orthodox rabbis of the nineteenth 
century because of his broad Talmudic scholarship, 
his deep piety, and his personal influence for good. 
and he was probably the only rabbi of his time that 
exerted a wide influence on his fellow rabbis and on 
the Jewish communities of Russia. His discipleg 
collected and published some of his sayings, com. 
mentaries, and sermons in “ Eben Yisrael” (Warsaw, 
1858) and in “ ‘Ez Peri” (Wilna, 1880). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY ; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 697, Warsaw, 1886; 


H. M. Steinschneider, Ir Wilna, p. 128; Feldberg, in Kedosh 
Yisrael, Wilna, 1884. 
J. G. L. 


H. R. 

Lipmann Lipkin: Russian mathematician ; born 
at Salaty, government of Kovno, 1846; died at 
St. Petersburg Feb. 9 (21), 1876; son of Israel Sa- 
lanter. lLipkin’s early training consisted in the 
study of the Bible, the Talmud, and other religious 
books. At an early age he began to show a deci- 


Sarauel, rabbi at Plungian 


Zeeb Wolf 


daughter = 


daughter = 
Elijah, 


David of 
Rossiena 


daughter = 
Samuel Hasid 


daughter = ? 
J acob Neu- 
stadter Jacob, rabbi 
at Bausk 
Elijah Kalischer (1862) 
(Ragoler ; 
d. 1850) 


David Rabinowitz, 
rabbi at Glusk 


Jacob of Propoisk 
(d. 1895) 


of Rossiena rabbiat Ritawe 


Isaac Israel = Ida Birkhahn, 
Friedrichstadt 


1847) 


Nathan Nata, 
rabbi at 


Michael, Druya (d. 


rabbi at Polotsk 


Joshua, rabbi at 
Kletzk and Neshwizh 


1887) 





rabbi at Telsbi 


Reuben Goldberg 
(dad. Riga) 


Asne = Itzig 
Birkhahn, 
Riga 


Israel (Salan- 
ter) Lipkin 
(ad. 1883) 


Lipmann Lipkin 
(d. St. Peters- 
burg) 


Mordecai Zebi, 
rabbi at Dubrovna 
(d. Grodno 1899) 


PEDIGREE OF THE LIPKIN FAMILY. 


til 1857, when failing health compelled him to re- 
move to Germany for medical treatment. He re- 
mained in the house of the philanthropists, the 
Hirsch brothers of Halberstadt, until his health im- 
proved, and then (in 1861) began the publication 
of the Hebrew monthly “Tebunah,” devoted to 
rabbinical law and religious ethics. On account. 
of his failing health this periodical was dis- 
continued at the end of a year, and Lipkin again 
lived for a time the life of a wanderer, visiting 
yeshibot and offering advice to teachers and students 
wherever his assistance was sought. Toward the 
end of his life Lipkin was called to Paris to organ- 
ize a community among the Russian immigrants, 
and he remained there for two years. 

Lipkin was a singular combination of the ultra- 
Orthodox Jew and the man of the world, particu- 
larly in regard to the duties of citizenship. He 
preached love for the fatherland and respect for the 
laws of the country. When the ukase making mil- 
itary service universally obligatory appeared, Lip- 
kin wrote an appeal to the rabbis and community 


| 


J 


ded inclination for scientific subjects, particularly 
mathematics. Not knowing any European lan- 
guage, he had to derive his information from He- 
brew books alone. Notwithstanding the incomplete 
nature of such sources, and without other aid, Lip- 
kin not only succeeded in mastering the elementary 
sciences, but also acquired a knowledge of the 
higher mathematics. He also began the study of 
modern languages, especially German and French. 
Subsequently he went to Kénigsberg, where through 
the influence of Professor Rischelo he was admitted 
to the lectures. Somewhat later Lipkin entered the 
Berlin Gewerbe-Academie, and then Jena Univer- 
sity, where he received the degree of Ph.D., his 
dissertation being “ Ueber die Réumlichen Strophoi- 
den.” From Jena Lipkin went to St. Petersburg, 
and because of his great ability was permitted to 
take the examination for master of mathematics in 
spite of the fact that he possessed only the degree 
of “candidate,” had not studied in any Russia 
schoo], and was not even thoroughly conversant 
with the Russian language. In 1878 he passed his 


Q7 | THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


ee es ae : 

examination brilliantly. His dissertation was al- 
most completed when he was attacked by smallpox, 
of which he died. : 

Lipkin’s name first became known in the mathe- 
matical world through his mechanical device for the 
change of linear into circular motion, this mecha- 
nism Laving been invented by him while he was still 
q pupil at the technical high school. He described 
pis invention in the journal of the Russian Acad- 
emy (“Mélanges Mathcmatiques de l’Académie In- 
périale & St. Petersbourg,” 1870), under the title 
«Ueber eine Gelenkgeradeftihrung von L. Lipkin.” 
The Russian mathematician Chebyshev had tried to 
show that an exact solution was impossible; and his 
yiews were accepted until Lipkin’s discovery proved 
the contrary. This invention has been described in 
numerous text-books, such as Collignon’s “Traité 
de Mécanique, Cinématique ” (Paris, 1873), where it 
js called “ Lipkin’s Parallelogram.” 

A model of Lipkin’s invention was exhibited at 
the exposition at Vienna in 1878, and was later se- 
cured from the inventor by the Museum of the In- 
stitute of Engineers of Ways of Communication, 
St. Petersburg. 

Lipkin never lost his deep interest in purely Jewish 
affairs, as is shown by his contributions to “ Ha- 
Zefirah.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Yevreiskaya Biblioteka, v. 191 (translated 
into German in Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1876, p. 13); Ha-Zefirah, 


1816 
H. R. J. G. L. 


LIPMAN, CLARA: American actress; born 
in Chicago. She made her début as an ingénue 
with Modjeska in 1888, and subsequently played 
similar parts in A. M. Palmer’s company. She cre- 
ated the principal réle in “ Incog ” (1891), but before 
this had interpreted leading parts in classic drama 
in various English and German companies. In 1898 
she created the part of Julie Bon Bon in “The Girl 
from Paris.” With her husband, Louis Mann, she 
starred for five years, appearing in “ All on Account 
of Eliza,” “The Red Kloof,” “The Telephone Girl,” 
“The Girl in the Barracks,” “Master and Pupil,” 
etc. During the season of 1902-3 she withdrew 
from the stage on account of an accident to one of 
her arms. Clara Lipman is the author of a play 
entitled “ Pepi” (1898). 

A, F. H. V. 


LIPMAN, SAMUEL PHILIPPUS: Dutch 
jurist; born in London April 27, 1802; died at Hil- 
versum July 7, 1871. He was educated at Glueck- 
stadt, Hamburg, and Amsterdam; studied law at 
Leyden (1819-22), and in 1828 established himself as 
a lawyer at Amsterdam, where he soon became fa- 
mous as a pleader. In May, 1852, he was converted 
to Roman Catholicism. He then removed to The 
Hague, and devoted himself after 1862 entirely to 
Teligious study. 

Lipman published, besides many pamphlets (a com- 
plete list of which is given in “ Levensberichten ”): 
“Geschiedenis van de Staatkunde der Voornaamste 
Mogendheden van Europa Sedert den Val van Na- 
poleon,” 2 vols., Zutphen, 1834; “Het Nieuwe Tes- 
tament Vertaald,” ’s Hertogenbosch, 1859; “Consti- 
tutioneel Archief van Alle Koninklijke Aanspra- 


VuL.—7 


Lipkin - 
Lipmann-Mulhausen 





—— 


ken en Parlementaire Adressen,” 4 vols., 1847-68 

(2d ed., The Hague, 1864). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Tijd, July is, iil: De Waehter, Aug. 
1, 1871; Levensberiehten ran de TY BE soor Let- 
terkunde, 1872; Van der Aa. Biographiseh Woordenboek, 
XXi1. 

8. : E. St. 
LIPMANN-MULHAUSEN, YOM-TOB 

BEN SOLOMON: Austrian controversialist, Tal- 

mudist, and cabalist of the fourteenth and fifteenth 

centuries. According to Bishop Bodecker of Bran- 
denburg, who wrotca refutation of Lipmann’s “ Niz-~ 
zahon,” Lipmann lived at Cracow. But Naphtali 

Hirsch Treves, in the introduction to his “Siddur,” 

calis him Lipmann-Miilhausen of Prague, adding 

that he lived in the part of the town called “ Wys- 
chigrod.” Manuscript No. 223 in the Halberstam 
collection contains a document issued at Prague in 

1413 and signed by Lipmann-Mitlhausen, as dayyan. 

It is seen from his “ Nizzahon” that, besides his rab- 

binical studies, Lipmann occupied him- 

His At-_ self with the study of the Bible, that 
tainments. he was acquainted with Karaite liter- 
ature, that he read the New Testa- 

ment, and that he knew Latin. His authority in 
rabbinical matters is shown by his circular to the 
rabbis warning them ayainst the use of any shofar 
not made of a ram’s horn (comp. Luzzatto in “ Ke- 
rem Hemed,” vii. 56). There are also responsa ad- 
dressed to him by Jacob b. Moses M6lln (Neubauer, 

“Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 907, 5), and Israel Is- 

serlein mentions him (“Terumat ha-Deshen,” No. 

24) as one of five scholars who met at Erfurt. In 

1399 (Aug. 16) Lipmann and many other Jews were 

thrown into prison at the instigation of a converted 

Jew named Peter, who accused them of insulting 

Christianity in their works. Lipmann was ordered 

to justify himself, but while he brilliantly refuted 

Peter’s accusations, as a result of the charges sev- 

enty-seven Jews were martyred on Aug. 22, 1400, 

and three more, by fire, on Sept. 11 in the same 

year. Of the accused Lipmann alone escaped death. 
Lipmann was the author of: “Sefer ha-Nizzahon,” 

a refutation of Christianity and Karaism and a 
demonstration of the superiority of rabbinical Juda- 
ism; “Zikron Sefer ha-Nizzahon,” 4 


His refutation of Christianitv, an abstract 
Works. in verse of the preceding work (pp. 


107-117 in the “Tela Ignea Satane” 
of Wagenseil, who supplied a Latin translation and 
added a long refutation, Freiburg, 1681; Geiger, 
in Bresslauer’s “Deutscher Volkskalender,” iii. 48, 
declares Lipmann’s authorship of this poem doubt- 
ful); a commentary to the “Shir ha-Yihud” (Frei- 
burg, 1560). In Samson b, Eleazar’s “Baruk she- 
Amar” (Shklov, 1804) there is a cabalistic treatise 
on the Hebrew alphabet, entitled “Sefer Alfa Beta,” 
the author of which is given as "Sw Ss. Sachs 
and Steinschneider concluded that the author was 
Lipmann-Miilhausen. This work discusses: (1) the 
form of the letters, (2) the reason for their form, (8) 
the mystery of their composition, order, and numer- 
ical value, and (4) the cabalistic explanation of their 
form. In this work the author frequently mentions 
a cabalistic work entitled “Sefer ha-Eshkol” and 
a commentary to the “Sefer Yezirah.” Menahem 
Ziyyoni’s “Zefune Ziyyoni” is ascribed, in a pam- 


Lipmann-Mulhausen 
Lippmann, Gabriel 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 98 


Pees ee ee ee | ge ee pe ee a a eee eee ee eras 


phlet quoted by Reuben Hoshke (Yalk., Reubeni, 
section “Naso”), to a certain R. Tabyomi, whom 
Steinschneider (“ Cat. Bodl.” col. 1411) identifies with 
Lipmann-Milhausen. Lipmann promises, in his 
“ Nizzahon ” (§ 197), a commentary to Pirke Abot, 
but such a work is not extant. Finally, it may be 
added that Manuscript 820in Oppenheimer’s collec- 
tion was supposed to be a Biblical commentary by 
the author of the “Sefer ha-Nizzahon,” but Dukes 
(“Orient, Lit.” xi. 299) declares that it is nothing 
else than the “ Nizzahon ” itself. 

Lipmann’s reputation is dependent, mainly, upon 
his “ Nizzahon.” That a rabbi in the fifteenth cen- 
tury should occupy himself with Latin and the 
New Testament was certainly a rare thing. Lip- 
mann was compelled to justify himself (§ 8) by re- 
ferring to the saying of R. Eliezer, “Know what 

thou shalt answer to the heretic ” (Abot 
Contents of ii. 14). The whole work consists of 
the ‘‘Niz- 354 paragraphs, the number of days 
gahon.” in the lunar year, each paragraph, 
with the exception of the last eight, 
beginning with a passage of the Bible, upon which 
the author founds his argument. Thus his argu- 
ments rest upon 346 passages taken from all the 
books of the Old Testament. The last eight para- 
graphs contain his dispute with the convert Peter. 
In the introduction Lipmann says that he divided 
the work into seven parts to represent the seven days 
of the week. The part for the first day contains the 
arguments against Christians; that for the second 
day those against the Karaite interpretation of the 
Bible; those for the remaining five days contain 
severally interpretations of obscure Biblical passages 
that are likely to mislead students; the reasons for 
the commandments ; arguments against atheists ; 
arguments against the Karaites and their rejection 
of the Talmud; and an account of the sixteen things 
which comprehend the whole of Judaism and which, 
after being indicated in the Pentateuch, are repeated 
in the Prophets and Hagiographa. 

Very characteristic is Lipmann’s refutation of the 
assumed miraculous birth of Jesus, as well as his 
demonstration of the falsity of the conclusions of 
the Christians who claim that the birth of Jesus was 
foretold by the Prophets. He constantly quotes 
Maimonides, Ibn Ezra, Nahmanides, Saadia, Rashi, 
Shemariah of Negropont, and other ancient schol- 
ars. Lipmann must have written his “Sefer ha- 
Nizzahon” before 1410, for he expressed a hope 
that the Messiah would arrive in that year (§ 385). 
It was first published by Hackspan (Altdorf, 1644), 
who with great difficulty obtained the manuscript 
from therabbi of Schneittach. Wagenseil published, 

at the end of his “Sota” (Altdorf- 


Transla- Nuremberg, 1674), corrections of 
tions and MHackspan’s edition under the title of 
Refuta- “Correctiones Lipmanniane.” Later, 

tions. the “Nizzahon” was reprinted, with 


the addition of Kimhi’s “ Wikkuah,” 
in Amsterdam (1709 and 1711) and Konigsberg (1847). 
Sebald Snelle published the Hebrew text with a Latin 
translation and refutation of the paragraph (§ 8) de- 
nying the miraculous birth of Jesus (Altdorf, 1648); 
and at various dates he published Latin translations 
of the paragraphs directed against Christianity. A 


~ guiden. 


Latin translation of the whole work, with the ex. 
ception of the passages taken from the Pentateuch, 
was made by John Heinrich Blendinger (Altdorg 
1645). Aswill be readily understood, the work gave 
rise to many polemics and called forth replies from 
Christians. The first was Stephen Bodecker, Bishop 
of Brandenburg, a younger contemporary of Lip. 
mann, who wrote a refutation of the “ Nizzahon” 
(comp. Wolf, “ Bibl. Hebr.” i. 736). The followin 
other refutations are published: Wilhelm Schickard, 
“Triumphator Vapulanssive Refutatio,” ete. (Tibin. 
gen, 1629); Stephen Gerlow, “Disputatio Contra 
Lipmanni Nizzachon” (Kénigsberg, 1647); Christian 
Schotan, “Anti-Lipmanniana” (Franeker, 1659), 
giving also the Hebrew text of the “ Nizzahon.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 443; First, Bibl, 


Jud. ii. 403; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., viii. 71-72; Sachs, in Ke. 


rem Hemed, viii, 206 et seq.; Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. cols, 
1410-1414; idem, Jewish Literature, pp. 118, 129, 145: Wot, 
Bibl. Hebr. i., iii., No. 1864; Zunz, Z. G. pp. 124, 129, 194, 380, 


D. M. Sen, 


LIPOVETZ: Town in the government of Kiev, 
Russia. In 1897 it had a total population of 6,068, 
of which 4,500 were Jews. There were 670 Jewish 
artisans and 71 Jewish day-laborers; of the latter 25 
engaged in field-work during the harvest season. 
The economic condition of the Jews there has been 
unfavorably affected by the abolition of annual and 
weekly fairs, and in 1900 the poverty of the popu- 
lation became so great that a mob of several hun- 
dred collected at the house of the local police official 
and demanded bread and the reestablishment of the 
fairs. The Jewish artisans are engaged extensively 
in the manufacture of a new kind of footwear, one 
variety of which, worn by the peasantry, is known 
as “postaly,” and another, worn by the more pros- 
perous, as “skorokhody.” The 25 hadarim afforded 
instruction to 475 children, and 59 Jewish pupils at- 
tended the city school. The Talmud Torah, found- 
ed in 1898, had 97 pupils. In 1768 Lipovetz suffered 
with other Ukrainean towns from the attacks of the 
Haidamacks. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Voskhod (monthly), 1890, ii. 94; Voskhod 
(weekly), 1900, Nos. 12, 17. 
S. al; 


H. R. 

LIPPE (Lippe-Detmold): Small sovereign 
principality in northwest Germany, with a Jewish 
population of 750; total population (1895) 123,516. 
The earliest traces of Jewish settlement in Lippe 
date back to the beginning of the fourteenth cen- 
tury. The Jews in the principality of Lippe seem 
to have enjoyed more privileges and greater security 
than in other German states. Thus the town coun- 
cil of Lemgo in a document dated 1419 refers to a 
Jew named Moses as “our fellow citizen.” The 
contribution of the Jewry to the city treasury 
amounted in 1507 to one hundred florins ($40), a con- 
siderable sum in those days. Besides, it had to 
pay a Jew-tax, which in 1511 was fixed at eighteen 
In the year 1500 the “Edelherrn” Bern- 
hard VII. and Simon V. (father and son) permitted 
Antzell the Jew, with his wife and servants, to re- 
side in Detmold. 

A Jewish community was not formed in Detmold 
until the second half of the seventeenth century. 
Religious differences seem to have led to a split im 


99 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lipmann-Mulhausen 
Lippmann, Gabriel 


rr O's z<''rorvwvr'''—- 


the community, for in 1723 the Jews of Detmold 
asked permission to build a second synagogue. 
These synagogues, however, were merely rented 
rooms. In 1742 the community evidently reunited, 
for it acquired a house and a barn, and con- 
structed out of the latter a synagogue, which is still 
wn use. In 1810, during the regency of the princess 
Pauline, the Jews in Lippe received family names 
and were regularly registered. At this time there 
were 175 Jewish families in Lippe; twenty-seven 
of these families were resident in Detmold, under 
Rabbi Abraham Lob Fiirnbach, succeeded by his 
son Dr. Enoch Farnbach (Fahrenbach), who offici- 
ated until his death (Oct. 5, 1872). The civic rights 
of the Jews, as well as their systems of school and 
synagogue, were regulated. afresh by the laws of 
1858 and 1879. From 1872 (Oct.) to 1879 (March) 
the rabbinate was provisionally filled by the teacher 
Leseritz of Detmold and, afterward, by Rabbi Klein 
of Lemgo. 

After this period, consequent upon the steady de- 
crease in the size of the community, the rabbinical 
position was left vacant, The supervision of relig- 
ious instruction in the twelve congregations of the 
principality, comprising about 900 members, some 
250 of whom belonged to Detmold, was entrusted to 
the teacher and preacher Abraham Plaut of Detmold. 
Detmold is the birthplace of Leopold Zunz and 
of Dr. Abraham Treuenfels, while Dr. Hermann 
VOGELSTEIN, at present (1904) rabbi in Stettin, is 
a native of Lage in the principality of Lippe. 

As a benefactor to the Jews in Lippe, and, partic- 
ularly, of the Detmold community, may be men- 
tioned the court commissioner Solomon Joel Her- 
ford (d. Sept. 21, 1816). He was the founder of the 
Joel Herfordsche Schule, the Joel Herfordsche Mil- 
den Stiftungen, and the Jiidische Militér-Unterstiit- 
zun gskasse. 

D. A. Pt. 


LIPPE, CHAIM DAVID: Austrian publisher 
and bibliographer; born Dec. 22, 1828, at Stanisla- 
wow, Galicia; died Aug. 26, 1900, at Vienna. For 
some time he was cantor and instructor in relig- 
ion at Eperies, Hungary, but he left that town for 
Vienna, where he conducted a Jewish publishing- 
house, which issued several popular works. He 
himself edited a bibliographical lexicon of modern 
Jewish literature (“ Ch. D. Lippe’s Bibliographisches 
Lexicon der Gesammten Jidischen Literatur der 
Gegenwart und Adress-Anzeiger,” Vienna, 1881; 
2d ed. 1900). 

8. E. J. 


LIPPMANN, EDOUARD: French engineer; 
born at Verdun Feb. 22, 1883. Educated at his na- 
tive town, the lycée at Metz, and the Ecole Centrale 
des Arts et Manufactures at Paris, he graduated as 
engineer in 1856. Joining the firm of Degousé & 
Laurent, architects, he resided in the French capital 
and took an active part in the defense of Paris as 
Captain of the volunteer engineer corps during the 
Franco-Pussian war. In 1878 he established him- 
self in Paris, founding the house of Edouard Lipp- 
mann & Company. He became especially inter- 
ested in the boring of deep wells (one bored by his 
firm at the Place Herbert at Paris was 718 meters 


deep), especially petroleum-wells, and in the build- 
ing of bridges, canals, and roads in various parts of 
the world. 

Lippmann has published several essays in the pro- 
fessional papers, especially in the “Genie Civil,” 
and is the author of “ Petit Traité de Sondage.” He 
has received several honorable mentions at the inter- 


national ex positions; e.g., at Amsterdam in 18838, and 


at Paris in 1867, 1878, 1889, and 1900. 

Lippmann is an officer of the Legion of Honor. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Curinier, Dict. Nat. ii. 127. 

S. F. T. H. 


LIPPMANN, EDUARD: Austrian chemist; 
born at Prague Sept. 28, 1842; educated at the 
gymnasium of Vienna and the universities of Leip- 
sic and Heidelberg (Ph.D. 1864). He took a post- 
graduate course at Paris, and in 1868 became privat- 
docent at the University of Vienna. During 1872 
he took charge of the classes of Professor Linnemann 
at the technical high school at Brinn; in 1875 he 
was appointed assistant professor of chemistry at 
Vienna University and chief of the third chemical 
institute; andin 1877 he was appointed professor of 
analytical chemistry at the Vienna Handelsaka- 
demie, which position he resigned in 1881. He is at 
present (1904) lecturer of chemistry at the Vienna 
technical high school. 

Lippmann has contributed many essays to the 
reports of the Vienna Imperial Academy of Sciences 
and to the professional journals of Europe. 
se aa Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, ii., Vienna, 

ee 


S. F. T. H. 


LIPPMANN, GABRIEL: French physicist; 
born at Hollerich, Luxemburg, in 1845. After being 
educated at the Ecole Normale and in Germany, he 
went to Paris, taking the degree of D.Sc. in 1875. 
During his stay in Germany he had given special 
attention to electricity, and subsequently invented 
the capillary electrometer, an electrocapillary mo- 
tor, etc. In 1891 he discovered the process of color- 
photography, which discovery he amplified in 1892. 
He prepared giass slides, which were covered with 
a very finely granulated bromid-of-silver solution, 
and which, when dried, were placed in a concave 
frame filled with quicksilver, giving a mirror-like 
surface to the solution. When the photograph is 
taken the light-rays form a wave of light in the so- 
tution in conjunction with the rays from the quicksil- 
ver-mirror, giving light “maxima” and dark “ min- 
ima.” These when reproduced give, by reflected 
light, a true picture in the original colors. How- 
ever, the very long exposure necessary (about ten 
minutes) makes the process unsatisfactory. This 
discovery won him recognition. In 1883 he succeeded 
Briot as professor of physical mathematics at the 
Sorbonne, and in 1885 he became professor of ex per- 
imental physics at the same institution. In 1886 he 
was elected member of the Académie des Sciences, 
succeeding Dessain. Lippmann has contributed 
many essays to the professional journals, and is the 
author of “Cours de Thermodynamique,” Paris, 
1886, and “Cours d’Acoustique et d’Optique,” 28. 
1888. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nouveau Larousse Itlustreé. 


Ss. F. T. H. 


Lippmann 
Lipschutz 





LIPPMANN, GABRIEL HIRSCH: German 
rabbi; born at Memmelsdorf, Bavaria; died at [Kis- 
singen May 26, 1864. He went in his early youth 
to Bur gpreppach, where he studied the Talmud un- 
der Rabbi Abraham Moses Maylinder. Ie contin- 
ued his studies at the yeshibah at Fiirth aud, under 
the guidance of Chief Rabbi Hillel Sondheimer, at 
Aschaffenburg; he received his Ph.D. degree from 
the University of Wiirzburg. He then accepted a 
call as preacher to Aurich, and later became dis- 
trict rabbi in Kissingen. 

Lippmann was the editor of: “Sefer Zahot. Ueber 
die Feinheiten der Hebriischen Sprache. Gramma- 
tische Forschungen von Abraham ibn Esra. aoe 
Ausgabe mit Hebraischem Commentar,” Firth, 1827 
Sefer ha-Shem. Ueber das Tetragrammaton,” rb, 
1834; “Safah Berurah. Ueber Hebr. Grammatik | 
. . . Abr. ibn Esra, mit Hebr. Commentar,” 7. 
1839; “Sefat Yeter. Beleuchtung Dunkler Bibcl- 
stellen von Abraham ibn Esra, mit Hebr. 
Commentar und Vorwort von I. M. Jost,” Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, 1848. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bamberger, Gesch. 2 sees in Aschaffen- 
burg, p. 78; Ben Chananja, 1864, N 


M. L. B. 


LIPPMANN, MAURICE: French engineer; 
born at Ville d’Avray (Seine-et-Oise) Sept. 27, 1847. 
He received his diploma as bachelor of law in 1869. 
During the siege of Paris in 1870 he served in the 
artillery. In 1874 Lippmann was appointed director 
of the state manufactory of weapons (“manufac- 
ture nationale d’armes ”) at St. Etienne, which posi- 
tion he held for ten years. Resigning in 1884, he 
retired to private life, living at Bracquemont, near 
Dieppe. Tn 1889 he was appointed a member of the 
commission of military art for the French Exposi- 
tion of 1890. 

Lippmann has published : “jT’Art dans l Armure 
et dans les Armes.” He is an officer of the Legion 
of Honor. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Curinier, Dict. Nat. ii. 144. 


s, F. T. H. 


LIPPOLD: German physician and financier; 
born at Prague; lived at Berlin in the sixteenth cen- 
tury. He was in great favor with the elector Joa- 
chim II., acting as his financial adviser and as ad- 
ministrator of Jewish affairs. After the sudden 
death of Joachim (1571), his son and successor, Jo- 
hann Georg, accused Lippold of having poisoned 
the elector. Being put to the torture of the rack, 
he confessed this crime; and, although he afterward 
retracted, he was executed Jan, 28, 1578, the Jews 
of Berlin and of the province of Brandenburg being 
ex pelled from the country in the same year. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ludwig Geiger, Gesch. der Juden in Berlin, 
p. vi., Berlin, 1871; Gratz, Gesch. 2d ed., ix. 474. 


D. S. MAN. 


LIPSCHITZ, RUDOLF: German mathemati- 
cian; born May 14, 1882, at Konigsberg, East Prus- 
sia; died at Bonn Oct. 8, 1903. Educated at his na- 
tive town (Ph.D. 1853), he established himself in 
1857 as privat-docent in the University of Bonn, 
becoming professor of mathematics in the Univer- 
sity of Breslan i in 1862, and in that of Bonn in 1864, 

Lipschitz was the author of: “ Wissenschaft und 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


100 


Staat,” Bonn, 1874; “Die Bedeutung sai: tame oie, dead © piesaddautane Gor These. Theore. 
tischen Mechanik, ” Berlin, 1876; “Lehrbuch der 
Analysis,” Bonn, 1877-80; “ Untersuchungen tiber 
die Summen von Quadraten,” 2). 1886. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brockhaus Konversations-Le enue 

8, Pee be 3 

LIPSCHUTZ (LUPSCHUTZ, epnanees 
LIBSCHITZ): Name of a family of Polish and 
German rabbis; derived from “ Liebeschitz,” name 
of a town in Bohemia. 

Aryeh Léb Lipschiitz: Austrian rabbi and 
author; lived in the second half of the eight. 
eenth and in the first half of the ninetcenth cen- 
tury; died in Brigul, Galicia, before 1849. He wag 
the pupil of Aryeh Loéb (author of “ Kezot ha-Ho- 
shen”) and son-in-law of Moses Teitelbaum, rabbi 
at Ujheiy. He held the office of rabbi in several 
cities in Galicia, and at last went to Brigul, where he 
remained till his death. He was the author of “ Ari 
She-be-Haburah” and “Geburot Ari,” novelle on 
Ketubot, mentioned in “‘Emek Berakah,” by Joseph 
Saul Nathanson. Besides these works he wrote 
“Aryeh debe-‘Ilai,” containing novelle on Kiddu- 
shin, Yoma, Menahot, Kinnim, and Niddah, as well 
as responsa on the four parts of the Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
This work was published in Lemberg. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, 1. 82, 
ii. 16; Eliezer Cohen, Kin’ at Soferim, p. 104b (note 1788), 
; and p. 110a, 
N. T. L. 


8. 8. 

Baruch Isaac Lipschitz : Son of Israel Lip- 
schtiitz; born in Dessau; died in Berlin Dec. 18, 1877. 
He was at tirst rabbi at Landsberg, and then district 
rabbi in Mecklenburg-Schwerin, but was obliged 
to resign both positions in consequence of dis- 
agreements with his congregations. Thereafter he 
lived in private at Hamburg. He wrote “ Torath 
Sch’muel, ein Erbauungsbuch fiir Israeliten ” (Ham- 
burg, 1867). 

s. M. K. 

Baruch Mordecai b. Jacob Lipschitz (Lib- 
schitz): Russian rabbiand author; born about 1810; 
died at Siedice, Poland, March 80, 1885, At an 
early age he became known for his wide Talmudical 
learning; and later he ranked with the leading rab- 
binical authorities of his time. Rabbis from all 
parts applied to him for decisions in regard to diffi- 

cult questions, and his responsa were characterized 
by clearness and sound sense, He officiated as rabbi 
for forty-three years in various cities, including 
Semiatitz, Wolkowisk, Novogrudek, and_ finally 
Siedice, where he remained till his death. 

Lipschitz was the author of: “Berit Ya‘akob” 
(Warsaw, 1876-77), responsa on the four parts of the 
Shulhan ‘Aruk; “Bet Mordekai,” sermons; “ Min- 
| hat Bikkurim,” novell on the Shulhan ‘Arak; and 
novell# on the Jerusalem Talmud. The last three 
works remain in manuscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Zefirah, 1885, No. 14; Ha-Asif, 1885, D- 
758; H. N. Steinschneider, Ir Wiina, p. 164. 
N. T. L. 


Ss, 8, 

Eliezer ben Solomon Lipschiitz: German 
rabbi; died at Neuwied about 1748, At the age of 
thirty he became rabbi at Ostrow, where he gathered 
many pupils about him. Several years later he ac- 
cepted a rabbinate elsewhere, but differences with 





(‘aye daaddoa Aanaodurtayuos & Wo0AT) 


tit 


rey COTOdd rT 40 NOMIAOIXT 


lLOCTSY 
Ye Liltty sy, ay 


nee. 


meget 


dtag hia, i visi Cilla 
oy, 


a 











13998 By) uv Qua/s}33/38 me ni Aout 03/99 0162) 
=Jmq Uaqpjol any dot anf sve dyg) Bunavay qua mB nf uay1agH uauumoal uajyo/urirayics uafignarqan]0 snv/ignad uadofusw urgltaGey u2q 2898 


Ud Quay pt Quo /uayaliie aGnngo/usua ayy arqias uIUG! Usd UDA O//GauUvAUIgNE t312Quy Qua sula| Goygany UaqaUsyG 


‘Yrrqisar usBotuyjoa/uasaye sadpnardvyy qua sa(pynog yoguun (pon/udpaacy, nf-SZSl/svuwl sc usq(urBuvbag mg, wagaphaggy wahiqngyjua 
WI Uva o)uagiHg uajvgi UIgGaitswtUG Qua UIUY|NYAG LanIIQIIT}OO LaUD|/ANG! UD aCppar/uoNNIac 99 Hun gpg) dunes 


AVOURS NOAM SIG Tuy 9304s) Vag HUNG) AEG [eo DULY VGABLIY 


Lrpschutz 
Lisbon 





his congregation soon compeiled him to resign. He 
wandered about until finally he went to Cracow, 
where he obtained a rabbinate through the influence 
of his wife’s uncle, Simon Jolles. There, too, he 
had many enemies, and on the death of Jolles he 
was obliged to leave Cracow. After some time he 
became rabbi at Neuwied, where he remained until 
his death. He wrote “Heshib R. Eli‘ezer we-Siah 
ha-Sadeh,” responsa, published together with a 
number of responsa by his son Israel Lipschiitz 
(Neuwied, 1749), and “ Dammesek Eli‘ezer,” novell 
(to Shuthan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah and Hoshen Mish- 
pat) and responsa, among the latter being some 
written by his brother Ephraim Lipschiitz (2b. 1749). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Preface to Heshib R. Eliezer we-Siah ha- 
Sadeh; Dembitzer, Kelilat Yoji, ii. 188, Cracow, 1893. 
8. M. K. 
Gedaliah ben Israel Lipschiitz: Rabbi at 
Obrzizk, near Posen; flourished in the eighteenth 
and nineteenth centuries (d. 1826). He was the au- 
thor of the following works: “Regel Yesharah ” 
(Dyhernfurth, 1776), explanations of Rashi and tosa- 
fot to the section Nezikin, notes on Abot de-Rabbi 
Natan and on the smal! tractates of the Talmud, with 
two supplements treating of weights, measures, and 
geometry in the Talmud, and explaining the calcula- 
tions found in Kilayim iii., v.; “Humre Matnita” 
(Berlin, 1784), divided into six parts (“kinnim ”), 
containing a commentary on the Talmud, explana- 
tions of all the foreign words found in the Talmud, 
a commentary on Asheri (Rosh), notes on Alfasi, a 
commentary on Targum Onkelos, and explanation of 
the difficult mishnayot; “ Keneset Yisrael” (Breslau, 
1818), notes on the Mishnah and on various Talmud- 
- ical subjects, extracted from several works left by 
Gedaliah in manuscript, and published by his son 
Israel Lipschitz. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1008; First, 
Bibl. Jud, ii. 275; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, s.v. 
8. Ss. I. Br. 
Gedaliah ben Solomon Lipschitz: Polish 
scholar; lived at Lublin in the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries. He was a relative and also 
a pupil of Meir of Lublin, whose responsa he 
edited, adding to them an index (Venice, 1618). 
He wrote a commentary to Albo’s “‘Ikkarim,” 
entitled “‘Ez Shatul” (2. 1618). This commen- 
tary may be considered a double one; in “Sho- 
rashim ” the commentator explains the text of Albo, 
while in the part called “‘Anafim” he gives an ex- 
position of Albo’s views, comparing them with the 
views of other philosophers. In the preface, Lip- 
schiitz says that he composed the commentary in his 
twenty-sixth year, but that for various reasons he 
could not publish it. Later, at the request of 
friends, he revised his work, which revision he com- 
pleted at Lublin, Feb. 12, 1617. He compiled an 
index to the Biblical and Midrashic passages in Al- 
bo’s text. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 218; First, Bibl. 
Jud. ii. 230; Nissenbaum, Le-Korat ha-Yehudim be-Lub- 


lin, p. 46 
S. 8. M. SEL. 


Hayyim ben Moses Lipschititz: Polish rabbi 
of the seventeenth century; born at Ostrog about 
1620. He wrote “ Derek Hayyim” (Sulzbach, 1702), 
a book containing prayers and ritual laws for per- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


109 
Ss: 
sons who are traveling, published by some of hig 
pupils. Although the book contains prayers which 
show that the author was a follower of Shabbethaj 
Zebi, it is interesting to know that it had the ap. 
probation of eight of the most renowned rabbis of 
the time. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wiener, Kehillat Mosheh, p. 297; Emden, Ty. 
rat ha-Kena’ot, p. 144, Lemberg, 1870; Steinschneider, Cg; 
Boal. col. 8380. ' 
D. B. Fr, 


Israel Lipschiitz: Son of Eliezer Lipschitz; 
rabbi at Cleve. There he became notorious in cop. 
nection With a “get” controversy which attracted 
the attention of a large number of contemporary 
Jewish scholars. The dispute arose over a divorce 
granted by him in August, 1766, which was de. 
clared invalid and which the rabbinate of Frankfort. 
on-the-Mam opposed with such persistence and ve- 
hemence that it became a “cause célébre.” Israel 
Lipschiitz was severely criticized and stoutly de- 
fended. Toward his own defense he published 
(Cleve, 1770) seventy-three similar decisions, under 
the title “Or Yisrael,” to counterbalance the “ Or ha- 
Yashar” published by Simon Kopenhagen in the 
previous year at Amsterdam. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Horovitz, Frankfurter Rabbiner, iii. 67 

et seq., Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1884, 

Israel Lipschiitz: Son of Gedaliah Lipschitz; 
born 1782; died Sept. 19, 1860. He was rabbi first 
at Dessau and then at Danzig. He led the life of an 
ascetic, frequently fasted three days in succession, 
and studied incessantly. He wrote “Tif’eret Yis- 
rael,” a commentary on the Mishnah, in which he 
applied to the orders a nomenclature of his own: 
Zera‘im he called “ Zera‘ Emunah” ; Tohorot, * Ta‘am 
wa-Da‘at” (Hanover, 1830); Nezikin, “Kos Ye- 
shu‘ot” (Danzig, 1845). His ethical will (“Zaw- 
wa’ah”; 1861) contains twenty-eight paragraphs, 
consisting chiefly of moral and ascetic precepts. He 
left in manuscript many notes (“ derashot ”) to Caro’s 
Shulhan ‘Aruk and to Maimonides’ Yad ha-Hazakah, 
a comprehensive treatise on the order Tohorot, and 
many responsa. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, i. 406, 

Warsaw, 1864; Steinschneider, Hebi. Bibl. iv. 27. 

Joshua Aaron Lipschiitz: Rabbi at Biitzow, 
Mecklenburg-Schwerin; born in Poland in 1768. 
He was a correspondent of Jacob Emden (“She’elat 
Ya‘abez,” pp. 50 ed seq.). 

8. M. K. 


Judah Lib b. Isaac Lipschiitz: Austrian 
rabbi and author of the seventeenth century; rab- 
bi at Ejidlitz, Bohemia. He wrote: “Hanhagot 
Adam,” a collection of rules from other works, 
on daily religious practises (Firth, 1691; Amster- 
dam, 1717; Zolkiev, 1770); “ Zaddik Tamim,” a re- 
daction of the former work with many additions 
(Fiirth, 1699; an abridgment of the book was seen 
in manuscript by Nepi, in Padua); “We-Zot l- 
Yehudah,” explanations added to Jacob Weil’s 
“Shehitot u-Bedikot,” on the rules of slaughtering 
cattle (Furth, 1699; Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1820). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. i. 225, 226: Zedner, Cat. 

Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 439; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefa 

rim, pp. 141, 506, 571. 

L. G. N. T. EL. 


1038 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lipschitz 
Lisbon 


ee ne ee gee a oe a eS | oe ee Te a 


Moses ben Noah Isaac Lipschiitz: Polish 
rabbi, and the author of the commentary “Lehem 
Mishneh,” on the orders Zera‘im, Mo‘ed, and Koda- 
shim (published, according to Azulai, in 1596). He 
wrote a commentary also to the treatise Abot (Lub- 
lin, 1612; reprinted at Cracow in 1687 and included 
in the edition of the Mishnah published at Amster- 
dam in 1726). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii. 71. 


= M. K. 


Noah b. Abraham Lipschiitz (called Noah 
Mindes): Polish rabbinical scholar; died in Wilna 
Dec. 22, 1797. He was a prominent member of 
the Jewish community of Wilna, and married a 
daughter of Elijah Pesseles. Lipschiitz’s daughter 
married Abraham, son of Elijah, gaon of Wilna. 
Lipschtitz was the author of two cabalistic works, 
“Parpera’ot le-Hokmah” (Shklov, 1785), on the 
Pentateuch, and “ Nifla’ot Hadashot” (Grodno, 1797), 
which latter includes cabalistic explanations by R. 
Samson Ostropoler. Both works were published 
anonymously. Noah died about three months after 
Elijah Gaon and was buried near him. 


Baro Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, pp. 170-171, Wil- 
na, 
P. Wi. 


H. R. 

Solomon ben Moses Lipschiitz: German can- 
tor; born at Firth about 1675; died at Metz after 
1708. He studied at Nikolsburg in the yeshibah 
of David Oppenheim, and for some time acted as 
cantor, shohet, and teacher at Wallerstein. He 
then went to Pfersee, and thence to Prague, where 
he became chief cantor in the Phinehas and Zi- 
geuner synagogues. In 1706 he retired to Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, but in the following year ac- 
cepted the position of cantor at Metz, where he 
died. Lipschitz was the author of “Te‘udat She- 
lomoh ” (Offenbach, 1708), a book of morals and laws 
- for cantors, published with the approbation of the 
rabbi and parnas of Metz. 

D. B. Fr. 


LIPSCHUTZ, SOLOMON: American chess- 
player; born at Ungvar, Hungary, July 4, 1863. 
At the age of seventeen he emigrated to New York, 
where he soon became known in chess circles. In 
1883 he was chosen as one of a team to represent 
New York in a match with the Philadelphia Chess 
Club, and won both of his games. In 1885 he won 
the championship of the New York Chess Club, and 
in the following year took part in the international 
tournament held in London, where he succeeded in 
defeating Zukertorf and Mackenzie, among others. 
At the Masters’ Tournament at New York in 1889 
Lipschutz gained the sixth place, he being the only 
American player to secure a prize. In 1890 he won 
the championship of the United States, and repeated 
his success in 1892. He secured for the Manhattan 
Chess Club the absolute possession of the “Staats- 
Zeitung” challenge cup by winning it three times in 
Succession (one tie against Steinitz). Twice pitted 
against Lasker, he has drawn his games on each oc- 
casion. Several of the games played by Lipschutz 
have been published in “Examples of Chess Master- 
Play ” (New Barnet, 1893). 


Lipschutz revised “The Chess-Player’s Manual,” 
and he edited “The Rice Gambit,” New York, 1901. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Chess Monthly, Dec., 1890. 
A. A. P. 


LISBON: Capital of Portugal. It had the 
largest Jewish community in the country and was 
the residence of the chief rabbi (“arraby mor”). It 
had several “Judarias” or Jewish streets, one of 
them in the part of the city called “de Pedreira,” 
between the cloisters do Carmo and da Trinidade ; 
another, Jaid out later, wasin the quarter da Con- 
ceicad. In 1457 a third Judaria was created, the de 
Alfama, near the Pedro gate. In the Rua Nova, 
passing through the most beautiful and the liveliest 
part of the city, resided the rich and prominent 
Jews, the large synagogue being in the same thor- 
oughfare. A small synagogue was erected by Jo- 
seph ibn Yahya about 1260, at his own expense. 

For a long period the Jews of Lisbon were left 
undisturbed. The first storm broke upon them dur- 
ing the war between Dom Ferdinand of Portugal 
and Henry II. of Castile. The Castilian army 
forced its way into Lisbon; several Jews were killed, 
and the Rua Nova was plundered and destroyed by 
the rapacious soldiery (1873). The grand master 
of the Knights of St. Bennett of Aviz, later King 
John I., successor of Dom Ferdinand, protected the 
Jews in the capital against pillage. As a sign of 
their gratitude, the Jews, in addition to their con- 
tribution to the gift of 10,000 livres made to the king 
by the city, presented to him 70 marks and made 
him 2 loan of 1,000 reis. 

The Jews of Lisbon, who in 1462 paid for “ser- 
vico real” alone 50,000 reis (about 3,500 francs), were 
engaged in various mercantile pursuits and trades. 
When Dom Duarte imposed restrictions upon free 
intercourse between Jews and Christians, represent- 
atives of the Jewish community at Lisbon applied 
to the king for the removal of the restrictions, and 
the king granted the request in a letter to the com- 
munity dated Dec. 5, 1486. The prosperity and 
consequent luxury of the Jews aroused the envy and 
hatred of the Christians, even to the point of vio- 


Jence. Toward the end of the year 1449 some young 
men maltreated several Jews at the 

Outbreaks fish-market, and the royal corregidor 
Against had them publicly whipped. This 
Lisbon aroused the anger of the people 
Jews. against the Jews, who were attacked, 


and a number of whom were killed, 
despite their brave resistance. Probably the fight 
would have ended in a terrible massacre but for the 
armed intervention of the Count de Monsanto. 
The attack was renewed, and the king was com- 
pelled to adopt severe measures against persons con- 
victed of aggressions against the Jews. The pro- 
found hatred against the latter was increased by 
the arrival of immigrants from Castile, who sought 
shelter at Lisbon. 

In 1482 the populace again assailed the Jews, 
plundered their stores, and destroyed their dwell- 
ings; it was at this time that Isaac Abravanel lost 
his entire possessions, including his valuable library. 
To increase their troubles, the pestilence broke out 
simultaneously with the immigration of their core- 


Lisbon 





ligionists from Spain. By order of the city council 
the refugees from Spain were required to leave the 
city at once; though, through the intervention of 
the king, John IL., the city council was compelled to 
grant to Samuel Nayas, procurator of the Castilian 
Jews, the right to stay there, and to the Castilian 
physician Samuel Judah the right to practise medi- 
cine (Rios, “ Hist.” iii. 888-349). In 1497, by order 
of King Emanuel, the Jews were driven out of 
Portugal; the Lisbon community ceased to exist, 
and the large synagogue was transformed into a 
church. 

The number of Jewish scholars of Lisbon is not 
especially large. Besides the members of the old 
familics Ibn Yahya and Negro, who 
were born in the Portuguese capital 
and lived and studied there, there were 
the chief rabbis Judah and Moses 
Navarro, Judah Cohen, and others, as well as the 
rabbis Joseph and Moses Hayun and a certain Don 
Abrahain, who was a physician and, in 1484, became 
also rabbiat Lisbon. Lisbon isthe birthplace of Isaac 
Abravanel and his sons, and of Jacob ibn Habib, 
and at Lisbon lived Joseph Vecinho (physician to 
King John I1.), Abraham Zacuto, and Abraham 
Zarzar. The learned Eliezer Toledano in 1485 estab- 
lished in this city a Hebrew printing-press, of which 
several books were the product. Among these was 
the Pentateuch with the commentary of Moses ben 
Nahman (1489). In Lisbon Samuel ben Yom-Tob 
wrote (1410) a Torah roll now preserved in Bern; 
Samuel de Medina, in 1469, a Pentateuch; and Elie- 
zer, son of Moses Gagos, in 1484, a ritual work for 
Isaac, son of Isaiah Cohen. 

After their expulsion from Lisbon no Jews resided 
there openly, but there wus a large number of “se- 
cret Jews,” or “Christads Novos” (New Chris- 
tians), who were compelled to attend the Church 
ceremonies, but in secret lived in accordance with 
Jewish precepts. The Portuguese people hated 
these New Christians, or Maranos, far more than 
the confessed Jews, though King Emanuel favored 
them in order to win them by kindness to the Chris- 

tian faith. But the king was power- 
New Chris- less to protect them in face of the in- 


Lisbon 
Scholars. 


tians at cendiary speeches of fanatical priests. 
Lisbon. On May 25, 1504, Whitsunday, a 


-number of New Christians happened 
to meet in the Rua Nova, and were chatting to- 
gether, when suddenly they were surrounded by a 
crowd of turbulent youths who insulted and reviled 
them. One of the New Christians finally drew his 
sword and injured some of the tormentors. A tumult 
ensued, which soon was checked by the appearance 
of the governor of the city with an armed guard. 
Forty of the rioters were arrested and condemned 
to be whipped and to be exiled for life to the island 
of St. Thomas, but through the intervention of the 
queen they were pardoned. 

This uprising was the forerunner of the terrible 
massacre of the secret Jews in Lisbon which oc- 
curred in April, 1506. During the celebration of 
the Jewish Passover on the night of April 17 in 
that year, a party of New Christians was suddenly 
attacked and seventeen of them were arrested, but 
were set at liberty after two days. The people, en- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





104 
ee ere eee een eee 
raged at thisact, talked of bribery, and were ready to 
burn all New Christians at the stake. Two dayg 
later, on April 19, a number of Christians and New 
Christians attended a service in the Church of the 
Dominicans, in order that they night beseech God to 
stop the terrible, devastating pestilence. Suddenly, 
in a side chapel called the “ Jesus Chapel,” a crucifix 
radiating an extraordinary brightness attracted the 
attention of the Christians, who saw therein a mira- 


cle. One of the secret Jews was incautious enough 
to express his lack of faith in the wonder. This 
was the spark that caused the conflagration. The 


people were excited to the highest pitch and com- 
mitted most fearful deeds of violence. The unbe. 
lieving New Christian was seized by the hair, 
dragged out of the church, and killed forthwith by 
the infuriated women, and his body was burned on 
a hastily erected pile on the Rocio Praca. Two Do- 
minican monks, Joaé Mocho, from Evora, and Ber- 
naldo, an Aragonese, marched through the streets 
carrying the crucifix, calling aloud “Heresia! He- 
resia!” and exhorting the people to extirpate all 
heretics. The mob was soon joined by German, 
Dutch, and French sailors, and a terrible massacre 
began. On the first day, over five hundred New 
Christians were killed and burned; next day the 
brutalities were renewed in even worse form. Ba- 
bies in the cradle were not spared; women seeking 
shelter in the church were dragged from the altar, 
outraged, and flung into the flames. The day’s 
work ended with the murder of the tax-farmer Joad 
Rodriguez Mascarenhas, the richest and most hated 
New Christian; he was dragged to the Rua Nova, 
killed by the populace, and burned amid great re- 
joicing. Over two thousand (according to other 
authorities, four thousand) secret Jews were killed 
during the course of forty-eight hours. 

The king, who was far from the capital at the 
time, was deeply incensed, and proceeded with se- 
verity against the criminals. The ringleaders were 
hanged, and many others were quartered or decapi- 
tated. The two Dominican monks who stirred up 
the people were expelled from their order and gar- 
roted, and their bodies were burned. Every resi- 
dent of the city of Lisbon (which thereafter was no 
longer allowed to call itself “ the most faithful”) who 
was found guilty of either robbery or murder was 
punished corporally and subjected to loss of prop- 
erty (Damiio de Goes, “Cron. de D. Manocl,” pp. 
141 et seg.; Garcia de Resende, “ Miscellanea,” x. 
6; Pina, “Chron. de D. Affonso,” v. 180; “Shebet 
Yehudah,” p. 93; Usque, “Consolacam,” p. 200; 
hence the statement in “‘Emek ha-Bakah,” p. 90; 
Herculano, “Inquisicaé em Portugal,” i. 142 et 
seqg.; De Mendoca, “Historia de Portugal,” vi. 959; 
Rios, “ Hist.” iii, 863 et seg.; Kayserling, “Gesch. 
der Juden in Portugal,” pp. 145 e¢ seg.; Gritz, 
“Gesch.” ix.). 

After the catastrophe a number of secret Jews left 
the country; the greater part of these fugitives re- 
turned to Lisbon, however, and for a time they were 
protected by the king, but werealways hated by the 
people. Thearrivalof David Reubeni at the capital 
of Portugal produced a feverish excitement among 
the secret Jews. They believed him to be their savior 
and honored him as the expected Messiah. A New 





PAGE FROM THE ‘*ABUDARHAM,” LISBON, 1489. 


(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Lisbon 
Lissa 


Christian of Lisbon, a young man of twenty-four, 
Diogo Pires, who held a government position, openly 
confessed the Jewish faith and, calling 
Visit of himself “Solomon Molko,” became 
Reubeni. an adherent of Reubeni. By means 
of large money payments, the rich 
New Christians in Lisbon were able to postpone, 
but not prevent, the introduction of the Inquisition. 
Lisbon was the seat of a congregation called 
“The Brotherhood of San Antonio,” which existed 
among the secret Jews; it met in the Rua de 
Moueda, ina house which contained a secret syna- 
gogue, where Diaconus Antonio Homem conducted 
the service. He suffered for his attachment to Ju- 
daism by death at the stake on May 5, 1624. Not 
a few of the secret Jews who were distinguished as 
poets, physicians, and scholars, and who in Italy and 
Holland openly avowed themselves to be Jews, 
called Lisbon their birthplace, or resided there at 
some time. In this city Duarte Pinhel, or Abraham 
Usque, wrote his Latin grammar (1548), and Ama- 
tus Lusitanus and Abraham Farrar practised medi- 
cire. Moses Gideon Abudiente, Manuel de Pina, 
and others were born at Lisbon (see AuTo DA FE; 
INQUISITION ; PORTUGAL). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, 
Leipsic, 1867; J. Mendes dos Remedios, Os Judeos em Por- 
tugal, i., Coimbra, 1895; Rios, Hist. ii. 274, 281; iii. 179, 337. 


G. M. K. 


——Modern: Besides the Maranos who continued 
to reside in Lisbon after the expulsion, the city has 
at all times contained a certain number of avowed 
Jews also, mainly from neighboring Africa. This 
is evidenced by the edict issued Feb. 7, 1537, by 
John [1., in which the Jews were ordered to wear 
badges so that they might be distinguished from 
Christians. A greater spirit of tolerance toward the 
Jews began to prevailin government circles with the 
accession of the Braganza dynasty (1640), which had 
been considerably assisted by Jewish financiers in its 
struggles against Philip IV. of Spain. But, owing 
to the fear of the Inquisition, which continued to 
persecute the Neo-Christians or Maranos, and to the 
fanaticism of the populace, only a few Jews ventured 
tosettle in Lisbon. It wasonly toward the middle of 
the eighteenth century that a Jewish community be- 
gan to be formed by the inflow of Jews from Gib- 
raltar, who, as British subjects, could practise their 
religion freely, though privately. The 
Eighteenth decrees of 1773 and 1774, which were 
Century. issued by King Joseph under the influ- 
ence of his minister, the Marquis de 
Pombal, and which deprived the Inquisition of all 
tyrannical and arbitrary powers, gave a new impulse 
to the settlement of Jews at Lisbon, and toward the 
close of the eighteenth century there were a con- 
siderable number of them in the Portuguese capital, 
and the need of a near-by burial-place began to be 
keenly felt. For this purpose a small piece of 
ground was leased, in 1801, in the English cemetery 
situated in the Rua da Estrella, and the first to be 
buried there was a certain Jose Amzalaga (d. Feb. 
26, 1804). The lease, which had been made privately 
without special legal sanction, was renewed, in 1833, 
at an annual rental of 1,000 reis. 
At the beginning of the nineteenth century there 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 108 


were in Lisbon several widely known Jewish firms 
which rendered great services to Portugal by gy), 
plying grain during a famine that occurred aboy 
1816. In recognition of these services the goverp. 
ment agreed to permit the foundation ofa synagogue 
although hitherto the laws of the country had hot 
permitted the practise of any form of religion othe, 
than the Roman Catholic. The synagogue, undey 
the name “Sha‘ar ha-Shamayim,” wag 
Synagogue founded in 1818 by R. Abraham pg. 
Founded bella; the Jews, however, had no legal 
18138. = status; they were only tolerated. Ag. 
cording to the information given jp 
1825 by the prelate Joaquim José Feiveira Gardo to 
the French historian Capefigue, there were in Lig. 
bon at that time about 500 Jews, the majority of 
whom were engaged in brokerage and in foreign 
trade, and they owned three private synagogues, 
Although by the law the Jews were considered ag 
foreigners, some of them took part in the politica} 
movements of the country. Levy Bensabath anq 
his son Marcos Bensabath distinguished themselves 
by their struggles against the absolute 


Distin- government of Dom Miguel I. (1828. 
guished 1834). Later Marcos Bensabath became 
Jews of an officer in a regiment of light infan-. 


Lisbon. try. In 1853 R. Abraham Dabellg 
died, and his synagogue was managed 
by a committee composed of Leaio Amzalak, Levy 
Bensabath, Abraham Cohen, Fortunato Naure, and 
Mair and Moisés Buzaglo. Several years later oc- 
curred the death of Salamaio Mor José, and the two 
congregations then existing were united (about 
1855). The union was of short duration, and a new 
synagogue was erected in 1860 in the Alley dos 
Apostolos; it is still the principal prayer-house in 
Lisbon. About that time Jacob Toledano of Tan- 
giers was called to the rabbinate of Lisbon and offi- 
ciated there until 1899. Animportant event for the 
Jews of Lisbon was the recognition of their religion 
by the government Oct. 80, 1868, when the commu- 
nity was authorized to use as a burial-place a plot 
of ground it had acquired for the purpose in 1869. 
On June 30, 1892; the government sanctioned the 
constitution of the charitable society Gemilut Ha- 
sadim. 

In 1890 a plan for the complete organization of 
the community of Lisbon was adopted, according 
to which all the Orthodox Jews, both Sephar- 
dim and Ashkenazim, were to form one congrega- 
tion. An interesting article (No. 31) of their 
constitution runs as follows: “Should the Portu- 
guese Jews disappear from this town and from the 
kingdom, the German Jews here at that time may 
take under their care and for their own use the syn- 
agogues, estates, portable objects, and other things 
of value then in the possession of the Portuguese 
Jews or accruing to them later; but the German 
Jews shall restore the whole to the Portuguesé 
congregation should it be reestablished.” Besides 
the Gemilut Hasadim Society, there exists at Lisbon 
a useful benevolent association known as the Some) 
Nophlim, founded in 1865; this institution, in 1900, 
established a kasher restaurant for the poor, and }8 
now (1904) contemplating the establishment of 42 
asylum for Jewish travelers. On May 25, 1902. was 


107 


laid the comer-stone of the new Sha‘are Tikwah 

synagogue, which has replaced the various syna- 
ogues formerly in use. In accordance with the 

jaw, the new building is situated in an enclosure 
and bears no outward sign of being a place of wor- 

ship. . 

The community of Lisbon now numbers about 400 
persons in a total population of 357,000; they are 
mostly natives of Gibraltar, Morocco, or the Azores, 
and the majority of them are ship-owners and mer- 
chants. Among those Jews who have become 
widely known in connection with science, letters, or 
the arts are the following: Alfred Benarus, pro- 
fessor of fine arts; Bensaude, professor at the In- 
dustrial Institute; Joseph Benoliel, professor at tlic 
Marques de Pombal Industrial School; Jacob Ben- 
gaude, professor of English at the Collége du Porto; 
Salancio Saragga, a distinguished Hebraist; Dr. 
Raul Bensaude, consulting physician to the King 
of Portugal, and officiating rabbi since the death of 
Jacob Toledano in 1899. The hazzan of the com- 
munity is Levy ben Simon of Jaffa. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in _Portuyal, 
pp. 338 et seq.; Lindo, History of the Jews in Spain and 
Portugal, pp. 374 et seq.; Bail, Les Juifs au Dix-Neuvieénie 
Siécle, p. 126, Paris, 1816; Revue Orientale, i. 274; Allg. 


Zeit. des Jud, 1841, p. 681; Cardozo de Bethencourt, in J. Q. 
R. xv. 251 et seq. 


D. I. Br. 


— Typography: Hebrew printing flourished in 
Lisbon for the three years from 1489 to 1492, the first 
work, the commentary of Nahmanides on the Pen- 
tateuch, being produced by Eliezer Toledano in July, 
1489. The next year he produced a “ Tur Orah Hay- 
yim” and two sections of the Bible. Eliezer Alan- 
tansi, Who had a printing-press also at Ixar, printed 
the “ Abudarham ” at Lisbon, and two other works 
were produced here—Joshua Levi's “ Halikot ‘Olam ” 
and an edition of the Proverbs; the printer of the last- 
named is not known. Toledano was one of the 
earliest to use borders. It has been suggested that 
the printer Ibn Yahya carried the Lisbon types to 
Constantinople and either printed from them there 
or used them as models for new types. J. 


LISBONNE, EUGENE: Lawyer, and a mem- 
ber of the French Senate; born at Nyons, near Avi- 
gnon, Aug. 2, 1818; died at Montpellier Feb. 6, 1891. 
He was a lawyer at Montpellier under the govern- 
ment of July, 1830, and became attorney of the re- 
public at Béziers. On Dec. 10, 1848, he was dis- 
missed, and at the coup d’état (Dec. 2, 1851) was 
deported. After the accession of Napoleon HI. he 
returned to Montpellier and took an active part in 
the struggles of the republican party against the 
empire. From the revolution of Sept. 4 to April 
23, 1871, he was prefect of the department of Hé- 
rault, where he energetically opposed the “ Govern- 
ment of Moral Order.” On Feb. 20, 1876, he was 
elected to represent the second district of Montpel- 
lier in the Chamber of Deputies, where he was one 
of the leaders of the Republican Union. After the 
crisis of May 16, 1877, he was reelected (Oct. 14). 
In 1887 he introduced the measures which established 
almost complete freedom of the press in France. 
The elections of Aug. 21, 1887, compelled Lisbonne 
to retire from public life; he soon reentered it, how- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
a ae 


Lisbon 
Lissa 


ever (Jan. 5, 1888), and as senator from Heérault in- 
troduced a measure in restriction of those of 1887. 
This was carried by the Senate, but was defeated in 
the Chamber of Deputies. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Encyclopédie, 


g, J. Ka. 


LISKER, ABRAHAM BEN HAYYIM: 
Russian rabbi of the seventeenth century; native 
of Brest-Litovsk. After studying in the yeshibot of 
Lublin and Cracow, Lisker was called to the rabbin- 
ate of Rossiena, in the government of Kovno, He 
was the author of “Be’ecr Abraham,” a commentary 
ou the six orders of the Mishnah and based upon 
preceding commentaries, to which he added his own 
novell under the title “Me Be’er.” Only that part 
of his commentary that deals with the first three 
orders has been published: Zera‘im (Frankfort- 
on-the-Oder, 1665) and Mo‘ed and Nashim (7d. 
1683). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 381; Michael, 
Or ha-Hayyim, No. 95. 
M. SEL. 


8. 8. 


LISSA (called formerly Polnisch Lissa): 
Town of Prussia. Originally a village, it was in- 
corporated in 1534; and soon afterward the first 
Jews settled there, with the authorization of Count 
Andreas Lescynski (1580-1606). Many of these Jew- 
ish settlers were probably of German origin, as the 
names “Auerbach” and “Oldenburg” frequently 
occur. The first privilege granted to them is dated 
March 10, 1626. In that year there already existed 
a synagogue at Lissa, also a cemetery, the plot for 
which had been presented by Count Lescynski. 
The earliest extant tombstone is dated 1662. At 
that date the community was fully organized and 
the schedule of taxation determined. Communal 
expenses were defrayed by taxes on slaughtering, 
dowries, the sale of houses, the ritual bath, and leg- 
acies, The Jews of Lissa not only engaged in com- 
merce, but also followed trades: there were tailors, 
furriers, shoemakers, goldsmiths, lacemakers, lock- 
siniths, tanners, barbers, embroiderers in gold, jew- 
elers, buttonmakers, dyers, and turners. Most of 
these trades were organized into gilds, each of which 
generally had its own rabbi. The strong competi- 
tion between the Jewish artisans and merchants and 
the Christians often led to sanguinary conflicts. 

The Jews of Lissa suffered much during the wars 
in which Poland engaged, and more especially from 
the Cossack persecutions under Bogdan CHMIEL- 
NICKI, On the partition of Poland Lissa was an- 
nexed to Prussia. 

In its most prosperous days Lissa contained be- 
tween 4,000 and 5,000 Jews. It became the seat of 
a famous yeshibah which attracted students even 
from distant parts of Germany (“Memoiren der 
Gliickel von Hameln,” ed. Kaufmann, pp. 281-234). 
The first rabbi of Lissa was Isaac Hilenburg (1648), 
whose successors were: Jacob Isaac ben Shalom (d. 
1675); Isaac ben Moses Gershon (d. 1695); Ephraim 
Kalisch; Mordecai ben Zebi Hirsch (d. 1758); 
Hirsch’s brother, Abraham b. Zebi Hirsch (died as 
rabbi of Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1768); Phoebus 
Heilman (rabbi of Bonn: died at Metz); Aryeh 
ben Samuel; Tebele Horachow (d. 1792); and Jacob 


Lissack 
Literature 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


108 





Lissa (died at Stry in 1882). After Jacob Lissa‘s 
death the rabbinate remained vacant until 1864, 
when the present incumbent, Dr. 5S. Bick, was 
elected. Among the many Talmudic scholars of 
Lissa was Akiba Eger, the younger (subsequently 
rabbi at Posen), who lived there from 1770 to 1791. 
The present (1904) population of Lissa is about 
14,000, including about 1,200 Jews. 

D. S. B. 

LISSACK, MORRIS: English author and 
communal worker; bornat Schwerin-on-the- Wartha, 
grand duchy of Posen, in 1814; died in London Jan. 
13, 1895. He emigrated to England in 1885, and in 
1839 settled asa “teacher of languages and dcaler 
in jewelry ” at Bedford, where he lived for nearly a 
half-century. In 1851 he published a book entitled 
“Jewish Perseverance, or The Jew at Home and 
Abroad,” an autobiography with pious meditations 
and moral reflections. Lissack became a trustee of 
the Harpur Charity, Bedford, and took advantage 
of his position to secure concessions in favor of Jew- 
ish pupils. He was also an active worker in the 
cause of Jewish emancipation. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Jan. 18, ie 

J : 


LISSAUER, ABRAHAM: German physician 
and anthropologist; born at Berent, West Prussia, 
Aug. 29, 1832; educated at the gymnasium of his 
native town and at the universities of Vienna and 
Berlin (M.D. 1856). He practised in Neidenburg till 
1863, when he removed to Danzig; but gave up his 
practise in 1892 upon his appointment as custos and 
librarian of the Anthropological Society of Berlin. 
LLissauer published several essays on medical and 
anthropological subjects, among which may be 
mentioned: “Zur Antipyretischen Behandlung des 
Typhus Abdominalis,” in Virchow’s “ Archiv,” Jiii. ; 
“Ueber den Alkoholgehalt des Bieres,” in “ Berliner 
‘Klinische Wochenschrift,” 1865; “Ueber das Ein- 
dringen von Canalgasen in die Wohnriume,” in 
“Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift fiir Oeffentliche Ge- 
sundheitspflege,” 1881; “ Untersuchungen iiber die 
Sagittale Krimmung des Schadels,” in “ Archiv fiir 
Anthropologie,” 1885, xv.; “Die Prahistorischen 
Denkmiiler der Provinz West-Preussen,” 1887; “ Al- 
tertiimer der Bronzezeit in der Provinz West-Preus- 
sen.” Lissauer died Oct. 1, 1908. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. Vienna, 1901. 


S. F, T. H. 


LISSAUVER, HEINRICH: German pliysi- 
cian; born at Neidenburg Sept. 12, 1861; died at 
Hallstadt, Upper Austria, Sept. 21, 1891; son of 
Abraham Lissauer. Hestudied medicine at the uni- 
versities of Heidelberg, Berlin, and Leipsic, receiv- 
ing his diploma in 1886. Settling asa physician in 
Breslau, he became assistant at the psychiatric hos- 
pital and clinic of the university, which position he 
continued to hold until his death. 

He wrote several essays in the medical journals, 
especially on pharmacology and on the anatomy 
and pathology of the nerves. Among these may be 
mentioned: “Beitrag zum Faserverlauf im Hinter- 
horn des Menschlichen Riickenmarks und zum Ver- 
halten Desselben bei Tabes Dorsalis,” in “ Archiv 
fiir Psychiatrie,” xvii.; “Ein Fall von Seelenblind- 


heit Nebst einem Beitrag zur Theorie Derselben,” 
wm, xxi.; “Sehhiigelveriinderungen bei Progressivey 
Paralyse,” in “Deutsche Medizinische Wochen. 
schrift,” 1890. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. Vienna, 1901. 


g, Fe T.-H, 


LISSER, ELEAZAR BEN SOLOMON 
(ZALMAN): Polish scholar; lived at Kleczewo in 
the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. He was the 
author of a twofold commentary on Jedaiah Beder. 
si’s “Behinat ‘Olain,” published with the text at 
Frank fort-on-the-Oder (1792). The first part, enti. 
tled “ Migdenot Eleazar.” deals with the interpreta. 
tion of the text; the second, entitled “ Ha-Mazkir,” 
contains the vocabulary. Eleazar wrote twofold 
commentaries also, under similar titles, on Benjamin 
Musafia’s “Zeker Rab” and on Abraham ibn Ezra’s 
“Hidah,” which he published with the text, the 
former at Altona (1807), and the latter, under the gen. 
eral title “ Homat Esh,” at Breslau (1799), with an ap- 
pendix containing literary essays by Eleazar and also 
enigmas. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 914; Zedner, 
Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 489; Fuenn, Keneset Yis- 
rael, p. 142. 

H. R. I. Br. 


LISSER, JOSHUA FALK: Prominent rabbi 
and Talmudist of the second half of the eighteenth 
century; a descendant of Joshua Falk Kohen of 
Lemberg and of R. Liwa (MaHRaL) of Prague, anda 
pupil of R. Moses Zarah Erpuitz of Prague, author 
of “Or la-Yesharim.” He was dayyan or judge at 
Lissa while R. David Tebele was chief rabbi there, 
and was, therefore, a member of the council which 
in 1782, under the presidency of David Tebele, con- 
demned and burned Naphtali Herz Wessely’s letter 
entitled “Dibre Shalom we-Emet.” Lisser wrote 
commentaries onthe minor tractates Abot de-Rabbi 
Natan, Semahot, and Derek Erez Rabbah we-Zuta, 
with textual emendations (“Binyan Yehoshua‘,” 
Dyhernfurth, 1788); the commentary on the Abot 
de-Rabbi Natan was reprinted in the Wilna (1897) 
edition of the Talmud. In the preface he apol- 
ogizes for his textual emendations by referring to 
Solomon Luria and Samuel Edels, who had likewise 
suggested variants in their commentaries. 

Ss. 8. J. Z. LL. 


LITERATURBLATT DES ORIENTS. Sce 
ORIENT, DER. 

LITERATURE, HEBREW: Under this des- 
ignation may be comprised all the works written by 
Jews in the Hebrew and the Aramaic tongue. 
Works written in Hebrew by non-Jews are too few 
to require consideration here. The term “Jewish 
literature ” should be used in a broader sense, as in- 
cluding works written by Jews upon Jewish sub- 
jects, irrespective of the language in which they may 
be expressed, while the term “ Judaica” should be 
applied to works written by Jews or non-Jews upon 
Jewish subjects, but in languages other than He- 
brew. Anexceptionis made in the case of Aramaic, 
not only because of its intimate philological connec: 
tion with Hebrew, but also because at an early date 
it became practically a second mother tongue for 
the Jews, and was used in the Bible, in many of the 
Talmudic discussions, in the praver-book, and in the 


109 
et eS a a ee 
Cabala. Works written by Jews but not upon Jew- 
jsh subjects and not in Hebrew are treated under the 
names of their respective authors. Seealso JuDmo- 
GERMAN; JUDH0O-GREEK ; JUD.EO-SPANISH, 

The most significant characteristic of Hebrew lit- 
erature is that the greater part of it is directly or indi- 
rectly the outgrowth of the Bible. There isa marked 
continuity in the development of the later from the 
earlier literary forms, all of them going back to the 
first source—the Bible. In other words, Hebrew 
literature is chiefly a religious literature, secular 
writings, produced mostly under the influence of 
foreign literatures, forming but a minor part of it. 
It seems, therefore, that, aside from dividing Hebrew 
literature into periods, as is usually done in histories, 
it will be best to give a sketch here under the cate- 
gories into which the Bible itself may be divided, 
showing what part of the literature may be traced 
back to the Bible and what must be traced to foreign 
influence. These categories are “ Law,” “ Prophecy 
and Wisdom Literature,” “Tistory,” and “ Psal- 
mody.” For more detailed information see subjects 
referred to throughout this article. : 

The Law as a literature has continued its develop- 
ment from the earliest times down to the present day, 

and has been of greater influence upon 
The Law. the life of the Jews than any other 
branch of literature. It owes its 
growth chiefly to the doctrine, long inculcated in the 
Jewish mind, that along with the written law Mo- 
ses received also an oral law, which was faithfully 
handed down by an unbroken chain of teachers and 
leaders to the men of the Great Synod and by them 
to succeeding generations. This gave rise to the 
Talmudic law, or HaALAKAH, which deals, like the 
Biblical law, not only with man’s civil and public 
life, but also with his private habits and thoughts, 
his conscienee, and his morality. Traces of the 
Halakah are discoverable even in the Later Proph- 
ets, but its period of full development lies between 
300 B.c. and 450 c.g. (see MisHnauw; TALMUD). In 
the latter half of the fifth century the Babylonian 
schools declined and the teachers of the Law no 
longer assumed authority. They confined their 
teachings to the comparison and explanation of the 
laws that came down to them from previous gen- 
erations, allowing themselves to introduce only 
methodological and mnemonic signs into the Tal- 
mud. This sums up literary activity in the line of 
the Law during the period following the close of the 
Talmud, See SanorarmM. 

The developinent of the Halakah in the subse- 
quent period received impetus from the fact that 
the Babylonian schools once more raised themselves 
to an important position, owing, perhaps, to Arabic 
dominion in that country. The Geonim, as the 
teachers of this period are called, did not produce 
independent halakah, but continued to promote the 
study of the Talmud. What the Bible was to the 
Tannaim and Amoraim that the Talmud became, in 
its turn, to the Geonim and later teachers. It lay 
before them as an object of exposition, investiga- 
tion, and discussion. The succeeding period was one 
of systematization, condensation, and elucidation: 
introductions, commentaries, compendiums, and 
dictionaries were the outcome of the study of the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lissack 
Literature 


a 





Talmud in those days. A new epoch commenced 
with the activity of Maimonides. His ~ Mishneh 
Torah” embraces the whole field-of Halakah, and be- 
came an object of much discussion and explanation. 
In the fourteenth century the halakic literature be- 
gan to deteriorate, and instead of being the guide of 
conduct it became a mere play of the intellect. In 
the sixteenth century, however, it again received a 
fresh impetus through the Shulhan ‘Aruk of Joseph 
Caro, which is still the standard work of traditional 
Judaism. Works on the Halakah are to be found 
in various forms, viz., in the form of commentaries 
(Perushim; Kuntresim), glosscs (Nimukim), 
additions (TosEFor), novella (Hipptusiim), collec- 
tions (Likkutim), compilations (Kobezim), com- 
pendiums (Kizzurim), decisions (Pesakim), and 
judgments (Dinim), as well as in independent 

codes and responsa. 
From the prophetic utterances to the preachings 
and homilies of later days was but a short step, and 
accordingly public preaching for gen- 


Prophecy eral instruction and moral edification 
and Wis- wasinstituted among the Jews in very 
dom Lit- carly times. This gave rise to the 
erature. Haggadah, which did for the spirit 


what the Halakah did for the practise 
of Judaism. Just as the Halakah embraces various 
kinds of law, so does the Haggadah embrace differ- 
ent forms of thought. In a restricted sense, how- 
ever, the Haggadah may be said to deal with ethics 
and metaphysics, and it is in this sense that it may 
be regarded as the natural issue of the earlier proph- 
ecies. In its ethical characteristics the Haggadah — 
was greatly influenced by the Wisdom literature of 
the Bible, but in its metaphysical tendencies it shows 
the influence of Hellenistic philosophy. To the 
ethical Haggadah belong a few apocryphal books, 
such as Bren Sira, the Apocalypse of Zerubbabel, 
and the Wisdom of Solomon, and the still more im- 
portant works Pirke Apsot, Abot de-Rabbi Natan, 
and Masseket Derek Erez. The metaphysical Hag- 
gadah did not develop into a separate literature until 
a much later date. See Mrprasy; TareumM. 

About the middle of the eighth century Arabic 
philosophy began to exercise a strong influence over 
the Jewish mind, and owing to the rationalistic 
character of that philosophy the Midrash ceased to 
grow, and its place was taken by theological and 
philosophical works of a systematic nature. The 
prophetic spirit is no longer so clearly discernible as 
before, owing to the Jarge intermixture of foreign 
thought, but, on the other hand, the prodigious de- 
velopment of Hebrew literature in the Middle Ages 
must be ascribed to this foreign influence, for its 
presence is felt in ahnost every branch of thought 
cultivated in those days. It is seen in the rise 
of Karaism, in the development of philology and 
exegesis, as well as in the cultivation of general sci- 
ences among the Jews. Latcr, again, when Jewish 
thought came in touch with Christian mysticism, 
the developed Cabala sprang into existence in place 
of the metaphysical Haggadah (see CaBaLa). Fi- 
nally, a great part of the large controversial liter- 
ature owes its existence to the conflict between Ju- 
daism and Mohammedanism. 

The theological literature previous to the twelfth 


Literature 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


110 





century is very fragmentary, and consists mostly of 
partial translations from the Arabic. Though the 
beginning of this literature dates from 


Philo- the days of Saadia Gaon, there is 
sophic no independent work of the kind in 


Hagegadah. Hebrew until a much later date, and 

even the earliest among the prominent 
men in this field, IBN GABIROL (11th cent.), Judan 
HA-LEVI and MAIMONIDES (12th cent.), wrofe mn 
Arabic, as had Saadia. The first important theo- 
logical writers in Hebrew were LEVI BEN GERSHON 
(14th cent.), Joseph Apo (15th cent.), and Elijah 
DELMEDIGO (15th cent.) 

The ethical literature was continued in the works 
of Gabirol and Bawysa BEN JOSEPH (11th cent.), 
Halevi (12th cent.), Isaac Aboab and ELEAZAR BEN 
JUDAH (18th cent.), Jedaiah BEDERsI (14th cent.), 
Leon of Modena (16th cent.), and Moses Hayyim 
Luzzarro (18th cent.), as well as in the large litera- 
ture of ethical WILLs and correspondence current 
throughout the Middle Ages, 

The metaphysical Haggadah assumed under the 
influence of Arabic philosophy the aspect of a sys- 
tematic philosophy, and through the influence of 
Christian mysticism it became a sort of theosophy 
which looked for the hidden and disregarded the 
evident meaning of the Law, and which, under the 
name of Cabala, began to develop an extensive lit- 
erature, first in Italy and in Provence, and later in 
the East. The founder of the Cabala was R. Isaac 
THE BLIND (12th cent.), who was followed, in the 
thirteenth century, by a host of eminent scholars. 
To the same century undoubtedly belongs the most 
famous cabalistic work, the Zohar, which is ascribed 
by all critics to Moses de Leon. The cabalistic lit- 
erature of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries is 
mostly anonymous and not original, But a new 
epoch opens with the teachings of R. Isaac Luria in 
the sixteenth century. He inaugurated the “ prac- 
tical” Cabala. No longer content to be restricted 
to the world of thought, this Cabala assumed to in- 
terfere in the world of action and to direct man’s 
conduct in life. Luria’s chief disciple was Hayyim 
VITAL, who committed the teachings of his master 
to writing. In the latter part of the seventeenth 
century this “ practical” Cabala was at the root of 
the Shabbethaian movement, and in the eighteenth 
century if was the cause of the extravagances of 
the Hasidim, the chief of whom were Israel Ba‘al 
Shem, Bir of Meseritz, and Salman of Liadi. 

With the rise of systematic theology there came 
into existence an extensive literature of controversy. 
For although traces of this literature may be found 

in the Talmud, it was not until Juda- 
Polemical ism came into conflict with its two 
Literature. sister religions and with Karaism 

that religious controversy became a 
significant part of Hebrew literature. The first 
great work of this kind is the “Cuzari” of Judah 
ha-Levi, which is directed mainly against Moham- 
medanism and Karaism. But the most fruitful 
period for religious controversy was the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries, and the leading authors of 
that period were Profiat DuRAN, Joseph Alo, Isaac 
ABRAVANEL, and Yom-Tob Lipmann HELLER. Jn 
the sixteenth century two strong polemics were 


written against Christianity: the “Hoda‘at Ba‘a} 
Din” of Joseph Nast and the “ Hizzuk Emunah” of 
Tsanc ben Abraham Troxr. In modern times Isaae 
Baer Levinsohn wrote many controversial works, 

Ancther product of the influence which <Arabie 
philosophy exerted over Judaism is Karaism. Jy 
took its origin in the latter part of the eighth cen. 
tury and came early under the influence of Moham. 
medan dogmatism, Its literature dates from the 
same period, and consists mainly of dogmatics, exe. 
gesis, and grammatical works; its most prominent 
authorsare: Judah HAbassr (12th cent.); Aaron the 
Elder (18th cent.); AARON BEN ELntan, author of 
““Ez ha-Hayyim” and “Gan ‘Eden” (14th cent.): 
Elijah Basnyazr (15th cent.); and Zerah Troxr 
(17th cent.). In the nineteenth century the most 
prominent Karaite scholar was Abraham ben Samuel 
Firxovicu. To the influence of Arabic literature 
must be ascribed also the scientific development of 
Hebrew grammar, which in turn greatly affected 
Biblical exegesis; both form important branches of 
Hebrew literature, but they can not be discussed here, 
“The meager achievements of the Jews in the 
province of history do not justify the conclusion 
that they are wanting in historic per- 
ception. The lack of Jewish writings 
on these subjects is traceable to the 
sufferings and persecutions that have marked their 
path. Before the chronicler had had time to record 
past afflictions, new sorrows and troubles broke upon 
them” (G. Karpeies, “Jewish Literature, and Other 
Essays,” p. 23). Though real historical works, in 
the modern sense of the term, are a very late product 
in Hebrew literature, the elements of history were 
never absent therefrom. The traditional nature of 
the Halakah created a demand for chronology and 
genealogy, while the Haggadah often enlarged upon 
the historic material of the Bible for purposes of its 
own. The most irnportant historic documents of 
the Talmudic period are the Seder ‘Olam Rabbah 
(1st cent.)and the Megillat Ta‘anit (2d cent. ; though 
in its present state, however, perhaps the product 
of the eighth century), From the geonic period 
there are a number of historic documents, e.g., Seder 
‘Olam Zuta, Seder Tannaim we-Amoraim, and the 
Letter of Sherira Gaon. From the tenth century 
there is the “ Yosippon,” and from the eleventh the 
“Sefer ha-Kabbalah” of ABRAHAM IBN Daub,  Be- 
sides these there are some notable books of travel to 
be mentioned, as the “Sefer Eldad ha-Dani” (11th 
cent.), the “Sibbub Rab Petahyah ” (12th cent.), and 
the “ Massa‘ot” of Benjamin of Tudela (12th cent.). 
The fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth centuries 
produced notable chroniclers like Solomon IBN 
Verca (15th cent.), Abraham Zacttro (16th cent.), 
JOSEPIL HA-KOHEN (16th cent.), David Gans (16th 
cent.), David ConForTE (17th cent.), and Jehiel 
HEILPRIN (17th cent.). Azariah dei Rossr (16th 
cent.) may be regarded as the first critical literary 
historian, and his work is authoritative even to-day. 
In the eighteenth century Hayyvim Joseph David 
Azulai is the most prominent literary historian, 
while in the nineteenth century the chief works on 
history and the history of literature are those of 
Rapoport, Schorr, I. H. Weiss, Frankel, and Isaac 
Halévy. See HisTORIOGRAPHY. 


History. 


111 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Literature 





The literature devoted to the liturgy of the Syna- 
gogue extends over a long period. Although in the 
Bible there is no mention made of any 

Psalmody. composition specially written for the 
purpose of prayer, it is not unlikely 

that many Psalms were recited In the Temple serv- 
ice and then adopted as prayers. And inasmuch as 
the oldest prayers are largely mosaics, made up of 
quotations from the Scriptures, the liturgy may 
justly be regarded as a development of the Psalm 
literature. It was due to this Biblical origin also 
that the language of the old prayers was in most 
cases Hebrew and thestyle fluentand forcible. The 
later development of the liturgy, however, was 
closely connected with the development of the Mid- 
rash. This is evident from the fact that the addi- 


tions Which grew up around the old nucleus of the. 


prayer were in the spirit of the Midrash, until 
finally the Midrash itself entered into the liturgy. 
Under the influence of the new forms of poetry in 
the Arabic period the daily prayers, and still more 
those of the festivals, assumed variousforms. Litur- 
gical poems adapted for special occasions were pro- 
duced and new technical names invented. By de- 
grees even dogmatic theology and halakah were 
versified and introduced into the liturgy. The im- 
portant occasions of life—birth, marriage, and death 
—were made the subject of synagogal poetry. The 
literature of the liturgy is so large that no attempt 
is made to record names. It will be sufficient to 
state that although a skeleton of much of the ritual 
was already fixed in Talmudic times additions to it 
were made as late as the sixteenth century. See 
Liturcy; Piyyvut. 

From religious to secular poetry is but a step, yet 
it was only in the middle of the tenth century that 
secular poetry began to flourish. In 
this as in other branches of Hterature, 
Arabic influence was strongly felt from 
the days of Hasdai (10th cent.) down 
to those of Immanuel of Rome (14th cent.). From 
the fifteenth to the seventeenth century inclusive, 
Hebrew poetry declined, and was not revivified until 
the beginning of the eighteenth century, when it 
came under the influence of modern literatures. The 
period from Moses Hayyim Luzzatto to that of 
Naphtali Wessely may be called the Italian period, 
and that from Wessely to Abraham Bir Lebensohn, 
the German period. Judah Lib Gordon, though he 
came under the influence of foreign literatures, made 
the foreign taste subservient to the Jewish spirit. 
He is also the first poet to deal with real life, while 
the recent school of poets, under the influence of the 
national movement, shows a tendency to return to 
romanticism. Owing also to the influence of mod- 
ern literatures, Hebrew has developed a literature 
of fiction and essays which deserves general recog- 
nition. 

Finally, a word must be said of the works written 
in Hebrew that deal with the arts and sciences. 
Originally, the sciences developed among the Jews 
asa branch of Halakah, receiving recognition only 
by virtue of some religious function which they 
Were made to serve, as, for example, astronomy in 
connection with the fixing of the calendar, upon 
Which depended the observance of the festivals. 


Secular 
Poetry. 


Later, however, when the Jews came in contact with 
Arabic civilization, the sciences came to be cultivated 
for their own sake, and since the middle of the tenth 
century many books have been written on the vari- 
ous arts and sciences, irrespective of their religious 
bearing. See also DicTIonNARIFs; DRAMA; FABLES; 
Fouk-Sones; Foux-TaLtes; GRAMMAR, HEBREW; 
HEbREW LanauaGE; Porrry, Dipactic; SEMrric 
LANGUAGES; TRANSLATIONS. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Abrahams, Chapters on Jewish Literature, 
Philadelphia, 1899; D. Cassel, Lehrbuch der Jiidischen 
Gesch. und Literatur, Leipsic, 1879 (2d ed., Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, 1896) ; idem, Afanual of Jewish History and Lit- 
erature, London, 1883; J. W. Etheridge, Jerusalem and Ti- 
berias: Sora and Cordova, an introduction to the study of 
Hebrew literature, London, 186; A. S. Freidus, 4 Scheme. 
of Classification for Jewish Literature in the New York 
Publie Library, New York, 1901 ; Gritz, Gesch. passim; G. 
Karpeles, Gesch. der Jtidischen Literatur, Berlin, 1886; 
idem, Hin Blick in die Jiidische Literatur, Prague, 1895; 
idem, Jewish Literature, and Other Hssays, Philadelphia, 
1895; 8S. Levy, Is There a Jewish Literature? in J. Q. R. xv. 
583-603 ; M. Steinschneider, Jiidische Literatur, in Erseh and 
Gruber, Enecyc. section ii., part 27; idem, Jewish Literature, 
London, 1857; H.L. Strack, Bibliographischer Abriss der 
Neuhebriiischen Literatur (C. Siegfried and H. L. Strack, 
Lehrbuch des Neuhebrdischen Sprache, pp. 98-182, New 
York, 1884); Weiss, Dor; Winter and Wiinsche, Die Jiidische 
Litteratur ; Zunz,G. 8S. What Is Jewish Literature 2 by W. 
Bacher, A. Wolf, and 8. Levy, in J. Q@. R. xvi. 300-329; He- 
brew Literature, Translations fromthe Talmud, Midrash, 
and Kabbala, with introduction by M. H. Harris, in Uni- 
versal Classie Library, Washington and London, 1901; He- 
brew Literature, Comprising Talmudic Treatises, Hebrew 
Melodies, and the Kabbalah Unveiled, with introduction 
by E. Wilson, in The World’s Great Classics, New York and 
London, 1901. See also JEw. ENCYC. iii. 199, s.v. BIBLIOGRA- 
PHY, 


J. I. D. 


LITERATURE, MODERN HEBREW: Mod- 
ern Hebrew literature (1748-1904), in distinction to 
that form of Neo-Hebraic literature known as rab- 
binical literature (see LITERATURE, HEBREW), which 
is distinctly religious in character, presents itself 
under a twofold aspect: (1) humanistic, relating to 
the emancipation of the language by a return to the 
classical mcdels of the Bible, leading to the subse- 
quent development of modern Hebrew; (2) human- 
itarian, dealing with the secularization of the lan- 
guage with a view to the religious and _ social 
emancipation of the Jews of the ghetto. These two 
tendencies are expressed by the word HASKALAH, 
a term denoting the movement which predominated 
in Hebrew literature from the second half of the 
eighteenth century down to the death of Smolenskin 
in 1885. 

Beginning with the seventeenth century, many at- 
tempts were made to emancipate Hebrew from the 
forms and ideas of the Middle Ages. 
Italy, with critics and poets like Aza- 
riah dei Rossi, Leon of Modena, Fran- 
cis, etc., who were inspired by the Ital- 
jan Renaissance, led in this period of 
transition in Hebrew literature. Butit was not until 
the appearance of Moses Hayyim Luzzatto that He- 
brew poetry shook off the medieval fetters which 
hindered its free development, His allegorical 
drama “La-Yesharim Tehillah” (1748), which may 
be regarded as the first product of modern Hebrew 
literature, is a poem that in its classic perfection of 
style is second only to the Bible. In the less ad- 
vanced countries especially it has contributed to 
the regeneration of Hebrew and has stimulated a 
host of imitators among writers removed from mod- 
ern literary centers, 


Period of 
Transition 
in Italy. 


Literature 


At Amsterdam, Luzzatto’s pupil, David Franco 
Mendes (1718-92), in his imitations of Racine (“ Ge- 
mul ‘Atalyah ”) and of Mctastasio (“ Yehudit ”), con- 
tinued his master’s work, without, however, equal- 
ing Luzzatto’s poetic inspiration and originality. 
In Germany, where, in consequence of the ideas 
promulgated by the encyclopedists, the Jews de- 
veloped more normally, and where, moreover, in 
the middle of the eighteenth century, Hebrew was 
still almost the only literary language accessible to 
the masses, another successor of Luzzatto, Naphtali 
Hartwig Wessely (1725-1805), inaugurated the has- 
kalah movement. His “Shire Tif’eret,” or “*Mo- 
siade,” which, though falling short of poetic inspira- 
tion, is written in a pure, oratorical style and is 
marked by a lofty, moral tone, made him, so to 
speak, poet laureate of the period. 

Under the stimulus of Mendelssohn, literary soci- 
eties were formed by the Maskilim in the large com- 

munities, which undertook to propa- 


First gate modern ideas among the Jews 
German and to familiarize them with modern 
Maskilim. secular life. Two schools or parties, 


which were more or less distinct, un- 
dertook this work: (1) the Brurists, a group of com- 
mentators and translators of the Bible who, under 
the leadership of Mendelssohn, desired to replace the 
Judzo-German dialect with pure German and to 
provide a more rational interpretation of the sacred 
text; (2) the Me’assefim, scholars connected with 
the first literary collection in Hebrew, “ Ha-Me’as- 
sef,” which was established in 1785 at Breslau by 
Isaac Eichel and B. Lindau, and which became the 
organ of the haskalah and a bond of union among 
the Hebraists. 

Wessely may be regarded as the spiritual leader 
of the Me’assefim. Although a devout believer him- 
self, he did not hesitate to meet the objections which 
the Orthodox rabbis of Austria and Germany op- 
posed to all educational and civic reformsadvocated 
by the government of Joseph Il. In his eight mes- 
sages (1784), “Dibre Shalom we-Emet,” he empha- 
sized the necessity, even from the standpoint of the 
Talmud, of these reforms as well as of secular stud- 
ies, especially the study of modern languages and 
classical Hebrew and of manual training. Despite 
the opposition of the Orthodox rabbis of Germany 
and Austria, the aid of the liberal Italian rabbis 
enabled him to arouse public opinion in favor of the 
haskalah, and thus to prepare the way for the Me’as- 
sefim. “Ha-Me’assef” was discontinued after an 
existence of seven years, the French Revolution and 
the downfall of the old order of things destroying 
the interest in the Hebrew language, which was the 
only relic left to the emancipated Maskilim. The 
literary and scientific value of “ Ha-Me’assef” is very 
doubtful. In their instinctive aversion to every- 
thing medieval and rabbinic, the Me’assefim went to 
the other extreme and adopted the affected style of 
the “melizah,” which was cultivated by their suc- 
cessors, and which often ended in mere artificial 
juggling with words. As regards their content 
most of the pieces in the collection have only a 
slight interest, being merely puerile imitations of 
German pseudo-romanticism. Having broken with 
the Messianic ideal of traditional Judaism, and being 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





112 


Se a hoe et 
unable to replace it with another ideal more in con- 
formity with modern ideas, the Me’assetim ended in 
advocating assimilation with the surrounding peo- 
ple. Butthe importance of this first secular period. 
ical in Hebrew was such that it imposed its name 
upon the entire literary movement of the second 
half of the eighteenth century, which is called “the 
period of the Me’assefim.” 

Among the Me’assefim, I. Eichel is noteworthy 
for his uncompromising attitude, unusual at that 
time, toward rabbinism, and Baruch Lindau is known 
for his works on the subject of natural science and 
written in Hebrew, The most influential, however, 
was the rabbi Solomon Pappenheim (1776-1814), 
an eminent philologist, whose sentimental elegy, 
“ Arba‘ Kosot,” was the book of the day and con- 
tributed much to the dissemination of the melizah. 
The most valuable contributors to “Ha-Me’assef” 
were, perhaps, the Me’assefim of Polish origin, espe- 
cially the grammarian and stylist 8. Dubno; §, 
Maimon, the commentator of Maimonides; the eec- 
centric but gifted [saac Satanow, author of the 
maxims “ Mishle Asaf”; and the grammarian Judah 
Ben-Zeeb (Bensew) of Cracow. 

In short, although the Me’assefim lacked original. 
ity, they accomplished the double task which they 

had set themselves. Hebrew, which 

Influence had been almost entirely neglected in 

of the the Slavic countries, was again stud- 
Me’assefim. ied, giving rise to a literature more or 
less worthy the name and producing 

the Maskilim, a class of secular scholars who were 
active during the following century in awakening the 
masses from their medieval slumbers and in dispu- 
ting, in the name of science and modern life, the au- 
thority of the Rabbis over the people (sce HASKALAH). 

The nineteenth century did not open auspiciously 
for Hebrew literature, especially in western Europe. | 
Hebrew disappeared more and more as a living lan- 
guage among the emancipated Jews, who had _ bro- 
ken with their national ideals and were ambitious of 
assimilating themselves entirely with their neigh- 
bors. It is true that the Napoleonic wars gave 
birth to a whole literature of odes and hymns, many 
of which were sung in the synagogue, the most 
poetical and characteristic being Elie Halfan Ha- 
lévy’s “ Ha-Shalom” (Paris, 1804); but the few rabbis 
who continued to use Hebrew did not influence 
the masses. In Italy, however, there was still an 
ardent band of Hebrew scholars, among them the 
poet E. Luzzatto. About this time the center of liter- 
ary activity was definitively transferred to the Slavic 
countries, where was witnessed a remarkable revival 
of Hebrew letters. The lead which Austria, fol- 
lewed by Italy, took in the movement at the begin- 
ning of the nineteenth century was later yielded to 
Russia; and that country has maintained its leader- 
ship down to the present time. 

At the close of the eighteenth century Polish Ju- 
daism, which fora long time had been politically 

isolated and had devoted itself en- 

Poland and tirely to pious observance and to the 
Austria. study of the Talmudic law, came in 
contact with modern ideas, and awa- 

kened from its centuries of slumber. Galicia be- 
came a center for the haskalah. The “Me’assef,” 


113 


which had been edited In a new series in Ger- 
many by Solomon ha-Kohen (Dessau, 1809-11), but 
without much success, was revived at Vienna and 
later in Galicia, and succeeded, first under the title 
of “Bikkure ha-‘Ittim ” (1820-81), and then under 
that of “Kerem Hemed ” (1888-42), in gathering to- 
gether many writers, the larger proportion of whom 
were Polish, In Poland, however, where the Jewish 
population lived apart, and could not even aspire 
to the dreams of equality and liberty of the German 
writers, the Maskilim were confronted with very 
complicated problems. On the one hand, political 
upheavals, modern instruction, and military serv- 
ice had paved the way for the mysticism of the 
Hasidim, which seized the masses despite the efforts 
of the liberal rabbis aided by writers like D. Samoscz 
and Tobias Feder. 

On the other hand, light literature and romantic 
imitattons could not satisfy scholars saturated with 
Talmudic study. In order to meet these needs He- 
brew literature descended from its heights to devote 
its attention to the necessities of daily life. Joseph 
Perl, a Meecenas and himself a scholar, encouraged 
this movement, and published the parody “ Megal- 
leh Temirin,” directed against the superstitions and 
the cult of the Hasidic zaddikim. Solomon Judah 
Rapoport (1790-1867), who began by translating 
Racine and Schiller, now turned to the critical study 
of the past. By his able reconstruction of the lives 
and the scientific work of the masters of the Middle 
Ages, by his careful critical method, and by his de- 
votion to the Law and the Jewish spirit, Rapoport 
created the SCIENCE OF JUDAISM. 

But this science, which was warmly received espe- 
cially by the cultivated minds of western Europe, 
could not satisfy the poor Polish scholars, living in 
entirely Jewish surroundings, and, ng longer con- 
tented with the reasons advanced by the medieval 
masters, anxiously questioning the wherefore of the 
present and future existence of Israel. Then a mas- 
ter mind arose, to give an answer at once ingenious 
aud adapted to the time. Nachman 
Krochmal, teaching gratuitously in 
his obscure corner of Poland, suc- 
ceeded in uniting the propositions of 
modern critics with the principles of 
Judaism by the bond of nationalism, 
as it were, thus creating a Jewish philosophy in 
conformity with modern thought. Starting with 
Hegel’saxiom of real and of absolute reason, Kroch- 
mal sets forth in his essays and in his ingenious Bib- 
lical and philosophic studies that the Jewish people 
is a concrete national organism, a separate unity, 
whose existence is justified, as the existence of all 
other nationalities is justified. But, at the same 
time, as the people of the Prophets, it has in addi- 
tion a spiritual reason for its existence, which tran- 
scends national boundaries, and will join the entire 
human race in one bond. 

Many poets, scholars, and popular writers besides 
Rapoport and Krochmal contributed to the dissemi- 
nation of Hebrew and to the emancipation of the 
Jews of Galicia. The satirical poet Isaac Erter 
(1792-1841), whose collection of essays, “Ha-Zofeh 
le-Bet Yisrael,” is one of the purest works of mod- 
ern Hebrew literature, attacked Hasidic supersti- 

VITI.—8 


Nachman 
Krochmal 
(1785- 
1840). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Literature 


tions and prejudices in a vigorous and classical style, 
marked by bright fancy and a cutting sarcasm 
which heaped ridicule upon the rabbi and satire 
upon the zaddik. 

Meir HWalevy Letteris acquired merited renown and 
was for a long time considered poet laureate of the 
period by reason of his numerous translations, both 
in prose and in poetry, including “ Faust ” and works 
by Racine and Byron, and also on account of origi- 
ual lyric poetry, his song “ Yonah Homiyyah” being 
a masterpiece. The popularizer of Galician history 

and geography, Samson Bloch, also 


The won a reputation, although his insipid 
Galician and prolix style does not warrant the 
School. — success achieved by his works. The 


Galician scholar Judah Mises is noted 
especially for his violent attacks on rabbinical tradi- 
tion and for his extreme radicalism, his work being 
continued by I. A. Schorr, the daring editor of “ He- 
Haluz.” 

Outside of Galicia, where the scholars issued their 
works, and where periodicals multiplied, some of 
which were published at Vienna, as “ Kokebe Yiz- 
hak ” (ed. Stern), “Ozar Nehmad ” (ed. Blumenfeld), 
Kerem Hemed, ete., groups of Maskilim or indi- 
vidual scholars were to be found toward the middle 
of the century in all the countries of Europe. In 
Germany the campaign for and against religious 
reform gave opportunity to certain scholars and 
rabbis to conduct their polemics in Hebrew. Zunz, 
Geiger, Z. Frankel, Jellinek, Carmoly, First, J. 
Schwarz, and others, also published part of their 
works in Hebrew. Moses Mendelssohn of Hamburg, 
a pupil of Wessely and author of the makamat 
“Pene Tebel” (Amsterdam, 1872), may be considered 
as the epigone of the Me’assefim. In the Nether- 
lands, especially at Amsterdam, there was also a 
circle of epigones, including the poet Samuel Mol- 
der (1789-1862). In Austria, Vienna was the de- 
pot for publishing Hebrew books and periodicals, 
and Prague became an active center for the haska- 
lah, The best known among the Maskilim here is 
J. L. Jeiteles (1773-1838), author of witty epigrams 
(“Bene ha-Ne‘urim”) and of works directed against 
the Hasidim and against superstition, and director of 
the “ Bikkure ha-‘Ittim.” There were scholars in 
Hungary also, the most gifted among them being 
Solomon Lewison of Moor (1789-1822), a remarkable 
stylist, whose classical “Melizat Yeshurun” places 

him above all the poets of the period. 

Decadence Gabriel Siidfeld, father of Max Nor- 
of the dau, and Simon BacHER, may also be 

School. mentioned. The reflex of this move- 

ment was felt even in Rumania (J. 
Barasch, etc.). Galicia, however, the center of the 
haskalah, finally succumbed to Hasidism, while the 
moderns gave up Hebrew, and ended by more or 
less openly advocating assimilation. A few circles 
of Maskilim barely succeeded in perpetuating the 
Hebrew tradition, but had no influence on the masses. 

The Italian school exercised a more pronounced 
influence. I. S. Reggio (1784-1854) endeavored in 
his “Ha-Torah weha-Filosofiah ” to reconcile mod- 
ern thought with the Jewish law, while in his nu- 
merous writings and publications he openly sided 
with the German religious reformers. Joseph Al- 


Literature 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


114 





manzi, Hayyim Saiomon, S. Lolli, and others 
wrote poems on the grandeur of the Law and the 
glory of Isracl; these contained, however, not a 
spark of originality. More interesting perhaps is the 
only poetess of the period, Rachel Morpurgo (1790- 
1860), whose poems evince religious piety anda 
mystic faith in Israel’s future. The most original 
and gifted Italian writer of the period is Samuel Da- 
vid Luzzatto (SHeDaL, 1800-65), whose influence 
reached beyond Italy and beyond his time. Gifted 
with an encyclopedic mind, Luzzatto did good work 
alike in poetry (“Kinnor Na‘im”), in philology 
(“Bet ha-Ozar” and “Betulat Bat Yehudah”), in 
philosophy, and in general literature. At the same 
time Luzzatto was the first modern writer to intro- 
duce religious romanticism into He- 
brew and to attack northern rational- 
ism in the name of religious and 
national feeling. “True Jewish sci- 
ence is founded on faith. . . . Faith is the only ar- 
biter of supreme morality which gives us true hap- 
piness. The happiness of the Jewish people, the 
people of morality, does not depend on its political 
emancipation, but on faith and on morality... .” 
These ideas led Luzzatto into polemics with his 
northern friends, but they also helped to familiarize 
the believers in Russia with modern literature. 
Luzzatto thus found the key to the heart of the 
masses; and it was due to him that the work of the 
Maskilim, which had failed of permanent results in 
the West, in the East led to the development of a 
national literature. But in Italy also Hebrew de- 
clined more and more, even among scholars; and by 
the second half of the century it was almost entirely 
forgotten in the civilized countries of Europe. 

The large bodies of Jews in the Polish districts 
annexed to Russia were entirely removed from all 
political and social life, and vegetated in a kind of 
profound resignation or in mystical piety. At the 
Europeanized city of Odessa, however, Galician 
Jews formed a circle of Maskilim, which, though 
active, was restricted in its influence. Here in the 
middle of the century were the scholars 8. Pinsker 
and 8. Stern, who were soon joined by the Karaite 
Firkovich and by the poet Jacob Eichenbaum. 
The acknowledged leader of these Maskilim of 
southern Russia was Isaac Biir Levinsohn, the apos- 
tle of humanism in Russia, whose influence pene- 
trated even into government circles, but whose lit- 
erary work has been overestimated. His personal 
endeavors, as well as his books (“Te‘udah be-Yis- 
rael” and “Bet Yehudah”), in which he recommends 
to the Orthodox the study of the sciences and the 
pursuit of manual employments, con- 
tributed to general emancipation 
rather than to that of Hebrew litera- 
ture in particular. Lithuania, an eminently Jewish 
country, was more favored by circumstances; and 
here the haskalah was destined to lead to the unfold- 
ing of a literature. At Shklov, the first city to 
come in contact with the outside world, a group of 
humanists arose as early as the beginning of the cen- 
tury. But it was at Wilna, the capital of the coun- 
try, abandoned by its native population and entirely 


Italy : 
Luzzatto. 


Russia. 


removed from outside influence, that the Hebrew 


language fiourished to an extraordinary degree. It 


was due to the enlightened tolerance of the gaon 
Elijah Wilna and the zeal of his pupils that Wilng 
became, toward the end of the eighteenth century, 
the home of excellent grammarians and stylists, 
About 1820 or 1830 a circle of Maskilim, called “ Ber. 
liner,” and evidently inspired by the writers of Ger. 
many, was formed, which assiduously cultivated 
modern Hebrew literature. Two eminent scholarg 
lent special luster to this new literary movement, — 
M. A. GtNZBURG well deserves his title “the father 
of prose,” which he won for himself through his 
numerous translations, histories, and scientific com- 
pilations, his picturesque narration of the ritual 
murder at Damascus, his realistic autobiography 
“Abi‘ezer” (a glowing criticism of customs of the 
past), and especially through his style, which is at 
once temperate, realistic, and modern. At the same 
time Abraham Bir LEBEeNsoHN, called “the father 

of poetry,” lent new radiance and vig- 

A. Bar or to Hebrew verse. The touching 
Lebensohn. lyric quality of some of his poems, the 

profound pessimism, the plaint over 
life, and the fear of death, which betray the feelings 
of the Jew tried by the ordeal of ghetto life, all 
stamp him as the veritable poet of the ghetto. The 
simplicity of his ideas, his rabbinical dialectic and 
even his frequent prolixity only added to his popu- 
larity. His poems “Shire Sefat Kodesh” were ex- 
traordinarily successful; and his elegant, limpid, 
and often energetic style is still justly admired. 

It was due to these two masters that modern He- 
brew literature was widely disseminated throughout 
Lithuania, circles devoted to the haskalah being 
formed nearly everywhere. Hebrew became the lan- 
guage of daily life, the literary language, aud, what 
is still more characteristic, the language of folk-lore. 
In fact, the list of popular Hebrew poems by known 
or unknown authors is too long to be noted here. 
The unhappy political situation of the Russian Jews 
under Nicholas I.—a period of persecutions of all 
kinds and of terror—had particularly contributed to 
produce this stateof mind in the harassed people; and 
while Hasidism completed its work of producing in- 
tellectual obscurantism and hopeless resignation in 
the province of Poland and in southern Russia, 
mysticism found in Lithuania a redoubtable enemy 
in the sentimentality of the unfolding Hebrew Jiter- 
ature. 

The diffusion of the affected style of the melizah 
and the return to the Janguage of the past awakened 
among this unhappy people a regret for the glori- 
ous Biblical times and a romanticism that was to 
bear rich fruit. Popular Hebrew poetry had be- 

come fundamentally Zionistic, as is 


Popular evident from the anonymous poems 
and Liter- then written (“Shoshannah,” “ Ziyyon, 
ary Ro- Ziyyon,”etc.). Literary romanticism 


manticism. soon followed upon this romantic tend- 

eocy. The Lithuanian writers, shar- 
ing the life and patriotic thoughts of the people, 
and encouraged by the example of 8. D. Luzzatto, 
who united modern culture with ardent patriotism, 
turned to romanticism. The prolific popularizer 
Kalman Schulman (1826-1900) inaugurated roman- 
tic fiction and introduced the romantic form into 
Hebrew through his Hebrew version of “Les Mys 


115 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Literature 





téres de Paris” (“‘ Mistere Paris”); and he became one 
of the civilizers of the ghetto through his numerous 
popular scientitic works and especially through his 
studies of the Jewish past. His pure, flowing, me- 
lizah style, hisextreme sentimentalism as well as his 
naive romanticism in al] matters touching Judaism, 
won for him great influence. For fully half a cen- 
tury he, in spite of his lack of originality, ranked as 
a master. The young and gifted writer Micah Jo- 
seph LEBENSOHN (1828-52), the first true artist and 
romantic poet in Hebrew, has left poems that are 
perfect in style, including an admirable translation 
of the “ #neid,” lyrics of love, of nature, and of 
sorrow. But his masterpieces are romantic poems 
(“ Moses,” “Judah ha-Levi”) dealing with Israel’s 
glorious past. 

The creator of the Hebrew novel was Abraham 
Mapu (1808-67), whose historical romance “ Ahabat 
Ziyyon” exercised an important influence on the 
development of Hebrew. This novel, which deals 
with the golden age of Judah, that of Isaiah, and is 
couched in the very language of that prophet, is 
rather a succession of poetic pictures reconstruct- 
ing the civilization of ancient Judea than a con- 
nected story. Simple and primitive in his thoughts, 
Mapu was so imbued with the spirit of the Bible 
that, although unconsciously, he was translated to 
ancient times, and, guided by a marvelous intui- 
tion, he succeeded in reconstructing the free, agri- 
cultural life of ancient Judah, in the land of the 
prophets, of justice, and of truth, the land of love 
and of the joy of life. This past, to renew which 
was the ambition of scholars and people, superim- 
posed itself upon the present, and it was due to Ma- 
pu’s novel that an entire people came forth from its 
long lethargy, to be reborn. Another novel (“ Ash- 
mat Shomeron”) by Mapu served to increase his 
popularity. 

Many imitators of these leaders of Hebrew roman- 
ticism appeared, and at a time when the political 
outlook checked all hopes of a better life: the 
Maskilim demanded, in the name of the prophetic 
past, the rights of civilization and progress. Many 
persons, also, were won over to the reading of secu- 
lar literature. When in 1856 Silbermann founded 
at Lyck the first political journal in Hebrew, “ Ha- 
Maggid,” he met with unexpected success and had 
many imitators. In Austria, Russia, and even in 
Palestine, periodicals, more or less successful, ap- 
peared, furthering the cause both of Hebrew and of 
emancipation, Among these journals were “ Ha- 
Karmel,” founded by the scholar Samuel Joseph 
Fuenn; “Ha-Zefirah,” founded by the popularizer of 
science C. Z. Slonimsky; and “ Ha-Meliz,” founded 
by A. Zederbaum. 

The accession of Alexander II. radically changed 
the condition of the Russian Jews. A wave of lib- 

erty and radicalism swept through the 

Official empire, and for the first time the Rus- 
Liberalism sian Jews could hope for a lot similar 
and Radi- to that of their western coreligionists. 

calism. Awakened from their century-long 

sleep, the backward people of the 
ghetto began to shake off religious and other fetters, 
becoming imbued with modern ideas and adopting 
modern modes of life. In the large centers there 


Was no serious opposition to emancipation, and the 
Jews flocked in masses to the schools and sought 
secular enployments. The scholars themselves, en- 
couraged by the government and by the notables of 
the great cities, decided to attack all the “domains 
of darkness” of the past, and to occupy themselves 
with the affairs of the day; and when the small 
provinces, less disturbed by the economic and moral 
upheavals, bitterly opposed this social emancipa- 
tion—which led to forgetfulness of the Law and 
endangered the faith—the Maskilim knew no limits 
to their fury against the fanatics of the ghetto. 
Hebrew literature, at first realistic, attacking cus- 
toms and superstitions in the name of utility and 
the reality of things, became more and more anti- 
rabbinical as it opposed religious tradition. Mapu 
led the way in his novel “‘Ayit Zabua‘,” which, 
though a failure from a literary point of view, de- 
picts the backward types of the ghetto, the Tar- 
tuffes, and the enemies to progress, with a realism 
intentionally exaggerated. ABRAMOWITSCH, then 
a young man, described in his novel “Ha-Abot 
we-ha-Banim” the customs of the Husidim and the 
struggles of their progressive sons. The aged poet 
Abraham Bir Lebensohn published his drama, “ Emet 
we-Emunah” (written twenty-five years previously), 
in Which he satirized cabalistic hypocrisy and mys- 
ticism. The number of popularizers of science, 
critics of belated customs, and belittlers of the relig- 
ious past became legion. 
The most distinguished among these writers was 
the poet Leon Gorpon, an implacable enemy of the 
Rabbis, who personified in himself this 
Leon realistic epoch. He began by writing 
Gordon romantic poems in imitation of the 
(1830-92). two Lebensohns. But when the hori- 
zon widened for the Russian Jews, he 
was filled with pity for the deplorable state of the 
Orthodox masses, to whom he addressed his “Haki- 
zah ‘Ammi”—“ Awake, my people, to a better life,” 
t.é., “to the life of those about you.” Of a mettle- 
some spirit, he unmercifully attacked the rabbinical 
law, the dead letter, the religious yoke weighing 
upon the masses. He regarded rabbinism as the 
greatest misfortune of the Jewish people, which 
killed the nation by delivering it up to the more sec- 
ular Romans, and which hindered its participation 
in the realities of modern life. Gordon’s activity 
covered all branches of literature. He ranks fore- 
most in Hebrew literature as a satirical poet and 
critic of manners; and as a writer of fables he has 
no equal. But in spite of his apparent severity and 
his extreme skepticism, he remained at heart a pa- 
triot; and when he criticizes he does so in order to 
elevate the social life of the Jews, while grieving 
for the misery of the Messianic nation. Even in his 
historical poems, “Zidkiyahu be-Bet ha-Pekudot” 
and “Bi-Mezulot Yam,” he displays all his love for 
his people, which became more pronounced during 
the years of persecution and misery in Russia, But 
even then he believed that rabbinism was the enemy 
which prevented a national renascence. Gordon 
was among the first successfully to introduce Tal- 
mudisms into poetry. 
The hopes of the Maskilim were not realized: 
Russia did not continue its radical reforms; and a 


Literature 


reaction began between 1865 and 1870. Disappointed 
in their dreams of equality, writers now bent all 
their energies to the work of the emancipation of 
individuals from among the masses, by dissemina- 
ting instruction and by advocating the pursuit of 
trades as being necessary to fit the Jews to deal 
with the exigencies of life and to take part in the 
battle for subsistence incident to the economic 
changes of the time. 

In Galicia a cirele of scholars, under the leader- 
ship of Schorr, director of “He-Haluz,” and A. 
Krochmal, advocated religious reforms, boldly at- 
tacking tradition and even the law of Moses. But 
in Russia, especially in Lithuania, the scholars did 
not go so far. The ideology of the Maskilim was 
not accepted by the scholars who came in closer 
contact with the masses; and instead of attacking 
principles, they advocated practical reforms and 
changes in conformity with the needs of daily life. 
Utilitarianism succeeded to the ideology of the ear- 
lier scholars. Abraham Kowner in his 
pamphlet “ Heker Dabar,” ete. (1867) 
attacked the masters of Hebrew for 
being idealists, and the press because 
it ministered neither to the strict necessities of daily 
life nor to the material well-being of the masses. 
Paperna and others were also pronounced realists. 
Moses Lilienblum inaugurated a campaign in favor 
of the union of life and faith—an endeavor perilous to 
its author and his emulators, but noteworthy as be- 
ing the last attempt of rabbinic Judaism to adapt 
itself to the needs of modern life without giving up 
its minute observances. In his instructive volume 
“Hattot Ne‘urim,” Lilienblum has left a curious doc- 
ument describing the inner conflicts of a young Tal- 
mudist of the ghetto who has passed through all 
the stages between the simple life of an Orthodox 
believer and that of a skeptical freethinker. View- 
ing the life of the modern Jew, emancipated and in- 
different to all that is Jewish, he is shaken in his 
highest convictions and cries out, “The Law will 
never go hand in hand with life.” Lifienblum him- 
self at last became a utilitarian, seeking in Jewish 
life nothing but individual material well-being, and 
testifying regretfully to the downfall of the haska- 
lah by reason of an excess of ideology. “ Young 
men must think and work for their own lives only.” 
This became the watchword of the last Maskilim 
toward 1870. 

The ghetto, however, had not yet spoken its final 
word. Within the confines of traditional Judaism 
itself the modernization of Hebrew and of the relig- 
ious spirit was accentuated, leading to a compro- 
mise between faith and life. Orthodox journals 
were beginning to be the mouthpieces of a conserva- 
tive party more in touch with modern ideas. Side 
by side with the realistic press—‘ Ha-Meliz,” the 
organ of the realists; “ Ha-Zefirah,” a popular scien- 
tific journal; “He-Haluz,” an antireligious paper; 
and others—there were “ Ha-Maggid ” and “ Ha-Leba- 
non,” in which Orthodox rabbis enthusiastically 
advocated the cultivation of Hebrew and boldly 
offered plans for its rejuvenation as well as for the 
colonization of Palestine. Michel Pines, the antag- 
onist of Lilienblum, published in 1872 his “ Yalde 
Ruhi,” a treatise displaying deep faith, and in which 


Utilitari- 
anism. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


116 





he bravely defends traditional Judaism, insisting that 
ritual and religious observances are necessary to a 
maintenance of the harmony of faith, 
which influences the mind as well as 
the morals. Reforms are unneces- 
sary, because believers do not feel the need of them, 
and freethinkers no longer cherish any beliefs. Like 
the mass of believers, Pines does not share the pes. 
simism of the realists, but he firmly believes in the 
national renascence of Judaism. Any understand. 
ing between the two parties seemed impossible, the 
realists no longer believing in the future of Ju- 
daism, and the conservatives refusing all attempts 
at religious reform. Even skeptics like Gordon 
were alarmed to see “ the young people leave without 
returning.” Then, once again, a man arose to under- 
take the work of mingling the humanistic and the 
romantic currents and of leading the haskalah back 
to the living sources of national Judaism. This was 
Perez Smolenskin, the initiator of the 
P. Smolen- progressive national movement. He, 
skin also, began his carcer, in 1867, with a 
(1842-85). critical article of pronounced realism, 
“Bikkoret Tehiyyah.” But, disheart- 
ened by the fanaticism of the ancients and by the 
indifference and narrowness of the moderns, he left 
Russia and traveled first through Austria and later 
through the other western countries, sorrowfully 
noting the decadence of Judaism and of his patriotic 
ideal. At Vienna he issued in 1868 “ Ha-Shahar,” 
whose object it was to attack medieval obscurantism 
ind modern indifference. For eighteen years Smo- 
lenskin continued this laborious campaign. In his 
“Am ‘Olam ” (1872) he appears as the champion of 
the national preservation of Israel and of the realiza- 
tion of the rabbinical ideal freed from all mysticism. 
This secularization of an ideal which had consti- 
tuted Israel's power of resistance had important re- 
sults. In the first place it restored to Judaism and to 
Hebrew the best amoug the young men, who, while 
still profoundly attached to Judaism and to the life 
of the masses, had no longer any faith. This pre- 
pared the way for Zionism. But this was not all. 
Smolenskin recognized that one of the chief factors 
in the process of assimilation was the idea sct forth 
by Mendelssohn and especially by his disciples (Gei- 
ger and others) that Judaism does not constitute a 
nation but a religious confession, an idea which 
would naturally induce the assimilation of the free- 
thinkers. Smolenskin attacked this idea in a series 
of articles, which, though violent and often unjust, 
were yet needed to point out the priority of the 
national factor over the religious factor in the con- 
servation of Judaism. 

For eighteen years “Ha-Shahar” was the rally- 
ing-point for daring ideas and campaigns against 
the obscurantists and the moderns. It was especial- 
ly noted for the realistic novels of Smolenskin, which, 
despite their technical shortcomings, take a high 
place in Hebrew literature. Side by 
side with character sketches of the 
ghetto and violent attacks on obscu- 
rantism appear a profound love for 
the masses and an ardent faith in Israel’s future and 
in the apotheosis of young scholars endowed with 
the soul of prophecy, veritable dreamers of the 


M. Pines. 


¢¢ Ha- 
Shahar.” 


117 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Literature 





ghetto. For the first time the Hebrew language, 
as modernized by Smolenskin, took immense strides. 
“Ha-Shahar” published only original work; and 
through the support and influence of its editor 
there arose a whole school of realists who wrote in 
Hebrew. In addition to Gordon and Lilienblum, 
there were Brandstidter (the clever creator of the 
short story in Hebrew), 8. Mandelkern, J. L. Levin, 
Ben Zebi, M. Colin, Silberbusch, Mandelstam, and 
others. Science was represented by 8. Rubin, D. 
Kohan, Heller, D. Miller, ete. 

The influence of “Ha-Shahar” was felt’ through- 
out Hebrew literature. The popular poet and 
scholar of the south, A. B. Goitlober, founded his 
review “Ha-Boker Or” (1876) for the purpose of de- 
fending Mendelssohn and the haskalah. Gottlober 
himself contributed character sketches of the Hasi- 
dim, while the gifted writer R. A. Braudes began in 
its pages his novel “ Ha-Dat weha-Hay yim,” in which 
he depicts with masterly hand the struggle for the 
union of life and faith. Even America boasted a 
Hebrew journal, “Ha-Zofeh be-Erez Nod,” pub- 
lished by Sobel. A. converted Jew, Salkinson, pro- 
duced an admirable Hebrew translation of Shake- 
speare and of Milton, and the socialist Freiman 
published a review in Hebrew entitled “ Ha-Emet ” 
(1878). More important, however, was the great 
work by I. H. Weiss, “Dor Dor we-Dorshaw,” 
dealing with the evolution of religious tradition. 
The sciences were taken up by H. Rabbinowitz, 
Pories, 8. Sachs, Reifman, Harkavy, Gurland, J. 
Halevy, A. Epstein, Zweifel, Popirna, Buber, ete. 
Eveu the style was modernized, although the 
melizah did not disappear, asis seen by the writings 
of Schulman, Friedberg, and others. 

Smolenskin’s ideas bore fruit. With the return 
of the national ideal, Hebrew as the national lan- 
guage was again revived. Leon Gordon’s literary 
jubilee was enthusiastically celebrated in St. Peters- 
burg, and after his return from a journey through 
Russia in 1880, he was everywhere received as the 
national author, even by the students of the capi- 
tals. The appearance of anti-Semitism, the renewed 
persecutions, and the terrible years 1881 and 1882 
finally destroyed the ideals of the haskalah, whose 
last Hebrew followers were forced to admit that 
Smolenskin was right. 

When the first colonics in Palestine had been 
founded, and there existed no Jonger a belief in the 
possibility of religious reform without an upheaval 
of Judaism asa whole, if was commonly admitted 
that the work of Israel’s national rebirth should be 
encouraged. The Hebrew press undertook espe- 
cially to support the “Hobebe Ziyyon ” (CHOVEVEI 
ZION), as the Zionists were then called. Hebrew 
modern literature, wlich for a century had been 
progressive and secularizing, now became the in- 
strument of patriotic propaganda. Often those 
who had formerly advocated reforms now urged the 
abandonment of modern ideas in order to conciliate 
the masses. Smolenskin alone did not abandon his 
civilizing mission, and remained a progressive real- 
ist. Tle finally succumbed to overwork and died in 
1885. On his death “ Ha-Shahar” ceased publica- 
tion, just one century after the appearance of “Ha- 
Me’assef ” (1785). This was the end of the haskalah. 


It now gave place to Zionism, which was at first 
hesitating, but gradually arose to the realization and 

assertion of its full strength. 
The changing attitude in the profession of faith 
among Hebrew scholars and the young men who 
had returned to the national ideal and 


Contempo- to the prophetic dreams was of advan- 
rary Lit- tage to Hebrew, which now came to 
erature be considered as tlic national language 
(1885- of the Jewish people and the tie 
1904). uniting the Jews of all countries. 


While E. Ben-Judah at Jerusalem, 
through personal example and through propaganda 
in his journal “ Ha-Zebi,” restored Hebrew as a liv- 
ing language in Palestine, there was an increasing 
demand for Hebrew books in Russia, and the mod- 
ernized Jews became ambitious to cultivate the na- 
tional language. The success of the great literary 
collection “ Ha-Asif” (edited by the writer N. Soko- 
low), which succeeded “Ha-Shahar,” soon called 
forth other publications, noteworthy among which 
was the Zionistic work “Keneset Yisrael” by the 
historian S$. P. Rabbinowitz, and the more scientific 
“QOzar ha-Sifrut.” 

In 1886 L. Kantor began the publication of “Ha- 
Yom,” the first Hebrew daily paper; and soon after 
“Ha-Meliz” and “ Ha-Zefirah ” were 


Daily changed into dailies. <A political 
Press. press, also, was established, and con- 


tributed largely to the propagation of 
Zionism and to the modernization of Hebrew style. 
The founding of two large publishing-houses (the 
“Ahiasaf” and “ Tushiyyah ”), through the efforts 
of Ben-Aviepor, finally regulated the conditions 
for the progress of Hebrew, and created a class of 
paid writers. Journals, more than other forms of 
literature, are multiplying, and there are a number 
even in America. 

Literary activity was resumed after a short inter- 
val, now ou an entirely national basis and in agree- 
ment with the many needs of a nationalist group. 
All the branches of letters, science, and art were 
assiduously cultivated, without. neglecting the re- 
nascence of the Jewish people in the land of their 
fathers. In the field of poetry, besides Mandelkern 
and Gottlober, both couverted to Ziouism, are to be 
found Dolitzky, author of Zionistic songs describing 
the miseries of the Russian Jews; the two Zionist 
poets Isaac Rabinowitz and Sarah Shapira, and the 
gifted lyric poet M. H. Mané, who died at an early 
age. Perhaps the most noteworthy was C. A. Sha- 
pira, an eminent lyric poet, who, embittered by in- 
dignation, introduced a new note into Hebrew po- 
etry—hatred of persecution. There is, finally, N. 
H. Imber, the poct of renascent Palestine and the 
author of popular songs. Bialik is a lyric poet of 
much vigor, an incomparable stylist, and a romanti- 
cist of note, while his younger conteniporary Saul 
Tschernichowsky is proceeding along new lines, in- 
troducing pure estheticism, the cult of beauty and 
of love, in the language of the Prophets. The most 
gifted among the younger poets are 8. L. Gordon, 
N. Pinés, A. Lubochitzky, Kaplan, Lipschtitz, and 
A. Cohan. 

In the field of belles-lettres Ben-Avigdor is the 
creator of the new realistic movement; this he ex- 


Literature 
Lithuania 


pounds in his psychologic stories and especially in his 
“Menahem ha-Sofer,” in which he attacks, in the 
name of modern life, national chauvinism. Braudes 
became prominent asaromanticist. The aged A. J. 
Abramowitsch, who has returned to Hebrew, de- 
lights his readers by his artistic satires. I. L. Perez 
has in his songs, as in his poetry, a tendency toward 
symbolism. M. J. Berdyczewski attempts to intro- 
duce Nietzschian individualism into his stories and 
articles. Feierberg expresses the sufferings of a 
young scholar seeking truth. Goldin isa pleasing 
but sentimental writer of stories. Bershadsky is an 
outspoken realist and close observer. Others deserv- 
ing mention are: J. Rabinovitz; Turov; A. 8. Ra- 
binovitz; Epstein; Asch; J. Steinberg; Goldberg; 
Brener; the Galiciaus Silberbusch and Samueli; the 
poet and prose-writer David Frischman, the transla- 
tor of “Cain”; J. Ch. Tawjew, who isa distinguished 
feuilletonist and writer on pedagogies; A. L. Le- 
vinsky, the story-teller, author of a Zionist Utopia 
(* Travels in Palestine in 5800”); and J. L. Landau, 
the only dramatic poet. As Landau is a poet rather 
than a psychologist, his “Herod” and other plays 
are not intended for the theater, The Orientalist 
Joseph Halévy has published a volume of patriotic 
poems. 

The reaction of 1890 in the work of colonizing 
Palestine and the evident necessity of taking some 
steps to meet such a reaction produced the work 
of “Ahad ha-‘Am” (Asher Ginzberg). He is no- 
tably a critic of manners; and in the name of pure 
ideology he attacked first actual colonization and 
then political Zionism. Judaism before everything, 
and not the Jews; a moral and spiritual, not an 
economic and a political center; a national ideal ta- 
king the place of faith—such, in the rough, is the 
idea of this acute and paradoxical publicist. A 
number of young men, influenced by his collection 
“Ha-Pardes” and the review “ Ha-Shiloah,” found- 
ed by him and continued by Klausner, have fol- 
lowed in his lead. Quite opposite in tendencies is 
Zeeb Ya‘bez, the editor of “ Ha-Mizrah,” a remarka- 
ble stylist and religious romanticist. L. Rabinovitz, 
the director of “Ha-Meliz,” in his articles “ Ha- 
Yerushshah weha-Hinnuk ” also shows himself to be 
a defender of Jewish tradition, while Ben-Judah, the 
author of “ Hashkafah ” (Jerusalem), constantly op- 
poses obscurantism. N. Sokolow, by the power of 
his genius, forces Hebrew and modern ideas even 
upon the Hasidim. The critic Reuben Brainin is a 
close observer, an admirable stylist, and a charming 
story-teller. The historian 8. Bernfeld isa scholarly 
popularizer of Jewish science. 

Pedagogics and juvenile literature also have their 
periodicals and worthy representatives. Among 
these are: Lerner, 8. L. Gordon, Madame Ben-Judah, 
Yellin, Grosovsky, aud Berman. Many scholars 
have devoted themselves to science, as the late phi- 
losopher F, Misés; the grammarian J. Steinberg, 
who is an admirable writer; the anatomist, archeolo- 
gist, and author of popular stories Katzenelenson: 
Neimark; and Hurvitz. There are, in addition, 
many translators and compilers who have rendered 
into Hebrew Longfellow, Mark Twain, Zola, and 
even De Maupassant; and this work is being actively 
carried forward. There is a steady increase in the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


118 





number of daily and weekly journals, all of which, 
though Zionistic, are none the less progressive, 
With the emigration of the Russian Jews to foreign 
countries, Hebrew is tinding new centers. In 1904 
a course in modern Hebrew literature was instituted 
at the Sorbonne, Palestine is in a fair way to 
become the home of Hebrew as a living language, 
and in America and in England there are numerous 
publications in Hebrew. Even in the Far East, He. 
brew books and periodicals are to be found in in- 
creasing numbers, stimulating national and social 
regeneration. But it must be remembered that the 
future of Hebrew is intimately connected with Zion- 
ism, which is accepted by the masses only by reason 
of the ideal of national renascence. Faithful to its 
Biblical mission, the Hebrew language alone is able 
to revive moral vigor and prophetic idealism, which 
have never failed where the sacred language has 
been preserved. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: N. Schlousz, La Renaissance de la Littéra- 
ture Hébraique, 1748-1885, Paris, 1903; R. Brainin, Mapu, 
Smolensky (in Hebrew), Warsaw; S. Bernfeld, Dor Hakam, 
Warsaw, 1896; idem, Da‘at Elohim, ib. 1897-98; J. Klausner, 
Hebrew Literature in the Nineteenth Century (in Russ 
sian); M. Mendelssohn, Pene Tebel, Amsterdam, 1872. 


G. N. St. 


LITHUANIA (Russian or Polish, Litwa; in 
Jewish writings xp): Formerly a grand duchy, 
politically connected more or less intimately with 
Poland, and with the latter annexed to Russia. 

Lithuania originally embraced only the way wode- 
ships of Wilna and Troki; but in the thirteenth cen- 
tury it augmented its territory at the expense of 
the neighboring principalities and included the duchy 
of Samogitia (Zhmud; ~'9}). 

Tn the first half of the fourteenth century, when 
Russia was already under the Tatar yoke, the Lith- 
uanian grand duke Gedimin (1316-41) still further 
increased his possessions by family alliances and by 
conquest until they came to embrace the territories 
of Vitebsk, Kiev (1321), Minsk, ete. Under Olgerd 
and Keistat, sons of Gedimin, the Russian principal- 
ities of Chernigov-Syeversk, Podolia (1362), and 
Volhynia (1377) were also added to Lithuania; and 
the territory thus extended from the Baltic to the 
Black Sea. 

As early as the eighth century Jews lived in parts 
of the Lithuanian territory. Beginning with that 
period they conducted the trade between South Rus- 
sia, t.e., Lithuania, and the Baltic, especially with 
Danzig, Julin (Vineta or Wollin, in Pomerania), and 
other cities onthe Vistula, Oder, and Elbe (see Georg 
Jacob, “ Welche Handelsartikel Bezogen die Araber 
des Mittclalters aus Baltischen Liindern?” p. 1). 

When Duke Boleslaw I. of Poland sent Bishop 
Adalbert of Prague in 997 to preach the Gospel to 
the heathen Prussians (Lithuanians), the bishop com- 
plained that Christian prisoners of war were sold 
for base money to Jews, and that he was not able 
to redeem them. Records, of that time, of Jewisi 
residents in Krev are stillextant. About the middle 
of the twelfth century Rabbi Eliezer of Mayence 
referred to some ritual customs of the Russian, 7.e., 
Lithuanian, Jews (“ Eben ha-‘Ezer,” p. 74a, Prague, 
1710), and in the same century mention was made 
also of Moses of Kiev. In the thirteenth century 
Jews lived in Chernigov, Volhynia, and Smolensk. 


119 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Literature 
Lithuania 





Among them there were men of learning, as is evi- 
denced by a manuscript in the Vatican Library 
(Codex 300) dated 1094, and consisting of a com- 
mentary on the Bible written in “ Russia.” Another 
commentary, dated 1124, also written in Russia, is 
preserved in Codex Oppenheim Additamenta, Quar. 
No, 138, at present in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. 
About the same time there lived in Chernigov Irzr 
(Isaac), who is probably identical with Isaac of Rus- 
sia. In the first half of the fourteenth century there 
lived in Toledo, Spain, a Talmudic scholar, Asher 
ben Sinai, who came from Russia (Asheri, Responsa, 
part 51, No.2; Zunz, “‘Ir ha-Zedek,” p. 45). These 
isolated cases do not prove, however, that Tal- 
mudic learning had, at the period in question, become 
widely diffused in the Lithuanian-Russian territory. 
As Harkavy has pointed out, the individual efforts 
of the Russian Talmudists to spread Jewish knowl- 
edge did not’ meet with success until the sixteenth 
century. Ina letter written by Eliezer of Bohemia 
(1190) to Judah Hasid it is stated that in most places 
in Poland, Russia, and Hungary there were no Tal- 
mudic scholars, chiefly because of the poverty of 
the Jews there, which compelled the communities to 
secure the services of men able to discharge the three 
functions of cantor, rabbi, and teacher (“Or Za- 
rua‘,” p. 40, § 1138, Jitomir, 1862). These refer- 
ences to Russia do not necessarily always apply 
to Lithuania, since Galicia also was designated by 
that name in Hebrew writings of the Middle Ages, 
while the Muscovite territory of that time was 
referred to as “Moskwa.” The mention of the 
name “ Lita” first occurs in a responsum of the fif- 
teenth century by Israel Isserlein. He refers to a 
certain Tobiah who had returned from Gordita 
(Grodno ?) in Lithuania, and states that “it is rare 
for our people from Germany to go to Lithuania” 
(Israel Bruna, Responsa, §§ 25, 738). 

The origin of the Lithuanian Jews has been the 
subject of much speculation. It is now almost 
certain that they were made up of two distinct 
streams of Jewish immigration. The older of the 
two entered Lithuania by way of South Russia, 
where Jews had lived in considerable numbers since 
the beginning of the common era (see ARMENIA; 

Bosporus; CRIMEA; Kertcu). The 

Origin of fact that these had adopted the Rus- 

Lithuanian sian language (the official language 
Jews. of the Lithuanians) and the customs, 
occupations, and even the names of the 
native population, serves to prove that they came 
from the East rather than from western Europe. 
The later stream of immigration originated in the 
twelfth century and received an impetus from the 
persecution of the German Jews by the Crusaders. 
The blending of these two elements was not com- 
plete even in the eighteenth century, differences 
appearing at that time in proper names, in the pro- 
nunciation of the Judwo-German dialect, and even 
in physiognomy. 

The peculiar conditions that prevailed in Lithu- 
ania compelled the first Jewish settlers to adopt a 
different mode of life from that followed by their 
western coreligionists. In the Lithuania of that 
day there were no cities in the western sense of the 
word, no Magdeburg Rights or close gilds. 


Some of the cities which later became the im- 
portant centers of Jewish life in Lithuania were at 
first mere villages. Grodno, one of the oldest, was 
founded by a Russian prince, and is first mentioned 
in the chronicles of 1128. Novogrudok was founded 
somewhat later by Yaroslav; Kerlov in 1250; Vo- 
ruta and Twiremet in 1252; Hiragola in 1262; Gol- 
schany and Koyno in 1280; Telshi, Wilna, Lida, 
and Troki in 1820. 

With the campaign of Gedimin and his subjec- 
tion of Kiev and Volhynia (1820-21) the Jewish in- 
habitants of these territories were induced to spread 
throughout the northern provinces of the grand 
duchy. The probable importance of the southern 
Jews in the development of Lithuania is indi- 
cated by their numerical prominence in Volhynia 
in the thirteenth century. According to an annal- 
ist who describes the funeral of the grand duke 
Vladimir Vasilkovich in the city of Vladimir (Vol- 
hynia), “the Jews wept at his funeral as at the fall 
of Jerusalem, or when being led into the Babylonian 
captivity.” This sympathy and the record thereof 
would seem to indicate that long before the event 
in question the Jews had enjoyed considerable pros- 
perity and influence, and this gave them a certain 
standing under the new régime. They took an act- 
ive part in the development of the new cities un- 
der the tolerant rule of Gedimin. 

Little is known of the fortunes of the Lithuanian 
Jews during the troublous times that followed the 
death of Gedimin and the accession of his grand- 
son Witold (1841). To the latter the Jews owed 

a charter of privileges which was 


The momentous in the subsequent history 
Charter of the Jews of Lithuania. The docu- 
of 1888. ments granting privileges first to the 


Jews of Brest (July 1, 1888) and later 
to those of Troki, Grodno (1389), Lutsk, Vladimir, 
and other large towns are the earliest documents to 
recognize the Lithuanian Jews as possessing a dis- 
tinct organization. The gathering together of the 
scattered Jewish settlers in sufficient numbers and 
with enough power to form such an organization 
and to obtain privileges from their Lithuanian rulers 
implies the lapse of considerable time. The Jews 
who dwelt in smaller towns and villages were not in 
need of such privileges at this time, as Harkavy 
suggests, and the mode of life, the comparative 
poverty, and the ignorance of Jewish learning among 
the Lithuanian Jews retarded their intercommunal 
organization. But powerful forces hastened this or- 
ganization toward the close of the fourteenth cen- 
tury. The chief of these was probably the coopera- 
tion of the Jews of Poland with their Lithuanian 
brethren. After the death of Casimir the Great 
(1370), the condition of the Polish Jews changed for 
the worse. The influence of the Catholic clergy at 
the Polish court grew; Louis of Anjou was indiffer- 
ent to the welfare of his subjects, and his eagerness 
to convert the Jews to Christianity, together with 
the increased Jewish immigration from Germany, 
caused the Polish Jews to become apprehensive for 
their future. On this account it seems more than 
likely that influential Polish Jews cooperated with 
the leading Lithuanian communities in securing a 
special charter from Witold. 


Lithuania 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


120 


mn  -- —-- Y'IOIYX' —-O_ oOo nnn 


The preamble of the charter reads as follows: 


**In the name of God, Amen. All deeds of men, when they 
are not made known by the testimony of witnesses or in wri- 
ting, pass away and vanish and are forgotten. Therefore, we, 
Alexander, also called Witold, by the grace of God Grand Duke 
of Lithuania and ruler of Brest, Dorogicz, Lutsk, Vladimir, and 
other places, make known by this charter to the present and 
future generations, or to whomever it may concern to know or 
hear of it. that, after due deliberation with our nobles we have 
decided to grant to all the Jews living in our domains the rights 
and liberties mentioned in the following charter.” 


° ON 
Tykotzin 


rohiczyn 


1 SCALE OF MILES 


» ~+100 150 


has loaned money to a Christian, but has no witnesses to proye 
it, the latter may clear himself by taking an oath. (35) Jews 
may make loans on any personal property except blood-staineg 
articles or articles employed in religious service. (6) Wherea 
Christian asserts that an article pawned to a Jew has been 
stolen from a Christian, the Jew, after swearing that he was 
ignorant of the robbery, is relieved of responsibility to the 
owner of the article, and need not return it until the sum aq. 
vanced by him, with the interest, has been repaid. (7) Where 
a Jew loses pawned property by fire or robbery he is relieved 
from responsibility for articles so lost if he takes an oath that 
such articles were lost together with hisown. (8) A suit be. 





Chernigov 





1, BL | 
30 85° BORMAY & Co., N.Y. 


SS SSS ES 





GRAND DUCHY OF LITHUANIA AT ITS GREATEST EXTENT, SHOWING CITIES WHERE JEWS LIVED. 


The charter contains thirty-seven sections, which 
may be summarized as follows: 


(1) In criminal or other cases involving the person or property 
of a Jew, the latter can not be convicted on the testimony of one 
Christian witness ; there must be two witnesses—a Christian and 
a Jew. (2) Where a Christian asserts that he has placed an 
article in pawn with a Jew, and the Jew denies it, the latter 
may clear himself by taking the prescribed oath. (3) Wherea 
Christian claims that he has pawned an article with a Jew fora 
sum less than that claimed by the latter, the Jew’s claim shall be 
allowed if he take the usual oath. (4) Wherea Jew claims he 


tween Jews may not be decided by a city judge, but must be 
submitted in the first instance to the jurisdiction of the subway- 
wode, in the second instance to the waywode, and fAnally to the 
king. Important criminal cases are subject to the jurisdiction 
of the king alone. (9) A Christian found guilty of inflicting 
wounds upon a Jewess must pay a fine to the king and damages 
and expenses to the victim, in accordance with the tocal reguia- 
tions. (10) A Christian murdering a Jew shall be punished by 
the proper court and his possessions confiscated to the king. 
(11) A Christian inflicting injuries upon a Jew, but without 
shedding blood, shall be punished tn accordance with local law. 
(12) A Jew may travel without hindrance within the limits of 


121 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 





the country, and when he carries merchandise he shall pay the 
same duties as the local burghers. (13) Jews may transport the 
bodies of their dead free of taxation. (14) A Christian injuringa 
Jewish cemetery shall be punished in accordance with the local 
law and his property confiscated. (15) Any person throwing 
stones into the synagogue shall pay to the Waywode a fine of two 
pounds. (16) A Jew failing to pay to the judge the fine called 

**wandil’’ shall pay the anciently established fine. (17) Any 
Jew not appearing in court after being twice summoned shall 
pay the customary fine. (18 A Jew inflicting wounds on an- 
other Jew shall be fined in avcordance With local custom. (19) 
A Jew may take an oath on the Old Testament in important 
eases only, as where the claim exceeds in value fifty ‘*griven” 
of pure silver, or where the case is brought before the king. 
(20) Where a Christian is suspected of killing a Jew, though 
there Were no witnesses, and the relatives of the vietim de- 
clare their suspicion, the king is to give the Jews an execu- 
tioner for the accused. (21) Where a Christian assaults a 
Jewess he shal] be punished according to loeal usage. (22) 
A subwaywode may not summon Jews to his court except on 
aregular colwplaint. (23) In cases concerning Jews the court 
is to sit either in the synagogue or in a place selected by 
the Jews. (24) Where a Christian pays the sum advanced 
to him on any article when due, but omits io pay the interest, 
he shall be given a written extension of time, after which 
the sum unpaid shall be subject to interest until paid. 
(25) The houses of Jews are free from military quartering. (26) 
When a Jew advances to a noble a sum of money on an estate, 
the Jew is entitled, if the loan be not repaid on maturity, to the 
possession of the property, and shall be protected in its posses- 
sion. (27) A person guilty of stealing a Jewish child shall be 
punished as a thief. (28) If the value of an article pawned with 
a Jew by a Christian for a period less than a year does not ex- 
ceed the amount advanced upon it, the pawnbroker, after taking 
the article to his waywode, may sell it; but if the article is of 
greater value than the sum advanced the Jew shall be obliged 
to keep it for a further period of one year and one day, at the 
expiration of which time he shall become its possessor, (29) No 
person may demand the return of pawned property on Jewish 
holy days. (80) Any Christian forcibly taking an article pawned 
with a Jew, or entering a Jewish house against the wish of its 
owner, shall be subject to the same punishment as a person 
stealing from the common treasury. (31) To summon a Jew te 
appear in conrt is allowed only to the king or the waywode. 
(32) Since the papal bulls show that Jews are forbidden by their 
own law to use hitman blood, or any blood whatever, it is for- 
bidden to accuse Jews of using human blood. But in the case 
of a Jew accused of the murder of a Christian child, such ac- 
cusation must be proved by three Christians and three Jews. If 
the Christian accuser is unable to prove his accusation he shall 
be subjected to the same punishment that would have been in- 
flicted on the accused had his guilt been proved. (83) Loans 
made by Jews to Christians must be repaid with interest. (84) 
The pledging of horses as security on loans made by Jews must 
be done in the daytime; in case a Christian should recognize a 
horse stolen from him among horses pawned with a Jew, the 
latter must take an oath that the horse was received by him in 
the daytime. (35) Mint directors are forbidden to arrest Jews, 
when the latter are found with counterfeit coin, without the 
knowledge of the king’s waywode, or in the absence of promi- 
nent citizens. (86) A Christian neighbor who shali fail to re- 
spond at night when a Jew calls for help shall pay a fine of 
thirty “‘zloty.”? (37) Jews are permitted to buy and sell on the 
sanie footing as Christians, and any one interfering with them 
shall be fined by the waywode. 


The charter itself was modeled upon similar doc- 
uments granted by Casimir the Great, earlier by Bo- 
leslaw of Kalisz, to the Jews of Poland. These in 
their turn were based on the charters of Henry of 
Glogau (1251), King Ottokar of Bohemia (1254-67), 
and Frederick II. (1244), and the last-mentioned 
upon the charter of the Bishop of Speyer (1084). 
The successive remodelings of the different docu- 
ments were made necessary by the characteristic 
customs and conditions of the various countries; and 
for this reason the charter granted by Witold to the 
Jews of Brest and Troki is distinguished from its 
Polish and German models by certain peculiarities. 
The chief digressions are in $§ 8, 21, 28, 33, and 35, 


The distinctive features were made more manifest in 
the later issues of these privileges by the attempt 
to conform them to the needs of Lithuanian-Russian 
life. While the carlier charters of Brest and Troki 
were evidently framed upon western models for a 
class of Jews largely engaged in money-lending, the 
charters of Grodno (June 18, 1889 and 1408) show 
the members of that community eugaged in various 
occupations, including agriculture. The charter of 
1389 indicates that the Jews of Grodno, the residence 
of Witold, had lived there for many years, owning 
land and possessing a synagogue and cemetery near 
the Jewish quarter. They also followed handicrafts 
and engaged in commerce on equal terms with the 
Christians. 

As the Jews of Germany were servants of the 
rulers (“ Kammerknechte ”), so the Lithuanian Jews 
formed a class of freemen subject in all criminal 
cases directly to the jurisdiction of the grand duke 
and his official representatives, and in petty suits to 
the jurisdiction of local officials on an equal footing 
with the lesser nobles (“Shlyakhta”), boyars, and 
other free citizens. The oilicial representatives of 
the grand duke were the elder (“starcsta”), known 
as the “Jewish judge” (“judex Jndsorum”), and 
his deputy. The Jewish judge decided all cases be- 
tween Christians and Jews and all criminal suits in 
which Jews were concerned; in civil suits, however, 
he acted only on the application of the interested par- 
ties. Either party who failed to obey the judge’s 
summons had to pay hima fine. To him also be- 
longed all fines collected from Jews for 
minor offenses. His duties included 
the guardianship of the persons, prop- 
erty, and freedom of worship of the 
Jews. He had no right to summon any one to his 
court except upon the complaint of an interested 
party. In matters of religion the Jews were given 
extensive autonomy. 

Under these equitable laws the Jews of Lithuania 
reached a degree of prosperity unknown to their 
Polish and German coreligionists at that time. The 
communities of Brest, Grodno, Troki, Lutsk, and 
Minsk rapidly grew in wealth and influence. Every 
community had at its head a Jewish elder. These 
elders represented the communities in all external 
relations, in securing new privileges, and in the reg- 
ulation of taxes. Such officials are not, however, 
referred to by the title “elder” before the end of 
the sixteenth century. Up to that time the docu- 
ments merely state, for instance, that the “Jews of 
Brest humbly apply,” etc. On assuming office the 
elders declared under oath that they would discharge 
the duties of the position faithfully, and would re- 
linquish the office at the expiration of the appointed 
term, The elder acted in conjunction with the 
rabbi, whose jurisdiction included all Jewish affairs 
with the exception of judicial cases assigned to the 
court of the deputy, and by the latter to the king. 
In religious affairs, however, an appeal from the 
decision of the rabbi and the elder was permitted 
only to a counci] consisting of the chief rabbis of 
the king’s cities. The cantor, sexton, and shohet 
were subject to the orders of the rabbi and elder. 

The favorable position of the Jews in Lithuania 
during the reign of Witold brought to the fronta 


The ‘* Sta- 
rosta.” 


Lithuania 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


122 


SS ae ee ie 


number of the wealthier Jews, who, besides enga- 
ging in commerce, also leased certain sources of the 
ducal revenues or became owners of estates. The 
first known Jewish farmer of customs duties in Lith- 
uania was “Shanya” (probably Shakna), who was 
presented by Witold with the villages Vinnike and 
Kalusov in the district of Viadimir. The good-will 
and tolerance of Witold endeared him to his Jewish 
subjects, and fora long time traditions concerning 
his generosity and nobility of character were current 
among them. He ruled Lithuania independently 
even when that country and Poland were united for 
a time in 1418. His cousin, the Polish king Ladis- 
laus IT., Jagellon, did not interfere with his admin- 
istration during Witold’s lifetime. 

After Witold’s death Ladislaus assumed active 
sovereignty over a part of Lithuania. He granted 
(1482) the Magdeburg Rights to the Poles, Ger- 
mans, and Russians of the city of Lutsk, while 
in the case of the Jews and Armenians the Polish 
laws were made effective (see POLAND). This policy 

toward his Jewish subjects in Poland 
Under the was influenced by the clerical party, 
Jagellons. and he attempted to curtail the privi- 

leges granted to them by his prede- 
cessors. However, his rule in Lithuania was too 
short to have a lasting effect on the life of the 
Lithuanian Jews. 

Swidrigailo, who became Grand Duke of Lithu- 
ania at the death of Witold (1430), strove to prevent 
the annexation of Volhynia and Podolia to the 
Polish crown. He availed himself of the service of 
Jewish tax-farmers, leasing the customs duties of 
Vladimir to the Jew Shanya and those of Busk to 
the Jew Yatzka. There is, however, reason for 
the belief that he was not always friendly toward 
the Jews, as is shown by his grant of the Magde- 
burg Rights to the city of Kremenetz and the placing 
of all the inhabitants, including the Jews, under the 
jurisdiction of the German waywode Yurka (May 
9, 1438). The latter act may have been prompted 
by his desire to retain the allegiance of the German 
inhabitants of Volhynia. Swidrigailo was assassin- 
ated in the year 1440, and was succeeded by Casimir 
Jagellon. 

As Grand Duke of Lithuania (1440-92) Casimir 
Jagellon pursued toward his Jewish subjects the 
liberal policy of Witold. In 1441 he granted the 
Magdeburg Rights to the Karaite Jews of Troki on 
conditions similar to those under which they were 
granted to the Christians of Troki, Wilna, and 
Kovno; giving the Troki Karaites, however, a 
wider autonomy in judicial matters and in com- 
munal affairs, allowing them one-half of the city 
revenues, and presenting them with a parcel of 
land. The Troki and Lutsk Karaites were descend- 
ants of 380 families brought, according to tradition, 
by Witold from the Crimea at the end of the four- 
teenth century, when Rabbinite Jews were already 
established in Troki (see Graetz, “History,” Heb. 
transl. by Rabinowitz, vi. 225). Settling originally in 
New Troki, the Karaites subsequently spread to 
other Lithuanian and Galician towns. The poorer 
among them were, like most of the Rabbinite Jews, 
engaged in agriculture and handicrafts, while the 
richer members were, like the wealthier Rabbinites, 


leaseholders and tax-farmers. The Lithuanian rulerg 
of that time did not make any distinction between 
Rabbinites and Karaites, designating both in their 
decrees merely as “Jews” (“Zidy”). See KARAITEs, 
In 1453, for services rendered to him, Casimir 
granted to the Jew Michael of Hrubieszéw, his wife, 
and their son Judah, exemption from all taxes and 
customs duties throughout the country. Between 
1463 and 1478 he presented to Levin 


Jews as Schalomich certain lands in the way- 
Tax- wodeship of Brest, together with the 
Farmers. peasants living on them. In 1484 he 


awarded the lease of the customs duties 
of Novgorod for three years to the Troki Jews Llig 
Moiseyevich, Ruwen Sakovich, Avraam Danilovich, 
and Jeska Schelemovich. In 1485 he ordered the 
way wode of Troki to see that the Jewish part of the 
town paid its taxes separately, this arrangement 
being made in response to a petition from the Jews 
themselves. In 1486 he leased the customs of Kiev, 
Wischegorod, and Jitomir for a term of three years 
to Simha Karvchik, Sadke and Samak Danilovich, 
Samaditza, and Ryzhka, who were Jews of Kiev 
and Troki. In the same year the customs duties 
of Bryansk were leased to Mordecai Gadajewich and 
Perka Judinovich of Kiev; certain taxes of Grodno 
and Meretz to Enka Jatzkovich and his sons of 
Grodno; and the customs duties of Putivl to Jews 
of Kiev and Troki. In 1487 the customs duties of 
Brest, Drohycin, Byelsk, and Grodno were leased to 
Astaschka Ilyich, Onatani Ilyich, and Olkan, Jews 
of Lutsk, and the customs duties of Lutsk to 
Shachna Peisachovich and Senka Mamotlivy. In 
1488 certain taxes of Grodno and Meretz were again 
leased to Jatzkovich and his sons, and the customs 
duties of Zvyagol to the Lutsk Jews Israel, Yeska, 
and Judah. Inthe following year the customs duties 
of Minsk were leased to the Jew of Troki, Michael 
Danilovich; the customs duties of Vladimir, Pere- 
myshl, and Litovishk to the Jews of Brest and Hru- 
bieszow ; and thecustoms dutiesof Kiev and Putivito 
Rabei and other Jews of Kiev. In 1490 certain rev- 
enues of Putivl were leased to Merovach and Israel 
of Kiev and Abraham of Plotzk. These leases 
prove that throughout Casimir’s reign the impor- 
tant commercial and financial affairs of the grand 
duchy were largely managed by Jewish lease- 
holders, to whom he was heavily indebted. At 
times his treasury was depleted to such an extent as 
to compel him to pawn the queen’s robes and his 
silverware, but the Jews came to his aid in time 


of need. According to the Polish 
Com- historian Jaroszewicz in his “Obraz 
mercial Litwy,” the Jews of Lithuania after 


Relations. the reign of Casimir Jagellon were 

intimately connected with the devel- 
opment of the country’s commerce. Their business 
ventures reached far beyond Lithuania, most of the 
export trade to Prussia and the Baltic Sea being 
in their hands. 

Historians are agreed that Casimir was not 2a 
strong and justruler. Hedid notscruple to give con- 
tradictory promises to Poland and Lithuania, and his 
frequent favors to the Jews do not necessarily show 
that he was their friend. At most he considered 
them as useful agents in his financial undertakings. 


1238 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 





The influential Jewish tax-farmers often encoun- 
tered difliculties with foreign merchants. The Rus- 
sian Grand Duke Ivan Vassilivich ITi. repeatedly 
made representations to Casimir in regard to the 
high-handed treatment of Muscovite merchants and 
ambassadors by the tax-collectors Shan (the son-in- 
jaw of Agron), Simha, Ryabchik, and others. The 
king upheld his Jewish tax-farmers on the ground 
that the Russian merchants attempted to evade pay- 
ment of customs duties by choosing rarely traveled 
roads. From these documents it is also clear that 
the Jewish customs officials had under them armed 
men to arrest violators of the regulations. At Casi- 
mir’s death (1492) many of his Jewish creditors 
were left unpaid. 

Casimir was succeeded as king of Poland by his 
son John Albert, and on the Lithuanian throne by 
his younger son, ALEXANDER JAGELLON. The lat- 
ter confirmed the charter of privileges granted to 
the Jews by his predecessors, and even gave them 
additional rights. His father’s Jewish creditors re- 
ceived part of the sums due to them, the rest be- 
ing withheld under various pretexts. Jewish tax- 
farmers continued to lease the customs duties in the 
important cities, as is exemplified by a lease of those 
of Brest, Drohoczyn, Grodno, and Byelsk (Oct. 14, 
1494) to four Jews of Brest. The favorable attitude 

toward the Jews which had character- 

Expelled ized the Lithuanian rulers for genera- 

by tions was unexpectedly and radically 

Alexander. changed by a decree promulgated by 

Alexander in April, 1495. By this de- 

cree all Jews living in Lithuania proper and the ad- 

jacent territories were summarily ordered to leave 
the country. 

The expulsion was evidently not accompanied by 
the usual cruelties; for there was no popular ani- 
mosity toward the Lithuanian Jews, and the decree 
was regarded as an act of mere wilfulness on the 
part of an absolute ruler. Some of the nobility, 
however, approved Alexander’s decree, expecting 
to profit by the departure of their Jewish creditors, 
as is indicated by numerous lawsuits on the return 
of the exiles to Lithuania in 1503. It isknown from 
the Hebrew sources that some of the exiles migrated 
to the Crimea, and that by far the greater number 
settled in Poland, where, by permission of King 
John Albert, they established themselves in the 
towns situated near the Lithuanian boundary. This 
permission, given at first for a period of two years, 
was extended “because of the extreme poverty of 
the Jews on account of the great losses sustained 
by them.” The extension, which applied to all 
the towns of the kingdom, accorded the enjoy- 
ment of all the liberties that had been granted to 
their Polish brethren (Cracow, June 29, 1498). The 
expelled Karaites settled in the Polish town of 
Ratno. 

The causes of the unexpected expulsion have 
been widely discussed. It has been suggested by 
Narbut and other Lithuanian historians that the 
decree was the outcome of Alexander’s personal 
animosity toward the Jews, he having been edu- 
eated by the Polish historian Dlugosc (Longinus), 
an avowed enemy of the Jews. Others have held 
that it was instigated by the grand duchess He- 


lena, daughter of Ivan III. of Russia. Legend has 
it that she was at first very friendly toward the 
Jews, but having been rendered barren by a Jewish 
midwife through the aid of witchcraft, her father 
demanded the punishment of the witches, and the 
decree of expulsion followed. Theimprobability of 
this story has been demonstrated by Bershadski 


(“Litovskie Yevrei,” p. 251), who shows that the 


marriage took place in Feb., 1495, and that the 
expulsion occurred in April of the same year. Ber- 
shadski and Harkavy suggest as a probable motive 
the pressure put upon Alexander by the Catholic 
clergy. He may have been influenced by the expul- 
sion of the Jews from Spain (1492). This view is 
strengthened by his continued favors to the baptized 
Jews, as exemplified by his lease to Simsha of Troki 
(who had adopted the Christian faith); of the cus- 
toms at Putivl in the same year to Feodor, “the 
newly baptized,” and his son-in-law Peter; and the 
grant to the former tax-farmer of Putivl, “the newly 
baptized” Ivan, of one-third of the income from 
these customs duties; and above all by the very 
marked favors shown by him to Abraham Jesofovich 
after his baptism, Alexander going so far as to create 
him a member of the hereditary nobility. These 
favors indicate that if the expulsion was due to 
animosity on Alexander’s part, such animosity was 
a religious rather than a racial one. Another mo- 
tive suggested by Bershadski was the financial 
embarrassment of the grand duke, then heavily in- 
debted to the wealthy Jewish tax-farmers and lease- 
holders. During the settlement with his Jewish 
creditors (Dec., 1494), ¢.e., four months before the 
expulsion, it was noticed that Alexander was much 
troubled over the condition of his finances, as was 
evidenced by his repudiation for one reason or an- 
other of a part of his debts (“ Russko-Yevreiski 
Arkhiv,”i., No. 26). Alexander’s extravagance was 
commonly known; and it was said of him that “he 
pawned everything that he did not give away.” 
The depleted condition of his treasury may have 
driven him to adopt drastic measures. By confisca- 
ting the estates of the Jews the grand duke became 
the owner of their property. He presented a part of 
these estates to monasteries, charitable institutions, 
and baptized Jews “ for certain considerations,” and 
turned the proceeds into the grand-ducal treasury, 
A third motive assumed by Bershadski was the 
desire to replace the Jews by German settlers. As 
to the second and third of these possible motives, 
documents show that, while they may have helped 
Alexander to reach his decision, yet there was a cer- 
tain foundation for the popular tradition concerning 
the influence of Grand Duchess Helena in the mat- 
ter. As the daughter of Ivan IIJ. she must have 
been aware of the grave apprehensions created in 
Moscow by the successful propaganda of the Juda- 
izing sect, and the probable fear of the Lithuanian 
clergy that the Jupaizina HEREsy would spread to 
Lithuania. The success of the new teaching was 
impressed upon it by the conversion of Helena’s 
sister-in-law the Princess Helena of Moscow (daugh- 
ter-in-law of Ivan III.), the Russian secretary of 
state Kuritzyn, and the Metropolitan of Moscow 
Zosima. The clergy, alarmed at the success of the 
new heresy, probably convinced Alexander that its 


Lithuania 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


124 





encouragement by Ivan III. and his court would 
create a grave political danger for Lithuania. 

Soon after the promulgation of the decree the 
Jewish tax-farmers hastened to adjust their affairs 
and to render their accounts to Alexander, but evi- 
dently they could collect only a small portion of the 
sums due to them. The more valuable of the real 
property left by them was soon disposed of by the 
grand duke. In June, 1495, he presented his fur- 
rier Sova with an estate near Troki, together with 
the cattle, grain, and all else pertaining to it, which 
had belonged to the Jew Shlioma. On June 26 of 
the same year he presented the nobleman Soroka and 
his brother with estates belonging to the Jews Enko 
Momotlivy and Itzchak Levanovich and situated 

in the district of Lutsk. On July 15 
Escheat of the Bishop of Wilna was granted the 
Jewish  housesand estates of the Jews Bogdan 
Property. Chatzkovich and Ilia Kunchich, while 
the city of Wilna received asa gift the 
house formerly belonging to the Jew Janushovski, 
On Aug. 10 the farm of the Konyukovich broth- 
ers in the district of Grodno was given by Alexan- 
der to his secretary Lyzovy, and on Aug, 30 he pre- 
sented a house in Lutsk, ouce the property of the 
Jew Enka, to his stableman Martin Chrebtovich. 
On March 12, 1496, the nobleman Semashkowich re- 
ceived the farm in Volhynia belonging to the Jews 
Nikon and Shlioma Simshich, and on March 21 all the 
properties left vacant by the Jews in Grodno. On 
Oct. 4 the estates of the brothers Enkovich of Brest 
were presented to Alexander’s secretary Fedka Ja- 
nushkovich; on Jan. 27, 1497, the estate of Kornitza, 
formerly belonging to the Jew Levon Shalomich, 
was given to Pavel, magistrate of Brest-Litovsk. In 
July of the same year all the unoccupied properties 
left by the Jews of Lutsk were presented to the 
elders of the city, in order to encourage new settlers. 
This distribution of Jewish property by Alexander 
was continued until the middle of 1501. 

Soon after Alexander’s accession to the throne of 
Poland he permitted the Jewish exiles to return to 
Lithuania. Beginning March, 1503, as is shown by 
documents still extant, their houses, lands, syna- 
gogues, and cemeteries were returned to them, and 
permission was granted them to collect their old 
debts. The new charter of privileges permitted them 
to live throughout Lithuania as heretofore. It also 

directed the vice-regent of Wilna and 
Return to Grodno, Prince Alexander Juryevich, 
Lithuania. tosee that the Jews were restored to the 
enjoyment of their former property 
and assisted in the collection of debts due to them. 
The privilege was accorded them of repurchasing 
also the property originally owned by them at the 
price paid by their successors to the grand duke. 
They were likewise to pay all expenses for improve- 
ments and for the erection of new buildings, and were 
obliged to pay all mortgages. Moreover, they were 
required to equip annually a cavalry detachment of 
1,000 horsemen besides paying large annual sums to 
the local authorities. 

The return of the Jews and their attempt to re- 
gain their old possessions led to many difficulties and 
lawsuits. Alexander found it necessary to issue 
an alditional decree (April, 1503), directing his 


vice-regent to enforce the law. In spite of this 
some of the property was not recovered by the Jews 
for years. 

The tax-farmers returned to their old occupations, 
and were shown many marks of favor by Alexan- 
der. He could not, however, obliterate the remem- 
brance that he had robbed the Jews. The permission 
given the exiles to return is ascribed to the depleted 
condition of his treasury and to the impending war 
with Russia, combined with the efforts of the infiu- 
ential Jews of Poland and the baptized Jews of 
Lithuania to secure their return. 

The improvement in the condition of the Jews was 
especially marked in the reign of Alexander’s young. 
est brother. Sigismund I, (1506-48). Among his first 

decrees was one (Dec. 22, 1306) which re- 

Sigismund lieved the two synagogues of Lutsk— 
I. the Rabbiniteand the Karaite—from the 
annual tax of 12 kop groschen imposed 

upon them by the city authorities. In January of 
the following year he confirmed, at the request of 
the Lithuanian Jews, the grant of privileges made 
by Witold in 1888, This was modeled after the orig- 
inal charter of Brest and was included in the first 
Lithuanian statute of 1529. Numerous other exam- 
ples of his good-will toward the Jews show that 
while being a good Catholic he was free from fanat- 
icism and religious intolerance. He looked upon his 
Jewish subjects as a class of men contributing by 
their usefulness to the welfare of the country, and 
as being entitled to the protection of equitable laws. 

Like his predecessors, Sigismund availed himself 
extensively of the services of the wealthy tax- 
farmers. He borrowed large sums from them and 
in return accorded them special privileges. The 
most influential among the tax-farmers at his court, 
at the beginning of his reign, was Michael Jesofo- 
vich. When, in 1508, Prince Glinski rebelled against 
Sigismund, and by an agreement with the rulers of 
Moscow attempted to effect the annexation of por- 
tions of Poland and Lithuania to the Muscovite em- 
pire, two Jews of Brest, Itzko and Berek, aided the 
prince in his undertaking, and furnished him with 
secret information. Michael Jesofovich excommu- 
nicated them with the blowing of the shofar and with 
great public solemnity. In recognition of Michael’s 
services, and prompted also by the desire to estab- 
lish a more perfect system of tax-collection, Sigis- 
mund appointed him prefect over all the Lithuanian 
Jews (1514), This wasa similar appointment to that 
of ABRAHAM OF BOHEMIA as prefect of the Polish 
Jews (1512). Like Abraham, Michael was invested 
with wide powers. He had the right to communi- 
cate directly with the king on important Jewish 
matters, and with the aid of a learned rabbi to ad- 
minister justice among his coreligionists in accord- 
ance with their special laws. Michael’s actual au- 
thority concerned the collection of taxes rather than 
the internal communal administration; and what- 
ever his religious powers may have been, he cer- 
tainly was not chief rabbi of the Lithuanian Jews, 
as some Jewish historians have stated. 

This and similar acts, accompanied by the strength- 
ening of the communal organizations, added to the 
prosperity of the Lithuanian communities. The 
most flourishing among them at the time were those 


125 





of Brest, Grodno, Troki, Pinsk, Ostrog, Lutsk, 
and Tykotzin. The members of the communities 
found themselves in a better position 
Prosperity lezally than the burghers, although 
of the Con- in practise the Jews were often de- 
gregations. prived of the full enjoyment of their 
rights. According to the Lithuanian 
statutes of 1529 the murder of a Jew, a nobleman, 
or a burgher was punishable by death, and compen- 
sation was to be paid by the family of the murderer 
to that of the victim. But while the life of a Jew 
or a nobleman was valued at 100 kop groschen, that 
of a burgher was valued at only 12 kop groschen. 
Proportionate compensation was provided for per- 
sonal injuries. The prominent Jewish tax-farmers 
frequently exceeded their legal powers, as is shown 
by complaints to the authorities. Thus in 1538 
Goshko Kozhchich, a Jew of Brest, was fined 20 kop 
groschen for the illegal imprisonment of the noble- 
man Lyshinski. Similarly in 1542 the Jew Zacha- 
riah Markovich was ordered to pay 12 kop groschen 
as compensation for assaulting the king’s boyar 
Grishka Kochevich. On the other hand, numerous 
instances are recorded of the friendly intercourse 
between Jews and Christians. They drank and ate 
in common, and the Jews took part in the Christian 
festivals and even vied with their Christian neigh- 
bors in athletic feats. But with the exception of a 
few wealthy Jewish tax-collectors, the Jews of Lith- 
uania were nota great economic or political force. 
In their mode of life they were not markedly differ- 
ent from the rest of the population, and the names 
of the Jewish middle class are rarely met with in 
official documents. The rich Jews, however, are 
frequently mentioned in connection with their offi- 
cial business. | 
About 1539, rumors were spread by a baptized Jew 
that many Christians had adopted the Mosaic faith 
and had found refuge and protection 
Rumors of among the Jews of Lithuania. An in- 
Converts to vestigation was ordered by Sigismund, 
Judaism. but it failed to disclose anything in- 
criminating the Jews. None the less, 
in the course of the inquiry the king’s nobles sub- 
jected the Jews to great annoyance. They unjustly 
arrested them on the highways, broke into their 
houses, and otherwise maltreated them. Before the 
conclusion of the investigation another rumor was 
spread ascribing to the Lithuanian Jews the intention 
to emigrate to Turkey and to take the new converts 
with them. New inquiries accompanied by similar 
excesses and abuses were made. The Jews sent nu- 
merous deputations to the king, protesting their inno- 
cence. Theirassertions weresubstantiated by the find- 
ings of aspecial commission ; and Sigismund hastened 
to declare the Jews free from any suspicion (1540). 
In the last years of Sigismund’s reign, and even 
during part of that of Sigismund August, Bona 
SFrorza shared in their government, sometimes as- 
suming absolute authority. The energetic queen 
was herself eager to make and to save money. 
Among the many decrees issued by her in her own 
hame are two of special interest, as evidencing the 
occurrence of internal conflicts in Jewish com- 
munities. These deal with the quarrel in the com- 
munity of Grodno between the powerful Jupai 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 


family (Yudichi) and the rest of the community, 
due to the appointment of a rabbi in opposition to 
the wishes of a majority of the congregation. This 
rabbi was Mordecai, son-in-law of Judah Bogdano- 
vich, and he is probably identical with Mordecai 
ben Moses Jaffe, rabbi of Cracow, who died about 
1568, Ee should not be confounded with Mordecai 
ben Abraham JAFFE, author of * Lebushim ” (1530- 
1612), who also was rabbi of Grodno (1572). Queen 
Bona decreed that the opposing faction be permitted 
to appoint a rabbi of its own, who was not to be re- 
lated to the Judah family, and that the members of 
the latter should not call themselves “elders” of the 
Jews, a title that should be assumed only with the 
consent of the entire community. Accordingly, 
Moses ben Aaron was elected rabbi by opponents of 
the Judah family. This case tends to show that 
Mordecai Jaffe represented the Bohemian party, and 
Moses ben Aaron the Lithuanian-Polish faction. 
Sigismund II., August, only son of Sigismund I., 
succeeded as Grand Duke of Lithuania (1544) before 
the death of his father. He succeeded to the Polish 
throne in 1548. Liberal in his rule and in his treat- 
ment of his Jewish subjects, he accorded them the 
same tolerance as he did the Lutherans 
Under Sig- and Calvinists, who were then begin- 
ismund II. ning to grow in numbers both in Po- 
land and in Lithuania. Like all the 
Jagellons, he was a great spendthrift and of loose 
morals, but was none the less mindful of the welfare 
of his people. At the beginning of his reign the 
power of the lesser nobles (“Shlyakhta ”) was still 
limited. They did not participate in the legislative, 
judicial, or administrative affairs of Lithuania. Until 
then the rights of the nobility, and of the Jews had 
differed but slightly. Thus the rabbi of Brest, Men- 
del Frank, was styled “the king's officer,” and the 
Jew Shmoilo Israilevich was appointed deputy to 
the governor of Wilna. The more prominent Jews 
were always called in official documents “ Pany ” 
(“Sirs”). Like the nobility, the Jews carried swords, 
and were ready to fight whenever the occasion war- 
ranted. They wore also golden chains, and rings on 
which were engraved coatsof arms. Until the union 
of Lublin (1569) the Jews of Lithuania, with few 
exceptions, lived on grand-ducal lands, and as sub- 
jects of the king enjoyed his protection. Thus the 
king ordered the reigning prince, Juri Semionovich 
of Slutsk, to pay damages for illegal acts against 
certain Jews, instructing the loca] authorities in case 
of opposition on the part of the prince to place the 
Jews in possession of his estates. The Jews could 
also collect debts not only from the Lithuanian lords, 
but even from such prominent persons as the Grand 
Duke of Ryazan. King Sigismund even entered 
into a diplomatic correspondence with the Grand 
Duke of Moscow urging the restoration of merchan- 
(lise confiscated in Russia from Lithuanian Jewish 
merchants. Therelations between the Jewsand the 
local authorities were governed partly by their char- 
ters of privileges and partly by custom. The Jews, 
for instance, made presents to the magistrate or 
elder, but were quite independent in their dealings 
with them. The local officials were answerable to 
the king for illegal acts. 
The middle of the sixteenth century witnessed a 


Lithuania 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


126 





growing antagonism between the lesser nobility and 
the Jews. Their relations became strained, and the 
enmity of the Christians began to disturb the life of 
the Lithuanian Israelites. The anti-Jewish feeling, 
due at first to economic causes engendered by com- 

petition, was fostered by the clergy, 

Rise of who were then engaged in a crusade 
Opposition. against heretics, notably the Luther- 

ans, Calvinists, and Jews. The Refor- 
mation, which had spread from Germany, tended to 
weaken the allegiance to the Catholic Church. Fre- 
quent instances occurred of the marriage of Catholic 
women to Jews, Turks, or Tatars. The Bishop of 
Wilna complained to Sigismund August (Dec., 1548) 
of the frequency of such mixed marriages and of 
the education of the offspring in their fathers’ faiths. 
The Shlyakhta also saw in the Jews dangerous com- 
petitors in commercial and financial undertakings. 
In their dealings with the agricultural classes the 
lords preferred the Jews as middlemen, thus creating 
a feeling of injury on the part of the Shlyakhta. 
The exemption of the Jews from military service 
and the power and wealth of the Jewish tax-farmers 
intensified the resentment of the Shlyakhta. Mem- 
bers of the nobility, like Borzobogaty, Zagorovski, 
and others, attempted to compete with the Jews as 
leaseholders of customs revenues, but were never 
successful. Since the Jews lived in the towns and 
on the lands of the king, the nobility could not wield 
any authority over them nor derive profit from 
them. They had not even the right to settle Jews 
on their estates without the permission of the king; 
but, on the other hand, they were often annoyed by 
the erection on their estates of the tollhouses of the 
Jewish tax-collectors. 

Hence when the favorable moment arrived the 
Lithuanian nobility endeavored to secure greater 
power over the Jews. At the Diet of Wilna in 1551 
the nobility urged the imposition of a special poll- 
tax of one ducat per head, and the Volhynian nobles 
demanded that the Jewish tax-collectors be forbid- 

den to erect tollhouses or place guards 
Action of atthe taverns on theirestates. In 1555 
the Nobles. the illegal treatment of the Jews by 
Zhoslenski, the magistrate of Wilna, 
led Sigismund August to announce that a fine of 
300 kop groschen would follow any repetition of 
such an excess of power. In 1559 the nobility of 
Samogitia complained of abuses by Jewish tax- 
collectors and demanded that the collection of cus- 
toms duties be entrusted to them on the same terms 
as to the Jews. In 1560 the king found it necessary 
to prohibit the magistrates of Volhynia from assu- 
ming jurisdiction over the clerks of the tax-collector 
Mendel Isakovich. In 1563 the Lithuanian nobility 
demanded that the Jews furnish 2,000 foot-soldiers 
and an even greater number of sharpshooters. In 
1564 Bernat Abramovich, clerk of the prominent 
tax-collector Isaac BoropAvKA, was arrested and 
tried on the accusation of having murdered a Chris- 
tian child. The royal chamberlain testified that he 
had heard the confession of Bernat shortly before 
his execution, and that he had solemnly declared his 
innocence. Investigation proved the falseness of 
the charge, which had been prompted by enmity 
toward Borodavka, 


A similar unfounded accusation of two other gery. 
ants of Borodavka in 1566 led Sigismund August to 
declare the innocence of the accused, and to reatftirm 
the decree of Aug. 9, 1564, by which all Jews ac. 
cused of the murder of Christian children or of dese. 
crating the host were to be tried by the king himself 
before the assembled Dict. Until the time of trial] 
the accused were to be surrendered for safe-keeping 
to two of their coreligionists, The guilt of the ac- 
cused could be declared only on the testimony of four 
Christian and three Jewish witnesses. The failure 
to prove the accusation rendered the accuser Hable 
to loss of life and property. In this decree the king 
also reminded the Christians of the grand duchy that 
previous charters and papal bulls had amply proved 
that Jews were not in need of Christian blood for 
the purposes of their ritual. 

The opposition to the Jews was finally crystallized 
and found definite expression in the repressive Lith- 
uanian statute of 1566, when the Lithuanian nobles 
were first allowed to take part in the national! legis- 


lation. Paragraph 12 of this statute 
The Act contains the following articles: “The 
of 1566. Jews shall not wear costly clothing, 


nor gold chains, nor shall their wives 
wear gold or silver ornaments. The Jews shall not 
have silver mountings on their sabers and daggers; 
they shall be distinguished by characteristic clothes; 
they shall wear yellow caps, and their wives ker- 
chiefs of yellow linen, in order that all may be en- 
abled to distinguish Jews from Christians.” Other 
restrictions of a similar nature are contained in the 
saine paragraph. However, the king checked the 
desire of the nobility to modify essentially the old 
charters of the Jews. 

Twenty years later the royal veto was ineffective 
against the increasing power of the nobility; but by 
that time the attitude of the latter toward the Jews 
had undergone such a complete change that instead 
of adding new restrictions the nobility abolished 
most of the regulations which had been so objec- 
tionable. 

Through the union with Lithuania, Poland gained 
in power and exerted a greater influence on the 
former country, The introduction of the reformed 
faith (the teachings of Calvin) met with ready accept- 
ance by the nobility and middle classes. The new re- 
ligious ideas brought in their wake a taste for science 

and literature, and Jewish and Chris- 

After the tian children sought learning in the 
Union of same schools. A number of young 
Lublin. men went to Germany and Italy for 
the study of medicine and astronomy. 

The inmates of the yeshibot (of Lithuania especially) 
were acquainted with the writings of Aristotle, as is 
evidenced by the complaint of Solomon Luria that 
Rabbi Moses Isserles was responsible for much free 
thought. He had noticed in the prayer-books of the 
scholars (bahurim) the prayer of Aristotle. Cardi- 
nal Commendoni testifies that many Russian and 
Lithuanian Jews had distinguished themselves in 
medicine and astronomy. The Jews of Lithuania 
were, like their Catholic neighbors, affected by the 
broader spiritual atmosphere of theday. The Polish 
Calvinists, among them Prince Radziwil, enjoyed 
extensive influence at court, and Radziwil was almost 


127 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 





successful in causing Sigismund August to renounce 
allegiance to the papal authority. The extreme 
Calvinists, like the Socinians and the followers of 
Simon Bupny, attacked the doctrine of the Trinity 
asaformof polytheism. Therefore they were styled 
Unitarians or anti-Trinitarians, and were frequently 
referred to by their opponents as “ half-Jews.” The 
infiuence of the religious unrest of the times on Jew- 
ish thought is evidenced by the discussions which 
took place between the Jews and the dissenters (see 
CzEcHowIc). The learned Karaite Isaac ben Abra- 
ham of Troki took a prominent part in such discus- 
sions. His polemical experience is described in his 
work “Hizzuk Emunah” (translated into Latin by 
Wagenseil and published with the Hebrew text in 
1681, and later translated into Spanish, German, 
and French), This work is frequently cited by the 
French encyclopedists in their attacks on Catholi- 
cism. The French Duke Henry of Anjou, one of 
the leaders in the massacre of St. Bartholomew, was 
elected to succeed Sigismund August on the thrones 
of Poland and Lithuania. He was an enemy of the 
Jews notwithstanding the fact that he largely owed 
his election to the efforts of Solomon ASHKENAZI. 
He planned strict measures against his Jewish sub- 
jects, and blood accusations occurred during his 
short reign. Fortunately he escaped to France in 
1574 to assume the crown left vacant by the death 
of his brother. After the short interregnum which 
followed, the Polish people elected the Transylva- 
nian Duke Stephen Batuori. During the latter’s 
equitable rule of eleven years the condition of the 
Polish and Lithuanian Jews was greatly improved. 
In July, 1576, he ordered by decree that all persons 
making false blood accusations or baseless charges 
of desecration of the host, then being spread in 
Lithuania, should be severely punished, his own in- 
vestigations having convinced him that such accusa- 
tions were instigated merely to incite riots. He found 
not only that the Jews were innocent and beyond 

suspicion, but also that the Shlyakhta 


Under who had made the accusations had 
Stephen themselves been misled by fanatical 
Bathori. agitators. He declared that “ whoso- 


ever shall disobey this decree shall be 
severely punished irrespective of his position in so- 
ciety; and whoever shall spread such rumors shall 
be considered a calumniator; and he who shall make 
such false charges before the authorities shall be 
punished by death.” In the same month he con- 
firmed by decree all of the ancient privileges of the 
Lithuanian Jews. At the beginning of his reign 
Mordecai Ja¥F¥E (author of the “Lebushim ”) went 
to Lithuania. He at first officiated in Grodno, and 
built the large synagogue which is still standing 
there and which has on its ark an inscription show- 
ing that the building was completed in 1578. 
Mordecai Jaffe by his great rabbinical erudition and 
secular knowledge played an important rdéle in the 
CounciL, OF Four LaAnps and in the development 
of the methodical study of rabbinical literature 
in Lithuania and Poland. See also Batuort, 
STEPHEN. 
The long reign of Sigismund ITI. (1587-1632) wit- 
nessed gradual but decisive changes in the relations 
of the Lithuanian Jews to the rest of the popula- 


tion. Born in the Protestant family of the Vasas, 
Sigismund was educated by his father, John IIL., 

in the Catholic faith with a view to 
Sigismund his future occupation of the Polish 


IIT. and throne. The Jesuit training of Sigis- 
Ladislaus mund was reflected in his attitude 
IV. toward his non-Catholic subjects. The 


severe measures which he took against 
the dissenters affected the Jews also. In the attack 
of the Jesuits on Protestants and Greek Catholics 
the Jesuits caused the promulgation of numerous 
decrees restricting the ancient privileges of the Lith- 
uanian Jews. They secured complete contro! of the 
education of the Polish-Lithuanian youth and in- 
stilled into the future citizens a religious intolerance 
hitherto unknown in Lithuania and which later 
made the existence of the Jewish subjects almost 
unbearable. A return to medieval methods was pre- 
vented only by the unsettled political and social con- 
dition of the country and the independence of the 
Shlyakhta. This independence, however, gradually 
vanished, and in the political degeneration which 
followed, the lesser nobility became a tool in the 
hands of a few reactionary leaders. 

The king himself, following in the footsteps of 
his predecessors, attempted to pose as the protector 
of the Jews. He confirmed their charters of privi- 
leges (1588), and frequently took their part in their 
struggle with the Christian merchant gilds; but 
more often he sacrificed them to the self-assumed 
power of the city magistrates. The commercial 
rivalry between the Jews and the burghers, and 
the disregard by the latter of the ancient rights of 
the Jews, led Sigismund to issue several special de- 
crees declaring the inviolability of Jewish autonomy 
in religious and judicial matters. The first of these 
decrees was due to the efforts of Saul Judich, repre- 
senting the Jews of Brest (1598), and was called 
forth by the illegal assumption of authority over 
the Jews by the magistrates of Brest in matters re- 
served to the jurisdiction of the kahals or the king. 
The object of the magistrates was the collection of 
excessive fees and other extortions, This Saul 
Judich was one of the most prominent farmers of 
taxes and customs duties in Lithuania, and as “ serv- 
ant of the king” was in a position to render impor- 
tant services to his coreligionists. He is first men- 
tioned in a decree of 1580 as having, in company 
with other communal leaders, strongly defended the 
rights of the Jews of Brest against the Christian 
merchants. As Bershadski shows, he is the Saul 
WauHL, the favorite of Prince Radziwil, who, ac- 
cording to legend, was made King of Poland for one 
night. 

In the same year (1580) Sigismund granted the 
Jews of Wilna, asa protection against the oppressive 
measures of the city magistrates, a charter permit- 
ting them to purchase real estate, to engage in trade 
on the same footing as the Christian merchants, to 
occupy houses belonging to the nobles, and to build 
synagogues. As tenants of the nobility they were 
to be exempt from city taxes, and in their lawsuits 
with Christians they were to be subject to the juris- 
diction of the king’s waywodes only. A few days 
later the king accorded them the additional right to 
establish in the lower portion of the city a syna. 


Lithuania 


a i 


gogue, cemetery, and bath-house, as well as stores 
for the sale of Kasher meat. The burghers natu- 
rally resented the grant of these privileges and used 
every effort to secure their curtailment. Their en- 
deavors evidently met with success, for in 1606 the 
Jews of Wilna found it necessary to petition the 
king for protection. 

Later decrees of Sigismund show that ultimately 
anti-Jewish influences prevailed at his court. In 
1597 he granted the Magdeburg Rights to the city 
of Vitebsk, but denied by a legal technicality the 
right of the Jews to reside permanently in the city. 
Another decree provided that no synagogue should 
be built without the king’s permission. In the 
carrying out of this enactment the Jews were prac- 
tically compelled to secure the permission of the 
Catholic clergy also whenever they desired to build 
asynagogue, Still another decree, which was later 
incorporated into the statutes, provided for the ele- 
vation to nobility of Jewish converts to Christianity. 
The rapidly growing number of the so-called “ Jeru- 
salem nobles” later caused alarm among the Polish 
nobility, and in 1768 the law was repealed. 

With the permanent establishment of the Jesuits 
in Poland and in Lithuania, the ramification of their 
intrigues and their active participation in politics 
and in legislation gave them a predominating influ- 
ence in the affairs of the country. Having come to 

Lithuania in the reign of Sigismund 
Influence II., August, the Jesuits at first kept 
of Jesuits. free from politics, and occupied them- 
selves with educational work, science, 
and literature. Stephen Bathori had no fear of 
their intrigues, and even entrusted them with the 
management of the newly established academy in 
Wilna. However, aided by the demoralized condi- 
tion of the country, they soon succeeded in arraying 
the religious factions against one another. Bribery 
was rampant at the court and among the city offi- 
cials. The masses were unruly and licentious, the 
Shlyakhta wilful, the clergy fanatical, and the mag- 
istrates lawless. The Jews were frequently made 
to suffer in these factional struggles. The restric- 
tions put upon them grew constantly; they were 
forbidden to engage in retail trade, handicrafts, and 
other remunerative callings, and they were prac- 
tically outlawed. The only occupation in which they 
were to any extent safe from the rapacity of city 
officials was the keeping of taverns in the townlets 
and villages. There, their only masters were the 
nobles, whom it was easier to please than the numer- 
ous functionaries and Shlyakhta. Thus the Jews 
unfortunately became in some parts of Lithuania 
useful tools in the hands of the nobility for the ex- 
ploitation of the peasantry. The lords then found 
it expedient to take the Jews under their protection. 
Prominent among them were the Radziwils in Lith- 
uania, and the Wishnevetzkis in the Ukraine. 

Ladislaus IV. (1682-48) was not a zealous Catho- 
lic, and he had no love for the Jesuits. Heattempted 
to make peace between the warring religious fac- 
tions, and sought to revive the ancient rights of the 
Jews. On March 11 and 16, 1633, he confirmed the 
charters of privileges of the Jews of Lithuania, and 
decreed that all suits between Jews and Christians 
should be tried by the waywodes and elders and not 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


128 





by the city magistrates, who were the avowed ene. 
mies of the Jews, and often discriminated against 
them. He also checked the anti-Jewish student 
demonstrations, instigated by Jesuit teachers. All 
appeals in suits betwecn Jews were to be brought 
before the king or his vice-regent. 

Notwithstanding his religious tolerance, however, 
Ladislaus lacked the energy to resist the power of 
the clergy and the merchants, and was vacillating 
in his policy. At times he supported the Jews; at 
other times he yielded to the influence of their op- 
ponents. In 1633 and again in 1646 he confirmed 
the decree of his father (July, 1626) expelling Jews 
from the central portion of Moghilef and assigning 
them new quarters in the lower portion of the city. At 
the instigation of the Christian merchants of Wilna 
he also limited the rights of the Jews of that city. 
Aided by the propaganda of the clergy, the burgh- 
ers caused new acts to be introduced, known as “De 
Judeis.” It was decreed, for instance, that Jews 
should not appear on the main streets or in the market- 
places on Christian holidays; that Jewish physi- 
cians should not attend Christian patients; and that 
Jewish barbers should neither shave nor cup Chris- 
tians. Fortunately for the Jews, on account of the 
powerful protection of the nobility, enactments 
could not always be carried out. Moreover these de- 
crees, advocated by the lesser clergy and the Jesuits, 
were opposed by other powerful Church magnates, 
the bishops and the archbishops, who, as landed 
proprietors, availed themselves of the services of the 
Jews. Thus in the Catholic Church itself there 
were two parties, one favorable and the other an- 
tagonistic to the Jews; and it is often found that 
the archbishops and bishops were in opposition to 
the Church councils. 

On the whole, the animosity toward the Jews pro- 
duced by various economic evils had taken such deep 
root that Ladislaus, well-meaning as he was, found 
himself unable to stem the tide of class dissensions. 
The Jews themselves felt grateful for whatever 
efforts he made in their behalf, as was thus voiced by 
one of the leading rabbis of his time, Shabbethai ben 
Meir ha-Kohen of Wilna (SHak): “He was a right- 
eous king, worthy to be counted among the just; 
for he always showed favor to the Jews, and was 
true to his promise.” The Jewish masses, who had 
found safety on the estates of the landed nobility, ulti- 
mately became scapegoats in the bitter struggle of 
the Greek Catholic peasantry with the Polish nobles 
and Roman Catholic clergy, a struggle which cul- 
minated in the Cossacks’ UPRISING, 

The fury of this uprising destroyed the organiza- 
tion of the Lithuanian Jewish communities. The 
survivors who returned to their old homes in the 
latter half of the seventeenth century were practi- 
cally destitute. The wars which raged constantly in 

the Lithuanian territory brought ruin 

Effect of to the entire country and deprived the 

Cossacks’ Jews of the opportunity to earn more 
Uprising. thana bare livelihood. The intensity 
of their struggle for existence left them 

no time to reestablish the conditions which had ex- 
isted up to 1648. JonHNn Castutr (1648-68) sought 
to ameliorate their condition by granting various 
concessions to the Jewish communities of Lithuania. 


129 





Attempts to return to the old order in the com- 
munal organization were not wanting, as is evident 
from contemporary documents. Thus in 1672 Jew- 
ish elders from various towns and villages in the 
grand duchy of Lithuania secured a charter from 
King Michael Wishnevetzki (1669-78), decreeing 
“that on account of the increasing number of Jews 
guilty of offenses against the Shlyakhta and other 
Christians, Which result in the enmity of the Chris- 
tians toward the Jews, and because of the inability 
of the Jewish elders to punish such offenders, who 
are protected by the lords, the king permits the 
kahals to summon the criminals before the Jewish 
courts for punishment and exclusion from the com- 
munity when necessary.” The efforts to resurrect 
the old power of the kahals were not successful, 
The impoverished Jewish merchants, having no 
capital of their own, were compelled to borrow 
money from the nobility, from churches, congrega- 
tions, monasteries, and various religious orders. 
Loans from the latter were usually for an unlimited 
period and were secured by mortgages on the real 
estate of the kahal. The kahals thus became hope- 
lessly indebted to the clergy and the nobility. 

Numerous complaints to King Jomn Sopreski 
(1674-96) by the Jews of Brest against their com- 
munal leaders, led him (May, 1676) to grant the 
rabbi of Brest, Mark Benjaschewitsch, jurisdiction 
in criminal cases over the Jews of his community, 
and to invest him with the power toimpose corporal 
punishment and even thesentence of death. Under 
this ruler the Lithuanian communities saw a partial 
restoration of their old prosperity, and the authority 
of the LITHUANIAN COUNCIL served to bring some 
order out of the chaotic condition of the Lithuanian 
Jewry. Still the real stability of the old communi- 
ties was destroyed, and frequent conflicts arose in 
regard to the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of 
the kahals. In the middle of the eighteenth cen- 
tury all the Lithuanian kahals were insolvent (see 
Jew. Encyc. vii. 410b, s.v. KAMAL). 

In 1792 the Jewish population of Lithuania was 
estimated at 250,000 (as compared with 120,000 in 
1569). The whole of the commerce and industries 
of Lithuania, now rapidly declining, was in the hands 
of the Jews. The nobility lived for the most parton 
their estates and farms, some of Which were managed 
by Jewish leaseholders. The city properties were con- 
centrated in the possession of monasteries, churches, 
and the lesser nobility. The Christian merchants 
were poor. Such was the condition of affairs in Lith- 
uania at the time of the second partition of Poland 
(1793), when the Jews became subjects of Russra. 

The founding of the yeshibot in Lithuania was 
due to the Lithuanian-Polish Jews who studied in 
the west, and to the German Jews who migrated 
about that time to Lithuania and Poland. Very lit- 
tle is known of these early yeshibot. No mention 

is made of them or of prominent Lith- 


Judicial uanian rabbis in Jewish writings until 
Function the sixteenth century. The first 

of the known rabbinical authority and head 
Rabbis. of a yeshibah was Isaac Bezaleel of 


Vladimir, Volhynia, who was already 
an old man when Luria went to Ostrog in the fourth 
decade of the sixteenth century. Another rab- 

VIII.—9 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 





binical authority, Kalman Haberkaster, rabbi of 
Ostrog and predecessor of Sclomon Luria, died in 
1559. Occasional references to the yeshibah of Brest 
are found in the writings of the contemporary rabbis 
Solomon Luria (d. 1585), Moses IssenuEs (d. 1572), 
and David Gans (d. 1589), who speak of its ac- 
tivity. Of the yeshibot of Ostrog and Vladimir in 
Volhynia it is known that they were in a flourishing 
condition at the middle of the sixteenth century, 
and that their heads vied with one another in Tal- 
mudic scholarship. Mention is also made by Gans 
of the head of the Kremenetz yeshibah, Isaac Cohen 
(d. 1578), of whom but little is known otherwise. 
For other prominent scholars in Lithuania at that 
time see Brest-Lirovsk; Gropno; KREMENETZ; 
Ostroc; WILNA. 

At the time of the Lublin Union, Solomon Luria 
was rabbi of Ostrog, and was regarded as one of the 
greatest Talmudic authorities in Poland and Lith- 
uania. In 1568 King Sigismund ordered that the 
suits between Isaac BoRopAvKA and Mendel Isako- 
vich, who were partners in the farming of certain 
customs taxes in Lithuania, be carried for decision 
to Rabbi Solomon Luria and two auxiliary rabbis 
from Pinsk and Tykotzin. 

The far-reaching authority of the leading rabbis of 
Poland and Lithuania, and their wide knowledge of 
practical life, are apparent from numerous decisions 
cited in the responsa, They were always the cham- 
pions of justice and morality. Inthe “ Etan ha-Ez- 
rahi” (Ostrog, 1796) of Abraham Rapoport (known 
also as Abraham Schrenzel; 1. 1650), Rabbi Meir 
Sack is cited as follows: “I emphatically protest 
against the custom of our communal leaders of pur- 
chasing the freedom of Jewish criminals. Sucha 
policy encourages crime among our people. I am 
especially troubled by the fact that, thanks to the 
clergy, such criminals may escape punishment by 
adopting Christianity. Mistaken piety impels our 
Jeaders to bribe the officials, in order to prevent 
such conversions. We should endeavor to deprive 
criminals of opportunities to escape justice.” The 
same sentiment was expressed in the sixteenth cen- 
tury by R. Meir Lublin (Responsa, § 188). Another 
instance, cited by Katz from the same responsa, 
likewise shows that Jewish criminals invoked the 
aid of priests against theauthority of Jewish courts 
by promising to become converts to Christianity. 

The decisions of the Polish-Lithuanian rabbis are 
frequently marked by breadth of view also, as is in- 
stanced by a decision of Joel Sirkes (“ Bet Hadash,” 
§ 127) to the effect that Jews may employ in their 
religious services the melodies used in Christian 
churches, “since music is neither Jewish nor Chris- 
tian, and is governed by universal laws.” 

Decisions by Solomon Luria, Meir Katz, and Mor- 
decai Jaffe show that the rabbis were acquainted 
with the Russian language and its philology. Jaffe, 
for instance, in a divorce case where the spelling 
of the woman’s name as “ Lupka” or “ Lubka” was 
in question, decided that the word is correctly 
spelled witha “b,” and not with a “p,” since the 
origin of the name was the Russian verb “lubit” 
= “to love,” and not “lupit” = “to beat” (“ Lebush 
ha-Buz we-Argaman,” § 129). Meir Katz (“Ge- 
burat Anashim,” $ 1) explains that the name of Brest- 


Lithuania 
Litthauer 


Litovs« is written in divorce cases “Brest” and not 
“Brisk,” “because the majority of the Lithuanian 
Jews use the Russian language.” It is not so with 
Brisk, in the district of Kujawa, the name of that 
town being always spelled “Brisk.” Katz (a Ger- 
man) at the conclusion of his responsum expresses 
the hope that when Lithuania shall have become 
more enlightened, the people will speak one lan- 
guage only—German—and that also Brest-Litovsk 
will be written “ Brisk.” 

The responsa throw an interesting light also on 
the life ot the Lithuanian Jewsand on their relations 
to their Christian neighbors. Benjamin Aaron Sol- 
nik states in his “Mas’at Binyamin” (end of six- 
teenth and beginning of seventeenth century) that 
“the Christians borrow clothes and jewelry from 

the Jews when they go to church.” 
Items from Joel Sirkes (/.c. § 79) relates that a 
the Christian woman came to the rabbi 

Responsa. and expressed her regret at having 

been unable to save the Jew Shlioma 
from drowning. A numberof Christians had looked 
on indifferently while the drowning Jew was strug- 
glinginthe water. They were upbraided and beaten 
severely by the priest, who appeared a few minutes 
later, for having failed to rescue the Jew. 

Rabbi Solomon Luria gives an account (Responsa, 
§ 20) of a quarrel that occurred in a Lithuanian 
conununity concerning a cantor whom some of the 
members wished to dismiss. The synagogue was 
closed in order to prevent him from exercising 
his functions, and religious services were thus dis- 
continued for several days. The matter was there- 
upon carried to the local lord, who ordered the re- 
opening of the building, saying that the house 
of God might not be closed, and that the cantor’s 
claims should be decided by the learned rabbis of 
Lithuania. Joseph Katz mentions (“She’erit Yo- 
sef,” § 70) a Jewish community which was for- 
bidden by the local authorities to kill cattle and to 
sell meat—an occupation which provided a liveli- 
hood for a large portion of the Lithuanian Jews. 
For the period of a year following this prohibition the 
Jewish community was on several occasions assessed 
at the rate of three gulden per head of cattle in 
order to furnish funds wherewith to induce the offi- 
cials fo grant a hearing of the case. The Jews 


finally reached an agreement with the town magis-. 


trates under which they were to pay 40 gulden an- 
nually for the right to slaughter cattle. Accord- 
ing to Hillel ben Herz (“Bet Hillel,” Yoreh De‘ah, 
§ 157), Naphtali says the Jews of Wilna had been 
compelled to uncover when taking an oath in court, 
but later purchased from the tribunal the privilege 
to swear with covered head, a practise subsequently 
made unnecessary by a decision of one of their 
rabbis to the effect that an oath might be taken 
with uncovered head. 

The responsa of Meir Lublin show (§ 40) that the 
Lithuanian communities frequently aided the Ger- 
man and the Austrian Jews. On the expulsion of 
the Jews from Silesia, when the Jewish inhabitants 
of Silz had the privilege of remaining on condition 
that they would pay the sum of 2,000 gulden, the 
Lithuanian communities contributed one-fifth of the 
amount. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


130 





The influence in communal life of prominent rab- 
binical scholars, such as Mordecai Jaffe, Moses 
Isserles, Solomon Luria, and Meir Lublin, proved 
but a slight check to the growing misrule of the ka- 
hals. The individuality of the Lithuanian Jew was 
lost in the kahal, whose advantages were thus largely 
counterbalanced by the suppression of personal lib- 
erty. The tyranny of the kahal administration and 
the external oppression drove the great mass of the 
Lithuanian Jewry to seek consolation in the dry 
formalism of Talmudic precepts. The Talmud and 
its endless commentaries became the sole source of 
information and instruction. Every Jew was com- 
pelled by the communal elders to train his children 
in Talmudic lore. The Halakah offered a solution 
for every question in Jewish life, while the poetry 
of the Haggadah supplied alleviation for sorrow and 
hope for the future. Reformers arising among the 
Lithuanian Jews were forced by the kahal elders 
either to leave the community or to bend to the will 
of the administration. All was sacrificed to the in- 
violability of customs sanctioned by tradition or by 
the letter of the Law. The ties of friendship and 
family relationship were subordinated to the interests 
of thecommunity. Hence it is little to be wondered 
at that the Cabala found fertile soil in Lithuania. 
The marked indications of approaching political an- 
archy were the chief causes of the organization of 
the LITHUANIAN COUNCIL. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Antonovich, Monografit po Istorti Zapadnoi 
i Yugo-Zapadnoi Rossii, vol. i., Kiev, 1885; Bershadski, Li- 
tovskie Yevrei, St. Petersburg, 1883; idem, Russku-Yevrei- 
ski Arkiv, 2 vols., i). 1882; Czacki, Rozprava o Zydach ¢ 
Karaitach, Wilna, 1807; idem, O Litewskich i Polskich 
Prawach, Warsaw, 1800; Dubnov, Yevreiskaya Istoriya, 
vol. ii., &.v., Odessa, 1897 ; Graetz, History of the Jews, Hebrew 
ed., vols. vii. and viii., s.v.; Harkavy, in Russische Revue, 
vols, xxil., xxiii., St. Petersburg, 1883-84; Jaroszewicz, Obraz 
Litwy ... od Czasow Najdawniejszych do Konca Wieku, 
xviii., Wilna, 1844; Kraushaar, Historya Zydéw w Polsce, 2 
vols., Warsaw, 1865-66; Leontovich, Istoricheskoe Izslyedo- 
vanie 0 Pravakh Litovsko-Russhikh Yevreyev, Kiev, 1864; 
Maciejowski, Zydzi w Polsce nia Rusi i Litwie, Warsaw, 
1878; Narbutt, Dzieje Narodu Litewskiego, part viii., p. 490; 
Neubauer, Aus der Petersburyer Bibliothek, Leipsic, 1866; 
Regesty i Nadpisi, vol. 1., St. Petersburg, 1899; Sternberg, 
Geschichte der Juden in Polen, Leipsic, 1878; Sistemati- 
cheski Ukazatel, s.v., St. Petersburg, 1893; Sbornik Budush- 
chnosti, i. 244. 

H. R. 


LITHUANIAN COUNCIL (Hebr. Wa‘ad 
Medinot Lita, or Wa‘ad ha-Medinot ha-Ra- 
shiyyot de-Lita): Long before the Union of Lub- 
lin, probably with the beginning of the sixteenth 
century, the Jews of Poland and Lithuania were 
taxed as a single body, the pro rata assessment being 
made by the Jews themselves. In 1613 Sigismund 
IIf. decreed separate assessments for the Jews of 
Lithuania and Poland. The former were obliged to 
pay 9,000 gulden and the latter 7,000 gulden, the 
per capita payment being the same in each case. 
In order to assure an equitable distribution of the 
taxes among the several communities, and because 
of the desire to secure uniform legislation in relig- 
ious mattersand to protect their communal interests, 
the Jews of Lithuania organized, in 1623, a separate 
council of their own, this council being known as the 
“Wa‘ad ha-Medinot ha-Rashiyyot de-Lita.” Pre- 
viously, from the Union of Lublin in 1569 until 1623, 
the Jews of Lithuania, not being, perhaps, in urgent 
need of a council of their own, had their represent- 
atives in the Council of Three Countries (Poland, 


131 


a 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lithuania 
Litthauer 


—_———e— oO A re PPE ear P07 


Russia, Lithuania), or in the Council of Five Lands 
(see CoUNCIL OF Fotr LaNnps), 

It was customary for the Lithuanian delegates to 
hold preliminary meetings at Brest-Litovsk before 
taking part in the deliberation of the general coun- 
cils. It has not yet been determined, however, to 
what extent the Lithuanian Jews were governed by 
the decisions of these councils; only this much is 
certain, that while they were well represented at the 
councils’ sessions they occasionally refused to obey 
their rulings. The Lithuanian councils were orig- 
inally composed of delegates from the three most 
important communities—Pinsk, Brest, and Grodno. 
Wilna was added in 1652, and Slutsk in 1691. The 
councils were designated in accordance with the 

number of communities represented, 


Relation as “Wa‘ad Shalosh [Arba‘, or Ha- 
to Council mesh] Medinot Rashiyyot de-Lita” (= 
of Four “Council of Three[Four, or Five] Main 
Lands. Districts of Lithuania”). The Lithua- 


nian Council in time became an author- 
itative body in all local Jewish affairs ; but, while 
practically an independent body, it assumed a sub- 
ordinate position to the Council of Four Lands. At 
times the two councils worked in unison in matters 
of common interest during the sessions of the Coun- 
cil of Four Lands, but where differences occurred, 
the authority of the latter prevailed. Thus, in the 
dispute in regard to Tykotzin, in the government of 
Lomza, a boundary town between Poland and Lith- 
uania, it was decided to place the town under the 
jurisdiction of the Council of Four Lands, although 
formerly it had been regarded as Lithuanian terri- 
tory. Similarly, in the dispute between Tykotzin 
and Grodno concerning the iess important neighbor- 
ing communities of Zabludov, Horodok, and Khvor- 
oshcha, the latter were assigned by the Council of 
Four Lands to Tykotzin. In this case, however, 
the decision was not accepted as final (“Sefer ha- 
Yobel,” pp. 257-259). 

The Lithuanian Council, Hke that of the Four 
Lands, had no fixed meeting-place ; it assembled 
biennially or triennially at Zabludov, Seltzy, or 
elsewhere. Like that of the Four Lands, also, it 
served to cement the interests of the Lithuanian 
and other Russo-Polish Jews at a time when disso- 
Jution and demoralization reigned in the Polish king- 
dom, and it acted as a bulwark against the rancor 
of the Christian clergy, especially the Jesuits, who 
made continuous attacks on the Jews. The records 
of the Lithuanian Council are better preserved than 
those of the Council of Four Lands. There is ex- 
tant a complete list of the mectings held by the 
Lithuanian Council from 1628 to 1762, when it was 
abolished, after over 1,000 regulations (“takkanot ”) 
nad been adopted. These takkanot were made 
with the following ends in view: 

(1) To encourage and endear to the people the study of the 
Tuimud by establishing yeshibot, and to supervise the conduct 
of students. (2) To protect the interests of the Jewish people 
as a Whole and as individuals against the malice of non-Jews, 
hy pleading the cause of the Jews in the Polish Diets. (3) To 
supervise the conduct of the coinmuuities as well as of individ- 
uals, in order to prevent them from rousing the antagonism of 
their neighbors by indulging in impropér and illegal trades. 
(4) To determine and properly distribute the government taxes 


imposed upon Jews. (5) To determine the boundaries of each 
kahal district. (6) To determine the duties of each community 


and its shave in the common efforts and expenditures in cases 
Where bicod accusations were to be contested. (7) To deter- 
mine the right of membership to be granted to new settlers in 
the econnnunities (°° heskat yishshub*') : as euch Jewish commu- 
nity stood responsible for the conduct of its individuals, restric- 
tions Were necessary to regulate the granting of membership to 
newcomers. (8) To aid poverty-stricken communities and indi- 
viduals. (9) To maintain and aid poor settlers in Palestine. 


Of the regulations enacted at the mectings of the 
Lithuanian Council the following deserve mention, 
since they afford an insight into the state of culture 
of the Lithuanian Jewsand into the character of the 
council itself: “Every community shall carefully 
guard against card- and dice-playing, and offenders 
shall be fined and subjected to corporal punishment ” 
(1623; No. 51). “Beggars invading Lithuania and 
Russia [meaning White Russia], especially those 
who disguise themselves as scholars and pious per- 
sons while committing secretly various wicked acts, 
shall not be allowed to remain in any ope commu- 
nity more than twenty-four hours” (1623; No. 87). 
“It shall be the duty of the communal leaders to 
expose any attempts at fraud which may be discov- 
ered on the part of Jews borrowing money or goods 
from a ‘shlakhtitz’ [peasant], or leasing from lords 
estates, taxes, and other sources of revenue. On the 
refusal of the parties likely to be defrauded to heed 
the warning of the conimunal leaders, the latter 
shall declare the transaction void, using force if nec- 
essary, in order that the Christians concerned may 
not suffer loss” (No, 26). “It is incumbent upon 
the three chief communities of Lithuania to arrange 
annually for the marriage of thirty poor girls, giving 
each a dowry of thirty gulden.” 

Among the takkanot there arealso regulations re- 
garding competition in business, against luxury, and 
against expeusive and gaudy dresses. 

In 1654-56, when the Russians invaded Lithua- 
nia, the activities of the Lithuanian Council relaxed. 
It convened less frequently, and the regulations 
adopted between 1656 and i670 deal in the main 
with financial accounts. After 1670, however, it 
resumed its former energy. | 

The Lithuanian Council was abolished about 1762, 
at the same time and for the same reason as the 
Council of Four Lands. Thenceforward taxes were 
no longer imposed on Lithuania as a whole, but on 
each community separately, the prime motive for 
the union of the communities being thus abolished. 

H. R. 

LITTAUER, LUCIUS NATHAN: American 
congressman and manufacturer; born in Glovers- 
ville, N. Y., Jan. 20, 1859. He graduated from Har- 
vard University in 1878, after which he engaged in 
the glove-manufacturing business with his father, 
whom he succeeded in 1882. He was elected in 1896 
to the 55th Congress as Republican representative 
of the 25th District of New York and has been re- 
elected to each succeeding Congress. He has served 
as a member of the Committee on Appropriations. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Congressional Directory of the 58th 
Congress; American Jewish Fear Book, 1902-3. 


LITTE OF REGENSBURG. See Jupzo- 
GERMAN LITERATURE. 
LITTHAUER, ISSACHAR BAR: Polish- 


German Talmudist; flourished at the beginning of 


Little Russia 
Liturgy 


the nineteenth century. He wrote: “Iggeret Yis- 
sakar,” on morality and religion, in the form of a let- 
ter to hisson (Budapest and Lemberg, 1826); “ Da‘at 
Yissakar,” commentary on Rashi to the Pentateuch 
and the Five Megillot (Budapest, 1827). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 184, Warsaw, 
1886; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 258; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. 
No. 5281. 

H. R. A. S. W. 


LITTLE RUSSIA. See Russia. 


LITURGISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT. See PERI- 
ODICALS. 

LITURGY: The Jewish religious service falls, 
generally, into two main divisions—instruction and 
prayer. This division of the service has existed 
since the earliest times. In the time of Isaiah the 

people gathered in the courts of the 

Divisions Temple toreceive instruction from the 

of Divine Prophets and to pray (Isa. i. 12-15), 
Service. while on the day of the New Moon 
and on the Sabbath women also visited 
them (II Kings iv. 23). Atthe Feast of Tabernacles 
in the Sabbatical year the Law was read to the as- 
sembled people (Deut. xxxi. 10-18), and Ezra re- 
cited passages from the Pentateuch to the commu- 
nity (Neh. viit. 5-8). In the course of time this led 
to the custom of reading certain portions of the 
Scripture, especially of the Pentateuch, to the peo- 
ple on the Sabbath, on feast-days, and even on Mon- 
days and Thursdays, as well as on New Moon and 
fast-days, and by the first century of the common era 
this was regarded as an ancient usage (Josephus, 
“Contra Ap.” ii. 17, end; Acts xv. 21; B. K. 82a e¢ 
passim ; comp. Philo, ed. Mangey, ii. 568, 630; 
Winer, “B. R.” ii. 549; Zunz, “G. V.” pp. 1-7). 
This part of the worship is described under HaFrta- 
RAH; MEGILLOT; LAw, READING FROM THE. The 
second division, that of prayer, is still more ancient, 
and is frequently mentioned in the Bible (I Sam. i. 
10; I Kings viii. 12 e¢ seg. ; I] Kings xx, 2et passim), 
while Deutero-Isaiah speaks of the house of God as 
a “house of prayer for all people” (Isa. lvi. 7; on 
the form of prayer and posture see Guthe, “ Kurzes 
Bibel wirterbuch,” pp. 82 e¢ seg., and other diction- 
aries; also ADORATION, ForMs OF). In general, it 
may be said that in the earliest times the prayers 
were short, and were used only occasionally in pri- 
vate devotion, and that no ritual was developed in 
the pre-exilic period. Formal prayers are found 
only in Deut. xxvi. 5-13 and Lev. xvi. 21. 

In view of the position which the Temple occu- 
pied, it may be assumed that after the exile the public 

worship there tnfluenced the liturgy, 

Influence and in great part even created it; the 
ofthe Tem- prayers just mentioned were part of 
ple on the the Temple worship. The Levites 

Liturgy. recited prayers of thanksgiving and 

praise during the morning and evening 
sacrifices (I Chron. xxiii. 30), and Neh. xi. 17 indi- 
cates that this was an established ceremony. The 
threefold repetition of the daily prayer (Dan. vi. 11; 
Ps. Iv. 18 [A. V. 17]) is likewise connected with the 
Temple service, the second prayer corresponding 
perhaps with the sacrifices which were offered by 
individuals between the official morning and evening 
sacrifices. The Talmud says, with correct historical 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


132 





insight, that the prayers were instituted to corre. 
spond with the sacrifices (Ber, 24b, passdin). The 
fact that in praver the face was turned toward the 
Temple (Dan. vi. 10; TI Chron. vi. 34: Ber, 4h-5a, 
passim), as well as the contents of the praver, to- 
gether with various other indications, clearly shows 
that the synagogal liturgy was derived primarily 
from the Temple worship. 

In the Temple itself, side by side with the sacrifi- 
cial cult, there existed a liturgy whose most splen- 
did remnants are the Psalms, which constituted the 
hymnal of the Second Temple and now occupy 
an “important position in the synagogal liturgy. 
Those Psalms which are cast in the form of prayers 
and hymns soon took their place as hymns in the 
service of the sanctuary, even though they were not 
originally composed for this purpose, and they were 
sung, especially on feast-days, in the synagogue 
and in private gatherings. In its descriptions of 
Temple festivities the Book of Chronicles alludes to 
them, especially to the eighteen ‘ Hallelujah,’ ‘ Hal- 
lel,’ and ‘ Hodu’ Psalms (Ps. cv.-cvii., exi.-cxviil.,, 
CXXXV., CXXXvi., exlvi.-cl.)... . Prophecy and 
psalmody were gradually typitied in two persons, 
Moses and David. .. . Even after the destruction 
of the Temple these united elements left their im- 
press upon the Synagogue: the readings were de- 
voted to the Law and the discourses to the Prophets, 
while entire psalms, or verses from them, were used 
as prayers” (Zunz,“8. P.” pp. 4 e¢ seg.). The place 
which many Psalms occupied in the worship may still 
be recognized from their form (final verses, notes on 
the mode of recitation, etc.) or from their contents 
(see the commentarics to the Psalms by Olshausen, 
Hupfeld, and others, and especially by Graetz), The 
authors of the superscriptions and concluding words 
of the Psalms recognize the collection as liturgical 
(Ps. Ixxii., end: “The prayers of David .. . are 
ended”), and tradition frequently alludes to this 
fact (e.g., Tamid, end). In the ritual of the Syna- 
gogue the Psalms retain their ancient position, at 
least as regards the text of the prayers. “In the 
Sabbath and festival discourses the wise man be- 
comes the prophet, and the leader in prayer the 
psalmist ” (Zunz, é.¢.). 

In addition to the sacrifice, which was in the 
care of the priests, and the singing of the Psalms, 
which was performed by the Levites, the Temple 
had its special hturgy for the third class of the peo- 
ple, the Israelites. The entire nation had been di- 
vided into twenty-four sections, so that to each divi- 
sion of priests there corresponded one of Levites and 
one of Israelites. Each section served for a week in 
the Temple, and this period was a time of fasting, 
for the Israelites assigned to the section doing serv- 
ice, both those who were in Jerusalem and those 
who had remained in their country homes. Every 
day they read a prescribed portion of the first 
chapter of Genesis. These details are recorded in 
Ta‘an. iv. 1, in both Talmuds ad loc., and in Tosef., 
Ya‘an., iv., which seem to assign the beginnings of 
synagogal worship to the Temple; that there was 
some foundation for their account is shown by 
the fact that Joshua b. Hananiah, a teacher liv- 
ing in the time of the Temple, is mentioned. It 
is possible, however, that the reading of the Torah 


133 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Little Russia 
Liturgy 





was taken over intothe Temple ritual from an al- 
ready existing synagogal ritual. 

The services in periods of drought constitute an 
independent source for the liturgy of the Syna- 


gogue. The frequent scarcity of rain 
Fast-Day greatly distressed the people, for it 
Services. meant famine and death to man and 


beast. At such times public assem- 
blies for fasting and praver were held as early as the 
time of the Prophets, in which old and young, the 
bride and the groom, took part (Joel i.; ii. 16-17; 
Jer. viii., especially verse 11). An entire treatise of 
the Mishnah (Ta‘anit) is devoted to the regulations 
in regard to fasting, and its second chapter discusses 
the liturgy in detail. The prayer consisted of 
twenty-four benedicttons. of which eighteen were 
those of the daily prayer and six were additional 
(sce Schiirer, “Gesch.” 3d ed., ii, 490; Israel Lévi, 
in “R. E. f.” xivii., where the sources and bibliog- 
raphy are given). The final evening prayer, “ Ne- 
‘ilah,” recited on this oceasion, has been preserved 
onJy in the service for the Day of Atonement. 
The liturgy for the fast was developed long before 
the common era, and it is highly probable not only 
that it was evolved independently of the Temple, 
but that it-influenced the beginnings of the daily 
form of worship. 

It is certain, however, that the institution of tbe 
reading of the “Shema‘” (Deut. vi. 4-9) originated 
entirely in the Temple service. At the morning 
sacrifice the priests read the Ten Commandments 
and the “Shema‘” and recited several benedictions 
(Tamid v.). Contrary to the custom in all other 
ceremonies, the day for the Temple service began 
with sunrise, and not with evening or with the ap- 
pearance of the moon, and since the first rays of the 
sun were awaited before beginning the morning sacri- 
fice there was some danger lest it might be held that 
thesun-god was being worshiped, Hence the congre- 
gation was addressed as follows: “Hear, O Israel, the 
Eternal is our God; the Eternalis One.” It may have 

become customary, therefore, as early 


The Read- as the Persian period to recite the first 
ing of the sentence of the “Shema‘” in the Tem- 


‘“‘Shema‘.” ple before beginning the sacrifice, the 
other verses, including Deut. xi. 13- 
21, being added in the course of time. The require- 
ment that it should be recited outside the Temple 
and before sunrise (Ber. v. 1 e¢ passtm) points to the 
origin of this usage. Its antiquity may be inferred 
from the fact that Josephus (“ Ant.” iv. 8, § 18) 
seems to ascribe it to Moses and that in traditional 
literature it is explained asa Biblical custom. <At 
that time it must have been in existence for some 
centuries, for its genesis had been forgotten. The 
reading of the “Shema‘” in the evening must have 
been introduced somewhat later, since it was not re- 
cited in the Temple, and the rules governing it were 
less rigorously defined. 
logue probably became customary in the Greck 
period in order to guard, by the solemn utterance of 
the first two commandments, against the imminent 
danger from Hellenistic polytheism (see Blau in 
“R. E. J.” xxxi. 179-201, where the history of the 
benedictions in the “Shema‘ ” is discussed). In an- 
cient times the “Shema‘” was not recited in the 


The reading of the Deca- | 


manner now customary in the synagogue, but either 
with the leader, verse by verse alternately, or in 
some other way. As it was Israel’s solemn confes- 
sion of faith, each one knew it by heart (Ta‘an. 26a), 
and it was recited in the synagogue “with one 
mouth, one voice, one song ” (Cant. R. viii. 14). It 
might be read in any language (Sotah vii. 1 and 
parallels), and a scribe once heard it in Greck (Yer. 
Sotah 21b, below). It was sometimes read back- 
ward (Ber. ii. 4 and parallels), a custom which is 
reminiscent of magic practises (see SHEMA‘). 

The second and doubtless later division of the 
daily liturgy is the prayer consisting of eighteen 
benedictions, named the “ Tefillah” «ar éfoy#v in the 

sources. This petition, which is still 
‘*Shemoneh included in every Jewish prayer- 
‘Esreh.” book, is called SHEMONEH ‘ESREH 
(eighteen prayers) even in the ear- 
liest sources (Ber. vi. 3; Ta‘an. ii. 2). Rabbi Johanan 
(d. 279), the famous director of the school of Tibe- 
rias, who was distinguished also for his knowledge 
of the historical traditions, ascribes the introduction 
of these benedictions, the emphasizing of the sanc- 
tity of the Sabbath, the feast-days, and the bene- 
dictions at their close, to the Great Synagogue (Ber. 
38a). Four kinds of liturgy, in the widest sense 
of the word, are here mentioned: “ berakot,” “ tefil- 
lot,” “hiddushot,” “ habdalot.” In the benedictions. 
are included, ¢.g., the sentences of thanksgiving 
recited after meals, which are probably very ancient 
(see Maimonides, “ Yad,” Tefillah), and which are ex- 
plained as Biblical, as well as all blessings spoken on 
partaking of fruit, executing commands, and the like, 
The beginnings of these prayers, perhaps, date back 
to the Persian period, their brevity and pure, simple 
Hebrew favoring this view. Their development, 
doubtless, was gradual and occupied several cen- 
turies. This may be assumed even in the case of the 
“Shemoneh ‘Esreh,” of which the first and last three 
benedictions constitute the foundation and hence are 
the oldest portion; and they are mentioned in the 
Mishnah with special names designating the several 
sentences (R. H.iv.; Tamid v.1; R. H. 82a). “The 
ancient regulation which designates that portion for 
all the days of the year, while the other passages of 
the ‘ Tefillah’ are excluded on the Sabbath and on 
festivals, is almost certainly a proof of greater age” 
(Zunz, “G. V.” 2d ed., p. 380). The intermediate 
twelve sentences are of later date, and Zunz ascribes 
them to various periods. Different versions of one 
and the samme prayer were apparently differentiated 
and included as independent benedictions. These, 
however, never received a stereotyped form for gen- 
eral use, and each has its own history (El\bogen, in 
“ Monatsschrift,” 1902). Even before the destruc- 
tion of the Temple the twelfth benediction was 
added expressly against apostates and traitors (“ bir- 
kat ha-minim”), and later was the cause of vari- 
ous changes in the “Shemoneh ‘Esreh ” (Zunz, é.c. p. 
382; Elbogen, /.c.). This prayer can not have been 
directed exclusively against Judseo-Christians, for 
at the time of its composition they can have been 
neither powerful nor antinomian in Palestine (see 
MINIM.) 

On account of its age the “Shema‘” was much 

more widely known than the “Tefillah” which 


* 


Liturgy 


has just been outlined. This is clear from the fact 
that the * Tefillah”’ is regarded as a rabbinical, 
while the “Shema‘” is regarded as 

‘¢Shema‘” a Biblical, prayer. As late as 100 
and C.K. a prominent scribe asserted that 
‘¢Tefillah.”? the entire “Tecfillah” was unneces- 
sary and that the evening “Te- 

fillah ? was not binding, in consequence of which 
view he became involved in a controversy with 
the patriarch GAMALTEL IT. (Ber. 28a, passin; E)- 
bogen, @.¢c.). On account of its length it was not 
suitable for the mass of the people. Asa matter of 
fact, only seven, nine, or ten benedictions are in- 
cluded in the “ Tefillah ” for the feast-days, although 
they are of earlier date and of greater Importance, 
in view of the occasion. On these days, also, the 
daily benediction was very short, consisting prob- 
ably only of a few words, perhaps as_ follows: 
“Cleanse our hearts that we may serve Thee faith- 
fully” (Frisch, in “Magyar-Zsid6 Szemle, ” 1892. 
pp. 264 et seg., Where the importance of a short 
prayer is shown; comp, 26. pp. 313 et seg., where the 
same author attempts to sketch the historical devel- 
opment of the “ Tefillah”). Probably both because 
it was the custom of the Temple and because they 
were ignorant of the “ Tefillah,” the people them- 
selves did not pray, but listened to the hazzan, the 
“delegate of the community,” and punctuated his 
sentences with “‘ Amen” (R. H. 32a; Elbogen, ¢.c.). 

In the sanctuary the people later responded with 
another formula, mentioned below. They were 
educated for prayer only by centuries of practise, 
and the original formulas, consisting of one or two 
words, remained as distinctive signs in the ampli- 
fied invocations. The “THallel” and “Hodu” for- 
mulas, which are in fact found only in passages from 
the Psalms included in the synagogal ritual, are 
characteristic of the oral worship of the sanctuary. 
The “ Hosanna ” is likewise derived from the Temple, 
and the “Baruk” formula is probably taken from 
the same source, although the latter soon became 
predominant and was repeated frequently both in 
public and in private worship. Prayers for week- 
days, Sabbaths, and fast-days, the liturgy for fast- 
days, and grace before and after meals, as well as all 
kinds of benedictions and prayers of thanksgiving, 
have retained the same fixed form to the present 
day, and may, therefore, be discussed in some detail 
here, together with their historical development. 
As regards their external form, all the prayers des- 
ignated by the Talmud, in the passage cited above 
(Ber. 38a), as “benedictions, prayers, sanctifications 
and habdalahs,” are merely berakot. 

In the earHest times the people prayed only occa- 
sionally, and the benedictions likewise were merely 
incidental utterances of thanks for mercies vouch- 
safed, as for rescue from danger, etc. The different 
forms of the root “barak” occur frequently in the 
Bible, even in the oldest portions. The word meant 
originally “to bend the knee” (comp. “berek ” 
“knee” in Ps. xev. 6), and hence in general “to 
praise,” “to pray,” because the ancients commonly 
knelt on such occasions. In this sense the partici- 
ple (“ baruk ”) is used in the “kal,” and all the other 
forms (“berck,” “meborak,” ctc.) in the * pi‘el” and 
6¢ pu‘ai.” 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


134 





The adjuration “Praise God!” was probably ad- 
dressed to the people of earlier times only in the 
flush of victory after deliverance from the dangers 
of war (Judges v. 2, 9), but later, when a regular 
Temple cult had been instituted, 
it may have been uttered daily, so 
that it became a liturgical formula 
with which divine worship was gen- 
erally concluded (Ps, Ixvili. 27 LA. V. 
26], c. 4, passim). In Ps. cxxxvy., 
(comp. also cxviii. 2-4) Israelites, priests, Levites, 
and the pious are summoned by groups to “ bless the 
Lord!” and it is noteworthy that this invitation is 
placed at the couclusion of the Psalm. The final 
verse, “Blessed be the Lord out of Zion, which 
dwelleth at Jerusalem. Praise ye the Lord,” con- 
stituted the benediction spoken by those who had 
been summoned. The benedictions that conclude 
the closing chapters of the five books of Psalms(xh., 
Ixxii., IXxxix., cvi., cl.), all bemg in substance one 
and the same culogy, may represent synagogal for- 
mulas from the time of the Temple which the people 
intoned after completing the singing of the several 
books. Occasionally, however, the people con- 
cluded with a simple “Amen” (comp. the Psalms 
quoted and I Chron. xvi. 36). It may also be as- 
sumed that such benedictions were not reserved for 
public worship exclusively, but were also pro- 
nounced in private: “TI will bless the Lord at all 
times: his praise shall continually be in my mouth” 
(Ps. xxxiv. 2; comp. exv. 18, cxlv. 2). Mention is 
made of supplications at “evening and morning, 
and at noon” (Ps.lv.18 [A. V. 17]), and of praise 
offered seven times a day (Ps. exix. 164), while in 
another passage only praise rendered in the morning 
is mentioned (Ps. lix. 17). 

The origin of this liturgical usage was the cus- 
tom, on joyful occasions, of praising God for His 


Doxologies 
During 
Public 
Worship. 


goodness. A few examples may be 
Private given here in their Biblical order, 
Benedic- Thus Noah says, “Blessed be the 
tions the Lord God of Shem” (Gen. ix. 26); 
Model. Eliezer prays, “Blessed be the Lord 


God of my master Abraham, who hath 
not left destitute ny master of his mercy and his 
truth” (Gen. xxiv. 27); and Jethro exclaims, 
“Blessed be the Lord, who hath delivered you out 
of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand 
of Pharaoh” (Ex. xviii. 10). Similar utterances are 
found in I Sam. xxv. 82 (David to Abigail) and 
xxv, 39 (where David says of Nabal’s death, 
“ Blessed be the Lord, that hath pleaded the cause 
of my reproach”) and TI Sam. xviii. 28 (Ahimaaz). 
Solomon thanks God in similar phraseology for hav- 
ing placed him on the throne of his father (I Kings 
1. 48, viii. 15; comp. viii. 56), and Hiram, King of 
Tyre, uses the same formula in rejoicing that God 
had given David such a wise son over this great 
people (20. v. 7). The Queen of Sheba says to Solo- 
mon, “ Blessed be the Lord thy God, which delighted 
in thee, to set thee on the throne of Israel” (7b. x. 9). 
This formula is used also in Zech. xi. 5; 1I Sam. 
xxi. 47 (Ps. xvili. 47 [A. V. 46]): Ps. xxvili. 6, 
exliv. 1; Ezra vii. 27; If Chron. ix. 8. It is inter- 
esting to note that in Ruthiv. 14 the women address 
Naomi with the same formula, which shows that 


135 





it was transferred to the liturgy from popular 
speech. 

The doxology in all these passages is really a 
prayer of gratitude to God for blessings bestowed, 
either on the speaker or on another. 
The occasion of the thanksgiving is 
stated at the end and is generally in- 
troduced by the relative pronoun “asher” (also by 
“ki,” Ps. xxviii. 6), or by a participle preceded by 
an article (comp., however, Zech. xi. 5). The same 
order occurs also in the benedictions prescribed by 
the Talmud. The benediction proper is expressed 
in most cases by “baruk,” which generally consti- 
tutes the first word. An exception is found in I 
Kings x. 9 (II Chron, ix. 8), which has “ Yehi 
Adonai Eloheka baruk,” imitating the phraseology 
of * Yehi Shem Adonai meborak” (Job i. 21; Ps. 
cxili. 2). Neither of these formulas is found else- 
wherein the Bible. The Tetragrammaton alone des- 
ignates the name of God in Ex. xviii. 10; Ruth iv. 
14; I Sam. xxv. 39; I Kings vill. 56; Zech. xi. 5; 
Ps. xxviii. 6, Ixxxix. 53, cxxiv. 6, exxxv. 21 (once 
“ Adonai,” Ps. Ixviii. 20 [A. V. 19], and twice “ Elo- 
him,” Ps. Ixvi. 20, Ixviii. 86 [A. V. 33]). Usually 
“Elohim,” “Elohe Yisrael,” or some similar expres- 
sion is added to the Tetragrammaton, so that God is 
generally named in the third person, The phrase 
“Baruk Attah Adonai, lammedeni hukkeka” (Ps. 
exix. 12) is an exception, and the benedictions in the 
Talmud have, curiously enough, this form also, al- 
though only as regards the use of the second person, 
since “ Elohenu Melek ha-‘Olam ” is normally added 
to the Tetragrammaton. This use of the second 
person indicates a later origin, like “ Elohe Abotenu ” 
(Ezra vii. 27; comp. “Abinu,” I Chron, xxix. 10), 
which occurs also in the first benediction of the 
“Shemoneh ‘Esrch.” The earliest form of the Torah 
benediction is found in Ps. cxix. 12, which isalso the 
only one that is a prayer and uot an expression 
of gratitude. The benediction “U-baruk Shem 
Kebodo le-‘olam” (Ps. Ix xii. 19) is identical with the 
preceding “Baruk Adonai,” for “Shem Kebodo ” 
indicates the Tetragrammaton (comp. Deut. xxviii. 
58, “ha-Shem ha-Nekbad ”; Neh. ix. 5, “Shem Kebo- 
deka”; and Ps. xxiv. 7-10, “Melek ha-Kabod”). 
This gave rise to the later formula “ Baruk Shem 
Kebod Malkuto le-‘olam wa-‘ed ” (which was, how- 
ever, used in the Temple), in which “ Adonai Elohim” 
is paraphrased by three words in order that the people 
should not pronounce the real names of God. The 
benediction is once called “berakah” in the Bible— 
“And blessed be thy glorious name, which is exalted 
above all blessing and praise ” (Neh. ix. 5). The 
words “ ‘olam” and “‘olam wa-‘ed,” which with 
variations areadded to the benedictions, are of later 
origin and belong to the liturgical formula. They 
occur only in the Psalms and in Chronicles (Ps. xli. 
14 [A. V. 13], xxii. 19, Ixxxix. 58 (A. V. 52], evi. 
48 cxili. 9, exv. 18, exlv. 1; I Chron. xvi. 36, xxix. 
10). This formula seems to have been used only 
When the congregation was assembled as a whole. 


Form. 


The significance of the benediction steadily in-- 


creased in the course of centuries until it finally was 
use] on the occasion of every manifestation of nature 
and of human life. While it appears in the Bible 
Only in connection with public worship and on a 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liturgy 





few special occasions, in the traditional literature 
it accompanies all the expressions of individual 
life, and sanctities all functions of the 
body and the soul. The pious Jew, 
on going to sleep and on awakening, 
and on all intervening occasions, ut- 
tered, and still utters, words of praise 
toGod. God is praised for His mercy 
on occasions of joy or sorrow, on satisfying the needs 
or desires of the body, on studying the Law, or on ful- 
tilling the ordinances of religion. The benediction, 
like the entire religion, is individualized and special- 
ized. It continually reminds the Jew of God, and 
only when unclean, before he has bathed or puritied 
himself in some other way, is he forbidden to utter it. 
The fact that the treatise Berakot, devoted to it, pre- 
cedes all the other treatises, indicates its extent and 
importance, and its popularity is shown by the mi- 
nute questions referring to it, which were discussed 
even by the earliest scribes. “The benedictions of a 
man indicate whether he is a scholar” (Ber. 50a; 
comp. Ta‘an. 16a). Some examples are selected 
here from the mass of material, which may show 
the variety of these utterances and their nature. 

There were persons who were very exact in re- 
gard to the benedictions and watched their neigh- 

bors closely (. py7p3). If any one 

General made a mistake in the form in use 
Doxology. during worship, the entire congrega- 

tion corrected him (7d. 51a). He who 
deviated from the form laid down by scholars was 
remiss in his duty, although in a certain case the 
short sentence of a shepherd—who was the proto- 
type of ignorance among the Talmudists—was ap- 
proved (20, 40b). Prayers and doxologies might be 
recited in any language (Svtah 82a e¢ passim), Week- 
days and feast-days, as well as all kinds of food, 
had their special benedictions (Ber. 40a, below), A 
blessing might not be pronounced over anything that 
had been “accursed ” (“min kelalah,” unsound fruit, 
etc. ; 22. 40b), nor in case of nocturnal pollution, nor 
unnecessarily (26. 20b, 88a). The doxology is pro- 
nounced before fulfilling any of the commandments 
(Pes. Tb; comp. Tosef., Ber. vil. 1). 

One hundred benedictions a day shall be pro- 
nounced by every oue (Men. 48b, below), but who- 
ever writes them down sins as grievously as if he 
had burned the Torah (Shab. 115b). The Tetra- 
grammaton and a reference to God as the King of 
the World are essential to every benediction (Ber. 
12a, 40b, 49a). While Johanan b. Zakkai still used 
the Biblical form and in a doxology referred to God 
in the third person (Hag. 14b, “ Baruk Adonai Elohe 
Yisrael she-natan,” etc.), only the second person is 
used in the later doxologies (“ Baruk Attah Adonai 
Elohenu Melek ha-‘Olam”). The last three words 
are omitted in certain cases (Ber. 46a, below). The 
knee shall be bent on uttering “ baruk ” (2d. 12b), 
although this rule refers only to prayer and not to 
other benedictions (comp. also 72, 34b, relating to 
the king and high priest). One person may pro- 
nounce the benediction for all the other persons as- 
sembled (7). 58a). The principal person at table is 
entitled to say grace (¢b. 47a, 45h), to which the 
others respond with “Amen,” which is regarded as 
more important than the pronouncing of the bera- 


Difference 
Between 
Bible and 
Talmud. 


Liturgy 


kah itself (2d. 538b), and it is even praiseworthy to 
say “Amen” after one’s own eulogy. One should 
not pronounce a “rapid, chopped, or orphaned 
‘Amen,’ nor speak the benediction too quickly,” nor 
lift the voice at the “ Amen” above the voice of the 
speaker (7), 45a, b, 47a). The form of some bence- 
dictions depends on the number of those present (2d. 
49b). “Thou shalt praise God for evil fortune as 
well as for good” (2. ix. 1). One should say, even 
in the house of mourning, “ Blessed be the Merciful 
One who granteth good things” (“Baruk ha-Tob 
weha-Mctib”). Akiba, however, says, “Blessed be 
the Just Judge” (“Baruk Dayyan Emet,” 7d. 46b, 
S4b, 60b). After a successful journey by sea or 
desert, after recovery from illness, or after release 
from prison, one should say, “Blessed be He who 
granteth favors” (“ Baruk gomel hasadim,” 7b. 54b). 
There was also a special blessing for a person who 
had been bled (?). 60a). See BENEDICTION. 

God was praised at the crowing of the cock for 
having given it understanding to distinguish be- 
tween day and night, and there were special bene- 
dictions for every act of dressing, which are now 
collected at the beginning of the book of daily 

prayer (Ber. 60b). “ Whoso profits 


Daily aught from this world without rect- 
Benedic- ting a benediction defrauds it” (7d. 
tions. 35a). Everything that may be en- 


joyed (fruits of the earth, etc.) has a 
corresponding benediction; only the words “every- 
thing came into being at His word” may be ap- 
plied to them all (¢d. 40a). There is even a berakah 
for perfume (¢. 48b, where individual rules are 
given for other things). Bread and wine, being the 
most important articles of food, have special bene- 
dictions (7). vi. 1). The seven kinds of fruit of the 
Holy Land enjoy certain prerogatives, and the oil 
of the patriarch and of the emperor is especially 
honored (7). 40b, 48a, 44a). Most of the regulations 
refer to the prayer after meals, which is often called 
“the three benedictions.” . It had to be spoken 
and might not be recited mentally (7b. 15a, b), It 
was obligatory also upon women, slaves, and chil- 
dren, who might pronounce it in place of the head of 
the family, and did so if he was unacquainted with 
Hebrew (20. 20b). This and the Torah benediction 
alone were regarded as Biblical, while the introduc- 
tion of the others was ascribed to the Great Syna- 
gogue (7b, 38a, 48b; Meg. 17a). The first benedic- 
tion of the prayer at meals, it is said, was composed 
by Moses, the second by Joshua, and the third by 
David and Solomon (Ber. 48b); Moses was the first 
one who could praise God for the food offered (the 
manna), Joshua the first who could praise him for the 
Holy Land, and David and Solomon the first who 
could praise him for Jerusalem, which was delivered 
into theirhands. The fourth benediction (“ Ha-Tob 
weha-Metib ”), it was said, was introduced at Jabneh 
in thanksgiving for the burial of those who had been 
killed in the great war with Rome (70 c.E.). These 
four benedictions, according to a “heavenly voice” 
(see Bar Kot), are worth forty denarii (Hul. 87b). 
The blessing at meals had to be pronounced while 
sitting (Ber. 51b), and there are ten regulations re- 
garding the wine used in connection with it (¢d. 51a). 
It is dangerous, on account of the demons, to drink 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


1386 





two cups of wine, or any even number (7. 51b). 
The benediction pronounced over bread is also men- 
tioned inthe New Testament (Matt. xv. 86; John vi, 
11: Acts xxvii. 385) and by Philo (ed. Mangey, ii. 
481). 

The Torah benediction and the reading of the 
“Shema’” (Deut. vi. 4-8) are likewise explained as 
being Biblical, while the “Shemoneh ‘Esreh” is re- 
garded as a rabbinical institution (Ber. 2la). As 
the doxologies preceding the “Shema‘” are really 
Torah benedictions, they also are declared to be Bib- 
lical (comp. 78. 11b, 48b, and the interesting passage, 
Shab. 88a, referring to the “threefold” Torah). 
The following is considered the best berakah: 
“Blessed be the Lord who hath given the doctrine” 
(2b. 11b). The division of the benedictions into 
Biblical and rabbinical is important for the mat- 
ter of chronology, the first group being earlicr in 
origin. The most important doxologies of the 
prayer are “Yehi Shemo ha-gadol meborak” (2d. 
21a = Job i. 21 and Ps. exiii. 2; Aramaic, “ Yehe 
Shemeh rabba meborak,” Ber. 57a; Shab. 119b; Suk. 
38h, 39a; Targ. Yer. to Gen. xlix. 2; Deut. vi. 4) 
and the “Baruk Shem kebod malkuto le-‘olam 
wa-‘ed” already mentioned (Pes. 56a; Deut. R. ii. 
31, 36). In the sanctuary the people pronounced 
this blessing, but no “ Amen” (Ta‘an. 16; Ber. 54a). 

The following rules and customs deserve special 
notice from a historical and religious point of view: 

A special berakah was pronounced at 


Benedic- the circumcision of a praselyte (Shab. 
tions of 1387b, “le-muletha-gerim”). “Amen” 
Historical may be said after the benediction of a 
Interest. Samaritan only if one has heard the 


whole of it (Ber. viii. 1); the blessing 
for light may not be recited for the light beheld at 
the end of the Sabbath in a city inhabited mostly 
by Samaritans (25, 53a). At Jabneh a special bera- 
kah against Judao-Christians (Minim) was composed 
after the destruction of the Temple (7b. 28b). If the 
hazzan commits an error in reciting this passage he is 
removed (40. 29a), “ Anyone who says, ‘The pious 
praise Thee,’ is guilty of heresy ” (Meg. iv. 9), while, 
according to R. Judah, any one uttering a benedic- 
tion on seeing the sun is also guilty of heresy (Tosef., 
Ber. vii. 6). This mishnaic teacher ordains that 
one should praise God every day “that Thou hast 
not created me a heathen ora woman or a slave” 
(Men. 48b, below; comp. Gal. iii. 28; Diogenes Laer- 
tius, i. 1, § 7; James Darmesteter, “Une Priére 
Judéo-Persane,” p. 9, Paris, 1891; “ Monatsschrift,” 
xxxvii. 14; “Magyar Zsid6 Szemle,” x. 100). On 
seeing a Hermes one should say, “Blessed be He 
who is lenient toward them that break His law,” 
and on beholding a place where an idol has been 
destroyed, “ Blessed be He who destroyeth idols in 
our land; as He hath destroyed it in this place, so 
may He destroy all in the land of Israel, and lead 
the hearts of their worshipers back unto His service.” 
In a foreign country, however, one should say noth- 
ing, for the majority of the inhabitants there are 
heathen (Ber. 57b; comp. x. 1). “ Any one behold- 
ing a place where miracles have been vouchsafed to 
Israel should say, ‘ Blessed be He who hath shown 
marvelous things unto our fathers on this spot’ ” 
(tb.), together with benedictions applying to mani- 


137 


festations of natural phenomena. One who sees 
Jewish sages should say, “ Blessed be He who hath 
granted of His wisdom to His followers”; and who- 
ever sees pagan sages should say, “ Blessed be He 
who hath granted of His wisdom to His creatures.” 

At the sight of Jewish or pagan kings praise was 
rendered to God, who granted of His dignity to His 
followers or to His creatures (%. 58a), On _ be- 
holding graves of Jews one should praise God, 
who created them and who will finally raise them 
up again (2b, 68b). He who sees the Euphrates 
from the bridge of Babylon or the Tigris from the 
bridge of Shebistena should praise the Creator (i. 
59b), for it was believed that these streams had arisen 
at these places and were therefore still in their orig- 
inal state, although a Babylonian amora of the early 
part of the fourth century indicates another place as 
the source of the Euphrates, the Persians having 
diverted it from its channel. God should receive 
praise and thanksgiving from any one beholding a 
ford of the sea, of the Jordan, or of the River Arnon 
(where Israel beheld marvels); beholding hailstones 
(Ex. ix. 38), the cliff of Beth-horon (Josh. x. 11), the 
stone which Og, King of Bashan, wished to hurl 
upon Israel, the rock on which Moses sat when 
Joshua fought with Amalek (Ex. xvii. 12), the wife 
of Lot, or the fallen walls of Jericho (Ber. 54a). 
All these objects were still to be seen at the time of 
the composition of this baraita, about the second 
century. 

Although the benedictions of the priests, and 
the benedictions pronouuced in the house of mourn- 
ing, and at betrothals, weddings, etc., are mentioned, 
there are no indications that they were 
regarded as exercising any material 
influence on persons or things, 7.e., 


Difference 
Between 


Christian that they were sacramental as the 

and Jewish Christian Church has taught and 
Benedic- still teaches (Herzog-Hauck, “ Real- 

tions. Encyc.” ii. 588). They are merely 


utterances of praise and_ thanks- 
giving, and it can no longer be determined whether 
originally they had the force which the Church 
ascribes to them. It is certain, however, that the 
idea of sacramentalism was foreign to Judaism. 
Several passages in the New Testament in praise of 
God are called “ doxologies ” (e.g., Rom. xvi. 27; see 
Hastings, “ Dict. Bible,” i. 620). 

The principal component parts of public worship 
are the “Shema‘ ” and the “ Tefillah,” the preceding 
recitation from the Psalms, etc., having only the 
force of custom. As late as the time of Maimonides 
morning prayer began with “ Kaddish ” before “ Ba- 
reku” and ended with it (“ Yad,” Tefillah, ix.), and 
this practise still obtains in the Sephardic ritual. 

In the course of time additions to the 

Origin and liturgy were multiplied. The ritual, 
Develop~ even in itssimpler portions, took defi- 
ment. nite form only by degrees. The earli- 
est elements of synagogal worship 

were developed from the Temple service and the 


custom of sacrificial watches (‘Ma‘amad ”), as well 


as from private and public worship—from psalms 
and prayers which were composed at different 
times for special occasions. The benedictions at 
the beginning of the “Ma‘amad” and the prayers 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liturgy 





at the end became respectively the “Shema‘” and 
the * Tetillah ” (Rapoport, “ Kalir”; Zunz, “G. V.” 
pp. 367 et seg.). The latter, which about 100 C.E. 
had neither definite redaction nor general bind- 
ing force, probably consisted at first of only six 
numbers for week-days and seven for Sabbath and 
feast-days; in the remaining numbers either a Hasi- 
dic or a political origin may be traced. Even in the 
second century the final benedictions for public 
fast-days still varied (Ta‘an. 17a); in the third the 
whole assembly was not yet accustomed to go to the 
synagogue at “ Musaf” (Yer. R. H. iv. 8; Rapoport, 
“*Erek Millin,” p. 164), and the attendance was gen- 
erally small (Zunz, “G.V.” p. 339). It took centuries 
before the order of prayer as found in the Babylo- 
nian Talmud became established: it was neither 
desired nor was it possible to give it a fixed and defi- 
nite form (Zunz, “ Ritus,” pp. 1 e¢ seq.). 

Private prayer existed side by side with the offi- 
cial liturgy. A large number of prayers composed 
by scribes and recited on special occa- 
sions are mentioned in traditional lit- 
erature, and prayers by laymen are 
also quoted. In general, animportant 
place was assigned to prayer, although its thought- 
less drawling was condemned. Thus, it is said, 
“Prayer is more pleasing to God than good works 
and sacrifice” (Ber. 32b and parallels); while Jo- 
hanan felt, “Would that prayer lasted the entire 
day.” Worship was held to be equivalent to prayer, 
and indeed the ritual was actually modeled upon the 
sacrificial cult (Sifre, Deut. xi. 14; Ta‘an. 2a; Ber. 
28b). There were many rules regarding prayer (20. 28, 
31; Sanh. 22; Ab. ii. 18, etc.). He who prays should 
drop his eyes, but lift up his heart (Yeb. 105b), al- 
though he should not raise his voice (Ber. 24, 31). The 
saying “God wisheth the heart” (Sanh. 106b) has 
become a proverb. The suppliant Knelt, or fell on 
his face, stretching out his hands and his feet (pros- 
tration; Ber. 34b et passim), although this is now 
done only on the Day of Atonement at the “ ‘Abo- 
dah” (see ADORATION), The pious made them- 
selves ready an hour before prayer, and stood still 
for an hour after it (Ber. 31b). A drunken man was 
not allowed to pray (‘Er. 64; see the eight prescrip- 
tions which, according to “Yad,” Tefillah, v. 1, 
must be observed). All faces were turned toward 
the sanctuary (Ber. 80a), and Maimonides ordained 
(i.c, v. 6, following Ber, 31) that the windows should 
be opened during prayer. The hands were washed 
before praying (Ber. 16, 26; Shab. 10), a custom with 
which the construction of synagogues on the banks 
of rivers is connected. Ten adults were required 
to be present at worship (Meg. 34a), a custom which 
still obtains. On the other hand, the entire congre- 
gation did not pray, as it does to-day; but the leader 
in prayer, the “messenger of the congregation,” the 
most learned among them (Ta‘an. 17b), standing in 
a depression, prayed for all (Ps. exxx.1; Ber. 10b): 
“to step down before the Tabernacle ” is equivalent 
to “leading in prayer” (R. H., end). 

Among the people various superstitions arose in 
connection with the recitation of prayers. The reader 
of the “Shema‘” must not blink his eyes, nor com- 
press his lips, nor point with his fingers (Yoma 
19). It is forbidden to pray with phvlacteries in 


Private 
Prayer. 


Liturgy 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


138 





the hand or with a Torah roll on the arm (Ber. 23b). 
He who is unwilling to Jead the prayers in a col- 
ored garment may not lead when dressed in white, 
and he who will not lead in sandals may not lead 
barefoot (Meg. 24b; for other examples see Blau, 
“ Altjiidisches Zauberwesen,” pp. 146 et seq.). 

The Jewish liturgy at first completely dominated 
the Christian, The three benedictions—still placed at 
the head of the morning prayer-—-in which the Jews 
praise God that he has not created them heathen, or 
slaves, or women (Men. 43b), express, as their brev- 
ity indicates, ancient Jewish views; and therefore 
they are not to be regarded as imitations of similar 
Greek formulas (Diogenes Laertius, 1.1,$7). Astri- 
king allusion to this prayer is found in Paul’s Epistle 
to the Galatians, iii, 28: “There is neither Jew nor 
Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither 
male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” 
A similar view is expressed in a Parsi prayer (“ Mo- 
natsschrift,” xxxvii. 14 et seg.; “Magyar Zsidd 
Szemle,” x. 113 e¢ seg.). For early forms of liturgy 
see “J. Q. R.” x. 654 et seq. 

The early Christian liturgy, in the reading of the 
Scriptures, in prayer, and in the singing of the 
Psalms, was modeled on synagogal practises. The 

fact that no complete Christian litur- 


Influence gicalspecimensof the first three centu- 
on Early ries are extant indicates that the lit- 
Christian urgy in use during that period may 
Liturgy. have been borrowed from that current 


in the synagogue. The earliest extant 
Christian prayers, the pseudo-Cyprianic (text in Mi- 
chel, “ Gebet und Bild in Friihchristlicher Zeit,” pp. 3 
et seg., Leipsic, 1902), written after 300, are still Jew- 
ish in formand content. One of them begins with the 
* Kedushshah ” and continues with the introductory 
formula of the “Shemoneh ‘Esreh,” and mentions 
also “purity of heart,” which was and is still the 
main point in the seventh or middle benediction for 
the Sabbath and feast-days. After the “Shema‘” 
the Jewish ritual placed the *“ salvation benediction ” 
(“ge’ullah ”); and Christian circles, in harmony with 
folk-beliefs, derived from this benediction various 
prayers for deliverance from the persecutions of the 
devil, Satan is mentioned in Jewish prayers also 
(é.g., morning prayer), although not in the official 
liturgy nor in the obligatory prayers. 
The liturgy of the fasts, which is the oldest, as- 
sumed definite form long before the common era (I, 
Lévi, in“ R. E, J.” xivii, 161-171; Mi- 


Jewish = chel, /.¢. pp. 44 e¢ seg.). Its formulas 
Prayers took the deepest hold upon the people 
and Early on account of its antiquity and its 
Christian peculiar solemnity. This explains 
Art. why the views of the early Christian 


Church show the dominant influence 
of this liturgy and why its prayers contain for the 
most part not New Testament but Old Testament 
phraseology. The liturgy naturally dominated carly 
Christian art as well. The subjects for the fig- 
ures in the catacombs, on stained glass, etc., were 
borrowed as a rule from those Biblical stories which 
were found also in the Jewish festival literature ; as, 
for example, the sacrifice of Isaac, Daniel in the lion’s 
den, the three Hebrews in the fiery furnace, and 
scenes from the story of Jonah (comp, Kaufmann 


in “R. E. J.” xiv. 338-48, 217-253). The prayers 
do not always observe the chronological order of 
events; in one prayer the name of Job follows im- 
mediately upon that of Abraham, the author evi- 
dently sharing the Jewish view that Job was the 
contemporary of Abraham (see Michel, J.¢c., where 
extensive bibliography is given). 

The history of the ritual is eventful and varied. 
At first there were no written prayers; a scribe of 

the end of the first century says, “The 
History of writers of benedictions are as those 
the Ritual. that burn the Torah.” A man who was 
caught copying some at Sidon threw 
a bundle of his copies into a washtub (Shab. 115b 
and parallels; comp. Blau, “ Altjiidisches Zauber- 
wesen,” p. 93). In no case was written matter used 
during public worship. Prayer-booksappear about 
the seventhcentury. “The prayer-booksare doubt- 
less older than the prayer ‘ orders,’ which date from 
the eighthcentury. However, the first book of this 
kind of which definite mention is made was com- 
posed by Gaon Kohen Zedek (848); a gencration later 
appeared the Siddur of Amram Gaon, which was 
much used after the eleventh century and formed 
the foundation for benedictions and Siddur collec- 
tions” (Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 18). Prayer-books (“sid- 
dur”) were composed also by Saadia, Hai, Nissim, 
and Rashi(extant in MSS.; Buber, in “ Ha-Zefirah,” 
1904, No. 8), by Rashi’s pupil Simhah (“ Mahzor 
Vitry,” ed. Hurwitz, Berlin, 1892), and by others 
(Zunz, “Ritus,” pp. 19, 25). The most important 
work of the twelfth century in this direction, and 
one highly extolled in later times, was 
Siddur and “the Yad ha-Hazakah of Maimonides, 
Mabzor. in which, for the first time, the texts 
of prayers and the ritual were ar- 
ranged in masterly order by a scholar” (Zunz, le. 
pp. 26 ef seq.). 

Between 1180 and 1820 an immense amount of 
work was done in Europe in systematizing the wor- 
ship, the prayer-books of this period forming the 
foundation for the ritual of the succeeding centuries. 
There were, also, Arabic forms of siddurim. Until 
1300 the Halakah and the Haggadah, current prac- 
lises, poetry, mysticism, and philosophy, all con- 
tributed toward the shaping of the ritual, the poetic 
material not being increased to any extent after this 
period (Zunz, J.c. pp. 27-80). The word “mah- 
zor” (shortened from “mahzor tefillim”), denoting 
“ prayer-book,” means literally astronomical or 
yearly cycle, The Syrians use the term “ mahzor” 
to denote the breviary. While the Sephardim ap- 
ply it to those collections which contain all the 
prayers for the year, the Ashkenazim apply it to 
the prayer-books containing the festival ritual only. 
Spanish, Italian, and French mahzorim were issued 
sometimes in octavo and smaller sizes, and were 
often written in small script and handsomely bound. 
In Germany the various collections were seldom 
issued in quarto, but generally in folio, with the 
exception of the Siddur proper, which was issued 
in smaller size. In contrast to these heavy and ex- 
pensive volumes for public worship, the 12mo or 
16mo Siddur was used for private devotions after 
the thirteenth century. The latter often contained 
much superstitious matter, part of which, in the 


139 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liturgy 





course of time, found its way into the regular prayer- 
books and was then accepted as part of the ritual 
service (7b. p. 84). 

The Cabala, which had taken deep root by 1500, 
effected material changes in the Siddur. “In the 

beginning of the seventeenth century 

Influence Isaiah Horowitz and others, with their 
of Cabala. following of the school of Luria, be- 

gan to introduce new prayers, strange 
words, and unintelligible meditations [“kawwa- 
not "|, with which they deluged public and private 
worship. All the siddurim and mahzorim from 
Tlemcen to Kaffa are filled with mystic alterations 
and additions; even amulet-formulas were included 
and thus introduced among the people. This cab- 
alistic-ascetic movement progressed from Palestine 
to Italy and Poland, from Poland to Germany and 
Holland, and from Jerusalem and Leghorn to Bar- 
bary. Based on ancient customs, it introduced fast- 
ing on the ‘Small Day of Atonement’ and on the 
eve of New-Moon, early-morning devotions, regular 
societies which held meetings for prayer and fasting 
on Mondays and Thursdays, and others which as- 
sembled nightly to lament over the Exile, and the 
like. . . . Through the dissemination of the printed 
Siddur, of formulas for grace at meals, and of ‘ tik- 
kun’ of all kinds, prayers, either old and obsolescent 
or new, found their way from foreign rituals and 
from the works of the cabalists into the ritual of the 
communities, and there they were retained, modi- 
fying to a considerable degree public worship ” (2. 
pp. 149 e¢ seg.). On commentaries to the prayers, 
and on ritual books, etc., see Zunz, d.c. pp. 21 ef seq., 
158 et seg.; Abudarham, p. 80; for the varieties of 
prayer-books used after 1180 see Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 
33; for mystic vigil order, ete., after 1580, evening 
assembly at the Feast of Weeks and the “ Hosna‘na 
RABBAH,” etc., see 2b. pp. 151 et seg. 

On the whole, the original prayers, as handed down 
by the Talmud and the Geonim, agree in all the 
rituals with Amram’s Siddur, although this, as re- 
gards the position of the Psalms and of the “ Baruk 
she-Amar,” or the wording of individual phrases and 
clauses, coincides sometimes with the Roman and 
sometimes with the German or the Spanish Mah- 
zor. The various rituals are divided into two chief 
groups, the Arabian-Spanish and the German-Ro- 
man. In the former group, the Spanish, or; more 
correctly, the Castilian, ritual has been preserved 
in the purest form. This group includes the rit- 

uals of Aragon, Catalonia, Avignon, 
Two Main Algeria, Tunis, Tlemcen, Majorca 
Groups of (Catalonio-African), Provence, Car- 


Rituals. pentras, Sicily (various rituals), and 
Tripoli (for further details see 2b. pp. 
38 e¢ seqg.). “Saadia’s Siddur apparently contained 


the substance of the old prayer-order of Egypt, his 
version of the ‘ Tefillah’ in particular being the one 
used in that country. . . . After 1200, however, the 
use of Maimonides’ prayer-order became prevalent in 
Egypt, Palestine, Maghreb, and among the Mozara- 
bic communities generally, the members of which 
were subsequently called ‘ Moriscos’” (¢b. p. 55). 
At Saragossa and Traga the “Musaf Tefillah” on 
New-Year’s Day was not recited by the congrega- 
tion alone before its recitation by the hazzan, but 


together with the latter, the ignorance of the major- 
ity of the congregation being assigned as the reason 
for this practise (¢). p. 41). As Spain was a center 
for the first group of rituals, so was Germany for 
the second. The several rituals may vary in details, 
but they agree in essentials. TheJewsof Germany, 
Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, Poland, Prussia, and 
Hungary have one and the same order of prayer (dd. 
p- 75). The French ritual is really that of Bur- 
gundy, and the English communities had probably 
the same or a similar one (2d. pp. 68 e¢ seg.). The 
Roman ritual was widely disseminated, and the “ Ro- 
manian” or Greek ritual exists in the Romanian Mah- 
zor, Which dates from some period after 1520 (26. pp. 
76-79). The Romanian group includes also the rit 
uals of Corfu and Kaffa, while the Palestinian ritual, 
which varied to some extent in the earlier period, 
lost its independence in the twelfth century (¢d. pp. 
82-84). The interrelation of the various rituals ap- 
pears in individual portions of the service, chiefly in 
those which were not based on ancient usage, such 
as the dirges (“kinot”) for the Ninth of Ab and 
the “ Hosha‘not.” 
“The Day of Atonement did not always have the 
somber coloring given it in the Middle Ages. Even 
in the time of the Soferim the peo- 


Day of ple danced in the vineyards on that 
Atone- day, and as late as the beginning of 
ment. the fourth century it does not seem to 


have been customary in Palestine for 
every one to spend the whole day in the synagogue 
(Hul. 101b). The form of the ‘ TEFILLAN’ bad not 
been definitely fixed by the third century; it occa- 
sionally ended with ‘ NE‘ILAII,’ omitting the evening 
prayer... ‘‘Abodah’ and ‘Selihah’ were consid- 
ered as the most important divisions, even though 
the form of the latter was by no means invariable.” 
Amram ’s Siddur does not refer to the “ Kol Nidre,” 
which jis designated in the later redaction as of 
Spanish origin, and was recited only by the hazzan 
(Zunz, “Ritus,” pp. 95> ef seg.; on ‘ABODAH and 
ABINU MALKENU in antiquity sce 7d. pp. 101, 118). 
The second and the fifth day of the week (comp. 
Luke xviii. 12) were set apart even in antiquity as 
lesson-days, on which the people went to the syna- 
gogue. In the early Middle Ages the pious began to 
consider these as penitential days. Penitence con- 
sisted In prayer and fasting, there being no fast-day 
without a prayer of atonement (“SELIHAH ”), while to 
utter this without fasting was considered unseemly. 
The ten days of penance between New- Year and the 
Day of Atonement were observed, however, in an- 
tiquity, which, as stated above, possessed a defi- 
nitely fixed fast-day liturgy (Zunz, “ Ritus,” pp. 
120-130; ¢tdem, “S. P.” p. 88). 
Toward the end of the Middle Ages there were 
many changes in the form of worship, for reasons 
both internal and external. “Guten- 


Changes berg and Luther no less than the Cab- 
in the = ala and the Inquisition influenced the 
Prayer- ritual of the Synagogue. After the 
Books. first decades of the fifteenth century 


the minute regulations of the ritual 
manuals allowed scarcely any initiative to the haz- 
zan, who had, moreover, lost his former high posi- 
tion, being now neither a poet nor a teacher of the 


Liturgy 
Liverpool 





Law, nor was he either of these at any time in Ger- 
many or Poland. When the art of printing made 
manuals and prayer-books accessible to all, the editor 
took the place of the hazzan, Printing imposed re- 
strictiongs ... The similarity of the copies in the 
hands of the people produced uniformity; the 
‘ Minhag ‘conformed to the printed editions. Within 
forty or fifty years printed Hebrew prayer-books 
were current in the countries in which there were 
Jews and printing-presses. The German ritual was 
the first one printed (grace at meals, 1480; ‘Selihah,’ 
n.d. and 1496; prayer-book, 1508; Mahzor, ¢. 1521); 
then followed the Roman ritual (prayer-book and 
Mahzor, 1486; ‘Selihah,’ 1487; ‘Hosha‘na,’ 1503), 
the Polish (prayer-book, 1512; Mahzor, 1522; ‘ Yo- 
zerot,’ 1526; ‘Selihah,’ 1529; all printed at Prague), 
and those of Spain (n.d. and 1519), Greece (1520), 
Catalonia (1527), Aragon (n.d.), and the Karaites 
(1528)” (Zunz, “Ritus,” p. 145; for further details 
on commentaries, translations, editions of prayer- 
books, and the ritual of the Karaites, 7. pp. 158- 
162; on the last-named sce also Zunz, “G. V.” pp. 
489 et seg.; and comp. Lady McDougall, “ Hymns of 
Jewish Origin,” in “Songs of the Church,” London, 
1908). 

After the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 
1492 the Spanish ritual was more widely introduced 
and became an important factor. The “informers ” 
caused material changes in the Mahzor. Even in 
the Middle Ages they brought charges against the 
prayer-books as well as the Talmud, and conse- 
quently their owners in alarm erased passages, cut 
out entire leaves, and changed single words here 
and there. The Kot Nipr& and the ‘ALENU were 
special objects of attack ag early as the fourteenth 
century; in the second half of the following cen- 
tury the persecutions steadily increased, especially 
on the part of the preaching friars, and soon the In- 
quisition began to actin thesame direction. “When 
printing and a knowledge of the language facilitated 
examination of the liturgical prayers, the Roman 
Church being at the same time endangered by the 
Reformation, the books were watched more care- 
fully, and a censorship which constantly increased 
in severity fettered the prayer-books also. Certain 
expressions were no longer allowed in the editions. 
. .. Since that time some prayers have disappeared 
entirely and others have been mutilated. ... The 
Herdenheim edition of the ‘ Selihah ’ (1546) removed 
‘all offensive and dangerous matter.’ Thenceforth 
not only the Siddur and Mahzor, but all Jewish 
printed books, were subject to constant attack from 
the Dominicans, who employed converted Jews. 
. . . In the year 1559 the prayer-books of the com- 
munity of Prague were taken to Vienna to be ex- 
amined.” These mutilations increased in the course 
of time (Zunz, “ Ritus,” pp. 145 et seg., and appen- 
dix vi.; comp. also zdem, “G. S.” iii. 289; Berliner, 
“HKinfluss des Ersten Hebriischen Buchdrucks auf 
den Cultus und die Cultur der Juden,” Frankfort- 
on-the-Main, 1896; Popper, “The Censorship of 
Hebrew Books,” New York, 1899). 

The reform of worship began with Moses Mendels- 
sohn asaresult of the general readjustment in Jew- 
ish life and learning. Wolf Heidenheim especially 
rendered enduring services to this reform by the cor- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


140 





——— 





rectness of his editions, his excellent notes, and the 
translations adapted to his time. The editions of the 

Siddur by Landshuth (Konigsberg, 
Reforms in 1845) and Baer (Rédelheim, 1868) are 


the Nine- alsovaluable. Liturgy wasand isstill 
teenth the field on which the different par- 
Century. ties within Judaism—Orthodox, Pro- 


gressive, and Reform—fight their 
battles with more or less bitterness. Among these 
conflicts the Hamburg Temple controversy, in 1819, 
and the Reform prayer-book controversy of the Ber- | 
lin community are especially noteworthy. Reform 
is still progressing in this department and is not 
likely to reach a conclusion in the near future. 
Leopold Zunz (1794-1886) investigated all branches 
of the liturgy with astonishing assiduity. In his 
first great work, “Gottesdienstliche Vortriige” 
(Berlin, 1832), which is the earliest product of 
modern Jewish science and which contains a 
complete history of the liturgy, he advocates the 
abolition of many old prayers and the introduction 
of appropriate new ones (pp. 494 e¢ seqg.). Reform, 
however, was not content with removing external 
abuses; it investigated the earliest prayers of the 
liturgy, the recitation of which had been declared 
to be obligatory as early as the time of the Talmud. 
It considered the views which gave rise to these 
prayers in connection with modern ideas and has 
abandoned the prayers, either partly or entirely. 
See BENEDICTIONS; GRACE AT MEALS; HABDALAH; 
HABINENU; Hap Gapya; HAFTARAH; HaGGADAH 
(SHEL Pesan); HakKAFOT; HALLEL: HALLELUIAT: 
Happiness; HazzaAn; HEIDENHEIM, WoLF; Ho.t- 
Ness; Maazor; MEGILLOT, THE Five; Music, 
SyNAGOGAL; PRAYER-Books; REFORM; etc. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: IL. Zunz. G. V.; idem, Ritus:; idem, 8. P.: 
idem, Literaturgesch, (with Supplement, 1867); Steinsehnei- 
der, Jitdische Litteratur, in Ersch and Gruber, Eneye. see- 
tion ii., part 28 (English ed., Jewish Literature, London, 18/3 
Hebrew ed., Sifrut Yisrael. Warsaw, 1897): Sehiirer, Gesch. 
3d ed., Leipsic, 1901-2 (see Index, s.v. Gehet); Benjacob, Ozar 
ha-Sefarim, iii. 660, 722-885 (editions of the prayer-books). 
Some of the many other works on liturgical literature are 
quoted in the body of the article. 

A. L. B. 


LITWACK or LITTWACK, JUDA: Dutch 
mathematician; born in Poland about 1760; died 
Jan. 15, 1886; buried at Ouerveen. A disciple of 
Moses Mendelssohn, he removed to Amsterdam, 
where he became oue of the most important mem- 
bers of the ‘Adat Yeshurun congregation. With 
C. Asser and Lemon he was appointed a deputation 
to the Sanhedrin at Paris, where he delivered a dis- 
course in the German language (Feb, 12, 1807). 

Litwack was a member of the Mathesis Artium 
Genetrix society. He wrote “Verhandeling Over 
de Proefgetallen Gen. 11,” Amsterdam, 1817 (2d ed., 
1821). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bierens de Haan, Bibliographie Neerlan- 
daise: Collection des Procés Verhaux, ii.: Gritz, Geseh. xi. 
298; Jaarhoeken, 1886, p. 86; Vaderlandsche Letteroefen- 
ingen, 1817. p. 482. 


8. E. SL. 

LIVER (1133): A glandular organ situated, in 
man, to the right beneath the diaphragm and above 
the stomach. In six passages of the Bible in which 
the liver is mentioned the expression 433m moni 
is met with in reference to the part of the organ 
which had to be sacrificed as a fatty piece (Ex. 


141 





xxix. 18, 22, e¢ passin). The meaning of this ex- 
pression has not been successfully established. 
Both Onkelos and pseudo-Jonathan translate it 
£73297 NIN, or in the Hebrew form 3357 Nn, 
which is met with in the Talmud. The Authorized 
Version, following Jerome, renders it “the caul 
above the liver”; and it seems that Rashi gave the 
same interpretation. But the Septuagint renders it 
by “the lobe of the liver,” which shows that the 
piece sacrificed was a part of the liver itself. The 
interpretation “caul” or “flap around the liver” 
seems to be based on the Aramaic 3yn, taken in the 
sense of “surrounding.” But Bochart (“ Hierozoi- 
con,” i. 562, Leipsic, 1793-96) has proved the error 
of such an interpretation, referring to Saadia’s Ara- 
bic rendering “za’idah” (= “excrescent”). Kohut 
(*Aruch Completum,” s.c. Y3¥YN and 9334 78N) 
draws attention to a passage in Tamid (51a) in which 
“the finger of the liver” is spoken of (see Rashi ad 
loc.). Kohut therefore supposes that the Aramaic 
syn is the equivalent of the Arabic “khansar” = 
“little finger.” His supposition is confirmed by 
Isaac ibn Ghayyat, who quotes Hai Gaon (Dukes, 
in “Orient, Lit.” ix. 587) to the effect that the ex- 
pression 4337 78M comes from the Arabic and that 
the liver iscomposed of pieces similar to fingers. Ac- 
cording to Nahmanides (Responsa, No. 162), if this 
part of the liver is perforated, the flesh of the ani- 
mal may be eaten (see also Dillmann on Lev. fii. 
4; Driver and White, “ Leviticus,” p. 65; Nowack, 
“Archdologie,” i. 228; comp. CauL; Fart). 

Neither man nor beast can live without a liver 
(‘Ar. 20a). If the liver is missing from an animal, 
its flesh may not be eaten (Hul. 42a). Therefore 
if any one dedicates to the sanctuary the value of 
his head or of his liver, he must pay the value of 
his entire person (‘Ar. 20a; B. M. 114a). On liver 
complaints see Maimonides, “ Yad,” Shehitah, vi. 1, 
8, 9; vii. 4, 19, 21; vill. 16. 

The liver is the seat of life. The archers pierced 
the liver with their arrows (Prov. vii. 28), thereby 
quickly causing death. Johanan (d. 279) says: “He 
smote him under the fifth rib” (I Sam, ii. 23), @.e., 
in the fifth partition, where liver and gall are con- 
nected (Sanh, 49, above). Johanan does not mean to 
imply that liver and gall are in the chest, as Ebstein 
infers (“ Medicin des N. T. und des Talmuds,” ii. 
129), but merely that liver and gall were wounded. 
The tradition (I Kings xxii. 84; II Chron. xviii. 
33) that the arrow struck the king between the 
ribs (““debakim ”) likewise refers to the fifth partition 
(see also Sanh. 638b; Kohut, “ Aruch Completum,” iv. 
182b). A tannaite living at Rome about 150 recom- 
mends the membrane of the liver of a mad dog asa 
remedy against hydrophobia, and Galen also ap- 
proves of this remedy; but the Palestinian teachers 
forbade it because its efficacy had not been proved 
(Yoma viii. 5; 84a, b; see Blau, “ Altjiidische Zau- 
berwesen,” pp. 80 e¢ seg.). Tobit vi. 8, viii. 2, how- 
- ever, shows that fumigating with fish-livers was 
considered a means of exorcising evil spirits in 
Palestine. 


On the functions of the liver there is only a single 


passage tn the Bible, namely, Lam. ii. 11: “ Mine 
eyes do fail with tears, my bowels are troubled, my 
liver is poured upon the earth, for the destruction of 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liturgy 
Liverpool 





the daughters of my people.” On the functions 
of the several organs of the human body this obser- 
vation is found in the Talmud: “The liver causes 
anger; the gall throws a drop into it and quiets it” 
(Ber. 61, above). 

Theaugural significance of the liver, hepatoscopy, 
is mentioned only once in the Bible, and then asa 
foreigncustom. Ezekiel (xxi. 21) says of Nebuchad- 
nezzar: “For the king of Babylon stood at the part- 
ing of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use 
divination: he made his arrows bright, he con- 
sulted with images, he looked into the liver” (see 
JEW. Encyc. iv. 624a, ¢.r. Divination). Levi (8d 
cent.) remarks on this passage: “as the Arabian, 
who slaughters a sheep and inspects the liver” 
(Eccl. R. xii. 7). 

8. 8. L. B.—M. SEL. 

LIVERPOOL: Chief seaport in the northwest of 
England, situated on the Mersey, and in the county 
of Lancashire. There was a primitive settlement of 
Jews in the town about 1750, but this later became 
extinct. Tombstones with Hebrew inscriptions were 
discovered beneath some structures between Derby 
street and Cumberland street, an old portion of the 
city. The synagogue with cemetery attached is 
marked in a map of Liverpool for 1796; but at the 
time of Harwood’s large survey in 1803 it had dis- 
appeared. It became a Sandemanian chapel (W. 
Robinson, “ History of Liverpool,” 1810, p. 888). 

It seems that the first Jewish settlers were mainly 

recruited from the Portuguese Jews 
Early Set- of Bevis Marks, London, and were of 
tlements. those who were about to proceed to 
Ireland, Dublin being then an estab- 

lished Jewish center. 

About 1780 the Jews again assembled for worship 
in Turton Court, on the site of the present custom- 
house. From their names, as given in a Liverpool 
directory of 1790, they appear to have been a med- 
ley of Germans, Poles, and Londoners, mostly itiner- 
ant dealers and venders of old clothes. Here and 
there a Sephardi is recorded as a merchant; but the 
Polish element must have predominated, as the early 
minute-books of the community are written in Ju- 
dzo-German with square, not cursive, characters. 

The next removal, in Dec., 1789, was to Frederick 
street, the Liverpool corporation assigning to the 
Jews for religious purposes a building with a gar- 
den in the rear for a cemetery. At the extreme end 
of this synagogue, which could hold sixty or seventy 
worshipers, was a glass roof evidently intended for 
a sukkah or tabernacle. In the basement was a 
“mikweh,” or ritual bath. In 1806 the corporation 
presented the Jews with another site in Seel street, 
where the Old Hebrew Congregation met from 1807 
until 1874, when it removed to the present hand- 
some building on Prince’s Boulevard. In 1835 the 
town hed encroached on the cemetery in Oakes 
street, and a burial-ground was purchased in Fair- 
field (Deane road), then quite rural; this in turn be- 
came inadequate, and a new one in Broad Green 
was opened in June, 1904. 

The Seel street synagogue was the first in the 
United Kingdom in which sermons were delivered 
in English; this happened in 1806, the preacher be- 
ing TobiasGoopMan. D. W. Marks acted as secre- 


Liverpool 
Loans 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


142 





tary and preacher to the congregation in 1883. Te 
subsequently became chief minister of the Berke- 
ley Street (London) Congregation of British Jews. 
There were probably 250 Jewish families in Liver- 
pool in 1838, when a secession took place in the com- 
munity. At first the seceders held divine service in 
a small building in Hardman street, 
New Con- now used asa temperance hall. In 1857 
gregation. they erected a handsome building in 
Hope place. They also purchased a 
cemetery in Green lane, Tuebrook, which is still 
(1904) in use. 

In 1846 a few numbers of a monthly Jewish maga- 
zine entitled “ Kos Yeshu‘ot ” appeared in Liverpool. 

The first organization in Great Britain in con- 
nection with the Alliance Israélite Universelle was 
founded in Liverpool in 1868, three years before the 
Anglo-Jewish Association was established in Lon- 
don, with which, however, it later amalgamated. 
In 1882 the extensive emigration to America was 
organized and directed from Liverpool; and during 
the year of the Russo-Jewish persecutions 6,274 
persons were sent, ata cost which amounted to over 
£30,000 ($150,000), to the United States and Canada 
in thirty-one steamships. 

It is computed that there are at present about 
1,500 Jewish families in Liverpool in a total popu- 
lation of about 685,000. Owing to the great influx 
of Russian and Polish Jews, a number of hebras 
have sprung into existence, as well as two consider- 
able congregations: (1) Bet ha-Midrash, situated in 
Crown street; (2) the Fountains Road Congregation, 
situated in the suburb of Kirkdale. 

A Hebrew school was founded in 1842, commen- 
cing with ten pupils. Subsequently a building was 
erected in Hope place to accommodate eighty pu- 
pils; it has since been enlarged so as to provide 
room for more than 700 children. 

Among the many Jewish organizations may be 
mentioned: the Philanthropic Society, Provident 
Society, Tontine Benefit Society, Board of Guar- 
dians, Jewish Shelter, Ladies’ Benevolent Charity, 
Branch of the Angio-Jewish Association. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: B. L. Benas, in Proceedings of the Historic 
Society of Lancashire and Cheshire (1900), vol. xv. 


J. B. L. B. 
LIVONIA. Sec RIGA. 
LIVORNO. See LEGHORN. 


LIWA BEN BEZALEEL. Sce Jupan LOw 
BEN BEZALEEL. | 

LIZARD: A saurian or lacertilian reptile. 
About forty species and twenty-eight genera of liz- 
ards found in Palestine have been enumerated, the 
most common of which are the green lizard (Lacerta 
etridis) and its varieties, and the wall-lizard belong- 
ing to the genus Zootoca. It is therefore gener- 
ally agreed that besides “leta’ah,” traditionally ren- 
dered by “lizard,” the following terms, enumerated 
among the “creeping things that creep upon the 
earth ” (Lev. xi. 29 et seg.), also denote some kinds 
of lizard: “zab” (Arabic, “dabb”), identified with 
the Uromastiz spinipes (A. V. “tortoise”; R. V. 
“great lizard”); “anakah” with the gecko, of 
which six species are found in Palestine (A. V. “ fer- 
ret”; R. V. “gecko”; see FERRET); “koah” (Vul- 


? 


ee a ee ee ee ea ee 


gate and Kimhi, “stellio”) with the monitor (A, 
V. “chameleon”: R. V. “land-crocodile;: see CHa- 
MELEON); “homet” with the sand-lizard (A. Y. 
“snail”; R. V. “sand-lizard”); “tinshemet,” by 
reason of the etymology of the name (= “ breath- 
ing,” “blowing ”), with the chameleon (A. Y. 
“mole”; R. V. “chameleon”; see CHAMELEON); 
“semamit ” (Prov. xxx. 28), the same word which 
the Targum Yerushalmi uses for “leta’ah,” and the 
Samaritan version for “anakah,” the meaning of 
the passage being that the lizard may be held in the 
hand with impunity (A. V. “spider”; R. V. “liz- 
ard”), 

In the Talmud “leta’ah” is the general term for 
the Lacertilia. It isdescribed as having a thick but 
soft and separable skin (Shab. 107a, b; Hul. 122a), 
and its eggs have the white and yolk unsepa- 
rated (‘Ab. Zarah 40a [Rashi]). A case of resusci- 
tation of an apparently dead lizard by pouring cold 
water on it is related in Pes. 88b. In Shab. 77b 
the semamit is mentioned as inspiring terror in the 
scorpion and also as serving as a cure for its bite, 
with which may be compared Pliny, “ Historia 
Naturalis,” xxix. 4, 29. In Sanh. 1038b it is related 
that King Amon, after abolishing the Temple serv- 
ice, placed a semamit upon the altar. The cha- 
meleon is considered to be intended by “zekita” in 
Shab. 108b. This may be connected with “zika” 
(= “wind ”), meaning properly “the windy,” the 
ancients believing the chameleon to live on air 
(comp. Pliny, /.¢, viii. 33, 85). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Tristram, Nat. Hist. pp. 266 et seq.; L. Lewy- 
sohn, Z. T. pp. 221 et seq. 
I. M. C. 


E. G@. H. 

LOANS: In the commonwealth of Israel, as ~ 
among other nations of antiquity, loans of money, or 
of corn or like commodities, were made as a matter of 
favor by the wealthy to those standing in need, and 
but seldom, if ever, in the way of furnishing capital 
necessary for enterprises in trade or agriculture. 
At least in all passages of Scripture lender and bor- 
rower stand, at the time of the loan, in the attitude 
of benefactor and dependent (Ps. cxil. 5); after the 
loan, in that of master and servant 
(Prov. xxii. 7); and, when the lender 
enforces his demand, in that of tyrant 
and sufferer (II Kings iv. 1). It is 
made the duty of the well-to-do Israelite to lend of 
his affluence to his poor brother (z.e., fellow Israel- 
ite) according to the borrower’s wants, at least when 
a pledge is offered (Ex. xxii. 25; Deut. xv. 8), and 
that without claiming interest (see Usury); and he 
should not refuse even when the approach of the 
year of release endangers the recovery of the loan 
(Deut. xv. 9), and though the security of the pledge 
is much weakened by the lender’s duty of returning 
it when the debtor needs it (see PLEDGE), In truth, 
to lend is regarded in Scripture (2). 1-11) as an act 
of benevolence the reward for which must be ex- 
pected only from God. 

R. Ishmael, of the time of Hadrian (see Mek., Ex. 
xxii, 25), reckons the command to lend to the poor 
as one of the affirmative precepts; and the Talmud 
(B. M. 71a) derives from Ex. xxii. 25 the rule that 
between the Gentile who offers interest and the 
Israelite from whom it is not allowed to be accepted, 


In the 
Bible. 


143 





the latter should have the preference; between the 
rich and the poor, one should lend to the poor: 
between kinsmen and townsmen, lend 
to kinsmen first, but give the prefer- 
ence to townsmen over those from a 
distance. To lend is deemed more 
meritorious than to give (Maimonides, “ Yad,” Mal- 
weh, i. 1); for by a timely loan the receiver may be 
saved from beggary. 

The lender or creditor is bidden also, on inferen- 
tial Scriptural grounds (¢).; Deut. xv. 2-3), not to 
press the borrower or debtor when he knows that 
the Jatter can not pay; which admonition was so 
extended by the Rabbis that they forbade the cred- 
jtor to show himself to the unfortunate debtor, in 
order that he might not put the latter to shame 
(“ Yad,” de, xiii. 3). 

On the other hand, it is a most sacred duty of the 
borrower to pay if he can. To withhold payment is 
wickedness (Ps. xxxvii, 21), and, according to the 
Rabbis, the debtor, when able to pay, must not 
even put the creditor off, telling him to come again; 
nor must he waste the borrowed money or lose it 
recklessly, so that he can not repay it. 

Under the written law (Deut, xv.) all debts arising 
from a loan are canceled by the passage of the year 
of release over them, on the last day (last of Elul) 
of that year. The text (¢d. verse 9) warns earnestly 
against the baseness of not Jending to the poor from 

fear of such release; yet in the days 


In the 
Talmud. 


Cancela- of King Herod this kind of baseness 
tion of prevailed among the well-to-do Jews 
Loans. to such an extent that Hillel the 


Elder, who according to rabbinical 
tradition was at that time president of the Sanhe- 
drin, in order “that the door might not be shut in the 
face of borrowers” thought it best to contrive a 
fiction whereby to nullify the Scriptural law (sce 
Sheb. viii. 2-8; Sifre, a@ loc.). He authorized the 
creditor to execute a deed, known as the “ prosbul,” 
in some such words as these: “I, A. B., hereby de- 
liver to you [giving the names], judges of the court 
at [naming the place], all the claims which I own, 
so that I may coliect them at any time I may 
choose”; which instrument was signed by the 
judges and by two witnesses, and the bonds were 
then handed over to the court. The act of Hillel 
was justified on the ground that the year of release 
being indissolubly connected with the year of jubilee 
and the restoration of lands to their former owners, 
and the latter being in the second commonwealth no 
longer feasible, the release of debts ceased to bea 
Scriptural and became only a rabbinical law, and 
for good cause might therefore be modified, or even 
abrogated, by the Great Sanhedrin (see Talmud Ye- 
rushalmi on above mishuah). The Sabbatical year, 
as far as it affected seed-time and harvest, was 
meant only for the Holy Land; neither did it ever 
work the release of debts beyond the boundaries of 
that country. Joseph Caro says, in his code, that 
as a rabbinical institution the law of the year of re- 


lease operates in all times and places; but the gloss 


Of Moses Isserles declares that in “these countries,” 
meaning northern Europe, it had fallen entirely into 
desuetude. 

A debt arising from the sale of goods or of land 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liverpool 
Loans 


or from liability for wrongs done, the wages of 
labor, or the hire of lands or of animals, whether 
liquidated by the written law or unliquidated, was 
not affected by the year of release; but if the par- 
ties agreed upon the amount due or that should be 
paid, and upon the length of time of forbearance, 
such debt or liability became a loan in the eyes of 
the law, and was then regarded as a subject of re- 
lease, unless kept alive by the prosbul (Sheb. viii. 
2; Sifre, Deut. 15). 

The fear that a literal enforcement of the Scrip- 
tural law against lenders wouid “shut the door in 
the face of borrowers” led to its relaxation in other 
respects also. Thus, strictly speaking, creditors 
should have the debtors’ worst lands (“ zibburit ”) 
allotted to them in satisfaction; but as such a rule 
would ciscourage loans, it was modified so as to al- 
Jot middle-grade lands for their satisfaction (Git. 
49b; see APPRAISEMENT). 

S, L. N. D. 


LOANS or LOANZ (y2x15), ELIJAH BEN 
MOSES ASHKENAZI: German rabbi and caba- 
list; born at Frankfort-on-the-Main 1555; died at 
Worms July, 1686. He belonged to the Rashi fam- 
ily, and on his mother’s side was the grandson of 
Johanan Luria, and on his father’s of Joselmann of 
Rosheim. After having studied in his native city 
under the direction of Jacob Ginzburg and Akiba 
Frankfort, Loans went to Cracow, where he attended 
the lectures of Menahem Mendel. While there he 
prepared for publication the “Darke Mosheh” of 
Moses Isserles. At the beginning of the seventeenth 
century Loans was called to the rabbinate of Fulda, 
which he left in 1612, occupying sucessively the 
rabbinates of Hanau, Friedberg (1620), and Worms 
(1630), in which last-named city he remained until 
his death. 

Loans was a diligent student of cabala, and for 
this reason was surnamed “Ba‘al Shem.” Besides 
his great. learning he possessed many accomplish- 
ments, such as music and calligraphy; and all kinds 
of legends circulated regarding his personality. He 
was the author of the following works: “ Rinnat 
Dodim ” (Basel, 1600), a commentary on Canticles; 
“ Miklol Yofi” (Amsterdam, 1695), a commentary on 
Ecclesiastes; “Wikkuah Yayin ‘im ha-Mayim” 
(bo, 1757), a poem with a commentary; “ Ma‘agle 
Zedek” (Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 
1832), a commentary on Bahya’s “Hobot ha-Leba- 
bot”; “Zofnat Pa‘aneah” (2b. No. 1880), a com- 
mentary on the “ Tikkune Zohar”; a commentary on 
Genesis Rabbah (4. No. 149); “ Adderet Eliyahu ” 
(2b. 1829), a commentary on the Zohar. 

Loans also edited the “‘Ammude Shelomoh” of 
Solomon Luria on the “Semag” (Basel, 1599), and 
the “Sha‘are Dura” of Isaac ben Meir of Dueren, to 
which he wrote a preface (¢b. 1600). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Moses Mannheimer, Die Juden in Wormeg, p. 
61, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1842; L. Lewysohn, Nafshot Zaad- 
dikim, p. 59, ib. 18355; Carmoly, in Jost’s Annalen, i. 94; 
Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. col. 9423; Zunz, Z. G.p. 402; Mi- 
chael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 401. 

K. I. Br. 


LOANS, JACOB BEN JEHIEL: Physician 
in ordinary to the German emperor Frederick ILL. 
(1440-93), and Hebrew teacher of Johann Reuchlin; 
died at Linz about 1506. Loans rendered lifelong 


Loanz 
Lob 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


144 


i a SS Se ee Ee a gt eh get peg ee ape 


faithful service to the emperor, by whom he was 
knighted. At Linzin 1492 Reuchlin, who had been 
sent to the emperor’s court by his protector Eber- 
hard of Wirttemberg, met Loans; and the latter 
became his first teacher in Hebrew grammar. 
Reuchlin always held him in grateful remembrance; 
he cites him as “preceptor meus, mea sententia 
valde doctus homo Jacobus Jehiel Loans Hebreeus ” 
(“Rudimenta Hebraica,” p. 249) or “ humanissimus 
preceptor meus homo excellens” (2. p. 619). Gel- 
ger supposes that Reuchlin took Loans as a model 
for the Jewish scholar Simon, one of the three dis- 
putants in Reuchlin’s “De Verbo Mirifico.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ludwig Geiger, Johann Reuchlin, pp. 105 et 

seq.; Gratz, Gesch. ix. 47, 83, 147; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 

273: Steinschneider, Jewish Literature, p. 208; Winter and 

Wiinsche, Die Jtidische Litteratur, ti. 220. 

G. M. Sc. 

LOANZ, JOSEPH. Sce JosEL (JOSELMANN, 
JOSELIN) OF RosHEIM. 

LOB ARYEH BEN ELIAH OF BOLO- 
CHOW : Russian rabbi; born at Satanov, govern- 
ment of Podolia, 1801; died at Zaslavl, government 
of Volhynia, Sept. 2, 1881; a descendant of Rabbi 
Joshua Héschel of Cracow (1654-64), author of “Se- 
fer Toledot Aharon.” Léb Aryeh, in addition to 
his studies in rabbinic literature, had a thorough 
knowledge of the Bible and of Hebrew grammar, 
and he became a fluent writerin Hebrew. Hehada 
fair knowledge of mathematics also. He was rabbi 
of Zaslavl for about twenty years, and published 
“‘Arugat ha-Bosem,” commentaries to the Yoreh 
De‘ah, Wilna, 1870, and “Shem Aryeh,” commen- 
tarics to other parts of the Shulhan ‘Aruk, Wilna, 
1873. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Preface to Shem Aryeh; Walden, Shem ha- 

Gedolim he-Hadash, pp. 66, 72; Ha-Zefirah, 1881, No. 36. 

L, G. H. R. 

LOB ARYEH HA-KOHEN OF STYRIA: 
Rabbi at Rozniatow and afterward at Styria; died in 
1818. He was the author of the following works: 
“Kezot ha-Hoshen,” a casuistic commentary in two 
volumes on the Hoshen Mishpat of Joseph Caro’s 
Shulhan ‘Aruk, published in 1788 and later; “ Abne 
Millu’im,” a similar commentary in two volumes on 
the Eben ha-‘Ezer of the same work (Lemberg, 
1815, and Zolkiev, 1825); and “Sheb Shema‘tata,” 
novell on the Talmud (Lemberg, 1804). The first 
volume of the “Abne Millu’im” contains an ap- 
pendix, entitled “Meshobeb Netibot,” in which the 
author defends his first works against the attacks of 
Jacob of Lissa. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, p. 79; 

Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 54. 

8. 8. I. Br. 

LOB ARYEH BEN MEIR: Lithuanian rabbi; 
lived in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. 
His notes on Rashi and on Elijah Mizrahi’s commen- 
taries on the Pentateuch were published, under the 
title “Hiddushe Maharsha” (Hanover, 1716), with 
Samuel Edel’s novellze on the Pentateuch, by his 
brother Zebi Hirsch b. Meir. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. iii., No. 358d ; Steinschnei- 
der, Cat. Bodl. col. 745. 
s. S. M. SEt. 


LOB ARYEH BEN TOBIAH: Lithuanian 
Talmudic scholar and printer; died at Wilna Oct. 


24, 1812. He enjoyed great consideration in Wilna 
on account of his learning and of the assistance ren- 
dered by him to Talmudic students. He was the 
first (in partnership with Tobiah b. Abraham Abele) 
to establish a Hebrew printing-house at Wilna (1799), 
The first work printed there was Saadia’s “ Ma’amar 
ha-Tehiyyah weha-Pedut.” Owing to competition 
the establishment existed a short time only. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, pp. 199, 225. 
J M. SEL. 


LOB BEN BARUCH BENDET: Rabbi of 
Byelostok, Russia, in the eighteenth and nineteenth 
centurics; author of “Sha’agat Aryeh ” (Byelostok, 
1805), novellze on the treatise Makkot, The author 
quotes frequently his father’s “ Ner Tamid” (Grodno, 
1789); and in the preface he states that he has writ- 
ten novelle on the whole Talmud. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 553; Walden, 

Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, p. 79. 

H. R. M. SEt. 

LOB, ELIEZER: German rabbi; born at 
Pfungstadt, grand duchy of Hesse, 1837; died at 
Altona Jan. 28, 1892. He was educated at the gym- 
nasium of Darmstadt and at the University of Gies- 
sen, and received his rabbinical instruction chiefly 
under Benjamin H. AUERBACH, rabbi of Darmstadt, 
whose daughter he married. At first he was prin- 
cipal of the Jiidische Realschule in his native city, 
founded by him (1857-61). Subsequently he was 
called to the rabbinate of Ichenhausen, Bavaria, 
where he remained until 1878, when he was called 
to succeed Jacob Ettlinger as chief rabbi of Altona. 
He contributed to the “Jiidische Presse,” and pre- 
pared for publication H. J. Michael's bibliograph- 
ical work “ Or ha-Hayyim,” but ill health prevented 
him from completing his labor, which was finished 
by A. Berliner. A rabbinical work by him, “ Dam- 
mesek Eli‘ezer,” remained in manuscript. He wasa 
devoted worker for Orthodox communal affairs and 
was for years a trustee of the Hildesheimer Semi- 
nary at Berlin. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dukesz, Iwoh, Fwoh le-Moshab, pp. 183-136, 
Cracow, 1903 


8. D. 

LOB B. JOSEPH (REB LOB SARAH’S): 
Early Hasidic rabbi; died in Yaltushkov, Podolia, 
about 1797. His was the strangest and most mys- 
terious character of the many miracle-working rabbis 
of the Hasidim of the latter part of the eighteenth 
century. He continually traveled from one Polish 
city to another, spending money lavishly, but never 
accepting anything from hisadherents. Most of the 
wonderful stories which are still told about him con- 
nect him with kings and princes and with successful 
efforts to influence the authorities in behalf of Jews. 
This caused Gottlober to suspect that he was in the 
secret service of the Polish or the Austrian govern- 
ment, a view scemingly absurd, although a letter by 
R. Bir of Meseritz, stating that “R. Lob Sarah’s 
of Rovno is to be assisted and implicitly believed, 
for he is rendering important services to Jews, and 
will himself orally explain things which can not be 
put down in writing ” (Primishlauer’s “Darke Ye- 
sharim,” Jitomir, 1805), lends some slight support 
to the supposition. Thestory of an eye-witness that 
R. Léb Sarah’s passed the guards unnoticed and en- 


145 


Loanz 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Lob 





tered the royal palace of Warsaw on the day of the 
coronation of Stanislaus Poniatowski (1764), and the 
account of his seven years’ struggle with Emperor 
Joseph IIL, on whom he inflicted terrible sufferings. 
are characteristic examples of the miracles ascribed 
to him by the superstitious people. R. Azriel of 
Kozin (near Kremenetz), his pupil (according to Gott- 
lober, his driver), was considered as his successor. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eleazar ha-Kohen, Kin’at Soferim, p. 75a, 
Lemberg, 1892; Gottlober, in Ha- Boker Or, v. 386-388, vi. 1-2: 
Seder ha-Dorot he-Hadash, pp. 43-49; Walden, Shem hu- 
Gedolim he-Hadash, p. 81, Warsaw, 1882. 

H.R. P. WI. 

LOB JUDAH B. EPHRAIM: Rabbi of the 
second half of the seventeenth century; probably 
born in Wilna, from which city his father, Ephraim 

b. Jacob ha-Kohen, fled to Buda (Ofen, incorporated 

into the present Budapest) during the Cossack up- 

rising of 1655; dicd in Palestine after 1686. Lob 
remained in Buda until 1684, when he went to Je- 
rusalem, and there, with the assistance of Moses 

Galanti the younger, began to prepare for publica- 

tion his father’s work “Sha‘ar Efrayim.” When 

Charles of Lorraine wrested Buda from the Turks 

in 1686, the members of Léb’s family lost: all their 

possessions and removed to Prague. Lob returned 
from Palestine to that city; and wealthy people 
there assisted him to publish the “Sha‘ar Efrayim,” 
with his own notes and an appendix (Sulzbach, 

1686). He went again to the Holy Land, and died 

in Safed (according to others, in Jerusalem). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, s.v. Ephraim of 
Witna; Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, pp. 84-85, Wilna, 1860 ; 


idem, Keneset Y" israel, p. 399, Warsaw, 1886; Eleazar ha- 
Kohen, Kin’at Soferim, p. 55a, Lemberg, 1892. Pow 
. WHE. 


Ss. 8. 

LOB JUDAH B. ISAAC: Polish rabbi; died 
in Cracow about 1730; grandson of R. Joshua, au- 
thor of “Maginne Shelomoh.” He officiated as 
rabbi at Shidlow, Poland, being at the same time 
_a representative of Cracow in the Council of Four 
Lands. After 1715 he became rabbi and president 
of the yeshibah at Cracow, where he remained till 
his death, 

Léb Judah is known by his approbations to many 
books, among which may be mentioned “Panim 
Me’irot,” by Meir Eisenstadt (Amsterdam, 1714), 
and “ Berit, Shalom,” by Phinehas b. Pelta (Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, 1718). 

Of his family are known only two sons: David 
Samuel, who succeeded his father, first in Shidlow 
and afterward in Cracow, and Isaac, rabbi of Tar- 
now, Galicia. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, ‘Ir oe pp. 159-160; Friedberg, 


Luhot Zikkaron, pp. 
oo Ne Thi. 


LOB JUDAH BEN JOSHUA: Bohemian 
scholar; lived at Prague in the middle of the seven- 
teenth century. He filled the office of secretary to 
Simon Spira, chief rabbi of Prague, and he pub- 
lished, under the title “Milhamah be-Shalom,” an 
account of the siege of Prague by the Swedes in 


1648 and of the suffering of the Jews on that occa- 


Sion. Printed first at Prague, it was reproduced 
later, with a Latin translation by Wagenseil, in 
“Exercitatio Tertia,” and republished in the “ Bik- 
kure ha-‘Ittim,” iv. 103 e¢ seg. 

VIII.—10 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz’s oe a Asher’s edition of Benjamin 
af Tudela, p. 284: idem, Z. G p. 300, No. 242; Steinschneider, 
Cat. Boal. col. 1324; Zedner, ‘Auswanl Historischer Sticke, 
p. 188, Berlin. 1840. 

D. I. Br. 

LOB HA-LEVI OF BRODY: Galician rabbi 
of the beginning of the nineteenth century; held 
office first at Podhajce. then at Brody. Among his 
contemporaries was Ephraim Zalman Margaliot, 
chief rabbi of Brody, in whose “Bet Efrayim” oc- 
curs a responsum of Léh’s. He was the author of 

“Leb Aryeh” (Lemberg, 1820), a commentary on 

Hullin. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefartm, p 
Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadagh, p. 82. 
D. M. SEL. 


LOB BEN MEIR. Sce Jcpan BEN Meir. 


LOB MOKIAH OF POLONNOYE: Polish 
preacher and leader of the Hasidic party in the sec- 
ond half of the eighteenth century. Léb was a 
pupil of Israel Ba‘al Shem-Tob and of Biir of Mes- 
eritz, aud contributed much to the former’s thaumat- 
urgy. Several wonderful things are narrated about 
him in the “Shibhe Ba‘al Shem-Tob.” Léb was the 
author of a work entitled “Kol Aryeh” (Korzec, 
1802), homiletic annotations on the Pentateuch. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Rodkinson, Toledot Ba‘ale Shem-Toh, p. 38, 

Kénigsberg, 1876; Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, 


p. 79. 
Hi. R. M. SEL. 


LOB BEN MOSES HA-KOHEN: Polish 
rabbi of the eighteenth century; author of “Pene 
Aryeh” (Novidvor, 1787), novellze on the Talmud, 
to which is added a pamphlet entitled “ Kontres 
Mille de-Abot,” novelle by Léb’s father and father- 
in-law. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 486; First, 
Bibl. Jud. ii. 265, 
H. R. M. SEt. 


LOB OF POLONNOYE. See L6s Moxrau. 


LOB BEN SAMUEL ZEBI HIRSCH: Russian 
rabbi; born probably at Pinczow, government of 
Kielce, Poland, about 1680; died at Brest-Litovsk 
1714. Loéb was on his father’s side the grandson of 
Joel SrRKEs and stepson of David ben Samuel ha- 
Levi, of whom he was also the pupil. He studied 
besides under Joshua Héschel, author of “ Maginne 
Shelomoh,” and under Yom-Tob Lipmann Heller. 
He was rabbi successively of Swirz, Galicia (before 
1663), Kamorna, Stobnitz, Zamosc (1679-89), Tiktin, 


p. 233; Walden, 


Cracow, and finally Brest-Litovsk (1701-14). He 


was considered by his contemporaries so great a Tal- 
mudic authority that in 1669 he was sent with his 
stepbrother Isaiah ha-Levi to Constantinople to 
investigate the claims of Shabbethai Zebi. His re- 
sponsa were published later, under the title “Sha- 
’agat Aryeh” (Neuwied, 1736), by his grandson 
Abraham Nathan Meisels, who added some of his 
own under the title “Kol Shahal.” Other responsa 
of Léb’s are to be found in the “Shebut Ya‘akob,” 
No. 107 edited by his grandson, and in “Teshubot 
Geonim Batra’e,” published first in Turkey by the 
author of “ Ma‘ane Elihu,” and afterward in Prague 
(1816). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Friedberg, Luhot Zikkaron, pp. 24, 25: AZu- 
lai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii. 188; Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 
527; M. Zunz, ‘Ir ha-Zedek, pp. 150 et sey. and note 64. 


H. R. M. SEL. 


Lb 
Lodz 


LOB OF SHPOLA: Early Hasidic rabbi; died at 
an advanced age Oct. 4, 1810. It is said that he was 
a poor “melammed ” or teacher in his younger days, 
aud that he did not assume the title of rabbi be- 
cause, unlike other “zaddikim ” of that period, he 
was not the pupil or disciple of a great zaddik. 
Although his only claim to prominence in the Hasi- 
die world was a visit which he paid once to R. 
Israel Ba‘al Shem-Tob, the nominal founder of 
Hasidism, both R. Baruch of Medzhibozh and R. 
Nalman of Bratzlave (the first a grandson and the 
second a great-grandson of the Ba‘al Shem) devel- 
oped a fierce antagonism to him. He was popularly 
knownas “the Shpoler Zeide ” (grandfather of Shpo- 
Ja), and was revered for his great piety. Heled a very 
simple, almost ascctic, life, and distributed in char- 
ity most of the money given him by his numerous 
adherents. He left no writings, and if his detractors 
are to be believed, he did not possess the knowledge 
and intelligence to produce anything of value; but 
he so impressed his contemporaries that his name is 
still preserved among the Hasidim, especially those 
of southern Russia, as that of one of the saintly, 
miracle-working rabbis of the first period of Hasi- 
-dism. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gottlober, in Ha-Boker Or, v. 384-388; Rod- 
oe Toledot Ba‘ale Shem-Toh, pp. 39-40, Kénigsberg, 

H.R, P. Wr. 


LOB (ARYEH) BEN ZACHARIAH (called 
also Hocher R. Lob): Polish rabbi; born at Cra- 
cow about 1620; died there 1671. When a young 
man he was called as rabbi to Vienna, where he offi- 
ciated for a few years. Thence he went to Przem- 
ysl, Galicia, and in 1665 he became rabbi at his na- 
tive place, where he remained until his death. He 
was the author of “ Tikkune Teshubah,” an ethical 
work in Judo-German, Cracow, 1666. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz, “lr ha-Zedek, p. 115, Lemberg, 1874; H. 

N. Dembitzer, Kelilat Yow, i. 78b: Joel Dembitzer, Mappe- 

let ‘Ir ha-Zedek, p. 25. 

H. R. B. Fr. 

LOBATO: Marano family, several of whose mem- 
bers lived at Amsterdam. The best-known mem- 
bers of the family are: 

Diego Gomez Lobato (called also Abraham 
Cohen Lobato): Portuguese Marano; born at 
Lisbon, where he was living in 1599; cousin and 
countryman of the poet Paul de Pina (Rehuel Je- 
shurun). When the latter was going to Rome, in- 
tending to enter a monastery there, Lobato gave 
him a letter, dated April 3, 1599, addressed to Elijah 
Montalto (subsequently physician to Maria de Med- 
ici), who was then living at Leghorn, asking Elijah 
to dissuade Paul from his purpose. Paul de Pina 
was in fact induced by Montalto to desist from carry - 
ing out his intention. He became an enthusiastic 
follower of Judaism, and lived, like Diego Gomez 
Lobato, at Amsterdam. 

Isaac Cohen Lobato: Portuguese Marano; born 
at. Lisbon; died at an advanced age in Amsterdam ; 
a relation of Dicgo Gomez Lobato, At the per- 
formance in the first synagogue of Amsterdam of 
Rehuel Jeashurun’s antiphonal poem “ Dialogo delos 
Sicte Montes” (composed in 1624), in which the 
mountains of the Holy Land are introduced as 
speakers, Lobato took the leading part of Wt. Zion. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


146 


ne + 





In 1678 he, together with David Mendes Coutinho, 
founded the philauthropic society Sha‘are Zedek at 
Amsterdam. 

Rehuel Cohen Lobato: Sephardic authu, 
lived at Amsterdam; father of Isaac Cohen Lobato. 
Together with Moses Belmonte he issued a new 
Spanish translation of the Pirke Abot, entitled “ Pe- 
rakym” (Amsterdam, 1644). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. ix. 520, x. 4; Kayserling, Se- 
phardim, p. 176; idem, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. pp. 27, 64, 89. 


G. M. K. 


LOBATTO, REHUEL: Dutch mathematician; 
horn at Amsterdam June 6, 1797; died at Delft Feb. 
9, 1866. He sprang from a Portuguese Marano 
fainily which had gone to Holland in 1604. From 
his mother, a Da Costa, he acquired a complete 
knowledge of the south-EKuropean languages; and 
while yet a schoolboy he displayed remarkable tal- 
ent for mathematics. Littwack and Van Swindern 
were his teachers, and at Brussels Quetelet, with 
whom he edited the “Correspondance Mathéma- 
tique et Physique.” In 1823 he published “ Wis- 
kundige Mengelingen.” In 1828 he was appointed 
gager at Delft; afterward he became inspector-gen- 
eralof the gaging-office there; and in 1842 he was ap- 
pointed teacher of higher mathematics in the same 
city. 

Lobatto was the author of a great number of arti- 
cles in scientific periodicals and of various school- 
books. From 1828 till 1849 he was editor of the offti- 
cial annual of statistics. In 1841 he was appointed 
by Minister Rochussen member of a commission for 
the conversion of the public debt. The Order of 
the Netherlands Lion was conferred upon him; he 
reecived the degree of doctor “honoris causa” from 
Groningen University, and was a member of the 
Royal Academy of Sciences. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Matthes, in Jaarhoek Koninklijke Akademie 
voor Wetensehappen, Arsterdam, 1866 (gives complete lists 
of Lobatto’s works): Spectator (The Hague), 1866; Bierens 
de Haan, Bihliographie V.d. Aa Woordenboek, xxi. 

Dz E. S81. 

LOBEL, ARTHUR: Austrian physician; born 
at Roman, Rumania, May 15, 1857; educated at the 
gymuasium of Czernowitz and the universities of 
Vienna and Paris (M.D., Vienna, 1883), During 
the year 1884 he served as assistant at the General 
Hospital, Vienna, and in 1885 settled as a physician 
at the watering-place of Dorna, where he practises 
during the summer months, spending the winters in 
Vienna. In i898 he received the title of “ Kaiser- 
licher Rath.” 

Loébel is the author of: “ Das Balneotherapeutische 
Verfahren Wihrend der Menstruation,” Berlin, 
1880; “Der Curgebrauch mit Mineral wiissern With- 
rend der Graviditit,” 2d. 1888; “Das Bukowinaer 
Stahlbad Dorna,” Vienna, 1889; “Die Curdiitetik 
im Eisenbade,” Vienna and Leipsic, 1890; “ Die 
Moorbiider und Deren Surrogate,” Vienna, 1890; 
“Zur Thermalbehandlung der Endometritis,” Leip- 
sic, 1891; “Die Neueren Behandlungsinethoden der 
Metritis Chronica,” 7b. 1892; “ Kosmetische Winke,” 
Leipsic and Vienna, 1894: “Zur Behandlung der 
Oophoritis Chronica,” Berlin, 1895; “ Geschichtliche 
Entwicklung des Eisenbades Dorna,” Vienna, 1896; 
“Das Diitetische Verhalten Wahrend der Menstru- 
ation,” Kreuznach, 1897; “ Die Balneologischen Cur- 


147 THE 


methoder bei Behandlung der Chronischen Para- 
und Perimetritis,” Halle, 1898: “Die Balneo- und 
Didtotherapie der Arterioklerose,” Vienna, 1898; 
“Zur Puerperalbehandlung mit Trink- und Badeku- 
ren,” Berliu, 1900; “ Die Leistuungen der Physikali- 
schen Herzheilmethoden,” Vienna, 1902; “Studien 
tiber die Physiologische Wirkungen der Moorbiider,” 
ab. 1904. 

LOBEL, HIRSCHEL. See Levin, HirscuEt. 

LOBELE OF PROSSNITZ. See Prossnitz, 
LOBELE. 

LOBO, MOSES JESHURUN: Spanish poet; 
lived at Amsterdam in the seventeenth century. 
He was one of the poets who celebrated the martyr- 
dom of Abraham Nufiez Bernal in 1655; and _ his 
elegies form a part of the “Elogios” (Amsterdam, 
1655). Daniel de Barrios (“ Relacion de los Poetos,” 
p. 56 = “R. E, J.” xviii. 285) speaks of “an excel- 
lent Spanish poet, Custodio Lobo, otherwise called 
Moses Jeshurun Ribero” (died at Leghorn), some 
anti-Christian verses by whom he quotes. The sim- 
ilarity of their names induced Wolf (“ Bibl. Hebr.” 
iii., No. 1579d) to suppose the two poets to be 
identical. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 254; Kayserling, Sephar- 


dim, p. 262; idem, Bibl. Esp.-Port. Jud. p. 64. 
G. M. SEL. 


LOCK. See Key. 

LOCUST: Of all the insects the locust is most 
frequently mentioned in the Old Testament. It oc- 
curs under the following nine names, which proba- 
bly denote different species; but there is no certain 
clue by which the exact species intended by each 
name can be identified: (1) “arbeh” (A. V. some- 
times “ grasshopper”), the most common term, com- 
prising the whole genus; 2) “sol‘am,” derived by 
Ibn Ezra from “sela‘” = “rock ” (rock-locust; A. V. 
“bald locust”); (3) “harvol 2(A. V. “beetle”; R. 
V. “cricket”; Jewish exegetes, “grasshopper”; 
comp. Arabic “harjal” = “a troop of horses,” or 
“Jocust,” from “harjala” = “to hop,” “to jump”); 
(4) “hagab” (A. V. usually “grasshopper”; seems 


likewise to be used in a general sense in Num. xiii. . 


33; Isa. xl. 22); (5) “hasil” (I Kings viii. 87: Ps. 
Ixxviii. 46); (6) “gazam” (Joel i. 4; Amos iv. 9), 
usually rendered “ palmer-worm ”; (7) “yelek” (Jer. 
li, 27; Nahum iii. 15; LXX. and Vulgate, “bron- 
chos ” ; R. V. “canker-worm ”); (8) “ zelazal” (Deut. 
XXViii. 42) may be an onomatopeeic designation of 
locusts in general; (9) “gebim” and “ gobai” (Na- 
hum iii. 17; Amos vii. 1; A. V. “grasshopper”; 
R. V. margin to the latter passage, “green 
worms”) are probably also general terms. The 
first four species are enumerated among the “ winged 
creeping things” which are allowed to be eaten, and 
are described as having “legs above their feet to 
leap withal upon the earth” (Lev. xi. 21 e¢ seq.). 

Upward of forty orthopterous insects have been 
discovered in Palestine. The <Acrydium lineola, 
A. peregrinum, and the Gidipoda migratoria are 
counted among the most destructive, and are there- 
fore the most dreaded. 

The term “locusts ” is sometimes used figuratively ; 
é.g., for swarming hordes and mighty hosts (Judges 
vi. 5, vii. 12; Jer, xivi. 28; Prov. xxx. 28); for pran- 


JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Léb 
Lodz 


cing horses (Joel ii. 4: Job xxxix. 20): as anembiem 
of voracious greed (Isa. xxxill. 4; Amos vii, 1); of 
feebleness, insignificance, and perishableness (Num. 
xiii. 388; Isa. x1. 22; Ps. cix. 23; Nahum ili. 17). 

The Talmud points out as the marks of the clean 
locust: four fect, two hopping legs, and four wings 
which are large enough to cover the body (Hul. 
39a). Besides the specics mentioned in the Old Tes- 
tament the Talmud refers to many others (comp. 
Hul. 65). Public prayers were instituted against 
the plague of locusts (Ta‘an. 14a, 19a). Some lo- 
custs, probably variegated, were the playthings of 
children (Shab. 90b). The egg of the har gol car- 
ried in the ear relieves earache (dd. 65a); while the 
left part of the “zipporat keramim” worn on the 
left side of the body preserves one’s knowledge (2d. 
JOb; Tristram, “Nat. Hist.” p. 306; Lewysohn, 
“Z. T.” p. 285; Burckhardt, “Notes on the Bed- 
ouins,” p. 269). 

E. G. H. I, M. C. 


LODEVE: Small town in the department of Hé- 
rault, France. A Jewish community was founded 
here as early as the fifth century. It was under 
the jurisdiction of the bishop, to whom it paid an 
annual tax. In 1095 Bishop Bernard, tn conformity 
with an old decision of the councils, forbade mar- 
riages between Jews and Christians, on pain of ex- 
communication for the latter. In 1188 King Philip 
Augustus of France confirmed the bishop’s rights 
and privileges relating to the Jews. Several Lodéve 
Jews were living at Montpellier in 1298 and 1294, 
and at Perpignan in 1418 and 1414. A Paris manu- 
script (Bibliothéque Nationale, No. 242), containing 
Levi b. Gershon of Bagnol’s commentary on Genesis 
and Exodus, refers to two rabbis of Lodéve (120%), 
Eleazar and Isaac pp or pra (= “ Botin,” accord- 
ing to Carmoly), or Isaac del Portal or de la Porte 
(apwr jo). This name is probably derived from “ Por- 
tale ” (Latin, “ Portalis ”), in the department of Vau- 
cluse. It may, however, be derived from “ Portes,” 
a Village in the department of the Gard. A Jew 
named Isaac de Portes lived at Nimes in 1806. 

Rabbi Solomon Ezobi of Carpentras corresponded 


‘with the Bishop of Lodéve, Jean Plantavit de la 


Pause, author of the work entitled “ Planta Vitis seu 

Thesaurus Synonymicus Hebrieo-Chaldeo-Rabbini- 

cus”; about 1629 he addressed three Hebrew poems 

to the bishop. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, Revue Orientale, iii. 340; Dom Vais- 
séte, Histoire Générale de Languedoc, vol. i. book XV.3 
vol. iii., book 1xx.; Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 158, 274, 611; 
R. E. J. xiv. 66, 53. 733 xxii, 265; Saige, Les Juifs du Lan- 
gquedoe, Vii. 3, 12, 


14. 
res S. K. 


LODZ (LODZI): City in the government of Pi- 
otrkow, Russian Poland, about 90 miles west of 
Warsaw. As Jate as 1821 it was only a village of 
800 inhabitants, when the manufacture of woolens 
was first introduced there by Germans Later, cot- 
ton-mills were added. The population of Lodz 
gradually increased until in 1872 it amounted to 
50,500; and in 1876 it reached a total of nearly 
80,000, including about 15,006 Jews. 

Lodz is now considered the second city of Poland, 
both in population and in the importance of its cot- 
ton-mills; indeed, itis styled “the Manchester of Po- 





Peete THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 148 
land.” The rapid growth of the city is due no more | Asylum, opened in 1895 with 64 children. The re- 


to the Germans than to the Jews, who introduced 
numerous spindles and hand-looms in almost every 
household, and, being satisfied with small profits, 
were able to compete with the largest manufac- 
turers both in Moscow and in other cities of Russia. 
The expulsion of the Jews from Moscow in 1891 
helped to increase the volume of business in Lodz. 
In 1898 the keen competition abroad compelled the 

Jewish merchants of Lodz to adopt 


Introduc- desperate measures to retain business 
tion of by making also a cheap grade of 
Shoddy. goods to imitate woolens. This new 


stuff was called “ shoddy,” being a 
mixture of waste from cotton and woolen stuffs 
which was formerly discarded as of no value. The 
Polish newspaper “ Rozowj” lamented this new at- 
tempt of the Jews to “spoil the market.” 

The question of employing Jewish operatives was 
a very difficult one. In the first place, they could 
not subsist on the small wages paid to the mill- 
hands, Secondly, when the factories were built and 
machinery was introduced the Jews could not work 
together with non-Jewish operatives on Saturday, 
and the establishments were closed on Sunday. 
Israel Posnanski, the richest manufacturer of Lodz, 
in order to utilize Jewish labor, solved the problem 
by setting aside a factory for Jewish employees. 
Later, Rabbis Meisels and Jelski prevailed upon 
other Jewish manufacturers to open similar fac- 
tories, 

The Jewish community of Lodz was organized 
before Lodz was recognized as a town, Hillel, the 
first rabbi, died in 1823; his successor, Ezekiel, died 
in 1851; and the present (1904) rabbi, Elijah Hay- 
yim Meisels, was elected in 1878. 

There is in Russia no Reform congregation; but 
it has what is known as “German” congregations. 
These are attended by the rich mem- 
bers of the community ; strict decorum 
is observed ; a cantor with trained choir 
conducts the service; and an academ- 
ical rabbi delivers his sermons in pure 
German or Russian, Lodz has such 
a congregation. Adolph M. Radin, now in New 
York, was elected its rabbi in 1884, and was suc- 
ceeded by the present rabbi, Israel Jelski. The con- 
gregation completed its new temple in 1888 at a cost 
of 500,000 rubles. 

There are two synagogues, one on the Old Bazaar 
and onein Wulke, the Jewish quarter. The leaders 
of the community are Michael Adolph Cohen, attor- 
ney at law; Herzberg; Pinkus; and Wachs. 

The Hebrew Free School (Talmud Torah) has 
been under the management of Herman Konstadt 
since 1877, The Jewish hospital was founded by 
Israel] Posnanski, who donated 40,000 rubles for it in 
1879. The building was finished in 1883. 

The Free Loan Society (Gemilut Hasadim) was 
organized in 1883 by J. S. Goldman and Isaac Mon- 


Congrega- 
tions and 
Syna- 
gor ues. 


diecki. In the same year Isaiah Ro- 
Institu-  senblatt established the Free Lodging 
tions. Society (Haknasat Orehim). There are 


also a home for the aged (Bet Mahseh 
li-Zekenim), and an asylum for poor girls. Mar- 
cus Silberstein is the founder of the Orphan 


port of 1897 shows an average expenditure of 14,960 
rubles perannum. A Hebrew technical school, or- 
ganized by J. K. Posnanski, Bernhard Dobronicki, 
and 8, Jarazinski, has an attendance of 800 pupils. 
The Jewish clerks employed in the factories formed 
a mutual aid society in 1896. Isidor Kempinski 
shortly before his death (1900) founded a secular 
school for Jewish children. 

The Jews of Lodz have contributed liberally to 
charitable institutions abroad. For example, they 
gave 10,000 rubles to Rabbi Hildesheimer toward a 
Hebrew school for Russian Jewish immigrants in 
Berlin in 18838; and it is estimated that in the same 
year they expended in charity more than 1,000,000 
rubles. They contributed also a large sum to help 
their Christian neighbors build a Russian church in 
Lodz. 

Among the Jewish celebrities who are natives of 
Lodz is David Janowski, the champion chess-player 


of France. On his visit to his native city in 1900 the 
authorities recognized his successes by 
Distin- presenting him with a gold medal. 


guished The artists Herschenberg, Glitzen- 
Natives. stein, and Pilichowski also were born 
in Lodz. The last-named received a 
gold medal at the Paris Exposition of 1900 for his 
painting “The Wandering Jew.” Another gold 
medal was awarded to Emanuel Sadokierski of Lodz 
for excellency in bookbinding and for articles made 
of papier-maché (“Currier Warszawski,” 1900, No. 
239). The Jews of Lodz, however, refused to send 
a manufacturing exhibit to the Paris Exposition, 
thereby marking their indignation at the proceed- 
ings in the Dreyfus affair. Among Jewish writers 
of Lodz are David Fischman, the Hebrew novelist, 
and Sarah Feige Foner, author of the Hebrew nov- 
els “Beged Bogedim” and “Ahabat Yesharim.” 
She organized in Lodz the Bat Ziyyon Society for 
teaching girls the Hebrew language and Jewish his- 
tory and literature. 

The present (1904) population is about 300,000, 
including 75,000 Jews, The statistics of 1896 give 
1,827 births, 1,856 deaths, and 564 marriages among 
the Jews of Lodz in that year. 

H.R. J. D. E. 

LOEB, ISIDORE: French scholar; born at 
Sulzmatt (Soultzmatt), Upper Alsace, Nov. 1, 1839; 
died at Paris, June 3, 1892. The son of Rabbi 
Seligmaun Loeb of Sulzmatt, he was educated in 
Bible and Talmud by his father. After having 
followed the usual course in the public schoo] of his 
native town, Loeb studied at the college of Rufach 
and at the lycée of Colmar, in which city he at the 
same time attended classes in Hebrew and Talmud 
at the preparatory rabbinical school founded by 
Chief Rabbi Solomon KuiErm. In 1856 he entered 
the Central Rabbinical School (Ecole Centrale Rab- 
binique) at Metz, where he soon ranked high 
through his knowledge of Hebrew, his literary abil- 
ity, and his proficiency in mathematics. In 1862 he 
was graduated, and received his rabbinical diploma 
from the Séminaire Israélite de France at Paris, 
which had replaced (1859) the Metz Ecole Ceutrale 
Rabbinique. 


149 


Locb did not immediately enter upon a rabbinical 
career, but tutored for some years, first at Bayonne 
and then at Paris. In 1865 he was called to the rab- 
binate of St. Etienne (Loire). His installation ser- 
mon, ou the duties of the smaller congregations 
(“Les Devoirs des Petites Communautés”), is one of 
the best examples of French pulpit rhetoric. 

Soon, however, he felt a desire to extend the field 
of his activity. He went to Paris, where he was 
appointed (June 1, 1869) 
secretary of the Alliance 
Israélite Universelle, 
which position he held 
until his death. It was 
largely due to Loeb’s 
Inbors that this associa- 
tion became an impor- 
tant factor in the prog- 
ress of Oriental Juda- 
ism; and he created the 
library of the Alliance, 
which is one of the most 
valuable Jewish libra- 
riesin existence. Mean- 
while he continued his 
historical and philolog- 
ical researches, and de- 
veloped an extensive 
literary activity. The 
chair of Jewish history in the Rabbinical Seminary 
of Paris having become vacant through the resig- 
nation of Albert Cohn (1878), Loeb was appointed 
his successor, He held this position for twelve 
years. His main activity, however, was devoted 
to the Société des Etudes Juives, which was or- 
ganized in Paris in 1880. Beginning with the first 
number, he successfully edited the “Revue des 
Etudes Juives,” the organ of that society, and was, 
moreover, @ voluminous and brilliant contributor 
thereto. 

The following warks published by Loeb deserve 
especial notice: “La Situation des Israélites en Tur- 
quie, en Serbie, et en Roumanie ” (1869); “ Biogra- 
phie d’ Albert Cohn” (1878); “Tables du Calendrier 
Juif Depuis Ere Chrétienne Jusqu’au XX Xe Sic- 
cle”; “Les Juifs de Russie ” (1891); “ La Littérature 
des Pauvres dans la Bible”; and “ Réflexions sur les 
Juifs.” The two last-named works have been pub- 
lished by the Société des Etudes Juives. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : I. Lévi, list of Loeb’s works, in R. H. J. vol. 

xxiv.; Z. Kahn, biographical sketch, ib. 

s, Z. K. 

LOEB, JACQUES: American biologist; born 
in Germany April 7, 1859; educated at the universi- 
ties of Berlin, Munich, and Strasburg (M.D. 1884). 
fie took a postgraduate course at the universities 
of Strasburg and Berlin, and in 1886 became assist- 
ant at the physiological institute of the University 
of Wiirzburg, remaining there till 1888, when he 
went in a similar capacity to Strasburg, During 
his vacations he pursued biological researches, at 
Kiel in 1888, and at Naples in 1889 and 1890. In 
1892 he was ecalicd to the University of Chicago as 
assistant professor of physiology and experimental 
biology, becoming associate professor in 1895, and 
professor of physiology in 1899. In 1902 he was 





A 


Isidore Loeb. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lodz 
Loewe 





called to fill a similar chair at the University of 
California. 

The main subjects of his worksare: animal tropisms 
and their relation to the instincts of animals; hetero- 
morphosis, ¢.e., substitution at will of one organ of 
an animal for another; toxic and antitoxic effects of 
ions; artificial parthenogenesis; and hybridization 
of the eggs of sea-urchins by the sperm of starfish, 

Among Loeb’s works may be mentioned: “He 
liotropismus der Thiere und Seine Identitiét mit dem 
Heliotropismus der Pflanzen,” Wirzburg, 1889; 
“ Physiologische Morphologie,” part i., 20. 1890; part 
li., 7, 1891; “ Vergleichende Physiologie des Gehirms 
und Vergleichende Psychologie,” Leipsic, 1899; edi 
tion in English, New York, 1900. 

A. F. T. H. 


LOEB, LOUIS: American artist; born at Cleve- 
land, Ohio, Nov. 7, 1866. At the age of thirteen he 
was apprenticed to a lithographer in his native city, 
and in 1885 went to New York, where he studied in 
the night-schools of the Art Students’ League, of 
which he became vice-president in 1889, Loeb went 
to Paris in 1890, and studied under Géréme, obtain- 
ing honorable mention at the Paris Salon in 1895, 
and third medal in 1897. 

From 1893 Loeb contributed to the chief maga- 
zines of the United States. He was a member of 
the Society of American Artists and associate of the 
National Academy of Design, and he contributed 
many noteworthy paintings to their exhibitions. 
Among the most important are the portraits of T. 
Zang will (1898), J. H. Schiff (1904), Eleanor Rob- 
son (1904) ; and the following pictures: “Temple of 
the Winds,” 1896 (silver medal, Pan-American Ex- 
position, Buffalo, 1903); “ The Breeze ” (1900) ; “ The 
Joyous Life” (1908) ;and * The Dawn, ” 1903 (Webb 
prize). He died July 12, 1909. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Who’s Who in America; The Bookman, 
Feb., 1900 A 


LOEB, MORRIS: American chemist; born at 
Cincinnati, Ohio, May 23, 1863; son of Solomon 
Loeb ; educated at the New York College of Phar- 
macy and at the universities of Harvard, Berlin, 
Heidelberg, and Leipsic. In 1888 he became pri- 
vate assistant to Professor Gibbs of Newport, R. L, 
and a year later docent at Clark University, Wor- 
cester, Mass. He has been professor of chemistry 
at New York University since 1891, and director of 
the chemical laboratory there since 1894. 

Loeb has largely occupied himself with matters of 
Jewish interest and holds offices in many charitable 
associations and other communal organizations. 
He is president of the Hebrew Technical Institute, 
president of the (N. Y.) Hebrew Charities Building 
Fund, director of the Jewish Theological Semi- 
nary of America and of the Educational Alliance 
(1892-97). He is the author of various scientific arti- 
cles, chiefly on physical and inorganic chemistry. 

A 


LOEWE, LOUIS: English Orientalist and the- 
ologian; born at Zilz, Prussian Silesia, 1809; died 
in London 1888, He was educated at the yeshi- 
bot of Lissa, Nikolsburg, Presburg, and at the 
University of Berlin. Stopping at Hamburg on 
his way to London, he was entrusted with the clas- 


Loewe 
Logic 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


150 





sification of the Oriental coins in the Sprewitz cab- 
inet. Soon after his arrival in London he was intro- 
duced to the Duke of Sussex, who in 1889 appointed 
him his “Orientalist.” He then traveled in the 
East, where he studied Arabic, Persian, Coptic, Nu- 
bian, Turkish, and Circassian. In Cairo he was pre- 
sented to the khedive, Mohammed Ali Pasha, for 
whom he translated some hieroglyphic inscriptions. 
While in Palestine he was attacked by Bedouins, 
who took everything he had with him, including his 
collections and note-books, On his return he met 
at Rome Sir Moses and Lady Montefiore, who invi- 
ted him to travel with them to the Holy Land. 
When in 1840 Sir Moses went on his Damascus ex- 
pedition, Loewe accompanied him as his interpreter. 
In the firman granted for the relief of the accused, 
Loewe discovered that the word “ pardon ” (“‘afw ”) 
was used instead of “acquittal,” and it was due to 
Sir Moses’ exertions that the change to “acquittal ” 
was made. 

Altogether, Loewe accompanied Sir Moses ‘ion- 
tefiore on nine different philanthropic missions. 
When Jews’ College was opened in 1856, he was 
nominated principal; and when Sir Moses Mounte- 
fiore opened a theological college at Ramsgate in 
1869, he made his friend principal of that institu- 
tion, which position Loewe retained until three 
years after the Geath of his patron. 

Loewe wrote: “The Origin of the Egyptian Lan- 
guage,” London, 1887; a translation of J. B. Levin- 
sohn’s “Efegs Dammim,” ¢. 1841; a translation of 
David Nieto’s “Matteh Dan,” 7). 1842 (awarded the 
York Medal); “Observations on a Uniqne Coptic 
Gold Coin,” 1849; a dictionary of the Circassian 
language, 1854; as well as several sermons and a 
Nubian grammar (the latter still in manuscript). 
BiBLioGRAPHY: Celebrities of the Day, April, 1881; J. H. 

Loewe, 4 Catalogue of the Library of the Late Dr. L. 


Loewe, 1890. 
J: H. Hr. 


LOEWE, LUDWIG: German manufacturer, 
philanthropist, and member of the Reichstag; born 
at Heiligenstadt Nov. 27, 1837; died at Berlin Sept. 
11, 1886. The son of a poor teacher, he attended 
the gymnasium in his native city, and then went to 
Berlin. While still a young man he accidentally 
made the acquaintance of Ferdinand Lassalle before 
the period of the lattcr’s socialistic agitation, and 
was admitted to his brilliant social circle. 

Loewe first entered npon a mercantile career as a 
dealer in woolens, then became a machinist, and in 
1864 established a manufactory of sewing-machines 
in Berlin. In 1870 he visited the United States to 
study the construction of machinery, and on his re- 
turn to Germany founded a factory for the produc- 
tion of tool-machinery in accordance with American 
methods, utilizing American machinery that had 
never before been introduced into Germany, He 
brought the manufacture to such a pitch of perfec- 
tion that the Prussian War Department arranged 
with him for the establishment of a factory for the 
production of weapons. Undera guaranty from the 
government, Loewe established a remarkable plant 
to supply not only weapons for the army, but also 
machinery for expositions. 

From 1864 uutil his death Loewe was a member of 


the Berlin Municipal Council, and was particularly 
influential in developing the school system. He 
was elected a member of the Prussian Abgeordne- 
tenhaus in 1876, and two years latera member of the 
Reichstag ; here he identified himself at first with the 
* Fortschrittspartei,” being a devoted follower of 
Johann Jacoby, and afterward with the progress- 
ive party (“ Deutsch-Freisinnige”). Subsequently 
his contracts with the government in connection 
with the furnishing of small arms were the sub- 
ject of calumnious animadversions by the anti- 
Semite Hermann AHLWARDT. Loewe having died, 
his brother Isidor, then at the head of the firm, in- 
sisted upon a complete investigation, which resulted 
in the demonstration of the utter baselessness of the 
charges made by the anti-Semitic leader. These 
charges were nothing less than that the Loewes were 
members of an international Jewish couspiracy to 
secure control of the entire world; that the greatest 
obstacle to gratifying this ambition being the obsti- 
nacy of the Germans, tie surest means of breaking 
that obstinacy was by the defeat of the Germans in 
war; that this could be most effectually secured by 
arming the German soldiers with defective weap- 
ons; and that to this end the Loewes had, by fraud 
and bribery, foisted upon the German military au- 
thorities nearly half a million guns that would ex- 
plode in battle, maiming and disabling those who 
carried them and frightening their comrades, tlus 
causing stampedes and routs, 

Loewe was for some time president of the Jewish 
congregation in Berlin. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ally. Zeit. des Jud. 1886, pp. 614-615, 632-638 ; 


Ahlwardt, Newe Enthillungen: Judenflinten, Dresden, 
1892; Judenflinten, part ii., ib. 1892. 
S. M. Co. 


LOEWENTHAL, EDUARD: German writer 
and editor; born March 12, 1836, at Ernsbach, Wirt- 
temberg; educated at the high school at Stuttgart 
and at the University of Tiibingen, where he studied 
jurisprudence and philosophy (Ph.D. 1859). He 
founded at Frankfort-on-the-Main the “ Allgemeine 
Deutsche Universititszeitung ” and became assistant 
editor on Max Wirth’s “Der Arbeitgeber.” Soon 
afterward he became editor of Payne’s “Die 
Glocke” at Leipsic, and established there the “ Zcit- 
geist.” In 1873 he became editor-in-chief of the 
“Neue Freie Zeitung,” and in the following year 
founded the Deutscher Verein fiir Internationale 
Friedenspropaganda. 

After having served two terms in prison as the 
result of press lawsuits, Loewenthal went to Brus- 
sels, London (where he remained for a year), and 
Paris. In the last-named city he founded the 
“Weltbithne, Deutsche Pariser Zeitung,” and a 
French monthly, “Le Monde de l’Esprit.” In 1888 
he returned to Berlin, Emperor Frederick ITI. hav- 
ing proclaimed an amnesty for politicai offenders. 

Among Loewenthal’s works may be mentioned: 
“System und Gesch. des Naturalismus” (6th ed. 
1868; Engl. transl. 1897); “Gesetz der Sphiirischen 
Molekularbewegung” (also an English edition); 
“Napoleon III. and the Commune of Paris” 
(drama); “Kine Religion ohne Bekenntniss” (1865); 
“Der Militarismus als Ursache der Massenverar- 
mung ” (1868; translated into French, at the expense 


151 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


= oewe 
Logic 





of the Société des Amis de Ja Paix, 1869); “ Grund- 
ziige zur Reform und Kodification des Volker- 
rechits” (1872; translated into English and French): 
“Le Cogitantisme ou la Religion Scientifique ” 
(1886); “Der Staat Bellamy’s und Seine Nachfol- 
ger” (1892); “Grundriss der Gesch. der Philoso- 
phie” (1896); “Die Religidse Bewegung im 19. 
Jahrhundert ” (19003; “ Die Fulguro-Genesis im Ge- 
gensatz zur Evolutionstheorie ” (1902); “ Gesch. der 
Friedensbewegung ” (1908). 
8. L. Da. 


LOEWY, EMANUEL: Austrian archeologist ; 
born at Vienna Sept. 1, 1857; educated at the gym- 
nasium and university of his native city (Ph.D. 
1882). He is now (1904) professor of archeology at 
the University of Rome. 

Loewy is the author of: “Untersuchungen zur 
Griechischen Kiinstlergeschichte ” (1883); “ Inschrif- 
ten Griechischer Bildhauer” (1885); “Lysipp und 
Seine Stellung in der Griechischen Plastik ” (1891); 
“Die Naturwiedergabe in der Aecltesten Griechischen 
Kunst ” (1900). 

8 F. T. HH. 


LOEWY, MAURICE: Astronomer; born at 
Vienna, Austria, April 15, 1838. A descendant of 
a Hungarian family, he received his education at 
his native city, where he was employed at the observ- 
atory. In 1860 he was called to the Paris Observa- 
tory as assistant astronomer, being appointed astron- 
omer in 1864. In 1865 he became a French citizen. 
In 1872 he was appointed 
a member of the Bureau 
des Longitudes; in 1873 
he was elected to the 
French Institute (Acadé- 
mie des Sciences); in the 
same year he became 
assistant director and in 
1896 director of the Paris 
Observatory. 

Loewy since 1878 has 
been editor of “ Ephemé- 
rides des Etoiles de Cul- 
nination Lunaire,” and 
since 1896 of the “ Rap- 
port Annuel sur 1’ Etat 
de Observatoire de 
Paris.” He invented sev- 
eral important astronom- 
ical instruments, among which is especially well 
known his “equatorial condé” or elbow-telescope, 
with which he secured the best photographs of the 
moon. He published with Puiseux since 1896 the 
“Atlas Photographique de la Lune.” 

Among Loewy’s numerous essays and works may 
be mentioned: “ Nouvelles Méthodes pour la Déter- 
mination des Orbites des Cométes,” 1879; “Des Elé- 
ments Fondamentaux de |’ Astronomie,” 1886; “De 
la Constance de Aberration et de la Réfraction,” 
1890; “Lu Coefficient de 1'Elasticité,” 1892 Qvith 
Tresca); “De la Latitude et des Positions Absolues 
des Etoiles Fondamentales.” 1895. Loewy’s “Me- 
moires” have been published in the “Comptes Rendus 
de Académie des Sciences * and in the “ Annales de 
VObservatoire.” Le died Oct. 15, 1907. 





Maurice Loewy. 


sIBLIOGRAPHY : Curinier, Dict. Nat. ili. 12; La Grande Bn 
eyclopédie, xxii. 415; Nouveau Larousse Ltlustré, v. 730; 
Mevers Konversations-Lextikon. 


s. KF. T. AH. 


LOGIC: The science of correct thinking; the 
science of the principles governing the comparative 
and constructive faculties in the pursuit and use of 
truth. Although, judging from the principles that 
were propounded by the Tannaim for the deduc- 
tion of halakot from the Biblical text, it can be 
surmised that the Rabbis were acquainted with the 
laws of syllogisms, analogies, etc., no mention of 
logical science is made in Jewish literature prior to 
the Judeo-Arabic period (see Tatmup). It was 
only with the transplantation of the Arabo-Greek 
philosophy to Jewish soil that the Aristotelian 
“Organon,” as propounded by the Arabs, became 
the vade-mecum of every Jewish student, and was 
regarded as indispensable to the acquisition of meta- 
physical and psychological knowledge. The He- 
brew terms adopted for “logic” were 4397 AYN, 
which is the literal translation of the Arabic “‘ilm 
al-kalam,” and }vnn mdan, corresponding to the 
Arabic “‘ilm al-mantik,” each signifying both “the 
science of speech” and “the science of thinking.” 
The term “hokmat higgayon” was, according to 
Shem-Tob (“Sefer ha-Emunot,” p. 45), first so em- 
ployed by the Tibbonides. It is found also in the 
Talmud, but in the sense of “recitation.” Eliezer 
said to his pupils, “ Restrain your children from }»3n ” 
(Ber. 28b), intending thereby to warn them against 
parading a superficial knowledge of the Bible gained 
by verbal memorization, The anti-Maimonists, 
however, interpreted the word “higgayon” in the 
sense of “logic,” and saw jn Eliezer’s saying a warn- 
ing against the study of that science. 

The first work on logic written by a Jew was the 
“Makalah fi Sana‘at al-Mantik” of Maimonides 
(12th cent,), translated into Hebrew by Moses ibn 
Tibbon under the title “ Millot ha-lliggayon.” It is 
divided into fcurteen chapters containing explana- 
tions of 175 Jogical terms. The He- 
brew terminology used by the transla- 
tor has becn adopted by all subsequent 
writers on Hebrew philosophical lit- 
erature. The eight books of the “ Or- 
ganon,” without counting Porphyry’s introduction, 
areenumerated. The “ Millot ha-Higgayon” was first 
published with two anonymous commentaries at 
Venice in 1552, and has since passed through fourteen 
editions. Commentaries upon it were written by Mor- 
decai Comtino (15th cent.) and by Moses Mendelssohn, 
A Latin translation was published by Sebastian 
Minster (Basel, 1527); and German ones were made 
by M. 8. Neumann (Venice, 1822) and Heilberg 
(Breslau, 1828). 

During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries 
Jewish literature was enriched with several wvi- 
tings on logic. The works of Al-Farabi and of 
Averroes were translated and commented upon; and 
the translations have survived the originals. Of 
Al-Farabi’s essays on logic the following are still 
extant in Hebrew manuscripts in various European 
libraries: the Introduction (Arabic, “Tautiyah”; 
Hebr. myyn), in three versions; the “Isagoge of Por- 
phyry ”; “Hermeneutics”; “Posterior Analytics,” 


First Jew- 
ish Work 
on Logic. 


Logic 
Lombroso 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


152 





the translation of which is attributed to Moses ibn 
Tibbon; “Topics,” in two versions; and “Syllo- 
gisms,” an abridgment of which was 
Transla- made by Jacob ben Abba Mari Anatoli 
tions of under the title “Sefer Hekesh Kazer.” 
Al-Farabi. A commentary on Al-Farabi’s five 
chapters on logic was written in the 
fifteenth century by the Karaite Abraham Bali. Of 
Averroes’ Short Commentary there are two Hebrew 
versions: one made by Jacob ben Machir of Mont- 
pellier in 1189 and published under the title “ Ko] 
Meleket Higgayon” at Riva di Trenta in 1509, and 
the other made by Samucl Marsili ben Judah of Taras- 
con in 1329. A Latin translation of Jacob ben Ma- 
chir’s version was made by Abraham de Balmes. 
A commentary on the Short Commentary was writ- 
ten by Moses Narboni (1840-55). Of Averroes’ Mid- 
dle Cominentaries those on Porphyry’s introduction, 
“Categories,” “Interpretation,” “Syllogisms,” and 
“Demonstration ” were translated by Jacob ben Ab- 
ba Mari Anatoli; on “ Topics” and “Sophistical Ref- 
utations,” by Kalonymus ben Kalonymus of Arles 
in 1818; on “Rhetoric” and “Poetics” by Todros 
Todrosi of Trinqguetaille in 1387. Anatoli’s transla- 
tion of the first five books was used by Joseph Caspi, 
who wrote an abridgment of the books on logic under 
the title “ Zeror ha-Kesef.” <A translation from the 
Greek of Aristotle’s logic was made in the fourteenth 
century by Shemariah ben Elijah Ikriti of Negropont. 
At the end of the same century Joseph ben Moses 
Kilti treated, in his work “Minhat Yehudah,” of 
Aristotle’s logic in the fashion of the aphorisms of 
Hippecrates. Shortly after appeared a work on 
Aristotle’s logic written by Elijah ben Eliezer of 
Candia. Another original work of the same period 
was the “ Kelale Higgayon” of David ibn Bilia. 
Averroes’ Middle Commentaries were much com- 
mented upon during the fourteenth and fifteenth 
centuries. The oldest supercommentary known is 
that found in the Vatican Library (MS. No. 337). 
It dates from 1316 and deals with Porphyry’s “ Isa- 
goge,” “Categories,” and “Ilermenecutics.” The 
other known supercommentaries of the fourteenth 
century are those of: Jedaiah Bedersi, mentioned 
by Moses Habib; Levi ben Gershon, a Latin trans- 
lation of which is still extant in manuscript in the 
Vatican Library (see “Atti dell’ Academia dei 
Nuovi Lincei,” Rome, 1863); Judah ben Samuel 


Abbas; and Abraham Abigdor ben Meshullam 
(Bonet). A rimed résumé of Porphyry’s introduc- 


tion and the “Categories” was given by Moses Rieti 
in his “ Mikdash Me‘at.” 
To the writings on logic of the fifteenth century 
belong: the supercommentary on Averroes’ Middle 
Commentaries, and the abridgment of 
Commen- Logic, entitled “ Miklol Yofi,” by Mes- 
taries on ser Leon (Judah ben Jehiel); the 
Logic. abridgment of the “ Categories,” “Syl- 
logisms,” and “Demonstration” by 
Abraham Farissol; the commentary on the “Isa- 
goge” by Joseph ben Shem-Tob; the commentaries 
on the “Isagoge,” “Categories,” and “Interpreta- 
tion” by Elijah Habillo; the annotations on Aver- 
roes’ Middle Commentary on the “Categories” and 
“Interpretation” by Manoah Sho’ali; and several 
anonymous commentaries on various books on logic. 


A supercommentary on the “ Posterior Analytics' 
was written by Abraham Bibago. Of Averroes’ ques- 
tions on the “Organon,” contained in the “ Masa’il & 
al-Hikmah,” one portion was translated by Kalony- 
mus ben Kalonymus, and the whole by Samuel ben 
Meshullam in 1820 under the title “ Ha-She’elot ha- 
Dibriyyot weha-Derushim Asher le-Pilusufim.” A 
commentary on two portions was written by Levi 
ben Gershon. From Samuel’s translation proceeded 
the Latin version made by Abraham de Balmes, 
which was first published in 1550. Another Latin 
translation of six portions was made by Elijah Del- 
medigo. Samuel ben Judah translated into Hebrew 
other questions on logic proceeding from the Arabic 
writers Abu al-Kasim ben Idris, Abu al-Hajjaj ibn 
Talmus, Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad ben Kasim, and ‘Abd 
al-Rahman ben Tahir. These questions also were 
rendered into Latin by Abraham de Balmes. An 
original writer on logic of the fifteenth century was 
Mordecai Comtino. 

Like the other branches of philosophy, the study 
of logic has since the sixteenth century been neg- 
lected by the Jews, and no important work on this 
science has been published in Hebrew. Among the 
Jewish logicians of modern times the most notable 
was Solomon Maimon, who wrote “ Versuch Hiner 
Neuen Logik” (Berlin, 1794), in which he attempted 
to expound an algebraic or symbolic system of logic. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Munk, Mélanges, p. 108 et passim; Renan, 

Averroés et VAverroisme, pp. 184 et seq.; Steinschneider, 

Hehbr. Uebers. pp. 43 et seg.; idem, Al-Farabi, ahaa 

J. : 


LOGOS, THE. See Memra; PHILo; WIspDoM. 


LOLLI, DAVID: Italian physician; born at 
Goritz 1825; died at Triest 1884; son of Samuel 
Vita Lolli; studied medicine at Padua and Vienna. 
On the outbreak of the Italian war for liberation he 
abandoned his studies, hastened to Padua to join 
the volunteers, took part in the unsuccessful at- 
tempt to hold Vicenza, and then joined the garrison 
guarding Venice. When the cholera broke out in 
the besieged city, Lolli also was stricken. On his 
recovery he returned to his native city, but subse- 
quently established himself as a physician at Triest. 
He continued to agitate for the independence of 
Italy (in which he included Goritz and Triest), and 
often incurred great danger in consequence. 

Lolli wrote much, especially on psychology and 
magnetism. Most of his works remained in manu- 
scripts; but the following were published: “Sul 
Magnetismo Animale, Pubblicato Nell’ Occasione di 
Conseguire la Laurea,” Padua, 1850; “ Sulla Migliare, 
Due Parole di Occasione,” Triest, 1857; “Sii Forte e 
Sarai Libero (Seneca): Sii Libero e Sarai Forte,” Mi- 
lan, 1860, published anonymously for political rea- 
sons; “I Numi,” Milan, 1866, a symbolical story, 
published under the pseudonym “ Aldo Apocalissio ” ; 
“Sul Cholera,” Triest, 1866; and “L’Amore dal 
Lato Fisiologico, Filosofico, e Sociale,” Milan, 1883. 

S. E. L. 


LOLLI, EUDE: Italian rabbi; born at Gdritz 
Aug, 23, 1826; died at Padua, Dec. 15, 1904; edu- 
cated in his native town and at the rabbinical college 
of Padua, graduating thence in 1854. In 1865 he 
was appointed professor of the college, a posi- 


153 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Logic 
Lombrogo 





tion he held until the institution was definitely 
closed in 1871. In 1869 he was elected chief rabbi 
of Padua, and in 1877 he became lecturer in, and in 
1886 professor of, Hebrew and Chaldaic at the Uni- 
versity of Padua. 

Lolli was the author of: “ Dizionario de] Linguag- 
gio Ebraico-Rabbinico,” Padua, 1869; “ Prelezione 
ad un Corso di Lingua Ebraica e Caldaica,” 1877; 
“Corso di Grammatica della Lingua Ebraica,” 7. 
1878. He also contributed a large portion to 5. D. 
Luzzatto’s “ La Sacra Bibbia Volgarizzata,” Rovigo, 
1872. He died Dec. 15, 1904. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : De Gubernatis, Diz. Biog. 


8, ieee Lees 


LOM (LOM-PALANKEK): Town in Bulgaria, 
situated at the mouth of the River Lom. It has a 
population of about 8,000, of which approximately 
700 are Jews, chiefly artisans and traders in grain. 
On March 20, 1904, a riot broke out against the Jews 
in connection with the disappearance ofa young Bul- 
garian, Whom the Jews were accused of murdering 
for ritual purposes. Through the timely measures 
taken by the government, a massacre was averted, 
and the riot subsided after a number of stores 
and dwelling-houses and the synagogue had been 
sacked, The young Bulgarian was afterward found 
drowned. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Huniziklopedichesht Slovar, xvii. 945, St. 
Petersburg, 1895; Budushchnost, 1904, Nos. 13-14. 
D. A. S. W. 


LOMAZY: Town in the district of Bialy, near 
Brest-Litovsk, Russia. Though in 1566 there was 
no Jew among its 400 house-owners, its customs 
revenues were farmed out to Jews. In 1589 the 
customs and mills were leased to the Jews Leibka, 
Wolfovich, and Itzka. According to Samuel ben 
Phoebus (“Tit ha-Yawen”) 200 Jews were killed 
in Lomazy during the Cossack uprising (1648-49). 
In 1897 the Jews of Lomazy numbered 1,100 ina 
total population of 3,200. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Russko-Yeurciski Arkhiv, ti., No. 282; Reges- 


ty, i., Nos. 669, 671; Samuel ben Phoebus, Tit ha-Yawen. 
H. R. G. D. R. 


LOMBROSO (LUMBROSO): Sephardic fam- 
ily, members of which lived in Tunis, Marseilles, 
and Italy. The two forms of the family name are 
doubtless due to different readings of the Hebrew 


ynnannd. 

Abram Lumbroso, Baron: Tunisian physi- 
cian and scientist; born in Tunis 1813; died in 
Florence 1887. After completing his classical stud- 
ies in Florence and receiving his M.D. degree at 
Pisa, he became physician-in-chief to the Bey of 
Tunis and afterward director of the state sanitary 
service. In 1846 he accompanied the bey to Paris, 
receiving from King Louis Philippe the Order of 
the Legion of Honor. 

In Tunis Lumbroso founded a scientific society, 
of which he was president; and he was one of the 
most ardent assistants of the bey, who was interested 
in the promotion of culture. Lumbroso distin- 
guished himself not only by his skill as a physician, 
but also by his philanthropic acts. Asa reward for 
his valuable services during the cholera epidemic, 
rendered to foreigners and to natives without regard 


to sect or creed, King Victor Emanuel II. of Italy 

bestowed upon him the title of baron, with remain- 

der to his eldest son. He was decorated also by the 

Sultan of Turkey with the Order of the Medjidie. 
Of Lumbroso’s published works may be cited: 

“Schizzo Storico Scientifico sul Colera Asiatico che 

Invase la Reggenza di Tunisi nel 1849 e 1850,” Mar- 

seilles, 1850; “ Lettere Medico-Statistiche sulla Reg- 

genza di Tunisi,” 7). 1850. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Gubernatis, Piccolo Dizionario det Con- 
temporanei, Rome, 1895; Resoconto sulle Opere del Ba- 
rone Dr. Abram Lumbhroso Letta al’ Accademia Reale di 
Medicina di Torino net Anno 1866, 

David Lumbroso: Tunisian political agent; 
born in Tunis 1817; died in Leghorn 1880. He was 
a highly respected merchant in the Italian colony of 
the former city, and was much trusted by the Tu- 
nisian government, to which he was of service on 
many critical occasions. 

Giacomo Lumbroso: Brother of Abram Lum- 
broso; head of a prominent business house at Mar- 
seilles, where he was consul for Tunis till the latter 
came under the protectorate of France. 

Giacomo Lumbroso, Baron: Son of Abram 
iumbroso. He studied law in Tunis, graduating 
with honors, but devoted himself principally to his- 
torical and archeologic researches, upon which he 
has written mauy important works. He was pro- 
fessor of ancient history, first in the University of 
Pisa and afterward in that of Rome. He resigned 
the latter position and retired to private life. 
Baron Giacomo is a member of the Accademia dei 
Lincei. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Gubernatis, Piccolo Dizionario dei Con- 
temporanei, Rome, 1895. 

Giacomo Lumbroso: Italian physician; born 
in Leghorn 1859. He was privat-docent in neuropa- 
thology and electrotherapeutics at the Institute of 
Florence, and physician-in-chief at the united royal 
hospitals of Leghorn. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Gubernatis, Piccolo Dizionario dei Cun- 
temporanei, Rome, 1895. 

8. EK. L. 

Isaac Lumbroso: Chief rabbi of Tunis and rab- 
binical author; died in 1752. He was prominent in 
the Tunisian Jewry, being judge of the community 
about 1710—an epoch coinciding with the schism 
which divided the Jews of the city into two camps, 
native Tunisians and Gournis or Italians. Lumbro- 
so was appointed rabbinical judge of the latter; 
and, being a man of means, he filled at the same 
time the position of receiver of taxes to the bey as 
well as that of caid, being the representative official 
of his community. 

From a literary point of view, Lumbroso, who 
was one of the most brilliant pupils of Rabbi Zemah 
Zarfati, was the most important among the Tunisian 
rabbis of the eighteenth century. He encouraged 
and generously assisted his fellow rabbis; and his 
reputation as a Talmudist and cabalist has survived 
to the present day. 

Lumbroso was the author of “ Zera‘ Yizhak,” pub- 
lished posthumously at Tunis in 1768. This work, 
the only one which has as yet been printed in that 
city, is @ commentary on the different sections of 
the Talmud. Several funeral orations, pronounced 


Lombrose 
London 


by Lumbroso on divers occasions, are appended 


thereto. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cazés, Notes Bibliographiques, pp. 240-246, 


Ss. 8, M. Fr. 


Isaac Vita Lumbroso: Father of Abram Lum- 
broso; born in Tunis 1798; died in Leghorn 1871. 
He was well known because of his philanthropy. 
For thirty years he was president of the Portuguese 
consistory in Tunis, and for four years judge of the 


Court of Appeals. 
S E. I. 


he 


Jacob Lombroso: Italian rabbi and physician. 
of Spanish origin; lived at the beginning of the sev- 
enteenth century in Venice, where he published a 
notable Bible having an exhaustive introduction 
and explanations together with Spanish translations 
of the more difficult passages. By some he is con- 
sidered to be the author of the “ Propugnaculum 
J udaismi,” written in defense of Judaism against the 
attacks in the fifth book of Grotius’ “De Veritate 
Religionis Christiane.” Mortara, however (“In- 
dice,” p. 35), observes that Lombroso himself as- 
cribes this work to Isaac Orobio. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Rossi, Dizionario. 


D E. L. 


LOMBROSO, CESARE: Italian alienist and 
criminologist; born Nov. 18, 1835, at Verona. Both 
his paternal and his maternal ancestors belonged to 
the tribe of Levi. On his father’s side he was de- 
scended from a family 
which for many gener- 
ations had been rich 
in rabbis and Hebra- 
ists. His maternal an- 
cestors were chicfly 
manufacturers and 
bankers who had long 
been established at 
Chieri, Piedmont. But 
in this branch of his 
family, also, there were 
many men of great 
talent, among others 
the poet David Lxrv1, 
who took an important 
part in the Italian 
struggle for liberty, 
firstasa Carbonaro, and 
afterward as a deputy. 

Under Professor Marzolo, Lombroso studied He- 
brew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Chinese, intending to 
devote himself wholly to philology. He afterward 
Studied medicine at Padua, Paris, and Vienna, and 
from the very beginning showed an especial prefer- 
ence for the study of insanity. While still a stu- 
dent he wrote two essays—one on insanity in antig- 
uity, and one on the insanity of Cardan—in which, 
for the first time, was pointed out the connection 
between madness and genius, 

Lombroso served as physician in the Austro-Ital- 
jan war (1859). The scientific results of his military 
service were two papers on amputation (which were 
awarded the Riberi prize, the only official academic 
reward he ever received), and a volume on Cala- 
brian folk-lore, which subject he had an opportunity 





Cesare Lombrasa, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


154 





of studying after the conclusion of peace, when he 
und his regiment were transferred to Calabria. Ags 
this regiment was composed of soldicrs from all parts 

of Italy, Lombroso took advantage of 
Studies in the opportunity thus afforded him tc 
Ethnology. study the ethnical types of the Italian 

people, and to lay the foundation for 
an ethnographical-anthropological chart of Italy. 
Some time later he was sent from Calabria to Pavia, 
where he asked permission to visit the insane asylum 
regularly, in order to acquire greater knowledge in 
his specialty. This permission being refused, he 
abandoned the military career. 

His experience during the following year was a 
very trying one. He taught at the University of 
Pavia, and served as a physician in the insane asy- 
lum; but in both cases he gave his services gratui- 
tously; and at night, in order to earn a bare subsist- 
ence, le had to make translations from the German. 
It was under such circumstances that he produced, 
among other works, his Italian edition of Mole- 
schott’s well-known work, “Kreislauf des Lebens,” 
under the title “Il Circuito della Materia.” At 
length, after a year of extreme want, he was made 
professor of psychiatry at Pavia, with a yearly sal- 
ary of 2,000 francs ($400), at that time a very con- 
siderable sum to him. His first two pamphlets, 
which he wrote during two sleepless nights, deal 
with genius and madness, and contain in embryo 
all the ideas afterward developed in his great work, 
“L’Uomo di Genio” (see below). During the first 
year of his professorship he wrote “ L’ Uomo Bianco 
e 1'Uomo di Colore,” a work treating of the develop- 
ment of the human race, Which development is con- 
ceived entirely from the point of view of the theory 
of evolution, and is filled with Darwinian ideas, 
although at that time Lombroso knew neither Dar- 
win nor Herbert Spencer. 

In Pavia, also, Lombroso began his studies of pel- 
lagra, @ peculiar skin-disease prevalent in northern 
Italy and the origin of which was totally unknown. 
He showed conclusively that it was due to a poison 
developed in old, moldy corn, the only food of the 
poor agricultural laborers of the country. On 
account of his discovery of the real cause of this 
malady he was denounced by the landed proprie- 
tary to the government as a madman; and it was 
demanded that he should be deprived of his pro- 
fessorship. Years later, however, his theory of pel- 
lagra was accepted by the whole profession. On 
the skull of a criminal executed at Pavia, he noticed 
the fossa occipitalis media, an atavic feature which 
he was the first to observe. | 

Lombroso was transferred from Pavia University 
to that of Turin, where he was made the professor of 
psychiatry and of medical jurisprudence. He made 
a collection of criminals’ skulls and photographs, of 
writings and works of art by lunatics and condemned 
criminals, as well as of prison appliances, which is 
one of the most extensive and instructive of its kind. 
He had many disciples, who are called collect- 
ively in Italy “La Scuola Lombrosiana.” Many of 
these (¢.9., Enrico Ferri, Baron Garofalo Roncoroni, 
Patrizi, Ferrero, Zerboglio, and Carrara) have as a 
result of their investigations attained to national and 
even world-wide renown. 


155 | 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lombroso 
London 





Lombroso’s name is chiefly connected with two 
theories: (1) that genius is a peculiar, psychical 
form of larvate epilepsy; (2) that there is a degen- 
erate class of human beings, distinguished by ana- 
tomical and psychical characteristics, who are born 

with criminal instincts and who rep- 

Theories resent a reversion to a very primitive 

of Genius form of humanity. He made a rich 
and Crime. collection of matertals for the investi- 

gation of his theory that genius is a 
form of epilepsy. Both he and his pupils carefully 
studied the best-known geniuses of all nations, ages, 
and spheres of activity; they brought together 
everything pertaining to their lives, works, appear- 
ance, hereditary characteristics, illnesses, idiosyn- 
crasies, habits, etc., and noted all traits that could 
make it seem probable that the subjects had suf- 
fered from epileptic disturbances. 

In his theory of the born criminal, Lombroso recog- 
nized crime asa phenomenon of degeneration, and 
placed the criminal among those abnormal types of 
the human species which, according as their de- 
velopment is either defective or excessive, present 
examples of atavism or of evolution—7.e., become on 
the oue hand idiots or criminals; on the other, 
saints, martyrs, altruists, revolutionists, artists, or 
poets. The effect of this theory was felt chiefly in 
the field of criminal jurisdiction. It gave rise to 
a distinct science—criminal anthropology; and it 
effected a revolution in the mode of viewing both 
the criminal and the crime which has found expres- 
sion in the newer penal codes. 

Of Lombroso’s works may be mentioned: 
“T’Uomo Delinquente iu Rapporto alla Antropolo- 
gia, alla Giurisprudenza ed alle Discipline Carce- 
rarie” (8 vols., 4th ed. Turin, 1889; German transl. 
by Friinkel, “Der Verbrecher in Anthropologischer, 
Aerztlicher und Juristischer Beziehung,” 2 vols., 
Hamburg, 1887-90; Atlas, 1895); “ L’ Uomo di Genio ” 
(2b. 1889; 6th ed. 1894; German transl. by Frinkel, 
“Der Geniale Mensch,” Hamburg, 1890; translated 
into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, etc.); 
(with Guglielmo Ferrero, afterward Lombroso’s son- 
in-law) “La Donna Delinquente” (2b. 1893; German 
transi, “Das Weib als Verbrecherin und Prosti- 
tuirte,” Hamburg, 1894); (with Laschi) “I) Delitto 
Politico” (2 vols., 7b. 1890); “Le Crime, Causes et 
Remédes ” ; “L’ Antisemitismo ele Scienze Moderne ” 
(2b, 1894; German ed., Leipsic, 1894); “Grafologia ” 
(Milan, 1894); “Gli Anarchisti” (2. 1894; German 
transl, Hamburg, 18995). 

Lombvoso was associate editor of the “ Archivio 
di Psichiatria, Antropologia Criminale e Scienze 
Penali.” He died Oct. 19, 1909. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gubernatis, Ecrivains du Jour; La Grande 

Eneyclopédie; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon:; Kurela, 


Cesare Lombroso und die Naturgeschichte des Verbrech- 
ens, Hamburg, 1892. 


8. M. N. 


LOMZA (LOMZHA): Capital~of the govern- 
ment of Lomza, Russian Poland; situated on the 
left bank of the River Narev. In 1897 it had a total 
population of 26,075, including 9,822 Jews. The 
earliest known references to an organized Jewish 
community in Lomza date from the beginning of the 
Nineteenth century. The first rabbi recorded is 


and 1 Talmud Torah (180 pupils). 


Solomon Zalman Hasid, a cabalist, who corresponded 
with Akiba Eger. Hewas rabbi of the Lomzacom- 
munity for thirty years, and died there about 1840. 
He was succeeded by R. Benjamin Diskin (who ofti- 
ciated until 1848) and the latter, by his son Joshua 
L6b Diskin (b. Grodno 1818; ad. Jerusalem 1898). 
Abraham Samuel Diskin, another son of Benjamin 
Diskin, was born at Lomza in 1827, and became rabbi 
of Volkovisk (government of Grodno), where he died 
in 1887. He was the author of “Leb Binyamin.” 
Joshua Léb Diskin was succeeded by R. Elijah 
Hayyim Meisels, now (1904) rabbi at Lodz. The 
fifth rabbi was Eliezer Simhah Rabinowitz (1879), 
now at Kalvariya. The present rabbi is Malchiel 
Zebi Tennenbaum, author of “ Dibre Malkiel.” 

In 1884 a destructive fire rendered eighty families 
homeless. In 1885 a yeshibah was established in 
Lomza by R. Eliezer Shulawitz, the pupil of R. 
Israel Salanter. The institution is attended by hun- 
dreds of boys, who are provided there with food and 
clothing. Among the prominent members of the 
Lomza community may be mentioned Dr, Ephraim 
Edelstein, son-in-law of Lazar Rosenthal of Yase- 
novka. 

Besides the general schools, Lomza has special 
Jewish schools, including 20 hadarim (480 pupils), 
The yeshibah has 
about 250 students. The charitable institutions in- 
clude a hospital, a poor-house, a tree-loan associa- 
tion, and a society for aiding the poor. Manufac- 
turing and trading have been but little developed 
in Lomza. In 1897 there were 1,327 Jewish artisans 
there. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Asif,i., iv. 5; Ha-Zefirah, 1877, No. 11; 
1879, No. 26; 1883, No. 81; 188, p. 266; 1887, p. 10; 1889, 


p. 1188. 
. 5. @. LS. J. 


H. R. 
“LONDON: Capital city of England. According 
to William of Malmesbury, William the Conqueror 
brought certain Jews from Rouen to London about 
1070; and there is no evidence of their earlier exist- 
encein England. Besides these settlers from Rouen, 
London was visited by Jews from the Rhine valley, 
one of whom, from Mayence, had a friendly dispute, 
about 1107, with Gilbert Crispin, Abbot of West- 
minster. Another Jew waseven converted to Chris- 
tianity by Anselin (“ Opera,” III., epist. cxvii.). The 
earliest reference toa collective Jewish settlement is 
in the “Terrier of St. Paul’s,” of about 1115, where 
mention is made. of some land in the “ Jew street,” 
which from its description corresponds to a part of 
Old Jewry. In 1180 the Jews of London incurred a 
fine of £2,000—an enormous sum in those days—“ for 
the sick man whom they killed”; possibly some 
charge of magic was involved. Among the persons 
paying this fine was “ Rubi Gotsce” (Rabbi Josce or 
Joseph), whose sons Isaac and Abraham were the 
chief members of the London community toward the 
end of the century, and whose bouse in Rouen wasin 
possession of the family as late as 1208 (“ Rot. Cart.” 
105b). In 1158 Abraham ibn Ezra visited London 
and wrote there his letter on the Sabbath and his 
“Yesod Mora.” Up to 1177 London was so far the 
principal seat of Jews in England that Jews dying 
in any part of the country had to be buried in the 
capital, probably in the cemetery known afterward 


London 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


156 





as “Jewin Garden,” and now as “Jewin street.” 
The expulsion of the Jews from the Isle of France 
in 1182 brought about a large acquisition to the 
London community, which was probably then vis- 
ited by Judah Sir Leon, whose name occurs as “ Leo 
le Blund” in a list of London Jews who contributed 
to the Saladin tithe Dec., 1185. This list includes 
Jews from Paris, Joigny, Pontoise, Estampes, Spain, 
and Morocco. 

The massacre of the Jews at the coronation of 
Richard I. Sept. 8, 1189 (see ENGLAND), was the first 

proof that the Jews of England had 

Massacre of any popular ill-will against them. 

of 1189. Richard did practically nothing to 

punish the rioters, though he granted 
a special form of charter to Isaac fil Joce, the chief 
London Jew of the time, “and his men,” which is 
the earliest extant charter of English Jews. In 
1194 the Jews of London contributed £486 9s. 7d. 
out of £1,803 7s. 7d. toward the ransom of the king: 
in the list of contributors three Jewish “bishops” 
are mentioned—Deulesalt, Vives, and Abraham. In 
the same year was passed the “Ordinance of the 
Jewry,” which in a measure made London the center 
of the English Jewry for treasury purposes, West- 
minster becoming the scat of the ExciEQUER OF 
THE JEWS, Which was fully organized by the be- 
ginning of thethirteenth century. Meanwhile anti- 
Jewish feeling in London had spread to such an ex- 
tent that King John found it necessary in 1204 to 
rebuke the mayor for its existence. After the mas- 
sacre of 1189, it would appear, the Jews began to 
desert Old Jewry, and to spread westward into the 
streets surrounding the Cheape, or market-place, 
almost immediately in front of the Guildhall, To 
a certain extent the Jews were crowded out from Old 

Jewry by the Church, which during 
Old Jewry. the twelfth century established there 

the monastery of St. Thomas of Acon, 
St. Mary Colechurch, and at the back St. Martin 
Pomary, looking upon Ivonmonger lane, where, it 
would seem, the Jews’ College, or high school of all 
the English Jews, was located. 

‘scheats and purchases tended also to drive the 
Jews away from this quarter, the corner houses of 
Ironmonger lane being taken from Jews by the Ear] 
of Lancaster and the Earl of Essex respectively. 
The Jewish dwellings spread along Gresham street, 
Milk street, and Wood street. The fact that the 
chief noblemen of the time were anxious to obtain 
them shows these houses to have been strongly 
built, as was indeed the complaint at the time of the 
riots. 

Besides their predominant position, due to the 
existence of the Exchequer of the Jews, and which 
brought to London all the Jewish business of the 
country, the Jews of the capital had also spiritual 
domination, inasmuch as their presbyter or chicf 
rabbi held a position analogous to that of the arch- 
bishop (see PRESBYTER). 

The chief synagogue of the London Jewry at this 
date appears to have been on the site of BAKEWELL 
Hau. It probably continued to be used down to 
the Expulsion, though for certain reasons it was in 
private hands from 1283 to 1290. Another syna- 
gogue, in the northeast corner of Old Jewry, was 


handed over to the Fratres de Sacca, while still an- 
other was given to St. Anthony’s Hospital, on the 
site of which is now the City Bank. Reference io 
more than one synagogue ainong the Jews of Lon- 
don is distinctly seen in the proclamations which 
were ordered to be made in the “svnagogues” to 
determine whether or not a person was in debt to 
the Jews (see “Select Pleas of the Jewish Ex- 
chequer,” ed. Rigg, p. 9). 

The Jews of London suffered from their position 
as buffer between the king and the barons. In 1215 
the barons opposing John sacked the Jewish quar. 
ter and used the tombstones of the Jewish cemetery 
to repair Ludgate (Stow, “Survey of London,” ed. 
Thoms, p.15). Similarly, in the trouble with Simon 
de Montfort, in 1268, the barons looted the London 
Jewry in pursuance of their opposition to the op- 
pression of the king, into whose hands fell the debts 
of the Jews in London and elsewhere. This out- 
burst had been preceded in 1262 by a popular riot 

against the Jews in which no less than 


In the 700 had been killed. A curious suit 
Barons’ which followed the death of a Jew on 
War. this occasion is given in “ Select Pleas,” 


pp. 78-76, from which it appears that 
some of the Jews of that time took refuge in the 
Tower of London. It is amistake, however, to sup- 
pose that there was a separate Jewry in that neigh- 
borhood. Most of the trials that took place with 
regard to ritua] or other accusations were held in 
the Tower (see NorwicH). Nevertheless the Tower 
continued to be the main protection of the Jews 
against the violence of the mob; and they are re- 
ported to have been among its chief defenders in 
1269 against the Earl of Gloucester and the disin- 
herited. 

In 1244 London witnessed an accusation of ritual 
murder, a dead child having being found with gashes 
upon it which a baptized Jew declared to be in the 
shape of Hebrew letters. The body was buried with 
much pomp in St. Paul’s Cathedral, and the Jews 
were fined the enormous sum of 60,000 marks (about 
£40,000). Later on, in 1279, certain Jews of North- 
ampton, on the accusation of having murdered a boy 
in that city, were brought to London, dragged at 
horses’ tails, and hanged. 

Toward the later part of their stay in London the 
Jews became more and more oppressed and de- 
graded, and many of them, to avoid starvation, re- 
sorted to doubtful expedients, such asclipping. This 
led at times to false accusations; and on one occa- 
sion a Jew named Manser fil Aaron sued for an in- 
quiry concerning some tools for clipping which had 
been found on the roof of his house near the syna- 
gogue (1277). In the following year no fewer than 
680 Jews were imprisoned in the Tower, of whom 
267 were hanged for clipping the coinage. On 
another occasion the lord mayor gave orders that no 
meat declared unfit by the Jewish butchers should 
be exposed for sale to Christians (Riley, “Chron.” 
p. 17%). 

Disputes as to jurisdiction over the Jews often 
occurred between the Jewish Exchequer and the 
lord mayor. Thus in the year 1250 pleas of dis- 
seizin of tenements of the city of London were with- 
drawn from the cognizance of the justice of the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


157 


London 





Jews aud assigued for trial in the mayor’s court, 
though they were reassigned to the Exchequer in 
1271. In that year Jews were prevented from ac- 
quiring any more property in London, on the ground 
that this might diminish the Church tithes (“De 

Antiquis Legibus Liber,” pp. 234 et 
The Church was very careful 


Syna- seq.). 
gogues to prevent any encroachment on its 
Closed. rights; and it endeavored to curtail 


those of the Synagogue as much as 
possible. In 1288 Bishop Peckham caused all syna- 
gogues in the diocese of London to be closed; and 
it is for this reason that there exists no record of 
any synagogue falling into the hands of the king at 
the Expulsion (1290), though it is probable that the 
house held by Antera, widow of Vives fil Mosse of 
Tronmonger Jane, was identical with the synagogue 
and was used for that purpose. 

At the Expulsion the houses held by the Jews fell 
into the hands of the king, and were with few ex- 


Indeed, their presence appears to have become so 

common that in an old play (" Every Woman in Her 

Humour,” 1609) a citizen’s wife thus 

advises any one desirous of going to 

court: “ You may hire a good suit ata 

Jew's.” From this it would appear 
that Jewish traffic in old clothes had already begun. 

Toward the middle of the reign of Charles I. a 
number of Spanish Jews, headed by Antonio Fer- 
nandez CARVAJAL, settled in London in order to 
share in the beuefits of the trade between Holland 
and the Spanish colonies. They passed as Span- 
iards, and attended mass at the chapel of the Span- 
ish embassy; but when the Independents, with 
sromwell at their head, became predominant in 
English affairs, several of these Jews assisted him in 
obtaining information about Spanish designs (sce 
INTELLIGENCERS). Meanwhile MANAssEn BEN Is- 
RAEL attempted to secure forma) permission for the 
return of the Jews to England. At the conference 


The 
Return. 


Seale 


tooft. 


200 






— 


The 


WEST 





The side 


(24a rket covered with booths) 


Tilting Ground 


CHE PING 


‘ 
Sci sha w 


SYNAGOGU 


‘ 
' 
sl Leet 





1 gy 
13: 45 WEAN 
s t\ree 
[22 VE 
PY ‘ 
’ ‘ 
i 
j \ 
1 ? 
i i 
' 1 
‘ iy 
' re 
1 
EE = 
} Co) 


~ 








ve 


Wwe 

SSNS 

\ Sy 
y 


4&3. 
ol 


ee ee oe et ee oe 


Olde 





of Cheape 


THE LONDON JEWRY, 1290. NUMBERED PLOTS BELONGED TO JEWS. 
(From Jacobs’ *‘ Jewish Ideals.’*) 


ceptions transferred tosome of his favorites. In all, 
the position of about twenty-five houses can still 
be traced (sce accompanying map), though it is 
doubtful whether the 2,000 Jews of London could 
have been accommodated in that small number of 
dwellings. As will be seen, the houses were clus- 
tered around the Cheape or market. Many of their 
owners were members of the Hagin family, from 
which it has been conjectured Huggin lane received 
its name (but see Hagin Deunscres). Traces of 
the presence of Jews are found also in surrounding 


Manors which now form part of London, as West 


Ham, Southwark, etc. 
From the Expulsion to the seventeenth century 


London was only occasionally visited by Jews, 
mainly from Spain. In 1542 a certain number of 
persons were arrested on the suspicion of being Jews. 


at Whitehall on Dec. 18, 1655, the matter was left 
undecided; but it was put to a practical test in the 
following year by the ROBLES case, as a result of 
which Cromwell granted the lease of a burial- 
ground at Mile End for 999 years (“Jew. Chron.” 
Nov. 26, 1880). Even previous to this the Jews had 
met for worship in a private house fitted up as a 
synagogue in Creechurch lane, Leadenhall street; 
and it is possible to assume the existence of a sec- 
ond meeting-place at St. Helens in the same neigh- 
borhood by 1662. These places of worship were 
fairly well known to the general public, though they 
were protected by treble doors and other means of 
concealment. Thomas Greenhalgh visited the one 
in Creechurch lane in 1664; and from the number of 
births in that year it would appear that about 280 
Jewish souls resided in London at the beginning of 


London 





the reign of Charles IT. These must have increased 
considerably by 1677, when more than fifty Jewish 
names occur in the first London directory (Jacobs 
and Wolf, “Bibl. Anglo-Jud.” pp. 59-61), implying 
a population of at least 500 Jewish souls. There is 
evidence of anumber of aliens pretending to be Jews 
in that very year (L. Wolf, in “Jew, Chron.” Sept. 
28, 1894, p. 10). 

Much opposition was directed against the Jews by 
the citizens of London, who regarded them as for- 
midable rivals in foreign trade. Besides a petition 
of Thomas Violett against them in 1660, attempts 
were made in 1664, 1678, and 1685 to puta stop to 
their activity and even to their stay in England. 
On the last occasion the ingenious point was made 
that the grants of denization given to the London 
Jews by Charles II. had expired with his death, and 
that their goods were, therefore, liable to alien duty 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


158 





aside for the Jewish brokers. In 1697 a new set of 
regulations was passed by a committee of the Ex. 
change appointed by the aldermen, which limited 
the number of English brokers to 100, of alien 
brokers to 12, and of Jewish brokers to 12. Of the 
12 Jews admitted all appear to have been Sephar- 
dim except Benjamin Levy, who was probably an 
Ashkenazi, A petition in 1715 against the admig- 
sion of Jews to the Exchange was refused by the 
board of aldermen. 
The Sephardim soon established communal inst}- 
tutions, following, it may be conjectured, the ex- 
ample of Amsterdam, from which city 
Organiza- most of them had emigrated. The 
tion. Gates of Hope School was founded ag 
early as 1664; and this was followed 
by the Villa Real Schools in 1780. The Sephardic 
Orphan Asylum had been established as early as 





SPANISH AND PORTUGUESE CEMETERY, MILE EXD ROAD, LONDON. 
(From a photograph.) 


(Tovey, “Anglo-Judaica,” pp. 287-295); and this 
contention was ultimately sustained, The more im- 
portant merchants of London, however, recognized 
the advantages to be derived from the large Jewish 
trade with the Spanish and Portuguese colonies and 
with the Levant, to which, indeed, England was 
largely indebted for its imports of bullion. Rodri- 
ques Marques at the time of his death (1668) had no 
less than 1,000,000 milreis consigned to London from 
Portugal. Accordingly individual Jews were ad- 
mitted as brokers on the Royal Exchange, though 
in reality not eligible by law. Solomon Dormido, 
Manasseh ben Israel’s nephew, was thus admitted 
as early as 1657, and others followed, till the south- 
eastern corner of the Exchange was definitely set 


1705, and a composite society, whose title com- 
meneed with “Ionen Dalim,” was founded in 1704 
to aid lying-in women, support the poor, and to 
give marriage portions to fatherless girls. In 1736 
a Marriage Portion Society was founded, and eleven 
years later the Beth Holim, or hospital, came into 
existence, this In turn being followed in 1749 by the 
institution known as “Mahesim Tobim.” Thanks 
to these and other minor institutions, the life of a 
Sephardic Jew in London was assisted at every 
stage from birth, through circumcision, to marriage, 
and onward to death, while even the girls of the 
community were assisted with dowries. This un- 
fortunately had a pauperizing effect, which came 
to be felt toward the beginning of the nineteenth 





8S, LUNDON. 


5 


HELEN 


GREAT ST. 


+ 


E. 


oGt 


EW SYNAG 


ERIOR OF THE N 


INT 


) 


g 


10 


gray 


(From an old en 


London 


century. All these institutions centered csetuis.. paste tie ta oaseen cna wountlai. the 
great Sephardic synagogue built in Bevis Marks 
Sept., 1701 (see Bevis Marks SYNAGOGUE). This 
was a center of light aud learning, having the soci- 
ety Etz Haim (founded as carly as 1664) for the 
study of the Law. Later this was merged with the 
yeshibah into one institution called the “ Medrash,” 
which is still in existence. In the early days of the 
community almost all the names of importance were 
connected with Bevis Marks, eg., the Cortissos, 
Lagunas, Mendes, Pimentels, Samudas, Salvadors, 
Sarmentos, Suassos, and Villa Reals; the Nietos and 
the Azevedos likewise represented a high state of 
culture and Hebrew learning. By the middle of 
the eighteenth century these and other families, such 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


160 


eee Re er Oe ne Oe 
tion of bullion. The Jamaica trade was almost 
monopolized by them (7d. pp. 44-49). The most 
important member of the community was Samson 
GIDEON, who by his coolness during the crisis of the 
South Sea Bubble and the rising ‘of 1745 rendered 
great service to the government ‘and acquired large 
means for himself, The riots that followed the pas. 
sage of the bill of 1753 for the naturalization of Jews 
had in many ways a disastrous effect 

Social upon the Sephardic section of the 
Condition community. Despairing of emancipa- 
in 1750. _ tion, a large number of the wealthiest 
and most cultured cither were bap- 

tized themselves or had their children baptized, 
Gideon leading the way in the latter expedient, 








EXTERIOR OF THE SYNAGOGUE, DUKE SrREET, LONDON. 
(From a photograph.) 


as the Franks, Treves, Seixas, Nunes, Lamegos, Sal- 
omons, Pereiras, and Francos, had accumulated con- 
siderable wealth, mainly in foreign commerce; and 
in a pamphlet of the time it was reckoned that there 
were 100 families with an income ranging between 
£1,000 and £2,000, while the average expenditure of 
the 1,000 families raised above pauperism was esti- 
mated at £300 per annum. The whole community 
was reckoned to be worth £5,000,000 (“ Further 
Considerations of the Act,” pp. 34-35, London, 
1753). The Jews were mainly concerned in the East- 
Indian and West-Indian trades and in the importa- 


His son became Lord Eardley in the Irish peerage. 
One consequence of the rejection of the naturaliza- 
tion bill of 1753 was the formation of the Board of 
Deputies, then known as the “ Deputados of the 
Portuguese Nation,” really an extension of the 
Committee of Diligence formed to watch the pas- 
sage of the naturalization bill through the Irish Par- 
liament in 1745. The Board of Deputies came into 
existence asasort of representative body whose first 
business was to congratulate George III. on his 
accession. As indicated by its earlier name, its 
membership was confined to Sephardim, though by 


161 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


London 








arrangement representatives of the “Dutch Jews” 
were allowed to join in their deliberations (see Lon- 
DON BoaRD OF DEPUTIES). 

Meanwhile the “Dutch Jews” or Ashkenazim had 
from the beginning of the century been slowly in- 
creasing in numbers and importance. They had es- 
tablished a synagogue as early as 1692 in Broad 
street, Mitre square; and thirty years later the con- 
gregation was enabled by the generosity of Moses 
Hart (Moses of Breslau) to remove to a much more 
spacious building in Duke’s place, Aldgate, still 
known as the “Great Shool.” His brother, Aaron 
Hart, was established as the chief rabbi; and his 
daughter, Mrs. Judith Levy, contributed liberally 
to the synagogue’s maintenance. Three years later 


Tea eer eee! 


CHa erg: 


of the Ashkenazic community consisted of petty 
traders and hawkers, not to speak of the follow- 
ers of more disreputable occupations. P. Colqu- 
houn, in his “ Treatise on the Police of the Metrop- 
olis” (London, 1800), attributes a good deal of crime 
and vice to their influence; and his account is con- 
firmed by Jess formal sketches in books like P. 
Egan’s “Life in London” and by the caricatures of 
Rowlandson and his school. The lower orders of 
the Sephardic section also were suffering somewhat 
from demoralization. Prize-fighters like Aby Be- 
lasco, Samuel Elias, and Daniel Mendoza, though 
they contributed to remove some of the prejudice of 
the lower orders, did not help to raise the general 
tone. 








JEWS’ HOSPITAL AND ORPHAN ASYLUM, WEST NORWOOD, LONDON. 
(From a photograph.) 


a schism occurred, and the Hampro’ SyNAGoGuE 
was founded. It was not till 1745 that the Jews of 
the German ritual found it necessary to establish 
any charity. The Hakenosath Berith was then or- 
ganized, to be followed as late as 1780 by the Meshi- 
vath Nephesh. Rigid separation existed between 
the two sections of the community. Even in death 
they were divided: the Ashkenazic cemetery was at 
Alderney road, Mile End. 


The social condition of the Ashkenazim toward > 


the end of the eighteenth century was by no means 
Satisfactory. Apart from a very few distinguished 
merchants like Abraham and Benjamin Goldsmid, 
Levy Barent Cohen, and Levy Salomons, the bulk 


VITi.—11 


The revelations of Colquhoun led earnest spirits 
within the community to seek for remedies; and 
Joshua van Oven with Colquhoun’s 

Ashkena- assistance drafted a plan for assisting 
zic Insti- the Jewish poor which was destined 
tutions. to bear fruit fifty years later in the 
Board of Guardians. Attention was 

directed to the education of the poor in 1811, when 
the Westminster Jews’ Free School was established ; 
and six years later the Jews’ Free School was 
founded in Ebenezer square, and replaced a Tal- 
mud Torah founded in 1770. The first head master 
was H. N. Solomon, who afterward founded a pri- 
vate school at Edmonton which, together with that 


London 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


162 





of L. Neumegen at Highgate, afterward at Kew, 
educated most of the leaders of the Ashkenazim 
during the first two-thirds of the nineteenth century. 
Even earlier, care had been taken of orphans. By 
the exertions of Abraham and Benjamin Goldsmid 
the sum of £20,000 was collected between 1795 and 
1797, with which in 1806 the Jews’ hospital, called 
“Neveh Zedek,” was opened June 28, 1807, at 
Mile End for the support of the aged poor and 
for the education of orphan children. This was 
removed to Norwood in 1863 to a building erected 
on ground presented by SBarnett Meyers. A 
similar institution, the Jews’ Orphan Asylum, 
founded in 1831, ee ee 
was amalga- 
mated with the 
Neveh Zedek in 
1876; and these 
were supple- 
mented by the 
National and 
Infant schools 
founded in 1836, 
and by the Jews’ 
Infant School 
founded in 1841 
by Walter Jo- 
sephs. Provision 
for the aged poor 
was made by the 
Aged Needy 
Society, founded 
in 1829, and by 
the almshouse 
established by 
Abraham Moses 
and Henry Salo- 
mon nine years 
later. The blind 
were cared for 
from 1819 on- 
ward by the In- 
stitution for the 
Relief of the In- 
digent Blind. 
The poor were 
cared for by a 
committee of the 
three London 
synagogucs— 
the Great, the 
Hambro’, and 
the New. 
Meanwhile echoes of the Mendelssohnian move- 
ment had reached London, besides which the gen- 
eral wealth of the Sephardic community had brought 
its members in contact with the main currents of 


culture. One of the Sephardim, Emanuel Mendes 
da Costa, had been secretary of the 
Second Royal Society; and his brother Solo- 


Sephardic mon had presented to the newly 
Defection. founded British Museum 200 Hebrew 

books, which formed the nucleus of 
the magnificent Hebrew collection of that library. 
Moses Mendez had proved himself a poetaster of 
some ability; and Oliver Goldsmith in his “ Haunch 





Jews’ College, Queen’s Square, London. 
(From a photograph.) 


of Venison” depicteda Jewish journalist of his time 
as a characteristic figure. But the “mahamad” of 
Bevis Marks went on in its old way without regard 
to any changes, spiritual or otherwise, in the conmu- 
nitv which it ruled; inflicting fines, and repelling 
many of the most promising members who were 
getting in touch with more refined methods of wor- 
ship. Many of them ceased their connection with 
the Synagogue, cither formally by becoming bap 
tized or by resigning and ailowing their children to 
be brought up in the dominant faith. Among the 
families thus deserting the Synagogue at the begin- 
ning of the nineteenth century may be enumerated 
the Basevis, 
D’Israelis, _‘Ri- 
cardos, Samu- 
das, Uzziellis, 
Lopezes, and 
Ximines. Not 
that the Sephar- 
dim were left 
without some 
important fig- 
ures: ananel 
de Castro, David 
Abravanel Lin- 
do, Jacob and 
Moses Mocatta, 
not to mention 
Sir Moses Mon- 
tefiore, were still 
left to uphold 
the more rigid 
traditions of Be- 
vis Marks (Gas- 
ter, “Hist. of 
Bevis Marks,” 
p. 172, London, 
i901). 

The hegemony 
in the commn- 
nity was thus 
transferred to 
the Ashkenazic 
section, which 
had been reen- 
forced by the 
powerful _ per- 
sonality of Na- 
than Meyer 
Rothschild, who 
had removed 
from Manches- 
ter to London in 1805 and who thenceforth became 
the central figure of the community. By his side 
Stood the venerable figure of the “Rav,” Solomon 
Herschel. Even in the literary sphere the Ashke- 
nazim began to show ability. Whereas David Levi 
had been almost their sole representative at the end 
of the eighteenth century, in the first third of the 
nincteenth Michael Josephs, Moses Samuels, and 
Hyman Hurwitz treated the various branches of 
Hebrew learning; and the arts were represented by 
John Braham in secular, and by the two Aschers in 
sacred, music. Against these names the Sephardim 
could only show those of Elias Hyam Lindo and 


163 


Grace Aguilar in letters and that of Carlo Delpini 
in drama. 

Though the parliamentary struggle for emancipa- 
tion was intended for the benefit of all British Jews, 
and has, therefore, been described in some detail 

under ENGLAND, it centered mainly 
Struggle around London. The influence of the 
for Eman- Jewsinthecity hadincreased. David 
cipation. Salomons was one of the founders of 
the London and Westminster Bank; 
the London Docks began their great career through 
the influence of the Goildsmids; the Alliance Insur- 
ance Company was in large measure the creation of 
Sir Moses Montefiore and his brother-in-law, Nathan 
Rothschild. These and similar institutions brought 
Jewish merchants into ever-widening relations with 
men of influence in the city. Their bid for justice 
was widely supported by the citizens of London. 
Thus, at the first attempt to pass the “Jew Bill” in 
1830 the second reading was supported by a petition 
of no fewer than 14,000 citizens of London; and this 
was supplemented at the second attempt in 183838 by 
a petition of 1,000 influential names from Westmin- 
ster. Again, the Sheriffs’ Declaration Bill of 1835 
was in reality concerned with the shrievalty of Lon- 
don, for which the popular David Salomons was 
making a gallant fight; in this he succeeded that 
year, to be followed two years later by Moses Mon- 
tefiore, who was soon afterward knighted by Queen 
Victoria. In the same year (1835) Salomons was 
elected alderman, but was unable to occupy that 
office owing to his religion. For ten years he urged 
the right of his coreligionists to such a position, 
till at last he succeeded in getting a bill passed al- 
lowing Jews to become aldermen in the city of Lon- 
don and, thereby, eligible as lord mayor. Salo- 
mons was the first Jewish sheriff (1835), the first 
Jewish alderman (1847), and the first Jewish lord 
mayor (1855) of London. He was clearly destined 
to be the first Jew elected member of Parliament, 
though, appropriately enough, it was Baron Lionel 
Rothschild who first actually took his seat as mem- 
ber for the city of London, which had shownso much 
sympathy for Jewish emancipation (sce ENGLAND). 

The sympathy thus attracted to Jews in the city 
was prominently shown during the Damascus AF- 
FAIR, when a Mansion House meeting was held 
(July 8, 1840) to protest against the threatened dis- 
aster. Incidentally, the struggle for Reform aided 
in opening out new careers for the disfranchised 
Jews of London. Francis Goldsmid, one of the 
most strenuous fighters for the cause, was adinitted 
to the bar in 1833, though there were doubts as to 
his eligibility. He was followed in 1842 by John 
(afterward Sir John) Simon, who was ultimately one 
of the last sergeants-at-law. 

Meanwhile the community in both its sections was 
rent by a schism which left traces almost to the end 

ofthecentury. Alike among the Ash- 

Reform kenazim and the Sephardim the more 
Movement. cultured members had been increas- 

ingly offended by the want of decorum 
shown both at Bevis Marks and the “Great Shool.” 
Protests were made in 1812 and 1828 in the former 
Synagogue, and in 1821 and 1824 in the latter; but 
on Dec, 4, 1836, matters were brought to a crisis by 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


London 


a definite proposal for Reform presented to the ma- 
hamad by anumber of the “ Yehidimn.” The petition 
was rejected as were similar ones in 18389 and in 1840, 
so that in 1840 twenty-four gentlemen, eighteen of 
the Sephardic and six of the Ashkenazic section of 
the community, determined to organize a congrega- 
tion in which their ideas as to decorum in the serv- 
ice should be carried out. The new congregation 
dedicated its synagogue in Burton strect Jan. 27, 
1842, notwithstanding a “caution” which had been 
issued Oct. 24, 1841, against the prayer-book to be 
used by it, and a “herem” issued five days before 
the inauguration of the synagogue against all hoid- 
ing Communion with its members. This ban was 
not removed till March 9, 1849. For the further 
history of the movement see REFoRM JUDAISM. 
The schism produced disastrous effects upon the 
harmony of the community. The older congrega- 
tions would not even allow deceased members of the 
new one to be buried in their graveyard; and it was 
necessary to establish a new cemetery at Ball’s 
Pond (1843). The Board of Deputies, under the in- 
fluence of Sir Moses Montefiore, refused to recognize 
the new congregation as one qualified to solemnize 
valid Jewish marriages; and a special clause of the 
Act of 1856 had to be passed to enable the West 
London Synagogue of British Jews to perform such 
marriages. 
It is not without significance that the beginnings 
of the Jewish press in London coincided in point of 
time with the stress of the Reform 
The Jewish controversy. Both “The Voice of Ja- 
Press. cob,” edited by Jacob Franklin, and 
“The Jewish Chronicle,” edited by D. 
Meldola and Moses Angel—the latter of whom had 
in the preceding year become head master of the 
Jews’ Free School, over which he was to preside for 
nearly half a century—came into existence in 1841. 
About the same time a band of German Jewish 
scholars established themselves in England and 
helped to arouse a greater interest in Jewish litera- 
ture on scientific principles than had been hitherto 
displayed. Among these should be especially men- 
tioned Joseph Zedner, keeper of the Hebrew books 
in the British Museum; the eccentric but versatile 
Leopold Dukes; H. Filipowski; L. Loewe; B. H. 
Ascher; T. Theodores; Albert Lowy; and Abraham 
Benisch, who was to guide the fortunes of “ The Jew- 
ish Chronicle” during the most critical years of its 
career. The treasures of Oxford were about this 
time visited by the great masters Zunz and Stein- 
schneider. They found few in England capable of 
appreciating their knowledge and methods, Abra- 
ham de Sola, David Meldola, and Morris Raphall 
being almost the oply English Jews with even a tinc- 
ture of rabbinic learning. On the other hand, the 
native intellect was branching out in other directions. 
Showing distinction in the law were James Graham 
Lewis, Francis Goldsmid, and John Simon; in dra- 
matic management, Benjamin Lumley; in song, 
Mombach in the synagogue, and Henry Russell out- 
side it; in music, Charles Sloman, Charles K. Sala- 
mah, and Sir Julius Benedict; in painting, Solomon 
Alexander Hart, the first Jewish R.A., and Abra- 
ham Solomon; in commerce. besides the Rothschilds 
and Goldsmids, the Wormses, Sassoons, Sterns, and 


London 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


164 





Sir Benjamin Phillips were rising names distin- 
guished both within and without the community. 
J. M. Levy and Lione] Lawson were securing a large 
circulation for the tirst penny London newspaper, 
the “Daily Telegraph.” Confining their activities 
within the community were men like Barnet Abra- 
hains, dayyan of the Sephardim; Sampson Samuel: 
H. N. Solomon; N. I. Valentine; the Beddingtons: 
Louis Merton; and Sampson Lucas. AJ] these may 
be said to have flourished in the middle of the cen- 
tury, toward the end of the struggle for complete in- 
dependence. 


Poor to revise the system of charity conducted jointly 
by the three synagogues according to the treaty 
of 1805. This body soon developed loan, industrial, 
apprenticeship, visitation, and immigration com- 
mittees, and for eighteen years (1862-79) took 
medical care of the Jewish poor, mainly under the 
supervision of Dr. A. Asher. Lionel Cohen, together 
with the last-mentioned, then devoted his attention 
to the solution of the financial and other problems 
brought about by the western extension of the Lon- 
don ghetto up to the middle of the century. The 
Jews of Lendon had remained concentered in the 





JEWISH BOARD OF GUARDIANS BUILDING, LONDON. 
(From a photograph.) 


With them, but of a later generation, were grow- 
ing up men who were destined between 1850 and 
1880 further to consolidate the London community, 

now firmly established in the respect 

Further and confidence of the other citizens. 
Consolida- Thechiefrabbi, N. M. Adler, began the 
tion (1856- proccss by establishing Jews’ College 

1871). for the training of Jewish ministers, 

in 1860 following it up, in coopera- 

tion with Dayyan Barnet Abrahams, with the estab- 
lishment of the Jewish Association for the Diffusion 
of Religious Knowledge. Ephraim Alex with the 
aid of the energetic Lionel L. Cohen founded in 1859 
the Board of Guardians for the Relief of the Jewish 


Whitechapel district with the classic “ Petticoat 
lance” as a nucleus; but as wealth increased among 
the Ashkenazic Jews a steady western exodus took 
place, so that it was necessary as early as 1855 to es- 
tablish, under the ministry of the Rev. A. L. Green, 
in Great Portland street, a branch synagogue of 
the “ Great Shool.” Synagogues at Bayswater (1863), 
in the Borough (1867), and at North Londen (1868) 
were further evidences of the dispersion tendency: 
and it became necessary to secure harmony in divine 
service and consolidation in financial responsibility by 
bringing these synagogues under one management. 

At the suggestion of Chief Rabbi N. M. Adler, 
the three city synagogues—the Great, the Hambro’, 


(,{Ropuo’y ul Mae aYLL ,, ‘Blao'T pus faseny 1933Y) 
‘NOGNOT AO UALEVIO HSILMGIe 





“ANTOD ® AVAHOE : fp ees > : 
taney eae i | Wee a\ UR 4¢ NYHL S831 
Yipes Lid : qo SS | { 5 , ks Atlee yes , yAXS OL %& ee 
: a de 4 Seg? auunih:: “YU acaeaaec Se : : 12 01 %os 
yy ADWIHBYD eZ : : : . a GAAS ees fae TE 3 sf % | 4 
Phy alk Pani | Seschrtouto 7 at BA Ae aa aah 2 ame %y6 OL DSL 
i frat & % Fim tee wen ‘yo /j 900101730 


¢ : we. Fi : 
S —s SEVIS NOILVINdOd HSI 
SZ EER aa Sey ethos. ee 40 Paes: 


Bi 


E 


+ 


DWERS AoW 


& 


yodog 
me ey 


c a Balt f Sy PEGE e fc B : . > Y ; r 
et Beas | : . al ‘| q : c ‘ e al 


ZB 
a 
rae 


iy 


ty 
% 


SS 
RS 

Pee 

3 
Sis 


pf td, 
hf: 


YU, 


sate, 
HE) 


ag 


TDi 


PEP PPL LIES 
LEE 


as 
>j + 
Shiner ge 
re 


Cote es eg 
EMEC} a 











London 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


166 





and the New—with their western branches at Port- 
land street and Bayswater agreed toascheme (April 
19, 1868), Which was submitted to the Charity Com- 
missioners of England and embodied by them in an 
Act of Parliament. This was passed July 14, 1870, 
although the legislature hesitated to establish the 
Synagogue just at the time when it was disestablish- 
ing the Irish Church. The original five synagogues 
have since been joined by ten others (see UNITED 
SYNAGOGUE). One of the consequences of this ar- 


rangement, which upon the face of it appears to be 
merely financial, was to give a certain pontifical im- 
portance to the chief rabbi, without whose consent, 
according to a special declaration attached to but 
not forming part of the Act of Parliament, no 


a ek ee, 


de Mesquita (d. 1751). Moses Cohen d’ Azevedo again 
raised the position of haham to some consequence 
during his rule (1765-84). Of his successors, Ra- 
phael Meldola (1805-28), Benjamin Artom (1866- 
1879), and Moses Gaster, the present incumbent 
(elected in 1887), have been the most distinguished. 

But by the end of the cighteenth century the 
“Ravs” or chief rabbis of the Ashkenazim had be- 
gun to vie in importance with the hahamim of the 
Sephardim. The firstof these was Aaron Hart (Uri 
Phoebus), brother of Moses Hart, founder of the 
Great Synagogue. He was succeeded by Hirschel 
Levin (sometimes called “Hirschel Lobel” and 
“fart Lyon”) who held office only seven years 
(1756-68), and then returned to the Continent. He 





WENTWORTH STREET, FORMERLY ‘*‘ PETTICOAT LANE,’’ LONDON. 
(From a photograph.) 


changes in ritual could be undertaken by any con- 
stituent synagogue, 

Indeed, one of the characteristic features of the 
London community has always been the impor- 
tance of the chief rabbi (called among the Sephardim 
“haham”) of the prominent congregation, around 
whom as a sort of center of crystallization the com- 
munity has rallied. At first the Sephardim held 

this position, which had been secured 

The by the important work of David Nieto, 
Rabbinate. who became chief of the Sephardim 
in 1702 and was one of the most dis- 

tinguished Jews of his time, being equally noted as 
philosopher, physician, mathematician, and astron- 
omer. His predecessors, Jacob Sasportas (1656-66) 
and Solomon Ayllon (1689-1701), were not suited 
either by character or by attainments to acquire 
great influence. David Nieto was succeeded by his 
son Isaac, Who in turn was followed by Moses Gomez 


was succeeded by David Tebele Schiff, who was 
chief rabbi from 17635 to 1792, and who founded a 
hereditary rabbinate for the next century, though 
his successor, Solomon Herschell (1802-42), was re- 
lated to Schiff’s predecessor, Hirschel Levin. Chief 
Rabbi N. M. Adler, who followed Herschell, was a 
relative of Schiff, and did much for the harmonizing 
of the London community ; Jews’ College, the United 
Synagogue, and, to a certain extent, the Board of 
Guardians owe their existence to his initiative. He 
was succeeded by his son, Herman Adler, the pres- 
ent (1904) incumbent of the post. 

Besides Jews’ College, the Board of Guardians, and 
the United Synagogue, the same generation arranged 
for a more efficient performance of its duties to- 
ward Jews oppressed in other lands. This function 
would naturally have fallen to the Board of Deputies; 
but, owing to its action with regard to the Reform 
Synagogue, certain members of this latter, espe- 


167 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


London 





cially Sir Francis Goldsmid and Jacob Waley, de- 
termined to form an independent institution to act 
for the British dominions in the same way that the 
Alliance Israélite Universelle had acted for the Con- 
tinent. Owing to the Franco-Prussian war the Alli- 
ance had lost all support in Germany, and increased 
support from England had become necessary; this 
was afforded by the ANGLO-JEWISH ASSOCIATION, 
founded in 1871 with Albert Lowy as its secre- 
tary, who was instrumental also in founding the 
Society of Hebrew Literature in 1878. 

By the beginning of the last quarter of the nine- 
teenth century the London Jewish community had 
fully overcome the difficulties which had beset it at 

the beginning of the century; and it 


Social now organized all branches of its ac- 
Condition tivity in a systematic and adequate 
About manner. A series of remarkably able 
1880. public servants—Asher Asher at the 


United Synagogue, A. Benisch at the 
“Jewish Chronicle,” Moses Angel at the Jews’ Free 
School, A. Léwy at the Anglo-Jewish Association, 
S. Landeshut at the Board of Guardians, and 8. Al- 
mosnino, secretary of the Bevis Marks Synagogue 
and of almost all the Sephardic institutions—gave a 
tone of dignity as well as of efficiency to communal 
affairs. They were supported by leaders, some of 
whom, as Sir Julian Goldsmid and Baron Henry de 
Worms (afterward Lord Pirbright), had shown their 
capacity in national affairs, while others, like Lionel 
L. Cohen and his brother Alfred, Barrow Emanuel, 
David Benjamin, and Charles Samuel (to mention 
only those who are dead), had devoted their great 
abilities and administrative capacity to the internal 
needs of the community. Other members of the 
community were attaining distinction in the various 
branches of professional life. Sir George Jessel was 
the most distinguished judge, Judah P. Benjamin 
the most renowned barrister, and George Lewis 
the most noted solicitor practising English law. In 
medicine Ernest Hart, Henry Behrend, and R. Lieb- 
reich were noted; and in chemistry Ludwig Mond 
had become distinguished. Taste and capacity for 
literature were being shown by Sydney M. Samuel 
and Amy Levy; Frederic H. Cowen and in a less 
degrce Edward Solomon were gaining distinction 
in music; and David James was famous in acting. 
It was estimated about the year 1883 that the total 
Jewish population of London then numbered 47,000 
persons. Of these, 3,500 were Sephardim (including 
500 “ Reformers”); 15,000 could trace their descent 
from the Ashkenazim of the eighteenth century; 
7,500 from Jews who had settled in England in the 
early part of the century; 8,000 were of German or 
Dutch origin; and the remaining 13,000 were Rus- 
Sian and Polish. What might be called the native 
element thus outnumbered the foreigu contingent 
by 26,000 to 21,000 (Jacobs, “ Jewish Statistics,” iii.). 
The various social classes into which they were 
divided were summarized by the same observer as 
follows, the numbers of the first four classes being 
determined from estimates of Jewish names in the 
“London Directory,” of the last three from the ac- 
tual statistics of Jewish charitable institutions; the 
humber of shopkeepers and petty traders also were 
based on the Jast-mentioued source (7d. ii.): 


———_——— 





Position. ee Family Income. 
Professional and retired living W. 1,200 i 100 at £10,000 
Rich merchants living W......... 5,400( 11,400 ** 1,000 
Merchants with private houses 

living N.,S., and E.............. 3,600 800 ** 500 
Professional and retired living N.,' 

sg EO ae Sto hacen ND 800 200 ** 250 
Shopkeepers.........cccecccccccces 12,500 3,000 ** 200 
Petty traders.........cccccccccuces / 11,000 2,000 ** 100 
Servants, Ct@.... ccc cece cece eee | DU  dcctaG 30 
Board of Guardians, casualsand/; oi J 1,000 ** 50 

CHYOHIC J 053-24 scvcwedetns Henin le pL | papa + 10 
Other paupers and afflicted......, 2,242 | 
Russian refuUgees.......ccecccecece 1,947 ¢ loka 10 





The total income was about £3,900,000, or an aver- 
age per head of £82. 

As regards their occupations, an examination of 
the London directory for those merchants sufficiently 
important to appear in its pages resulted in the fol- 
lowing classification (zd. v.): 

















nwa nw 
S| 4 g5\ 4 
s 7 fem es a7 ee 
B#/ 4 He | = 
Class. a= = Class. ate | 
os 2 of = 
S a = Ay S 
Zs] 4 as | 4 
Merchants and Leather ......... 17 BL 
factors.syeccsse 84 689 TOR Ss cv avade hata 18 TC 
Clothing ....-.00. 68 | 799 || Instruments..... Li 33 
Furniture ........} 49 348 |; Tobaceo........ 9 | 164 
FOOd......ceeeres 30 348 || Money-dealers .. 5 33 
Stationery........| 19 lil SPORE oh ges Fees: 4 51 
SOWEINYs cb ca veens i 245 Professions...... 1 ( 154 








There were but three occupations having over 
one hundred names: Stock Exchange brokers, 138; 
general merchants, 131; and tailors, 128. Then 
came clothiers, 89; bootmakers, 80; city of London 
brokers, 78; diamond-cutters, 78; furniture-brokers, 
60; watchmakers, 57. The trades in which Jewish 
merchants had the largest representation were those 
in coconuts, oranges, canes and umbrellas, meer- 
schaum pipes, and valentines. 

Unfortunately this prosperous condition of the 
community was rudely disturbed by the Russian 
persecutions of 1881; these mark an epoch in Anglo- 
Saxon Jewry, upon whose members has fallen the 
greatest burden resulting from them. On Jan. 11 
and 18, 1882, appeared in “The Times” of Lon- 

don an account of the persecution of 


The the Jews in Russia, written by Joseph 
Russian Jacobs, which drew the attention of 
Exodus. the whole world to the subject and 


led toa Mansion House meeting (Feb. 
1) and to the formation of a fund which ultimately 
amounted to more than £108,000 for the relief of 
Russo-Jewish refugees. This was supplemented by 
a further sum of £100,000 in 1890, when a similar 
indignation meeting was held at the Guildhall to 
protest against the May Laws (see Mansion HovusE 
AND GUILDHALL MEETINGS). 

The circumstances of the case, however, pre- 
vented the Russo-Jewish Committee, even under the 
able chairmanship of Sir Julian Goidsmid, from 
doing much more than supplement the work of the 
Board of Guardians, upon which fell the chief bur- 
den of the Russian exodus into England. But the 


London 





publicity of the protest made on these occasions, 
and the large sums collected, naturally made the 
London community the head of all concerted at- 
tempts to stem the rising tide of Russian oppres- 
sion, and gave London for a time the leading posi- 
tion among the Jewish communities of the world. 
As passing events which helped to confirm the con- 
sciousness of this proud position may be mentioned 
the centenary in 1885 of Sir Moses Montefiore’s 
birth, celebrated throughout the world, and the 
Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition (suggested and 
carried out by Isidore Spielmann) at the Albert Hall, 
London, in 1887. 
This exhibition 
led, six years 
later, to the 
foundation of 
the Jewish His- 


torical Society 
of England. 
The number 


of refugees per- 
manently added 
to the London 
Jewish commu- 
nity—most of 
them merely 
passing through 
on their way to 
America—was 
not of very large 
proportions; but 
an average of 
about 2,500 ina 
condition of 
practical desti- 
tution annually 
added to a com- 
munity of less 
than 50,000 souls 
naturally taxed 
the communal 
resources to the 
utmost. To pre- 
vent evils likely 
to result from 
the landing of 
refugees unac- 
quainted with 
the English 
language and 
customs, the 
Poor Jews’ Temporary Shelter and the Jewish As- 
sociation for the Protection of Girls and Women 
were founded in 1885. 

The newcomers generally showed a tendency to 
reject or neglect the religious supremacy of the 
English chief rabbi; and to check this and to serve 
other purposesa Federation of East End Synagogues 
was effected in 1887 under the auspices of Samuel 
(afterward Sir Samuel) Montagu. The want of 
capacity and technical skill among the newcomers, 
or “ greeners,” caused them to fall into the hands of 
hard taskmasters, and resulted in their becoming 
victims of the “sweating system,” which formed the 
subject of a parliamentary inquiry (1888-90), due to 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Exterior of the New West End Synagogue, London. 
(From a photograph.) 


168 





the not overfriendly cfforts of Arnold White. The 
poverty resulting from this system led to serious 
evils in the way of overcrowding with resulting im- 
morality. Several remedial institutions were founded 
to obviate these evil results in the case of boys, the 
most prominent of which were the Jewish Lads’ 
Brigade (1885) and the Brady Street Club for Work- 
ing Boys. It was nevertheless found necessary in 
1901 to establish an industrial school for Jewish 
boys who had shown criminal tendencies. 

The increased tide of alien immigration became 
especially noticeable as it was mainly directed into 
one administra- 
tive district of 
East London, 
that of Stepney. 
The overcrowd- 
1 ing which al- 
| ready existed in 

this district was 

accentuated; 
and a _ certain 
amount of dis- 
placement of the 
native thabit- 
ants took place 
| owing to the ex- 
| cessive rise in 
rents, producing 
asystem of “ key 
money,” by 
which a bonus 
was paid by the 
incoming tenant 
for the privilege 
of paying rent. 
Certain branches 
of the tailoring, 
shoemaking,and 
carpentering 
trades tencled to 
become monopo- 
lized by the 
Russo -Polish 
Jews settled in 
Stepney. To- 
ward the end 
of the nine- 
teenth century 
a certain amount 
of objection 
began to be 
raised to this and other tendencies of the immi- 
grants. A special organization known as “The 
British Brothers’ League,” headed by Major Evans 
Gordon, raised an agitation against any further 
immigration of the kind; and owing in large 
measure to its clamor, a royal commission was ap- 
pointed to examine into the alleged effects of unre- 
stricted immigration. Though nominally directed 
against all aliens, it was almost without disguise 
ap plied chiefly to aliens of the Jewish faith. A pre- 
vious commission, appointed to consider the same 
subject in 1889, had decided that the evils, if any, 
were so insignificant that they did not require any 
special legislation. 





+ 
ta A oe cose BI* 6 





ERIOR OF THE NEW WEST END SYNAGOGUE, LONDON. 





(From a photograph.) 


London 


The commission, on which Lord Rothschild sat as 
member, devoted a considerable amount of attention 
to the subject, holding forty-nine public meetings 
mostly with regard to the London Jews of the East 

End. On the whole, it gave a fairly 
Commis~- favorable account of the alien immi- 
sion on grant. He was acknowledged to be 
Alien Im- fairly healthy and reasonably clean on 
migration. arrival, thrifty and industrious, and 
law-abiding. His children were espe- 
cially bright and assimilative of English ways. It 
was not proved tothe satisfaction of the commission 
that any severe displacement of labor had been 
caused by the “ greener,” who on his part tended to 
introduce new though less highly efficient methods 
of production in the clothing and furniture indus- 
tries. The one true indictment found against the 
immigrant was that of overcrowding; and the rec- 
ommendations of the commission were chiefly di- 
rected against this. It suggested that any district 
in which aliens congregated should be declared a pro- 
hibited area, and no alien should be admitted thereto 
for a period of two years after his arrival; and that 
to insure this all immigrants should be registered. 
Legislation intended to carry this out was in- 
troduced into Parliament in 1904, but with- 
drawn. An unfortunate admission of Leonard L. 
Cohen, president of the Board of Guardians, that 
his institution found it necessary to send back a 
certain number of “undesirables,” weakened the 
possible resistance of the London community to the 
proposal that the repatriation of such undesirables 
should be undertaken by the government. 

During the last quarter of the nineteenth century 
a certain revival of interest in Jewish literature and 
history occurred among native London Jews. A 

small study circle associated with the 


Intellec- Rev. A. L. Green in the early part of 
tual the seventh decade, and a series of 
Progress. public lectures in connection with 


Jews’ College, gave opportunities for 
young men of promise to display their ability. 
These efforts have been more recently seconded by 
those of Jewish literary societies spread throughout 
London, and of a Jewish Study Society founded in 
1900, mainly in imitation of the American Council of 
Jewish Women. “The Jewish Quarterly Review,” 
founded by C. G, Montefiore and edited by him and 
by Israel Abrahams, has gradually become one of 
the most important scientific journals connected 
with Jewish science. Bothof these gentlemen have 
been connected from time to time with movements 
intended to render religious worship more free from 
traditional trammels. The latest of these move- 
ments was that of the Jewish Religious Unionin the 
year 1902, which was eminently a year of unions, as 
it saw also the formation of the Jewish Literary 
Societies Union, the Union of Jewish Women, and 
the Jewish Congregational Union. 

One more movement may be referred to as char- 
acteristic of the London Jewry. About 1885a num- 
ber of the younger intellectual workers in the com- 
munity were collected around Asher I. Myers, editor 
of “The Jewish Chronicle,” in an informal body; 
they called themselves “The Wandering Jews,” and 
included 8. Schechter, I. Zangwill, Israel Abrahams, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


170 


Joseph Jacobs, Lucien Wolf, and others. These 
met for several years in one another’s houses for the 
informal discussion of Jewish topics, and this ulti- 
mately led to the foundation of the Maccabeans, 
an institution intended to keep professional Jews in 
touch with their coreligionists. This mixing with 
the outer world while still retaining fellowship with 
Israel is most characteristic of London, as indeed of 
the whole of English, Jewry. 

Recent immigration has tended to divide London 
Jewry into two diverse and toa certain extent an- 
tagonistic elements; but the experiences and the 
administrative policy of the past decade have tended 
to bridge over the gap and reunite the two classes 
in communal organization. The beginning of the 
twentieth century finds difficulties similar to those 
found at the beginning of the nineteenth. Former 
experience shows that it is within the power of the 
community to remedy its own shortcomings. 

This sketch of the history of the institutions and 
the prominent men that have made up the London 
community may be concluded with a list of the latter, 
from 1700 onward, including many who could not 
otherwise be specifically referred to. Persons whose 
date of birth alone is given are still living. 








Name. Date. Description. 
Abraham, Abraham...... d. 1863 Author and communal 
worker. 
Abrahams, Abraham.....{ 1801-80 ne writer on she- 
hitah. 
Abrahams, Barnett.......} 1831-638 Dayyan. 


Abrahams, Barnett Lionel; b. Dec. 9,) Communal worker. 











1869. 
Abrahams, Israel......... b. 1858 . Author and communal 
worker. 
Abrahams, Louis Barnett.) b. 1842. ii Beet eStats SEY, Free 
School. 
Adler, Elkan Nathan.....| b. 1861....; Comimunal worker ; bib- 
liophile. 
Adler, Very Rev. Her-| b. May,| Chief rabbi of the Uni- 
mann. 1839. ted Hebrew Congre- 
| gations of the British 
Empire. 
Adler, Rev. Michael...... b. July 27,) Minister of Central Syn- 
1868. agogue. 
Adler, Nathan Marcus....| 1803-90....} Chief rabbi of England. 
Aguilar, Ephraim Lopez, 17389-1802..| Eccentric and miser, 
Pereira, Baron d’. 
Aguilar, Grace.......se0 1816-47....| Novelist. 
Alex, Ephraim .........+. 1800-82....} Founder Jewish Board 
of Guardians. 
Alexander, Abraham..... 1718-86....! Author and printer. 
Alexander, David L...... | b. 1842....} President, Board of 
| ; _..| , Deputies. 
Alexander, Levy.......... 1754-1853 ? | Author and printer. 
Alexander, Lionel L..... | 1852-1901..| Honorary Secretary, 
Board of Guardians. 
Imeida, Joseph d’....... 1716-88.... Stockbroker. 
Almeida, Manuela Nu-; ft. c. 1720..| Poetess. 
fez a’. 
Almosnino, Hasdai.,,.... d. 1802....) Dayyan. 
Almosnino, Isaac......... d. 1843....) Hazzan. 
Almosnino, Solomon......| 1792-1878..| Secretary, Bevis Marks 
Synagogue. 
Angel, Moses.. .eeee| 1819-98....! Educationist. 
Ansell, Moses........... d. 1841....; Secretary, Great Syna- 
gogue. 
Ansell, Zalman....... seee| fl, 1790....| Dayyan. 
Aria, Mrs. David B....... | baa ue U1, Journalist. 
866. 
Artom, Benjamin........ 1835-79....| Haham. 
ASCHOT, (De Haws ve'su eden ee 1812-95....: Rabbi and author. 
Ascher, Joseph..... eters 1229-69....| Musical composer. 
Ascher, Simon........0505 1789-1872..! Hazzan. 
ASDEY,; ASHER 65 sie sias ...| 1837-89...., First Secretary, United 
| Synagogue. 


Avigdor, Elim d’......... d. 1895 
ANARAOE, Countess Rachel; 1816—96.. 


Avigdor - Goldsmid, 
mond Elim a’. 
Azevedo, Moses Cohen d’.! d. 1784.... 


OB) vivaseanene 


Communal worker. 
Communal worker. 


Communal worker 


Haham. 


171 





Name. 





Ballin, Mrs. Ada Sara ... 


Barnato, B. L.. 
Barnett, A. L 
Barnett, Morris 


aaeoen 


an eaee 


Baruh, ‘Raponel, cc cossen. 
Beddington, Alfred H.... 
Beddington, Ed. Henry... 


Beer, Mrs. Rachel. 
Behrend, Henry......... 
Belais, Abraham......... 
Belasco, ADV....... 
Belasco, David 
James). 


Belisario, Isaac Mendes. . 
Belisario, Miriam Meudes. 
Bienvenida! 


Belmonte, 
Cohen. 


Benedict, Sir Julius...... 


Benham, Arthur......... 
Benisch, Abraham ....... 
Benjamin, David......... 


Benjamin, Judah Philtip.. 


Bensusan, Samuel Levy.. 


Bentwich, Herbert....... 


Bernal, Ralph... 


Bisechofftsheim, Mrs. H. L. 
Blank, Joseph E.......... 


Bolaffey, Hananiah 


Braham, John...... asian lek 


Buzaglo, Abraham 


ee eee 


eer enas 


(David 


eee eee are 


1835-1900... 
' 1819-72, ee 


eee eee ee ea 


1828-93... 


1773-1858. . 
b. 1797.... 
1839-93... 


dad. 1791.... 
dad. 1885.. 
fh elie: 


1804-85... 


1875-95... 
1811-78.... 
1815-93.... 
18]1-84.... 


b. Sept. 
1872. 


eee eereoveane 


7 Si7S3.x 
b. 1779.. 

T74- 1856, . 
a: 1788.... 


Carvajal, Antonio Fernan-} d. 1659.... 


dez de, 
Castello, 
Castello, Manuel... 


Castro, Hananel de....... 


Castro, Jacob de.... 


Castro, dacob de...... ro 


Chapman, Rev. John.... 


Cohen, Alfred Di. occscaks 


Cohen, Arthur 


Cohen, Benjamin Louis.. 
Cohen, Rey. Francis L.... 


Coben, Leonard L........ 


Cohen, Levy Barent...... 
Cohen, Lionel Louis...... 


Cohen, Louis Louis....... 
Coben, Nathaniel Louis.. 
Cohen, Samuel Isaac...... 


Cortissos, Don José....... 
Costa, Benjamin Mendez 


a. 
Costa, Emanuel Mendez 


da. 


Costa, Solomon da,........ 


Cowan, Phineas...... eves 
Cowen, Frederic H....... 


Dainow, Hirsch 


Dayids, Arthur Lumley... 
Davidson, Ellis Abraham. 
Davis, David Montague,. 
Davis, Felix Arthur...... 


Davis, Frederick ......... 
Davis, Israel....... Picoaiies 


Davis, JAMES......-es0e0- 


Dayis, Maurice........... 


Davis, Myer David.. 


Delpini, Carlo Anton..... 


Deutsch, Emanuel Osear.. 


Disraeli, Benjamin, Earl) 1804-81.. 


of Beaconsfield. 


D'Israeli, Isaac........+.- 
Dolaro, Selina........ woes} 1852- ee 
Da pares Mew tceckawéaes be 


Daniel.......... 


ee bree 


seneen 


eee er eeanane 


eeanneeeage 


ete ean 


1831-83.. 
b. Mar, 2]. 
1827 


1794-1849, . 

Tr Es pos 
1704-89... 
b. 1845... 


1836-1903... 
b. 1880... 


b. 1844.... 

b, Nov. 14, 
1862, 

b. April 17, 
18a8. 

1740-1808, . 

1832-87... 


1799- L882. . 


OLB 
| Wa Wi) ar 


fl. c. 1760... 


eee ee ee meee 


1843-1900. . 
b,. 1825, «53 


1821-98....! 


b. 1830.... 
qd. 1828.... 


1831-73.... 


1766-1848, . 





b. 1852... 


t 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Description. 


Journalist. 

Financier. 

Dayyan. 

DRAWAtiet and actor. 

Author. 

Communal worker. 

Communal worker. 

Journalist. 

Physician, author, and 
communal worker. 

Hebrew author. 

Pugilist. 

Actor. 


Preacher. 
Authoress. 
Poetess. 


Composer and musi- 
cian. 

Dramatist. 

Hebraist and journalist. 

Communal worker. 

American statesman 
and English barrister. 

Journalist. 


Communal worker. 


Politician and art-col- 
lector. 
Communal worker. 
Communal secretary. 
Hebraist and author, 
Composer and singer. 
Inventor and author. 
Founder of London 
Jewish community. 
Communal worker. 
Communal worker. 
Communal worker (Se- 
phardadie), 
Comedian. 
Physician and surgeon. 
Communal worker and 
educationist. 
Communal worker. 
Communal worker and 
King’s counsel. 
Member of Parliament. 
Minister, Borough New 
Syhagocue. 
President, Board 
Guardians. 
Communal worker. 
Communal worker, fin- 
ancier, and politician. 
Financier. 
Communal worker. 
Communal secretary. 


of 


Army contractor. 
Philanthropist. 


Librarian to the Royal 
Society and scientific 
writer. 

Donor of Hebrew libra- 
ry to British Museum, 


.| Public worker. 
| Composer 


and con- 
ductor, 

Maggid. 

Orientalist. 


Technologist. 


| Composer. 


Communal worker. 


Antiquary. 
_ Proprietor 
Chronicle.” 


“Jewish 


| Playwright and jour- 


nalist. 
Physician and commu- 
nal worker. 
Anglo-Jewish historian. 
Clown and _ theatrical 
manager. 


i Orientalist. 


_ Statesman. 


Author. 


| Actress, 


Secretary, Anglo-Jew- 
ish Association. 





ee TE —eEE 
Se ee eS eee oor 








| 
i 





Ellis, Sir Barrow Helbert.| 1823-87.... 


Emanuel, Barrow........ 
Emanuel, Charles Herbert 


Lewis. 


Emanuel, Frank L,...... 


Emanuel, Joel 
Emanuel}, Lewis.... 


Emanuel, Walter L....... 
Evans, Samuel (** Young 


Duteh Sam ”’). 


Falk, Hayyim Samuel Ja- 


cob (** Ba‘al Shem ’’). 
Farjeon, B. L 


Faudel, Henry ........... 

Faudel-Phillips, Sir 
George, Bart. 

Fay, Rev. David..... chews 

Fernandez, Benjamin 
Dias. 


Franklin, 


Franklin, Jacob Abraham 


Freund, Jonas..... 


Friedlander, Michael.... 


Gaster, Anghel.......... 


eeew ner eaaeeve 


BUS An sa ses% bs 
Franklin, Ernest Louis... 


Gaster, Very Rey. Moses.. 


Gideon, Samson.......... 
Goldsmid, Abraham,..... 


is ae Albert Edward 
WwW. 
Goldsmid, Anna Maria.... 


Goldsmid, Benjamin...... 


Goldsmid, Sir 


Bart. 


Goldsmid, Sir Isaac Lyon, 


Bart. 


Goldsmid, Sir Julian ..... 
Goldstiiecker, Theodor.... 


Francis, 


Gollanez, Rey. Hermann. 


Gollanez, Israel......... 


Gollanez, ' 
Gompertz, Benjamin.... 


Poa Mv Wacaae eons 


Gompertz, Epbraim...... 


Gompertz, Isaac........-- 


Gompertz, Lewis. 


Goodman, Edward John.. 


Goodman, Tobias....... 


Gordon, Lord George..... 


Gordon, Samuel, , 
Green, Rev. A. A 


Green, Rev. 
Greenberg, L. J 


Guedalla, Henry ......... 
Guedalla, Judah.......... 


Harris, Henrv. sseeeas 5 Rods 
Jsidore...... 


Harris, Rev. 


Hart. Antonis 22% dcr ks 


Hart, Ernest...... 
Hart, Moses.........+. 'e 


Hart, Solomon Alexander. 
Hartog, Cécile Sarah...... 


ennpenvee 


eneeanae 


Aaron Levy..| 


eee eee wees 











1842-1904... 
b. Jan. 10, 
1868. 

b. 1866.,.. 
di: LESS: = eo: 

1832-98 


b. 1869% 553 
1801~43.... 


1708-82... 


1833-1908... 
d. 1863... 


b. 1840... 
b. April, 
1854. 


Oe THZO var 
b. Oct., 1822 


b. Aug. 16, 
1859. 
1809-77... 


1699-1762... 
1756-1810, . 


1846-1904... 
1805-89... 

759-1808... 
1808-78... 
1778-1859, . 


1838-96. ... 
1821-122... 


b. Nov. 80, 
1852. 
b, 1864660. 


1822-1900. . 
1779-1865... 





fl. 1860.... 
A | 7418 RD6.. 
. 1861.. 
b. Dee. 19, 
1836. 
fl. 1834 
731-63: 


b. Septem- 
ber, 1871. 
b. 1860... 


1821-83... 


eer e ete e eee 


b. ¢. 1820.. 
1760-1858... 


1819-99. . 
b. June 6. 
1853. 


1670-1756. . 
1836-98. ... 
ad. 1756.. 


1806-81... 


eeeveevpeeeeesn 


London 
Name. | Date. Description. 
Dyte, Ds Blosicesees agi an iG. San Saved lifeof George ITI. 
Eichholz, Alfred .........| b. Nov. 26,| Educationist. 
1869. 
Eisenstadt, Jacob......../ fH. ¢. 1770..; Author of ** Toledot 
Ya‘akob.” 
Eliakim b. Abraham......| fi. e. 1794..| Hebrew author. 
Brine Samuel (Dutch 1775 -1816.. Pugilist. 
am’ 


Indian statesman. 
Communal worker. 
Secretary, Board of 
Deputies. 
Artist. 
Philanthropist. 
secretary, Board 
Deputies. 
Litterateur. 
Pugilist. 


of 


Cabalist. 


Novelist. 

Worker for emancipa- 
tion. 

Communal worker, 


Minister, Central Syna- 
gogue. 
Author. 


Communal worker. 
Communal worker, 


Journalist and philan- 
thropist. 

Physician and founder 
of the German Hos- 
pital. 

Principal, Col- 
lege. 

Physician. 

Haham of the Spanish 
and Portuguese Con- 
gregation. 

Financier. 

Finaneier and philan- 
thropist. 

Colonel; communal 
worker and Zionist. 


Jews’ 


.| Authoress and comimnus 


nal worker. 
Financier and philan- 
thropist. 
Philanthropist and poli- 
tician. 
Financier 
thropist. 
Communal leader. 
Professor of Sanskrit, 
King’s College. 
Professor of Hebrew, 
University College. 
Secretary, British Acad- 


and philan- 


Actuary and mathema- 
tician. 

Economist and mathe- 
matician. 

Poet. 

Founder of ‘* Animals’ 
Friend.” 

Journalist. 


Preacher and author. 
Convert to Judaism. 
Novelist. 


Minister, Hampstead 
Synagogue. 

Minister and preacher. 

Communal worker and 
Zionist. 

Communal worker. 

Moroccan merchant and 
vhilanthropist. 

Communal worker. 

Minister, West London 
Synagogue of British 
Jews. 

Chief rabbi. 

Physician. 

Founder of Duke’s 
Place Synagogue. 

Artist. 

Musician. 





London 
Name, Date. 
|i—_-_—— 
Hartog, Numa Edward...! 1846-71.... 
Henriques, David Quixano, 1804-7G...-. 
Henry, Emma............ 1788-1870... 
Henry, Michael,......... 1830-75... 
Hersechell, Solomon....... 1762-1842. . 
HATSCH eS eh oee RS) ee eee ees 
Hirschfeld, Hartwig......] .... cece ce 
Hurwitz, Hyman......... 1770-1844. . 
Hyams, Henry H......... b. 1852, 
Isaac, Benjamin.......... d. 1750. 
Isaae, Samuel............ 1812-86. ... 


Isaacs, Sir Henry Aaron.. 


Isaacs, Rufus D........ a are eee 
Jackson, Harry.... cece 1886-85. . 
Jacobs, Joseph.......... .»| 1813-70.. 
Jessel, Albert Henry ...../ b. Oct. 31, 
1864. 
Jessel, Sir Charles James,| b. May .", 
Bart. 1360. 
Jessel, Right Hon. Sir] 182483,... 
George. 
Joseph, Delissa....... sees) D. 1839... 
Joseph, Rey. Morris...... i b. 1848.... 
Joseph, N.S8....... spine b. 1834... 
Josephs, Michael......... 1763-1849. . 
Kalisch, Marcus M........ 1828-85... 
Keeling, Henry L........ 1805-80 
Keizer, Moses ...........- 1831-93 
Kimhi, Jacob..........56. 1720~1800 
King, JoNN...........500. . 1824.. 
Kohn-Zedek, Joseph...... 1827-1904 
Laguna, Daniel Israel....| 1660-1720 
Lamego, Moses........... fl. 1757. 
Landau. Hermann ....... b, 1844, 
Landesbut, Samuel....... 1825-77. 
Lara, Isidore de.......... b. Aug. 9, 
1858. 
Lasker, Emanuel........ -!| b. Dee. 24, 
1868. 
Laurence, John Zechariah! 1828-70, . 


Lawson, Lionel.......... 1823~79.... 
Lee, Sidney ..........008. b. Dee. 5, 
1859. 
Leon, Hananel de........ fl. ec. 1821 
Levetus, Celia............ d. 1873.... 
Levi, David.............. dat nem 
Levisohn, George (Gom-| d. 1797.. 
pertz). 
Levy, Abraham.......... dv. eept Ts 
48. 
LEVY ys AMY ois c dee ewews 1862-89. ... 
Levy, Benjamin.......... fl. 1750... 
Levy, Jonas.............05 dG. 1894,...! 


in 


Levy, Joseph Hiam.,.,.... 


Levy, Joseph Moses Sadat 1812-88, a 
Levy, Rev. Solomon...... b. 1872.... 
Lewis, Sir George Henry. lee 21, 
Lewis, Harry &........... b. 1861... 
Lewis, James Graham....| d. 1873, 
Liebreich, Richard....... b. June 30,' 
1830. 
Lindo, Abigail ........... 1803-48 
Lindo, Algernon......... b. 1863... 
Lindo, David Abarbanel.. 1765-1851. 
Lindo, Elias Haim ....... 1783-1865. . 
Lindo, Frank............. b. Oct. 30, 
De 
Lindo, Gabriel........... b. oan ly, 


Lindo, Moses Albert Norsa| b. April 27, 
1862. 


Loewe, James H.......... b. 1852 


Loewe, Louis............. 


Lopez, Sir Manasseh, Bart.} d. eae 
Lowenthal, J. J 1810- 


b. Aug. 15, 
18380, 





b. July 17, 
1838 


| Surgeon and ophthal- 





1809-88. ||| 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Description. 


——— 


Senior wrangler. 

Prominent reformer. i 

Poetess. 

Journalist and mecha- 
nician. 

Chief rabbi. 

Hebraist and journalist. 

Arabist. 

Professor of Hebrew 
and author. 

Communal secretary. 

Founder of Hambro’ 
Synagogue. 

Promoter of the Mersey | 
tunnel. 

Municipal worker: lord | 








mayor. 
King’s counsel. 
Actor. 
Wizard and prestidigi- 
tator. 
Communal worker. 





Director of public com- 


panies. 
Master of the rolls. 





Communal worker: ar- 
chitect. 

Senior delegate minis- 
ter, West London 
Synagogue. 

Communal worker: ar- 
chitect. 

Hebraist. 

Hebraist and Bible com- 
mentator. 

Philanthropist. 

Hazzan. 

Hebraist and pedier. 

Author. 

Hebraist. 

Hebraist and poet. 

Philanthropist. 

Communal worker, 

Secretary, Board 
Guardians. 

Musician. 





er ton ee 
i a re a, 


of 





Chess champion of the 
world. 

Ophthalmic surgeon 
and author. 

Newspaper proprietor. 

Author and _ Shake- 
spearean scholar. 

Physician. 

Authoress. 

Hebraist and author. 

Surgeon and author. 


ee 2 
fe 6 i i ne. 


Educationist and com- | 
munal worker. 
Poetess and novelist. 
Finaneier. 
Vice-chairman, London 





and Brighton Rail- 
way. 

Political economist. 
Proprietor of ‘ Daily 
Telegraph.” 
Minister, New Syna- 
gogue. 

Solicitor. 


Communal worker. 
Solicitor. 


mologist. 
Hebrew lJexicographer. 
Musician. 
Communal worker. 
Jewish historian. 
Actor. 


a rg 


Communal worker. 
Communal worker. 


Communal worker. 
Orientalist ; first prin- 
cipal Judith Monute- 
flore College. 
Politician. 
Chess-player. 





hes 


| Lueas, Alice (Mrs. Henry 


' Lucas, Sampson.......... 


172 





Name. Date. 


Léwy, Rev. Albert........ 


b. Decem-: 


| 


Description. 


Communal worker. 


ber, 1816. | 


Lucas). 


Lunuey, Benjamin 
Lyon, George Lewis...... 


eee nene 


Mocatta, Abraham ....... 
Mocatta. Abraham Lum- 
brozo de Mattos. 


Pyke, Joseph......seceree 


fl. 1677.... 
1797-1880. . 
1730-1800. . 


@eoeeer ete rae: 


Mocatta, A. de Mattos.. 1853-91... 
Mocatta, Frederick David Cora 15 
Moceatta, Jacob...... we eee] L470-1825 
Mocatta, Moses........... 1768-1857 
Mombach, Julius (Israel)| 1813-80. 
Lazarus. 
Mond, Ludwig............ b. March 7, 
1839 
Montagu, Hyman........ 1845-95 
Monae, Sir Samuel,! b. 1882 
Nonwiok: Claude G..... b. 1838.. 
Montefiore, Sir Francis} b. Oct. 10, 
Abraham, Bart. 1860. 
Montefiore, Horatio...... 1798--1867. . 
Montefiore, Joseph Bar-| 1803-93... 
row. 
Montefiore, Joseph Mayer) 1816-80... 
Montefiore, Sir Joseph Se-| 1822-1901.. 
bag. 
Montefiore, Judith, Lady.. | 1784-1862. . | 
Montefiore, Leonard...... + 1853-79...) 
Montefiore, Sir Moses.) 1784-1885. .| 
Bart. { 
Mosely, Alfred............ b. 1855.. | 
Moses, Joseph Henry..... 1805-75... 
Myers, Asher I........... 1848-1902... 
Nenmegen, Leopold...... 1787-1875... 
Newman, Alf. Alvarez....} 1851-87..... 
Newman, Selig........... 1788-1871 
Nieto, David............. 1654-1728 
Nieto, Isaac...........06. d. 1755 
Nonski, Abraham ........ fl. 1785 
Oppenheim, Morris Sim-{ d. 1882 
eon. 
Pacifico, Emanuel........] ....+:- eine 
Palgrave, Sir Francis} 1788-1861.. 
Cohen. 
Pereira, Jonathan........ 1804-53... 
Phillips, Sir Benjamin....{ 1811-89.... 
Piccictto, James.......... 183C-97.... 
Picciotto, Moses Haim....; 1806-79.... 
Pimentel, Abraham Jacob] fi. 1720.... 
Henriques. 
Pimentel, Sara de Fon-| fl. 1720.... 
seca y 
Pinto, Thomas........... d. 1773.... 
Pirbright, Baron......... 1840-1902. . 
Price, Julius Mendes.....[) .....c.eee. 


1824-1902. . 


Authoress and commu. 
nal worker. 


' Theatrical director. 

Journalist and commu- 
i nal worker; editor, 
** Jewish World.” 


t 
| 

12 . Communal worker. 
“1 





Lyon, Hart...... Sd pespuars at 1721-1800.., Chief rabbi. 
Maas, Joseph............. 1847-86....! Musician and singer. 
Magnus, Lady............ b, 1844.. Authoress and commu- 
' nal worker. 
Magnus, Laurie... ee 5, Author and journalist. 
ie. 
Magnus, Sir Philip........ b. Oct. 7,/ Educationist and com- 
1842. | munal worker. 
Marks, B. 8 ssaceiseisni5s weet e eee ues | Artist and communal 
worker. 
| Marks, David Woolf...... b. Nov. 22,; Chief minister, West 
811. London Synagogue. 
| Marks, Harry Hananel....; b. 1855....) Member of Parliament: 
journalist; “ Finan. 
| cial Times.” 
Medina, Sir Solomon de,.j fi. 1711....| Army contractor. 
Meldola, David........... 1797-1858. .| Dayyan. 
Meldola, Raphael ........ 1754-1828. .' Haham. 
Meldola, Raphael ........ b any 19,| Chemist. 
Mendes, Abraham........ fl. 1718. | Thieftaker. 
Mendez, Moses..,........ 158. Banker and poet. 
Mendoza, Daniel......... 1763-1836..| Champion pugilist. 
Merton, Louis............ 1840-74. Financier. 
i Meyers, Barnett.......... 1814-89 Communal worker. 
MiddJeman, Judah...... fi, 1847 
Mocato, Moses............ 167 Merchant and author. 


Communal worker. 
Merchant and commu. 
nal worker. 


ae | Hebrew author. 


. Communal worker. 


Philanthropist. 


)..i Communal worker. 
..| Author. 


Musician and composer. 


Chemist. 





Numismatist. 
Communal worker. 


Author and communal 
worker. 

Communal worker and 
Zionist. 

Communal worker. 

Communal worker. 





., Communal worker. 


Communai worker. 


Philanthropist. 
Author. 
Philanthropist. 


South-African pioneer. 

Philanthropist. 

Journalist and commu. 
nal worker. 

Schoolmaster. 

Metal-worker and art- 
collector. 


... Hebraist and teacher. 





Haham. 

Haham. 

Hebrew writer on vac- 
cination. 

Barrister. 


Founder of almshouses, 
Historian. 


Physician. 

Lord mayor of Lon- 
don. 

Angilo-Jewish historian. 

Communal worker. 

Author. 





Poetess. 


Violinist. 

Member of Parliament. 

Artist : journalist ; trave 
eler. 

Communal worker. 


173 


name, 





ryne, Lionel By vscsniscs ! 
Raphall, Morris Jacob....: 
Rausuk, Samson 
Rebello, David Alves..... 


eae e atone, 


Ricardo, David...........5 
Rintel, Meir.............. 
Rosebery, Lady 


Rothschild, Sir Anthony 
de, Bart. 

Rothsehild, Baroness 
Charlotte de. 

Rothschild, Baron Ferdi-| 
nand de. 

Rothschild, Lord......... 


Rothschild Baroness Han-: 
nah de. 
Rothschild, Baroness Ju-' 
liana de. 
Rothschild, Lady 
Rothschild, Leopold de... 
Rothsehiild, Baron Lionel: 


de. 
Rothschild, Hon. Lionel 
Walter. 


Rothschild, Baron Mayer 
d 


e. 
Rothschild, Baron Nathan 
Mayer. 
Russell, Henry 
Salaman, Chas. Kensing- 


eorneseeoseeeos 





ton. 
Salaman, Malcolm Charles 


Salomons, Annette A.. 
Salomeons, Sir David, en 


Salomons, Sir David isl 
ne}, Bart. 

Salomons, LO@Vievies cave oes | 

Salvador, Joseph 

Samuda, Isaac de se 
quera. 

Samuda, Jacob 

Samuda, Joseph d'Aguilar 


oorteeesers 


nee era eesei 


Samuel, Baron Denis Mo-) 
ses de. 

Samuel, Charles.......-.. | 

Samuel, Sir HarryS..... | 


Samuel, Herbert | 
Samuel, Sir Marcus, Bart.: 
Samuel, Moses.,........., 


eteeosnee 
t 


eeoostoses 


Samuel, Stuart M......... 





Samuel, Sydney M 
Samuels, MoseS........5- 


eenseenn 


Sarmento, Jacob de Cas- 
tro. 
Sassoon, Sir Albert....... 


Schiff, David Tebele...... 
Schloss, David Frederick. 
Schloss, Leopold 





Coeeraeoses 


Sebag, SOlOMON......006. 
Seligman, Isaac....... eee 


Semon, Sir Felix ........- 
Sequera, Isaac Henriques. 
Serra, Isaac Gomes....... 
Simon, Sergeant Sir John. 
Simon, Oswald John..... 
Singer, Rev. Simeon...... 
Sloman, Charles.......... 
Sloman, Henry....... Por 
Snowman, Isaac.......... 
Sola, Abraham de....... 

Sola, Samuel] de.......... 


Solomon, Abraham....... 
Solomon, Henry Naphtait, 


Shy Lol iaees 


"1795-1860. . 


—b. 1856... 


1851-90. ... 
1810-76 . 
1836-84 
1839-98... 
b. Nov. & 


1810, 
1782-1850. . 


eee 


eater eererete 


1818-s4.... 
777-1836. . 


1813-1900. 
1814-1901. . 


b. Sept. 6, 
Pegi 


1879... 
597 -1873.. 


b, June 28, 
1851. 
1774-1843. . 

fi. L758... 
fl. 1721... 


1811-74... 
1813-84.. 


1782-1860. . 


18?1- ee 
b. 1853.. 


b. 1879.. 
b. 1853.. 


1804-68.... 


Beare 
fl. 1830 . 


1692-1762 
1818-97... 


1738-1816. . 
d. 1818.... 
1818-97. 


b. Sept. 3, 
1 


1808-70.... 


1793-1873. . 
b. 1874.... 
1825-52... 


1839-66.... 
1824-62.... 
1796-1881. . 


THE JEWISH 


Description. 





Queen’s counsel. 

Preacher and author. 

Hebrew poet. 

Merchant and numis- 
matist. 

Economist and politi- 
cian. 

Hebrew author. 

Political and 
leader. 

Financier and commu- 
nal worker. 

Philanthropist. 


Philanthropist; mem- 
ber of Parliament. 
Communal worker. 


Communal worker 
Philanthropist. 


Communal worker. 

Communal worker. 

Financier and  politi- 
eian, 

Communal worker: 
Member of Parlia- 
ment. 

Financier and = sports- 
man. 

Financier. 


Composer and singer. 
Musician. 


Author and journalist. 


Authoress. 

Lord mayor and politi- 
cian. 

Engineer. 


Financier. 
Philanthropist. 
Physician. 


Civil engineer. 

Politician and 
builder. 

Financier. 


ship- 


Communal worker. 
Member of Parliament; 
communal worker. 
Member of Parliament. 
Lord mayor of London. 

Authar. 

Secretary to the Board 
of Deputies. 

Member of Parliament: 
communal worker. 

Author, 

Biographer of Mendels- 
sohn. 

Physician. 


Anglo-Indian merchant 
and philanthropist. 

Chief rabbi. 

Communal worker. 

Communal worker. 


Hebrew teacher. 
Communal worker. 


Laryngoscopist. 


Physician. 
Philanthropist. 
Conimunal worker, law- 
yer, and politician. 
Communal worker. 


Minister, New West 
End Synagogue. 

Musical composer and 
improvisator. 

Actor, 

Artist. 

Preacher; professor of 
Hebrew. 

Hazzap. 

Artist. 

Eduecationist and He- 
braist. 


social | 


ENCYCLOPEDIA 























| Spielmann, Isidore,...... 


| Stern, David, Viscount de 
Stern, Sir Edward David.. 


| Sylvester, J. J 


_ Villiers, 
 Waley, Jaeob 
| Wandsworth, 


: Ximenes, Sir Morris...... 
| aangwill, Israel.......... 


Name. 


Solomon, Selim........... 


Solomon, Solomon Joseph: 





Spielmann, Marion H..... | 





Stern, Baron Hermann de| 

SPCII, EOGVc abs. Ba cena ceed 

Strauss, Gustave Lewis 
Maurice. 

Suasso, Isaae (Antonio) 
Lopez, Baron Avyernes 
de Gras. 

Sydney, Algernon Edward! 





eee eevee er ten 


Symons, Baron Lyon de.. 
STHCEK, -MOGIE. \ cacseccasees 


, Valentine, Nathan Isaac.. 


Van Oven, Barnard 
Van Oven, Joshua,....... 
Van Strahlen, Samuel... 


aeereve 


Villa Real, Isaac da Costa 


John Abraham 
Jacob de. 


see eer aenene 


Baron...... 


eevee reese nae 


Wasserzug, H 
WO, GUN, . cvs adscin 
Wolf, Joseph 


sree eee eer eae 


Worms, Baron de........ 


Worms, Maurice Benedict 
de, 


Worms, Baron Solomon de 





Zangwill, Louis.......... | 
Zedner, Joseph.........6. : 
Zimmer, N. L, 


Zukertort, J. H........... 





London 


Description. 


Secretary, West London 
Synagogue of British 
Jews; communal 
worker. 

Artist. 


' Communal! worker. 
2, Author and publicist. 


| Financier. 


d. 1877. 

b. ¢. 1860... - Communal worker. 

1815-87....: Financier. 

b. Jan. 2,; Minister, East London 
1865. | Synagogue. 

1807-87.... Author. 

1698-1775 Financier. 

b. Jan. 8, Solicitor and communal 
1834. worker. 

1814-97 Mathematician; pro- 

fessor. 

fi. 1800.. Communal worker. 

Besar, Caine Communal worker. 

fl. 1806....) Hebrew author. 

1797-1860..; Physician. 

1766-1838..| Surgeon. 


b. 1845.... 
ad. 1/380.... 
b. 1863.... 
1819-73... 


1795-1862... 


b. Feb. 16, 
1829, 
1805-67... 


— 
S 
i 
9 2) 
aw 


eeoey 





1842-88... 


Hebrew librarian, Brit- 
ish Museum. 

Founder of Villa Real 
School. 

Writer and communal 
worker. 

Conveyancer ; professor 
of political economy. 

Politician. 


{ Hazzan and composer. 


Journalist and Anglo- 
Jewish historian. 
Traveler and Christian 
missionary. 
Politician. 


Financier, 


Financier. 
Financier. 
Man of letters. 
Novelist. 
Hebraist. 


.| Hebraist and eabalist. 


Chess-plaver. 


——Present Conditions (Statistics): It is pos- 
sible to ascertain with some accuracy the Jewish 
population of London owing to the fact that statis- 
tics of Jewish deaths and marriages have been re- 
corded with some completeness by the United Syn- 
agogue and the Board of Deputies for the last thirty 


years. 
Popula- 
tion. 


To the information from these 
sources may be added the reports of 
the number of Jewish children attend- 


ing the Jewish schools, given by Ja- 
cobs and Harris in successive issues of the “ Jewish 


Year Book” with ever-increasing fulness. 


The fol- 


lowing table gives these data at intervals of five 
years for the last thirty years: 








——.— 





——__—$$—$__ 





Year. Deaths. Marriages. se ¢ gaa ss 
1S. edeoauasninse nn ne) partes ei 
ISIS. kapaasenentens 98 B77 Se 
TheR Aa. ceeae ends 959 B81 7,383 
TSS8o sri cet ate nae 1,129 589 ASrae 
Letoisa esc wer ee eee Lig 788 15,964 
TBS 624k sdy Sees | 1.765 | 1,096 19,442 
WINES oc Save acargaee 2,200 1,478 31,515 








From the last-given data the number of Jews in 


i London in the middle of 1902 can be ascertained 


London 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


174 





with some degree of probability, The general 
death-rate of London for the year 1902 was 17.6 
per thousand, but since the Jewish population is 
composed so largely (three-quarters as against one- 
half in the general London population) of young 
men and women of the most viable ages, 15-60, 
it is unlikely that the death-rate was higher than 
15 per thousand (the same as that in the Jewish 
quarter of the borough of Stepney in 1901). This 
would give a Jewish population in London of 
148,866 in 1902, an estimate which is confirmed by 
the number of marriages, 1,478, which, at 10 per thou- 
sand—a very high rate indeed—would give 147,800. 
The number of school-children, however, would 
point to aneven higher total. Of these, 31,515, out 
of a total of 761,729, were in board and voluntary 
schools. If the proportion of school-children to 
population held with regard to the Jewish children 
as to the total population (4,536,541) within the 
school board area, this would imply a Jewish popu- 
lation of about 187,427. But these statistics are for 
a year later than that of the death-rate figures quo- 
ted above, and besides it is probable that more Jewish 
children are entered on the school-books, and more of 
those entered attend, than with the general popula- 
tion, so that the figures are somewhat misleading. 
Altogether it is likely that the Jewish population of 
London in the middle of 1802 was about 150,000, of 
whom at least 100,000 were in the East End of Lon- 
don, half of these being in the borough of Stepney 
(“Alien Immigration Commission,” iii. 90). Of the 
remainder the majority are well-to-do residents in 
the Maida Vale, Bayswater, and Hammersmith dis- 
tricts, though subordinate ghettos have been created 
in Soho and Southwark. From the above-cited 
figures it would seem probable that the London Jew- 
ish population trebled during the years between 
1883 and 1902. Part of this increase is doubtless 
due to the excess of births over deaths and to mi- 
gration from the provinces, but at least 50,000 
have been added by foreign immigration during 
that period, an average of 2,500 per annum. 

This increase has been met by a corresponding 
increase in the number of seat-holders in the London 
synagogues—2,289 in 1873; 3,897 in 1883; 5,594 in 

1898; and 9,556 in 1902. Altogether 


Syna- there are 65 synagogues to meet the 
gogues. religious needs of the Jews of Lon- 
don; of these 15 belong to the United 
Synagogue. They areas follows, with the num- 


ber of their seat-holders and their income for 1902, 
and are arranged in the order of their reception 
within the ranks of the United Synagogue: 























AS = se ve) 
ge} 2 ge | 3 
Synagogue. BS 3 Synagogue. & = 3 
— ~ h— Y 
ie ie? 
Great.... £2,923 | 4387 ||New West End.| £4,613 [| 820 
Hambro’....... 489} 200 ||/Dalston........ 2,186 | 3861 
INGW sia ciste hie. 1,458 | 302 ||) Hammersmith. , | 934} 211 
Bayswater..... 4.259 | 303 Hampstead..... 4,896; 464 
CONTE) isoeees% 3,710 | 3850 |‘iSouth Hackney.) 1,190} 354 
Borough........ 794} 178 |/Stoke Newing-| 
St. John’s Wood] 3,020) 378 | TOW Gapece asi | BOGE arpa 
East London....) 1,202 / 353) |} ———_—__; —_ ——— 
North London..| 1,318) 187 | Totals sass | £33,792 |4,458 








Besides these there are 38 minor synagogues com- 
bined in the Federation of Synagogues, of which 
the chief are Cannon St. Road, London Chevra 
Torah, Sandy’s Row, and West End Talmud Torah, 
Outside these two great associations stand the Span- 
ish and Portuguese Congregation with its center at 
Bevis Marks, and the West London Synagogue of 
British Jews at Berkeley street (see REFORM JUDa- 
IsM). Of the remaining 10 synagogues the most in- 
teresting is the Western, in St. Alban’s place; it was 
founded in 1797 and was for a long time the only 
synagogue outside the “city.” Altogether the ex- 
penditure of these 65 synagogues may be reckoned 
at something like £50,000 per annum, while besides 
these there is a very large number of “hebrot” 
scattered throughout the Jewish quarter. Many 
London Jews, however, still remain unattached to 
any prominent synagogal organization, and for the 
chief holidays of the New-Year, in the autumn, a 
large hall in the East End is hired, where the serv- 
ices are attended by no less than 5,000 persons. A 
large proportion of the Jewish inhabitants of Lon. 
den makes use of one or other of the numerous char- 
itable institutions. In 1883 the proportion was one- 
fourth (Jacobs, “Jewish Statistics,” p. 
14), though it is probably not so high 
at present. From 1895 to 1901 an an- 
nual average of 851 cases of foreigners arriving dur- 
ing the year applied to the Board of Guardians, or 
Russo-Jewish Committee (“ Alien Immigration Com- 
mission,” iii. 93), As a case includes on an average 
3 persons, this would imply that nearly the whole of 
the 2,500 persons arriving during the year have rea- 
son to apply, for one cause or another, to the Board 
of Guardians. On the other hand, the assistance 
needed and given is often very slight, and the pro- 
portion of those who remain chronically connected 
with the charitable institutions is fairly small, 
probably not more than 5 per cent of the whole 
Jewish population. 

Almost every need of a Jewish person from birth 
to burial is provided for by one or other of the 
metropolitan Jewish charities, of which the follow- 
ing isa classified list, with the amounts expended 
during the year 1902; in most cases dates of founda- 
tion are given in parentheses: 


Charity. 


ORPHANS. 


Jews’ Hospital and Orphan Asylum, West Nor- £ ss. d. 
WO0d CLG O) 50 hess cth eS aw hea seen 10,506 16 10 
Spanish and Portuguese Orphan Society (for chil- 


dren of Sephardim only; 1703)...........c000> 625 0 0 
Hayes Industrial Sehool (exclusive of grants 
CATHCU) 5.0 syns pees Gund eke exes ewe eeheaes 600 0 0 
GIRLS. 
Domestic Training Home (1894)..........cce0cee 1161 2 1 
DEAF AND DUMB AND BLIND. 

Deaf and Dumb Home (1863)............ccceees 2,145 8 3 
Institution for the Indigent Blind (1819)......... 1,918 0 0 
APPRENTICESHIP. 

Mahasim Tobim (for Sephardim only; 1749)..... 1388 0 0 
LABOR REGISTRY. 

Location and Information Bureau (1892)........ 1,028 4 10 
EMIGRATION. — 

Emigration Society (1852)........ccccccccsessess 668 14 9 


*LSTNDLIN] HSIMAP JO SHILITVOO'T DNIMOHS NOCNOT 40 dV 


. fie pre ta me 
\ fsa {fnosogyénoqg. TI MH OL of/ 
' | esi AS vise “pag 


/s Yploms rar ty 
4 












NVHOLV 


Sehh be 
pi 
HO}TIT 





Vuir oad A i 


1 99,7 ge PIS PY arog; 
P f 19mt99wDZ 


“Ds 
PH\ROM PIO 













Le 
TIGA WY ty 
Rey 
. WY 
Cx RON NOLONINN “Mas 
Lv @ a DiS "PH [ uo ae eG 
% yatompnsy CE NN sate 


‘OY “PY LOWIasotyy 
dT 





“Oi 
faspuonaag ‘Us Suoaog 


Xx OL D NY 



















"WIS ESD) \R vy 2 hve <4 é Diy ‘ ane : 
uD : 15s ‘. isitayy . TOY 8.7 DF 
feu \s on tes 7, é fg ie 52? ney : Wea cb isedins iD. p> aoe 

ot : A DULY : == a 
Qty) eee 








% 
Si as 7 is 107924 ee 


BN bys “NOLIN OY I AMEND S vy 
= . Aff nh ; ee 
J aEHOPIA Bex 
WIS “NT et, 


oy ery myer as 
on Y UOUSUIY 


ae 



























“DIE tT 
UOPUOT 





















oa 


LUD 



























api Ne A 










































































Ss 2; eats ara 
——— is is oP UA 
Sauaclser z — ee, * SLE ac Bitter as 
a BS gy SA gr Sa TAT 10 A\ASER BOS S mm 25 BNL POA 8ON 
er ad LZ POT —AP}LIUS LAUMOd a] SMA 100g 26 Eas Bag Das 
wig it of Prdzaar ALLE) MSEMO PQ: tg eA sans : earmusingy 
AAS FPocke-osqiibttage ers FE ggies_ 8D WIG ne, 
Pe ov YA A N\A TL Sff lows is OLISEIDTO MSTA “Ofauy 2305 ABS é bunppn 2 
gh ‘\ 109WIG That [OOtpy ded y (9! ‘x SOTILa(e JO/P.anog PLZ eNOS ONE Ip, fi 
soos = Fapuory LS i St _ teen anos - 
yaffapeng ® eas OpPuote ve >? PYPORUM AIT UUN FAY a 7) a 
se AaNcoriettoe —. Svs sae cut ME f Nf ema e 
aye A LRPHSO PRISE Of OD. pI “IS J Yo De mks Je 
. ms osornsnu a , ' A Cone arts oe 4 DIS Wb pious ET a S May @ CU NSns ¢ ig “page “PN ot 
Aa ae, Saas A S$ Mop 
1 = “utg ouwry bed Wits Guo As Apts <= aR “Dig Vin TASSAH \ Ys BAPUD MOT (5 
. 7 Wy, é TNS D = _ . < boty puimop's % “ 
pig Aopupeg {pasaya We itt re oP fap oe 
Ue Crayaunere WEQv™ wna], OL 90.0) | ree 4 voig Vy amon B® 
4 ae 3 \  gasnotl ml f ung s % %0 \&: (\z 
tn gent ‘ —— v we cs s 
\ ayy e 3 PE mag yortpo2os fe Z |: . a WORF.) .smop 
\z, mr rey ! u0}8 wsoUsnyA y ysis 
‘VIS PACT Ne ORY “UNIT Poy pry (4 se PY Pooy eRe MAINS 
70 sBprequng 82° = 2 See tEAN 
7 wie ery NX or %, 


Od da T90 





“Duy ploy Lo? 


“Pay 
\ Atte 










































‘akg p OTL SOL ES 
NOWS—F ane Ne us 
DI a = 3 <|) - oe : nOULM 
B iy "7 rr 
rs : yy Pre NITS Upmy Sig 
> ae PU—~m uno uts fcaqouse 5. ES 
“ uopuy ZL top ; YION@ Pt iN: 
"mts @= OZ, p Lae: PAW itopaiy 
ss ae Is Re Pave, ‘mag Runqousny oe a Meap ain geet 
SORA UNOS 4. wag worpUR “f mA \ A : iy Naa spiel q aan: Soeumg 
») wy HINT OV all bathe “PU fff "DIY UNWuUr7s S Poa 7 3, 
uO .. i a Nea ~Puog-8 ting /Apy nis 7 2, 
ts aut OFF tIUY OD EF Pe | PUu-§ meq soTeAC JOT 
Wor ceaog \ dS Aft a "DAY 2YSIRUINT 
qo Hayyonu - hanquowng 
p LENS a 


LOTSULMIN 


kG NOPSTUG 
| > yo WS 








176 























London THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
LOANS. Spanish and Portuguese Jews’ Board of Guard- £ s.d. 
£ s.d. (AS ISSO vaaeaactey ouschanetseicesssc vet ceauas 1,637 10 1 
Ladies’ Benevolent Loan Society (1844).... ..... 2,476 0 U Jewish Ladies’ West End Charity (1842)......... 970 8 9 
Western Jewish Philanthropic Society (1827).... 247, 3 «6 Soutle Londo (190 ecco ose teckoe kek oes eee 69 16 6 
Exceisior Fund (862) ¢ccse.0 wie sag aelee seca eas 150 0 O | Tradesmen’s Benevolent Society (1858).........5 522 0 0 
Board of Guardians for the Relief of the Jewish 
RELIEF IN KIND, Poor (1859): 
(ay Meals, Reel secede seh £20,301 11 9 
Soup-Kitchen for the Jewish Poor (1854)......... 2,099 6 Sanitary Department..... 216 3 0 
Society for Providing Penny Dinners (at Board LOADS issu bceeeiat cares 19,465 11 11 
and Jewish Schools 3 1883)........... cee eee eee 406 5 2 WorkKrooms ..... 0. cece eee 112 15 O 
Society for Providing Sabbath Meals (1869)...... 269 6 10 WidustTalscciaheeese dads 2,887 18 5 
: Russo-Jewish Committee. 2,214 3 6 
(b) Clothing. Administration.......... 3,104 li 9 
Jewish Ladies’ Clothing Association (pon Inves- Alnishouses........ceeece 44 2 6 
tigation by Visiting Committee ; 1892) ee eee ee 48,346 17 10 
Jewish Schoals’ Boot Fund (1889).......... serves 309 4 4 United Synagogue Charities (exclusive of contri- 
(c) Bread, Meat, Coal, and Groceries. bution to Board of Guardians ; apres — 
East End Bread, Meat, and Coal Charity (1896).. 331 18 5 P Cee pee eet kee eae ee 
? : eS GPANTS 4 ansedid ecsecees 340 0 0 
Metropolitan Promoters of Charity (1860)........ 47416 0 cereale ead as 
: xs poe Relief in Kind........... 119 138 3 
Meshivath Nephesh (1780)............65 pieces 2,455 0 0 Brat ce : 
North London G Fund (1890 579 4 7 Marriage Portions........ 104 0 O 
or OD on rocery un ) ee ee ee ee ry 4 d Ministers’ Augmentation. 00) 0 0 
NURSING FOR INVALIDS. Special Bequests... ard aee 1465 15 4 
as ' Festival Distributions.... 472 18 0 
Sick-Room Helps ASSOCIACION. L600... cece cree eens 1,186 19 3 WAT Ob col. cs hae cae 582 0 7 
Ladies’ Society for Helping the Poor and Sick... 00 0 0 Visitation Committee .... 600 0 0 
Se fd ee : Talinud Torah...... ees 29 2 8 
LYING-IN INSTITUTIONS. Mikwah and Poor of Holy 
Ladies’ Benevolent Institution ............00 cee 2,000 0 0 Tita boos Peco oo eee rcs 40 @ 0 
Honen Dalim, Menahem Abelim, Hebrat Yeto- Charity Funerals......... 1,027 15 1 
mot, and Hebrat Moalim (for Sephardim only; Free Religious Services .. 473 12 11 
St NOP EN arate elect aia tole atthe Deca Wasa etal de alae enn cine k 245 0 0 Educational Institutions. 996 3 4 
Lyne -in: Chavitys «ig etes baw kes amie ooo vides 2 163 0 0 — 6,617 13 4 
Jewish contribution to Hospital Sunday Fund, 1903. 1.67910 1 
CONVALESCENT HOMES. - ——-- 
Baroness de Hirsch Convalescent Home (1898)... 2.000 9 5 TObAL. 66s eeeee ee esses eeeee nee eeeen ens ce eeeas £111,639 3 5 
-¥ . 2 £26) 9 2 y 
Jewish Convalescent Home (1862)..........e0ee: 1,208 2 3 From this total should be deducted the figures of 
INCURABLES. the loan department of the Board of Guardians and 
Home and Hospital for Jewish Incurables (1889), 3,174 8 1 | of the other loan societies, amounting to £22,338 
ees 15s. 5d., leaving a total expenditure of £89,300 &s. 
THE AGED. : pea 
(ay Homes: Od. a0 the charity budget of the London Jewry in 
Home for Aged Jews (1894) ....... ccc cee eee eee 2,773 6 8 1902, apart from P rivate donations. Among sue? 
Beth Holim Hospital (in connection with the a large body of persons it is natural that a certain 
Spanish and Portuguese Congregation; 1747)... 1,190 0 0 | proportion of them should fall by the way, either 
Salomons’ Almshouses (in connection with the from weakness or wickedness. Com- 
United Syne ce te 7.2 oe)s Defectives paratively speaking, these are few in 
J. H. Moses’ Almshouses (Jewish Board of Guard- Pp ¥ SP &) : 
ians: 1862). and De- number. Only 1,909 found it neces- 
Abraham Lyon Moses’ and Henry Solomon’s Alms- linquents. sary to apply for Poor Law relief 
houses, Devonshire street, Mile End, E. (1838). throughout London in 1901. at least 
*s Almshouses, Welle! . : : A : 
qe DEMED IEE Serseeen ues gas oi sina four-fifths of these being merely applicants for med- 
’ bia ve - an bate icine. Records have been kept of the number of 
ociety for Relieving the Aged Needy (1829)..... 1474 ‘oh : a ara ° : 
Jewe’ Hospital and Orptiai Asylum. “West: Nor: Jewish inmates of public institutions in and around 
WOO (ITD) secon eens ciarvewedecseasundene ww... 874 019 | London for the last thirty years, from which may 
ee be compiled the following table showing the num- 
: ber received annually: 
City of London Benevolent Society for Assisting 
Widows of the Jewish Faith (1867)............ ; 829 4 8 oo = a eo 
Israelite Marriage Portion and Widows’ Pension a & : a o, 2 yf 
SOCIELY a: inu.tle massed coe cistseceryBolemnera nt tiee sua 150 0 0 E S 23 = = a5 
Year. Ss =f S34 Z, Sc oe 
MARRIAGE PORTIONS. be B ke 5 E 8 a3 
a 2 
Marriage Portion Society (1850).......... 2.00 P 6119 4 ‘ aa = 
Society for Granting Marriage Portions to Or- 187: 88 66 eo 4 81 “¢ Soe vai 
o . . MED nerrspercne w ae 
phans (for Sephardim only). 1878.00 46 333 6 186 3 3 
CHILDREN. roe re Seo wa 506 23 227 3 4 
zim ieracnia te 8 re ve 247 
Jewish Branch of Children’s Country Holiday TRE et 51 1,190 209 oH Fe is 
BUGS CLAD chs es sie Veoh iat erat otal wee Ad 464 0 4 | 1898........ 106 1,609 851 514 20 2 
Initiation Society (1745)............ er eee si 5l4 14 4 | 1902........ 129 2,091 458 796 9 37 
Jewish Créche (1897) ....... ccc cece cece evens és 483 14 5 
PREVENTIVE AND RESCUE WORK. The prisoners were held mostly for minor offenses. 
Jewish Association for the Protection of Girls and _ | Thus in 1902, while 796 were received, the maximum 
Women (1885) eae oe Perec ress asset vevesesovcase 942 4 0 number of inmates at any one time was 2338, showing 
GENERAL. that, in the majority of instances, they served very 
Hebrew Society for Brotherly Help (1896)......... 260 0 0 | Short sentences. Asregards other undesirable qual- 
Poor Jews’ Temporary Shelter (1885)..........06 3,690 7 2 | ities the Alien Immigration Commission recorded 


177 





only 98 bankruptcies among alien Jews in the Loun- 
don district during the three years ending March 8&1, 
1903 (“ Report,” i. 835). 
Nine-tenths of all the Jews who reside in Lon- 
dou send their children to the ordinary public schools, 
one-third of these going to the volun- 
Education. tary and the remainder to the Board 
schools. The chief Jewish voluntary 
schools are given in the following list, with the num- 
ber attending them in 1903: 





a 
————— 




















| 
School. | Boys. | Girls. Infants. | Total. 
———_——|___— 

Jews’ Free School...| 2,289 | 1,310 Las 2.599 
Infant sehools....... ay. sehr Lies 1,727 
Stepney Jewish......| 4065 ail 182 859 
Bayswater Jewish... 135 95 81 ol] 
Westminster Jewish. 315 322 See 637 
Norwood Asylum.... 150 132 30 312 
Deaf and Dumb..... 25 IG: |) secu | 41 
South London ....... 109 72 SS 234 
Thrawl Street ....... Dt Sawai 153 170 3828 
Hayes Industrial ....; 57 ae ONE) “sxiene | BY 
ORB Fe eae kecnceasa 3,486 | 2.801 2,248 | 8,100 








Of the children attending the Jewish voluntary 
schools about one-fifth were born abroad, one- 
eighth in England of native parents, and the rest 
were born in England of foreign parents. The 
greatest of Jewish schools is the Jews’ Free School, 
Bell lane, one of the largest institutions of its kind 
inthe world. Thetotal expenditure of these schools 
is about £52,000 per annum. Quitea large majority 
of Jewish children in London go to other than purely 
Jewish schools, the proportion being shown by the 
following table: 











School. Boys. Girls. Infants. Total. 

Board schools.,..... 6,189 6,416 8,741 21,346 
Voluntary schools 

EPO WISI och cased , 8,486 2,371 2,243 8,100 
Voluntary schools 

(non-Jewish) sci 2c.) wcaee fF wanes | mews 2,069 

Poet ceaces | 81,515 

| 





In addition English instruction for adult Russian 
refugees is provided by the English evening classes 
in connection with the Russo-Jewish Committee. 

A somewhat higher grade of educational effort is 
indicated by the many social clubs and institutions 
intended to link together Jewish lads and young 

men. Thecentral body of this kind is 
Social In- the Jewish Workingmen’s Club, Great 
stitutions. Alie street, Aldgate, founded in 1872. 

As @ preparation for this there are a 
certain number of clubs for Jewish working boys, 
the chief of which is the Brady Street. Club, founded 
in 1896. There are similar clubs for girls—the Jew- 
ish Girls’ Club, founded in 1886, and the West Cen- 
tral Jewish Girls’ Club, founded in 1887. 

For specifically Jewish instruction the provision 
in London is somewhat small. Each division of 


the community has a bet ha-midrash, the Sephar- 


dic institution of that name being instituted as far 

back as 1664, The Ashkenazic institution is under 

the auspices of the United Synagogue, and the pres- 

ent building was opened in 1876. Local institutions 
VIII.—12 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


London 





of a similar character exist in North and Northeast 
London. The Jews’ College still remains the center 
of Jewish learning in London, though large provi. 
sion is now made for more popular lectures and in- 
struction by the Jewish Study Society and its vari- 
ous offshoots, which are combined in the Union of 
Jewish Literary Societies, founded in 1902. 

It is impossible to give any full account of the 
occupations of London Jews, but in the census of 
1901 there is a list of occupations of 
Russians and Poles in London, which 
at any rate enables the statistician to 
determine the most popular occupa- 
tions among the least-favored individuals of the 
London Jewry. It is as follows: 


Occupa- 
tions. 


MALES. FEMALES. 
POCA ips eat a Ge aged ead dane acon 4 jie tees 28,574 24,863 
Under ten years............ 1,927 1,959 
Over dias nS ae 26,047 22,904 
Of whom earn their living. .24,164 5,358 
ClOthing- trades s6.s) 20 Succes teeets oes eesueewsne’ 14,666 3,698 
TANOIS Moo o Gs ees eee 10,070 2,603 
Women’s tailors. ........... 36 454 
Capmakers........cccccceene 707 214 
BGLITICNS so c33s05 biesiauen sc ed 319 167 
Shoemakers .........eeccee. 2,890 120 
Slipper-makers ............. 150 6 
Miscellaneous ............05 494 134 
PUrniture (rade. ocsisa cad baadeedede ae deseusss 2,550 12 
Cabinet-makers...........0.. 1,894 4 
POHSNOCTS: 6.<.sc05 oad aweueaes 5D 1 
Carpet-mMakers. ........c eee 135 ee 
Turners ...... ree sven ceed 2 
Misceilaneous......... veeee 246 5 
Painters ..........0005 Pace lanp sia hehe saan euetaeodates 226 1 
CArPORlieTs 0455 sosgs sine bee eae daree eases 210 
Watchmakers............005 Liana glee ateeew 158 1 
GOIGSIMIUNS 3c Oss S5 ceca tee ete aesade SosG vanes Sas 143 és 
TODACCO-WOPrKETS....... cece cc ceccccccsesertoccces 342 331 
TORACCO-NeRIETS |: 6 acs dios aseas store Zeb eeeateuacs 150 12 
Workers and dealers in food produce............ 1,322 177 
POGIGTS sci} :eciias tne oy we es sawn ee Mamata weasewes 464 69 
TVAGCSPCODIE 4s sea iaee soles aesei ees eeesers 609 44 
Travelers... ccccccccceccces 813 16 
ADONIS oie dcciew acc weak 163 20 
OUDGTS 4j.siessaid eee wees = 188 3 
TOAGCNOTS ioe cies bo ei eee ae eiaa ae vases 219 26 
SOLVGNUS: 5 oxo oats autuacae since a situtesawenSoweees 16 554 
Barbers (probably not Jewish)..........eseee0e: 519 14 
OUR CTS area hla aint wise oa etna ae eed aauls ras fh 1,729 


With regard to the classes which have been longest 
settled in the country, the proportions, though prob- 
ably not the numbers, of those employed in the vari- 
ous occupations are not likely to be much different 
from the estimate made in 1883 and given above. 

A large number of societies for mutual assistance 
exist in the London Jewry, no less than 140 being 
recorded in the last issue of the “ Jewish Year Book,” 

besides many separate branches of the 

Friendly larger orders, like the Grand Order of 
and Benefit Israel, the Ancient Order of Mount 
Societies. Sinai, the Hebrew Order of Druids, 
the orders Achei Ameth and Achei 

Berith, and the Order of Ancient Maccabeans. In 
addition, most of the hebrot are also benefit soci- 
eties, and there have existed altogether about 89 Jew- 
ish trade-unions in London (see Halpern, “ Die Jii- 
dischen Arbeiter in London,” pp. 66-68). Many of 
these latter, however, exist only fora short time, and 
occasionally are created simply for the purposes of 





i 


wondon a a at : . 7 
Toneano THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 178 
a strike. The most prominent of them appear to | theinterestsof British Jews asa religious community. 


be the United Ladies’ Tailoresses, founded in 1891, 
and the Independent Cabinet Makers’ Association, 
founded in 1895. The aim of Jewish workmen to 
become masters on their own account seems to 
stand in the way of their becoming tradc-unionists. 
London is one of the chief centers of Zionism, 
which was taken up with great enthusiasm. It is 
the seat of THe JeEwisir CoLontaAn Trust, aud the 
Fifth Zionist Congress was held there. 
Zionism. Of Zionist socicties, 23 exist there, be- 
sides the English Zionist Federation, 
of which Sir Francis Montefiore is the president. 
No less than 51 Zionists’ share clubs exist in Lon- 
don to enable Zionists of small means to become 
shareholders in the Jewish Colonial Trust. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacobs, Jews of Angevin Engtand, 1894; Mar- 
goliouth, History of the Jews in Great Britait,vol. iii., Lon- 
don, 1851; Halpern, Die Jtidischen. Arbeiter in London, 1902 ; 
C. Russel and H.S8. Lewis, The Jew in London, 1900 ; Jacobs 
and Harris, Jewish. Year Book, various years; Transactions 
Jew. Hist. Soc. Eng.; Jacobs, Studies in Jewish Statistics, 
London, 1891; Report of the Alien Immigration Commis- 
sion, 1903; Report from the Cammittee of the House of 
Lords onthe Sweating System, London, 1889; Report from 
the Select Committee on Immigration and Emigration 
(Foreigners), London, 1889; Evans Gordon, The Alien Tm- 
migrant, London, 1904; Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish 

_ History, 1902; Jacobs and Wolf, Bibl. Anglo-Jud. 

Typography: The earliest Hebrew printing 
in the city of London was done by Christian print- 
ers, the first book being an edition of the Psalms in 
four languages which appeared in London in 1648. 
Stcinschneider suggests that the Hebrew was printed 
from incised wooden blocks. The printer’s name 
was Thomas Harper. An edition of Abot with 
punctuated text was published at London in 1651, 
the printing being done by Thomas Roycroft, who 
appears also to have printed the Walton poly glot of 
1653-57. The first book printed forand by a Jew in 
London appears to have been the “ Urim we-Tum- 
mim” by Uri Phoebus (1707). It is doubtful 
whetber Johanan ben Isaac’s attack upou this work 
was printed in London; the continuation was cer- 
tainly done in Amsterdam. The Christian printer 
Thomas [live printed a few Hebrew works, among 
others the “ Matteh Dan,” 1715, of David Nieto. Simi- 
larly, about 1770, three Jews, Isaac ben Jedidiah, 
Moses ben Gershon, and Jacob Cohen, published a cer- 
tainnumberot works printed by William Tooke. The 
first regular printer and publisher may be regarded 
as David ben Mordecai Levi (1794-99), though pre- 
vious to this the ALEXANDERsS had begun their series 
of prayer-books (from 1770 onward), to be succeeded 
by the Valentines, who have published most of the 
rituals of the London community. For a long 
period the firm of Wertheimer, Lea & Company 
published most books in London requiring Hebrew 
type, apart from the Bible and the books of the 
conversionist societies. Filipowski may be here 
mentioned as having had printed the various works 
he edited in new and very clear though small type, 
in the middle of the nineteenth century. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, in Frsch and Gruber, Eneye. 
section Ti., part 28, p. 91; Cat. of the Anglo-Jewitsh His- 
torical Exhibition, p. 43. j 


LONDON COMMITTEE OF DEPUTIES 
OF BRITISH JEWS (more commonly London 
Board of Deputies): A body formed to safeguard 





It can be traced to a committee called “The Com- 
mittee of Diligence,” which committee was formed 
to watch the progress through the Irish Parliament, 
in 1745, of the bill for Jewish naturalization. After 
the rejection of the Naturalization Bill of 1733, and 
on the accession of George HI. in 1760, “deputados 
of the Portuguese nation ” were appointed to attend 
court and express the loyalty of the British Jews, 
which they did on Nov. 19, 1760, The German, or 
“Dutch,” Jews were not formally represented on 
the committee, but arrangements were made by 
which they should cooperate in Important cases. 
The board was established to protect the inter- 
ests of British Jews not only in the British Isles, 
but in the colonies. It was appealed to from 
Jamaica in 1761 and from the Balearic Isles in 1766, 
Meetings were held sporadically in 1778 and 1789, 
In the latter year Moses IJ. Levi was elected as pres- 
ident, and in 1812 the German members of the board 
became regularly connected with it. The deputies 
watched over all the legislation relating to mar- 
riages, labor laws, and other matters which might 
affect Jews prejudicially, and aided considerably in 
the struggle for Jewish emancipation. Jn 1885 Sir 
Moses Montefiore was elected president, and he re- 
mained in that office until his death, being supported 
by Sampson Samuel as secretary (appointed 1838), 
and later by Lewis Emanuel (d. 1898), who was suc- 
ceeded by his son Charles, the present (1904) sec- 
retary. The committee took an active part in the 
Damascus Affair as well as in the early struggle for 
Reform; as president, Sir Moses, throughout his in- 
cumbency of the office, vetoed every attempt at op- 
position on the part of the representatives from the 
West Londoz Synagogue. 

Beginning in 1838, attempts were made to get the 
provincial congregations to appoint representatives 
on the board, with varying but on the whole in- 
creasing success, the arrangement generally being 
for the provincial congregation to select as its rep- 
resentative a London resident —if possible, one of 
the congregation who had settled in London. The 
board had much to do with the foundation of the 
Morocco Fund as well as of the Rumanian Commit- 
tee, but since the formation of the Anglo-Jewish 
Association in 1871 it has worked conjointly with 
that body wherever any communication with the 
Foreign Office or with a foreign government is con- 
cerned. It helped also to found the Russo-Jewish 
Committee in 1882. The elections are held trien- 
nially, the latest occurring in May, 1904, when sixty- 
five deputies were selected, thirty-one from eighteen 
metropolitan synagogues, thirty-two from provincial 
synagogues, and two from colonial congregations. 
The expenses are borne pro rata by the various syna- 
gogues and congregations. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, 
ch. xili., xiv.; Jewish Year Book, 5664, pp. 58-60. 
J 


LONDON, JACOB BEN JUDAH HAZZAN : 
English scholar; born in Londen at the beginning of 
the eighteenth century. When quite young he 
went to Amsterdam, where he lived for a long time. 
Later he traveled through Italy, and in the course 
of his journey had the misfortune to be taken for a 


179 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


London 
Lonzano 





spy, on account of the numerous papers—the con 

tents of which were unintelligible to the police—he 

had with him. 
London was the author of an ethical work entitled 

“ Hista‘arut Melek ha-Negeb ‘im Melek ha-Zafon” 

(Amsterdam, 1737); the work is explained by two ac- 

companying commentaries, “Sinai” and “ Bozez,” 

the former being a general interpretation of the text, 
the latter containing definitions of the difficult 
words. London was also the editor of the “Shib‘ah 

‘Enayim” (Leghorn, 1745), containing editions of 

various works by Nahmanides, Aboab Isaac de Leon, 

and Abraham Bolat. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Revue Orientale, ii. 334; Steinschneider, 
Cat. Bodl. col. 1280: Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. 
Aus. p. 302. 

J. I. Br. 
LONDON, SOLOMON 3B. MOSES RA- 

PHAEL: Russian author and publisher; lived at 

Novogrudok, Lithuania, in the first half of the 

eighteenth century. He was the pupil of Samuel 

Schotten, rabbiat Frankfort-on-the-Main. He edited 

the following works: “ Zoker ha-Berit,” on the rite 

of circumcision (Amsterdam, 1710?); the “Zeri ha- 

Yagon ” of Shem-Tob ibn Falaquera (Hanau, 1716); 

“Matteh Mosheh,” by Moses b. Abraham Mat, rabbi 

of Przemysl (Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1720); “ Min- 

hah Hadashah,” on the Pirke Abot, containing ex- 
tracts from Rashi, Maimonides, and the “Pirke 

Mosheh ” and “Leb Abot” of Michael Moraftschek 

(#6. 1722); “Tikkun Shelomoh,” the order of Sab- 

bath prayers according to Isaac Luria (Venice, 1733; 

Amsterdam, 1775; Dyhernfurth, 1806); “ Orhot Za- 

dikim,” with a Judeeo-German translation (Am- 

sterdam, 1785); the “Agur” of Jacob Landau (Of- 
fenbach, 1788); “ Kehillat Shelomoh,” a collection of 
rites, prayers, and “dinim,” with a small Hebrew 
and Judso-German vocabulary under the title “ Hin- 
nuk Katan” (Amsterdam, 1744; Frankfort-on-the- 

Oder, 1799; Hanover, 1880); the “Sefer ha-Gan,” 

moral exhortations of Judah Hasid, and the “ Had- 

rakah ” of Johanan Luria (Fiirth, 1747). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Preface (by London) to Matteh Mosheh, 
Frankfort -on - the - Main, 1720; Approbation, ij. by Samuel 
Schotten; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 255; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. 
Books Brit. Mus. pp. 364, 498, 566, 698. 

WN. De Le 


H, R. 
LONG BRANCH. See New JERSEY. 


LONGO, SAADIA BEN ABRAHAM: Turk- 
ish Hebrew poet; lived at Constantinople about 
the middle of the sixteenth century. A manuscript 
in the Bodleian Library (Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. 
Hebr. MSS.” No. 1986) contains a collection of 
Longo’s poems on various subjects; letters written 
by him to contemporary scholars and by them to 
him; a poetical correspondence between Longo and 
David Onkeneira; and.a paper entitled “Nahal 
Kedumim,” in prose interspersed with verse in 
which occur 1,000 words beginning with &, an ar- 
rangement similar to that which was followed in the 
“Elef Alfin” of Ibn Latimi. 


Some of Longo’s dirges were published under the 


title “Shibre Luhot” (Salonica, 1594). To them is 
prefixed a chronicle of Jewish writers and their 
works, entitled “Seder Zemannim.” Longo wrote, 
besides, poems on many works of his contempora- 


ries; these poems are printed at the beginning of 
the works to which they refer. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 255; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bod, col. 2227, 


G. M. SEL. 

LONZANO, ABRAHAM BEN RAPHAEL 
DE: Austrian grammarian; lived at the beginning 
of the cighteenth century. He was baptized at Id- 
stein and took the name of Wilhelm Heinrich 
Neumann. His Hebrew grammar, “ Kinyan Abra- 
ham,” was published in Zolkiev in 1723 (De le Roi, 
“Die Evangelische Christenheit und die Juden,” i. 
93; Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” col. 699). 

T. M. Se. 


LONZANO, MENAHEM BEN JUDAH BEN 
MENAHEM DE: Palestinian Masoretic and mid- 
rashic scholar, lexicographer, and poet; died after 
1608 in Jerusalem. His nativity is unknown, but it 
has been supposed that he was born in Italy. Ac- 
cording to Jellinek, who identified Lonzano Goxtnd 
or roxy) with Longano, a seaport of Messenia, 
his home was Greece; it may, however, have been 
Longono, a port of Tnscany near Leghorn. In early 
childhood Lonzano lost both father and mother, and 
throughout his entire life he was haunted by pov- 
erty, care, and sickness (“Shete Yadot,” p. 81a). 

In his youth he went to Jerusalem and married 

there, but in consequence of the 


Poverty treachery of one of his friends, Geda- 
and liah Cordovero, he was compelled to 
Travels. leave the city; he went to Constanti- 


nople, where he enjoyed the hospital- 
ity of a certain Solomon (“Tobah Tokahat,” pp. 
140, 148). 

There also he met Samuel di Modena, whom he 
callg “teacher,” and under whom he studied for 
some time (Conforte, “Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 44a). 
From Constantinople he returned to Jerusalem: he 
was compelled to travel continually to earn his 
bread. In old age, again driven by poverty, he re- 
turned to Italy, having spent altogether about forty 
years of his lifein Jerusalem. Though paralyzed 
in both feet and with the sight of one eye entirely 
lost, he preached twice in an Italian synagogue and 
gave the community cause to marvel at his unusnal 
knowledge of midrashic literature. A fund was 
raised by the congregation to support him and to 
enable him to return to Jerusalem, and a petition 
was sent to a wealthy man asking him for a gener- 
ous contribution. This letter (Mortara, No. 12) has 
been published by David Kaufmann (“J. Q. R.” 
viii. 525 e¢ seg.). Lonzano died in the outskirts of 
Jerusalem and was buried there (comp. “Shibhe 
Yerushalayim,” p. 8a; “Hibbat Yerushalayim,” p. 
42b; Luncz, “Jerusalem,” i. 115). 

Lonzano had three children; a son, Adonikam, 
died at an early age. He was the father-in-law of 
the historian David Conforte (“Kore ha-Dorot,” 
Z.c.); Lonzano of Florence (1716), author of a re- 
sponsum mentioned in “Shemesh Zedakah ” (i., No. 
15, p. 27a), may be one of his descendants (Lands- 
huth, “‘Ammude ha-‘Abodah,” p. 184). 

Lonzano’s first work, composed and printed 
in his youth, probably in Constantinople about 
1572, contains “Derek Hayyim,” a moral poem of 


Lonzano 
Lopez 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


180 





$15 verses; “Pizmonim u-Bakkashot,” hymns and 
prayers; and “‘Abodat Mikdash,” a poetical descrip- 
‘ion of the daily sacrifice in the Temple (comp. 
Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” col. 1728). 

He wrote commentaries to most of his poems; this 
was, indeed, often necessary on account of the ob- 
scurity of his verses, especially where they are caba- 
listic in content and employ the cabalistic terminol- 
ogy. He generally indicates the meters of the piy- 
yutim, many of which were set to Arabic melodies 
because these, the author thought, were better 
adapted, on account of their melancholy, to arouse 
feelings of devotion and humility (“Shete Yadot,” 
p. 65b); or, as he says farther on in the same work 
(p. 142a), because they sound more solemn than any 
others. He is well aware of the fact that high 
authorities objected to the use of foreign melodies 
for religious hymus, but he does not share their 
view, although he objects most strongly to the 
practise of imitating the sound of foreign words by 
means of Hebrew assonants. He condemns, for in- 
stance, “Shem Nora,” imitating the title of the 
Italian song “Seniora”; and he felt compelled to 
declare solemnly before God and Israel that he used 
foreign terms only to praise the Lord and not for 
profane or frivolous purposes (2b. p. 122a). 

From the point of view of literary history the 
passage in “Shete Yadot” (p. 137b) in which he 
names those payyetanim he preferred is valuable. 
He considers a good religious poem one that would 
cheer and gladden him while it would also make 
him weep; that would break the haughtiness of his 
heart and inspire him with love for God (comp. 
Sachs, “ Die Religidse Poesie der Juden in Spanien,” 
p. 257). Although his own poems display little 
taste or beauty, the cabalists were fond of quoting 
them, and some of his piyyutim became part of the 
Sephardic Mahzor (comp. Mahzor Sefarad for “Sha- 
losh Regalim,” ed. Vienna, 1836, pp. 21-22: Reu- 
bens, “ Catalogue Heshek Shelomoh,” p. 88, No. 578, 
Amsterdam, 1857; Landshuth, “‘Ammude ha-‘Abo- 
dah,” p. 181). 

Lonzano called his chief work “Shete Yadot” 
(=“Two Hands”; Venice, 1618), taking the title 
from Ex. xxvi. 17; and, keeping to the same figure, 
he divided these two “hands” into five “fingers” 
(“ezba‘ot”) each. The five fingers of the first part, 
called “Yad ‘Ani” (“Hand of the Poor”; comp. 
Ezek. xvi. 49), are severally entitled “Or Torah,” 
“Ma‘arik,” “‘Abodat Mikdash,” “Derek Hayyim,” 
and “Tobah Tokahat.” 

(1) “Or Torah,” Masoretic studies, and emenda- 
tions of the Masoretic text of the Pentateuch. For 

this he used old Pentateuchal manu- 

Masorabh. scripts, from which he took much val- 

uable material not found in other 
sources. He possessed some very valuable unprinted 
midrashim, among them some which even the author 
of the ‘Aruk and of the Yalkut had never seen. To 
aid him in collecting his splendid library his friends 
wrote to the communities of Jerusalem, Aleppo, and 
Damascus, and he obtained books from those cities. 
An illustration of Lonzano’s scientifie spirit is found 
in the passage in which he says: “JI have made this 
correction on the strength of ten or more manu- 
scripts, not one of which could be copied [now] for 


100 ducats, and some of which are more than five 
or six hundred years old, namely: the ‘ Massoret 
Seyag la-Torah’ of Meir ben Todros ha-Levi Abu- 
latia (a manuscript of the Masorah), the ‘ Kiryat 
Sefer’ of Meiri, the ‘‘Et Sofer’ of David Kimhi, 
the ‘Shemen Sason,’ and various others. Accord- 
ingly, if any one is in doubt as to the reading of any 
passage in the Bible, with God’s help I will resolve 
his perplexity, especially if Tam at home.” Lon- 
zano could not endure the thought that this scientific 
material was lying idle or that it might perish with 
him. He therefore determined to publish the book, 
even at an expense of a hundred dueats for printing, 
although he was weil aware that he was acting cru- 
elly toward his needy family in Jerusalem, to which 
he could send no money. The “Or Torah” was 
afterward published separately (Amsterdam, 1659; 
Hamburg, 1738; Berlin, 1745; Zolkiev, 1747; see 
Benjacob, “Ozar ha-Sefarim,” p. 28). 

(2) “ Ma‘arik,” explanations in alphabetical order 
of foreign wordsin the Talmuds, the Midrashim, and 
the Zohar. His knowledge of Arabic and Greek, 

gained during his toilsome journeys, 
Lexi- proved of great service in his philo- 
cography. sophical investigations. In the intro- 
duction to this part he speaks, not 
without humor, of his new method of treating these 
loan-words and of the way he came to adopt it. 
Thus Lonzano actually reintroduced into lexicogra- 
phy the rational, scientific spirit of the old, classic 
Hebreo-Arabic philologists, despite the opposition 
of his contemporaries and against the authority of 
old, recognized teachers, including even the author 
of the ‘Aruk. The summary of the “ Ma‘arik” by 
Philippe d’Aquin, the author of the lexicon “ Ma- 
‘arik ha-Ma‘areket” (Paris, 1629), like the whole 
of the work “Shete Yadot,” is as valuable as it is 
rare. It has been published in modern times by A. 
Jellinek (Leipsic, 1853), and is printed in the Lem- 
berg edition of the ‘Aruk of Nathan ben Jehiel of 
Rome under the title “Arba‘ah Sefarim Niftahim ” 
(1857). 

(3) The “‘Abodat Mikdash ” and (4) “ Derek Hay- 
yim” are reprints, with additions, from his first 
work, mentioned above; the “‘Abodat Mikdash” 
was published also by Judah Perez in his collection 
“Sha‘are Rahamim” (Venice, 1710), by Jacob Em- 
den (Leghorn, 1767), by Azriel of Wilna (Firth, 
1726), and at Venice at the end of the sixteenth cen- 
tury (see First, “ Bibl. Jud.” ii. 256; Zedner, “Cat. 
Hebr. Books Brit. Mus.” p. 528). 

(5) “Tobah Tokahat,” didactic poems, written at 
the house of Solomon, his patron in Constantinople. 
These are largely borrowed from a collection of short 
moral proverbs, entitled “Sefer Toze’ot Hayyim,” 
by a certain Moses ben Nathanael ibn Solomon. 

The second part of the “Shete Yadot,” called 
“Yad ha-Melek,” and also divided into five “fin- 
gers,” is a collection of old midrashic works, some 
of which appeared here for the first time; others 
afforded more complete and correct texts than any 
previously known. Lonzano himself, on account 
of lack of money, could print only: (1) “ Haggadat 
Bereshit”; of the remaining four “fingers” of the 
“Yad ha-Melek,” (2) “Midrash Agur” was pub- 
lished, according to Benjacob (“ Ozar ha-Sefarim,” 


181 


». 299), in 1626, at Safed or Kefar ‘Ain Zeitun; but 
Steinschneider (“ Cat. Bodl.” col. 1778) denies that it 
ever appeared in print. The other three “fingers” 
exist only in manuscript: (8) “Tanna debe Eli- 

yahu”; (4) “ Abot de-Rabbi Natan,” “ Masseket De- 
ok Erez,” “ Otivvot de R. Akiba”; (5) “Sefer ha- 
Tashluniin,” containing the remaining portions of 
Genesis Rabbah, and supplements to Midrash Yelam- 
medenu, Sifra, Sifre, and Tanhuma. 

Louzano wrote also: “‘Adi Zahab,” glosses to the 
“Lebush ” of Mordecai Jaffe (see Azulai, “Shem ha- 
Gedolim,” ii. 106); “Imre Emet,” notes on Hayyim 
Vidal’s Cabala; “‘Omer Man,” commentary on Idra 
Zuta, a part of the Zohar, published with a refu- 
tation by Naphtali ben David (Amsterdam, 1729); 
and lexicographical observations on the Yerushalmi 
(published by 8S. Buber in “ Ha-Asif,” ii, 320 et seq.). 

In spite of physical infirmities, Lonzano was an 
eager combatant, and not only defended his own 

conclusions with energy, but also ag- 
Character- gressively attacked both his prede- 
ization. cessors and his contemporaries. At 
the same time he always felt conscious 
that their worth was as far above his as the “ heaven 
is above the earth” (“Shete Yadot,” p. 83), He as- 
sails the author of the midrashic commentary “ Mat- 
tenat Kehunnah,” attacks Israel ben Moses Najjara 
on account of blasphemous illustrations and expres- 
sions in his “ ‘Olat Hodesh,” disputes with Abraham 
Monson concerning Vidal’s Cabala, with Solomon 
Norzi concerning the Masorah, and with others. It 
can easily be understood that in his single-minded 
devotion to the truth, “to which all owe the highest 
regard” (“Shete Yadot,” p. 81b), Lonzano made 
many personal enemies. In only one respect does 
he seem to have been in harmony with the spirit of 
the time, and that was in his love for the Cabala 
and his hostility toward philosophy. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. L. Frumkin, Toledot Hakme Yerushala- 
yim, pp. 108 et seq.; D. Kaufmann, Notes on the Life of 
Menahem di Lonsano, am J. Q. R. viii. 525; Landshuth, 
‘Ammude ha--Ahedah, 78 et seq.; Jellinek, Ma ‘arik. 
Preface : Delitzsch, Zur Ceicn: der J lidischen Poesie, p. 56; 
Zunz, S. P. p. 337. 

8. 8. M. Sc. 


LOOKING-GLASS. See Mirror. 


LOPEZ: A family of Sephardic Jews several of 
whom were distinguished for scholarly attainments. 

Eliahu Lopez: Dutch hakam of the seventeenth 
century. He received his rabbinical education, to- 
gether with Isaac Nieto and others, in the Yeshiba 
de los Pintos at Rotterdam, and then at Amsterdam, 
in which city he was for some years hakam. At the 
dedication of the large synagogue he delivered an 
oration, Which was printed together with the other 
orations delivered on that occasion. While still a 
young man Lopez went as hakam to Barbados. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibl, Exp.-Port.-Jud. p. 64; idem, 

in Publ. Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. tii. 19. 

Isaac Lopez: Hakam at Amsterdam. He issued 
a new and revised edition of Aboab’s “ Nomologia ” 
(Ainsterdam, 1727). 

Isaac Henriquez Lopez: Haham in London at 
the beginning of the eighteenth century. At the 
inauguration of the society known as ‘ “Sahare Ora 
Vaawi Yethomim ” he delivered a discourse which 
was printed under the title “Oracion . . . Que se 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lonzano 
Lopez 


Hizieron en la Celebridad de Ja Fundacion de la 
Santa y Pia Hermandad de Sahare Ora Vaawi 
Yethomim ” (London, 1703). 

G. M, K. 


LOPEZ, SIR MANASSEH MASSEH: 
English politician; born in Jamaica Jan. 22, 1755; 
died at Maristow House, Devonshire, 1881; de- 
scended from ancient Sephardic stock. Both he 
and his father, Mordecai Rodriguez Lopez, became 
converts to Christianity in 1802. In the same year 
Manasseh Lopez was returned to Parliament as 
member for New Romney, and was created a baro- 
net Oct. 5, 1805, with remainder to his nephew 
Ralph Franco. At the next election Lopez secured 
a seat for Barnstaple, for which borough he was 
again returned in 1818. On March 18, 1819, he was 
found guilty of having bribed the electors of the 
borough of Grampound to secure his election, and 
on conviction was sentenced to two years’ imprison- 
ment with a fine of £1,000 ($5,000). On Nov. 18 he 
was again prosecuted for a similar offense, and on 
conviction was sentenced to another fine and term 
of imprisonment, Notwithstanding this, Lopez 
was once mere returned to Parliament, in 1828, as 
member for the borough of Westbury. He was re- 
elected in 1826, but resigned to make room for Sir 
Robert Peel, who had been rejected at Oxford Uni- 
versity. 

Subsequently Lopez filled the office of recorder of 
Westbury, in addition to being a magistrate for two 
counties. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Picciotto, Sketches of Angio-Jewish History, 
pp. 304, 305; Dict. Nat. Biog.; Gentleman’s Magazine, 1881. 


J: G. L. 


LOPEZ, RODRIGO: Court physician to 
Queen Elizabeth; born in Portugal about 1525; ex- 
ecuted June 7, 1594, for having attempted to poison 
the queen. He settled in London in 1559, and in 
1571 was residing in the parish of St. Peter le Poer. 
Previous to this he had become a member of tlie Col- 
lege of Physicians, and was selected in the last- 
mentioned year to read the anatomy lecture at the 
coNege—an honor which he declined. Before 1584 
he had become body-physician to the Earl of Leices- 
ter; and he was accused of assisting that nobleman 
in removing some of his enemies by poison. Two 
years later he became chief physician to Queen 
Elizabeth, who in 1589 granted him the monopoly of 
importing aniseed and sumac into England. 

At court Lopez became acquainted with the Earl 
of Essex, and was thus brought into relations with 

Don Antonio, the pretender to the 
Relations crown of Portugal, and with Antonio 
with Don Perez, the discharged secretary of 

Antonio. Philip [. He assisted them in indu- 

cing the queen to permit the attempted 
invasion of Portugal in 1589, and suffered some 
loss of influence through its failure. An indiscreet 
revelation of some of Essex’s ailments set that no- 
bleman against him; and about 1590 Lopez began 
intriguing against Antonio with the court of Spain, 
at. first with the connivance of Walsingham, who 
hoped through Manuel de Andrada, one of Lo- 
pez’s adherents, to obtain useful information of 
Spanish projects. Andrada brought back a dia- 


Lopez 
Lord’s Prayer, The 


mond and ruby ring worth £100 as an earnest of 
the reward Lopez would get if he removed Don An- 
tonio. Lopez offered the ring to the queen, who 
refused it, presumptive evidence, according to Ma- 
jor Hume, that she knew it came from Philip II. 
Later on, the ring was used as evidence of Lopez’s 
designs against the queen. 

In Oct., 1598, one Esteban de Gama was seized in 
Lopez’s house on a charge of conspiring against 
Don Antonio; and shortly afterward a person named 
Gomez d’Avila was likewise seized on landing at 
Dover. He proved to have mysterious correspond- 
ence relating to “the price of pearls” and to musk 
and amber, and to be in some relation with Lopez. 
A third conspirator, Ticino, was induced to come 





over from Brussels with an invalid safe-conduct. 
By confronting the prisoners some evidence was 
elicited leading to the conclusion that the “price 
of pearls” referred to a plot against the queen, 
He was seized 


in which Lopez was implicated. 
and examined 
by the Earl of 
Essex, who 
failed, however, 














THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


182 


view,” 1894, pp. 440-472) denies his innocence on 
the ground that he kept the negotiations secret. 
Major Hume (“Treason and Plot,” pp. 115-152, 
New York, 1901) considers his guilt unproved, as 
he had been permitted to make similar false sugges- 
tions with the connivance of Walsingham in 1590, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: 8. Lee, in Gentleman's Magazine, Feb., 1880; 
idem, in Tr. New Shakespeare BOC 1887- 


92, pt. ii. pp. 
158-162; idem, in Dict. Nat. Biog. s.v.; H. Graetz, Shylock 


in der Sage,tm Drama, und in der Cah. Krotoschin, 
880; Forneron, Philippe IT. vol. ii., Paris, 1890; Hume, 
Treason and Plot, p. 116, note. J 


LOPEZ-LAGUNA. Sce LAGUNA. 


LOPEZ ROSA: Portuguese Marano family of 
Lisbon, which owned a printing establishment there 
in 1647. 

Duarte Lopez Rosa: Physician; born at Beja. 
Duarte was condemned by the Inquisition at Lisbon 
(Oct. 10, 1723) as anadherent of Judaism. 

Moses Duarte Lopez Rosa: Physician and 
poet of the seventeenth century; born at Beja, 
stayed fora time 
at Rome, and 
then settled in 
Amsterdam, 























to find any defi- 


where in 1680 


























nite cause for 
suspicion.  La- 
ter, confessions 
.of the minor 
conspirators led 
to Lopez being 
put on the rack, 
where he con- 











he openly pro- 





fessed Judaism, 
taking the name 
of Moses. He 
was a member 
of the Akademia 
de los Floridos 
at Amsterdam. 





fessed to having 
entertained sug- 
gestions as to 




















Especially at- 
tached to the 
Portuguese 








poisoning the royal couple, he 
queen for the addressed _son- 
sum of 60,000 = —s SS oes nets and a longer 
ducats, but, - ,0em to the 
as he alleged, Lp conporindang PEE ayson the Queene : oyal bride 
merely with the Lopez Conspiring to Poison Queen Elizabeth. elect, a princess 
design of cozen- (From Carleton’s ‘‘ Thankful Remembrances,”’ 1694.) of Neubu rg, and 

to the  brides- 


ing the King 

of Spain and of getting as much money out of 

him as possible. This excuse was not accepted ; 
and, after lingering some time in the 

His Tower, he, with D’Avila and Ticino, 

Execution. was hanged, drawn, and quartered as 
a traitor, declaring with his last breath 

amid the derision of the spectators that he loved the 

queen as well as he loved Jesus Christ. 

His trial created a great sensation at the time. 
References are made to it in Marlowe’s “ Faustus,” 
Dekker'’s “Whore of Babylon,” and Middleton’s 
“Game at Chess”: while it has been suggested by 
Sidney Lee that he was the original Shylock in “The 
Merchant of Venice,” a version of which appears to 
have been put on the stage about two months after 
Lopez’s execution. The fact that Shakespeare was 
on the side of the Earl of Essex, and that Antonto is 
adopted as the name of the hero, lends some plausi- 
bility to this suggestion. See SHy Lock. 

Historians are divided as to the exact amount of 
criminality involved in Lopez’s connection with 
Spanish plots. Dimock (“English Historical Re- 


man, D. Manuel Telles da Silva; and some years 
later he wrote a pean on the birth of an infante. 
The published works of Lopez Rosa include: 
“ Alientos de la Verdad en los Clarines de la Fama,” 
etc., Amsterdam, 1688; “Soneto Dedicado a la 
. . Princeza de Neuburgo D. Maria Sofia, 
Agora Rainha de Portugal, em Sua Felice Unido 
com el Rey D. Pedro IT.” n.d., n.p.; “Soneto ao 
exc. Senhor Principe Senescal de Ligue,” n.d., n.p.; 
“Panegyrico Sobre la Restauracion de Inglaterra en 
la Coronacion de las Magestades de Guillelmo HI. y 
Ser* Maria por Reyes de Ja Gran Bretafia,” 7b. 1690; 
“Elogios ao Felice Nacimiento do Infante de Portu- 
gal, Filho de D. Pedro IJ. e de D. Maria Sofia,” 7d. 
1691. The following remained unprinted: “ Luzesde 
la Idea y Academicos Discursos Que Se Proposieron 
en la Flustre Academia de Amsterdam en el Afio de 
1683, Intit. Los Floridos de la Almendra, con Otros 
Flores del Ingenio”; and “ Novellas Espanholes.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Barbosa Machado, Bibliotheca. Lusitana, i. 
733; Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 95; idem, Gesch. 
der Juden in Portugal, p. 319. 


183 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Lois Piva: The 





Ruy (Ezekiel) Lopez Rosa: Astrologer; born 
in Portugal; lived at Amsterdam in the seventeenth 
century. He gave an exposition of the “seven 
weeks” of Daniel ix. 25. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Barrios, Relacion de los Poetas, p. 54; Kay- 
serling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 95; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bod. col. 3044. 

Simon Lopez Rosa (cailed also Abraham 
Farrar): Physician, and director of the oldest 
Spanish-Portuguese congregation (Bet Ya‘akob) in 
Amsterdam; died Dec. 14, 1618 (his wife died nine 
days later). He was not an orthodox Jew. He 
spoke slightingly of the Haggadah and the Cabala, 
and converted many members of the community to 
his liberal views. A precursor of Uriel Acosta, 
Lopez Rosa opposed the rulings of the Rabbis, thus 
occasioning a quarrel in the congregation, which led 
to the founding in 1618 of a new congregation (Bet 
Yisrael). R. Joel Sirkes of Brest-Litovsk, to whom 
the rabbis of Amsterdam carried the case, advised 
them to excommunicate Lopez Rosa. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibl. Hsp.-Port.-Jud. p. 443 


idem, in R. E. J. xiii. 275 et seq. 
G. M. K. 


LORD’S PRAYER, THE: Name given by the 
Christian world to the prayer which Jesus taught 
his disciples (Matt. vi. 9-18; Luke xi. 1-4). Accord- 
ing to Luke the teaching of the prayer was suggested 
by one of Jesus’ disciples who, on seeing him holding 
communion with God in prayer, asked him to teach 
them also to pray, as John the Baptist had similarly 
taught his disciples a certain form of prayer. Obvi- 
ously, then, the latter was of a similar character, 
From the Talmudic parallels (Tosef., Ber. iii. 7; Ber. 
16b-17a, 29b; Yer. Ber. iv. 7d) it may be learned 
that it was customary for prominent masters to re- 
cite brief prayers of their own in addition to the 


regular prayers; and there is indeed a certain simi- 


larity noticeable between these prayers and that of 
Jesus. 

As the following extracts from the Revised Ver- 
sion show, the prayer in Luke is much shorter than 
that in Matthew, from which it differs, too, in ex- 
pression. Possibly both were in circulation among 
the early Christians; the one in Matthew, however, 
is of a later origin, as is shown below: 


MATTHEW. LUKE. 
Our Father which art in Father, Hallowed be thy 
heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 
name. 


Thy Kingdom come. Thy Thy kingdom come. 
will be done, as in heaven so 


on earth. 


Give us this day our daily 
{Greek : apportioned or need- 
ful] bread. 

And forgive us our debts, as 
we also have forgiven our 
debtors. 


And bring us not into temp- 
tation, but deliver us from the 
evil one. [Addition in many 
manuscripts: For thine is the 
kingdom, and the power, and 
the glory, for ever. Amen.] 


Give us day by day our daily 
{apportioned] bread. 


And forgive us our sins; 
for we ourselves also forgive 
every one that is indebted to 
us. 

And bring us not into temp- 
tation. 


The prayer is a beautiful combination or selection 


of formulas of prayer in circulation among the Ha- 


sidwan circles; and there is nothing in it expressive 
of the Christian belief that the Messiah had arrived 
in the person of Jesus. On the contrary, the first 
and principal part is a prayer for the coming of the 
kingdom of God, exactly as is the Kappisa, with 
which it must be compared in order to be thoroughly 
understood. 

The invocation “ Our Father” = “ Abinu” or ABBA 
(hence in Luke simply “Father”) is one common 
in the Jewish liturgy (see SHEMONEH ‘ESREH, the 
fourth, fifth, and sixth benedictions, and comp. es- 

pecially in the New-Year’s ritual the 


Original prayer “Our Father, our King! Dis- 
Form and close the glory of Thy Kingdom 
Meaning. unto us speedily”). More frequent 


in Hasidean circles was the invocation 
“Our Father who art in heaven” (Ber. v. 1; Yoma 
viii. 9; Sotahix. 15; Abot v. 20; Tosef., Demai, ii. 9: 
and elsewhere: “ Yehi razon mi-lifne abinu she-ba- 
shamayim,” and often in the liturgy). A comparison 
with the Kaddish (“May His great name be hal- 
lowed in the world which He created, according to 
His will, and may He establish His Kingdom... 
speedily and at a near time”; see Baer, “‘Abodat 
Yisrael,” p.129, note), with the Sabbath “ Kedush- 
shah” (“Mayest Thou be magnified and hallowed in 
the midst of Jerusalem . . . so that our eyes may 
behold Thy Kingdom”), and with the “ ‘Al ha-Kol” 
(Massek. Soferim xiv. 12, and prayer-book: “ Magni- 
fied and hallowed . . . be the name of the supreme 
King of Kings in the worlds which He created, this 
world and the world to come, in accordance with 
His will . . . and may we see Him eye to eye when 
He returneth to His habitation”) shows that the 
three sentences, “Hallowed be Thy name,” “Thy 
Kingdom come,” and “Thy will be done on earth as 
in heaven,” originally expressed one idea only—the 
petition that the Messianic kingdom might appear 
speedily, yet always subject to God’s will. The 
hallowing of God’s name in the world forms part of 
the ushering in of His kingdom (Ezek. xxxviii. 23), 
while the words “Thy will be done” refer to the 
time of the coming, signifying that none but God 
Himself knows the time of His “divine pleasure” 
(“razon”; Isa. Ixi. 2; Ps. lxix. 14; Luke ii. 14), 
The problem for the followers of Jesus was to 
find an adequate form for this very petition, since 
they could not, like the disciples of John and the 
rest of the Essenes, pray “May Thy Kingdom come 
speedily ” in view of the fact that for them the Mes- 
siah had appeared in the person of Jesus. The form re- 
ported to have been recommended by Jesus is rather 
vague and indefinite: “Thy Kingdom come”; and 
the New Testament exegetes explain it as referring 
to the second coming of the Messiah, the time of the 
perfection of the kingdom of God (comp. Luke 
xxii. 18). In the course of time the interpretation 
of the sentence “ Thy will be done” was broadened in 
the sense of the submitting of everything to God’s 
will, in the manner of the prayer of R. Eliezer (1st 
cent.): “Do Thy will in heaven above and give 
rest of spirit to those that fear Thee on earth, and 
do what is good in Thine eyes. Blessed be Thou 
who hearest prayer!” (Tosef., Ber. iii. 7). 
The rest of the prayer, also, stands in close relation 
to the Messianic expectation. Exactly as R. Elie- 


Lord’s Prayer, The 
Lot 


zer (Mek.: “Eleazar of Modin”) said: “He who 
created the day created also its provision; where- 
fore he who, while having sufficient 

Relation to food for the day, says: ‘ What shall I 
Messianic cat to-morrow?’ belongs to the men 
Expecta- of little faith such as were the Israel- 
tion. ites at the giving of the manna” 
(Mek., Beshallah, Wayassa’‘, ii. ; Sotah 

48b), so Jesus said: “Take no thought for your 
life, what ye shall eat or... drink... .. O ye 
of little faith. . . . Seek ye first the Kingdom of 
God. . . . and all these things shall be added to 
you” (Matt.vi. 25-34; Luke xii. 22-31; comp. also 
Simeon b. Yohai, Mek. ?.c.; Ber. 35b; Kid. iv. 14). 
Faith being thus the prerequisite of those that wait 
for the Messianic time, it behooves them to pray, 
in the words of Solomon (Prov. xxx. 8, Hebr.; 
comp. Bezah 16a), “Give us our apportioned bread ” 
(“lehem hukki ”), that is, the bread we need daily. 

Repentance being another prerequisite of redemp- 
tion (Pirke R. El. xliii.; Targ. Yer. and Midr. Le- 
kah Tob to Deut. xxx. 2; Philo, “De Execrationi- 
bus,” S$ 8-9), a prayer for forgiveness of sin is also 
required in this connection. But on this point spe- 
cial stress was laid by the Jewish sages of old. 
“Forgive thy neighbor the hurt that he hath done 
unto thee, so shall thy sins also be forgiven when 
thou prayest,” says Ben Sira (Ecclus. [Sirach] 
xxviii. 2). “To whom is sin pardoned? To him 
who forgiveth injury” (Derek Erez Zuta vilti. 3; 
R. H. 17a; see also JEw. Encye. iv. 590, s.2. DipDas- 
caLiA). Accordingly Jesus said: “ Whensoever ye 
stand praying, forgive, if ye have aught against any 
one; that your Father also which is in heaven may 
forgive you your trespasses” (Mark xi. 25, R. V.). 
It was this precept which prompted the formula 
“And forgive us our sins [“hobot” = “debts”; the 
equivalent of “‘awonot” = “sins ”] as we also for- 
give those that have sinned [“ hayyabim ” = “ those 
that are indebted ”] against us.” 

Directly connected with this is the prayer “ And 
lead us not into temptation.” This also is found in 
the Jewish morning prayer (Ber. 60b; comp. Rab: 
“Never should a man bring himself into temptation 
as David did, saying, ‘Examine me, O Lord, and 
prove me’ [Ps. xxvi. 2], and stumbled” [Sanh. 
107a}). And as sin is the work of Satan (James i. 
15), there comes the final prayer, “But deliver us 
from the evil one [Satan].” This, with variations, is 
the theme of many Hasideean prayers (Ber. 10b-17a, 
60b), “the evil one” being softened into “ yezer 
ha-ra‘” = “evil desire,” and “evil companionship ” 
or “evil accident”; so likewise “the evil one” in 
the Lord’s Prayer was later on referred to things 
evil (see commentaries on the passage). 

The doxology added in Matthew, following a 
number of manuscripts, is a portion of I Chron. 
xxix. 11, and was the liturgical chant with which 
the Lord’s Prayer was coucluded in the Church; it 
oceurs in the Jewish ritual also, the whole verse 
being chanted at the opening of the Ark of the Law. 

On closer analysis it becomes apparent that the 
closing verses, Matt. vi. 14-15, refer solely to the 
prayer for forgiveness. Consequently the original 
passage was identical with Mark xi. 25; and the 
Cord’s Prayer in its entirety is a later insertion in 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


184 


Matthew. Possibly the whole was taken over from 
the “ Didache” (viii. 2), which in its original Jewish 
form may have contained the prayer exactly as 
“the disciples of John” were wont to recite It. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. H. Chase, The Lord’s Prayer inthe Early 
Church, in Texts and Studies, 3d ed.. Cambridge, 1891; 
Charles Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, 1897, pp. 124- 
130 ; A. Harnack, Die Urspriingliche Gestalt des Vaterun- 


ser, in Sitzungsberichte der Koniglichen Academie der 
Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1904. K 
A. 


LORD’S SUPPER (called also The Last 
Supper): Name taken from I Cor. xi. 20, and given 
by the Christian world to the rite known as the 
eucharist, the partaking of the cup of wine and 
the bread offered in memory of Jesus’ death and 
brought into connection with the story of his 
last meal, which he is said to have taken with his 
disciples on the eve of his crucifixion. Accord- 
ing to the synoptic Gospels (Matt. xxvi. 26-29; 
Mark xiv. 23-25; Luke xxii. 15-18, 19), Jesus was 
partaking of the Passover meal with his disciples on 
the fourteenth of Nisan, before his capture by the 
officers of the high priest. The Gospel of Jobn, 
however, knows nothing of the institution and 


. assigns the crucifixion to the fourteenth day of Ni- 


san, the day when the Passover lamb is sacrificed. 
This discrepancy shows that the identification 


of the “crucified Christ ” with the “lamb of God 


which taketh away the sin of the world” (John i. 
29 [adapted from Isa. liii. 7]; I Peter i. 19; Acts 
vili, 82; Rev. v. 6; and elsewhere) gradually led to 
an identification of Jesus with the Passover lamb 
also (see I Cor. v. 7%). 

Subsequently the mystic love-meals of the Mithra- 
worshipers, who also broke bread and drank the 
soma-wine in memory of Mithra’s last supper (see 
T. Cumont, “ Die Mysterien des Mithra,” pp. 99-101, 
118-119, Leipsic, 1903), caused the love-feasts of the 
early Christians to be celebrated as actual remem- 
brances of the last supper eaten by Jesus; and so 
a special passage was inserted (I Cor. xi. 23~28, in- 
terrupting the context, and contradictory to 7. x. 4) 
in which the apostle rather oddly declares that 
he had received from Jesus by inspiration the 
statement that he had instituted the eucharist on the 
night of his betrayal, giving the formulas for the 
bread and the cup which, with some variations, ap- 
pears in each of the three synoptic Gospels. Incom- 
patible with the whole story, however, is the fact 
that the Christian DipacHE (ix. 1-4; comp. JEw. 
Encyc. iv. 587) gives the eucharist formulas for the 
cup and the wine used in Christian circles without 
any reference to the crucifixion or to the last sup- 
per. This makes it probable that the institution 
had developed out of the Essene communion-meals 
and was only at a later time referred to Jesus, 

The original idea of the Essene communion-feasts, 
borrowed from Parseeism, remained attached to it: 
the hope for the banquets (of leviathan) in paradise; 
wherefore Jesus is reported as having especially re- 
ferred to wine in the Kingdom of God (Matt. xxvi. 
29; Mark xiv. 25; Luke xxii. 18, 30). 

The whole story of the Passover celebration by 
Jesus on the eve of his crucifixion thus arose in cir- 
cles where real familiarity with Jewish law and life 
no longerexisted. Ithas, however, been argued that 


185 


the ritual of the mass or communion service is derived 
from that of the Passover eve service (see Bickell, 
“Messe und Pascha ”). K. 


LORIA. Sec LUBIA. 


LORIA, ACHILLE: Italian political econo- 
mist; born at Mantua March 2, 1857; educated at 
the lyceum of his native city and the universities of 
Bologna, Pavia, Rome, Berlin, and London. He be- 
came professor of political economy in the Univer- 
sity of Sienna in 1881; and he has held a similar ap- 
pointment in the University of Padua since 1891. 

Loria is the author of: “La Rendita Fondiaria e 
le Sue Elisione Naturale,” Milan, 1880; “Le Basi 
Economiche della Costituzione Sociale,” Turin, 
1886 (translated into French 1898, German 1895, and 
English 1899); “ Analisi della Proprieta Capitalista, ” 
2 vols., 2b, 1889 (received the royal prize); “ L’Opera 
Postuma di Carlo Marx,” Rome, 1895; “ Problemi 
Sociali Contemporanei,” Milan, 1896 (translated into 
French 1897); “La Costituzione Economica Odi- 
erna,” Turin, 1899. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conrad, Handworterb. der Staatswissen- 
schaften. 

S. F. T. H. 

LORIA, GINO: Italian mathematician; born 
at Mantua May 19, 1862; educated at the Mantua 
lyceum and at the University of Turin, becoming 
doctor of mathematics in 1884. The same year he 
was appointed demonstrator in mathematics in the 
University of Turin; in 1886, teacher at the military 
academy, Turin; and in 1887, assistant professor in 
the University of Genoa, where since 1891 he has 
held the chair of descriptive geometry. 

Loria’s publications treat of pure mathematics and 
its history, and have appeared in Italian and foreign 
magazines. He is also the author of “Il Passato ed 
il Presente delle Principali Teorie Geometriche,” 2d 
ed. 1896 (translated into German, Polish, and Eng- 


lish). 

s. F. T. HH. 

LORKI, IBN VIVES. See [sn Vives AL- 
LORQUI. 

LORM, HIERONYMUS. See LANDESMANN, 
HEINRICH. 


LORRAINE. See METz. 


LOS ANGELES: Commercial and manufactur- 
ing city in the state of California; situated on the 
left bank of the river of the same name, and about 
14 miles from the Pacific Ocean. Jews first settled 
in Los Angeles in 1849; and they increased in num- 
ber so rapidly that within afew years they organ- 
ized a congregation and erected a house of worship. 
They also obtained from the city the grant of a tract 
of land for a cemetery, and established a charitable 
organization to afford decent burial for.the poor, 

At present (1904) the Jews number about 3,000 in 
a total population of about 120,000. There are a 
number of Jewish educational and charitable institu- 
tions, of which may be mentioned: Ladies’ Hebrew 
Benevolent Society, Los Angeles Lodge I. O. B. B. 
and two other B’nai B’rith lodges, Kaspare Cohn 
Hospital Association, and Ladies’ Aid Society. The 
congregation has had five rabbis: A. W. Edelman, 
E. Schreiber, A. Blum, M. G. Solomon, and S. Hecht, 
the present incumbent. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lord’s Prayer, The 
Lot 


The Jewish contingent of the population has taken 
an active part in promoting the business interests of 
the city, and a number of Jews are prominent as 
bankers, manufacturers, real-estate dealers, whole- 
sale-grocery merchants, etc. There are also several 
Jewish physicians, lawyers, architects, and mechan- 
ics. See JEw. Encyc. iii. 511, 8.7. CALIFORNIA. 

A. 

LOST PROPERTY. See Frxper or Prop- 
ERTY, 

LOT (15).—Biblical Data: Son of Haran, 
Abraham’s brother, and, consequently, nephew of 
Abraham; emigrated with his grandfather, Terah, 
from Ur of the Chaldees to Haran (Gen. xi. 31). 
Lot joined Abraham in the land of Canaan, and in 
the time of famine went with him to Egypt (7. xii. 
4, xiii. 1). Owing to Lot’s riches in flocks and 
tents a quarrel arose between his herdsmen and 
those of Abraham, the result of which was the sep- 
aration of uncle and nephew. Lot chose the fertile 
plain of the Jordan, and extended his tents to Sodom 
(26, xiii. 5-12). After the defeat of the King of Sod- 
om and his allies in the valley of Siddim; Lot, who 
had been dwelling among them, was taken prisoner, 
with all his family and property, by Chedorlaomer ; 
but he was rescued by Abraham (74, xiv. 12-16). 

In Gen. xix. Lot is represented as the counterpart 
of Abraham in regard to hospitality: like Abraham, 
he rose to meet the angels, whom he took for men, 
bowing to them; and, like Abraham, too, he 
“pressed ” them to enter his house and “made them 
a feast” (2b. xix. 1-3). When his dwelling was sur- 
rounded by the profligate people of Sodom, Lot 
placed his duty as a host above that as a father and 
offered them his two unmarried daughters. The 
angels then announced to him that their mission was 
to destroy the guilty cities, and urged him to leave 
the place. Lot tried, but unsuccessfully, to persuade 
his sons-in-Jaw to leave also. He himself hesitated 
to flee, and the angels took him, his wife, and his two 
daughters by the hand, “the Lord being merciful 
unto him,” and led him out of the city. They then 
enjoined him to flee to the mountain without look- 
ing behind him; but the mountain being so far off 
Lot requested them to spare the small city of Zoar 
in order that he might find refuge there; and his 
request was granted. During the flight to Zoar, 
Lot’s wife, who looked behind her, was turned into 
a pillar of salt (2b. xix. 4-22, 26). 

Lot, fearing that Zoar, also, might be destroyed 
eventually, went up to the mountain and dwelt in a 
cave, where, by an incestuous intercourse with his 
two daughters, he became the ancestor of the two 
nations Moab and Ammon (7). xix. 30-88). Lot is 
twice mentioned in the expression “ children of Lot,” 


applied to Ammon and Moab (Deut. ii. 19; Ps. 
Ixxxiil. 8). 
E.G. H. M. SEL. 





In Rabbinical Literature: Lot is gener- 
ally represented by the Rabbis in an unfavorable 
light. When the quarrel arose between his shep- 
herds and those of Abraham (Gen. xiii. 7), there was 
a quarrel between Abraham and Lot also. The lat- 
ter sent his flocks to graze in fields that did not be- 
long to him; and when Abraham, induced by the 
complaints of the wronged owners, remonstrated, 


Lot 
Lots 





Lot showed himself rebellious (Targ. of pseudo- 
Jonathan and Yer. to Gen. xiii. 7; Pesik. R. 3 [ed. 
Friedmann, pp. 9b-10a]; Gen. R. xli. 6-7). Lot, 
while separating himself from Abraham, separated 
himself from God also, saying, “I have no desire 
either in Abraham or in his God” (Gen. R. xii. 
9-10). It was only after the wicked (“rasha‘ ”) Lot 
had left Abraham that God spoke again to the latter 
(Pesik. R. .c.; comp. Gen. xiii. 14). Lot was given 
over to lust; therefore he chose Sodom as his resi- 
dence (Pesik. Rt. 7.c.; Gen. R. xli. 9), and his daugh- 
ters’ act of incest was due to his neglect. The 
account of it was therefore read every Saturday in 
the synagogues as a warning to the public (Nazir 
238b; Gen. R. li. 12). 

The above-mentioned incident of the flocks shows 
that Lot was not too conscientious; he was besides 
very greedy of wealth; and at Sodom he practised 
usury (Gen. R. li, 8). His hesitation to leave the 
city (comp. Gen. 
xix. 16) was due 
to his regret for 
his great wealth 
which he was 
obliged to aban- 
don (Gen. R. 1. 
17). The Rabbis 
cited the drunk- 
enness of Lot as 
an example of 
the degree of in- 
toxication which 
renders a man ir- 
responsible (‘ Er. 
65a). All the 
special favors 
which Lot re 
ceived from God 
were granted 
through the 
merit of Abra- : oruageue — a 
ham; otherwise p dak ices anerinraraatnsatositenmntonitsai 
he would have 
perished with 
the people of 
Sodom (Gen. R. xli. 4; Midr. ha-Gadol to Gen. xiil. 
11). His being spared at the time of the destruction 
of Sodom is recorded also as a reward for not hav- 
ing betrayed Abraham when the latter told Pharaoh 
that Sarah was his sister (2d. li. 8). 

The Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer, however, shows a much 
milder attitude toward Lot, interpreting the word 
“zgaddik” of Gen. xviii. 23 as referring to him 
(Pirke R. El. xxv.). Besides passing over in silence 
Lot’s shameful deeds, it records the hospitality 
which, in imitation of Abraham, he practised at 
Sodom: even after the people of Sodom had pro- 
claimed that any hospitable person would be 
burned, he continued to practise it under cover of 
night. This trait is mentioned alsoin Gen. R. (1. 8); 
but it is there narrated in a manner which renders 
Lot’s merits insignificant. It is further said (7. 1. 
9; Lev. R. xxiii.) that Lot pleaded the whole 
night in favor of the people of Sodom. The Alpha- 
bet of Ben Sira (ed. Bagdad, pp. 2b, 17b, 19b), 
apparently borrowing from the Koran (suras vil. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPED1a 





Lot's Wife Turned into a Pillar of Sait. 
(From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the fourteenth century.) 


186 


78-82, xxii, 43), calls Lot “a perfectly righteous 
man” (“zaddik gamur”) and prophet (comp. II 
Peter ii. 7, 8; Epstein, “Mi-Kadmoniyyot ha-Yehu- 
dim,” 121). 

Genesis Rabbah (1. 14) concludes that Lot had at 
the time of the destruction of Sodom four daugh- 
ters, two married and two betrothed, and that the 
latter escaped with their father. But he had previ- 
ously had a daughter named Pelotet, who was mar- 
ried to one of the inhabitants of Sodom. She 
secretly practised hospitality, but being one day 
discovered by the people of Sodom, was sentenced 
to be burned (Pirke R. El. é.c.; “Sefer ha-Yashar,” 
“Lek Leka,” ed. Leghorn, p. 28a). Lot’s wife, 


called “ ‘rit ” or “ ‘Idit,” desirous to see whether her 
other two daughters followed her, looked behind 
her; but she then saw the back of the Shekiuah 
aud was accordingly punished for her imprudence 
(Pirke R. El. @.e.). 


She was turned into a pillar of 
salt because she 
had_ previously 
sinned by not 
giving salt to 
strangers (Targ. 
pseudo-Jona- 
than and Yer. to 
Gen. xix. 26; 
comp. Gen. R. 
li. 7). According 
toa legend, oxen 
used to consume 
every day the 
pillar of salt by 
licking it down 
to the toes, but 
it was restored 
by the morning 


(Pirke RR. El. 
d.c.; Sefer  ha- 
Yashar, “ Wa- 


yera,” p. 28a, b). 
Lot’s wife, be- 
ing turned intd 
a pillar of salt, 
was not con- 
sidered as a dead body, contact with which ren- 
dered one unclean (Niddah 70b). The transfor- 
mation was one of those miraculous occurrences 
at sight of which one must recite a benediction 
(Ber. 54a). 

Ss. 8. M. SEL. 
——Critical View : Lot is regarded by the critics as 
an eponym representing the supposed common an- 
cestor of the two tribes or nations of Moab and Am- 
mon. His relation to Abraham is in this view 
intended to mark the ethnographic connection of 
these two tribes with the Israelites; and his choice 
of an eastern location may be taken as indicating a 
voluntary relinquishment of all claims of the Moab- 
ites and Ammonites to Canaan. His relations with 
his daughters probably represent some rough pleas- 
antry common among the Israclitish folk and indica- 
ting their scorn for their nearest neighbors. Fenton, 
however (“Early Hebrew Life”), suggests that ina 
matriarchal state such unions would not be indeco- 
rous, Since in social stages where descent was traced 





187 


only through the mother the father would be no re- 
lation to the children. 

The story about Lot’s wife, also, bears marks of 
popular origin, and is regarded by critics and travel- 
ers as a folk-legend intended to explain some pillar 
of crystallized rock-salt resembling the female hu- 
man form. Owing to its composition, such a pillar 
would soon dissolve. Onein the neighborhood of 
the Dead Sea was identified by Josephus (“ Ant.” i. 
11, § 4) as that of Lot’s wife; and another (or the 
same) had that name at the time of Clement of 
Rome (I Cor. xi. 2). 

As Lot is declared to have dwelt in a cave (Gen. 
xix. 30), Ewald (“History of Israel,” i. 318) and 
Dillmann (ad doe.) identify him with Lotan, the 
leader of one of the tribes of Horites or cave-dwell- 
ers (Gen. xxxvi. 22, 29). The Dead Sea is still 
called “ Bahr Lut.” 

E.G. H. J. 

LOTS: Means of determining chances. Primi- 
tive peoples, and occasionally those on a higher 
plane of culture, resort to lots for the purposes of 
augury. ‘They spin a coconut or entangle strips of 
leather in order to obtain an omen. Thieves espe- 
cially are detected by the casting of lots, etc. (Tylor, 
“Primitive Culture,” German ed., i. 78-82). The 
pagans on a ship with Jonali under stress of a storm 
cast lots in order to find out who among them had 
incurred the Divine anger (Jonah i. 7). Haman re- 
sorted to the lot when he intended to destroy the 
Jews (Esth. iii. 7). The Greek heroes cast their 
lots into Agamemnon’s helmet in order to ascertain 
who should fight with Hector (“ Iliad,” vii. 171). In 
ancient Italy oracles with carved lots were used. 

The ancient Israelites ikewise resorted to the lot 
for the most varied purposes, Rhabdomancy was 
known as late as Hosea (Hos. iv. 12); and Ezekiel 
(Ezek. xxi, 26 e¢ seg.) mentions the arrow-oracle of 
the King of Babylon, which was still used a thou- 

sand years later among the pagan 

In Ancient Arabians (Wellhausen, “Reste Arabi- 
Israel.  schen Heidenthuins,” 2d ed., pp. 126 e¢ 
seq.; comp. Sprenger, “Leben und 

Lehre des Mohammed,” i. 259 et seg. ; Huber, 
“Ueber das Meiser-Spiel der Heidnischen Araber,” 
Leipsic, 1883). As the priestly lot-oracles are dis- 
cussed under Ernop, Urim anp TitummMim, and 
TERAPHIM, the present article deals merely with 
the lot in secular life. Joshua discovers the thief, 
and Saul the guilty one, by means of the lot (Josh. 
Vii. 16 et seg.; 1 Sam. xiv. 42; comp. I Sam. x. 20 
et seq.). Primitive peoples divide land and other 
common property by means of the lot. In Hebrew 
the word for “lot” (“ goral ”) has retained the mean- 
ing of “share”; it has also acquired the more gen- 
eral meaning of “fate” (isa. xvii. 14, lvii. 6; Jer. 
xlii. 25; Ps. xvi. 5: Dan. xii.). The land west 
of the Jordan is divided among the several tribes 
by lot (Num. xxvi. 55 et seq., xxxiii, 54, xxxiv. 
18, xxxvi. 2; Josh. xiii. 6, xiv. 2, xv. 1, xvii. 
1, xviii. 6-10, xix. 51, xxiii. 4; Ps. Ixxviii. 55, 
cv, 11; comp. Ezek, xlv. 1, xlvii. 22). Jewish tra- 
dition, finding offense in this kind of allotment, de- 
Clared that the land was really divided under the 
Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the lot being merely 
the visible means of confirming the division for the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lot 
Lots 


people (Sifre, Num. 132; B. B. 122a). Prov. xvi. 
33 and xviii. 18 indicate that Jots were cast in legal 
controversies. The wicked “part my garments 
among them, and cast lots upon my vesture” (Ps. 
xxii. 19; comp. Matt. xxvii. 35; John xxix. 24). 
Booty of war is divided by lot (Joel iv. 8; Nahum 
iii. 10; Ob. 11; see also Judges xx. 9; Nel. x. 35, 
xi. 1; [ Chron. xxiv. 5, xxv. 8, xxvi. 18 (see Herzog- 
Hauck, “ Real-Encyc.” 3d ed., xi. 648 ef seg.). 

According to the etymology of the word “ goral,” 
the lots were probably small stones, or sticks, as Hos. 
iv. 12 indicates. They were thrown, or possibly 
shaken (Prov. xvi. 33, “into the lap”), so that one 
fell out, whereby the case in question was decided. 
Tt can not be ascertained whether a tablet with wri- 
ting on it is meant in Lev. xvi. 8, as the Mishnah 
assumes (Yoma fil. 9, iv. 1). At the time of the 
Second Temple the lot was prominent in the Tem- 

ple cult, and customs were developed, 
In Talmud after Biblical example, whereby the 
and several offices were apportioned by 

Midrash. lot. The priests drew lots in all cases 

where differences might arise (Yoma 
dfa, 89a—41a, 62a-63b, 65b; Zeb. 118b; Men. 59b; 
Ker. 28a). In Tamid i. 2 the overseer of the Tem- 
ple calls for the lot; and Yoma 24b records a dis- 
cussion whether the priests shall draw lots in holy 
or insecular garments. Lots were cast four times in 
succession (Yoma iv. 1). The Prophets increased the 
four classes of priests that returned from the Dias- 
pora to twenty-four; they mixed up the names of 
the additional] ones and placed them in an urn (éA777) 
and then let each of the four original classes of priests 
draw five names (Tosef., Ta‘an. ii. 1, and parallel 
passages). The urn was originally made of cypress- 
wood; but the high priest Ben Gamala had one 
which was made of gold (Yoma iii. 9); hence draw- 
ing lots from it created a sensation (Yer. Yoma 41b, 
below). In the sanctuary the lots were taken out by 
hand (Yoma 39b, 40a). The lot was either a black 
or a white pebble (Yer. Yoma iv., beginning), or 
was made of olive-, nut-, or cypress-wood (Yoma 
37a). A third kind, consisting of pieces of paper 
with writing on them (z:trdxov), is frequently men- 
tioned. 

Many facts seem to indicate that choosing by lot 
was common in post-Biblical times. Moses chose 
the seventy elders (Num. xi. 26) by selecting six 
men from each of the twelve tribes, and then placing 
seventy-two pieces of paper (z:traxov), of Which two 
were blank, into an urn, one being drawn by each 
man. He proceeded similarly in determining the 
278 first-born who were to pay each five shekels ran- 
som, 22,278 tickets in all being drawn (Yer. Sanh. 
19¢c, below, and parallel passages), Eldad and Me- 
dad were, according to Targ. Yer. to Num. xi. 26, 
among the elders who drew lots. Jacob’s sons also 
drew lots to decide who should take Joseph’s coat to 
their father (Gen. R. Ixxxiv.). Achan attempted to 
bring the casting of lots into discredit when he said 


to Joshua: “If I order you and the high priest Elca- 


zar to draw lots, one of you will certainly be pro- 
nounced guilty” (Sanh. 48b). Nebuchadnezzar’s 
casting of lots (Ezek. xxi. 25 e¢ seg.) is mentioned ; 
but, according to the vernacular of the time, the 
Greek word «/jpog is used, which occurs also in 


Lots 
Love 


Acts i. 26 (Lam. R., Preface, No. 5; Midr. Teh. x. 
6; comp. 2b. x. 5 on casting of lots among the Ro- 
mans, and Krauss, “ Lehnworter,” li. 545b). 

In Palestine brothers divided their patrimony by 
lot as late as, and probably much later than, the 
second century (B. B. 106b). Apparently the lot 
was also occasionally used in ordaining teachers 
(Yer. Bik. 65d, |. 24). Under Grecian influence the 
drawing of lots degenerated into dice-playing. “No 
one is accepted as witness who plays with little 
stones [1W7¢0¢],” z.e., gambles professionally (Yer. 
Sanh. iii. 6 and parallel passages). The same regu- 
lation applies to the dice-player (cuBeurge and Kufeia), 
who is frequently referred to (see passages in 
Krauss, l.¢. ii. 501). 

The drawing of lots and its companion practise, 
the throwing of dice, were common in the Middle 

Ages; and they are even in vogue at 

In the Mid- the present time. Moses of Coucy (ec. 
dle Ages 1250) mentions xylomancy. Splinters 
and in of wood the rind of which had been 
Folk-Lore. removed on one side, were tussed up, 
and according as they fell on the 

peeled or the unpeeled side, augured favorably or 
- unfavorably (Giidemann, “Gesch.” i. 82). An Ital- 
ian teacher denounced the casting of lots (7b. ii. 
221). Dice-playing was especially in vogue among 
the Italian Jews of the Middle Ages, and was, as well 
as other games of hazard, frequently forbidden (20. 
ii. 210). In Germany there was a game of chance, 
called “Riick oder Schneid,” in which a knife was 
used (Berliner, p. 22). Many books on games of 
chance originated in the later Middle Ages (see bib- 


Isaac de Lousada = Judith (daughter of 
1. 1831) Baron @’ Aguilar) 


Moses Baruch Lousada = Bella Barrow 
(d. 1826) of Jamaica 


Isaac = Sarah 
(daughter of Duke de 
Losada y Lousada) 


John Baruch 
= Tryphena 
(1832; daughter 
of 8S. Barrow) 


George a 
Juliana 
Goldsmid 


; Herbert G. 


| 
Bella = 2 others Lonsena 
Major Wills 


Arthur 
6sons 5 daughters 


liography below). The present writer has in his 
possession a Bokhara manuscript containing a “ Lot- 
Book of Daniel.” It mentions also means (“segul- 
lot ”) for detecting a thief. The Jews of the present 
day, likewise, are not unacquainted with the various 
modes of casting lots found among all peoples and 
used for various and generally harmless purposes; 
but among these remnants of ancient superstition 
customs that are Jewish in origin are probably to be 
found only in Hasidic circles and in the Eust. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. W. Davies, Magic, Divination, and De- 
monology, pp. 74 et seq., London and Leipsic, 1898; Hastings, 
Diet. Bible, iii, 152 et seq.; Thomas Gataker, Von der Natur 
und dem Gebrauche der Loose, 1619; H. Guthe, Kurzes 
Bibelworterb. p. 397, Tiibingen and Leipsic, 1903: Ham- 


burger, R. B. T. i. 723; A. Lenmann, Aberglaube und Zau- 
berei, p. 40, Stuttgart, 1898; Lenormant, Magie und Wahr- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





188 


ee ——$___, 


sagekunst, ete., Jena, 1878; Herzog-Hauck, Real-Encye. 3d 
ed., xi. 643 et seq.; B. Stade, Gesch. Israels, 1. 471 et seq.; EB, 
Tylor, Primitive Culture, Index; Germ. ed., i. 78 et seg., Leip. 
sic, 1873; I. Wellhausen, Reste Arabischen Heidenthuime, 
2d ed., pp. 182 et seg.; Winer, B. R. ii. 31. On medieval and 
modern lot-books: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 90 et seq.: 
A. Berliner, .A4us dem Leben der Deutschen Juden im Mit- 
telaiter, Berlin, 1900; M. Grunwald, Mittheilungen der Ge- 
sellschaft fiir Jiidische Volkskunde, v. 12; M. Giidemann, 
Gesch. i., ii.; Steinschneider, Loosbiicher, in Hebr. Bibl. vi. 
120; idem, Jiidische Literatur, ch. xxii., end. 


A. L. B. 
LOTTERIES. See GAMBLING. 
LOUISVILLE. See KEentwtcky. 


LOUSADA (OF PEAK HOUSE): Name of a 
family that has held for many generations large pos- 
sessions in Jamaica. A member of the family was 
created Duke de Lousada and Marquis di San Mini- 
ato. It isthe only Jewish family that has held so 
exalted a title. Its members claim to be descendants 
of the original Spanish grandees of that name. Isaac 
de Lousada was confirmed, in 1848, in the titles that 
had been borne by his “ancestor” the Duke de Lou- 
sada, grand chamberlain to Charles II]., King of the 
Two Sicilies. This monarch, when crowned King 
of Spain, created the duke a grandee of the first 
class. Isaac de Lousada died in 1857, and was suc- 
ceeded by his eldest son, Emanuel, second duke (b. 
1809; d. 1884). Emanuel was succeeded by his 
nephew, Horace Francis, the third and _ present 
(1904) duke, son of Count Francis (d. 1870), the sec- 
ond son of the first duke. Count Francis married 
Marianne, daughter of Sir Charles Wolsely ; he was 
created Marquis di San Miniato by the Grand Duke 
of Tuscany in 1846. Following is a pedigree of the 
family : 


Moses 


Isaac de Lousada 
(Ist Duke de Lousada, 1848; 
a. 1857) 


| | 
Sarah = Francis Herman 
Isaac Lousada (Marquis di San (b. 1818; 
Miniato, 1846; d. 1881) 
d. 1870) == Francoise 
= Marianne Tard 
Wolsely 


Emanuel 
(1809-85 ; 
2a duke) 


Horace Francis 
(8d duke; 2d marquis; 
1837) 


b. 
I. G. D. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Debrett, Peerage, 1901, p. 928; Isaac da Costa, 
Israel en de Volken, p. 465, Utrecht, 1876; Burke, Landed 
Gentry, 1868, i. 900; Rietstap, Armorial General, i. 101, 
Gouda, 1884. 

J. H. Get. 


LOVE (n2nxN): The deep affection by which 
one person feels closely drawn to another and im- 
pelled to give up much, or do much, for him with- 
out regard of self.—Biblical Data: While the 
word Fane, like the Greek ayazy, denotes also sen- 
sual love (Hos. ii. 7, 9,12; Ezek. xxiii, 5, 9; Judges 
xvi. 4; II Sam. xiii. 15), it becomes, owing to the 
higher ethical spirit pervading Judaism, more and 
more expressive of the purer sentiment so exqui- 
sitely characterized in Cant. viii. 6-7: “ Love is strong 
as death. . . . Many waters can not quench love, 


189. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lots 
Leve 





neither can the floodsdrown it: if aman would give 
all the substance of his house for love, it would ut- 
terly be contemned.” Besides love of man for wom- 
an, “ahabah” denotes parental love (Gen. xxv. 28, 
xxXVii. 8), and it is transferred to that love of man 
for man which is better termed friendship, and which 
is exemplified in the love of David and Jonathan 
and characterized by the former in the words, “My 
brother Jonathan, very dear [A. V. “pleasant ”] 
hast thou been unto me; thy love to me was won- 
derful, passing the love of women” (If Sam. i. 26, 
Hebr.). Hence “lover” becomes identical with 
“friend” (Prov. xviii. 24; Ps. xxxviii. 12 [A. V. 
11}, Ixxxvilil. 19 [A. V.18]). Gradually the entire 
system of life is permeated by the principle of love, 
and the relation between God and man as well as 
between man and man is based upon it. 

It is the prophet Hosea who, chastened by his ex- 
perience in his own life, gives to love a deeper and 
purer meaning, while finding that God loves Israel 
notwithstanding its backslidings (Hos. xi. 1). It is 
a love of free will (#3. xiv. 5[A.V. 4]). Upon love 
Deuteronomy builds its entire system. God loved 
the fathers (Deut. x. 15), and because He transferred 
this love to their descendants, the entire people of 
Isracl, He chose them, though not on account of 
their own merit, to be His own peculiar (missionary) 
nation and shielded them against their foes (26. vil. 
6-8, xxiii. 6). He therefore demands their love in 
return (¢b. vi. 5; x.12; xi. 1, 18, 22; xili. 4; xix. 9; 
xxx. 6, 16, 20). He loves also the stranger, and 
demands love for the stranger in return (2d. x. 18- 
19). The love of God for Israel is declared by 
Jeremiah to be “an everlasting love” (Jer. xxxi. 3), 
and both the exilic seer and the last of the prophets 
accentuate this love of God (Isa. lxili. 9; Mal. i. 2). 

The love of God for mankind in general is not ex- 
pressed in Scripture by the term “love,” but by 
“mercy ” (Ps, exlv. 9); it is, however, extended to 
all who observe His commandments (Ex. xx. 6; 
Deut. vii. 9), who follow righteousness and speak 
“right” (Prov. xv. 9, xvi. 18; Ps. exlvi. 8), because 
He loves righteousness and justice (Isa. Ixi. 8; Ps. 
xi. 7, xcix. 4). Nor is the love of God for Israel 
favoritism. “ Whom the Lord loveth He chasten- 
eth” (A. V. “correcteth”; Prov. iii. 12), Love be- 
ing the essence of God’s holy nature, the law of hu- 
man life culminates in the commandment “Thou 
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Lev. xix. 18). 
This love includes the enemy (Ex. xxiii. 4-5). The 
words “Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy 
heart: thou shalt not bear sin against [A. V. “suffer 
sin upon hin”|] him... nor bear any grudge 
against the children of thy people” (Hebr.) show 
in what manner the enemy can be loved—one must 
remove the cause of hatred in order to be able to 
love his neighbor (Lev. xix. 17). This includes the 
Stranger (Lev. xix. 34); the criminal also is called 
“thy brother” (Deut. xxv. 8; see BROTHERLY 
Love). 

——In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera- 
ture: Jove as a divine principle was especially 
developed among the Hasidim, who made love of 
God and love of man the guiding principles of their 
lives (Philo, “Quod Omnis Probus Liber,” § 12; see 
EssenEs). To them God appeared as “the spirit of 


love for all men” (Wisdom i. 6). “Thou lovest all 
things that are. ... Never wouldst Thou have 
made anything if Thou hadst hated It... . Thou 
sparest all, for they are Thine, O Lord, Thou Lover 
of souls” (¢. xi. 24-26). Philo also (“De Opificiis 
Mundi,” i. 4; comp. Miller, "Buch von der Welt- 
schépfung,” 1841, p. 150) finds love, or goodness, to 
be the principle and motive power of the divine 
creation, So God says to Ezra, as he complains 
about the ills of the world, “Thou canst not love 
My creation more than 1 do” (IV Esdras viii. 45). 
Love for God and man is accordingly declared to be 
the principle of conduct in the Dipacne and in the 
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Simeon, 8, 4; 
Issachar, 5; Zebulun, 8; Dan, 5; Gad, 7; Benjamin, 
8). Love of all creatures is taught by Hillel (Abot i. 
12; Wisdom xii. 19; Philo, “De Humanitate,” &§ 12- 
14; comp. BROTHERLY LOVE and GOLDEN RULE). 

The Rabbis also declare that the world was cre- 
ated by the divine principle of iove (Gen. R. xii. 
15) and that the human world is founded on mercy 

(Ab. R. N. iv.). “Beloved is man by 
Justice the God, in whose likeness he is made; es- 
Funda-__ pecial love was shown him in being 
mental made aware of this godlikeness of 
Principle. his” (Ab. iii. 14). Still, a deeper con- 
ception of the Rabbis made justice the 
fundamental principle of life, and not mere love. 
“When God saw that the world could not stand on 
rigid justice, then only He tempered it with love” 
(Gen. R. 2.¢c.). Love pardons but fails to eradicate 
sin in individuals or society at large. Upon justice, 
truth, and peace the world is founded (Ab. i. 15; 
Deut. R. v. 1). Love is not strong and firm enough 
to form the foundation of life, whether in individ- 
uals, who must strive for character, or in society at 
large, which can not afford to tolerate wrong-doing 
(see HouIness; JUDGMENT, DiIvINE). Love pre- 
vails only where God is recognized as Father, and 
this tender relation works for pity and forgiveness 
(Ber. 7a). A depends then upon whether that state 
has been attained in which the will of God is done 
from mere love. 

Whether the heathen as well as Jews may attain 
this state of true God-childship is a question at is- 
sue between the Hellenistic and a few of the more 
liberal Palestinian rabbis on the one hand and the 
greater majority of the rabbis on the other. The 
former insist that Job and Enoch attained this state 
as wellas Abraham; the latter deny it, asserting that 
fear and not love of God was the motive power of 

the ancient heathen (comp. Testament 
The of Job, i. 24 [in Kohut Memorial 

Broader Volume, p. {71], Enoch, Ixxi. 14, and 

Hellenistic Slavonic Enoch, Ixiv. 5, with Sotah 

View. v. 5 and Gen. R. xxv.). Christianity 
was partiy influenced by the broader 

Hellenistic views in stating that “God is love” and 
that al] men are children of God (I John iii.1; iv. 7-8, 
11-20; v. 3). Still, the prevailing view in the New 
Testament is that of Paul, according to whom it is 


‘the Holy Spirit which, through baptism, works love 


and renders the believers “sons of God,” for whom 
there would otherwise be only salvation by right- 
eousness (Rom. viii. 14-81; comp. i. 17). In other 
words, only through belief in the especial God-son- 


Love 
Low 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


190 





ship of the crucified Christ does the Christian ob- 
tain the title of God’s son and the right to claim His 
fatherly love. This view is maintained also in John 
v. 20-24, x. 17, xv. 9, xvil. 26. 

This conception of a divine love bought by sacri- 
ficial blood was combatted by the rabbis; R. Akiba, 
for instance, declares: “Beloved are the Israelites 
inasmuch as they are called children of God”; 
especially did that love manifest itself in making 
known to them that they are children of God (Abot 
iii. 15, with reference to Deut. xiv. 1). The entire 
relation between Israel and God is found by R. 
Akiba to be typified in the Song of Songs, which 
to him is “the holiest of all books,” because it 
allegorizes the divine love (Yad. iii. 5; Cant. R., 
Introduction). Whether Israel may claim God’s love 
as His children when disregarding His command- 
ments is a matter of dispute between R. Meir (who 
affirms) and R. Judah (who denies; Sifre, Deut. 96). 

The love of God means the surrounding of life 
with His commandments (Men. 43b) and is condi- 

tioned by the love of the Torah (Rk. 
God’s Love H. 4a); God loves Israel in a higher 
for Israel. degree than He does the Gentiles (Sifre, 

Deut. 144; Yoma 54a) because through 
the Torah they stand closer to Him (Pesik. ii. 16-17) ; 
they love Him, giving their very hves for the ob- 
servance of His commandments (Mek., Yitro, 6, to 
Ex. xx. 6). Indeed, love of God is voluntary sur- 
render of life and all one has for God’s honor (Sifre, 
Deut. 32; Ber. 64a). It is unselfish service of God 
(Aboti. 3; ‘Ab Zarah 19a). There are chastisements 
of love for the righteous to test their piety (Ber. 5a; 
comp. Rom. v. 3). It is this unequaled love, bra- 
ving suffering and martyrdom, which cstablished 
the unique relation between God and Israel, so that 
“none of the nations can quench this love” (Cant. 
R. viii. 7). This unique love is echoed also in the 
liturgy (see AHABAH RABBAH). Tobeatrue “lover 
of God,” however, means “to receive offense, and 
resent not; to hear words of contumely, and answer 
not; to act merely from love, and rejoice even in 
trials as tests of pure love” (Shab. 88b; Sotah 81a; 
comp. Rom. vili. 28). 

Love as the highest aim of life is especially em- 
phasized in Tanna debe Eliyahu R. xxvi.: “Love 
should be perfectly unselfish, and regulate the con- 
duct of man toward man.” In the same sense it is 
accentuated as the highest incentive of action by 
Bahya ibn Pakuda, in “Hobot ha-Lebabot” (see 
JEW. Encyc. ii. 454). Maimonides, in his Yad ha- 
Hazakah, devotes the whole tenth chapter of Hil- 

kot Teshubah, with reference to Abot 

The High- i. 3, to love as the motive which gives 

est Aim ail human action its true ethical and 

of Life. religious value. Similarly, Nahman- 

ides in his commentary to Deut. vi. 

4, with reference to Sifre, 7.c., declares that love of 

God involves the study and observance of the Law 

without regard to gain or expectation of reward; so 

also Bahya ben Asher, in his “Kad ha-Kemah,” un- 
der “ Ahabah.” 

R. Eleazar of Worms, in his ethical work “Ro- 
keah,” begins with the chapter on love, referring to 
Sifre, Deut. 32, 41, 48; Ber. 54a; Yoma 86a; Ned. 
62a; Sotah 3la; Tanna debe Eliyahu xxvi.; Midr. 


Teh. to Ps. xiii. 2(“I love Thee; that is, ‘I love 
Thy creatures’ ”); and Midr. Tadshe xii., and stating 
that he who truly loves God subordinates all other 
desires and cares to the one great object of life—the 
fulfilment of God’s will in joy. Still more exten- 
sively does Elijah de Vidas, in his ethical work 
“Reshit Hokmah” (part 2), dwell on love as the 
highest aim and motive of life. He also quotes the 
Zohar (i. 11b; ii. 114, 116a; iii, 68a, 264b, 267a; and 
other passages), Where it is frequently stated that 
pure love is suppression of all care for self, and 
through such love true union of the soul with God 
is effected. This union is said by the cabalists to 
take place in the cclestial “palace of love” (Zohar 
i. 44b, ii. 97a). 

Still greater importance was attached to love 
when it was rendered a cosmic principle in the philo- 
sophical systems of Hasdai Crescas and, through him, 

of Spinoza. Instead of rendering the 
As Cosmic creative intellect the essence of the 
Principle. Deity, as did Maimonides and all the 
Aristotelians, Crescas, like Philo of 
old, makes love the essential quality of God. Love 
is divine bliss, and hence love of God is the source 
of eternal bliss for mortal man (“ Or Adonai,” i. 8, 
5; comp. Spinoza’s “ Amor Intellectualis,” v. 32-36; 
see Joél, “Don Chasdai Creskas’ Religionsphiloso- 
phische Lehren,” 1866, p. 87; ¢dem, “Spinoza’s The- 
ologisch-Politischer Tractat,” 1870, pp. ix.-xi.). 

But, more than Crescas, it was probably Don 
Judah Isaac Abravanel, known as LEo HEBR«Xvs, 
from whom Spinoza borrowed the idea of “intellec- 
tual love” as a cosmic principle, and who, following 
the Platonic and pantheistic tendency of the period 
of the Italian Renaissance, made (in his “ Dialoghi 
di Amore”) the “amore intellectivo” and “amore 
mentale” or “rationale” the essence of God and the 
central force and end of the world. “ Love links all 
things together in the cosmos, but while love in the 
natural world is sensual and selfish, divine love is 
unselfish and uplifting. God’s love created the 
world and brings about the perfection of all things, 
especially of man, who, when good, is God-loving 
as well as God-beloved, and whose love of God leads 
him to eternal bliss, which is identical with divine 
love.” This intellectual love is identical with the 
Biblical “to him [God] shalt thou cleave” (Deut. x. 
20, xi. 22, xiii. 5; Sifre, Deut. 49; Sotah 14a) and 
gives rise to the “imitatio Dei.” It is highest per- 
fection and supreme joy (B. Zimmels, “Leo He- 
breus,” 1886, especially pp. 51, 67, 74-79, 89- 
100). Leo Hebreeus’ view of love as the principle 
of the world appears to have exerted some influence 
also upon Schiller in his “ Philosophische Briefe ” 
(1838, x. 289; Zimmels, @.¢. pp. 8-11). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Griinbaum, Der Grundzug und Dessen Ent- 


wicklung der Liehe im Judenthume, in Geiger’s Wiss. 
Zeit. Jiid. Theol. ii. 285, iii. 59, 180; Schenkel’s Bibellericon. 


K. 
LOVE-FEAST. See AGAPE. 


LOVEMAN, ROBERT: American poet; born 
at Cleveland, Ohio, April 11, 1864; educated and now 
(1904) residing at Dalton, Ga.; M.A., University of 
Alabama. He has published the folowing volumes 
of verse, which have won for him recognition from 
contemporary critics: “Poems,” Tuscaloosa, Ala.. 


191 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Love 
Low 





1889; “Poems,” 7b. 1898; “Poems,” Philadelphia, 
Pa.. 1897; “A Book of Verses,” 7b. 1900; “The 
Gates of Silence,” New York, 19038. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Who's Who in America, 1908-5; Stedman, 
Ait American Anthology, New York, 1900; Adams, Dict. of 
Authors, \ 


LOVINSON, ERMANNO (formerly Her- 
mann): German historian; born in Berlin June 8, 
18683; educated at Berlin University (Ph.D. 1888), 
Since 1889 he has lived in Italy. and since 1895 has 
been assistant archivist of the royal state archives at 
Rome. 

Loévinson’s published works in German include: 
“Beitrige zur Verfassungsgeschichte der Westfiili- 
schen Reichsstiftsstidte,” Paderborn, 1889; “Die 
Mindensche Chronik des Busso Watensted, eine Fil- 
schung Paullinis,” 2d. 1890; and “Ist die Gesch. 
eine Wissenschaft?” Berlin, 1892 (translated from 
the Italian of P. Villari); in Italian: “Cristoforo 
Colombo Nella Letteratura Tedesca,” Rome, 18938; 
“Giuseppe Garibaldi ela Sua Legione Nello Stato 
Romano 1848-49,” 2b. 1902. S. 


LOVY, ISRAEL: French cantor and syna- 
cogal composer; born near Danzig Sept., 1773; died 
in Paris Jan. 7, 1882. He received a Talmudic and 
secular education at Glogau, where his father was 
hazzan. lLovy traveled extensively, visiting the 
greatest cantors of the time, and studying the works 
of the greatest masters, especially those of Haydn 
and Mozart. In 1799 he settled at Firth, where 
he became accomplished in violin, violoncello, and 
piano, and proficient in French and Italian. After 
having served for short terms congregations in 
Mayence, Strasburg, and London, he was called in 
1818 to Paris, where he officiated as cantor until his 
death. Lovy was gifted with a voice of unusual 
strength, compass, and sweetness, and the greatest 
masters of vocal music at Paris attended the Jewish 
services to hear him sing. He received attractive 
offers from the stage, but the Jewish Consistory of 
Paris elected him for life and thus induced him to 
remain as cantor. In March, 1822, his congregation 
dedicated a new temple and introduced an organ and 
boys’ chorus. Lovy wrote all the music for the 
organ and the new choir, and it was mainly the 
beauty of his compositions that silenced the opposi- 
tion of the Orthodox element of the community, 
which at first protested against the innovation. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Mendel and Reismann, Musikalisches Con- 
versations-Levikon, Berlin, 1878; Arch. Isr. 1850 (biography 
by his grandson Eugéne Manue)). 

s. I. War. 

LOW, A. MAURICE: Anglo-American wri- 
ter; born in London July 14, 1860. Educated at 
King’s College School in that city, and afterward 
in Austria, he devoted himself to journalism. Since 
1888 he uas been correspondent at Washington, 
D. C., for the “Boston Globe,” and since 1896 for 
the London “ Daily Chronicle,” being the first Wash- 
ington correspondent to be appointed by an English 
paper. 

Low’s journalistic positions have been many. 
Since 1896 he has edited the American department 
of the London “ National Review ”; he wrote “The 
United States and Its Dependencies” for the “ An- 
nual Register” (London, 1901); and is a contributor 


to the majority of the more influential magazines in 
England and America, including “ Collier’s Weekly,” 
“Tarper’s Weekly,” “The Forum,” “North Ameti- 
can Review,” “Scribner’s,” “McClure’s,” and “The 
Fortnightly Review.” He is the author of “The 
Supreme Surrender,” a novel (New York, 1901). 
A. 

LOW, ASHER BEN ARYEH LOB: Chief 
rabbi of Carlsruhe; born at Minsk in 1754; died at 
Carlsrulie July 23, 1837. He studied under his father, 
Aryeh Lob, rabbi of Metz; and when the latter had 
become blind he assisted him in conducting his 
yeshibah or rabbinical college. In 1788 Asher was 
elected rabbi of Niederwerrn, and in 1785 rabbi 
of Wallerstein. When in 1809 the Grand Duke of 
Baden organized the Jewish congregations of his 
country upon the Napoleonic model, Asher was 
elected member of the consistory and chief rabbi 
(“Oberrath” and “Landrabbiner”) of the grand 
duchy. Heaccepted these positions in 1810, and oc- 
cupied them until his death, declining a call to Paris 
and, later, one to Metz. Asher wasa strict Talmud- 
ist of the old school, and very orthodox in his views, 
though at the same time tolerant of those of others, 

In his last years his health was very precarious, 
and the work of the rabbinate was done by his as- 
sistant, Elias Willstitter. Shortly before his death 
he sent various manuscripts dealing with rabbinical 
subjects to Wilna; but only some responsa were 
published—in a work of his father, “She’elot u- 
Teshubot Sla’agat Aryeh ha-Hadashot,” Wilna, 
1873. One of his sons, who adopted the family 
name “ Ascher,” was rabbi of Biithl, and died there 
Feb. 20, 1888. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1887, pp. 252, 260. 
J. S. MAN. 


LOW, BENJAMIN WOLF: Polish-Hunga- 
rian rabbi; born in Wodzislaw, government of 
Kielce, Poland, 1775; died at Verbo, Hungary, 
March 6, 1851. His father, Eleazar Low, instructed 
him in Talmudic literature, and at an early age he 
became rabbi of a Polish congregation. In 1812, 
following his father to Austria, he became rabbi 
of Kolin, Bohemia. In 1826 he was called as rabbi 
to Gross-Tapolesany, Hungary, and in 1886 to 
Verbo, where he spent the remainder of his life. 
His only work is “Sha‘are Torah,” a treatise on the 
principles of Talmudic law which shows the author’s 
methodical mind and vast knowledge of Talmudic 
literature. Three parts of the work appeared in print 
(Vienna, 1821 and 1850; Satoralja-Ujhely, 1872), 
while the fourth part is stillin manuscript. Wolf 
Low was twice married; his first wife, from whom 
he obtained a divorce, was the daughter of Eph- 
raim Zalman Margolioth of Brody; the second was 
the daughter of Isaac Landau, rabbi of Auschwitz. 
Léw’s son Jeremiah, rabbi in Satoralja-Ujhely, 
was the recognized leader of the Orthodox party in 
Hungary and its spokesman in an audience which its 
deputation obtained with the emperor in order to 


protest against the establishment of a rabbinical sem- 


inary (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1864, p. 292). He was 
nevertheless opposed to the secession of the Orthodox 
from the whole body of Judaism and therefore re- 
fused to take part in a congress planned by the Or- 


Low 
Lowe 


thodox (i. 1870, p. 786). Upon his death in 1872 

he was succeeded by his son Eleazar, who was later 

called to the rabbinate of Unghvar, of which he is 
still (1904) the incumbent. Other grandsons of Wolf 

Léw are Abraham and Benjamin Singer, joint 

authors of “ Ha-Madrik,” a pedagogic anthology of 

the Talmud. Moses Lé6b Buiocit was Wolf Léw’s 
nephew and pupil. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Miinz, Rabbi Eleasar, Genannt Schemen 
Rokeach, pp. 90-100, Treves, 1895. D. 
LOW, LEOPOLD: Hungarian rabbi; born at 

Czernahora, Moravia, May 22, 1811; died at Szege- 

din Oct. 18, 1875. He received his preliminary edu- 

cation at the yeshibot of Trebitsch, Kolin, Leipnik, 
and Eisenstadt (1824-35), and then studied philol- 
ogy, pedagogics, and Christian theology at the Ly- 
ceum of Presburg and at the universities of Pesth 
and Vienna (1835-41). After having been a teacher 
at Prossnitz, he succeeded to the rabbinate of Gross- 

Kanizsa (Sept. 10, 1841). 

Low early in his career acquired a knowledge 
of Hungarian, and was the first to introduce it into 
the synagogue service, 
his first sermon in that 
language being printed 
in 1845. In 1844 he be- 
gan his Hterary activity 
in behalf of the emanci- 
pation of the Hungarian 
Jews, taking the lead 
in that struggle until 
i its object. was attained 
|’ (1867). The periodical 
I “Ben Chananja,” edited 
by him from 1858 to 
1867, was an especially 
influential factor in this 
. movement. 

In 1846 Liw had been called to Papa, where he 
encountered many difficulties. Afterthe revolution 
he was denounced by his enemies, and was arrested, 
but was pardoned by General Hay nau (Dec. 14, 1849) 
and liberated after two months’ imprisonment. In 
consequence of this persecution he accepted a call to 
Szegedin, where he was installed Dec. 10, 1850. He 
refused subsequent calls to Lemberg, Brinn, and 
Bucharest, as well as to the Hochschule fiir die 
Wissenschaft des Judenthums at Berlin. 

Léw brought his thorough knowledge ot his- 
tory, theology, and esthetics to bear upon the reform 
of the ritual in agreement with modern views. He 

was the foremost preacher of Hun- 

Influence gary, especially in the vernacular, 

on and was invited to participate in 

Hungarian nearly all the patriotic celebrations 
Reform. and synagogal dedications. His Hun- 

garian sermons (1870) formed the first 

Jewish collection of the kind issued in that lan- 

guage. Léw combined the careful, logical arrange- 

nent of the Christian sermon with a clever analysis 
of complicated haggadic sentences. His studies, 
beginning with the history of the Halakah, subse- 
quently included the entire Jewish archeology of 
post-Talmudic time. He endeavored to determine 
the development of Jewish life and law as it ap- 
pears in the halakic literature, and to disprove, 





\ ~~ 
qa See 


Leapoid Low. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


192 





in the interest of Judaism, the view that Judaism 
remained stationary in its manners and customs 
down to the beginning of the Reformation in Ger. 
many. His most important archeological studies and 
responsa were written for the purpose of proving the 
development of various institutions and of showing 
the influence, in many cases, of forcign customs. 

Liw was a leading authority both from a scien- 
tific point of view and in questions of practical the- 
ology. The absolute (1850-66) as well as the consti- 
tutional government (1867) of Austria and especially 
that of Hungary were guided by the replies he 
gave to their questions in matters referring to the 
organization of the Jewish ritua! and schools. Jew- 
ish education throughout Hungary owes much to 
him. Down to his death he was the leader of the 
progressive Hungarian Jews, especially after the 
general congress—which was convened against his 
advice and in which he did not take part—had re- 
sulted inaschism among the Jews of Hungary instead 
of the union that had been anticipated. 

Aside from his works on the Halakah, Léw left 
only one other larger work, “ Ha-Mafteah ” (1805), 
a history (in German) of exegesis among the Jews: 

this is still authoritative. After the 

His Works. emancipation, when he gave up the 

editorship of “Ben Chananja,” he de- 
voted himself to larger archeological monographs, of 
which the following were published: “ Die Graphi- 
schen Requisiten ” (1870-71) and “Die Lebensalter 
in der Jiidischen Literatur” (1875). Fragments 
of a third volume, “Der Synagogale Ritus,” were 
published posthumously (1884). His smaller works 

have appeared in five volumes (Szegedin, 1889-1900), 

the last of which contains a complete bibliography 

of his works. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Low and Kulinyi, A Szegedi Zsiddk, 1888, pp, 
172-251. 8. 
Of Ldw’s sons, Immanuel Léw, a rabbi and 

Orientalist (born at Szegedin, Hungary, Jan. 20, 

1854), was educated at his native town and at Berlin, 

where he studied at the Lehranstalt fiir die Wissen- 

schaft des Judenthums and at the university, gradu- 
ating as rabbi andas Ph.D. in 1878. The same year 

he became rabbi in Szegedin, where he is still (1904) 

officiating. 

Among his books may be mentioned: “ Ara- 
miische Pflanzennamen,” Vienna, 1881; “A Szege- 
di Zsid6k,” Szegedin, 1885; “A Szegedi Chevra,” 28. 
1887; “ Alkalmi Beszédek,” 7. 1891; “Az Ezredév 
Nyole Beszéd,” 2b. 1896; “Low Immanuel Beszé- 
dei,” 7b. 1900; “Imadsagok,” 3d ed. 7. 1903; “V6- 
résmarty Mihaly,” 2. 1900; “Szilagyi Dezs6,” 7. 
1901; “Tisza Kalman,” 7. 1902; “Kossuth Lajos,” 
2b, 1902; “Templomszentelé,” <b. 1908; “Deak Fe- 
renc,” ¢d. 1908. He has furthermore contributed 
articles on Syriac lexicography to various volumes 
of the “Z. D. M. G.,” and has edited the following 
works: “Schwab Léw, Emlékeztetés a Vallasban 
Nyert Oktatasra,” 5th ed. Szegedin, 1887; “Liw 
Lipé6t, Biblai Torténet,” 10th ed. Budapest, 1902; 
“Leopold Low: Gesammelte Schriften,” i.-v,, Szeg- 
edin, 1889-1900. 

s. F. T. H. 

Another son, Samuel Léw (born Sept. 11, 1846, at 
Papa; studied at Szegedin and Vienna [M.D. 1871}. 


193 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Low 
Lowe 





isa physician, In 1873 he went to Budapest, where 
three vears later he founded the “Pester Medizi- 
nisch-Chirurgische Presse.” In this periodical, of 
which he is (1904) the editor-in-chief, most of his 
scientific articles have appeared. 

A third son, Theodor Low (born Nov. 14, 1848, 
at Papa), is a lawyerin Budapest. The following 
ure his chief works: “Iromany Példék az uj Magyar 
Csédeljarashoz ” (Budapest, 1882), on the new Hun- 
varian bankruptcy proceedings, and “A Magyar 
Binteté Toérvénykonyv a Biintettekrél és Vétségek- 
rol” (@, 1884), on the Hungarian criminal and civil 
codes. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Szinnyei, Mayyar Irok Elete; Low and Ku- 

linyi, A Szeyedé Zsiddk, p. 218. 

fg. L. VY. 

A fourth son, Tobias Low, was born June 5, 
1844. at Gross-Kanizsa, Hungary, and died June 
7, 1880, at Budapest, where he had been acting 
attorney-general. In 1874 he founded the “ Mag- 
var Igazsigtigy,” a legal periodical in the inter- 
ests of Hungarian jurisprudence and legislation. 
Low took an active part in the preparation of the 
Hungarian penal code, for which he edited the ma- 
terial (1880). 

A fifth son. William Low, isa lawyer and edi- 
tor in New York city. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Szinnyei, Magyar Irék Elete. 


8. 


LOW, MORITZ: Astronomer; born at Mako, 
Hungary, in 1841; died in Steglitz, Berlin, May 235, 
1900; studied at the universities of Leipsic and Vi- 
enna, and received his Ph.D. degree from the Uni- 
versity of Budapest (1867). After graduating he 
became an assistant at the Leipsic observatory, and 
in 1883 was appointed section chief in the Prussian 
geodetic institute at Berlin, with the title of pro- 
fessor, 

Low's principal works are: “ Elemente der Plane- 
ten”: “Einfluss der Verbesserten Sternorter auf die 
Polhéhen der Gradmessung in Ostpreussen ”; “ Pol- 
héhe von Helgoland”; “Zur Theorie der Passage- 
Instrumente im Ersten Vertikal”; ‘“ Astronomisch- 
Geodiitische Ortsbestimmungen im Harz”; “ Pol- 
héhebestimmungen im Harzgebirge Ausgefiihrt 
1887-91.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. June 8, 1900 (Gemeinde- 

bote, p. 21; Univ. Isr. June 15, 1900, p. 408. 

8, N. D. 

LOW, SAMUEL (called also Samuel Kollin, 
or Kelin): Taimudist; son of Nate (y3 = Nathan) 
ha-Levi; born at Kolin, Bohemia, about 1720; died 
May 20, 1806, at Boskowitz, Moravia, where for 
nearly sixty years he had presided over a yeshibah. 
He wrote: “ Mahazit ha-Shekel,” an extensive sub- 
commentary on Abraham Abele Gombiner’s “Ma- 
gen Abraham” on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim 
(Vienna, 1807-8; 2d ed. 1817; several times re- 
printed); “ Hilkot Niddah” (Lemberg, 1858); and 
“Hilkot Melihah ” (¢. 1860). His son Wolf Bosko- 
witz delivered the sermon at his funeral (“ Ma’amar 
Esther,” Ofen, 1887). His descendant in the fifth 
generation, Dr. Max Anton Loéw, a convert to 
Roman Catholicism, was the attorney of the anti- 
Semite DeckERT (“Mittheilungen der Gesell. zur 
Abwehr des Antisemitismus,” 1896, pp. 45, 48; 1897, 
pp. 190, 246: “ Oest. Wochenschrift,” 1896, p. 65). 

VITI.—18 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Walden. Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, ti, 44, 
Warsaw, lss0: Benjacob. Uzar ha-Sefarim, p. 821; Furst, 
Bibl. Jud. sv. Kallin, Samuel; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books 
Brit. Mus. p. 417. 

D. S. Man. 

LOWE, AUGUST: Russian mathematician and 
author of mathematical works. Of his books the 
best known are: “Obscheponyatnaya Teoriya Per- 
spectivy,” 1858; “Obscheponyatnaya Praktiches- 
kaya Geometriya,” 2d ed. 1860; “Nizshaya Geo- 
desiya,” 2d ed. 1861; “ Prakticheskaya-Arifmetika 

Diya Dyevitz,” 1862; “Kurs Arifmetiki i Sobra- 

niye Arifmeticheskikh Zadach,” 2d ed. 1871; “Na- 

chalnyya Osnovaniya Geometrii,” 2d ed. 1871; and 

“Arifmetika Dlya Nachalnykh Narodnykh Uchi- 

lishch,” 1872. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Entziklopedicheski Slovar, xvii. 480. 


I. R. J. GL. 


LOWE BEN BEZALEEL. Sce Jupau Liw 
BEN BEZALEEL. 


LOWE, JOEL: German commentator; born in 
1760; dicd in Breslau Feb. 11, 1802. He signed his 
name in Hebrew writings as Joel SS9q (= “son 
of R. Judah Lob”). At the age of twenty he went 
to Berlin, where he received instruction from Isaac 
Satanow, who wasa followerof Moses Mendelssohn. 
In Berlin Lowe met Mendelssohn, his acquaintance 
with whom soon ripened into friendship. Mendels- 
sohin’s influence was doubtless instrumental in secur- 
ing for Léwe the position of tutor in the house of 
the influential David Fricdliinder. Lowe became a 
most intimate friend of another prominent Men- 
delssohnian, Isaac Abraham Enuchel, whose first 
work, a Hebrew biography of Mendelssohn, con- 
tains a dedicatory letter addressed to Lowe. At the 
close of his life Léwe was principal of the Wil- 
helms-Schule in Breslau. 

L6we was an excellent Hebraist, grammarian, and 
exegete, and, like most Mendelssohnians, was also a 
“Schongeist.” Conjointly with Aaron Wolfsohn he 
edited “ Ha-Meassef,” in which periodical he pub- 
lished a large number of poems and essays. He be- 
longed to the bi’urists who assisted Mendelssohn in 
his commentaries on the Bible. Hisown main work 
was a critical Hebrew commentary and an excel- 
lent introduction to the Psalms (1788), which latter 
forms a history of Biblical poetry; and he pub- 
lished, also, Mendelssohn’s German translation of 
the Psalms in Hebrew letters. In company with 
Aaron Wolfsohn, Léwe pubiished Mendelssohn’s 
German translation of the Song of Solomon with a 
Hebrew commentary. He was the first to translate 
the “Haggadah shel Pesah” into German (1785). 
Of his “‘ Ammude ha-Lashon,” on the elements of 
the Hebrew language, only the first part was pub- 
lished (1794). He wrote also on chronology, and 
was a contributor to Eichhorn’s “ Allgemeine RBibli- 
othek der Biblischen Literatur.” His plan to pub- 
lish a Hebrew grammar on a large scale did not 
materialize. 

s. E. Scur. 


LOWE, KONRAD: Austrian actor; born at 
Prossnitz, Moravia, Feb. 6, 1856. He took a law 
course at the University of Vienna, and then went 
on the stage (1878). After filling engagements in 
various Austrian and German cities he was called in 


Lowe 
Lowenthal 


1895 to the Hofburgtheater, Vienna, of which com- 
pany he has since been a member. He plays heroic 
parts. 

Léwe has also been active as a writer and drama- 
tist. He has published a volume of poetry enti- 
tled “Leben und Lieben” (Leipsic, 1890), and has 
adapted Grabbe’s “ Herzog Theodor von Gothland ” 
(Vienna, 1892). 8. 

LOWE, LUDWIG: German physician; born 
at Berlin March 11, 1844. After graduating from 
the gymnasium, he attended the universities of 
Jena, Wiirzburg, Strasburg, and Breslau, leaving 
the last institution with the degree of doctor of 
medicine in 1872. In the following year he became 
an assistant at the anatomical institute of the Uni- 
versity of Strasburg, which position he held till 
1875, when he became an assistant at the dermato- 
logical hospital and dispensary of the Charité at 
Berlin, resigning this position in 1876. In 1878 he 
was admitted to the medical faculty of the Univer- 
sity of Bern as lecturer on anatomy. He finally 
returned to Berlin and established himself as a spe- 
cialist in diseases of the ear, nose, and throat. 

Lowe has contributed several essays to medical 
journals, and is the author of: “ Beitriige zur Ana- 
tomie der Nase” (Berlin, 1878, 2d ed. 1883); “ Bei- 
trige zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Nervensys- 
tems ” (vol. i, Berlin, 1880; vol. fi., Leipsic, 1883); 
“Lehrbuch der Ohrenheilkunde,” 1884. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex, 1901. 

8. | aes ee eB 

LOWE, MOSES SAMUEL (Johann Mi- 
ehael Siegfried Liwe): German painter and en- 
graver; born at Kénigsberg, Prussia, June 24, 1756; 
died there May 10, 1881. Aided by the friendship 
and influence of the Friedlander family, he had 
achieved such a reputation by 1780 that the em- 
press Catherine I. of Russia commissioned him to 
paint her portrait. His pictures were among the 
most popular in the German exhibitions, and he 
was one of the foremost miniaturists and pastel- 
painters of his time. He was also a master of the 
game of chess. His “Bildnisse Jetzt Lebender Ber- 
liner Gelehrten mit Selbstbiographien” (Berlin, 
1806-7) was praised by Goethe (“ Werke,” xxviii. 
60 e¢ seq.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Aug. Hagen, Newe Preussische Provinziat- 
hiditter, ii. 317 et seqg.; Jolowiez, Gesch. der Juden in K6- 
nigsberg, p. 102. 

D. M. K. 


LOWENBERG, JULIUS: German geogra- 
pher; born at Strzelno, Prussia, 1800; died at Berlin 
Dec. 12, 1898. He was educated in Berlin, where he 
became acquainted with Alexander von Humboldt, 
who assisted him in various ways. He wrote: 
“Afrika” (1833); “ Historisch-Geographischer At- 
las” (1886-40); “Gesch. der Geographic” (1840); 
“Alexander von Humboldt” (1842); “Humboldt’s 
Reisen in Amerika und Asien” (1844); “Gesch. der 
Geographischen Entdeckungen ” (1882); “Die Ent- 
deckungs- und Forschungsreisen in den Beiden 
Polarzonen ” (1886). His last years he spent in the 
Jewish home for aged people in Berlin. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Allg. Zeit. des Jud. Dec. 21, 1893; Ktirschner, 
Literatur-Kalender, 1893. 


J. D. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


194 





LOWENFELD, LEOPOLD: German physi- 


cian; born in Munich Jan. 28, 1847: educated at 
the gymnasium and university in his native city 
(M.D. 1870). During the Franco-Prussian war he 
was assistant physician in a Bavarian field-hospital. 
After several years of practise in the United States, 
he settled permanently in his native city (1875), 
Léwenfeld has published: “Studien tiber Aeti- 
ologie und Pathogenese der Spontanen Hirnblutun- 
gen,” 1886; “Sexualleben und Nervenleiden,” 1891; 
“Pathologie und Therapie der Neurasthenie und 
Ifysterie,” 1893; “Lehrbuch der Gesammten Psy- 
chotherapie,” 1897; “Der Hypnotismus: Handbuch 
der Lehre von der Hypnose und der Suggestion,” 
1901; “ Die Psychischen Zwangserscheinungen, auf 
Klinischer Grundlage Dargestellt,” 1904; “Die 
Moderne Behandlung der Nervenschwiche,” 4th 
ed. 1904. S. 


LOWENGARD, MAX: German rabbi; born 
in Wiirttemberg; died at Basel May 25, 1876. He 
was a friend of Berthold Auerbach and a diligent 
student of Schelling’s philosophy. Though a fer- 
ventadvocate of Reform in lis youth, he became a 
zealous supporter of Orthodoxy in the latter part of 
his life, after having occupied rabbinates in Geben- 
hausen and other communities of Wiirttemberg. He 
was the author of “ Beitriige zur Kritik der Reform- 
bestrebungen in der Synagoge” (Stuttgart, 1841); 
“ Auch Einige Worte Ueber das Neue Gebetbuch im 
Hamburger Tempel” (Tiibingen, 1842); and “Je- 
hova, Nicht Moloch, War der Gott der Hebréer,” a 
refutation of Ghillany’s “Die Menschenopfer der 
Alten Hebriéer” (Berlin, 1848). The first work ap- 
peared under the pseudonym “ Juda Leon.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ti. 269; Steinschneider. Cat. 

Boal. col. 1629; Kayserling, Sterbetage, p. 22, Prague, 1891. 

s. {. Br. 


LOWENSTAMM, LEVI SAUL. See ARYEE 
LOEB BEN SAUL. 


LOWENSTAMM, SAUL: Rabbi and Tal- 
mudist; born at Rzeszow 1717; died at Amsterdam 
June 19, 1790. He is known as the author of “ Bin- 
yan Ariel” (Amsterdam, 1778), which title he chose 
asapunon“ Ben Aryeh.” As he telisin the preface, 
he was appointed rabbi at wopnd (Lakaez, Hun- 
gary ?), and afterward at Dubuo in succession to his 
father-in-law, Abraham Kahana (d. 1749); and in 
1755 at Amsterdam, on the death of his father, Levi 
Saul LOWENSTAMM. 

Besides “ Binyan Ariel,” Saul L6wenstamm wrote 
annotations on Niddah (Amsterdam, 1765), on the 
Shulhan ‘Aruk (26. 1765), on the Pentateuch (7b. 1768- 
1777), on the Mishnah (2). 1775), and many approba- 
tions and poems (1766-78). His “ Binyan Ariel ” is di- 
vided into three parts: (1) annotations on the Penta- 
teuch; (2) on the Five Rolls; and (3) on some pas 
sages from the Talmud. 

Léwenstamm devoted much attention to the bet 
ha-midrash founded by his father. The generosity 
of the members of the community enabled him to 
build a new home, which he occupied June 22, 1778. 

Some cf the memorial addresses delivered on his 
death have been published. He was succeeded bY 
his son Jacob Moses Léiwenstamm. 


195. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lowe 
Lowenthal 





BIBLIOGRAPHY: Landshuth, Toledot Anshe Shem, pp. 70, 118, 
Berlin, 1884; Buber, Anshe Shem, p. 389, Cracow, 1895; She- 
‘crit Yisrael (transl. Polak), p. 617; Wagenaar, ken Oud Ge- 
bouw, Amsterdam, 1881; Koenen, Geschiedenis der Yoden 
in Nederiand, p. 369. 

Dd. E. St. 
LOWENSTEIN, BARUCH SOLOMON: 

Russian mathematician; born at Wolodarka, Russia, 

jn the second quarter of the nineteenth century. He 

wrote: “ Bikkure ha-Limmudiyyot,” explanations of 
mathematical passages in the works of Abraham ibn 

Ezra, Moses Maimonides, and Joseph Delmedigo. 

He also annotated and published a second edition of 

“Shebile di-Rekia‘,” by Elias ben Hayyim Kohen 

Hochheimer, on the rules of the calendar, with the 

elements of geometry, trigonometry, and astronomy 

(Warsaw, 1863). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 217. 

D. S. MAN. 
LOWENSTEIN, BERNHARD: Austrian 

rabbi; born at Meseritz, province of Posen, Feb. 1, 

1821; died at Lemberg March 15, 1889. Upon the 

recommendation of Ludwig Philippson he was 

elected preacher in Szent Miklos, Liptau, Hungary 

(1845), where he became known as the pioneer of 

the modern synagogue servicein Hungary. In 1857 

he left Szent Miklos for the rabbinate of Butscho- 

witz, Moravia, whence, shortly afterward, he was 

called as rabbi to Lemberg. Léwenstein was an im- 

pressive preacher and an indefatigable communal 

worker. He was twice decorated by the Emperor 
of Austria. In addition to some sermons, he pub- 
lished a volume of poems under the title “ Jiidische 

Klinge” (Briinn, 1862), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Teller, Shem ‘Olam, Cracow, 1889; Buber, 
Anshe Shem, p. 126, Cracow, 1895. D 


LOWENSTEIN, L. H.: Hebrew scholar; died 
at Frankfort-on-the-Main about 1850. He was re- 
viser in the publishing-house of Isaac Lehrberger at 
Rédelheim, which office was afterward held by Se- 
ligman Barr. He published: The Book of Prov- 
erbs, edited from manuscripts, with a Hebrew com- 
mentary and a German metrical translation (Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, 1888); “ Kol Bokim,” the Book of 
Lamentations, with a Hebrew commentary and a 
German metrical translation, to which he added 
various dirges introduced into the liturgy of the 
Synagogue (2b. 1888); “ Damascia: die Judenverfol- 
gung zu Damascus und Ihre Wirkung auf die Oef- 
fenttiche Meinung, Nebst Nachweisungen iber den 
Ursprung der Gegen die Juden Wiederholten Beschul- 
digung des Ritualmords” (Rédclheim, 1840; 2d ed. 
1841) ; “ Mizmor Je-Todah,” an ode addressed to Moses 
Montefiore on his return from the Orient (2d. 1841); 
“Stimmen Bertihmter Christen tiber den Damascener 
Blutprozess” (¢. 1842). He also edited the Penta- 
teuch with Targum Onkelos, Rashi’s commentary, 
and an explanation of the French words occurring 
in the last-named (2 vols., 2b. 1848). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 270; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bodl. cols. 154, 1680. 


D. S. MAN. 

LOWENSTEIN, LEOPOLD: German rabbi; 
born in Gailingen, Baden, Dec. 1, 1848. He at- 
tended the gymnasium at Biscliofsheim-on-the-Tau- 
ber, receiving at the same time instruction in the 


Talmud from his father, who was district rabbi 
there. He subsequently entercd the University of 
Wirzburg (1862), attending concurrently the Tal- 
mudic lectures of Rabbi Seligmann Biir Bamberger, 
and then went to the yeshibah of Rabbi Israel Hil- 
desheimer at Eisenstadt, Hungary. In 1872 he be- 
came district rabbi in his native place, and ex- 
changed that position in 1887 for his present one in 
Mosbach, Baden, where he officiates as rabbi for the 
three districts of Mosbach, Merchingen, and Wert- 
heim. In 1891 he was decorated with the Zahringer 
Léwenorden. 

Léwenstein published: “Gesch. der Juden am 
Bodensece ” (1879), and “ Beitriige zur Gesch. der Ju- 
den in Deutschland,” i. 1895, ii. 1898; since 1900 
he has edited the * Blitter far Jiidische Gesch. und 
Literatur,” which appears as a supplement to “Der 
Israelit ” of Mayence. S, 

LOWENSTEIN, RUDOLF: German author; 
born at Breslau Feb. 20, 1819; died at Berlin Jan. 
6, 1891. When only nine years of age he was bap- 
tized. Educated at the gymnasium at Glogau and 
the universities of Breslau and Berlin, he received 
the degree of Ph.D. in 1848. 

As early as 1836 some of Léwenstein’s poems had 
been printed in the journals of Silesia; and his rep- 
utation was established by the appearance in 1846 
of his “Der Kindergarten,” a collection of songs 
for children. In 1848 he with David Kalisch and 
Ernest Dohm founded the well-known “ Kladdera- 
datsech,” of which he became one of the chief editors. 

The revolution of 1848 found Léwenstein on the 
liberal side, and he was expelled from Prussia in 
1849 for his political activity. Weturning to Berlin 
in 1850, he resumed the editorship of “ Kladdera- 
datsch” and continued in this capacity for thirty- 
seven years. In 1863 he became editor also of the 
political part of the “Gerichtszeitung.” In 1887 he 
retired from public life. 

Besides his “Der Kindergarten,” he wrote “ Ehret 
die Frauen,” Berlin, 1874, and many songs, most of 
which were set to music. 

His political poems in the “ Kladderadatsch ” 
gained him a wide reputation, especially those writ- 
ten during the eventful period 1860-80. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Jan. 9, 1891, p. 7: De le Roi, 

Juden-Mission, i. 854; Briimmer, Deutsches Dichter-Lexi- 


kon, Eichstadt and Stuttgart, 1876. 
8. F. T. H. 


LOWENTHAL, JOHANN JACOB: Hunga- 
rian chess-master; born July, 1810, in Budapest; 
died at St. Leonard’s-on-Sea, England, July 20, 
1876. He was educated at the gymnasium of his 
native city, and received a civil appointment under 
the administration of Louis Kossuth. On the down- 
fall of the latter, L6wentha] was expelled from Aus- 
tria-Hungary, and he emigrated to America (1849). 
In 1851 he went to London, and thenceforward re- 
sided permanently in England. At the Manchester 
tourney of 1857 Léwenthal defeated Anderssen for 
first place; in 1858 he Jost a match with Morphy ; 
and in the same year he gained first prize at Bir- 
mingham. 

Lowenthal was for some time chess editor of 
“The Illustrated News of the World” and of “ The 
Era.” He was editor also of “The Chess Players’ 


Lowenthal 
Lubarsky 


Magazine ” (1863-67). In 1860 he published “* Mor- 
phy’s Games of Chess, with Analytical and Critical 
Notes.” Under the influence of W. G. Ward, with 
whom he played chess, Lowenthal became a Roman 
Catholic. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dict. Nat. Biog. 


J. An 2. 

LOWENTHAL, NATHAN: Russian histolo- 
gist; born in 1856; educated at the Academy for 
Physicians and Surgeons at St. Petersburg and at 
the universities of Kiev and Geneva, From 1881 
to 1884 he was assistant to Schiff at Geneva, but he 
went to Lausanne in the latter year as assistant 
professor of histology, becoming professor in 1890. 

Léwenthal is the author of the following mono- 
graphs: “Ueber den Unterschied der Secundiren 
Degeneration des Seitenstranges nach Hirn- und 
Riickenmarksverletzungen,” in Pfliiger’s “ Archiv 
fiir Physiologie,” 1883: “Contribution Expérimen- 
tale a l’Etude des Atrophies Secondaires du Cor- 
don Postérieur et de la Colonne de Clarke,” in “ Re- 
cueil Zoologique Suisse,” 1885-86; (in collabora- 
tion with Herzen) “ Trois Cas de Lésion Médullaire,” 
etc., in “ Archives de Physiologie Normale et Patho- 
logique,” 1886; “ Experimentalisch-Anatomischer 
Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Bahnen im Riickenmark 
und Gehirn ”; “ Notiz tiber die Protoplasmastructur 
der Kornzellen des Eierstockes,” and “ Zur Kenntniss 
des Keimfleckes im Ureie Einiger Siiuger,” in “ Ana- 
tomischer Anzeiger,” 1887-95; “ Die Spermatogenese 
bei Oxyuris Ambigua.” “Die Befruchtung, Rei- 
fung, und Teilung des Kies von Oxyuris Ambigua,” 
and “ Die Harder’sche Driise,” all in “* Internationale 
Monatsschrift fiir Anatomie,” 1889-96; “Zur Frage 
tiber die Anwendung von Terpentinél in der His- 
tologischen Technik,” in “Centralblatt ftir Phy- 
siologie.” 1889; “Technisch-Histologische Notiz ” 
and “Ueber eine Nene AlKoholische Carminlésung,” 
in “Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaftliche Mikroskopie,” 
1893-1902 : “ Contribution A Etudedu Lobe Olfactif 
des Reptiles.” in “Journal de Anatomie et de Ja 
Physiologie,” 1894; “ Driisenstudicn ” and “ Beitrag 
zur Kenntniss der Struktur und der Teilung von 
Bindegewebszellen,” in “ Archiv fiir Mikroskopische 
Anatomie,” 1900-3; “ Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Be- 
ziehungen der Taenia Semicircularis,” in “ Morpho- 
logisches Jahrbuch,” 1902. He has written also two 
books: “Questions d’Histologie: La Cellule et Jes 
Tissus,” Paris, 1901; and “Atlas zur Vergleicheden 
Histologie der Wirbeltiere,” Berlin, 1904, S. 

LOWENTHAL, NAUMANN: German teach- 
er and writer; born Feb. 25, 1819, at Schmiegel; 
died at Posen Feb. 25, 1855. He attended the gym- 
nasium in Lissa and the universities of Berlin and 
Breslau, where he devoted himself principally to 
the study of philosophy, mathematics, and the natu- 
ral sciences. He took his degree at Halle in 1841, 
and in 1844 passed the examination “ pro facultate 
docendi” at Berlin. Lowenthal was the first Jew in 
Prussia to be appointed a head teacher, and that at 
a municipal technical school (“ Realschule ”) in Po- 
sen. Besides many treatises in technical periodicals, 
he published “ Die Physiologie des Freien Willens,” 
Leipsic, 1843. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. xix. 203. 
x M. K. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


196 





LOWI, ISAAC: German rabbi; born at Adels. 
dorf, near Erlangen, Bavaria, Jan. 31, 1803; died at 
Firth Dee. 26, 1878. He received his Talmudical 
training at the yeshibah of Wolf Hamburger ay 
Firth, and studied philosophy and philology at the 
University of Munich. He was rabbi of Uhifeld 
from 1827 to 18380. when he was elected district 
rabbi of Firth, Though his election was duly 
confirmed by the government (Dec. 1) the opposition 
of the Orthodox party rendered necessary a decree 
of installation by King Ludwig J. (March 10, 1831), 
As early as Dec. 30, 1881, and Feb. 29, 18382, his ac- 
versaries, among whom was his former teacher, 
Wolf Hamburger, petitioned the government to de- 
pose Liwi for teaching irreligious doctrines in his 
sermons and in the school and for introducing re- 
forms into the divine services without regard to an- 
cient customs aud religious laws. For nearly cight 
years this suit was pending, until the government, 
by an order of Oct. 28, 1888 (renewed April 13, 188), 
enjoined upon Léwi “to be more careful in his 
words and actions and to have more regard for those 
who conform to the true Mosaic ceremonials and 
who do not adhere to ‘ pernicious neology.’” Lowi 
was also sentenced to pay one-third of the costs of 
the suit; in the following year he was enjoined 
from performing the rite of confirmation. When 
the Orthodox party renewed its attacks, the govern- 
ment (1842) ordered a new election, which resulted 
ina strong majority for Lowi, after which he was 
allowed to perform the ceremony of confirmation. 

Lbwi’s opponents nevertheless continued their 
complaints and insisted upon his dismissal; the gov- 
ernment again decided in his favor, but allowed the 
dissatisfied members to elect for themselves an Or- 
thodox rabbi who might officiate at weddings and 
decide religious questions. The agitation against 
Liwi gradually ceased, He stood in high esteem 
with King Ludwig IL, who knighted him in 1869. 
In Léwi’s last years Emil Neubiirger became his 
assistant, succeeding him upon his death, From 
1857 to 1872 the young congregation of Nuremberg 
was iucluded in his rabbinical district. When, on 
Dee. 23, 1856, by order of the district government, 
the magistrate of Fiirth requested him to serve as 
the spiritual guide of the Nuremberg Jews, Liwi 
declined, giving as his reason their religious indif- 
ference. But when the government insisted and a 
committee of the Jews of Nuremberg expressed 
reoret for their former conduct, he accepted the 
added responsibility (Feb. 1, 1857). Léwi Jent effi- 
cient aid in establishing the Nuremberg congrega- 
tion and in regulating its religious affairs. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1839, pp. 244 et seg.; 1841, 

p. 610; 1843, p. 48; 1844, p. 259; 1847, p. 598; 1869, p. 745; 

1874, pp. 24, 44: Orient, 1844, pp. 141, 164; Barbeck, Gesch. 

der Juden in Niirnherg und Fiirth, pp. 90. 98, Nuremberg, 

1878; Jost, Neuere Gesch. i. 145; Ziemlich, Die Israetitische 

Kultusgemeinde Niirnberg, passim, Nuremberg, 1900. 


D. S. MAN. 


LOWINSOHN, JACOB MORDECAI BEN 
JUDAH LOB: Russo-Polish scholar and journal- 
ist; born in Grodno 1832; died in Warsaw Feb. 13, 
1878. A son of the rabbi of Grodno, he was trained 
in Talmud, and then studied Russian, German, Po- 
lish, and French, which he mastered in a very short 
time. Thus equipped he entered upon a journalis- 


‘entra ts awa SS SV gs 


re ee eee. 


197 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lowenthal 
Lubarsky 





tic career. He published numerons articles in Rus- 
sian papers, and when, in 1862, Daniel Nenfeldt 
founded the JUTRZENKA, LOwinsohn became an act- 
ive collaborator on it, always defending the inter- 
ests of his coreligionists. He was a great contro- 
versialist, and had heated discussions with R. Hirsch 
Ixalischer in “Ha-Maggid,” and with L. J. Shapiro 
in the “ Jutrzenka.” 

He settled in Serhei, government of Suwalki, 
where he made the acquaintance of David Gordon, 
editor of “Ha-Maggid,” and Rabbi Hayyim Fillip- 
power. About 1868 he passed his examination at 
the Rabbinical Seminary of Wilna, where he was 
ordained rabbi; but he never accepted a rabbinate. 

Of his first work, “Ha-Adam be-Zelem Elohim” 
(Kénigsberg, 1855), only a limited number of cop- 
ies were printed, Which he distributed among his 
friends. His numerous articles and essays on Jew- 
ish literature and science he published under the 
nom de plume Sp.. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. J. Shapiro, in Gan Perahim, pp. 63-65, 
Warsaw, 1890; Shapire and Gordon, in Ha-Maygid, 1878, No. 
10, p. 80. 

H.R. I. S. B. 


LOWISOHN, SOLOMON : Historian and poct; 
born in Mor, district of Stuhlweissenburg, Hhun- 
gary, In 1788; died there April 27, 1821. He stud- 
ied at the yeshibah of Prague, among his fellow 
students being his relative Moses Saphir, the hu- 
morist. He subsequently became a corrector in 
the printing establishment of Anton Edler vou 
Schmid in Vienna. 

Lé6wisohn’s works include: “Sibah be-‘Olam ha- 
Neshamot” (Prague, 1811); “ Melizat Yeshurun ” 
(Vienna, 1816), poems; “Melkere Erez,” treating 
of the topography of the Bible. Le wrote also for 
the Mishnah edition published in 1815 an essay on 
the language of the Mishnah. Further, he trans- 
lated and annotated the festival prayers, and part 
of the ritual for the 9th of Ab (Vienna, 1819). His 
most important work is “Vorlesungen fiber die 
Neuere Gesch. der Juden” (7/4. 1820), of which the 
tirst volume only was published. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ignatz Reich, Beth-El, i. 72-77; A. Biiehler, 
A Moori_Chevra-Kadisa Torténete, Budapest, 1891; A. 
Biichler, Egy Magyar Zsido Koitté, in Izraelita Magyar, 
kvkinyve, i. 887-408; Pallas Lex. xi. 

S. A. Bt. 


LOWY, ADOLF: German physiologist; born 
in Berlin June 29, 1862; educated at the gymnasium 
and university of his native city (M.D. 1885), where 
he became privat-docent in physiology at the latter 
in 1895, and assistant professor in 1900. For his 
monograph “Untersuchungen tiber die Respiration 
und Circulation bei Aenderung des Druckes und des 
Sauerstoffgchaltes der Luft,” Lowy received a prize 
from the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, in 
1895. Numerous other publications of his have ap- 
peared in Pfliiger’s “Archiv fiir die Gesammte 
Physiologie,” in the “Archiv fiir Anatomie und 
Physiologie,” and in “ Virchow’s Archiv.” 8. 


LOWY, ALBERT: English rabbi and commn- 
nal worker; born at Aussee, Moravia, Dec., 1816. 
He studied first at Olmiitz, and then moved to Vi- 
enna, where under Professor Steinschneider he began 
a@ Systematic study of Hebrew and Arabic. A few 


years after the formation of the Reform Synagogue in 
London, Lowy wasappointed minister in association 
with the Rev. Professor Marks, whom he assisted 
in compiling the prayer-book of the congregation. 
He served for fifty years, retiring in 1892. From 
1871 to 1889 he acted as secretary of the Anglo-Jew- 
ish Association, which, with Dr. Benisch, he had 
helped to found. 

Liwy’s knowledge of Samaritan literature enabled 
him to collect and catalogue the Samaritan manu- 
scripts belonging to the Earl of Crawford and Bal- 
carres. He printed in the “Trans. Soc. Bibl. 
Arch.,” 1875, the first specimen of a dialect of 
Aramaic current among the Jews of Urmia; and his 
contribution gave rise to the subsequeut literature on 
the subject. In 1891 he printeda “ Catalogue of He- 
braica ind Judaica in the Library of the Corporation 
of the City of London.” with a copious subject-in- 
dex, Jn recognition of his researches, the Tniver- 
sity of St. Andrews conferred upon him in 1893 the 
honorary degree of LL.D. 

Lowy helped to found the Society of Hebrew Lit- 
erature; and was a frequent lecturer before the 
Society of Biblical Archeology and other learned 
associations. He died May 21, 1908. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Dee. 4, 1876; Jew. Worid, Nee. 

22, 1899; Vowung Israel, 1897. 

J. Gr. LL. 

LOWY, JACOB EZEKIEL: German rabbi 
and author; born at Wotzenplotz, Austrian Silesia, 
Aug. 24, 1814; died at Beuthen Nov. 20, 1864. After 
attending various veshibot in his native country, 
he became a pupil of Wolf Léw in Nagy Tapol- 
csany, and then, inclining to Hasidism, he went sue- 
cessively to Lemberg and Brody in order to continue 
his rabbinical education. Finally he went to Berlin, 
where he acquired some secular learning. Having 
obtained after great difficulties a license to marry, 
he settled as a business man in Bielitz, and in 1846 
was appointed district rabbi of Wadowice, with a 
seat at) Oswiecin (Auschwitz). In 1854 he was 
elected rabbi of Beuthen. which position he contin- 
ued to hold until his death. 

Liéwy was the author of “ Bikkoret ha-Talmud: 
Kritisch-Talmudisches Lexikon” (vol. i., Vienna, 
1863). containing 150 articles for a proposed Tal- 
mudic encyclopedia. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Die Neuzeit, No. 1, Vienna, 1865, 


s. Dd. 


LUAH. See Armanac; CALENDAR. 


LUBARSKY, HESCHEL ABRAMOVICH: 
Russian writer; born at Balta Sept., 1878. He was 
educated in a family of Hasidim, in the Odessa 
Commercial School, and in the Riga Polytechnical 
Institute. In 1897, while a student in the latter in- 
stitute, he joined the Zionist movement. Shortly 
after he went to Palestine, where he visited the 
Jewish agricultural colonies, which he described in 
a series of articles under the title “ V Stranye Pred- 
kov.” Returning to Odessa in 1898, he wrote “ Pa- 
lestina,” descriptive of the Holy Land and of the 
condition of the Jews there (Warsaw, 1900). In 
1900 Lubarsky graduated from the Riga Polytech- 
nical Institute (as engineer), and is now (1904) pursu- 
ing his studies in Berlin. He has contributed numer- 


Lubeck 
Lublin 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


198 





ous articles to the Russo-Jewish periodicals, and, in 
1908, published a pamphlet, “Shestoi Kongress Sion- 
istov,” on the subject of the Sixth Zionist Congress. 
His father, Abraham Elijah, is a well-known Zionist. 
It. R. J. L. La. 


LUBECK: Free city of Germany; situated on 
the River Trave, not far from the Baltic Sea; it 
forms, with the surrounding territory, a free state. 
In 1900 it had a population of 82,813, including 663 
Jews. Like most of the free cities of Germany, 
Liibeck did not tolerate the Jews. In 1350 the city 
council wrote to Duke Otto of Brunswick-Liineburg 
requesting him toexterminate the Jews living in his 
territory, as they were responsible for the plague, 
which would not cease until all Jews had been killed. 
As the council 
does not men- 
tion any order 
to this effect 
in the city, it 
is clear that 
Jews could not 
have lived 
there before 
then. In 1499 
the local chro- 
nographer, 
Reimer Kock, 
states express- 
ly that “there 
are no Jews in 
Liibeck, as 
they are not 
needed here.” 
The Thirty 
Years’ war 
and, perhaps, 
the Chmiel- 
nicki persecu- 
tions in Poland 
seem to have 
caused a num- 
ber of Jews to 
go to Liibeck. 
The gild of the 
goldsmiths 
complained in 
1658 that 
“many Jews 
and other sus- 
picious characters sneak daily into the city to 
deal in precious metals”; and the council decreed, 
April 15, 1677, that no Jew should be permitted to 
stay in the city overnight without the express per- 
mission of the senate, which was rarely given. In 
1680 two “Schutzjuden” of the senate, Samuel 
Frank and Nathan Siemssens, are mentioned. But 
when the senate accepted Siemssen’s son-in-law, 
Nathan Goldschmidt, as “Schutzjude,” the citizens 
objected, and wherever he rented a house the neigh- 
bors protested to the senate. It was, perhaps, due 
. to an intrigue that Goldschmidt was accused of 
having received stolen goods (Feb. 15, 1694); the 
trial dragged on forat least five years, and its result 
is not known. 





New Synagogue at Liibeck. 
(From a photograph.) 


| 


The gilds continued to demand of | August Buchholz as their advocate. 


the council the expulsion of all Jews, and finally 
saw their wishes fulfilled (March 4, 1699). In spite 
of that victory of the gilds, Jews not only made 
brief visits to the city, but the council permitted, as 
early as 1701, one Jew to remain as “Schutzjude” in 
consideration of an annual payment of 300 marks 
courant (384), 
The great difficulties which stood in the way of 
prospective Jewish settlers in Liibeck suggested the 
evasion of the prohibition by a settle- 
Settlement ment in the neighboring territory of 
in Neigh- Denmark. A nuinberof Jews, mostly 
borhood. Polish fugitives, settled in the vil- 
lage of Moisling as early as 1700, 
and, in spite of constant protests by the gilds, the 
council had .to grant thera, as Danish subjects, the 
right to enter 
the city, al- 
though under 
great restric- 
tions. Desir- 
ing to obtain 
jurisdiction 
over the Jews 
in Moisling, 
the city of Li- 
beck acquired, 
in 1765, the 
estate whose 
owner had 
feudal rights 
over the inhab- 
itants of that 
village; when, 
in 1806, the 
King of Den- 
mark ceded the 
district that 
included Mois- 
ling, to Li- 
beck the Jews 
there became 
subjects of the 
latter city. 
But when Li- 
beck was an- 
nexed to 
France (Jan. 1, 
1811) all dis- 
criminations 
ceased; the 
special taxes of the “Schutzjuden ” were abolished, 
and many Jews of Moisling, as wellas of other places, 
moved to Litbeck, where they at once purchased a 
lot fora synagogue. In the following years their 
numbers were rapidly augmented, especially in 
consequence of the expulsions during the siege of 
Hamburg. As soon, however, as the French domi- 
nation had ceased, the senate began to debate the re- 
striction of the Jews, to whomit proposed giving “an 
appropriate new constitution ” (1815), while the gilds 
peremptorily demanded their expulsion. The Jews 
protested against this violation of their rights, and, 
together with the Jewish citizens of other free cities, 
appealed to the Congress of Vienna, engaging Carl 
But the city 


199 


would not yield, in spite of the intercession of the 
Prussian chancellor Prince Hardenberg and of the 
Austrian chancellor Prince Metternich. The Con- 
gress of Vienna finally adopted Article 16 of the 
“ Bundesakte,” which guaranteed to the Jews in all 
German states the rights which they had obtained 
“from” the various states, instead of “in” the vari- 
ous states, as the original text read (June 8, 1815). 

Having thus obtained a free hand, the 

Expelled senate of Liibeck decreed (March 6, 
After Con- 1816) that all Jews should leave the 

gress of city within four weeks. The Jews 

Vienna. again protested, but finally were com- 

pelled to accept the proposition of the 
senate, which guaranteed to all Jews who would set- 
tle in Moisling the rights of Liibeck citizens, sub- 
ject to certain limitations (Sept., 1821); in 1824 all 
Jews, with the exception of a few “Schutzjuden,” 
had left the city. The senate now showed a certain 
amount of good-will toward its Jewish subjects by 
giving them a house in Moisling for their rabbi, and 
by building a new synagogue, for which the congre- 
gation was required to pay only a moderate annual 
rent. 

Since 1831 the Jews have had io serve in the mili- 
tia: in 1837 a parochial school, subsidized by the 
city, was opened; and in 1839 the senate issued an 
order which compelled the gilds to register Jewish 
apprentices. A commission appointed in 1842 re- 
ported that the condition of the Jews should be im- 
proved by an extension of their rights, but their 
emancipation did not become perfect until the law 
of Oct. 9, 1848, abolished all their disabilities. In 
1850 a new synagogue was acquired. This brought 
to the young congregation considerable annoyance; 
the ill-disposed neighbors, who claimed that the 
ritual bath connected with it spread an unbearable 
smell of garlic, endeavored to obtain an injunction 
against it (this building gave way to a new syna- 
goguein 1880). In 1859 the rabbi moved from Mois- 
ling to Liitbeck, and in the same year a parochial 
school was opened in the city. In 1869 the school in 
Moisling was closed, and in 1872 the Moisling syna- 
gogue, which had not been used for some time, was 
demolished. A law of Aug. 12, 1862, modified the 
form of oath (“More Judaico”) which Jews until 
that time had been compelled to use, and introduced 
anew form, which remained in force until the Ger- 
man law of 1879, regulating civil procedure, abol- 
ished it. 

The Litbeck congregation has a parochial school 
of three grades, and religious instruction for Jewish 
children attending public schools has been made 
compulsory by the law of Oct. 17, 1885. The city 
pays to the congregation an annual subsidy. The 
rabbis of the congregation have been: Akiba Wert- 
heimer (called also Akiba Victor; up to 1816; d. 
1835, as rabbi of Altona); Ephraim Joé#l, an uncle 
of Manuel and David Joél (1825-51); Siissmann 
Adler (teacher and preacher, 1849-51; rabbi, 1851- 
1869); S. Carlebach, the present (1904) incumbent 
(smce 1869). The congregation has a number of 
educational, devotional, and social organizations. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jost, Neuere Gesch. der Israeliten, i. 32 et 
seq.; Gratz, Gesch. xi. 824 et seq.: Carlebach, Gesch. der Ju- 
den in Litbeck und Moisling, Liibeck, 1898; Statistisches 
Jahrbuch, 1908. D. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Liibeck 
Lublin 


LUBELSKI, PHILIPP: Polish physician; 
born at Zamose 1788; died at Warsaw Feb. 3, 1879. 
He began his career as an army surgeon under Na- 
poleon I., who created him an officer of the Legion 
of Honor. After the close of the Franco-Russian 
war Lubelski was appointed chief physician of the 
military hospital at Zamosc. From 1826 he resided 
permanently in Warsaw, where he engaged in pri- 
vate practise. 

His son, Wilhelm Lubelski (born at Warsaw 
1832; died there 1890), was likewise a physician. 
He studied medicine at Dorpat, Vienna, and Paris, 
and held the position of physician in ordinary at the 
hospital of the Orphan Asylum of Jesus at Warsaw. 
He published four medical works (1861-69). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Enecyklopedja Powszechna, ix., Warsaw, 
ier Gurland, Yevreiski Kalendar, p. 117, St. Petersburg, 


M. R. 


LUBLIN: City of Russian Poland, in the gov- 
ernment of the same name; situated 60 miles south- 
east of Warsaw; in importance the third city of 
Poland. Numbers of Jews were living in Lublin 
in the fourteenth century. They were not allowed 
to dwell in the city proper, but were restricted to 
the suburb of Kazimierz on the Bystrzyc, a tribu- 
tary of the Wierprz. This suburb was named after 
Casimir III., by whose order it was assigned to the 
Jews in 1396. Later it became known as the 
“Piaski Zydowskie” (Jewish Strand). The Jews 
were allowed gradually to occupy a district within 
the city until the accession to the Polish throne of 
Sigismund II. (1518), who confined the settlement of 
the Jews to their original quarter. Inthe following 
year the king imposed upon them a special tax called 
“Striegeld,” and, to please their competitors, the 
Christian merchants, restrained their commercial en- 
terprises. The manufacture of beer, which was at 
that time exclusively in the hands of the Jews, was 
now restricted by the king to those who had ac- 
quired real property in the city. In 1552 he pro- 
hibited the Jews from dealing in food. 

From the middle of the sixteenth to the middle 
of the eighteenth century Lublin was a great center 
of Jewish activity and the principal place of meet- 
ing of the CounciL oF Foun LAnps. 

At the end of the sixteenth century the Jews, in 
consideration of the payment of special taxes, were 

permitted to reside in the Podzance 


H, R, 


Special quarter of Lublin. The government 
Taxes and record of licenses (part xxxvi., No. 
Restric- 14) of the year 1596 shows that there 
tions. were then 100 Jewish houses in Pod- 


zance, and that the annual tax was 
fixed at 80 florins and 27 grivins. Sigismund Au- 
gust increased the tax on houses to 250 fl. Besides 
taxing the tenants of the houses 70 fl., he imposed 
the following additional taxes: for 16 butcher-shops, 
58 fl. 6 gr.; for 20 hot-bath tubs, 80 f1.; for a bath- 
house and a liquor-shop at Podzance, 200A. The 
number of Jews in the city at that time may there- 
fore be estimated at about 2,000. Their numbers 
steadily increased, and tn 1630 the annual tax paid, 
by them amounted to 800 Polish guilders. Ladis- 
laus IV. confirmed (March 21, 1633) the privileges 
granted to the Jews by former kings of Poland. 


Lublin 


Immediately prior to the Cossacks’ UPRISING in 
1648 the Jesuits instigated a riot and attacked the 
Jewish quarter. Twenty houses were ransacked, 
cight Jews being killed and twenty wounded. The 
Jesuits were prosecuted before Ladislaus ITV. and 
were severely punished. Later (1650) the Jesuits 
established in Lublin a printing-press which ex- 
isted till 1670. They published many works hostile 
to the Jews, thus creating enmity between the 
latter and the Christian inhabitants. To the influ- 
ence of the Jesuits is attributed also the decree of 
1650, forbidding Jewish apothecarics to prepare 
medicine, and that of 1654, prohibiting performances 
by Jewish musicians not having a special permit 
from the government. 

The Jewish population of Lublin in 1656 was 
about 2,000 families, and, including those who for 
safety fled from the neighboring vil- 
lages, there must have been in the city 
tions and at least 10,000 Jews, most of whom 
Massacres. were massacred by the Cossacks. 

Among the martyrs were many promi- 
nent rabbis and scholars. Some entered the cemetery 
and, after engraving their names upon the wall, ar- 
ranged to be buried alive rather than fall into the 
hands of the mob and be tortured. Rabbi Samuel 
b. David, in his “ Hesed Shemuel ” (ed. Amsterdam, 
1699, pp. 2b, 48b), assigns the occurrence to the day 
preceding the Sukkot festival of 5417 (= Oct. 15. 
1656), and describes his own miraculous escape (see 
Cossacks’ UPRISING). 

Under the city magistrate Jan Carl Danielowicz 
the Jews of Lublin fared better than they had done 
at any previous time. In his charter of Nov. 21, 
1675, concerning the rights of the Jews, Daniclowicz 
reviews the privileges granted by the former Polish 
kings, which he declares to bea safeguard to Jewish 
life and property. He enumerates the following 
provisions: (1) The Jews of Lublin to contribute 
no more than the customary real-estate tax of 700 
Polish guilders (this tax covered the dwellings, 
synagogues, charitable institutions, cemetery, shops, 
wax-factories, and bath-houses). (2) All contracts 
made between Christians and Jews residing in Pod- 
zance, regarding the purchase and sale of mead, 
beer, brandy, etc., to be valid. (8) The commercial 
tex on Jews to be no higher than the same tax on 
Christian citizens in proportion to their respective 
numbers. (4) Jews to be exempt from having sol- 

diers quartered ainong them either per- 
Privileges manently ortemporarily. (5) Jews to 


Persecu- 


for Jews. be exempt from furnishing food and 
clothing supplies to the guard of the 
city hall. (6) No encroacliment to be made on the 


Jewish cemetery. (7) In legal suits concerning 
chattels appeals to be made to the city magistrate; 
in other cases, to the Supreme Court. “I make,” 
he says, “these provisions voluntarily, and promise 
to fulfil them for the benefit of the Jews who have 
petitioned me, and for the benefit of their descend- 
ants, so long asI live; and I pray that my succes- 
sors shall follow my example.” 

King Joun Sopieskr in 1679 prohibited trading 
between Jews and Christians during Christian holi- 
days, and ordered the confiscation of any goods sold 
on those days. King Augustus IL in 1720 further 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


A ALS a A a yeep PPP cn 


200 


aa 


restricted Jewish commerce, and annulied the leases 
of shops to Jews in the Christian quarters of the 
town on the ground that the Jews were keen com 
petitors of the Christian merchants. Augustus IIT, 
forbade (1786) Jews to act as agents of Christians, 
It is claimed that this restriction was formulated at 
the solicitation of the Jewish congregation against 
certain of its members, who, in order to shirk the 
communal tax, and also to avoid the special govern- 
ment tax, severed their connection with the syna- 
gogue and transacted business as the nominal agents 
of Christians, and shared the profits with them. 
Stanislaus Augustus Poniatowski, the last King of 
Poland, on his coronation in 1764, ordered the expul- 
sion of Jews from Lublin and its suburbs. Later 
they were permitted to return subject to curtailed 
privileges and heavy taxes. The Russian army cap- 
tured Lublin in 1881. 

Jewish communal life in Lublin began with the 
above-mentioned settlement of Jews in the suburb 
of Piaski, where they were permitted to form a con- 
gregation under a charter and with a seal bearing the 
emblem of a hornless deer. Not only were they al- 

lowed to have their own civil laws, 

Communal but they were even appointed attor- 

Work.  neysand judges in the general courts. 

Indeed, to such an extent was this the 

case that the waywodes of Warsaw specially assem- 
bled in 1540 to prohibit such appointments. 

The Jewish cemetery, situated on the Gradzisk 
hill, was granted to the Jews by Tenczinski in 1555; 
Jut it had already been utilized as a Jewish burial- 
ground, as is evidenced by the record of a tomb- 
stone dated 1541. 

The congregational minute-books, which had been 
placed in the government archives, were destroyed 
by fire in 1829. They contained valuable data for 
the history of the Lublin Jews and of the Council 
of Four Lands. There is left but one pinkes of the 
hebra kaddisha beginning with 1685, interesting ex- 
tracts from which are published in Nissenbaum, * Le- 
Korot ha-Yehudim be-Lublin,” p. 14. The record 
includes a proclamation of 1694 by the officers of the 
burial society excommunicating evil-minded persons 
who had denounced their Jewish neighbors for self- 
ish purposes before Christian priests and noblemen. 
These persons were blacklisted by the members of 
the society, who pledged themselves not to give 
them a decent funeral nor to bury them within the 
Jewish cemetery. The offenders were, however, 
afforded the opportunity to retract their denuncia- 
tions and to give a solemn promise never to repeat 
the offense (2b. p. 142). 

Lublin possesses five synagogues: (1) The Mehar- 
shal Synagogue, the oldest in the town, formerly at- 

tended by Solomon Luria. It has 

Syna- seats for about 3,000. (2) The Syna- 
gogues and gogue of Zebi b. Moses Doctor (“ Doc- 
Charitable tor” meaning “Rabbi”; otherwise 
Institu- known as Jeleno {Hirsch} Doctoro- 
tions. wicz), founded by Zebi in 1669 by per- 
mission of King Ladislaus TV. It ap- 

pears that this synagogue wasalso rebuilt by Zebito 
commeniorate the victoriesof King John Sobieski in 
1688. (3) The Synagogue of Saul Wahl (d. 1617). 
This synagogue is known alsoasthe “ Liufer [“run- 


201 


ners ”] Synagogue,” because it was formerly used by 

visitors and strangers. (4) The Kahal Synagogue, 

often visited by Samuel EvELs (d. 1631). 

Parnes Synagogue, founded by Abraham Parnes (d. | 

1763). There are also a “ Tailors’ Synagogue” and 

several others of recent date. 

Among the charitable and educational institutions 
are: the Jewish hospital, housed in a modern build- 
ing, with 56 beds; an asylum for the aged. for 
widows, and for orphans; a Hebrew free school 
(Talmud Torah); and a Jewish school, in which the 
teaching of Hebrew and of secular knowledge is 
combined under Jewish and non-Jewish masters. 
On the yeshibot founded by various rabbis see Jacob 
PoLLak; Shalom SHacuna; Solomon Luria; Meir 
ben Gedaliah LUBLIN. 

The government census of 1896 gave the total 
population as 48,758, of whom 28,788 were Jews. 
In 1899 the total Jewish population of the govern- 
ment of Lublin was 186,787. Lublin isan industrial 
and manufacturing town, containing 3 distilleries, 3 
breweries, 4 tanneries, 6 brick-factories, 4 soap-and- 
candle factories, 3 tobacco-factories, 2 implement- 
factories, and 1 flour-mill; also factories of yarn and 
of linen and hemp goods. The Jews control most 
of these, and nearly all the mercantile and banking 
business. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sierpinski, Historyezny Obraz Miasta Lub- 
lina, Lublin, 1849: Zielinski, Mono. Lublina, ib. 1877; Dene 
bitzer, Miktehe Bikkor ct, Letter 2. Cracow, 1892; Friedberg, 
Le-Toledot ha-Defus ha-Ibri be-Liblin, ib. 190L; Nissen- 
baum, Le-Korot ha-Yehudim. be-Lublin, Lublin, 1900; Jti- 
disché'Statistik, Berlin, 1908; Ha-Maggid, 1852, No. 16; Ha- 
Asif, 1886, p. 393; Bershadski, in Voskhod, Oct., 1895. 
H. R. J. D. E. 

—-Typography: The first Hebrew printing- 

house at Lublin was founded in 1547 by Joseph 

of Lublin, who printed the “Ketab Hitnazzelut le- 

Darshanim ” of David ha-Darshan (1548), and some 

other books. In 1550 he obtained from Sigismund 

August the monopoly of printing Hebrew books. 
In 1558 a new printing-house was founded by 

Jacob b. Moses, Meshullam b. Solomon, Eliezer b. 

Isaac of Prague, Kalonymus b. Mordecai Jafe, and 

Jacob b. David Gutrat. The first work printed by 

them was the Pentateuch (1558); in the following 

year they issued the Talmud treatises Shebu‘ot and 

Pesahim, which were followed by many other books 

before 1579. In that year printing was suspended 

till 1590, when it was resumed and carried on till 1608. 

During that time the house printed Mordecai Jafe’s 

“Lebush ” (1590), Jacob ben Asher’s “Tur Orah 

Hayyim ” (1599), etc. 

In 1606 Zebi Hirsch b. Kalonymus Jafe opened 
& printing-house, where he printed the “ Minhat 
Yehudah” of Judah Léb b. Obadiah Eulenburg 
(1609), and the “ Tebu’ot Shor” of Ephraim Zalman 
Shor (1615). In 1618 he began the printing of the 
Talmud, which was completed in 1628. In 1642 
Kalonymus b. Zebi Jafe opened another printing- 
house, from which were issued, among other books, 
the “Yalkut Shim‘oni” (1613) and “ Dammesek 
Eli‘ezer” (1646). The wars which broke out in 
Poland caused a suspension of the work. 

Fourteen years later a new printing-house was 
founded by Jacob b. Abraham Jafe. He printed 
the “‘Ammudeha Shib‘ali” of Bezaleel of Slutsk 
(1662), and the “Ketonet Passim,” on the Pesah 


(5) The | | 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lublin 


~ Haggadah, by Joseph b. Moses of Przemysi (1685), 
_ besides a great many pamphlets. 


For nearly two hundred years the printing of 
Hebrew books at Lublin was suspended. In 1870 
Hirschenhorn and Schneidemesser opened a new 
printiug-house, and issued the collection of responsa 
known as “Noda‘ bi-Ycehudah” and other books. 
In 1901 they printed a beautiful edition of the Bible 
with various commentarics. 

Be ee Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. ii; Zunz, Ozar ha-Sifrut. 
: By Friedberg, Zur Gesch. der Hebr, Typographie in 
unlit. 1900; Ersch and Gruber, Encye. section ii. part 28, 


p. 56; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. cols. 319, 1216, 1220, 1705, 
s. Vv. Jafe. 
B. FR. 


LUBLIN, MEIR BEN GEDALIAH (Ma- 
HaRaM): Polish rabbi; born at Lublin (%) 155s: 
died there May 3, 1616. He was descended from 
a family of rabbis, and he speaks of his father as 
being an eminent Talmudist (Maharam, Responsa, 
No. 1). His principal teacher was his father-in-law, 
Isaac ha-Kohen Shapiro, rabbi of Cracow (dd. No. 
105), and he distinguished himself so highly in the 
knowledge of the Talmud and Posekim that in 1587, 
when he was not yet thirty years old, he was invi- 
ted to the rabbinate of Cracow. Up to that time he 
seems to have lived in Lublin; for in one of his re- 
sponsa (No. 138), which bears neither date nor 
place, he writes, “all my tools [¢.e., books] are still 
at Lublin.” According to Lewinstein (“ Ha-Goren,” 
i. 41-48), Lublin was from 1582 onward chief rabbi 
of Lublin, at the same time that Simon Wolf Auer- 
bach was head of the yeshibah there (but see ACEk- 
BACH, SIMON {ZE’EB] WoLr). Owing to continual 
quarrels between the pupils of these two Talmud- 
ists, Lublin was ordered to leave the town. 

It can not be said with certainty how long he re- 
mained at Cracow, as there is only one (undated) re- 
sponsum (No. 50) which he wrote while holding 
that rabbinate. It seems certain, however, that he 
left Cracow after 1591 in order to become rabbi at 
Lemberg, a position which he held till 1613. In 
Lemberg he was engaged in continual controversies 
with Joshua Falk, author of “ Me’irat ‘Enayim ” 
particularly a bill of divorce issued by the latter at 
Vienna occasioned lengthy discussions between them 
(Maharam, Responsa, Nos. 123 e¢ seg.; see also 
Fak, JOSHUA BEN ALEXANDER HA-KOHEN). Lub- 
lin speaks in his responsa (Nos. 68, 102-108) of a 
fire Qeferring to the fire of Lemberg) in which his 
work “Seder Gittin ” was burned. 

According to a tradition, Lublin was forced by 
the authorities of Lemberg, at the instigation of 
Abraham Schrenzel, to Jeave the town. The latter 

thus avenged his teacher, Joshua Falk, 

Leaves who had been insulted by Lublin. 

Lemberg. At this time (1618) the community of 
Lublin being in want of a rabbi, Meir 

accepted the rabbinate. and he continued to hold it 
till his death. Wherever he settled Lublin organized 
a yeshibah, of which he was the head; and owing to 


‘his renown as a Talmudic scholar and casuist, the 


number of his pupils was considerable. Among 
them were Joshua Héschel of Cracow, author of 
“Maginne Shelomoh,” and Isaiah Horowitz, author 
of “Shene Luhot ha-Berit.” besides many others who 
became prominent rabbis or heads of yeshibot. He 


Lublin 
Lucena 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


202 





took special interest in his yeshibah, and often he 
signed his responsa “the one who is much occu- 
pied with his pupils” (Responsa, Nos. 80, 81, ef pas- 
sim). He was consulted by rabbis even from Italy 
and Turkey (2). Nos. 12, 18, 21, 89). 

His printed works are: (1) “Meir ‘Ene Haka- 
mim” (Venice, 1619), novell forming a casuistic 
commentary on the Talmud, Rashi, and Tosafot; 
published by his son Gedaliah. It has since been 

republished several times, and is now 


Works. _ printed in all the principal editions of 
the Talmud under the heading “ Maha- 
ram.” (2) “Manhir ‘Ene Hakamim” (7. 1619), a 


collection of 140 responsa, published by his son 
Gedaliah, who in collaboration with his brother Isaac 
added a preface. His unpublished works include: 
“Ma’or ha-Gadol,” a commentary on the four Tu- 
rim; “Ma’or ha-Katon,” a commentary on the 
“Sha‘are Dura”; “ Ner Mizwah,” a commentary on 
the “Sefer Mizwot Gadol”; “Torah Or,” a homi- 
letic commentary on the Pentateuch; “Or Shib‘at 
ha-Yamim,” a collection, apparently unfinished, of 
orally transmitted laws. 

The method employed by Lublin in his commen- 
tary on the Talmud was the opposite of that adopted 
by him when lecturing to his pupils in the ye- 
shibah. In the latter case, as is usual with great 
casuists, he explained the passages of the Talmud, 
of Rashi, or of the Tosafot at great length,or, as he 
expressed himself, “by profound pilpul” (Maharam 
on ‘Ab. Zarah 22a; Hul. 2b; Niddah 2b). But in 
his commentary or novelle he for the most part 
adopted a short and simple explanation, giving as his 
reason for not expounding a passage at greater 
length that he did not wish to dwell on it too long 
(Hul. 9b, 81b). In certain cases where he employed 
pilpul, he justified himself by saying that he was 
obliged to do so as the students might otherwise in- 
terpret the passage wrongly (Shab. 48a), or because 
he wished to sharpen their minds (7b. 20a). He 
showed a great tendency to correct the text of the 
Talmud (comp. Maharam on Git. 5, 6; Yeb. 59 e¢ 
passim), 

Being a fearless critic, Lublin did not spare 
even the Tosafists when their expressions seemed to 
him obscure (Maharam on Suk. 10; Bezah 7). He 

was generally dogmatic both in his 
Method of novell and in his responsa; he de- 

Interpre-. clared on several occasions that his 

tation. interpretation was the right one and 

that the passage could not be ren- 
dered otherwise (Maharam on Shab. 67 et passim), 
He often attacked Solomon Luria and Samuel Edels, 
saying that their interpretations were erroneous and 
might mislead students (Shab. 58b; Hul. 28a et pas- 
stm). In his responsa he took for his basis the Ama- 
RONIM, whom he declared to be of greater authority 
than the Tosafists, Maimonides, or Mordecai b. Hil- 
lel (Responsa, Nos. 114, 188, 187). Tle violently at- 
tacked Joseph Caro’s Shulhan ‘Aruk, declaring that 
it wasa mixture of laws from different authorities and 
having no connection with one another (#b. No. 11: 
Isserles, Responsa, No. 185). Lublin paid little heed 
to the Cabala, though it is evident from his re- 
sponsum No. 34 that he believed in the sacredness 
of the Zohar. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Buber, Anshe Shem, pp. 182-133: Gratz, 
Geach. 3d ed., x. 53-54; Horodetzki, in ffa-Goren, i. 55-61; 
Lewinstein, ib. pp. 30-54; Nissenbauin, Le-Korot ha-Yehu- 
dim be-Lublin, pp. 31-34, Lublin, 1899; Steinschneider, 
Cat. Boal. col. 1705; J. M. Zunz, ‘Ir ha-Zedek, pp. 28-42. 

8. S. M. SEL. 

LUBLINER, HUGO (pseudonym, Hugo Biir- 
ger): German dramatist; born at Breslau April 22, 
1846. He studied at the industrial school in Berlin, 
and became manager of a cotton and woolen mill. 
Inclination led him to dramatic composition. At 
first he wrote occasionally only, but with such suc- 
cess that he at length gave up business and devoted 
himself wholly to the production of plays. 

Among the best-known of Lubliner’s works are: 
“Nur Nicht Romantisch ” (1865), one-act comedy, 
the only one of his earlier efforts that still holds the 
stage; “ Der Frauenadvokat ” (1873), three-act com- 
edy, which has been performed at all the principal 
German theaters; “Die Modelle des Sheridan” 
(1875), four-act comedy; “Die Florentiner ” (1876), 
tragedy; “Die Adoptierten” (1877), drama; “Ga- 
briele” (1878), drama; “Die Frau Ohne Geist” 
(1879), comedy; “Auf der Brautfahrt” (1880), com- 
edy; “Gold und Eisen” (1881); “Der Jour Fix” 
(1882), comedy; “ Aus der Grossstadt ” (1883); “ Die 
Mitbiirger” (1884), comedy; (with G. von Moser) 
“Glick bei Frauen”; (with Paul Lindau) “ Frau 
Susanne”; “Grifin Lambach” (1886); “Die Glau- 
biger des Glickes” (6th ed., Breslau, 1886); “Die 
Frau von Neunzehn Jahren ” (2b. 1887), the last two 
as parts of the romance-cycle “Berlin im Kaiser- 
reich”; “Die Armen Reichen ” (1886), comedy ; “ Der 
Name” (1888), drama; “Im Spiegel” (1890), com- 
edy; “Der Kommende Tag” (1891), drama; and 
the following comedies: “Das Neue Stiick ” (1894) ; 
“ Aus der Menschlichen Komédie ” (1895); “An der 
Riviera ” (1895); “Die Junge Frau Arneck ” (1895); 
“Roman eines Anstiindigen Midchens” (1896); 
“ Andere Luft,” (1897); “ Das Fiinfte Rad ” (1898) ; and 
“Splitter und Balken” (1899). Some of the forego- 
ing pieces were collected in “Dramatische Werke ” 
(4 vols., Berlin, 1881-82). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brockhaus Konversations-Lexthon; Mey- 
ers Konversations-Lextkon. 


S. N. D. 


LUBLINER, OZIASZ LOUIS (LUDWIK): 
Polish writer ; born 1809 ; diedat Warsaw 1868. After 
the Polish revolution of 1831 he settled in Brussels, 
where he published “ Des Juifs en Pologne,” an ex- 
amination of the condition of the Jews in Russia 
from the historical, legislative, and political points 
of view. He wrote also, in Polish, “ Obrona Zydow ” 
(Warsaw, 1858), a defense of the Jews living in Po- 
lish territory; and a number of articles in Polish 
periodicals on the Jewish question. In 1861 he pub- 
lished in Brussels a work entitled “ Les Confiscations 
des Biens des Polonais,” in which he reviewed the 
various ukases of Emperor Nicholas I. concerning 
Poland, and criticized the cruel treatment of the 
Polish Jews. In 1862 Lubliner was appointed libra- 
rian at the University of Warsaw. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Orgelbrand, Eneyklopedja Powszechna, vol. 

Ix.; American Israetite, ix. 102. 

H. R. J. G. L. 

LUBLINSKY, SOLOMON : German journalist 
and writer; born at Johannisberg, Prussia, Feb. 18, 


203 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lublin 
Lucena 





1868. He was occupied for atime as a clerk ina 
second-hand bookstore at Venice, after which he 
engaged in journalism at Berlin. Later he became 
one of the foremost Jewish writers. In addition to 
his journalistic work Lublinsky produced the follow- 
ing works, published in Berlin: “Jtidische Cha- 
ractere bei Grillparzer, Hebbel, und O. Ludwig”, 
* Literatur und Gesellschaft im 19ten Jahrhundert ”’ 
(1899); “Multatuli” and “Der Imperator,” dramas 
(1901); “Gescheitert,” a novel (1901); “ Hannibal,” 
a drama (1902). He died Jan. 1, 1911. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kurschner, Deutscher Literatur-Kalender, 

p. 811; Ahiasaf, 1898-99, p. 117. 

Wl. R. A. 8. W. 

LUBOML: Town in the government of Vol- 
hynia, Russia. Jews lived there as early as the six- 
teenth century, though the attitude of the Christian 
inhabitants toward them was distinctly hostile. In 
1557 the Jewish community resolved that none of its 
members should buy property within the city, for 
there was danger of its being attacked or set on fire 
by the Christian inhabitants. In 1576 this decision 
was reaffirmed by the leaders of the community with 
the indorsement of R. Abraham Polyak. Those who 
had violated this rule were warned to sell their prop- 
erty to Christians, under penalty of a fine or of some 
other punishment. Outside the town the Jews 
owned eight parcels of land; some of them leased 
grist-mills, and others leased three lakes, paying 
for their leases in money, pepper, saffron, and salt 
fish to the total value of about 400 gold ducats. 
The population of Lubom! in 1897 was 4,600, of 
whom 8,300 were Jews, It has 349 Jewish arti- 
sans and 52 Jewish day-laborers. The seventeen 
hadarim give instruction to 870 pupils, and 60 are 
instructed in the Talmud Torah (1898). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Katz, Le-Korot ha-Yehudim, p. 7 Berlin, 

1899; Regesty i Nadpisi, i. 241, St. Petersburg, 1899. 

H.R. S. J. 

LUCAS, LOUIS ARTHUR: African explorer; 
born in London Sept. 22, 1851; died at sea Nov. 
20,1876. After traveling inthe United States (1872) 
and Egypt (1873), he organized an expedition to ex- 
plore the Kongo, He left London Sept. 2, 1875, and 
arrived at Khartum in Jan., 1876, leaving that place 
in the following April. He next went with Colonel 
Gordon to the Albert Nyanza, and navigated the 
northern part of the lake in the first steamboat ever 
launched on it. He returned to Khartum in Aug., 
1876, and reached Suakim on Nov. 18 of that year. 
In connection with this journey, Lucas compiled a 
vocabulary of Bisharin words, which was pub- 
lished in the “ Journal of the Anthropological Insti- 
tute.” 

In the same year (1876), against the advice of 
Gencral Gordon and his staff, Lucas attempted to 
cross Africa, but, becoming sick and paralyzed, he 
soon had to return to Khartum. After lying ill] for 
three months, he died on a steamboat between Sua- 
kim and Suez, and was buried at Jiddah. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Times (London), Dee. 26, 1876; Jew. Chran. 


Dec. 29, 1876; Athenwum, Dec., 1876; Proeeedings of the 
Royal Geographical Society, 1876; Dict. Nat. Biog. 


J G. L. 


LUCCA (Hebr. spr) : City of Tuscany, Italy. 
Its Jewish community is known in literature espe- 


cially through the Kalonymus family of Lucca, 
whose ancestor saved the life of the German em- 
peror Otto II. after the battle of Cotrone in Calabria 
(982), and seems thereupon to have settled at Ma- 
yence, where the family had extensive privileges. 
In the twelfth century the community again appears 
in literature in the person of Abraham ibn Ezra, 
who lived at Lucca for a time while writing his 
grammatical works “Yesod” and “Sefat Yeter,” as 
well as his commentary on the Pentateuch and 
Isaiah. He seems to have given instruction here in 
Hebrew grammar and Biblical science; one of his 
pupils, Hayyim, he mentions by name. The com- 
munity was not a large one at that time; for Ben- 
jamin of Tudela, who visited it in 1165, found only 
forty Jews, under the leadership of R. David Sam- 
ue] and R. Jacob. 

In 1431 permission was granted to Angelo di Gaio, 
a Jew from Forli, to settle in Lucca and to opena 
bank for loans. <A dispute arose, however, when 
King Sigismund, as he passed through Lucca, forci- 
bly imposed a tax of 1,500 gold florins on the Jew, 
and Di Gaio left the city, while his son Gaietro 
opened a bank elsewhere, Later a similar permis- 
sion was granted in Lucca to Isaac Manuelli & Co., 
who with others had settled in the city, and had a 
synagogue in a private house, besides a cemetery. 
Certain enemies of the Jews lodged a complaint 
against them with Pope Nicholas V.; but he, annul- 
ling the constitutions of Clement V. and a decree of 
the Bishop of Lucca, declared himself in favor of the 
Jews and confirmed their privileges. Other Jews 
who had banks in Lucca were David Dattali or da 
Tivoli and Vitale Isaac. In 1489, however, as a 
result of the anti-Jewish preaching of Bernardino 
da Feltre (in whose way many difficulties were 
placed at first in order to protect the Jews), the 
community decided to open a mont-de-pieta, and 
the Jews, who had objected to its establishment, 
were obliged to pay a fine of 1,300 florins, 

Since their residence in Lucca was neither profit- 
able nor secure, the Jews abandoncd the city ; accord- 
ing to some sources they were driven fromit. After 
1500 they returned, but they were in general not 
permitted to stay more than fifteen days consecu- 
tively. There are records, dated as late as May, 
1728, of the names of Jews who had permission to 
make an extended residence in the city. After the 
French Revolution the Bacciochi family desired in 
vain to attract to the principality Jews who would 
buy property from the state. 

Lucca has never had a Jewish community of any 
importance, and at present (1904) only about thirty 
Jews live there. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Aronius, Regesten, Nos. 70, 186; Rosin, Die 
Religionsphilosophie des Abraham tbn Esra, in Monats- 
schrift, xi. 21; Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, ed. Asher, 
i. 37, ii. 16; Depping, Die Juden im Mittelaiter, pp. 368 


et seq.; Regio Archivio dt Stato di Lueca, i. 208, 210-211, 
362; lii. 387-388, s.v. Ebrei. 
G. I. E.—V. C. 


LUCENA (moxpD‘Ss, sap%Sy): City near Cor- 
dova, Spain, magnificently situated, and surrounded 
by strong walls and wide moats. In early times it 
was inhabited almost exclusively by Jews who had 
arrived together with its founders; hence it was 
called “Jews’ City,” an epithet applied also to 


Lucerne 
Lulab 





Granadaand Tarragona. The Jews of Lucena, who 
carried on extensive trade and industries, were, ac- 
cording to an Arabic writer, richer than those of 
any other city. They enjoyed the same freedom as 
their coreligionists in the large Mohammedan cities. 
Their rabbi, who was elected by the entire commu- 
nity, was granted special privileges, and acted as 
judge in the civil and criminal cases arising in the 
community. 

The Jews lived peaceably until the Almoravides 
came into power. A certain fakih of Cordova pre- 
tended to have discovered a tradition according to 
which the Jews had entered into an agreement with 
Mohammed that they would embrace Islam at the 
end of the fifth century after the Hegira. Yusuf 
ibn Teshufin thereupon went to Lucena (1107) to 
induce the Jews of that city to fulfil the promises 
made by their ancestors. As the Jews suspected 
Yusuf of caring for their money rather thau for 
their faith, they applied to [bn Hamdin, the cadi of 
Cordova, or, according to Condé, to the vizier Ab- 
dalah ibn ‘Ali, who induced the king to compro- 
mise the matter by accepting a very large sum of 
money. The Jews were glad to escape so easily. 
A worse fate befell them thirty-nine years later un- 
der the rule of the Almohades, whose leader, ‘Abd 
al-Mu’min, persecuted and robbed them and forced 
them to accept Islam; and the flourishing and 
wealthy city, the seat of Jewish science, was des- 
troyed (1146). At the beginning of the eleventh 
century several important scholars lived in Lucena, 
as also their most brilliant pupil, Abu al-Walid ibn 
Janah. When Ferdinand III. of Castile conquered 
Andalusia he presented Lucena to the first bishop 
of Cordova, Don Lope, his former teacher. Isaac 
Alfasi founded a large Talmudic academy in Lucena, 
and here also Isaac ibn Ghayyat, Isaac ibn Albalia, 
and Joseph ibn Migash were prominent. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jdrisi, Geogra/fia, p. 265, Leyden, 1866; Condé, 

Historia de la Dominacion de los Arabes en Esparia, ii., 


ch. xxili.; Rios, Hist, i. 227 et seq., 300. 365; Dozy, Gesch. der 
Mauren in Spanien, ti. 388: Gratz, Gesch. v. 116 et seq.. 187. 


G. M. K. 


LUCERNE: City of Switzerland, in the canton 
of the same name. Jews were living there as early 
as the middle of the thirteenth century. The earli- 
est records of the town contain regulations for the 
sale of the flesh of animals slaughtered according to 
ritual: “ When a Jew slaughters an animal, the meat 
shall be sold ‘hinten an in der Schall,’ and it shall 
also be stated that it belongs to the Jew.” The regu- 
lations further say that the Jews who have obtained 
rights of sojourn or citizenship “shall offend no one, 
either by words or by deeds, either in the city or 
without it, And no one shall offend or injure the 
Jews ‘von deheines Kindes wegen on des Rates 
wissende,’ on pain of paying a fine of five pounds, 
without remission; and if the offender be so poor 
that he can not pay this fine. he shall nevermore set 
foot in the city.” As elsewhere in Switzerland, the 
Jews in Lucerne were engaged in money-lending, 
they alone being privileged to charge interest on 
loans. In 1401 they were expelled from the city. 

Tt was not until about 1864 that a Jew (from En- 
dingen) again settled in Lucerne. The city has now 
(1904) a Jewish community numbering forty-two 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





204 


—es 


members. In 1900 there were 336 Jews in the en- 
tire canton. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ulrich. Jiidisehe Gesehiehten in der Sehieveiz, 
pp. 15 et xey.; Pfyffer, Geach. der Stadt und des Kantons 
Luzern, p. 151; Kopp, Geschichtsbilder der Schweiz, i. 347 
et seq. 


G. M. K. 

LUCIFER (woddpoc): Septuagint translation 
of “ Helel [read “ Helal”] ben Shahar” (= ™ the bril- 
liant one,” “sonof the morning ”), name of the day, 
or morning, star, to whose mythical fate that of the 
King of Babylon tscompared in the prophetic vision 
(Isa. xiv. 12-14). It is obvious that the prophet in 
attributing to the Babylonian king boastful pride, 
followed by a fall, borrowed the idea from a popu- 
lar legend connected with the morning star: and 
Gunkel (‘Schépfung und Chaos,” pp. 182-134) is 
undoubtedly correct when he holds that it repre- 
sents a Babylonian or Hebrew star-myth similar to 
the Greek legend of Phaethon. The brilliancy of the 
morning star, Which eclipses all other stars, but is 
not seen during the night, may casily have given rise 
toamyth suchas was told of Ethana and Zu; he was 
led by his pride to strive for the highest seat among 
the star-gods on the northern mountain of the gods 
(comp. Ezek. xxviii. 14; Ps. xlvili. 3 [A.V. 2]), but 
was hurled down by the supreme ruler of the Baby- 
lonian Olympus. Stars were regarded throughout 
antiquity as living celestial beings (Job xxxviil. 7), 

The familiarity of the people of Palestine with 
such a myth is shown by the legend, localized on 
Mount Hermon, the northern mountain of Palestine 
and possibly the original mountain of the gods in 
that country, of the fall of the angels under the 
leadership of Samhazai (the heaven-seizer) and Azucl 
(Enoch, vi. 6 e¢ seg.; see Fai of ANGELS). An- 
other legend represents Samhazai, because he re- 
pented of his sin, as being suspended between heaven 
and earth (like a star) instead of being hurled down 
to Sheol (see Midr,. Abkir in Yalk. i. 44; Raymund 
Martin, “Pugio Fidei,” p. 564). The Lucifer myth 
was transferred to Satan in the pre-Christian cen- 
tury, as may be learned from Vita Adz et Evie (12) 
and Slavonic Enoch (xxix. 4, xxxi. 4), where Satan- 
Sataniel (Samael?) is described as having been one 
of the archangels. Because he contrived “to make 
his throne higher than the clouds over the earth aad 
resemble ‘My power’ on high,” Satan-Sataniel was 
hurled down, with his hosts of angels, and since 
then he has been flying in the air continually above 
the abyss (comp. Test. Patr., Benjamin, 3: Ephes. 
ii. 2, vi. 12). Accordingly Tertullian (* Contra Mar- 
rionem,” v. 11, 17), Origen (* Ezekiel Opera,” ili. 
356), and others, identify Lucifer with Satan, who 
also is represented as being * cast down from heaven ” 
(Rev. xii. 7, 10; comp. Luke x. 18). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Cheyne, Encyc. Bibl.: Duhbm, Das Buch Je- 
saiah, 1892, p. 96. 3 
K 


LUCUAS: Toward the end of the reign of the em- 
peror Trajan, in 116, the Jews of CYRENE rebelled, 
their leader being Lucuas according to Eusebius 
(“ Hist. Eecl.” iv. 2), Andreias according to Dio Cas- 
sius (Ixviii. 32). These two statements can not be 
harmonized, as some historians have attempted to do, 
by supposing that either of the two names wasa sym- 
bolic one (Lucuas = “the bright or shining one,” 


205 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lucerne 
Lulab 





Andreias = “the brave”); for the authors would 

not have passed over such an explanation in silence. 

Moreover, Eusebius and Dio Cassits refer to differ- 

ent phases of the rebellion. According to a later 

source, Abu al-Faraj, Lucuas sought refuge in Pal- 
estine, Where he was defeated by Marcius Turbo. 

According to Eusebius he was proclaimed king; and 

the Papyrus Parisiensis No. 68 (published by Wilcken 

in “Hermes,” xxvii, 464 e¢ seg.) refers perhaps to 
him. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Miinter, Der Jiidische Krieg, p. 18; Krauss, 
in R. BJ. xxx. 206; Gritz, Gesch. 3d ed., iv. 115; Sebtirer, 
Gresch. 3d ed., i. 665, 

Q, S. Kr. 

LUDASSY (GANS), MORIZ: Hungarian 
journalist; born at Komorn in 1825; died at 
Reichenau Aug. 29, 1885. As early as 1848 he 
was editor of the “Esti Lapok” in Budapest and 
of the “Magyar 
Vilag,” advocating 
in both periodicals 
the cause of the 
Conservatives, 
About fifteen years 
later he went to 
Vienna, where, with 
Georg Apponyiand 
Paul Sennyei, he 
founded the “‘ De- 
batte,” which = ad- 
vocated the estab- 
lishment of a dual 
government in 
Austro-Hungary 
and the political 
equality of the two 
countries, When 
Count Julius An- 
drissy was premier, 
Ludassy was chief 
of the Hungarian 
press bureau and 
was at the same 
time ministerial 
councilor in the de- 
partment of the in- 
terior. Hereturned 
to Vienna, however, where he was commissioned by 
Minister Beust to edit the “ Tagespresse,” the organ 
of the imperial court party during the war of 
1870-71. In recognition of his services he was 
created a Hungarian noble. 

One of his sons, Julius Ludassy, whose pen-name 
is “ Julius Goose,” is one of the editors of the “ Frem- 
denblatt” in Vienna. He has written several come- 
dies, among them “ Maximen,” “Spleen,” and “ Gar- 
rick.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Lex. xi. Agai, Por és Hamu, p. 320. 


Ss. L. Y. 
LUKE. See New TESTAMENT. 


LULAB: Name given to the festive palm-branch 
which with the Erroe is carried and waved on the 
Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot). The three constit- 
uents of the lulab are: (1) a shoot of the palm-tree 
in its folded state before the leaves are spread out; 


Representation of a Lulab on a Glass Dish Found in the Jewish Catacombs 
at Rome. 
(In the Museo Borgeano at Rome.) 


this must be at least three handbreadths long, so that 
it may be waved, and must be bound round with 
a twig or tendril of its own 
kind; (2) three twigs of 
myrtle of the species which 
has its leaves in whorls of 
three; and (8) two willow- 
branches of the kind of 
which the wood is reddish 
and the leaves are long and 
entire (Suk. 29b, 32b, 34a). 
The myrtle-twigs and wil- 
low-branches are tied to the 
lower end of the palm- 
branch—the former on the 
right, and the latter on the 
left—by means of three rings of palm-strips. These 
branches constitute with the etrog the “four spe- 
cies” (“arba‘at ha- 
minim ”), 

The use of the 
lulab is closely con- 
nected with the 
reciting of the 
HAL Len (Ps. exiil.- 
cxviil.). In the 
Second Temple it 
was waved during 
the recitation of the 
passa ges ex pressive 
of thanksgiving or 
prayer, viz., Ps. 
exvill. 1-4, 25 (Suk. 
8%b). The manner 
of waving was as 
follows: Facing 
east and holding 
the lulab in the 
right hand and tlie 
etrog in the left, the 
worshiper shook the 
former in the direc- 
tions east, south, 
west, aud north, 
upward and down- 
ward, forward and 
backward; this was 
in acknowledgment of God’s sovereignty over nature 








(7 A 


Coin of Bar Kokba Bearing 
a Lulab. 
(After Madden.) 





(#.). After the additional sacrifices of the day had 
been offered the lulab and etrog were 

In the carried in procession around the altar 
Temple. inthe court while Ps. cxviil. 25, or the 


refrain NIA 11 YN, was chanted. 
On each of the first six days one such processional cir- 
cuit (““hakkafah”) was made; on the seventh day 
seven circuits took place, and at the end the 
etrogs were caten by the children (Suk. 45a; see also 
Hosua‘'Na Rappan), According to tradition, the 
carrying of the lulab was observed in the Temple 
throughout the seven days of the feast, but outside 
of it on one day only. After the destruction of the 
Tempie, R. Johanan ben Zakkai ordained that the 
practise should be observed everywhere during 
seven days, “in remembrance of the Temple” (Suk. 
Ala, 48b). 
This ordinance is observed in the synagogue (ex- 


Lulab 
Lumley 


cept on Sabbath). The mode of carrying and 
waving the lulab and etrog is the same as it was 
in the Temple, but the first waving takes place be- 
fore the commencement of Hallel, while the usual 

formula of benediction is recited: 


In the “Blessed art thou’... concerning 
Syna-__ the holding of the lulab.” After the 
gogue. Musaf service (which takes the place 


of the additional sacrifices in the 
Temple) the processional circuits, the precentor or 
hazzan leading, are made around the reading-desk, 
or bemah, on which the Torah-scrol! is held in an up- 
right position, while the hosannas (hymns beginning 
and closing with the words N) pwn) are chanted, in 
the same manner as in the Temple. 

The ordinance is binding on every observant Jew. 
One should not break fast before carrying it out. 
In countries where, owing 
to the cost, not every 
household can afford a 
lulab and an etrog, the 
poor are allowed the use 
of those belonging to their 
wealthy brethren. Usu- 
ally the congregationowns 
alulab and an etrog which 
are carried from house to 
house, so that clildren 
and feeble persons who 
can not come to the syna- 
gogue may observe the 
commandment and be al- 
lowed to break their fast 
in due time. 

The ordinance of the 
lulab is derived from Lev. 
xxiii. 40: “And ye shall 
take you on the first day 
the fruit of goodly trees, 
branches of palm-trees, 
and the boughs of thick 
trees, and willows of the 
brook: and ye shall rejoice 
before the Lord your God 
seven days.” Aside from 
the palm-branch and the 
willows the passage does 
not specify what shall be 
used; and the. interpreta- 
tion of the“ fruit of goodly 
trees ” and the “ boughs of 
thick trees” to mean the 
etrog and myrtle respect- 
ively, as also the precise 
manner of using the four 
species, rests on tradition. 
A question as to the cor- 
rectness of the accepted 
interpretation of the pas- 
sage is raised in Lev. R. 
xxx. 15 (comp. also Tan., 
Emor, 20); and the answer 
is, quoting Prov. xxx. 24, 
“There be four things 
which are littl upon the earth, but they are ex- 
ceeding wise,” that the “ wise” explained the four 





(After Picart.) 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


206 





species to mean etrog, lulab, myrtle, and wiiow- 
branches. A justification is attempted in Suk. 32k 
on the ground that “boughs of 
thick trees” implies a tree whose 
leaves cover the branches, and 
that this is characteristic of the 
myrtle, or a tree whose fruit and 
wood taste alike (have the same 
aroma), Which again is a peculi- 
arity of the myrtle. The pres- 
ence of the latter characteristic 
is given as justification for the 
choice of the etrog also (7. 37a). 
In Ta‘an. 2b the four species are 
put in close relation with the 
prayers for the annual rainfall 
(comp. also Lev. R. xxx. 18), 
which was believed to be deter- 
mined upon on the Feast of 
Tabernacles (R. H. 16a; comp. 
Suk. 37b); and it is added that 
the choice of them is suitable, 
for as “they can not exist with- 
out water, so also the world can 
not exist without water.” 

In addition to these explana- 
tions, the Midrash (3. 9-14; 
comp. Tan., Emor, 17) indulges 
in many symbolical explanations 
of the four species, e.g., they 
refer to God Himself in Ilis 
various attributes and activities; 
they remind one of the three 
patriarchs and Joseph, or of the 
four mothers of Israel; they 
represent the great Sanhedrin 
with the scholars and their dis- 
ciples and scribes attached to it; 
or the whole people of Isracl in 
its four divisions of (1) pious 
and learned, (2) learned but not 
pious, (8) pious but not learned, 
and (4) those who are neither; 
and lastly they symbolize the 
four chief constituents of the 
human body—the spinal column, 
the heart, the eye, and the 
mouth. The Samaritans and 
Karaites refer the passage in 
Leviticus to the parts constitu- 
ting the booth (“sukkah”), pointing to Neh. viii. 
15, where, however, some different species (“olive- 
branches” and “branches of wild olive”) are enu- 
merated. 

The assumption—drawn from the fact that Plu- 
tarch (“Symp.” iv. 6, 2) and Josephus (* Ant.” 
xiii. 18, § 5: “for it is the custom among the Jews 
for each to have on the Feast of Booths a thyrsus of 
palms and citrons”; comp. also IL Macc. x. 7) refer 
to the lulab as “thyrse” (@tpooc), and the latter, in 
“Ant.” ili. 10, § 4 (“carrying in their hands a bunch 
of myrtle, willow-branches, palms, and citrons ”), as 
eipeocovn—that the carrying of the lulab was con- 
nected with the Bacchic celebrations, or with the 
Pyanepsia and Thargelia, ignores the spirit and tend- 
eucy of the Judaism of the Maccabean period. It 





Lulab, 
(Frown a photograph.) 


207 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lulab 
Lumley 





is repudiated, in his manner, even by Tacitus 
(“ Hist.” v. 5). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Haremberg, in Biblioth. Latbec. iii. 434; A. 


Bichler, in R. EB. J. xxxvii. 181-202 (on the passages in Plu- 
tarch, Josephus, and Tacitus). 


A. I. M. C. 


LULIANI BEN TABRIN: Palestinian schol- 
ar of the beginning of the fourth century. The 
name, which is the equivalent of “ Julianus ben Tibe- 
riauus,” has been corrupted into ‘7 2y }2 esp 
in Pesik. R. 7 (ed. Friedmann, p. 26a). His father’s 
name, the usual form of which is Pray, is written 
also 4720 (Ex. R. xliv.) and pow (Gen. R. xeviii. 
24). Luliani is particularly known as the transmit- 
ter of haggadot of his teacher, Isaac Nappaha. He 
is frequently mentioned in pre-Talmudic literature 
and in the Midrash. There is, however, one hagga- 
dah ascribed to Luliani himself: “When the lesser 
people listen to the great and yet the latter do not 
alleviate the burden of the former, they shall ac- 
count for it to God” (Ruth R., Introduction, 6); but 
a similar sentence is ascribed to R. Isaac in Deut. 
R. i. 8. The statement of Midrash Tehillim (to Ps. 
xviii. 29) that Luliani transmitted a haggadah of R. 
Ishmael is apparently a mistake due to the abbrevi- 
ation *"5. Lulianiis mentioned also as having asked 
his teacher Isaac a halakic question (Yer. Meg. 75c). 
Luliani was the father of the Hiyya b. Luliani who 
is frequently mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud 
and who is stated to have caused rain to fall in time 
of drought (Ta‘an. 25a). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. ii. 210 et passim ; 

Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 

8. 8. M. SEL. 


LUMBROSO. See LoMBroso. 


LUMBROZO, JACOB or JOHN: Physician, 
planter, and trader resident in the palatinate of 
Maryland, America, in the middle of the seven- 
teenth century; born at Lisbon; died between Sept. 
24, 1665, and May 31, 1666. From Portugal he re- 
moved to Holland, and ultimately established him- 
sclf in Maryland Jan. 24, 1656. His arrival formed, 
directly or indirectly, an important event in the life 
of the province. He early exercised his profession, 
and apparently enjoyed a lucrative practise. On 
Sept. 10, 1668, letters of denization were issued to 
him, together with certain privileges, enabling him 
to take up land under the liberal terms established by 
the proprietary—a privilege of which he promptly 
availed himself. A “Mistress Lumbrozo” was liv- 
ing in Sept., 1663, having arrived in Maryland in the 
preceding year. She was probably not of Jewish 
descent. Lumbrozo appeared as a witness in a law- 
suit in 1657, and served as a juror in 1668. In 1665 he 
was granted a commission to trade with the Indians. 
He seems to have been in active intercourse with 
London merchants and to have corresponded with a 
sistcr in Holland. He amassed considerable wealth 
both in real and in personal property. 

Although Jews were resident in Maryland prob- 
ably from its settlement, Lumbrozo is the first [s- 
raelite—indeed the only one of that time—of whose 
faith there is documentary evidence. He was one 
of the earliest medical practitioners in the palati- 
nate, and for nearly a decade continued to be an im- 


portant figure in its economic activity. His carcer 
is of widest interest in its relation to the history and 
nature of religious toleration in Maryland. After 
living for at least two years in undisturbed quiet as 
a recognized dew, and probably as a professed one, 
he was in 1658, through the activity of zealots and 
in consequence of his own indiscretion, arrested, 
under the provisions of the so-called Toleration Act 
of 1649, for “blasphemy,” that is, for denial of the 
doctrine of the Trinity, thus becoming liable to pun- 
ishment by death and forfeiture of lands and goods. 
The general amnesty proclaimed in the province ten 
days later, upon the accession of Richard Cromwell 
to the English protectorate, gave him freedom. 
Whether in consequence of his high economic impor- 
tance or because of the milder interpretation put 
upon the statute in the case of discreet unbelievers, 
no further attempt was made to vindicate the letter 
of the law; and thereafter Lumbrozo gradually suc- 
ceeded in exercising most of the rights of a fully 
naturalized citizen. 

Record exists of a John Lumbrozo, born in June, 
1666, who apparently was a posthumous child of 
Jacob’s. But the widow married very soon after 
his birth; and the name “ Lumbrozo ” figures no more 
in Maryland colonial records. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hollander, Some Unpublished Material Re- 
lating to Dr. Jacob Lumbrozo of Maryland, in Pull. Am. 
Jew. Hist. Soc. No. 1 (1893), pp. 25-389; idem, Civil Status of 
the Jews in Maryland, 1624-1776, ib. No. 2 (1894), pp. 83-44. 
and references therein cited. 

A. J. H. Ho. 

LUMLEY, BENJAMIN : Director of Her Maj- 
esty’s Theatre, Drury Lane, London; born in Can- 
ada 1811; died in London March 17, 1875. He was 
the son of Louis Levy, a Canadian merchant who 
died in London about 1831. Benjamin was educated 
at King Edward’s School, Birmingham, and early 
in life assumed the name “Lumley.” In 1832 he 

became a solicitor in London, and from 1837 to 1842 

was a parliamentary agent, publishing in 1838 a 

standard book on “ Parliamentary Practise on Pass- 

ing Private Bills.” From 1836 to 1841 he super- 
intended the finances of Her Majesty's Theatre for 

Laporte, and on Sept. 25, 1841, succeeded him in 

the management. He transformed the whole sys- 

tem of opera, and employed artists like Grisi, Per- 
siani, Mario, Tamburini, and Lablache in grand op- 
era, and Taglioni, Cerito, and Elssler in the ballets. 

These latter he made much more elaborate, introdu- 

cing the famous “ pas-de-quatre ” In 1845, In 1847, 

however, as the result of many quarrels with his 

“stars,” a rival opera-house was opened in Covent 

Garden, and Lumley was saved from ruin only by 

securing the services of Jenny Lind. On her retire- 

ment from the stage in 1849, Lumley’s fortunes be- 
came embarrassed; and his attempt at controlling 
the Paris Opera House in 1850-51 led to further pe- 
cuniary difficulties. After the burning of Covent 

Garden Theatre in 1856 Lumley resumed the man- 

agement of the Drury Lane house; but he failed to 

make it pay, and finally became reduced to such 


circumstances that he accepted the results of two 


benefit performances (1863), He introduced into 
England over thirty Italian operas, including Doni- 
zetti’s “La Favorita,” Verdi’s “Ernani” and “La 
Traviata,” and Auber’s “ Masaniello.” 


Luncez 
Luria 





Lumley wrote two fantastic works of fiction: 
“Sirenia,” 1862; and “Another World,” 1873; the 
latter, describing a utopia in the planet Mars, had 
some success, and ran through three editions, He 
published also his “ Reminiscences,” 1864. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Times (London), March 19, 1875; Illustrated 
Sporting and Dramatic News, March 21, 1875; Boase, Mod- 
ern English Biog.; Dict. Nat. Biog. GQ. L—J 


LUNCZ, ABRAHAM MOSES: Russian 
scholar and editor; born Dec. 9, 1854, at Kovno, 
Russia; went when very young to Jerusalem, where 
he still (1904) lives. Tunez, who has been blind for 
many years, has founded, in conjunction with Dr. 
Koisewski, an institution forthe blind at Jerusalem. 

In the exploration of the Holy Land, Lunez has 
rendered great services from the historical, geo- 
graphical, and physical standpoints, through his 
guide-books for Palestine, his Palestine annuals, and 
his Jerusalem almanac: (1) “Netibot Ziyyon we- 
Yerushalayim: Topography of Jerusalem and Its 
Surroundings” (vol. i, 1876); (2) “Jerusalem, 
Jahrbuch zur Beférderung einer Wissenschaftlich 
Genauen Kenntnis des Jetzigen und des Alten Palis- 
tina” (Hebrew and German, 6 vols., 1881-1903); 
(3) “ Literarischer Palistina-Almanach” (Hebrew; 
since 1894). Heownsa Hebrew printing-press, from 
which he has begun the issue of a Palestinian library, 
Estori Farhi’s “Kaftor wa-Ferah” and Schwarz’s 
“Tebu’ot ha-Arez ” being the first works published. 
He has now (1904) in the press a new edition of 
the Jerusalem Talmud with commentary and intro- 
duction. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sokolow Sefer Zikkaron, p. 184. 

s. M. L. B. 

LUNEL (Hebr. b 9995) : Chief town of the de- 
partment of Herault, France: at times it is called 
mm Sian and ym nypa (see Zerahiah Gerundi, 
preface to “ Ma’or,” and I. de Lattes, “Sha‘are Ziy- 
yon,” p. 75). The Jewish community here is an 
ancient one; important in the eleventh century, it 
became still more prominent in the twelfth. Benja- 
min of Tudela, who visited it in 1166, says (“ Itiner- 
ary,” 1. 3) that it consisted of 3800 members, some 
of whom were very learned and wealthy and took 
pleasure in offering hospitality to poor students 
eager to attend its famous academy. This institu- 
tion had become so important in the twelfth century 
that it was at times called the “dwelling-place of 
the Torah” (“Ma’or” to Pes. vii.), and the “ vesti- 
bule of the Temple” (“ Temim De‘im,” No. 7%). 

The lords of Lunel were in general very well dis- 
posed toward the Jews. In 1252 one of them, 
Gaucelin, employed two Jews of his dominion as 
intermediaries to consult the Spanish Jewish doctor 
Ibrahim in behalf of Alphonse of Poitiers, whose 
eyesight had become seriously affected. In 1295 
Rosselin of Lunel, in spite of the interdictions of the 
Church councils, pawned the revenues of his barony 
toa Jew named Thauros. In 1319 the Jews of Lu- 
nel were arrested, and the property was seized of 
those among them who were charged with having, 
during the preceding Holy Week, “in outrageous 
mockery ” carried a crucifix through the streets of 
Lunel and trailed it in the dust (MS. Aubais, in the 
Nimes Library, fol. 60). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


208 





At present there is not a single Jewish family 
in Lunel, and only a few vestiges of the synagogue 
remain in the former Hotel de Bernis (now belong- 
ing to A. Ménard) in the Rue Alphonse Ménard, 
According to a document in the municipal archives 
(case 5, book i., No. 2319) the cemetery was situ- 
ated on the Mas Desports road. 

The following scholars, or “sages of Lunel,” are 
mentioned in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries: 
Meshullam b. Jacob, a very learned man; Judah b, 
Saul ibn Tibbon, physician and translator; Samuel 
ibn Tibbon, translator of Maimonides’ “ Morell Ne- 
bukim”: the Talmudists Zerahiah b. Isaac ha-Leyi 
(Gerundi), Jonathan b. David ha-Kohen, and Mano. 
ah; Abba Mari b. Moses b. Joseph (Don Astruc of 
Lunel), author of the “ Minhat Kena’ot,” a collec- 
tion in which he preserved the letters exchanged 
from 1303 to 1806 between the champions of ortho- 
doxy and the advocates of science and philosophy 
(among the former were the Lunel rabbis Isaac b. 
Abigdor Simeon b, Joseph, called “ En Duran of Lu- 
nel,” and Meir b. Isaiah; among the latter, Solomon 
b. Isaac, called the “ prince,” who was commissioned 
in 1286. together with several other Jews, to collect 
the taxes imposed by King Philip the Fair upon the 
Jews in the jurisdiction of the seneschal of Carcas- 
sonne); the physician Solomon, who is probably 
identical with Maestro Solomon Davin, author of a 
work on fever; Sen Samuel, commentator of the 
“Moreh Nebukim ”; and the astronomer Salmon; 
and in the fourteenth century, the philosopher 
Asher b. Abraham Cohen. 

Several scholars from Lunel bore the surname 
“Yarhi” (= “of Lunel”), among them: Abrahain 
b. Nathan ha-Yarhi, David ha-Yarhi, Aryeh Ju- 
dah ha-Yarhi b. Levi (Zunz, “ Literaturgesch.” p. 
495: idem, “Z. G.” p. 469), and Solomon b. Abba 
Mari ha-Yarhi, who lived in the second half of the 
fourteenth century and wrote a Hebrew grammar 
entitled “ Leshon Limmudim.” The name “ Lunel” 
is still a very common one among the Jews of 
southern France. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Saige, Les Juifs du Languedoc, passim: Re- 
nan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, pp. 512 et seq.; idem, 
Les Ecrivains Juifs, pp. 401, 404 et seq.; Bédarrides, Les 
Juifs en France, pp. 100, 143, 144; Abbé A. Rouet, Notice 
sur da Ville de Lunel au Moyen Age, pp. 13-77; Thomas 
Millerot, Histoire de la Ville de Lunel, pp. 27, 40 et seq.: 
Dom Vaisséte, Histoire Générale du Languedoe, iv. 161; 
Gritz, Gesch. vii. 28 et seg.; S. Kahn, Les Ecoles Jiives et la 
Faculté de Médecine de Montpellier, pp. 7,11; Gross, Gallia 
Judaica, pp. 277 et seq. 

G S. K. 


LUNTSCHITZ, SOLOMON EPHRAIM. 
See EprnaimM, SOLOMON BEN AARON, 

LUNTZ: Name of a family descended from the 
Loans, or Loanz, family of Worms. According to 
a family tradition, Elijah, the sixth in line of direct 
descent from Moses, son of Joselman Loans, emi- 
grated from Worms and settled in the little town of 
Kelm (Chelm; now in the government of Kovno) 
about the year 1700, and became its rabbi. He left 
a son, Meir (b. 1709), whose first son, Elijah of 
Krozhe (Krozher; 1723?-~-1814), was a wealthy and 
pious Talmudist, and whose descendants adopted the 
name of Rabinowitz. His second son, Ezekiel, be- 
came rabbi of Shavli about 1749, and continued in 
that position until his death in 1808. One of Eze- 
kiel’s sons, Moses, enjoyed the rare distinction of 


209 





feing magistrate of Shavli. Another son, Getzel, 
was the great-grandfather of Wolf Luntz of Riga, 
3 Well-known communal worker and one of the 
founders of the Zionist movement in Russia. Abra- 
ham Moses Luncz of Jerusalem does not belong to 
this family, whose pedigree follows: 









=o 
sa 
cee 7 g 
o Ow 
os — Sunt = 
Zeas Q \ sa 
-22c8 ll 8a 
eo Uses an aug 
Sse EI gm Ad 
% OR ao o> 
vy = 22s 
oe = a o—~ 
wo 2 aero) a5 
ren ed dv 
o} = 
i fae 
a 
E 5 
a ad 
= ae 
ham ted 
“a lg. g 
is) 
== ogxo 
cN |_ sand 
i oe 3 es 
& fy apes 
—_ N ir A ° 
: zy | 
3 mo 
~ Se, 
Aa S 
ns i— 1) 
4D a 
~ or Bs 
| To a 
=a mn 
wen ie) ox 
ore uw A ar 
o Ow (oss a 
= 3 a OG alae 
E eS ay ~ |x = 
5 = aks BOS A) ease 
= § HOSE = 20. = 
a ‘aoa pa, = 
= ot RD a I Ss 
-_ dv, ws t ~_ fx] x 
. HAT ' a5 Bl 5 
= oe A=) te os & SBS a 
<< [ @sSe |_#% Bez 
7 A ~ @® — i Samo 
by zr | = on ; — m—-s GL 
= S ooh) 
a | Voss ~ 
=, i at 
= => 
roa | af 
a ie 
tae = 
i—_ OR ~~ 
aa aot sR a 
| 232 age E & 
i — Did o 
mw Se) 
toh ~— 2 = 
ai | =| = =. 2 
N =) ~ fs SS 
oo. = 9 N 
a iS ier ae 
a ss So ml 
2 a 3 
i 3 rs 
ee 
jan) 
Lae | 
N 
= 2s gos 
22> a3 
255085 2 4 aa a 
SS s 2h —te— <8 35 
4 OadRn Ss 2 8s 
Sem gw oS 3s So eaw 
eoreor an bat i N m_ O 
e2cg ae 
esas ea2 
2 S85 ess 
za me 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Judah Lob Luntz, Kobez Shoshanim, pp. 58- 
64, Wareaw, 1891. 
P. Wi. 


H.R. 

LUPERIO (LUPERCIO), ISAAC: A Jew, 
perhaps a Marano, of Spanish descent; lived at 
Smyrna His apology, written in Spanish and di- 
rected ggainst a monk at Seville, and an interpreta- 
tion by him of Daniel’s “seventy weeks,” entitled 
“Apoloxia Repuesta y Declaracion de las Setenta 
Semanas de Daniel, Contra lo Que Escrivio una Per- 
sona Residente en Ruan,” appeared in a Latin trans- 
lation at Basel, 1658. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibl. Hsp.-Port.-Jud. p. 64; De 
Rossi, Bibliotheca Judaica Antichristiana, p. 58; De Rossi- 


Hamberger, Hist. Worterb. p. 186. , 
a. M. K, 


VIII.—14 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lunez 
Luria 


LUPSCHUTZ. See Lurscuirz; Lipscuitrz. 

LURIA: A family with wide ramifications and 
several of whose members were distinguished for 
mystical tendencies and rabbinical Knowledge. 

Abraham b. Nissan Luria: Russian rabbi and 
grammarian of the first half of the nineteenth cen- 
tury. He was rabbi of Skod (Shad 7) in Lithuania, 
and is known chiefly through his grammatical work 
* Nisyonot Abraham ” (Wilna, 1821). It consists of 
two parts, of which the first is on the grammatical 
passages in Rashi’s commentary on the Bible, and 
the second on similar passages occurring in the older 
commentaries on the Mishnah and Talmud. 


= 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibi. Jud. ii. 257; Fuenn, Safah le- 

Ne’emanim, p. 149, Wilna, 1881. 

David b. Aaron Luria: Russian educator; born 
in Minsk about 1800; died in Konigsberg, Prussia, 
July, 1873. The son of wealthy parents, he was 
given a liberal Jewish education, which he later 
supplemented by the acquisition of a knowledge 
of the secular sciences. After Lilienthal’s failure 
(1842) to induce the Jews of Minsk to establish a 
school for Jewish children, Luria took up the work 
and succeeded beyond all expectations. At first op- 
posed by the Orthodox, he soon overcame all oppo- 
sition, and in 1843 gained control of the Talmud 
Torah of Minsk. As its supertntendent, he trans- 
formed it into a modern institution; and his admi- 
rable management won the recognition not only of 
the local authorities, but even of the central govern- 
ment (see “Journal of the Ministry of Public Edu- 
cation,” vol, 538, 1. 40). 

Luria’s success not only turned his former antag- 
onists into warm supporters, but induced the well- 
to-do Jewish merchants to open a school for their 
children so that they might be enabled to receive 
as good an education as was given to the orphans in 
the Talmud Torah. Thus a merchants’ school was 
founded, also under Luria’s management; but it 
failed on account of circumstances over which he 
had no control. The support it had received, 
however, encouraged him to establish the Midrash 
Ezrahim. or citizens’ school, for children of the mid- 
dle class, which proved a great success, although its 
fees were more than double those of the local gym- 
nasium. But all bis hopes were destroyed when his 
classes in the Talmud Torah and his Midrash Ezra- 
him were closed by order of the government, to 
make room for the government schools which were 
then being established in Jewish communities. 
Greatly disappointed, “his only rewards being a 
gold medal from the czar and a short poem by Gott- 
lober” (“ Ha-Nizzanim,” p. 214, Wilna, 1850), he re- 
tired to his books and his studies, and for the rest 
of his life took but little interest in public affairs. 

Luria was the author of “ ‘Omer ba-Sadeh ” (Wil- 
na, 1853), a book for the young, in which Biblical 
passages are explained in a moral and patriotic sense. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Yevreiskaya Biblioteka, tii. 860 et seq.. Ha- 

Shahar, iv, 569; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. pp. 220-221. 

Enoch Zundel b. Isaiah Luria: Russian 
preacher and author; died in Brest-Litovsk Feb. 18, 
1847. He lived for several years in Wilna, and 
later became successively preacher in New Zhagory 
and Novogrudok, both in the government of 


Luria 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDLA 


210 





Kkovno. He wrote “Kenaf Renanim” on “ Perek 
Shirah ” (Krotoschin, 1842; Presburg, 1859; War- 
saw, 1888). He wrote also “Motot Kenafayim,” 
sermons and addenda to his former work, but it re- 
mained in manuscript. A review of the “Kenaf 
Renanim ” is given in “ Orient, Lit.” 1842, No. 26. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, “eneset Yisrael, p. 312; Feinberg, ‘Ir 
Tehilah, p. 228, Warsaw, 1886. 
P. Wr. 


H.R. 

Isaac ben Solomon Ashkenazi Luria 
(ARI): Founder of the modern Cabala; born of 
German parents at Jerusalem in 1534; died at Safed 
Aug. 5, 1572. While still a child he lost his father, 
and was brought up by his rich uncle Mordecai 
Francis, tax-farmer at Cairo, who placed him under 
the best Jewish teachers. Luria showed himself a 
diligent student of rabbinical literature; and, under 
the guidance of Bezalee! Ashkenazi, he, while quite 
young, became proficient in that branch of Jewish 
learning. Attheageof fifteen he married his cousin, 
and, being amply provided for, was enabled to con- 
tinue his studies undisturbed. Whenabout twenty- 
two years old, becoming engrossed with the study 
of the Zohar, which had recently been printed for 

the first time, he adopted the life of a hermit. [le 
removed to the banks of the Nile, and for seven 
years secluded himself in an isolated cottage, giving 
himself up entirely to meditation. He visited his 
family only on the Sabbath, speaking 


Lives as_ very seldom, and always in Hebrew. 
Hermit. Such a mode of life could not fail to 


produce its effect on a man endowed 
by nature with a lively imagination. Luria became 
a visionary. He believed he had frequent inter- 
views with the prophet Elijah, by whom he was in- 
itiated into sublime doctrines. He asserted that 
while asleep his soul ascended to heaven and con- 
versed with the great teachers of the past. 

In 1569 Luria removed to Palestine; and after a 
short sojourn at Jerusalem, where his new cabalistic 
system seems to have met with but little success, 
he settled at Safed. There he formed a circle of 
cabalists to whom he imparted the doctrines by 
means of which he hoped to establish on a new basis 
the moral system of the world. To this circle be- 
longed Moses Cordovero, Solomon Alkabiz, Joseph 
Caro, Moses Alshech, Elijah de Vidas, Joseph Hagiz, 
Elisha Galadoa, and Moses Bassola. They met 
every Friday, and each confessed to another his sins. 
Soon Luria had two classes of disciples: (1) novices, 
to whom he expounded the clemeutary Cabala, and 
(2) initiates, who became the depositarics of his se- 
cret teachings and his formulas of invocation and 


conjuration. The most renowned of the initiates 
was Hayyim Vital of Calabria, who, 
Disciples. according to his master, possessed a 


soul which had not been soiled by 
Adam's sin. In his company Luria visited the sep- 
ulchers of Simeon ben Yohai and of other eminent 
teachers, the situation of which had been revealed 
to him by his constant mentor, the prophet Elijah. 
Luria’s cabatistic circle gradually widened and be- 
came a separate congregation, in which his mystic 
doctrines were supreme, influencing all the religious 
ceremonies. On Sabbath Uuria dressed himself in 
White and wore a fourfold garment to signify the 


four letters of the Ineffable Name. His followers 
looked upon him asa saint who had the power to 
perform all kinds of miracles, while he himself pre- 
tended to be Messiah ben Joseph, the forerunner of 
Messiah ben David. 

Luria used to deliver his lectures extempore and, 
with the exception of some cabalistic poems in Ara- 
maic for the Sabbath service, did not write anything, 

The real exponent of his cabalistic sys- 
His tem was Hayyim Vital. He collected 
Utterances. all the notes of the lectures which 
Luria’s disciples had made; and from 
these notes were produced numerous works, the 
most important of which was the “*Ez Hayyim,” in 
six volumes {see below). <At first this circulated in 
manuscript copies; and each of Luria’s disciples 
had to pledge himself, under pain of excommuniea- 
tion, not to allow a copy to be made for a foreign 
country; so that for a time all the manuscripts re- 
mained in Palestine. At last, however, one was 
brought to Europe and was published at Zolkiev in 
1772 by Satanow. In this work are expounded both 
the speculative Cabala, bascd on the Zohar, and the 
practical or miraculous Cabala (mwyy mba), of 
which Luria was the originator. 

The characteristic feature of Luria’s system in the 
speculative Cabala is his definition of the Sefirot and 
his theory of the intermediary agents, which he 
calls “ parzufim ” (from tpécwrov =“ face”). Before 
the creation of the world, he says, the En Sof filled 
the infinite space. When the Creation was decided 
upon, in order that His attributes, which belong 
to other beings as well, should manifest them- 
selves in their perfection, the En Sof retired into 
His own nature, or, to use the cabalistic term, con- 
centrated Himself Qosy m& Oxy). From this con- 
centration proceeded the infinite light. When in its 
turn the light conceutrated, there appeared in the 
center an empty space encompassed by ten circles 
or dynamic vessels (“kelim”) called “Sefirot,” by 
means of which the infinite realities, though form- 
ing an absolute unity, may appear in their diver- 
sity; for the finite has no real existence of itself. 
However, the infinite hght did not wholly desert the 
center; a thin conduit (4)2°y) of light traversed the 
circles and penetrated into the center. But while 
the three outermost circles, being of a purer sub- 
stance because of their nearness to the En Sof, were 
able to bear the light, the inner six were unable to 
do so,and burst. It was, therefore, necessary to re- 
move them from the focus of the light. For this 
purpose the Sefirot were transformed into “ figures” 

(“parzutim”’). The first Sefirah, Keter, 


The was transformed into the potentially 
Sefirot. existing three heads of the Macro- 


prosopon (“Erek Anfin”): the second 
Sefirah, Hokmah, into the active masculine principle 
called “Father” (“ Abba”); the third Sefirah, Binah, 
into the passive, feminine principle called “ Mother” 
(“Imma”); the six broken Sefirot, into the male child 
(“Ze‘er”), which is the product of the masculine 
active and the feminine passive principles; the tenth 
Sefirah, Malkut, into the female child (“ Bat”). This 
proceeding was absolutely necessary. Had God 
in the beginning created these figures instead of 
the Sefirot, there would have been no evil in the 


211 





world, and consequently bo reward and punish- 
ment; for the source of evil is in the broken Sefirot 
or vessels, while the light of the En Sof produces 
ouly that which is good. These five figures are 
found in each of the four worlds: namely, in the 
world of emanation (moyen ody): in that of crea- 
tion (AN IN ody): in that of formation cody 
a7S°R); and in that of action (wyn Dy), which 
represents the material world. 

Luria’s psychological system, upon which is based 
his practical Cabala, is closely connected with his 
metaphysical doctrines. From the five figures, he 
says. emanated five souls, Neshamah, Ruah, Ne- 
fesh, Hayyah, and Yehidah; the first of these being 
the highest, and the last the lowest. Man's soul is 
the connecting - link between the infinite and the 
finite, and as such js of a manifold character. All 
the souls destined for the human race were created 
together with the various organsof Adam. Asthere 
are superior and inferior organs, so there are superior 
and inferior souls, according to the organs with 
which they are respectively coupled. Thus there 
are souls of the brain, souls of the eye, souls of the 
hand, ete. Each human soul isa spark (“ nizoz ”) from 
Adam, The first sin of the first man caused confu- 
sion among the various classes of souls: the superior 
intermingled with the inferior; good with evil; so 
that even the purest soul received an admixture of 
evil, or, as Luria calls it, of the element of the 
“shells” (“kelipot”). From the lowest classes of 
souls proceeded the pagan world, while from the 
higher emanated the Israelitish world. But, in con- 
sequence of the confusion, the former are not wholly 
deprived of the original good, and the latter are not 
altogether free from sin. This state of confusion, 
which gives a continual impulse toward evil, will 
cease With the arrival of the Messiah, who will estab- 
lish the moral system of the world upon a new basis. 
Until that time man’s soul, because of its deficien- 
cies, Can not return to its source, and has to wander 
not only through the bodies of men and of animals, 
but even through inanimate things such as wood, 
rivers, and stones. 

To this doctrine of metempsychosis Luria added the 
theory of the impregnation (“ ‘ibbur ”) of souls; that 
is to say, if a purified soul has neglected some relig- 
ions duties on earth, it must return to the earthly 
life, and, attaching itself to the soul of a living man, 

unite with it in order to make good 

Return of such neglect. Further, the departed 
the Soul. soul of a man freed from sin appears 
again on carth to support a weak soul 

which feels unequal to its task. However, this 
union, which may extend to three souls at one time, 
can only take place between souls of homogeneous 
character; that is, between those which are sparks of 
the same Adamite organ. The dispersion of Israel 
has for its purpose the salvation of men’s souls; and 
the purified souls of Israelites unite with the souls of 
men of other races in order to free them from demo- 
niacal influences. 
his forehead a mark by which one may learn the na- 
ture of his soul: to which degree and class it belongs; 
the relation existing between it and the superior 
world; the wanderings it has already accomplished ; 
the means by which it can contribute to the estab- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


According to Luria, man bears on 


Luria 


lishment of the new moral system of the world; 
how it can be freed from demoniacal influences; and 
to which soul it should be united in order to become 
purified. This union can be effected by formulas 
of conjuration. 

Luria introduced his mystic system into religious 


observances. Every commandment had for him a 
mystic meaning. The Sabbath with 
Influence all its ceremonies was looked upon as 


on Ritual. the embodiment of the Divinity in 
temporal life; and every ceremouy 
performed on that day was considered to have an 
influence upon the superior world. Every word, 
every syllable, of the prescribed prayers contain hid- 
den names of God upon which one should meditate 
devoutly while reciting. New mystic ceremonies 
were ordained and codified under the name of 
“Shulhan ‘Aruk shel Ari.” This tendency to sub- 
stitute a mystic Judaism forthe rabbinical Judaism, 
against which Luria was warned by his teacher of 
Cabala, David ibn Abi Zimra, became still stronger 
after Luria’s death. His disciples, who applied to 
him the epithets “Holy” and “Divine,” sank fur- 
ther in mysticism and paved the way for the pseudo- 
Messiah Shabbethai Zebi. 

The following are the works attributed to Luria 
by his disciples, given in the order of their pub- 
lication : 

1595. Marpe Nefesh, on the purification of the soul. Venice. 
1600. Tikkune ha-Tesbubah, on penitence. Published by Elijah 
Moses de Vidas. Venice. 


1615. Seder we-Tikkun Keri’at Shema‘, mystic explanations of 
the Shema*. Prague. 
1620. Sefer ha-Kawwanot, mystic explanations of the prayers. 


Venice. (With corrections by Pethahiah ben Joseph, 
Hanau, 1624: Amsterdam, 1710; Jessnitz, 1723; abridged, 
under the title “Zot Hukkat ha-Torah,” by Abraham 
Hazzekuni, Venice, 1659.) 

1624. Tikkune Shabbat, mystic poems for Sabbath, and explana- 
tions of the Sabbath ceremonies. Venice, 

1652. Sefer Ma‘yan ha-Hokmah, on Creation and on the union 
between the higher and lower spheres, first published 
by Abraham Kalmankes. Amsterdam. 

1683. Derek Emet, annotations on the Zohar and the “‘ Sefer ha- 
Tikkunim.” In three parts, Venice, 1665. 

1663. Notes on the ** Zohar he-Hadash,” with text. Venice. 

1680. Shulhan ‘Aruk, mystic explanations of many religious 
ceremonies. 

Mubhar she be-A bot, cabalistic commentary on Pirke Abot. 


1710. Re‘amim u-Re‘ashim, prognostications. Constantinople. 
1715, Notes on the Zohar, with text. Amsterdam. 


be 


1719. Perush Sefer Yezirah, commentary on the **Sefer Yezi- 
rah.”? Amsterdam. 

1728, Tikkun Ashmurot, midnight prayers termed *‘bazot.” 
Alnsterdam. 

1737. Golel Or, on metempsychosis. 
fah Bikayim. Smyrna, 

1766. Hadrat Melek, commentary on the Zohar. 
Shalom ben Moses Buzaglio. Amsterdam. 

1781. Seder ha-Tefillah, a book of praver. Published by Aryeh 
ben Abraham. Zolkiev. 

1785. Likkute Shas, cabalistie dissertations on several Talmudic 
treatises. Korzec, 

178. Zohar ha-Rakia’, commentaries on the Zohar, with the 
text. Korzec. 

1785. Kol be-Ramah, on the Idra Rabba, with additions by Jacob 
ben Hayyim Zemah. Korzec. 

1788. Kelalot Tikkunim we-’Aliyyot ha-"Olamot, on the ascension 
of the soul. Lemberg. 

1839. Ma’or we-Sheinesh, cabalistic collectanea. Published by 
Judah ben Abraham Raphael Koriat. J.eghorn. 

Hayyim Vital, as stated above, produced from the notes of 

Luria’s lectures a work entitled * ‘Ez Hayyim’’ (kxorzec, 1784), 

in six volumes: (1) ** Ozerot Hayyim,”* containing twenty-one 

cahalistie essays; (2) “Sefer Dernshim,”’ cabalistic explana- 

tions of the Bible; (3) “‘ Sefer Kawwancet,”’ mystic explanations 


Published by Meir ben Hali- 


Published by 


Luria 
Luther 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


212 





of the prayers; (4) **Ta‘ame ha-Migwot.” on the precepts: ©) 
*sefer ba-Gilgulim,’’ on metempsychosis; (6) “°Sefer Likku- 
tim,” miscellanea, According to Azulai, Luria wrote in the 
earlier part of his life novelle on Zebahim and Bezah. A hala- 
kie consultation addressed by Luria to Joseph Caro is inserted 
in "' Abkat Rokel” (§ 156). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Solomon Shelemiel ben Hayyim, Shiite ha- 
Ari, Korzee, 1785; Orhot Zaddikim, Leghorn, 18); Napb- 
tali Herz ben Jacob Elhanan, Toledot ha-Ari, published with 
the ‘Emek ha-Melek, Amsterdam, 1648; Hayyiin Cohen, Ma- 
‘aseh ha-Ari, in the introduction to his Mekor Hayyin, ib. 
1655; Sefer Sedah ha-Ari, ib. W20; Mavaseh Nissim shel 
ha-Ari, ib. 1720; Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 104 > Conforte, 
Kore ha-Dorot, p. 40b; Rossi, Dizionario, p. 1&6; Steinschnei- 
der, Cat. Boal. cot, 1133: idem, Jewish Literature. p. 456; D. 
Ch. Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, p. 134, London, 1865; Griitz, 
Giesch, ix. 486 et seq.; Fuenn, Keieset Yisrael, p. 630. 

K. I. Br. 
Johanan ben Aaron ben Nathanael Luria: 
Alsatian Talmudist; lived successively at Niedern- 
heim and Strasburg at the end of the fifteenth cen- 
tury and in the beginning of the sixteenth. After 
having studied for many years in German yeshibot, 
he returned to Alsace and settled in Strasburg, 
where he founded a yeshibah by permission of the 
government, Luria was the author of an ethical 
work entitled “Hadrakah” (Cracow, ¢. 1579) and 
of “ Meshibat Nefesh ” (Neubauer, “ Cat. Bodl. Hebr. 

MSs.” No. 257), a haggadic and mystical commen- 

tury on the Pentateuch, founded on Rashi. To this 

commentary Was appended a dissertation in which 

Luria refuted the arguments advanced by Chris- 

tians against Judaism. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Carmoly, [tinéraires cde la Terre Satite, p. 
345; Zunz, Z G. pp. 106-180; Orient, Lit. xi. 546; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col, 1398. 

K, I. Br. 

Solomon b. Jehiel Luria: Rabbi and author; 
born in Brest-Litovsk, Lithuania, 1510; died at Lub- 
lin Nov. 7, 1578. When stilla youth his parents sent 
him to Posen, where he studied under the guidance 
of his grandfather Rabbi Isaac Klauberia. He left 

Posen in 1535, owing to an extensive fire which des- 

troyed his grandfather’s property. On his return 

to his native place he assiduously continued his 


studies. Here he married Lipka, daughter of Rabbi 
Kalonymus. After some time he was clected rabbi 


of Brest, and established a yeshibah there. About 
1550 he received the appointment of rabbi and head 
of the yeshibah at Ostrog, and in 1555 he moved 
to Lublin, where he became head of the famous 
yeshibah. 

Concerning his method of study and teaching he 
savs: “[ was painstaking always to trace the last 
source of the Halakah, which I used to discuss with 
my friends and pupils, spending sometimes a week 
in research and close reasoning till I came upon the 
root of the matter; then I used to put it down in 
my book, And it was always my habit to quote ail 
the opinions of my predecessors, according to their 
rank of authority, also the decisions and rulings of 
those who compiled the responsa, in order to avoid 
the suspicion of plagiarism or the reproach that I 
had overlooked the opinion of some great authority. 

In two years I did not reach in my 


His studies further than half of the tract- 
Method ate Yebamot. I spent a whole year 
of Study. on two chapters of the tractate Ketu- 


bot; and the chapter ‘ Mizwat Halizah’ 
[Yebamot] took me half a year.” Itis therefore not 
surprising that Luria was very independent, and 





was not afraid to say in public: “Do not take any 
notice of what people have been accustomed tilj 
now to consider as permitted; for most of them 
used to read only the ‘ Tur Orah Havyim’ by Rabbi 
Jacob ben Asher. He gave permission in the name of 
his father, Rabbi Asher; and in his introduction he 
even asserts that wheuevcr he quotes the ruling of 
his father, it should be considered as decisive for 
practise. And, indeed, many people took it for 
granted that it is to be looked upon as the last and 
absolnte decision, as though it were handed down 
to usas a tradition of Moses from Mount Sinai. The 
fact that he agrees with his father does not pledge 
us to agree with him; indeed, so it is in many ritual 
matters that the general usage is against him.” Nor 
does he spare even Joseph Caro, whom he accuses 
of having occasionally expressed merely superficial 
views in his effort to harmonize conflicting laws, as 
well as of having sometimes based his decisions on 
the reading of corrupt texts. 

With even more asperity he speaks of Benjamin 
Zeeb and his responsa, “Binyamin Ze’eb,” which 
he warns the public are worthless and full of pla- 
giarisms. Of some of the rabbis of his time he 
says as follows: “The ordained are many; but 
those who know something are few, The number 
of overbearing ones is steadily increasing, none of 
whom Knows his place. As soon as they are or- 
dained they begin to dominecr and, by means of 
their wealth, to gather about themselves disciples, 


just as lords hire slaves to run before them. They 
ruJe over the scholars and the congregation. They 


excommunicate and anathematize, and they ordain 
pupils who did not study under them, and receive 
therefor money and reward. They are always seek- 
ing their own interests.” 
Though Luria was not on very good terms with 
most of his contemporaries, yet he formed an inti- 
mate friendship with Rabbi Moses 
Friendship Isserles of Cracow, as may be seen 


with from their correspondence. But this 
Isserles. friendship did not prevent Luria from 


remonstrating with Isserles when he 
icarned that the latter was devoted to the study of 
philosophy, for he exhorted him with the words: 
“Thou art turning to the wisdom of the uncircum- 
cised Aristotle. Wo unto my cyes that they have 
seen such a thing! Thisis a sin for such a prince in 
Israel.” The adherents of the Cabala he censured 
severely, saying: “These modern ones pretend to 
belong to the sect of the cabalists. . . . They can 
not see in the light of the Zohar, which they do not 
understand. . . . Therefore, do not go in their 
ways. Have nothing to do with things secret.” 
Luria’s works include: (1) “Hekmat Shelomoh” 
(Cracow, 1582), critical notes on the Talmud and its 
earlier commentaries; it has been appended to the 
later editions of the Talmud; (2) Responsa (Lub- 
lin, 1574); (8) “ Yam shel Shelomoh ” (Prague, 1615, 
and later), novelle on different treatises of the Tal- 
mud: on Baba Kamma,; on Hullin (Cracow, 1646); 
on Yebamot (Altona, 1740); on Bezah (Lublin, 
1636); on Kiddushin (Berlin, 1766); and on Gittin 
(2d. 1766) ; (4) * Yeri’ot Shelomoh,” supercommentary 
on the commentary of Elijah Mizrahi on Rashi. 
prepared for print by his pupil Jehiel ben Megshul- 


213 





lam; (5) “*Ammude Shelomoh ” (Basel, 1600), com- 
mentary on the book of precepts by Rabbi Moses 
of Coucy; (6) “‘Ateret Shelomoh”; (7) “ Zemirot” 
(Venice, 1602), commentary on the “Sha‘are Dura” 
of Isaac of Ditren (Lublin, 1598), liturgical songs; 
and others, Many of Luria’s works are still extant 
in manuscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pascheles [sraelitischer Votkskalender, x. 49; 
Der Orient, ix. 568; Ha-Magyid, p. 27, Lyek, 1858; Horo- 
dezky, in Ha-Goren, i. 95; idem. Kerem Shelonioh (1896); 
Rabbinowicz, Ma@amar, p. 46, Munich, 1877; Steinschneider, 
Cat. Bodl, cols. 23-65: Nissenbaum. Le-Korat ha-Yehudim 
be-Liuhlin, p. 20, Lublin, 1899: Epstein, Die Iamilie Lurie, 
p. 14, Vienna, 1901; Feinstein, ‘Jr Tehillah, p. 198, Warsaw, 
1886 ; hohn-Zedek, Shem u-She’erit, p. 21, Cracow, 189% ; Giide- 
mann, Quellenschriften zur Geseh, des Cnrterrichts, p. 59, 
Berlin, 1891; Gratz, Gesch. ix. 436; Ha-Asif (Warsaw), v. 
27; Isr. Letlerbode, xi. 165. 

Ss. S. B. Fr. 

LUSITANUS, AMATUS. See Juan Roprico 
DE CASTEL-BRANCO. 

LUST. See YEZER wa-RaA‘, 

LUSTRATION. See ABLUTION. 


LUTHER, MARTIN®*: German church re- 
former; born at Eisleben Nov. 10, 1488; died there 
Feb. 18, 1546. The Reformation originated in the 
Renaissance, being due partly to the general critical 
exaniination of traditional doctrines, and partly to 
the study of ancient languages, particularly of Greek 
and Hebrew, a study which was advocated and 
fostered by the Humanists, and the necessity of 
which was implied in the fundamental principle 
of Luther that Scripture alone is the infallible 
guide in religious belief. Luther attempted from 
the start to win over Reuchlin, the author of the 
first Hebrew grammar written by a Christian and 
the defender of rabbinical literature against the 
attacks of the apostate Pfefferkorn and against the 
Doniinicans who supported him; but while Me- 
lanchthon, Reuchlin’s nephew, was Luther’s truest 
friend, and while he did not succeed in winning 
Reuchlin over to his cause, he incurred the enmity 
of Reuchlin’s foes, one of them being the Domini- 
can friar, HOOGSTRATEN. 

While Luther always upheld the Bible as the 
basis of belief, and while he speaks very highly of 
Hebrew, which he calls the best, the richest, and at 

the same time the plainest language, 

Scant he himself did not go back to the 
Knowledge original text; indeed, he admits that 
of Hebrew. he was not a Hebrew scholar, and 
especially that he knew nothing of We- 

brew grammar (70. ]xii, 818). A Hebrew book he had 
received, he gave to a friend, saying, “ Execedit. 
enim vires meas” (“ Luther’s Siimmtliche Werke,” 
li. 612, “Briefe”). His exegetical principle is one 
which reveals the context by inspiration rather than 
by grammatical exposition, and while he speaks 
very highly of Moses and David Kimhi, whose 
works he knew through Nicholas de Lyra and 
Paulus of Burgos, he often inveighs, in his charac- 
teristically coarse manner, against what he calls the 
perversions of the rabbinical exegetes who “ versu- 
Chen, drehen, deuten, martern fast alle Wort” 
(0), xxxii, 174 [“ Von den Juden und Thren Liigen ”] 
and Ixii. 311-817; see Geiger, “Das Stndium der 





* This article is limited to the presentation of Luther’s re- 
lation to Jews and Judaism. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


aedern”; #5, xii. 355), 


Luria 
Luther 


Ifebr. Sprache in Deutschland,” pp. 5-7, 182, Breslau, 
1870). He speaks highly of the Jewsas having been 
chosen by God as the instruments for the promulga- 
tion of His message to the world. “The Jews,” he 
says, “are of the best blood on earth” (Luther, Zc, 
xxv. 409); “through them alone the Holy Ghost 
wished to give all books of Holy Scripture to the 
world; they are the children and we are the guests 
and the strangers; indeed, like the Canaanitish 
woman, we should be satistied to be the dogs that 
eat the crums which fall from their master’s 
table” (xxv. 260). 

In Luther's attitude toward the Jews two periods 
have to be distinguished. During the earlier, which 
lasted until 1587 or shortly before, he is full of com- 
passion for their misery and enthusiastic for their 
conversion to Christianity; in the later, toward the 
end of his life, he denounces them in unmeasured 
terms, saying that it is useless to convert any Jew, 
and accusing them of a relentless hatred of Cliris- 
tianity and of all the crimes which their enemies 
ever charged them with — well-poisoning. ritual 
murder, cowardly assassinations of their paticnts, 
etc. He wishes the princes to persecute them mer- 
cilessly and the preachers to set the mob against 
them. What caused this change of attitude is not 
exactly known. Luther himself speaks of polem- 
ical works written by Jews in which they blas- 
phemed Jesus and Mary, of the propaganda which 
they made among Christians and which caused 
quite a number of Christians in Moravia to em- 
brace Judaism, and of three Jews who had come to 
him to convert him. 

The first of Luther’s works dealing with the Jews 
is a pamphlet entitled “Dass Jesus ein Geborner 

Jude Sei,” which appeared in 1543 and 

‘‘Dass Je- was republished seven times in the 
sus ein Ge- same year (vb. xxix. 45-74). The oc- 
borner  casion for publishing the pamphlet 
Jude Sei.” was the accusation hurled against 
Luther, evidently by his Catholic op- 

ponents, that he had denied the supernatural birth 
of Jesus. After defending himself against the 
charge of being a Jew at heart, he speaks of the 
Jews and of the way to convert them to Christianity. 
“Our fools, the popes, bishops, sophists, and monks, 
these coarse blockheads [“ die groben Eselskopfe ”], 
dealt with the Jewsin sucha manner that any Chris- 
tian would have preferred to bea Jew. Indeed, had 
I been a Jewand had I seen such idiots and dunder- 
heads [Télpel und Knebel] expound Christianity, 
I should rather have becomea hog thana Christian ” 
(ib. xxix. 46-47). The accusation that Roman Ca- 
tholicism presented Christianity in such a repulsive 
form that Jews could not be won over by it occurs 
repeatedly in his works. “Tf [were a good Jew, 
the pope could never persuade me to accept his idol- 
atry. Iwould rather ten times be racked and flayed ” 
(“ehe wollte ich mich zehen Mal lassen raedern und 
In another passage he tells 
the anecdote, derived from Boccaccio, of a Jew who 
desired to embrace Christianity but wished first to 
see the pope. When the Jew returned from Rome 
he asked a priest to baptize him, “for the God of 
the Christians must indeed be a God who forgives 
all iniquity if he suffers all the rogueries of Rome” 


Luther 
Lutsk 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


214 





(2b. Ixti. 877). “Tf the Apostles had dealt with the 
heathen as the Chiristians deal with the Jews, none 
ever would have been converted to Christianity ” 
(2b, XXix. 47). 

Luther closes this remarkable pamphlet with the 
following appeal: “I would advise and beg every- 
body to deal Kindly with the Jews and to instruct 
them in the Scripture; in such a case we could ex- 
pect them to come over to us. If, however, we use 
brute foree and slander them [“ genen mit Luegen- 
theiding umb ”], saying that they need the blood of 
Christians to get rid of their stench, and other non- 
sense of that kind, and treat them like dogs, what 
good can we expect of them? Finally, how can we 
expect them to improve if we prohibit them to 
work among us and to have social intercourse with 
us, and so force them into usury? If we wish to 
make them better we must deal with them not ac- 
cording to the law of the pope, but according to the 
law of Christian charity. We must receive them 
kindly and allow them to compete with us in earning 


a livelihood, so that they may have an opportunity to. 


witness Christian life and doctrine; and if some re- 
. main obstinate, what of it? Not every one of us is 
a good Christian” (¢b. xxix. 74). 

This book was undoubtedly written with the pur- 
pose of winning the Jews over to Christianity, as 
may be inferred from the fact that he sent it in the 

year of publication toa converted Jew 


Hope of named Bernhard (Geiger, “ Jiid. Zeit.” 
Conversion vii. 24 et seg.). Luther was an enthu- 
of Jews. siastic believer in the Christianity of 


the apostle Paul, and therefore ex- 
pected from the Reformed Church the fulfilment of 
Paul’s prophecy that all Israel shall be saved (Rom, 
xi. 26). “If this prophecy has not been fulfilled 
yet, itis because papacy has presented such a per- 
verted Christianity that the Jews have been repulsed 
by it.” It is very probable that Luther expected 
the attestation of the truth of Christianity by a gen- 
eral conversion of the Jews, and, being disappointed, 
changed his attitude toward them. In one of his 
letters he speaks of a Polish Jew who had been hired 
to assassinate him, but this was most likely merely 
a vague rumor in which he did not himself believe 
(Geiger, “Jtid. Zeit.” vii. 26). In 1587, when Duke 
John Frederick of Saxony, who was a strong sup- 
porter of the Reformation, ordered the expulsion of 
the Jews from his country, Josel Rosheim, the ad- 
voeate of the Alsatian Jews, armed with a letter of 
introduction from Luther’s friend Capito, asked 
Luther to intercede with the duke in behalf of his 
coreligionists. Luther, however, refused to act, say- 
ing that the Jews had not appreciated the kindness 
he had shown them in his book and that they were 
“doing things which are unbearable to Christians.” 
The somewhat obscure allusions of this letter seem 
to indicate that he was incensed at the Jews for their 
refusal to become Christians (7. v. 78-80; Geiger, 
“Fd. Zeit.” v. 28; “R. BE. J.” xiii. 112). 

Two books published by Luther in 1544 are espe- 
cially marked by bitterness—“ Von den Juden und 
Thren Luegen” and “Vom Schem Hamphoras und 
vom Geschlecht Christi,” both printed in Wittenberg 
(ib. xxxii, 99-358). The occasion for writing the 
first book was, as he states, the audacity with which 


the Jews attacked the Christian dogmas and espe- 
cially the Christological exposition of the Old 
Testament. The bitterness noticeable in the wri- 
tings of his last years and which was 
‘“Von den due to disappointment at the siow 
Juden und progress of his work, to the dissen- 
Thren sions among his followers, and, not 
Luegen.” the least, to his physical ailments, ig 
evident to a degree which is grievous 
to his most ardent admirers. He must have been 
influenced by some converts from Judaism, such as 
Antonius Margaritha and Bernhard Ziegler (7, 
xxxii. 357), probably the Bernhard referred to 
above, for he attacks the views expressed in the 
prayer-book as blasphemous, and repeats the old 
accusations that the Jew does not consider the 
“voyim ”as human beings, that he prays for their 
misfortune (7b. xxxii. 193), and that when a Chris- 
tian comes to his house he says to him “Sched 
willkomm,” which the Christian understands as a 
welcome, though in reality the Jew is calling him a 
“devil” (¢. xxxii. 222). Luther praises the “dear 
Emperor Charles” for having expelled the Jews from 
Spain (7). xxxii, 231, evidently meaning Ferdinand, 
Charles V.’s grandfather), and expresses great satis- 
faction ata recent edict of expulsion from Bohemia. 
He repeatedly urges that their synagogues be burned, 
and is sorry that he can not destroy them with hell- 
fire. He further advises that their houses be torn 
down, their books taken from them, their rabbis 
prohibited from teaching; that no safe-conduct be 
granted them; that their usury be prohibited; that 
their public worship be interdicted; that they be 
forced to do the hardest labor; and he admonishes 
every body to deal with them in a merciless manner, 
“even as Moses did, who slew three thousand of 
them in the wilderness.” The invectives which he 
uses against them are vile even for sixteenth-cen- 
tury standards. After admonishing his readers not 
to have the slightest intercourse with the Jews, he 
says: “Tf that which you already suffer from the 
Jew is not sufficient strike him in the jaw.” The most 
fanatic statement is the following: “If I had power 
over them I would assemble their most prominent 
men and demand that they prove that we Christians 
do not worship the one God, under the penalty of 
having their tongues torn out through the backs of 
their necks ” (7d. Xxxii. 257). 
His “Shem Hamphoras” was written to refute a 
statement made by some Jews that Jesus performed 
his miracles with the aid of magic art. 
‘‘Shem He attacks cabalistic and rabbinical 
Hampho- literature, saying that if Jews possess 
ras.” the knowledge of magic art they must 
have had it from Judas Iscariot (7d. 
xxxii. 842 ef seq.). In both works he repeatedly dc- 
clares it useless to attempt the conversion of any 
Jew, for a Jewish heart is so “stocksteineisenteufel- 
hart” that it can never be changed (7b. xxxii. 276). 
He also quotes, in his “Table-Talks,” a report that 
in a church of Cologne is the statue of a dean who 
was a convert from Judaism and who had ordered 
the statue to be made with a cat in one hand and & 
mouse in the other, because just as mouse and cat 
will never live in harmony, neither will Jew and 
Christian (7). Ixii. 371). 


215 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Luther 
Lutsk 





These Cooks aroused grave fears among the Jews, 
and Josel Rosheim asked the city council of Stras- 
burg to allow him to publish a book in refutation of 
Luther’s pamphlets (July 11, 1548); but this the 
council considered unnecessary. Josel complains 
that aithough he made seven attempts to sce Luther 
he was never admitied, and in his memoirs, written 
in the year following Luther's death, he speaks with 
bitterness of the great reformer’s attitude toward the 
Jews, expressing the hope that he was in hell, both 
body and soul (“R. EL. J.” xvi. 92; see also, on 
Josel’s relations with Luther, Feilchenfeld, “ Rabbi 
Josel von Roshcim,” p. 121, Strasburg, 1898). 
Luther often referred to the Jews in his commen- 
taries on the Bible, as in his exposition of the 109th 
Psalm, in which he explains the reference to the 
lot of the wicked to bea prophecy of Israel’s mis- 
ery. The argument that the sufferings of the Jews 
are the just punishment for their rejection of Jesus 
ig as common with him as with all medieval theo- 
logians. The totally different attitudes which he 
took at different times with regard to the Jews made 
him, during the anti-Semitic controversies of the 
end of the nineteenth century, an authority quoted 
alike by friends and enemies of the Jews. 
BIBLIOGRAPYI¥: Lither’s Stimmtliche Werke, 67 vols., Er- 

langen and Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1826-57 (the edition used 

for the references given in the text) ; Herzog-Hauck, Real- 

Eneye. sv. Bibelttbersetzungen Deutsche and Luther; 

Gritz, Gesch. 3d ed., ix, 196, 304 et seq., 311 et seq.; Geiger, 

Jiid. Zeit. v. 23-29, D. 

LUTSK (LUTZEK): District city in the govern- 
ment of Volhynia, Russia, situated on the right bank 
of the Styr at its junction with the Gizhtza. Be- 
tween the years 1224 and 1227 about 300 Karaite 
families removed from Wilna to Volhynia, and some 
of them settled in Lutsk. About the same time a 
number of Rabbinite Jews also came to Volhynia. 
Lutsk Jews are mentioned in Witold’s charter of 
privileges granted to the Jews of Lithuania July 1, 
1388. Reference is made to them also in the grant 
of the Magdeburg Rights to the burghers of Lutsk 
by Ladislaus Jagellon Oct. 31, 1432, whereby the 
Jews and Armenians of that city are accorded the 
same rights as those of Cracow and Lemberg, except 
as regards the collection of customs duties, which the 
king reserves for himself. Toward the end of the 
fifteenth century the Jewish community of Lutsk 
had acquired considerable wealth and influence, and 
some of its members figured prominently as tax- 

farmers. The records of that time 

In the mention the names of the brothers 
Fourteenth Ostashka and Jonathan Ilyich, Shakna 

and Novakhovich, Israel, Esko, Judah, 

Fifteenth Enka Momotlivy, and Olkon. The 

Centuries. last-named is probably the Alkan 

Danilevich to whom King Casimir 

Jagellon at the time of his death owed 415 kop 

groschen, a debt partly repudiated by his heir, 
Alexander Jagellon. 

On the expulsion of the Jews from Lithuania in 
1495 the extensive estates owned by the wealthy 
Jews of Lutsk were distributed among Alexander’s 
favorites. Thus on June 26, 1495, he presented to 
the Polish nobles Soroka and his brother two estates 
in the district of Lutsk belonging to the Jews Enka 
Momotlivy and Itzkhak Levanovich; on March 12, 


1496, he gave the estate of Topoli, formerly the 
property of the Jew Simchich, to the alderman of 
Lutsk; on June 5, 1496, he presented another Jew- 
ish estate to Prince Ostrozhski; and on July 31, 
1497, for the encouragement of Christian settlers, he 
inade to the Christian inhabitants of Lutsk a general 
grant of the vacant lands and houses belonging to 
the exiled Jews. On the return of the Jews to the 
city in 1508 they organized two separate communi- 
ties, one Rabbinite and the other Karaite, having 
their respective synagogues, as appears from a 
decree issued by King Sigismund Dec. 22, 1506, 
by which he grants the petition of the Jews of 
Lutsk for the removal] of the burdensome tax of 12 
kop groschen on cach of the two syn- 
Jewish Tax-agogues. Tosome extent at least the 
Collectors. Jews regained their former wealth and 
influence, becoming prominent as be- 
fore in the farming of the taxes and as leaseholders, 
and engaging in important commercial underta- 
kings. The more important of them were Shamakh 
Danilevich and Missan Kozka (1507); Mishko Pol- 
chekovich, Abraham Shakhnovich, Mordas Chaga- 
dayevich, Frush, Nissan Shimchich, and Rebinko 
Leveyevich (1509). In 1509 the collection of taxes 
in Lutsk and in other towns was awarded to the 
Jew Michael Jesofovich, who again farmed the taxes 
on salt and wax in Lutsk from 1520 to 1526. 
During the first half of the sixteenth century the 
Jews of Lutsk continued to share in the prosperous 
condition of their coreligionists throughout Poland 
and Lithuania. They were often granted special 
privileges and exemptions, as is evidenced by a 
number of contemporary documents. By a royal 
decree dated July 18, 1528, the Jews equally with 
the burghers were freed from the payment of taxes 
to the crown fora period of ten years, and of mu- 
nicipal taxes for five vears. This decree was issued 
in response to a petition for such exemption on ac- 
count of a destructive fire which had devastated the 
city. Similarly in 1551 the Jews of Lutsk, in com- 
mon with those of other towns, were exempted from 
the payment of the special tax called “Schereb- 
schisna”; and on July 30, 1556, King Sigismund 
August exempted them from the payment of cus- 
toms duties on all commodities except wax and salt, 
on tlie same conditions as the Christian inhabitants, 
Documents of the middle of the sixteenth century 
bear witness to the growing friction between the 
Jewish community of Lutsk and the local authori- 


ties. In 1545 both the Rabbinite and 

In the the Karaite community made com- 
Sixteenth plaint that Prince Matvei Chetvertin- 
Century. ski, ignoring the privileges granted to 


the Jews of Lutsk by the king, had 
blocked the road to their cemetery and cut off 
access to a certain pond. An inspector sent to in- 
vestigate the case reported thereon to King Sigis- 
mund August, who ordered the prince to reopen 


the road and to abstain from further obstructing it. 


As time went on the friction increased, due largely 
to the great power of the Jewish Ieascholders and 
tax-farmers, who were under the immediate jurisdic- 
tion of the king, and who naturally refused to ac- 
knowledge the authority of the local officials. For 
instance, in 1560 Mendel Isakovich, a Lutsk Jew, 


Lutsk 
Luxemburg 





complained to the king that the authorities of Vol- 
hynia had placed under their jurisdiction his (Men- 
del’s) secretaries and other employees engaged in the 
collection of the taxes. The king ordered that 
henceforth these ofticials should not be interfered 
with. Again, in 1561, the burgomaster and alder- 
man of Lutsk complained in the name of the burgh- 
ers that the agents of the Jewish Icaseholder Yeska 
Shiomich had caused them great damage by collect- 
ing during the fair of St. Simon large sums for the 
privilege of selling spirituous liquors, in conse- 
quence of which the visitors had departed aud the 
burghers “were obliged to wander in the villages 
like Gipsies.” Moreover, the same agents had pro- 
hibited the burghers from leaving the town with 
spirituous liquors in their possession, thereby caus- 
ing them pecuniary loss. In 1566 the burghers of 
Lutsk descended on the royal estate of Guidovskoye 
and seized the Jew Shmoila Gooshich, whom they 
put to death notwithstanding the protest of the 
other employees on the estate. In 1569 the alder- 
man of Lutsk, Prince Koritzki, imprisoned the Jews 
of the city on account of the non-payment of their 
share of the tax levied on the Jews of Lithuania. 
King Sigismund August, however, ordered their re- 
lease, since they had already paid the poll-tax of 15 
groschen determined upon by the Diet of Grodno. 
The king ordered also the removal of the seals 
which had been placed on the synagogue and 
other property of the Jews. In the same year 
the whole of Volhynia was added to Poland, and 
the members of both of the Jewish communities 
of Lutsk teok the oath of allegiance (June 23, 
1569). 

A considerable number of legal documents dating 
from the latter half of the sixteenth century make 
mention of the Jews of Lntsk and of their relations 
to their neighbors. In 1571 John Stcfanovich, the 
superior of the monastery of Derwansk, stated in 
his will that he had paid in behalf of the town secre- 
tary of Lutsk the sum of 24 groschen to the Jews 
Izel and Yesko for the building of a cellar. In the 
list of property left by Andrei Rusin, Bishop of 
Pinsk and Turov, reference is made to certain docu- 
ments belonging to a Jew and relating to three prop- 
erties “at the end of the crooked bridge of Lutsk ”; 
also to ten documents written in Hebrew. Among 
the servants of the bishop are enumerated several 
bought from this Jew. In1583 Batko (Simeon) Mi- 
sanovich, who had recently been baptized, requested 
the alderman of Lutsk to enter in the city records 
his bequest to his son Moshka of certain moneys due 
to him (Simeon). 

A number of documents preserved in the central 
archives of Kiev, and dated 1563, afford interesting 
information concerning the life of the Jews of Lutsk 
at this time. Among these is the complaint of the 
Jew Yakhna Leveyevich, a soldier in the service of 
Prince Constantin Ostrozhski, against his father-in- 
law, Nissan Rabiyevich of Klevan, who in Yakh- 
na’s absence had visited his house, taken away his 
wife and his goods, and had then disappeared. The 
enumeration of the articles abstracted includes 
Turkish knives, a Hungarian sword with silver 
mountings, a silver dagger, saddles, and gold or- 
naments, besides household utensils. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


216 


——= 


In 1601 Prince Grigori Sangushko Koshirski pre- 
sented for entry in the city records of Lutsk a copy 
of the lease to the Jews Abraham 


In the Shmoilovich of Turisk, Getz Pert 
Seven-  sovich of ‘TTorchinsk, and then 
teenth heirs, of his estates in the town of 
Century. Gorokhov, the estate and village of 


old Gorokbov, and a number of other 
estates and villages. The lease was for a period of 
three years, and the lessees were permitted among 
other things to exercise complete jurisdiction over 
the peasants, even to the extent of inflicting the 
death penalty if necessary. 

On March 6, 1625, Leib Israilevich and Ilia 
Abramovich, Jewish scholars of Lutsk, reported for 
entry in the city records an attack made upon 
them by the nobles Lesetzki and their followers 
while the complainants were accompanying to 
the cemetery the body of Leib Isakovich. The Le- 
setzkis had filled in the freshly dug grave, had 
destroyed the bridge leading to the cemetery, had 
nailed fast the cemetery gates, and had refused to 
allow the burial to take place until a debt due to one 
of them should have been paid. The priest, ap- 
pealed to by the Jews, ordered the Lesetzkis not to 
molest the Jews; but the nobles collected an armed 
mob, drove off the Jews, many of whom were 
wounded, and threw the body of Isakovich into the 
ditch. 

In Oct., 1637, the burghers of Lutsk lodged a com- 
plaint against all the Jews to the effect that they 
paid nothing into the city treasury, that they had 
freed many houses from local jurisdiction, that they 
had built many others on land belonging to the 
burghers, and had established on the city walls 
breweries and distilleries, thus diminishing the city’s 
power of defense; further, that they had refused 
to perform military and guard duty, and that they 
had purchased liquor from the merchauts of places 
outside of the city limits, reselling it within the city. 
Complaint of excessive taxation was also made by 
Jewish leaseholders and their representatives. 

In 1647 one of the priests of Lutsk forbade the 
communicants of his church to buy meat from Jew- 
ish butchers, The matter was carried to the courts, 
and the priest was ordered to pay damages. 

During the Cossack uprising under CHMTELNICKE 
(1648-49) the Jewish community suffered severely, 
anda number of Jews were killed. In 1662 the Dict 
of Volhynia exempted the Jews of Lutsk and other 
Volhynian towns from the payment of all taxes ex- 
cept that on braid. 

In 16387 Lutsk possessed a yeshibah which was des- 
troved probably by the Cossacks in 1648. In the 
“ Sefer Zikkaron” of the Karaites (Neubauer, “ Ginze 
Petersburg,” p. 180) is a statement concerning 
the Karaites of Lutsk and commencing as follows: 
“These are the names of the members of our com- 
munity who were killed by the Cossacks.” During 
the same uprising the prayer-houses were destroyed 
and all the books burned (Graetz, “ Hist.” Hebrew 
ed., vol. vii.). In 1699, at the request of Charles 
XII. of Sweden, Mordecai ben Nissan, sexton of @ 
Karaite synagogue, went to Lutsk and wrote an 
account of his observations in “Lebush Malkut,” 
in which he denounces the Rabbinite Jews. 


217 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lutsk 
Luxemburg 








Among the tombstones in the Jewish cemetery are 
those of: Hannah Ginzburg, died in 1317 (7°); a 
woman who died in 1595; Rabbi Eliakim Getzel. died 
in 1715; Rabbi Mordeccai ben Shalom, died in 1723; 
Judah Zeeb ben Tobias, martyred in 1764; and the 
maggid of Lutsk, Meir ben Hayyim, died in 1819 
(“ Ha-Meliz,” 1860, No. 19). 

In 1791, the year of its annexation to Russia, 
Lutsk contained only fifty houses owned by the 
burghers; the rest belonged to the Rabbinite Jews 
and the Karaites. In 1864 there were 3,428 Rabbin- 
ite Jews and 221 Karaites in a total population of 
4,973; in 1895 the numbers were 12,007 and 72 re- 
spectively in a total population of 15,125. In the 
last-cited year the community possessed eighteen syn- 
agogues and prayer-liouses besides a Karaite prayer- 
house, one Jewish hospital, and one Jewish dispen- 
sary. At the same date there were in the district of 
Lutsk, exclusive of the city, 42 Karaites and 18,775 
other Jews in a total population of 188,686. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Regesty, i., passim; Russko-Yevreiski Ar- 
hiv, i., passim. 
H. R. 


LUTZYN: Russian town in the government of 
Vitebsk; itis situated nearachain of mountains and 
surrounded by lakes and streams. Lutzyn is an 
ancient city, and was fortified by the Livonian Order 
in the twelfth century. According to tradition and 
local inscriptions, Jews began to settle at Lutzyn in 
the fifteenth century; but when Ivan the Terrible 
conquered Polotsk, Lebezh, and Lutzyn, those of 
the Jews in the neighborhood who did not flee were 
exterminated. The Jews of Polotsk and Lebezh 
were drowned by the order of Ivan, but the Jews 
of Lutzyn, according to tradition, escaped, together 
with a number of the Poles and Catholic clergy. 
At the end of the sixteenth century, after the Rus- 
sians had been driven out, Jews again cominenced 
to settle in and around Lutzyn, but their number 
remained smail until the second half of the eight- 
eenth century. After the first partition of Poland 
(1772) the Jews of Lutzyn became the subjects of 
Russia, but they remained an unorganized commu- 
nity, without rabbi, charitable institution, or ceme- 
tery, until 1783. Atthistimea great misfortune befell 
them. Some Catholic priests and Jesuits attempted 
to convert the Jewish tailor Moses, and when the 
latter, during a dispute, answered in a way that was 
unpleasant to his opponents and reflected upon the 
Christian religion, he was burned alive. On theday 
after this crime was committed, the Jews collected 
theashes of their martyr, buried them with impress- 
ive ceremonies on the spot where he had been burned, 
and decided to organize themselves; they finally 
succeeded in bringing to justice the murderers of 
their “kadosh ” (martyr). 

In 1795 David Ziony was appointed rabbi of 
Lutzyn; he held the rabbinate for two years, and 
died at the age of thirty-eight. His eldest son, 
Naphtali, succeeded him when not quite twenty 
years of age, and served his community more than 
fifty years. He established several charitable insti- 
tutions, and, when he died in 1848, was succeeded 
by his eldest son, Aaron Selig. R. Aaron Selig died 
in 1875, after occupying the rabbinate for twenty- 
Seven years. He was the author of “Sefer Ziyyoni ” 


(Wilna, 1872), on various religious and theological 
subjects. 

Aaron Selig was succeeded by Eleazar Don-Echi, 
a nephew, and his oldest son-in-law. The latter is 
the author of “Eben Shetiyah,” and is the present 
(1904) rabbi of Lutzyn. 

Tn the early spring of 1883 a Christian girl, who 
had been for several months a servant in the housce- 
hold of the Jew Zimel Lotzov, disappeared, and 
was afterward found drowned near the town. The 
procurator of the government, influenced by the 
clergy, made out a case against the Lotzov family 
and the whole community. Prince Urusoff, the 

Russian jurist and philanthropist, left 

Blood Ac- St. Petersburg to defend the Jews, the 
cusation. result being that the jury declared 
them innocent of any connection with 

the drowning of the girl. But the procurator was 
not satisfied with this verdict and transferred the 
case to the courts of Vitebsk, where Lotzov and his 
wife were sentenced to Siberia—Lotzov to penal 
servitude for life in the government mines, his wife 
to imprisonment for six years. Prince Urusoff again 
defended them, but his eloquence, as well as the 
testimony of physicians and other witnesses, failed 
to save thein, because the representatives of the gov- 
ernment used every possible means, lawful and un- 
lawful, to influence the minds of the Vitebsk judges. 
The Lotzovs were declared guilty, not as murderers 
themselves, but as the shelterers of murderers who 
had killed a Christian girl for some unknown reason. 

The Jews of Lutzyn contributed materially to the 
establishment of Jewish agricultural colonies in 
Kherson, Yekaterinoslav, and northwestern Russia. 
In 1885 many Jews of Lutzyn sold their property 
for small sums and went to South Russia, where the 
government gave them farming land. A few dec- 
ades after the migration to the Kherson and Yeka- 
terinoslav colonies, two Jewish agricultural colonies 
were founded by the government near Lutzyn. 

Lutzyn has a population of 6,000, half of which 
areJews. Of these 810 are artisans and 65 day- 
laborers. The educational institutions consist of: 
a Jewish one-class school with 30 pupils, 20 hadarim 
with 150, and a Talmud Torah with 42; there are 
also 49 Jewish pupils attending the district and 
common schools. 


BIBLIOGRAPUY: Lyutzinskoye Dyelo Po Obvinentyu Lotzo- 
vykh, Gurevicha it Maukh vw Ubistuye Martt Drich t Stena- 
graficheski Otehet, St. Petersburg, 1885, 

H.R. I. Zr. 


LUXEMBURG: Grand duchy of central Fu- 
rope, its capital bearing the same name, The 
sources do not definitely indicate when Jews first 
settled in Luxemburg. The first record of a Jew re- 
siding there occurs in a document of the year 1276. 
At this time the Jewish population of the duchy 
seems to have been small and in indigent circum- 
stances; for the impoverished nobility of Luxem- 
burg transacted their money affairs with the Jews 
of Treves, Coblenz, Saarburg, and Wittlich. Dur- 
ing the entire Middle Ages the Jews 
lived ina ghetto, where there were a 
Jews’ gate, a cemetery, and a syna- 
gogue. It appears that subsequently 
the cemetery ceased to exist: for down to the be- 
ginning of the nineteenth century the Jews buried 


Early 
History. 


Luxemburg 
Luzki 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


218 





their deadat Freudenburg, in the district of Saarburg, 
province of the Rhine. As elsewhere in the Ger- 
man empire, the Jews of Luxemburg were the “servi 
camer” of the German empcrors, and as a source 
of income to the imperial exchequer they were 
placed by the emperors under the protection of the 
local princes. Thus, on May 7, 1050, at the time of 
the Black Death, Charles TV. ordered the governor 
and the provost of Luxemburg to look to the safety 
of the Jews living there. In 1370, when the Jews 
of Brussels were accused of having desecrated a 
holy wafer, Wenzel, Duke of Brabant and Luxem- 
burg, expelled all the Jews from Brabant; and none 
are met with in the country during the next fifty 
or sixty years. 

With the beginning of the Burgundian rule (1441) 
Jews are again found at Luxemburg; each of them 
had to pay two gulden for a protection that was 
merely nominal. In March, 1470, notwithstanding 
the presence of the governor and the militia, the 
townspeople attacked the Jews, plundered and de- 
molished their houses, and maltreated them, so that 
they were barely able to flee to the castle on the 
Bockfelsen (Clausener Berg), to which they were ad- 
mitted by the governor and whence they subse- 
quently reached places of safety. 

In the beginning of the sixteenth century there 
were Jews at Echternach, Luxemburg, Arlon, and 
Igel. But no Jews are mentioned after 1527, and 
probably none were living at Luxemburg from the 
time of the Spanish rule, 1555, to the end of the 
eighteenth century, although Maranos seem to have 

lived there in the seventeenth century. 

In the All the more worthy of note is it that, 

Sixteenth as is shown by a tablet in the wall of 
Century. the present fortress of the city, the fa- 
mous citadel of Luxemburg was built 
by a Jewish engineer, Isaac de Traybac, in 1644. 
Little is known of the Maranos’ occupations. They 
were probably engaged in retail business; for by a 
decree of the provincial council, dated April 15, 1513, 
they were forbidden to sell cloth otherwise than by 
the piece. They were never required to wear the 
so-called Jews’ hat or yellow badge; and although 
they were compelled to take an oath “more Juda- 
ico” they were not required to submit to the humil- 
inating ceremonies that usually accompanied it. A 
decree of Philip V., issued Sept. 6, 1708, determined 
the poll-tax that traveling Jews had to pay at the 
bridges of various cities, this decree being con- 
firmed Sept. 20, 1720. These conditions seem to 
have obtained during the entire eighteenth century 
down to the beginning of the French Revolution; 
for as late as 1787 a Jew complained of this unjust 
tax, without receiving satisfaction. 

By the laws of Jan. 28 and July 20, 1790, and 
Sept. 27 and Nov. 18, 1791, the Jews were granted 
equal civic rights with the other citizens. The 
community, numbering seventy-five persons, was or- 
ganized by a law of March 17, 1808, and was placed 
under the jurisdiction of the consistory of Treves. 
When, onthe termination of the French rule, Luxem- 
burg was incorporated with the Netherlands (1815), 
the community was joined to the synagogue of Maes- 
tricht; and when Holland was separated from Bel- 
giurm by the Belgian revolution of 1830 the grand 


duchy of Luxemburg became autonomous, and the 
Jewish community independent. A rabbinate, sub- 
ventioned by the state, was organized, 

In the the first incumbent being Dr. Samuel 
Eighteenth Ifirsch (1843-66), former rabbi of Des- 
and sau. Asan advocate of religious re- 
Nineteenth form he had to contend with many 


Centuries. difliculties. He was succeeded by the 
French rabbi Sopher, of Dijon (1866- 
1870). In 1871 Dr. Isaac Blumenstein was elected 


rabbi, and upon his death (Aug. 3, 1908) Dr. Sam- 
wel Fuchs was called to the rabbinate. A new cem- 
etery was laid out in 1884, and a handsome new 
synagogue was built in 1894. On Jan. 12, 1899, 
the supreme court declared the community, as 
represented by its president, to possess the rights 
of a corporation. There are also Jewish communi- 
ties at Ettelbriick, Grevenmacher, Esch, and Meder- 
nach; and Jews are living in about twenty other 
smaller localities. The communities of Ettelbriick 
and Grevenmacher have each their own cemetery ; 
at Esek a new synagogue was built in 1899. 

The grand duchy has about 1,200 Jews in a total 
population of 286,548, and the capital 407, in 20,938. 
Only the community in the city of Luxemburg is 
officially recognized. It is under city and state su- 
pervision, and enjoys all the privileges accorded 
other ecclesiastical bodics. The affairs of the com- 
munity are directed by a board of seven members, 
whose election is subject to confirmation by the 
government. Although legally the Jews of Lux- 
emburg have full civic rights, they hold no govern- 
ment offices and: are not represented in municipal 
councils. One exception, however, is to be recorded, 
due principally to local circumstances. In Hamm, 
near Luxemburg, the office of mayor is held 
by a Jew, Jules Godchaux, his predecessors having 
been his father, Samson, aud the latter’s cousin, Paul 
Godchaux. The Luxemburg Jews are engaged 
in industry, commerce, and agriculture. In their 
cloth-, glove-, and furniture-factories, they employ 
hundreds of working men, thus contributing materi- 
ally to the national wealth. Socially, the Jews are 
on the same footing as the other citizens; and anti- 
Semitism has made no progress there, although 
clericalism in its organ “Luxemburger Wort” has 
occasionally started an anti-Jewish agitation. In 
one case the editor was fined 500 francs for libeling 
Jews and Judaism (April 2, 1889). 

D. I. Bu. 

LUZ: 1. Older name of the city of Beth-el (Gen. 
xxvili. 19, xxxv. 6, xlviii. 3; Josh. xvi. 2, xviii. 13; 
Judges 1. 23). 

2. Name of a city in the land of the Hittites, built 
by an emigrant from Beth-el, who was spared and 
sent abroad by the Israelitish invaders because he 
showed them the entrance to the city (Judges i. 26). 
“Luz” being the Hebrew word foranalmond-tree, it 
has been suggested that the city derived its name 
from such a tree or grove of trees. Winckler com- 
pares the Arabic “laudh” (“asylum”). Robinson 
(“ Researches,” ili. 889) identifies the city either with 
Luwaizah, near the city of Dan, or (20, iii, 425) with 
Kamid al-Lauz, north of Heshbon (now Hasbiyyah); 
Talmudic references seem to point to its location 
aS somewhere near the Phenician coast (Sotah 


219 
46b; Sanh. 12a; Gen. R. Ixix. 7%). Legend in- 
vested the place with miraculous qualities. “Luz, 
the city known for its blue dye, is the city which 
Sennacherib entered but could not harm; Nebu- 
chadnezzar, but could not destroy; the city over 
which the angel of death has no power; out- 
side the walls of which the aged who are tired of 
life are placed, where they meet death ” (Sotah 46b); 
wherefore it is said of Luz, “the name thereof is 
unto this day ” (Judges i. 26, Hebr.). It is further- 
more stated that an almond-tree with a hole in it 
stood before the entrance to acave that was near 
Luz; through that hole persons entered the cave 
and found the way to the city, which was alto- 
gether hidden (Gen. R. @c.). 

3. Aramaic name for the os coccyx, the “nut” 
of the spinal column. The belief was that, being 
indestructible, it will form the nucleus for the resur- 
rection of the body. The Talmud narrates that the 
emperor Hadrian, when told by R. Joshua that the 
revival of the body at the resurrection will take its 
start with the “almond,” or the “nut,” of the spinal 
column, had investigations made and found that wa- 
ter could not seften, nor fire burn, nor the pestle and 
mortar crush it (Lev. R. xviii.; Ecel. R. xii.). The 
legend of the “resurrection bone,” connected with 
Ps. xxxiv. 21 (A. V. 20: “unum ex illis [ossibus] 
non contfringetur”) and identified with the cauda 
equina (see Eisenmenger, “ Entdecktes Judenthum,” 
ii, 931-9338), was accepted as an axiomatic truth by 
the Christian and Mohammedan theologians and 
anatomists, and in the Middle Ages the bone re- 
ceived the name “Juden Knoéchlein” (Jew-bone; 
see Hyrtl, “Das Arabische und Hebriiische in der 
Anatomie,” 1879, pp. 165-168; comp. p. 24). Aver- 
roes accepted the legend as true (see his “ Religion 
und Philosophie,” transl. by Miller, 1875, p. 117; 
see also Steinschneider, “Polemische Literatur,” 
1877, pp. 815, 421; ¢dem, “Hebr. Bibl.” xxi. 98; 
adem, “ Hebr. Uebers.” p. 819; Low, “ Aramaische 
Pflanzennamen,” 1881, p. 320). Possibly the legend 
owes its origin to the Egyptian rite of burying “the 
spinal column of Osiris” in the holy city of Busiris, 
at the close of the daysof mourning for Osiris, after 
which his resurrection was celebrated (Brugsch, 
“Religion und Mythologic,” 1888, pp. 618, 634). 


RIBLIOGRAPHY: Jastrow, Dict.; Levy, Neuhebr. Worterb. 
K. 


LUZKI, SIMHAH ISAAC BEN MOSES: 
Karaite writer and bibliographer; born at Lutsk at 
the end of the seventeenth century; died, according 
to Firkovich, at Chufut-Kale, Crimea, or, according 
to another source, at Lutsk, March, 1766. He was 
well versed in rabbinical literature and was also 
a diligent student of Cabala. An indefatigable and 
able copyist. he went in 1751 to Chufut-Kale, where 
there was a flourishing Karaite community which 
possessed a rich library of Karaite manuscripts. 
He was received into the house of the Karaite writer 
Mordecai ben Berakah Yerushalmi, and succeeded 
Samuel Kala‘i as teacher of the bet ha-midrash at 
Chufut-Kale. Luzki rendered great services to Ka- 
raite literature both as copyist and as writer. To 
his labors are due the preservation of many valu- 
able works: and his book on bibliography (see be- 
‘ow), although sometimes lacking critical sense, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


a, 


Luxemburg 
uzki 


became an indispensable guide to the student of 
ancient Karaite literature. 

The following are Luzki’s works in the chrono- 
logical order of their composition, as given by him- 
self in his “Orah Zaddikin ”: “ Be’er 
Yizhak,” commentary on Judah Gib- 
bor’s “Minhat Yehudah ” on the Pen- 
tateuch; “Siah Yizhak,” commentary on the prayer 
ANSN  npaw 34s for the Day of Atonement; “ Reshit 
Hokmah,” commentary in three volumes on the 
daily prayers; “ Me’irat ‘Enayim,” code in two vol- 
umes, of which the first, entitled “Ner Mizwah,” 
comprises the Commandments and their explana- 
tions, and the second, entitled “ Ner Zaddikin,” enu- 
merates the differences between the Rabbinites and 
the Karaites and gives a genealogy of the Karaite 
scholars and a list of their works; “Sha‘are Zedek,” 
on the calendar; “‘Akedat Yizhak,” on the laws con- 
cerning the slaughtering of animals, and on the ten 
Karaite articles of belief; “Kebod Elohim,” com- 
mentary on Joseph ben Mordecai Troki’s mystic 
prayer “Ha-Elef Leka”; “ Arba‘ Yesodot,” on the 
four dogmatic principles, namely, the creation of 
the world, the existence of an invisible God, His 
holiness and spirituality, and His unity ; “ Tefillah le- 
Mosheh,” questions and answers exchanged between 
God and Moses; “Halikot ‘Olam,” description of 
the creation of the world and of the nature of all 
things according to their quantitative and quali- 
tative attributes; “‘Ene Yizhak,” commentary on 
Elijah Bashyazi’s calendric tables; “Toledot Yiz- 
hak,” religious poems, enigmas, letters, etc., in two 
volumes; “Ture Zahab u-Nekuddot ha-Kesef,” on 
the precepts, in two volumes, of which the first, 
“Ture Zahab,” enumerates in verse all the precepts, 
arranged in the order of the 620 letters of the Deca- 
logue; the second, “ Nekuddot Kesef,” being a com- 
mentary thereon; “Sefer Bereshit,” a mystic ex- 
planation of the Creation; “ Rekeb Elohim,” on the 
mysteries of the Divine Chariot; “ Kebod Melakim,” 
a mystic explanation of the letters of the Hebrew 
alphabet; “Sefer ha-Tappuah,” on the Creation and 
on the Divine Chariot, according to the modern 
Cabala; “ Libnat ha-Sappir,” on the ten Sefirot. 

The only two writings of Luzki’s which have been 
printed are: (1) “ Orha-Hayyim ”(Koslov, 1835), com- 
mentary on Aaron ben Elijah’s philosophical work 
““Ez Hayyim,” and (2) “Orah Zaddikim ” (Vienna, 
1837), which is an abridgment of the “ Ner Zaddi- 
kim.” Another redaction of the last-named work, 
prepared by Luzki in 1756 at the request of Mor- 
decai ben Berakah Yerushalmi, and entitled “Ig- 
geret Mikra’e Kodesh,” gives a fuller description of 
the works enumerated in the “Orah Zaddikim.” 

Luzki was a strong believer in Cabala, which he 
defends in his “ Or ha-Hayyim,” “ Libnat ha-Sappir,” 
and “Sefer ha-Tappuah.” Heasserts that the Zohar 
was composed before the Mishnah, although it be- 
came known only at the time of Joseph Gikatilla. 
Had Maimonides, he says, known this divine book 
he would not have spent his time on the futilities of 
philosophy; and when Luzki criticizes the Cabala 
it is only the practical and not the speculative 
Cabala. Luzki cites the great rabbinical authorities 
who believed in the authenticity of the Zohar, from 
Abravanel down to Joseph Delmedigo. According 


Works. 


Luzzatti 
Luzzatto 





to him there were cabalists even among the Karaites. 

Luzki was the author also of many religious po- 

ems. five of which have been incorporated into the 

Karaite ritual (part iii., beginning). 

BIBLLOGRAPHY: Firkovieh, Abne Zikkaron, No. 451; Jost, 
Gesch, des Judenthums wid Seiner Sekten, ii, 8703; Furst, 
Gesch, des Kardert. ii. leet sey. Newbauer, Aus der Peters- 
hurger Bibliothek. pp. 82 et seq.; Gottlober, Bikkoret le- 
Toledut ha-Karw in, p. 203. 

I. Br. 


K. 

LUZZATTI, LUIGI: Italian statesman and 
political economist; born at Venice March 11, 1841; 
studied at the University of Padua (Doctor of Law 
1863) and in Venice. While in the latter city he 
was stronglyinfluenced 
by Politeo, professor of 
philosophy, and by Za- 
nella, the lyric poet and 
teacher of literature 
from Vicenza. At the 
age of twenty Luzzatti 
had already given lec- 
tures on economics in 
Venice. He was an 
enthusiastic supporter 
of the doctrine of free 
trade. At twenty-two 
he became a teacher at 
the Istituto Tecnico in 
Milan; in 1867, pro- 
fessor of economics 
in the University of 
Padua; and in the 
same year the government appointed him commis- 
sioner for the Paris Exposition. 

In 1869 he became gencrai secretary under Min- 
ghetti in the agricultural department of the ministry. 
Shortly afterward he entered Parliament as deputy 
from Oderzo, and later was chosen as the represent- 
ative of Padua. 

Luzzatti has held his seat in Parliament uninter- 
ruptedly for more than thirty years. He is one of 
the leaders of the Right, and has repeatedly been 
president of the budget committce. In matters re- 
lating to economic development he has rendered his 
country incalculable service. He introduced the 
ideas of Schultze-Delitzsch into Italy, and made 
them national. He also labored in behalf of co- 
operative associations and for the establishment of 
postal and school savings-banks. We is an authority 
on all questions connected with the tariff, and has a 
firm grasp of the subject of commercial treaties. 

Luzzatti is a tireless worker, speaker, and writer. 
At all times he upholds Italy’s friendship with 
France. He has frequently been entrusted by suc- 
cessive Italian governments with delicate inter- 
national negotiations. As one of the delegates who 
arranged (1902) the commercial treaty with France, 
he received the grand cross of the Legion of Honor. 
When in 1901 King Victor Emmanuel III. estab- 
lished the Order of Labor, Luzzatti, in recognition 
of his labors in behalf of the working classes, was 
the first to receive the new decoration, Ile fights 
against the Agrarians, who have now become so pow- 
erful in Germany; and he endeavors to make prop- 
aganda in favor of commercial treaties to prevent 
“* Middle-Age economics ” from invading Europe, 





Luigi Luzzatti. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


220 





From Feb., 1891, to May. 1892, and from July, 
1896, to June, 1898, Luzzatti was minister of the 
treasury in Rudini’s cabinet. He then returned to 
his chair of economics at the University of Rome. 
At present (1904) he is minister of the treasury in 
the cabinet of Giolitti. 

His works inelnde the following: “II Socialismo 
e le Questioni Sociali Innanzi ai Parlamenti d’Eu- 
ropa,” 1888; “Schultze-Delitzsch,” 18838; “ Emula- 
zione e Progressi delle Banche d’Emissione in 
Italia,” 1886; “L’Abuso del Credito e la Finanza 
Italiana,” 1889; “La Pace Sociale all’ Esposizione 
di Parigi,” 1890. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Telesforo Sarti, 71 Parlamento Subalpino e 
Nazionale. Terni, 1890; De Gubernatis, Diz. Biog.: Leone 
Carpi, Il Risorgimento Ttaliano, Biografie Storico-Poli- 
tiche, vol.i., Milan, 1888; Luigi Branzi, I Moribonai di Mon- 
tecitorio, Turin, 1889; Nuova Eneiclopedia Italiana, 1895, 
Supplement, iv. 201; Jew. Chron. Nov. 6, 1903. 

S. S. Mun. 

LUZZATTO (LUZZATTI): Name of a family 
of Italian scholars whose genealogy can be traced 
back to the first half of the sixteenth century. Ac- 
cording to a tradition communicated by $8. D. Luz- 
zatto the family descends from a German who im- 
migrated into Italy from the province of Lausitz, 
and who was named after his native place (* Lau- 
satia,” “Lausiatus” = “Luzzatto”) The name 
“Luzzatti,” which one branch of this family bears, 
can similarly be traced back to the plural form “ Lau- 
siati.” The German rite is credibly reported to 
have been observed in the family synagogue (Scuola 
Luzzatto) in Venice. 

The earliest member of the family of whom there 
is record is one Abraham Luzzatto, who lived at 
Safed at the beginning of the sixteenth century. 
His descendants may be grouped with some degree 
of probability in the following pedigree: 


Abraham Luzzatto 


Isaac (Safed) Samuel (Venice; c. 1567) 


Jacob (b. 1550) Abraham (d. 1593) 


Tsaae Judah (d. 1605) 
pa 
Simon Baruch 
(b. 1590 d. 1663) (Padua; b. vs ; d. 1669) 
Isaac Jacob 
| 7 
Asher Raphael Solomon Benedetto Moses Hayyinm 
(b. 1707; d. 1747) 
Isaac 


Isaac (Triest) Ephraim 


Mordecai 
(b. a d. 1789) 


Jacoh (Triest; 
ad. 1762) 


] 


Jacob Hezekiah 
(d. 1828) | 
Samuel David 
(b. 1800 ; d. 1865) 
| 
Filosseno Isaia Beniamino 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Autobiografia di S. D. Luzzatto Preceduta 
di Alcune Notizie Storico-Letterarie sulla Famiglia Luz- 


221 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Luzzatti 
Luzzatto 


SS a a ee ee 


zatto a Datare del Secolo Decime Sesto, Padua, 1878-82; 

Brann, Die Familie Luzzatto, in Samuel David Luzzatto : 

Ein Gedenkbuch zum Hundertsten Geburtstag, Berlin, 

WN: Mortara, Jridice. S. Be.—J. 

Benedetto (Baruch) Luzzatto: Italian preacher 
and poet; flourished in the seventeenth century at 
Padua. where be was chief rabbi toward the close 
of his life. He united Talmudic learning with pro- 
found classical scholarship, aud was especially well 
versed in history and philosophy. In 1686 he wrote 
a finished Italian sonnet for his friend Immanuel 
Perto Rapa’s mathematical treatise “Porto Astro- 
nomico. ” 

Luzzatto was highly esteemed by contemporary 
schoiars. The anatomist and botanist Giovanni 
Weslingio was his intimate friend, and Leon of Mo- 
dena in a list of his pupils praises his halakic learn- 
ing. None of his works has been published. 


RIBLIOGRAPHY: 8. D. Luzzatto, Autobiografia, p. 12; Brann, 
in Samuel David Luzzatto, cin Gedenkbuch, p. 36. 


dD. I. E. 

Beniamino Luzzatto: Italian physician; born 
at Padua Dec. 3, 1850; died there June 22, 1898; 
son of Samuel David Luzzatro. Educated at the 
university of his native town (M.D. 1872), he be- 
cume physician at the general hospital. In 1876 he 
was appointed lecturer on pathology, and in 1882 
assistant professor and chief of the propsdeutic 
clinic of Padua University. 

Luzzatto wrote essays on the systolic murmur 
of the apex of the heart (Padua, 1875); on chronic 
broncho-pneumonia and tuberculosis (Milan, 1876); 
on tetanus traumaticus in pregnancy (Padua, 1876); 
and le was also the author of: “Embolia dell’ 
Arteria Pulmonale,” Milan, 1880; “Vade Mecum 
di Pereussione,” Padua, 1882; “Lezioni di Pro- 
pedeutica Clinica,” 7, 1883. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Ler. 


s, KF. T. O. 

Ephraim Luzzatto: Italian physician and 
poet: born at San Daniele, Friuli, in 1729; died 
at Lausanne, Switzerland, in 1792; studied medicine 
at the University of Padua, graduating in 1751. 
After practising in Italy for some years, he settled, 
in 1763, in London, where he was appointed physi- 
cian in the hospital of the Portuguese congregation. 
In 1792 he left London, and was on his way to Italy 
when he died. Luzzatto was a highly gifted He- 
brew poet, and he exercised his talent with equal 
success in national, mythological, moral, and some- 
times amorous themes; the beauty of his style and 
the richness and delicacy of his vocabulary place his 
productions far above theaverage. He seems, how- 
ever, to have lacked conviction and to have wavered 
sometimes between the extremes of religion and 
atheism, between Judaism and paganism. 

Luzzatto wrote “Eleh Bene ha-Ne‘urim.” poems 
on various subjects (London, 1766), and “Kol Sha- 
hal” (Berlin, 1796). A second edition of the former 
work was published by Meir Letteris (Vienna, 1839). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, in Rerue Orientale, i. 459; S. D. 
Luzzutto, in Buseh’s Kalender, p. 152; D. A. de Sola, in Ori- 
ent, Lit. i. 7; Delitzseh, Zur Gesech. der Jiidischen Poesie, 
p. 92; Kokebe Yizhak, xxii. 20; Mortara, Indice, p. 36. 

s, I. Br. 


Filosseno (Philoxene) Luzzatto: Italian 


scholar; son of Samuel David Luzzarro; born at 
Triest July 10, 1899: died at Padua Jan. 25, 1854. 


Luzzatto (whose surname is the Italian equivalent 
ot the title of one of his father’s principal works, 
“Oheb Ger,” which was written at the time of 
Filosseno’s birth) showed from childhood remark- 
able linguistic aptitude, and having mastered several 
European languages, he devoted himself to the study 
of Semitic languages and Sanskrit. When a boy of 
thirteen he deciphered some old inscriptions on the 
tombstones of Padua which had puzzled older 
scholars. Two years latcr, happening to read 
D’Abbadie’s narrative of his travels in Abyssinia, 
he resolved to write a history of the Falashas. In 
spite of his premature death, he wrote several im- 
portant works: “L’Asia Antica, Occidentale e 
Media” (Milan, 1847): “Mémoire sur l’Inseription 
Cunéiforme Persane de Behistan,” in “Journal de 
PInstitut Lombard ” (¢b, 1848): “Le Sanscritisme de 
la Langue Assyrienne ” (Padua, 1849); “Etudes sur 
les Inscriptions Assyriennes de Persépolis, Hamadan, 
Van, et Khorsabad” (74. 1850): “Notice sur Abou 
Jousouf Hasdai ibn Shaprout ” (7b. 1852); “ Mémoire 
sur les Juifs @’Abyssinie ou Falashas ” (printed pos- 
thumously in “ Arch. Isr.” Nii.-xv.), He also trans- 
lated into Italian eighteen chapters of Ezekiel, add- 
ing to the same a Hebrew commentary. Luzzatto 
contributed to many periodicals, mostly on philolog- 
ical or exegetical subjects. Of special interest are 
his observations on the inscriptions in the ruins of 
the ancient Jewish cemetery in Paris (“Mémoires 
des Antiquités de France,” xxii. 60). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. Cahen, in Areh. Isr. xv. 270 et seq.; First, 
Bibl. Jud, ii. 231: H.S. Morais, Honinent Israelites, pp. 218 


et seq., Philadelphia, 1880. ; 
S. M. Set. 


Isaia Luzzatto: Italian notary; born at Padua 
Sept. 27, 1886; died there Nov. 7, 1898; son of 
S. D. Luzzatto; graduated in law at the university 
of his native city. He was for some time at- 
torney for one of the principal Jewish families of 
the community. Uis life was saddened by illness and 
other troubles. Besides a small work, written in his 
youth, on the battle of Legnano, he wrote various 
books to serve as a guide for the publication of his 
father’s writings: “Materiale per la Vita di 8. D. 
Luzzatto ” (extract from the “ Corriere Israclitico ”), 
Triest, 1877; “Index Raisonné des Livres de Cor- 
respondance de Feu 8. D. Luzzatto de Trieste, Pre- 
cédé d'un Avant-Propos et Suivi d’un Essai de 
Pensées et Jugements Tirés de Ses Lettres Inédites.” 
Padua, 1878; “Materiale per Ja Tllustrazione degli 
Scritti Editi e Inediti di 8. D. Luzzatto,” 7), 1878: 
“Catalogo Ragionato degli Scritti Sparsi di S. D. 
Luzzatto, con Riferimento Agli Altri Suoi Scritti, 
Editi e Inediti,” 74. 1881. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vessillo Israelitico, 1898, p. 380. 

8. Oe oe 

Jacob ben Isaac Luzzatto: Oriental rabbiand 
preacher; flourished at Safed in the second half of 
the sixteenth century. In the pinkes of Venice it 
is stated that a Jacob Luzzatto died in that city 
April 13, 1587, at the age of about sixty; he may 
well have been the subject of this article, though 
there is nothing to sustain the identification. 

Luzzatto was the author of “ Kaftor wa-Feral ” 
or “ Yashresh Ya‘akob ” (Basel, 1580), containing be- 


Luzzatto 


sides some stories from the “Sefer Hasidim,” 165 
haggadot explained according to Rashi, the Tosa- 
fot, Solomon b. Adret, and R. Nissim; parallel pas- 
sages being cited from the Yerushalmi, Midra- 
shim, and cabalistic works. The particular object 
of this work was to defend the Haggadah against 
the attacks of ecclesiastical censors. As at the end 

of the book Luzzatto calis himself “corrector,” S. 

DPD. Luzzatto concluded that it was Jacob Luzzatto 

who wrote the “ Haggahot,” or explanatory notes to 

the Talmud, printed at Basel, 1578-80, under the 
censorship of Marco Marino. The object of those 
notes was to show that the haggadot which seem to 
be directed against Christianity have really an alle- 
gorical meaning. Luzzatto wrote also “ Kehillat 

Ya'‘akob ” (Salonica, 1584), novelle on the Talmud, 

and edited and supplied a preface and index to 

Solomon Molko’s “Sefer ha-Mefo’ar ” (Cracow, 1570) 

and to Menahem Recanati’s “Ta‘ame ha-Mizwot ” 

(Basel, 1581). From his preface (rimed) to the lat- 

ter work, it is seen that though born at Safed, 

his Hebrew pronunciation was that of the German 

Jews, indicating his German origin. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 554; First, Bibl. 
Jud, ii. 277; Jellinek, in Orient, Lit. vii. 221; 8. D. Luzzatto, 
Autobiografia, in Mosé, i. 83-86; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. 
col. 1230. 

8. M. SE. 

Moses Hayyim Luzzatto: Italian cabalist and 
poet; born at Padua 1707; died at Acre May 6, 1747. 
Hlis father was the wealthy merchant Jacob Luz- 
zatto, and his mother also was a descendant of the 
Luzzatto family. We was carefully educated by his 
father in Latin and in other languages. At the 
age of thirteen he entered the Talmud Torah of his 
native city, which was then widely known through 
the teachings of Judah Minz, and which numbered 
among its instructors Isaiah Bassani and Isaac Hay- 
yim Cohen de Cantarini, with the former of whom 
Luzzatto was especially intimate. He read omniv- 
orously in the library of the Talmud Torah, being 
attracted particularly by the cabalistic works he 
found there. 

Benjamin ha-Kohen Vital of Reggio (comp. Kauf- 
maun in “Monatsschrift,” xli. 700 e¢ seq.), a pupil 
of Moses Zacuto and father-in-law of Bassani, seems 
to have exerted a great influence on Luzzatto’s de- 
velopment as poet and cabalist. Luzzattosoon took 
up Isaac Luria’s works, endeavoring to master the 
practical Cabala by their aid; ancl he instructed his 
former teachers in its mysteries in a school which he 
opened in hisown house after Bassani had moved to 
Reggio. 

The Talmud and mysticism, however, did not sat- 
isfy Luzzatto’s versatile mind; and at an early age 
he began a thorough study of the Hebrew language 
and of poetic composition. He wrote epithalamia 
and elegies, a noteworthy example of the latter being 
the dirge on the death of his teacher Cantarini, a 
lofty poem of twenty-four verses written in classical 
Hebrew. Before completing his twentieth year 
Luzzatto had begun his composition of one hundred 
and fifty hymns modeled onthe Biblical Psalter. In 
these psalms, composed in conformity with the laws 
of parallelism, he freed himself from all foreign in- 
fluences, imitating the style of the Bible so faithfully 
that his poems seem entirely a renaissance of Bib- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


222 





lical words and thoughts. They provoked the 
criticism of the Rabbis, however. and were one of 
the causes of the persecutions to which Luzzatto 
was later subjected. R. Jacob Poppers of Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main thought it unpardonable presump- 
tion te attempt to equal the “anointed of the God of 
Jacob.” Only two psalms are known of which it can 
with certainty be said that they belonged to Luz- 
zaito’s psalter (“ Bikkure ha-‘Ittim,” 1825, p. 56; 
1826, p. 99); in addition seven hymns 
by him which were sung at the inau- 
guration of the enlarged Spanish svna- 
gogue at Padna appeared in the work 
“Hanukkat ha-Maron” (Venice, 1729); but it is not 
certain whether they were taken from the psalter., 

As a youth Luzzatto essayed also dramatic poetry, 
writing at the age of seveuteen his first Biblical 
drama, “Shimshon u- Felistim.” of which only 
fragments have been preserved, in another work of 
his. This youthful production foreshadows the 
coming master; it is perfeet in versification, simple 
in language, original and thoughtful in substance, 
This first large work was followed by the “ Leshon 
Limmudim,” a discussion of Hebrew style with a 
new theory of Hebrew versification, in which the 
author showed his thorough knowledge of classical 
rhetoric. It is in a certain sense a scientitic demon- 
stration of the neoclassic Italian style, in contrast 
with the medieval. There is a vast difference be- 
tween Luzzatto’s style, which recalls the simplicity, 
smoothness, and vigor of the Bible, and the insipid, 
exaggerated, and affected work of his contempo- 
raries. The book, dedicated to his teacher Bassani, 
was printed at Mantua 1727, with a text which de- 
viates from the manuscript formerly in the posses- 
sion of M. 8. Ghirondi. 

In the same year or somewhat later, Luzzatto 
wrote his allegorical festival drama “ Migdal ‘Oz ” 
(or “Tummat Yesharim”), on the occasion of the 
marriage of his friend Israel Benjamin Bassani. 
This four-act play, which shows Latinand JtaHanas 
well as Biblical influence, illustrates the victory of 
justice overiniquity. It is masterly in versification 
and melodious in language, the lyrical passages be- 
ing especially lofty; and it has a wealth of pleasing 
imagery reminiscent of Guarini’s * Pastor Fido.” 
The drama was edited by M. Letteris, and published 
with notes by 8. D. Luzzatto and prolegomena by 
Franz Delitzsch, Leipsic, 1837. 

The Cabala, however, attracted Luzzatto more 
than did science or poetry; and he was seized with 

the illusion that he enjoved the special 

Cabalistic favor of a heavenly genius (“mag- 
Produc- gid”) which vouchsafed divine reve- 
tions. lations to him as it had done to his 
cabalistic predecessors. He imagined 

that he beheld heavenly visions and that he conversed 
with the prophet Elijah, Adam, the Patriarchs, and 
others; and he finally became convinced that he 
was the Messiah, called to redeem humanity and 
more especially Israel. Many cabalistic works, in- 
cluding “Shib‘im Tikkunim,” “ Kelale Hokmat ha- 
Emet,” «9°65 Pithe Hokmah,” “ Ma’amar ha-Ge’ul- 
lah,” “Likkute Kawwanot,” “Hibbur ‘al Kohelet,” 
“* Ma’amar ha-Wikkuah,” “ Perush ‘al ‘Aseret lia-Dib- 
rot,” “Ma’amar ‘al ha-‘Ikkudim Asher be-Sefer ha 


His 
Psalter. 


223 





Zohar.” “Perush la-Tikkunim ha-Meyuhasim _le- 
RaSliBI,” were the fruit of these aberrations of a 
great mind, He explained his teachings in pure, 
simple Hebrew reminiscent of the language of the 
Mishnah. In his cabalistic commentary on the Pen- 
tateuch, on the other hand, which he entitled 
«Zohar Tinyana,” he imitated the language of the 
Zohar, thinking that this “second Zohar” would in 
time take the place of the first. 

None of these works, however, was published; 
and only two sympathetic disciples, Isaac Marini 
and Israel Treves, were initiated by Luzzatto into his 
esoteric doctrine and were deemed worthy to meet 
him for daily cabalistic discussion. Chance re- 
vealed their secret. While Luzzatto was visiting 
his teacher Bassani at Reggio, a scholar by the naine 
of (Raphacl) Israel Kimhi (author of the “‘Abodat 
Yisrael”) came to Padua for a few days, and Luz- 
zatto’s disciples showed him their master’s writings. 
Kimhi guarded his discovery while in Padua; but 
at Venice he told of it. Luzzatto’s reputation asa 
cabalist soon spread far and wide, attracting many 
pupils, while his native city also began to awaken 
to his greatness and to honor him In various ways. 

Among Luzzatto’s pupils was a Pole, Jekuthiel 
b. L6b Gordon of Wilna, who had come to the uni- 
versity in 1729 to study medicine. At home he had 
given much time to the Talmud and to other Jewish 
literature; and now, putting his other studies aside, 
he took up the Cabala under Luzzatto. Fascinated 
by his teacher, he described his impressions, together 
with [Luzzatto’s visions, in a letter to Meir H. 
Bosing, which, by a trick of fate, fell into the hands 
of the court agent Mordecai Jaffeof Vienna. Jeknu- 
thiel then wrote a Ietter to R. Joshua Héschel of 

Wilna, in which he enclosed a leaf 
Opposition from the “Zohar Tinyana.” Luz- 


and zatto’s reputation thus spread beyond 
Polemics. Italy; and while the followers of the 


Cabala rejoiced in its new disciple, its 
opponents, who had not forgotten the troubles caused 
by Shabbethai Zebi, looked with apprehension upon 
Luzzatto’s work, Chief among these was Moses 
Hagiz of Altona. The Venctian rabbis had still 
another cause for complaint against Luzzatto, for 
when Leon of Modena’s anticabalistic work “ Ari 
Noham” (or “Sha‘agat Aryeh”) fell into his hands 
he wrote the pointed reply “Hoker u-Mekubbal ” 
(or “ Ma’amar ha-Wikkuah”), in which he unspar- 
ingly attacked the famous Venetian rabbi. The 
other rabbis thereupon indignantly opposed Luz- 
zatto, who now found himself unwillingly the cen- 
ter of public discussion. Every effort was made to 
condemn him; and letters and responsa multiplied 
in Padua, Venice, Leghorn, and Altona. No de- 
cisive steps were taken at the time in Italy itself; 
but the German rabbis, yiclding to Luzzatto’s ene- 
mies who were headed by Moses Hagiz, pronounced 
the ban upon any who should write in the language 
of the Zohar, in the name of the “faithful shep- 
herd,” or of other saints. 

The Venetian rabbis thereupon requested Bassani 
at Reggio to explain to Luzzatto the consequences 
of his actions, and to take an active part in the con- 
troversy generally. Bassani then went to Padua 
and induced Luzzatto to declare in writing before 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Luzzatto 





the delegates of the Venetian rabbinate that he 
would renounce the teachings of the Cabala, would 
not show his works to any one, and would publish 
nothing in future without the approval of his teacher 
Bassani and other reliable men. Luzzatto’s works 
were locked up ina casket, one key of which was 
given to Bassani and another to the representatives 
of the Venetian rabbinate. Luzzatto himself re- 
ceived the title of rabbi. 

He now seemed definitely to have renounced his 
connection with the Cabala, and he turncd again to 
literature, producing histinest poems. He traveled, 
cultivated his friends, married the daughter of R. 

David at Mantua, and took part also 

Renewed in the business affairs of his relatives. 

Cabalistic Despite all this, he could not perma- 
Activity. nently resist the attractions of the 
Cabala. It seems that decreasing 
prosperity once more led him to mysticism; for, not- 
withstanding his promises, he composed the cabalis- 
tic works “ Kelalim Rishonim le-Hokmat ha-Emet,” 
“Tefillah we-Shir ‘al Ge’ullat Mizrayim.” “ Tefillah 
we-Shir ‘al Mattan Torah,” and * Wikkuah ben ha- 
Sekel weha-Neshamah,” and Bassani was weak 
enough to slur his duty and to refrain from opposi- 
tion to thisactivity. Thenews reached the Venetian 
rabbis, who had been informed that Luzzatto in- 
tended also to publish his polemic against Leon of 
Modena. They lent a credulous ear to those who 
had been set to watch Luzzatto; and when he re- 
fused to take an oath that he would publish no 
more works without submitting them to the censor- 
ship of the Venetian rabbinate, the six rabbis of 
Venice pronounced (Dec., 1784) a ban upon him and 
his works, and made it incumbent upon every one 
who possessed any copies of his writings to deliver 
them to the rabbinate. News of the ban was sent 
to all the communities of Germany; and Hagiz was 
informed of the victory he had gained. 

It was now impossible for Luzzatto to remain in 
Italy; for he was abandoned by all except Bassani 
and a few faithful friends. He therefore decided to 
emigrate to Amsterdam. On the journey he did 
not neglect to exhort his pupils to endurance and 
harmony. In Frankfort-on-the-Main a deep humili- 
ation awaited him: he had to promise under oath to 
give up his mystic studics and not to print or even 
write a sentence cabalistic in content, Not until his 
fortieth year would be be permitted to study the 
mysteries of the Cabala, and then only in the Holy 
Land in company with worthy men. This declara 
tion was communicated to many rabbis in different 
countries; and Luzzatto’s works were taken away 
from him. 

Luzzatto was welcomed at Amsterdam with great 


honor. He was received into the house of the prom- 
inent Moses de Chaves, whose son he 

At Am- = taught, and the Sephardic community 
sterdam. offered hima salary; but, preferring 


his personal independence, he sup- 
perted himself by grinding optical lenses. He de- 
voted his spare time to study and teaching, and 
was soon able to send for his wife, son, and parents, 
who likewise were cordially received. Luzzatto 
now resumed his correspondence with Bassani and 
his pupils; he commended the latter to his teacher 


Luzzatto 





and exhorted them to remain faithful to the study 
of the Cabala. This correspondence became known 
to the Venetian rabbis, and as they could do nothing 
further to Luzzatto, they attacked Bassani, who 
was suspected of having opened the casket which 
contained Luzzatto’s works (though perhaps the 
psalms were not included [[Xahana, “ Luzzatto,” p. 
10, note 2]) and of having restored them to him. 
This casket, which was supposed to be guarded by 
a cherub (Zunz, “Die Monatstage des Kalender- 
jahis,” p. 26), is said to have found its way to Prague 
after many vicissitudes (comp. Kaufmann, “ Con- 
tributions 4 la Biographie de Mcsé Hayyim Luz- 
zatto, Yekutiel Gordon et Mosé IHages.—La Caisse 
des Manuscrits de Luzzatto et Jacob Cohen Popers,” 
in “R. BE. J.” xxiii. 256-261). The ban was then re- 
newed against those having forbidden works by 
Luzzatto in their possession and failing to deliver 
the same to the rabbinate 
of Venice. 

Meanwhile Luzzatto’s 
reputation was increasing 
at Amsterdam. [He won 
the friendship of the fore- 
most men there and dis- 
played great activity asa 
teacher, still continuing 
his cabalistic studies. In 
that city he published the 
following works: “ Mesil- 
lat Yesharim” (1740), a 
popular survey of relig- 
jous ethics, which was 
widely read; the Talmudic 
and methodologic treatise 
“Derek Tebunot ” (1743); 
the smaller works, dealing 
With various subjects, 
*Ma’amar ha-‘Tkkarim,” 
“Ma’amar “al ha-Agga- 
dot,” “Derek Hokmah,” 
*Ma’amar ha -Hokmah” 
(1743); and the allegorical 
drama “ La-Yesharim Te- 
hillah,” written on the mar- 
riage of his pupil Jacob de 
Chaves—“a work of art 
unique in Neo-Hebraic lit- 
erature, masterly in form, language, and thought, 
a monument to his great gifts, fitted to immortalize 
him and the tongue in which le composed it.” This 
drama, which in its simple plot bears much resem- 
blance to that of the * Migdal ‘Oz,” is closely con- 
nected in sentiment with the ethical works written 
by Luzzatto at Amsterdam and is filled with lofty 
thought. T& was imitated by many on account of 
its style, which is modeled, though with great free- 
dom, on that of the Bible. Luzzatto had only fifty 
copies printed, which he distributed among the 
prominent members of the Sephardic community of 
the city. 

At Amsterdam Luzzatto lived quietly and com- 
fortably for ten years, making one short visit to 
London. When his period of renunciation of the 
Cabala drew to a close he was filled with a longing 
for the Holy Land, and after many hardships he ar- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


1 re ee 





Samuel David Luzzatto. 


224 





rived with his wife andsonat Safed. He exchanged 
some letters with his disciples at Padua, in which 
he spoke of his aims and hopes; but in the midst of 
his plans for the future he, together with his wife 
and sca, died of the Plague in his fortieth year, and 
was buried at Tiberias beside R. Akiba. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacob Emden, Torat ha-Kenw@ot; M. 8. Ghi- 

rondi. in Kerem Hemed, ii. 54 et seq.: J. Almanzi, tb. iii. 113 

et sey.; Franz Delitzsch, Zur Geach. der Jiidischen Poesie, 

pp. 39 et seq.; Jost, Gesch. des Judenthums und Seiner 

Nekten, ili. 179 et seqg.: Gratz, Gesch. x. 369 et seq.: Zunz, 

Literaturgesch. p. 449; Autobiografia di S. D. Luzzatto 

Preceduta di Aleune Notizie Storica-Letterarie sulla Fa- 

miglia Luzzatto, Padua, 1882; Abraham Kahan, Rabbi Ray- 

yim Luzzetto, Warsaw, 1899; Kaufmann, Poésies de Moise 

Hanyim Luzzatto, eic., in 2, bd. Xxxix. 1338 et seq.; Hal- 

berstam. ib. 317 et seg. 

S. KE. N. 

Samuel David (ShaDaL) Luzzatto: Italian 
philologist, poet, and Biblical exegete; born at 
Triest Aug. 22, 1800; died at Padua Sept. 30, 1865. 

While still a boy he en- 
tered the Talmud Torah 
of his native city, where 
besides Talmud, in which 
he was taught by Abra- 
ham Eliezer ha-Levi, chief 
rabbi of Triest and a dis- 
tinguished pilpulist, he 
studied ancient and mod- 
ern languages aud = pro- 
fane science under Mor- 
decai «le Cologna, Leon 
Vita Saraval, and Raphael 
Baruch Segré, whose son- 
in-law he later became, 
He studied Hebrew also 
at home, with his father, 
who, though a turner by 
trade, was an eminent 
Talmudist. 

Luzzatto manifested ex- 
traordinary ability from 
his very childhood, so that 
while reading the Book 
of Job at school he formed 
the intention to write a 
commentary thereon, con- 
sidering the existing com- 
mentaries to be deficient. 
In 1811 he received as a 
prize Montesquieu’s “Considérations sur les Causes 
de la Grandeur des Romains,” ete., Which contributed 
much to the development of his critical faculties. 
Indeed, his literary activity began in that very year, 
for it was then that he undertook to write a He- 
brew grammar in Italian, translated into Hebrew 

the life of sop, and wrote exegetical 

Early notes on the Pentateuch (comp. “Il 

Ability. Vessillo Israelitico,” xxv. 374, xxvi. 

16). The discovery of an unpub- 

lished commentary on the Targum of Onkelos in- 

duced him to study Aramaic (preface to his “Oheb 
Ger”). 

At the age of thirteen Luzzatto was withdrawn 
from school, attending only the lectures in Talmud 
of Abraham Eliezer ha-Levi. While he was reading 
the “‘En Ya‘akob” by Jacob ibn Habib, he came to 
the conclusion that the vowels and accents did not 


225 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Luzzatto 





exist in the time of the Talmudists, and that the 
Zohar, speaking as it does of vowels and accents, 
must necessarily be of later composition. Ie pro- 
pounded this theory in a pamphlet which was the 
origin of his later work “Wikkuah ‘al ha-Kab- 
balah.” 

In 1814 there began a most trying time for Luz- 
zatto. His mother dying in that year, he had to do 
the housework, including cooking, and to help his 
futher in his work as a turner, Nevertheless, by 
the end of 1815 he had composed thirty-seven poems, 
which form a part of his “Kinnor Na‘im,” and in 
1817 had finished his “ Ma’amar ha-Nikkud,” a trea- 
tise on the vowels. In 1818 he began to write his 
“Torah Nidreshet,” a philosophico-theological work 
of which he composed only twenty-four chapters, 
the first twelve being published in the “Kokebe 
Yizbak,” vols. xvi.-xvii., XXi.-xxiv., xxvi., and 
the remainder translated into Italian by M. Coen- 
Porto and published in “ Mosé,” i.-ii. In 1879 Coen- 
Porto published a translation of the whole work in 
book form. In spite of his father’s desire that he 
should learn a trade, Luzzatto had no inclination for 
one, and in order to earn his livelihood he was 
obliged to give private lessons, finding pupils with 
great difficulty on account of his timidity. From 
1824, in which year his father died, he had to de- 
pend entirely upon himself. Until 1829 he carned 
a livelihood by giving lessons and by writing for the 
“ Bikkure ha-‘Ittim ”; in that year he was appointed 
professor at the rabbinical college of Padua. 

At Padua Luzzatto had a much larger scope for 
his literary activity, as he was able to devote all his 
time to literary work. Besides, while explaining 
certain parts of the Bible to his pupils he wrote 
down all his observations. Luzzatto was the first 
Jewish scholar to turn his attention to Syriac, con- 
sidering a knowledge of this language necessary for 
the understanding of the Targum. His letter pub- 
lished in Kirchheim’s “ Karme Shomeron ” shows his 
thorough acquaintance with Samaritan. He wasalso 
the first Jew who permitted himself to amend the 

text of the Old Testament; and his 

Critical emendations have met with the ap- 
Treatment provalof Christian scholars. Through 

of Bible. acarcful examination of the Book of 

Ecclesiastes, Luzzatto came to the 
conclusion that its author was not Solomon, but 
some one who lived several centuries laterand whose 
name was Kohelet. The author, Luzzatto thinks, 
ascribed his work to Solomon, but his contempora- 
ries, having discovered the forgery, substituted the 
correct naine “ Kohelet” for “Solomon” wherever 
the latter occurred in the book. As to the Book of 
Isaiah, in spite of the prevalent opinion that chapters 
x].-Ixvi. were written after the Captivity, Luzzatto 
maintained that the whole bock was written by 
Isaiah. Difference of opinion on this point was one 
of the causes why Luzzatto, after having main- 
tained a friendly correspondence with Rapoport, 
turned against the latter. 
interruption of his relations with the chief rabbi of 
Prague was that Luzzatto, though otherwise on 
good terms with Jost, could not endure the latter’s 
rationalism. He consequently requested Rapoport 
to cease his relations with Jost; but Rapoport, not 

VITI.—15 


Another reason for the_ 


knowing Luzzatto personally, ascribed the request 
to awrogance. 

Liuzzatto was a warm defender of Biblical and 
Talmudical Judaism; and his opposition to philo- 
sophical Judaism brought him many opponents 

among his contemporaries. But his 


Views on opposition to philosophy was not the 
Philoso- result of fanaticisin nor of lack of un- 
phy. derstanding. Heclaimed to have read 


during twenty-four years all the an- 
cient philosophers, and that the more he read them 
the more he found them deviating from the truth. 
What one approves the other disproves; and so the 
philosophers themselves go astray and mislead stu- 
dents, It is for this reason that while praising 
Maimonides as the author of the “Yad,” Luzzatto 
blames him severely for being a follower of the 
Aristotelian philosophy, which, he says, brought no 
good to himself while causing much evil to other 
Jews (“ Penine Shadal,” p. 417). Luzzatto attacked 
Abraham ibn Ezra also, declaring that the latter’s 
works were not the products of a scientific mind, 
and that as it was necessary for him in order to 
secure a livelihood to write a book in every town 
in which he sojourned, the number of his books cor- 
responded with the number of towns he visited. Ibn 
Ezra’s material, he declared, was always the same, 
the form being changed sometimes slightly, and at 
other times entirely (“ Kerem Hemed,” iv. 181 et seq.). 
Luzzatto’s pessimistic opinion of philosophy made 
him naturally the adversary of Spinoza, whom he 
attacked on more than one occasion. 

During his literary career of more than fifty years, 
Luzzatto wrote a great number of works, both in 
Hebrew and in Italian. Besides he contributed to 
most of the Hebrew and Jewish periodicals of his 
time. His correspondence with his contemporaries 
is both voluminous and instructive; there being 
hardly any subject in connection with Judaism on 
which he did not write. The following is a list of 
Luzzatto’s works: 


Ixn HEBREW. 
Kinnor Na‘im, collection of poems. Vol. i.. Vienna, 1825; vol. 
ji., Padua, 1879. 

Kinah, elegy on the death of Abraham Eliezer ha-Levi. 
Triest, 1826. 

Oheb Ger, guide to the understanding of the Targum of Onke- 
los, with notes and variants; accompanied by a short Syriac 
grammar and notes on and variants in the Targum of Psalms. 
Vienna, 1830. 

Hafla’ah sheba-‘Arakin of Isaiah Berlin, edited by Luzzatto, 
with notes of hisown. Parti., Breslau, 1830; part ii., Vienna, 
1839. 

Seder Tannaim wa-Amoraim, revised and edited with vari- 
ants. Prague, 1839, 

Betulat Bat Yebudah, extracts from the diwan of Judah ha- 
Levi, edited with notes and an introduction. Prague, 1840. 

Abne Zikkaron, seventy-six epitaphs from the cemetery of 
Toledo, followed by a commentary on Micah by Jacob Pardo, 
edited with notes. Prague, 1841. 

Bet ha-Ozar, collection of essays on the Hebrew language, 
exegetical and archeological notes, collectanea, and ancient po- 
etry. Vol. i., Lemberg, 1847; vol. ii.. Przemysl, 1888; vol. iii., 
Cracow, 1889. 

Ha-Mishtaddel, scholia to the Pentateuch. Vienna, 1849. 

Wikkuah ‘al ha-Kabbalah, dialogues on Cabala and on the ar- 
tiquity of punctuation. Gdritz, 1852. 

Sefer Yesha‘yah, the Book of Isaiah edited with an Italian 
translation and a Hebrew commentary. Padua, 1855-67. 

Mebo, a historical and critical introduction to the Mahzor. 
Leghorn, 1856, 


Luzzatto 
Lydda 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


226 





Diwan, eighty-six religious poems of Judah ha-Levi corrected, 
vocalized, and edited, with a commentary and introduction. 
Lyck, 1864. 

Yad Yosef, a catalogue of the Library of Joseph Almanzi. 
Padua, 1864. 

Ma’amar bi-Yesode ha-Dikduk, a treatise on Hebrew grammar. 
Vienna, 1865. 

Hereb ha-Mithappeket, a poem of Abraham Bedersi, published 
for the first time with a preface and a comimentary at the be- 
ginning of Bedersi’s “ Hotam Toknit.””. Amsterdam, 1865. 

Commentary on the Pentateuch. Padua, 1871. 

Perushe Shedal, conimentary on Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Proverbs, 
and Job. Lemberg, 1876. 

Nahalat Shedal, in two parts; the first containing a list of the 
Geonim and Rabbis, and the secoud one of the payyetanim and 
their piyyutim. Berlin, 1878-79. 

Yesode ha-Torah, a treatise on Jewish dogma. Przemysl, 
1880. 

Tal Orot, a collection of eighty-one unpublished piyyutim, 
amended. Przemysl, 1881. 

Iggerot Shedal, 361 letters, published by Isaiah Luzzatto and 
prefaced by David Kaufmann. Przemysl, 1882. 

Penine Shedal (see below). Przemysl, 1883. 


In ITALIAN. 


Prolegomeni ad una Grammatica Ragionata della Lingua 
Ebraica,. Padua, 1836. 

Il Giudaisino Ulustrato. Padua, 1848. 

Calendario Ebraico. Padua, 1&49. 

Lezioni di Storia Giudaica. Padua, 1832. 

Grammatica dela Lingua Ebraica. Padua, 1853. 

Italian translation of Job. Padua, 1853. 

Discorsi Morali agli Studenti Israeliti. - Padua, 1857. 

Opere de] De Rossi. Milan, 187. 

Italian translation of the Pentateuch and Haftarot. Triest, 
1858-00. 

Lezioni di Teologia Morale [{sraelitica. Padua, 1862. 

Lezioni di Teologia Dogimatica Israelitica. Triest, 1864. 

Elementi Grammaticali del Caldeo Biblico e del Dialetto Tal- 
mudico. Padua, 1865. Translated into German by Krtiger, Bres- 
lau, 1873; into English by Goldammer, New York, 1876; and 
the part on the Talmudic dialect, into Hebrew by Hayyim Zebi 
Lerner, St. Petersburg, 1880. 

Discorsi Storico-Religiosi agli Studenti Israeliti. 

Introduzione Critica ed Ermenutica al Pentateuco. 
1870. 

Autobiografia (first published by Luzzatto himself in ‘* Mosé,” 
i.-vi.). Padua, 1882. 

Isaiah Luzzatto published (Padua, 1881), under the respective 
Hebrew anda Italian titles ‘* Reshimat Ma’amare SHeDaL”’ and 
** Catalogo Ragionato degli Scritti Sparsi di S. D. Luzzatto,”’ an 
index of all the articles which Luzzatto had written in vari- 
ous periodicals, 


The “ Penine Shedal” (= “The Pearls of Samuel 
David Luzzatto”), published by Luzzatto’s sons, 
is a collection of eighty-nine of the more interest- 
ing of Luzzatto’s letters, These letters are really 
scientific treatises, which are divided in this book 
into different categories as follows: bibliographical 
(Nos. i.-xxii.), containing letters on Ibn Ezra’s 
“'Yesod Mora” and “Yesod Mispar”; lturgical- 
bibliographical and various other subjects (Nos. 
Xxili.-xxxi.); Biblical-exegetical (Nos. xxxii.-lii.), 
containing among others a commentary on Ecclesi- 
astes and a letter on Samaritan writing; other exe- 
getical letters (Nos, liii.-lxii.); grammatical (Nos. 
Ixiii.-Ixx.); historical (Nos. Ixxi.-lxxvii.), in which 
the antiquity of the Book of Job is discussed; philo- 
sophical (Nos, Ixxviii.-lxxxii.), including letters on 
dreams and on the Aristotelian philosophy; theo- 
logical (Nos. Ixxxiii.-Ixxxix.), in the last letter of 
which Luzzatto proves that Ibn Gabirol’s ideas were 
very different from those of Spinoza, and declares 
that every honest man should rise against the 
Spinozists. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bernfeld, in Sefer ha-Shanah, ti. 278 et 
ség.; idem, in Gedenkbuch zum Hundertsten Geburtstag 


Padua, 1870. 
Padua, 


Luzzattos, Berlin, 1900; Educatore Israelita, xiii. 313, 357, 
368; xiv. 19; Geiger, in Jitd, Zeit. iv. 1-22; A. Kahana, in 
Ha-Shiloah, tii. 58, 337; iv. 58, 143; J. Klausner, ib. vii, 
117-126, 213-228, 299-305; S. D. Luzzatto, Autobtografiea, 
Padua, 1882; idem, in Ha-Maggid, ti., Nos. 17-19, 22, 23, 30, 
33; lii., Nos. 1, 13, 14, 21, 22, 31-333; vi., Nos, 12, 15, 16, 21-23; 
H.S. Morais, Aminent Israelites of the Nineteenth Century, 
pp. 211-217, Philadelphia, 1880; Senior Sachs, in Ha-Lebanon, 
li, 303, 327, 344. 

S. M. SEL. 


Simeon (Simhah) ben Isaac Luzzatto: Ital- 
ian rabbi and apologist; born about 1580; died Jan, 
6, 1663, at Venice, where he was rabbi. Luzzatto 
was one of the most prominent demagogues of his 
time, and when still a young man he had already 
acquired renown as a rabbi and scholar. He ig 
styled “rabbi” at the head of a long responsuin en- 
titled “ Mish‘an Mayim,” which he wrote in 1606 
in regard to the “mikweh” of Rovigo (“ Mashbit 
Milhamot,” pp. 88b-56b). He shared the rabbinate 
of Venice with Leon of Modena, who held him in 
great esteem; according to Wolf (“ Bibl. Hebr.” iii, 
1150), they wrote together a work on the Karaites, 
The above-mentioned responsum shows him to have 
been an authority in rabbinics; and he is quoted by 
Isaac Lampronti (“Pahad Yizhak,” i., 8.7. Mwx 
Nnwapny AN), Raphael Meldola (“ Mayim Rabbim,” 
No, 11), Mordecai Jaffe (“ Lebush,” end of “ Eben 
ha-‘Ezer”), and other rabbinical authorities, 

As may be seen from his Italian writings, Luz- 
zatto was well acquainted with ancient Hterature 
and philosophy as well as with the literature of his 
time, while he is praised by Joseph Delmedigo as a 

distinguished mathematician (comp. 

His ‘‘Dis- Conforte, “Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 50a). 
corso.”  Luzzatto wrote two important works 

in Italian—“ Discorso Circa il Stato 

degli Hebrei” (Venice, 1638) and “Socrate” (2. 
1651). The former is a treatise on the position of 
the Jews, particularly of those that lived in Venice. 
It is an apology for the Jews in eighteen arguments, 
each of which forms a chapter. For instance, one 
chapter defends them on the ground of their useful- 
ness in commerce; another explains the causes of de- 
creases in certain revenues of a state and shows that 
encouragement of the activities of the Jews would 
tend to increase those revenues. He points out that 
the Jews are especially fitted for commerce; that 
they loyally observe the laws of the state; that the 
Venetian republic reaped great advantages from 
their relations with them. The chief merit of this 
book is its impartiality, for while Luzzatto depicts 
the better characteristics of the Jews he does not 
ignore their faults. He shows remarkable know!l- 
edge of the commerce of his timeand of the political 
influences that affected it. According to him, the 
common people felt little antipathy toward the 
Jews, upon whom, to some extent, they depended 
for their living. It was among the patricians that 
the fanatical religious zealots were found who, out 
of envy, advocated restrictions and even banish- 
ment. Wolf translated the last three chapters into 
Latin; they comprise (1) an examination of Hebrew 
literature and of the variousclasses of Jewish schol- 
ars; (2) an account of the directions in which the 
Jews were permitted freedom, and of their suffer- 
ings; and (3) a survey of the Jews in non-Italian 
countries (“ Bibl. Hebr.” iv, 1115-1185), The thir- 


227 





teenth chapter was translated into Hebrew by Reg- 
gio in his “Iggeret Yashar” (i. 65-70). 

In the second work, “Socrate,” written in his 
youth, Luzzatto endeavors to prove the impotence 
of human reason when unaided by divine revelation. 
It is in the form of a parable, in which he puts his 

thoughts into the mouth of Socrates. 
His Reason, being imprisoned by Orthodox 
‘‘Socrate.”? Authority, appealed for liberation to 
the Academy of Delphi, which had 
been founded to rectify the errors of the human 
intellect. The academy granted her petition not- 
withstanding the remonstrance of Pythagoras and 
Aristotle, who argued that Reason, when free, would 
spread abroad most frightful errors. Liberated Rea- 
gon caused great mischief, and the academicians did 
not know what to do, when Socrates advised 
combining Reason with Revelation. It is apparent 
that Luzzatto was a thinker and a believer as well; 
he did not share Manasseh b. Israel's dream that 
the ten tribes still exist together in some part of 
the world. He maintained that Daniel’s revelation 
refers not to a future Messiah, but to past historical 
events. This utterance of Luzzatto was either mis- 
understood or deliberately perverted by the convert 
Samucl Nahmias (Giulio Morosini), who, in his “ Via 
della Fide,” makes Luzzatto say that Daniel’s reve- 
lation may perhaps point to Jesus as the Messiah 
(comp. Wolf, dc. iv. 1128). 

Luzzatto, who dedicated this book to the doge 
and Senate of Venice, stated that his ancestors had 
settled in Venice two centuries previously. In the 
first book (pp. 5a, 99a), Luzzatto quotes a work of 
his own entitled “Trattato dell’ Opinioni e Dogmi 
deg!’ Hebrei e dei Riti Loro Piu Principali.” Jacob 
Aboab asserts that he saw in Venice a collection of 
Luzzatto’s speeches and responsa, which included 
a decision in regard to the use of a gondola on the 
Sabbath. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 283; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., 

x. 147 et seq.: 8S. D. Luzzatto, Autobiogratia (in Mosé, i. 300 

et seq.): Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, pp. 316-317 ; 


Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. col. 2597. 
g, M. SEL. 


LWOW, AARON MOSES BEN ZEBI 
HIRSCH: Grammarian, scribe, and dayyan of 
Lemberg in the eighteenth century. He wrote: 
“Shirah Hadashah ” (Zolkiev, 1764), a Hebrew gram- 
mar in verse, divided into six poems with explana- 
tions in prose, composed after the model of Elijah 
Levita’s “ Perek Shirah ” ; “Ohel Mosheh ” (zd. 1765), 
a complete Hebrew grammar in four parts, follow- 
ing Kimhi’s “Sefer ha-Zikkaron” and criticizing 
Zalman Hanau (RaZaH); also “ Halakah le-Mosheh,” 
novell# on the Talmud and decisions; and “ Ohel 
Mo‘ed,” a treatise on the Hebrew language, both of 
which works are still unpublished. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 284; Buber, Anshe Shem, 


p. 26 
I. R. M. SEL. 


LYDDA or LOD (45): City in Palestine, later 
named Diospolis ; situated one hour northeast of 
Ramleh, about three hours southeast of Jaffa, and, 
according to the Talmud (Ma‘as. Sh. v. 2; Bezah 
da), a day’s journey west of Jerusalem. It seems to 
have been built originally by a descendant. of Ben- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Luzzatto 
Lydda 


jamin (I Chron. viii. 12), and to have been occupied 
again by Benjamites after the Exile (Ezra ii, 33; 
Neh. xi. 35). According to the Talmud (Yer. Meg. 
i. 1) it was a fortified city as early as the days of 
Joshua. At the time of the Syrian domination the 
city and district belonged to Samaria, and Deme- 
trius II. (Nicator) apportioned it to Judea (I Macc. 
xi. 84; Josephus, “Ant.” xiii. 4, $9). Cestius Gal- 
lus, Itoman proconsul under Nero, burned Lydda 
when he advanced upon Jerusalem from Ceesarea 
(Josephus, “B. J.” ii, 19, § 1), but soon afterward it 
is named as the capital of one of the toparchies into 
which Judea was later divided, surrendering as such 
to Vespasian (2b. iit. 8, § 5; iv. 8,8 1). Josephus 
describes it as a “village ” equal in size to a “city” 
(“ Ant.” xx. 6, § 2). 

At a time which can not definitely be fixed, but 
which was during the Roman period, the name of 
the place was changed to Diospolis, which name is 
found on coins struck under Septimius Severus and 
Caracala. The city is frequently mentioned by 
Eusebius and Jerome. It became a bishopric at an 
early date, its bishops signing at the various coun- 
cils either as bishops of Lydda or as bishops of 
Diospolis (comp. Reland, “ Palestina ex Monumentis 
Veteribus Illnstrata,” p. 877; Robinson, “ Palistina,” 
iil. 263 e¢ seg.). At an early date Lydda was a center 
of the veneration of St. George, for both Anto- 
ninus Martyr (c. 600) and Benjamin of Tudela refer 
to it as the burial-place of the saint (comp. Reland, 
i.c.). On the varying fortunes of the city see Rob- 
inson, “Palastina” (/.c.). The present village of 
Lidd still preserves traces of the historical Lydda, 
which is described in tradition as second only to 
Jerusalem (comp. Van de Velde, “Reise Durch 
Syrien und Palistina,” i. 382; Munk-Levy, “ Palis- 
tina,” pp. 148 et seg.; Schwarz, “Das Heilige Land,” 
p. 104; Neubauer, “G. T.” pp. %6 e¢ seg.; Socin, 
“Palistina und Syrien,” 2d ed., pp. 11 e¢ seq.). 

After the destruction of Jerusalem, Lydda was 
famous asa seat of Jewish scholarship, and the acad- 
emy which flourished there is frequently mentioned 
in the Talmud and other works of traditional litera- 
ture. The term “scholars of the South” (“zikne 

Darom,” Hul. 182b; Zeb. 28a: “rab- 

After the banan di-Daroma,” Lev. R. 20, 168b; 

Fall of “rabbanan mi-Daroma,” Yer. M. K. 
Jerusalem. iii. 82; and simply “Deromayya,” 

Yer. Pes. v. 82) doubtless refers to the 
Lydda teachers of the Law, whose wisdom is rec- 
ognized also in the sentence “Ha-rozeh she-yahkim 
yadrim ” = * Let him who wishes to attain to wisdom 
go to the South” (B. B. 25b; comp. also Schiirer, 
“Gesch.” ii. 302). 

Rabbi Eliezer lived at Lydda (Yad. iv. 8; Sanh. 
82b); R. Tarfon taught there (B. M. 49b); and it 
was also the scene of R. Akiba’s activity (R. H. 
i. 6). Responsa from Lydda are often mentioned 
(Tosef., Mik. vii. [viii.], end); but despite the 
reputation which the teachers at the academy en- 
joyed, there seems to have been a certain feeling of 
animosity against them in consequence of their ar- 
rogance, and it was therefore denied that they pos- 
sessed any deep knowledge of the Law (comp. Pes. 
62b; Yer. Pes. 32a; Yer. Sanh. 18c, d; Bacher, 
“Ag, Pal. Amor.” i. 60, iii. 16). 


Lying 
Lyons 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


228 





At Lydda, in the garret of one Nitsa, during the 
I[adrianic persecutions, was adopted the historical 
resolution that where martyrdom was the only al- 
ternative, all the religious laws, excepting three, 
might be transgressed, the three exceptions being 
the laws concerning idolatry, incest, and murder 
(Yer. Sheb. iv. 85; Sanh. 74a; Yer. Sanh. iii, 21; 
comp. Pesik. xiii.) At another meeting held in 
Nitsa’s garret the question whether the study of the 
Law is more important than the practise of the Law 
was unanimously decided in the affirmative (Kid. 40b; 
comp. Sifre to Deut. xi. 13 [ed. Friedmann, p. 79b] 
and parallels). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 2d. ed., iv. 1/0, especially note 
lV; Jost, Geseh. des Judenthums und Setner Sekten, ii. 80, 


107, 

J. fh. N, 

LYING (Hebr. “shakar,” “kKazab,” “kahash,” 
and “shaw ”): Telling a falsehood with the intent of 
deceiving.—Biblical Data: Lying is most vigor- 
ously condemned in the Law: “ Keep thee far from 
a false matter” (Ex. xxiii. 7); “ Neither deal falsely, 
neither lie one to another” (Lev. xix. 11). Regard- 
ing the false oath sce PErsury. Lying on the 
witness-stand to harm another is a crime specially 
mentioned in the Decalogue (Ex. xx. 16). and the 
punishment is that the false witness be dealt with as 
the one witnessed against would have been dealt 
with if guilty (Deut. xix. 15-21). Regarding lying 
in fraudulent dealing see FRauD AND MISTAKE. 

Lying is abhorred throughout Scripture as an 
offense against the holy God who “lieth not” (I 
Sam, xv. 29; Ps. Ixxxix. 84-85); it is “an abomina- 
tion of the Lord” (Prov. xii. 29). “He that telleth 
Jies shal! not tarry in my sight” (Ps. ci. 7; comp. 
xxiv. 4and xv. 2). “They speak falsely every one 
with his neighbor; with flattering lips and witha 
double heart. . . . The Lord shall cut off all flatter- 
ing lips” (Ps. -xit. 8-4, Hebr. [A. V. 2-3]). “Speak 
ye every one the truth to his neighbor... love 
no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, 
saith the Lord” (Zech. vill. 16-17). “The remnant 
of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither 
shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth ” 
(Zeph. iii. 183). With the Psalmist, one should “ hate 
every false way ” and “abhor lying” (Ps. exix. 104, 
128, 163). 
——-In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera- 
ture: Ben Sira warns against the habit of lying as 
even worse than theft, because it brings ruin and 
disgrace (Ecclus, xx. 24-26; comp. vii. 12-14); he 
warns also against duplicity of tongue (22. v. 9, 14; 
xxviii. 13), which “is a snare of death” (“ Didache,” 
1.4). The spirit of lying is one of the seven evil spirits 
in man (Test. Twelve Patr., Reuben, 3). “Hate 
lying in order that the Lord may live among you 
and Belial flee from you,” warns Dan (74, Dan, 1-6). 
Especially emphatic are the Rabbis in condemning 
lying. “God’s seal is truth” (Shab. 55a; Gen. R. 
lxxxi.). “He who changes his word acts as if he 
were worshiping other gods” (Sanh. 92a). Among 
the “three God hateth is he who speaks the thing he 
means not,” “ with duplicity of tongue ” (Pes. 113b). 
“ Liars can not behold the majesty of God ” (Sotah 
42a). “'To conceal the truth, or to deceive others by 
creating a false impression, even for a good purpose, 


is a transgression of the command, ‘ Thou shalt keep 

thee far from a false matter’” (Shebu. 8la). To 

pretend an affectionate feeling in order to win the 
good opinion of another is sinning against truth 

(Tos. to B. K. vii. 8). The Shammaites declared it 

sinful even to lavish, at the wedding-feast, lauda- 

tions on a bride which are not in harmony with the 
truth, as, for instance, to call her beautiful when 
she is ugly (Ket. 17a). “In case of doubt, train thy 
tongue always to say ‘I do not know,’ lest thou be 
caught in an untruth” (Ber. 4a), “Never tell a 
child ‘I shall give you so-and-so’ unless you actn- 
ally will give it to him; else the child will learn to 
utter untruths himself” (Suk. 46b). “Canaan, in 
his last will, told his children not to speak the 
truth ” (Pes. 113b). “ Let thy ‘ yea’ be ‘yea’ and thy 

‘nay’ ‘nay’” (B. M. 49a). “Truth willabide; false- 

hood will notabide” (Shab, 104a). In casea life de- 

pends upon your telling a falsehood, as, for instance, 
when a robber or murderer inquires after one he 
pursues, the law permits lying (Ned. ii. 4; Shuihan 

‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 232, 14; see also under Hy- 

pockisy), Inthe Daily Prayers the silent prayer be- 

gins with the words, “ My God, keep my tongue from 
evil and my lips from speaking falsehood!” (Ber. 
17a); and at the beginning of the Morning Prayers 
are recited these words, taken from Tanna debe 

Eliyahu Rabbah 21: “At all times man should be 

God-fearing In secret also, and ever confess the truth 

and speak the truth in his heart.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, R. B. T.s.v. Wahrhaftigkeit : F. 
Perles, Bousset’s Religion des Judenthums, pp, 71-74, Ber- 
lin, 1908 

Ky. 

LYON, ABRAHAM DE: One of the first Jew- 
ish settlers in Georgia, U. S. A.; ancestor of the 
well-known family of that name which has figured 
prominently in the annals of that state. According 
to a family tradition he was born in Spain, The 
early records, however, invariably describe him as 
“a vineron from Portugal” and as having been for 
years prior to his emigration “a vineron in Portu- 
gal.” He went to America in the same year that 
the colony of Georgia was founded by Oglethorpe, 
and settled in 1733 in Savannah, where he soon be- 
came a frecholder. 

The trustees of the colony were especially desir- 
ous of making Georgia a wine-producing country ; 
and De Lyon soon attracted the attention of their 
agents by his ability as a horticulturist and vine- 
grower. He introduced viticulture and cultivated 
several kinds of grapes, among them the Porto and 
Malaga, to great perfection. He proposed to the 
trustees that if they would lend him £200 sterling he 
would employ that sum, with a further sum of his 
own, in importing from Portugal “ vines and vine- 
rons.” His proposition was accepted, and the 
money was sent to Oglethorpe, who, however, gave 
only a part of it to De Lyon, claiming that “he had 
other uses for the money.” 

In his journal, under date of Dec., 1787, Col. Will- 
iam Stephens, the agent of the trustees, gives an 
elaborate description of De Lyon’s vineyard. 

De Lyon probably removed from Georgia about 
1740, when the illiberal policy of the trustees caused 
both Jewish and Christian settlers to leave: and 
there is a definite record of Mrs. De Lyon’s depar- 


229 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lying 





ture in that year in the trustees’ journal. In all Hke- 
libood, however, De Lyon soon returned to Savan- 
nah and died there. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Charles C. Jones. History of Georgia, i. 378: 
idem,in Publ. Am, Jew. Hist. Soc. i. 10; Leon Hiihner, 
The Jews of Georgie in Colonial Times, ib, x. 65-95, and 
authorities there cited. . 

A. L. Ht. 

LYON, GEORGE LEWIS: English journalist 
aud communal worker; born at Portsea, England, 
Dec. 11, 1828; died in London Feb. 14, 1904. After 
acting for a time as secretary of the Portsmouth 
Hebrew Benevolent Institution, Lyon went to Lon- 
don in the early fifties and became secretary of the 
Jews’ and General Literary and Scientific Institu- 
tion. Onresigning this position he devoted himself 
to financial journalism, and became city correspond- 
ent of many London and provincial newspapers. 
In Feb., 1878, he founded and edited the “Jewish 
World,” which journal, however, passed into other 
hands some years before his death. 

Lyon was secretary of the Jews’ Infant School 
and subsequently of the Jews’ Emigration Society. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Year Book, London, 1903; Jew. 

Chron. Feb. 19, 1904. 

J. G. L. 

LYON, HART. See Hrrscn, LEviIn Josepn. 


LYON (LEONI), MYER: Operatic singer and 
hazzan; died at Kingston, Jamaica, about 1800; 
uncle of John Braham; both he and his nephew 
were choristers at the same time at the Great Syna- 
gogue, London. Lyon was also a public singer; 
and his voice was said to have surpassed that of his 
nephew in sweetness and melody. His first appear- 
ance was at Covent Garden (1775) in “ Artaxerxes.” 
He subsequently joined Giordani in the manage- 
ment of au English opera-house in Dublin, and was 
also engaged by Palmer for the Royalty Theatre. 
He finally became hazzan in the English and Ger- 
man Synagogue, Kingston, Jamaica, being the first 
qualified hazzan in the English colonies. 

Lyon composed many morceaux for both theater 
and synagogue, particularly for the “Musaf” of 
Rosh ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Dec. 26, 1873; Humphreys, Me- 
moirs of De Castro, London, 1824; Picciotto, Sketches of 
Anglo-Jewish History; Thespian Diet. 

J G. IL. 

The name “Leoni” is given to the melody asso- 
ciated in English hymnals with the verses commen- 
cing “The God of Abraham praise.” These were 
composed by Thomas Olivers, a Wesleyan minister 
London, ona Friday evening in 1770, and was deeply 
(1725-99). He had attended the Great Synagogue, 
moved by the service, carrying away a keen impres- 
sion of the singing of Myer Lyon (Leoni) im the 
closing hymn Yicpau. Lyvyonafterward gave him 
the melody, and Olivers called it by his name. The 
hymn was an immediate success. Eight editions 
were called for in two years, and the thirtieth edition 
was reached in 1779. 

The melody thus furnished was the tune then (and 
still) used by the English Jews for the concluding 
hymn inthe Sabbath eve service. The characteris- 
tic and effective tune, of no great age, is also utilized 
among Continental Jews on the festivals. A tune by 
the late Sir John Stainer is now more often sung 


Lyons 
with Olivers’ verses in the Church of England 
service. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Bar. Bat‘al Tefillah. No. 760, Goteborg, 


lsvv, and Frankfort, 1883; Cohen and Davis, fe oice of Prayer 
and Precise, No, 28, London, 1899; Hymns, Ancient and 
Modern, No. 601. lst tune, ib. 1895 : Jew. Chron. Dec. 26, 
1873; J. Julian. Dictionary of Hymnology. p. 1150, 1. 1892 ; 
Mortgomery, Christian Psalmody, p. 28. ih, 1828. 


J. FLL. C. 

LYON, ROBERT: American journalist; born 
in London, England, Jan, 15, 1810; died in New 
York city March 10, 1858. After a bricf business 
career in London, he emigrated to the United States 
(1844), and, meeting no success in a manufacturing 
enterprise, began to publish (Oct. 26, 1849) ° The 
Asmonean,” the first American Jewish weekly of its 
kind, which he conducted until his death. He ed- 
ited at the same time the New York “Mercantile 
Journal,” an organ devoted to trade. For a time 
Isaac M. Wise and other Jewish writers of the day 
were regular contributors to “The Asmonean,” 
which, however, failed to win more than local fame. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY; Mor oe Eminent Israelites of the Nineteenth 
Centur? yy, Pp. 221-228 
A. A. S. I. 


LYONS: City on the Rhone, France. Jews 
seem to have been established in the surrounding re- 
gion at an early date. The fact that Pope Victor in 
the fifth century prohibited the Archbishop of Vi- 
enne (France) from celebrating Easter with the 
Jews shows not only that there were Jews in the 
towns surrounding Lyons, but also that the Chris- 
tians were on terms of comparative intimacy with 
them, 

It is chiefly in the ninth century that the presence 
of Jews in Lyons is incontestably demonstrated. 
They then formed a prosperous com- 
munity and lived in a special quarter 
situated at the foot of the Fourviére 
hill, of which one street is still called 
“Rue Juiveric.” Protected by the King of France, 
Louis le Debonnaire, and by Judith, his wife, they 
were special objects of aversion to the bishop Aao- 
BARD, Who, however, succeeded only in alienating 
himself from his sovereign, and failed utterly in his 
struggle against them. 

The Jews continued to live in Lyons until the 
middle of the thirteenth century. The arrival of 
Pope Innocent 1V., who took refuge in the domain 
of the archbishop, seems to have been fatal to them. 
The council held at Lyous in 1245 under the presi- 
dency of the pope expressed indignation at the rela- 
tions existing between Jews and Christians and tried 
to repress the former. Not only were they pre- 
cluded from holding any office; they were also 
obliged to wear on their dress a piece of cloth of a 
special color and circular in form. About the same 
time Archbishop Philip of Savoy, setting an example 
which was to be imitated three years later by Jean, 
Bishop of Vienne, expelled them from Lyons. 

For nearly a century there were no Jews, except 
temporary residents, in the whole district. A mannu- 
script copy of a tariff of taxes paid to the archbishop 
or metropolitan chapter for merchandise in 1340 
shows that every Jew who passed through Lyons 
was obliged to pay 12 deniers on entering the city 
or else to receive a blow (“ Archives du Rhdéne,” an 
inedited manuscript), 


First 
Mention. 


Lyons 
Lyra 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


230 





Beginning with the fourteenth century, official 
records show that Jews had returned to Lyons and 
were living there. The ordinance of Charles V., 
dated Sept. 27, 1864, decreeing that the Jews of 
Lyons should contribute to the common charges, 
clearly proves their presence in the city. At that 

time they lived in the same quarter, 

In the St. Georges, which their predecessors 
Fourteenth had occupied two centuries earlier, 

Century. In 1379 Jean de Tabaru drove them 

out of the Rue Dorée, adjacent to the 
Rue Juiverie, and bade them settle in another quar- 
ter, situated on the right bank of the Rhone. Their 
number increased daily, as is seen from a document 
of the time in which the city complains of the 
benefits derived by the clergy from the Jews 
(“Archives du Rhéne,” carton CC, 290). In 1386 
Charles VI. by letters patent renewed the ordinance 
of his father ordering the Jews to contribute to the 
expenses of the city (“ Archives de la Ville de Lyon,” 
CC, 290). They had then, as under Louis IIL., a 
conservator of their rights, the “magister Judzo- 
rum.” In 1393 the archbishop claimed jurisdiction 
over the Jews, who protested, declaring themselves 
subject to the king. They lost their case, however, 
as is shown by a document of the fourteenth cen- 
tury in which are found the names of certain Jews 
of Lyons: Josson of Montmelian, Josson of Ver- 
menton, Dalmon Moyses, Saussin, and Abraham 
Noblet (“Archives du Rhé6ne,” ch. metrop., fols. 
116-119). 

The edict of Sept. 17, 1894, by which Charles VI. 

expelled all Jews from France, did not immediately 

affect those at Lyons. Several histo- 
Expulsion. rians give 1420 as the date of their 

definite departure from the city and 
of their arrival at Trevoux, whither they transferred 
the gold- and silver-thread industry. The names 
“Trefousse,” “ Dreyfus,” etc., are probably Alsatian 
corruptions of “Trevoux,” as certain malcontents 
among these Lyonnaise Jews were driven out later 
from Trevoux and took refuge in Alsace. 

From this time until the middle of the eighteenth 
century Jews were not allowed to live in Lyons, 
Two documents, dated respectively 1548 and 1571, 
show that their presence was at these dates consid- 
ered a scanda! to the city and the Christian religion. 

Toward the end of the reign of Louis XV. several 
Jewish families again settled at Lyons. Some of 
them came from the cities of the south—Avignon, 
Carpentras, and Cavaillon; others, from Bordeaux 
or Alsace, At the very beginning of this reign 
the community numbered about fifteen families. A 
special vault was assigned to them for burial in the 
ground adjoining the hospital; and the mortuary 
records, still extant in the archives of the city, show 
that between the years 1767 and 1787 thirty-two 

bodies were interred there. The syn- 

Syndic of dic of the new community was Elijah 

the Com- Rougetof Avignon. Ina letter dated 

munity. 1781 the lieutenant-general of the po- 
lice of Lyons confers this dignity 

upon him and indicates to him the formalities to be 
observed before the magistrates by those Jews who 
live in the city and by those who are merely pass- 
ing through Lyons. The successor of Elijah Rou- 


get in the syndicate was Benjamin Naquet, who held 
the office for twenty years. 

During the Revolution little attention was paid to 
the Jews of Lyons, since there was only a small 
number of them in the city, and they passed unno- 
ticed. One of them, however, figures among the 
victims executed by the revolutionary tribunal 
which was instituted under the Reign of Terror; 
this was Azariah Vidal, executed in 1798, 

After becoming French citizens by the decree of 
the convention of Sept. 27, 1791, the members of the 
Lyonnaise community in 1795 acquired for a ceme- 
tery, at a cost of 12,000 francs, a piece of land lo- 
cated at the Guillotiére. 

The history of the community during the first half 
of the nineteenth century includes nothing of par- 
ticular interest. Numbering only 200 souls under 
the empire and 500 under the Restoration and the 
constitutional monarchy, it was controlled after 1808 
by the consistory of Marseilles, its affairs being reg- 
ulated by a board of administration. Of the numer- 
ous administrators may be mentioned Isaac Helft 
(1808-18), Isaac Cerf of Ricqlés (1828-38), and 
Nordbeim (1838-51). Religious services were held 
in a modest prayer-house, first in the Rue Bellecor- 
diére, on the second floor of a house occupied by 
numerous tenants, then on the ground floor of one 
in the Ruedu Peyrat. Until 1850 the service was 
performed by an officiating minister. In that year 
a decree of the president of the republic instituted 

a rabbinate at Lyons, which inclu- 

The ded in its jurisdiction the department 

Rabbinate. of the Rhdéne, of the Isére, and of 

the Loire. On Dec. 26, 1850, Jacques 

Weinberg, rabbi at Ribeauville, was called to fill the 
post. 

In 1854 the suggestion was made to create a new 
cousistory with Lyons as its center. This was 
effected Aug. 24, 1857: it comprises the depart- 
ments of the Loire, the Ain, the Isére, the Jura, the 
Sadne and Loire, and the Doubs. The consistory 
of Lyons has been represented at the central con- 
sistory by the Orientalist Salomon Munk (1838-67) ; 
by Michel Alcan, professor in the Conservatoire 
des Arts et. Métiers (1867-77); by the poet Eugéne 
Manuel (1877-1900); and by M. Camille Lyon, de- 
partmental chief in the council of state (the present 
representative). In the ten years succeeding its 
foundation the Israelitish population had become 
doubled. The consistory obtained from the munic- 
ipal council of Lyons for the site of a synagogue a 
parcel of land situated in one of the most beautiful 
quarters, on the Quai Tilsitt, facing the hill of the 

Fourviére. On June 23, 1864, the new 

The Syna- synagogue, built according tothe plans 
gogue. of Abraham Hirsch, was inaugurated. 

It is considered to be one of the most 

beautifulin France. In 1864 a home for the aged 
was built. In 1870 a new cemetery, adjacent to the 
old one, was purchased. The various presidents of 
the consistory have been: J. Kuppenheim, Abra- 
ham Hirsch, Leon Kahn, and Henri Gaisman. M. 
Weinberg, who was the first to occupy the post of 
grand rabbi after the creation of the consistory, and 
who died in 1879, was succeeded by the present 
(1904) incumbent, Alfred Lévy, who was installed at 


231 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Lyons 
Lyra 





Lyons July 1, 1880, having previously been rabbi 

at Dijon (1867-69) and at Lunéville (1869-80). 

The Jews of Lyons at present (1904) number about 

1,500 in a total population of 466,767. The annual 

communal budget includes 40,000 

Present francs for religious purposes and 
Condition. 25,000 francs for charities. Besides 
the home for the aged mentioned 

above, there are: a board of charities, destined es- 
pecially to help poor travelers, of whom there are al- 
waysa great number at Lyons; two women’s chari- 
table societies; a young women’s society for the pro- 
tection of poor girls;a young people's society for 
educating poor boys; and two mutual aid societies, 
Among those members who hold honorable offices 
and render distinguished services to the state may 
be mentioned: Edouard Millaud, senator; Abraham 

Hirsch, honorary chief architect of the city of Ly- 

ons; Aron, councilor of the Court of Appeal; Aron, 

chief engineer of the Paris-Lyon-Mediterranean Rail- 
way Company; Brahm, solicitor of the Court of Ap- 
peal; Edmond Weil, professor in the faculty of 
medicine; Emmanuel Lévy, lecturer in the faculty 
of law; Lang, director of the Ecole Ja Martiniére ; 

Lévy Léon and Weil, professors at the Lycée; Sey- 

ewetz, subdirector of the school of chemistry ; Marc 

Lévy, professor atthe school of commerce; Isidore, 

commandant of artillery and subdirector of the 

arsenal. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Menestrier, Histoire Consulaire de Lyon; 
Prudhomme, Les Juifs en Dauphiné, Grenoble, 1883; Ar- 
chives du Rhéne, carton CC; ib., Actes Capitulaires, E 1; 
Archives de la Ville de Lyon, earton BB; Archives de 
Villefranehe, carton AA3 A. Lévy, Notice sur les Israétites 
de Lyon, 1894; Baluze, Opera Agobardi, Paris, 1866; In- 
auguration du Temple Israélite de Lyon, Lyons, 1864; MS. 
Lyons, No. 1464. 

G. A. I. 

LYONS, ISRAEL : Hebrew teacher and author; 
born in Poland; died 1770. He emigrated to Eng- 
land and settled in Cambridge. Here he practised 
the craft of silversmith and acquired a reputation 
as a Ilebrew scholar. This led to his appointment 
as “teacher of the Hebrew tongue” in the Univer- 
sity of Cambridge. He wrote “The Scholar’s In- 
structor, or Hebrew Grammar, with Many Additions 


and Emendations Which the Author Has Found 


Necessary in His Long Course of Teaching Hebrew,” 
a second edition of which appeared in 1757 and a 
fourth in 1823, while his treatise “Observations and 
Enyniries Relating to Various Parts of Scripture 
History” was printed by the Cambridge Press in 
1768 and published by subscription. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nichols, Literary Anecdotes, ti. 327, 419, Lon- 

don, L812. 

J, I. Co. 

LYONS, ISRAEL: English astronomer, bota- 
nist, and mathematician; born at Cambridge 1739; 
died in London 1775; son of Isract Lyons. In his 
earliest youth he showed a remarkable aptitude for 
study, especially for mathematics. He began in 
1755 the study of botany, which he continued till his 
death. In 1758 he published a “ Treatise on Flux- 
ions,” dedicated to his patron, Dr. Smith, master of 
Trinity College; and in 1768 “ Fasciculus Plantarum 
Circa Cantabrigiam Nascentium, Que post Raium 
Observate Fuere.” Lyons was invited by Sir Jo- 
seph Banks, president of the Royal Society, who had 


received his earliest lessons in science from him, to 
lecture at Oxford in 1762, but he soon returned 
to Cambridge. He was appointed by the board 
to accompany Captain Phipps (afterward Lord Mul- 
grave) on a voyage to the north pole in 1773.) On 
his return he married and settled in London, where 
he died in about a year. At the time of his death 
he was engaged in publishing some papers of Ed- 
mund Haliey, secretary of the Royal Society. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nichols, Literary Anecdotes, ii. 327-328 and 
iii. 660, London, 1812; Maunders, Treasury of Biography; 
Carmoly, Médecins Juifs, Brussels, i844; Jew. Chron. Nov. 
27, 1863. 
J. I. Co. | 
LYONS, JACQUES JUDAH: Armerican 
minister; son of Judah and Mary Lyons; born in 
Surinam, Dutch Guiana, Aug. 25, 1814; died in New 
York Aug. 12, 1877. He was educated in Surinam, 
and was minister of the Spanish and Portuguese 
congregation there, Neweh Shalom, for five years. 
He left Surinam in 1837 and went to Richmond, Va., 
where for two years he was minister of the Congre- 
gation Beth Schalom. I[n1839 he was elected min- 
ister of the Spanish and Portuguese congregation 
Shearith Israel, New York city, in succession to Isaac 
Seixas, and served the congregation thirty-eight 
years, successfully combating every movement to 
change the form of worship in his congregation. 
Lyons was among those who founded The Jews’ 
(now Mount Sinai) Hospital; he was actively con- 
cerned in founding the Jewish Board of Delegates 
and Hebrew Free Schools and was superintendent 
of the Polonies Talmud Torah School, in connection 
with his own congregation. For many years he 
was president of the Hebra Hased ve-Emet and of 
the Sampson-Simpson Theological Fund. Lyons 
was an ardent student and collected a library that is 
now in possession of the Jewish Theological Semi- 
nary of America. In 1857, in connection with the 
Rev. Dr. Abraham De Sola of Montreal, he prepared 
and published a Hebrew calendar covering fifty 
years, together with an essay on the Jewish calendar 
system. 
A. F. H. Y. 


LYRA, NICOLAS DE: French exegete; born 
at Lyre, near Evreux, Normandy, about 1270; died 
at Paris Oct. 23, 13840. The only certain dates in 
connection with his life are furnished by his epitaph 
in the monastery of the Minorites at Paris, which 
has been edited by Wadding. He entered the Fran- 


‘ciscan order at Verneuil in 1291 and studied later at 


Paris, where he became doctor of theology and 
taught at the Sorbonne until 13825, when he was ap- 
pointed provincial of his order for Burgundy. 

Lyra, who was later declared to be of Jewish de- 
scent, wrote an anti-Jewish work entitled “ De Mes- 
sia Ejusque Adventu Preterito.” His most impor- 
tant activities, however, were exegetical. Of the 
four methods of interpretation indicated in the 
minemonic verse 

** Littera gesta docet, quid credas allegoria, 

Moralis quid agas, quo tendas anagogia,” 
he was the first to emphasize as the most important 
that dependent upon the literal sense (“sensus litte- 
ralis”), and he endeavored to apply this system of 
Biblical exegesis to the exclusion of all others. His 


Lyre | 
a‘arib 


chief work, to which he devoted himself from 13822 
to 1830, is his * Postille Perpetuz, sive Brevia 
Commentaria in Universa Biblia” (first printed at 
Rome 1471-72, Cologne 1478, Venice 1482, and 
often since, either in whole or in part). After his 
death his book was supplemented by such additions 
as the general introduction, “De Libris Canonicis et 
Non Canonicis,” and by numerous prefaces. The 
“Postille ” includes fifty books of commentary on 
the entire Old and New Testaments and the Apoc- 
rypha, which latter is regarded as less binding in 
character. There are also thirty-five books of “ Mo- 
ralities ” (“ Moralia”). The author presents his point 
of view in the three prologues to his work, especially 
in the second—* De Intentione Autoris et Modo Pro- 
cedendi.” Even in cases which tradition has inter- 
preted mystically he still considers the literal mean- 
ing as the decisive one; he offers esoteric explana- 
tions but seldom, and then almost always with a 
Christological tendency, for he seeks to find the 
deeds of the New Testament the fulfilment of the 
words of the Old. 

Lyra used the original texts of the Old and New 
Testaments rather than the corrupt Latin transla- 
tions. His knowledge of Jewish tradition was drawn 
from Rashi, whom he transcribes almost word for 
word, and who also was an advocate of literal exe- 
gesis (“ peshat”). Raymond Martin was his author- 
ity for Aramaic and Arabic, and he was frequently 
indebted to many others, particularly to Thomas 
Aquinas on the Book of Job. During the Middle 
Ages, Lyra was highly esteemed and widely read on 
account of his sound scholarship, judicious interpre- 
tation, and freedom from dogmatic prejudice. Lu- 
ther frequently used Lyra’s works; to them he owed 
his rabbinical knowledge, especially his acquaint- 
ance with Rashi, and it is to this influence that the 
well-known verse alludes—“Si Lyra non lyrasset, 
Lutherus non saltasset.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Wadding, Annales Minorum, v. 264 et seq., 
vii. 237 et seg.; Fabricius, Bibliotheca Latina, xiii. 350 et 
seqg., Hamburg, 1736; Herzog-Hauck, Real-Eneye. xii. 28 et 
seqg.; Nicolas von Lyra und Seine Stellung in der Gesch. 
der Mittelalterlichen Schrifterklérung, in_Katholik, ii. 
940 et seq. (1859); Fischer, Des Nicolas von Lyra Postillw 
Perpetue, in Jahrbuch fiir Protestantische Theologie, 
1889; Siegfried, Raschis Hinfluss auf Nicolas von Lyra 
und Luther, in Archiv fiir Nrforschung des Alten Testa- 
ments, i. 428, ii. 36; Maschkowski, Raschis Einfluss auf 
Nicolas von Lyra in der Auslegung des Exodus, in Stade’s 
Acitschrift, 1891. See also the works of Richard Simon, Dies- 
tel, and Reuss. 


+a G. WE. 
LYRE. See Harp and Lyre, 


LYSIAS: Syrian statesman of royal descent; 
died 162 n.c. (I Mace. iii. 32; Josephus, “ Ant.” xii. 
7,32). When Antiochus Epiphanes undertook a 
campaign against the Parthians in 166-165, he ap- 
pointed Lysias regent and guardian of his heir, An- 
tiochus YV. (Kupator), who called Lysias brother (II 
Macc. xi. 22). The new viceroy was charged with 
the suppression of the Jewish revolt, and on the de- 
feat of his generals he himself led a strong army 
against the rebels (165). He seems to have marched 
along the Palestinian coast to southern Judea, but 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


232 


he was defeated at Beth-Zur, south of Jerusalem, 
and was obliged to retreat to Antioch (I Mace. iii, 
34-36, iv. 26-35; “Ant.” xii. 7, § 9). 

According to II Maccabees, which Niese regards 
as the best authority on the subject, this campaign 
took place after the consecration of the Temple by 
Judas Maccabeus, The same source states also that 
Lysias made peace with Judas and quotes the letter 
in which the former is supposed to have granted the 
demands of the Jews (II Macc. xi. 1-21). 

According to I Maccabees, however, this peace 
was not concluded until a later date. After the 
death of Antiochus Epiphanes, Lysias went to Judea 
(163) with the young king Antiochus V. He again 
attacked from the south, besieged Beth-Zur, and 
thus compelled Judas to raise the siege of Acre and 
give battle. The Jewish army was defeated near 
Beth-Zechariah, and Beth-Zur fell into the hands of 
the victors. The Syrians had already laid siege to 
Jerusalem, then held by the Jews, who would, in all 
probability, have been utterly defeated had not Lys- 
ias been compelled to make war upon his rival 
Philip, who had been appointed guardian of Anti- 
ochus V. (I Macc. vi. 28-48; IT Macc. xiii, 1-17; 
“Ant.” xii. 9, §§ 8-3; idem, “B. J.” 1.1, 8 5). The 
regent found it advisable, therefore, to make peace 
with the Jews, whom he allowed to resume their 
former prerogatives (I Macc. vi. 53-62; II Macc. 
xiii, 238-26; “Ant.” xii. 9, §§ 6-7). 

Realizing that it was impossible to deprive the 
Jews of their religious freedom, Lysias proved him- 
self a better politician than his king, Antiochus 
Epiphanes. He would have conquered Philip had 
not his own soldiers betrayed him and his ward, An- 
tiochus V., to the pretender Demetrius [. (Soter), 
who put them both to death (162; I] Macc. vii. 1-4; 
If Macc. xiv. 2; Appian, “Syrian War,” § 47; 
“Ant.” xii. 10, § 1). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Niese, in Hermes, xxxv. 468-476; Schirer, 
Gesch. i. 205, 213-216, 
J S. Kr. 


LYSIMACHUS: Anti-Jewish Alexandrian wri- 
ter; lived before Apion. Like the Stoic Chere- 
mon, he went beyond even Manetho in his inimical 
account of the exodus of the Jews from Egypt. 
According to Lysimachus, the Jews, numbering 
110,000, left Egypt in the reign of King Bokchoris, 
journeyed through the desert on the advice of a cer- 
tain Moyses, and after many hardships finally ar- 
rived at Judea, where they founded the city of 
Hierosyla (= “Temple robbery ”), which they sub- 
sequently called “ Hierosolyma.” 

The fragments of Lysimachus found in Josephus 
(“Contra Ap.” i. 84 et seqg.), as well as in the works 
O7Saixa Tapadesa and Néoret, which are often quoted 
in ancient literature. have been collected by C. Mil- 
ler in “Fragmenta Historicorum Grecorum,” Iii. 
334-842 (see, also. Reinach, “Textes d’Auteurs 
Grecs.” pp. 117 ef seq.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Josephus, Contra Ap. i. 34 et seq.: ii. 2,143 
Schirer. Gesch. iii, 403 et seg.; Westermann, in Pauly-Wis- 
sowa, Real-Encyc. iv. 1811. 


3, M. K. 





Tw NOY x L 
233 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Ane 
MAACAH: 1. Small Aramean kingdom east of | Petersburg (No. 716, where the name of the author 


the Sea of Galilee (1 Chron. xix. 6). Its territory 
was in the region assigned to the half-tribe of Ma- 
nasseh east of the Jordan. Maacah, its king, became 
a mercenary of the Ammonites in their war against 
David (II Sam. x. 6), It is probable that the city 
Abel of Beth-maachah in Naphtali (2. xx. 15) derived 
its name from its relation to this kingdom and people. 

2. A wife of David, and daughter of Talmai, 
King of Geshur (dd. iii. 3), a near neighbor of the 
Maachathites. 

3. King of Gath, to whose son, Achish, Shimei’s 
servants fled early in Solomon's reign (I Kings ii. 
39). About a half-century earlier than this event, 
David with 600 men had fled to Achish, son of 
Maoch, King.of Gath (I Sam. xxvii. 2); but the 
identification of Maoch is doubtful, though kinship 
is exceedingly probable. 

4. Wifeof Rehoboam, King of Judah, and mother 
of Abijah; in I Kings xv. 2 she is called the daugh- 
ter of “ Abishalom,” but of “Absalom ” in II] Chron. 
xi. 20, 21. She was removed from her position as 
queen mother by her grandson Asa (2d. xv. 16). 

Other persons of this name are mentioned in Gen. 


xxii. 24; I Chron. ii. 48, vil. 15, vili. 29, xi. 43, 
Xxvii. 16. 
E. G. H. I. M. P. 


MA‘ALI IBN HIBAT ALLAH, ABU AL-: 
Egyptian physician; lived at Fustat (Cairo) at the 
end of the twelfth century. He was the physician 
of Salah al-Din (Saladin) and, after the death of the 
latter, of his brother Al-Malik al-‘Adil. Ibn Abi 
Usaibi‘ah, in his biographies of the Arabic physi- 
cians, speaks highly of Abu al-Ma‘ali’s learning, 
generosity, and great influence at court. He relates 
further that almost all his children embraced Islam. 
Al-Ma‘ali wrote many works and essays on medicine, 
which are no longer in existence. Steinschneider is 
inclined to identify Ma‘ali with the brother-in-law of 
Maimonides and the secretary of the mother of the 
vizier Al-Fadal. Ma‘ali wrote a work on medicine 
entitled “ Ta‘alik wa-Maghrabat.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Die Arabische Literatur der 


Juden, § 155. 
G. I. Br. 


MA‘AMAD. Sce MAHAMAD. 


MA‘ARABI (AL-MAGHREBI), ISRAEL 
sare SAMUEL HA-DAYYAN: Karaite schol- 

*: lived at Cairo in the thirteenth and fourteenth 
dentures teacher of the Karaite physician and 
writer Japhet ibn Zaghir of Cairo. Ma/‘arabi wrote, 
in Arabic, a work on the precepts (probably “ Kitab 
al-Fara’id”), of which only the part dealing with 
the laws concerning the slaughtering of animals and 
the part treating upon the calendar (but ina Hebrew 
tran. Jation) are extant in manuscript, the former in 
Lonaon (Brit. Mus., Or. No. 2528), St. Petersburg 
(Firkovich collecticn, No. 640), and Strasburg (No. 
00), the latter in Leyden (Nos. 25 and 60) and St. 


| ha-Massoret,” 


is erroneously given as “Elijah ha-Dayyan”). A 
Hebrew translation of the part on the laws of 
slaughtering was published under the title “ Hilkot 
‘Inyan Shehitah ” at Vienna (1830); a Hebrew trans- 
lation of the part treating upon the calendar was in- 
corporated in the * Tikkun ha-Kara‘im,” reproduced 
by Wolf in his “ Bibliotheca Hebriea” (iv. 1077 e¢ 
seg.). In addition to the work on the precepts, 
Ma‘arabi wrote: “ Tartib al-‘Aka’id al-Sittah,” on the 
six articles of belief (the belief in God, in Ilis mes- 
senger [Moses], in the Prophets, in the Torah, in 
Jerusalem, in the Last Judgment); “Sharh ‘Aseret 
ha-Debarim,” a commentary on the Decalogue (St. 
Petersburg, Firkovich collection, No. 688); “Ig- 
geret,” a decision in a contested case of marriage 
(Fisch! MSS., No. 59 E.); “Mukaddimah,” a com- 
mentary on Prov, iii. 13, or, according to Neubauer, 
a prayer for the dead (“zidduk ha-din ”), 

Ma‘arabi attacked, in bis work on the precepts, 
the theories of the “ Ba‘ale ha-Rikkub” with regard 
to the laws of incest, and advocated the reform that 
had been preconized by Joseph ha-Ro’eh. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Munk, in Jost’s Annatlen, iii. 93; idem, No- 
tice sur Ahoulwalid Merwan ibn Djanah, Dp. 8: Pinsker, 
Likkute Kadmoniyyot, pp. 148, 176, 238; Steinschneider. 
Cat. Boal. col. 1168: idem, Hehr. Bibl. a 51, xx. 91; idem, 
Die Arabische Literatur der Juden, § 184: First, ‘Gesch. 
des Kardert. ii, 252; Gritz, Gesen. ‘Vii. 399 ; Gottlober, 
Bikkoret le- Toledot ha-Kara’ im, p. 186; Neubauer, Aus 
der Petersburger Bibliothek, pp. 25, 27 


J I. Br. 

MA‘ARABI, NAHUM: Moroccan Hebrew 
poet and translator of the thirteenth century (“ Ma- 
‘arabi,” “ Maghrabi” = “the western” or “the Mo- 
roccan”). His poems are found only in Moroccan 
collections. Two of them, of a liturgic character, 
were published by L. Dukes in “Zur Kentniss der 
Hebrdischen Pvuesie” (pp. 162-163), and they were 
translated into German by M. Sachs in “ Die Re- 
ligidse Poesie” (p. 131). Ma*‘arabi translated from 
Arabic into Hebrew: (1) Maimonides’ “Iggeret 
Teman,” under the title “ Petah Tikwah,” to which 
he added a preface in verse (Basel, 1631); (2) the 
commentary to the “Sefer Yezirah” by Isaac Israeli 
or Jacob b. Nissim, prefacing it with a poem (a frag- 
ment of it was published by L. Dukes in “ Kontres 
pp. 5-10); (8) Joseph ibn Zaddik’s 
“Microcosmos,” under the title “Ha-‘Olam ha- 
Katon” (the translation is anonymous, but see 
Steinschneider [“ Hebr. Uebers.” pp. 408-469]); (4) 
Saadia’s commentary on the thirteen hermeneutic 
rules (““Shelosh ‘Esreh Middot”) of R. Ishmael. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Hehr. Uebers. pp. 395, 409, 
930, ee idem, Cat. Bodl. col, 2021; idem, Hebr, Bibl. xv. 
13; Dukes, Kontres ha- Massoret, pp. 5-10; idem, Zur 
HaighiE pp. 162 ct seq.; Ozar Toh, 1885, p. ll. 

Gc: M. SEL. 


MA‘ARIB: The evening prayer, from the first 
benediction in which the name is taken, the Tal- 
mudic term being “Tefillat ‘Arbit”; one of the 


| three daily prayers instituted in conformity with 


the practise of David (“ Evening, and morning, and 


Ma/‘arib 
Ma‘aseh 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


234 





at noon, will I pray,” Ps. lv. 18 [A. V. 17]) and Dan- 
iel (Dan. vi. 10). The Talmud ascribes to the Pa- 
triarchs the origin of the prayers, and credits Jacob 
with the “Ma‘arib,” because it is said: “And he 
lighted [“ wa-yifga‘”] upona certain place . .. be- 
cause the sun was set” (Gen, xxviii. 11), interpreting 
“wa-yifga‘’” as “and he prayed ” (comp. “tifga‘’” 
“make intercession,” Jer. vii. 16). 

In Biblical times prayers were devotional in char- 
acter and were considered as voluntary offerings. 
But after the destruction of the Tempie, prayers be- 
came obligatory as substitutes for the sacrifices: 
“So will we render as bullocks the offering of our 
lips” (Hos. xiv. 2, R. V.). But inasmuch as the 
offering of sacrifices in the Temple occurred only 
twice a day, morning and afternoon, oniy the corre- 
sponding two prayers became an obligation, while 
the “ Ma‘arib” still remained a voluntary prayer, 
according to the best authority (Ber. 27b). This of 
course refers to the standing-prayer, “Shemonch 
‘Esreh,” and not to the “Shema‘,” which it is obliga- 
tory to read morning and evening. Consequently 
in Talmudic times and in a greater part of the 
geonic period, as the “Seder R. Amram Gaon” 
clearly shows, the standing-prayer was omitted from 
the “Ma‘arib” service. To replace the Eighteen 
Benedictions, eighteen scattered Biblical verses, each 
mentioning the name of God, were introduced at 
the end of the “ Ma‘arib” service. This composition, 
beginning with “Baruk Adonai le-‘olam,” was ar- 
ranged by the rabbis of Babylonia and accepted by 
the rabbis of Palestine. Maimonides admits that 
the “ Ma‘arib” is only voluntary, but he claims that 
since the Jews everywhere, by common custom, 
consented to say the prayer regularly, it is cquiva- 
lent to an obligation (“ Yad,” Tefillah, i. 6). 

“Ma‘arib” usually follows the “Minhah” prayer 
at the synagogue, to avoid the trouble of a second 
gathering of the congregation. The time for the 
“Ma‘arib ” service begins when three stars are visi- 
ble in the heavens. The time may be extended to 
midnight, and in case of an emergency to the rising 
of the morning star (Ber. i. 1). The service begins 
with “Wehu Rahum” and “ Baraku,” and continues 
with the first benediction, “ Asher bi-Debaro,” the 
second benediction, “Ahabat ‘Olam,” 
*Shema‘” (Deut. vi. 4-10, xi. 18-22; 
Num. xv. 87-41), the third benedic- 
tion, “Emet we-Emunah,” the fourth 
benediction, “ Hashkibenu” (Ber. 4b), the eighteen 
verses mentioned above, “ Yire’u ‘Enenu,” the stand- 
ing-prayer, and the “‘Alenu.” If the “ Ma‘arib” 
service 18 conducted by a quorum of ten, the leader 
does not repeat the standing-prayer, 

On Friday evening the “Ma‘arib” service com- 
mences somewhat earlier, preceded by “ Leku Neran- 
nanah.” TheSephardim begin with “ Wehu Rahuim,” 
as usual, but the Ashkenazim omit this, as the Sab- 
bath is a day of joy not to be disturbed with any 
supplication or devotional prayer of the character 
of “Wehu Rahum.” The Zohar gives another rea- 
son for the omission—that on Sabbath “the Higher 
Judgment must not be revoked” (Zohar, Terumah, 
p. 180a, ed. Wilna, 1882). The leader of the 
congregation repeats a part of the standing- 
prayer for Sabbath, “Magen Abot,” “Bame Madli- 


ed 
— 


Order of 
Prayer. 


eae < ; 
( kin” (the second chapter of Shabbat, relating to the 


lighting of Sabbath Lights), the “ Alenu,” and “ Yig- 

dal.” See DEVOTIONAL LITERATURE; PRAYER. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Shulhan ‘“Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 38 235-2387; 
Yarhi, Minhagim, pp. 22b et. seq., ed. Goldberg, Berlin, 1855; 
Shibale ha-Leket, §§ 43-48, ed. Buber; Dembitz, Servires in 
Synagogue and Home, p. 80. For the text and Engtish 
al ee see Singer, Authorized Daily Prayer-Book, 
London. 


J J. D. E. 


MAARSSEN, JOSEPH BEN JACOB: 
Dutch scholar and publisher; member of a family 
of printers; lived at Amsterdam in the seventeenth 
and eighteenth centuries. Maarssen published the 
following works: (1) A Judeo-German translation, 
by himself, from the Dutch of an account of the 
uprising that occurred at Amsterdam in 1696. It 
was edited (Amsterdam, 1707), under the title “ Eine 
Beschreibung von die Rebelerci zu Amsterdam,” by 
the translator’s father, who had witnessed the events. 
(2) “Hanok la-Na‘ar,” models of Judao-German let- 
ters, with a glossary containing more than one hun- 
dred Latin, French, and German words, compiled 
by him in collaboration with Moses Bendin (Amster- 
dam, 1714-15). (8) “ Leshon Zahab,” or “ Miktam le- 
Dawid,” by David Maarssen, models of Hebrew let- 
ters, published as a supplement to the preceding 
work (¢@b. 1714). (4) “ Yehoshua‘ ben Sirak,” the 
wisdom of Ben Sirah, translated by Maarssen into 
Judzxo-German from the Dutch (¢. 1712). (5) 
“Schone <Artliche Geschichten,” seven stories of 
Boccaccio’s, translated, also by Maarssen, from the 
Dutch (7. 1710). (6) “ Tikkun Soharim we-Tikkun 
Hillutim,” specimens of commercial notes and of the 
laws concerning commercial bills, compiled by him 
in collaboration with Zebi Hirsch ben Gershon 
Szczebrszeszyn and Moses Bendin (¢), 1714), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinsehneider, in Serapeimm, ix. 385, 8457 x. 

10; idem, Cat. Bodl. col. 1505; idem, in Ersch and Gruber, 

ieneye. section ii., part 28, p. 70. 

Dd, I. Br. 

MAAS, JOSEPH: English musician and singer; 
born at Dartford, Kent, Jan. 30, 1847; died at Lon- 
don Jan. 16, 1886. Maas acted as chorister for five 
years at Rochester Cathedral (from 1856) and stud- 
ied under J. C. Hopkins and Madame Bodda-Pyne. 
When his voice broke he becamea clerk in the dock- 
yards at Chatham. In 1869 he went to Milan, re- 
turning to England in 1871, when he appeared at 
one of the Henry Leslie Choir Concerts at St. James’s 
Hall; he sang in “ Babil and Bijou” at Covent Gar- 
den in Sept., 1872. He made his reputation as an 
operatic singer in America, Where be remained for 
a number of years, chiefly as first tenor in various 
English opera companies. On his return to Eng- 
land he was engaged by Carl Rosa, and appeared in 
“The Golden Cross” at the Adelphi Theatre in 1878. 
In 1879 he appeared at Her Majesty’s Theatre as 

vwenz? in Wagner’s operaof that name. Jn the bal- 
lad operas of Balfe and Waliace his popularity was 
unequaled; one of his best and most successful parts 
was that of the heroin Massanet’s “ Manon” at Drury 
Lane Theatre. Maas sang forashort time in Italian — 
opera at Her Majesty’s and Covent Garden theaters. 
On the concert platform he had few rivals in Eng- 
lish ballads and as a soloist in Handel’s oratorios, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Times (London), Jan. 18 and ale 
Je * . 


235 





MAAS, MYRTIL: French mathematician ; born 
in France in 1792; died in Paris Feb. 27,1865. He 
early showed an aptitude for mathematics, and in 
1813 entered the Ecole Normale at Paris, where he 
studicd until the political upheaval of 1815 caused 
the suspension of the school. In that vear, when 
walking with some of his schoolfellows in the Champ 
de Mars, where the troops were drilling, he was 
accidentally shot in the Jeg, and the wound never 
perfectly healed. Being a Jew, le was unable to 
obtain a chair in mathematics; but he found employ- 
ment first in a porcelain factory and then as a pri- 
vate tutor, In 1818 he was employed as actuary 
by the Compagnie d’ Assurances Générales of Paris. 
He then studied in London, returned to Paris, was 
chosen by the company from among three distin- 
guished mathematicians, and soon became its vice- 
president. In 1828 he became president of a new 
life- aud fire-insurance company, founded by the 
Foulds. Maas labored actively in the interests of 
the Jews; in 1880 he became a member of the Cen- 
tral Consistory, and thirteen years later its vice- 
president. His death was caused by a malady that 
developed from his wound. A eulogy upon him was 
read in the directors’ room of the company, and his 
old schoolfellows bad a medal engraved in his honor ; 
this was delivered to his son, who assumed the posi- 
tion and responsibilities of his father. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Servi, Jsraeliti @ Europa, pp. 195, 196; -Ar- 

ae Israélites, Mareh 15, 1865 ; Univers Israélite, April 8, 


S, N. D. 


MA‘ASEH BERESHIT; MA‘ASEH MER- 
KABAH (literally, “work of Creation” and “ work 
of the Chariot”): Talmudic terms for the esoteric 
doctrine of the universe, or for parts of it (comp. 
CabaLa). Ma‘aseh Bereshit, followiug Gen. 1., com- 
prises the cosmogony of the Talmudic times; Ma‘aseh 
Merkabah, based on the description of the Divine 
Cliariot in Ezek. i., and on other prophetic descrip- 
tions of divine manifestations, such as that in Isa. vi., 
is concerned with the theosophic views of those times. 
The secret doctrine might not be discussed in pub- 
lic. Ecclesiasticus (iii, 21-22) inveighs against its 
study: “Seck not out the things that are too hard 
for thee, neither search the things that are above 
thy strength. But what is commanded thee, think 
thereupon with reverence; for it is not needful for 
thee to see with thine eyes the things that are in 
secret.” Hag. ii. 1 says: “ Ma‘aseh Bereshit must not 
be explained before two, nor Ma‘aseh Merkabah 
before one, taless he be wise and understands it by 
himself”; Hag, 13a then goes on to explain that 
the chapter-headings of Ma‘aseh Merkabah may be 
taught, as was done by R. Hiyya. According to 
Yer. Hag. ii. 1, the teacher read the headings of the 
chapters, after which, subject to the approval of the 
teacher, the pupil read to the end of the chapter. 
R. Zera said that even the chapter-headings might 
be communicated only to a person who was head of 
a school and was cautious in temperament. Accord- 
ing to R. Ammi, the secret doctrine might be en- 
trusted only to one who possessed the five qualities 
enumerated in Isa. iii. 3. A certainageis, of course, 
necessary. When R. Johanan wished to initiate R. 
Eliezer in the Ma‘aseh Merkabah, the latter an- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ma‘arib 
Ma/‘aseh 





swered, “I am not yet old enough.” A boy who 
recognized the meaning of Speen (Ezek. i. 4) was 
consumed by fire (Hag. 18b), and the perils con- 
nected with the unauthorized discussion of these 
subjects are often described (Hag. ii. 1; Shab. 80b). 

Hag. 11b states that it is permissible to inquire 
concerning the events of the six days of Creation, 
but not regarding what happened be- 
fore the Creation. In no case, then. 
is the entire cosmogony included in 
the term “ Ma‘aseh Bereshit,” but only 
its more mystic aspects, nor canall the passages of the 
Talmud and the Midrash dealing with these problems 
be considered as parts of the doctrine. Thus, ideas 
like those regarding the ten agencies by means of 
which God created the world, or questions as to 
whether heaven or earth was first created, or con- 
cerning the foundations of the world, or as to 
whether there are two heavens or seven (all these 
problems being mentioned in connection with the 
interdiction against teaching the Ma‘aseh Bereshit 
to more than one person), do not belong to the doc- 
trine itself, for such arguments are forbidden by the 
dictum, “Thou mayest speak of the seven heavens, 
but of the things thereafter thou mayest not speak.” 
The views which are found scattered throughout 
the Talmud, and especially in Gen. R. i-xii., are 
generally haggadic in character; indeed the question 
arises Whether anything more than mere allusions 
may be expected therein regarding the Ma‘aseh Be- 
reshit in so far as it is esoteric in content. Some in- 
formation seems to be given, though only by intima- 
tion, in the well-known story in Hag. 14b-15b of the 
four scholars that entered paradise (that is, penetrated 
the mysteries of the secret doctrine), of whom only 
R. Akiba remained uninjured. R. Akiba’s words 
at the beginning of the story (14b), “ When ye reach 
the shining marble stone do not cry out ‘ Water, 
water,’ ” seem to point to those theories of Creation 
which assume water to be the original element. 

Ben Yoma is represented as interested in the de- 
termination of the space between the upper and 
lower waters. Hag. ii. 1 also indicates this in the 
story of R. Judah b. Pazzi, who opened his discourse 
on Ma‘aseh Bereshit with the words, “In the begin- 
ning the world was water in water.” Thus the 
question of the primal clemcuts undoubtedly belongs 
to this field. Here again one must distinguish hag- 
gadic and devotional from mystic and philosophical 
thought, and must not teach views such as that the 
world was created out of “tohu” and “bohu” and 
“hoshek,” or that air, wind, and storm were the 
primal elements, as component parts of the doctrine 
of Creation. In like manner the cosmogonic concep- 
tions of the Apocrypha and of geonic mysticism 
must not be considered as indications of the secret 
teachings of the Ma‘asel Bereshit. 

Somewhat simpler is the question regarding the 
nature of the Ma‘aseh Mcrkabah, which is designated 
as “an important matter” in the Talmud (Suk. 28a) 

and which, perhaps, occupies on the 

Chariot of whole a more prominent position than 
Fire. the Ma‘aseh Bereshit. Just as in the 
case of the latter, the purely haggadic 

explanations of Ezek. i., as found, for instance, in 
Hag. 18b, must not be taken into consideration. This 


Creation 
Mystery. 


Ma'‘aseh 
Ma‘aser 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


236 





chapter of Ezekiel, it is declared, may be studied 
even by young pupils, because a boy can seldom rec- 
ognize the doctrines implied therein. The object, 
therefore, was to find special secrets in these verses. 
R. Akiba is said (Hag. 15b~16a) to have gathered his 
mystic deductions from Deut. xxxiii. 2 (“and he 
came with ten thousands of saints”), Cant. v. 10 (“the 
chiefest among ten thousand ”), Isa. xlvili. 2 (“ The 
Lord of hosts is his name”), and I Kings xix. 11, 12 
(Elijah’s great theophany). The Ma‘aseh Merka- 
bah, therefore, dealt with esoteric teachings concern- 
ing the visible manifestations of God, and hence with 
angelology and demonology, though not to the same 
degree asin Talmudic literature. As the story of R. 
Akiba indicates, the other theophanies mentioned in 
the Bible were used in the Ma‘aseh Merkabah; Hag. 
18b shows, e.g., that this was the case with Isa. vi. 

The Ma‘aseh Merkabah scems to have had prac- 
tical applications. The belicf was apparently cur- 
rent that certain mystic expositions of the Ezekiel 
chapter, or the discussion of objects connected with 
it, would cause God to appear. When R. Eleazar 

b. ‘Arak was discoursing upon the 
Practical Ma‘aseh Merkabah to R. Johanan b. 
Applica- Zakkai, the latter dismounted from his 
tions. ass, saying, “It is not seemly that I sit 
on the ass while you are discoursing 
on the heavenly doctrine, and while the Divinity is 
among us and ministering angels accompany us.” 
Thena fire came down from heaven and surrounded 
-all the trees of the field, whereupon all of them to- 
gether began to recite the hymn of praise. R. Jose 
ha-Kohen and R. Joshua (according to Yer. Hag. ii. 
1, R. Simon b. Nathanacl) had similar experiences. 
The belief in the appearance of God is indicated also 
in the popular idea that all who inquire into the 
mysteries of the Ma‘aseh Merkabah without being 
duly authorized will die a sudden death. Sucha 
divine interposition is expressly mentioned in con- 
nection with the “story of the Creation” in Sanh. 
95b. Rab Hananiah and Rab Hoshaiah studied the 
“Sefer Yezirah” and the “ Hilkot Yezirah” respect- 
ively every Sabbath evening and succeeded in crea- 
ting a calf as large as a three-year-old ox. 

This esoteric tendency, originating in pagan con- 
ceptions in connection with certain Bible stories, 
must have led often to pessimistic and nihilistic 
views, as isshown by the accounts of Aher or Elisha 
b. Abuyah (Hag. 15a, b), and the Mishnaic passage, 
“He who speaks of the things which are before, 
behind, above, and below, it were better he had 
never been born.” 

According to a tradition handed down by Jose 
b. Judah, a tanna of the second half of the second 
century (Tosef., Hag, ii. 2; Hag, 14b; Yer. Hag. 
ii. 1), Johanan b. ZakkKai was the founder of the 
secret doctrine. In the same passage, in both Tal- 
muds, it is said, however, that he refused to discuss 
it, even in the presence of a single person, although, 
as already stated, R. Eleazar b. ‘Arak discoursed on 
it with him and was extravagantly praised by him; 
two other pupils of his, R. Joshua and R. Jose ha- 
Kohen, also discussed it with him. According to 
tradition, the second one to give instruction in these 
matters was R. Joshua, vice-president of the Sanhe- 
drin under R. Gamaliel. He was succeeded by R. 


Akiba, and the last to teach them was R. Nehun- 
ya b. ha-Kanah. R. Jose the Galilean and Pappus 
discussed the subject with R. Akiba (Hag. 14a; 
Gen. R. xxi.). The tradition, quoted above, of the 
four who studied the secret doctrine mentions, be- 
sides Akiba, Simeon b. ‘Azzai, Simeon b. Zoma, and 
Elisha b. Abuyah. The fate of the last-named, who 
was driven from Judaism by his experience, is said 
to have given rise to restrictive measures. Thestudy 
of profane books was forbidden (Sanh. 100), and an 
interdiction of the public discussion of these sub- 
jects was issued, only R. Ishmacl objecting. In the 
time of R. Judah, R. Judah b. Pazzi and Bar Kap- 
para delivered public discourses on these mysteries 
(Yer. Hag. ii. 1; Gen. R.i.). R. Levi regarding this 
as inadmissible, R. Hiyya declared that the chapter- 
headings might be taught, R. Judah ha-Nasi was 
at this time the authority to whom, as formerly to 
R. Johanan, such matters were referred, In later 
times the interdiction against public discussions of 
the story of the Creation was accepted witsout pro- 
test, but by way of warning this saying (Hag. 16a) 
of Resh Lakish was added: “His eyes shall be dull 
who looketh on three things—the rainbow [because 
it resembles Ezekicl’s vision], the King [because he 
resembles God in majesty], and the priest [because 
he utters the name of God].” 

This Talmudic doctrine may well be connected 
with the old Jewish esoteric teachings of the time of 
the Second Temple, as partly preserved in the Apoc- 

rypha and the pseudepigrapha; but 
Source of the theosophic and cosmogonic por- 
Doctrines. tions of this literature can not with 
certainty be regarded as the source of 
the Talmudic doctrine, nor can the literature of the 
so-called geonic mysticism, crystallized in the Ma- 
‘aseh Bereshit and the Ma‘aseh Merkabah and desig- 
nated in its literary form by these names, be re- 
garded as the immediate continuation of Talmudic 
mysticism. Although much of the material found 
in the former may belong to the Talmud, yet the 
entire doctrine of the heavenly halls, angelology, 
and the doctrine of the Creation as it is found, for 
instance, in the “Sefer Yezirah,” must not be regard- 
ed as Talmudic in origin. The very fact that there 
are so many Talmudic and midrashic parallels to the 
conceptions of the geonic period leads to the conclu- 
sion that they contain only a limited amount of orig- 
inal material from the aucient esoteric teachings. It 
may be mentioned, finally, that Maimonides inter- 
prets Ma‘aseh Bereshit as referring to physics and 
Ma‘aseh Merkabah as referring tometaphysics. See’ 
also MERKABAH. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, R. B. T. ii, s.v. Geheimlehre; 

Zunz, G. V. 2d ed., Vv. 171-173. 

J. A. B. 

MA‘ASEH BOOKS: Books written in Judeo- 
German in Hebrew script, and containing stories, 
Jegends, and tales (“ ma‘asim ”) on various subjects, 
most of them relating to Jews and Judaism. They 
originated about the beginning of the fifteenth cen- 
tury, When Jews were living in the Rhenish provin- 
ces,and were further developed during the migrations 
to Russia and Poland. Like the name “ma‘aseh- 
buch ” itself, this entire literature is a mixture of 
Jewish and German, both in language and in sub- 


237 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ma‘aseh 
Ma‘aser 





stance. The first products of Judeo-German liter- 
ature, Which is very voluminous, were principally 
translations of the prayer-books and the Bible, and 
devotional books. The ma‘aseh books constitute a 
group by themselves; their object was to furnish 
eutertainment and instruction for women and girls, 
who, unlike the men, were not in duty bound to 
learn Hebrew. Where the subject is a non-Jewish 
one, Hlebrew words may be altogether lacking in the 
story, except the invariable formula at the end of 
the book—p'5p and 9°38 (P¥59 °° 4D ON), or a note 
in Hebrew regarding the author, and a Hebrew 
verse on the title-page. At first the writers gener- 
ally chose nonsJewish stories, but as the literature 
developed, Jewish subjects were given the prefer- 
ence. It is to be noted, furthermore, that in the 
earlier period consecutive stories of considerable 
length were employed, while later the ma‘aseh col- 
lections took the form of readers and anthologies 
containing short stories ending with a moral; for 
this reason fables also are included. 

The non-Jewish subjects at first selected were vari- 
ousin nature. Indeed the Jews were led to make these 
collections by their acquaintance with the stories 
from the cycles of King Arthur, Dietrich of Bern, 
and the “ Nibelungenlied,” all of which 
were well known in the region of the 
Rhine. Thus a Judzeo-German ver- 
sion was made of the poem “ Ritter aus Provincien- 
land, Sigmund Is Sein Name Genannt, und Magda- 
lena, Tochter des Kénigs von England.” In 1501 Eli- 
jah Levita composed at Venice the well-known Basa 
Buci or “ Bovo-Ma‘aseh,” a Judseo-German rimed 
version of the English romance of Bevis of Hamp- 
ton, following Italian versions in which the hero is 
called “Bovo d’Antonia,” the form of the name 
which gave Levita’s rendcring its title. Sources 
apparently the most remote were drawn upon for 
material, such as the facetie of Till Eulenspiegel, 
and even Boccaccio’s frivolous tales, which found 
their way into Judeo-German from Dutch versions. 

Side by side with this foreign matcrial Jewish 
tales were developed and remodeled. The Bible, 
especially the stories of Joseph, David, and Samuel 
(the “Schmuel-Buch,” Basel, 1612), offered rich ma- 
terial, while Jewish history and literature furnished 
an abundance of subjects. There are also Judeo- 
German historical works, such as the “ Yosippon,” 
“Shebet Yehudah,” and “She’erit Yisrael” (Grin- 
baum, “Jiidisch-Deutsche Chrestomathie,” pp. 345, 
397, 361). The stories of Judith and Esther, of 
the heroic wars of the Maccabees and the destruc- 
tion of the Temple, were retold, mingled with many 
legends; and later works, such as the “Ben ha- 
Melek weha-Nazir” (Prince and Dervish), were also 
translated. 

Jewish readers, curiously enough, preferred the 
books dealing with non-Jewish subjects (comp. Cor- 

nelius Adelkind’s introduction to Levi- 

Modifica- ta’s translation of the Psalins and the 
tions introduction to the ma‘aseh book of 
Introduced. 1602). Although Perles has shown 
(“ Monatsschrift,” 1876, pp. 851 et seq.) 

that in the stories belonging to the Dietrich cycle 
the passages with a Christian coloring were replaced 
by others, a change which was probably made also 


Subjects. 


in other non-Jewish stories, yet such alterations 


did not suffice for the real purpose of the ma‘aseh 
books, which was to furnish instruction in Jew- 
ish history and literature for those who were igno- 
rant of Hebrew. To remedy this defect a pious Jew 
issued in 1602 a work known simply as “ Ma‘aseh- 
buch,” purporting to be a collection of Jewish leg- 
ends and historical tales and without any admixture 
whatever of foreign elements. The collector indicates 
his purpose in the preface as follows: “ Here cometh 
a beautiful Ma‘asch Book, ye dear sirs and dames; 
now lock upon the beautiful Ma‘asch Book, which 
has never before been published in the world, and 
contains some three hundred ma‘asim, all made from 
the Gemara and also from the Nn35 and Behai: 
and also from R. Judah Hasid’s ma‘asim ye will miss 
none; and also from the Sefer Hasidim, and the 
Sefer Musar, and the Yalkut, as ye may see below 
in my ‘simanim.’ Therefore, ye dear dames, ye 
now have the German books all before you, and ye 
have likewise the German Gemara, even as ye have 
‘kol hattoro kullo gor.’” Then in Hebrew: “By 
order of Jacob b. Abraham of blessed memory, of 
Meseritsch in Lithuania. Here at Basel the great 
[city], 3862 [¢.e., 1602], by Herr Conrad Waldkirch.” 
Despite the author’s intention, some non-Jewish 
stories found their way into this book. Stein- 
schneider assumes that its compiler lived in western 
Germany in the last third of the sixteenth century. 
A German translation of it was published by Chris- 
toph Hellwig (Helvicus), together with notes that 
are anti-Jewish in tone (Giessen, 1612), The “ Ma- 
‘aseh Adonai” and the “ Ma‘asehbuch ” (Wilmersdorf 
and Rédelheim, 1752) from which Griinbaum pub- 
lished extracts (“ Chrestomathie,” pp. 385 e¢ seq.), may 
also be noted here. All the works belonging to this 
class of literature are very similar in content, be- 
ing compilations of an undigested series of anec- 
dotes from various Jewish books, especially from 
the Babylonian Talmud, the Midrash, Yalkut, the 
Zohar, and such historical books as the “ Yuhasin,” 
“Shalshelet ha-Kabbalah,” and “Shebet Yelhudah.” 
Each story begins with the words “Ma‘aseh es ge- 
schach ” or “ Ma‘aseh es wor einmal” (“a ‘ma‘aseh’ 
happened,” or “there was a ‘ma‘aseh’ Once upon a 
time”). The authors prefer to narrate instructive 
stories or miracles of anonymous hasidim, and they 
frequently tell tales of famous Jewish rabbis like 
Maimonides and Luria, or of earlier ones like Joshua 
ha-Levi and Akiba. Often the stories are noble 
and lofty and sincere in their religious feeling, and 
are told in simple, straightforward language. The 
ma‘aseh books contain highly valuable material for 
the knowledge of the life and thought of the Jews 
of the Middle Ages, but as yet they have scarcely 
been studied from this point of view. A detailed 
bibliographical list of this literature is given by 
Steinschneider in his Bodleian catalogue. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodt. cols. 613-619; Griin- 
baum, Jildisch-Deutsche Chrestomathie, pp. 385 et seq., 
Leipsic, 1882; Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. vi. 22, vii. 42 et 
seq., Vili. 13-17, ix. 58; idem, in Serapewum, xxvii. 1-12; 
idem, in Gosche’s Archiv ftir Litteraturgesch. ii. 1-21; 


Wiener, History of Yiddish Literature in the Nineteenth 
Century, pp. 2 et seq., 42, New York and London, 1899. 


A. G. WE. 
MA‘ASER. See TITHE. 


Ma‘aserot 
Maccabees 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


238 





MA‘ASEROT (nywynp = “tithes”): Seventh 
masseket of the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Palestinian 
Gemara, in the Talmudic order of Zera‘im. It deals 
with the tithes of agricultural produce due to the 
Levites (Num. xviii. 21). In contradistinction to 
the tithe called “ma‘aser sheni,” which the owner 
must consume at Jerusalem (Deut. xiv. 22 ef seg.), 
and to the triennial poor man’s tithe (Deut. xiv. 28 
et seg., XXvi, 12 et seg.), called “ma‘aser ‘ani,” the 
tithe treated in this masseket is denominated “ma- 
‘aser Lewi” (the Levite’s tithe) or “ ma‘aser rishon ” 
(first tithe; see Ma‘as. Sh.v. 6,10). The latter name 
was formerly applied to this treatise (see Joshua ha- 
Levi, “ Halikot ‘Olam,” 1.1; Frankel, “ Darke ha- 
Mishuah,” p. 257), which is so styled in the Erfurt 
manuseript of Tosefta (ed. Zuckermandel). The 
treatise is divided into five chapters (three in the To- 
sefta), and its contents, briefly stated, are as follows: 

Ch. i.: Whatever is edible, and is private prop- 
erty, and grows in the ground is subject to tithe. 
Plants that are edible while young as well as when 
full grown are subject to tithe before maturity 
(if any part of the crop is taken before maturity); 
but of plants that are not properly eatable before 
they reach a certain stage of ripeness one may eat, 
without separating the tithes, until they develop. 
The Mishnah then proceeds to designate the respect- 
ive stages at which plants come under the general 
head of edibles and are consequently subject to 
tithe. As between picking for marketing and for 
domestic consumption a distinction is made: in the 
latter case one may use small quantities before 
bringing the mass under shelter (comp. iii. 5). 

Ch. ii.-iv.: Under what circumstances a HaBER 
may eat of the produce of an ‘AM HA-AREZ without 
first separating the ma‘aser. If a laborer, hired to 
assist in gathering figs, stipulates with his employer 
that he be allowed to eat of the fruit, he may eat 
without regard to tithing; but if his stipulation 
includes one of his dependents, or if he sends one of 
his dependents instead, the latter will not be privi- 
leged to partake of the fruit before the tithe is prop- 
erly set aside. [The laborer is by law entitled to 
eat of the produce he handles (see B. M. vii. 2 et 
seg.), aS a kind of charity; comp. B. M. 92a et seq.] 
After the crop reaches the employer’s enclosed 
premises the laborer may eat thereof only if his em- 
ployer has not promised to board him. 

Ch. v.: Laws regarding cases in which one is re- 
quired to pay tithes when he transplants vegetables; 
laws regarding the sale of crops to one who is sus- 
pected of non-observance; law regarding the pay- 
ing of tithes in the case of vegetable fields purchased 
in Syria. 

8, 8. S. 

MA‘ASIYYOT. See ANECDOTES. 

MACCABZEAN, THE: Monthly magazine of 
Jewish life and Jiterature published in New York; 
established Oct., 1901, as the outcome of a resolution 
unanimously passed at a convention of the societies 
affiliated with the Federation of American Zionists, 
held at Philadelphia in the June preceding. 

Until June, 1902, “The Maccabsean” was issued 
partly in English and partly in Yiddish under the 
editorship of Louis Lipsky. By a resolution of the 
convention held in Boston in June, 1902, the Yid- 


M. 


dish department was dropped, and the editorial chair 
has since been occupied by J. de Haas. In 1903 
(Jan.) the publication was incorporated as a stock- 
company, the Federation holding the majority of the 
stock, and Prof. Richard Gottheil being appointed 
president of the company. The present (1904) pres- 
ident is G. H. Mayer; M. B. Laude, William Morris, 
and J. H. Lieberman are respectively vice-president, 
treasurer, and secretary. 

G. ". 


MACCABZEANS, THE: Association of English 
Jewish professional men and others; founded in 1892; 
its aim is social intercourse and cooperation among 
its members with a view to the promotion of the 
higher interests of the Jewish race. At first mem- 
bership was not limited to any one class in the com- 
munity, but shortly after the establishment of the 
club admission was restricted to Jewish professional 
men, The term “professional men” was, how- 
ever, very widely interpreted, and subsequent legis- 


- lation has empowered the committee to elect in any 


year ten Jews who have become prominent by rea- 
son of their public services or their connection with 
literature, science, or art. These specially elected 
members must not number more than one in four of 
the ordinary membership. 

The establishment of the Maccabszans was pri- 
marily due to Herman Cohen, with whom the idea 
originated, and whose efforts were well supported 
by several professional friends, including Solomon 
J. Solomon, A.R.A. (first president); and Asher I. 
Myers (treasurer), Herman Cohen himself became 
first honorary secretary. The Maccabeeans hold fre- 
quent meetings for the reading and discussion of 
papers of Jewish interest. Not only do these meet- 
ings offer a free platform on which all parties in the 
community meet and discuss controversial topics of 
general interest, but asa result of papers read before 
the Maccabeans the Jewish Lads’ Brigade, the Jew- 
ish Athletic Association, and the Education Aid 
Society, among other movements, have been started. 

J. A. M. H. 


MACCABEES, THE (Greek, 0: Makxaaior) : 
Name given to the Hasmonean family. Originally 
the designation “Maccabeus” (Jerome, “ Macha- 
beeus ”) was applied solely to Judas, the third son of 
Mattathias the Hasmonean (I Macc. ii. 4, tii. 1, e¢ pas- 
sim), Mattathias’ other sons having different sur- 
names; but as Judas became the leader of the party 
after his father’s death, and as he was also the most 
heroic warrior, his surname was applied not only 
to all the descendants of Mattathias, but even to 
others who took part in the revolutionary move- 
ment under the leadership of the Hasmoneans. 
Hence the title “Books of the Maccabees.” 

The etymology of the name, in spite of the efforts 
of the scholars, who have advanced various theories 
on the subject, remains undetermined, According 
to Jerome (“ Prologus Galeatus ”), the First Book of 
the Maccabees was originally written in Hebrew. 
Origen (in Eusebius, “ Hist. Eccl.” book vi., last 
chapter) even gives the Hebrew title, 93 w pany 

N; thus the Greek and Latin furms of the name 
must have been transliterations from the Hebrew. 

But the original Hebrew text is lost; and there is 


239 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ma‘aserot 
Maccabees 





no mention of the name either in the Talmud or in 
the Midrash, where the family is always referred to 
as “the Hasmoncans.” In later Hebrew writings 
the name occurs in two forms, *35, transliterated 
from the Latin, and °39, according to the Greek 
spelling. The latter form is generally explained as 
meaning “the hammer,” a surname given to Judas 
on account of his heroism. Iken (“Symbol Litte- 
raria,” 1. 184, Bremen, 1744) derives it from the Ara- 
bic “mankab” (= “ general”), while, according to 
others, the name originated in the fact that Modin, 
where Mattathias dwelt, was in the territory of Gad 

(Reland, “ Palistina,” p. 901), the banner of which 

tribe bore the inscription 3p, the final letters of 

the names Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 

8951) is, however, the preferred form; it occurs in 
“Yosippon” (ch. xx.), and is ex plained by Gorionides 
as meaning “ the hero,” though it is not known in 
what way. Others explain it as composed of the 
initials of mm ooxa qd 1 (Ex. xv. 11), written 
on the banner of the Hasmoneans, or as the initials 
of JIMNY jJ2 ja NN. But the statement that 
it was the surname of Judas only is against these 
interpretations, Curtiss (“The Name Macha- 
bee,” Leipsic, 1876) derives it from 7723 = “to 
extinguish”; thus °25% would mean “the extin- 
guisher,” which agrees with the interpretation of 
Gorionides. Finally, the following two opinions 
may be added: (1) that the Hebrew read ‘x3np = 
“he who hides himself,” referring to the fact that 
the Hasmoncans hid themselves in the mountains (I 
Macc. fi. 28); (2) that of Filosseno Luzzatto that 
it is a Greek word, an anagram of Buaioud yoo = “ vio- 
lent warrior.” For the history of the Maccabees 
see FTASMONEANS; JUDAS MAccABEUS; MATTATHIAS 
MACCABEUS, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Levi, in Mogsé, ii. 6; E. Levi, in Univers 
Tsraélite, x)vi. 380; D. Oppenheim, in Ha-Maggid, xvii., Nos. 
5,6; P. Perreau, in Vessitio Israelitico, xxviii. 76, 113: Wet- 
stein, in Ha-Maggid, xxiii., No. 19; Zipser, in Ben Chananja, 
hii. 497 et seg.; Winer, B. R. i. 631, s.v. Judas. 

J. M. SEL. 

MACCABEES, BOOKS OF: I. There are four 
books which pass under this name—IJ, II, III, and 
IV Maccabees. The first of these is the only one of 
the four which can be regarded as a reliable histor- 
ical source. 

I Maccabees: The First Book of the Maccabees 
covers the period of forty years from the accession 
of Antiochus (175 B.c.) to the death of Simon the 
Maccabee (185 B.c.). Its contents are as follows: 
Ch. i. 1-9 is a brief historical introduction; i. 10-ii. 
70 treats of the rise of the Maccabean revolt; iii. 
1-ix. 22 is devoted to the Maccabean struggle under 
Judas: ix. 23-xii. 53, to the fortunes of Israel under 
Jonathan; xiii, 1-xvi. 24, to the administration of 
Simon. The events are followed with intense inter- 
est and sympathy. At times the enthusiasm of the 
writer rises to a high pitch and breaks out into 
poetry of a genuine Semitic character (comp. iii. 
3-9), The style is simple, terse, restrained, and ob- 
jective, modeled throughout on that of the historical 
books of the Old Testament. The fact that just 
proportions are observed in treating the different 
parts of the narrative proves the author to have 
been a writer of considerable skill. He dates all 
events in terms of the Seleucid era. 


It is clear from the Semitic idioms which occur 
throughout the work that it was composed in a 
Semitic language (see, for example, ii, 40, iv. 2), and 

certain passages indicate with great 

Original clearness that the original language 
Language. was Hebrew (see ii. 39, iii. 19). To 

this fact Origen and Jerome also bear 
testimony, though it is possible that the version 
or paraphrase known to them was Aramaic. 

The Hebrew original seems not to lave borne 
the name “ Maccabees,” though it is not known what 
was its real designation. Eusebius (“ Hist. Eccl.” 
vi. 25) quotes Origen as authority for the name 
Lap37G Sa3avac EA, aname which has been explained 
in many different ways. For some of these see Grimm. 
(“Das Erste Buch der Makkabier,” p, xvii.) Dal- 
man (“Gramimar,” p. 6), whom Torrey (Cheyne and 
Black, “ Encyc. Bibl.”) follows, takes the name asa 
corruption of {SoIpwM mA ADD (= “Book of the 
Hasmoneans”), If this be the correct interpretation, 
an Aramaic translation of the book must have been 
made at an early time, and it was this translation 
which was known to Origen and Jeromc—a view 
which does not seemimprobable. Be this as it may, 
the Hebrew was translated very early into Greek, 
and the Greek only bas survived. The Greek ver- 
sion scems to be a literal one, often preserving the 
Semitic, and sometimes even the Hebrew, idiom; 
but it is clear, and probably it is, on the whole, a 
satisfactory translation. It is transmitted in three 
uncial manuscripts of the Septuagint—the Codex 
Sinaiticus, the Codex Alexandrinus, and the Codex 
Venetus—as well as in several cursives. 

Concerning the author no information is obtain- 
able beyond that which may be inferred from the 
book itself. He was a devout and patriotic Jew 
who lived and wrote in Palestine. This latter fact 
is proved by his intimate and exact geographical 
know:edge of the Holy Land (comp. 
iii, 24; vii. 19; ix. 2-4, 38, 34, 43; xii. 
36-40; xii. 22, 23; xvi. 5, 6) and by 
his lack of accurate knowledge of any of the foreign 
countries which he mentions. The author was also 
a loyal admirer of the Hasmonean family; he be- 
lieved that to it Israel owed her deliverance and 
existence. He admired not only the military deeds 
of Judas (comp. v. 63), but also those of Jonathan 
(comp. x. 15-21) and Simon (comp. xiv. 4-15), The 
narrative is told not as though deliverance came by 
miracle, but as though it was due to the military 
genius of these men, exercised under the favoring 
guidance of God (i. 64, ili. 8). Curiously enough 
the word “God” does not appear in the work, nor 
does the word “Lord.” The idea is not lacking, 
however, as in the Book of Esther, but is repre- 
sented by “ Heaven,” or by the pronoun “He.” The 
author was a deeply religious man in spite of this 
mannerism., Ile was very zealous for the Law and 
for the national religious institutions (see i. 11, 15, 
43; li, 20-22; iti. 21), for the Scriptures (i. 56, iii. 
48), and for the Temple (i. 21, 89; tii. 48). 

It should be noted, also, that throughout the work 
the priesthood is represented in a favorable light. 
The renegade priests Jason and Menelaus are not 
mentioned—a fact in striking contrast with the 
treatrnent which the Second Book of the Maccabees 


Author. 


Maccabees 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


240 





accords them. From these facts Geiger conjectured 
that the author was a Sadducee, and most recent 
writers follow him in this opinion, although they 
consider him wrong in calling the First Book of the 
Maccabees a partizan document; its temperate and 
just tone certainly redeems it from such a stricture. 
The terminus a quo of the work is found in the 
fact that John Hyrcanus L, who be- 
gan to reign in 185 B.C., is mentioned 
at the close of the book (xvi. 21-24). 
As the Romans are throughout spoken of in terms 
of respect and friendliness, it is clear that the Zer- 
minus ad quem must be sought at some time be- 
fore the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey in 638 
B.c. As to whether the date can be more nearly de- 
termined scholars are not agreed, The determining 
fact is held by most to be the statement in xvi. 238, 
24, that the “rest of the acts of John... are 
written in the chronicles of his high-priesthood.” 
Itis thought by many that this implies that John 
had died and thata sufficient time had elapsed since 
his death to permit the circulation of the chronicles. 
Bissell (Lange’s “Commentary,” p. 479) thinks that 
not more than a score or two of years had passed, 
while Schirer (“ Hist. of the Jewish People,” div. 
ii., vol. iii., p. 8) and Fairweather (in “Cambridge 
Bible” and Hastings, “ Dict. Bible”) think that not 
more than a decade or two liad elapsed, and date the 
work in the first or second decade of the first century 
B.c. Torrey, on the other hand, thinks (“Encyc. 
Bibl.”) that this reference to the chronicle of the 
priesthood is an imitation of well-known passages 
in the Books of Kings, that it was intended solely 
as a complinient to John, and that the work was 
composed early in his reign (¢.e., soon after 135 B.c.) 
by one who had been an interested spectator of the 
whole Maccabean movement. The vivid character 
of the narrative and the fact that it closes so abruptly 
after the death of Simon make this a very plausible 

view. 
Those who maintain the later date of the work are 
obliged to account for the vivid details which it 
contains by supposing that the writer 


Date. 


Sources employed older sources, such as let- 
and ters and memoranda. In Torrey’s 
Integrity. view no such sources are needed, as 


the author, where he did not have per- 
sonal knowledge, could have talked with partici- 
pants or eye-witnesses of the events. In either case 
the First Book of the Maccabees is one of the best 
sources known for the history of the Jews. 

J. D. Michaelis held that Josephus used the He- 
brew original of the book, which differed in some 
important particulars from the present text. Desti- 
non (“ Die Quellen des Josephus,” 1882) revived this 
theory and endeavored to prove (pp. 80 e¢ seq.) that 
ch. xiv.-xvi. were not contained in the edition used 
by Josephus, Destinon bases his argument on the 
fact that Josephus treats this portion very scantily 
in comparison with his treatment of the other ma- 
terial of the book, although these chapters contain 
quite as much and as interesting material. He 
has been followed by Wellhausen (“I. J. G.” pp. 222 
et seq.). But Torrey (in “ Encyc. Bibl.”), by utilizing 
the investigations of Mommsen, has shown that Jo- 
sephus actually knew some of this material and in- 


troduced it at a later point m his work (" Ant.” Xiv. 
8, $ 5), in describing the history of Hyrcanus IT. 
In all probability, therefore, the First Book of the 
Maccabees has retained its original form. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Grimm, Das Erste Buch der Makkahcer, in 
Frurzgefasstes Baxegetisches Handbuch zu den Apokry- 
phen, 1853; Wace, Apocrypha; Bissell, Apoerypha, in 
Lange’s Commentary; Fairweather and Black, First Book of 
Maccabees, in Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges; 
Kautzsch, .Apokryphen: Torrey, Schweizer’s LHehrew 
Text of I Maceaheex, in Jour. Bib. Lit. xxii. 51-59. 


II Maccabees: The Second Book of the Macca- 
bees opens with two letters written by Jews resident 
in Palestine to brethren dwelling in Egypt. The first 
letter occupies ch. i. 1-10a; the second, ch. i. 10b- 
ii. 18. These letters, it is thought by some, formed 
no part of the original work. The preface is found 
in ch. it. 19-32, and states that Jason of Cyrene had 
composed tive books on the Maccabean revolt, which 
the writer undertakes to epitomize for his readers. 
Ch. iii, relates how the attempt of Heliodorus to 
plunder the Temple was miraculously thwarted; 
ch. iv. narrates the wickedness of the high priests 
Jason and Menelaus, and of Simon, the Temple 
overseer; ch. v., how Antiochus began the persecu- 
tion of the Jews; ch. vi. and vii., the story of the 
martyrdom of Eleazarand the seven young men and 
their mother; while ch. viii.-xv. are occupied with 
the history of the wars of Judas Maccabeus. 

The time covered by this material is barely fifteen 
years, from the very end of the reign of Seleucus 

IV., whose servant was Heliodorus, 
Historical to the victory of Judas over Nicanor 
and (175-160 e.c.). The reason why the 
Religious book terminates here is to be found in 
Character. its aim, which was to set before the 
Jews of the Diaspora the importance 
of observing the two Maccabean feasts—the Feast 
of the Dedication and the Feast of Nicanor. In no 
other way, the writer believed, could they share in 
the glory and the fruits of the great struggle for 
liberty. The author is so intent on this that though 
he has landed Judas as a splendid example of relig- 
ious patriotism he passes in silence over his death. 
The writer further takes occasion often to impress 
upon his readers the sacred character of the Temple 
at Jerusalem, which the Diaspora might easily un- 
dervalue. In contrast with I Maccabees, the lan- 
guage of II Maccabees is highly religious. Godap- 
pears as the great “Sovereign” who miraculously 
delivers His people (see iii. 24 and, perhaps, ii. 21). 
The author is a religious teacher (see iii. 1 ef seq., 
iv. 15-17, v. 17-20, et a/.); he did not write for the 
sake of the history as such. This places his work 
in a very different class from that of I Maccabees. 
In the earlier part he supplies some welcome infor- 
mation not contained in I Maccabees, and in nearly 
every chapter are interesting facts—some of them 
confirmed by Josephus—which may, with caution, 
be used. But his purpose, style, and temperament 
are such that, since the time of Ewald, it has been 
recognized that the work is not a sober and re- 
strained history like I Maccabees, but is rhetorical 
and bombastic. 

One important fact to be noted is the writer’s be- 
lief in the bodily resurrection of the dead (see vii. 9, 
11, 14, 36; xiv. 16; apd especially xii. 43-45). This, 
together with his attitude toward the priesthood as 


241 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maccabees 





shown in his lifting the veil which I Maccabees had 
drawn over Jason and Menelaus, led Bertholdt and 
Geiger to regard the author as a Pharisee and the 
work as a Pharisaic party document. This much, 
at least, is true—the writer's sympathies were with 
the Pharisees. The author claims that he epito- 
mized the work of Jason of Cyrene (ii. 23), which 
seems to have been his only source, 
unless he himself prefixed the two let- 
ters to his work. Jason isthought by 
Schiirer (i.c. p. 212) to have compiled his work 
from hearsay shortly after 160 b.c. at Cvrene. If 
this is true, the work of Jason, like IH Maccabees, 
concluded with the victory over Nicanor. There 
can be no doubt that both the work of Jason and 
that of his epitomizer (z.e., the author of IT Macca- 
bees) were written in Greek, and that the latter was 
a Hellenistic Jew. 

There is a reference in ch. xv. 37 to the Book of 
Esther, which would preclude any earlier date of 
authorship than about 130 B.c. (see Cornill, “ Ein- 
leitung,” p. 252). On the other hand, II Maccabees 
was known to the author of the Epistle to the He- 
brews (see Peak, in “The Century Bible,” p. 223) 
and to Philo (see Schiirer, 2.¢. p. 214). The work, 
therefore, must have been composed about tlie be- 
ginning of the common era. 

The two letters prefixed to II Maccabees have ex- 
cited much discussion. Some scholars regard them 
as the basis of the author’s work, which he himself 
prefixed to it because they treat of the topics of 

which he wished to speak—the Tem- 


Sources. 


The ple at Jerusalem and the importance 
Letters. of observing its feasts. Others hold 


that the letters were placed in their 
present position by a later hand, while some believe 
them to be fabricated. There is in the letters noth- 
ing which is inconsistent with their belonging to the 
time from which they profess to come, and there 
seems to be no good reason for doubting that it was 
the epitomist himself who prefixed them to the 
book. For details see the works mentioned below. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Grimm, Zweites, Drittes, und Viertes Biicher 
der Makkabder, in Kurzgefasstes E.cegetisches Handbuch 
zu den Apokryphen: Wace, Apocrypha; Kautzsch, Apo- 
kryphen; Bruston, Trois Lettres des Juifs de Palestine, in 
Stade’s Zeitschrift, 1890, x. 110 ef sey.; Torrey, Die Briefe 


2 Makkahbder, t. 1-ti. 13, ib. 1900, xx. 225 et seg.; Herkenne, 
Die Briefe zu Beginn des Zweiten Makkabderbuches, 1904. 


III Maccabees: The Third Book of the Macca- 
bees has in reality nothing to do either with the 
Maccabees or with theirtimes. It received its name 
probably because it is a fiction concerning the perse- 
cution of the Jews by a foreign king; that king 
was Ptolemy Philopator (222-205 B.c.). The story 
runs as follows: After Ptolemy’s defeat of Antio- 
chus III. in 217 8.c., at the battle of Raphia, the 
former visited Jerusalem and tried to enter the Tem- 
ple, but was miraculously prevented (i. 1-ii. 24). Re- 
turning to Alexandria, he assembled the Jews in the 
hippodrome to be massacred, but the necessity of 
writing down their names exhausted the paper in 
Egypt, so that they escaped (ii. 25-iv. 21). Next the 
king devised a plan for having the Jews trampled to 
death by elephants; this also was frustrated in vari- 
ous improbable ways (v. 1-vi. 21). The king then 
underwent a change of heart and bestowed great 

VIII.—16 


favor on the Jews, and the day on which this oc- 
curred was ever after celebrated as a festival in 
memory of the deliverance (vi. 22-vil. 28). 

The author of this fiction was certainly an Alex- 
andrian Jew who wrote in Greek, for its style is 
even more rhetorical and bombastic than that of 
IL Maccabees. The work begins abruptly and is 
thought to be but a fragment of a once larger 
whole. Whether there is any foundation for the 
story concerning Philopator with which the writer 
begins there is no means of knowing. If true, it is 
one of a very few grains of fact in the whole account. 
Josephus (“Contra Ap.” ii. 5) tells how Ptolemy 
Physco (146-117 B.c.) cast the Jews of Alexandria, 
who, as adherents of Cleopatra, were his political 
opponents, to intoxicated elephants. 
When the clephants turned on his own 

ship and people the king saw a sudden appari- 
Character. tion and gave up his purpose. The 
Jews, it is added, celebrate the day of 
their deliverance. It would seem that the author of 
III Maccabees, anxious to connect this celebration 
with Jerusalem, has transferred it to an earlier 
Ptolemy and given it an entirely unhistorical set- 
ting. His narrative can not be regarded as a suc- 
cessful fiction, as it abounds in psychological as well 
as historical improbabilities. 

This work was written later than II Maccabees, 
for itsauthor made use of that book (see ii. 9; comp. 
II Macc. vi. 18 e¢ seg. and xiv. 35 with ITI Macc. iii. 
25-33; see also Grimm, J.¢. p. 220). He can not have 
written earlier, therefore, than the end of the first 
century B.c. On the other hand, he can not have 
written later than the first century c.E. or his work 
would not have been used by Christians. Ewald 
regarded this work as a polemic against Caligula 
and dated it accordingly about 40 c.E.; this view 
has been abandoned by more recent writers, since 
Philopator is not represented as claiming divine 


honors, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: In addition to the works cited in the bibliogra- 
phy to the second part of this article: Deissmann, Bible Stud- 
jes, 1901, pp. 341-345 ; I, Abrahams, in J. Q. R. 1896-97, ix. 38 
et seg.: Ewald, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, iv. 611-614. 


IV Maccabees: The Fourth Book of the Macca- 
bees, so called, is a semiphilosophic discourse, or 
sermon, on the “supremacy of the pious reason” 
(ch. i. 1). It consists of a prologue (i. 1-12) and of 
two principal parts. The first of these G. 18-i1i. 18) 
is devoted to the clucidation of the author’s philo- 
sophical thesis, and the second (iii. 19-xvili. 24) to 
the illustration of the thesis by examples drawn 
from II Maccabees. In the latter portion of the 
work there is, first Gii. 19-iv. 26), a brief review of 
the sufferings of the Jews under Seleucus and his 
son (?) Antiochus Epiphanes; the conquering power 
of reason is illustrated (v, I-vii. 28) by the example 
of Eleazar, drawn from IT Macc. v. 18-81; by that 
of the seven brethren (vii. 24—-xiv. 10), drawn from 
II Macc. vii. 1-28; and by that of their mother (xiv. 
11-xvi. 25), taken from JI Mace. vii. 25 e¢ seg. In 
ch, xvii. and xviii. the author expresses his impres- 
sions with reference to these martyrdoms. 

It appears, therefore, that the only connection this 
work has with the Maccabees is in the fact that the 
author’s illustrations are drawn from the Second 
Book of the Maccabees. 


Author- 


Maccabees 


Ch. xviii. 83-24 has been thought by several schol- 
ars to be the work of a later hand, but the opinion 
does not appear to be well founded. 
Integrity Ch. xvii. 2 would form a weak ending 
and to the book, while xviii. 20-24 suits 
Character. well the style of the author of the 
earlier parts, and the apparent incon- 
gruity of xviii, 6-19 would scem to be designed in 
this hortatory composition to make a strong im- 
pression on itshearers, This latter view is strength- 
ened if it be remembered that the work is throughout 
a discourse addressed directly to listeners (comp. 1. 
1, 7; 31.13; xiii. 19; xviil.1). Ewald and Freuden- 
thal called it a sermon and held that it is an exam- 
ple of Alexandrian synagogue preaching, but this 
view is now abandoned, for even in the Diaspora 
the sermon of the synagogue was usually founded 
on a passage from the Bible. This discourse, also, 
is too abstruse for an ordinary congregation; it is 
an address to a more select circle. 

Its style is oratorical and ornate, though not so 
extravagant as that of III Maccabees. It contains 
a large philosophic element of the Stoic type, 
though its author possessed a taste for philosophy 
rather than real philosophical insight. It contains 
also a core of Judaism. The writer was a Jew who 
could clothe his religion in a philosophic garb in 
accordance with the tendency of the times. The 
Hellenic and the Jewish elements in his work both 
appear at their best and in a combination almost 
without a parallel; the nearest example is the New 
Testament Epistle to the Hebrews. 

It is probable, therefore, that the author of IV 
Maccabees was an Alexandrian Jew. Eusebius 
(“ Hist. Eccl.” iit. 10) and Jerome (“De Viris [lus- 
tribus,” xiii.) ascribe the work to Josephus—an 
opinion which was for a long time followed, and 

which has caused the text of IV Mac- 

Author  cabees to be included in many editions 

and Date. of the works of Josephus. But the 
language and style of the work differ 
so radically from those of the writings of Josephus 
that it is clear that this isa mistaken opinion. Of 
some of its historical combinations, asiniv. 5and v. 1, 
Josephus could hardly have been guilty. The wri- 
ter of [IV Maccabees had certainly come under the 
influence of the culture of Alexandria, even if he 
lived and wrote in some other city. As to the time 
when the book was written, the data for an opinion 
are the same as in the case of ITI Maccabees: it was 
written probably at the close of the last century 
B.c. or during the first century c.B., and before the 
time of Caligula, for the Jews seem to have been at 
peace at the time. 

The writer is astrong believer in immortality, but 
he has abandoned the Pharisaic standpoint of II 
Maccabees, which recognizes a bodily resurrection, 
and holds to the view that all souls exist forever, 
the good being together in a state of happiness (xvii. 
18), with the Patriarchs (v. 37) and with God (ix. 8 
and xvii, 18). These views are the 
more striking as they are entwined 
with the same narratives which in II 
Maccabees express the more material- 
istic view. The writer holds, also, that the suffering 
of the martyrs was vicarious; by it they wrought 


Escha- 
tology. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


242 


ee 


deliverance for their nation (comp. i. 11, xvii. 19- 

28, xviii. 24). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: For the Greek text of IV Maecabees, as well as 
of the other books, see Swete, The Old Testament in Greek, 
Vol. jil., 1894 ; for the translation, see Kautzsch, Apokryphen, 
ii. 152 et seq.: for introductions, see Bissell in Lange’s Com- 
mentary, and Schiirer, History of the Jewish People; see 
also Bensly, The Fourth Book of Maccabees in Syriac, 1898, 

T. G. A. B. 

II.* I Maccabees, now extant only in Greek, was 
originally composed in Hebrew or Aramaic, most 
probably the former; but the original can not have 
been long in circulation. The fragment ofa Hebrew 
text of I Maccabees published by Chwolson (1896) 
aud again by Schweizer (1901) is not part of the 
original; and it may well be that even 
Origen knew only an Aramaic trans- 
lation and not the original. He calis 
(Kusebius, “Hist. Eccl.” vi. 25) I Mac- 
cabces LapSyf Ya(p)Savacea, a title which has given 
rise to much conjecture. Only two suggestions need 
be named: Derenbourg’s bx sanw ms 7p (“ Book 
of the Family of the Chief of the People of God”), 
given in his “ Essai sur |’ Histoire et la Géographie de 
la Palestine” (p. 450, Paris, 1867), and Dalman’s 
WYN M3 7D, in his “Grammatik des Jiidisch- 
Palistinischen Aramiisch ” (p. 6, Leipsic, 1894). Of 
the name “ Maccabees” it may be mentioned that in 
a text of the Megillat Anteyukas (“J. Q. R.” xi. 291 
et seg.) the reading is *N)pD (=“ the Zealot”), which 
would be very acceptable were it better attested. 

As to the date of the book, much turns on the mean- 
ing of the last two verses. Some critics, indeed, doubt 
the authenticity of the whole of the last section 
(xiv. 16-xvi. 24), but the trend of opinion is in favor 
of the integrity of the book. Schtirer and Niese 
(in “Kritik der Beiden Makkabiéerbitcher,” Berlin, 
1900) maintain that the last verses imply that I 
Maccabees was written after the death of John Hyr- 
canus (105 B.c.), but there is good reason for hold- 
ing that the reference is to the beginning (185 B.c.) 
and not to the end of Hyrcanus’ reign (see “J. Q. 
R.” xiii, 512 e¢ seq.). 

Critics are practically unanimous in attaching 
great value to I Maccabees as a historical record. 
“On the whole, the book must be pronounced a 
work of the highest value, comparing favorably, in 
point of trustworthiness, with the best Greek and 
Roman histories” (Torrey). This is high praise; | 
but it is fully deserved (comp. Schtirer, “ Gesch.” 
iii. 141). Niese (/.c.) has done good service in vin- 
dicating the authenticity of Judas’ embassy to 


I Macca- 
bees. 


‘Rome; and it is no peculiar demerit in I Maccabees 


that in the reports of the numbers engaged in bat- 
tle, of speeches, and even of documents, its account 
is inexact and sometimes quite incredible. Such 
defects are shared by Thucydides and Livy. The 
substance, not the exact form, of documents was 
given by ancient historians, On the other hand, it 
differs somewhat from the Biblical histerics in its 
standpoint. The divine element is not wanting, and 
success is ultimately traced (as in Mattathias’ death- 
bed utterances) to God. Judas invariably sings 
psalms of thanksgiving for victory, and the key -note 
of the revolt is “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, 


*A second article on the Book of Maecabees is inserted as 
treating the subject from a Jewish standpoint.—J. 


243 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maccabees 





but unto thy name give glory” (Ps. cxv. 1). The 
period also, asmany hold, gave rise to numerous new 
psalms. But in I Maccabees, nevertheless, history 
is written from the human standpoint. Victory is 
earned by endeavor as well as bestowed by grace. 
Partly because of this phenomenon, it was urged by 
Geiger (“Urschrift,” 1857, pp. 200-230) that one 
may detect a dynastic purpose in the book and that 
its author was a Sadducean apologist for the Has- 
moncans, 

It is certainly true that the author is silent con- 
cerning the worst excesses of the (Sadducean) high 
priests, and attaches primary importance to the 
founder of the dynasty, Mattathias. Mattathias is 
unknown to JI Maccabees, though the latter is sup- 
posed by Geiger to be a Pharisaic counterblast to 
the Sadducean I Maccabees. Yet, strangely enough, 
in the Pharisaic tradition of the Talmud and Syna- 
gogue Mattathias plays a large part, so large that 
Judas is thrown into the background. 

On one important point some modern writers are 
unfair to the book. God is not “named” in it: the 
term “heaven” replaces the divine name. From 
this the inference has been drawn that “God was 
absolutely conceived as reigning in the remote 
heaven, and no longer as dwelling among the peo- 
ple by the Shekinah” (Fairweather and Black, “I 
Maccabees,” Introduction, p. 47). This is as false 
an inference as would be a similar conclusion from 
the opening words of the Lord’s Prayer, “Our Father 
whoart in Heaven.” God is not “named” through- 
out the Lord’s Prayer. In J Maccabees the personal 
pronoun is most significantly used (ili, 22, 51; iv. 
10, 55) with relation to the term “heaven”; and, 
more remarkable still, the pronoun issometimes used 
(ii. 61) without any noun at all: “ And thus consider 
ye from generation to generation, that none that put 
their trust in him shall want for strength.” That 
there grew up a disinclination to “name” God is 
undoubted; but whatever the origin of this scrupu- 
losity, it was not any sense of the remoteness of God 
(see discussion by Benjacob, “Im Namen Gottes,” 
p. 164, Berlin, 1903). From the Maccabean period 
onward God becomes ever nearer to Israel. If there 
was a fault at all, it was not that God became too 
transcendent; the tendency was rather in the direc- 
tion of overfamiliarity than of undue aloofness, 

Unlike I Maccabees, the book known as II Macca- 
bees was written in Greek. For the history of the 
war it is of less value than I Maccabees, though 
some recent writers (in particular Niese) have main- 
tained the opposite opinion. It adds, however, im- 
portant particulars regarding the events that led up 
to the Maccabean revolt. Besides this, II Maccahces, 
Written quite independently of I Maccabees, is a 
strong support of the general truth of the familiar 
story of the revolt, though II Maccabees is embel- 

lished with angelical and miraculous 

II Macca- ornament foreign to the first book. 
bees. Its style is rhetorical, its purpose di- 
dactic. It emanated from Alexandria 

and was addressed to the Greek-speaking Jews of 
the Diaspora. It was designed to impress on them 
the unity of Judaism, the importance of Jerusalem 
as the center of religious life, and the duty of ob- 
serving the two feasts of Hanukkah and Nicanor’s 


Day (see NICANOR). That the book has a Pharisaic 
color is undoubted, but not in the sense of being 
a partizan pamphlet in reply to I Maccabees. which, 
indeed, the author of II Maccabees most probably 
did not know. Moreover, I] Maccabees takes uo 
account of Mattathias, nor, indeed, of any of the 
band of heroes except Judas; and this is not easily 
forced into evidence of Pharisaic partizanship. On 
the other hand, in II Macc. xiv. 6 Judas is repre- 
sented as the leader of the Hasidseans, who have 
many points in common with the Pharisees, and from 
whom the Hasmoneans were soon alienated. 

Of specifically non-Sadducean doctrines, I] Mae- 
cabees has a very clear expression of belief in the 
resurrection, Death isa “short pain that bringeth 
everlasting life” (II Macc. vii. 36; comp. other pas- 
sages in the same chapter and xiv. 46). Judasis rep- 
resented (II Macc. xii. 48 e¢ seg.) as making offcrings 
for the dead because “he took thought of the resur- 
rection,” ‘The reference to such offerings is, how- 
ever, without parallel in Jewish literatare, and noth- 
ing is otherwise known of such offerings being made 
at the Temple in Jerusalem (see Israel Lévi, “La 
Commemoration des Ames dans le Judaisme,” in 
“R. EK. J.” xxix. 48), 

The book is usually held to belong to the latter part 


of the first century B.c. ; Jason (of whose work it pur- 


ports to bean epitome) wrote at least a century earlier, 
Niese places II Maccabees at the date 125-124 z.c., 
thus regarding it as older than, as well as superior 
to, I Maccabees. In this preference of the second 
to the first book, Niese stands practically alone, but 
he has done great service in vindicating the impor- 
tance and value of the former (comp. also Sluys, 
“De Maccabeorum Libris I et II Questiones,” Am- 
sterdam, 1904). It remains to add that the authen- 
ticity of the letters prefixed to II Maccabees has 
been fiercely assailed. Yet it is coming to be recog- 
nized that the letters have a clear bearing on the 
design of the book, as explaiued above, and it is 
quite conceivable, though very improbable, that 
they were part of the original work of Jason. On 
these letters see, besides earlier literature, Herkenne, 
“Die Briefe zu Beginn des Zweiten Makkabier- 
buchs,” Freiburg, 1904. 

One point remains. The martyrdoms described 
in I] Maccabees, especially of the mother and her 
seven sous, have given the book undying value as 
an inspiration and encouragement to the faithful of 
all ages and creeds. As will be seen below (in con- 
nection with IV Maccabees), this feature of the Mac- 
cabean heroism made a special appeal to the Chris- 
tianity of the first four centuries. “The figure of 
the martyr, as the Church knows it, dates from the 
persecution of Antiochus; all subsequent martyrol- 
ogies derive from the Jewish books which recorded 
the sufferings of those who in that day were strong 
and did exploits” (E. Bevan, “House of Seleucus,” 
1902, ii, 175). 

III Maccabees purports to record a persecution of 
the Jews in Alexandria during the reign of Ptolemy 
(IV.) Philopator (222-204 .c.), The Jews are as- 
sembled in the hippodrome, and 500 infuriated ele- 
phants are to be let looseupon them, Jn the event 
the elephants turned against the persecutors, and the 
Jews not only escaped, but were treated with much 


Maccabees 
Machir 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


244 





honor by the king. That there is much of the fabu- 
lous in this story is obvious, and it may well be that 
the similar story told in Josephus 
III Macca- (“Contra Ap.” ii. 5) concerning Ptole- 
bees. my (VII.) Physcon is, as most assume, 
the original of III Maccabees. The 
book would thus belong at the latest to the first cen- 
tury C.E.; at the earliest to the last century B.c. Re- 
cently important new light has been thrown on the 
book by the discovery of early Jewish settlements 
inthe Fayum. On independent gounds, the present 
writer (““J. Q. R.” ix. 89) aud Prof. A. Bichler 
(“ Tobiaden und Oniaden,” pp. 172 et seqg., Vienna, 
1899) have put forward the theory that the book re- 
fers to a persecution in the Fayum. Certainly, the 
rapid transference of Jewish allegiance from Egyp- 
tian to Syrian hegemony about 200 n.c. finds its ex- 
planation if the Jews of Egypt were then undergoing 
persecution. That the author was an Alexandrian 
is unquestionable. On the other hand, Willrich 
(“ Hermes,” 1904, xxxix. 244) disputes the Fayum 
theory and supports the view that the book is best 
explained as referring to Caligula. 

The beautiful work known as IV Maccabees is a 
homily, not a history. As Freudenthal was the 
first to show, it is a sermon addressed to a Greek- 
speaking audience, and delivered probably on Hanuk- 
kah (“ Die Flavius Josephus Beigelegte 
Schrift tiber die Herrschaft der Ver- 
nunft [IV Makkabiéerbuch},” Bres- 
lau, 1869), the thesis being that, rea- 
son (religion) can control the passions; the author 
illustrates this from many examples, especially from 
the story of the Maccabean martyrdoms as related in 
II Mace. vi., vii. A very noble level of eloquence is 
reached by the writer, and the book is in many ways 
one of the best products of the syncretism of He- 
braic and Greek thought. 

The authorship of IV Maccabees was at one 
time ascribed (as by Eusebius, Jerome, and other 
authorities) to Josephus, but this is clearly wrong. 
Nothing can with definiteness be asserted as to the 
date of the book; it belongs probably to the period 
shortly before the fall of Jerusalem. In its present 
form it contains possibly some Christian interpola- 
tions (¢.g., vii. 19, xiii. 17, xvi. 25), but they are cer- 
tainly very few and insignificant. Later on, Chris- 
tian homilists used the same topic, the martyrdoms, 
as the theme for sermons; the Church maintained 
a Maccabean feast (though not on the same date as 
the Jews) for at least four centuries. Homilies by 
Gregory Nazienzen and Chrysostom for the festival 
of Aug. 1 (the “Birthday of the Maccabees”) are 
extant on this subject. On the ‘‘Maccabees as 
Christian Saints” see Maas in “Monatsschrift,” 
Xliv, 145 et seg. 

V Maccabees, so called by Cotton (“ Five Books 
of Maccabces,” 1882), is known also as the Arabic IT 
Maccabees. It is included in the Paris and London 

Polyglots. It has clear relations to 

V Macca- II Maccabees, the Arabic “ Yosippus,” 
bees. and the Hebrew “ Yosippon.” Late in 
origin and without historical value, 

the book is, however, of considerable importance 


from other points of view, 
J. I. A. 


IV Macca- 
bees. 


A GT yyy 9 


MACEDONIA: Country of soutneastern Eu- 
rope; now a part of the Turkish empire. It is the 
native country of Alexander the Great, who is, there- 
fore, called “ Alexander the Macedonian ” in rabbin- 
ical writings. In Dan. xi. 30 the Macedonians are 
mentioned under the name “ Kittim” (R. V.), ane 
Eusebius and the Hebrew Josephus or Gorionides 
(Knobel, “ Vélkertafel,” p. 103) use the same desig- 
nation. 

In the apocalyptic literature this kingdom is 
known as the “fourth beast” (Dan. vii. 7). The 
First Book of the Maccabees, which originally was 
written in Hebrew, also uses the word ‘“‘ kittim” for 
Macedonians, and mentions Philip and Alexander 
(i. 1), as well as Philip IIL. and his illegitimate son 
Perseus (viii. 5), as kingsof the Macedonians. Since 
the Greek Syrians style themselves “successors of 
Alexander,” these Syrians also are called “ Mace- 
donians” (II Macc. viii. 20). 

The Rabbis, whose acquaintance with Greek life 


Was one acquired during the Macedonian era, 


identified the Hebrew “ Yawan” (Javan) with Mace- 
donia (Targ. Yer. to Gen. x. 2; Targ. of I Chron. 
i. 5; Yoma 10a; Gen. R. xxxvii. 1), and to them, 
as to Danicl, Macedonia represented the eschatolog- 
ical kingdom (Mek. to Ex. xx. 18; Targ. of I Sam. 
ii. 4); with them the expression “Javan” is inter- 
changeable with “ Macedonia.” They mention, prob- 
ably in a figurative sense, the “jaundice” of Mace- 
donia (Targ. Yer. to Deut. xxviii. 22); also the gold 
from the same country (Targ. to Esth. viii. 15; 2d 
Targ. to Esth. vi. 10). 

Many Macedonian idioms, it is claimed, are found 
in the Jewish-Hellenistic language, especially as it 
appears in the Septuagint (Swete, “Introduction 
to the O. T. in Greek,” p. 291, Cambridge, 1900). 
Cities having Macedonian names were founded on 
Palestinian soil, such as Beroea, Dion, Pella. Certain 
weapons of the Macedonians are referred to by Jo- 
sephus (“B,. J.” v. 11, § 3). 

Many Jews must have lived in Macedonia, since 
Christian doctrines found a ready and early accept- 
ance there. Paul visited the Macedonian regions on 
his second missionary journey (Acts xvi. 9; comp. 
I Cor. xvi. 5); his fellow workers Silasand Timothy 
labored there (Acts xvii, 14, xviii. 5). Paul visited 
it again on his third journey (Acts xx. 1; IE Cor. i. 
16, ii. 18, vii. 5), stopping in the cities Philippi, Thes- 
salonica, and Berea. Jewish inscriptions have been 
found in Thessalonica (“R. E. J.” x. 78), and the 
presence of Jews in Macedonia is proved also by 
Agrippa’s letter to Caligula (Philo, “Legatio ad 
Caium,” £ 36 [ed. Mangey, ii. 587]). 

For an account of the Jews in Macedonia in 
modern times see TURKEY. 


ee: Schiirer, Gesch, iii. 27; Krauss, Lehnworter, 
ii. 349, 


G. S. Kr. 


MACHADO: Name of a family of Maranos 
which appears to have emigrated to America from 
Lisbon. The name is met with in Mexico and the 
West Indies at a very early date. Asearly as 1600, 
during the course of the trialof Jorge de Almeida by 
the Inquisition in Mexico, Isabel Machado and 
her father, Antonio Machado, were charged with 


245 





being Jews. Abraham de Macado is mentioned 
asa resident of Martinique in 1680, and M. Macha- 
do is known to have been a planter in Surinam, 
about 1690. 

The most important family bearing the name in 
America is the one in New York. It is descended 
from David Mendez Machado, who went from 
Lisbon, asa refugee from the Inquisition, to England, 
where he joined the emigrants going to Georgia, ar- 
riving at Savannah in 1738. David Mendez Machado 
married Zipporah, duughter of Dr. Samuel Nuifiez, 
one of the early settlers of Georgia, and shortly after- 
ward left Savannah for New York; there, in 1734, 
he became hazzan of the Spanish and Portuguese 
congregation Shearith Israel, with which he re- 
mained until his death in 1758. Aaron Machado, 
presumably a brother, became a freeman in New 
York in 1739. David Mendez Machado had two 
children: Rebecca, born in New York, 1746, mar- 
ried at Philadelphia, in 1762, Jonas Phillips (see 
Pritirps); and Sarah, married Mr. Moses of 
Charleston, 8. C. Among the distinguished de- 
scendants of David Mendez Machado may be men- 
tioned Commodore Uriah P. Levy, Henry M. 
Phillips, Jonas B. Phillips, Mordecai M. Noah, and 
N. Taylor Phillips. 

Following is a family tree of the Machado family 
of New York : 


David Mendez Machado = Zipporah Nufiez 
d. 1753) (d. 1799) 


Rebecca = (1762) Jonas Phillips 
(1746-18381) (1736-1803) 


21 children 


Sarah = Mr. Moses 
Israel Moses 
Raphael Moses 
Raphael Moses, Jr. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: N. Taylor Phillips, Family History of the 
Rev. David Mendez Machado; Publications Am. Jew. 
Hist. Soe. ii, 45 et seq.3 iv. 33 vi. 47, 128. 

A. L. Hv. 

MACHZERUS: Mountain fortress in Perea, on 
the boundary between Palestine and Arabia. Alex- 
ander Jannzeus first built a fortification there (Jose- 
phus, “B. J.” vii. 6, § 2). His wife Salome Alexan- 
dra turned over to the Sadducean party all the cit- 
adels with the exception of Hyrcania, AJexandrium, 
and Macherus (Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 16, § 3), where 
the Hasmoneans had their treasures. Gabinius ad- 
vanced upon Machzrus; Alexander surrendered, and 
the fortification was razed to the ground by the 
former (“ Ant.” xiv. 5, §§ 2, 4). Shortly afterward 

Aristobulus fortified himself there, and Gabinins 

captured the position again after a siege of twodays 

(“B. J.” i. 8, § 6). Herod restored it as a frontier 

fort against the Arabs, founded a walled city there, 

and built towers, turning the whole mountain-top 
into a fortification. In the middle of the fortified 

space he built a splendid palace (“B. J.” vii. 6, § 2). 

According to Pliny (“Historia Naturalis,” v. 16, 

£72), it was, next to Jerusalem, the strongest fortress 

in Palestine. In the war against the Romans it was 
occupied by Jews after the Roman garrison had re- 
tired from it (“B. J.” @¢.). 

Not till two years after the fall of Jerusalem did 

Lucilius Bassus advance upon Macherus with a 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maccabees 
Machir 


Roman army. The fort was defended by a heroic 
youth called Eleazar; he fell into the hands of the 
Romans and was to have been crucified; but the 
Jews, to save him, surrendered the city on condition 
that they be allowed a safe retreat. The Romans, 
however, broke their word; about 1,700 men were 
killed, and the women and children were sold as 
slaves; 3,000 Zealots who had joined the fugitives 
from Macherus were killed in a bloody battle near 

the Jordan (2. vii. 6, $$ 1-6). 

Several wonderful features of Josephus’ narrative 
can be explained through Talmudic accounts. Ac- 
cording to Josephus, in the Herodian palace was a 
rue which grew as high as a fig-tree (*B. J.” vii. 6, 
$2); with this statement should be compared Yer. 
Peah vil. 4 and Ket. 111b (see Winer, “B. R.” «2. 
“Senf”). Josephus says that from two hills in the 
vicinity flowed two springs, one warm and the other 
cold, and that together they afforded an agreeable 
and healthful bath; allusion is made to these hills in 
the Talmud also when it declares that the goats in 
the mountains of Machxrus grew fat upon the odors 
from the Temple (Tamid 80; Yoma 389b), meaning 
probably odors from the mountain of Macherus 
itself, which was used as a signal-fire station for the 
announcement of New Moon (R. H. 28b; Tosef., 
R. H. ii. 2). 

The spelling of the name Machierus varies in the 
rabbinical writings between 9))3%) and 4351, also 
“N39; it was pronounced “Mekhawar” (comp. 
Maya3épwco, “ Machaveros” in writings of the Middle 
Ages). Accordingly, Maya:pove in Josephus is prob- 
ably only a Greek form of the Semitic name, and is 
not connected with payaipa (= “knife”), Strabo 
(xvi. 2,§ 40) and Stephen of Byzantium also mention 
the place. John the Baptist is said to have been killed 
at Macherus (“-Ant.” xviii. 5, § 2). It is identified 
with the present Mukaur, east of the Dead Sea (Rau- 
mer, “ Paldstina,” p. 264; Brann, in “ Monatsschrift,” 
1878, p. 845). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bottger, Lexicon zu Fl. Josephus, p. 165; 
Gritz, Gesch. 4th ed., iii, 548; Neubauer, G. 7. pp. 40, 42; 
Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., i. 688; Ha-Lebanon, v. 359. 

G. S. Kr. 

MACHIM, MASAHOD COHEN: Moorish 
envoy to England, in 1818, from Mulai Sulaiman, 
Emperor of Morocco (1794-1822), in whose reign 
Christian slavery was abolished in Morocco. His 
son Meir Cohen Machim visited England in the 
same capacity in 1827. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, 
p. 174; _ s PER ONOMUN: History of the Jews in Great Brit- 
ain, ii. 197. 


J I. Co. 


MACHIR: 1. The first-born son of Manasseh 
(Josh, xvii. 1; I Chron. vii. 14); founder of the most 
important or dominant branch of the tribe of Manas- 
seh. His importance is shown by the collocation of 
Ephraim and Machir (instead of Manasseh) in Deb- 
orah’s Song (Judges v. 14), which seems to imply 
that the whole tribe was once known by his name. 
This is confirmed by the statement that Machir was 
the only son of Manasseh (Num. xxvi. 29). In Gen. 
]. 23 the children of Machir are said to have been 
“born upon Joseph’s knees” (R. V.), that is, they 
were adopted by Joseph (Gunkel, “ Genesis,” p. 442; 
Stade’s “ Zeitschrift,” 1886, pp. 145 et seq.). 


Machir 
Machpelah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


246 





Machir removed to the east of the Jordan, con- 
quered Gilead (Num, xxxil. 39, 40; Deut. iii. 15), 
and added Bashan to his territory. Hence Machir 
is spoken of as the father of Gilead (I Chron. it. 21, 
23; vii. 14; Num. xxvi. 29), and Gilead is called the 
son of Machir (Num, xxvii. 36; Josh. xvii. 3: I 
Chron, vii. 17). Theconquest of Gilead is generally 
regarded as made not during the first invasion of the 
lands east of the Jordan, but subsequently by a re- 
flex movement from western Palestine. 

The Midrash (Num. R. xiv. 19) mentions three 
sons of Machir, for whom the three whole offerings 
referred to in Num. vii. 57 were brought by the 
chief of the tribe of Manasseh. These sons inher- 
ited the possessions of their brother Jair, who died 
childless. 

2. Sonof Ammiel, who had an estate at Lo-debar, 
east of the Jordan, not far from Mahanaim (II Sam. 
ix. 4 et seqg., xvii. 27). He remained faithful to the 
house of Saul, giving refuge to the son of Jonathan, 
Merib-baal, or Mephibosheth. Later, however, he 
showed his loyalty to David by supplying his 
army at Mahanaim during the rebellion of Absalom 
(Smith, “Samuel,” pp. 310, 356, New York, 1900). 

J. He N, 


MACHIR: A Babylonian scholar who settled in 
Narbonne, France, at the end of the eighth century 
and whose descendants were for many generations 
the leaders of that important community. Accord- 
ing to a tradition preserved by Abraham ibn Daud 
in his “Sefer ha-Kabbalah,” Machir was a descend- 
ant of the house of David. He wassent to Narbonne 
by the calif Harun al-Rashid at the request of Char- 
lemagne, who, it is said, received the Babylonian 
scholar with great honor, conferred upon him and 
his descendants the title of “king of the Jews,” and 
gave him a section of the city of Narbonne. AlI- 
though this relation between Machir and Charle- 
magne is probably legendary, it isa fact that the 
Machir family enjoyed for centuries many privileges 
and that its members bore the title of “ nasi” (prince). 
Benjamin of Tudela, who visited Narbonne in 1165, 
- speaks of the exalted position occupied by the de- 
scendants of Machir, and the “Royal Letters” of 
1864 (Doat Collection, pp. 58 e¢ seg., 389-353) also 
record the existence of a Jewish “king” at Nar- 
bonne. The place of residence of the Machir family 
at Narbonne was designated in official documents 
as “Cortada Regis Judeorum” (Saige, “Hist. des 
Juifs du Languedoe,” p. 44). Machir is said to have 
founded a Talmudical school there which vied in 
greatness with those of Babylonia and which at- 
tracted pupils from many distant points. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zacuto, Yuhastn, ed. London, p. 84; Gross, in 
Monatsschrift, 1878, p. 250; 1881, p. 451; idem, Gallia Ju- 
datea, p. 404; Neubauer, in R. Bb. J. x. 100-103; Renan-Neu- 
bauer, Les Rabbins Francais, pp. 561, 743. 
kK. C. I. Br. 
MACHIR BEN ABBA MARI: Author of a 

work entitled “ Yalkut ha-Makiri,” but about whom 

not even the country or the period in which he lived 

is known. Steinschneider (“Jewish Literature,” p. 

143) supposes that Machir lived in Provence; but 

the question of his date remains a subject of dis- 

cussion among modern scholars. The work itself is 
similar in its contents to the “ Yalkut Sbim‘oni,” 


with the difference that while the latter covers the 
whole Bible, Machir extended his compilation of 
Talmudic and midrashic sentences only to the books 
of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve Minor 
Prophets, Psalms, Proverbs, and Job. In the intro- 
ductions, apparently very similar, to these books, 
Machir gives the reason which induced him to un- 
dertake such a work: he desired to gather the scat- 
tered haggadic sentences intoone group. He seems 
to have thought it unnecessary to do the same thing 
for the Pentateuch and the Five Scrolls, as it had 
been done already, to a certain extent, in the Mid- 
rash Rabbah; but it may be concluded that Machir 
intended to make such a compilation on the earlier 
prophetical books also. From his introduction to 
the part on Isaiah it would seem that he began with 
Psalms and finished with Isaiah, though in his in- 
troduction to the part on the Psalms he mentions 
the other parts. 

Machir used the following sources in his compila- 


| tion: the two Talmuds, the Tosefta, the minor trea- 


tises, the Sifra, the Sifre, the Pesikta, Midrash Rab- 
bah on the Pentateuch, Midrash Kohelet, Midrash 
Tehillim, Midrash Mishle, Midrash Iyyob, Midrash 
Tanhuma, a Midrash quoted as p"\anws, Pirke Rabbi 
Eli‘ezer, Seder ‘Olam, and Haggadat Shir ha-Shirim, 
frequently quoting the last-named Midrash in the 
part on Isaiah. Machir had another version of 
Deuteronomy Rabbah, of which only the part on the 
section “Debarim” exists now (comp. 8. Buber, 
“Qikkutim mi-Midrash Eleh ha-Debarim Zuta,” 
Introduction). It is difficult to ascertain whether 
Machir knew of the Midrash Yelammedenu; he 
quotes only Midrash Tanhuima, but the passages 
which he cites are not found in the present text of 
that work, so that it is possible that he took these 
passages from the Yelammedenu. 

Only the following parts of the “Yalkut ha- 
Makiri” are extant: Isaiah, published by L. Spira 
(Berlin, 1894; comp. Israel Lévi in “R. E. J.” 
xxviii. 300) from a Leyden manuscript; Psalms, 
published by 8. Buber (Berdychev, 1899) from two 
manuscripts (one, previously in the possession of 
Joseph b. Solomon of Vyazhin, was used by David 
Luria, and its introduction was published by M. 
Straschun in Fuenn’s “ Kiryah Ne’emanah,” p. 304; 
the other is MS. No. 167 in the Bodleian Library): 
the twelve Minor Prophets (Brit. Mus., Harleian 
MSS., No. 5704); Proverbs, extant in a MS. which 
is in the possession of Griinhut (“ Zeit. fir Hebr. 
Bibl.” 1900, p. 41), and which was seen by Azu- 
lai (“Shem ha-Gedolim,” ii., 8.0. “ Yalkut ha- 
Makiri ”). 

Gaster (““R. E. J.” xxv, 48 et seg.) attached great 
importance to Machir’s work, thinking that it 
was older than the “ Yalkut Shim‘oni,” the second 
part of which at least Gaster concluded was a bad 
adaptation from the “ Yalkut ha-Makiri.” Gaster’s 
conclusions, however, were contested by A. Epstein 
(“R. E. J.” xxvi. 75 et seg.), who declares that Ma- 
chir’s “ Yalkut” is both inferior and later than the 
“Yalkut Shim‘oni.” Buber conclusively proved, 
in the introduction to his edition of the “ Yalkut ha- 
Makiri,” that the two worksare independent of each 
other, that Machir lived later than the author of 
the “ Yalkut Shim‘oni,” and that he had not seen the 


247 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Machir 
Machpelah 





latter work. Poznanski thinks that Machir lived in 
the fourteenth century. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Poznanski, in R. BE. J. xl. 282 et seqg., and the 

sources mentioned above. 

E. C, M. SEL. 

MACHIR BEN JUDAH: French scholar of 
the tenth and eleventh centuries; born at Metz; 
prother of Gershom Me’or ha-Golah. He is known 
by his dictionary entitled “ Alfa Beta de-R. Makir,” 
not extant, but quoted often by Rashi, RaSHBaM, 
Eliezer b. Nathan, Jacob Tam, and other tosafists. 
As the title indicates, the dictionary was arranged 
in alphabetical order, and from the many quotations 
by Rashi in his commentary on the Talmud (Hul. 
20b; Pes. 50a et passim) it seems that it dealt chiefly 
with the difficult words and passages of the Talmud; 
but (by Rashi) he is quoted also for the interpreta- 
tion of the word “ botnim,” in Gen. xliii. 11... Machir 
adopted for the most part the interpretations of his 
brother, who was Nathan ben Jehiel’s teacher. Still 
he sometimes differed from his brother in the inter- 
pretation of words, and in such cases Nathan often 
adopted the opinion of Machir (comp. Jacob Tam, 
“Sefer ha-Yashar,” p. 58b), though he never quotes 
him in his “‘Aruk.” The quotations from Machir 
by Rashi and the other rabbis mentioned above 
were collected by Solomon L. Rapoport in his bi- 
ography of Nathan b. Jehiel (“ Bikkure ha-‘Ittim,” 
x. 8, xi. 82). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 283; Michael, Or ha- 

Hayyim, No. 1104. 

T M. SEL. 


MACHLUP, ADOLF: Hungarian merchant 
and philanthropist; born at Eisenstadt in 1883; 
died at Budapest Jan. 1, 1895. He studied at Buda- 
pest, and at the Polytechnic School in Vienna, and 
took part in the revolutionary movement of 1848. 
In 1867 he and his brother Eduard built at Buda- 
pest the first leather-factory in Hungary, and in 1868 
the first factory for stearin candles and soap. Both 
these enterprises did much to advance Hungarian 
industry and trade. Machlup left large sums to 
many Jewish as well as non-Jewish societies, in- 
cluding a bequest of 200,000 gulden to found a non- 
sectarian Home for Convalescents in the city of 
Budapest. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Nagy Lexicon. 

8. L. V. 

MACHORRO (13ND; spelled also Machorre, 
Maczoro, Magoro): Name of a family of Sephar- 
dim that flourished in Brazil, Germany, Holland, 
Hungary, and Italy. Thirteen persons bearing the 
name are buried in Altona, the earliest epitaph being 
dated 1620 and the latest 1782. A Jacfob] de Dan- 
[iel] Machorre was one of the contributors to an 
album which contained the autographs and verses 
of thousands of persons who had inspected Prof. 
D, Mill’s model of the Temple of Solomon at Utrecht 
(ec. 1748-57). Mention is made of a Maczoro, in 
Temesvar, Hungary, in 1772, Abraham, Moses, 
and Solomon Machorro flourished at Amsterdam 
about the middle of the seventeenth century. The 
first two were members of the society Temime 
Derek. Abraham is highly praised by De Barrios 
as one skilled equally in the use of the flute and of 
the pen. Elijah Machorro, a kinsman of Abraham 


Machorro, lived in Brazil about the same time. 
Moses ben Daniel Machorro was rabbi in Venice 
about 1698. One of his decisions with reference to 
the cutting of the hair on the “middle days” of the 
festivals (“hol ha-mo‘ed”) is published in Moses 
Hagiz’ “Leket ha-Kemah,” on Yoreh De‘ah (pp. 
31-32, Amsterdam, 1706; see BEARD). <A Portu- 
guese version of this responsum, not known to bibli- 
ographers, seems to have been circulated in Amster- 
dam about 1704 (comp. “ Catalogue Cardozo,” p. 75, 
Amsterdam, 1870). It is well worth mention that 
one of the numerous Maranos figuring in the trial of 
Gabriel de Granada in Mexico (1642-45) was named 
Juan Pacheco de Leon, alias Solomon Machorro 
(“Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc.” No. 7, p. 8). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Barrios, Relacion de los Poetas y Escri- 
tores Espafioles, p. 58; Wolf, Bibl. Heb. iii. 103; Rios, 
Estudios, p. 568 ; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 
251, Triest, 1853; Kayserling, Sephardim, pp. 296, 360, 361; 
idem, in R. EB. J. xviii. 287 (1889) ; idem, in Bibl. Esp.-Port.- 
Jud. pp. 23, 65, Strasburg, 1890; Mortara, Indice, p. 36, Padua, 
1886 ; M. Grunwald, Portiugiesengrdber auf Deutscher Erde, 


p. 115, Hamburg, 1902; the sources cited by G. A. Kohut in 
Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. No. 3, pp. 108-109. 


A. G. A. K, 


MACHPELAH.—Biblical and Post-Biblical 
Data: Name ofa field and cave bought by Abraham 
asa burying-place. The meaning of the name, which 
always occurs with the definite article, is not clear; 
according to the Targumim and the Septuagint it 
means “the double,” while Gesenius (“Th.”), with 
more reason, connects it with the Ethiopic for “the 
portion.” It appears to have been situated near 
Mamre, or Hebron, and to have belonged to Ephron 
the Hittite. Abraham needed a burying-place for 
Sarah, and bought the field of the Machpelah, at the 
end of which was a cave, paying four hundred silver 
shekels. The cave became the family burying-place, 
Sarah being the first to be buried there; later, Abra- 
ham, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah, and Jacob were placed 
there (Gen. xxiii. 9, 16-20; xxv. 9; xlix. 80-81; 1. 
18). It is designated twice only as the “cave” of 
the Machpelah (Gen. xxiii. 9, xxv. 9); in the other 
instances it is called “the cave of the field of the 
Machpclah” or “the cave in the field of the Mach- 
pelah.” No further reference is made to it or to the 
burying-place of the Patriarchs, though some schol- 
ars find an allusion to it in II Sam. xv. 7%, 9. 

Josephus speaks of the purchase of Ephron’s field 
at Hebron by Abraham as a place of burial and 
of the tombs (Mvyueia) built there by Abraham and 
his descendants, without, however, mentioning the 
name “Machpelah” (“Ant.” i. 14, 22). In the 
twelfth century the cave of the Machpelah began to 
attract visitors and pilgrims, and this aroused the 
curiosity and wonder of the natives. Benjamin of 
Tudela relates: “At Hebron there is a large place 
of worship called ‘St. Abraham,’ which was pre- 
viously a Jewish synagogue. The natives erected 
there six sepulchers, which they tell foreigners are 
those of the Patriarchs and their wives, demanding 
money as a condition of seeing them. If a Jew 
gives an additional fee to the keeper of the cave, an 
iron door which dates from the time of our fore- 
fathers opens, and the visitor descends with a 
lighted candle. He crosses two empty caves, and 
in the third sees six tombs, on which the names of 
the three Patriarchs and their wives are inscribed in 


Machpelah 
Magdala 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


248 





Hebrew characters. The cave is filled with barrels 
containing bones of people, which are taken there 
as to a sacred place. At the end of the field of the 
Machpelah stands Abraham’s house witha spring 
in front of it” (“Itinerary,” ed. Asher, pp. 40-42, 
Hebr.). Samuel b, Samson visited the cave in 1210; 
he says that the visitor must descend by twenty- 
four steps in a passageway so narrow that the rock 
touches him on cither hand (“ Pal. Explor. Fund,” 
Quarterly Statement, 1882, p. 212). Now thecaveis 
concealed by a mosque; this was formerly a church, 
built by the Crusaders between 1167 and 1187 and 
restored by the Arabs (comp. Stanley, “Sinai and 
Palestine,” p. 149). See Hebron. 

E. G. H. M. SEL. 
—-In Rabbinical Literature: The name of 
“ Machpelah ”(=* the doubled one”) belongs, accord- 
ing to the Rabbis, to the cave alone, their reasons for 
the name being various: it was a double cave, with 
two stories (Rab); it contained pairs of tombs (Sam- 


uel); it had a double value in the eyes of people - 


who saw it; any one buried there could expect a 
double reward in the future world ; when God buried 
Adam there He had to fold him together (Abahu; 
‘Er. 58a; Gen. R. lviii. 10). Adam and Eve were 

the first pair buried there, and there- 

Tomb of fore Hebron, where the cave was situ- 
Adam and ated, bore the additional name of “ Kir- 

Eve. jath-arba ” (= “the city of four”; ¢.e., 

of the tombs of Adam and Eve, Abra- 

ham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah 
(‘Er. 53a; Sotah 18a; comp. Gen. R. lviii. 4). 

According to Pirke R. El. xxxvi., the cave of 
Machpelah was at Jebus, and the reason that in- 
duced Abraham to buy it was the following: When 
Abraham went to fetch the calf for his guests (comp. 
Gen. xviii. 7) it escaped to the cave of Machpelah. 
Abraham ran after it, and when he entered the cave 
he saw Adam and Eve lying in their beds as though 
they were sleeping, while lighted candles were 
around them, exhaling a fragrant odor. Abraham, 
filled with a desire to possess the cave, determined 
to buy it at any price. The Jebusites, however, re- 
fused to sell it to him until he had sworn that when 
his descendants conquered the land of Canaan they 
would spare the city of Jebus (Jerusalem). <Abra- 
yam accordingly took the oath, and the Jebusites 
inscribed it on brazen idols which they placed in the 
markets of the city. This was the reason why the 
children of Benjamin did not drive out the inhabit- 
ants of Jebus (Judges i. 21). Abraham secured his 
purchase of the cave of Machpelah by a formal deed 
signed by four witnesses: Amigal, son of Abishua 
the Hittite; Elihoreph, son of Ashunah the Hivite; 
‘Iddon, son of Ahira the Gardite; Akdul, son of 
‘Abudish the Zidonite (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” section 
“Tayye Sarah,” p. 37a, Leghorn, 1870). 

After Isaac’s death, Jacob, desirous of becoming 
sole owner of the cave of Machpelah, acquired Esau’s 
part of it in exchange for all the riches left him by 
his father. This sale was also ratified 
by a document, which Jacob put in 
an earthen vessel to preserve it from 
decay (7b. section “Wayesheb,” p. 
77b). Nevertheless, at the burial of Jacob the 
cave was the subject of a violent dispute between 


Title- 
Deeds. 


Jacob's children and Esau. The latter opposed 
the burial of Jacob in the cave on the ground that 
there was room only for four pairs, and that Jacob, 
by burying Leah, had filled up his part. Naphtali 
returned to Egypt for the title-deed, but meanwhile 
Hushim, the son of Dan, struck Esau on the head 
with a stick so that the latter’s eyes fell on Jacob’s 
knees (Sotah J.c.; comp. “Sefer ha-Yashar,” ¢.c. 
pp. 97a-98a, where it is said that Hushim cut off 
Esau’s head, which was buried on the spot). There 
is another tradition, to the effect that Esau was slain 
by Judah in the cave of Machpelah at Isaac’s burial 
(Midr, Teh. xviii.; Yalk., Gen. 162). 


S. 8, M. SEv. 
MACROCOSM. See Microcosm sanp Macko- 
CcosM. 


MADATI. See MEpIa. 

MADRID: Capital of Spain. Jews lived there 
as early as the twelfth century. By the old munic- 
ipal law (“Fuero de Madrid”) they were given the 
same privileges as the other inhabitants, with the one 
exception that Christian butchers were forbidden to 
sell “carne trefa” (meat which the ritual laws for- 
bid Jews to eat), orany other flesh of animals slaugh- 
tered by Jews, under penalty of a fine of 10 mara- 
vedis or of imprisonment. <A certain Yucaf de Don 
Salomon Aben Cahal (Sahal) in Madrid, in the year 
1336, sold a vineyard belonging to him situated in 
Ensiniella, near Madrid, to Garcia de Canillas; the 
deed, bearing the date of March 21, 1836, signed by 
Leon Cag(Isaac) Caragoci as witness, is printed in the 
“Boletin de la Real Academia de la Historia” (x. 
160). In the years 1343 and 1369 Jews were living 
in villages in the neighborhood of Madrid—Parla, 
Torrejon de Vedasco, Polvoranca, Alcavendas, Bara- 
jas, and Covefia. Undoubtedly they were numeric- 
ally insignificant, for in the year 1474 the taxes of 
the Jews in Madrid, Ciempozuelos, Pinto, Barajas, 
and Torrejon de Vedasco amounted to only 1,200 
maravedis, In the year 1384 the monastery of 5. 
Domingo in Madrid received from King John I. an 
annuity of 3,000 maravedis, payable from the taxes 
of the Jews. 

As was the case with the Jews in the remainder 
of Castile in 1391, of those in Madrid some were 
plundered and murdered and others were forcibly 
baptized. The city council, asin Valencia, demanded 
the punishment of the rioters and their leaders ; some 
were captured, and others, among them Ruy Sanchez 
de Urosco, Lope Fernandez and Diego de Vargas, and 
Ruy Garcia de la Torre, took to flight ; the government 
empowered the council to confiscate the property of 
those found guilty. The destruction of the Jewry 
in Madrid inflicted great loss upon the monastery of 
S. Domingo. The Jewry was situated in the Cuaile 
de la Fé, in the immediate vicinity of Las Damas 
street and next to the 8. Laurencia Church; this 
street contained the synagogue, and until 1492 was 
known as “Synagogue street.” After 1891 the 
Jewry was rebuilt. By an order of Ferdinand and 
Isabella of May 28, 1480, it was surrounded by a 
wall, the gates of which were locked at dusk. 

Several Jewish physicians lived in Madrid. One 
of them, Rabbi Jacob, was privileged (Nov. 9, 1481) 
to live outside the Jewry, so that he might visit his 
patients at night unhindered. As physicians or sur- 


249 





geons there were appointed by the council, in 1481 
and 1489, Don Juda and his son Maestre Zulema 
(Salomon)and Rabbi Jacob (probably the one already 
mentioned) and his son Rabbi Joseph. The Jews 
were compelled to take part in the public church 
festivals. At one of these festivals, held on June 
22 1480, both the Jews and the Moors in Madrid 
were compelled to give an exhibition of the dancing 
peculiar to their respective races. 

Since 1869 Jews have again begun to live in 
Madrid, going there from Tunis, Mogador, Lis- 
bon, Alexandria, and from various cities in France 
and elsewhere —about twenty families in all. 
They have not formed a congregation nor conse- 
crated a cemetery; but they hold services on New- 
Year and on the Day of Atonement in a private 
house. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rios, Hist. i. 195, iii. 568, 591; Fidel Fida, 
Estudios Historicos, v. V7 et seqg.; R. E. J. xiii. 245 et seq. 


bed M. K. 


MAFTIR: 1. The reader of the concluding por- 
tion of the Pentateuchal section on Sabbaths and 
holy days in the synagogue. On regular Sabbaths 
that portion forms a part of the section read by the 
seventh reader, and is repeated by the one appointed 
to read the Haftaral. For special Sabbaths and 
holy days the maftir reads a separate Pentateuchal 
portion bearing on the occasion. Such was the cus- 
tom established by Rashi and his teachers. But the 
general custom of the congregations in France was 
that the maftir on such occasions recited the last 
portion of the regular lesson besides reading the 
special one (Meg. 28a). <All congregations have 
since accepted the decision of Rashi. The maftir is 
not counted in the quorum of readers, which must 
not be less than seven on Sabbaths or than five on 
holy days. Since the maftir repeats but a few sen- 
tences and is not counted in the necessary quorum, 
it was held that he received somewhat less honor than 
the other readers, and therefore he was compensated 
in Talmudic times by being granted the privilege of 
reading the “Shema‘” and the “‘Amidah” on the 
same day (Meg. iv. 6, 24a). 

2. The reader of the Haftarah. He should not 
begin to read the Haftarah unless he has previously 
read a portion of the Torah (Meg. 23a); nor should 
he read the Haftarah until the scroll is rolled up 
(Sotah 39b). The text of the Haftarah must not be 
less than twenty-one verses in the books of the 
Prophets, three verses being thus allowed for each of 
the seven readers of the Torah (Meg. 23a). The bene- 
dictions recited by the maftir (other than the two for 
the reading of the Pentateuchal portion) are five— 
one before and four after the Haftarah; they are 
mentioned in Soferim xiii. 9. The first benediction 
begins with “ Praised be the Lord, . . . who chose 
goodly prophets and approved their words spoken 
in truth”; the end of the second benediction reads, 
“who is faithful iu all His words”; the third ends 
with “who is building Jerusalem”; the fourth with 
“the shield of David”; the fifth with “who sancti- 
fied the Sabbath” (or “the holy days”). Maimonides 
copied the older version reading “building Jerusa- 
lem”; but R. Abraham ben David amends this to 
“who maketh Zion joyful through her children,” 
Which version has since been retained. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| beriag is noted aJso in Yer. Ma‘as 


Machpelah 
Magdala 


The reading of the Haftarah is generally reserved 
for a bar mizwah, or fora bridegroom on the Sab- 
bath before his marriage. On Shebu‘ot, after the 
first benediction and before the Haftarah, the maf- 
tir recites a poem beginning “ Yezib pitgam.” 

3. Sometimes, the usher or sexton whose duty it 
was to watch at the conclusion of the prayer-service 
at the synagogue and to gather and usher in the 
students in the bet ha-midrash. ‘Awira Shammai 
was a maftir for the yeshibah of the “ great teacher” 
(perhaps Judah ha-Nasi I.; Hul. 5la). See Bar 
MizwauH; HarrarsauH; Law, READING FROM THE. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Dembitz, Jewish Services in Synagogue and 

Homie, pp. 264, 276. 

A J. D. E. 


MAGAZIN FUR DIE WISSENSCHAFT 
DES JUDENTHUMS: Journal founded by Dr. 
Abrauam Berliner Jan. 1, 1874. It appeared first 
as a bimonthly, in quarto form, under the title 
“Magazin fiir Jiidische Geschichte und Literatur,” 
and contained a series of articles by Berliner on He- 
brew manuscripts in the Italian libraries, besides 
studies in the history of Jewish culture, criticisms 
of new publications, extracts from midrashim, ete. 
Many of the most prominent Jewish scholars were 
contributors, and the success of the magazine justi- 
fied Berliner in enlarging its scope. With its third 
volume (1876) it was changed to an octavo quarterly 
in order that lengthier and more strictly scientific 
articles (exegetical, philological, historical) might 
be admitted, its title became “ Magazin fir die Wis- 
senschaft des Judenthums,” a special Hebrew sup- 
plement (“‘Ozar Tob”) was added to contain prin- 
cipally material from unpublished Hebrew manu- 
scripts, and Dr. David Hoffmann became associated 
in the editorship, The excellence of the contribu- 
tions, including many by the editors and by such 
scholars as Steinschneider, D. Kaufmann, D. Oppen- 
heim, M. Wolff, Harkavy, A. Epstein, and Bacher, 
was maintained for twenty years, when pressure of 
other duties compelled the editors to suspend pub- 
lication (1898). 

J. W. P. 

MAGDALA: Town in Palestinein the province 
of Galilee; probably the birthplace of Mary Magda- 
lene. There isa Talmudic sentence which declares 
that Magdala was destroyed (by the Romans) on ac- 
count of its immorality (Lam. R. ii. 2). Jesus once 
went to Magdala by ship on the Sea of Gennesaret 
(Matt. xv. 39; even if the reading Mayadav [= Maya- 
daa] be accepted in place of Mayda/4, it must be in- 
ferred that Magdala is meant). Because he made 
the journey by boat some have held that the town 
was on the eastern shore of the sea; such a conclu- 
sion is not necessary, however, and Magdala was 
more probably on the western shore, perhaps the 
present Al-majdal, a smal! village an hour and a 
quarter north of Tiberias. 

Rabbinical accounts are clear only in indicating 
Magdala as situated near Tiberias. In Tosef., ‘Er. 
vi. 18 (ed. Zuckermandel, p. 145; comp. Yer. ‘Er. 
v. 22d, where the description is more detailed and 
accurate), it is true, Tiberias is placed near Gadara 
also, which latter place is known to have been situ- 
ated east of the Jordan. But the proximity to Ti- 
iii. 50c; and 


Magdeburg 
Magen Dawid 


Simeon ben Lakish, who had a quarrel with the 
patriarch, fled to Magdala from the neighboring 
Tiberias (Yer. Sanh. ii. 19d; Hor. iit. 47a). There 
were in Magdala a seminary or a synagogue, and a 
school for children (Eccl. R. x. 8). In several pas- 
sages inthe Talmud and Midrash “ Magdala ” occurs 
as a variant of “Migdal Zabba‘aya” (tower of the 
dyers). Neubauer is consequently of the opinion 
that the latter as well as other names compounded 
with “Migdal” refers to a quarter in the town of 
Magdala; but this is not the case. Only so much is 
certain, that a few teachers of the Law were born in 
Magdala—e.g., R. Isaac (B. M. 25a) and Yudan (Yer. 
Ber. ix. 14a; Ta‘an. i. 64b). In the Talmud besides 
the usual Aramaic name “Magdala” the Hebrew 
form “ Migdol” occasionally occurs (¢.g., Tosef. ‘Er. 
vi. 18). This is without significance, however, as 
is shown by the fact that the Biblical “Migdol” is 
regularly rendered by the Septuagint as Mdydwso¢ 
(e.g., in Num. xxxiti. 7), 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Winer, B. R.; Neubauer, G. T. p. 217; Light- 

foot, Hore Hebraic, p. 136. 

G. S. Kr. 

MAGDEBURG: Capital of the Prussian prov- 
ince of Saxony; situated on the Elbe. It hasa pop- 
ulation of 229,683, of whom. about 2,000 are Jews. 
There were Jews at Magdeburg as early as the tenth 
century. The district occupied by them lay with- 
out the city and was called “Judendorf zu Magde- 
burg” (Hagedorn, in “Geschichtsblatter fir Stadt 
und Land Magdeburg,” xx. 93). Politically as well 

as geographically they belonged to 
Under the thearchbishopric of Magdeburg rather 
Arch- than tothe town; probably they never 
bishop. lived within the city itself. The first 
inflow of Jews to Magdeburg is sup- 
posed to have been from the Rhine district, but the 
date when this took place isunknown. The earliest 
mention of them there occurs in a document of Otto 
the Great, dated July 9, 965, in which the “Jews 
and other traders” living in the city are placed under 
the exclusive control and jurisdiction of the Arch- 
bishop of Magdeburg (Aronius, “Regesten zur 
Gesch. der Judenin Deutschland,” p. 55). The way 
in which Jews are described in this and in a similar 
document of Otto II. dated June 4, 973 (Aronius, 
.c. p. 56), justifies the infcrence that even at that 
period they formed a community of fair size and 
were of such Importance commercially that they 
contributed materially to the prosperity of Magde- 
burg. If Westberg’s view is correct that the word 
“Maznbrgh,” found in an Arabic source, is a cor- 
ruption of “Magdeburg,” it was there that the 
Judeo-Arabic traveler IBRAHIM IBN YA‘KUB “the 
Israelite ” appeared in 965 at the court of Otto the 
Great, perhaps as a member of an embassy from 
Cordova, and obtained from the emperor valuable 
information concerning the Slavs, which he used in 
the account of his travels, written in Arabic. 

The history of the Jews in Magdeburg in the suc- 
ceeding centuries resembles in all respects the rec- 
ord of other Jewish communities in Germany during 
the Middle Ages. It may be inferred that they 
were prosperous from the fact that many Jews of 
Magdeburg accompanied the funeral procession of 
Archbishop Walthard in 1012 and manifested their 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


250 


grief in lamentations (see Aronius, /.c. p. 61). On 
the other hand, the First Crusade (1096) is said to 
have caused the expulsion of the Jews 
Early Mid- from the Judendorf (Aronius, é.c. p. 
dle Ages. 93; comp. p. 111). In a communi- 
cation from Pope Innocent IIT. to the 
clergy of the archbishopric of Magdeburg, dated 
Dee. 31, 1199, in which they are urged to come to the 
assistance of the Christians in the Orient, there is 
the provision that the secular arm shall compel the 
Jews to release their Christian debtors from paying 
interest and that, until they shall have done so, they 
shall not be permitted to have any intercourse with 
Christians (Aronius, J.c. p. 155). How far this reg- 
ulation was observed is unknown. Archbishop 
Albrecht of Magdeburg, although friendly to the 
Jews, could not prevent the destruction of the Ju- 
dendorf in 1213 by the troops of Otto IV. (A. Levy, 
“Gesch. der Juden in Sachsen,” p. 8, Berlin, 1900). 
In 1261, on the Feast of Tabernacles of that year, 
when Jews from other cities were in 
Judendorf the Judendorf, Archbishop Robert, 
Destroyed finding it necessary to refili his empty 
12138. — coffers, seized their money and valu- 
ables, and held the richest of them 
for high ransoms. He seems to have done the same 
at Halle; no less than 100,000 silver marks are said 
to have been extorted from the Jews of the two 
cities (Aronius, J.c. p. 281; M. Spanier, “Zur Gesch. 
der Juden in Magdeburg,” in “Zeitschrift fiir die 
Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland,” v. 273). His 
successor as archbishop, Conrad of Sternberg, was 
unfriendly to the Jews on religious grounds. 

The religious fanaticism awakened by the Cru- 
sades and the desire of the cities for independence 
found vent at this time in wholesale persecutions 
of the Jews. When in 1301 a Christian girl from 
the Judendorf circulated the rumor that the Jews 
had nailed an image of Jesus to a cross, recrucify- 
ing him in effigy, the citizens fell upon the ghetto, 
plundered it, and killed some Jews and drove 

Othersaway. A documentof 1312 has 

Persecu- been preserved, according to which the 
tions, 1301 Jews bought four fields for the exten- 
and 1348. sion of their cemetery. At the time 

of the Black Death (1848) the citizens 
and peasants of the vicinity again fell upon the 
Judendorf, pillaged it, and burned many Jews in 
their houses. This time, however, Archbishop Otto 
and the magistrate Von Vorn took the Jews under 
their protection, so that the uprising gained little 
headway, although during it the rabbi of the commu- 
nity, Rabbi Shalom, died the death of a martyr (see 
Salfeld, “ Martyrologium,” p. 247; comp. p. 284). 
A tombstone in the old Jewish cemetery also names 
a martyr, Samuel, of the year 1356. Between 1361 
and 1367 Archbishop Dietrich employed a Jewish 
court banker, Schmoll or Shemuel. In 1885, ac- 
cording to a document, the cemetery was again en- 
larged. This fact, together with the names men- 
tioned in this record, justifies the conclusion that the 
community was growing considerably at that time 
through additions from other cities. 

In 1410 Archbishop Giinther issued a patent to the 
Jews of Magdeburg, assuring them of his protection 
for six years, in return for which they were to pay 


251 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Magdeburg | 
Magen Dawid 





a tax of 40 silver marks in half-yearly payments. 
This patent, however, which contains benevolent 
provisions regarding the legal status of the Jewish 
community, was not meant seriously, for in the fol- 
lowing year Giinther would have extorted money 
from the Judendorf had not the citizens of Magde- 
burg frustrated his design lest they should lose the 
securities they had deposited with the Jews. When 
Ernst von Sachsen entered the city as archbishop in 
the year 1476, the Jews also did homage to him; 
but in 1492 the archbishop, yielding to the inflamed 
passions of the citizens and the clergy, decreed the 

banishment of the Jews from Magde- 

Banished burg on account of an unimportant 

1492. altercation between two Jews and two 
monks. The edict was enforced nine 
months later after the council of Sudenburg had 
paid the Jews the equivalent of their houses and 
goods. More than 1,400 emigrated. The syna- 
gogue of the Judendorf was turned into a chapel in 
honor of the Virgin Mary and named “ Marienka- 
pelle,” and the name “ Judendorf” was changed to 
“Mariendorf” (see H. A. Erhard, “Das Judendorf 
bei Magdeburg und der Erzbischof Ernst zu Magde- 
burg, Judenverfolgung im Jahre 1493,” in Lede- 
bur’s “ Archiv fir die Geschichtskunde des Preussi- 
schen Staates,” 1880, i. 318). 

Of the internal life of the community up to the 
time of its banishment very little is known. It 
submitted religious questions to Meir Rothenburg 
(d. 1298; Responsa, No. 32, ed. Cremona, 1557) and 
to various French scholars. At the time of Isaac 
ben Moses of Vienna (1200-70) there lived in Mag- 
deburg a Rabbi Hezekiah ben Jacob, with whom 
the former was in correspondence (Steinschneider, 
“Hebr. Bibl.” viii. 2). In the fifteenth century Ja- 
cob Molin mentions a scholar, Rabbi Isaac, of Magde- 
burg (“Minhagim,” Hilkot Hanukkah). At that 
time the community seems to have been active and 
flourishing and to have had a yeshibah which was 
attended also by students from other places, who 
were assured of safe-couduct by a patent of protec- 
tion issued in 1410. 

After the banishment, (1493) no Jew was allowed 
the right to settle in Magdeburg, whose magistrate, 

in a letter to the king dated Sept. 14, 
Permission 1711, speaks of that right as “a high 
to Return. royal favor.” It was not until 1720 

that a Jew, Gumpert by name, ob- 
tained permission to reside in the Altstadt of Magde- 
burg, and up to 1806 only one protected Jew at a 
time enjoyed this privilege. If Jews attempted to 
remain in the Neustadt, the council of the city was 
soon forced to expel them, as is seen from the case 
of Lewin Bauer (see M. Spanier, l.c. pp. 892 ef seq.). 

The present community did not come into exist- 
ence until the third decade of the nineteenth century. 
Its first preacher, who was also the principal of the 
newly founded religious school of the community 
(the first of its kind in North Germany), was 
Ludwig PHILippson, who was rabbi from 1833 
to 1862 (Kayserling, “Ludwig Philippson,” pp. 47 
et sey., Leipsic, 1898). Philippson, in his reminis- 
cences, speaks of an old rabbi named Salme, to whom 
he was for a time assistant. Philippson was suc- 
ceeded as rabbi by M. GUDEMANN (1862-66) and 


M. RauMer (1869-1904), A new synagogue was 
built in the city of Magdeburg in the years 1850- 
51. The community has a burial association, 
institutions for the support of invalids, widows, 
and orphans, various other benevolent founda- 
tions, a Jewish women’s society, and a society 
for Jewish history and literature. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Glidemann, Zur Gesch. der Juden in Mag- 
deburg, Breslau, 1866 (= Monatsschrift, xiv. 241 et seq: 
Statistisches Jahrbuch des Deutsch-Israelitischen Gemein- 
debundes, 1908, p. 46. 

D. M. Sc. 
MAGDEBURG LAW (MAGDEBURG 

RIGHTS): General name for a system of privi- 

leges “securing the administrative independence of 

municipalitics,” which was adopted in many parts 
of Germany, Poland, and Bohemia (“ Eneyc. Brit.”). 

Usually it was introduced into the Slavic countries at 

the instance and for the benefit of the German mer- 

chants and artisans, who formed the most important 
part of the population of many cities. Jews and 

Germans were always competitors in those cities, 

and as the Jews lived under special privileges and 

were not considered a part of the native population, 
not only were they excluded from participating in the 
benefits of the Magdeburg law, but their condition 
usually was rendered worse wherever it was in- 
troduced. In Wilna, where the Magdeburg law was 
granted to the municipality as early as the four- 
teenth century, the Jews were expressly excluded 
from its benefits, but in the near-by city of Troki the 

Jewish community secured from Grand Duke Casi- 

mir Jagellon the Magdeburg rights for itself, and in- 

dependently of the Christian community, which had 
received the same rights earlier. This grant, dated 

March 27, 1444, gave the Jews of Troki equal rights 

with their Christian neighbors (see LiTHuANta). 
One of the most interesting provisions of the Mag- 

deburg law relating to Jews was that a Jew could 
not be made “Gewaersmann,” that is, he could not 
be compelled to tell from whom he acquired any 
object which had been sold or pledged to him and 
which was found in his possession. This actually 
amounted to permission to buy stolen property. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bershadski, Litouvskie Yevrei. pp. 221, 234, 241 
et seg.; Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, p. 6, Wilna, 1860. 


H. R. P. Wr. 


MAGEN DAWID (‘“David’s shield”): The 
hexagram formed by the combination of two equi- 
lateral triangles; used as the symbol of Juda- 
ism. Jt is placed upon synagogues, sacred vessels, 
and the like, and was adopted as a device by the 
American Jewish Publication Society in 1878 (see 
illustration, JEw. Encyc. i. 520), the Zionist Con- 
gress of Basel (7d. ii. 570)—hence by “Die Welt” 
(Vienna), the official organ of Zionism—and by other 
bodies. The hebra kaddisha of the Jewish com- 
munity of Johannesburg, South Africa, calls itself 
“Hebra Kaddisha zum Rothen Magen David,” fol- 
lowing the designation of the “red cross” societies. 

The Jewish view of God, which permitted no 
images of Him, was and still is opposed to the ac- 
ceptance of any symbols, and neither the Bible nor 
the Talmud recognizes their existence. It is note- 
worthy, moreover, that the shield of David is not 
mentioned in rabbinical literature. The “Magen 
Dawid,” therefore, probably did not originate within 


Magen 
Magzid 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


252 





Rabbinism, the official and dominant Judaism for 
more than 2,000 years. Nevertheless, a David's 
shield has recently been noted on a Jewish tomb- 
stone at Tarentum, in southern Italy, which may 
date as early as the third century of the common 


pat. 
ihe [a0 x 8) 





A * Magen Dawid” from a ** Mizrah.” 


era (see Herbert M. Adler in “J. Q. R.” xiv. 111). 
The earliest Jewish literary source which mentions 

, the “Eshkol ha-Kofer” of the Karaite Judah 
Hadassi (middle of the 12th cent.), says, in ch. 242: 
“Seven names of angels precede the mezuzalh: 
Michael, Gabriel, etc. . . . Tetragrammaton protect 
thee! And likewise the sign called ‘ David’s shield ’ 


is placed beside the name of each angel.” It was, 
therefore, at this time a sign on amulets. 
In the magic papyri of antiquity, pentagrams, 


together with stars and other signs, are frequently 
found on amulets bearing the Jewish 
names of God—“ Sabaoth,” “ Adonai,” 
“Eloai”—and used to guard against 
fever and other diseases (Wessely, 
“Nene Zauberpapyrni,” pp. 68, 70, and note). Curi- 
ously enough, only the pentacle appears, not the hex- 
agram, In the great magic papyrus at Paris and 
London there are twenty-two signs side by side, and 
acircle with twelve signs, but neither a pentacle nora 
hexagram (Wessely, /.c. pp. 31, 112), although there 
is a triangle, perhaps in place of the latter. In the 
many illustrations of amulets given by Budge in his 
“Egyptian Magic” (London, 1899) not a single pen- 
tacle or hexagram appears. The syncretism of 
Hellenistic, Jewish, and Coptic influences did not, 
therefore, originate the symbol. It is probable that 
it was the Cabala that derived the symbol from the 
Templars (see Vajdain “Magyar Zsidé Szemle,” 
xvii. 314 ef seg.; German reprint in Grunwald’s 
“Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft ftir Jiidische Volks- 
kunde,” x. 188 e¢ seg.). The Cabala,in fact, makes 
use of this sign, arranging the Ten Setirot, or 
spheres, in it, and placing it on amulets (sce illus- 
trations, Jew. Excyc. i. 181, 550; tii. 475). 

The pentagram, called Solomon’s seal, is also 
used as a talisman, and Henry thinks that the Hin- 


Magic 
Papyri. 


dus derived it fromthe Semites (“ Magie dans I’ Inde 


Antique,” p. 98, Paris, 1904), although the name by 
no means proves the Jewish or Semitic 

Solomon’s origin of the sign, The Hindus like- 
Seal. wise employed the hexagram as a 


means of protection, and as such it 
is mentioned in the earliest source, quoted above, 
In the synagogues, perhaps, it took the place of the 
mezuzah, and the name “shield of David” may 
have been given it in virtue of its protective pow- 
ers. The hexagram may have beeu employed origi- 
nally also as an architectural ornament on syn- 
agogues, as it is, for example, on the cathedrals of 
Brandenburg and Stendal, and on the Marktkirche at 
Hanover, A pentacle in this form, ¥, is found on the 
ancient synagogue at Tell Hum. Charles IV. pre- 
scribed for the Jews of Prague, in 1854, a red flag 
with both David's shield and Solomon’s sea), 
while the red flag with which the Jews met King 
Matthias of Hungary in the fifteenth century showed 
two pentacles with two golden stars (Schwandtner, 
“Scriptores Rerum Hungaricarum,” ii. 148). The 
pentacle, therefore, may also have been used among 
the Jews. It occurs in a manuscript as early as the 
year 1078 (facsimile in M. Friedinann, “Seder Eliyahu 
Rabbah we-Seder Eliyahu Zuta,” Vienna, 1901). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Grunwald, Jahrb. flir Jiidische Gesch. 
und Literatur, vol. iv., Berlin, 1901; Witteilungen der 
Gesellschaft fiir Jildische Volkskunde, x. 137-140, Hamburg, 
902; B. Vajda, Zur Gesch. des Davidsschildes, in Magyar 
Zsidé Szemle, 1900, xvii. 310-322 ; Zunz, Ritus, p. 149 (the 
6ith Psalm on David's shield in the form of the menorah); D. 
Mayer, Der Aberglaube des Mittelatters, p. 25%, ao ie 
J. “ D. 


MAGGID. See CaBALa. 


MAGGID: Itinerant preacher, skilled as a nar- 
rator of stories. A preacher of the more scholarly 
sort was called “darshan” and usually occupied the 
official position of rabbi. The title of “maggid 
mesharim ” (= “a preacher of uprightness”; ab- 
breviated O°») probably dates from the sixteenth 
century. There always have been two distinct 
classes of leaders in Israel—the scholar and rabbi, 
and the preacher or maggid. That the popular 
prophet was sometimes called “maggid” is main- 
tained by those who translate “maggid mishneh” 
Zech. ix. 12, by “the maggid repeats” (Lowy, 
“ Bekoret ha-Talmud,” p. 50). Like the Greek soph- 
ists, the early maggidini based their preaching on 
questions addressed to them by the multitude. Thus 
the Pesikta, the first collection of set speeches, usually 
begins with “yelammedenu rabbenu” (= “let our 
master teach us”), An excellent exampleis the 
Passover Haggadah, which is introduced by four 
questions; the reciter of the answer is called 
“maggid.” Whenthere were no questions the mag- 
gid chose a Biblical text, which was called the 
“petihah ” (opening). 

The greater popularity of the maggid as com pared 
with the darshan is instapced by the fact that the 

people left the lecture-room of R. 
Popularity Hiyya, the darshan, and flocked to 
of the hear R. Abbahu, the maggid. Toap- 

Maggid. pease the sensitive Hiyya, Abbahu 

modestly declared, “ We are like two 
merchants, one selling diamonds and the other selling 
trinkets, which are more in demand” (Sotah 40a). 


2538 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Magen 
Maggid 





Talmudists like R. Meir combined the functions of 
a darshan and a maggid (Sanh. 88b). When R. 
Isaac Nappaha was requested by one in his audience 
to preach a popular haggadah, and by another a 
halakie discourse, he answered, “Iam like the man 
who had two wives, one young and one old, and 
each wishing her husband to resemble her in ap- 
pearance: the younger pulled out his gray hair 
while the older pulled out his black hair, with the 
result that he became entirely bald.” R. Isaac 
thereupon delivered a lecture that embraced both 
halakah and haggadah (B. K. 60b). 

Levi ben Sisi, his son Joshua, and others were at 
the head of aregularschool of rabbinical maggidim. 
Rh. Ze‘era was opposed to their methods of twisting 
and distorting the Biblical verses to suit their mo- 
mentary fancy. In Ze‘era’s estimation their works 
were of no more value than books on magic (Yer. 
Ma‘as. iii. 9). In the geonic period and in the Mid- 
tile Ages the principal of the yeshibah, or the rabbi, 
delivered a lecture before each festival, giving in- 

structions in the laws governing the 
In Geonic days of the festival, The maggid’s 
Times. function was to preach to the common 
people in the vernacular whenever 
occasion required, usually on Sabbath afternoon, 
basing his sermon on the sidra of the week. The 
wandering, or traveling, maggid then began to ap- 
pear, and subsequently became a power in Jewry. 
His mission was to preach morality, to awaken the 
dormant spirit of Judaism, and to keep alive the Mes- 
sianic hope in the hearts of the people. The mag- 
gidim’s deliverances were generally lacking in liter- 
ary merit, and were composed largely of current 
phrases, old quotations, and Biblical interpretations 
which were designed merely for temporary effect; 
therefore none of the sermons which were delivered 
by them have been preserved. 

Maggidism reached a period of high literary activ- 
ity in the sixteenth century. The expulsion of the 
Jews from Spain in 1492 revealed a master mag- 
gid in Isaac ABRAVANEL, His homiletic commen- 
tary on the Bible became an inexhaustible source of 
suggestion for future maggidim. In his method of 
explaining every chapter, preceded by a number of 
questions, he followed the early maggidim and 
sophists. His long argumentations in an easy and 
fluent style were admirably suited to the purposes of 
amaggid. Moses ALSHECH, a maggid in Safed, 
Palestine, preached every Sabbath before large audi- 
ences. In his commentaries he followed closely the 
method of Abravanel. Alshech also became an au- 
thority for the maggidim, who quoted him fre- 
quently. 

The persecutions of the Jews brought forth a 
number of maggidim who endeavored to excite the 

Messianic hope as a balm to the troub- 

Relation to led and oppressed Jewry. Asher 
Messian- LEMMLEIN preached in Germany and 
ism. Austria, announcing the coming of the 
Messiah in 1502,and found credence 

everywhere. Solomon Mouko preached, without de- 
claring the date of the advent, in both Italy and Tur- 
key. and asaresult was bummed at the stake in Mantua 
in 1583. R. Héschel of Cracow (d. 1663) delighted 
in the elucidation of difficult passages in the mid- 


rash known as the “Midrash Peli’ah” (= “ wonder- 
ful” or “obscure” midrash). H. Ersohn’s biogra- 
phy of Hoschel, in his “ Hanukkat ha-Torah ” (Pie- 
trkov, 1900), gives a collection of 227 “sayings ” 
gathered from 227 books by various writers, mostly 
Héschel’s pupils. These sayings became current 
among the maggidim, who repeated them on every 
occasion. Some maggidim copied his methods and 
eveu created a pseudo-Midrash Peli’ah for the pur- 
pose of explaining the original ingeniously in the 
manner initiated by R. Héschel. 

Elijah b. Solomon Abraham of Smyrna, in the 
beginning of the eighteenth century, published his 
“Shebet Musar,” which he divided into fifty-two 
chapters, one for each week. This book caused 

him to be knownas the “ Terror Mag- 
The ‘‘ Shebet gid”; he preached moral and relig- 
Musar.” ious conduct as a safeguard against 
the terrible punishments of the day 
of judgment. Dante could not picture the horrors of 
hell and the punishments awaiting the wicked more 
minutely than did the author of the “Shebet Musar.” 
It established a new “fire and brimstone” school of 
maggidim. Judah Rosanes of Constantinople (d. 
1727), in his “Parashat Derakim,” combined the 
darshan with the maggid. He adopted a new 
method of harmonizing the acts of Biblical person- 
ages with the legal views of Talmudic scholars. 
For instance, Pharaoh, in refusing to release Israel 
from bondage, acted according to the contention of 
Abaye, while Moses insisted on Israel’s release in 
accordance with the decision of Rabba. This far- 
fetched pilpulism had many followers, some of 
whom asserted that Ahasuerus concurred in the 
decision of Maimonides, and that Vashti coincided 
with the opinion of RaBaD. 

Jacob Kranz of Dubno, the “ Dubner Maggid ” (d. 
1804), author of “ Ohel Ya‘akob,” adopted the Mid- 
rash’s method of explaining by parables and the in- 
cidents of daily life, such as the relations between 
the man of the city and the “yeshubnik ” (village 

man), between the bride, the bride- 

The groom, and the “mehuttanim” (con- 
‘*Dubner tracting parents), and compared their 
Maggid.” relations to those between Israel and 
YuHwH or between the Gentiles and 

the Jews. He drew also moral lessons from the “ Ara- 
bian Nights” and from other secular stories in illus- 
trating explanations of a midrash or a Biblical text. 


Moses Mendelssohn named Kranz the “Jewish 
fesop.” Kranz’s pupil Abraham Biir Plahm and a 


host of other maggidim adopted this method. In the 
same period there were Jacob Israel of Kremnitz, 
author of “Shebet mi- Yisrael,” a commentary on 
the Psalms (Zolkiev, 1772); Judah Low Edel of 
Slonim, author of “ Afike Yehudah,” sermons (Lem- 
berg, 1802); Hayyim Abraham Katz of Moghilef, 
author of “ Milhamak be-Shalom” (Shklov, 1797); 
Ezekiel Feiwel of Deretschin, author of “Toledot 
Adam” (Dyhernfurth, 1809) and maggid in Wilna 
(Levinsohn, “Bet Yehudah,” ii. 149). 

The most celebrated maggid during the nine- 
teenth century was Moses Isaac ben Noah Darshan. 
the “Kelmer Maggid” (b. 1828; d. 1900, in Lida). 
He was among the “terror” maggidim of the 
“Shebet Musar” school and preached to crowded 


Maggid 
Magic 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


254 





synagogues for over fifty years in almost every 

city of Russian Poland. Another prominent mag- 

gid was Hayyim Zedek, known as the “Rum- 
sheshker” (Gersoni, “Sketches of Jewish Life 
and History,” pp. 62-74, New York, 1873). The 

“philosophical” maggid is one who 

Philo- preaches from Arama’s “Akedat” 

sophical and Bahya’s “Hobot ha-Lebabot.” 

Maggidim. Enoch Sund!] Luria, the author of 

“Kenaf Renanim,” on “Pirke Shi- 
rah” (KKrotoschin, 1842), was a noted philosophical 
maggid. 

Meir Leibush Malbim (d. 1880), in his voluminous 
commentaries on the Bible, followed to some extent 
Abravanel and Alshech, and his conclusions are 
pointed and logical. Malbim’s commentaries are 
considered to offer the best material for the use 
of maggidim. 

From the “terror,” or “ Musar,” maggid developed 
the “penitential” maggid, who, especially during 
the month of Elul and the ten days of penitence be- 
tween New-Year’s Day and Yom Kippur, urged 
the wicked to repent of their sins and seek God’s for- 
giveness. Jacob Joseph, chief rabbi of the Russian 
Jews in New York (d. 1902), formerly maggid of 
Wilna, was one of these. In the middle of his 
preaching he would pause to recite with the people 
the “Shema’‘,” the “ Kolenu,” and the “ Ashamnu,” 
raising the audience to a high pitch of religious 
emotion. The maggid usually ends his preaching 
with the words, “u-ba le-Ziyyon goel,” etc. (a re- 
deemer shall come to Zion speedily in our days; let 
us say “Amen”). Some of the wandering maggidim 
act also as meshullahim. The yeshibot in Russia 
and the charitable institutions of Jerusalem, espe- 
cially the Wa‘ad ha-Kelali, send abroad meshul- 
lah-maggidim. The resident maggid who preaches 
at different synagogues in one city is called the 
“Stadt Maggid,” asin Wilna and other large cities 
in Russia. The modern, or “maski],” maggid is 
called “ Volksredner” (people’s orator), and closely 
follows the German “Prediger” in his method of 
preaching, Zebi Hirsch Dainow (d. 1877) was the 
first of the modern type of maggid, which soon de- 
veloped into that of the “national,” or “ Zionistic,” 
maggid. Hirsch Masliansky and Joseph Zeff, both 
of New York, are representatives of the latter class. 
See HoMILETICSs. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Deutsch, The Decline of the Pulpit, in 
American Hebrew, 1899, No.17; Dor Dor u-Darshanim, in 
Ha-Yom, 1887, No. 213. 

J. J. D. E. 


MAGGID (STEINSCHNEIDER), HILLEL 
NOAH: Russian genealogist and historian; a de- 
scendant of the family of Saul Wahl; born at Wilna 
1829; died there Oct. 29, 1908. His father was a 
bibliographer, and his grandfather Phinehas was 
rabbi at Polotsk and Wilpa, the emissary of Elijah 
of Wilna in his struggle with the Hasidim, and the 
author of nine exegctical works. Having lost his 
father at the age of eighteen, Maggid learned the 
calling of a lapidary, but not content with cutting 
epitaphs on tombstones and monuments, he occa- 
sionally composed inscriptions. He early joined the 
Progressionists of Wilna, among whom were Fuenn, 
Lebensohn, and M.A. Ginzburg. He indulged his 


taste for general literature and published various 
articles and bibliographical papers in the current 
Hebrew periodicals. Among these may be noted 
his biography of David Oppenheim, rabbi of Prague 
(in “Gan Perahim,” 1882), and his notes on the his- 
tory of the Jewish community of Lemberg (in “ Anshe 
Shem,” 1895). Maggid also collaborated with Fuenn 
in the latter’s history of the Jewish community of 
Wilna (“ Kiryah Ne’emanah”). Maggid’s most im- 
portant work was “Ir Wilna,” the first volume of 
which appeared in Wilna in 1900; it contains the 
biographies of more than three hundred prominent 
rabbis, preachers, and communal workers. The 
notes alone, referring to genealogical literature, 
show that the author was familiar with responsa 
literature as well as with general rabbinical and 
historical works in Hebrew literature. Maggid left 
in manuscript two other volumes, containing biog- 
raphies of the important scholars and communal 
workers of Wilna in more recent times. The third 
volume contains also new material for the history of 
the Jewsin Wilna and Lithuania, and includes numer- 
ous documents hitherto unpublished. A sketch of 
his life was written by Ben ‘Ammi in his “ Ocherkio 
Litvye” (in “Voskhod”), Maggid’s son is David 
Maggid of St. Petersburg, author of ‘“Toledot 
Mishpat,” Ginzburg. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Halpern, in Sbornik Budushehnost, iv. 249, 

St. Petersburg, 1904; Voskhod, Nov., 190 

H. R. J. G. L. 


MAGGID MISHNEH. See PERIODICALS, 


MAGHARIYYAH, AL-: Arabic name of a 
Jewish sect, meaning “ Men ofthe Caves.” According 
to the account given by Joseph al-Kirkisani this sect 
was founded in the first century before the common 
era and derived its designation from the fact that it 
kept its books in caves. Except the writings of one 
named “the Alexandrinian,” and a later work enti- 
tled “Sefer Yadua‘,” these books, he says, were of 
little value. The sect reckoned the months from 
the appearance of the new moon and prohibited 
games of every kind. It possessed strange commen- 
taries on the Bible, and, contrary to the Sadducees, 
it was opposed to all anthropomorphisms. Believ- 
ing God to be too sublime to mingle with matter, 
the sect rejected the idea that the world was created 
directly by Him, and invented an intermediary 
power. This power was an angel who produced 
the world, in which he is God’s representative. The 
Law and all communications to prophets proceeded 
from this angel, to whom are referable all the an- 
thropomorphic expressions concerning God found in 
the Bible. 

This account of the tenets of the Maghariyyah 
agrees with that of the Jewish sect erroneously 
called by Shahrastani “ Al-Mukaribah,” and coupled 
by him with that of the Yudghanites founded in the 
cighth century (“Kitab al-Milal wal-Nuhal,” ed. 
Cureton, p. 168). This confusion of names and 
dates led to the erroneous ascription of its foundation 
to Benjamin ben Moses al-Nahawendi, who was in- 
fluenced by the writings of the Maghariyyah (some 
of them were still extant at the time of David ben 
Merwan al-Mukammaz), as, according to Kirkisani, 
was also Arius, the founder of the Christian sect of 
the Arians. 


- 


255 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


7 


Mageid 
Magic 





Harkavy identifies the Maghariyyah with the Es- 
senes. The reasons given by him for this identifi- 
cation are: (1) the name of the sect, which, accord- 
ing to him, does not refer to its books, but to its 
followers, who lived in caves or in the desert, this 
being known to have been the Essene mode of life; 
(2) the coincidence in the date of its foundation with 
that of the Essenes; (8) the theory of the angel, 
which is in keeping with the tenets of the Essenes; 
(4) Kirkisani’s omission of the Essenes from his list 
of the Jewish sects, which omission would be unac- 
countable had he not considered the Maghariyyah to 
be identicai with the Essenes. [arkavy goes still 
further and identifies the “ Alexandrinian ” author 
with Philo, whose sympathies with the Essenes are 
well known, and sees in the theory of the angela 
perfect analogy to Philo’s “ Logos.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jellinek, in Orient, Lit. xii. 410; Gratz, Gesch. 
vi. 1923; Gottlober, Likkoret le-Toledat ha-Kera im, p. 100; 
Harkavy, Le-Korot ha-Kittot be-Yisrael, in the Hebrew 
transl. of Gritz’s Gescl. (iii. 496). 

a I. Br. 


MAGI. See BABYLONIA. 

MAGIC (n°5v3): The pretended art of producing 
preternatural effects; one of the two principal divi- 
sions of occultism, the other being Divination. The 
effects produced may be either physical (as a storm 
or death under conditions insufficient to explain its 
occurrence, or any phenomenon impossible in the or- 
dinary course of nature) or mental. and the latter 
either intellectual (as preternatural insight or knowl- 
edge) or emotional (as love or hate arising or disap- 
pearing in obedience to the arbitrary will of the magi- 
cian), The methods of producing these effects include 
on the one hand actions of various sorts, and on the 
other incantations, invocations, and the recitation 
of formulas. Evenin the Talmud the act and the 
results produced by it are regarded as the criteria 
of magic, and these two factors appear in all forms 
of witchcraft as essential characteristics. Closely 
connected with magic are SUPERSTITION and DE- 
MONOLOGY. In so far as gods are invoked (demons 
frequently being degraded gods), magic is akin to 
idolatry, and, in a certain sense, to ASTROLOGY. 

Jewish magic is mentioned as early as Deut. xviii. 
10-11, where various classes of diviners, astrologers, 
and exorcists are named, their cere- 
monies being forbidden as idolatrous 
(comp. II Kings xxi. 6; IL Chron. 
xxxiil. 6). Nor is there any doubt 
expressed as to the actual potency of magic, and the 
magician, who may misuse it, is accordingly feared 
and abhorred (Micah v. 11 [A. V. 12]; Jer. xxvii, 
9; Ex. xxii. 17-23; ef al.). The commonest form of 
magic was the love-charm, especially the love- 
charm required for an illicit amour. Such magic 
was practised especially by women, so that magic 
and adultery frequently are mentioned together (II 
Kings ix. 22; Nah. ili.4; Mal. iii. 5). The law (Ex. 
xxii. 17 [A. V. 18]) which punishes sorcery with 
death speaks of the witch and not of the wizard. 
This was correctly interpreted by the Talmud (Sanh. 
67a) as implying that magic was practised chiefly 
by women, and the context of the passages in Exo- 
dus which mention sorcery clearly shows that it was 
associated with sexual license and unnatural vices 
(Blau, “Das Altjiidische Zauberwesen,” pp. 17-18, 


In the 
Bible. 


Strasburg, 1898; see WrrcncraFt). The frequency 
of allusions to it in the Bible indicates that the prac- 
tise of magic was common throughout ancient Israel. 
More abundant information is found in post-Bib- 
lical literature, especially in the Babylonian Talmud, 
where the great number of the pas- 
In Tal- sages alluding to magic furnishes in- 
mudic Lit- controvertible evidence of its wide 
erature. diffusion. It was, however, only the 
practise of witcheraft which was pro- 
hibited, for a knowledge of magic was indispensable 
to a member of the chief council or of the judiciary, 
and might be acquired even from thie heathen. The 
most profound scholars were adepts in the black 
art, and the Law did not deny its power. The peo- 
ple, who cared little for the views of the Jcearned, 
were devoted to witchcraft, though not so much ag 
the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans 
(Blau, fc. pp. 17 et seg.). “Adultery and sorcery 
have destroyed everything” (Sotah ix. 13); the 
majesty of God departed from Israel and His wrath 
came upon the world when the “wizards” became 
too numerous (Tosef., Sotah, xiv. 8): Simon b. She- 
tah hanged eighty witches in a single day (Sanh. 
45b); Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xlii. 9-10 is quoted in 
Sanh. 100b with the addition of the words “ When 
the daughter grows old she will probably deal in 
magic ” (see further examples in Blau, /.c. pp. 23-26). 
This ingrained belief in magic infected even the 
scholars; for although they did not practise witch- 
craft for gain or for unlawful ends, they occasionally 
counteracted black magic by white. They were 
even able to create a calf when they needed food 
(tb. pp. 26 et seg.). Healing by means of white 
magic is not condemned except when the means 
employed are pagan or idolatrous. Many scholars 
consumed men with a glance, or reduced them to 
a heap of bones, but since this magic was regarded 
as a punishment for sins which had been committed, 
the passages of the Talmud which mention it take 
no exception to it (Blau, d.c. pp. 49-61). Exorcism 
also flourished, although not as widely as in Judxo- 
Christian circles (Acts viii. 9, xiii. 6-9). Jesus was 
regarded in the Talmud and by the ancient world 
generally as a magician (Sanh, 106b; Sotah 47b; see 
JESUS IN JEWISH LEGEND). The Greco-Roman 
world regarded the Jews as a race of magicians. 
(Juvenal, vi. 542-547; Suidas, s.v. Ecextag, et passim). 
The means adopted in witchcraft were manifold. 
The most potent was human speech, to which all 
peoples attribute invincible power. “® Open not thy 
mouth for evil” (Ber. 19a and parallels). Those 
words of the magician are all-powerful which he 
utters at the right timeand place and under proper 
conditions (Biau, f.c. pp. 68-82). Since 
official Judaism bitterly opposed black 
magic, there was a constant stream 
of prohibitions against it, and from 
these the existence of various forms of witchcraft can 
be inferred. The secret Jewish name of God was a 
powerful factor in incantation, as is shown by the 
Egyptian magic papyri written in Greek, in which 
heathen and Jewish names of the Deity are fre- 
quently found in juxtaposition or combination, 
termed ANwD (= “ union”) by the Talmud (2d. pp. 
117-146). 


Magic 
Agencies. 


Magic 
Magnus 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


256 





In addition to the magic word and the magic 
formula there were various magic objects (7. pp. 
156-165) which were used to avert the Evin Eye. 
Women and children, and even animals, as being 
weaker and less capable of resistance, were protected 
by AMULETS and Talismans. These charms con- 
sisted cither of natural objects or of papers with 
writing on them. Copies of the Bible had protect- 
ive power and were carried especially on journeys, 
while the tefillin, as their Greek name, PHYLAC- 
TERIES, implies, were also regarded as preservative, 
at least in Hellenistic circles, as were the slips of 
paper (“mezuzot”) attached to the door-posts. 
Blau (25. pp. 96-117) has edited, translated, and ex- 
plained two Hellenistic exorcismal formulas, one of 
which was found in a grave in Hadrumetum (in the 
ancient Byzacium), in the Roman province of Africa. 

In addition to the official sources from which the 
data given above are derived, the Apocrypha, in 
view of its antiquity, deserves attention in con- 
nection with the subject of magic. The general 
picture which it presents is the same 
as that given by the Bible and the 
Talmud. According to the Book of 
Enoch (ix. 7), the angels taught the 
daughters of men “incantations, exorcisms, and 
the cutting of roots, and revealed to them healing 
plants” (comp, viii. 1 e¢ seg. with vii. 6, ix. 8; x. 
7-8 with xiii, 2, xvi. 38, and Ixix. 12 e¢ seg.). The 
heart, liver, and gall are magic agencies, and the 
blind Tobit recovers his sight when his eyes are 
anointed with the gall of a fish (vi. 4 e¢ sey., viii. 
2, xi. 10; see Sibyllines, ili. 220 ef seg., discussed in 
“ Alter Orient,” ii. 41; Ascensio Isaie, ii. 5; Syriac 
Apoc. Baruch, Ix. 1, where the muttering of the in- 
cantations of the Ammonites is mentioned; see 
Kautzsch, “Apokryphen,” li. 485, note). Noah’s 
book of healing (Jubilees, x.) was magical in char- 
acter, as were the writings of Solomon and Moses, 
mentioned elsewhere. 

In the Middle Ages, as in antiquity, the Jews 
were regarded as magicians, and many of them 

doubtless profited by the general de- 

Medieval lusion. Inthe ninthcentury a Jewish 

Jewish magician named Zambrio is found in 
Magicians. Italy (Giidemann, “Gesch.” ii. 40; 

comp. p. 205), and Sicilian sorcerers 
flourished even a century earlicr (Zunz, “Z. G.” 
p. 486; “ Magyar Zsidé6 Szemle,” xv. 47). The Ara- 
bic author Mas‘udi speaks of a Jewish magician 
(Budge, “Egyptian Magic,” p. 23). The Jews were 
considered sorcerers in Germany also (Giidemann, 
Zc. ii. 233; comp. “Israelitische Monatsschrift,” 
1899, No. 7; “ Hebritische Bibliographie,” 1903, No. 
24; Micelle, p. 30, “Judwi... pessimi magici”; 
“Jiidische Wahlrsager,” in Van Vloten, “ Recherches 
sur la Domination Arabe,” pp. 55 et seg., Ainster- 
dam, 1894). In timesof drought, during the Middle 
Ages, the people turned to the Jews, who were 
supposed to be able to cause rain, and they are still 
regarded by some peoples as magicians, 

The diversity existing within ancient Jewish 
magic and the essential contradiction between witch- 
craft and monotheism are in themselves evidences 
of foreign influence on the system. The scholars 
of the first centuries of the present era refer fre- 


Apoc- 
rypha. 


quently and unanimously to Egypt as the original 
home of magic arts (Blau, f.¢. pp. 37-49). Iu the 
Bible the real homes of all varieties of 
Sources of witchcraft are given as Egypt (Ex. 
Jewish vii. e¢ passtm) and Babylon (Isa. xlvii. 
Magic. 9-15), It is very probable that in this 
respect both countriesinfluenced Israel, 
and their political power and high civilization made it 
inevitable that that influence should bedeep, although 
the lack of historical data renders it impossible to de- 
termine its extent or trace itscourse. The influence 
of Egypt admits of no doubt as regards post- Biblical 
Judaism, which was for a long period under the 
control of the Ptolemies both in its civilization and 
its government. The Egy pto-Hellenistic syncretism 
influenced first the Hellenistic Jews, especially those 
of Alexandria, and through them the Jews of Pales- 
tine. The Jewish and Judeo-Christian view as to 
the source of Hebrew magic is confirmed by the 
Books of Hermes and by the recently discovered 
Greek and Coptie magic papyri, in which the Jew- 
ish element is no small factor; and Jacob (“Im 
Namen Gottes ”) has recently proved that the belief 
in the almighty power of the name of God is Egyp- 
tian in origm. Although Assyro-Babylonian and 
other elements are not lacking, they are for the 
most part astrological and divinatory in character. 
Egypt, therefore, gave ancient Judaism its magic 
and Babylonia gave it its divination, while Helenism 
served as the connecting-link. 

In view of the authority which the Talmud pos- 
sessed for posterity the magic in it could not but in- 
fluence later generations, There is no doubt that 
the majority of the theurgic and magic elements in 
the post-Talmudic literature which Jellinek collected 
in his “Bet ha-Midrash,” date from Talmudic, and 
in part even from pre-Talmudic, times (see GNosTI- 
cisM). This may be assumed also for the magical 
portions of the geonic literature in general, espe- 
cially as the Geonim lived and worked in Babylonia. 
This ancient magic, blended with Hellenistic and 
medieval European clements, was incorporated in 
the “practical Cabala.” At the close of the Mid- 
dle Ages the CABaLa influenced the Jewish and 
the Christian world alike. The “ Nishmat Hayyim ” 
of Manassel: ben Israel, chief rabbi in Amsterdam in 
the seventeenth century, is filled with superstition 
and magic, and many Christian scholars were de- 
luded. The evil deeply and widely infected the 
people, and is still active, especially among the 
Hasidim. See ABRACADABRA; ABRAXAS; ASMO- 
DEUS; ASTROLOGY; AsusA; AUGURY; BALAAM; BIB- 
LIOMANCY; BLESSING AND CURSING; CURSING; 
DEATH; FoLK-MEDICINE; HerMeEs, Boors OF; 
LIVER; NECROMANCY; ete. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zimmern, Beitriige zur Kenntnis der Bahy- 
lonisehen Religion, Leipsic, 1896; Blau, Das Altjiidische 
Zdauberwesen, Strasburg, 1898; Brecher, Das Transcenden- 
tale, Magie, und Magische Heilarten im Talmud, Vienna, 
1850; Davies, Magic, Divination, and Demonology Aniongy 
the Hebrews and Their Neighbours, London, 1898 (with ex- 
tensive bibliography): Gaster, The Sword of Moses, ib. 1896; 
Gtudemann, Geseh.; Jacob, Im Namen Gottes, Berlin, 1905 5 
Reitzenstein-Poimandres, Studien zur Griechisch-Aegiup- 
tischen und Friithehristlichen Literatur, Leipsic. 19045 
Schiirer, Gesch. iii. 297-304 (extensive bibliography); Scholz, 
Gotzendienst und Zauberwesen bei den Alten Hebriiern 
und den Benachbarten Vélkern, Ratisbon, 18°77: Moise 
Sehwab, Un Vase Judéo-Chaldéen. in R. BE. J.iv. 165; Smith, 
Witchcraft and the Old Testament, in Bibliotheca Sacra, 
1902, pp. 26-35; Zauberei, in Winer, B. R.; Magier, Mayic, 


257 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Magic 
Magnus 





in Herzog-Hauck, Real-Encyc. xii. 55-70: Hastings, Dict. 

Bible ; Jiidische Magie, in Beilage zur Mtinchener Alige- 

meinen Zeitung, 1898, No. 38. 

J. L. B. 

MAGINO, MEIR DI GABRIELE: French 
silk-manufacturer; lived at Venice. In 1587 he 
went to Rome to promote the manufacture of silk, 
which had been begun in that city; and on 
June 4 of the same year the monopoly of silk- 
manufacture by his improved process was secured 
to him for sixty years, only the sister of the 
pope taking a share of the profits. He was also 
permitted to live outside the ghetto for fifteen 
years. In 1588 Magino printed his Italian lectures 
on the uses of silk and on its manufacture, dedi- 
cating the book to Pope Sixtus VY. In the same 
year he received a privilege and patent for polishing 
mirrors and cut glass with a vegetable oil which he 
had discovered. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ranke, ROmische Ptipste, i. 455; Natale Et- 
tore, {lt Ghetto di Roma, p. 218; Vogelstein and Rieger. 
Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii. 180 et seq.; Berliner, Gesch. 
der Juden in Rom, ii. 28. 

D. To RE: 

MAGISTER JUDAS0ORUM. See BisHor or 
THE JEWS; HOCHMEISTER. 

MAGISTRATE. See JUDGE. 

MAGISTRATUS, ELIJAH. See ELuAan BEN 
SAMUEL BEN PARNES OF STEPHANOW; GENAZ- 
ZANO, E.iJAw HAYYIM BEN BENJAMIN OF. 

MAGNESIA. See MAnissa. 

MAGNET. See PERIODICALS. 

MAGNUS, EDUARD: German painter; born 
at Berlin Jan. 7, 1799; died there Aug. 8, 1872. 
After studying successively medicine, architecture, 
and philosophy, he finally adopted the profession of 
painting, attending the Berlin Academy of Fine Arts. 
From 1826 to 1829 he traveled in France and Italy, 
revisiting the latter country in 1831. In 1850-53 he 
again toured through France and also visited Spain. 
In 1837 he became a member of the Berlin Academy, 
and in 1841 received the title of professor. His gen- 
eral culture secured for him considerable influence 
in artistic circles. Heis best known by his portraits, 
of which “Thorwaldsen,” “Prince Radziwill as a 
Child,” “Count Wrangel,” “ Mendelssohn-Barthol- 
dy,” “Gustav Magnus,” “Countess Arnim,” “ Ma- 
dame Egells,” “Henrietta Sontag,” “Jceuny Lind ” 
(National Gallery, Berlin), and “KK. Mandel” are the 
most important. His genre pictures include: “The 
Fisher Boy of Nice,” “ The Returning Greek,” “ Ital- 
ian Women,” “ Children Playing with Flowers,” and 
“Ttalian Landscape” (a very poetic production), In 
recognition of his ability he was decorated with 
the ribbon of the Order of Michael, the Order of the 
Red Eagle of the fourth class, and several gold 
medals. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Seybert, Kiinstler-Lexrikon; Meyers Kon- 
versations-Lerikon, 


s. J. So. 

MAGNUS, HEINRICH GUSTAV: German 
chemist and physicist: born in Berlin May 2, 1802; 
died there April 4, 1870. He was graduated from 
the University of Berlin in 1827, afterward studying 
a year at Stockholm under Berzelius, and later 
Spending some time in Paris under Gay-Lussac and 
Thénard. In 1831 Magnus began teaching as privat- 

Vill. —17 


docent in Berlin; in 1884 he became assistant pro- 
fessor of physics and technology in the university 
there, and in 1845 was appointed professor. The 
physical cabinet of the university was formed by 
him. He ceased teaching in Feb., 1869. 

The first work published by Magnus was “ Ueber 
die Selbstentziindlichkeit des Feinzerteilten Eisens ” 
(1825). While at Stockholm in 1828 he discovered 
the compound knownas “the green salt of Magnus.” 
He discovered also sulfovinic, ethionic, and isethi- 
onic acids, and (with Ammermiiller) periodic acid; 
investigated the diminution in density produced in 
garnet and vesuvianite by melting; and studied the 
property inherent in the blood of absorbing carbonic 
acid and oxygen (founding thereon the theory of the 
absorption of the blood), On Dec. 18, 1841, he pub- 
lished the results of his experiments upon the co- 
efficient of the dilatation of gases (Regnault hav- 
ing published his results in the same field on Nov. 
20 of the same year); in 1860 and 1861 he announced 
the results of his experiments on the transmission of 
heat through gases by conductibility and radiation, 
which led to a long controversy with Tyndall. 

He made researches also in magnetic and in ther- 
mal electricity, hydraulics, the deflection of project- 
iles from firearms, the diathermal power of gases, 
the polarization of radiant heat, etc. The results of 
his experiments and researches may be found in 
Poggendorff’s “ Annalen ” or in the publications of 
the Berlin Academy of Sciences. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Helmholtz, Rede zum Gedéichtnis an G. 
Magnus, Berlin, 1871; Hofmann, Zur Hrinnerung an G. 
Magnus, ib. 18715 Aus Jac. Berzelius’ und G. Magnus’ 
Briefwechsel; Allg. Dewtsche Biographie; Poggendorff, 
Biographisch-Literarisches Handwéorterb.: Brockhaus 
Kkonversations-Lexikon; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon : 
Larousse, Dict.; La Grande Encyclopédie: Eneye. Brit.: 
Appletor's Cyclo..of Am. Biog.; Johnson’s Hneiye. 

s. N. D. 
MAGNUS, LADY KATIE: English author- 
ess and communal worker; born at Portsmouth 

May 2, 1844; daughter of E. Emanuel; wife of Sir 

Philip Maguus. She has been connected with various 

committees of the Berkeley Street Synagogue, has 

taken a great interest in the Jews’ Deaf and Dumb 

Home, and is treasurer of the Jewish Girls’ Club. 

Lady Magnus has written much on Jewish topics, 

beginning with “ Little Miriam’s Bible Stories” and 

“ Holiday Stories,” as well as two sketches of Jew- 

ish history—“ About the Jews Since Bible Times” 

(London, 1881) and “Outlines of Jewish Ilistory”; 

the latter has run into three editions, and has becn 

republished (with additional chapters on America) 
by the Jewish Publication Society of America 

(Philadelphia, 1900). She has contributed much to 

the periodicals, and a colicction of her various 

papers was published under the title “Salvage” 

(1899). Those relating to Jewish topics are included 

in her “Jewish Portraits,” which has run into a sec- 

ond edition (London, 1901). She is also the author 

of “ First Makers of England,” London, 1901. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Year Book, 5664 (1903-4). 


MAGNUS, LAURIE: Engtish author and 
publisher: son of Sir Philip Magnus: born in Lon- 
don in 1872; educated at Magdalen College, Oxford. 
He was the Berlin correspondent of the London 
“Morning Post” (1897-98) and leader-writer for the 





eens THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 258 
same paper. He is now (1904) joint managing di- | When the government (March 16, 1722) issued a 


rector of George Routledge & Sons, Ltd. Magnus 
has edited a series of “Secondary Education Text- 
Books” for the publishing-house of John Murray, 
has published “A Primer of Wordsworth,” trans- 
lated the first volume of “Greek Thinkers” (from 
the German of Prof. T. Gomperz), and has edited 
“Prayers from the Poets” and “Flowers of the 
Cave” (in conjunction with Cecil Headlam). He 
has written “Aspects of the Jewish Question” 
(1902), reprinted and enlarged from the London 
“Quarterly Review.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Year Book, 1901-2. 

J. M. W. L. 

MAGNUS, LUDWIG IMMANUEL: Ger- 
man mathermatician; born in Berlin March 15, 1790; 
died there Sept. 25, 1861; cousin of Heinrich Gustav 
Magnus. His father died when he was young; and 
his mother induced him to enter his uncle’s bank ; 
after business hours he studied Euclid. In the 
Napoleonic wars he was a volunteer in the artil- 
lery, being soon promoted to the rank of gunner and 
serving from 1813 to 1815. On the conclusion of 
peace he again took up the business of banking in 
Berlin; in his leisure hours studying higher mathe- 
matics, and teaching that subject in the academy 
founded in 1816 by a brother of the sculptor Cauer. 
On the removal of the academy to Charlottenburg 
(1826) Magnus continued to be one of its regular staff 
of teachers; and he held that position until 1834, 
when Cauer died. Magnus then abandoned teaching, 
and spent the next nine years as head revenue offi- 
cer in the recently founded Berliner Kassenverein, 
retiring in 1843 on a competency. Hard work had, 
however, broken his health, and he did nothing more 
for mathematics. During the latter part of his life he 
was an invalid, suffering from a disease of the eyes. 

By 1884 Magnus’ reputation as a mathematician 
had become established, and the University of Bonn 
conferred upon him the honorary degree of doctor. 
Magnus’ mathematical writings appeared in Ger- 
gonne’s “Annaies des Mathématiques,” vols. xi. 
and xvi. (1820-25); in Crelle’s “Journal,” vols. v., 
vii., vili., and ix. (1830-32); in the third part (1833) 
of Meier Hirsch’s “Sammlung Geometrischer Auf- 
gaben”; andin “Sammlung von Aufgaben und Lehr- 
sitzen aus der Analytischen Geometrie des Raumes” 
(published in 1837, but written long before). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Deutsche Biographie, xx. 91-92, Leip- 
sic, 1884; Poggendorff, Biog.-Literarisch Handworterb. 
Leipsic, 1863, s.v. 

s. N. D. 

MAGNUS, MARKUS: Elder of the Jewish 
congregation of Berlin in the first quarter of the 
eighteenth century; court Jew to the crown prince, 
afterward King Frederick William I. The Jewish 
community of Berlin was divided into two hostile 
camps by Magnus’ quarrels with his rival, Jost 

Liebmann. Frederick I. favored the latter, while 

the crown prince supported Magnus. After the 

death of Liebmann his widow and sons continued 
these quarrels, which ended in the victory of Mag- 
nus. He induced the members of the congregation 
to substitute a public synagogue for the two private 
synagogues hitherto maintained by Liebmann, Veit, 
and Riess (see JEw. Encyc. iii. 70-71, iv. 317). 


new regulation for the administration of the Berlin 
Jewish congregation, Magnus and Moses Levi Gum- 
pertz were appointed permanent chief elders with a 
salary of 300 thalers each. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Geiger, Gesch. der Juden in Berlin, 1. 19-21, 
38, Berlin, 1871; Gratz, Gesch. x. 309-310, 350, Leipsic, 1868. 


D. S. Man. 
MAGNUS, PAUL WILHELM: German bot- 
anist; born at Berlin Feb. 29, 1844; educated at the 
Werdergymnasium and the university of his native 
city and at the University of Freiburg-im-Breisgau 
(Ph.D. Berlin, 1870). He became in 1875 privat- 
docent at his alma mater, where since 1880 he has 
occupied the position of assistant professor of bot- 
any. He was a member for botany of the Prussian 
commission for the exploration of the seas, and as 
such took part in the expeditions of 1871 in the 
Baltic Sea, of 1872 in the North Sea, and of 1874 on 
The Sley. He made reports of these expeditions, 
which were published by the government. Magnus 
contributed articles on botany to various scientific 
journals, and is the author of: “ Beitriige zur Kennt- 
niss der Gattung Najas,” 1870; “Morphologie der 
Sphacelaricen,” 1878; “Pilze des Kantons Grau- 
biindten,” 1890. 

s, F. T. H. 

MAGNUS, SIR PHILIP: English education- 
ist; born in London Oct. 7, 1842; educated at Uni- 
versity College in that city, and at the University of 
London (B.A. 1868; B.Sc. 1864). Destined for the 
Jewish ministry, he pursued his studies in Berlin 
(1865-66). On his return to England he became one 
of the ministers of the Berkeley Street Synagogue, 
London. At the same time he did much private 
teaching, and was professor of mechanics at the 
Catholic University. His “Lessons in Elementary 
Mechanics” (London, 1874) was for a long time the 
standard text-book on the subject. In 1880 he was 
appointed secretary of the City and Guilds of Lon- 
don Institute for the Advancement of Technical 
Education, and in that capacity became the leading 
authority on technical education in the United King- 
dom. He was a member of a royal commission for 
this subject (1881-84), visiting in connection there- 
with the chief educational centers of western Eu- 
rope. In 1886 he was knighted in recognition of 
his services to education. In 1888 he published a 
work on “Industrial Education,” as one of a series 
of text-books on education edited by him. He was 
principal of the Finsbury Teclinical College from 
1888 to 1885, and a member of the London School 
Board in 1890 and 1891. In 1900 he became fellow 
of the senate of London University, and at the pres- 
ent time (1904) is connected in an honorary capacity 
with many important educational institutions. 

Magnus’ work at the Guilds Institute caused 
him to resign his position in the Jewish ministry; 
but he has retained his interest in many communal 
institutions, being vice-president of the Anglo-Jew- 
ish Association, president of the Deaf and Dumb 
Home, and a representative on the board of deputies 
of the Berkeley Street Synagogue, of which he has 
been also a warden. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Men and Women of the Time, 1894; Who's 
Who, 1904 J. 


259 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Magnus 
Mahamad 





MAGOG. See GoG anp Macoa. 
MAGREPHAH. See Music. 
MAGYAR IZRAELITA. Sce PERIODICALS. 


MAGYAR ZSID6 SZEMLE: Hungarian 
Jewish monthly review ; established in 1884 by Josef 
Simon, secretary of the Jewish chancery, Wilhelm 
Bacher, and Josef Ban6czi, the two Jatter being pro- 
fessors in the “ Landesrabbinerschule ” of Budapest. 
Its purpose is to promote the scientific knowledge 
of Judaism, and at the same time to disseminate in- 
formation concerning the social and legal conditions 
of the Jews. The editorship was assumed by Ba- 
noezi and Bacher, who retired in 1890 in favor of 
L. Blau and F. Mezey. The latter resigned at the 
end of 1895 after the Ungarisch-Israelitischer Littera- 
turverein had been founded through the efforts of 
the “Magyar Zsid6 Szemle,” which thereafter be- 
came a quarterly under the sole editorship of Blau. 
Its list of contributors includes Americans as well 
as Buropeans. It is the first and at present (1904) 
the only Jewish scientific periodical published in 
Hungarian, and has attracted a large number of con- 
tributors from among the younger generation. 

H. R. L. B. 


MAGYAR ZSINAGOGA. See PERIODICALS. 


MAH NISHTANNAH (lit. “wherein is dis- 
tinguished”): The opening words of the child’s 
questions to the father in the Passover Haggadah ; 
the whole of the domestic service of the Passover is 
sometimes, familiarly, sonamed. The questions are 
often chanted in the students’ cantillation of the 
Talmudical schools; the text thus intoned may be 
found in Jew. Encyc. iii. 550. 

A. F. L. C. 


MAHAMAD (more correctly MASAMAD 
[sy0]): The board of directors of a Spanish-Por- 
tuguese congregation. The word is of Neo-Hebrew 
origin, and in the Talmud is applied to the repre- 
sentatives of the people present at the Temple 
service (Ta‘an. 15b). The board consisted of four 
wardens and a treasurer, and its members were 
elected, or, more exactly, cooptated, from the “ ye- 
hidim ”—those who had full rights of membership 
in the synagogue. Whenever a vacancy occurred 
between elections, which happened chiefly through 
death, the remaining members, with eight ex-mem- 
bers, formed an electoral committee, and conferred 
upon one of their number, by lot, the right to nom- 
inate a new coNeague from thecongregation. Ifthe 
assembly approved of the choice, it held good. This 

system naturally resulted in a monop- 

Rules of oly of the administration of the con- 

Election. gregation bya limited number of fam- 

ilies. That this oligarchic circle might 
not become too narrow, it was decided that no one 
could be a member of the mahamad at the same time 
as his son, grandson, son-in-law, stepson, brother, 
brother-in-law, nephew, or cousin; and, further- 
more, in order to insure just decisions, no one under 
twenty-five could be elected treasurer of the ma- 
hamad, and no one under forty could be warden, 
unless he had already served astreasurer. This was 
the rule in the Bevis Marks SYNAGOGUE of Lon- 


don, and the regulations were practically the same 
in the other Portuguese communities. 

The laws of the mahamad, according to which the 
affairs of the synagogue were administered, were 
called AscaAMoT. Basing its authority on them, the 
mahamad exercised over the members of the congre- 
gation a despotic control which degenerated into a 
sort of police supervision. No membercould marry 
or be divorced without the consent of this board, 

nor could one bring a lawsuit against 

Despotic a fellow member without first consult- 

Rule. ing the mahamad on the subject, ex- 
cept in cases where such a delay in 
bringing complaint would cause him injury. No 
book, and no treatise of a religious or political na- 
ture, in any language whatsoever, could be printed 
without the permission of the mahamad. Thus Ha- 
ham David Nieto published his “ Matteh Dan ” “con 
licencia de los Sefiores del Mahamad” (London, 
1714), and Isaac Nieto dedicates his sermon on Yom 
Kippur “a los muy Llustres SSrs. del Mahamad, y 
por su Orden Impresso ” (¢6, 1756). In London, for 
the greater political security of the congregation, 
every one was forbidden by the mahamad to join 
parties “which any of the people may form against 
the government, the ministry, or the judicial admin- 
istration of the kingdom.” 

In the synagogue, or in the law-court of the ma- 
hamad, no one might oppose an order of the ma- 
hamad or of the presiding officer who represented 
it, or criticize such an order, or write or circulate 
writings containing adverse criticisms of actions 
taken by it. The haham of the congregation en- 
joyed the same protection. No non-Portuguese 
Jew might pray in the Portuguese synagogue with- 
out the permission of the mahamad, nor might any 
one refuse an office or function in the services, or in 
the administration of synagogal affairs, which the 
mahamad or its president might assign him, Ac- 
cording to the ascamot of the Bevis Marks Syna- 
gogue of London, any one who did not accept elec- 
tion as a member of the mahamad, or who had not 
shown his willingness to accept it before the ex pira- 
tion of eight days. was fined £40; if he had been 
elected treasurer, he was fined £80. The strict ap- 
plication of this rule, in 1813, led Isaac D’Israeli to 
sever his connection with the Bevis Marks Syna- 
gogue, since he would neither accept the office of 
warden nor pay the fine of £40. The board was es- 
pecially strict in the observance of the first ascama, 
that no one might hold services outside the syna- 
gogue, except in a house of mourning during the 
first seven days thereof. 

The mahamad was very prompt in imposing pen- 
alties where its regulations were ignored or vio- 
lated, though excommunication, exclusion from the 
synagogue for a certain length of time, fines for the 

benefit of the poor-fund, withdrawal 

Disci- ofall “mizwot,” forfeiture of the right 
plinary to vote, and similar disciplinary meas- 
Measures. ures began naturally in the course of 
time to lose their desired effect. Oc- 

casionally, moreover, the mahamad appealed to the 
secular authorities to execute its decrees, as in Lon- 
don in 1788, when it desired to remove those who, 
during the service on Purim, according to ancient 


Mahanaim | 
Mahrish-Ostrau 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


260 





custom, beat on the synagogue kettle-drums when- 
ever the name of Haman was read: from the Megil- 
lah. At Amsterdam, in the year 1670, the mahamad 
applied to the magistracy for confirmation and sup- 
port in the execution of its decree that noone might 
sever his connection with the congregation even 
when under the strictest excommunication. A con- 
fession of repentance made by the delinquent before 
God and the congregation was sufficient to bring 
about a mitigation of the punishment or to secure a 
total revocation of the decree of excommunication. 

The members of the mahamad were at the same 
time members ot the tax-commission, and in this 
capacity were comprised among the “ fintadores” 
(see JEW. ENcyc. v. 388b, 8.7. FINTA), 

In the Portuguese communities the affairs of the 
congregation and of the synagogue are still admin- 
istered by a mahamad, although the disciplinary 
powers granted by the old ascamot have been very 
materially curtailed. The régime of the old mahamad 
of London is humorously described by Israel Zang- 
will in “The King of Schnorrers” (pp. 105 ef seq.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. June 11, 1897, p. 11; M. Gaster, 
History of the Ancient Synagogue, passim, London, 1901; 
die Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, Index, ib. 


D. M. Sc. 


MAHANAIM: City on the east of the Jordan, 
near the River Jabbok; first mentioned as the place 
where Jacob, returning from Aram to southern 
Canaan, had a vision of angels (Gen. xxxii. 1-2). 
This implies that Mahanaim was a sanctuary at a 
very early period. In the records in the Book of 
Joshua of the allotments to the tribes Mahanaim is 
accounted a part of the inheritance of the tribe of 
Gad (xxi. 88). Apparently it was on the border be- 
tween Gad and Manassch, and it was assigned as a 
Levitical city (Josh. xiii. 26, 80; xxi. 88; comp. I 
Chron. vi. 80). 

Mahanaim gained a temporary prominence in the 
days of the beginnings of the kingdom. It was then 
a stronghold, adapted to serve as a refuge for fugi- 
tives of importance (IT Sam. xviii. 24). Toit Abner, 
Saul's general, brought Ish-bosheth, Saul’s son and 
successor (II Sam. ii. 8); during his brief and ill- 
starred reigu Mahanaim was his capital. To Maha- 
naim David od at the time of Absalom’s rebellion 
(II Sam. xvii. 24, 27; I Kings ii. 8), and made it his 
residence until ve rect all to e erusalem. Later on it 
was the headquarters of one of Solomon’s commis- 
sary officers (I Kings iv. 14), According to Maspero 
(* The Struggle of the Nations,” p. 773), Mahanaim 
was among the cities plundered by Shishak during 
his invasion (I Kings xiv, 25) of Israelitish territory. 
There is no subsequent reference to the city in the 
annals. It is not improbable that a vigorous resist- 
ance to Shishak or to some other invader brought 
about its utter demolition. The form of the name 
appears to be dual, hence the common rendering 
“two companies” or “camps.” The narrator of 
Jacob's plan (Gen, xxxit. 7) for avoiding the loss of 
all his property so understood the name. Many 
scholars at the present day prefer to regard the 
termination in this case as the expansion ofa shorter 
ending rather than as a sign of the dual. 

The exact location of Mahanaim is very uncertain, 
the Biblical data being inconclusive. The city was 


certainly in northern Gilead and in a situation which 
commanded an extensive view (II Sam, xviii. 24); 
it was approached from the south by way of the 
Jordan valley and probably through a wadi that 
aebouched into it (II Sam. ii. 29). 2Lost explorers 
agree in placing it at or near the wadi ‘Ajlun. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Conder, Heth and Moah: Merrill, East of the 
Jordan; Van Kasteren. in Z. D. P. V. xiii. 205 et seq.; Buhl, 
Geographie des Alten Paldstina, p. 257; G. A. Smith, Hist. 


Geog. pp. 586-588, 
s. F. Kk. S. 


MAHER-SHALAL-HASH-BAZ (55y any 
12 wn= “speeding for booty,” “hastening to the 
spoil”) : Symbolic name of the son of Isaiah indica- 
ting the sudden attack on Damascus and Syria by 
the King of Assyria (Isa. viii. 8-4). Isaiah had first 
been commanded by God to write it on a large roll 
(¢b. viii. 1), 

E. G. H. M. 

MAHLER, ARTHUR: Austrian archeologist ; 
born in Prague Aug. 1, 1871. After completing 
his studies at the gymnasium in Prague, he studied 
the history of art and archeology at the universities 
of Prague and Vienna (Ph.D.), and in 1902 became 
privat-docent in archeology at the German university 
at Prague. He has contributed a number of articles to 
the “Jahreshefte des Oesterreichischen Archiologi- 
schen Institutes” (of which institute he is a corre- 
sponding member), the “Revue Archéologique,” and 
the “Journal d’Archcéologie Numismatique.” He 
is the author of “Polyklet und Seine Schule: ein 
Beitrag zur Gesch. der Gricchischen Plastik ” (Letp- 
sie, 1902). He also delivered a series of lectures at 
the American Scliool for Archeology at Rome. 


SEL. 


8. 

MAHLER, EDUARD: Austrian astronomer; 
boru in Cziifer, Hungary, 1857. He was graduated 
from the Vienna public school in 1876, and then 
studied mathematics and physics at the university 
in that city, taking his degree in 1880. From Nov. 
1, 1882, till the death of T. Oppolzer (Dec., 1886) 
Mahler shared in the latter’s scientific labors. On 
June 1, 1885, he was appointed assistant in the royal 
Austrian commission on measurement of degrees. 

Mahler has devoted himself chiefly to chronology. 
Tn early life he paid considerable attention to an- 
cient Oriental listory, Assyriology, and Egypt- 
ology, in which subjects he is at present privat- 
docent at the University of Budapest. On Sept. 6, 
1889, he received the royal gold medal “ litteris et 
artibus” of Sweden and Norway; and since 1898 
he has been an official of the Hungarian National 
Museum. 

Mahler has published: “ Fundamentalsitze der 
Allgemeinen Flichentheorie,” Vienna, 1881; “ As- 
tronomische Untersuchung iiber die in der Bibel 
Erwiihnte Aegyptische Finsterniss, ” tbh, 1885; “ Die 
Centralen Sonnenfinsternisse,” 7b. 1885; “ Untermueh: 
ung ciner im Buche Nahum auf den Untergang 
Ninive’s Bezogenen Finsterniss,” 2b. 1886; “ Biblische 
Chronologie und Zeitrechnung der Hebriier,” 20. 
1887; “Fortsetzung der Wiistenfeld’schen Ver- 
gleichungs-Tabellen der Mohammedanischen und 
Christlichen Zeitrechnung,” Leipsic, 1887; “ Chro- 
nologische Vergleichungs-Tabellen,” Vienna, 1889: 
“Maimonides’ Kiddusch-Hachodesch,” 7. 1890 


261 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mahanaim 
Mahrish-Ostrau 





(translated and explained); besides many papers 
in Hungarian as well as contributions to various 
German scientific journals, as “ Zeitschrift der Deut- 
schen Morgenlindischen Gesellschaft,” “ Sitzungs- 
berichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissen- 


schaften,” “Journal Asiatique,” “Zeitschrift ftir 


Assyriologie,” “Zeitschrift fir Mathematik und 
Physik,” and “ Zeitschrift ftir Aegyptische Sprache.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, ii. 321-322. 


8. N. D. 


MAHLER, GUSTAV: Austrian composer; 
born at Kalischt, Bohemia, July 7, 1860; studied at 
the gvmnasiums at Iglau and Prague, and entered 
the University of Vienna in 1877. He attended also 
the conservatorium in that city, studying pianoforte 
with Epstein, and composition and counterpoint 
with Bruckner. After conducting theater orchestras 
at Hall (Upper Austria), Laibach, and Cassel (where 
he directed the grand musical festival as a leave- 
taking), he was in 1885 appointed the successor of 
Anton Scidl at Prague, where, among other works, 
he conducted Wagner’s “Ring der Nibelungen,” 
“Meistersinger,” and “ Tristan und Isolde,” the sym- 
phony of Bruckner, and the Ninth Symphony of 
Becthoven. From 1886 to 1888 he was kapell- 
meister at the Stadttheater in Leipsic, where, in 
the absence of Nikisch, he conducted the opera for 
six months. During the following years he labored 
to bring about a thorough reorganization of the 
Royal Opera at Budapest, to which place he had 
been called in 1888. In 1891 he was appointed con- 
ductor at the Stadttheatcr in Hamburg, and held 
this position until 1897, when he became kapell- 
meister of the Royal Opera, Vienna, succeeding 
Wilhelm Jahn as director. Later he was converted 
to Christianity. 

While generally recognized as one of the greatest 
musical leaders of the day, Mahler aroused consid- 
erable interest also by his compositions, among 
which are the following: “Die Drei Pintos,” an 
opera (Leipsic, 1888); symphony in D major (per- 
formed at Budapestin 1891, and also at the Weimar 
Music Festival); two symphonies, C minor (1895) 
and F major (1896); “ Humoreske” for orchestra; 
“Das Klagende Lied,” for soli, choir, and orchestra: 
three books of songs. He was a director of the 
Metropolitan, Opera House orchestra, New York 
City, 1907-1910, and died May 18, 1911, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Riemann, Musik-Lexikon ; Baker, Biograph- 
ical Dictionary of Musicians. 


S. J. So. 
MAHOMET. See MoHAMMED. 


MAHOZA (N10, @.¢., “The City”): Babylonian 
city on the Tigris, three parasangs south of Ctesiphon. 
Near it was the citadel of Koke (3139 NPR, X77), 
which was regarded as a part of Mahoza. Owing 
to its proximity to the royal canal, Nehar Malka, it 
was called also “Mahoza Malka” (Maoga-Malcha). 
Mahoza existed in the third century (see below) and 
seems to have been inhabited solely by Jews, for 
one of the amoraim expressed his astonishment at 
not seeing a “mezuzah” on the gates of Mahoza 
(Yoma ila). Most of the Jews there were descend- 


ants of proselytes (Kid. 78a, b) and they are repre- 
sented as given over to luxury, on account of which 
they were denounced as “ children of Hell” (93793 °33;; 
R. H. lia). as “effeminate” (Shab. 109a), and as 
“drunkards “ (Ta‘an. 26a). The women of Mahoza 
had a passion for jewelry, and when Levi b. Sisi 
promulgated a halakah permitting women to wear 
‘their jeweled head-dress on Sabbath, eighteen women 
of one street alone took advantage of that decision, 
while only twenty-four women in the whole city 
of Nehardea followed their example (Shab. 88a). 
On the other hand, the people of Mahoza were in- 
telligent (owing to their drinking the water of the 
Tigris; Ber. 59b) and charitable (B. K. 119a). 

Mahoza had an academy, seemingly founded about 
the middle of the third century by Joseph b. Hama, 
Raba’s father, who was succeeded by Rabbah 
(Sherira, in Neubauer, “M. J. C.”i. 29). The acad- 
emy was most prosperous under Raba, who attracted 
thither many students and thereby caused the de- 
cline of Abaye’s academy at Pumbedita. Thus 
Mahoza, after Pumbedita, may with justice be called 
the home of the Talmud; but after Raba’s death, 
owing to the lack of able successors, the academy of 
Mahoza gave way to that of Pumbedita. Mahoza 
was destroyed in 4663 by the Romans under Julian 
the Apostate, during the war against the Persians. 
It was rebuilt, however, and became later the capi- 
tal of a small Jewish state governed by the Prince 
of the Captivity (the “ Resh Galuta”), This Jewish 
independence did not last long, fur the Jewish army, 
under Mar Zutra, the exilarch, was defeated by 
Kobad, King of Persia, and Mar Zutra, with his 
grandfather Mar Hanina, was executed on the 
bridge of Mahoza (ce. 520); the Jews there were 
taken captive by Kobad, and the family of the exil- 
arch escaped to Judea. 

About the middle of the sixth century Chosroes 
Nushirvan built in the vicinity of Mahoza a town 
on the plan of Antioch; he called it “ Antiocheia- 
Rumia,” but the Arabs caHed it “Al-Mahoza” 
(Gregory Bar Hebreus, “Ta’rikh al-Duwal.” ed. 
Pokocke, Arabic text, p. 150). This town also had 
a large Jewish population, the greater part of which 
was put to death by the Persian general Mebodes 
when he captured the town in the beginning of the 
seventh century. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst. Kultur- und Litteraturyesch, der Ju- 

den in Asien, p. 100, Leipsic, 1849: Gratz, Gesch. 2d ed., iv. 

M. SEL. 


274-275, 351, 875: Neubauer, G. T. pp. 358-357. 
Boe. 
MAHRISH-OSTRAU: Townin Moravia, Aus- 

tria. The congregation of Mihrish-Ostrau is one of 

the youngest in Moravia, for Jews were not allowed 

to settle there until 1792, and it was not until 1848, 

when general freedom of residence was granted, that 

the congregation began to grow rapidly. It is now 
the second largest Jewish congregation in Moravia, 
and embraces a number of smaller neighboring com- 

munities, including Oderberg; it numbers 6.500 

souls. It became a chartered congregation in 1875 

and dedicated its syndgogue in 1879 (on which 

oceasion Chief Rabbi Jellinek officiated). The 
first rabbi of the congrezation was Dr. B. Zimmels, 
who died in 18938. He was followed, in 1894, by the 
present (1904) incumbent, Dr. Jacob Spira. The 


Mahzor 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


262 





community, since 1871, has supported a parochial 
school, which has now 200 pupils. 

Among its institutions are the Jewish Women’s 
Society, the Bikkur Holim (with a membership of 
220), and a bet ha-midrash. The community sup- 
ports also a number of poor students. 

D. J. SP. 

MAHZOR (plural, Mahzorim): Term applied 
to the compilation of prayers and piyyutim; origi- 
nally it designated the astronomical or yearly cycle. 
By the Sephardim it was used for a collection 
which contains the prayers for the whole year, while 
the Ashkenazim employed it exclusively for the 
prayer-book containing the festival ritual. The 
Mahzor varies with the custom (379%) of the coun- 
tries or cities in Which it isused. Among the differ- 
ent European Mahzorim the oldest is the * Mahzor 
Romaniya,” known also as “ Hazzaniyya shel Ro- 
maniya,” or “ Grigos.” It originated in the Byzantine 
empire (Whence the name “ Romaniya”), and differs 
from the Ashkenazic in that it contains fewer poet- 
ical compositions of Kalir. It was edited by Elijah 
ben Benjamin ha-Levi (who enriched it with poet- 
ical compositions of his own), and according to Zed- 
nerwas published first at Venice, in the printing-office 
of Danie] Bomberg, and thenat Constantinople (1573- 
1576). Itis divided into two large volumes and con- 
tains, besides the prayers for the yearand the piyyu- 
tim, the Five Scrolls, the Book of Job, the Haggadah 
of Passover, the beginnings and endings of the Sab- 
batical sections of the Pentateuch, and calendricrules. 

From the Byzantine empire the use of piyyutim 
was introduced into southern Italy, and thence into 
Rome. The Romans adopted some parts of the Mah- 
zor Romauiya, discarded others, and added much 
that was new, thus forming a new rite known by 

the name “Minhag Bene Roma,” or 


Roman “ Minhag Lo‘azim,” or “ Minhag Ital- 
Rite. yan.” The Roman ritual was widely 


disseminated from Rome, and after 
1520 the Greek ritual was based upon the Roman 
Mahzor, which served also as a basis for the rituals 
of Corfu and Kaffa. The Roman Mahzor was pub- 
lished first at Soncino in 1485. Johanan Treves 
wrote a commentary on it under the title “ Kimha 
de-Abishona,” which was published, together with 
the text, at Bologna in 1540. An Italian translation 
of the Mahzor was published at Bologna in 1588, at 
Vienna in 1823, and at Leghorn in 1837. 

The use of piyyutim was introduced into northern 
Europe probably from Italy. There, again, the Mah- 
zor underwent many changes, and a German (“ Ash- 
kenazi”) ritual was established which is contained 
in the “ Mahzor Ashkenaz,” the “ Mahzor Pehm | Bo- 
hemia] we-Polin [Poland],” and the “Minhag Zar- 
fat” (= “ French ritual”). Of these the first two only 
are now in use. The French ritual was never pub- 
lished; it is extant partly in manuscript and partly 
in the ritual of the three Italian communities of 
Asti, Fassano, and Monecalvo, where many French 
Jews settled after their expulsion from France in 
1306 and 1894. The several Mahzorim included in 
the Ashkenazic ritual vary in some details, but agree 
in essentials. They are distinguished from those of 
other rituals in containing numerous piyyutim based 
upon the Halakah and Haggadah. The German ritual 


is used by the Jews in Germany, Bohemia, Moravia, 
or Silesia, Prussian Poland , Russia, Austria, Hungary, 
France, and England. The Ashke- 

Ashke-  nazic Mahzor was first published about 

nazic Rite. 1521, the Polish in 1522. Among the 

commentaries on the German and Po- 
lish Mahzor, which have often been published to- 
gether with the text, are those of: Benjamin ben 
Meir ha-Levi of Nuremberg (Tanhausen, 1540), Isaac 
ben Jacob Jozebel (entitled * Hadrat Jsodesh,” Ven- 
ice, 1554), an anonymous writer (entitled “ Ma‘agle 
Zedek,” Venice, 1568), Zcebi Iirsch Zundels (Lublin, 
1579), Nathan Shapira (Cracow, 1604), Joseph Beza- 
leel Kaz Mehokek (Prague, 1616), a second anony- 
mous writer (with additions entitled “Sefer ha-Muas- 
bir,” by Joseph Rwwy. and with glosses and notes 
entitled “ Masbir he-Hadash,” by Moses Kosmann, 
Amsterdam, 1667), Hirz Shatz (Wilhelmsdorf, 1673), 
Benjamin Wolf Heidenheim (Rédelheim, 1800), 
Uri Feibus ben Aryeh Lib (entitled “ Keri’e Mo‘ed,” 
Breslau, 1805), Moses Israel Biidinger (Metz, 1817), 
and Jehiel Michael ha-Levi (entitled “ Matteh Lewi,” 
Slobuta, 1827). 

Translations of parts of the German Mahzor into 
the vernacular of the countries in which they were 
used began to be mace as early as the fourteenth 
century. Jn 1571 Abigdor ben Moses published a 
Judxo-German translation of the Mahzor for New- 

Year and the Day of Atonement. In 

Transla- 1600 the Judwo-German translation of 
tions into the whole Mahzor was published by 

German. Meir Anshel ben Joseph Mordecai of 

Posen. A German translation of the 
whole Mahzor was first published by Benjamin 
Wolf Heidenheim, 1800. He was followed by Prosper 
of Alsace (Metz, 1817), Moses ben Israel Landau 
(Prague, 1884), Moritz Frenkel (Berlin, 1838-40), 
I. N. Mannheimer (Vienna, 1840), Moses Pappen- 
heimer and Jeremiah Heinemann (Berlin, 1840-41), 
Raphael Jacob Fiirstenthal (Krotoschin, 1845), Meir 
ha-Levi Letteris (Prague, 1845), and Michael Sachs 
(Berlin, 1855). A French translation of the whole 
Mahzor was published by Elhanan Durlacher (Paris. 
1852). 

The first attempt to render the Mahzor into Eng- 
lish was made by A. Alexander, who in 1787 pub- 
lished the piyyutim for the eve of the Day of Atone- 
ment, and in 1789 the whole service for New-Year. 
In 1794 David Levi published an English version 
of the services for New- Year, the Day of Atonement. 
and the feasts of Tabernaclesand Pentecost, and thir- 
teen years later gave a new version of the whole 
Mahzor. In 1860 a new English version was pub- 
lished by David Aaron de Sola. A Dutch transla- 
tion of the entire Mahzor was published by Gabriel 
Isaac Pollack in 1841. The services for New-Year 
and the Day of Atonement were rendered into Rus- 
sian by Rabbi Hurwitz after 1880. 

Spain, in the Middle Ages the home of Jewish 
poetry, could hardly be satisfied with the piyyutim 

of Kalir, which had been introduced 
In Spain. either from Babylonia with the “Sid- 

dur” of R. Amram Gaon, or from 
Italy. These, therefore, were replaced by new piy- 
yutim composed by Spanish poets, as Joseph ben 
Abitur, Solomon Gabirol, Isaac Ghayyat, Judah ha- 





PAGE FROM A FOLIO MANUSCRIPT MAHZOR OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Mai 
Maimon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


264 





Levi, and Abraham and Mosesibn Ezra. Indeed, the 
number of piyyutim composed by Spanish poets 
was so great that almost every Spanish city had its 
ownritual. After the Spanish exile the same ritual 
was adopted by all the Sephardim with the exception 
of the Catalonian and Aragonian congregations of 
Salonica, which still use their old Mahzor for New- 
Year and the Day of Atonement. 

The Mahzor of the Sephardic ritual was first pub- 
lished at Venice in 1614. As representing distinct 
branches of the Sephardic ritual may be regarded: the 
Tripoli Mahzor for New- Yearand the Day of Atonc- 
ment (published first at Venice in 1648, under the title 
“Sifte Renanot”); the Mahzor of Tunis (published 
at Pisa); the Mahzor of Algiers (“ Minhag Algaza’ir,” 
published first at Amsterdam in 1685); and the mah- 
zorim of Provence and Languedoc, four of which 
are still extant—those of Avignon, Carpentras, 
Cavaillon, and Montpellier. Many piyyutim of the 
Sephardim were incorporated into the Mahzor of 
northern France, and some of them entered the Ger- 
man Mahzor. Parts of the Spanish Mahzor, like 
the “‘Abodah ” of Joseph ben Abitur, the “ Azharot ” 
of Solomon ibn Gabirol, and various poems by Isaac 
ibn Ghayyat, were annotated by Jacob Anatoli, 
Moses ibn Tibbon, Isaac ben Todros, Simon Duran, 
and by others. Jacob Tam compiled a mahzor 
modeled upon the Spanish Mahzor, and many litur- 
gical poems of Spain are found in the Mahzor Vitry, 
compiled by Simhah ben Samuel of Vitry, pupil of 
Rashi. 

The Spanish Mahzor exerted an influence upon 
the Karaite ritual. Several rabbinical poems of 
Spanish origin were introduced into the Karaite 
service before it was arranged by Aaron ben Joseph. 
See Lirurcy; Poetry; PRAYER-Books. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Luzzatto, Melo; idem, in Kerem Hemed, iv. 
23a: Zunz, Ritus, Berlin, 1859; idem, in Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 
1838, pp. 580 et seq.; Steinschneider, Jewish Literatur €, pp. 
164 et seq.; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, $.V. 4M. 


J. T. Br. 

MAI, JOHANN HEINRICH (the elder): 
Gernan Protestant theologian; born in Pforzheim 
Feb., 1658; died in Giessen Sept., 1719. In 1689 he 
became professor in the University of Giessen. Be- 
sides various Biblical exegetical works he wrote: 
“Synopsis Theologie Judaice” (Giessen, 1698); 
“Exercitatio . . . de Jure Anni Septimi” (ed. by 
his son, 2. 1707, and later printed along with Mai- 
monides’ tract on the subject); “Grammatica Rab- 
binica ” (¢. 1710). [lisson J. H. Mai(the younger; 
b. March, 1688; d. June, 1732) was made professor 
of Greck and Oriental languages in the University 
of Giessen in 1709; he published, among other 
things: “Dissertatio . . . de Origine, Vita Atque 
Scriptis D. Isaac Abarbanielis” (Altdorf, 1708); 
“TD. Isaaci Abarbanielis Preco Salutis in Ling, 
Latin. Translatus” (Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1712). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Universal-Lexicon, Halle and Leipsic, 1739; 
Jécher’s Gelehrten-Lexicon. 
T. 


MAI, JOSEPH BEN MICHAEL: German 
printer; born at Dyhernfurth Dec. 29, 1764; died 
at Breslau Dec. 1, 1810. His father had a printing 
establishment at Dyhernfurth, to which Joseph and 
his brother succeeded. Mai was a Talmudic scholar 
and wrote prefaces to the works of his father-in- 


law, Isaiah Berlin, rabbi of Breslau. He wrote also, 

in collaboration with his brother, notes to the four 

Turim (Dyhernfurth, 1790). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Berliner, Rabbi Jesaja Berlin, p.13; Fuenn, 
Keneset Yisrael, p. 482; Léwenstamm, Mispad Mar, Bres- 
lau, 1833. 

J. B. Fr. 
MAIER, JOSEPH VON: German rabbi; born 

Apr. 24, 1799; died at RULE EAT Aug. 19, 1878; 

rabbi at Stuttgart, 1833-73 . president of the first 

rabbinical conference held at Brunswick in 1844, 

and he was also a member of the Jewish Con- 

sistory of Wiirttemberg. In recognition of his 
action for reform in Jewish prayer and for organ- 
izing the Jewish communities he was ennobled by 
the King of Wiirttemberg. This gave him the dis- 
tinction o6E being the first German rabbi belonging 

to the nobility (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1878, p. 585), 

g, J. War. 


MAIMING. See MAYHEo. 


MAIMON (MAIMUN) BEN JOSEPH: 
Spanish exegete and moralist; born about 1110; 
father of Moses Maimonides. He studied under 
Joseph ibn Migash at Lucena, and became a day- 
yan. He was the author of a commentary, in Ara- 
bic, on the Pentateuch, fragments of which are 
quoted by his grandson Abraham. Maimon wrote 
in Arabic also on the “dinim” concerning the rit- 
ual and the festivals. It is, possibly, from this 
source that Maimonides quotes in his commentary 
on the Mishnah (Bek. viii. 7; ‘Eduy. i. 3, iv. 7; and 
Sheb. vi. 7) and in his “Yad” (Shehitah, x1. 10). 
His only extant work, however, is a letter of conso- 
lation which has been identified with the “Te¢geret 
ha-Shemad ” attributed to his son; the Arabic text 
was edited and translated by L. M. Simmons (“J, 
Q. R.” ii. 66-101). It was written in the year 1160, 
while Maimon and his son Moses were at Fez. 
They left Fez in 1165 and arrived at Jerusalem on 
Oct. 12 in that year (see Mosks BEN MArMON). 

L. M. Simmons, in J. Q. R. ii. 62-64; Stein- 
idem, Die Arabische Li- 
J. 

MAIMON, MOISEI LEIBOVICH: Russian 
painter; born at Wilkowiszk, government of Su- 
walki, Russian Poland, Feb. 4, 1860. After attend- 
ing the schools of painting in Warsaw and Wilna he 
entered, in 1880, the Academy of Fine Arts at St. 
Petersburg; in 1881 he was awarded a silver medal 
for a painting from life, and in 1883 was graduated. _ 
At the exhibitions of the academy in 1884 and 1885 
he was again awarded silver medals. In 1885 and 
1886 Maimon executed portraits of the daughter of 
General Minkevitz and of the son of Baron Ungern 
von Sternberg. In October of the latter year he 
was awarded a gold medal by the academy for his 
“St. Irene Cures St. Sebastian,” and for his “Ivan 
the Terrible Taking Orders Before His Death from 
the Metropolitan” the title of “ Artist of the First 
Degree” was conferred upon him. He painted many 
portraits, among them those of the czar, czarina, 
the three princes, and Prof. Daniel Chwolson (1900; 
St. Petersburg Artists’ Exhibition). His paintings 
include: “The House-Cleaner,” “The Wagons at 
the Market-Place,” “An Applicant,” and “The Poli- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
schneider, Hehr. Bibl. viii. 114; 
teratur der Juden. 













ss: yas TN VTS iis ee 


ae st a Us a 
ae) alge 1312) aE kta wes wit 


Y wit ee 31 










es 











aca "13 43 an3 no = ‘3 Tay peaira 



















ame gen 33 ao Sper ray hy qs 
s ats ry NUN P'S? an mo! Ney "yee : 
7 54 99151: ie os" jae ties rm 20 im ry 




















mawa0 = aa nS ) aa) oY ri an o 





ee te TON 


: Pray fi mm a fe ne Mi 






é ested athe ay 









: ah ‘DEUS or nega rm =e “NED 


“wag ~ B3 be es 


























er “3S asseh come re : 


s 








; = eo 





PAGE FROM THE FIRST EDITION OF THE MAHZOR, SONCINO, 1485. 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Maimon 





ticians” (exhibited 1889 and 1891; these represent 
chiefly peasant types); “He Lost His Way.” “An 
Old Man,” »A Girl’s Head,” and “The Fishers” 
(“Blane et Noir” exhibition of 1891); “A Corner in 
the Theater,” “In the Kitchen,” “ Buying Groceries,” 
and “ Repairing His Property” (academy exhibition 
of 1892): “A Cheap Restaurant” (St. Petersburg 
Art Exhibition of 1892); “The Maranos” (1893; 
Academy of Fine Arts); “The Mushroom-Scller,” 
“A Girl Student,” and “The Peasant Elder” (St. 
Petersburg Artists’ Exhibition of 1894); “The Invi- 
tation,” “The Broken Heart” (1895); “ A Prayer in 
the Woods,” “The Bouquet Fading Away,” “The 
Southern Girl,” “The Servant-Girl,” “ An Old Man ” 
(1896); “A Woman’s Head” (St. Petersburg Exhi- 
bition, 1899, held in the palace of Baron Shtiglitz). 

Maimon attained also considerable success in car- 
icature. In 1900 he published two albums, one con- 
taining ten portraits of women, and the other ten 
portraits of men, all of persons mentioned in the 
Bible; some of these were copies from works of the 
great masters. 

“The Maranos” represents a Passover night in a 
rich Marano home. The family is seated at the 
table, at the head of which an old man, clothed in 
white, is reading from the Haggadah. The door 
opens suddenly and a masked and armed force of 
the Inquisition enters. The family is horror-stricken, 
with the execption of the old man, who continues 
to read quietly, with bis hand on the arm of the 
chair, and by his attitude seeming to say: “I will 
finish my reading and then I shall be ready.” For 
this painting he was made “ Academician and Titu- 
lar-Rath.” 

Maimon contributed several articles to the weekly 
edition of the “ Voskhod,” and an article of his in 
Hebrew was presented, in the form of a pamphlet, 
by “Ha-Meliz ” to its readers. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sefer ha-Shanah, 1901, pp. 72-81. 


H.R. J. G. L. 


MAIMON, SOLOMON BEN JOSHUA: 
Philosophical writer; born at Nieszwicz, Lithuania, 
in 1754; died at Niedersiegersdorf, Silesia, Nov. 
22, 1800. Endowed with greaty ability, he became 
versed in rabbinical literature while still a child. 
He was married at the age 
of twelve, by his father, 
to the daughter of a 
widow of his native town; 
at the age of fourteen 
Maimon was a_ father. 
Pressed by his mother-in- 
law, with whom he was 
perpetually quarreling, to 
earn a livelihood, he be- 
came tutor to the family 
of an innkeeper in a 
neighboring village. is 
days were spent in ex- 
peunding the Pentateuch 
to his unpromising pu- 
pils, and the greater part 
of his nights in studying Jewish philosophical 
literature. He derived special pleasure from specu- 
lative science. Maimonides’ “Moreh Nebukim” be- 





Solomon Maimon. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


266 





came his guiding star, and it was in token of rever- 
ence for that great master that he assumed the name 
of “Maimon.” He soon plunged into 
cabalistic mysticism, which he en- 
deavored to place upon a philosophical 
basis, being convinced that the Cabala 
was an attempt, veiled in allegory and fable, ata 
scientific explanation of existence. This endeavor 
of Maimon’s irritated the Hasidim with whom he 
ussociated, and he received rebukes instead of the 
expected compliments. Disillusioned, he turned to 
secular studies. Maimon began to study physics, 
especially optics, from old German books, which he 
procured at considerable pains. The further he ad- 
vanced in the study the stronger grew his innate 
thirst for knowledge, and, being harassed both by 
his implacable mother-in-law and by his coreligion- 
ists, who began to regard him as a heretic, he de- 
cided to go to Germany and there study medicine. 
A pious merchant accorded him passage to Konigs- 
berg, and, after many struggles, at the age of 
twenty-five he reached Berlin. 

But a rude reception awaited the future philoso- 
pher, whose words Goethe was to treat with respect, 
and to whom Schiller and Kerner were to pay trib- 
utes of praise; he was refused admission as a vaga- 
bond by the Jewish gatekeeper. In his despair 
Maimon appealed to a rabbi he had met, showing 
bim the manuscript of his commentary on the 
“Moreh.” Unfortunately, the rabbi belonged to 
those for whom Maimonides’ philosophical work is 
the symbol of heresy. For six months Maimon 
wandered about the country, in company with a 
professional beggar, until he reached Posen. There 
he was befriended by the pious rabbi Hirsch Janow, 
who, conceiving a high opinion of Maimon’s rabbin- 
ical learning, furnished him with means of subsist- 
ence. After two years of comfortable life Maimon 
grew weary of his superstitious surroundings, and 
recklessly wounded the religious feelings of his Or- 
thodox protectors. Again he went to Berlin; this 
time, owing to the protection of a countryman of 
his settled there, he was admitted. Soon a happy 
accident brought him into contact with Moses Men- 


Early 
Studies. 


delssohn. In reading Wolff’s “Metaphysics” Mai- 
mon was quick to detect the deficien- 
Received cies in his proofs of the existence 


of God; Maimon wrote a criticism of 
them and sent it to Mendelssohn, who, 
recognizing in him a profound thinker, took him 
under his protection. 

Maimon had now an excellent opportunity to be- 
gin an honorable career; but his mind, fed on meta- 
physical problems, had become inadaptable to any 
regular occupation. He abandoned his project of 
studying medicine and took up pharmacy; but after 
three years of study he was not in a position to exer- 
cise it professionally. He frequented bad society, 
acquired habits of intemperance, and made a profes- 
sion of cynicism which scandalized his protectors. 
Finally he was abandoned by Mendelssohn and had 
to leave Berlin. Mendelssobn, however, gave him 
letters of recommendation which secured hima good 
reception in the leading Jewish circles of Holland, 
whither he went after a short stayin Hamburg. In 
Holland, again, his uncouth manners and unman- 


in Berlin. 


a N é ; a 
ns LJ 


1B 4 i an ANE 
BURG aS ee ppereereensneinn;:::. IMMONROET OT aa 





PAGE FROM 4 MAHZOR PRINTED AT PRAGUE, 1525. 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Maimon 
Majority 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


268 





ageable temper alienated his friends. In despera- 
tion he returned to Hamburg and, in order to im- 
prove his position, decided to embrace Christianity. 
Addressing a letter to a Lutheran clergyman, he 
expressed his readiness to abandon Judaism. Mai- 
mon, however, had a natural aversion to hypocrisy, 
and naively confessed that it was not religious con- 

viction that made him prefer Chris- 


Resorts to tianity, for, he says, Judaism is more 
Conver- in keeping with reason than is Chris- 
sionists. tianity. The honest clergyman nat- 


urally refused to baptize him, but pro- 
cured him the means of entering the gymnasium of 
Altona in order that he might improve his knowl- 
edge of languages. 

After two years Maimon left the gymnasium and 
returned to Berlin. His former friends, especially 
Mendelssohn, befriended him again, andsent him to 
Dessau, where he was to translate into Hebrew Ger- 
man scientific works intended tor circulation among 
the Russian and Polish Jews. Their publication, 
however, was abandoned, and Maimon, dissatisfied 
with his friends, went to Breslau, where, through 
the assistance of Ephraim Kuh and Professor Grave, 
he found pupils. While there Maimon received a 
visit from his son, then twenty years of age, who 
demanded, in the name of his mother, that Maimon 
should return to his family or give her a letter of 
divorce. Maimon had refused a similar demand, 
made through a messenger, while he was still in 
Hamburg, becatise he hoped to be able in the near 
future to support his family in his native country; 
now that he could no longer entertain such a hope 
he endeavored to persuade his wife and son to join 
him in Germany. They refused, however, and 
Maimon finally gave the desired divorce. 

In 1786 Maimon once more returned to Berlin, 
and, protected by Ben David, Asher, and Marcus 
Herz, devoted himself to literary-philosophie activ- 
ities. In 1790 Count Kalkreuth gave him an asylum 
on his estate at Niedersiegersdorf, Until that year 

Maimon had published only philosoph- 


Philo- ical articles. In 1788 he became ac- 
sophic quainted with Kant’s philosophy, and 
Essays. under its influence wrote “Versuch 


tiber die Transcendentale Philosophie ” 
(Berlin, 1790), in reference to which Kant declared, 
in a letter to Marcus Herz, that of all his critics and 
opponents Maimon was the most acute. In 1791 
Maimon published a philosophical lexicon, in which 
he had collected a series of dissertations on the prin- 
cipal points of philosophy. This work gave rise to 
a violent controversy between him and Reinhold; 
Maimon defended his views in “Streifereien im 
Gebiete der Philosophie ” (2b. 1798). 

After having published three historical and crit- 
ical works on philosophy—* Ueber die Progresse der 
Philosophic” (zd. 1798); “ Versuch einer Neuen Logik” 
(tb. 1794), in which he attempted to expound an 
algebraic or symbolic system of logic; and “ Die 
Kategorien des Aristoteles ” (db. 1794), with explan- 
atory notes—propedeutic to his theory of logic— 
Maimon produced his most important work, “ Kri- 
tische Untersuchungen tiber den Menschlichen 
Geist” (¢b. 1797), which secured him a prominent 
place among the historians of philosophy. Therein 


he originated that speculative monistic idealism 
which, during the first half of the nineteenth century, 
pervaded not only philosophy, but ail 
sciences, and by which Fichte, Schel- 
The 


His 
‘« Kritische ling, and Hegel were influenced. 


Untersuch- great question at issue in Kant’s anal- 
ungen.” ysis of the mind was, “Has man any 


ideas which are absolutely and ob- 
jectively true?” the answer to which depends on an- 
other question, * Has mau any ideas independent of 
experience?” for if all ideas depend on experience, 
there can be no question of objective ideas, expe- 
rience being essentially subjective. 

Kant answered the second question in the affirma- 
tive, and the first in the negative. He showed that 
in consciousness certain elements are given which 
are not derived from experience, but which are 
necessarily true. However, these given elements or 
“things in themselves” man knows only as they 
appear to him, but not as they are “per se.” This 
concept of “things in themselves” is rejected by 


-Maimon, who holds that the matter of exterior objects 


which produce impression on man’s sensibility is ab- 
solutely intelligible. He also contested the Kantian 
distinction between sensibility and understanding 
as well as the subjectivity of the intuitions of time 
and space. For him, sense is imperfect understand- 
ing, and time and space are sensuous impressious of 
diversity, or diversity presented as externality. In 
practical philosophy he criticized Kant for having 
substituted an unpractical principle for the only 
motive for action—pleasure. The highest pleasure 
is in knowing, not in physical sensation, and because 
it recognizes this fact the “Ethics” of Aristotle is 
much more useful than the Iantian. 

Maimon’s autobiography was published by K. 
Ph. Moritz (Berlin, 1798). In this work he gives a 
résumé of his views on the Cabala, which he had 
expounded in a work written while he was still in 
Lithuania. According to him the Cabala is practi- 

cally a modified Spinozism, in which 

Autobiog- not only is the world in general ex- 
raphy. plained as having proceeded from the 
concentration of the divine essence, 

but every species of being is derived from a special 
divine attribute. God, being the ultimate substance 
and the ultimate cause, is called “En Sof,” because 
He can not be predicated by Himself. However, 
in relation to the infinite beings, positive attributes 
were applied to Him, and these attributes were re- 
duced by the cabalists to ten—the ten sefirot. The 
ten “circles” correspond to the ten Aristotelian cate- 
gories, without which nothing can be conceived. 
In the same work Maimon expresses his views on 
Judaism. He divides Jewish history into five main 
periods: (1) the period of natural religion, extending 
from the Patriarchs to Moses; (2) that of revealed or 
positive religion, from Moses to the Great Sanhedrin ; 
(8) the mishnaic period; (4) the Talmudic period; 
(5) the post-Talmudic period. Maimon censures the 
Rabbis for having burdened the people with minute 
prescriptions and ceremonies, but praises their high 
moral standard. Only those, he says, who have not 
penctrated into the real spirit of the Talmud and 
who are not familiar with the custom of the ancients, 
especially of Orientals, of veiling their theological, 


269 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maimon 
Majority 





ethical, and philosophical teachings in fable and alle- 

gory, can tind in the old rabbinical writings matter 

for derision. 

Maimon was the author of the following Hebrew 
works, of which only the first has been published: 
“ Gib‘at ha-Moreh,” a commentary on the first part 
of Maimonides’ * Moreh Nebukim,” preceded by a 
sketch of the history of philosophy (Berlin, 1791); 
“Ta‘alumot Hokmah,” on mathematical physics; 
and “Heshek Shelomoh,” The last work is in four 
parts: (1) * Ma‘asch Nissim,” on the twelve sermons 
of R. Nissim; (2) “‘Ebed Abraham,” on Ibn Ezra’s 
commentary on the Pentateuch and Psalms; (8) 
“Ma'‘aseh Libnat ha-Sappir,” reflections; (4) “ Ma- 
‘asch Hosheb,” on algebra. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. J. Wolff, Maimoniana, Berlin, 1813; J. H. 
Witte, Solomon Maimon, Berlin, 18/6; Ed. Erdmann, Gesch. 
der Newern Philosophie, iii., part 1, p. 510, Leipsic, 1853 ; 
Geiger’s Jiid. Zeit. iv. 189; 8S. Bernfeld, in Ha-Shiloah, 1901, 
p. 226; 8. Hodgson, Philosophy of Experience, Preface; 


Venn, Symbolic Logic, Preface; Watson, Salomon Maimon, 
Toronto, 1890; Zangwill, Dreamers of the Ghetto. 


K. I. Br. 
MAIMONIDES, MAIMUNI. See Moses BEN 
MaAIMON. 


MAIMONISTS. See FrRAncE; Moses BEN Matr- 
MON, 
MAINTENANCE. Scc HUSBAND anpD WIFE. 


MAINZ. Sce MAYENCE. 


MAISON, KARL: Bavarian merchant, manu- 
facturer and deputy; born in Oberdorf, Wtrttem- 
berg, Sept. 18, 1840; died in Munich Sept. 29, 1896. 
He was educated at the primary and Latin schools 
at Oberdorf, and received a business training at 
Offenbach-on-the-Main. When Maison attained his 
twenty-fourth year be became a partner in the 
firm of A. Maison, established in Munich. In 1871 
Maison was appointed a “Commerzienrat” and 
became a member of the Upper Bavarian Chamber 
of Commerce avd Manufacture in 1875. Subse- 
quently he was elected a director of that body 
and chosen Danish and Swedish-Norwegian con- 
sul. Maison represented Munich in the Chamber 
of Deputies from 1887 to 1896. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bettelheim, Biog. Jahrbuch, 1900, pp. 40*, 41*. 
s. N. D. 
MAJOR, JULIUS: Hungarian composer of 

music; born Dee. 18, 1859, at Kaschau on the 

Hernad, chief town of Aber Uj Var district, Hun- 

gary. He commenced his studies at the Realschule 

in Pesth, intending to become an engineer, but left 
that institution and entered the Landesmusikaka- 
demic, where he was a pupil of Volkmann and 

Erkel. Subsequently he was appointed music- 

teacher in various institutions, and at the present 

time (1904) he holds the office of instructor in 
music at the Jewish teachers’ seminary at Buda- 

pest. At the Pesth gymnasium he organized a 

pupils’ orchestra; in 1894 he founded the Hun- 

garian Women’s Chorus; and in 1896 he established 

a school of music which enjoyed considerable 

popularity. 

Major is an excellent pianist and has become 
Known through his composition of chamber-music. 
His works include: two trios; several violin sonatas; 
a piano concerto; a serenade for stringed orchestra : 


a “ Hungarian Sonata”; several songs; and choruses 
for female voices. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Riemann, Musik-Lexikon. 

s. L. V. 

MAJOR, SOLOMON IBN: Turkish rabbi; 
flourished toward the end of the sixteenth century 
at Salonica, where he was head of the yeshibah. 
Many distinguished rabbis were Major's pupils, 
among them being Joseph Florentin, Abraham Fal- 
con, and his own son Moses ibn Major. He was the 
author of a number of responsa, some of which are — 
printed in the “Teshubot” of Hayyim Shabbethai 
(Salonica, 1651), some in the latter’s “Torat Hay- 
yim ” (2b. 17138), and some in Judah Lerma’s “ Peletat 
Bet Yehudah” (Venice, 1647). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, pp. 44b, 46a; Fiirst, 
Bibl. Jud. ii. 316. 
D. M. SEL. 


MAJORCA. See BALEARIc ISLANDs. 


MAJORITY (319): 1. More than half of a given 
number or group; the greater part: applied to opin- 
ions. In their endeavor to find a Biblical basis for 
every principle of law the Rabbis interpreted Ex. 
xxiii. 2 so as to derive the majority principle from 
it (Sanh. 3b). But since this passage stands in con- 
nection with laws regulating the administration of 
justice, the principle was applied only where a deti- 
nite number (HP NANA RAY) was concerned, as when 
a difference of opinion arose among the judges con- 
stituting a court of justice (see ACQUITTAL); or as in 
the case, frequently quoted in the Talmud, where a 
piece of meat was found in a street that contained nine 
shops for kasher meat and one for terefah, in 
which case it was held that the meat came from one 
of the kasher shops, since they were in the majority. 
Other Biblical passages and laws had to be em- 
ployed in order to find a Mosaic basis for the majority 
principle where the numbers were not definite (R314 
wp mnmo7; Hul. 11a, b). The principle was fol- 
lowed in all Jegal and ritual enactments and 
gave rise to a number of maxims, by which the 
Rabbis were guided in the decision of various cases. 
For instance, the majority of women marry when 
they are virgins (Ket. 16a); most children are born 
after nine months of pregnancy (Yeb. 37a); most 
women give birth to healthy children (Yeb, 36a); 
the majority of idolaters are loose in their moral 
conduct (Ket. 18b); most of those engaged in the 
ritual slaughtering of animals are expert (Hul. 3b); 
most of the actions of minors are of no value (Hul. 
86a); the majority of animals yield milk only after 
they have borne young (Bek. 20b); most sick peo- 
ple recover, while most of these who are dangerously 
sick (“ goses ”) do not recover (Git. 28a). 

These and many similar maxims scattered through- 
out the Talmud were valuable not only in the deci- 
sion of a doubtful case (see HAzaKaw), but also in 
determining the state of an object. There were, 
however, some rabbis who would not be guided 
entirely by the majority principle, holding that 
the case under consideration might belong to the 
exceptional minority (Rnd wom). R. Meir(Yeb. 
61b) forbade a minor from performing the levirate 
rite or the halizah, declaring that he might later 
be found to be impotent, although the majority of 


Majority 
Makkedah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


270 





persons are not impotent. Rt. Jose (Yeb. 67a, b), R. 

Akiba (Bek. 20b), R. Tarfon (Mak. 7b; comp. Hul. 

11b; Tos. Hul. 11b, s.z. “ Lahosh”), and many other 

tannaim and amoraim also, were careful to provide 
for the minority. But the consensus of opinion 
among the Rabbis was to follow the majority in all 
cases, even where capital punishment was involved 

(Sanh. 69a). 

The performance of the greater part of an act 
was sometimes counted, on the majority principle, 

as equivalent to the performance of 

‘*Major- the whole act. If, in slaughtering an 
ity” of an animal, one cuts through the greater 

Act. part only of the esophagus aud the 

windpipe, although the Law requires 

that both these be severed, the animal is ritually fit 

for food (Hul. 27a; see SHEHITAH). Similarly, after 

the greater part of achild’s body protrudes from the 
womb), the child is considered as born (Nid. 29a). 

When the principle of majority conflicted with 
the principle of hazakah the former took prece- 
dence (IXid. 80a). The same is the case when it con- 
flicts with the principle of proximity (“karob”; B. 
B. 23b). The principle of majority does not apply to 
monetary cases (B. B. 92b; B. Kk. 27b; Tos. B. K. 27b 
s.v. “Ko.”), While in the case of a disagreement 
among the judges the opinion of the majority is 
followed (see ACQUITTAL), in the case of disagreeing 
witnesses majority is entirely disregarded. If a 
hundred witnesses testified toa certain fact and two 
witnesses refuted their testimony the testimony of 
none was believed (Mak. 5b; Maimonides, “ Yad,” 
‘Edut, xviii. 8; see EVIDENCE). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Goitein, Kesef Nibhar, s.v. 315, Lemberg, 
1895; Hamburger, R. B. T. s.v. Mehrheit; Yad Malaki, ii. 
157, Berlin, 1857; Jalish, Melo ha-Ro‘im, s.v. 315, Halber- 
stadt, 1859. 

2. The age at which the law permits one to man- 
age his own affairs; full age; maturity. No deti- 
nite age of maturity is given in the Bible. To the 
army. only those above twenty years of age were 
admitted (Num, i. 8). This was also the age-limit 
for those who had to pay the half-shekel when the 
people were counted (Ex. xxx. 14). Th: Levites 
were admitted to service at the age of thirty (Num. 
iv. 28; comp. viil. 24, where twenty-five is given as 
the age-limit; in I Chron. xxiii. 27 and in Ezra iii. 8 
the age-limit is put at twenty; comp. Hul. 24a), and 
were dismissed from service at the age of fifty 
(comp, 7.). In the case of vows to the sanctuary 
(“‘arakin ”), mention is made of various ages with 
regard to determining the assessment value of the 
individual (Lev, xxvii. 1-8; see Estimate; Vow). 

The Rabbis, however, reckoned the age of matu- 
rity from the time when the first signs of puberty 
appear (Nid, 52a), and estimated that these signs 
come, With women, about the beginning of the thir- 
teenth year, and about the beginning of the four- 
teenth year with men. From this period one was 

regarded as an adult and as responsi- 

The Age ble for one’s actions to the laws of the 

of community, In the case of females, 
Maturity. the rabbinic law recognized several 
distinct stages: those of the “ketan- 

nah,” from the age of three to the age of twelve and 
one day ; the “ na‘arah,” the six months following that 


- xe. 10). 


period; and the * bogeret,” from the expiration of 
these six months. In the case of males, distinction 
was made in general only between the period prece- 
ding theage ot thirteen and one day and that follow- 
ing it, although, as will be seen below, other stages 
were occasionally recognized. 

The attainment of the age of majority, however, 
did not of itself render one an adult; the prescribed 
age and the symptoms of puberty together were 
necessary to establish the majority of a person. If 
there were no signs of puberty at the age of ma- 
jority (@.e., at the beginning of the thirteenth year 
in a female and at the beginning of the fourteenth 
in a male) the person retained the status of a minor 
until the age of twenty. If after that period signs 
of impotence developed, thus explaining the absence 
of the signs of puberty, the person was admitted to 
the status of an adult; if such signs did not develop, 
the person remained in the status of a minor until 
the age of thirty-five yearsand one day—the greater 
part of the time allotted to man on earth (comp. Ps. 
In the case of a woman, the bearing of 
children was regarded as sufficient to establish her 
majority (Yeb, 12b; Maimonides, “ Yad,” Ishut, ii. 
9; comp. “Maggid Mishneh” and “ Lehem Mish- 
neh” ad loc.; for the whole subject see Nid. v. 3-8; 
vi. 1, 11-12; “ Yad,” @.c. ch. it.). 

The ketannah might be given in marriage by her 
father, and the marriage was valid, necessitating a 
forma] divorce if separation was desired. Her carn- 

ings and her findings, also, belonged 
Marriage to her father, and he could annul her 
of Minors. vows and accept a divorce for her 
(Nid. 47a; Ket. 46b). In the absence 
of her father, her mother or her brothers might con- 
tract a marriage for her, but such @ marriage might 
be annulled by her without any formality before 
she reached the age of maturity (see Mr’un),  Ille- 
gitimate intercourse with her carried with it the reg- 
ular punishment for the transgressor, although she 
could not be punished (Nid. 44b). The na‘arah, 
however, although still under the control of her 
father (Kid. 41a), was considered a responsible per- 
son; her vows were valid (Nid. 43b). The boge- 
ret was regarded as entirely independent of her 
father’s will and was looked upon as an adult in all 
respects (Nid. 47a). 

The Rabbis recognized in males a stage similar 
to that of the ketannah. A boy nine years of age 
was regarded as being of a nubile age, so that if he 
had illegitimate intercourse with a woman forbidden 
to him she would be liable to punishment, a‘though 
he could not be punished until he reached the age 
of maturity—thirteen years and one day (Nid. 44a). 
His marriage, however, was not valid (Kid. 50b; 
“Yad,” d.¢, iv. 7), although he could acquire a * yeba- 
mah” through intercourse (Nid. 45a; B. B. 156)). 
A. stage similar to that of the na‘arah was recog- 
nized by the Rabbis in the case of the rebellious son 
(Deut. xxi. 18-21), The period during which one 
might become liable to the punishment inflicted 
upon the rebellious son was extended to include 
the three months (six months in Yer. Sanh. viii. 1) 
immediately succeeding the age of maturity (Sanh. 
69a). After a boy had reached the age of maturity 
he was regarded a responsible person in all ritual 


271 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Majority 
Makkedanh. 





and criminal matters, and the court inflicted pun- 
ishment upon -him for any transgressions. The 
Rabbis entertained the belief that heavenly punish- 
ment was not visited for sins committed before the 
age of twenty (Shab. 89b; comp. B. B. 121b; Mah- 
zor Vitry, ed. Hurwitz, p. 550; Hakam Zebi, Re- 
sponsa, § 49; but comp. “Sefer Hasidim,” ed. Wis- 
tinetski, § 16, where the opinion is expressed that 
the heavenly punishment does not depend on age 
but on the intelligence of the transgressor; see also 

Asher ben Jebiel, Responsa, xvi. 1). 
According to the Mosaic law minors are unable 
to enter upon any business transaction. The Rabbis, 
however, provided that those who are 


Business above the age of six and manifest an 
Transac- appreciation of business dealings 
tions of should be able to dispose of movable 
Minors. property (Git. 09a, 65a). After they 


had reached the age of maturity they 
might dispose even of real property that came into 
their possession through gift or purchase, but they 
could not dispose of inherited immovable property 
until they reached the age of twenty (B. B. 155a, 
156a; see CoNsENT; Girrs; INFANCY). The same 
principle was followed with regard to their testi- 
mony. After the age of thirteen and one day their 
testimony was admitted, though in general only 
when the disposition of movable property was in- 
volved. If, however, they showed signs of intelli- 
gence and of an appreciation of the value of their tes- 
timony, they might testify also in cases involving im- 
movable property (B. B. 155b; “ Yad,” ‘Edut, ix. 8). 
Minors were disqualified from testifying in any case, 
although the testimony of an adult with regard to 
incidents that he had witnessed in his minority was 
in some cases admitted into evidence (Ket. 28a; B. 
K. 88a; see EvriDENCE). For the age at which one 
might become a judge sce JUDGE IN RABBINICAL 
LITERATURE. 

Although the minor was considered not responsi- 
ble for any act of his and could not be summoned to 
court for any injury caused to another by him or 
by his property, still when one of his animals 
showed signs of viciousness (see GoRING Ox) the 
court was obliged to appoint some one to take 
charge of the animal. There isa difference of opin- 
jon among the Rabbis as to what should be done if 
it caused damage after that, some thinking that the 
damage should be collected from the minor’s prop- 
erty, and others that the trustee should pay the 
damages (B. K, 89a). 

On arriving at the age of maturity the boy is 
obliged to observe all the cominandments of Juda- 
ism (Ab. v. 21; comp. Mahzor Vitry, f.c.; see Bar 
Mizwan). From that time on he may be counted as 
one of the ten needed for public worship (Shulhan 
‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 55, 9), and he may even act 
as hazzan in case of emergency, although, as a rule, 
the hazzan is required to have a full 
beard (Hul. 24b; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Ze, 
58, 6-8). While the minoris regarded 
in many respects as incapable of per- 
forming religious observances (Kil. xvii. 15; Toh. 
viii, 6; Maksh, vi, 1) and is placed in the same cate- 
gory as the deaf-mute and the idiot (see DEAF 
AND DumB; INSANITY) still parents are enjoined to 


Religious 
Majority. 


train their children in the observance of religious. 
duties and customs even before they reach the age 
of maturity. On the Day of Atonement children of 
nine years of age should be made to fast part of the 
day, and those who have reached the age of eleven 
and are healthy should fast the whole day (Yoma 
78b, 82a). In all other religious observances, as in 
making the pilgrimage to Jerusalem on every festi- 
val (Hag. 2a, 6a), in attending the general assembly 
on Sukkot following the Sabbatical year (Hag. 3a; 
see Deut. xxxi. 12), and in wearing zizit or tefillin 

(Ar. 2b), the father is expected to train his child 

during various stages of its minority. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Léw, Die Lebensalter in der Jtidisehen. Li- 
teratur, Szegedin, 1875; Mayer, Die Rechte der Israeliten, 
Athener und Rémer, ti. 126, Leipsic, 1866; Mendelssohn, 
Ritualgesetze der Juden, pp. 83-85, Berlin, 1793; Mielziner, 


Jewish Law of Marriage and Divarce, pp. 11-74, Cincin- 
nati, 1884. 


s. J. H. G. 


MAKAT, EMIL: Hungarian poet; born at 
Mako Nov. 17, 1871; died at Budapest Aug. 6, 
1901; son of Rabbi A. E. Fischer. He was edu- 
cated at the Rabbinical Seminary in Budapest and 
distinguished himself as a student by his poct- 
ical talent. Some of the medieval Hebrew pocts, 
like Gabirol, Ha-Levi, Moses ibn Ezra, Al-Harizi, 
and Immanuel of Rome, he made known by his happy 
renderings of their productions. He wrote also 
“Absalom,” a Biblical drama; “Zsidé Kbéltékbél” 
(1891), a collection from the Hebrew poets; and 
“Enekek Eneke” (1892); and he published a few 
volumes of lyric poetry. 

8. . A. KE. 


MAKKEDAH: City situated, according to the 
Priestly description of tribal boundaries and groups 
of cities contained in the Book of Joshua (xv. 41), 
among the foot-hills bordering upon Judah and ex- 
tending westward to the maritime plain. It is men- 
tioned also several times in the narrative (Josh. x.) 
of the pursuit of the routed forces of the allied south- 
ern kings by the Israehtes under Joshua, and once 
(xii, 16) in the list of the princes conquered during 
the southern campaign. Apparently Makkedah 
was a stronghold of some importance, being deemed 
worthy of especial mention side by side with Lib- 
nah, Lachish, and Hebron (x. 28-87). Near the city 
was a large cave in which the five allies sought 
refuge. When this was reported to Joshua he 
ordered the exit of the cave to be blocked by boul- 
dersand guarded. The army then followed the flee- 
ing enemy and accomplished its utter defeat. On 
its return to Makkedah the five kings were led out 
and executed. 

The site of Makkedah is muchin doubt. Warren 
was the first to identify it with the modern Al-Mu- 
ghar (“the cave”), several miles southwest from 
Ekron, aud about eight miles from the sea and 
twenty-five miles from Gibeon. The determining 
reason for this identification is the presence of caves 
at Al-Mughar. According to Major Conder it is 
the only site in the Shefelah where caves are to be 
found. Eusebius declared that Makkedah was eight 
miles east of Eleutheropolis, but this seems incred- 
ible. 

S, F, K. §. 


Makkot 
Makower 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


272 





MAKKOT (7120 = “blows,” “ punishments”) : 
Treatise of the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Gemara (Pal- 
estinian and Babylonian). Itis fifth in the order of 
Nezikin (“ Damages”), following Sanhedrin, to which 
in contents it is closely related and with which it 
was formerly united (see Maimonides, “ Hakdamah”). 
It is divided into three chapters (containing respect- 
ively 10, 8, and 16 mishnayot), and treats of the 
conditions under which false witnesses are pro- 
nounced guilty of, and punished for, conspiracy 
(Deut. xix. 16 e¢ seg.); of the conditions under which 
the homicide is interned in a city of refuge (Ex. xxi. 
18; Deut. xix. 4-5); of the penalty of flagellation 


(Deut. xxv. 1 e¢ seg.), when incurred and how ad- ! 


ministered. Following is an epitome of its con- 
tents: 

I. According to the Pentateuchal law, the false 
witness suffers the penalty which he intended should 
fall on his guiltless brother (Deut. xix. 19), How- 

ever, there are cases where the same 


Contents penalty can not be intlicted, as where 
of First conspirators would degrade a priest 
Section. by falscly declaring him to be the off- 


spring of a union between a priest and 
a divorcée, a union that would debar him from par- 
ticipating in priestly functions (Lev. xxi. 138-14); or 
where they would bring about an innocent man’s 
banishment to a city of refuge by falsely charging 
liim with manslaughter. In either case the same 
penalty can not be imposed: in the first instance, 
because the witnesses’ children, who are entirely in- 
nocent, would be tainted; in the second, because the 
cities of refuge are for the protection of the invol- 
untary homicide only (see HomictpE). Therefore 
the penalty is commuted from degradation or intern- 
ment to flagellation. But in general the same pen- 
alty is meted out to false witnesses. Thus, where 
they conspire to have one adjudged indebted to an- 
other in a certain sum of money, and it is legally 
proved that their testimony is fabricated, they are 
jointly condemned to pay the accused a like sum. 
Or, where thev testify that A had borrowed from 
B a certain sum to be repaid at the end of a 
month, and it is proved that the loan was made 
for ten years, they are jointly fined to the 
amount that would be given for the use of the sum 
in question for the period of ten years less the one 
month. 

Where the penalty involved is capital or corporal 
punishment, each of the confuted witnesses is sub- 
jected to the full penalty. Thus, if they aver that 
a certain man had been sentenced to receive thirty- 
nine lashes, but had escaped before the execution of 
the sentence, and itis legally proved that their tes- 
timony is false, each of them will receive thirty-nine 
lashes. However, to subject the confuted witnesses 
to the penalty attached to the crime charged by them 
it must be legally demonstrated that they themselves 
could not possibly have witnessed the crime or the 
transaction concerning which they have testified, sup- 
posing it to have been committed, and it is necessary 
that the court should have pronounced their intended 
victim guilty, but should not have executed the 
sentence before the confutation. Nor can the false 
witnesses be found guilty of plotting and be sub- 
jected to the penalty involved by their accusation un- 


” 


less they constitute a legal number anda legal “ set, 
and unless the whole set is confuted. (See ALDI.) 

If among a large number of witnesses one is dis- 
covered to be debarred from testifying in the case 
before the court, or to be disqualified from bearing 
witness anywhere, the whole number is disqualified. 
An escaped convict, being recaptured and brought 
before the tribunal that had originally convicted 
him, can have no new trial, but is dealt with accord- 
ing to the sentence passed. If suchaone is brought 
before another tribunal and a legal number of wit- 
nesses testify that in their presence a certain court 
had found him guilty of a certain crime, and that he 
had escaped before suffering the penalty, the latter 
court is bound to have the convict duly punished. 
The chapter concludes with sentiments opposed to 
capital punishment. A sanhedrin that averages one 
sentence of death in every seven years is a mur- 
derous tribunal; Eleazar b. Azariah is of opinion 
that it is such if it average one sentence of death in 
seventy years; and Tarfon and Akiba declare that 
they would never have permitted the execution of 
a human being. Simon b. Gamaliel, however, be- 
lieves that removing the fear of punishment would 
contribute toward an increase in bloodshed. 

II. Accidental homicide subjects its author to 
exile in one of the cities assigned as cities of refuge. 
Every Israelite is subject to this law, no exception 
being made on account of descent or station or rela- 

tionship. A parent accidentally kill- 
Accusation ing a child, or vice versa, is subject 


of Acci- to exile; and so is the high priest. 
dental The only exception allowed is in fa- 
Homicide. vorof the sightless. But as “acci- 


dents” admit of gradation, not all 
accidental homicides are subject to the penalty of 
exile (see HoMicIpE). The number of the cities 
of refuge is six—three in Canaan and three beyond 
the Jordan (Num, xxxv, 13-14), and careful provi- 
sion is made for their easy reach. On his way to 
the city the exile is accompanied by scholars whose 
duty it is to defend him against the avenger of 
blood. Once interned in one of the cities he remains 
there for life, or until the death of the high priest 
during whose term the accident occurred (Num. 
XxXxv. 28 et seg.). If the high priest himself is the 
exile, the death of lis successor does not release 
him; neither does the death of a high priest free an 
exile who has slain a high priest. If the exile goes 
beyond the bounds of the city, the avenger of blood 
may kill him with impunity (see AVENGER). In 
case the exile again becomes subject to exile, he is 
transferred from the district in which he had resided 
to another, but he must not leave the city. If 
honors are offered the exile in his asylum, he must 
not accept them without first acquainting the peo- 
ple with the reason for his presence there; if then 
the people think him worthy he may accept. When, 
on the death of a high priest, he returns to his orig- 
inal home, all the property he had left there is re- 
stored to him; but he can not resume an office which 
he held at the time of his banishment. 

IIIf. The third chapter enumerates fifty-nine of- 
fenses, each entailing flagellation. Ofthese, three 
are marital sins of priests: four. prohibited inter- 
marriages; seven, sexual relations of an incestuous 


273 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Makkot 
Makower 





nature; eight, violations of dietary laws; twelve, 
various violations of the negative precepts; twenty- 
tive, abuses of Levitical laws and vows. When the 
offense has been persisted in, the punishment de- 
pends on the number of forewarnings 
Penalty of (see HatTra’an). The Mishnah gives 
Flagella- thirty-nine as the maximum number 
tion. of stripes the court may impose for 
any one misdemeanor; but the con- 
vict must be examined as to his physical ability to 
endure the full count without endangcring his life. 
The convict is bound in bent position to a post, and 
the public executioner administers the punishment 
with a leather strap while one of the judges recites 
appropriate Scriptural verses (Deut. xxviii, 15, 29; 
xxix. 8; Ps. Ixxviii. 38). Any one guilty of a sin 
which is punished by excision may be cleared by 
flagellation. The author of this midrash, Hanina b. 
tamaliel, adds, “If by the commission of a sin one 
forfeits his soul before God, so much the more rea- 
son is there for the belief that, by a meritorious 
deed, such as voluntary submission to punishment, 
his soul is saved.” 

The tractate concludes witha few haggadic pas- 
sages bearing upon the punishment awaiting the 
siuner and the reward reserved for the righteous. 
The Gemara, Jerusalem as well as Babylonian, elab- 
orates the concise rules embodied in the Mishnah, 
citing opinions and counter-opinions, 
Scriptural texts to prove one or the 
other, and precedents. Haggadotalso 
abound there, but chiefly in the Babylonian. The 
following is quoted from the Yerushalmi: Refer- 
ring to the provision that the roads leading to the 
several cities of refuge must be kept in good order 
(ii. 5 [ed. Krotoschin, p. 8]}), Eleazar b. Jacob as- 
serts that there were signs bearing the direction 
*“miklat” (= “refuge,” “asylum ”), and Abun states 
more exactly that the roads were provided with sign- 
posts attached to which were index-hands inscribed 
with the word “miklat.” Thereupon Phinehas re- 
marks, “From the consideration of such merciful 
provisions one can learn the meaning of the saying 
of the Psalmist, ‘Good and upright is the Lord, 
therefore will He point sinners the way [to the city 
of refuge}]’” (Ps. xxv. 8, Hebr.). 


8. 8. 


Gemarot. 


S. M. 


MAKO: Town in Hungary, in the county of 
Csanad. It has a total population of 33,722, of 
which 1,642 are Jews (1900). Jews began to settle 
there about the middle of the eighteenth century, 
under the protection of Stanislavich, the Bishop of 
Csanad, who, in 1740, assigned a special quarter to 
them. They soon formed a community, and by 
1747 had established a hebra kaddisha. The first 
rabbi of Mako was Judah b. Abraham ha-Levi, who 
occupied the rabbinate from 1778 to 1824. He was 
succeeded by Salomon Ullman (1826-63). Ullman 
wrote a commentary on certain sections of Yoreh 
De‘ah, under the title “ Yeri‘ot Shelomoh ” (Vienna, 
1854). He was followed by Anton Enoch Fischer 
(1864-96), former rabbi of Duna-Féldvar. Fischer 
introduced German and (later) Hungarian in his ser- 
mons. Mako has a Jewish school (of which Mar- 
cus Steinhardt has been one of the teachers for 


VHTI.—18 


forty years), established in 1851, a Jewish women’s 
association, a Jewish students’ aid society, anda 
Jewish women’s lying-in hospital. The present 
(1904) incumbent is Dr. A. Kecskemeti. 

D. A. KE, 


MAKOWER, HERMANN: German jurist; 
born at Santomischel, Posen, March 8, 1880; died 
at Berlin April 1, 1898. His father, recognizing the 
inadequate educational facilities of the town, sent 
him, alone and almost penniless, at the age of nine, 
to win a living and an education in Berlin. There 
he attended the Franzésische Gymnasium, secured 
a position as chorister in a synagogue, and met 
Siegmund Meyer, a boy of the same age, with whom 
he formed a friendship that lasted throughout his 
life. Makower gave private lessons, and after grad- 
uation served as “ Referendarius” and assessor, and 
ultimately became “Grundbuchrichter” at the Ber- 
lin city court, a position never before held by one of 
his coreligionists. In 1857 he published his first 
contribution to legal literature, “Die Stellung der 
Vertheidiguog im Preussischen Strafverfahren ” 
(Berlin, 1857). He gave up his prospects for judi- 
cial advancement for the more substantial rewards 
of a career as legal practitioner. 

Makower’s activities in the sphere of commercial 
law were inaugurated by his “Studien zur Konkurs- 
ordnung vom 8. Mai 1855” (Berlin, 1861). In the 
following year appeared his great work, in the prep- 
aration of which his friend Siegmund Meyer co- 
operated with him—“ Das Allgemeine Deutsche 
Handelsgesetzbuch, Nebst dem Preussischen Ein- 
fiihrungsgesetze vom 24. Juni 1861, und der In- 
struktion vom 12. Dezbr. 1861, fiir den Praktischen 
Gebrauch aus den Quellen Erliutert ” (Berlin, 1862; 
1ith ed., 1893); this was followed by “Zur Revision 
der Deutschen Konkursordnung ” (23, 1894), and by 
a number of minor writings on insurance companies 
and the protesting of bills and notes, and by discus- 
sions of various points in commercial law. 

He enjoyed a very large and lucrative practise, 
and won for himself a clientele among the greatest 
men of his time. One of the celebrated canses with 
which he was identified was that of the historian 
Theodor Mommsen, charged with slandering Prince 
Bismarck. He opened his argument at one of the 
several trials of this case with these words: “Two 
princes represent antithetical views; one, a prince 
of diplomacy, the other, a prince of learning; one, 
a man who makes history, the other, a man who 
writes history”; after appealing to the highest 
courts of the empire Mommsen was finally acquitted 
(1883). 

Makower was Zealously interested in the commu- 
nal and congregational life of the Jews in Berlin, 
and earnestly supported the efforts to sustain the 
Lehranstalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums. 
For its benefit he delivered a lecture, Jan. 10, 1881, 
entitled “ Unsere Gemeinde ” (Posen, 1881), Another 
contribution to the literature of Jewish communal 
affairs was his treatise on “Die Gemeinde- Verhialt- 
nisse der Juden in Preussen” (Berlin, 1873). He 
was instrumental in the publication of the “ Re- 
gesten zur Geschichte der Juden im Deutschen 
Reich,” and was one of the most active in collabora- 


Makre 
Malachi 





tion on the “ Grundsitze der Jiidischen Sittenlehre.” 
From 1866 to 1892 he was a member of the board 
of the Jewish community of Berlin; from 1870 to 
1892 he was its president. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bernhard Breslauer, Hermann Makower, in 
Ally. Zeit. des Jud. 1898, pp. 162-163, 173-175, 185-188, 200~ 
202; Justizrath Meyer, Justizrath Hermann Makower, in 
Deutsche Juristen Zeitung, ii. 162-165. 

S. M. Co. 


MAKRE DARDEKE: Name given in the Mid- 
die Ages to Hebrew glossaries primarily intended 
for the use of students of the Bible; its literal mean- 
ing is “teacher of children.” The first and most 
noteworthy work of this kind is the one published 
at Naples in 1488, the author of which is Perez 
Trévét. The work gives every Hebrew vocable, ac- 
companied by a translation into Italian and Arabic 
and a short explanation in Hebrew, at times quoting 
the French glosses occurring in the Bible commen- 
tary of Rashi and in the works of R. David Kimhi. 
The work was composed in 1395, in southern Italy, 
with the purpose of promoting a better understand- 
ing of the Scriptures among the Italian Jews (who 
had neglected Biblical for Talmudic studies), in order 
to enable them to answer successfully Christian and 
Moslem attacks on Judaism. This work is of im- 
portance for the fourteenth-century Italian it con- 
tains. Similar works, based on this, were afterward 
produced in other countries, French, German, or 
Spanish being substituted for the original Italian 
and Arabic. The Italian glosses of the “Makre Dar- 
deke” were published separately by M. Schwab in 
“R. E. J.” (xvi. 258 ef seq.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bodek, in Ortent, viii. 612-618: Griinbaum, 
J tidiseh-Deutsche Chrestomathie, pp. 521 et seq.; Giidemann, 
Gesch. ti. 206; Perles, Beitrdige zur Gesch. der Hebr. und 
Aram, Studien, pp. 118-130. 

G. GTi 

MAKSHAN, SAMUEL BEN PHINEHAS 
HA-KOHEN: Bohemian Talmudist of the six- 
teenth century; born in Prague. He wrote: “Te- 
hillat Dibre Shemuel,” commentary on the Targum 
of Esther (Prague, 1594 [according to Zunz, “Z. 
G.” p. 278; 1601 according to other bibliogra- 
phers]); “Bet Din shel Shemuel,” commentary on 
Rashi to Esther and Ruth and on the Targum of the 
latter (Lublin, 1606); “ Yegon Leb,” commentary on 
Lamentations (Cracow, n.d.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 318; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bodl. col. 2495. 

D. M. SEL. 

MAKSHIRIN (“Predisposings ”): Name of the 
eighth tractate, in the Mishnah and Tosefta, of the 
sixth Talmudic order Tohorot (‘“ Purifications ”). 
This tractate contains six chapters, divided respect- 
ively into 6, 11, 8, 10, 11, and 8 sections, while the 
Tosefta has only three chapters and 31 sections. It 
treats of the effects of liquids in rendering foods 
with which they may come into contact susceptible, 
under certain conditions, of Levitical uncleanness. 
It is based on the Scriptural provision, “If any water 
be put upon the seed, and any part of their carcass 
fall thereon, it shall be unclean” (Lev. xi. 88; see 
34 et seg.). From this the Rabbis deduce (1) that 
foods are not susceptible of uncleanness by contact 
with the carcass of a reptile unless the foods have 
first been moistened (see Hul. 36a); and (2) that as 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


274 


Scripture, in the passage just cited, uses the expres- 
sion jm 8D, which, when vowelless, may be read 
either “kiyuttan ” (= “if it be put”) or “ki yitten” 
(= “if one will put”), and as “ putting ” is necessa- 
rily the result of intention, “being put” also must be 
accompanied by intention (see B. M. 22b). Where 
this condition is absent the contact of liquid with 
foods will have no effect. Hence the general rule 
elaborated in the first chapter following. 

Ch. i.: All liquids (“mashkin”; see vi. 4 e¢ seq.), 
when originally desired (expected to be beneficial), 
though ultimately unwelcome, or when the reverse 
is the case (not desired originally, but ultimately 
acceptable), predispose loose fruit moistened by them 

to Levitical uncleanness. Thus if one 

General  shakesatree to bring down some fruit, 

Principle. or adead reptile, and at the same time 
some drops of water fall from the tree 
on fruit lying near by, the water does not come under 
the law of ki yuttan, or the fruit under liability to 
uncleanness by contact with a defiling object; but 
when one’s intention is to shake off the rain- water or 
the dewdrops, the loose fruit moistened thereby be- 
comes susceptible to uncleanness. Where water is 
used for other than its ordinary purposes, as where 
one submerges fruit or vegetables to secrete them 
from thieves, the effect is not to render the fruit lia- 
ble to defilement. A precedent under this ruie is 
cited from the history of the last days of Judea’s 
struggle against the Romans, when some citizens of 
Jerusalem secured their fig-cakes from the sicarii by 
hiding them under water, the Rabbis deciding that, 
under the circumstances, the submersion did not 
predispose the food to uncleanness. Similarly, fruit 
that is floated down a river is not subject to the 
rule of ki yuttan. 

Ch. ii.: In doubtful cases, objects and conditions 
are classified by a majority rule. For example, the 
defiling effects of receptacles of waste water used 
in common by Jewsand Gentiles will depend on the 
majority using them; if the majority are non-Jews 
the water will be considered Levitically unclean, but 

where the majority are Jews the water 


Doubtful will be considered Levitically clean. 
Cases. Where these are equally divided the 
presumption of uncleanness will pre- 

vail. The majority rule is not limited to questions 


of clean and unclean; it serves as a criterion in 
other matters, ritual and even civil. 

Ch. iii.-vi. 3 continue the discussion of the main 
subject in connection with the Scriptural expres- 
sion “ki yuttan.” Ch. vi. 4-8 enumerates the mash- 
kin which render loose fruit Hable to Levitical un- 
cleanness through contact with defiling objects. Ac- 
cording to the Rabbis, the term “ mashkin” covers 
seven kinds of liquid: dew, water, wine, oil, blood, 
milk, and honey (see Tosef., Shab. viii. [ix.}] 24- 
28, where Scriptural phraseology is adduced to 
prove the connotation of “mashkeh”). “Water” 
includes discharges of the eye, ear, and other organs. 
There is no Gemara, Yerushalmi or Babli, to this 
treatise. 

8. S. 


MALABAR. See CocuHIn. 
MALACH, HAYYIM. See Hayyim Mau’ag. 


S. M. 


275 


MALACHI, BOOK OF.—Biblical Data: The 
Book of Malachi is the last in the canon of the Old 
Testament Prophets. It has three chapters in the 
Masoretic text, while in the Septuagint, the Vul- 
gate, and the Peshitta it hasfour. The King James 
Version also, following the latter versions, has four 
chapters. As in the books of Isaiah, Lamentations, 
and Ecclesiastes, the last verse in the Masoretic text 
is a repetition of the last verse but one. The style 
of the book is more prosaic than that of any of the 
other prophetical books; the parallelism met with in 
the others is here less pronounced, and the imagery 
often lacks force and beauty. The method of treat- 
ment is rather novel; it approaches the teaching 
method of the schools; Cornill speaks of it as “ casu- 
istic-dialectic.” Thus the prophet first states his 
proposition; then he follows with remonstrances 
that might be raised by those he addresses; finally 
he reasserts his original thesis (comp. 1. 2 e¢ seq., 6 et 
seg.; ii. 18 et seg., 17; ii}. 8, 18 ef seg.). This form 
adds vividness to the argument. The book may be 
divided into three sections—(1) i. 1-ii. 9; (2) ii. 10- 
17: (8) iii. (A. V. iii. and iv.), the divisions given 
being those of the Masoretic text. 

Ch. i. 2-ii. 9 represent Yuwu as Ruler and loving 
Father. It opens with a tender allusion to the love 
shown by YHwu to Judah in the past; yet Judah 
acted faithlessly, deserting its benefactor. Malachi 
then addresses himself to the priests, 
those who are to lead the people in the 
way of Yuwu. He castigates them 
for being derelict in their duty by offering on 
YuHWAH’s altars polluted bread and animals that have 
blemishes. By doing so they show that they de- 
spise YHwH (i. 6-10). But Yuwnr can do without 
their worship, for the time will come when the 
whole heathen world will worship Him (i. 11-14). 
If the priests will not heed the admonition, dire 
punishment will be visited upon them (1. 1-8). 

Ch. ii. 10-17 speaks of Yow as the supreme God 
and Father of all, and inveighs against those who 
had left their Jewish wives and married heathen 
women. 

Ch. iii. (A. V. iii. and iv.) speaks of YuHwu as the 
righteous and final Judge. It begins with the an- 
nouncement that the messenger of YuwH will come 
to prepare the way for Him by purifying the social 
and religious life (1-4). Yuwa will call to judg- 
ment all those who have transgressed the moral law 
and have been lax in the observance of the ritual; 
He invites all who have gone astray to return to 
Him and receive His blessings (5-15). The faithful 
will be blessed, while those who persist in disobey- 
ing the law of God will be punished (16-21). The 
book closes with a final exhortation to the godly. 

Malachi, as opposed to the other prophetical 
books, lays much stress upon ceremonial observance 
(i. 6 et seg., 18 ef seg.; ill. 7 e¢ seg., 22): the priest is 
Yuwn’s messenger (ii. 7, iil. 3 e¢ seg.), and the law 
of Moses, with its statutes and observances, must be 

strictly observed (ili. 22). Yet he is 

Prophetic nota formalist; the book breathes the 
Tone. genuine prophetic spirit. Thus, from 
the idea of the brotherhood of all 

Israelites he deduces the social duties which they 
owe to one another (ii. 10). Ceremonial observance 


Contents. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Makre 
Malachi 


is of value in his eyes only so long as it leads to 
spiritual service. In scathing language he lays 
bare the moral degeneracy of his time, a time given 
over to adultery, false swearing, oppression of the 
hireling and the widow and the fatherless (iii. 5 
et seqg.). Especially severe is he toward those who 
had entered into wedlock with heathen women (ii. 
11-16). 

The conditions that existed under his predecessors 
Haggai and Zechariah seem to have existed at the 
time of Malachi. The Exile is a matter of the past; 
the Temple is built, and sacrifices are being offered 
(i. 10, iii. 1-10). Malachi describes most faithfully 
the temper of his generation. The people had 
strayed away from Yuwu, and sought, by an as- 
sumption of indifference and by mockery, to hide 
their restlessness. The exiles had been disillusioned 
when they found the land of their fathers a wilder- 
ness. Drought, locusts, failure of harvests (ili. 10 
et seg.) had deepened their discontent. Yuwu’s 
sanctuary had been rebuilt, but still their condition 
did not improve; they were growing impatient and 
were asking for proofs of Yuwu’s love (iii. 13 et 
seg.) Under the pressure of these unfavorable cir- 
cumstances, priests and people neglected to show 
YuwH the honor due to Him (i. 2 e¢ seq.). Malachi 
lays stress upon the inevitableness of the Day of 
Judgment, the coming of which would prove to the 
skeptical that devotion and fear of God are not in 
vain, but will be rewarded. The messenger of 
YuwH and the Last Judgment form the closing 
theme of Malachi’s prophecy. The messenger will 
come in the person of Elijah, who will regenerate 
the people and restore them to union with Yawn. 
——In Rabbinical Literature: Malachi is iden- 
tified with Mordecai by R. Nahman and with Ezra 
by Joshua b. Karha (Meg. 15a). Jerome, in his 
preface to the commentary on Malachi, mentions 
that in his day the belief was current that Malachi 
was identical with Ezra (“Malachi Hebrai Esdram 
Existimant”). The Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel 
to the words “By the hand of Malachi” (i. 1) gives 
the gloss “Whose name is called Ezra the scribe.” 
According to Sotah 48b, when Malachi died the 
Holy Spirit departed from Israel. According to R. 
H, 19b, he was one of the three prophets concerning 
whom there are certain traditions with regard to the 
fixing of the Jewishalmanac. A tradition preserved 
in pseudo-Epiphanius (“De Vitis Proph.”) relates 
that Malachi was of the tribe of Zebulun, and was 
vorn after the Captivity. According to the same 
apocryphal story he died young, and was buried in 
his own country with his fathers. 

—Critical View: The name sonby is not a 
“nomen proprium”; it is generally assumed to be an 
abbreviation of sonbp (= “messenger of YHWH”), 
which conforms to the Maaayiac of the Septuagint 
and the “ Malachias” of the Vulgate. The Septua- 
gint superscription is év yepi ayyéAov airov, for 13 
s9NoY. Wellhausen, Kuenen, and Nowack consider 
ch.i. 1 a late addition, pointing to Zech. ix. 1, 
xii. 1. Cornill states that Zech. ix.-xiv. and Malachi 
are anonymous, and were, therefore, placed at the 
end of the prophetical books. Mal. ii, 1 shows al- 
most conclusively that the term ‘38> was misun- 
derstood, and that the proper name originated in a 


Malachi 
Malea 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


276 





misconception of the word. The consensus of opin- 
ion seems to point to 432-424 B.c. as the time of 
the composition of the book. This was the time 
between the first and second visits of Nehemiah to 
Jerusalem. Some assert that the book was written 
before 458 B.c., that is, before the arrival of Ezra in 
Jerusalem. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Boehme, in Stade’s Zeitschrift, vii. 210 et seq.; 
Driver, Introduction; D. Knobel, Prophetismus der He- 
brder, i. 386, Breslau, 1837; Bleek, Introduction to the Old 
Testament, 2d ed., i. 8573; Cornill, Einleitung in das Alte 
Testament, pp. 205 et seq.. Freiburg, 1896; Cornill, The 
Prophets of Israel, p. 158, Chicago, 1895, AG 
Ss. 5 ; 


MALACHI, ABRAHAM. Sce ABRAHAM 
MALAKI. 


MALACHI B. JACOB HA-KOHEN: Prom- 
inent Talmudist and methodologist of the eighteenth 
century; the last of the great rabbinical authorities 
of Italy; died before 1790. He was dayyan at Leg- 
horn, and apparently lived to an old age. A deci- 
sion by him, dated Nisan, 1782, and referring to a 
civil case at Rome, is included in the responsa of 
Rabbi Isaiah Bassani of Reggio (“ Todat Shelamim,” 
No. 11, Venice, 1741). 
Eybeschiitz and Emden he sided with the former 
(letter of the rabbinate of Leghornin “ Luhot ‘“Edut,” 
p. 22). He is especially famous for his “ Yad Mal- 
‘aki” (Leghorn, 1767; Berlin, 1856; Przemysl, 1877), 
a methodological work in three parts: part one con- 
tains an alphabetical list of all the rules and tech- 
nical terms foundin the Talmud, with explanations ; 
part two deals with rules regarding the codifiers; 
part three treats of the rules relating to legal deci- 
sions, explaining certain general principles of legal 
responsa. Malachi wrote also a liturgical work, 
“Shibhe Todah” (Leghorn, 1744), containing prayers 
for the 22d of Shebat, a fast-day instituted by the 
community of Leghorn. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 63; Steinschnei- 

der, Cat. Bodl. col. 1644. 

8. 8. J. Z. L. 

MALAGA (npbn, apd, mpxdx): Spanish 
Mediterranean seaport; capital of the province of 
Malaga; said to have been founded by the Phenicians. 
Malaga was an important place of commerce in the 
time of the Romans and had Jewish inhabitants at a 
very carly date. During the Moorish supremacy the 
Jews there enjoyed complete equality and, espe- 
cially in the time of Samuel ibn Nagdelah, were 
even held in high esteem, although under the Al- 
mohades they shared the sufferings of their brethren 
in the rest of Spain. The sources of information 
are very scanty concerning the Jewish commu- 
nity of Malaga, which, although not so large as 
those of Seville, Cordova, and Granada, was still of 
some importance. When the city was taken by the 
Spanish, Aug. 18, 1487, the Jews from Seville and 
Cordova, who had been baptized by force and had 
sought protection in Malaga from the persecutions 
of the Inquisition, were cruelly tortured and killed. 
All the Malaga Jews, 400 to 450 in number, mostly 
women who spoke Arabic and dressed like Moorish 
women, were taken captive and condemned to sla- 
very with the remainder of the inhabitants. The 
young Solomon ibn Verga was sent to the Spanish 
communities to collect money for their ransom, and 


In the controversy between 


succeeded in raising 20,000 gold doubloons. With 
this sum, added to the money and jewels the cap- 
tives themselves possessed, they were redeemed and 
sent to Africa in two sailing vessels by the chief 
tax-collector Don Abraham Senior, who had be- 
come a Christian and who, probably because of his 
change of faith, is not mentioned by the contempo- 
rary Jewish chroniclers. After the year 1492 Jews 
were no longer allowed to live in Malaga, though 
Maranos were still found there in the eighteenth 
century. Malaga is the birthplace of Solomon ibn 
Gabirol, and there lived Isaac ha-Levi ibn Hakam 
ha-Sofer (a contemporary of Isaac b. Sheshet), 
Judah aud Moses Alashkar, and others. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bernaldez, Cronica de los Reyes Catolieos, 


ch. Ixxxvi. et seg.; Gratz, Gesch. viii. 348; Zacuto, Sefer Yu- 
hasin, p. 22%a; Rios, Hist. iii. 299; Shebet Vehudah, p. 108. 
G. M. K. 


MALBIM, MEIR LOB BEN JEHIEL 
MICHAEL: Russian rabbi, preacher, and ILebra- 
ist; born at Volochisk, Volhynia, in 1809; died at 
Kiev Sept. 18, 1879. The name “Malbim” ts de- 
rived from the initials of his name (o»aSp), and be- 
came his family name by frequent usage. Malbim 
was educated in Hebrew and Talmud by his father 
and by his stepfather (R. L6b of Volochisk). He 
showed unusual talent from his early childhood, and 
his works indicate that 
he had a considerable 
knowledge of secular 
sciences. From 18388 
to 1845 he was rabbi of 
Wreschen, district of 
Posen, and in the lat- 
ter year was called to 
the rabbinate of Kem- 
pen, where he remained 
until 1860; he was 
thereafter known as 
“der Kempener.” In 
1860 Malbim became 
chief rabbi of Bucha- 
rest, Rumania. Buthe 
could not agree with 
the rich German Jews 
there; they wished to 
introduce the Re- 
formed rite, and did 
not shrink even from violence in the pursuit of their 
aims. By intrigues they succeeded in throwing him 
into prison, and though he was liberated through 
the intervention of Sir Moses Montefiore, it was 
upon the condition that he leave Rumania. 

Malbim went to Constantinople and complained 
to the Turkish government, but obtained no satis- 
faction. After staying six months in Paris, he went 
to Lencziza, government of Kalisz, Russian Poland, 
as successor to his deceased father-in-law, Hayyim 
Auerbach (1866). Shortly after he was rabbi at 
Kherson, and thence was called to the rabbinate 
of Moghilef, on the Dnieper (1870), There, too, his 
lack of subservience provoked the resentment of the 
richer Jews; these denounced him asa political crimi- 
nal, and the governor of Moghilef ordered him to 
leave the town. Malbim then went to Kénigsberg as 
chief rabbi of the Polish community, but there he 





Meir L6b Malbim. 


277 


fared no better than in Bucharest and Moghilef ; 
he was continually harassed by the German Jews. 
When Malbim passed through Wilna in 1879 the 
community there would have appointed him rabbi 
in place of Isaac Elijah Landau, but the governor 
of Wilna opposed the election on the ground that 
he could not sanction the appointment of arabbi who 
had been expelled from Moghilef as a political crimi- 
nal. In September of the same year Malbim was on 
his way to Krementchug, to the rabbinate of which 
town he had been appointed, when he fell sick and 
died at Kiev. 

Malbim was the author of: “ Arzot ha-Hayyim,” 
commentary aud novelle on the Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
Orah Hayyim (Breslau, 1837); “ Arzot ha-Shalom,” 
collection of sermons (Krotoschin, 1839); “ Ha- 
Torah weha-Mizwah,” commentary on the Penta- 
teuch and Sifra (Warsaw, 1874-80); “ Mikra’e Ko- 
desh,” commentary on the Prophets and Hagiographa 
(2b. 1874; this commentary is double—on the words 
and on the sense; Malbim always endeavored to ex- 
plain the different meanings of synonyms); “ Mashal 
u-Melizah,” dramatic philippic, in verse, against 
hypocrisy (Paris, 1867). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Der Israelit, 1879, p. 1079; S. Sachs, in Ha- 

Lebanon, ii. 92 et seq., 106 et seq. 

H. R. M. SEL. 

MALCHA : Russian town, in the government of 
Grodno. A Jewish community existed in Malcha 
in 1588, when, in consequence of rumors current as 
to the killing of a Christian laborer by the Jews, the 
kahal of Malcha invited the constable of the district 
of Brest, Alexander Shavlovski, to visit Malcha 
and investigate the matter. No evidence being 
found to justify the rumor, the Jews made a formal 
protest against the spreading of the accusation. It 
has a total population (1903) of about 3,000, half of 
whom are Jews. Of the latter, 291 are artisans. 
In the hadarim 90 Jewish children are instructed, 
and in the two Talmud Torahs, 40. The charitable 
organizations consist of a bikkur holim, a gemilut 
hasadim, ete. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regestyi Nadpisi, p. 383, St. Petersburg, 1899. 

H.R. S. J. 


MALCHIN. Sce MECKLENBURG. 


MALCHUS (CLEODEMUS THE PROPH- 
ET): Hellenistic writer of the second century B.c. 
His Semitic name, “ Malchus,” a very common one 
in Phenicia and Syria but not met with among the 
Jews, combined with the pagan traditions abounding 
in his work, has given rise to discussions concerning 
his origin. Ewald supposes him to have been a 
Phenician; Herzfeld, a Syrian; Freudenthal en- 
deavors to prove that he was a Samaritan; and 
Schtirer holds that he must have been either a Jew 
or a Samaritan. 

Cleodemus was the author of a history of the 
Jews in Greek, in which Jewish traditions are 
blended with Greek mythology. A short notice of 
this history, which is no longer in existence, is 
quoted by Josephus (“ Ant.” i. 15) from Alexander 
Polyhistor. Cleodemus relates that among the sons 
of Abraham and Keturah were three, Apher, Surim, 
and Japhran ('Adépav, ’Acovpeiu, ‘Idépav), from 
whom the town of Aphra, the land of Assyria, and 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Malachi 
Malea 


em 2 RTS cr 


Africa derived their names. He relates further that 
these three sons helped Hercules in his fight against 
Libya and Anteus, and that Hercules married the 
daughter of Aphra, by whom he had ason, Didorus, 
from whose son Sophon the Sophacians derived their 
name, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ewald, Gesch. vii. 91: Herzfeld. Gesch. des 
Volkes Israel, iii. 498, 573; Freudenthal, Alerander Poly- 
histor, p. 1380 et passin; Schiirer, Geseh. iii. 357 (Eng. transl 


ii. iii. 

i I. Br. 
MALEA (MALEHA; MELEA), MEIR 
DE: “Almoxarif mayor”; chief farmer of taxes ot 
King Ferdinand III. (the Holy) of Castile, whose 
favor he gained through his honesty and zeal in the 
interest of the state. Don Meir, who was versed in 
the Talmud and was held in high esteem by his co- 
religionists, is called by Moses ben Nahman “the 
great prince, the learned Don Meir Almoxarif.” Fer- 
dinand’s son and successor, Alfonso X. (the Wise), 
whose finances, in consequence of the troub!ed con- 
dition of the state, were in great confusion, em- 
ployed, after the death of Don Meir, his sons Don 
Zag (Isaac) and Don Juzef, who inherited the influ- 
ence and position of their father, to remove the 
financial difficulties. When Alfonso desired to sub- 
due his vassal Aben Nathfot de Niebla. Don Zag 
undertook the provisioning and administration of 
the entire army, being given as security the lease 
of all the customs duties and taxes. 

Don Zag remained the only lessee of taxes until 
1276, when he met competitors in the persons of his 
brother-in-law Don Abraham ibn Xuxen (Shushan) 
and one Roy Fernandez of Sahagum, and was com- 
pelled to enter into partnership with them. For 
two years these three paid the king an annual rent 
of 80,000 gold maravedis. Don Zag, who possessed 
the complete confidence of the king, took, with his 
brother Don Juzef, in addition to the lease of the 
taxes, that of the fines, most of which were concerned 
with commerce and customs, and the officials of the 
king were placed at their disposal to recover such 
fines. They certainly rendered in this capacity great 
services to the state, but they nevertheless incurred 
in no small measure the anger of the population. 

Don Zag, who was exceedingly wealthy, fell sud- 
denly, through the following incident, from the 
height upon which he stood: When King Alfonso 
undertook the siege of the city of Algeziras, he or- 
dered the almoxarif to employ in victualing the army 
the large sum which he had collected as tax-Jessee. 
Just then Don Zag was accidentally met by the in- 
fante, Don Sancho, who was in conflict with his royal 
father, and the infante succeeded in taking the 
money from Don Zag under the pretext that he 
wished to send it to his mother, Donna Violante, 
living in separation from the king. The king, ex- 
ceedingly enraged, ordered Don Zag and the other 
Jewish tax-lessees to be thrown into dark dungeons. 
When the infante returned to Seville from his victo- 
rious campaign against the Moors, in the autumn of 
1280, the king had the unfortunate Don Zag dragged 
through the city and executed in the presence of the 
infante. The infante had endeavored to relieve the 
almoxarif, who was suffering on his account and 
who had rendered such valuable services to the state, 
but all his endeavors proved futile. One Sabbath 


Malekar 
Manasseh 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


278 





shortly after, when all the Jews of Castile and Leon 
were in their synagogues, they were seized by order 
of Alfonso, who demanded 12,000 gold maravedis, 
and imposed a fine of another 12,000 for every day 
of delay. The deposition of Alfonso, which took 
place several years later, stands in no relation to the 
execution of Don Zag. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zufiiga, Anales de Sevilla, i. 297, 318; Mar- 
ques de Mondejar, Memorias Historicas del Rey Sabio, pp. 
297, 367: Moses b. Nahman, Responsa, Nos. 284, 322; Rios, 
Hist. i. 488 et seq.: Gratz, Gesch, vi. 165; Kayserling, Gesch. 
der Juden in Spanien, i. 118, 218. - 

G. M. K. 
MALEKAR, MOSES BAPUJEE: Beni-Israel 
soldier; bornat Bombay about 18380. He enlisted in 

the 12th Regiment Native Infantry Apri] 12, 1851; 

was made subahdar Jan. 1, 1863; subahdar-major 

Feb. 15, 1878. He received the second class Order 

of British India in 1879, and later that of the first 

class, with the title of “Sirdar Bahadur.” He was 
present at the siege and capture of Kotah and at the 
action of Bunnas (awarded medal and clasp). On 
his retirement he was made justice of the peace. 

J. J. Hy. 


MALICE. Sce INTENTION. 


MALINOVSKI, JOSEPH. Sce TROk1, Joseru 
B. MORDECAI. 

MALKA BEN AHA: Gaon of Pumbedita from 
V7L to 773. Theonly fact known concerning him is 
that, with Hanrnar Kaw ANA BEN HUNA (765-775), he 
opposed Natronai ben Habibai, who, for unknown 
reasons, endeavored to supplant the exilarch Zakkai 
ben Ahunai; the two geonim succeeded in compel- 
ling Natronai to leave Babylonia. Natronai prob- 
ably settled in Kairwan. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Letter of Sherira Gaon, in M, J. C. i. 36, 
188; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, iii. lléa et seqg.; Gratz, 
Gesch. v. 174, 2d ed., Vv. 420; Weiss, Dor, iv. 27, 29. 

SS. M. Sc. 

MALKI, EZRA BEN RAPHAEL: Rabbi of 
Rhodes in the seventeenth century ; brother-in-law 
of Hezekiah cde Siiva, the author of “ Peri Hadash.” 
Malki was the author of “ Malki ba-Kodesh ” (Salo- 
nica, 1749). This work contains novell on the laws 
of Passover given in the Shulhan ‘Aruk (Orah Hay- 
yim) and in the “ Bct Yosef”; commentaries on the 
Pesah Haggadah and on the parts of the Yad ha-Ha- 
zakah which contain the laws concerning the Pass- 
over lamb, Rosh ha-Shanah, Yom Kippur, and lu- 
lab; novell on the “ Sefer Mizwot ha-Gadol”; and 
collectanea. He wrote also: “Shemen la-Ma’or” 
(Constantinople, 1760), novelle on the first chapter 
of Baba Mezi‘a, in which he defends Zerahiah ha- 
Levi against the attacks of Nahmanides; “ ‘En Mish- 
pat” (¢b. 1770), responsa; “*Enot Mayim” (Salonica, 
1811), sermons. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii., s.v. wsp3 125D; 
First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 320; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. 
Mus. p. 508. 

s. M. SEL. 

MALKI, RAPHAEL MORDECAI: Rabbin- 
ical scholar and physician of Palestine; lived at 
Safed about 1627. He was versed in astronomy and 
philosophy, and was the author of a commentary 
on the Pentateuch entitled “ Perush ‘al ha-Torah.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hazan, Ha-Ma‘alot lieShelomoh, p. 89. 
$s. M. FR. 


MALKUT SCHLAGEN. Sec Srripes. 


MALTER, HENRY: American rabbi and 
scholar; born at Zabno, Galicia, March 23, 1867; 
educated at the Zabno elementary school, and at 
the universities of Berlin (1889-93) and Heidelberg 
(Ph.D. 1894). He pursued his Jewish studies at the 
Veitel Heine-Ephraimsche Lehranstalt, Berlin (un- 
der Steinschneider) from 1890 to 1898, and at the 
Berlin Hochschule from 1894 to 1898, receiving his 
rabbinical diploma from the latter institution. He 
acted as librarian of the scientific library of the 
Jewish community at Berlin in 1899, and in 1900 
was appointed professor of medieval philosophy and 
Arabic at the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati; 
since 1902 he has also filled the office of rabbi of the 
Sheerith Israel Congregation of Cincinnati. His 
publications include: “Sifrut Yisrael,” a Hebrew 
edition of Steinschncider’s “Jewish Literature,” 
with additional bibliographical notes; “Die Be- 
schneidung in der Neueren Zeit” (in Glasberg’s 


_ “Die Beschneidung,” Berlin, 1896); “ Die Abhand- 


lung des Abu Hamid al-Gazzali” (Frankfort-on-the- 
Main, 1896); “Katalog der von Fischel Hirsch 
Nachgelassenen Biicher ” (Berlin, 1899). He has also 
contributed to “Ha-Maggid,” “Ha-Shiloah,” “ Mi- 
Mizrah umi-Ma‘arab,” “Jiidischer Volkskalender,” 
“Deborah,” “American Journal of Semitic Lan- 
guages,” and the “ Hebrew Union College Journal” 
and “ Annual.” A. 


MALVANO, GIACOMO: Italian diplomat; 
born at Turin Dec. 14,1841. In 1862 he entered the 
diplomatic service, and by 1887 had become envoy 
extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary; two 
vears later he was appointed councilor of state, and 
shortly afterward became general secretary in the 
ministry of foreign affairs, In 1875-76 he formed 
one of a committee appointed to draft certain com- 
mercial treaties; in 1879 he attended the monctary 
conference held at Paris, as the delegate of the Ital- 
jan government. In 1891-92 he arranged a number 
of commercial treaties with Austro-Hungary, Ger- 
many, and Switzerland. He was repeatedly nomi- 
nated vice-president and member of council of the 
Italian Geographical Society; he still (1904) occu- 
pies the latter position. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Gubernatis, Diz. Biog. 

s. V. C. 

MAMON (MAMMON): Mishnaic Hebrew 
and Aramaic for “riches.” The word itself is given 
in the Sermon on the Mount. “ Ye can not serve 
God and maminon ” (Matt. vi. 24). There is no evi- 
dence that there was a Syriac god of this name, the 
modern idea that such a god existed being derived 
from Milton’s personification of the name—“ Mam- 
mon, the least erected spirit that fell from heaven ” 
(“Paradise Lost,” i. 679). The word occurs in 
Abot ii. 12, where almsgiving is called “ the salt of 
Mammon or riches.” Gesenius suggests that the word 
was derived from “matmon” (“treasure”), with as- 
similation of the“ tet.” Thespelling with three“ m’s,” 
however, is apparently not justified; the Greek form 
with two is held by most scholars to be correct. 

J. 

MAMRAN: A check; an expression used by 
Polish Jews from the end of the sixteenth to the be- 


279 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Malekar 
Manasseh 





ginning of the nineteenth century. The word is 
derived from “membrana,” Low Latin equivalent 
for “promissory note.” It was first used by Mordecai 
Jafehin “ ‘Ir Shoshan ” (ch. 48), and was recognized 
by the law of East Prussia of 1801. Later laws, 
declaring that in legal documents only the language 
of the country may be used, threw the term into 
disuse. There ‘are various forms of the word— 
“mamre,” “mamram,” “mamrama,” “mamrame,” 
etc., and a number of false etymological derivations 
(e.g., from 9h = “to exchange”; or from “ Maha- 
ram” [Meir] Lublin, supposed to have introduced it). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bloch, Der Mamran (j707), der Jtidiseh- 

Tae Wechselbricf, in Berliner Festschrift, Berlin, 


A. D. 


MAMZER. See BASTARD. 


MAN, SON OF (Hebrew, “ben adam” or “ben 
enosh”; plural, “ bene adam”; Aramaic, “bar 
enash,” “bar nasha,” or “bar nash”): Individual 
of the species man; synonym of “man.” While “ben 
enosh” occurs only in Ps. exliv. 3, the term “ben 
adam” is found exclusively in poetic (Num. xxiii. 
19; Ps. viii. 5[ A. V. 4]) and prophetic passages (Isa. 
li. 12; Jer. xlix. 18). The expression is used with 
particular force about ninety times in Ezekiel, from 
ch. ii. 1 on, as the title by which the prophet is ad- 
dressed by YHwus, obviously to accentuate the great 
distance between him, the earth-born mortal, and the 
sublime God who speaks tohim. Most of the Jewish 
commentators, whom modern exegetes follow, take 
the title in that sense. “God addressed him thus in 
order to make him feel that, though God speaks to 
him, he is still a frail human being” (comp. “bene 
adam” with “bene ish” [the former denoting the 
humbler, and the latter the higher, classes of men] 
in Ps. xlix. 3 [A. V. 2]). 

The expression “sonof man” (“bar enash ”) has a 
peculiar use in Dan. vii. 18. Daniel in a vision 

sees “one like the son of man coming 
In Daniel. on[A. V. “ with”] the clouds of heaven 

and appearing before the Ancient of 
Days,” to receive from Him “the dominion, the 
glory, and the kingdom for all time” (Hebr.). 
There is no dispute among commentators that Israel 
is thereby meant; but they differ as to the question 
whether the “son of man” depicted is merely a per- 
sonification of the people, or whether the writer had 
in mind a concrete personality representing Israel, 
such as the Messiah or Israel’s guardian angel, the 
archangel Michael. The latter interpretation, pro- 
posed by Cheyne and adopted by others, has little 
in its favor compared with the older opinion that the 
person of the Messiah is alluded to—a view shared 
by the Rabbis (Sanh. 98a; Midr. Teh. to Ps. ii.; 
comp. the name “‘Anani” in Targ. to J Chron. iii., 
and “bar nefele” [= “son of the clouds”] in Sanh. 
96b) and the Apocalyptic as well as Christian writers 
(Enoch xxxvii.-]xxi.; IV Esdras xiii. 3; Justin 
Martyr, “Dialogus cum Tryphone,” p. 31, and 
Ephraem Syrus in his commentary to Daniel, Lc. ; 
see also the commentaries of Nowack and others to 
the passage). 

It is this double use of the term “son of man” 
in the New Testament time and in New Testament 
documents which has caused great confusion to the 


recorders and translators as well as to the exegetes 
of the New Testainent. Asis seen in Enoch and 1V 
Esdras (1.¢.), “son of man” was among the Apoca- 
lyptic writers a favorite term for the Messiah, and 
accordingly it occurs frequently in Messianic apoca- 
ly pses embodied in the New Testament (Matt. xxiv.- 
xxv.; Mark xiii. 26; Luke xxi, 27, 36) and in Messi- 
anic prophecies which are ascribed to Jesus regarded, 
in accordance with this conception, as the “son of 
man” in the clouds (of glory) (Matt. xii. 40; xiii. 
27, 41; xvi. 27; xix. 28; xxvi. 64; Mark viii. 38, 
xiv. 62; Luke xii. 40; xvii. 22-80; xviii. 8, 31; xxii. 
69; John i. 51, iii. 13, v. 27, vi. 62). 

The term “sonof man” hasa quite different mean- 
ing in such sayings as “the son of man is Jord even 
of the Sabbath day ” (Matt. xii. 8 and parallels). It 
denotes simply man as master over the Sabbath in 
the same sense given it in the saying of the Rabbis, 
“The Sabbath is given over unto you, but not you 

unto the Sabbath ” (Mek., Ki Tissa, 1). 


General- In many passages the expression “son 
ized Use of man” is used in the sense of “that 
of Term. person,” or “ myself,” a use of it known 


to have been common in Talmudic 
times. Thus when Jesus says “the son of man hath 
not where to lay his head ” (Matt. viii. 20), he means 
simply “myself”; and likewise when he speaks of 
his future suffering and betrayal, the term “son 
of man” has nothing to do with the Messianic 
title (Matt. xvii. 22 and parallels). Afterward the 
records confounded the two usages, and conse- 
quently Matthew uses the term promiscuously in 
a manner which has to this day puzzled most of 
the commentators (see Wellhausen, “Des Menschen 
Sohn,” in “Skizzen und Vorarbeiten,” 1899, pp. 187- 
215; and comp. Dalman,.“ Die Worte Jesu,” 1898, 
pp.191-218). 

The following passage in Yer. Ta‘an. ii. 65b is 
remarkable. Commenting on Num. xxiii. 19 (“God 
is not a man that he should lie, neither the son 
of man that he should repent”), R. Abbahu, who 
had frequent disputations with Christians in Ces- 
area and was therefore acquainted with their termi- 
nology, said: “ Ifa man says,‘ [am God,’ he lies; if he 
says, ‘Iam the son of man,’ he will repent; if he 
says, ‘I will ascend to heaven,’ he will not succeed.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cheyne, Eneye. Bibl.; Wellhausen, Skizzen 
und Vorarbeiten, 1899, pp. 187-215. K 
XA. 


MANASSEH: 1. The elder of two sons born 
before the famine to Joseph and Osnath, daughter 
of the priest of Heliopolis (Gen. xli. 50-51, xl1vi. 
20). Biblical etymology, deriving his name from 
nw) (= “to forget”), makes it signify “He who 
causes one to forget,” and explains it in the passage 
“God... hath made me forget all my toil” (2d. 
xli. 51). According to Gen. xlviii. 5, Manasseh 
and Ephraim were put by the patriarch Jacob on 
an equality with Reuben and Simeon as progeni- 
tors of separate tribes. In the blessings invoked 
by Jacob on the heads of Manasseh and Ephraim, 
Manasseh, although the elder, was made subordi- 
nate to Ephraim (7b. xlviii. 14), Tradition does 
not tell what caused Jacob’s preference for Eph- 
raim (see EPHRAIM and. Junior Rieut). Notwith- 
standing his subordination, Manasseh’s blessing 


Manasseh 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


280 





was not to be despised. Manasseh, like Ephraim, 
was to be protected by “the Angel which redeemed ” 
Jacob “from all evil,” and was to grow into a great 
people (7b. x]viii. 16, 19). Because Gen. xlviii. 20 
reads, “in thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make 
thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh,” the phrase “ God 
make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh” has been 
given a place in the benediction Jewish parents pro- 
nounce over their sons on the eves of Sabbaths and 
holy days. I Chron. vii. 14 reports that Manasseh 
was married toa Syrianconcubine. Targums Jeru- 
shalmi and pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xlil. 23 make the 
statement that Manasseh was steward in Joseph’s 
house, acted as interpreter for Joseph when the 
latter talked to his brothers, and possessed extraor- 
dinary physical strength, which he displayed at the 
imprisonment of Simeon. 

J. W. R. 

2. One of the twelve tribes of Israel which re- 
ceived a portion in the land of Canaan; its eponym 
was a son of Joseph. While at the time of the 
Exodus Manasseh numbered 82,200 (Num. i. 35, ii. 
21) against Ephraim’s 40,500 (Num. 1. 382-38, ii. 
19), before Israel’s entrance into Canaan forty years 
later Manasseh had increased to 52,700 (Num. xxvi. 
84), and Ephraim had fallen to 32,500 (Num. xxvi. 
87). This made Manasseh rank sixth in numerical 
importance, the tribes more numerous being Judah, 
Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, and Asher. 

During the march through the Sinaitic desert 
Manasseh’s position was, with Ephraim and Benja- 
min, on the western side of the Tabernacle (Num. 
ii. 18-24); the chief of the tribe was Gamaliel, son of 
Pedahzur (Num. i. 10, ii, 20, vii. 54). 

The Targums of Jerusalem and pseudo-Jonathan 
to Num, fi. 18 report that the standard of the three 
Rachel tribes revealed the figure of a boy, with the 
inscription: “The cloud of the Lord rested on them 
until they went forth out of the camp”; and the 
Talmud mentions that Manasseh’s tribal banner, 
during the journey to the Promised Land, consisted 
of a black flag with the embroidered figure of a 
unicorn. Among the twelve spies sent by Moses to 
report on Canaan, Manasseh was represented by 
Gaddi, son of Susi (Num. xiii. 11). Manasseh is re- 
corded as prompting the enactment of laws regula- 
ting the possession of property in Canaan by daugh- 
ters where the father had died without a son; the 
particular case in question was that of the daughters 
of Zelophehad (Num. xxvii. 1-8). 

Manasseh was valorous. It took a prominent 
part in the defeat of the natives encountered on 
both sides of the Jordan. Reference is made to its 
prowess in Num. xxxii. 39; Deut. iii.14; Josh. xvii. 
1; and particularly in I Chron. v. 18-22. Its war- 
riors Machir, Jair, and Nobah conquered the most 
difficult districts, Argob and the hills of Gilead. 
The fearless chieftains Gideon, who with a small 
army defeated the Midianites (Judges vi. 15), and 
Jephthah, who vanquished the Ammonites (Judges 
xi.), belonged to Manasseh. 

The territory inhabited by Manasseh lay on both 
sides of the Jordan. The part east of the Jordan 
was acquired after the conquest of Gilead (Num. 
XXxli.), and was requested on the ground of being 
specially adapted for the grazing of cattle—the 


same argument as that urged by Reuben and Gad 
for preferring that section of Canaan. The boun- 
daries of Eastern and Western Ma- 

Territory nasseh can not be given with exactness. 

of Eastern Manasseh probably extended 

Manasseh. from the Jabbok to Mount Hermon 

(its northern portion consisting of 

Argob and Bashan), while Western Manasseh ex- 

tended from Ephraim, lying directly south, to the 

slopes of Mount Carmel (comp. Josh. xvii. 15: “Get 
thee up to the wood country ”). 

Although more numerous than Ephraim shortly 
before the conquest of Canaan, Manasseh did not 
compare with Ephraim in wealth, power, and pop- 
ulation in later times; Western Manasseh never 
completely expelled the natives (Josh. xvii. 12; 
Judges i. 27). 

At the time of David’s accession to the throne, 
Western Manasseh sent to Hebron 18,000, and East- 
ern Manasseh 120,000—Reubenites and Gadites in- 
cluded. After this event Eastern Manasseh gradu- 
ally disappears and Western Manasseh lacks 
prominence, although both sections had separate 
rulers; Joel, son of Pedaiah, governed the latter, 
and Iddo, son of Zechariah, governed the former (I 
Chron. xxvii. 20-21). 

Manasseh is heard of in the revival under Asa; in 
the Passover celebration in the days of Hezekiah; 
in the subsequent attack on idolatry; in the reform 
instituted by Josiah; and in the restoration of the 
Temple (II Chron. xv. 9; xxx, 1, 10-11, 18; xxxi. 
1; xxxiv. 6, 9). 

Like Reuben and Gad, Manasseh ultimately lost its 
identity ; it became assimilated with the inhabitants 
of the country, whose idolatries it practised. The 
children of Manasseh “ transgressed against the God 
of their fathers, and went a-whoring after the gods 
of the people of the land, whom God destroyed be- 
fore them” (I Chron. v. 25). In Ps. Ix. 9 (A. V. 7) 
and cviil. 8 Manasseh is called a most precious pos- 
session. | 

J. W. R. 

3. According to II Kings xxi. 1, Manasseh, the 
successor of Hezekiah upon the throne of Judah, was 
but a boy of twelve at his father’sdeath. His reign 
of fifty-three years is the longest recorded in the 
annals of Judah. There can be no doubt that Sen- 
nacherib, the King of Assyria, departed to his capi- 
tal in the days of Hezekiah (II Kings xix. 36), re- 
garding Judah as a conquered and tribute-paying 
province; and so it remained during the reigns 
of Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, his successors 
upon the throne of Assyria. In their published in- 
scriptions Manasseh of Judahis distinctly mentioned 
as a vassal king (Schrader, “K. B.” ti. 148, 238). 
That these sovereigns cherished a real interest in their 
western domain is shown by their settlement of col- 
onists in Samaria (Ezra iv. 2, 9-10). Each of them 
invaded and plundered Egypt and maintained pro- 
tracted sieges of the strong cities of Phenicia. 

In If Kings, written within a century or so of 
Manasseh’s death, there is no hint of revolt. The 
Chronicler, however, declares (II Chron. xxxiii. 11) 
that in consequence of the deliberate unfaithful- 
ness of Judah God brought upon the nation “the 
captains of the host of the King of Assyria,” who 


281 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





took Manasseh in chains to Babylon. Thence. hav- 
ing truly repented, he was restored to his throne, 
where he demonstrated the genuine- 
ness of his change of heart by giving 
himself to measures of defense, ad- 
ministration, and religious reform. To 
harmonize the Chronicler’s testimony 
with that of the Hebrew contemporary writings is 
even more difficult. The crying need in the days 
of Josiah, Manasseli’s immediate successor, was re- 
ligious reform; Jeremiah declared (xv. 4; comp. II 
Kings xxili. 26) that Manasseli’s sins had yet to be 
ex piated. 

The writer in Kings emphasizes three deplorable 
details of the reign of Manasseh: the religious re- 
action which followed hard upon his accession; its 
extension by the free adoption of foreign cults; and 
the bitter persecution of the prophetic party. Dur- 
ing Manasseh’s half-century the popular worship 
was a medley of native and foreign cults, the influ- 
ence of which was slow to disappear (Ezek. viii.). 

Such a reaction involved the persecution of those 
who had bitterly condemned the popular syncretism. 
The prophets were put to the sword (Jer. ii. 30). 
“Innocent blood” reddened the streets of Jerusalem 
(II Kings xxiv. 4). For many decades those who 
sympathized with prophetic ideas were in constant 
peril. 

J. F. K. 8. 

4. Son of Johanan the high priest and brother of 
Jaddua; married Nicaso, daughter of Sanballat 
(Josephus, “Ant.” xi. 7, § 2). In Neh. xiii. 28 he 
is referred to as “one of the sons of Joiada, the son 
of Eliashib the high priest,” but is not mentioned 
by name. It is further said (¢d.) that, owing to his 
being Sanballat’s son-in-law, Nehemiah had deposed 
him from the priesthood. 

Josephus describes this fact at greater length. 
He says that the high priest Jaddua, Manasseh’s 
brother, was himself indignant at Manasseh on ac- 
count of his marriage with a foreign woman, and, 
joining the people of Jerusalem, he gave Manasseh 
the alternative of divorcing his wife or of leaving 
the priesthood. Manasseh went to Sanballat, and 
declared to him that in spite of his love for his wife 
he gave the preference to the priesthood. Where- 
upon Sanballat promised him that if he would retain 
his wife he would obtain for him from the king the 
dignity of a high priest. He further promised that 
he would build with the king’s approval a temple 
upon Mount Gerizim, where Manasseh should offici- 
ate ashigh priest. Manasseh, accordingly, remained 
with his father-in-law and became high priest in the 
Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim (“ Ant.” xi. 8, 
$§ 2-4). Still, Josephus says (2b. xii. 4, $1) that 
Manasseh officiated as high priest at Jerusalem be- 
tween the priesthood of his nephew Eleazar and 
that of Onias II. (see SANBALLAT). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. ii. 161, 167, 242; Schiirer, Gesch. 

3d ed., i. 182. 

G. M. Set. 

MANASSEH, PRAYER OF: Greek poetic 
composition attributed to Manasseh, son of Heze- 
kiah, King of Judah, “when he was holden captive 
in Babylon” (II Chron. xxxiii. 11-13, 18-19). It is 
found among the Canticles which, in some of the 


Relations 
with 
Assyria. 


Manasseh 


Septuagint manuscripts, are appended to the Book 
of Psalms, and is placed at the end of II Chronicles 
in some Latin manuscripts (see Swete, “The Old 
Testament in Greek,” ii., pp. viii. and xi., and iii., 
pp. vi. and 802-804; Sabaticr, “ Bibl. Lat.” iii. 1038), 
It is found also in the “ Apostolic Constitutions ” (ii. 
22) and in the “ Didascalia” (where it follows a ref- 
erence to II Chron, xxxiii.). The Latin translation 
found in some Vulgate manuscripts is not by Je- 
rome, but is, according to Fritzsche, “certainly of 
more recent origin.” The Prayer of Manasseh was 
never distinctly recognized as canonical by the 
Church; but it has been deservedly retained by 
Luther, and is included in the authorized English 
version, among the Apocrypha. 

In the “ Apostolic Constitutions ” (ii. 22) the whole 
story of Manasseh is given as an instructive lesson 

to bishops in their dealings with the 
The Story. erring and in the administration of 

justice. The story is based upon II 
Kings xxi. and II Chron, xxxiii, After recounting 
the sins of Manasseh it relates that he was taken 
captive to Babylon, bound in shackles of iron, and 
cast into prison. Bread made of bran and water 
mixed with vinegar was given him in small quan- 
tities, only so much as would keep him alive. In 
his great affliction he repented of his sins, humbled 
himself, and sought Yuwu’s forgiveness. Then 
follows the prayer, after which Yuwn had compas- 
sion upon him. A flameof fire appeared about him, 
his chains and shackles melted, and he was restored 
to Jerusalem and to his kingdom. Thereafter he 
worshiped YHWwH only and sought. to undo the evil 
he had done in the earlier part of his reign. Julius 
Africanus (¢. 221 ¢.E.), apparently, had read the 
story in this form, for he says that “ while Manasseh 
was reciting a hymn his bonds burst asunder, iron 
though they were, and he escaped” (see Hastings, 
“Dict. Bible ”). 

The prayer opens with an invocation addressed to 
the “Lord, Almighty, God of our fathers, Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, and of their righteous seed.” His 
power, glory, and majesty are described, and His. 
compassion, long-suffering, and grace to the repent- 
ant sinner. The passage following (not found in 
the Greek MSS. of the LXX.) declares that God has. 
promised forgiveness to the transgressor and _ has. 
“appointed repentance unto sinners, that they may 
be saved.” He has not appointed repentance only to 
persons such as the Patriarchs, who 
have not sinned, but “unto me that 
amasinner.” There follows a confes- 
sion of sin, couched for the most part 
in general terms. The only approach to specific 
statement is in the words, “I did not Thy will, 
neither kept 1 Thy commandments” (omitted by 
Codex A, “Apostolic Constitutions,” and by Latin 
MSS.); “I have set up abominations and multiplied 
offenses.” This, of course, may be understood as. 
referring to his idolatrous practises. Next he 
pleads for forgiveness, and concludes with a confi- 
dent expectation that God will save him and with 
an outburst of praise for His mercy. 

Ewald and, more recently, Budde (Stade’s “ Zeit- 
schrift,” 1892, pp. 39 et seg.) have maintained the 
view that the Greek version of the prayer is a trans- 


The 
Prayer. 


Manasseh 
Manasseh ben Israel 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


282 





lation from a Hebrew original. This is not impos- 
sible, but it is not supported by sufficient evidence. 
The author was evidently a Jew, 
but the place and date of composi- 
tion can not be definitely ascertained. 
The story in IT Chronicles assumes the 
existence of a Prayer of Manasseh and of various 
details of his life in the “history of Hozai” (R. V.) 
or “of the seers” (LXX., évi Tav Adywr TOY 6porTor). 
This history must have been lost, and the Greek 
prayer is, most probably, the attempt of some pious 
Jew of later times to reproduce it. Schirer (“ Hist. 
of the Jewish People,” division ti., vol. iii., p. 188) 
compares the interpolation of the prayers of Mor- 
decai and Esther as supplements to the Book of 
Esther, and the 
Prayer of Azariah 
and the Song of the 
Three Holy Children 
as supplements to 
the Book of Daniel. 
There is, indeed, 
nothing in the con- 
ception of God's for- 
giving grace to the 
repentant sinner 
which is not implied 
in the story in Chron- 
icles as well as in 
other still earlier Old 
Testament passages, 
as Ex, xxxiv. 6-7, 
and Ps. xxxiv. 18, li. 
17. The emphasis, 
however, upon the 
fact that God is God 
of the penitent as 
well as of the right- 
e0us, and the concep- 
tion of the Patriarchs 
as conspicuous ex- 
amples of the latter, 
point to the later 
Judaism. F.C. Por- 
ter (Hastings, “ Dict. 
Bible ”) thinks it isa ila 
Hellenistic composi- 
tion. So does Swete 
(“Introduction to the 
O. T. in Greek,” p. 258). Nestle (“Septuaginta- 
studien,” 1899, iii.) maintains that the text of the 
prayer in the Greek manuscripts of the Sep- 
tuagint comes from the “Apostolic Constitutions,” 
or from the “ Didascalia,” and that it is not, as has 
been commonly supposed, drawn by the latter from 
the Septuagint. 

There appears to be no trace of the Prayer of 
Manasseh in Jewish tradition. The Jerusalem Tal- 
mud (Sanh. x. 2) relates that Manasseh was put into 
an iron mule, beneath which a fire was kindJed. In 
his torture he prayed in vain to the idols he had 
formerly worshiped. At last he besought the God 
of his fathers, and was delivered (comp. Apoe. Ba- 
ruch, vi. 4). 


Author- 
ship. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Text: Fritzsche, Vet. Test. Grec. Libri 
Apocryphi, pp. xiv., 92; Swete, Old Testament in Greek, 





Manasseh ben Israel. 
@rom the engraving by Salom Italia.) 


iii. 802-804; Nestle, Septuagintastudien, 1899, iii. Conmen- 
taries: Fritzsche, FKxegetisches Handbuch, 1851; Ball. in 
Speaker's Commentary (Apocrypha, li. 362 ef seq.): Rys- 
sel, in Kautzsch, Apukryphen und Pseudepigraphen, 1899 
(transl. and notes). 


T, J. F. McL. 


MANASSEH BEN ISRAEL: Dutch poly- 
histor; born at La Rochelle about 1604 (see Bethen- 
court in “Jew. Chron.” May 20, 1904); died at 
Middleburg, Netherlands, Nov. 26, 1657. After the 
auto da féof Aug. 3, 1608, his parents had thought it 
prudent to leave Lisbon. They soon passed on from 
La Rochelle to Amsterdam, where Manasseh was 
brought up under Isaac Uzziel of Fez, the rabbi of 
the new congregation Neveh Shalom; the latter 
died in 1620 and was succeeded by Manasseh. Two 
years later Manasseh 
married Rachel 
Soeiro. He soon be- 
came distinguished 
as one of the best 
orators of the Am- 
sterdam pulpit, ri- 
valing even Isaac 
Aboab. Thecontrast 
between their preach- 
ing was acutely in- 
dicated by a Spanish 
priest of the time, 
Fra Antonio Vieyra, 
who reported, after 
hearing both, that 
“ Manasseh said what 
he knew and Aboab 
knew what he said.” 
Neither preaching 
nor private tuition 
being sufficient to 
provide him with # 
suitable livelihood, 
Manasseh started the 
first Hebrew press in 
Amsterdam (indeed, 
in all Holland), in 
which he produced a 
Hebrew prayer-book 
(Jan. 12, 1627) set up 
from entirely new 
type, an index to 
the Midrash Rabbah 
(1628), a Hebrew grammar of his teacher’s, Isaac 
Uzziei (1628), and an elegant and handy edition of 
the Mishnah. 

Meanwhile Manasseh ben Israel was occupied with 
the compilation of his chief work, “ El] Conciliador,” 
a laborious enumeration and discussion of all the 
passages contained in the Old Testament which seem 
to conflict with one another. Manasseh brought his 
very extensive rabbinical knowledge to bear upon 
each of these, and wrote, in fluent Spanish, an ex posi- 
tion of the recognized Jewish method of reconciling 
the seeming inconsistencies. The book was almost 
the first written in a modern language by a Jew which 
had an independent interest for Christian readers, 
and it accordingly gave Manassch a wide-spread 
reputation in the learned world. Some of the best 
scholars of his time had correspondence with him— 


283 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manasseh 
Manasseh ben Israel 





Tsaac and Dionysius Vossius, Hugo Grotius, Caspar 
Barleus, Cunzeus Bochart, Huet, and Blondel; Anna 
Marie de Schurman consulted him. His Jewish 
acquaintance Was even more numerous, and in- 
cluded Emanuel Frances, and the Buenos, Abravanels 

(relatives of his wife), Pintos, Abu- 


His dientes, and Henriques. He corre- 
Friend- sponded also with Zacuto Lusitano, 
ships. Daniel Caceres, and Diego Barrassa 


(to whom he dedicated one of his 
works), and assisted Joseph Delmedigo to publish a 
selection of his works at Amsterdam. 
Notwithstanding this wide fame, Manasseh ben 
Israel still found it difficult to obtain a living for him- 
self, wife, and three 
children; be deter- 
mined, therefore, on 
settling in Brazil, 
whither, in 1638, he 
had sent his brother- 
in-law, Ephraim 
Soeiro, on a joint 
venture, At this 
time the three syna- 
goguesof Amsterdam 
were reorganized, 
and, aS seems prob- 
able, Manasseh ben 
Israel lost his position 
as rabbi of the Neveh 
Shalom. In prepara- 
tien for his departure 
lic dedicated the sec- 
ond part of the “ Con- 
ciliador,” which ap- 
peared about that 
time, to members of 
the Jewish commu- 
nity of Pernambuco. 
At this moment the 
brothers Pereira came 
to his aid and estab- 
lished a yeshibah, 
placing him at the 
head (1640). Manas- 
sch was thus enabled 
to devote himself en- 
tirely to authorship 


| 
| 





tion to the countries in Europe where Jews were not 
permitted to live, trusting that by obtaining their 
admission the coming of the Messiah would be ac- 
celerated. He entered into correspondence with 
Christina, Queen of Sweden, ostensibly regarding 
matters of Hebrew learning, but probably with the 
design of getting her help in obtaining for the Jews 
admission into Sweden. But his chief attention was 
directed to securing the readmission of Jews into 
England, with many leading theologians of which 
country he was in active correspondence on this 
point. 
Manasseh attracted the notice of many Protes- 
tant theologians who likewise were convinced of 
the speedy coming of 
the Messiah and who 
naturally desired to 
know the views of 
Jewish theologians 
on a topic so specific- 
ally Jewish. Among 
these Christian theo- 
logians were Abra- 
ham von Franken- 


berg, the Silesian 
mystic, and Johannes 
Mochinger. But it 


was especially several 
of the more mystical- 
minded of the Puri- 
tans in England who 
had become _inter- 
ested in the question, 
and Manasseli entered 
into correspondence 
with several of them, 
including John Dury, 
Thomas Thorow- 
good, and Nathaniel 
Holmes. The first- 
named had _ written 
to Manasseh on the 
subject of the Israel- 
itish descent of the 
American Indians, 
thereby redirecting 
his attention to An- 
tonio de Montesinos’ 





and to his ever-wi- -— C views. Manasseh de- 
dening correspond- enyfich en ft Yale termined, therefore, 
ence with Jewish to write a treatise on 


and Christian literati. 

Manasseh was most profoundly interested in Mes- 
sianic problems, being convinced, for example, of 
the Davidic origin of the Abravanel family, from 
which his own wife was descended. He was full 
of cabalistic opinions, though he was careful not to 
expound them in those of his works that were writ- 
ten in modern languages and intended to be read by 
Gentiles. In particular, he was convinced that the 
restoration to the Holy Land could not take place 
until the Jews had spread into and inhabited every 
part of the world. In 1644 he came in contact with 
Antonio de Montesinos (Aaron Levi), who convinced 
him that the North-American Indians were the Lost 
Ten Tribes. He appears to have directed his atten- 


(After the mezzotint by Rembrandt.} 


the Lost Ten Tribes, 
and in support of the readmission of the Jews into 
England published his “ Esperanca de Israel ” (Hope 
of Israel; 1650). This work appeared 
first in Spanish, then in a Latin trans- 
lation; to the latter he wrote a pref- 
atory epistle addressed to the Par- 
liament or Supreme Court of England 
in order to gain its favor and good- 
will for the Jews. The pamphlet 
aroused much interest in England, several replies 
being written, especially with regard to the identity 
of the North-American Indians with the Lost Ten 
Tribes. One of the replies, “An Epistle to the 
Learned Manasseh ben Israel” (London, 1650), was 


Advocates 
Readmis- 
sion of 
Jews into 
England. 


Manasseh ben Israel 
Manasseh ben Joseph 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


284 





written by Sir Edward Spencer, member of Parlia- 
ment for Middlesex; another appeared anonymously 
under the title * The Great Deliverance of the Whole 
House of Israel” (2d. 1652). Both these replies in- 
sisted upon the need of conversion to Christianity 
before the Messianic prophecies about Israel) could 
be fulfilled, and it was, perhaps, for this reason that 
the matter was dropped for a time. 

Meanwhile Cromwell’s attention had been drawn 
to the subject, and before the negotiations with 
Holland were broken off by the Navigation Act of 
1652 Cromwell's representative at Amsterdam was 
put into communication with Manasseh; the latter 
addressed the English council of state on the subject 
of the readmission, and a pass was issued to enable 
him to goto England. After the cessation of the 
war between Holand and England, Manasseh sent 
his son Samuel and his nephew David Dormido to 
consult with Cromwell. They being unsuccessful, 
Samuel returned to Amsterdam in 1655 to persuade 
his father to attempt the task himself. 

Manasselhi arrived in London in October of that 
year, and immediately printed his “Humble <Ad- 
dresses to the Lord Protector,” the result being a 
national conference held at Whitehall in December, 
1655. It does not appear that Manasseli spoke at 
this conference, though his pamphlet was submitted 
toit. A formal declaration was made by the lawyers 
present at the conference that there was nothing in 
English law to prevent the settlement of Jews in 
England, though the question of its desirability was 
ingeniously evaded by Cromwell (see CROMWELL). 
Prynne wrote his “Short Demurrer” against the 
proposal, and this was answered by Manasseh ben 
Israel in his “ Vindicie Judseorum” (London, 1656). 
Meanwhile the opening of the Robles case had 
brought the question to a practical issue, though 
not in the sense Manasseh was striving for. He ap- 
pears to have quarreled with the London Jews, and 
had to go for help to Cromwell, who, at the cnd of 
1656, made him a grant of £25, and in the following 
year gave him a4 pension of £100 a year. In Sep- 
tember, 1657, his son Samuel died; with the aid of 
a grant from Cromwell, Manasseh took the body to 
Holland to be buried at Middleburg, where he him- 
self died two months later. Though he had not 
succeeded in obtaining formal permission for the 
resettlement of the Jews in England, he had by the 
publicity of his appeal brought the subject promi- 
nently before the ruling mindsof England, and thus 
indirectly led to the recognition of the fact that 
there was nothing in English law against the re- 
admission. 

The pamphlets connected with the return of the 
Jews to England have been republished, with an in- 
troduction, by Lucien Wolf through the Jewish His- 
torical Society of England (London, 1901); the first 
part of the “ Conciliador ” appeared at Frankfort-on- 
the-Main in 1632; the remaining three parts at Am- 
sterdam in 1641, 1650, and 1651. Manasseh wrote 
also: a seriesof works in Latin on various theological 

problems, giving the usual rabbinic 
His Works. solutions, all printed at Amsterdam 
—* De Creatione” (1635), “ De Resur- 
rectione Mortuorum” (1635), “De Termino Vite” 
(1639); an essay in Spanish, “De Ja Fraglidad Hu- 


mana ” (1642); and alist of the 618 commandments 
in Portuguese, entitled * Thesoro dos Dinim ” (1645), 
Several of his works have been translated: “Con- 
ciliador ” into Latin by Vossius (Amsterdam, 1632), 
and into English by E. H. Lindo (London, 1642; re- 
printed, Edinburgh, 1904). His* Esperanca de Is- 
rael” was translated into English by M. Wall, and 
had three editions between 1650 and 1652; into Ger- 
man by M. Drucker (1651); into Hebrew by Eliakim 
ben Jacob (1697). His * Vindiciee Judeorum ” was 
translated into German, with a preface by Moses 
Mendelssohn (reprinted 1782). Manassch contem- 
plated writing a large number of other works “on 
the influence of tradition,” “on the divine origin 
of the Mosaic law,” “asummary of Jewish theol- 
ogy,” a“ bibliotheca rabbinica,” anda “ Hebrew-Ara- 
bic lexicon ”; none of these works saw the light, nor 
did the “ Historia Heroyca,” which he intended as a 
sequel to Josephus. Of special interest is his book 
on the statue of Nebuchadnezzar — “ Estaiua de 
Nebuchanassar” (Amsterdam, 1657 7). This was 
illustrated by four plates by Rembrandt, explained 
by Manasseh in his prefatory remarks. Rembrandt, 
etched a portrait of Manasseh, and another eugra- 
ving of him was executed by Salom Italia in 1642. 
There is a portrait by Rembrandt at St. Petersburg 
alleged to be of Manasseh, but its dissimilarity to 
the authorized portrait renders it impossible that 
the two can be of the same person. 

Manasseh claimed to read and understand ten lan- 
guages, and printed works in five—Hebrew, Latin, 
Portuguese, English, and Spanish. His erudition 
was wide, but he had no claims to accuracy or thor- 
oughness, and he is now chiefly remembered for his 
untiring labors toward the readmission of the Jews 
into England. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Kayserling, in Jahrb. filr die Gesch. der 
Juden, pp. 85-188 (transl. by F. de Sola Mendes, in Miscellany 
of the Society of Hebrew Literature, second series, pp. 
96 et seq., London, 1877: also separately); Lucien Wolf, Intro- 
duction to Manasseh ben IsraelUs Mission to Oliver Crom- 
well; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. Nos, 6205, 8703; D. P. Huet, 
Huetiana, pp. 225-227, Paris, 1722; Lady Magnus, Jewwisie 
Portraits, pp. 68-89; M. Weiskopf, in Arch. Isr. 1902, pp. 53- 
54, 61-62, 77-78; E. N. Adler, in J. Q. R. April, 1904. 


MANASSEH, JACOB: Turkish rabbinical 
writer and chief rabbi of Salonica, where he died in 
1832. Among his works may be mentioned: “ Ohel 
Ya‘akob,” an alphabetical collection of the laws of 
religion (Salonica, 18382); “Be’er ha-Mayim,” re- 
sponsa (28. 1836); “‘En ha-Mayim,” commentary 
on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah (printed in Turkey 
in 5618 = 1858). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hazan, Ha-Ma‘alot li-Shelomoh, pp. 6, 13, 445 

Franco, Histoire des Israélites de VEmpire Ottoman. 

8. M. FR. 

MANASSEH BEN JOSEPH OF ILYE 
(known also as Ben Porat): Russian rabbinical 
writer and philosopher; born at Smorgony, gov- 
ernment of Wilna, 1767; died at Ilye, in the same 
government, 1831. At seven years of age he was 
acquainted with some original sources in rab- 
binical literature, but his father would not per- 
mit him to study Hebrew grammar and the Bible 
lest these might interfere with his Talmudic studies. 
According to the custom of that time Manasseh was 
married early; at the age of thirteen he became the 
husband of the daughter of a wealthy citizen of 


285 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manasseh ben Israel 
Manasseh ben Joseph 





Sinorgony; but he soon divorced her and married 
the daughter of a merchant in the village of Lye, 
where he spent most of his life. His erudition early 
drew acircle of friends and disciples around him, 
and in discussing with them the rabbinical laws and 
regulations he did not hesitate to criticize such au- 
thorities as the Shulhan ‘Aruk and Rashi. Heeven 
dared to interpret some parts of the Mishnah in 
contradiction to the explanation given by the Ge- 
mara; for such daring he probably would have been 
put under the ban had not an influential rabbi, 
Joseph Mazel of Wyazyn, come to his rescue. The 
lutter took great Interest in Manasseh and threw 
epen to him his extensive and valuable library of 
rabbinical and philosophical literature. 

Manasseh became acquainted also with Elijah 
Gaon of Wilna, whom he visited once a year; but 
whea Elijah discovered that Manasseh visited Zal- 
man of Liozna, the leader of the northern Hasi- 

dim, he credited those of his disciples 
Relation to who asserted that Manasseh showed 
Elijah of Hasidic leanings, and held aloof from 
Wilna. him, though Manasseh explained to 
the gaon that only a love ot knowledge 
induced him to visit Zalman, and that his views dif- 
tered widely from those of the Hasidim. Manasseh 
really sympathized somewhat with the latter, ex- 
pecting that their movement might develop into 
something better than the existing rabbinical ortho- 
doxy. In his writings Manasseh holds Elijah of 
Wilna in high esteem, declaring in “ Binat Mikra ” 
(Grodno, 1818) that from him he had iearned to inter- 
pret the Talmud by the simple philological method 
ef the “peshat,” while the majority of Talnudic 
teachers used the less scientific methods of the “de- 
rash,” He even says that but for Elijah of Wilna the 
Torah would have been forgotten in Israel (“ Alfe 
Menashsheh,” § 102: comp. § 177). 

The suspicions of the Orthodox members of Ma- 
nasseh’s community increased when he began to 
study philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy. 
He had formed the resolution to go to Berlin for the 
purpose of becoming acquainted with the circle of 
Moses Mendelssohn; but at K6nigsberg he was 
stopped by some of his Orthodox coreligionists, who 
induced the Prussian authorities to refuse him a pass- 
port. Thus he was forced to return home, where, 
with the sole aid of some old manuals, he studied 
German, Polish, natural philosophy, and mechanics. 

Manasseh had large ideas of educating the Russo- 
Jewish vouth, but the rabbis of his time were not 
prepared to accept them. In his “ Pesher Dabar” 

(Wilna, 1807) he complains “that the 

Shows  Jewsare divorced from real life and 
Advanced its practical needs and demands; that 

Tenden- the leaders of the Jews are short- 

cies. sighted men who, instead of enlight- 
ening their followers, darken their in- 

tellect with casuistic restrictions, in which each rabbi 
endeavors to outdo his predecessors and contempo- 
raries. The wealthy class thinks only of its profits, 
and is not scrupulous with regard to the means of 
getting money. Even those who are honest and en- 
deavor to help their poorer brethren do it in such an 
unintelligent way that they do harm rather than good. 
Instead of educating the children of the poor to be- 


come artisans, they add to the number of idlers, and 
are thus responsible for the dangerous consequences 
of such an education.” Plingiansky (see bibliog- 
raphy) is of the opinion that these words were di- 
rected against Elijah; and from the preface to 
“Pesher Dabar” it is evident that Manasseh desired 
to make peace between the leader of the Hasidim 
and the gaon. The consequences to the author of 
this daring appeal to the rabbis were serious; many 
rabbis destroyed his book, and some of his disciples 
and nearest friends left him. 

Manasseh’s father-in-law having lost his fortune, 
Manassch left his native town and went to Brody, 
where he made the acquaintance of R. Jacob Lan- 
dau, who expressed his disapproval of Manas- 
seh’s radical criticism of Rashi. He went next to 
Brest-Litovsk, where R. Arych Léb Katzenellen- 
bogen engaged him as teacher to his sons, on the 
express condition that he adopt the interpretation 
of Rashi. Manassch, however, could not abandon 
his critical methods, and, being dismissed, returned 
to Hye. During his stay in Volhynia, on his way 
to Brody, Manasseh had begun to print his “ Alfe Me- 
nashsheh,” but when the printer became acquainted 
with the radical spirit of the work he threw both 
proofs and manuscript into the tire. Manasseh at 
once proceeded to rewrite his book, and owing to his 
remarkable memory was able to complete it; he 
published it in Wilna in 1827 (republished in War- 
saw in 1860). In this work Manasseh demonstrates 
that in accordance with the rabbinical teachings the 
Rabbis have the power to amend certain Jewish 
legal decisions when there is a necessity for it. Ma- 
nasseh was compelled to suppress the paragraph 
containing this (§ 20) because Samuel Katzenellen- 
bogen threatened that if it were not withdrawn he 
would order the work publicly burned in the syna- 
gogue-yard. 

When the Russian government ordered the estab- 
lishment of rabbinical schools, Manasseh wrote a 
work on higher mathematics, mechanics, and strateg- 
ics and asked his friends to induce some scholar to 
translate this work into Russian in order to show 
the government what a Jew could produce on those 
lines. His friend Joseph of Wyazyn feared, how- 
ever, the unfavorable comment of the officials, who 
might say that the Jews, instead of working on 
farms, were preparing war plans. It was resolved 
therefore to burn the manuscript. Judah Lob of 
Kovno, Samuel Eliasberg, and Wolf Adelsohn may 
be mentioned among Manasseh’s friends. 

Manasseh was undoubtedly a great scholar, and 
his mind was remarkable for subtlety and power of 
analysis; he was also a friend of the people, and 
translated his “Samma-de-Hayye” into Judxo-Ger- 
man for the purpose of reaching them. In another 
work, “Shekel ha-Kodesh ” (Shklov, 1823), he de- 
fends himself against the accusation of being an 
ambitious innovator. He says that his opponents 
can not even understand that one can risk his peace 
by antagonizing influential rabbis out of mere love 
for one’s people. He asserts that he never sought 
wealth, fame, or pleasure, and that he lived on bread 
and water; but that the thirst for self-perfection 
would not allow him to rest until he had fulfilled 
his mission. In the same book he shows that it is 


Manchester 
Mandzeans 





erroneous to suppose that the earthly life is only a 
vale of tears and misery and the antechamber toa 
future life. 

Manassebh was one of the first victims of the chol- 
era epidemic of 1831. He did not live to realize any 
of his aspirations, but he prepared the ground for the 
Maskilim, who disseminated his ideas. Besides the 
above-named works Manasseh left one on mathe- 
matics and some other writings in manuscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Plungiansky, Sefer ben Porat, Wilna, 
1858; Golubov, R. Manasseh ben Porat, in Voskhod, 1900, 


xi. 77. 
5. S. H. R. 


MANCHESTER: City in Lancashire, England, 
and one of the chief British manufacturing centers, It 
has a population of 543,969, of whom about 25,000 
are Jews (the second largest Jewish community in 
the British empire). The history of the Manchester 
Jewish community dates from about 1780, when 
Jews commenced to settle near Shudehill and Long 
Millgate. The first synagogue was founded by two 
brothers, Lemon and Jacob Nathan, from Liver- 
pool, where a congregation had recently been organ- 
ized. The upper part of a house in Long Millgate 
served as the first place of worship of the new com- 
munity. Lemon Nathan became its first president 
and Rabbi Alron (Aaron Jacobs) its first minister. 
A son of Rabbi Abron, Alexander Jacobs, became 
an early president of the Manchester Jews, and in 
1804 established their first local charity. It was 
known as the Manchester Jewish Philanthropic So- 
ciety, and its object was to grant relicf during the 
winter months to poor resident Jews. The original 
cemetery was opened in 1794, in the neighborhood of 
St. Thomas’ Church, Pendleton. The congregation 
next worshiped in Ainsworth Court, Long Millgate, 
removing, in 1824, to Halliwell street, where it 
erected a synagogue for itself. Sixteen years later 
a schism occurred, in consequence of which a sep- 
arate congregation was formed which worshiped 
in Miller’s lane, acquiring a cemetery of its own at 
Miles Platting; after a time, however, the two con- 
gregations were reunited. A third cemetery was 
acquired at Prestwich, in 1848. 

The appointment of Dr. Schiller-Szinessy as rabbi 
of the Halliwell Street Synagogue was productive 
of another schism, which led to the establishment, 
in 1856, of a Reform synagogue, under the auspices 
of Professor Theodores, Horatio Micholls, Dr. Hesse, 
Sigismund Schloss, and others. On the retirement 
of Dr. Schiller-Szinessy, in 1861, he was succeeded 
by Dr. Gustav Gottheil, who ministered at Man- 
chester for thirteen years, until called to America 
to fillthe pulpit of Temple Emanu-El, New York. 
Dr, Gottheil’s most prominent successor at Man- 
chester was the Rev. L. M. Simmons (d. 1900). 

The Halliwell Street Congregation continued to 
grow, and in 1858 it removed to Cheetham Hill, 
where a magnificent place of worship was built, 
which became known as the “Great Synagogue” 
and is now the principal synagogue in Manchester. 
Prof. 8S. M. Isaacs of Liverpool—the first regular 
English preacher in Great Britain—became preacher 
of the Great Synagogue in that year, dividing his 
ministrations between the two cities. In 1863 he 
left Liverpool and thenceforth devoted himself en- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


286 





tirely to the Manchester synagogue; he died in 1878, 
and was succeeded by the Rev. Dr. B. Salomon. In 
1871 two new synagogues were established, one in 
Oxtord road, for the Jews living in South Manches- 
ter, and another in York street, for the Spanish and 
Portuguese Jews. The rapid growth of the com- 
munity since 1890 has necessitated the foundation of 
several new congregations, and there are now nearly 
thirty svnagogues. 

In 1888 the Manchester Hebrew Association had 
founded religious classes, and in 1842, as an outcome 
of these classes, a Jewish school was established 
through the instrumentality of Abraham Franklin 
and his brother Jacob Franklin (subsequently editor 
of the “ Voice of Jacob ”), Philip Lucas (who became 
the first president), and Eleazar Moses. A couple 
of rooms were engaged, in the first instance, at the 
Salford Lyceum Institution, and an enlarged build- 
ing in York street was acquired in 1851. In 1869 
the present structure in Derby street was erected. 
The school now (1904) has 2,300 scholars (800 in the 
boys’ and girls’ classes respectively, and 700 in- 
fants). The head master, Ephraim Tlarris, MLA., 
has occupied that position since 1869. The Jewish 
Board of Guardians was founded in 1867. 

Other important Jewish institutions in Manchester 
are: the Hebrew Philanthropic and Loan Society 
(established 1861); the Sustentation Fund (connected 
with the Manchester Congregation of British Jews); 
the Visiting Committee (founded in 1885, in conjunc- 
tion with Liverpool, for hospital and prison visita- 
tion); the United Sisters’ Maternity Society; the 
Jewish Ladies’ Visiting Association; the Children’s 
Holiday Home; the Jewish Home for Aged and 
Needy Jews; the Hebrew Bread, Meat, and Coat 
Society; the Soup Kitchen for the Jewish Poor; the 
Talmud Torah School; the Jewish Working Men’s 
Club (founded 1887); the Manchester Board of 
Shechita; the Manchester Naturalisation Society; 
the Manchester branch of the Jewish Lads’ Brigade; 
and the Manchester Jewish Hospital. Zionism is 
also strougly represented in Manchester. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jewish World, Sept.-Nov., 1877 ; Jew. Chron. 


Aug.-Oct., 1908; Jewish Year Book, 1904. LH 
J. . : 


MAND.ZZANS: Eastern religious sect that pro- 
fesses and practises an admixture of Christian, Jew- 
ish, and heathen doctrines and customs. The mem- 
bers of the sect live in Lower Babylonia, in the 
territory of Wasit and Bassora, near Khuzistan, and 
speak the languages of the localities in which they 
are settled (Arabic and Persian). Their sacred books 
are in an Aramaic dialect which has close affinities 
with that of the Talmud of Babylon, and they are 
written in peculiar characters resembling Old Pal- 
myrenian script. Besides the name “ Mand:eans,” 

derived from SN N13) (= “ word of 
Language. life”), the most important figure in 

the Mandean religious system, they 
take, in their dealings with other communions, the 
name of “Sabians,” and call the wise and learned 
among them “ Nasoreans” (Ky\¥3). To European 
scholars of the seventeenth century, who first heard 
of their existence through Christian missionaries, 
they were known under the erroneous appellation 
of “Christians of St. John” (tbe Baptist), on account 


287 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manchester 
Mandeeans 





of the reverence in which St. John is held among 
the members of the sect and because of their fre- 
quent baptisms. The sacred books of the Mandxans 
consist of fragments, of various antiquity, derived 
from an older literature. Of these the most impor- 
tant is the NT29 (= “treasure ”) or N37 NIAID (= “the 
great book”), which dates from somewhere be- 
tween 650 and 900 c.e, It is divided into two un- 
equal parts: the larger, intended for the living, is 
termed 9°" (= “to the right hand”); the smaller, 
- containing prayers to be read on the burial of 
priests, is called xoepp (= “to the left hand”). In 
this book, and in some other works of lesser impor- 
tance, is expounded the Mandzean religious system, 
in which Jewish influence is distinctly visible. It 
is essentially of the type of ancient Gnosticism, 
traces of which are found in the Talmud, the Mid- 
rash, and in a modified form in the later Cabala. 
The xts3 gives three conflicting accounts of the 
Creation, the least complicated of which may be 
summarized as follows: A triad of divinities existed 
at the beginning of all things—Pira Rabba (= “the 
great fruit”), Ayar Ziwa Rabba (= “the ether of 
great brilliancy ”), and Mana Rabba. (According to 
Joseph Halévy, Mana is the Biblical jt, which the 
Talmud and Midrash regarded as a celestial food. 
The connection between Pira and 
Mana is easily explained by the Gnos- 
tic idea which compares the divine 
essence to the grain of a fig.) The 
last-named, the most prominent of the three, is the 
King of Light, from whom all things proceeded. 
From him emanated the Great Jordan, which per- 
meates the whole ether, the domain of Ayar. (The 
idea that watcr, air [ether], and fire existed before 
the creation of the world is found in a Palestinian 
midrash of the fourth century; see Epstein, in “R. 
E. J.” xxix. 77.) Then Mana called into existence 
Hayye Kadmaye (“ primal life”), and, when the act 
was accomplished, withdrew into strictest privacy, 
being visible only to the souls of pious Mandeans. 
As the revealed and governing deity, Hayye Kad- 
maye is entitled to the chief worship and adoration. 
Hayye Kadmaye produced, besides the numerous 
angels (N*IMIY) that arose from the further develop- 
ment and combination of these primary manifesta- 
tions, Hayye Tinyane (“secondary life”), or Yusha- 
min (= xy ms, the Jehovah of the Hebrews being 
considered by the Gnostics as a divinity of second 
rank). The next emanation after Yushamin was 
Manda de-Hayye (SN S790), the Primal Man 
(N7OTP NIDA; in the Cabala, wap orN). Then a 
revolution occurred in heaven, Yushamin attempted 
to seize the government, but failed, and was pun- 
ished by ejection from the pure ethereal world into 
that of inferior light. (A similar story of the revolt 
of Satan and of his banishment to the subterranean 
regions is found in the haggadic literature; see Gen, 
R. iv.) Manda de-Hayye revealed himself to hu- 
manity in a series of incarnations, 
Series of first taking the forms of the three 
Revela- brothers Hibil, Shitiel, and Anosh (the 
tions. Biblical Abel, Seth, and Enoch). The 
most prominent of these is Hibil, who 
possesses the same attributes as Manda de-Hayye, 
with whom he is often confounded. 


Gnostic 
Elements. 


Among the “‘utre” (angels) who emanated from 
Hayye Tinyane the most prominent is Hayye Tli- 
taye (“third life”), often called Abatur (* father of 
the ‘utre”). He sits on the verge of the world of 
light that hes toward the lower regions, and weighs 
in his balance the deeds of the spirits ascending to 
him from the earthly life. Beneath him originally 
Was an immense void, with troubled black water at 
the bottom in which his image was reflected, the 
reflection ultimately becoming solidified into Peta- 
hiel, called also Gabricl, who partakes of the nature 
of matter. Petahiel received the mission to build 
the earth and to people it. Accordingly he made 
Adam and Eve, but was unable to make them stand 
upright; whereupon Hibil, Shitiel, and Anosh were 
sent by Hayye Kadmaye to infuse into their forms 
spirit from Mana Rabba himself. Wibil then in- 
structed man in the true religion, and apprised him 
that his Creator was not Petahiel, but the Supreme 
God who is far above him. Petahiel was then ex- 
iled to the under world, made up of four vestibules 
and three hells. Each of these vestibules has two 
rulers—Zartay and Zartanay, Hag and Mag (see 
Goce AND Macoe), Gaf and Gafan, Antan and Kin. 
In the highest hell rules the grisly king Shedum (in 
Haggadic literature, Ashmecdai; see ASMODEUs). 

Invested with the power of Mana Rabba, Hibil 
descended into these lower regions and brought forth 
Ruha, the mother of falsehood and lies, the queen of 
darkness, and prevented her return to the nether world 
(see Liniro). She then bore the devil Ur; he in his 
pride sought to storm the worid of light, but was 
overpowered by Hibil, who cast him into the black 
waters and imprisoned him within seven iron and 
seven golden walls. By Ur, Ruba bore three sets of 
sons, seven, twelve, and five respectively. They all 
were translated by Petahicl to the heavenly tirma- 
ment, the seven forming the seven planets and the 
twelve the signs of the zodiac, while the fate of -the 
remaining five is unknown. 

According to the Mandéan belief the appointed 
duration of the world is four hundred and cighty 
thousand years, divided into seven epochs, in each 
of which one of the planets rules. The whole hu- 

man race, with the exception of one 


True and single pair, has been destroyed three 
False times. The Mandeans consider the 
Prophets. Biblical saintsas false prophets. Such 


were Abraham (who lived, according 
to their computation, 6,000 years after Noah, during 
the reign of the sun), Misha (Moses, in whose time 
the true religion was professed by the Egyptians, 
from whom the Mandeans claim to descend), and 
Shlimon (Solomon, son ot David. to whom the devils 
yielded obedience; comp. Git. 57a). A true prophet 
was Yahya (John), son of Zechariah. who was an 
incarnation of Hibil. 

During forty years Yahya baptized myriads of 
men in the Jordan. By a mistake he baptized 
the false prophet Yishu Meshiha (Jesus), son 
of the devil Ruha Kadishta. Thereupon Hibil’s 
younger brother Anosh descended from heaven, 
caused himself to be baptized, performed miracles, 
and brought about the crucifixion of the false Mes- 
siah, Then he preached the true religion, destroyed 
the city of Jerusalem (“Ur-Shalom” = “the devil 


— 


Mandel 
Mandelstamm 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


288 





finished it”), which had been built by Adonai, and 
dispersed over the world the Jews, who had put 
Yahya to death. It is interesting to note that the 
Mandeans accuse the Christians of using the blood 
of Jewish children in the preparation of hosts. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Chwolson, Die Ssebier und der Ssabismus, 
i. 100, St. Petersburg, 1856 ; Néldeke, Manddische Gramma- 
tik, Introduction, Halle, 1875; A. J. H. Withelm Brandt, Die 
Mandaddische Religion. Leipsic, 1889; Joseph Halévy, in R. EB. 
J. xxii. 189 et seq.; K. Kessler, in Herzog-Hauck, Real-Eneye, 
J. I. Br. 
MANDEL, PAUL: Hungarian jurist and dep- 
uty; born at Nyirbator Jan. 6, 1889. He studied 
law in Budapest and Vienna, and in 1875 was elected 
to the Hungarian Parliament as representative of his 
native city. He hasretained hisseat from that time 
up to the present (1904); he became a member of the 
law committee in 1881, and has taken a prominent 
part in framing the laws concerning guardianship, 
copyright, and the office of royal notary public. 
His parliamentary speeches in 1878 against capital 
punishment aroused much attention, as did those in 
1884 in the cause of religious freedom, and in 1885 
against the anti-Semites. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sturm, Orsvaggylil’st Almanach, 1897; Szinn- 
yei, Magyar Irok. 
s, L. VY. 
MANDELKERN, SOLOMON B. SIMHAH 
DOB: Russian poet and author; born in Mlynov, 
Volhynia, 1846; died in Vienna March 24, 1902. 
He was educated as a Talmudist. After his father’s 
death he went to Dubno (he was then fourteen), 
where he continued his Talmudical studies. He 
became associated with the Hasidim in that com- 
munity and with their “rabbi,” Mendel of Kotzk, 
with whose son David he spent some time studying 
Jewish philosophy and Cabala. Later he became 
identified with the Haskalah movement. After his 
marriage he went to Wilna, entered its rabbinical 
school, and graduated as a rabbi. Mandelkern sub- 
sequently studied Ori- 
ental languages at St. 
Petersburg University, 
where he was awarded 
a gold medal for an 
essay on the parallel 
passages of the Bible. 
In 1873 he became as- 
sistant rabbi at Odessa, 
where he was the first 
to deliver sermons in 
Russian, and where he 
studied law at the uni- 
versity. Thedegree of 
Ph.D. was conferred 
upon him by the Uni- 
versity of Jena. About 
1880 he settled in Leip- 
sic and occupied him- 
self with literary work 
and with teaching. In 1900 he visited the United 
States; he returned to Leipsic in 1901, and was 
visiting Vienna when he suddenly became ill and 
died in the Jewish hospital of that city. 
Mandelkern was a prolific writer in several lan- 
guages, especially in Hebrew, in which he produced 
poetical works of considerable merit. His literary 





Solomon Mandelkern. 


career began in 1886 with “ Teru‘at Melek Rab,” an 
ode to Alexander II., followed by “ Bat Sheba‘,” an 
epic poem, “ Ezra ha-Sofer,” a novel (transl. from the 
German by L. Philippson), and a satirical work en- 
titled *“ Hizzim Shenunim ” (all published in Wilna). 
Other works of his are: “Dibre Yeme Russiya,” a 
history of Russia (Warsaw, 1875; written for the 
Society for the Promotion of Culture Among Russian 
Jews; for this work he was presented by the czar 
with a ring set with brilliants); “Shire Sefat 
‘Eber,” Hebrew poems (2 vols., Leipsic, 1882 and 
1889); and “Shire Yeshurun,” a translation of 
Byron’s “Hebrew Melodies” (#5. 1890). He pub- 
lished also: “Bogdan Chmelnitzki,” in Russian, a 
translation of Hanover’s “ Yewen Mezulah” (St. 
Petersburg, 1878; Leipsic, 1883); a Russian edition 
of Lessing’s fables (0. 1885); and “Tamar,” a novel 
in German (2. 1885; really a translation of Mapu’s 
“ Ahabat Ziyyon,” without any mention of Mapuas 
the author). Sermons by him in Russian, and Rus- 
sian and German translations of his Hebrew songs 
and articles, have appeared in various periodicals; 
and most Hebrew journals and year-books pub- 
lished within the last thirty years (especially “ Ha- 
Shahar,” “ Ha-Asif”) contain articles, poems, and 
epigrams by him. 

Mandelkern’s greatest work is the “ Hekal ha- 
Kodesh,” or “ Veteris Testamenti Concordantiz,” a 
Hebrew-Latin concordance of the Hebrew and Chal- 
daic words found in the Bible (Leipsic, 1896), which 
has almost superseded all similar works of that na- 
ture. Anabridged edition of this monumental work 
appeared under the title “ Tabnit Hekal” (2. 1897; 
for the various criticisms which were made of Man- 
delkern in connection with the two editions of the 
concordance, and for lists of errata, see Stade’s 
“ Zeitschrift,” xviii. 165, 348; xix. 187-191, 850; xxii. 
320; xxiii, 94, 852; xxiv. 146; etc.). 

In his last years Mandelkern was engaged in the 
composition of a Talmudic and Midrashic concord- 
ance, part of which, probably, is among the many 
complete and incomplete works which he left in man- 
uscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sokolow, Sefer Zikkaren, p. 67, Warsaw, 
1890; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels.; Lippe, Bibliographisches 
Lexicon; Sistematicheski Ukazatel (an index to Russian 
literature upon the Jews): Wiernik, in Jewish Comment, 
Jan. 19, 1900; Illustrirte Zeitung, Feb. 15, 1896: April 3, 
1902; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. (May 16, 1902); Jewish Exponent, 
April 11, 1902. 

P. WI. 


H.R. 


MANDELLI, DAVID: Hungarian linguist; 
born about 1780 at Presburg; died at Paris Dec. 22, 
1836. He was one of the greatest linguists of his 
time, and is said to have excelled in his knowledge 
of foreign languages even the celebrated Cardinal 
Giuseppe Mezzofanti. The favorite studies of Man- 
delli were Hebrew, Arabic, Persian, Chinese, Greek, 
and Latin, from a combination of which he formed 
a language of his own (Oettinger, “Moniteur des 
Dates ”). 

8. I. War. 

MANDELSTAMM, BENJAMIN B. JO- 
SEPH: Russian Hebraist and author; born in Zha- 
gory about the end of the eighteenth century; died 
in Simferopol May 8, 1886. He was the eldest of 
several sons and received a liberal education. In 


289 


the first part of his “ Hazon la-Mo‘ed ” (Vienna, 1877) 
Benjamin describes a journey which he made from 
Zhagory to Moscow about 1885. The second part 
of the work consists of letters which he wrote from 
Wilna in 1841-43 in regard to LILIENTHAL’S mission 
in Russia. Like most of the leading Maskilim 
of the time, Mandelstamm was at first very enthu- 
siastic about the movement; but he was much dis- 
appointed at the results and expressed strong dis- 
approval of Lilienthal’s methods. The third part 
contains a description of the Crimea with plans for 
bettering the condition of the Russian Jews. 
Mandelstamm was employed by the Giinzburgs, 
with some intervals, for more than forty years, and 
from 1864 until the time of his death he was their 
representative in Simferopol. He visited Paris in 
1875 and gave a graphic description, in Hebrew, of 
the French capital in his “ Paris” (Warsaw, 1878). 
He furthermore wrote “ Mishle Binyamin,” which 
appeared in the first two volumes of “ Ha-Asif” 
(published also separately), and contributed to 
“ Ha-Meliz ” (1892, Nos. 267-271) a very interesting 
alescription of the younger days of his brother Leon 
and to “ Ha-Zefirah ” (xv., Nos. 12 e¢ seg.) an article on 
the anti-Fewish riots of 1881-82. He is considered 
one of the best of Hebrew prose-writers, although 
his too florid style and his continual deviations from 
the subject can hardly please a modern reader. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-<Asif, fii. 117; Ha-Shahar, viii. 384 Ha- 
Zefrah, xtii., No. 26; Keneset ha- Gedolah, iv., part 2, pp. 30 


et 8eq.: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 227, 
H.R. P. Wi. 


MANDELSTAMM, LEON (ARYEH LOB) 
B. JOSEPH: Russian Hebraist, poet, and educa- 
tor; born in Zhagory, government of Kovno, in 
1809; died in St. Petersburg Sept. 12, 1889. He 
was the fourth son of Joseph Mandelstamm, a man 
of liberal and progressive views who had imbibed 
German ideas and collected German books during 
his business travels in Germany. Under the guid- 
ance of his father and older brothers Leon acquired 
a large amount of rabbinical and secular knowledge 
before he was fifteen years of age. He married while 
very young, and settled with his wife’s parents in 
Keidany, government of Wilna; but his progressive 
thoughts and habits were considered heretical there, 
and he was compelled to divorce his wife after about 
six months of married life. 

Mandelstamm then resumed his studies with re- 
newed vigor, and about 1832 went to Wilna with 
the intention of entering its university; but that 
institution being about to be transferred to Kiev, 
he entered the University of Moscow instead. He 
graduated as a “candidate” (bachelor) in philology 
from the University of St. Petersburg in 1844, being 
the tirst Jew in Russia to attain that honor. 

Mandelstamm acted as secretary to the rabbinical 
commission called at St. Petersburg in the summer 
of 1848 to draw up a system of education for the 
Jews of Russia. When LILIENTHAL, who had been 
selected to carry out the plans of the commission, or 
rather the plans of Uvarov, the Russian minister of 
public instruction, suddenly left Russia in 1845, 
Mandelstamm was appointed in his place and served 
under Uvarov and his successors until he retired in 
1857. In these twelve years he wrote, edited, and 

VIIT.—19 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mand 
Mandeletarmen 


published various books for use in Jewish schools, 
superintended the establishment of schools in vari- 
ous localities, including the rabbinical schools of 
Wilna and Jitomir, and appointed teachers for them 
(see Gottlober in “ Ha-Maggid,” xvii. 892). He had 
charge also of the disbursement of the candle-tax 
funds, which were for the purpose of supporting 
those schools; the conservative masses, hating both 
the tax and the purpose for which it was levied, 
saw in him the embodiment of all the evil of the 
new movement. The ill-feeling against him disap 
peared in later years (sec Gurland in “ Ha-Shahar,’ 
iv. 112). 

After his retirement from the service of the gov- 
ernment he engaged in various financial enterprises, 
but few of which were successful. He spent much 
time in Germany, especially in Berlin, where most 
of his works were published. His Russian transla- 
tion of the Bible was at first prohibited in Russia, 
and was permitted later only on condition that it 
would not be sold without the Hebrew text (“ Allg. 
Zeit. des Jud.” 1870, pp. 488-489; 7. 1871, p. 340). 
His last years were spent in poverty and neglect. 
Having died suddenly ona ferry-boat, he was buried 
in a pauper’s grave; several days afterward, how- 
ever, he was disinterred and buried with proper hon- 
ors in the Jewish cemetery of St. Petersburg. His 
library was taken to the United States by A. M. Bank 
and was sold to the New York Public Library, where 
it formed the nucleus of the Jewish department of 
that institution. 

Mandelstamm was the author of: “Stikhotvoreni- 
ya,” poems (Moscow, 1840); “ Hinnuk Ne‘arim,” He- 
brew and German text-book for schools, in two parts 
(Wilna, 1849-50); notes to the Bible, in the edition 
(24 vols.), with the German translation, printed (un- 
der his supervision) by the Russian government (St. 
Petersburg, 1852) and known as the “ Mandelstamm 
edition” of the Bible; “Shene Perakim,” better 
known as “ Kebod Melek,” in Hebrew and German 
(tb. 1852); “V Zashchitu Yevreyev” (2b. 1858); 
“Sefer Millim,” Russian-Hebrew and Hebrew-Rus- 
sian dictionary (2b. 1859); “ Hore Thalmudice,” in 
German (Berlin, 1860); Russian translation of the 
Pentateuch (7b. 1862; 2d ed. 1871); “Die Bibel, Neu 
Uebersetzt und Erklart” (the Book of Genesis and a 
dramatization of Canticles, both annotated ; 7b, 1862); 
“Biblische Studien,” in two parts (¢b. 1862); “Sara- 
tovskie Mucheniki,” an account of a ritual-murder 
trial of 1857 (Berlin, 1863); “ Einleitung in den Pen- 
tateuch” (z+. 1864); “Yevreiskaya Semyya,” a 
drama (7b. 1864; 3d ed., St Petersburg, 1872); “O 
Zheleznikh Dorogakh,” on Russian railroads (St. 
Petersburg, 1865-67); “ Bibleiskoe Gosudarstvo,” in 
“Yevreiskaya Biblioteka,” for 1871; “Stimmen in 
der Wiiste,” German songs (London, 1880). He 
also contributed numerous articles to periodicals in 
various languages. A part of his “Hore Thal- 
mudice,” under the title “Rabbi Joshua ben Hana- 
nia,” appeared in an English translation (Berlin, 
n.d.). The four volumes of extracts from Maimon- 
ides’ Yad ha-Hazakah, with German translation, 
published by the Russian government (St. Peters- 
burg, 1851), were prepared, under Mandelstamin’s 
supervision, by his townsman Havyim Sack. 

Mandelstamm hadason, Joseph, a physician, who 


Mandelstamm 
Manissa 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


290 





died long before him. A daughter, by a second 

marriage, is the wife of Dr. M. L. Zimmerman of 

Philadel phia. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bloch’s Wochenschrift, 1889, No. 46: Brock- 
haus-Etron, Russian Encyclopedia; Jtidische Presse, xx., 
No. 39: B, Mandelstamm, Alumme Aryeh Mandelstamm, in 
Ha-Meliz, 1892, Nos. 267-271; Ha-Aeliz, 1889; Moskovr- 
skiya Vyedomosti, 1889, No. 276; Voskhod (weekly ed.), 1889, 
No. 36; Ha-Meliz, 1889, Nos. 198, 199, 201, 232. Pw 

: I. 


H.R. 

MANDELSTAMM, MAX (EMANUEL): 
Russian physician and Zionist; born in Zhagory, 
government of Kovno, in 1888. His father, Ezekiel 
Mandelstamm, younger brother of Benjamin and 
Leon Mandelstamm, taught him French and Ger- 
man, in addition to the usual studies of the “heder.” 
Later Max attended a school in Mitau for about a 
year, and the gymnasium at Wilna from 1850 to 
1854. At the age of sixteen he entered the Univer- 
sity of Dorpat as a medical student, and later stud- 
ied at Kharkof, where he graduated in 1860. After 
practising medicine in Chernigov for about four 
years he went to Ber- 
lin (1864) and entered 
the university, where 
he studied ophthal- 
mology under Graefe 
and pathology under 
Virchow. Jater he 
studied for some time 
in Heidelberg under 
Helmholtz, and in 
1866 he became assist- 
ant physician in Pa- 
genstecher’s hospital 
for eye-diseases in 
Wiesbaden. Two 
years later he settled 
in Kiev, where he still 
(1904) resides. He is 
considered one of the 
leading oculists in 
Russia. He was pri- 
vat-docent at the Uni- 
versity of Kiev for 
twelve years, and was thrice chosen professor; but 
the election was each time declared void on account 
of his being a Jew. He was for four years the head 
of the clinic for eye-diseases at the university, and 
is now the head of a private ophthalmic hospital 
which he established in 1880. 

Mandelstamm takes.a prominent part in Jewish 
affairs both in Kiev and in Russia generally. He 
was president of a committee to assist emigration in 
1881 and 1882, and was one of the two Jewish rep- 
resentatives who were permitted to plead the cause 
of the Jews before the commission which investi- 
gated Jewish affairs after the riots of 1881. He has 
taken a leading part also in Zionism since the incep- 
tion of the movement, and has been a conspicuous 
figure at all the Zionist congresses held during re- 
cent years. Most of Mandelstamm’s writings are on 
subjects relating to his scientific specialty, and have 
appeared in Graefe’s “ Archiv ” (vols. xi., xiii., xix.) 
and “Centralblatt fiir Praktische Augenheilkunde ” ; 
only one essay has been translated into English, under 
the title “How Jews Live,” London, 1900. His arti- 





Max Mandelstamm. 


cles ou Zionism appeared in “ Welt” and “Ost und 
West.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brainin, in Ahiasaf, 1900, pp. 386-349. 
H. K. P. WL. 


MANDL, CHRISTOF: Hungarian author; 
converted to Christianity in 15384. His godfather 
was George, Margrave of Brandenburg, to whom 
Mand! dedicated his “ Dass Jesus Christus Sey das 
Ewig Wort” (1536), in which Jesus is represented 
as the Redeemer. His other works are “ Rechnung 
der 70 Wochen Daniclis” (1552) and another, pub- 
lished in 1557, in which Jesus is described as the 
Messiah (Biichler, “ A Zsidék Térténete Budapesten,” 
Budapest, 1901). 

Dz A. Bt. 


MANDL, LUDWIG LAZAR: Hungarian 
anatomist and pathologist; born at Budapest Dec., 
1812; died in Paris July 5, 1881; educated at Vi- 
enna and Budapest (M.D. 1886). He then settled in 
Paris to study microscopy. His researches in the 
embryology of the higher mammalia attracted the at- 
tention of the Parisian Society of Physicians, which, 
in 1845, requested him to prepare anatomical speci- 
mens. In 1846 he began to lecture on microscopic 
anatomy at the Collége de France. In the same 
year he was made a knight of the Legion of Honor. 
After 1862 he lectured before the Medical Clinic of 
Paris on diseases of the vocal organs. 

Mandl was a prolific writer; the following are 
among his principal works: “Sanguis Respectu 
Physiologico ” (Budapest, 1836); “ Anatomie Micro- 
scopique” (Paris, 1838-58); “Traité Pratique du 
Microscope” (ib. 1839); “Mémoires d’Anatomie 
Pathologique” (¢b. 1840); “ Manuel d’Anatomie Ge- 
nérale” (7b. 1848; awarded a prize by the French 
Academy in 1858); “Traité d’Anatomie Microsco- 
pique” (7. 1847; awarded a prize by the French 
Institute in 1850); “ Mémoires Concernant la Patho- 
logie et la Thérapeutique des Organes de la Respira- 
tion” (7b. 1855); “Traité Pratique de Maladies de 
Larynx et de Pharynx ” (7b. 1872). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jtidisches Athentium, p. 129 (inaccurate); 
Ally. Deutsche Biog. xx. 178; Reich, Beth-Hl, iv. 31: Szinn- 
yei, Magyar Iroék. 

8. L. V. 


MANDL, MORITZ: Austrian dramatist and 


journalist; born in Presburg May 18, 1840. He 


went to Vienna and there joined the editorial staff 
of the “Wanderer” (1862) and later that of the 
“Neue Freie Presse.” Since 1877 he has been as- 
sistant editor of the “ Fremdenblatt.” 

Mandl has written: “ Deutschland und der Augen- 
blick” (Leipsic, 1861), a pamphlet that won some 
attention; “Isaithchen von Heilbronn” (Vienna, 
1873), a German epic; a dramatic prologue to the 
Vienna “ Kleist-Feier” of 1876; and several plays. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, i. 336-337. 
S. N. D. 


MANE. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 


MANESSIER DE VESOUL: French com- 
mupal leader; originally from Vesoul and probably 
of the family of Héliot of Vesoul, whose ledger has 
been published by Isidore Loeb (in “R. E. J.” viii., 
ix.). He is chiefly known in connection with the 
Paris community. It was he who negotiated for 


291 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mandelstamm 
Manissa 





the return of the Jews to France about the year 
1358. He was appointed by the king “ procureur 
général” of the Jews, with the function of grant- 
ing or withholding the right of entrance into France 
to every individual Jew, being in turn responsible 
for their contributions to the treasury. He held 
this position as late as 1876. Associated with him 
about 1870 was one Jacob de Pont St. Maxence. 
After a time these two quarreled, and Jacob accused 
Manessier and Vivant (Manessier’s brother) of cer- 
tain malversationsin his office, of having established 
a synagogue without the king’s permission, and of 
having pronounced an edict of excommunication 
contrary to the provisions of the act of Parliament 
of Feb. 3, 13874. Manessier was imprisoned in the 
Chatelet, Paris. The king’s proctor demanded a 
tine, with imprisonment until the fine had been 
paid. It is, however, probable that this was re- 
witted, as Manessier afterward recovered his credit 
with the court, after having made peace with 
Jacob. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Isidore Loeb, in Gritz Jubelschrift, pp. 54-96. 


G. J. 


MANETHO (Greek, Mave@dc or Mavefav): Greco- 
Egyptian writer whose history of Egypt, forming a 
source of Josephus, especially in his book “Contra 
Apionem” (i. 14 e¢ seg.; ed. Niese, §§ 73-105; 228- 
251), possesses special interest for the history of 
Israel. 

Manetho was high priest of Sebennytus in the 
Delta (according to some, erroneously, of Heiiopo- 
lis), and lived under the first two Ptolemies. His 
history was written after 271 B.c.; its importance 
rests on Manetho’s ability to use hieroglyphic 
sources directly. Though heseems to have enjoyed 
considerable reputation among the contemporary 
Greeks, it does not appear that his history was much 
read in the first century of the common era. Jose- 
plus is the only writer who furnishes coherent ex- 
tracts. After him, Julius Africanus (221) and Euse- 
bius (326) extracted chronological tables of Egyptian 
dynasties and kings for their Biblical chronogra- 
phies. Both extracts were preserved by Georgius 
Syncellus (ce. 792). The confusion of facts and 
names in Josephus’ extracts (especially on the Exo- 
dus, “Contra Ap.” i. 26; ed. Niese, §§ 228 ef seq.) is 
almost incredible. Some of the errors may be at- 
tributed to Josephus himself. What Josephus re- 
ports about the Hyksos (or Hykussos) dynasty con- 
tains valuable information; but the connection of 
those kings and the Israelites is an untenable theory. 
What remains of the Manethonian Exodus account 
after the correction of the most manifest blunders 
seems, however, to show that the writer used the 
Biblical narrative and tried to combine it with some 
popular Egyptian tales. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : The extant fragments of Manetho have often 
been collected (by Rosellini, Bunsen, and others). They are 
most conveniently accessible in C. Miller, Historici Greeci 
Minores, ii. 511; and the most valuable treatise on them is 


Unger, Die Chronologie des Manetho, 1867. For scattered 
literature see Wiedemann, Gesch. Aegyptens, p. 121. 


T. W. M. M. 


MANETTI, GIANNOZZO: Italian statesman 
and Christian Hebraist; born in Florence 1396; died 
at Naples Oct. 26,1459. At the suggestion of Pope 


Nicholas V., who had made him one of his secre- 
taries, Manetti learned Hebrew from a Jew named 
Manuel. He is said to have had a Jewish servant 
with whom he spoke Hebrew; and his son Agnolo 
from an early age was taught Hebrew besides Latin 
and Greek. 

Manetti translated the Psalms at Nicholas’ re- 
quest, but had to defend the principles of his trans- 
lation in a special treatise. In the hope of gaining 
the 5,000 ducats promised by the pope for the dis- 
covery of the original Hebrew of the Gospel of Mat- 
thew, Manetti collected many Hebrew manuscripts 
which are now in the Vatican. He also began a 
large apologetic work against the Jews. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Burckhart, Renaissance in Italy, i. 270; 


Steinschneider, in Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl. i. 87; Michaud, in 
Biographie Universelle; Nuova Enciclopedia Italiana. 


T, dis 


MANI, ELIJAH: Turkish rabbi; died in He- 
bron, Palestine, in the summer of 1899. He wasa 
native of Bagdad, where he was held in great esteem 
for his piety and his knowledge of the Cabala. 
About 1856 he went to Jerusalem, and two years 
later settled in Hebron. When R. Moses Pereire of 
that city died, Mani succeeded him as rabbi of the 
Sephardim. For fourteen years he accepted no re- 
muneration, but later was forced by poverty to over- 
come his scruples. He was very active in charita- 
ble and communal affairs, and his simple and noble 
life won for him the respect and admiration of all 
the inhabitants of that ancient city; Mohammedans 
as well as Jews thronged to his funeral. He is said 
to have written eleven works, which he refused to 
publish. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ahiasaf, 566] (1900-1), pp. 385-386. 
Ss. 8. P. Wr. 


MANISSA (the ancient Magnesia ad Sipy- 
lum): Town in the Turkish vilayet of Aidin, 
twenty-eight miles northeast of Smyrna. It hasa 
population of 40,000, of whom 1,800 are Jews 
(against 1,200 in 1838). The community there is 
said to be older than that of Smyrna. Richard 
Pococke, who visited the city about 1783-34, says 
(“Description of the East,” ii. 56): “Several Jews 
[of Manissa] exported goods toSmyrna and Europe. 
They also manufactured calicoes, and usually were 
rich. To-day they are the commercial leaders. As 
artisans, they are chiefly shoemakers, tinsmiths, etc. 
The young women have recently begun to Jearn the 
manufacture of Turkish rugs, and this industry isin 
quite a flourishing condition.” When Tournefort 
visited the district in 1702 (“ Voyage au Levant,” ii. 
490) he found three synagogues there; now there 
are five—named Shalom, Mayorca, Toledo, ‘Ez 
Hayyim, and Talmud Torah. The oldest of these, 
Shalom, was destroyed by fire, but has been rebuilt. 

Among its benevolent societies are the hebra kad. 
disha; the Hospital Society; the Mohar u-Mattan, 
which assists and dowers girls who wish to marry; 
the Hesed shel Emet, which provides for poor 
families in time of mourning; the Shilluhim, to 
assist strangers and the poor to emigrate; and the 
‘Ozer Dallim, which provides the poor with shoes. 
The different societies have their own revenues. 

There are two cemeteries, one old and the other 


Manissa 
Manna 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


292 





dating back about a century. In the former, tomb- 
stones dated 5406 (= 1646) have been found. A por- 
tion of the old cemetery was occupied for some years 
by Mohammedan refugees, who mistook it for va- 
eant ground, and built houses there. To save thc 
new cemetery from a similar fate, it was enclosed 
with walls in 1900 by the hebra kaddisha, which 
spent for this purpose 400 Turkish livres. The 
community has a small but well-organized hospital, 
which was founded in 1869 on the initiative of Rabbi 
Hayyim Mazliah and Rabeno Algranati. Before 
the establishment of schools by the Alliance Israélite 
Universelle (one for boys in 1892 and another for 
girls in 1896) the Talmud Torah was the only edu- 
cational center. The school buildings stand on a 
fine estate belonging to the community. After the 
foundation of these schools the Talmud Torah ceased 
to exist, and modern ideas of progress have been 
adopted. Hebrew, French, and Turkish are taught 
in the schools, and a reading-room was established 


in 1895. Greek, Turkish, and Judeeo-Spanish are the 
vernaculars. The community is governed by a 


chief rabbi, who is also the government representa- 
tive. Since the abolition of the communal tax called 
“‘arikah,” the tax upon salt has met the communal 
needs and the salaries of the rabbis and shohetim. 

The oldest of the chief rabbis of whom any men- 
tion is made was Aaron Lapapa, the author of the 
“Bene Aharon” (Smyrna, 1674), who was succeeded 
by Benjamin Melammed. After Melammed, the 
next rabbis known were Zerahiah Azulai, author of 
“Sukkat Dawid”; Raphael Abraham Mazliah, au- 
thor of “ Ma’amar ha-Melek ” (Salonica, 1806); Joseph 
Mazliah, Abraham Mazliah, Joseph Hakim, Moses 
Mazliah, and David Gomel, the present (1904) rabbi. 
Two blood accusations have been brought against 
the Jews of Manissa, one in 1883 and the other in 
1893. In 1837two hundred Jews died of the Plague. 

In a chest in the synagogue Shalom is preserved 
a parchment manuscript of eight books of the Bible, 
in three volumes. The first volume contains the 
books of Genesis and Exodus; the second those of 
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; and the 
third Joshua, Judges, and Isaiah. At the end of 
the last volume is the name of the copyist, Reuben 
bar Todros, and the date of the book, 5049 (1289). 
These booksare greatly venerated. Some years ago 
the second volume was sent to Paris to be sold in 
order to obtain money for the needs of the commu- 
nity. As soon as the book had left Manissa there 
occurred a succession of sudden and premature 
deaths. Attributing these misfortunes to the re- 
moval of the volume, the community telegraphed 
for its immediate return. 

Among the famous Jews born in Manissa was 
Samtob (Shem-Tob) Shikar, a composer of Oriental 
music. 

About eighty years ago, in the time of Kara Oglu 
Osman, Chelebi Aaron Franco was the government 
treasurer; on the downfall of the former, Franco 
shared his disgrace; Franco’s enemies went so far as 
to pass sentence of death on hitn, but he was saved 
through the efforts of Hayyim Palaggi, chief rabbi 
of Smyrna. One of the contemporaries of Franco 
was a certain Chelebi Abrahamaji Mayo, proprietor 
of a large estate. Samtob (Shem-Tob) Joseph is 


at present the veterinary surgeon of Manissa an its 
dependencies; several Jews are members of local 
tribunals, und David Franco is the present draygo- 
man of the Italian vice-consulate. 

D. A. GA. 


MANN, LOUIS: Americanactor; born in New 
York city 1865; son of Daniel and Caroline Mann. 
He began his career as an actor when but six years 
of age. In 1880 Mann went on tour with a 
small compauy, and subsequently was engaged by 
the elder Salvini (1881), by Lewis Morrison (1882), 
and by J. K. Emmett (1888). At the conclusion of 
these engagements Mann set outas a “barnstormer ” 
in classical drama. Among the parts he has cre- 
ated may be mentioned that of Uzterson the law- 
yer, in Robert Louis Stevenson’s “Dr. Jekyll and 
Mr. Hyde,” as presented by Daniel Bandmann (1887). 
Mann next appeared in “Incog,” in which he took 
one of the leading parts (1891). His next conspicu- 
ous success was in 1896, in a burlesque of the char- 
acter of Svengali in “The Merry World.” Later he 
turned his attention to German comedy parts and 
originated those in “The Strange Adventures of 
Miss Brown” (1896), “ The Girl from Paris” (1897), 
“The Telephone Girl” (1898), “All on Account of 
Eliza ” (1901), and “ Master and Pupil.” Since then 
Mann has devoted himself especially to these and 
character parts. In 1902 he took the leading réle in 
“The Red Kloof,” and later joined Weber and Fields 
of New York, being associated with them in their 
productions until the dissolution of their partnership 
in 1904, 

A. F. H. VY. 


MANNA (}6).—Biblical Data: The miracu- 
lously supplied food on which the Israelites subsisted 
in the wilderness. Its name is said to have origi- 
nated in the question NIM jd (“ What is it?” Ex. xvi. 
15, R. V.; comp. Rashi ad loc.), asked by the Israel- 
ites when they first saw it. According to George 
Ebers (“ Durch Gosen zum Sinai,” p. 286), the name 
comes from the Egyptian “mennu” (= “ food”). 
The manna is also designated “bread” (Ex. xvi. 4); 
it is called “the corn of heaven” and “the bread of 
the mighty” in Ps. Ixxviii. 24-25, R. V., and, in a 
depreciative sense, “the light bread” in Num. xxi. 
5. The manna descended in the night in the form 
of coriander-seed of the color of bdellium (Num. Xi. 
7), so that in the morning the ground looked as if it 
were covered with hoar frost. The grains were 
ground or pounded into flour, and then the flour 
was prepared and baked in the form of cakes, the 
taste of which was like that of “wafers made with 
honey” or “as the taste of fresh oil” (Ex. xvi. 31; 
Num, xi. 8). 

The gathering of the manna was connected with 
several miracles: it was collected before sunrise, for, 
in spite of its hard substance, it melted in the sun. 
The quantity collected made exactly one omer for 
every person, whether one collected much or little. 
On Friday morning the portions were double, for 
the manna could not be found on Sabbath. The 
manna was eaten the day it was gathered; if it were 
left until the following morning it corrupted and 
bred worms, though the manna gathered on Friday 
and kept for the Sabbath remained fresh. It con- 


293 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manissa 
Manna 





io : 
tinued to descend during the forty years the Israel- | spicuous that all the kings of the East and West 


ites were in the wilderness, but when they arrived 
at Gilgal, on the 14th of Nisan, and began to eat 
the grain grown there, the manna ceased to fall. 
In order to perpetuate the memory of this provi- 
dence, Aaron was told to put an omer of manna in 
a vessel and lay it “ before the testimony ” (Ex. xvi. 
17-35; Josh. v. 10-12). Num. xxi. 5 makes it ap- 
pear that manna was the only food of the Israelites 
while they were in the wilderness, although refer- 
ences to provisions of fine flour, oil, and meat are 
met with elsewhere. It may be either that the 
mnianna constituted their main but not only food- 
supply during the whole forty years, or that it be- 
came their exclusive food after the provisions they 
took with them 
from Egypt 
were exhausted. 

Certain mod- 
ern scholars at- 
tempt to iden- 
tify the manna of 
Exodus with the 
exudation of the 
tamarisk-trees 
(named by Eb- 
renberg the 
“Tammarix 
mannifera”) of 
the Sinaitic pen- 
insula. The 
Arabs call it 
“mann al-sa- 
ma” (= “heav- 
enly manna”), 
and collect itand 
sell it to pil- 
grims. It has 
been identified 
also with the 
exudations of other trees found in those regions. 
A more recent view identifies the Biblical manna 
with lichen and allied species of plants found in 
Arabia and other parts of western Asia. The re- 
ports of modern travelers, however, are contradict- 
ory in regard to “ manna.” 

EB. C. M. SEL. 
— In Rabbinical Literature: Manna was one 
of the ten things created on the first Friday of Crea- 
tion, in the twilight (Abot v. 9; comp. Targ. pseudo- 
Jonathan to Ex. xvi. 4, 15). According to Zabdi b. 
Levi, the manna which fell near the camp of the 
Israclites in the wilderness covered an area two 
thousand cubits square; it remained on the ground 
until four hours after sunrise, when it melted. It 
fell to a depth of sixty cubits, or, according to 
Isi b. Akiba (Midr. Teh. to Ps. xxiti.), of fifty 
cubits, and the quantity which fell every day would 
have sufficed to nourish the people for two thou- 
sand years. The question why was it necessary 
that the manna should fall every day is answered 
by the Rabbis in different ways: the Israelites couJd 
not be encumbered with its burden; they necded 
warm food every day, and the manna was warm 
when it fell; they needed that their hearts should be 
turned to God for their daily bread. It was so con- 





Israelites Gathering Manna in the Desert. 
(From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the fourteenth century.) 


could see it from their palaces (Yoma 76a; Tan., Be- 
shallah, 21). 

In order that the manna might remain clean, a 
north wind first swept the ground, and then rains 
washed it. Then, after the ground had been cov- 
ered with a layer of dew, the manna fell upon 
it, and was itself then covered with dew (Mek., 
Beshallah, Wayassa‘, 8; comp. Sifre, Num. 89). It 
so fell that the righteous had no trouble in gathering 
it, finding it at the doors of their tents; those of less 
firm belief had to go farther for it; the wicked had 
to go far from the camp to gather it (Yoma 75a). 
A very different statement, but of the same na- 
ture, is given in Tan., Beshallah, 22: The diligent 
went out into 
the field to 
gather the man- 
na; the less dili- 
gent went just 
outside their 
tents; but the 
indolent fay in 
their sleeping- 
places while 
the manna fell 
into their out- 
stretched hands. 
Created only for 
the children of 
Israe!, the 
heathen could 
not secure the 
smallest quan- 
tity of it, for 
when one 
stretched out his 
hand to pick it 
up, it slipped 
from his grasp 
(Sifre, Deut. 318; Midr. Abkir, in Yalk., Ex. 258); 
according to another opinion, it tasted bitter to the 
heathen (Tan., é.c.). 

The melting of the manna formed streams which 
furnished drink to many deer and other animals, and 
when those animals were afterward killed by 
heathen, the latter recognized in the meat the taste 
of the manna (Tan., J.c.; comp. Targ. pseudo-Jona- 
than to Ex. xvi. 21). It was only in this way that 
the heathen could know the true taste of the manna, 
for the water itself was bitter to them (Tan., d.¢.). 
With the manna precious stones fell every morning 
(Yoma /.c.). The manna was adapted to the taste 
of each individual; to the adult it tasted like the 
food of theadult, while to the sucking child it tasted 
like the milk of its mother’s breasts. By wishing, 
one could taste in the manna anything desired, 
whether fowl or fruit; thus the statement that the 
people ground it, or pounded it, and then baked it 
(Num. xi. 8), is only figurative, for if one so wished 
it tasted like food made of flour ground or 
pounded, baked or cooked. According to a differ- 
ent interpretation, the wicked were compelled to 
grind it and prepare it until it was fit for food, 
while for the righteous it was ground by angels be- 
fore it fell from heaven. 








tae wan clase THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 204 
The manna exhaled a fragrant odor, and during | Abib,” “Tla-Shoshannah,” and “Mas’at Nafshi” 


the forty years the Israelites wandered in the wil- 
derness it served the women as perfume. Being a 
heavenly food, the manna contained nutritious mat- 
ter only, without any waste products, so that during 
the whole time the Israelites lived upon it the gross- 
est office of the body remained unexercised. The 
Israelites, nevertheless, complained of it (comp. 
Num. xi. 6): “Shall a human being 
not discharge of what he eats? our 
bowels will surely be swollen” (Yoma 
l.c.; Sifre, Num. 87-89; Tan., /.¢.). 
A miracle attended the collecting of the manna, 
in that the number of omers gathered by each 
family was found to correspond to the number of 
its members. This rendered the manna useful in 
solving most difficult problems. For instance, when 
two people came before Moses, one accusing the 
other of having stolen his slave and the other claim- 
ing to have bought the slave, Moses deferred his 
decision tothe following morning, when the number 
of omers of manna in their respective houses showed 
to whom the slave belonged. In this way many 
otherwise inextricable complications could be un- 
raveled (Yoma 75a). 

The Rabbis disagreed as to the period of time for 
which the pot of manna was placed by Aaron “ be- 
fore the testimony.” Tt was placed there only for 
the following generation; it was placed there for 
all future generations; it was to be Kept there until 
the coming of the Messiah. It is one of the three 
things which will be restored by Elijah. Jeremiah, 
When remonstrating with the children of Israel for 
their negiect of the Torah, showed them the pot of 
manna: “See how God nourishes those that occupy 
themselves with the study of the Law.” There is 
also a disagreement between the Rabbis with regard 
to the length of time after Moses’ death in which 
the Israelites ate the manna—whether for forty 
days, seventy days, or for the fourteen years during 
which the land of Canaan was conquered and di- 
vided among the tribes. According to R. Joshua, 
the manna ceused to descend immediately after 
Moses’ death, and the Israelites were compelled to 
eat what they had gathered previously (Mek., /.¢.). 
The manna is reserved as the future food of the 
righteous, for which purpose it is ground in a mill 
situated in Shehakim, the third heaven (Hage. 12b; 
Tan... fe.). 

B.C. M. SEL. 

MANNE, MORDECAI ZEBI: Russian He- 
brew poet and painter; born at Rodzkowitz, gov- 
ernment of Wilna, 1859; died there in 1886. He re- 
ceived the Talmudic training usual tn Poland, and 
was taught Hebrew grammar by his father. At 
thirteen he entered the yeshibah at Minsk, and he 
remained there until 1876, when he removed to Wilna, 
studied at the yeshibah there, and, on the advice of 
Joshua Héschel Levin, entered the school of paint- 
ing and design. ITis first poetical writings also 
belong to that time. In 1880 he went to St. Peters- 
burg and enrolled as a student at the Imperial 
Academy of Fine Arts, receiving, in 1882, a silver 
medal from the grand duke Vladimir for extraor- 
dinary progress. 

Manne’s poems, 


Charac- 
teristics. 


“Mebasser ha-Abib,” “ Ha- 


a NL NN rp pe gegen 


(which has been set to music and is sung often in 
Zionist gatherings), place him among the foremost 
Hebrew poets. His best poems are somewhat 
didactic in character, as “ Tikwah la-‘Obed,” a frag- 
mentary work, depicting the contrast between hopc 
and despair. Another fragmentary poem, “ We- 
Zarah ha-Shemesh u-Ba ha-Shemesh,” is an elegy 
on the death of Emperor Alexander If. His first 
prose article, on the art of painting, especially 
among the Jews, appeared in “Ha-Zefirah” in 
1882. This was followed by a whole series of 
papers on art, artists, and esthetics, including one 
on the art of poetry and a paper on the Jewish 
painter Oppenheim. His’ writings have been 
published in two volumes, under the title “Kol 
Kitbe Mordekai Zebi Manne ” (Warsaw). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ost und West, 1902, p. 195; Kol Kitbe, War- 


saw, 1896. 
H. R. J. G. L. 


MANNHEIM: Town in the grand duchy of 
Baden, Germany. It has a population of 141,131, 
including 5,478 Jews (1900). Jews are not known 
to have lived in Mannheim before the middle of 
the seventeenth century. On Sept. 1, 1660, thirteen 
families, eleven of German and two of Portuguese 
origin, obtained permission from the elector Karl 
Ludwig to reside there. A deed dated 1656 mentions 
the first burial-ground, which in 1661 was exchanged 
for another; the latter was used until 1889. The 
first rabbi was Naphtali Herz (1657-71). His suc- 
cessor was Isaac Brilin (1671-78), who was appointed 
rabbi at Mannheim after the expulsion of the Jews 
from ITammelburg. Upon his death his son-in-law, 
Eliezer b. Jekuthiel, became rabbi; but, like his suc- 
cessor, Moses Grotwohl (1679), he held the office only 
a short time. Even at that early date there were 
78 Jews in Mannheim, a fact which induced the 
municipal administration to submit a request to the 
government of the Palatinate not to grant any more 
permits to Jews. I[saac Aaron Worms of Metz was 
rabbi from 1685 to 1698. ‘The devastation of .the 
Palatinate by the French compelled the Jews of 
Mannheim, who had assisted in the defense of the 
city, to go elsewhere; nearly 70 families lost their 
homes by fire. Heidelberg received 26 families un- 
til their houses at Mannheim were rebuilt (1691). 
Among the new houses was the large quadrangular 
building erected by the court factor Emanuel Op- 
penheimer of Vienna, son of the famous Samucl 
OPPENTEIMER, and which, until 1729, wasthe tem po- 
rary residence of the elector Karl Philipp. A con- 
cession granted in 1698, whose object was to bring 
about the reconstruction of the city as soon as possi- 
ble, increased the number of Jewish inhabitants 
to 150 families. In 1701 the Jews obtained permis- 
sion to extend their burial-place and to build 4 
synagogue. 

The first rabbi after the reconstruction of the city 
was Joseph David Ulf (1706-29). Jt was at this 
period that a Kats was founded at Mannheim 
through the generosity of Lemle Moses Reinganum, 
with a capital of 100,000 gulden. The building, in- 
cluding a synagogue and bet ha-midrash, wus dedi- 
cated in 1708, and, with some alterations, exists to-day. 
Similar institutions, but smaller, were established by 


295 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manna _ 
Mannheimer 





Michael] May and Elias Haium. The rabbi at that | vacant by Zunz in Berlin. German services, how- 


time was Samuel Helmann (1726-51), an opponent 
of Jonathan Eybeschittz. On Ielmann’s appoint- 
nient as rabbi at Metz, David (Tebele) Hess was 
elected chief rabbi in Mannheim. During his tenure 
of office oecurred the notorious divorce dispute of 
Cleve, which involved a member of the Mannheim 
congregation and aroused a bitter controversy among 
the rabbis of Germany (1766; see “Or Yisrael,” 
Cleve, 1770; Horovitz, “Frankfurter Rabbinen,” 
iv. 27-381, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1885; Lubetzki, 
“Bidke Battim,” p. 44b, Paris, 1896). The elector 
Karl Theodor granted more Jews the right to live in 
Mannheim (1744), at the same time, however, order- 
ing them to settle in the side streets, as they should 
not be allowed to own a house in the main street. 
For thirty-two years the chief rabbi at the klaus was 
Naphtali Hirsch Katzenellenbogen. The “Stadt- 
rabbiner” was Ilirschel Levin (1770-78), who left 
Mannheim for Berlin. In 1784 Michel Scheuer, 
from Mayence, was appointed “Stadtrabbiner”; he 
held the office for twenty-five years and died in 1809. 
His successors were: Gottschalk Abraham, who had 
been klaus rabbi and “Oberland” rabbi (d. 1824); 
Hirsch Traub (d. 1849); Moses Praeger (d. 1861), 
who introduced a Reform service (1856) ; B. Friedman 
(1863-79); and the present (1904) rabbi, M. Steckel- 
macher (since 1880). Mannheim contains many 
Jewish philanthropic institutions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Léwenstein, Gesch. der Juden in der Kur- 

pfalz, Frankfort-onu-the-Main, 1895. 


D, L. L. 


MANNHEIMER (MAGYAR), GUSTAV: 
Hungarian painter; born at Budapest Feb. 27, 
1854. He studied at the schools of drawing in 
Budapest, Munich, Vienna, and Rome. The best 
known of his paintings are: “On Flowery Mead,” 
“Procession at Anacapri,” “Young Tramps,” and 
“Ttalian Evening Landscape.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Singer, Ally. Kitnstler-Lexikon, vol. iii. 


s 


MANNHEIMER, ISAAC NOAH: Jewish 
preacher; born at Copenhagen Oct. 17, 1793: died 
at Vienna March 17, 1865. The son of a hazzan, he 
began the study of the Talmud at an early age, 
though not to the neglect of secular studies. On 
completing the course of the cathedral school at 
Copenhagen, he took up philosophy, Oriental Jan- 
guages, and theology at the university there, at the 
same time continuing his studies in Talmud and 
Jewish science. When the Jews of Denmark were 
emancipated in 1814 confirmation was made obliga- 
tory, and the office of catechist was instituted by 
the state, Mannheimer being the first incumbent 
(1816). The first confirmation took place May, 1817. 
In 1821 Mannheimer went to Vienna, where there 
was then no congregation, the community being di- 
vided into twoopposing parties. Mannheimer, who 
was welcomed by both factions, soon succeeded in 
organizing a congregation, drafting a program and 
ritual on the traditional basis and harmonizing the 
views of the two parties. He returned to Copen- 
hagen in December of the same year. Failing in 
his attempt to secure a new synagogue for Re- 


form services, he accepted a call to the pulpit left | 


ever, were interdicted in that city; the temple for- 
merly under the ministry of B. Beer was closed, and 
the royal cabinet order of Dec. 26, 1823, obtained by 
the Orthodox party, frustrated the attempt to adapt 
the old ritual to new forms 
by delivering German ser- 
mons in the chief syna- 
gogue. Mannheimer there- 
fore left Berlin and took 
temporary charge of the 
pulpit of Hamburg, preach- 
ing also at Leipsic during 
the fairs. In 1824 he mar- 
ried Liseke Damier, and in 
November of the same year 
he was called to the new 
synagogue of Vienna. As 
he could not receive the 
title of preacher or rabbi, 
he was inducted, in June, 
1825, as “Direktor der 
Wiener K. K. Genebmigten 
Oeffentlichen Israelitischen 
Religionsschule”; he dedicated the new temple in 
April, 1826, and officiated there until 1829. 

Mannheimer’s success was due in great measure 
to his oratorical gifts. His sermons were, for their 
time, models (Geiger, “ Einleitung in das Studium 
der Jtidischen Theologie,” in “ Nachgelassene 
Schriften,” ii. 31). His German translation of the 
prayer-book and of the fast-day prayers, and his 
arrangement of the fast-day liturgy, are of perma- 
nent importance for the ritual, the conservative 
spirit in which this work was undertaken leading’ to 
its adoption by many communities. 

In 1848 Mannheimer was returned by Brody to 
the Austrian Reichstag, where he delivered two 
memorable speeches, one on the Jew-tax (Oct. 5, 
1848) and the other on the abolition of capital pun- 
ishment (Jan. 29, 1849). On his seventieth birthday 
the city of Vienna conferred honorary citizenship 
upon him. He devoted the gifts bestowed by the 
community upon him on that occasion to a founda- 
tion for the aid of rabbis, preachers, aud teachers, 
which still bears his name. 

Mannheimer published the following works: 
“Predikener Holdte ved det Mosaiske Troes-Sam- 
fund’s Andagts-Ovelser i Modersmaalet { Sommer- 
halvaaret 1819” (Copenhagen, 1819); “ Gottesdienst- 
liche Vortriige Gehalten im Israelitischen Bethause 
zu Wien im Monate Tischri 5594” (Vienna, 1884); 
“Gottesdicnstliche Vortrige fiir die Wochenab- 
schnitte des Jahres,” vol.i., Genesis and Exodus (78. 
18385; partly translated into Hebrew by E Kuttner, 
under the title MJ %%, 7b. 1865); a translation of the 
prayer-book and of the fast-day prayers according 
to the ritual of the Vienna Temple (1840; frequently 
reprinted). His polemics and responsa include: 
“Gutachten fiir das Gebetbuch des Hamburger 
Tempels” (1841); “Gutachten Gegen die Reform- 
partei in Frankfurt-am-Main in Angelegenheit der 
Beschneidungsfrage” (1843); “Einige Worte tiber 
Juden und Judenthum” (supplement to the “ Oes- 
terreichische Medicinische Wochenschrift,” 1842, 
No. 84), directed against Professor Rosa’s statements 





Isaac Noah Mannheimer, 


Mannheimer 
Mantino 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


296 





in reference to the Jewish question (1848). Two 

numbers of his “Gottesdienstliche Vortriige ” ap- 

peared posthumously, edited by S. Hammerschlag 

(Vienna, 1876). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Wolf, Isak Noa Mannheimer, Prediger: 
Eine Biographische Skizze, Vienna, 183 (Italian transl. 
by Lelio della ‘Torre, Triest, 1863); Kayserling, Bibliothek 


Jiidischer Kanzelredner, i. 285, and the bibliography there 
given. 


J. E. N. 

MANNHEIMER (HERSCHMAN), 
LOUISE: Writer and poetess; born at Prague 
Sept. 3, 1845. In 1866 she went with her parents 
to New York, where she became the wife of Prof. 
Sigmund Mannheimer. She wrote German and 
English poems, and articles and reviews for German 
and English periodicals. Zimmermann’s “ Deutsch 
in Amerika” (Chicago, 1894) contains some of her 
poems anda short biographical notice. Among her 
productionsin English are * TheStorm,” a translation 
of one of Judah ha-Levi’s poems, and “ The Harvest,” 
a prize poem (printed in “The American Jews’ An- 
nual,” Cincinnati, 1897). 
under the title of “The Jewish Woman” a transla- 
tion of Nahida Remy’s “Das Jiidische Weib” (2d 
ed. 1897). She is the author of “The Maiden’s 
Song,” and is the founder of the Cincinnati Jewish 
Industrial School for Boys and the inventor of the 
Pureairin Patent Ventilator. 

A. S. MAN. 


MANNHEIMER, SIGMUND: American 
educator; born at Kemel, Hesse-Nassau, May 16, 
1835. Educated at the teachers’ seminary at Ems, 
Nassau, he became teacher in the Jewish schools of 
Schierstein (1853) and Hegenheim (1858). In 1861 
he entered the University of Paris (Bachelier és Let- 
tres, 1863), becoming professor of German in 1864. 
In 1865 he went to America and lived successively 
in Baltimore (to 1867), New York (to 1878), St. 
Louis (to 1876), and Rochester, N. Y. (where he be- 
came teacher at the Jewish school). In 1884 he was 
appointed professor of exegesis and Aramaic, and 
librarian, at Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, 
Ohio. 

Mannheimer has published: “Die Wahrheit tiber 
den Talmud ” (Basel, 1858 ; translated from the French 
of T. Klein); “ Hebrew Reader and Grammar” (New 
York, 1873; 4th ed., Cincinnati, 1903); “ Anti-Semi- 
tism ” (Cincinnati, 1897; translated from the French 
of Leroy-Beaulieu); “Iggeret Musar,” an English 
translation of Solomon Alami’s “Iggeret Musar” 
(4b. 1898). He died Dec. 18, 1909. 

A. FE. T. H. 


MANOAH B. JACOB: French Talmudist; 
lived at Lunel in the second half of the thirteenth 
century. He is sometimes quoted under the abbre- 
viation 9°" (= “R. Manoah ”; Halberstam MSS., No. 
345). 
his father. After a brief residence at Narbonne, 
where he studied with Mefr b. Simon and Reuben 
b. Hayyim, Manoah returned to Lunel. Like sev- 
eral of his contemporaries, he was a student of the 
works of Maimonides, and wrote a commentary on 
the latter’s Yad ha-Hazakah, which is quoted in 
“Sha‘are Ziyyon” under the title “ Sefer ha-Manoah,” 
and in “Kore ha-Dorot,” under the title “Sefer 


In 1895 she published © 


Manoah often cites decisions in the name of. 


S$ SS PUR SD SR Shyer py AP peeve rey 
LLL LL LL TL LEC PaO FC SS PS tr ey Re 


ha-Menuhah.” It was printed at Constantinople 
in 1518. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, p. 60a; Conforte, 
Kore ha-Dorot, p. lia; Isaac de Lattes, Sha‘are Ziyyon. p. 
75: Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, p. 512; First, 
Bibi. Jud.; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 285, 

Ss. 8. K. 


MANOAH OF LUNEL. Sce Manoanes. JAcon. 


MANOAH B. SHEMARIAH HANDEL: 
Polish author; born at Brzeszticzka (Npy*ypypr3), 
Volhynia; died in 1612. He was the author of the 
following works: “ Hokmat Manoah,” glosses to the 
Talmud (printed in the Cracow 1602-5 edition of the 
Talmud, and separately at Prague, in 1602, by his 
son); “ Menoah ha-Lebabot,” commentary to Bahya 
ben Joseph’s “ Al-Hidayah ila Fara’id al-Kulub” 
(Lublin, 1596; frequently reprinted); “ Manoah Maza. 
Hen,” on the title-page of which the emperor Ru- 
dolph and King Matthias are mentioned. Manoah 
must have composed a number of other works, for 


his son, who preserved those already noted, speaks 


of his intention to publish “all” his father’s works 
on the Talmud, the Cabala, and astronomy. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sternberg, Gesch. der Juden in Polen, p. 184, 
Leipsic, 1878; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1652, No. 6209. 


8. 8. G. WE. 


MANRESA: Town in Spain, in the province of 
Barcelona. In the twelfth century it is said to have 
contained 500 Jewish families, most of which lived 
in a narrow lane named “Grau dels Jueus,” near the 
town hall; their cemetery, still called “ Fossana dels 
Jueus,” was outside the city. In the thirteenth 
and fourteenth centuries the Jews there were en- 
gaged in manufacturing, in trading (including that in 
slaves), in money-lending (at the rate of 20 per cent, 
the usual interest at that time), and in the cultiva- 
tion of their vineyards and estates. The hostility of 
the Christians toward the Jews which prevailed 
throughout Catalonia was manifested in Manresa. 
also. In 1825 the Christian inhabitants of the town 
endeavored to prevent the Jews from baking their 
Passover bread, so that the latter were obliged to 
appeal to the king for protection. The Jews in 
Manresa did not escape the general persecution of 
1391, and many of them professed to accept Chris- 
tianity. After 1414 comparatively few Jews re- 
mained in the town, and in 1492 they sold their 
property for whatever they could get for it and left 
the country. At the beginning of the fifteenth cen- 
tury Manresa had 30,000 inhabitants; three centuries 
later it contained barely one-fifth of that number. 
Several members of the Zabarra (Sabara) family 
lived in Manresa. The townis not mentioned in the 
“Shebet Yehudah.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. M. de Mas y Casas, Memoria Historica de. 
los Hebreos y de los Arabes en Manresa, Manresa, 1837 (2d. 
ed. 1882); Ed. Tamaro, Los Judios de Manresa, in Jacobs, 
Sources, pp. 154 et seq.; R. E. J. Vv. 286 et seq., vi. 297; Rios, 
Hist. ii. 155, 402; iii. 310. 


MANSION HOUSE AND GUILDHALL 
MEETINGS: Meetings held at the summons of 
the lord mayor of London by citizens of the English 
metropolis to protest against the persecution of the 
Jews. The first of these was held on July 8, 1840, 
to protest against the blood accusation brought 
against the Jews of Damascus. A demand for this 


297 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mannheimer 
Mantino 


ee SS SS re ee 


meeting was made by 210 important residents of the 
city. Speeches were delivered by Daniel O’Connell, 
Alderman Thompson, Dr. Bowring, and others, ex- 
pressing their disbelief in the accusation and de- 
manding the release of theaccused. The resolutions 
of the meeting were sent by the lord mayor to the 
chief ambassadors of foreign powers residing in 
England, and an especially favorable reply was re- 
ceived from the Emperor of Russia. Over forty 
years later meetings were convened by the lord 
mayor of London to protest against the persecutions 
of the Jews in Russia, Attention had been called 
to these by articles in the London “Times” of Jan. 
9 and 11, 1882, written by Joseph Jacobs, anda req- 
uisition was made for a Mansion House Meeting in 
consequence. Therequisition was signed by thirty- 
eight persons, including the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury, Cardinal Manning, Charles Darwin, John 
Tyndall, and cighteen members of Parliament. 
This meeting was followed by numerous others 
throughout the United Kingdom, including one at 
the University of Oxford. 

The requisition for the Guildhall Meeting of Dec. 
10, 1890, was signed by eighty-three persons, again 
headed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and Cardi- 
nal Manning, and including nineteen peers, twenty- 
seven members of Parliament, and the foremost rep- 
resentatives of nearly every learned profession. The 
following resolution, proposed by the Duke of 
Westminster and seconded by the Bishop of Ripon, 
was adopted: “That in the opinion of this meeting 
the renewed sufferings of the Jews in Russia from 
the operation of severe and exceptional edicts and 
disabilities are deeply to be deplored, and that in 
this last decade of the nineteenth century religious 
hberty is a principle which should be recognized by 
every Christian community as among the natural 
human rights.” In the name of the citizens of Lon- 
don a memorandum was addressed to the czar to this 
effect, praying that the Jews of Russia should he 
granted political and social equality with the rest of 
his subjects. The czar refusing officially to receive 
the communication, it was returned through the for- 
eign office. 

As a@ consequence of the first of the two last- 
mentioned meetings, a Mansion House Fund was 
raised of £108,000 and was administered by a Man- 
sion House Committee; this later took over the 
£100,000 collected after the Guildhall Meeting, when 
it became known henceforth as the Russo-Jewish 
Committee. In the early stages of its work the 
Mansion House Committee supervised the transpor- 
tation of large numbers of Russo-Jewish refugees 
from Brody to America, having a branch committee 
at Liverpool presided over by B. L. Benas. The 
chairman of both committees was Sir Julian 
Goldsmith, and the honorary secretary was N.8, Jo- 
seph. The committee took part also in all the confer- 
ences held to consider the position of the Russian 
Jews and helped to found agricultural colonies at 
Moosomin, Canada; Painted Woods, N. Dak.; Vine- 
land, N. J.; and elsewhere. None of these colonies, 
however, had a very long life. The Russo-Jewish 
Comunittee, besides assisting the Jewish Board of 
Guardians by arranging for the immigration, repatri- 
ation, and settlement of refugees, founded also in 


London a Location and Information Bureau asa labor 
registry, aud evening classes in English for the refu- 
gees, so as to enable them to earn their living outside 
the congested districts. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Times (London), Feb. 2, 1882, and Dec. 
11, 1890; Publications of the Russo-Jewish Committee. 
O. J. S.—J. 


MANSUR MARZUE: Egyptian rabbi and 
author; settled at Salonica toward the close of the 
eighteenth century. He was the author of several 
works: “Zur Todah” (Salonica, 1788), a commen- 
tary on the Yad ha-Hazakah; “Ben Pedahzur” 
(tb. 1786), sermons; “Korban Elizur,” a Talmudic 
commentary. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim: Franco, Histoire 
des Israélites de V Empire Ottoman, p. 127. 


S. M. Fr. 


MANTINO, JACOB BEN SAMUEL : Italian 
physician; died at Damascus in 1549. His parents. 
—and perhaps Mantiuo himself—were natives of Tor- 
tosa, Spain, which place they left at the time of the 
banishment of the Jews from Spain (1492). Mantino 
studied medicine and philosophy at the universities 
of Padua and Bologna. Having graduated, he es- 
tablished himself at the latter place, and devoted his. 
hours of leisure to the translation of scientific works 
from Hebrew into Latin. By these translations he 
soon acquired a high reputation, and he was be- 
friended by the highest dignitaries of the court 
of Pope Clement VII. 

The war of 1527 compelled Mantino to leave the 
Pontifical States. He settled at Verona, where the 
new bishop, Giberti, protected him. In 1528, when 
Giberti left Verona for Rome, Mantino decided to 
settle at Venice, where the Council of Ten exempted 
him from wearing the Jews’ hat. This privilege 
was granted him, at first for a term of several 
months, upon the recommendation of the French 
and English ambassadors, the papal legate, and 
other dignitaries whom he numbered among his 
patients. At the expiration of the prescribed 
term Mantino found an influential protector ir 
another of his patients, Théodore Trivulce, marshal 
of France and governor of Genoa; the latter, urging 
his own services to the Venetian Republic, in- 
sisted that the counci] should make the exemption 
perpetual. 

The efforts of the English king Henry VIII. to 
get rid of his wife Catherine on the pretext that 
their marriage was contrary to the Biblical law, and 
that the dispensation obtained from Pope Julius II. 
was invalid, involved Mantino in difficulties. Henry 
sent Richard Croke to Italy in order to obtain opin- 
ions favorable to his case, and the latter addressed 
himself to Jewish as well as to Christian scholars. 
Pope Clement VII., in his turn, consulted Mantino. 
who decided against Henry. This decision created 
for Mantino many enemies in Venice, where Croke 
had won a favorable opinion from the famous phy- 
sician and scholar Elijah Menahem Halfon, among 
others. Meanwhile the Messianic dreamer Solomon 
Molko, whom Mantino had energetically opposed 
while he was in Venice, went to Rome, followed by 
Mantino. Having many friends and protectors at 
the court of Clement VII., Mantino soon acquired 


Mantino 
Mantua 





great influence in Rome, which he employed in 
crushing Molko. Mantino attained the zenith of 
his influence at the accession to the papal throne of 
Paul TIT. (1534), who appointed him his physician. 
This high position did not prevent Mantino from 
concerning himself with the affairs of the Jewish 
community of Rome, in whose records he appears 
as a member of the rabbinate, with the title “ gaon.” 
In 1544, for some nnknown reason, Mantino re- 
turned to Venice, where again he was exempted 
from wearing the Jews’ hat. Five years later he 
accompanied, as phy- 
sician, the Venetian 


ambassador to Da- 
mascus, where he 
died soon after his 
arrival. 


Mantino translated 
the following com- 
mentaries of Aver- 
roes: “ Paraphrasis 
Averrois de Partibus 
et Generatione Ani- 
malium,” with the 
commentary of Levi 
ben Gershon (dedi- 
cated to Pope LeoX. ; 
Rome, 1521); com- 
mentary (the compen- 
dium) on Aristotle’s 
“Metaphysics”; the 
“middle commenta- 
ries” on Aristotle’s 
“ Isagoge”—booksi.- 
iv. of “Topics” and 
“Poetics” (Venice, 
1550); commentary 
on Plato’s “ Repub- 
fic” (dedicated to 
Pope’ Paul _ III.); 
proem to the large 
comunentary on Aris- 
totle’s “Physics”; 
the largecommentary 
on the third book of 
Aristotle on the soul; 
proem to book xii. of 
Aristotle’s “Meta- 
physics”; the “mid- 
ile commentary ” on 
Aristotle’s — “ Phys- 
ics.” He translated 
also Averroes’ med- 
ical work “ Colliget ” 
(~ Kullayot”), the first book of Avicenna’s “ Canon,” 
und Maimonides’ “Shemonah Perakim.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wolf, Bibl. Hehbr. i. 606; Wiistenfeld, Die 

Uebersetzungen Arabischer Werke in das Lateinisehe 

seit. dem XI. Jahrhundert, pp. 123 et seq.; Steinschneider, 

in Zunz Jubelschrift. pp. 18, 20; idem, Cat. Bodl. col. 12385; 

idem, Hebr. Uebers. pp. 145, 438, 673, 685, 976; Kaufmann, 

in &. #. J. xxvii. 30 et seg.: IL Vessillo Israelitico, 1885, p. 

317; Renazzi, Storia del” Universita degli Studi di Roma, 

ii. 110; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii. 


94 et seq. 
D. I. Br. 


MANTLE OF THE LAW (n5p): The cover 
of the scroll of the Pentateuch. The Hebrew name 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Mantle of the Law, Velvet, Seventeenth Century. 
(In the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.) 


298 





“mappah ” is derived fromthe Greek para, Orig- 
inally, a wrapping of fine silk was spread along 
the full length of the parchment, to protect the 
writing froin dust and injury when the scroll was 
rolled up. The mantie is mentioned in Soferim iii. 
16. “A scroll that has no mantle shall be turned 
face down, so as not to expose the writing” (Yer. 
Meg. i. 9). The custom of completely covering 
the writing with silk, when the mantle is not 
in use, is still practised by the Sephardim in the 
Orient. The color chosen is usually green. Prob- 
ably, in earlier times 
the less expensive 
method was adopted 
of using a narrow 
strip of silk to cover 
the writing at the 
opening of the scroll, 
which would account 
for the word pazra = 
“kerchief” or “nap- 
kin.” Another kind 
of covering wascalled 
“mitpabat,” and was 
used to wrap. the 
scroll after it had 
been rolled up. It 
appears from the 
Mishnah that all 
books or scrolls were 
provided with cover- 
ings (Kelim xxiv. 14). 
When Levi b. Samuel 
and Huna b. Hiyya 
were preparing Cov- 
erings for the books 
of R. Judah, they 
thought the scroll of 
Esther did not re- 
quire a mitpahat, for 
Which opinion they 
were rebuked by R. 
Judah (Sanh. 100a). 
In the Orient, man- 
tles are often not 
used, carved wooden 
boxes being substi- 
tuted for them. 

The “mantle of 
the Law,” as it is 
popularly called, is 
made in the form 
of a bag, to fit the 
scroll after it is 
rolled up. It is open at the bottom and closed 
at the top except for two openings to allow the 
scroll-handles (* ‘ez hayyim ”) to passthrough. The 
mantle is made of expensive material, which must, 
not have been used for any other purpose. Old, 
worn-out mantles should not be thrown away, but 
should be stored in the genizah or sewed into 
a shroud for a corpse to be buried in (Shulhan 
‘“Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 154, 4), Between the sec- 
tional readings of the Pentateuch at the synagogue 
the scroll is closed and covered with the mantle. 
On special occasions, when two scrolls are read from, 


rt a a a een tg Se 


299 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mantino 
Mantua 





the one first used must be rolled up and covered be- 
fore the mantle isremoved from the second scroll (2d. 
147). The mantle of the Law is usually decorated 
er embroidered with the CRowN oF THE Law, the 





Mantle cf the Law, Holland, Early Eighteenth Century. 
(Froin Picart.) 


Lion of Judah, aud with tasselsand ornaments, The 
mantle is often made and presented to the syna- 
gogue by women, and sometimes bears the name of 


the donor or donors. 
J. J. D. E. 


MANTUA : Fortified Italian city, on the Mincio ; 
capital of the duchy of Mantua. It has a popula- 
tion of 29,160, including 1,100 Jews (1901). In 1858 
it had 2,523 Jews—the greatest number in its his- 
tory. The first mention of Jews in Mantua dates 
from the twelfth century, when Abraham ibn Ezra 
finished (1145) there his grammatical work “ Zahot.” 
Apparently he wasin that city again in 1153. There 
are no further references to Jews in connection with 
Mantua until they are mentioned in the new statutes 
of the city at the end of the fourteenth century, 
when a large number seem to have lived there. In 
1459 a special tax of 2,000 ducats was imposed on 
the community, though by vigorous protest they 
succeeded in having it reduced to 600 ducats. The 
importance of the community about that time is evi- 
dent from the fact that two famous rabbis, Joseph 


Coon and Judah da Napoli (Messer Leon), officiated 
in Mantua, although, on account of their inability 
to agree, both were expelled from the city in 1475. 
In the following year, with the consent of the pope, 
the Jews were permitted to lend money at interest, 
and eight years later Bernardino da Feltre founded a 
“monte di pieta” there, the granting of its charter 
being one of the first acts of the government of the 
new prince, Francesco Gonzaga (1466-1519), who 
was generally ill-disposed toward the Jews. In 
1485 he ordered all of them, with their 
Under the wives, to attend Bernardino’s anti- 
Gonzagas. Jewish sermons. In 1496, when the 
preachers again demanded that re- 
strictions be placed on courtezans and Jews, the 
wife of the prince, during his absence, ordered the 
wearing of the Jewish badge. 

From this time the treatment of the Jews varied, 
and intermittently they were favored by the princes. 
Although Frederick Gonzaga, the first Duke of Man- 
tua, hada Jewish physician, Abraham Portaleone, he 
forbade the Jews to keep Christian servants, an ex- 
ception being made in regard to necessary services 
performed on the Sabbath. In 1531 the Marano 
Solomon Moliko was burned publicly at the stake 
during the visit of Emperor Charles V. Aithough 
the congregation had received permission from Pope 
Clement VII. in 1530 to build an Ashkenazic syna- 
gogue, the duke did not confirm it until 1540, at the 
earnest solicitation of Isaac Porto; the last-named 
was called to the rabbinate of Mantua in 1550, as the 
first of an uninterrupted succession of rabbis whose 
names are preserved in the communal archives. 

The condition of the Jews improved under Duke 
Frederick’s suc- 
cessors, <A de- 
cree Of 1545 
says: “We de- 
sire that the 
Jews shall be as 
free and secure 
in pursuing 
their business 
and professions 
in our city and 
in our duchy as 
the Christians.” 
These were the 
best days of the 
community, the 
numbers of 
which probably 
were augmented 
by Portuguese 
immigrants, 
The Jewish mer- 
chants of Man- 
tua carried on 
extensive  busi- 
ness with  for- 
eign countries. 
Jews were often 
welcomed at court, and after 1542 the duke had 
Jewish musicians and Jewish actors. Neverthe- 
less, oppressive measures were enacted against 
them; their cemetery was taken from them in 





Mantle of the Law, Padua, Eighteenth 
Century. 
(From Frauberger.) 


Mantua 





1549 that an extension to a monastery might be | Jews and Christians. 
Guglielmo Gonzaga, who was 
also the first Duke of Monferrato, confirmed their 
old privileges and suppressed a riot which threatened 
them in 1562. The security which the community 


built in its place. 


enjoyed enabled 
it to interest it- 
self in Jewish 
affairs at large, 
and it was in- 
strumental in 
securing the re- 
ception of a dele- 
gation from the 
Jewish commu- 
nities, in 1568, 
by the Council 
of Trent, which 
delegation ob- 
tained permis- 
sion to print He- 
brew books. 

In 1577 new 
edicts were is- 
sued regarding 
the wearing of 
the badge. Evil 
times came with 
Vincenzo Gon- 
zaga (1587- 
1612), who, in 
1590, expelled 
all foreign Jews 
from the city to 
prevent the in- 
crease of the 
Jewish popula- 
tion. In the fol- 
lowing year this 
decree was rein- 
forced by men- 
aces against the 
entire commu- 
nity. On April 
22, 1600, Giu- 
ditta Franchetti, 
eighty years of 
age, was pub- 
licly burned on 
a charge of 
witchcraft, and 
other members 
of the commu- 
nity were sen- 
tenced to heavy 
punishments. 
In 1602, how- 
ever, in spite of 
these rigorous 
proceedings, the 


Franciscan monk Bartolomeo da Salutivo publicly 
accused the prince of leniency toward the Jews. 


was obliged to interfere sternly in their behalf 
(Aug. 14), although at the beginning of the year he 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


300 








Mantle of the Law, Oriental. 
(in the United States National Museum, Washington, D. C.) 


Ife next forbade Jewish phy- 
sicians to treat Christians without special permission, 
and, at the instance of Pope Clement VIII, decreed 
(Nov. 7) that the Jews should sell all their real estate 
Within a year; he placed all their civic and commer- 


cial affairs under 
the jurisdiction 
of a special offi- 
cial termed 
*commissario 
degli Ebrei,” 
and in certain 
other relations 
they were sub- 
jected to ecele- 
siastical control. 
This office of 
Jewish commis- 
sioner existed 
until 1765. In 
1610 the estab- 
lishment of a 
whetto was cle- 
creed, and = in 
Feb., 1612, the 
Jews were com- 
pelled to move 
intoit. Thenew 
edict called the 
“Toileranza 
Generale” sub- 
jected them to 
still more rigor- 
ous treatment; 
if was renewed 
every eight 
vears, on payv- 
ment of a large 
sum, and re- 
mained in force 
until 1791. 
Charles of 
Rethel, who suc- 
ceeded to the 
dukedom on the 
extinction of the 
house of Gon- 
zaga in 1628, as- 
sured the Jews 
of his favor.. 
During the siege 
of Mantua by 
Emperor Ferdi- 
nand IT., in the 
same year, they 
helped to fortify 
and defend the 
city, even break- 
ing the Sabbath ; 
and when the 


city was betrayed (1630) to the enemy 1,800 Jews 
were expelled and their property confiscated; nor 


as Abraham Masserani has recounted in his “ Ha-Ga- 
lut weha-Pedut” (Venice, 1634). 


In 1699 the com- 


As the populace was threatening them, Vincenzo could they return until after many bitter experiences, 


had issued orders for the complete separation of 


munity was released from the obligation of attending 


301 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mantua 





Christian sermons, and about 1700 various Jews re- 
ceived extensive industrial privileges, and were even 

entrusted with the management of state domains. 
When Mantua came into the possession of the 
Hapsburgs, after the war of the Spanish succession, 
the Austrian governors tricd to protect the Jews 
from the many petty annoyances which the latter 
had to suffer through clerical intrigues; for the de- 
cree issued in 1740 by the grand inquisitor of the 
Roman Curia marked the cnimination of the perse- 
cution and humiliation of the Jews by Rome. In 
Mantua they were permitted to insti- 


Under tute a suit for compensation for annoy- 
the Haps- ance on the street on the testimony of 
burgs. a single witness. To avoid being in- 


sulted by the students of the gymna- 
sium—it had become customary for the students to 
insult Jews whenever they met them—the Jews 
made a yearly 
payment in kind 
to the principal. 
On special occa- 
sions, as during 
sieges, large as- 
sessments were 
levied upon the 
community, 
which was espe- 
cially taxed dur- 
ing the reign of 
Maria Theresa, 
though under 
her the civic 
status of the 
Jews began to 
improve, In 
1752 the sani- 
tary laws were 
<leclared to be 
equally binding 
upon Jews and 
Christians, and 
the restriction 
regarding Jew- 
ish physicians 
was abrogated. 

The condition of the Jews improved still further 
when Joseph IT. was made coregent. In 1772 they 
were allowed to loan money at. the “ monte-di-pieta,” 
while in 1779 many of the ancient restrictions were 
repealed, the badge was abolished, Jews were ad- 
mitted to the public schools and were allowed to 
acquire real estate. and the tribunal of the Inquisi- 
tion was suppressed. Under Leopold IT. (1790-92) 
a deputation sent to Vienna succeeded in having the 
“ Tolleranza Generale” made permanent and in se- 
curing the repeal of all special taxeson the commn- 
nity, while the emperor declared that he would 
put the Jews on an equality with all other citizens in 
all points compatible with the general welfare. But 
under Francis I. (1792-1835) the Jews had more troub- 
jed times and were again heavily taxed. 

The community of Mantua, like all other Italian 
communities, had a period of freedom in 1797, dur- 
ing the French invasion of Italy. Two Jews, David 
Pavia and Felice Coen, were made members of the 





Maotle of the Law. 
(Gn the British Museum.) 


municipal council, and the latter became also a 
member of the central administration of the district 
of the Mincio, while Rabbi ABRAHAM DE COLOGNA 
was a member of the cabinet of the Cisalpine Re- 
public. The gates of the ghetto were torn down by 
the people in 1798, butin the following year the city 
was retaken by the Austrians, and the political sus- 
pects, including some Jews, wereimprisoned. Zech- 
ariah Carpi has given an account of his suffer- 
ings in his “ Toledot Yizhak ” (Cracow, 1892). The 
French, however, soon retook the city, and Napo- 
leon’s pro-Jewish legislation wentinto force. Abra- 
ham de Cologna represented Mantua at the Congress 
of Lyons in 1801, and he took part also in the Con- 
vention of Notables at Paris, being made vice-presi- 
dent of the Sanhedrin (1806-7) and subsequently 
president of the consistory. 

In 1814 Mantua again came under Austrian rule. 
The Jews re- 
tained their 
rights, but were 
not permitted to 
hold public 
offices, with the 
exception of 
those connected 
with the posses- 
sion of real es- 
tate, and even 
this exception 
was declared to 
be revocable. 
The number of 
Jewish families 
was tobe limited, 
special permis- 
sion being nec- 
essary for immi- 
gration and for 
marriage. Fran- 
cis IL, however, 
declared that he 
would endeavor 
to place the 
Jews upon an 
equality with 
the other citizens, his desire being to see that all 
shared alike in the welfare of the state. He or- 
dered that the rabbis of the community should 
give proof of sufficient secular and religious educa- 
tion. In 1821 Mantua proposed to the communities 
of Lombardy and Venice that a rabbinical seminary 
should be founded, and as aresult the institute at 
Padua was opened in 1829. The community con- 
tinued to suffer from its insecure legal status and 
from the enmity of the populace, and was imperiled 
by the riots of 1824 and 1842, The Jews did not ob- 
tain full civie liberty until Mantua was incorporated 
in the kingdom of Italy by the peace of 1866, One 
of the heroes of the Italian struggle for unity, Giu- 
seppe FinzI, was a Mantuan Jew. 

The community of Mantua repeatedly held an im- 
portant position in Judaism. At the time of the 
Renaissance it was distinguished for the number of 
its scholars and liberal thinkers; it was the birthplace 
of Azariah dei Rossi, For a long time the com- 


Mantua 
Manuscripts 





munity was obliged to furnish to the dukes of Gon- 
zaga a company of actors who from 1525 to 1597 
gave dramatic representations, which 


Scholars form an important chapter in the early 
and history of the Italian stage. The dra- 
Rabbis. maturge of the company, Leone Som- 


mo, produced in his “Dialoghi sull’ 
Arte Rappresentativa” the first work of its kind; in 
recognition of his merits asa poet he was made a 
knight, and a member of the Academy of Padua. 
Among the Jewish musicians at the court of Mantua 
were the harpists Abraham dell’ Aspra and his 
grandson; Isacchino Massarano was distin guished as 
a lutist, a singer, and a dancing-master; Solomon 
Rossi was known asacomposer of religious and sec- 
ular song's, while his sister Europa was a singer, 
and her son Anselmo and Davide Civité were es- 
teemed as composers. Mordecai Finzi wasa mathe- 
matician and Abraham Colorni an engineer. Mantua 
was foremost, also, in the sixteenth century in the 
field of Jewish science. As a century previously 
Joseph Colon had taught there, so now the brothers 
Moses and David Provencal were famous as Tal- 
mudists, founding the rabbinical academy which 
flourished down to modern times; while a third 
brother, Judah Moscato, was famous as a preacher 
and philosopher. The brothers Provencal were so 
enthusiastic in the cause of science that David and 
his son Abraham determined to establish a uni- 
versity in their house (1564), and issued a detailed 
prospectus inviting students (“ Ha-Lebanon,” v. 418 
et seg.; “ Berliner Festschrift,” pp. 1642 seqg.). Sub- 
sequently Mantua became the chief seat of the 
cabalists. 

The community of Mantua has had many famous 
rabbis, and a number of rabbinical families whose 
members succeeded oue another in office. The most 
noteworthy names are: Basilea, Brieli, Cases, Co- 
logna, Fano, Jaré, Modena, Mortara, Moscato, Por- 
taleone, Provencal, Dei Rossi, Romanelli, Saraval, 
Viterbi, and Zacuto. Marco Mortara officiated 
from 1842 until 1894, and was succeeded by Isaiah 
Levi. 

Since the sixteenth century the community has 
had six places of worship: Scuola Grande (built 
1537), transferred a century later to its present site); 
Scuola Norsa Torazzo (founded 1513) ; 
Scuola Cases (founded 1590); Scuola 
Beccaria (founded in 1595 over a 
slaughter-house and named after it); 
Scuola Porto (founded 1540); and Scuola Ostiglia 
(founded 1558). In the first three the Italian ritual is 
followed, in the last three the German. Their founda- 
tions have recently been in part united. The com- 
munity owns @ large nbrary containing numerous 
manuscripts and important archives, from which 
Stern has published a number of documents. Among 
Mantua’s philanthropic institutions is the Casa di 
Ricovero, an asylum for the aged founded in 1825 
and connected with a foundation for the promotion 
of trade and industry among the Jews and a home 
for apprentices. In 1834 Samuele Trabotti devoted 
his entire fortune to a fund for dowering Jewish 
brides, educating Jewish youths in the arts and 
sciences, establishing prizes for artisans, and reliev- 
ing the sick and the pour. This richly endowed 


Syna- 
gogues. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


802 





foundation absorbed the existing institutions of 

similar character. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Gioia, Statistica del Dipartimento del 
Mincio, Milan, 1888; C. Diarco, Studi Intorno al Municipio 
di Mantova, Mantua, 18738; R. Rocco, in Annali di Statis- 
tica, 1884: L. Carnevali, Gli Israeliti di Mantova, Mantua, 
1878; idem. Jl Ghetto di Mantova, ib. 1884; Al. d’Ancona, 
Origini del Teatro Italiano, Turin, 1891; Ed. Birnbaum, 
Jiidische Musiker am Hofe zu Mantua, Vienna, 1893; M. 
Stern, Urkundliche Beitrdge tiber die Stellung der Ptpste 
zu den Juden, vol. i., Kiel, 1893; Mortara, Indice ; Zunz, Z. 
G. pp. 249 et seq. LE 
D. . I, 


——Typography: Mantua was among the earliest _ 
places at which Hebrew works were printed. The 
physician Abraham Conat started printing there as 
early as 1476, when he produced the Tur Orah 
Hayyim; some of his productions may have been 
begun even in the preceding year. He had the 
merit of producing the only Hebrew incunabulum 
published during its author’s lifetime —~ “Nofet 
Zufim.” His wife, Estellina Conat, made herself 
responsible for the “Behinat ‘Olam,” issued from 
his press after his death. In the printing of Levi 
ben Gershon’s Pentateuch, Conat was associated 
with Abraham of Cologne, possibly identical with 
the Abraham de Tintori who afterward emigrated 
to Bologna. Hebrew printing was resumed at Man- 
tua in 1513 by Samuel Latif, who appears to have 
been forced from business a year later by the com- 
petition of the Soncinos. The next printers of He- 
brew books were Christians—the Rufinellis and Phi- 
lipponits (1561-97) ; their printer’s sign was a peacock. 
A large number of Jewish workmen, including Meir 
Sofer, his son, and his son-in-law, were employed by 
them. In the seventeenth century Eliezer de Italia 
started a Hebrew printing-press (1612), being followed 
by Judah di Perugia in 1622. In the eighteenth cen- 
tury Isaac Jaré and Raphael Hayyim di Italia printed 
at Mantua. For reproductions from books printed 
at Mantua see JEWIsH ENCYCLOPEDIA, iv. 172, 178, 
205; vii. 261. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, in Ersch and Gruber, Eneyc. 
section ii., part 28, pp. 34, 48-46; Cat. Bodl. col. 310. 


MANUEL, EUGENE: French educator and 
poet; born at Paris July 13, 1823; died there June 
1, 1901. A grandson on his mother’s side of the 
famous Paris hazzan Lovy, he remained throughout 
his brilliant career intimately attached to the faith 
of his ancestors. After having finished his studies 
at the Collége Charlemagne he entered the Ecole 
Normale (1843-46), where he had as comrades Emile 
Burnouf, Paul Janet, Gaston Boissier, Caro, Alfred 
Méziéres, and Pasteur, all of whom have become 
renowned in the world of letters and science. Man- 
uel became professor of rhetoric successively at the 
colleges of Dijon, Grenoble, Tours, and in the 
lyceums Charlemagne (1849) and Saint-Louis and 
the Collége Rollinin Paris. After the Franco-Prus- 
sian war Jules Simon, having become minister of 
public instruction, appointed Manuel his “chef du 
cabinet ” and in 1872 “directeur du secrétariat.” 

Soon after, Manuel became inspector-general of 
secondary public instruction (1876). He now began 
to devote much of his energy and time to liter- 
ature. Jn 1852 he had already published an edition 
of the “ Morceaux Choisis des . . . Cuvres Ly- 


303 


riques” of Rousseau. His second work, written in 
collaboration with his brother-in-law Lévi-Alvares 
(1854-58), was in four volumes, and was entitied 
“La France sous |’ Aspect Géographique, Historique 
et Administratif.” His earliest poems, “Pages In- 
times,” date from the year 1866, and it was they 
which laid the foundation for his literary fame. 
The ring of patriotism in his “ Poémes Populaires,” 
which appeared in 1871, rendered them very popu- 
lar. “Henri Regnault,” “Les Pigeons de Ja Répub- 
lique,” “ En Voyage,” and “ Pendant la Guerre” have 
placed Manuel in the rank of the foremost poets 
of his time. This last dramatic poem and “Les 
Ouvriers”” were played at the Théatre Francais with 
Coquelin and Sarah Bernhardt in the leading rdles 
(Jan. 17, 1870). About this time “L’ Absent” and 
“Pour les Blessés ” were represented at the Théatre 
Francais. Manuel made several unsuccessful at- 
tempts to gain admission to the Académic Francaise. 

Those of Manuel’s poems which bear a special 
relation to Judaism are: “La Place du Pauvre,” 
dedicated to his friend Isidore Cahen, the director 
of the “Archives I[sraélites”; “Le Verset”: “La 
Priére” ; “Cain et Abel”; and “ Les Trois Peuples” 
(Jerusalem, Athens, Rome). His biography of his 
grandfather Israel] Lovy, in the “ Archives Israélites” 
(1850), deserves special mention. For twenty years 
Manuel was professor of Greek and Latin litera- 
ture at the Jewish Theological Seminary at Paris, 
and he was one of the six founders of the Alliance 
Israélite Universelle, remaining a member of that 
institution until his death. After the death of 
Michel Alcan, Manuel was elected to represent the 
Jews of Lyons in the Central Consistory of the Jews 
of France (1877). He was a commander of the 
Legion of Honor. On Oct. 27, 1901, the Société 
Historique d’Autenil et de Passy, of which he was 
one of the founders, placed a memorial tablet on 
the house in which the poet died. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Archives Israélites, June. 1901; Univers 
Israélite, June, 1901; A la Mémoire de Eugéne Manuel, 
1901; A la Mémoire de Hugéne Manuel, 1902; M. Bloch, in 
R. #. J. xivi. 3 


MANUSCRIPTS: The first materials used for 
writing were such substances as stone, wood, and 
metal, upon which the characters were engraved 
with a stylus. At a very early time, however, ani- 
mal substances were employed, and letters were 
written upon them with various liquid preparations. 
The usual word for a written document, “sefer.” 
which occurs 182 times in different forms in the 
Bible, and is to be supplied in many places, as, for 

instance, with “Torah,” designates 

Writing the skin of an animal, the writing 

Material. material anciently employed by the 

Orientals, and not papyrus, The 
usual word for writing, “katab,” the fundamental 
meaning of which is “to place signs in succession,” 
is found in the Bible 220 times (Blau, “Studien zum 
Althebriischen Buchwesen,” pp. 9 et seq.). For 
private writing in the first centuries of the common 
era various materials were used, including clay 
tablets for bills. Books might be written only on 
skins of animals, of which three kinds were prepared 
—“ gewil,” “kelaf,” and “doksostos.” Gewil is the 
plain hide with the hair scraped off (z.e., leather); 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mantua — 
Manuscripts 


Kelaf is parchment, made by paring away the skin, 
and which received the writing upon the flesh side 
(2.€, & membrane); doksostos is another form of 
parchment (20. pp. 22 e¢ seq.). 

Copies of the Bible were, as a rule, made from 
whole skins, as at the present day, which were pre- 
pared from clean animals. To this the copyist 
(“sofer”) himself generally attended. 
A gaon says, “We have never seen a 
Torah scroll which was written on 
parchment.” There is a possibility, 
however, that in ancient times there were Biblical 
books written on papyrus; in regard to non-Bib- 
lical writings this supposition is even probable. The 
skin used for writing was ruled, and there were spe- 
cial regulations for margins and for the number of 
lines. Only black, effaceable ink, which was re- 
newed when necessary, might be used for Biblical 
works. Metallic ink was known, but was forbidden. 
The Letter of Aristeas ($$ 176-179), however, re- 
lates that the copy of the Bible sent by the high 
priest to the Egyptian king Ptolemy was written in 
gold, and the Talmud also speaks of gold-writing, 
which may have been a Jewish invention (Blau, fc. 
pp. 18, 150 et seg.; see Index). 

Both the Jewish and the non-Jewish world in 
antiquity had books in the form of scrolls (Isa. 

xxxiv.4; Job xxxi. 35-86; Jer. xxxvi.; 
Scroll and Ezek. ti. 8-9; Ps. xl. 8; Zech. v. 1). 
Codex. In post-Biblical times the employment 
of such scrolls may be traced for a 
thousand years, and in copies of the Pentateuch for 
the synagogue this usage has survived until the 
present time. Both the Letter of Aristeas (/.c.) 
and I Mace. ili, 48 speak of scrolls. On the arch of 
Titus a man is depicted carrying on his back a long 
roll, undoubtedly a representation of the Torah 
scroll of the Temple of Jerusalem, which was taken 
to Rome (see Josephus, “B. J.” vii. 5,8 5). The 
Talmud and Midrash know books only in this form 
(Blau, f.e. pp. 40-48), and the Christian documents 
of the first three centuries testify also to the use of 
rolls (Schulze, in “Greifswalder Studien Hermann 
Cremer Dargebracht,” pp. 148-158). When and 
where the codex form first appeared among the Jews 
is as yet unknown. It is not impossible that the 
word “diftera,” in Soferim iii. 6, designates a co- 
dex. The oldest complete and dated manuscript 
of the Bible, the codex of the Prophets at St. 
Petersburg, was written in 916, In ancient times 
school children had tablets for their first lessons in 
reading and writing, while wax tablets (7/vaf) were 
in general use among Citizens, so that the prototype 
of the book was familiar from a very early period. 
There is, therefore, no need to assume foreign influ- 
ence, whether Greco-Roman or Oriental and Chris- 
tian, to explain the development of the scroll into 
the codex. The transition probably began in the 
seventh century and proceeded gradually, since no 
distinct mention of a codex has yet been discovered 
in the Talmud and Midrash. 

The books of antiquity were always of small size 
(If Kings xxii. 8-10; If Chron, xxxiv. 15 ef seq.; 
Neh. viii. 1 e¢ seg.; see references from the Talmud, 
Midrash, and classic literature in Blau, /.c. pp. 72 et 
seq.), and people sat cross-legged when reading them. 


Parch- 
ment. 


Manuscripts 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


304 





‘The largest scroll, the official copy of the Torah, 
which was used in the Second Temple had at most 
a height of six and a diameter of two 
handbreadths (2b. pp. 76 e¢ seqg.). The 
smallness of the books was compen- 
sated by the minuteness of the charac- 
ters (7b. p. 79 et seg.). The contents of 
a manuscript might be very small, as, 
for example, one of the Book of Obadiah, or the ori gi- 
nal roll of fasts (¢. 100 c.£.), while the normal size 
probably never exceeded that of the collection of the 
‘Twelve Prophets. At the time of the first selection 
of the canon (c. 4th cent. B.c.) large scrolls could not 
have been popular, as is shown by the division of the 
‘Torah into five parts, by the division of the Book of 
the History of the Kings into the books of Samuel 
and Kings, by the separation of the books of Ezra 
and Nehemiah from the Chronicles, and by other 
instances. About the year 100 c.E., however, there 
were certainly collective scrolls which contained the 
three sections of the Bible in one roll each, while 
there were even some which included all the books 
of the Scriptures in one large roll. Such a one, 
probably, was the Hexapla of Origen. There was, 
moreover, no lack of copics of single portions, 
which contained a section of a book, such as the 
Roll of Jealousy (= Num, v. 11-23, ete.; Blau, le. 
pp. 46-70). 

The preparation of books has had an eventful his- 
tory. At the time of the chroniclers (¢. 3d cent. B.C.) 
Bible copies were rare; they had been almost entirely 
destroyed by the Syrians before the Maccabean 
revolt. Afterward, however, their number increased 
steadily, since it was made incumbent on every one 
to write a copy of the Torah for himself, and each 
congregation owned at least one. In the Talmudic 
period there was an enormous number of copies, es- 
pecially as if was customary to wear portions of 
the Bible (chiefly Torah rolls) around the arm as 
amulets, Manuscripts of the Bible were found also 
in heathen families, and pagans even liked to trade 
m these books, which they were able to write them- 
selves. Christians converted from Judaism or pagan- 
ism owned many Hebrew writings (4. pp. 84-97). 
Tn consequence of the ever-increasing demand a kind 
of book-trade developed as carly as 
the first century. In general, how- 
ever, people ordered their manu- 
scripts direct from the copyist, accord - 
ing toancientcustom. The Apocrypha, the original 
of which has been lost, and other non-Biblical He- 
brew books, were not in special demand and did not 
circulate in large numbers. 

The high value placed upon the Scriptures is evi- 
«lenced by the great care taken for their preserva- 
tion. The scrolls were wound on a stick, the Torah 
on two sticks. Coverings of various kinds served 
to protect them, and cases of various forms were 
used for keeping them. The rolls were firmly tied 
with a cord, and sometimes they were sealed to pre- 
vent any one from reading them with- 
out permission (20. pp. 173-188 et seq.). 
When worn out the manuscripts of the 
Bible were protected against profana- 
tion by being placed in the coffins of dead scribes. 
In consequence of this custom not a single Bib- 


Size, Com- 
pass, and 
Distribu- 

tion. 


Book- 
Trade. 


Oldest 
Codices. 


lical manuscript has been preserved from an- 
cient times, nor is there any hope that one will ever 
come to light. Nevertheless, a few archetypes which 
existed in antiquity are mentioned. In the first 
rank among these stands the copy of the Torah of 
the Second Temple, already noted (I Mace., Intro- 
duction; IT Mace. ii. 14; Josephus, “Ant.” v. 1, 
$17; Blau, Zc. pp. 99 et seg.). “The Book of the 
Court ” (M. K. iii. 4a e¢ al.) was the copy from which 
the high priest read on the Day of Atonement and 
which served as a model (Blau, U.e. p. 107). 

Three other codices from the Temple court are 
mentioned: “Sefer Me‘on,” “Sefer Za‘atute,” and 
“Sefer Hi,” and they still served as models at the 
beginning of the fourth century (2d. p. 104). After 
the destruction of the Temple the Torah of the cele- 
brated copyist R. Meir, the codex of Emperor 
Severus, and others (2. p. 111) are mentioned, while 
from post-Talmudic times date the codices of Hillel, 
Sanbuki, and others. The most celebrated was the 
codex of Ben Asher, used by Maimonides (H. L. 
Strack, “Prolegomena Critica in Vetus Testamen- 
tum Hebraicum”). See BIBLE MANUSCRIPTS. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Low. Graphische Requisiten bei den Ju- 

den, Leipsic, 1810-71; L. Blau, Studien zum Althebriischen 

Buchwesen und zur Bithlischen Litteratur- und Textge- 

schichte, Budapest and Strasburg, 1902 (where a full bibliog- 

raphy is given); idem, Ueber den EKinfluss dea Althebrii- 


ischen Buchiwesens, in Berliner Festschrift, Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, 1908 (also printed separately). 


L. B. 


It is now necessary to inquire how the Hebrew 
manuscripts collected in various public and private 
libraries were written, and in what form the mate- 
rial of which they consist was presented. The time 
over which the inquiry extends ranges, roughly 
speaking, from about the year 900 of the common 
era down to the present day, though in some in- 
stances, notably in the case of papyri, an earlier 
period is referred to. For inscriptions on stone, 
meta!, and other hard substances see PALEOGRAPHY. 

I. Materials Used to Receive Writing.— 
Papyrus (Greek, tazvpoc, from the ancient Egyptian 
word “ p-apa”; but in Herodotus always BiBdoc, no 
doubt also from an Egyptian term ; Hebrew, “neyar,” 
apparently representing the Arabic “naur”): The 
number of Hebrew papyri hitherto discovered is 
quite insignificant as compared with the numer- 
ous classical papyri recently brought into Europe 
from Egypt. There is the small number of Egyp- 
tian-Aramaic papyri belonging tothe late Ptolemaic 
or early Roman period, of which the British Museum 
papyrus No. cvi.*is a good representative specimen 

(see the first specimen of writing on 

Earliest Plate I.; also “ Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.” 
Papyri. xxv., parts4and 5). Some pieces da- 
ting from the sixth to the ninth century 

have been described by Steinschneider, Chwolson, 
and others (for references see bibliography below). 
The Cambridge University Library possesses a muti- 
lated liturgical codex assigned to the ninth century. 
The papyrus of the Decalogue in the same library, 
first described by 8. A. Cook (“Proc. Soc. Bibl. 
Arch.” xxv., part i.; see Jew. Encyc. iv. 498, ¢.2. 
DECALOGUE), may be assigned to the sixth or seventh 
century (see Pl. IIT., No. 59). A few Oxford frag- 
ments, probably of the sixth century, have been 


305 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manuscripts 





described by A. Cowley in “J. Q. R.” Oct., 1908 (see 
Pl. J., No. 2). 

Skins (Hebrew, “‘or,” known also as “gewil”; 
Greek, dipfépa, aterm which in early times was trans- 
ferred to papyrus, and was later on applied to vellum 
also): None of the skin was peeled off, but the hair 
was carefully rubbed away; for it was the hair side 
that was used for writing upon. The ancient rule of 
using only skins for Torah rolls has not, however, 
been universally followed in the period under con- 
sideration. The Yemenite rolls (Pentateuch, Esther, 
and 737 MNP) are indeed all of red skin; and the 
Pentateuch rolls written in the eighteenth century 
for the Jews of K’ai-Fung-Foo, China (e.g., Brit. 
Mus, MS. Add. 19,250), are of white leather. The 
oldest Pentateuch roll (14th cent., Spanish origin) in 
the British Museum is also of leather; but there are 
many specimens on vellum belonging to the six- 
teenth century and onward. Of the forty-seven 
Karaite Pentateuch rolls in the Imperial Library, 
St. Petersburg, only five are of leather, the remain- 
ing forty-two being of vellum. This proportion no 
doubt represents the greater deviation among the Ka- 
raites from the old synagogue rolls. For the Book 
of Esther vellum appears to have been more largely 
used than for the Torah. A roll of the Haftarot on 
leather, written in Corfu in 1560, found its way into 
Europe afew yearsago. For manuscripts in book 
form skins would in carly times have been naturally 
superseded by parchment or vellum as material fitted 
for receiving writing on both sides. 

Parchment and Vellum (Hebrew, “kelaf” and 
“ doksostos,” for the exact meaning of which see 
above): For practical purposes, that is to say, so far 
as the manuscripts now under consideration are con- 
cerned, it is enough to remark that “kelaf,” not un- 
like the term “parchment” in its more restricted 
sense, signifies the rougher article, while by “ doksos- 
tos,” as by the term “vellum,” the finer variety is 
meant. The Jews were no doubt at all times adepts 
in theartof producing parchment and vellum, as they 
had so much need of the materials, and as a religious 
intention during the manufacture was considered 
important; but their art would naturally be condi- 
tioned, to a large extent at any rate, by the degree 
of perfection attained in it in the countries where 
they were domiciled. The finest kinds of vellum 
used for Hebrew manuscripts were of Spanish and 
Italian origin. As examples of the former may be 
mentioned Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5866 (liturgy, mid- 
dle of 15th cent.: thin vellum, delicately worked, 
smooth surface), and Brit. Mus. MSS. Or. 2626~2628 
(Bible, 1482-1488: stout, crisp, and pretty smooth). 
A fine specimen of Italian vellum of about the mid- 
dje of the same century is furnished by Brit. Mus. 
MsS. Add. 19,444-19,445 (Florentine liturgy: mate- 
rial very carefully prepared and slightly tinted). 
Rougher sorts of material were to be found by the 
side of the finer kind in both countries. 

Among representative codices of earlier times, the 
British Museum Pentateuch dating from the ninth 
ecntury (MS. Or. 4445, apparently of Babylonian 
origin) consists of strong, crisp, and very smooth 
vellum. Brit. Mus. MS. Harley 5720 (probably of 
early part of 12th cent.; also of Eastern origin) is 
hard and strong, with surface not very smooth. 


VIII.—20 


The British Museum copy of the Mahzor Vitry (MSS. 


Add. 27,200-27,201: 12th cent.; French origin) is 
written ona very inferior sort of mate- 

Examples rial. Frenchas well as German vellum 
of Old employed for Hebrew iu the Middle 

Vellum. Agesis, in fact, asa rule coarse as com- 

pared with the Spanish and Italian 
kinds; but Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 11,689 (collection of 
works, 12th cent.), from the south of France, is an 
example of exceedingly fine, smooth vellum. The 
vellum used for Hebrew charters in England in the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries (note especially the 
large collection belonging to Westminster Abbey) is 
fairly good, though fineness of manufacture can not 
be expected in material used for this particular pur- 
pose. Some of the early examples of vellum (11th 
and 12th cent.) found in the Cairo Genizah are stout 
and smooth; other specimens are of a rougher man- 
ufacture. No example of purple-stained vellum, of 
which there are fair numbers among Greek and 
Latin manuscripts, has so fur coine to light among 
Hebrew ones. On the comparative use of vellum 
and paper see below. 

Paper (Greek, wazvpoc, name taken over from 
“ papyrus ” ; called also “charta bombycina,.” “ charta 
Damascena,” etc. ; Hebrew, 9%3, also taken over from 
the Hebrew name for papyrus): This material was 
known to the Chinese at a very early period; and 
the Arabs are said to have first learned its use at 
Samarcand about the middle of the eighth century 
(for an account of recent researches on this matter 
see “J. R.A. S.” Oct., 1908, first article, where further 
references will be found). A Judwo-Persian docu- 
ment lately brought from Khotan, written (in Per- 
sian in Hebrew characters) on paper, appears to be- 
long to the eighth century (see “J. R. A. 8.” Oct., 
1903, fifth article). Another extant example of a 
Judxo-Persian document is dated 1020 (“J. Q. R.” 
1899, pp. 671 et seq.). 

The Karaites, stauding as they did in very close 
connection with the Arab world, and being also less 
tied by this kind of conservatism, appear to have 
used no other material than paper for their manu- 
scripts in book form. Karaite collections of man- 
uscripts are, therefore, an excellent means of study- 
ing the kinds of paper made in Palestine, Egypt, 
and Turkey during a practically uninterrupted pe- 
riod from the tenth century onward. Thus Brit. 
Mus. MS. Or, 2540 (Exodus: Hebrew text in Arabic 
characters; see the first two specimens on Pl. IV., 
col. 2) belongs to the tenth century. Among the 
dated Karaite manuscripts are found specimens be- 

longing to 1004, 1024, 1027, 1211, 1331, 


Karaite 1564, 1614, 1700, 1744, and 1869. 
Manu- = Like early Oriental paper generally, 
scripts. the older kind of Karaite paper (ap- 


parently made for the most part of 
fine linen rag) is stout, of a yellowish tint, and with 
a glossy surface. In later times the yellowish tint 
gradually disappears, the texture becomes rougher, 
and the surface less smooth. The early specimens 
of paper used by the Karaites are, moreover, much 
finer than the Khotan Hebreo-Persian document 
(probably Chinese paper) already referred to. An 
early dated example of a Rabbinite manuscript on 
paper is Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 73 (1192; Rashi’s com- 


Manuscripts 





mentary on Baba Mezi‘a, written in the East). A 
British Museum copy of the “Tahkemoni” (MS. 
Add. 27,113; Spanish Oriental writing) is dated 1282. 
The last-named two manuscripts show the same kind 
of slight yellowish tint; but the paper of the second 
is thicker than that of the first. A specimen of 
Italian paper of 1363-64 is furnished by Cambridge 
University Library MSS. Dd. 11, 12; and Brit. Mus. 
Ms. Add. 27,293 (also of about the middle of the 
14th cent.) is a specimen of fairly early Spanish 
paper. 

The European Jews were slow in allowing paper 
to displace vellum; for though several paper-fac- 
tories are known to have existed in the thirteenth 
and fourteenth centuries (indeed, the earliest known 
mention of paper made in Europe occurs in the 
tract of Peter, Abbot of Cluny, 1122-50), there are 
comparatively few Hebrew paper manuscripts of 
the fourteenth century. There is a fair number of 
the following century; and the proportion kept on 
growing until the use of paper became quite com- 
mon among the Jews from the seventeenth century 
onward. 

Egypt as a center of Arab life would naturally 
abound in paper manuscripts fairly early; and the 
contents of the Cairo Genizah accord- 
ingly include specimens dated 882 (in 
the possession of E. N. Adler), 977, 
1005, etc. (at the British Museum and 
elsewhere). In Yemen paper was used by the Jews 
pretty freely side by side with vellum from the 
fifteenth century and probably earlier. The older 
specimens of Yemenite paper often show an exag- 
gerated kind of yellow tint. For the rest, the Jews 
of the different countries would naturally depend on 
the paper manufactured there; and the information 
contained, ée.g.,in Sir E. M. Thompson’s “ Greek and 
Latin Paleography,” will, therefore, be found to 
apply to Hebrew manuscripts also in so far as vel- 
lum can be shown to have in some degree given 
place to paper. 

II. Writing-Fluids, etc.: The ink (Hebrew, 
“deyo”; Arabian variety, “hibr”) used by the Jews 
during the period here considered would naturally 
be much the same as that used by their Gentile 
neighbors in different countries, On the manufac- 
ture of ink generally see Thompson, @.c. pp. 50, 51. 
The ink sanctioned by Maimonides, and no doubt 
used by him for writing his own scroll of the Law, 
was, according to a responsum discovered a few 
years ago, made of oil, pitch, resin, gum arabic, etc. 
By burning these substances a soot was formed 
which was mixed with gum and honey, and the thin 
slices formed of it were finally dissolved in an infu- 
sion of galls (see “J. Q. R.” July and Oct., 1899). 
Vitriol (DINIPSP; + xaAxavOoc) is expressly excluded 
by Maimonides, though he does not absolutely 


Paper in 
Egypt. 


forbid it. His point is that the ink 
Kinds = should cleave firmly to the vellum, 
ofInk. but that, at the same time, one should 


be able to erase it (on this point, as 

on the preparation of ink generaily, see Low, “Gra- 

phische Requisiten und Erzeugnisse bei den Juden,” 
p. 145; and Ink). 

With regard to the appearance of the ink actually 

used in the manuscripts now under observation, it 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


306 


should be noted that Torah rolls are all written 
with black ink (though early Samaritan scrolls are 
written with ink of a reddish hue). Brit. Mus. MS. 
Or. 4445 (9th cent.) and in fact many of the early 
manuscripts written in the East are in black or 
bluish black. Several of the finest Spanish codices 
show a yellow tint, while the finer sort of Italian 
manuscripts present a more or less violet one. Ger- 
man ink is generally black, though not very pro- 
nouncedly so. Early Cairo Genizah fragments often 
show a yellow tint; but Yemenite ink is usually 
black. 

Red ink is sometimes, though but rarely, used 
alternately with the usual writing-fluid. Pigments 
of different kinds, though generally red, are some- 
times used for initial words, etc. On the use of gold 
as a writing-fluid see p. 313 under “ Iluminations.” 

With regard to writing-instruments, only the reed 
(“kulmos”; «@Aauoc) and the quill pen need be con- 
sidered here. It is difficult to say when the quill 
came into use, and for how long the reed was used. 
alongside of it. Syrian scribes are known to have 
used the quill as far back as 509 (Wright, “Cat. 
Syriac MSS. in Brit. Mus.” p. xxvii.); and the Os- 
trogoth Theodoric (c. 454-526) is reported to have 
used a quill for writing his name. The reed, on the 

other hand, continued in use to some 

Kinds of extent through the Middle Ages, and 


Pens. appears to have survived in Italy into 
the fifteenth century (Thompson, J.c. 
p. 49). Several early Hebrew codices of Eastern 


origin appear to have been written with a reed; but 
the greater suitability of the more fiexible quill 
pen could not have been overlooked by Jewish 
scribes even in comparatively early times. 

III. Forms of Books: Apart from contracts of 
small size(“ get,” “shetar halizah,” etc.), which would 
naturally be preserved flat, there cali for considera- 
tion (1) the roll and (2) manuscripts in book form. 

The Roll (Hebrew, “ megillah”; Latin, “ volumen” ; 
used only for the five scrolls, the Torah roll itself 
being always called “Sefer Torah”): This consists 
of a number of strips of leather or vellum sewed to- 
gether to form acontinuous whole. Itis, at one end, 
fixed to a stick round which it is rolied; and it is 
usually provided with a flat, round border-piece at 
top and bottom to keep the roll even. The number 
of columns to a strip varies considerably ; and there 
is also great diversity in the height of rolls. Brit. 
Mus. MS. Harley 7619, which is about 263 ins. high, 
is probably one of the largest extant. Esther rolls 
are sometimes of very diminutive dimensions. <A 
very remarkable and perhaps unique specimen of a. 
roll is Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 26,883 (containing caba- 
listic prayers written in Italy in the 15th cent.), which, 
though measuring about 125 ins. from. 
end to end (the height being about 43 
ins.), is allof one piece instead of con- 
sisting of strips sewed together. The 
vellum of this roll is very fine; and the workman- 
ship in straightening out so long a piece must have 
been exceedingly elaborate. Rolls of Ruth, Lamen- 
tations, the Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes are 
far less frequent than those of Esther. The Yemen- 
ite rolls of the AIN AYP (to which the haftarah for 
the Ninth of Ab is found attached), as also a leather 


Size of 
Rolls. 


307 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manuscripts 


| 


roll of 1560 containing the haftarot, have already 
been mentioned. For Karaite Torah rolls consult 
Harkavy aud Strack, “Catalog der Hebriiischen 
Bibelhandschriften zu St. Petersburg,” Nos. 1-47. 
For Samaritan rolls see Harkavy, “Catalog der He- 
briischen und Samaritanischen Handschriften der 
Kaiserlichen Oeffentlichen Bibliothek ” (in Russian), 
St. Petersburg, 1875. 

Manuscripts in Book Form: Manuscripts in book 
form date from the whole period under consideration, 
and were doubtless in use for a number of centuries 
before. Most of the early codices that have been 
preserved are very large. Thus Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
4445 measures about 163 ins. by 13 ins.; the St. 
Petersburg codex of 916, about 142 ins. by 12} 
ins.; the Vatican codex of the Sifra, dating from 
1073, about 122 ins. by 10 ins.; the British Museum 
copy of the Mahzor Vitry, about 154 ins. by 12 ins. 
Small sizes are, however, not wanting. German 
codices of the Bible and liturgy written in the thir- 
teenth and fourteenth centuries are generally very 
large. Among manuscripts written in Italy the 
quarto and octavo sizes are much more common 
than in Germany. Spanish Bible codices of the 
thirteenth to the fifteenth century are asa rule hand- 
some quartos; but the comparatively few Spanish 
service-books extant are usually very small, proba- 
bly on account of the proscription 
under which Jewish worship lay in 
Spain, and owing to the fact that 
small volumes could be more easily 
hidden away. North-African manuscripts of the 
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are more often 
octavos than quartos. Yemenite Bible codices are 
generally folios, and liturgies either folios or quar- 
tos. The Karaites had a great predilection for the 
octavo size. 

In the arrangement of quires (generally 8 or 10 
leaves to a gathering), etc., Hebrew manuscripts do 
not differ from contemporary Latin and Greek ones; 
and the student may, therefore, be referred to gen- 
eral works on paleography. When a Hebrew vel- 
Jum manuscript is opened, “the two pages before 
the reader have the same appearance, either the yel- 
low tinge of the hair side or the whiter surface of 
the flesh side” (Thompson, J.c. pp. 62-63). There is 
usually af the end of cach quire a catchword in- 
dicating the first word of the next quire. Signa- 
tures in Hebrew letters—in the case of Hebrew- 
Arabic works, sometimes in either Arabic letters or 
pumerals—were generally placed in the left-hand 
lower corner on the last page of a quire, but occa- 
sionally in the right-hand upper corner of the first 
page. In some cases both methods were adopted. 
In Karaite manuscripts the signatures are often in 
the left-hand upper corner of the first page. 

The ruling of Hebrew manuscripts is not different 
from that observable in contemporary classical ones. 
There are usually perpendicular lines to mark off 

the columns, besides the horizontal 
Ruling of ruling. The prickings in the margin 

Manu- made to mark the distances between 

scripts. _ the horizontal lines have in many cases 

been cut away in the process of bind- 
ing. The writing sometimes depends from the 
ruled line instead of standing on it; so, e.g., Brit. 


Size of 
Books. 


| 


Mus. MS. Or. 4445 (9th cent.; comp. Blau, “Stu- 
dien zum Althebriiischen Buchwesen,” p. 147). 

The earlier codices of large size have usually cither 
two (¢.7., St. Petersburg codex of the year 916) or 
three columns (e.g., Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 4445) (see 
Blau, é.¢. pp. 1388-139). Manuscripts of small size 
generally exhibit but one column to a page. In 
later times the single column became much more 
frequent even in manuscripts of larger size. 

IV. Styles of Writing: The style of writing 
Hebrew has in each country been influenced more 
or less by causcs similar to those which produced 
what may fairly be called national differences in 
calligraphy generally. So far as Europe is con- 
eerned, Hebrew penmanship most probably was 
brought first to the countries of the southern 
coast, more especially to Spain and Italy; and 
spread thence into France, Germany, and divers 
other countries, assuming various modifications in 
its course. The locality in which a manuscript was 
written is, however, not always a safe guide to the 
kind of calligraphy used, as it sometimes happened 
that a scribe belonging to one part of the world 
prosecuted his profession for a longer or shorter 
time in a different country. It should also be re- 

marked that after the introduction of 


Copying printing there arose a tendency to copy 

from from printed forms; so that, in Europe 
Printed at any rate, the square character has 
Forms. for several centuries past been almost 


everywhere conforming to one par- 
ticular form of calligraphy. The earlier printed 
books were, it is true, set up in types that were 
cut differently in different countries (compare 
especially the early Spanish with the early Italian 
printed books); but the Spanish forms soon super- 
seded all the others, and they have on account of 
their greater regularity ever since maintained their 
ground both in printing and in writing. 

In the following observations the specimens of 
writing given in the accompanying four plates are 
referred to their sources and localities, and attention 
is occasionally directed to some peculiarities of pen- 
manship. As a rule, however, the specimens are 
left to speak for themselves. 

A. Square Writing: This series is, for the sake of 
completeness, preceded by two lines taken from the 
above-mentioned British Museum papyrus No. cvi.* 
(belonging to the late Ptolemaic or early Roman 
period), as the Hebrew-Aramaic writing then used 
exhibits a close affinity with the Palmyrene charac- 
ter, and thus forms an important link in the transi- 
tion to the square character. Then follow speci- 
mens of: 

karly Oriental (Nos, 2-8): No. 2 is taken from an 
Oxford papyrus belonging to the sixth or seventh 
century (“J. Q. R.” xvi., No. 61); No. 3, from the 
Hebreo-Persian document (apparently of the 8th 
cent.) lately brought from Khotan in central Asia 
and already referred to; No. 4, from Brit. Mus. MS. 
Or. 4445 (9th cent.); No. 5, from the St. Petersburg 
codex of the Later Prophets (dated 916); No. 6, from 
Codex Gaster No. 150 (belonging to about the same 
period); No. 7, from a contract (dated 980) on vel- 
lum, brought to the British Museum from the Cairo 
Genizah; No. 8, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 1467 (Per- 


PLATE J, 


. |e, | 
conte orem © ANY ay 


Y 4)! 
be, iad sini Bas 4 | (99 (ai, 


WI7 Tee ees 772 
PILED App a7 p) Dw $\ ae 


“Sie rip apDD Fre RNA Vy?’ 
=) nepdonin 2 HOTZ SNK py faa : 
fproimrpi IP Vz NeesN 
mpbavannixh mprany eo e Fria pis 4 


yest a psn NAD ION 
1 : =n {4 


wy me 


YL ODN; a synanaypn 











Moran yaR SAWS Speen mn Ney 
iat WYN Abia MS 6 


mwoy yan STN. We PONIES ; 


Pre SVT INSTF wena : 
ara ps Aa: r pir tah ws By 


sai et ee 
AR PIT 0 pntian ommnad | 1 naw! is 


poivnbon np WAIT, =a YWwIYYD 19>) yp Tatt97 Ly Yn 1 
I9 yy mow a ba Ds | a 





yyy RUA VALS 
‘HOMO NADY 4 


20 OR RIGIIS ‘Yor Hie, 


Lada 


soured} cayn 





PLATE 71. 


DIN OWI WY 394 32 
NIA LY I) Ow. 

23 DAG 4 TUNA DrWsx4 Wx Wak x 33 

SHE WD shay or n'Wha5 aron au ys mon 


UPIA PO Di Misse 94 
DMIKUM Vyys 93-9 
Noy» ahhyes seme app syne 35 

PW yr TW Posy NS K OW Vs 
Yohei > Nyy wes yes 36 
SNS VREED PS ISN (Jy) ye 
pie 1998 WE It OD 97 
INE ein os A SIMS 
IF *IDOD WIN 
live 199199 29D 200 


Sekromn Lerdsronls 29 
"eeu Pep Pronh 


Sonar ypinyensycy 49 
SHADED IES o wey Sinn 


roe Asay Al 


tT ws 


38 


bS wi 
roy ASL os ANI 42 
raat yy dyad 

DDS YS DMI WN yy w>OUH 

25» DPD rw» wow Say “nny 


sh ~ Sorry as yP>1n MN 


43 


EWI WD Dep 2 
WBW SUEY RY 
RAI NSS “Tb 294 
U1 TNE ES Keay 9899 bys 
Hac WDAWIY VD, Mw 23 
Sy SIP ys Abn DD 


moprarhs bse sep oy og 
syst best cre sinh r”) 


22 


oy va ngons WX 25 
sano NWS yar 
NO DYMINAWU RNIN 2 
wT aS ys Nh 


wt PRAM hy . 


ODS Bitty 
VENDORS KMD WA 2 
POLAT DSING Vay 

$97 9337 TAGS 7D 29 
DI ARRYINZYs! 
VIVO (SAR S30 


DUK KIWI) yb 


13 1THAH TTAB TA 
gaat 7a m7 nana % 


Puater III. 


Vy J -sy09 aun NAIDD HAY OM BF sr armpigtataesion DAD 44 
3s\' DOTY “VD WPS “WAV ws pee fa ph vhs 198 [N) 
nasi poh nis aden rv 56 9 you ons bye anh stan 
LING Wi pen bBle 294) DANN orp I yyw sa hym aee 

so7se Jus onve Jb wentnd saree goats 


ni 


WK KU ONK “york 79443) (enHn73 57 


WASDE NK H4DI KINKI DY “K) praia waws bys1 eas 19 47 
8 $9163 AWN TTD IK NK skKans 


. nyo sipby94 BUSS AND GrI4o Bo: (nit 


bins seas porn bx parade 


TM? 24D Nun Nipd NT NH WON 5g sh 713 UN WH [API SNID 


“DART Mews. sigh Sls vipat 
FI 9 7M File Png DI5)-NM NN ION Sy) 


worn owe) ps7 nine DK 


say FY '948 
INI WDD “DIY YI 
gwansn seis 152 -annden Ly qwrd 
IX SWI byDD gry 
geben upon) 5 bo BONNY HT Hyy75 ANNI I" Ag 
23 MUST) NK ay nlx rts mp3) v ‘3% ‘oan gost) nye eh <p% 
KY INN nad eres PY e0 YW DIIN YS DAM “wy? 


pads PIT by PIP? (P50 


Savy yoru ayant vinr> » 
r JOY AS D7 nronvs oY P3J 90 UD a op 


n) YING A ATE Sy Wy OKI W WY UAT 


wy ahd oad mum — smankannapanihdunandl s2 
Bend ware vs ear gg VOM rAdaMon yy niby 
3 BE. WPLB WIP) \"fayay pos =—™~ asvnark ont art hie?) 53 
AINA ID TA Nae ways PSsys NINN D729 YS 


WwaYw tropmsap ey 3 Ayaan moray 
VRB vars snfy bon Ae iid 
eeprinaropabsamim — Yorn DyINK (IK W'NI64 


Ay (fap (Harr Opn tonfs aie GAAS ay b> (Sus ¥> NaN 


Puiate IY. 


) “4 e } ty 
Our Yarse ) sakes 15 
isp 


vy > press: 


POP PW MOG? EP WO PIT Une ioup ud) 2p TT 
puw PPI 901 FDO Me) pr" ae re ¢ 


PPI p7ry wo yp")! Castes Fa eeeplpwlare 


ws i ba “e anu 7 7UU8 sat 
AT 


pe a eauahe Lid) por ne WP 19 


£334) OHFVDI PIPD ‘phuyph 
ie yess oe ds |? saip pbarsop AWD OS 


18 


io yj ad O70 AL Jip3{ pew 95¢ tak 80 
Stuy pte ts jf. Ge r3gt.ss li) “Otnarye 
Sy "Tit >> er PD Les | $034 97750 arch JSBNw 


B 
Sy aa mow) daw als sans SO gi 


"PIII? D7) DVO? 
ah I> IIA he D2 '37URD ‘ory a Le OUY 82 
Ee whee, wmnp> 2) 9p 


"Phen oD LD ‘eo 2p er “7 Leiass r>>aoof 93 


weet De Lh PY Ce abo rsp 


JF ae 


Cus vss fry mt a7iay ty Or Vacs iG Cu §4 
I? pe rin AUK {PIS (> by ”% 


fe do Bry 40M y/ s lol paul set 
auld yr Jot ple ‘af p? 2 85 


AAS Ad neers yar: suytel at VIQtr wosan aA 86 
oa PAH ED Py vey altel yt apart ~erad WFO? 

<ro5i950 vg Sx pasna stor 999 2199 APY) 

MHAD * gw) wal tt 99% YO! BAD 


amMvawery nyr dry my) 64 


MP3 Nay a ye ads ro» 
bara | awrod PAwa) bua aay AWD [% 
Jhon pears wun! wee ‘ 5 
pup wy ahirmv emda J 0)» 6 
“Imseprrfay Heraove froma wr 
ODM DWPYPIP IK §6 
WL 2H SDD) 7477) 
Bh row mye ens 


rwr Swi prpy 
mpenopoee 
sugedy! ot Tyree tacdyds} 68 
pay 207 AP vb i ie poe WD (>) 
sey da} so Ope sph a Aare 
sy0999 ys 017379 yw, §9 


bony ay 7D oma ‘p22 BOW 
an DMI DMD DDD) MWD 


ayo qewd pr 49 pao'nbuninnl aa 7 0 
pwr tw yn 9S 20 ob pypxp Sotaynw 
JD “YP Mays yore probs 


ssyryy pose rny ven penalo rsh wSY 7, 
qmana)dyyn ompranovsfanyas Sv 
yoqvaynr2 bannys.n399 hy anna 
abn Ant joe Se pes 972 
whe ADE 33 yak 29199 DK 
e ary 
wy 
—“PYIND? oye eno 7 3 


OPKITD DY OXMIGWI IVP) 0F71/ 
ear pM re yy oy 


LAL pw sik 55 40) VATA 
cork No wpr pi FP 
core py yep yryr 


Manuscripts 


sian origin, probably 11th cent.). With regard to 
No. 3 it should be noted that though the final 
“nun” (of which, however, no instance appears in 
the specimen) is long in the document, this is no 
mark of later date; for the long form of the letter 
appears in early papyri (as in specimen No. 2). In 
Nos. 4-6 the final “nun” is uniformly short. No. 8 
shows the superlinear punctuation combined with 
the ordinary mode of accentuation. 

Syro-Egyptian (Nos. 9-11): No. 9is taken froma 
Hebrew letter, dated 1055, brought to the British 
Museum from the Cairo Genizah; No. 10, from the 
text of the Hebrew Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), also from 
the Cairo Genizah (1ith-12th cent.); No. 11, from 
Pl. IL. of Neubauer’s portfolio of facsimiles (referred 
to hereafteras “ Neubauer”) printed to illustrate his 
catalogue of Oxford manuscripts (12th-18th cent.). 
In No. 9 note the peculiar combined form of 
(which is really Rabbinic). The mark over the sec- 
ond word of line 2 in No. 10 refers to a marginal 
note in the original. In No, 11 both the punctua- 
tion and the accentuation are superlinear. 

Spanish (Nos. 12-15): No. 12 is taken from the 
Brit. Mus. MS. Harley 5720 (11th cent.); No. 18, 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2201 (dated 1246); No. 
14, from a Bible codex belonging to the Earl of 
Leicester (15th cent.; see C. D. Ginsburg, “ Facsim- 
iles,” London, 1898); No. 15, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
2626 (dated 14838). No. 12 may fairly be described 
as representing a transition stage from the early 
Oriental square writing to the Spanish. 

Itatian (Nos. 16-18): No. 16 is taken from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Arundel Or. 2 (dated 1216); No. 17, from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2786 (dated 1890); No. 18, from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 18,692 (handwriting of Abra- 
ham Farissol, dated 1478). It should here be re- 
marked that instead of the square writing in the 
proper sense of the word, Italian scribes often em- 
ploy for Bible codices the semi-Rabbinic character 
exemplified in No. 45 (see below). 

Franco-German (Nos. 19-21): No. 19is taken from 
Brit. Mns. MS. Add. 10,455 (dated 1810); No. 20, 
from Cambridge University Library MSS. Ee, 8, 9 
(dated 1347; see the “Oriental Series of the Palo- 
graphical Society” [hereafter referred to as “O. 
8.”], Pl. XLI.); No. 21, from Neubauer, Pl. XI. 
(written before 1471). Note especially the sloping 
character of No. 20, a peculiar mark of German 
writing. 

Greek (Nos. 22-24): No. 22 is taken from the 
Carlsruhe codex of the Prophets (dated 1105-6; 
“O, 8S.” PL. LXXVII.); No. 28, from Brit. Mus. 
MS. Add. 27,205 (dated 1179); No. 24, from Neu- 
bauer, Pl. X XI. (written before 1268). 

Yemenite (Nos. 25-28): No. 25 is taken from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Or. 2378 (18th-14th cent.); No. 26, from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2370 (dated 1460-61); No. 27, 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2210 (dated 1468); No. 
28, from Neubauer, Pl. XXXT. (dated 1561). 

Varia (Nos, 29-31): No. 29 is taken from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Or. 2496, showing Karaite square wri- 
ting of apparently the thirteenth century; No. 30, 
from a Pentateuch roll written for the Jews of K’ai- 
Fung-Foo, China (18th cent.; Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 
19,250; snowing the dependence of Chinese on Per- 
sian writing); No. 31, from Neubauer, Pl. XX XIX. 


a a te a ee a ee 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


312 


(see Harkavy, “ Neuaufgefundene Bibelbandschrift- 
en,” Table II.—perhaps a forgery). 

B, Square Rabbinic or Semi-Rabbinic Writing : This 
series shows an approximation in greater or less de- 
gree to the freer Rabbinic style of writing. 

Syro-Egyptian (Nos. 82-38): No. 32 is taken from 
an Oxford papyrus of the sixth or seventh century 
(see “J. Q. R.” xvi., No. 61); No. 33, from a manu- 
script of the above-mentioned Hebrew Ecclesiasticus 
(perhaps 9th cent.) belonging to E. N. Adler; No. 
34, from the Genizah document Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
5588 (dated 1008); No. 385, from the Genizah docu- 
ment Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5536 (dated 1015); No. 36, 
from the Genizah document Brit. Mus. MS. Or, 5545 
(dated 1089); No. 37, from the Genizah document 
Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5551 (dated 1151); No. 38, from 
Neubauer, Pl. IV. (signature of Maimonides). The 
Rabbinic tendency in No. 35 is only slight; but 
the nis written freely, and the gencral appearance 
of the specimen shows affinity with semi-Rabbinic. 
It is necessary to note the slighter approximation of 
the square to the freer Rabbinic forms, 

Spanish and North- African (Nos. 39-42): No. 39 
is taken from Brit. Mus. MS. Harley 5530 (18th 
cent.); No. 40, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5866 (mid- 
dle of 15th cent.); No. 41, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
5600 (15th cent.); No. 42, from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 
19,780 (17th cent.). No. 40 appears to be of deci- 
dedly Spanish origin, the remaining three numbers 
being North-A frican (No. 42 can be definitely located 
as Algerian). 

Italian (Nos. 43-46): No. 43 is taken from the 
Leyden copy of the Talmud Yerushalmi (dated 1281 ; 
see “QO. 8S.” Pl. LVL); No. 44, from Brit. Mus. MS. 
Add. 18,690 (written between 1382 and 1850); No. 
45, from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 19,944 (dated 1441); 
No. 46, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 1081 (dated 1390). 
No. 46 appears to show French characteristics com- 
bined with Ltalian ones. 

Franco-German (Nos. 47-50): No. 47 1s taken 
from the Vatican copy of the Sifra (dated 1073; see 
“O. §.” Pl. XC.); No. 48, from Brit. Mus. MS. 
Add, 27,214 (dated 1091); No. 49, from Brit. Mus. 
MS. Arundel Or. 51 (dated 1189); No. 50, from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Or, 5466 (dated 1690). In Nos. 47-49 the 
tendency to semi-Rabbinic is but slight. 

Greek (No. 51): This specimen is taken from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Harley 5583 (15th-16th cent.). 

Yementie (Nos. 52-58): No. 52 is taken from Brit. 

Mus. MS. Or. 4837 (a fine copy of Ibn Janah’s 
“ Kitab al-Usul,” 14th cent.); No. 58, from Neu- 
bauer, Pl. XXXII. (dated 1491). 
. Karatte (Nos. 54-56): No. 54 is taken from Neu- 
bauer, Pl. XXXIV. (13th-14th cent.); No. 55, 7d. 
Pl. XXXYV. (written before 1353); No. 56, 72. Pl. 
XXXVI. (dated 1747). 

Persian(Nos, 57-58): No. 57istaken from Brit. Mus. 
MS. Or. 5446 (Pentateuch in Persian; dated 1319); 
No. 58, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or, 2451 (dated 1483). 

C, Rabbinic Writing: This series exhibits various 
styles of writing of a decided Rabbinic character. 

Early Oriental (Nos. 59-60): No. 59 is taken from 
the Decalogue papyrus referred to above (probably 
6th or 7th cent.); No. 60, from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
73 (perhaps written at Mosul; dated 1190). 

Syro-Egyptian (Nos. 61-63): No. 61 is taken from 


313 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manuscripts 





Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5519 (12th cent.); No. 62, from 
Neubauer, Pl. HI. (143th-14th cent.); No. 63, 75, Pl. 
VI. (14th cent. ?). 

Spanish (Nos. 64~65): No. 64 is taken from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Add. 14,763 (dated 1273); No. 65, from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 5866 (middle of 15th cent. ; for 
semi-Rabbinic forms from the same manuscripts see 
No. 40), 

North-African, ete. (Nos. 66-68): No. 66 is taken 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 27,118 (dated 1282); No. 
67, from Neubauer, Pl. VIT. (dated 1480; described 
as Syrian Rabbinic Maghrebi character); No. 68, 
2b, Pl. XIII, (15th cent.; described as Oriental Pro- 
vencal). 

ltatian (No. 69): Specimen taken from Brit. Mus. 
MS. Or, 5024 (dated 1874). 

Franco-German (Nos. 70-72): No. 70 is taken 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 17,049 (dated 1894); No. 
71, from Cambridge University Library MS. Add. 
560 (dated 1401; see “O. 8.” Pl. LXVIII.); No. 72, 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 27,199 (Elijah Levita’s 
autograph; dated 1515). 

Greek (Nos. 73-74): No. 78 is taken from Neu- 
bauer, Pl. XXIII. (written before 1184); No. 74, 2d. 
Pi. XXV. (dated 1375). 

D. Cursive Writing: Thisseries is preceded by two 
specimens (Karaite) of writing in which the Hebrew 
text is written in the Arabic character and provided 
with Hebrew punctuation. No. 75 is taken from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2540 (10th cent.), and No. 76 
from Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 2549 (11th cent.). No. 77 
(Neubauer, Pl. XTX.; dated 1506) is Oriental. No- 
78 (4b. Pl. X.; handwriting of Jacob b. Hayyim, 
early 16th cent.) is a specimen of Spanish cursive. 
Nos. 79-83 are Italian. No. 79, from Neubauer, 
Pl. XXIX., is old Italian; No. 80, from Brit. Mus. 
MS. Add. 27,096, is Mordecai Dato’s writing (16th 
cent.). No. 81, from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 27,148, 
is Judah Modena’s autograph (1648); No. 82, from 
Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 26,991, is Solomon Portaleone’s 
autograph (17th cent.); and No. 88, from Brit. 
Mus. MS. Add, 27,103, is Joseph Almanzi’s auto- 
graph. Nos. 84 and 85 are German, the former 

being taken from Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 

Specimens 18,695 (a Mahzor ina Judswo-German 
of Cursive. translation, dated 1504), and the latter 
from Neubauer, Pl. XVII. (Heiden- 

heim’s autograph). No. 86 is Karaite German cur- 
sive writing, dated 1826 (Neubauer, Pl. XXXVII.). 
Here may fitly be added aspecimen of writing from 


nono broke oboins Sy5i 
ori ANID S72 KY shes 
TIEN III VANE tikes 
Ware F538 Y7390 Youn 


Codex Gaster 80, fol. 28b, which contains forms 
rarely found elsewhere. Remarkable is the abbre- 


viation of wine in line 2. The manuscript contains 
Maimonides’ “Sefer ha-Madda',” and may belong to 
the fourteenth or to the thirteenth century. The 
writing appears to combine Yemenite with Persian 
characteristics (perhaps displaying the former more 
than the latter). 

V. Illuminations: Pluminations in Hebrew 
manuscripts are far from being rare. Roughly 
speaking, the proportion of illuminated codices in a 
large and representative collection of Hebrew manu- 
scripts would probably be found to be about seven 
or eight, if not more, in every hundred. On some 
early Eastern illuminations of Biblical codices 
(mostly in gold) see M. Guster, “Hebrew IJlumi- 
nated Bibles of the [Xth and Xth Centuries (Codi- 
ces Gaster 150, 151).”. A fair specimen of early Per- 
sian chain-like ornamentation can be seen in “O. 8.” 


Pl. LIV. (Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 1467). 

Compara- Fine specimens of arabesque border 
tive Fre- illumination are found, ¢.9., in Brit. 
quency of Mus. MSS. Or. 2626-2628 of the year 
Tllumina- 1483-84, and in Brit, Mus. MSS. Har- 
tions. ley 5698 and 5699, a page of which has 


been reproduccd in colors for the pres- 
ent article (see frontispiece). In this instance, how- 
ever, the arabesque form has been much modified. 
On Haggadah illuminations sce HAGGADAH., 

Spain and Provence seem to have been fore- 
most in the last-named branch of illustration. Fine 
German illuminations are comparatively rare, The 
ornamentuations, or what were meant for such, found 
in German copies of the Bible, etc., are as a rule 
grotesque rather than appropriate. Very interest- 
ing specimens of French illuminations, however, are 
found in Brit. Mus. MS, Add. 11,689 (12th and 13th 
cent.), containing a collection of Biblical, liturgical, 
and other texts. <A finely ornamented page of an 
early Karaite Biblical text (10th cent.) has been re- 
produced in colors in G. Margoliouth, “Catalogue 
of the Hebrew and Samaritan MSs. in the Brit- 
ish Museum,” vol. i., Pl. V. (Brit. Mus. MS. Or. 
2540). 

VI. Palimpsests: Hebrew palimpsests, 7z.e., 
manuscripts showing Hebrew written over erased or 
partly erased earlier writing, are rare. The Jews, 
as was only natural, did not, as a rule, like to utilize 
for sacred purposes material that had been used for 
other objects. Some notable examples of Hebrew 
palimpsests have, however, been found in the Cairo 


Genizah. From this source come the 

Palimp- Oxford fragments containing Hebrew 
sests and writingof apparently the twelfth cen- 
Colophons. tury over Palestinian Syriac of the 


sixth and seventh, and eighth and 
ninth centuries (see Gwilliam and others in “ Anec- 
dota Oxoniensia,” Semitic Series, 1893-96). More 
interesting still are the Cambridge palimpsests which 
coniain Hebrew of the eleventh and twelfth cen- 
turies written over portions of Aquila’s Greek ver- 
sion of the Old Testament and Origen’s Hexapla 
(see F. C. Burkitt, “Fragments of the Books of 
Kings According to the Translation of Aquila,” 
1897; and C. Taylor, “Hebrew-Greek Cairo-Geni- 
zah Palimpsests,” 1900). A page of palimpsest in 
which a Hebrew liturgical text of 1179 was written 
over Latin writing of the tenth century can be seen 


Manuscripts 
Ma‘oz Zur 


in“O. 8.” PL LXXYVIII. (Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 
27.205); see also JEw. Encyc. s.c. AQUILA. 

VII. Colophons: At the end of a manuscript, 
and sometimes also at the conclusion of parts of the 
same, a colophon (Greek, xoAogov) cr “ finishing 
stroke” is often found. In its fullest form the colo- 
phon contains (1) the title of the work, (2) the name 
of the scribe, (8) the name of the person for whom 
the manuscript was written, (4) the place of writing, 
(5) the date, and (6) precative and benedictive sen- 
tences, usually taken from the Bible (see CoLoPuon). 

The mention of the title in a colophon is, in the 
case of unknown or little-known works, helpful for 
identification, if, as not infrequently happens, the 
beginning of the manuscripts has been lost. The 
entries of scribes’ names at times reveal long genc- 
alogies of families among which the profession of 
cepying had descended from father to son for a 
number of generations. Scribes sometimes mark off 
their names also in the initial letters of one or more 
pages of the manuscripts. The complimentary epi- 
thets lavished by the scribe on his rich, or compar- 
atively rich, employer are often conspicuous enough ; 
but the more important references to descent and 
position are not wanting. There are also cases in 
which the scribe writes his manuscript for himself 
or for one or other of his children. The mention of 
the place of writing is, of course, useful for local- 
izing the different styles of writing, though, as has 
already been mentioned, caution has to be exercised 
in this respect. 

The manner of dating a manuscript demands spe- 
cial notice. For some points connected with the 
subject see CHRONOLOGY and Era. Mention should 
be made first of the two specitically Jewish modes 
of dating, and then of eras borrowed from other 
nations. 

(1) The era of the Creation is in common use in 
manuscripts written in most parts of Europe; and 
as it appears to have been generally adopted about 
the middle of the tenth century of the common era, 

it was used in the entire period here 


Methods dealt with. If the full number of years 
of Dating from the Creation is given, the reck- 
Manu-  oning is styled “perat gadol” (abbre- 
scripts. viated 4"5); and the year of the com- 


mon era is obtained by subtracting the 
number 3760 (or 3761, if the manuscript was written, 
or rather finished, in the first three months of the 
Jewish year). But the thousands are often omitted ; 
aud the reckoning is then called “perat katon” 
(abbreviated p’p). In such cases the number 1240 
(or 1241) has to be added in order to obtain the date 
of the common era. 
(2) Dating from the destruction of the Second 
Tempte (¢.e., from the year 68) is comparatively rare 
in manuscripts, but it is not, as has been thought, 


strictly confined to Greece; for this mode of dating, 


is found not only in the Carlsruhe copy of the 
Prophets, which was written in a Greek Ashkenazic 
hand in 1105-6 (nya yaan> Adannay aay jonn NF 
Mmynan = 4866 of the Creation or 1088 from the de- 
struction of the Temple). but also in the Vatican 
copy of the Sifra written in a French hand in 1078, 
snd (see below) in a manuscript. from Yemen. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


314 


A very common mode of dating manuscripts writ- 
ten in the East is (8) by the Seleucidan or Greek era 
(“le-heshbon ha-Yewanim,” “le-minyan shetarot,” 
or simply “li-shetarot”; sometimes considered to 
synchronize with the cessation of prophecy). In 
order to obtain the corresponding c.r. date, 311 (or 
3121f the manuscript is dated within the first three 
months of the Jewish year) has to be subtracted. 
This era is by far the most common in Hebrew man- 
uscripts written in Yemen, though the era of the 

Creation as well as the Mohammedan 

‘‘Minyan era is also occasionally met with, one 

Shetarot.” cra being sometimes followed by an- 

other. The Karaites use also the 

Greek era; but the reckoning from the Creation is 

more common in their colophons. The Karaites 

add the Mohammedan era more frequently than 
do the Jews of Yemen. 

(4) The Mohammedan era just referred to is gen- 
erally introduced under the designation “heshbon 
ha-Yishme‘elim”; but the expression “le-keren 
ze‘era” (in allusion to Dan. vii. 8) is also found. 

(5) The common era is of very rare occurrence in 
Hebrew colophons; and it then only follows the 
year of the Creation previously given. Thus Brit. 
Mus. MS. Harley 5704 (containing a unique copy 
of the Yalkut Makirion the Minor Prophets, written 
for Cardinal A gidius) is dated “Tuesday, the 16th 
day of Ab, in the year 274 of the ‘small reckoning’ 


[p’nb on : this being at the same time an example 
ot utilizing the numerical value of aScriptural phrase 
for dating], and according to their reckoning 1514” 
(the term “]i-yezirah” being then added by mis- 
take). There are some instances where the Chris- 
tian month is given side by side with the year of 
the Creation, 

A remarkable instance of multiple dating (though 
given at the beginning of the manuscript, and, there- 
fore, not in the form of a colophon) is found in 
Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 27,294 (containing an Arabic 
commentary in Hebrew characters on Maimonides’ 
Mishneh Torah, ch. i.-iv.; see “J. Q. R.” xiii. 488), 
which was written by the scholarly Yemenite com- 
piler Sa‘id ibn Daud. It contains the following 


.- be» 8 ee @ 


the destruction of the First Temple); 
Multiple (2) YON IY ‘sind (1898 since the de- 
Dating. = struction of the Second Temple); (3) 
... DOMWY ney (date of Exodus no 


6s © 8 2 @ 


MYWNS (1778 since the cessation of prophecy; the 
same as No. 4). 

It should here be remarked that the date of a 
manuscript may, in the absence of a colophon, be 
computed from the table of calendar cycles of nine- 
teen years that is sometimes (more especially in 
liturgical manuscripts) added to the text. Thus 
Brit. Mus. MS. Add. 27,205 must have been written 
about 1180; for the table of cycles commences with 
NDS, the two hundred and sixty cycles past yielding 
260 x 19 = 4940 a.m. = 1180 c.k. In manuscripts 


containing digests of Talmudical law, the date may 


315 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Manuscripts 
Ma‘oz Zur 





sometimes be gathered from the year given in the 

form of the letter of divorcement (” get”), etc. 

A curious addition, sometimes attached to colo- 
phons (in certain cases standing by itself), is the 
precative phrase that the scribe should suffer no in- 
jury (pr x5) “until anassshould mount on the Jad- 
der [dreamed of by Jacob] ” (pdb “pM soy 83] 
faSn WAN apy’ WwWeR]; sec “O.S.” description of Pl. 
LAVIID). 

VIII. Owners, etc.: A large number of manu- 
scripts contain the names of those who at one time 
or another owned them. These are generally found 
on fly-leaves at the beginning or at the end, but 
sometimes also in the margin of inner leaves. Oc- 
castonally owners record the births of their children 
on the fly-leaves, more rarely deaths and other 
events. Jn anumber of instances manuscripts are 
marked as having becn obtained by au owner at the 
division of his late father’s or another testator's prop- 
erty. Contracts of transfer of manuscripts by sale 
are also often found; and occasionally the pawning 
of a manuscript is recorded on one of its fly-leaves. 
The money value that was at the time attached to 
the manuscript is sometimes stated in the noticcs of 
sale. 

IX. Censors: On this subject see CENSORSHIP 
or HEBREW Books. The following few remarks 
may, however, be added to what is said in that arti- 
cle: An instance of self-imposed censorship in 
France, about 1291, is found in a Hebrew manu- 
script at the British Museum (Add. 19,664). Brit. 
Mus. MS. Add. 17,050 contains (in the form of a 
fiy-leaf} a document, dated Lugo, Feb. 16, 1610, by 
which permission was given to carry the codex to 
Modena. Brit. Mus. MS, Or. 74 contains an entry 
made for the ceusor by his notary. Very often the 
entries of several censors are found on the same page, 
the manuscript having been from time to time sub- 
jected to fresh examinations. 

BIBLIOGRAPITY : In addition to the sources given in the article 
the following tray be cited: On papyri: Steinschneider, in 
Zeitschrift fiir Aegyptische Sprache. xvii. 93; Chwolson, 
C. 1. H. cols, 120-125; Erman and Krebs, Aus den Papyri 
des Koiniglichen Museums, p. 290; Mitthetlaigen aus der 
Sanmilung des przherzug Rainer, i. 38-44. Catalogues: 
See list in JEW. ENcycC. ili. 618 ef seg.  Faesimiles : Neu- 
bauer, Faesimiles of Hebrew MSS. in the Bodleian Li- 
brary, Preface, 1886 (which has been largely drawn upon in 
the accompanying plates); C.D. Ginsburg, Series of XVITT. 
Facsimiles of MSS. of the Hebrew Bible, London, 1898 ; 
Che Haggadakh of Sarajevo, Vienna, 1898; and The Frag- 
ments Hitherto Recovered uf the Hebrew Text of Fecle- 
siasticus, Oxford and Cambridge, 1901. 


G. G. M. 


The following list gives the number of known 
Lebrew manuscripts in existence with the names of 
libraries or private owners possessing them. The 
dates in parentheses are those of the printed cata- 
logues of the collections. 


ENGLAND. FRANCE AND SWITZER- 
Bodleian, Oxford (1886). 2,541 LAND. 
BN. AGICP i ose se aek es 1,476 


Paris, Bibliothéque Na- 
eeese8 1,313 


British Museum (1893). 1,196 
(Cumbridge University... 762 tionale (1866).... 


Jews’ College (1903).... 580 Baron Gitinzburg....... 900 
Beth-Hamedrash (1884). 147 BOSSI: iieeeus ees eewees 20 
C.D. Ginsbure......... 80 BOR oo6icsbecets sees as 20 
Trinity College, Cam- Nimes.......00- vaucie wes 15 

WPIUI Csi 9 8 ester S54 29 LYONS......+. ecaseeeue aves F 12 


Christ Chureh, Oxford. . 13 EIS@WHECTE. .....0.eeeee 9 


RUSSIA. Angelica, Rome (1878).. ot 
St. Petersburg.......... 880 Bologna (1887)......... 28 
Friedlandiana.......... 300 Vittorio Emanuele, 
GERMANY AND AUSTRIA- Rome (1878).......... 28 
HUNGARY. MOdeNd wissseeeseeeeee, Fi 
Munich (1897).......... 408 Venice (1886)........... 19 
Hamburg (1878)........ 35) SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. 
Berlin (1897)........... “59° Escurial.......++ (pistes, “GS 
Vienna (1847) eee nssrove . 200 Toledo Bet sia Be ea as Se 42 
Breslau Seminary ...... 190 : 
Strasburg (1881)..000 2 i Elsewhere....... Seeeena t 
Leipsic, Ratsbibliothek UNITED STATES. 
CLBSSY 2 veeeave sek oetes 43 Jewish Theological 


Erfurt (1863).... ...... 17 
Budapest Seminary..... 12 
Geiger (Hochschule), 


Seminary, New York. 750 
Columbia University.... 100 
Sutro, San Francisco.... 135 


Benin ieee sedan R 
HOLLANXD AND SCANDI- 
ITALY. NAVJA. 
Parma (1803, 1880)...... 1,634 Leyden (1858)....... .. 116 
Vatican, Rome (1756)... 580 Upsala (1843)..... es ahs 38 
Turin (1874)............ 294 Rosenthal ............0. 32 
Mantna (1878).......... 1:8 Copenhagen (1846) ..... 16 
WIOTENCE pace see ete 130 Lund (18540)...... rere 6 


Besides these there are other collections not yet 
catalogued; some in private hands, e.g., those of 
Dr. M. Gaster of London, and of the late D. Kauf- 
mann at Budapest, others in public libraries, as, for 
example, the Alliance Israélite Library. The frag- 
ments of the Cairo Genizah, numbering many thou- 
sands, and scattered in Cambridge, Oxford, London, 
and Paris, are not included. Many libraries, as the 
Bodleian and Bibliothéque Nationale, have received 
notable accessionssince their catalogues were printed. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Vorlesungen tiber die Kunde 
Hehritischer Hanadschriften, pp. 68-90, 
J. 


MA‘OZ ZUR (8 Ny): Commencement of the 
hymn originally sung only in the domestic circle, 
but now used also in the synagogue, after the kin- 
dling of the lights on the Feast of Dedication (Ha- 
NUKKAH). The acrostic signature is that of Morde- 
cai. = Zunz (“ Literaturgesch.” p. 580) is inclined to 
place the author of this hymn in the middle of the 
thirteenth century. He may have been the Morde- 
cai ben Isaac ha-Levi who wrote the Sabbath table- 
hymn “Mah Yafit” (Majufes), or even the scholar 
referred to in Tos. to Niddah 36a. Or, to judge 
from the appeal in the closing verse, now generally 
suppressed, he may have been the Mordecai whose 
father-in-law was martyred at Mayence in 1096. 

The bright and stirring tune now so generally as- 
sociated with “ Ma‘oz Zur” servesas the “represent- 

ative theme” in musical references 

The to the feast (comp. ADpDIR Hu; AkDA- 
Traditional mur; HaLuen). Indeed, it has come 
Tune. to be regarded as the only Hanukkah 
melody, four other Hebrew hymns for 

the cccasion being also sung to it (comp. Zunz, Le. 
pp. 422, 429; D. Kaufmann, in “ Ha-Asif,” ii. 298), 
as well as G. Gottheil’s paraphrase, “Rock of Ages,” 
in the “ Union Hymnal” (No. 107). It was originally 
sung for “Shene Zetim” (“Olives Twain”), the 
“Me’orah,” or piyyut, next preceding the Snema‘ in 
the Moruing Service of the (first) Sabbath in the eight 
days of the Feast of Dedication. Curiously enough, 
“Shene Zetim” alone is now sometimes sung to a mel- 
ody which two centuries ago was associated rather 
with “Ma‘oz Zur.” The latter is a Jewish-sounding 
air in the minor mode, and is found in Benedetto 


lias Zur THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA . 316 


ciety, 1.36, London, 1900; Jewish Chronicle(London), Nov. 23, 


Marcello’s “ Estro Poetico Armonico,” or “ Parafrasi | q 
1888; Dec. 20, 1889; Dec. 5. 1890; Dee. 25, 1891; L. Lewandow- 


Sopra li Salmi” (Venice, 1724), quoted as a melody 
of the German Jews, and utilized by Marcello as the 
theme for his “Psaim XV.” This air has been tran- 
scribed by Cantor Birnbaum of Kénigsberg in the 
“Tsraelitische Wochenschrift ” (1878, No. 51). at F. L. C. 
The present melody for the Hanukkah hymn has MAPU, ABRAHAM: Russian Hebrew novel- 
been identified by Birnbaumasanadaptation from the ; ist; born near Kovno Jan. 10, 1808; died at Kénigs- 
old German folk-song “So weiss ich eins, dass mich | berg Oct. 9, 1867. Mapu introduced the novel into 
erfreut, das pluemlein auff preiter heyde,” given in | Hebrew literature. His early education in Bible 
Béhme’s“ Altdeutsches Liederbuch ” (No. 685); it was | and Talmud was received at the heder, on leaving 
widely spread among German Jews as early as 1450. | which, at theage of twelve, he continued the study of 
By an interesting coincidence, this folk-melody was | the Talmud in private, and was so successful that he 
also the first utilized by Luther for his German | soon acquired the name of “ ‘Tllui” (Friedberg, “ Zik- 
chorals, He set it to his “Nun freut euch lieben | ronot,” in “ Hausfreund,” i. 22). Moved thereto by 
Christen gmein” (comp. Julian, “Dictionary of | his own poetical and impulsive disposition and in- 
Hymnology,” 3.0. “Sing praise to God who reigns | fluenced by his father, Jekuthiel, himself a mystic 
above”). It is familiar among English-speaking | and cabalist, Mapu took up, at the age of fifteen, 
people as the tune for a translation by F. E. Cox | the study of Cabala. According to an anecdote re- 


ski, Chanukka-Hymne (two voices and piano), Berlin; J. Ra- 

senfeld, Chanukka Hymne fiir Kinderstimmen, Berlin: 
D. Rubin, Maoz Tsur fitr Chor und Orgel; A. Schoenfeld, 

Nationalgesang zur Erinnerung an die Siege der Makkha- 

bdr, Posen. 
A 


a ep i ter 


MA‘OZ ZUR 





Yewa-nim nik - be - zu ‘a - lai azai bi - me Hash - man -_ nim, 





Ufa -rezu ho - mot mig - da - lai, wetim-m’u kol ha - shema - nim: 


| ——— =a 


Umin - no - tar kan - kan « 











Bene bi-nah ye - me shemo-nah 


of the hymn “Sei lob und ehr dem hochsten gut,” | lated of him, heattempted to give his studies practi- 
by J. J. Schiitz (1640-1730). As such it is called | cal effect by endeavoring to render himself invisible. 
“Erk” (after the German hymnologist), and, with | Though he carefully followed cabalistic prescriptions 
harmonies by Bach, appears as No. 283 of “Hymns, | he was cruelly disillusioned by being addressed by 
Ancient and Modern” (London, 1875). The earliest | a friend at the very moment when he thought him- 
transcription of the Jewish form of the tune is due }| selfsecure from mortal observation (7).). Mapu later 
to Isaac Nathan, who set it, very clumsily indeed, | studied Talmud and Cabala with Elijah Kalisher 
to the poem “On Jordan’s Banks” in Byron’s “He- | (Ragoler), rabbi at Slobodka (Mapu’s birthplace). 
brew Melodies” (London, 1815). Later transcrip- | In Kalisher’s house he found a copy of the Psalms 
tions have been numerous, and the air finds a place | with a Latin translation, and this awakened within 
in every collection of Jewish melodies. It was | him a desire to study Latin, which he did from that 
modified to the form now favored by English Jews | translation. <A better opportunity to study Latin 
by the delicate liturgical taste of Mombach, to | presented itself when he formed the acquaintance of 
whom is due the modulation to the dominant in the | a Catholic priest while teaching in a country school; 
repetition of the first strain, shown in the transcrip- {| and he made such good progress in the language 
tion above. that he wrote a book in Latin (2d. i. 24). 

From this time dates Mapu’s devotion to secular 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ed. Birnbaum, Chanuca-Melodie fur Piano- i i ; it 
forte, mit Varbemerkung, Konigsberg, 1890; E. Breslaur, studies, Solncnaare to ee ae seal 
Sind Originale Melodien bei den Juden Geschichtlich which he pursued henceforth assiduously. In the 
Nachweisbar ? p. 70, Leipsic, 1898; Cohen and Davis, Voice | forties he removed with his family to Rossieny, gov- 


of Prayer and Praise, No. 294 (and especially Mombach, in ; ; 
We eld 66), London, 1899; Journal OF the Folk-Song So- | eraoment of Kovno; there he became acquainted with 


317 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ma‘oz Zur 
Mar 


eee 


the scholar Senior Sachs, who greatly heightened his 
love for ancient Hebrew history and literature and 
for the beauties of Biblical diction, of which Mapu 
made later such good use in his romances (Brainin, 
“Abraham Mapu,” p. 
36). A few years later 
he became teacher in 
the house of Apatov 
Parnes at Wilna, and 
then was appointed 
teacher of Jewish re- 
ligion and German at 
the gymnasium of 
Kovno. In 1860 his 
health began to fail; 
he suffered especially 
from palsy in his right 
hand, which made 
writing difficult for 
him; in 1867 he 
went for medical 
treatment to Konigs- 
berg, where he died 
(2b. i. 67). 

The literary activity of Mapu fell in a period of 
barrenness for Hebrew literature, as far as fiction 
was concerned. Here and therea poem of moderate 
value, or a translation of a French romance, had ap- 
peared, but there was not one original novel. His 

first book, “Ahabat Ziyyon,” begun 
His in 1831 and publishcd at Wilna in 
‘*Ahabat 1853, is a romance of the time of King 
Ziyyon.” Hezekiah and Isaiah. In this as well 
as in his other works, one recognizes 
the unmistakable infinence of the French Romantic 
school—of Victor Hugo, Dumas (pére), and Eugéne 
Sue, particularly of the last-named, whom Mapu al- 
waysadmired (72, 1.49), Perhaps through their influ- 
ence Mapu succeeded in giving to his characters gen- 
uine nafveté and naturalness, which combined with 
a highly suecessful use of Biblical diction to make 
this work classic. “Ahabat Ziyyon” was translated 
into German as “Tamar” by 8S. Mandelkern (2d 
ed., Leipsic, 1897), without mention of Mapu’s 
authorship; into English, under the titte “ Amnon, 
Prince and Peasant,” by Frank Jaffe (London, 1887), 
and by Schapiro, under the title “In the Days of Isa- 
yah” (New York, 1908); into Yiddish, in Warsaw 
(1874). His second work, “ Ashmat Shomeron ” (Wil- 
na, 1865), is likewise a work of powerful imagina- 
tion. It isa romance of the days of Ahaz, King of 
Judah, and of Pekah b. Remaliah and Hosea b, Elah, 
kings of Isracl, depicting the wild, orgiastic character 
of Samaritan society and setting against it the purity 
and simplicity of Judean society. “‘Ayit Zabua‘” 
(Wilna, 1857-61) is a novel, in five parts, of modern 
life, picturing the struggle of the Maskilim against 
the “ painted vulture,” or hy pocrite—a standing epi- 
thet at that time for the ultra-Orthodox. 

Mapu wrote also “ Hozeh Hezyonot,” a romance, 
in ten parts, of the times of Shabbethai Zebi; but 
owing to the intervention of the “hypocrites” of his 
town the manuscript was destroyed while on its 
way to the minister of public instruction for ap- 
proval, only a fragment being preserved. His other 
works are “Hanok Ja-Na‘ar” and “Amon Pada- 





Abraham Mapu. 


gug,” Hebrew text-books (Wilna, 1859, and Konigs- 
berg, 1868), and “ Hausfranzose ” (Wilna, 1861), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Kapian, Hayye Mapu, Vienna, 1870; Brai- 
nin, Abraham Mapu, Piotrokow, 1900; Friedberg, Zikronot, 
in Hausfreund, i. 21 et seq.; S. Sachs, Le-Toledot Abraham 
Mapr, in Ha-Meassef, pp. 18 et seq. (supplement to Ha-Zefi- 
rah, Warsaw, 1903); N. Slouschz, Littérature Hebraique, 
pp. 104 et seg., Paris, 1908 

Ai Se We - 


H. R. 


MAR (719): Aramaic noun meaning “lord.” 
Daniel addresses the king as “ Mari” (= “my lord”: 
Dan. iv. 16 [A. V. 19]; comp. Hebr. “ Adoni,” used 
in speaking to the king). Inthe Palestinian schools 
“ Mari” and “ Rabbi” were customari.y employed in 
addressing the sages. It is said of King Jehosha- 
phat that on seeing ascholar he rose from his throne, 
and saluted him with the words, “Abi, abi; rabbi. 
rabbi; mari, mari” (Ket. 108b; Mak. 24a). Jesus 
was addressed by his disciples both as “ Mari” and 
as “Rabbi” (comp. Dalman, “Die Worte Jesu,” i. 
269 e¢ seg.). In conversation, “Mari” was used asa 
respectful form of address in Palestine (comp. Yer. 
Pes. 21b, lines 48-49: “1 iyo xb, Mt NN): 
“ Mar,” in Babylonia (comp. Yoma20b: 49 nor). In 
the latter country “ Mar” became also a title prece- 
ding the name, and it was sometimes customary to 
call scholars “Mar” and not “ Rab,” particularly in 
the case of the two great contemporariesof Rab(Abba 
Arika)—Mar Samueland Mar ‘Ukba. When Abaye 
was speaking of his uncle and teacher Rabbah bar 
Nahmani, he merely said “Mar,” without adding 
any name (Pes. 101a). When Tabyomi, R. Ashi's 
son, cited in a lecture sentences by his father, he 
did not refer to him by name, but said “ Abba Mari” 
(= “my father, my lord”). 

Tabyomi'’s contemporaries never referred to him 
by name, but called him “ Mar”; in the Talmud he 
is, therefore, designated only as “Mar bar Rab 
Ashi,” “Mar” and “ Rab” (= “ lord” and “ master ”) 
together becamea customary title of the Babylonian 
scholar in the geonic period. Sherira Gaon is the 
first one to use this combination, in the letter in 
which he refers to the first geonim— 
Mar Rab Hanan at Pumbedita and 
Mar Rab Mar at Sura (where “ Mar” 
is already a proper name; sve JEW. 
Encyc. v. 568, s.v. GAon)—and he always prefixes the 
double title “Mar Rab” to their names (2b. v. 571). 
In the prayer “Yekum Purkan,” dating from the 
time of the Geonim, the scholars are designated as 
“Maranan we-Rabbanan” (= “our lords and mas- 
ters”). The title “Mar Rab,” also, was combined 
with the personal suffix of the first person plural], so 
that the Geonim were called “Marana Rabbana” 
(= “our lord, our master”). This seems to have 
been the official title in the headings of the questions 
addressed to the Geonim(comp. Harkavy, “Respon- 
sen der Gaonen,” p. 149; Neubauer, “M. J. C.” i. 41, 
etc.), and itis the exact ramaic counterpart of the 
Hebrew “ Adonenu we-Rabbenu,” by which, accord- 
ing to the tannaitic Halakah, the king was to be ad- 
dressed (Tosef., Sanh. iv. 3). Tbe gaon was called 
also simply “ Marana ” (Harkavy, lc. pp. 83, 107, 140, 
148), or the Hebrew “ Adonenu ” was used instead 
(tb. pp. 88, 187, 278, 814), which was rendered in 
Arabic by “Sayyiduna.” “Mar Rab” was applied 


Title and 
Name. 


Marah 
Marano 


also to scholars who were not geonim (Harkavy, 
lc. pp. 24, 172). 

The title “Mar” was not customary in the West, 
so that Abraham ibn Daud, in his “Sefer ha-Kab- 
balah,” refers to the Geonim merely as “ Rab.” Men- 
ahem Meiri distinguishes only the scholarly and 
noble Todros and his son Levi of Narbonne by the 
title “ Marana we-Rabbana” (Neubauer, le, 11, 229). 
Isaac Lattes (dd. ii. 288) likewise designates certain 
scholars of Narbonne by the title “ Maran” (1) = 
N97), which also means “our lord.” This is the 
title subsequently applied as a mark of respect 
to Joseph Caro, the author of the Shulhan ‘Aruk 
(comp. Azulai, “Shem ha-Gedolim,” i. 82). One 
of Lattes’ manuscripts has “Morenu” ({399%)) in- 
stead of “Maran.” The title “Morenu,” which orig- 
inated in the fourteenth century, is developed from 
the older form “ Marana” (Giidemann, “ Gesch.” iii. 
31). The Hebrew form “ Morenu ” instead of “ Mara- 
na” occurs sporadically even in the geonic period 
(comp. Harkavy, Z.c. pp. 275 and 276, where the gaon 
Saadia is entitled “ Morenu we-Rabbenu”). There are 
other indications, also, which show that the two 
words were regarded as synonymous (comp. Targ. 
to Prov, v. 18, where py is translated by ‘ny = 
“my lords, my masters”; Sanh. 98, where 1) °34 
is to be read instead of yx) ‘5; and Dalman, /.c. p. 
268). Thus the old Hebrew title “Marana” was 
changed to “Morenu,” with the meaning “doctor 
noster,” perhaps under the influence of the custom 
which had become prevalent among Christian schol- 
ars of addressing one another with the title “doc- 
tor.” As shown in the examples given above, 4) 
itself designated the teacher and sage. 

S. S. W. B. 


MARAH (lit. “bitter”): The name of a station 
or halting-place of the Israelites in the wilderness 
(Ex. xv. 283; Num. xxxill. 8), so called in reference 
to the water of the well found there. it was reached 
by the Israelites three days after crossing the Red 
Sea and after they had passed the valley of Shur 
and the wilderness of Athan. The well is variously 
identified with ‘Ayun Musa, ‘Ain Naba, or Al- 
Gharkadah (comp. Holzinger, “Exodus,” p. 55; Dill- 
man, “ Exodus,” p. 177). The Talmud says that at 
Marah three laws were added to the seven com- 
mands already given to Noah—those regarding the 
institution of tribunals, Sabbath observance, and 
obedience to pareuts (Suk. 56b; Levy, “ Neuhebr. 
Worterb.” iii. 244D). 

J. E. TN. 


MARANO (plural, Maranos, generally written 
Marranos): Crypto-Jews of the Iberian Peninsula. 
The term, which is frequently derived from the New 
Testament phrase “maran atha” (“onr Lord hath 
come”), denotes in Spanish “damned,” “ accursed,” 


“banned”; also “hog,” and in Portuguese it is used 


as an opprobrious epithet of the Jews because they 
do not eat pork. The name was applied to the 
Spanish Jews who, through compulsion or for 
form’s sake, became converted to Christianity in 
consequence of the cruel persecutions of 1391 and of 
Vicente Ferrer’s missionary sermons. These “con- 
versos ” (converts), as they were called in Spain, or 
“Christéos Novos” (Neo-Christians) in Portugal, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


318 


or “Chuetas” in the Balearic Isles, or “ Anusim ” 
(constrained) in Webrew, numbered more than 
100,000. With them the history of the Pyrenean 
Peninsula, and indirectly that of the Jews also, en- 
ters upon a new phase; for they were the imme- 
diate cause both of the introduction of the Inquisi- 
tion into Spain and of the expulsion of the Jews 
from that country. The wealthy Maranos, who en- 
gaged extensively in commerce, industries, and 
avriculture, intermarried with families of the old 
nobility; impoverished counts and marquises un- 
hesitatingly wedded wealthy Jewesses; and it also 
happened that counts or nobles of the blood royal 
became infatuated with handsome Jewish girls. 
3eginning with the second generation, the Neo- 
Christians usually intermarricd with women of their 
own sect. They became very influential through 
their wealth and intelligence, and were called to im- 
portant positions at the palace, in government cir- 
cles, and in the Cortes; they practised medicine and 
law and taught at the universities; while their chil- 
dren frequently achieved high ecclesiastical honors. 

The Maranos and their descendants may be divided 
into three categories. The first of these is composed 
of those who, devoid of any real affection for Juda- 

ism, and indifferent to every form of 
Classes of religion, gladly embraced the oppor- 
Maranos. tunity of exchanging their oppressed 
condition as Jews for the brilliant 
careers opened to them by the acceptance of Chris- 
tianity. They simulated the Christian faith when 
it was to their advantage, and mocked at Jews and 
Judaism. A number of Spanish poets belong to 
this category, such as Pero Ferrus, Juan de Valla- 
dolid, Rodrigo Cota, and Juan de Espaiia of Toledo, 
called also “E] Viejo” (the old one), who was con- 
sidered a sound Talbnudist, and who, like the monk 
Diego de Valencia, himself a baptized Jew, intro- 
duced in his pasquinades Hebrew and Talmudic 
words to mock the Jews. There were also many 
who, for the sake of displaying their new zeal, per- 
secuted their former coreligionists, writing books 
against them, and denouncing to the authorities 
those who wished to return to the faith of their 
fathers, as happened frequently at Valencia, Barce- 
Iona, and many other cities (Isaac b. Sheshet, Re- 
sponsa, No. 11). 

The second category consists of those who cher- 
ished their love for the Jewish faith in which they 
had been reared. They preserved the traditions of 
their fathers; and, in spite of the high positions 
which they held, they secretly attended synagogue, 
and fought and suffered for their paternal religion. 
Many of the wealthiest Maranos of Aragon belonged 
to this category, including the Zaportas of Monzon, 
who were related by marriage to the royal house of 
Aragon; the Sanchezes; the sons of Alazar Yusuf 
of Saragossa, who intermarried with the Cavallerias 
and the Santangels; the very wealthy Espes; the 
Paternoys, who came from the vicinity of Verdun 
to settle in Aragon; the Clementes; the sons of 
Moses Chamoro; the Villanovas of Calatayud; the 
Coscons; and others, 

The third category, which includes by far the 
largest number of Maranos, comprises those who 
yielded through stress of circumstances, but in their 


319 


home life remained Jews and seized the first opportu- 
nity of openly avowing their faith. They did not 
voluntarily take their children to the 

Temporary baptismal font; andif obliged to do so, 
Maranos. they on reaching home washed the 
place which had been sprinkled, They 

ate no pork, celebrated the Passover, and gave oil to 
the synagogue. “In the city of Seville an inquisi- 
tor said to the regent: ‘ My lord, if you wish to know 
how the Maranos keep the Sabbath, let us ascend 
the tower.’ When they had reached the top, the 
former said to the latter: ‘Lift up your eyes and 
look. That house is the home of a Marano; there is 
one which belongs to another; and there are many 
more. You will not see smoke rising from any of 
them, in spite of the severe cold; for they have no 
fire because it is the Sabbath.’ Pretending that 
leavened bread did not agree with him, one Marano 
ate unleavened bread throughout the year, in order 
that he might be able to partake of it at Passover 
without being suspected. At the festival on which 
the Jews blew the shofar, the Maranos went into 
the country and remained in the mountains and in 
the valleys, so that the sound might not reach the 
city. They employed a man specially to slaughter 
animals, drain away the blood, and deliver the meat 
at their homes, and another to circumcise secretly ” 
(“Shebet Yehudah,” pp. 96 e¢ seqg.). The Jews of 
that time judged the Maranos gently and indul- 
gently; in Italy a special prayer was offered for them 
every Sabbath, asking that “God might lead them 
from oppression to liberty, from darkness to the 


light of religion” (MAYS OINIT Syw DIN DIN 
Sean wow Way OMe PMY pom oon maw 
nbpxor nnd my wey) DOSY IN DLN 


JON WOSD) me 5; MS. Roman Mahzor of the year 
1441). Tothe Maranos who lived in secret conform- 
ity with the Jewish law, the Rabbis applied the 
Talmudic passage: “Although he has sinned, he 
must still be considered a Jew”; and Anusim, who 
took the first opportunity of going to a foreign 
country and openly professing Judaism, might act 
as witnesses in religious matters according to rab- 
binic law. <A distinction was frequently made be- 
tween Spanish and Portuguese Maranos in regard to 
marriage and divorce (Isaac b. Sheshet, ¢.c. Nos. 4, 
11; Saadia ibn Danan, in Edelmann, “Hemdah 
Genuzah,” pp. 14 e¢ seg.; Joseph b. Leb, Responsa, 
i. 15; the responsa of Moses ben Habib, Samuel de 
Medina, and many others). 

The large numbers of the Maranos, as well as their 
wealth and influence, aroused the envy and hatred 
of the populace, whom the clergy incited against 
them as unbelieving Christians and hypocrites. 
The Neo-Christians were hated much more than the 
Jews, and were persecuted as bitterly as their former 
coreligionists had been. The first riot against them 
broke out at Toledo in 1449, and was accompanied 
with murder and pillage. Instigated by two canons, 
Juan Alfonso and Pedro Lopez Galvez, the mob 
plundered and burned the houses of 
Alonso Cota, a wealthy Marano and 
tax-farmer, and under the leadership 
- . @ workman they Jikewise attacked the resi- 

‘nces of the wealthy Neo-Christians in the quarter 


n Spain. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marah 
Marano 


De la Magdelena. The Maranos, under Juan de la 
Cibdad, opposed the mob, but were repulsed and. 
with their leader, were hanged by the fect. As an 
immediate consequence of this riot, the Maranos 
Lope and Juan Fernandez Cota, the brothers Juan, 
Pedro, and Diego Nuifiez, Juan Lopez de Arroyo, 
Diego and Pedro Gonzalez, Juan Gonzalez de Iles- 
cas, and many others were deposed from office, in 
obedience to a new statute. Another attack was 
imade upon the Neo-Christians of Toledo in July. 
1467. The chief magistrate (“alealde mayor”) of 
the city was Alvar Gomez de Cibdad Real, who had 
becn private secretary to King Henry IV., and who, 
if not himself a “converso,” as is probable, was at 
least the protector of the Neo-Christians. He, to- 
gether with the prominent Maranos Fernando and 
Alvaro de la Torre, wished to take revenge for an 
insult inflicted by the counts de Fuensalida, the 
leaders of the Christians, and to gain control of tlie 
city. <A fierce conflict was the result. The houses 
of the Neo-Christians near the cathedral were fired 
by their opponents, and the conflagration spread so 
rapidly that 1,600 houses were consumed, including 
the beautiful palace of Diego Gomez. Many Chris- 
tians and still more Maranos perished in the flames. 
or were slain; and the brothers De la Torre were 
captured and hanged. 

The example set by Toledo was imitated six years 
later by Cordova, in which city the Christians and 
the Maranos formed two hostile parties. On March 
14, 1473, during a procession in honor of the dedi- 

cation of a society which had been 

Riots at formed under the auspices of the fanat- 

Cordova. ical Bishop D. Pedro, and from which 

all “conversos ” were excluded, a little 
girl seems to have accidentally thrown some dirty 
water from the window of the house of one of the 
wealthiest Maranos, so that it splashed over an image 
of the Virgin. Thousands immediately joined in 
the fierce shout for revenge which was raised by a 
smith named Alonso Rodriguez; and the rapacious 
mob straightway fell upon the Maranos, denouncing 
them as heretics, killing them, and plundering and 
burning their houses. To stop the excesses, the 
highly respected D. Alonso Fernandez de Aguilar, 
whose wife was a member of the widely ramified 
Marano family of Pacheco, together with his brother 
D. Gonzalo Fernandez de Cordova (“el gran Capi- 
tan”), the glory of the Spanish army, and a troop of 
soldiers, hastened to protect the Neo-Christians. D. 
Alonso called upon the mob to retire, but instead of 
obeying, the smith insulted the count, who imme- 
diately felled him with his lance. The people, 
blinded by fanaticism, regarded their slain leader as 
amartyr. Incited by Alonso de Aguilar’senemy, the 
knight Diego de Aguayo, they seized weapons and 
again attacked the Maranos. Girls were outraged: 
and men, women, and children were pitilessly slain. 
The massacre and pillage lasted three days; those 
who escaped seeking refuge in the castle, whither 
their protectors also had to retire. It was then de- 
creed that, in order to prevent the repetition of such 
excesses, no Marano should thenceforth live in Cor- 
dova or its vicinity, nor should one ever again hold 
public office. 

Like the persecution of the Jews in 1391, the at- 


Marano 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


320 





tack on the Maranos in 1473 spread to other cities. 
At Montoro, Bujalance, Adamur, La Rambla, San- 
taella, and elsewhere, they were killed, and their 
houses were plundered. At Jaen the populace was 
so bitter against them that the constable Miguel 
Lucas de Jranzo, who undertook to protect them, 
was himself killed in church by the ringleaders 
(March 21, 22). The Maranos were fiercely attacked 
by the populace in Andujar, Ubeda, Baeza, and 
Almodovar del Campo also. In Valladolid the pop- 
ulace was content with plundering the Neo-Chris- 
tians, but the massacre was very fierce at Segovia 
(May 16, 1474). Here the attack, instigated by D. 
Juan Pacheco, himself a member of a Marano family, 
was terrible; corpses lay in heaps in all the streets 
and squares, and not a Neo-Christian would have 
escaped alive had not the alealde Andreas de Cabrera 
interfered. At Carmona every Marano was killed. 
The introduction of the Inquisition was bitterly 
opposed by the Maranos of Seville and other cities of 
Castile, and especially of Aragon, where they ren- 
dered considerable service to the king, 
Introduc- and held high legal, financial, and mili- 
tion of In- tary positions. As D. Miguel Lucas de 
quisition. Iranzo, constable of Castile, had been 
slain in the cathedral of Jaen, so the 
inquisitor Pedro AkBUES was assassinated twelve 
years later in the cathedral of Saragossa, the former 
by Christians, the latter by Maranos. The murder- 
ers of De Iranzo went scot-free, while those of the 
inquisitor were punished most cruelly. Together 
with the introduction of the Inquisition an edict 
was issued that henceforth the Jews must live within 
their ghetto and be separated from the Maranos. 
Despite the Jaw, however, the Jews remained in 
communication with their Neo-Christian brethren. 
“They sought ways and means to win them 
from Catholicism and bring them back to Juda- 
ism. They instructed the Maranos in the tenets and 
ceremonies of the Jewish religion; held meetings in 
which they taught them what they must believe and 
observe according to the Mosaiclaw; and enabled 
them to circumcise themselves and their children. 
They furnished them with prayer-books; explained 
the fast-days; read with them the history of their 
people and their Law ; announced to them the coming 
of the Passover; procured unleavened bread for them 
for that festival, as well as kasher meat throughout 
the year; encouraged them to live in conformity 
with the law of Moses, and persuaded them that 
there was no law and no truth except the Jewish 
religion.” All these charges were brought against 
the Jews in the edict issued by Ferdinand and 
Tsabella, and formed the grounds for their banish- 
ment from the country. The decree of expulsion 
materially increased the number, already large, of 
those who purchased a further sojonrn in their 
beloved home by accepting baptism. 
The Portuguese Maranos or Christéos Novos clung 
much more faithfully and steadfastly than their 
Spanish brethren to the religion of 
In their fathers, bearing the most terrible 
Portugal. tortures for the sake of their faith. 
The scholar Simon Mimi of Lisbon, 
who would not renounce Judaism even in prison, 
his wife, his sons-in-law, and other Maranos were 


enclosed in a wall built up to their necks, the 
prisoners being left for three days in this agonizing 
situation. As they would not yield the walls were 
torn down, after six of the victims had dicd, and 
Mimi was dragged through the city and slain. Two 
Maranos who served as wardens in the prison 
buried the body of the martyr in the Jewish ceme- 
tery at the risk of their lives (Abraham Saba‘, 
“Zeror ha-Mor,” p. 105b; Gratz, “ Gesch.” viii. 898). 

The Portuguese, being even more fanatical than 
the Spaniards, hated the Maranos much more than 
the Jews, considering them neither Christians nor 
Jews, but atheists and heretics, Manya Portugucse 
preferred death to being treated by a Marano phy- 
sician. The hatred which was felt for the Maranos, 
and which had long smoldered, broke out at Lisbon. 
On April 17, 1506, several Maranos were discovered 
who had in their possession “some lambs and poul- 
try prepared according to Jewish custom; also un- 
leavened bread and bitter herbs according to the 
regulations for the Passover, which festival they 
celebrated farintothe night.” Several of them were 
seized, but were released after a few days. The 
populace, which had expected to see them punished, 
swore vengeance. On the same day on which the 
Maranos were liberated, the Dominicans displayed 
in a side-chapel of their church, where several Neo- 
Christians were present, a crucifix and a reliquary 
in glass from which a peculiar light issued, A Neo- 
Christian, who was so incautious as to explain this 
ostensible miracle as being due to natural causes, was 
dragged from the church and was killed by an infuri- 
ated woman. A Dominican roused the populace 
still more; and two others, crucifix in hand, went 
through the streets of the city, crying “ Heresy!” 

and calling upon the people to destroy 

Massacre the Maranos. All Neo-Christians 
at Lisbon. found in the streets were killed; and 

a terrible massacreensued, More than 
500 Maranos were slain and burned on the first day ; 
and the scenes of murder were even more atrocious 
on the day following. The innocent victims of 
popular fury, young and old, living and dead, were 
dragged from their houses and thrown upon the 
pyre. Even Christians who in any way resembled 
Maranos were killed. Among the last victims, and 
the most hated of all, was the tax-farmer Jodo 
Rodrigo Mascarenhas, one of the wealthiest and 
most distinguished Maranos of Lisbon; his house was 
entirely demolished. In this manner at least 2,000 
Maranos perished within forty-eight hours, King 
Manuel severely punished the inhabitants of the 
city. The ringleaders were either hanged or quar- 
tered, and the Dominicans who had occasioned the 
riot were garroted and burned. All persons con- 
victed of murder or pillage suffered corporal pun- 
ishment, and their property was confiscated, while 
religious freedom was granted to all Maranos for 
twenty years. 

The Neo-Christians of Portugal, who were dis- 
tinguished for their knowledge, their commerce, and 
their banking enterprises, but were bitterly hated, 
despised, and reviled by the Christians, were led to 
entertain better hopes for the future by the appear- 
ance of a foreign Jew, David Re’ubeni. Not only 
was this Jew invited by King John to visit Portu 


821 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marano 





gal; but, as appears from a letter (Oct. 10, 1528) of 
D. Martin de Salinas to the infante D. Fernando, 
brother of the emperor Charles, he also received 
permission “to preach the law of Moses” (“ Boletin 
Acad. Hist.” xlix, 204). The Maranos regarded 
Re’ubeni as their savior and Messiah. The Neo- 
Christians of Spain also heard the glad news; and 
some of them left home toseek him. The rejoicing 
lasted for some time; the emperor Charles even ad- 
dressed several letters on the matter to his royal 
brother-in-law. In 1528, while Re’ubeni was still in 
Portugal, some Spanish Maranos fled to Campo 
Mayor and forcibly freed from the Inquisition a 
woman imprisoned at Badajoz. The rumor spread 
at once that the Maranos of the entire kingdom had 
united to make common cause. This increased the 
hatred of the populace, and the Neo-Christians were 
attacked in Gouvea, Alemtejo, Olivenca, Santarem, 
and other places, while in the Azores and the island 
of Madeira they were even massacred. These excesses 
led the king to believe that the Inquisition might 
be the most effective means of allaying the popular 
fury. 

The Portuguese Maranos waged a long and bitter 
war against the introduction of the tribunal, and 
spent with some satisfactory results immense sums 
to win over to their cause the Curia and the most 
influential cardinals. The sacrifices made by both 
the Spanish and the Portuguese Neo-Christians were 
indeed astonishing. The same Maranos who from 
Toledo had instigated the riot of the communes in 
1515, Alfonso Gutierrez, Garcia Alvarez “el Rico” 
(the wealthy), and the Zapatas, offered through 
their representative 80,000 gold crowns to Emperor 
Charles V. if he would mitigate the harshness 
of the Inquisition (“R. E. J.” xxxvii. 270 e¢ seg.). All 
these sacrifices, however, especially those made by 
the Mendes of Lisbon and Flanders, were powerless 
to prevent or retard the introduction of the Holy 
Office into Portugal. The Maranos were delivered 
over to the popular fury and to the heartless serv- 
ants of the Inquisition, They suffered unspeak- 
ably. At Trancoso and Lamego, where many 
wealthy Maranos were living, at Miranda, Viseu, 
Guarda, Braga, and elsewhere they were robbed and 
killed. At Covilhiothe people planned to massacre 
all the Neo-Christians on one day; and to achieve 
this the more easily, the prelates petitioned the 
Cortes in 1562 that the Maranos be required to wear 
special badges, and that the Jews in the cities and 
villages be ordered to live in ghettos as before. 

The Maranos, who were constantly threatened 
and persecuted by the Inquisition, tried in every way 
to leave the country, either in bands or as individ- 
ual refugees. Many of them escaped to Italy, at- 
tracted thither by the climate, which resembled that 

of the Iberian Peninsula, and by its 
Dispersion. kindred language. They settled at 
FERRARA, and Duke Ercole I. d’Este 
granted them privileges, which were confirmed by 
his son, Alfonso I., to twenty-one Spanish Maranos, 
physicians, merchants, and others (20. xv. 119 ét seq.). 

Spanish and Portuguese Maranos settled also at 
Florence; and Neo-Christians contributed to make 
Leghorn a leading seaport. They received privi- 
leges at Venice, where they were protected from 

VIill.—21 


the persecutions of the Inquisition. At Milan they 
materially advanced the interests of the city by their 
industry and commerce, although Jodo de la Foya 
captured and robbed large numbers of them in that 
region. At Bologna, Pisa, Naples, Reggio, and 
many other Italian cities they freely exercised their 
religion, and were soon so numerous that Fernando 
de Goes Loureiro, an abbot from Oporto, filled an en- 
tire book with the names of the Maranos who had 
drawn large sums from Portugal and had openly 
avowed Judaism in Italy. In Piedmont Duke 
Emanuel Philibert of Savoy welcomed the Maranos 
from Coimbra, Pablo Hernando, Ruy Lopez, and 
Rodriguez, together with their families, and grant- 
ed them commercial and industrial privileges, as 
well as the free exercise of their religion. Rome was 
full of Maranos. Pope Paul ITI. received them at 
Ancona for commercial reasons, and granted ecom- 
plete liberty “to all persons from Portugal and Al- 
garve, even if belonging to the class of Neo-Chris- 
tians.” Three thousand Portuguese Jews and 
Maranos were living at Ancona in 1553. Two years 
later the fanatical Pope Paul IV. issued orders to 
have all the Maranos thrown into the prisons of the 
Inquisition which he had instituted. Sixty of them, 
who acknowledged the Catholic faith as penitents, 
were transported to the island of Malta; twenty- 
four, who adhered to Judaism, were publicly burned 
(May, 1556); and those who escaped from the Inqui- 
sition were received at Pesaro by Duke Guido Ubaldo 
of Urbino. As Guido was disappointed, however, in 
his hope of seeing all the Jews and Maranos of Tur- 
key select Pesaro asa commercial center, he expelled 
(July 9, 1558) the Neo-Christians from Pesaro and 
other districts (7b. xvi. 61 e¢ seq.). Many Maranos 
were attracted to Ragusa, formerly a consider- 
able seaport. In May, 1544, a ship landed there 
filled exclusively with Portuguese refugees, as Bal- 
thasar de Faria reported to King John. 

At this same period the Maranos were seeking 
refuge beyond the Pyrenees, settling at St. Jean de 
Luz, Tarbes, Bayonne, Bordeaux, Marseilles, and 

Montpellier. They lived apparently 
In France. as Christians; were married by Catho- 

lic priests; had their children baptized, 
and publicly pretended to be Catholics. In secret, 
however, they circumcised their children, kept the 
Sabbath and feast-days as far as they could, and 
prayed together. King Henry IJI. confirmed the 
privileges granted them by Henry IL., and protected 
them against such slanders and accusations as those 
which a certain Ponteil brought against them. 
Spanish and Portuguese Maranos petitioned Henry 
IV. to permit them to emigrate to France, saying 
that should he do so, a Jarge number of their fellow 
sufferers, “good men all of them,” would choose 
France as their home; but many Neo-Christians 
who entered French territory were obliged to leave 
within a short time. Under Louis XIII. the Mara- 
nos of Bayonne were assigned to the suburb of St. 
Esprit. At St. Esprit, as well as at Peyrehorade, 
Bidache, Orthez, Biarritz, and St. Jean de Luz, they 
gradually avowed Judaism openly. In 1640 several 
hundred Maranos, considered to be Jews, were living 
at St. Jean de Luz; and at St. Esprit there was a 
synagogue as early as 1660. 


Marano 
Marburg 


Next to Turkey the Maranos turned chiefly to 
Flanders, attracted by its flourishing cities, such as 
Antwerp, where they settled at an early date, and 
Brussels, Before the end of the sixteenth century 
Portuguese Maranos, under the leadership of Jacob 
Tirado, arrived at Amsterdam. So many others fol- 
lowed these that the city was called a new Jerusalem, 
while hundreds of Neo-Christian families settled at 
Rotterdamalso. Maranos from Flanders, and others 

direct from the Pyrenean Peninsula, 

In went under the guise of Catholics to 

Flanders. Wamburg and Altona about 1580, 

where they established commercial re- 

lations with their former homes. Christian IV. of 

Denmark invited some Neo-Christian families to set- 

tle at Glickstadt about 1626, granting certain priv- 

ileges to them and also to the Maranos who came to 
Emden about 1649. 

Large numbers of Maranos, however, remained 
in Spain and Portugal, despite the extensive emigra- 
tion and the fate of countless victims of the Inqui- 
sition. The Neo-Christians of Portugal breathed 
more freely when Philip III. came to the throne and 
by the law of April 4, 1601, granted them the privi- 
lege of unrestricted sale of their real estate as well 
as free departure from the country for themselves, 
their families, and their property. Many, availing 
themselves o7 this permission, followed their core- 
ligionists to Africa and Turkey. After a few years, 
however, the privilege was revoked, and the Inqui- 
sition resumed itsactivity. Butthe Portuguese who 
were not blinded by fanaticism perceived that no 
forcible measures could induce the Maranos to give 
up the religion of their fathers. 

Individual Neo-Christians, as Antonio Fernandez 
Carvajal and several from Spain, Hamburg, and 
Amsterdam, went to London, whence their families 
spread to Brazil, where Maranos had settled at an 
early date, and to other countries of America. The 
migrations to Constantinople and Salonica, where 
refugees had settled after the expulsion from Spain, 
as well as to Servia, to Rumania and Bulgaria, and 
even to Vienna and Temesvar, continued down to 
the middle of the eighteenth century. 

Whether there are still Maranos in Spain or not, 
this much is certain, that there are many persons in 
Barcelona, Saragossa, Madrid, Cordova, Toledo, and 
Burgos who, conscious of their Jewish descent, are 
well disposed toward the Jews. In Portugal there 
is a community of Maranos at Covilhaé. See In- 
QUISITION, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Rios, Hist. ili. 147 et seq.; Isaac da Costa, Is- 
rael und die Volker, German transl. by Mann, p. 274; Kay- 
serling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, pp. 262 et seq., and 
vibliography given there; R. EF. J. xi. 148, xv. 118, xvi. 61 et 
seq., xliii. 259; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. liii. 402; Grunwald, 
Portugiesengriiber, pp. 6 et seq., 128 et seq. 


J. M. K. 

MARBE HASKALAH. See SOcrIETY FoR 
THE PROMOTION OF CULTURE AMONG THE JEWS OF 
Ruessia. 

MARBLE (yw): A stone composed mainly of 
calcium carbonate or of calcium and magnesium 
carbonates. It is mentioned in the Old Testament 
in three very late passages only. According to I 
Chron. xxix. 2, David prepared, among other mate- 
rials, White “marble stones” for the building of the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


322 





Temple. The account of the building in the Book 
of Kings does not mention the use of marble. Inthe 
Song of Solomon (v.15) the author compares the legs 
of the bridegroom to marble pillars in golden sock- 
ets. Finally, Esther i. 6 speaks of marble columns 
and of a pavement of white and colored marble in 
the palace of the Persian king. In the last-cited 
passage it is not wholly certain if the text is intact 
in the versions; consequently there is doubt whether 
marble is really meant. In the other two passages 
also the correctness of the text has been doubted 
(see “Encyc. Bibl.” s.v. “ Marble”). 

Moreover, the fact that all the old authorities, es- 
pecially the accounts of the building of the Temple, 
preserve complete silence on the subject shows that, 
the Hebrews in olden times were not acquainted 
with the use of marble as a building-stone. Its 
employment for building purposes seems to have 
been very limited even among the Assyrians. 

E. G. H. I. Be. 


MARBURG: 1. Town inthe Prussian province 
of Hesse-Nassau. Jews are first mentioned as living 
in Marburg in adocument dated May 13, 1317, which 
indicates that they were then organized as a com- 
munity and possessed a synagogue; also that they 
dwelt in a special quarter of the town. From a 
document of 1452 itappears that the synagogue was 
demolished in that year, and that the Jewish ceme- 
tery passed into Christian hands; hence the Jews 
must have been expelled from Marburg about that 
time. They gradually returned to the city; and in 
1532 Landgrave Philipp revoked the decree of ex- 
pulsion issued by him in 1524, and permitted the 
Jews provisionally to remain in his territory for a 
period of six years. Two Jews, named respectively 
Liebmann and Gottschalk, availed themselves of 
this permission in 1536, 

As the Hessian cities repeated)y petitioned against 
the admission of Jews, the number of the latter 
remained very small: in 1744 there were only six 
Jewish families at Marburg; in 1776, eight. No 
one was permitted to harbor foreign Jews, except 
at the times of the fairs, on pain of being fined and of 
losing the privilege of protection. The Marburg 
community increased somewhat with the granting 
of freedom of residence; but even as late as 1902 it 
numbered only about 800 members ina total popula- 
tion of 16,668. It possesses a handsome synagogue 
(built in 1897), a parochial and a religious school, 
and a home for pupils and apprentices (opened in 
1901) with seventy inmates. 

Since 1823 Marburg has been the seat of the board 
of management of the union including the Jew- 
ish communities in the districts of Marburg, Kirch- 
hayn, Frankenberg, and Ziegenhain. Marburg is 
the seat also of a district rabbinate, which includes 
not only the former districts, but also those of Bie- 
denkopf and Wetzlar. The district rabbis have been: 
Moses Solomon Gosen, 1824-62; Liebmann Gersfeld, 
1862-76; and Dr. Leo Munk, the present (1904) in- 
cumbent, appointed in 1876. There area number of 
educational and philanthropic societies. Hermann 
Cohen has been for a number of years professor of 
philosophy at the University of Marburg. 

D. L. Mo. 


323 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marano 
Marburg 





2. Austrian town, the second in the duchy of 
Styria. It has a population of 24,501, including 
about 100 Jews. Jews first settled at Marburg to- 
ward the end of the thirteenth century ; gravestones 
of that period are still found there. According to 
the records they had a synagogue in their ghetto in 
1277, as well as a school and a bath-house. The 
Jews of Marburg were respected merchants; they 
owned houses, fields, mills, and vineyards, and lived 
peaceably with their neighbors. They were not af- 
fected by the great persecutions of 1836 and 1338, 
and many Jews persecuted elsewhere found refuge 
at Marburg on payment of an annual tax of 40 
guiden. In the old 
tax-records of Mar- 
burg the Jews are 
described as quietand 
wealthy merchants 
who paid their taxes 
promptly. The Jews 
who were expelled 
from the territory of 
the neighboring city 
of Cili in 1404 were 
received at Marburg, 
to the benefit of its 
commerce and indus- 
try. The decree of 
Frederick IIT. (1410- 
1498) relating to the 
importation of Hun- 
garian wines was es- 
pecially favorable to 
the Jewish wine-mer- 
chants. About this 
time R. Israel Isser- 
LEIN, one of the fore- 
most rabbis of the fif- 
teenth century, anda 
native of Marburg, 
officiated there. Up 
to the middle of the 
fifteenth century the 
Jews of Marburg 
were generally re- 
spected; the Jew Eli- 
jah was one of its 
most prominent citi- 
zens, and Gerl, Jacob, 
and Aram Rorer were 
in the employ of 
noblemen as their 
treasurers. Mention 
is made also of 
the Jews Cham, who owned six, and Maul, who 
owned three, houses in Marburg. The wealthy 
money-lender Abraham b. Isaac advanced the 
money for part of the expenses of the Diet and con- 
tributed large sums for the equipment of the army. 
The Jews Hirsel, Sisskind, and Aaron b. Sé6ldmann 
are mentioned among those who gave money to the 
Christian Church. | 

Marburg is one of the four cities of Styria the 
Jews of which had a special judge (“ Judenrichter ”), 
whose position was regarded as “ very lucrative ” ; 
about 1440 it was held by the governor Sigmund 





The * Judengasse”’ of Marburg in Hesse. 
(From an old print by Joh, Aug, Keach, 


4 
1 
1 
| 


von Rogendorf himsclf. There were special “ Ju- 
denmeister ” for internal Jewish affairs. Notes of 
debts held by Jews against Christians had to be in- 
dorsed by the city judge. In 1477, when the Jews: 
of Marburg were building a new synagogue, David 
b. Aram, who had removed a short time before to- 
Radkersburg, refused to pay the contribution of 
twelve guiden which the community levied upon 
him. The result was a tedious lawsuit, which 
Frederick III. finally settled by deciding that the: 
defendant’s assessment should be remitted, and that. 
he should be neither excommunicated nor subjected 
to coercion of any other kind. The Jewsof the city 
continued to enjoy 
the protection of the 
authorities and the 
good-will of their 
Christian fellow citi- 
zens until 1496, when. 
the emperor Maxi- 
milian decreed the 
expulsion of all Jews. 
from Styria. Those 
in Marburg, appar- 
ently, were permitted 
to remain until they 
had settled their 
financial affairs, for 
as late as 1499 some 
were still living 
there. ‘Their prop- 
erty was purchased 
by Christian families, 
the synagogue being 
taken by Bernardin 
Drukher, who trans- 
formed it into a 
Christian church. 
After Drukher’s. 
death the records con-- 
tained in the build- 
ing were destroyed 
by the magistrate of 
the city, and the 
church was turned 
into a storehouse; in 
1659 if was again con- 
verted into a church; 
in 1785 it became a 
storehouse again; it. 
is now (1904) in use 
asa tenement. The 
ritual bath-house 
was destroyed dur- 
ing the last century. After the expulsion Jews 
were not permitted even to pass through Marburg 
except on the payment of a poll-tax. In 1788 they 
were allowed to attend some of the fairs in Styria, 
but not at Marburg. Jn 1811 three Jews were bap- 
tized in that city, but none settled there again until 
1867, when the merchant Jacob Schlesinger was 
admitted. Some of the Jews now resident there are 


government and district officials. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Paff. Marburg in Steiermark, Graz, 1847 +. 
Muehar, Gesch. des Herzogthwmns Stetermark, 9 vols., ib. 


1844-77. 
Dp. S. Mu. 


Marc 
Maretzek 





MARC, CHARLES CHRETIEN HENRI: 
French physician; born in Amsterdam Nov. 4, 1771; 
died in Paris Jan, 12, 1841. He took the degree of 
M.D. at Erlangen in 1792, and practised at Vienna, 
Bamberg, andin Bohemia. In 1795 he went to Paris, 
where with Fourcroy, Cabanis, Desgenelles, and 
others, he founded the Société Médicale d’Emula- 
tion. For several years he had a hard struggle, but 
by 1811 his position had become secure; his books 
won him fame, and he became a member of the 
Board of Health (1816) and of the Academy of 
Medicine (soon after its foundation, in 1820). In 
1829, with Esyuirol, Parent-Duchitelet, Orfila, and 
others, he founded the “Annales d’Hygiéne Pub- 
lique et de Médecine Légale,” to which he wrote the 
introduction. After the Revolution of July, 1880, 
he becaine first physician to Louis Philippe. He 
embraced Christianity. 

Marc published: “Observations Générales sur les 
Poisons” (1795, translated into several languages) ; 
“Sur les Hémorrhoides Fermées ” (Paris, 1804, trans- 
lated from the German of Hildenbrand); “ Manuel 
d’Autopsie Cadavérique Médico-Légale” (1808, 
translated from Roze); “ Recherches sur Emploi du 
Sulfate de Fer dans le Traitement des Fiévres Inter- 
mittentes” (7b. 1810); “La Vaccine Soumise aux 
Simples Lumiéres de la Raison” (76. 1810 and 1836) ; 
“De la Folie Considérée dans Ses Rapports avec les 
Questions Médico-Judiciaires ” (2 vols., 70. 1840; one 
of the first works to show the connection between 
crime and insanity); etc. He contributed many 
articles to the “Bibliothéque Médicale,” the “ Dic- 
tionnaire de Médecine,” the “Dictionnaire des 
Sciences Médicales,” and to other journals. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Encyclopédie ; Larousse, Dict. 
N. D 


s. 

MARC-MOSSE, JOSEPH: French poct and 
author; born in Carpentras about 1780; died in Paris 
Feb. 21, 1825. His name appears to have been orig- 
inally “Moses”; he was known also under the 
pseudonyms “L’Ami” and “Lejoyeux de Saint 
Acre.” At the age of six Joseph wrote verses, 
and at seven knew by heart the finer scenes of 
Racine’s “ Athalie,” and had versified passages from 
Fénelon’s “Télémaque.” In 1787 he was kidnaped 
by the Catholic clergy, baptized, and shut up ina 
monastery, whence for five years his friends, not- 
withstanding great efforts, found it impossible to 
extricate him. In 1792, however, after the outbreak 
of the Revolution, he was restored to his family, 
transformed into a little “abbé galant ”—diseased in 
body, depraved in taste, corrupt in morals, and 
given over to laziness and sensuality. He presently 
went to Paris, where he showed himself a born 
courtier and frequenter of the society of the great, 
and where he was much sought after and admired. 
The irregularities of his life gradually brought on 
consumption, and, rather than endure the trials that 
lay before him, he committed suicide, in company 
with his English wife. 

Marc-Mossé wrote: “Chronique de Paris” (1819); 
“Archives des Lettres, des Sciences et des Arts” 
(1820-21); “ Eucharis, ou les Sensations de 1 Amour” 
(1824); “La Caninéide” (epic-satiric poem); “Le 
Printemps” (idyl read by the author at the Paris 
Athénée in 1810); “Odes” (to the refugees from 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


324 


as 


Spain, to war, to Napoleon’s marriage); “ a France 
Consolée,” etc.; a critical examination of Lamennais’ 
“Essai sur l Indifférence en Matiére de Religion ” (in 
defense of the Israelites). He wrote also many ama- 
tory poems, studies, and treatises upon the art of 
pleasing, the art of preserving and increasing beauty, 
the art of making oneself loved by women, etc. 
(1808-11), and he left a large number of works in 
manuscript. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Encyclopédie; Servi, Israeliti 


ad Europa, pp. 197-199. 
8. N. D. 


MARCELLO, BENEDETTO: Italian musi- 
cian; born at Venice 1686; died there 1789. He 
is particularly celebrated for his settings to the 
Psalms, fifty of which, under the title of “ Estro 
Poetico-Armonico, Parafrasi Sopra li Salmi,” were 
published at Venice between 1724 and 1727, in eight 
volumes. These compositions, in the cantata form, 
for from one to four voices, with accompaniments for 
organ, violoncello, two violas, or other obligato 
strings, are noble and dignified; and their grandeur 
and beauty have earned them repubtication in nu- 
merous editions. Important for the study of He- 
brew melody is the circumstance that for the themes 
of eleven of the earlier Psalms, Marcello utilized 
Jewish airs, taking six from the German and five 
from the Spanish tradition, Some historians of 
music, led by Forkel, have fallen into the error of 
assuming that Marcello’s selected melodies repro- 
duce the ancient Temple intonations forthe Psalms, 
The list of Hebrew originals, given by Marcello 
himself, should, however, have guarded against 
this. The themes utilized by Marcello are: (1) to 
Ps, ix., a chant of the Spanish Jews for Ps. elxiv.; 
(2) to Ps. xii., a German chant for Ps. cxiv.; (8) to 
Ps. xiv., a “ Hallel ” air used in the Spanish ritual; (4) 
to Ps. xvi., a German melody for “* Ma‘oz Zur”; (5) 
to Ps. xvii., a Spanish chant for Ps. xevi. and xeviii. 
(comp. De Sola and Aguilar, “ Ancient Melodies,” 
No. 18; Cohen and Davis, “Voice of Prayer and 
Praise,” No. 16); (6) to Ps. xviii., a Spanish hymn by 
Solomon ben Mazzal Tob, No. 233 in Soncino’s col- 
lection (Constantinople, 1545), for the Sabbath when 
a bridegroom attends the synagogue; (7) to Ps. xviii., 
a German mebody for the hymn “ Ha-Mabdil”; (8) to 
Ps. xix.,a Spanish melody to Ibn Gabirol’s hymn 
“Sha‘ar Asher Nisgar” (Dukes, Ehrensiulen,” p. 
76; F. H. Cowen has employed the same melody for 
the “ Dance of the Reapers” in his oratorio “ Ruth,” 
composed for the Worcester Musical Festival of 
1887); (9) to Ps. xx., a German melody for the Sab- 
bath evening hymn “ Lekah Dodi”; (10)to Ps. xxii., 
a German melody for Ibn Gabirol’s hymn “Shofet 
Kol ha-Arez ” (comp. Baer, “ Ba‘al Tefillah,” Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, No. 1426); (11)to Ps. xxiii., a Ger- 
man air, in folk-song style, for the “ Kaddish ” at 
the conclusion of the service on the eve of the New- 
Year. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ed. Birnbaum, in Der Jtidische Kantor, p. 

o48, Bromberg, 18838; J. Singer, Marcello Benedetio, ein 


Christlticher Psalmen-Componist des 17. Jahrhunderts, Vi- 
enna, 1885. 


D. je Fries OF 
MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS. Ses 
ANTONINUS. . 


325 





MARCUS, BRENTGEN: First Jewish court 
singer in Germany; flourished toward the end of the 
seventeenth century. She lived with her father, 
Isaac Marcus, in the town of Wesel in Brandenburg, 
where, in 1690, Frederick of Brandenburg, after- 
ward King Frederick I. of Prussia, heard her sing. 
Admiring her voice, and desiring tosecure for her a 
musical education, he sent her and her father to 
Berlin. On July 16 of that year he wrote to the 
Prince of Anhait aud the council uotifying then of 
his discovery and his wishes concerning Brentgen, 
and commended her to the attention of his wife, the 
princess Sophie Charlotte, who, however, was not 
at Berlin when the singer arrived. On July 25 the 
Prince of Anhalt wrote to the crown prince that he 
and others bad heard and admired her unusually 
fine voice, and that provision would be made for her 
in accordance with lis wishes, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isaak Miinz, Hine Jiidische Hofsdingerin vor 
209 Jahren, in Der Israelit, Xxv., No. 54, Supplement, 

g, M. Co. 

MARCUS, LEWI (LEWIN): German lawyer; 
born Oct. 15, 1809, at Rhena, Mecklenburg ; died Oct. 
7, 1881, at Manchester, England. On acccunt of his 
indefatigable exertions in behalf of his coreligionists 
he became known as the “Gabriel Riesser of Meck- 
Jenburg.” He was the first Jewish deputy of the 
Mecklenburg Diet, of which he became vice-presi- 
dent. He was made honorary citizen of the city of 
Schwerin, and fer seventeen years was acting presi- 
dent of its municipal council (Kayserling, “ Gedenk- 
hlitter,” Leipsic, 1892), and president of the Jewish 
community of Schwerin. 


s. I, War. 


MARCUS, LOUIS. See Marts, Lupwia. 

MARCUSE, ADOLF: German astronomer: 
born Nov. 17, 1860, in Magdeburg; educated at the 
universities of Strasburg and Berlin (Ph.D. 1884). 
Before his graduation he took part, as assistant, in 
the German expedition (1882) to South Carolina to 
observe the transit of Venus. In 1883 he studied at 
the Russian observatory at Pulkova, near St. Peters- 
burg; in 1886 he went to Santiago, Chile, as astron- 
omer-in-chief to the national observatory, remaining 
there for two years; while in South America he 
visited the Argentine Republic, Brazil, and Pers. 
On his return to Germany he received an appoint- 
ment at the royal observatory in Berlin, where in 
behalf of the Centralbureau der International Erd- 
messung he was engaged, until 1891, in making 
continuous observations of the periodical changes 
of latitude. In April, 1891, he was commissioned 
by the same society to conduct the astronomical- 
geodetic expedition to the Hawaiian Islands; as 
a result of his observations the investigation of 
the changes of geographical latitucs was consider- 
ably advanced. 

After his return from the South Sea Isiands and 
from a journey to Samoa, Australia, and Ceylon, 
he constructed a large photographic zenith-tele- 
scope in Berlin for the purpose of improving the 
photographic method of determining the altitude of 
the pole, and of rendering it available for scientific 
purposes, His lectures at the Royal University of 
Berlin are chiefly on the determination of geo- 
graphical and nautical Jocations by means of 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


TS LS A aT Nt STs EY Pr ne ay PEN EC SS TT NO CPT Reeve PTF PR prey Pe re AAA ee Yer mY MAVEN P= vere Zs 
ET eR A eR SN + NEP p BN 





Mare 
Maretzek 


astronomy, with practical demonstrations at the cb- 
servatory. He improved also the photographic 
method of determining locality by constructing a 
photographic instrument for purposes of travel, 
Since 1908 he has been one of the editors of the 
“Geographisches Jahrbuch ” (Gotha). 

Marcuse is amember of the international astro- 
noniical and of the geographical societics of Berlin, of 
the Free Photographic Association, and of the Ger- 
man society for the study of aerial navigation. Of 
his writings the following may be mentioned: “Die 
Physische Beschaffenheit der Cometen” (Berlin, 
1884); “Beobachtunugsergebnisse der K6niglichen 
Sternwarte” (part 4, 7. 1888); “Die Hawalischen 
Inseln” (2, 1894); “Die Atmosphirische Luft” (2b. 
1896); “Die Photographische Bestimmungsweise 
der Polhéhe” (¢. 1897); “Die Fehler der Sinnes- 
wahrnehmungen bei Pricisionsmessungen” (2. 
1897); “Beitriige zur Nautischen Astronomie ” (7d. 
1899); “Anwendung Photographischer Methoden 
zur Geographischen Ortsbestimmung” (7b. 1899); 
“Die Neuere Entwickelung der Geographischen 
Ortsbestimmung ” (72. 1901); “Physik der Erde ” (7d. 
1902); “Bearbeitung der Berliner Polhéhen 1889- 
1890 im Auftrage des Centralvereins der Interna- 
tionalen Erdmessung ” (7. 1902); “Handbuch der 
Geographischen Ortsbestinmung” (Brunswick, 
1904). S. 


MARCZALI, HEINRICH: Hungarian histo- 
rian; bornat Marezali April 3, 1856; educated at Raab, 
Papa, Budapest, Berlin, and Paris. In 1878 he be- 
came professor at the gymnasium of his native town. 
He became a member of the Hungarian Academy in 
1893, and two years later he was appointed professor 
of Hungarian history at the University of Budapest. 
In addition to numerous contributions to specialist 
journals, he has written the following books: “A 
Foldrajzi Viszonyok Befolyésa Magyarorszag Tor- 
ténetére” (Budapest, 1874); “A Magyar Torténet 
Kutféi” (5. 1880; German transi. “Quellen der 
Ungarischen Gesch.” Berlin, 1882); “Regestak a 
Kiilfoldi Levéltarakbo6!” (Budapest, 1882): “Ujkor 
Torténcte ” (7b. 1883-86); “ Magyarorszég Torténete 
II. Jozsef Koraban ” (7). 1882-88); “ Maria Theresia ” 
(to. 1891); “A Legujabb Kor Térténete ” (7b. 1892); 
“Az Arpddok és Dalmaczia” (French transl. under 
the title “Les Relations de la Dalmatie du XI. au 
XITI. Siécle,” Paris, 1898); the first, second, and 
eighth volumes of the great history of Hungary pub- 
lished by Szilagyi. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Lex. 


8. L. V. 


MARETZEK, MAX: Austrian impresario; 
born at Brinn, Moravia, June 28, 1821; died at 
Pleasant Plains, New York, May 14, 1897. He was 
a pupil of Seyfried 2: Vienna, and also attended the 
university in that city. Several years later he be- 
came connected with Italian opera in London. In 
1848 he went to New York, where he began his 
career as leader of the orchestra at the Italian opera, 
From 1849 to 1878 he was organizer and manager of 
grand opera at the Astor Place Opera House, the 
Academy of Music, and Pike’s Opera House (now 
the Grand Opera House). He occasionally made 
professional tours to other cities of the United 


WMaretzek 
Margolioth 





States, and to Mexico and Cuba, In 1849 he brought 
to America the celebruted singer Mlle. Bertucca, 
who afterward became his wife. 

In Oct., 1854, Maretzek leased the Academy of 
Music, and in the following year had a brilliant sea- 
son, Lis company including La Grange, Brignoli, 
Vestvalt, and Badiali. ~Semiramide” and “I Tro- 
vatore ” were produced for the first time in Aimerica 
curing that season. “Rigoletto” was brought out 
‘in $855, and “Traviata” and “ William ell” in 
1356. 
on Nov. 34of that year he introduced Adelina Patti. 
Afe controled the Academy from 1864 until it burned 
down In 1866. Among his singers of that period 
were Gazzaniga, Clara Louise Kellogg, Ronconi, 
Adelaide Phillips, Mazzolini, and Sueci. On Nov. 
25, 1863, he conducted the first performance of 
“Faust” in America, the cast including Kellogg, 
Sulzer, Mazzolini, and Biacchi. 

Upon the restoration of the Academy of Music in 
1867, opera was given there under his direction, with 
Kellogg, Mazzolini. Ronconi, Minnie Hauck, and 
Antonicei in the cast. In the following year he 
leased Pike’s Opera House, but returned to the 


In 1858 Maretzck engaged Piccolomini, and | 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Academy in 1869, where he brought out the French — 


tenor Lefrane. It was here aiso that Lucca made 
her first appearance under Maretzek’s management 
‘in 1872. 

The list of operas introduced by Marctzek to the 
New York public, in addition to those already men- 
‘tioned, includes the following: “ Forza del Destino ”; 
“Tone”; “Carneval de Venice”; “ Don Sebastiano ”; 
“Saffo”; Peri’s “Judith”; “Fra Diavolo”; “Le 
Prophcte”; “L’Africaine”; “Aroldo”; “IT Masna- 
dier”; “Medea”; “Crispino e la Comare” ; “ Romeo 
et Julictte”; “L’ Etoile du Nord”; “ Luise Miller”; 
“TY Due Foseari”; “ Attila”; “Roberto”; “Anna Bo- 
Jena”; “Policlito”; “Maria di Rohan”; “ Linda di 
Chamounix”; “La Favorita”; “Don Pasquale”; 
“Macbeth”; “Marino Faliero”;: “Belisario”: 
* Betty ”; “I Lombardi.” During the latter part of 
his life Maretzek enjoyed great popularity as a 
teacher of singing in New York. On Oct. 12, 1889, 
his golden jubilee was celebrated, Mme. Lehmann, 
Herr Kalisch, Signor Perotti, Mine. Fursch-Madi, 
Miss Anna Juch, Herr Alvary, Herr Fischer, the 
Daly and Palmer companies, as well as several other 
artists, participating. Maretzck composed the 
operas “Hamlet” (Brinn, 1848) and “Sleepy Hol- 
low” (Academy of Music, New York, 1879). THe 
composed also orchestral and chamber music, piano- 
forte pieces, sougs, etc., and wrote “Crotchets and 
Quavers,” New York, 1857. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Herald, New York, May 15, 1897; Baker, 
Bioyraphical Dictionary of Musicians. 


S. J. So. 
MARGALIOT, MARGALIOTH. Sce Mar- 
GOLIOTH, 


MARGALITA, AARON: Polish convert to 
Christianity; born 1663 at Zolkiev. He was a 
learned rabbi, and traveled as a maggid in Poland 
and Germany, preaching in the synagogues. In 
Holland he remained for seven years teaching rab- 
binics at Leyden. He thus became intimate with 
‘Trigiand, through whose influence he was converted 
to the Reformed Church, as Margalita himself re- 


326 





lates in his work “Oblatio Aaronis seu Tractatus de 
Passionibus Christi,” Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1706. 

Disappointed in his hope of receiving support 
which would enable him to study for an academic 
eareer, he left Holland and went to Berlin. LHere 
he denounced the Talmudic Haggadah as contain- 
ing blasphemicsagainst the Christian religion, where- 
upon King Frederick I. of Prussia ordered that the 
copies of anew edition of the Midrash Rabbah, which 
had been published at Frankfort-on-the-Oder in 
1705, should be placed under seal until the Christian 
theological faculty of that city should render an 
opinion upon the work, This opinion being favor- 
able, the order of suspension was revoked and the 
sale of the book was permitted. 

Through the protection of King Frederick, Mar- 
galita was appointed professor of rabbinic Tlebrew at 
the University of Frankfort-on-the-Oder. Here he 
remained but a short time, and it is said thaf in 1712 
he became a convert to the Lutheran Church at 
Hamburg. Jécher says in his lexicon that for hav- 
ing expressed a desire to return to Judaism, Marga- 
lite, Was Imprisoned at Copenhagen, where he died 
wu few years later. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bischoff, Thalmud-Ucbersetzungen, p. 171, 
note 11, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1899; A. Furst, Christen und 


Juden, pp. 192-193, Strasburg, 1892; Gratz, Geseh. x. 313-314 ; 
Jost, Gesch. des Judenthions und Neiner Sekten, viii. 298. 


D. S. MAN. 


MARGARITA, ANTONIUS: Convert to 
Christianity in the first half of the sixteenth cen- 
tury; born about 1500 at Ratisbon (Regensburg), 
where his father, Jaccb Margolioth, was rabbi; died 
at Vienna; baptized in 1522 at Wasserburg, Ba- 
varia. lle was teacher of Hebrew successively at. 
Augsburg, Meissen, Zell, Leipsic, and (from 1587 
till his death) at the University of Vienna. 

He wrote “Der Gantz Jiidisch Glaub mit Sampt 
ainer Griindlichen und Wahrhafften Anzaygunge, 
Aller Satzungen, Ceremonien, Gebetten, Haymliche 
und Offentliche Gebreuch, Deren sich dye Juden 
Halten, Durch das Gantz Jar, Mit Schébnen und 
Gegriindten Argumenten Wyder Jren Glauben,” 
Augsburg, 1580; Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1544, 1561, 
1689; Leipsic, 1705, 1718. The author ridicules 
Jewish ceremonies, accuses the Jews of usury and of 
sentiments hostile to Christians and Christianity, 
and argues against their Messianic hopes. He de- 
nounces the ‘ALENU prayer as anti-Christian in 
tendency. Declaiming against the usury and idle- 
ness of the Jews, he appeals to the magistrates to 
remedy the evil and to force the Jews to perform 
manual labor. He charges the Jewish physicians 
with ignorance and greediness, and asserts that, de- 
spite their minuteness in ritual, the Jews are neither 
pious nor charitable, and that, notwithstanding their 
apparent aversion to proselytism, they are eager to 
cain adherents to their faith. 

This libelous book had a great influence upon 
Luther, who made use of it in writing his “Von den 
Juden und Ihren Liigen.” It was praised by Hoorn- 
beck, B. Lutberus, and Joseph Miller; but Wagen- 
seil speaks of it less favorably. When it appeared, 
JOSEL OF RosHErm, being at that time at Augsburg, 
made complaint to Emperor Charles V., who ap- 
pointed a committce to examine the denunciations 


327 


contained in the book. The author was imprisoned 
and later expelled from Augsburg. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De le Roi, Die Eivangelische Christenheit 
aud die Juden, i. 221, Leipsie, 1854: A. First, Christen und 
Juden, p. 191, Strasburg. 1892; First. Bibl. Jud. ii. 3380: Gei- 
ger, Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland, ii. 824-325, v. 810-312 3 
(xratz. Gesch. ix. 190-191, 303-804, 314, note: Steinschneider, 
Cat. Bodl. No. 6263; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. i., No. 385; G. Wolf, 
Studien zur Jubelfeier der Wiener Universit dt, pp. 28-29, 
Vienna, 1863. 


D. S. Man. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maretzek 
Maigolioth 





controversies with the author of “ Noda‘ bi-Yehu- 
dah,” among others. The most renowned of this 
branch of the Margolioth family was Ephraim 
Solomon of Brody (d. there Aug. 5, 1828). Ephra- 
im Solomon was not a rabbi, but his numerous 
works were accepted in the rabbinical world as au- 
thoritative. There are numerous scholars bearing 
the name of Margolioth whose relationship to the 
family, though probable, can not be determined. 


Samuel Margolioth | 
(dayyan at Posen ¢, 1550) 





I 
i 
Zebi Hirsch 
(rabbi at Vladimir} 


Mendel of Wilna 





Abraham 
(of Zolkieyv) 


Moses Mordecai __ 
(rabbi at Cracow ; d. 1616) 





Moses (7) Joseph Sheindil Mendeij 
(Talmudist 3 (d. Cracow = (rabbi at Przemysl; 
d. Cracow) 1624) dg. April 2, 1652) 
| 
Israel Samuel Mordecai Asher Nahman  —........ Elijah Eliezer Moses Joel Feibus 
(son-in-law of _ of (son-in-law of (rabbi at of Przemys! (rabbi at (rabbi at (son-in-law of 
Abraham of Wilna Kapel of Meseritz) Judah (son-in-law  Lubomil) Tarnow) R. Abraham 
Tismenitz) Krotoschin) of Potok of Hirsch of Brest- 
bsienitian (a. 1672) Hinker) Moses Zeeb Litovsk) 
(rabbi at 
Mendel Eliezer. Furth) 
Heikeril 
(of Lublin) Isaac of 
Jaworow 
Menahem 


Monis (of Aolkiev) 


Mordecai 
Zebi Hirsch Menahem Monis 2Fe 
(rabbi at Dunojowce ; d. 1829) 
Alexander Sender : 
(rabbi at Satanov ; d. 1802) | 
Ephraim Zalman Hayyim Mordecai 
(d. Brody 1828) {rabbi at Dubno; 4d, 
Samuel Zebi Hirsch Mordecai 1818) 


(rabbi at Dulezawka) 
Satanoyv) 
Meshullam Nathan 


(rabbi at Berdychev ; 
61) 


{followed his father in 
the rabbinate of 


MARGOLIOTH PEDIGREE. 


MARGOLIOTH ; cnydan ; the name occurs also 
as Margaliot, Margolis, Margulies, Margo- 
louth, and in various other forms): Polish family 
of Talmudic scholars that traces its descent from 
Rashi, on the one side, and from the families of Shor 
and Samuel Edels on the other. The first Margolioth 
kuown was Samuel, dayyan at Posen about 1550; 
one of his sons, Moses Mordecai, was rabbi at Ora- 
cow. The daughter of R. Moses Mordecai married 
a relative, Mendel Margolioth, rabbi at Przemysl 
(d. April 2, 1652), and bore him eight sons, allof whom 
were distinguished Talmudists. It is not certain 
from which one of Mendel Margolioth’s sons Judah 
of Potok (d. 1672) was descended. From Mor- 
decai b. Menahem Monis, the great-great-grand- 
son of Judah of Potok, descended a line of scholars. 
Mordecai himself was a cabalist and had Talmudic 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, pp. 
24-95, 53, 94-97, 111, Warsaw, 1888: ‘Ir ha-Zedek, p. 42: 
Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 327; Buber, Kiryah Nisgabah, 
p. 8, Cracow, 1903. 

J. A. &. W. 

Abi Ezra Selig Margolioth: German Tal- 
mucdist; flourished in the first half of the eighteenth 
century; born at Kalisch, where he was subse- 
quently preacher. He preached also at Prague for 

a short time. He then went to HALBERSTADT, 

where he was prebendary of the “ Klaus” founded 

by Berent Lehmann in 1708. According to Stein- 
schneider, he then went with his wife to Palestine, 

Lehmann furnishing him with the necessary funds. 

Margolioth was the author of: “Kesef Nibhar.” 

commentary on the Pentateuch (Amsterdam, 1712); 

“Hibbure Likkutim,” novell and responsa (Venice, 

1715). 


Margolioth 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolina, ii. 68; Steinschnei- 
der, Cat. Bodl. No. 2584; Auerbach, Gesch. der Gemeinde 
Halberstadt, p. 62. 

D. A. PE, 
Abraham Elijah b. Nathan Margolioth: 
Rabbi of Nachod, Bohemia, where he was a “moreh 
zedek ” (acting rabbi) at the beginning of the eight- 
eenth century. With Eliezer b. Pethahiah, hazzan 
of Worms, he wrote “ Tefillah le-Kibbuz Galyotenu, ” 
published at Amsterdam in 1705 (Benjacob, “ Ozar 
ha-Sefarim,” p. 661; Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” 
No. 8347; Wolf, “Bibl. Hebr.” iii. 21). 
D P. Wi. 


Alexander Margolioth: Polish rabbi; died in 
Satanov, Podolia, Jan. 8, 1802. He succeeded his 
father, Zebi Hirsch, as rabbi of Zbaraz, Galicia, and 
was there in 1774. Later he became rabbi of Sata- 
nov, where he remained until his death. He is 
spoken of very highly by contemporary rabbis like 
R. Ezekiel Landau and R. Aryeh Lob of Stry (an- 
thor of “Kezot ha-Hoshen”). <A collection of his 
responsa from 1776 to 1791 was published more than 
half a century after his death, under the title “ Te- 
shubot ha-RAM.” (Warsaw, 1859). He was the 
teacher of hisnephew Ephraim Solomon Margolioth 
of Brody. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at HKedoshim. p. 73; 
Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 138. 
P. Wt. 


HW. R. 
Asher Solomon Margolioth. See Jupau Lés 
BEN ASHER ALARGOLIOTH. 


Ephraim Zalman Margolioth: Galician rabbi; 
born in Brody Dec. 19, 1762; died Aug, 24, 1828. 
He received his Talmudic education at diferent 
yeshibot, in which he distinguished himself for the 
acuteness of his intellect and for his astonishing 
memory. His correspondence with Ezekiel Landau 
and other leading Talmudists soon gained for him a 
high reputation. He established a banking. house 
which proved so successful that within a short time 
he became quite wealthy. In 1785 he published his 
responsa entitled “Bet Hadash ha-Hadashot ”; and 
in the following year the rabbis of Brody elected 
him one of their number. Being of independent 
means, he opened in his house a yeshibah of which 
he was the head; and several of his pupils became 
eminent rabbis. 

Margolioth was considered a high rabbinical au- 
thority. He published the following works: “ Bet 
Efrayim” (2 vols., Lemberg, 1809-10), commentary 
on parts of the Yoreh De‘ah; oration at the funeral 
of R. Meir Kristianopoler (2b. 1815); “ Bet Efrayim ” 
(4 parts, 2, 1818), responsa on the four parts of the 
Shulhan ‘Aruk; “Yad Efrayim” (Dubno, 1820), 
commentaries on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim; 
“Sha‘are Efrayim ” (4. 1820), on the rules pertain- 
ing to the reading of the Law; “Yad Efrayim” 
(Zolkiev, 1823), extensive commentaries on the names 
of men and of women to be employed in letters of 
divorce; “Shem Efrayim ” (Berdychev, 1826), com- 
mentary on the Pentateuch; “ Matteh Efrayim ” (Zol- 
kiev, 1834), on the ritual laws to be observed from 
the beginning of the month of Elul until after the 
Feast of Tabernacles, as well as on the regulations 
regarding the Kaddish of orphans: “Zera‘ Efra- 
yim ” (Lemberg, 1853), commentary on the Pesikta 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


2 


eee cece $e = en Oe ce mm 


328 


Rabbati. Many other works by him are still in 


manuscript. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadasnh, p. 21. 
Warsaw, 1864; Kluger, Toledvt. Shelomoh, p, 33, Lemberg. 
188%; 8. J. Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 327, Warsaw, 1886: 
Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 5115 fen Dinah (ora- 
tion delivered at Margolioth’s funeral), Zolkiev, 1834. 

8. 8. B. Fn. 

Hayyim Mordecai Margolioth: Polish rabbi: 
died at Dunajowce 1818; brother of Ephraim Solo- 
mon Margolioth. Hayyim Mordecai was at first 
rabbi at Brestitzki, and later became rabbi in Great. 

Dubno, where he established a printing-office. He 

was among those who elected the three deputies 

sent to St. Petersburg to confer with the govern- 
ment upon Jewish alfairs, and was the author of 

“Sha‘are Teshubah,” commentary to Shulhan 

‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim (Dubno, 1820); it contains ex- 

tracts from other works and appcars in most edi- 

tions of the Shulhan ‘Aruk. 


Bini.10GRaPHy: * Ir Dubnowe-Rabbaneha, p. 26, Cracow, 1902 : 
Steinsenneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 4698; First, Bibl. Jud. ii, 327. 


Isaac ben Jacob Margolioth: Rabbi of 
Prague, where he died April 17, 1525; son of Jacob 
Margolioth, rabbi of Nuremberg. He is mentioned 
in connection with the Mintz-Margolioth affair, in 
which he sided with his father. fe wrote the pref- 
ace to his father’s “Scder Gittin wa-Halizah.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ejisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at Kedoshim, pp. 1°. 
68, St. Petersburg, 1897-98; 8. Rapoport, Gal “Bd, p. di, 


Prague, 1856. 
BE. ¢. A. S. W. 


Jacob Margolioth of Nuremberg: German 
rabbi of the fifteenth century; died at an advanced 
age about 1492. His contemporaries Joseph Colon 
(Responsa, No. 26) and Judah Minz (Responsa, Ne. 
18) speak of him as one of the greatest rabbis of lis 
time, Which caused Griitz (“Gesch.” viii. 268) to 
hold that in ali probability he presided over thie 
meeting of German rabbis held in Nuremberg in 
1474. Emperor Frederick II]. ordered, in 1487, the 
two brothers Abraham and Solomon of Um to 
submit their disputes to Jacob Margolioth, “ Hoch- 
meister” of Nuremberg (see Wiener, “ Regesten zur 
Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland,” No. 126). In the 
quarrel between Moses Capsali and Joseph Colon. 
Margolioth sided with the former. Later, accord- 
ing to Gritz (“Gesch.” viii, 58), he opposed Jacob 
Pollack, who is said to have been his pupil; but 
the ahove-quoted responsum of Judah Minz proves 
this to be only a surmise. 

Zunz (“Z. G.” p. 106), and after him Gritz and 
Fuenn, confounded this Jacob Margolioth with a 
younger contemporary at Ratisbon, of the same 
name, who corresponded with Reuchlin, Itis prob- 
able that Jacob Margolioth “of Nuremberg ” is iden- 
tical with R. Jacob Margolioth “of Worms,” and 
perhaps with R. Jacob Margolioth “of Lucca” (% 
and Jacob Marmonda Margolioth (Moses Minz, Re- 
sponsa, Nos, 73, 114). He is commonly accepted 
as the author of “Seder Gittin wa-Halizah,” and, 
consequently, as the father of Isaac b. Jacob Mar- 
golioth of Prague (da. 1525), the editor of that work. 
which appeared together with the “ Tib Gittin” of 
Ephraim Zalman Margolioth (Zolkiev, 1823). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at Kedoshim, Appen- 
dix, pp. 67-68, 74, St. Petersburg, 1897-98: Fuenn, Kerieset 
Yisrael, pp. 555-456, Warsaw, 1886; idem, Kiryah Ne’ema- 
nah, p. 328, Wilna, 1860; Wiener, in Monatsschrift, 1868, 
xvii. 343 et seg. 


329 


———- 


Jacob Margolioth of Ratisbon: German 
rabbi and Hebraist; flourished about 1500. He is 
known chiefly by a Hebrew letter addressed to 
Reuchlin, which is preserved in “ Epistolze Clarorum 
Virorumad Reuchlinum” (see text in Fuenn, “ Ke- 
neset Yisrael,” pp. 555-556, where he is confounded 
with Jacob Margolioth, rabbi of Nuremberg), His 
son, the apostate Antonius Marearita, relates 
the great services which Jacob rendered his towns- 
men by interceding in their behalf with Siegmund 
von Rohrbach, who was imperial governor at Ratis- 
bon from 1499 to 1512 (quoted by Wiener from 
Margarita’s “Der Gantz Jiidisch Glaub,” p. 133, 
Leipsic (1705). According to the same authority 
this Jacob Margolioth bad another son, who was 
a musician in Prague; this led Wiener to believe 
that this musician may be identical with R. Tsaae b. 
Jacob Margolioth of Prague (d. 1525), who eclited 
his father’s “Seder Gittin wa-Halizah ” (see MarGo- 
LIOTH, JACOB, OF NUREMBERG); but the supposi- 


tion seems improbable. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wiener, in Monatsschrift, 1868, xvii. 345 et 
seq. (where all other sources are quoted and discussed). 


dD. P. Wt. 

Jacob Koppel b. Zebi Margolioth: Polish 
preacher and moralist of the seventeenth century ; 
died 1673 (?). He came from Vladimir, Volhynia, 
where he was an eye-witness of tle massacres of 

1648-49, from which he escaped to Germany. He 

was the author of “Mar’ot Ya‘akob,” tables of etli- 

ical rules (Venice, 1662); “Mizbah Ya‘akob,” a ser- 

mon on penitence and some haggadic novellx (2. 

1662); and “Kol Ya‘akob,” on the Pentateuch and 

the Talmud, to which is appended an elegy on the 

victims of the above-mentioned massacres (Amster- 

dam, 1708). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 556; Furst, Bibl. 
Jud. ii. 328; Lewinstein, in Dor Dor we-Dorshaw, p. 109, 
Warsaw, 1899. 

We. KR, P, Wi. 
Judah Léb ben Asher Margolioth: Grand- 
son of R. Mordecai Jaffe; died at Frank fort-on-the- 

Oder June 14, 1811. He was successively rabbi at 

Busnow, Szebrszyn, Polotsk, Lesla, and Frank fort- 

on-the-Oder, and wrote the following works: “ Kor- 

ban Reshit,” responsa and discussions on Rosh 
ha-Shanah (Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1778); “ Peri 

Tebu’ah,” responsa (parts i. and #., Novidvor, 

1796: parts iii. and iv. are still in manuscript); 

“Tal Orot,” treatises on the essence of the soul, 

on immortality, etc. (Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1751); 

“Or ‘Olam,” treatises on natural philosophy, to 

which is appended Saadia Gaon’s commentary on 

Canticles (éb. 1777); “Bet Middot,” on ethics, in 

prose and verse (Dyhernfurth, 1778); ““Aze ‘Eden,” 

homilies on belief, philosophy, pride, and humility, 

with a criticism of Mendelssohn's “Jerusalem ” (4, 

1802); “Amirah Ne‘imah.” on the Haggadah and 

the Pentateuch (in manuscript): “Iegeret ha-Meli- 

zah,” on styie (Novidvor, 1794): “Sefer Tob we- 

Yafeh,” collection of poems on dogmatic. grammat- 

ical, and Jiturgica] subjects (Frank fort-on-the-Oder, 

1770). He was probably the first Judeo-Polish au- 

thor to write on natural philosophy. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Zeman, i. 97; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, 
p. 413, Warsaw, 1886; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl, No, S740 ; 
First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 328: Zeitlin, Bibl. Hebr. p. 229. 

E. C. A. S. W. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Margolioth 





Meir b. Zebi Hirsch Margolioth: Polish 
rabbi and author; born probably at Horodenka. 
Galicia; died at an advanced age at Ostrog, Vol- 
hynia, April 24, 1790. He was rabbi of the district 
of Lemberg for more than forty years (¢. 1742-82), at 
the time when Lemberg had two rabbis, one for the 
city proper and one for the surrounding district. 
In 1732 he seems to have gone to Ostrog, where he 
remained until his death. Margolioth was a pupil 
of R. Isracl Ba‘al Shem Tob (BEShT), the reputed 
founder of Hasidism, and was probably the greatest 
Talmudical authority of the time to confess to such 
discipleship. He wasthe author of “ Meir Netibim,” 
responsa and novell (Polnoi, 1791), “Sod Yakin u- 
Bo‘az,” on the Cabala (7b.), and “Derek ha-Tob 
weha-Yashar,” on the Shulhan ‘Aruk (Polnoi and 
Shklov, 1799). 

Margolioth left four sons: Joseph Nahman, 
rabbi of Polnot and father of R. Hayyim of Ostrog; 
Bezaleel, rabbi of Zwahil and successor to his fa- 
ther as rabbi of Ostrog; Saul, rabbi successively of 
Komorn, Zbaraz, and Lublin; and Naphtali Mor- 
decai. Margolioth’s daughter married Naphtali 
Herz ha-Kohen, rabbi of Scharigrod. Margolioth 
had also an older brother, Isaac Dob Bar (rabbi of 
Jazlowicz and the district of Podolia; author of 
“Be’er Yizhak”), who is mentioned in his works. 
Tsaac Dob Biir was one of the three rabbis (the 
other two being R. Israel Ba‘al Shem and R. Hay- 
yim Cohen Rapoport of Lemberg) who represented 
the Talmudist position in tle discussion with the 
Frankists under the auspices of Bishop Mikulski in 
1759. Margolioth’s mother wasa sister of R. Aryeh 
Lebush b. Mordecai Auerbach of Stanislau (d. 1772). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Buber, Anshe Shem, pp. 187-140, 202, Cracow, 

1895; Lazar ha-Kohen, iin‘at Soferim, pp. 162-163, Lemberg, 


1892; Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadasnh, p. 87. 
D. P. Wr. 


Moses b. Judah Léb Margolioth: Rabbi at 
Semnitz, Hungary, in the nineteenth century; son 
of Judah Léb Margolioth. He was the author of 
“HWakirat ha-Gemul,” treatises on retribution and 
punishment, with an appendix under the title 
“ Keter Malkut,” a poem by W. Buchner (Budapest, 
1829; Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” No. 6518). 

Moses Mordecai ben Samuel Margolioth: 
Talmudist and cabaiist; born probably at Posen, 
where his father was rabbi, about 1540; died at 
Cracow Nov. 21, 1616. On the death of Joseph 
Katz (1591) Moses Mordecai Margolioth pecame head 
of the yeshibah at Cracow, which office he retained 
over twenty years. He wrote: “Hasde Adonai,” 
ou the thirteen attributes of God (Cracow, 1589); 
“Selihah ‘al ha-Kedoshim,” prayer for the martyrs 
of 1596. published in an edition of selihot (Dyhern- 
furth, 1702); “Zohar Hadash‘im Midrash ha-Ne‘lam” 
(Cracow, 1608). 

BIBLIOGRAPITY: Zunz, ‘Ir ha-Zedek, p. 42, Lemberg, 1874; 
Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 6517; Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 380. 
Naphtali Margolioth (Margaritha): Scholar 

and author; born at Vienna 1562. He embraced 

Christianity in 1603, taking the name of Julius 

Conrad Otto, and later became professor of ITe- 

brew at Altorf. Subsequently he returned to Ju- 

daism. He wrote: “Usus Ebree Lingua” (Nu- 

remberg, 1604); “Grammatica Hebreea,” (20. 1605); 


Margolis 
Mariamne 


“Lexicon Radicale,” a dictionary ie rae oe een ae en ey rabbinical and 
Talmudic words (22. 1607); “Gale Razaya,” a work 


full of false Talmudic citations and of misinterpre- | 
tations of Talmudic savings regarding the Messianic | 


idea and the doctrine of the Trinity (24. 1605). 
Wolf, Bidl. Hebr. i. 480, tii. 365, iv. 845; De le 


Steinschneider, Cat. 

Bodt. No. 6023; First. Bibl. Jud. ii. 330. 

ELC. A. S. W. 

Saul b. Meir Margolioth: Polish rabbi; died 
in Lublin Dec, 18, 1800 (27); son of R. Meir of Os- 
trog and Lemberg (author of “Meir Netibim”) and 
pupil of R. Isracl Ba‘al Shem-Tob. He was rabbi 
successively of Zbaraz, Galicia, and of Komorn, be- 
fore he went to Lublin, where he remained until 
his death. 

Saul is often mentioned in the records of the com- 
munity of Lublin as the author of useful communal] 
imeasures. He left no works, but is mentioned in 
the above-cited work of his father’s. His son Zebi 
Hirsch, who married a daughter of R. Lob of 
Armscenlan, succeeded Saul b. Meir as rabbi in the 
city of Lublin. ' 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Buber, Azshe Shem, p. 202. Cracow, 1895; 
Nissenbaum, Le-Korot ha-Yehudim be-Lublin, p pp. 91-94, 
Lublin, 1899: Lewinstein, in Dor Dor we-Dorshaw, p. 124, 
Warsaw, 1899. . 
H.R. P. WI. 


MARGOLIS, ISAAC BEN ELIAH: Russo- 
Polish rabbi and author; born in Kalvariya, gov- 
ernment of Suwalki, Russian Poland, 1842; died in 
New York Aug. 1, 1887: son of the rabbi ‘of Wiz- 
hajny, and a descendant of Yom- Tob Lipmann Hel- 
ler of Prague. 

His youth was devoted to the study of the Talmud ; 
and in 1862 he settled in Meretz, government of 
Wilna, where later on he embarked in business. 
The zealots of that city and business reverses ren- 
dered his life there unpleasant; and in consequence 
he removed to Kovno, where he soon found employ- 
ment as tutor in the house of Ezekiel Jaffe. Later 
he became rabbi of Druskeniki, government of 
Grodno. In 1884 he emigrated to the United States 
and became rabbi of the Congregation Anshe-Kal- 
variya, New York. 

Margolis was the author of “ Ma‘oz ha-Talmud ” 
(Warsaw, 1868), an apologetic work in defense of 
the Talmud and the Shulhan ‘Aruk against certain 
critics; “Ma‘oz ha-Yam ” (Wilna, 1870), a reply to 
the attacks of M. L. Lilienblum in “ Megillah ‘A fah ”; 
and “Sippure Yeshurun” (Berlin, 1876), a collec: 
tion of Talmudic and Midrashic legends, anecdotes, 
etc., written in an elegant Hebrew style. He also 
c ontributed largely to the Hebrew periodicals “ Ha- 
Maggid,” “ Ha-Zefirah,” and “ Ha-Meliz.” 


BIRLIOGRAPHY: AH. Herzmann, in Ha-Asif, iv.: M. Caplan, in 
Ha-Zetirah, No. 168; American Hebrew, Aug. 22, 1887, p. 8. 


H.R. I. S. B. 


MARGOLIS, MAX LEOPOLD: American 
philologist ; horn at Meretz, government of Wilna, 
Russia, Oct. 15, 1866; son of Isaac Margolis; edu- 
cated at the elementar y school of his native town, 
the Leibnitz gymnasium, Berlin, and Columbia 
versity, New York city (Ph.D. 1891). In i891 he wa 
appointed toa fellowship i in Semitic languages at Co. 
lumbia University, and from 1892 to 1897 he was in- 
structor, and later assistant professor, of Hebrew 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
Roi. Evanaqelische Christenheit, i. 138 5 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


3390 





and Biblical exegesis at the Hebrew Union College 
of Cincinnati. In 1897 he became assistant professor 
of Semitic languagesin the University of California : 
in 1898, associate professor; and since 1992 he has 
been acting head of the Semitic department. 

Of Marvolis’ works may be mentioned: ~° The 
ume College MS. of Megillah.” New York, 
1892; “Notes on Semitic Grammar,” parts 1.-Hi., in 
« Flebraica ” (“American Journal of Semitic Lan- 
snages and Literatures”), 1894, 1896. 1902.0 - Phe 
Theology of the Old Prayer-Book.” in “ Year Book of 
the Ceutral Conference of American Rabbis.” 189°; 

“The Theological Aspect of Reformed Judaism.” 
Baltimore, 1904. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The .imerican fsraclite, 1902. 

A, Ro TT. i. 

MARGOLIUT, MARGULIES, MARGU- 
LIOTH. See Mareor. IOTIT. 

MARGOLIUTH, MOSES: Convert to Chris- 
tianity ; born In Suiwalki: Poland, Dec. 3. 1820; died 
in London Feb, 25. 1881. He went to Liverpool, 
England, in 1837, where he met a convert named 
Lazarus, and the Rev. H. S. 5. Joseph; the latter bap- 
tized Margoliuth in April, 1888. He entered Trin- 
ity College, Dublin, Jan., £840; became curate of St. 
Augustine, Liverpool, June 30, 1844; and had many 
ecclesiastical appointments, ultimately becoming 
vicar of Little Linford, Buckinghamshire (18% 7-81). 
He took the degree of Ph.D. at Erlangen in 1857. 
In 1847 he started a Hebrew-Christian monthly 
magazine entitled “ The Star of Jacob.” 

Margoliuth wrote the following works, all pub- 
lished in London: “ Modern Judaism ” (1843); “The 
History of the Jews of Great Britain ” (1857; a work 
of some merit in the last two volumes); “A Pilgrim- 
age to the Land of My Fathers” (1858); “The Cu- 
rates of Riverdale ” (1860); “ The Spirit of Prophecy ” 
(1864); “The Poetry of the Hebrew Pentateuch” 
(1871). Margoliuth was one of the revisers of the 
English version of the Old Testament. He wrote 
also a considerable number of minor works. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish World, London, March 4, 1881; Jour- 

nal of British Archeological Association, 18813 M. ‘Margo- 

liuth, Some Triumphs and Trophies of the World (1882) 

Autobiography prefixed to Modern. Judaisin. 

Ji G. L. 

MARGULIES, SAMUEL HIRSCH: Rabbi; 
born at Brzezan, Gulicia, Oct. 9, 1858; a descendart 
of Rabbi Ephraim Zalman Margolioth; educated at 
the theological seminary at Breslau. He was from 
1885 to 1887 rabbi of the Congregation Newe Sha- 
Jom in Hamburg; till 1890, of the congregation at 
Weilburg, Hesse-Nassau; and since 1890 he tas been 
chief rabbi of Florence. In 1899 he was appointed 
principal of the Collegio Rabbinico Italiano, which 
was later transferred from Rome toe Florence. 

Margulies has published several essays in Ber- 
liner’s “ Magazin” and in the “ Monatsschrift,” and 
is the author of: “Saadja Alfajfimi’s Arabische 


Psalmen- Uebersetzung,” Breslau, 1884; “Zwei 
Pesach-Predigten,” Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1888: 


“Dichter ‘ind. Patriot.” Treves, 1896. He is also 


(1904) editor of the “ Rivista Israelitica.” 
s, Bo Es i: 


MARHAB IBN AL-HARITH: Jewish 
Arabian warrior and poet; killed during Moham- 


331 


med’s invasion of Khaibarabout 628. Marhab, who 

was of Himyarite descent, distinguished himself 

lv his bravery in defending onc of the forts of 

Khaibar. He is represented in the “Ta’rikh al- 

Hamis” (quoted by Caussin de Perceval) as a man 

of uncommon strength and audacity, wearing two 

culrasses, a double turban and a helmet, and a 

sword at each side, and brandishing a three-pointed 

lance. According to the custom of Arab warriors, 

Marhab sent a poem challenging any of Mohammed’s 

lreroes to single combat. Ali, Mohammed’s cousin 

and third successor, answered the challenge, and 

Marhab was killed. According to Ibn Hisham, Mo- 

hammed’s biographer, it was Mohammed ibn Masila- 

mah, who, wishing to avenge his brother, killed on 
the previous day, offered to fight Marhab. Ibn 

Hisham further says that the two combatants kept 

4 tree between them as a defense, and that the 

branches of the tree immediately over their heads 

were sooncut away. Marhabaccidentally dropping 
his sword, Mohammed seized the opportunity to 
deal him a fatal blow. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Caussin de Perceval, Essai sur l’ Histoire des 
Arabes, iii. 195 et seg.; Gritz, Gesch. 3d ed., v. 105-106; Ibn 
Hisham, Kitab Sirat Rasul Allah, pp. 760-761, ed. Wisten- 
feld, Géttingen, 1858, 

J. M. SEt. 


MARHESHWAN. Sec HESHWAN. 


MARI BEN DIMT: Second gaon of Pumbe- 
dita. When the Jewish scholars were compelled to 
leave the Babylonian academies, Mari, with others, 
went to Firuz-Shabur and there established a new 
academy which became associated with bis name. 
After the death of the gaon Hanan of Iskiya, in 609, 
he was elected successor in the gaonate. Two ha- 
Jakic decisions of his have been preserved—one, 
quoted by Judah Gaon, concerning two unknown 
plants mentioned in the Talmud (Chaim M. Horo- 
witz, “ Halachische Schriften der Geonim,” ii. 56, 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1851: “ Teshubot ha-Geo- 
nim,” p. 45, ed. Lyck, 1864), and the other concern- 
ing the marriage of a “mamzer” (“ Halakot Gedo- 
lot,” ed. Vienna, p. 22a). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. v. 12-13; Miiller, Binleitung in 
die Responsen der Bahylonischen. Geonen, p. 62; Weiss, 


Dor, iv. 6; Letter of Sherira Gaon, in Neubauer, M. J.C. - 


i. 85, fi. 187. 
E. C. 


MARIA THERESA. See AUSTRIA. 


MARIAMNE: 1. Wife of Herod the Great; 
the first of this name. She was the daughter of the 
Hasmonean Alexander, a son of Aristobulus IJL., 
who was conquered and put to flight by Herod’s 
father, Antipater. Her mother was Alexandra, 
daughter of the reigning prince Hyrcanus II, 
When [ferod, at that time tetrarch, entered Jerusa- 
jem in triumph in 42 3.c., Alexandra sought to bring 
about the marriage of her daughter to him, hoping 
thus to avoid the ruin of her house (Josephus, 
“Ant.” xiv. 12, § 1; ddem, “B. J.” 1. 12, § 3). The 
war, however, left Herod no leisure; and not until 
five years after his betrothal to Mariamne, and three 
years after he had become nominal king of Judea, 
did he leave the siege of Jerusalem, in 37 B.c., and 
celebrate his marriage in Samaria (“ Ant.” xiv. 15, 
$14; “B. J.” i117, § 8). Mariamne bore him three 


M. Sc. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Margolis 
Mariamne 


sons, Alexander, Aristobulus, and one who died 
young, and two daughters, Salampsio and Cypros. 

The marriage proved an unhappy one. The king, 
indeed, loved the beautiful woman passionately ; 
but the queen could not forget that Herod had been 
the murderer of all her family and that he had suc- 
ceeded to the throne really at the cost of her pater- 
nal house. She displayed a natural pride toward 
this parvenu which was especially felt by Herod’s 
mother and by his sister Salome, who wrought so 
much evil in the course of her life. 

The queen ruled the king completely, This was 
made manifest when Alexandra insisted that her 
son, Mariamne’s brother, should be made high 
priest. On the advice of Dellius, the friend of 
Antony—who wished to give the latter’s passion 
another direction—she sent pictures of her two beau- 
tiful children to the Egyptian queen, Cleopatra. 
Antony had, in fact, designs on the youthful Aris- 
tobulus; and since Mariamne also asked the favor of 
the king, he found himself obliged to make the 
youth high priest (85 B.c.; “Ant.” xv. 2, $6; °B. 
J.” i, 22, § 3), although, in reality, only to kill him 
on a suitable occasion. When, later, Herod was 
obliged to justify before Antony at Laodicea the 

killing of Aristebulus, he placed Mari- 

Left in amne under the protection of Joseph, 

Charge of his brother-in-law, commanding him 
Joseph. to kill her in case he (Herod) should 
not retum alive. As Joseph had oc- 
casion to associate a good deal with Mariamne in 
connection with governmental affairs, he good- 
naturedly told her of the boundless love the king 
felt for her and of the secret instructions which 
Herod had given him. A false report of Herod’s 
death being circulated, Mariamne sought refuge 
with the Roman legions. Herod, however, was dis- 
missed with the favor of Antony. On his return 
Salome accused Mariamne of adultery with Joseph. 
Herod at first would not believe the charge; but it 
chanced that the queen reproached him for the 
secret commission he had entrusted to Joseph, and 
this convinced Herod of the criminality of Joseph 
and Mariamne. In his anger he caused Joseph to 
be put to death immediately, and he would have 
similarly disposed of Mariamne had not his love for 
her been greater than his anger. He, however, 
threw Alexandra into prison (34 B.c.) as the instiga- 
tor of the scandal (“ Ant.” xv. 3, §§ 5-9; “B. J." i. 
22, $& 4-5). 

In the spring of the year 30, Herod visited Augus- 
tus in Rhodes. He Jeft Mariamne and her mother 
under the protection of a certain Joseph and of the 
Iturean Sohemus. Again he commanded that his 
wife should be killed in the event of his death. 
The king had hoped to find love on his return; in- 
stead he found himself hated and avoided. The 

king’s mother and sister found him 

Falsely ready to listen to their slanders. Sa- 

Accused lome told him that Mariamne sought 
by Salome. to poison him. Thereupon the king 

questioned Mariamne’s favorite eu- 
nuch, who said he knew nothing of the poison, but 
that the queen was offended because of what Sohe- 
mus had told her in regard to his secret instructions. 
Sohemus met the same fate as had Herod’s brother- 


Mariamne 
Murxs 





in-law, and Herod caused Mariamne to be accused 
before a tribunal composed of his friends, which pro- 
nounced sentence of death. The king and some of 
the judges did not wish to hasten the execution, de- 
sirlug merely to put Marianne in prison ; but Salome 
represented that the people might raise a disturbance 
and seek to release Mariamne, and the latter was con- 
sequently led to death. During the entire route to 
the place of execution her own mother, Alexandra, 
desiring to rehabilitate herself in Herod’s eyes, re- 
viled her, accusing her of adultery and of ingrati- 
tude toward Herod. Mariamne answered not a 
word, and died calm and composed (* Ant.” xv. 6, 
85; 7,§ 6), being about twenty-eight years of age 
(29 B.c.). 

The fact that Mariamne was twice accused under 
similar circumstances of adultery with the regent, 
makes it probable that Josephus’ account contains 
some inaccuracies, the more su as the second account 
is wholly lacking in “B. J.” (Destinon, “ Di Quellen 
des Josephus,” p. 113). The second account, how- 
ever, can not be a simple repetition on the part of 
Josephus of the first, since Josephus himself, in re- 

lating the second incident, refers to 

Discrep-_ the first (* Ant.” xv. 7, $1). It is re- 
ancy in the markable that Josephus mentions Jo- 

Sources. seph the second time without any 

further particulars (4b. 6, § 5), which 
looks, it is true, as though he had before him two 
parallel] accounts which he tried to combine in this 
way. According to “B. J.,” Mariamne was put to 
death in the first case—that is, in the year 34. But 
this is impossible, since she could not have borne 
five children between the years 87 and 34. Indeed 
on closer scrutiny the two incidents do not appear at 
all identical, since in the second case it isnot the re- 
gent Phreroras with whom Mariamne is associated, 
but Sohemus, who was of comparatively low rank, 
Hence the two incidents are probably historical, and 
the omission of the second account in“ B. J.” is due 
to the fact that Josephus. as usual, has condensed 
his narration in that work. The historian Nicholas 
of Damascus believed in Mariamne’s guilt (* Ant.” 
xvi. 7, § 1). 

There isa Talmudic legend concerning the mar- 
riage and death of Mariamne, although her name is 
not mentioned. It is to the effect that when the 
whole house of the Hasmoneans had been rooted 
out, she threw herself from the roof and was killed 
(B. B. 3b). Outof love for her, Hered is said to have 
kept her body preserved in honey for seven years 
(44.; S. Geiger, in “ Ozar Nehmad,” iii. 
1}. Inthe Talmud this sort of mental 
derangement is called a “deed of 
Herod ” (Sanh. 66b).  Joseplius relates 
also that after her death Herod tried in hunting and 
banqueting to forget his loss, but that even his 
strong nature succumbed and he fell ml in Samaria, 
where he had made Mariamne his wife (“ Ant.” xv. 
7, $7). The Mariamne tower in Jerusalem, built 
by Herod, was without doubt named after her; it 
was called also “Queen “ (Bacizic;“ B. J.” ii. 17. $8: 
v. 4, § 8). 

Josephus writes the name Mapcauy, adding the in- 
flectional ending to Map:du (= Dp), the Septuagint 
form of the name, In some editions of Josephus 


Talmudic 
Legends. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| 
: 
| 
| 
| 


S32 





” 


Mapiauuy stood with double “uw”; this was dissini- 
lated to “mn” in the Middle Ages, and the name 
has so remained (S. Pape-Benseler, “ Worterbuch 
der Griechischen Eigennamen,” 8d ed. 1870, s.7.). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 4th ed., ili. 187, 200, 216; Deren- 
bourg, Hist. p. 141; Sehiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., i. 3858-586 5 Well- 

hausen, I. J. G. 4th ed., pp. 325, 328. 

2. Wife of L[erod the Great; the second of this 
name. She was held to be very beautiful; and 
Herod, on first seeing her, was svized with an ardent 
passion for her. Since he did not wish to obtain 
possession of her by force, he thought it best te 
marry her. He advanced her father, Simon the sou 
of Boethus (a man of humble birth, originally from 
Alexandria, but at that time living in Jerusalem), tu 
the position of high priest (25 b.c.) a few years 
after the execution of the first Mariamne (Josephus, 
“Ant.” xviii. 5, §4; comp. ¢. xvii. 1, § 2; adem, 
“B. J.” i. 28, § 4). 

Mariamne bore Herod one son, also called Herod 
(“Ant.” xvii. 1, $2), who married Herodias (2b. x viii, 
5, § 4), and who was in fact the destined heir to the 
throne (“B. J.” 1.29, $2; comp. 7b. 30, § 3). Man- 
amne knew of Herod’s intention in regard to her son 
(2. 80, 8 7). Josephus always writes Mapiduy or 
Maprauuy, as he does also in the case of other persons 
of the same bame. 


223; Schtirer, Gesch. 
G. S. ir. 


MARIAMPOL (Polish, Marjampol; called 
formerly Staripole) : Town situated in the govern- 
ment of Suwalki, Russian Poland. The Jewish 
community there, like the town itself, is of compar- 
atively recent date, At first the community was 
dependent, in communal affairs, upon the neighbor- 
ing town of Kalvartya. Its first rabbi, Hayyim 
Shershaver, was elected in 1780, though the com- 
munity was too poor to build a synagogue; and the 
rabbi then visited a number of towns in order to col- 
lect money for that purpose. Tn the Polish revolu- 
tion of 1831a Polish regiment passed through Mari- 
ampoland carriedaway four of the Jewish elders wha 
were faithful to the Russians, and left them, bound. 
in the forest, In the same year, on the occasion of 
an encounter between the Russians and the Poles at 
Mariam pol, the latter locked all the Jewsin the syn- 
ngovue, with the result that only one Jew was killed. 
Mariampol! has (1897) a total population of 6,298, of 
which over two thousand are Jews. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: YValkut Ma‘arahi, i. 116. 

WH, R. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz. Gesch. 4th ed., iii. 
3d ed.. i. 400. 


ALS. W. 


MARIK, SOLOMON: Spanish surgeon, of 
whose life no details are known. He wrotein Span- 
ish in Hebrew script a work entitled “Libro de la 
Cirogia,” of which a fragment exists in a volume of 
miscellanea in the royal library at Munich, 

David Marich or Marik, a physician and mer- 
chant, and Abraham Marich, both Spanish exiles, 
together with nineteen others, received permission 
from Duke Alfonso of Este on Feb. 1, 1498, to 
settle with their families at Ferrara (““R. E. J.” 
xv. 120). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Munich, codex 241, 33; 


Kayserling. Bibl. Exp.-Port.-Jud. p. 65. 
G. M. K. 


333 





MARINI, SOLOMON B. ISAAC: Italian 
rabbi of the seventeenth century; died in 1670. He 
was the only rabbi at Padua who survived the 
plague of 1681, which decimated the community. 
His wisdom and his eloquence contributed much to 
the restoration of order. Ile wrote a commentary 
to Isaiah entitled “Tikkun ‘Olam” (Verona, 1652). 
He was renowned as a scholar, teacher, and pastor, 
and among his pupils was the physician and rabbi 
Isaac Hayyim Cantarini, His brother, Shabbethai 
b. Isaac Marini (d. 1685), was a physician. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledet Gedole Yisrael, pp. 

336, 308 et seq. 

Db. I. E. 

MARIX, ADOLPH: American naval com- 
mander; born Apr. 24, 1848, in Saxony. He went 
to America while still a boy, and in 1864 entered 
the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, 
Md., graduating in 1868. In 1869 he was pro- 
moted to the rank of ensign, and in the following 
year was assigned to special duty on the U.S. 8. 
“Congress.” He was promoted master in 1870, 
served on the “Canandaigua” with the North At- 
jantie squadron during 1871-72, was commissioned 
lieutenant in 1872, and served thereafter on vari- 
ous ships in the North Atlantic and Asiatic sta- 
tions until 1879, when he was assigned to service in 
the Hydrographic Otlice. In 1880 he was ordered 
to the training-ship “Minnesota,” from which, in 
1882, he was transferred to the battle-ship “ Brook- 
lyn,” then with the South Atlantic squadron. From 
1883 to 1886 he served again on the Asiatic station, 
after which he was assigned to special service in 
the judge-advocate-general’s office. In connection 
with his duties in this department he was sent to 
Australia (1888), and on his return (1889) was or- 
dered to the training-ship “ Jamestown,” from which 
he (1892) was transferred to the Hydrographic Ot- 
fice in New York. In 1893 he was promoted lien- 
tenant-commander and assigned to the receiving-ship 
* Minnesota,” until in 1895 he was transferred to 
the ill-fated battle-ship “ Maine,” on which he served 
until January, 1898, when he took command of the 
U.S. S. “Seorpion.” He served as recorder of the 
Maine court of inquiry. In March, 1899, he was 
promoted to the rank of commander. 

Commander Marix was by act of Congress ad- 
vanced two numbers for “eminent and conspicuous 
conduct in battle in two engagements at Manzanillo 
July 1and July 18, 1898,” during the Spanish-Amer- 
ican war. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamersly, Records of Living Officers of the 
U.S. Navy, New York, 1898; List of Officers of the U.S. 
Navy and of the Marine Corps 1775-1900, pp. 351, 718. 

E. C. F. C. 


MARK. See SEAL; SIGNATURE. 
MARK. See New TESTAMENT. 


MARKENS, ISAAC: American writer; born 
in New York city Oct. 9, 1846; son of Elias Markens, 
a linguist and Orientalist. Isaac Markens was edu- 
cated in the public schools of his native city. He 
became a merchant, and afterward private secretary 
to Railway Commissioner Albert Fink. Subse- 
quently he entered the journalistic field, and wrote 
for the New York “Commercial Advertiser” and 
the “Mail and Express.” In 1888 he published 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mariamne 
Marks 


“The Hebrews in America,” a series of historical 
and biographical sketches of value as being the first 
of their kind on American Jewish history. 

Markens was for several years secretary to the 
board of arbitration of the Joint Executive Com- 
mittee of Eastern and Western Railways. A 


MARKS, B. 8.: English artist; born in 1827 at 
Cardiff, where he received his art education and fol- 
lowed the profession of portrait-painter until his 
removal to London in 1867. Asa native of Wales 
he became Royal Cambrian Academician. During 
the more than thirty years of his professional career 
in London he has executed commissions for many 
distinguished sitters, including the Prince of Wales, 
Lord Rothschild, Chick Rabbi N. I. Adler, the late 
Lord Shaftesbury, Lord Aberdare, and Field-Marshal 
Sir John Burgoyne. Marks is an active communal 
worker in connection with Jewish schools and insti- 
tutions. Hewas a member of the comunittees of the 
Jews’ Free School and of the Westminster and the 
Bayswater schools, and for a long period acted as 
honorary art teacher to the pupils and teaching staffs. 

In the general community Marks has been active 
in the free-library and art-school movements, and 
contributed to the establishment of the Cardiff and 
Ealing libraries. His son, Percy L. Marks, is an 
architect, and has published “ Principles of Plan- 
ning” (London, 1901). His daughter, Constance 
Isabelle, has shown considerakle mathematical 
talent, having become editor of the mathematical 
department of the “Educational Times.” Two 
other daughters, Anne and Gertrude, follow their 
father’s profession, while another, Helena, has pub- 
lished several songs. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Young Israel, Aug., 1898; Jewish Year Book, 
1900-1 and 1903-4. 
J. G. L. 


MARKS, DAVID WOOLF: The “ father” of 
Anglo-Jewish Reform; born in London Nov. 22, 
1811; educated at the Jews’ Free School, London. 
He acted as pupil-teacher at Solomon’s boarding- 
school at Hammersmith for five years, and then be- 
came assistant reader at St. Alban’s Synagogue, but 
resigned the latter position to go to Liverpool as as- 
sistant reader and secretary. At Liverpool his desire 
for Reform found expression in his refusal to read 
the Law on the second days of festivals. Mean- 
while Marks devoted himself to general literature, 
and ultimately secured the appointment of professor 
of belles-lettresat Wigan College, Liverpool. About 
1840 a movement was in progress in London for es- 
tablishing a Reform synagogue, and the sympathy 
with Retorm of which Marks had given evidence 
brought him under the notice of the founders of that 
movement; he was accordingly elected, at the age 
of twenty-nine, minister of the West London Syna- 
gogue of British Jews, 

During his sixty years’ ministration to that con- 
gregation Marks effected important changes in the 
community. He was active in furthering educa- 
tional projects, in instituting regular pulpit instruc- 
tion, and in improving decorum in Jewish public 
worship. In 1848 he was appointed to the chair of 
Hebrew at University College, London, which he 
filled until 1898. He died May 8, 1909. 


Marks 
Marriage 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


334 





Marks published three volumes of sermons, and 
@ pamphlet entitled “The Law is Light”; he 
was one of the editors of Smith’s “ Dictionary of the 
Bible,” and he compiled and published the order 
of service used in the Reform synagogues. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Nov. 22, 1895: Young Israel, 

Jan.. 1898: Morais, Eminent Israelites of the Nineteenth 


Century: Jewish Fear Book, 1908-4, 
J. G. L. 


MARKS, HENRY HANANEL: English 
journalist and politician; born April 5, 1805, in 
London: fifth son of the Rev. Prof. D. W. Marks; 
educated at University College, London, and at the 
Athenée Royale, Brussels. At the age of sixteen he 
went to the United States, where he entered the 
journalistic field, meeting with varying success. 
Finally, when his resources were at their lowest ebb, 
he returned to London (1888), and soon after estab- 
lished the “Financial News.” Beginning in a very 
small way, he made the paper a power in the finan- 
cial world. Jn 1889 Marks was elected member for 
Marylebone of the London County Council; three 
years later at the parliamentary election he con- 
tested the Northeast Bethnal Green division; and in 
1895 he was elected member of Parliament for St. 
George’s Tower Hamlets. He retained his seat until 


1900. 
Bin OSnAPH Ys W ho’s Who, 1904; The Jewish Year Book, 
J. E. Ms. 


MARKS, MARCUS M.: American merchant; 
born at Schenectady, N. Y., March 18, 1858, In 
1877 he started a business at Passaic, N. J., and later 
entered the wholesale clothing firm of his father, 
David Marks&Sons. He has held many prominent 
positions in connection with the clothing trade, be- 
ing president of the Clothiers’ Association of New 
York, president of the National Association of Cloth- 
iers, president of the Clothing Trade Association of 
New York, and chairman of the Hospital Saturday 
and Sunday Association Trade Auxiliary. He has 
served also as trustee of the Hospital Saturday and 
Sunday Association, director of the Educational Alli- 
ance, member of the Conciliation Committee of the 
National Civic Federation, director of the National 
Butchers’ and Drovers’ Bank, and is now (1904) or- 
ganizing credit cooperation in several trades, with 
the view of establishing a central clearing-house for 
direct trade information. Marks has been a contrib- 
utor to labor and trade journals on subjects of labor 
and conciliation and on credit ccoperation. 

A. F. H. V. 


MARKS, SAMUEL: South-African pioneer; 
born in Germany about 1850. He went to Cape Col- 
ony about 1868 and commenced trading in the coun- 
try. He entered the diamond trade, and, gain- 
ing the confidence of the diggers, bought claims 
and worked them. He was joined subsequently by 
his brothers; working harmoniously together, they 
amassed an enormous fortune. In 1884 Marks left 
the diamond-fields for the Transvaal, where he be- 
came acquainted with President Kruger, advanced 
the government considerable sums of money, and 
acquired numerous farms in the Transvaal. These 
farms turned out to be extensive and valuable coal- 


mines, and the Cape government contracted with the 
tirm of Lewis & Marks for the supply of coal for its 
railway. The interests of the firm in South Africa 
at the end of the century were almost colossal. It 
gave great impetus to the trade of the country by 
its opening up of coal- and silver-mines and by its 
establishment of glass, jam, and other factories. It 
furthermore held the monopoly of the mannfacture 
of spirits and possessed a distillery near Pretoria. 

PIBLIOGEAEHT: Jewish Chronicle, June 28, 1895; March 17, 


J G. L. 


MARKUS, LUDWIG: German Orientalist; born 
in Dessau Oct. 31, 1798; died in Paris July 15, 1843. 
He attended the Franzschule and the ducal gym- 
nasium in Dessau; he was sent to the latter by the 
hereditary Prince of Anhalt-Dessau, his father hav- 
ing lost his means. He then studied medicine at 
Berlin University (1818-21), but when in the last 
year of his course he abandoned medicine for philos- 
ophy, and studied astronomy under Encke at the 
Berlin Observatory so ardently that his mind was 
for a time affected. When scarcely recovered he 
became a member of the Society for Jewish Culture 
and Science in Berlin. In its “Zeitschrift fir die 
Wissenschaft des Judenthums” for 1822 (pp. 401- 
418) appeared his first publication, the beginning of 
a work on the natural history of Palestine, which 
was still unfinished when the periodical discontin- 
ued publication. He then began his life labor—a 
work on the foreign colonies in Abyssinia and Sen- 
aar from the seventh century B.c. to the fourth cen- 
tury c.E. In 1825 Markus went to Paris, wlicre Cu- 
vier appreciated his attainments; through Cuvier's 
influence Markus was engaged to edit part of the 
notes to Panckoucke’s Latin-French edition of Pliny 
(1829). He steadily proceeded with his work on 
Abyssinia, though he was without means to publish 
it; but two extracts from itappeared in the “ Journal 
Asiatique” for 1829. In 1830 Cuvier secured for him 
an appointment as teacher of German in the royal 
college at Dijon, where he wrote the elementary 
works needed by the pupils. 

The loss of his devoted mother in 1885 having left 
Markus almost alone in the world (he already had 
lost nearly all his brothers and sisters), he fell into a 
state of melancholy which made teaching in Dijon 
distasteful to him. Wis work on the Vandals having 
been very Well received, he resigned his position in 
Dijon and (1888) returned to Paris. It was one day 
about this time that Markus met Heine and a com- 
panion walking on the boulevard. Heine’s com- 
panion, struck by Markus’ somewhat ludicrous ap- 
pearance, inquired, “ Who is that man?” Heine, 
who had known the Orientalist at the university, re- 
plied, “That is the King of Abyssinia.” This title, 
so thoughtlessly conferred, thereafter clung to him. 
Markus died in Dr, Pinel’s asylum for the insane. 
Baroness de Rothschild bore the funeral expenses, 
and Heine wrote an obituary. Markus had a re- 
markable memory and was called the “ walking li- 
brary.” He was very modest, and, in spite of his 
poverty. charitable to the extent of his means. 

He wrote: “Storia dei Vandali” (1836); “Géo- 
graphie Ancienne des Etats Barbaresques” (1842: 
translation of a part of K. Mannert’s “Geographic 


335 





der Griechen und Rémer,” with extensive notes and 
additions); a comparative chronology of the princi- 
pal nations of antiquity; and a prosody of the Greek 
and Latin languages. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Arch, Isr. 1848, pp. 541-49 (obituary by S 
Munk ; translated into German by S. Heilberg, Breslau, 1847): 
Servi, Isracliti. C Europa, pp. 197-199; Heine, Gesammelie 
Werke, xiv. 179-202, Hamburg, 1876; "Ally. Zeit. des Jud. 
1843, Nos. 18 and 34. 

s. N. D. 
MARLI (Six»y), SAMUEL RAPHAEL 

BEN MAZLIAH: Italian Talmudist and litur- 

gist of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 

According to 8. D. Luzzatto, the name “ Marli” 

means “of Arles” (Steinschneider, “Hebr. Bibi.” 

iv. 97, v. 46). Marli was the head of the yeshibah 

of Mantua (Abraham Portaleone, “Shilte ha-Gib- 

borim,” p. 20a), and was one of the rabbis that 
participated in the heated controversy over the 

“Mikwah ” of Rovigo (Moses Porto, “ Palge Mayim,” 

p. 59).* 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 
337 5 piecnuelder, Cat. Bodl. col. 2435; Zunz, Literatur- 


ese. p. 42 
M. SEL. 


eeu ALEXANDER: Austrian 
physician; born at Mielnica, Galicia, Feb. 19, 1865; 
educated at a gymnasium and at the University of 
Vienna (M.D. 1887). He removed to Paris, where 
he became a pupil, later an assistant, at the Pas- 
teur Institute. He is the author of “ Versuch einer 
Theorie der Septischen Krankheiten,” Vienna, 1894. 

In 1900 Marmorek claimed to have discovered an 
antidote (antistreptococcus serum) against puerperal 
fever; but his remedy did not prove efficacious. 
It is still, however, used at the Pasteur Institute. 
Again, in 1903 he appeared before the French Acad- 
emy of Medicine in Paris, claiming to have found 
an antidote for tuberculosis. He stated that the tu- 
berculin discovered by Koch was not the toxin (or 
poison) of the tubercle-bacillus, but a product which 
only stimulates the ceils to produce the toxin; that 
the real toxin had been found by him (Marmorek), 
and that he had discovered also the antituberculosis 
vaccine. He claimed good results for his remedy, 
which he had sent to Duyen of Paris and Von Mi- 
kulicz of Breslau. The first-named expressed him- 
self in favor of Marmorek’s antidote; the other con- 
demned it. 

Marmorek is known also as an ardent Zionist. As 
a student he had been a member of the Kadimah, 
the first students’ Zionist society of Vienna; he is 
therefore one of the earliest of the modern Zionists. 
He was made an officer of the first Zionist Congress, 
and has held office in each succeeding one. Heis at 
the head of the French Zionist Federation and is the 
founder of the Jewish Popular University in Paris. 
He has taken an active part also in communal work 
in Paris, and was one of the founders of the “ Echo 
Sioniste,” the Zionist monthly published in Paris. 
Marmorek has been decorated with the Legion 
d’Honneur 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : The medical eT oF Nov. and Dec., 1903; 

Le Petit Journal (Paris), Dee. 2 ; 

Ss. F. T. H. 

MARMOREK, OSKAR: Austrian architect; 
brother of Alexander Marmorek ; born at Skirta, Ga- 
licia, April 9, 1863. He studied at the polytechnic 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marks 
Marriage 





high school at Vienna and took a postgraduate 
course at Paris. Returning to Vienna in 1889, he 
settled there as an architect. Several important 
works were undertaken by Marmorek, including the 
illuminated fountain at the Forestry Exposition of 
1890 at Vienna, the music-hall at the Vienna Mu- 
sical Exposition of 1892, and the plan of the villa 
district of Assee. 

_Marmorek, like his brother Alexander, was an en- 
thusiastic Zionist, having been a member of the 
Vienna Kadimah. At the first Zionistic Congress he 
was appoiuted member of the Actions Committee, 
which office he held several years. In 1902 he was 
a member of the ‘Arish Expedition. 

At the Congress of Basel in 1901 Marmorek pro- 
posed to recognize the hospitality of Basel by erect- 
ing a Zionist Congress Home, and exhibited his own 
plans therefor. He died April 7, 1909. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, Vienna, 1893. 


s. | eee ae Ee 


MARRIAGE.—Biblical Data: The carliest He- 
brew literature represents a coinparatively high de- 
velopment of social and domestic life. Of primitive 
conditions of polyandry, such as existed among the 
early Arabs, there is no certain evidence in the Old 
Testament. HKven of the matriarchate, or reckoning 
of kinship through the mother, which W. Robertson 
Smith holds to have been originally the universal 

rule of Arabia (“Kinship and Mar- 


Forms.of riage,” 2d ed., pp. 145-190), there is 
the Mar- no clear indication. Traces thereof 
riage Re- have been supposed to remain incertain 

Jation. family connections, such as those of 


Milcah and Sarah, or in tribal groups, 
such as the sons of Leah and of Rachel, and also in 
the evidently closer and more intimate relationship 
between children of the same mother or with relu- 
tives on the maternal side. There is, however, 
probably nothing more in these than such distinc- 
tions as would necessarily arise in polygamous fam- 
ilies and in the natural intimacy between full broth- 
ers and sisters. Polygamy, or, more correctly, 
polygyny, was the prevalent form of the marriage 
relation iz Old Testament times. There seems to 
have been no limit to the number of wives or concn- 
bines a man might have, except his ability to main- 
tain them and their children. Asa matter of fact, 
however, only men of wealth, chiefs, or kings had 
many wives; the historian draws special attention 
to the large households of Gideon, David, and Solo- 
mon (Judges viii. 80; Il Sam. v. 18; [ Kings \i. 
1 eé seg.). The Patriarchs had not many wives; 
Tsaac appears to have been content with one. Cases 
such as those of Elkanah (I Sam. i. 1-2) and Jehoiada 
(II Chron. xxiv. 3), each of whom had two wives, 
may have deen common (comp, Deut. xxi. 15). 

Not infrequently the IIebrew slave-girl became 
the wife or the concubine of her master. Tnstances 
are given of the wife voluntarily giv ing her maid to 
be wife to her husband (Gen. xvi. 3; xxx. 3, 9). 
The lot of the childless wife in such a home was 
evidently an unhappy one. The law of later times 
was designed to limit the practise and to correct the 
abuses of polygamy. The king is enjoined not to 
multiply wives, “that his heart turn not away ” 


Marriage 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


336 





(Deut, xvii. 17). A man may not “take « woman 
to her sister to be a rival to her” (Lev. xviii. 18, R. 
V.). The interests of the less loved, or the hated, 
wife and her children are guarded (Deut. xxi. 15- 
17). Even in the earliest legislation the slave-girl 
who is espoused by her master and the slave’s wife 
are protected in their rights (Ex. xxi. 2-11; comp. 
Deut. xxi. 10 e¢ sey.). 

By the Prophets polygamy was discouraged. In 
the prophetic history monogamy is presented as the 
ideal original state (Gen. ii. 18 e¢ seg.). Plurality of 
wives first occurs among the degenerate Cainites 
(Gen. tv. 23); but Noah is the husband of one wife, 
and so, apparently, is the patriarch Job. The idy]- 
lic pictures of JI Kings iv., Ps. exxviii., Prov. xxxi. 
10 et seq., are of monogamous homes. Hosea and 
Isaiah were monogamists, When the Prophets rep- 
resent Jehovah’s relation to Israel by the figure of 
nlarriage, it is as a jealous husband choosing and 
betrothing to himself one beloved wife (Hos. ii.; 
Isa. 1. 1, liv. 5). The books of Proverbs and Eccle- 
slasticus exalt the place and character of the wife 
in the undivided home (Prov. xii. 4, xviii. 22, xix. 
14, xxxi. 10 e¢ seqg.; Ecclus. (Sirach] xxv. 1, 8; xxvi. 
1 et seg., 13 et seg.; comp. Eccl. ix. 9). Monog- 
amy was the rule among the Jews in Roman times, 
but there were notable exceptions. While the New 
Testament does not expressly prohibit. it discredits 
and discourages, polygamy (e.g., Matt. xix. 4-5; I 
Tim. iii. 2, 12). 

In the earliest Hebrew history endogamy prevails: 
particular care is taken that Isaac and Jacob shall 

contract marriage only with their own 


Kinship kin. The Canaanite wives of Esau 
and were “a grief of mind unto Isaac 
Marriage. and to Rebekah” (Gen. xxvi. 34-35; 


comp, xxvii. 46). Someof the sons of 
Jacob also departed from this custom (Gen. xxxviii. 
1-2, xli. 44). Moses married outside his own peo- 
ple, but he was a fugitive, and became an adopted 
member of his wife’s tribe (Ex. ii. 21; comp. iv. 18). 
It was, nevertheless, looked uponas right and fitting 
that marriage should take place within the circle of 
one’s own kindred (Gen. xxiv. 2-4, xxix. 19; comp. 
Judges xiv. 3). 

However, the changed conditions subsequent to 
settlement in Canaan made an intermingling of 
races inevitable (see Judges iii. 6; Ruth i. 4; HI 
Sam. xi. 8; I Kings vii. 14; I Chron. ii. 17; II 
Chron. xxiv. 26), and the custom of the kings in 
making foreign alliances by marriage favored this 
(II Sam. it. 8; I Kings iii. 1, xi. 1, xvi. 31). The 
Deuteronomic law forbids marriage with the Canaan- 
ites, but, apparently, makes an exception to the en- 
dogamous rule in favor of the Edomites and Egyp- 
tians (Deut. vii. 3, xxii. 7; comp. Ex. xxxiv. 16). 
The period of the Exile and the century following 
was also a period of laxity, but strict laws prohib- 
iting marriage with the foreigner were enforced in 
the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra ix. 10; Neh. 
xiii. 23-80). 

The older custom of intermarriage within the cir- 
cle of kinship was governed by no strict rules. Of 
course marriage with a daughter or uterine sister 
was not tolerated, but there was no bar to union 
with close relatives on the father’s side, and even 


down to the Babylonian exile such unions appear to 
have been common (Gen. xx, 12; Ex. vi. 20; Num. 
xxvi. 59; If Sam. xiii. 138; Ezek. xxii. 10-11). 
Deuteronomy prohibits certain marriages with near 
relatives (xxii. 80; xxvii. 20, 22-23), but the most 
elaborate legislation in this direction is found in 
Leviticus (xvili. 7-17, xx. 11-21). According to 
this Jaw a man may not marry his mother, step- 
mother, mother-in-law, father’s sister, mother's 
sister, paternal uncle’s wife, half-sister, stepsister 
(daughter of stepmother and her former husband), 
sister-in-law (brother’s wife), living wife’s sister, 
daughter-in-law, stepdaughter, granddaughter, or 
daughter of stepson or stepdaughter. It is clear 
that marriage with a deceased wife’s sister is not 
forbidden, but it has been argued that the near rela- 
tives of the wife equally with those of the husband 
are within the forbidden degree to him and that, as 
the wife’s mother and daughter are barred, go also, 
by analogy, is the wife’s sister. Whatever its 
anomalies or defects, there is no doubt that by this 
law a high ideal of domestic and social purity was 
maintained. The pre-Islamic Arabic custom, au- 
thorized by Mohammed, was closcly similar. See 
INCEST. 

The ancient custom of levirate marriage requires 
to be considered here. According to the story in 
Gen. xxxviii., it was an obligation resting upon a 
man to take in marriage the childless widow of a 
deceased brother and “to raise up seed to his 
brother,” The Deuteronomic law provides that 
where brothers live together, if one die without sons, 
the widow shall not marry a stranger, but that her 
husband’s brother shall take her, and that the first- 
born son shall be reckoned the son of the dead 
brother and shall succeed to his inheritance. Appar- 
ently there is a twofold purpose here—to perpetuate 
the husband’s name and to prevent the alienation of 
the property. The widow is permitted to insult pub- 
licly an unwilling brother-in-law by loosing his shoe 
and spitting in his face (see Hauizanm). Thenceforth 
his name is to be called in Israel “the house of him 
that hath his shoe loosed ” (Deut. xxv. 5-10; comp. 
Matt. xxii. 24-25; Mark xii. 19; Luke xx. 28). A 
slightly different example of the same custom is 
presented in the Book of Ruth. Indeed, the custom 
has been shown to have been widely prevalent out- 
side of Israel! (Westermarck, “History of Human 
Marriage,” pp. 510-514). It is difficult to determine 
whether or not the law in Lev. xviii. 16 and xx. 21 
is intended as an abrogation of the old Jevirate law. 
More probably Leviticus states the general rule to 
which the levirate is a particular exception (see 
Nowack, “ Lehrbuch der Hebriischen Archiologie,” 
i. 846; Driver, “Deuteronomy,” ad lvc.). See 
LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. 

The wife was regarded as property (see Ex. xx, 
17; comp. the Hebrew terms “ ba‘al” = “husband ” 
and “be‘ulah” = “wife”; literally, the “owner” or 
“master” and the “owned”). She 
was, however, valuable property and 
was, as a rule, well cared for. She 
was not isolated as among the Moham- 
medans, but had considerable freedom 
and influence. In the wealthier homes she must 
often have had a large measure of independence, 


Duties of 
Husband 
and Wife. 


337 


and in the royal household she sometimes became an 
important power in the state. It will be sufficient 
to recall the stories of Sarah and Rebekah; of Deb- 
«rah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, who 
judged Israel; of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite ; 
of Abigail (Nabal’s wife) and the Shunammite 
woman; of Jezebel and Athaliah. In the prophetic 
account of the Creation (Gen. ii., iii.) she is made a 
helpmeet for her husband, bone of his bone and flesh 
of his flesh. In the home the innermost apartment 
was hers, or, in some instances, a separate house 
(Judges xv. 1, xvi. 9; I Kings vii. 8). She per- 
forms the ordinary household duties or manages 
the affairs of her household and directs her servants 
{I Sam. ii. 19; Prov. xxxi. 10 et seq.). She must be 
chaste and obedient, and infidelity on her part is 
looked upon as a gross sin (Gen. ili. 16; Deut. xxii. 
20 et seg. ; Ezek.xvi.; John viii. 5-7). A false accusa- 
tion against her is severely punished (Deut. xxii. 13 
et seqg.); a curious ordeal is prescribed in Num. v. 
11-81 for testing the truth or falsity of a charge 
of infidelity. Adultery is strictly forbidden in the 
moral code and is denounced by the Prophets as a 
crime comparable to stealing, murder, false swear- 
ing, and idolatry (Ex. xx.14; Jer. vii. 9, xxiii. 10; 
Hos. iv. 2; Mal. iii. 5). The husband must provide his 
wife with food and raiment. While greater laxity 
was evidently permitted to him than to the wife, 
yet conjugal fidelity was highly esteemed and sex- 
ual license regarded as foolish and even fatal (Judges 
xix.-xx.; II Sam. xi.—-xii. ; Prov. ii., v., vi., vii.). In 
the New Testament love and fidelity on the part of 
the husband, and obedience on the part of the wife, 
are inculcated (Acts xv. 29; Ephes. v. 22-33; Coloss. 
fii. 18-19; I Thes. iv. 3-6). 
' The first step toward marriage was betrothal, in- 
volving the consent of the parent cr guardian of the 
girl and the payment of aprice. The 
act of betrothal is expressed by the He- 
and Nup- brew word “aras”; the price paid, by 
tial Rites. “mohar” (see Gen. xxxiv. 12; Ex. 
xxii. 16-17; Deut. xx. 7, xxii. 29; Hos. 
ii. 19-20). The mohar may be in the form of service 
in the field or in war (Gen. xxix.; I Sam. xviii. 25). 
Probably it was customary, even in early times, to 
give the bride some portion of the mohar, or at least 
to give her presents (Gen. xxiv. 58, xxxi, 15, xxxiv. 
12). After betrothal the bride might be taken to 
her husband’s house and the nuptials celebrated 
either immediately or later (Gen. xxiv. 49-67; 
Judges xiv. 5 et seq.). The initial steps, it appears, 
were customarily taken by the parents of the suitor, 
who formally made the proposal (Gen. xxiv., Xxxiv. 
4-6; Judges xiv. 2, 10). Not infrequently, how- 
ever, in the comparatively free social intercourse of 
those days, the young man and woman had met 
and formed a mutual attachment resulting in 
a love-match (Gen. xxix. 9-12, 18; I Sam. xviii. 
20, 28). 

The bride did not always go to her husband 
empty-handed. Sometimes she received gifts from 
her father, and a king’s parting gift to his daughter 


Betrothal 


was in one case a conquered city (Josh. xv. 16 e@ | 


seq.: Judges i. 12 et seg.; I Kings ix. 16). 

exilic times mention is made of a wife’s dowry and 

of a woman being able, by her own wealth, ta sup- 
WIIT.—22 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





In post- | jij. 6: comp. DESECRATION). 


Marriage 


port her husband (Tobit viii. 21; Ecclus Sirach 
XXv. 22). Mention is made also of a written mar- 
riage contract (Tobit vii. 14), 

After betrothal the bride was subject to the same 
restrictions as a wife (Deut. xxii. 23-24). Of the 
marriage ceremonial little is known; it is not men- 
tioned at all in the story of Isaac, while in that of 
Jacob (Gen. xxix.) a marriage-feast and a nuptial 
week are spoken of. The central features in later 
times were the wedding-procession and the wedding- 
feast. ‘The bridegroom in festive attire and accom- 
panied by his friends went to the home of the bride, 
whence she, likewise in bridal garments, veiled, and 
accompanied by her companions, was led to the 
house of his parents (Isa. lxi. 10; Judges xiv. 10-11; 
Jer. ii, 82; Isa, xlix. 18; Ps. xlv. 8-15), The pro- 
cession was er.ivened with songs by, or in praise of. 
the bride and bridegroom, and was lighted, if in the 
evening, by torches or lamps (Jer. vii. 34, xvi. 9, 
xxv. 10; I Macc. ix. 37-39; Matt. xxv. 1-12; comp. 
Ps. xlv. and the Canticles, possibly representing 
such wedding-songs). There followed the nuptial 
feast in the house of the bridegroom, and the sub- 
sequent festivities sometimes continued for several 
days (Matt. ix. 15, xxii. 1-14; John ii. 1). 

The husband has the right to divorce his wife, 
but he was required by the Deuteronomic law to 
give her a writing of divorce (Deut. 
xxiv. 1). She may remarry, but if 
she is again divorced or is left a 
widow her former husband may not receive her again 
(Deut. xxiv. 2-4). Older practises are probably rep- 
resented in Hos. ii. and II Sam. iii. 14. In two 
eases the right to divorce was withdrawn (Deut. 
xxii, 19, 29). The prophet Malachi protested most 
strongly against the practise (Mal. ii. 10-16). In 
the teaching of Jesus it is expressly condemned ex- 
cept on the ground of adultery (Matt. v. 31-32; 
Mark x. 2-12; Luke xvi. 18; comp. I Cor. vii. 11-18). 
See Divorce and GET. 


Divorce. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benzinger, Arch. Freiburg, 1894; Nowack, 
Lehrbuch der Hebr. Arch, vol. i. ib. 1894; Keil, Biblical 
Archeology, vol. ii. Stade, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, i. 
371-395, Berlin, 1887; McLennan, Primitive Marriage (re- 
printed in Studies in Ancient History, London, 1876); W. 
Robertson Smith. Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, 
Cambridge, 1895 (new ed., London, 1908); Stareke, The Prini- 
itive Family, London, 1889; Westermarck, History of Hu- 
man Marriage, London, 1891 (new ed., 1908); Cheyne and 
Black, Hneyec. Bidl.; Hastings, Diet. Bible. 


g. J. F. McbL. 


In Rabbinical Literature : Wedded life was 
regarded by the Rabbis as the most natural and the 
most exalted state. The unmarried man lives with- 
out joy, without blessing, and without good; also, 
according to others, without the Torah, without a wall 
(protection), and without peace (Yeb. 62b; Gen. R. 
xvii. 2). R. Hisda, in interpreting the expression 
“in want of all things” as used in Deut. xxviii. 48, 
said that it meant “without a wife” (Ned. 41a). 
Another amora, R. Eleazar, referring to Gen. v. 2, 
wished to deprive the unmarried man of his man- 
hood (Yeb. 68a). It is therefore permitted for one 
to sell a scroll of the Law if the money is needed for 
the purpose of getting married (Meg. 27a; Yer. Bik. 
At marriage all sins 
are forgiven (Yeb. 68a; Yer. Bik, tii. 3). 
One should be careful in selecting a wife. 





A say- 


Marriage 


ing current among the Rabbis was, “ Hasten to buy 
land; deliberate before taking a wife; descend one 
step in choosing a wife; ascend one 
step in choosing the best man” 
(“shushbin”; Yeb. 68a). Oneshould 
first establish a home and plant a 
vineyard, and then marry (Sotah 44a), The pursuit 
of the study of the Law, however, should be post- 
poned until after marriage, when a man is settled 
in mind and can devote himself entirely to that 
vocation (Yoma 72b; Men. 110a; comp. Kid. 29b). 

To marry a woman for her wealth was deprecated 
by the Rabbis(Kid. 70a; “Seder Eliyalu Zuta,” ch. 
iii., ed. Friedmann, Vienna, 1902; Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
Eben ha-'Ezer, 3, 1, Isserles’ gloss; “ Sefer Hasidim, ” 
S$ 1094, 1096, ed. Wistinetzki, Berlin, 1891; see 
Dowry). The daughter of a respectable family is 
most to be desired (B. B. 109b); especially should the 
brothers of the bride be good and respectable men, 
for the character of the children is like that of the 
brothers of the mother (B. B. 110a; “Sefer Hasidim,” 
S$ 1092, 1099, 1100). One should sell all he possesses 
in order to marry the daughter of a learned man 
(Pes. 49a, b; Ket. 111b; Yalk., Ex. 269; comp. Yoma 
71a). A marriage between the daughter of a priest 
or of a learned man and an ignoramus (“‘am_ ha- 
arez”) will not be a successful one (Pes. 49a). Al} 
the promises of the Prophets will be fulfilled upon 
him who gives his daughter in marriage toa learned 
man (Ber. 34b); it is as if he united himself with the 
divine presence itself (“Shekinah”; Ket. 111b). It 
is deemed advisable that the wife should not be of a 
higher rank than the husband, in accordance with 
the homely saying, “A shoe that is larger than my 
foot I do not desire” (Kid. 49a). The Rabbis were 
very much opposed to marriage between an old man 
and a young woman, or vice versa (Yeb. 44a; Sanh. 
76a, b); they also advised against marrying a di- 
vorced woman or a widow (Pes. 112a). Marriage 
should be contracted with no other intention than 
that of doing the will of God (Sotah 12a; “Seder 
Eliyahu Zuta,” ch. iii.). 

The acquisition of a good and virtuous wife was 
regarded by the Rabbis as one of the greatest bless- 
ings. The praise given to the virtuous woman in 
Prov. xxxi. is elaborated in Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), 
from which the Rabbis frequently quote the sen- 
tence: “ Blessed is the man that hath a virtuous wife, 
for the number of his days shall be doubled” (xxvi. 

. 1, Hebr.; comp. Yeb. 63b). He is rich 

Influence who has a wife whose deeds are 
‘of Wife. noble (Shab. 25b), for the wife can 
influence her husband more than he 
can influence her (see Gen. R. xvii. 1). In Palestine 
the custom was to address a man who had just 
been married with the question, “Maza o Moze?” 
referring to the initial words of two passages, Prov. 
xviii. 22 (“ Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good 
thing”) and Eccl. vii. 26 (“ And J find more bitter 
than death the woman. .. .” (Ber. 8a; Yeb. 63b), 
The quarrelsome woman was abhorred by the Rabbis 
of the Talmud, so that one would rather have all the 
evils combined than a bad wife (Shab. 11b). Some 
of the prominent Rabbis are recorded as having suf- 
fered much from the spitefulness of their wives 
(Yeb. 68a: comp. B. B. 145)). 


Choice 
of Wife. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


838 


Physical beauty in woman was highly appreciated 
by the Rabbis; a beautiful wife is one of the things 
that contributes to man’s happiness (Ber. d7b; comp. 
Yoma74b), A woman that has beautiful eyes needs 
no further recommendation (Ta‘an. 84a) “The 
highest attribute of a woman is her beauty” was 
the song of the maidens of Jerusalem at their gath- 
erings on the Fifteenthof Ab and the Day of Atone- 
ment when wishing to attract the attention of the 
assembled youths (Ta‘an. 81a). While it is com- 
mendable to marry soon after betrothal (Midr. 
Shemuel xvii. 4 and note, ed. Buber, Cracow, 1893), 
no one should marry a woman unless he has seen 
her beforehand (Kid. 41a; “Sefer Hasidim.” § 1148). 
Similarity in stature or in complexion between the 
man and the woman was regarded with disfavor. 
A. tall man should not marry a tall woman, nor @ 
short man a short woman; a dark man should not 
marry a dark woman, nor a fair-complesioned man 
a fair-complexioned woman (Bek. 45b). 

The proverb that “marriages are made in heaven ” 
is illustrated by a story in the Midrash. A Roman 
matron, on being told by R. Jose ben Halafta that 
God arranges all marriages, said that this was an 

easy matter, and boasted that she could 


Marriages do as much herself. Thereupon she 
Made in assembled her male and female slaves 
Heaven. and paired them off incouples: buton 

the morrow they all went to her with 
complaints. Then she admitted that divine inter- 


vention is necessary to suitable marriages (Gen. R. 
Ix viii. 83-4). Even God Himself finds it as difficult 
an undertaking as the dividing of the Red Sea. 
Forty days before a child is born its mate is deter- 
mined upon (Gen. R. Ixviii. 3-4; Sotah 2a; Sanh. 
22a; comp. M. K. 18b; “Sefer Hasidim,” § 1128). 

R. Jose asked of Elijah, “The Bible calls the wife 
a helpmeet; in what manner does she assist her 
husband?” To this Elijah replied, “A man brings 
wheat to his house, but he would have to chew the 
grains of wheat; he brings flax to his house, but he 
would have toclothe himself in flax—were it not for 
the wife, who [in preparing these materials] enlight- 
ens his eyes and helps him onto his feet ” (Yeb. 68a; 
Lekah Tob to Gen. ii. 18; comp. “Seder Eliyahu 
Rabba,” x. [ix.], where the story is given at greater 
length), To the worthy man the wife is a helpmeet;. 
to the unworthy man the wife is a hindrance (Yeb. 
63a). 

The term “kiddushin” (sanctification), by which 
the act of marriage is designated in rabbinical wri- 
tings, points to the reverence in which this cere- 
mony was held. “He thus prohibits her to the 
whole world as a sacred object” is the explanation 
given to that term (Kid. 2b). Marriage was the 
symbol frequently employed by the Prophets to 
designate the relation between God and Israel (Hos. 
ii. 2-22; Isa. lxii. 4-5, liv. 6; Jer. iii. 1, 20; Ezek, 
xvi.; e¢ «l.). The love-songs of Canticles were 
taken by the Rabbis to refer to the love of God for 
Israel (see “ Aggadat Shir ha-Shirim ” to Cant, viii. 5; 
“Seder Eliyahu Rabba,” ch. vii. [vi.] and x. [ix.]; 
et al.); God betrothed Israel with few gifts in this 
world, but the marriage which will take place in the 
Messianic time will be attended with many gifts. 
(Ex. R. xvi. 30). The relation of Israel to the Torah 


339 


is also symbolized as that of man to wife. The 
Torali is betrothed to Israel and therefore forbidden 
to every other nation (Ex. R. xxxiii. 8; Sanh. 59a; 
Pes. 49b), 


BIBLIOGRAPITY: Buchholz, Die Familie, Breslau, 1867 ; Suwal- 
ski, Hayye ha-Vchudi, ch. liii., Warsaw, 1593. 
8. 8. J. H. G. 


— Statistics: The number of marriages and the 
conditions Under which they are contracted differ 
in the Jewish from those of the surrounding popu- 
lation. <A smalicr proportion marry, though these, 
for the most. part, marry earher than their neigh- 
bors. However, the changed social conditions in 
Germany in recent years are tending to modify the 

proportions. The number of Jews 
Frequency. marrying to every thousand of the 

Jewish population (including children) 
is almost invariably less than among the general 
population, as may be seen from the following 
table: 





2 
-| 4 
w 
Place. Epoch. e = Authority. 
a a = 
p=} 
oO 
Algiers...... 1878 105 | 75 | ** Annuaire Statistique de ta 
France,”’ 1881], p. 580. 
Austria .,.... 1864 46 | 83 | J eiteles, | “a Chitheremethds 
Wien,” p, 50. 
Sn aang 1870 53 | 98 Some ** Beitrage,”’ p. 69. 
Baden ....... 1857-68 | 58 | 74 | Tb. 
Bavaria...... 1835-68 | 61 | 75 | Td. 
Bucharest. ...| 187 127 | 65 | ‘ Grasului Bucaresci,’’ 1878. 
France,...... 1855-59 | 62 | 82 | Legoyt, ‘* Immunities,” p. 68. 
Hungary..... 1864-73 iS 105 | Schwicker, ** Ungarn,” p. 99. 
Prussia....... 1822-40 | 89 |} Hoffmann, in “Jour. Stat. 
soc.” 1846, p. 78. 
UP Pras 1820-76 | 75 | 88 | Fireks, ‘‘ Zeit. Preuss. Stat.” 
1884, p. 148. 
ended palate 1878-82; 65 | 78 | Ruppin, in “ Jahrbitcher fiir 
| RE OnAieRonates: 1902, p. 
fan 1888-92; 66 ; 801 Id. 
eagles 1893-97 | 66 | 81 | Tb. 
Russia......+. 1852-59 | 82 | 95 Legoyt, l.c. p. 52. 
RY cciehinm tet LOE 87 |100 | ‘‘Le Mouvement de la Russie 
| en 1867,”’ p. 19. 
Tuscany ..... 1861 70 | 97 | Legoyt. ic. p. 60. 
Victoria (Aus-| 1871-80] 53 | 63 | ** Victorian Year-Book,” 1881, 
tralia). | p:-ATF: 





Jews live generally in towns, and fewer town- 
dwellers marry than country people. There is a 
larger preponderance of Jewesses over Jews in most 
of the countries of western Europe, where emigration 
removes the young men, and this slightly reduces the 
rate of marriage. In fact, the rate is probably illu- 
sory because reckoned on the whole of the popula- 
tion, including children. The Jarger the number of 
marriages the larger the number of children, and, 
therefore, the larger the population, Thus because 
the number of marriages among Jews is really 
greater, it has the appearance of being smaller. 

The age at which marriage is contracted affects 
more than any other circumstance the physical, 
mental, and social characteristics of the offspring, 
determining the average duration of a generation, 
the fertility of marriage, and the phys- 
ical and mental health of chiidren, 
and, it has been conjectured, the pro- 
portion of sex to sex in the offspring. The most 
important ages are those below 20 and those between 
20 and 80, the latter being the normal and more de- 


Age. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marriage 


sirable period for marriage. The following details 
are known with regard to Jewish marriages at these 


























ages, The figures in parentheses refer to females. 
Under 20. 20 to 30. 
Place. Epoch. ‘a= 
s Chris- fae Chris- 
Jews. thins. Jews. tates 
Austria..... 1861-70 70 (23.5) (15.1)/68.6 (58.7) | 8.7) 158.6 (37.6) 
Moscow..... 1868-72 | 6.2 (49,3) | 4.0 (29.9) 176.6 (48.4) 155. 4 (55.6) 
Budapest... 1858-70 (38.4) | (20.5) Bi. (48.5) 151.0 (53.1) 
POSEN a sontes 1867-73 | 0.7 (17.8)) 1.7 (17.1) 165.7 (69.1) 69.4 (68.2) 
Russia...... 1867 47.6 (68.2) 86.9 (56.7) ss 9 pate dig: OS. 7) 
Theat Biaa, dats 1897 5.9 (27.7) 31.2 (55.0) 77.7 (68.9) |54.5 (88.5) 
St. Peters- 
urg ..... 1866-72 | 9.5 (56.9) 3.7 (27.3) [52.4 (30.6) |48.1 (51.4) 


| 


The relatively early marriage of Jews was noticed 
in 1841 by Hoffmann, who mentions that 78.6 per 
cent of Jewish marriages in Prussia between 1822 
and 1840 occurred under the age of 40 as against 
74.6 of the general population (“Jour. Stat. Soc.” 
ix. 80). K6rési attempts to prove that Jews have 
the fewest abnormal marriages (that is, where the 
bride is under 18, or over 40, and the bridegroom 
over 4))—12 per cent as against 35 per cent among 
Catholics, and 3838 per cent among Protestants 
(“Statistisches Jahrbuch,” 1878, p. 87). In Russia, 
however, the general population appears to marry 
earlier than the Jewish. The proportion of protog- 
amous marriages, or first marriages, is larger among 
Jews than among Gentiles, as may be seen from the 
following table giving the percentage of such mar- 
riages: 

















Place. | Epoch.| Jews. ee Authority. 
Austria ....| 1861-70 | 87 (98) 82 (89) | Schimmer, “‘Stat. der 
Jud.”’ 1873, p. 6. 
Budapest,....| 1858-75 | 88 (84) — | 86 (89) | K6r6si, yanes Vil- 
les,”’ p. 


Moscow ....| 1868-72 | 88 (88) | 83 (85) | Th. p. 178. 





Prague... ..| 1879-80} 86 (96) | 82 (92) Statist Handbuch,” 
; 1881, p. 24 ; 
Prussia 1867-73 | 91 (97) | 83 (89) | Bergmann, l.e. p. 96. 
rata 
Russia......|1870 | 74 (80) | 82 (87) |‘ ee Stat. Soc.” 1880, 
St. Peters- 1866-72 | 83 (78) | 85 (87) | Kérdési, Le. p. 172 
burg. | 





This is probably due to the greater viability of 
Jews, since the longer husband and wife live the less 
likely either is to contract a second marriage. Thus 
among Jews in Budapest in 1870 no less than 66 per 
cent of those over 50 had husband, or wife, living, 
as against 51 per cent among Catholics and 53 per 
cent among Protestants (“Statist. Jahrb.” 1878, p. 
38). It is probable that Jews more frequently than 
others marry their cousins. Jacobs has shown this 
for England, where marriage of cous- 
Consan-_ insoccurs to the extent of 7.5 percent 
guineous of all marriages as against 2 per cent 
Marriages. in the general population (“Studies 
in Jewish Statistics,” ch. i.); Stieda 
has shown the same for Lorraine, where such mar- 
riages occur in the proportion of 23.02 per 1,000 
among Jews as against 1.86 among Protestants, 
and 9.97 among Catholics. 
The following table gives.the proportion of intev- 
marriages between Jews and Christians, and be- 


Marriage-Broker | 
Marriage Ceremonies 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


340 





tween Christians and 
piaces mentioned: 


Jewesses, at the times and 




















Shee 
| La) 3% 
Place. |Epoch.! 2% | 22 Authority. 

Pk | So 

| O15 
Algeria....| 1878 | 0.91 | 0.94 “Ann, Stat. France,” 1881, 

_ p. S81. 

Bavaria....| 1876-80 | 1.57 | 2.19 | ee Bay. Stat.’ 1881, p. 
Berlin ..... 1881 | 7.95) 4.91 ‘Statist. Jahrb.’ ix. 8. 

Fer aad 1895-99 |10.53 | 6.53 Ruppin, Le. p. 761. 
Budapest . .| 1881 0.96 | 0.10 . ** Pest in 1880,”" p. 12. 
Prague..... 1878-80 | 1.14 | 0.20  “* Statist. Handbuch,’ 1881, 

Posh 
Prussia..... 1875-79 | 4.46 | 5.36 | Fireks, ** Zeit. Preus. Stat.” 
| | 1880, p. 16. 
Vienna .. | 3.06 Korési, lc. p. 18. 





Relatively speaking, mixed marriages are not very 
numerous (see INTERMARRIAGE). 

The creeds professed by divorced persons are 
rarely given, so that it is difficult to ascertain 
whether Jews are divorced more frequently than 


others. In Bavaria, between 1862 and 1865, di- 
vorces were 5.1 per cent in Jewish 
Divorces. marriages as against 6.1 per cent in 


Protestant and 5.7 per cent in Catho- 
lic marriages (“ Annales de Demographie,” 1882, p. 
290). In Berlin, 1885-86, Jewish divorces were 2.7 
as against 3.6 for Protestants and 2.7 for Catholics; 
ten years later the figures were—Jews, 3.3; Protes- 
tants, 4.7; Catholics, 3.8 (Ruppin, J.c. 1902, p. 385). 


Bucenn Jacobs, Studies in Jewish Statistics, pp. 


J. 
MARRIAGE-BROKER. See SHADKAN, 


MARRIAGE CEREMONIES: Association of 
the sexes was much restricted among the Jews, 
and the BETROTHAL was generally brought about 
by a third person, often a professional match-maker 
(“shadkan”). The latter received a brokerage-fee 
fixed by law, as a rule a small percentage of the 
dowry, thesum being doubled when the contracting 
parties came from a distance. It was paid by 
either of the parties, or each paid one-half, at the 
betrothal orafter the wedding. The rabbi, asa per- 
son enjoying special confidence, was also often em- 
ployed as intermediary; it iswell known that Jacob 
Levi of Mayence lived upon fees thus derived, while 
he devoted his income as rabbi to assisting his 
pupils. Although the marriage preliminaries were 
exclusively the concern of the parents and their 
agents, yet the young people were in nowise forced 
into the contract. 

Early marriages were frequent; apart from moral 
considerations, they were often due to political con- 
ditions; in Russia, for example, the Jews were sub- 
ject to conscription, but those who were married 
men were excused from military service. Social 
conditions also had some influence: a father, pos- 
sessing the dowry for his child, urged the marriage 
so as to secure the dowry to her before one of the 
numberless persecutions robbed him of it. The be- 
trothal was concluded, conditionally or definitely, 
as soon as the amount of the “kenas” (the penalty 
for breaking the contract) was fixed; however, 
*t had, generally, no religious or legal signiti- 


A CC it TT SIG SAL SSeS fa SS tr N= 0 Tt 


cance, since the Talmudic custom of immediately 
connecting the betrothal (“ kiddushin ”) and the nup- 
tial ceremony (“erusin”), and of having the mar- 
riage proper follow later (“nissu’in ”), fell more and 
more into disuse in the Middle Ages. At the be- 
trothal the stipulations made by each party were 
fixed (“tena‘im rishonim ”), and a glass was thrown 
upon the floor, the broken pieces of which were 
saved to be laid upon the eyes of the espoused 
pair after death. 
In Poland, even to-day, the bridegroom receives 
pastry (“chosenbrod ”) when he visits his betrothed. 
During the week before the wedding- 
Prelimina- day the betrothed pair was allowed 
ries. to leave the house only when accom- 
panied. On Friday evening, or some- 
times two Sabbaths, before the wedding, a feast was 
given in honor of the parents; this feast was com- 
monly called “ spinnholz” (“sponsalia” or “spindel”), 
or, in Poland,“ vorspiel.” On the day before the wed- 
ding the most prominent members of the community 
carried the presents of the groom to the bride with 
special ceremonies; as was customary also in non- 
Jewish circles, the presents consisted generally of a 
girdle, veil (“covering ” before the ceremony still 
obtains, in conformity with Rebekah’s example), 
mantle (“kursen”), and wreath, subsequently also 
of a “siflones tefillah,” a prayer-book with the in- 
scription myn ody mn) mans (“ Love, fraternity, 
peace, and good-fellowship”). Among the Greco- 
Turkish Jews a ring was included, called “nissu’in ” ; 
among the Greeks and Romans it was called “sym- 
bolum” (hence the Jewish “siflones”). The groom 
received a ring and shoes, latera tallitand a shroud. 
The rings were handed down in the family: the 
rings were formerly often of fine workmanship, 
having the miniature model of a synagogue carved 
on them and the inscription N13 33, later om 
31 (= “ good luck ”). 
Two weddings on one day, especially of brothers 
or sisters, were avoided, and it was considered un- 
lucky if the father-in-law and the son- 
Day of in-law had the same name. In Tal- 
Wedding. mudic times virgins were married pref- 
erably on Wednesday, and widows on 
Thursday (later, on Friday afternoon), a custom 
that still obtains in the East. A wedding in Ma- 
yence at the end of the fourteenth century took the 
following course: Early in the morning the “schul- 
klopfer” invited the whole community to the cere- 
mouy. The leaders took the bridegroom, with 
music and candles, to the court of the synagogue; 
then the musicians and candle-bearers brought the 
bride with ber friends and an escort of women. At 
the door of the synagogue the groom took the 
bride’s band, while the two were showered with 
wheat and coins (given afterward to the poor), and 
Ps. exlvii. 14, and later Gen. i. 28 (“ Be fruitful, and 
multiply ”), were recited as a greeting; after this they 
sat for a short time. hand in hand, on the bench in 
front of the synagogue. Then the bride was escorted 
home, where she put on the festive robe of the mar- 
ried, and under it the shroud (“sargenes”). The 
groom also modified his festive appearance by 
drawing the hood (* gugel”) over his head, which 
he strewed with ashes; even to-day the groom in 


341 


eastern Europe wears the sargenes, With this sign 
of mourning for Zion even at the height of human 
felicity, belonged in Talmudic times another—the 
breaking of a glass, the pieces of which were 
gathered up by girls “for luck,” while the “sham- 
mash ” cried out “Zeh ha-ot ” (= “ This is the sign ”), 
and all present responded “ Mazzal tob.” The grief 
at Zion’s loss appeared likewise in the mournful 
strains of the wedding-songs in the Talmud, as also 
in the poems of Judah ha-Levi, who first composed 
individual “carmina” on the model of Ps. xlv. and 
the “kallah” songs down to the eighteenth century. 

As soon as the groom had sat down beside the 
Ark of the Law, the morning prayer began, after 
which the bride was led with music to the door of 
the synagogue; thence she was escorted by the 
rabbi and the elders of the community to the bemah 
(see ALMEMAR), taking her place at the right of the 
groom (comp. Ps. xlv. 10 [A. V. 9], in which 


Ee 

\ts 

) ‘at 
1 


SS 
4S 
wy 8 


'Yy 


Se OS 


BAU 





Marriage Ceremony. 
(From a Passover Haggadah, Amsterdam, 1695.) 


the last letters of the words sr" bow ha ia 
(“upon thy right hand did stand the queen ”], taken 
in reverse order, spell nb5 {“bride”]), where the 
mothers of the young couple stood. Bride and 
groom were covered with the tallit, or with the long 
end of the groom’s gugel, and wedded. Later the 
wedding-tent (“huppah”) came into use; this was 
a reminiscence of the litter in which the bride was 
formerly carried or of the room in which the couple 
were left alone fora time. Then the 
groom was escorted home, and after 
him the bride, whom he met at the 
door and as she entered he placed 
her hand on the upper post, thus making her the 
mistress of the house. The wedding-festival proper, 
in the bride’s house, did not begin until the eve- 
ning; it lasted until Sunday morning, but was inter- 
rupted by the Sabbath morning service. At. this, 
as at every service, the groom was the center of in- 
terest; in his honor songs were rendered that grew 
more numerous as marriages became less frequent, 
and more solemnas the social and political condition 
of the Jews was rendered more unfortunate. On re- 


The 
Huppah. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


ee oe A A A a Pt SY yO = A Or oH 


Marriage-Broker | 
Marriage Ceremonies 


turning home the groom handed to his young wife 
his mantle, girdle, and hat to signify that she shared 
his property. 

The bridal procession (mentioned in Biblical wri- 
tings) was headed, among the Spanish Jews, by 
mimes, fiddlers, and armed riders. In Egypt the 
bride was decked with helmet and sword, while the 
groom and his escort wore feminine garments and 
colored their finger-nails with henna, as women did. 
The women played the cymbals and danced. Even 
the most dignified scholars, also, danced in Talmudic 
times. Later, music was regarded as an essential 
part of the wedding, non-Jews being engaged to play 
on the Sabbath, while on the other hand Jewish 
musicians played at the festivities of Christians. 
The garlanding of the bridal pair, a custom of Bib- 
lical origin that was carried to an extreme of extrava- 
gance, ceased with the destruction of the Temple; yet 
the myrtle-wreath of the bride has been retained. 
Even in New Testament times young girls with 
torches escorted the pair (Matt. xxv.); in Arabia 
a pole to the top of which a light has been fastened 
is carried at the head of the procession. In Bagdad 
the groom is accompanied to the house of the bride by 
poor people carrying lamps, and he distributes for 
this service coins among them. On the way the poor 
thrust live sheep in front of bim, and whenever he 
steps on the head of one he gives a certain amount to 
its owner. The bride is usually led seven times (or 
at least once) around the groom; or both sit while 
the people, old and young, dance around them. Ac- 
cording to an ancient Persian custom in Talmudic 
times, nuts and flowers were strewn in the path of 
the pair, and they were showered with barley which 
had been planted in a pot shortly before the wed- 
ding (on the use of hops in this connection see Hehn, 
“Kulturpflanzen,” p. 488; and on the use of rice 
among the Indians, whose wedding-customs are very 
similar to those of the Jews, see Dorville, “Gesch. 
der Verschiedenen Volker des Erdbodens”). On the 
birth of a boy a cedar was planted; on that of a girl, 
an acacia; and when the girl became a bride her lit- 
ter was made from the branches of that acacia. In 
Germany the young couple’s first meal consisted of 
milk and honey, and salt was sprinkied in the house 
(comp. Num. xviii. 19). In Tur Malka two hens 

are carried before the couple, and 

Wedding- after the wedding chicken is placed 

Feast. before them (“chosenhiihndel”). In 

the East they jump over a vessel con- 

taining a fish, and in Germany fish was formerly 

eaten on the second day of the wedding-week; all 
these customs are symbols of fertility. 

The fasting of the bridal pair dates back to the 
Talmud; it is either due to the fact that their sins 
are forgiven or is intended to remind them of the 
duty of temperance. The wedding-songs were oft- 
en in the form of riddles, following Biblical prece- 
dent (Samson’s wedding), and were improvised espe- 
cially by the jester (“ marschalik ”), who, however, 
at times moved his hearers to tears by serious 
speech, as he still doesin eastern Europe. Plays also 
were given, a practise which prevailed otherwise 
only at Purim. 

Before the fourteenth century the presence of the 
rabbi was not required; nor did he speak at the cer- 


Marriage Ceremonies 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


342 





cemony, though he did at the feast, when the groom 
likewise delivereda “ derashah” (Talmudic discourse ; 
hence the use of the word “derashah” for wedding- 
gifts). Weddings were occasionally celebrated in the 
open air in the Middle Ages, although the Talmud 
protested against the custom; it was done probably 
because of the limited space in the synagogue or In 
the bride’s house; later the custom was interpreted 
symbolically (comp. Gen. xv. 5). At the synagogue 
service on the Sabbath after the wedding the con- 
gregation read to the groom the chapter on Isaac’s 
marriage, a custom that ceased in Europe with the 
seventeenth century. In the East the Arabic transla- 
tion is read in addition to the Hebrew. 

During the seven blessings at the ceremony the 
bride and the groom, in accordance with a wide- 
spread superstition, each tried to secure the mastery 
in the household by putting one of the feet on the 
foot of the other. At the time of the Geonim (as 
occasionally to-day in the East) these seven blessings 
were uttered twice—once in the house of a relative 
of the bride, whither the latter had been taken from 
her father’s house on the evening before the day 
of the wedding, and once in the house of the 
groom. 

The ring, without stone or inscription, is put on 
the first finger of the bride’s right hand. The mar- 
riage certiticate, the wording of which varies accord- 
ing to time and place (Chorny, “Sefer ha-Massa‘ot,” 

p. 242; Rinman, “ Mas‘ot Shelomoh,” 
The ‘‘Ke- pp. 156, 159; Kaufmann, in “ Monats- 
tubah.” = schrift,” 1897; S. Krauss, in “Zeit. 
fir Hebr. Bibl.” 1901; A. Berliner, in 
“Mekize Nirdamim,” ix.), dates from the Hellenis- 
tic period; among the Sephardim, especially the 
Italian Sephardim, and in Cochin, it was artistically 
ornamented. In early times it often bore the por- 
traits of the bridal pair. Among the Jews of the 
Caucasus it is sometimes put in the grave (Chorny, 
lc. p. 26). 

The reports of travelers concerning the marriage 
ceremonies among the Oriental Jews are interesting. 
Thus Rinman tells of the White Jews at Cochin: If 
the contracting parties have come to an understand- 
ing, the couple are taken before the elders of the com- 
munity, the eldest of whom asks the groom whether 
he consents to the union; if he has parents, he an- 
swers, “The will of my parents is my will”; if not, 
“TJ desire her.” Then the bride is questioned, and 
if she also consents, the elder takes a cup of wine and 
drinks to the health of the pair, the others present 
doing likewise; then they partake of coffee and 
confectionery and leave. On theday of the wedding 
the groom wears a white turban and the bride a fine 
cap; after the ceremony both clothe themselves in 
red silk, and on the seventh day in green silk or 
in silk of some other color. 

The costs of the feast are borne by the father of the 
bride, the father of the groom furnishing only wine 
and meat (often forty beeves during the fifteen days 

of the feast, although beef is given only 

Customs of to the servants, the guests being fed 
Cochin. with fowl). The owner of the largest 

; house in the community surrenders 

his apartments for the wedding festivities. On the 
Sabbath the groom spreads a feast for his friends; 


then the whole community goes to the house of the 
bride to escort her to the house of one of her relatives, 
who serves coffee tothem. Attheend of the Sabbath 
the bride is led to the house in which the ceremony 
is to take place, and there the people eat and drink 
until after midnight. On the following evening 
the bride is led to the mikweh, or ritual bath. On 
Tuesday morning the goldsmith comes to make the 
ring for the bride, which she wears until her death. 
While she puts the ring on, the women sing Mala- 
barian songs. In the evening the groom is led with 
music to the synagogue, where he stands on the steps 
before the Ark of the Law and recites the evening 
prayer with the congregation. Then the whole com- 
munity, with the sound of trumpets and drums, calls 
for the bride, who walks under a kind of sun-um- 
brella carried by her father, in accordance with a 
Talmudiclaw. She sits down with her bridesmaids 
to the right of the Ark; before her stands a sil- 
ver inkstand, to be used by the signatories to the 
ketubah. 

The groom, in the tallit, sits down opposite her 
with his two best men; the hazzan thereupon tills a 
golden cup with wine and gives it to the groom, 
receiving in return 74 francs; and the groom, reciting 
the first blessing, drinks part of the wine and gives 
some to the bride. Then he hands her the ring, 
with the words: “ Thou, , daughter of , art be- 
trothed unto me, ——, son of , according to the 
law of Moses and Israel.” Thereupon the ketubah is 
read to a certain melody, and the groom gives it to 
the bride, after having thrice repeated, “ Here is thy 
ketubah.” The hazzan then causes the groom to 
take hold of his tallit, and to promise that he “ will 
fulfil his duties as husband.” After the hazzan has 
pronounced the seven blessings, the bride is un- 
veiled, to the song “ Yafah kalebanah,” based on 
Cant. vi. 10. Hand in hand, the young couple now 
proceed, with music and torch-bearers, and followed 
by the people, to the house in which the festivities 
are to be held. There the groom dances with his 
friends and the bride with hers, and all partake of 
refreshments. At 10 o’clock they sit down to the 
feast, the bridal couple at the head of the table, and 
next to them the leaders of the community, men on 
the one side and women on the other. The old 
people call out “Yehi he-hatan weha-kallah!” 
(Long live groom and bride!), and the young peo- 
ple answer, “ Hep! Hep!” (This custom is derived 
from the Portuguese.) The hazzan then sings, the 
community responding, after which the elders sing, 
and the hazzan pronounces grace and intones Ps. 
cxi., “Eshet Hayil,” and finally the seven biessings 
(a different elder of the community blesses the bride 
and groom on each of the seven wedding-days). 
Then the young people dance with the groom, clap 
their hands, and again sing Ps. exi. 

On Wednesday evening the groom goes to the 
bride, who has assumed a white gown, which the 
women take away assoon as the groom is gone. The 
next day the elder women, after a meal, gather to 
pass judgment on the virtue of the young wife. On 
the following Sabbath there is another feast. Inthe 
synagogue is read from a printed copy of the Torah 
the section, “And Abraham had reached the days,” 
with the Aramaic translation. After the service 











“RYQINGAD HIN 


Ft pene 


SEM ee: 


ODE ATES 


ar a ta a 
awe 
eae a cor ma 


= 
cae 


—rt 


a 


a 





Hi 


ni 3 
i 


i= 


STS 


i 


ra wes ripe ma nirare 


= 


A 


Par 


peer tet 


afta Ly are wf y “i SP We Vip 
ey cans ieee 


and ++ am — 
ee r armed cis, ii r 7 iia aan 
A AL TL tite an ie thi asa BRERA AS 


wf 
£ 


i cc 


COBLT cc‘ ToTMOMOLeD soqoe par ,, “asTMoIpy W074) 
AQLHOTIQ ATUVGA ‘SMAC OUAANAYON ONOWY ANOWATYAD TZOVIVUV NK 


ETE MM he 
7 - 
ose Ty ¢ 
- . ae ee ae 
: Weer OIE as gg 
sae 
oie 


foe tree eer 
gle sade enerey 


Serre yyy nd PONMIRAAIA VAAL 


elle 


a ey pee Ge 
ra PT ogy ik 


PI Lae Lo A A lag hg og 


i 


a Pree 


il 


= 
— 
\—4 
i 
4 
— 
=> 
= 
— 
— 


ut 


iM 


LLM 
wiiinice | 
CARIN CLM 


IARI 


Mm 
IRL TT 


HTH) 


Hh 


ll 


N\ \ 


havin 
rN 


iN eee Il 


a © een oe a 
LY We as Fy) 


EE 


if 


Ti 


if 


Hz Hil 


} 


i 


HUN 




















a ano 
ary 


i 
a ee A 
i—" 


oo sean. 
mg 
rs 


i: 
y a 
t 
4 
EL RTECES 


} 





Marriage Ceremonies 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


344 





every one gathers in the house of festivity; the 
bride, in gorgeous garments, with a wreath of pearls 
on her head, stands in front of her throne, the women 
sing before her, the men eat, drink, and dance, and 
then all sit down to dinner. Simmatler feasts are held 
daily until the following Wednesday. On Tuesday 
evening there is a greater feast, when the guests 
present their gifts. There is no difference between 
the weddings of the rich and the poor, since the rich 
give to the poor everything that is required for 
the occasion. 
In Cochin and among the Cingalese the follow- 
ing order is observed: The bride counts seven days 
from the day on which the groom de- 
In Ceylon. clares his intention of marrying her. 
On the night before the eighth day she 
takes a bath, the women assisting her, and singing. 
The next night, called “kofa,” she is led with music 
to the women’s ritual bath, after which the rabbi 
sings a song beginning “ Yafah kalebanah Torah” 
(an acrostic containing “ Yizhak”); a Torah-roll, 
opened at the Decalogue, is placed before the bride, 
who kisses it while putting her hand to her eyes. 
Then the rabbi blesses her, placing his hand on her 
head. The people eat, and sing acrostics with 
the names “ Abraham” and “Solomon”; after wash- 
ing their hands they say grace and go home. On 
the following day they gather again in the wed- 
ding-house; the bride places the presents of the 
groom in a vessel, and the goldsmith examines the 
gold and silver to see that they are not below the 
-minimum value of one “ peruta” ormiteeach. Here, 
also, the women sing. Ata second gathering on the 
same day the groom appears with his hair cut, hav- 
ing bathed and donned new garments, including a 
new turban; as soon as he comes to the table the 
guests sing Ps. exxii., the groom is placed among 
them, and they recite Esth. viii. 15 e¢ seg.; he is then 
blessed and sits down at table. This meal is called 
“ajni.” After dinner the rabbi sings “ Kalil hatan 
li-berakah,” and the several blessings of grace are 
recited in turn by various guests. The next evening 
the people proceed with music and songs to the syn- 
agogue, where the groom and his best men (“shush- 
binim ”) light four wax candles; then the procession 
marches to the wedding-house, where the bride is 
waiting. She is placed on a chair, wrapped in a 
large cloth, and the groom stands in front of her 
and quotes again from the Book of Esther (viii. 15 
et seq.). Then the groom himsclf, a3 is customary in 
Yemen, pronounces, according to the version of 
Maimonides, the first blessing over a cup of wine, 
to which a silver ring is attached by a white thread. 
He tastes the wine, takes off the ring, and gives the 
cup to the bride with the words “ Ba kiddushiki.” 
After drinking she gives the cup to some one in 
the circle. The groom next places the ring on the 
little finger of her right hand, using the same words 
as before, and the rabbi reads the marriage cer- 
tificate, after having obligated the groom (by taking 
hold of his mantle—“ mekabbel kinvan "—three 
times) to fulfil the chief duties of the husband as 
stated in the certificate. The certificate is signed by 
the groom and two witnesses, and then given to the 
bride. Songs follow, the bride is unveiled and placed 
in a litter, and cups of wine are given to the groom 


and the rabbi, who pronounces the seven blessings. 
The ceremony ends with a song. 

On the Sabbath morning the groom goes with his 
relatives to the synagogue, where he is received 
by the rabbi with the words of Ps. cxxii. He is 
called up as the eighth to read the Torah, while the 
leader in prayer recites a piyyut— Arba‘ah Kelli- 
lin.” Before the second blessing the groom recites 
by heart from Gen. xxiv. After the Haftarah the 
words of Isa, Ixi. 10 are pronounced before the 
blessings. When the groom leaves the synagogue 
the rabbi repeats Ps. cxix., etc. Arrived at home, 
the bride and groom are blessed by the rabbi, and 
the people eat and sing, On the eve of the seventh 
day of the wedding-week the bride and groom are 
led with music to the synagogue, the rabbi reads 
Ps. xliv.,and the groom recites the evening prayer; 
then they go to the wedding-house, where the rabbi 
repeats “ Yafah kalebanah,” and the people feast and 
sing * Yismah hatan ba-kallah.” 

In the town of Tilla on the Sabbath the passage 
Gen. xxiv. is read to the groom from a second. 
Torah-roll, and the janitor of the synagogue ren- 
ders the song “Mi Kamoka,” by Judah ha-Levi 
(in the Sephardic mahzorfor Purim). On the morn- 
ing of the third day the friends of the groom color 
his hands and feet red (the people go barefoot in 
Tilla); in the evening there is a great feast, after 
which they shave the groom’s head and put on the 
turban the bride has given him, he, on his part, hav- 
ing presented his friends and the brothers of the 
bride with turbans; all then proceed, with dancing 
and singing and with torches, to the house of the 
bride. There the groom pronounces one blessing 
over a cup Of wine and the others over a second 
cup; he takes a ring and coins of gold, copper, and 
(chiefly) silver, and says to the bride, in Aramaic: 
“Be hallowed and be betrothed unto me, , the 
bridegroom, thou, bride and virgin [divorcée or 
widow], by this cup of wine and by this coin; on 
account of them thou shalt pass into my possession, 
according to the law of Mosesand of Israel.” After 
having given her wine, he offers her the money and 
the ring, before witnesses, and translates from the 
Arabic the marriage certificate, which he also gives 
her. The congregation sings the seven blessings 
together with songs in honor of the couple, and the 
choir-leader recites Ps. iii., the people responding 
“Hallelujah.” Then the groom says, “ You have 
blessed me, may God bless you; you have made me 
glad, may God make you glad,” and drinks the wine. 
On Friday evening there is a feast in the house of 
the bride, at which the groom gives her the wed- 
ding-gift. On the Sabbath she is taken to the house 
of the groom, where the festivities last for seven 
days, on each of which the seven blessings are re- 
cited. During this time the groom sits daily for one 
hour under the huppah. 

In Bagdad the palms and the soles of the bride 
and her friends are colored with henna the night be- 
fore the wedding. The people make merry first in the 
house of the bride, then in that of the grooin. The 
next day, about five hours before sunset, the “haka- 
mim” accompany the groom and his relatives to the 
house of the bride. The hakam lifts the bride’s veil 
in order to show her to the groom, but lets it fall 





i) 


! 


Ful 

















wilh 
A 


ll 





4 


) 


ig 


| 











| 


ana 


i 


i} 


psn 


‘) 


AQAA 
Sel 


At Qa 
\ 


™: 





Phe ial 


y 





S AMONG GERMAN JEWS, EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 


N 


SSTO 


MARRIAGE PROCE 


») 


*? 3748 


iche Verfassung, 


irch! 


atz, “K 


(Frem Bedensch 


Marriage Ceremonies 
Marriage Laws 





again immediately. In Bagdad also the celebration 
lasts seven days. 

Chorny (U.c. p. 298) says that in the Caucasus the 
ceremony is always performed on Wednesday. On 
the preceding Thursday three or four girls, relatives 
of the bride, put on her clothes and 
invite other girls to sleep in a special 
room With her. Toward evening the 
groom sends meat and rice-flour to 
the bride and her friends. The latter go out to 
sprinkle the flour on the young people, who dance 
while the boys and girls clap their hands. On 
this evening also the groom spreads a feast for 
his friends. On Sabbath morning the friends of the 


In the 
Caucasus. 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


346 





She is clad in mourning to indicate her sor- 
row at leaving her parents’ house. The visitors 
every Where receive presents and refreshments. As 
they approach the house of the groom, his com- 
panions appear and pelt the procession with sand 
and small stones. The groom is similarly led about 
among his friends. If he is rich he is even obliged 
to have silk wedding-garments made for the mem- 
bers of his household. 

On Tuesday evening the father of the groom 
spreads a feast for the whole community. On 
Wednesday the bride and groom fast. About noon 
the rabbi, with a male relative of the groom and 
some women, goes to the house of the bride in order 


song. 





MARRIAGE SCENE AT CRACOW. 
(From “ Oesterreichisch-Ungarische Monarchie in Wort und Bild.”’) 


bride, among whom there must be at least five grown 
persons, clad in the bride’s garments, go from house 
to house leaving invitations to the feast and receiv- 
ing wherever they may stop sugar, coffee, apples, 
or eggs. 

After the service, at which the groom is not called 
up for the Torah, which is read only after the cere- 
mony, the guests accompany the pair to the house of 
the groom for a feast, and then to the house of the 
bride, where the men eat first and the women after- 
ward, the girls furnishing music with harmonicas, 
trumpets, etc. Onthe Sabbath, as well as on the fol- 
lowing day, the bride spreadsa table for her friends; 
on Sunday the groom for his friends. On Monday 
and Tuesday the bride visits the friends of her house- 
hold with her girl companions, who sing a Tatar 


to inspect the clothing which she has had made 
with the money of the groom. Quarrels often arise 
on this occasion. If the father is wealthy he adds 
asum of money to that which has been provided 
by the groom. 

Then the groom and bride are taken to the sea for 
the bath, after which they put on the wedding-gar- 
ments. The groom is preceded by young men, and 
the bride by girls, with drums and with hand-clap- 
ping and Tatar songs. While the hair of the weep- 
ing bride is being combed, the girls light the lamps; 
then the bride, kneeling, receives her mother’s bless- 
ing. The brothers of the bride, if she has any, other- 
wise an uncle, lead her to the ceremony in the court 
of the synagogue, the girls following with lights, 
generally white candles ornamented with blossoms. 


‘VIOIIVS Ni SN3AI0S JODVIHYVAN 


4rxtid mysmads.iie 
ITIA “IOAN UA 





ee Google 


347 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marriage Ceremonies 
Marriage Laws 





The groom also is brought with songs from the 
sea; girls go to meet him in festive train, with dishes 
of confectionery, and with a branch hung with 
silken kerchiefs and coins. Arrived at home, he is 
kissed on the forehead by all the women; then, after 
having been blessed by his relatives, he is led with 
music to the court of the synagogue, where, under 
the huppah, the rabbi with two pnpils awaits the 
pair. The music ceasing, the groom goes under 
the huppah, while the bride’s parents are mourn- 
ing at home for their child and those of the groom 
are preparing for the ceremony. The bride is led 
a few times around the groom, the bridesmaids and 
the others carrying lights. The ritual is that 
of the Sephardim; the rabbi sits during the cere- 
mony, and both he and the groom hold a glass 
of wine during the blessings, drinking after each 
of them. 

After the ceremony, guns aud rockets are dis- 
charged; the bride, closely veiled by her attendants, 
is put on a horse, which a relative of the groom 
jeads while another holds a mirror before her face; 
and with shouting and music the couple are led 
home, showered on the way with rice. Arrived 
at the house of the bride, the girls dance, and as soon 
as she crosses the sill the door-posts are smeared 
with honey, while a light burns over the door; 
at the same time the young men again discharge 
pistols. The musicians are then paid, and the 
wedding procession is ended. 

Afterward the groom goes walking with his 
friends until the evening, when the men and the 
women eat in separate rooms without music. After 
the meal is finished the gifts, of gold only, are pre- 
sented, the rabbi blessing each giver. The bride 
keeps with her in the room of the women only a 
sister and an aunt, if she has any, and a few 
friends. Late in the evening, after the guests have 
departed, the groom is led to the bride. After a 
time the young men call him out, discharging guns. 
The bride’s mother must prepare for them a cock 
and a hen, or all her chickens will be stolen and 
killed. The bride and groom receive also money 
and fruit, the latter being eaten in the bride’s room, 
The bride herself remains for twelve days behind 
a curtain, guarded by girls who demand pay from 
the groom. 

In Grusia (Georgia; Chorny, f.c. p. 129) the groom 
and bride are led in festive train from their homes to 
the synagogue, where they take their places beside 

the bemah,. The hakam recites some 

In piyyutim, translating them into Gru- 
Grusia. sian, the ketubah also being written 
in Hebrew and Grusian. After a 

blessing upon the czar the groom covers himself 
and the bride with a tallit. While the hakam pro- 
nounces the first blessings the groom holds a 
ring and an earthen vessel containing wine. Then 
handing the ring to the bride, he breaks the vessel ; 
covered by a cloth, the ends of which both hold, 
the bride and groom circle around the bemah, kiss 
the curtain of the Ark of the Law, and leave the 


synagogue. 
‘ M. Gr. 


MARRIAGE LAWS: The first positive com- 
mandment of the Bible, according to rabbinic inter- 


pretation (Maimonides, “Minyan ha-Mizwot,” 212), 
is that concerning the propagation of the buman 
species (Gen. i. 28). It is thus considered the duty 
of every Israelite to marry as early in life as pos- 
sible. Eighteen years is the age set by the Rabbis 
(Ab. v. 24); and any one remaining unmarried after 
his twentieth year is said to be cursed by God Him- 
self (Kid. 29b). Some urge that children should 
marry aS soon as they reach the age of puberty, 
z.é., the fourteenth year (Sanh, 76b); and R. Hisda 
attributed his mental superiority to the fact that 
he was married when he was but sixteen years old 
(id. d.c.). It was, however, strictly forbidden for 
parents to give their children in marriage before 
they had reached the age of puberty (Sanh. 76b). 
A man who, without any reason, refused to marry 
after he had passed his twentieth year was fre- 
quently compelled to do so by the court. To be 
occupied with the study of the Torah was regarded 
as a plausible reason for delaying mar- 
riage; but only in very rare instances 
wasa man permitted to remain in celi- 
bacy all his life (Ycb. 68b; Maimon- 
ides, “ Yad,” Ishut, xv. 2,3; Shulban ‘Aruk, Eben 
ha-‘Ezer, 1, 1-4; see CELIBACY). 

The duty of marriage is discharged after the birth 
of a son and a daughter (Yeb. 61a). Still no man 
may live without a wife even after he has many 
children (7d.). Women are exempted from the duty 
of marriage, although, to avoid suspicion, they are 
advised not to remain single (7b. 65b; “ Yad,” @.e. 
2, 16; 2b. Issure Biah, xxi, 26; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 1, 13; 
see WOMAN). 

The consent of parentsis not essential to the valid- 
ity of a marriage (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 240, 
25, Isserles’ gloss). The Rabbis, however, urge 
great care in the choice of a wife. He who marries 
a woman unworthy of him is bound by Elijah and 
chastised by God; and concerning him Elijah writes, 
over the signature of God, “ Wo unto him who pro- 
fanes his children and degrades his family ” (Kid. 
70a; Derek Erez R.i.). According to R. Akiba, he 
who marries a wife that is unworthy of him trans- 
gresses five Biblical commandments (Ab. R. N. 
xxvi. 4). While all families are presumptively pure 
and respectable, those that are at constant warfare 
with one another, or whose members are accustomed 
to call one another shameful names, or are known for 
their acts of cruelty and uncharitableness, are under 
suspicion of being of impure descent (Kid. 71b, 76b). 
The families most desirable for matrimonial alliances, 
according to the Rabbis, were classified in the fol- 
lowing order: those of the scholar; the most promi- 
nent man of the community; the head of the con- 
gregation; the collector for charity ; and the teacher 
of children, The family of the ignoramus (“‘am 
ha-arez ”) is to be avoided, and one should not give 
his daughter in marriage tosuch a person (Pes. 49b; 
“Yad,” Issure Biah, xxi. 32; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 2; 
see ‘AM HA-AREzZ). 

To the degrees of prohibited marriages enumer- 
ated in the Bible (Lev. xviii. 6-18, xx. 11~21), the 
Rabbis added some new degrees, besides extending 
those mentioned in the ascending and the descending 
line. These additions are known in the Talmud by 
the name of “sheniyyot,” 7.e., secondary, such as 


Age for 
Marriage. 


Marriage Laws 
Marseilles 


are given on the authority of the Soferim (“Scribes”). 
See HauizaH; Incest; LEVIRATE MARRIAGE. 

Prohibitions of marriage on grounds other than 
those of consanguinity refer to the following: (1) 
Mamzers, persons born of incest or of adultery ; they 

are not permitted to marry Israelites 

Prohibi- (see BasTaARD; Founpiine; ILLEGITI- 

tions of macy; INcESsT). (2) Ainmonites or 

Marriage. Moabites; they may not marry Israel- 

itish women. (3) Egyptians or Idu- 
means to the third generation. (4) Nethinim or 
Gibeonites. The Rabbis declare: “ Now all prose- 
lytes are permitted to marry Israelites; and we do 
not suspect that they are descendants of any of 
the nations forbidden in the Bible” (“ Yad,” Issure 
Biah, xii. 25; Tosef., Kid. v.6; Yad.iv. 4; Ber. 28a; 
sce INTERMARRIAGE; PROSELYTES). (5) Slaves. (6) 
Spadones, z.e., persons forcibly emasculated, but not 
those that are born so. When the defect is the 
result of a disease, there is a difference of opinion 
among the authorities (Eben ha-‘Ezer, 5). 

One who is suspected of having committed adul- 
tery with another man’s wife is not permitted to 
marry her after she has been divorced or after she 
has become a widow (Sotah 25a; Yeb. 24b; see 

AvDULTERY). The Biblical prohibition 
Prohibited forbidding one toremarry his divorced 
Degrees. wife after she has been married to an- 
other (Deut. xxiv. 4) is extended by 
the Rabbis to the following cases: No one may re- 
marry his divorced wife if he divorced her on sus- 
picion of adultery, or because she had subjected 
herself to certain vows, or on account of her bar- 
renness (see Divorce). Those who assist at a 
divorce proceeding, or the witnesses who testify to 
the death of an absent husband, may not marry 
the woman thus released (Yeb. 25a; Git. 45a; 
“Yad,” Gerushin, x. 18; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 10. 3: 
12, 1-2). 

Besides the proselyte and the profane (HALALAQ) 
or the divorced woman (Lev. xxi. 17 [A. V.14]), the 
descendants of Aaron were forbidden to marry also 
the “haluzah,” the woman who performed the cer- 
emony of Harizaw (“loosening the shoe ”) upon her 
deceased husband’s brother (Yeb. 24a). <A pricst’s 
wife who had been criminally assaulted had to be 
divorced by her husband (7d. 56b). A woman cap- 
tured by an enemy in time of war was under suspi- 
cion of having been assaulted by her captors, and 
hence priests were forbidden to marry her, unless wit- 
nesses wlio were with her during the whole time of 
her captivity testified that she had not been assaulted 
(Ket. 22a, 27a). The Rabbis insisted on the fulfil- 
ment of these laws even after the Temple had been 
destroyed and the priestly office abolished ; and they 
compelled an Aaronite, under penalty of excom- 
munication or other means, to divorce the woman 
that he had married contrary to the Law (“ Yad,” 
Issure Biah, xvii.-xx.; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 6, 7: see 
PRIESTLY CODE). 

There are some prohibitions which relate specific- 
ally to the woman’s remarriage. A woman who 
was twice widowed, if both husbands died natural 
deaths, might not marry again (Yeb. 64b; “ Yad,” 
’.c. xxi. 31; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 9). A widow oradivorced 
woman might not remarry before the expiration of 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


348 


ninety days from her husband’s death or from the 
time when the bill of divorce was handed to her. 
This provision was made in order to 
ascertain whether she was pregnant, 
and that in the event of her being so 
the paternity of her child might be es- 
tablished. For the sake of uniformity the Rabbis 
required the woman to wait that length of time 
even when there could be no suspicion of pregnancy. 
If she was visibly pregnant, she might not remarry 
until after her delivery, and even then, if the child 
lived, she was required to wait until it was twenty- 
four months old. A woman who had an unweaned 
child was required to wait the same period. If the 
child died during the interval, she might remarry 
immediately (Yeb. 41a, 42a; “ Yad,” Gerushin, xi. 
18-28; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 13; see Divorce; Wipow). 

There are certain times during which marriage is 
forbidden. During the first thirty days of mourn- 
ing after the death of a near relative no marriage 
may be entered upon. A widower may not remarry 
until three festivals have passed after the death 
of his wife. If, however, she left him with lit- 
tle children needing the care of a mother, or if he 
had not yet discharged his duty of propagating the 
species, z.e., if he had no children (see above), he 
might remarry after a lapse of seven days (M. Kk. 
23a: “Yad,” Ebel, vi. 5; Yoreh De‘ah, 392). No 
matriage might be entered upon on Sabbaths, holy 
days, or the week-days of the holy days, except in 
very urgent cases (Bezah 36b; “Yad,” Shabbar, 
xxiii. 14; 7. Ishut, x. 14; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 64, 5; 
Orah Hayyim, 3389, 4, 524, 1, Isserles’ gloss). The 
first nine days of the month of Ab were regarded as 
days of mouruing and no marriage might then be 
performed. Some extended this prohibition to the 
three weeks intervening between the fast of the 
Seventeenth of Tammuz and that of the Ninth of 
Ab (Orah Hayyim, 551, 2, 10, Isserles’ gloss, and 
commentaries), The period between Passover and 
Shabu ‘ot (“Sefirat ha-‘Omer”) was also regarded as 
one of mourning; and no marriage might be per- 
formed during this time, except ona few specified 
days. In some places it was customary to refrain 
from marriage only until the thirty-third day of the 
Omer (2). 498, 1, Isserles’ gloss; see Mournine: 
OMER). 

Marriage, being regarded also asa civil transac- 
tion, required the consent of the contracting parties 
in order to make it valid (see Consent). Hence 
idiots or imbeciles were considered incapable of con- 
tracting a legal marriage (see Insanrry). The deat- 

mute was also debarred from entering 
Conditions. a iegal marriage for the same rea- 

son, but the Rabbis sanctioned the mar- 
riage of a deaf-mute if contracted by means of signs 
(sce DEAF anD DumB IN JEW1sn Law). Minors 
(¢.é., such as have not reached the age of puberty, 
which was held to begin at thirteen years in males, 
and twelve in females), are also precluded from 
contracting marriages (see Magority). A daugh- 
ter who was a minor could be given in marriage by 
her father; and such a marriage was valid. In the 
case of her father’s death, her mother or her brothers 
could give her in marriage, subject to her confirma- 
tion orannulment on her reaching theage of puberty 


Remar- 
riage. 


349 


‘see Mi‘un). A marriage contracted under certain 
conditions was valid when the conditions were ful- 
tilled. The conditions had to be formulated in ac- 
cordance with the general laws governing conditions 
(see CONDITIONS). 

In rabbinic times there were two distinct stages 
in the marriage ceremony: (1) its initiation or the 
BETROTHAL (“erusin ”), and (2) its completion or the 
marriage proper (“nissu’in”). These might or might 
not have been preceded by an engagement (“ shiddu- 
kin”), although the prevailing custom was to have 
a formal engagement before marriage, when a con- 
tract (“tena’im”) was drawn up in which the par- 
ties promised, under the penalty of a fine (“ kenas”), 
to be married at an appointed time (see BREACH OF 
Promise OF MARRIAGE), The Rabbis regarded it 
as improper to marry without a previous engage- 
ment, and would punish one who did so, although 
the act itself was considered valid (Kid. 12b: 
“Yad,” Ishut, ii. 22; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 26, 4). 

The betrothal was effected in any of the three 
following ways: (1) by the man handing a coin (a 
perutah, the smallest Palestinian coin, was sufficient 
for the purpose) or its equivalent to the woman in 
the presence of two competent witnesses, and pro- 
nouncing the words “Be thou consecrated to me,” 
or any Other phrase conveying the same idea; (2) by 
the man handing acontract (“shetar”) to the woman 
containing the same formula; (8) by actual cohabi- 
tation between groom and bride. This last form 
of betrothal was discouraged by the Rabbis; and 
sometimes such a procedure met with severe punish- 
ment at the hands of the authorities. The manner 
of betrothal first mentioned seems to have been the 
most common, but later this was modified, so that in- 
stead of money the man gave his bride aring, plain, 
and made of goid, the value of which was constant 
and well known (Tos., Kid. 9a, s.v. “ Wehilketa”; 
Eben ha-‘Ezer, 27, 1; 81, 2, Isserles’ gloss; see BE- 
TROTHAL). Theact of betrothal might be performed 
also by proxies appointed either by the bride or 
by the groom or by both; but it was recommended 
that the contracting parties be present at the cere- 
mony (“ Yad,” Ishut, iii. 19; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 35, 36). 
After betrothal the parties were regarded as man 
and wife; and the act could be dissolved only by 
death or by a formal bill of divorce. If the woman 
proved unfaithful during the period of betrothal she 
was treated as an adulteress, and her punishment 
(that of stoning; Deut. xxii. 23, 24; Sanh. 66b) was 
considered to be much more severe than that (stran- 
ulation) inflicted upon the unfaithful married 
woman (Deut. xxii. 22; Sanh. 52b). The parties were 
not, however, entitled to conjugal rights, nor were 
they bound by the obligations of married life (see 
HUSBAND AND WIFE). 

After the lapse of a certain period from the time 
of betrothal (twelve months if the bride was a virgin 
and a minor, and thirty days if she was an adult or 
a widow; Ket. 57b), during which the bride could 
prepare her trousseau, the marriage proper was cele- 
brated. This was attended with the ceremony of 
home-taking (“ likkuhin” or “ nissu’in”) and isolation 
of the bridal pair in the bridal chamber (“huppah ”). 
From that time they became husband and wife, even 
if there was no cohabitation. Various ceremonies 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marriage Laws 
Marseilles 


attended the act of marriage (see MARRIAGE CERE- 
MONY). An important feature was the handing over 
of the marriage contract (“ketubah ”) to the bride. 
In later times the two stages of marriage were com- 
bined, a custom universally followed at the present 
time. 

Besides the cross-references cited above see Con- 
FERENCES; Dowry; KETUBAH; PILEGESH ; PoLya- 
AMY. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, RA. B. T.i.,8.v. Ehe; ii.,s.v.Trau- 
ung; Mayer, Rechte der Isracliten, Athener, und Rémer, 
ii., sections 207-231, Leipsic, 1866; Saalschiitz, Das Mosaische 
Recht, ch. eii.-ev., Berlin, 1853: Weill, La Femme Juive, 
Paris, 1874; Buchholz, Die Familie, Breslau, 1867; Duschak, 
Das Mosaisch-Talmudische Hherecht, Vienna, 1864; Frin- 
kel, Das Jtidische Eherecht, Munich, 1891; Bergel, Die Ehe- 
verhidltnisse der Alten Juden, Leipsic, 1881: Mielziner, The 
Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce, Cincinnati, 1884; 
Bloch, Der Vertrag, sections 96-102, Budapest, 1593; Amram, 
The Jewish Law of Divorce, Philadelphia, 1896 ; Graszl, Hhe- 
recht der Juden in Oecesterreich, Vienna, 1849; Fasse), Das 
Mosaisch-Talmiaudische Civilrecht, i., 88 44-121, Vienna, 1852; 
Lichtenstein, Die Ehe nach Mosaisch-Talmudischer Auffas- 
sung, Leipsic, 1879; Frankel, Grundlinien des Mosaisch- 
Talmudischen Hherechts, Breslau, 1860. 

8. 8. J. H. G. 


MARRIAGE SETTLEMENT. See Kerusan. 
MARRIED WOMAN. Sce MARRIAGE; WomMAN. 


MARSEILLES (ny5ywap or xSp1n): Sea- 
port of southern France with about 5,000 Jews in a 
population (1896) of 420,300. It had a Jewish col- 
ony as early as the fifth century, and in 567 a num- 
ber of exiles from Clermont, Auvergne, sought 
refuge there from the intolerance of Bishop Avitus, 
Pope Gregory intervened in their behalf in 591, re- 
proaching Theodore, Bishop of Marseilles, for hav- 
ing attempted to convert them by force and not by 
suasion. Benjamin of Tudela says (“ Itinerary,” 1.6) 
that when he passed through the city, about 1165, 
the Jewish community numbered 3800 members, 
who worshiped in two synagogues. In the thir- 
teenth century the Jews carried on an extensive com- 
merce and had considerable relations with the East. 
While they are called “ citizens of Marseilles” (“ cives 
Massilize ”), as appears from the compact made in 
1219 between the city and the bishop in regard to 
the municipal franchises, and from the agreement be- 
tween the inhabitants of Marseilles and the Duke of 
Avignon in 1257, this does not seem to denote that 
they had equal rights with their Christian fellow 
citizens. Theircondition, which seems to have been 
favorable during the earlier parts of the Middle Ages, 
underwent a change in 1262, when the city was 
obliged to capitulate in consequence of an insurrec- 
tion against the Duke of Anjou, Count of Provence, 
to whom the Jews were surrendered as property 
which he might tax at pleasure. The count, on 
the other hand, was well disposed toward the Jews, 
and in March, 1276, issued a severe edict against the 
inquisitors who had compelled them to wear a 
badge of greater size than the one worn by them 
since the Lateran Council of 1215, and extorted 
large sums from them under the pretext of fines. 

Still, although theoretically the Jews were citi- 
zens. certain passages of the laws make it clear that 
they were not treated as such. After 
the age of seven they were obliged to 
have on their breasts a disk of some 
colored material, as large as the hand, 
while married Jewesses were required to wear spe- 
cial veils, “orales,” under penalty of a fine of five 


Disabili- 
ties. 


Marseilles 
Martin 


sous. As in other cities of Provence, the Jews 
of Marseilles were forbidden to testify against Chris- 
tians if their testimony was challenged, or to work 
on Sundays and Christian holy days. They were 
likewise prohibited from going to the baths more 
thun once a week, from journeying to Alexandria, 
or from embarking in groups of more than four on 
the same ship. Jcwish passengers on a vessel, more- 
over, were forced to refrain from meat on days when 
the Christian passengers abstained. 

Toward the end of the thirteenth century a Jew 
living near the episcopal palace arranged some Purim 
games which the Christians regarded as a mockery 
of their religion, and the bishop, making the whole 
community responsible, imposed a heavy fine upon 
it (Ibn Adret, Responsa, iii. 889). 

The fourtecnth century was a golden age for the 
Jews, for they were placed under the absolute pro- 
tection of the municipality. The municipal council 
did not permit the statutes to be construed in any 

way to their disadvantage, nor did it 
Fourteenth hesitate to oppose the guardian of the 
Century. Jews appointed by the Count of Pro- 
vence, or the most hostile of the clergy, 
to secure for the Jews the security promised them 
by the laws of the city. They were permitted to 
engage in the same trades as the Christians; most 
them were brokers, wine-, or cloth-merchants, or 
tailors. There was also one “magister lapidis” or 
stone-cutter. Another Jew, Crescas Davin, called 
Sabonerius, is said to have introduced the soap in- 
dustry in 1371, and he was succeeded by his son 
Solomon Davin. 

Although the majority of the Jews were engaged 
in commerce, there were also anumber of physicians 
(Barthélemy, “Les Médecins & Marseille Avant et 
Pendant le Moyen Age,” Marseilles, 1888; reprinted 
nearly entire in “R. E. J.” vii. 298, 294), 

The counts of Provence intervened in behalf 
of the Jews whenever occasion demanded. Thus, 
in 13820 King Robert enjoined his royal officers to 
afford special protection to the Jews, to assist them 
under all circumstances, and to receive them at need 
either in his castles and fortresses or in theirs; and 
in 1331 and 1332 Philippe de Sanguinet, seneschal of 
Provence, decreed that the Jewish communities in 
general and all Jews in particular should be pro- 
tected against every vexationand that their property 
should be guarded by royal officers. 

No compiaint seems ever to have been brought 
against the community as a whole. In 1857 it 
helped to defend the city, threatened by a siege; in 
1385 it contributed fifty florins to a loan which the 
citizens of Marseilles found themselves obliged to 
contract. In return, Queen Marie, in 1387, and her 
son Louis IT. in 1889, confirmed the liberties, privi- 

leges, and immunities of the Jews. 


Under As long as Provence was independent 
Provengal the counts refused to listen to the ex- 
Rule. ag gerated complaints against the Jews, 


who continued to live under benevo- 
lent municipal statutes and franchises. In 1422 
Queen Yolande of Naples, Countess of Provence, 
forbade her royal officers to accept certain personal 
property from the Jews, under penalty of forfeiture 
of office and of payment of 100 marks fine silver. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


350 


In 14638 King René, who ten years previously 
had entertained certain charges which had beer 
brought against the Jews without investigating 
them, declared that they had aright to his specia: 
protection, since they could count on if alone, not 
being able to rely on that of the Church. In 1481. 
on the complaint of two Jewish deputies, Solomon 
Botarelli and Baron de Castres, Reneé closed the 
baptistery of Saint-Martin, where a Christian woman 
had foreibly baptized a young Jewish girl, and he 
obliged the parishioners to have their children bap- 
tized in the Church of St. Jacques de la Corrigceric. 

In 1484 the lawless bands which overran the cities 
of Provence, attacking and pillaging the Jews, as- 
sailed the community of Marscilles, and in the fol- 
lowing year the inhabitants of the city, accusing 
the Jews of usury and of various imaginary crimes, 
fell upon them and massacred a large number, de- 
manding that King Charles VIII. immediately expel 
the remainder from Provence. Theking, not daring 

to comply at once with a demand so 
Projects of contrary to the tolerance hitherto 
Expulsion. characterizing the rule of the counts 

of Provence, decreed that all Jews de- 
siring to depart should be permitted to leave the city 
unmolested, provided they had fulfilled all their 
engagements with the Christians. The municipal 
council, ignoring this royal command, forbade any 
Jew or Jewess to leave with property. The Jews 
protested vigorously to the provost and the munici- 
pal council against this unjustifiable action, and 
demanded the protection of the magistrates. These 
protests must have been in so far effective as to se- 
cure them a respite, for in 1492 the community was 
still numerous enough to ransom 118 Aragonian 
Jews captured by the pirate Bartholemei Janfredi, 
paying the sum of 1,500 écus, which it borrowed 
from a Christian. Hight years later a royal decree 
of banishment from Marseilles was issued against 
the Jews, though it was not carried out completely 
until about 1501. 

In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries some 
Jews had again settled at Marseilles. Among them 
were Villaréal, who was expelled in 1682 for having 
induced some Jewish families to come to the city 
and having opened a synagogue in his house; Lopez, 
originally from Bordeaux, who was driven out in 
1711; and Rouget, who, in virtue of a residence of 
tifteen years at Marsciiles, claimed in 1771 the right 
of engaging in marine commerce. 

Since 1808 Marseilles has been the seat of a con- 
sistory, whose administrative authority extends over 
all the Jewish communities of southern France. 

The Jewish quarter, with its principal strect, 
which was called “Carreria Jusatarie” or “ Carreria. 
Judseorum,” and its lanes and bywavys, 
formed a kind of island designated 
“Insula Juzatarie,” and occupied a 
considerable area. In 1350 the Jews planned to 
leave their ghetto, but the inquisitor objected and 
obliged them to remain. When the city was taken 
by King Alphonso V. of Aragon, in 1423. the Jews. 
suffered especially, and most of them fled from 
Marseilles, seeking refuge in various places of Pro- 
vence, Some returned within a short time, under 
the protection of a safe-conduct, while the remainder 


Ghetto. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marseilles 
artin 





were conjoined to return within fifteen days, under 
penalty of furnishing their coreligionists with a suf- 
ficient security to guarantee the pay- 
Syna- ment of the communal debt incurred 
gogues and befvre the disasters of 1423. The 
Cemeteries. Jews had two synagogues in the Mid- 
dje Ages, one “Scola Major,” and 
the other “Seola Minor.” A Latin document men- 
tions a third synagogue in an entirely different 
quarter, The present temple was built in 1865. 
In medieval times the Jewish cemetery was 
situated on the Mont-Juif or Montjusieu, but after 
the expulsion of the Jews King Charles VIII. pre- 
sented the site to a citizen of Marseilles. In 17838 
Solomon de Silvaand Mordecai Hay Darmon bought 
a plot in the Quartier du Rouet, This served as a 
cemetery for the Jews until 1804, when it no longer 
sufficed ; and a larger picce of land was bought in the 
vicinity (* R. E. J.” xiv. 302). At present (1904) the 
community of Marseilles owns two cemeteries, one, 
now closed, near the Place Castellane, and the other 
in the Quartier de St. Pierre. 

The hospital was situated in the vicinity of the 
large synagogue, and the two almshouses were 
under the supervision of rectors. One of them was 
called “Saraca.” The Jew Bonias Salemas left it 
in 1426 a bequest of four measures of pure wine 
annually as a perpetuity; to the other one he be- 
queathed, in a similar manner, a measure of oil to 
be delivered every year on the eve of the fast of 
Kippur. The women’s bath, called “Lo Banhador 
de jas Fennas,” was also situated in the ghetto. 
The Jews had their own slaughter-house, called 
“Lo Masel de los Jusieus.” 

In the second half of the twelfth century Mar- 
seilles was an important center for Jewish studies. 
Benjamin of Tudelastyles it “the city 
of geonim and sages.” In 1194 it was 
to these “scholars and learned men” 
that Maimonides addressed his letter on astrology 
(comp. Maimonides, “!la¢gerot,” ed. Amsterdam, p. 
6). The following are some of the scholars of Mar- 
seilles: twelfth century: Simeon b. Antoli or Ana- 
tole and his brother Jacob, Isaac b. Abba Mari, Moses 
b. Samuel ibn Tibbon; thirteenth century: Jacob 
b. Machir (called also Profatius Judsus), Shem- 
Tob b. Isaac, Joseph of Marseilles, Solomon Nasi 
b. Isaac Cay], Jonathan, Isaac of Marseilles, Samuel 
b. Judah or Meles Bonjudas; fourteenth century: 
Solomon b. Joseph, Nissim b. Moses, Shem-Tob 
Falcon, and Joseph b. Johanan; fifteenth century : 
Judah b. David (called also Maestre Bonjudas Bon- 
davi),and Jacob b. David Proven¢al. Of the modern 
rabbis may be noted Jonas Weyl (d. 1903) and his 
successor, the present (1904) incumbent, Honel 
Meiss. 


Scholars. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Aug. Fabre, Hist. de Marseille, i. 481-491; 
idem, Anciennes Rues de Marxeille, pp. 99-109; Bédarride, 
Les Juifs en France. p. 2/8: Barthélemy, Les Médecins a 
Marseille Avant ef Pendant le Moyen Age, pp. 13-29; idem, 
La Savonneric Mearscillaise. p. &: Blaneard, Documents 
Inédits sur le Commerce de Marseiile au Moyen Age, i. 2d 
part. No. 5. p. 79, No. 3814, p. 392; ii., No. 518, p. 76, No. 716, 
p. 161, Nos. 963, 964, p. 274: ii, 8d part, No. 23, p. 423; Beug- 
not, Les Juifs @Oceident, i. 135; C. Arnaud, Kssai sur la 
Condition des Juifs en Provenee, pp. U4, 15, 28 et seq.; Dep- 
ping, Les Juifs dans le Moyen Age, pp. 198-200; Gregory of 
Tours, Historia Franeorum, v.11, vi.17; Gross.in Monats- 
schrift, 1878, p. 155: idem, Gallia Judaica, pp. 366-384; Oc- 
tave Teissier, Marseille au Moyen Age, pp. 48-155; Papon, 


Histoire Générale de la Provence, iii., 61, documents, xv., 
Portal, Un Proces en Responsabilité Médicale, p. 5. Mar- 
seilles 1902; R. E. J. vii. 293: ix. 6; xii. 267: xiv. 310; xvi. 
73: xvii. 96; xIvi. 1, 246; xivii. 62; xlix. 301; Rulli, Hist. de 
Marseille, xiii. 26, pp. 305-309; Shebet Yehudah, ed. Hano- 
ver, p. 114. ; 

D. S. Kk. 


MARSHALL, LOUIS: American lawyer and 
communal worker; born at Syracuse, N. Y.. Dec. 
14, 1856; educated at the Syracuse high school and 
at the Columbia College Law School. He cntered 
upon the practise of his profession in Syracuse in 
1878, removing to New York city in 1894. Asa 
member of the bar Marshall has attained a distin- 
guished position, He was appointed by Governor 
Hill, in 1890, a member of the commission to revise 
the judiciary article of the constitution of New 
York, and was elected to the New York Constitu- 
tional Convention of 1894, serving as vice-chairman 
of the judiciary committee and chairman of the 
committee on “future amendments.” Ile has served 
also as vice-president of the New York State Bar 
Association and has written numerous articles and 
essays on professional subjects. 

Marshali is active also as a Jewish communal 
leader. He is adirector and chairman of the execu- 
tive committee of the Jewish Theological Seminary 
of America, and is a director of the Congregation 
Emanu-El, the Educational Alliance, and the Jew- 
ish Protection and Aid Society (all of New York), 
and of the New York branch of the Alliance Israé- 
lite Universelle. Marshall has taken especial inter- 
est in the establishment of a Jewish “ protectory ” 
for delinquent Jewish children, and has occasionally 
delivered addresses and lectures on Jewish subjects. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Markens, The Hebrews in America, p. 229; 
History of the Bench and Bar of New York; Leslie, His- 
tory of New York. A 


MARTIN, RAYMUND: Spanish Christian 
theclogian; born in the first half of the thirteenth 
century at Subirats in Catalonia; died after 1284. 
In 1250 he was selected by the provincial chapter, 
sitting in Toledo, to study Oriental languages at a 
Dominican school which had been founded for the 
express purpose of preparing its pupils to engage in 
polemics against Jewsand Moors. Subsequently he 
lived fora long time ina monastery at Barcelona. 
In March, 1264, he was commissioned, with the 
Bishop of Barcelona, Raymund de Pefiaforte, and 
two other Dominicans, Arnoldus de Sagarra and 
Petrus Janua, to examine the Hebrew manuscripts 
and books which the Jews, by order of the king, 
were to submit to them, and to cancel passages 
deemed offensive to the Christian religion. This is 
the first instance of Dominican censorship of the 
Talmud in Spain. Their report was not at all 
severe, however, since Raymund Martin declared 
that many passages were confirmatory of the truth 
of Christianity, and that the Talmud should not be 
burned entirely (“ Pugio Fidei,” ii. 14, § 8). 

Martin was the author of two anti-Jewish books, 
one of which, the “ Capistrum Judzorum,” has never 
been printed. His chief work, the “Pugio Fidei,” 
mentioned by Victor Salbaticis in 1520, was lost for 
a long time, but was finally brought to light by 
Justus Scaliger, and edited by Joseph de Voisin, 
with many notes, under the title “Pugio Fidet 


Martinet 
Martyrdom 


Raymundi Martini Ordinis Predicatorum Adversus 
Mauros et. Judeos” (Paris, 1651). Better known 
than this edition is its reprint by J. B. Carpzov 
(Leipsic, 1667), with the anti-Jewish preface “In- 
troductio in Theologiam Judaicam.” The work 
treats of God's omniscience, the Creation, immortal- 
ity, and the resurrection of the dead, and attempts to 
show the falsity of the Jewish religion; the latter 
part of the work is valuable on account of its extracts 
from the Talinud, the Midrash, and from other 
sources. Martin has been accused of forgery because 
of his quotations from Genesis Rabbah, which was 
not otherwise known; but Zunz defends him against 
this charge (“G. V.” p. 300). 

Martin was widely read in Hebrew literature, quo- 
ting not only from Talmudic and Midrashic works, 
but from Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Maimonides, and Kimhi. 
His fundamental! views, which he attempts to sub- 
stantiate by his citations, are that Jesus is announced 
in rabbinical literature as the Messiah and son of 
God; that the Jewish laws, although revealed by 
God, are abrogated by the advent of the Messiah; 
that the Talmudists corrupted the text of the Bible, 
as is indicated by the “tikkun soferim.” Martin’s 
work was fora long time the chief source for Domin- 
ican polemics. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Antoine Touron, Histoire des Hommes Il- 

lustres de VOrdre de St. Dominique, i. 489-504, Paris, 1743; 

Jacob Quétif, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum, i. 396-398, 


ib. 1719; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. i. 1016-1018, iii, 989-991; Herzog- 
Plitt, Real-Encye.; Gratz, Gesch. vii. 124, 150. 
ae G. WE. 


MARTINET, ADAM: German Catholic Orien- 
talist; born in Hoéchstidt, near Bamberg, in Jan., 
1800; date of death uncertain. Martinet, who was 
a professor in the lyceum of Bamberg, was the au- 
thor of “ Tif’eret Yisrael,” or “ Hebriische Chresto- 
mathie der Biblischen und Neueren Literatur, mit 
Anmerkungen und Glossar” (Bamberg, 1837), in 
which are given selections from the writings of 
Rapoport, Wessely, Friedlander, and other modern 
Hebrew authors. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Oettinger, Moniteur des Dates; Allgemeine 
Deutsche Biographie. . 


MARTINEZ, FERRAND: Archdeacon of 
Ecijain the fourteenth century, and one of the most 
inveterate enemies of the Jewish people; lived at 
Seville, where among Christians he was highly re- 
spected for his piety and philanthropy. In his ser- 
mons and public discourses he continually fanned the 
hatred of the Christian population against the Jews, 
. to whom heascribed all sorts of vices. As vicar-gen- 
eral of Archbishop Barroso of Seville he arrogated to 
himself the right of jurisdiction over the Jews in his 
diocese, injuring them wherever he could, and de- 
manding that the magistrates of Alcalé de Guadeyra, 
Ecija, and other places no longer suffer the Jews 
among them. The Jewish community of Seville, at 
that time the richest and most important community 
of the country, was forced to appeal to King Henry 
IT., who commanded the archdeacon, in a letter 
dated Aug. 25, 13878, not to meddle in future with 
the affairs of his subjects the Jews; not to incite 
the people against them; and to abstain from deci- 
ding their lawsuits. The Jews were empowered to 
withdraw from the archdeacon’s jurisdiction, and 
the royal officials of Seville and other cities were 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


352 


summoned to protect the Jews in their rights. But 
this made no impression on Ferrand Martinez; and 
the Jews were obliged, four years later, to complain 
to King JohnI. Johnsevereiy reproved him (March 
3, 1882), but to no effect. The king issued a new 
edict (Aug. 25, 1888) in which he commanded tbe 
archdeacon to desist, on pain of heavy punishment. 
Nothing, however, could keep Ferrand Martinez 
from pursuing his purpose of exterminating the 
Jews. 

The community of Seville finally decided to sum- 
mon the archdeacon before the highest tribunal. On 
Feb. 11, 1888, Ferrand Martinez, and the clothier 
Judah Aben Abraham, the representative of the 
community of Seville, together with their witnesses, 
appeared before the “alcaldes mayores” Ferrand 
Gonzalez and Ruy Perez. Judah, referring to the 
two royal edicts, demanded in the name of the 
community that the archdeacon should desist once 
for all from any arbitrary and unlaw- 
ful acts against the community; other- 
wise the community would imme- 
diately bring a complaint before the 
king. Ferrand Martinez declared in his written an- 
swer, read eight days later before the tribunal, that 
he would continue to preach and act as heretofore; 
that all he had done so far had been done on the 
advice of the archbishop and for the benefit of the 
Church and the welfare of the king. He asserted 
also that the Jews had offered him 10,000 doub- 
loons for deciding an important case in their favor. 
The archiepiscopal chapter now interfered, sending — 
two of its members to the king to say that the arch- 
deacon was setting aside even the authority of the 
pope, and that the safety of the Jews was imperiled. 
The king, who was entirely ruled by his wife, Leo- 
nora, Ferrand Martinez’s penitent, replied that mat- 
ters should not be precipitated, and that the arch- 
deacon’s zeal was worthy of all praise; at the same 
time he declared that the Jews under his protection 
must not be maltreated. 

Archbishop Barroso proceeded more energetically. 
Summoning a body of theologians and experts in 
canonical law, he called upon Martinez to recant. 
As Martinez refused to do so, he was forbidden to 
perform thenceforth any ecclesiastical functions 
whatsoever, or to decide any case, on pain of excom- 
munication. When Ferrand Martinez was deposed 
from office the Jews of Seville felt relieved, but 
their relief was of short duration. The archbishop 
Barroso and King John died within three months, 
The king was succeeded by Henry HI., a child of 


Public 
Trial. 


eleven years, under the tutelage of his bigoted 


mother. The archiepiscopal chapter chose the ex- 
communicated archdeacon for vicar-general. Ferrand 
Martinez immediately (Dec. 8, 1390) 
Appointed called upon the clergy of his diocese 
Vicar~ to demolish all synagogues in their 
General. parishes, and send to him without de- 
lay all lamps, Hebrew books, and 
scrolls of the Law found therein, on pain of excom. 
munication. The clergy of Ecija and Alcala de Gua- 
deyra obeyed at once; and the synagogucs of Soria 
and Santillana also came near being torn down. 
The Jewish community of Seville turned in its 
consternation to the king (about Dec. 15, 1890), who 


353 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Martinet 
Martyrdom 





seven days later sent a letter to the archiepiscopal 
chapter, holding it responsible forall damages Jone 
to the Jews, and commanding it to rebuild or to 
repair at its own expense all synagogues that had 
been torn down or damaged. He gave strict orders 
that the archdeacon should be at once deposed from 
office and placed where he could do no further harm. 
The chapter proceeded to obey the king’s command ; 
out Martinez declared that an ecclesiastic was sub- 
ject to the Church and not to the king, and that the 
chapter had no right to depose him from office, 
or to demand that be rebuild the demolished syna- 
gogucs. 

Under Leonora’s regency Martinez could defy 
even the king, receiving effective support from the 
people he had aroused. The first riots broke out in 
March, 1391, during which several Jews were killed. 
The great massacre occurred at Seville June 6, 1891, 
when several thousand Jews were killed and many 
forced to accept. baptism. The people rose against 
the Jews throughout Castile, Aragon, and Majorca, 
many thousands being slain or forced into the 
Church. Ferrand Martinez was imprisoned at 
Seville in 1895 by command of Henry III., but was 
soon released. The people worshiped him as a 
saint. Before his death he presented his whole 
fortune to the hospital of San Maria at Seville, 
which he had founded. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zuniga, Anales de Sevilla, ii. 29 et seq.; Rios. 

Hist. ii. 338, 579 et seq.; Henry Ch. Lea, Acta Capitular del 


Cahilda de Sevilla, in American Historical Review, i. 220 
et.seq.; R.E. J. xxxvili. 260 et seq. 
G. M. K. 


MARTINI GEESE. Sce BARNACLE-GOOSE. 


MARTINIQUE: Islandin the West Indies, now 
coustituting a French colony. In the beginning of 
the seventeenth century a number of Dutch Jews 
settled at Martinique and in the neighboring islands, 
and were in very prosperous Circumstances when 
France took possession of the island in 1685. Butin 
1658 the Jesuits, jealous of the commercial suprem- 
acy of the Jews, induced the sovereign council 
of Martinique tc issue an edict forbidding Jewish 
commerce in the islands. At theinstance, however, 
of the home authoritics the council revoked this de- 
cision, which menaced the interests of the colony, 
and consented to restore the Jews to their commer- 
cial riglits. 

This freedom was of short duration. In 1664 
Governor-General] Tracy was induced by the Jesuits 
to issue a decree forbidding “ persons of the Jewish 
nation to buy or sell on the Sabbath-day [Sunday] 

.. on pain of a fine of 800 pounds of petun, of 
which one-third shall go to the church, one-third to 
the poor, and one-third tothe informer.” The Jews 
thereupon appealed to the new governor, Baas, 
who restored to them the free exercise of trade 
and commerce. Their enemies then approached 
the governor, who, yielding to their importunities, 
forbade (1669) Jews “to perform on Saturday any 
ceremonies relating to their faith, . . . to work on 
Sunday, or to appear in public from Maundy Thurs- 
day to Easter Sunday.” But, like his predecessor, 
Baas soon perceived the importance of Jewish com- 
merce and industry and sent Colbert a report favor- 
able to the Jews, requesting certain privileges for 

VIII. —28 


them, especially that of the free exercise of their 
religion. Colbert pleaded the cause of the Jews so 
well before the King that on May 28, 1671, Louis 
NIV. decreed that the Jews of Martinique should 
thenceforth enjoy not only religious liberty but also 
the same privileges as the otherinhabitants. During 
the life of Colbert all hostile schemes against the 
Jews failed, despite the powerful support which their 
enemies found in Count de Blénac, who had sue- 
ceeded Baas as governor. But with Colbert’s death 
they lost their protector, and the governor, yielding 
to the Jesuits, on Sept. 24, 1688, during a visit to 
France, obtained from Louis XIV. an edict ban- 
ishing the Jews from Martinique. This order, evi- 
dently, was not put into execution at once, since 
two years later a new decree was issued, known as 
the “Code Noir,” which obliged the Jews to leave 
the island within three months. Noexceptions were 
to be made, not even in favor of Benjamin d’ Acosta, 
who had introduced the cultivation of the sugar- 
cane in the island. In1694six Jewish families went 
to Martinique, but were at once expelled. 

In the first half of the eighteenth century some 
Jews obtained permission to live in the colony. 
Laws were passed granting them a degree of legal 
existence, and the “Code Noir” was declared to ap- 
ply only to foreign Jews. In 1722 David Grapis 
of Bordeaux established an office at St. Pierre. In 
1764 Count d’Estaing imposed a tax upon the Jews, 
who were then numerous in Martinique, some re- 
siding there under the protection of “ naturalization 
papers” and others being merely tolerated. Wish- 
ing to have their position clearly defined, they ap- 
pealed to their coreligionists of Bordeaux, with 
whom they were in family and business relations, to 
request Louis XVI. to extend to colonial Jews the 
privileges enjoyed by the Jews of Bordeaux, Jacob 
Rodrigues Pereire of Bordeaux took up the cause 
of the Jews of Martinique, and addressed an elo- 
quent memorial to Minister Tartine, who, after in- 
vestigating the matter for some months, declared 
against any change (1776), All subsequent attempts 
made to improve their condition were equally un- 
successful, and they contimued to live under a 
régime of bare toleration down to 1789, when the 
French Revolution removed their disabilities. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Abbé Grégoire, Histoire des Sectes Religi- 

euses, VO, iii., book xi.; Moreau de Saint-Méry, Lois et Con- 

stitutions des Colonies Francaiszes @ Amérique sous le Vent, 

vols. i. and ii., passim, Paris, 1787; R. B. J. ii. 93, iv. 183, 

vy. 80; Théophile Malvezin, Histoire des Juifs ad Bordeatr, 


pp. 241-243. 
D. S. Kk. 


MARTYRDOM, RESTRICTION OF: True 
te the principle current in rabbinical literature— 
“live through them [the laws], but do not die 
through them” (Yoma 85b, based on. Lev. xviii. 5)— 
the Rabbis endeavored to restrainethe desire for 
martyrdom on the part of the zealous. . During the 
period of the Hadrianic persecutions'such a restraint 
was obviously necessary. Akiba is related to have 
courted martyrdom rather than give up the teach- 
ing of the Law, in spite of the'warning given to 
him by Papus (Ber. 61b); as did also Hananiah b. 
Teradion, in spite of the counsel of Jose ben Kisma 
(‘Ab. Zarah 18a). R. Ishmael, on the other hand, 
was of the opinion that one may even: worship idols 


ae 


Martyrdom 
Martyrs 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


354 





in order to save one’s life, although he admits that 
martyrdom should be preferred toa public profes- 
sion of idolatry (Sanh. f4a; ‘Ab. Zarah 24b). Prob- 
ably it was during this period that the following 
principie was adopted, at a sitting of rabbis in the 
house of a certain Nitzah in Lydia: “All negative 
commandments of the Bible, except those with re- 
gard to idolatry, adultery, and murder, may be 
transgressed if there is danger of life” (Sanh. 4a; 
Yer, Sanh. iii. 6; Yer. Sheb. iv. 1; comp. Pesik. R., 
ed. Friedmann, p. 55a). At the same meeting the 
question whether the study of the Law is more im- 
portant than the practise of the Law was decided in 
the affirmative, for the reason that study leads to 
practise (Kid. 40b; Cant. R. ii. 381; Sifre, Deut. 41). 
This question was of practical importance to the 
rabbis of that time, and the decision meant that one 
must subnit to martyrdom rather than forsake the 
study and the teaching of the Law (see B. K. 17a). 
The later rabbis, while disregarding this last deci- 
sion, adopted and developed to meet various cases 
the general principle governing submission to mar- 
tyrdom for the practise of the Law (comp. Gritz, 
“Gesch.” 3d ed., iv., note 17, ii.; Weiss, “ Dor,” ii. 
131). 
If the intention of the persecutor is not so much 
to benefit himself as to compel the Jew to trans- 
gress the laws of Judaism in public 
Conditions (N’DND = zappyoia, explained to mean 
of Mar- “in the presence of ten Israelites”), 
tyrdom. the Jew should rather submit to mar- 
tyrdom than commit even the small- 
est’ transgression. In a time of general persecu- 
tion of Jews one should prefer martyrdom when 
required to transgress a law even in private (Sanh. 
74a, b; Maimonides, “Yad,” Yesode ha-Torah, v. 
148; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 157, 1). Ina case 
in which a Jew is permitted to transgress a law 
when the alternative is death, he may submit to 
martyrdom, if he prefer martyrdom to the trans- 
gression; some authorities, however, forbid this, 
regarding itasa forfeiting of life to noavail (“ Yad.” 
Yesode ha-Torah, v. 4; comp. Mishneh le-Melek 
ad loc; Yer. Sheb. iv. 2; ‘Ab. Zarah 27b; Tos. 2d. 
s.v. “Yakol”; Yoreh De'ah, Zc¢.). If he can re- 
deem himself by giving up all his possessions he 
should part with all he has rather than transgress a 
negative law of the Bible (R. Nissim on Alfasi to 
Suk. fii. 2, 80. “Dabar”; Isserles to Yoreh De‘ah, 
Z.e,; “Pithe Teshubah,” ed loe.; comp. “Sefer Husi- 
dim,” ed. Wistiuetzki, § 1865), One who trans- 
gresses the Law instead of submitting to martyr- 
dom where martyrdom is enjoined, can not be 
punished in the courts, since the transgression is 
committed under duress, but lle must be regarded 
as a defiler of God’s name; and if he persists in 
living in the same place and in continuing the trans- 
gression when he can escape, he forfeits his por- 
tion in the future world and will be assigned to the 
lowest chambers of Gehenna (“ Yad,” dc.) At no 
time is it permitted to a Jew to commit suicide or to 
kill his children in anticipation of religious persecu- 
tion; he must wait until the persecutor comes and 
submit to the death inflicted upon him (“Be’er ha- 
Golah” to Yoreh De‘ah, 157, 1, end, quoting the 
“ Bedek ha-Bayit ”). 


A A A AA PPT CCT CI TT AC ep pS PS hcp cee 
A Ne ty vee re 


The same laws that apply to cases of religious 
persecution apply also to other cases which involve 
danger to life. At the order of a physician a sick 
man is permitted to break all the laws of the Bible 
except the three mentioned above— 
idolatry, adultery, and murder—if his 
life depends on the breaking of these 
laws (Pes. 25a; “ Yad,” Zc. v. 6-8). 
But, anxious for the chastity of Jewish women, the 
rabbis decided that even when adultery is not in- 
volved, as when the woman is unmarried, one should 
be left to die from the intensity of his passion rather 
than that the purity of a Jewish woman should be 
defiled. In an instance related in the Talmud con- 
versation between the sick man and the object of his 
desire was forbidden (Sanh. 75b; “ Yad,” d.e. v. 9). 
Martyrdom is enjoined only when the transgression 
of the Law would involve a deliberate act. Thus, 
a woman is not obliged to undergo martyrdom if 
attacked with an immoral intent (comp. Sanh. 74b; 
Tos. 26. s.v. “ Weha”; R, Nissim on Alfasi to Pes. ii. 
1, sv. “Huz”; Isserles to Yoreh De‘ah, /..). 

If a number of Jews are threatened with death if 
they do not deliver one among them to be slain, they 
all should submit to the alternative of martyrdom. 
There is a differenee of opinion, however, in a case 
where the one demanded is indicated by name. Some 
authorities hold the view that in sucha case they 
may surrender the one thus specified in order to save 
themselves from death; while othersare of the opin- 
ion that they may surrender him only when he is 
guilty of some act that involves the death-penalty. 
The same is true if one among a number of women 
is demanded for immoral purposes (Ter. viii. 12; 
Yer. Ter. viii. 4. end; Tosef. ¢. vii. 23: comp. 
Rashi to Sanh. 72b, sv. “Yaza"; “Yad,” Lev. 5; 
and “Kesef Mishneh,” ad toc.; Yoreh De‘ah, l.c.; 
“Sefer Hasidiin,” §$ 258, 254). 

In times of persecution a Jew may not say that 
he is a Gentile in order to save himself from death, 
although he may mislead his persecutors into an un- 
derstanding that he is not a Jew (ROSh to ‘Ab. 
Zarah ii. 4; Yoreh De‘ah, 157, 2). In such a case it 
is permitted to the Jew to put on garments with 
“sha‘fatnez” (wool and flax) in them, or to shave 
his beard, and for a woman to attire herself in male 
garments, or in those worn by nuns, in order to de- 
ceive the persecutors (“Hatam Sofer” to Shulhan 
‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 159; “Sefer Hasidim,” §§ 202- 
207, 259-262). Although it is forbidden to a Jew to 
be alone with a non-Jew (‘Ab. Zarah 22a), in case of 
persecution a Jew may seek protection at the house 
of a non-Jew (ROSh, Responsa, xix. 17; Yoreh 
De‘ah, ec. 8; comp. “Sefer Hasidim,” § 251). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, R. B. T. ii., s.v. Rabbinismus ; 
Supplement, i., s.v. Mdirtyrer-. 
J. H. G. 


8. 5. 

MARTYROLOGY: Biography of martyrs. 
Early in its existence the Christian Church began to 
register the judicial proceedings against its martyrs 
and saints. These records, called “Acta Sancto- 
rum,” took the form of calendars, menologics, 
“mena,” or “legenda passionalia.” Since the an- 
niversaries of the deaths of the saints were celebrated 
by the sacrifice of the mass, the calendars were 
merely lists arranged according to the secular year 


Other 
Cases. 


355 


and intended only for the use of individual churches. 
The martyrologies, which were introduced in the 
seventh century, were an amplification of the calen- 
dars, and contained short biographies, and lists of 
the festivals of other churches. The arrangement 
of tliese books clearly appears in the present official 
“Martyrologium Romanum.” The third class of 
stories, the “ Vitse Sanctorum,” had the alternative 
name of “legends,” as being intended both for pri- 
vate and for public reading. 

Isracl likewise hasits “saints,” though the word is 
used in an entirely different sense from that em- 
ployed by the Christian Church. Only a brief por- 

tion of the liturgy is set aside for coim- 

Jewish memorating the martyrs of Israel, and 

‘‘Saints” the literature on the Jewish heroes of 
or Martyrs. the faith iscomparatively small. The 
“kedoshim,” the saints of Israel, had 
merely fulfilled their religious duty when they stead- 
fastly endured tortureand death. Their widows did 
not marry again, since their murdered husbands still 
lived in liturgical poems, simple notices, or formal 
narratives, and in single lists; in Germany these lists 
were read at the HazkaratT NESHAMOT to the com- 
munity, which, on the Sabbaths before Pentecost 
and before the anniversary of the destruction of 
Jerusalem, as well as on the 9th of Ab, commended 
the souls of the martyrs to the mercy of God. The 
lists of the places of martyrdom and of the martyrs 
contained in the MeEmMor-Books may in a certain 
sense be calied “ martyrologies,” although there were 
also independent works bearing this name. Schudt 
(“Jtidische Merkwtirdigkeiten,” iv. 1) has the fol- 
lowing passage referring to the descendants of the 
martyrs persecuted by the Inquisition: “The ‘ Neu- 
ester Staat des Kénigreichs Portugall,’ by an anon- 
ymous author, also shows that the Jews have special 
martyrologies and records of corecligionists whom 
they honor as martyrs since because ‘of their relig- 
ion they were executed by the Inquisition in Spain 
and Portugal... . It is also noteworthy that the 
Jews of Amsterdam have their own books of mar- 
tyrs, in which they enter the names of those who 
were burned for the sake of their faith, and many 
Jews are marvelously steadfast when they face the 
Inquisition ” (comp. also “ Unschuldige Nachrichten 
auf das Jahr 1740,” p. 10; Delitzsch, “Zur Gesch. 
der Jiidischen Poesie,” p. 122). 

Among the lists of martyrs made in Germany, the 
home of persecutions, are those of Worms of 1096 
and 13849, preserved in several places: the Nurem- 
berg list of 1849; and the lists in the memor-books 
of Sontheim, Heilbronn, Krautheim, Neustadt-on- 
the-Aisch, Sindringen, and Widdern (1298), dating 
from the time of the persecutions instigated in 
Franconia by the nobleman Rindileisch. A de- 
tailed martyrolog y, however, is found in the mem- 
or-book of the famous old community of Nurem- 

berg, which was composed in 1296 by 

The Isaac b. Samuel of Meiningen; by re- 
Nuremberg quest of the HisrorisciieE COMMISSION 
Martyrol- it was edited by Salfeld, under the title 
ogy. “Das Martyrologium des Ntrnberger 
Memorbuches,” and published in 1898 

as the third volume of the “Quellen zur Gesch. der 
Juden in Deutschland.” The compiler drew his 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Martyrdom 
Martyrs 


material not only from ancient accounts of the 
persecutions, but also, in all probability, from lists 
which were kept in the Jewish communal archives 
of Nuremberg. In lapidary style he gives an elo- 
quent account of the victims slain in Germany 
during the Crusades; during the persecution caused 
by a false accusation of profanating a host in Fran- 
conia; in 1298, during various local massacres; and 
at the time of the burning of the Jews in 13849. 
The account referring to this incident mentions only 
the victims at Nuremberg, while references to for- 
mer persecutions are apparently complete. For the 
years 1298, 1838-39 (see ARMLEDER PERSECUTIONS), 
and 1849, also, the manuscript contains lists of those 
who died as martyrs for their faith. In addition 
to the accounts of the persecutions in Germany, 
there are lists of those at Blois (1171) and Troyes 
(1288), while the persecutions in England and in 
France are merely mentioned, with the exception of 
that at Corbeil, which is especially emphasized. The 
manuscript contains also notes on the suiferings and 
martyrdoms of converts to Judaism (Salfeld, “ Mar- 
tyrologium, ” p. 149)in the midstof theother martyrs; 
and these are followed by alist of places where mar- 
tyrdoms occurred during the persecutions under 
Rindfleisch in 1298. Thestatements in the lists of 
martyrs are supported by contemporary accounts, 
especially by the historical elegies, of which eleven 
taken from manuscripts and old editions, have been 
added to the work. 


sah csepteigad pe Wetzer and Welte, Kirchenlezxicon, i. 173 et 
scq., 8.V. Acta Sanetorwm; Krauss, Real- Encyeloptidie der 
C arisilichen Altertiimer, ii. 380, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1882 ; 
Salfeld, Martyrologium, pp. xviii., note 1, and xx., note 1; 
Neubauer, Le Memorbuch de Mayence, in R. ks. Aa iv. Let 
seq.; idem, Isr. Letterbode, viii. 80 et seq.; Jellinek, Worms 
und W. ien, pp. det seq. (comp. Neubauer in Isr. Letterbode, 
vi. 677, viii. 891); Jellinek, Mdrtyrer- und Memorbuch ; Ja- 
raczewsky, Geseh. der Juden in CoA kroner, Fests¢ hrift 
zur Hinweihuny der Neuen pee in Erfuri, p. 16; 
Berliner, in Kobez al-Yad, 1887, 24 (containing the list of 
martyrs at Erfurt in 1221); Stern, in Zeitsehr. fiir. die Gesch. 
der Judenin Deutschland, ii. 195: Grotefend, Die Frankfur- 
ter Judenschlacht von 1241, in AMiftheilungen des Vereins 
fitr Gesch. und Altertumskunde in Frankfurt-am-Main, vi. 
63; Horovitz, Frankfurter Rabbinen; Carmoly, Annuaire 
Isr aélite, 1835-56. p. 100; Darmesteter, Dewr Elégies du Ve ati- 
can, in Romania, 1874, pp. 443-486; DL’ Autodafé de Troyes, 
in R. E. J. Ai. 199 et seq.; Stern and Salfela, Nirnherg im 
Mittelalter, pp. 172 et seqg.; Lowe, The M emorbook of Niirn- 
berg (German transl. by Rahmer), in Litteraturblatt, vol. x., 
Nos. 31-32 7 
J. S. Sa. 
MARTYRS, THE TEN: Among the numer- 
ous victims of ine persecutions of Hadrian, tradition 
names ten great teachers who suffered martyrdom 
for having, in defiance of an edict of the Roman 
elnperor, instructed their pupils in the Law. They 
are referred to in haggadic literature as the ‘Asa- 
rah Haruge Malkut. Popular imagination seized 
upon this episode in Jewish history and embellished 
it with various legends relating the virtues of the 
martyrs and the fortitude shown by them during 
their execution, These legends became in the ge- 
onic period the subject of a special midrash—the 
Midrash ‘Asarah Haruge Malkut, or Midrash Eleh 
Ezkerah, of which there exist four versions, each 
differing from the others in various points of detail 
(see Jellinek, “B. H.” i. 64, vi. 19). Contrary to the 
accounts given in the Talmud and in Midrash Rab 
bah (‘Ab. Zarah 17b, 18a; Ber. 61b; Sanh. 14a; 
Lam. Rh. ii. 2; Prov. R. i. 13), which clearly state 
that there were intervals between the executions 


Martyrs 
Marx 


of the ten teachers, the Midrash ‘Asarah Haruge 
Malkut, probably in order to produce a greater ef- 
fect upon the mind of the reader, describes their 
martyrdom as occurring on the same day. 

This midrash differs from the older sources in re- 
gard also to the accusation upon which they were 
condemned. It says that when a certain Roman 
emperor who had been instructed in the Law came to 
the Biblical passage, “And he that stealeth a man, 
and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he 
shall surely be put to death” (Ex. xxi. 16), he con- 
ceived the following mischievous device: He sum- 
moned Ishmael ben Elisha (perhaps the propounder 
of the “Thirteen Rules”; see Ab. R. N., ed. Schech- 
ter, p.54b; comp. Ned. ix. 10), Simeon (certainly not 
Simeon ben Gamaliel II; see Ta‘an. 29b), Ishmael, 
Akiba ben Joseph, Hlananiah ben Teradion, Huzpit 

(the interpreter [“ meturgeman ”] of the 


Their Sanhedrin of Jamnia), Yeshebab (the 
Names. secretary of the Sanhedrin), Eliezer 


ben Shammua‘ (in Midr. R. le. “R. 
Eliezer Hersanah,” or “R. Tryphon”), Hananiah ben 
Hakinai (in Midr. R. 2c. “Judah ha-Nehetam ”), and 
Judah ben Baba, and demanded of them what was 
the punishment prescribed by the Law for stealing a 
man. They answered, “Death”; whereupon the 
emperor said, “Then prepare to die, for your an- 
cestors [alluding to the history of Joseph and his 
brethren] committed such a crime, and you, as the 
representatives of the Jewish nation, must answer 
for it.” The rabbis asked for a delay of three days 
that they might ascertain, by invoking the Ineffable 
Name, whether the punishment pronounced against 
them was ordained by Heaven. Ishmael ben Elisha, 
in his capacity as high priest, or as the son of a 
high priest, was chosen to make the inquiry, and 
after having ascertained that it was decreed by 
Heaven, the rabbis submitted to their fate. 

Ishmael and Simeon were the first to be taken to 
the place of execution, where a dispute arose be- 
tween them as to which should be executed first, 
each desiring to precede the other in order that he 
should be spared the sight of the martyrdom of his 
colleague. Thereupon the emperor ordered lots to 
be cast, and the lot fell on Simeon, whose head was 
stricken from his body with a sword. Ishmael was 
flayed; he suffered with great fortitude, and began 
to weep only when his executioners reached the 
place of the phylacteries. The third victim was 
Akiba, whose flesh was torn off with a carding- 
implement. While undergoing the torture he re- 
cited the Shema‘ with a peaceful smile on his face. 
Astonished at his extraordinary courage, his execu- 
tioner asked him if he was a sorcerer that he could 
so easily overcome the pain he was suffering, to 
which Akiba replied, “I am no sorcerer, but I re- 
joice that I am permitted to love God with my life.” 
He died at the last words of the Shema‘—“ God is 
One.” The fourth martyr was Hananiah ben Tera- 
dion, who was wrapped ina scroll of the Law and 
placed ona pyre of green brushwood; to prolong 
his agony wet wool was placed on his chest. “Wo 
is me,” cried his daughter, “that I should see thee 
under such terrible circumstances!” “I should in- 
deed despair,” replied the martyr, “were I alone 
burned; but since the scroll of the Torah is burning 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


356 





with me the Power that will avenge the offense 
avainst the Law will avenge me also.” His disci- 
ples then asked: “ Master, what seest thou?” He 
answered: “I see the parchment burning while the 
letters of the Law soar upward.” His disciples then 
advised him to open his mouth that the fire might 
enter and the sooner put an end to his sufferings; 
but he refused to do so, saying, “It is best that He 
who hath given the soul should also take it away: 
no man may hasten his death.” Thereupon the 
executioner removed the wool, fanned the flame, 
thus accelerating the end, and then himself plunged 
into the fire. 

The martyrdom of the remaining rabbis is noted 
without details, with the exception of Judah ben 
Baba, who is said to have been pierced by lances. 
He was the last of the martyrs; according to the 
Talmud (Sanh. 14a), he was surprised by the Romans 
in the valley between Usha and Shefar‘am, where he 
was secretly investing the seven remaining pupils of 
Akiba with the authority to continue the teaching 
of the Law. The martyrdom of the “Ten Teach- 
ers” is commemorated in a selihah recited in the 
Musaf service of the Day of Atonement. It is 
entitled “Eleh Ezkerah,” and is based upon the ac- 
count givenin the Midrash ‘Asarah Haruge Malkut. 
With some difference in names it is treated also in 
the dirge for the Ninth of Ab entitled “Arze ha- 
Lebanon.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gritz, Geseh. iv. 161 et seqg.; J. Derenbourg, 
Essai sur U Histoire et la Géographie de la Palestine, pp. 
427 (note), 430 (note), 436, Paris, 1867. 

S. I. Br. 


MARX, ADOLF BERNHARD: German 
musical writer; born at Halle May 15, 1799; died at 
Berlin May 17, 1866. Ue had studied music for 
some time with D. 8S. Tiirk when his father, who 
had destined him fer the law, sent him to the Uni- 
versity of Halle, where he matriculated. Shortly 
afterward, however, he rejected the offer of a legal 
appointment at Naumburg in order to devote him- 
self entirely to music, and proceeded to Berlin, where 
he became a pupil of Zelter, while gaining a liveli- 
hood by teaching. In conjunction with the well- 
known publisher Schlesinger, he founded (1824) the 
“ Berliner Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung,” which 
he conducted until 1880. In 1827 the University of 
Marburg conferred on him the title of doctor of 
philosophy ; and in this capacity he lectured on the 
pedagogics of music at the University of Berlin, 
which institution in 1880 appointed him musical 
director of its student choir. 

With Kullak and Stern, Marx founded in 1850 the 
Berliner Musikschule, now the Stern Musik Con- 
servatorium, one of the most prominent musical 
institutes of Berlin. Here he taught until 1856, 
when he resigned in order to devote himself entirely 
to literary and university work and to the teaching 
of composition. His long and intimate friendship 
with Mendelssohn was ultimately severed because 
of the latter’s strictures upon Marx’s compositions, 
which, indeed, have not withstood the test of time. 
His musical writings, however, are far more valu- 
able, andinclude: “ Ueber Malerei in der Tonkunst” 
(1828); “Die Lehre von der Musikalischen Komposi- 
tion” (Berlin, 1887-1847, 4 vols.; several times re 


357 THE JEWISH 


printed); “Allgemeine Musiklehre” (1839; 9thed., 
1875; translated into English); “ Die Musik des 19ten 
Jahrhunderts und Ihre Pflege ” (1855): “ Ludwig van 
Beethoven’s Leben und Schaffen” (1858; 8d ed., 
1875); “Gluck und die Oper ” (1868, 2 vols.); “ Erin- 
nerungen aus Meinem Leben” (1865, 2 vols.); and 
several other writings of an analytical nature. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Mendel, Musikalisches Konversations-Lexi- 

kon; Riemann, Wusik-Lextkon, 

s. J. So. 

MARX, BERTHE: French pianist; born at 
Paris July 28, 1859. She began to study the piano- 
forte at the age of four, receiving her first instruc- 
tion from her father, who for forty years was a Vio- 
loncello-player in the Conservatoire and GrandOpera 
orchestras. In 1868 she entered the Conservatoire, 
where she became a pupil of Henri Herz, in whose 
elass at the age of fifteen she gained the first prize. 
Upon completing her studies she undertook a series 
of concert tours through France and Belgium, every- 
where mecting with a cordial reception. At Brus- 
sels she met Sarasate, who, recognizing her great 
talent, engaged her as soloist and accompanist, in 
which capacities she accompanied him on his tours 
through Europe and America, extending even to 
Mexico and California; she played in all in about 
600 concerts. She has composed several “ Rhapsodics 
Espagnoles,” aud has arranged Sarasate’s Spanish 
dances for the piano. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Ehrlich, Celebrated Pianists of the Past 
and Present Time. 


s. J. SO. 


MARX, DAVID: Chief rabbi of Bordeaux, 
France; born at Landau, Bavaria, In 1807; died 
Feb., 1864. On his graduation from the Ecole Cen- 
trale Rabbinique at Metz he assumed charge of the 
Ecole Religieuse Israélite at Nancy; and in June, 
1837, before he had attained the age required for 
the office, he was elected by the consistory of: Bor- 
deaux to succeed Chief Rabbi Abraham Andrade. 
In 1841 he proposed the introduction of confirma- 
tion at Bordeaux, a rite then regarded as a danger- 
ous innovation. Marx organized numerous institu- 
tions in the community of Bordeaux, including a 
“salle d’asile” and an infirmary; and under his 
guidance the children of the community founded 
the Société de la Jeunesse Israélite de Bordeaux, for 
the relicf of less fortunate children. At various 
times during bis term of office he interfered in be- 
half of minors who had been kidnaped from their 
parents by Catholic proselytizers. In 1852 he was 
decorated by Napoleon IE., then prince-president, 
with the cross of the Legion of Honor, On the day 
of his funeral Dounct, Cardinal Arehbishop of Bor- 
deaux, ordered the bells of all the churches in the 
city to be tolled. Marx, who was a remarkable 
preacher, published the following sermons: “Ser- 
mon sur Ie Culte Public” (Bordeaux, 1853); “ Dis- 
cours lors de Inauguration de la Synagegue de 
Clermont-Ferrand” (1862); “Sermon sur le Dogme et 
la Morale” (¢b. 1868). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Aristide Astruc, Oraison Funébre de D. 


Marx, Paris, 1864. 
$ J. Ka. 


MARX, JACOB: German physician; born in 
Bonn 1743; died in Hanover Jan. 24, 1789; studied 


ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Martyrs 
Marx 


medicine in Halle (M.D. 1765). He traveled for 
scientific purposes in Holland and England, in the 
latter country making the acquaintance of Dr. 
John Fothergill. He finally settled in Hanover, 
where he made himself greatly beloved. He has 
been reproached with inability to free himself from 
the prejudices of his time when he opposed Herz 
for attacking the Jewish burial customs of the 
period. Marx wrote: “Dissertatio de Spasmis et 
Motibus Convulsivis Optimaque Tisdem Medendi 
Ratione” (Halle, 1765); “ Observata Quedam Medi- 
ca” (Berlin, 1772); “Observationes Medics ” (Han- 
over, 1774-87), in three parts: part one was trans- 
lated into German by Bohm (Berlin and Hanover, 
1786), parts two and three by Marx himself (Han- 
over, 1787); “ Abhandlung tiber die Lungenschwind- 
sucht” (Hanover, 1784); “Gesch. der Eicheln und 
Erfahrungen tiber die Diiit und Medizinischen Ge- 
brauch Derselben” (1784): “ Bestétigte Krifte der 
Kicheln ” (1787); “ Ueber die Beerdigung der Toten” 
(Hanover, 1787); ete. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Deutsche Biog.; Allg. Zeitschrift des 


Judenthums, 1840, p. 711. 
s. N. D. 


MARX, KARL: German socialistic leader and 
political economist; born at Treves May 5, 1818; 
died in London March 14,1883. His father, a prac- 
tising attorney at the Landgericht, adopted Chris- 
tianity in 1824. Marx attended the gymnasium at 
Treves and the universities of Bonn and Berlin, 
graduated as doctor of philosophy, and then turned 
to journalism, becoming in 1842 editor of the 
“Rheinische Zeitung fiir Politik, Handel nnd Ge- 
werbe,” which was founded by the Liberal party at 
Cologne. It was the most radical journal of the 
time in Germany. Marx became involved ina num- 
ber of controversies, particularly with the “ Oberpri- 
sident” of the Rhine province, concerning the condi- 
tion of the peasantry of the Moselle district: and 
in 1848 he resigned his editorial position to study 
political economy. In that year also he married 
Jenny, daughter of Baron von Westphal. 

Shortly after the marriage Marx, on the invitation 
of Arnold Ruge, went to Paris toaid in the publica- 
tion of the “ Deutsch-Franzésische Jahrbitcher,” of 
which, however, only one (double) number was issued 
(1844), It contained, besides other matter, the cele- 
brated “ Lobgesiinge auf den KG6nig von Bayern,” 
by Heine, and two articles by Marx himself, “Zur 
Kritik der Hegel’schen Rechtsphilosophie ” and “ Zur 
Judenfrage.” 

After the publication of the “Jahbrbiicher,” Marx 
became associated with the “ Vorwiirts,” also pub- 
lished in Paris. The Prussian government intimated 
to that of France its displeasure at certain utter- 
anees of the “ Vorwiirts ”; and Guizot ordered those 
of its editors who were not French citizens to leave 
the country. An interpellation in the French Cham- 
ber led to a revocation of the order; but Marx de- 
cided to leave Paris, and in 1845 he went to Brussels. 

In Paris Marx had become intimately connected 
with the Bund der Gerechten, which had been 
founded in Paris in 1836, and which afterward 
became the Kommunistenbund. Its leaders in 
London corresponded with him; and they formed a 
branch in Brussels from which to send representa- 


Marx 
Maryland 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


358 





tives to the congress to be held in London in the 
summer and fallof 1847. Marxattended in Novem- 
ber, and after expounding his ideas in a number of 
addresses, the * Kommunistische Manifest,” prepared 
by himself and Engels, was finally adopted, its con- 
cluding words, “ Proletarier aller Lander, vereiniget 
Euch!” becoming the battle-cry of the laboring 
classes throughout the world. Upon the outbreak 
of the Paris revolution, in Feb., 1848, Marx pre- 
pared to go to the scene of conflict, but was arrested 
and foreed to return to Germany. From June 1, 
1848, he edited the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung.” 
As leader of the left wing of the democratic move- 
ment of the Rhine province he was an important 
factor in the revolution. 
He was a member of 
the Rheinische Kreisaus- 
schuss der Demokraten, 
and with Schaffer and 
Schneider, as a commit- 
tee of the organization, 
sivned a proclamation 
(Nov., 1848) in which 
the members of the 
Democratic Association 
were advised to resist 
the collection of all taxes 
and to organize a mili- 
tary force. Marx and 
his associates were ar- 
rested and placed on 
trial for incitement to 
rebellion; but a jury 
acquitted them. In 1849 
the government felt it- 
self strong enough to 
order his banishment 
(May 16}: and he went 
once more to France. 
When Marx arrived 
in Paris a number of 
petty revolutions were 
ripe. in which he un- 
doubtedly took part, 
although his share In 


them dees not seem ' 
clear, When the dem- 
onstration of June 13 


came to an end he was 
directed to leave France; and he then sought 
refuge in England. 

Freed from agitation and revoiution, Marx had 
now about fourteen years of peaceful literary activ- 
ity. He frequently contributed to the Anglo-Amer- 
ican press. On Sept. 24, 1864, a great mecting was 
held in London, at which Professor Beesly, the posi- 
tivist, presided, and it was finally determined to es- 
tablish a permanent organization of the working 
people of the civilized world. The International 
Working Men's Association was thus founded. 
Mazzini and Marx were entrusted with the task of 
preparing the address and the constitution ; and at the 
congress held in Geneva in 1866 the report of Marx 
wasadopted. Until 1872 Marx dominated the organ- 
ization at the congresses and in the executive com- 
mittee. His purpose was that of propagandaalone; 





but the mistake of the leaders was that the influence 
of the association was not exerted to hinder the 
Paris Commune in 1871. Marx himself was guilty 
of an even worse mistake: he actually approved 
the Commune’s operations, in his pamphlet “Der 
Birgerkrieg in Frankreich,” published in 1871 and 
reissued in 1876. Jn order to dissolve the Interna- 
tionale without giving his opponents a chance to 
reorganize it, he in 1872 transterred the seat of the 
general council to New York, in care of his faithful 
follower F, A. Sorge; and so the association came 
to an end. 

The great work of Marx’s life, and that with which 
his fame is most enduringly identified, is “Das Ka- 
pital,” of which the first 
volume was published 
in 1878; the second, 
edited by Engels, in 
1885; and the third, in 
1894. Of the first (4th 
ed., 1892) an English 
translation by Moore and 
Aveling was issued in 
London in 1886. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gustav Gross, 
Karl Marz, Leipsic, 1885; 
Eugen yon Béhin-Bawerk, 
Karl Mara, transl. by Alice 
M. MacDonald, London, 
1892; Georg Adler, Die 
Grundlagen der Karl 
Marx’schen HKrittk der 
Bestehenden Volkswirth- 
schaft, Tibingen, 1887 (con- 
tains a bibliography of 
Marx’s writings); E. Ave- 
ling, The Student’s Marx, 
London, 1892; Stonimski, 
Kant Mara’ Nationaloko- 
nomische Irrlehren, trans}. 
from the Russian, Berlin, 
1897. 

s. M. Co. 

MARX, ROGER: 
French art critic; born 
in Nancy Aug 28, 1859. 
In 1878 he went to Paris, 
where he wrote for vari- 
ous theater and art jour- 
nals. In 1888 he be- 
came art, and afterward 
literary, critic of the 

. “Voltaire.” He was later 

appointed secretary of 

the Academy of Fine Arts, which position he re- 
signed on the death of the director, M. Castag- 
nary, though he continued to act as inspector of 
the Academy. In 1886 the government sent him 
on a mission to Spain to study the methods of in- 
struction foilowed in the schools of industrial art 
and of design. In1889 he was appointed assistant 
inspector-general of museums and organized the 
centennial section of French art at the Exposition 

Universelle in 1900, when, on the occasion of the 

opening of the fine arts exhibits, he was made an 

officer of the Legion of Honor. Asa writer he isan 
individualist. 

Marx has published: “Les Jouete” and “ Les 
Dimanches de Paris.” two works of fietion: *° Etude 
d'Art Lorrain” (1882): *L’Art 4 Nancy en 1882” 
(Nancy, 1888); “Henri Regnault ” (1886); “La Dé- 


359 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marx 
Maryland 





coration et Art Industriel a1’ Exposition Universelle 
de 1889” (Paris, 1890); “Histoire de la Médaille 
Francaise Depuis Cent Ans” (1890); “The Painter 
Albert Besnard” (7). 1893); “J. KX. Huysmans” (7d. 
1894); “La Collection des Goncourt” (1897); “ Die 
Franzésischen Medailleure Unserer Zcit,” a col- 
lection of 442 medals and plaquettes (Stuttgart, 
1898); “Les Médailleurs Francais de 1789” (Paris, 
1898); “La Décoration et les Industries d’Art” (20. 
1901); “Les Médailleurs Modernes en France et a 
)’Etranger” (2. 1901); “Handbuch fiir Leihbiblio- 
theken.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Larousse, Dict. 2d Supplement; Areh. Isr. 

July 4, 1889; Univ. Isr. May 4, 1900. 

s. | N. D. 

MARX, SAMUEL: Chief rabbi of Bayonne, 
France; bern in 181% at Dirkheim, Bavaria; died iu 
1887; cousin of David Marx. On completing his 
studies at the Ecole Centrale Rabbinique at Metz, 
he became director of the Ecole Religieuse Israélite 
at Nancy and assistant to the chief rabbiof that city. 
In 1843 he was appointed rabbi of Saint-Esprit and 
Bayonne, becoming chief rabbi three years later. 
Marx published the following sermons: “Sermon 
Prononcé 4 la Synagogue de Nancy, le 16 Avril, 
1842”; “Discours de 1’Installation, 18 Décembre, 
1846” (Bayonne); “Sermon sur la Mesousa” (20. 
1866); “Le Centenaire de Sir Moses Montefiore ” (2d. 
1884). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Henry Léon, Histoire des Juifs de Bayonne, 

Paris, 1898. 

s, J. IA. 

MARYLAND: One of the thirteen original 
States of the American Union. The history of the 
Jews in Maryland may be divided into three periods: 
the first extends from shortly after the establishment 
of the provincial government at St. Mary’s, in 1634, 
to the expansion of trade and commerce in the 
middle of the eighteenth century; the second begins 
wv decade before the Revolution and ends with the 
practical removal of political disabilities in 1826; the 
third covers the following seventy years of German 
immigration, congregational development, aud com- 
munal growth. 

The characteristic of the first, or provincial, 
period is the apparent absence of any single influx 
of Jews corresponding to those which occurred in 
New York, Newport, Savannah, and Charleston. 
Reeord is found of one Mathias de Sousa as carly as 
1639, fifteen years before the arrival of “David 
Israel and the other Jews” at New Amsterdam. If, 
indeed, credence is to be given to the distinctiveness 
of such names as Matthias de Costa, Isaac de Bar- 
rette, Hester Cordea, David Fereira, and Jacob Leah, 
it seems probable that Jews were resident in Mary- 
Jand in appreciable numbers from the earliest days 
of the palatinate. Yet percolation rather than in- 
flux, and quict exercise rather than open profession 
of faith, seem to distinguish the period. 

Fromamong the hazy forms which thus constitute 
the history of the Jews in provincial Maryland the 
figure of Jacob or John LumBrozo stands forth in 
bold prominence. We is the first, indeed the only, 
Jew of whose faith there is documentary evidence. 
Subsequent data gather about him as a nucleus, and 
it is largely in his experience that the difficulties of 


the period must be solved. He isone of the earliest 
medical practitioners in Maryland; his arrival forms 
a distinct event in the life of the province, and for 
nearly a decade he continues an im- 
Jacob portant figure in its economic activ- 
Lumbrozo. ity. Names of a distinctively Jewish 
character appear at intervals in the 
accessible records from 1660 to the overthrow of the 
proprietary government in 1692, always without 
mention of any communal organization, without 
even a bare indication of the bearers’ faith, Among 
these are the names of David Fereira, Francis 
Hyems, Abraham Hart, Daniel Mathena, Jacob Leah, 
Solimon Barbarah, Sarah Hayes, Philip Salomon, 
Joseph Lazear, Matthias de Costa, Isaac de Barrette, 
Hester Cordea, and Isaack Bedlo. Whatever such 
evidence may suggest, the positive conclusion to 
which it leads is that while the Jew in proprietary 
Mary land was, de jure, without civil rights, was de- 
nied freedom of residence, and was liable to punish- 
nent by death for the bare profession of his faith, he 
was, de facto, permitted undisturbed domicil and 
was gradually allowed the exercise of certain unde- 
fined rights. 

The reduction of the palatinate to a crown colony 
in 1692 led naturally to a Protestant church estab- 
lishment, and ecclesiastical organization, it seems, 
tended to identify citizenship with church member- 
ship and to disfranchise the professed Jew in the 
province at large. The broader organization of the 
cities, whither the Jew would naturally gravitate, 
permitted some political recognition. Thus the 
charter of Annapolis, granted in 1708, conferred the 
suffrage upon any person possessing a freehold ora 
visible estate of twenty pounds sterling, and those 
of other cities and towns gradually followed with 
similar privileges. But even there the Jew could 
hold no office. The act of 1715 reorganizing the 
Protestant Church establishment provided that the 
oath of abjuration, terminating with the words, 
“upon the true faith of a Christian,” should be ad- 
ministered to “all persons that already have, or 

shall hereafter be admitted to have or 


Excluded enjoy, any office or place of trust withi- 
from in this province.” The exclusion was 
Office. _ perfected in the following year by the 


addition of the oaths of allegiance and 
abhorrency, and the test; to the last two no con- 
scientious Jew could subscribe. No essential modi- 
fication was made in this requirement until sixty 
years later, when it was embodied in the fundamen- 
tal law of the state. 

Whatever recognition the Jew could obtain, it is 
necessary to remember, was accorded entirely upon 
sufferauce. Legally, profession of Judaism still re- 
mained punishable by death. In 1723 the spirit of 
the Toleration Act of 1649 was revived by an act 
(repealing an apparently similar measure of 1715) 
“to punish blasphemers, swearers, drunkards.” It 
did much more than this, however, in the opening 
enactment, which declared that “if any person shall 
hereafter within this province . . . deny our Savior 
Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, or shall deny the 
Holy Trinity ” he shall, for the first offense, be fined 
and have his tongue bored; for the second, fined and 
have his head burned; for the third, put to death. 


Maryland 


This act also remained unrepealed until after the 
adoption of the state constitution. 

From the restoration of the “lord proprietor” in 
1715 until the outbreak of the Revolution, Jewish 
names are rarely mentioned. The Jewish settle- 
ments at Schaefersville and Lancaster seem to have 
contributed little to the stream of German immigra- 
tion which tlowed steadily from southeastern Penn- 
sylvania into Frederick county, Md. Similarly, the 
Jewish communities of Philadelphia and New York 
do not appear to have yielded to the commercial in- 
ducements offered by the more southerly colony. 
The absence of such contact suggests either a delib- 
erate avoidance of the province or the absence of 
public avowal of Jewish faith during residence 
therein, Church establishment terminated with the 
fall of proprietary rule and with the emergence of 
Maryland into statehood. With it fell, too, the 
force of the legislation which for a century and a 
half had declared profession of the Jewish faith a 
capitaloffense. The practical identification in men’s 
minds of citizenship and church membership and the 
subscription to doctrinal oaths as a necessary pre- 
liminary to political office could not, however, be 
swept away so easily. 

In Sept., 1776, a declaration of rights and a formal 
constitution were submitted to the Provisional Con- 
vention by a committee of five members appointed a 

month before. Asadopted, the thirty- 

The Con- fifth article of the declaration of rights 

stitution provided: “That no other test or qual- 

of 1776. ification ought to be required on ad- 
mission to any office of trust or profit 

than such oath of support and fidelity to this state, 
and such oath of office, as shall be directed by this 
convention or the legislature of this state, and a 
declaration of belief in the Christian religion.” The 
text of the oath of fidelity was given in the fifty- 
fifth article of the constitution, and the requirement 
that the person so appointed “shall also subscribe a 
declaration of his belief in the Christian religion ” 
was repeated. Henceforth the Jew in Maryland 
was secure in his religious profession and vested 
with certain political privileges. But the largest 
civic recognition was sti]l withheld, and not until 
half a century later, after a persistent struggle ex- 
tending over more than half this interval, was the 
fullest equality in the eye of the Jaw accorded him. 

The gradual influx of Jews into Maryland during 
and immediately after the Revolutionary war must 
ubdoubtedly be attributed to the commercial and 
industrial advantages of Baltimore. There is hardly 
any detailed information concerning the number, 
time of arrival, or personal history of these early 
settlers; a considerable part of them seems to have 
come from Philadelphia, and almost all appear to 
have been persons in moderate circumstances. 

The first formal legislative effort to effect the 
removal of the existing disability was made in 1797. 
On Dec. 138 in that year a petition signed by Solo- 
mon Etting, Bernard Gratz, and others was pre- 
seuted to the General Assembly at Annapolis; the 
petitioners averred “that they are a sect of people 
called Jews, and thereby deprived of many of the 
valuable rights of citizenship, and pray to be placed 
upon the same footing with other good citizens.” 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


360 


———— 


The petition was read and referred to a committee 
of three persons, who upon the same day reported 

that they “have taken the same into 
Beginnings consideration and conceive the prayer 


of Civic of the petition is reasonable, but as it 
Emanci-_ involves a constitutional question of 
pation. considerable importance they submit 


to the House the propriety of taking 
the same into consideration at this advanced stage 
of the session.” This summary disposition of the 
petition put a quietus upon further agitation for 
the next five years. On Nov, 26, 1802, a petition 
“from the sect of people called Jews” specifically 
stating their grievance, namely, “that they are de- 
prived of holding any office of profit and trust under 
the constitution and lawsof this state,” was referred 
to the General Assembly, which read it and referred 
it to a special committee of five delegates, including 
the two Baltimore representatives, with instructions 
to consider and report upon the prayer of the peti- 
tioners for relief. A month later the petition was 
refused by a vote of thirty-eight to seventeen. The 
attempt to secure the desired relief was repeated at 
the legislative session of 1808; again proving unsuc- 
cessful, it was renewed in the following year. 

There is much similarity in these successive at- 
tempts as disclosed in the bare outline of formal 
records. In 1803 and in 1804, asin 1802, petitions 
for legislative relief were presented to the House of 
Delegates, read, and referred to special committees. 
As in 1802, bills to the desired effect were reported 
back from these committees and shelved at the sec- 
ond reading; in 1808 the further consideration of the 
bill at this stage was postponed till the following 
session of theassembly; in 1804 the bill was defeated 
by a decisive vote of thirty-nine to twenty-four. 
Four successive attempts had now been made to 
secure full civic recognition, and four successive de- 
feats had been suffered. Some favorable advance 
in publicsentiment becomes evident upon a compar- 
ison of the votes of 1804 and 1802, but gencral opin- 
ion still continued so pronouncedly hostile to the 
grant of relicf that to the few determined spirits 
upon whom the brunt of the struggle had thus far 
fallen any further agitation seemed absolutely hope- 
less if not actually unwise. Accordingly with the 
legislative defeat of 1804 further formal agitation 
ceased until fourteen years later. 

Within this period (1804-18) occurred three cir- 
cumstances of prime importance with respect to 
further efforts to secure legislative relief: (1) the 
rise in material importance and communal influence 
of the Jews of Baltimore; (2) the actual hardship, 
as distinct from merely possible inconvenience, suf- 
fered from the operation of civil disabilities; (3) the 
enlistment of the keen sympathy and persistent ef- 
forts of certain distinguished men active in public 
affairs in Maryland in behalf of the struggle for the 
removal of civil disabilities of the Jews. 

The first circumstance is largely connected with 
the arrival in Baltimore from Richmond, Va., in the 
year 1803, of the Cohen family, consisting of the 
widow and six sons of Israel J. Cohen. The eldest 
son, Jacob I. Cohen, Jr., became at an early age a 
successful business man, and the founder of the 
banking-house of Jacob I. Cohen, Jr., & Brothers, 


361 


widely and honorably known in commercial circles. 
With Solomon Etting he was early recognized as a 
leader and representative figure in the 
The Cohen local Jewish community. Hisinterest 
Family. inpublicaffairswaskeenand sustained, 
his intercourse and friendship with 
persons engaged in public life large and intimate, 
and his concern for the full emancipation of Jews 
in Maryland intense. He was the author of the suc- 
cessive petitions for relief and the proposed consti- 
tutional amendments that besieged every session of 
the General Assembly from 1816 to 1826. He was 
the moving spirit of the sharp legislative struggle 
that followed each effort, and it was his personal 
friends, largely out of regard for him, who led in 
the successive contests. 

The second circumstance, the actual as distinct 
from the possible inconvenicnce entailed by civil 
disabilities, is closely associated with the rise in 
material importance of members of the Jewish com- 
munity. The elder Cohen had in Richmond been 
“conspicuous in all municipal movements, being 
chosen a magistrate and a member of the city coun- 
cil”; his sons found that so humble an office as that 
of wood-corder in Baltimore required a preliminary 
declaration of belief in the Christian religion. Reu- 
ben Etting wasdeemed by Thomas Jefferson worthy 
of appointment as United States marshal for Mary- 
land, but for the office of constable or justice of the 
peace his religious persuasion was an absolute dis- 
qualification. Others who had served with distinc- 
tion in the defense of Baltimore in 1812 and in sub- 
sequent military engagements were disqualified 
from rising from the ranks, and while personal 
bravery and the esteem and admiration of associates 
caused the letter of the law to be ignored, the offi- 
cer’s commission was held nevertheless by tacit 
consent and upon bare sufferance. These two 
conditions, the larger influence and wider intercourse 
of leading Jewish families of Baltimore and the 
actual hardship suffered by the operation of civil 
disabilities, combined to eniist the sympathy and 
aid of a group of men active in public life in Mary- 
land, and these conducted the legislative struggle 

for full emancipation in the General 


Struggle Assembly in the years from 1816 to 
in Legis- 1826. The most prominent figure in 
lature. this group, which included Thomas 


Brackenridge, E. S. Thomas, General 
Winder, Col. W. G. D. Worthington, and John V. 
L. MacMahon, was Thomas Kennedy of Washing- 
ton county. 

The history of the legislative struggle for the re- 
moval of the obnoxious restriction can be indicated 
here only in the barest outline. Beginning with the 
legislative session of 1818, and continuing until the 
desired end was attained in 1826, a deliberate and 
sustained attempt was made at cach successive ses- 
sion of the General Assembly to secure legislation 
relieving the Jewish appointee to political or civil 
oftice in Maryland of the necessity of subscribing to 
a declaration of belief inthe Christian religion. The 
legislative struggle attracted wide-spread attention 
throughout the United States. The important news- 
papers of the country characterized the test as a dis- 
graceful survival of religious intolerance and urged 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maryland 


its prompt repeal, The Jew Bill became a clearly 
defined issue in Maryland politics. In the debate in 
the legislative session of 1819-20, a detailed account 
of which has been preserved in notes taken by 
Thomas Kennedy and communicated to Jacob I. 
Cohen, it was openly charged that certain members 
had failed of reelection because they had voted for 
the repeal of Jewish disabilities. Onthe other hand, 
a disposition favorable to Jewish emancipation be- 
came at an carly date a sine qua non of election 
from Baltimore. In 1822 a bill to the desired effect 
passed both houses of the General Assembly; but 
the constitution of Maryland required that any act 
amendatory thereto must be passed at one session of 
the General Assembly and published and confirmed 
at the succeeding session of the legislature. Ac- 
cordingly recourse was necessary to the legislative 
session of 1823-24, in which a confirmatory bill was 
introduced, accompanied by a petition, marked by 
singular loftiness of sentiment and dignity of tone, 
from the Jews in Maryland. The bill was con- 
firmed by the Senate, but in the House of Delegates, 
after a stirring debate, the important speeches in 
which have been preserved, it was defeated, and all 
formal legislation hitherto enacted was rendered 
nugatory. 

But the end was nearer, perhaps, than even the 
friends of emancipation dared hope. On the very 
last day of the following session of the legislature 
(Feb. 26, 1825) an act “for the relief of the Jews in 
Maryland,” which had already received the sanction 
of the Senate, was passed by the House of Delegates 
by a vote of twenty-six to twenty-five, only fifty- 
one out of eighty members being present. The bill 
provided that “every citizen of this state professing 
the Jewish religion ” who shall be ap- 
pointed to any office of profit or trust 
shall, in addition to the required oaths, 
make and subscribe a declaration of 
his belief in a future state of rewards and punish- 
ments instead of the declaration now required by 
the government of the state. A year later the brief 
but effective statute was enacted “that an act passed 
at December session, 1824, entitled an ‘act for the 
relief of the Jews in Maryland,’ shall be, and the 
same is hereby, confirmed.” 

An epilogue to the history of the struggle thus 
sketched were the repeal in 1847, at the instance of 
Dr. Joshua I. Cohen and through the efforts of John 
P. Kennedy, of a curious surviving discrimination 
against the Jews in the existing laws of evidence, 
and the efforts made, also at the instance of Dr. 
Joshua I, Cohen, in the constitutional conventions 
of 1850 and 1867 to eliminate entirely the religious 
test. The removal of the civil disabilities of the 
Jews in Maryland was gracefully signalized by the 
prompt election in Baltimore (Oct., 1826), as mem- 
bers of the city council, of Solomon Etting and 
Jacob I. Cohen, both of whom had been throughout 
the moving spirits of the legislative struggle. 
Cohen was made president of the “First Branch,” 
and subsequently was elected for a long series of 
years as a municipal representative of his ward. 

Since 1825 the Jew in Maryland has suffered no 
formal] disability with respect to political office, and 
he has been frequently appointed to positions of 


Act of 
1825. 


Marzroth 
Mashiah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


362 





trust and influence. The later history of the Jews 
in Maryland has been in the main the history of the 
Jewish community of BALTIMORE. Small bodies of 
Jews are to be found in Cumberland (165 in 1901), 
Hagerstown (209 in 1902), and in many localities 
throughout the state. The Jewish population of 
Baltimore in 1902 was estimated at 25,000, and that 
of the twenty-three counties (including towns) out- 
side of Baltimore, at 1,500, making the total Jew- 
ish population of the state 26,500. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hollander, Some Cirpublished Material. Re- 
lating to Dr. Jacob Lumbrozo of oe yland, in Publica- 
tions Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. 1893, No. 1, pp. 25-39 ; idem, Civil 
Status of the Jews in Maryland, 168-1976. ib. 1894, No. 2, 
pp. 33-44 (see also references therein cited); Sketch of Pro- 
ceedings in the Legislature of Maryland, December Session, 
1818, on What Is Commonly Called the Jew Bill, Baltimore, 
1819; Address to the Children of Israel in Maryland, ib. 
1820; Speech of Thomas Kennedy, Esq., in the Legislature 
of Maryland on the Bill Respecting Civ il Rights and Re- 
ligious Privileges, Annapolis, 1823; Memorial of Jewish 
Inhabitants of Maryland to the General Assembly, 1824 
(n.p.)3 Governor Worthington’s Speech on the Maryland 
Test Act, 1824, Baltimore, 1824; Speeches on the Jew Bill in 
the House of Delegates in Maryland, by H. M. Bracken- 
ridge, Col. W. G. D. Worthington, and John S. Tyson, 
Esquire, Philadelphia, 1829; Winning the Battle; or One 
Girl in Ten Thousand, ib. es G. E. Barnett, in American 
Jewish Year Book, 1902-3, 46-62 ; correspondence and 
records in the possession of Mr. cates Cohen, Baltimore, Md. 
A. J. H. Ho. 
MARZROTH (pscudonym of Moritz Barach): 

Austrian author; born in Vienna March 21, 1818; 

died at Salzburg in 1888. After leaving the Uni- 

versity of Vienna in 1844 he entered the field of 
journalism, in which his influence helped to es- 
tablish a more liberal régime. He founded sev- 
eral journals, including “ ‘Das Wiener Feuilleton ” 

(1858; belles-lettres), “ “Der Komet” (Vienna, 1853; 

humor), and “ Die Komische Welt,” edited the comic 

album “ Brausepulver” (Vienna and Leipsic, 1847 

and 1848), and wrote for “Fliegende Blatter,” 

“Ueber Land und Meer” (“Wiener Croquis,” a 

humorous chronicle of Vienna life), “Bauerle’s 

Theaterzeitung ” (letters of travel from 1855), and 

other publications. Most of his poems are in dialect, 

of which he was a master, and many of his songs have 
been set to music. Toward the end of his life he 
left Baden bei Wien, where he had long lived, and 
settled at Salzburg. 

The following works of Barach may be mentioned: 

“Bilder, Lieder, und Geschichten,” in dialect (Berlin, 

1854); “QLiederbuch ohne Goldschnitt” (Dresden, 

1856); “Satans Leier” (Prague, 1860); “Spottvégel 

(70. 1864); “ Geistergestalten aus dem Alten Wien ” 

(Vienna, 1868); “Schattenspiele aus dem Alten und 

Neuen Wien” and “ Bitt’ Gar Schén, Singa Lass’n!” 

poems in the Salzburg dialect (1878); “ Lachende 

Geschichten” (4 vols., 1880-81); “ Weltlust: Histo- 

rietten, Schwinke und Lieder eines Heitern Vagran- 

ten” (Leipsic, 1888); “ Alt-Wien: Bilder und Ge- 
schichten ” (2b, 1885); “ Ein Neuer Decameronce ” (2d. 

1887); and the following comedies: “Fritz Ntirn- 

berger,” “ Die Frau Professorin,” “Zur Statistik der 

Frauen” (¢b. 1869, in one act), “Lucretia Borgia 

(with Otto Prechtler), ‘“ Der Biberhof,” “ Eine Million 

fiir einen Erben” (with L. Feldmann). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wurzbach, Biograph. Lex.; Briimmer, Dich- 
ter-~Lex.; Bornmtller, Biograph. Schriftsteller-Ler. 
<. N. D. 
MASADA: Strong mountain fortress in Pales- 

tine, not far west of the Dead Sea. The fortress was 


built by the high priest Jonathan (a statement which 
Schiirer upon insuflicient grounds holds to be false), 
who also gave it its name (Josephus, “B. J.” vii. 8, 
$8). The name is certainly Hebrew: “Mezadah ” 
= “mountain fortress.” Josephus writes Macada 
and Macadéd (variant, Meoddaj; Strabo (xvi. 2, § 44) 
Cond pis it to Moacdda; while Pliny (“ Historia Na- 
turalis,” v. 17, § 78) writes correctly “Masada” 
(comp. “Die Epitome des Solinus,” ed. Mommsen, 
& 35). Helix, second in command under Cassius, took 
the fortress from the Herodians in 42 B.c. (Josephus, 
“Ant.” xiv. 11,8 7; “B.J.”i.12,§ 1). Later Herod 
took refuge Here (“ Ant.” xiv, 18, $8; “B. J.” i. 18, 
§ 7); Antigonus, who besieged the fortress, could not 
take it, inspite of the fact that the defenders suffered 
from a scarcity of water (“ Ant.” xiv. 14, § 6; 1, 
SS 1-4; “B, J.”1. 15, $8 3-4). When Herod became 
king he repaired the fortress, building a wall with 
thirty-seven high turrets around the summit of the 
mountain, which was flat. Within the wall were 
dwelling-houses and a splendid palace for Herod, 
who wished the fortress to bea place of refuge from 
every danger. Grain, which was stored there, on 
account of the purity of the air did not spoil easily 
(“B. J.” vii. 8, § 3). 

Masada attained great importance in the war with 
the Romans. The Sicarii captured it and killed the 
Roman garrison (“B. J.” ii. 17, § 2); Menahem took 
possession of the arms stored there by Herod (7d. 
$8); Menahem’s relative Eleazar b. Jair governed 
the fortress for about six years (7b. § 9); and Bar Giora 
also took refuge there for some time (28. 22, § 2). 
From here the Sicarii harassed and plundered the 
whole vicinity, especially Engedi (zd. iv. 7,§ 2). Not 
until three years after the fall of Jerusalem did a 
Roman army, under Silva, advance upon Masada. 
Josephus in this connection gives a detailed account 
of the situation of the fortress, Which was almost in- 
accessible and inexpugnable (2d. 8, § 3); there 
was only one spot upon which the Romanscould place 
a battering-raim, and even there only with great diffi- 
culty. When, finally, a breach was madein the wall, 
the invaders were confronted by anewly erected bul- 
wark, which, however, they succeeded in destroying 
by fire. Eleazar b. Jair persuaded the besieged to 
kill themselves, and when the Romans entered they 
found alive only two women (24. 8, 8S 1-7; 9, § 2). 

With the fall of Masada the war came to an end 
(on the 15th of Nisan, 78; 72 according to Niese in 
“TIermes,” xxviii. 211). 

Smith and Robinson (“ Palistina,” ii. 477) discov- 
ered Masada in the cliffs of Al-Sabbah. Theaccount 
of Josephus has been completely confirmed by them 
and by Ritter (“ Erdkunde,” xv. 655); and the traces 
of the Roman camp may still be seen. 


il. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Tuch, Masada, Leipsic, 1868; Boettger, Topo- 
grvaphisch-Historisches Lericon zit den Schr iften des Fla- 
vius Josephus, p. 175; Conder and Kitehener, The Survey of 
Western Palestine, tii, 418-421; Schtirer, Geseh. 3d ed., 1.391, 
note 68; 638, note 137. e 
G. S. Ixp. 
MASARJAWAIH or MASARJOYAH or 

MASARJIS: One of the oldest Arabic Jewish 

physicians, and the oldest translator from the Syriac ; 

lived in Bassora about 883. Hisname, mutilated in 
every possible way, has been transmitted in Euro- 
pean sources; nor has it yet been satisfactorily ex- 


3863 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Marzroth 
Mashiah 





plained. Neuda (in “ Orient. Lit.” vi. 182) compares | 


the name “ Masarjawaih ” with the Hebrew proper 
name “Mesharsheya”; but the ending “-waih” 
points to a Persian origin. The form “ Masarjis” 
has been compared with the Christian proper uame 
“Mar Serjis”; but it is not known that Masarjis 
cmbraced either Christianity or Islam. 

Masarjawaih’s son, who also was a translator, 
and was the author of two treatises (on colors and 
on foods), was called “ ‘Isa,” that is, “Jesus”; which 
name, of course, points to the fact that this son had 
been converted to Christianity. 

Masarjawaih translated the pandects of the arch- 
deacon or presbyter Aaron from the Syriac into 


tlt 1 





MASHAL. See PARnaBue. 


MASHIAH, HASUN BEN: Karaite scholar ; 
flourished in IEgypt (or Babylonia) in the first half 
of the tenth century. According to Steinschneider, 
“Hasun” is a corrupted form of the Arabic name 
“Husain,” the} being easily confounded in manu- 
script with the’. Hasun, or, as he is generally 
quoted by the Karaite authorities, Ben Mashiah, 
was a younger contemporary of Saadia Gaon, whom, 
according to Sahl ben Mazliah in his “ Tokahat 
Megullah,” he once challenged to a religious contro- 
versy. Hasun was the author of a polemical work, 
written probably in Arabic, in which he refuted one 





MOUNT Masana IN JUDEAa,. 
(Frou a photograph by Bonfils.) 


Arabic and added to the thirty chapters of this 
translation twoof his own. Healso wrote in Arabic 
two treatises, “The Virtues of Foods, Their Ad- 
vantage and Their Disadvantage,” aud “The Vir- 
tues of the Medicinal Plants, Their Advantage and 
Their Disadvantage.” None of these three writings 
has been preserved. Their contents, however, are 
known to a certain extent by quotations. How 
much Masarjawaih added to the translation of 
Aaron’s pandects can hardly be decided, as_ the 
works themselves are preserved in fragments only. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, in Z. D. Af. G. liii. 428 et seq. ; 

idem, Die Arabische Literatur, 3 16, pp. 13 et seq. 


a. M. Sc. 


of Saadia’s unpublished anti-Karaite writings, which 
came into his possession after the death of the author. 
Owing to a misunderstanding of a passage (§ 258) in 
the “ Eshkol ha-Kofer” of Hadassi, Hasun was er- 
roneously credited with the authorship of the anon- 
ymous chapter, on the theodicy, entitled “Sha‘ar 
Zedek ” (St. Petersburg, Firkovich MSS. Nos. 688, 
685), in the religio-philosophical work “ Zikron 
ha-Datot,” and of “ Kuppat ha-Rokelim.” Simah 
Isaac Luzki attributes to Hasun also a work on the 
precepts (“Sefer ha-Mizwot ”). Abraham ibn Ezra, 
in his introduction to the commentary on the Penta- 
teuch, quotesa Karaite scholar named Ben Mashiah, 
who is probably identical with Hasun. 


Maskil 
Masorah 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pinsker, Likkute Kadmoniyyot, p. 114; Furst, 
Gesch, des Kardert. ii. 46: Gottlober, Bikkureé le-Toledot 
ha-Rrera’im, p. 168; Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. iv. 48; idem, 
Cat. Bodl. p. 2169; idem, Cat. Leyden, p. 390; idem, Hebr. 
ae p. 460; idem, Die Arabische Litcratur der Juden, 
Ss. I. Br. 
MASKIL (plural, Maskilim): 1. A title of 

honor used principally in Italy. The word “mas- 

kil,” with the meaning of “scholar” or “enlight- 
ened man,” was used by Isaac Israeli, who died 
in 1826 (“my colleagues, the maskilim”; ‘“ Yesod 

‘Olam,” ii. 11, Berlin, 1846). But in some places 

“maskil” meant one who held a secondary rabbin- 

ical position corresponding to that of dayyan, and 

Jehiel Heiiprin (“‘Erke ha-Kinnuyim,” p.45b, Dy- 

hernfurth, 1806) so defines it. In the Orient the 

overseers of the poor, or “gabbai zedakot,” are 

called “maskilim” (Hazan, “Kerub Mimshah,” p. 

26b, Alexandria, 1895). In Italy, and especially in 

Tuscany, the title “maschil” is conferred on rab- 

binical students (see Panzieri in “ Jewish Comment,” 

vol. xiv., No. 18; “Il Corriere Israelitico,” 1889, pp. 

166-167), though in some parts of Italy the title 

given In such cases is “haber.” It may be said to 

correspond to the title “Morenu” among the Ger- 
man Jews; it is considered inferior to the rabbinical 

title “hakam ” (“Tl Vessillo Israelitico,” 1900, p. 244). 

Azulai reports in his diary that in 1776 he experi- 

enced considerable difficulty in adjusting a trouble 

which had arisen in Ancona over the fact that the 
title “ maskil” had been bestowed on the local hazzan 

(“Ma‘agal Tob,” p. 6b, Leghorn, 1879). 

2. Among the Jews of the Slavonic countries 

“maskil” usually denotes a self-taught Hebrew 


scholar with an imperfect knowledge of a living 


language (usually German), who represents the love 
of learning and the striving for culture awakened 
by Mendelssohn and his disciples; 2.¢., an adherent 
or foilower of the HaskaLamw movement. He is 
“by force of circumstances detained on the path 
over which the Jews of western Europe swiftly 
passed from rabbinical lore to European culture ” 
and to emancipation, and “his strivings and short- 
comings exemplify the unfulfilled hopes and the 
disappointments of Russian civilization.” 

The Maskilim are mostly teachers and writers; 
they taught a part of the young generation of Rus- 
sian Jewry to read Hebrew and have created the 
great Neo-Hebrew literature which is the monument 
of Haskalah. Although Haskalah has now been 
flourishing in Russia for three generations, the class 
of Maskilim does not reproduce itself. The Maski- 
lim of each gencration are recruited from the ranks 
of the Orthodox TFalmudists, while the children of 
Maskilim very scldom follow in the footsteps of 
their fathers, This is probably due to the fact that 
the Maskil who breaks away from strictly conserva- 
tive Judaism in Russia, but does not sueceed in be- 
coming thoroughly assimilated, finds that his mate- 
rial conditions have not been improved by the 
change, and, while continuing to cleave to HasKa- 
lah for its own sake, he does not permit his children 
to share his fate, 

The quarrels between the Maskilim and the Or- 
thodox, especially in the smaller communities, are 
becoming less frequent. In the last few years the 
Zionist movement has contributed to bring the Mas- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


364 


kilim, who joined it almost to a man, nearer to the 

other classes of Jews who became interested in that 

movement. 

The numerous Maskilim who emigrated to the 
United States, especially after the great influx of 
Russian immigrants, generally continued to follow 
their old vocation of teaching and writing Hebrew, 
while some contributed to the Yiddish periodicals. 
Many of those who went thither in their youth en- 
tered the learned professions. See LITERATURE, 
MODERN HEBREW. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Atlas, Mah le-Fanim u-Mah le-Ahor, pp. 56 et 
seq., Warsaw, 1898; Brainin, in Ffa-Shiloah. vii. 43; Fried- 
berg, Zikronot, ii. 27 et seq., Warsaw, 1899; Gersoni, in Tide- 
pendent, New York, Jan. 12, 1898; Taviov, in Ha-Meliz, 
Xxix., No. 77; Wiernik, in New Era Illustrated Magazine, 
Feb., 1904, pp. 34-43. ? 

L: W T=), 


MASKILEISON, ABRAHAM B. JUDAH 
LOB: Russian rabbi and author; born 1788; died 
at Minsk 1848, He was a descendant of R. Israel 
Jaffe of Shklov, author of “Or Yisracl.” Maskilci- 
son officiated as rabbi in many cities, and in his late 
years went to Minsk, where he remained till his 
death. Having no desire to use his cabalistic kKnow!- 
edge for gain, as was done by the miracle-working 
rabbis, he devoted his whole life tostudy. He lived 
in comparative poverty, being satisfied with a small 
income. He wrote the following works: “ Maskil 
je-Etan ” (Shklov, 1818), novelle on partsof Mo'ed 
and Kodashim, printed with the approbations of 
Saul Katzenellenbogen of Wilna and Manasseh 
lliyer; “Be’er Abraham ” (Wilna, 1848), novelle on 
the remaining partsof the Talmud. After hisdeath 
were published: “ Nahal Etan” (2). 1859), novellre on 
the first two parts of Maimonides’ Yad ha-Haza- 
kah; “Mizpeh Etan” (Jitomir, 1858-64: Wilna, 
1880-86), notes on the Talmud; “Yad Abraham” 
(Wilna, 1888), novell on Yoreh De‘ah; notes on 
Sifre, some of which are published at the end of the 
Wilna edition (1865). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn., Ieneset Yisrael, p. 41; Eisenstadt- 
Ben Zion, Rahhane Minsk, pp. 27-48; Benjacob, Ozer ha-Se- 
farim, pp. 1382, 135, 376, 395 ; preface (by Maskileison’s son) to 
Nahal Etan. 

H, R. bias bom By 

MASKILEISON, NAPHTALI: Russian He- 
brew author and book-dealer; born at Radashko- 
vichi, near Minsk, Feb. 20, 1829; died at Minsk Nov. 
19, 1897. Tis father, R. Abraham Maskileison, a 


Hebrew scholar of note and the author of “ Maskil le- 


Etan,” instructed him in Talmud. Study of the 
poetical works of Moses Luzzatto and N. Wessely 
awakened Maskileison’s interest in Neo-Hebrew lit- 
erature, then regarded with disfavor by the Ortho- 
dox circles in which he grew up. His first poetical 
production was the drama “Esther,” which was 
praised by the poet A. B. Lebensohn. Later he 
published, in various Hebrew pcriodicals, some 
poems which are marked by beauty of form and 
depth of thought. His many prose articles, pub- 
lished in the Hebrew periodicals during a period of 
forty years, are likewise distinguished for their ex- 
cellence, as is his “ Miktabim le-Lammed,” a collee- 
tion of eighty-eight letters of varied content (Wilna, 
1870). One of Maskileison’s most valuable under- 
takings was his revised edition of Jehicl HEILPRIN’S 
“Seder ha-Dorot” (Warsaw, 1878-82). He system- 


365 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Maskil 
Masorah 





atized the work and corrected the errors and omis- | ically speaking, the Aramaic is placed between two 


sions that had rendered the chronology almost use- 
less, and appended a biography of Heilprin. He left 
many works in manuscript. Maskileison represents 
the best type of the Maskilim, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Voxkhod, 1897, No. 49. p. 1367: Ahiasaf, 1808, 
p. 345: Sekolow, Sefer Zikkaron, pp. 158 et seq. 


H. R. J. G. L. 

MASLIANSEY, ZEBI HIRSCH B. HAY- 
YIM: Russian preacher; born in Slutsk, govern- 
ment of Minsk, June 6, 1856. He received a thor- 
ough rabbinical education, spending two years in 
the yeshibah of Mir. Later he settled as a teacher 
in Pinsk, where he remained about fourteen years, 
occasionally preaching. In 1887 he went to Yeka- 
terinoslaf, where also he taught and preached. In 
1891 he went to Odessa, where his oratorical talent 
attracted the attention of the Zionist leader M. L. 
Lilienblum and others, who advised him to devote 
himself entirely to preaching. For the following 
three years he traveled through many parts of Rus- 
sia, his Zionist speeches arousing much enthusiasm. 
In 1894 he went to England, and in 1895 to the 
United States, where he is recognized as a foremost 
Yiddish and Hebrew orator. Since 1898 he has lec- 
tured every Friday evening in the auditorium of the 
Educational Alliance, New York city. The “ Yid- 
dishe Welt,” a daily Yiddish newspaper, was 
founded by him in 1902 in New York. He contrib- 
uted also to the Hebrew periodicals “ Ha-‘Tbri” 
and “ Ha-Pisgah;” in which he described his Russian 
travels, 

BIBLIOGRAPITY: Eisenstadt, Dor Rabbanaw we-Soferar, ii. 
30, Wilna, 1900: iden, Hakme Yisrael be-Ameriha, pp. 70- 
41, New York, 1903; M. Zablotski and J. Massel, in fHa-Yiz- 
hari, Manchester, 1895, 

H.R. Poo WE 

MASORAH: The system of critical notes on 
the external form of the Biblical text. This system 
of notes represents the literary labors of innumer- 
able scholars, of which the beginning falls probably 
in pre-Maccabean times and the end reaches to the 
year 1425. 

The name “Masorah” occurs in many forms, the 
etymology, pronunciation, and genetic connection of 
which are much-mooted points. The term is taken 
from Ezek. xx. 37 and means originally “ fetter.” 
The fixation of the text was correctly considered 

to be in the nature of a fetter upon its 

Etymology exposition. When, in course of time, 

of the the Masorah had become a traditional] 

Name. discipline, the term became connected 

with the verb ‘pp (=“to hand 
down ”), and was given the meaning of “tradition.” 

For a full discussion of the meaning and history 

of the word see Bacher in “J. Q. R.,” iii. 785, and 

C. Levias in the “Hebrew Union College Annual” 

for 1904. 

The entire body of the Masorah goes back to the 
Palestinian schools; but recently Dr. P. Kahle dis- 
covered a fragment of the Babylonian Masorah 
which differs considerably from the received text in 
its terminology (comp. Paul Kahle, “Der Masore- 
tische Text des Alten Testaments nach der Ueber- 
lieferung der Babylonischen Juden,” Leipsic, 1902). 

The language of the Masoretic notes is partly 
Hebrew and partly Palestinian Aramaic. Chronolog- 


periods of the Hebrew ; the latter appearing in the old- 
est, the pre-amoraic period, and in the latest, the Ara- 
bic period (which begins here about 800). To the old- 

est period belong terms like nN = “ let- 
Language ter”; mw, “section”; pipa, “verse”: 
and Form. pyp, “sense-clause ”; xdn, “plene”; 

aon. “defective”; spp, “Bible”: 
also DIDID Nip. OHI Woy, pos: the verb tps 
= “to punctuate,” and certain derivatives; not all 
of these terms, however, happen to occur in the 
remnants of tannaitic literature which have been 
preserved. The Aramaic clements may thus be dated 
roughly from 200 to 800. 

The Masoretic annotations are found in various 
forms: (¢) in separate works, e.g., the “Oklah we- 
Oklah”; (2) in the form of notes written in the 
margins and at the end of codices. In rare cases 
the notes are written between the lines. The first 
word of each Biblical book is also as a rule sur- 
rounded by notes. The latter are called the Initial 
Masorah ; the notes on the side margins or between 
the columns are called the Small or Inner Maso- 
rah; and those on the lower and upper margins, 
the Large or Outer Masorah. The name “Large 
Masorah ” is applied sometimes to the lexically ar- 
ranged notes at the end of the printed Bible, usu- 
ally called the Final Masorah, in Hebrew litera- 
ture Masoretic Concordance (AIDA AD WY, or 
Mes 3yo ADM). 

The Small Masorah consists of brief notes with 
reference to marginal readings, to statistics showing 
the number of times a particular form is found in 
Scripture, to full and defective spelling, and to ab- 
normally written letters. The Large Masorah is 
more copious in its notes, The Final Masorah com- 
prises all the longer rubrics for which space could 
not be found in the margin of the text, and is ar- 
ranged alphabetically in the form of a concordance. 
The quantity of notes the marginal Masorah con- 
tains is conditioned by the amount of vacant space 
on each page. In the manuscripts it varies also 
with the rate at which the copyist was paid and the 
fanciful shape he gave to bis gloss. 

The question as to which of the above forms is the 
oldest can not be decided from the data now acces- 
sible. On the one hand, it is known that marginal 
notes were used in the beginning of the second cen- 
tury of the common era; on the other, there is every 
reason to assume the existence of Masoretic baraitas 
which could not have been much later. The Small 
Masorah is in any case not an abbreviation of the 
Large Masorah. Like the latter, it occurs also ar- 
ranged in alphabetical order. 

From the statements in Talmudic literature to the 
effect that there was deposited in the court of the 
Temple a standard copy of the Bible 
for the benefit of copyists, and that 
there were paid correctors of Biblical 
books among the officers of the Temple (Ket. 106a); 
from the fact that such a copy is mentioned in the 
Aristeas Letter (§ 80: comp. Blau, “Studien zum Alt- 
hebr. Buchwesen,” p. 100); from the statements of 
Philo (preamble to his “Analysis of the Political 
Constitution of the Jews”) and of Josephus (“ Contra 
Ap.” i. 8) that the text of Scripture had never been 


Origin. 


Masorah 


altered; finally, from the fact that there scem to 
have been no differences of readings between Phar- 
isees and Sadducees, it may be concluded that the 
Scriptural text, at least as much as then belonged 
to the canon, was already fixed, at the latest, about 
200 B.c. and perhaps a century earlier. 

While the text was thus carly fixed, it took cen- 
turies to produce a tolerable uniformity among all 
the circulating copies. This is by no means aston- 
ishing when one considers that the standard copy 
deposited at the Temple could be of benefit only to 
those who were sufficiently near Jerusalem to make 
use of it. This was not the case with those living in 
the Diaspora. When to this is added the carelessness 
of some copyists, it will not seem strange that as 
late as the second century of the common era schol- 
ars found it necessary to warn against Incorrect 
copies; and the conclusions usually drawn from dif- 
ferences in the late books between the Hebrew text 
and the Greck version lose much of their force. 

In classical antiquity copyists were paid for their 
work according to the number of stichs. As the 
prose books of the Bible were hardly ever.written in 
stichs, the copyists, in order to estimate the amount 
of work, had to count the letters. Hence developed 
in ihe course of time the Numerical Masorah, 
Which counts and groups together the various ele- 
ments and phenomena of the text. Thus pnw) 
(Lev. vili. 23) forms the half of the number of verses 
in the Pentateuch; all the names of Divinity men- 
tioned in connection with Abraham are holy except 
"98 (Gen. xvill. 8); ten passages in the Pentateuch 
are dotted; three timesthe Pentateuch has the spell- 
ing xb where the reading is 3. The collation of 
mianuscripts and the noting of their differences fur- 
nished material for the Text-Critical Masorah. 
rhe close relation which existed in earlier times (from 
the Soferim to the Amoraim inclusive) between the 
teacher of tradition and the Masorite, both frequently 
being united in one person, accounts for the Exeget- 
ical Masorah. Finally, the invention and intvoduc- 
tion of a graphic system of vocalization and aecen- 
tuation gave rise to the Grammatical Masorah. 

The old Hebrew text was, in all probability, writ- 
ten in continuous script, without any breaks. The 
division into words, books, sections, paragraphs, 
verses, and clauses (probably in the chronological 
order here enumerated); the fixing of the orthog- 
raphy, pronunciation, and cantillation; the intro- 

duction or final adoption of the square 

Fixation of characters with the five final Jetters 
the Text. (comp. NUMBERS AND NUMERALS); 
some textual changes to guard against 

blasphemy and the like; the enumeration of Ictters, 
words, verses, ete., and the substitution of some 
words for others in public reading, belong to the 
earliest labors of the Masorites. Since no additions 
were allowed to be made to the official text of. the 
Bible, the early Masorites adopted other expedients: 
e.g., they marked the various divisions by spacing, 
and gave indications of halakic and haggadic teach- 
ings by full or defective spelling, abnormal forms 
of letters, dots, and other signs. Marginal] notes 
were permitted only in private copies, and the first 
mention of such notes is found in the case of R. 
Meir (c. 100-150). The traditionally fixed text, espe- 


TILE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


366 





cially with a view to its orthography, was called 
nwo; the traditional pronunciation, SQ pd; the 
division into sense-clauses, which underlies the 
proper recitation or Cantillation, DYOYyy pyprDor pyran. 
Tannaitic sources mention several passages of 
Scripture in which the conclusion is inevitable 
that the ancient reading must have differed from 
that of the present text. The explanation of 
this phenomenon is given in the ex- 


Tikkune pression S3INDA MSD (“Scripture has 
Soferim. used euphemistic Janguage,” @.e., te 


avoid anthropomorphism and anthro- 
popathisin), R. Simon b, Pazzi,an amora of the third 
century, calis these readings “emendations of the 
Scribes” (“tikkune Soferim”; Gen. R. xix. 7), as- 
suming that the Scribes actually made the changes, 
This view was adopted by the later Midrash and by 
the majority of Masorites. In Masoretic works these 
changes are ascribed to Ezra; to Ezra and Nehe- 
miah; to Ezra and the Soferim; or to Ezra, Nehe- 
Iniah, Zechariah, Haggai, and Baruch. All these 
ascriptions mean one and the same thing: that the 
changes were made by the Men of the Great Syn- 
agogzue (comp. Tan., Beshallah, on xv. 7). Ben 
Asher remarks that the proper expression would have 
been ODD M93 (% Dikduke ha-Te‘amiin,” $ 57), but, 
in the sense of the oldest sources, the only proper ex- 
pression would have been D°3)N37 495. a term which 
in an old variant has really been preserved (comp. 
Blau, “Masoretische Untersuchungen,” p. 50). 

The term “tikkun Soferim” has been understood 
by different scholars in various ways. Some re- 
gard it as a viva voce correction or modification 
of Biblical language authorized by the Soferim for 
homiletical purposes; ¢.e., the Scribes interpret a 
supposed euphemism, and their interpretation is 
‘alled “tikkun Soferim.” Others take if to mean a 
mental change made by the original writers or re- 
dactors of Seripture; ¢e., the latter shrank from 
putting in writing a thought which some of the 
readers might expect them tocexpress. Considering 
the various interpretations and the fact that neither 
the number nor the identity of the passages in ques- 
tion is definite (Mekilta counts 11, Sifre 7, Tanhuma 
18, Masorah 15 or 18), 8. Sachs (in “ Kerem Hemed,” 
ix. 57, note) and, without mentioning him, Barnes 
(“Journal of Theological Studies,” 1. 387-414) come 
to the conclusion that the tikkun tradition belongs 
‘ather to the Midrash than to the Masorah; 7.¢., its 
true bearing is on exegesis, not on textual criticism, 
The tikkune Soferim are interpretations, not read- 
ings. The tikkun tradition is probably connected 
with the tradition which ascribes the redaction of 
several books of Scripture to the Great Synagogue, 

There are, however, phenomena in the Biblicai 
text which force one to assume that at some time 
textual corrections had been made. These correc- 
tions may be classified under the following heads: 

(1) Removal of unseemly expressions used in refer- 
ence toGod; ¢.4., the substitution of 773 (“to bless ”) 
for Ob5 (“to curse ”) in certain passages. 

(2) Safeguarding of the Tetragrammaton; e.g., 
substitution of “Elohim” for “ YHwH” in some pas- 
sages. Under this head some have counted such 
phenomena as the variants of the divine names in 
theophorous proper names; e.g., “Joahaz” for “Je- 


Peart P eoneee mow ann hs 
seer fbs tek Qare o 








PAGE FROM A THIRTEENTH-CENTURY (7) MANUSCRIPT BIBLE BEARING MASORETIC NOTES WRITTEN TO FORM ORNAMEDSTAI. 
DECORATIONS. 
(In the British Museum.) 


Masorah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


368 





hoahaz,” “ Elijah” for “ Eliyahu,” ete., but compare 
on this point J. H. Levy in “J. Q. R.” xv. 97 et seq. 

(3) Removal of application of the names of false 
gods to Ynwu; e.g., the change of the name “Ish- 
baal” to “ [shbosheth.” 

(4) Safeguarding the unity of divine worship at 
Jerusalem, Here belongs the change (Isa. xix. 18) 
DIAN Vy for PIyA Wy or OFA Wy. 

Among the earliest technical terms used in con- 
nection with activities of the Scribes are (Ned. 37b) 
the “mikra Soferim” and “‘ittur Soferim.” In the 
geonic schools the first term was taken to signify 
certain vowel-changes which were madeé in words in 

pause or after the article; ¢.g., ys, 

‘¢ Mikra ” yIN7; the second, the cancelation ina 

i‘ he x few passages of the “waw ” conjunc- 

ur." tive, where it had by some been wrong- 

ly read. The objection to suchan ex- 

planation is that the first changes would fall under 
the general head of fixation of pronunciation, and 
the second under the head of “kere” and “ ketib.” 
Various explanations liave, therefore, been offered 
by ancient as well as modern scholars without, how- 
ever, succceding in furnishing a satisfactory solution. 

A number of words is mentioned—by the Tal- 
mud 5; by later authorities 8—which negatively ex- 
pressed have no yan, but positively expressed 
have a ANwn. According to Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah ii. 8 
{Aic), this Masoretic note should be understood to 

mean that the Scribes had left un- 
Undecided decided the question whether the af- 
Construc- fected words belonged to the prece- 
tions. ding or to the following clause. But 
such an interpretation may be objected 
to for two reasons. First, the accentuation fixes the 
construction of those words in a very definite way. 
Even if one assumes that theaccentuators had acted 
high-handedly and had disregarded tradition, which 
is not probable, it is impossible to conceive how in 
public worship the words were recited to indicate 
such doubtful construction, The reader must have 
connected them either with the first or with the sec- 
ond clause. Secondly, a still graver objection is 
that some of those words make sense in only one 
clause, the one in which the accentuators have put 
them. It must, therefore, be assumed that the tra- 
dition refers here to cxegesis, not to textual eriti- 
cism. It must refer to what is termed by later 
scholars 4379"} muy. akind of construction a76 xocvor, 
wherein the word is understood to follow itself im- 
mediately. Tradition was undecided whether these 
words were to be read merely as they stood, or un- 
derstood also with the following word. 
There are four words having one of their letters 


suspended above the line. One of them, my» 
(Judges xviii. 30), is due to a correc- 
Suspended tion of the original Rwy out of rever- 
Letters ence for Moses. The origin of the 
and Dotted other three (Ps. Ixxx. 14; Job xxxviii. 
Words. 13, 15) is doubtful. According to 
some, they are due to mistaken ma- 
juscular letters; according to others, they are later 
insertions of originally omitted weak consonants. 
Tn fifteen passages in the Bible some words are 
stigmatized. The significance of the dots is dis- 


puted. Some hold them to be marks of erasure; 
others believe them to indicate that in some collated 
manuscripts the stigmatized words were missing, 
hence that the reading is doubtful; still others con- 
tend that they are merely a mnemonic device to in- 
dicate homiletical explanations which the ancients 
had connected with those words; finally, some main- 
tain the dots were designed to guard against the 
omission by copyists of text-elements which, at first 
glance or after comparison with parallel passages, 
seemed to be superfluous. Instead of dots some 
manuscripts exhibit strokes, vertical or else horizon- 
tal. The first two explanations are unacceptable 
for the reason that such faulty readings would be- 
long to kere and ketib, which, in case of doubt, the 
majority of manuscripts would decide. The last 
two theories have equal probability. 

In nine passages of the Bible are found signs usu- 
ally called “inverted nuns,” because resembling the 
letter 9. Others find a resemblance in these signs 
to the letter 4“ or 3. 5. Krauss (in Stade’s “ Zeit- 
schrift,” xxii. 57) holds that the signs 
were Originally obeli, and have text- 
critical value. He assumes that the 
correct reading in Massek. Soferim vi. 
1, 2is $5"; but the original reading seems to be 
"poy, a word of unknownetymology. If the word 
stands for *9pwy it would be a synonym of j}*y and 
mean simply “sign.” But the reading WS\yw 
(“ram’s horn”) yields a very good sense. It is the 
Greek zapaypagoc, which had exactly such a sign 
and served the same purpose (comp. Perles, “ Ety- 
mologische Studien,” p. 41, note 1; p. xiv., col. 8). 

Even in antiquity substitutions were made—at 
first only orally in public worship; later also in the 
form of marginal notes in private copies—of readings 
other than those found in the text. As Frankel has 
shown (“ Vorstndien,” pp. 220 ef seg.), even the 
Septuagint knew those readings and 
frequently adopted them. These vart- 
ants have various origins. Some of 
them represent variants in ancient 
manuscripts and have, therefore, a_ text-critical 
value (comp. Kimhi, Introduction to Commentary 
on Joshua; Eichhorn,“ Kinleitung,” § 148; also Jo- 
seph ibn Wakar, in Steinschneider, “Jewish Liter- 
ature,” p. 270, note 15). Others arose from the ne- 
cessity of replacing erroneous, difficult, irregular, 
provincial, archaic, unseemly, or cacophonous ex- 
pressions by correct, simpler, current, appropriate, 
or euphonious readings (comp. Abravanel, Introduc- 
tion to Commentary on Jeremiah). A third class 
may have been designed to call attention to some 
mystic meaning or homiletical lesson supposed to be 
embodied in the text (comp. Krochmal, “ Moreh 
Nebuke ha-Zeman,” ch. xiii.; S. Bamberger, “ Ein- 
leitung zu Tobiah b. Eliezer’s Lekah Tob zu Ruth,” 
p. 39, note 1). A fourth class, finally, and this very 
late, is due to variants found in Talmudic literature 
(comp. “Minhat Shai” on Isa. xxxvi. 12, Ps. xlix. 
18, Eccl. viii. 10; Luzzatto, in “ Kerem Hemed,” ix. 
9 on II Sam. xxii. 8). These variants are of a three- 
fold character: (1) words to be read (“kere”) for 
those written in the text (“ketib ”); (2) words to be 
read for those not written in the text; (8) words 
written, but not to be read. 


Inverted 
Letters. 


Marginal 
Readings. 





Beet ae eda 
FAGE FROM A MANUSCRIPT BIBLE OF THE rOURTEENTH CENTURY CONTAINING MASORETIC NOTES. 


(Frou: the Sulzberger evliection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


VITt.—24 


Masorah 
Massachusetts 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


370 





A certain school of Masorites used for the term 
“kere” the synonymous term “sebirin.” The read- 
ings of that school are usually registered by the 
Masorah disapprovingly with the addition “u-mat- 
in” = “and they are misleading.” 

To the Masorites belongs also the credit of invent- 
ing and elaborating graphic signs to indicate the 
traditional pronunciation. syntactical construction, 
and cantillation of the Biblical text. 

The history of the Masorah may be divided into 

three periods: (1) creative period, from 

History of its beginning to the introduction of 

Develop-  vowel-signs; (2) reproductive period, 

ment. from the introduction of vowel-signs 
to the printing of the Masorah (1425); 
(3) critical period, from 1425 to the present time. 

The materials for the history of the first period are 
scattered remarks in Talmudic and Midrashic litera- 
ture, in the post-Talmudical treatises Masseket Sefer 
Torah and Masseket Soferim, and in a Masoretie chain 
of tradition found in Ben Asher’s “ Dikduke ha- 
Te'amim,” 3 69 and elsewhere. “Masseket Soferim 
isa work of unknown date by a Palestinian auther. 
The first tive chapters are a slightly amplified repro- 
duction of the earlier Masseket Sefer Torah, a com- 
pendium of rules to be observed by scribes in the 
preparation and writing of Scriptural rolls. Ch. vi, 
to ix. are purely Masoretie; the third part. com- 
mencingateh, x., treats of ritualistic matter. While 
the work asa whole is perhaps not eather than the 
heginning of the ninth century, its Masoretic por- 
-tions probably go back to the sixth or seventh cen- 
tury. A comparison of this work with the Maso- 
retie material found in Talmudic literature shows that 
the lists of marginal readings have been systematic- 
aliv enlarged, A critical coniparison has been insti- 
tuted between parallel passagesin Scripture. Rules 
are now given, for the first time, as to the unusual 
form in which certain Jetters and words, of which 
the Talmud had taken special note, are to be writ- 
ten. The stichometrical form in which the Serip- 
tural songs are to be arranged is deseribed in fuller 
detail than it had been in the Talmud. It is also 
Stated that in private copies the beginnings of verses 
used to be marked, Some readings in ch. xiii. 1 
mention also accents; but these readings are doubl- 
fulicomp. VocanizaTion). Inthe chain of tradition 
quoted in Ben Asher the earliest name is a certain 
Nakkai, who is said to have emigrated under the 
persecutions of T. Annius Rufus from Palestine to 
‘Babylonia and spread Masorctie Knowledge in the 
city of Nehardea. This would be about 140 of the 
conmmon era, and the tradition, containing eight 
names, would date about 840. 

In the course of time differences in spelling and 
pronunciation had developed not only between the 

schools of Palestine and of Babylonia 
Differences —differences already noted in the third 

Between century (comp. Ginsburg, “ Introduc- 

Babylonia tion,” p. 197)—but in the various seats 

and of Jearning ineach country. In Baby- 

Palestine. lonia the school of Sura differed from 

that of Nehardea; similar differences 
existed in the schools of Palestine, where the chief 
seat of learning in later times was the city of Tibe- 
rias. These differcuces must have become accentu- 


c 





. frequently the Masorah. 


ated with the introduction of graphic signs for pro- 
nuvciation and cantillation; and every locality, 
following the tradition of its school, had a standard 
codex embodying its readings. 

In this period living tradition ceased, and the 
Masorites in preparing their codices usually fol- 
lowed the one school or the other, examining, how 
ever, standard codices of other schools and noting 
their differences. In the first half of the tenth cen- 
tury AARON B. Moses BEN AsieER of Tiberias and 
Ben NAPHTALI, heads of two rival Masorctical 
schools, each wrote a standard codex of the Bible 
embodving the traditions of their respective schools. 
Ben Asher was the last of a distinguished family of 
Masorites extending back to the latter half of the 
eighth century. In spite of the rivalry of Ben Naph- 
tali and the opposition of Saadia Gaon, the most 
eminent representative of the Babylonian school 
of criticism. Ben Asher’s codex became recognizec 
as the standard textof the Bible. Notwithstanding 
all this, for reasons unknown neither the printed 
text nor any manuscript which has been preserved 
is based entirely on Ben Asher: they are all eclectic. 
Aside from Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, the names 
of several other Masorites have come down; but, 
perhaps with the exception of one—Phinechas, the 
head of the academy, who is supposed by mod- 
ern scholars te have lived about 750—ncither their 
time, their place, nor their connection with the va- 
rious schools is known, 

The two rival authorities, Ben Asher and Ben 
Naphtali, practically brought the Masorah toa close. 
Very few additions were made by the later Maso- 

rites, styled in the thirteenth and four- 


Ben Asher tvcenih centuries NAKDANIM, who re- 
and Ben vised the works of the copyists, added 
Naphtali. the vowels and accents (generally in 


fainter ink and with a finer pen) and 
Considerable influence on 
the development and spread of Masoretic literature 
was exercised during the eleventh. twelfth, and 
thirteenth centuries by the Franco-German school 
of Vosarists. Ro. Gershom. his brother Machir, 
Joseph b. Samucl Bontils (Tob ‘Elem) of Limoges, 
R. Tam (Jaceb b. Metr:, Menahem b. Perez of 
Joigny, Perez b, Elijah of Corbeil, Judah of Paris, 
Mefr Spira, and R. Metr of Rothenburg mace Mas- 
oretic compilations, or additions to the subject, 
which are all more or Jess frequently referred to in 
the marginal glosses of Biblical codices and in the 
works of Hebrew grammarians. 

Jacob b, Wayyim ibn Adonijah, having collated a 
vast number of manuscripts, systematized his mate- . 
rial aud arranged the Masorah in the second Bom- 
berg edition of the Bible (Venice, 1524-25). Besides 
introducing the Masorah into the margin, he com- 
piled at the close of his Bible a concordance of the 
Masoretic glosses for which he could not tind room 
in a marginal form, and added an elaborate intro- 
duction—the first treatise on the Masorah ever pro- 


duced. In spite of its numerous er- 
Critical rors, this excellent work has generally 
Study. — been acknowledged as the “textus re- 


ceptus” of the Masorah Next to [bn 
Adonijah the critical study of the Masorah has been 
most advanced by Elijah Levita, who publiskec his 


371 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mascranhn 
Massachusetts 





famous “Massoret ha-Massoret” in 1588. The 
~ Tiberias” of the elder Buxtorf (1620) made Le- 
Vitu’s researches accessible to Christian students. 
Walton's cighth prolegomenon is largely a réchautfe 
of the ° Tiberias.” Levita compiled likewise a vast 
Masoretic concordance, “Seter ha-Zikronot,” which 
still lies in the National Library at Paris unpub- 
lished. The study is indebted also to R. Meir b. 
Todros ha-Levi (RaMaH), who, as early as the thir- 
teenth century, wrote his “Sefer Massoret Sevag 
la-Torah ~ (correct ed. Florence, 1750); to Menahem 
di Lonzano, who composed a treatise on the Masorah 
of the Pentateuch entitled “Or Torah”; and in par- 
ticular to Jedidiah Solomon of Norzi, whose * Min- 
hat Shai” contains valuable Masoretie notes based 
ona careful study of manuscripts. Mention must 
also be made of J. C. Wolf, whese “ Bibliotheca 
Hebrea™ contains a treatise on the Masorah anda 
list of Masorctic authorities (part ., bookin.). For 
less-known names consult the bibliography below. 
In modern times knowledge of the Masorah has 
been advanced by the following scholars: W. Hei- 
denheim, A. Geiger, 8. D. Luzzatto, 8, Pinsker, 8. 
Frensdorff, II. Graetz, J. Derenbourg, D. Oppen- 
heim, 5. Baer, L. Blau, B. Koénigsberger, A. Biich- 
ler, J. Bachrach, I. H. Weiss, 8. Rosenfeld, M. 
Lambert, J. Reach, A. Ackermann, L. Bardowicz, 
aud W. Bacher. Among Christian scholars are to 
be mentioned: H. Hupfeld, Franz Delitzsch, L. H. 
Strack, C. D. Ginsburg (a Jew by birth), W. Wickes, 
Ad. Merx. F’. Praetorius, and P. Kahle. 
In imitation of the Masorah to the Hebrew text, a 
stindlar work eXists to the text of Targum Onkclos, 
first edited by A. Berliner (Leipsic, 
Masorah to 1877), then by 8. Landauer (Amster- 


Targum dam, 1896). According to Berliner’s 
Onkelos. opinion, it must have been compiled 


about the end of the ninth or the be- 
ginning of the tenth century, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the name: Paul de Lagarde, Mittheilun- 
geri, Sst: P. Haupt, Proc. Lim. Oricndal Soc. xvi., p. evi.3 
SD. Luzzatto, additamenta to poagay aANSD-, ti. 119b: Ed. 
Konig, Lehargebdude, ii. 358, 491; idem, Tadroduction, p. 88 ; 
Ginsburg, Masoretico-Critieal Tntroduction, p. 421, note 1; 
Blau, in AZecit. fite Hebr. Bibl. iv. 62: especially Bacher, in 
J.Q. R. ili. 78): idem, Aelleste Terminologie, s.v.5 comp. 
J. Bachraeh, Ishtaddelut ‘ine Shedatl, i, 20, notes 4, 34, 181. 

Editions: In RaDhinie Bible. Venice, 1524-25, by Ton Ado- 
nijah: in Basel edition by Buxtorf, 1618-19 (in some respects 
an improvement on its predecessor, although it exhibits inany 
unwarrantable alterations); Frensdorlf, Ochlah ae-Ochlah, 
Hanover, 1854; idem, Die Meassora Meqgna, i... th. 1876; C.D. 
Ginsburg, Phe AWassorah, London, 1850-55, 8, Baer’s MWasv- 
roftis stil unpublished. 

Masereticu-erammatical works: Ben Asher. Dikduke ha- 
Teantim,. ec. Baer and Strack, Leipsic, 1879; anonymous, 
Hovayot ha-Kore inedited ; Joseph of Constantinople, WAdat 
Dibburim, inedited ; Samson Punctator, Hibbur hea-Konin, 
inedited : Moses Punctator, Darke ha-Nikkud weha-Neginot, 
ed. Frensdorif, Hanover, 1847; Jekuthiel Punctator. “Fin ha- 
Kore, ed, Heidenhein (in his Pentateuch Me‘or ‘Enayin, 
Réddelheim, 1818-21, and in his Seder Yeme ha-Puriin, ib. 
1826); anonvinous, Manuel die Leetenwr, ed. Derenhourg, 
Paris, 1870 ‘reprint from Journal Asiatique); anonymous, 
Petite Granunaire Hebreique, ed. Neubauer, Leipsic. 1891. 

Commentaries: M. A. Angel. Measoret ha-Berit. Cracow, 
1629: Abraham b. Reuben of Oehrida, Sefer Bet Abraham, 
Constantinople, 1742: David Viterbi. Sefer Fim la-Masoret, 
Mantua, W748: Abraham b. Jeremiah of Calvary, Sefer Seder 
Abraham, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1752: Asher Amshel of 
Worms, Seyac la-Lorah, ib. 1766: Joseph b. David Heilbron 
of Eschwege, Nefer Mebin Hidot, Amsterdam, 1765 ( pla- 
giarism from the preceding work): Solomon Dubno, Tikka 
Soferim, in Mendelssohn’s Pentatench Nefibof ha-Shalom, 
Berlin, 1783: Phoebus h. Solomon, Menorat Shelomoh, and 
Minhat Walil,in Pentateuch edited in Dobrowno, 1804: Jo- 
seph b. Mordeeai, Masorah Berurah, Berdychey (18297); 
Joseph Kahnan b. Solomon, Sha‘ar ha-Masorah, Wilna, 1870. 


Historico-critical works on the Mas#rah: Jacob b. Hayyim, 
Tutroduction, ed. Ginsburg, London, 15: E. Levita, Mas- 
saret ha-Massuret, ed. Giusburg, ib. lout: H. L. Strack, Pro- 
legommend Critica, Leipsic. 1873; Joseph Kalman b. Solomon, 
Mebo hua-Massurah, Warsaw, 1862 (2d ed., ib. 1890 71; Gei- 
ger, Jiid. Zeit. ii. 73-119: J. H. Weiss. in Gesceh. der Jit- 
dischen Tradition, iv. and Index; 8. Rosenfeld, introduction 
to Ris Mishpohat Soferim, Wilna, 1883; Ad. Merx. Die 
Tsehututhaleschen Eragmente, in Verhandluuangen des 
Fiintten Literneationalen Orientalischen Congresses, part 
ii., Section 1. pp. 188-225, Berlin, 1882: Isidore Harris, The 
Rise and Derilopmernt of the Massorah, in J. Q. R. i. 128- 
lie, 225-257 C. D. Ginsburg. Introduetion to the... He- 
brew Bible, London, 1897; W. Bacher. Die Masoreh, in Win- 
ter and Witnsche, Jiidische Literatur, ii. 121-132: Ham- 
burger, Mitssera.in his R. B. 7. Supplement, iv. 52-68, 

On speelal points: Serer Tagii. ed. J. Bareés. Paris, 1866: 
Midrash Hasecrot wi-Yeterot, ed. Beriiner. in his Peletat 
Soferim, Breslau, 1872 (reecited in a more complete form by 
S. Wertheimer, Jerusalem. 1899): 8. Resenfeld. Maamar bi- 
dere u-AWetib, Wilna, 1868+ M. Lambert. Une Serie de Qere- 
Ietih, Paris, 1891; J. Reach, Die Sebirin der Massoreten 
von Tiberias, Breslau, 1995; L. Blau. Masoretische Unter- 
suchungen, Strasburg, 1891: idem. Zur Eiduleitung in die 
Heilige Schritt, Budapest, 1894: B. Kénigsberger. Ais Ma- 
sorahk und Tatmudhkritih, 1. Berlin, 1892: A. 8. Weissmann, 
Iredushshat ha-TN A, Vienna. 1887 ; S$. R. Edelinann, FHa-Me- 
sillot, Wilma, 1875; L. Bardowiez, Studien zur Geschichte 
der Orthographie des Atthebriiischen, Frankfort-on-the- 
Main, 1894; A. Wedell, De Emendafionibus a Sapherim 
ue ae Sacris Veteris Testamenti Propositis, Breslau, 

59. 

For articles in periodical literature ¢ompare M. Schwab, 
Répertoire, s.v. Accents, Division de la Bible, Massora, 
Massorctes, Sections de la Bihle, Sedarim. Versets de la 
Bihle, Tikkun Sofrim, and spoa. For older Christian lit- 
erature compare the references in Strack’s Prolegomend. 
For special points compare the literature under the various 
terms in C. Levias, Dictionary of Philological Terminology s 
aiso the bibliographies to ACCENTS IN HEBREW; BIBLE MANU- 
SCRIPTS; NAKDANIM; OKLAH WE-OKLAH 3; and VOCALIZATION. 


T. C. L. 


MASSACHUSETTS: A northeastern state iu 
the American Union. The earliest record of a Jew in 
Massachusetts bears the date of May 8, 1649, and 
refers to a certain Solomon Franco, for whom an 
allowauce was made pending his return to Holland ; 
and recorded among the inhabitants of Boston, in 
1695, there are “Samuell, the Jew,” and * Raphael 
Abandana” (* Publications Am. Jew. Ilist. Soc.” 
No. 11, pp. 78-80). On Sept. 15, 1702, Simon the 
Jew was baptized at Charlestown, taking the name 
of “ Barns,” and about the same time acertain Joseph 
Frazon or Frazicr lived in Boston. An attempt to 
convert him was unsuccessful, and it is recorded 
that he died Feb. 4, 1704, and that his body was 
sent to Newport, R. f£., for burial. In 1722 Judah 
ALONES was baptized; be was an instructor in 
Hebrew at Harvard College from 1723 to 1760. 

The first considerable colony in Massachusetts re- 
sulted directly from the Revolutionary war. In 
17i Aaron Lopez and Jacob Rivera, with fifty-nine 
other Jews, left Newport to finda refuge from its 
invasion by the British troops, and established 
themselves at Leicester, Mass. Lopez was a man of 
great wealth and, according to Ezra Stiles, in the 
extent of his commercial dealings was probably 
surpassed by no merchant in America (7. No. 10, 
p.15). Ile purchased an estate at Leicester and 
erected upon it a substantial house, which since has 
become the home of the Leicester Academy. The 
colonists rigidly observed the customs of their faith. 
In spite of the high opinion in which Lopez was 
held, it appears that in 1762 the supreme court 
of Massachusetts refused to grant the application 
of himself and Isaac Lezur for naturalization (¢. 
No. 6. p. 71). 

It is known that other Jews went to Boston dur- 
ing the seventeenth century, but owing to the intol- 


Massachusetts THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 372 


Master and Servant 








erance of the Puritans, they either removed or em- } tle in the towns outside of Boston, and now there 
braced Christianity. Thisaccounts for the numerous | are estimated to be about thirty thousand Jews in 
families of distinctively Jewish name found in many | various parts of the state, exclusive of those in the 
of the Massachusetts towns, Just prior to the War , capital. The newcomers have become American- 
of the Revolution Moses Michael Hays went to Bos- | ized and take an interest in public affairs: many 
ton from Newport, taking with him his own family | work in factorics and mills; it is estimated that 
and his two nephews, Abraham and Judah Touro. | 30 per cent of them are successfully established 
Hays was a successful insurance underwriter, and | in various branches of business; a few still follow 
for four years (1788 to 1792) was grand master of | the old custom of peddling. In Boston there are 
the Grand Lodge of Masons of Massachusetts; he | 40,000 Jews, 21 synagogues, 64 lodges, many chari- 
died in 1805. It is not known that any of his de- | table societies, and a large number of social and 
scendants live there. Abraham Touro became a | literary clubs. 
very wealthy merchant, and when he died in 1822 
he bequeathed $10,000 to the Massachusetts General 
Hospital, and $5,000 each to the Asylum for In- 
digent Boys, the Massachusetts Humane Society, 
and the Boston Female Society. His brother Judah 
Touro went to New Orleans, Judah Hays, Isaac 
Solomon, aud Abraham Solis were residents of Bos- 
ton between 1780 and 1798. 
In 1880 a number of Algerian Jews settled in Bos- 
ton and occupied themselves in trading; some of 
them went to Newport to live; the others disap- 
peared, and no trace of them is Ieft. In 1840 a 
number of German and Polish Jews settled in 
Boston, and their descendants still live there (for 
the history of Boston Jews see Boston). After 
1880, Russian and Rumanian Jews began to set- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hiihner, he Jews of New England, in Pub- 
lications Adm. Jew. Hist. Soc. No. 11, pp. 75 et seg.: Cyrus 
Adler, The Menoralt, 1888, v. 256-260. 

A. G. Mo. 


MASSARANI (MASSARAN): Name of an 
Italian family which has been known since the latter 
part of the fifteenth century. Originally the name of 
the family was JNIONOD, from Massarano, a small 
town near Novarain Piedmont. Subsequently vari- 
ous members lived at Mantua, and still later at Milan. 
The earhest known bearer of the name was Isaac 
Massaran, who copied, in 1255, No. 23 of the Codex 
De Rossi; it is not certain, however, whether he be- 
longed to this family or whether he was a native of 
Mazarron, in Spain. Two centuries later the copy- 
ist Isaiah b. Jacob b. Isaiah Massaran lived at 
Mantua and wrote Nos. 6 and 620 of the Codex 
De Rossi, No. 127 of the Codex Turin, and No. 45 
of the Codex Montefiore. Azariah dei Rossi's schol- 
arly brother-in-law, Hayyim Massaran, who 
owned a number of rare Talmudical works, lived at 
Mantua about 1560. At the same time Bezaleel b. 
Samson, Levi b. Jacob, Samson bk. Jehiel, and 
Samson b. Isaiah, all belonging to the Massarani 
family, were living in this community. Among 
these Bezaleel b. Samson Massarani is especially 
noteworthy for his energetic efforts to save He- 





STATISTICS. 


The following statistics of Massachusetts cities 
and towns (exclusive of Boston) were obtained 
through inquiry of town officials or are based upon 
the “American Jewish Year Book” for 5661, and 
upon manuscript additions thereto in possession of 
the Jewish Publication Society of America: 














—— $$ -$ 














‘ 3 | 
ems Fe = wR | hk e . e 
ae | iS ¢ | fit oased brew books from the destruction with which the 
‘ ae SE = 5 i as Archie , . 
Name. of City grange anes) S & | ZS: ! Inquisition threatened them. He was the chairman 
"Town. Soe D 0 ;:s } . . ; 
si SS2/ 6 S §  S8 | of the deputation of communal directors aud rabbis 
7 -~ ~ } t —4 . 7 «4 
eet See w a= that decided at Padua upon an anticipatory censor- 
a) . . : e A 
ship in order to secure perniussion to reprint the 
te ae 30) Talmud. As the leader of this deputation Bezaleel 
Att J a¢ sean e ee 
ee rete ere e sees 300 ‘ 1 2 1 went to Rome, to Pope Sixtus Y., and obtained 
ri jv #e.. eC esee A etre | ee “ . . e . ° 
Waianae eta ean os » HOO | 4 | 9 ee 1 permission to print and own the Talmud after it 
a i cee) Nee ENG, had been censored and expurgated and the title 
“Di FETS wwe awe nice siece ae voce os ve ° 2 
Fall River ...... ein | 3 2 | 8 | 3 changed. Samson Massarani wus one of the dep- 
* Faulkner 1 ness repose uties cited by the cardinals in 1590 before the Con- 
Fitchburg 1 building : a af : f tl jie Be ee es s 
Gloucester 0, 200 | 1 i i 1 gregation of the Index Expurgatorius. Another 
eas teen eee anaes ma 2 a Samson, asonof Bezaleel, was a pupil of R. Moses 
OLYORE ce cacecoereces ” pe an ° 
Tawienee 0... Ce BOO 3 2 oe Provencal, with whom he corresponded on Tal- 
ok rete e teen eeenees mo | 2 0 ae ae mudic subjects. In 1092 Simon Massarani pub- 
MUG Sctisacceial OO) | i is 4, aE lished at Mantua <Al-Harizi’s “Mishle Hakamim,” 
Meer ree ee eee eaees a} dash (the eae A with a rimed Italian translation, under the title * Mot- 
PURLO TU ava c1isaie goad ab bisre eoene t eo. ee ° ye ° Pare ° : ° Ze * 7 : 
Mie ck cease meu hie? nate Dok gt * tidi Diversi Sag gi Tradottidi Lingua Hebrea in Vol- 
New Redford....s00as 1,000 | 4 | 2 i 2 gare.” Abraham b. Isaac Alluf described. in 1639, 
NEWtOW ses a detey gnee 32 we | vee Ja ae . : Rene. : 
Mochi! AGMISS ! Si | Bf 1 1 1 the expulsion of the Jews from Mantna. Ephraim 
cea ttt teeees er a > ; Massarani was rabbi at Cento in 1676. and in cor- 
Ss 7 Pe ee ar or aot rw ro] ace . . 

QUOC ces cahoop ries |) ae | 1 | ie | 9 respondence with Isaac Lampronti. About the same 
4tTg a € | 2 * » ‘ ty 
Sey cra eau ro SURke a Ae vs time Isaac Massarani was rabbi at Salonica. 
Springfield... ‘ 301) 4 eS 6 Among the more recent members of this family may 
Taunton ..........00- | 80 vee be mentioned Giacobbe Massarani, lawver at 

> 
Watertown .........6. | . 2 . dees & : 2 ’ 
Worcester 00 - 1,000 4 nek 1 | Milan about 1850, whose son Tullo, one of the fore: 
| 


_ } most writers of Italy, was formerly vice-president 





373 


—_— 


of the Italian chamber, and has been a member 

of the Senate since 1879. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz. in Averem Hemed, y. 184; Mortara, In- 
dice, p. 343 Stern. Crhundiche Beitrdge,i., Nos. 131 et seq. 

G. I. E. 
MASSARANI, TULLO: Italian senator, au- 

thor, painter: born at Mantna in 1826; died Aug. 4, 

1905. He studied law at Pavia and took an active 

part in the Italian revolution of 1848, after the fail- 

ure of which he fled to Frankfort-on-the-Main. 

From Paris he went to Switzerland, thence to Milan, 

where he became a member of Parliament (1860-67), 

and was afterward very cfHcicnt as a member of the 

municipal council. He is well known in Italy as a 

painter, his best-known painting being “The Warm 

Baths of Alexandria.” His essay on Heine in “ Cre- 

poscolo” (1857) and his translation of the latter’s 

works have made Heine very popular in Italy. 

Massarani was president of the international jury of 

art at the Paris Exposition of 1878. He isa member 

of the Lombard Institute for Arts and Sciences, of 
the Academy of Fine Arts, and honorary member of 
the Academy of San Luca. He is the author of the 
following works: “Quelques Mots sur la Défense 
de Venise” (Paris, 1849); “L’Idea Italiana Attra- 
verso i Tempi” (#3. 1850); “Deutschland und die 

Italicnische Frage” (Breslau, 1859); “L’ Arte a Mo- 

naco e a Norimberga” (Florence, 1870); “Studii di 

Letteraturae di Arte” (2b. 1878); “Studii di Politica 

e di Storia” (¢2. 1875); “ Domeniche di Agosto” (7. 

1876); “ Legnano, Grandi e Piccole Storie ” (1876); 

“Kugenio Camerini e i Suoi Tempi” (24. 1877); 

“T Arte a Parigi” (Rome, 1879); “Sermoni” (Flor- 

ence, 18850; 2d ed. 1884); “Il Libro di Giuda” (7d. 

1882); “Saggi Critici” (2d ed. 1883); “Carlo Tenca 

e il Pensiero Civile del Suo Tempo” (7b, 1886); 

“Cesare Correnti Nella Vita e Nelle Opere” (zd. 

1892); “L’Odissea della Donna,” prose and verse 

(Rome, 1898); “Come la Pensava il Dottore Lor- 

renzi” (1894). He has collected and published the 

scattered writings of Cesare Correnti. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nuova Enciclop, Italiana, 4th Supplement ; 
Brockhaus Konversations-Lexikon, xi. and Supplement; 
Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. 

s. N. D. 

MASSEKET or MASSEKTA (plural, Massek- 
tot, Massektiyyot; Num. R. xviii. 21; Midr. Teh. 
civ. 25): Any collection of rabbinic texts affecting 
any more or less complex subject. Literally the 
term means “a web” (from DJ =“to weave”; 
comp. Latin “textus”). Itisapplied indifferently to 

a treatise of the Mishnah (Shab. 3b; B. K.102a), toa 

compilation of baraitot (Shab. 114a), or to a treatise 

of the Mishnah with Gemara (Hor. 10b). The whole 
of the Mishnah as now known comprises sixty-three 
massek tot, though ancient authorities speak of sixty 
only, reckoning the three Babot (Baba Kamma, 

Baba Mezi‘a, and Baba Batra) as one and Sanhe- 

drin and Makkot as one (Num. R. xviii. 21; see 

Straschun ad loc., note 23; Cant. R. vi. 9; see Luria 

ad loc.). The Babylonian Gemara embraces thirty- 

seven massektot, and the Palestinian thirty-nine. 

Besides these there are appended to editions of 

the Babylonian Talmud many “minor masscktot” 

(“massektot ketannot”), seven of which Raphael 

Kirchheim edited (Frankfort - on - the - Main, 1851); 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Massachusetts 
Master and Servant 


these seven are chiefly of ahalakic nature. Latterly 
the term “masseket” was applied to any treatise, 
even if of comparatively small compass and of caba- 
listic type. See TALMUD. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohut, Aruch Completum ; Levy, Chal. Wor- 


terb.; idem, Neuhebr. Worterb.; Jastrow, Dictionary. 
ae S. M. 


MASSEL, JOSEPH: Russian Jewish Hebraist; 
born at Ujasin, government of Wilna, 1850. He 
emigrated to England in the nineties and settled at 
Manchester, where he opened a printing and publish- 
ing office. Massel has translated and published the 
following works: “Ha-Rokel,” a novel, translated 
from the German (Warsaw, 1886); “Shimshon ha- 
Gibbor,” a translation of Milton’s “Samson Ago- 
nistes” (Manchester, 1895); “ Mi-Kenaf ha-‘Arez,” 
original poems, and translations from the English (/d. 
1898); “Dibre Ahikar,” translation of “ Ahikar the 
Wise ” (¢b. 1898); “ Yehudah ha-Makkabi,” a trans- 
lation of Longfellow’s “ Judas Maccabeus ” (zd. 1900). 
He has published also “ Ha-Makhelah,” a collection 
of Hebrew poets from 1725 to 1903 (London, 1908). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 282; Lippe, 

Osaf ha-Mazkir he-Hadash, p. 260, Vienna, 1899; Jewish 

Vear-Book, 1904. 

J. A. 8. W. 


MASTER AND SERVANT: The Pentateuch 
lays down the rule, in favor of the workinan, that 
“the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with 
thee all night until the morning ” (Lev. xix. 18); the 
preceding words of the same verse, “thou shalt not 
oppress thy neighbor” (Rt. V.), are also construed as 
forbidding the withholding of the workman’s hire (B. 
M. 110). Even more strongly is this idea expressed 
in Deut. xxiv. 15: “In his day thou shalt give him 
his hire; neither shall the sun go down upon it” 
(R. V.). 

Deut, xxiii. 25, which permits one who goes into 
the vineyard or the cornfield of his neighbor to 
pluck and eat grapes or ears of corn, though he 
may not use a vessel for the former nor a sickle for 
the latter, is by tradition (B. M. vii. 2-8) interpreted 
as applying only to the workmen who enter into the 
vineyard or field in the employment of the owner. 

(1) What the Mishnah says about the rights and 
duties of workmen (“po‘alim”) applies mainly to 
those employed in husbandry; mechanics and car- 
riers are specially treated as such, Asin the law of 
rural leases (see LANDLORD AND TENANT), local cus- 
tom was the principal standard in dealings with 
those hired for husbandry. The Mishnah (B. M. vii. 
1) says, “He who hires workmen and asks them to 
work in early morning or in late evening at a place 
where early morning or late evening work is not 
customary can not compel them [to do so]. Where 
the custom is to feed, he must feed; to provide 

sweets, he must provide [them]—all 

Board as_ according to the custom of the prov- 

Wages. ince.” This applies also to the qual- 

ity of the board, as R. Simeon ben 
Gamaliel points out in answer to the saying of R. 
Johanan ben Mattai, of whom the following is re- 
ported: He sent his son to hire laborers, and the 
son agreed to board them. When he returned to 
his father, the latter said: “My son, even if you 
provide for them a meal equal to the best of Solo- 


Master and Servant 
Mathematics 


THE JEWISI ENCYCLOPEDIA 


374 





mon’s, you have not discharged your obligation to 
them, for they are the children of Abraham, Isaac, 
and Jacob. Before they begin to work, say to them: 
‘IT shall give you bread and beans.’” Though R. 
Johanan’s view is not correct, it shows the high 
regard in which even the lowly Israelite, depending 
on hired labor for his daily bread, was held by the 
sages (B. M. 88-87). 

(2) The passages in Leviticus and Deuteronomy 
on the payment of hired laborers, one giving the 
entire day and the other the entire night in which to 
pay, are thus harmonized in the Mishnah (B. M. ix. 
11): “He that is hired by the day receives [his 
wages] at any time in the [following] night; one 
hired by the night, at any time in the [following] 
day; one hired by the hour, at any time during the 
night and day following; one hired by the week, 
month, year, or week of years, if the time ends in 
the day, during the remainder of the day; if during 
the night, he receives it during that night or on the 
folowing day.” The duty of the hirer to pay 
promptly is not confined to wages, but extends to 
payment for the use of cattle or implements (B. M. 
ix. 12), probably because these were often furnished 
by the workman, as is the case to-day with the 
teamster, who sets a price per day for himself and 
his team. 

(8) In regard to the right to eat grapes or cars of 
corn in the master’s field, the AMishnah (B. M. vii. 
2-8) says: “The tollowing cat according to Scrip- 
ture: He that works on what is aftixed to the ground 
eats at ihetime of finishing the work; he that works 
on what is separated from the ground cats before 
the work is complete [for after that it is subject to 
tithe] of those things which grow from the earth 
{which excludes esculent roots|.” But those engaged 
in milking or cheese-making, for instance, do not 
eat of the produce they are handling. “ He whose 
work is among figs has no right to eat from the 
grapes, or vice versa; but the man may restrain his 
appetite until he comes to the finest fruit.” All this 
applies to men at ordinary work; but when the 
workmen are engaged in bringing back some of the 
master’s lost property, they may cat while going 
from furrow to furrow, or while returning from the 

wine- or oil-press, or from what is on 


User of a beast of burden which they are un- 
Crop. loading. The workman may eat cu- 


| cumbers, or dates, or the like, irre- 
spective of their market vaiue; but he should be 
taught not to act greedily and thereby “close the 
docr upon himself.” Phe workman may, for a sum 
of meney, surrender his right to eat, either on his 
own behalf, or on behalf of his wife, or of his grown 
children or slaves, but not on behalf of his infant 
children or infant slaves, or of his beasts. 

Those that watch the crops are according to 
Scripture not permitted to eat, but by custom are, 
nevertheless, allowed to do so. When one man 
watches the fields of several owners he may satisfy 
his hunger from the field of one alone (B. M. 87-98). 

(4) Elsewhere (B. M. vi. 1-2) the Mishnah speaks 
of mechanics (“ umanin”), ass-drivers, and teamsters, 
the hirer being not a master mechanic or master 
carrier, but a householder (“ba‘al ha-bayit”) who 
employs them in his own affairs. If, in the case of 


the hirer and the mechanic, one has Jed the other into 
error, the latter has no remedy beyond a “rebuke” 
(“tar‘umet”). In the Gemara two possible cases of 
this sort are mentioned. In one the householder 
scnds one workman to employ others, and the work- 
man so sent engages them either at highcr wages 
than authorized (which, of course, does not bind the 
employer), or at lower wages, which, to their loss, 
they accept. In the other, after work is begun, 
the master (or the workmen) refuses to continue. 
But where an ass-driver or teamster is hired under 
pressing circumstances, as fora wedding ora funeral, 
or Where workmen are hired to bring in flax from 
the tanks, or to do similar tasks invoiving perish- 
able matter, and they refuse to continue (after be- 
ginning the work), the hirer may employ others 
at the cost of ihe workmen so refusing. to the extent 
of the whole wage or any part thereof, 

When the mechanics who have been employed 
refuse to continue with the work (after doing part) 

they are at a disadvantage: the hirer 
Mechanics. may take out of their wages all the 

cost of employing others, even though 
the rate of wages has risen; but if the householder 
refuses to continue he is at a disadvantage: that is, 
he must pay them for what they have done plus the 
whole contract- price for the future work. less what 
it would cost to hire others, even though the rate of 
wages has fallen in the interval. In general, who- 
ever recedes from a contract is at a disadvantage 
(it. “his hand isthe lower”). These rules naturally 
would apply to husbandry alsv (B. M. 15a: B. B. 
1538). 

(5) Whenever a workman in plying his trade has 
in his charge any chattel or animal of his employer, 
his liability for loss or damage is measured by that of 
a “keeper for hire” (B. M. vi. 6). See BAILMENTs. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Maimonides, Yad, Sekirut, ix.: Caro, shulian 


“Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat, 311-319. . 
5. FeoN 1: 


MAT, MOSES BEN ABRAHAM: Galician 
rabbi; bornat Przemysl about 1550; died at Opatow 
1606. After having studied Talmud and rabbinics 
under his uncle R. Zebi and Solomon Luria. he be- 
came rabbi of Beldza, where he had a large number 
of pupils. He retired from this rabbinate and lived 
privately fora time at Vladimir. He was then called 
to the rabbinate of Przemysl, and, in 1597, to that 
of Luboml. Toward the end of his life Mat became 
the chief of the community of Opatow and district 
rabbi of Cracow. 

Mat was the author of the following works: 
“YTaryag Mizwot” (Cracow, 1581), a versification of 
the 618 commandments; “ Matteh Mosheh ” (7A, 
1590~91), a treatise on the practical ritual laws; 
“Wo’il Mosheh” (Prague, 1611), a simple and homi- 
letic commentary on the Pentateuch, in which he 
occasionally explains the commentary of Rashi, 
Some responsa of hisare to be found in the responsa 
collections of his rabbinical contemporaries. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohen Zedek, Shem u-She'erit, p, 40, Cracow, 
1895; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1762; First. Bibl. Jud, 


ii. 334 
B, Fr. 


Ss. 8. 
MATAH MEHASYA (MAHSEYA): Town 
in southern Babylonia, near Sura (see Schechter, 


375 


——_— 


“Saadyana,” p. 68, note 1). Sherira Gaon regarded 
the two placesas identical, forin his accounts of the 
geonim of Sura he uses the names of both Matah 
Mehasya (or Mehasya) and Sura to indicate the seat 
of theacademy, the former name even being the more 
frequent of the two. In the passage where he de- 
scribes the founding of the Academy of Sura by Rab 
he saysexpressly that Rab had come to “ Sura, which 
is Matah Mehasya” (ed. Neubauer, i, 29; variant, 

“Sura, called ‘Matah Mehasya’”). There is no 

doubt, however, that these names belonged to two 

distinct towns, Which came to be regarded as one 
when the seat of theacademy wasmentioned. They 
are named together in Ber. 29a, where the different 
modes of speech of the peoples of the two places are 
noted, Other Talmudic passages clearly indicate 
that these were two different towns (B. M. G67b: 

Yoma 86a). Sherira Gaon himself says (i. 30) that 

in the second half of the third century Huna’s school 

(by implication the academy founded by Rab) was 

in the vicinity of Matah Mehasva; Rab’s colleague 

Hisda lived at Sura. Itseems likely, therefore, that 

the school was situated between the two places. 

When the academy entered upon a new period of 
prosperity, under Ashi, in the second half of the 
fourth century, its seat was at Matah Mcehasya, 
where Ashi lived, and most of the Talmudic refer- 
ences to this place, which, Ashi says (Ket. 4a), may 
not be called either a city or a borough, date from 
his time. He refers to its synagogue, which 
strangers visited on his account (Meg. 26a), and he 
claims to have saved the town from destruction by 
prohibiting the construction of houses higher than 
the synagogue (Shab. 11a). Ashi was wont to say 
that the non-Jewish inhabitants of Matah Mehasy:z 
were hard-hearted, since they beheld the splendor 
of the Torah twice a vear at the great Kallah assem- 
blies, and yet not one of them was converted to Ju- 
daism (Ber. 27b). 

Halevy assumes that Sura again became the seat 
of the academy after Ashi’s death (* Dorot ha-Ri- 
shonim,” ii. 599), and that Mar b. Ashi restored Ma- 
tal, Mehasya to the position to which Ashi had raised 
it. From his time probably dates the maxim which 
the martyr Mashershaya gave his sons, contrasting 
the outward poverty of Matah Mchasya with the 
splendor of Pumbedita: “ Live on the dung-heaps of 
Matah Mehasya and not in the palaces of Pumbe- 
dita!” (Ker. 6a; Hor. 12a). There were various 
differences of opinion between the scholars of Pum- 
bedita and Matah Mehasya regarding questions of 
civil law, the opinions being collected in Ket. 55a. 
Rabina, the last amora of the Academy of Sura, 
lived at Matah Mehasya (see Yoma 86a; Kid. 38a; 
B. K., end). The Talmud refers to the destruction 
of Matah Mehasya (Shab. 11a), but in post-Talmudic 
times the town lent its name to the Academy of 
Sura, as stated above. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Berliner, Beitrdige zur Geographie und 
Ethnographie Bahyloniens, p. 45, Berlin, 1883; I. H. Hirseh- 
ensohn, Sheba’ Hakmat, pp. 162 et seq., 177, Lemberg, 1883 ; 
I. Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, ti. 543 et seq. — 

Ss. 8. W. B. 

MATALON, JACOB BEN SOLOMON: 
Turkish rabbinical scholar; lived at Salonica in the 
sixteenth century. According to De Rossi (“ Dizio- 
nario,” i, 185) the name “Matalon” is the Hebrew 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Master and Servanit 
Mathematics 





equivalent of “one of Toulon,” but Zunz (see Stein- 
schneider, “Cat. Bodl.” col. 1241) derives it from 
“ Mataloni,” the name of an Italian town. In spite 
of his premature death Matalon wrote several works, 
two of which were published (Salonica, 1597): 
“She’erit Ya‘akob.” sermons, and “Toledot Ya‘a- 
kob,” commentary on various haggadot in the Tal- 
nud and Midrashim. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 38a; Fiirst, Bibl. 

Jud, ii, 834. 

E. C, M. SEL. 

MATALON, MORDECAI: Rabbi of Salonica 
in the sixteenth century; uncle of Jacob b. Solomon 
Matalon. Besides being a prominent Talmudist, 
Matalon was, according to his companion Samuel di 
Modena, who quotes him frequently in his responsa, 
well versed in secular sciences (Responsa on Hoshen 
Mishpat, No. 40). IIe is quoted also by Isaac 
Adarbi in his “ Dibre Ribot” (Nos. 217, 826). Mata- 
lon was the author of responsa inserted in the 
“Mishpete Shemuel” of Samuel Kala‘i (Venice, 
1599). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, pp. 38a, 40a, b; 
Furst, Bint. Jud. ii. 8384. 
Ss. M. SEL. 


MATATRON. See METATRON, 


MATER SYNAGOGUE. See Pater 
GOGUE. 

MATHEMATICS: The science that treats of 
the measurement of quantities and the ascertain- 
ment of their properties and relations, The neces- 
sity of studying astronomy for calendric purposes 
caused the ancient Hebrews to cultivate various 
branches of mathematics, especially arithmetic and 
geometry, applications of which are frequent in the 
Mishnah and Talmud. With regard to aritinnetic 
there occur the four rules, in both whole numbers 
and fractions; even the decimal svstem is alluded 
to by Rabba, who savs that the Persians called the 
nunber 10 “one” (Ber. 60a). As to geometry, the 
treatises ‘Erubin, Kelim, Ohalot, ete., contain many 
applicatious of planometry and stereometry. The 
terms “bigon,” “trigon,” “tetragon,” and “ penta- 
gon” are found several times inthe Talmud, bath in 
their geomctrical sense, signifying a figure of two, 
three, four, or five angles, and in their arithmetical 
sense, expressing the numbers 2, 3,4, and 5, As 
early as the forty-ninth “middot” of R. Nathan 31 to 
1 is givenas the reiation between the circumference 
and the diameter of a circle. The names which oc- 
cur often in the Talmnd in connection with mathe- 
matical propositions are Gamaliel, Joshua. Judah, 
and Samuel. 

Still, however rapid may have been the spread of 
mathematical knowledge among the Jews in the 
Talmudic times, no work on that science is known 

to have existed in Jewish literature 

‘‘Mishnat prior to the Judeo-Arabic period, to 

Middot.” which belongs probably the “ Mish- 

nat Middot,” the oldest mathematica] 

workin Hebrew known. According to Steinschnei- 

der, who first published it (Berlin, 1864), it is an 

imperfect endeavor to propound the elements of 
geometry. 

With the expansion of the Greco-Arabic philoso- 
phy the Jews began to take part in the development 


SyNA- 


Mathematics 


of mathematies, which was regarded as a science 
introductory to philosophy. It was divided by the 
Arabian school into seven “discipline”; namely, 
arithmetic (Vaynn fm), algebra (NM12wWNnn Mm), geom- 
etry (ADIIA For WPA A), astronomy (FINAN), 
astrology (YDIN N), optics (MINA M), and music 
cmay). OF these only algebra and geometry are 
treated at length in this article, the others being 
dealt with under their respective names. 

With the exception of the above - mentioned 
“Mishnat Middot,” no work on algebra or geometry 
is known to have been written in Hebrew before the 
twelfth century; the few writings composed by 
Jews in these branches of mathematics, which in 
the Middle Ages were neglected in favor of astron- 
omy and astrology, were In Arabic. The oldest 
Jewish writer on mathematics in its strict sense was 
the renowned astrologer Mashallah (more correctly 
Ma Sha Aliah), who flourished at the end of the 
eighth century and at the beginning of the ninth. 

A contemporary of his, Abu Othman 


Arabic Sahl ibn Bishr ibn Habib ibn Hani, 
Jewish wasthe author of a work on algebra 
Mathema- entitled “Al-Jabar wal-Mukabalah.” 
ticians. Another work on algebra, bearing the 


same title, and a commentary on the 
“Blements” of Euclid, were written about the 
same time by a Jewish convert to Islam, Sind ben 
‘Ali. To the same period belongs Sahl Rabban al- 
Tabari, who was considered one of the greatest 
geometers of his time. Among the writers of the 
tenth and cleventh centuries mention should be 
made of Bishr ben Phinehas ben Shu‘aib and Jacob 
ben Nissim of Kairwan, the latter of whom wrote, 
under the title “Hisab al-Ghubar” (Hebr. pawn 
Pan), a work on Indian mathematics. In thetwelfth 
century works on algebra and geometry began to 
appear in Hebrew, mainly as translations from the 
Arabic. 

The first known Hebrew writer on geometry was 
Abraham bar Hivya ha-Nasi, who expounded its 
elements in a work entitled “ Hibbur ha-Meshihah 
weha-Tishboret.” This work, which probably 
formed a part of his encyclopedia “ Yesode ha- 
Tebunah we-Migda: ha-Emunah,” was edited by 
Steinschneider in the publications of the Mekize 
Nirdamim Society (1895, vol. xi.). A Latin transla- 
tion of Abraham bar Hivya’s work was made about 
1136 by Plato of Tivoli. Another prominent wri- 
ter on geometry in that century was Samucl ibn 
“Abbas, who, at the request of Sultan Abu al-Fath 
Shah Ghazzi, composed in Arabic a work on the 
difficulties encountered by the geometer. AS a 
translator of astronomical and mathematical works 
from the Arabic into Latin, in the same century, the 
Jewish convert known by the name of Johanues 
Hispalensis was distinguished. An English Jew is 
said to have written in Latin, in 1190, a work on 
mathematics under the title “Mathematica Rudi- 
menta Quedam.” 

The thirteenth century was especially rich in 
mathematical productions. The writings of the 
Greek and Arabian mathematicians were translated 
into Hebrew and commented upon. Judah ben 
Samuel Cohen of Toledo (1288), in his encyclo- 
pedia—written originally in Arabic and translated 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
| 


376 


by himself into Hebrew under the title “ Midrash 
ha-Hokmah ”—gives extracts from the “ Elements ” 
of Euclid. In 1278 Euclid’s entire 
In the work was translated from the Arabic, 
Thirteenth probably by Moses ibn Tibbon. An- 
Century. other translation, entitled “ Yesodot,” 
or “Shorashim,” and including Hy psi- 
cle’s books, is supposed to have been made by Jacob 
ben Machir. Commentaries upon it by Arabian 
mathematicians, suchas Al-Farabi and Ibn Haitham, 
were also rendered into Hebrew, probably by [Kxa- 
lonymus ben Kolonymus, who, according to the 
commentary of Simplicius, had translated Book xiv. 
aud lbn Haitham’s commentary on the introduction 
to Book x. Among the other commentaries on the 
“Elements” still extant in manuscript in various 
European libraries are those by a pupil of Jacob 
ben Machir; by Abba Mari on the introduction to 
Book i.; by Levi ben Gershon on the propositions 
of Books i., iii., iv., and v.; by Abraham ben Solo- 
mon Yarhi; and, according to Joseph Delmedigo, 
by Elijah Mizrahi. Euclid’s “ Data” was rendered 
into Hebrew, from the Arabic version of Hunain 
ibn Ishak, by Jacob ben Machir, under the title 
“Sefer ha-Mattanah.” Three new translations were 
made between 1775 and 1875. Euclid’s works were 
published first by Abraham ben Joseph Minz, with 
annotations by Meir of Firth, under the title 
“Reshit Limmudim hu Sefer Iklides ” (Berlin, 1795), 
Five years later a new translation of the first six 
books of the “ Elements” was published by Baruch 
Schick (The Hague, 1780). In 1875 a new translation 
of Books xi. and xii. was published at Jitomir. 
Jacob ben Machir, in the thirteenth century, 
translated from the Arabic the work on spherical 
figures of the Alexandrian matheima- 
Transla-_ tician Menelaus, Kalonymus ben Ka- 
tions from lonymus twice translated the works 
the Arabic. of Archimedes on conoids and sphe- 
roids and on the measure of the circle 
under the titles “ Be-Kaddur ube-Iztawwonot ” and 
“Sefer Arkimedes be-Meshihat ha-‘Iggulah.” Ile 
made the following translations also: “Sefer Me- 
shalim be-Tishboret,” on algebraic propositions; 
“Sefer ha-Temunah ha-Hittukit ”; a work on geom- 
etry by Thabit ibn Kurra entitled “ Al-Shakl al- 
Katta‘”; “Ma’amar be-Iztawwonot webe-Hiddu- 
dim,” a treatise on cylinders and cones by Abu 
al-Kasim Asbagh or Asba‘ ben Mohammed. In 
the fifteenth century Jewish literature was enriched 
with several important works on algebra and geom- 
etry. Mordecai Comtino, teacher of the rabbi and 
mathematician Elijah Mizrahi, wrote a treatise, in 
two parts, on arithmetic and algebra, in which he 
followed partly the Greek and Latin authors, partly 
the Mohammedan; he also annotated the “ Ele- 
ments.” Elijah Mizrahi wrote on arithmetic, alge- 
bra, and geometry under the title “ Meleket ha-Mis- 
par.” Mordecai ben Abraham Finzi translated from 
the Latin, under the title “ Tahbulat ha-Mispar,” a 
work on algebra by Abu Kamil Shuja‘, and a work 
on geometry under the title “ Hokmat ha-Medidah.” 
The most prominent representative of mathemat- 
ical knowledge among the Jewsin the sixteenth cen- 
tury was the historian David Gans, who wrote three 
works on mathematics—*“ Ma’or ha-Katan,” “ Migdal 


377 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mathematics 





Dawid.” and “Prozdor.” Among the mathemati- 
cians of the seventeenth century the most renowned 
was Joseph Delmedigo, who in his “Bosmat Bat 
Shelomoh” gives a survey of geometry and devotes 
several chapters of his “Ma‘van Gannim” to 
trigonometry and algebra. In the cighteenth cen- 
tury the most noted mathematician among the Jews 
was Elijah Wilna, who wrote a work containing 

treatises on trigonometry, geometry, 


Elijah and some principles of astronomy and 
Wilna. 3 algebra. The following is a list of all 


the IIebrew works on algebra, geom- 
etry, and arithmetic published up to the last years 
of the nineteenth century: 


pops, a new translation of Euclid, by Baruch Schick. The 
Hague, 1780, 

owSpix, on Books xi. and xii. of the ** Elements,” by David 
Friesenhausen. Jitomir, 1875. 

aosx, containing, among other scientific dissertations, treatises 
on arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and trigonometry, by Joseph 
Delmedigo. Amsterdam, 1629, 

yay aD, arithmetic, in Judwo-German, by Faibus Hur- 
witz. Amsterdam, 1791. 

aya ts, on the geometrical propositions found in the Tal- 
mud, by Tobias Hurwitz. Prague, 1807. 

S793N Ponz, arithmetic. according to Elijah Mizrahi and non- 
Jewish sources, by Abraham Niederlander. Prague (1609?). 

p2vn7 27s, arithmetic, by Jebiel Michael Epstein, Wilna, 
1836. 

naprn mosn, arithmetic, by Moses Hayyim Eisenstadt. Dy- 
hernfurth, 1712. 

“roon man, arithmetic and algebra, by Nahman Hirsch Lin- 
der of Dubno. Warsaw, 1855. 

ayy coro, arithmetic, translated from the French by 
Jacob Eichenbaum. Warsaw, 1857. 

naena rye, arithmetic, in Judseo-German, by Aryeh Lob 
Shames. Amsterdam, 1690. 

Swe Ty, geometry, by Gabriel Judah Lichtenfeld. 
Warsaw, 1865, 

Sy 3)D*, containing, among other things, geometrical propo- 
sitions, by Baruch Schick. Berlin, 1777. 

“yn “ms. on the various branches of mathematics, by 
Hayyim Zelig Slonimski. Jitomir, 1865. 

nawnn S>2, algebra, by David Friesenhausen. Berlin, 1797 
(Zolkiev, 1835). _ 

aosayon rainy, logarithms, by David Friesenhausen. K6- 
nigsberg, 1554. 

nayna wns. arithmetic, by Letableau. Warsaw, 1866 (ib. 
1875). 

43n napin, proofs on the eleventh proposition of Euclid, by 
David Friesenhausen. Vienna, 1820. 

pawan PON, arithmetic, by Moses Samuel Neumann. Vi- 
enna, 1831. 

nawmpd MON, arithmetic and algebra, by Elijah ben Gershon 
of Pintschow, Zolkiev, 3740. 

mayne moss, in two volumes: the first, entitled pawn vy, 
deals with arithmetic and the elements of algebra; the second, 
mya oayas3, treats of geometry, by Gershon Elias. Berlin, 1765 
(Frankfort-on-tbhe-Oder, 1766; Ostrog, 1806). 

ayn months, arithmetic, in Judweo-German, by Goldenberg. 
Berdychev, 1825 (sdilkov, 1854). 

Pawn PINTS, arithmetic and algebra, in Hebrew and Judzo- 
German, by Moses Zerah Eidlitz. Prague, 1775. (In Hebrew 
only, Zolkiev, 1837, 1845.) 

Lams msm money, on all branches of mathematics, in three 
volumes, by Shalom Blenker. Berdychev, 1834. 

"apn rowdy, arithmetie, algebra, and geometry, by Elijah 
Mizrahi. Constantinople, 1534. 

swans NOT ISN TDD, algebra, by Asher Anshel Worms. Of- 
fenbach, 1722. 

AIROA Nsw. on geometry, edited by Steinschneider. Berlin, 
1864. (With a German translation and notes by Hermann Scha- 
pira, Leipsic, 1880.) 

wp x), geometry and trigonometry, by Simeon Waltsch. 
Berlin, 1786. 


amp) sy, arithmetic, by Menahem Zion Porto. Venice, 
1627. 


mp7 Pry, on the mathematical propositions found in the 
Talmud, by Jacob Kopel. Cracow, 1598 (Amsterdam, 1710). 


man MS sp 7p, dissertations on geometry, by Kopel Sha- 
eherles. Vienna, 1814. 

M3yD M353, criticisms on the mathematical works of Hayyim 
Zelig Slonimski, by Gabriel Judah Lichtenfeld. Warsaw, 1874. 

MIyp Pips, arithmetic and algebra, by Joseph Schiliffers., 
Wilna-Grodno, 1827. 

MASA Ap. trigonometry, by Baruch Schick. Prague, 1784. 

navn mosbn sp, arithmetic. Witna, 1830. 


Dw2T7 PswN A, a commentary on the ‘Elements,”* by Abra- 
hain Joseph Minz. Berlin, 1775. 


ppt sSoay, on the calendar. and on arithmetic and geome- 
try, by Elijah Hechim. Warsaw, 1868. 

SMX JID DAD °3u", logarithms, by Rabinowitsch. St. Pe. 
tersburg, 1872, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Poggendorff, Handiwérterb. i. 458; Zucker 
mann, Das Mathematische im Talmud,in Jahresbericht 
der Frankelschen Stiftung, 1878; Eduard Mabler, Die Irra- 
tionalitdten der Rabbinen, in Zeitschrift fiir Mathematik, 
1884; idem, Zur Valmudischen Mathematik, ib. 1886; Gur- 
land, Calendar, vi. 112-118; Steinschneider, Jewish Litera- 
ture, passim ; idem. in Bibtiotheca Mathematiea, 1890; idem, 
Hebr. Cebers.; idem, Die Arabische Literatur der Juden. 


J. I. Br. 


Modern: The number of mathematicians of 
Jewish origin in the nineveenth century is so great 
that a detailed list of all could hardly be given 
here. As there are, moreover, no data regarding 
the lives of the French, English, and Russian 
mathematicians the biographer frequently would 
be obliged to resort to conjecture. For example, it 
is believed that Lobatschewski, one of the discov- 
erers of absolute geometry (pangeometry), was the 
son of Jewish parents, since his father, a native of 
Poland, is known to have been converted to the 
Orthodox Greek Church, and conversion from Ca- 
tholicism is not likely. Similarly, the ancestry of 
the great astronomer Friedrich Bessel calls for in- 
vestigation. 

The folowing German mathematicians may be 
mentioned: M, Abraham (mathematical theory of 
electricity); Aronhold; Borchardt (algebra; editor 
of Crelles’ “Journal fiir die Reine und Angewandte 
Mathematik ”); Georg Cantor (author of the theory 
of transfinite numbers); Moritz Cantor (history of 
mathematics); Eisenstcin; Fuchs; Gordan (basal 
principles of the theory of invariants); Hensel (con- 
tinued Kronecker’s investigations); Hurwitz (author 
of prominent works in various branches of mathe- 
matics); Hamburger (differential equations); Hirsch 
Meyer (source for all modern collections of elemen- 
tary examples; properties of sy mnietrical functions) ; 
Jacobi; Jolles(geometry); Konig (algebra); Kénigs- 
berger (transformation of hyperelliptical functions; 
biography of Helmholtz); Kronecker; Landau (the- 
ory of numbers); Landsberg (algebraic [Abel’s] 
functions): Lipschitz (prominent in all departinents 
of pure and applied mathematics); London (geom- 
etry); Minkowski (foremost living [1904] authority 
on the theory of numbers); Nocther (algebra and 
Abel’s functions); Pasch (critique of the principles 
of mathematics; important geometrical investiga- 
tions on complexes); Pringsheim (modern theory of 
functions); Rosanes (geometrical transformation and 
apolarity); Rosenhain; Saalschiitz (convergence; 
apphed mathematics); Schlesinger (comprehensive 
text-book, and original investigations on differen- 
tial equations); Schénflies (geometry); Schwarz- 
schild (director of the observatory at Géttmgen; 
mathematical astronomy); Wilsch (theory of in- 





378 





Matthias THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
variants); Weingarten (foremost living authority 


on the theory of surfaces); Wolfskehl (theory of 
numbers). 

Of Italian mathematicians the following are the 
most important, their chief distinction being won 
in analytic and synthetic geometry: Castelnuovo, 
Enriquez, Fano, Jung, Beppo Levi, Levi-Civita, 
Loria, Segre, Volterra (mathematical physics). 

The most prominent Russian mathematicians are 
Schapiro (cofunctions; algebraic iteration) and Slo- 
nimski (inventor of a well-known counting-machine 
and editor of Jewish calendars). 

Of the Jewish mathematicians of France those who 
have gained especial prominenee are: Hadamard 
(Hadamard’s theorem); Halphen (reduction of linear 
equations to integrable form [obtained a prize from 
the French Academy]; spatial curves [obtained a 
prize from the Berlin Academy]; compare Stieltjes’ 
biography of him in Halphen’s ‘Traité des Fonc- 
tions Eliptiques.”’ vol. iti.); Maurice Levi (mathe- 
matical physics: president. of the Institute). 

The most noteworthy English mathematician ts 
James Joseph SYLVESTER. 

a Ss. G. 

MATHIAS OF CRACOW. Se Catanora. 


MATRIARCHY: A system of society in which 
deseent and property are traced solelv through 
females. It has been suggested that the promi- 
nence given to the mothers of kings in the Books of 
Kings and to the wives of the Patriarchs are survi- 
vals of this system. The fact that the tribes can be 
divided into tribes descended from Rachel and tribes 
cdeseonded from Leah has also been urged in favor 
of this view, especially as the name ‘‘ Rachel” means 
‘ewe,’ and the name ‘Leah’ has been traced by 
Robertson Smith to a Semitic root meaning “ante- 
lope.” The view is thus dependent upon the theory 
that the early Israclites had a totemistic tribal sys- 
tem (see ToTEMISM). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage 
in Early Arabia, especially p. 219, Cambridge, 1885; Jacobs, 

Studies in Biblical Archxology, London, 1891. 


A. J. 
MATTANIAH. See ZEDEKIAH. 


MATTATHIAS MACCABEUS: The origi- 
nator of the Maccabean rebellion. His genealogy is 
given as follows in the First Book of Maccabees, the 
most authentic source: ‘‘ Mattathias, the son of John, 
the son of Simeon, a priest of the sons of Jotarib, from 
Jerusalem; and he dwelt at Modin”’ (I Mace. i. 1). 
Josephus (‘‘Ant.’”’ xit. 6, § 1) traces the genealogy 
back for one gencration further, mentioning Asa- 
moneus (= Hasmonaus) after Simon. But this Has- 
moneus should not be considered as Mattathias’ 
great-grandfather, but merely as a distant ancestor 
of the whole house, since only so is it comprehensible 
why both Greck and rabbinical sources of the follow- 
ing period call the whole house that of the Hasmone- 
ans. The faet, moreover, that the names John and 
Simeon recur in the family in the very next genera- 
tion after Mattathias, while the name ‘‘ Hasmonzeus ’s 
is not found in historic times, is a proof that the 
first bearer of this name belongs to antiquity. 

The rabbinical sources have a different account. 
In the Seder ‘ Olam Zuta, which, it is true, is not very 


reliable. Mattathias is given as the direct sen of 
and elsewhere also Hasmonai appears 
as a historic person who is very much 


Hasmonai; 


Distin- jn evidence. Thus, in Soferim xx. 
guished § occurs the reading: ‘ Mattithiah, 
from = son of Johanan the high priest, and 


Hasmonai. Hasmonni and his sons.” The con- 

junction ‘‘and’”’ must originally have 
stood also in the liturgical formula fixed for the 
Hanukkah feast, so that Mattathias and Hasmonai 
are to be regarded as two independent herees who 
lived in the same period and who were probably 
relatives. In the Talmud, Hasmonat is even men- 
tioned before Mattathias (Meg. lla}. A micdrash to 
Deut. xxxill. 11, quoted by Rashi, mentions ‘the 
children of Hasmouai, among them Eleazar; as does 
also Jellinek ‘“B. H.”. vi. 2. Hasmonai thus appears 
in these passages in the place of Mattathias. 

The rabbinical sources never mention all of Mat- 
tathias’ sons together, but only one at a time, some- 
times Eleazar (who, according to most of the authen- 
tic sourees, took only a subordinate part), sometimes 
John (who also is unimportant in the books of the 
Maccabees and in Josephus), and sometimes Judas. 
The First Book of Maccabees and Josephus enu- 
merate the sons of Mattathias as follows: John 
Gaddis or Caddis (Johanan Gadi), Simon Thassi, 
Judas Maceabeus, Eleazar Avaran, and Jonathan 
Apphus. The Aramaic-sounding cognomens, which 
have not been fully explained, were probably given 
them by their father, with reference to contemporary 
events or to the respective characters of the sons 
themselves. The second Book of Maccabees men- 
tions still another brothcr, between Simon and Jona- 
than, called Joseph; but that is probably only 2 
corrupt reading for “Johanan.” 

Mattathias belonged to the priestly tribe of Joix- 
rib (comp. I Chron. xxiv. 7); the name is badly pre- 
served in Josephus. From the statement that hc 
was from Jerusalem, but resided in Modin, it is cer- 
tain that he actually officiated in Jerusalem. The 
rabbinical sources which make him high priest are 
mistaken. Mattathias was already old when the 
religious persecution under Antiochus Lpiphanes 
broke out. The king’s soldicrs under Apetles, whe 

is mentioned by Josephus but not 

Refuses tO in the Book of Maccabees, came to 
Sacrifice Modin, asimall city in Judea. They set 
to Idols. up an altar to the heathen god, and 
ordered Mattathias, as the most influ- 

ential citizen, whose example would be followed, to 
sacrifice in accordance with the king’s command. 
But Mattathias said: “Though all the nations that 
are under the kine’s dominion obey him, . vet 
will T, and my sons, and my brethren, walk in the 
covenant of our fathers” (I Mace. il. 19-20). And 
when a certain Jew was about to obey the command, 
Mattathias, who was filled with holy wrath, killed 
the offender and destroyed the altar, while his sons 
cut down the king’s officer. Thereupon Mattathias 
called out: ‘‘Whoever is zealous for the Law, and 
maintaineth the covenant, let him follow me.” His 
countrymen, abandoning all their possessions. fol- 
lowed him and hid in the mountains and desert places. 
Others, who had hidden themselves before, joined 
them. When Mattathias learned that the pious ones 


379 


would rather be cut down by the king’s soldiers 
than defend themselves on the Sabbath he com- 
manded them to fight, when necessary, on that day. 
This practise, savs Josephus, was continued in later 
days. It is evident from this that Mattathias had 
authority in religious matters also. 

Irom his hiding-place he scoured the neighboring 
districts of Judea, drove out small bands of the 
king’s troops, punished the renegade Jews, destroyed 
the heathen temples and altars, and brought chil- 
dren, who through fear had not been circumcised, 
into the covenant of Abraham. Josephus, whose 
account otherwise agrees with that of I Maccabees, 
differs from it in stating that Mattathias reigned 
one year and then became ill. Also in “B. J.” Gi. 1, 
§ 3) Josephus speaks of Mattathias as a prince chosen 
by the people. According to both authorities, Mat- 
tathias before his death urged his sons and the peo- 
ple to continue steadfast in the defense of their an- 
cestral religion. Of his sons he designated Simon 
as counselor and Judah as general. He died in 146 
of the Seleucid era (166 B.c.), and was buried in 
Modin, amid the lamentations of all Isracl. Niese 
has tried to prove from the fact that Mattathias does 
not appear in the Second Book of Maccabees that 
he never existed. This has been refuted by Schtirer 
and Wellhausen. The importance of Mattathias is 
attested by the fact that rabbinical tradition men- 
tions his name and even puts it in the Hanukkah 
prayer. The name Mattathias recurs in the person 
of his grandson, a son of Simon (I Maee. xvi. 14). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gritz, Gesch. ii.2 322-325: Niese, Kritik der 
Beiden Makkabéerbiicher, pp. 44-47 (reprint from Hermes, 
1900, vol. xxxv.); Schirer, Gesch. 3d ed., 1.202; Wellhausen, 
I. J. G. 4th ed., p. 257, note 1, Berlin, 1901; Krauss, in &.F. 


J. xxx. 215. For the sources of Josephus see Biichler, 7b. 
XXxiv. 69-76. 
G. S. Kr. 


MATTATHIAS B. SIMON: Son of the Has- 
monean prince Simon, whom he accompanied on his 
last journey, together with his brother Judah and 
his mother. Simon, with his sons, was mvited by 
his son-in-law Ptolemy to a banquct in the fortress of 
Docus, near Jericho, where he was murdered, his sons 
being first put in fetters and then killed. The ac- 
counts in I Maccabees and in Josephus do not agrec 
as to whether Mattathias was slain at the same time 
as his father, or later; Josephus, however, probably 
reports the affair correctly, as he refers also to 
other sourecs. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: JI Mace. xvi. 16; Josephus, Ani. xiii. 8, § 1; 
idem, B. J.i. 2, $8; C. Werner, Johann Hyrkan, p. 10, note 
22, Wernigerode, 1877; Gratz, Gesch. ili. 67 e¢ seq. 

G. M. K. 

MATTERSDORF, JOABBEN JEREMIAH: 
Hungarian rabbi; died about 1807. Through the 
influence of Aaron Chorin, a disciple of his father, 
he beeame rabbi of Deutsehkreuz, near Mattersdorf, 
Hungary. He wrote “Hen Tob” (Zolkiev, 1806), 
commentary on a part of the code Eben ha-‘ Ezer, 
to which is added ‘‘Zebed Tob” on the same code, 
by his son-in-law Isaac (fisikk) ben Lippmann 
Frankel. Joab wrote also: “Sha‘are Binah,’”’ no- 
vellee to Isaac ben Reuben Alfasi’s ‘‘Sha‘are She- 
bu‘ot,”’ Vienna, 1792. Like Joseph Caro, Marcus 
Benedict, and others, Mattersdorf mistook this Isaac 
ben Reuben for a grandson of Isaac Alfasi (see JEw. 
Encyc. i. 377, s.v. ALrasi, Isaac BEN REUBEN). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Mathias 
Matthias 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 194; Fiirst. 
Bibl. Jud. ii. 334; Loéw, Gesammelte Schriften, ii. 257: 
Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 5824; Zunz, in Geiger’s Wiss. 
Zeit. Jud. Theol. iii. 57. 


D S. Man. 


MATTHAI (SIMEON), ADAM RUDOLF 
GEORG: German convert to Christianity; born at. 
Firth 1715; died at Nuremberg 1779. After having 
studied Talmud at Prague under his father, Jaidel, 
who was lecturer on Talmud in the bet ha-midrash, 
Matthai, whose name was then Simon, returned 
to his native town. There he was appointed teacher 
in the Jewish high school and afterward leeturer in 
the bet ha-midrash. In April, 1748, Matthai an- 
nounced to the clergy of Fiirth his intention of em- 
bracing Christianity, and on their advice he went to 
Nuremberg, where he was baptized on Sept. 20 of 
the same year, and where he was afterward ap- 
pointed sacristan of the Dominican Church. 

Matthéi wrote several works in German which, 
according to his admirers, were a defense of Chris- 
tianity against the attacks of the Jews, but in real- 
ity were attacks on Judaism. It must be admitted, 
however, that he displaved in his writings a wide 
knowledge of rabbinical literature. 

The following is a list of his works in their chron- 
ological order; with one exception they were pub- 
lished at Nuremberg: 

Beschreibung des Jiidischen Sabbats. 1750. 

Die Verderbniss des Heutigen Judenthums. 1752. 

Beschreibung des Jiidischen Neujahrsfestes. 1755. 

Beschreibung des Jiidischen Purimfestes. 1758. 

Beschreibung des Jidischen Jom Kippur. 1760. 

Sammlung Talmudischer Lehrsi&tze. Sehwabach, 1763. 

Abhandlung von der Verleumdung. 1765. (1766, 

Sendschreiben an Rabbi Peloni aus der Stadt Lo-Theda. 

Erneuerung des Taufbundes. 1768. 

Kurzgefasste Talmudische Lehrsitze von der Nothwendig- 
keit Sich in den Ehestand zu Begeben. N.d. 

Beweis von der Uebereinstimmung der Alten Israelitischen 
Kabbala mit der Lehre des Apostels Paulus. N.d. 

Beweisgriinde von der Uebereinstimmung der Altjiidischen 


Lehre mit der Lehre der Christen. 1770. 
Christlich Gesinnte Erklarung der Kabbalisten Ueber das 


Hohelied. 1776. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De le Roi, Juden-Mission, i. 398; Fiirst. 
Bibl. Jud. ti, 335. 
G M. SEt. 


MATTHEW. See New TESTAMENT. 


MATTHIAS BEN MARGALOT: Associated 
with Judah ben Zippori in the instigation of an up- 
rising against Herod the Great (Josephus, “ Ant.” 
xvii. 6, § 2; idem, “B. J. i. 383, § 2). See Jupan 
BEN ZIPPORL. 

S S. Ixr. 


MATTHIAS BEN THEOPHILUS: Name of 
two high priests. 1. The suecessor of Simon ben 
Boethus, and, unlike the other high priests ap- 
pointed by Herod, who were foreigners, a native of 
Jerusalem (Josephus, “Ant.’’ xvii. 4, § 2). On the 
eve of a Day of Atonement— for the priest the most 
important time in the year—he had become ritually 
unclean, and consequently was unable to perform 
the duties of Ins office, which were discharged in- 
stead by his kinsman Joseph ben Ellem (“ Ant.” 
xvi. 6, § 4). This occurrence is mentioned in the 
Talmud (Tosef., Yoma, i. 4; Yoma 12b; Yer. Yoma 
38d), although the name of Matthias ben Theophilus 
is omitted. His deposition, however, was not due 
to this cause, but to the fact that he was supposed 


Mattithiah 
Maurogonato 





to have been implicated in the insurrection when the 
golden eagle was pulled down from the gate of the 
Temple (see JUDAH BEN ZipporR}). His tenure of 
oftice Jasted only one or two years (5-4 B.C.). 

2. A descendant, apparently, of the preceding, 
and the last high priest but one. He was in office 
in 63 ¢c.F., When the war against the Romans broke 
out (Josephus, “Ant.” xx. 9,87). During the troub- 
les in Jerusalem which preceded the siege by 
Titus (““B. J.” iv. 8, § 7) he was deposed, since he, 
hke the other aristocrats, belonged to the peace 
party, one of his sons having even sought refuge 
with the Romans. Matthias was put to death asa 
dangerous character by the very Simon ben Gioras 
whom he had invited to Se to subdue the 
revolutionists (“B. J.” vi. 2, $2). According to 
Griitz, it is he who is refered to in a Talmudic 
story which relates that once, on a Day of Atone- 
ment, a high priest remained in the Holy of Holies 
a longer time than usual praying for the Sanc- 
tuary, which was in danger of destruction by the 
Zealots (Tosef., Yoma, ii. 5; Yoma S58b; Yer. 
Yoma 42). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Derenbourg, Histoire de la Palestine, p. 160; 

Gritz, in Monatsschrift, 1881, pp. 41 et: dotag es orale Cain 


4th ed.. iii. 787, 750; Sehtirer, Gesch. ii, 
S, S. Ir. 


MATTITHIAH B. HERESH: Roman tanna 
of the second century; born in Judea; probably 
pupil of R. Ishmael, and certainly a contemporary 
and friend of his pupils R. Josiah and R. Jonathan. 
After his ordination Mattithiah went to Rome, ap- 
parently on account of the persecution by Hadrian; 
there le founded a school and a Jewish court which 
soon became proniinent. Halakic sentences by him 
have been preserved which show his desire to 
make the Sabbath laws less rigorous in so far as 
their fulfilment by the sick was concerned. He 
seems, however, to have devoted himself chiefly 
to the Ilaggadah; a number of his homiletic sen- 
tences, especially to Exodus, are extant. He hasa 
muxim in the Pirke Abot: “Mect cach man with 
friendly greeting; be the tatl among lions rather 
than the head among foxes” (iv. 15). He associated 
with the Palestinian scholars who visited Rome and 
sought instruction from them—from R. Simeon b. 
Yohai and R. Eleazar b. Jose, for instance. <A later 
legend in the Midrash Abkir represents him as vic- 
- toriously resisting a temptation placed in his path 
by Satan. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, pp. 180 et seq.; 


Gritz, Geseh. 3d ed., iv. 283; Bacher, Ag. Tan. 1. 385 et seq.: 
¥ ogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. 110 et 


seg. 
E, Cc, IR E. 


MATTITHIAH B. ISAAC OF CHINON 
(93°p): French scholar of the end of the thirteenth 
century. Hewasa pupil of R. Perez of Corbeil and 
a contemporary of Mordecai b. Hillel, martyred at 
Nuremberg in 1298. He is sometimes wrongly iden- 
tified with Mattithiah, the teacher of Eliezer b. Joel 
ha-Levi, author of the ritual work “ Abi Asaf,” who 
lived at the beginning of the thirteenth century. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Mordecai, Mo‘ed Katan, No. 936; idem, Ketu- 
hot, v.. Nos. 184, 200; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. ‘581. 


E. C. S. K. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


380 


MATTITHIAH B. JOSEPH THE PRO- 
VENCAL Qwy3175): Chief rabbi of Paris and of 
France from 1360 to 13885; son of Joseph b. Johanan 
of Treves, rabbi of Marseilles ; pupil of Perez b. 
{saac ha-Kohen and of Nissim b. Reuben of Gerona. 
In 1860 King Charles V. appointed him chief rabbi of 
the community of Paris and of all the newly organ- 
ized communities of France, exempting him and 
Manecier of Vesoul from wearing the Jewish badge. 
Mattithiah founded a rabbinical school at Paris 
which soon attracted many pupils, eight of whom 
were called to various communities. “He is proba- 
bly identical with Mattithiah Treves (yyy, the 
author of MS. No. 676, folio 147, containing a re- 
sponsum, in the Paris Bibliothéque Nationale) and 
with Mattithiah “the Frank” Ops nym; author of a 
methodological treatise on the Talmud). Isaac ben 
Sheshet (Responsa, No. 271) applies to him the title 
of “Eben Bohan” (“touchstone ”), a term which has 
been held to imply that he composed a work bearin 
this name (Shabbethai Bass, “Sifte Yeshenim,” x., 
No. 9). Zunz (“ Literaturgesch.”) mentions a litur- 
gical poet by the name of Mattithiah b. Joseph “the 
administrator” (“ha-parnes ”), but this latter epithet, 
can apply neither to Mattithiah b. Joseph nor to 
his father. 





BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brill. Jahrbiicher, 1.93; Carmoly. in Arch. 
Tar, 1856, p. 261; Gross, Gallia Judaiea, pp. 532-533; Léon 
Kahn, Les Juifs d Paris, p.263 Gratz, Gesch. Viii. D: Ordon- 
nances dex Roys de Franee, v. 498: Zunz, Z. G. pp. 190, 193. 


8. S. K, 


MATTITHIAH KARTIN (known also as 
Ibn Harton): Scholar of the fourteenth century. 
He translated into Hebrew verse the “Moreh Nebu- 
kim” of Maimonides in 1868 (comp. Wolf, “Bibl. 
Hebr.” i., No. 1682). His work scems to have been 
lost, unless this Mattithiah is identical with Matti- 
thiah b. Shabbethai of Monte Politiano, a work of 
whose, in verse, is found in the library of the Vati- 
can (No. 258). Steinschneider, after having declared 
(*Cat. Bod.” col, 1897) that Mattithiah versified the 
“ Moreh Nebukim,” says, in his “Jewish Literature ” 
(p. 147), that his work is a commentary, in Hebrew 
verse, on the “ Moreh.” In the Vatican Library (MS. 
No. 298) there isa poem of Mattithiah’s, entitled “ Me- 
bine ‘Am,” which is anacrostic containiug his name. 
Steinschneider thinks that this Mattithiah may be 
identified with the Italian liturgist called Mattithiah, 
whose three dirges are found in the library of Par- 
ma (MS. De Rossi No. 1205). Zunz (“ Literatur- 
gesch.” p. 579) supposes that the latter was a poet 
of the sixteenth century. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. p. 428. 
J. M. Sen. 


MATTITHIAH BEN MOSES BEN MAT- 
TITHIAH: Spanish Talmudist; lived toward the 
end of the fourteenth century and at the beginning 
of the fifteenth. Ele was a member of the Yizhari 
family of Narbonne. As he himself relates, his an- 
cestors on being banished from France (1306) settled 
together with other scholars in Catalonia and Ara- 
gon. According to Neubauer, Mattithiah is iden- 
tical with the rabbi of this name cited as one of 
those who took part in the disputation at Tortosa 
in 14138. 

Mattithiah was the author of the following 


381 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mattithiah 
Maurogorato 





works: (1) “Derashot,” homilies on the Penta- 

teuch, no longer extant; (2) a commentary on Ps. 

cxix. (Venice, 1546; partly translated into Latin by 

Philippe d’Aquin, Paris, 1629); (8) a commentary on 

Pirke Abot, still extant in manuscript: (4) notes on 

Abraham ibn Ezra’s commentary on the Pentateuch 

(Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 236); (5) 

a philosophical commentary on the Pentateuch, still 

extant in manuscript; (6) “ Parashiyyot,” homilies; 

(7) “ Derashot,” no longer extant. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Loeb, in R. B. J. vii. 155. ix. 119; Neubauer, 
ib. vii. 154; Steinsechneider, iD. ix. 118; Renan-Neubauer, Les 
Eerivains Juifs Franeais, p. 48%. 

G. I. Br. 
MATTITHIAH OF PARIS: Head of the 

Talmudic school of Paris in the eleventh century 

and doubtless idcntical with Mattithiah b. Moses, 

one of Rashi’s pupils. He is occasionally called 

Mattithiah the Great. He corresponded with 

Samuel b. Meir (RaSiHBad), who names him among 

the “ancients” of Paris. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 226, 508; Mahzor 
Vitry, No. 280; Or Zarua’, i.188b; Shibbole ha-Leket, ii., 
Nos. 18, 136, 

K. C. S. K. 


MATURITY. Sec Masorniry. 


MATZEL, ASCHER: Hungarian soldier and 
philanthropist; born 1763 at Stampfen, Hungary ; 
died Nov. 22, 1842. At the age of seventeen he en- 
tered the service of the Jewish hospitalin Vienna, of 
which he became the superintendent in 1799.  Em- 
peror Joseph II appointed him during the war 
with the Turks superintendent of the hospital in the 
fortress of Leopoldstadt, which position he later 
exchanged for that of director of the hospital of 
Semlin. The emperor bestowed on him many tokens 
of his appreciation, among others a diamond ring 
with the emperor's initials. 

After the close of the war Matzel returned to 
Vienna to resume charge of the Jewish hospital. 
In 1813 he received from Emperor Francis the gold 
medal of honor and from the Emperor of Russia the 
Order of Merit. In 1814 Matzel became manager of 
the military magazine of munitions, and in 1880, 
during the cholera epidemic, he became chief of the 
board of health of the Rossau, a suburb of Vienna. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jlidischer Plutarch, ii, 194-196, 

S. 

MAURICE, CHARLES: Theatrical director: 
born at Agen, France, May 29, 1805; died in Ham- 
burg Jan, 27, 1896, Maurice, who was of French 
descent, was educated in his native city, and until 
his twenty-second year, when he accompanied his 
father to Hamburg, was totally ignorant of the 
German language. Although unfamiliar with theat- 
rical matters, Maurice assumed charge of a minor 
playhouse in Hamburg in 1831 and proved so suc- 
cessful that, when the great fire of 1842 destroyed 
the structure, aid came to him from all quarters, and 
he was enabled to replace it with the present Thalia- 
theater. In 1847 he assumed the management of the 
Stadttheater also, relinquishing it, however, in 1854. 
From that time on Maurice’s encrgics were devoted 
to the Thaliatheater, which obtained world-wide 
fame under his direction. In 1885 he retired from 
active participation in its affairs, but in 1893 he was 





histrionic talent. 


forced, by the death of his son and successor Gustav, 
to resume the management. Maurice celebrated in 
1881 the tifticth anniversary of his entry upon the 
theatrical field, and was the recipient of a series of 
remarkable felicitations. 

Maurice was not merely a clever manager from 
the commercial point of view, but also a student 
of human nature remarkable for his discernment of 
It was Maurice who developed 
the immature talent of Bogumil Dawison and of 
Friederike Gossman, and encouraged Emil Thomas, 
Marie Barkany, Franz Wallner, and others, when 
their fame was still embryonic. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohut, Berithmte Israelitische Mdnner und 
Frauen, pp. 245-249, 
s. E. Ms. 


MAUROGONATO, ISACCO PESARO: Ital- 
ian legislator; born in Venice Nov. 26, 1817; died 
in Rome April 5, 1892. Tle was a member of a 
prominent family of Ferrara. His father, Israel 
Pesaro, removed to Venice on his marriage, and the 
son took the name of Maurogonato in addition to 
the family name in consequence of an inheritance 
left him by one of his mother’s relatives. He stud- 
ied Jaw, and afterward finance and political econ- 
omy. Maurogonato took an active part in the or. 
ganization of the Venetian revolution of 1848-49; on 
its outbreak he was elected to the assembly, and 
was later made minister of finance. tle succeeded 
in supplying an empty treasury with funds for 
carrying on the war, and was Manin’s and Tom- 
maseo’s right hand. When the Austrians examined 
the municipal accounts after regaining possession of 
the city they found them absolutely correct. Gen- 
eral Gorskowski exclaimed in surprise, “T never 
could have believed the rascailly Republicans were 
so honest!” On the collapse of the revolution Mau- 
rogonato was one of the forty excepted from the 
amnesty; with Manin and Tommaseo he was com- 
pelled to leave the country. He went to the Ionian 
Islands, but in a few years was allowed to return to 
Italy and engage in business at Vicenza. 

In 1866 Maurogonato again entered public life as 
a member of the chamber. When in 1884 the rec- 
ognition of the loans made to the Venetian revolu- 
tionary government of 1848-49 was proposed in Par- 
liament, Maurogonato—who thought the proposition 
a just one, but did not feel that he could consci- 
entiously advocate it to his own gain—turned over 
his claims, before the discussion began, to the mu- 
nicipality of Venice. They brought about 16.000 
franes, and that sum became the foundation of a 
fund for furnishing anuual subsidies to the veterans 
of the revolution. He became vice-president of the 
chamber and was for a number of years a member 
of the general budget commission. The portfolio of 
finance was several times offered to him, Victor 
Emanuel even personally urging him to accept. but 
he steadily refused. On Oct. 27, 1890, King HWum- 
bert made him a senator. Both houses of Parlia- 
ment, the government, and the municipal councils 
of Venice and of Rome took official notice of his 
death, and King Humbert sent his condolences to 
his family. Imposing public funeral services were 


| held at Rome and at Venice, in which latter city he 


Mauschberger 
Maxims 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


382 





was buried. Throughout his life Maurogonato was 
devoted to the interests of his coreligionists. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Areh. Isr. 1892, pp. 156-157; J) Vessillo T[s- 

raeliticn, 1882, pp. 123-124. 

g. N. D. 

MAUSCHBERGER, LEOPOLD: Biblical 
scholar of the eighteenth century. He was the au- 
thor of commentarics on the Pentateuch and the 
Earlier Prophets (Olmiitz, 1757), and on the books 
of Chronicles, Ezra, Tobit, Judith, ete. (¢. 1758; 
First, “ Bibl. Jud.”). T. 


MAUTHNER, FRITZ: Austrian poet, novel- 
ist. aud satirist; born in Iloritz, Bohemia, Nov. 22, 
1849. Heattended the Piarist gymnasium in Prague 
aud then ostensibly studied law at the university, 
though in reality he busied himself almost exclu- 
sively with philosophy and the history of art. He 
passed only tie first state examination in jurispru- 
(lence, after which he was occupied for a short time 
in a lawyer's office in Prague. While there he pub- 
Hshed a collection of sonnets, under the title * Die 
Grosse Revolution” (1871), which almost brought 
upon him an indictment for treason, This was fol- 
lowed by “Anna” and several minor comedies, 
which were successfully produced. Ele then devoted 
himself exclusively to literature. After writing for 
a time for Prague publications, he removed, in 1876, 
to Berlin, where he wrote critical articles for various 
journals. Since 1895 he has written the dramatic 
articles for the “ Berliner Tageblatt.” Mauthner’s 
works include: “Aus dem Miéirchenbuch der Wahr- 
beit,” satirical prose poems: “Nach Bertihmten 
Mustern,” parodies (Stuttgart, 1879); “Der Neue 
Ahasver,” romance (Bern, 1881); “ Dilettanten Spic- 
gel, Travestic nach Horaz’s Ars Poetica” (74, 1883): 
*“Oredo ” (Berlin, 1886); “Der Letzte Deutsche ven 
Blatna” (4. 1886); “ Von Keiler zu Zola” (2b. 1887); 
*Sclanock, oder die Literarische Karri¢re der Ge- 
genwart.” a satire (74. 1888); “Quartett Fanfare” 
(L888); “ AXantippe” (Dresden, 1889): “ Der Pegasus, 
eine Trazo-Komische Geschichte ” (Dresden, 1889); 
“Der Villenhof”; three romances published col- 
lectively under the title of “Berlin W” (1890); 
“Bekentnisse einer Spiritistin: Hiliegard Nilson ” 
(Berlin, 1891): “Hypatia,” romance (Stuttgart, 
1892); “ Der Geisterseher,” humorous romauce (Ber- 
lin, 1894); “Kraft,” “Die Bunte Reile,” and “ Der 
Steinerne Riese.” romances (1896); * Die Bohmische 
WTandschrift” (1897); “ Beitrige zu einer Kritik der 
Sprache: Sprache und Psychologie” (Stuttgart, 
1901). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenberg, Das Geistige Berlin ; Nord und 

Niid, May, L904. 

: N. D. 

MAUTHNER, JULIUS: Austrian chemist; 
born in Vienna Sept. 26, 1852; edueated at Vienna 
University (MLD. 1878), where he became privat- 
docent in experimental medical chemistry (1881) and 
assistant professor (June 8, 1885). He is a member 
of the Leopold and Caroline Academy of Naturalists 
and Chemists. He has published a number of 
scientific papers in the “Sitzungsberichte der Kaiser- 
lichen Akademie der Wissenschaften,” Liebig's 
“Annalen der Chemie,” “Berichte der Deutschen 
Chemischen Gesellschaft,” “Zeitschrift fiir Biolo- 


hi 


gie.” “Wiener Medicinische Blitter,” and _ else- 
where. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, ii. 328-3829; 

Schmidt, Jahrb. der Gesammten Medicein, 

s. N. D. 

MAUTHNER, LUDWIG: Austrian ophthal- 
mologist; born in Prague April 18, 1840; died in 
Vienna Oct. 20, 1894; educated at the University of 
Vienna (M.D. 1861). He was admitted to the med- 
ical faculty of his alma mater as privat-doccnt in 
ophthalmology in 1864, and became professor in the 
University of Innsbruck in 1869. This position he 
resigned in 1877, returning with tie title of professor 
to Vienna, where he again became privat-docent. 
In 1890 he was appointed assistant-chief physician 
in the eye dispensary; and four years later he was 
appointed protessor. In 1899 a monument was 
erected in his honor in the “ Arcaden” of Vienna 
University. 

Mauthner wrote many essays upon neuropathy 
and ophthalmology for the medical journals. Among 
his works may be mentioned: “Die Bestimmung 
der Refractionsanomalien mit Hilfe des Augen- 
spicgels,” Vienna, 1867; “ Lehrbuch der Ophthal- 
moskopie,” 7@b. L868; “Recherches sur la Structure 
du Systeme Nerveux,” Paris, 1868; * Die Optischen 
Fehler des Auges.” Vienna, 1872 (2d ed, 1876); “ Die 
Sy philtischen Erkrankunyven des Auges,” in Zeissl’s 
“Lehrbuch der Augenheilkunde,” 1878; “Die Sym- 
pathischen Angenleiden,” Wiesbaden, 1879: “* Die 
Punktionspriifung des Anges,” 7), 1880; * Gehirn und 
Auge,” 7. 1881; “Die Lehre vom Glaukom,” 2d. 
1882; * Die Lehre von den Augenmuskeln,” 2. 1885 
(2d ed. 1889); “Die Nicht Nuclearen Augenmuskel- 
ihmungen.” @, 1886: “ Diagnostik und Therapie 
der Augenmuskelliihmungen,” 76, 1889. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biey. Ler. 


x. F. T. H. 


MAUTNER, EDUARD: German author and 
journalist; born at Budapest Nov, 138, 1824; died in 
Baden, near Vienna, July 2, 1889. His father, who 
was a merchant in Budapest, died when Eduard was 
seven years old, whereupon his mother, with her 
children, of whom Eduard was the oldest, removed 
to Vienna. There he attended the elementary school 
and the gymnasium. After attending lectures on 
philosophy at the University of Prague (1848), 
where he published several poems and a tale in 
Glaser’s “Ost und West,” he returned to Vienna, 
began the study of medicine, exchanged it for that 
of Jaw, and then dropped law for literature. In 
1844 he removed to Leipsic. studied philosophy and 
ethics, and renewed friendships begun at Prague 
with Moritz Hartmann, Uffo Horn, and Alfred Meiss- 
ner. To Lewald’s “Europa,” Ierlosssohn’s “ Ko- 
met,” Kuranda’s “Grenzboten,” and Octtinger’s 
“Charivari” Mautner contributed poems, tales, and 
critical and literary articles. all of which were well 
received by the critics. He returned to Vienna in 
the autumn of 1847. 

While visiting his mother in Triest, the revolution- 
ary movement of 1848 began. Mautner hastened 
to Vienna, and during the revolution was active 
as a journalist, writing especially for Frankl’s 
“Sonntagsblatt.” Henext acted as feuilletonist and 


383 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


MNMauschberger 
Maxims 





dramatic critic for the “Ostdeutsche Post,” the 
~ Presse,” and the " Wanderer.” In 1851 his comedy, 
~ Das Preislustspiel,” took the second prize at the 
Hofburg Theater competition. In 1853 he traveled in 
Germany, Belgium, Frauce, and England, returning 
to Vienua in 1854,to publish a series of sketches in 
the * Ostdeutsche Post” and in the “ Familienbuch 
des Oesterreichischen Lloyd.” From 1855 to 1864 
he was officially connected with the Staatsbalngescell- 
schaft,; during that period he published several poet- 
ical works, and some minor comedies that were pro- 
duced in Vienna, Early in 1865 he became assistant 
in the Imperial Court Library at Vienna, and after- 
ward was engaged in the literary bureau of the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Ue wrote: “Grafin 
Aurora” (Vienna, 1852); “Kleine Erzihiungen ” (7. 
1858): “In Catilinam, ein Kranz Geharnischter 
Sonette,” against Napoleon (¢b. 1859); “ Wihrend 
der Bérse” (Berlin, 1863; played at the court thea- 
ter); “Eine Frau, die an der Boérse Spiclt” (pro- 
duced at the Vienna Carltheater); “ Eglantine,” 
drama (Vienna, 1863); “ Die Sanduhr” (Berlin, 1871); 
“Eine Kriegslist,” comedy (1878); “Von der Aar 
zur Donau,” festival play (1881); “Ausgewihlte 
Gedichte ” (Vienna, 1889). 

BIBLIVUGRAPHY: Wurzbach, Bing. Lex.; Meyers Konversa- 

fions-Lexvikon ; Jtidisches Athentium. 


S. N. D. 


MAXIMS (Legal): Short sayings in which 
principles of law of wide application are laid down. 
They are known to all systems of jurisprudence: 
thus, “Casus nocet domino” and “Ignorantia juris 
nocet” are maxims of Roman law; “Nobody can 
plead his own wrong” and “ You can not come into 
a court of equity but with clean hands” are maxims 
of English law. Of the maxims which are current in 
the Talmud many belong to substantive law, others 
to the law of evidence and procedure. The follow- 
ing may be citcd as examples: 

Irs AN wmv wmee. snane $2 (ML am 
bound to make good any damage caused by what- 
ever [am bound to guard” [B. K. i. 2]). This ap- 
plies to domestic animals, to a pit or any similar 
source of danger, and to fire. See ACCIDENT. 

obyy5 spo os (“A man is always forewarned ” 
[B. Kx. ii. 6]): that is, a man is, like the owner of a 
“forewarned ox,” always liable for the whole damage 
arising directly from bis acts. 

Aya wnyyap yop) myiw wan (“A deaf man, a fool, 
and a child are bad to meet” [B. K. 87a}) because 
whoever harms them is liable for the damage done, 
while no compensation is recoverable from them for 
any damage done by them. 

MOD DIN Gey ymby (“A man’s agent is, in cf- 
fect, the man himself”), This is similar to the 
Roman principle * Qui facit per alium facit per se.” 

mov yee now $5 («Who pays isnot flogged ” 
{Mak. i. 2}); that is, wherever the law orders com- 
pensation paid for an unlawful act, and the pay- 
ment is made. punishment by stripes *an not be 
inflicted, 

mand pnp mano vIn $5 (“Whenever one 
thing is more nearly permanent than another it has 
the preference ” [Hor. iii. 6]) appears in the Gemara 
simply as Dp Wn (“ The permanent ranks first 2); 


a rule derived from the often reiterated insistence of 
the Torah on the celebration of the daily sacrifice on 
festive days, when other sacrifices also are pre- 
scribed 

psa mom px (“They have no mercy in judg- 
ment” | Ket, ix. 2-3]) means that the courts do not 
act on the principle of modern equity known as 
“marshaling the assets,” the principle of giving to 
the creditor having the weakest hold on other funds 
6y735) a stronger hold on the fund under dispute ; 
every creditor must take his chance, according to 
the opinion of R. Akiba, which prevails over that of 
R. Tarfon. 

DI mMpw AVN prin (“ Damage by seeing is called 
damage” [Gemara; Bb. B. 2b]) expresses the right 
of a householder to privacy; that is, to be screened 
while in his house or courtyard from the view of 
his neighbors is a legal right. 


Saw ay Mant. MIT IMD INN pon pe 
y2o2) Ap aN wD (“One court does not overrule 
the decision of another court unless it is greater in 
wisdom and numbers” [‘Eduy. i. 5]) is a principle 
that, supplemented by the high regard in which the 
Tannaim (ending with R. Judah about 220) were 
held by succeeding generations, has done much to 
keep Jewish laws and customs in their old, some- 
times obsolete, forms. See AHARONIM. 

AA MR pan np (“Let the judgment pierce 
the mountain” [Sanh. 6a, b]), corresponding to the 
Latin “Fiat justitia, ruat colum” (Let justice be 
done though the heavens fall), expresses a principle 
not much followed in practise, as the sages always 
desired a compromise between the litigants more 
than strict enforcement of the law. 

yen wosy Dw DIN Px (No man can make 
himself out wicked” [Sanh. 25a]) means that no 

penalty, such as death, exile, or stripes, 


Law of  normore than full restitution, nor even 
Evidence a fixed sumas damages to an injured 
and party, can be awarded upon the admis- 
Procedure. sion or confession of the accused (see 


ACCUSATORY AND INQUISITORIAL PRO- 

CEDURE; see Ket. iit. 9). Two competent witnesses 
are indispensable. 

seoopr pew eS (We have not seen’ is no 
proof” |[‘Eduy. ii. 2]). This principle was carried 
further in the Talmudic than it is in modern law, 
as the former wasaverse to the establishment of any 
fact by indirect evidence. 

nprma pos) (“Property [abides] im its status” 
[B. Bb. ix. 8-9; see BurDEN oF PROOF]), In the 
absence of evidence cither way, property remains 
with the owner In possession, and his heirs. 

tran poy mand sess (He who desires to 
take anything from his companion must furnish the 
proof” [B K. iii. 11; see BURDEN oF PROOoF]); 
that is, the party seeking recovery of money or 
property must prove his case. The English rule is 
that the burden of proof rests upon the party having 
the affirmative in any issue; the Talmudic rule will 
often prove at variance with this practice. 

mAyiawa ayn mypoa ato (‘He who admits a 
part is bound to make oath” [Shebu. vi. 1-3]). One 
that is sued for a given sum or thing of value, and 
admits that he owes a smaller sum, or thing, than 


May 
May Laws 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


384 





that claimed, or admits facts tending to such a con- 
clusion, can not by his mere denial in regard to the 
balance put his adversary to proof; but he must, if 
the latter calls for it, confirm his denial by an oath. 

“Aw TDA Sin waxy ABA (* The mouth which 
bound [forbade] is the mouth that also loosened ” 
[“ permitted”; ‘Eduy. iii. 6]). This maxim is given 
with this illustration: 

Where it is known of a woman only by her own 
account that she has been a captive, and she says 
she was not defiled, her statement is taken, and she 
may marry into the priesthood; but if the proof of 
her captivity rests upon witnesses, and she claims 
that she was not defiled, the court would say by xb 
Dvn YX Mp (We do not live on what she says”; 
see also, for the rule, Ket. it. 5, and, for its counter- 
part, Ixet. 1. 6-9). 

The general principle known as b>, with which 
the discussion of a branch of law in its details some- 
times ends, is to be distinguished from the ordi- 
nary legal maxim. An example js found at the end 
of the treatise Shebu‘ot, the last chapter of which 
states all the cases in which a depositary, by swear- 
ing to an untrue statement of fact, ineurs guilt, and 
concludes with: “This is the general principle: 
“Whoever swears in order to make it easier for him- 
self, is guilty; tomake it harder for himself, is not 
guiltyv.’” Legal maxims are to be distinguished 
from such sayings of woridly wisdom as: “He who 
has read the letter, let him carry out its purpose.” 

s. L. N. D. 


MAY, ISAAC: Rabbi of Lublin, Poland, in the 
lattcr half of the sixteenth century. Gaining the 
favor of Count Jenchinsky, the starost of Lublin, he 
secured In 1556 a very considerable parcel of land 
which adjoined his house, and which had formerly 
been covered by a mill-pond. Having filled in this 
uneven area, May made it available for the growth 
of the overcrowded Jewish quarter of Lublin. In 
time most of the land became covered with Jewish 
houses; but May reserved a portion of it, which be 
presented to the community for the establishment of 
a yeshibah. In this way he was largely instru- 
mental in founding the first high-grade rabbinical 
schoolin Poland. Theroyal decree, secured Aug. 23, 
1567, by Isaac May and other representatives of the 
community, contains a passage which, frecly trans- 
lated, reads as follows: “In compliance with the 
representations of some of hisadvisers and the hum- 
ble petition of the Jews of Lublin, King Sigismund 
August permits the Jews to build at their own gen- 
eral expense [“sumpto communi Judis “] a gym- 
nasium for the instruction of persons in the Jewish 
religion, and near the gymnasium @ synagogue, on 
the land of Isaac May, rabbi of Lublin, situated be- 
tween the Jewish houses, near Lublin Castle, in the 
Jewish quarter...” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Bershadski, in Voskhod, Dec., 1896, p. 18. 


H.W. J. G. L. 


MAY, LEWIS: American merchant and banker; 
born in Worms Sept. 23, 1823; died at Dobbs Ferry. 
N. Y., July 22, 1897, He went to the United States 
in 1840, and in 1845 established an independent 
business in Shreveport, La. In 1850 he effected an 
important copartnership for the purpose of carrying 


ou trade in San Francisco, Cal., Portland, Ore.. and, 

later, in New York. He took up his residence in the 

last-named city in 1856. In 1869 he retired from mer- 
cantile life and established the banking firm of May 

& King. Heturned his business talents toward other 

enterprises also, serving for many vears as. trus- 

tee, treasurer, or director of various New York cor- 
porations. 

May was treasurer and director of Mt. Sinai Ilos- 
pital for nincteen years, was one of the erganizers 
aud the first president of the Young Men's Hebrew 
Association, and was trustee and president of Tem- 
ple Emanu-E! for thirty-three years. In recognition 
of his services the congregation of Temple Emanu- 
EI, in 1888, presented him with a valuable testimo- 
nial, and after his death dedicated a memorial win- 
dow in the Temple to him. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: National Cyclopedia of American Biog.; 
The Metropolis, part 1.3 The American Hebrew, July and 
Noy., 1897: Myer Stern, The History of Temple Emanu-Etl. 
A, J. 8. 
MAY, MITCHELL: Member cf the Amcrican 

House of Representatives; born in Brooklyn, N. Y., 

July 10, 1871; educated at the Brooklyn Polytechnic 

Institute and Columbia Law School. Ie was amem- 

ber of the 56th Congress (1899 to 1901) and has held 

several positionsin Jewish communal creanizations. 
A. 

MAY LAWS: Temporary regulations concern- 
ing the Jews of Russia, proposed by Count Tgnatiev, 
and sanctioned by the czar May 3 (15). 1882. They 
read as follows: 

** (J) Asa temporary measure, and until a general revision ts 
made of their legal stutus, it is decreed that the Jews be forbid- 
den to settle anew outside, of towns and boroughs, exceptions 
being admitted only in the case of existing Jewish agricnitural 
colonies. 

** (2) Temporarily forbidden are the issuing of mortgages and 
other deeds to Jews, as well as the registration of Jews as les- 
sces of real property situated outside of towns and boroughs; 
and also the issuing to Jews of powers of attorney to manage 
and dispose of such reai property. 

(3) Jews are forbidden to transact business on Sundays and 
on the principal Christian holy days; the existing regulations 
concerning the closing of places of business belonging to Chris- 
tians on such days to apply to Jews also. 

‘** (4) The measures laid down in paragraphs 1, 2. and 3 shall 
apply only to the governments within the Pale of Jewish Settle- 
ment [that is, they shall not apply to the ten governments of 
Poland].” 


These regulations, as is apparent from their 
phraseology, were intended only as temporary 
measures; and the government itself when it issued 
them was aware of the fact that such ievislation 
would not suffice for the permanent adjustment of 
the legal status of the Russian Jews. But public 
excitement due to the riots in South Russia ran high; 
there was no time to weigh the practical conse- 
quences of the new regulations either to the Jews 
themselves or to their non-Jewish neighbors. The 
regulations were to remain in force until the final 
revision of the laws concerning the Jews. This re- 
vision was assigned to a special Commission, under 
the chairmanship of Count Pahlen, which soon 
afterward completed its task; but no further action 
has been taken in the matter, and the “temporary ” 
regulations are still in force with no immediate pros- 
pect of their repeal. 

The official motives for the enactments were stated 


385 


as follows: “These laws are called into being by the 
effort of the government to improve the relations 
between the Jews and the native population in the 
Paie of Settlement, and to protect the 

Ostensible former from the hostility of the latter, 
and Real which has manifested itself in out- 

Motives. burstsagainst the personand property 

of the Jews; also to lessen the eco- 
nomic dependence of the native population upon the 
Jews.” Ina resolution of the Senate (Nov. 28, 1888) 
the government adinitted that “ the existing relations 
between the Jews of the Pale and the native Rus- 
sians can not be considered normal, and the deter- 
mination of the legal status of the Jews in our 
country urgently calls for a decisive and early set- 
tlement, which, owing to its extent and complexity, 
and because of the importance of the interests in- 
volved, can be made only by a thorough revision of 
the entire existing legislation concerning the Jews.” 
The enactments, while not changing essentially and 
permanently the existing laws concerning the Jews, 
were intended to remove the main motives for a 
conflict between the Jews and the native popula- 
tion (“Ryesheniya Obsch, Sobran. Senata,” 1888, 
No. 25). 

Such were ostensibly the reasons which led the 
government to pass the temporary regulations. As 
a matter of fact they were merely the outcome of 
the Panslavist policy for the repression of the Jews. 
The views of the Ultra-Conservatives have not been 
realized; neverthelessit is certain that the May Laws 
have resulted in great injury to the economic and 
political life of Russia. 

The temporary regulations have from the begin- 
ning given rise to different interpretations and end- 
less misunderstandings and complaints. For in- 
stance, the phrase “to settle anew outside of towns 
and boroughs ” has been a prolific source of official 


abuse. Some governments informed 
Applica- their officials that by this phrase must 
tions. be understood not only change of resi- 


dence by a Jew from one settlement to 
another, but also from one house to another in the 
same settlement. The Senate decided against this 
interpretation; but in the meantime it had become a 
source of much annoyance to the Jews. As to the 
removal from one settlement to another, it appears 
that every Jew became interned in the village in 
which he happened to be living at the time of the 
enactment. Thus, while he was still accorded the 
right to remove from village to city within the Pale, 
he lost the right to remove from village to village. 
In this wise petty officials acquired the power to 
annoy the Jews and toresort toextortion. Appeals 
to the Senate have usually resulted in decisions 
favorable to the Jews; but the expenditure of time 
and money involved in them detract considerably 
from their effectiveness. 

A few examples will suffice to show to what 
lengths local officials have gone in the interpreta- 
tion of the May Laws. If one who had the right to 
reside ina village left it temporarily, he encountered 
trouble on returning (see the decision of the Senate 
in the case of Engelmann, May 12, 1895, No. 5120). 
Jews who had served in the army encountered diffi- 
culties, at the expiration of their terms of service, in 

VITI.—25 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


May 
May Laws 


resettling in the villages in which they had dwelt 
(idem, May 28, 1884; case of Reznikov, Jan. 13, 
1885). Similar difficulties were experienced by Jews 
living in villages and employed in cities, whither 
they went daily, sometimes remaining there for a 
few days (idem, case of Feigin, Jan. 30, 1895, No. 
12538), and by Jews privileged to live anywhere in 
the empire (¢dem, case of Elkin, Oct. 2, 1885). Mis- 
understandings occurred in the case of Jews living 
in the suburbs of cities also (dem, 1888, No. 18). 
Difficulties arose through conflicting decisions of the 
Senate as to what constituted a townlet (¢dem, July 
27, 1887, No. 8849). <A frequent source of annoy- 
ance was the illegal change by local administrations, 
without the permission of the minister of the inte- 
rior, of townlets to villages (¢dem, March 22, 1894; 
Feb. 18, 1896, No. 1591; July 3, 1896, No. 6557; 
and many others). There are also numerous cases 
on record where local officials refused permission to 
Jews to visit villages temporarily for business pur- 
poses, although the law expressly states that Jews 
are only forbidden to “settle anew ” (¢dem, 1895, No. 
4025). A further limitation created by the May 
Laws is that Jews possessing the right of residence 
in villages have not the right to execute leases or 
contracts to purchase, the absurd condition being 
thus created of compelling the Jews to live under 
the open sky. This absurdity was finally removed 
by the Senate, which decided that Jews having such 
right of residence might rent rooms or might build 
houses of their own on Jand leased for the purpose 
(tdem, Sept. 28, 1892, No. 11702). The Senate like- 
wise decreed that Jews might rent for grazing pur- 
poses lands belonging to cities and located within 
the city limits (7dem, Oct. 10, 1890). On the other 
hand, it has been decreed by the Senate department 
of appeals that even Jews who are privileged to 
reside anywhere in the empire have not the right 
to lease lands situated outside of cities and town- 
lets (¢dem, 1889, No. 24). 

The May Laws also limit the rights of Jews to be- 
come shareholders in stock companies, or directors, 
managers, or superintendents of real property be- 
longing to corporations and situated outside of 

towns or townlets in the Pale. Jews 

Relation may be admitted as members by a 

to Stock majority vote of the stockholders, but 
Companies. they may not hold appointments as 

officers of such companies. Only a 
certain proportion of Jews, moreover, may be ad- 
mitted, the number being limited to one-tenth of the 
total number of shareholders (Collecticn of Laws, 
May 20, 1897, No. 51, p. 674). 

The administration of the May Laws by petty 
officials who were very often ignorant of their mean- 
ing intensified abuses. The Senate had to instruct 
the officials in the most simple principles of law; for 
instance, that a law is in force only from the day of 
its publication. The attempts to define the phrase 
“new settlement” led to the taking of censuses of 
the Jewish residents, sometimes by semi-illiterate 
police officials; and grievous blunders resulted. 
Jews were registered as living in a certain village — 
when they really lived in another, while the names 
of actual residents were omitted altogether. For in- 
stance, because he was not included in the registry 


May Marriage 
Mayence 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


386 





list, Gdaliya Zeigermacher was expelled from the 
Village of Puzheikovo, although it was proved that 
he had lived there for sixteen years. One Bondar- 
chick was improperly registered as residing in the 
village of Baksha, and was therefore expelled from 
the village of Kapustyanka, where he had lived for 
twenty years. The misspelling of names, a very 
frequent occurrence, led to annoyance and expul- 
sion; ¢g., “Gruzman” was entered as “ Ruzman”; 
“Garvich” as “Gurovich”; and “Shmerka Dorf- 
man” as “Shlyoma.” <A slight error made by a 
petty official, not to speak of various evil motives, 
sufficed to bring about the expulsion of the unfortu- 


at Saaz, Bohemia; and since 1881 he bas held a sim- 
ilar position in Berlin, where he is also docent at the 
Lehranstalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judentums. As 
founder of the rabbinical society of Germany, whose 
president he at present (1904) is, he convened the first 
congress of German rabbis at Berlin in 1884. He is 
one of the most eloquent rabbisof Germany. In 1903 
he received the title of professor. 

Maybaum is the author of the following works: 
“Die Anthropomorphismen und Authropopathicen 
bei Onkelos und den Spiteren Targumim,” Breslau, 
1870; “Die Entwickelung des Altisraelitischen 
Priestertums,” 7b. 1880; “Die Entwickelung des 





ANCIENT REMAINS OF THE JEWISH CEMETERY AT MAYENCE, 
(From a photograph.) 


- nate Jew from his home and to bring terror and de- 

spair upon him. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gessen, in Yevreiskaya Bihlioteka, 1908, x. 
318; Sbornik, Budushehnosti, i. 16; Voskhod, Jan.—Feb., 1888, 
p. 57; 1901, No. 78, Mysh, Rukovodstvo k Russkim Zakonam 
o Yevreyakh, St. Petersburg, 1898: The Perseeutions of the 
Jews in Russia, issued by the Russo-Jewish Committee, Lon- 
tous 1890, contains a summary of the special and restrictive 

aws. 

H. R. 

MAY MARRIAGE. See Omer. 

MAYBAUM, SIEGMUND: Rabbi in Berlin; 
born at Miskolcz, Hungary, April 29, 1844. He re- 
ceived his education at the yeshibot of Eisenstadt 
and Presburg, at the lyceum in the latter city, and at 
the university and the theological seminary of Bres- 
lau (Ph.D., Halle, 1869). From 1870 to 1878 he was 

rabbi at Als6-Kubin, Hungary; from 1873 to 1881, 


Israelitischen Prophetentums,” Berlin, 1888; “Pre- 
digten,” 7b. 1892-94; “ Jiidische Homiletik,” 2B. 1894; 
~ Methodik des Jiid. Religionsunterrichtes,” Breslau, 
1895; “Die Anfange der Jiid. Predigt,” Berlin, 1901. 
8. F. T. H. 
MAYENCE: German city in the grand duchy 
of Hesse-Darmstadt; on the left bank of the Rhine; 
the seat of an archbishop, who was formerly one of 
the prince-electors of the Holy Roman Empire. It 
has a population of 84,251, of whom 3,200 are Jews. 
Although there are no historical documents relating 
to Jewish settlements while Mayence was under 
Roman rule, it may be assumed that Jews followed 
the Roman legions to the Rhine in the first centuries 
of the common era. Legend reports that Charle- 
magne called Kalonymus of Lucca as rabbi to the 


387 








congregation of Mayence, but documentary evidence 
of the existence of Jews in Mayence does not ante- 
date the first half of the tenth century, when Arch- 
bishop Frederick (937-954) made an unsuccessful at- 
tempt to restrict Jewish commercial activity. In 
1012 the peace of the Jews of Mayence was dis- 
turbed by a religious persecution instigated by 
Henry If., and which led to apostasy or banish- 
ment. After a few months, however, the exiles re- 
turned to the city, and most of the converts to 
Judaism. In the following period of peace the in- 
tellectual life of the Jews of Mayence flourished as 
never before, under various members of the KALONY- 
MUs family and under other Talmudic authorities, 
including in particular GERSHOM BEN JUDAH. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


May Marriage 
Mayence 





the Second Crusade claimed more victims, in conse- 
quence of theagitationsof the monk Radulph. — Per- 
secutions which threatened the Jews in 1187 and 
1188 were averted by the bishop and the emperor 
Frederick Barbarossa, Toward the end of the thir- 
teenth century the accusation of ritual murdcr was 
raised at Mayence. In June, 1281, R. Meir b. 
Abraham ha-Kohen was slain and the synagogue 
desecrated and burned; on April 19, 1283, ten Jews 
were slain by the populace. The persecutions 
spread throughout the vicinity, and in 1285 the 
Jews of Mayencc, Worms, Speyer, Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, and the Wetterau decided to abandon 
their property and to emigrate to Palestine under 
the leadership of R. Meir or Rornensere. The 





THE CEMETERY OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF MaAYENCE. 
(From a photograph.) 


In 1084 the Jews were accused of having caused 

a conflagration which destroyed a large part of the 
city, and many emigrated in consequence. These 
refugees were received by Bishop Riidiger Huoz- 
man of Speyer, who desired to build up his city. 
(The charter dated 1090 and supposed to have been 
issued by this bishop is a forgery of later times, 
based on a document of Henry IV.) Under the 
leadership of Emicho of Leinigen the Crusaders at- 
tacked the Jews of Mayence May 27, 1096, massa- 
cring more than eleven hundred in the 


Massacres city and fifty-three who had fled to 
During the neighboring Ridesheim, in spite 
Crusades. of their brave resistance and of the 


protection of Archbishop Ruthard. 
Included by Henry IV. in the “king’s peace” of 
1108, the community slowly recovered, until in 1147 


real estate left at Mayence—in the most beautiful 
part of the city, the so-called “Judenerben ”—was 
seized by the city in 1286, but was confiscated to the 
state by Archbishop Adolf IT. in 1462. The Jews of 
Mayence escaped the massacres of 1298 under Rrxp- 
FLEISCH and 1338-39 under ARMLEDER. In Au- 
gust, 1349, at the time of the Black Death, nearly 
the whole community perished, and the ghetto was 
set on fire. The community gradually revived, 
however, aud lived in peace for nearly ninety years, 
until the Jews were expelled from the city July 2%, 
1438, in consequence of municipal quarrels; their 
cemetery and synagogue were confiscated, and the 
tombstones were used for building purposes. When 
the old city government was overthrown in 1414 the 
Jews were permitted to return by Archbishop 
Dicther, who claimed them as his property. Ex- 


Mayence 


pelled again in 1462 by Archbishop Adolf, though 
soon readmitted, they were obliged to leave the city 
definitely in 1473, their synagogue being transformed 
into a chapel. On March 6, 1492, a Jew named 
Isaac was permitted to occupy and manage the 
“mikweh ” (ritual bath), which had been owned by 
the state for twenty years, and to bury in the 
* Judensand,” mentioned as a cemetery as early as 
1286, the Jewish dead brought into the city. 

The sufferings of the Jews of the metropolis were 
shared by those in various localities in the arch- 
bishopric, where Jews had settled since the Carlovin- 
gian time. This is clear from the following partial 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


388 


living under the protection of Archbishop Uriel of 
Gemmingen, who, on June 2, 1518, appointed the 
“Jews’ doctor” Beyfus to the position of “rabbi, 
‘Hochmeister,’ corrector, and chief judge” of all the 
Jews in the diocese, assigning him the village of 
Weisenau near Mayence as his residence. A move- 
ment inaugurated by Archbishop Albrecht of Bran- 
denburg in 1516 to expel all Jews from western Ger- 
many failed through the intervention of the emperor 
Maximilian. The few who found a domicil at 
Mayence in the sixteenth century were obliged to 
leave in 1579, together with those of the district of 
the Rhine. Anew community was founded in 1588, 





INTERIOR OF THE SYNAGOGUE OF THE ISRAELITISCHEN RELIGIONSGESELLSCHAFT, MAYENCE. 
(From a photograph.) 


summary of places which suffered: Aschaffenburg. 
persecutions in 1147, 1837, 1849; Amorbach, 1349; 
Bensheim, 1849; Bingen (mentioned in 


In the 1160-73), 1349; Dieburg, 13849; Elt- 
Arch- ville, 1849; Erfurt, 1221, 1266, 1349; 
bishopric. Fritzlar, 1349; Heppenheim, 1349; 


Heiligenstadt - im-Eichsfeld, 1349; 
Klingenburg, 1298; Kénigheim, 1298; Kénigshofen, 
1298, 1849; Krautheim, 1298; Kiilsheim, 1837; Lahn- 
stein, 1287, 1849; Lorch, 1276, 1387; Miltenberg, 
1849; Neudenan, 1298; Ostheim, 1298; Seligenstadt, 
1349; Tauberbishofsheim, 1235, 1298, 1837, 1349. 

In the beginning of the sixteenth century only 
one Jewish family was living at Mayence. In the 
diocese of Mayence, outside the city, Jews were 


which received accessions from Frank fort-on-the- 
Main in 1614, after the FrErrMILcy insurrection in 
that city, and from Worms in 1615, 


Commu- on the expulsion of the Jews there. 
nity Reor- Elijah Loans, who brought with him 
ganized. refugees from Hanau, reorganized the 


community of Mayence. Arabbi was 
officially appointed in 1630, and a new synagogue 
was built nine years later. While the French held 
Mayence (1644-48) the community was subjected to 
heavy burdens, and scarcely were these trials passed 
when the elector Johann Philipp decreed, Dec. 8, 
1662, that only twenty Jews should be protected and 
be permitted in the city, this number being reduced 
to ten in 1671. These were compelled to move intoa 


389 





new Jews’ street and to submit to the most humili- 
ating restrictions, while the Jews who were per- 
mitted to settlein neighboring localities were equally 
hampered. Although subsequent electors permitted 
Jews to go to Mayence, only 101 “protected ” Jews 
were allowed there during the electorate. 

The government, inspired by the tolerant legisla- 
tion of Joseph Il. of Austria, endeavoved, even be- 
fore the outbreak of the French Revolution, to 
ameliorate the condition of the Jews in the arch- 
bishopric. The first steps taken were the inquiry 
of 1782 and the 
reseript of July 
29, 1788, while 
the general re- 
script of Feb. 9, 
1784, was in- 
tended to bring 
about acomplete 
change. After 
determining the 
salary of the 
rabbi and of the 
Jewish provin- 
cial board at 
Aschaffenburg, 
declaring the 
German lan- 
guage to be ob- 
ligatory in book- 
keeping, regu- 
lating the laws 


of dowry and ? , | : ua i 


guardianship, 
forbidding hasty 
burial, decreeing 
that every 
teacher must 
pass the state ex- 
amination, and 
enacting the 
establishment of 
two or three 
Jewish schools 
in the electorate, 
the rescript con- 
tinues: “In or- 
der to neglect 
nothing which 
may contribute 
to the education 
and the future 
welfare of the 
Jews, We per- 
mit, although we do not command, the Jewish 
youth of both sexes and all ages, like the Chris- 
tian, to attend the Christian village and city (“ Real 
und Normal”) schools, especially in the electoral 
capital Mayence, and schoolsof all kinds.” Further 
legislation beneficial to the Jews was checked by 
the outbreak of the French Revolution. From the 
capture of the fortress of Mayence on Oct. 21, 1792, 
by the French to its restoration to Germany by the 
terms of the Peace of Paris Nov. 8, 1814, the Jews 
of the city were free French citizens, The gates of 
the ghetto were removed on Sept. 12, 1798, by a 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Interior of the Gemeinde Synagogue, Mayence. 
(From a photograph.) 


Mayence 





decree of the municipal council. Members of the 
Mayence community were among the delegates sent 
to Paris in 1806 from the department of Mont Ton- 
nerre, of which Mayence was the capital; the com- 
munity sent delegates also to the Great Sanhedrin, 
held tn the same city. 

After civic liberty had been won, work on behalf 
of education and progress was undertaken. The 
regulation, introduced by Napoleon's decree of May 
17, 1808, and providing that Jews must hold certifi- 
cates of good character before being permitted to 
engage in trade, 
remained in 
force until 1847. 
After Mayence 
was incorpo- 
rated with the 
grand duchy of 
Hesse June 16, 
1816, full citi- 
zenship was 
guaranteed to 
the Jews therein 
by the law of 
Dec. 17, 1820, 
though this pro- 
vision was not 
entirely kept. 
By the decree of 
Nov. 2, 1841, the 


community of 
Mayence, with 
the other com- 


ee ; munities of 
Hesse, was reor- 
ganized; on the 
establishment of 
the German em- 
pire they were 
granted full 
civic equality. 
In spite of oc- 
casional out- 
breaks of mou 
violence the 
lives and_ the 
property of the 
Jews of Ma- 
yence were gen- 
erally protected 
by law, and they 
held property 
under the same 
conditions as the 
Christians, with whom they lived peaceably. In the 
twelfth century they were made KAMMERKNECHTE 
of the empire, a status that entailed 
Social many hardships. They were op- 
Condition. pressed by persecutions, forcible con- 
versions, the humiliating Jews’ oath, 
which Archbishop Conrad (1160-1200) exacted, and 
other measures. Emperor Otto IV. declared in 1209 
that the empire had no claim to the Jews of the arch- 
bishopric of Mayence. The archbishops, who acted 
as protectors of the Jews of Germany, representing 
the emperor by virtue of their office of imperial 





° 


Mayence 
Mayer 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


390 





chancellors, were not always lenient masters. The 
council held at Mavence in 1238 excommunicated 
Christians who associated with Jews, while the pro- 
vincial synod held at Fritzlar in 1259 imposed the 
badge upon the Jews of Mayence, and issued inim- 
ical regulations, which were aggravated by Arch- 
bishop Peter in 1810. In 1295 Archbishop Ger- 
hard, in consideration of a yearly payment of 112 
Aachen heller, assigned his Jews to the city with 
the privilege of taxing them at will; Archbishop 
Gerlach renewed this agreement on Sept. 3, 1366. 
Mayence had its own Jews’ law, which was not en- 
tirely unfavorable to them; but this did not protect 
them under the emperors Wenzel, Rupert, and Sigis- 
mund. Jn1885 Archbishop Adolf remitted the Jews’ 
tax and abolished the dice-tax which had been in- 
stituted in the Rhine provinces. The following cen- 
turies show an unbroken series of oppressive and ex- 
clusive measures as well as heavy taxation—the 
Jews being compelled to pay imperial, state, and 
municipal taxes, protection money, and especially 
the LErBzo.., of which the last-mentioned was not 
abolished until 1792. 

In days of peace as well as in days of oppression 
and persecution the Jews of Mayence preserved aud 
cultivated their Hterature. An academy founded 
by the family of KALonymus in the tenth century— 
which reached its zenith under R. Gershom and his 
contemporaries and pupils Judah ha-Kohen, Elic- 
zer b, Isaac, Jacob b. Yakar, Isaac ha-Levi, Isaac 
b. Judah, and others—competed with that of Worms, 
sending its pupils into all countries. Thereligious, 
marital, social, and industrial life of the Jews of the 
Middle Ages was regulated by the decrees of the 
rabbinical synods held at Mayence in 1150, 1228, 
1245, 1307, and 1381, as it had formerly been gov- 
erned by the decrees of the French synod held at 
Troyes in the beginning of the twelfth century, 
and still earlier by the “regulations” (“takkanot ”) 
of R. Gershom. The affairs of the community were 
directed, probably down to the end of the fourteenth 
or the beginning of the fifteenth century, by the 
“Judenrat,” under the presidency of a BisHop oF 
THE JEWS (called in the documents also “Jews’ 
pope”) appointed by the archbishop. Religious 
affairs were conducted by the rabbi and his college. 
After the reorganization the Jews of Mayence lived 
under simple regulations, rarely being without spir- 
itual leaders, a well-attended yeshibah, and all the 
usual institutions of a well-ordered community. 

A list of the most prominent scholars and rabbis 
down to the middle of the fifteenth century, and a 
complete list beginning with 15838, are given below: 


Members of the Kalonymus family; Gershom b. Judah, Me’or 
ha-Golah (c. 960-1028, or 1040); Simon b. Isaac ha-Gadol (begin- 
ning of the ilth century); Eliezer b. Isaac 

Scholars ha-Gadol (c. 1040); Judah ha-Kohen (author 
and Rabbis. of a legal code; ¢. 1040); David b. Samuel ha- 
Levi (ce. 1050); Abraham b. Judah ha-Kohen 

(ce. 1060); Isaac b. Judah (c. 1080); Jacob b. Yakar (ec. 1080); 
Isaac ha-Kohen ({b. Abraham ?]; c. 1080); Isaac b. Eleazar ha- 
Kohen (1093); martyrs of the First Crusade (1096): David, Judah 
ha-Levi, Menahem b. David, Samuel b, Judah the younger, Sam- 
Nel b, Judah ha-Kohen; Abraham b. Isaac ha-Kohen (e. 1100); 
Nathan b. Machir (ce. 1100); Eliakim b. Joseph (ec. 1130); Ka- 
lonymus b. Judah (e. 1140); Eliezer b. Nathan (¢. 1150); Meshul- 
lam b. Kalonymus (e. 1150): Judah b. Kalonymus b. Moses (ce. 
1175); Moses b. Mordechai (c. 1175); Moses b. Solomon ha-Kohen 
(ce. 1175); Solomon b. Moses ha-Kohen (¢, 1200); Samuel b. Solo- 


mon (18th cent.); Baruch b. Sumuel (e. 1220); Judah b. Moses 
ha-Kohen (c¢. 1250); Meir b. Baruch of Rothenburg (1230-98); 
Yakar b. Samuel ha-Levi (later in Cologne, 1270); Abraham b. 
Meir ha-Kohen (murdered in 1281); Jacob b. Isaac (d. 1818); 
Isaac b. David (d. 1829); Samuel b. Yakar (called ‘* Bonfant”’; 
hazzan; d. Sept. 23, 1845); Joseph b. Isaac of Thann (slain 1349); 
Eliezer b. Samuel ha-Kohen (d. 1857); Jacob of Nordhausen (e, 
1365); Jehiel b. Moses ha-Levi (d. Nov. 14, 1880); Moses b. Jeku- 
thie] ha-Levi (1881); Todros (c. 1400); Zalman Runkel (ce. 1420): 
Jacob b. Moses ha-Levi (Maharil; ¢. 1355-1427); Moses Minz 
(left Mayence 1455); Judah Minz (brother of Moses; left Ma- 
yence; d. Padua 1508); Joshua Moses b. Solomon Luria (d. 1591); 
Renben b. Solomon (d. 1598); Joseph (da. 1603); David b. Isaac 
(d. 1613); Eli Nathan b. Joseph Moses (d. 1631); Judah Léwe of 
Frankfort (1630-33); LOb Rofe (1634-44); Nathan, son of Isaac 
Jacob Bonn of Frankfort (1644-50); Saul Judah b. Moses Naph- 
tali (1650-56); Simon Goldisch (1656-62); Jacob Simon (1662-68); 
Jacob of Ostrog (1668-74); Samuel Sanwil of Lublin (1675-78); 
David b. Aryeh Léb of Lida (1679-83); Wolf Traub (1683-87); 
Judah Léb b. Simon (1687-1714); Isaac Seckel b. Immanuel 
(1715-21); Bernhard Gabriel Eskeles (1721-23); Isaac Seckel Et- 
hausen (1723-29); Bernhard Wiener (1730-32); Moses Brandeis 
(Moses Harif; 1733-67); David (Tewele) Scheuer (1768-82); 
Noah Hayyim Zebi Berliner (1783-1800); Herz Scheuer (1800-10, 
and 1814-22); Samuel Wolf Levi (1810-14); Léb Ellinger (Schna- 
dig; 1823-47); Joseph Aub (1853-66; later in Berlin: d. 1880); 
Benedict Cahn (until 1879; d. 1886); Marcus Lehmann (rabbi of 
the Religionsgesellschaft ; 1854-90); Julius Fiirst (until 1881); 
Sie~mund Salfeld (since 1880); Jonas Bondi (rabbi of the Re- 
ligionsgesellschaft since 1890). 


After the French period the conditions for a time 
were as they had been under the electorate; but in 
1880 the Hessian government under- 


Recent took to regulate the affairs of the 
Develop- Jewish community. The internal de- 
ments. velopment of the community pro- 


ceeded slowly. In 1836 instruction in 
the Jewish religion was made obligatory in the 
high schools. In 1853 R. Joseph Aub was called 
to the rabbinate, with R. Benedict Cahn as assistant 
rabbi and teacher of religion; and in the same year 
the new synagogue was dedicated. The reforms in- 
troduced in this synagogue caused a number of 
the Orthodox members of the community to form a 
separate congregation—the Religionsgesellschaft, 
which built its own synagogue and organized a 
school. It continued to participate in all the af- 
fairs of the community, and as few of the mnembers 
of this separate congregation left it when the law of 
1878 was promulgated, a large part of the communal 
taxes is remitted to it annually for its religious ex- 
penses. Mayenceis the birthplace of Michael Creiz- 
enach, Isaac Bernays, Joseph Derenbourg, Ludwig 
Baniberger, and other notable men. 

Following is a list of the svnagogues and other 
communal institutions of Mayence: principal syn- 
agogue, dedicated in 18538 (see illustration); syna- 
gogue of the Religionsgeseilschaft, dedicated in 
1879 (see illustration); school, founded Nov. 11, 
1880; elementary and religious school of the 
Religionsgesellschaft, founded in 1859; ritual bath 
(mikweh), rebuilt in 1888; the old cemetery—first, 
mentioned in 1286, closed in 1880 (see illustration); 
the new cemetery, opened in 1881 (see illustration) ; 
hospital and poorhouse, opened in 1904; various 
other charitable and religious ‘societies, including a 
society for Jewish literature, a Zionist society, and 
a Bene Berit lodge. In April, 1904, while certain 
excavations were being made in the city, a remark- 
able building was discovered, which has _ been 
named the “ House of Kalonymus.” 

The grand-ducal rabbinate of Mayence, in charge 


sgl 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mayence 
Mayer 





of Dr. Siegmund Salfeld, includes the communities 

of the following places: Bodenheim, Bretzenheim- 

Finthen, Dalheim, Dolgesheim, Ebersheim-Harx- 

heim, Essenheim, Guntersblum, Hahn- 

The heim, Kastel, Mayence, Mommenhein, 

Rabbinate. Nicderolm, O}erolm, and Oppenheim- 

Nierstein (where Jews have been living 

since the middle of the thirteenth century ; see Kay- 

serling, “Die Juden in Oppenheim,” in “Monats- 
schrift,” ix. 295 e¢ seg.), Sérgenloch, and Weisenau. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Documents in the Allgemeines Reichsarchiv 
at Munich, the Kreisarchiv at Wurzburg, the Hof- und Staats- 
archivy at Darmstadt, the archives of the Jewish community at 
Mayence, and in the Mayence city library; Joannis, Scrip- 
teres Rerum Moguntiacarum, i. 526; Jaffé, Monumenta. 
Moguntina; Gudenus, Codex Diplomaticus ; Will, Regesta 
Archiepiscop. Mogunt.; Schunek, Coder Diplomaticus ; 
Aronius, Reyesten; Bobmer, Fontes, iv. 548; Neubauer- 
Stern-Baer, Hebriiische Berichte ttber die Judenverfol- 
guig Wihrend der Kreuzziige, in Quellen zur Gesch. der 
Judenin Deutschland, ii. 2 et seqg.; Salfeld, Martyrologium 5 
Schaab, Diplomatische Gesch. der Judcn in Mainz, Ma- 
yence, 1855 ; Hegel, Sttidtechroniken, Mainz 1f. Verfassungs- 
gesch. pp. 165 et seq.; Bodmann, Rheingauische Alterthiimer, 
ii. 712 et seg.; Wiener, Regestenr; Bresslau, Zur Gesch. der 
Juden in Deutsehland, in Steinschneider. Hehr. Bibl. x. 169 
et seq.: Carmoly, Die Juden zu Mainz im Mittelatter, in Is- 
raclit, 1863, 1866; Stern, Quellenkunde zur Gesch. der Dewt- 
schen Judcn, Nos. 85;~868 ; Carlebach, Die Rechtlichen und 
Socialen Verhélltnisse der Jiidischen Gemeinden Speyer, 
Worms und Mainz, Leipsic, 1901; Stern, Kdniy Ruprecht 
von der Pfalz in Seinen Beziehungen zu den Juden, Kiel, 
1898: Salfeld, Bilder aus der Verganyenheit der Jlidischen 
Gemeinde Mainz, Mayence, 1903; Leopold Rothschild, Die 
Judengemeinden in Mainz, Speyer und Worms von 1345- 
1438: Berlin, 1904 ; Bresslau, in Zeit. fiir die Gesch. der Juden 
in Deutschland, ii. 82 et seqg.; Griitz, Gesch. vi. 96, 101; vii. 
186, 874: viii. 252 et seq., 273 et seq.: Stern, Der Hochverrats- 
prozess Geyendie Deutschen Juden im Anfange des 17. 
Jahrhunderts, in Konigsberger Monatsblidtter, pp. 33 et 
seq., Berlin. 1890. On the rabbis see Zunz; Giidemann ; 


Kohn, Mordechai ben Hillel, Breslau, 1878; Michael, Or ha- . 


Hiayyim, Carmoly, Zur Geseh. der Rabbiner in Mainz, in 
hKlein’s Sehulbibliothelk, ii. 156 et seqg.: Memorbuch of the 
Community of Mayence, 1583-1847. 

D. S. Sa. 


MAYER, ABRAHAM: Belgian physician; 
born at Ditsseidorf July 10, 1816; died at Antwerp 
March 1, 1899. After studying medicine at Bonn 
(M.D. 1839) he settled in Antwerp in 1848, where he 
practised asa physician until bis death. He took 
an active part in public life and in the medical ac- 
tivitics of his adopted country. For some years he 
was assistant surgeon in the Belgian regiment of the 
Hussars of the Guard; and he became a member of 
the board of imedical inspectors to the schools at 
Antwerp, and president and vice-president of vari- 
ous medical societies in Belgium. Mayer contrib- 
uted many essays to the medical journals of Bel- 
gium, including the following: “Un Cas de Mort 
par Suite de Brfilure (Perforation Duodénale),” 1866; 
“Un Cas d’Eclampsie Puerpérale au Commence- 
ment du Neuviéme Mois de Ja Grossesse: Enfant né 
Vivant ai Terme,” 1868; “Quelques Observations 
sar les Hopitaux de Londres,” 1869; “Une Cause 
Tnsolite de l’Intoxication Saturne: par le Tabac 
A Priser,” 1870; “Deux Cas d’Intoxication Puerpé- 
rale,” 1878; “Une Note sur le Traitement du Cho- 
léra,” 1885. Most of these were published in the 
proceedings of the Société de Médecine and the 
Société Médico-Chirurgicale, both of Antwerp. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. March 10, 1899; Annales de la 


Société Médico-Chirurgicale d’Anvers, pp. 89 et seq., Ant- 


werp, Feb., 1899. 
Ss. F. T. H. 


MAYER, CONSTANT: French painter; born 
at Besancon Oct. 4, 1832. He became a pupil at the 


Ecole des Beaux-Arts and of Léon Cogniet in Paris. 
In 1857 he went to America and settled in New 
York, but later returned to Paris, where he now 
(1904) resides. He is an associate of the National 
Academy of Design in New York and a member of 
the Société des Artistes Francais of Paris; he be- 
came a member of the Legion of Honor in 1869 and 
is “ Hors Concours” at the exhibitions of the Paris 
Salon. His subjects are genre and_ portraits. 
Among his paintings are: “Consolation” (1864); 
“Love’s Melancholy”; “Maud Miller” (1867); 
“ Episode in the Campaign of 1863” (1869); “Song 
of the Shirt ” (1875); “Song of the Twilight ” (1879) ; 
“Good News ” (1882); “ First Grief” (1885). Among 
the portraits painted by him are those of General 
Grant, General Sherman, and Mme. de Lizardi (ex- 


hibited in the Salon of 1903). 
A. F. N. L. 


MAYER, ELKAN: German army physician; 
born in Frankfort-on-the-Main (where his father was 
a physician), and took his degree at a German uni- 
versity. In1753 he applied to the council of Frank- 
fort for permission to practise, but the petition was 
refused. In 1760, however, he was appointed mili- 
tary physician of the imperial infantry regiment, 
under general master-of-ordnance Count von Mac- 
quard, whose regimental commander, Angelo de 
Pasquali, commended Mayer highly. Debates on 
the subject of the right of Jews to practise medicine 
took place for years between the council and the 
Jewish congregation. 


BIBI OERAT EY: Landau, Gesch. der Jiidischen Aerzte, 1895, 
p. f 


s, N. D. 

MAYER, HENRY: American caricaturist; 
born at Worms July 18, 1868. Mayer is the son of 
a Jewish merchant of London, but was educated at 
Worms. In 1885 he went to Mexico, and subse- 
quently to Texas. There he discovered his ability 
to draw, and developed his talent without the aid of 
a teacher. Mayer next went to Cincinnati and 
thence to Chicago, where he began his career as car- 
icaturist and illustrator. 

He has published most of his sketches, including 
the following: “The Autobiography of a Monkey ” 
(1898); “In Laughiand” and “Fantasies in Ha! 
Ha!” (1899); “Trip to Toyland ” (1900); “The Ad- 
ventures of a Japanese Dol] ” (1901). Mayer has con- 
tributed to “Fliegende Blitter ” (Munich), “Black 
and White ” and “ Pall Mall Magazine” (London), 
“Life” and “ Puck ” (New York), “Le Rire” (Paris), 
and to many other publications. His cartoons on the 
“Dreyfus affair” in English periodicals attracted 
wide-spread attention. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Oct. 29, 1899; Brush and Pencit 

(Chicago), June, 1901. 

A. E. Ms. 

MAYER, MORITZ: German rabbi; born at 
Dirckheim-on-the-Hardt, Germany, Dec. 16, 1821; 
died at New York Aug. 28, 1867. He studied 
law at Munich, and entered on the practise of his 
profession in his native city, when the revolution 
of 1848 broke out, and he, being forced to flee, 
emigrated to America. Arriving in New York, 
he taught at Dr. Lilienthal’s institute up to 1851, 
when he was called as rabbi to Charleston, 8. C., 


Mayer 
Mazzah 


where he remained until 1856. Failing health and 
differences with his congregation owing to his radi- 
cal views compelled him to leave Charleston; and 
he returned to New York, intending to practise 
law. Fora short time he officiated as rabbi in Al- 
bany, and then, again returning to New York, he 
became secretary of the Grand Lodge of the Inde- 
pendent Order B’nai B’rith (1863), which office he 
held until his death. 

Mayer contributed frequently to the Jewish press, 
and translated various German works into English; 
e.g., Samuel Adler’s catechism; Geiger’s lectures on 
Jewish history; Ludwig Philipson’s pamphlet on 
the Crucifixion; and Fanny Neuda’s “Hours of 
Devotion.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The American Israelite, Sept. 13, 1867; Allg. 

Zeit. des Jud. 1867, pp. 800, 842. 

A. D. 

MAYER, SAMUEL: German rabbi and law- 
yer; born at Hechingen Jan. 3, 1807; died there 
Aug. 1, 1875. He studied at the Talmud Torah in 
his native town, entered the bet ha-midrash and the 
lyceum at Mannheim in 1823, and went to the Uni- 
versity of Wiirzburg in 1826, where he attended at 
the same time the Talmudic lectures of Chief Rabbi 
Abraham Bing. Mayer then went to Tubingen, 
where he took his degree. In 1830 he was called 
to the rabbinate of Hechingen, which he occupied un- 
til his death. He took up also the study of law and 
was admitted to the bar in 1849. He was the only 
tabbi in Germany combining the offices of rabbi and 
lawyer. Mayer was a prolific writer; his chief 
work, the fruit of twelve years of labor, is entitled 
“Die Rechte der Israeliten, Athener und Rémer, mit 
Riicksicht auf die Neuen Gesetzgebungen” (vol. i., 
“Das Oeffentliche Recht”; vol. ii., “Das Privat- 
recht,” Leipsic, 1862-66; vol. iii., “Das Strafrecht,” 
Treves, 1876). He edited the “Israelitisches Sams- 
tagsblatt” (1837) and the “Israelitischer Musen- 
almanach” (Dinkelsbithl, 1840). He wrote also 
“Gesch. der Israeliten in Hohenzollern-Hechingen ” 
(published in “Orient, Lit.” 1844). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bibl. Jiid. Kanzelredner, ii. 166; 

Allg. Zeit des Jud. xxxix. 582 et seq. 

8, M. K. 

MAYER, SIGMUND: Austrian physician; 
born at Bechtheim, Rhein-Hessen, Dec. 27, 1842. He 
studied at the universities of Heidelberg, Giessen, 
and Tiibingen (M.D. 1865) and took a postgraduate 
course at the universities of Heidelberg and Vienna, 
becoming privat-docent in the latter in 1869. In 1870 
he removed to Prague, where he became privat-docent 
at the German university and assistant at the physi- 
ological institute. He was appointed assistant pro- 
fessor in 1872; became chief of the histological in- 
stitute in 1880; and was appointed professor of 
histology in 1884. 

Mayer has written many essays (about 60), which 
have been published in the medical journals of Aus- 
tria and Germany, in the reports of the Vienna Im- 
perial Academy of Sciences, in Stricker’s “ Hand- 
buch der Lehre von den Geweben,” and in Hermann’s 
“Handbuch der Physiologie.” He isthe author also 
of “Histologisches Taschenbuch,” Prague, 1887. 
He was one of the first to introduce the use of methy- 
lene blue in microscopy and to describe the chro- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


392 


maffin cells in the sympathetic nerve, the degenera- 

tion and regeneration of the nervous system, the 

sarcolysis, etc. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. 

s. F. T. H. 

MAYHEM: In English law, the offense of de- 
priving a person of any limb, member, or organ by 
violence. The bearings of such an act in the rab- 
binical law are fully treated under ASSAULT AND 

BATTERY. 
de L. N. D. 

MAYO, RAPHAEL ISAAC BEN AARON: 

Talmudical scholar of Smyrna; died in 1810. He 

was the author of the following works: “Sefer 

Shorashe ha-Yam,” commentary on the Yad ha- 

Hazakah (8 vols., Salonica, 1806-15); “Darke ha- 

Yam,” containing homilies and funeral sermons 

(2b. 1813); “Sefat ha- Yam,” halakic decisions and re- 

sponsa (2b. 1818); “Pe’at ha-Yam,” a commentary 

on Bezah, with a number of halakic rules appended 

(6. 1882). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. col. 2127 (where 
the author’s name is given as ** Maggio”); Zedner, Cat. He- 
brew Books Brit. Mus. p. 515. 

E. C. T. Br. 
MAZLIAH BEN ELIJAH IBN AL- 

BAZAK: Italian Talmudist of the eleventh cen- 

tury. The surname, Ibn al-Bazak, the meaning of 

which is unknown, shows that Mazliah came from 

a family of Eastern Jews. Mazliah knew Arabic 

well. After having been dayyan in Sicily, he went 

to Pumbedita, where he attended the lectures of Hai 

Gaon; after Hai’s death he returned to Europe. 

Mazliah at that time gave Samuel ha-Nagid an 

Arabic work entitled “Sirat R. Hai Gaon,” in which 

he had recorded the most noteworthy features of 

Hai’s life; this work is quoted by Moses ibn Ezra 

(“Kitab al-Muhadarah wal-Mudhakarah,” ch. vii.) 

and by Joseph ibn ‘Aknin (commentary on Canti- 

cles). Mazliah relates in this work that he was par- 
ticularly struck at the friendship which existed be- 

tween Hai Gaon and the Catholicos, whom Hai did 


‘not hesitate to consult in regard to questions of 


exegesis. 

A. Mazliah was one of the teachers of Nathan b. 
Jehiel, who quotes him in his “‘Aruk” (particularly 
8.0. I}PHIN) and declares that he studied under 
him. Geiger and Kohut identified this Mazliah with 
Mazliah ben Elijah. Kohut even suggested that it 
was from his teacher that Nathan learned Hai’s 
interpretations of Arabic and Persian words. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Geiger, Jtid. Zeit, ii. 301-304 ; Gratz, Gesch. 

3d ed., vi. 3, 70; Kobut, preface to his edition of the Aruch 

Completum, p. xi.; Mortara, Indice, p. 38; Steinscbneider, 

Die Arabische Literatur der Juden, § 85. 

J. M. SEL. 

MAZLIAH, JUDAH B. ABRAHAM PA- 
DOVA: Italian Talmudist, cabalist, and poet; 
rabbi of Modena, where he died Aug. 10, 1728. He 
was the author of two works: “Tokahat Megullah ” 
and “‘Ozerot Sheleg” (the latter cabalistic in na- 
ture); andof the following poems: onbiyn bs pas 
Syx3 55 Syn, Tebinah; ty) yan ANN}, anacrostic 
containing the words ayy Dv (“the name of sev- 
enty-two letters”); and 7)5A Oy, an epigram on hu- 
man mortality, an epitaph in the cemetery at Pinale. 
Only a few of his many responsa have been printed. 


393 


Judah had two sons: Manasseh Joshua of Mo- 
dena, brother-in-law of Isaiah Bassani (¢. 1750}, some 
of whose responsa have been preserved ; and Mena- 
hem Azariah, rabbi of Florence (c. 1775), an au- 
thority in the Law and a prolific preacher, who also 
wrote various poems, many of which were liturgical. 
The genealogy cf the family is traced to Abraham 
b. Samuel of Padua, who married in 1530. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Senior Sachs, yrp7, Nos. 12a, 20-82, 47; Zunz, 


Literaturgesch. pp. 447, 552; Landshuth, ‘Ammude ha-‘ Abo- 
dah, Py im ke seqg.; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, 


pp. 1 
8. 8 H. B. 


MAZOVRA (MASSURIA). See PoLanp. 


MAZZAH (plural, Mazzot): Bread that is free 
from leaven or other foreignelements. It is kneaded 
with water and without yeast or any other chemical 
effervescent substance, and is hastily prepared to 
prevent the dough from undergoing the process of 
spontaneous fermentation, which would make it 
“hamez” (leavened bread). The word is derived 
from the Hebrew root py (“to compress” or “to 
extract”). “Mazzzeh,” inthe singular form, is found 
only in Leviticus (ii. 5, viii. 26) and Numbers (vi. 
19); elsewhere it occurs in the plural. The mazzah 
was the primitive form of bread. The discovery of 
the leavening process not only resulted in an increase 
in the mass of the dough, but made the bread more 
palatable. Mazzah, however, still remained the 
poor man’s bread, as he could not afford to wait 
even twenty-four hours for it to leaven; and it 
was called therefore “lehem‘oni” (the bread of the 
poor; Deut. xvi. 3). Mazzah was necessary, also, 
when a meal was to be prepared at short notice for 
an unexpected guest; for example, at the recep- 
tion of the angels by Abraham (Gen. xviii. 6), or 
at Sodom by Lot (Gen. xix. 3), or for Saul by the 
witch of Endor ([ Sam. xxviii. 24). The usual form 
of the plain mazzah was that of a round cake 
(“ugah”); this is the usual form of bread eaten to- 
day in Syria and Palestine. 

The mazzah offered at sacrifices was of various 
forms—‘“lehem” (lit. = “bread”), “hallah” (= 

“loaf”), “rakik” (=“wafer”); the 
The Use of latter 1wo were mixed or spread with 
Mazzah. oil (Ex. xxix. 2). Mazzot were re- 
quired to be absolutely pure, as neither 
leaven nor honey was permitted in connection with 
sacrifices (Lev. ii. 11). The reason assigned is 
that mazzah is a symbol of purity, while leaven 
represents the evil impulse of the heart (Ber. 17a). 
Mazzah was partaken of with the lamb on Passover 
eve (Ex. xii. 8) because the lamb was considered an 
offering to the Lord. The eating of mazzot during 
the seven days of the Passover festival is intended 
to recall the hurried departure from Egypt, which 
event must be commemorated (Ex. xii. 14, 17, 39; 
Deut. xvi. 4) on every anniversary. 

The Zohar calls mazzah “nahama ‘illa’ah” (heav- 

enly bread), an antidote to the Egyp- 


A Symbol tian slavery and corruption and a 
of Free- symbol of freedomand idealism, Maz- 
dom. zah was to cure Israel and prepare 


him for the acceptance of the Torah 
(Zohar, Tezawweh, p. 188b, Wilna, 1882). 
Nevertheless, the eating of mazzah during Pass- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


_days (Pes. 120a). 


Mayer 
Mazzah 


over, unlike the prohibition against eating hamez, 
is not imperative; it isa voluntary act (“reshut ”), 
That is, a Jew may abstain from eating both hamez 
and mazzah, except on the first, eve, when the eating 
of mazZah is obligatory (“hobah ”). Thisisdeduced 
from the passage, “Six days thou shalt eat unleav- 
ened bread” (Deut. xvi. 8), though the other pas- 
sages command that mazzot shall be eaten seven 
In accordance with this distine- 
tion, the mazZah of the first night is called “mazzat 
mizwah” (=the “precept mazzah”) or “mazzat 


<a “att 





Making Mazzot. 
(From a Passover Haggadah, Amsterdam, 1695.) 


shemirah ” (= the “observance mazzah,” based on 
Ex. xii. 7); it must be specially prepared and 
preserved for Passover eve (Pes. 88b). The special 
care of the “shemirah” consists in watching the 
wheat during harvesting, milling, and baking, that 
it shall not become leavened, either by rain swelling 
the grains or dampening the flour, or by too much 
kneading and slow baking. The shemirah is used 
principally for the Seder nights, while the more 
pious use such mazzot every day of the Passover 
festival. ‘The ordinary mazzah is prepared of “ke- 
mah min ha-shuk ” (flour purchased at the market), 
and the bakers are careful only during the process of 
kneading aud baking. The ordinary mazzah may be 
used for the first night’s meal, when eating mazzah 
is obligatory. Yet even the market flour must 
be made only of wheat, barley, spelt, oats, or rye 
(Pes. ii. 5), rice and a species of millet being ex- 
cepted (Pes. 35a). 

On the theory that at night the sun underneath 
the earth warms the wells and rivers below and 
makes the water tepid (Pes, 94b), R. Judah ordered 

that the kneading for mazzah shall be 


‘‘Mayim done with “mayim she-lanu” (water 
She- that has “lodged” overnight at home 
Lanu.” and has been exposed tothe cold night 


air), The aim is to have the water 
for kneading as cold as possible in order to prevent 
the fermentation of the dough (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah 
Hayyim, 455, 2). Although not necessarily against 


Mazzah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


394 





the Law, it is the custom to omit salt or seasoning 
from the mazzah (/.¢. 455, 5). 

The size of cach mass of dough for mazzah may 
not exceed one-tenth of an ephah, equal to 43} 
medium-sized hens’ eggs, and the time allowed for 
preparing it is the time required for a journey of a 
mile (= 2,000 cubits), that is, about twenty-seven 
minutes (/.c. 456, 1; 459, 2). However, a continuous 
kneading and frequent hand-washings in cold water 
may extend the time. According to R. Gamaliel, 
the preparation of the mazzah was performed by 
three women: one kneaded the dough, another 


































































































in a subsequent operation, thus prolonging the 
time and causing fermentation; as a result of their 
pretest the form of the mazzah was changed to a 
square. Still, there are a great many, perhaps a 
Majority, who use round, machine-made mazzot, 
while there are many pious ones who would use no 
other than hand-made mazzot. Eisenberg, at Kiev, 
Russia, recently invented a mazzah-machine ca- 
pable of baking 15 poods (about 541 pounds) of 
dough in one or two hours (“ Der Jud,” 1902, No. 9). 

The perforation of the mazzah, after being rolled 
into shape, aud before baking, was for the purpose 

















PREPARATION OF MAZZOT. 
(From Kirchner, ‘ Judisches Ceremouiel,”’ 1726.) 


formed the mazzah, and the third baked it (Pes. 
lii. 4). 

The thickness of the mazzah must not exceed the 
size of a closed fist, four fingers or four inches, 
which was the thickness of theshowbread. A later 
custom was to make mazzah one finger thick (“Bet 
Hillel,” Yoreh De‘ah, No. 96). In modern times the 
mazzah is much thinner, varying from four to five 
mazzot tothe inch, and is made in round form about 
twelve inches in diameter. In about 
1875 mazzah-baking machinery was 
invented in England, and soon after 
introduced in America. Some rabbis 
opposed the innovation, claiming that the corners 
of the machine-made mazzah were trimmed round 


Size and 
Shape. 


of keeping it from raisiug and swelling in baking. 
It appears that in the early centuries the perforation 
of the mazzah was quite artistic. In the house of 
R. Gamaliel the perforations of the mazzot repre- 
sented figures, Eividently the perforating was done 
with an implement that looked like a comb, as the 
word “serikin” indicates. The figures were those 
of animals, flowers, etc. Artistic perforation was 
later prohibited, as it consumed too much time and 
caused fermentation. Baytus b. Zonin suggested 
Stamping the mazzah with ready-made figured 
plates, hut was opposed on the ground that no dis- 
crimination must be made in favor of any particular 
kind of perforation (Pes. 37a). R. Isaac b. Gay- 
yat says the figures represented Grecks, doves, and 


395 


fishes. Maimonides permits any fancy design if made 
by a professional baker, as he does it quickly (“ Yad,” 
Hamez u-Mazzah, v.15). In later pe- 


The riods the perforating implement was 
a wheel, called the “reidel,” provided 


‘¢ Reidel.” 

with sharp teeth and attached to a 
handle. The perforator, usually a youth, would 
run his reidel through the mazzah in lines crossed 
at right angles and about one inch apart. The 
mazzah-machine has an automatic perforator that 
makes lines at intervals of a half inch. 

The baking of pudding, fillings, or sponge-cake 
out of ordinary flonr is prohibited during Passover 
for fear of fermentation in consequence of the delays 
in preparation. But itis permitted to make all kinds 
of pastry out of mazzah-flour, as no fermentation is 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mazzah 


oven, it was incumbent on the “lord of the house” 
to superintend the mazzah-baking for his family 
(see “Am. Jew. Hist. Soc.” ix. 70). 

In America mazzah-baking is an important in- 
dustry. In New York city alone, in 1904, 10,000 
barrels of flour were used in making about 1,700,000 
pounds of mazzah, distributed among fifteen bakers, 
one of them making mazzah by hand, and one small 

bakery making mazzah shemirah, The 


Mazzah- larger bakeries commence work four 
Baking or five months before Passover. New 
as an York supplies many cities in the 
Industry. United States and Canada with maz- 


zah, Other large mazzah-making cen- 
ters are Chicago, Pittsburg, Boston, Philadelphia, 
and Baltimore. Mazzot have become popular among 


MM = 


YY¥ 


PREPARING MAZZOT. 


(From Leusden, “ Philologus Hebrawo-Mixtus,’”’ Utrecht, 1657.) 


possible after the flour is baked. For baking and 
cooking with mazzah-flour see Cookery. Ordinary 
flour may be kneaded with pure fruit-juices, with 
eggs, or With honey, as no fermentation is possible 
with them. This is called “rich mazzah,” and may 
be eaten on Passover, except on the first night, when 
the regular mazzah, or lehem‘oni, is obligatory (Pes. 
36a). In the early centuries mazzah-baking was done 
by the wife daily, for the household’s use. In the 
Middle Ages preparations were made to bake maz- 
zot thirty days before Passover, except the mazzah 
shemirah, which was baked in the afternoon of the 
14th of Nisan, at the time when the Passover lamb 
was formerly sacrificed (Orah Hayyim, 453, 4). 
Still later, when the community had a communal 


non-Jews, who use them as tea-biscuits. R. Jacob 
Modln (d. 1420), in his “Sefer Maharil,” mentions the © 
custom, in baking mazzot, of starting the fire with 
the willows used for Hosha‘na and for the lulab. 

It is forbidden to eat mazzah on the day before 
Passover, in order that it may be more palatable on 
the evening of Passover. The three mazzah-cakes 
used at the Seder service on Passover eve are 
placed one on the other in a plate or in a threefold 
cover specially made for the occasion, The three 
mazzah-cakes are distinguished as “ Kohen,” “ Levi,” 
and “Israel.” The fourth order of the Seder is Yahaz, 
in which the middle mazzah (“ Levi”) is broken into 
two parts, the larger being put aside as afikomen, 
with which the meal is finished; the smaller part is 


Mazzebah 
Me’assefim 


left between “Kohen” and “Israel.” When the 
Haggadah is recited the mazzot are uncovered and 
exposed to view. The eighth order of 
the Seder is Mazzah; in it a piece of 
the “Kohen” and a piece of the 
“Levi” are eaten after the benedic- 
tions “Ha-Mozi” and “Mazzah.” The “Israel” is 
eaten during the tenth order, Korek, with the bitter 
herbs, as practised by Hillel. 

An ancient custom, which still prevails in some 
parts of the Orient and in Europe, is to keep a sin- 


At the 
Seder. 





ig 

, Fe a 
at i 

Bl | at 
; ao 
Vai 


Implements for Marking Mazzot. 
(From Frauberger.) 


gle mazzah hanging on the interior wall of the syna- 
gogue all the year in strict observance of the pas- 
sage “That thou mayest remember the day when 
thou camest out of the land of Egypt all the days 
of thy life” (Deut. xvi. 8). See AFIKOMEN; BLoop 
AccUSATION; LEAVEN; PASSOVER; SEDER. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pes. 35a-40a; Maimonides, Yad, Hamez u- 
Mazzth, v. and vi.; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 453-462, 
471-482; Benzinger, Arch. pp. 85, 482, 451, 467; Rodkinson, 
Mazzat Mizgwah wa- Alilat ha-Dam, Vienna, 1888; Stanis- 
ct Sama de Hayye, a manual of Mazzot, Berdychev, 


J. | J. D. E. 
MAZZEBAH. See STONE AND STONE- WORSHIP. 


McCAUL, ALEXANDER: English Christian 
missionary and author; born at Dublin May 16, 
1799: died at London Nov. 18, 1868. He was edu- 
cated at Trinity College, Dublin. Becoming inter- 
ested in the Jews, he was sent as a missionary to 
Poland in 1821, where he studied Hebrew and Ger- 
man at Warsaw. In 1822 he went to interview the 
czar in regard to the conversion of the Jews. He 
continued to live at Warsaw for ten years, interest- 
ing the grand duke Constantine, the crown prince 
of Prussia, and Sir Henry Rose in his work. Ih 
1887 he produced an elaborate attack upon Jewish 
legalism under the title “Old Paths”; it was pub- 
lished weekly for over a year. This created consid- 
erable interest among Jews, and was translated into 
several languages, including Hebrew (“ Netibot 
‘Olam ”). An answer in Hebrew (“ Netibot Emet ”), 
was published by Judah Middleman in 1847, a trans- 
lation by Stanislaz Hoga having appeared in the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


396 


preceding year. McCaul wrote vigorously against 
the blood accusation, and refused the Protestant 
bishopric of Jerusalem, on the ground that it should 
be held by a Jew by birth, recommending M. §. 
ALEXANDER for that post. He became professor of 
Hebrew and rabbinical literature at King’s College, 
London. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Guardian (London), Nov. 18, 1863; Dict. 
Nat. Biog. j 


MEAH. See HAMMEAH, TOWER OF. 


MEAL-OFFERING: Comprehensive term for 
all sacrifices from the vegetable world; to desig- 
nate these in the Old Testament the Hebrew word 
“minhah” is used, which, as a probable derivative 
of the Arabic verb “manah” = “to give” properly 
signifies “ gift” or “present.” The desire of offering 
to God oblations of vegetables or cereals is presup- 
posed in the Bible to be as general a human one as 
that of pleasing God by animal sacrifices. The ear- 

liest example of a meal-offering is un- 


Name and doubtedly the sacrifice that Cain ten- 
Early dered from the fruit of his field (Gen. 
History. iv. 8-5). Gideon added to a meat- 


offering mazzot made of an ephah of 
flour (nbp; Judges vi. 19). Mazzot were probably 
also baked from the flour (mp) that Hannah took 
to Shiloh (I Sam. i. 24); for it is not likely that 
flour alone was sacrificed, it being in the unprepared 
state not an article of human food. A vegetable 
sacrifice is referred to also in the second member of 
the phrase ANSD) Mat (2. ii. 29, iii. 14). Loaves of 
bread (ond m733) were laid before God (7b. x. 8). 
Mention is made of their being placed in tke sanc- 
tuary of YHwu at Nob (db. xxi. 7). In the term 
yA Nn (I Kings xviii. 29, 36) the second mem- 
ber (25yn7) is added not as a new distinction quali- 
fying this 79 as different from the others or asa 
fixed regular institution, but merely in view of the 
preceding fixation of time, “and when midday was 
past.” Leavened bread (y19n) likewise was sacrificed 
(Amos iv. 5). Vegetable sacrifice is also designated 
as “minhah” when it is connected with a thank- 
offering (Amos v. 22), a meat-offering (Isa. xix. 21), 
or a burnt offering (Jer. xiv. 12; Ps. xx. 2). The 
foregoing shows that cereal oblations are mentioned 
only sporadically in the early historical books. 

The Law ordains: («) as regards the material of 
the meal-offering that it must consist, except in the 
case of the jealousy-offering (Num. v. 15), of fine 
flour (nbp: Lev. ii, 1), oil (2.), salt (2. verse 13), 
and incense (2b. verses 1 ef seg., 15 et seq.), while 
leaven and honey must be kept strictly separate (2d. 
verse 11), the latter probably because it fermented 

easily (comp. the Neo-Hebraic pean 

Regula- —“to ferment,” in Dalman, “ Ara- 
tions of the miisch-Neuhebrilisches Wdorterb. zu 

Law. Targum, Talmud, und Midrasch,” 
1901, p. 86). (%) This material might 

be offered in the following forms: (@) barley flour 
(MDP) without oil or incense was brought for the so- 
called jealousy-offering (Num. v. 15); (8) fine flour 
(nSp), even in its original state, must have oil poured 
over it, and be sprinkled with incense, the last alone 
being lighted (Lev. ii. 1-3); (y) the meal-offering 
might consist of different kinds of cakes (verses 


397 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mazzebah 
Me’assefim 





4-7); (6) the first-fruits of the field were offered in 
the shape of roasted ears or ground grains of fresh 
corn (verse 14, where boss was isa later addition; 
comp. Konig, “Syntax,” § 333 t). 1t is an interest- 
ing detaii that the meal-offering which was baked 
on a flat tin pan (MA3ND) was broken into small 
pieces (DAB; Lev. ii. 6, vi. 14). (c) The meal-offer- 
ings, according to the purposes they served, might be 
divided into two groups: (a) those offered alone as 
a substitute in the case of the poor (Lev. v. 11 e 
seq.) for the sin-offering; as the daily meal-offering 
(“tamid ”) of the priests (Ex. xl. 29; Lev. vi. 12-16; 
comp. I Chron. ix. 31); and as the jealousy -offering 
(Num. v. 15 e¢ seqg.), which “reminds of sin” (comp. 
the sheaf offered in recognition of the beginning of 
harvest [Lev. xxiii. 9 e¢ seq.|, the loaves of the Feast 
of Weeks [7d. xxiii, 16 e¢ seg.], and the showbread 
[7b. xxiv. 5 et seg.}); and (8) meal-offerings added to 
the animal-offerings. These “ musaf” offerings were 
added to the thank-offering (Lev. vii. 11-18, etc.), 
to the sacrifice of purification of the Israelites (Lev. 
ix. 3) and of the lepers (2. xiv. 10-20), and to the 
burnt offering (Num. xv. 1-16); and they were 
combined with a drink-offering. The unqualified 
statement that the unconsumed portion of the meal- 
offering should belong to the priests (Lev. ii. 3) 
refers probably also to the accompanying meal- 
offerings (comp. Franz Delitzsch in Riehm’s “ Hand- 
worterb.” cols. 1519b, 1520a). Not every burnt 
offering, however, is to be supplemented by a meal- 
offering, as Lev. xii. 6 shows. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: For the earlier views see Franz Delitzsch, in 
Speiseopfer, in Riehm’s Handworterb. des Biblischen Al- 
terthums; the later view of the history of vegetable sacri- 
fices is supported by Benzinger, Arch. 88 62 et seq.; Baentsch, 
Exodus-Leviticus, in_Handkommentar, 1900; Bertholet, 
Leviticus, in Kurzer Handkommentar, 1901. 

E. G. Il. E. K. 

ME’ASHA: 1. Palestinian tanna, to whom one 
reference occurs in the Mishnah (Peah ii. 6), from 
which it appears that he lived in the time of Hillel’s 
descendants (comp. Heilprin, “Seder ha-Dorot,” ii.). 

2. Palestinian haggadist; grandson and pupil of 
JosHua B. Levt (Yer. Ber. ti. 8; Yer. Bezah i. 6 ef 
al.). From the few details concerning him it ap- 
pears that on Saturdays he used to have himself 
carried to the synagogue in order to preach (Yer. 
Bezah é.¢.), that he was not rich, and that he died 
suddenly in the time of Amor (Ket. 85b). Me’asha 
is particularly noted for the vision which he is re- 
ported to have seen during a trance lasting three 
days, and concerning which he said: “I have been 
in a world of confusion where people who are hon- 
ored here are held in contempt” (Ruth R, iii. 1). In 
Pes. 50a this vision is ascribed to JOSEPH B. JOSHUA 
B. LEvI; Joseph was probably Me’asha’s father. 
Me’asha inferred from Isa. xxxiil. 15-17 that when 
one shuts his eyes to things indecent he is worthy 
to view the face of the Shekinah (Pesik. R. 24 
fed. Friedmann, p. 125a]; Derek Erez i.; Lev. R. 
Xxili, 138). 

3. Palestinian amora of the fourth century ; men- 
tioned as a companion of Samuel b. Isaac and Zera 
(Yer. Ber. ii. 9 e¢ al.), His halakic and haggadic 
sentences are met with in both Talmudim. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. tli. 614 et seq., et 
passin; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 
BS. 8. M. SEL. 


ME’ASSEFIM (“collectors”; from DN = “to 
collect”; hence the name of the periodical “ Ha- 
Me’assef” = “The Collector”): Name designating 
the group of Hebrew writers who between 1784 and 
1811 published their works in the periodical “ Ha- 
Me’assef,” which they had founded. In 1782 Moses 
Mendelssohn’s German translation of the Pentateuch 
had appeared. Inthe “bi’ur” or commentary which 
he added to this translation, he dwelt on the beauty 
of the Hebrew language, its wealth of imagery, and 
its adaptability for poetic expression, By his com- 
ments on Scripture, also, he largely stimulated He- 
brew, grammatical, and exegeticstudies, Theseeds 
he thus scattered bore fruit even in his lifetime. 
While reading and discussing Mendelssohn’s Scrip- 
tural expositions, Isaac Abraham EucuEet and Men- 
de] BrEssLAv, who were at that time tutoring in 
the house of David Friedliinder at Konigsberg, con- 
ceived the idea of causing Hebrew as a literary lan- 
guage to be used more widely among the Jews. As- 
sured of the material support of Simon and Samuel 
Friedlinder, they issued in the spring of 1783 an 
appeal to all Jews to assist in establishing a society 
for the study of Hebrew (Hebrat Doreshe Leshon 
‘Eber). The periodical “ Ha-Me’asset” was projected 
as a rallying-point for all those who were inter- 
ested in and able to contribute to the work. 

The undertaking met with a cordial reception in 
many quarters, especially in Berlin; Mendelssohn 
and even the aged Naphtali Hirz WrssrLy prom- 
ising their support and contributing to “Ha-Me’as- 
sef,” the former anonymously. The first number 
of the periodical was announced April 18, 1788, in a 
prospectus, “ Nahal ha-Besor,” signed by Euchel, 
Bresslau, and Samuel and Simon Friedlinder. The 
first volume appeared in 1784, being the earliest suc- 
cessful periodical published in Hebrew. The first 
three volumes were issued in monthly numbers at 
Kénigsberg (the frontispiece to vol. iii. being Naph- 
tali Herz Wessely’s portrait); vols. iv.-vi. appeared 
in quarterly numbers at K6nigsberg and Berlin; 
vol. vii. (one number only) at Breslau; vol. viii. at 
Berlin; the first two numbers of vol. ix. at Altona, 
and the last two at Dessau; vol. x. (two numbers 
only) also at Dessau. Thenew “Collector” (“ Ahare 
ha-Me’assef” or “Ha-Me’assef he-Hadash”), edited 
by 8. Cohen, may be regarded as a continuation of 
“Ha-Me’assef.” Vol. i. appeared at Berlin in 1809; 
vol. ii. at Altona in 1810; and vol. iii. at Dessau in 
1811. 

In addition to articles on Hebrew prose and poetry 
“Ha-Me’assef” printed general scientific articles, in- 
teresting papers on mathematics and natural science, 
biographies of eminent Hebrew scholars, and articles 
on the history of the Roman emperors; responsa on 
religious questions, ¢.g., on the speedy burial of 
the dead, have also been collected in its pages. The 
attitude of “Ha-Me’assef” was by turns Orthodox or 
Reform, according to the views of the collaborator, 
It was often very aggressive toward the strictly Or- 
thodox view, although Wessely had from the very 
beginning advised a purely objective point of 
view. 

The principal collaborators on “ Ha-Me’assef ” were 
Ben Zeeb, Bras, Bresslau, Cohen, Dessau, Euchel, 
Franco-Mendez, Friedlander, Friedrichsfeld, Herz, 


Measures 
Mecklenburg 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


398 





Joseph Hirsch, Lindau, Léwe, Liwisohn, Mendels- 

sohn, Wessely, Witzhausen, and Wolfsoln. 
See BiuRIsts; HasKALAH; MENDELSSOHN, Moses. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. parts i.-iii.; Gritz, Gesch. 
xi. 13] et seq.; Lesser, Register und Chronik der Gesell- 
schaft der Freunde, Berlin, 1842; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. 
col. 5753; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. parts i. and fi.;: Allg. 
Zeit. des Jud. 1837, p. 448; Israel Davidson, The Beginnings 
of Periodical Literature, Baltimore, 1900. 


G. M. L. B. 
MEASURES. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 


MEAT-TAX: In Austria, as everywhere else, 
the Jewish communities imposed a tax on meat, 
the revenue from which was used for communal 
purposes. During the eighteenth century, however, 
the national government used this method of raising 
a revenue from the Jews in order to support educa- 
tional institutions. Such was the case in Galicia 
after 1791. In the congregations belonging to the 
kingdom of Bohemia the meat-tax, with the tax on 
wine and fish, was used to compensate the govern- 


ment for the loss of revenue attending the abolition. 


of the toleration-tax in 1782. It was about two 
kreutzer on one pound of meat and ten kreutzer on a 
goose. The tax was levied in such a way that the 
butchers had to give with every pound of meata 
receipt for the payment of that duty, while in the 
ease of fowl the shohet was not permitted to kill 
unless the party requiring his services handed him 
such a receipt. This tax was farmed out to a con- 
tractor; he paid the government a fixed annual 
sum for the whole province and had his subcontract- 
ors in every town. The latter were almost invariably 
Jews, and exacted their money with merciless rigor. 
Those who attempted to evade the tax were heavily 
fined. The hardships entailed by the cruelty of 
these tax-farmers are vividly presented in Eduard 
Kulke’s novels. 

For the meat-tax in Russia see KoROBKA. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Stiger, Gesetzliche Verfassung der Galizi- 

schen Judenschaft, Lemberg, 1831; Seari, Systematische 


Darstellung der in Betreff Juden in Mdhren und Sehlesien 
Erlassenen Gesetze, Brinn, 1835. D 


ME’ATI, HA- (nxon): Family of translators 
which flourished at Rome in the thirteenth and four- 
teenth centuries, 

Nathan b. Eliezer ha-Me’ati: Earliest known 
member of the family; called the “ Prince of Trans- 
lators” and the “Italian Tibbonide ”; lived in Rome 
from 1279 to 1283. His native place seems to have 
been Cento, whence his name “ Me’ati,” which is the 
Hebrew equivalent of “Cento” (= 100). After ac- 
quiring many languages during his long wandcr- 
ings, he settled at Rome, where he translated scien- 
tific and especially medical works from Arabic into 
Hebrew, to take the place, as he declared, of the 
medical literature of the Jews which had existed 
even at the time of Solomon but had been lost, and 
to silence the mockery of the Christians, who said 
that the Jews had no such literature. His transla- 
tions are: (1) ‘Ammar ben ‘Ali al-Mausuli’s “ Al- 
Muntahib fi ‘Ilaj al-‘Ain,” on the treatment of the 
eye; (2) the “Canon ” of Avicenna; (8) the aphorisms 
of Hippocrates with Galen’s commentary (Neubauer, 
“Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 1588); (4) the apho- 
risms of Maimonides, a selection from various 


authors, chiefly from Galen, published under the 
title “Pirke Mosheh,” Lemberg, 1804. 

Many anonymous translations are attributed to 
Me‘ati, among them: (1) Razi’s treatise on bleeding, 
“ Ma’amar be-Hakkazah”; (2) Zahrawi’s “ Kitab al- 
Tasrif ” (Hebrew title, “ Zeruf ”); (3) Ibn Zuhr’s “ Wi- 
tab al-Aghdhiyah ” (Hebrew title, "Sefer ha-Mezo- 
not ”); (4)an anonymous work on the causes of eclip- 
ses entitled “Ma’amar ‘al Sibbot Likkut ha-Me’orot.” 

Samuel ha-Me’ati: Son of Solomon ha-Me‘ati. 
He concluded the translation of an extract from 
Galen’s commentary to Hippocrates’ work “On 
Regimen in Acute Diseases,” and, some time after 
1306, the translation of a medical work by Ibn 
Zuhr. 

Solomon ha-Me’ati: Son of Nathan b. Eliezer 
ha-Me’ati. He completed (1299) the translation, be- 
gun by his father, of Galen’s commentary to Hip- 
pocrates’ work “On Airs, Waters, and Places.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Rossi, Dizionario, p. 53; Nepi-Ghirondi, 

Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p.274; Carmoly, H istoive des Méde- 

eins Juifs, p. 84; Zunz, in Geiger’s J iid. Zeit. iv. 190; Stein- 

ip Gon Cat. Bodl. eo). 2073; idem, Hebr. Uehers. pp. 595, 


663, 666, 670, 679, TOL, 746 5 ‘idem, in Monatsschrift, 1893. 


XXXViii. 179; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in 


Rom, i. 398 et seq. 
J. I. Br.—I,. E, 


MEBORAK HA-NAGID. See Eeyrpt. 


MECHANIC. See Artisans; Laporn;: MASTER 
AND SERVANT. 
MECHNIKOV. See Novacnovicn, IL. 


MECIA (MATTHEW) DE VILADESTES: 
Jewish chartographer of Majorca at the beginning 
of the fifteenth century. He was the author of a 
map, dated 1418, formerly in the convent of Val de 
Cristo, near Segorbe, but now in the Bibliothéque 
Nationale at Paris. In it he gives special promi- 
nence to the navigation in African waters of Jacme 
Ferrer, also of Majorca. It fills six sheets in Mar- 
cel’s “ Choix de Cartes et de Mappemondes des XI Ve 
et XVe Siécles” (Paris, 1896). The map is based 
upon the work of Jaffuda Cresqyues, the probable 
author of the atlas of Charles V. Mecia therefore 
belonged to the Judxo-Catalan school of chartog- 
raphers. Don Miguel Bonet has discovered in the 
archives of Majorca a permit of the governor's lieu- 
tenant allowing the “convert Macia” to debark in 
Sicily. This is dated Jan. 20, 1401, and probably 
refers to Mecia. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. T. Hamy, in Comptes Rendus of the Aca- 
démie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1902, p. 71. 


a G. 


MECKLENBURG: Territory in North Ger- 
many; bounded on the north by the Baltic Sea. 
Formerly it constituted one duchy, but since 1701 it 
has been divided into Mecklenburg-Schwerin and 
Mecklenburg-Strelitz, forming two separate grand 
duchies of the German empire. However, their 
governments are still intimately connected. Meck- 
lenburg-Schwerin has (1900) 607,770 inhabitants, 
among whom are 1,763 Jews, divided into 36 con- 
gregations; Mecklenburg-Strelitz has 102,602 inhab- 
itants, including 331 Jews, divided into 6 congrega- 
tions. It is possible that the settlement of Jews 
in Mecklenburg dates from 1243, when Brandenburg 
expelled its Jews; but it is equally probable that. 
the first Jewish settlers arrived from western Ger- 


399 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Measures 
Mecklenburg 





many, Where the Jews were frequently persecuted. 
It is certain, however, that Jews lived in Meck- 
lenburg as early as 1266, for in a 
Early Set- document dated April 14, 1266, in 
tlement. which Henry I. (the Pilgrim) con- 
ferred upon Wismar the Liibeck rights, 
Jews are mentioned together with the private 
servants and officials of the prince. Thus Wismar 
Seems to contain the oldest settlement of Jews in 
Mecklenburg. By and by they are heard of in other 
cities: in Boizenburg, 1267; Rostock, 1279; Cracow 
and Giistrow, 1325; Malchin, 1882; Schwerin (now 
the center of the Jewish communities in Mecklen- 
burg), about 1340; Friedland and Parchim, 1350; 
Neubrandenburg, 1440. 

The Jews of Mecklenburg were compelled to pay 
a considerable sum annually for the privilege of liv- 
ing there and for protection by the prince. The 
several estates looked with great disfavor upon their 
presence and never neglected an opportunity of in- 
juring them. They had no right to own real estate, 
and their residence, as a rule, was confined to the 
most neglected quarters of the city they dwelt in. 
In Wismar, for instance, they inhabited the Altbo- 
terstrasse, which was called “Platea Judzorum ” ; 
here they had a synagogue, called “Domus Jude- 
orum.” Naturally their fate was bound up with 
that of their protector. Thus when Henry under- 
took a pilgrimage to Palestine, where he remained 
for twenty-four years in Mohammedan captivity, 
the Jews were expelled from Wismar (1290), and 
were not readmitted until the succession of Henry 
IT. (the Lion- Hearted). During his reign a Jew 
named Nathan (1810)—was permitted to own real 
estate in Wismar. Under Albrecht II. their po- 
sition changed for the worse; only two Jewish fami- 
lies were permitted to reside in Wismar, and they 
became subject to the jurisdiction of the city magis- 
trates instead of to that of the prince, thus being 
exposed to the fanaticism and hatred of the people. 
Some Jews were admitted into Wismar in 13849, but 
they were expelled again in 1850, and since then and 
for 500 years thereafter there was no trace of Jew- 
ish residence there. 

In the other cities matters were worse. Jews at 
Cracow and Gistrow suffered martyrdom three 
times within 167 years. A baptized Jewess accused 
her brother-in-law Eleazar of having desecrated the 
host; allthe Jews were seized and burned, the syna- 
gogue was destroyed, and in its place was erected a 
“chapel of the Holy Blood ” (1825). Two Christians 
of Rostock who were found guilty of having robbed 
and murdered a Jew and Jewess were punished 
with banishment only (13820), In 1850 the wide- 
spread accusation that the Jews had poisoned the 
wells was made in Mecklenburg, and nearly all the 
Jews there were driven out. They seem, however, 
to have resettled there within a few decades. 

Mecklenburg’s cruel treatment of the Jews reached 
its climax in 1492, in connection with a charge of 
desecrating the host. A Jew was accused of having 
persuaded a priest to become a convert to Judaism 
and of having induced him to steal the sacred host 
for the purpose of desecrating it. The matter being 
brought before the duke, he ordered all the Jews to 
be placed under arrest and brought to Sternberg. 


There they were subjected to horrible torture in 
order to extort from them a confession. But 
though they persistently denied the charge, the 

sentence to burn them alive was pro- 


The nounced, On Oct. 24, 1492, twenty- 
Sternberg four Jewsand twoJewesses were taken 
Burning. toa hill near the city of Sternberg— 


since then called the “ Judenberg ”— 
where they died on the pyre. Those not burned 
were banished from the Jand. The prominent rab- 
bis of the time declared the ban against any Jew 
who would settle in cruel Mecklenburg, and there 
is no evidence that any Jew settled there until the 
second half of the seventeenth century. 

In the meantime Protestantism had taken root in 
Mecklenburg, and religious fanaticism was no longer 
so rampant asin former days. Yet it was during 
the reign of the Catholic prince Christian I. (1658- 
1692) that the second movement of Jews to Mecklen- 
burg began. In 1676 he called to his court the Jews 
Abraham Haym and Nathan Benedix of Hamburg, 
gave them special privileges, and granted them a 
tobacco monopoly, the first in Mecklenburg. At the 
intervention of the court Jews, Duke Frederick 
William abolished the poll-tax. But his successor, 
Charles Ludwig (1747-56), who had special political 
reasons for wishing to please the people, issued an 
edict that all unprivileged Jews should leave the 
land within four weeks; this ieft only about thirty 
“Schutzjuden” in Mecklenburg. The same prince 
called to his court the brothers Philip and Nathan 
Aaron, who became the real founders of the present 
Jewish communities in Mecklenburg. Through 
their influence the Jewish population there so in- 
creased that they were able in 1752 to call a con- 
vention to deliberate upon their religious needs. 
They decided, among other things, to request the 
chief rabbi of Frankfort-on-the-Oder to remove the 
ban of 1492 and toestablish a Jewish tribunal. The 
latter, however, did not receive the sanction of the 
government, and was abolished (1755) by a rescript 
of the duke. In 1764they held another convention, 
with the sanction of Duke Frederick the Pious, who 
vested in the rabbis the power of judges among 
the Jews. In 1765 one Marcus Moses graduated as 
a physician, and an edict of the duke permitted him 
to practise. This was the first graduation of a Jew 
in Mecklenburg. One Marcus Isaac (who distin- 
guished himself during the occupation of Mecklen- 
burg by Frederick the Great) and a certain Hirsch 
were the first in the commercial field; they began 
about this time to export wool, thus encouraging 
the raising of sheep, which occupation has greatly 
contributed to the prosperity of the country. 

‘Under this mild government the community de- 
veloped rapidly. Two synagogues were dedicated 
—one on Sept. 5, 1763, at Altstrelitz, the com- 
munity of which numbered 130 families; the other 
at Schwerin in 1778. Still the populace was hos- 
tile toward the Jews and often insisted on the 
strict enforcement of the constitutional provisions 
by which the dukes of the Mecklenburg duchies 
pledged themselves to grant no privileges to Jew- 
ish settlers to the detriment of Christian citizens. 
Duke Frederick Francis I. was the first prince that 
earnestly desired their emancipation. On Feb. 22, 


Mecklenburg 
Medals 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


400 





1511, the Jews petitioned him on that subject, and 
he consulted the estates at the following conven- 
tion. They acknowledged the justice of the pc- 
tition, but argued that the Jews were 
Their First not as yet ready for emancipation. 
Emanci- But Professor Tychsen of the Univer- 
pation. sity of Rostock, who was consulted 
on the matter, declared himself in 
favor of the petition. After some hesitation the 
duke finally decided in favor of the Jews, and issued, 
Feb. 22, 1818, a constitution which declared that. 
his Jewish subjects, with their wives and children, 
were citizens of Mecklenburg; leaving future legis- 
lation to decide whether or not they were to be ad- 
mitted to government positions. The Jews soon 
had an opportunity to show their gratitude; the 
Jewish youth enthusiastically responded to the 
duke’s call to arms in 1818. But the reaction which 
set in after Waterloo and the ill-will of the states 
brought about a suspension of this lawin 1815. In 
1829 the Jews were first admitted to the practise 
of law, with the limitation that they could prac- 
tise only in the city courts. Mecklenburg adopted 
in 1848 the “Grundrechte” (constitution) of the 
Frankfort Parliament abolishing all disabilities on 
account of religion, but repealed it two years later. 
But times had changed. While in former days 
the people opposed the emancipation of the Jews, 
in 1867 the municipal boards of various cities In 
Mecklenburg petitioned the Reichstag for it, and a 
member of the Reichstag, Wigger by name, was the 
most ardent advocate of the passage of a law abol- 
ishing all disabilities based on differences of religion. 
The Reichstag passed that law by a large majority 
March 12, 1869, and King William of Prussia, as 
the head of the North German Federation, confirmed 
it July 3, 1869. With the passage of this law and 
its insertion in the constitution of the German em- 
pire in 1871, the last political disability resting on 
the Jews of Mecklenburg, as on Jews throughout 
the empire, was removed. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Donath, Gesch. der Juden in Mecklenburg, 
Leipsie, 1874, 
I. War. 


Dd. 

Of the internal conditions of the Mecklenburg 
Jewry during the first settlement, up to 1492, noth- 
ing is known. During the second settlement, in 
the seventeenth century, the community was too 
small to show any spiritual activity. The first sign 
of such isin the case of Nathan Aaron, who main- 
tained Joshua Spira in his houseasachaplain. The 
first rabbi appointed by the duke was Jeremiah 
Israel (1763), whose chief duty consisted in acting 
as judge for the scattered communities of the duch- 
ies. He was succeeded by the above-mentioned 
Joshua Spira, author of “Panim Masbirot” (or 
“* Arba’ Shittot li MeHaRISh”), novellze and re- 
sponsa (Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1770). 

During the latter part of the eighteenth and at 
the beginning of the nineteenth century the differ- 

ences between R. Marcus Lazarus Jaffe 

Spiritual and R. Joshua Falk Albu and their con- 
Activities. gregations frequently occupied the at- 

tention of the authorities. As these 
rabbis were Poles and notin sympathy with the edu- 
cational movement which had won the allegiance 


of the Jews of Mecklenburg, as of other communi- 
ties in Germany, an attempt was made about 1828 
to establish in Giistrow a normal school where Jew- 
ish teachers might be trained, but the movement 
failed for lack of means. The congregation of Alt- 
strelitz, however, established a parochial school, 
which at one time flourished under the famous Ger- 
man lexicographer Daniel SANDERS. 

The movement for emancipation which began 
about 1830 resulted in the foundation of a society for 
promoting the adoption of manual occupations by 
Jews (1836). Three years later the government took 
steps toward improving the condition of the Jews 
by giving themaconstitution. An “Oberrath ” was 
organized consisting of two goverment officials, 
the “ Landrabbiner,” and five representatives of the 
communities. The “Landrabbiner,” who was re- 
quired to have academic training, was to raise the 
intellectual standard of the congregation and intro- 
duce certain reforms. The first to hold this office 
was Samuel HoLpuHEIM, elected in 1840. He re- 
signed in 1847 to take charge of the Berlin Reform 
congregation. He organized parochial schools and 
instituted Reform services; his reforms, however, 
were all of a moderate character, although they 
aroused considerable opposition. 

A far stronger opposition was experienced by 
Holdheim’s suceessor, David EINHORN (1847-58), 
when he blessed in the synagogue a child whose 
father refused to permit its circumcision. In the 
ensuing controversy Franz DELITzscH, then pro- 
fessor at Rostock, participated, publishing in a Ros- 
tock daily a series of articles to which Einhorn re- 
plied in very heated terms. 

With Einhorn’s resignation the government de- 
cided to strengthen the Orthodox party by calling 
Baruch Lipscstrz, who was to effect a restoration 
of historic Judaism. The rigidity of his views, 
however, caused the government to dismiss him in 
1858, when he was succeeded by another exponent 
of strict Orthodoxy, Solomon CoHnN, who in 1876 
was succeeded by the present (1904) incumbent, G. 
F, FEILCHENFELD. 

The smaller principality of Mecklenburg-Strelitz 
had a rabbi in the middle of the eighteenth century 
—Marcus Levin Siisskind, who published a German 
sermon preached at the dedication of the synagogue 
in 1763. He was succeeded by R. Sanwil of Bran- 
denburg; the present (1904) incumbent, Jacob Ham- 
burger, has officiated since 1852. The rabbinical 
author Judah L6b lived in Altstrelitz; his treatise on 
resurrection was translated by Professor Tychsen 
under the title “Die Auferstehung der Todten aus 
dem Gesetze Mosis Bewiesen” (1766). Later, Ju- 
dah Lob was rabbi of Birnbaum, and then of Stock- 
holm. 

The University of Rostock had a famous Orien- 
talist in Tychsen, who taught first in Biitzow (1760) 
and then in Rostock (from 1779). A. T. Hartman, 
the opponent of the emancipation of the Jews, also 
taught in Rostock (1811-88). Among the prominent 
Jews who are natives of Mecklenburg may be men- 
toned: I. Marcus, alternate deputy to the Frankfort 
Parliament in 1848; the lexicographer Daniel San- 
ders; and the journalist Emil Jonas, translator of 
Scandinavian poetry into German. D. 


401 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA i hot red 


MEDALS: Soon after the revival of the art of 
engraving medals, about the middle of the fifteenth 
century, a few Jewish specimens were struck in 
Italy, although the number was very small on ac- 
count of the general oppression of the Jews at that 
period, The number gradually increased during 
the eighteenth century, Keeping pace with the im- 
provement of Jewish conditions; and in the second 
half of the nineteenth century, when the Jews had 
been emancipated in nearly all civilized countries, 
medals were struck so frequently that one or more 
appeared nearly every year. The following list con- 
tains the principal Jewish medals known. Those 
issued in honor of comparatively unimportant pri- 
vate persons and numerous miscellaneous and cab- 
alistic medalsare notincluded. Thesymbol ° desig- 
nates medals which are described in works mentioned 
in the bibliography and * those in the illustrations. 


1503. Benjamin b. Elijah Beer: obverse, bust; reverse, in- 
scription ; 167 mm. 

1552.* ° Elias and Rica Delatas : bust on both sides; 49 mm. 

1556.*° Gracia Nasi: engraved on oneside only ; bust ; 66 mm. 

1654. Baptism of the Jew Michael of Prague: oval; obverse, 
baptism (in the Jordan); reverse, inscription ; 82 x 
69 mm. 

1670. Three hundredth anniversary of the alleged desecra- 
tion of the host at Brussels: obverse, the Holy Sacra- 
ment; reverse, inscription ; 39 mm. 

1670. Idem: obverse, the Holy Sacrament ; reverse, escutch- 
eon; 32 mm. 

1686. Participation of the Jews in the defense of Buda: ob- 
verse, smelting-furnace; reverse, inscription; 2 
sizes, 41 and 47 mm. respectively. 

711.*° Confiagration in the ghetto of Frankfort: obverse, the 
fire: reverse, inscription; inscription about the 
edge; 44 mm. 

1735.° Eliezer ben Samuel Shmelka: obverse, bust; reverse, 
inscription. 

1738. Siiss Oppenheimer’s execution : obverse, bust; reverse, 
gallows; 38 mm.: ‘*Schraub ”’ medal; 42 mm. 

1745.*° Edict of exile at Prague: obverse, audience ; reverse, 
Solomon’s Temple; 64 mm. 

c.1773.* ° Moses Mendelssohn : obverse, bust ; reverse, skull and 
butterfly ; 43 mm. 

c.1775. Idem: one-sided cast medallion; bust, skull, ete.; 
99 mim. 

1781. Edict of Toleration by Emperor Joseph II.: obverse, 
bust; reverse, obelisk and genius; 45 mm. 

1782* Idem: obverse, bust; reverse, clericals of the three 
confessions; 438 mm. 

1790.* Medal presented by the Hessian Jews to Landgrave 
Ludwig X.: obverse, nan sacrificing: reverse, in- 
scription ; 37 mm. 

1790.° Medal presented by the Hessian Jews to the Landgra- 
vine Caroline Henrietta: obverse. palm-tree; re- 
verse, inscription ; three variants, 34, 34, and 29mm, 
respectively. 

1791.* Wilhelmschule at Breslau: obverse, grafted trunk ; re- 
verse, inscription; two sizes, 18 and 11 mm. re- 
spectively. 

1798.* ° Daniel Itzig’s seventieth birthday: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, allegorical group; 52 mm. 

1803. Lippmann Meyer’s seventy-third birthday: obverse, 
bust; reverse, inscription; 88 mm. 

c. 1808.*° Marcus Herz: obverse, bust; reverse, Pallas; 41 mm. 

1805.* ° Emancipation of the Russian Jews: obverse, bust ; re- 
verse, man sacrificing ; 46 mm. 

1£06.* ° Napoleon and the Sanhedrin: obverse, bust; reverse, 
Napoleon and a Jew ; 41 mm. 

1&08.* ° Emancipation of the Westphalian Jews : obverse, thank- 
offering; reverse, two geniuses: 42 mm. 

1810. Building of the synagogue at Bordeaux: inscriptions 
on both sides; 35 mm. 

c.1816. Gershom Mendes Seixas: obverse, bust and inscription. 

1820. Four hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the alleged 
desecration of the host at Brussels: obverse, the Holy 
Sacrament; reverse, inscription ; 32 mm. 

1824. Laying of the corner-stone of the synagogue at Munich: 
obverse, bust; reverse, engraved inscription ; 26mm. 


VITT.—26 


1826. 
1827. 


1858 (?). 
1859. 


1860. 


edals 


Dedication of the same synagogue: obverse, the syna- 
gogue ; reverse, inscription ; 39 mm. 

Court commission of the Dutch Jews; obverse, altar and 
symbols: reverse, plain ; 59 mm. 

Giuditta Pasta: one-sided medallion ; head; 113 mm. 

Idem: obverse, head; reverse, inscription; two vari- 
ants, 43 and 35 mm. 

Idem: obverse, homage ; reverse, inscription ; 47 mm. 

Ludwig Borne: one-sided medallion; head; 189 mm. 

Gabriel Riesser: obverse, allegorical group; reverse, 
inscription ; 59 min. 

Death of N. M. von Rothschild : obverse, head ; reverse, 
inscription ; 62 mm. 

Court commission of the Dutch Jews : observe, symbolic 
picture; reverse, plain; 47 min. 

Elias Hensche} and the Jews of Breslau: obyerse, head; 
reverse, inseription ; 389 mm, 

Montefiore and Crémieux at Damascus: obverse, audi- 
ence; reverse, Inscription ; 48 mm. 

The king in the synagogue at Mastricht : obverse, the 
synagogue; reverse, inscription ; 41 mm. 

Jewish Home for the Aged at The Hague: obverse, the 
building ; reverse, inscription; 40 mm. 

Jewish hospital at Hamburg (Solomon Heine): obverse. 
head: reverse, the building; two sizes, 45 and 12 
mm. respectively. 

Jewish loan institute at Hamburg: obverse, beehive; 
reverse, inscription ; 45 mm. 

Montefiore and the Jews of Hamburg: obverse, escutch- 
eon; reverse, inscription ; 42 min, 

R. Solomon Herschel!: obverse, bust: reverse, Torah 
scroll ane inscription ; 62 mm. 

Hebrew school at Birmingham ; obverse, the building; 
reverse, inscription ; 45 mm. 

First Jewish confirmation at Warsaw: obverse, seven- 
branched candlestick and tables of the Law; re- 
verse, inscription ; 42 mm. 

S. M. von Rothschild’s seventieth birthday: obverse, 
head; reverse, escutcheon ; 59 mm. 

Isaac Bernays’ jubilee: inscriptions on both sides: 51 
mm. 

Rachel (Felix): obverse, head; reverse, inscription ; 
d3 mm. 

Medal dedicated to Giacomo Meyerbeer by the Concordia 
Society: obverse, bust ; reverse, inscription ; 46mm. 

Destruction of Rothschild’s castle, Surenne: inscrip- 
tions on both sides; 69 mm. 

Medal given by the Italian Jews to B. d’Azeglio: ob- 
verse, bust; reverse, inscription; 51 mm. 

Daniel Manin: obverse, bust; reverse, homage of the 
people: 57 mm. 

Society for the Emancipation of the Oriental Christians 
and Jews: obverse, group; reverse, inscription ; 62 
mmm, 

General de Meza: obverse, bust; reverse, trophy; 45 
mm. 

August Neander: obyerse, bust; reverse, inscription; 
45 mm. 

Dr. Gruby: obverse, snake of Aisculapius; reverse, in- 
scription ; 50 mm. 

Orthodox synagogue at Frankfort: obverse, the syna- 
gogue; reverse, inscription ; 39 mm. 

Engraver Samuel Jesi: obverse, head; reverse, in- 
scription ; 68 mm. 

Giacomo Meyerbeer: obverse, head; reverse, lyre; 41 
mm. 

Medal presented by the Italian Jews to Albert Cohn: 
obverse, tempie vessels ; reverse, inscription ; 55mm. 

Similar medal presented to Ludwig Philippson. 

Laemmelschule at Jerusalem: obverse, palm-tree ; re- 
verse, inscription ; 33 mm. 

Death of Rachel (Felix): obverse, head; reverse, in- 
scription ; 53 mm.; token, 23 mm. 

M. G. Saphir: one-sided medal; bust; 47% mm. 

R. Henri Loeb’s jubilee: obverse, bust; reverse, in- 
scription ; 59 mm. 

Right conferred upon the Austrian Jews to possess real 
estate: obverse, allegorical picture; reverse, in- 
scription ; 73 mm. 


(ce. 1860). Société J. R. Pereire, prize medal: obverse, Pereire 


1861 (?). 
1861. 


teaching ; reverse, inscription ; 54 mm. 

Historical painter B. Ullmann: one-sided medaljlion ; 
bust; 123 mm. 

Synagogue at Cologne: obverse, the synagogue; re- 
verse, interior view ; 59 mm. 





COMMEMOKATIVE MEDaLp. 


1. Elias and Rica Delatas, 1352, 2. Gracia Nasi, 1556. 3. Conflagration at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1711. 4. Edict of Exile from 
Prague, 1745. 5. Edict of Toleration Issued by Emperor Joseph II., 1781. 6. Presented by Hessian 
Jews to the Landgrave Ludwig X., 1790. 


Un the collection of Albert Woif, Dresden.) 


er nem en tee a tre ate ene 





COMMEMORATIVE MEDALS. 


7. Emancipation of Westphalian Jews, 1808. 8. Emancipation of Russian Jews by Alexander I., 1805. 9. Napvleon and Sanhedrin, 
1806. 10. Marcus Herz, 1805. 11. Wilhelmschule at Breslau, 1791. 12. Daniel Itzig’s Seventieth Birthday, 1793. 
13. Moses Mendelssohn's ** Phaedon,” 1775. 
(In the collecticu of Albert Wolf, Dresden.) 


Wedals 
Medeba 





1861. 


1863. 


Nuniistatist Oberndoerfer’s seventieth birthday: ob- 
verse, bust; reverse, inscription ; 40 mim. 

Preacher Mannheimer’s seventieth birthday: obverse, 
bust; reverse, iuscription ; 50 mm. 

Moses and Judith Montefiore: obverse, busts of both: 
reverse, inscriptions ; 68 mm. 

Jewish orphan asylum for boys at Amsterdam: obverse, 
allegorical group; reverse, building ; 68 mm. 

Dr. M. H. Romberg: obverse, head; reverse, inscrip- 
tion ; 62 mm. 

Joseph Wertheimer retiring from office : obverse, bust ; 

reverse, inscription ; 45 mm. 

Cantor Peretes’ jubilee of office; inscriptions on both 
sides ; 32 mm. 

Deputy Dr. Max Hirsch: octagon; obverse, bust; re- 
verse, two hands; 25 min. 

The astronomer H. Goldschmidt: obverse, three heads ; 
reverse, allegorical figure ; 69 mm. 

Oppenheimer foundation at Hamburg: obverse, bust; 
reverse, building; 44 mm. 

Crémieux at Tours: obverse, head (on another an es- 
cutcheon); reverse, inscription ; 46 min. 

Franchetti’s heroic death: two variants; (1) obverse, 
escutchéon ; reverse, inscription; 83 mm.; (2) ob- 
verse, head ; reverse, inscription ; 24 mm. 

Synagogue at Pribram (Przibram): obverse, the syna- 
gogue; reverse, shield of David; 33 mm. 

Jubilee of the Portuguese synagogue at Amsterdam: 
obverse, escutcheon (pelican); reverse, inscription $ 
36 mm. 

Two hundredth anniversary of the Hebra Kaddisha, 
Gailingen: inscriptions on both sides; 34 mm. 

Death of the painter S. L. Verveer: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, easel ; 60 mm. 

Portuguese synagogue at Paris: obverse, tables of the 
Law ; reverse, inscription ; 28 mm. 

Salomon H. von Mosenthal’s death: obverse, head ; re- 
verse, genius ; 59 mm. 

Minister of Justice GoGefroi: obverse, bust: reverse, 
inscription ; 69 mm. 

Joseph Pizza's death: obverse, bust ; reverse, masonic 
emblems; 42 mm. 

Medal presented by the officials of the Jewish commu- 
nity of Vienna to Ludwig August Frank!: obverse, 
head; reverse, escutcheon ; 389 mm. 

R. E. A. Astruec’s jubilee of office: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, inscription ; 55 mm. 

N. Montefiore: prize medal for militarv surgeons; ob- 
verse, fleld-hospital ; reverse, escutcheon : 60)mm. 

Adolphe Crémieux’s death: obverse, bust ; reverse, in- 
scription ; 68 mm, 

Anti-Semitic movement at Berlin: four variants: (1) 
obverse, escutcheon ; reverse, inscription; (2) ob- 
verse, caricature ; reverse, sticks and hat; (3 and 4) 
inscriptions on both sides; 24 mm. 

Jubilee of the Edict of Toleration: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, inscription ; 80 mm. 

Adolf Sonnenthal’s jubilee: obverse, bust; reverse, 
theater ; 60 mm.: also in form of a thaler. 

Jubilee of the theater director Ch. Maurice: obverse, 
bust ; reverse, inscription. 

Preacher Jellinek’s jubilee of office: inscriptions on 
both sides ; 44 mm. 

New synagogue at Frankfort: obverse, the synagogue ; 
reverse, inscription ; 36 mm. 

Prix Osiris: obverse, fencing - weapons; 
wreath ; 34 mm. 

Architect Max Fleischer : obverse, bust ; reverse, syna- 
gogne ; 104 mm. 

Montefiore’s one hundredth birthday; struck three 
times (London, Corfu, and Manchester): obverse, 
bust: reverse, inscription; 42, 41, and ? mm. 

Ignaz Kuranda: one-sided medallion; bust; 145 mm. 

Medal presented by the Jewish Aid Society at Luxem- 
burg to Engenie Bloch: obverse, allegorical group: 
reverse, inseription ; 59mm. 

New synagogue at Munich: obverse, the synagogue ; 
reverse, inscription : 4) mm. 

Founding of a Frankfort Jodge: obverse, shield of 
David; reverse, tables of the Law : 25 mm. 

R. Abraham Alexander Wolf’s sixtieth anniversary 
of office: obverse, bust; reverse, inscription; 38 
mm. 

Numismatist Donehaner’s death: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, inscription: 58 mm. 


reverse, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


1889. 
1889. 
1889. 


1890. 


1890. 
1890. 
1891. 
1891. 
1891. 
1892. 
1892. 
1893. 
1898. 
1893. 


1894. 
1894. 


1895. 
1896. 
1896. 
1896. 


1900. 
1900. 


1900. 
1900. 


1901. 
1901. 
1902. 


1902. 
1903. 


1903. 


1904. 


404 


mmo 


Gerson von Bleichréder: obverse, bust; reverse, es- 
cutcheon ; 25 mm. 

Court choirmaster H. Levi: 
bust; 110 mm. 

Editors of the ** Neue Freie Presse’? (Bacher, Benedikt, 
and Werthner): obverse, three busts ; reverse, news- 
paper; 85 mii. 

Liquidation of the Deutseh-Israelitische Gemeinde of 
Hamburg: obverse, Torah cabinet; reverse, alle- 
gorical group 5; 42 mm. 

Ludwig Barnay’s jubilee: obverse, bust; reverse, in- 
scription ; 45 mm. 

M. R. von Mises’ ninetieth birthday: obverse, bust ; 
reverse, escutcheon ; 45 mm. 

M. R. von Mises’ death: obverse, bust; reverse, es- 
euteheon ; 40 mm, 

M. von Wilmersdoerffer’s jubilee: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, escutcheon ; 49 mm. 

Prof. E. H. Kisch’s fiftieth birthday: obverse, bust; 
reverse, Hygeia; 55 mm. 

Numismatist Adolph Meyers-Gedanensis: oval; ob- 
verse, bust; reverse, buildings; 71 < 57 mm. 

Prof. Th. Gomperz’s sixtieth birthday: obverse, bust ; 
reverse, allegorical group ; 46 mm. 

Jubilee of the Nichstenliebe Society, Vienna: obverse, 
hands; reverse, inscription ; 37 mm. 

State councilor T. M. C. Asser: obverse, bust; reverse, 
inscription ; 63 mmm. 

Preacher Adolf Jellinek’s death: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, inscription ; 55 mm. 

Karl Marx: one-sided medallion ; bust ; 189 mm. 

Dr. Adolf Fischhof’s death : obverse, bust ; reverse, al- 
legorical group ; 55 mim. 

Jubilee of the factory of Ludwig Lowe: obverse, bust ; 
reverse, allegorical figure ; 56 mm. 

R. Isaac Elhanan Spektor: obverse, bust; reverse, 
chapel ; 29 mm. 

Synagogue at Galatz: obverse, the synagogue; re- 
verse, masonic emblems ; 40 mm. 

Prof. Moritz Benedikt’s jubilee: square plaque; bust; 
60 X 44 mm. 

Charlotte Furtado-Heine: horticultural prize medal, 
founded by a will. 

Michael Fischhof, founder of ‘* Austria”: obverse, 
bust; reverse, view of city ; 50 mm. 

Prof. Joseph Gruber’s seventieth birthday ; plaque; 
bust; 606 * 45 mmm. 

Zionist leader Architect O. Marmorek: plaque; bust; 
118 mm. 

Second Zionist Congress: obverse, allegorical group; 
reverse, inscription ; 68 mm. 

Israelitische Religionsgesellschaft to Wilhelm Carl 
and Mathilde von Rothschild : obverse, interior view 
of synagogue ; reverse, inscription ; 40 mm. 

Reunion of the Frankfort Israelitische Realschule: ob- 
verse, view of city ; reverse, inscription ; 389 mm. 

Choir prize of the Religionsgesellschaft of Frankfort: 
obverse, interior view of synagogue; reverse, mu- 
sical instruments; 39 mm. 

Prof. James Joseph Sylvester, prize medal for mathe- 
maties : obverse, bust ; reverse, inscription ; 56mm. 

Stepney Jewish School: obverse, allegorical figure; 
reverse, inscription. 

Dr. K. Lippe’s seventieth birthday: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, flaming shield of David; 30 mm. 

Dr. Ludwig von Guttmann’s death: obverse, bust; re- 
verse, mine-insnector; 35 * 31 mm. 

Composer Carl Goldmark’s seventieth birthday: ob- 
verse, bust; reverse, oak and laurel; 55 mm. 

Idem: plaque; bust; 200 * 155 mm. 

Fiftieth anniversary of the Stern Conservatorium : ob- 
verse, bust; reverse, allegorical figure; 42 mm. 
Salo Cohen, director of the Jewish community of Vi- 

enna: plaque: bust; 168 x 115 mm. 

Enlargement of the synagogue at Frankfort: obverse, 
old and new synagogues; reverse, inscription ; 39 
mm. 

Composer Ignaz Briill: plaque: head ; 200 X 135 mm. 

Virtuoso Alfred Griinfeld : plaque; head ; 70 X 50 mm. 

Synagogue at Szegedin : obverse and reverse, building $ 
29 mm. 

Musician Siegfried Ochs: obverse, bust; reverse, lyre 5 
30 mim. 

Centenary of the Frankfort Philanthropin: obverse, 
sower; reverse, beehive ; 50 mm. 


one-sided medallion; 


405 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medals 
Medeba 





1904. M. von Wilmersdorffer’s death: plaque ; bust; 100 mm. 
1904. Artist Joseph Israels’ eightieth birthday. 


For the names of Jews prominent as engravers of 
medals see Jew. Encyc. v. 175, 8.0. ENGRAVING 
AND ENGRAVERS. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Mulder, Hene Zeldzame Medaille, Amster- 
dain, 1859: Sechudt, Jiidische Merckwiirdigkeiten, ii. 82: 
Wolf, Hine Unhekannte Jtidische Medaille, in Monats- 
schrift, 1894; idem, Eine Medaille auf R. Elieser hb. 
Samuel Sehmelka, ib. 1898; idem, Das Jiidische Berlin 
Gegen Ende des Achtzehnten Jahrhunderts tn Abbiidun- 
gen und Medaillen, in Kaufmann Gedenkhueh ; idem, Die 
Hamburger auf oder von Juden Geprigten Medaitlen, in 
Mittheilungen ftir Jiidische Volkskunde, No. xiii; idem, 
Zweiauf Judentaufen Beztig“itthe Mecaillen, in Monats- 
schrift, 1900; Zunz, Hine Merkwiirdige Medaille.in G.S. 
jii. 

A, A. W. 

MEDEBA (modern name Madeba): A town 
east of the Dead Sea and a few miles south of Hesh- 
bon. It was wrested from the Moabites by Sihon, 
King of the Amorites (Num. xxi. 80); and after the 
conquest of Palestine it was assigned, together with 
the plain in which it lay, to the tribe of Reuben 
(Josh. xiii. 9, 16). During the war of the Ammon- 
ites against David, the Syrian allies of the former 
encamped at Medeba, which seems at that time to 
have been under Ammonite control (I Chron. xix. 
6-15), Later it was seized by the Moabites again; 
for, according to the MoasBITtE STONE (line 8), 
“Omri annexed [all the land] of Medeba, and Israel 
occupied it, his days and half his son’s days, forty 
years.” This statement is confirmed by Isa. xv. 2, 
which mentions Medeba as a city of Moab, under 
whose control it remained until the Moabites were 
driven south of the Arnon by Jeroboam II. 

During the Maccabean period John, brother of 
Jonathan and Simon Maccabeus, was murdered by 
a robber clan, led by Jambri or Ambri, who lived 
in Medeba, and who in revenge were ambushed and 
slain while taking part ina marriage procession near 
the town (1 Macc. ix. 85-42; Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 
1, §§ 2,4). It was later taken by John Hyrcanus 
after astubborn siege (¢A, xiii. 9, § 1), and finally was 
captured by Alexander Jannzeus, although Hyrcanus 
II. promised to restore it to Aretas, King of Arabia, 
(tb. xiii. 15, § 4; xiv. 1, § 4). 

J. L. H. G. 


Medeba, after lying desolate for some centuries, 
was reoccupied by a colony of Greek Christians 
about 1880; to this colony a smaller one of Latin 
Christians has since been added. In erecting the 
necessary buildings for this new occupation many 
beautiful mosaics which belonged to churches and 
monasteries of the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries 
have been uncovered. Many of these may still 
be seen in hovels, stables, and farmyards. The 
most noteworthy of these is the mosaic map of Pal- 
estine, some remains of which may still be seen in 
the floor of the Greek church at Medeba. The dis- 
covery of this map was announced in Dec., 1896, but 
there is reason to believe that it had been known to 
a small circle of ecclesiastics for some time before 
this, and that when it was first discovered it was in 
a much better state of preservation than at present. 
Toward the end of 1896 efforts were made to make 
accurate charts of the remains of it and to give to 
the world some knowledge of this remarkable pro- 


duction. The publications in reference to it will be 
found in the bibliography at the end of this article. 

The artistic and technical difficulties which the 
makers of the map had to overcome were very great, 
but they surmounted them with surprising success. 
Exact proportions and perspective were of course 
not attained, but the general relations of the sacred 
sites were graphically pictured; much valuable in- 
formation as tothe condition of the landat the time 
at which the mosaic was made (fifth or sixth century 
Cc. E.) is given, and the traditions then current con- 
cerning the location of Biblical sites found expres- 
sion. Thus the statements of Eusebius and Jerome 
in their onomastica are illustrated and in some cases 
supplemented. 

Jerusalem is pictured on the map as being bisected 
by a long colonnaded street. The wall of Jerusa- 
lem did not enclose the southern end of the two hills 
on which the city stands, After enclosing the Church 

of Mt. Zion on the site of the present 
Jerusalem Ccenaculum it turned sharply to the 
Map. northeast. Traces of another wall, 
approximately on the line of the pres- 
ent one, are also visible; this latter wall is, no 
doubt, that built by Hadrian, while the exten- 
sion which includes the Church of Mt. Zion pictures 
a period before the time of Eudoxia, who rebuilt the 
wall on the line of that of Nehemiah. This not only 
throws light on the topography of Jerusalem for 
that period, but helps to date the map. Prominent 
buildings like the Church of the Holy Sepulcher are 
pictured on the map with sufficient clearness to af- 
ford considerable information concerning their archi- 
tecture at that time. 

The makers of the mosaic were especially inter- 
ested in Christian themes. They accordingly pic- 
tured the Sea of Galilee as bearing a ship containing 
the disciples, and Peter endeavoring to walk on the 
water (Matt. xiv. 25-81). 

One easily recognizes on the map the uames of 
many sites which are well known, such as Baitin 
(Bethel), Jifna, Jibia, Beer-sheba. Sites in southern 
Palestine and on the Philistine plain are given with 
considerable fulness. Gerar is shown close to Beer- 
sheba and to the west ot it—a location which conflicts 
with the usual identification of Gerar with Umm 
Jarar, five miles to the south of Gaza. The Philis- 
tine Gath is placed near the site of the modern 
Ramleh. 

On the south the map extends far enough to show 
Lower Egypt. Witnesses quoted as reliable by 
Father Cléopas, the librarian of the Convent of the 
Holy Sepulcher, said that they saw the mosaic some 
years before it was so badly mutilated and declared 
that they recognized Ephesus and Smyrna thereon. 
It would seem, therefore, that when intact the map 
included Asia Minor as well as Egypt. 

Tradition in the fourth century was not always 
more reliable than it is now, a fact to which this 
map sometimes bears witness. For example, the 
thrashing-floor of Atad, which Gen. 1. 10 places east 
of the Jordan, is on this map identified with Beth- 
hogla (“thrashing-floor of Atad, which is now Beth- 
hogla”). Beth-hogla, however, is the modern ‘Ain 
(Kasr) Hajlah in the plain southeast of Jericho, west. 
of the Jordan, where a Greek monastery is situated. 


Medes 
Mediator 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cléopas and Lagrange, La Mosaique Géo- 
graphique de Madaba,in Rev. Bib. April, 1897 ; Clermont- 
Ganneau, Recueil @Archéologie Orientale, ii. 161 et seq.; 
Pal. Explor. Fund, Quarterly Statement, 1897, pp. 2138 
et seq. (Clermont-Ganneau); 1898, p. 251 (idem); 1898, p. 85 
(Schick); 1898, pp. 177 et seg. (Mommert); Séjourné, Médeba, 
in Revue Biblique. 1892, i. 617-644; Bacher, in J.Q. R., Xiii. 
E.G. H. G. A. B. 
MEDES. See MEptIa. 

MEDIA (Latin, Wedia; Greek, Mydia; Old Per- 
sian, dda; Hebr. 1%): Ancient name of a coun- 
try which is located south and west of the Cas- 
pian Sea, and is associated with events in Jewish 
history. The confines of Media anciently embraced 
territory corresponding roughly to the present Azer- 
baijan, the southern borders of the Caspian, the 
province of ‘Irak-‘Ajami, and the districts of modern 
Persia which adjoin the mountains of Kurdistan and 
Luristan. In the Hebrew Scriptures Media and the 
Medes are mentioned more than a dozen times. The 
antiquity of the name is believed to be shown by its 
having been borne by Noah’s grandson Madai, son of 
Japheth (Gen. x. 3 [A. V. 2]), who is commonly re- 
garded as the progenitor of the Median race, Mount 
Ararat being within the ancient Median borders. 
From the Bible, furthermore, it is known that Israel- 
ites were placed in cities of the Medes by Shalman- 
eser, King of Assyria, after his conquest of Samaria 
(II Kings xvii. 6, xviii. 11); and Media is referred to 
under the form “ Amada” or “Madai” in the records 
of this king and of Tiglath-pileser. Allusions to 
Media in connection with Persia are not rare in cer- 
tain books of the Scriptures; and the laws of the 
Medes and Persians became a synonym for ali that 
was fixed and unalterable (Esth. i. 3, 14, 18, 19; x. 2; 
Dan. v. 28, vi. 8, vili. 20). The part taken by Media 
and Elam, meaning Persia, in the overthrow of 
Babylon forms a portion of the prophecy of the 
elder Isaiah (Isa. xiii. 17, xxi. 2; comp. also Jer. xxv. 
25). At Ecbatana, in the province of the Medes, 
moreover, was found the famous edict of Cyrus 
granting a decree for the building of 
the Temple at Jerusalem (Ezra vi. 2: 
I Esdras vi. 23). The same capital 
is prominent likewise in the Book of Judith (Judith 
i. 1 e¢ seg.); and the ancient Median city Rhages 
figures elsewhere in this book and strikingly in the 
narrative of Tobit (Judith i. 5,15; Tobit i. 14, v. 5, 
vi. 10). On the identification of “ Darius the Me- 
dian ” and on Daniel’s position under his rule (Dan. 
v. 28, vi. 8, viii, 20, ix. 1, xi. 1), see DANIEL; 
DARIUS. 

With regard to Media as a factor in the world’s 
history, the antiquity of the people as an Iranian 
nation is conceded, even though the existence of a 
so-called Median empire in very remote times may 
be open tosomedoubt. According tothe fragments 
of Berosus of Babylon, however, the Median royal 
line extended back almost two thousand years be- 
fore the time of Alexander the Great; 
and the historian Ctesias pretends to 
give a list of kings and their reigns 
running back nearly to10008B.c. For 
historic purposes, however, thestory of Media begins 
with Dejoces (Ayiéxyc), whom Herodotus (“ Hist.” 
i. 16 e¢ seg.) describes as the founder of the empire. 
This monarch is mentioned as “ Dayaukku” in the 
inscriptions of Sargon: and he ruled over Media 


In Bible. 


Ctesias’ 
Account. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


406 


from 709 to 656 B.c. or, more exactly, from %00 to 

647. He was succeeded by Phraortes (Old Persian, 

“Fravartish ”), who extended the boundaries and 

sway of Media and ruled from 647 to 625. Phra- 

ortes in turn was followed by Cyaxares (Old Persian, 

“lH]uvaxshatara”; Babylonian, “ Uvakuishtar ”), 

whose reign (625-585 u.c.) formed the culmination 

of the Median ascendency. It was under this ruler, 
in alliance with Nabopalasar, King of Babylon, that 
the destruction of Nineveh and the overthrow of the 

Assyrian empire took place (c. 607-604 B.c.). His 

successor was Astyages (Bab. “Ishtuvegu”), whom 

Oriental tradition erroneously identifies with the 

legendary Azh-Dahak of Babylon. With the rule 

of Astyages (585-550 B.c.) came the decline and 
final overthrow of Media by Persia under Cyrus. 

The Median supremacy was lost sight of in the 

greater glory of Persia. Thenceforth the two na- 

tions came to be regarded as one, their names being 
often united and used interchangeably, although 
divisions were recognized. After the death of Alex- 
ander the Great, for example, Media Minor, which 
corresponds roughly to Azerbaijan, was distin- 
guished from Media Major, which became a part of 
the Syrian empire; and, again, Media Major was 
later comprised in the Parthian domain and was 
finally included in the great empire of the Sassa- 

nians. . 

From the religious standpoint also Media is im- 
portant because Zoroaster is believed to have arisen 
in that country; and the similarities between Zoroas- 
trianism. and Judaism are many and striking. See 
AVESTA; PERSIA. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Justi, Gesch. Irans von den Aeltesten 
Zeiten, in Geiger and Kuhn, Grundriss der Iranischen_Phi- 
lologie, pp. 406-415, Strasburg, 1897; Rawlinson, Five Great 
Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World, vols. tii.-iv., 
London, 1865; M. Duncker, Gesch. des Alterthums, Leipsic, 
1877 (= History of Antiquity, Eng. transl. by E. Abbott, 
London, 1881); J. Oppert, Le Peuple et la Langue des Medes, 


Paris, 1879; Ed. Meyer, Gesch. des Alterthums, Stuttgart, 
1884; idem, Die Entstehung des Judenthums, Halle, 1896. 


G. A. V. W. J. 


MEDIATOR (Greek, Mesirnc): An agent that 
goes between; one who interposes between parties 
at variance; in particular, an intercessor between 
God and man. Judaism recognizes in principle no 
mediatorship between God and man. “The Lord 
alone did lead him [Israel], and there was no strange 
god with him” (Deut. xxxii. 12). “See now that I, 
even I, am he, and there is no god with me: [ kill, 
and I make alive; £ wound, and I heal” (2d. 39). 
“In his love and in his pity he redeems them; and 
he bare them and carried them” (Isa. lxili. 9). 
“What nation is there so great, who hath God so 
nigh unto them, as the Lord our God ts in all things 
that we call upon him for?” (Deut. iv. 7). When 
told by God that Israel should henceforth be led by 
an angel, Moses replied: “If thy presence go not 
with me, carry us not up hence” (Ex. xxxiii. 15). 
Still for the people the distance between the Deity 
and frail humanity was too great to be overcome by 
the spiritual effort of the multitude or of the com- 
mon individual. Hence the prophet, believed to 
be in constant communion with God, is viewed in 
Scripture as the fit person to intercede on behalf of 
men in trouble. Thus Abraham is empowered by 
God to pray for pardon and restored health for 


NOY *AMMINAD HLA FHL AO ATHVIOUd ‘ANTILSHTVY JO dv DIVSOW 





CHANYOD GNV]-LBDOIY Wadd NI ‘OTDUVING ‘'NATVSAUAL AO XVId) “VAACAW 


Poona caer Ee eee 
eau sate os ne AR MS Lat 


Tiger di 


Se a, 


2 pleas sapdb aeer. crop rE NT MS creak NCOP LN cr een tian ood wt trees! cope eta tit a 









G an taser te a tae seesa nan seme citts SSS aS 


Mediator 
Medicine 


Abimelech (Gen. xx. 7, 17; comp. 7b. xviii. 23-38). 
Moses intercedes on behalf of Pharaoh and the 
Egyptians (Ex. viii. 5-8, 24-26; ix. 28-33; x. 17-18) 
and also on behalf of his own people (23. xvii. 11, 
xxxii. 11; Deut. ix. 18); likewise Samuel (I Sam. 
vii. 5; xii. 19, 23; comp. Ps. xcix. 6), Jeremiah (Jer. 
xv. 1), and Job Job xlii. 7; comp. Ezek. xiv. 14- 
20). Noah, Daniel, and Job save their generations 
by their righteousness, 

In the Apocryphal and Hellenistic literature the 
idea of mediatorship is more pronounced. Jere- 
miah is frequently mentioned as the one who “ pray- 

eth much for the people” (II Macc. 

In Apocry- xv. 14); “whose works are to this city 
phal and [Jerusalem] asa firm pillar and whose 
Hellenistic prayers as a strong wall” (Apoc. Ba- 
Literature. ruch, ii. 2; “Rest of the Words of Ba- 
ruch,” i. 2, ii. 3; comp. Jer. vi. 27; 

Pesik. 115b). According to Tobit (iii. 26), angels 
bring the prayers of men before God’s throne. 
Enoch is asked by the fallen angels to intercede for 
them (Enoch, xiii. 4-7). Abraham is described as 
interceding for the sinners in a state of suspense 
(Testament of Abraham, xiv.; comp. Luke xvi. 24). 
Moses was “the advocate of Israel who bent his 
knees day and night in prayer to make intercession 
for his people” (Assumptio Mosis, xi. 17, xii. 6). 
The Patriarchs in heaven were believed to be inter- 
cessors for the living (Philo, “De Execrationibus,” 
$9; Lam. R., Introduction, 25; comp. Josephus, 
“Ant.” i. 18, § 3); for all the righteous souls (Sibyl- 
lines, ii. 331). Remarkable is the warning of Enoch 
to his children: “Say not our father stands before 
God and prays for us to be released from sin; for 
there is no person there to help any man that hath 
sinned ” (Slavonic Enoch, liii. 1; comp. Isa. lxiii, 16). 

In principle the Rabbis were against prayers to 
angels for intercession. Says R. Judan: “A man 

in trouble who has a great man for a 

In Rab- patron stands at the door awaiting 

binical the answer the servants will bring, 
Literature. whether or not he will be permitted 

to approach him for aid. He who 
needs God’s help ought not to ask the assistance of 
either Michael or Gabriel or any other angel, but 
should turn immediately to God; for whosoever 
shall call on the name of God shall be delivered ” 
(Yer. Ber. ix. 18a, after Joel iii. 5 [A. V. ii. 32]). 
“ However exalted the Most High is, let but a man 
enter His house and whisper a prayer and the Al- 
mighty listens as a friend to whom a secret is con- 
fided ” (Yer. Ber. Z.c.). 

Nevertheless, to judge from the early Christian 
writers (Col. it. 19; Origen, “Contra Celsum,” i. 26, 
v. 6; Clement, “Stromata,” vi. 5, 41; Aristides, 
“Apologue,” xiv.), angels were often invoked by 
certain (Gnostic?) classes of Jews. The passage in 
Job xxxiii. 23 (comp. v. 1) also led the Rabbis to 
assume that angels plead for men at the throne of 
God (Yer. Kid. i. 61d). Shab. 12b reads: “He who 
prays in the Aramaic language will lack the aid of 
angels, whose language is Hebrew,” while from 
Tosef., Hul. ii. 18 (comp. Mek., Yitro, Ex. xx. 4) it 
may be learned that angel-worship was not unknown 
in certain Jewish circles, And this led eventually, 
notwithstanding the opposition of many rabbinical 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


408 


authorities (see the passages in Zunz, “G. V.” pp. 
147-149), to the introduction even into the liturgy 
ot prayers addressed to the angels and seeking their 
mediation. The Ineffable Name, the divine attri- 
bute of mercy, the thirteen attributes of God (see 
Mippor), the holy throne, the gates of heaven, 
and the Torah were also appealed to in the liturgy 
(see Zunz, v.c.). A great sinner in the Talmud 
invokes the mountains and the stars to pray for 
him (‘Ab. Zarah 17%a). 

Especially was Michael invoked as intercessor for 
the Jewish people (Dan. xii. 1; see Liicken, “ Mi- 
chael,” 1898, pp. 11-25). Metatron (Mithra) also is 
frequently mentioned in Gnostic circles together 
with Michael as mediator of the Revelation (Sanh. 
388b, with reference to Ex. xxiii. 21; Gen. R. v.; 
comp. Tan., Mishpatim, ed. Buber, p. 12). Right- 
eous souls also appear as intercessors (Tanna debe 
Eliyahu R. iii.). 

The Rabbis, however, insisted upon not allow- 
ing God’s absolute sovereignty and power to be in- 
fringed through the interference of angels. “The 
angels were created on the second day so that it 
should not be believed that they had a share in the 
creation of the world” (Gen. R. i., iii.). The Lord 
Himself, and no angel, or seraph, or other mes- 
senger of His, smote the Egyptians at the time of 
Tsrael’s redemption from Egypt (Passover Hagga- 
dah; Mek., Bo, 7); though in the destruction of 
Sodom, Gabriel assisted (Gen. R. li. 8). 

That the Law was given to the people or to Moses 
through angels is a belief ascribed to the Jews by 

Josephus (“ Ant.” xv. 15, § 3), by 
Moses the Paul (Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2), and by 
Mediator Stephen (Acts vii. 38, 53; comp. 
of the Apoc. Mosis, i.; Book of Jubilees, i. 
Law. 27; Hermas, “Similitude,” viii. 3, 3, 
where Michael is mentioned as media- 
tor of the Book of the Law). Rabbinical teach- 
ing, on the other hand, consistently opposed the | 
idea of such a mediatorship. “When the Lord 
spoke with Moses the angels who stood between them 
did not hear a word” (Num. R. xiv., end; comp. 
Sifre, Num. 58). Moses alone is viewed in rabbin- 
ical literature as the mediator (“sirsur” = “ go-be- 
tween”) between God and Israel (Pesik. R. vi.; Ex, 
R. iii. 6, vi. 8; Num. R. xi. 5). In Hellenistic 
literature also Moses is called “mediator,” Meoirne¢ 
(Philo, “ De Vita Moysis,” iii. 19; Assumptio Mosis, 
i. 14, iii. 12; Gal. iii. 19). The Samaritans call 
Moses the “ Mesites” (see Bancth, “Marqah,” 1888, 
p. 48), and he is actually invoked as intercessor 
by them (see “J. Q. R.” viii. 604). At the same 
time the Midrash (Lekah Tob on Deut. xxxiii. 4) 
says: “No one knows the place where Moses is 
buried, so that no one should ever sacrifice at his 
grave, or worship him, or bring incense-offerings 
to him.” “ Wherefore criest thou to me?” (Ix. xiv. 
15) is thus explained by the Rabbis: “There is no 
need of asking God concerning His children, as He 
Himself is in distress when His children suffer,” 
“My children have already prayed to Me, and [ 
have heard their prayer,” said God to Moses (Ex. 
R. xxi.; Cant. R. i. 2; Mek., Beshallah, 3). 

Philo, however, speaks of “ The Word ” (“ Logos ”) 

as the mediator between two worlds. “The Father 


409 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mediator 
Medicine: 





who created the universe has given to His arch- 
angelic and most ancient Word a preeminent gift to 
stand on the confines of both; while separating the 
created things from the Creator he pleads before the 
immortal God on behalf of the mor- 
tal race which sins continually, and is 
the ambassador sent by the Ruler to 
the subject race. He exults in this 
office and boasts of it, saying: ‘I stood in the midst 
between the Lord and you’” (Num. xvi. 48). From 
this it was but one step to claim for Jesus the same 
cosmic mediatorship, as Paul and his followers did 
while presenting him as the mediator of the new 
covenant and the restorer of the relations between 
man and God which had been broken through sin (I 
Tim. ii. 5; Heb, viii. 6, ix. 15, xii. 24). Against 
this teaching R. Akiba declares: “Happy are ye 
Israelites!) Before whom do ye cleanse yourselves, 
and who cleanses you from sin? None but your 
Father in Heaven; for Scripture says: ‘I shall 
sprinkle upon you clean waters, and ye shall be 
clean ’ (Ezek. xxxvi. 25), and ‘Israel’s hope [“ mik- 
weh”} is the Lord’ (Jer. xvii. 13). Like the 
mikweh, ‘the Fountain of Water,’ so is the Lord 
the source of purification for all impurities” (Yo- 
ma viii. 9). 

Regarding the function of the priests, Judaism is 
also very outspoken in denying to any human being 
the power of conferring any blessing upon the peo- 
ple. The words “And they shall put my name 
upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them” 
(Num. vi. 27) are thus commented upon (Sifre, 
Num. 48; Num. R. xi., end): “Israel is not to be- 
lieve that its blessing depends upon the priests, 
nor should the priests claim the power of blessing 
for themselves; but God aloneis He who confers the 
blessing.” 

Maimonides in the fifth article of his creed lays 
especial stress upon prayer being offered exclusively 
to God and to no other being; and in his commen- 
tary (Sanh. xi.) he points out particularly that the 
angels should not be appealed to as mediators or in- 
tercessors between God andman. In the same man- 
ner Nahmaunides declares it wrong to pray to angels 
as intercessors (see his discourse “Torat Adonai,” 
ed. Jellinek, pp. 80-31). Lipman of Mithlhausen in 
his “Nizzahon,” pp. 12, 182, writes: “Our rabbis 
have rejected every kind of mediatorship, referring 
to the Scripture: ‘Him alone shalt thou worship, 
and to him shalt thou cleave’ (Deut. x. 20). Every 
appeal to intercessors leads to idolatry and to im- 
purity.” The remark of Abraham ibn Ezra (com- 
mentary on the Pentatcuch, Introduction), “The 
angel that mediates between man and God is reason,” 
is characteristic of the spirit of Judaism. 


Philo’s 
Logos. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, R. B. T. ii. 188-142, s.v. Mittel- 
oder Unmittelbarheit Gottes. K 


MEDICINE.—In Bible and Talmud: The 
ancient Hebrew regarded health and disease as ema- 
nating from the same divine source. “TI kill, and I 
make alive; I wound, and I heal” (Deut. xxxit. 39), 
said the Lord through Hisservant Moses; and there- 
fore they who minister to the health of their fellows 
are regarded as the messengers of God, as the execu- 
tors of His will. Although Yuwu is the physician 


of Israel (Ex. xv. 26), yet the practise of medicine 
is sanctioned by the Law: “If men strive together, 
and onesmiteanother ... and... he keepeth his. 
bed . . . he shall pay for the loss of his time, and 
shall cause him to be thoroughly healed” (2. xxi, 
18-19). Joseph employed house physicians (Gen. 
1, 2); and Isaiah mentions especially a surgeon 
or wound-dresser (Isa. iii. 7). Among the Jews, 
unlike other primitive nations, the priests did not 
monopolize the art and science of healing. Moses 
assigned to them only the task of police supervision 
in cases of contagious diseases. The Bible does not 
mention a single instance of a priest having per- 
formed the functions of a physician. The Prophets, 
however, practised occasionally the art of healing. 
Elijah brought to life a child apparently dead (I 
Kings xvii. 17-22); and his disciple Elisha performed. 
a similar miraculous cure (II Kings iv. 18-20, 84- 
35). A man of God restored the paralyzed hand of 
King Jeroboam (J Kings xiii, 4-6). Isaiah cured 
King Hezekiah of an inflammation by applying a 
plaster made of figs (II Kings xx. 7%). 

At a later period physicians were held in high es- 
teem by the people, as may be gathered from Ben Si- 
ra: “ Honor a physician with the honor due unto him 
for the uses which ye may have of him, for the: 
Lord hath created him. . . . The Lord has created 
medicines out of the earth; and he that is wise will 
not abhor them. . . . And He has given men skill 
that He might be honored in His marvelous works. 

My son, in thy sickness be not negligent; . . . 
give place tothe physician; , . . let him not go from 
thee, for thou hast need of him” (Ecclus. [Sirach} 
xxxvViii. 1-12). Afterward the status of the medical 
profession became still more exalted. The court 
of justice (“bet din”) employed in certain cases the 
services of a physician (“rofe”), whose expert tes- 
timony was decisive in criminal matters. In cases. 
of assault, for instance, it was his duty to give his 
opinion (“umdena”) as to the danger to the life of 
the assaulted (Sanh. 78a; Git. 12b). Corporal pun- 
ishment was inflicted under the supervision of a 
physician (Mak. 22b). No physician was permitted 
to practise without a license from the local judicial 
council (B. B. 21a; Mak. 20b). Every city was re- 
quired to have at least one physician; and to live 
in a city that had none was considered hazardous 
(Sanh. 17b). 

The medical knowledge of the Talmudists was 
based upon tradition, the dissection of human bodies, 
observation of diseases, and experiments upon ani- 

mals (“‘issuk be-debarim”; Hul. 57b). 


Sources of When making theirrounds physicians. 


Medical used to take their apprentices with 
Knowl- them (Deut. R. x.). In the majority 
edge. of cases the art of healing was trans- 


mitted from father to son (Yer. R. H. 
i. 8, 57b). The numerous medical aphorisms pre- 
served in the Talmudim and Midrashim, and the fact 
that physicians took part in the discussion of many 
important religious questions by the Rabbis, indi- 
cate that the latter were not unacquainted with the 
science of medicine (Naz. 52a; Nid. 22b). That the 
demand upon the skill of physicians was considera- 
ble may be adduced from the statute law prohibiting 
the part owner of a house from renting his part te 


Medicine 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


410 





a physician on account of the noise and disturbance 
caused by the visiting patients (B. B. 21a). Physi- 
cians reccived for their services comparatively large 
tees. A current. saying was: “A physician who 
takes nothing is worth nothing ” (B. K. 85a). 

What was the sum total of medical knowledge 
possessed by the ancient Hebrews can not be stated 
definitely, for the reason that neither the Bible nor 
the Talmud contains medical treatises as such. The 
Mishnah mentions a medical book, “Sefer Refu’ot,” 
which was attributed to King Solomon and expur- 
gated by King Hezekiah (Pes. iv. 9), and the Talmud 
citesa treatise on pharmacology, “ Megillat Samma- 
nin” (Yoma 88a); but neither of these has been pre- 
served. Medicine was an integral part of the religion 
of the Jews; and medical subjects are treated of or 
alluded to only in so far as they concern or eluci- 
date some point of law. 

There are in the Bible but few direct references 
to the internal organs. Biblical poetry, however, 

abounds with expressions in which the 
Anatomy. names of such organs are used meta- 

phorically, ¢e.g.: “ Hisarchers compass 
me round about, he cleaveth my reins asunder, and 
doth not spare; he poureth out my gall upon the 
ground” (Job xvi. 18); “His vessels are full of 
healthy fluid, and the marrow of his bones is well 
moistened ” (7), xxi. 24, Hebr.); “Iam weary; . . 
my throat is dried” (Ps. ]xix.). See ANATOMY. 

The laws concerning clean (“tohorah”) and un- 
clean (“tum/’ah”) afford means for ascertaining in 
part the familiarity of the ancient Hebrews with 
certain branches of anatomy. According to the 
Mosaic law (Num, xix. 14), any one who comes in 
contact with a dead body or any part thereof, or 
who remains in a tent wherein a corpse is found, is 
considered infected (“unclean”) for seven days. 
The Mishnah teaches that this tent-infection 
(*tum/’at ohel”) takes place in the presence either 
of a complete corpse, or of an anatomical unit or 
member (“eber”), z.¢., a bone covered with its soft 
parts. A bone stripped of its soft parts does not 
infect. Should, however, a coilection of such bones, 
by either their bulk or number, represent more than 
half of the skeleton (“sheled ”), their infecting power 
is equal to that of a complete corpse (Oh. i. ef seq.). 
This law made it imperative that the number of 
bones in the human body should be ascertained. 
Oh. i.-viii. gives the number as 248; and the fol- 
lowing bones are recognized and named: hand 
(“pissat ha-yad ”) 30; forearm (“Ixaneh ”) 2; clbow- 
joint (“ marpek ”) 2; arm 1; shoulder-joint (“ kataf”), 

including shoulder-blade (“ Kanaf ”), 4; 
Osteology. foot (* pissat ha-regel ”) 30; ankle-joint 

(“Kkarsol”) 10; leg 2; knee-joint (“ ‘ar- 
kub”), including knee-cap (“ pikah”) 5; thigh 1; 
hip -joint (“ kotlit ”), including head of femur (“ buka 
de-itma ”) and imnominate bone (“kKeliboset”), 3; 
spinal column (“shedrah”) made up of vertebre 
(“hulyot ”) 18; ribs 11; breast-bone (“mafteah shel- 
leb”) 6; sacrum and coccyx (“ ‘ukaz”) 6; and head 
9, in which were recognized the vertex (“kederah ”), 
two condyloid processes, the foramen magnum, the 
fontanels, maxillary bone, maxillary arch (“ gabbot 
ha-zakan ”), and the nasal bone (“ ‘ezem ha-lhotam ”). 
This enumeration gave rise to numerous disputes as 


to the number of bones constituting a normal skele- 
ton. The disciples of R. Ishmael, in order to settle 
this question, obtained the body of a young harlot 
who had been put to death, and, having subjected 
it to prolonged boiling (“shelikah”), counted the 
bones and found the number of them to be 282 
(Bek. 45a). Neither of the numbers given agrees 
with modern anatomical knowledge. The explana- 
tion of the discrepancy is to be found in the youth- 
ful age of the subject used, many of the bones not 
having become completely ossitied; also the pro- 
longed boiling caused them to be separated into 
their original component parts, so that the Talmud- 
ists counted the epiphysis and diaphysis as separate 
bones. AS an expert osteologist is mentioned Theo- 
dos, a well-known physician (Naz. 52a), 

The Bible speaks of muscles under the general 
term “flesh” (“basar”). The abdominal muscles 
are mentioned in Job xl. 16. The psoas muscle is 
mentioned in the Talmud (Hul. 98a); and Rab His- 
dai made the remarkable observation 
that the psoas in all clean animals, @.¢., 
those that chew the cua and whose 
hoofs are cleft, has two accessory muscles whose 
respective tibers run longitudinally and transversely 
(20. 59a). Tendons are frequently mentioned under 
the term “ giddim.” 

The salivary glands or “fountains” (Niddah 55b) 
are situated in the cavity of the mouth (Ab. R. N. 
Xxxi.) and under the tongue (Lev. R. xvi.). The 
capacity of the pharynx (“bet ha-beli‘ah”) was 
found by experiment to be larger than it seems. A 
hen’s egg can casily be swallowed whole (Yoma 
80a). The esophagus (“ weshet”) and larynx (“ka- 
neh ”) have their respective origins in the pharynx. 
The structure of the esophagus is composed of two 
layers (“orot”)—an outer, muscular one and an 
inner, serous one (Hul, 48a). The inner layer 
has longitudinal folds throughout. its length, ex- 
cept at the upper part, which is called “ tarbez 
ha-weshet” (72. 48b). The lower portion of the 
inner layer is supplied with hair-like projections 
(7b. 44a). 

The larynx (“kaneh,” “ gargeret”) is composed of 
a large ring of cricoid cartilage (“tabba‘at gedolah ”), 
thyroid cartilage (“koba‘,” “ pikah shel-gargeret.”), 
and the epiglottis (““shippuy Koba‘”; Hul. 18b). 
The trachea is composed of incomplete cartilaginous 
rings (““hulyot”), and membranous ones (“bene 
hulyah ”). 

The alimentary canal of ruminating animals is 
thus described : 

“The food passes from the mouth into the phar- 
ynx, thence into the esophagus [“istomka ”], thence 
into the reticulum [“ bet ha-kosot ”], thence into the 
psalterium [“ha-masas” or “hemses”], thence into 
the abomasum [“karsa”], thence into the duode- 
num [“resh mayah ”], thence into the smal) intestines 
[“kerukah kattinah”], thence into the blind gut 
[“sanya debe”], thence into the large intestines 
[“kerukit ‘ubya”], thence into the rectum [“ peta- 
troka”]}, whence it makes its exit through the 
sphineter ant [“iskutha”]” (Lev. R. iii.). 

According to R. Samuel, there are no hair-like 
projections (“ milot”) below the pylorus (“mezar ”). 
The gastro-intestinal tract throughout its length 


Myology. 


411 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 





is covered externally with the peritoneum (“ kerum 
nikiaf”) except the posterior surface of the lower 
portion of the rectum (“hilholet”; Hul. 49b). The 
peritoneum forms the greater omentum (“ peder ”), 
which isattached tothe greater curvature or “bow ” 
(“isashta ”) of the stomach (7d. 50a) and the begin- 
ning of the small intestines (25. 98a). 

The liver is attached to the diaphragm (“ tarpesha”) 
by a fold of the peritoneum (2). 46a). It is united 
also with the gall-bladder (“marah”) by means of 
a harrow tube (“simpona”; 72. 48b). The pancreas 
is considered an accessory organ of the liver, and is 
called the “finger of the liver” (“ezba‘ ha-kabed ”). 
Its relations to the abdominal organs are described 
correctly (Tamid 31a). The anterior abdominal wall! 
is divided into an inner, peritoneal layer (“keres 
penimit”) and an outer, muscular one (“ keres hizo- 
nah”). The spleen and kidneys are frequently 
mentioned in Talmud and Midrash, but no descrip- 
tion is given (see below). 

The lungs are composed of two “rows” (“‘aru- 
got”), right and left, divided vertically by a sep- 
tum (“tarpesh ha-leb”) which rises from the pericar- 

dium (“kis ha-leb”) and is attached to 
The Lungs thespinalcolumn. The large bronchi 
and Heart. (“bet ha-simponot”) enter respectively 

the inner side of each row (2d. 50a). 
Alongside of the bronchi enter also the large blood- 
vessels (“ mizrakim ”; 7b. 98b). The number of lobes 
in each lung is given correctly (4b, 47a). The pleura 
is composed of two layers, an outer, rough one 
(*“kerama ‘illaya”) and an inner, rose-colored one 
(“kerama tatta’a,” “kittuna de-warda”; 7b, 46a). 
The heart is composed of two ventricles (“halal ”), 
the right being larger than the left (23. 45b). It is 
situated to the left of the median line (Men. 37b). 
Rab expressed a radical view for his time, namely, 
that the aorta (“kaneh shel-leb ”) contains blood, not 
air (Hul. 45b). The large veins are called “ weri- 
dim”; the small ones, “hute dam.” 

The brain is not mentioned in the Bible. Accord- 
ing to the Talmudists, it has two coats, an outer 
(the dura mater) and an inner coat (the pia mater), 
the one being hard (“kashshish ”), the other thin 
(“dakkik ”). The spinal cord begins outside of the 
condyloid processes (Hul, 45a). The Zohar gives a 
somewhat more detailed description: “The skull 
contains three cavities in which the brain is lodged. 
From the brain issue thirty-two paths. These paths 
spread over the body connecting it with the brain” 
(Zohar on Lev. xxvi.). 

From the laws relating to circumcision, flux, men- 
struation, etc., which are discussed at length in the 
Bible and especially in the Talmud, may be gath- 
ered some idea of the knowledge which the ancient 
Jews possessed concerning the anatomy of the gen- 
erative organs. Of the male genitals the anatom- 
ical parts are mentioned as follows: The scrotum 

(“kis”) is divided by a septum into 

The two sacculi (Bek. 40a); the testes 
Generative (“bezim,” “ashakim ”) have two coats 
Organs. (Hul. 45a); each testicle has anappen- 
dix, the epididymis (“hute bezah”; 

Yeb. 75a); it is supplied with blood-vessels (* gide 
pahad”; Hul. 98a) and nerves (2b. 45b), and it con- 
tains a viscid tluid (Yeb. 75a). It was held that the 


le ing 


spermatic fluid and the urine had each a separate 
canal for their exit (Bek. 44b). 

Besides the uterus only the visible parts of the 
female generative organs (“rehem”), there being 
many synonyms, are mentioned in the Bible. The 
Taimud mentions the following: Mons ceneris (Hebr. 
“kaf tappuah”; Yer. Yeb, 1-2); eulva (*‘erwah”); 
roma pudendorum (“bet ha-setarim”; Niddah 66b); 
vestibulum vagine (“bet hizon”; 7b. 41b): orifictum 
wrethre (“lul”; 2. 17b); hymen (“betulim ”): ost?- 
um tagene (“bet shinnayim”; 7. 46b): vagina 
(“bet toref,” “bet ha-rehem”; Shab. 64a): septum 
vesico-caginalis (“ gag prosdor”; Niddah 18a); sep- 
tum vagina-rectalis (“karka prosdor”; 7%.): uterus 
(“rehem”; 2b.); canalis cervieis uteri (“makor; 7. 
41a); cavum utert (“heder” (ib. 17b]; “bet herayon” 
[‘Ar. 7a]). 

According to the Mosaic law (Lev. xii. 2-5), a 
woman after giving birth toa male child remained 
unclean for seven days thereafter; in the case of a 
female child, fourteendszs. ‘Then followed a period 
of purification—for a male thirty days, and for a 
female sixty-six days. According to 
the Mishnah, miscarriages fell under 
the same law, provided, however, the 
fetus (“shefir”) was completely formed 
(“merukkam ”) and its features were well differen- 
tiated (“ mi-zorat adam”). Monstrosities and all fe- 
tuses not viable were exempt from the above-named 
law (Niddah iii.). This interpretation of the Biblical 
law served as an impetus to the Talmudists for the 
diligent study of embryology. 

The esteem in which were held those who occu- 
pied themselves with this study is shown in the leg- 
end that King David devoted a great deal of his time 
to these investigations (Ber. 4a). R. Samuel, it is 
said, was able to tell the exact age of a fetus (Niddah 
25b). The fetus, it was held, is completely formed at 
the end of the sixth week. AbaSaul, a grave-digger 
by occupation, but also an embryologist, describes 
an embryo at the end of the sixth week as follows: 
“Size, that of the locust; eyes are like two specks 
at some distance from each other, so are the nostrils; 
feet like two silken cords; mouth like a hair... . 
The soles are not well defined.” He adds that the 
embryo should not be examined in water, but in oil, 
and only by sunlight (Niddah 25b). R. Samuel 
(/.c.) contended that tt wasim possible to differentiate 
the sex before the end of the fourth month, which, 
by the way, is the opinion of modern embryologists. 
At certain autopsies it was found that the male em- 
bryos were completely formed at the end of the 
forty-first day, and the female embryos at the end 
of the eighty-first day. The Rabbis contended that 
the autopsies had not been free from error (Niddah 
30b). The soft partsare formed first, then the bones 
(Gen. R. xiv.). Monstrosities like cyclopia, monop- 
sia, double back with double spinal column, and 
artresia wsophag: (“weshet atum”), etc., are men- 
tioned (Niddah 28b, 24a, b). 

The Bible identifies the blood with the soul (Gen. 
ix. 4). The Talmudists regard blood as the essen- 
tial principle of life (Hul. 125a). The relation be- 
tween strength and the development of muscles is 
mentioned in the Bible (Job xl. 16). The Talmud- 
ists noted the fact that the muscles change their form 


Embry- 
ology. 


Medicine 


when in motion (Hul. 98a). Respiration is compared 
to burning. Expired air can not sustain life (Sanh. 


77a). The life of all the organs of 
Physi- the body depends upon the heart 
ology. (Yer. Ter. viii. 4). Each gland secretes 


a fluid peculiar to itself, although all 
the glands derive their material from the same 
source (Num. R. xv.). Thedifference in the struc- 
ture of the teeth in herbivorous and carnivorous 
animals is noted (Hul. 59). Saliva, besides moisten- 
ing the tongue, adds to the palatability of food 
(Num, R. xv.). The stomach performs a purely 
mechanical function, that of churning the food; it 
is compared toa mill. Digestion proper (“ikkul ”) 
is carried on in the intestines. The time occupied 
in digestion is not the same in all individuals. The 
end of the digestive period is made manifest by the 
return of a desire for food (Bek. 52b). Eating when 
the bowels are full is likened to the making of a fire 
in a stove from which the ashes have not been re- 
moved (¢b. 55a). Normal defecation hastens diges- 
tion. Birds digest their food rapidly (Shab. 82a); 
dogs, slowly (Oh. xi. 7). The reasoning faculties 
are lodged in the brain (Yeb. 9a). The movements 
of the body depend upon the integrity of the spinal 
cord (Hul. 58). Rabbi Isaac holds that the liver 
elaborates blood (Shab. 82a). 

There are tumerous references to the influence of 
climate, customs, trade, etc., upon the development 
of the organism asa whole, and upon certain groups 
of muscles (Ab. R. N. xxxi.; Yeb. 108a; M. K. 25b). 

The phenomena preceding the period of menstru- 
ation are described in detail (Niddah xi, 8). The 
menstrual fluid is considered by Rabbi Meir as an 
extra nutritive material which is discharged periodic- 
ally when of no use, but which is converted into 
milk during the period of lactation (7b.). Absence 
of menstruation indicates sterility. Fear and cold 
may arrest the flow (7b. 66). 

That medicine was an integral part of the religion 
of Israel is made more evident from the pathological 
studies of the Rabbis than from any other branch of 

medical science. It is indeed remark- 
Pathology. able that the Rabbis seem to have been 

the first to recognize practically what 
is at present the prevailing theory, namely, that the 
symptoms of all diseases are merely outward mani- 
festations of internal changes in the tissues—a theory 
never advanced by their contemporaries, e.g., Hip- 
pocrates and his disciples, and only vaguely hinted 
at by Galen (“De Locis Affectis,” i., ch. ii.). Their 
pathological studies were a direct outgrowth of 
the law concerning the “flesh that is torn of beasts 
in the field,” which becomes unfit (“terefah”) for 
food (Ex. xxii. 80 [A. V. 81]). Certain rules con- 
cerning this infection are enjoined upon those who 
come in contact with the flesh of an animal that 
“dieth of itself or is torn with beasts” (Lev. xxii. 
8). The Talmudists went a step further, and de- 
clared that the word “unfit” included the flesh of 
anilnals afflicted with any disease which would have 
sooner or later caused the death of the animal (Hul. 
iij. 1). 

In order, therefore, to determine the condition of 
the internal organs, each slaughtered animal was 
subjected to an autopsy; this is the practise even 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


412 


to-day. The pathological changes of the lungs 
have been most diligently studied as to color, con- 
sistency, cavities, and vegetable growths. Redness 
of the lungs indicates hyperemia (Hul. 47b), a 
condition which is not fatal (7). 46b): blue and 
light-green discoloration is not considered danger- 
ous (2. 47b); black indicates that the object has 
begun to disintegrate (“lakah”); and the part of 
the Jungs thus affected can not return to its nor- 
mal state. Bright yellow (“yarok”) is considered 
the color indicative of the most fatal condition. If, 
on inflating the lungs, it is found that air does 
not enter into a certain part of them (“otem be- 
re’ah ”), it is then important to find out whether the 
obstruction is caused by pus or mucus (“mugla”) in 
the bronchi, which might have been expelled by 
coughing, or is due to thickening of the tissues. In 
the latter case the animal is unfit for food. Caseous 
degeneration (“re’ah she-yabeshah”), “in which 
there is no blood and it crumbles under the nail,” 
makes the flesh of the animal unfit for food. Sof- 
tening of the lung (“ re’aii she-nitmasmesah ”) is fatal. 
In the case of an animal with collapsed lungs (“re’ah 
she-zamckah”) the following rule is given by the 
Talmud: if after they have been immersed in water 
they can be inflated with air, the flesh of the animal 
is fit for food; if they can not be so inflated it is unfit. 
A pitcher-shaped cavity in the lung (“re’ah she-nish- 
pekah ke-kiton ”), filled with fluid, renders the ani- 
mal unfit for food. An empty cavity (“ re‘ali she- 
nimmokah”) is not dangerous to life (2é.). The 
Rabbis speak of vegetable growths (“ zemahim ”) on 
the lungs in connection with adhesions of the lung 
to the thorax (“dofen”); and they describe several 
forms, all of which are not considered dangerous. 
Perforation of the outer coat of the brain is not 
fatal; but the slightest perforation of the inner coat 
is. Rabbi Jacob held that an injury of the spinal 
cord is fatal; the editor of the Mishnah said that it 
is fatal only when the injury extends to more than 
one-half of its transverse diameter (Hul. ili. 1). A 
sheep that dragged its hind legs was diagnosed by 
Rabbi Yemar as suffering from ischiagra (“shig- 
rona”); but Rabina contended that it was a paralysis 
due to the solution of continuity of the spinal cord. 
The sheep was killed, and the diagnosis of Rabina 
was corroborated (Hul. 51a). This is the only case 
on record in ancient literature where a diagnosis 
was made during life and was verified at a post- 
mortem examination, Rabbi Levi saw one who suf- 
fered from tremor of the head, and heremarked that 
the man was suffering from softening of the spinal 
cord. Abaya said that such cases were not fatal, but 
the patients lost their reproductive functions (72. ). 
Perforation of the heart is considered fatal. No 
other pathological changes of the heart are men- 
tioned. A transverse division of the trachea is not 
considered fatal, provided it is less than one-half of 
its circumference. Longitudinal wounds in the 
trachea heal quickly (¢). 45a, 54a, and 57b). Loss 
of substance is not considered fatal (72. 18b). Per- 
foration of the esophagus is fatal, since the food 
may escape into the mediastinum (7). 45b). Vol- 
vulus is considered fatal (¢b. 56b). Perforation of the 
stomach or of the intestines is fatal. Extirpation of 
the spleen in animals and in man is not considered 


413 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 





fatal (Hull. 2). Rupture or wounding of the spleen 
is considered fatal. Ablation of the uterus is men- 
tioned and is not considered fatal (Bek. vi. 4). Atro- 
phy and abscess of the kidney are fatal (Hul. 
55a, b). Accumulation of transparent fluid in the 
kidney is not fatal (24. 58h). 

The pathological changes iu the liver mentioned in 
the Talmud are: that in which the organ becomes 
dry and bloodless and “crumbles under the nails”; 
abscess; and stone-like hardening. Extirpation of 
the liver is not considered fatal if there is left intact 
the part which surrounds the biliary duct and “ that 
place from which the liver receives its vitality.” 
Absence of one testicle is mentioned, and the sub- 
ject is considered sterile (Bek. vi. 6). Hypertro- 
phy and atrophy of the testicles (¢b. 40b), scrotal 
herhia (“ruah ba-ashakim ”), and elephantiasis scrott 
(the sufferer being called “me’ushkan”; 7d.) are also 
mentioned. Various forms of hypospadias and epi- 
spadias are described (Niddah 13a; Yeb. 76a). The 
Mishnah enumerates 140 pathological conditions 
which in the eyes of the Law make a man a “ crip- 
ple” (“mum”) and therefore unfit to perform any 
religious service in the Temple. Fifteen of these 
describe various osteologic deformities of the head, 
spine, and extremities (Bek. vii.). Therare cases of 
individuals having a tendency to hemorrhage are 
related, and the fact that this affection is hereditary 
is noted (Yeb. 64b). 

Wounds in different parts of the body, caused by 
different weapons—sword, arrow, hammer, etc.— 
are mentioned in the Bible (II Sam. ii. 23, iii. 27, iv. 6, 
xviii. 14, xx. 10; Num. xxv. 8; Judges iii. 21, v. 
24: I Kings xxii. 34; II Chron. xxxv. 23; and often 
elsewhere). Inflammation and abscesses (Deut. 
xxviii. 27, 85), gangrene and putrid discharges (Ps. 
xxxviil. 6; Prov. xii. 4, xiv. 80; II Mace. ix. 9) are 
also referred to. Wounds were treated by the ap- 
plication of wine or oil, bandages or 
sutures (Isa. i. 5; Jer. viii. 22, xivi. 
11, li. 8; Deut. xxviii. 27). The sur- 
gical operations mentioned in the Bible are those of 
CIRCUMCISION and castration, the latter being pro- 
hibited (Deut. xxiii. 1). 

During the Talmudical period surgery attained 
a high degree of development. Many physicians 
devoted themselves exclusively to it. Surgeons 
(“ummanim ”; Sanh. 9ib), when operating, used to 
wear a tunic over their dress (Kelim xxvi. 5). 
They used various surgical instruments (20. xili. 2). 
In major operations the patients were given an an- 
esthetic or a sleeping-potion (“samme de-shinta ” ; 
B. M. 88b). Venesection was extensively used upon 
the healthy and the sick alike. Mar Samuel Yar- 
hinai went so far as to recommend its use once in 
thirty days (Shab. 129b). After the age of fifty 
venesection should be employed less frequently (Git. 
70a). Itis not to be performed during inclement 
weather: and a careful dietetic régime should be 
followed for some time after the operation (Shab. 
129a). Bleeding by means of leeches (“‘alukah,” 
“nime shel mayim” ; ‘Ab. Zarah 12b) and by means of 
cupping (the cup being called “karna de-ummana ” ; 
Shab. cliv. 2) is frequently mentioned. Dislocation 
of various joints (‘Ab. Zarah 29), fractures, amputa- 
tions (Ker. 66a; Sem. 28; Shab. 66a), and trephining 


Surgery. 


(Ket. 77b) are discussed in the Talmud. Artificial 
teeth, made of hard wood, gold, or silver, were used 
(Shab. 65a; Ned. 66b). Extirpation of the spleen 
was successfully performed upon man (‘Ab. Zarah 


44a). The following forms of castra- 
Opera- tion are mentioned: Amputatio mem- 
tions. brt; extirpatio testiculorum (Deut. 


xxii. 2 [A. V. 1]): subcutaneous 
stretching or cutting of the cord (Lev. xxii. 24; 
Bek. 39b); and obliteration of the testicle by means 
of gradual pressure. Intubation of the Jarynx was 
practised upon animals (the tube was called “keru- 
mit shel kaneh”); and a plate (“hidduk shel karwe- 
yah”) was used in a case of loss of substance of 
the cranium. <A uterine speculum was used (Nid- 
dah 66). 

The practise was adopted of freshening up the 
borders of old wounds in order that union might be 
effected (Hul. 77). The operation for imperforate 
anus in the new-born is described (Shab. 184b). 
Wounds exposed to air do not heal as readily as 
protected ones (Hul. 46). In an accident in which 
the abdominal viscera were protruding through a 
wound the reposition of the organs was effected 
automatically by frightening the patient, which 
caused the abdominal muscles to relax; after this 
the external wound was closed by sutures (Shab. 
82a). Nasal polyps are said to cause fetor ex ore 
(Ket. 77). Crutches and various other orthopedic 
appliances are mentioned (Shab. 65a). Intestinal 
parasites and hydatids are frequently mentioned 
(Hul. 48a). Extraction of the fetus through an 
incision made in the abdomen was an operation 
known to the Talmudists(Niddah 40b). See Barus, 
BatTHiIna; Crrcumcrstox; MIDWIFE; MIRACLES; 
Heauttu Laws. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Bergel, Die Medizin der Talmudisten, 
Leipsic and Berlin, 188; W. C. Bitting, Biblical Medicine, 
in Tr. New York Medical Society, 1891, viii. 367; F. Boerner 
and 8S. A. Wagner, De Statu Medicine apud Veteras Ebreos, 
Wittenberg, 1775; Brecher, Der Aderlass im Talmud, in 
Prager Medizinische Wochenschrift, 18%, pp. 228, 257; D. 
Carcassonne, Essai Historique sur la Médecine des Hébreux 
Anciens et Modernes, Montpellier, 1811; C. L. Craft, Decas 
Theorematum ad Dicetologam Biblicam Sypectatitium, Co- 
penhagen, 1736; S. Csernowsky, De Medicinw apud Ebrceos 
et Atgyptos Conditione, Halle and Magdeburg, 1742; D. de 
Pomis, De Medico Hebrea, Venice, 1588; W. Ebstetn, Die 
Medizin im Alten Testament, Stuttgart, 1901; C. E. Eschen- 
bach, Seripta Medico-Biblica, Rostock. 1779; M. Fensdorf, 
Ueber die Medizin der Alten Hebrder, Bamberg, 1837; J. B. 
Friedrich, Zur Bibel: Naturhistorische, Anthropologische, 
und Medicinische Fragmente, Nuremberg, 1848; J. Jeoffroy. 
Les Sciences Médicales chez Hébreux, xxx. 697, 757, 769, 
Paris, 1880; Griinbaum, Medyeyna w Talmudzie. Pan. To- 
warz. Lek. 1xxx. 192, Warsaw, 1884; B. W. Gintzburger, 
Disputatio Inauguralis qua Medicinam ex Talmudicis 
Tllustratam, Gottingen, 1748; Joachim Halpern (of Wilna), 
Beitriige zur Gesch, der Talmudischen Chirurgie, Bres- 
lau, 1869; J. M. B. Harden, Notes on the Medicine of 
Moses, in Southern Medical and Surgical Journal, iii. 257, 
Augusta, 1847; F. Hoffmann, De Dicetetica Sacree Scripture 
Medicina, in his Opuscula Theol. Phys.-Med. Halle, 1740; 
J. Hyrtl, Das Arahische und Hebriiische tn der Anatomie, 
Vienna, 1879; A. H. Israels, Beitrdye zur Talmudischen 
Medizin, in Janus, ti. 3380, 352, Breslau, 1847; idem, De Kei- 
zersnede by Levenden, Volgens den Babylonischen Talmud, 
Amsterdam, 1882; L. Kazenelson, Anatomiya, Normalnaya 
4 Patologicheskaya v Drevneyevreiskot Pismennosti, St. 
Petersburg, 1889; S. W. H. Kemper, Biblical Medicine, in 
Indiana Journal of Medicine, 1872-78, iii. 1, 47, 385; M. 
Levin, Analecta Historica ad Medicinam Ebrmorum, 
Halle, 1798; 8. Lizelius, De Poetis Medicis Sacree Scripturce 
Interpretidus Commentatis, Speyer, 1743; P. J. Miller. 
Biblical Medicine, Strasburg, 1785; J. H. Nebel, Physiologic- 
Biblice Selecta Quadem Capita Breviter ac Strictim It- 
lustrata, Giessen, 1711; O. N. Nicolaus, Meletema, de Servis 
Josephi Medicis ad Gen. l. 1,2, Magdeburg, 1752; Oppler, 
Einiges aus der Altjiidischen Medicin, in Deutsche Archiv 
fiir Medicinische Gesch. iv. 62, Leipsic, 1881; G. L. Pasno- 


Medicine 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


414 





ligo, Della Condizione della Medica Scienza Presso tl Po- 
polo Ebreo, n.d.; M. Pholis, De Questione an Esau Fuerit 
Monstrum, Wittenberg, 1669; I. M. Rabbinowiez, La Aléde- 
cine du Tealmud, Paris, 1880; Rittman, Die Talmiucdisehe 
Medizin im Mittelalter, in Allg. Wiener Medicinische Zei- 
tung, (868, xifi. 123; b. Schagen, Specimen Anatomic Bib- 
lie’, Utrecht, 1750; J. D. Sehleunitz, Philologemata Medica, 
sive ad Mecicinam et Res Medicas Pertinentia ex brea et 
Huic Adtinibus Orientatibus Linguis Decerpta, Halle and 
Magdeburg, 17358; J. J. Schmidt, Biblischer Medicus, Ziil- 
lichau, 1743: J. H. Slevogtius, Biblical Medicine, Jena, 1699; 
C. D. Spivak, Menstruation: A Summary of the Theories 
of the Ancients with Special Reference to the View Held 
by the Talmudists, in Medical Times, Feb, 14, 1891: M. 
Steinschneider. Schriften tiber Medicin in Bibel und Tatl- 
mud und ther Jiidisehe Aerzte, in Wiener Klinische 
Rundschau, 1896; J. H. Walker. Ow the State of Medical 
Art Among the Jews as Recorded inthe Bible, in Midland 
Medical and Surgical Reporter, ii. 168, 248, Worcester, 1830- 
1831; R. J. Wunderbar. Bibliseh-Talmudische Medizin, 1857; 
Bumm, Spuren der Griechischen Psychiatrie im Taitmud, 
1901; Bennett, Diseases of the Bible. 1887; Burrell, The In- 
sane Kings of the Bible, in Am. Jour. of Insanity, 18938, iv. 
493 ; Bombaugh, The Plagues and Pestilences of the Old Tes- 
tament, in Johns Hopkins Medical Bulletin, 1893, iv. 64; 
Carnault, La Tuberciulose Bovine et le Tatmud, in Revue 
Scientifique, 4th series, vol. xvii., Nos. 3, 73; Kotelman, Die 
Geburishilfe hei den Alten Hehriiern, Marburg, 1876; 
Ebstein, Die Medizin im Neuen Testament und im Tal- 
mud, Stuttgart, 1903; Ellis, Biblical Obstetrics, in The Lan- 
cet, i, 874, London, 1875; Preuss, Der Arzt in Bibel und 
Talmud, in Virchow'’s Arehiv, vol. exxxviii. 261; idem, 
Materialien zur Gesehiehte der Alten Medizin: die Or- 
gane der Bauchhiile nach Bibel und Talmud, in Allge- 
meine Medizinische Central-Zeitschrift, 1898, pp. 489, 502, 
514, 526; idem, Die Erkrankungen der Haut, ib. 1903, pp. 
431, 455, 474: idem, Der Tote und Seine Bestatlany, ib. 1901, 
Nos. 25, 26. 27; idem, Die Miinnliche Genitalien und Thre 
Brankheiten nach Bibel und Talmud, in Wiener Medizi- 
nische Wochenschrift, 1898, pp. 570, 618, 662, 709, 1194, 1239; 
idem, Biblisch-Talinudische Pathologie und Therapie, in 
Zeit. fiir Medizin, xlv. 457; idem, Chirurgisches in Bibel 
und Talmud, in Deutsche Zeit. fiir Chirurgie, lix. 507: Ra- 
vitzki, Ueber die Lehre der Superfetatio und der Ent- 
stehungs-Ursache die Fetus Compressus im Talmud, in 
Janus, vi. 410. 461, 542; Rosenbaum, Une Conference Con- 
tradictoire, Religieuse et Scientifique sur VAnatomie et 
Physiologie des Organes Genitaux de la Femme al Ecole de 
Rami Fils de Samuel. et de Rabbi Yitshac Fils de Rabhi 
Yehoudou, dla Fin du Deuxiéme Siéele, Paris, 1901; Scha- 
piro, Obstetrique des Aneiens Hébreux ad’ Apres la Bible 
et le Taimud, Compareée avec la Tacologie Gréco-Ramain, 
in La Franee Médicale, 1904; idem, Coninaissance Medi- 
cal de Mar Samuel,in R. HE. J. Paris, )xii., No. 88, p. 143 
Tyesershh Medizina po Biblit i Talmudu, St. Petersburg, 


S. S, C. D. S. 


o 


——In Post-Talmudic Times: During the fifth 
and sixth centuries of the common era the sciences 
Janguished in the Orient owing in part to disturbed 
solitical conditions, to superstitions, and to the 
attention which was being paid to pseudo-sciences. 
The persecutions of the Jews under Honorius (in 
404 and 419), Theodosius the Great (493), and Kobad 
in Persia (520) resulted in the promulgation of laws 
forbidding Jews to hold any oflice, to follow any 
handicraft or liberal art, or to practise medicine. 
With the spread of Mohammedanism in the sev- 
enth century a great revival of the sciences took 
place in Asia Minor. The califs opened colleges 
which included medical schools at Bagdad, Kufah, 
and Bassora, and these were well equipped and 
were furnished with the best of teachers. Among 
both the teachers and the students were to be found 
many who bore Jewish names, Science then was 
free to all; but in 853 a law was promulgated in 
Bagdad which prohibited the Jews from teaching or 
studying medicine in any language other than He- 
brew or Syriac. The Mohammedans, being able to 
fill all positions themselves, were no longer in need 
of the help of the Jews. The earliest Jewish physicians 
mentioned during the golden age under the Arabs 
were: Abu Hafsah Yazid (c. 648), physician to the 


calif Omar, Mohammed’s successor; MASARJAWAIH | 


(Messer Jawait) in Bassora about 888, physician to 
the calif Mu‘awiyyah I, whom he induced to pro- 
cure translations of works written in foreign lan- 
guages, and who himself translated from the Syriac 
into Arabic the pandects of Aaron the Archdeacon, 
upon medicinal plantsand foods; Ishak ben Amram 
(a. 799; not to be confounded with the Kairwan 
physician of thesame name), who wrote a treatise on 
poison; Sahl, called “ Rabban al-Tabari,” who lived 
about 800 at Taberistan on the Caspian Sea, was an. 
eminent physician and mathematician, and translated 
into Arabic the “ Almagest” of the Greek astrono- 
mer Ptolemy; his son ALI IBN Sam. N RABBAN 
AL-TABARI (ABU AL-Hasan), who lived at Irak about 
850, became a convert to Mohammedanism, and was 
court physician to the califs Al-Mu‘tasim and Al- 
Mutawakkil. 

Harun al-Rashid (786-809) was the founder of the 
university at Bagdad, the most flourishing institu- 
tion of its time, possessing hospitals, 
a medical school, and holding med- 
ical examinations. The professors in- 
cluded Joshua ben Nun (¢. 800), a physician of high 
repute and translator, one of whose pupils was Yu- 
suf Ya‘kub ibn Ishak (c. 850); much later Hrpat 
ALLAH ABU AL-BARAKAT B. ‘ALI B. MALKA, who 
lived about 1150 and who pursued his studies under 
the greatest difficulties on account of the laws pro- 
hibiting Jews from studying medicine (later he be- 
came a convert to Mohammedanism); Ibn Zakariyya 
(died at Aleppo 1190); Sa‘ad al-Daulah, court phy- 
sician to the Mongolian khan Arghun (1284-91) 
when in Bagdad (killed in 129i for not curing his 
lord). The calif Ma’mun, Harun al-Rashid’s son 
(813-833), established the universities of Bassora and 
Samarcand. 

After the beginning of the fourteenth century the 
center of Mohammedan learning moved westward, 
and no more Jewish physicians are net with in ‘Trak 
after that date. The sciences followed the conquer- 
ing armies of the Arabs from Asia Minor through 
Egypt and the Mediterranean countries of Africa to 
Spain and southern France, to Sicily, and thence to 
Italy. Alexandria, Cairo, and Kairwan became the 
seats of colleges with medical schools. At Kairwan 
about 793 lived the Jewish physician Shammakh, who 
poisoned the imam Idris by order of Harunal-Rashid; 

at Algiers, about 900, Ishak ibn ‘Imran, 

Egypt and court physician to the emir Ziyadat 
Northern Allah II., and Ishak ibn ‘Imran the 
Africa. Younger, court physician to the last 
Aghlabite emir, Ziyadat Allah IIT. 

‘Imran the Younger’s successor was Isaac ben Solo- 
mon ISRAELI (¢. 832-932), who later became oculist 
and physician to the Fatimite calif ‘Ubaid Allah al- 
Mahdiat Kairwan. Israeli’s works written in Arabic 
were translated into Latin in 1087 by the monk Con- 
stantine of Carthage, who claimed them as his own. 
In 1515 they were reprinted in Latin in Leyden 
under the title “Opera Omnia Isaci Judei,” fhe sub- 
jects treated including fever, dietetics, urine, drugs, 
dropsy, therapeutics, and aliments; the last part 
appeared in Hebrew under the title “Sefer ha- 
Mis‘adim.” The Leyden edition contains not only 
Israeli’s works, but also those of other physicians 
falsely attributed to Israeli (Steinschneider doubts 


Bagdad. 


415 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 





if Israeli really existed). Israeli’s pupil was Dt- 
Nasi IBN Tamim (Abu Sahl), also court physician 
(c. 950), who is said to have been a convert to Islam. 
Jewish physicians in Egypt were: Ephraim ibn al- 
Za‘faran (d. 1068), celebrated through his library ; 
Abu §Sa‘id ibn Husain (Al-Tabib), about 1050; Abu 
Mansur (¢. 1125), one of the physicians of the calif 
Al-Hatiz; Nathanael Israeli (the Egyptian), at Cairo 
(ec. 1150), court physician to the last Fatimite calif 
of Egypt and to the great Saladin; Abu al-Barakat 
(e. 1150); Abu al-Fada’il ibn al-Nakid (d. 1189), a 
celebrated oculist; Abu al-Bayyanal-Mudawwar (d. 
1184), also physician to Saladin, and David ben Sol- 
omon (1161-1241), connected with the hospital Al- 
Nasiri in Cairo, both Karaite physicians; the Ka- 
raite Sadid b. Abi al-Bayyan (ec. 1160); Abu Ja‘far 
Joseph Nathanael Israel (¢c. 1175); and Abu al- 
Ma‘ali, brother-in-law of Maimonides, also in the 
service of Saladin. 

In 1166 MarmonrpeEs himself (1135-1205) went to 
Egypt and settled in Fustat. Born at Cordova, 
Spain, he left his native land on account of the dis- 
franchisement of the Jews by the Mohammedan 
rulers. He became court physician to the sultan 
Saladin. Of the descendants of Maimonides the 
following were physicians: his son Abraham (1185- 
1254), his grandson David (1212-1800), 
also the two sons of the latter, Abra- 
ham Maimonides IT. (1246-1810) and 
Solomon, all of whom held the office 
of nagid also. In Aleppo liveda pupil of Maimonides, 
Yusuf al-Sabti (d. 1226); while in Fez practised 
another pupil of his, Abual-Hayyuj Yusuf. In Cairo 
lived ‘Imran al-Isra’ili (11635-1239); Samuel Abu 
Nasr ibn ‘Annas (c. 1165); Abu al-Hasan (d. 1251); 
Jacob b. Isaac (c. 1250); the Karaite Solomon Cohen 
and Al-Asad al-Mahalli (about the end of the twelfth 
century); [bn Abi al-Hasan al-Barkamani and the 
pharmacologist Abu al-Muna al-Kuhin al-‘Attar ¢e. 
1325); in Egypt, the encyclopedist Abu Mansur al- 
Haruni(¢. 1375); at Algiers, Simon ben Zemah DurAN 
(1860-1444); Samuel and his son Jacob (c¢. 1425); the 
Samaritan Abu Sa‘id al-‘Afif (c. 1450); Solomon ben 
Joseph (c. 1481), nagid of Egypt, and physician to 
the sultan Al-Malik al-Ashraf. 

When the Arabs crossed the Straits of Gibraltar 
the influx of culture from Arabia into Spain was 
important. Here again the califs supported the uni- 
versities, as those of Cordova, Seville, 
and Toledo, and again Jewish physi- 
cians are found, ¢.g.: HaspsaI ABU 
YUsuF 18nN SHAPRUT ( 915-970), who lived in Cor- 
dova, was appointed physician to ‘Abd al-Rahman 
III, and became prime minister to that calif, for 
whom he translated the works of Dioscorides into 
Arabic; Harun at Cordova (¢. 975); Amram ben Isaac 
(d. 997) at Toledo; Jonah (Abu al-Walid Merwan 
ibn Janah; at Cordova 995-1045). The physician 
Abu Bekr Mohammed ben Merwan ibn Zuhr (d. 
1031 at Talabira) and his grandson, the celebrated 
Abu Merwan ibn Zuhr. who lived in Bagdad, 
Cairo, and Spain, are considered by many to have 
been Jews, but this has been frequently denied, 
and no positive proof of their Jewish descent has 
been presented. Abu Merwan was the most im- 
portant physician of his time, opposing the Arabic 


Maimoni- 
des. 


Spain. 


physician AVICENNA (980-1087), who in his * Cancn ” 
gave the “rules of medicine,” superseding the works 
of Hippocrates and Galen, although he himself 
adopted the fundamental ideas of these two great 
physicians. Other Jewish physicians of note were: 
JupAH HWA-LeEvt (b. 1085); Sulaiman ibn al-Mu- 
‘allim, court physician to the calif Ali at Seville 
(1106-45); Abraham ibn Ezra (1092-1167) at Toledo; 
Maimonides, mentioned above: at Randa, Elias ibn 
al-Mupawwak (c. 1150); in Toledo, Jacob: in Ara- 
gon, Joseph Constantin; in Barcelona, Judah ben 
Isaac, Judah ben Joseph ibn al-Fakhkhar, court 
physician to Ferdinand ITI.; in Saragossa, BABIEL 
BEN Moses and his brother Solomon Bahiel (e. 1225); 
in Madrid, Solomon ben David; in Gerona, Moses 
b. Nabman (1194-1267) and Shem-Tob ben Isaac of 
Tortosa (1206-66). About 1250 lived Judah Moria; 
{brahim ben Sahl; Nathanael ben Joseph al-Malih; 
Samuel Benveniste; Jacob ben Shushar; Joseph ibn 
Sason (d. at Toledo 1336); ABNER or Burcos (1270- 
1348), a convert to Christianity ; Samuel Inn Waxar 
(d. e. 1833), physician to King Alfonso XI.; Todros 
Abulafia; Abraham ben David Casuiart (d. 1849); 
Vidal Crescas de Caslar (¢. 1827); Eliezer Cohen ibn 
Ardot; Nissim ben Reuben Gerundi (at Barcelona 
1340-80); Abraham ibn Machir; Abraham ibn Zarzal 
(d. at Toledo 1862); Shem-Tob ben Jacob; Meir 
Alguadez (d. about 1415); Joseph ibn Vives (Joseph 
al-Lorqui) ; Solomon ben Abraham ibn Daud; Jacob 
of Toledo; Todros ibn Davor; Isaac b. Solomon; 
Abraham of Lerida, oculist to John IT. of Aragon 
(e. 1470); in Catalonia, Gallab (Galled). 

The Arabs had lost Spain forever, and the intoler- 
ance of the Christian rulers forced many Jewish 
physicians to leave that country. In 1335 the synod 
of Salamanca had declared that the Jewish physi- 
cians offered their services only to kill as many Chris- 
tians as possible (Délinger, “ Die Juden in Europa,” 
in “ Akademische Vortriige”). In 1412 John I. pro- 
hibited Jews from practising in Spain. Some im- 
migrated into France, ¢e.g., Judah ibn Tibbon, Jo- 
seph ben Isaac ben Kimhi, Isaac ben Shem-Tob, 
Solomon ben Joseph ben Ayyub; some into Algiers, 
as Simon bar Zemah Duran; and others into Italy, 
as Joshua ben Joseph IBn VIVES AL-LORQUI (Hie- 
ronymus de Santa Fé) about 1400. 

In Portugal lived Gedaliah ibn Yahya the Elder 
(¢. 1800), physician to King Diniz; Solomon ben 
Moses Solomon; Moses, the physician 
to Ferdinand I. and John I.; Profiat 
DuRAN (e. 1400; he emigrated to Pal- 
estine); at Lisbon, Gedaliah ibn Yahya the Younger, 
physician to Alfonso V. (c. 1476; emigrated to Tur- 
key); Joseph and Rodriquez, physicians to John IT. 
of Portugal (1481-90), who were members of the 
commission appointed to examine Columbus’ plans. 

At the time the Jewish Arabic physicians were 
practising in Egypt, they are found in Sicily also. 
Shabbethai ben Abraham ben Joel (DONNOLO) (918- 
982), who wrote a small work on pharmacology, 
which has been republished by Steinschneider, lived 
in Oria. From Sicily they came to southern Italy and 
settled in Salerno. The ancient University of Sa- 
lerno is said to have been founded by the Benedic- 
tine monks of Monte Cassino in the sixth century, 
the monks being priests and physicians, as the 


Portugal. 


Medicine 





rabbis of old. But it was not until the ninth cen- 
tury that it rose to prominence and became for the 
Occident what Bagdad had been for the Orient, the 


leading medical school. In 848 Joseph taught 
there, and in 855 Joshua, both Jew- 
Italy. ish physicians. In the eleventh cen- 


tury lectures are said to have been 
‘delivered in Greek, Arabic, Hebrew (with Elinus as 
teacher), and Latin. The medical school of Salerno 
became celebrated under the name of “ Civitas Hip- 
pocratica.” Elinus’ successor as teacher of Hebrew 
was Copho, the editor of the “Compendium Saler- 
nitanum,” the first medical encyclopedia. It is not 
known positively that both were Jews—Stein- 
schneider thinks they were not —but tradition 
ascribes to them a Jewish origin, as it does to Copho 
II. (who wrote a book on the “ Anatomica Porci” 
—which certainly makes the ascription dubious, 
dedicating it to Robert, eldest son of William the 
Conqueror). He was followed by Hillel ben Samuel 
of Verona (1220-95), who translated into Hebrew 
Brun6’s work on surgery, known only uncer the title 
“Chirurgia Bruni ex Latina in Hebream Translata.” 

From Salerno the Jewish physicians can be traced 
through Italy. From this school proceeded: Hana- 
neel of Amalfi; Abu al-Hakim of Turin; and Farag 
BEN Sauim (Faragut), who lived in Salerno about 
1250. The last-named was physician to Charles of 
Anjou, King of Sicily, and was one of the first phy- 
‘sicians who translated—-not into Hebrew, but into 
Latin. Other physicians of note were : in Rome, 
Nathan ha-Me’ati, a noted translator, who ren- 
dered the “Canon” of Avicenna into Hebrew in 
1279; Isaac, the court physician of Pope Boniface 
VIII.; Zerahiah ben Isaac ben Shealtiel of Barcelona 
{e, 1275); several members of the Anaw family 
(Benjamin, Abraham, Judah, Zedekiah, Jekuthiel, 
Menahem Rofe [about the fourteenth century]); 
Manuele and Angelus Manuele, physicians to Boni- 
face IX. ; Judah ben Solomon Nathan(En Bongodos); 
and Moses ben Isaac (Gajo) of Rieti (1888-1460); 
at Naples, Samuel ben Jacob of Capua, court phy- 
sician to Charles II., and Isaac, court physician to 
King Robert of Anjou; at Palermo, David; at 
Verona, Michael ben Abraham; at Padua, Gentili 
da Foligno (died of the plague 1348) ; at Venice, Leo 
(ce. 1880), and the following members of the Astruc 
family: Judah Solomon, Isaac Solomon, Abraham 
Solomon, Jacob Rofe, and many others. 

As the school of Salerno grew in importance it 
‘was able to rely on its own pupils for teachers, and 
could, as Bagdad had done before it, discard Jewish 
assistance. The connection of the Jews with its 
further development diminished ; in later years they 
did not exercise a great influence on the history of 
medicine in Italy, and their réle became insig- 
nificant. 

While the University of Salerno was flourishing, 
eertain Jewish schools, where medicine also was 
taught, are said to have existed in the 
south of France. About the year 1000 
Rabbi Abon was principal of the Jew- 
sh school at Narbonne; and one of his pupils 
founded the Jewish medical school at Montpellier 
{e. 1025). Independent of these unimportant schools, 
however, were the beginnings of the great univer- 


France. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


416 





sities of France—Paris, Narbonne, and Montpellier— 
which soon were to compete with Salerno. In Paris, 
always a seat of Orthodox Christian theology, 
afew Jewish physicians are met with at the end of 
the thirteenth century: Copin and Moses, Rabbi 
Isaac and his son Vital. In 1301 this school was 
closed to the Jews. In Montpellier, where the earliest 
professors are said to have taught at first in Arabic 
and Hebrew, the use of Latin was introduced in the 
twelfth century only, when the fame of that uni- 
versity was at its zenith. Among the teachers and 
pupils were: Isaac ben Abraham; his 
pupil Judah, whose pupil was Moses 
ben Nahman; Jacob ha-Katon, who 
was dean of the medical faculty; Me- 
shullam the physician (1048-1108), a contemporary 
of Rashi; Samuel ibn Tibbon, the well-known 
translator; Jacob ben Abba Mari of Marscilles, later 
court physician to the German emperor Frederick 
II, at Naples; Judah ben Samuel ibn Tibbon (1120- 
1190). Moses ibn Tibbon (1230-85), and Jacob ben 
Machir ibn Tibbon, called Profatius Judzeus, dean 
of the medical faculty about 13806 (this family pro- 
duced three generations of eminent physicians; see 
Inn Trsppon); and Abraham Aprepor (b, 1350), 

As at Bagdad and Salerno, soat Montpellier laws 
were promulgated against the Jews as teachers and 
practitioners of medicine, e.g., in the edict of Count 
William in 1180; of the Council of Béziers in 1246, 
and of Alby in 1254, In 1293 a law was enacted pun- 
ishing with three months’ imprisonment Christian 
patients who accepted treatment from Jewish physi- 
cians. Philip of Arlois expelled Jewish physicians 
altogether from Montpellier in 1506. At the school 
of Marseilles were Shem-Tob ben Isaac of Tortosa 
(1206-66) and his son Abraham b. Shem-Tob, In 
southern France practised also Ishanan Yarhuni, 
Nathan ben Samuel, and the oculist Abraham of 
Aragon at Toulouse; in Narbonne, David Cas- 
LARI (¢. 1275); at Avignon, Israel CASLARI (c. 13825). 
The councils of Avignon (1826 and 1387) and that 
of Rouergue also declared against Jewish physi- 
clans. 

In 1850 the Jews were permitted to return to 
France; but a law was passed whereby only grad- 
uated and licensed physicians could practise. Again 

some names of Jewish doctors, espe- 

Recall of cially as court physicians, are to be 

the Jews found, eg.: Samuel and Meshullam 
to France. ben Abigdor again at Montpellier; 

Elias of Arles (ec. 1407) at Valence; 
Jacob Lunel and the surgeon Dolan Bellan at Car- 
cassonne; Nathan Tauros (ec. 1446) at Tarascon; 
Jekuthiel Judah ben Solomon and Mosks BEN 
JosHuA (Maestre Vidal Blasom; died after 1362) 
at Narbonne; Crescas Salannas, Hayyim Bendig, 
Abraham Abigdor (¢. 1402), Bendig of Caneto, Bel- 
lanti (¢. 1415), Solomon Mordecai (c. 1481), Moses 
Carcassonne (c. 1468), allat Arles; Abraham ben Sol- 
omon and Abraham Astruc (c. 1446) of St. Maxim; 
Cohen (c. 1446) at Marseilles (‘Revue des Etudes 
Juives,” April and June, 1904, pp. 265 et seq.). 

From France the Jewish physicians passed into 
Belgium, where in the fourteenth century are found 
Abraham le Mirre, Magister Sause, Lyon, Ely, Isaac 
of Amessi, and Jacob of Chambery. 


Montpel- 
lier. 


417 





In England at this time only three Jewish physi- 
cians call for mention: the young physician who 
was the last victim of the massacre at Juynz in 1190: 
Isaac Medicus of London (Jacobs, “The Jews of 
Angevin England,” pp. 114, 340, London, 1893); and 
Abraham Motun of London (1260-90). 

In Germany the influence of Jewish physicians at 
this time was small, Harun al-Rashid’s great con- 
temporary was Charlemagne, in whose dominion 

are said to have practised the physi- 
Germany. cians Meshullam ben Kalonymus, Jo- 
seph ben Gorion, Moses ben Judah, 
Todros of Narbonne, and Joseph ha-Levi. Under 
Louis the Bald a certain Zedekiah was court phy- 
Sician. They were probably from the Orient. 
Many Jews were living in Germany, a number of 
whom had migrated from Spain and France; but the 
universities were founded comparatively late, and 
they were not open to Jews. The Jews therefore 
studicd Talmud and Cabala, and took no part in the 
renaissance of science. Horowitz says that there are 
no records of the Frankfort community before 1241; 
and this is the most important German community. 
That there must have existed Jewish physicians is 
shown by the decree of the Conncil of Vienna of 
1267 forbidding Jews to treat Christian patients. 
During the ravages of the plague in 1348 and 1349 
Jewish physicians were accused of having poisoned 
the wells; andat Strasburg a Jewish surgeon named 
Balavignus was executed in 1848 for an alleged 
crime of this nature. The Jewish physicians of 
this period included the following: Jacob of Stras- 
burg at Frankfort (¢. 1878); Baruch (¢. 1390); the city 
physician Solomon Pletsch of Ratisbon (1894), who 
received as stipend 86 florins and six yards of cloth 
and was required to treat the servants of the city 
council and the sick Jews; his successor, Isaac Fried- 
rich, who received only 20 florins; in Speyer, Lem- 
belin; in Schweiduitz, Abraham; in Bohemia, Simon; 
in the Palatinate, Godliep; at Basel, Jossel, who held 
the office of city physician at an annual stipend of 
25 silver pounds: Gutleben, his successor, who re- 
ceived only 18 pounds; at Wiirzburg, Scligmann (ce. 
1407), physician to Bishop John I.; his successor, 
John II., permitted a woman named Sarah to practise 
medicine in the bishopric of Wirzburg, who, with 
the Jewess Zerlin (ce. 1475), oculist at Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, was the earliest Jewish woman physician 
in Germany of whom there is record. 

In addition to those above mentioned there were: 
in Tirol, Rubein (c. 1482); in Graz, Niklas Unger 
(c. 1439); in Wirzburg, Heylmann (ce. 1450); Jacob 
ben Jehiel Loans, physician to the emperor Frederick 
ITI. (¢. 1450), who, with Obadiah Sforno, was Hebrew 
teacher of Reuchlin; Michael, surgeon to Frederick 
IIl.; at Frankfort, Solomon of Zynonge (ec. 1450); 
his son Joseph (¢. 1500); and Moses of Aschaffen- 
burg. 

In the opening years of the sixteenth century per- 
secutions of the Jewish physicians began. In 1509 
appeared Victor of CarBeNn’s “Opus Aureum ac 
Novum,” the third part of which treats of Jewish 
physicians. In 1505 Lorenz of Bibra prohibited 
Jews from practising in Wtrzburg (the edict was 
reenacted in 1549). Up to 1517 the physicians 
who wished to practise in Vienna had to acknowl- 


VIII.—27 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 





edge under oath their belief in the “immaculate 
conception,” 

In 1422 Pope Martin VY. in a bull exhorted all 
Christians to treat the Jews with kindness, and per- 
mitted the latter to practise medicine. But at the 
end of the fourteenth and at the beginning of the 
fifteenth century Jewish physicians found the 
greatest difficulty in practising medicine. Papal 
deerees and Church councils (as at Basel, 1484) 
decided against them. The Arabian influence in 
southern Europe had disappeared. 

Hippocrates and Galen ruled supreme in the med- 
ical world up to the thirteenth century. The Arab 
physician AVICENNA (980-1087) wrote his celebra- 
ted“ Canon,” which work took rank next to the wri- 
tings of Hippocrates and Galen. But their works 

were translated into Arabic, a language 
Retrospect which, in Europe, was known only to 
from 622 the Jews, who retranslated them into 
to 1492. Hebrew and Latin, and thus held the 
key to medical science. Learning from 
these great scholars, the Jewish teachers and physi- 
clans wrote works of theirown. They excelled in sur- 
gery and medicine (including ¢cphthalmology), in 
therapeutics, pharmacology, and toxicology. The 
connection of the Jews with the drug-trade of the 
East helped them to contribute also to a practical 
kuowledge of pharmacology at a time when every 
apothecary posed as a doctor; but with these 
branches of the true science of medicine there 
was during the first millennium of the common era 
combined also a Knowledge of pseudo-science, as- 
trology, and Cabala. Superstition was still an im- 
portant factor. Against these pseudo-sciences Mai- 
monides wrote. Astrology was to him not based 
on science, but on superstition; and in his works he 
warns against its use. 
——-In Modern Times: Human anatomy, the ba- 
sis of all medicine, had not been studied scientific- 
ally by the physicians of the Talmud (they seem 
only to have boiled human bodies as the physicians 
of other countries had done, and, counting the bones, 
to have come to erroneous conclusions), by Hip- 
pocrates, by Galen (who used monkeys for his 
subjects), by Avicenna, or by their respective fol- 
lowers. The Jewish and Mohammedan religions 
and the Christian Church were all opposed to a 
desecration of the human body such as proper ana- 
tomical investigations would have required. The 
German emperor Frederick II. (1212-56) permit. 
ted dissection; but Pope Boniface VITI. prohib- 
ited it. 

Luigi Mondino de’ Luzzi, professor at Bologna 
(d. there 1826), dissected three female bodies. From 
that time anatomy received, with little interrup- 
tion, the attention it deserved, and medicine, from 
being a more or less pseudo-science, commenced 
to be a real science, although half a millennium had 
still to pass before it was entirely liberated from 
superstition. 

While the popes, such as Eugenius IV., Nicho- 
las V., Calixtus IIL, and the temporal sovereigns 
promulgated decrees against the Jews, they still em- 
ployed Jewish physicians themselves. Many of these 
Jews became converts to Christianity, among them 
Josiah Lorki of Spain, physician to Benedict XIII. 


Medicine 


Josiah took the name of “ Hieronymus de Santa Fé,” 
and became a great enemy of his former coreligion- 
ists, who gave him the name “the Calumniator.” 
He persecuted especially Jewish physicians and 
apothecaries. 

There were, however, some important Jewish 
physicians in Italy, namely: Elijah DrLMEDIGO 
(1460-97), professor at Padua and 
Florence; Obadiah Elias ben Judah 
at Tivoli; Isaac d’Albadi (1450) at 
Barletta; Joseph ha-Levi of Naples: Messer Leon 
of Mantua; his son Messer David of Naples; 
JUDAH (Laudadeus) DE BLANts at Perugia (ec. 1520); 
ABRAHAM DE BAuMEs (d. 1528) at Padua; Solo- 
mon Vidal of Venice at Corfu; Vidal Balso at 
Reggio; Vitale (¢. 1550) and Bonajuto (¢. 1610) 
ALATINO at Spoleto; and Teodoro de Sacerdoti at 
the court of Julius IIT. Popes Paul II. and Alex- 
ander VI. favored Jewish physicians through privi- 
leges, e.g., Samuel Zarfati and Isaac Zarfati (¢. 
1530), physicians to Pope Clement VIL., whom J]saac 
saved from burial alive; Joseph ha-Kohen, physi- 
cian to the doge Andrea Dorea of Venice (ec. 1540); 
Obadiah Sforno (d. 1550 at Bologna), the Hebrew 
teacher of Reuchlin; Judah ibn Yahya at Bologna; 
Benjamin, also at Bologna; Raphael at Sarzena. 
Several important physicians were included in the 
PoORTALEONE family, e.g., Benjamin at Naples, his 
grandson David of Pavia, his great-grandson Abra- 
ham (1542-1612) at Mantua, and Isaac Cohen at 
Sicnna. From these names it may be seen that while 
Jewish physicians were more or less prohibited by 
the popes from practising in the east of Europe, in 
Italy they flourished. 

Boner DE Lates of Provence, when the Jews 
were expelled from that district in 1498, went to 
Rome as physician to Pope Leo X. He is well 
known also through the part he took during the 
Pfefferkorn persecutions. From Spain emigrated 
Judah Abravaneland Jacob Mantino. Judah Abra- 
vanel (LEo HEBRXUS) was minister at the court of 
Ferdinand and Isabella; expelled from Spain in 
1492, he went to Italy. His brother lived as phy- 
sician in Ferrara about 1549, Jacob Mantino settled 
in Rome as court physician to Pope Paul III. He 
acted also as ambassador of Charles V. at Venice. 
Paul IV. (15358) was a great persecutor of the Jews, 
enacting laws against them, some of which were 
repealed only in the nineteenth century, and on ac- 
count of which many Jews emigrated to Turkey. 
- During this period lived Juan Roprico DE CasTEL- 
BRANCO, surnamed “Amatus Lusitanus” (1511-68), 
at Ancona and Salonica; David d’Ascoli, who de- 
fended the Jewish physicians in an essay published 
at Strasburg in 1559; David de Pomis (b. 1525 at 
Spoleto; d. at Venice 1588), also a great defender of 
his colleagues (“ De Medico Hebrwo Enarratio Apo- 
logica,” Vienna, 1588). These were succeeded by 
the following: Moses ben Samuel Cases (c. 1600); 
KALONYMUS BEN JUDAII (¢. 1575), Joseph Hamez, and 
Jacob Lombroso at Venice; Samuel Meldola at Man- 
tua; David Hayyim Luria and three CANTARINIS at 
Padua (Kalonymus, 1593-1631 ; Isaac Hayyim, 1644~ 
1723: Judah, 1650-94); Ezekiel de Castro at Vero- 
na; Moses ben Jacob Cordovero at Leghorn; Jacob 
ben Isaac Zahalun at Ferrara, celebrated through his 


Italy. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


a SS Po SS PP ee errr 


418 


“Ozar Hayyim” (“Thesaurus Vite”) at Venice 
(1683); Hananiah ben Menahem Cases at Florence (e. 
1700); Isaac Cardoso, emigrated to Italy from Spain, 
where he had lived as a Marano; Manuele di Cesena, 
physician to Pope Sixtus V. 

To the eighteenth century belong: Shabbethai Vita 
Marini of Padua; Isaac LaMPRONTI (d. 1756); Isaac 
Borgo; Mordecai Zahalun; Jacob Heilprin; Aaron 
Cases (d. 1767); Israel Gedaliah Cases (d. 1798), all 
of Ferrara; Solomon Levi and Isaac Levi Val, of 
Verona; at Mantua, the Konia family : Joseph, 
Solomon, Moses Benjamin, Wolf, and Israel: at 
Leghorn, Isaac Foa, known also as a printer; Elias 
Concile; Adam and his sons Jacob and Azariah 
Hayyim Bondi; at Friaul, Tsaac Luzzatto, 1780- 
1808; his brother Ephraim (b. 1729), who practised 
for more than thirty years in London, and died 
(1799) while traveling in Lausanne; Graziado NEPI 
(1759-1836), rabbi and physician at Cento, who 
belonged to the great French Sanhedrin of 1806. 

In France are to be found very few Jewish physi- 
cians during this period, as unbaptized Jews were 
allowed only in papal Avignon: 
Pierre de Notre Dame (a baptized 
Jew) at Arles (1500); Joseph Colon at 
Perries; Mordecai Nathan and Joseph de Noves at 
Avignon; Elias Montalto (d. at Paris 1615), court 
physician to Maria de Medici, by whose order his 
body was embalmed and sent to Holland for burial 
in a Jewish cemetery; bis son Isaac, at Paris; at 
Bordeaux, John Baptist de Silva (1686-1742), who 
had the best consulting practise in Kurope, and was 
physician to Louis X1VY., by whom he was knighted ; 
at Nancy, Isaac Assur and Jacob Beer (¢. 1775). 

Though Jewish physicians were not allowed to 
practise in France, their skill was so well known 
that Francis I. (1515-47) during a severe sickness 
asked the Emperor of Germany for a Jewish physi- 
cian. When one arrived the king, thinking he wasa 
Christian, sent him back. The king then asked the 
Sultan of Turkey for another Jewish physician, who 
cured liim (Cabanis, “ Révolution de la Médecine,” 
p. 128, Brussels, 1844), 

While the Mohammedans lost Spain, they captured 
Constantinople (1458), and Jewish physicians were 

allowed to practise in Turkey, as in 

In the the other Mohammedan possessions. 

Turkish From Spain, Portugal, Italy, and 
Dominions. France Jews emigrated to Turkey. 

Among them were the following: in 
Constantinople, Solomon ALMOLTt (¢. 1517); Joseph 
Hamon; his son Moses (1490-1567), physician to Su- 
laiman the Magnificent; and his grandson Joseph 
(d. 1578); Ibn Yahya; Abraham ha-Levi ibn Migas; 
Abraham Nahmias; Leo Siaa (¢. 1636); Israel Co- 
NEGLIANO (c. 1680); Ephraim Penseri; Abraham ben 
Yaish; Abraham Samuel Solomon; and Isaac Jabez 
(e. 1700); at Salonica, Samuel Uzziel (¢. 1550); Abra- 
ham Cohen (¢. 1700); at Jerusalem, Elijah of Fer- 
rara (¢. 1460); David ibn Shoshan, head of the 
Sephardic yeshibah in 1552; Jacob ibn Amram; 
Jacob ABOAB; and Samuel ha-Levi (c. 1625); the 
physician Jacob Hayyim Zemah was chicf rabbi in 
1645. In Corfu lived Samuel Valerio (e. 1550); 
in Zante, Jacob ben Uzziel (¢c. 1600); Abraham 
Cohen (1670-1722). 


France. 


419 


_ 


In the Netherlands, which during this period was 
mostly under Spanish rule, Jewish physicians were 
few: Abraham Zacuro (Zacutus Lusi- 


In the tanus), an emigrant from Portugal 
Nether- about 1600; at Amsterdam the BuENO 
lands and family (Abraham, Ephraim Hezekiah, 
England. Jacob, Joseph, and Solomon); Baltha- 


zar de CAsTRO (1620-87); somewhat 
later Joseph Israel MeEnDEs; Samuel de Silva; Sam- 
uel Jeshurun; and Samuel de Mercado (c. 1650); 
Samuel de Misa (¢. 1725); Johanan van Embden and 
Naphtali Herz (¢. 1750). 

In England during this period there were very 
few Jewish physicians, e.g., Elias Sabot (¢. 1410); 
Rodrigo Lorrz (b, 1525 in Portugal), court physi- 
cian to Queen Elizabth 1580, for attempting to poi- 
son whom he was executed in 1894. When Cromwell 
permitted the Jews to settle openly in England there 
immigrated thither Abraham de Mercado about 1659; 
Joseph MENDES Bravo about 1675; Ephraim Isaac 
Abendana, in Cambridge and Oxford (d. 1710), and 
his brother Jacob (1630-95); David Nieto, in Lon- 
don (¢. 1710); Jacob de Castro Sarmento, in London 
(1692-1762); Fernando Mendez (d. 1724); Isaac de 
Sequera Samuda (b. 1721); Israel Lyons (1739-75); 
Samucl Nunez (ce. 1750); Joseph Hart Myers (1758- 
1828): Abraham Nonski (ec. 1785; writer on vaccina- 
tion); the three Schombergs (Isaac, d. 1781; Meir 
Low, d. 1761; and Ralph, d. 1792); Isaac Henriques 
Sequera (1788-1816); Abraham van Oven (d. 1778); 
Joshua van Oven (1766-1838); Solomon de Leon (ec. 
1775); George Gompertz Levisohn (da. 1797); Ehas 
Friedberg ; and a Doctor Jeremias (¢. 1775). 

While before 1500 there had been very few Jewish 
physicians in the German-speaking countries, in the 

later centuries many were to be found, 

Germany. among whom were especially the 

under - mentioned—in Frankfort -on- 

the-Main: Joseph bar Ephraim Levi (d. 1582); 
Abraham ben Joseph Levi (d. 1581); Jacob ben 
Samuel and Aaron (ec. 1600); Shelomoh (d. about 
1631); his son L6w Leo Shelomoh; Isaac Heln (d. 
1654); Joseph Solomon DELMEDIGO (b, 1591 at Can- 
dia; practised in Candia, Cairo, Lithuania, Ham- 
burg, Amsterdam, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Worms, 
and Prague, where he died 1655); his son-in-law 
Solomon Brne (b. about 1615); Jonas ben Moses 
Bonn; Abraham ben Isaac Wallach; Leo Simon; 
Abraham Heln (ec. 1650); Benjamin Levi BucusBatm 
(1645-1715); his sons Gutman Wolf (1678-1770) and 
Lipman (b. 1677); Amshel Gutman (d. 1748), son of 
Gutman Wolf; Issachar Bair Liebman (d. 1758); An- 
selin Schloss Beifuss (d. 1793); and Adolf Worms 
(d. 1812), In Hamburg are to be mentioned: Ro- 
drigo de Castro (1550-1627), an eminent gynecolo- 
gist; his sons Benedict de CastTRo (1097-1684), court 
physician to Queen Christina of Sweden, and Daniel 
(Andreas) de Castro (b. 1599), court physician to 
King Christian IV. of Denmark; Jacob RosaLess, 
who practised in Hamburg from 1687 to 1645; and 
Benjamin ben Immanuel Musaphia (1606-75). At 
Schaffhausen lived the physician David (e. 1550); at 
Mithlheim, Solomon ben Boaz; at Colmar and Rap- 
poltsweiler, Judah Carmoly (1700-85); at Colmar, 
Anshel Meyer (¢. 1750); at Coblenz, Emanuel Wal- 
lich (c. 1750); at Bingen, Abraham Bing (¢. 1550), 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 


father of Solomon Bing of Hamburg; at Mayence, 
Selkeles Grotwahl (¢. 1675) and his son Meier; Lipp- 
mann Levi and Phoebus Cohen (¢. 1775); at Bonn 
(also at Neuwied), Benjamin Croneburg (e. 1750); 
Wolf and his two sons Heinrich and Solomon (also 
at Dtiren); at Diisseldorf, Gottschalk Lazarus van 
Geldern (1726-95) and his son Joseph (1765-96), 
Heine’s grandfather; at Cologne, Naphtali ben Jo- 
seph Levi (c. 1625); at Metz, Isaac (e. 1650); Naphtali 
Herz; Solomon ben Baruch; Mayer and Isaac Wal- 
lich (¢. 1700); Jacob Wallich: Marcus Cosman Gom- 
pertz Wolf; and Enoch Levin (¢. 1750): the two 
brothers Willstadt (¢. 1775); Elkan Isaac Wolf; and 
Jacob Aronsohn (c. 1790); at Hanover, Mcier Cohen 
and Jacob Marx (¢. 1775); at Bamberg, Adalbert 
Friedrich Markus (17538-1816). In the principalities 
of the Hapsburg family were only a few Jewish 
physicians; at Innsbruck, Lazarus (c. 1560); at 
Vienna, Isaac (Ginzburg?) and his son Judah Loéb 
Winckler (c. 1625; both left Vienna 1670 and settled 
in Posen); Joseph Oesterreicher (1756-1882). At 
Prague were: Isaac ben Joshua (c. 1550); Abraham 
Kiscn (1720-1808); Jonas Mischel JEITELES (1735- 
1806) and his son Benedict (1762-1813); at Berlin, 
Lippoip (ce. 1535), court physician to the elector 
Joachim IT.; Hector, executed 1573 for having pol- 
soned his master; Lébel (c¢. 1698); the dentist Veit 
Abraham (ec. 1699); Marcus Eliezer Br.ocy (1723-99) ; 
Aaron Solomon GUMPERz (1723-69); Markus HEerz 
(1747-1803), husband of Henriette Herz: Georg Levi- 
son (d. 1797); at K6énigsberg, Isaac May and Mi- 
chae! Abraham (c. 1550); at Breslau, Zadok (e. 1775); 
at Lissa, Mordecai Rofe. 
Although at the beginning of the eighteenth cen- 
tury conditions in Germany were not favorable for 
Jewish physicians, at the middle and 
Medical end of the same century most of the 
Education Jewish practitioners received degrees. 
of German from German universities. In 1700 
Jews. the universities of Rostock and Witten- 
berg counseled Christians against em- 
ploying Jewish physicians, who, they declared, were 
incompetent (meaning that they had not received a 
university education), In 1725 King Frederick Will- 
iam I, of Prussia prohibited Jews aot having diple- 
mas from practising medicine, and in 1745 appeared 
at Frankfort a book by Johann Helfrich Pfeil expo- 
sing the ignorance of Jewish physicians. 
When the kings of Poland permitted Jews to set- 
tle in some parts of their dominions, physicians ap- 
peared there also. At Cracow lived 
In Poland. Ezekiel (c. 1503); Isaac Jacob (d. 
about 1510), physician to King Sigis- 
mund I.; Solomon ben Nathan ASWKENAZI (1520- 
1602), physician to Sigismund IT. and to the sultan 
Sulaiman II.; Solomon Luria in Lublin; Tobias 
Coun (1652-1729), who practised in Poland, Adria- 
nople, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, and was court 
physician to five Turkish sultans; Jonas Casal (ec. 
1675), physician to John Sobieski; Philipp Lubelski 
at Cracow (1788-1879); Elias Pinschow (ec. 1775); at 
Thorn, Morgenstern (c. 1567); at Posen, the Wincklers 
(the father Leo [Judah Léb] emigrated from Vienna 
about 1670): his sons Jacob and Isaac and his grand- 
son Wolf, all four important physicians and leaders 
of the community; Levi Elias HtrscHet (1741-72). 


Medicine 


In Moscow practised Magister Anton (Ehrenstein). 
The first Jewish physician in that city probably 
came from Rome. He was court physician under 
Ivan II. and was executed in 1485 by the servants 
of Prince Karakucza, whose son he had failed to 


cure. He was succeeded by LEo, who was executed 
in 1490, also for not having cured one 
Russia. of Ivan’ssons. In the fifteenth cen- 


tury lived Solomon Calvaire; Stephan 
von GADEN, also court physician (executed in 1682). 
At St. Petersburg lived the court physician Antonio 
Ribeiro Sanchez (1699-1783). The greater number 
of Jewish physicians are found in the larger commu- 
nities, ¢.g., at Hasenpoth, Issachar Falkensohn BEHR 
(b. 1746), Judah ha-Levi Hurwicz, Jacob Lib- 
schutz, David Abrahamson (ce. 1775), Aaron Solomon 
Tobias (d. 1782), Lazar Isaac Kume (¢. 1800); at 
Wilna, L6b Gordon (¢. 1725); at Mitau, Elrich (d. 
1809); at Bausk and Odessa, Eliezer Elias Lowen- 
thal (¢. 1775); also at Bausk, Lachmann. 

The foregoing lists of physicians are certainly not 
complete. There probably lived many a good Jew- 
ish practitioner whose name has not been recorded. 

With very few exceptions the Jewish 


Review _ pliysicians of the period 1495-1800 did 
(1495- not excel. They were usually general 
1800). practitioners, very often combining 


the offices of rabbiand physician. A 
few are cited as great consulting physicians, as the 
above-mentioned John Baptist de Silva of Paris and 
the gynecologist Rodrigo de Castro of Hamburg. 
Only a few left important medical works. As a 
rule their influence upon medicine was only slight. 
They suffered with their brethren expulsion from 
many countrics. They were very often prohibited 
from practising among Christians and were allowed 
.0 follow their profession among their brethren only. 
The universities were often closed to them; and 
popes and princes issued edicts against them. 
—TIn Recent Times: The French Revolution 
brought a great change in the status of Jewish 
physicians. Jews were admitted to citizenship in 
nearly every country of western Europe, and were 
permitted to study at all universities and to practise 
their profession. Even in Russia to-day (1904) there 
are many Jewish physicians to be found; but it is es- 
pecially in Germany, Austria, and the United States 
that Jews have become prominent as gencral prac- 
titioners, specialists, university professors of medi- 
cine (since 1848), and medical journalists. It is only 
possible to enumerate some of those who have ob- 
tained prominence in medical circles during the 
nineteenth century, beginning with those who have 
died. 

Physicians: Solomon Ludwig Steinheim (Altona, 
1789-1866); Bernhard van Oven (London, 1797- 
1860); Martin Steinthal (Berlin, 1798-1892; at his 
death the oldest physician in Germany), reeditor of 
Hufeland’s “ Macrobiotik ”; Daniel Peixotto (Lon- 

don, 1800-48); Hananeel de Leon (2d. 

General ¢. 1825); J. L. Levinson (7. 1800-74); 

Practi- Raphael Koscu (Berlin, 1803-72); Jon- 

tioners. athan Pereira (London, 1804-58); Max- 

imilian HEINE (St. Petersburg, 1805-79), 
brother of Heinrich Heine: Johann J acosy (Kénigs- 
berg, 1805-77); Jonas GRATZER (Breslau, 1806-89) ; 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


420 


Moritz Rapoport (Lemberg, 1808-80); Isaac A. 
Franklin (London, 1812-80); David GRuBy (Paris, 
1810-98), known through his free public lectures; 
Eleazar Meldola (London, 1810-79); Ludwig Gw- 
TERBOCK (Berlin, 1814-95); Moritz Adolph Unna 
(Hamburg, 1813-88); Julius Barascu (Bucharest, 
1815-63) ; Sigismund Sutro (London, 1815-86) ; Jacob 
Eduard Polak (Vienna, 1818-91), court physician at 
Teheran to the Shah of Persia; Ferdinand FaLKson 
(K6nigsberg, 1820-1900), known through a lawsuit 
which was due to his marriage to a Christian woman ; 
Samuel KRISTELLER (Berlin, 1820-1900); Hermann 
HrrscHFELpT (Colberg, 1825-85), to whose memory 
a monument was erected at Colberg; Henry Behr- 
end (London, 1828-93); Wilhelm LuBELsKI (War- 
saw, 1832-90); Ernest Abraham Hart(London, 1886- 
1898); and L. G. Gold (Odessa, da. 1902). 

Anatomists: Friedrich Gustav Jacob HENLE (Gdot- 
tingen, 1809-85), one of the leading anatomists of 
his time; Jacob HErz (Erlangen, 1816-71), whose 
monument is to be seen in Erlangen—one of the 
three monuments erected to Jews in Germany, 

the other two being those of Moses 

Deceased Mendelssohn at Dessau, and Hermann 
Specialists. Hirschfeldt at Colberg; Judwik 

Maurycy HIRSCHFELD (Warsaw, 1816- 
1876); Siegmund Srirzer (Constantinople, 1839- 
1894), physician to Sultan ‘Abd al-Majid. 

Physiologists: Simone Fusrnt (Palermo, 1841-98), 
friend and pupil of Moleschott; Ernst FLEIscHL 
VON Marxow (Vienna, 1846-91); Moritz Scuirr 
(Geneva, 1823-96); Gabriel Gustav VALENTIN (Bern, 
1810-83), one of the leading physiologists of his age. 

Microscopists: Gottlieb GLUGE (Brussels, 1812- 
1898), one of the pioneers of microscopy; Ludwik 
Mandl (Paris, 1812-81). 

Embryologists: Robert Remax (Berlin, 1815-65), 
the first Jewish privat-docent in Prussia, admitted 
to the Berlin faculty in 1847, and well Known 
through his discoveries in neurology, embryology, 
and electrotherapy; Leopold SCHENx (Vienna, 1840- 
1892), well known through his theory. 

Pathologists: Kar! Friedrich CANstTatTt (Erlangen, 
1807-50), founder and editor of the well-known 
“ Jahresbericht tiber die Fortschritte der Gesammten 
Medizin Aller Lander,” begun in 1841 and continued 
after his death by Virchow; Julius CoHNnEem 
(Leipsic, 1839-84), author of the theory of emigra- 
tion of white corpuscles as the origin of pus and 
of inflammation, and demonstrator of “ Cohnheim’s 
areas”; Felix Victor Brrcou-HIrRscHreLp (Leipsic, 
1842-99); Moritz Heinrich RoMBERG (Berlin, 1795- 
1873), the eminent neurologist; Simon SAMUEL 
(Kénigsberg, 1885-99); Solomon STRICKER (Vienna, 
1834-98), the founder of microtomy ; Karl WEIGERT 
(Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1845-1904), 

Clinicians: Jonas Freund (London, d. 1880), 
founder of the German Hospital, London; Heinrich 
JacoBsON (Berlin, 1826-90); Hermann LEBERT 
(Lewy) (Breslau, 1813-78); Ludwig TrausBE (Ber- 
lin, 1818-76), the father of experimental pathology; 
Daniel Maduro Peixotto (New York, about 1859). 

Surgeons: Michelangelo Asson (Venice, 1802-77); 
Leopold von DitTTEL (Vienna, 1815-98), who per- 
formed over 800 operations for calculus; Joseph GRv- 
BER (2). 1827-1900); Aaron JEITELES (Olmiitz, 1788- 


421 


1878); Michel Lévy (Paris, 1809-72); Germain Sée 
(Paris, 1818-96); Lewis OpPpENHEIM (London, 18382- 
1895); Julius Wo.LFF (Berlin, 1836-1902); Paul Gt- 
TERBOCK (Berlin, 1844-97). 

Gynecologist: David HaussMANN (Berlin, 1889- 
1895). 

Pharmacologist: Hermann Friepvenc (Breslau, 
1817-84), 

Aurists: Joseph GRUBER (Vienna, 1827-1900) and 
Solomon Moos (Heidelberg, 1831-95). 

Ophthalmologists: Isaac Hays (Philadelphia, 1796- 
1879), editor of the “ American Journal of Medical 
Science”; Ignaz HirscuLter (Budapest, 1823-91); 
John Zechariah Laurence (London, 1828-70); Aaron 
FRIEDENWALD (Baltimore, 1836-1902); Max Lan- 
DESBERG (New York, 1840-95); Ludwig Maurnner 
(Vienna, 1840-94), to whose memory @ monument 
was erected in the arcades of Vienna University, 
the only monument dedicated toa Jew in Austria. 

Larynyologists: Jacob GoTTSTEIN (Breslau, 1832- 
1895); Abraham Kuun (Strasburg, 1838-1900); Jo- 
hann ScCUNITZLER (Vienna, 1835-93); Elias HEYMAN 
(Stockholm, 1829-89); Karl Stoerk (Vienna, 1882- 
1889); Louis Elsberg (New York, 1886-85); Isaac 
Micuakn (Hamburg, 1848-97); G. Ash (New York, 
d. 1902). 

Neuropathist: Oscar BERGER (Breslau, 1844-85). 

Dermatologists: Moriz Kapost (Kohn) (Vienna, 
1837-1902); Oskar Sruon (Breslau, 1845-82); Her- 
mann von ZEISsL (Vienna, 1817-84), defender of the 
dual theory of syphilis. 

Psychiatrist: Ludwig MEYER (Gottingen, 1827- 
1900). 

Hygienists: Nikolaus Heinrich Jutrvs (Hamburg, 
1783-1862); Michel L&vy (Paris, 1809-72); Levi Ali 
CoHEN (Groningen, 1817-89). 

Electrotherapist: Moritz Meyer (Berlin, 1821-93). 

Balneologist: Gottfried Schmelkes (Teplitz, 1807- 
1870). 

Biologist: Ludwig Lewin Jacobsou (Copenhagen, 
1783-1848). 

Encyclopedists: Friedrich Jacob BEHREND (Ler- 
lin, 1808-89); Samuel GUTTMANN (Berlin, 1839-98). 

Miscellaneous: Authority on forensic medicine: 
Johann Ludwig Caspar (Berlin, 1796-1864). Hy- 
drotherapist: Ludwig F. FRANKEL (Berlin, 1806- 
1872). Dental surgeon: Ludwig Heinrich Hor Lan- 
DER (Breslau, 1833-97), one of the German pioneers 
of scientific dentistry. 

Historians of medicine: August Hrrscw (Berlin, 
1817-94), still an undisputed authority; Abraham 

Hartog Israets (Amsterdam, 1822- 


Medical 1883); Franz Romeo SELIGMANN (Vi- 
History enna, 1808-79). 

and Jour- Journalists: Louis Posner (Berlin, 
nalism. 1815-68), editor of the “Berliner Kli- 


nische Wochenschrift ” ; Leopold Wit- 
TELSHOFER (Vienna, 1818-89), editor of the “ Wie- 
ner Medizinische Wochenschrift ”; Paul GuTTMANN 
(Berlin, 1833-93), editor of the “Journal fiir Prak- 
tische Aerzte”; Julius Grosser (Prenzlau, 18385- 
1901), editor of the “ Deutsche Medizinal-Zeitung ”; 
Louis WALDENBURG (Berlin, 1837-81), editor of the 
“Berliner Klinische Wochenschrift”; Johann Jacob 
(Joseph Isidor) Sacus (Nordhausen, 1803-46), pub- 
lisher and editor of medical journals, The cham- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 


pion of homeopathy in Austria is Emil AurscHUL 
(Prague, 1812-65), who founded and published (1853) 
the first homeopathic magazine in Austria. 

Of living physicians, the following list gives the 
names of some of the more important, especially of 
those who have held official positions: 

Austria: The alienist Arnold Pick; the physi- 
ologist Sigmund Mayer; the pathologists Philipp 
Joseph Pick and Alfred Pribram, all four of Prague; 

the aural surgeon Adam POoOLrmrzer; 

Living the electrotherapists Moritz Benedikt 
Physicians and Gustav GARTNER; the patholo- 

in Europe. gist Anton WEICHSELBAUM; the pedi- 
atrists Alois Epsrern and Max Kas- 
~SOWITZ ; the clinicians Moritz Heitler, Leopold Osrr, 
Alois Pick, Wilhelm von WrixvrEernitz, Emil ZcucK- 
ERKANDL; the dermatologist Isidor NEUMANN; the 
ophthalmologist Isidor ScuxaBpent; Samuel von 
Bascn, body-physician to the emperor Maximilian 
of Mexico; the journalist Alexander FRANKEL; 
Leopold von SELIGMANN, retired colonel-surgeon 
of the Austrian army, all of Vienna: the balneolo- 
gists Enoch Heinrich Kiscn of Marienbadl and Josef 
SEEGEN of Carlsbad. 

Denmark: The pathologist Karl Julius Sano- 
MONSEN Of Copenhagen. 

England: The ophthalmologist Richard LiEes- 
REICH; the laryngologist Sir Felix SEmon; the pa- 
thologist Bertram Abrahams, all three of London; 
to these may be added the bacteriologist Waldemar 
HAFFKINE of Calcutta, India. 

France: The inventor of color photography 
Gabriel LippMANN; the bacteriologist Alexander 
Marworexk; the physician Anselme WEILL: the 
surgeon Marc Se; the clinicians Julius Go1p- 
SCHMIDT, Georges HayrEM, and Louis Mand]; the 
laryngologists Benjamin Benno Loewenberg, Louis © 
Lucien DRrREYFUs-Brisac, all of Paris: the neuro}l- 
ogists Hippolyte Bernheim of Nancy and Max 
NorpbAu of Paris. 

The number of Jewish physicians in Germany 
is very great: the anatomist Gustav SCHWALBE of 
Strasburg; the physiologists Julius BerNsrer of 
Halle, the brothers Hermann and Immanuel Munx 
and Nathan Zuntz of Berlin, Isidor Rosenthal of 
Erlangen; the histologist Gustav Jacob Born of 
Breslau; the pathologists Ludwig BRIEGER and Os- 
kar IsRaEu of Berlin; the clinicians Imar Boas and 
Wilhelm Esstein of Géttingen, Albert FrANKEL 
and Julius Lazarus of Berlin, Ludwig LicaTrHem 
of Kénigsberg, Martin Menpentsoun of Berlin, 
Oscar Mrnxowski of Strasburg, Carl Posner, 
Ottomar Rosenspacu, Hermann SENATOR, Georg 
Anton Solomon, all of Berlin; the dermatologists 
Gustav BENREND, Heinrich KOBNER, Oskar Lassar, 
Georg Richard Lewy, all likewise of Berlin, Albert 
NeisseEr of Breslau, Paul Gerson Uxna of Ham- 
burg; the surgeons Robert KUTNER, James ISRAEL, 
William Levy, all of Berlin; the pediatrists Adolf 
Baoixsky and Livius Ftrst of Berlin and Eduard 
Heinrich Henocn of Dresden; the gynecologist 
Ernst FRANKEL of Breslau, Leopold and Theodor 
LANDAU of Berlin, Julius ScHOTTLANDER Of Heidel- 
berg, Paul Zweirer of Leipsic: the neuropathists 
Hermann OpPENuEIM, Emanuel MENDEL, Albert 
MOLL, and Ernst Julius REmak, all of Berlin; the 


Medicine 
Medina 





bacteriologist Paul Enruicu of Frankfort-on-the- 
Main; the orthopedist Leopold Ewer of Berlin; 
the ophthalmologists Julius Hirscusere of Berlin, 
Hermann L. Coun of Breslau, Ludwig L. LaQquEetr 
of Strasburg, Max Solomon of Berlin, Leopold 
Weiss of Heidelberg; the pharmacologists Max 
JAFFE of K6nigsberg, Oskar Matthias, Eugen 
LIEBREICH and Louis Lewin of Berlin; the 
otologists Ludwig Karz and Ludwig Lowe of 
Berlin; the laryngologists Paul Heymann and B. 
FRANKEL of Berlin; the encyclopedist Albert Eu- 
LENBURG of Berlin; the forensicist Adolf LESSER of 
Berlin; the hygienist Ernst Levy of Strasburg; the 
historian Julius Leopold Pace. of Berlin; the an- 
thropologist Abraham Lrssaver of Berlin. 

Hungary: The neuropathist Otto Schwartzer 
von Babarcz; the oculist Nathaniel Furr; the 
clinician Friedrich KorAnvyI, all of Budapest. 

Italy: The specialist of forensic medicine Sal- 
vatore OTTOLENGHI of Sienna; the clinician Benia- 
mino Luzzatro of Padua; the great alienist Cesare 
LOMBRoso and the pathologist Pio FoA, both of 
Turin, 

The Netherlands: The clinician Samuel Sieg- 
mund Rosenstein of Leyden. 

Rumania: The physician Karpel Lippe. 

Russia: Isaac DemBo of St. Petersburg, author of 
“ lfla-Shehitah weha-Bedikah”; the ophthalmologist 
Max (Emanuel) MANDELSTAMM; the hygienist and 
court physician Joseph Vasilievich BERTENSOHN and 
his nephew Lev Bertensohn of St. Petersburg; 
the physician Joseph CHazanowicz of Byelostok, 
founder of the Abarbanel Library at Jerusalem; 
the clnician W. Manassein of Kasan; Isidorus 
Brennson at Mitau. Of the physicians at present 
practising in Courland 19.2 per cent are Jews. 

Switzerland: The pathologist Moritz Rota of 
Basel. 

Turkey : Elias ConeN Pasha of Constantinople. 

United States: The first Jewish physician men- 
tioned in colonial timesin the United Statesis Jacob 
Lumbrozo, who practised about 1639 in Maryland. 

The number of Jewish physicians in the United 
States to-day (1904) is very large, but only a few— 


mainly those who have acquired official positions— 


can be mentioned here: the general practitioners 
Mark Blumenthal, Simon Brainin, David A. D’An- 
cona, Julius Friedenwald, Boleslav Lapovski, Mau- 
rice T. Lewi, Samuel J. Meltzer, Alfred Meyer, 

William Moss, Max Rosenthal, Arthur 
In the Uni- F. Sampson, J. F. Schamberg, Laza- 
ted States. rus Schéney, C. D. Spivak, Richard 

Stein, Jacob Teschner; the physi- 
ologist David Riesman; the pathologists Albert 
Abrams, Isaac Adler, Simon Flexner, and Bernard 
S. Talmey; the hydrotherapist Simon Baruch; the 
microscopist Isidore Berman; the surgeons G. W. 
Birkowitz, Nathan Jacobson, Howard Lilienthal, 
William Meyer, Joseph Ranschoff, and Lewis N. 
Steinbach; the jurisprudent N. E. Brill; the aurists 
William Cowen, M. D. Lederman, and Max Toep- 
litz; the gynecologists Joseph Brettauer, Louis 
Ladinsky, and $. Marx; the laryngologists Jacob 
da Silva Solis-Cohen, Max Freudenthal, and Emil 
Maver; the clinicians Henry W. Bettmann, Solomon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


422 


Max Einhorn, A. A. Eshner, Joseph Oakland Hirsch- 
felder, G. A. Knopf; the pediatrists 8. Henry Des- 
sau, Frederick Forchheimer, Henry Nloway, Abra- 
ham Jacobi, Henry Koplik, and Nathan Oppenheim ; 
the dermatologists William Gottheil and Sigismund 
Lustgarten; the ophthalmologists Harry Frieden- 
wald, Emil Gruening, Charles H. May, and H. 
Scharpringer; tlie neurologists Joseph Frankel, G. 
W. Jacoby, Bernhard Sachs, and William Leszyn- 
ski; the biologist Jacques Loeb; the bacteriologist 
Milton Joseph Rosenau; and the dentists Leopold 
Greenbaum and John J. Ifart. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Carmoly, Histoire des Médecins Juifs, Brus- 
sels, 1844 (a book full of material, but often unreliable); Hyrtl, 
Das Arabische und Hebrdische in der Anatomie, Vienna, 
1879; Miinz, Ueber die Jtidischen Aerzte im Mittelalter, 
Berlin, 1887; M. Horovitz, Jiidische Aerzte in Frankfurt- 
am-Main, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1886; Landau, Gesch. der 
Jtidischen Aerzte, Bertin, 1895; Hirsch, Biog. Lex.; Pagel, 
Biog. Lex.; Steinschneider, Wissenschaft und Charlatanerie 
Unter den Arabern im Neunten Jahrhundert, in Virchow's 
Archiv, xxxvi.; idem, Constantinus Africanus und Seine 
Arabischen Quellen, ib. xxxvii.: idem, Die Toxicologischen 
Schriften der Araber bis Ende des XIT. Jahrhunderts, ib. 
lii.; idem, Ueber Medicin in Bibel und Talmud und iiber 
Jidische Aerzte,in Wiener Klinische Rundschau, 1896; 
idem, Hebr. Uebers.; idem, Donnoio, Berlin, 1868; idem, 
Hebr. Bibl.; idem, Die Arabische Literatur der Juden, 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1902; Wiistenfeld, Die Academien 
der Araber und Ihre Lehrer, Gottingen, 1837; idem, Die 
Uebersetzungen Arabischer Werke in das Lateinische, 
seit den XI. Jahrhundert, ib. 1877; idem, Die Geschichts- 
schreiber der Araber und Ihre Werke, ib. 1882; Haeser, 
Lehrbuch der Geschichte der Medizin und der Epide- 
mischen Krankheiten, Jena, 1882; Aaron Friedenwald, Jewish 
Physicians and the Contribution of the Jews to the Science 
of Medicine, in Publ. of the Gratz College, 1897, Philadel- 
phia, 1897; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, 
Berlin, 1895-96; Berliner, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, 1893; Joseph Jacobs, The Jews of Angevin 
England, pp. 114, 340, London, 1893; idem, Jewish Year- 
Book; Kayserling, Zur Gesch. der Jtidischen Aerzte, in 
Monatsschrift, vii. 165; Kaufmann, Un Siecle del? Existence 
Wune Famille de Juifs de Vienne et de Posen, in R. E. J. 
xx. 275; Ddllinger, Die Juden in Huropa, in Akademische 
Vortrdge, vol. i., Nérdlingen, 1890; Revue des Etudes Juives, 
Xii. 77-97, xvii. 221-254, xlviii. 48-81, xcvi. 265-272. 


J F. T. Hi. 


MEDINA: Second sacred city of Islam; situated 
in the Hijaz in Arabia, about 250 miles north of 
Mecca. It is celebrated as the place to which the 
Hegira (Mohammed's flight from Mecca) was di- 
rected, and as the capital and burial-place of Mo- 
hammed. According to Arabic tradition, Yathrib 
and the Hijaz were originally peopled with Amale- 
kites, who were displaced by the Israelites. There 
are different accounts as to when this displacement 
was effected: some say that it occurred under Moses 
(comp. “Kitab al-Aghani,” iv. 263); some, under 
Joshua; and some, under David, who it is stated 
resided in the Hijaz during Absalom’s rebellion. 

Jews may have settled in the Hijaz after the sack 
of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; and it is proba- 
ble that they came in successive colonies, e.g., after 
Pompey’s attack upon Judea (64 B.c.), after Titus’ 
conquest of Jerusalem (70 c.E.), and again after 
Hadrian’s persecution of the Jews (in 136 C.E.; see 
ARABIA). 

The Jews had a very rich and flourishing settle- 
ment at Yathrib and built strongholds in the city 
and vicinity. The principal families were the Banu 
Kainuka‘, the Banu Kuraiza, and the Banu al- 
Nadir. The latter two were known as the “ Al- 
Kahinan,” because they traced their descent from 
Aaron. In the fourth century Arab tribes from 
Yemen began toencroach upon the Jewsin Medina. 


da Silva Solis-Cohen, Joseph and Julius Eichberg, { They were divided into two clans, the Banu Aus and 


423 


the Banu Khazraj. By calling in outside assistance 
and treacherously massacring at a banquet the prin- 
cipal Jews, these Arab clans finally 


Jewish gained the upper hand at Medina to- 
Tribes at ward the end of the fifth century (for 
Medina. datesee“J.Q. KR.” vii. 175, note). From 


this time the Jews retired into the 
background for about a century. About four or five 
years before the Hegira the Jews took an active part 
in the battle of Bu‘ath between the Banu Aus and 
the Banu Khazraj. The Banu Nadir and the Banu 
Kuraiza fought with the Banu Aus, while the Banu 
Kainuka‘ were allied with the Banu Khazraj. The 
latter were defeated after a long and desperate 
battle. 
It is probable that the presence of Jews in Medina 
did much to prepare the way for Mohammed’s 


teaching. When the prophet first went to Medina 
he was inclined to be friendly toward 
Moham- the Jews. They were included in the 


med’s Atti- treaty between him and the inhab- 
tude To- itants of Medina. He also made cer- 
ward Jews tain concessions to them on the ground 
of Medina. of religion, and adopted their kiblah 
—Jerusalem—in the hope of winning 
them to his cause. They, however, ridiculed him, 
and delighted in drawing him into arguments to ex- 
pose his ignorance; so that his concilatory attitude 
was soon changed to enmity. A few Jews were 
converted to Islam, among them Abdallah ibn 
Salam, whom Mohammed called the “servant of 
God,” and of whose conversion the prophet made 
much, 

Finally Mohammed began to use actual violence 
toward the Medina Jews. After the battle of Bedr 
a woman called AsMA, said by some to be a Jewess, 
wrote satirical verses, and was killed in her sleep, 
probably with Mohammed’s consent. Not long be- 
fore, Abu ‘Afak of the Banu Amr, who had been con- 
verted to Judaism, had been assassinated for having 
displeased Mohammed by writing verses ridiculing 
the new religion. Mohammed then seems to have 
decided to get rid of the Jews in a body, since they 
were a constant menace to his cause. He began 
with the Banu Kainuka‘, who were goldsmiths, and 
lived by themselves in a fortified suburb. He first 
summoned them to accept his religion, and they re- 
fused. Soon a pretext was found for an open at- 
tack. A Moslem girl was insulted by a Jew of the 
Banu Kainuka‘; the Jew was killed by a Moslem, 
and the latter in turn was killed by the brothers 
of the murdered Jew. Mohammed immediately 

marched against the Banu Kainuka‘ 
Mohammed and besieged them in their stronghold. 
Attacks After a siege of fifteen days they sur- 
Jews. rendered, and their lives were spared 
only at the urgent request of Ab- 
dallah ibn Ubai, the influential leader of the Arab 
opposition, whose pleading Mohammed dared not 
ignore. Being allowed to leave the country, they 
emigrated toward thenorth. Their departure weak- 
ened the Jews, who if they had been united might 
have withstood Mohammed’s attacks. 

About a month after the emigration of the Kai- 
nuka‘, Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Meccan opposi- 
tion. visited Huyayy of the Banu al-Nadir, but, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medicine 
Medina 


being refused admittance by him, spent the night 
with another intluential man of the same tribe and 
obtained information from him concerning the state 
of Medina. Another Jewish poet was assassinated 
about this time at Mohammed’s desire. This was 
Ka‘b tbn al-Ashraf of the Banu Nadir, who had 
been stirring up the Kuraish at Mecca by his verses 
after the battle of Bedr. Ibn Sanina, a Jewish mer- 
chant, was killed on the day after Ka‘b; and the 
Jews now began to fear to leave their houses. In 
the summer of 625 Mohammed attacked and be- 
sieged the Banu al-Nadir. There appears to have 
been no satisfactory pretext for the attack. Mo- 
hammed claimed that he had received a revelation 
telling him of the treachery of the Jews. Aftera 
siege of fifteen or twenty days Abdallah ibn Ubai 
prevailed on the Nadir to surrender. They were 
exiled, being allowed to take their goods with them, 
and emigrated toward the north, settling in Khai- 
bar and in Syria. 

There were now left only the Banu Kuraiza, and 
Mohammed soon found a pretext to attack them. 
Some of the Jewish exiles, chief among them being 
the above-mentioned Huyayy, had stirred up the 
Kuraish and other Arab tribes against Mohammed, 
and they persuaded the Banu Kuraiza to join them 
in their plans. Mohammed, however, succeeded in 
making the Jews and their Arab allies suspicious of 
each other; and the allies, who had been besieging 
Medina, suddenly departed in the midst of a storm, 
thus leaving the Kuraiza unsupported. Mohammed 
marched against them, claiming to have received a 
special revelation to that effect, and laid siege to 
their fortress, which was afew miles to the southeast 
of the city. They surrendered after a month’s 
siege, without having risked a fight. Their fate 

was left to the decision of Sa‘d ibn 
Fate Mu‘adh of the tribe of Aus, who, in 
of Medina spiteof the pleading of his own tribe, 
Jews. condemned the men to death and the 
women and children to slavery. The 
sentence was executed; and 750 Jews were killed in 
cold blood. Huyayy was the last to die, with his 
last breath denouncing Mohammed as an impostor. 
The prophet wished to make a beautiful woman of 
the tribe, by the name of Rihanah, his wife, but, tra- 
dition says, she preferred to be his slave instead. 
Thus the last of the powerful Jewish tribes in 
Medina was destroyed. Neither Mohammed, how- 
ever, nor his successor drove all the Jews out 
of the country. That extreme measure was taken 
by Omar, who claimed to have heard the prophet 
say that all Jews should beexiled. Medinais one of 
the Moslem cities that neither Jews nor Christians 
may enter. See Banu Karnuxa‘; Banu Kuraiza; 
Banu AL-NADIR. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Caussin de Perceval, Essai sur 0 Histoire dex 
Arabes, passim; Gratz, Gesch. iv. 66, 75 et seq., 81-83; 


Hirschfeld, Essai sur UV Histoire des Juifs de Médine,in R. 
E.. J. vii. 167 et seq., x. 10 et seg. 


Ji M. W. M. 


MEDINA: Prominent Jewish family, members 
of which lived during the sixteenth and seventeenth 
centuries chiefly in Turkey and Egypt. Most prob- 
ably it took its name from one of the two Spanish 
cities named Medina. 


Medina 
Megillah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


424 





The following is a genealogical tree of those mem- 
bers of the family whose relationship is established 
(the numbers in parentheses correspond to those 
given in the text): 

(8) Samue) 
(1505-89) 


(5) Moses 


| | 


(4) Judah (10) Solomon (9) Shemaiah 
(d. 1648) 


J 
Moses Samuel 

1. David b. Moses di Medina: Cabalistic au- 
thor; flourished at the beginning of the eighteenth 
century. He wrote: “Nefesh Dawid” (Constanti- 
nople, 1786), a cabalistic commentary on the Penta- 
teuch and the Five Scrolis; and “Ruah Dawid we- 
Nishmat Dawid” (Salonica, 1747), in two parts, the 
first being a commentary on the part of the Zohar 
called “Iddera Rabba,” and the second a cabalistic 
commentary on Canticles. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozgar ha-Sefarim, pp. 400, 544; 


Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. s.v. Samuel Medina; Zedner, 
Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 516. 


2. Isaac Hayyim di Medina: Editor of a 
prayer-book for the congregation of Sienna, arranged 
and published by him with the cooperation of Jedi- 
diah Levi under the title “Seder Zemirot,” Leghorn, 
1786. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 160; Zedner, 
Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. pp. 484, 516, 

3. Jacob di Medina: Son of Isaac Hayyim 
(No. 2); author of liturgical poems published under 
the title “ Yashir Yisrael” (Leghorn, 1805), and of a 
poem in the collection of congratulatory poems 
““Et ha-Zamir ” (2b, 1794 ?), published on the occasion 
of the wedding of E. M. Recanate. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 232 (where 
‘*son of Moses” is erroneous, as the latter was only the co- 
editor), 484; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. pp. 475, 
516, 651, s.v. Recanate (where the name ‘‘ Medina” is miss- 
ing), and p. 675, s.v. Samuel b. Moses, the Priest. 

4. Judah di Medina (surname Comprado or 
Conrado): Son of Moses (No. 5); mentioned by 
Conforte as a scholar. His wealth aroused the en- 
mity of a non-Jew, who killed him at the door of his 
own house. The Jews of Salonica seized the mur- 
derer, and hanged him at the scene of his crime. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, pp. 48b, 50a; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 3004. 


5. Moses di Medina: Son of Samuel (No. 8); 
lived at Salonica. He is praised for his Talmudic 
learning and for the generous use which he made 
of his wealth in the interest of Tebrew literature. 
He published the responsa of his father and wrote 
a preface thereto. A list of his published works is 
given in Stcinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” col. 3004 (sec 
also Conforte, le. p. 48b). | 

6. Moses Medina: Talmudic scholar; lived at 
Constantinople, and later (ce. 1650) at Jerusalem (see 
Conforte, “Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 49a; Steinschneider, 
“Cat. Bod],” s.2. “Samuel Medina.” 

7. Moses Medina: Rabbi of the Portuguese con- 
gregation at London; contemporary of David NIEro. 
He wrote “Della Divina Providencia” (Loudon, 


1705), a defense of Nieto’s work of the same title 
and published together with it. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 889; Steinschneider, Cat. 

Bodl. No. 8910; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. tii., No. 15¥eb,. 

8. Samuel b. Moses di Medina (RaShDaM): 
Talmudist and author; born 1005; died Oct. 12, 
1589, at Salonica. He was principal of the Tal- 
mudic college of that city, which produced a great 
number of prominent scholars during the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries. His teachers were the 
noted Talmudists Joseph Taitazak and Levi ibn 
Habib, and among his schoolmates were Isaac 
Adarbi, Joseph ibn Leb, and Moses ALMOSNINO. 
While on a mission to Constantinople he met 
the noted grammarian Menahem di Lonsano, who 
studied under him for some time and who therefore 
speaks of him as his teacher (Conforte, * Kore ha- 
Dorot,” ed. Cassel, p. 44a). 

Among Samuel’s many disciples who attained 
prominence were Abraham de Boron and Joseph 
Inn Ezra. Hehadacontroversy with Joseph Caro 
and other rabbis at Safed, against whom he wrote a 
polemical letter (“Ketab Tokahah”; see Azulai, 
“Shem ha-Gedolim,” s.z.). A grandson of his was 
Samuel Hayyun, author of “ Bene Shemuei,” novel- 
lz and responsa (Salonica, 16137). 

Samuel’s works include: “Ben Shemuel,” Man- 
tua, 1622, thirty sermons on various subjects, pub- 
lished with a preface by his grandson Shemaiah ; 
“ Widdushim ” (unpublished), novelle on some Tal- 
mudie tractates (Benjacob, “Ozar ha-Sefarim,” p. 
188); a collection of 956 responsa in four parts, of 
which the first two were published during the life- 
time of the author (1578-87?) under the title “ Piske 
RaShDaM” (Benjacob, @.e. p. 491; Conforte, de. 
p. 88a, Cassel’s note; Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” 
No. 7056). <A complete edition of the last-named 
work was undertaken later by the author’s son 
Moses, who added a preface (Salonica, 1594-97; new 
ed. 2b. 1798). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 8909; Zedner, 
Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. s.v. 


9. Shemaiah di Medina: Son of Moses (No. 
5); born at Salonica; died at Venice June 3, 1648. 
Being compelled to leave Salonica owing to a quar- 
rel with certain influential men of that city, he 
emigrated to Venice, where be occupied a very re- 
spected position as a member of the rabbinate. Ja- 
cob Frances wrote an elegy on his death. 

Shemaiah was the author of many liturgical 
poems, concerning which see Steinschneider, “Cat. 
Bodl.” s.7.. He wrote also “Ma’amar al ‘Onshe 
Gehinnom ” (unpublished), a treatise on punishment 
in hell, dedicated to Isaac Aboab, Jr. A commen- 
tary on Proverbs (Nepi-Ghirondi, “ Teledot Gedole 
Yisrael,” pp. 823, 352, 858) has been ascribed to him, 
but whether correctly so is doubtful (see Stein- 
schneider, s.v.). He also edited “Ben Shemuel,” a _ 
collection of sermons by his grandfather Samuel, 
and “ Bene Shemuel,” the work of his relation Sam- 
uel Hayyun, to which two books he wrote prefaces. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ben Shemuel, Preface, Mantua, 1622; Ben- 

jacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 2838, 33], 469: Cunforte, Kare 

ha-Dorot, Index ; Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. cols. 2516, 3004; 


Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. iii.. Nos. 2195c-2196 ; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. 
Books Brit. Mus. p, 696. 


425 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Medina 
Megillah 





10. Solomon di Medina: Son of Moses (No. 
5); livedat Salonica. Ile was personally acquainted 
with David Conforte, who obtained from him some 
biographical data concerning his grandfather Sam- 
uel, and who speaks of him with respect. He was, 
however, dead when Conforte wrote his “ Kore ha- 
Dorot ” (1674-83; see Cassel’s introduction, p. iv.), 
as the latter adds to Solomon’s nanie the eulogy y"3. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 38a; Steinschnei- 
der, Cat. Bodl. col. 8004. 


The following Medinas seem to belong to a differ- 
ent family: 

Benjamin di Medina: Talmudist; died at Mo- 
nastir, Turkey, about 1650. He wasa pupil of Dan- 
iel Estrosa (see Michael, “Or ha-Hayyim,” No. 789), 
and schoolmate of David Conforte (see the latter’s 
“Kore ha-Dorot,” p. 52b). 

David di Medina: Rabbi in Cairo about 1650. 
He wrote anapprobation to Mordecai Levi’s “ Darke 
No‘am,” published at Venice in 1697 (see Conforte, 
lc. p. 52a; Michael, U.c. No. 749; Steinschneider, 
“Cat. Bodl.” col. 2451, s.2. “Samuel Medina”). 

Samuel b. Isaac di Medina, a scribe (1491), is 
mentioned in Neubauer, Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS. No. 
30, 9642. 

D H. M. 


MEDINA, SIR SOLOMON DE: English 
army contractor about 1711. He was a wealthy 
Jew who went to England with William ITI., and 
who attained some notoriety by his extensive deal- 
ings with the English governmentof hisday. “The 
Jew Medina,” as he was popularly called, held a 
position of prominence in connection with the Eng- 
lish forces. During the War of the Spanish Suc- 
cession (1702-14) he accompanied the Duke of Marl- 
borough on his campaigns, advanced him funds, and 
furnished provisions for the troops. He also estab- 
lished a system of expresses which outstripped those 
of the government, so that his agents were in posses- 
sion of important news before it reached the minis- 
ters of the crown. His negotiations were made evi- 
dent in an attack on the Duke of Marlborough in 
Parliament in 1711 for receiving from the Jew a 
yearly payment of £6,000. Marlborough replied 
that the money had been expended in obtaining 
trustworthy information. It was said of Medina 
that every British victory contributed as much to 
his wealth as to the glory of England. For his serv- 
ices he was knighted, being the first Jew in Eng- 
land to receive that honor. Sir Solomon de Medina 
was at one time the largest contributor to the Bevis 
Marks Synagogue, and he remained faithful to his co- 
religionists to the last. His descendants, however, 
eventually abandoned Judaism. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Picciotto, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish History, 
pp. 50, 58, 59; Jew. World, Feb., 1878; Dict. Nat. Biog. 

J. G. L. 

MEDINI, HAYYIM HEZEKIAH (known 
also under his initials Onm): Palestinian rabbin- 
ical writer; born at Jerusalem 1838; son of Rabbi 
Raphael Eliahu Medini, At the age of nineteen, on 
completing his studies in his native city, he received 
the rabbinical diploma. He then went to Constanti- 
nople, where for thirteen years he was a member of 
a rabbinical court. 


rabbi to Kara-Su-Bazar in the Crimea. In 1889 


In 1866 he was called as chief 


Medini returned to Palestine, staying first at Jeru- 
salem, and going in 1891 to Hebron, where he has 
since been acting chief rabbi. 

Medini’s works include: “ Miktab le-Hizkivahu ” 
(Smyrna, 1865), Talmudic studies and responsa; * Or 
Li” (¢b. 1874), responsa; “Pakku'‘ot Sadeh” (Jeru- 
salem, 1900); “Sede Hemed,” his chief work, an en- 
cyclopedic collection of laws and decisions in al- 
phabetical order, twelve volumes of which bave 
appeared since 1890 (Warsaw). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nahum Sokolov, in Sefer ha-Shanah, War- 
saw, 1900. 
s. M. Fr. 


MEGED YERAHIM. See PERIODICALS. 


MEGIDDO (9939; once Megiddon [ptand, Zech. 
xii. 11]): Capital of one of the Canaanitish kings 
conquered by Joshua; assigned to Manasseh (Josh. 
xii, 21, xvii, 11: I Chron. vii. 29). Its Canaanitish 
inhabitants were only put to tribute, not driven 
out (Josh. xvii, 12-18; Judges i. 27-28). Megiddo 
is repeatedly referred to in Biblical history. It is 
mentioned in connection with Baana, one of Solo- 
mon’s commissariat officers, who had to provision 
the king’s household for one month in the year. Its 
fortifications, which were of ancient date (being 
mentioned in the inscription of Thothmes III), 
were restored by Solomon (I Kings iv. 12, ix. 15). 
Ahaziah is said (II Kings ix. 27) to have died at 
Megiddo after he had escaped from Jehu; but in IT 
Chron, xxii. 9 it is said that Ahaziah was found in 
Samaria, taken to Jehu, and slain. The most mem- 
orable occurrence connected with the city was the 
battle there or in the valley of Megiddo, between 
Pharaoh-nechoh and Josiah, in which the latter was 
slain (II Kings xxiii. 29-30; II Chron, xxxv, 22); 
“the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of 
Megiddon ” may have been on account of this bat- 
tle (Zech. xii. 11; see Hapap). The same battle is 
mentioned by Herodotus (ii. 159), but under the 
name “ Magdolum ” instead of “Megiddo.” The city 
is frequently mentioned in connection with Taanach 
(Josh. xii. 21, xvii. 11; Judges v. 19; I Kings iv. 
12; I Chron. vii. 29), near the plain of Esdraelon ; the 
expression in Deborah’s song is “in Taanach on the 
waters of Megiddo.” 

Megiddo is mentioned on the El-Amarna tablets. 
Robinson (“ Researches,” iii. 177-800) identified the 
site of Megiddo with the modern Al-Lajjun, on the 
western border of the plain of Esdraclon. Other 
scholars have identified it with Al-Mujaidil, near 
Nazareth; with Majdal, near Acre; with Jida; and 
with Mujaddah, three miles south of Beth-shean. 

J. M. SEt. 

MEGILLAH: Name of a treatise in the Mish- 
nah and in the Tosefta, as well as in the Babylonian 
and Jerusalem Tulmuds. It is the tenth treatise in 
the mishnaic order Mo‘ed, and includes four chap- 
ters, containing thirty-three paragraphsinall. Ch. 
i. 1-4 treats of the portion of the month Adar in 
which the Megillah is to be read, and, in case of a 
leap-year containing two months of Adar, it desig- 
nates which month is to be chosen. The 15th of 
Adar, or in a leap-year the same day of the second 
Adar, is the day appointed for walled cities, and 
the 14th of Adar for unwalled cities and for villages. 
The inhabitants of the latter, however, when living 


Megillah 
Megillat Ta‘anit 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


426 





in districts where they meet weekly in the neighbor- 
ing city, may read the roll on the 18th, 12th, or 11th 
of Adar, if the gathering takes place on one of 
these days. Since this distinction is made between 
the two months of Adar of a leap-year, while both 
months are alike in all other respects, ch. i. 5-11 
notes several other groups of objects and cases 
which differ from one another in one point only; 
one such group, é.g., consists of the sacred books, 
the tefillin, and the mezuzah, the first two of which 
may be written in any language and script, but the 
last only in Hebrew and in square script. Greek 
is given the preference over all other foreign lan- 
guages, since, according to R. Gamaliel, even the 
sacred books may be written in it. 

Ch. ii. deals with the proper manner of reading 
the Megillah; with the language (mishnah 1), stating 
that those who do not understand Hebrew may read 
it in their own tongue; and with the problems 
whether it shall be read in whole or in part, which 
portions are to be read (mishnah 3) and at what time 
of the day. The statement that it may be read dur- 
ing the entire day is supplemented by the enumera- 
tion of many other regulations and customs which 
may be observed throughout the day if they are as- 
signed to the daytime, or throughout the night if 
assigned to the night (mishnayot 5-6). 

Ch. iii. discusses the sale of sacred objects, the 
synagogue and its furnishings, and the sacredness 
which still attaches in many respects to the ruins of 
a synagogue which has been destroyed (mishnayot 
1-3). It further discusses the sections which are to 
be read on the Sabbaths in Adar in addition to the 
customary weekly sections, and what is to be read 
on each feast-day (mishnayot 4-6.). From the stand- 
point of contents this chapter does not belong to the 
treatise Megillah, being connected with it only by its 
fourth paragraph. 

Ch. iv. begins with certain rules concerning the 
reading of the Megillah (mishnah la); then follow 
rules referring to other ritual readings from the 
Law and the Prophets (mishnayot 1b-2). One of 

these regulations holds that ten per- 
Interpola- sons must be present at each reading ; 
tions and and in this connection many other re- 

Digres-  ligious ceremonies are enumerated as 

sions. requiring the presence of ten persons 
(mishnah 8). Mishnah 4 defines the 
relation of the reader to the translator; mishnayot 
5-7 determine who may read, who may lead in 
prayer, and which priest is entitled to lift up his 
hands for the blessing; mishnah 8 discusses un- 
seemly dress of the prayer-leader and unseemly 
behavior regarding the tefillin; mishnah 9 enumer- 
ates incorrect expressions in prayer, designates the 
persons who must be silenced in public prayer, and 
contains various allusions to the views and customs 
of the sectarians (“minim”) of the time; mishnah 
10 enumerates the passages in the Torah which may 
be read but not translated, and the passages in the 
Prophets which may not be read as haftarot. 

The sequence of chapters here given is that of the 
Palestinian Talmud in the manuscript of the Mish- 
nah edited by Lowe, and is also the one found in 
most of the editions of the Mishnah, in the Tosefta, 


Munich (MS. No. 140) and Oxford (Neubauer, “Cat. 
Bod]. Hebr. MSS.” No. 366). The sequence of 
chapters in the printed editions of the Babylonian 
Talmud, on the other hand, corresponds with that 
of MS. Munich No. 95. Here the 
Variations chapter cited above as the fourth, “ Ha- 
in MS. kore et ha-megillah ‘omed,” precedes 
the chapter which has been designated 
as the third, “Bene ha-‘ir.” R. Hananeel offers a 
sequence differing from both; making “ Ha-kore et 
ha-megillah ‘omed” the second chapter, “Ha-kore 
et ha-megillah Je-mafrea‘” the third, and “Bene 
ha-‘ir” the fourth. 

The Tosefta to this treatise omits many of the 
passages contained in the Mishnah, but, on the other 
hand, it discusses in full detail much that is not 
found therein. Noteworthy is the enumeration of 
the passages in the Bible in which a euphemistic 
word is read instead of an objectionable one (iv. 39), 
while the condemnation of any translation of the 
Scriptures is also a striking feature (iv. 41). 

The Gemara of the Babylonian Talmud contains 
in its first chapter, besides explanations of the vari- 
ous mishnayot, many important comments, of which 
the most interesting are: (1) on the origin of the final 
letters J, D, }.7, and y (pp. 2b-8a); (2) on the origin of 
the targumim, that of the Torah being ascribed to 
the proselyte Onkelos, and that of the Prophets to 
Jonathan b. Uzziel (p. 3a; no targum of the Hagi- 

ographa seems to have been known at 


Tosefta that time); (3) on the origin of Purim, 
and which is said to have been originally 
Gemara. merely alocai festival at Shushan; the 


objections raised to its introduction 
that it might rouse the hatred of the Gentiles against 
the Jews; the hesitation at including the Book of 
Esther in the canon, and the reasons why it was 
finally admitted (p. 7a). The Gemara contains also 
the legend of the origin of the Septuagint (p. 9a, b). 
King Ptolemy called together seventy-two elders, 
assigned each one a separate house, and had them 
translate the Torah individually and without con- 
sultation. All these translations were found to agree 
absolutely, even to the changes made in certain pas- 
sages. Pages 10b to 17a of the Gemara form a hag- 
gadic midrash to Esther. 

The second chapter of the Gemara discusses the 
several mishnayot, gives an account of the origin 
of the Shemoneh ‘Esreh prayer, and explains the 
sequence of the several benedictions. In the Ge- 
mara on ch. iti. the most noteworthy feature is the 
remark on the pronunciation of Hebrew current 
among the inhabitants of Bet-She‘on, Bet-Hefa, and 
Tibonin, who confounded “alef” with “‘ayin,” and 
“he” with “het.” The Gemara to ch. iv. contains, 
in addition to the notes on the mishnayot, some im- 
portant regulations regarding public worship. The 
Gemara of the Palestinian Talmud mentions certain 
other feast-days in the month of Adar, which were 
similar to Purim, including the Day of Trajan 
Gyva'), the 12th, and the Day of Nicanor, the 13th 
(i. 5). Especially noteworthy is the remark on the 
origin of square script and on the translation of 
Aquila (i. 9). The passage in the Palestinian Tal- 
mud on Aquila’s version compels the assumption 


and in the codices of the Babylonian Talmud at | that “Onkelos” in the Babylonian Talmud (8a) is 


427 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Megillah 
Megillat Ta‘anit 





merely a corruption of “ Aguila,” and that the ref- 
erence in this latter Talmud also is to the Greek 
and not to the Aramaic trauslation. 

S, &. J. 24. I. 


MEGILLAH OF CAIRO. See Eeyret. 


MEGILLAT ANTEYOKOS. Sce AnNTIOcHUS, 
SCROLL OF. 


MEGILLAT SETARIM (“Concealed Roll”): 
Name of a roll supposed to have been found in the 
bet ha-midrash of R. Hiyya, and which contained 
halakot recorded by him. Three passages from it, 
which are maxims of R. Ise b. Judah, are quoted 
by Abba Arikain the Talmud (Shab. 6b, 96b; B. M. 
92a) with the introductory phrase: “I found a hid- 
den roll in the bet ha-midrash of R. Hiyya.” 

According to Rashi (Shab. 6b), although it was 
not permissible to record halakot, the scholars 
were accustomed to write in rolis (which were then 
hidden) such sentences and maxims of various 
tannaim as were seldom repeated in the schools, 
and which were, therefore, liable to be forgotten; 
aud he declares the Megillat Setarim was such a 
rou. This explanation is not satisfactory, however; 
for according to it R. Hiyya could not have been 
the only one to make such a roll, and yet no manu- 
script of this character by any other scholar is 
mentioned. Moreover, it is not easy to see how Rab 
could have had access to the scroll if it was kept 
in concealment merely because it was forbidden to 
write halakot. Rashi’s assumption that the inter- 
diction against recording halakot. still existed at the 
time of R. Hiyya is whoily incorrect; for Judah 
ha-Nasi I. abrogated it by committing the Misn- 
NAH to writing. R. Hiyya did not conceal his 
Megillah, therefore, because it contained halakot, 
but because of their nature, inasmuch as his roll 
comprised sentences which Judah ha-Nasi had ex- 
cluded from his Mishnah. besides additions and 
emendations to Rabbi’s Mishnah most of which were 
contrary to that author’s opinions. 

R. Hiyyahid his Megillah during Rabbi’s lifetime 
that he might not offend him; but after Rabbi’s 
death this reason no longer existed, and Rab was per- 
mitted to see the scroll. This explanation of the 
origin and contents of the Megillat Setarim is also 


indicated by its name, “concealed roll,” which im- f 


plies that there were rolls containing halakot which 
were not kept secret, among them Rabbi’s Mishnah 
collection. This view also invalidates the assump- 
tion of Lebrecht (“ Handschriften und Erste Ausga- 
ben des Talmuds,” p. 10), who, in reading “ Megillat 
Sedarim ” instead of “Megillat Setarim,” infers that 
this roll contained the six orders (“sedarim ”) of the 
Mishnah. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Weiss, Dor, ii. 198; Frankel, Darke ha-Mish- 
nah, p. 218, note, Leipsic, 1859. 
Q ae Ts: L. 


w 


MEGILLAT TA‘ANIT (“Scroll of Fasting ”): 
A chronicle which enumerates thirty-five eventful 
days on which the Jewish nation either performed 
glorious deeds or witnessed joyful events. These 
days were celebrated as feast-days. Public mourn- 
ing was forbidden on fourteen of them, and public 
fasting on all. In most of the editions this chroni- 
cle consists of two parts, which are distinct in lan- 


guage and in form, namely: (1) the text or the Me- 
gillat Ta‘anit proper, written in Aramaic and con- 
taining merely brief outlines in concise style: (2) 
scholia or commentaries on the text, written in He- 
brew. The days are enumerated, not in the chrono- 
logical order of the events they commemorate, but 
in the sequence of the calendar, the Megillat Ta‘anit 
being divided into twelve chapters, corresponding 
to the months of the year. Each chapter contains 
the memorial days of a single month, the first chap- 
ter dealing with those of the first month, Nisan, and 
so on to the twelfth chapter, which treats of those 
of the twelfth month, Adar. 

The festal occasions which these days were in- 
tended to keep alive in the memory of the people 

belong to different epochs; and on this 

Five basis the days may be divided into 

Groups five groups, namely: (1) pre-Macca- 

of Feasts. bean; (2) Hasmonean; (3) ante-Saddu- 

cean; (4) ante-Roman; and (5) of the 

Diaspora, the last-named comprising memorial days 

admitted after the destruction of the Temple. There 

are also a few days which do not refer to any known 

historical event, and are, therefore, chronologically 
uncertain, 

These memorial days did not become festivals by 
being incorporated and recorded in the Megillat 
Ta‘anit, as J. Schmilg has attempted to prove 
(“Ueber die Entstehung und den Historischen Werth 
des Siegeskalenders Megillat Ta‘anit,” pp. 11-20), 
but had been known and celebrated by the people 
long before that time, as he himself is obliged to ad- 
mit in the case of some of them; indeed, the celebra- 
tion of these festivals or semi-festivals evidently ex- 
isted as early as the time of Judith (Judith viii. 6). 
The compilers of the Megillat Ta‘anit merely listed 
the memorial days and at the same time determined 
that the less important should be celebrated by a 
mere suspension of fasting, while public mourning 
was to be forbidden on the more important ones. 

In an old baraita (Shab, 13b) the question as to 
the authorship of the work is answered as follows: 
“Hananiah b. Hezekiah of the Garon family, to- 
gether with a number of others who had assembled 
for a synod at his house, compiled the Megillat 


Ta‘anit.” According to an account in the “ Halakot 
Gedolot, Hilkot Soferim ” (ed. Vienna, 

Author- p. 104; ed. Zolkiev, p. 82c), the mem- 
ship. bers of this synod were the “Zikne 


Bet Shammai ” and “ Zikne Bet Hillel,” 
the eldest pupils of Shammai and Hillel. The Me- 
gillat Ta‘anit must have been composed, therefore, 
about the year 7 of the common era, when Judea 
was made a Roman province to the great indigna- 
tion of the Jews (comp. Schmilg, é.c. pp. 20-86). 
This calendar of victories was intended to fan the 
spark of liberty among the people and to fill them 
with confidence and courage by reminding them of 
the victories of the Maccabees and the divine aid 
vouchsafed to the Jewish nation against the heathen. 

The scholium to Megillat Ta‘anit, xii., end, evi- 
dently quoting an old baraita, says: “ EHleazar b. 
Hananiah of the family of Garon together with his 
followers compiled the Megillat Ta‘anit.” This 
Eleazar is identical with the Zealot general Eleazar, 
who took a noteworthy part in the beginning of the 


Megillat Ta‘anit 
Megillot 


revolt against the Romans, vanquishing the garri- 
son at Jerusalem, as well as Agrippa’s troops, and 
Menahem’s Sicarian bands. According to this ac- 
count, therefore, the Megillat Ta‘anit was composed 
by the Zealots after the year 66 of the common era, 
during the revolution (Gritz, “ Geseh.” lil., note 26), 
although it is not necessary to correct the Talmudic 
account to agree with the scholium, and to read, as 
does Gritz, in Shab, 13b, “Eleazar b. Hananiah,” 
instead of “ Hananiahk.” On the other hand, the 
view of Schmilg (/.c.) that the scholium is incorrect 
is erroneous, since there is both internal and external 
evidence in favor of its authenticity. The account 
in the Talmud and that in the scholium may both 
be accepted, since not only Hananiah the father, 
but also Eleazar the son, contributed to the com- 
pilation of the work. Eleazar, one of the central 
figures in the war against the Romans, endeavored 
to strengthen the national consciousness of his peo- 
ple by continuing his father’s work, and increased 
the number of memorial days in the collection, to 
remind the people how God had always helped them 
and had given them the victory over external and 
internal enemies. 
Eleazar did not, however, complete the work, 
and several days were subsequently added to the 
list which was definitely closed in 
Interpola- Usha, as is proved by the fact that the 
tions. 12th of Adar is designated as “Tra- 
jan’s Day,” and the 29th of that month 
as “the day on which the persecutions of Hadrian 
ceased ” (comp. Brann in “ Monatsschrift,” 1876, p. 
379). Furthermore, R. Simon b. Gamaliel, who was 
nasi at Usha, says in the baraita Shab. 13b: “If 
we should turn all the days on which we have been 
saved from some danger into holidays, and list them 
in the Megillat Ta‘anit, we could not satisfy our- 
selves; for we should be obliged to turn nearly 
every day into a festival” (comp. Rashi ad loc.), 
This sentence clearly indicates that the work was 
definitely completed at Usha in the time of R. 
Simon, in order that no further memorial days 
might be added. 
The Hebrew commentary on the Megillat Ta‘anit 
was written much later, the author, who did not 
live earlier than the seventh century, 


Hebrew having before him the text of both 
Commen- the Talmudim as well as that of Bere- 
tary. shit Rabbah (comp. Brann, @.¢. pp. 


410-418, 445-451). The commenta- 
tor collected those baraitot of the Talmud which 
contained comments on the Megillat Ta‘anit, and 
jumbled them uncritically with accounts from other, 
unreliable sources. The references of Schmilg’s 
(t.c. pp. 86-41) merely prove that the scholiast en- 
deavored to make his work pass for a product of the 
tannaitic period. Asa matter of fact, however, the 
Talmud knows only the Aramaic text, which alone 
is meant by the term “ Megillat Ta‘anit.” This text, 
which had been committed to writing and was 
generally known (‘Er. 62), was explained and inter- 
preted in the same way as the Bible (Yer. Ta‘an. fi. 
66a). The many quotations from the Megillat 
Ta‘anit in the Talmud are all taken from the Ara- 
maic text and are introduced by the word “ketib ” 
= “itis written,” asin Hul. 129b; Meg. 5b; Ta‘an. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


428 


12a and 18b; there is not a single quctation 
from the scholium, In Ta‘an, 12a, the single pas- 


sage, “bi- Megillat Ta‘anit,” from 

The Text which Schmilg tries to prove that the 
and the ‘Talmud quotes the scholium as well 
Scholium. as the Megillat, is a later addition 


(comp. Brann, /.c. pp. 407 ef seg.), and 
is not found in the Munich manuscript (comp. Rab- 
binowitz, “Ha-Meassef,” iii. 63). Although the 
comments found in the scholium are mentioned in 
the Talmud, they are not credited to the Megillat 
Ta‘anit, but are quoted as independent baraitot, 
so that the scholium took them from the Talmud, 
and not vice versa. 

As the text and the scholium of the Megillat 
Ta‘anit are distinct in form and in language, 
so do they differ also in value. The text is an 
actual historical source, whose statements may be 
regarded as authentic, while its dates ure reliable if 
interpreted independently of the scholium. The 
scholium, on the other hand, is of very doubtful his- 
torical value and must be used with extreme cau- 
tion. Although it contains some old baraitot which 
are reliable, the compiler has mixed them with 
other, unhistorical, accounts and legends, so that 
even those data whose legendary character has not 
been proved can be credited only when they are 
confirmed by internal and external evidence. 

The Megillat Ta‘anit is extant in many editions, 
and has had numerous commentaries. The best 

edition of the Aramaic and Hebrew 

Editions textis that by A. Neubauer, which is 

and Com- based on the editio princeps and the 

mentaries. Amsterdam edition of 1711, compared 

with the codex De Rossi (Parma MS. 

117) and some fragments of a manuscript in the 

Bodleian Library, Oxford (Neubauer, “M. J. C.” ii. 
3-25, Oxford, 1895). 

Of commentaries the following may be mentioned: 
Abraham b. Joseph ha-Levi, double commentary 
(Amsterdam, 1656); Judah b. Menahem, doublecom- 
mentary (Dybernfurth, 1810); Johann Meyer, Latin 
translation published in his “Tractatus de Tempo- 
ribus,” ete. (Amsterdam, 1724). Derenbourg and 
Schwab have made French versions of the Aramaic 
text. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gritz, Geseh., lil., notes 1, 26; J. Derenbourg, 
Hist. pp. 489-446; J. Schmilg, Ueher Entstehung und His- 
torisehen Werth des Siegeskalenders Meqillat Ta'anit, Leip- 
sic, 1874; J. Wellhausen, Die Pharisder und die Sadducter, 
pp. 56-63, Greifswald, 1874 ; Joel Miller, Der Text der Fasten- 
rolle, in Monatsschrift, 1875, pp. 48-48, 139-144; M. Brann, 
Entstehung und Werth der Megillat Ta‘anit, pp. 375-884, 
410-418, 443460, ih. 1876; P. Cassel, Messianische Stellen des 
Alten Testaments, Appendix, Berlin, 188; Weiss, Dor. ii. 
254-257; B. Rattner, in Rabbinowitz, Ha-Meassey, 1902, pp. 
91-105: M. Sehwab, La Megillath Taanith, in Actes du 
Onztéme Congres International des Oricntalistes, pp. 199- 
259, Paris, 1898. 

s Je Le Gi 


MEGILLAT YUHASIN (= “Scroll of Gene- 
alogies”): A lost work to which several references 
are made in the Talmud and Mishnah. In Yeb. 49b 
Ben ‘Azzai, in support of a point in law, says: “I 
found a‘ Megillat Yuhasin’ in Jerusalem wherein 
it was written that . . . isa bastard born of a mar- 
ried woman.” On thesame page two other citations 
from the “ Megillat Yuhasin” occur: “The Mishnak 
of Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob comprises but a kab, but 
itischoiee ”; and“ Manasseh killed Isaiah.” In Yer 


429 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Megillat Ta‘anit 
Mezgillot 





Ta‘an. iv. 2 and in Yeb. ii. the following occurs: 
“’Phey founda‘ Megillat Yuhasin ’ in Jerusalem, and 
therein it is written. ‘Iillel was a descendant of 
David; Yanunai, of Eli.’” From these allusions it 
seems that the “ Megillat Yuhasin” was a record of 
principal events, of genealoyics, and of facts pertain- 
ing to the Law, haggadie and halakic. Pes. 62b 
mentions a “Sefer Yuhasin,” which may be identical 
with the * Megillat Yuhasin.” It must have been a 
secret book that was still extant at the beginning of 
the third century, for R. Johanan bar Nappaha re- 
fused to teach it to R. Simlai: “ We do not teach it to 
the people of Lydda 
and Nehardea.” Later 
in the same century 
it became lost, and 
Rab laments the fact. 
with the words 
(Pes. 62b): “Since 
the ‘Sefer Yuhasin’ 
has been lost the 
strength of the 
sages has been 
weakened and the 
light of their eyes 
dimmed.” 

Rashi says the 
“Sefer Yuhasin” 
was a history, but 
if it was the same as 
the “ Megillat Yuha- 
sin,” It must have 
contained laws and 
family records also. 
Eliakim Milzahagi, 
the author of “ Sefer 
Rabiah,’ proposes the 
explanation that the 
“Megillat Yuhasin ” 
contained geneal- 
ogies, and the 
“Sefer Yuhasin” 
history and laws, 
but the exact nature 
of the work, lost 
evenin Talmudic 
times, can not now 


be ascertained. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohut, Aruch Completum, iv. 125, v. 76; 
Levy, Neuhebr. Woérterb. ii. 237, iii. 17; Hamburger, R. B. 
T. ii. 291; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 216, No. 113; Zunz, 
G. V. p. 185; Eliakim Milzahagi, Sefer Rabiah, viii. 123. 


i. 'C; 8. J. LB. 

MEGILLOT, THE FIVE: The “five rolls” 
(mban wrm)—Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamenta- 
tions, Ecclesiastes, and Esther. At the time of the 
formation of the canon of the Hagiographa these 
five books were not regarded as a unit, nor is the 
name “Megillah” as applied to them collectively 
found either in the Talmud or inthe Midrash. In the 
oldest two modes of arrangement of the Hagiographa, 
the Talmudic and the Masorctic, they do not follow 
one another, at least in the order in which they 
stand in the first five editions of the Bible (comp. 
JEW. Encyce. tii. 144), During the Talmudic period 
only the Esther roll was called “Megillah,” as is 
shown by the treatise which bears that name; but 





Megillat Esther, Dutch, Early Eighteenth Centurv. 
(in the possession of Arthur E. Franklin, Lonéoz.) 


since the word assumed the meaning of “a small 
roll,” it was applied to the other four books when 
they were received into the liturgy in post-Tal- 
mudic times (Blau, “ Althebraisches Buchwesen,” 
pp. 66 é seq.). The sequence of the Song of Solo- 
mon and of Ecclesiastes, and probably of Esther, in 
the canon of the Hagiographa did not escape criti- 
cism (see JEW. Encyc. iii. 149); and in the earliest 
arrangement Ecclesiastes seems to have stood at the 
end of the group (éb. 14a). 

The oldest sources for the liturgy mention Ruth, 
Song of Solomon, Lamentations, and Esther, but 
not Ecclesiastes (So- 
ferim xiv. 8). It is 
clear from Soferim 
xiv. 8, where the last- 
named roll is again 
ignored, that this is 
no chance omission. 
On the other hand, 
its name is found m 
the Mahzor Vitry (p. 
440, below): “The 
entire congregation 
while seated read the 
book [M5D, not nbs] 
of Ecclesiastes [at 
the Feast of Taber- 
nacles|.” That this 
custom was of late 
development is 
shown by the fact 
that the entire con- 
gregation read—that 
the book was not 
read to them. At 
the time of the Mish- 
nah only Esther was 
read publicly. In 
the Talmudic period 
Lamentations was 
read privately ; while 
the other three megil- 
lot wereadmitted into 
the liturgy only in 
post-Talmudic days, 
Ecclesiastes being the 
last of all. 

Liturgical usage necessitated manuscripts which 
should contain not only the Torah and the Haftarot 
from the Prophets, but also the Five Rolls. For 
the same reason the so-called Midrash Rabbah was 
gradually collected for the five Megillot as well as 
for the Torah. The allusions to the individual 
feasts which Miller (“Soferim,” p. 187) finds in the 
Haggadah furnish no proof that the rolls in question 
were read at these particular festivals; for by the 
same process of reasoning it might be inferred from 
Yer. Meg., end, that the Song of Solomon instead of 
Ruth was read on the Feast of Pentecost. But 

Yalk., Ruth, 994, says: “ Why is Ruth 

Late Use read at Pentecost? Because the Torah 

in Liturgy. was given only through suffering.” 

This statement is not found, however, 
in uny of the parallel passages; and it is, therefore, 
evidently a later addition, and not an ancient mid- 


Megillot 
Me'‘ilah 
rash. The late origin of this usage (“minhag ”) is 


reflected in the discussions of scholars up to the 
sixteenth century regarding the form of the benedic- 
tion and other questions (Isserles, “Orah Hayyim,” 
p. 490, end; idem, Responsa, No. 85). Soferim xiv. 18 
States that at the terminations of the festivals the 
proper rolls were read twice on the two evenings 
(Song of Solomon at the Passover: Ruth at Pente- 





Silver Fish Forming Case for Scroll of Megillat Esther. 
(In the possession of Arthur E. Franklin, Loudon.) 


cost), or on the Sabbath of each demi-festival, the 
latter being the custom among the people. It is 
now customary in Jerusalem to write the Five Rolls 
on parchment like the other Biblical books, and in 
reading them to pronounce over all the benediction 
which is generally used in the case of the roll of 
Esther, making the proper changes (sce further on 
the Song of Solomon at Passover and Ruth at Pen- 
tecost, Mahzor Vitry, ed. Hurwitz, pp. 304, 344). 
Although the Feast of Purim was celebrated long 
before the present era (IL Macc. xv. 36; Josephus, 
“Ant.” xi. 6, § 18; comp. John v. 1), it is doubtful 
when the custom of reading the roll of 
Esther publicly was introduced; but 
it wasat all events before the destruc- 
tion of the Temple (Tosef., Meg. i. 6, 
where Zechariah ben ha-Kazzab is quoted). AI- 
though the oldest tannaim are not mentioned in the 
rules for reading Esther, yet the detailed character 
of these regulations, and the fact that there is a spe- 
cial tractate on them, show that the usage was de- 
veloped before thecommonera. On the otherhand, 
the license allowed villagers on the day of reading, 
the discussions among scholars as to whether one 
was required to read only from ii, 5 or iii. 1 or iv. 
1 (Meg. ii. 3; Tosef., Meg. it. 9), together with 
many concessions as compared with the lessons from 
the Torah (e.g., minors might read; 2. ii. 11, iv. 1), 


The Roll 
of Esther. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


430 


and the fact that even in later times large scope 
was granted to popular custom, justify the con- 
clusion that the origin of the reading of the roll of 
Esther must not be dated too remotely (Meg. 2a). 
The custom of reading it in the month of Adar 
had become general probably by the third century 
of the common era, and had been sauctioned (Yer. 
Meg. 70a, 2); but the public reading of the book 
for those unable to read had apparently been in- 
troduced a century before. In the third century 
(22, 73b, 28) the entire roll was usually read, but 
only once and in the daytime (Meg. ii. 4, 5), while 
during the persecution by Hadrian a scribe read 
it at night (Tosef., Meg. ii. 4). In many places 
in Palestine it was read on two days (Yer. Shek. 
46a, 8). The custom of reading in both the evening 
and the morning, which now generally prevails, 
was not established until the post-Talmudic period 
(Soferim xxi, 8; comp. also Mahzor Vitry, pp. 207 et 
seg.). The Karaites read the roll at the ends of the 
two Sabbaths which precede Purim, a reminiscence 





Silver Case Containing Seroll of Megillat Esther. 
(In the possession of Maurice Herrmann, New York.) 


of the original custom of reading it throughout 
Adar until the fifteenth. The Megillah was wrapped 
about a rod (the Mahzor Vitry mentions two rods); 
and in the Middle Ages it was often illuminated. 

In the Talmudic period Lamentations formed no 
part of the service; and, strictly speaking, it has 


431 


never become such. In Ta‘an. 80a, below, the ba- 
raita states that on the Ninth of Ab the Bible may 
not be read nor the tradition studied, but that “Job, 
Lamentations, and the sections of Jere- 
Lamenta- miah which deal with calamity,” may 
tions. be recited. In post-Talmudic times, 
however, the custom of reading Lam- 
entations had become general (Soferim xiv. 8). The 
book was also read responsively (Mahzor Vitry, p. 
226); and In many synagogues, because the Ninth 
of Ab is a day of mourning, only one light was Lit 
by which it might be read (R. Asher, Ta‘an. 9, end). 
The persecutions of the Crusades strongly influ- 
enced the gloom of Tish‘ah be-Ab and its litur- 
gy (see Mahzor Vitry, p. 227, and Orah Hayyim, 
§ 554). See, also, EccLEsTAsSTES; EsTuHER, Book oF; 
LAMENTATIONS; RurH; and Sone oF Sones. 
S. LL. B; 
MEHLSACK, ELIAKIM. See SamIer, A.G. 


MEIER, MORITZ HERMANN EDUARD: 
German philologist; born at Glogau, Silesia, Jan. 
1, 1796; died at Halle Dec. 5, 1855. He was edu- 
cated at the Graue Kloster in Berlin and at the uni- 
versities of Breslau and Berlin (Ph.D. 1818). He 
embraced Christianity in 1817, In 1819 he became 
privat-docent in the University of Halle; in 1820, 
assistant professor at Greifswald; and in 1825, pro- 
fessor of ancient philology at Halle. 

Of Meier’s many works may be mentioned the 
following: (with Sch6mann) “ Der Attische Process ” 
(Halle, 1827), which received the prize from the Ber- 
lin Academy of Sciences; “ De Gentilitate Attica,” 2d. 
1885; “De Andocidis Oratione Contra Alcibiadem, ” 
tb, 1886; “De Crantoris Solensis Libro Deperdito,” 
7b. 1840; “De Proxenio sive de Publico Grecorum 
Hospitio,” 2b. 1848; “Fragmentum Lexici Rheto- 
rici,” 7b, 1844; “Die Privatschiedsrichter und die 
Ocifentlichen Dieten Athens,” 7b. 1846; “De Vita 
Lycurgi et de Lycurgi Orationum Reliquiis,” 2d. 1847. 
In 1832 he published (at Halle) an edition of De- 
mosthenes’ speech against Midias. 

From 1828 Meier was coeditor of the “ Allgemeine 
Litteraturzeitung.” Heedited also (from 1830 with 
Kiaimtz; from 1842 alone) the third section of Ersch 
and Gruber’s “Allgemeine Encyklopiidie der Wis- 
senschaften und Kiinste,” and from 1852 also the 
first section of that work. Eckstein and Haase pub- 
lished in Leipsic (1861-68) a collection of Meier’s 
essays under the title “Opuscula Academica.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: G. Hertzberg, in Allgemeine Deutsche Bio- 

graphie. 

s, BAT ad: 

ME‘ILAH (“Trespass in Regard to a Holy 
Thing”): Treatise of Seder Kodashim in the Mish- 
nah, Tosefta, and the Babylonian Talmud. In the 
Mishnaic order this treatise is the eighth, and con- 
tains six chapters comprising thirty-eight para- 
graphsinall. It deals chiefly with the exact pro- 
visions of the Law (Lev. v. 15-16) concerning the 
trespass-offering and the reparation which must be 
made by one who has used and enjoyed a consecrated 
thing. Its contents may be summarized as follows: 

Ch. i.: Sacrifices in which trespass can occur; in 
what parts: in the most holy sacrifices (“ kodshe ko- 
dashim ”) in all parts and in the partly holy (“ko- 
dashim kaJlim”) in certain parts only, Cases in 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Megillot. 
Me'‘ilah 


Which trespass can occur and those in which it can 
not occur. Rule of R. Joshua that if the priests. 
have once had the right to eat of a sacrifice no tres- 
pass can take place (§ 1). In this connection the 
question is raised whether there can be a trespass in 
the case of those parts of the sacrifice which have 
been removed from the sanctuary before the sprin- 
kling of the blood ($$ 2-3). Effects of the sprin- 
kling upon the sacrificial animal with regard to tres- 
pass (§ 4). 

Ch. ii.: The time after which a trespass can take 
place in the various meat-offerings, the different 
offerings of food, the Pentecostal bread, and the 
showbread. Closely allied with this is the deter- 
mination of the time after which the different sacri- 
fices may be invalidated by certain errors, and the 
period after which one may become guilty of 
“piggul” (abomination), “ notar” (leaving something 
over from the sacrifice), and “tame” (impurity) in 
connection with them ($$ 1-9). 

Ch, iii.: An enumeration of many things of which 
one may not partake, although if he does so, he is 
not guilty of trespass. This leads to 
a discussion of other regulations con- 
cerning certaiu of these things, as well 
as of the question whether and in what 
case one may be guilty of trespass in connection 
with objects belonging to or found upon certain 
consecrated things, such as grass in a consecrated 
ficld, the fruit of a consecrated tree (§ 6), and the 
foliage in a consecrated wood (§ 8). 

Ch. iv.: The combination of various sacrifices. 
in reckoning the minimum amount necessary to be 
used in order to constitute trespass ($$. 1-2). In 
this connection many more kinds of combinations. 
are given with relation to other legal and ritual 
questions. 

Ch. v.: Determination of a peruta, the smallest 
coin, as the minimum value which the use of holy 
objects must have to make one guilty of trespass. 
Discussion of the question whether the use made of 
a consecrated object must be worth a peruta or 
whether the amount of the object consumed by this. 
usage must equal a peruta; in connection with which 
a distinction is made between different objects ($ 1). 
The commission of trespass by various persons suc- 
cessively upon the same object. 

Ch. vi.: Cases in which the trespass has been com- 
mitted by proxy. The principle is laid down that 
if the agent has acted precisely in accordance with 
his orders, the person who gave such orders is guilty 
of the trespass; but if theagent has not soacted, he 
himself is guilty of the trespass. Enumeration of 
different examples ($$ 1-5), Cases in which neither’ 
of the two is guilty of trespass and instances in 
which both trespass (§ 4). 

In the Tosefta, Me‘ilah is the seventh treatise and 
has but three chapters. These, however, contain 

all that is in the six chapters of the 

In the Mishnah, with a few omissions and 
Tosefta and amplifications. 

Gemara. The Gemara to this treatise is de- 

voted almost exclusively to elucida- 
tions of the mishnayot, there being only one hag- 
gadah in the treatise, bearing on the story of BEN 
TEMALION. 


In the 
Mishnah. 


Meinek 
Meir 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


432 





There is no gemara of the Jerusalem Talmud to 
this treatise, nor in fact to any treatise of the order 
KKodashim (comp. Buber, “Die Angebliche Existenz 
eines Jerusal. Talmud zur Ordnung Jodaschim.,” 
in Berliner’s “ Magazin,” 1878, pp. 100-105). 

S. 8. J. Z. L. 


MEINEK, MOSES SAKEL (called also Mo- 
ses Isaac ben Baruch of Redwitz): German 
scholar and editor; lived at Offenbach at the begin- 
ning of the eighteenth century, He published in 
1715, under his own name, Naphtali Pappenheim’s 
“Teutsche Apothek,” and in 1717 ariddle in Judo- 
German verse composed by an anonymous author. 
This riddle was reproduced, with a German tran- 
scription, by Schudtin his * Jiidische Merck witirdig- 
keiten ” (iv., continuation iii. 108-109), Schudt refer- 
ring to Meinek as a printer. In 1722 Meinek edited 
the anonymous “Siyyumah ha-Parashiyyot meha- 
Torah,” a guide for the reader of the Law. He 
was probably himself the author. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. Nos. 3682, 3976, and 
col. 1944: Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. iii., No. 1572¢, iv., No. ladie; 
Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 419. 
ap M. SEL. 
MEIR (MEIR BA‘AL HA-NES = “Mcir the 

miracle-worker”): Tanna of the second century 

(fourth gencration); born in Asia Minor. The ori- 

gin of this remarkable scholar, one of the most stri- 

king figures of his age, is wrapped in obscurity. Ac- 
cording to a haggadah, he was adescendant of Nero, 
who, says a Jewish legend, escaped death at the 

ime of his deposition and became subsequently a 

convert to Judaism (Git. 56a), The mystery of Mcir’s 

origin extends to his name, for according to the Tal- 
mud the name “ Metr” (=“ one who enligh tens ”) was 
given to him because he instructed the wise In the 

Law (‘Er. 18b); as to his original name, the Baby- 

lonian Talmud (/.¢.) gives it as “ Me’asha,” but the 

Jerusalem Talinud seems not to know it. Sometimes 

he is called “ Nehorai,” the Aramaic equivalent of 

“Meir.” Meir began to study very early in life. 

At first he entered the school of Akiba, but, finding 

himself not sufficiently prepared to grasp the lec- 

tures of that great master, he went to the school of 

Ishmael, where he acquired an extensive knowledge 

of the Law. He then returned to Akiba, who, rec- 

ognizing his dialectical powers, ordained him over 
the heads of his other disciples (‘Er. 

Ordained J.c.). This ordination, which was con- 

in Youth. sidered invalid on account of Meir’s 

youth, was confirmed by Judah ben 

Bata (Sanh. 14a; see Rashi «ad loc.). 

Unlike his master Akiba, Meir seems to have kept 
aloof from the revolutionary movement of Bar Kok- 
ba. Nevertheless he suffered greatly from its con- 
sequences, His father-in-law, Hananiah ben Tera- 
clion, fell a martyr to the Hadrianic persecutions, and 
his sister-in-law was taken to Rome and sold to a 
keeper of a house of i]l fame. A tale of her rescue 
by Meir, though embellished with legend, may have 
& foundation in fact. Urged by his wife to attempt 
the rescue of her sister, who, she asserted, would 
rather forfeit her life than her virtue, Meir journeyed 
to Rome. Attired as a wealthy Roman, he went to 
the house to which she had been taken, and asked to 
see her. “She is very beautiful,” said the keeper, 


“but no man has as vet gained her favor.” Over- 
joved, Meir offered him a lar ge sum of money to 
permit her to be carried off. TF he keeper hesitated. 
fearing that it might cost himhishead, “ Fear not,” 
said the rabbi; “when danger threatens thee say, 
‘Meir’s God, help me!’” Still the man hesitaied. 
To convince him of the efficacy of his advice, Meir 
approached a number of savage watch-dogs at the 
gate and by a mystic word made them cringe at his 
fect. His fears allayed, the keeper yielded (‘Ab. 
Zarah 18a; Ecc). R. vii. 12). 

During the Hadrianic persecutions Meir lived 
abroad, but he returned to Judea after the repeal of 
the oppressive edicts, and took a promi- 
nent part in the reestablishment of the 
Sanhedrin in the city of Usha. Short- 
ly afterward Simeon ben Gamaliel II. was elected 
patriarch, and Meir was raised to the dignity of ha- 
kam, in which office he was charged with the duty 
of preparing the subjects to be discussed in the San- 
hedrin. To his activity and influence was due the 
adoption of the Jaws known as the “ Institutions of 
Usha.” To his duties in connection with the San- 
hedrin Meir added the establishment of academies 
of his own in Bethsan, Ammaus near Tiberias, etc., 
where he successively lived and lectured. A won- 
derful feat of memory displayed by him on one of 
his travels is mentioned in the Talmud, On the 
eve of the Feast of Purim, Meir found himself ina 
small Jewish community where no copy of the Book 
of Esther could be found; he thereupon wrote out 
the book from memory without a mistake (Tosef,, 
Megillah, it.). 

Meir infused new life into the development of the 
Halakah. He introduced the rule of testing the va- 
lidity of a halakah on rational grounds. The dia- 
lectical power displayed by him in halakic discus- 


At Usha. 





Synagogue at the Alleged Tomb of Rabbi Meir at Tiberias. 
(From a photograph.) 


sion was so great that most of his hearers followed 
him with difficulty. “He was able,” says the Tal- 
mud, “to give a hundred and fifty reasons to prove 
a thing legally clean, and as many more reasons to 
prove it unclean” (Er. 13b). This excess of dialec- 
tics is given in the Talmud as the only reason why 
his halakot did not receive the force of law; the pros 
and cons offered by him were so nearly equal in 
strength that one never knew his real opinion on a 
subject. In the deduction of new halakot from the 
Biblical text Meir used with great caution the her- 
meneutic rules established by his teacher Ishmael, 
regarding them as unreliable; and he rejected Aki- 


433 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meinek 
Meir 





ha’s method of deducing a new halakah from a 
seemingly superfluous particle in the Scriptural text 
(Sotah 1¥a; Sifre, Balak, 181).  Meir’s greatest 
merit in the tield of the Halakah was that he con- 
tinued the labors of Akiba in arranging the rich ma- 
terial of the oral law according to subjects, thus 
paving the way for the compilation of the Mishnah 
by Judah ha-Nasi. 
Mcir’s haggadot won by far the greater popular- 
ity; in this direction he was among the foremost. 


place with the traditional sayings of the Fathers are 
these: “Have little business, and be busied in the 
Torah”; “Be lowly in spirit to every man”; “If 
thou idlest from the Torah, thou wilt have many 
idlers against thee”; “If thou laborest in the Torah, 
He hath much to give unto thee” (Ab. iv. 14). 
Other maxims of his, on study and the fear of the 
Lord; have been transmitted by Johanan: “ Learn 
the ways of the Lord with thy whole heart and with 
thy whole soul”; “Watch at the gates of the Law ”; 





INTERIOR OF THE ALLEGED TOMB OF RABBI MEIR AT TIBERIAS. 
(From a photograph by Elkan N. Adler, Londo...) 


Well versed in the Greek and Latin literatures, he 
would quote in his haggadic lectures fables, para- 
bles, and maxims which captivated 

His his hearers. To popularize the Hag- 
Haggadah. gadah he wrote haggadic glosses on 
the margin of his Bible and composed 

midrashim. Both glosses and midrashim are no 
longer in existence, but they are quoted in the mid- 
rashic literature, the former under the title “Torah 
shel Rabbi Meir,” or “Sifra shel Rabbi Meir,” and 
the latter, on the Decalogue, under the title “ Midrash 
Anoki de-Rabbi Meir” (Gen. R. ix. 5). To Metr is 
attributed also a collection of three hundred fables, 
three of which are referred to in the Talmud (Sanh. 
38b; see Alsop’s FABLES AMONG THE JEWs). 
Among those of Meir’s maxims that have found a 

VITI.—28 


“Keep the Law in thy heart”; “Let the fear of the 
Lord be always before thine eyes and keep thy 
tongue from evil words”; “Cleanse and make thy- 
self pure that thou mayest stand without sin before 
the Lord, and He will be with thee” (Ber. 17a). 

An instance of Meir’s humility and love of peace 
is related in the Midrash. Among his hearers was a 
woman who never missed a lecture of his. Once, 
the discourse being more prolonged than usual, the 
woman returned home late in the evening. This 
infuriated her husband, whoturned her out-of-doors 
and swore that he would not take her in until she 
had spat in Meir’s face. Refusing to do this, she 
lived separated from her husband. When Meir was 
informed of the incident he went to the woman and, 
pretending to have a sore eye, requested her to 


Meir ene THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meir ben Eliakim 





Spit in it to heal it (Lev. R., Deut. R.). Meir was 
noted for his hatred ofignorance. ‘“ He that gives his 
daughter to an ‘am ha-arez is as though 
Hatred of he put her before a lion” (Pes. 56a). 
Ignorance. “Ife who leaves an ‘am ha-arez in 
his house asleep and returns to find 
him awake may be sure the house has been pol- 
luted” (Toh. 8a). Still he would rise before an old 
man, even if he werean ‘am ha-arez (Yer. Bik. 65c). 
Meir’s experience of the world was wide and va- 
ried, and the Haggadah records several of his social 
maxims: “Love the friend who admonishes thee and 
hate the one who flatters thee; for the former leads 
thee to life and the future world, while the latter 
puts thee out of the world.” “Conciliate not thy 
friend in the hour of his passion; console him not 
when his dead is laid out before him; question him 
not inthe hour of his vow; and strive to see him 
not in the hour of his disgrace” (Ab. R. N. xxix.; 
comp. 20. xxxvi. and Ab. iv. 18, where these max- 
ims are given in the name of Simeon ben Eliezer). 
Meir was fond of discoursing upon traveling. 
“When thou art in Rome do as the Romans do” 
(Gen. R. xlviii.). “Travelers should go in threes, 
fora single traveler is likely to be murdered ; two are 
likely to quarrel; but three will always make their 
way in peace” (Eccl. R. iv.). Meir exalts work and 
recommends parents to instruct their children in a 
clean trade (Kid. 82a). “ He who does not work on 
week-days will end by being compelled to work 
even on Sabbaths; for idleness leads to misery, and 
misery to crime; and once a prisoner, the idler will 
be forced to labor even on the Sabbath” (Ab. R.N. 
xxi.). “It is not the trade followed but the merit 
of the workman which makes him rich or poor” 
(kid. 2.c.). Those who run after richesare reproved 
by Meir in the following saying: “Man comes into 
the world with closed hands as though claiming 
ownership of everything; but he leaves it with 
hands open and limp, as if to show that he takes 
noe with him. Yetif man has sought the best 
course in life, his reward awaits him 
Maxims beyond the grave; there he finds the 
and Views. table set for a feast of joy that will 
last through eternity ” (Eccl. R. i.). 
Meir’s generosity and confidence in God are illus- 
trated by the following details of his private life 
given in the Midrash (Eccl. R. ii. 18). By success- 
fully following the calling of public scribe he earned 
three shekels a week. Of these two were spent on 
his household and one was given to poor fellow stu- 
dents. When asked why he did not save something 
for his children he answered, “If my children are 
good the Lord will provide for them, for it is said, 
‘[ was young and Tam old, yet [have never seen 
the righteous forsaken nor his seed demanding bread ’ 
[Ps. xxxvii. 25]. If my children are not good they 
deserve nothing, and it would be aiding the enemies 
of the Lord if I left them wealth.” With all his 
piety, Meir showed a spirit of great tolerance. He 
declared that a heathen who occupied himself with 
the Torah was as worthy of Judaism as a high 
priest, for it is said, “Ye shall therefore keep my 
statutes . . . which if a man do, he shall live in 
them” (Lev. xviii. 5). He explained this to mean 
that eternal happiness was not the heritage of the 


434 





—e_ 


Jews exclusively (Sifra to Lev. é.c.). Thus Meir is 
said to have lived on friendly terms with heathen 
scholars, with whom he had religious controversies; 
he was especially intimate with the Greek philos- 
opher Euonymus of Gedara, to whom he paid a visit 
of condolence on the death of the latter’s parents 
(Gen. R. Ixv.; Lam. R., proem, 2). 

Meir’s tolerance, however, is best shown by his 
attitude toward the apostate ELISHA BEN ABUYAH 
(Aher), his teacher. Of all Elisha’s colleagues he 
alone, perhaps in the hope of reclaiming him for 
Judaism, continued to associate with him and discuss 
with him scientific subjects, not heeding the remon- 
strances of some pious rabbis who regarded this as- 
sociation with some suspicion. Meir’s attachment 
for Elisha was so great that on the death of the latter 
he is said to have spread his mantle over his friend’s 
grave. Thereupon, according toa legend, a pillar 
of smoke arose from it, and Meir, 
paraphrasing Ruth iii. 13, exclaimed, 
“Rest here in the night; in the dawn 
of happiness the God of mercy will 
deliver thee; if not, I will be thy redeemcr” (Hag. 
15b). The same haggadah adds that at the death of 
Meir smoke ceased to issue from Elisha’s grave. 
Notwithstanding his tolerance, Meir’s treatment of 
the Samaritans was very severe; and he enacted 
several laws that were destined to widen the breach 
between them and the main body of Judaism (Hul. 
6a). The Midrash (Gen. R. xv.; Pesik. R. 23) re- 
ports several religious controversies between Meir 
and Samaritan scholars concerning creation, resur- 
rection, and similar subjects. 

The later part of Mefr’s life was saddened by 
many misfortunes. In one day he lost two promis- 
ing sons, who died suddenly on a Sabbath while he 
was at the house of study. A story is related ina 
midrash (quoted in Yalk., Prov. 964) of the fortitude 
shown on that occasion by Meir’s learned wife, BE- 
RURIAH. Controlling her feelings, she withheld the 
knowledge of their death from her husband during 
the Sabbath in order that the day should not be pro- 
faned by weeping and lamentation, and on the con- 
clusion of the Sabbath sought to console her husband 
with a parable. Shortly after the deathof his sons 
Meir lost his wife. According to a Jegend, she com- 
mitted suicide after having been dishonored by one 
of her husband’s pupils (Rashi to ‘Ab. Zarah 18a). 

The last years of Meir’s life were passed in Asia 
Minor. He was induced to leave Palestine because 
of the conflict that arose between him and the patri- 
arch. The origin of this conflict was the change in- 
troduced by Simeon in the ceremonial of the Sanhe- 

drin. Custom required its members 

Opposes’ to rise when the president, the judge, 

the or the reader entered the academy. 
Patriarch. Simeon, having an exaggerated idea 
of his dignity, issued an order that the 

assembly should rise as a body only on his own en- 
trance, while on the entrance of the judge only the 
first row, and on that of the reader only the second 
row, should rise, Meir and Nathan (the judge) felt 
justly offended at this new arrangement and deter- 
mined to show Simeon’s unfitness for his office by 
puzzling him with difficult halakic questions which 
he would be unable to answer. Informed of this con- 


Relations 
with Aher. 


435 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meir 
Meir ben Eliakim 





spiracy, Simeon expelled them from the Sanhedrin, 
but he could not prevent them from writing difficult 
questions and distributing them among its mem- 
bers. Compclled toreadmit both Nathan and Meir, 
he contrived that their names should not be recorded 
in the ordinances enacted by him, Nathan sub- 
mitted, but Meir continued to embarrass the pa- 
triarch by addressing to him difficult questions. 
When, at last, the patriarch threatened excommuni- 
cation, heanswered, “I do not care for your sentence 
unless you can prove to me on whom, on what 
grounds, and under what conditions excommuni- 
cation may be imposed,” and left the Sanhedrin (Yer. 
M. K. iii. 81a). 

Meir died somewhere in Asia Minor, “Bury me,” 
said he to his pupils, “by the shore, that the sea 
which washes the land of my fathers may touch also 
my bones” (Yer. Kil., end), Though during life 
Mcir had many adversaries, after his death the trib- 
ute paid to his virtue and greatness was universal. 
“Fe opencd the eyes even of the wise in the Law” 
is said of him in the Talmud (‘Er. 13b). An amora 
said: “The Creator of the world Knows that Meir 
had not his equal in his time” (2.). R. Jose, in 
pronouncing Mcir’s funeral sermon at Sepphoris 
said: “He was a great man and a saint, and was 
humble withal” (Yer. Ber. ii. 56b). Of all the Tan- 
naim, Meir’s name is most widely known among the 
people. In the house of every pious Jew there is a 
money-box hung on the wall in which the inmates 
deposit their alms for the poor of Palestine; this box 
is called “ Meir Ba‘al ha-Nes Pushke.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, vol. i.; Blumen- 

thal, Rabbi Meir, Leben und Wirken, Frankfort-on-the- 

Main, 1888; Revson, Toledot Rabbi Meir, Warsaw, 1889; 

Meir Bat ‘Ayin, Tunis, 1899; Landsberg, in Ha-Zofeh, i. 87 ; 

Gritz, Gesch. iv. 480; Weiss, Dor, ii. 132; Bacher. 1g. Tan. 

ii. 2 ct seq.; Braunschweiger, Die Lehrer der Mishnah, pp. 


186 et seg., Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1903. 
J I. Br. 


MEIR (MAESTRO BENDIG) OF ARLES. 
See Benpic, MEIr. 


MEIR BEN BARUCH HA-LEVI: Rabbi at 
Vienna from 1360 to 1890; a native of Fulda (Isser- 
lein, “Terumat ha-Deshen,” No. 81). His authority 
was acknowledged not only throughout Germany, 
but even by the Spanish rabbis (Isaac b. Sheshet, 
Responsa, No. 278). He acquired great cclebrity 
through his introduction into Germany of the rab- 
binical system of ordination. Owing to persecu- 
tions, the number of competent rabbis had decreased, 
and persons unqualified were inducted into rabbin- 
ates. To prevent this Meir issucd an order to the 
effect that no Talmudical student should officiate 
as rabbi unless he had been ordained and had ac- 
quired the title of “morenu” (Isaac b. Sheshet, é.c. 
Nos. 268-272). At first the order provoked the op- 
position of many rabbis, who accused Meir of a de- 
sire to rule; but they afterward accepted it. Later 
Meir assumed authority over the French rabbis, and 
sentto France Isaran B. ABBA Mani with authority 
to appoint rabbis there. 

Although Meir Icft no work, it appears from 
Jacob Mélln, who frequently mentions him in his 
“Minhagim,” that he collaborated with his contem- 
poraries Abraham Klausner and Shalom of Neustadt 
in the compilation of a work on ritual customs. 


Two “tehinnot ” for the 10th of Adar and the 23d of 
Iyyar respectively are ascribed to Meir. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Auerbach, Berit Abraham, Preface, p. 6, 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1860; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., viii. 10 et 
seq., 86; Weiss, Dor, v. 169 et seg.: Wolf, Geseh. der Juden 
in Wien, p. 14, Vienna, 1876. 
G. M. SE. 
MEIR CALW (CALVO; ybxp) : Biblical com- 
mentator; the country and year of his birth are 
unknown. As he quotes Levi b. Gershon it may 
be assuined that he lived not earlier than the fifteenth 
century. Metr Calw was the author of a commen- 
tary on the Pentateuch entitled “ Minhah Hadashah,” 
extracts from which were published by Heidenheim 
in one of his editions of the Pentateuch (Rédelheim, 
1818-21), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 339; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1695; First, Bibl. Jud. i. 140. 
D. M, SEL. 


MEIR OF CLISSON: French Talmudist of 
the first half of the thirteenth century. He is men- 
tioned in an extract from “ Pa‘neah Raza” (MS. Hal- 
berstam) on Gen. ii, 23 as a Bible commentator. 
Gross takes him to be identical with Metr ben Ba- 
ruch, who emigrated to Jerusalem in 1211 together 
with his brother the tosafist Joseph of Clisson and 
many other French rabbis. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, in R. EH. J. vi. 128; idem, Gailia Juda- 


ied, p. 596. 
8. 8. A. PE. 


MEIR B. DAVID: Grammarian of the last 
third of the thirteenth century. He wrote, under the 
title “ Hassagat ha-Hassagah,” a criticism of Ibn Ja- 
nah’s “ Kitab al-Mustalhak.” Meir’s work is known, 
however, only through passages quoted by Profiat 
Duran (“Ma‘aseh Efod,” pp. 116, 173). Joseph ibn 
Kaspi, who knew Meir b. David personally, quotes, 
in his supercommentary on [bn Ezra, an expianation 
which he heard from Meir’s lips (see Dukes, “ Nahal 
Kedumim,” p. 9). Meir is probably identical with 
the grammarian R. David, whose note on Job vii. 
4 is quoted by Abraham Bedersi in his work on 
synonyms, “Hotam Toknit” (p. 189; comp. Intro- 


duction, p. x.). 
iT: W. B. 


MEIR BEN ELEAZAR (known also as Meir 
Lombard [p129, pan] ha-Darshan): French 
liturgical poct of the first half of the thirteenth cen- 
tury. He wrote: (1) a series of poems to be recited 
on the seventh evening of Passover, some of which 
are arranged in alphabetical order; (2) a dirge be- 
ginning “Ziyyon zefirat pe’er,” giving at the end 
in an acrostic “ Meir Hazak”; (8) an alphabetical in- 
troduction to the Targum of Ex. xiii. 21. a passage 
which is read on the seventh day of Passover. The 
last-named poem is composed of six strophes, of four 
verses each, beginning with “It hazuta we-dugma.” 
According to Landshuth (“‘Ammude_ ha-*‘Abodah,” 
p. 159), Meir was the author of the dirge beginning 
“ Ahbirah millin,” which is recited on the Ninth of 
Ab; but Zunz (“Literaturgesch.” p. 360; Supple- 
ment, p. 88) ascribes it to Meir of Rothenburg 
(comp. 7). p. 469). 

G. M. SEL. 

MEIR BEN ELIAKIM: German liturgist; 
probably lived at Posen toward the end of the sev- 


Meir ben Elijah 
Meir of Rothenburg 


enteenth century; author of “ Mefr Elohim” (n.p., 
n.d.), a collection of Biblical passages to be recited 
on entering the synagogue, and ethical directions 
for prayer, Meir says in this work that he wrote 
two “Menorot” containing collections of prayers, 
and Steinschneider thinks that the “ Menorah” 
printed at Prague in 1696 may be one of them. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Boal. col. 1697. 
J. M. Sen. 


MEIR BEN ELIJAH OF NORWICH: Eng- 
lish poet; flourished about 1260 at Norwich. One 
long elegiac poem and fifteen smaller ones by him 
are found ina Vatican manuscript, from which they 
were published by A. Berliner (London, 1887). It 
is possible that Meir was a son of Elias Levesque 
(Jacobs and Wolf, “ Bibl. Anglo-Jud.” No. 102; A. 
Berliner, in “Hebriiische Poesien von Mcir ben 
Eliah aus Norwich,” Introduction). J. 


MEIR (MOSES MEIR) B. EPHRAIM OF 
PADUA: Scribe and printer at Mantua; died in 
Nov., 1588. After practising various professions he 
settled in Mantua as ascribe. He was well versed 
in Talmud, and was a friend of Moses Provencal. 
There were forty-three of his scrolls among the 
Italian communities, the first being completed Oct. 
23, 1541; the last was begun April 5, 1582. His 
standard scroll, which served as a model for his 
other work, was used by the community of Mantua, 
where it is still preserved. It contains a long colo- 
phon, in which all who gave him commissions and 
the dates of the completion of his scrolls are men- 
tioned. Foratime he wrote tefillin also. His method 
of writing gave rise toa learned controversy among 
the Italian rabbis, which was finally decided in his 
favor by R. Meir KaTzENELLENBOGEN. He was 
the author of a treatise on the “Taggin,” and was 
likewise active as a teacher of the Bible, his system 
of instruction being praised by Abraham Portaleone. 
In 1556 he founded a printing establishment at 
Mantua, which was continued after his death, doing 
good service at a time when the Inquisition was 
active and Hebrew books wereinterdicted. He pub- 
lished, among other works, the first edition of the 
Zohar (1558-60), the Mishnah, the Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
Dei Rossi’s * Me’or ‘Enayim,” the “ Mishneh Torah,” 
and the Talmudic treatises, all these being issued in 
handy volumes. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Z. G. pp. 252 et seq.; Mortara, Indiee, 
Pp. 46: and especially D. Kaufmann, in J. Q. R. xi. 266 et seq.; 
RE. J. xxxil. 130 et seg. 

J I. E. 

MEIR B. GEDALIAH OF LUBLIN. See 
LUBLIN, MEYR B. GEDALIAH. 

MEIR BEN ISAAC OF ORLEANS: French 
liturgical poet and, possibly, Biblical commentator 
of the end of the eleventh century. Meir and his 
son Eleazar are quoted in the commentary to I 
Chron. (xxix. 11) wrongly ascribed to Rashi. He 
composed several piyyutim, the best known of 
which are “Torah ha-Temimah” (a supplication tn- 
terspersed with many Aramaic and Talmudic words 
and having the general rime in 7%. and in which he 
expresses his horror of apostasy) and “ Almanot 
Hayyot,” a sclihah for Yom Kippur. Both piyvutim 
are signed PIM PNy* 72 WN and are acrostics con- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


436 


taining the name “Eleazar.” The second piyyut 
was translated into German by Zunz (“S. P.” p. 184). 
There is a selihah beginning “Mi yodea‘ yashub,” 
referring to a massacre of 38,000 Jews by the Cru- 
saders, which, though it is signed }}Fh PNy¥* 73 VND 
and is an acrostic containing the name “ Eleazar,” is 
supposed by Zunz to have been composed a century 
later. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 33; Landshuth, 
‘Ammude ha-‘Abodah, p. 167; Zunz, Literaturgesch. p. 251. 


J. M. SEL. 
MEIR B. ISAAC OF TRINQUETAILLE: 

French scholar of the twelfth century ; a member of 

the family of Menahem Meiri of Perpignan. Ie 

was a native of Carcassonne, whence his father took 
him to Provence, where he soon became one of 
the most distinguished pupils of Abraham David 

(RaBaD) of Posquiéres. After settling at Trinque- 

taille, a suburb of Arles, he composed the following 

two works: “Sefer ha-‘Ezer,” a defense of Alfasi 
against the attacks of Zerahiah b. Isaac ha-Levi 

Gerondi; “Hibbur ha-Mukzeh,” a treatise enumer- 

ating all the things that may not be touched on Sab- 

baths and feast-days. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 246; Isaac de Lat- 
tes, Sha‘are Ziyyon, p. 72; Meiri, Introduction to the Bet 
ha-Behirah, p. lib; Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Fran- 
¢ais, p. 51d. 

J. S. K. 

MEIR IBN JAIR: Italian (?) Talmudist and 
grammarian of the sixteenth century. His family 
name seems to have been “ Metri”; for he is always 
mentioned under the name of “Meir -le-Bet Meir” 

(= “Meir of the house of Meir”). He is called “Ibn 

Jair” because 1x° 3" is written after his name in the 

manuscript sources; it may, however, be an 

equivalent of “ Meir” or may mean “ May his light 
continue.” Meir was the author of: “Yair Na- 
tib,” or, according to Nepi-Ghirondi (“Toledot 

Gedole Yisrael,” p. 255), “ Meir Natib ” (Sabbionetta, 

1553), a treatise on the law concerning the slaugh- 

tering of animals, frequently quoted by Hayyim 

Benveniste in his “Keneset ha-Gedolah”; a trea- 

tise on the eight conjugations in Hebrew grammar, 

under the title “Simane kol Shemonah Binyanim ” 

(2b. 1554), a work which was afterward revised by the 

author and published under the title ef “ Dikduk ” 

(2b. 1597). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii., s.v. Yair Na- 
tib; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1706. 

G. M. SEL. 
MEIR BEN JOSEPH BEN MERWAN 

HA-LEVI: French scholar; flourished at Nar- 

bonne in the twelfth century; brother of the nasi R. 

Moses ben Joseph ben Merwan, and pupil of Isaac 

ben Merwan, head of the Narbonne academy in the 

early part of the twelfth century. He was held in 
great respect and associated with Abraham ben 

Isaac, ab bet din, who presided over the rabbinical 

college of Narbonne about 1165. According to the 

conjecture of Gross (“Gallia Judaica,” p. 414), Meir 
ben Joseph is identical with Meir ben Jacob, who is 
mentioned, with the rabbinical scholars Todros ben 

Moses, Abraham ben Isaac, Moses ben Joseph Me- 

shullam ben Nathan, and Moses ben Todros, at the 

end of a rabbinical responsum dated at Narbonne in 
the middle of the twelfth century. 


437 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Abraham ben David, Sefer ha-Kabhaiah ; 
«lLhimaaz Chronicle, p. 84; Temim De*on, p. 122; Kol Bo, 
No. 120; Benjamin Auerbach, Introduction to the Sefer ha- 
Eishkol, p. viii. ‘ 

G. S. K. 

MEIR KADOSH (MEIR BEN JEHIEL 
BRODA): Moravian Talmudist ; born at Ungarisch- 
Brod in 1598. He is known for his “Megillat R. 
Meir” (Cracow, 1632), in which he narrates an ad- 
venture which happened to him when he was fifteen 
years old, and on account of which he acquired the 
epithet “Kadosh” (= “saint” or “martyr”). In 
1608 he left his native town with eight other stu- 
dents in order to attend a yeshibah in Poland. On 
the way he was kidnaped by the waywode of 
Auspitz, who kept him in prison for fifteen weeks, 
and endeavored to torture him into accepting Chris- 
tianity. Meir remained firm, and was finally ran- 
somed by the Jews of Cracow and placed in the 
yeshibah of Moses Meisels. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. cols. 1701-1702. 

D. M. SEL. 

MEIR HA-KOHEN: French scholar of the 
thirteenth century; born at Narbonne; died at To- 
ledo, Spain, whither he had emigrated in 1263 
(Israeli, “Yesod ‘Olam,” ii. 35, ed. Berlin, 1846). 
Meir occupied himself particularly with the study 
of the Masorah; and, according to Menahem Meiri 
(“ Kiryat Sefer”), he was one of the five rabbis who, 
by comparing a great number of manuscripts, en- 
’ deavored to establish a correctly revised Pentateuch 
for France and Germany. 

Meir’s identity has been frequently mistaken: 
Bartolocci (“ Bibl. Rab. Magna,” iv. 20) identifies 
him with the author of the “Haggahot Maimu- 
niyyot,” a German scholar of the end of the thir- 
teenth century; Zunz (“Literaturgesch.” p. 288), 
confounding him with Moses ha-Kohen of Lunel, 
attributes to him the “ Hassagot,” or strictures on 
Maimonides; while Carmoly (“Ha-Karmel,” vii. 
58) identifies him with Meir Zarfati, the supposed 
author of a poem against the “ Moreh,” beginning 
with the words “ Anshe minut” (comp. Steinschnei- 
der, “Hebr. Bibl.” xiii.). It may be added that 8. 
Sachs (“Cat. of the Ginzburg Library,” p. 46) at- 
‘tributes to Meir ha-Kohen the “Sefer ha-Me’orot,” 
which in reality is the work of Meir b. Simeon, 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 422; Renan-Neu- 

bauer, Les Rabbins Francais, pp. 731-733. 

G. M. Sen. 

MEIR BEN LEVI: Austrian Talmudist and 
Biblical commentator of the beginning of the eight- 
eenth century; a native of Zolkiev. Under the 
title “ Likkute Shoshannim ” (Jessnitz, 1722), he com- 
piled the comments and novelle of the Geonim on 
the Pentateuch and arranged them in the order of 
the weekly lessons. Meir afterward revised the 
work, and, having added thereto notes of his own, 
published it under the new title “ Miksheh Zahab.” 
From the preface to the second edition (Frankfort- 
on-the-Oder, 1733), the first edition seems to have 
been printed at Zolkiev (n.d.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 369; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1704. 

G. M. SEL. 

MEIR OF OSTROWO. See MARGOLIOTH, 
Meir bp. ZEBI HIRSCH. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meir ben Elijah 
Meir of Rothenburg 


MEIR OF ROTHENBURG (MEIR B. BA- 
RUCH ; frequently called in bricf aN’ DAW, 
or ‘py Os'7Y): German tosafist, codifier, and 
liturgical poet; born at Worms about 1213; died in 
the fortress of Ensisheim, Alsace, May 2 (April 27 
old style), 1298. Te belonged to a family which was 
noted for its scholars; and in his responsa he <des- 
ignates about a dozen Talmudic authorities of his 
time as his relatives. The epitaph, still extant, of 
his father, who died (1275) at a very advanced age, 
praises the latter’s extraordinary piety, eminent 
scholarship, brilliant gift of oratory, and great 
popularity. It may be assumed, therefore, that 
Meir received his earliest instruction from his father, 
though his first teacher proper was Isaac b. Moses 
of Vienna, under whom, as well as under Samuel b. 
Menahem, he studied at Wiirzburg. Meir studied 
at the French yeshibot also, his teachers there being 
Jehiel b. Joseph of Paris, Samuel b. Solomon of 
Falaise, and Samuel of Evreux. On his return to 
Germany he quickly gathered around him a band of 
devoted pupils, including many married men, whe 
left their families for a time in order to listen to so 
brilliant a teacher. 

It is difficult to determine Meir’s actual official 
position among the German rabbis of his time. 
Modern historians maintain that he was chief rabbi 
of Germany, elected by the communities and con- 
firmed by Emperor Rudolph. It is very doubtful, 
however, whether at this time the office of chief rabbi 
existed in Germany; and even if it did, there is 
nothing to prove that Meir occupied it. The desig- 
nations “Chief” (Responsa, ed. Prague, No. 946), 
“Father of Rabbis,” etc., merely indicate that on 
account of his great scholarship he was everywhere 
recognized as the spiritual leader, whose decrees 
and institutions were considered as authoritative. 
As far as is known, he officiated as rabbi in the fol- 
lowing communities: Kostnitz, Augsburg, Wtirz- 
burg, Rothenburg, Worms, Nuremberg, and Ma- 
yence. This order of enumeration is probably 
chronological; but nothing is known of Meir’s terms 
of office in the different cities. As he is generally 
called Meir “of Rothenburg” (Rothenburg-on-the- 
Tauber), he probably stayed longest in that city. 
Meir was well-to-do, perhaps rich; for, according 
to his own account, he had in his house at Rothen- 
burg separate apartments for winter and summer, 
with an airy dining-room, and separate rooms for 
each of his pupils. 

Meir’s decisions in questions of taxation regulated 
the financial conditions of the Jewish communities 

of Germany. Thus he decided that 

Official no member of a community should 

Activity. be permitted to negotiate with the 
authorities in matters of taxation, as 

this might be detrimental to the community (2d. 
No. 184). When Emperor Rudolph presented his 
son Albrecht in 1282 with Austria, Styria, and Ca- 
rinthia, the communities of those districts refused 
to pay their portion of the taxes to the federation 
of communities of the empire, on the ground that 
they now belonged to a different state. Meir de- 
cided that the refusal of the communities to con- 
tribute to the general tax fund could be justified 
only if the emperor gave up those countries entirely 


Meir of Rothenburg 


without claiming any part of their revenues (7b. No. 
131). Another important decision of Meir’s had 
reference to the ransom of Jews, who were fre- 
quently imprisoned at that time for the purpose of 
extorting money from them. He decided that the 
ransomed Jews must reimburse the community in 
every case; and that the latter, in case of need, 
was net only justified in taking, but was in duty 
bound to take, the property of the prisoners, even 
against their will, for ransom. He based his deci- 
sion on the ground that in such cases the ransom 
was not a private matter, but concerned the Jewish 
conununities, and that the individual ought there- 
fore to be compelled to give up his property for his 
release, although he personally might prefer prison 
to poverty. 

Meir himself was soon to experience what life in 
prisop meant. His seizure, imprisonment, and sad 
death have made too deep an impression on the Jews 
to be a matter for doubt; moreover, contemporane- 
ous Christian writers confirm the chief incidents of 
the story. However, as some highly important 
points are not clear, it may be best to give here the 
following concise account: “R. Meir b. Baruch 
was about to go abroad with his wife, his daugh- 
ters, his sons-in-law, and all his family, and had 
proceeded as far as a city in the mountains of Lom- 
bardy, where he intended to stay until all his trav- 
eling companions had gathered about him, when sud- 
denly the wicked Bishop of Basel passed through 
the city on his journey from Rome, accompanied by 
a baptized Jew named Kneppe [NBS 3p]. The lat- 
ter recognized Meir and informed the bishop, who 
brought it about that the lord of that city, Count 
Meinhard of Gorz, seized Meir on the fourth of Tam- 
muz [= June 28], 1286, and delivered him to Em- 
peror Rudolph, who cast him into prison” (marginal 
glosses to folio 85 of the “ Minhagbuch” of Worms, 
written in 1625, quoted by Lewysohn, “Sechzig 
Epitaphien,” p. 36; comp. also 8. Back, “R. Meir 
ben Baruch,” pp. 62 et seg.). Neither the object of 
his journey nor the actual reason for the imprison- 
ment is given in any source; but modern historians 

have attempted various explanations. 

Supposed The condition of the Jews of Germany 
Reasons for was such toward the end of the thir- 

Imprison- teenth century that they were not for 
ment. a moment sure of their lives and prop- 
erty. Murder, pillage, arson, and ex- 
tortion were of daily occurrence. Under these cir- 
cumstances many Jews emigrated; and Palestine 
especially attracted the fugitives from Germany, as 
in that country very favorable conditions obtained 
for the Jews during the reign of the Mongolian khan 
Argun and his Jewish minister Sa‘d al-Daulah. It 
is assumed that Meir was leading such a band of 
cmigrants, and that he was imprisoned by the gov- 
ernment in order to put astop to this movement, 
which, if continued, would have materially injured 
the imperial treasury. 

The account of a young contemporary of Meir, 
who was in very close relations with him, seems to 
indicate, however, that Meir had entirely different 
reasons for emigrating. He says that the emperor 
demanded a great sum of money from the Jews, 
which the latter would not or could not pay, and 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


438 


that consequently their leader feared—and justly 
so, as the sequel showed—that the emperor would 
seize him asa hostage (“Zawwa’at R. Yehudah b. 
Asher,” ed. Schechter, in “Bet Talmud,” iv. 374), 
After his seizure Meir was probably first taken to 
Wasserburg (37139wW%)), a German locality that can 
not now be identified, and then transferred to the 
fortress of Ensisheim in the district of Colmar, Up- 
per Alsace. The Jewish communities of course did 
everything to secure the liberation of their greatest 
teacher; but the ransom demanded by the govern- 
ment—30,000 marks, according to one report—was 
such an exorbitant one that the negotiations dragged. 
A later authority, frequently well informed in mat- 
ters of history (Solomon Luria, “ Yam shel Shelo- 
moh,” to Git. iv., No. 66), says that Mefr himself 
prevented any such high sum being paid for his hb- 
eration lest the government should repeat this ex- 
pedicnt of imprisoning important men for the pur- 
pose of extorting money. He therefore remained in 
prison from June 28, 1286, until his death (1293). He 
bore his seven years of captivity heroically. In the 
beginning he was consoled by the hope of a speedy re- 
lease; and later on he submitted in the thought that 
it was the will of God, whose ways are always just. 
Even in prison he was occupied solely with studying 
and teaching. He wrote, or revised, a large part of 
his works; and his responsa now took the place of 
oral instruction. 
Meir was a voluminous writer. His works include: 
(1) Tosafot to several Talmudic treatises. Pas- 
sages are quoted therefrom to Berakot, 
Literary Shabbat, ‘Erubin, Yoma, Gittin, Ne- 
Activity. darim, Baba Kamma, Baba Mezi‘a, 
Baba Batra, Shebu‘ot, Menahot, 
and Hullin. The tosafot to Yoma in the editions 
are those of R. Meir, and are the only tosafot of his 
that have been printed. (2) Responsa, of which 
various parts have appeared (Cremona, 1537; 
Prague, 1608; Lemberg, 1860; Berlin, 1891). (3) 
“Hilkot Berakot,” or “Seder Berakot,” regulations 
for the various formulas of blessings to be pro- 
nounced in performing certain actions. The book 
is frequently cited in the works of Meir’s pupils, 
and is probably identical with the “ Birkot MaHa- 
RaM,” issued in 1558in Rivadi Trento. (4) “ Hilkot 
Shehitah,” regulations for the ritual slaughtering and 
subsequent examination (“bedikah ”) of animals, in 
manuscript in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (Neu- 
bauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” Nos. 1171, 2275). 
(5) “ Hilkot Abelut,” or “ Hilkot Semahot,” on mourn- 
ing customs. This work, somewhat abbreviated, is 
included also in the “ Mordekai” to Mo‘ed Katan; 
but in all the passages where the author speaks in 
the first person, the third person has been substitu- 
ted, so that here Meir’s work appears everywhere 
in quotation. Judah b. Nathan ha-Levi edited and 
published this work under the title “Sefer Mahaneh 
Lewiyyah,” Leghorn, 1789. (6) “ Halakot Pesukot,” 


decisions on various subjects, in manuscript at the 


Bodleian (Neubauer, /.c. No. 781, 2a), This library 
contains also various collections of Meir’s decisions 
(Neubauer, /.c. Index). (7) “ Piske ‘Erubin,” short 
summary of the Talmudic-rabbinical regulation of 
the ‘erub. (8) “Hliddushim,” novelle to various 
treatises of the Talmud. Azulai possessed a copy 


439 


of this work. (9) Minhagim of ritual ceremonies in 
the synagogue, in manuscript in the Vatican and 
Bodleian libraries. (10) Treatise on the marital du- 
ties of husband and wife, in manuscript in the Vati- 
can Library. (11) Commentary on the sixth order 
of the Mishnah, of which there have been published 
in Romm’s edition of the Talmud (Wilna, 1897) the 
commentaries to the treatises Nega‘im and Oholot, 
from an Oxford manuscript, and fragments of the 
rest from citations in Lippman Heller’s Mishnah 
commentary. (12) Masoretic notes, in manuscript 
in the Vatican and Oxford libraries. It is not im- 
probable that Meir was the author also of the 
“ Likkute ha-Maimuni,” found in the Austrian manu- 
script of the “ Mordekai ” (see MORDECAI B. HILLEL), 
and consisting of very brief extracts from Maimon- 
ides’ “Yad,” with occasional decisions by other au- 
thors referring to the subject or short remarks by 
the author himself. Meir isnot, however, the author 
of the cabalistic-ethical works “Sefer Emunot” and 
“Be’er Mayim Hayyim,” which are ascribed to him 
by some scholars. 

Meir was also a voluminous liturgical poet, nine- 
teen of his poems being included in the German 


Mahzor. On account of his great au- 
As Pay- thority as a Talmudist, his composi- 
yetan. tions were included even in the liturgy 


of the Day of Atonement and of the 
Ninth of Ab. Although Meir was a German, he 
modeled his poems upon those of Judah ha-Levi, 
without, however, equaling them, Still his piyyutim 
show great command of language, and to a certain 
extent true poetic inspiration also. The best-known 
among his poems is his dirge on the public burning 
of Hebrew books at Paris in 1244, composed in the 
strophic rime of Judah ha-Levi’s “ Zionide,” and ri- 
valing its model in warmth of imagination and depth 
of feeling, though much inferior to it in purity of 
language and in versification. Meir likewise wrote 
commentaries on earlier piyyutim, being probably 
encouraged todo so by his father, who himself wrote 
such comments (Zunz, “ Ritus,” pp. 195, 199). 

The great authority which Meir enjoyed during 
his life increased rather than lessened after his death. 
Aside from Rashi and Rabbenu Gershon, he is the 
only one upon whom the honorary title “Me’or ha- 
Golah ” (= * Light of the Exile”) has been conferred. 
It would be difficult to overestimate his influence on 
the development of the religious life of the Jews of 
Germany. He is also one among the few Germans 
whose authority extended far beyond the limits of 
their own country, and that not only during their 
lives—even Solomon ben Abraham ADRET, the 
greatest Spanish Talmudist, consulted Meir on diffi- 
cult questions—but also for generations afterward. 

Meir’s renowned pupil, ASHER BEN 

His His- Jentre., introduced the teachings of 

torical Im- his master into Spain and Portugal. 
portance. The great influence which Meir ex- 
ercised upon the religious life of the 

Jews was chiefly personal, acting directly upon his 
pupils, who on their part endeavored to perpetuate 
the authority of their master. In addition to Asher 
ben Jehiel, especially noteworthy among Meir’s pu- 
pils were MorpEcars. HILLELand MrEiR HA-KOHEN, 
who were largely instrumental in establishing his 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


SENS SED 
Sy 5 eG eS piu 


Meir of Rothenburg 


authority through their widely circulated compendi- 
ums of the Law, Through the works of these pupils 
it is possible to form an opinion of Meir’s importance, 
although most of his works, with the exception of the 
responsa, either have perished or remain unpub- 
lished. The tosafot to Yoma, of which, as has been 
said above, Meir is the author, show him to have 
been a most clear and Jogical thinker; and it is easy 
to see how his methods of Talmud study became the 
model for his pupil Asher b. Jehiel, who in his 
“ Halakot ” follows directly in his master’s footsteps. 
These tosafot show also Mcir’s fine insight into 
methods and system, as evidenced by his frequent 
references to the composition and methods of the 
Mishnah (comp., é.g., Yoma 2a, catchword “Shi- 
be‘at,”and 7b. (3b, catchword “ Yom ha-Kippurim ”). 

Although Meir was well versed in the works of 
his predecessors and studied them in detail, he was 
very independent in his views and often combated 
with vigor those of the old authorities. Meir was 
the representative of uncompromising Talmudism, 
which looked upon the Talmud asthe norm and rule 
of life. For this reason he was opposed to mysti- 
cism, which had flourished in Germany from the 
time of Eleazar of Worms, as well as to the phil- 
osophic trend of the Spanish school. 
It is especially noteworthy that he 
showed a marked independence of the 
superstition then prevailing in Ger- 
many among Jews as well as non-Jews. Thus he 
paid no regard to the “ danger” of so-called pairs (see 
ZuGOT), t.e., of using or partaking of things in pairs 
(“ Tashbez,” No. 552); he trimmed his nails in the 
sequence of the fingers (7. No. 560); and he advised 
that Jews might go bareheaded (70. No. 549). He 
admitted that he knew nothing of eschatological 
secrets, of which the mystic books of his time were 
full (2b. No. 247), and declared emphatically against 
indiscriminate emigration to Palestine. Only those 
should go there, he claimed, who could support 
themselves well, and would be able to lead a holy 
life in the Holy Land (7. Nos. 559-562). Where 
the Halakah, according to him, demanded onerous 
observance, this must be carried out; for he held 
that the Talmudic regulations must not become 
an object of derision, meaning thereby that they 
must be enforced by the authorities, so as not to lose 
their significance (Responsa, ed. Cremona, No. 194). 
Next to the Halakah, he assigned to religious prac- 
tises a great authority, and endeavored to put them 
upon a firmer basis than their existing one, Meir is 
cited as an authority for many religious customs of 
the house and the synagogue, as his influence gave 
stability to usages which hitherto had been variable. 

In moral as well as ethical questions he inclined 
to the rigorous interpretation. The following sen- 
tence in one of his responsa is characteristic: “Cursed 
be the woman who has a husband and does not adorn 
herself; and cursed be the woman who has no hus- 
band and adorns herself ” (Responsa, ed. Prague, No. 
199). The question whether a lawyer could bring 
into court arguments which he was convinced were 
false, he answered as follows: “No Jew may beconie 
guilty of such an ignominious sin against truth and 
justice” (Responsa, ed. Cremona, No. 246). Meir’s 
importance lies in the fact, therefore, that he led the 


Tenden- 
cies. 


Meir ben Samuel 
Meisel 


German Jews away from the mysticism to which 
they were trending, and toward a rational, thorough 
study of the Talmud; also in that he endeavored to 
put their variable religious practises upon a firm 
basis, his principle being to decide religious ques- 
tions in conformity with the conclusions at which 
he had arrived by independent study of the Talmud 
(“ Tashbez,” No. 5381). 

When Meir was iinprisoned in Alsace, many of his 
relatives also went to that country, members of his 
family being found there for centuries (Neubauer, 
“La Famille de Meir de Rothenburg,” in “R. E. J.” 
xii. 91-94). The Weil family of southern Germany 
claimed Meir as its ancestor; and there were also 
many Jews at Prague who designated themselves 
as INA KAN Naw. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: 8. Back, ?. Meir ben Baruch, Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, 1895; Carmoly, in Jost’s Annaten, 1889, pp. 348- 
349; Duschak, in Kokebe Yizhak, xiii. 20-21; Gratz, Gesch, 
vii., Index; idem, in Wertheimer’s Jahrb. fiir Israeliten, 
1862-63, pp. 40-54; Giidemann, Geseh. i. 170-173: D. Kaut- 
mann, Die Grabsteine R. Meir’s von Rothenburg und 
Alerander Wimpfers in Worms, in Monatsschrift, xl. 
126-130; idem, ib. pp. 185-188; Kohn, Mardochai ben Hillel, 
pp. 30- 32. 85-88 + Landshuth, “Ammude ha- ‘Abodah, pp. 160- 
161: [. Loeb, in'R. EJ. xx. 21 22; Lewysohn., Sechzig Eipi- 
tauphien, pp. 35-39 ; Steinsehneider, Cat. Bodl. s.v.; Weiss, 
Dor, v. 3-17 Renan- Neubauer, Les Rabbins Ere angais, pp. 
452- 461: Neubauer, Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS. Index; Wiener, 
Regesten : idem, in Ap edanclinil ts xii. 168-172: Zunz, Li- 
teraturgesch. pp. 357-362; idem, S. P. pp. 310- 312 ‘contains 
translations of some of Meir’s piyyutim); idem, Z. G. index. 


Ss. Ss, L. G. 


MEIR BEN SAMUEL (RaM): French tosa- 
fist; born about 1060 in Ramerupt; died after 1135. 
His father was an eminent scholar. Meir received 
his education in the Talmudical schools of Lorraine, 
his principal teachers being Isaac ben Asher ha-Levi 
and Eleazar ben Isaac of Mayence (Pardes, ed. 
Constantinople, p. 38a; comp. Neubauer in “ Mo- 
natsschrift,” 1887, p. 508), with whom he later car- 
ried on a correspondence (“ Or Zarua’,” ii. T5b; “ Sefer 
ha-‘Tttur,” ed. Lemberg, 1. 52). 

Meir married Rashi’s second daughter, Joche- 
bed, by whom he had three sons (Conforte, “ Kore 
ha-Dorot,” ed. Cassel, p. 14a), Samuel ben Meir 
(RaSHBaM), Isaac ben Meir (RIBaM), and Jacob 
ben Meir (Rabbenu Tam), all of them well-known 
scholars. According to Gross, Meir had also a 
fourth son, Solomon. Samuel ben Simhah of Vitry, 
father of the tosafist Isaac the Elder, was Meir’s 
son-in-law. Afeir’sson Isaac, the often-quoted tosa- 
fist, died in the prime of life, leaving seven children 
(see Rabbenu Tam, “Sefer ha-Yashar,” ed. Vienna, 
No. 616, p. 72b; ed. Rosenthal, No. 41, p. 71). This 
loss distressed the father to such an extent that he 
felt indisposed to answer a halakic question ad- 
dressed to him by his friend Eleazar ben Nathan of 
Mayence (20.). 

Meir attained a very great age, and is sometimes 
cesignated as “the old” (“ha-yashish ”; 2b. ; “Sefer 
Seder ha-Kabbalah,” in Neubauer, “MM. J. C.” p 
184; Eliezer b. Nathan, p. 148a). From the fact 
that his grandson, Isaac ben Samuel, born about 
1120, speaks of religious customs which he found 
conspicuous in his grandfather’s house, and from 
other indications, it has been concluded that Meir 
was still alive in 1135. 

Meir was one of the founders of the school of 
tosafists in northern France. Not only his son and 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


440 


pupil Rabbenu Tam (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” ed. Vien- 

na, No. 252, p. 27a), but also the tosafot (Tos. Ket. 

1038b; Tos, Kid. 15b, 59a; Tos. Men. 100a) quote 
his ritual decisions. It was Meir ben Samuel who 
changed the text of the Kot Nipre formula (see 

“Sefer ha-Yashar,” ed. Vienna, No. 144, p. 1%a). A 

running commentary on a whole passage of the 

Gemara (Men. 12a et seg.), written by him and his 

son Samuel in the manner of Rashi’s commentary, 

is printed at the end of the first chapter of Menahot. 

Meir composed also a selihah beginning “ Abo 

lefaneka,” which has been translated into German 

by Zunz (“Synagogale Poesie,” p. 183), but which 
has no considerable poetic value (ddem, “ Litera- 
turgesch.” p. 254; Landshuth, “ ‘Ammude ha-‘Abo- 

dah,” p. 168). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem Rha-Gedolim, ed. Wilna, i. 118, 
No. 11: Gritz, Gesch. vi. 68-144; Gross, Gallia yudaice. pp. 
804, 542, 635; D. Rosin, Samatel hen Meir ais Schrifterkldrer, 
in Jahresbericht des Jiidisch-Theoloyischen Seminars, pp. 
3 et seq., Breslau, 1880; Weiss, Dor, iv. 336; idem, Sefer Zo- 
ledot Gedole Yisrael (Tole dot R. Ya “akob ben Meir), p. 4, 
Vienna, 1883; Zunz, Z. G. p. 31; see also ISAAC BEN MEIR OF 
NARBONNE}; ‘JACOB BEN MEIR TAM ; and SAMUEL BEN MEiR. 


G. M. Sc. 
MEIR B. SAMUEL OF SCZEBRSZYN: 
Hebrew author of the seventcenth century. In the 
(lisastrous years of 1648-49 he lived at Sczebrszyn, 
Russian Poland, an honored member of the commu- 
nity, whence he escaped, on its invasion by the Cos- 
sacks, to Cracow; there he published his “ Zok ha- 
‘Ittim ” (1650), an account, in Hebrew verse, of Jew- 
ish persecution during the Cossack uprising. This 
book was afterward published by Joshua b. David 
of Lemberg under his own name; Steinschneider 
was the first to discover this plagiarism. Meir 
wrote also “ Mizmor Shir,” a Sabbath hymn, in Ara- 

maic and Judeo-German (Venice, 1639). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gurland, Le-Korot ha-Gezerot, iv. 3; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 6824; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 345. 


H. R. A. S. W. 


MEIR BEN SIMEON OF NARBONNE: 
Talmudist and controversialist ; lived at Narbonne in 
the second half of the thirteenth century. He was 
a disciple of Nathan ben Meir of Trinquetaille, and 
a contemporary of Nahmanides, with whom he main- 
tained a scientific correspondence. Meir enjoyed a 
high reputation asacommentator. Asher ben David 
invokes his authority in his (Asher’s) commentary 
on the thirteen attributes (AIT "35); and the anony- 
mous commentator on the Targum Onkelos highly 
praises Meir in his “ Patshegen.” 

Meir was the author of a controversial work en- 
titled “ Milhemet Mizwah” (Parma MSS. No. 2749). 
It is divided into five parts: (1) an account of a 
religious disputation held in 1245 before the bishop 
En Guillem de la Broa and in the presence of the 
Jewish notables of Narbonne and Capestang; (2) 
controversies with Christian ecclesiastics; (8) con- 
versations of an apologetic nature, and explanations 
of Biblical passages concerning the Messiah and 
of Talmudical haggadot interpreted by Christians 
in favor of their belief; (4) commentary on the 
“Shema‘” and on the thirteen attributes of God; 
and (5) letter on the “Sefer ha-Bahir,” which work 
Meir declares to be a forgery. 

Another work by Meir, entitled “ Meshib Nefesh,” 
defending the first chapter of Maimonides’ “ Yad ha- 


441 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meir ben Samuel 
Meisel 





Hazakah” against the attacks of an anonymous 
writer, is also extant in manuscript (MS. Ginzburg, 
No. 572, 10). 

According to Neubauer (“ Isr, Letterbode,” iii. 57), 
Meir is identical with the Meir ben Simeon men- 
tioned in a Talmudical compilation (Neubauer, 
“Cat. Bod]. Hebr. MSS.” No, 1558, 2, § 665) and in 
other works, where he is sometimes called “ Ha- 
Me‘ili.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. xvi. 44, 67> Neu- 
bauer, in Archives des Missions, 3d series, i. 55; Lubetzki, 

Introduction to Sefer Hashlamah; Gross, in Monats- 


sehrift, 1874, p. 571; idem, Gallia Judaica, pp. 4238-425; Re- 
nan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, pp. 438 et. seq. 


S. 8. J, Br. 

MEIR B. SOLOMON B. DAVID: Gramma- 
rian of the end of the thirteenth century. He wrote 
a short but interesting grammatical work, which is 
extant only in a manuscript formerly in the posses- 
sion of Halberstam, but now in the Montefiore 
Library (No. 410, 8; see “R. E. J.” xiv. 788). In 
the preface he states that the author of the Hebrew 
grammar entitled “Petah Debarai” was his grand- 
father. Purposing to summarize some of the ele- 
ments of Hebrew grammar, Meir discusses, in seven 
chapters, transitive and intransitive verbs, the mean- 
ing of the “hif‘il,” the “ pi‘el,” and the other derived 
stems, and the pronominal suffixes of the verbs. 
As he saysin the preface, he intended thereby to 
prepare for his own use an aid to study, and to con- 
sider problems which had not been treated in the 
work of his grandfather, referred to above. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. Bacher, in A. EB. J. x. 140 et seq. 

TS W. B. 

MEIR BEN TODROS. See ABULAFIA. 

MEIRI, MENAHEM BEN SOLOMON: 
Provencal Talmudist and commentator; born at 
Perpignan in 1249; died there in 1306; his Provencal 
name was Don Vidal Solomon. He wasa disci- 
ple of Reuben ben Havyim of Narbonne. Me’iri is 
regarded as one of the most brilliant commentators 
of the Middle Ages. His works are clear and con- 
cise and bear the stamp of a scientific and logical 
mind. Me ‘iri was the author of many works, most 
of which are still extant. These are: a treatise on 
penitence entitled “ Hibbur ha-Teshubah,” or “ Me- 
shibat Nefesh,” still extant in manuscript (MS. de 
Rossi, No. 1318); “ Bet ha-Behirah,” containing com- 
mentaries on most of the books of the Talmud, sev- 
eral of which were published, namely, those on 
Megillah (Amsterdam, 1769), Yebamot (Salonica, 
1794), Shabbat (Leghorn, 1794), Nedarim, Nazir, 
and Sotah (2. 1795), Yoma (2. 1760), Abot (with 
Me’iri’s historical and literary introduction and a 
short biography of the author by G. Stern; Vienna, 
1854); “Kiryat Sefer,” a Masoretic work on the 
method of writing scrolls of the Law, in two parts 
(Smyrna, 1868-81); commentarics on the Bible, of 
which only those on Proverbs and the Psalms are 
extant (the former was published at Leiria, 1492; 
the latter is in manuscript; Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl.” 
p. 69). Azulai mentions three other works by Me ‘iri 
which are no lenger in existence: “Bet Yad,” on 
the obligation of washing the hands before meals 
and in the morning; “Magen Abot”; and “Ohel 
Mo‘ed.” In the commentary on Sanhedrin, Me’iri 
quotes another work of his entitled “Ketab Dat,” 


which, judging from the title, must have been a 
catechism. 

Me’iri was too much of a philosopher himself to 
interdict the study of philosophy. Thus, when so- 
licited by Abba Mari to give his adhesion to the ex- 
communication launched against the secular sciences, 
Me’iri wrote him a letter in which he emphatically 
defended science, the only concession he made being 
to forbid the study of secular sciences by any one be- 
fore he has thoroughly studied the Talmud. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Rossi, Dizionario, ti. 48; Azulai, Shem 
ha-Gedolim, i. 128; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 17313 
Shorr, in Ozar Nehmad, ii, 99; Stern, Bet ha-Behirah, In- 
troduction; Geiger, in He-Haliuz, ti. 14: Carmoly, in Orient, 
i.704; Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabhins Franeais, pp. 528 et 
seq.; Grétz, Gesch. vii. 206 et sey.; Gross, Gallia Judaica, 
pp. 461-462. 

s. S. I. Br. 
MEISACH, JOSHUA: Russian Hebrew au- 

thor; born at Sadi, government of Kovno, 1848. 

Meisach has written and edited over one hundred 

works in Yiddish and Hebrew. He began his liter- 

ary career in 1861 with the weekly “Ha-Karmel,” 
since which year he has contributed toa great num- 
ber of Hebrew and Yiddish periodicals, has edited 
the magazine “Gan Perahim” (i.-iii., Wilna-War- 
saw, 1881-93), and has written various novels, 
essays, etc. Among these are the following: 

“ Ha-Emunah we-Haskalah,” essays (Wilna, 1874); 

“Miktabim mi-Sar shel Yam,” essays (Warsaw, 

1885-89); “Tefah Megullah,” criticisms (7b. 1886) ; 

“Bamat Yizhak,” on the theater (75. 1889); “Ozar 

Hadash,” anecdotes and narratives from the Talmud 

and the Midrash, alphabetically arranged (Wilna, 

1898). Meisach now (1904) resides at, Warsaw. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sefer Zikkaron, p. 68, Warsaw, 1888; Lippe, 


Asaf ha-Mazkir he-Hadash, p. 262: Zeitlin, Bibl. Post- 
-Uendels. p. 235; Ha-Yehudi, 1904, No. 46. ACSW 


H.R, 

MEISEL: Bohemian family which became fa- 
mous chiefly through Mordecai Marcus b. Samuel 
Meisel, “primate” of Prague. The family seems 
to have come originally from Cracow, to whose 
community Mordecai Meisel bequeathed large sums 
for charitable purposes; and there, toward the end 
of the sixteenth century, the printer Menahem 
Nahum b. Moses Meisel flourished. As early as 
1477, however, the name of “ Meisel” is mentioned in 
documents relating to Prague (Lieben, “ Gal ‘Ed,” 
p. 15). 

Frummet Meisel: Second wife of Mordecai 
Meisel; died Shebat 28, 1625. She contributed with 
her husband to the building of the Meisel syna- 
gogue, and some of the gifts which they presented 
on the occasion of its dedication (see Mordecai Mar- 
cus MEISEL) are still exhibited on the anniversary 
of her death. On her tombstone she is described 
asa woman distinguished for piety and morality. 
It is furthermore stated that every synagogue of 
Prague possessed votive offerings of hers, the most 
noteworthy gift being a golden cup weighing 100 
crowns; that she supported scholars liberally ; and 
that she was hospitable and very philanthropic. 
David Gans likewise praised her noble character and 
her fidelity to her husband. Itseems strange, then, to 
readin the “ ‘Emek ha-Baka” (ed. Wiener, p. 141), that 
she objected so strongly to the last will and testament 
of Mordecai Meisel that he divorced her while he 


Meisel 





lay dying. Although this statement has been often 

questioned, there must be some truth in it, for on 

her gravestone she is designated as the daughter of 
the famous elder Isaac Rofe (Lékarz), not as Meisel’s 
wife. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Foges, Altertlimer der Prager Josefstadt, 
Prague, 1882; Lieben, Gal ‘Ed, ib. 1856; A. Kisch. Das Tes- 
tament Mardvchat Meysels, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1893. 
D. A. Ast. 


Judah Léb ben Simbah Bonim Meisel: 
Printer and author at Cracow in the seventeenth 
century. Meisel reopened, in 1668, the printing es- 
tablishment of 
his father-in- 
law, Nahum 
Meisel, and con- 
tinued it until 
1670. The first 
work printed by 
him was Jacob 
Weil's “Shehi- 
tot u-Bedikot ”; 
the last one, the 
Eben ha- ‘Ezer 
and Hoshen ha- 
Mishpat of the 
Shulhan ‘Aruk. 
Meisel was the 
author of a 
work entitled 
“Ta‘ame ha- 
Massoret,” a 
commentary on 
the Masorah, at 
the end of which 
there are some 
novella on the 
Talmud (Am- 
sterdam, 1728). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: 

Steinschneider, 

Cat. Boal. cols. 

13873, 2986; M. 

Zunz, ‘Ir ha-Ze- 


dek, Supplement, 
p. of, note. 


J. M. SEL. 


Mordecai 
Marcus Meisel 
(Miska Marek 
in Bohemian 
documents): 
Philanthro- 
pist and com- 
munal leader at 
Prague; son of 
Samuel Meisel; 
born at Prague 
1528; died there March 18, 1601. The persecution 
of the Jews of Prague by the fanatical Ferdinand 
I. occurred while Mordecai was a youth. In 1542 
and 1561 his family, with the other Jewish inhab- 
itants, was forced to leave the city, though only 
fora time. The source of the great wealth which 
subsequently enabled him to become the benefactor 
of his coreligionists and to aid the Austrian im- 
perial house, especially during the Turkish wars, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| 





eer ee ie 





Tombstone of Mordecai Meisel at Prague. 
(From Jerabek, ‘‘ Der Alte Prager Judenfriedhof,”) 


442 








is unknown. He is mentioned in documents for 
the first time in 1569, as having business relations 
with the communal director Isaac Rofe (Lékarz), 
subsequently his father-in-law. His first wife, 
Eva, who died before 1580, built with him the 
Jewish town-hall at Prague, which is still stand- 
ing, as well as the neighboring Hohe Synagoge, 
where the Jewish court sat. With his second wife, 
Frummet, he built (1590-92) the Meisel synagogue, 
which was much admired by the Jews of the time, 
being, next to the Altneusynagoge, the metropolitan 
synagogue of the city; it still bears his name. 
The costly gold- 
en and silver 
vessels with 
which he and his 
wife furnished 
this building 
either were lost 
during the law- 
suit over his 
estate or were 
burned during 
the conflagra- 
tions in the ghet- 
to in 1689 (June 
21) and 1754 
(May 16). The 
only gifts dedi- 
cated by Meisel 
and his wife to 
this synagogue 
that have been 
preserved are a 
curtain (“ paro- 
ket”) embroid- 
ered with bun- 
dreds of pearls, 
a similarly 
adorned = wrap- 
per for the scroll 
of the Law, and 
a magnificent 
bronze orna- 
ment for the al- 
memar. Jacob 
Segre, rabbi of 
Casale - Monfer- 
rato, celebrated 
the dedication of 
the synagogue 
in a poem which 
is still extant, 
and his contem- 
porary David 
Gans, the chron- 
icler of Prague, 
has described in his “Zemah Dawid” the enthusi- 
asm with which the Jewish population received the 
gift. 

Meisel enlarged the old Jewish cemetery of 
Prague by purchasing adjoining uncultivated land, 
on which he erected a house for washing the dead, 
a mikweh, a bet ha-midrash, a Kuavs, and a hospi- 
tal (still in existence). He spent much money also 
in ransoming Jewish prisoners; paved the ghetto of 


443 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meisel 





Prague, which had been much cnlarged at that time; 
often provided clothing, of a uniform pattern, for 
all the poor of his community; presented large 
dowries every year at Hanukkah to two poor brides 

chosen by lot; lent large sums with- 

His Bene- out interest to needy merchants; and 
factions. provided for the widows and orphans 

of the community. He presented 

costly synagogal vessels and adornments to other 
communities, including those of Cracow, Posen, 
and Jerusalem. He presented and loaned altogether 
the sum of 20,000 thalers to the community of Posen 
when it was burned out June 11, 1590; gave gener- 
ously to Christian philanthropies, contributing a 
considerable amount toward the completion of the 
Church of the Savior; and repeatedly lent large 
sums to the empress as well as to the emperor, being 
rewarded with considerable privileges, many of 
which affected the Meisel synagogue. This syna- 
gogue had a standard with an escutcheon; it might 
not be entered by any officer of the law; it was 
exempt from taxation for all time. Although 
Meisel had no children, the emperor granted him 
the right to dispose of his estate; but after his 
death the heirs were involved in difficulties as a re- 
sult of this privilege. 
mint shekels for ritual purposes (“ pidyon ha-ben ” 
and “mahazit ha-shekel”), and one of these coins, 
dated 1584, is still in existence. 

Meisel’s last will and testament, which he drew 
up in the presence of Chief Rabbi Low (Jupan 
Léw B. BEZALEEL), the communal director Joachim 
Brandeis, and Meir Epstein, leaving his estate to his 
two nephews, Samuel the Elder and Samuel the 
Younger, is still extant in manuscript. He was 
interred with the highest honors. Immediately after 
his burial the Bohemian treasury, at the instance of 
the emperor, confiscated his estate, consisting of 
516,250 gulden in money together with many houses. 
Whatever was found was carried off; one of the 
chief heirs was tortured into revealing the hiding- 
place of what had been concealed, which also was 
claimed. Meisel’s wealth and philanthropy have 
become proverbial among the Jews, and many anec- 
dotes are connected with his name. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lieben, Gal ‘Ed; Foges, Altertiimer der 
Prager Josefstadt ; Hock-Kaufmann, Die Familien Prags, 
Presburg, 1892; A. Kisch, Das Testament Mardochai 
Meysels:; idem, Das Meiselbanner in Prag, Prague, 1901. 
D. A. Kt. 
Moses b. Mordecai Meisel: Russian scholar 

and communal worker; born in Wilna about 1760; 

died in Hebron, Palestine, after 1888. He was 

shammuash of the community in his native town and 
was in his younger days one of the followers of 

Elijah Gaon. Later he joined the Hasidim, but did 

not participate in the bitter controversies concerning 

them which disturbed the Polish Jewry in those 
times. Ie was a great admirer of Moses Mendels- 
sohn and approved Solomon Dubno’s bi'ur of Gene- 
sis (1788). There is also an approbation by Meisel 
of Samuel Gershoni’s “Debar Shemucl” (Byelo- 

stok, 1814). He left Wilna for Palestine in 18138 

and settled in Hebron. Dr. Lowe, who met him 

there in the summer of 1838, describes him as an old 
man well acquainted with German literature. 

Meisel was the author of “Shirat Mosheh” 


He had the right also to - 


(Shklov, 1788), a poem on the 618 precepts, cach line 
beginning with a letter from the Ten Command- 
ments. His son Aryeh Lob (d. 1835) was a leader 
among the Hasidim of Wilna. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne‘emanah, pp. 246-247, 288, 
Wilna, 1860; M. A. Ginzburg, Debir, pp. 47-48, Warsaw, 1883, 


H. R. P. Wi. 


Samuel Meisel (the elder): Nephew of Mordecai 
Marcus b. Samuel; born in 1585; died in 1630. He 
was wealthy and prominent in affairs. In 1616 he 
received an imperial privilege. The printing-press 
of Abraham Heide (Lemberger) was situated in his 
house. After Mordecai Meisel’s death the settle- 
ment of his estate involved his family in a tedious 
suit with the government, and from the records of 
this suit is derived the information regarding the 
members of this family. One of the houses belong- 
ing to the estate was awarded, in 1610, toa nephew, 
Jacob, and his wife, Johanka; and three years later, 
King Matthias, successor of Rudolf II., gave the 
remaining real estate to another nephew, Samuel 
Meisel (the younger; d. 1625), son of Simon. The 
Meisel synagogue and other property were awarded 
to the Jewish community. As the state had con- 
fiscated all the money (more than 500,000 gulden) 
and most of the real estate, the family sued the 
community for the income from the synagogue, the 
baths, institutional buildings, etc., amounting to 800 
florins a year. The rabbinate thereupon excommu- 
nicated the entirely impoverished family (c. 1670), 
and this led to indescribable persecutions and scan- 
dals. Decent burial was refused to Marek, son of 
the younger Samuel Meisel, in 1674, and the funeral 
cortége was insulted. His daughter was attaeked 
in her house by the mob, and the family had to pay 
large sums in order to secure honorable burial for 
the heir Joachim Meisel. It did notappear until 
the final verdict rendered in this suit by the magis- 
trate of Prague Sept. 18, 1684, that through the 
machinations of the notorious apostate Philipp Lang, 
chamberlain to the emperor until 1608, the record of 
Meisel’s privileges had been secretly stricken from 
the official register in 1601, on the ground of their 
having been obtained by fraud, and that the sums 


- subsequently paid to the widow and to the heirs, 


and the two houses given them, were alleged to 
have been merely gifts. The heirs, naturally, were 
not satisfied with this decision; but the great fire in 
the ghetto of Prague, in 1689, which destroyed the 
Meisel synagogue and the other buildings of the 
estate, terminated the controversy. The family 
flourished at Prague down to modern times; and 
branches of it are found at Warsaw, Budapest, 
Breslau, and Berlin. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Kisch, Das Testament Mardochai 


Meysels; Lieben, Gal ‘Ed; Benedikt Foges, Aitertiimer 
der Prager Josefstadt. 


D. A. KX. 


Wolf Alois Meisel: Hungarian rabbi; born 
at Roth-Janowitz July 16, 1815; died at Budapest 
Nov. 30, 1867. Owing to his father’s conversion to 
Christianity, the family relations were so inharmo- 
nious that he reached the age of seventeen before 
he was able to begin definite preparation for the 
future. In 1832 he went to Hamburg, where he ap- 
plied himself to the study of the Talmud and grad- 


Meisel 
Mekilta 





uated from the gymnasium. He entered the Uni- 
versity of Breslau in 1888, where he continued his 
study of the Talmud and attended lectures on rhet- 
oric. In 1848 he was called to the rabbinate of 
Stettin, and on May 11, 1859, to that of Budapest. 
Here he was in constant contlict with his congrega- 
tion owing to the state of transition, both in religion 
and in politics, through which the Hungarian Jews 
passed during his administration. His “ Homilien 
tiber die Spriiche der Viiter” (Stettin, 1851; Hun- 
garian transl. by Bauer Markti Lérincz, Budapest, 
1862) are models of Jewish pulpit-literature. His 
“Prinz und Derwisch,” poems (Stettin, 1847; 2d 
ed., Budapest, 1860), and “Der Priifstein,” poems 
(published posthumously by the Meisel-Wohlthit- 
tigkeitsverein, Budapest, 1878), are translations. He 
died suddenly while preaching a sermon, which 
Simon Bacher and his son Wilhelm Bacher pub- 
lished in German and Hebrew under the title “Die 
Brunnen Isaak’s” (2b, 1867). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, W. A. Meisel: cin Lehens- und 


Zeithild, Leipsic, 1891; Venetianer, 4 Zsiddsdy Szervezete, 
pp. 496 et seq.; Buichler, A Zsidék Vorténete, pp. 479 et seg.: 
Pallas Lex.; Hochmuth, Leopold Low, pp. 208 et seq., Leip- 


sic, 1871. 
; L. V. 


S. 

MEISEL SYNAGOGUE. Sec MEISEL, Mor- 
DECAL MARCUS ; PRAGUE. 

MEISELS, DOB BERUSH B. ISAAC: Po- 
lish rabbi and statesman; born in Szczekoeiny about 
1800; died in Warsaw March 17, 1870. He wasa 
scion of one of the oldest families in Cracow, and 
was brought up in Kamenetz, Podolia, where his 
father (d. 1832) was rabbi. After marrying the 
daughter of the wealthy Solomon Bornstein of 
Wielicka, he settled as a banker in Cracow, of which 
city he became rabbi in 1882. He occupied the rab- 
binate for nearly a quarter of a century, but was not 
recognized by the entire community, a considerable 
part of which adhered to his opponent, R. Saul 
Landau, Meiselsalways took a conspicuous part in 
the civic life of his place of residence; and in the 
stormy times of 1846 he was chosen one of the twelve 
senators of Cracow. In 1848 he was elected, with 
the aid of Catholic votes, to represent the city in the 
provisional Austrian Reichsrath, meeting at Krem- 
sicr. He took his seat among the radicals, and when 
the president expressed his surprise at seeing a rabbi 
seated on the “left,” Meiscls gave the reply: “Juden 
haben keine Rechte” JJews have no right!). 

In 1856 Meisels became rabbi of Warsaw, where 
he soon gained the respect and confidence of the en- 
tire population. In 1861, during the riots and ex- 
cesses which preceded the outbreak of the second 
Polish insurrection, he did everything in his power 
to induce the Jews to sympathize with the cause of 
Poland. He accompanied the Archbishop of War- 
saw to the funeral of the victims of the first out- 
break and marched together with Father Wyszynski 
at the head of a delegation to the city hall. Later 
he was appointed by the Russian vice-regent a mem- 
ber of the provisional municipal council of Warsaw ; 
but he remained loyal to the cause of the Polish 
patriots, thereby, it is believed, preventing massacres 
of Jews which some Polish leaders had planned and 
which the Russian government was not anxious to 
avert (“ Alle, Zeit. des Jud.” 1861, p. 227). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


444 


een — 





1861 Meisels, together with Dr. M. Jastrow, was 
arrested and thrown into prison; after several 
mouths’ confinement both were expelled from 
the country. Meisels was invited to settle in Lon- 
don; but in 1862 he was permitted to return to 
Warsaw, where he remained until his death. 
Meisels was the author of novellee on the “Sefer 
ha-Mizwot” of Maimonides, which appeared to- 
gether with the text as “Hiddushe MaHaRDaM ” 
(Warsaw, 1870). One of his sons, Israel Meisels, 
was dayyan in Cracow and rabbi of Siedlce, Poland, 
from 1858 to 1867. He died in Cracow Nov, 17, 
1875, aged 58 (“ Ha-Maggid,” xix. 407). Another son, 
Solomon Meisels, was living in Vienna in 1871. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: B. D. Rabbinowiez, Doheh Sifte Yeshenim, 
Warsaw, 1870; Angelehik, Ish Hayyit, Cracow, 1871; Fuenn, 
Keneset Yisrael, p. 185, Warsaw, 1886; Wettstein, Toledot 
MaHaRaN (biography of Hayyim N. Dembitzer), pp. 14 et 
seq., Cracow, 1893; Orient, 1848, pp. 240, 348, 358; 1849, pp. 
15-16: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1861, pp. 177, 214, 2285 1862, p. 223 
Ha-Shahar, viii. 504. 
if, R. P. Wi. 


MEISELS, NAHUM. Sce Cracow. 
MEISSEN. See SAxony, 


MEKILTA (plural, Mekilata): The halakic 
midrash to Exodus. The name “ Mekilta,” which 
corresponds to the Hebrew “ middah ” (= “ measure,” 
“rule ”), was given to this midrash because theScrip- 
tural comments and explanations of the Law which 
it contains are based on fixed rules of Scriptural 
exegesis (“middot”; comp. TaumMuD HERMENEU- 
rics). The halakic midrashim are in general called 
“middot,” in contrast to the “ halakot,” or formulated 
laws; and an interpreter of the Midrash was termed 
“bar mekilan” = “aman of the rules” (Ley. R. til.). 
Neither the Babylonian nor the Palestinian Talmud 
mentions this work under the name “ Mekilta,” nor 
does the word occur in any of the passages of the 
Talmud in which the other halakic midrashim, Sifra 
and Sifre, are named (Hag. 8a; Kid. 49b; Ber. 47b; 
etc.). It seems to be intended, however, in one 
passage (Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah iv. 8), which runs as fol- 
lows: “R. Josiah showed a mekilta from which he 
cited and explained a sentence.” His quotation 
actually occurs in the Mekilta, Mishpatim (ed. Weiss, 
p. 106b). It is not certain, however, whether the 
word “mekilta” here refers to the work uuder con- 
sideration ; for it possibly alludes to a baraita collec- 
tion—which might also be designated a “ mekilta ” 
(comp. Pes. 48a; Tem. 38a; Git. 44a)—containing 
the sentence in question. On the other hand, this mid- 
rash, apparently in written form, is mentioned several 
times in the Talmud under the title “She’ar Sifre 
debe Rub” = “ The Other Books of the Schoolhouse ” 
(Yoma 74a; B. B,124b), A geonic responsum (Har- 
kavy, “Teshubot ha-Geonim,” p. 81, No. 66, Berlin, 
1888) in which occurs a passage from the Mckilta 
(ed. Weiss, p. 41a) likewise indicates that this work 
was known as “She’ar Sifre debe Rab.” The first 
person to mention the Mekilta by name was the 
author of the “ Halakot Gedolot” (p. 144a, ed. War- 
saw, 1874). Another geonic responsum 
refers to it as the “ Mekilta de-Erez 
Yisrael” (Harkavy, @7.c. p. 107, No. 
229), probably to distinguish it from 
the Mekilta of R. Sraron Bar Yoragr, which was 


First 
Mention. 


Late in | generally known in the Babylonian schools (Hoff- 


445 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meisel 
Mekilta 





mann, “Zur Einleitung in die Halachischen Mi- 
draschim,” p. 86). 

The author, or more correctly the redactor, of the 
Mekilta can not be definitely ascertained. RL. Nis- 
sim b. Jacob, in his “ Mafteah ” (to Shab. 106b), and 
R. Samuel ha-Nagid, in his introduction to the 'Tal- 
mud, refer to it as the “Mekilta de-Rabbi Yish- 
mael,” thus aseribing the authorship to Tshmael. 
Maimonides likewise says in the introduction to his 
Yad ha-Hazakah: “RR. Ishmacl interpreted from 
‘we’eleh shemot’ to the end of the Torah, and this 
explanation is called ‘mekilta.? R. Akiba also 
wrote a mekilta.” This R. Ishmael, however, is 
neither an amora by the name of Ishmael, as Fran- 
kel assumed (Introduction to Yerushalmi, p. 105b), 
nor Rabbi’s contemporary, Rabbi Ishmael b. R. 
Jose, as Gedaliah tbn Yahya thought (“Shalshelet 
ha-Kabbalah,” p. 24a, Zolkiev, 1804). He is, on the 
contrary, identical with R. Ishmael b. Elisha, R. 
Akiba’s contemporary, as is shown by the passage 
of Maimonides quoted above. The present Mekilta 

can not, however, be the one com- 
Mekilta of posed by R. Ishmacl, as is proved by 
R.Ishmael. the reference to R. Ishmacl’s pupils 

and tootherlatertannaim. Both Mai- 
monides and the author of the “ Halakot Gedolot,” 
moreover, refer, evidently on the basis of a tradition, 
toa much larger mekilta extending from Ex. i. to 
the end of the Pentateuch, while the midrash here 
considered discusses only certain passages of Exo- 
dus. It must beassumed, therefore, that R. Ishmael 
composed an explanatory midrash to the last four 
books of the Pentateuch, and that his pupils am plified 
it (Friedmann, “ Einleitung in die Mechilta,” pp. 64, 
"3; Tloffmann, dc. p. 78). A later editor, intending 
to compile a halakic midrash to Exodus, took R. 
Ishmael’s work on the book, beginning with ch. xii., 
since the tirst eleven chapters contained no refer- 
ences to the Law (Friedmann, t.¢c. p. 72; Hoffmann, 
l.c. p. 87). He even omitted passages from the por- 
tion which he took; but, by way of compensation, 
he incorporated much material from the other ha- 
lakic midrashim, Sifra, R. Simeon b. Yohai’s Mekilta, 
and the Sifre to Deuteronomy. Since the last two 
works were from a different source, he generally des- 
ignated them by the introductory phrase, “dabar 
ahar” = “another explanation,” placing them after 
the sections taken from R. Ishmael’s midrash. But 
the redactor based his work on the midrash of R. Ish- 
mael’s school; and the sentences of R. Ishmael and 
lis pupils constitute the larger part of his Mekilta. 
Similarly most of the anonymous maxims in the 
work were cerived from the same source; so that it, 
also, wasknownas the “ Mekiltaof R. Ishmael” (“ Me- 
kilta de-Rabbi Yishmael”). The redactor must have 
been a pupil of Rabbi, since the latter is frequently 
mentioned (comp. Abraham ibn David in “Sefer ha- 
Kabbalah,” in Neubauer, “M. J. C.” p. 57, Oxford, 
1887, who likewise ascribes it to a pupil of Rabbi). 
He can not, however, have been R. Hoshaiah, as A. 
Epstein assumes (“ Beitriige zur Jiidischen Alter- 
thumskunde,” p. 55, Vienna, 1887), and as might be 
inferred from Abraham ibn David’s reference; for 
Hoshaiah is mentioned in the Mekilta (ed. Weiss, p. 
§0b). Rab (Abba Arika) therefore probably re- 
dacted the work, as Menahem ibn Zerah says in the 


preface to “Zedah la-Derek” (p. 14b). Rab, how- 
ever, did not do this in Babylonia, as Weiss as- 
sumes (* Einleitung in die Mechilta,” p. 19), but in 
Palestine, taking it after its completion to Baby- 
lonia, so that it was called the Mckilta of Palestine 
“* Mekilta de-Erez Yisrael”). 
Baraitot from the Mekilta are introduced in the 
Babylonian Talmud by the phrases “Tena debe R. 
Yishmacl” = “It was taught in the 
Quotations school of Rh. Ishmael,” and in the Pal- 


in the estinian Talmud and the haggaclic 
Talmud. midrashim by “ Teni R. Yishmael” = 


“KR. Ishmael taught.” Yet there are 
many baraitot in the Talmud which contain com- 
ments on Exodus, and which are introduced by the 
phrase “Tena debe R. Yishmael,” but are not in- 
cluded in the Mekilta under discussion. These 
must have been included in R. Ishmael’s original] 
Mekilta, and the fact that they are omitted in this 
midrash is evidence that its redactor excluded many 
of the passages from R. Ishmael’s work (comp. 
Hoffmann, t.¢. p. 42). 

The Mekilta begins with Ex. xii., this being the 
first legal section found in Exodus. That this is 
the beginning of the Mekilta is shown by the 
““Aruk,” 8.7. xp, and by the “Seder Tannaim we- 
Amora’im ” (ed, Luzzatto, p. 12, Prague, 1889). In 
like manner It. Nissim proves in his “ Mafteah ” (to 
Shab. 106b) that the conclusion of the Mekilta which 
he knew corresponded with that of the Mekilta now 
extant. 

In the editions the Mekilta is divided into nine 
“massektot,” each of which is subdivided into “ pa- 
rashiyyot.” The nine massektot are as follows: (1) 
“Massekta de-Pesha,” covering the pericope “Bo” 
(quoted as “ Bo”), Ex. xii. 1-xiii. 16, and containing 
an introduction, “ petikta,” and 18 sections; (2) “ Mas- 
sekta de-Wayehi Beshallah ” (quoted as “ Besh.”), 2d. 
xiii. 17-xiv. 31, containing an introduction and 6 
sections; (3) “Massekta de-Shirah” (quoted as 
“Shir ”), 7b. xv. 1-21, containing 10 sections; (4) . 
“ Massekta de- Wayassa‘” (quoted as “ Way.”), 2b. xv. 
22-xvii. 7, containing 6 sections; (5) “ Massekta de- 
‘Amalek,” consisting of two parts, (a) the part 
dealing with Amalek (quoted as “Am.”), @. xvii. 
8-16, containing 2 sections, and (0) the beginning of 
the pericope “ Yitro” (quoted as “ Yitro”), 7b. xviii. 
1-27, also containing 2 sections; (6) “ Massekta de- 
Bahodesh” (quoted as “Bah.”), 2b. xix. 1-20, 26, 
containing 11 sections; (7) “ Massekta de-Nezikin,” 
7b, xxi. 1-xxii. 28; and (8) “ Massekta de-Kaspa,” 7d. 
xxii. 24—-xxiiil. 19; these last two massektot, which 
belong to the pericope “ Mishpatim,” contain 20 sec- 
tions, consecutively numbered, and are quoted as 
“Mish.”; (9) “ Massekta de-Shabbeta,” containing 2 
sections, (@) covering the pericope “Ki Tissa” 
(quoted as “Ki”), 2b. xxxi. 12-17, and (2) covering 
the pericope “ Wayakhel” (quoted as “ Wayak.”), 
ib, xxxv.1-3. The Mekilta comprises altogether sev- 
enty-seven, or, if the two introductions be included, 
seventy-nine sections. All the editions, however, 
state at the end that there are eighty-two sections 
(comp. Weiss, Z.¢. p. 28; Friedmann, /.c. pp. 78-80). 

Although the redactor intended to produce a hala- 
kic midrash to Exodus, the larger portion of the 
Mekilta is haggadic in character. From Ex. xii. 


Mekilta 
Mekize Nirdamim 


the midrash was continued without interruption as 
far as Ex. xxxiii. 19, z.e., to the conclusion of the 
chief laws of the book, although there 
Haggadic are many narrative portions scattered 
Elements. through this section whose midrash 
belongs properly to the haggadah. 
Furthermore, many haggadot are included in the 
legal sections as well. The halakic exegesis of the 
Mekilta, which is found chiefly in the massektot 
“Bo,” “ Bah.,” and “ Mish.,” and in the sections “ Ki” 
and “ Wayak.,” is, as the name “ mekilta ” indicates, 
based on the application of the middot according 
to R. Ishmael’s system and method of teach- 
ing. In like manner, the introductory formulas 
and the technical terms are borrowed from his mid- 
rash (comp. Hoffmann, U.c. pp. 48-44). On the other 
hand, there are many explanations and expositions 
of the Law which follow the simpler methods of 
exegesis found in the earlier halakah (comp. Mrp- 
RasH HALAKATI). 

The haggadic expositions in the Mekilta, which are 
found chiefly in “ Beshallah ” and “ Yitro,” are in part 
actual exegeses, but the majority of them are merely 
interpretations of Scripture to illustrate certain eth- 
ical and moral tenets. Parables are frequently in- 
troduced in connection with these interpretations 
(e.g., “ Bo,” ed. Weiss, p. Ib; “Besh.,” pp. 86a, b, 
37a), a8 Well as proverbs (e.g., “Bo,” p. 2b; “ Way.,” 
p. 60b) and maxims (e.g., the apothegm of the an- 
cient Zekenim, “Besh.,” p. 62b; “Shir,” p. 46b). 
Kspecially noteworthy are the haggadot relating to 


the battles of the Ephraimites (“ Besh.,” p. 28b) and- 


to Serah, Asher’s daughter, who showed Joseph’s 
coffin to Moses (zd. p. 29a), besides others, which are 
based on old tales and legends. 

It must also be noted that some of the tannaim 
mentioned in the Mekilta are referred to only here 
and in Sifre, Num., which likewise originated in R. 
Ishmael’s school (comp. Hoffmann, J.¢. pp. 38-39). 
On the earlier editions of the Mekilta and the com- 
mentaries to it see Weiss, U.c. pp. 25-26, and Fried- 
mann, d.c. pp. 12-14. The following are more recent 
critical editions: J. H. Weiss, “ Mechilta ” (with in- 
troduction and commentary), Vienna, 1865; M. Fried- 
mann, “ Mechilta de-Rabbi Ismael” (with introduc- 
tion and commentary), 7. 1870. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hirsch Chajes, Iggeret Bikkoret, p. 5a, Lem- 
berg, 1840; Zunz, G. V. pp. 1-52, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1892; 
Z. Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, p. 508, Leipsic, 1859 ; 
idem, in Monatsschrift, 1853, pp. 388 et seq.; 1854, pp. 149- 
158, 191-196; J. H. Weiss, Hinleitung in die Mechilta, pp. 16- 
35: M. Friedmann, Einleitung in die Mechiita, pp. 9-80; D. 
Hoffmann, Zur Hinleitung in die Halachischen Midra- 
schim, pp. 36-45, Berlin, 1887; L. A. Rosenthal, Einiges tber 
die Agada in der Mechiita, in Kohut Memorial Volume, 
pp. 463-484, ib. 1897. 

S. J. Z. Lb. 
MEKILTA DE-RABBI SHIM‘ON: Halakic 
midrash on Exodus from the school of R. Akiba. 

No midrash of this name is mentioned in Talmudic 

literature; but medieval authors refer to one which 

they call either “ Mekilta de-R.Shim ‘on b. Yohai,” or 

“Mekilta Ahrita de-R. Shim‘on,” or simply “ Mekilta 

Aheret” = “another mekilta.” From it passages 

are cited, especially by Nahmanides in his Penta- 

teuchal commentary on Gen. slix. 31; Ex. xiv. 19, 

xxi. 8, xxii. 12; Lev. xxiii. 24; and by R. Todros 

ha-Leviin his works “ Sefer ha-Razim” and “ Ozar ha- 

Kabod ” (MSS, in the Kénigliche Hof- und Staatsbi- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


446 


bliothek, Munich; comp. M. H. Landauer in “ Orient, 
Lit.” 1845, vi. 182 et seg.). Until recently, aside 
from these quotations and some given by certain au- 
thors of the sixteenth century, as Elijah Mizrahi in 
nis commentary on Rashi’s commentary on the Pen- 
tateuch, R. Shem-Tob b. Abraham in his “ Migdal 
‘Oz” to Maimonides’ “ Yad,” and R. Meir ibn Gab- 
bai in his “ Tola‘at Ya‘akob” (p. 68b, Cracow, 1570), 
the only other extract ofany length from the Mekil- 
ta de-R. Shim‘on which was known was the one pub- 
lished by R. Isaac Elijah Landau from a manuscript 
of R. Abraham Halami, as an appendix to his edition 
of the Mekilta (Wilna, 1844). There were, therefore, 
various erroneous Opinions regarding this lost work. 
Zuuz (“G. V.” p. 419, note a) considered it as a cab- 
alistic work ascribed to R. Simeon b. Yohai. M. 
H. Landauer (i.c.) identified it with the Mekilta de- 
R. Yishmael, while J. Perles (in “ Monatsschrift,” 
1858, pp. 145 eé seg.) held that the medieval authors 
applied the name “ Mekilta de-R. Shim‘on” merely 
to his maxims which were included in the Mekilta 
de-R. Yishmael, since separate sentences could be 
called “mekilta”. M. Friedmann was the first to 
maintain, in his introduction to the Mekilta of QR. 
Ismael (pp. 54 e¢ seg., Vienna, 1870), that, in addi- 
tion to R. Ishmael’s work, there was a halakic mid- 
rash to Exodus by R. Simeon, which was called the 
“Mekilta de-R. Shim‘on,” and that this Mekilta 
formed part of the Sifre mentioned in Babli (Sanh. 
86a; Ber.47b; Meg. 28b; Kid. 49a; Sheb. 41b; Hag. 
da). This assumption of Friedmann’s was subse- 
quently confirmed by the publication of a geonic 
responsum (Harkavy, “Teshubot ha-Ge’onim,” p. 
107, No. 229, Berlin, 1888), where a baraita from the 
Sifre de-Be Rab to Exodus is quoted, which is the 
same passage as that cited by Nahmanides from the 
Mekilta de-R. Shim‘on b. Yohai, in his commen- 
tary on Ex. xxii. 12. This extract designates the 
work of R. Ishmael as the “ Mekilta of Palestine,” 
in contradistinction to R. Simeon b. Yohai’s mid- 
rash. It is clear, therefore, that the Mekilta of R. 
Simeon was impiied in the title Sifre de-Be Rab 
(comp. Hoffmann, “ Einleitung in die Halachischen 
Midraschim,” p. 46); and itis mentioned in the Mid- 
rash Tehillim (ed. Buber, Wilna, 1891), p. 252 (comp. 
Buber’s note there), under the Hebrew name “ Mid- 
dot R. Shim‘on b. Yohai.” It is possible aiso that 
Simeon himself intended to refer to his midrash 
in his saying: “Learn my middot” (Git. 67a). 
The Palestinian sources, the Yerushalmi and the 
haggadic midrashim, introduce baraitot from this 
Mekilta with the phrase, “Teni R. Shim‘on” = “R. 
Simeon has taught” (comp. Friedmann, introduc- 
tion to his edition of the Mekilta, pp. 55 et seg.; 
Hoffmann, /.c. p. 48). The phrase “ Tena de-Be R. 
Shim‘on” is extremely rare, however, in Babli, 
where this midrash ranks as one of the “ Sifre de-Be 
Rab” (Hoffmann, J.c. p. 50). Many sentences of 
R. Simeon are quoted there in the name of his son 
Eleazar, so that Hoffmann has very plausibly con- 
cluded (Z.c. p. 51) that Eleazar edited his father’s 
midrash. 

The Mekilta de-R. Shim‘on has disappeared; but 
some extracts from it have been preserved in the 
collection known as “ Midrash ha-Gadol,” as I. Lewy 
first pointed out (“Ein Wort iiber die Mechilta des 


447 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mekilta 
Mekize Nirdamim 





R. Simon”). These fragments have been collected 
by D. Hoffmann and published under the title 
“Mechilta des R. Simon b. Jochai” in the Hebrew 
monthly “Ha-Peles” (vols. i. to iv., passim). 

This Mekilta compiled from the Midrash ha-Gadol 
preserves abundant material from the earliest Scrip- 
tural commentaries, quoting, for instance, a sentence 
from the “* Doreshe Reshumot” on Ex. xxi. 12 (“ Ha- 
Peles,” iii. 258) which is found nowhere else. It 
contains also much from post-Talmudic literature 
(comp. Hoffmann, é.c. p. 387, note 19), for the col- 
lector and redactor of the Midrash ha-Gadol had a 
peculiar way of dressing sentences of such medieval 
authorities as Rashi, Ibn Ezra, “‘Aruk,” and Mai- 
monides in midrashic garb and presenting them as 
ancient maxims (comp. Schechter, Introduction to 
“ Midrash ha-Gadol,” p. 18, Cambridge, 1902). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Friedmann, introduction to his edition of 

the Mekiita. pp. 51-73, Vienna, 1870; D. Hoffmann, Finleitung 


in die Halauchischen Midraschim, pp. 45-51, Berlin, 1887; 1. 
ae Bin Wort tiber die Mechilta des R. Simon, Breslau, 


8. J. Z. L. 


MEKILTA LE-SEFER DEBARIM: A ha- 
Jakic midrash to Deuteronomy from the school of 
Rabbi Ishmael. No midrash by this name is men- 
tioned in Talmudie literature, nor do the medieval 
authors refer to sucha work. Although Maimon- 
ides says in his introduction to the Yad ha-Haza- 
kah, “I. Ishmael explained from ‘we-eleh shemot ’ 
to the conclusion of the Torah, that is, the Mekilta,” 
he did not see this midrash, which also includes 
Deuteronomy, since he does not quote any Mekilta 
passages to that book of the Pentateuch in his 
“Sefer ha-Mizwot,” although he draws upon the ha- 
lakic midrashim in discussing most of the com- 
mandments. Maimonides probably knew, therefore, 
merely through an old tradition which he had heard 
that such a midrash by R. Ishmael existed. 

But there are other circumstances which prove 
that there was once such a work. Many midrashic 
baraitot to Deuteronomy are introduced in the Tal- 
mud with the words “Tena debe R. Yishmael,” and 
may be recognized in form and substance as Ishmael’s 
midrashim (comp. Hoffmann, “ Zur Einleitung in die 
Halachisechen Midraschim,.” p. 77; ¢dem, “Ueber 
eine Mechilta zu Deuteronomium,” in the “ Flildes- 
heimer Jubelschrift,” German part, pp. 88-98). B. 
B. 124b quotes a passage to a verse in Deuteronomy 
from the “She’ar Sifre de-Be Rab,” a termby which 
the Mekilta de-Rabbi Yishmael is designated (comp. 
Hoffmann, ?.c. p. 40). This clearly indicates that 
there was a midrash to Deuteronomy by R. Ishmael 
at the period of the Amoraim. This work, which 
was called also “ Mekilta,” disappeared at an early 
date, and was therefore unknown to the medieval 
authors. The editor of the Midrash ha-Gadol, how- 
ever, knew it and included many passages from it 
in his collection. The citations from R. Ishmael’s 
Mekilta to Deuteronomy which are contained in the 
Midrash ha-Gadol have been collected by D. Hotf- 
mannand printed under the title “ Likkute Mekilta: 
Collectaneen aus einer Mechilta” in the “ Hildes- 
heimer Jubelschrift,” Hebr. part, pp. 8-382, and sep- 
arately under the title “Likkute Batar Likkute: 
Neue Collectaneen aus einer Mechilta zu Deutero- 
nomium” (Berlin, 1897). It appears from these pas- 


sages that this midrash contained much valuable 
material from the earlier halakic exegetes. Espe- 
cially noteworthy is the statement that R. Simon 
Gamaliel, together with R. Johanan b. Zakkai, ad- 
dressed a circular letter to the Galileanus and other 
communities (“ Likkute Mekilta,” p. 80), a state- 
ment which certainly antedates the parallel passage 
in Tosef., Sanh. ii. 6. 

Hoffmann’s collection of extracts from the Mekilta 
includes also many quotations from Maimonides’ 
“Yad” (comp. Hoffmann, “Ueber eine Mechilta,” 
p. 85, and his preface to the “ Likkute Mekilta,” p. 
4). Aside from the passages included in the Mid- 
rash ha-Gadol, some fragments of the Mekilta have 
been preserved in the Cairo GENizan: these were 
discovered by Schechter and published by him in 
the “J. Q. R.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: D. Hoffmann, Zur Einleitung in die Hala- 
chischen Midraschim, p. 77, Berlin, 1887 ; idem, Ueber eine 
Mechilta zu Deuteronomium, in Jubelschrift: zum Sieh- 
zigsten Geburtstag des Dr. Isr. Hildesheimer, German part. 
pp. 83-98, Berlin, 1890. 

8, J. Z. L. 

MEKIZE NIRDAMIM: International society 
for the publication of old Hebrew books and manu- 
scripts. It was established first at Lyck, Germany, 
in 1864, under the direction of Rabbi Nathan Adler, 

Sir Moses Montefiore, and Joseph Zeduer (London), 

Albert Colin (Paris), 8. TD. Luzzatto (Padua), M. 

Sachs (Berlin), Eliezer Lipman Silberman (Ihyck), 

and M. Straschun (Wilna). It was reestablished at. 

Berlin in 1885 under the supervision of Abraham 

Berliner (Berlin), Moses Ehrenreich (Rome), J. Der- 

enbourg and David Ginsburg (Paris), 5S. J. Tfal- 

berstam (Bielitz), A. Harkavy (St. Petersburg), M. 

Jastrow (Philadelphia), David Kaufmann (Buda- 

pest), and M. Straschun (Wilna). 

The society has published the following works: 


1864. ‘Et Sofer, by David Kimhi. 

1864-88. Pabad Yizhak, by R. Isaac Lampronti, letters 3-7. 
Lyck-Berlin. 

1864-98. Teshubot ha-Ge’onim: one hundred and twenty re- 


sponsa of the Geonim. Lyck. 
1864-1902. Diwan le-R. Yehudah ha-Levi. Lyck-Berlin. 


1866. Melammed ha-Talmidim, by Jacob Anatoli. 

1866. Eben Sappir, by Jacob Safir. 

1868. Pesikta ha-Yeshanah, attributed to Rab Kahana. 

1868-71. Imre Shefer, by N. H. Wessely. 

1871. Wikkuah ‘al ha-Ahabah, by Judah Abravanel. 

1871. Sefer Toledot Rabbenu Yizhak Lampronti. 

1871. Sefer ha-Musar, by Ephraim of Modena. 

1874. Tagmule ha-Nefesh, by Hillel b. Samuel of Verona, 

1874. Sefer ha-“Ibbur, by Abraham ibn Ezra. 

1874, Perush ‘al Shir ha-Shirim, by Moses ibn Tibbon. 

1874. Yibuse Tanna’im we-Amora’im, by a contemporary 
of Rashi. 

1881. Ha-Sarid weha-Palit, by Saadia Gaon. 

1881-88. Sefer Hasidim. 

1882. Metek Sefatayim, by R. Immanuel Frances. 

1885. Perush ‘al Sefer Yezirah, by Isaac Barcelona. 

1885-87. Teshubot ha-Ge’onim. 


1885-1904. Kobez ‘al Yad, a series of collected smaller works; 
collections of old documents. 


1886. Tarshish, diwan of R. Moses b. Ezra. 

1886-92. Maimonides, commentary on Seder Tohorot. 

1887. Sefer ha-Galuy, by R. Joseph Kimhi. 

1887-92. Halakot Gedolot. 

1888. Sefer Zikkaron, by Joseph Kimhi. 

1889. Ma‘yan Gannim, commentary on Job, by Samuel b. 
Nissim Masnuth. 

1889-93. Mahzor Vitry, by R. Simhah, pupil of Rashi. 

1890. Yehudah Ya‘aleh, by Judah Cologna and Isaac Hir- 
schenson, 

1891-92. Teshubot MaHaRaM, responsa of R. Meir of Rothen- 

burg. 


Melammed 
Melchior 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


4.48 


ge x sh nn ccc een 


1893-96. Sefer ha-Shorashim, by R. Jonah ibn Janah. 

1894. Midrash Zuta, on the five Megillet. 

1895. Megillat Sedarim, by Abraham Brody. 

1895. Seder ha-Hakamim. 

189s, Minhat Kena‘ot, by R. Jehiel of Pisa. 

1898. She’elot u-Teshubot she be-Sefer ha-Yashar le-Rab- 
benu ‘Tam. 

1899. Midrash ha-Torah, commentary on the Pentateuch, by 
Solomon Astruc of Barcelona. 

1899, Kebod Hakamim, by David Messer Leon of Mantua. 


1899-1901. Orhot Hayyim, by Aaron ha-Kohen of Lunel. 


1900. Tashlum Abudarham, Jose b. Jose’s “‘Abodah”’? and 
other ritual] poems, with motes by Abudarham. 

1900-01. Midrash Sekel: Tob, by Menahem b. Solomon. 

1902. Sefer ha-‘Ittim, by Judah b. Barzilai of Barcelona. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. D. Lippe, Bibliographisches Lexicon, i. 
451 ef seq., Vienna, 1881; new series, i. 391, Vienna, 1899; 
Verzeiciniiss der Sehriften des Verein Mekize Nirdamim, 
1885-95, 1896, 1898. 

G. A. 8. W. 

MELAMMED (“teacher”): A term which in Bib- 
lical times denoted a teacher or instructor in gen- 
eral (¢.g., in Ps. cxix. 99 and Prov. v. 18), but which 
in the Talmudic period was applied especially to a 
teacher of children, and was almost invariably fol- 
iowed by the word “tinokot” (children; B. B. 21a). 
The Aramean equivalent was “ makre dardeke” (zd. ). 
The melammed was appointed by the community, 
and there were special regulations determining how 
many children he might teach, as well as rules gov- 
erning the choice of applicants for the office and 
the dismissal of a melanmed (7d.). These regula- 
tions were extended and augmented in the post- 
Talmudic period. 

Besides the teachers appointed by the community 
there were others who were privately engaged by 
the parents of children; hence it became necessary 
to define accurately the mutual rights and duties of 
the melammed and of the parents. While giving 
instruction the melammed was not allowed todo any 
other work (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat, 338, 
5). If he was ill, and therefore unable to teach for a 
time, as much was deducted from his wages as the 
lessons for that time would have cost (¢b.); but if, 
on the other hand, the pupil was ill and could not 
take his lessons, the melammed received full pay- 
ment (76. 385, 1). The melammed was not allowed 
to punish his pupils too severely; and he had to 
teach both in the daytime and during part of the 
night (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 245, 10-11). 
He might not leave his pupils alone, nor neglect 
his duties; and he was required to be pious and to 
understand his vocation (2b. 245, 17). Only a mar- 
ried man might be a melammed (7. 245, 20- 
21). In addition to these regulations many others 
concerning the melammed are given in Yoreh 
De‘ah (/.c. and 246), as well as in Hoshen Mish- 
pat (Z.c.), but some of them are not observed at 
present. 

A. distinction is now made between the village 
melammed, who is engaged as a private tutor by 
a Jew living in a village, and who teaches the child 

in the house of its parents, and the 


Regula- melammied ina town, who teaches in 
tions for hisown home, which serves at the same 
Private time as a schoolroom (see HEDER). 
Tutors. A distinction is likewise drawn be- 


tween the “melammed dardeki” and 
the “melammed gemara.” The former teaches chil- 
dren of both sexes to read and write Hebrew, and 


also a chapter or two of each weekly lesson from 
the Pentateuch, and he generally has one or more 
assistants (in German “behelfer”). The gemara 
melammed, on the other hand, teaches Bible and 
Talmud to the boys; and, when they are older, 
the Shulhan ‘Aruk as well. Searching questions 
are seldom asked concerning the melammed’s peda- 
gogical fitness; and it frequently happens, more- 
over, that parents, for charity’s sake, send their 
children for instruction to persons who are unfit for 
any other vocation, but who possess more or less 
knowledge of the Talmud. As the profession of a 
melammed is not an enviable one, it is mostly prac- 
tised by people who can not find any other employ- 
ment. In Russia and Poland, therefore, the word 
“melammed ” is, in slang, synonymous with “ good- 
for-nothing ” or “dolt.” Among the Karaites, how- 
ever, the term denotes, like “rab” among the Rab- 
binites, “teacher” and “master,” and is regarded as 
a title of honor. Consequently there are among the 
Karaites many learned men who are called by the 
title “ha-melammed ha-gadol” (the great master), 
or merely “ha-melammed” (the master; comp. 
Pinsker, “Likkute Kadmoniyyot,” Index; Gott- 
lober, “Bikkoret le-Toledot ha-Kara’im,” pp. 195, 
207, Wilna, 1865). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lampronti, Pahad Yizhak, s.v., in addition 
to the authorities cited in the article. 


J: J. Z. L. 


MELBOURNE: Capital of the British colony of 
Victoria. Attempts were made to hold services in 
Melbourne in the house of M. Lazarus in 1839 and 
in that of Solomon Benjamin in 1841; but the first 
congregation of the city was that entitled “ The Holy 
Congregation of a Remnant of Israel,” which was 
formed in 1844 with A. H. Hart as president. A 
synagogue, under the presidency of the above-men- 
tioned Solomon Benjamin, was built on land granted 
by the government in 1847. The first minister was 
the Rev. Moses Rintel, a native of Edinburgh, who 
was called from Sydney to fill the position. In 1858 
a trivial difference split the community and led to 
the formation of a so-called “ Polish” section in op- 
position to the English congregation. The division 
was led by Rabbi Rintel himself, with whom the 
president had quarreled because the former had not 
been robed in his canonicals when attending the fu- 
neral of the wife of a leading member of the congre- 
gation. Rabbi Rintel began to hold services in a 
small hall in Lonsdale street, which was afterward 
abandoned for a new location in Stephen (Exhibi- 
tion) street. 

The existence of the second congregation, called 
the “Mikra Yisrael,” had the good effect of stimula- 
ting Judaism in Melbourne through the spirit of 
rivalry which was created between the two sections. 
Tn 1875 the “foreign,” now known as the East Mel- 
bourne, congregation built. a synagogue in Albert 
street, where it still continues to hold well-attended 
services. Rabbi Rintel arrived in Melbourne in 
1847, and he continued in his work there till his 
death in 1880. During his later years he exercised 
a considerable influence over the community. In 
1865 he utilized the hall in Lonsdale street for a Jew- 
ish denominational school, which was placed under 
the control of a Mr. Curtis. The school had a short 


449 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Melammed 
Melchior 





life, owing to the suppression of denominational by 
secular education, 

The original congregation with its svnagogue in 
Bourke street was looked upon for many vears, and 
indeed is still regarded, as the leading Jewish relig- 
ious organization. It was ministered to successively 
by the Revs. M. Rintel, A. Marks, A. F. Ornstein, 
Raphael Benjamin, and Dattnar Jacobsen. Joseph 
Abrahams, present (1904) incumbent, arrived from 
London in 1884, and has belped in the establishment 
of the United Jewish Education Board, of which he 
is president as well as of the bet din of Victoria. In 
the latter position Abrahams has taken a firm stand 
ou the admission of proselytes. In Kast Melbourne 
Rintel was succeeded by Revs. M. Griinbaum, A. 
D. Wolinski, I. Myers, and J. Lenzer. In 1873 the 
Bourke street congregation established a Hebrew 
denominational school, where both IIlebrew and Eng- 
lish subjects were taught. It was carried on with 
great success for about twenty years, after which 
time the congregation was compelled to close it on 
account of an insufficiency of funds. 

Intimately connected with the Bourke street con- 
gregation and for many years regarded as the lead- 
ing representative Jew of Victoria was the late Hon. 
Fdward Conkn, Mayor of Melbourne on three oc- 
casions, he was elected by East Melbourne to the 
Legislative Assembly, continuing to represent this 
constituency till his death in 1877. His successor in 
Parliament was the late E. L. Zox, who also took a 
keen interest in synagogal and communal affairs, 
heing at different times the president and treasurer 


of the Bourke street congregation. Among the 
living public men who maintain an interested 


connection with the synagogue is Sir Benjamin 
BENJAMIN, 

The highest official position hitherto occupied by 
au Jew in Victoria was the attorney-generalship, held 
by the Hon. I. A. Isaacs during the Turner ministry 
from 1894 to 1899. His brother, J. I. Isaacs, was 
3x member of Parliament, having been elected by the 
district of Owen in 1894. In addition to the above- 
uamed Jews who have sat or are still sitting in the 
Victorian Parliament, there are the Hon. N. Stein- 
feld of Ballarat, the Hon. Joseph Steinberg of Ben- 
digo (ex-president of the Bendigo congregation), 
the Hon. F. J. Levien (whose parliamentary career 
has extended over a longer period than that of any 
other Jewish member and who was the first presi- 
dent of the Geelong congregation), Theo. Fink, B. 
J. Fink, and D. B. Lazarus, the last-named of whom 
was at one time an ardent supporter of the Jewish 
community in Bendigo. 

The congregation of St. Kilda, a suburb of Mel- 
bourne, came into existence in the sixth decade of 
the nineteenth century. The synagogue was erected 
in 1872. For many years past the congregation has 
been composed for the most part of members of mid- 
dle-class families in easy circumstances. The Mi- 
chaelis family was for a long period among its chief 
supporters. The post of minister was held by E. 
Blaubaum from 1878 till his death (1904). He was 
co-editor of the “Jewish Herald,” a fortnightly pub- 
lication which chronicles the doings of <Aus- 
tralian Judaism. In communal matters the St. 
Kilda congregation, as a rule, cooperates with the 

VITT.—29 





Melbourne institutions. In its district are situated 
the almshouses and Montefiore Hall. There is a 
federated board, appointed from the Bourke street, 
Albert street, and St. Kilda congregations, to deal 
with the question of mixed marriages—the most 
difficult of all the problems engaging the attention 
of the Melbourne community. 

The oldest charitable institution in Melbourne is 
the Philanthropic Society, founded in 1856. In 1863 
the Jewish Friendly Society was formed; it still 
does good work. <A very useful society, founded 
in 1888, is known as the “Jewish Mutual Aid.” It 
was the parent of the Sydney Mutual Aid, the ob- 
ject of both being to grant substantial loans with- 
outinterest. The founders of the Melbourne society 
were P, Blashki, J, P., and the Rev. I. Myers; the 
son of the former founded the Sydney society. 

J. DLE. 


MELCHIOR, MORITZ GERSON: Danish 
merchant; born in Copenhagen June 22, 1816; died 
there Sept 19, 1884. At the age of twenty-four he 
entered the firm of Moses & Son G. Melchior, estab- 
lished by bis grandfather. His father and one of 
his brothers, with whom he was associated in busi- 
ness, died a few years after, and left the manage- 
ment of the firm in his hands until, in 1850, he was 
joined by his younger brother Moses Melchior (b. 
Jan, 29, 1825, at Copenhagen). Together they en- 
larged the business greatly and founded a branch in 
Melbourne, Australia, in order to establish a market 
for Danish products. 

Melchior filled several important public offices in 
Copenhagen. He was alderman from 1851 to 1869, 
a member of the Maritime and Commercial Court 
(S86 og Ifandelsretten) from 1862 to 18838, and a mem- 
ber of the Landsthing (Upper House) from 1866 to 
1874. In 1861 he was one of the founders of the 
free-trade society, of which he later became the 
director. He was one of the founders also of Pri- 
vatbanken (1857), and leader of the Chamber of 
Commerce (Grosserersocietetet) from 1873. 

Within the Jewish community also Melchior was 
prominent; he was a member of its representative 
committee from 1849 to 1852, of which during the 
last year he was the leader. 

Hans Christian Andersen (tbe well-known author 
of fairy tales) was often a guest in Melchior’s house, 
where he spent his last days. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Bioyrafisk Lexicon. 


s. F.C, 


MELCHIOR, NATHAN GERSON: Danish 
physician: born in Copenhagen Aug. 2, 1811; died 
there Jan. 80, 1872; brother of Moritz G. and 
Moses Melchior. Nathan graduated from the Uni- 
versity of Copenhagen in 1885. In 1886-37 he 
traveled, studying ophthalmology at the universities 
of Berlin, Leipsic, Dresden, and Prague, and on his 
return made the treatment of diseases of the eve his 
specialty. In 1842 he became a member of the 
Medical Society of Brussels, and in 1848 of that of 
Mechlin. During the war with Germany (1848-50) 
he served as an army surgeon at a lazaretto In 
Copenhagen. In 18538 the title of “professor” was 
conferred upon him; in 1855 he was appointed 
privat-docent in ophthalmology at Copenhagen Uni- 


Melchizedek 
Meldola 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


450 





versity ; two years later he became a member of the 
board of directors of the newly founded Ophthal- 
mological Institute in Copenhagen: and in the same 
year he acted as vice-president of the ophthalmo- 
logical congress at Brussels. In 1856 he was sent 
abroad by the king to study the means adopted by 
foreign countries against the contagious Egyptian 
eye-disease then ravaging a great part of Europe. 

Melchior published a number of essays in Da- 
nish medical journals, among which may be men- 
tioned “Et Tilfeide af Heldig Overskerelse af 
Musculus Rectus Internus paa begge Ojnene” and 
“Nogle Ord med Ilensyn til Prof. Switzer’s Be- 
pyverkninger om Operation for Skelen.” To the 
“Annales d’Oculistique” be contributed (1844) an 
article entitled “Om Pupillens Dilatation i Sund og 
Sygelig Tilstand.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : C. F. Bricka, Daisk Biografisk Lexicon ; 
Ersiew, Almindeligt Forfatter-Lexricon, Copenhagen, 1847. 


s. F. C. 
MELCHIZEDEK (pty~35 = “king of right- 
eousness ”): King of Salem and priest of the Most 
High in the time of Abraham. He brought out 
bread and wine, blessed Abram, and received tithes 
from him (Gen. xiv. 18-20). Reference is made to 
him in Ps. ex. 4, where the victorious ruler is de- 
clared to be “priest forever after the order of Mel- 
chizedek.” The story is neither an invention nor 
the product of a copyist’s error, as Cheyne (“ Encyc. 
Bibl.”) thinks, but rests upon ancient Jerusalemic 
tradition (as Josephus, “B. J.” vi, 10, affirms; 
comp. Gunkel, “Genesis,” 1901, p. 261), “ Zedek ” 
being an ancient name of Jerusalem (probably con- 
nected with the Phenician Svdvx — “ Zedek ” = “ Ju- 
piter”; comp. Shab. 156a, b; Gen. R. xliii.; Pesik. 
R. 20: see Baudissin, “Studien zur Semitischen 
Religionsgesch.” 1876, i. 14-15). Hence “ ‘ir ha-ze- 
dek ” (Isa. i. 21, 26). “neweh zedek ” (Jer. xxxi. 23, 
}. 7), “sha‘are zedek” (Ps. exviil. 19). The city’s 
first king, accordingly, was known either as “ Adoni 
Zedek ” (Josh. x. 1 et seg. ; comp. Judges i. 5-7, where 
* Adonizedek ” is the correct reading) or as “ Malki- 
zedek.” The fact that he united the royal with the 
priestly dignity, like all ancient (heathen) Kings, 
made hima welcome type to the composer of the 
triumphal song (Ps. cx.). 
But to the Jewish propagandists of Alexandria, 
who were eager to win proselytes for Judaism with- 
out submitting them to the rite of cir- 


Type of cumcision, Melchizedek appealed with 
Ancient especial force asa type of the mono- 
Monothe- theist of the pre-Abrahamic time or 
ism. of non-Jewish race, like Enoch. Like 
Enoch, too, he was apotheosizecd. He 


was placed in the same category with Elijah, the 
Messiah ben Joseph, and the Messiah ben David 
(Suk. 52b, where “ Kohenzedek ” should be corrected 
to “Malkizedek”). The singular feature of super- 
natural origin is ascribed to all four, in that they 


are described as being “without father and 
without mother, without descent, having nei- 


ther beginning of days nor end of life, but 
made like unto the son of God abiding forever” 
(Heb. vii 2-3; comp. Ruth. R. v. 8, where the 
original text [see “Pugio Fidci,” p. 125] referred 
also.to Ps. ex. 4, Isa. lili. 2. and Zech. vi. 12 comp. 


Yalk., Reubeni Bereshit. %d: Epiphanius. * Here- 
sis.” lv. 3). According to Midr. Teh. to Ps. xxvii, 
Abraham learned the practise of charity from Mel- 
chizedek. Philo speaks of him as “the logos. the 
priest whose inheritance is the true Ged ~ (* De Alle- 
voriis Legum,” iii. 26). 

The Samaritans identified the city of Salem with 
their sanctuary on Mount Gerizim (see LACX., Gen. 
xxxiii. 18: comp. Eusebius, “* Preparatio Evange-: 
Hea,” 1x. 17). 

The rabbis of later generations, rather antagonis- 
tic to the cosmopolitan monotheism of Alexandria, 
identitied Melchizedek with Shem, the ancestor of 
Abraham (Ned. 32b; Pirke R. El. xxilil.; Targ. to 
Gen. xiv. 4). A singular story is told of Melchize- 
dek in the Ethiopian Book of Adam and Eve, which, 
before it was turned into a Christian work, seems to 

have presented a strange combina- 


The tion of Jewish and Egyptian elements 
Melchize- emanating from a sect afterward 
dekites. knownas the Melchizedekites. There 


(ili. 13-21) Noah tells his son Shem be- 
fore his death to take “ Melchizedek, the son of Ca- 
naan, Whom God had chosen from all generations of 
men, and to stand by the dead body of Adam after it 
had been brought from the ark to Jerusalem as the 
center of the earth and fulfil the ministry before 
God.” The angel Michael then took away Mel- 
chizedek, when fifteen years of age, from his father, 
and, after having anointed himas priest, brought him 
to (Jerusalem) the center of the earth, telling his 
father to share the mystery only with Shem, the son 
of Noah, while the Holy Spirit, speaking out of the 
ark when the body of Adam was hidden, greeted 
Melchizedek as “the tirst-created of God.” Shem 
went, carrying bread and wine, and, assisted by the 
angel, brought the body of Adam to its destination. 
Melchizedek offered the bread and wine upon the 
altar they built near the place where Adam’s body 
was deposited, and then Shem departed, leaving the 
pure lad in his garment of skins under the sole 
protection of the angel, no one on earth know- 
ing of his whereabouts until, at last, Abraham met 
him. Compare also “Die Schatzhéhle” (Bezold’s 
transl. 1888, pp. 26-28), where the father of Mel- 
chizedek is called “Malki” and the mother *“ Yo- 
Zedek ”; and see the notes to Malan’s “Book of 
Adam and Eve” (1882, pp. 237-238). Against the 
opinion of Roensch (Das Buch der Jubilien,” 1874, 
p. 502), that the story of Melchizedek has been in- 
tentionally omitted from the Book of Jubilees, see 
Charles in his Commentary to Jubilees (xiii. 25). A 
remnant, probably, of these Melchizedekites ap- 
pears in early Christian literature asa heretic sect 
which regarded Melchizedek as a great heavenly 
power and as a son of God, superior to Jesus 
(Epiphanius, “ Heresis,” lv. 1-9; Hippolytus, “ Re- 
futatio Heresium,” vii. 36, x. 20; pseudo-Tertul- 
lian, 48; Augustinus, “De Heresibus.” 34; see also 
Herzog-Hauck, “Real-Encyc.” 3.7. “ Monarchianis- 
mus”), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Fried]ander, Antichrist, 1901, pp. 88-89. 
Ss. Kk. 


MELDOLA: Ancient Sephardic family whose 
genealogy can be traced through sixteen genera- 


wo” 





(1) Isaiah Meldola (b, 1282; d. 1640; lived in Toledo and Mantua) 
(2) Samuel Meldola (d. 1415) 
(3) Isaiah ee (d. L473) 
(4) David Meldola (expelied from Spain 1492) 
(5) Raphael Meldola (15th and 16th cent.) 
(6) Samuel Meldola (d. 1530) 


(7) Jacob "iia (16th cent.) 
i] 


| 
(8) Eleazar Meldola (d, 1655) (9) Samuel Meldola (physician to Duke of Mantua 1651) 


(10) David Israe] Meldola (b. 1612; d. 1679) 
m. (a) Miriam Azubi; (2) Henriques 





(11) Eleazar Meldola (19) Abraham Meldola 
(b. 1643; d. L702) ib. ¢. 1645; d. 1720 or 1728 : 
m. (a) 1677 Reina Senior; (B) 1691 Sarab Senior hazzan of Great Synagogue, Leghorn) 
m. Reina Hannah Diaz Pardo 
(12) Raphael Meldola ’ Istrilia Meldola 
(b. 1685 ; d. April 17, 1748; and 4 others = te 
FOOT ee cCeGie (eodaie Rachel Meldola (20) David Meldola (23) Jacob 
led s i - i 3 } we JE 4 & 1 = ¢ owe Je ig 
mh AOE Bee Meltole scout) (d. 1758) (d. 1745; chief of  Meldola 
m. 1701 Raphael the great yeshi- (dd. 1761) 
Meldoja (cousin) bah, Leghorn) 
m. daughter of 4 braham 
| Jacob Ispinoza Meldola 
(da. 1774; 
hazzan) 
Eleazar Mel- Abraham Rebecea (13) David Reina Simhah (14) Moses Hezekiah (21) Jacob Reina 
dola (b. 1708 Meldola (Riea) Meldola (b. 1714 Esther Meldola Meldola (b. 1725 at Meldola m. Abra- 
in Leghorn ; (b. 1705 in Meldola in Leghorn ; Meldola = (b, 1722) Leghorn; d. 1:91; (poet. ham 
d. 1763) m. Leghorn ; (b. 1709) hakam in (b, 1715 5 professor Uriental Leghorn) Meldola 
Leah Abulafia = d. 1755; m. Joshua Amsterdam) da. 1786) languages, Paris 1732 
of Florence typographer) Abiathar m. Rachel University) 
m. Reina, (had issue) Sarphaty, | ~~) Raphael 
daughter of granddaughter rr David Mel- 
David of Moses Ra- | dola (18th 
Meldola phael d’Agui- (15) Ra- Isaae —_ cent.: ~head 
lar, 1739 phael Mel- Meldola of the 
| dola (b. (b. Leg- — yeshibah 
Leghorn horn) Reshit Hok- 
eee | id | | pooh | uae He. ross d. mah, 
r 
Esther Raphael Rebecca Hannah  Eliashib Samuel Simkah Abraham one Leghorn) 
Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola (b. panam of 
(b. 1740 = (b. 1742) «Ch. 1744) Oo. 1746). 1748 (Cb. 1750) (b. 1752) 1754 in Am- Great Jacob 
inAm- in Am- m.Sam- m. Abra- in Am- mm. at Co- sterdam ¢ Britain) Meldola 
sterdam) sterdam) wel ben ham sterdam) penhagen settled Nm. Stella (rabbi at 
m. Aaron Joshua Fendes m. Esther Sarah Hamburg ss Bola fti Pisa) 
de Shab- © ha-Kohen = 1784 Osorio, Jessurun 172); m. (a) (4 bulafia) 
bethai Pardo, daughter of Ham- Angela Is- 
Ephrati VW71, in of Abra- burg 1787 rael 1776; 
Amster- ham (b) Gracia | 
dam Garela a (17) Da- (16) Rica Abra- Elea- 3 Samuel 
Osorio, (eh ‘Mtrica «Wi Mel- Meldola ham = _zar daugh- Meldola 
1778 c) Ulrica — dola (b. (b.1799 Mel- Mel- ters (b. 1815; 
Wallack Leghorn in Leg- dola _ dola d. 1881) 
1810 1797; d. horn; 4d. (chem- (physi- l 
| London London ist; cian) (18) 
; y 1853 5 1865) had Raphael 
David David Rachel David presi- m. 1819 issue) Meldola 
? Meldola Meldola Meldola Meldola dingrab- David (b. 1849 
Joshua David Solomon = (p, 1780) (b. 1790) ~~ (b. 1780) (b. 1782) ~——rdbi of Se- Aaron de in Len- 
Pardo Pardo Pardo m.Jacob m. Angela, phar- Sola of don: 
(b. 1772) (b. 1778) (b. 1775) de Moses daughter dim, London profess- 
de Suasso of Michael London) | or of 
] Namias, chemis- 
808 try: Fel- 
| ; , low of 
Mosesde Abraham Abraham de Sola Eliza de Sola 13 other the 
Suasso  Meldola (b. London 1825; (b. 1880; sonsand = Royal 
(b. 1803) (b. 1804) 4. Montreal 1882 ; d. 1904) daugh-  goejety) 
; professor, Mon- m. Rev. ters ae 
treal) m. Esther Abrahain 
Joseph 1852 Pereira Mendes 
1848 
a) eee — 
A. D. Meldola de Sola Clarence J. de Sola 5 others F. de Sola Men- H. Pereira others 
(rabbi Spanish and (president Canadian des (rabbi Mendes (rab- 
Portuguese Jews, Zionist Federation) Congregation bi Congrega- 
Montreal) m. Belle Maud Gold- Shaaray Te- tion Shearith 
m. Katherine smith 1901 filah, New York) Israel, New 
Samuel 1887 (has issue) mn. Isabe! Cohen York) m. 
(has issue) (bas issue) Rosalie Pisa 
(has issue) 
C. I. pve S. 


GQENFALOGICAT, TREE OF THE MELDOLA FAMILY. 


Meldola 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


452 


—> 





tions without a break to Isaiah Meldola of Toledo 
(born in 1282). Under Spanish uames it long flour- 
ished in Toledo, and produced many men of note and 
of learning. The name “Meldola”™ seems to have 
been assumed when some of the family first estab- 
lished themselves in Italy, prior to the going of 
Isaiah Meldola to Mantua. One branch, however, 
took the name “Montalto”; and from this branch 
was descended the Portuguese Marano family of 
Montalto, including Elihu Montalto (physician to 
Marie de Medici, queen of Henry IV. of France, and 
counselor to Louis XIIL.), as well as the painter G. 
8S. D. Montalto. 

Subjoined is the genealogical tree of the Meldola 
family. The numbers in parentheses correspond to 
those given in the text. 

1. Isaiah Meldola: Oneof the sages of Castile ; 
born in Toledo, Spain, 1282; died at Mantua, Italy, 
in 1340. IIe was hakam of Toledo after having 
previously served as dayyan. Owing to politico- 
religious troubles he left Spain for Italy, where 
some of his relatives had already settled. and he was 
appointed chief rabbi of Mantua and head of the 
college there. 

2. Samuel Meldola: Son of Isaiah (No. 1); born 
in the earlier half of the fourteenth century, died in 
1415. He succeeded his father as hakam of Mantua 
and as head of the college. He was distinguished 
as a preacher, and was the author of several theo- 
logical works. 

3. Isaiah Meldola: Son of Samuel (No. 2); 
born in Mantua toward the close of the fourteenth 
century; died 1475. He was hakam and dayyan, 
and was the author of “ Hazon Yesha‘yahu,” a com- 
mentary on Isaiah, printed in Mantua. He also prac- 
tised medicine and wrote a work on physiology. 

4, David Meldola: Son of Isaiah Meldola (No. 
3); born at Mantua inthe early part of the fifteenth 
century ; died about 1505. He went to Spain, where 
he made efforts to maintain the Spanish Jewish 
colleges, but returned to Italy in 1492, Rejoining 
his relatives in Mantua, he was received at court 
with favor. He devoted hisdeclining years to the 
writing of a nuinber of Jewish theological works. 

5. Raphael Meldola: Son of David Meldola 
(No. 4); born about the middle of the fifteenth cen- 
tury; died during the earlier half of the sixteenth 
century. He was hakam of the Jewish community 
of Mantua, and also a court councilor. 

6. Samuel Meldola: Son of Raphael Meldola 
(No. 5); born during the latter part of the fifteenth 
century; dicd 1580. He was physician to the Duke 
of Mantua, winning eminence by his skill as a prac- 
titioner; and he wrote a work on medicine. He was 
also hakam and dayyan of Mantua. 

7%. Jacob Meldola: Son of Samuel Meldola (No. 
6); born about the beginning of the sixteenth cen- 
tury; died about 1580; one of the chief rabbis of 
Mantua. He was the father of two sons, Eleazar 
(No. &) and Samuel (No, 9). 

8. Eleazar Meldola: Elder son of Jacob Mel- 
dola (No. 7); born in the sixteenth century; died, 
according to most authorities, in 1655, but one author- 
ity places the date much earlier. He succeeded 
his father as hakam of Mantua, and was very distin- 
guished as a preacher, his oratorical powers securing 


for him renown throughout Italy. A volume of his 
orations was published in Venice. 

9. Samuel Meldola: Italian physician; lived 
during the seventeenth century; younger son of 
Jacob Meldola (No. 7) and brother of Eleazar Mel- 
dola (No. 8). He was physician to the Duke of 
Mantua. and was the author of a work on mediciue, 
entitled “Refu‘ot Te‘alah.” He devoted attention 
also to religious and metaphysical studies and 
was the author of “Keri’at Shema‘” and “ Debar 
Shemuel.” 

10. David Israel Meldola: Son of Eleazar 
Meldola (No. 8); born at Mantua 1612; died, accord- 
ing to most authorities, in 1679 at Florence, while 
one source gives an earlier date. He was trained 
for the rabbinate in his native city, but on account 
of the war, famine, and pestilence he fled to Flor- 
ence. He went thence to Leghorn, where he was 
head of the college for more than twenty years, 
and was then persuaded to return to Florence to 
accept office as hakam and ab bet din. 

Meldola was the author of a commentary on Scrip- 
tural passages, and of “Emunah Omen,” a work on 
the Jewish faith. He married Miriam Azubi, and 
after her death espoused a grandniece of Elihu 
Montalto. He was survived by two sons: Eleazar 
(No. 11), from whom springs the elder branch of 
the family, and Abraham (No. 19), from whom is 
descended the younger branch. 

11. Eleazar Meldola: Elder son of David Israel 
Meldola (No. 10); born 1643; died 1702 (one author- 
ity states 1704). He went from Florence to Leghorn 
with his younger brother, and became head of the 
Taimud Torah, and chief rabbiof Leghorn. He was 
noted as a grammarian and as the author of a work 
entitled “ Halakah we-Haggadah.” He marricd in 
1677 Reina Senior, daughter of Jacob Senior, by 
whom he had seven children. After her death he 
married (1691) Sarah Senior, by whom he had five 
children. 

12. Raphael Meldola: Italian rabbi; born at 
Leghorn in 1685; died April 17, 1748; fifth child of 
Eleazar Meldola (No. 11) by his wife Reina Senior. 
He was originally named Samuel Jacob Meldola, 
but on bis recovery from a dangerous illness his 
name was changed to Raphael. He was elected 
rabbi of Pisa in 1722. In 1729 he was clected to 
succeed Isaac da Costa as chief rabbi of Bayonne 
and St. Esprit, and he remained hakam of these 
congregations until 1741, when he returned to Leg- 
horn. 

Meldola was the author of a large number of theo- 
logical and ethical works, the most important being 
“Mayim Rabbim ” (Amsterdam, 17387), and his re- 
sponsa, in several volumes, which gained for hima 
European reputation, and which were afterward 
published by his son David in Amsterdam. He 
wrote also a poem in honor of Mendelssohn’s “ Je- 
rusalem.” He married in 1701 Rachel Meldola, the 
daughter of his uncle Abraham, by whom he had 
seven children. His third son, David (No. 18), and 
his youngest son, Moses Hezekiah (No. 14), became 
very distinguished. His second son, Abraham, born 
in Leghorn 1705, was a noted typographer. 

13. David Meldola: Third son of Raphael 
Meldola (No. 12); born at Leghorn 1714; died (it is 


453 


said} at the age of 104, He went with his father to 
Bayonne, Iceft that city in 1785, and settled In Am- 
sterdam, where he undertook the publication of his 
father’s works, as well as some of his own writings. 
He was appointed hakam of several of the religious 
societies and philanthropic organizations. 

Meldola was the author of: “ Mo‘ed Dawid” (Am- 

sterdam, 1740), an astronomical and mathematical 
work, including a poem giving the rules of the 
‘alendar (first published in the ritual work “ Tefillat 
Yesharim,.” t%. 1740); “Dibre Dawid” (2b. 1753); 
“Darke Yesod ha-Limmud,” on the methodology 
of the Talmud (7b. 1754); “Darke Dawid” (Am- 
sterdam and [amburg, 1793-95): and many cthers 
preserved in manuscript (Nepi-Ghirondi, “ Tolecdot 
Gedole Yisrael,” p. 79). He married in 1739 Rachel 
Sarphaty (or Sarfatti), daughter of Eliashib Natha- 
nacl Sarphaty of Amsterdam and granddaughter of 
Moses Raphael d’Aguilar, by whom he had eight 
children, born in Amsterdam. His youngest son, 
Abraham, born 1754, removed to Hamburg in 1772, 
and was the author of many works, including * Tra- 
duccion de las Cartos Mercantines y Manuales,” 
Hamburg, 1784, and “ Nova Grammatica Portugue- 
za,” Leipsic, 1785. 

14. Moses Hezekiah Meldola: Youngest son 
of Raphael Meldola (No. 12); born at Leghorn 1725; 
died 1791. Though trained in the banking business, 
he abandoned commercial pursuits to follow a pro- 
fessional career. He won renown as a philologist, 
and was the author of a number of books on Semitic 
languages; he likewise attained to the rank of 
hakam and was appointed professor of Oriental 
languages in the University of Paris. He was the 
father of two sons, Raphael (No. 15) and Isaac. 

15. Raphael Meldola: LElderson of Moses Heze- 
kiah Meldola (No. 14); born in Leghorn 1754: died in 

London June 1, 1825; one 


of the most prominent 
members of the Meldola 
family. He received a 


thorough university train- 
ing, both in. theological 
and in secular branches, 
and displayed such re- 
markable talents that when 
only fifteen years old he 
was permitted to take his 
seat in the rabbinical col- 
lege. He was preacher in 
Leghorn for some years, 
and in 1808 he obtained 
the title of rabbi. 

In 1805 Meldola was elected haham of the Span- 
ish and Portuguese Jews of Great Britain, and 
proved a worthy successor of Sasportas and Nieto. 
His name will ever be indissolubly associated with 
that of Bevis Marks, London. Possessed of a re- 
markably virile mind, he was a dominant factor in 
the British Jewry of his generation. He was the 
author of “Korban Minhah,” “Huppat Hatanim” 
(1796), and “Derek Emunah,” published by his son 
after his deatb. He left several other works in 
manuscript. His scholarship attracted around him 
a circle in which were many of the most distin- 
guished men of his day, including Benjamin D’ Israeli 





Raphael Meldola. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Meldola 


and Isaac D’Israeli; and it is noteworthy that he 
opposed the policy which produced the famous rup- 
ture between the latter and the mahamad (see I)'Is- 
RAELI, FsA Ac), He maintained a literary correspond- 
ence with many of the most prominent Christian 
clergymen and seholars of his time; and his ac- 
quaintance with the Archbishop of Canterbury and 
the Canon of Windsor led to his being received by 
King George III. 

Meldola married Stella Bolafti (Abulafia), by whom 
he had four sons and four daughters. 

16. Rica Meldola: Eldest daughtcr of Raphael 
Mcldola (No.15): born at Leghorn 1799; married (Alay 
20, 1819) David Aaron de Sola, senior minister 
and preacher of Bevis Marks Synagogue, London, 
and became the mother of a large family. Of her 
sons, Abraham de Sola was professor of Semitic 
languages and literature in McGill University, Mon- 
treal, Canada, and rabbi of the Sephardic congrega- 
tion in that city. He was the father of the Rev. A. 
D. Meldola de Sola and of Clarence I. de Sola of 
Montreal. Oneot Riea’s daughters, Eliza, married 
the Rev. Abraham P. Mendes of Birmingham 
and London, England, and afterward of Newport, 
R. I. She was the mother of the Revs. F. de Sola 
Menbes and H. Pereira Mennes of New York. 

17. David Meldola: Eldest son of Raphael 
Meldola (No. 15): born at Leghorn 1797; died in 
London 1858. He obtained the rabbinical degree at 
Leghorn, and after the death of his father was 
elected presiding oflicer of the bet din of the London 
Sephardic community. Although not given the 
title of haham, he was the acting chief rabbi from 
1828 until his death. It was during lis incumbency 
that the London Jewish community passed through 
the stormy period of the early Reform movement. 
Meldola was the founder, in conjunction with Moses 
Angel, of the London “ Jewish Chronicle.” A pro- 
found Hebraist and Talmudist, he was the author 
of a number of writings, including several works in 
manuscript on Jewish theology and prayers, besides 
elegies, orations, and poems in Hebrew. 

18. Raphael Meldola: Son of Samuel Mel- 
dola, youngest son of Raphael Meidola (No. 15); 
English naturalist and chemist; born in London in 
1849. In 1875 he was sent by the Royal Society to 
the Nicobar Islands in charge of an eclipse ex pedi- 
tion. Since 1885 he has been professor of chemistry 
at the Finsbury Technical College. He has made 
many discoveries of important compounds and coal- 
tar dyes. He is the author of a large number of 
scientific works, among them the article on “ Organic 
Chemistry ” in the * Encyclopedia Britannica,” and 
“The Chemistry of Photography,” London, 1884; 
and he has translated and edited Weismann’s “ Stud- 
iesin the Theory of Descent.” published in 1882. Tn 
1895 and 1896 he was president of the Entomo- 
logical Society. Meldola has accomplished much 
for the diffusion of technical instruction, being a 
member of the Technical Instruction Committee of 
the Essex County Council. Jn recognition of his 
services to science he was elected fellow of the Royal 
Society. 

The Jineof Abraham. younger son of David Israel 
Meldola (No. 10), is as follows: 


19. Abraham Meldola: Chief hazzan of the 


Meldola 
Mels 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


454 





Great Synagogue, Leghorn; died 1720 or 172s. Mel- 
dola was the author of two works on “hazzanut ” 
and Hebrew music. He married Reina Hannah, 
daughter of Jacob Diaz Pardo, by whom he had a 
daughter, Rachel, and two sons, David (No. 20) 
and Jacob (No. 23). 

20. David Meldola: Elder son of Abraham 
Meldola (No. 19). He was hakam and chief of the 
great yeshibah at Leghorn, and was the author of 
several volumes of Hebrew poems. He married the 
daughter of Jacob [spinoza, by whom he had a son, 
Jacob (No. 21), and a daughter, Reina. 

21. Jacob Meldola: Italian poet; flourished 
during the eighteenth century; son of David Mel- 
dola (No. 20). He was also minister of the Leghorn 
synagogue, 

22. Raphael David Meldola: Son of Jacob 
Meldola (No. 21); lived during the latter half of the 
eighteenth century. He was president of the Reshit 
Hokmah College, Leghorn, and guined celebrity as a 
poet and iumorist. He published several volumes 
of verse. He was the father of Jacob Meldola, 
who occupied the rabbinate of Pisa sume time in the 
nineteenth century. 

23. Jacob Meldola: Younger son of Abraham 
Meldola (No. 19); died in 1761. He was a noted 
theologian, and the author of “Sefat Hayyim.” His 
son, Abraham Meldola (d. 1774), was hazzan in 
Italy, and was the author of two volumes of dis- 
courses. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sefer Toledot Adam, manuscript, part i., by 
Eleazar Meldola, Leghorn, beginning 1679; part iji., by Ra- 
phael Meidola, Leghorn, Pisa, and Bayonne, beginning 1702; 
part iii., by David Meldola, Amsterdam, beginning 1744; 
part iv., by Abraham Meidola, Hamburg, beginning 1772 ; sup- 
plemental part by David bar Raphael Meldolu, London, 1828; 
Dibre Dawid, Preface and p. 139, Amsterdatn, 1753; Pedi- 
gree of the Meldola Family from death of Isaiah Meldola, 
1340, extracted from a book of about 400 verses from an- 
cient manuscripts by R. Meldola; D. Meldola, The Way of 
Faith,Preface, London, 1848; Leon, Histoire des Juifs de Ba- 
yonne, p. 864, Paris, 1893; Caster, Hist. of Bevis Marks, 
London, 1901; Henry 8. Morais, Eminent Israelites of the 
Nineteenth Century, Philadelphia, 1880; The Gentleman’s 
Magazine (London), Oct., 1828; Jew. Chron. July 25, 1851; 
The Hebrew Observer (London), March 11 and April 15, 
1853; Lucien Wolf, Old Jewish Families in England, in 
The Leisure Hour (London), Aug., 1886; The Ocecident 
(Philadelphia), xi. 80, 218; Israel (London), June, 1899; 
April, 1901 ; et seq. 

G. Cc. L pre 8. 

MELIHAH (“salting”): The process of salt- 
ing meat in order to make it ritually fit (kasher) 
for cooking. The prohibition against partaking of 
blood was extended by the Rabbis to include, under 
certain conditions, flesh containing blood (based 
on Gen. ix. 4; see BLoop). Hence various reg- 
ulations are prescribed in the rabbinic codes 
which tend toward the elimination of blood from 
the meat before it becomes fit for use. The pro- 
hibition against blood, however, applies only to the 
blood of mammals and birds, not to the blood of 
fishes or of locusts, and even in mammals and birds 
ouly the blood which is contained in the veins or 
which is congealed on the surface, or which has be- 
gun to flow from the meat, is forbidden; as long as 
the blood is a part of the meat it may be eaten. 

For instance, one may cut off a piece of raw meat. 

wash off all the blood that may have gathered on its 

surface, and eat it (Ker. 20b, 21a; Shulhan ‘Aruk, 

Yoreh De‘ah, 67,1). When, however, meat is to 

be used for cooking, during which process it will 


certainly discharge a great deal of its blood, it is 
necessary to salt it, in order to let the blood tlow 
freely for a time before cooking it. Meat that is to 
be roasted over an open fire need not be salted, for 
all the blood that will be discharged during roast- 
ing will be consumed in the fire. The custom, how- 
ever, is to salt it a little even in this case (Hul. 14a, 
and Tos., sv. “ We-Nasbin”; Yoreh De‘ah, 76). 

In preparing meat for cooking the following proc- 
ess is observed: The meat is first soaked in water 
for about half an hour in order that the pores may 
be opened to emit the blood. If it is 
left in the water longer than twenty- 
four hours, both the meat and the 
vessel containing it become unfit for 
use, for the meat is then regarded asif it had been 
cooked (Senay N14 “3 wvg5), and meat cooked 
without previous salting is forbidden. It is cus- 
tomary not to use for any other purpose the vessel 
in which meat is soaked before salting, although if 
it is used (after it has been washed) the food cooked 
in it, even if placed in it hot, is permitted for food 
(Yoreh De‘ah, 69, 1). The meat is next placed on 
a wicker basket, or on straw, or on a slanting board, 
and thickly salted on all sides. In the case of poul- 
try the body should be opened and the entrails re- 
moved before it is salted. The meat is left in the 
salt for about an hour, or, if urgent, for about 
twenty minutes. The salt is then shaken off, and 
the meat is rinsed twice, after which it may be 
cooked (/.c. 69, 4-8). If the meat is cooked before 
the salt is washed off, the pot and all that it contains 
are forbidden, unless the quantity in the pot is sixty 
times greater than the quantity of the salt and the 
moisture of the blood upon it. If the meat is cooked 
before it is salted, the pot and all that it contains are 
forbidden, unless the quantity in the pot is sixty 
times greater than the piece of unsalted meat, and 
even then, according to some authorities, the piece 
itself is forbidden (2.c. 69, 9, 11: see also “ Be’er 
Heteb ”). 

Three days from the time the animal is slaugh- 
tered the meat does not discharge its blood through » 
salting, and therefore may not be cooked except by 
roasting over an open fire. If, how- 
ever, water has been poured over it dur- 
ing that time, it may be salted within 
three days from the time the water was poured 
over it, and may then be used in cooking (/.¢. 69, 12, 
13). The liver, because of the abundance of blood 
it contains, must be cut open and roasted before it 
may be cooked (Hul. 1l1a; Yoreh De‘ah, 73). Be- 
fore salting the head must be cut open and the brains 
removed; the horny parts of the legs must be 
removed (.c. 71); the heart must be cut open; and it 
isalso customary to open the large veins of the lungs 
before salting (/.¢. 'f2). 

Many pieces of meat, even if some are beef ana 
some poultry, may be placed one on the top of the 
other in salting. Fish and meat, however, should 
not be salted together, for the fish, after discharging 
all its blood, will absorb the blood discharged by 
the meat (/.c. 70). The intestines should not be 
salted with other parts, although if this be done 
they may still be used in cooking (2.¢. 75). Eggs 
found in the body of a fowl need salting. but must 


A 


The 
Process. 


Details. 


455 





not be salted with other meat (/.c. 75, 1, Isserles’ 


gloss), 
erage Maimonides. Vad, Ma‘akalot Asurot. 6; 
Caro, Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De'ah, 69-78: Rokeah, 88 410— 
431: Kol Bo, 103: Or Zarua’, i, 409-478: Hokmat Adam, 
33 30-35, 
Ss. 8. J. H. G. 


MELLI: Family of scholars and rabbis that de- 
rived its name from Melli, an Italian village in the 
province of Mantua. The family can he traced back 
to the fifteenth century. 

Eliezer Meili: Rabbi of Venice inthe sixteenth 
century. He is mentioned in the responsa of Moses 
Provencal (No. 194). 

Elijah ben Abraham Melli: The earliest 
known member of the family; rabbi of Parma in 
the second half of the fifteenth century. Among 
the Italian manuscript responsa in the possession of 
Mortara there is one of Elijah Melli’s, addressed (1470) 
to Joseph Colon, concerning the divorcing of a bap- 
tizedJew. It wasissned at Parma, where Melli was 
rabbi. Appended to itis the answer of Joseph Colon 
approving the bill of divorce. 

Jehiel Melli: Rabbi of Mantua in the begin- 
ning of the seventeenth century; author of “Tap- 
puhe Zahab” (Mantua, 1623), an abstract of Elijah 
de Vidas’ book on religious ethics, “ Reshit Hok- 
mah”; appended are annotations concerning ritual 
luws. Jt was published with the “Hanhagot” of 
Asher ben Jehiel by Melli’s son-in-law, David Porta- 
Teone. 

Phinehas Elijah ben Zemah Elijah Melli: 
Rabbi in Mantua in the sixteenth century. Ile re- 
ceived the degree of chief rabbi Jan. 15, 1581. Ile 
wus distinguished as a Talmudist, and is quoted by 
Lampronti (“Pahad Yizhak,” iv. 24) and Moses 
Provencal (Responsa, Nos. 97, 112). Responsum 
No. 231 of the 260 responsa of the Italian rabbis 
is his. 

Zemah Elijah b. Phinehas Elijah Melli: 
Rabbiin Mantua in the sixteenth century. He re- 
cecived the degree of chief rabbi on the same day as 
his father. Responsa of his, addressed to various 
contemporaries. are among the manuscripts in the 
possession of Mortara. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Fuenn. Keneset ¥ oe ee p. 560; Mortara, [n- 
tice, pp. 38-39 ; Mosé, v. 125, 379; vi. 134, 192, 264: Stein- 


schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1280. . 
L. M. SE. 


MELO, DAVID ABENATAR: Rabbi and 
poet; born in Spain about 1550. His translation 
of some of the Psalms into Spanish verse brought 
him under the suspicion of the Inquisition, and he 
was imprisoned. When, after several years of tor- 
ture, he was acquitted (1611), he left Spain aud emi- 
grated to Amsterdam. Hesoon gained a reputation 
as a stylist and scholar; became a member of the 
academy “ De los Pintos ”; and was finally appointed 
rabhi of the Portuguese synagogue Bet Yisrael in 
Amsterdam. There are many allusions in his verses to 
the tortures he underwent while imprisoned by the 
Inquisition. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Sephardim, pp. 169 et seg.; De 


Barrios, ny Jesiha de los Pintos; idem, Relacion le 
lox Poetets. p. 532 Wolf. Bill. Hebr. iii. ‘17, 205, 1068 


G. W. M. 


THLE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meldola 
Mels 


+ ——— 


MELOL or MELUL rb), 3 MOSES HAY: 
Compositor and translator in Leghorn (1777-93); 
son of Jacob Raphael Melol and brother of David 
Hayyim Melol, He translated or edited the “Sefer 
Azharot ha-Kodesh” and the Book of Ruth (Leg- 
horn, 1777), and translated into Ladino “Seder Hat- 
tarat Nedarim,” the ritual for dissolving an oath, 
“como suelen practicar en Ja Yesiba de Gemiluth 
Hasadim ” (¢0. 1792). Mordecai Melol, a relative of 
his, edited “ Alegria de Purim” (2b. 1792). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ersch and Gruber, Encye. section ii., part 28, 

p. 63; Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. pp. 68, 9:7. 


G. M. K. 


MELS, ALFRED (pseudonym of Martin 
Cohn): Gerinan author; born at Berlin April 15, 


1831; died at Summerdale, near Chicago, July 22, 
1894, Ile studied at the University of Berlin, but 


in 1848 ran away to join the Foreign Legion of 
Algiers. He was severely wounded while on the 
way to Oran in charge of a detachment of recruits. 
Tiring of this life, he went to Paris, where he found 
literary employment with Alexandre Dumas. 

In 1850 Mels as a private joined the rebel army of 
Sleswick-Holstein against Denmark, and at Idstadt 
was again wounded. Recovering, he returned to 
Paris as correspondent for various journals. Later 
he went to Madrid to become the editor of “Las 
Novedades.” This position he resigned in order 
to join the Spanish army, in which he rose to the 
rank of captain. In 1864 Mels returned to Ger- 
many to become a contributor to the “ Gartenlaube ” 
and, later, to the “ Daheim.” In 1866 he published 
anonymously “Der Feldzug der Main-Armee,” an 
account of the progress of the Prussian army oper- 
ating in the vicinity of the Main in 1866. In 1869 he 
went to the Paris Exposition as representative of 
“Daheim” and “Ueber Land und Meer.” 

On the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war Mels 
was appointed by the London “Times” one of its 
correspondents with the German army; but after 
the fall of Sedan he resigned in order to accompany 
Napoleon III. to Wilhelmshéhe. Thence he went 
to Vienna, where he became the feuilletonist of the 
“Wiener Tageblatt.” In 1878 he published, under 
the nom de piume “Don Spavento,” an exposé and 
n satirical criticism of Viennese journalists and their 
methods: “Typen und Sihouetten von Wiener 
Schriftsteller und Journalisten.” From Vienna he 
went successively to Graz, Zurich, Paris, Italy, and 
Chicago. 

Mels’s best-known work is the comedy “ Heine’s 
Junge Leiden” (1872), which has heen performed 
more than 2,000 times. An equal measure of suc- 
cess Was achiev ed by “Der Neue Frithling ” (1877), 
after two other plays, “Der Staatsanwalt ” (1875) 
and “Das Letzte Manuscript ” (1876), had been only 
moderately successful. Among Mels’s other works 
are: “Erlebtes und Erdachtes” (1869); “ Herzens- 
kaimpfe” (1869); “Gehilde und Gestalten” (1870); 
“ Seltsame Schicksale” (1872); “ Unsichtbare Machte” 
(1875): and “Ferne Horizonte” (1876-78).  Mels 
embraced Christianity in 1859. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Unsere ey i. 672-675: Bornmiiller, Sehrift- 
steller-Levikon, 1882. p. 484; Franz Briimmer, Dettsches 
Dichter-Lexrikon, 1836. 

S. E. Ms. 


Melun 
Memor-Book 


Principal town of the department Seine-et- Marne, 
France. There wasa very important Jewish com- 
munity here as early as the twelfth century. The 
scholars connected with the Talmudic school of the 
city took part in the synod held at Troyes about 
1160 under the direction of Rashbam and R. Tam 
(“Kol Bo,” No, 117, where ND YIM must be 
read instead of nerd ‘aom). A Jew of Melun, Vi- 
vant, Was appointed in 1202 to collect the taxes of 
his coreligionists; another, Leo Crossius, obtained 
permission ip 1204 to live at the Chateletin Paris. In 
Dec., 1230, Saint Louis, King of France, together 
With the barons at a meeting held at Melun, promul- 
gated the following decrees: (1) henceforth Jews 
will not be permitted to make contracts: (2) they 
will be considered the property of the barons in 
whose territory they live; (8) in cases of migration 
they may be forcibly returned to their former 
homes; (4) debts due to them shall become void if 
not collected within nine legal terms, and shall no 
longer bear interest; (5) the vouchers for their 
credits shall become worthless if not submitted to 
the barons before All Saints’ Day. 

The Jews occupied a special quarter at Melun, 
called “La Iviferie,” which is mentioned in the doc- 
uments of the years 1206, 1212, and 1218, preserved 
in the archives of Notre Dame of Melun. Ina doc- 
umenut dated Jan. 5, 1307, there is a reference to the 
sale of a house and barn, situated in the Jews’ street, 
that had belonged to the Jew Donin and his neph- 
ews, Another document, of the year 13811, refers 
to the sale of a house situated in the manor of the 
“hopital 5S. Jean de Hierusalem. ruc de Ja Iviferie, 
iouxte la maison qu'on appelle Veschole aux Juifs.” 
In the library of Melun there is a manuscript of the 
fourteenth century entitled * Breviarium Judaicum,” 
being a mahzor (partly unedited), according to the 
French ritual, for the holy-days of Rosh ha-Shanah 
and Yom Kippur (described in detail by M. Schwab 
in “R. EJ.” xiii. 296-299). Like the Jews in other 
parts of France, those of Melun were forced in 1806 
by King Philip the Fair to leave the city without 
hopes of ever returning. 

The most prominent scholars of Melun include: 
(1) Meshullam b. Nathan, identical, according to 
Z. Kahn (2¢. i. 236), with the Narbonne scholar of 
the same name. Meshullam is known to have gone 
in 1150 from Narbonne to Melun, where he soon ac- 
quired a high reputation. He corresponded with R. 
Tam and the most famous rabbis of his time. He is 
quoted in the tosafot to Bezah (16a), ‘Abodah Zarah 
(29b), and Pesahim (105a), (2) Nathan b. Meshul- 
lam, son of the preceding; was living at Etampes 
in 1180. (8) Jedidiah, teacher of Abraham ben 
Nathan of Lunel. (4) Menahem Sire Léon, or Mes- 
ser Leon (18th cent.). (5) The tosafist David of 
Melun, and (6) his son Judah, who in 1225 directed 
the Talmud school and was one of the four French 
rabbis who took part in 1240 in the religious con- 
troversy at Paris against Nicholas Donin. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY ; Ordonnances des Rois de France, i. 53; Dep- 
ping, Les Juifs dansle Moyen Age, p. 125; Carmoly, [tiné- 
raires dela Terre Sainte, p. 187: Zunz, Z. G. pp. 48, 53, 94; 
Renan-Neubauer. Bes Eerivains Juifs Francais, p. 410; 
RE. Fit. 38, xiii. 299-800, xv. 234: Gross, Gallia Judaica, 
pp. 352-553. 

G. i S. K. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


MELUN (Hebrew. pad, seed, nd‘, or ped): 


456 


MELVILLE, LEWIS (LEWIS S. BENJA- 
MIN): English anthor; born in 1874. He is the 
author of the following works: “ Life of Thackeray ” 
(1899): “Thackeray's Stray Papers” (1902); “In 
the World of Mimes” (1902); and “Introduction to 
Thackeray's Works * (1903-4). He is a contributor 
to the “Fortnightly Review,” “The Bookman,” 
“Temple Bar,” and to other English periodicals. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Literary Vear-Book, 1904. 


J. I. L. B. 


MEM: Thirteenth letter of the Hebrew alpha- 
bet; the meaning of the name is “ water,” the prim- 
itive shape of the letter resembling waves (see AL- 
PHABET). “Mem” has two forms: one for the 
beginning or middle of a word (1), and one for the 
end (QO). Its numerical value (in post-Biblical wri- 
tings) is 40. Being a labial, it interchanges in the 
Semitic group of languages with other labials, that 
is to say, with 9, ). 3, and sometimes also with the 
liquids 5, 3, b. In composition it appears as a pre- 
fix, denoting place, time, instrument, or agent, and 
is employed to form all participles except the “kal” 
and “nif‘al,” and numerous substantives. 

Ain M. SEL. 


MEMEL: City in the district of K6nigsberg, 
East Prussia. It has a population of 19,796, inclu- 
ding 1,214 Jews (1900). The earlicst mention of the 
Jews of Memel occurs in connection with the ad- 
journment of the diet by Duke Albrecht April 20, 
1567, when he decreed their expulsion from the city. 
In 1664 the Great Elector granted the Dutch Jew 
Moses Jacobsohn de Jonge the right of residence in 
the city. De Jonge, who carried on an extensive 
business, was finally compelled by financial diflicul- 
ties to Jeave, and after that Jews were permitted to 
enter only during the fairs. Fursand Hebrew books 
were important articles of trade. The Prussian edict’ 
of 1812 enabled the Jews again to settle in Memel, 
aud the extensive commerce in wood carried on with 
Russia attracted many Polish and Russian Jews, 
among others, to the city. The community was not 
organized until 1862, when the hebra kaddisha was 
established. The first rabbi was Dr. Isaac RULF 
(1865-98), who established the parochial school and 
the hospital, as well as the method of religious in- 
struction, and was actively interested in behalf 
of the Russian Jews. He was succeeded by Dr. 
Ismanuel Carlebach. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ralf, Zur Geseh. der Juden ta Memel, in 
on first Bericht der Israelitischen Religionsschule, Memel, 


1 
D. H. Y. 


MEMOR-BOOK (German, “Memorbuch”): A 
manuscript list of localities or countries in which 
Jews have been persecuted, together with the names 
of the martyrs, and necrologies. Memor-books are 
devoted primarily to the learned and influential, al- 
though others may be included for special reasons, 
particularly Jews distinguished for their noble char- 
acter, or who performed their duties toward the 
community with especial faithfulness or who gave 
or bequeathed gifts to its institutions. These me- 
morials to the dead. which were intended to serve as 
inspirations to the living, were read wholly or in 
part at the memorial services (see HaAzKARAT NESHA- 


457 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Melur 
Memor-Book 





mot). The so-called “ memmern *—the reading of 
the lists of martyrs and of places of martyrdom— 
was heard in the synagogue on the Sabbath before 
the Ninth of Ab and on the Sabbath before Pente- 
cost also. 

The earliest memor-book extant is that of the com- 
munity of Nuremberg. It was begun in 1296, and 
isso complete that it must have had predecessors 

which served as models for it. At all 


Memor- events, notwithstanding their name, 
book of the memor-books are not borrowed 
Nurem-_ from the Christian Church, but area 

berg. product of Jewish piety; for it hasal- 


ways been customary in Israel to re- 
member the dead, to pray and to present offerings 
for them, and to hand their names down to poster- 
ity. Indeed, the Christian Church adopted this 
custom, which developed into the ritual observance 
of All Souls’ Day, from Judaism. Although the 
different memor-books occasionally show a resem- 
hlance to a certain form of literature produced by 
the Catholic Chureh—the diptychs borrowed from 
the Romans, the “libri vite” or “libri viventium ” 
used until the Carolingian period, the later calen- 
dars, necrologies, and martyrologies—yet many pas- 
sages in the Church Fathers indicate that the 
prayers for tle dead were Jewish in origin, and 
date from the time of the Apostles, who were Jews 
(comp. Bantz, “Das Fegfeuer,” p. 76, Mayence, 
L883; Propst, “ Liturgie der Ersten Drei Christlichen 
Jahrhunderte,” pp. 804 et seq.). 

After it had become customary to remember 
scholars, martyrs, benefactors, and others in prayers 
on the Sabbath and on feast-days, the names of the 
dead were entered in special books, with the formu- 
las for the “hazkarah” or the “hashkabah” (see 
HaAzKARAT NESHAMOT), generally beginning with 
the words: “ Yizkor Elohim nishmat ...” (May 
God remember the soul of . . .). These books 
contained, in addition to the general part—the intro- 
ductory prayers and the names of the noble and 
beneficent—a simple list of the dead, with notes on 
their works and the sums spent for the repose of 
their souls. A list of localities and countries where 
persecutions had taken place either preceded the 
necrologies or was added to them. 

The original name of the memor-book was taken 
from the Bible, and it was called either “Sefer Zik- 


karon ” (= “Book of Remembrance,” after Mal. iii. 
16) or “Sefer ha-Zikronot ” (= * Book 
Name. of Commemorations”). The later title, 


“Sefer Hazkarat Neshamot” (= * Me- 
morial Book of Souls”), was soon superseded by 
the general name “Memorial Book” or “ Memor- 
Book,” which was applied to similar works in Chris- 
tian circles also. The names “ pinkes” (= “ book,” 
from the Greek z/vat), “Selbuch,” and “ Totenbuch ” 
oecur but seldom. The word “ memor-book ” 
(PINID, PIIWND. PAWN) is derived from the 
Latin “memoria” (see Salfeld, “ Martyrologium, ” 
p. xii., note 5). . 

The memor-book of the community of Nurem- 
berg, which was formerly designated by the mis- 
leading term “ Memor-Book of Mayence,” on the au- 
thority of Carmoly (in “Israelit,” 1865, 1866), Gritz 
(““Gesch.”), Neubauer (in “R. E. J.” iv. 1 ef see.), and 


others, was begun in 1296 by a skilful scribe, Isaac 
b. Samuel of Meiningen, as a gift to be presented 
to the community of Nureniberg at 


So-Called the dedication of a new synagogue 
Memor- (Nov. 15, 1296). It was then taken 
Book of to Mayence, where it was stolen aud 
Mayence. sold. Subsequently it was acquired 


by Carmoly, after whose death the 
Israelitische Religionsgesellschaft of Mayence ob- 
tained possession of it. It consists of three parts: 
(1) the first necrology of the community of Nurem- 
berg, a list of deaths and of gifts from about 1280 
to 1346; (2) the martyrologium, a list of martyrs from 
1096 to 1349; and (3) the second necrology of the 
synagogue of Nuremberg, a memor-book and list of 
deaths and of gifts from 1873 to 1392. The entire work 
was edited by Salfeld (1896 and 1898); the necrolo- 
gies by Stern and Salfeld (“Nitirnberg im Mittel- 
alter,” pp. 95-205, Kiel, 1894-96); and the martyr- 
ology at Berlin, 1898, text, translation, introduc- 
tion, cte. 

The first necrology, which was probably preceded 
by forty-four pages containing a history of the per- 
secutions or a cycle of elegies, is prefaced by a 
prayer on the announcement of the 
New Moon; a benediction for the mem- 
bers of the community who undertake 
to keep the fast-day called “Sbeni we-Hamishi we- 
Shem”; a benediction for the benefactors and per- 
sons attending the svnagogue; a prayer for the sick; 
and the * Ab ha-Rahamim,” a prayer for the martyrs 
of Israel. This is followed by a poem referring to 
the book, the building, and the dedication of the 
synagogue, and closing with the words: “The 

ames of the donors have been entered in the Book 
of the Beloved, who sleep in the grave.” Then 
come the prayers, found in nearly all the memor- 
books, for the souls of the spiritual heroes of Israel 
and of individual benefactors, and the prayers for 
the dead (“ yizkor”), in Hebrew and Old French, for 
the individual martyrs and the persecuted commu- 
nities. The martyrology is introduced by a sum- 
mary of the persecutions of 1096 to 1298, the names 
of the martyrs between 1096 and 13849, a list of cities 
and villages in which persecutions took place under 
Rindfleisch (1298) and Armileder (1836-89), and at the 
time of the Black Death (1848-49), The second 
necrology is introduced by the ritual for the New 
Moon and a prayer for the members of the commu- 
nity (“ Misheberak.” almost in the present form), to 
which are added the same lists and other material 
as in the first necrology, 

As illustrations of the nature of the memor- 
book there follows a translation of the oldest por- 
tion thereof (2. e., the portion which, amplified ac- 
cording as time and circumstance required, is com- 
mon to all memor-books) and of two yizkor from 
the Hebrew and one from the Old French: 

* The following souls are remembered [in prayer] on all Sab- 
baths of the year: Mar Solomon and Mistress Rachel, who have 
done much for the welfare of the community and have averted 
persecutions: our teacher R. Gershom, who by his teachings 
was the light of the eyes of the Israelites in the Diaspora; our 
teacher R. Simon the Great, who has done mueh for the 
communities and has averted persecutions; our teacher R. 
Solomon [b. Isaac, i.e., RashiJ, who through his commentaries 


was the light of the eyes of the Israelites in the Diaspora; our 
teacher R. Jacob and his brother R. Samuel, whose love spread 


Contents. 


Memor-Book 
Memorial Dates 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


458 





the study of the Word of God in Israel; Mar Isaac and Mistress 
Bela, through whose efforts the toll was repealed at Coblenz ; 
‘our teacher R. Meir b. R. Baruch, who has spread the study of 
the Word of God in Israel.” 

** May God remember, as He has remembered the souls of Abra- 
ham, Isaac, and Jacob, the souls of all members of communi- 
ties Who have been killed, stoned, burned, strangled, slaugh- 
tered, drowned, broken on the wheel, hanged, or buried alive 
because they remained true to their belief in the One God. 
Since they have suffered this grievous pain, may God remem- 
ber thelu, together with all pious men and women who rest in 
paradise. To this we respond: Amen!” 

**May God remember, as He has remembered the souls of 
Abraham, Isaae, and Jacob, the souls of all members of com- 
munities who have striven for the welfare of the congregation, 
have averted persecutions, have secured the repeal of taxes, 
and have recovered scrolis of the Law from unworthy hands. 
Whether a pious gift has been vowed for them or not. may God 
y2tnemiber them for their deeds.” 

** May God remember the soul of ... together with the souls 
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because hte bequeathed . . . to 
the cemetery (Rememra Jé spirteine ... comme _ spirteine 
... ki ad layés ... pouramourki fesis, cil le memred .. . ); 
because he did this, may God remember him together with 
the pious who dwell in paradise. Amen!” 


The formulas in French were added later, prob- 
ably after 1306, when a number of French exiles 
settled at Nuremberg. 

Several of the extant memor-books, single lists 
from manuscripts and printed texts, as well as 
works dealing with the subject, have been used by 
Salfeld in his edition of the Nuremberg memor-book 
(see his “ Martyrologium,” pp. xXxvi. e¢ seq.), and a 
discussion of their form, contents, and importance 
for the history of scholars and of persecutions will 
be found there. The following list gives a survey 
of his material : 


Hebrew Codex No. 45 of the Landes- und Universitits-Biblio- 
thek in Strasburg, pp. 15-16, with lists of the martyrs of Worms 
of 1096 and 1349. 

Hebrew Codex No. 87 (42) of the municipal library, Hamburg, 
fols, 31 et seq., with 165 places of persecution in 1208 et seg. 
(Salfeld, I.c. p. XxXvii.). 

Extract from a memor-bvook of 1313-14, formerly in the posses- 
sion of Chief Rabbi Charleville-Versailles, containing a list of 
places in which persecutions occurred between 1298 and 1303 
(Jelinek, “* Kontres Hamkonen, Martyrer- und Memorbuch,” p. 
9, Vienna, 1881). 

Mahzor, MS. Oxford, Neubauer, ** Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.°’ No. 
1108, with a list of places of the persecutions of 1349 (reprinted 
in “‘R. E. J.’ iv, 29). 

Oxford MS., Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.’ No. 1171, with 
lists of 1349 (reprinted in “*R. E. J.” iv. 29, 30). 

Codex Epstein in Vienna (formerly in tbe possession of Hal- 
verstam of Bielitz), prayer-book according to the German ritual, 
with a list of communities in which martyrdoms took place 
(first ed. "* Isr. Letterbode,” viii. 89; republished in ‘* Martyro- 
logiuin,” p. 79; comp. also pp. xxlii., 272). 

| Wibei, translation of an old fragment of a Jewish martyrol- 
ogy (*Unschuldige Nachrichten auf das Jahr 1740’’), dating 
from the second half of the fifteenth century. 

Two anonymous memor-books of German communities 
(“* Martyrologium,” p. xxviii.). 

Manuscript of Carmoly, in possession of Dr. Brann at Breslau 
(ib.). 

Memor-books of the following places: Alsheim, eight- 
eenth century; Bayersdorf, written in 1689; Bergheim-on-the- 
Erft, begun in 1677; Bingen, in 1787; Bédigheim, i745; Bonn, 
1725; Bretten, between 1716 and 1742; Coblenz, 1580; Deutz 
(Cologne), beginning with 1581; Dittigheim, 1746; Flérsheim, 
nineteenth century ; Frankfort-on-the-Main (first entry 1627); 
Firth, memor-book of the Neuschule, of the Waisenverein, of 
the Klaus, and of the Altschule (edited by Lowenstein in Gei- 
ger’s ** Zeitschrift,” i. 274, ii. 91 et seg.): Gailingen, 1842 ; Gross- 
Gerau, seventeenth century; Hagenan, 1800; Hanau, part i., 
1601; Kastel, 1785; Kirchbain, (773; Kocehendorf, 1732; Kreuz- 
nach, 1638; Kriegshaber; Mavence eommuial memor-books of 
1583 and 1837, Krankenpflege-Verein No. 3, beginning of eight- 
eenth century, and Religionsgesellschaft, 1853: Mannheim, 
1784; Michelstadt, beginning of eighteenth century; Minden, 


beginning of seventeenth century; Nieder-Ebnhbeim ; Nurette 
berg (necrology of 1349; ed. Lowe, ** The Memor-Book of Nirn- 
berg,”? London, 1881); Ober-Ehnheim ; Oppenheim, 1795 ‘after 
an earlier copy); Partenheim, 1738: Pfersee (comp. Perles in 
** Monatsschrift,”? xxii. 503 et seg.): Rbeinbach near Bonn, one 
necrolugy of 1650; Sontheim: Strasburg; Treves, 1664; Vi- 
enna; Weilmiinster, 1708; Weisenau near Mayence, 1782 (after 
an earlier copy): Worms, i., if., iii; Xanten, on the lower 
Rhine, one part of 1776. 

Many other valuable memor-books exist besides 
those used by Salfeld. That of Buttenwiesen has 
been edited by Lamm in “ Monatsschrift,” xlv_ 540 e¢ 
seg., While those of Binswangen, Edenheim, Ehren- 
breitstein (formerly called Thal; first entry 1647), Em- 
den, Harburg (Swabia), Héchberg near Wirzburg, 
Oettingen, Steppach, Wallerstein, Wittelshofen, aud 
many others are still unedited. The memor-book of 
Misslitz belonging to the Klaus Synagogue of Zecha- 
riah Lewi of Vienna has been described by Kauf- 
mann (in Berliner’s “ Magazin,” xvii. 289 e¢ seq.). 
who used also the one of Diisseldorf (“ Aus Heinrich 
Heine’s Alinensaal,” p. 274), while that of Mamels- 
dorf has been mentioned by Zunz (“ Literaturgesch.” 
p. 112) and others. 

Further study on the subject, together with scien- 
tific editions of the memor-books, would probably 
yield valuable data for statistics, economics, gene- 
alogies of scholars and families, nomenclature, dip- 
lomatics. ritual, and liturgy, as well as for Jewish 
history in general. See MARTYROLOGY. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salfeld, Ifartyroalogium. 1896-98 ; Stern and 

Salfeld, Niirnberg iin Mittelalter, Kiel, 1894-96. 

J. S. Sa. 

MEMORIAL DATES: Jewish communities, 
as a rule, have taken no note of birthdays of any 
of their members and only in rare cases of the dates of 
death. One of these cases is the anniversary of the 
day on which Gedaliah was assassinated (8d_ Tishri), 
upon which a fast is observed by Jews in all parts 
of the world; and on the 18th Ty yar (Lag be-‘Omer), 
Jews living in Palestine visit the tomb of Simon 
ben Yohai, believing this date to be the anniversary 
of the latter’s death. Jews of eastern Europe, 
furthermore, record the days on which eminent rab- 
bis die, because on every “ Jahrzeit ” (anniversary of 
the day of death) they make it a practise to visit 
the graves of such rabbis, and to ask for their inter- 
cession in heaven. 

Besides these “Jahrzeiten” there are a number 
of days which, although they have acquired a re- 
ligious aspect, have also a historical significance, and 
are observed either by the Jews asa whole or by 
local communities. Thus the Ninth of Ab is ob- 
served as a fast-day, for on that day the Temple 
was twice destroyed. Onthetwenty-fifth of Kislew 
the Feast of Hanukkah begins, because on that day 
Judas Maccabeus consecrated anew the Temple at 
Jerusalem (165 B.c.). 

The communities of Cologne, Worms, Mayence, 
and a few other cities in the Rhine district observed 
fast-days in memory of the martyrs who died during 
the First Crusade (Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 127). Polish 
Jews fast on the 20th of Siwan on account of the 
Cossack atrocities of 1648 (see FASTING AND Fast- 
Days). In Crete and Frankfort-on-the-Main as well 
as in certain communities in Egypt, special feasts 
or Purims are celebrated in commemoration of mi- 
raculous events. The Alexandrian Jews observed a 


« 


459 








memorial dav in honor of the translation of the Bible 
intu Greek (Philo, “ Vita Mosis.” ii., § 7; sce also 
FESTIVALS). 


In imitation of these memoria] days sanctified by 


religion, other dates of Jewish interest have been 
recorded from time to time, and are used in calen- 
dars, almanacs, and at times in the Jewish press. 
In recent years large collections of notable dates 
have been made by Jewish scholars and historians, 


beginning with L. Zunz. 


in 


The following list gives 
calendric order the more important and inter- 


esting of these: 


=i oe Or 


JANUARY. 


. Jair Hayyim Bacharach, German rabbi, died, 1702. Several 


thousand Jews killed by an earthquake at Safed and Ti- 
berias, 1837. 


. Persecutions of Jews at Lauda and Bischofsheim, 1235. 
. “Neue Stittigkeit’’ for Frankfort-on-the-Main makes right 


of domicil perpetual, 1617. Rachel, French actress, died, 


1858. 


. Moses Mendelssohn, philosopher and religious reformer, 


died, 1786. Wilhelm Beer, German astronomer, born, 
1797. 

Joseph Salvador, Jewish historian, born, 
Lasker, German statesman, died, 1884. 


1796. Edward 


. First auto da fé held at Seville, 1481. 


Disputation at Tortosa, Joseph Albo being one of the partici- 
pants, 1413. Sir Julian Goldsmid, English member of Par- 
liament, died, 1896. 


. Samuel Cahen, translator of the Bible into French, died, 


1862, 


. Liebmann Adler, American rabbi, born, 1812. 


David Nieto, haham of London, died, 1728. Poll-tax abol- 
ished in France, 1784. 


. Abraham Mapu, Russian Hebrew writer, born, 1808. Lelio 


della Torre, Italian Jewish theologian, born, 1803. 


. Edict of Juan IH. of Castile, withdrawing civil jurisdiction 


from the Jews, confirmed, 1412. 


. Law of Baden forms Jews into special religious community 


With all privileges, 1809. Alexander I. of Russia issues 
edict removing Jews from villages to towns and cities in 
the governments of Moghilef and Vitebsk, 1875. 


. Hebrew books, confiscated under bull of Feb. 28, 1593, burned 


at Rome, 1601. Great fire in the Frankfort ghetto, {711. 


. Leopold Dukes, Hungarian Jewish scholar, born, 13810. 
, Johann Jacob Raabe, translator of the Mishnah, born, 1711. 
. Mareus Herz, physician and philosopher, born, 1747. 

. Solomon Sulzer, reformer of synagogal music, died, 1890. 

. Marcus Herz, physician and philosopher, died, 1808. 


Isaac 
D'Israeli, English litterateur and father of the Earl of 
Beaconsfield, died, 1848. 


. Moritz Oppenheim, German painter of Jewish family life, 


born, 1800. 


. Jews expelled from France, 1306. Nathan Marcus Adler, 


chief rabbi of the British empire, died, 1880. 


. David Cassel, Jewish historian, died, 1893. English Zionist 


Federation founded, 1899. 


23, Abraham ibn Ezra, Bibie exegete and poet, died, 1167. 


. Bogumil Dawison, German actor, died, 1872. 


. Ferdinand Julius Cohn, German botanist and Zoologist, 


born, 1828. Jsaac Artom, Italian statesman and senator, 


died, 1900. 


. Disputation at Paris on the Talmud, 1240. 
. First edition of the Hebrew Pentateuch printed at Bologna, 


1482, 


. Jerome Napoleon grants full civil rights to Jews of West- 


phalia, 1808. 


. Lippold, master of the Brandenburg mint, executed, 1573, 


Theodor Benfey, German Sanskritist and philologist, 
born, 1809. 


. Abraham Furtado, president of the Sanhedrin suinmoned by 


Napoleon, died, 1817. 


. Henry III. issues reguiations for English Jewry, 1253. 


FEBRUARY. 

Mass-meetings 
held at New York and London expressing sympathy with 
the persecuted Jews of the Russian empire, 1882. Perez 
Smolenskin, Russian Hebrew writer, died, 1885. 


3. Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, composer, born, 1809. Charles 


the Bourbon, King of Naples and of the two Sicitlies, in- 
vites the Jews back for fifty vears, 1744. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


4, 


qr 


Ha pod 


. Solomon Munk, French Arabic scholar, died, 1867. 


. Opening of the Sanhedrin at Paris, 1807. 


. Two thousand Jews burned at Strasburg, 1349. 


Wemor-Book 
Memorial Dates 


* Resettlement Day in England. Oliver Cromwell grants 
Carvajal aud other Jews right of residence. 1697. Joseph 
Stiss Oppeuheimer executed; many Jews driven from 
Wirttemberg in consequence, 1738. 


. Rashion the Pentateuch, the earliest dated printed Jewish 


~~ 


book, issued at Reggio, 1475. ‘The disappearance of Father 
Tomaso (Thomas) gives rise to the Damascus Affair, 
1840. Nehemiah Briill, Jewish scholar, died, 1591. 
Flijah 
Benamozegh, Italian rabbi and cabalist, died, 1900. 


. Shabbethai Cohen (Shach), died, 1663. Berthold Auerbach, 


German novelist, died, 1887. 
] Isaac Adolphe 
Cremieux, French statesman, died, 1880. 


. Societait Felix Libertate founded at Amsterdam, 1795, 
. Auto da fé at Toledo at which 740 Jews were reconciled, 


1486. Ludwig Borne, German writer, died, 1887, Isauc 
Baer Levinsohn. the Mendelssohn of Russia, died, 1860. 


. Zacharias Frankel, Jewish scholar and theologian, died, 


1875. 
Jews or- 
dered to leave Vienna, 1670. 


. Carel Asser, Dutch jurist, born, 1780. 
. Emancipation of the Jews of Sweden, 1870. Commission 


appointed to revise the laws concerning the Jews of Rus- 
sia, 1883. 
Heinrich Heine, German poet, died, 1856. 


. “Hatti Humayun” issued, granting full civic rigbts to 


Turkish Jews, 1856, Congregation of the Holy Office de- 
clures forcible baptism of Jewish children by Christian 
nurses éffective, 1702. 


. Peter Beer, Austrian educator, born, 1758. Henry IV. 


grants Jews of Speyer protection to life and property, 
1090. 

Johann Christopher Wolf, Christian bibliographer of Jewish 
books, born, 1683. 


. dohann Reuchlin, champion of the Jews and defender of the 


Tahmud, born, 1455. 
born, 1793. 


Isaac Marcus Jost, Jewish historian, 


. Franz Delitasch, Christian Hebraist, born, 1613. Sir George 


Jessel, master of the roils, Kngland, born, 1824. 


. Moritz Oppenheim, German painter of Jewish family life, 


died, 1882. 


. Bull of Nicholas V. prohibiting Christians from having so- 


cial intercourse with Jews and Saracens, 1451. 


. Jews expelled from all Papal States except Rome and An- 


cona, 1659. 


. Benedict Spinoza, philosopher, died, 1677. Paulus Cassel, 


Jewish scholar and convert to Christianity, born, 1821. 


. Vineent Fettmitch and his chief accomplices executed, 


Frankfort, 1616. Berthold Auerbach, German novelist, 
born, 1812. Rachel, French actress, born, 1820. 


MARCH. 


. About four thousand Jews burned at Worms, 1349. 
. Gregory IX. issues bill forbidding Christians to dispute on 


matters of faith with Jews, 1238. “‘ Rights of Man” de- 
elared in Holland, 1795. Religious freedom proclaimed in 
Austria, 1849. 


. The states of Austria demand that no Jews be permitted to 


dwell there, 1460. 


. Massaere of Jews at Navarre, 1328. 


Mordecai Jaffe, codifier of rabbinical law, died, 1612. Joseph 
Almanzi, bibliophile and poet, died, 1860. 

Julius Fiirst, Hebrew philologist and Jewish bibliographer, 
died, 1873. 


. Ignaz Moscheles, German composer, died, 1870. 
. Bull of Benedict XIII. against the Talmud and any Jewish 


books attacking Christianity, 1415. Edict giving the Jews 
of Prussia citizens’ rights, 1812. 


2, Judah Lob Bensew, Jewish grammarian and lexicogra- 


pher, died, 1811. Ludwig Augustus Frankl, German wri- 
ter and poet, died, 1893. 


. Aaron of Neustadt (surnamed Blumlein), uncle and chief 


instructor of Isserlein, died, 1421. 


. Mob attacks the Jewish quarter at Cordova, slaughtering 


many Jews and Maranos, 1473. Heyman Steinthal, lin- 
guist and philosopher, died, 1899. Ludwig Bamberger, 
German deputy and political economist, died, 1899. 


. Albert Cohn, Orientalist and philanthropist, died, 1879. 


Peddling prohibited in Rumania; 20,000 Jews are thus de- 
prived of a livelihood, 1884. 


6, Jews of York slay themselves in order to avoid baptism, 


Lia 


Memorial Dates 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


460 





1%. Napoleon institutes the system of consistories in France, 


18, 
19. 


20. 
Zi. 


22. 


23. 


24. 


25. 
26. 
27. 
28. 


24. 


° 


me 


1808. Jacques-Franyois-Fromenthal-Elie Halévy, compo- 
ser, died, 1862. Judah P. Benjamin becomes secretary of 
war of the Confederacy of America, 1862. 

Leopold Zunz, Jewish scholar, died, 1886. 

Jews of Brest-Litovsk granted free trade and occupation 
and half of the tolls, 1527. 

Riots in many cities of Germany, 1848. 

Leo da Modena, [Italian rabbi and author, died. 1648. Three 
Jews executed at Wilna on a false blood accusation, 
1691. 

Charter granted to Jews of England by Richard I., 1190. 
Jews permitted to return to Lithuania, 1508. Michael 
Beer, German poet, died, 1833. 

Talmuds burned in Rome at the Feast of Pentecost, 1822. 
Naphtali Herz Wesel (Hartwig Wessely), died, 1805. Isaac 
Artom elected senator in Italy; first Jew to hold such an 
office, 1877. 

Joseph Caro, codifier of rabbinical Judaism, died, 1575. 
Solomon Halberstain, Jewish scholar, died, 1900. 

Joseph Alnanzi, bibliophile and poet, born, 1801. 

Isaac M. Wise, American Reform rabbi, died, 1900. 

Wilhelm Beer, German astronomer, died, 1850. 

Lazarus Bendavid, German philosopher and reformer, died, 
1832, James Darmesteter, French Orientalist, born, 1849. 
Jews expelled from Moscow by order of the governor- 
general, 1891, 


. Meir ben Todros ha-Levi Abulafia (RaMaH), nasi and Tal- 


mudist, died, 1244. Jews who served in Russian army 
permitted by edict to settle in Finland, 1858. 

Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides), philosopher, born, 1185. 
Solomon Sulzer, reformer of synagogal music, born, 1804. 


. Edict of expulsion of Jews from Spain issued by Ferdinand 


and Isabella, 1492. 
APRIL. 


Disappearance of Esther Solymosi gives rise to a blood ac- 
cusation at Tisza-Eszlar, 1882. Baroness Clara de Hirsch, 
philanthropist, died, 1899. 

Jews expelled from Genoa, 1550. 

Charles V. of Gerinany issues edict against blood accusations, 
1544. Hirsch Kalischer, founder of modern Zionism, born, 
1795, 


. Isanc da Fonseca Aboab, hakum at Amsterdam, died, 1693. 


Opening of the Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition in the 
Royal Albert Hall, London, 1887. 


. Moses Ephraim Kuh, first German Jewish poet, died, 1790. 
. Aaron Bernstein, German publicist, born, 181%. 
. Emancipation of the Jews of Prussia, 1848. 


Ferdinand III. grants Bohemian Jews right of residence in 
all royal towns, 1648. One hundred and twenty-eight 
Jews killed by soldiers and populace at Bucharest as the 
result of a blood accusation, 1801. 


. Karl Isidor Beck, Austrian poet, died, 1879. 
. First anathema against Hasidim issued at Wilna, 1772. 


me 


Fer- 
dinand Lassalle, socialist agitator, born, 1825. 


. Jews of Cracow phindered and many murdered by soldiers, 


1464. 


.» Sabbato Morais, Ainerjean rabbi, born, 1823. Ediet of Nich- 


olas I. founding agricultural coloniesin Russia; general 
Jewish regulations issued in Russia, 1835. 
Deutsch-Israelitischer Gemeindebund founded, 1869. 


- Dankmar Adler, Alnerican architect, died, 1900. 
- Menahem ben Jacob, poet and teacher at Worms, died, 1203. 
. Frederick the Great issues a ** General-Privilegium ” for the 


Prussian Jews, 1750. Pope Pius IX. issues edict to re- 
move the walls of the Roman ghetto, 1848. 


. Charge of host desecration at Prague leads to massacre of 


Jews, 1389. Ear) of Beaconsfield, English premier, died, 
1881. 


. Massacre of Jews at Cordova by soldiers of Sulaiman ben al- 


Hakim, 1018. Jacob Emden, German rabbi, died, 1776. 


. Levi ben Gershon, philosopher and commentator, died, 1344. 


Proselyte Nicholas Anthoine burned at Geneva, 1632, 


. Baron Maurice de Hirseh, philanthropist, died, 1896. ; 
. Isaac Adolphe Crémieux, French statesman, born, 1796. 


Uriah Phillips Levy, American commodore, born, 1792. 


. Louis XIII. of France issues edict forbidding Christians, un- 


der penalty of death. to shelter Jews or converse with 
them, 1615. Elijah ben Solomon of Wilna, the ** Gaon,” 
born, 1720. Poll-tax in territories of Brunswick-Liine- 
burg abolished, 1803. 

First recorded auto da fé held at Troyes. 1288. 

Anti-Semitic league of Germany presents a petition with 
255.000 signatures to Bismarck, 3881. 


26. 


23 


1. 


wt 


. All the Jews of England thrown into prison, 1287. 


Dutch West India Company directs Peter Stuyvesant to al. 
low Jews to dwell and trade in New Netherlands, 1655, 
Jews expelled from Russia and the Ukraine by Catherine, 


W227. 


. Meir of Rothenburg died, 1293. Anti-Semitic riot at Eliza- 


bethgrad begins a series of excesses against the Jews in 
South Russia, 1881, 

Antony Samuel Adani-Salomon, French sculptor, died, 1881. 

Decree ordering Jews to leave Spain publicly announced, 
1492. 

MAY. 

Moses Isserles, Polish rabbi and code annotator, died, 1572. 
Johann Jacoby, Gernian statesman, born, 1805. Sir Francis 
Henry Goldsmid, M.P., first English Jewish lawyer, born, 
1808, 

Giacomo 

Meyerbeer, composer, died, 1864. 


. Jews of Speyer massacred by the Crusaders, 109v. 
. Benjamin H., Rumanian traveler, died, 1864. 


Ludwig Borne, German Writer, born, 1786. Judah P. Ben- 
jamin, statesman and lawyer, died, 1884. 

Attack on the Alcana (smaller Jewry) of Toledo by the ene- 
mies of Sarmuel ha-Levi ; 1,200 injured, 1359. 


. Anti-Jewish riots in different parts of Russia, especially in 


Kiev, 188]. 

Great auto da fé at Lisbon, 1682. 

Bull of Benedict XIII. against Talmud and any Jewish 
books attacking Christianity, 1415, Abraham Geiger, Jew- 
ish scholar and theologian, born, 1810. 

Massacre of tbe Jews of Worms by Crusaders, 1096. Synod 
of Vienna under Cardinal Guido orders Jews to wear 
pointed hats, 1267. 


4. Solomon Munk, French Orientalist, born, 1803. 
3. Bogumil Dawison, Polish-German actor, born, 1818. Rus- 


sian ** May Laws”? issued, 1882. 


. Emancipation of the Jews of Holland, 1796. Heyman Stein- 


thal, philosopher and linguist, born, 1823. 


. First Jewish school in Hungary opened at Alt-Ofen, 1784. 


William Steinitz, chess-player, born, 1836. 


. Anti-Jewish riots in Algeria, 1897. 


Isaac Alfasi, Talmudic author, died, 1103. 
Samuel Alatri, Italian philanthropist, died, 1889. 


. Thirty Jews burned at Bésing, near Presburg, 1529. 
. Martyrdom of Brussels Jews charged with host desecration, 


1370. Israel ben Eliezer Ba‘al Shem-Tob (BeSHT), founder 
of the sect Hasidiin, died, 1760. Mordecai M. Noah, Amer- 
ican diplomat and conimunal worker, died, 1851. 


. All the Jews of Austria seized, 1420. 
. Riot at Frankfort-on-the-Main on account of a Jewish per. 


vert; 180 kiNled and Jewish quarters destroyed, 1241. 
Abraham (reiger, Jewish scholar and reformer, born, 1810. 


. Louis Philippe issues regulations for the internal organiza- 


tion of the French Jews, 1844. 


. Martyrdom of Jews at Blois, 1171. 
. Jews of Mayence massacred by Crusaders, 1096. Jacques 


Francois-Fromenthal-Elie Halévy, composer, born, 1799. 


. Lelewel, Polish geographer and friend of Jews, died, 1861. 
. Massacre of Jews at Cologne by Crusaders, 1096. 


Ignaz 
Moscheles, German coinposer, born, 1794. 


JUNE, 


. “ Privilegium Fredericianum * issued by Duke Frederick IH. 


of Austria, 1244. 


. Tolerance edict of Joseph IT. of Austria issued, 1782. Grace 


Aguilar, English novelist and writer on Jewish history, 
born, 1816. 


. Outbreaks against Jews of Seville, 1391. 
. Jews of Rome forbidden to practise usury, 1570. Sir Julius 


Benedict, composer and conductor, died, 1885. 


. Henry II. imposes on Jews of Toledo a tax of 20,000 goid 


* dollas *? (= $9,630,000), 1369. 


. Louis Jacoby, German engraver, born, 1828 David Kauf- 


mann, Hebraist and Orientalist, born, 1852. 


. Riots at Posen lasting to July 4, on aceount of a false mur- 


der charge, 1696. Fanny von Arnstein, society leader at 


Vienna, died, 1818. 


. Jacob Tam, most prominent of French tosafists, died, 1171. 


Samuel Mohilever, rabbi and Zionist, died, 1898. 


. Six thousand Jews of Nemirov slaughtered by the Cossacks, 


2. Jews of France ordered to wear a yellow badge, 1269. 
. Jews expelled from Genoese territory, 1567. 
. Many Jews murdered in Erfurt, 1221. Joseph Solomon del 


Medigo born. 1591. 


o£ 


461 





li. 


Twenty-four wagon-louds of Talmuds and two hundred 
other manuscripts burned at Paris, 1244. Eighty Maranos 
imprisoned by Alexander V1. at Rome, 1503. 


20. Four thousand Jews siain at Toledo, 1391. Cossacks slay 


=7t Ge 


31. 


. Religious disputation before Louis IX. of France, 1240. 


. Jews of Xanten massacred by Crusaders, 1096, 


. Judah ben Asher, Talmudist, died, 1349. 


thousands of Jews at Homel. Poland, 1767, 


. Rabbinical synod held at Ferrara, loot. Jacques Offenbach, 


colnposer, born, 1819. 


. Martyrdom of Jews of Weissenburg, 1270. 


Jews treacberously murdered at Tulchin by Cossacks, 1648. 
Edgar Mortara forcibly taken from his family, giving rise 
to the ** Mortura Case,”* 1858. 

Two 
hundred and fifty Jews murdered in Rothenburg-on-the- 
Tauber, 1298. 

Lipmann Heller forced to leave his post as rabbi at Prague, 
1629. Adolf Jellinek, Jewish scholar, born, 1821. 

Joseph 

Israeis, Dutch painter, born, 1824. 


. Meir of Rothenburg imprisoned at Rotevil by Bishop Henry 


of Basel, 1286. Jew badge introduced into Venice, 1366. 


- Blood accusation at Xanten, 189i. 


we me 


Edict forbidding Maranos to leave Portugal, 1587. 
peHed from Prague, 1745. 


Jews ex- 


JULY. 


. Elijah ben Samuel burned at Rome, 1298. Bernard Beer, 


German-Jewish scholar, died, 1861, 


. Anglo-Jewish Assuciation founded, 1871. 


Nansion House meeting in London protests against the out- 
rages of the Damascus Affair, J8{0. Religious freedom 
proclaimed in Germany, 1868. ‘Theodor Herzl, Zionist 
leader, died, 1904. 

Isabella Nuflez 

Alvarez burned in auto da fé at Madrid, 1682. 


. Pope Innocent IV, issues bull against blood accusation, 


1247. 


. Three hundred Jews murdered at Tarrega, Catalonia, 1348. 
. Gregory X. issues bull against blood accusation, 1274. Lud- 


Wig Chronegk, German theatrical manager and actor, 
died, 1891. 


. Seligmann Heller, German poet, born, 1831. 
. Julius Oppert, Orientalist, born, 


1825. Lord Rothschild 
takes his seat as first Jewish peer in the British House of 
Lords, 1884. 


. Czarina Anne expels the Jews from Little Russia, 1740. E. 


H. Lindo, Jewish historian, died, 1865. 


. Godfrey of Bouillon takes Jerusalem, and nearly all the 


Jews there are slaughtered, 1099. Solomon Yizhaki 
(Rashi), commentator, died, 1105. Berlin Congress inserts 
clause 44 into its treaty, 1878. 


. Cnited Synagogue of London established by Act of Partia- 


ment, 1870, 


. Pope lays down principle that Jews were doomed to per- 


petual servitude because they had crucified Jesus, 1205. 
Royal decree expelling Jews from Portugal issued, 1508. 
Act permitting Jews to trade in New Netherlands issued, 
1655. 


. Graziadio Isaiah Ascoli, Italian philologist, born, 1829. 
. Anti-Semitic riots at Neustettin, lasting two days, 1881. 
13. Nathan Rothschild, founder of the London banking-house, 


died, 1886. 


. Thirty-eight Jews burned at Berlin, 1510. 
~0. Religious disputation at Barcelona, Nahmanides defending 


Judaism, 1263. 
Shabbethai ben Joseph Bass, founder of Jewish bibliogra- 
phy, died, 1718. 


. Furst expulsion of Jews from France, 1306. About 10,000 


Jews slain at Polonnoye, near Jitomir, 1648. 


. Shabbethai Zebi, pseudo-Messiah, born, 1626. 
. Jean de Bloch, Russo-Polish financier, born, 1836. 


Jews expelled from Vienna, 1610. Johann Christopher 
Wolf, bibliographer of Jewish books, died, 1789. 


. Pope Paul IV. establishes the ghetto at Rome, 1556. First 


sitting of the Assembly of Notables, 1806. 


y. Benedict Spinoza excommunicated, 1656. 
. Emancipation in Hungary, 1849. Eduard Lasker secures the 


passing of the ** Austritt-Gesetz,”’ permitting persons in 
Prussia to sever connection with any religious community, 
1876. Sir Moses Montefiore, philanthropist, died, 1885. 


. Max Nordau, writer and Zionist, born, 1849. Joseph Deren- 


bourg, Orientalist, died, 1895. 


. Auto da fé at Toledo, 1488. 


Little St. Hugh of Lincoln disappeared, 1255. Nachman 


Krocbmal, Galician scholar, died, 1840. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


i 


w 


feed 
a 


. Jews expelled from Spain. 1492. 


. Great massacre of Jews at Barcelona, 1391. 


Memorial Dates 





AUGUST. 


. Mordecai ben Hille) killed during the massacre of Jews at 


Nuremberg, 1208. Two Jews elected to the National As- 
sembly of Holland, 1797. Last auto da fé at whicha Jew 
Was burned held at Valencia, 1826. 

First Portuguese synagogue 
at Amsterdam dedicated, 1675, 


. Patent for Bohemia removes all Jewish disabilities, 1797. 


Carel Asser, Dutch jurist, died, 1886. 
Samuel Cahen, translator of the Bible into French, born, 
1796. Max Ring, German poet, born, 1817. 
Maria Theresa, 
for an annual consideration ef 3,000,000 gulden, suspends 
for a period of 10 years the edict expelling Jews from 
Austria, 1748. 


. Marcus Eliezer Bloch, naturalist, died, 1799. 
. Bolko I. of Silesia grants Jews **Privilegium Frederici- 


anum,”’’ 1295. 

Bull of Pius TY. permits Jews to lay aside the yellow hat on 
journeys, 1561. Jacob Christian Basnage, Christian his- 
torian of the Jews, born, 1653. 

Jews settle in Pinsk and secure lands for synagogue and 
cemetery, 1506. Anti-Jewish riots at Frankfort ; house of 
the Rothschilds attacked, 1819. 

Leopold Zunz, Jewish scholar, born, 1794. Alexander I. of 
Russia prohibits foreign Jews from settling permanently 
in Russia, 1824. 

Jonah Abravanel, Hebrew poet, died, 1667. Restriction on 
the use of Christian praenomens removed in Bohemia, 1836. 

Nahmanides visits Jerusalem, 1267. Jossel von Rosheim ob- 
tains from Charles V. an extension of the Alsatian privi- 
leges tu the whole Holy Roman Empire, 1530. William 
Steinitz, chess-master, died, 1900. 

Johannes Buxtorf H., Christian Hebraist, born, 1599. 

Baruch Auerbach, educator and philanthropist, born, 1798. 


. Simon ben Asher, astronomer, died, 1342. 


Johannes Buxtorf I1., Christian Hebraist, died, 1664. 


. Papal edict forbids Jews to admit Christians into synagogue, 


1592. 


. Michael Beer, German poet, born, 1800, 
. Maranos of the Basque Provinces ordered to leave the Jews 


ish streets and to live among Christians, 1493. 

Joseph Derenbourg, Orientalist, born, 1811. 

Six thonsand Jews slaughtered in Mayence, 13849. 

Yhree thousand Jews slaughtered in Erfurt, 1849. Aaron 
Chorin (Choriner), Hungarian rabbi, died, 1844. 

Samuel David Luzzatto, Italian Jewish scholar, born, 1800. 
David Gans, Jewish historian and mathematician, died, 
1613. 


. **Alenu” prayer forbidden in Prussia, 1703. Isaac Samuel 


Reggio, Jewish theological writer, died, 1855. Opening 
of the first Zionist, Congress at Basel, 1897. 


Zebi Ashkenazi, rabbi in London and Amsterdam, died, 1658. 


. Joseph Piehon of Seville, chief royal tax-gatherer, executed 


by order of Jewish judges, 1879. Ferdinand Lassalle, so- 
cialistic agitator, died, 1864. 


SEPTEMBER. 


Jews of Brest ordered to obey court of Rabbi Mendel Frank, 
1531. Anti-Jewish riots at Frankfort-on-the-Main, under 
Fettmileh, 1614. 

Jews of Holland declared by the National Assembly citizens 
of the Batavian republic, 1796. 


. Coronation massacre at Loudon, 1189. James Joseph Syl- 


vester, English mathematician, born, 1814. Anti-Jewish 
riots at Stockholm, 1852. 


. Michael Sachs, German rabbi, born, 1808. 
. Henrietta Herz, leader of Berlin salon, born, 1764. 


Moses Mendelssohn, philosopher and religious reformer, 
born, 1729. 

Hirsch (Heinrich) Graetz, Jewish historian, died, 1891. 

Israelsky, accused of ritval murder at Konitz, acquitted, 
1900 


. Captain Alfred Dreyfus condemned a second time, 1899. 


Jewish community founded at Berlin, 1671. Shabbethal 
Zebi, pseudo-Messiah, died, 1676. 
Jewish Colonization Association founded by Baron de Hirsch, 


1891. 


. David Oppenheim, biblophile, died, 1736, 


Johannes Buxtorf I., Christian scholar, died, 1629. Shab- 
bethai Zebi embraces Mohammedanism, 1666. 


. Albert Cohn, Jewish scholar and philanthropist, born, 1814. 
. Akiba Eger the Elder, rabbi and Talmudic author, died, 


1780. Giacomo Meverbeer, composer, born. 1791. 


Memorial Dates 


Memphis 





. Grace Aguilar, English novelist and writer on Jewish his- 


tory, died, 1847. 


’. Decree ordering Jews to leave France issued, 1894. Pedro 


Arbues, inquisitor, ““the darling of Torquemada,” died, 
1485. 

Jonathan Kybeschtitz, rabbi and author, died, 1764. Sultan 
of Morocco grants religious liberty to Jews and Christians, 
1880. 


. Mayer Rothschild, founder of the Frankfort banking-house, 


** pardoned,” 1899. 
Ghetto at 


died, 1812. Capt. Alfred Drevfus 
Gedaliah Yahya, writer on history, died, 1487, 
Rome abolished, 1870. 


22, Dedication of the Mayence synagogue, 1104. 


13. 


31. 


1. 


. James Darmesteter, French philologist, died, 1894. 


Moses Sofer, rabbinical author, born, 1762. 


i. Emancipation of the Jews of France, 1791. 
. First congregation founded at Stoekhohn, 1775. 


Jews of Krems massacred, 1349. Fanny von Arnstein, soci- 
ety leader at Vienna, born, 1757. Samuel David Luzzatto, 
Italian Jewish scholar, died. 1865. 


ee Frankel, Jewish scholar and theologian, born, 
801. 


OCTOBER. 


About 7,000 Jews expelled from the government of Kier, 
Russia, 1898. 

Thousands of Jews killed at Lublin by Cossacks, 1636. 

Blood-accusation riot at Galatz; ninety Jews injured and 
four synagogues destroyed, 1868. Moses Schreiber (Sofer), 
Orthodox leader and rabbi, died, 1889. 

Emancipation of the Jews of Baden, 1862. 


. Jacques Offenbach, French composer, died, 1880. 


Abraham Firkovich, Karaite scholar, born, 1787. 


. Eleazar of Brody, rabbi at Amsterdam, died, 1741. 
. Jacob Eduard Polack, physician to the Shah of Persia, died, 


1891. 


. Casimir IL., the Great, of Poland, grants Jews * Privilegium 


Fredericianum,”’ 1333. Adolf Franck, French philosopher, 
born, 1809. Abraham Mapn, Russian Hebrew writer, died, 
1867. 


. Elijah ben Solomon of Wilna, the ** Gaon,”’ died, 1797. 
. Ninety Jews massacred at Munich, 1285, 
. Akiba Eger, rabbi and Talmudie author, died, 1837. 


Victor Enianuel emancipates the Jews of Rome, 1870. Leo- 
pold Low, rabbi and critie, died, 1875. 


. Eduard Lasker, German politician, born, 1829. 
. Moritz Hartmann, Anstrian poet, born, 1821. 
. Joseph Solomon del Medigo, physician and scientist. died, 


1658. Jewish quarter of Kossow. Galicia, attacked; ten 
Jews killed, 1898, 

Bull appointing Tomaso Torquemada inquisitor-general of 
Aragon, Valencia, and Catalonia, 1488. Senatorial decree 
grants privileges to baptized Jews in Russia, 1776. 


. Lazarus Bendavid, German philosopher and reformer, born, 


1762. 

Giulio 
Bartolocci, Italian Christian student of Jewish literature, 
died, 1687. 

Emin Pasha (Ed. Schnitzer), African traveler, killed, 1892. 

Israelitische Theologische Lehranstalt of Vienna founded, 
1893. 

Roman Curia decides that a Jewish child once baptized 
must be brought up under Christian influences, 1587, 
Henriette Herz, leader of the Berlin salon, died, 1847. 


. Abraham Geiger, Jewish scholar and religious reformer, 


died, 1874. Inquisition at Rome refuses permission to 
Jews to put gravestones or inscriptions over their dead, 
1625. 

Moses Montefiore, philanthropist, born, 178!. Decree of 
Crémieux naturalizes the Jews of Algeria, 1870. 

Asher ben Jehiel (Rosh), died, 1327. 


. Anti-Jewish riots at Cracow, 1407. 


‘Abd al-Majid receives Moses Montefiore in regard to the 
Damascus Affair, 1840. Moses Nahmanides. philosopher 
and commentator, died, 1270. Emanuel Deutsch, English 
Jewish Talmudic scholar, born, 1829. 

Jews of Kur-Hessen granted full emancipation (first in Ger- 
many). 1833. Conference of Jewish notables of western 
Europe at Brussels, to discuss Rumanian question, 1872. 

Jews expelled from Portugal, 1497. Heinrich Graetz, Jew- 
ish historian, born, 1817. 


NOVEMBER. 


Jews of England imprisoned by King John, 1210. Jews ban- 
ished from England, 1290. Isidore Loeb, French Jewish 
sebolar, born, 1839. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


to 


moo Do 


. Auto da fé held at Seville, 148]. 


462 


. Wiliam I]. of Germany receives a Zionist deputation headed 


by Dr. Theodor Herz], at Jerusalem. 1898, 


. Third and final expulsion of the Jews from France, 1384, 


Ludwig Chronegk. German actor, born, 1837. 

Felix Mendelssohn-Bar- 
tholdy, composer, died, 1847. 

David Sassoon, Indian financier, died, 1&b4. 


. Firman issued by Sultan ‘Abd al-Majid against blood accu- 


sation, 1840. Abraham Azulai. cabalistic author, died, 
1643. 


. Rabbinical synod of Mayence regulates the payment of Jew- 


ish taxes, 1228. Peter Beer, educational writer, died, 1838. 
David Einhorn, American Reform rabbi, born, 1809. 
Sabbato Morais, American Orthodox rabbi, died, 1897. 

Law regulating the adoption of family names by Jews ib 
Austria, 1787. 

Talmud burned at Kamenetz-Podolsk by the Frankists, 
1757. Benjamin Peixotto, Ameriean diplomat, born, 1834. 

Act passed by General Assembly of New York permitting 
Jews to omit “‘upon the faith of a Christian’? from the 
oath of abjuration, 1727. 

Riot at Paris; many Jews plundered, several! killed, and the 
rest forced to flee, 1580. Jews executed for imaginary 
crime at La Guardia, 1491. 

Simhah Pinsker, Hebrew author, died, 1864. 

First meeting of English Jewish Board of Deputies, 
** Lehrerseminar ’’ founded at Berlin, 1840. 


178). 


. Emma Lazarus, American poetess, died, 1887, 


Rus- 
Jost, 


Anton Rubinstein, 
Isaac M. 


Manasseh ben Israel, died, 1657, 
sian composer and pianist, died, 1894. 
Jewish historian, died, 1860. 

Solomon Maimon, German philosopher, died, 1800. 

Leopold Kompert, ghetto poet and novelist, died, 1886. 

Benedict Spinoza, philosopher, born, 1632, 

Abraham ben David of Posquiéres (RaBaD IIT.), French 
Talmudic commentator, died, 1198. Sir Julius Benedict, 
English composer, born. 1804. 


. Jews of Augsburg massaered, 1349. 
. Bull of Honorins 1V.to arehbishops of York and Canterbury, 


against the Talmud, 128. Anton Rubinstein, Russian 
composer and pianist, born, 1830. 


DECEMBER. 


Manuel Fernando de Villa Real, Portuguese Jewish states- 
man, executed by the Inquisition at Lisbon, 1652, 

UKase of Elizabeth expelling Jews from Great Russia, 1742. 

Eduard Bendemann, German painter, born, 1811. 

Opening of the Whitehall conference of English notabjes on 
the question of the readmission of Jews into England, 
1586. 

David Friedlander, religious reformer and scholar, born, 
1750. Anselm Mayer von Rothschild, financier, died, 
1855. 

Jews expelled from Breslau, 1738. Nathan Ghazzati, warm 
adherent of Shabbethai Zebi, excommunicated, 1666. 
Baron Maurice de Hirseh, philanthropist, born, 1831. 

Guildhall meeting protests against the persecution of Rus- 
sian Jews by the ‘*May Laws,’ 1890. Auto da fé held at 
Toledo; nine hundred Jews “ reconciled,’ 1486. 


. Napoleon issues decree dividing the whole French empire 


into Jewish consistories, 1808. 

Isaac Leeser, American Orthodox rabbi, born, 1806. 

Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides). philosopher, died, 1204. 
Emperor Charlies IY. makes an agreement with Rudolph 
IV. of Austria and John of Bohemia not to receive Jews. 
expelled from Austria, and viee versa, 13860. Heinrich. 
Heine, German poet, born, 1797. 


. Mattithiah Straschun, Talmudic scholar, died, 1885. 


Ludwig Dessoir, German actor, born, 1810. 

Three hundred Jews of Bychow, near Moghilef, slaughtered. 
1659. Kalman Schulman, Russian Hebrew writer, died, 
1898, 

Jews expelled from Bohemia, 1744. 

Poll-tax abolished in Austria, 1781. 

Mefize Haskalah founded in Russia, 1863. 

Benjamin Disraeli, afterward Ear] of Beaconsfield, English. 
premier. born, 1804. Adolf Sonnenthal, German actor, 
born, 1834. Emancipation of Jews of Austria, 1867, 


. Jacob Christian Basnage, Christian historian of the Jews, 


Gied, 1725. 


. Paulus (Selig) Cassel, Jewish scholar and eccnvert to Chris- 


tianity, died, 1892. 
King Emanuel orders all Jews to leave Portugal, 1496. 
Anti-Semitie riots at Warsaw, tasting three days, 1881. 


463 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Memorial Dates 
Memphis 





25. Johannes Buxtorf I., Christian Jewish scholar. born. 1564. 
David Friedlander, religious reformer and scholar, died, 
1834. Jean de Bloch, Russo-Polish financier. died. 1901. 

2.. Judaizing followers of R. Zechariah of Kiev burned at Mos- 
cow, 1503. Eduard Bendemann, German painter, died, 
1889. 

28& Ludwig Philippson, Jewish publicist. born, 181]. Full civil 
rights and privileges granted to the Jews of Frankfort, 
sil. 

29. Ludwig Philippson, Jewish publicist, died, 1889. Jewish 
Emancipation Act passed in Hungary, 1867. Adolf Jeili- 
nek, Jewish scholar, died, 1893. 

30. Jews of Granada, among them Joseph ibn Nagdila, massa- 
cred, 1061. Ludwig Dessoir, German actor. died, 1874. 

31. Isaac Artom. Italian senator, born, 1829. Sampson Raphael 
Hirseh, Jewish theologian, died, 1888. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Die Monatstage des Kalenderjahres, 
Berlin, 1872; M. Kayserling, Sterbefage aus Alter wand 
Neuer Zeit, Prague, 1891; Gedenkbidtter: Hervrorragencde 
Jiidische Persénlichketten des 19. Jahrhunderts, Leip- 
sic, 1892; G. Deutsch, in Deborah, 1901 and 1902: idem, 
Memorahbie Dates of Jewish History, New York, 1904. 


Js I. G. D. 


MEMORIAL SERVICE: Prayer for the dead 
is mentioned as early as the last pre-Christian century 
(see II Macc. xii. 44), and a sacrifice for the dead, 
probably given in the form of charity, was known 
in Talmudic time (Sifre, Deut. 210; Hor. 6a). The 
reading of the chapter “ Ahare Mot” on the Day of 
Atonement suggested the idea of offering on that 
day a special prayer for the memory of the dead 
(comp. Pesik. 174b with the interpolated sentence in 
Tan., Yelammedenu, Ha’azinu, and Kol Bo, Ixx.). 
Regarding the extension of the prayer for the dead 
to other holy days, see the literature in Bet Yosef, 
Tur Orah Hayyim, 621; M. Brick, “ Pharisiiische 
Volkssitten und Ritualien”; L. Low, “ Gesammelte 
Schriften,” i. 129, v. 29; I. Levi, “La Commémora- 
tion des Ames dans le Judaisme,” in “R. E. J.” 
xxix. 43-60; Hamburger, “R. B. T.” ii, s.r. “See- 
lenfeier”; HazkKarat NESHAMOT (in which article 
the memorial service for Orthodox congregations is 
treated). 

Reform Judaism remolded the old liturgy, lay- 
ing special stress on the idea of the immortality of 
the soul, thereby affording a source of comfort to 
mourners in their grief. In the new form, the me- 
morial service, which dwells mainly on the awful 
solemnity of deathand the hope of a future life, and 
which is written to a great extent in the vernacular, 
has become one of the most prominent and impressive 
features of the Day of Atonement. Among those 
who composed elaborate and solemn memorial serv- 
ice liturgies Leopold Stein and David Einhorn 
may be specially mentioned. 

There isacertain uniformity in the Reform rituals 
with regard to the elements of which the memorial 
service consists: a recitation or intonation of the 
verses Ps. cxliv. 3-4, xe. 6,3; Deut. xxxii. 29; Ps. 
xlix, 18 (A. V. 17), xxxvii. 3, xxxiv. 23 (A. V. 22), 
forms the introduction to a meditation dwelling on 
the fleetingness of life; this is followed by a psaln, 
like Ps. xxiii.; selected poems from Ibn Gabirol, 
Judah ha-Levi, and Bahya ben Joseph, translated 
into the vernacular, lead up to the prayer for the 
memory of the departed, in which, finally, mention 
is made, as in the old “ Hazkarat Neshamot,” of the 
great martyrs of the past. In many congregations 
the death-roli for the vear is read. and persons dis- 
tinguished in Israel who died during that period are 


| 


also remembered. The reciting of the “ Kaddish” 

by the entire congregation closes the service, to which 

claborate and betitting music lends great solemnity. 
A. K. 


MEMPHIS: City of ancient Egypt, situated 
about ten miles south of modern Cairo. “ Mem- 
phis” is the Greek form of the Egyptian * Menfe,” 
and is used in Hos. ix. 6, A. V., and in Isa. xix. 13, 
R.V., margin (comp. Judith i. 10). The Hebrew 
form is “ Mof,” and occurs in Hos. ix. 6; in all other 
places it has been corrupted to “ Nof,” which the 
versions, however, render correctly by “Memphis.” 

As the capital of Egypt, Memphis seems to be 
mentioned in Hos, ix. 6; Ezek. xxx. 13, 16 (where, 
however, some critics alter the name in accordance 
with the Septuagint); Cornill, by making certain 
corrections, reads it alsoin Ezek. xxx. 15and Isa. xix. 
13. Jer. ii. 16 places it parallel with other large 
Egyptian cities, especially of the Delta. According 
to Jer. xliv. 1, xlvi. 14, the Jews fleeing from the 
Babylonian war to Egypt had formed a colony there. 

A part of Memphis, called “the White Wall” 
(later forming the citadel of the city ; see Herodotus, 
ili, 91; Thucydides, i, 104), existed at a very early 
period, and the residences of many Egyptian kings 
of the third to the sixth dynasty were built near it. 
From its temple the city always retained the sacred 
name “Temple of Ptah” (“Hat-ka-ptah,” whence, 
probably, the name “Egypt” hasbeen taken). The 
civil name and an account of the development of 
the city are derived from the funeral pyramid of 
King Ppy (vocalized “Apopy” ?) I. of the sixth 
dynasty, called “Men-nofer” = “good resting.” 
Hence the later abbreviations “ Menfe,” “ Menbe” 
(“Mempi” in Assyrian; Delitzsch, “Wo Lag das 
Paradies ?” p. 314), etc. Other etymologies found 
in Greek writers are unwarranted. 

Memphis remained froin the sixth dynasty to the 
Arab conquest perhaps the first, certainly the second, 
city of Egypt; and it frequently was the capital. 
The Arabs, however, soon caused its depopulation 
by founding new capitals a little to the north of it, 
for which the stones from the ruins of Memphis 
were used ,so exhaustively that only a few traces, 
near modern Mitrahineh and the large necropoles on 
the border of the desert (the pyramids of Gizeh, etc.), 


bear witness to the former existence of the city. 


E. G. H. W. M. M. 


MEMPHIS: Largest city of the state of Ten- 
nessee in the United States of America. Although 
the year 1845 is designated as the date of the 
earliest settlement of Jews in Memphis, it appears. 
that a few had lived there temporarily before that 
time. Among the most prominent of the carlier 
settlers was Joseph J. Andrews, a former resident of 
Charleston, 8. C., and Philadelphia. In 1847, when 
his brother died, he donated several acres of land to 
the Israelites of Memphis to be used as a burial- 
ground, This caused his resident coreligionists te 
organize in 1850 a Hebrew Benevolent Society. 
Divine service was then held only on Rosh ha- 
Shanah and Yom ha-Kippurim. 

By 1853 there was a considerable increase in the 
Jewish population, and a congregation was organ- 
ized under the name “B'nai Israel,” with M. Simon 


Memphis 
Menahem 


as president and Solomon Hess as secretary. A hall 
was leased in a building on Front street; and Jonas 
Levy, formerly of Little Rock, Ark., 
was engaged as hazzan and shohet. 
A. Hebrew school, under the direc- 
tion of the Rev. L. Sternhetmer, was 
established, and a lot was bought with $2,000 do- 
nated by Judah Touro in 1833, At the beginning 
of 1858 greater interest was manifested in communal 
affairs. A building, known as “The Farmers’ and 
Mechanics’ Bank,” was purchased and dedicated 
(March 26, 1858) as a house of worship. At the 
same time the Rev. J. J. Peres was elected hazzan. 
In 1860 the Rev. Simon Tuska of Rochester, N. Y., 
was chosen as rabbi. His views were those of mod- 
erate Reform; but when an organ, a mixed choir, 
and family pews were introduced into the syna- 

gogue a considerable number of mem- 


First Con- 
gregation. 


Orthodox _ bers seceded and formed (1862) an Or- 
Congrega- thodox congregation called “ Beth-E] 
tion Emess.” The numerical strength of 
Formed. the B’nai Israel congregation was re- 
duced; but the members held their 

own, and when, after the close of the Civil war, 


many Israelites from the West and the East settled 
in Memphis, most of them affiliated with the Reform 
congregation. Rabbi Tuska died suddenly on Dec. 
30, 1870; and the congregation elected as his suc- 
cessor the Rev. M. Samfield, formerly rabbi of the 
B'nai Zion congregation, Shreveport, La. He was 
installed Aug. 15, 1871, and still (1904) occupies the 
rabbinate. 

Some years later a consolidation of the Beth-El 
Emess congregation with B’nai Israel was effected, 
and in 1888 a lot on Poplar street was bought for 
the site of a temple. The building was dedicated 
Jan. 18, 1884. Another Orthodox congregation, es- 
tablished in 1862, had no permanent place of wor- 
ship until 1890, when the members bought a church 
and converted it into a synagogue, giving their or- 
ganization the name of “Baron Hirsch Congrega- 


tion.” The number of members is at present (1904) 
eighty-five. Another orthodox congregation was 
founded in 1904, under the name of “Anshai 


S’fard,” with a membership of fifty. 

The number of Jews in Memphis is estimated at 
2,500 in a total population of 120,000. The follow- 
ing societies are in existence: Lebrew Ladies’ 
Benevolent Society, United Hebrew Relief Associa- 
tion, Young Ladies’ Aid Society, Jewish Ladies’ 
. Aid Society (Orthodox), Young Men’s Hebrew As- 
sociation, Ladies’ Salon Circle (literary), B’nai B’rith 
Lodge, Free Sons of Israel Lodge, Kesher shel 

Barzel Lodge, Zionist Society, Memphis Club 
(social). The majority of Jews are merchants, but 
many are engaged in various trades as tailors, 
shoemakers, tinners, printers, opticians, carpenters, 
barbers, engravers, watchmakers, painters, butch- 
ers, and manufacturers of clothing, caps, shirts, 
and mattresses, There are also a considerable num- 
ber following the various professions, as lawyers, 
musicians, teachers, physicians, and journalists. 

A. M. Sa. 

MEMRA (= “ Ma‘amar ” or “ Dibbur,” “ Logos”): 
“The Word,” in the sense of the creative or direct- 
ive word or speech of God manifesting His power in 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


A SS Sie ete ye yee P a= hr 
TN a rH 


464 


the world of matter or mind; a term used especially 
in the Targum as a substitute for * the Lord? when 
an anthropomorphic expression is to be avoided. 
——Biblical Data: In Scripture “the word of the 
Lord” commonly denotes the speech addressed to 
patriarch or prophet (Gen. xv. 1; Num. xii. 6, xxiii. 
5; 1 Sam. iii, 21; Amos v. 1-8); but frequently it 
denotes also the creative word: “ By the word of the 
Lord were the heavens made ” (Ps. XX xi. 6; comp. 
“For He spake, and it was done”; “He sendeth his 
word, and melteth them [the ice]”; “ Fire and hail; 
suow, and vapors; stormy wind fulfilling his word”; 
Ps. xxxili. 9, exlvij. 18, exivili. 8). In this sense 
it is said, “For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in 
heaven” (Ps. exix. 89). “The Word,” heard and 
announced by the prophet, often became, in the 
conception of the seer, an efficacious power apart 
from God, us was the angel or messenger of God: 
“The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it hath 
lighted upon Israel” (Isa. ix. 7 [A. V. 8], Iv. 11); 
* He sent his word, and healed them ” (Ps. cvii. 20); 
and comp. “his word runneth very swiftly ” (Ps. 
exlvii. 15). 
——In Apocryphal and Rabbinical Litera- 
ture: While in the Book of Jubilees, xii. 22, the 
word of God is sent through the angel to Abraham, 
in other cases it becomes more and more a personi- 
fiedagency: “By the word of God exist His works” 
(Ecclus. [Sirach] xlii. 15); “The Holy One, blessed 
be He, created the world by the ‘Ma’amar’” (Mek., 
Beshallah, 10, with reference to Ps. xxxili. 6). 
Quite frequent is the expression, especially in the 
liturgy, “Thou who hast made the universe with 
Thy word and ordained man through Thy wisdom 
to rule over the creatures made by Thee” (Wisdom 
ix. 1; comp. “Who by Thy words causest the eve- 
nings to bring darkness, who opcnest the gates of 
the sky by Thy wisdom”; . . . “who by His speech 
created the heavens, and by the breath of His mouth 
ail their hosts”; through whose “words all things 
were created”; see Singer’s “Daily Prayer-Book,” 
pp. 96, 290, 292). So also in IV Esdras vi. 38 
(“ Lord, Thou spakest on the first day of Creation: 
‘ Let there be heaven and earth,’ and Thy word hath 
accomplished the work”). “Thy word, O Lord, 
healeth all things” (Wisdom xvi, 12); “Thy word 
preserveth them that put their trust in Thee” (dc. 
xvi, 26). Especially strong is the personification of 
the word in Wisdom xviii. 15: “Thine Almighty 
Word leaped down from heaven out of Thy royal 
throne as a fierce man of war.” The Mishnah, with 
reference to the ten passages in Gene- 


Personifi- sis (ch. i.) beginning with “And God 
cation of said,” speaks of the ten “ma’amarot ” 
the Word. (=“specches”) by which the world 


was created (Abot v. ft; comp. Gen. 
R. iv. 2: “The upper heavens are held in suspense 
by the creative Ma’amar”). Out of every speech 
[“dibbur ”] which emanated from God an angel was 
created (Hag. 14a). “The Word [“dibbur”] called 
none but Moses” (Lev. R. i. 4, 5), “The Word 
[“dibbur”] went forth from the right hand of God 
and made a circuit around the camp of Israel” 
(Cant. I. i. 18). 
In the Targum: In the Targum the Memra 
figures constantly as the manifestation of the divine 





465 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Memphis 
Menahem 





power, or as God's messenger iu place of God Him- 
self, wherever the predicate is net tn contormity 
with the dignity or the spirituality of the Deity. 


Instead of the Scriptural “You have not believed in the 
Lord.” Targ, Deut, i. 32 has * You have not believed in the 
word of the Lord *; instead of “I shall require it [vengeance] 
from him,” Targ. Deut. xviii. 19 has ** My word shall require it.” 
‘The Memra,” instead of “the Lord,” is * the consuming fire ”’ 
(Turg. Deut. ix. 3; comp. Targ. Isa. xxx. 27). The Memra 
**plagued the people”? (Targ. Yer. to Ex. xxxii. 35). ‘The 
Memra sinote him * (i Sam. vi. 73 comp. Targ. 1 Kings xviii. 
243 Hos. xiii. 14: et al). Not“ God,” but** the Memra,”* is met 
within Targ, Ex. xix. 17 (arg. Yer. “the Shekinah” ; comp. 
Targ@, EX. xxv. 22: °° T will order My Memrato be there’). "I 
will cover thee With My Memra,” instead of * My hand” (Targ. 
Ex. xxxili. 22). Instead of “* My soul,” "" My Meira shall reject 
you’ (Larg. Lev. xxvi. 303; comp. Isa. i. 14, xlii. 1; Jer. vi. 8; 
Ezek. xxiii. 18). “* The voice of the Memira,”* instead of ** God,” 
is heard (Gen. iii. 83; Deut. iv. 33, 363; V.2!: Isa. vi. 8: ef al). 
Where Moses says, °° I stood between the Lord and you” (Deut. 
vy. o}, the Targum has, ** between the Meimraof the Lord and 
you’; and the “sign between Me and you”? becomes a“ sign 
between My Memra and you”’ (Ex. xxxi. 13, 17; comp. Lev. 
xxvii. 46; Gen. ix. 12; xvii. 2, 7,10: Ezek. xx.12). Instead of 
God, the Memra comes to Abimelek (Gen. xx. 3), and to 
Balaam (Num. xxiii. 4). His Memra aids and aceompanies 
Israel, performing wonders for them (Targ. Num. xxiii. 21; 
Peut. i. 80, xxxiii. 8; Targ. Isa. Lxiii. J4; Jer. xxxi. 1: Hos. 
ix. 10 [comp. xi. 3, “‘the inessenger-angel”*]). The Memra 
gues before Cyrus (Isa. xlv. 12). The Lord swears by His 
Memra (Gen. xxi. 28, xxii. 16, xxiv. 3; Ex. xxxii. 18; 
Num. Xiv. 30; Isa. xiv. 23; Ezek. xx. 5; et al.). It is His 
Memra that repents (Tare. Gen. vi. 6, vill. 21; I Sam. xv. U1, 
331. Not His “band,” but His ** Memra has laid the foundation 
of the earth”? (larg. Isa. xviii. 13); for His Memra’s or Name's 
sake does He act (l.c. xviii. 11; If Kings xix. 34). Through 
the Memra God turns to His people (Tare. Lev. xxvi. 90; II 
Kings xiii. 283), becomes the shield of Abraham (Gen. xv. 1), 
and is with Moses (Ex. iii. 12; iv. 12, 15) and with Israel (Targ. 
Yer. to Num. x. 85, 36; Isa. Ixiii. 1f). It is the Memra, not 
God Himself. against whom man offends (Ex. xvi. 8; Num. 
xly. 5; I Kings viii. 50; II Kings xix. 28; Isa.i. 2, 16; xly. 3,20; 
Hos. vy. 7, vi. 7; Targ. Yer. to Ley. v.21, vi. 2; Deut. v. 11); 
through ITis Memra Israel shall be justified (Targ. Isa. xlv. 25); 
with the Merara Israel stands in communion (Targ. Josh. xxii. 
24, 27)3 in the Memra man puts his trust (Targ. Gen. xv. 6; 
Targ. Yer. to Ex. xiv. 31; Jer. xxxix. 18, xlix. 11). 


Like the Shekinah (comp. Targ. Num. xxiii. 21), 
the Memra is accordingly the manifestation of God. 
“The Memra brings Israel nigh unto God and sits 
on His throne receiving the prayers of Israel” 
(Targ. Yer. to Deut. iv. 7). It shielded Noah from 
the flood (Targ. Yer. to Gen. vil. 16) and brought 

about the dispersion of the seventy 
Mediator- nations (/.¢c. xi. 8); it is the guardian 
ship. of Jacob (Gen. xxviii. 20-21, xxxv. 
3) and of Israel (Targ. Yer, to Ex. xii. 
23. 29); it works all the wonders in Egypt (Z.¢. xiii. 
x. xiv. 25); hardens the heart of Pharaoh (/.c, xiii. 
15:1: goes before Israel in the wilderness (Targ. Yer. 
to Ex. xx. 1); blesses Israel (Targ. Yer. to Num. 
xxiii. 8); battles for the people (Targ. Josh. iii. 7, 
x. 14, xxiii, 8) As in ruling over the destiny of 
min the Memra is the agent of God (Targ. Yer. 
to Num, xxvii. 16), soalsois it in the creation of the 
earth (Isa. xlv. 12) and in the execution of justice 
(Targ. Yer. to Num. xxxiii. 4). So, in the future, 
shall the Memra be the comforter (Targ. Isa. Ixvi. 
13): “My Shekinah I shall put among you, My 
Memra shall be unto you for a redeeming deity, 
and you shall be unto My Name a holy people” 
(Targ. Yer. to Lev. xxii. 12). “My Memra shall 
be unto you like a good plowman who takes off the 
yoke from the shoulder of the oxen”; “the Memra 
will roar to gather the exiled” -Targ. Hos. xi. 5, 
VITI.—80 


10). The Menira is * the witness” (Targ. Yer, xxix. 
23); it will be to Israel like a father (/.¢. xxxi. 9) 
and “will rejoice over them to do them good” (/¢. 
Xxxli. 41). “In the Memra the redemption will be 
found ” (Targ. Zech. xii. 5). “The holy Word” was 
the subject of the hymns of Job (Test. of Job, xii. 
3, ed. Kohler), 
It is difficult to say how far the rabbinical con- 
cept of the Memra, which is used now asa parallel 
to the divine Wisdom and again as a 
The Logos. parallel to the Shekinah, had come 
under the influence of the Greek term 
“Logos,” which denotes both word and reason, and, 
perhaps owing to Egyptian mythological notions, 
assumed in the philosophical system of Heraclitos, 
of Plato, and of the Stoa the metaphysical meaning 
of world-constructive and world-permeating intelli- 
gence (see Reizenstein, “Zwei Religionsgeschicht- 
liche Fragen,” 1901, pp. 88-111; comp. Aall, “Der 
Logos,” and the Logos literature given by Schiirer, 
“Gesch.” 1. 8, 542-544). The Memra as a cosmic 
power furnished Philo the corner-stone upon which 
he built his peculiar semi-Jewish philosophy. 
Philo’s “divine thought,” “the image” and “ first- 
born son” of God, “the archpriest,” “intereessor,” 
and “paraclete” of humanity, the “arch type of 
man” (see PH1Lo), paved the way for the Christian 
conceptions of the Incarnation (“the Word become 
flesh”) and the Trinity. The Word which “the 
unoriginated Father created in His own likeness as 
a manifestation of His own power” appears in the 
Gnostic system of Marcus (Irenzeus, “ Adversus 
Hereses,” i. 14). In the ancient Church liturgy, 
adopted from the Synagogue, it is especially inter- 
esting to notice how often the term “ Logos,” in the 
sense of “the Word by which God made the world, 
or made His Law or Himself known to man,” was 
changed into “Christ” (see “Apostolic Constitu- 
tions,” vil, 25-26, 34-38, e¢ al.). Possibly on account 
of the Christian dogma, rabbinic theology, outside 
of the Targum literature, made little use of the 
term “Memra.” See Logos. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bousset, Die Religion des Judenthums im 
Neutestamentlichen Zeitaiter, 1903, p. 341; Weber, Jildische 
Theologie, 1897, pp. 180-184. K 


MENAHEM: King of Israel 748-788 8.c.; son 
of Gadi. Zachariah, the son of Jeroboam ITI,, had 
at the end of six months’ reign been slain by Shal- 
lum, a usurper. Menahem went from Tirzah, one 
of the government fortresses, to Samaria, cut down 
the usurper, and occupied the throne (II Kings 
xv. 8-14). Immediately thereafter he smote Tiph- 
sah because it refused to vield to him, and in- 
flicted the most barbarous punishment upon the 
women of the city and its borders (¢. verse 16). 
This Tiphsah has been identified, by a slight change 
of letters, with En Tappuah (Josh. xvii. 7), a city 
on the borders of Ephraim and Manasseh. 

It was in the reign of Menahem that the great 
Tiglath-pileser III. appeared on Israel’s horizon: 
“There came against the land Pul, the King of As- 
syria; and Menahem gave Pul a thousand talents of 
silver, that his hand might be with him to confirm 
the kingdom in his hand. And Menahem exacted 
the money of Israel, even of all the mighty men of 
wealth. of each man fifty shekels of silver, to give 


Menahem b. Aaron 
Menahem ben Jacob 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 











to the king of Assyria. So the king of Assyria 
turned back, and staved not there in the land ” (2. 
verses 19-20, R. V.). Theidentification of Pul with 
Tiglath-pileser III. is beyond dispute. Israel at 
this time had 60,000 men of wealth, and was too 
powerful a kingdom to yield to Assyria without a 
struggle. 

Among the tributaries of Tiglath-pileser, as de- 
scribed in his own inscriptions, are found the fol- 
lowing: Kushtashpi of the city of Kummukh; 
Rasunnu of Gar-imeri (that is, Rezin of Aram-Da- 
mascus); Mi-ni-hi-im-mi of the city of Sa-mi-ri-na- 
ai (that is, Menahem of Samaria); and Hirum of the 
city of Sur (Tyre). From this reference it is possi- 
ble to assign Menahem to a date about 748-738 B.c., 
His complete subjection to the King of Assyria 
seems to have occurred about the close of his reign, 
so that his son and successor was obliged to carry 
the burden of Assyria’s tribute. 

Menahem was the only King in thisanarchic period 
of the Northern Kingdom who died a natural death. 

E.G. H. I. M. P. 


MENAHEM B. AARON IBN ZERAH: 
Spanish codifier; born in Navarre, probably at Es- 
tella, in the first third of the fourteenth century ; 
died at Toledo July, 1385. His father, forced to 
leave France in 1806 through the expulsion of the 
Jews, went to Spain and settled in Estella, where 
Menahem passed his youth. In the massacre which 
took place in Estella in 1328, Menahem’s parents 
and his four younger brethers were slain. Mena- 
hem himself was stricken to the ground, and Jay all 
but dead from his wounds, when he was saved 
through the compassion of a Knight, a friend of his 
father’s. He then studied two years under Joshua 
ibn Shu‘aib, after which he went to Alcala to join 
Joseph ibn al-‘Aish, with whom he studied the Tal- 
mud and Tosafot. His chief teacher was Judah b. 
Asher, who went through the whole of the Talmud 
with him, with the exception of the third and fourth 
orders. In 1361 Menahem succeeded Joseph ibn al- 
‘Aish as rabbi in Alcala, and held office for eight 
years, during which time he also taught the Talmud. 

In consequence of the civil war which broke out 
in 1868, Menahem lost all his property, and he then 
went to Toledo, where Don Samuel Abravanel took 
him under his protection, and enabled him to con- 
tinue his studies during the rest of his life. In honor 
and for the benetit of this protector Menahem wrote 
“Zedah la-Derek” (Ferrara, 1554). This work oc- 
cupies a peculiar position among codes, and is in a 
ecrtain sense unique. As the author states in the 
introduction (ed. Sabbionetta, p. 166), it is intended 
mainly for rich Jews who associate with princes and 
who, on account of their high station and their in- 
tereourse with the non-Jewish world, are not over- 
rigorous in regard to Jewish regulations. For such 
a Class of readers a law-codex must not be too 
voluminous, but must contain the inost essential 
Jaws, especially those that the higher classes would 
be inclined to overstep. 

The “Zedah la-Derek” is divided into five parts 
(comprising altogether 372 sections), which may be 
summarized as follows: Parti.: The ritual and all 


466 





concerning phylacteries, zizit, ete. Part ti,: Laws 

concerning forbidden foods. Part iii.: Marriage 

laws. Partiv.: Sabbath and feast-days. Part v.: 

Fast-days and laws formourning. Asasupplement 

to the last part is a treatise on the Messiah and on 

the resurrection of the dead. Mevahem sought to 
emphasize the ethical side of the Law in his work. 

He was not satisfied with merely stating the regula- 

tions like other religious codifiers: he tried also to 

give a reason for them. Deficient as the * Zedah 
la-Derek ” is as a code, its author has succeeded re- 
markably well in bringing to Hight the religious 
element in the Jewish ceremonial. At the same 
time he is far removed from mysticism (comp. ¢h. 
ed, Sabbionetta, iv. 4, 1, p. 187), possessing an unusu- 
ally wide mental horizon. Although his parents and 
brothers fell victims to religious hatred, he still main- 
tained that the superiority of Israel as the “chosen 
people” is based upon their fulfilling God’s word, 
and “that a non-Jew who lives in accordance with 

God’s will is more worthy than a Jew who does not 

perform it” (2.7. 1, 33. p. 39). In dogmatical ques- 

tions Menahem was more inclined to a strictly Or- 
thodox point of view than to a philosophical one, 
although he believed that the Biblical stories of the 

Creation and the Bible’s teaching about the resurree- 

tion contained mysteries, which he did not venture to 

solve. Ina Turin manuscript (A. iv. 37) are given 
laws by him on shehitah and bedikah, perhaps ex- 
cerpted from his larger work. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Spanien wid 
Portugal, i. 84: Zedah la-Derek, p. 16a; Aimanzi-Luzzatto, 
Abne Zikkaron, pp. 14-16 (where the date of Menaherm's 
death is given together with the inscription on his tomb: the 
Jewish chronographers place his death eleyen years earher:: 
Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. s.v.; Renan-Neubauer, Herivains 
Juifs, pp. d61 et seq. 


8. 8. [.. G. 


MENAHEM B. ABRAHAM. 
MENAHEM BEN ABRAHAM. 


MENAHEM BEN ELIAKIM : German schol- 
at of the fourteenth century; a native of Bingen. 
He was the author of “‘Aruk Goren,” a dictionary 
of the Talmud, with German translations of all the 
difficult words, particularly those taken from Arabic 
and Greek. The basis of this work is the “‘Aruk” 
of Nathan ben Jehiel, from which Menahem made 
many extracts and to which he added new matter. 
The meaning of the title probably is “a condensed 
‘Aruk,” but Wolf (‘ Bibl. Hebr.” iv., No. 1426b) 
reads pu Fp “Short ‘Aruk.” and the Latin 
translation “Aruch Breve” is given by Emden in 
“'Kohelet Dawid” (No. 195d), although it does not 
correspond to the Hebrew jx3 FY given by Isaac 
Metz. Wolf concluded that, in spite of the simi- 
larity of contents, the “‘Aruk Goren” is not to be 
identitied with the anonymous “ ‘Aruk ha-Kazer.” 
Jewish Literature, p. t43 


See BONAFOos, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, 
Zunz, Z. G. p. 120. 
G. M. SEL. 


MENAHEM ELIEZER BEN LEVI: Lithu- 
anian Talmudist; born at Wilna; died at Minsk Dec. 
23, 1816. After studying Talmud under Solomon 
of Vilkomir he settled at Minsk, where he became 
head of the yeshibah. His “ Ya‘ir Kinno,” a com- 
mentary on Kinnim, which he wrote when still a 


that is related to it, as, for example. the regulations | young man, was much appreciated by ElijahMWilna: 


467 





* Menahem Eliezer was aided by Heaven to find the 
meaning of this difficult treatise, in which so many 
commentators have failed.” After the death of 
Elijah Wilna his pupils requested Menahem Eliezer 
to write a commentary on their teacher’s notes to 
the Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim. This commen- 
tary he began, but did not finish. He was the au- 
thor of works on the Pentateuch and on the Mish- 
nah, of novell, and of responsa, none of which has 
been published. 


BIBLIOGRAPILY: Benzion Eisenstadt, Rabbane Minsk, p. 41: 
Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, pp. 205-206; Walden, Shem ha- 
Gedolim he-Hadash, p. 93. 

H.R. M. SEL. 

MENAHEM BEN ELIJAH: Turkish litur- 
gist of the fifteenth century; a native of Kastoria. 
He composed the following piyyutim: (1) “Mah 
vakeru re‘im be-kum ashmoret,” a “petihah”; (2) 
*Me‘on ehyeh asher ehyeh,” a “tokahah”; both 
giving in acrostic the names of himself, his father, 
and his native town; (8) “He middot kol hodot le- 
baddeka milleta,” a hymn _ consisting of twelve 
strophes, each beginning and ending with the letter 
“he”; (4) a “tefillah” entitled “Shirat ha-Yad ha- 
Hazakah” or “ Malkiel.” This piyyut is peculiar in 
that, in addition to a short introduction, it consists 
of 140 lines of five words each. Every word in the 
first ten lines begins with 4; in the next ten lines, 
with 3; and so on to the end of the pivyut, which 
therefore gives the full name b's aby te 72 ong 
fifty times over. 

Among the Egyptian fragments published by 
Neubauer in “J, Q. R.” ix. 26-28 is a letter from a 
certain Menahem b. Elijah which refers to the Cru- 
sades. At the end of the letter the writer says that 
he had intended to go to Syria, but was detained 
through fear of the German army. As he speaks so 
often of Salonica, in the district of which Kastoria 
is situated, one might be tempted to identify him 
with the subject of this article; but Zunz concluded 
that the liturgist lived in the second half of the fif- 
teenth century. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Literaturgesch. p. 386; Supplement, 


p. 28, 
GQ, M. SEL. 


MENAHEM THE ESSENE:  £=Prominent 


teacher of the Essene faction in the time of King: 


Herod, about the middle of the first pre-Christian 
century. He was renowned for his prophetic powers. 
According to Josephus (“ Ant.” xv. 10, § 5), he was 
distinguished also for the saintliness of his life as 
well as for possessing knowledge of the future. 
Legend has it that when he saw young Herod going 
to school he clapped him on the back and addressed 
him as king, announcing to him that he would reign 
successfully, but without displaying the love and 
justice he ought toward men or the piety duc to 
God, and that therefore his end would be one befit- 
ting his crimes. When afterward in the zenith of 
his power Herod recalled this strange prediction. he 
sent for Menahem and asked him how long his reign 
would be. As Menahem did not immediately an- 
swer, Herod urged him, asking whether his reign 
would last ten years; whereupon Menahem replied: 
“Yes, twenty: nay, thirty years.” Pleased with 
this answer, Herod dismissed him with a clasp of 


TUE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Menahem b. Aaron 
Menahem ben Jacob 





the hand and thenceforth bestowed special honors 
upon the Essenes. This Menahem has been cor- 
rectly identified with the one mentioned in the Mish- 
nah as ab bet din and head of aschool in association 
with Hillel ha-Nasi and as Shammai'’s predecessor ; 
but the duumvirate of ab bet din and nasi is prob- 
ably due to a misconstruction of history when the 
real issues between the Hasidwan or Pharisean and 
the Sadducean or Bocethusian factions were no longer 
understood. A dim reminiscence of the relation of 
Menahem to Herod, however, has been preserved 
in a baraita, quoted in Hag. 16b, which states that 
“Menahem went out to join those serving the king, 
and cighty pairs of disciples attired in silk robes 
went with him.” Another tradition is that he be- 
came an apostate (Yer. Hag. ii. 77d). The two tra- 
ditions have been confounded and appear in two 
other forms also: according to one, Menahem was 
forced to leave the Pharisaic school, and when seen 
with his eighty pairs of disciples was told that they 
no longer had a share in the God of Israel; aceord- 
ing to the other, he went from one degree (“mid- 
dah”) to another until he became a Gnostic (here- 
tic ?). See, however, Gritz, “Gesch.” fii. 213. 
IK. 

MENAHEM BEN HELBO. Sce Kara, Jo- 
SEPIL BEN SIMEON. 

MENAHEM BEN JACOB BEN SOLOMON 
BEN SIMSON: German synagogal poet: died at 
Worms April 16, 1208. IIe was a member of an old 
family of Jewish scholars connected with that city. 
His great-grandfather Simson, who was living in 
Worms at the time of the First Crusade and was 
surnamed “Ha-Darshan,” is quoted by Rashi on 
Isa. lviii. 14 and Amos vi. 8. One of Simson’s sons, 
Samuel, is also quoted by Rashi (“Ha-Pardes,” p. 
33a). Jacob, another son of Simson, dicd at Worms 
during the First Crusade (1096). In his epitaph 
Menahem is called “teacher of the Law.” “ preach- 
er,” and “payyetan.” Aresponsum of his addressed 
to the German Talmudist Eliezer ben Joe] ha-Levi 
is preserved among the responsa of Judah ben Asher 
(p. 48a). 

Menahem is known principally through his syna- 
gogal poetry. Zunz credits him with thirty-one 
poems—among them being examples of “ Ma‘arib,” 
“Yozer,” “Ofan,” “Ahabah,” “Sulat,” ° Reshut,” 
“Kedushshah ”—as well as with a number of “seli- 
hot.” Among his clegies the following deserve 
mention: “Me‘one Shamayim” (which founda place 
in the German ritual for the 9th of Ab): “ Alelai Ki 
Ba’u Rega‘ ” (on the martyrs of Blois, 1171, and of 
Boppard, 1195; part of it las heen translated into 
German by Zunz, “S. P.” p. 250); a selihah on the 
ten martyrs; a seliaah commemorating the victims 
of a persecution in 1147 or 1190. Another selihah, 
beginning “Anah ha-Shem ha-Nikbad,” has been 
translated by Zunz into German (“S. P.” p. 263). 
Corresponding to the condition of the Jews during 
this period, a tone of gloom and despondency per- 
vades his poetry. 

It has been supposed that Menahem is identical 
with the synagogal poet Menahem ben Jacob de 
Lutra, quoted in De Rossi. Parma. MSS., No. 1274, 
and with Menahem of Lutra (nud), who produced 
a rimed compilation of the thirteen articles of faith 


Menahem ben Jair : 
Menahem ben Moses 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


468 





(see “Catalogus Librorum Manuscriptorum civ. 
Lipsiensis,” p. 295). It has been maintained that 
Menahem was born in Kaiscrsluutern, and that 
therefore he was called Menahem de Lutra; this 
supposition, however, does not seem tenable. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Lewysohn. in Ally. Zeit. des Jud. 1855, p. 
215; idem, in Monatsschrift, 1856, p. 420; Landshuth, “4 - 
mude ha-Abodah, pp. 185 et seq.; L. Lowenstein, Beitrtige 
zur Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland, i. 4, Frankfort-on-the- 
Main, 1895; Zunz, Literaturgesch. pp. 294 et seq., 510. 
J M. Sc. 
MENAHEM BEN JAIR: Leader of the Sr- 
caru. He was a grandson of Judas of Galilee, the 
founder of the Zealot party, of which the Sicarii 
were a branch. Menahem checked the lawlessness 
of the Sicarii, who, under his leadership, in 66 c.&., 
stormed the fortress of Masada and slew the Roman 
garrison. Later they entered the fortress of An- 
tonia, after its garrison had been forced to retreat 
by the Zealots under Eleazar ben Ananias, and ruth- 
lessly murdered the maimed and helpless left behind 
by the Romans. Exulting in his successes, Mena- 
hem now demanded the leadership of the Zealots, 
sought recognition as the Messiah, and led his men 
into still more cruel acts of violence. Eleazar ben 
Ananias, realizing that the Sicarii were a menace, 
turned the Zealots against Menahem, who fled to 
Ophla, but was captured and executed. He was 
succeeded by Jhis brother Eleazar. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 4th ed., fii. 432, 457 et seq.: Jo- 
sepbus, B. J. fi. 17, §8 8-10. 
D. 8S. J. L. 
MENAHEM B. JOSEPH B. HIYYA: Gaon 
of Pumbedita 858-860. He was probably elected to 
the office of gaon rather on account of his father 
than for his own merit. He had a rival in the gaon 
Mar Mattithiah b. Rabbi, his superior in Talmudic 
lore, between whom and Menahem dissensions con- 
tinued until the death of the latter. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sherira Gaon, Responsa, ed. Neubauer, p. 38; 
Gritz, Geach. 3d ed., v. 231: Weiss, Dor, iv. 181; Heilprin, 
Neder ha-Dorot, ed. Maskileison, i. 181. 

A. 8. W. 


MENAHEM BEN JOSEPH OF TROYES: 
Liturgical compiler; lived at Troyes in the thir- 
teenth century, succeeding his father, JosePpH Haz- 
ZAN BEN JUDAH, aS hazzan. The Jewish liturgy is 
indebted to him for collecting the order of prayers 
Which was used in the community of Troyes and 
which is often quoted under the title “Siddur 
Troyes” (Neubauer, ‘Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No, 
1118; De Rossi, Parma MS. No. 403). His collec- 
tion was arranged by his pupil Judah ben Eleazar, 
perhaps identical with the author of the commentary 
“Minhat Yehudah” (written about 1813), which con- 
tains a quotation from Menahem’s work. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 240; Steinsehneider, 
Jewish Literature, p. 344, note 40a; 8. D. Luzzatto, in G. I, 
Pollak, Halikot Kedem, p. 50, Amsterdam, 1847 ; Zunz, Ritus, 
pp. 28, 134; idem, Literaturgesch. pp. 221 et seq. - 

E. ¢. M. Sc. 

MENAHEM B. JUDAH: Roman halakist of 
the twelfth century. There are few data regarding 
his life, neither the year of his birth nor that of his 
death being determined. It is known, however, 
that he was descended from a family of scholars. 

Ile is mentioned by Benjamin of Tudela: and he 

was personally acquainted with Joseph ibn Plat. The 


only known date in his history is 1166, in which vear 
he was director of the Talmudic academy at Rome. 
Menahem's father, Judah b. Menahem, a younger 
contemporary of Nathan, was a prolific liturgical 
poet, whose work is, for the most part, included in 
the Roman Mahzor. Menahem Judah himself did 
not write, his studies being confined to the ITalakah. 
The names of two of his contemporaries are known, 
Solomon b. Abraham and Abraham, called “ Ezra b. 
Mattathias,” who were his colleagues on the rab- 
binical board. 

Menahem’s responsum referring to the benedic- 
tions at circumcision and delivered on the occasion 
of the visit of Joseph ibn Plat of southern France, 
is the only one of his that has been preserved. It is 
possible that he answered the question addressed 
by the mishnaic commentator Isaac b. Melchizedek 
of Siponto to the “ wise men of Rome”; in any case, 
the answer was delivered during his rabbinate. 
Thus he may also be identical with the Menahem 
celebrated by Abraham ibn Ezra in the poem “ Ha- 
dashin Ma‘ase El” (ed. Rosin, “Reime und Ge- 
dichte,” i, 124 e¢ seg.). He was the father of a sin- 
gleson, Moses. Thereis ground for the assumption 
that this Moses was identical with the author of the 
Roman “zulat” “Im Tekayyemu Mizwotai,” which 
he dedicated to his son Menahem in an acrostic. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Literaturgesch. pp. 140, 173; Berliner, 


Gesch, der Juden in Rom, it. 28; Gross, Gallia Judaiea, p. 
08; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Ram, i. 220, 
pene 


Vy 


G8, 

s. H. B.—G,. We. 

MENAHEM BEN MACHIR: German litur- 
gist of the eleventh century; a native of Ratisbon. 
His grandfather, also called Menahem b. Machir, 
was a nephew of Gershom b. Judah, and he himself 
was a cousin of Isaac b, Judah, Rashi’s teacher, 
He is quoted in Rashi’s “ Pardes” (21d, 33c) and in 
the “Likkute Pardes” (9b; comp. “ Piske Reka- 
nati,” No. 589). Mepahem witnessed the Jewish 
massacres of 1096 in Germany and commemorated 
them ina numberof selihot. His ptyyutim include; 
“ Adam be-kum,” for the Esther fast (quoted in Tos. 
to Hag. 1la); “ Ahalleh et pene Adonai,” for Yom 
Kippur minhah; “ Amarer ba-beki,” for the 17th of 
Tammuz; “Lammah Adonai ta‘amod” (in ten stro- 
phes); a “kinah” forthe 9th of Ab, beginning “ Ebel 
a‘orer”; five “yozerot,” including one for the “ Na- 
hamu” Sabhath and one forthe “Shubah ” Sabbath; 
three “ofannim”; three “zulatot”; “Kehosha‘ta 
elim,” a “hosha‘na” for the Sabbath of Tabernacles; 
“ Ma‘arib,” for the Feast of Tabernacles; “ Nishmat,” 
to be recited on Simhat Torah; and a “reshut” for 
Hatan Torah. to be recited on the same day. Most 
of his piyyutim are alphabetically arranged, but all 
of them bear the author’s signature. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Landshuth, “Ammude ha-‘Abodah, vp. 191- 
192; Zunz, Literaturqesch. pp. 158, 250. 
A. M. SEL. 


MENAHEM MANN BEN SOLOMON HA- 
LEVI. See AMELANDER, MENAHEM MANN BEN 
SOLOMON WaA-LEVI. 

MENAHEM MANUELE 3B. BARUCH 
HA-LEV1I: Polish rabbiand author; died in Lem- 
berg 1742. He wasadescendant of R. Joseph Cohen 
ot Cracow (author of “She’erit Yosef”), of R. Isaac 
Shrenzel, and of R. Saul Wahi. He occunied the 


469 FHE 





office of dayyan in Lemberg under the presidency 
of R. Hayyim Rapoport. 

Menahem was the author of “Zera’ Baruk” 
(Wandsbeck, 1730), novellac on some tractates of the 
Talmud. Another work of his was “‘Emek Hala- 
kah we-Ta‘am Man ” (Frapnkfort-on-the-Oder, 1745), 
consisting of two parts: (1) discourses on the Hala- 
kah; (2) explanations of the Haggadah. It contains 
also an approbation by R. Moses b. Aaron of Lem- 
berg (given in 1735) and novelle by Naphtali Herz 
Ashkenaziand Moses Harif, both rabbis of Lemberg. 
According toastatement of the author in his preface 
to the “‘ Emek Halakah,” he wrote also a book en- 
titled “‘Abodat ha-Lewi” on the order Kodashim. 

Menahem’s signature as dayyan is found in docu- 
ments and deeds inserted in the Lemberg memor- 
book. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Buber, Anshe Shem, p. 142. 

H. R. IN Te 

MENAHEM MENDEL BEN BARUCH 
BENDET: Lithuanian Talmudist of the cight- 
eenth century; born at Shklov; died in Palestine. 
He was a pupil of Elijah of Wilna, whose works he 
later helped to edit and publish. Elijah Gaon’s 
commentaries on Proverbs, on the Shulhan ‘Aruk 
(Orah Hayyim and Yoreh De‘ah), on Abot, on the 
Sefer Yezirah, and on the Pesah Haggadah, and his 
notes to the minor treatises, were published by 
him. After Elijah’s death Mehahem Mendel went 
to Palestine and settled at Safed, where he became 
lecturer in Talmud in the bet ha-midrash established 
there in memory of Elijah of Wilna. He was the 
author of ten works, mystical in character, as yet 
unpublished (comp. Israel b. Samuel, “Pe’at ha- 
Shulhan,” Preface, Safed, 1836). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn. Airyah Neemanah, p. 162; Joshua 
Heshe}] Levin and Nahman of Grodno, “Aliyyot Eliyaht, pp. 
59, 67, Wilna, 1889. 

E. C. M. SEL. 

MENAHEM OF MERSEBURG (pia): 
German author; lived between 1420 and 1450. Of 
his life few details are known. Jacob Weil (Re- 
sponsa, No, 183) speaks of him as a great and prom- 
inent scholar; and he is mentioned also by Judah 
Minz, and by Solomon Luria in his commentary on 
the Talmud. Both of them identify him with Men- 
ahem Meil Zedek, while Azulai distinguishes be- 
tween the two Menahems. According to Jacob 
Weil’s allusions, Menahem must have lived in the 
first half of the fifteenth century. 

Menahem wrote a collection of halakic notes 
(“nimukim”), which forms an appendix to Weil’s 
responsa, This work, which was regarded as au- 
thoritative in all the communities in Saxony, deals 
with the rabbinical marriage laws, the civil code, 
and the taxation of the communities. Jn contrast 
to the meager scientific contributions of the German 
Jews of the period, who discussed little besides 
petty liturgical questions, Menahem’s book shows 
his lively interest in all matters that concern Juda- 
ism. Of great practical importance was his ruling 
in reference to the “mi'un,” or the decision that if 
a girl has been married during minority at the in- 
stance of her mother or brothers but not at the com- 
mand of her father, she has the right, when she at- 
tains her majority, to dissoive the union without a 


JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Menahem ben Jair 
Menahem ben Moses 





billofdivorce. Menahem, considering this immoral, 
repealed the law by virtue of his authority; but in 
the following century his ruling was set aside, and 
the Talmudic law again went into force. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch, vili, 137. 


S. G. WE. 


MENAHEM B. MICHAEL B. JOSEPH 
HA-KARA’I (called also Menahem Girni ha- 
Goleh): Karaite philosopher and poet; born in 
Babylon; a contemporary of Saadia. He corre- 
sponded with David al-Mukammas, whom he had 
met in Babylon, on philosophical subjects, and per- 
haps also regarding the Karaite “shehitah.” Sub- 
sequently he went to Alexandria, whence he wrote 
to the Karaite community at Cairo asking aid. In 
his letter he touched also on philosophical topies, 
and quoted the Karaite philosopher Joseph al-Basir. 
Leaving Alexandria for Cairo, Menahem continued 
his correspondence with David al-Mukammas; for, 
although the latter was living in the same city, 
Menahem was restrained by poverty fromapproach- 
ing a man of such prominence. In one letter, writ- 
ten at Cairo, Menahem explained to David, in an- 
swer to the latter’s rsoroach, that he believed both 
in the creation of the world and in the heavenly 
bodies. 

Aside from the rules for slaughtering, written in 
verse, three of Menahem’s piyyutim have been pre- 
served in the Karaite siddur. Menahem is quoted 
as a grammarianin the “Sefer ha-Mibhar” of Aaron 
b. Elijah the Elder, and probably also In the “‘Ez 
ha-Hayyim ” of Aaron b. Elijah the Younger. This 
Menahem must not be confounded with another 
who was likewise a contemporary of Saadia and who 
corresponded with the last-named in Arabic. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pinsker, Likkute Kadmoniyyot, p. 168; Ap- 

pendix, pp. 43 et seqg.; Steinscbneider, Cat. Leyden, p. 186; 

Gratz, Gesch, 3d ed., v. 284: Mordecai b. Nisan, ed. Wolf, p. 

130 (ed. Vienna, p. 13); Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. i. 762, ee 


MENAHEM B. MOSES TAMAR: Poet and 
commentator; probably a pupil of Mordecai Com- 
tino of Constantinople; flourished in the fifteenth 
and sixteenth centuries at Adrianople or Philip- 
popolis. He wrote commentaries to the books of 
Proverbs, Ruth, and Esther, a supercommentary to 
Abraham ibn Ezra’s commentary to the Pentateuch, 
and a Hebrew grammar entitled “ Rashe Besamim.” 
He furnished a noteworthy contribution to Hebrew 
poetry in his “Azharot” (comp. JEw. Encyec. ii. 
370-871), to which he wrote a commentary entitled 
“Tanhumot El.” He composed also other liturgical 
poems, including an imitation of Judah ha-Levi’s 
“ Zioniad,” and a hymn for the commencement of 
Purim. It has not been proved—although the at- 
tempt has been made—that he is identica] with Men- 
ahem b. Moses, the author of some liturgical poems 
found in the Roman Mahzor, in the Mahzor of Avi- 
gnon, avd in a manuscript of Abraham Bedersi’s 
“Diwan,” now in the British Museum. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Leyden, pp. 120 et seq. 

(comp. Zunz in Zeit. fitr. Hebr. Bihl. ix. 133) and pp. 1389 et 

seq.; idem, Hebr. Uebers. p. 593; Zunz, Literaturgesch. p. 

526; Landshuth, “Ammude ha-‘Abodah, pp. 194 et seq.; 

Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 286; Luzzatto, 


Nahlat, pp. 21, 51. 
D. H. B. 


Menahem Obel 
Menahem Vardimas 


MENAHEM OBEL. See Mournine. 


MENAHEM BEN PEREZ OF JOIGNY: 
Freuch tosafist and Biblical commentator of the 
twelfth century. Zadoc Kahn (“R. E. J.” iii. 7) 
identifies him with Menahem the Saint mentioned in 
Tos. Hul. 11b: and be conjectures that Menahem 
was killed at Bray-sur-Seine in the massacre of 1190. 
Gross, however, thinks this assertion doubtful, and 
concludes that Menahem died about 1180. Mena- 
hem ben Perez took an active part in the synod 
which was assembled at Troyes under the direction 
of the two brothers R. Samuel b. Meir and R. Jacob 
Tam. 

As a tosafist, Menahem ben Perez is quoted in 
Tos. Ber. 89b, 40a; ‘Er. 68a; B. M. 60a; Yoma 6a; 
Pes. 116a, and by later authorities. Asher b. Jehiel 
had before him Menahem’s tosafot (Asheri, Yeb. 
8a). Asa Biblical commentator, he is quoted in the 
“Da‘at Zekenim,” p. 29a, and in the “ Minhat Yehu- 
dah,” p. 83b. Menahem was the author of a work 
entitled “ Massorah Gedolah” or “The Great Maso- 
rah” (still unpublished), in which he completed the 
work bearing the same title by R. Gershom Meor 
ha-Golah. Joseph the Zealous mentions Menahem ’s 
controversy with a priest (“R. E. J.” Le.). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gratz, in Monatsschrift, xxxvi. 19; Gross, 

Gallia Judaica, pp. 261-252, 

S. 8. M. SEL. 


MENAHEM PORTO. Sce Porro, 
MENAHEM OF RECANATI. See REcANATI. 


MENAHEM BEN SARUK (MENAHEM 
B. JACOB IBN SARUK): Spanish philologist 
of the tenth century. He was a native of Tortosa, 
and went, apparently at an early age, to Cordova, 
where he found a patron in Isaac, the father of the 
subsequent statesman Hasdai ibn Shaprut. At 
Isaac’s death Menahem eulogized his protector’s 
virtues in an inscription placed in the synagogue 
which had been built by Isaac at Cordova. He 
wrote also elegies on him, which were universally 
recited during the period of mourning. Menahem 
then returned to his native city, where he engaged 
in business. 

Hasdai ibn Shaprut, however, recalled Menahem 
to Cordova and encouraged him to complete his 
life-work, a dictionary of the Hebrew language. 
In other ways also his new patron availed himself 
of his protégé’s literary talents. Hasdai on his 
mother’s death requested Menahem to compose a 
dirge; and when Hasdai addressed his questions to 
the king of the Chazars, Menahem was commis- 
sioned to write the letter, which has become an im- 
portant historical document. Menahem, however, 
carried on his work amid great privations, as Hasdai 
did not prove a liberal patron. 

The dictionary had scarcely been completed when 
an opponent to its author arose in Dunash ben La- 
brat. who had come to Spain from Fez, and who 
wrote a criticism on the work, which he prefaced by 
a eulogistic dedication to Hasdai. The slanders of 
personal enemies likewise seem to have aroused 
Hasdai’s anger agaiust Menahem to such a pitch 
that the latter, at the command of the powerful 
statesman, suffered bodily violence, his house being 
destroyed. Ina touching letter to Hasdai (a valua- 


THE JEWISI ENCYCLOPEDIA 


470 








ble source from which most of these statements have 
been taken) Menahem, who probably died shortly 
afterward, complained of the wrong 


Dispute done him. He seems to have made 
with some impression on his patron. Men- 
Dunash. ahem himself had not rephed to Du- 


nash, but his pupils defended their 
teacher, and in response to Dunash’s criticism wrote 
a detailed refutation which was marked by polem- 
ical acumen and exact grammatical knowledge. 
Judah b. David Hayyus, one of these three young 
scholars who so effectually defended their master, 
became the founder of scientitic Hebrew grammar; 
another, Isaac ibn Gikatilla, was subsequently, as 
one of the most learned men of Lucena, the teacher 
of Abual-Walid Merwan ibn Janah. Thus the most 
flourishing period of Hebrew philology, whose chief 
representatives were Hayyuj and Ibn Janah, began 
with Menahem ben Saruk. 

The place to be assigned to the “ Mahberet,” as 
Menahem entitled his dictionary, has been briefly 
discussed elsewhere (see JEW. ENcyc. iv. 580, 8.¢. 
DicrironartEs). This was the first complete lexical 
treatment of the Biblical vocabulary composed in 
Hebrew in which the view then prevailing, that 
there were both uniliteral and biliteral roots, was 
definitely systematized and worked out. This the- 
ory was set aside Jater by Menahem’s own pupil, 
Hayyuj, who correctly assumed the triliteral char- 
acter of Hebrew roots; but, because it was written 
in Hebrew, Menahem’s dictionary remained for a 
long time the chief source of philological instruction 
for Jews who were unacquainted with Arabic, espe- 
cially, . ‘erefore, for those in the Christian countries 
of Europe. Thus Rashiin the second half of the 

eleventh century refers to Menahem 


Character- as a philological authority; Rashi’s 
istics of grandson, Jacob b. Meir Tam, com- 
His Dic- posed a work for the special purpose 
tionary. of vindicating Menahem against the 


attacks of Dunash; and (about 1140) 
Menahem b. Solomon composed in Haly a dictionary 
which was based for the most part on the * Mah- 
beret.” 

Regarding the grammatical importance of Mena- 
hem ben Saruk’s work, it may be noted that, al- 
though he had no systematic knowledge of the 
forms of the language, and was unacquainted even 
with Saadia’s grammatical works, yet he recognized 
throughout his lexicon that there are inviolable laws 
underlying the language, and that its forms and 
phenomena are subject to definite rules. This in- 
sight, which appears in the terminology he employs, 
bridges the apparent chasm between him and his 
pupil Hayyuj. As Menahem composed his work in 
Hebrew, he could not use the terminology of the 
Arabic grammarians; yet he tacitly adopted some of 
their terms, translating them into Hebrew, and ex- 
plained some words, although without acknowledg- 
ing it, on theanalogy of kindred Arabic expressions. 
He avoids, however, any open comparison of the 
language of the Bible with that of the Koran, not- 
withstanding the precedent furnished him by Saadia 
and Ibn Kuraish, authors whom he quotes in his 
dictionary. He doubtless refrained from such com- 
parison because of the narrow-minded religious 


471 


prejudice which then prevented the Spanish Jews 

from engaging in such linguistic comparisons. 

Menahem ben Saruk’s dictionary was edited by 
Filipowski (London, 1854), and addenda from the 
Bern manuscript of the “Mahberet ” 
were published by D. Kaufmann in 
"Z. D. M. G.” xl. 867-409. The de- 
fense by Menahem'’s pupils was edited by S. G. 
Stern in “Liber Responsionum” (Vienna, 1870), 
where Menahem’s letter to Hasdai ibn Shaprut (first 
edited by Luzzatto in * Bet ha-Ozar”) is reprinted 
(pp. XXHiL.-XXXVii.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 8S. Gross, Menahem bh. Saruk, Berlin, 1872; 
Bacher, in Winter and Wiinsche, Jiidisehe Litteratur, ii. 
145-149; idem, Die Anftinge der Hebrdiischen Grammatik., 
pp. 70-95; Dukes, Beitrdye zur Gesch. der Aeltesten Ausle- 
gung und Spracherkldiruny des A. T. ii. 119 et seq.: 
Gratz, Gesch. Ist ed., v. 872 et seq.: Geiger, Das Judenthum 
und Seine Gesen. ii. 87 et sey. Jitdisehe Zeitschrift, ix. 65, 
x. 831; vrachman, Die Stellung und Bedeutung des Jehi- 
dah Hajjug in der Gesch. der Hebréischen Grammatik, 
pp. 17-27, Breslau, 1885; Weiss, Dor, iv. 228-234; Steinschnei- 
der, Cat. Bod, cal. 1738. 

v. W. Bz 

MENAHEM BEN SIMEON: French Biblical 
commentator at the end of the twelfth century; a 
native of Posquiéres and a pupil of Joseph Kimhi. 
The Bibliothégque Nationale, Paris (MS. No. 192, 
1-2), contains Menahem’s commentary to the books 
of Jeremiah and Ezekiel: the commentary to the 
former was completed in 1191; the commentary to 
the latter ends in the middle of ch. x1. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 450. 

J, M. Set. 

MENAHEM B. SOLOMON B. ISAAC: Au- 
thor of the “Sekel Tob” and the “Eben Bohan”: 
flourished in the first half of the twelfth century. 
The presence of twenty-five Italian glosses in his 
works Indicates that he lived in Italy. The “Sekel 
Tob,” written in 1189 at Rome, is a midrashie com- 
pilation on the Pentateuch. The substance of the 
old midrashim is quoted in smooth and ornate lan- 
guage, from which foreign words are excluded, the 
general method being that of Tobias b. Eliezer’s 
“Lekah Tob,” which is frequently quoted, both 
with and without acknowledgment. Menahem's 
sources, in addition to the Targumim, are the whole 
of the earlier midrashic literature as well as the lit- 
erature of geonic mysticism. He interprets also 
halakic authors, especially Alfasi and R, Hananeel. 
explaining verses as well as single words literally, 
although he expressly states that the midrashic in- 
terpretation is deeper and more thorough. “Sekel 
Tob” is frequently quoted both for its exegesis 
and for its halakic decisions. In the Middle Ages 
it was still intact, but now only the portion from 
Gen. xv. 1 to Ex. xi. 2 (edited by Buber, Berlin, 
1900) is in existence, In two separate manuscripts in 
the Bodleian Library. Fragments of his commen- 
tary to Leviticus are found in a Munich manuscript, 
and, according to Steinschneider, portions of a simi- 
lar commentary to the Five Megillot are contained 
in a codex at Berlin. 

Of Menahem’s other work, the “Eben Bohan,” 
ouly fragments are extant (Munich MS. No. 55). 
A part of it has been translated by Dukes, and it has 
been analyzed in detail by Bacher. This work, 
completed at Rome in 1148, in five months, was in- 
tended to prepare the author’s three young sons for 


Editions. 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Menahem Obel 
Menahem Vardimas 


the study of the Bible. Menahem undertook to pre- 
pare for the tirst timein Hebrew acomprehensive man- 
ual of the Hebrew language and of Biblical exegesis. 
The work was divided into fifty parts; the first part, 
by far the largest and most valuable, was a diction- 
ary of the Hebrew language; the other parts, now 
known only by their chapter-headings, dealt with 
grammar. The author follows chiefly Menahem b. 
Saruk ; occasionally, and with diffidence, however, he 
advances his own views, and the entire conception 
of the form and contents of the work shows a certain 
degree of independence. It was intended, according 
to Bacher, to uphold Menahem b. Saruk’s system 
against the teachings of Hayyuj and Ibn Janah, intro- 
duced about that time (1148) into Italy by Abraham 
ibn Ezra. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Z. G. pp. 71, 108; Bacher, Die Hebr. 
Sprachwissenuschaft (Winter and Wiinsehe, Die Jtidische 
Litteratur, li. 185); idem, Bibeleveyese (ib. ii. 272); idem, 
Lieitung zum Sechelt Tob, pp. i.. 1x., Berlin, 1900: Dukes, 
Arohez ‘al-Yad, part J, Esslingen, 1346; Kirehheim, in Orient. 
Lit. vii. 439; Steinschneider, Hehr. Bibl. xvii. 28 et seq., 134 
et. seq.; Bacher, Der Priifstein des Menahem bh. Salomo, in 
Grdte Jubelschrift, pp. 94-115. 

J. A. B. 
MENAHEM OF TIEKTIN (MaHaRaM TIK- 

TIN; MENAHEM DAVID BEN ISAAC): 

Polish rabbi and author of the sixteenth century ; 

pupil of Moses Isserles. Menahem oceupied himself 

with emending and annotating various texts; his 

notes on the halakot of Isaac Alfasiand Mordecai b. 

Millel have keen published under the title “ Hagga- 

hot Maharam Tiktin,” These “haggahot ” were first 

published by Menahem ’s son Asher (Cracow, 1597- 

1598), and have since been republished in the edi- 

tions of Alfasi. According to Asher b. Menahem 

(preface to his edition of the “Haggahot”), Men- 

ahem wrote many other works, and particularly 

notes to the Targum, to the commentaries of Rashi 
and Nahmanides, to the prayers and piyyutim, to 
the Zohar and other cabalistic works. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, p. 58; Fiirst, 
Bibl. Jud. ii, 851-352 : Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1742. 
Be. M. Sen. 


MENAHEM VARDIMAS BEN PEREZ 
THE ELDER: French tosafist and liturgist; 
died at Dreux 1224. The name “ Vardimas,” found 
in Talmud Babli (Shab. 118b) as a bye-name of Men- 
ahem bar Jose, was adopted by this tosafist prob- 
ably to distinguish him from other persons bearing 
the name “ Menahem.” According to Gross, Mena- 
hem is identical with the person of the same name 
mentioned by Samuel of Falaise as having been his 
master, the epithet “ Ha-Kkadosh” given by Samuel 
meaning simply “the Pious” and not * the Martyr.” 

Menaliem’s authority in halakic matters is invoked 
by Moses of Coucy (“Semag.” § 27) and by many 
others. He is mentioned among those who took 
part in the famous discussion on phylacteries, 
which, according to Gedaliah ibn Yahva (“Shalshe- 
let ha-Kabbalah,” p. 52a), was held in Menahem's 
house. Jn a manuscript commentary on the Penta- 
teuch (Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” Nov 270) 
Menahem is cited as a Biblical commentator. A 
liturgical poem of his on the sacrifice of Isaac is 
inserted in the ritual of Rosh ha-Shanah. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz, Z. G. pp. 53, 1938; idem. Literaturgesch. 
p. 328; Neubauer, in R. EB. J. xvii. 153: idem, in Geiger’s 
Jiidische Zeit. ix. 218; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. T 

s. 8, ‘ 


Br. 


Menahem ben Zebi 
Menander 





MENAHEM BEN ZEBI: German rabbi: died 
at Posen( 7’) in 1724. He was the pupil of R. He- 
schel and of Aaron Samuel Kaidanover (author of 
“Birkat ba-Zebah ”). He wrote: * Zinzenet Mena- 
hem” (Berlin, 1719), an elucidation of difficult pas- 
sages in the Haggadah; “Lehem Menahem,” re- 
spousa, and explanations of various Talmudic 
passages; and “ Ta‘ame Menahem,” on Rashi’s com- 
mentary on the Pentateuch. 

BIBLIOGRAPILY : Steinsehneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 6872: Azulal, 

Shem ha-Gedolim, ti. 125, 

B,C. A. S. W. 

MENAHEM ZIONI (ZIYYUNI) B. MEIR 
OF SPEYER: Cabualist of the middle of the fif- 
teenth century; author of the cabalistic commen- 
tary “Ziyyuni,” from which he derives his name. 
He based his work upon Rashi and Nahmanides, 
and especially upon the old cabalistic literature of 
the geonic period. The “Ziyyuni” is introduced 
by poems in alphabetic and acrostic order. The di- 
vision Bereshit begins with a preface on the impor- 
tance of the assumption of the creation of the world, 
and in support of this view the arguments of Mai- 
monides are quoted at length. Short poems serve 
as transitions tothe several parashiyyot, and in con- 
clusion there is an acrostic poem, to which, in the 
second edition, another poem is added. The verse 
of Zioni quoted by Dukes (“ Orient, Lit,” tv. 798) from 
a manuscript chrestomathy constitutes the last stanza 
of this final poem. The book is frequently quoted 
in the Yalkut Re’ubeni. It was printed by Vincen- 
tio Conti at Cremona in 1559, in rabbinic script, and 
after this edition was burned (in the same year) by 
marauding Spanish soldiers, it was reprinted there 
in the following year. Menahem is not to be iden- 
tified with Menahem Zion b. Meir 335 ron {as does 
Heidenheim, “ Pijjutim und Pajtanim,” p. 8), a pay- 
yetan of the twelfth century well known under the 
name of “Menahem b. Machir” (Zunz, “G. V.” 2d 
ed., p. 408). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ph. Bloch, Die Jtidische Mystik unead Kab- 
hala, in Winter and Wiinsche, Die Jiidisehe Litteratur, iii. 
282: Zunz. Z. G. p. 105; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. i. 774; Stein- 
schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1742. 

NE A. B. 


MENAHEM-ZION BEN SOLOMON (ven- 
erally called Menahem-Ziyyon R. Zalman 
Gabbai’s): Polish rabbi and preacher; died at 
Altona in 1681. He was at first rabbi of Vladislav, 
government of Suwalki, Russian Poland, and then 
dayyan at Cracow. He wrote a work entitled “ Ne- 
hamot Ziyyon ” (Frank fort-on-the-Main, 1677), a col- 
“lection of twenty-two sermons. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wolf, Bibl. Hebr.i., No. 1451; Steinschneider, 


Cat. Bodl. eol. 1733. 
H.R. M. SE. 


MENAHOT (“ Meat-Offerings ”): Treatise in the 
Mishnah, in the Tosefta, and in the Babylonian Tal- 
mud. It discusses chiefly the more precise details 
of the regulations governing the different kinds 
of meat-offering mentioned in Lev. ii. 5, 11-18: vi. 
7-11; vii. 9, 10; xxiii, 18, 16; Num. v. 11 e¢ seg., 
vi. 18-20, xxviii., and xxix. inthe Mishnaic order 
Kodashim this treatise is second. It is divided into 
thirteen chapters, containing ninety-three para- 
graphs in all. 

Ch. i.: The intention requisite to make an offering 


THE JEWISIL ENCYCLOPEDIA 


472 


valid: the omissions through which a meat-offering 
becomes “ pasul” (unfit) or “ piggul” (an abomina- 
tion: if the person sacrificing intends 


‘‘Pasul” to eat it after the allotted time, it 
and becomes piggul; if he intends to eat 
‘‘Piggeul.” it outside the place appointed for it. 


it becomes pasul); how the handful 
(“komez ”) is te be taken; the oil necessary for the 
komez, and the incense. 

Ch. ii.: Further details concerning pasul and pig- 
cul, according to the different kinds of offerings, 
how the various parts of an offering affect one an- 
other in regard to piggul. 

Ch. iii.: The circumstances under which a meat- 
offering remains Kasher; how the parts of an 
offering, or how different offerings presented to- 
gether, affect one another in regard to pasul. In 
this connection many other things are enumerated 
which render one anotber invalid, e.¢., the two sec- 
tions of the law (“parashiyyot ”) in the mezuzah, or 
the four in the tefillin. 

Ch. iv.: Continued enumeration of those things 
which do or do not render one another pasul (this 

affords an occasion to explain how the 


Mode of  Israclites in the wilderness sacrificed 
Sacrifice. and how the altar, the table, and the 


candlesticks were consecrated); the 
meat-offering of the high priest. 

Ch. v.: Preparation of the meat-offerings; the 
offerings which need additional ingredients. and 
what these must be; what offerings must be brought 
near the altar (“haggashah”) and what offerings 
must be waved (‘tenufah ”); what offerings must be 
both brought near the altar and waved; what offer- 
ings may be neither waved nor brought near. 

Ch. vi.: Offerings from which only a handful is 
taken and offerings which are placed entire upon the 
altar; further details concerning the preparation of 
the meat-offering. 

Ch. vii.: Regulations concerning the sacrifice of 
thanksgiving (“todah”) and concerning the offering 
of the Nazarites. Here it is stated that the measures 
were changed, and that the new so-called “ Jerusa- 
lem” measure was one-sixth larger than the old one, 
termed “midbari” (from the desert). 

Ch. viii.: Whence the materials were taken for 
the different meat-offerings (here are mentioned the 
places which produced the best flour and the best oi}; 
how the best oil and flour was obtained; where the 
best wine was found and how it was tested. 

Ch. ix.: The different measures used in the Tem- 
ple to measure the flour, the oi], and the wine for 
the various offerings; drink-offerings; the sacrifices 
for which drink-offerings were requisite; the laying 
of hands upon the sacrificial animal (“ semikah ”); the 
sacrifices in which this takes place, and who may 
perform the semikah. 

Ch. x.: The wave-offering (“omer”); when aud 
whence it was brought; the ceremonial 
observed in the cutting of it and how 
it was offered: the regulation intro- 
duced by R. Johanan b. Zakkai arter 
the destruction of the Temple. 

Ch. xi.: The preparation of the pentecostal bread 
and of the showbread: the size of the loaves and 
when they may be eaten; the placing of the show- 

f 


Wave- 
Offering. 


473 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Menahem ben Zebi 
Menander 





bread on the table and the distribution of it among 
the priests. 

Ch. xii.;: Exemption from meat- and drink-offer- 
ings; the time after which exemption is no longer 
possible; offerings from which no one may be ex- 
empted; vows of meat- and drink-offerings; how the 
vow may be fulfilled. 

Ch, xiii.: Regulations concerning vows of offer- 
ings which are not strictly defined; sacritices vowed 

for the temple at Jerusalem may not be 


Intention offered inthe temple of Onias, or vice 
of versa; the priests of the temple of 


Onias are not permitted to serve in the 
temple at Jerusalem. The conclusion 
of thechapter and of the treatise runs: “It is imma- 
terial whether one sacrifices much or little so long as 
his mind is intent on God.” 

The order given above is that of the editions of 
the Mishnah and of many manuscripts of the Tal- 
mud (comp. the observation of R. Bezaleel Ashke- 
nazi at the end of the “Shittah Mekubbezet ” on Me- 
nahot, in the Wilna edition of the Talmud, p. 109b). 
On the other hand, all the printed editions of the Tal- 
mud have the chapter beginning “R. Ishmael,” 
given above as the tenth, in the sixth place, the 
remaining chapters occurring in the order given 
above, Special attention should be given to the 
account in the Tosefta to this treatise of the acts of 
greed and violence committed by the priests during 
the time of the Second Temple, which was destroyed 
because of their rapacity and mutual hatred (xiii. 18- 
22). TheGemara contains, in the third chapter, inter- 
esting observations on the forms of Hebrew letters 
and on the regulations for the writing of the Torah, 
of tefillin, and of the mezuzah, while in the fourth 
chapter are regulations concerning the zizit. 

The following passages also are specially note- 
worthy: p. 53a, b—an instance of the peculiar style 
of R. Ezra’s haggadic exegesis ; the 
tradition as to how God justified Him- 
self to Abraham for the destruction of 
the Temple and the exile of the peo- 
ple; the comparing of Israel to an olive-tree; p. 99b 
—the attitude of R. Ishmael toward Greck culture; 
p. 109b—the account of the origin of the temple of 
Onias. The last passage is important enough to 
be repeated here: “At the hour of his death the 
high priest Simon the Just appointed his younger 
but learned son Onias to be his successor. Onias 
renounced his claim in favor of his elder brother 
Shimei. Onias, however, secretly grudged him his 
position and endeavored to supplant him. Conse- 
quently when Shimei, who was inexperienced in the 
priestly service, asked Onias to instruct him in its 
duties, the latter misled him into putting on a wom- 
an’scap and girdle to officiate in, and then told the 
priests that Shimei had promised his beloved to offi- 
ciate in her cap and girdle on the day of his instal- 
lation in office. When the priests threatened to kill 
Shimei for thus trifling with the service, he told 
them how the matter really stood. . Thereupon the 
priests sought the death of Onias, but he fled to 
Egypt and there built histemple.” Thereis no Jeru- 
salem Gemara to Menahot. The Tosafot to Menahot 
(109b, reference word, “nizdamen”) refers to Yeru- 
shalmi Yoma (v. 2), where the passage cited is found. 


Sacrifice. 


Special 
Passages. 


Toxatat Cn the Warsaw edi- 
* Hiddushim ** 


J. Z. L. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isaiah di ‘Trani. 
tion of the Talmud. 1861, wreng|y cesignated as ° 
vf Soiomon ben Adret). 


MEN AKKER. Scc Porcine. 

MENANDER: 1. Putative author of a collec- 
tion of proverbs, in a Syriac manuscript in the Brit- 
ish Museum, edited in 1862 by Land, and bearing the 
superscription, “The sage Menander said.” Either 
this Menander was a real person, a Hellenistic 
Jew whose proverbs, probably written originally in 
Greek, are now extant only in tiis Syriac transla- 
tion, or the name is a pseudonym, as Schiirer as- 
sumes; similar collections of proverbs were fre- 
quently ascribed to the famous Attic comedian, 

Frankenberg has recently proved that these Svriac 
sentences are of Jewish origin, and has pointed out 
numerous instances of relationship between them 
and sentences in the canonical Book of Proverbs and 
in Ecclesiasticus. <A few sentences quoted from 
Land’s edition may serve to make this kinship 
clear. 

* Rejoice with thy children, O father, for these are the [true] 
joys” (p. 68, line 18; comp. Prov. x. 1; Ecelus. [Sirach] xxv. 7. 
xxx. 4). ‘* Whosoever wrongeth his maid servant doth not es- 
cape the vengeance of God” (p. 11, ine 5; comp. Ecelus. [Si- 
rach] xli. 22). 

““Whoever committeth adultery perisheth’’ (p. 69, line 12: 
comp. Prov. ti. 18, vii. 27). 

**He who sleepeth at an untimely season hateth counsel and 
guidance; for such sleep bringeth death and destruction” (p. 
66, line 3; comp. Proy. vi. 9-11, xix. 15, xx.13). “If thou art 
about to take a wife, see that she hath no evil tongue, for a 
quarrelsome woman is hell, and an evil man is death” (p. 66, 
below ; comp. Ecclus. [Sirach] xxv. 13, 19). ‘*Fear God, and 
He shall save thee if thou shalt call upon Him in time of need’ 
(p. 67, line 2; comp. Prov. xxiv. 16). “If thou sittest at meat 
with many, show them not thy filled purse, lest they borrow 
from thee without thought of repayment; or if thou remindest 
them, lest they provoke strife wilh thee, so that thou losest thy 
money and becomest their enemy ” (p. 65, lines 7-9; comp. Ec- 
clus. [Sirach] viii. 12; xxix. 4, 14). “Friendship is good and 
useful, since it endureth even to the house of death’ (p. 72, line 
10; comp. Ecclus. [Sirach] vi. 14, xxxvii.2). ‘“‘The heart of 
the fool rejoiceth in witeheraft, and the Chaldean art besotteth 
the understanding of the simple” (p. 70, line 6; comp. Ecelus. 
[Sirach] xxxi. 1). ‘‘ Eat not with the wicked; for he filleth 
himself at thy table, and then speaketh evil of thee’’ (p. 70, be- 
low; comp. Eeelus. [Sirach] xi. 29). ‘Work diligently in 
youth, that thou mayest have wealth in thine age” (p. 71, lines 
25 et seqg.; comp. Prov. x. 22: Eeclus. [Sirach] xi.]0,11). ‘* Bet- 
ter one day under the sun than a hundred years in sheol” (p. 
71, line 22; comp. Eecl. ix. 4). “* Desirable are life, money, and 
the blessing of children; but of more worth is a good name” 
(p. 72, line 8; comp. Eccl. vii. 1). 

The entire work consists of single disconnected 
sentences. There are no theoretical maxims on the 
value of wisdom, as in Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus, 
but only guides to practical life; concerning this 
there is hardly a theme in Menander that is not 
treated in the same spirit as in the two Biblical 
books. The ritual aspect of religion, however, is 
hardly mentioned. 

The entire lack of Christian allusions in the collec- 
tion may be held to confirm its Jewish origin. 
Pagan references are found only in the mention of 
Homer and in the rather long polemic against im- 
pious priests who despise their own gods and are 
gluttonous at banquets (p. 69). Frankenberg inter- 
prets this passage as referring to Jewish conditions, 
while Schiirer regards it as a Gentile interpolation. 

The only allusions to the date of composition 
point to the period of Roman rule, for gladiators are 
mentioned (p. 65, line 14) and crucifixion is declared 


Mende 


Mendelson THE 


JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


474 





to be the punishment for theft (p. 70, line 8), al- 
though the mention of priests and tithes implies the 
time of the Temple. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Land, Anecdota Syriaca, i, Leyden, 1862; 
Frankenberg, Die Schrift des Menander ein Produkt Cer 
Jlidischen Spruchweisheit, in Stade’s Zeitschrift, 1895, xv. 
225-277 + Sebtirer, Gesch. 3d ed., til. 476-478. 

2. Historian; a native of Ephesus; lived probably 
at the time when the kingdom and the school of 
Pergamos were at their zenith, whence he was called 
also “the Pergamionian ”:; apparently, one of the 
pupils of Eratosthenes (276-195 B.c.). Menander 
wrote a history of Phenicia, taking his material 
from the original documents in the archives at 
Tyre. As he mentions the fact that King Hiram 
had wood taken from the forests of Lebanon for the 
building of the Temple, he is cited by Josephus 
(“ Ant.” ix. 14, § 2) as a witness for the verity of 
Biblical history; and also in connection with <As- 
syrian history Menander has a curious reference, 
unknown elsewhere, to the younger son of a certain 
Abdemon, who is said to have vanquished Solomon 
in guessing riddles (Josephus, “Contra Ap.” i. 18; 
idem, “ Ant.” viii. 6, § 3). 

BiBLIOGRAPHY: C. Miller, Fragmenta Historicorum Greeco- 


ram, iv. 445; Th. Reinach, Texrtes ad’ Auteurs Grecs et Ro- 
mains Relatifs au Judaisme, i. 44-46, Paris, 1895. 


J. S. Kr. 


MENDE: Capital of the ancient county of 
Gévaudan; now chief town in the department of 
Lozére, France. In the twelfth century a Jewish 
community existed here, having a synagogue, whose 
ruins still (1904)remain. In 1807 a contention arose 
between Philip the Fair, King of France, and the 
Bishop of Mende on the question of the possessions 
of the Jews who had been expelled in the preceding 
year. In April, 1810, an arrangement between the 
king and the bishop was made by virtue of which 
Philip abandoned to the latter one-third of the con- 
fiscated goods of the Jews, as well as a house at 
Mende which had belonged to a Jew named Ferrier. 

Other parts also of Gévaudan were inhabited by 
Jews in the Middle Ages, as Marvejols or Marvége 

(way), where Jacob ha-Levi, the mystic, lived 
about 1203; Villefort (amin), where the site of 
the old Jewish cemetery is still known (“ Memoires de 

la Société Royale des Antiquaires de France,” viii. 

334); and others. Even in their names several vil- 

lages indicate the former residence of Jews there, 

as Salmon, formerly Salomon; Mont-David, Booz, 

Ruth, and Obed (7d. p. 320). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Saige, Les Juifs du Languedoe, pp. 14, 101, 
324; Depping, Les Juifs dans le Moyen Age, p “£3: : Bédar- 
ride. Les Juifs en France, en Italie, et en Fispagne, p. 227; 
F. André, Notice sur les Juifs en Gévaudan, in Bulletin 
de la Société Historique de Lozére, 1872, historical part. pp. 


85-91; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 364. 
1. S. K. 


IZENDEL: Name of a prominent Hungarian 
tumily which flourished in the latter half of the fif- 
teenth century and in the first half of the sixteenth 
in Ofen (Buda), Members of three generations of it 
are known; namely, Jacob, Israel, and Isaac Men- 
del, who held the office of “ Princeps Judeorum.,” 
“Supremus Judeorum,” or * Prefeetus Judseorum ” 
between 1482 and 1539. This office. which seems to 
have existed only during that period, was created by 
King Matthias in order to give the Jews an accred- 


ited representative at court, who at the same time 
should be responsible for the payment of their taxes. 
The “ Prefectus Judeorum ” was empowered to im- 
pose fines and other penalties on the Jews. As an 
official of the crown lhe was exempted from wearing 
the Jews’ hat. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohn, Magyar Zsiddk Tortenete, pp. 216 et 


seq.: Engel, Gesch. des Unyarischen Reiches, i. 80 et seq; 
Biichler, A Zsidék Torténete Budapesten, Pp. 50 et sey.: 


Venetianer, A Zsidosag Szerverete, pp. 273 et seq., 326 
et seq. 
D, L. Y. 


MENDEL, EMANUEL: German physician; 
born at Bunzlau, Silesia, Oct. 28, 1839; educated 
at the universities of Breslau, Vienna, and Berlin 
(M.D. 1860). In 1861 he took charge of a private 
insane asylum at Pankow, near Berlin. He served 
as surgeon in the Franco-Prussian war (1870-71), 
and gained the Iron Cross. In 1871 he removed to 
Berlin and became privat-docent in psychiatry at 
the university, and in 1884 was made assistant pro- 
fessor. From 1877 to 1881 he was a member of the 
German Reichstag. He died June 28, 1907. 

Mende] was collaborator in psychiatry on Eulen- 
burg’s “Realeneyclopiidie der Gesammten [lecil- 
kunde,” Ebstein-Schwalbe’s “Handbuch der Prak- 
tischen Medizin,” and Tuke's “Journal of Mental 
Science.” He wrote many essays in the med- 
ical journals, especially on psychiatry, and is editor 
of the “Neurologisches Centralblatt” and of the 
“ Jahresbericht tiber Neurologie und Psychiatrie.” 
Of his numerous works may be mentioned: “ Pro- 
gressive Paralyse der Irren,” Berlin, 1880; “ Die 
Manie,” Vienna, 1881; and “ Die Geisteskranken in 
dem Entwurf des Birgerlichen Gesetzbuches fir 


das Deutsche Reich,” Berlin, 1889. 
8. F,. T. H. 


MENDEL, HENRIETTE: Bavarian actress; 
born July 31, 1883; died at Munich Nov. 12, 1891. 
In early life she was noted for her beauty and his- 
trionic talents. Having been created Baroness 
(Freifrau) of Wallersee in the peerage of Bavaria on 
May 19, 1859, she married, May 28, 1859, Duke Lud- 
wig Wilhelm, eldest son of Duke Maximilian Joseph 
of Bavaria, who had renounced his rights of primo- 
geniture in favor of his younger brother. The 
union was signally happy, and the issue of the mar- 
riage, Marie Luise, married Count Georg von La- 
risch. The baroness died after a protracted illness, 
and was buried according to the rites of the Catholic 
Church, in the city of Munich. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Almanach de Gotha; Allgemeine Zeitung, 

Nov. 12-16, 1891. 

s. A. M. F. 

MENDEL, HERMANN: Music publisher and 
writer; born at Halle Aug. 6, 1834; died at Berlin 
Oct. 26, 1876. He received his musical education at 
Halle, Leipsic, and Berlin. In 1858 he entered the 
Berlin music-publishing house of Schlesinger, and 
later that of Bote & Bock. In 1862 he established 
a business of his own and conducted it until 1868, 
contributing at the same time to numerous period- 
icals, such as the “Echo,” “Tonhalle,” “ Theater- 
diener,” “Berliner Montagszeitung,” and “ Deutsche 
Musikerzeitung,” which last-named he conducted 
from its inception in 1870 until his death. He is 


best known as the projector of the celebrated “ Mu- 
‘ 





sikalisches JConversations-Lexikon,” which he be- 
gan in 1870 witha large and distinguished staff of 
collaborators. <At the time of his death, however, 
it had reached only the letter “M.” As completed 
under the editorship of Dr. Reissmann, it consists 
of eleven volumes, and is one of the most compre- 
hensive works of its kind. Prominent among the 
other publications of Mendel are his well-known 
biographies of Nicolai and Meycrbeer, and his edi- 
tion of Mode’s “Opernbibliothek,” consisting of 
about ninety opera-libretti, with preface, cte. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Grove, Dictionary of Music and Musicians; 


Riemann, Musik-Lexikon. 
s ° J . So. 


MENDELSBURG, LEON: Russian teacher 
and writer; born at Hodava, Russian Poland, 1819; 
died at Warsaw March, 1897. He studied Talmud 
at Tomashov, where Phinehas-Mendel Heilprin ex- 
ercised a beneficial influence on his education. 
In 1850 Mendelsburg was appointed government 
teacher at the Jewish public school in Novograd- 
Volhynsk; and in 1854 he was transferred to the 
rabbinical school at Jitomiv, where he remained 
until the closing of that school by the government 
“(July 1, 1873). He then settled in Koretz, and later 
removed to Warsaw. From 1850 Mendelsburg was 
a constant cc.iributor in German to the “ Allge- 
meine Zeitung des Judenthums,” in which he pub- 
lished valuable papers on the life of the Jews in 
tussia. He published also “ Dichtung und Warh- 
heit ” (Leipsic, 1862), a volume of sketches of Russo- 
Jewish life. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sokolow, Sefer Zikkaron, p. 12; Ha-Zefirah, 


L897", p. 233. 
H.R. J. G. L. 


MENDELSOHN, JOSEPH: German author: 
bern at Jever Sept. 10, 1817: died at Hamburg 
April 4, 1856. He was admitted at an early age to 
the Jewish free school at Hamburg, and in 1831 en- 
tered a printing establishment at Brunswick as an 
apprentice, remaining there as journeyman until 
1839. On his return to Hamburg he devoted him- 
self to literature, but shortly afterward, aided by 
Solomon Heine, he went to Paris for further study. 
In 1841 he returned to Hamburg and resumed his 
literary work. 

Mendelsohn was the author of the following 
works: “Blithen. Gedichte und Novellen eines 
Schriftsetzers” (Brunswick, 1839), with a preface 
by F. K. von Strombeck; “Pariser Briefe” (1841); 
~ Wilde Blumen” (1842); “Ueberall Jesuiten” 
(1846); and some comedies from the French, inclu- 
ding “Er Muss Aufs Land” (1845) and “Ein Weib 
aus dem Volke ” (1846). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Briimmer, Lexikon Deutscher Dichter wit 

Prosaisten, ii. 29. 

8. M. K. 

MENDELSOHN, MARTIN: German physi- 
cian; born at Posen Dec. 16, 1860: studied medicine 
at the universities of Leipsic and Berlin (M.D. 1885). 
After a year spent in Paris, where he took a post- 
graduate course, he established himself as a physi- 
cian in Berlin, becoming assistant at the first medical 
clinic and later at the Charité Hospital. In 1895 he 
was admitted as privat-docent tothe medical faculty 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| 
| 


Mende 
Mendelson 





of Berlin University. and received the title of pro- 
fessor in 1899. 

Mendcisoin has collaborated on Eulenbure’s 
* Realencyclopiidie der Gesammten ITeilkunde,” and 
since 1894 has edited the “Zeitschrift fir Kranken- 
pHlege.” Te has contributed many essays (about 
100) to the medical journals, and is the author of: 
“Das Opium,” Berlin, 1888: “Der Comfort des 
Kranken,” 7, 1890 (2d ed. 1892); “ Aerztliche Kunst 
und Medizinische Wissenschaft,” Wiesbaden, 1893; 
“Einfluss des Radfahrens auf den Menschlichen Or- 
ganismus,” Berlin, 1896; “ Krankenpflege fiir Medi- 
ziner,” 7). 1899, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Bioy. Lev. 

s, Fr. T. H. 

MENDELSOHN, SAMUEL: American rabbi 
and scholar; born in Shillelen, province of Kovuno, 
Russia, March 31, 1850. He was educated at the 
rabbinical college, Wilna, at the rabbinic school, 
Berlin, and at Maimonides’ College, Philadelphia, 
Pa. (1873). In 1888 he received the honorary de- 
gree of doctor of law from the University of North 
Carolina. Mendelsohn was rabbi of the Congrega- 
tion Beth-E], Norfolk, Va., from 1878 to 1876, since 
which date he has served as rabbi of the Congrega- 
tion Temple of Israel, Wilmington, N. C. 

Mendelsohn has published *The Criminal Juris- 
prudence of the Ancient Hebrews” (Baltimore, 
1891), in addition to several pamphlets and a large 
number of articles, on subjects of general Jewish 
interest and Talmudical research, in “Ha-Zofeh,” 
the “Jewish Messenger,” “Jewish Record,” “South 
Atlantic Magazine,” “American Israelite,” and 
“Revue des Etudes Juives.” 

In 1879 he married Esther Jastrow, niece of the 
Rev. Dr. M. Jastrow. He has one son, Charles 
Jastrow Mendelsohn; the latter was fellow in 
classics in the University of Pennsylvania (1901- 
1903), where he also received the degree of doctor 
of philosophy in 1904. A. 


MENDELSON, MORRITZ EMANUILO- 
VICH : Polish physiologist and physician; born at 
Warsaw 1855. He studied medicine at the Univer- 
sity of Warsaw, and received his doctor’s degree 
from the University of Kharkov in 1884. From 
1876 to 1887 he worked in various laboratories and 
clinicsin Europe: at Berlin under Dubois-Reymond ; 
at Erlangen under Rosenthal; and at Paris under 
Charcot and Mars of the Collége de France, where 
he was for some time assistant also. Since 1890 he 
has been privat-docent in physiology in the Uni- 
versity of St. Petersburg. 

Among the medical works of Mendelson the fol- 
lowing may be inentioned: “Etude sur le Temps 
Perdu des Muscles,” in “Publ. du Collége de 
France,” 1879; “ Recherches Cliniques sur la Periode 
d’Excitation Latente,” in “ Archives de Physiologie 
Normale,” 1880; “Action de la Veratrine sur le 
Muscle,” 73. 1888; “Excitabilité et Travail Méca- 
nique du Muscle,” in “Publ. de Académie des 
Sciences,” Paris, 18838. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Entziklopedicheski Slovar, xix. 82. 

H. R. A. 5. W. 

MENDELSON, MOSES (called also Moses 
ben Mendel Frankfort): German Hebruaist and 


Mendelssohn 


THE JEWISI ENCYCLOPEDLA 


4°76 





i 
writer of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; : 
born in Hamburg; died there at an advanced age in| 
1861; a relative of Samson Raphae)] Hirsch. ! 

Mendelson lived in his native city as a private 
scholar. He translated into Hebrew the first book 
of Canipe’s “ Die Entdeckung Amcrika’s,” entitling it 
“Mezi’at ha-Arez ha-Hadashah” (Altona, 1807), and 
wrote a poem in honor of Hakam Isaac Bernays on the 
occasion of his installation at Hamburg (#), 1822). 
His “Bakkashat ha-Lammedin,” printed by Meir 
Hesse, appeared anonymously (2b. 1829). He also 
published: “Shushan ‘Edut, d.i. die Erkliirung der 
Fiinf Biicher Moshe’s” (Stuttgart, 1840-42), two 
parts, containing the Book of Genesis and repre- 
senting, according to his own statement, the fruit of 
thirty years’ labor. The Hebrew introduction to 
the second section (pp. ili.-lxx.) consists of two 
treatises, “‘Awon ha-Doresh ha-Yashan” and 
**Awon ha-Doresh he-Hadash,” in which in divert- 
ing fashion he scourges the old “darshanim ” and 
the modern preachers, Mendelson wrote also “ Die 
Synagoge zu Hamburg, Wie Sic War und Wie Sie 
Sein Soll” (Copenhagen, 1842), dedicated to the 
president of the German Jewish congregation of 
Hamburg. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Roest, Cat. Rosenthal. Bibl. p. 382; Fiirst, 
Bibl. Jud. ti. 359, 
s. M. K. 
MENDELSSOHN: German family rendered 
illustrious by the philosopher and the musician. It 
ean not verify its ancestry further back than the 
father of the philosopher, though there is a family 
tradition that it is descended from Moses Isseries. 


to Hamburg and went into partnership with his 
brother Joseph. At the same time he married Leah 
Salomon, a granddaughter of Daniel Itzig, and was 
persuaded by his brother-in-law, who at baptism 
had adopted the name of Bartholdy, to call himself 
“Mendelssohn-Bartholdy.” During the siege of 
Hamburg by the French, Abraham and his brother 
were obliged to leave the city on a foggy night se- 
cretly and in disguise. They went to Berlin and 
founded there the banking finn of Mendelssohn & 
Co., from which Abraham later retired. In the year 
1813 he equipped several volunteers at his own ex- 
pense, and in recognition of his efforts for the public 
welfare he was elected to the municipal council of 
Berlin. 

Dorothea (Brendel) Mendelssohn: Eldest 
daughter of Moses Mendelssohn; born at Bertin 
on Dec. 24, 1764; died at Frankfort-on-the-Main 
on Aug. 8, 1839. On account of her superior in- 
telligence and her somewhat masculine nature she 
was even in her youth the leader in the circle of her 
friends. Early in April, 1783, she married a Berlin 
banker named Yeit, an honest, worthy man, but of 
limited education and not prepossessing in appear- 
ance. After fifteen years of a married life far from 
happy, Dorothea became acquainted with Friedrich 
von Schlegel, at the house of H- ‘iette Henz, a 
friend of her youth, who had advised nera few years 
after her marriage to Veit to separate from him. 
Schlegel, at that time young, handsome, and already 
famous, was captivated by the brilliant intellect of 
Dorothea, seven years his senior, despite her lack of 
beauty. She deserted Veit for Schlegel, being dis- 


Mendel of Dessau 
= Sisa 


| 


Moses Mendelssohn 
= Fromet Gugenheim 





Jente Saul 








fl 








Dorothea = (1) Veit Joseph Abraham Recha Henriette Nathan 
(2) F. von Schlegel = Henriette Meyer = Leah (**Tante Jette") = Henriette Itzig 
Solomon | 
- Bartholdy 
Moses Johann Abraham Philip Georg Benjamin Alexander | Arnold Oftilie Withelm 
| | 
Fanny Cacilie Jakob Rebecea Paul 
= W. Hensel Ludwig = Dirichlet, Jr. = Albertine 
Felix Heine 
Leo Hensei Bartholdy 
= Cecile 
Jeanrenaud 
| | | | 
Karl Marie Paul Felix Elizabeth 
Wolfgang Pawine Felix August Fanny 
Paul Héleéne Abraham Eduard Hees 
i]1) 


MENDELSSOHN FAMILY TREE. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. Hensel, Die Familie Mendelssoh n, Berlin, 
1879: Freudenthal, Aus dem Hetmat Mendelssohn, Berlin, 
900. 


I. G. D. 

Abraham Mendelssohn: Second son of Moses 
Mendelssolin; born at Berlin Dec. 10, 1776; died 
there Nov. 19, 1885; father of Felix Mendelssohn- 
Bartholdy. In 1803 he became cashier in Foulds’ 
banking-house at Paris; but a year later he returned 





owned by her family. In 1799 Schlegel took her to. 
Jena, where he was unsuccessful. She shared his 
troubles and endured his moods, and in 1802 traveled 
with him to Paris, where she became a Protestant and 
married him. Six years later, on the return jour- 
ney. she, with her husband and her sor Philip, went 
over to Catholicism at Cologne. 


Dorothea paid a severe penalty for her relations 
t 


477 


with Schlegel, and was often obliged to struggle 
avainst abject poverty. For several years she lived 
on the scanty income from her literary labors and 
from what her deserted Husband sent her anony- 
mously from time to time. In 1818 and 1819 she 
lived at Rome with hersons Johannand Philip Veit, 
who had become artists. The rest of her eventful, 
unhappy life was passed at Frankfort-on-the- Main, 
where Schlegel was councilor at the Austrian lega- 
tion, and where, after his death (1829), she lived with 
her son Philip on a small pension. 

While still Schlegel’s mistress she had made a lit- 
erary venture in the novel “Florentine.” which was 
published by him anonymously (Litbeck and Leip- 
sic, 1801), and which was considered the best pro- 
duction of the romanticists in the domain of fiction. 
Under Schlegel’s name appeared her version of the 
eld German metrical romance “ Lother und Maller” 
i Frank fort-on-the-Main, 1805) and the translation of 
Madame de Staél’s “ Corinne” (Berlin, 1807). From 
Old French she translated 
the “Gesch. des Zauber- 
ers Merlin” in Schlegel’s 
“ Sammlung Romantischer 
Dichtungen” (Leipsic, 
1804), and she furnished 
several articles, signed 
“DPD.” for the magazine 
* Europa,” which Schlegel 
edited. Later she ex- 
changed the pen for the 
needle. “There are,” she 
suid, “too many books in 
the world: but I have 
twever heard that there are 
too many shirts.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Reichlin-Mel- 
degg, Paulus und Seine Zeit, 
Stuttgart, 1853, vol. if, and 
the autobiography of Sulpice 
Boisserée, ib. 1862, containing 
mmany of Dorothea’s letters ; 
Kayserling, Die Jiidisechern 
Frauen, p. 1833 idem, Doro- 
thea von Schlegel, in R. 
Prutz, Deutsches Musewni, 
1360, Nos. 49 ef seq.: S. Hensel, 
Die Familie Mendelssohn, i. 
45 et seq.. Berlin, 1879. 


Fanny Mendelssohn: 
Eldest daughter of Abra- 
ham Mendelssohn; born 
at Hamburg Nov. 15, 1805; 
died there May 17, 1847. When very young she 
inanifested an exceptional memory and talent for 
music. She, together with her brother Felix, re- 
ceived her musical training from Ludwig Berger and 
Zelter, while her education in other subjects was 
conducted by the philologist Karl Heyse, who was 
tutor in the Mendelssohn house. In the year 1829 
she married the painter W. Hensel in Berlin. She 
was herself a composer, and many of her brother 
Felix’s “Songs Without Words” are believed to be 
her work (Hensel, U.c. vols. i.-ii1.). 

dD. : M. Kk. 


Felix Mendelssohn (full name, Jakob Lud- 
wig Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy): German 
composer; born at Hamburg Feb. 38, 1809; died 
at Leipsic Nov. 4, 1847. He was a grandson of 


THE JEWISILT ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Felix Mendelssohn. 


Mendelssohn 


Moses Mendelssohn and a son of the banker Abra- 
ham Mendelssohn, who removed to Berlin in 1811. 
Felix received his early musical education from Lud- 
wig Berger (piano), Zelter (thorough-bass and com- 
position), and Henning (violin), At the age of ten 
he entered the Singakademie at Berlin as an alto, 
and in the following vear composed the cantata “In 
ttthrend Feierlichen Ténen” as well as several in- 
strumental pieces. 

The encouraging words of Cherubini, before whom 
Mendelssohn played while on a visit to Paris with 
his father in 1825, animated the young compo- 
ser; on Aug. 6, 1826, he finished his overture to 
“Ein Sommernachtstraum ” (A Midsummer Night’s 
Dream, op. 21), which composition was publicly 
performed at Stettin in Feb., 1827. During this sea- 
son Mendelssohn’s opera * Die Hochzeit des Cama- 
cho” was produced at the Berlin Theater, but was 
soon withdrawn by Spontini, who at that time en- 
joyed almost unlimited authority as director of the 
opera, and is said to have 
hada personal antipathy 
to the young musician. 
During the following win- 
ter Mendelssohn began a 
propaganda in behalf of 
Bach’s music, which cul- 
minated in the formation 
of a Bach Society and the 
publication of the masses 
of Bach as well as of all 
the church cantatas and 
other works of the great 
German composer. 

On April 10, 1829, Men- 
delssohn left Berlin for 
London, where, in the fol- 
lowing month, he made his 
début with much success 
at a concert of the Phil- 
harmonic Society. It was 
therefore from an English 
audience that he first re- 
ceived an acknowledg- 
ment of his genius. He 
gave five concerts in Lon- 
don, whence, inJuly, 1881, 
he set out upon a journey 
through Scotland, as a re- 
sult of which he wrote one of his most beautiful 
overtures, ° Die Hebriden ” (The Hebrides, op. 26). 

Always somewhat unpopular in Berlin, he, on his 
return to that city in 1833, failed in competition with 
Rungenhagen to obtain the conductorship of the 
Singakademic. In May of the same year, however, 
he was invited to conduct the Lower Rhine Musical 
Festival at Diisseldorf, in which city he remained 
as musical director until 1885, when he 
accepted the conductorship of the Ge- 
wandhaus orchestra in Letpsic, a body 
With which his name was thenceforth 
inseparably associated. The concerts 
given by this famous orchestra under 
Mendelssohn’s leadership, and with 
the assistance of the eminent concert-master Ferdi- 
nand Davin, soon enjoyed a world-wide celebrity 


Conductor 
of Gewand- 
haus Or- 
chestra, 
Leipsic. 


Mendelssohn 


and contributed to make Leipsic the musical center 
of Germany. Mendelssolin’s oratorio “ Paulus” (St. 
Paul) was performed at the Lower Rhine festival 
held at Diisseldorf May 22-24, 1836. 

On March 28, 18387, Mendelssohn married Cécile 
Charlotte Sophie Jeanrenaud. A few months later 
he left for England to conduct “Paulus” at the 
Birmingham festival. On his return he devoted all 
his energies to the Gewandhaus concerts, At the 
request of Frederick Wiliam IV. of Prussia, to 
whom several of his compositions were dedicated, 
Mendelssohn in 1841 went to Berlin to act as di- 
rector of certain concerts which were to be given in 
connection with an academy of arts planned by the 
King. Finding, however, that the musicians and 
the public were more or less hostile to him, he re- 
signed, remaining only at the special request of the 
king to arrange the music in the cathedral. The 
body of singers selected for that occasion afterward 
became famous as the “ Domchor” (cathedral choir). 
During this visit Mendelssohn conducted also the 
music to “Antigone,” which he had composed in 
compliance with the king’s express desire. 

In conjunction with Falkenstein, Keil, Kistner, 
Schleinitz, and Seeburg as directors, and Schumann, 
Hauptmann, David, Becker, and Pohlenz as teach- 
ers, Mendelssohn in 1842 organized the Conserva- 
torium at Leipsic, which institution, under the pat- 
ronage of the King of Saxony, was opened Jan. 16. 


1843. During the summer of 1844 

Organizes Mendelssohn revisited London, where 
Leipsic he conducted the last five concerts 

Conserva- given by the Philharmonic Society in 
torium. that year. He took part also as a 


pianist in Various other musical events 
of the season, everywhere receiving a most enthusi- 
asti¢ welcome. In 1846 he ouce more visited Eng- 
land, upon which occasion he conducted the first 
performance of his oratorio “Elias” (Elijah) at 
Birmingham (Aug. 26). On April 2, 1847, he con- 
ducted “Paulus” at Leipsic, and soon afterward 
again went to England, where he gave four per- 
formances of “Elias” at Exeter Hal], London. be- 
sides one at Manchester and another at Birmingham. 

On May 9 Mendelssohn returned to Germany. 
While he was at Frankfort the news of the sudden 
death of his sister Fanny, to whom he had been 
greatly attached, gave a serious shock to a consti- 
tution already enfeebled, and after visiting various 
health resorts the great composer returned in Sep- 
_tember to Leipsic, where about six weeks later he 
died. Baptized early in life, he was interred in 
Trinity Cemetery, Berlin. 

Mendelssolin’s best productions are the oratorios 
“Paulus” and “Elias.” the greatest works of their 
kind since Haydn. Besides the opera “ Die Hoch- 
zeit des Camacho,” Mendelssolin left the untinished 
opera “ Lorelei,” the operetta “Heimkehr aus der 
Fremde ” (op. 89), and several other unpublished 
operatic compositions. Among his other works are 
four symphonics; the symphony-cantata “Lobye- 
sang”; six concert-overtures; several concertos; 
chamber-music; and pianoforte and vocal compo- 
sitions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 8. Hensel. Die Familie Mendelssohn (1796- 

1847) nach Bricfen und Tagehiiehern, Berlin, 1879: Carl 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


478 


Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, Goethe und Felix Mendelsselin- 
Bartholady (1821-1831), translated by M. E. von Glehn, Lon- 
don, 1872; F. Hiller, ALendelssoha: Letters and Recollrc- 
tions, translated by M. E. von Glehn, ib, 1874; Grove, Dict. 
of Music and Musicians, vol. ii, where a full list of Men- 
delssohn’s compositions is given. 

s, J. So, 


Georg Benjamin Mendelssohn : German gevg- 
rapher; born in Berlin Nov. 16, 1794; died at Horch- 
heim, near Coblenz, Aug. 24, 1874; son of Joseph 
Mendelssohn, Asa child he went to Hamburg with 
his parents, but he began his studies at Berlin in 
1811, although they were interrupted by the cam- 
paigns of 1813 and 1815. After 1828, being ap- 
pointed privat-docent in geography and statistics 
at the University of Boun, he gradually rose to the 
position of regular professor there. Ile edited the 
“Gesammelte Schriften” of his grandfather with a 
biographical sketch (Leipsic, 1843-45), and also pub- 
lished “Das Germanische Europa” (Berlin, 1836) as 
well as “ Die Stindischen Institutionen im Monarchi- 
schen Staat” (Bonn, 1846). 

Henriette (Sorel) Mendelssohn: Youngest 
daughter of Moses Mendelssohn; born at Berlin 
1768; died there Nov. 9, 1831. She was a woman 
of broad interests, clear judgment, and exquisite 
manners; she remained unmarried, being, like her 
father, slightly deformed. She first devoted her- 
self to teaching in her sister Recha’s schoo! in 
Altona, but in 1799 entered a Jewish family in Vi- 
enna as governess, After a few years, however. 
probably on the invitation of her brother Abraham, 
she went to Paris, where she was at the head of a 
boarding-school. {er modest apartments were the 
rendezvous of scholars and artists: Spontini, Ma- 
dame de Staél, and Benjamin Constant were among 
her frequent visitors, while the two T[umboldts, 
Von EskeLes of Vienna, and others visited her 
whenever they were in Paris. In the year 1812 she 
became governess to the daughter of Count Sebas- 
tiani and remained in the count’s house until the 
marriage of her pupil to the Duke of Praslin, who 
became the murderer of his wife. Henriette, “the 
deepest and most thoughtful.” as Rachel Levin 
called her, was indignant at her sister Dorothea’s 
change of faith. Yet the course of action which 
she could not forgive in her sister, she later chose for 
herself, becoming not only a Catholic, but a biget. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling. Die Jiidischen Frauen, pp. 197 

et seq.; S. Hensel, Die Familie Mendelssohn, 1. 55 et seq. 

Joseph Mendelssohn: German banker; born 
at Berlin Aug. 11, 1770; died there Nov. 24, 1848; 
the eldest son of Moses Mendelssohn. He was highly 
talented, and was educated in the Talmud hy Flerz 
HomBERG and in languages and science by Fischer, 
Engel (the tutor of the two Humboldts), and others. 
He attended the “Morgenstunden” given by his 
father, and the Jectures on physics by Markus Herz 
and those on chemistry by Klaproth. He established 
himself at Hamburg, and afterward, together with 
his brother Abrabam, founded the banking firm of 
Mendelssohn & Co. at Berlin. From early youth he 
was an intimate friend of Alexander von Humboldt, 
who came one day and said that his landiord had 
served a notice on him 10 vacate, which was very 
inconvenient for him because of his natural-history 
collections. Joseph listened in silence. On the 


479 TIE 


JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendelssohn 





afternoon of the same day Humboldt received a let- 
ter saying he might live in his present house as 
long us he pleased, Mendelssobn having bought 
the house and become his landlord. 

Even in his latter years Mendelssohn busied him- 
self with literature and science. He published 
* Berichte tiber Rosseti’s Ideen zu einer Nenen Er- 
liiuierung des Dante und der Dichter Seiner Zeit” 
(Berlin, 1840) and “Ueber Zettelbanken ” (zb. 1846). 
His father's biography, published by his son G. B. 
Mendelssohn, was largely Joseph’s own work. 

His son Alexander (died at Berlin Oct. 25, 1871) 
was the last Jewish descendant of Moses Mendels- 
sohn. He was at the head of the firm after his 
father’s death. Te 
was a noble and un- 
usually philanthropic 
mah, and was the 
first Jew to receive 
the title of privy 
commercial councilor 
(* Geheimer Commer- 
zienrath ”). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY :_ Kayser- 

ling, Moses Mendels- 


sohn, Sein Leben wid 
Wirkes, 2d ed., p. 451. 


Karl Mendels- 
sohn-Bartholdy: 
German historian; 
born Feb. 7, 1888, in 
Leipsic; died Feb. 
23, 1897, at Brugg, 
Switzerland; son of 
Felix Mendelssolin- 
Bartholdy. He was 
professor of history 
at Freiburg-im-Breis- 
van. 

Moses Mendels- 
sohn (Moses ben 
Menahem-Mendel; 
abbreviated RaMBe- 
MaN); German Phi- 
losopher, translator of 
the Bible, and com- 
mentator; the “third 
Moses.” with whom 
begins a new era in 
Judaism, He was 
valled also, after his 
birthplace, Moses 
Dessau, with which name he signed his Hebrew and 
Jud:eo-German letters; born at Dessau Sept. 6, 1729; 
died at Berlin Jan. 4, 1786. Mendelssohn’s father 
was a poor Torah scribe, whose exacting occupation 
had a marked influence on the delicate sense of form 
and the fine handwriting of hisson. In spite of pov- 
erty, the father carefully educated the child. whose 
first Hebrew teacher he was, although he later en- 
gaged Rabbi Hirsch, the son of a Dessau dayyan, to 
instruct himin the Talmud. The boy then continued 
his studies under the rabbi of Dessau, David FRAN- 
KEL, who introduced him to Maimonides’ “ Moreh Ne- 
bukim.” His unremitting application to his studies 
brought on an illness which left him with curvature 
of the spine. In Oct., 1748. Mendelssohn went to 





(From the drawing by Daniel Chodewiecki.) 


| 
i 
I 


Berlin, where Frankel had been called as rabbia few 
months earlier; but the desire for knowledge, which 
was being more and more awakened. 

Early could not be satisfied with the Tal- 
Influences. inud. <A considerable influence was 
exerted upon the young Mendelssolin 

by a learned Pole, Israel Zamosz, who had been 
persecuted at home because of his liberal views. 
Zamosz instructed him in mathematics, and at the 
sanic time a young Jewish physician from Prague, 
Abraham Kiscim, was his teacher in Latin. Men- 
delssohn had seareely learned the principal rules of 
grammar when with his scanty earnings he bought 
a few of the Latin classics and an old Latin transla- 
tion of Locke’s “* Es- 
say Concerning the 
Human Understand 


ing.” This book, 
which had a _ pro- 
found influence on 


his future develop- 
ment, he tried with 
indescribable toil to 
decipher with the aid 
of a Latin dictionary. 
He found yet another 
teacher in Aaron Sol- 
omon GUMPERZ, 4 
well-to-do Jewish 
medical student, whe 
gave him lessons in 
French and English. 
Through him he ac 
quired a taste far sci- 
ence and became 
interested in the Leib- 
nitz- Wolffian philos- 
ophy. Gumperz, 
moreover, introduced 
him to several able 
young gymnasium 
teachers and to Mau- 
pertuis, the president 
of the Berlin Acad- 
emy. After seven 
vears of privation a 
better time came for 
Mendelssohn. <A rich 
silk-manufacturer in 
Berlin, Isaac Bern- 
hard (Bermann Zilz), 
engaged him in 1750 as tutor to his children; four 
years later he made him his bookkeeper, then his 

representative, and finally his part- 
Occupation ner. While conscientiously fulfill- 


as Book- ing his business duties, Mendelssohn 
keeper. continued unceasingly to acquire fur- 


ther knowledge. Without systematic 
schooling, almost without teachers and without guid- 
ance, he had attained great proficiency in languages, 
mathematics, philosophy, and poetry. “His integ- 
rity and philosophical mind make me anticipate in 
him a second Spinoza, lacking only his errors to be 
his equal,” ran a letter of Oct. 16, 1754, written by 
Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, to whom Gumperz had 
introduced Mendelssohn as a good chess-player. 


Mendelssohn 


This acquaintance developed into a most inti- 
mate friendship and deeply influenced Mendelssohn's 
development. Lessing, only a few months his se- 
nior, was the most liberal of German authors and 
the most uncompromising opponent of every form 
of intolerance. In 1749 he had placed a noble-minded 
Jew upon the stage in his comedy “Die Juden,” 
which may be regarded as the forerunner of “ Na- 
than der Weise.” The claim which had been ad- 
vanced by certain anti-Jewish critics, that a Jew 
could not possibly be worthy of respect, drove 
Mendelssohn to defend the honor of his race in jis 

first literary attempt in German, a let- 
Friendship ter to Gumperz, which brought him 
with before the public. He was then in- 

Lessing. troduced into the world of letters by 

Lessing, who, without Mendelssohn’s 
knowledge, published a small book which the latter 
had given him toread. This work, which appeared 
anonymously jn 1755, was the “ Philosophische Ge- 
spriiche,” wherein Mendelssohn declared himself a 
disciple of the school of Leibnitz and, despite his 
antipathy for pantheism, took sides with Spinoza. 
In the same year was published at Danzig the anon- 
ymous satirical treatise “Pope ein Metaphysiker,” 
called forth by a prize offered by the Berlin Acad- 
emy, and written by Mendelssohn and Lessing, both 
of whom eagerly defended the teachings of Leib- 
nitz. The names of the authors did not long re- 
main hidden. Several academicians, with whom 
Mendelssohn was acquainted, greeted him with 
marked respect; and even the court was eager 
to know “the young Hebrew who wrote in Ger- 
man.” Almost contemporaneously with the “ Phi- 
losophische Gespriiche” he wrote the “Briefe tiber 
die Empfindungen” (Berlin, 1755; translated into 
French by Thomas Abbt, Geneva, 1764), which 
contains a philosophy of the beautiful, and which 
forms the basis of all philosophic-esthetic criticism 
in Germany. On the advice of Lessing he then 
made a German version of the “ Discours sur 1’Iné- 
walité Parmi les Hommes,” a prize essay by Rous- 
sean, Whom he greatly admired. This translation, 
with explanatory notes and a dedicatory letter to 
“Magister” Lessing, appeared at Berlin in 1756. 

Through Lessing, Mendelssohn in 1755 made the 
acquaintance of the book-dealer Friedrich Nicolai, 
who in the course of a few months became his inti- 

mate friend, helping him in his study 
Friendship of modern languages and encouraging 


with him to learn Greek. Together with 
Nicolai. Nicolai he took Jessons from Rector 


Damm, who was known as a good 
Greek scholar; and in a short time he was able to 
read all the works of Plato in the original without 
assistance of any kind (G. Malkewitz, in “ Vossische 
Zcitung,” May 29, 1881, Supplement; G. A. Kohut, 
* Moses Mendelssohn and Rector Damm,” New York, 
1892). He and Nicolai also visited the “learned 
cotfee-house,” the meeting-place of a limited circle 
of scholars to which Mendelssohn belonged and in 
which each member read a mathematical or philo- 
sophieal paper every fourth week. For this society 
Mendelssohn prepared a treatise containing observa- 
tions “ Ueber die Wahrscheinlichkeit ” (On Proba- 
bility), which he requested a fellow member to read 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


480 


for him, cither out of modesty or because he stam- 
mered. The substance of this paper was repeated 
in his * Morgenstunden.” 

When Nicolai projected the “BibHothek der 
Schénen Wissenschaften und der Freien Kiinste ” in 
1756, Mendclssohn was asked to join its staff, and 
he soon became not cnly one of the most dihgent 
collaborators, but the very soul of the whole under- 
taking. In this magazine he reviewed the latest 
works on esthetics and literature, and also published 
his own studies on esthetics. Mendelssohn, Les- 
sing, and Nicolai began a correspondence on the 
subject, in which they discussed the purpose of 
tragedy, and the meaning of pity and fear and of 
terror and admiration. Upon this correspondence, 
by which Mendelssohn infiuenced directly Les- 
sing’s “Laokoon,” were based two treatises by the 
former which first appeared in the “ Bibhothek,” 
namely, “ Die Hauptgrundsiitze der Schoénen Kituste 
und Wissenschaften ” and “ Ueberdas Erhabene und 
Naive in den Schinen Wissenschaften.” These 
monographs—the first was translated into Italian by 
C. Ferdinandi (1779) and the other into Dutch by 
Van Goens (1769)—must be ranked among the most 
important contributions to pre-Kantian esthetics. 

At the end cf the first year Mendelssohn retired 
from the “ Bibliothek,” which Nicolai soon discon- 

tinned, ¢diting in its stead (after 1759) 


Contribu- the “Briefe die Neueste Literatur 
tions to LBetreffend.” The “ Literaturbriefe,” 
Criticism. oncof the most important publications 


of German journalism, were revolu- 
tionary incharacter. The criticism which Mendels- 
sohn (upon whom a large part of the editorial work 
devolved), together with Lessing, introduced was 
positive, creative, and essentially German in charac- 
ter. Mendelssohn's judgment was always impartial, 
sound, and clear-sighted. He, the barely tolerated 
Jew, dared to use the columns of the “ Literatur- 
briefe”” to criticize even the poems of Frederick the 
Great (1760). The review attracted much atten- 
tion; and an unprincipled scribzier, Von Justi, wish- 
ing to take revenge on the Jew and on the“ Literatur- 
briefe” (which had criticized a book of his as it 
deserved), lodged a complaint against the journal. 
The “ Literaturbriefe” were condemned; and legend 
has it that Mendelssohn was ordered to appear be- 
fore the king at Sans Souci. He is said to have es- 
caped the difficulty hy a witty simile which inclined 
the king in his favor. “ Whoever makes verses,” 
he said. “plays at ninepins; and whoever plays at 
ninepins, be he king or peasant. must have the ‘ set- 
ter-up’ tell him how he bowls.” 

Mendelssohn had good cause to be satisfied with 
his position in life. He lived independently, had 
faithful friends, and had already acquired a fortune, 
small though if was. He now wished to have a 
home of hisown. In April, 1761, he went to Ham- 
burg, where he was welcomed by Christian ad- 
mirers, While the chief rabbi of the 
city, Jonathan Eybeschititz, greeted 
him ina very flattering letter. There 
he became engaged to Fromet Gugen- 
heim (b. Oct. 6, 1737; d. at Hamburg March 16. 
1812), a plain, poor, and lowly girl, whom he mar- 
ried in June, 1762. During his honeymoon he began 


His 
Marriage. 


481 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendelssohn 





to work at the solution of a question proposed by 
the Berlin Academy of Sciences for a prize essay, 
“Ob die Metaphvsischen Wissenschaften ciner Sol- 
chen Evidenz Faéhig Sind wie die Mathematischen.” 
lis monograph “Ueber die Evidenz der Metaphy- 
sischen Wissenschaften” received the prize of 50 
ducats in June, 1763, and gained the victory over 
Thomas Abbt and Immanuel Kant, together with 
whose essays his was printed. A few months later 
(Oct., 1763) Mendelssohn reccived the privileges of a 
protceted Jew. A very often-repeated legend tells 
that the privilege was given him upon the interces- 
sion of Marquis d’Argens, who said tothe king: “A 
bad Cathohe philosopher begs a bad Protestant 
philosopher to grant the privilege to a bad Jewish 
philesopher. There is too much philosophy in all 
this for justice not to be on the side of the request.” 
At the same time the trustecs of the Jewish com- 
munity in Berlin honored him by exempting him 
from the payment of all Jewish taxes; and nine 
years later it passed a resolution that the “distin- 
guished man” should be eligible to all positions in 
the community. 

Partly owing to the “ Literaturbricfe,” of which 
hecontinued to 
be the chief col- 
Jaborator until 
1765, and part- 
ly because of 
the prize essay 
Which had in- 
troduced him 
to philosoph- 
jeal circles, and 
alsoon account 
of his other lit- 


erary works, 
hisassociations 


with poets and 
philosophers 
in Germany 
and = Switzer- 
land became more and more close. He stood in 
especially intimate relationship to the kindly and 
versatile young professor Thomas Abbt, in Frank- 
fort-on-the-Oder, and to Rinteln, then “ Consistorial- 
rath” in Biekeburg. Atthe request of the former, 
who was constantly meditating upon death, Men- 
delssohn began a correspondence concerning the 
destiny of man, and on the soul and its fate after 
death, This correspondence, to which Mendelssohn 
himself published notes, was printed in Mendels- 
sohn’s “ Gesummelte Schriften,” v. 230-408, and in the 
third volune of Abbt’s works, Abbt’s questions and 
doubts confirmed his friend’s decision, reached Jong 
before, to write on the immortality of the soul, and 
formed the basis of his chief philosophical work, 
“Phidon ” (1767). This follows Plato’s dialogue of 
the same name. Mendelssolin’s argument is that in 
the body there must be at least one substance which 
is neither corporeal nor composite and 

His which unites within itself all ideas 
‘*Phadon.” and conceptions; the soul, as_ this 
self-existing, indivisible essence, can 

not be destroyed. The “Phadon” was the most 
widely read book of its time. Its special charm 

VITI.—31 





Medal Struck in Honor of Mendelssohn’s ** Phaidon.” 
(In the collection of F, Lobo, Philadelphia.) 


| 
| 





was its elegant and lucid style. Never before in 
Germany had philosophical questions been treated 
in such clear language: so that his contemporaries 
with justice called him the “German Plato.” The 
“Phidon ” is one of the best productions of classic 
German prose; it was reprinted fifteen times and 
translated into nearly all the European languages, 
while a number of Hebrew versions were made. 
The Crown Prince of Brunswick was so delighted 
with it that during a visit to his royal uncle in Ber- 
lin in the autumn of 1769, he invited the author to 
visit him at the castle, and expressed the wish that 
he might induce him to come to Brunswick. 

The Count and Countess of Schaumburg-Lippe 
became well acquainted with Mendelssohn in Pyr- 
mont, where he lived in 1773 on aceount of. his 
health, and conversed with him about death and 
immortality. The Berlin Academy of Sciences 
proposed Mendelssohn as a regular member of the 
philosophical division, but Frederick the Great 
struck his name from the list, because the Empress 
Catherine of Russia also wished to be elected. The 
queen dowager, Luise Ulrika of Sweden, Fred- 
erick’s talented sister, took pleasure in conversing 
with Mendels- 
sohn. No 
stranger of im- 
portance who 
came to Berlin 
failed to pay 
his personal re- 
spects to the 
“German Soc- 
rates,” as Men- 
delssohn was 
often called 
after the ap- 
pearance of the 
* Phiidon.” 

Among those 
who corre- 
sponded with 
Mendelssohn and showed him great honor was Johann 
Kaspar Lavater, a preacher in Zurich, who visited 

the “ Jew Moses ” several times in 1763 

Contro- and gave, in his “ Physiognomik,” a 
versy with very interesting description of “this 

Lavater. man with the Socratic soul.” Lava- 

ter’s most earnest wish was to convert 
the Jew who had spoken admiringly of Jesus (al- 
though with the limitation, “if Jesus of Nazareth 
had been content to remain only a virtuous man”), 
and who had demonstrated the immortality of the 
soul on the grounds of reason instead of the Bible. 
In 1769, therefore, Lavater translated the “Idées 
sur l’Etat Futur des Etres Vivants, ou Palingénésie 
Philosophique” of Charles Bonnet, a professor at 
Geneva, entitling his version “Untersuchung der 
Beweise fiir das Christenthum,” and sent it to Men- 
delssohn with an introduction in which he chal- 
lenged him “cither to refute the book publicly, or, 
if he found it logical, to do what wisdom, love of 
truth, and honor required and what Socrates would 
have done if he had read the work and found it irre- 
futable.” This rash step. distasteful to Bonnet and 
soon regretted by Lavater himself, made a painful 


Mendelssohn 


impression upon the friends of Mendelssohn and 
upon all Berlin theologians, but it was most dis- 
tressing to Mendelssohn himself. He, the avowed 
enemy of all religious disputes, owed it to his in- 
most conviction, to his honor, and to his reputation 
to make a public answer, after obtaining permis- 
sion from the consistory. The latter willingly al- 
lowed him to reply, confiding in his “wisdom and 
modesty.” Mendelssohn’s answer is a model of 
Stoic calm and dialectic acuteness. He declared 
that his belief in the truths of his own relig- 
ion was unshakable. “If I had changed my faith 
at heart,” he says, “it would be most abject 
baseness not to wish to confess the truth according 
to my inmost conviction. If I were indifferent to 
both religions, and mocked or scorned all revelation, 
I should well know what wisdom would counsel, 
were conscience silent. What could keep me from 
it?” He declared, moreover, that Bonnet’s book 
was not at all one which could convert him, and 
that he had read many other defenses of Christian- 
ity, written by Germans, which were far more thor- 
ough and philosophical. This “Schreiben an den 
Herrn Diaconus Lavater in Ziirich” (Berlin, 1770; 
Hebrew translation with annotations by N. H. 
Wessely, edited by Solomon Fuchs, 7b. 1892) was 
followed by the “Antwort an den Herrn Moses 
Mendelssohn zu Berlin,” dated Feb. 14, 1770, with 
“ Nacherinnerungen ” by Mendelssohn (Berlin, 1770). 
Lavater regretted that he had involuntarily dis- 
tressed “the most noble of men” and begged his for- 
giveness. 

The dispute, however, continued. Although Bon- 
net regretted that he had been the innocent cause 
of Lavater’s action, and although he assured Men- 
delssolin of his highest esteem, he tried to refute 
his arguments in a new edition which appeared in 
the same year, and claimed that “the Berlin Jew had 
copied his trashy statements from my foot-notes.” 
Such a procedure impelled Mendelssohn to write his 
“Betrachtungen tiber Bonnets Palingenesie”; but 
the essay remained unfinished, and exists only asa 
sketch. In these observations as well as in letters 
to Lavater, to the Crown Prince of Brunswick, and 
to others, he expressed his views regarding the doc- 
trines of Christianity. Meanwhile a succession of 
scribblers was meddling in the controversy, espe- 
cially a Frankfort lawyer named J. B. Kélbele, who 
addressed to him two pamphlets (Frankfort-on-the- 
Main, 1770), in which spite and calumny rivaled 
each other. Mendelssohn made no reply. “ Who- 
ever is so obviously anxious to irritate me,” he 
wrote to a friend, “ought tohave much difficulty in 
succeeding.” In this long coutroversy he found 
few defenders, although the theologian Semler 
in Halle and Professor Michaelis in Géttingen, 
as well as an anonymous citizen of Hamburg, 
who wrote “Dienstfreundliches Promeéemoria an 
die Welche Herrn Moses Mendelssohn Durchaus 
zum Christen Machen Wollen” (1771), and the 
satirist Lichtenberg in Géttingen, were his open 
partizans. 

This controversy seriously affected Mendelssohn’s 
health, and compelled him in 1771 to refrain for 
several months from all mental activity. In July 
of 1773 and 1774 he went to Pyrmont to regain 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


482 


his health, and there he won the friendship of 
the reigning prince and became acquainted with 
Herder, who satirically remarked that “ Mordecai 
had as large a following as the 
Acquaint- grand vizier.” After he had gradu- 
ance with ally regained his physical strength, 
Herder. Mendelssohn resolved to carry out a 
cherished plan of devoting more of 
his intellectual activity to the Jews and Judaism. 
On account of his interest in philosophy and in 
German and esthetic literature, and owing to the 
failure of his first attempt to publish a weekly 
called “Kohelet Musar” (1750), he had somewhat 
neglected Jewish interests. In 1757 he had written 
asermon on the victory of the Prussians at Ross- 
bach, and a thanksgiving address after the battle 
of Leuthen, while six years later he prepared a ser- 
mon to celebrate the peace of Hubertsburg. The 
first of these addresses purported to have been de- 
livered by Rabbi FRANKEL, and the last by Rabbi 
Aaron Mosessoun in the synagogue at Berlin, and 
they had been published without Mendelssohn’s 
name as author (Kayserling, “Dankpredigt und 
Danklieder von Moses Mendelssohn, zum Ersten 
Male Herausgegeben und mit Hinleitung Versehen,” 
Berlin, 1866). Thissermon was translated into Eng- 
lish at Philadelphia in 1763 (“Publ. of Am. Jew. 
Hist. Soc.” i. 68, ii. 31, fii. 116; “Allg. Zeit. des 
Judenthums,” Iviii. 451), Besides these sermons, 
the first ones written and published in German by a 
Jew, Mendelssohn had annotated Ecclesiastes (Ber- 
lin, 1770) and written a commentary to the famous 
“Logic” of Maimonides, entitled “ Millot ha-Higga- 
yon.” He gavethe work to Samson Kalir, a Jewish 
scholar of Jerusalem, who had it printed (Frankfort- 
on-the-Oder, 1761) as his own work, but the second 
and all following editions appeared under Mendels- 
sohn’s name. 
The controversy with Lavater opened the second 
period of Mendelssohn’s activity, which was con- 
cerned chiefly with Judaism and the 
Jewish Jews. Being universally honored not 
Activities. only as a map, but as a metaphbysician 
and German writer, he became, almost 
unconsciously, the chief representative of his core- 
ligionists. When the Jewsin Endingenand Lengnau 
(see JEW. Encyc. i. 1-2, s.o. AARGAU), the only 
places in Switzerland in which they were then tol- 
erated, were threatened with new restrictions in 
1774, they appealed to Mendelssohn, asking him to 
intercede with Lavater. Distasteful as it was for 
him to have any further relations with his former 
opponent, he wrote him a letter asking him to doall 
he could for the Jews of Switzerland, and asaresult 
their rights were protected. When in 1777 several 
hundred impoverished Jews were about to be ex- 
pelled from Dresden, where Mendelssohn still had 
to pay the poll-tax, the president of the community 
turned to him, and he at once wrote a successful ap- 
peal to Freiherr von Ferber, from whom a year ear- 
lier he had received an oral assurance of esteem. 
At the request of the chief rabbi of Berlin, Hirschel 
Lewin, Mendelssohn compiled in German the “ Ri- 
tualgesetze der Juden” on Jewish civil law (Berlin, 
1778; 5th ed. 1826). Likewise, at the instance of his 
friend Klein, judge and later on professor, he ren- 


483 


dered into pure German, instead of the former Yid- 
dish, the formula of admonition which was spoken 
on taking the Jewish oath and which remained in 
force until 1869. 
Mendelssohn, who in his feelings was both Jew 
and German, wished to teach his coreligionists the 
German language and thus to prepare 
Transla- them for German culture, For his own 
tion of the children he began to translate the 
Bible. Pentateuch into German; at the ur- 
gent request of Solomon DtBno, how- 
ever, who prepared a Hebrew commentary for 
the translation, he decided to publish it under his 
own name, and at his own expense, and a speci- 
men soon appeared, entitled “‘Alim 1i-Terufah ” 
(Amsterdam, 1778). The undertaking was greeted 
with marked enthusiasm by the people, not only 
in Germany, but in Holland, France, and Eng- 
land, and was joyfully welcomed by such en- 
lightened rabbis as Hirschel Lewin and his son Saul 
in Frankfort-on-the-Oder, while Hartwig Wessely 
and Joseph Haltern composed poemsin honor of the 
translator. On the other hand, there were those 
who, like Raphael Kohen in Altona and his son- 
in-law Hirsch Janow, placed the German translation 
of the Pentateuch undera ban. Toward his oppo- 
nents Mendelssohn displayed a philosophic calm; 
for he was opposed to all controversies and espe- 
cially to those with theologians—“ those pugnacious 
proclaimers of peace,” as hecalled them. He knew 
only too well “how much opposition, hatred, and 
persecution are called forth at all times by the 
slightest innovation, no matter how beneficial.” The 
King of Denmark and the princes and leading men of 
the kingdom were among the subscribers to his work. 
Early in March, 1780, the Book of Genesis appeared, 
to which Dubno had written the greater part of the 
commentary; but a few months later this collabo- 
rator, alienated by the opponents of Mendelssohn, 
left him, so that he himself was obliged to prepare 
the entire commentary to Exodus, Asassistants for 
the remaining parts he obtained Hartwig Wessely, 
Aaron Jaroslav, and Herz Homberg, The whole Pen- 
tateuch was finished in 1788, and because of its remark- 
able merit it created a stir even in Christian circles. 
At the same time the translation of the Psalms ap- 
peared—the fruit of ten years’ labor—first in German 
characters and then in Hebrew type with a Hebrew 
commentary by Joel L6we. Mendelssohn’s version 
of the Song of Solomon, which was found among 
his papers, was published in 1788 by Joel Léwe 
and Aaron Wolfson, with a Hebrew commentary. 
The translation of the Pentateuch had an im- 
portant effect in bringing the Jews to share in the 
progressof the age. It aroused their interest in the 
study of Hebrew grammar, which they had so 
long despised, made them eager for German nation- 
ality and culture, and inaugurated a new era in the 
education of the young and in the Jewish school 
system, At Mendelssohn's suggestion 
Influence the Jiidische Freischule was founded 
on German at Berlin in 1781, the first organized 


Judaism. Jewish school in Germany, after 
which many similar institutions were 
modeled. There, according to the system planned 


by him, instruction was given not only in the Bible 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendelssohn 


and the Talmud, but also in technical branches and 
in German and French. 

Mendelssohn was also the first to advocate the 
emancipation of the Jews. When his coreligionists 
in Alsace, through their representative Cerfberr in 
Metz, requested him to prepare a petition for them 
to lay before the French council of state, he, sec- 
onded by Nicolai, persuaded his friend, the coun- 
cilor of war, Chr. W. Doum, to undertake the task. 
Thus originated the memorial “Ueber die Birger- 
liche Verbesserung der Juden.” which was the first 
monograph to discuss the question of emancipation 
scientifically, and in the drafting of which Men- 
delssohn appears personally to have had some 
share (“Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in 
Deutschland,” v. 75 et seg.). The sensation pro- 
duced by this work could not fail to call forth ad- 
verse Criticism and new polemics against the Jews. 

Thereupon Mendelssohn induced his 


Plea for friend Markus Herz to translate the 
Emanci- “ Vindicie Judeorum ” by the Amster- 
pation. dam rabbi, MANAsSSEM BEN ISRAEL, 


from English into German (Berlin, 
1782), and wrote for it a preface in which he replied 
to the critics of Dolhm’s work, remonstrated with 
Dohm himself, and energetically opposed the ban 
and the canon law. Attacks upon this preface ap- 
peared in periodicals and pamphlets. Cranz, the 
author of “Das Forschen nach Licht und Recht,” 
who was supported by a certain Herr Morschel, es- 
pecially assailed Mendelssohn’s principles and de- 
manded a public reply. In answer Mendelssohn 
wrote his celebrated epoch-making work “ Jerusa- 
lem, oder tiber Religidse Macht und Judenthum” 
(Berlin, 1788; translated into Italian, Triest, 1799; 
into English by M. Samuels, London, 1838, and by 
Isaac Leeser, Philadelphia, 1852; into Hebrew by 
A. B. Gottlober, Jitomir, 1867, and by P. Smolen- 
skin, Vienna, 1876). 

Mendelssohn’s“ Jerusalem,” which shows frequent 
analogies with Spinoza's “Tractatus Theologico- 
Politicus,” but reaches diametrically opposite re- 
sults, deals in the first section with the relation of 
State and Church, both of which, though having 

different objects and methods, should 

His ‘‘ Jeru- promote human happiness. Accord- 
salem.” ing to Mendelssohn, the Church has 
no right toown property, and Church 

law is essentially contradictory to the nature of re- 
ligion. He again opposed energetically the right of 
ban and excommunication, and was the first, at least 
in Germany, to plead for the separation of Church 
and State, and for freedom of belief and conscience. 
In the second part he deals with Judaism, which, 
according to him, has, in contradistinction to Chris- 
tianity, no dogma whose acceptance is necessary 
for salvation. With Leibnitz he differentiated be- 
tween eternal truths, which are based on reason and 
not on supernatural revelation, and temporary, his- 
torical truths, Judaismis no revealed religion in the 
usual sense of the term, but only revealed legislation, 
laws, commandments, and regulations, which were 
supernaturally given to the Jews through Moses. 
Mendelssohn did not recognize miracles as evidences 
of eternal truths, nor did he formulate articles of 
faith; hence he did not say “I believe,” but “Irecog- 


Mendelssohn 
Mendes 


nize that to betrue.” “The spirit of Judaism is free- 
dom in doctrine and conformity in action.” Accord- 
ingly he very curiously defined the ceremonial law as 
“a kind of writ, living, 
heart, full of meaning, and having the closest af- 
finity with speculative religious knowledge.” This 
is the indissoluble bond which is forever to unite 
all those who are born into Judaism. “ What 
divine law has ordained can not be repealed by rea- 
son, Whichis no Jess divine,” is Mendelssolin’s reply 
to all those who wished to release the Jews from 
the Law by sophistry. “Jerusalem,” on its appear- 
ance, met with little favor, yet Kant, then at the 
venith of his reputation, called it an “irrefutable 
book” and regarded it as “the proclamation of a 
great reform, which, however, will be slow in mani- 


quickening the mind and. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


{ 


484 


woman friend. This was the young August von 
Hennings, who lived for a few years in Berlin as 
secretary of the legation and who visited Mendels- 
sohn almost daily, afterward carrying on an active 
correspondence with him (for his letters see Kay- 
serling, “Moses Mendelssohn,” Ist ed., pp. 519 e¢ seq., 
and “Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in 
Deutschland,” i. 111 et seg.). Fora short time Men- 
delssohn wasintimate with Herder, to whom he first 
disclosed his intention of writing a biography of 
Lessing. THe afterward learned through Elise Rei- 
marus that the philosopher F. II. Jacobi, an ad- 
mirer of Bonnet and a friend of Lavater, had re- 
vealed this plan to her, and told her that Lessing iu 
his Jater years had been an ardent disciple of Spi- 
noza, <A new struggle with another opponent con- 


festation and in progress,” and which, as he wrote | fronted him, but before entering upon a contest 


Mendelssobn, 
“will affect not 
ouly your na- 
tion. but others 
as well.” A host 
of reviewers, 
among whom 
the Berlin theo- 
logians Zélner, 
Uhle, andothers, 
together with 
many insignifi- 
eant scribblers, 
condemned “ Je- 
rusalem,” while 
they decried its 
author as a ra- 
tionalist. or even 
as an atheist. 
The Jews were 
little more 
pleased. Since, 
on the one hand, 
he recognized 
the basal prin- 
ciple of Juda- 
ism to be free- 
dom of thought 
and belief, and, on the other, placed its whole 
essence in the ceremonial Jaw, both the Orthodox 
party and the reformers claimed him as their 


own. He was conservative by na- 
Attitude ture, and wished to abolish religious 
Toward abuses, such as untimely burial; but 
Reform. he stood immovably upon the founda- 


tion of the ancestral religion. It was 
through no fault of his that his disciples took differ- 
ent roads, and that several of his children renounced 
Judaism after his death, 

On Feb. 15, 1781, Lessing, Mendelssohn’s best and 
dearest. friend, died. Though in his last years he 
had written to Mendelssohn but seldom, yet he had 
erected a noble monument to his friend in “ Nathan 
der Weise.” taking as the model for his hero Men- 
delssohn himself (Kayserling, “ Moses Mendelssohn.” 
2d ed., p. 344, and the bibliography on “ Nathan” 
on p. 342). After Lessing’s death Mendelssohn 
formed a close friendship with the brother-in-law of 
Elise Reimarus in Hamburg, Mendelssohn's best 





Tombstone of Moses Mendelssohn. 
(From the drawing by Daniel Chodowiecki. ) 





with Jacobi, 
Mendelssohn, 
now weak and 
sickly, wished to 
set forth hisown 
fundamental 
metaphysical be- 
liefs and to re- 
fute pantheism. 
He did this in 
the lectures 
which he deliv- 
ered for his 
children, for the 
two Humboldts, 
and for others, 
and which ap- 
peared under the 
title “ Morgen- 
stunden oder 
Vorlesungen 
tiber das Dasein 
Gottes” (Berlin, 
1785; second en- 
larged — edition, 
2b. 1786; trans- 
lated into Ital- 
ian, Triest, 
1843; into Hebrew, Konigsberg, 1845). Before Ja- 
cohi had received this work, he had already pub- 
lished his “Ueber die Lehren des 
His ‘‘Mor- Spinoza, in Briefen an Herrn Moses 
genstun- Mendelssohn,” in which he recklessly 
den.”’ attacked Mendelssohn. Despite his 
distike for persona) quarrels, the lat- 
ter could not leave this challenge unanswered, and 
he replied in an article, “ An die Freunde Lessings,” 
in which he once more defended his friend. On the 
very day on which he took the manuscript to his 
publisher he caught cold, and a stroke of apoplexy 
brought his life to a close. 

The celebration of the hundredth anniversary of 
his birth, like that of his death, was general. The 
city of Dessau erected a monument to him, and one 
of his great-grandsons donated in his memory a 
scholarship-fund of 150,000 marks to the University 
of Berlin. 

An incomplete collection of his works was pub- 
lished at Ofen 1819-21, and, in one volume, at Vi- 


485 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendelssohn 
Mendes 





enna 1888; the first complete edition, with a biog- 
raphy by Joseph Mendelssohn, which contains also 
many of Moses’ letters, was published in conformity 
with the wishes of the family (Leipsic, 1843-45). 
A collection of his works on philosophy, esthetics, 
and apologetics was published by M. Brasch (Leip- 
sic, 1880). There are several portraits of him by 
Graff, Frisch, Rode, and Chodowiecki. 

Moses Mendelssohn left three sons, Joseph, Abra- 
ham, and Nathan, and three daughters, Dorothea, 
IRecha, and Henriette, whose biographies, together 
with those of some of their children, are given here. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Euchel, Toledot Rambema?, Berlin, 1786 (the 

lirst biography of Mendelssohn); Kayserling, Moses Mencdels- 

sohn, Sein Leben und Seine Werke, Leipsic, 1862 (2d ed. 


1888); idem, Moses Mendelssohn, Ungedrucktes und Un- 
Lekanntes von Ihm und tiber Ihn, ib. 1883. 


Nathan Mendelssohn: Youngest son of Moses 
Mendelssohn; born at Berlin Dec. 9, 1782; died 
there Jan. 9, 1852; married Henriette Itzig, young- 
est daughter of Daniel Itzig. He devoted himself 
to mechanics, and was the first Gerinan to pursue 
studies in this subject in England and France. He 
occupied a number of positions during his lifetime. 
From 1808 to 1813 he was a mechanician in Berlin; 
from 1813 to 1821, an officerin the militia; and from 
1821 until 1825, a manufacturer in Silesia. He then 
became tax-collector in Glatz and Liegnitz, and in 
1886 was appointed inspector of the chief mint in 
Berlin. Mendelssohn manufactured various instru- 
ments, some of which were of his own invention, and 
which much impressed Alexander von Humboldt by 
their excellence. At the instance of Humboldt he 
received a state subsidy for the construction of a 
dividing-machine which he completed in 1810. 

Of amechanical journal published by Mendelssohn, 
only a few numbers appeared. Until the end of his 
life he maintained an active interest in the promo- 
tion of industries and manufactures, as well as of 
art and science. He gave the first impulse to the 
foundation of the Polytechnic Society of Berlin, 
before which he lectured on photography, galvano- 
plastic art, electromagnetism, telegraphy, and kin- 
dred subjects. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. L6wenberg, in Vossiche Zeitung (Berlin), 

Oct. 7, 1883. 

Rebecka Mendelssohn: Daughter of Abraham 
Mendelssohn; born at Hamburg April 11, 1811. 
She was distinguished for her keenness of intellect 
and her brilliant wit. She was a gifted linguist and 
acquired such an exact knowledge of Greek that 
even in her later years she could read Homer and 
Plato without difficulty. In May, 1832, she mar- 
ried Lejeune-Dirichlet, professor of mathematics at 
the University of Berlin, who had been introduced 
into Mendelssohn’s house by Humboldt (Hensel, Z.c. 
vols. i,-iii.). 


Recha (Reikel) Mendelssohn: Second daugh- 
ter of Moses Mendelssohn; born at Berlin 1766; mar- 
ried Mendel Meyer, the son of her father’s intimate 
friend, the court-banker Nathan Meyer, in Mecklen- 
burg-Strelitz. The marriage was not a happy one 
and was soon dissolved. Recha, abright and clever 
but sickly woman, then established a boarding- 
school for girls in Altona, and later lived at Berlin 


in close association with her brother Abraham 

(ITensel, @.¢. 1. 55). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Moses Mendelssohn, p. 38, 

D, M. K. 
MENDES (MENDEZ): Netherlandish family ; 
one of the thirty prominent Jewish families which 
emigrated from Spain to Portugal under the leader- 
ship of the aged rabbi Isaac Aboab, and to which 
King John II. assigned the city of Oporto as a 
residence. Persecuted by the Inquisition, the Men- 
deses left Oporto and settled in Holland and Eng- 
land, emigrating later to America. 

Gideon Mendes: Consul of the Netherlands in 
1703 in the republic of Zale, Barbary, which had 
entered into a treaty with the Netherlands in 1651 
(Koenen, “ Geschiedenis,” p. 210). 

Isaac (Francisco) Mendes: A learned Jew 
who, with his parents and his brother Mordecai 
(Christoval) Mendes, went from Oporto to Am- 
sterdam in 1598. Isaac was highly respected by 
the Senate of Amsterdam. Through his efforts, it 
is said, the second synagogue of Amsterdam, Neweh 
Shalom, was erected, and that without occasioning 
dissension in the community, despite Gratz’s asser- 
tion to the contrary (“ Gesch.” ix. 518; Barrios,“ Casa 
de Jacob,” pp. 6 ef seq.). 

Isaac Mendes: Poct and musician: lived at 
Amsterdain about 1665; a friend of Daniel Levi de 
Barrios. About 100 years later another Isaac 
Mendes lived there, who copied “* Danielillo 6 Re- 
spuestas & los Christianos.” 

Joseph Israel Mendes: Physician; brother of 
Abraham Israel Mendes; died at Amsterdam 
Jan. 7, 1619. 

Joseph Mendes Bravo: 
in London in 1663. 

Moses (Fernando) Mendes: Physician; son of 
Maranos in Portugal; professor in the faculty of 
medicine at Coimbra, and physician to King John 
IV. of Portugal; died, according to some sources, in 
1725, or, according to others, Nov. 26, 1724. When 
the king’s daughter Catherine, wife of King Charles 
TI. of England, became seriously ill in Castile on her 
way to London, Fernando was sent to her, and at 
her request he accompanied her to London and re- 
mained there as her physician. His brothers An- 
dreas and Antonio went there with him. In Lon. 
don Fernando and his wife openly confessed Ju- 
daism, he taking the name of Moses. A daughter 
was born to him in the royal palace, to whom the 
queen was godmother, and who was named Cath- 
erine (Rachel) after her. In 1698 this daughter 
married Moses (Antonio) da Costa. In 1687 Mendes 
was elected a member of the Royal College of Phy- 
sicians and Surgeons. See Cosra, ANDREA MEN- 
DES DA. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lindo, History of the Jews in Spain, p. 350; 
Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, p. 324; idem. Se- 
phardim, p. 168: idem, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 70; Gaster, 
History of Bevis Marks, pp. 12, 97 (with portrait), et seq. 

D~. M. K. 


MENDES: One of the oldest Sephardic families. 
It continued in Spain and in Spanish possessions 
long after 1492, the year of the general expulsion. 
Many members of the family and its connections un- 
doubtedly succeeded that year in joining the Jews of 


Physician; practised 


Mendes 
Aquitaine. Others drifted to Holland, Italy, Tur- 
key, etc. The French or Aquitaine branch settled 


chiefly in Bordeaux, Bayonne, and Came.. It inter- 
married with such old families as Pereira, Da Costa, 
Gomez, Vaez, Osorio, Sola, Sespedes, Capote, Quiros, 
Henriques, Soares, Casado, Morro, Bonito, Fonse- 
qua, Nunes, Corcho, Netto, etc. Among Bayonne 
notables of this family may be mentioned Edouard 
Mendes (member of the municipal council, presi- 
dent of the tribunal of commerce, chevalier of the 
Legion of Honor), Auguste Mendes (“inspecteur des 
postes ”), and Elysée Mendes (member of the tribunal 
of commerce and of municipal council). The ear- 
liest Mendes tombstone now in existence in Bayonne 
is that of Rodrigues Mendes (1687). 

The Holland branch produced some notable wri- 
ters, such as David, son of Atalyah Franco Men- 
des (author of “Gemul ‘Atalyah,” “ Hanukkat ha- 
Bayit,” “Peri ‘Ez Hayyim,” “Teshu‘ot Yisrael”), 
Samuel Rodrigues Mendes, and Samuel da Silva 
Mendes (authors or editors of editions of the Se- 
phardic ritual on which the modern editions of 
David Levi, Meldola de Sola, Leeser, and Gaster are 
based). 

The West-Indian or American branch springs 
from David Pereira Mendes, who fled from Spain to 
Bayonne and who arrived in Jamaica in 1786. He 
died the same year, leaving one son, Samuel. This 
son had twelve children, from one of whom, Isaac, 
were descended Joseph and Abraham. Joseph was 
the father of Isaac Philipe and four daughters. 
Abraham was the father of Frederick de Sola Mendes 
and Henry Pereira Mendes. 

Abraham Pereira Mendes: English rabbi and 
educationist; born in Kingston, Jamaica, Feb. 9, 
1825; died in New York April18, 1898. He was the 
first master of the Beth Limud School of Kingston, 
but resigned in order to prepare in London, England, 
for the vocation of preacher and rabbi. He studied 
under Dr, Meldola, the dayyan, and the Rev. D. A. 
de Sola, “the learned hazzan ” of the Sephardic com- 
munity, and received his diplomas. He returned to 
Jamaica and became fora short time assistant to the 
Rev. Isaac Lopez, minister of the Kingston Sephar- 
dic congregation, but was soon called from that 
position to be the minister of the Moutego Bay com- 
munity. There he stayed until his wife’s failing 
health compelled him, in 1851, to return to her 
milder native climate. Mendes was then elected 
minister and preacher in the Birmingham (Eng.) 
congregation, and remained there until 1858, when 
he removed to London, became head of the Neveh 
Zedek for six years, and established Northwick Col- 
lege, a school for Jewish youth. He continued 
meanwhile his ministerial duties and literary labors, 
and on the death of Haham Artom acted as preacher 
aud dayyan for the Sephardic community of Lon- 
don. He was called to the ministry in the Newport 
(Rhode Island) congregation by the guardian con- 
gregation Shearith Israel of New York in 1888, and 
continued its minister until his death ten years later. 

He was the first among the Sephardim to publish a 
volume of sermons in English (1855). He translated 
the Daily Prayer-Book of the German Jews (Valen- 
tine’s edition), and finished the translation of the 
Festival and Holy Day Books left incomplete by the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


(ree 


486 


death of Rev. D. A. de Sola. He published, besides, 
“The Law of Moses,” “ Post-Biblical History of the 
Jews” (to fall of Jerusalem), “ Interlineary Transla- 
tion of the Prayer-Book” (German), and the Hag- 
gadah. He married Eliza, adaughter of Rev. D. A. 
de Sola of London. 

A. H. P. M. 

Frederick de Sola Mendes: American rabbi, 
author, and editor; born at Montego Bay, Jamai- 
ca, West Indies, July 8, 1850; son of R. Abra- 
ham Pereira Mendes. He was educated at North- 
wick College and at University College School, 
London, and at London University (B.A. 1869). 
Subsequently he went to Breslau, Germany, where 
he entered the university and studied rabbinics 
at the Jewish Theological Seminary. Mendes. re- 
ceived the degree of Ph.D. from Jena University in 
1871. Returning to England, he was licensed to 
preach as rabbi by Haham Benjamin Artom, in Lon- 
dou, 1878; in the same year he was appointed 
preacher of the Great St. Helen’s Synagogue of that 
city, but in December removed to New York, where 
he had accepted a call to the rabbinate of Shaaray 
Tefillah congregation (now the West End Syna- 
gogue); he entered upon his duties there Jan. 1, 
1874. Mendes was one of the founders of the 
AMERICAN HEBREW. In 1888 he took part in the 
Field-Ingersoll controversy, writing for the “ North 
American Review ” an article entitled “In Defense 
of Jehovah.” In 1900 Mendes joined the staff of 
Tue JEwIsH ENCYCLOPEDIA as revising editor and 
chief of the translation bureau, which positions he 
resigned Sept., 1902. Associated with Dr. Marcus 
Jastrow and Dr. Kaufmann Kohler, he is one of 
the revisers of the “New Bible Translation” in 
course of publication by the Jewish Publication 
Society. He has also translated “Jewish Family 
Papers: Letters of a Missionary,” by “ Gustav Mein- 
hardt” (Dr. William Herzberg). Of his publica- 
tions the following may be mentioned: “Child’s 
First Bible”; “Outlines of Bible History”; “ De- 
fense not Defiance.” He contributed also the ar- 
ticle on the “Jews” to “Johnson’s Encyclopedia.” 
In 1903 he became for a time editor of “The Meno- 
rah,” a monthly magazine. 

Henry (Haim) Pereira Mendes: American 
rabbi; son of Abraham Pereira Mendes; born in 
Birmingham, England, April 18, 1852. He was 
educated at Northwick College (rabbinics), at Uni- 
versity College (London), and at the University of 
the City of New York, taking the degree of M.D. 
He became minister of the Manchester (England) 
Sephardic congregation in 1874, and in 1877 was 
called to the Congregation Shearith Israel of New 
York, of which he is still (1904) the minister. In 
1881 he was one of the founders of the New York 
Board of Ministers, and acted as its secretary from 
its foundation up to 1901, when he became presi- 
dent. He joined Dr. Morais in helping to establish 
the Jewish Theological Seminary in 1886, of which 
he became secretary of the advisory board and pro- 
fessor of history. On the death of Dr. Morais he 
became acting president of the faculty until the ap- 
pointment of Dr. 8. Schechter. In 1884, the cen- 
tennial of the birth of Sir Moses Montefiore, he 
moved his congregation to convene the leading 


487 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendes 





Jews of New York to mark the event by some prac- 
tical work: the outcome was the Montefiore Home 
for Chronic Invalids, established in the same year. 
He was made vice-president of the Gild for Crippled 
Children in 1896, and in 1901 established the Jewish 
branch of that gild. He promoted the formation of 
the Union of Orthodox Congregations of the United 
States and Canada (1897) and was subsequently 
elected its president. Mendes was one of the found- 
ers of the Young Women’s Hebrew Association of 
New York (1902), of whose advisory board he is 
chairman. 

In Zionism, Mendes stands specially for its spiri- 
tual aspect; he served as vice-president of the Amer- 
ican Federation of Zionists and was a member of the 
Actions Committee of Vienna (1898-99). The de- 
gree of D.D. was conferred upon him by the Jew- 
ish Theological Seminary of America (1904). 

In conjunction with his brother Frederick de 
Sola Mendes, and others, he was one of the found- 


the drama which he contributed during the year as 
critic to the “ Journal.” 

Mendés was the author of a large number of works 
both in prose and in verse. <A perfect stylist, he 
was nevertheless inclined to the sensual; his “Le 
Roman d’une Nuit,” which appeared in the “Revue 
Fantaisiste ” (1867), was condemned as an immoral 
novel, and Mendés was sentenced to a month’s im- 
prisonment and a fine of 500 francs for publishing 
it. Of his works may be cited: In verse: “ Philo- 
méne,” 1863; “Odelettes Guerriéres,” 1871; “La 
Colére d’un Franc-Tireur,” 1872; “Le Soleil de 
Minuit,” 1876; “ Nouveaux Contes Epiques,” 1885; 
“Les Vains Amours,” 1896. Novels: ‘“ Histoires 
d’ Amour,” 1868; “ Les 73 Journées de la Commune,” 
1871; “Les Folies Amoureuses,” 1877; “Le Roi 
Vierge,” 1881; “Les Monstres Parisiens,” 1882-85; 
“Grand Magnet,” 1888; “Rue des Filles-Dieu,” 
1893; “Le Chercheur de Tares,” 1897. Most of 
these works have passed through several editions. 


David Pereira Mendes (b. 1740; d. 1786) 
Left Bayonne for Jamaica 1786 


Samuel Pereira 
(b. 1775 d, 1838) 


| 
Grace Isaac Abraham Abigail 


4 daughters 


Isaac 
(b. 1851 ; i 1904) 


4 daughters Joseph 





a | 


avid Frederick 
a “1849) (6 children) (2 children) 


J. 


(3 children) 


Henry Stella= A. Tucker Rosetta Isaac 


| | | | 
Esther Joseph David Daniel 3 others 
Judith 


Samuel 


Abraham 
(b, 1825; d. 1898) 


David Leonard Maria Rica Edith Frank 
(4 children) (4 children) 
Hy PM. 





MENDES PEDIGREE.—AMERICAN BRANCH. 


ers of “The American Hebrew” (1879), to whose 
columns, as to those of the general press, he is a 
frequent contributor. He is the author of “ Union 
Primer and Reading Book ” (1882); “Jewish History 
Ethically Presented” (1895); “Looking Ahead,” a 
plea for justice to the Jew (1900); “The Jewish 
Religion Ethically Presented” (1904). Among his 
other writings are: “In Old Egypt,” stories about, 
but not from, the Bible; “Esther”; “Judas Macca- 
beus”; and many essays in periodical publications. 
J. F. H. V. 


MENDES, CATULLE: French poet, drama- 
tist, and art critic; born at Bordeaux May 22, 1841. 
Educated in his native city, he went in 1859 to 
Paris, where he lived many years. In 1861 he 
founded the “Revue Fantaisiste ” and in 1864 the 
+ Parnasse,” later La République des Lettres.” From 
1893 he published an annual under the title “L’Art 
au Théatre,” containing the articles on music and 


Dramas: “La Part du Roi,” 1872; “ Justice,” 1877; 
“ Gwendoline,” 1886; “ Isoline,” 1888; “ Fiammette,” 
1889; “ Médée,” 1898. All his pieces have been pro- 
duced at the theaters of Paris, and have been well 
received. 

In 1894 Mendés received the cross of the Legion 
of Honor. He died Feb. 8, 1909. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Curinier, Dict. Nat.; La Grande Encyclo- 
pédie; Nouvelle Larousse lilustré ; Meyers Konversa- 
tions- ‘Lexikon. 


8. F,. T. H. 
MENDES, DAVID FRANCO. See Franco. 


MENDES, FRANCISCO: Portuguese Marano; 
physician to Don Affonso, brother of the cardinal in- 
fante; livedin Lisbon in the sixteenth century. The 
shoemaker Luis Diaz, who proclaimed himself to be 
the Messiah, induced Mendes to undergo circum- 
cision at the age of thirty-seven and to confess Ju- 
daism (c. 1541) together with other converts. Diaz 


Mendes 
Mendlin 


—_— 


was burned at the first auto da fé held at Evora 
toward the end of 1542, Francisco Mendes escaping 
the same fate by flight. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Informatione Somimaria, reprinted in Gratz, 
Gesch, 30 ed., ix. 551; Historia da Inquisicdo, p. 9, Lisbon, 
1845. . 

G M. Kx. 


MENDES, MAURITS BENJAMIN DA 
COSTA: Dutch philologist ; born at Amsterdam May 
16, 1851; entered the Atheneum (now the Uni- 
versity) there in 1867 and studied classic philology. 
An accident at gymnastics aggravated for two 
years the deafness from which he had suffered since 
his boyhood and caused him to give up his regular 
studies. Mendes established himself as a private 
master of classical languages and soon became 
known for his pedagogical capacity. Since 1891 he 
has been curator of manuscripts in the University 
library. 

Mendes has applied himself to the study of Greek, 
especially of Homer. In collaboration with his 
’ friend Dr. van Leeuwen (since 1884 professor at Ley- 
den) he published the so-called “ Editio Batavorum ” 
of Homer (“ [lias,” 2 vols., Leyden, 1887-89; 2d ed. 
1895-96; “Odyssea,” 2 vols., 1890-92; 2d ed. 1897- 
1898). In this edition not only has the letter “ di- 
gamma” been restored at the beginning of words in 
which the study of comparative grammar proves it 
to have been originally pronounced, but even the 
greater part of the results of the latest researches 
in Homeric grammar have been applied in recon- 
structing the text. For the use of Dutch schools the 
same coNaborators published: “ Attische Vormleer ” 
(¢>. 1877; 6th ed. 1901), an Attic grammar, and 
“Taalcigen der Homerische Gedichten” (¢, 1888; 
4th ed. 1898; translated into German 1886, and into 
French 1887), a grammar of the Homeric idiom. 
Mendes himself wrote a Latin grammar (¢). 1885; 
4th ed. 1899). 

On Jan. 8. 1898, Mendes was nominated “doctor 
honoris causa” of Amsterdam University in rec- 
ognition of his services in classical philology, As 
curator he published a catalogue of manuscripts, 
“De Handschriften der Stedelijke Bibliotheek met 
de Latere Aanwinsten ” (Amsterdam, 1902). 

From his youth Mendes has always had a great 
admiration for the stage. He is the author of many 
translations for the Dutch theater, and of some orig- 
inal comedies and plays, e.g.: “De Schuld ” (1882); 
“Gravin Sarah” (1883); “Thuis Gebleven” (1888; 
2d ed. 1892), “Zyn Model” (1888). His own remi- 
niscences of the stage he collected in a volume en- 
titled “ Toneelherinneringen ” (Leyden, 1900), con- 
taining materials for the history of the Dutch stage 
during the second part of the nineteenth century. 
With the students of the universities of Amsterdam 
and Utrecht, Mendes prepared performances of the 
following classic plays: “Antigone” (1885) and 
“Csdipus Rex” (1891) of Sophocles; “ Aulularia ” 
of Plautus (1892). 

Mendes’ brother Henri, born 1845, a chess-prob- 
lem composer of reputation, is a deaf-mute. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Réssing, Zondagsblad, Dec. 26, 1897 (with 
portrait): Mnemosyne, 1898, xxvi. 205, 599. 


Ss E. Su. 


MENDES (MENDEZ), MOSES: English poet 
and dramatist; born in London: died at Old Buck- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





488 


enham, Norfolk, Feb. 4, 1788; son of James Mendes, 

a stock-broker of Mitcham, Surrey, and grandson of 

Fernando Mendes. He was educated partly at St. 

Mary Hall, Oxford (MLA. 1750). Subsequently he 

engaged in stock-broking, and, having accumulated 

a fortune, he bought an estate at Old Buckenham, 

and devoted himself to literary pursuits. 

His first effort was “The Double Disappoint- 
ment,” a ballad-opera, produced with considerable 
success at Drury Lane Theatre, March 18, 1746, and 
revived at Covent Garden March 22, 1759. “The 
Chaplet,” a musical “entertainment,” the words by 
Mendes and the score by Boyce, scored a great suc- 
cess Dec. 2, 1749, because of both its merit and the 
clever acting of Mrs. Clive as Pastora. “Robin 
Hood,” produced at Drury Lane Dec. 18, 1750, and 
“The Shepherd’s Lottery,” played Nov. 19, 1751, 
were not successfu). 

Mendes’ only prose work was “ Henry and Blanch ” 
(1745), a tale taken from the French of “ Gil Blas.” 
It was dramatized the same year by Thomson, and 
was produced at Drury Lane Theatre. Other 
works were: “The Seasons” (1751), written in imi- 
tation of Spenser; “The Battiad” (1751), a satire 
on Dr. William Battie, written in collaboration with 
Paul Whitehead and Schomberg; “The Squire of 
Dames,” ancther poem in imitation of Spenser. 
Mendes also translated Maphus’ continuation of 
Vergil’s “ #neid” (1767). His “ The Blatant Beast ” 
was not published until 1792, when it appeared in 
the “European Magazine.” Mendes’ verses betray 
the dilettante; his humor, the mechanical fun of the 
playhouse of his day. 

Mendes’ two sons dropped their father’s name 
after his death, assuming that of “ Head” by royal 
warrant. His grandson Francis Bond Head was 
created a baronet July 14, 1888. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Huropean Magazine, Oct., 1792, pp. 251 et 
seq.; Dict. National Biography, xxxvii. 248-249; Jew. 
World, Feb. 14, 1873. 
ali E. Ms. 
MENDES-NASI, FRANCISCO: Member of 

one of the richest and most respected Portuguese 

Marano families; died about 1586; husband of Bea- 

trice de Luna. He owned a large banking-house in 

Lisbon, which had branchesin Flandersand France, 

and which advanced money to Charles V. and other 

rulers. After Mendes-Nasi’s death his brother 

Diogo, director of their Antwerp branch and hus- 

band of Beatrice de Luna's sister, was the richest 

Portuguese Marano, and, together with his sister- 

in-law, sacrificed great sums to prevent the intro- 

duction of the Inquisition into Portugal. Diogo 
died at Antwerp about 1545, leaving, like his 
brother, one daughter. A kinsman of both the 

Mendes was Hector Mendes, a very rich man, who, 

when asked by the King of Portugal what he called 

his own, replied: “The alms which I have given.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Herculano, Da Origem e Estabelecimento da 
Inquisicao em Portugal, ti. 159, Lisbon, 1854; Gratz, Gesch. 
ix. 366 et seq.; Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, 
pp. 211, 266 et. seq. 
nD. M. K. 
MENDESIA, GRACIA (called also Beatrice 

de Luna): Philanthropist; born about 1510, prob- 

ably in Portugal; died at Constantinople 1569; mem- 


ber of the Spanish family of Benveniste. Asa Marano 
/ 


489 


she was married to her coreligionist Francisco 
MeEnpDes-Nast. After the early death of her hus- 
band, Gracia no longer felt secure in Portugal, 
where the introduction of the Inquisition had endan- 
gered her life and property; and together with her 
only daughter Reyna and several relatives, she fled 
in 1586 to Antwerp, where many Maranos were then 
sojourning and where her brother-in-law Diogo 
Mendes was manager of the branch of the Lisbon 
banking-house, which was soon transferred entirely 
to Antwerp. 

Gracia did not feel at case in the capital of Flan- 
ders, despite the esteem in which she was held; for 
she could not endure the equivocation, imposed upon 
all Neo-Christians, of appearing to be a good Catho- 

lic, and she longed for a place where 

At she could openly avow her religion. 
Antwerp. All preparations had been made for 
departure, when her brother-in-law 

Diogo, who had married her younger sister, died (e. 
1545). Being appointed in his will manager of the 
business and trustee of the entire property, which 
the rulers indebted to the house had claimed and 
confiscated under the cloak of religion, Gracia was 
obliged to remain for some troublous years in Ant- 
werp. It was not until 1549 that she was able to 
go with her daughter, her widowed sister, an@ the 
latter’s daughter to Venice. Hereshe met with new 
difficulties, occasioned by her own sister, for Gracia 
had been appointed by her brother-in-law guardian 
of his minor daughter and trustee of her property 
until her marriage. The younger sister, who wasanx- 
ious to escape from Gracia’s tutelage, betrayed the 
latter as a secret Jewess to the Venetian authorities, 
alleging that she intended to flee with her wealth 
to Turkey and there openly to avow Judaism. At 
the same time the sister employed an anti-Semitic 
Frenchman to denounce Gracia to the French gov- 
ernment, within whose territory a large part of 
her wealth was invested. In consequence of these 
machinations the King of France as well as the Sen- 
ate of Venice confiscated the property of the Mendes 
family, and imprisoned Gracia at Venice in order 
to prevent her flight. Her nephews, especially the 
energetic Joaé Miguez (or Joseph Nasi, as he called 
himself as a Jew), who was also Gracia’s son-in-law, 
took steps to liberate her and to save the fortune. 
They appealed to Sultan Sulaiman, explaining to 
him that a widow had the intention of bringing 
great treasures into the Turkish empire, but that 
the republic of Venice prevented her from doing so. 
Moses Hamon, physician to the sultan, also took 
the matter up, hoping that the heiress 

Causes of the wealthy Gracia would marry 

War Be- hisson. Thereupona Turkish ambas- 
tween Ven- sador was despatched to Venice, with 

ice and a mandate to the signoria to grant the 

Turkey. captive Marano woman free passage 

to Turkey, together with her property 
and suite, and Gracia thus became unwittingly the 
cause of war between Venice and the Porte. 

In spite of the sultan’s mandate, the negotia- 
tions dragged over two years. Meanwhile Gracia 
was liberated (c. 1550) and immediately went to Fer- 
rara, where she acknowledged herself to bea Jewess. 
In 1552 she settled with her daughter Reyna at Con- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendes 
Mendlin 


stantinople and there also openly confessed Judaism, 
Her sister soon followed ber, and although the two 
had become reconciled, she still had many difficul- 
ties with her and with a nephew. 

Gracia was one of the noblest of women and was 
honored likea princess. Shespent her large fortune 
in relieving her suffering coreligionists. She made 
great sacrifices to prevent the introduction of the 
Inquisition into Portugal, and was the guardian 
angel of the Maranos. The poet Samuel Usque, 
who dedicated to her his Portuguese 
work, “Consolacam as Tribulacoes de 
Ysrael,” praises her as “the heart of 
her people.” She relieved the impov- 
erished Maranos in Flanders and other countries, 
protected them, and “gathered them together in 
obedience to the prescriptions of their ancient faith ”; 
and in the words of Immanuel Aboab, “ Whosoever 
should undertake to tell of the noble deeds and rare 
virtues of Donna Gracia would have to write entire 
books” (“Nomologia,” p. 304). Gracia appealed 
to the sultan against the cruelties of the fanatical 
Pope Paul [V., who condemned many Portuguese 
Maranos to the stake, and contemporary rabbis 
praise the piety, philanthropy, and nobility of soul 
with which she founded synagogues and aided Jew- 
ish scholars. A synagogue which she built at Con- 
stantinople still bears her name. 

Gracia betrothed her niece, Gracia Mendesia IT., 
to her nephew Samuel Nasi; the portrait of this 
Gracia at the age of eighteen was engraved by Gio- 
vanni Paolo Poggini of Ferrara on a medal which is 
now preserved in the Cabinet of Medals, Paris. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Joseph Caro, ADkat Roket, Responsum No. 
80; Joseph ha-Kohen, ‘Emek ha-Baka,p. 116; Joseph ibn 
Leb, Responsa, i. 63b, ii. 262; M. A. Levy, D. Joseph Nasi, 
Herzog von Naxos, Breslau, 1859; Gritz, Gesch. ix. 366 et 
seq.; idem, in Wiener Jahrbuch, 1857, pp. 7 et seq.; Kay- 
serling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, p. 211; idem, Die 
Jiidischen Frauen, pp. 81 et seq., 345 et seqg.; see also NaSI, 
JOSEPH. 


Dn. M. K. 

MENDL, SIGISMUND FERDINAND: 
English politician; born 1866. He was educated 
at Harrow School and University Coliege, Oxford, 
aud in 1888 was admitted to the bar at the Inner 
Temple, London. After unsuccessfully contesting 
the Isle of Wight in 1892, and Plymouth in 1895, 
he was elected member of Parliament for Plymouth 
in the Liberal interest in 1898, serving until 1900. 


Her 
Charities. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Who's Who, 1902; Harris, Jewish Year 
Book, 1901-2. 
J M. W. L. 


MENDLIN, JACOB WOLF: Russian Hebrew 
economist; born at Moghilef-on-the-Dnieper 1842. 
He was the first of the Hebrew writers to treat of 
economic questions in their application to the con- 
dition of the Jewish masses in Russia. About 1862 
he went to Germany, where he studied the labor 
movement under Lassalle. This movement roused 
his ambition to go more deeply into the study of 
economics and cooperation. 

In 1879 Mendlin made his first appearance as a 
writer in “Ha-Meliz,” with an article on the eco- 
nomic condition of the Russian Jews; and since 
then he has contributed articles on the same and 
allied questions to “ Ha-Zefirah,” “ Ha-Meliz,” “ Rus- 
kii Yevrei,” “ Voskhod,” and “Ulei.” Mendlin has 


Mendoza 
Menelaus 


also written: “Ba-Meh Niwwashea‘” (St. Peters- 
burg, 1883), four essays on the improvement of the 
economic condition of the Jews in Russia; “ Mekore 
ha-‘Osher ” (Odessa, 1898), a politico-economic study ; 
and “Quellen fun Selbsthilfe ” (in Yiddish), 26. 1894. 
In these writings Mendlin points to the mutual aid 
and cooperative organizations as the most effective 
means of improving the wretched condition of the 
Jewish masses in Russia. Mendlin also effected the 
founding of certain charitable institutions in the 
Jewish community of Odessa, where he is now 
(1904) living. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Khronika Voskhoda, 1904, No. 16. 

H. R. Be. 5 WW 

MENDOZA, DANIEL (nicknamed “Star of 
Israel”): English pugilist; born 1763 in White- 
chapel, London; died Sept. 3, 1836. Champion of 
England from 1792 to 1795, he was the founder of a 
distinct school of boxing which marks a period in 
the history of pugilism. In Miles’s “History of 
British Boxing,” London, n.d., the first period 
(1719-91) is described as “From the Championship 
of Fig to the Appearance of Daniel Mendoza” (i. 1~ 
70). Mendoza entered the prize-ring April 17, 1787, 
at Barnet, where he defeated, in less than thirty 
minutes, Samuel Martin, a butcher of Bath. This 
victory led to his being matched against Richard 
Humphries, by whom he was defeated Jan. 9, 1788, 
at Odiham, Hampshire, after a contest that lasted 
twenty-nine minutes, and during which more skill 
and science were displayed than had been shown in 
any match hitherto in England. In another match, 
at Stilton, Huntingdonshire, May 6, 1789, Hum- 
phries in the twenty-second round dropped to the 
ground without being hit, and on a repetition of 
these tactics Mendoza was declared the conqueror. 
He fought a third battle with Humpliries at Don- 
caster Sept. 29, 1790, and again defeated him. A 
popular ballad was composed on these encounters. 

In 1791 Mendoza went on a sparring tour and, 
crossing over to Ireland, thrashed “Squire Fitz- 
gerald,” an amateur, who had expressed a desire to 
test his skill with the champion (Aug. 2, 1791). On 
his return to England Mendoza was matched against 
William Warr (sometimes called “ Ward ”) of Bristol, 
whom he defeated in two encounters, at Smitham 
Bottom, near Croydon, May 14, 1792, and at Bex- 
ley Heath Nov. 12, 1794, respectively. 

Mendoza was appointed sheriff’s officer for the 
county of Middlesex in 1806, and later went on ex- 
hibition tours, the most successful being that made 
in the summer of 1819. After an absence of four- 
teen years from the ring, Mendoza was matched 
against Tom Owen, a Hampshire innkeeper, and 
met him July 20, 1820, at Banstead Downs. At this 
time Mendoza was in his fifty-seventh year, his op- 
ponent being six years younger. Owen, who had 
terribly “ punished ” his adversary, was declared the 
winner after twelve rounds. Advancing age and 
chagrin at his defeat led Mendoza to retire from 
the prize-ring, and to become the landlord of the 
“ Admiral Nelson” in Whitechapel. It is clear that 
Mendoza introduced a more skilful method of de- 
fense than had been current before his time, and 
tended to make boxing more “scientific,” a contest 
of skill rather than a struggle of brute force. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


490 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Boxiana: Sketchesof Antientand Modern 
A London, 1812; Miles, Pugilistica, vol. i.. Londou, 
SO. 
J. F. H. Y. 


MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN 
(por) bon N20 NID): Words written by a mys- 
terious hand on the wall of Belshazzar's palace, and 
interpreted by Daniel as predicting the doom of the 
king and his dynasty. The incident is described 
as follows: Once when King Belshazzar was ban- 
queting with his lords and drinking wine from 
the golden vessels of the Temple of Yuwu, a man’s 
hand was scen writing on the wali certain mysteri- 
ous words. Frightened by the apparition, the king 
ordered his astrologers to explain the inscription; 
but they were unable to read it. Daniel was then 
summoned to the royal palace; and the king prom- 
ised him costly presents if he would decipher the 
inscription. Daniel read it “Mene, mene, tekel, 
upharsin ” and explained it to mean that God had 
“numbered ” the kingdom of Belshazzar and brought 
it toan end; that the king had been weighed and 
found wanting; and that his kingdom was divided 
and given to the Medes and Persians (Dan. v. 1-28). 

The first question which presents itself to the 
critic—namely, why could the inscription be deci- 
phered by Daniel only—engaged the attention of the 
Talmudists, who advanced various answers. Cer- 
tain of them concluded that the Hebrew writing 
had been changed in the time of Ezra, so that even 
the Jews that were found in the royal court could 
not read an inscription written in archaic characters. 
But those who followed R. Simeon in maintaining 
that the writing had not been changed found other 
solutions for the problem; ¢.g., it was written in the 
cryptographic combination of wa AX, each letter of 
each pair being substituted by its companion, e.7., 


“On ND JIN my no’; or the words were written 


thus: Sex “pp22 DIN, one above 
Talmudical the other, having to be read verti- 
Explana- cally; or 1p70°) npS DIN DIN, cach 
tions. word backward; or, again, NDI NDS 
pou Snip, the first two letters of each 
word being transposed (Sanh. 22a). It is evident 
that the author of the Book of Daniel meant that the 
inscription was written in characters familiar to the 
king and the wise men of Babylon, but that, as often 
happens with ancient inscriptions, the transposition 
of certain letters baffled every attempt to decipher 
them. 

Various difficulties of the writing present them- 
selves also in Daniel’s interpretation: ¢.g., the repe- 
tition of N39 is not explained, and instead of the 
plural pop), the singular p15 without the con- 
junctive } is translated. It is true that Theodotion 
and Jerome, by giving three words only to verse 25, 
make it uniform with verses 26-28 (Theodotion read- 
ing “Mane”), and that the Septuagint, though dif- 
fering from Theodotion as to the meaning of the 
words, has also only three words, which it transfers 
to verse 17. Nevertheless the discrepancy in the 
Masoretic text as well as the grammatical construc- 
tion of the words has greatly puzzled the modern 
critics, It may be noted that the author chose 
words which had a double meaning and that Daniel, 
accordingly, gave the king a dual interpretation, 


491 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mendoza 
Menelaus 





applying both meanings of the words. Thus he in- 
terpreted N3D as “to count” and “to finish ”; bon. 
to “ Weigh” and “tobe wanting ”; p71, “to divide” 
and “Persia.” The question now arises as to the 
grammatical construction of these words. Accord- 
jug to Theodotion, Jerome, and Josephus (“ Ant.” x, 

11, § 3), they are substantives; but 


Views of according to the Septuagint they are 
Modern verbs in the perfect passive, which, 
Scholars. owing totheir vocalization, are difficult 


ofexplanation. Clermont-Ganneau, in 
along article on this subject (“Journal Asiatique,” 
series 8, villi. (1886), 36 e¢ seg.), first advanced the 

opinion that they are names of weights, namely, a 

mina, a shekel, and a peras, which last-named in the 

Talmud means a half-mina (comp. the expression 

D2D) 739 in ‘Eduy. iii. 3), and that p75) may be 

the dual form, “two half-minas.” Thus the mina 

would bean allusion to Nebuchadnezzar; the shekel, 
which in value is a very small part of the mina, to 

Belshazzar; and the two half-minas to Media and 

Persia (comp. Ta‘an. 21b). But as this interpreta- 

tion does not show how the words predicted the fall 

of Babylon, Clermont-Ganneau admits the possibil- 
ity of the first two words being verbs, but suggests 
that the ) of }'D75) should be affixed to the prece- 
ding word, which may be vocalized either sSpn, 

“they weighed,” or id>pn, “weigh”; in either case 

having Pou as its direct object. 

Among the many other suggestions offered by 
modern scholars that of J. Marquart may be men- 
tioned (“Fundamente Israelitischer und Jiidischer 
reschichte,” 1896, p. 73). He thinks that the legend 
of Belshazzar’s vision is connected ‘with that of 
Hextoporvs, and that possibly the writer of Dan. 
v. was of the Maccabean age. Marquart makes no 
emendation in the text of the passage in Daniel; 
but if his suggestion is well founded the sentence 
may be amended to read as follows: Sop NNnYD NND 
wip = “Smite, smite, slay, thou horseman!” As to 
the historicity of the inscription, Boissier points out 
that predictions written by a mysterious hand are 
referred to in a cuneiform tablet (see “Proc. Soc. 
Bibl. Arch.” 1896, xviii. 237). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cheyne and Black, Eneyc. Bibl.; D. Margo- 
ljouth, in Hastings, Dict. Bible; J. D. Prince, Mene, Mene, 
Tekel, Upharsin, Baltimore, 1898. 
s, 


M. SEL. 


MENELAUS (known also as Onias): High 
priest from 171 to about 161 B.c.; successor of Ja- 
son, the brother of Onias III. The sources are di- 
vided as to his origin. Aecording to IT Maccabees 
(iv, 23), he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin and 
was the brother of the Simeon who had denounced 
Onias III. to Antiochus IV. (Epiphanes) and revealed 
to the Syrians the existence of the treasure of the 
Temple; according to Josephus (“ Ant.” xii. 5), 
Menelaus was the brother of Onias III. and of Ja- 
son. Of these two conflicting statements the evi- 
dence is in favor of the former, first because it is 
unlikely that two brothers would be called by the 
same name, and secondly because the popular opposi- 
tion to Menelaus in favor of Jason, though both be- 
longed to the Hellenistic party, is more easily ex- 
plained if the successor of Jason did not belong to the 


priestly family. It is possible that Josephus con- 
founded Simeon, the brother of Menelaus, with Sim- 
eon, the father of Onias and Jason. 

Although during the three yearsof his pontificate 
Jason had given many proofs of his attachment to 
the Hellenistic party—by building a gymnasium in 

Jerusalem and by introducing many 
Hellenistic Greek customs—the zealous Hellenists 
Tenden- of the stamp of the Tobiads plotted 
cies. his overthrow, suspecting him of par- 
tiality to traditional Judaism. At 
their head stood Menelaus, who professed the ut- 
most contempt for the religion of his fathers and 
was ready to commit any crime in order to gratify 
his ambition. Having been sent to Antiochus to 
pay the annual tribute, he took the opportunity to 
outbid Jason and secure for himself the office of high 
priest. An officer named Sostrates was sent by An- 
tiochus with a troop of Cyprian soldiers to subdue 
any opposition that might be attempted by the fol- 
lowers of the deposed high priest Jason and to collect 
at the same time the sum Menelaus had promised. 

Menelaus’ first act was to seize the sacred vessels 
in the Temple stores in order to meet the pecuniary 
obligations he had incurred. This sacrilegious act, 
which was regarded even by the Greeks as heinous, 
came to the ears of the deposed high priest Onias 
III., who publicly accused Menelaus of robbing the 
Temple. The latter, afraid of the consequences of 
this accusation, induced the king’s lieutenant An- 
dronicus, who had had his share of the plunder, to 
get rid of Onias before a formal complaint had been 
lodged with the king. Accordingly Onias was de- 
coyed from the sanctuary at Daphne, in which he 
had sought refuge, and murdered. Menelaus con- 
tinued to plunder the treasures of the Temple until 
the people were aroused and scenes of violence en- 
sued, in which his brother Lysimachus met his death. 
He then brought before the king an accusation 
against the people of Jerusalem, that they were par- 
tizans of the Egyptians and persecuted him only 
because he was opposed to their party intrigues. 
This accusation caused the execution of several 
Jews who, although they proved beyond any 
doubt that Menelaus and Lysimachus had desecrated 
the Temple, were sentenced to death. 

Meanwhile Jason had not abandoned his claims to 
the high-priesthood, and while (170) Antiochus was 

waging war against Egypt he suc- 

Conflict ceeded in making himself master of 
withJason. Jerusalem and in forcing Menelaus to 

seek refuge in the citadel. Antiochus 
regarded this proceeding as an affront upon his 
majesty, and, having been compelled by the Ro- 
mans to leave Egypt, he marched against Jerusa- 
lem, massacred the inhabitants, and plundered the 
Temple; in this he is said to have been assisted by 
Menelaus. 

According to II Maccabees, it was Menelaus who 
persuaded Antiochus to Hellenize the Jewish wor- 
ship, and thereby brought about the uprising of the 
Judeans under the guidance of the Maccabees. 
During the first years of the restoration of the Jew- 
ish worship Menelaus still remained (though only 
nominally) high priest. Heis said to have been put 
to death by Antiochus V. (Eupator) when the latter 


Menephtha 
Menorah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


492 





made definite concessions to the Jews, the reason as- 
signed being that Menelaus, by his evil counsel, was 
indirectly responsible for the Jewish rebellion. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: IJ Mace. iv. 28 et seq.; Josephus, Ant. xii. 5; 
idem, B. J. i. 1, 88 1-6: Gratz, Gesch. ii. 303 et seq.; Sehtrer, 
Gesch. i. 195 et seq., 215; Biichler, Die Tobiaden und Onia- 
den, pp. 106 et seq. 

Ss I. Br. 


MENEPHTHA. Sce MERNEPTAI. 


MENGS, ANTON RAFAEL: Austrian 
painter; born in Aussig, Bohemia, March 12, 1728; 
died in Rome June 29, 1779; son of Ismael Israc]l 
Mrncs. Anton Mengs was early destined for an 
artist’s career; and his father with much strictness 
kept him to his studies, although the boy at first 
evinced but little inclination or ability for that call- 
ing. In 1741 he was taken to Rome, where he stud- 
ied the old masters, and upon his return to Dresden 
(1744) he was honored by King Augustus IIT. with 
the title of court painter. He obtained the roval 
permission to return to Romine to complete his stud- 
ies, and in 1748 his first large canvas, “The Holy 
Family,” appeared. A beautiful peasant girl, Mar- 
gareta Guazzi, who had posed as a model for this 
painting, won his heart; and in order to marry her 
he abandoned the Jewish faith and was adinitted 
iuto the Roman Catholic Church. Mengsagain vis- 
ited Dresden in 1749, but returned to Rome in 1752, 
where he spent the greater part of his life, and 
where most of his important works were painted. 
In 1754 he became the first director of the newly 
founded Painters’ Academy in that city. 

Mengs was an cclectic who endeavored to blend 
the peculiar beautics of the old masters Raifael, 
Titian, and Correggio. His taste was exquisite, his 
groupings and compositions simple and noble, his 
drawing always correct; while his coloring, with 
regard to which he took Titian for his example, 
was strong and true. Though his paintings lack 
the originality of genius, their force and beauty give 
them rank among the foremost works of art. 

In Rome Mengs painted the following large pic- 
tures: “Saint Eusebius Surrounded by Angels” 
(on the ceiling of the Celestine Monastery; 1757); 
“Apollo and the Nine Muses on Parnassus” (on a 
ceiling in Cardinal Albant’s villa); “History Wri- 
ting on the Shoulders of Time”; “ A Meeting of the 
Gods”; “Cleopatra.” In 1761 Mengs was called to 
Madrid by King Charles III. of Spain to decorate 
the ceiling of the dining-hall in the royal palace. 
He painted “The Apotheosis of Trajan” and “The 
Hall of Fame,” which latter is considered his mas- 
terpiece. In Madrid hecompleted also “ The Ascen- 
sion of Christ” for the altar of a new Catholic 
church in Dresden. Various other paintings by 
Mengs are in the possession of the art-galleries of 
many European capitals. Berlin has a “Holy 
Family ”; Vienna, “St. Joseph’s Dream,” “The Vir- 
gin,” “The Infant Savior,” “The Annunciation,” 
and “Infanta Maria Theresa”; St. Petersburg, “ An- 
dromeda Liberated by Perseus”; Dresden, “Cupid 
Sharpening an Arrow”; Madrid, “Christ's Release 
from Calvary ” and “ Mary of Magdala.” 

The “Opere di Antonio-Raffaelle Mengs” (2 vols., 
Parma, 1780) has been translated into German (by 
G. F. Prange, Halle, 1786), English (London, 1796), 
and French (by Jansen, Ratisbon, 1782; Paris, 1786). 


A young Englishman named Webb, to whom Mengs 
had expressed his ideas on art, published them for 
his own under the title “ Untersuchungen tiber die 
Schénheit ” (Zurich, 1771), which act of plagiarism 
gained him considerable fame. 

Mengs had twenty children, seven of whom out- 
lived him. Of these, five daughters were adopted 
by King Charles IIL. of Spain, who also accorded 
pensions to Mengs’s two sons. Mengs bequeathed 
his valuable collections of drawings, vases, and 
gvpsoplasts to the royal academics of art In 
Madrid and Dresden. Empress Catherine IT. of 
Russia erected a monument to his memory in St. 
Peter's Church, Rome, where he was interred. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dictionnaire Unirersel Enecyclopédique + 

Brockhaus Konversations-Levikon; Meyers Konversa- 

fions-Lexikon; Nouvelle Biographie Generale: Woer- 


mann, fsmael und Rafael Mengys, in Zeitschrift fiir Bild- 
ende Ioupst, vol. v., 1898. 


s. F. C, 

MENGS, ISMAEL ISRAEL: Danish por- 
triut-painter; born in Copenhagen 1690; died in 
Dresden Dec, 26, 1765, He learned the art of min- 
jature- and cnamel-painting in Litbeck, and then 
traveled through Germany, Italy, and Austria, earn- 
ing a scant livelihood until 1764, when he was ap- 
pointed professor at the Academy of Art in Dresden, 
and court painter to King August ILL, from whom 
he received an annuity. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon: 

Philip Weilbach, Dansk Kunstnerlecthon. 

8. F.C. 

MENKEN: American family. the first known 
member of which was Solomon Menken. 

Jacob Stanwood Menken: American mer- 
chant; born in Cincinnati 1538; youngest son of 
Solomon Meuken. With bis brother Nathan Davis 
he entered the Union army, and was captain of 
Company B, 27th Obio Infantry. He is (1904) a 
member of the Military Order of the Loyal Legion. 

Nathan Davis Menken: American merchant; 
born 1887 at Cincinnati; died 1878 at Memphis, 
Tenn. ; second son of Solomon Menken. He entered 
the Union army at the outbreak of the rebellion in 
1861, and was captain of Company A, Ist Ohio 
Cavalry, Ife was commander of Gencral Pope’s 
body-guard, and took part in thirty-seven battles 
and skirmishes in West Virginia, being mentioned 
for his “distinguished and soldier-like bearing ” as 
aimember of the supporting force in Colonel Brod- 
head’s report (March 27, 1862) of the battle of Kerns- 
town, Va. (“ War of the Rebellion, Official Records,’ 
first series, xii. 156, Washington, 1902). During 
the epidemic of yellow fever in Memphis in 1878 
Menken assisted a number of his coreligionists to 
leave the city by supplying them with the necessary 
funds. He himself remained, and, while cooperating 
with the Howard Association of which he was a 
member, succumbed to the disease. Menken was 
also a member of the Military Order of the Loyal 
Legion. 

Percival S. Menken: Eldest son of Jules <A. 
Menken; born in Philadelphia 1865; educated at 
Columbia University (W.A., Ph.D... LL.B.}. He 
is a member of the New York bar, and president 
of the Young Men’s Hebrew Association of New 
York. Fora number of years he was a trustee and 


493 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Menephtha 
Menorah 





secretary of the Jewish Theological Seminary Asso. 

ciation, and in 1904 a director of the Jewish Theolog. 

ical Seminary of America. He died May 17, 1908. 
S. Stanwood Menken: Eldest son of Nathan 

D. Menken; born in Memphis 1870. He is a mem- 

yer of the New York bar and is active in civic 

affairs. In 1897 he was nominated for judge of the 

City Court on the Citizens’ Union ticket as well as 

onthe People’s ticket. In 1896 he founded the Hall 

ot Records Association, to properly house the public 
records in New York city. 

Solomon Menken: [Born in Westphalia, Prus- 
sia, L787; died in Cincinnati, Ohio, 1858. Tle was 
sent to New York in 1821 as supercargo in a sailing 
vessel belonging to his uncle, a banker and ship- 
owner of Amsterdam. In 1819 he settled in Cin- 
einnati, Ohio, and founded in that city about 1825 
the first wholesale dry-goods house, that of Men- 
ken & Milius. His sons, Jules A. (born in New 
York 1836; died at Watch Point, Vt., 1890; first 
licutenant in the Home Guards, Cincinnati, during 
the Rebellion), Nathan Davis, and Jacob Stanwood 
Menken (for the last. two see above), were merchants 
in Cincinnati (from 1855 to 1861) and Jules A. and 
Nathan Davis in Memphis, Tenn. (as Menken & Co. 
from 18623 io 1888, and as J. S. Menken & Co. from 
1888 to 1899). 

BIBLIOGRAPITY: Isaac Markens, The Hebreiws tn America, 
New York, ISS&:; H. S. Morais, The Jews of Philadelphia, 
Philadelphia, 18494: Simon Wolf, The American Jewas Pa- 
triot, Soldier, and Citizen, Philadelphia, 1895. 

A. E. N. 8. 

MENKEN, ADA ISAACS : Anylo-American 
actressand writer; born June 15, 1835, at Milneburg, 
La.; died in Paris, France, Aug. 10, 1868. Her first 
appearance before the public was at the Opera- 
IIouse, New Orleans, where she danced with her 
sister Josephine, the two being known as “The 
Theodore Sisters.” From New Orleans Ada went 
to the Tacon Theater, Havana, as adancer. Thence 
she went to Texas, where she had many thrilling 
experiences, amoug them being a capture by Indians. 
Next she tried her hand at literature, writing for 
Various newspapers, and teaching languages. 

In Ang., 1856, she was married to Alexander 
Jsaacs Menken, pubhely embracing Judaism ; and 
she next played in Milman’s “Fazio” at the Varie- 
ties, New Orleans, and at various theaters in the 
Southand Middle West. While at Nashville (April 3, 
1859) she was married to John C. Heenan, the prize- 
fighter, known also as the “Benicia Boy.” With 
him she went to New York city, appearing at the 
National and the old Bowery theaters in “ Soldiers’ 
Danger” and “The French Spy.” Next she joined 
the company of John E. Murdoch, with whom she 
went on tour, playing réles entirely beyond her and 
even attempting Lady Macbeth. 

She made her appearance in her best-known réle, 
that of Mazeppa, at the Green Street. Theater, Al- 
bany, N. Y., June 7, 1861. Her success was con- 
siderable, though the part was more acrobatic than 
histrionic. In Oct., 1861, she married R. H. Newell, 
better known as Orpheus C. Kerr. Her next step 
was to go to London, where on Oct. 3, 1864, she ap- 
peared at Astley’s Theatre as Mazeppa, She failed 
to please, and went into temporary retirement, 
emerging Oct. 9, 1865, to play Zeon in Brougham’s 


“Child of the Sun.” In the meantime she had di- 

verced Newell and married James Barclay (Aug. 

21, 1865). A year later she went to Paris, where 

she played at the Gaité in Burgois and Dugué’s 

“Les Pirates de la Savane” (Dec. 80). 

Ada Menken published two books of poems: the 
first, “ Memoirs” (1856), under the nom de plume 
“Indigena”; the second, “Infelicia,” in 1868, dedi- 
cated “by permission” to Charles Dickens. She at- 
tracted considerable attention among English and 
French men of letters, ¢.g., in London, Charles 
Dickens, Charles Reade, and Algernon C. Swin- 
burne, and in Paris the elder Dumas, Théophile 
Gautier, and Victor Hugo. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Era Almanac, 1868; Dict. National Biogra- 
phy, Xxxvii. 252: Appieton’s Hucyc. American Biography : 
Memoirs accompanying the 1888 edition of Infelieia. 

J. E. Ms. 

MENORAH: The holy candelabrum. For 
Biblical Data sce CANDLESTICK. 
In Rabbinical Literature; 


a ~ 
t 


wa 


The Talmud 














The Mosaic Menorah as Described in Rabbiniea) Literature. 
(After a sketch by J. D. Eisenstein, New York.) 


speaks only of the menorah made by Bezaleel for 
the Tabernacle in the time of Moses (Ex. xxxvii. 
17 e¢ seqg.), Which was later placed in the Temple 


Menorah 
Mephibosheth 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


494 





(Tosef., Sotah, xiii., beginning), between the ten 
menorot made by Hiram for Solomon's Temple 
(I Kings vii. 49). Each of these menorot was one 
denarius in excess of the required weight (*kik- 
kar”) of the Mosaic menorah (Men. 29a). 

The Mosaic menorah, according to the Talmud, 
stood 18 “tefahim ” (1 tefah = 4 inches), or 72 inches, 
high, divided as follows: 3 tefahim for the tripod, 
including a “ perah” (blossom in relief); 2 tefahim 
space; 1 tefah for a “ gebia‘ ” (cup or vase), “ kaftor” 
(knob), and perah; 2 tefahim space; 1 tefah for 
a kaftor and branch on each side of the center 





A Modern Menorah. 
‘\) (In the possession of Maurice Herrmann, New York.) 


shaft and a kaftor above the joint; 1 tefah space; 
1 tefah for a kaftor and branch on each side and 
a kaftor above; 1 tefah space; 1 tefah for a kaf- 
tor and branch on each side and a kaftor above; 
2 tefahim space; 3 tefahim for a cluster of three 
gebi‘ot, a kaftor, and a perah on each of the branches 
and the center shaft (Men. 28b). 

The gebia‘ is described as resembling an Alexan- 
drian cup; the kaftor resembled the half of anapple; 
the perah resembled a blossom carved on pillars. 
Altogether there were 22 gebi‘im, 11 kaftorim, and 
9 perahim (23.; see accompanying illustration). 
Maimonides further explains that the gebia' was 
broad at the top and narrow at the bottom (proba- 
bly in the style of a flower-vase); the kaftor was 
somewhat egg-shaped with pointed tops; the perah 
looked like a dish with the brim doubled outward 
(“ Yad,” Bet ha-Behirah, iii. 1-11). The spread of 
the branches was 9 tefahim (36 inches), and there 
was the same measure for the tripod (“Shilte ha- 
Gibborim,” ch. xxxi.). 

The branches of the lamps had the apertures in 


which the wicks were placed turned toward the 
center lamp, which was known as “Ner ha-Ma‘a- 
rabi” (= “the Western Lamp”) because it was next 
to the branches on the east side (Rashi on Shab. 


22b). For, according to the Talmud, the menorah 
was so placed that its two branches 
Position. pointed toward the east and west re- 


spectively. <A similar rule applied to 
all vessels in theTemple (Men. xi. 7), except the Ark. 
Maimonides, however, holds the opinion, also ex- 
pressed in the Talmud, that the menorah, like the 
Ark, was placed at right angles to the length of the 
Temple, z@.c., pointing north and south and facing 
east and west. But this theory appears to be un- 
tenable. It was opposed by Abraham ibn Daud 
(RaBaD) and was strongly attacked in “Shilte ha- 
Gibborim ” (xxxi. 26b), 

The cleaning and refilling of the lamps, except 
the two most easterly, were performed by a priest 
every morning. If the priest found them extin- 
guished, he relighted them, The two eastern lamps 
were left burning till after the morning service, and 
were then cleaned and refilled (Tamid iii. 9; Yoma 
33a). The Ner ha-Ma‘arabi, also called “ Ner Elo- 
him ” (I Sam. iii. 8), was left burning all day and 
was refilled in the evening. It served to light all 
the lamps. The Ner ha-Ma‘arabi contained no more 
oil than the other lamps, a half-log measure (1 log 
contains the liquid of six eggs), sufficient to last 
during the longest winter night (Men. 89a); yet by 
a miracle that lamp regularly burned till the fol- 
lowing evening (2b. 86b). This miracle, however, 
ceased after the death of Simeon the Righteous, 
who was high priest forty years before the destruc- 
tion of the Temple (Yoma 389b). 

There was a ladder of three steps 9 tefahim high 
and 9 tefahim wide in front of the menorah. On 
the second step were placed the tongs, shovels, 
dishes, and oil. This ladder or stool was made by 
Bezaleel out of shittim-wood; but in Solomon’s 
Templeit was made of marble. The priest ascended 
the steps to fix and light the lamps (Men. and Tamid 
l.¢.). 

The menorah depicted on Titus’ arch is probably 
a representation of one of Solomon’s menorot, but 
not of the Mosaic mencrah, which was concealed 
by the priests prior to the destruction of the First 
Temple and of which all trace has since disappeared. 

Symbolically the menorah represented the crea- 
tion of the universe in seven days, the center light 

symbolizing the Sabbath. The seven 

Symbolic branchesare the seven continents of the 

Signifi- earth and the seven heavens, guided 

cance. by the light of God. The Zohar says: 

“These lamps, like the planets above, 

receive their light from the sun” (“ Beha‘aloteka,” 
beginning). 

The design of the menorah is used for a MizraH 
picture. The seven words of Ps. exiij. 3 respect- 
ively designate the seven branches. Some derive 
the design of the branches from a seven-verse chap- 
ter in the Psalms, or from the seven-verse prayer 
of R. Nehunya ben ha-Kanah beginning with 
“ Anna, bekoah gedulot.” A tablet with such a de- 
sign is sometimes placed in front of the prayer-desk, 
while others use the figure of the menorah as a 


495 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Ree red eth 





decoration for the Ark, Others again, in writing 
amulets, arrange a formula of seven letters and seven 
verses in the form of a menorah; and it was em- 
ployed also on tombs. See AMULET (illustration); 
ART IN THE SYNAGOGUE; CANDLESTICK; MIZRAII. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bahr, Symbotik @des Mosaisehen Cultus, i. 
534-543: Friedrich. Symbolik der Mosaischen Stiftshiitte, 
pp. 157-158, Leipsic, 1841; Rofe, Shilte ha-Gibborim, ch. 


xxXxi., Mantua, 1607; Isserles, Torat ha-‘Olah, i., ch. XVi.: 
Kolbo, Binyan Ariel, p, 75, No. 259, ed. Vienna, 1883. 


Ad J. D. E. 


MENORAH. See PERIODICALS, 


MENSTRUATION: The first appearance of 
the menses is known to depend on various factors— 
climate, occupation, residence in towns, etc.—of 
which racial affinities are the most important. Cli- 
mate is of unquestionable influence, the earliest age 
varying from eleven in hot to fifteen years in cold 
climates. Oppenheim, from an investigation of the 
time of the first menstruation in Bulgarian, Turk- 
ish, Armenian, and Jewish girls, concluded that race 
is the most important factor; and Lebrun states 
that among 100 girls of Jewish and Slavonian ex- 
traction, the majority of the Jewish girls menstru- 
ated at thirteen, while only one Slavonian girl men- 
struatedatthatage. Weissenberg presents statistics 
for Jewesses in South Russia from which it is seen 
that the first onset of menstruation was on the aver- 
age at the age of fourteen; the earliest appearance 
was in one girl at the age of ten; and in one it was 
as late as eightecn (Weissenberg, “Die Stidrus- 
sischen Juden,” p. 77). 

F. Weber investigated the subject in St. Peters- 
burg and found the following percentages, “early 
appearance” representing cases of fifteen years of 
age, and “lateappearance ” those of seventeen years: 








Rus- | Jew- | Ger- [oat 
sians. | esses, | mans. | Poles. | Finns. 
Early appearance...| 48.5 54.5 47.1 52.7 19.0 


Late appearance.... 6.36 3.7 2.9 2.9 19,25 


Considering as “premature” those who had their 
first menstruation at the age of twelve, and as “de- 
layed” those at eighteen years, Weber found the 
following percentages: 

















Rus- Jew- I ees. ||) e 

sians. | esses, | mans. Poe. Finns. 
ea a fan Meare = 
PFEMALIUITEs .<<.5 <3 10.6 12.5 8.2 L7 i 2. 5 
Delayed... sssss..0. } 2186] 112 | 3.8 | 29 | 00 








It appears from this that the first appearance of 
menstruation is much earlier in the Jewish and in 
the Slavonian girls than in the others. 

Joachim’s statistics for Hungary show that the 
first menstruation takes place there as follows: 
15 to 16 years. 


bb 


Magyar peasant Girls..........eee eee ie 

Jewish Girls .......0000. re eee vee 14° 15 

Slovak girls...-....... pian a uwee wavens 1°* 17 =“ 
Stober (“ Topographie et Histoire Médicale de Strass- 
bourg,” p. 266, Paris, 1864) found that in Strasburg 
the first onset of menstruation was at about the 
same age in Jewish girls as in the non-Jewesses. 
In no case did he observe it to occur before the 
twelfth year, and most had begun to menstruate 
between fourteen and seventeen. But he based his 


opinion on only a few observations. Raciborski 
(“Traité de la Menstruation,” p. 630, Paris, 1868) 
found that the first menstruation appeared in Jew- 
esses al the average age of 14 years, 3 months, 25 
days, as against 15 years, 8 months, 9 days in Sla- 
vonian girls. 

From the investigations of M. Fishberg in New 
York it appears that the first menstruation appears 
in Jewish girls of that city at the average age of 12 
years, 7 months. Of the 488 girls thus investi- 
gated 390 were immigrants mostly from eastern 
Europe, and 93 were natives, of foreign parentage. 
In the American-born girls the first menstruation ap- 
peared at the average age of 12 years, 1 month; and 
among the foreign-born girls the average age was 13 
years, °9 months. The earlicr onset of menstruation 
in the daughters of immigrants as compared with 
their mothers has been observed by Engelmann in 
other immigrant peoples in the United States (see 
“ Age of First Menstruation on the North American 
Continent” in “New York Medical Journal,” Ixxv. 
221~228, 270-277). After a careful study of statis- 
tical evidence he concludes that as regards the time 
of functional development the American girls are 
very much more precocious than those of other con- 
tinents in the same region of the temperate zone, 
and more precocious than the peoples from whom 
they have sprung. It appears that the Jewish 
girls in the United States show similar character- 
istics When compared with their sisters In Europe. 
The cause of this precocity is to be looked for in the 
social and educational conditions surrounding Jew- 
esses in the United States. 

For laws concerning menstruation see Nippau. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Ploss and Max Bartels, Das Weib, 7th ed., 

pp. 364-880; Weber, Ueber Menstrualverhdlinisse der 

Frauen in St. Petersburg, in St. Petersburger Medici- 

nische Wochenschrift, 1883, Nos. 41, 42, 43; Joachim, Unga- 


rische Zeitschrift, iv.. Nos. 30 -28: A, Corre, La MeéreetVEn- 
fant dans les Races Humaines, Paris, 1882. 


J. M. Fr. 


MENZ, ABRAHAM JOSEPH BEN SIMON 
WOLF: Rabbi at Frankfort-on-the-Main at the 
beginning of the eighteenth century. He wrote 
an elementary text-book on mathematics entitled 
“Reshit Limmudim,” in three parts: (1) “ Kelale 
Handasah,” the general rules of algebra; (2) “ Yeso- 
dot ha-Gematriot,” the elements of geometry; (3) 
“Yesod ha-Tekunah,” on astronomy; the first part 
only has been published (Berlin, 1775). It contains. 
the first book of Euclid, rearranged, with many 
original examples by the author. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 702; Fiirst, 


Bibl. Jud. ii. 368; Zeitlin, Bibl. Hebr. p. 238; Fuenn, Keiie- 
set Yisrael, i. 40; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 542, No. 49, 


D. S.J. BL. 


MEPHIBOSHETH: Only son of Jonathan, son 
of Saul, first king of Israel. The chronicler gives 
him the nameof Merib-baal (I Chron. viii. 34), mean- 
ing, perhaps, “ Ba‘al contends.” The relation of the 
two names is similar to that existing between Ish- 
bosheth = “ man of shame,” and Esh-baal = “man of 
Baal” (¢, verse 33). Upon the slaughter of Saul 
and his sons on Mt. Gilboa, the nurse in Jonathan's 
house fled with Mephibosheth, and in the flight the 
child fell and became a permanent cripple (II Sam. 
iv. 4). When David came to the throne his former 


Mequinez 
Meridian 


love for Jonathan impelled him to inquire whether 
any of Saul’s house remained alive, that he might 
show them kindness for the sake of his former bosom 
friend. Through Ziba, who had been a servant 
of Saul, he learned of the cripple Mephibosheth. 
David had him brought to Jerusalem, restored to 
him the estate of Saul, and made him a perpetual 
guest at the royal table (4. ix. 1-8). 

When David fled from Absalom this royal heir 
remained in Jerusalem—according to Ziba’s story 
(tb. xvi. 3), that he might be ready to take the throne 
which was about to be restored to his father’s house. 
-On David's triumphal return to Jerusalem Mephibo- 
sheth went out to meet and greet him. He was un- 
washed and unkempt. When David questioned him 
concerning his reason for having remained behind, 
Mephibosheth threw the blame on Ziba, and as evi- 
dence of his own sincerity pointed out his unkempt 
state (2b. xix. 24-30). The king was evidently per- 
plexed at the conflicting storics; and he decided that 
the estate of Saul should be divided equally between 
the questionable characters with whom he had to 


deal. Mephibosheth had ason, Micah (1 Chron. viii. 
34, 35). 
E. G. HH. Lo Ms.P: 


MEQUINEZ: Town in the interior of Morocco, 
about 35 miles west-southwest of Fez, It contains 
about 6,000 Jews in a total population of 50.000. But 
very little is known concerning the Jewsthere. The 
town was founded about 940c.r. As was the case 
in other parts of Mauritania, it is probable that there 
were a few Jews in Mequinez before 1492, and that 
these were joined by many others at the time of the 
expulsion from Spain. It has been pointed out that 
of thirty family names in Mequinez at least eight- 
een, such as “Gozlan,” “Toledano,” “ Pariente,” 
“Sasportas,” and “Verdugo,” are Castilian in ori- 
gin, Moreover, various customs, the mode of fem- 
inine dress, and the methods of preparing food, al! 
seem to show the influence of the Spanish Middle 
Ages. Details of the history of the Mequinez Jews 
are accessible only for the years since the Alliance 
Israclite began to publish its bulletins. In 1878 the 
town suffered from a famine which ravaged all 
Morocco, and the Alliance Israclite, the Anglo-Jew- 
ish Association, and the Board of Deputies of Lon- 
don sentabundant relief to the suffcring Jews. The 
following year the affliction was renewed through a 
drought and an epidemic, on which occasion Meyui- 
nez received relief from the Morocco Famine Relicf 
Fund of London. According to the Bulletin of the 
Alliance for 1880, between 1864 and 1880 forty-two 
Jews in Mequinez were assassinated by Mohammed - 
ans. The appeal of the Alliance Israélite director of 
schools to the consular and diplomatic representa- 
tives of Morocco and the presence of one of these 
directors at Mequinez nave helped to make the lives 
of the Jews there somewhat more secure. 

Mequinez has nineteen synagogues, the oldest of 
Which dates back 150 years. Each of these is named 
after its founder or else after the family which sup- 
ports it (¢.g., the Synagogue of Mordecai Loubaton). 
The Alliance Israélite founded two schools (attend- 
ance 61 boys and 36 girls respectively) at Mequinez 
in 1901. There are also ten small Talmud Torahs, 
having about 800 pupils and known by the names 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


—— A TO 8 Sherr 


496 


of the teachers in charge of them. The custom of 
placing epitaphs upon graves is not general in Me- 
quinez, except in the case of those who die without 
leaving male issue. In Mequinez, as in almost all 
the Jewish communitics of Morocco, it is not cus- 
tomary to invest any one with the title of chief 
rabbi. Religious matters are placed in the hands of 

a triumvirate of dayyanim, the president of the pres- 

ent (1904) triumvirate being R. Salomon Verdugo. 

These three rabbis are assisted in the discharge of 

their duties by a “ma ‘amad,” or council of notables ; 

in case of necessity these coustitute also a court of 
justice. 

The revenues of the Jewish communal adminis- 
tration are raised by means of a tax of one “doure” 
(about 60 cents) per head for large cattle and one 
“ peseta ” (about 462 cents) per head tor small cattle, 
and by contributions made by the wealthy families 
on the approach of the important holy days. These 
sources of revenue enable the communal adminis- 
tration to contribute to the schools of the Alliance 
Israélite, support the rabbis and the poor of the 
city, provide for funerals, pay the poll-tax, make 
gifts to the royal court and to the local authorities 
on the occasion of great Arabian fétes, and purchase 
the privilege of using the public roads, 

There are two societies in this populous commu- 
nity—the hebra kaddisha, which has charge of funer- 
als, and the foundation of which dates back to 
ancient times, and the “hilluk,” or the society 
charged with the weekly distribution of money and 
produce to the needy. The occupations of the 
Jewish population embrace all classes of mechan- 
ical labor and commerce. Some Jews are even em- 
ployed as kitchen gardeners in the outskirts of the 
town. The Jews of Mequinez occupy the Mellah, 
a walled ghetto containing 250 houses, all belonging 
to Jews. The streets are wide, but are not paved. 

From the standpoint of literature, Mequinez is the 
most fruitful community of Morocco. It has had 
at least thirteen rabbinical writers of note, of whom 
the following bclonged to the family of Verdugo, 
the dates of death in each case being given in 
parentheses: Mordecai (1773); Moses (1788); Judah 
(1803): Mimun (1812); Raphael (1820); Petha- 
hiah (1842): Jacob (1848); Joseph (1852). Of the 
Toledano family there may be mentioned Hayyim 
(1782); Jacob (1802): Moses Habib (middle of the 
19th cent.). David Hessin lived there toward the 
end of the eighteenth century. 

The ‘Isawites, members of a fanatical Arab sect, 
make annual pilgrimages to Mequinez to visit the 
tomb of Abn ‘Isa, the founder of the sect. On the 
day of theirarrival the gates of the Mellah are shut, 
and the government of the town places a guard there 
to prevent the pilgrims from pillaging and massa- 
cring its inhabitants. See Morocco. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Colonies Jiives dans VT Afrique Romaine, 
in R. E. J. 1902, No. 87; Bulletins of the Alliance Israélite 
Ciriverselle, 1861-1901; Hazan, Ha-Ma‘alot li-Shelomoh, pp. 
32, 81, 90. 

D. M. Fr. 


MERAB (37): The elder of Saul’s two daugh- 
ters (I Sam. xiv, 49; xviii. 17, 19). Saul formally of- 
fered Merab’s hand to David with the condition that 
the latter should distinguish himse]f in the war 


497 


with the Philistines. David did so, but Saul broke 
his promise by giving Merab to Adriel the Mehola- 
thite (zo. xviii, 19). 

J. M. SEL. 

MERARI, MOSES MENAHEM: Poet and 
chief rabbi of Venice in the seventeenth century. 
He was one of the rabbis who signed the decision in 
regard to the stores in Ferrara. A Hebrew poem 
(“Shir”) of hisis found inthe “ Hanukkat ha-Bayit ” 
of Moses Hefez (Venice, 1696). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 368; Mortara, Indice, p. 
39; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 253. 


ae M. SEL. 
MERCANTILE LAW. See COMMERCIAL 
Law. 


MERCY. See Compassion. 


MERECH: Russian town in the government of 
Wilna. The earliest mention of Jews there is dated 
1589, when a dispute was adjudicated (July 8) be- 
tween a Jew named Konyuk and a Christian in re- 
gard toa debt of the former. In 1551 the Jews of 
Merech were named among those of fourteen other 
towns to be exempted from the special tax (“Se- 
rebshchizna ”) levied upon all inhabitants, with the 
exception of villagers and Jews, at the Polish diet 
held in that year (Nov. 27) at Wilna. Merech pro- 
duced in the nineteenth century some noted He- 
brew scholars, as Mordecai Melzer, Isaac b. Elijah 
Margolis (d. New York 1887), and his son Max Mar- 
golis, of the University of California. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regesti t_ Nadpisi, pp. 117, 208. 


Wl. RB, A. S. W. 


MERIBAH (nap = “strife”): 1. A place in 
Rephidim in the wilderness; called also “ Massah 
and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children 
of Israel, and because they tempted the Lord ” (Ex. 
xvii. 7). It is certainly this Meribah which is al- 
Juded to in Ps. xev. & 2. A placeat Kadesh in the 
wilderness, the name occurring either as “Me Meri- 
bah” (= “the water of Meribah” ; Num. xx, 18, 24) or 
as “Me Meribath-Kadesh” (=“the water of Meribah 
in Kadesh”; Num. xxvii. 14; Deut. xxxii.51). The 
latter name appearsas the southern limit of the land 
of Canaan in Ezek. xivii. 19, xiviii. 28 (—“ the waters 
of strife in Kadesh”). It must be said, however, 
that the Septuagint invariably translates the word 
“ Meribah ” by zecdépyorc; and that the Targumim and 
the later commentators regard it asa common noun. 

It may be seen that the two narratives which 
give the origin of the name differ only in that in 
Ex. xvii. 7 Moses is ordered by God to strike the 
rock, while in Num. xxvii. 14he is ordered to speak 
to the rock, and for disobeying God’s order is pun- 
ished by not being allowed to enter into the promised 
land. Otherwise they are similar. It is for this 
reason that some critics regard the one narrative as 


a duplicate of the other. 
S, M. SEL. 


MERIDIAN, DATE-: Imaginary line fixed upon 
as the one along which the reckoning of the calen- 
dar day changes. East of this line the day is dated 
one day earlier than the west of it. The date- 
meridian involves many Jewish questions, such as 
fixing the Sabbath and the holy days in the Jewish 

VIIT.—82 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meq uinez 
Meridian 


calendar, counting the days of mourning, and dating 
documents. While in civil matters the Jews proba- 
bly would be guided by the international date-line 
180° from Greenwich, as agreed to by the geographers 
of many civilized nations, in religious matters the 
Jewish law can not recognize an imaginary date- 
line of recent origin which has not even been adopted 
by the majority of nations. 

The question does not appear in the Talmud nor 
in the early rabbinical literature. It is first men- 

tioned in the twelfth century in the 

In the “Cuzari” of Judah ha-Levi (ii. 20). 

**Cuzari.” Jerusalem is generally accepted as the 
navel, or center, of the world, as ad- 
duced from Ps. 1. 2(Tosef., Yoma, iii. ; Yoma 564b). 
According to the “Cuzari,” the Jewish date-line 
is 6 hours, or 90 degrees, east of Jerusalem, and 
18 hours, or 270 degrees, west of Jerusalem. Judah 
ha-Levi’s theory is based on the hy pothesis that the 
date was fixed at midday when the sun was at its 
zenith, shedding light 90 degrees eastward and leav- 
ing 270 degrees westward to finish the day. 

Jerusalem is in longitude 35° 13’ 25" east of 
Greenwich, and according to this Judah ha-Levi's 
date-line would be in longitude 125° 13' 25’ E., 
making China the Far East and separating it from 
Japan, which would be the Far West. Corea would 
be divided with Seoul (126° 85' E.) to the west. 
Under the American date would come Kamchatka, 
eastern Siberia, and the whole of Australia. On the 
other hand, the Philippines, with Manila (120° 58’ 
3” E.), would come under the Asiatic date. 

Phinehas Elijah, the author of “Sefer ha-Berit ” 
(article iv., ed. Briinn, 1797), raised the question also 
regarding the latitudes near the north and south 
poles, where night and day may each cover six 
months. Theauthor decided in that case to discard 
the sunlight as adistinction between night and day, 
and to figure 24 hours asa full day. As to the lon- 
gitude he was aware that the Jews on the two hemi- 
spheres did not observe exactly the same day as 
Sabbath. He did not, however, attempt to locate 
the date-line. 

Hayyim Selig Slonimski (d. May 15, 1904) pub- 
lished in “ Ha-Zefirah,” in 1874, an article addressed 
to the rabbinate and entitled “ What Sabbath Shall 
the Jewish Traveler in the Far East Observe?” 
Several prominent rabbis took part in the discus- 
sion. R. Moses b. Zebi Lapidus of Raseyn, Russia, 
and R. Isaiah Meir Kahana Schapiro of Czortkov, 
Galicia, accepted the meridian of Judah ha-Levi; 
Schapiro, however, marks it as passing through the 
Jordan instead of Jerusalem and thus moves the 
meridian about 20 miles eastward. 

Rk. Benjamin Zeeb Wolf Weller of Yaroslav, Ga- 
licia, does not admit Judah ha-Levi’s authority to 
establish a meridian and objects to any fixed date- 
line. In his opinion the method of dating must de- 
pend upon the order in which the countries were dis- 
covered. Hence far eastern Siberia, Japan, and 
Australia should retain the Asiatic or eastern date, 
while the Philippine Islands that were discovered 
from the American side should retain the American, 
or western, date. 

R. Weller thinks that one crossing from land dis- 
covered from the Asiatic side to land discovered from 


Meridian 
Merkabah 





the American side, or vice versa, must observe both 
his own Sabbath and that of his neighbors to make 
sure of the right date. The “uatural” meridian, as 
R. Weller calls it, was criticized as impracticable, 
since discoveries of islandsin the Pacific might be 
made from opposite coasts in such a way as to carry 
the Asiatic date farther west and the American date 
farther east. Slonimski, after reviewing the opin- 

ions of the rabbis, accepts Judah ha- 


Slonim- Levi's view as to the location of the 
skis Me- meridian at Jerusalem, which he ad- 
ridian- vocates both from the Jewish-national 
Line. and from the geographical standpoint. 


But he divides the distance equally, 
allowing 180 degrees on cach side. According to his 
view, the date-line would be in longitude 145° 13 
25” west of Greenwich. Slonimski argues that by 
allowing an equal portion on either side of the merid- 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





498 


settler must follow the Jewish date-line 180 degrees 
from Jerusalem. No change by the authorities 
thereafter can affect the date. Thus 
in the case of the Philippines, where 
the change of date occurred in the be- 
ginning of the year 1845, if the Jews 
living there prior to 1845 adopted the oid date, they 
must follow it and keep Sunday as the Sabbath-day. 
This would apply also to Alaska, where the date 
was changed in 1867, when the United States pur- 
chased it from Russia. As to the Jewish traveler, 
Mohilever decided that privately he must observe 
his own Sabbath and in public he ought to observe 
also the Sabbath of the place he visits. But if the 
traveler intends to settle permanently in that place, 
he must adopt its date. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Levi, Dibre Hakamim, Warsaw, 1876. 


J. J. D. E. 


Halakic 
Points. 








KAKCHATKA ca 
. ae 
OS 
ai 


LINE 








wg 
~ 
“ 
~ 
= 


rs 








——— 
; OS 


les 
r 





‘SI 








| 


ad 

















50 ‘tormar ~ ~ £9.) N. Ye 





WORLD ON MERCATOR’S PROJECTION SHOWING DATE-MERIDIANS. 


ian, the extreme difference from the meridian is but 
12 hours, whereas Judah ha-Levi’s division makes a 
difference of 18 hours. Besides, the equal division 
places the date-line in the most natural and conve- 
nient place in the Pacific, and gives the whole Amer- 
ican continent, exceptasmall part of Alaska near the 
Bering Strait, the same dating. This date-line, of 
course, excludes the Philippines, and even the Ha- 
waiian Islands, from the American date, and the 
Jewish settlers ou these islands ought to observe the 
American Sunday as the seventh day, or Sabbath. 
R. Samuel Mohilever of Byelostok coincides with 
Slonimski, holding, however, that any new Jewish 
settlement must accept the date adopted by the au- 
thorities of that place. But in case of dispute by 
the authorities regarding the correct date the Jewish 


MERKABAH (lit. “chariot”): The Heavenly 
Throne; hence “ Ma‘aseh Merkabah,” the lore con- 
cerning the heavenly Throne-Chariot, with especial 
reference to Ezek. i. and x. The conception of 
Yuwu riding upon cherubim, or fiery cioud-birds, 
upon the heavens or the clouds, is certainly genuine- 
ly Hebrew (see Ps. xviii. 11[A. V. 10]; Deut. xxxiii. 
26; Ps. Ixviti. 5 [A. V. 4]; Isa. xix. 1); hence His 
“war-chariot ” (Hab. iii. 8 and Isa. Ixvi. 15, Hebr.) 
and the name “chariot” for the ark with the cher- 
ubim (I Chron. xxviii. 18). Just as the Assyrian sun- 
chariot with its horses is employed in the legend of 
the ride of Elijah to heaven (II Kings it. 11; comp. 
Enoch |]xx. 2, Ixxii. 5, 1x xiii. 2), so did the prophet 
Ezekiel in his vision, probably suggested by Baby- 
lonian sculpture, see YHWH riding on the Throne- 


499 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meridian 
Merkabah 





Chariot when leaving the doomed Temple at Jeru- 
salem (see Miller, “Ezechielstudien,” 1895, pp. 8-11; 
Bertholet, “ Das Buch Hezekiel,” 1897, p. 12). Toa 
later age Ezekiel’s picture became a sacred mystery 
known by the term “ Merkabah” ascarly as the time 
of Ben Sira (Ececlus. xlix. 8). The ancient Mishnah 
lays down the rule: “The Ma‘aseh Merkabah should 
not be taught to any one except he be wise and 
able to deduce knowledge through wisdom (° gnosis’) 
of bis own” (Hag. if. 1). Job beheld the throne of 
God, and his daughters sang the doxology of the 
Ma‘aseh Merkabah (according to the Testament of 
Job, ed. Kohler, vii. 39, xi. 25; see Kohut Memorial 
Volume, pp. 282. 288). Quite characteristic is the 
story given in Tosef., Hag. ii. 1; Hag. 14b; Yer. 
Hag. ii. 77a: 

**R. Eleazar ben ‘Arak was riding on a mule behind R. Joha- 
nan b. Zakkai, when he asked for the privilege of being initiated 
into the secrets of the Merkabah. The great master demanded 
proof of his initiation into the gnosis, and when Eleazar began 
to tell what he had learned thereof, R. Johanan immediately 
descended from tbe mule and sat upon the rock. * Why, O mas- 
ter, dost thou descend from the mule?’ asked the disciple. 
‘Can IT reinain mounted upon the mule when the telling of the 
secrets of the Merkabah causes the Shekinah to dwell with us 
and the angels to accompany us?’ was the answer. Eleazar 
continued, and, behold, tire descended fron: heaven and lit up 
the trees of the tield, causing them to sing anthems, ancan angel 
cried out, ° Truly these are the secrets of the Merkubuh.” Where- 
upon R. Johanan Kissed Eleazar upon the forehead, saying, 
* Blessed be thou, O father Abraham, that hast a descendant like 
Eleazar b. “Arak !’ Subsequently two other disciples of R. Jo- 
hanan b. Zakkai walking together said to each other: * Let us 
also talk together about the Ma‘aseh Merkabah *; and no sooner 
did R. Joshua begin speaking than a rainbow-like appearance 
[Ezek. i. 28] was seen upon the thick clouds which covered the 
sky, and angels caine to listen as men do to hear wedding-music. 
On hearing the things related by R. Jose, R. Johanan b. Zakkai 
blessed his disciples and said: * Blessed the eves that beheld 
these things! Indeed { saw myself in a dream together with 
you, seated like the select ones [comp, Ex. xxiv. 11] upon Mount 
Sinai; and IT beard a heavenly voice saying: °° Enter the ban- 
queft-hall and take your seats with your disciples and disciples’ 
disciples, among the elect, the highest (‘third’) class”’” 
(rrevpatixot; see Joél, “ Blicke in die Religionsgeschichte,’’ 
1880, pp. 133-135). 

Obviously this is a description of an ecstatic state in 
which pictures the mind forms seem realities (comp. 
Tosef., Meg. iv. 28 and Meg. 24—“ With closed 
eyes they saw them”) The study of the Merka- 
bah was theosophy ; to the initiated the Hayyot and 
the Ofannim around the Heavenly Throne became 
beings that lived and moved before their eyes (see 
Jot], 2.¢. p. 152). It was in fact considered perilous 
to penetrate into these mysteries. “A 

Symbolic youth who studied the *‘ Hashmal’ 
Signifi- [Ezek. i. 27, Hebr.] was consumed by 
cance. the fire which sprang forth from it” 
(Hag. 18a; comp. Shab. 80a). Only 

the older men dared to be initiated into those mys- 
teries. “I am not old enough,” said R. Eleazar 
when R. Johanan b. Nappaha wished to instruct 
him in them. They were to be imparted in sug- 
gestions (‘initial sentences,” “rashe perakim ”) 
rather than in complete chapters (Hag. 18a). “The 
bird that flew over the head of Jonathan b. Uzziel 
as he studied them was consumed by the fire sur- 
rounding him” (Suk. 28a; comp. Meg. 8a). “Ben 
‘Azzai was seated meditating on the Torah, when. 
behold, a flame encircled him; the people told R. 
Akiba, and he went to Ben ‘Azzai, saying, ‘ Art thou 
studying the mysteries of the Merkabah’’” (Cant. 


R. i. 10; Lev. R. xvi). ~In the future Ezekiel will 
come again and unblock for Israel the chambers of 
the Merkabah ” (Cant. R. i. 4). 

Glimpses of the mysteries of the Merkabah may 
be discerned in such rabbinical sayings as the fol- 
lowing: “The angel Sandalfon towers above the 
rest of theangels the length of a five hundred years’ 
journey; his feet touch the earth while his head 
reaches the holy Hayyot. He stands behind the 
Throne-Chariot binding wreaths for his Master” 
(Hag. 18b). To R. Ishmael b. Elisha is ascribed the 
saying that when offering the incense in the Temple 
as high priest he beheld the angel Akatricl (“the 
wreath-binding one”; Sandalfon?) seated on the 
Throne and asked him for a blessing (Ber. 7a; comp. 
Bacher, “Ag. Tan.” i, 267). One of these great 
archangels is said to equal in size a third part of the 
world (Ex. QR. iii). Concerning the lion, the ox, the 
eagle, and the man as the four faces of the Hay- 
yot, see Hag. 13b; on account of these four, which 
carry God’s Throne-Chariot, the latter is called also 
“ Tetramoulon ”=“ Quadriga” (Ex. R. iii. 3; comp. 
Jellinek, “B. H.” iii. 92-95). 

The Merkabah mysteries, which remained the ex- 
clusive property of the initiated ones, the “ Zenu‘im ” 
or “ Hashsha‘im ” (see EssENEs), have becn preserved 
chiefly in the Enoch literature of the pre-Christian 

centuries, and in the “Hekalot” of 

In the the geonic time, known also as the 
Enoch Lit- “ Merkabah” and “Enoch Books” (see 

erature. Jellinek, “B. H.” ii, 40-47, 114-117, 

and Introduction xiv.-xvii., xxx., 
XXXii.; iil, 883-108, 161-168, and Introduction 
X¥X.-xxv.; v. 170-190 and Introduction xli.-xliii. ; 
Wertheimer, “Batte Midrashot,” ii. 15-28; see 
H[exaLor). Part of it has been embodied in the 
“payyetan-kedushshah ” literature and has found 
iis way also into other ancient apocrypha, such as 
the Testament of Abraham, the Ascensio Isaixe, 
etc. Besides the descriptions of the seven heav- 
ens with their hosts of angels, and the various 
storehouses of the world, and of the divine throne 
above the highest heaven, the most remarkable 
feature is that the mysteries rest on the belief in 
the reality of the things seen in an ecstatie state 
brought about by ablations, fasts, fervent invoca- 
tions, incantations, and by other means. This is 
called “the Vision of the Merkabah ” (“ Zefiyat ha- 
Merkabah ”), and those under this strange hallucina- 
tion, who imagine themselves entering the Heavenly 
Chariot and floating through the air, are called 
“ Yorede Merkabah ” (= “those that go down into the 
ship-like chariot”; Jellinek, “B. H.” iii, 90, 94 et 
seqg.). In this chariot they are supposed to ascend 
to the heavens, where in the dazzling light sur- 
rounding them they behold the innermost secrets of 
all persons and things, otherwise impenetrable and 
invisible. 

Particularly signiticant is the warrior-nature of 
the angels surroundiug the Throne-Chariot; flames 
dart forth from their eyes; they ride upon fiery 
horses (comp. Zech. vi. 1-8) and are armed with 
weapons of fire (Jellinek, Z.c.). In order to be al- 
lowed to pass these terrible beings the Merkabahi- 
rider must provide himself with amulets or seals 
containing mysterious names (“Hekalot,” Zc, 


Merkabah 
Merv 


XVii.-xxli., Xxx.), and in order to be able to step 
before the Throne he must recite certain prayers un- 
til God Himself addresses him, if he be worthy. 
The “Hekalot ” mention especially either R. Akiba 
or Rt. Ishmael, and their associates of the Bar Kokba 
time, as types of the “ Yorede Merkabah.” 

The central figure and chief actor in the theophany, 
however, is the “ Prince of the Face,” METATRON, 
the one next to the Throne, whose name, or whose 
seventy names, are like God’s, and who is none else 
than Enoch translated to heaven and transformed 
into the highest angel. He is the one who imparted 
to man all the knowledge of heaven and of the past 
and the future (see especially Jellinek, Z.c. v. 170- 
176), exactly as Enoch did in the Ethiopic and Sla- 
vonic Books of Enoch. 

Concerning the origin of the Merkabah-ride, Jelli- 
nek (“B. H.” ili. p. xxii.) expressed the opinion that 
Persian Sufism gave rise to its peculiar notions, and 
Bloch (“ Monatsschrift,” 1893, pp. 18-25, 69-74, 257- 
266, 805-311) endeavored to trace them all back to 
Arabic mysticism. But recent re- 
searches concerning the Mithra wor- 
ship and the Mithra liturgy have cast 
altogether new light on the whole 
Merkabah lore. Mithra, the heavenly 
charioteer, with his Quadriga, a chariot drawn by 
four horses, who was worshiped in ancient Persia 
as the god of light and regarded in early Roman 
times as the prime mover of the world, formed of 
the four elements (Dio Chrysostomus, “ Oratio,” 
XXXvi.; see Cumont, “Die Mysterien des Mitlira,” 
1908, pp. 87-88; Windischmann, “ Zoroastrische 
Studien,” 1868, pp. 309-812), was invoked under 
mysterious rites as the mediator between the inac- 
cessible and unknowable Deity, in the ethereal re- 
gions of light, and man on earth (Cumont, /.c. pp. 
95, 122), These rites bear such a striking resem- 
blance to those by means of which the Merka- 
bah-riders approached the Deity that there can 
scarcely be any doubt as to the Mithraic origin of 
the latter (see Dieterich, “Eine Mithrasliturgie,” 
1903, pp. 7-15). The only difference between them 
is that while the Mithra-worshipers, at Jeast those of 
Roman times, had the coming forth of Mithra as 
the highest god their aim, the Merkabah-riders have 
the seeing of the Lord on high as their goal, Meta- 
tron-Mithra, the archangel, being the divine char- 
ioteer who ushers them into the presence of God. 
Otherwise there is the same hallucination at work 
which makes the ecstatic imagine that he is lifted 
up from the earth to heaven to see the sun, stars, 
and winds come forth from their places; to behold 
the sun (or sun-god) and the entire celestial house- 
hold, the seven rulers of the celestial poles, or the 
archangels; and finally to gaze at the luminous 
youthful Mithra in all his beauty—the youthful 
Metatron of the Jewish mystics (see Cumont, Jc. 
pp. 117, 151, e¢ al.). 

Such spiritualistic experiences through mystic 
rites had their origin in Egypt rather than in Persia. 
Jamblichus (“De Mysteriis,” iii. 4, 5) describes the 
optic and acoustic illusions under which the Egyp- 
tian mystic labored as if they were realities, and at 
the same time he states that in the ecstatic state 
brought about by magic songs and proper environ- 


Origin of 
the Con- 
ception. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


500 


ment the soul is encompassed by a chariot of light 
and ether (aifepiwdég yai avyoewWéo 6ynua), on Which it 
beholds the heavenly things in the light reflected 
from above (iil. 14; see Von Harless, “Das Buch 
von der Aegy ptischen Mysterien,” pp. 53-54, 65~66). 
Neoplatonic ideas, accordingly, aided in rendering 
the Mithra worship the center of the mystic belief 
in which the world of antiquity sought relief during 
the period when the gods of classical antiquity were 
losing their authority and divinity; and Jewish wis- 
dom, following the tendency of the age, embodied 
it, under the name of Enoch Metatron, as secret lore 
in its system (see METATRON). 

Philo took the idea of the Merkabah with its char- 
ioteer Metatron and applied it to his Logos (“ De 
Somniis,” i. 25; “Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres 
Sit,” S$ 42, 48; “De Profugis,” § 19; “De Confu- 
sione Linguarum,” § 28; “De Monarchia,” i. 1; 
comp. Plato, “Phedrus,” ii. 46), Maimonides 
(“Moreh Nebukim,” fii. 1-7), in his antagonism to 
mysticism, went so far as to dissolve the whole Mer- 
kabah theophany of Ezekiel into mere physics, not- 
withstanding the rabbinical warning against disclo- 
sing these mysteries (see Pes. 119a). All the stronger, 
therefore, grew the zeal of the mystics, as is 
evidenced in the renewed form of the Cabala, which 
lent to the Merkabah lore and all the ecstatic visions 
and mystic operations connected therewith new life 
and vigor; of this the Book of Razreu and the later 
Cabala are ample proof. See Ma‘askH BERESHIT. 

K. 

MERNEPTAH (Greek, Meved6ic): Egyptian 
king, the fourth of the 19th dynasty; a promi- 
nent figure in the discussions concerning the _his- 
toricalness and chronology of Israel’s éxodus from 
Egypt. Uewasthe son and successor of the famous 
Rameses IT. (Sesostris), who is known to have built 
the cities enumerated in Ex. i. 11. Consequently, 
no conclusion seemed more certain than this: Ram- 
eses I]. was the Pharaoh of the oppression; Mernep- 
tah, that of the Exodus, which thus would date 
from the middle or end of the thirteenth century 
B.c. The discovery of the famous Israel inscription 
by Petrie (“Six Temples,” plates 18-14) has now 
made this conclusion very doubtful. Line 27in this 
inscription, a song of triumph over all foreign ené- 
mies of Egypt (Libyans, Hittites, Canaan, Ashke- 
lon, Gezer, Yenu‘ama), closes with the words: 
“Israel [“ Y-s-ir(a)-’a-ra”] is annihilated [pulled 
out], without any [further] growth; Palestine has 
become like a widow [?.e., helpless] for Egypt.” 
These words, dating from the fifth year of Mernep- 
tah, seem to point most naturally to Israel as settled 
in Palestine; though they have been construed as 
an allusion to the twelve tribes still wandering in 
the desert or still being held under bondage in 
Goshen. 

Merneptah reigned for at least twenty-five years, 
the first five of which were filled with desperate at- 
tacks on Egypt by Libyan tribes and by pirates 
from Europe and Asia Minor, Palestine and central 
Syria remained tributary, however. The buildings 
of the king (at Karnak, etc.) are not considerable. 
His mummy has recently been found at Thebes, and 
is now in the Museum at Cairo. 


E. G. H. , W. M. M. 


501 | 


MERODACH-BALADAN: King of Babylon 
(712 B.c.), who sent letters and a present to Heze- 
kiah, King of Judah, when the latter had recovered 
from his sickness. Hezekiah, delighted with the 
courtesy, shows the messengers all his treasures, 
withholding nothing from them. Whereupon the 
prophet Isaiah, hearing of the visit, comes to Heze- 
kiah and reproves him for the display he has made 
of his riches. He foretells the destruction of Heze- 
kiah’s kingdom, and the Babylonian captivity (Isa. 
xxxix.). In the parallel account in IT Kings xx. 
12-19 the name of this king is given as Berodach- 
baladan. 

According to the Talmud, Baladan’s face was 
changed to that of a dog, he being thereby com- 
pelied to abdicate the throne in favor of his son 
Merodach. Out of reverence, Merodach in all his 
edicts and ordinances added his name to that of his 
father in order to indicate that he really was only the 
representative of the latter (Sanh. 96b). 

8. 8. | L. G.—A. PE. 

MEROM: “The waters of Merom” is given in 
Josh. xi. 5as the name of ,the place at which the 
hosts of the peoples of northern Palestine assembled 
to meet the invader Joshua and hisarmy. Merom is 


now commonly identified with the modern Lake al- - 


Hulah, about fifteen miles north of the Sea of Galilee, 
and it is described as being of the shape of a pear with 
the stem pointing southward. It is three miles wide 
in its broadest part, and nearly four miles long, from 
the swamps to the outlet into the River Jordan. 
The lake is seven feet above the level of the Medi- 
terrancan, and varies from ten to sixteen feet in 
depth. Not far from its southwestern shores there 
is a considerable plain which seems to be the most 
probable location of the great battle between Joshua 
and the North-Canaanitish allies. The commander- 
in-chief of these forces, gathered from all parts of 
northern Palestine and even from the Jordan val- 
ley, was Jabin, King of Hazor. The great multi- 
tude of warriors is compared in numbers with “the 
sand that is upon theseashore . . . with horses and 
chariots very many.” 

The only hint as to Joshua’s method of attack 
is the statement that he came against the enemy sud- 
denly, and fell upon them. This probably indicates 
a night march and early morning attack as at 
Gibeon (Josh. x. 9, 10). The Israelites smote them, 
put them to flight, and pursued them in every direc- 
tion. Their horses were hamstrung, and their chari- 
ots were burned, while their cities and the whole 
country were laid waste. This last great battle so 
reduced opposition that Joshua was now ready to 
partition among the tribes of Israel for a permanent 
possession the land with its unconquered individual 
fortresses. 

E. G. H. I. M. P. 


MERON or MIRON: City of Galilee, situated 
on a mountain, three miles northwest of Safed and 
four miles south of Giscala, with which city it is al- 
most always mentioned in the Talmud. One of the 
passages is: “One may eat olives [the product of the 
Sabbatical year] till the last ones disappear from the 
trees of Giscalaand Meron” (Yer. Sheb. ix. 2). The 
ascent to Meron was so narrow that two persons 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Merkabah 
Merv 


could not walk abreast (R. H. 15a), and this de- 

scription may well be applied to the Meroth fortified 

by Josephus (“ Vita,” § 37; “B. J.” ii. 20, § 6). 

Meron is spoken of as a city inhabited by priests 

(Yer. Ta‘an. iv, 5), a fact alluded to by Eleazar ha- 

Kalir in one of his piyyutim (comp. Rapoport in 

his preface to Shalom ha-Kohen’s “ Kore ha-Dorot,” 

s.v. “Meron”). It is stated in the Midrash (Eccl. R. 

xi. 3) that a quarrel resulting in blows broke out 

between the people of Meron and those of Giscala 

on account of the remains of R. Eliezer b. Simeon, 
which each party desired to bury. 

To-day Meron is represented by the village of 
Merun (called in Hebrew writings “ Kefar Miron”), 
celebrated for its very ancient synagogue and for the 
tombs of some prominent tannaim. Benjamin of Tu- 
dela, who visited it, describes a cave there containing 
the tombs of HiLLEL and Shammai and many of their 
disciples; and he states that R. Benjamin b. Japheth 
and R. Judah b. Beterah also were buried there. 
But Benjamin does not mention the tombs of R. Sim- 
eon b. Yohai and his son Eleazar. Samuel b. Sam- 
son, Who was at Meron in 1230, speaks of the school 
anc tomb of Simeon b. Yohai which he saw there, as 
well as of the tomb of Eleazar. At the foot of the 
mountain, Samuel states, are 336 other tombs, and 
outside of the village are the tombs of Simeon 
Hatufah and of the prophet Obadiah (Carmoly, 
“ Ttinéraires,” pp. 183-134). There is now a magnifi- 
cent bet ha-midrash enclosing the supposed tombs of 
Simeon b. Yohai and Eleazar, which have become 
the place of an annual festival, held on Lag be- 
‘Omer, and called “Hillula de-R. Shim‘on ben 
Yohai” in commemoration of the death of the sup- 
posed author of the Zohar. 

Mcron is not to be identified with Shimron-meron 
of Josh. xii. 20, as the latter is called by the Rabbis 
“Simonia” (Gen. R. 1xxxi.; comp. LXX. ad loc.), 
and is the modern Simuniyyah, a village west of 
Nazareth (Robinson, “ Researches,” ii. 344). It 
may, however, be identical with Madon (Josh. xi.1), 
which is rendered “ Meron” in the Septuagint; and 
some scholars identify it with Meroz, mentioned in 
Judges v. 23. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, ed. Asher, i. 
45; Carmoly, Itinéraires, pp. 158 et sey.; Neubauer, G. T. 
pp. 228 et seq.; Robinson, Researches, ii. 444; Schwarz, 
Tebw ot ha-Arez, pp. 223-224, Jerusalem, 1900. 

J. M. SEL. 

MERV : District town in Russian Central Asia, 
on the River Murgab. The town sprang up when 
the district was annexed to Russia in 1884. Ht hasa 
total population of 8,727, including 486 Jews (1899). 
The old historic Merv is now utterly in ruins, and 
lies about eight miles east of the present town, ad- 
joining the manufacturing settlement of Bairam 
Ali, in the imperial domain of the czar. 

The Jews seem to have enjoyed greater religious 
liberty in old Merv than in many other cities. Dr. 
Wolff (“ Mission to Bokhara,” pp. 144, 148, New York, 
1848), who was in Merv in 1881, and visited it again 
in 1844 when engaged on his well-known mission to 
Bokhara, speaks of the Jews there as being in great 
favor with the calif. They were permitted to main- 
tain the Jewish faith and practises which they had 
been compelled to abandon at Meshed, where they 
were obliged to profess Mohammedanism. 


Merwan 
Meshullam 





QO’ Donovan, writing in 1852, before Merv was 
annexed to Russia, speaks of there being but seven 
Jewish families there. They were mostly engaged 
in trade, he states, and were treated with consider- 
able tolerance; yet “they were not allowed to call 
themselves ‘ Moussai,’ their religious name in these 
Eastern countries, but were compelled to style 

‘themselves ‘ Jedid,’ which signifies a convert to the 
Mussulman faith” (“The Merv Oasis,” ii. 129). A 
writer in the “Jewish Chronicle” (May 12, 1899) has 
a note regarding the Jews at Merv under the Rus- 
sian rule. He states that they came from Meshed, 
which most of them left in 1840 to escape the alter- 
natives of persecution or conformity to the Moslem 
faith. Ife adds, however, that “although they 
openly acknowledge their religion—for the Russian 
authorities put no impediments in their way in this 
respect—they live in dread, and meet for prayer ina 
cellar which is surrounded bya high wall. There is 
no Ark in the synagogue, and the scrolls of the Law 
are kept in a separate room, which can be entered 
only through a secret door. The Jedids have a de- 
jected appearance and fear everybody. They earn 
a precarious living as artisans.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: O’Donovan, The Mery Oasix, 2 vols... London, 
1882 (abridged.-1 vol., New York, 1884) ; Skrine and Ross, The 
Heart of Asia, pp. 349-356, London, 1899; Albrecht, Rus- 
sisch Centralasien, pp. 37-69, Hamburg, 1896 : Durrieux and 
Fauvelle, Samarkand la Bien Gardée, pp. 64-96, Paris, 1901. 


H.R. A. V. W. J. 


MERWAN HA-LEVI: French philanthropist 
of the second half of the eleventh century; one of 
the most prominent Jews of Narbonne, who de- 
voted his time and fortune to that community. It 
seems that he was also in favor with the govern- 
ment, being thus enabled to check unfavorable 
measures against the Jews. He was the head of a 
family which produced several famous Jewish 
scholars, among whom were his son, R. Isaac of 
Narbonne, and his grandson, Nasi Moses ben Jo- 
seph of Narbonne. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 412. 


G. A. Pe. 


MERZBACHER, ABRAHAM: German 
banker; born 1812 at Baiersdorf near Erlangen: 
died June 4, 1885, at Munich. Ile at first intended 
to follow a rabbinical career; but after an unsuc- 
cessful application for the ottice of rabbi in Ans- 
bach, he settled as a banker in Munich. He was an 
enthusiastic champion of the moderate conservative 
Jewish party, and a member of the central comimit- 
tee of the Alliance Israélite Universelle. 

Merzbacher was noted chiefly as a patron of Jew- 
ish science. He published at his own expense the 
work “Dikduke Soferim,” in 16 volumes, by Ra- 
phael Nathan Rabbinovicz (d. 1888). In the interest 
of this learned protégé and friend, Merzbacher col- 
lected one of the largest private Jewish libraries in 
the world, which now forms part of the city library 
of Frank fort-on-the-Main. S. 


MESERITZ. See MIEDZYRZECZ. 


MESHA: King of Moab, tributary to Ahab, 
King of Israel. Ie was a sheepmaster, and paid 
the King of Israel an annual tax consisting of the 
wool of 100,000 lambs and of 100,000 rams (IT Kings 
iit. 4). He rebelled against Israel and refused to 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


A TS Al 


LT STS A i gp yp 


502 





pay tribute; whereupon Jehoramn, King of Isracl, 
uniting his forces with those of Jehoshaphat, King 
of Judah, and of the King of Edom, marched round 
the southern end of the Dead Sea and invaded the 
Moabitish territory, That route was chosen, as is 
mentioned in the MOABITE STONE, because the cities 
north of the Arnon were fortified by Mesha. 

The invading army suffering from want of water, 
the prophet Elisha, who was present, was consulted 
upon the suggestion of the King of Judah. He 
bade them dig trenches in the sandy soil, which 
were speedily filled with water. The Moabite army, 
sceing the rays of the sun reflected in the water, 
imagined that the enemies had quarreled and mas- 
sacred one another; they made a reckless rush to 
spoil the camp, only to be repelled, routed, and put 
to flight with great loss, the few who escaped ecn- 
tering Kir-haraseth. The combined armies advanced 
into the land unopposed, “marred” the fields with 
stones, stopped up the cisterns and fountains, felled 
the forests, and beleaguered the fortress. With 700 
warriors Mesha attempted to break through the ene- 
my’s lines. Utterly failing in this, and reduced to 
desperation, he went to the top of the wall, and, in 
full view of the invaders. offered his eldest son, who 
should have reigned in his stead, as a burnt offering 
to propitiate the wrath of his god Chemosh. In 
consequence of this “there came great wrath upon 
Israc]”; and the Israelites, without pursuing their 
successes further, at once evacuated the country, 
leaving Mesha in undisturbed possession of it (20. 
iii. 6-27). See MoaBITE STONE. 


KB. G. HH. C. L. 
MESHA (Me’asha): Palestinian ainora; lived 
in the third century at Lydda, in Judea. He seems 


to have lost his parents when a child, for he was 
brought up by his grandfather, the eminent hag- 
gadist Joshua b. Levi, Atanearly age he displayed 
tine intelligence. His grandfather was fond of hear- 
ing him recite on Fridays the Biblical portion for 
the week; and the Midrash relates of him that once 
in his childhood he became ill and remained in a 
trance for three days, and that when he recovered 
his father asked him where he had been all that 
time; to this Mesha replied that he had been in a 
confused world and that persons held in honor 
in this world were there disgraced (Ruth R. iii. 1). 
Only a few halakot and sayings of his have been 
preserved in the Talmud. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, 1882, ii. 270; Bacher, 
Ay. Pal. Amor, i. 128, iii. 614. 
A. S. W. 


8. s, 

MESHERSHAYA BAR PAKOD: Babylo- 
nian amora of the sixth and last generation; lived 
in Sura. In the persecution of Jews by Perozes 
(Firuz), King of Persia, Meshershaya was impris- 
oned and executed together with Amemar bar Mar 
Yankai and the exilarch Hluna Mar (469-470). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sherira Gaon, ae ed. Neubauer, A 34; 
Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, 1889, i. 168 
A. S. W. 


g. 8. 

MESHULLAM BEN DAVID: German tosa- 
fist of the twelfth or of the first half of the thir- 
teenth century. He was the son of the tosafist and 
liturgist David ben Kalonymus of Miinzenburg, and 
he corresponded with R. Baruch (“,Mordekai,” Ket. 


503 





ii. 149), with Simhah of Speyer (¢. Hul. vi. 657, x. 
37), aud with Isaac Or Zarua’ (Hayyim Or Zarua‘, 
icesponsa, Nos. 108,121). Gross (" Gallia Judaica,” 
p. 196) thinks that the Meshullam mentioned in 
“ Mordekai,” Hul. vi. 657, is Meshullam of Melun. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Epstein, in Monatsschrift, xli. 468; Kohn, 

Mardochai ben Hillel, p. 141. 

KE. C. M. SEM. 

MESHULLAM BEN ISAAC SALEM BEN 
JOSEPH: Italian poct; lived successively at 
Mantna and Venice at the end of the sixteenth cen- 
tury and at the beginning of the seventeenth. Like 
his father, he wasa corrector in the Hebrew printing- 
oflices at theabove-named cities, which he often sup- 
plied with laudatory poems of his own composition. 
In addition to these, which were inserted at the 
head of several books, Meshullam was the author of 
three liturgical poems, namely: (1) “Kinah,” an 
elegy on the conflagration at Mantua in 1610; (2) a 
poem on the Exodus from Egypt; and (8) a selihah 
forming a fourfold alphabetical acrostic. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinsehneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1751; Zunz, 
Literaturgesch, p. 424. 
T. Br. 


G, 

MESHULLAM BEN ISRAEL: Talmudic 
scholar of the sixteenth and seventeeuth centuries; 
author of “Mar’eh Mekom ha-Dinim” (Cracow, 
1647), an alphabetical index to the Shulhan ‘Aruk. 
First (* Bibl, Jud.” ii. 369) records that he was 
known also as “Phoebus,” and says he died at Am- 
sterdam in 1652 and was praised by David de Barrios. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1750. 

E. ¢. M. SEL. 


MESHULLAM BEN JACOB OF LUNEL: 
Freneh Talmudist; died at Lunel in 1170. He di- 
rected a Talmudic school which produced several 
famous men, apd was an intimate friend of Abraham 
b. Isaac, ab bet din of Narbonne. who addressed to 
him. several responsa, and spoke of him in high 
terms. His Talmudic decisions are quoted in “Sefer 
ha-Terumot.” 

Meshullam was interested also in philosophy. 
According to Ibn Tibbon, whom he encouraged to 
translate Bahya’s “ Al-Hidayah ila Fara’id al-Kulub ” 
into Hebrew (“ Hobot ha-Lebabot”), he wrote sev- 
eral works dealing with moral philosophy, advised 
and assisted other Jewish writers, and possessed a 
large library. Judahibn Tibbon is never weary of 
praising Meshullam’s zeal in investigating the va- 
rious branches of knowledge. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 229. 


A. PR. 


MESHULLAM BEN JOEL HA-KOHEN: 
Galician Talmudist; died at Lemberg Sept. 25, 1809. 
At first rabbi at Zurawno (Galicia), he was called to 
Koretz to succeed his brother Isaac; he then went 
to Bolechow, and finally to Lemberg. Meshullam’s 
Talmudic attainments are evident not only in his 
works, but also from the fact that the most famous 
among his contemporaries requested his responsa. 
One of these is contained in “Sha‘ar ha-Hakanah ” 
(Lemberg, 1794), the work of his ancestor Naphtali 
ha-Kohen, another in Elijah Gaon’s “Shenot 
Kliyahu.” 


THE J EWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


RS Et A A rsh tA ETS ART ety yap 


Merwan 
Meshullam 


Meshullam was the author of “Pithe Niddah” 
(Lemberg, 1802), comments on the laws of Niddah. 
The book contains also a specimen of the author's 
work on the Pentateuch, entitled “Likkute Yom.” 
One of his responsa is also found in “Zikron Kehun- 
nah,” a work by his brother Isaac. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Buber, Anshe Shem, p. 171. 

D. A. PE. 

MESHULLAM BEN JONAH: Physician and 
translator of the thirteenth century. Itappears that 
he lived in southern France. Ie occupied himself 
with medicine merely as a study, and seems never 
to have practised. At the desire of a friend named 
Hafez or Shalem, Meshullam translated into Hebrew 
the medical work “Kitab al-Tazrif,” by Zahrawi. 
The translator’s preface begins with a Hebrew poem 
in honor of Hatiz. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. p. 745; Neu- 

bauer, Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS. No. 2120. 

s. J. Z. L. 

MESHULLAM BEN KALONYMUS BEN 
TODROS: French scholar of the twelfth and thir- 
teenth centuries; nasi of Narbonne. Meshullam 
sided with Judah al-Fakhkhar in his attaeks on the 
works of Maimonides and the philosophers. Never- 
theless, he blamed Al-Fakhkhar for the excessive ar- 
dor with which the latter fought the Maimonists, say- 
ing that among the latter there were many great 
and pious Jews. Ina letter which he wrote to Al- 
Fakhkhar, Meshullam particularly asked him to 
be indulgent toward David Kimhi. Al-Fakhkhar 
yielded to his friend’s request, assuring him that he 
would write nothing against Kimhi. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Geiger, in Ozar Nehinad, ii. 172; idem, in 

Jtid. Zeit. x. 285; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 408. 

gS. 8, M. SE. 

MESHULLAM BEN MACHIR (DON BO- 
NET CRESCAS DE LUNEL): French scholar; 
settled at Perpignan, where he died in 1806. Abba 
Mari, who was a relative of Meshullam, lamented 
the latter’s death in a letter of condolence which he 
sent to the community of Perpignan (“Minhat Ke- 
na’ot,” MS. No 182). Abba Mari also bewailed Me- 
shullam’s death in one of his liturgical pieces. 
Gross thinks that Meshullam b. Machir is to be 
identified with Sen Bonet de Lunel, who wrote a 
commentary on Ibn Ezra’s Bible commentary. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 289, 464; idem, in 

a J. iv. 205; Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, 

S. M. SEL. 

MESHULLAM BEN NATHAN OF ME- 
LUN (called also Meshullam of Narbonne): 
French toszafist; born at Narbonne about 1120. He 
was a member of the rabbinical college of Narbonne 
and, with Abraham ben Isaac, ab bet din, and other 
rabbis, was one of the signatories of a responsum 
issued there about 1150 (“Teshubot ha-Rambam,” 
p. 4, Leipsic, 1859; “Kol Bo,” No. 20). Not long 
after 1150 Meshullam settled at Melun, where he 
acquired considerable authority and where he cor- 
responded with some of the greatest rabbis of France, 
including those of Paris. He obtained the title 
of “Rab,” which had an official character in northern 
France. Meshullam was rather indulgent in his 
decisions, which much displeased R. Tam. A po- 


Meshullam 
Messiah 


lemical correspondence ensued between these two 

scholars, and Meshulilam, in spite of his clever dia- 

lectics, was obliged to submit in fear of excommuni- 

cation (comp. R. Tam, “Sefer ha-Yashar,” pp. 72- 

76; Tos. to Pes. 105a; Bezah 16a; ‘Ab. Zarah 29b; 

“ Mordekai,” Shab. iv. 384 ef passtm). Gross (in “ Mo- 

natsschrift,” xvi. 290) and Kohn (#. xxvi. 148) 

declared that Meshullam b. Nathan of Melun and 

Mesbullam of Narbonne were two different persons, 

though Gross afterward surrendered this opinion 

and identified them. Gross conjectures also that 
this Meshullam may be identical with the Biblical 
commentator quoted in the commentary to Chron- 
icles (II Chron. xiii. 2) wrongly attributed to Rashi 

(comp. Zunz, “Z. G.” p. 71), and that it is he who is 

spoken of by Yom-Tob of Joigny (“ Mordekai,” 

Shab. i. 250). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 352-3538; Zadoc 
Kahn, in 2. BE. J. i. 285-238; Kohn, Mardochai ben Hillel, 
p. 141. 

G. M. SEt. 
MESHULLAM PHOEBUS BEN ISRAEL 

SAMUEL: Chief rabbi of Cracow; born about 

1547; died at Cracow Oct. 17, 1617. Meshullam is 

first known as the head of a flourishing yeshibah 

at Brest-Litovsk, one of his pupils being Joel Sirkes. 

The year of his arrival at Cracow is not recorded, 

but it is certain that he was there in 1605. He was 

a recognized authority in rabbinical matters and 

was consulted by Meir Lublin (Responsa, No. 81) 

and by Sirkes (“She’elot u-Teshubot ha-BaH,” No. 

102). Aresponsum of Meshullam to Joshua Falk 

ha-Kohen contains an explanation (to Niddah v. 1) 

which shows Meshullam to have possessed a thor- 

ough knowledge of anatomy and some knowledge 
of Latin (“She’elot u-Teshubot ha-BaH ha-Hada- 
shot,” No. 84). Two other responsa of his are ex- 
tant (46. No. 81 and “She’elot u-Teshubot Ge’one 

Batra’e,” No. 44). Abraham Schrenzel in his “ Etan 

ha-Ezrahi” (Responsa, No. 29) mentions a work 

by Meshullam Phoebus entitled “Sefer Shemot. Git- 

tin,” a treatise on the proper names in a bill of di- 

vorce. Froma manuscript in his possession Meshul- 

lam edited the responsa of Moses Minz (Cracow, 

1617). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. M. Zunz, ‘Ir ha-Zedek, pp. 49-52. 

H. R. M. SEL. 
MESHULLAM BEN SOLOMON (surnamed 

En Vidas): Poet; lived at the beginning of the 

thirteenth century. Although Jedaiah Bedersi, in 

his “ [ggeret Hitnazzelut,” classes Meshullam among 
the Provencal poets, Meshullam’s native country 
seems to have been Spain. According to Gross 

(“Gallia Judaica.” p. 146), the name of the place 

MXDI, which is added to Meshullam’s name in a 

Bodleian manuscript (Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. 

MSS.” No. 1970, fol. 201), is to be corrected to 

merpt (= “Da Piera”). Ina Florence manuscript 

Meshullam is designated as “En Vidas de Gerona.” 
Meshullam ranged himself with the Orthodox in 

their struggle against the philosophers. He directed 

his attacks chiefly against the translator of that 
work, Judah al-Harizi, and wrote several satirical] 
poems on the “Moreh Nebukim.” These poems 
have been published by Steinschneider in the “ Sam- 
melband Kleiner Beitrige aus Handschriften ” (i. 3). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


504 


Meshullam was a poet of taleut; indeed, Abraham 
Bedersi, in his review of the principal Hebrew 
poets, classes him before Benveniste. The greater 
part of his poetical productions are extant in manu- 
script (Neubauer, Z.c., and the Florence MS. cited 
above). See DAPIERA. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, in Ha-Karmel, vii. 40; Gratz, 
Gesch, vii. 52; Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, 
p. 128; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 146. 

G. I. Br. 


MESHUMMAD. See Apostasy. 


MESHWI AL-‘UKBARI: Founder of the 
Jewish sect Al-‘Ukbariyyah (Okbarites), which 
derived its name from the city of ‘Ukbara, near 
Bagdad, said to have been the place of residence of 
Meshwi. According to Kirkisani, Meshwi lived after 
Ishmael Al-‘Ukbari; his original name was Moses, 
but it was converted by his adversaries into Meshwi 
(= “one whose ideas are confused”). Meshwi dif- 
fered in many points from both the Karaites and the 
Rabbinites. Because the Day of Atonement is termed 
in the Bible “Sabbath of Sabbaths” he affirmed that 
that feast must always occur on a Sabbath, which 
would make the Feast of Passover fallon Thursday. 
He ordered his followers to turn to the West in pray- 
ing, instead of in the direction of the Temple. Ac- 
cording to Meshwi, it was not allowable to offer 
sacrifices in the Temple on Sabbath. Contrary to 
the Biblical prohibition, Meshwi is said to have al- 
lowed his followers to eat fat. Hadassi (“ Eshkol 
ha-Kofer,” § 98), on the authority of David ibn 
Merwan al-Mukammas, gives the name of the 
founder of the sect as Moses of Baalbek, who is 
probably identical with Meshwi al-‘Ukbari. From 
an obscure passage in the “Ozar Nehmad” of the 
Karaite Tobias ben Moses, Delitzsch concludes that 
Meshwi embraced Christianity in the later part of 
his life; but this is highly improbable, for the sect 
would not have survived the apostasy of its founder, 
and Meshwi still had followers at the time of Kir- 
kisani. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pinsker, Likkute Kadmoniyyot, i. 16, 43; li. 
88, 98: Furst, Gesch. des Karéiert, i. 85; Gratz, Gesch. v. 
202 ; Gottlober, Bikkoret le-Toledot ha-Kara’im, p. 204; Har- 
kavy, Le-Korot ha-Kittot be-Yisrael, in Gratz, Dibre Yeme 
Yisrael, iii. 509. 

8. TY. Br. 

MESOPOTAMIA. A wide region cf western 
Asia which derived its name from its geographical 
position between the rivers Tigris and Euphrates. 
See ARAM; AssyRTIA; BABYLONIA. 


MESQUITA: Castilian family, members of 
which, during the period of the Inquisition, found 
their way to Holland, England, and America. 

David Bueno de Mesquita was one cf the 
wealthy merchants of Amsterdam about the middle 
of the seventeenth century. The family bueno de 
Mesquita still exists in England; in American his- 
tory also the name appears at anearly date. Luis de 
Amesquita is mentioned in the course of the trial 
of Gabriel of Granada by the Inquisition in Mexico 
(1642-45). From Obregon it is learned that Luis de 
Mesquita (alias De Amesquita Sarmiento) was a na- 
tive of Segovia, Castile, and a citizen and merchant 
of Mexico. The name is found also in the West In- 
dies. Benjamin Bueno de Mesquitg is mentioned 


505 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meshullam 
Messiah 





as a Portuguese merchant, resident in Jamaica, who 
petitioned the king for letters of denization in 1664; 
he appears to have lived there several years before 
the date mentioned. Banished from the island 
shortly after 1664, he went to New York. He was 
buried in that city, and his tombstone in the old 
cemetery on New Bowery is the oldest Jewish tomb- 
stone existing in New York; it bears the date of 
1688. Other members of the same family remained 
in Jamaica, and their name is repeatedly met with at 
later dates; thus Jacob Fernandes Mesquita 
was naturalized there in 1740 and Moses Mesquita 
in 1749. Abraham Bueno de Mesquita was a resi- 
dent of the island of Nevis early in the eighteenth 
century, though administration of his estate was 
granted in New York, to his daughter Blancha in 
1715. Members of this family appear repeatedly in 
the records of the New York congregation, but the 
name disappears during the nineteenth century. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. i. 91-92; 
v. 48-49, 112; vii. 102-108 (D. Fergusson, Trial of Gabriel de 
Granada); Obregon, Epoea Colonial, second series, p. 357, 
Po ea New York Hist. Soe. Col. ii. 154; Graetz, 


A. L. Hv. 

MESQUITA, MOSES GOMEZ DE: Haham 
of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews of England; 
born in 1688; died May 8, 1751. Mesquita was ap- 
pointed haham in 1744, in succession to Isaac Nieto, 
who had resigned, and held the office until his death. 
He solemnized the second marriage of Isaac Nieto 
in 1747, and the marriage of his own daughter, in 
1749, to Moses Cohen Dazevedo Ferme, who became 
haham in 1760. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gaster, Hist. of Bevis Marks, pp. 130-181; 
Cat. Anglo-Jew. Hist. Exh. p. 49. 


J. I. Co. 


MESSENGER. Sec AcENcy, Law oF. 


MESSER, LEON (JUDAH BEN JEHIEL 
ROFE): Italian rabbi, physician, and philosopher; 
flourished in Mantua in the latter half of the fifteenth 
century. He is said to have been born in Naples. 
The name “Leon” is the usual equivalent of “Ju- 
dah” and “ Messer” (= “ Maestro”), the title usual- 
ly given to physicians. He was rabbi in Mantua, 
where he had a conflict with his colleague Joseph 
COLON, in consequence of which both were expelled 
from the city (1475). Leon wrote a text-book 
on logic entitled “Miklal Yofi” (see Luzzatto in 
“Kerem Hemed,” v. 48), a grammar under the title 
“Libnat ha-Sappir,” commentaries to the “Logic” 
and the “Ethics” of Aristotle, and a text-book of 
rhetoric under the title “Nofet Zufim.” The last- 
mentioned is the only one of his works which has 
been printed; it was published in Mantua before 1480 
and was reedited by Jellinek in 1863 (Vienna). The 
object of the work was both apologetic and propa- 
gandic. The author desired to demonstrate to the 
non-Jewish world that the Jews were not devoid of 
the literary sense, and he wished to prove to his co- 
religionists that Judaism is not hostile to secular 
studies, which contribute toa better appreciation of 
Jewish literature. His theories follow chiefly those 
of Cicero and Quintilian. The book, as is evident 
from the fact that it was not reprinted within 400 
years, had only a small circle of readers, but within 


this circle it was highly appreciated. Azariah dei 
Rossi quotes Leon as a witness to the value of secu- 
lar studies (ch. ii., in “Me’or ‘Enayim,” ed. Ben- 
jacob, i. 75, Wilna, 1863), and Joseph Solomon Del- 
medigo recommends the book to the Karaite Zarah 
ben Nathan (Geiger, “ Melo Chofnajim,” p. 19, Ber- 
lin, 1840). Messer Leon’s son, David, also a phy- 
sician of Mantua, is the author of “ Tehillah le-Da- 
wid,” a book on philosophy, edited by his grandson 
Aaron ben Judah (Constantinople, 1577). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cat. Bodl. cols. 1381-1332; Nepi-Ghirondi, 
Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 200 5 Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. iii. 353- 


334; De Rossi, Dizionario, ii. 7; Dukes, pir Ns pp. 55 
et RC Vienna, 1837 ; Gritz, Geach. viii. 248-244 


MESSIAH (Hebr., “Ha-Mashiah”; Aramaic, 
“ Meshiha ” = “anointed one”): The name or title of 
the ideal king of the Messianic age; used also with- 
out the article as a proper name—* Mashiah” (in 
the Babylonian Talmud and in the midrash litera- 
ture), like Xporog in the Gospeis. The Grecized 
Meoovac of the New Testament (John i. 41, iv. 25) isa 
transliteration of the Aramaic form, Aramaic being 
the spoken language of Palestine in the time of 
Jesus. “The Messiah” (with the article and not in 
apposition with another word) is, however, not an 
Old Testament expression, but occurs for the first 
time in apocalyptic Hterature. Similarly, in all 
probability the use of the word “ Mashiah” to denote 
the Messianic king is not found earlier than the 
apocalyptic literature. In the Old Testament the 
earliest use of the word is with Yuwu (or with a 
pronominal suffix referring to YHwmr) asa title of the 
ruling sovereign Meshiah Yirwu (“God’s anointed 

"; T Sam. ii. 10, 85: xii. 8, 5; xvi. 6; xxvi. 9, 
11, 16, 23; I] Sam. i. 14, 16; xix. 21; IT 
The Name. Chron. vi. 42; Ps. xviii. 51 [A. V. 50]; 
xx. 7[A. V. 6]; cxxxii. 17 [applying 
to David]; Lam. iv. 20). In post-exilic times, the 
high priest, tilling the place formerly occupied by 
the king, is spoken of as “ ha-Kohen ha-Mashiah ” (the 
anointed priest; Lev. iv. 8, 5, 16; vi. 5), also (Dan. 
ix. 25, 26) as “* Mashiah Nagid” (an anointed one, a 
ruler) and simply “ Mashiah ” (an anointed one), re- 
ferring to Onias III. As the anointing of the high 
priest consecrated him above all his brethren to 
God’s service and gave him immediate access to God 
(comp. Lev. viti. 12, xxi. 10-12; Zech. iii. 7), so the 
anointing of the king made him Meshiah Yirwn, 
placed him in a special relationship to God, and estab- 
lished him as the one chosen by God torepresent His 
rulership in Israel and to bear witness to His glory 
before the nations (comp. II Sam. vii. 8-11, 14: Isa. 
lv. 4: Ps. Ixxxix. 4, 21-29). As “God’s anointed 
one” the king was sacrosanct and inviolable (comp. 
I Sam. xxvi. 9). Hence the later applications of the 
title “ Meshiah Yewu” in the Old Testament. 

In Isa. x!v. 1 Cyrus is called “ God’s anointed one,” 
because God has called him and given him victory 
after victory for the distinct purpose of putting an 
end to the Babylonian kingdom and the worship of 
idols, of setting free exiled Israel, and thus intro- 
ducing the new era of God’s universal dominion. 
In Ps. cv. 15 the Patriarchs are called “God’s 
anointed ones” because they are under the special 
protection of God and therefore inviolable. Fi- 
nally, in Hab. iii. 18, Ps. xxviii. 8, Ixxxiv. 10 (A. V. 


Messiah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


506 





9), and possibly in Ixxxix. 39, 52 (A. V. 38, 51), 
the title is applied to Israel, God's chosen people. 
See ANOINTING. 

*Mashiah” (anointed one of God) in Ps. ii. 2, 
which was formerly thought to have Messianic ref- 
erence, is now taken as referring either to a Has- 
monean king or to Israel. The latter interpretation 
is that prevailing in the Midrash (comp. Midr, Rab- 
bab and Tanhuma, Emor; Yalkut, Toledot. near 
end; Midr, Shoher Tob, ed ¢éor.), though the Messi- 
anic interpretation occurs in the eschatological de- 
scription (Pesik. Zutarta, Balak). 

But though the name is of later origin. the idea 
of a personal Messiah runs through the Oid Testa- 
ment. It is the natural outcome of the prophetic 
future hope. The first prophet to give a detailed 
picture of the future ideal king was [saiah (ix. 1-6, 
xi. 1-10, xxxii. 1-5). Of late the authenticity of 

these passages, and also of those pas- 
The Ideal sages in Jeremiah and Ezekiel which 
in Isaiah. give expression to the hope in a Mes- 

siah, has been disputed by various 
Biblical scholars (comp. Hackmann, “ Die Zukunfts- 
erwartung des Jesaiah”; Volz, “Die Vorexilische 
Jahweprophetie und der Messias”; Marti, “ Gesch. 
der Israelitischen Religion,” pp. 190 é¢ seg.; tdem, 
“Das Buch Jesaia”; Cheyne, “Introduction to Isa- 
jah,” and edition and transl.of Isaiah in “S. B. O. T.”). 

The objections of these scholars, however, rest 
principally on the hypothesis that the idea of the 
Messiah is inseparably bound up with the desire for 
universal dominion, whereas, in reality, this feature 
is not a Characteristic of the Messianic hope until a 
later stage of its development. The ideal king to 
whom Isaiah looks forward will be ascion of the 
stock of Jesse, on whom will rest the spirit of God 
asa spirit of wisdom, vaior, and religion, and who 
will rule in the fear of God, his loins girt with right- 
cousness and faithfulness (xi. 1-8a, 5). He will not 
(ngage in war or in the conquest of nations; the 
paraphernalia of war will be destroyed (ix. 4); his 
sole concern will be to establish justice among his 
people (ix. 6b; xi. 3b, 4). The fruit of his right- 
eous government will be peace and order through- 
out the land. The lamb will not dread the wolf, 
nor will the leopard harm the kid (xi. 8): that is, 
as the following verse explains, tvranny and vio- 
lence will no longer be practised on God's holy 
mountain, for the land will be full of the Knowledge 
of God as the water covers the sea (comp. XXxii. 1. 
2, 16). The people will not aspire to political great- 
ness, but will lead a pastoral life (xxxii. 18, 20). 
Under such ideal conditions the country can not but 
prosper, nor need it fearattack from outside nations 
Gx. 6a, xxxii. 15). The newly risen scion of Jesse 
willstand forth asa beacon to other nations, and they 
will come to him for guidance and arbitration (xi. 
10). He will rightly be called “ Wonderful Coun- 
selor,” “Godlike Hero,” “ Constant Father,” “ Prince 
of Peace” (ix. 5). 

This picture of the future fully accords with 
Tsaiah’s view, that the judgment will lead to a 
spiritual regeneration and bring about a state of 
moral and religious perfection; and it agrees also 
with the doctrine, which, in his bitter opposition to 
the alliances with Assyria and Egypt. he preached 


to his people—the doctrine, numely, that their sole 
concern should be God and their sole reliance be on 
Him, for thus, and thus only, might they endure (vii. 
9; comp. also v. 4, vili. 18, xxx. 15). The prophets 
advocated a government which would be in con- 
formity with God's will and be regulated by Iis 
laws of righteousness. In connection with Isaiah's 
Messianic hope it remains to be observed that the 
“Immanuel” passage, Isa. vil. 14, which is inter- 
preted in Matt. 1. 28 as referring to the birth of 
Jesus. has, as Robertson Smith (* The Prophets of 
Israel,” pp. 271 et seg., 426 et sey.) and others have 
pointed out, no Messianic import whatever. The 
name has reference merely to events 

The ‘‘Im- of the immediate present. He means 
manuel” to give a token by which the truth of 

Passage. his prophetic word may be tested, 

saying that any young woman giving 
birth to a son in the near future will call him “Im- 
manuel” (= “God with us”), in remembrance of the 
withdrawal of the Syrian-Ephraimitic armies from 
the country (v. 16). “"Almah” does not mean 
“virgin” (as given in A. V. and other versions; the 
only word meaning this is * betulah ”), but “a young 
woman sexually mature,” whether married or un- 
married; the article “ha-” of “ha-‘almah” is the 
generic article. 

The idea of a personal Messiah is not met with again 
until the time of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (the Messianic 
picture of Micah v. 1, 3-8, as is proved by the fact 
thatin it Isracl and the Messiah hold dominion ovet 
the nations, according to this view can not be ¢. 
pre-exiliec product of prophecy; in fact, it mus, 
have originated late in post-exilc times).  Jere- 
Iniah’s picture of the Messiah is nota detailed one; 
but, like his future hope in gencral, it agrees in adl 
essentials with that of Isaiah. The Messiah will be 
“a righteous sprout of David,” who will establish 
just judgment and wise government in the country, 
and whose name will be pty A (= “God is our 

salvation”; xxii. 5, 6; these two 


In Jere- verses recur in almost the same form 
miah and in xxviii. 15, 16. but in the latter verse 
Ezekiel. the name is applied to Jerusalem, an 


application which did not originate 
with Jeremiah, Ch. xxx. 9 ef seqg., 21 does not claim 
consideration here, as it is of later origin). 

In Ezekiel, the Messiah is a purely passive figure, 
the only personal reference to him being in xvii. 23 
—“he will become a mighty cedar” (Hebr.). The 
regeneration of the people, like their restoration, is 
exclusively the work of God. 

But in xxxiv, 23 et seg., xxxvii, 24 e¢ seg., which 
passages date from exilic times, there is an entirely 
new feature—the prophecy that David will be the 
king of the future state. As after the decline of 
the Holy Roman Empire the saga arose of the return 
of the emperor-hero Barbarossa, so, after the fall of 
the nation, the Jews of the Exile dreamed of the 
coming of a second David, who would reestablish 
them as a glorious nation. So Ezekiel lays empha- 
sis on the fact that the future Israel is to bea united 
nation as it was under David of old. The hope in 
the return of David is expressed also in the spurious 
passage mentioned above (Jer. xxx. 9) and in the 
gloss to Hos. iii. 5 (‘and David their King ”), and is 


A 


507 


THE JEWISE ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Messiah 


_ Sw 


mct With sporadically also in Neo-Hebraic apocaly p- 
tic literature (see below). 

[n post-exilic prophetic literature the hope in a 
Messiah is found only in the first two prophets of 
the post-exilic community, Haggai and Zechariah, 
and in Deutero-Zechariah, ch. ix., which, probably, 
dates from the time of the Scleucids. Haggai and 
Zechariah see in Zerubbabel the promised “sprout 
of David": but they state merely that he will re- 
build the Temple and attain great eminence asa 
ruler (Hag. it. 28: Zech, ii. 8, vi. 12). 

Deutero-Zechariah’s Messiah has much in com- 
mon with Isaial’s. He is described (Zech. ix. 9, 10) 
as a Yvighteous Prince of Peace, who will rise from 
the ranks of the pious and oppressed, who will ride 
into Jerusalem not in military splendor, but on an 
ass (comp. Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem on an ass, 
and also Ibn Kutaibah’s account of Salman, the 
governor of Medina at the time of the dissensions 
of the califs, who rode upon an ass in order to 
show his advocacy of peace). For, unlike worldly 
rulers, he will not maintain his dominion by the 
sword —he will destroy all the instruments of 
war (if, instead of spagm. is read in accordance 
with the LX.X. AD, 8d s. m.); but, by his ju- 
risdiction, which will extend to the ends of the 
earth, he will establish peace among the nations. 
Thus Deutero-Zechariah’s conception of the Messiah 
combines Isaiah’s conception with the hope of world- 
dominion cherished by his own age. 

The personal Messiah does not figure at all in the 
future hope of Deutero-Isaiah, whose lofty univer- 
salism marks the final step in the development of 

the religions ideas of the Prophets. 

Ideal of The salvation of mankind is the goal 
the Second of history, and Israel’s prerogative be- 

Isaiah. comes but the privilege of suffering 

for the good of the whole world. God 
has called Israel for the realization of His purpose 
toward man. Israel, and not an individual, is “the 
servant of God” (Isa. xii. 1-6, xix. 1-6, 1. 4-9, 
lii, 13-Nii. 12). through whom the regeneration of 
mankind will be accomplished, who will spread the 
true religion among all nations, convert all men into 
willing servants of God, and lead all tongues to 
confess Him (xlv. 23). Naturally, not the actual 
Israel of the present is meant, but the ideal Israel 
of the future, risen to spiritual heights in conse- 
quence of his wonderful deliverance by God. For 
this high destiny Isracl has been especially fitted by 
reason of the religious experience which God has 
stored up in him in the course of lis history; and, 
by submitting, inaccordance with God’s will, to suf- 
fering and ignominy, he fulfils his mission and ad- 
vances toward his final goal, In Isa. ii. 1-4 and 
Micah iv. 1-4 there is the same picture of the Mes- 
sianic future asin Deutero-Isaiah—Jerusalem as the 
religious center of the world, whence salvation will 
radiate to all men—bat contain the additional prom- 
ise that universal peace will ensue in consequence 
thereof. In like manner the post-exilic prophets 
Trito-Isaiah, Malachi, and Joel, and the post-exilic 
Apocalypse of Isaiah, xxiv.-xxvii., have no personal 
Messiah. According to them, God Himself, without 
the instrumentality of a man. will redeem Israel from 
his present misery and bring about the new era of sal- 


vation. The conclusion, however, of Malachi (the 
authorship of which is doubtful) speaks of a mes- 
senger, Elijah. whom God will send to convert men 
and thus pave the way for His own coming. 

As in the prophetic writings just enumerated, so 
in the Apocrypha of the Old Testament the figure 
of the Messiah has no prominence whatever. In 

I Maccabees there isa brief general ref- 


In the erence to the promise given to David, 
Apocry- that his throne would be reestablished 
pha. (ii. 57). but Ecclesiasticus, Judith, 


Tobit, Baruch, 11 Maccabees, and the 

Wisdom of Solomon contain no mention of the 
Davidic hope. The Hellenistic author of the Wis- 
dom of Solomon is so thoroughly universalistic that 
the idea of a Messiah is precluded. His eschatolog- 
ical picture shows no nationalistic feature whatever. 
The natural deduction from the facts thus far out- 
lined is that while from the time of the Prophets the 
belicf in an ideal future determined the character 
and tendency of Jewish religious life and thought 
to such an extent that this belief may be called the 
special characteristic of the Jewish genius, still, in 
the periods thus far covered, the idea of a personal 
Messiah is far from having that general prominence 
which one would, at first, be inclined to assume. 
Further, it has been seen how Deutero-Isaiah her- 
alded Cyrus as the favorite of God, the hero called 
by God to introduce the new era of universal bliss. 
In like manner, no doubt, as Kampers has shown in 
his “ Alexander der Grosse und die Idee des Welt- 
imperiums in Prophetie und Sage,” the Jewish con- 
temporaries of Alexander the Great, dazzled by his 
glorious achievements, hailed him as the divinely 
appointed deliverer, the inaugurator of the period 
of universal peace promised by the Prophets. Proof 
of this is: (1) The legend related in 
Josephus (“ Ant.” xi. 8) and in the 
Talmud (Yoma 67h) of the audience 
of the high priest Jaddua (in the Tal- 
mud it is Simon the Just) with Alex- 
ander the Great in Gaza. Alexander recognizes in 
the high priest the man who had appeared to him 
in a dream, urging him to the conquest of Asia and 
promising him that he himself would lead his army 
and deliver the Persian kingdom into his hands; he 
prostrates himself to worship God, whose name he 
sees inscribed on the plate of gold on the high 
priest’s cidaris, accompanies the high priest to Jeru- 
salem to sacrifice to God in His Temple, and is there 
shown the Book of Daniel, in which it is written 
that the Persian kingdom will be conquered by a 
Greek—a prophecy which Alexander applies to 
himself. (2) The various sagas which sprang up 
about Alexander, chiefly among the Jews in Alex- 
andria, and out of which the Alexander romance 
of pseudo-Callisthenes grew, the only explanation 
of which is that Alexander had once been the cen- 
tral figure in their future hope. (8) The apocalyp- 
tic traditionsabout Alexander the Greatin medieval 
apocalyptic literature and alsoin the midrashic liter- 
ature—for example. the tradition (mentioned by 
Josephus) of Alexander imprisoning Gog and Magog 
behind the mountains of darkness in the far north. 
The version of this legend given by Jacob of 
Serug (521 ¢.E.) and in the INoran, sura 18 (comp. 


Alexander 
as Mes- 
siah. 


Messiah 





Kampers, U.c. pp. 73, 76 et seg.) leaves no doubt that 
it was purely of apocalyptic origin. 

But while all these hopes centering in Alexander 
the Great bear witness to the liberality and broad- 
mindedness of the Jews of that time, they, on the 
other hand, corroborate the conclusion, expressed 
above, that the hope in the Messiah had, as yet, no 
definite form and can not have been commonly an 
article of faith. This is true, not only of the time 
of Alexander the Great, but even as late as the first 
period of apocalyptic literature, and is proved by 
the absence of a personal Messiah in the oldest apoc- 
alyptic writing, the Book of Daniel, as well as in 
the oldest part of the Book of Enoch (“The Apoca- 
ly pse of the Ten Weeks”) and in the Book of Jubti- 
lees, Which also date from the Maccabean period, 
apart from the fact, pointed out above, that in the 
contemporaneous apocry pha there is but vague ref- 
erence to the Messiah. The “one of the likeness of 
man” (“ke-bar enash ”) of Dan. vii. 13 (Hebr.), to 
whom the rulership in the divine world-monarchy 
will be entrusted, is, according to the author’s own 
explanation (vii. 18, 22, 27), the nation of God’s holy 
ones (2.¢., the faithful Jews). These constitute the 
earthly representatives of God in the “civitas Dei,” 
and in contrast to the other nations of the world, 
who are represented under the figures of ani- 
mals, they are represented under the figure of a 
man in order to signify that in them the divine 
ideal of manhood has preserved itsclf most faith- 
fully. 

Not until after the fal! of the Maccabean dynasty, 
when the despotic government of Herod the Great and 

his family, and the increasing tyranny 


Rise of of the Roman empire had made their 
Popular condition ever more unbearable, did 
Belief ina the Jews seek refuge in the hope of a 
Personal personal Messiah. They yearned for 
Messiah. the promised deliverer of the house of 


David, who would free them from the 
yoke of the hated foreign usurper, would putan eud 
to the impious Roman rule, and would establish His 
own reign of peace and justice in its place. In this 
way their hopes became gradually centered in the 
Messiah. As evidence that in the Ronian period the 
Messianic hope had become universal among the 
Jews may be adduced: (1) Jesus’ conviction that 
he was the Messiah, a conviction inspired in him by 
the current belief in a Messiah, as is shown by the 
fact that on his entry into Jerusalem the populace 
hailed him as such; (2) the testimony of Jose- 
phus (“ B. J.” vi. 8, 3 4), Tacitus (“ Hist.” v. 18), and 
Suetonius (Vespasian, iv.) regarding the Messianic 
belief of the Jewish people at that time; (8) the fact 
that even in Philo’s picture of the future, in spite 
of its moralistic tendency, the Messianic king has 
a place (comp. “De Premiis et Penis,” § 16). It 
may be noted in this connection that the “ Prayer 
for the Coming of the Messiah,” as the version of it 
given both in the Babylonian and in the Palestinian 
recensions of the SHEMONEN ‘EsrkEir shows (sec 
Nos. 14 and 15 respectively), can not have be- 
come an integral part of the daily prayers later 
than the time immediately following the destruction 
of the Temple, for in that period the “Shemoneh 
‘Esreh ” received its present form. Hillel’s assertion 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





508 


ey 


(Sanh. 98b) that there would be no future Messiah 
for Israel since the latter had had its Messiah in the 
days of Hezekiah, can have no weight as a contrary 
argument, as Hille] lived in the reign of Herod 
the Great, at the beginning of the period which 
marks the development of the popular belicf in the 
Messiah. 

As the future hopes of the Jews became Messianic 
in character the figure of the Messiah assumed a 
central and permanent place in apocalyptic litera- 
ture; and as apocalyptic literature in general, so 
the Messiah-concept in particular, embodies a mul- 
titude of bizarre fantasies which can not possibly 
be reconciled or woven into anything like a con- 
nected picture. There are many factors which con- 
tributed to this manifold and variegated imagery. 
Not only was all the Messianic and quasi-Messianic 
material of the Scriptures collected, and out of it, 
by means of subtle combinations, after the manner 
of the Midrash, a picture of the Messiah sedulously 
drawn, but everything poetical or figurative in the 
Prophets’ descriptions of the future was taken in 
a literal sense and expounded and dogmatized ac- 
cordingly. Many foreign elements, moreover, crept 
in at this time and became part of the gencral pot- 
pourri of imagery relating to the Messiah. This 
being the case, an exceedingly complex and diffi- 
cult question ariscs—whcre, in the Messiah-pictures, 
and, indeed, in the pictures of the future in gencral, 

presented by apocalyptic literature, 


Develop- has one to deal with organic develop- 
ment of ment from prophetic ideas, and where 
Concep- with foreign religious elements % At 

tion. present 16 is not possible to form a 


final judgment in regard to the place 
of origin of these foreign ideas. The material 
from the Assyro-Babylonian religion and mythology 
which has been offered in recent years by Assvriol- 
ogists shows what an involved question is presented 
in this one point, and that a series of preliminary 
and exhaustive studies is necessary before a final 
decision can be reached regarding it or the various 
questions bound up with it. The one thing safe to 
maintain in this connection is, perhaps, that, accord- 
ing to the time at which the heterogencous char- 
acter of the conceptions becomes noticeable in the 
literature, Alexandria must have had a prominent 
part in the fusion of the native and foreign elements, 
since that city had been from the time of Alexan- 
der the Great the seat of religious syncretisin as 
well as the intellectual metropolis of the civilized 
world, 

For the better understanding of the Messianic pic- 
tures in apocalyptic literature it is important to 
point out that, although frequently interlaced, two 
distinct sets of ideas may be traced—the one set 
concerned with this world, hence realistic and na- 
tional; the other directed to the world to come, hence 
transcendent and universalistic. The Messiah pre- 
sents a correspondingly double character. Side by 
side with the traditional idea of an earthly king 
of the house of David is the new conception of a 
heavenly preexistent Messiah, from which it follows 
that in regard to the question of the Messiah the 
older apocalyptic literature, as well as the younger 
rabbinical branch, falls naturally into two groups. 


509 





In the older apocalyptic literature the first book 
to be entioned in which the Messiah figures as an 
earthly king is “The Vision of the 


In the Seventy Shepherds of the Book of 
Older Enoch ” (ch. Ixxxv.-xc.) of the time of 
Apoca- John Hyrcanus (185-105 B.c.). The 
lyptic Lit- Messiah appears under the figure of 
erature. awhite bull at the conclusion of the 


world-drama (xc. 87 et seg.) and com- 
mands the respect and fear of all the heathen, who 
eventually become converted to God. Yet he does 
not take any actual réle. It is God Himself who 
wards off the last attack of the heathen against Israel, 
gives judgment, and establishes the world-dominion 
of Israel]. Second in this group come those parts of 
the Sibylline Books whose date, as Geffken’s recent 
critical analysis has established (“ Komposition und 
Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina,” pp. 7-18), 
is about the year 83 3.c. The Messiah is pictured 
(verses 652-666) as a king sent by God from the 
rising of the sun, who will put an end to war all 
over the earth, inasmuch as he will destroy some 
peoples and make permanent treaties with the 
others: in all his actions he will be solicitous not to 
follow his own counsel, but to obey the commands 
of God. The writer then describes at length the 
attack by the heathen nations on the magnificent 
Temple of God and on the Holy Land, and the an- 
nihilation of the nations by God; the Last Judgment, 
with the ensuing conversion of the heathen to God; 
the establishment of God's eternal kingdom over all 
men and the reign of universal peace; but, strange 
to say, throughout the description there is no men- 
tion of the Messiah. In fact, in verses 781 e¢ seq. 
the Israclites are spoken of as the prophets of God, 
the judges of mankind, and the just kings who will 
put an cud to the sway of the sword upon earth. 
“The Vision of the Seventy Shepherds” and 
Sibyllines, iii. 652 ef seg. say nothing whatever about 
the lineage of the earthly Messiah, but 
In the inthe Psalmsof Solomon (xvii.), which 
Psalms of were called forth by the conquest of 
Solomon. Jerusalem by Pompey (63 B.c.), he is 
designated as the “son of David,” 
who will appear at a time known only to God. 
These Psalms (/.c.) contain a more detailed descrip- 
tion of his personality and of his reign than any 
other writing of that period. The Messiah will first 
crush the unjust rulers and rid Jerusalem of, and 
destroy, the impious heathen. Then he will gather 
the scattered ones of Israel, distribute them through 
the land according to their tribes, and found hisown 
kingdom of peace and justice. No wicked person 
will be tolerated in his kindgom nor will foreigners 
be allowed to dweil there. He will subject the 
heathen nations to his rule, glorify the Lord before 
the whole world, and make Jerusalem pure and 
holy as of old, so that the nations will come from 
the ends of the earth to witness God’s glory. The 
description which follows of his righteous reign 
shows the influence of Isa. xi. 1 e¢ seg. Free from 
sin, strong in the divine fear, and filled with the 
spirit of God, of valor, and of justice, he will tend 
the flock of the Lord faithfully, hold the higher offi- 
cers in check, and make sinners cease by the power 
of his word, so that injustice and tyranny will not 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Messiah 





be practised in the land. He will not rely upon 
horses and warriors, nor heap up gold and silver to 
wage war, nor keep armies. In God alone will he 
place his trust, and his strength will be in Him. 

In the Apocalypse of Baruch (70-100 c.£.) the 
earthly Messiah will appear at the close of the fourth 
(z.¢., the Roman) world-empire and destroy it. The 
last ruler of the empire will, after his hosts have 
been destroyed, be brought in chains before the 
Messiah on Mount Zion, and there, after the im- 
piousness of his rule has been pointed out to him, 
he will be put to death by the Messiah’s own hand. 
Of the other nations, those hostile to Israe] will be 
put to the sword and the remainder subjected to 
the rule of the Messiah, who will establish himself 
on the throne of his kingdom, inaugurate the reign 
of morality and bliss, and hold dominion until 
the end of time, that is, until the consummation of 
the present world (xxix. 8, xxxix. 5-x]. 8, Ixxii.- 
Ixxni. 4. Ch. xxx. 1 is to be taken, with Volz 
[“ Jidische Eschatologie,” pp. 87, 203], as Christian 
interpolation). 

The Testament of Levi (ch. viii. and xviii.) shows 
a unique conception of the Messiah. He is not, as 

in the Testament of Judah (see below) 
In the Tes- and according to the popular belief, a 
taments descendant of David, but a priestly 
of the king of the tribe of Levi. His char- 
Patriarchs. acter and activity are altogether spiri- 
tual. The pouring out of the spirit 
and knowledge of the Lord over all mankind and 
the cessation of sin and evil will be the fruit of his 
ideal priesthood, which will jast for all eternity. 
He himself will open the doors of paradise, cast 
aside the sword threatening Adam, and give the 
saints to eat of the tree of life. He will chain up 
Belial and will give his children power to trample on 
the evil spirits. The picture of the Messiah in the 
Testament of Judah (ch. xxiv.), although far more 
brief, resembles, in its spiritual character and in its 
universalistic tendency, that in the Testament of 
Levi. The sole mission of the Messiah will be the 
regeneration of mankind, and his kingdom will be 
one of justice and salvation for the whole world. 
If, as Bousset sought to prove (“Zeitschrift fiir die 
Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft,” i. 198 et seq.), the 
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs date mainly 
from the time of the Maccabees, then the Messiah- 
conception of the Testament of Levi is easily ac- 
counted for; the author expects that the future 
Savior will be a prince of the reigning priestly 
house of the Maccabees. 

The oldest apocalypse in which the conception of 
a preexistent heavenly Messiah is met with is the 
Messiological section of the Book of Enoch (xxx-vii.- 

Ixxi.) of the first century B.c. The 

The Messiah is called “the Son of Man,” 
Heavenly and is described as an angelic being, 
Messiah. his countenance resembling a man’s, 
and as occupying a seat in heaven be- 

side the Ancient of Days (xlvi. 1), or, as it is ex- 
pressed in ch. xxxix. 7, “under the wings of the 
Lord of spirits.” In ch. xviii. 8, 6, xlix. 2b it is 
stated that “His name was called before the Lord 
of spirits before the sun and the signs of the zodiac 
were created, and before the stars of heaven were 


Messiah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


510. 





made”: that “He was chosen and hidden with God 
before the world was created, and will remain in His 
presence forevermore ” (comp. also xii. 6); and that 
“His glory will last from eternity unto eternity and 
his might from generation unto generation ~ (that 
“his name” in XIviii. 3 means really “son of man ” 
is evident from verse 6; comp. the similar use of 
“Shem Yuwt” for “ Yaw” in [sa. xxx. 27). He 
is represented as the embodiment of justice and 
wisdom and as the medium of all God's revelations 
to men (xlivi. 8; xlix. 1, 2a, 3). At the end of time 
the Lord will reveal him to the world and will place 
him on the throne of His glory in order that he 
may judge all creatures in accordance with the end 
to which God had chosen him from the beginning. 
When he rises for the judgment all the world will 
fall down before him, and adore and extol him, and 
give praise to the Lord of spirits. The angels in 
heaven also, and the elect in the Garden of Life, 
will join in his praise and will glorify the Lord. 
“He will judge all hidden things, and no one will 
be able to make vain exeuses to him”; he will judge 
also Azazel, with all his associates and all his hosts. 
The wicked ones of the earth, especially all kings and 
potentates, he will give over to damnation, but for 
the just and chosen ones he will prepare cternal 
bliss, and he will dwell in their midst for all eter- 
nity (xlv. 3,4; xlvi. 4-6; xlviil. 4-10; xlix. 4; li. 3; 
lv. 4; Ixi. 7-Ixii. 14), 

It is worthy of special] note that in the appendix to 
the Messiological section of Enoch, the latter himself 
isthe Son of Man = Messiah (1x xi, 14), and, as in the 
Slavonic Book of Enoch and the Hebrew Book of 
Enoch (see Jew. Encyc. i. 676, s.c. APOCALYPTIC 
LITERATURE), as well as throughout rabbinical lit- 
erature, Enoch is identical with METATRON = Meza- 
A@povog Or Mezaripavoc (t.¢e., the highest, ministering 
spirit, who stands next to God and represents His ru- 
lership over the universe), so there is an important 
connecting-link between the conception of the Son 
of Man = Messiah, and the Logos, which appears re- 
peatedly in Philo in place of the earthly future king 
(comp., ¢.g., his interpretation of “zemah,” Zech. vi. 
12, in “ De Confess.” § 14; see MemRaA). The Fourth 
Book of Ezra (about 100 ¢.£.) presents both the pre- 
existent and the earthly Messiah. The latter is seen 
in ch. vii. 28, xi. 37-46, xii. 31-34, where the Mes- 
siah is represented as the Lion “who will spring 
from the seed of David,” will destroy the fourth 
(¢.e., the Roman) world-monarehy, will rule 400 
years till the end of the Messianic intcrim, and then 
will die, together with all men. The former appears 
in the vision of the man rising from the sea (ch. 
xiii.). Here, as in the Messiological section, the 
Messiah is described as “one resembling aman” and 
is called “ille homo” or “ipse homo” (verses 8, 12). 
The statement is made also (under the influence of 
Dan. vii. 13) that he “flew with the clouds of 
heaven.” Other points of contact with the Messio- 
logical Book are: the statement that “he is the one 
whom the Most High has reserved for many ages to 
deliver creation” (verse 26); the reference to his 
being hidden with God (verse 52)—“ Even asno one 
can fathom nor learn what is in the depths of the 
sea, so none of the inhabitants of earth can see My 
son nor his escort [z.e., the host of angels who will 


accompany him when he appears upon carth], un- 
less it be at the appomted hour”: and. finally, the 
obvious reference to his preeXxistence in heaven, 
where the promise is given to Ezra, ° Thou wilt be 
taken from among men [to heaven] and wilt dwell 
with My son and with thy comrades until the end 
of time ” (xiv. 9). 

Whether the Messiah in Sibyllines v. 415-480, 
where he is called “a blessed man coming from 
heaven,” is the preexistent or the earthly Messiah 
can not be determined. In the Assumptio Mosis, 
however (¢. 4 B.c.),1¢ may be concluded, on the 
ground of the identification of the Son of Man = 
Messiah with Enoch = Metatron in Enoch Ixxi. 14, 
that it is the preexistent Messiah who is referred to 
(x. 2), for it is stated that, at the end of the last trib- 
ulation, when God’s dominion will be established 
over all creation, “the handsof the angel who stands 
in the highest place will be filled, and he will im- 
inediately avenge them [Israet] on their enemics.” 
As the author of the Fourth Book of Ezra (xiil.), as 
well as the author of the Messiological Book, evi- 
dently had Dan. vii. 18 in mind when he described 
the preexistent Messiah, it may be mentioned here 
that, while the Messianic interpretation of this pas- 
sage prevails in the rabbinic literature (the oldest 
example is the Messianic tradition in Sanh. 98a, for 
which Joshua b. Levi is mentioned as authority), 
the Greek text of Dan. vil. 13 presents not only the 
Messianic interpretation of “Bar Nash,” but unmis- 
takably also, in Kai G¢ cazati¢ yuepav sopiv added 

after we ving ardpurov ypyeto, the con- 
In ception of the preexistent Messiah. 

Rabbinic Moreover, contrary to the view held by 

Literature. many, that all the passages concerning 

the Son of Mab = Messiah in the Book 
of Enoch and TV Ezra are of Christian origin, it may 
be pointed out that the phrase “ Bar Nash” {= ° Son 
of Man”) must have been a common name for an 
angel of the highest order among the Palestinian 
Jews of the first Christian centuries. Yer. Yoma 
v. relates that, when reference was made in the bet 
ha-midrash to Simon the Just’s having, every year 
of the forty during which be was high priest, been 
accompanied into the Holy of Holies on the Day of 
Atonement by an “aged one.” veiled and garbed in 
linen (¢.e., by a heavenly being; comp. the “labush 
ha-badim” in Ezek. ix. 1, 3 e¢ «1.), R. Abbahu ob- 
jected: “Does not the prohibition, ‘No man shall 
be present in the Tabernacle when the high priest 
enters the sanctuary,’ extend to those of whom it 
is said, ‘the appearance of their countenance was 
that of a man’s countenance’?” (Lev. xvi. 17, 
Ezek. i. 10). Whereupon the rejoinder was made, 
“Who says that that being was Bar Nash? It 
was the All Holy Himself.” It may be noted in 
passing that this haggadah is of importance for the 
Greek text of Dan. vii. 13 as well as for the identi- 
fication of the Son of Man = Messiah with Enoch = 
Metatron. 

In the rabbinical apocalyptic literature the con- 
ception of an earthly Messiah is the prevailing one, 
and from the end of the first century of the common 
era it is also the one officially accepted by Judaisn. 
As proof of this may be given: (1) “The Prayer for 
the Coming of the Messiah,” mentioned above, in 


511 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Messiah 





which the Messiah is called “descendant of David.” 
(2) The information given in the second century by 
Justin (“ Dialogus cum Tryphone,” ch. xlix.) and 
by the author of “ Philosophumena” (ix, 80), Both 
writers state expressly that, contrary to the belief 
of the Christians, the Jews emphasize the human 
origin of the Messiah, and the author of * Philosophu- 
mena” adds that they expect him to be descended 
trom David. (8) The liturgy of later times, which, 
like the Daily Prayer, calls him the descendant of 
David throughout. His mission is, in all essential 
respects, the same as in the apocaly pses of the older 
period: he is to free Israel from the power of 
the heathen world, kill its ruler and destroy his 
hosts, and set up his own kingdom of peace 
(comp. the descriptions of him in Jew. Encyc, 
i. 675, so. ApocaLyrTic LITERATURE, NEoO-HE- 
BRAIC). 

The conception of the preexistent Messiah is met 
with in Pesik. R. xxxiii., xxxvi. (pp. 152b, 162, ed. 
Friedmann; comp. Yalk. i. 839). In accordance with 

the Messiological section of Enoch 
Heavenly the former of these two passages 
Preexist- says: “At the beginning of the crea- 
ence. tion of the world was born the King 
Messiah, who mounted into God’s 
thoughts before the world was made”; and in the 
latter passage it is related that God contemplated the 
Messiah and his works before the creation of the 
world and concealed him under His throne; that 
Satan, having asked God who the Light was under 
His throne, was told it was the one who would 
bring him to shame in the future, and, being then al- 
lowed, at his request, to sec the Messiah, he trembled 
aud sank to the ground, crying out, “Truly this 
is the Messiah who will deliver me and all hea- 
then kings over to hell.” God calls the Messiah 
“Ephraim, my righteous Messiah.” 

The preexistent Messiah is presented also in the 
Haggadah (Pes. 54a; Ned. 39a; Yalk. i, 20; e¢ al.), 
where the name of the Messiah is included among the 
seven thingscreated before the world was made, and 
where he is called “ Yinnon,” reference being made 
to Ps, lxxii. 17 (which passage probably was in the 
mind of the author of the Messiological section of 
Enoch when writing xlviii. 3). That, contrary to 
the view of Weber (“ Jiidische Theologie,” 2d ed., 
p. 355) and others, it is actual preexistence which is 
meant here, and not predestination, is evident from 
the additional remark—“ According to anothcr view, 
only the Torah and the Throne of Glory were [actu- 
ally] created; as tothe other [five] things the inten- 
tion was formed to create them” (Yalk., ¢.e.; in re- 
gard to “the name of the Messiah” compare the 
comment above to Enoch, xlviii. 3). Finally, the 
preexistence of the Messiah im paradise is minutely 
described in “The Revelation of R. Joshua b. Levi” 
(see JEW. Eweyc. i. 680), in Midrash Konen (Jelli- 
nek, “B. H.” ii. 29). and in “Seder Gan Eden ” (2d. 
iii. 182 e¢ seg., 195). In the first two, regardless of 
the apparent anomaly, the preexistent Messiah is 
called “Messiah ben David.” 

The conception met with in the rabbinical litera- 
ture of an earthly preexistence of the Messiah must 
be distinguished from that of his heavenly preexist- 
ence. It occurs in various forms, representing, 


probably, different stages of development. First, 
he is expected to lead a bidden life and then to step 
forth suddenly. (On this conception 


Earthly of the sudden, unexpeeted appearance 
Preexist- of the Messiah comp. Matt. xxiv. 27, 
ence. 43-44, where it is said that the Mes- 


siah will come like a thief in the night 
or like a flash of lightning.) This is the conception 
of him in Ex. R.i. and in Tan., Shemot, both of 
which say that as Moses, the first deliverer, was 
reared at the court of Pharaoh, so the future deliv- 
erer will grow up in the Roman capital; in agree- 
ment with this, in the Agadat ha-Mashiah (Jellinek, 
d.¢. ili. 142) it is said that the Messiah will suddenly 
be revealed to Israel in Rome. Then, again, the 
Messiah is represented as born, but not yet revealed. 
This conception appears as early as the second cen- 
tury in Justin Martyr's “ Dialogus cum Try phone” 
(ch. vili.), and in accordance with it is the passage 
Sanh, 98b, where R. Joshua ben Levi is quoted as 
saying that the Messiah is already born and is living 
in concealment atthe gatesof Rome. In Targ. Yer. 
to Micah iv. 8 the Messiah is on the earth, but be- 
cause of the sins of the people he is still in hiding. 
Finally, the Messiah is thought of as born at a cer- 
tain time in the past. This is the case in Yer. Ber. 
ii., which states that the Messiah was born at Beth- 
lehem on the day the Temple was destroyed, and in 
the Apocalypse of Zerubbabel (see Jew. Encyc. 
i, 682), which declares he was born in the days of 
King David and is dwelling in Rome. 

The notion, traceable to Ezek. xxxiv. 28 e¢ ad., that 
David himself is the Messiah, is another variation 
of the conception of earthly preexistence. It occurs 
in the apocalyptic fragment of the “Siddur” of R. 
Amram (see JEw. ENcyc. i. 678, ¢.v. APOCALYPTIC 
LITERATURE, 2) andin Yer: Ber, ii. The latter states 
that whether the King Messiah belongs to the living 
or to the dead, his name is David. 

Finally, there must be mentioned a Messianic fig- 
ure peculiar to the rabbinical apocaly ptic literature 

—that of Messiah ben Joseph. The 

Messiah  carliest mention of him is in Suk. 52a, 

ben Joseph. b, where three statements occur in re- 
gard to him, for the first of which R. 
Dosa (¢. 250) is given as authority. In the last of 


these statements only his name is mentioned, but the 


first two speak of the fate which he is to meet, name- 
ly, to fallin battle (as if alluding to a well-known 
tradition). Details about him are not found until 
much later, but he has an established place in the 
apocaly pses of later centuries and in the midrash 
literature—in Saadia’s description of the future 
(“Emunot we-De'ot,” ch. viii.) and in that of Hai 
Gaon (“ Ta‘am Zekenim,” p. 59). According to these, 
Messiah b. Joseph will appear prior to the coming 
of Messiah b. David; he will gather the children of 
Isracl around him. march to Jerusalem, and there. 
after overcoming the hostile powers, reestablish the 
Temple-worship and set up his own dominion. 
Thereupon ARMILUS, according to one group of 
sources, or GOG AND Masceoc, according to the 
other, will appear with their hosts before Jerusalem, 
wage war against Messiah b. Joseph, and slay him. 
His corpse, according to one group, will he un- 
buried in the streets of Jerusalem: according to the 


Messiah 
Metals 


other, it will be hidden by the angels with the 
bodies of the Patriarchs, until Messiah b. David 
comes and resurrects him (comp. JEW. Encyc. i. 
682, 684 [S$ 8 and 13]: comp. also Midr. Wavosha‘ 
and Agadat ha-Mashiah in Jellinek, “B. H.” i. 58 
et seq., iii. 141 et seq.). 

When and how chis Messiah-conception originated 
is a question that has not yet been answered satis- 
factorily. It is not possible to consider Messiah b. 
Joseph the Messiah of the Ten Tribes. He is no- 
where represented as such; though twice it is 
mentioned that a part of the Ten Tribes will be 
found among those who will gather about his stand- 
ard. There is a possibility, however, as has been 
repeatedly maintained, that there is some connec- 
tion between the Alexander saga and the Messiah 
b. Joseph tradition, for, in the Midrash, on the 
strength of Deut. xxxiii. 17, a pair of horns, with 
which he will “strike in all directions,” is the em- 
blem of Messiah b. Joseph (comp. Pirke R. El. xix.; 
Gen. R. Ixxv.; Num. R. xiv.; e¢ a@.), just as in the 
apocalyptic Alexander tradition in the Koran (re- 
ferred to above) the latter is called “The Double- 
Horned ” (“ Dhu al-Karnain”). See also EscHaTOL- 
oGy; JESUS; JUDAISM. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. Smend, Alttestamentliche Religionsgesch.; 
W. Nowack, Die Zukunftshofnung Lsraels in der Assyri- 
schen Zeit; Htthn, Die Messianischen Weissagungeis: Fr. 
criesebrecht, Der EKEiunecht Jahwes tn Deutero-Jesaia ; 
Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., ii. 29; W. Bousset, Die Religion des 
Judentums im Neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, part 3, ch. ii.- 
v.; part 6, pp. 474 et seqg.; P. Volz, Jiidische Kschatologie 
von Danicl bis Akiba, $ 34-35; H.J. Holtzmann, Lehrbuch 
der Neutestamentlichen Theologie, i. 68-85; W. Baidensper- 
ger, Die Messianisch-A pokalyptischen Hoffnungen des Ju- 
dentums; F. Weber, Jiidische Theolugie auf Grund cles 
Talmud, etc., ch. xxii.-xxiii.; G. H, Dalman, Der Leidende 
und der Sterhende Messias ; idem, Die Worte Jesu, pp. 19! 
et seq.; Kampers, Alerander der Grosse und die Idee des 
Weltimnperiums in Prophetie wid Sage; B. Beer, Welchen 
Aufsehluss Geben die Jtidischen Quellen ber den “* Zwet- 
gehornten ”? des Korans? in Z. D. M. G. ix. 791 et seg. 

J. M. Bu. 

MESSIAH, FALSE. See PsEvDOo-MESSIAR. 

MESSIANIC PROPHECY. See Propuers. 

MESSIANIC YEAR. Sce CALENDAR. 

MESSINA : Italian city, “at the point of Sicily, 
on the strait called Lunir, which divides Calabria 
from Sicily ” (“Itinerary ” of Benjamin of Tudela). 
Its Jewish community may have been founded even 
before the destruction of the Second Temple, al- 
though it is first mentioned in the letters of Greg- 
ory I. After along silence the sources again refer 
to it, in connection with a royal decree of 1129, and 
about 1170 Benjamin of Tudela found 200 Jews 
there on his return from the Holy Land. The Jews 
of Messina had the same constitution, rights, and 
taxes as all the other Sicilian communities, though 
their lot may have been somewhat harder because 
the archbishop claimed a certain authority over 
them. 

In 1347 several Jews were executed on the false 
charge of ritual murder, and their heads were pub- 
licly exposed; a marble inscription, “a monument 
to the faithless Jews,” was subsequently placed in 
the cathedral to commemorate theevent. Onasim- 
ilar occasion, in 1475, the Jews averted a riot only 
by the payment of a large sum of money. In 1492 
they were expelled from Messina, as well as from 
the entire island, though thirty-seven years before, 
in 1455, they had in vain attempted to emigrate. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


512 


Messina occupied an exceptional position in virtue 
of being the seat of the highest court of appeal for 
all the Jews of Sicily; and in 1489 Moses Hefez 
(Bonavoglio, who, as the representative of seven- 
teen communities, had induced King Alfonso V., 
in 1480 and 1481, to repeal ordinances unfavorable 
to the Jews) was made chief justice (“naggid ”) of 
the supreme court. Being at the court in Naples 
when appointed, he deputed his brother to act as his 
proxy; the latter accordingly was invested with the 
new dignity in the synagogue of Palermo. Moses 
Hefez died in 1447. Messina itself was not subject 
to the jurisdiction of the new chief justice, but 
formed a judicial district of its own. 

The Messina community must have been one of 
the largest on the island, judging from the tax-re- 
turns. In addition to the imposts levied equally 
upon all the communities, if was required to fur- 
nish, after 1847, the standards for the galleys of the 
commanding officer. Wine and meat also were 
taxed. In 1170 the community numbered only 200 
persons, but in 1453 there were 180 families there— 
about 8 per cent of the total population. It had 
several synagogues, one in the suburb of San Philip. 
There fragments of an inscription of the year 440 are 
said to have been found, but the reference is probably 
to one of much later date, in honor of a certain 
“ Moses” (?) who built a synagogue or some similar 
structure. A considerable number of Jews living 
in the vicinity of Messina endeavored to evade the 
iaxes and imposts of the community, and conse- 
quently were excluded by a royal decree of 1844 
from its rights and privileges. 

Little is known of the intellectual life of the Jews 
of Messina. About 1300 Abraham Abulafia, cabalist 
and magician, had two pupils there—Abraham and 
Nathan; some time later Aaron Facassi (Favi) offi- 
ciated there as rabbi, aud pronounced a sentence of 
excommunication upon a physician named Aaron 
(1340), which sentence was repealed by the goveru- 
ment. Moses Hefez (referred to above) officiated as 
rabbi about 1430, and succeeded in having the Jews 
released from compulsory attendance at Christian 
sermons. 

The scholars of Messina who edited the manu- 
script of Nahmanides’ commentary on the Penta- 
teuch, on which the Naples 1490 edition was based, 
are of somewhat later date. The Jewish physicians 
of Messina include Naccon de Fariono and Aaron 
(1367), Moses Spagnuolo and Bulfarachio (1375), 
Moses Yabe (1383), Joseph Factas and Gaudio (1396), 
Benedetto da 8. Marco “ Lugrossu ” and Machaluffo 
Ayculino (1404), Isaac de Bonavoglia (1425), Vilelmo 
Saccas (1482), Aaron de Sacerdotu de Girachi and 
Raba (1448), Moses de la Bonavoglia (1477), and 
Vitali Aurifici. There were a number of Turkish 
scholars of the sixteenth century who bore the sur- 
name “ Messini.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz, Z. G. passim; Bartolomeo e Giuseppe 
Laguimina, Codice Diplomatico det Guidei di Sicilia, passim. 
G. I. E. 
MESSING: Prussian family, members of which 
in the nineteenth century settled in the United 
States of America. 
Joseph Messing: Talmudist, exegete, and 
rabbi; born at Argenau, Prussia,,April 80, 1812; 


513 


died in London, Engiand, March 20, 1880. The 
only rabbinates he held were those of Gostyn and 
Witkowo, Posen. Messing was the author of: 
twelve homilies on Hanukkah (Breslau, 1862); 
“Gal Na‘ul” (1864), a commentary on Megillah, 
containing a prefatory notice by Sir Moses Monte- 
fiore; “Abne Shayish” (1868), a commentary on the 
tractate Abot; “Perush‘al Haggadah” (1869), a 
commentary on the Haggadah; and “Arono shel 
Yosef” (1876) on Bible exegesis. 

Three sons of Joseph Messing, who received their 
training under Guttmacher at Gritz, and Ottinger 
and Zunz at Berlin, were called to fill prominent 
pulpits in the United States. 

Aaron Messing: [Fldest son of Joseph Mes- 
sing; born 1848; rabbi at Mecklenburg (1859-67), 
New York (1867-70), San Francisco (1871-91). In 
1891 Messing was called to the rabbinate of B’nai 
Sholom Temple, Chicago, which he still (1904) occu- 
pies. He has founded not less than twelve congre- 
gations and twenty-three Sunday-schools in Nevada, 
Oregon, and California. Messing is the author of 
several popular Sabbath-school text-books, espe- 
cially “.A Hebrew Primer” and “The Jewish Cate- 
chism.” 

Mayer Messing: Second son of Joseph Mes- 
sing; born 1843. He is the oldest rabbi in continu- 
ous service With one congregation in the United 
States, having been minister to the Indianapolis 
Hebrew Congregation for thirty-seven years, since 
Oct. 21, 1867. 

Henry Messing: Third son of Joseph Messing; 
born March 10, 1848. He has been rabbi of the 
United Hebrew Congregation, St. Louis, Mo., since 
March 8, 1878. 

Abraham Joseph Messing: Youngest son of 
Aaron Messing; born Ang. 4, 1873, at Chicago, 
Ill.; was graduated from the Hebrew Union Col- 
lege in 1897, and has been rabbi of Temple Beth- 
Or, Montgomery, Ala., since Sept. 1, 1897. 
BIBLIOGRAPUY: Lippe. Bibliographisches Lexikon, pp. 319- 


321; Winter and Wiinsehe. Die Jitdiseche Litteratur, iii. 
824: American Jewish Year Book, 1908-4, pp. 81, 92. 


A, Ss. 


METALS: Although Deut. viii. 9 describes the 
Promised Land as one rich in ore, Palestine itself 
was really almost without metals, which had to be 
imported from neighboring countries. The passage 
in question is therefore taken by certain scholars to 
refer not to Palestine proper, but to Bashan, the 
present Hauran, whose rocks contain as much as 
20 per cent of iron—hence the name “ basalt.” Noth- 
ing is known of mining among the Hebrews them- 
selves (see MINES AND MINIn@); the description in 
Job xxviii, which shows a full knowledge of the 
technical process, probably refers to Egypt, which 
had engaged in mining on the Sinaitic Peninsula 
from earliest times. The existence of these mines 
in Sinai may account. for the fact that the Jerusalem 
Pentateuch Targum translates “the wilderness of 
Zin” (Num. xiii. 21; xxxiv. 3,4) by “mountain of 
iron.” Josephus (“B. J.” iv. 8,82; comp. Malala’s 
“Chronicle,” xviii. 182), however, places “the iron 
mountain ” in Trachonitis and not in the vicinity of 
Sinai (comp. Derenbourg in “R. E. J.” viii. 275). 
Another “mountain of iron” is mentioned (Suk. iii. 

VITE.—83 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Messiah 
Metals 





1); but this was in the vicinity of Jerusalem, and 
received its name not from its richness in iron, but 
from the fact that its rocks were hard asiron. Rob- 
inson (“ Researches,” i. 512) has shown that the 
country about the Red Sea is likewise entirely with- 
out iron deposits, 

The Hebrews were aware of the existence of gold 
at Havilah, Ophir, and Uphaz; and they obtained the 
precious metal from these districts either by means 

of their own ships, as under Solomon 
Sources of (I Kings ix. 28) and Jehoshaphat (2d. 
the Metals. xxii. 49), or through the markets of 

TYRE, where silver, iron, tin, and lead 
were brought (Ezek. xxvii. 12), probably by traders 
from Tarshish (7. xxxviii. 18). Tarshish is men- 
tioned as being under Tyrian dominion (Isa. xxiii. 
10); but its location and even the meaning of its 
name are still disputed points. The same doubt at- 
taches to two cities, Betah and Berothai, conquered 
by David, from which he “took exceeding much 
brass” CI Sam. viii. 8; in I Chron. xviii. 8 these 
citiesare Tibhath and Chun). Copper utensils came 
also from Javan (which here probably means Cy- 
prus), Tubal, and Meshech (Ezek. xxvii. 18). Ac- 
cording to the ideas of the time, the people of the 
last-named country lived in the far north; and the 
expression “iron from the north” occurs in Jer. xv. 
12. This iron seems to have been an especially good 
variety. The Rabbis mention the excellent Indian 
iron (‘Ab. Zarah 16a; Ab. R. N., Recension A, 
xxviii.) and the Indian swords (Tan., Wa’ethanan, 
6). Since the Oriental trade was chiefly in the 
hands of the Phenicians, the Israelites could thus 
become directly acquainted with the metals and had 
opportunity to obtain possession of them, 

A general name for “metal” does not occur in the 
Bible, but the following species are mentioned: gold, 
silver, copper, iron, tin, lead, antimony or stibium, 
and electrum. 

Gold (“ zahab,” connected with the root “zahab,” 
“toshine”): The various Biblical terms (see GoLD) 
employed to designate the color or the degree 
of purity of different varieties of the metal are in 
part identical with the terms used in the Talmud 
(Yer. Yoma iv. 41d; a little different in Yoma 44b) 
to characterize seven varieties: (1) good gold (with 
reference to Gen, ii. 12; comp. “good gold from 
Ophir”; Targum Sheni to Esth. 11. 1, ed. Lagarde, 
p. 227); (2) pure gold, ¢.e., such gold as can be put 
into the fire without losing weight (the golden lamp 
of the Tabernacle is said to have been put into the 
tire eighty times without losing weight); (3) fine gold 
(“zahab sagur”; comp. I Kings vi. 20); (4) “zahab 
mufaz,” which, according to one explanation, looks 
like burning brimstone, and according to another 
and probably more correct explanation is so called 
from the place in which it was found (Solomon’s 
throne was covered with this kind of gold: see T 
Kings x. 18); (5) unalloyed gold; (6) spun gold (“ za- 
hab shabut”), flexible as wax (the emperor Hadrian 
is said to have had a piece of the size of anegg; Dio- 
cletian, one as large asa Gordian denarius); (7) Par- 
vaim gold (II Chron. iii. 6), probably so called from 
an Arabian district. In the Babylonian Talmud 
gold of Ophir occupies the third place in the list; 
and “mufaz” gold is—apparently correctly—con- 


Metals 





nected with “paz” (comp, Cant, v. 15). The word 
occurs With the same meaning In the Talmud (Git. 
lib, 58a). If “ufaz” (Jer. x. 9: Dan. x. 5) is nota 
proper name, it is likewise probably connected with 
the same root. Some commentators, referring to 
Targum, Peshitta, and manuscripts of the Septua- 
gint, consider it to be corrupted from “ Ofir.” Almost 
all the names for gold here mentioned occur in I 
Kings x. Perhaps “eshkar” (Ps. lxxii. 10; Ezek. 
xxvii. 15) should also be connected with “sagur ”; in 
Assyrian “hurasu sakru ” means “ massive ” or “solid 
gold” (Delitzsch, “ Assyrisches Flandworterbuch,” p. 
499b); and “ sagur” and“ eshkar” may be synonymous 
(Cheyne, in “Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch.” 1899, xxi. 246; 
comp. Barth in “Programm des Berliner Rabbiner- 
seminars,” p. 32, Berlin, 1901). The Assyrian “ hura- 
su” explains the Hebrew “haruz” (Prov. viii. 10, 
xii. 27); the latter is used poctically for gold and 
really means “decided,” 7.¢., “declared a unit of 
value,” which gold had been fora longtime. More- 
over, the Greek ypvodo (= “ gold”) is said to come 
from the Hebrew (perhaps Phenician; see “R. E. J.” 
xvi. 276) word “ haruz” (Bochart, “ Hierozoicon,” ii. 
534; H. Lewy, “Die Semitischen Fremdwo6rter im 
Griechischen,” p. 59). Poetically “ketem” (Lam. 
iv. 1; Job xxviii. 19, xxxi, 24, etc.) is used, and ap- 
pears also in connection with “paz.” The expres- 
sion “bezer” occurs only twice (Job xxii. 24, 25), 
and is usually interpreted to mean “bars of gold.” 
The meaning “gold in rings” is also accepted for 
it (Hoffmann, in “ Zeitschrift fir Assyriologie,” 1887, 
p. 48). “Ophir”—that is, gold of Ophir—is its paral- 
lel; and the writer of the Book of Job (Job Lc.) says 
that both of these kinds of gold shall be as of no 
value to those who fear God. In the Talmud “ seeth- 
ing gold” is also mentioned (“ zahab roteah ”; Sanh. 
92b). See also Goup for Biblical passages. 

Silver (“kesef”): This metal derives its name 
from its pale color. The denominative “hiksif” 
means “ make pate” ( “kKasaf,” likethe Arabic “ kasaf,” 
= “desiderare ”), although in Job xxii. 25a compar- 
ison seems to be made between silver and something 
shining. The Greek apyipov (= Latin “argentum ”) 
likewise goes back to apyéc (“white”). “Kesef” 
was, in addition, a term for money in general 
among the Hebrews (see below), Silver has its 
veins (Job xxviii. 1). It is not found on the surface, 
nor in river-beds, like gold; but if must be taken 
with hard labor from the depths of the mountain. 
Strangely enough, the Septuagint translates “ka- 
sifya,” in Ezra viii. 17, according to the meaning of 
the root: év apyvpiov térw, “ place of silver,” that is, 
Ctesiphon. 

Copper (“nehoshet”): The Hebrews probably 
knew copper only in its natural state, and not as 
bronze, which is copper alloyed with tin, unless 
the copper ore was found mixed with tin. Accord- 
ing to one hypothesis, the Biblical-Hebraic “sefer ” 
means “ brass” or “ bronze” (“J.Q. R.” xv. 102). The 
term Nq173 (“ bronze”) occurs only in a late Jewish 
work (“Seder ha-Dorot,” s.v. 114, following “Shal- 
shelet ha-Kabbalah,” ed. Amsterdam, p. 8b), where 
the metals collected by David for the building of 
the sanctuary are enumerated (comp. Eusebius, 
“Preparatio Evangelica,” ix. 4). Bronze tablets 
are mentioned in I Mace. viii. 22; xiv. 18, 26; and 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


514 


in ANTLOCII tablets of the same metal informed the 
Jews of their rights. The altar was covered with 
copper, which did not melt, although fire was con- 
tinually burning upon it (Lev. R. vii.; Tan., Teru- 
mah, 11). A bropzeserpent (Num. xxi. 9; II Kings 
xvili, 4) is mentioned, and the proper name “ Ne- 
hushta” (II Kings xxiv. 8), the hyssop represented 
in bronze (Parah xii. 5), and shells of bronze (kéyy7; 
Yelammedenu, in “‘Aruk,” 8.0. °“931p) are note- 
worthy. See CopPer. 

Iron (“barzel,” “parzel”): The mountains of 
Palestine contained iron ore (Deut. viii. 9). Its 
vaiue was less than silver and more than stones (Isa. 
lx. 17). As was also the case in early times among 
the Greeks and Romans, iron was little used by the 
Hebrews; and it is mentioned only four times in the 
first four books of Moses (see Iron), Many under- 
stand the word “ paldah” (Nah. ii. 4) to mean “ steel.” 
a preparation of iron; but tbe correctness of this in- 
terpretation is uncertain. Iron can be broken in 
pieces with a hammer. In this it isa symbol of the 
Torah, which has numerous attributes and charac- 
teristics (Suk. 52a3 sce Tos. 25.). A teacher of the 
Law must be as hard as iron (Ta‘an. 4a). To forge 
and harden iron it must be put red-hot into cold 
water (Shab. 41a). Tron was heated on coal; and 
there are halakic regulations for doing this on the 
Sabbath (73. 130a). Iron as well as lead was used 
on the yokes of animals (Kelim xiv. 4, 5). The 
Rabbis were acquainted with the magnetic stone 
which attracts iron (Sotah 47a, “eben sho’ebet ”). 

Tin (“ bedil,” froma root meaning “to separate ”): 
The name itself indicates that the metal is not a pure 
one, but consists of parts separated from other 
metals, perhaps the lead in bars of silver (so De- 
litzsch on Isa, i. 25, where the word is used in the 
plural with “sigim”; Ibn Ezra rightly observes that 
no other names of metals occur in the plural); com- 
pare the Latin “stannum” (Pliny, “ Historia Natu- 
ralis,” xxxiv. 47); German, “werk”; and English, 
“alloy.” That “ bedil” denotes some particular metal 
is evident from passages like Num. xxxi. 22 and 
Ezek. xxii. 18, 20; xxvii. 12, where it is mentioned 
along with other metals; and according to the Sep- 
tuagint this metal was kaocirepo¢ = “tin,” a trans- 
lation which Luther has throughout his version. 
Among the Romans, until the fourth century, tin 
was called “plumbum album.” The Jews were 
probably acquainted with tin through the Phe- 
nicians, who brought it from their European colonies 
(from Britain |?j]; see Gutschmid, “ Kleine Schrift- 
en,” li. 55). The instrument used in summoning 
the people to synagogue in Babylonia was of tin 
(Pethahiah of Regensburg, p. 14, ed. London, 1856). 
Beautiful tin Seder platters are still in existence. 

Lead (“‘oferet”; Aramaic and Neo-Hebrew in 
Mishnah and Talmud, “abar,” “abra ”): Lead is men- 
tioned in Nuin. xxxi. 22; Ezek. xxii. 18, 20; also 
in Ezek. xxvii. 12, where it is referred to as an ex- 
port of Tarshish. Lead was obtained direct from 
the mines (Hul. 8a). Itis the symbol of weight (Ex. 
xv. 10). Tradition relates that the river-beds near 
Jerusalem were lined with lead (Letter of Aristeas, 
ed. Wendland, § 90; comp. “Seder ha-Dorot,” i. 115, 
Warsaw, 1891). White lead (Persian, “sapidag” 
[see “Z. D. M. G.” 1. 6, 43]; Syriac, “aspedka ”) oc- 


§15 





curs in the “ Halakot Gedolot” and clsewhere in the 
literature of the Geonim as “alsefidag” (see Ko- 
put, “ Aruch Compietum,” iv. 82). A wire of lead 
(* petilah shel abar”; Sanh. 02a) was used in killing 
those condemned to death by fire. The eaves of 
houses were made of lead (Mik. vi. 8). 

Antimony or Stibium (*“puk” = “eye-paint” 
(comp. “Z. D. M. G.” v. 286}; now called “Kuhl” 
in the Orient; hence the verb “Kahal” [Ezek. xxiii. 
40]; often mentioned in the Talmud and Midrash 
fe.g., Shab. viii. 3]): One spoke of “enlarging” the 
eyes With paint (Jer. iv. 30, R. V.) or of painting 
them (II Kings ix. 80). The meaning of Isa. liv. 
11 is disputed. According to Saadia, paint is 
meant here also; thus the meaning would be that 
the stones shine like women’s eyes. More modern 
scholars read “nofek.” Wisdom xiii, 14 interprets 
it to mean that on feast-days the faces of the gods 
were colored red with minium, 

Electrum: <A translation given by many for 
“hashmal ” (Ezek. i. 4, viii. 2); the English versions 
have AmBER. Bochart (“ Hierozoicon,” tit. 893) 
takes it to be the aurichalcum of the ancients. The 
Talmud has a haggadic interpretation for it (Hag. 
18a; comp. Munk in “Guide des Egarés,” il. 229). 
Omitting “hashmal” as not being the name of a met- 
al, Moses Cohen (on Ibn Ezra on Isa. i. 25) says that 
thereare seven kinds of metals mentioned in the Bible. 

A general name for metals, “matteket” (plural, 
‘mattakot ”; Kelim xiii. 7, xiv. 1; Hul. i. 6), from 

the roct “matak” = “natuk” (Targ. 

Metals in toI Kings vii. 16, 28), is first found in 

the Tal- the post-Biblical literature of the Jews. 

mud. Oa occurs in the Middle Ages (“R. 

E. J.” xiii. 88). Roman “metalla” in 

Spain are mentioned in T Mace. vil. 3. By way of 

punishment Jews were often exiled to Roman “ me- 

talla,” ¢.e., mines. A vather comprehensive word is 

‘singa (broken pieces of iron”: Jastrow, “ Diction- 

ary,” p. 266), from which ‘39993 (B. B. 89b: comp. 

“Halakot Gedolot,” ed. Hildesheimer, p. 421) would 

scem to mean “iron-monger.” Other names for 
metals which occur are the folowing: 

Argentum or Argentarium (Latin): Table-sil- 
ver; occurs often in the Midrash (Krauss, “ Lebn- 
worter,” ii. 126). A similar word is “chrysargy- 
rum,” a kind of money (see below). 

Arsenicon (Greek): A chemical element which 
occurs naturally together with sulfur and metals. 
In the Talmud (Hul. 88b), Syriac, and Arabic it is 
called “ zarnikh.” 

Asimon (Greek, do;uov): In Mishnah, Talmud, 
and Midrash, an unstamped (silver) coin (Krauss, 
Le. p. 86). The word may, however, be related to 
the Syriac “sema.” which means simply “silver” 
(Payne Smith, “ Thesaurus Syriacus,” p. 2494). By 
“asem” the Egyptians indicated a compound of 
gold and silver (Greek, 72exzpov); and the Septua- 
gint translates the Hebrew “ hashmal” (see above) 
similarly. 

From tannaitic times dates a regulation forbid- 
ding the making of weights out of “ba‘az” (see 
below), lead, tin («accizepoc), and other metals, be- 
cause they gradually wear away to the disadvan- 
tage of the buyer (Toser., B. B. v. 9 [ed. Zucker. 
mandel, p. 405]; B. B. 89b); in the text of the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Metals 





“Walakot Gedolot.” p. 421. SITHDSN also is found 
among the forbidden metals. Stili Immanuel Liw 
reads more correctly gepands (= * white lead”; see 
above) instead of S"55DxX noe. 

Ba‘az: This metal, mentioned above, is proba- 
bly a kind of tin Comp. Kelim xxx. 3; Targ. to 
Ezek, xxii. 18, and Targ. Yer. to Num. xxxi. 22). 
Ba‘az ranks above lead and xaccitepoc (Men. 28b). 
It is doubtful whether “abaza ” (Targum for “ bedil”) 
is related to it (see commentators on Kelim x. 2). 
Ba‘az was used for sealing documents (Targ. to Jer. 
XXxxii. 11, 14). 

Halkoma (Greek, yé?koua): Brass or copper; 
mentioned often in the Targum (Krauss, f.c. p. 299); 
especially bows of brass are mentioned (comp. the 
cognomen “ Halikopri” = yadxordpeog = “ithe man 
with a brazen face” (Krauss, l.c. p. 251). <A similar 
analogy was: “A scholar is firm as iron” (Ta‘an. 
da). | Corinthian brass, celebrated in antiquity 
(ny21Sp), is mentioned in the Talmud (Krauss, /.¢. 


p. 548), as well as by Josephus (“ Vita,” § 13). The 
Syrian translates Ezra viii. 27 similarly, X«e/xo 


AiSavov, in Rev. i, 15, ii. 18, can hardly mean any- 
thing else than “ brass of Lebanon.” 

Gruti (Greek, ypit7): Pieces of metal (Krauss, 
lc. p. 188), Perhaps the above-mentioned ‘9.73 
came from it (comp. yovTotaanc = “dealer in old 
iron,” in Wilcken, “ Ostraka,” i. 381). 

Hararah (Kelim xi. 3): Lumps of metal after 
casting, 

Karkemisha: An Aramaic word of unknown 
origin, occurring in the Targum (Targ. Yer. to 
Num. xxi. 22; Job xix. 24), and meaning “lead.” 

Milela (Ket. 67a): Gold ore as broken in the 
mine (Jastrow, é.¢, p. 798), 

Niska: A bar of gold or silver; occurs a dozen 
times in the Babylonian Talmud (Jastrow, é.c. p. 
917). According toJ. Halévy (in “M. Soc. Ling.” 
xi, 73), “niska” is Sanskrit, and means “ money- 
bag.” The Greek $a/o¢ also indicates “lumps” or 
“bars” (Krauss, d.c. p. 141; comp. the Greek pidpoc 
= Latin “ massa” in Blitmner, “ Technologie,” iv, 219). 

For sheet. metal there was likewise a term from 
the Greek, soon (zéradov; Krauss, l.c. p. 441), for 
which “tas” is used elsewhere. Still unworked 
pieces are called “ golemim ” (Kelim xii. 6). 

‘Eshet and ‘Ashashit: Especially frequent 
terms (Kohut, @.¢. vi. 281; Jastrow, ic. p. 1127), 
meaning “lumps” or “plates” or something similar 
(comp. Yoma 84b). Plates of iron were warmed 
(for the high priest); iron plates are spoken of also 
in ‘Ab. Zarah 16a. It is therefore natural to con- 
nect these words with the Biblical Hebrew “ ‘eshet ” 
(Ezek. xxvii. 19) = “hard iron”; since the idea 
“hard” seems certainly to be contained in it. In 
Men. 28b it is stated that the lamp of the sanctuary 
might be made of “‘eshet” as well as of gold; but 
“ “ashet” can not mean “ iron,” since it is classed above 
silver, unless indeed iron on account of its rarity 
was more valued than silver or even than gold. 
The metal must also have cast a reflection: for the 
lamp itself (“candela”) is called “‘ashasit.” The 
plates, whether of iron, silver, or gold, must, there- 
fore, have been highly polished, somewhat like the 
ancient mirrors. 

Obryzon (Greek, 68pvfov): Pure gold; a term oc- 


Metals 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


516 





curring once in the Targuin (Krauss, .¢. p. 14), and 
used alsoin Syriac and Arabic. Xpvodpyvpov, money 
called “ gold-silver,” occurs also in rabbinical wri- 
tings (IXrauss, f.c. p. 298). 

Paliza (Arabic, “falaz”;but see Fraenkel,é.c. p. 
158): A kind of bronze. Samuel (in the 3d cent.) 
bought a golden dish which was offered him as 
bronze (B. K. 118b). 

Stomoma (Latin, from the Greek orozwua; in 
Ber. 62b, NDYYN): A term meaning sometimes the 
tempering of iron, sometimes steel itself. The ex- 
pression is found also in Syriac, Mandzan, and Ara- 
bic; the genuine Arabic is “shaburkan” (Liéw, in 
Krauss, l.c. p. 120; according toa passage quoted 
there, tin was also so tempered. Concerning the 
method see Bliimner, J.c. iv. 348). Jiiger, Reiche- 
now, and Frenzel, in “Handbuch der Zoologie,” 
etc. (ii. 510, Breslau, 1880), state that the art of 
changing iron to steel was practised by the Jews. 

Sulfate of Iron: Used for ink; yéAKavfllog = 
“vitriol”; often mentioned by the Rabbis (Krauss, 
lc. p. 549). 

Marteka: Silver-slag (Git. 69b). 

For the working of metals the Hebrews had to 
rely wholly on the Phenicians, as the history of the 
building of Solomon’s Temple indicates. In Saul’s 

time the Hebrews bad armorers who 


Manufac- were very unpopular with the Philis- 
ture. tines (I Sam. xiii. 19, 20); and at the 


fall of Jerusalem smiths and lock- 
smiths (“haras” and “masger”; II Kings xxiv. 14) 
are mentioned. 

The tools used were: the hammer orax (“ pa‘am ”; 
Isa. xli. 7; comp. dxuou in Sirach [Ecclus.] xxxvili. 
: other tools are mentioned, 22. xxxvili. 18, x1 viii. 
; also “makkabah” in Isa. li. 1; “pattish,” 2d. 
xli. 7; and “halmut” in Judges v. 26); tongs (“mel- 
kahayim”; Isa. vi. 6); hatchet (“garzen”; Siloam 
inscription and Deut. xix. 5; this makes the word 
“barzel” in II Kings vi. 5 mean “tongs,” whereas 
it usually denotes only “iron”); bellows (“map- 
puah”; Jer. vi. 29; comp. Isa. liv. 6); fining-pot 
(“mazref”) for silver and a (melting) furnace 
(“kur”) for gold (Prov. xvii. 3), whence the desig- 
nation “furnace,” for Egypt (Deut. iv. 20; comp. 
Isa. x}vili. 10), is derived. A prophecy of Ezekiel’s 
(Ezek. xxii, 18-22) rests wholly on the technical 
process of metal-casting. 

In Talmudic times there was used the anvil 
(“saddan” = “block”; Gen. R. x.), the “base” 
(“tabhtit”; Kelim xvii. 17) for forging, which was 
beaten upon with a hammer. “To beat with the 
hammer” (“makah ba-pattish ”) is a very frequent 
ex pression in rabbinical literature. In the opinion of 
the Rabbis, tongs (“zebet ”)were created directly by 
God as the final act of creation (Ab. v. 6); compare 
the tongs (“ yattukin” and “ parakin” in Kelim xii. 
3) used in metal-casting. There were used also the 
spade (“kardom,” in Ps. Ixxiv. 5, 6; comp. Ab. iv. 
5), the shovel (“mara”=pdppovr), the ax (“hazina”), 
and the hammer (“kornos” = xéapvec). For grind- 
ing a peculiar tool was used (“mashhezet”; Kelim 
Xvii. 17; comp. “yahad” in Prov, xxvii. 17). Iron 
sledges (“masrekot shel barzel”; Ber. 61b; comp. 
Git. 57b) are mentioned as instruments of torture. 

The passage quoted from Ezekiel (xxii. 18-22) 


illustrates the manipulation of metals. The ore was 
gathered and thrown into the furnace, and the fire 
was blown to melt it (“natak,” substantive, “ hit- 
tuk”), 

To rid the cast of slag (“sig,” “sigim ”) the metal 
was refined again in the fire (“zaraf,” “zakak ”). 

To aid the process of melting, a kind 
Manipula- of soap (“ bar,” “barit” = “sal alkali,” 
tion. “potash”; see Luzzatto on Isa. i. 25) 
was thrown into the furnace. TIence 
a distinction was made between unrefined silver 
(“kesef sigim ” is probably the term; Ezek. xxii. 18) 
and refined silver (“kesef mezukkak” in J Chron. 
xxix. 4, or “zaruf” in Ps. xii. 7). After the metal 
had been purified it was tested (“bahan”). Smelters 
and gold-workers in general were called “refiners” 
(“zorefim”; Neh. iti. 82; comp. 7b. verse 31); there 
were also ironsmiths (“harashe barzel”; II Chron. 
xxiv. 12) and coppersmiths (“harash nehoshet”; I 
Kings vii. 14). Copper could be worked in various 
ways; there were shining copper (yellow bronze?; 
“nehoshet muzhab” in Ezra viii. 27), polished cop- 
per (“nchoshet kalal ” in Ezek. i.7; Dan. x. 6), and 
probably gilded copper also. 

Perhaps certain places in Palestine derived their 
names from the foundries existing therein, e.g., 
“Zarephat” (I Kings xvii. 9) and “ Misrephoth ” 
(Josh. xi. 8, xiii. 6), Malleable metals, such as gold, 
were mace into plates (ypn) from which were cut 
threads or wires (“kizzez petilim”; Ex. xxxix. 9). 
The important art of soldering was also known 
(“debek ”; Isa. xli. 7) At the time of Solomon 
there was a special place for casting (“yazak”; 
comp. “muzzak” in Job xi. 15). For the sanctuary 
“scoured ” copper (“morat”; I Kings vii. 45, 46) 
was used, while for the Tabernacle in the wilder- 
ness the metal was not cast, but hammered into 
shape (comp. “mikshah”). As the excavations at 
Mycene show, this process was known before cast- 
ing, and was in use even in prehistoric times. 
The Hebrews knew also how to make gold and sil- 
ver articles by incrustation (“zafah,” “hafah ”). 

Ornaments of gold and silver are frequently men- 
tioned in the Bible (see Costumr). The Hebrews 
had metal mirrors (“ mar’ot”; Ex, xxxviit. 8; comp. 

Blimner, J.¢. iv. 265). Several metal 
Ornaments, articles recorded in the Bible and 


— 
— 


Weapons, Mishnah are mentioned together in 
and Kelim xi. 8; ¢.g., weapons (helmet, 
Utensils. lance, xr, greaves, cuirass), Women’s 


ornaments (“ golden city,” z.e., a kind 
of crown with an image of Jerusalem), necklaces 
(“catelle ”), nose-rings, finger-rings with or without 
seals, metal threads, ete. Besides, there were the 
sword (“hereb,” “sayif ”), Knife, dagger (“pugio ”), 
sickle, scissors, hair-curlers(kaAAcypagoy), etc. (Kelim 
xiii. 1, 2). The mortar (“ maktesh”; Prov. xxvii. 22) 
was usually of copper, probably for sanitary rea- 
sons, because copper does not rust; the pestle (Bib- 
lical “‘eli”; Aramaic, “bukna”), of iron. The iron 
pestle breaks the copper mortar (“asita”; Niddah 
36b). Mention should also be made of: the hoe 
(“ mafselet ”), the cutting-knife (ouiay = Hebr. “sak- 
kin,” “magrefah”), the metal funnel (7pé6yx00¢ = 
“aparkas”; Kelim xiv., end), and the furnace and 
hearth of metal (7d. v. 11). From this last arises 


517 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Metals 





the expression “copper bottom” of the furnace 
(2b. viit. 3). 

The wealth of the Patriarchs in gold and silver is 
often emphasized (Gen. xili. 2, xxiv. 22). Accord- 
ing toa legend, Abraham built him- 
self a high iron tower (Soferiim 1x.). 
The Israelites took articles of silver 
and gold with them out of Egypt (Ex. xi. 2, xii. 
85); and the Midrash on this passage (Tan., Bo, 8) 
states that they melted the idols of the Egyptians 
into lumps of metal. For the golden calf and for 
the Tabernacle the precious metal was used in large 
quantities. Many fabulous storics are told of the 
wealth of Korah, as also of that of Joseph. David’s 
and Solomon’s wealth in gold has already been 
spoken of. Solomon’s throne was especially costly 
(I Kings x. 18). On the other hand, some of the 
later Jewish kings were so poor that they often used 
copper instead of gold. The copper pillars of Sol- 
omon’s Temple are said to have been taken to 
Rome; but those taken could have been only from 
Herod’s Temple. Benjamin of Tudela, who saw 
them in Rome, states that on the day of mourning 
for Jerusalem they wept and exuded sweat. More- 
over, the pillars of the Temple (IIerod’s) are de- 
scribed as of silver, gold, copper, tin (3°73), and iron 
(“Seder ha-Dorot,” ed. Warsaw, i. 92a). Antiochus 
IV. stole much gold and silver from the Second 
Temple (1 Mace. i. 21-24); and Herod the Great 
enriched himself by plundering the alleged graves 
of the kings (Josephus, “Ant.” vil. 15, § 3; xvi. 7, 
§ 1). All the gates of Herod’s Temple were of gold 
with the exception of the Nicanor Gate, the copper 
on Which, however, shone like gold (Mid. ii. 3). It 
is said that Nicanor had copper gates made in Alex- 
andria for the Temple, and that they reached Pules- 
tine only by a miracle (Yoma 88a; Yer. Yoma ii. 4). 
At the time of Herod, Menahem, the president of 
the Sanhedrin, brought eighty men iu golden breast- 
plates before the king (Hag. iti. 2). The Roman 
gencral Crassus took away a golden beam from the 
Temple of Jerusalem (Josephus, Z.c. xiv. 7, § 1). 
The cymbals in the Temple at Jerusalem deserve 
mention (Ps. cl. 5; Shek. v. 1,5y5y) as being made of 
metal. A golden grape-vine was placed on the gate 
of the Temple (Mid. iii. 8). 

The high priest John, ¢.e., King John Hyrcanus, 
did away with “the noise of hammering” in Jeru- 

salem (Ma‘as. Sh. v. 15; otherwise in- 

Miscella- terpreted in M. K. 11a). There are 

neous halakie regulations as to whether 
Conditions. neighbors were required to endure 
the noise of hammering (see “ Pa- 

had Yizhak,” s.v. 23M MgDIN). Founders or 
gold-workers figure in later times also (¢b. 8.7. 
AvsN). When the table service broke at the court 
of King Janneus it was replaced by the gold-work- 
ersin Jerusalem (2).). Women liked to wear golden 
ornaments; hence itis said that “goldsmiths have 
much to do with women” (Kid. 82a). R. Ishmael 
b. Elisha had a golden tooth made for a Jewish 
maiden (Tosef., Nedar, 66b). Earth instead of 
gold was put into the chest of Nahum of Gimzo. 
B. Joshua b. Hananiah was a maker of needles (Yer. 
Ber. 74: Yer, Ta‘an, 67d; see “*Aruk,” «7. Yom). 


History. 


The teachers witn the cognomen “ Nappaha” were | 


probably blacksmiths. The word “pattish” (= 
“hammer ”) occurs also as a proper name; in the 
Talmud it has asymbolical meaning. <At the time 
of Bar Kokba there were many Jewish smiths, and 
at Sichnim metal-workers were especially numer- 
ous (Gritz, “Gesch.” 8d ed., iv. 1386, 145). The 
workshops of the goldsmiths are mentioned in 
the time of the Mishnah (Tosef., Kelim, middle ex- 
tract, vii.10). At Jerusalem the gold-workers seem 
to have formed a separate gild (“zahabim ”; Toscef., 
Suk. iv. 6). The word “tarsiyyim” was formerly 
translated “ironsmith ” (Schtirer, “Gesch.” 8d ed., 
ii. 65, note 212). 

In the Middle Ages there were makers of metal 
implements (Abraham, “Jewish Life in the Middle 
Ages,” Index, London, 1896). It is interesting to 
note that Jews took part in the Bristol copper trade 
(t0.). The Jews engaged extensively in coinage 
also (see MinTERS). Strangely enough, the wri- 
tings on alchemy in the Middle Ages circulated 

under the name of Moses; the word 


In the 373 ‘% (Gen. xxxvi. 389), really a 
Middle proper noun, was explained to mean 
Ages. “the one who changes copper into 


gold” (ibn Ezra, ad lve.; comp. a 
work on 3m} % in Steinschneider, “Hebr. Uebers.” 
No. 577). Miriam, Moses’ sister, is said to have been 
the discoverer of the chemical known as bain-marie 
(see JEW. Encyc. i. 329, sc. ALCHEMY). <A Jew 
taught the English how to smelt copper (“ Tr. Jew. 
Hist. Soc. Eng.” iii. 12). In northern Africa the 
Jews were the only locksmiths, goldsmiths, metal- 
founders, and minters (see AFRiIcA). An Italian 
traveler of the sixteenth century relates that the 
greater number of Karaites in Jerusalem had fora 
long time been metal-founders (“ Jerusalem,” v. 86). 
From the very beginning Jews took an active part 
in the art of printing; and in some instances the 


Rabbis themselves cast the type for the printing of 


their own works (25. v. 286). Toward the end of 
the cighteenth century there were in Berlin many 
Jewish dic-sinkers and engravers (see “ Kaufmann 
Gedenkbuch,” pp. 629-653; comp. “ Mitteilungen 
... fir Jidische Volkskunde,” ix. 12 e¢ seqg.). The 
word “Ghetto” is said to have been derived from 

the Venetian mint, beside which the Jews lived. 
Just as on the occasion of the war with Midian 
the Bible established laws of cleanliness in regard to 
metals, so later in rabbinical literature 


Halakic metal vessels are discussed in their re- 
Bearing. lation to the Levitical laws of cleanli- 


ness. Metal vessels, whether flat or 
hollow, become unclean (vessels of other materials, 
if flat, do not become unclean): if they break they 
become clean; but when mended the earlier un- 
cleanness returns (Kelim xi. 1). Each metal dish 
which has a particular name may become unclean 
(Qh. 2). If clean iron is united with unclean iron, 
the larger constituent decides as to purity (2d. 4). 
All implements of war, all ornaments worn by 
women may become unclean in so far as they have 
a hollowed part, thus constituting a vessel (2d. 8). 
The rule that a firmly fitting cover protects from 
uncleanness does not apply to ba‘az (see above) and 
lead, because the cover only lies on top, but does 
not close the vessel hermetically (¢. x.2). If metal 


Metals 
Metatron 


vessels which have become unclean from contact 
with a corpse receive the purificative sprinkling, 
then break and are melted together and resprinkled, 
all on the same day, they, in the opinion of some, 
become clean (4. xiv. 7). But these rules become 
lost ina sea of details, and further information on 
the subject must be obtained from the codes (Mai- 
mouides, “ Yad,” etc.). See KELIM. 

In the only passage in the Bible in which an al- 
most complete list of the metals is given their order 

of value is as follows: gold, silver, 

Value of copper, iron, tin, and lead (Num. xxxi. 

Metals. 22). Generally, however, in the Bible, 

as also on the Egyptian monuments, 
silver is named before gold, to which metal it was 
preferred, owing to the greater difficulty in obtain- 
ing it. However, in estimating Solomon’s wealth, 
it is said of silver that “it was nothing accounted of,” 
Consequently, even at that early time gold must 
have been estimated at its true value (I Kings x. 21). 

From the Talmudic description of the lamp (Men. 
28b) the following classification of the metals ac- 
cording to their value results, beginning with the 
most precious: “‘eshet” (see above), gold, silver, 
ba‘az (see above), lead, tin (kasoizvepac). The spears 
of the Hasmonean kings were of iron plated 
with ba‘az (7b.); hence iron stood at the foot of 
the list, but only in regard to value. In respect to 
usefulness it stood high atnong the Jews. Among 
the Grecks and Romans tron isalways ranked above 
tin and lead (Bliimner, /.c. iv. 8). The coinage of 
Oriental peoples rests on a gold basis; that of the 
Phenicians and the Greeks ona silver one; that of 
the Romans on one of copper (73.). The Bible fixes 
silver as the medium of exchange (Levy, “Gesch. 
der Jiidischen Miinzen,” p. 8): so that in the matter 
of money, as in other things, the Hebrews were de- 
pendent on the Phenicians (comp. Schiirer, é.c. ii. 
53). Amishnah in this connection is instructive (B. 
M, iv. 1). It states which metal is to be regarded 
as acommodity, whichascoin. “Siiver buys gold 
(that is, as soon as the buyer has the gold coins— 
the commodity—iu his hands, he must pay for 
them with silver coins); gold, however, will not 
buy silver. Silver will buy copper; but not vice 
versa, Stamped money (“matbea‘”) will buy asi- 
mon; but not vice versa.” 

Among the figures of speech in the Bible in which 
metals occur, there is the elaborate symbolism of 
Dan. ii. and vii., where the kingdoms of the earth 
are compared to metals. This idea was thoroughly 
exploited throughout the Middle Ages (see Driver, 
“Daniel,” pp. 94-97, Cambridge, 1900); comp. Ex. 
R. xxxv. 5: “Gold is Babylon; silver is Media; 
copper is Greece; iron is not mentioned either at the 
time of the First or of the Second Temple, since it 
symbolizes Edom [Rome], which had destroyed the 
Temple; hence Edom can bring God no present in 
the Messianic kingdom.” Iron is thesymbol of war 
(Mek., Yitro; Tosef., B. K. vii. 6); the relation be- 
tween gold and copper altars should be judged ac- 
cordingly (Midr. Tadshe, xi.). A phallus was made 
of copper, or of gold (Ezek. xvi. 17; Isa. lvii. 8). 
According to Philo, who developed at length the 
symbolism of metals, gold denoted wisdom (ce¢ia; 
Philo, “De Leg. Alleg.” ed. Mangey, i. 25) or reason 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


518 








(idem, “De Vita Moysis” iii. 4); copper denoted 
perception (aic4yorc; 7b.). From chis Bahr (“Sym- 
bolik des Mosaischen Cultus,” i. 280) 

Symbolic tried in vain to prove the existence 

Meaning. of an claborate symbolism of metals 
among the Hebrews. Maimonides 
says of the Sabians that they associated a particular 
metal with each of the planets and made their statues 
to the latter of the appropriate metal (Chwolson, 
“Ssabier und Ssabismus,” ii. 658 e¢ seg.). In AL- 
CHEMY “moon” is equivalent to silver; “sun,” to 
gold, In the Midrash iron is the symbol of war 
(Mek., Yitro, 11; B. K. vii. 6). The golden altar in 
the sanctuary symbolized the soul; the copper one, 
the body (Midr. Tadshe, xi.). “ A scholar who is not 
hard as iron is no scholar” (Ta‘an. 4a); R. Sheshet 
was such a hard scholar (Men. 95b). A’ scholar 
appears to an idiot like a golden pitcher; if he has 
spoken to the idiot once he seems like a silver 
pitcher; and if he derives benefit from tiie fool he is 
only an earthen one (Shab. 52b). The strict ban was 
called “iron fate” (“‘ gizra de-farzela”; B. K. 81b). 

In sorcery and superstition the metals were im- 
portant agents. If any one was bitten by a mad 
dog le was to drink out of acopper tube for twelve 
months; in a severe case he was to use a golden 
one (Yoma 84a). Just as imprecations were usually 
written on leaden tablets in Rome (R. Wiinsch, 
“Sethianische Verfluchungstafeln aus Rom,” Leip- 
sic, 1898), so the Jews wrote, and still write, their 
AMULETS preferably on metal tablets. Coins or 
gold ornaments were put in the shoes or clothing of 
a bridegroom, with the idea that gold would take 
away the power of witchcraft (responsum quoted 
in Glassberg’s “ Zikron Berit la-Rishonim,” p. 149, 
Berlin, 1892). If copper, iron, tin, lead, or any other 
kind of metal is thrown into the fire and some of 
the pretended stone of wisdom is rubbed off and 
mixed with the metal, gold refined seven times will 
come out of the fire (“ Kerem Hemed,” ii. 48; Glass- 
berg, J.c. p. 204). Even to-day Jews give heed 
to the so-called “tekufah.” Water may be kept 
from becoming poisonous if it comes in contact 
with iron (8S. Landau, in “ Aruch,” p. 1665; Griin- 
baum, “Gesammelte Aufsitze zur Sprach- und 
Sagenkunde,” pp. 102, 144, Berlin, 1901; “R. E. J.” 
xli. 47). For sorcery with metals see also “Sefer 
Yuhasin,” ed. London, p. 284a. 

In Yemen to-day most people wear iron bands on 
their arms and feet and claim to feel strengthened 
thereby. The children wear around their necks a 
thick band of seven kinds of iron (“Eben Safir,” p. 
58b, Lyck, 1866). With this should be compared 
the metal amulets (“lamina”) representing the ser- 
pent of Moses, which a sect of Jews wore early in 
the common era (Philastrius, “ Hzres,”§ 21). In an 
apocryphal work ascribed to Ham, prescriptions 
on copper plates are spoken of (Fabricius, “ Codex 
Apocr. N. T.”i. 301). Indeed, Korah is said to have 
engaged in chemistry (Grinbaum, “ Neue Beitriige 
zur Semitischen Sprach- und Sagenkunde,” p. 171). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Wette, Lehrbuch der Hebriiisch - Jtuii- 

schen Archdologie, $8 105, 106, Leipsic, 1814; Roseniniiler, i- 

blische Alterthumskunde, iv. 1, 58; Movers, Phonizier, iii. 

1,27; Burton, The Gold Mines of Midian, London, 1878; Glo- 

bus, xxxv. 282; Kinzler, Biblisehe Naturgeschichte, 9th ed.: 


Bliimner, Technoiogie und Terminologie der Geiwerbe und 
Kiitnste bei Griechen und Rémern, vpl. iv., section 1, Leip- 


519 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Metals 
Metatron 





sic, 1886; Bahr, Symbolik des Mosaischen Cultus, i, 258-295, 

Heidelberg, 1837; E. Meyer, Gesch. des Alterthtums, i. 226; 

oe Das Altjiidische Zauberwesen, p. 157; Z. D. P. Vv. 

‘7 5. Kr. 

METATRON (Hebr. prod; Greek, Myzatep; 
Latin, “Metator”): Name of an angel found only in 
Jewish literature. Elisha b. Abuyah, seeing this 
angel in the heavens, believed there were “two 
powers” or divinities (Hag. 15a, above). When 
God wept over the destruction of the Temple, 
Metatron fell on his face and said: “I will weep; 
but weep not Thou.” God answered and said: “If 
thou wilt not suffer Mc to weep, I will go whither 
thou canst not come, and there will I lament” (Lam. 
R., Introduction, § 24; comp. Jer. xiii. 17). Metat- 
ron bears the Tetragrammaton; for Ex. xxiii. 21 
says, “My name is in him.” Yet he may not be 
worshiped; for the same passage says, “ Exchange 
Me not for him” (dialogue between a heretic and a 
Babylonian teacher, in Sanh. 388b, below; Targ. Yer. 
to Ex. xxiv. 1 has Michael instead of Metatron). 

Moses begs Metatron to intercede with God for 
him, that he may not die; but the angel answers: 
“It is useless; for I heard the words behind the veil, 
‘Thy prayer will not be answered’ ” (both editions 
of Tan., Wa’cthanan, 6). When God sorrowed for 
the death of Moses, Metatron fell down before Him 
and consoled Uim (Griinhut, “Likkutim,” v. 105a), 
and when Moses died, this angel with three others, 
“the princes of wisdom,” cared for him (Targ. Yer. to 
Deut. xxxiv. 6). The early commentators with good 
reason identified the prince of the world (Hul. 60a; 
Zeb. 16b; Sanh. 94a) with Metatron (Joél, “ Blicke in 
die Religionsgesch.” i. 124 e¢ seq.). God instructs 
children in the Torah during the last quarter of the 
day; Mctatron, during the first three-quarters (‘Ab. 
Zarah 8b). It was this angel who caused Shamhazai 
to say before the Flood, “ God will destroy the world” 
(Yalk. i, § 44). He is, moreover, Enoch, the great 
scribe (Targ. Yer. to Gen. v. 24; in Hag. 15a he is 
likewise represented as a scribe). 

These statements, found in the earlier sources, 
contain all the characteristic traits ascribed to Me- 
tatron in the later mystical works. The latter call 
him the “ prince of the presence” (Jel- 
linek, “B. H.” ii., pp. Xvi, 55 e¢ seq., v. 
171; “Responsen der Gaonen,” ed. 
Harkavy, No. 873, p. 872; comp. Isa. 
Ixtiil. 9), and “prince of the ministering angels” 
(Jelinek, Z.c. v. 172). He is the “mighty scribe” 
(7). ii. 68), the lord of all the heavenly hosts, of all 
treasures, and of sccrets (2). ii. 114, v. 174), and 
bears the lesser divine name (2d, ii. 61, 114, 117; v. 
175). The Zohar defines his nature exactly by de- 
claring that he is little lower than God (after Ps. 
viii. 6; Yalk. Hadash, 7, No. 51; comp. especially 
Jellinek, 7c. v. 174). Heis identical in all respects 
with Enoch; the “Hekalot” (5. v. 170-190), in 
which he is the chief personage, is called also “ The 
Book of Enoch” (comp. 7). ti., p. Xvi. and vi. 58: 
“Enoch whose name is Metatron ”). 

In the Apocrypha likewise Enoch appears as the 
heavenly scribe (Book of Jubilees, iv. 28; II Enoch 
lili. 2), although elsewhere he is called Michael 
(Ascensio Isaix, ix. 21), while, as noted above. Targ. 
Yer. to Ex. xviv. 1 substitutes the name of Michael 


In Later 
Records. 


for Metatron, which is found in the other sources. 
In the Hebrew writings Metatron fills the réle of 
Enoch in the Apocrypha in bearing 


Identical witnesstothesinsof mankind. Since 
with both sources represent him asa youth, 
Enoch. it may be assumed that the first ver- 


sions of the Hebrew mystical works, 
though they received their present form in the geonic 
period, originated in antiquity, so that the concep- 
tion of Metatron must likewise date from an early 
period. 

The views regarding the source of this conception 
differ widely. The name “Metatron,” which, as 
stated above, occurs only in Hebrew writings, is 
in itself striking. The derivation from the Latin 
“metator” (=“ guide”) is doubtless correct, for 
Enoch also is represented as a guide in the apocry- 
phal work which bears his name; and the Hebrew 
Book of Enoch, in which, however, reference to 
Metatron is constantly implied, says: “He is the 
most excellent of all the heavenly host, and the 
guide [Metatron] to all the treasuries of my {God]” 
(B. H. ii. 117). 

Mysticism prefers obscurity, and intentionally 
chooses a foreign word instead of the well-known 
nameof Enoch. Kohut identifies Metatron with the 
Zoroastrian Mithra; but probably only a few traits 
were borrowed from the latter. Sachs, Griinbaum, 
Weinstein, and others think that Mctatron is iden- 
tical with Philo’s Logos; but L. Cohn, the eminent 

Philonist, contradicts this view. M. 
Views as” Friedlander, on the other hand, takes 
to Origin. Metatron to be, both in name and in 
nature, none other than Horus, the 
“frontier guardian ” and “surveyor of the frontier ” 
of the early Gnostics. These divergent views clear- 
ly indicate that Metatron combines various traits 
derived from different systems of thought. Grun- 
wald (in “ Jahrb. fiir Jiidische Gesch. und Literatur,” 
1901, pp. 127 ef seg.) has yet another solution for 
the problem of Metatron. Theancients had already 
noticed that the numerical value of the letters in the 
word “Metatron” corresponded with those of the 
word “Shaddai” (= 3814), and “Metatron” is also 
said to mean “ palace” (“metatrion ”), and to be con- 
nected with the divine name D4py (“ place”), ete. 

In medieval mysticism Metatron plays the same 
réle as in antiquity and in the period of the Geonim 
(passages in Schwab, s.z.), thus furnishing a further 
proof of the tenacity and stability of mystic and 


superstitious conceptions. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: W. Bousset, Die Reliqion des Judenthums im 
Neutestamentlichen Zeitalter, pp. 247, 348, Berlin, 1903 ; But- 
tenwieser. in JEW. ENCYC. i. 677 et seq. (Metatron-Enoch); M. 
Friedlander, Der Vorchristliche Jiidische Gnosticismus, pp. 
102 et seq., Géttingen, 1898; M. Griinbaum, Gesammelte 
Aufsiitze zur Sprach- und Sagenkunde, pp. 74,124, 194, 
Berlin, 1901; M. Grunwald, Fin Altes Symbol in Neuer Be- 
leuchtung, in Jahrb. fiir Jidische Gesch. und Literatur, 
iv. 127, Berlin, 1901; idem, in Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft 
fiir Jidische Volkskunde, x. 138: Valk. Hadash, pp. 6b et 
sey., Nos. 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, 15. 16. 22, 23, 25, 68a; Nos. 43 et seq., 
8b: Nos. 59, 72; M. Joél, Blicke in clie Religionsgesch. 1, 124 
et seq.: L. Ginzberg, Jew. ENCYC. iii. 461b (Metatron-Enoch); 
A. Kohut, Jiidische Angelologie wut Deéimonologie, pp. 36 et 
seq., Leipsic, 1866; idem, in Magyar Zaido Szemle, 1884, i. 
94-100: M. Sachs, Beitriige zur Sprach- und Alterthums- 
forschang, i. 108, Berlin, 1852: M. Schwab, Vocabulaire de 
UAnyélologie, p. 170; Weinstein, Zur Genesis der Agada, 
part ii., Die Aleranudrinische Agada, Gottingen, 1901; comp. 
EL: oe in Monataschrift, xlvii. 89-96; Zunz, G. V. 2d ed., 
p. iia 
J. L. B. 


Metempsychosis 
Meturgeman 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


520 - 





METEMPSYCHOSIS. See TRANSMIGRATION 
OF SOULS. 

METER IN THE BIBLE: The question 
whether the poetical passages of the Old Testament 
show signs of regular rhythm or meter is yet un- 

solved; the question involves princi- 

State of the pally Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and most 

Question. of the prophetical books, with many 

songs and speeches contained in the 

historical books. The subject of strophic arrange- 

ment is not treated here, since it relates as much to 

the divisionsof thought as to those of metrical form 
(see PARALLELISM), 

No one can establish the metrical character of the 
whole of this literature, and no one can successfully 
deny thatit is metrical in part. The former of these 
statements will be generally accepted; for those 
who wish to find meter in the Old Testament are 
obliged to make many emendations of the text. As 
the second statement is often controverted, the ap- 
peal must be made to a trained and unprejudiced 
ear (not eye). The case might rest on a single 
Psaln, the 54th, which is as metrical throughout 
as some fantiliar English poems. The following 
translation of verse 3 imitates accurately the flow 
of the original: 

‘**O my God! by Thy name now redeem me, 
And by all Thine omnipotence free me.” 

The rime is unessential, though it is perfect in the 
Hebrew. The important matter is the regularity 
of movement, indicated by the symbol 3 -+ 8, 
which means that the verse consists of two equal 
stichoi separated by a cesura, each stichos hav- 
ing three tones. The movement may be termed 
either “rhythmical” or “metrical,” for the two are 
identical, as Sievers has shown (“Studien zur He- 
briiischen Metrik,” p. 25, Leipsic, 1901). It is just 
as erroneous to call such a Hebrew verse a hexameter 
as it would be to apply that term to its English 
equivalent; it is convenient to call cach tone-section 
afoot, but even that designation must be explained as 
referring to rhythm, not to syNabic division. That 
which gives these feet their metrical character is 
not the accent, which only marks, not makes, the 
rhythm; itis the flow of time, as measured in waves 

or pulse-beats recurring at regular in- 


Colloca- tervals. The time being equal, it mat- 
tions of ters not whether the syllabies in the 
Regular different feet are alike in number or 
Accent. not. In the example given they 


happen to correspond; each foot has 
the form xX X + except that the two riming feet 
are of the form x XK — &X. 
Every kind of foot in this psalm is frequently 
met with in English poetry; take, for example 
Ps. liv.3,4: KX X ~~, * X= XK, X —. (Comp. 
Tennyson: ‘* That he shouts witb his sister at play.’’) 
Ps. liv.8,4: ~x* KX, XX X —~. (Comp. 
* All in the valley of death.’’) 
There are but three more variations in the psalm: 
— xX, xX + X, 4, which all occur in two consecu- 
tive lines from Coleridge’s “Christabel ”: 
= eer = a ae 
**Is the night chilly and dark ?” 
Xx + x+-x- xk H+ 
“The night is chilly but not dark.” 


This same measure (8+ 38) holds in Psalms hv., 
Ixvii., and Ixxxiij,, and it is a curious coincidence 
that verse 5in each is extended to 3+38- 8 tones, 
while nearly all the other verses have 8-+3. 
Psalm c. begins with a single 3, hasa triple 3 in 
verses 3 and 4, and ends, as does Psalm Ixxxii., 
with a kind of Alexandrine. The remaining feet 
are 8-+3. <All these are short psalms, but several 
long ones are almost as strictly regular (e.g., Ps. 
Ixxx., Ixxxi., Ixxxv., xci.). Others follow prevail- 
ingly the scheme 4+ 4 (¢.g., Ps. xlvi., Hii.), and 
there are still other combinations, as 2+ 2, 34 2, 
and 4-++ 3. 

Outside the Psalms there are many poems and 
long sections either completely or measurably regu- 
lar, as Deut. xxxii., Ex. xv., Isa. xli. 1-10, and 
large portions of. the Book of Job. But the great 
majority of the Psalms are very irregular, and some 
of them defy all metrical rules (¢.g., Ps. xlv., lv., 
Ixiv., Ixxi., Ixxxvi., xcv., cii.). The common prac- 
tise is to be censured, which, by conjectural emenda- 
tion, alters the text in such cases to fit the assumed 
meter. Conjectures that approve themselves on 
critical grounds give, to be sure, one more sign of 
their correctness When they smooth rough meters; 
but no metrical system thus far proposed has proved 
satisfactory. An example or two may scrve to soften 
the apparent dogmatism of this judgment. One of 
the most elaborate metrical systems is that of Sie- 
vers (1901), who analyzes 93 poems. Of these, 20 
are psalms, but not a single rhythmically difficult 
psalm is included. Baethgen’s commentary on the 
Psalms (8d ed., 1904) attempts to give some met- 
rical account of each of the 150 Psalms. In the case 
of those noted above as difficult (and of many more) 
he frankly admits the difficulty, often confesses 
that it is insoluble, and in most other cases offers 
conjectures resting on an assumed regularity of the 
meter, Whereas the very question at issue is whether 
any such regularity can be shown. 

So far as the evidence extendsat present, it can only 
be asserted that the Hebrew poets were acquainted 
with meter, and employed it very freely, changing 
at will from one form to another, within the same 
composition, but making the substance of their 
thought so far paramount over its form that they 
were often unwilling to wait for a perfect rhyth- 
mica] expression. 

Metrical systems published before the nineteenth 
century are so mingled with subjective fancies that 
none of them is now worth considering; they were all 

patiently examined and thoroughly 


History refuted by J. L. Saalschiitz (“ Von der 
of the Form der IHebritischen Poesie,” Ké- 
Question. nigsberg, 1825). J.J. Bellermaun’s lit- 


tle book on the subject (“ Versuch tiber 
die Metrik der Eebriier,” Berlin, 1818) issound in prin- 
ciple, and its only important defects relate to the 
“more” (units of time) and the “sheva.” Saalschtitz 
corrected these defects, but erred in contending fora 
rhythm that descends (+ XX. +x, etc.) instead 
of one that ascends (x-—, kxX~, ete.). Ernst 
Meier (“Die Form der Hebriiischen Poesie,” Tii- 
bingen, 1853) returned to Bellermann, and reduced 
the matter to greater simplicity through his folk-lore 
studies. His contribution has beep unduly belittled, 


521 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Metempsychosis 
Meturgeman 





even by Kuenen; its chief mistake was in applying 
to all poetry what is true only of a part. Julius 
Ley (“Grundztige des Rhythmus in der Hebriiischen 
Poesie,” Halle, 1875) supplied that defect by a fun- 
damental investigation which gave a scicntific basis 
to the whole subject. His system was cumbersome 
at first (1866), but he improved it under the criti- 
cism of thirty-five years. Bickel] held the untenable 
theory that Hebrew meter is syllabic, like the Syriac, 
and is written uniformly in regular trochees or 
iambi. Hubert Grimme (“ Psalmenprobleme,” Frei- 
burg, 1902) built avowedly on Ley’s basis, but added 
a new doctrine of the more which is an improve- 
ment on the old, but which he has not been able to 
establish. In his earlier work he held correctly that 
the structure of the feet may vary in the same com- 
position; at present he holds the opposite theory 
and employs it freely in textual emendations. 
Sievers was the first to trace out thoroughly the 
relations of Hebrew metrics to general metrics. 
That part of his system possesses permanent value; 
but its practical application is marred by the at- 
tempt at an impossible simplicity and symmetry 
which derives every foot from the anuapest. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: In addition to works mentioned in the body of 
the article, Ewald, Die Diehter des Alten Bundes, part 1, 
Gottingen, 1835; Gustav Bickell, Carmina Veteris Desta- 
menti Metrice, Innsbruck, 1882; Kuenen, Hinleitwung, part 
3, Leipsic, 1894; Charles A. Briggs, The Study of Holy Scrip- 
ture, pp. 355-426, New York, 1899; Nivardus Sehlég], De Ale- 
triea Velerwm Hebreworum, Vienna, 1899; Eduard Konig, 
Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik, pp. 318-360, Leipsic. 1960. 

J WHC, 


METHODOLOGY. See TALMtp. 
METROLOGY. Sce WEIguTs AND MEASURES. 


METUENTES (lit. “fearing”): Term used in 
the Latin inscriptions by Juvenal for Jewish prose- 
Iytes. It corresponds to the Greek term ae3duevor 
tov Osev, which occurs in Josephus (“ Ant.” xiv. 72, 
ed. Niese) and in Acts x. 2, 22; xiii. 16, 26, 48. 50; 
xvi. 14; xvii. 4,17; xviii. 7, and to the [Hebrew 
“More Yuwu,” which, at an early date, likewise 
seems to have denoted proselytes (see II Kings 
xvii. 28, xxxii. 88). In the Psalms the expression 
is used for the whole body of pious persons outside 
the house of Israel (Ps. exv. 11, exviil. 4, exxxv. 
20; comp. Esth. ix. 27; Isa. lvi. 6), or perhaps for 
certain Gentiles who bad adopted some of the Jew- 
ish customs, notably the observance of the Sabbath 
and abstention from forbidden meat. Paul refers 
to such at Antioch, Thyatira, Thessalonica, and 
Athens. About the Black Sea a large number of 
inscriptions have been discovered relating to “ wor- 
Shipers of the Most High God” who were also of the 
same class, thongh possibly their Judaic practises 
Were not so pronounced as in the cases nearer Pal- 
estine (see HypsisTaARIAns), A mocking crucifix 
found on the Palatine Hill at Rome has the expres- 
Sion ZTEBETE OEON (see Jew. Enxcyc. ii. 222, 8.2, 
Ass-WonrsHip). Mek., Mishpatim explains Isa. lvi. 
6 as “those who fear Heaven.” Sce PROSELYTE. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sehtirer, Geseh. 2d ed., iti. 108-105; idem. Die 

Juden im Bosporanisehen Reiche, ete..in Sitzungsherichte 

der Berliner Akademie, 1897, pp. 200-225: Bernays, Die 

Gottesftirehtigen bei Juvenal, in Gesanunelte a 

g. eis 


METURGEMAN (“interpreter”): With the re- 
turn of the exiles from captivity the religious in- 


er 
OS a At LS 


struction of the people was put into the hands of 
the Levites (Neh. viii. 7-9; II Chron. xvii. 8, 9: 
xxxv. 8). These functionaries were called poy 3» 
(“teachers”). In all probability the language of in- 
struction was still Hebrew (Fricdinann, “ Onkelos,” 
p. 81. to the contrary). How long the Levites con- 
tinued in the oflice of teachers and how long the 
Hebrew language remained intelligible to the masses 
are unknown; but at a later time, when Aramaic had 
become the vernacular, and religious instruction had 
ceased to be the exclusive privilege of the priest- 
hood, the Levitic })319 (“teacher”) gave way to the 
lay pound (“tuterpreter,” “ translator”), called also 
wayn or oN. The official was paid probably by 
the community (comp. Pes. 50b; Rashi ad loc.), 
This seems, however, not to have been always the 
case, since the Halakah speaks also of a minor act- 
ing as meturgeman. 

The weekly lesson from the Pentateuch and the 
Prophets was read by a member of the congregation, 
and the meturgeman had to translate into the ver- 
nacular the Pentatcuchal lesson verse by verse; from 
the Prophets he translated three verses at a time. 
While the reader of the Hebrew text was forbidden 
to recite by heart, the meturgeman was not. per- 
mitted to read his translation froma book, or to look 
at the IIcbrew text when translating, in order that 
the people should not think that the translation was 
contained in the text. The meturgeman was also 
forbidden to raise his voice higher than that of the 
reader of the text. He did not limit himself to a 
mere literal translation, but dilated upon the Bib- 
lical contents, bringing in haggadic elements, ilns- 
trations from history, and references to topics of 
the day. This naturally required much time, to gain 
which the weekly lesson had to be short, so that 
the Pentateuch was finished only in a cycle of three 
or three aud one-half years; while the portion from 
the Prophets was frequently abbreviated. 

The free handling of the text, which frequently 
changed the translation into a sermon or homily, 
gave the meturgeman ample opportunity to f!ntro- 
duce his subjective views into the Jesson; and with 
the multiplication of sects this became distasteful to 
the Rabbis. The increase in the opposition to the 
meturgeman led to the fixation of the Targumim 
and to the demand that the meturgemau keep 
strictly to mere translation. Buta mere translation 
satisfied neither the public, who had Known the text 
from early school-days, nor the meturgeman, who 
was deprived of an opportunity to parade his knowl- 
edge and to display his oratorical gifts, Asa conse- 
quence the “darshan,” or preacher, was introduced ; 
and the literal translation fell gradually into disuse. 

While the meturgeman as Bible interpreter was a 
purely Palestinian institution, as interpreter of the 
Mishnah he was known also in Babylonia, where he 
was called AMoRA. Thehead of theacademy, wile 
seated, would tell him in Hebrew and in a low voice 
the outline of his lecture; and the meturgeman would 
in a lengthy popular discourse explain it in the ver- 
nacular to the andience. It is noteworthy that the 
meturgeman, whether explaining Bible or Mishnah, 
was not held in much esteem by the public; and in 
Talmud and Midrash he.is frequently referred to 
with contempt. See also Tareum. 


Metz 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


522 





BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Hiibsch, in Ben Chananja, v. 17 et seq.; A. 
Berliner, Targum Onkelos, ii. 73 et seq., Berlin, 1890; M. 
Friedmann, Onkelos, pp. 81 et seq. 


s. S. C. L. 


METZ: German fortified city in Lorraine; it has 
a population of 58,462, including 1,451 Jews. Ac- 
cording to ancient chronicles, Jews had settled in 
Metz in the year 221; they enjoyed municipal free- 
dom, and lived on very good terms with the Chris- 
tians. Itisstatedalso that when St. Eucaire, Bishop 
of Toul, had undertaken to convert the Jews, the 
emperor Julian, who was at Metz at the time, con- 
denned the bishop to prison for his untimely zeal. 
Under the Merovingians and Carlovingians there 
were Jews at Metz, engaged as agriculturists, mer- 
chants, artisans, and especially as goldsmiths and 
physicians, Jews and Christians formed intimate 
friendships; the clergy dined in the homes of the 
Jews, and more than one intermarriage 
Early resulted from this friendly intercourse. 
Conditions. The cordiality of these relations was 
increased by the etforts made by the 
Church councils to disturb it. At a council held at 
the monastery of St. Arnould at Metz May 1, 888, 
at which Balbodus, 
Archbishop of 
Tréves, presided, and 
which was attended 
by Dadou, Bishop of 
Verdun; Arnold, 
Bishop of Toul; and 
Robert, Bishop of 
Metz, on the com- 
plauint of the dean of 
the cathedral Jews 
were forbidden to 
drink or eat with, or 
to marry, Christians. 
These vexations 
lasted but a_ short 
time; under the sue- 
cessors of Charles the 
Bald, Jewsmightown 
real estate, and this 
would Jead to the 
supposition that they 
had other municipal 
rights. Bishop Adal- 
beron in 945 commanded David, a Jew of the dio- 
cese of Metz, to restore tothe monastery of St. Glos- 
sinde a vinevard of which he had secured possession. 
This Adalberon, who occupied the episcopal see 
until 984, was always very favorable to the Jews, 
who revered him. According to the chronicles, at 
his death “the Jews wept aloud; and mourned and 
lamented.” Some years later they showed similar 
feeling at the obsequies of another virtuous and tol- 
erant archbishop—Mattard. The dukes of Lorraine 
also took them under their protection and treated 
them with the greatest consideration. Thanks to 
this social peace, they devoted themselves to study, 
and among them were scholars called “the sages 
of Lorraine” (amd 19M); eclebrated rabbis, such 
as R. Simon ha-Gadol, R. Machir, Leontin, R. Eliezer 
(the author of the “Sefer Yere’im”), and especially 
Rabbenu Gershom Me’or ha-Gadol. 





Ancient Synagogue at Metz. 
(From Frauberger.) 


Persecutions, especially during the Crusades, scat- 
tered the Jews of Metz. Those who afterward re- 
turned found a refuge there, for which 


Period of they were obliged to pay thirty-four 
Persecu- deniers, levied on them when they en- 
tion. tered the city. Nevertheless, in 1865 


they were expelled by the magistrates, 
who assigned their presence as the cause of the 
destruction by lightning of twenty-two houses. In 
1567, after France had taken possession of Metz, 
some Jewish families were again admitted with the 
consent of the marshal of Vieilleville, and less than 

thirty years later they were organized 


Under intoacommunity. In 1595 they met 
French in generalassembly and elected a com- 
Rule. munal board, to which they delegated 


all power and all authority in every- 
thing concerning administration and police, and the 
jurisdiction of civil cases. Of the six men compo- 
sing this council the following three were rabbis: 
Isaac, son of Lazare Levy; Joseph Levy; and Solo- 
mon, son of Gershon Zay. The proceedings of this 


assembly, as well as those of the election, were sub- 
mitted for the approval of the higher authorities, 
who on July 12, 1595, 
PEE: “by the grace of God, 
es = and with the consent 


of his majesty, and 
of Monsieur, the 
Duke of Epergnan,” 
recognized those 
elected as the official 
representatives and 
the regularly ap- 
pointed intermedi- 
aries of the Jewish 
community of Metz. 

The community 
developed in = influ- 
ence and numbers; 
in 1614 it numbered 
500; in 1624 there 
were 120 families, 
consisting of more 
“ou la RiGee: than 600 individuals. 
ie ea The 





rabbi at that 
time was Moses 
Cohen of Prague. 


His nomination was confirmed by the Duke de Va- 
lette, peer and colonel-general of France and com- 
manding general of the king in the city and citadel 
of Metz, “to undertake the above-mentioned charge 
and functions of rabbi.” A fact that should %e no- 
ticed is that throughout the Middle Ages the nomi- 
nation of the rabbi required ratification by the state. 
In 1650 the rabbi was Moses Nerol; contrary to 
custom, and for some unknown reason, the council 
of the community did not ask the government to 
confirm his nomination. Louis XAILV., during his 
visit to Metz Sept. 25, 1657, visited the synagogue 
and gave andiencce to the council of the trustees of 
the community as well as tothe rabbi. The same 
day he signed Ietters patent for the privileges of the 
Jews, in which he warned them that in the future 
they would not be allowed to choose a rabbi with- 
out obtaining his consent. 


§23 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Ifetz 





As early as March 24, 1603, and Oct. 18, 1605, 
Heury IV. had granted the Jews letters patent, ac- 
cording to which he “took them under his protec- 
tion, and permitted them to trade according to their 
franchises, liberties, and ancient customs.” These 
letters patent were maintained, and the Jews’ privi- 
leges were even increased, by Louis XIII. (Jan. 24, 
1632), by Louis XTV., and by Louis XV. (July 9, 
1718). Louis XU. “rewarded them for their 
devotion and charity,” and granted them a new law 
to remove all difficulties between them and the in- 
habitants of the city, in consideration of the services 
they had rendered the garrison of Metz during the 
civil wars. The letters patent granted by Louis 
XIV. and Louis XV. were ratified and registered 
by the Parliament of Metz (Sept. 3, 1718). Those 


SNANONGN INS SVS AN NS Bh AN 


WONFY 
g 
WY WPifirow 


RamngonnnZ 

i 

+ é 

: WE 
4 


SARA EN AN 
=e 
ss = 


Nt 


Sway 


ww; Senge PAW 


4 ates 


| EK: 
SSAA 


Se yy’ 


Sk 


. pean ngangary i 
Z A 
A 





himself, Uri Cohen, already advanced in years, 
offered an cxample of patriotism by tendering his 
services for the defense of the city. It was he, 
also, who, after the victory of Valmy, set out at the 
head of the defenders of Thionville and, with Rol- 
ley, mayor of Metz, ied them before the Ark, where, 
in an enthusiastic speech, he extolled the bravery of 
the Jews and declared the country had the right to 
count upon the cooperation of all itscitizens. Dur- 
ing the Reign of Terror the synagogue was closed, 
the sacred utensils used in the services were put un- 
der seal, and the courtyard was used for a pasture; 
the tombstones were taken from the cemetery and 
used for building purposes. 

By the decrees of 1806 and of March 7, 1808, the 
Jewish creed was officially recognized, and in the 





INTERIOR OF AN OLD SYNAGOGUE AT METZ. 
(From Fraaberger.) 


of May 7, 1777, gave the Jews still greater liberties 
and spoke of them as citizens of the land. In 1782, 
when the Count of Provence, afterward Louis 
XVIII., went to Metz, he visited the synagogue, 
and the chief rabbi, Lion Asser (ARYEH LOEB BEN 
ASHER), in the name of the community, assured him 
of his homage and bestowed upon him the priestly 
benediction, This made a profound impression 
upon the count, and those about him were aston- 
ished to hear him praise the Jew. “Jew or Chris- 
tian,” he said, “what is the difference? I honor 
Virtue wherever it is found.” 

The French Revolution was greeted with enthu- 
Siasm by the Jews of Metz. In 1792 the chief rabbi 





creation of the seven consistories and grand rabbin- 
ates the district of Metz and the community of the 
city of Metz are mentioned. 
The first chief rabbi was Mayer Charleville, who 
was followed by Joseph Gougenheim, 
In Recent Wittersheim, Aaron Worms, Lyon 
Times. Lambert, and Lippmann. After the 
war of 1870 Lippmann, who was un- 
willing to surrender his allegiance to France, resigned 
his post. Ile was subsequently made chief rabbi 
at Lille. During this period Louis Morhange, for- 
merly professor at the rabbinical school in Metz, 
served aschief rabbi until the installation of Bigard. 
In 1885 the latter was succeeded by Isaac Weill, 


Metz 
Meyer 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


524 


a 


who in 1890 succeeded Arnold Aron as chief rabbi 
at Strasburg. His successors at Metz were Adolphe 
Ury and the present (1904) Incumbent, Nathan 
Netter. 

By the royal decree of 1824 the rabbinical school 
that was transferred to Paris in 1859 was established 
at Metz, The synagogue was erected in 1840 and 
dedicated in 1845, The community possesses com- 
munal schools, an infant school, a hospital, a maz- 
zih bakery, and numerous charitable societies, 
including a society of young people, which is recog- 
nized by the state and which gives aid without dis- 
tinction as to creed. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Cahen, Les Rabbins de Metz, in R. Bd. 

xii. 295; Schwab, Répertotre. 

D. A. U. 

METZ, ISAAC: Germanscholar; lived at Ham- 
burg in the first half of the nineteenth century. He 
compiled a catalogue, entitled “ Kehillat Dawid,” of 
David Oppenhcimer’s library (translated into Latin 
by Lazar Embden, Hamburg, 1826). To this cata- 
logue Jacob Goldenthal added an index (Leipsic, 
1845). Metz published also an edition of Judah ha- 
Levi's “Cuzari” (Hanover, 1836), based upon the 
Venice 1547 and 1594 editions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1752; Zeitlin, 

Bibl. Post-Mendels. pp. 238-239. 

Dd. S. MAN. 

METZLER-LOWY, PAULINE: Austrian 
contralto singer; born at Theresienstadt, Bohenua, 
Aug. 31, 1853. At the age of seven she entered the 
Prague Conservatorium, where she studied for four 
years. Graduating with honors, she immediately 
received anengagement at the theater in Altenburg. 
Her principal réles at this time were in Gluck’s 
“Orpheus,” Aleczene in “TL Trovatore,” and Navey 
in “Martha.” In 1875 she went to Leipsic at the 
invitation of Friedrich Hasse, then manager of the 
Stadttheater there, and after her début was at once 
permanently engaged. Here she remained for 
twelve years, singing with extraordinary success 
under three suceessive managers, Friedrich Hasse, 
Angelo Neumann, and Max Staegemann. She fre- 
quently appeared also at concerts and in oratorio at 
Hamburg, Bremen, Leipsic, Brunswick, and other 
cities, her appearance at the musical festival of the 
Allgemeiner Deutscher Mnusikverein in 1886 being 
especially memorable in this connection. 

Tn 1881 Pauline Léwy married the piano-teacher 
Ferdinand Metzler. Since her retirement from the 
operatic stage (June 12, 1887) she has devoted her- 
self principally to concert performances and later 
(from 1897) exclusively to vocal instruction. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bernhard Vogel, in Musikalisches Wochen- 
Diatt, pp. 468-470, Leipsic, 1888; Riemann, Wusili-Lerikon, 


8, J. So. 


MEXICO. Sce SovctTH AND CENTRAL AMERICA. 


MEYER, ADOLPH: American congressman; 
born at New Orleans, La., Oct. 19, 1842. He was 
a student at the University of Virginia when the 
Civil war broke out; and in 1862 he entered the 
Confederate army, serving until the close of the 
war on the staff of Brig.-Gen. John 8S. Williams of 
Kentucky, and holding finally the position of as- 
sistant adjutant-general. 


Aiter the war Meyer was largely engaged in the 
cultivation of sugar and cotton and in financial 
and commercial pursuits in New Orleans. In 1879 
he was clected colonel of the First Regiment of the 
Louisiana State National Guard, and in 1881 was 
appointed brigadier-general to command the First 
Brigade, embracing all the uniformed corps of the 
state. He was elected asa Democrat to represent 
the First District of Louisiana in the Fifty-second 
Congress, and successively reclected up to the (1904) 
Fifty-eighth Congress. Meyer served on the com. 
mittees on Naval Affairs and District of Columbia. 
He died March 8, 1908. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Biographical Congresstonal Directory, p- 
692, Washington, 1903. * 


MEYER, ALBERT: Danish tenor singer; born 
Oct. 29, 1839, at Sord, Zealand. In 1860 he sang in 
the chorus of the Royal Theater, Copenhagen, where 
he received instruction from H. Rung. He subse- 
quently appeared at several concerts, and had just 
received his first réle in “The Hunter’s Bride” 
(“ Jegerbruden ”) at the Royal Theater, when the 
war between Denmark and Germany broke out (1864) 
and he was called to serve in the army. Upon his 
return in 1865 he gave a concert which procured 
for him the means for a year’s stndy under Lam- 
perti in Milan. In 1866 he received an engagement 
at Folketheatret in Copenhagen, where he re- 
mained as a soloist until 1873, when he decided to de- 
vote his whole time to giving instruction in singing. 
He wrote “ Theoretisk-Praktisk Sangskole,” which 
presentsa theorctical-practical singing method based 
upon physiological studies of the human voice, and 
which appeared in Copenhagen, 1874, with a pref- 
ace by Professor Panum. After a visit. to the con- 
servatories in Berlin, Leipsic, Brussels, and Paris, 
Meyer opened in 1876a similar institution i Copen- 
hagen. 

Tn 1882 he was appointed conductor of the chorus 
of the Copenhagen Synagogue, for which he com- 
piled “Synagogekorets Melodier ved Sabbaths- 
cudstjenesten” (Copenhagen, 1892), melodies for 
use at the Sabbath services, among which are some 
compositions of his own. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon. 
™”~ 


a F.C. 


MEYER, ANNIE (née Nathan): American 
writer; born in New York city Feb. 19, 1867. She 
early revealed literary gifts, and articles from her 
pen appeared in “The Critic,” “Harper’s Bazar,” 
“Lippincott’s Magazine,” and “The Bookman.” 
The best-known of her shorter stories is “ Vorbei.” 
Some of her tales depict phases of Jewish life. 

In 1887 she married Dr. Alfred Meycr. Her first 
books were “Helen Brent, M.D.” and “My Park 
Book” (New York, 1899). Her most notable pro- 
duction is a novel, “Robert Annys, Poor Priest” 
(New York, 1901). She also edited “ Woman’s 
Work” (1898), the standard book on the subject, 

Mrs. Meyer has further distinguished herself as 
an organizer, public lecturer, and woman of affairs. 
She was chairman of the Committee on Literatures 
at the World’s Fair Congress at Chicago, and was 
at one time vice-president of an anti- woman suffrage 


525 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Metz 
Meyer 





movement. Her most valucd communal service was 
in connection with the founding of Barnard College 
—the first women’s college in New York. It was 
her energy that gathered together its promoters and 
secured the collection of funds for the first year. 
Sec also NATHAN, 

” M. IL H. 


MEYER, ARTHUR: French journalist; born 
at Havre 1846. When still a youth he went to Paris 
and bought and edited the “ Revue de Paris,” which, 
however, was soon discontinued. Fornearly twenty 
vears he reported for “Le Gaulois” and “Paris 
Journal,” becoming, in 1868, part owner of the 
former, Which he made the organ of the Bonapart- 
ists. When Prince Louis diced in 1879 Meyer left 
the “Gaulois” and bought the “ Paris Journal,” 
soon afterward “Le Gaulois,” and finally the 
“Clairon.” The three papers he then merged un- 
der the name of the “ Gaulois,” and made it the main 
organ of the Clerical-Monarchic party. Meyer was 
one of the most vehement adversaries of Captain 
Dreyfus. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Nouveau Larousse Illustré. 


s. F, T. H. 


MEYER, DAVID AMSEL: Danish financier; 
born in Copenhagen Jan, 18, 1753; died there Aug, 
80. 18138. Meyer started in business for himself at 
a very carly age, and during the period of general 
prosperity in the last decade of the cightecpth cen- 
tury his operations increased greatly, extending to 
transoceanic countries. On the deathof his brother, 
who had for some time been his partner, Meyer asso- 
ciated himself with his nephew 8. 8S. Trier, and 
founded the firm of Meyer & Trier, which occupied 
a prominent position in the world of finance. Sev- 
eral times the house had to face severe crises, as in 
1795, when a fire devastated Copenhagen, and in 
1799, when a general financial panic occurred. The 
firm, however, sustained no material injury to its 
commercial interests. 

In 1806 Meyer criticized the way in which the 
finanees of the country were being administered, 
and he especially denounced the reckless issue of 
unsecured paper currency. During the depression 
of the money market due to the Napoleonic wars, 
he was summoned by King Frederick VI. (1808), 
who consulted him on financial matters of state. 
Mever is said to have exercised a great deal of influ- 
ence on legislation in those days; and, in common 
With other unofficial advisers of the King, he had 
to bear his share of popular hatred, perhaps not un- 
mixed with envy. During a financial crisis in 1811 
Mever acted as the agent of the government in en- 
deavoring to avert pecuniary disaster. Enormous 
sums were placed at his disposal; and it was left to 
him to decide whether applicants for funds desired 
the money for legitimate business purposes or for 
speculation, and to grant or refuse the requests ac- 
cordingly. The Danish merchants did not long sub- 
mit to his arbitration, but sought other means of 
raising capital. 

During the latter part of the year 1811 Meyer re- 
tired from active business, and in 1812 his firm re- 
Ceived a letter of thanks from the king for its 
“arduous and self-sacrificing work in accordance 


with our will and desire.” At the same time he re- 

ceived the title of “ Hofraad.” 

Meyer left a fortune of 300,000 rigsbankdaler 
($150,000), of which sum he bequeathed 200,000 
kroner (330,000) to Jewish schools and charities in 
Copenhagen, while the remainder was distributed 
among various other educational and charitable 
institutions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nathanson, Hofraad David Amsel Meyer's 
Lernet, Copenhagen, 1816; C. F. Brieka, Dansk Biografisk 
Lexicon, 

8. | re Oe 

MEYER, EDVARD: Danish journalist and 
author; born Aug. 6, 1818, in Copenhagen: died 
there Aug. 4, 1880. He was the son of very poor 
parents and received little or no education during 
his boyhood, which he spent ina Jewish charitable 
institution. At the age of fourteen he was appren- 
ticed to a wood-turner in Kjége, and spent several 
years at this trade. In 1887 he established a weekly 
journal, the “ Kallundborg Ugeblad,” which in 1889 
was incorporated with another paper. In 1841 
Meyer returned to Copenhagen, where he started 
a humorous weekly, “Friskytten,” and later a sen- 
sational daily, “ Fly veposten,” which latter for some 
years yielded himan annual income of nearly 50,000 
Danish crowns. After many vicissitudes Meyer 
ended his days as he had begun them—in a Jewish 
charitable institution, 

Of his many writings may be mentioned: “ Poetisk 
Nysepulver” (Copenhagen, 1826); “Conversation ” 
(4), 1839), four pamphlets; “Danske Folkesange ” 
(td, 1839), Danish popular melodies; “Digte og 
Eventyr” (6, 1842), poems and fairy-tales. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Leritcon: 

Ersieu’s Forfatter-Lexicon, 

8. 1 ee, OF 

MEYER, ERNST: Danish genre painter; born 
May 11, 1797, at Altona, Sleswick-Holstein; died in 
Rome Feb. 1, 1861. He studied at the Academy of 
Arts and in Lorentzen’s Malerskole (“ painters’ 
school”) in Copenhagen, and became, in 1814, a pu- 
pil of the Modelskolen, where he was twice awarded 
a silver medal (1816 and 1818). One of his first 
paintings was “Gretchen Kneeling Before the Holy 
Virgin,” which was exhibited at the Academy of Arts 
in 1818 and which received much favorable comment. 

Meyer aspired to become a historical painter, but 
after an unsuccessful attempt he abandoned this 
branch of the art. He spent three years (1821-24) 
in Munich, and then went to Rome, where he met 
Thorwaldsen, the sculptor, who was the animating 
spirit of the circle of Danish artists there. 

Of Meyer’s paintings the following may be men- 
tioned: “Scene at a Well near a Capuchin Monas- 
tery,” 1827; “A Neapolitan Fisher Family ” (bought 
by Prince Christian Frederick), 1883; “A Fisher- 
man Observing the Wind” and “Parents Leading 
Their Son to the Cloister ” (painted between 1833 and 
1887), both of which are now in Thorwaldsen’s Mu- 
seum. His most famous painting was “Sailors 
Landing Travelers at Capri,” which was exhibited 
at the Copenhagen Academy of Arts in 1837 and 
became so popular that Meyer made several copies 
of it. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografsish re 
s _C. 


Meyer 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


526. 


SSS SSS SS SS SSS ae 


MEYER, FRIEDERICH CHRISTIAN: Jew- 
ish convert to Christianity ; born at Hamburg in the 
second half of the seventeenth century; died in Bel- 
cium about 1738. After having been baptized at 
Bremen, he became a missionary and traveled for 
thirty years. He was the author of the following 
works: (1) “Licht zu Erleuchten die Juden,” ex- 
alting the glory of Jesus (Leipsic, 1711); (2) “ Me’irat 
‘Enayim,” a pamphlet written in German, in which 
the author draws a parallel between Moses and 
Jesus, showing the supremacy of the latter (Amster- 
dam, 1718): (3) “ Der Abscheuliche Mord Christi,” in 
which he endeavors to demonstrate that the duration 
of the exile of the Jews can be attributed only to 
the crucifixion of Jesus (Hamburg, £719); (4) “ Vera 
Immanuelis Generatio,” written in Hebrew and de- 
monstrating the divinity of Jesus from the Proph- 
ets, especially from Isa. vii. 14. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sammlung von Alten und Neuen Theolo- 
gischen Sachen, 1728, p. 628; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. iii., No. 1897b. 

D. I. Br. 

MEYER, LEOPOLD: Danish physician; born 
in Copenhagen Nov. 1, 1852. After graduating 
from the university of that city (ML D. 1880) he went 
abroad to study obstetrics, and on lis return became 
privat-docent in gynecology at his alma mater. In 
1897 he was appointed professor of obstetrics and 
children’s diseases in the same university. 

Of Meyer’s writings the following may be men- 
tioned: “Det Normale Svangerskab, Fodsel, og 
Barselseng,” Copenhagen, 1882 (2d ed. 1891); “ Men- 
struationsprocessen og dens Sygelige Afvigelser,” 
7b, 1890; “Den Forste Barnepleje,” 20. 1891. Since 
1890 Mever has been associate editor of the “ Biblio- 
thek for Lreger,” the leading Danish medical journal. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Carée and Selmer, Den Danske Largestand ; 

Cc. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon. 

s. F. C. 

MEYER, LOUIS: Polish poet; born in the 
village of Sluzewo (Sluzhew), government of War- 
saw, Russian Poland, 1796; died March 25, 1869. He 
was sent in 1810 by his father to Berlin, where he pre- 
pared himself fora business career, at the same time 
manifesting an unusual talent for poetry. In 1816 
he returned to Poland, where he established him- 
self in business, but still found ample time to con- 
tinue his studies and to write German verse. In 
1861 he was elected member of the County Assem- 
bly, which, however, on account of the Polish insur- 
rection, did not convene. 

Meyer’s collected writings were published under 
the title “ Hinterlassene Deutsche Schriften eines Pol- 
nischen Juden,” Berlin, 1871. The book contains 
epic and dramatic poetry, pictures from Jewish life, 
and some aphorisms in prose. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hinterlassene Deutsche Schriften, ae 
Ht. R. 

MEYER, LUDWIG: German psychiatrist; 
born at Bielefeld Dec. 27, 1827; died at Géttingen 
Feb. 8, 1900. He studied medicine at the universi- 
tics of Bonn, Wiirzburg, and Berlin (M.D. 1852), 
and became assistant at the Charité Hospital in the 
last-named city. Later he held the post of physi- 
cian at the insane asylum in Schwetz, and was ap- 
pointed chief physician at the city hospital, Ham- 
burg, in 1856. In 1866 he became professor of 


psychiatry at the University of Gottingen, and 

director of the insane asylum connected with tls 

university, which positions he continued to hold 
until his death, 

Meyer founded with Griesinger in 1867 “Das 
Archiv fir Psychiatric.” Oe wrote more than one 
hundred essays for the medical journals. He wasan 
authority on psychiatry, and many hospitals have 
been built and furnished according to his sugges- 
tions and plans; among themare those of Hamburg, 
Gottingen, St. Urban, and Marburg. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lev.; Hirsch, Biog. Ler.; A. 
Cramer, in Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, Feb. 22, 
1890, p. 140. 

s. | em ta 

MEYER, LUDWIG BEATUS: Danish au- 
thor; born in Gandersheim, Brunswick, Jan. 3, 1780; 
died in Copenhagen July 28, 1854. From 1802 to 
1805 he lived in the latter city as a private teacher, 
beg subsequently appointed tutor in the family 
of Count Schimmelmann. In 1810 he became a nat- 
uralized citizen of Denmark, and entered the service 
of the government as chief of the bureau of the 
national debt. He resigned his appointment in 
1821, receiving the title of professor. 

Meyer now devoted his time exchisively to writing, 
his first work, “Haandbog i den Tyske Poetiske 
Literatur,” appearing in Copenhagen in 1828. [uy 
1837 he published a voluminous glossary of all for- 
eign words and phrases occurring in the Danish 
language. This lexicon, which was entitled “ Kort- 
fattet Lexicon over Fremmede, i det Danske Skrift-og 
Omgangssprog Forekommende Ord, Kunstudtryk, 
og Talemaader,” has, under the name of “Meyer’s 
Fremmedordbog,” become one of the leading author- 
ities among Danish lexicographical works, and has 
passed through several editions (Copenhagen, 1887, 
1841, 1899-1900). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salmonsen’s Store Itlustrerede Konversa.- 
tions-Lexicon, 

8. F.C. 

MEYER, MORITZ: German physician; born 
at Berlin Nov. 10, 1821; died there Oct. 30, 1893. 
After studying at the universities of Heidelberg, 
Halle, and Berlin (M.D. 1844), he settled in Berlin 
in 1845, where he practised until his death. Meyer 
was a specialist in diseases of the nerves and in the 
use of electricity in their treatment. During his re- 
scarches he invented the “ Meyersche Unterbrecher,” 
an instrument used in examining the reaction of 
muscles and nerves, He is the anthor of a well- 
known work entitled “ Die Electricitiit in Threr An- 
wendung auf Practische Medizin ” (Berlin, 1854; 4th 
ed. 1888). He furthermore wrote several articles on 
the paralysis induced by the constant use of snuff. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biographisches Lexikon. 


8. KF. T. H. 


MEYER, M. WILHELM: German astrono- 
mer; born at Brunswick Feb. 15, 1858. He first 
engaged in the book-trade, but soon gave it up and 
pursued astronomical studies at the universities and 
observatories at Géttingen, Leipsic, and Zurich. In 
1876 he established himself as privat-docent at Zu- 
rich; in 1877 he became a member of the staff of the 
observatory at Geneva, and in 1882 he lectured on as- 
tronomy at the Geneva University. In 1883 he re- 

4 


527 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meyer 


——_—— 








moved to Vienna, and thence to Berlin, where he be- 
came (1888) director of the “ Urania,” a society for the 
popularizin g of natural science, whose organ, “ Him- 
mel und Erde,” he has edited since 1889. Together 
with Schwalbe he edited Diesterweg’s “ Populiire 
Himmelskunde” (18th ed., Berlin, 1893). He has 
published: “Die Koénigin des Tages und Ihre Fa- 
milie” (Vienna, 1885); “Die Entstehung der Erde 
und des Irdischen” (Berlin, 1888); “ Mussestunden 
eines Naturfreundes ” (7. 1891), ete. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Meyers Konversations-Levikon. g 
MEYER, RACHEL: German authoress; born 
in Danzig March 11, 1806; died in Berlin Feb. 8, 
1874. A few years after the death of her sister 
Frederika, she married the latter’s husband. While 
devoting herself to charity and teaching, she found 
time to entertain noted men and to continue herown 
self-education, The publication of her first book, 
written while superintending the instruction of her 
children, was retarded by the death of a son. It ap- 
peared in Berlin in 1858 under the title “Zwei 
Schivestern”; it deals with the triumph of love over 
self and is an idealistic exposition of the marital 
relation. Her husband’s business necessitated his 
removing to Vienna; here Rachel met Kompert and 
August Frankl, and here she produced her sketch 
of Vienna life entitled “ Wider die Natur.” Another 
work, entitled “ Rachel” (Vienna, 1859), is a novel 
describing the life of the great actress Rachel. “In 
Banden Frei” (Berlin, 1869), her last novel, is a 
character study of her friend Lina Davidson. Rachel 
spent her last years in Berlin, with her daughters. 
Despite her idealism she was practical, and shortly 
before her death wrote a sketch of Stephenson, the 
inventor, with the express purpose of fostering in 
her nephew the practical spirit. 


ELS OGR SHINS Kayserling, Die Jtidischen Frauen, pp. 248- 
200. 
S. S. J. L. 


MEYER, SAMUEL: German rabbi; born in 
Hanover Feb. 26, 1819; died there July 5, 1882. 
He studied Talmud in his native city and at Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, and attended the University of 
Boun. In 1845 he was chosen successor to Nathan 
Adler as district rabbi of Hanover and Ltineburg. 
He carried out in 1847 the plan, already projected 
by Adler, of founding a teachers’ seminary in Han- 
over. Besides a few sermons he published “Gesch. 
des Wohlthiitigkeits-Vereins der Synagogen-Ge- 
meinde ITannover” (Hanover, 1862), and edited 
some unpublished poems of Abraham ibn Ezra, 
which he had discovered (“ Orient, Lit.” 1842). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinsclineider, Hebr. Bibl. vi. 32. 
s. M. K. 


MEYER, SARA (BARONIN VON GROTT- 
HUSZ): German authoress, and leader of a salon; 
born in Berlin in the latter half of the eighteenth 
century; died at Oranienburg Dec. 11, 1828. She 
wrote many stories, dramas, and political and moral 
essays in German and French, her French work being 
especially well received. Among her many friends 
were Goethe, Lessing, and Schiller. Most of their 
letters to her were accidentally burned, only twenty- 
one letters from Goethe, written in the years 1797- 


1815, being saved; these were published by Varn- 
hagen von Ense. 

Sara Meyer was light-minded, susceptible to flat- 
tery, conceited, and lacked moral stamina. After 
severing her first marriage-ties she was baptized and 
married Baron von Grotthusz. Her younger sister, 
Mariane, after the death of Prince Reuss, Austrian 
ambassador to the Prussian court, was found to be 
hislawful wite, She never bore the title of princess, 
but resided in Vienna as Frau von Eybenburg 
(from 1799). Like her sister, she was well educated, 
but wrote indifferently. She left in manuscript 
a number of sketches of well-known characters. 


a a: Kayserling, Die Jtidischen Frauen, pp. 216- 
Z19. 
s, S. J. 1. 


MEYER, VICTOR: German chemist: born in 
Berlin Sept. 8, 1848; died in Heidelberg in 1897. 
He was inclined toward literature and the stage, 
when a visit to his elder brother, then studying chem- 
istry at Ileidelberg, turned his thoughts into another 
channel, and he decided to become a chemist. He 
thoroughly prepared himself in mathematics and 
natural science in one of the gymnasiums of Berlin, 
spent one semester at the University of Berlin, and 
studied for some time with A. W. Hofmann. In 
1865 he entered the University of Heidelberg, in 
whose faculty there were such men as Helmholtz, 
Kirchhoff, and Bunsen, The Jast-uamed made him 
his private assistant. Tn 1868 he returned to Ber- 
lin to increase under Bayer his Knowledge of organic 
chemistry. 

When only twenty-three years old he was ap- 
pointed assistant professor at the Stuttgart Poly- 
technic School, and in 1872 was called to Zurich as 
the successor of Wislicenus. His brilliant work in 
Switzerland (1872-85), both in the laboratory and 
in the lecture-room, attracted students from many 
countries. 

In 1885 he received a call from the University of 
Gottingen, and spent three years in reorganizing 
the laboratories there. In 1889 he was invited to 
Teidelberg, his alma mater, to succeed Bunsen, The 
latter regarded him as the brightest and most prom- 
ising of the many eminent men who had studied 
under him, and it was his wish on his retirement 
that Meyer should be appointed as his successor. 

Meyer’s fame as a lecturer was world-wide; and 
his ingenuity and skill in devising and manipulating 
experiments, combined with his personal magnetism, 
attracted many hearers. Meyer's remarkable insight 
is illustrated by his discovery and studies of the 
thiophene group (1882). He discovered and (e- 
scribed the type of oximes (1882), investigated the 
nitro- (1872), nitroso-, isonitroso-, and iodo-com- 
pounds (1892), and studied the organic derivatives 
of ammonia, and with these the stereochemistry of 
nitrogen. He published his important researches 
on the esterification of the acids of the aromatic 
series (1894-95). 

Of great value are his investigations in physical 
chemistry, particularly those of vapor densities 
(1878-80) and the study of high temperatures. To- 
gether with Jacobson he wrote an excellent text- 
book on organic chemistry (“Lehrbuch der Orga- 
nischen Chemie,” 2 vols., Leipsic, 1891-95). Of his 


Mevyerbeer 
Meza 


THE JEWISH 


ENCYCLOPEDIA 


528 





other works may be mentioned: (with Langer) 

“Pyrochemische Untersuchungen,” Brunswick, 

1885; “ Die Thiophengruppe,” 7. 1888; “ Chemische 

Probleme der Gegenwart,” ITIcidelberg, 1890; 

“Kreebnisse und Zicle der Stereochemischen For- 

schung,” 1890; (with Treadwell) “Tabellen zur 

Qualitativen Analyse,” 3d ed., Berlin, 1891; “Aus 

Natur und Wissenschaft,” [cidelberg, 1892; “ Miirz- 

tage im Kanarischen Archipel,” 7b. 1893. 

Meyer's unceasing and confining work ultimately 
shattered his nervous system; and Ina fit of dejec- 
tion he took his own life. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Meyers Konversations-Lexiion ; Zeitschrift 
fiir Anorganische Chemie, xvi.3 Naturwissensciaftliche 
Runedschau, xii, Nos. 43. 4£; H. Goldschmidt, Zur Brin- 
nerung ait Victor Meyer, Heidelberg, 1897. 

8. J. G. L. 

MEYERBEER, GIACOMO: German com. 
poser; born at Berlin Sept. 5, 1791; died at Paris May 
2, 1864. Hisreal name was Jakob Liebmann Beer ; 
but he changed it when 
his grandfather promised 
to leave him his fortune 
on condition that the com- 
poser prefix the name 
“Meyer” to his patro- 
nymiec. He received his 
early instruction in music 
from Franz Lauska and 
Muzio Clementi, and at 
the age of seven made his 
début as a pianist in one 
of Patzig’s pupils’ con- 
certs (Oct. 14, 1800), play- 
ing the D Minor Con- 
certo by Mozart. He 
then studied theory under 
Zelter, and later under 
Bernard Anselm Weber, 
director of the Berlin 
Opera, with whom he re- 
mained until 1810, in 
which year he went to 
Darmstadt to study fortwo 
years under Abbé Vogler. 

In 1811 he wrote the 
oratorio “Gott und die Na- 
tur,” the score of which 
so pleased the Grand Duke 
of Hesse that he appointed Meyerbeer composer to 
the court. The first performance of the work took 
place May 8, 1811, at the Singakade- 
mie, Berlin. Two operas, “ Jephtha’s 
Geliibde” and “ Abimelek, oder die Bei- 
den Khalifen,” which Meyerbeer had 
written, were produced at the Royal Opera-rouse, 
Munich, in 1818. Soon afterward he gave a piano 
recital at Vienna, achieving a complete success. 

In 1815 Meyerbeer went to Venice in order to 
familiarize himself with Italian melody and vocali- 
zation. He now set to work writing in the Italian 
vein, and met with instantaneous success, his four 
operas composed at this time being received with 
immense enthusiasm. In 1823, while engaged on 
“Ti Crociato in Egitto,” the composer went to Ber- 
lin, where he unsuccessfully endeavored to arrange 
for a performance of his three-act opera “ Das Bran- 


Early 
Works. 





Giacomo Meyerbeer. 


| 
| 


denburger Thor.” Tn 1824 “Il Crociato” was pro- 
duced at Venice with very great success; and two 
years later Meyerbeer accepted an invitation to 
Paris to witness a performance of the same opera. 
Thenceforth he became wholly identified with the 
Freneh school of opera. On Nov, 21, 1881, his 
“Robert le Diable” was produced at the Grand 
Opera, Paris; and within a year the libretto had 
been translated into nearly every European lan- 
guage, and performances had been given in every 
important city. This opera was followed (Feb. 20, 
1836) by ~ Les Hugnenots,” an opera which was at 
first received with somewhat less favor than “ Robert 
le Diable,” but which ultimately came to be regarded 
as greatly its superior. 

After the production of “Les Huguenots” at Ber- 
lin, Meverbecr was called to that city by King Fred- 
erick William IV. as geueral musical director; and 
there he composed his opera “Das Feldlager in 
Schlesien,” which, lhow- 
ever, was not successfully 
produced until Jenny 
Lind, whom Meyerbeer 
had introduced to the Ber- 
lin public, assumed the 
role of Véelka. In _ the 
summer of 1846, at the 
request of the Princess 
of Prussia, Meyerbecrcom- 
posed the incidental music 
to the drama “Struensee,” 
written by his brother 
Michael Beer; and on Sept. 
19 following, this work, 
the music of which ranks 
among his best produc- 
tions, was performed at 
the Royal Theater, Berlin, 
After visits to Vienna and 
London in 1847, Meyer- 
beer returned to Berlin, 
where he produced Rich- 
ard Wagner’s “ Rienzi.” 
Two years later “ Le Pro- 
phéte,” the libretto of 
which had been completed 
by Scribe in 1842, was 
produced at the Grand 
Opera, Paris (April 16, 1849), and, like its prede- 
cessors, “Robert le Diable” and “ Les Huguenots,” 
soon made the circuit of the globe. 

Despite failing bealth Meyerbeer produced 
“L’Etoile du Nord” at the Opera Comique (1854), 
and four years later “Dinorah ou le Pardon de 
Ploermel.” Neither of these operas, however, met 
with the favorable reception accorded to Meyer- 
beer’s previous Parisian productions. In 1862 he 
represented German music at the opening of the 
London International Exhibition with his “Overture 
in the Form of a March.” Upon his 
return to Berlin he resumed his work 
upon * LD’ Africaine,” on which he had 
been engaged since 1838, For years 
the difficulty of getting a satisfactory cast had pre- 
vented the production of this opera; and several 
other circumstances hindered its performance dur- 

\ 


«T/A fri- 
caine.”’ 


§29 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Meyerbee:z 
Meza 





ing the composer's lifetime. In April, 1864, he re- 
turned for the last time to Paris, to superintend the 
preparatory rehearsals of this opera; but in the 
midst of his labors he died, and the opera was not 
produced until May 28, 1865. In accordance with 
Meyerbeer’s last wishes his body was taken to Ber- 
lin for burial; but imposing funeral obsequies were 
held in Paris also. 

Of Meverbeer’s compositions besides those already 
mentioned, the following deserve special notice: the 
monodrama “Thevelinden’s Liebe,” 
for soprano solo and chorus with clar- 
inet obligato, “ Romilda e Costanza” 
(1815); “ La Semiramide Riconosciuta ” 
(1819); “Emma di Resburgo ” (1819); “ Margherita 
d' Anjou” (1820); “ L’Esule di Granada” (1822); seven 
sacred cantatas of Klopstock, for quartet unaccom- 
panied ; choruses to Aischylus’ “ Eumenides” ; “ Der 
Genius der Musik am Grabe Beethoven’s,” for soli 
and chorus; “ Freundschaft,” for 4-part male chorus; 
Psalm xci., for eight voices, composed for the choir 
of the Berlin Cathedral; “ Fackeltiinze,” for brass or- 
chestra, composed for the weddings of the King of 
Bavaria (1846) and of the Princesses Charlotte (1850) 
and Anne (1858) of Bavaria; grand march for the 
Schiller Centenary Festival. 1859; Coronation March 
for King William I. (1863); aiso a large number 
of songs with pianoforte accompaniment, among 
which “Le Moine” (for bass) and “Das Fischer- 
miidchen ” are perhaps the most popular. 

Meverbeer received medals and other distinctions 
from almostevery civilized government. He stead- 
fastly adhered to Judaism throughout his life. He 
was ever ready to assist his fellow artists irrespect- 
ive of creed; and in his will he made provision for a 
similarly beneficent disposition of his wealth. He 
set aside, for instance, 10,000 thalers (the Meyer- 
beer-Stiftung), the interest of which he directed to 
be used in providing traveling fellowships for prom- 
ising students of music. 


Composi- 
tions. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hermann Mendel, Giacomo Meyerbeer, Ber- 
lin, N68; H. Blaze de Béry, Meverbeer, Sa Vie, Ses Ghuvres 
et Son Temps; M. Joél, Worte Gesprochen an der Bahre 
Meyerheers, Breslau, 1864; Grove, Dictionary of Musie and 
Musicians; Fétis, Biloyraphie Urviverselle des Musiciens. 


S, J. So. 


MEYSELS, BERISCH (BAER). 
SELS, Dos BErRtsir B. Isaac. 


MEYUHAS (pn): Oriental Jewish family 
Which gave several rabbinical writers to Jerusalem 
and Constantinople. 

Abraham ben Samuel Meyuhas: Rabbi in 
Turkey in the eighteenth century ; author of “Sedeh 
ha-Arez,” in three parts, the first two being homi- 
lies on the Pentateuch (Salonica, 1784-98) and the 
third containing responsa on the four parts of the 
Shulhan ‘Aruk, collectanea, and Talmudic annota- 
tions (Leghorn, 1788). In the preface Meynhas 
asserts that he wrote the following commentaries: 
“Digie Ahabah,” on Isaac Luria’s “ Derek ‘Ez ha- 
Havyim ” ; “Ha-Ma’or ha-Katon,” on Hay yim Vital’s 
““Ez Hayyiin”; “Siah ha-Sadeh,” on Isaac Luria’s 
“Sefer ha-Kawwanot.” First (“ Bibl. Jud.” ii. 847) 
ascribes to this Meyuhas the work entitled “ Bene 
Abraham,” responsa and homilies, and “ Kontres.” 


See MEI- 


| 


the responsa and homilies, however, are those of 
Abraham ben Judah Meyuhas; while the 
“ Kontres” was written by Nathan Meyuhas. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. dt, No. 302; 
Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. pp. 3386-537. 
M. SEL. 


Moses Mordecai Joseph Meyuhas: Son of 
Raphael Meyuhas ben Samuel; born 1788: died 
1806. He succeeded Yom-Tob al-Ghazi as chief rabbi 
of Jerusalem (1801-6). In 1799, on the approach of 
Bonaparte’s army, which already had taken Jaffa, 
Meyuhas assembled the Jews of Jerusalem and de- 
livered a@ patriotic speech, after which he seized a 
pickax and commenced to dig a trench, his corelig- 
ionists immediately following hisexample. He was 
the author of three Hebrew works: “Sha‘ar ha- 
Mayim,” notes on the Shulhan ‘Aruk, and responsa 
(Salonica, 1768); “ Birkot ha-Mayim,” novell, re- 
ligious laws, and responsa (¢. 1789); “Mayim 
Sha’al,” on the same subjects as the “Sha’ar ha- 
Mayim ” (2b. 1799). 

M. Fr. 

Raphael ben Samuel Meyuhas: Chief rabbi 
of Jerusalem and head of the yeshibah there; flour- 
ished about the middle of the eighteenth century. 
ste was the author of the following works, all pub- 
lished at Salonica: “ Minhat Bikkurim,” halakie and 
haggadic novell on several treatises of the Talmud 
(1752); “ Peri ha-Adamah,” novella on the four di- 
visions of Maimonides’ “Yad” (1752); ° Pene ha- 
Adamah,” homilies on the “parashiyyot” of the 
Pentateuch (1752); “ Mizbah Adamah,” novell on 
the four parts of the Shulhan ‘Aruk (177%). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii.,s.v. Mizbah 


Adamah;: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 347; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. 
Books Brit. Mus. p. 336. 
M. SEt. 


Samuel Hayyim Meyuhas: Chicf rabbi of 
Constantinople from 1836 to 1889; died some years 
after the latter date. He was the author of a vol- 
ume of responsa entitled “Shemen ha-Mishhah ” 
(Constantinople, 1840). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim; Hazan, Ha-Ma- 
‘alot li-Shelomoh ; Franco, Histoire des Israelites de VEm- 
pire Ottoman; Walden, Shem ha-Gedolim he-Hadash. 

J. M. Fr. 


MEZA (MESA): A family of Amsterdam distin- 
guished for the number of its members that filled 
rabbinic offices. 

Abraham Hayyim de Jacob de Solomon de 
Meza: Member of the Talmud Torah ‘Ez Hayyim 
in Amsterdam, and author of a sermon, delivered in 
Portuguese on the day of solemn devotion, “Sermao 
Moral . . . na Occasiio de Hum Dia Solemne de 
Oracdo ...em 4 Nisan 5307=15 Marco 1747,” 
Amsterdam, 1747, 

David de Abraham Hayyim de Jacob de Sol- 
omon de Meza: Sonof Abraham de Meza; died in 
Amsterdam after 1798. He published: “Sermao da 
Liberdade, Pregado na K. K.de Talmud Torah em 28. 
Yjar 5527,” Amsterdam, 1767; “ Sermao Moral, Preg. 

. em 8. Emor, 13 Yjar 5582,” 2b. 1767; “ Sermiao 
Moral Sobre o Pezo do Peccado, Preg. em 8. Qui 
Tetsé 9 Elul 5546,” 2d. 1786. Tle prepared also a 
new edition of “ Paraphrasis Caidayca en los Can 


Containing the laws of Gittin (Constantinople, 1773); | cares de Selomoh como Tambien los Apophthegmas 


VITT.—84. 


Meza 
Mezuzah 


de Aboth,” 7b. 1766. Several Hebrew songs of his 

are to be found in the collection of poems “Shir 

Emunim,” edited by Moses de Piza, 2b, 1793. 
David de Jacob de Meza: Son of the editor 

Jacob de Meza; member of the Talmud Torah * Ez 

Hayyim. Many of his responsa are contained in the 

compilation “ Peri ‘Ez Hayyim,” 20. 1741. 
Solomon de Isaac de Meza: Physician and 

hakam; born at Amsterdam; died there in 1742. 

He was a disciple of Solomon de Oliveyra and David 

de Pina, the latter of whom initiated him in the 

scicnce of medicine. He was a member of the rab- 
binate of the Spanish-Portuguese community in 

Amsterdam. 

Solomon Ayllon, David Mendes da Silva, and others, 

he signed the famous rabbinical decision in favor of 

the Shabbcthaian Nehemiah Hayyun (1711). A year 
after his death the catalogue of his library was pub- 
lished (Amsterdam, 1748). He wrote under the title 

“Sbulhan Shelomoh” an unimportant disquisition 

concerning the Sabbath-day’s journey from a vil- 

lage near Amsterdam (2), 1725). After his death 

appeared his “Meditagoens Sacras ou Sermoens 

Varios” (part i., 2b. 1764). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Bill. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 71; Car- 
moly, Histoire des Médecins Juifs, p. 226: D. Henriques de 
Castro, Catalogue de Vente, p. 118; Gratz, Gesch. x., p. xciii.; 

Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 5387. MOK 


MEZA, CHRISTIAN JACOB THEOPHI- 
LUS DE: Danish physician and author; born in 
Copenhagen Nov. 26, 1756; died there April 6, 1844. 
He was a son of the physician Christian de Meza, 
together with whom he embraced Christianity in 
1783. In the same year he graduated as M.D. from 
the University of Copenhagen, and became a mem- 
ber of the Royal Medical Society. From 1784 until 
his death he practised medicine in Elsinore. 

Meza published in the medical journals numerous 
essays, of which the following may be mentioned: 
“De Graviditate Mixta Observatio,” in “ Acta Regia 
Societatis Med. Hafniensis,” i. 442-450; “ Relatio 
Febris Tertians Intermittentis Epidemicee Anno 1784 
Grassantis,” in “Observationes Medico-Practice 
Quinque,” ii. 197-218; “En Sjeelden og Abnormal 
Tvillingfédsel,” in “ Bibliothek for Leger,” 1821, ix. 
41-43 (appeared afterward in “ Bulletin des Sciences 
Médicales,” Jan., 1880, and in “ American Journal of 
the Medical Sciences,” No. 12, 1880). 

Meza wrote also a drama, “Dormon og Vilhel- 
mine,” which was produced at the Royal Theater, 
Copenhagen, in 1796. 

Meza’s son, Christian Julius de Meza (1792- 
1865), was a general in command of a division of the 
Danish army during the war with Germany (1864). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon ; Er- 

slew’s Forfatter-Lexicon. 

G. F. C. 

MEZA, CHRISTIAN JULIUS FRE- 
DERIK (SOLOMON) DE: Danish physician; 
born in Amsterdam Sept. 4, 1727; died in Copen- 
hagen June, 1800. Meza, who was the son of a 
Portuguese rabbi, Abraham de Meza, studied medi- 
cine in Amsterdam, and later at the University of 
Utrecht (M.D. 1749). After further study in Ham- 
burg he went (1753) to Copenhagen, where he took 
up the practise of medicine. 


In conjunction with his colleagues 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


a ep A 


530 


In 1769 Meza published in French a treatise on 
hygiene entitled “De l’Education des Enfants tant 
Physique que Morale.” Another work of Meza’s, 
entitled “Tentamen Historiz Medicx ” (1795), was 
severely criticized in Germany. 

In 1772 he became a member of the newly founded 
medical socicty of Copenhagen. He was popu- 
larly called “ Jédedoktoren,” and was generally re- 
spected in Copenhagen, where he was for a long 
time the only Jewish physician. In 1783, after the 
death of his wife, Meza, together with a son and a 
daughter, embraced Christianity. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Dericon 3 
eos Joéodernes Stilling it Danmark, Copenhagen, 


= F. C. 


MEZEI, ERNEST: Hungarian deputy and 
journalist; born at Satoralja-Ujhely, Hungary, in 
May, 1851. He completed his school career partly 
in his native city and partly in Kaschau, and then 
took a course in law and philosophy at the Univer- 
sity of Budapest. While still a student. he entered 
upon a journalistic career, contributing leaders to 
the “Ellenér.” In 1874 he became one of the found- 
ers of the “ Egyetértés,” the representative organ of 
the extreme opposition, the so-called Independent 
party; and he has been on its editorial staff ever 
since. In 1878 he was nominated as deputy for the 
district of Gyoma, being warmly recommended by 
Louis Kossuth, but failed to seeure election. In 
1881 he was elected deputy for the city of Miskolez. 

During this period sprang up the celebrated 
TiszA-Esz_ar blood accusation, which gave rise to 
an intense anti-Semitic agitation. Mezei made the 
affair the basis of an interpellation addressed to ihe 
minister of justice, which called forth exciting scenes 
in the House of Deputies. During the considera- 
tion of the bill on mixed marriages between Chris- 
tians and Jews he made several pointed speeches 
agaiust the anti-Semites. 

Mezciis active also in the literary field, having pub- 
lished many scattered poems and sketches of travel, 
as wellas “ Olasz Bolyongasok ” (1877), a narrative of 
rambles through Italy. Occasionally he contrib- 
utes to the periodicals articles on current questions 
relating to the Jews. In a lecture entitled “ Zio- 
nismus als Nationale Idee,” delivered before the 
Hungarian Jewish Literary Society, he took a firm 
stand in opposition to the attempt to place over 
against the religious world-mission of Judaism a 
Jewish national propaganda. 

s G. W. 


MEZEI, MORITZ: Hungarian jurist and dep- 
uty; born at Satoralja-Ujhely Jan. 17, 1836. He 
studied law in Budapest, and even as a student took 
an active part in the efforts to restore the TTungarian 
constitution and emancipate the Hungarian Jews. 
He was the chief founder of the National Jud:co- 
Hungarian Society in 1861, and edited its journal, 
the “Izraelita Kozlény.” The spirit of [Tungarian 
nationalism which pervaded his writings caused 
him to be court-martialed by the governor, Count 
Moritz Palffy; but for a royal proclamation of 
amnesty issued on the occasion of the recovery of 
Queen Elizabeth he would have been condemned. 
He was obliged, however, to, resign his editorial 


ee ae 


come 


531 


ge ee ere ee ee 
position. In 1864, by the permission of the king, 
he began the practise of law at Budapest, al- 
though the legal profession had not hitherto been 
opened to the Jews. Three years later he was able 
to resume his journalistic advocacy of Jewish eman- 
cipation, and in 1868 was appointcd secretary of the 
congress convened by Baron Edtvés for the regula- 
tion of Hebrew communal affairs. In 1892 he was 
elected president of the organization which secured 
recognition of the Jewish religion in Hungary, and 
in 1893 he was elected to the Hungarian Parliament 
py the Jewish district of Budapest (Leopoldstadt). 
Mezei is also vice-president of the Hebrew congre- 
gational district 
of Budapest. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: 
Vv enetianer, A 
Zsidésday Szerve- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





Meza 
Mezuzah 





MEZUZAH (ani: lit. “door-post”): Name 
given to a rectangular piece of parchment inscribed 
with the passages Deut. vi. 4-9 and xi. 13-21, writ- 
ten in twenty-two lines according to the same rules 
as those for the Torah and tefillin. The parchment 
is rolled up and inserted in a wooden or metal case or 
tube. This is aflixed, ina slanting position, to the 
upper part of the right-hand door-post, so that the 
upper part is inward and the lower part outward, 
and about a handbreadth from the outer edge of the 
door-post. Onthe outer side of the top of the parch- 
ment is inscribed the name of God, ue; and an 
opening is left in the case opposite this word, 
which opening 
is protected by 
a picce of glass. 
The material on 


rete, p. $98; Pal- which the me- 
las Len. : ise zuzah may be 
= LV. canine a “yy aa ae “i written is as 
MEZEY, apie ewe os. mast) hs carefully pre- 


FRANZ: ILun- 
garian juristand 
author; born at 
Acsad Feb. 5, 
1860. His par- 
ents had destined 
him fora rabbin- 
ical career, but 
after reaching 
maturity and be- 
coming a thor- 
ough  ILIZebrew 
scholar, he took 
up the study of 
jurisprudence 
and was admit- 
ted to the bar 
at Budapest. As 
a writer and 
speaker his abil- 
ities were de- 
voted to the 
cause of Juda- 
ism even in his 
student days. 
In 1883 he was 
the mainstay of 
the defense in 
the Trsza - Esz- 
LAR altair as the representative of the Hungarian 
Jews, and for the past two decades, as secretary of the 
Jewish chancery (“Landeskanzlei”), he has been 
their chief source of inspiration toward advancement 
in religious and educational matters. He was one of 
the founders of the Hungarian Jewish Literary Soci- 
ety, and, with Wilhelm Bacher, edited its year-book ; 
from 1891 to 1895 he was coeditor of the “Mag- 
yar Zsid6 Szemle” with Ludwig Blau. He has also 
contributed to the * Nemzeti U jsag 7 and the “Jog: 
tudomany i Kozlony.” Mezey is (1904) secretary 
and attorney of the hebra kaddisha of Budapest, 
Which has attained, under his management, a mem- 
bership of 10,000. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Szinnyei, Magyar [rok. 


§. L. Y. 





Mezuzah Scroll. 


scribed as is that 
forascrollof the 
Law (Massek. 
Soferim i. 1: 
Asheri to Alfasi, 
“Sefer Torah ”; 
Shulhan ‘Aruk, 
Yoreh De‘ah, 
271; Yer. Megil- 
lah i. 9; Shab. 
102a; MS. Mezu- 
zah, ed. IXirch- 
heim, i. 1); but. 
while ascroll 
must always be 
written from a 
copy, the mezu- 
zah may be writ- 
ten from mem- 
ory (Men. 382b). 
Both selections 
mentionedabove 
must be con- 
tained therein; 
and if even one 
letter is missing 
the mezuzah 
may not be used 
(Men. 28a). Gen- 
erally the text is written in twenty-two lines 
equally spaced. The pious touch and kiss this 
part of the mezuzah as they pass through the 
door. The mezuzah is obligatory for every building 
used as a residence; and its fastening to the door- 
postis accompanied by the usual formula of benedie- 
tion: “ Blessed art. Thou our God, King of the world, 
who hast sanctified us by Thy commandments and 
hast commanded us to fasten the mezuzah.” On 
entering and leaving the house the pious touch the 
mezuzah (at “Shaddai”) with the hand, and recite 
the prayer: “May God keep my going out and my 
coming in from now on and ever more.” 

The mezuzah brings blessings to him that touches 
it: but it must not be touched with unclean hands. 
It is inspected from time to time to make sure of its 


peas S35 : 








yeezazab THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 532 
correctness. It may not be given to a non-Jew, | ness over His people (Ps. exxi. 7 et seg.), but alse 


lest it be not treated with due respect (see Men, tii. 
7%, 88b; Maimonides, “ Yad,” Tefillin, i1., v., vi; 
Yoreh De‘ah, 285-291). 

The obligation of the mezuzah is derived from the 
words: “And thou shalt write them on the door- 
posts of thy house and within thy gates.” The 
Rabbis considered the mezuzah of equal importance 

with the tefillin and zizit (len. 43b; 
Origin and Pes. 113b; comp. Shab. 23b, 32b). 
Signifi- The antiquity of the mezuzah is at- 
cance. tested by Josephus (¢. 87-100 ¢.E.), who 
speaks of its employment (“ Ant.” iv. 
8, § 13) as an old and well-established custom. In- 
scribed with passages of the Torah which emphasize 
the unity of God, His 
providence, and the 
resulting duty of man 
toward Ilim, the me- 
muzal is an emblen- 
atic representation of 
Israel's belief and 
practise. Thus  Jo- 
sephus says in speak- 
ing of the mezuzah 
(Z.c.): “The greatest 
benefits of God are 
to be written on the 
doors... in order 
that His benevolert 
providence may be 
made known every- 
where”; and Mai- 
monides adds 
(“Yad,” Tefillin, vt. 
13): “By the com- 
mandment of the me- 
zuzah man is re- 
minded, when com- 
ing or going, of the 
unity of God, and is 
aroused to the love 
of Him. He is awa- 
kened from his shum- 
ber and his vain 
worldly thoughts to 
the knowledge that 
nothing endures in 
eternity like the 
knowledge of the 
Rock of the World. 
This contemplation 
brings him back to 
himself and leads 
him on the right 
path.” 

In Taimudic times a protective power, especially 
in warding off evil spirits, was attributed to the 

mezuzah. This appears in such anec- 

Supersti- dotes as those of Artaban and Abba 
tious Con- Arika (see ARTABAN V.; comp. Yer. 

ception. Peah i. 1, 15d; Gen. R. xxxv. 3) and of 

Onkelos (‘Ab. Zarah 11a; comp. also 
Targ. to Cant. viii. 3; Men. 32b, 83b). In the Mid- 
dle Ages, under the influence of the Cabala, not only 
passages from the Bible treating of God's watchful- 


A Ay) t 


i ra m\\\ AN 


i PHIM i 
y (uy Lit “ Rt 
¥] NS Wy AN 
Ht, x iN \ 
am \ 
wn 





Wooden Case for Mezuzah. 
(In the possession of F, David, Cassel.) 


various names of angels were added to the orig- 
inal contents of the mezuzah. “yw was explained 
to represent the initials of (min) Mind cDiw 
Ses, after a cabalistic interpretation of Job xxii. 
17, 25 (comp. “Kol Bo,” 101, 4). At the bottom of 
the blank side the words )})3 1D3§93 Yd are written, 
which, according to 43°38, ¢.e., every letter stand- 
ing for the next preceding, reads: 7 WroN mit. 
Some, when leaving 
home on business bent, 
invoke God by the mys- 
terious words “ Kozo 
bemuksaz Kozo,” 
declaring that in His 
name they are about 
to go forth, and peti- 
tioning for success. 
Against the additions 
to the mezuzah Mai- 
monides raised his 
voice. He says 
(“ Yad,” Tefillin, v. 4): 
“There ig no harm in 
writing wy on the out- 
side; but those who 
write on the inside the 
names of angels, orf 
holy names, or verses, 
or other formula, are 
of those who will have 
no share in the future 
world. For these fools 
not only defeat in this 
manner the fulfilment 
of a great command- 
ment which has for its 
end the remembrance 
of the unity of God, 
and the love ef Him 
and worship of Him, 
but turn it into an 
amulet for their selfish 
interest, believing in 
their foolish hearts that 
it can be made to serve 
the preservationoftran- 
sitory worldly goods.” 
Maimonides’ view pre- 
vailed, and the addi- 
tions were eliminated. 
The Mohammedans likewise place over the doors 
and windows of their dwellings as well as of their 
shops the hame of God, or their profession of faith, 
or some maxim, or a verse of the Koran, or a short 
invocation (comp. Lane, “ Account of the aay 
ane Customs of the Modern Egyptians,” 3d ed., 
22, 820); anda similar custom seems to have ore 
vailed among the ancient Egyptians (comp. Wil- 
kinson, “Manners and Customs of the Ancient 
Egyptians,” 1878, i. 361; and Huetius, “ Demon- 
stratio Evangelica,” p. 58). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dassorius, De Rittbus Mezuze, in Ugolino. 
Thesaurus, Xxi.; Bodenschatz, Hirehliche Verfassung er 





Glass Cylinder Containing 
Mezuzah. 


Heutigen Juden, iv. 19-24; Leopold Low, Gesammelte 
Werke, il. 81-84. 
A. f IM. GC. 


533 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mezuzah 
ieah 





MHUSHILKAR, REUBEN EZEKIEL: 
Beni-Israel soldicr. He enlisted in the 19th Regi- 
ment Native Infantry Jan. 15, 1849, was made jem- 
idar Oct. 1, 1861, and promoted subahdar Jan. 1, 
1870. He was present at the battles of Multan, 
Gujarat, the Punjab (awarded medal and two 
clasps), Rajghur, Mungrowlee, Sindwah, and Kurai 
in central India (medal); served in Afghanistan from 
1878 to 1880 (medal and clasp); and retired March 
6, 1881. 

Ji J. Hy. 

MICAH (72°): 1. Prophet; author of the 
sixth book in the collection known as “ The Twelve 
Minor Prophets” (Mic. i. 1). The name of the 
prophet appears to be a shortened form of 7°55N, 
“Micaiah” (=“ Who is like Yuwn?”), and is so 
written in Jer, xxvi. 18 (comp. also Micam No. 2), 
The only data concerning Micah are those given in 
the superscription of the book bearing his name. He 
was a Morasthite; that is to say, a native of Moresh- 
ethgath (Mic. i. 14); and he prophesied in the days of 
Jotham, Ahaz, and Heze- 
kiah, kings of Judah—a 
period covering at the most 
fifty-nine years (756-697 
B.c.). Inthe above-cited 
passage of Jeremiah, how- 
ever, only the reign of 
Hezekiah is given as the 
period of Micah’s  ac- 
tivity. 

Pseudo-Epiphanius 
(* Opera,” ti. 245) makes 
Micah an Ephraimite. 
Confounding him with 
Micaiah, son of Imlah (I 
Kings xxii. 8 e¢ seg.), he 
states that Micah, for his 
inauspicious prophecy, 
was killed by order of 
Ahab through being 
thrown from a precipice, 
and was buried at Morathi 
(Maroth?; Mic. i. 12), near 
the cemetery of Enakim 
(Braxeiw, Septuagint rendering of 4343; j. 10), 
According to “Gelilot Erez Yisrael” Ane in 
“Seder ha-Dorot,” i. 118, Warsaw, 1889), Micah 
was buried in Chesil, a town in southern Judah 
(Josh, xv. 80). 

2. Biblical Data: A resident of Mount Ephraim 
wh», having stolen 1,100 pieces of silver from his 
mother, restored them to her on hearing her curses 
at the theft. The mother had dedicated the silver 
to Yuwt; and she accordingly gave 200 pieces to 
a founder, who made a molten image which was 
placed in Micah's house. Micah thus established a 
house of idols with an ephod and teraphim, and 
consecrated one of his sons to be his priest (Judges 
xvii. 1-5). In the course of time a young Levite 
named Jonathan, son of Gershon, happened to come 
to the house, and he was appointed by Micah as his | 
priest (4b. xvii. 7-18). The image, together with 
the priest, was captured by the Danites, who set it 
up at Dan, where it continued to be an object of 
Worship as long as the Tabernacle was at Shiloh (2d, 


| 





(are a a eae S ae aac 





Mezuzah Case. 
(After Picart.) 


Xviil.; see JoNatHAN No.1). In Judges xvii. 1, 4, 
the name “Micah” appears in the form 14"D"). 

8, M. SEL. 
Micah is identi- 
fied by the Rabbis with Sheba, son of Bichri, and 
with Nebat, the father of Jeroboam (Sanh. 101b). 
His name, derived by them from V2) on3, is inter- 
preted as meaning “the crushed one,” anappellation 
due toa miracle which happened to him. According 
to a haggadah, the Israelites, when unable to com- 
plete the. tale of bricks required from them by the 
Egyptians, were compelled to put their children in 
the brickwork in place of the bricks that were 
lacking. Moses withdrew one child (Micah), already 
crushed, and revived him; but, as God had foretold, 
he grew up to be an idolater (Tan., Yelammedenu, 
Ki Tissa; comp. Rashi to Sanh. d.c.). 

The Rabbis all agree that Micah was among those 
who crossed the Red Sea with Moses; but they dif- 
fer with regard to his idol. According to Sanh. 
1038b and Tan., Yelammedenu (/.¢.), Micah bad the 
idol with him; but aeccord- 
ing to Ex. R. (xii. 1) he 
took with him only the sil- 
ver of which the idol was 
afterward made, <A pas- 
sage in Pesahim (117a) 
scems to support the latter 
opinion, There is also a 
tradition that it was Micah 
who made the golden calf 
in the wilderness, and in 
the following manner: 
Moses, in order to bring 
Joseph’s coffin to the sur- 
face of the Nile, wrote ona 
splinter Ww by (= “Come 
up, ox”; Joseph being 
coinpared to an ox; sce 
Deut. xxxil. 17) and 
threw it into the water. 
Micah found the splinter, 
and, Jater, when Aaron 
cast the gold into the fire 
(Ex. xxxii. 24), threw the 
As a result a calf came out (Tan., 
see also JEw. Encye, iii. 509a, 





splinter after it. 
Yelammedenu, @.¢. ; 
sv. CALE, GOLDEN). 

Micah, though an idolater, was praised for his hos- 
pitality to travelers. Gareb, where his idol was set 
up, Was three miles distant from Shiloh, where the 
Tabernacle stood; and the smoke of the two altars 
mingled on account of their proximity. The angels 
wished to throw down the idol; but God said to 
them, “Leave it alone; for Micah offers bread to 
travelers.” Micah is even supposed to have a share 
in the future world (Sanh. 108b); it is for this rea- 
son that his name is twice written “ Micaiah” (see 
Mican No. 2, BrsiicaL Data), that is, with a part 
of the Tetragrammaton, like the names of the just 
(Num. R. x. 14). 

Ss. 8. M. Set. 
Critical View: The narrative of Micah’s idol, 
the historical basis of which is undoubted, was ap- 
parently written with the object of showing the 
origin of the temple of Dan (comp. I Kings xii. 29). 





Micah 
Michael 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


534 





At the same time it throws much light on the state 
of the YuHwi cult and of the Levites in the time of 
the Judges. The author expressly points out that 
Micah was a worshiper of YuHwu, for whose cult he 
had his private shrine with a regular priestly service. 
Although the laws of YuHwu forbade the erection of 
any shrine besides the one in the chosen place and 
the making of any image of Him (Ex. xx. 4 e¢ 
pussims Deut. xii. 5 e¢ seg.), Micah, evidently igno- 
rant ofthe Law, not only set up engraved and molten 
images representing the divinity he worshiped, but 
added other idols, the teraphim for instance. The 
narrative further shows that the Levites, being 
deprived of a share in the land, had to wander from 
place to place, accepting the office of family priest 
in order to procure a livelihood. 

The account itself presents many difficulties in 
regard to its construction. Besides several discrep- 
ancies in the text there are absolute contradictions. 
Thus in Judges xvii. 7 the Levite isa young man 
who lived in the neighborhood of Micah, while in 
the following verse he isa wandering Levite. There 
is also a discrepancy between verses 19 and 27 of ch. 
xvili. and between verses 80 and 381 of the same 
chapter concerning the duration of the cult of the 
idol at Dan. According to Oort, Wellhausen, and 
Knenen, the text has received many interpolations, 
with the object of throwing contempt upon the cult 
of Dan. On the other hand, Vatke (“ Alttestament- 
liche Theologie, ” 1835, p. 268) and Berthau, followed 
by other critics, recognize two parallel narratives 
united by a redactor. While there is some disagree- 
meut as to the component parts of the two versions, 
Budde’s division seems to be the most acceptable; 
he holds, namely, that the first narrative consists of 
Judges xvii. 1, 5, 8-ila, 12, beginning, 18; xviii. 1, 
part of 2, 8b, 4b-6, 8-10, part of 11, 12, part of 
13, 14, 16, 18a, 19-29, 31; and that the intervening 
verses form the second narrative. Budde is of opin- 
ion that the first narrative belongs to E; but he 
does not find sufficient grounds for ascribing the 
second to J. Moore thinks that the first version 
belongs to J. In the second version (2b. xviii, 30) 
the cult at Dan is indicated as having lasted ° till 
the day of the captivity of the land,” which is sup- 
posed by Moore to refer to the deportation by Tig- 
lath-pileser (784 B.c.). 

Besides the above-mentioned discrepancies certain 
points remain unsettled by the critics. Kimhi ex- 
plains the discrepancy between verses 3 and 4 of 
Judges xvil. by suggesting that the 200 shekels 
were an additional artisan’s fee, while the whole 
amount of the silver was used in the fabrication of 
the idol. Kuenen, however, thinks that the author 
intended to show that the mother broke her vow, and 
that Micah desired to throw contempt on the idol 
eult of Dan. Further, the critics do not explain 
precisely the name of Micah’s residence, nor the 
phenomenon of a Levite descended from Judah. 
Wellhausen’s opinion that the term "> means not a 
Levite, but one exercised in the cult of a divinity, is 
shown by the context to be an erroneous one. Ha- 
lévy’s theory is that the whole narrative belongs to 
one author, whose object was to show the origin of 
both temples, that of Beth-el and that of Dan, and 
who twice mentions Mount Ephraim, meaning 


thereby Beth-el (comp. Josh. xvi. 1). Thus 

Beth-el, having previously been the place of a pri- 

vate shrine which was subsequently transported to 

Dan, became, like Dan, the place of a public tem- 

ple. The Judah from whom the Levite was de- 

scended (Judges xvii. 7) was not the patriarch, but 

tlhe ancestor of a Levite family (comp. Neh. xii. 8; 

in Ezra ii. 40 AY May be an anagram of 71"). 

The residence of a Levite at Beth-lehem, which was 

not among the cities allotted to the Levites, shows 

that a temple of YuHwu with a Levitical service ex- 
isted there (comp. Judges xix, 18). The author 
points out that the Levite was of the tribe of Lev}, 
namely, a descendant of Moses, in whose name a sus- 
pended “nun” was interpolated by the Masorites 
out of respect for the lawgiver (see JoNATHAN No, 

1). With regard to the apparent discrepancy be- 

tween verses 30 and 31 of Judges xviit., the word 

PIN in verse 80 was corrected to ANA by Kim, 

then by Hiivernick, Hengstenberg, and Bleek, the 

passage thus reading “till the deportation of the 

Ark,” referring to the capture of the Ark in the bat- 

tle with the Philistines described in I Sam. iv. 4, 11. 

This renders possible a perfect agreement between 

the two verses. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Halévy, in R. WH. J. xxi. 207-217; Moore, 
Judges, pp. 366 et seq.; iden, Judges, notes to ch. xvii.-xviii., 
in Polychrome Bible, Eng. ed. 

g, M. Set. 
3. Son of Merib-baal (I Chron. viii. 84, 85; ix. 40, 

41) or Mephibosheth (11 Sam. ix. 12; A. V. “ Mi- 

eah”; R. V. “ Mica”), and grandson of Jonathan. 

4. Head of the Uzziel branch of the Kohathite Le- 

vites in the time of David (J Chron. xxiii. 20; 

xxiv. 24, 25). 5. A Reubenite; ancestor of the 

prince of that tribe, Beerah, whom Tiglath-pileser 

cartied into captivity (7b. v. 5-6). 6. Contempo- 
rary of Josiah, and father of Abdon, one of Josiah’s 
messengers to Huldah (IT Chron. xxxiv. 20). In 
the parallel account of If Kings xxii. 12 he is called 

“ Micaiah,” and his son’s name is given as “ Achbor.” 

7. A Levite of the family of Asaph whose descend- 

ants lived in Jerusalem (I Chron. ix. 15; Neh. xi. 

17, 22). 8. A Simeonite; father of Ozias, one of 

the rulers of Bethulia (Judith vi. 18). 

E.G. H. M. Sen. 


MICAH, BOOK OF,.— Biblical Data: The 
sixth book in the collection known as “The Twelve 
Minor Prophets”; it is ascribed to Micah the 
Morasthite (see Micatr No.1). It consists of seven 
chapters, the contents of which are as follows: Ch. 
i.: The idolatry of Samaria and Jerusalem are de- 
nounced; the prophet laments their fall and exhorts 
the people to mourning. Ch, ti.; Denunciation of 
oppression; prediction of the punishment of the 
people therefor; the restoration of Israel foretold. 
Ch. iti.: The prophet reproves first the princes for 
their cruelty, then the false prophets, who are the 
cause of all theevil. He again reproves the princes 
for their oppression, which, he says, will cause the 
ruin of Jerusalem. Ch. iv.: In poetical language 
the restoration of Jerusalem and of the glory of tlie 
house of the Lord and the victory of Israel over 
the other nations are foretold. Ch. v.: Prediction 
that a powerful king of Judah will vanquish the 
other nations, particularly Aslur, and will destroy 


535 





jdolatry. Ch. vi.: Israel is reproved for its sins, 
particularly its injustice; its punishment is prophe- 
sied. Ch, vii.: The lack of righteous men and the 
corruption of Israel are lamented; the prophet com- 
forts Israel, promising that it will be restored to its 
Jand and will triumph over its enemies. 

Critical View: With regard to the period of 
Micah’s activity, it has been remarked under Micau 
(No. 1) that there is a difference between the super- 
scription of the Book of Micah, where it is said that 
Micah began lis prophctical career in the days of 
Jotham, and Jer. xxvi. 18, where his prophecies are 
confined to Hezekiah’s reign. But a closer exami- 
nation of the prophecies themselves may lead to the 
acceptance of a period between the two; for it is 
evident from Mic. i. 2 ¢¢ seg. that Micah prophesied 
before the fall of Samaria, which, contrary to II 
Kings xviii. 10, took place under the reign of Ahaz, 
as may be inferred from a comparison between II 
Kings xvili. 13 and the cuneiform inscriptions (see 
HkEZEKIAH, CrivticAL VIEw), Hence it may be 
concluded that Micah prophesied as early as the 
reign of Ahaz; but nothing in his prophecies shows 
that they were pronounced earlier than that period. 
It docs not follow, however, that the above-cited 
passage of Jeremiah really conflicts with this view; 
for it may be that Hezekiah’s reign is mentioned 
alone either because it was more important than 
that of his predecessors or because the redaction of 
Micah’s prophecies possibly took place during the 
rule of that king. 

As the opening words of the book, “ Hear, all ye 
people!” are the same as those terminating the 
prophecy of Micaiah, the son of Imlah (I Kings xxii. 
28), ig may be that the latter was identified with 
Micah by the compiler of the Book of Kings, as he 
was later by pseudo-Epiphanius (sce Mrcanu No. 1). 
The termination of Micaiah’s prophecy with the 
identical words of the beginning of the Book of 
Micah seems to indicate in the former an allusion to 
the latter (comp. end of II Chron. with beginning 
of Ezra). Hengstenberg (“Christologie des Alten 
Testaments,” i. 475) and Keil (“ Lehrbuch der His- 
torisch-Kritischen Einleitung in die Schriften des 
Alten Testaments,” $$ 92, 98), however, suppose that 
the words of Micaiah in I Kings (/.c.) were added 
later, in the eighth century B.C. 

With regard to the division of the contents mod- 
ern critics do not agree. Some divide them into 
three parts, ch. i.-ii.; tii.-v.; vi.-vii.; others, into 
two main divisions: prophetic-political, ch. i.-v. ; 

and reflective, ch. vi.-vii. The ques- 

Contents tion arises whether the whole of the 
and Unity. book was written by Micah. It is 

generally accepted that the first three 
chapters, apart from ii. 12-18, belong to him. He 
begins with announcing the divine judgment upon 
Samaria and Judah (ch. i.), and then states the rea- 
son for that judgment (ii.-iii.). The two verses it, 
12-18 are considered by Stade and Kuenen as of the 
exilic, and by Wellliausen as of the post-exilic, period; 
and Micah’s authorship of them is denied by all the 
critics. Ch. iv.-v., which refer to the Messianic 
time, seem to have emanated from some other hand, 
for the following reasons: (1) the contrast of these 
chapters with iii. 12; (2) the nature of certain verses— 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Micah 
Michael 





for instance, “and thou shalt come to Babylon ” (iv. 
10)—shows clearly that they were not pronounced by 
Micah (comp. Hartmann, “Das Buch Micha Neu 
Ucbersetzt und Erklart,” 1800); (8) the ideas set 
forth in certain passages (eg., iv. 11-18, v. 9-18) 
were not current in the time of Micah. Ch. vi.-vii. 
6, representing Yuwu’s controversy with Israel, the 
denunciation of the corruption of the people, and 
the prophet’s lament over the decay of the Israclites, 
might from their contents proceed from Micah; but 
vii. 7 and the following verses are considered by 
most of the critics as spurious, inasmuch as the fall 
of Jerusalem, which is foretold in the preceding 
chapter, is here stated as having already taken place 
(comp. Driver, “Introduction,” pp. 310 ef seq.). 

Other theories concerning the composition of the 
book are advanced, among which that of Elhorst, 
in his “De Profetie van Micha” (1891), is the most 
peculiar, Ie thinks that, owing to a misunder- 
standing on the part of the transcriber, the arrange- 
ment of the chapters is a confused one, and that the 
true order should be: i.; ii. 1-5; iif. 1-5; ii, 6-11; 
ili, 6-11; ii, 12 e¢ seg.; iii, 12; vi. 1-5; vii. 1-6: vi. 
6-16; vil. 18, 7-12, 14-20; iv. 1-8: v. 1-7; iv. 9-14; 
v. 8-14. Tle admits, however, that iv, 9-14 and v. 
8 are post-exilic. This arrangement is plausible to 
a certain extent, but the loeation of fii. 12after ii. 
13 and of vii. 13 before vii. 7Zisimpossible. Finally, 
it may be remarked that the words of iv. 1-3 are 
identical with those of Isa. ii. 2-4, and that most 
probably they were interpolated later by the tran- 
scriber. 

Micah’s language is classical. With regard to 
rhetorical peculiarity he stands between Hosea and 
Isaiah, but nearer to the latter than to the former: 
for although, like the former, he is 
sometimes abrupt, he is similar to the 
latter in the mingling of mildness and 
strength, of gentleness and elevation. Another 
point of similarity between Micah and Isaiah is the 
frequent use of paronomasia (comp. Mic. i. 10-15, 
ii. 4), with the difference that Isaiah’s scope is 
greater than that of Micah, who in his prophecies 
lingers among the towns of the maritime plain, 
wherein was his birthplace. As to his message, 
Micah, like Isaiah, attacks the false proplicts (2d, iii. 
6-8; comp. Isa. xxix. 10 e¢ seq.), but he goes even fur- 
ther than Isaiah in warning against the overvalua- 
tion of sacrifices (Mic. vi. 6-8; comp. Isa. i. 11 et 
seq.),and in showing that the family of David must 
lose the throne before the most perfect scion will be 
born (Mic. v. 1 e¢ seg.; comp. Isa, xi. 1 et seg.). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Baudissin, Einleitung in die Bticher des 

Alten Testaments, 1901, sections 132 et seq.; Cornilt, Hin- 

leitunty, section 2, pp. 182 et seq.; Nowack, Erkidirung des 

Zublfprophetenhuches, in Handkommentar zum Auen 

Testament, 1897; G. A.Smith, The Twelve Minor Prophets, 

in The Expositor’s Bible. 

g, M. Sen. 

MICHA (x3°5): 1. Son of Mephibosheth (see 
Mican No. 3). 2. One of the Levites who sealed 
the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 11). 

K, G. H,. M. SEL. 


MICHAEL (559): One of the archangels 
(“one of the chief princes”; Dan. x. 13), who is also 
represented as the tutelary prince of Israel (7d. x. 21, 
xii. 1). The signitication of the name (= “ Who is 


Style. 


Michael 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


536 








like E]”%) was recognized by the Talmudists, who 
found an allusion to it in Ex. xv. 11 (A503 °9) and 
In Deut. xxxill 26 (OND }'N), combining the first 
word of the former passage with the second of the 
latter (Num. R. ii, 9) According to Simeon b. La- 
kish, however, the names of the angels were brought 
by the Jews from Babylon (Yer, R. H. 54d; Gen. R. 
xIviii. 9). Upon the basis of the above-cited pas- 
saves from the Book of Daniel (where Michacl is 
represented first as helping Daniel in his dispute 
with the angel of Persia and then as helping Israel 
in time of trouble—that is, in the Messianic time— 
and where he is styled “your prince”) Michael is 
specially designated in early Jewish writings and 
very frequently in the Book of Enoch as “the prince 
of Israel ” (Osa Opes o1w), and in later 
Jewish writings, particularly in caba- 
listic works, as “the advocate of the 
Jews.” It is for this reason that 
he is represented as the angel of forbearance and 
mercy (Enoch, xl. 8) who taught Enoch the mys- 
teries of clemency and justice (¢b, ]xxi. 2). 

Being the prince or advocate of Israel, Michael 
had to fight with the princes of the other nations 
(comp. Dan. x. 13) and particularly with Samael, 
Israel’s accuser.. Hisenmity with Samael dates from 
the time when the latter was thrown down from 
heaven. Samael took hold of the wings of Michael, 
whom he wished to bring down with him in his fall; 
but Michael was saved by God (Pirke R. El. xxvi.). 
The Rabbis declare that Michael entered upon his 
role of defender at the time of the Patriarchs. Thus, 
according to Eliezer b. Jacob, it was Michael who 
rescued Abrahain from the furnace into which he 
had been thrown by Nimrod (Gen. R. xliv. 16). 
It was Michael, the “one that had escaped ” (Gen. 
xiv. 18), who cold Abraham that Lot had been 
taken captive (Pirke R. El. Z.c.), and who pro- 
tected Sarah from being defiled by Abimelech 
(74,). He announced to Sarah that she would 
bear a son (comp. Gen. xviii. 10); and he rescued 
Lot at the destruction of Sodom (B. M. 86b; 
comp. Gen. R. 1. 2). Michael prevented Isaac from 
being sacrificed by his father by substituting a ram 
in his place (“ Yalk. Reubeni,” section “ Wayera ”), 
and saved Jacob, while yet in his mother’s womb, 
from being killed by Samael (Midr. Abkir, in Yalk., 
Gen. 110). Later Michael prevented Laban from 
harming Jacob (Pirke R. El. xxxvi.). It was 
Michael, too, who wrestled with Jacob and who 
afterward blessed him (Targ. pseudo-Jonathan to 

Gen. xxxil. 25; Pirke R. El. xxxvii.). 


Israel’s 
Advocate. 


Wrestles The Midrash Abkir (7.c. 182) thus 
with graphically describes the scene of the 
Jacob. wrestling: “At the break of day 


companies of angels came, saying, 
‘Michael, the hour of singing in praise of the Lord 
has arrived.” Michael began to implore Jacob to 
cease wrestling, saying he was afraid the angels 
might burn him (Michael) for omitting to take 
part in the heavenly chorus. When Michael finally 
struck Jacob’s thigh he was blamed by God for 
having caused a blemish in God’s priest. Michael 
applied to his companion Raphael, who healed 
Jacob's wound. Then God appointed Michael to be 
the defender of Israel” (comp. “David,” No. 18, 


“Yalk. Hadash,” where it is said that Michael's 
appointment took place when Solomon had built the 
Temple). Michael saved Asenath, daughter of 
Shechem by Dinah, from being killed by Jacob’s 
sons (Pirke R. EL. xxxviiil.), and Tamar from being 
burned (Targ. pseudo-Jonathan and Targ. Yer. to 
Gen. xxxviii. 25). 

Michael exercised his function of advocate of 
Israel at the time of the Exodus also, when Satan ac- 
cused the Israelites of idolatry and declared that 
they were consequently deserving of death by 
drowning in the Red Sea (Ex. BR. xviii. 5)... But ac- 
cording to Midr, Abkir (Yalk., Ex. 241), when ‘Uzza, 
the tutelar angel of Egypt, summoned Michael to 
plead before God, Michael remained silent, and it was 
God Himself who defended Israel. Michael led the 
Israelites during their forty years’ wandering in the 
wilderness (Abravanel to Ex. xxiii, 20). Legend 
makes him the teacher of Moses; so that the Israel- 
ites are indebted to their advocate for the supreme 
good of the Torah. This fact is alluded to in Deut. 

R. xi. 6 in the statement that Michael 

Teacher of declined to bring Moses’ soul to God 

Moses. onthe ground that he had been Moses’ 

teacher. It is clearly stated in Apoc, 

Mosis, i. that Moses received the two tables through 

the mediation of Michael. In the Book of Jubilces 

(i. 27, ii. 1) the angel who is said to have instructed 

Moses on Mount Sinai and to have delivered to him 
the tables of the Law is most probably Michael. 

Michael destroyed the army of Sennacherib (Ex. 
R. xviii. 5). He endeavored also to prevent Israel 
from being led into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar 
and to save the Temple from destruction; but the 
sins of the people were so great that. he was power- 
less to carry his purposes into effect. “ Michael, thy 
nation has sinned,” God said. “Save them for the 
sake of the good men which they still have,” Mi- 
chael answered. “I will burn Israel with his good 
men,” God replied (Yoma 77a; comp. Zohar, Ex. 
col. 414). According to Yalk., Lam. 1009, Michael 
and Gabriel pleaded for the Israelites, who, however, 
were doomed, and the two angels were themselves 
compelled to set the Temple on fire. In later wri- 
tings Michael is represented as refuting also on this 
occasion the accusations of Samael (Zohar, Mish- 
patim), There is a legend which seems to be of 
Jewish origin, and which was adopted by the Copts, 
to the effect that Michacl was first sent by God to 
bring Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem, and that 
Michael was afterward very active in freeing his 
nation from Babylonian captivity (Amélineau, 
“Contes et Romans de ]’ Egypte Chrétienne,” ii. 142 
et seg.). According to most of the rabbis, Michael 
saved Hananiah and his companions from the fur- 
nace (Gen. R. xliv. 16), Michael was very active in 
the time of Esther: “The more Haman accused 
Israel on earth, the more Michael defended Israel in 
heaven” (Esth. R. iii. 8). It was Michael who re- 
minded Ahbasuerus that he was Mordecai’s debtor 
(Targ. to Esth. vi. 1); and there is a legend that 
Michael appeared to the high priest Hyrcanus, 
promising him assistance (comp. Josephus, “ Ant.” 
xili. 10, $ 8). 

Michacl will continue his advocacy to the very end; 
and he will contend with Sampel for the liberation 


537 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Michael 





of Israel from Edom or Rome (* Yalk. Hadash,” “ Ga- 
lut,” No. 11). Samael will be subdued by Michael; 
but when the latter asks God to help 
Continuous Israel, God willsay, “Israel should turn 
Guardian- toward Me, beit only as farasthe point 
ship. of a needle.” When Israel turns to- 
ward the Lord, his advocate, Michael, 
will plead in his favor (Pesik. R. 44 fed. Fried- 
mann, p. 18da]). According to Ex. R. (xviii. 5), 
Michael and Gabriel will have the charge of vindi- 
cating Israel against Edom; but Rabbi’s opinion is 
that Michael alone will act. He will, besides, cleanse 
Israel from the wicked people (* Otot ha-Mashiah,” 
in Jellinek, “B. H.” ii. 61), It was Michael’s fight 
with Samael (with the devil in Assumptio Mosis, 
x.) Which gave rise to the well-known legend of Mi- 
chacl and the dragon. This legend is not found in 
Jewish sources except in so far as Sainael or Satan 
is called in the Cabala “the primitive serpent” 
(“nahash ha-kadmoni ”). 

The idea that Michael was the advocate of the 
Jews became so prevalent that in spite of the rab- 
binical prohibition against appealing to angels as 
intermediaries bet ween God and His people, Michael 
came to occupy a certain place in the Jewish lit- 
urgy. Apart from the word 93°30, which occurs 
frequently and which refers to Michael, there are 
two prayers besceching hin as the prince of mercy 
to intercede in favor of Israel: one composed by 
Eliezer ha-Kalir (Bartolocci, “ Bibl. Rab. Magna,” 
i. 192 e¢ seg.), and the other by Judah b. Samuel 
he-Hasid (MS. De Cambrai No. 946, fol. 110). 
But appeal to Michael seems to have been more 
common in ancient times. Thus Jeremiah is said 
(Barnch Apoc. Ethiopic, ix. 5) to have addressed 
a praver to him. “When aman is in need he 
must pray directly to God, and neither to Michael 
nor to Gabricl” (Yer. Ber. 1x. 18a). 

The conception of Michael as an advocate always 
interceding on behalf of israel gave rise to another 

idea, that of his being a high priest 

Michael making atonement for his people. 

as High Ezra recognized the place of the altar 

Priest. by seeing there one on which Michael, 

the great prince, was in the act of 
sacrificing (Zeb. 62a; comp. Men. 110a). The fourth 
heaven is called “ Zebul” (Sy31) because it con- 
tains the heavenly Jerusalem, the Temple, and the 
altar on which Michael, the great prince, sacrifices 
(Hag. 12b). A different statement is given in 
“Seder Gan ‘Eden” (Jellinek, fc. iii. 187), which 
places Michael in the upper heaven called “ ‘Ara- 


bot *(many; comp. Midr. Abkirin Yalk., Gen. 182). — 


This idea was afterward greatly developed by the 
cabalists. Michael is identified with Melchizedek 
(““Yalk. Hadash,” “Mal’akim,” No. 19); and the 
words “and the priest shall pronounce him clean” 
(Lev. xiii. 23) are explained in the “ Tikkune Zobar ” 
(fol. 2b) as referring to Michael, the high priest, 
acting as the representative of clemency. Michael, 
the high priest, is the standard-bearer of God (Jo- 
seph Gikatilla, “Sha‘are Orah,” p. 60c). The insti- 
tution of tithes is ascribed to Michael (Targ. 
pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xxxii. 25); and his place 
is appointed in the east, with the tribe of Levi 
(“Midr. Konen,” in Jellinek, 7.¢. ii. 39). 


With regard to the nature of the offerings which 
Michael brings to the altar, one opinion is that they 
are the souls of the just, while according to another 
they are fiery sheep (Tos. to Men. 110a), The former 
opinion, which has become prevalent in cabalistic 
writings (“Seder Gan ‘Eden,” d.c.; “ Yalk. Hadash,” 
“Neshamot,” No. 31; “Reshit Hokmah,” ch. iii.), 
explains the important position occupied by Michael 

in Jewish eschatology. The idea that 


Michael Michaelis the Charon of individual 
as Guide souls, which is common among 
of Souls. Christians, is not found in Jewish 


sources, but that he is in charge of the 
souls of the just appears in many Jewish writin gs, 
In the Testament of Abraham (Robinson, “ Texts ard 
Studies,” ji. 2, Cambridge, 1893), which is Jewish, it 
is said that Michael was ordered by God to bring 
Abraham's soul to Him. He had a discussion with 
Samael over the soul of Moses (Dent. R. xi. 6; © Midr. 
Petirat Mosheh,” in Jellinek, @.¢. vi. 75 e¢ seg.; comp. 
Jude 9). According to the Zohar (Gen., col. 808), 
Michael accompanies the souls of the pieus and 
helps them to enter the gates of the heavenly Jeru- 
salem. In“ Midr. ha-Ne‘elam ” (“ Zohar Hadash.” p. 
19c), however, it is said that Michacland lis host are 
stationed at the gates of the heavenly Jerusalem and 
give admittance to the souls of the just. Michael's 
function is to open the gates also of justice to the just 
(comp. Baruch Apoc. Ethiopic, ix. 5), David was not 
admitted there till the Temple was Luilt by Solomon ; 
then he was introduced by Michael (“ Yalk. Hadash,” 
“David,” No. 13), Atthe resurrection Michael will 
sound the trumpet, at which the graves will open 
and the dead will rise (“ Otot ha-Mashiah,” in Jelli- 
nek, dc. ti. 61-62; comp. Dan. xii. 1). It is in this 
sense that the Falashas mention Michael in their 
prayer (“Pri¢res des Falashas,” ed. J. Halévy, 
pp. 48-49, Ethiopic text), There is another hag- 
gadah to the effect that when the Messiah comes 
Michael and Gabriel will place themselves at the 
entrance of paradise and in the name 
of God greet the just (Jelinek, le. vi. 
148). Michael's residence will be in 
a range of seven mountains, sur- 
rounded by a grove of fragrant trees, among which 
one wiil be particularly distinguished forits beauty. 
The highest of the seven mountains will be the seat 
of the Lord, and the most fragrant tree, which wiil 
be inaccessible to any human being till the Day of 
Judgment, will be given to the pious (Enoch, xxiv.- 
xxv. 5). Contrary to Dan. xii, 2, it is said in “ Oti- 
yot de-R. ‘Akiba,” s.7, sant (in Jelinek, é.¢. iii. 28), 
that at the advent of the Messiah, God will give the 
keys of hell to Michael and Gabriel, who will bring 
the souls of the wicked into paradise. 

It is quite natural that, owing to his position 
with regard to the Jews, Michael should be repre- 
sented in the Haggadah as the most prominent of 
the archangels. He is called by Danicl (Dan. xii. 1) 
“the great prince,” and his greatness is described at 
length in later Jewish writings. He was one of the 
seven archangels first created (Enoch, xc. 21-22; 
Targ. Yer. to Deut, xxxiv. 6 gives only six), but 
among these seven four excel, and Michael is the 
chief of the four. Both he and Gabriel are called 
“great princes”; but Michael is higher in rank than 


Michael’s 
Mount. 


Michael 





Gabriel (Ber. 4b; Yoma 87a). He is the viceroy of 
God, who rules over the world (Enoch, lxix. 14 e¢ 
seg.), and wherever Michael appears the Shekinah 
also is to be found (Ex. R. ii. 8). Michael is on the 

right of God’s throne, while Gabriel is 


Michael on the left (*Haggadat Shema‘ Yis- 
and rael,” in Jellinek, @.¢. v. 166; Targ. to 
Gabriel. Job xxv. 2; Enoch, xl. 9). Four 


armies of angels sing in praise of the 

Lord, the first being that of Michael at the right 

hand of God (Pirke R. El. iv.; “Hekalot,” in Jelli- 

nek, Ze. ii, 43-44), A similar tradition is given in 

“Seder Gan ‘Eden ” (d.e. p. 188): Michael’s place is 

by the first river, Pison, while Gabriel’s is by the 

second, Gillon. It is Michael who, on account of his 
occupying the first place near God, receives the pray- 
ers of men from the angels and presents them to God 

(Baruch Apoc. Slavonic, xii.), His position makes 

him the companion of METATRGON (Zohar, i. 149b). 

As an angel of nature, Michael is represented as 
of the element of water, on account of which he is 
the prince of water, while Gabriel is the prince of 
fire (““‘Ammudeha Shib‘ah,” p. 49c; “Berit Menu- 
hah,” 37a; and elsewhere). This is probably the 
origin of the haggadah that when Solomon married 
Pharaoh’s daughter, Michael drove into the bed of 
the sea a stick around which slime gathered and on 
which, later, Rome was built (Cant. R. i. 6). In 
Sanh. 21b and Shab. 56b, however, this is ascribed 
to Gabriel, owing to a confusion which occurs also 
in Targ. to Job xxv. 2, where Michael is called the 
prince of fire. Michael is really the prince of snow, 
which is the element of water (Deut. R. v. 12); and he 
is also the angel of silver, while Gabriel is the angel 
of gold (“ Yalk. Hadash,” “Malakim,” No. 75). Mi- 
chael presides over the planet Mercury and conse- 
quently over Wednesday (Abraham Avenar, in 
Minster, “Calendar Hebreorum,” Basel, 1527). The 
same statement is given in the Hebrew mannu- 
scripts Paris No. 602 (fol. 1428) and No, 603 (fol. 
125a), both containing cabalistic formulas, Bué it 
would more befit Michael to preside over Saturn and 
be the angel of Saturday; and this position is 
ascribed to him in “Sefer Razi’el,” pp. 8a, 17b. He 
presides over the second solar period (“tekufah ”) 
and over the south wind, which blows during that 
season (7). 7a; Paris MS. No. 602, fol. 122a). He 
is the third of the “figure equivalents” (“ Keneh 
Binah,” p. 19a); and in enchantment his name is 
prononnced to charm reptiles (“Sefer Razi’el,” p. 
4n). See ANGELOLOGY., 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Kohut, Jiidische Angelologie, pp. 24 et 
seq., in Abhandlungen far adie Kunde des Morgenlandes, 
iv., No. 3; W. Ltiken, Michael, Gottingen, 1898; M. Schwab, 
Vocabulaire de V Angélologie, s.v. 983.2, Paris, 1897. 

J. M. SEL. 
——In Arabic Literature: Michaelis calledin Ar- 
abic literature “ Mika’il” or (in the Koran) “ Mikal.” 
IIe is one of the four archangels, and, according 
to Arabic tradition, he occupies a similar position 
among the Jews to that occupied by Gabriel among 
the Arabs; that is to say, he is their peculiar guard- 
ian. In the Koran Michael is mentioned once only, 
in sura ii. 92. In his commentary on verse 91 of 
that sura, Baidawi relates that on one occasion Omar 
went into a Jewish school and inquired concerning 
Gabriel. The pupils said he was their enemy, but 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


538 


that Michael was a good angel, bringing peace and 
plenty. In answer to Omar’s question as to the re- 
spective positions of Michael and Gabriel in God’s 
presence, they said that Gabriel] was on His right 
hand and Michael on His left. Omar exclaimed at 
their untruthfulness, and declared that whoever was 
an enemy to God and His angels, to him God would 
be anenemy. Upon returning to Mohammed, Oma 
found that Gabriel had forestalied him by revealing 

the same message, which is contained in verse 92. 

The commentators state with reference to sura Xi. 

72 that Michael was one of the three angels who 

visited Abraham. 

In Arabic tradition Michael always appears as 
second to Gabriel. When God is creating Adam 
He sends first Gabriel and then Michael to fetch the 
clay out of whieh man is to be formed. Both are 
restrained by the earth's protests; only Israfil pays 
no heed to them. When Adam and Eve are expelled 
from paradise, Gabriel is sent to the former, and 
Michael io the latter, to Impart comfort. On his 
death-bed Mohammed stated that Gabriel would be 
the first and Michael the second to pray over hin. 

It is unusual for Michael to be sent independently, 
as in the story of St. George, where Michael is com- 
missioned to destroy the brazen statue in which St. 
George is to be burned alive (Zotenberg, “ Chro- 
nique d’Abu Djafer . . . Tabari,” i. 30, 78; 
ii. 61; iii. 218, Paris, 1867-71). At the last day 
Michael will be one of the four angels who will 
survive after every other creature has been des- 
troyed. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries of Baidawi and Zamakh- 
shari on the Koran: Hughes, Dict. of Islam, s.v.; Mas‘udi, 
Les Prairies @ Or, ed, Barbier de Menard, Index ; Weil, Bib- 
lical Legends of the Mussutmans, p. 87, New York, 1846. 


J. M. W. M. 


MICHAEL HASID. See JEnHIEL MICHAEL 
BEN JUDAH LOB. 


MICHAEL, HEIMANN JOSEPH: Hebrew 
bibliographer; born at Hamburg April 12, 1792; 
died there June 10. 1846. He showed great acute- 
ness of mind in early childhood, had a phenomenal 
memory, and was an indefatigable student. He 
studied Talmudics and received also private instruc- 
tion in all the branches of a regular school educa- 
tion. He was a born bibliophile, and began to col- 
lect valuable works when still a boy of twelve. 
With his progress in Hebrew literature his love for 
books increased also, the result of which was his 
magnificent library of 860 manuscripts and 5,471 
printed works, covering all branches of Hebrew lit- 
erature. There were few books in his collection 
which he had not read; and he undertook the prep- 
aration.of a full catalogue of it. As far as he ac- 
complished this task, it was the foundation of the 
“Ozerot Hayyim, Katalog der Michael’schen Biblio- 
thek,” Hamburg, 1848. 

Michael took an interest not only in Jewish liter- 
ature, but in all the intellectual movements of the 
day, as is shown by the large number of contempo- 
rary books and leaflets found in his library. He 
never wrote directly for publication; but many 
scholars applied to him for information, and this he 
never withheld. His correspondence with Leopold 
Dukes, Franz Delitzsch, Wolf Heidenheim, Rapo- 


539 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Michael 





port, Luzzatto, Gesenius, Lebrecht, Akiba, Eger, 

and Leopold Zunz is of great literary interest. 

Michael’s only independent work was “Or ha- 

Havyim” (Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1891), a compre- 

hensive bibliographical and literary-historical dic- 

tionary of rabbinical literature, edited by his son, 
with preface by A. Berliner; it covers, however, 
only a few letters of the alphabet. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Z. G. p. 244, Berlin, 1845; Ozerot Hay- 
as Preface, Hamburg, 1548; Ally. Zeit. des Jud. 1546, 
s I, War. 
MICHAEL, ISAAC: German laryngologist; 

born at Tamburg Nov. 16, 1848; died there Jan. 7, 

i887. Ile studied at the universities of Heidelberg, 

Leipsic, Berlin, and Witrzburg (M.D. 1878), became 

assistant at the throat, and Jater at the ear, dispen- 

sary of the University of Vieuna, and in 1876 re- 
turned to Hamburg, where he practised until his 
death. His works include “Gesang-und Register- 
bildung ” (Hlamburg, 1887) and “Gesch. des Aerzt- 
lichen Vereins von Hamburg” (7b. 1896). He trans- 
ated Mackenzie’s “Hygicne of the Vocal Organs” 

(7b, 1889). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biographisehes Lexikon. 

Ss, F, a ie H. 

MICHAEL JESOFOVICH: Senior of the Jews 
of Lithuania under King Sigismund I. of Poland; 
born at Brest-Litovsk about the middle of the fif- 
teenth century; died there between 1580 and 1533, 
Michael, like his brothers Abraham and Isaac, was 
among the most prominent tax-collectors and lease- 
holders in Lithuania during the last quarter of the 
fifteenth and the first quarter of the sixteenth cen- 
tury. Exiled with the other Jews of Lithuania by 
Alexander Jagellon in 1495, he emigrated with his 
brothers to Poland. His brother Abraham embraced 
Christianity and soon returned to Lithuania; but 
Michael remained true to his religion, and did not 
again set foot in his native city until 1503, when 
permission to return was given to the expelled Jews. 

King Sigismund [., by a decree dated Wilna, Feb. 
2%, 1514, appointed Michael to the newly created 
seniorship over the Jewsof Lithuania. In his capac- 
ity as senior he not only was to serve as mediator 
between the Jews and the king, but was also em- 
powered to judge and to punish the Jews, in keep- 
ing with the rights granted to them, and to im- 
pose a fine or even aterm of emprisonment on the 
guilty. Michael evinced his piety by attempting 
to force the IXaraite Jews of Lithuania to conform 
to the doctrines of rabbinical law; but the Karaites, 
who possessed a charter of privileges granted them 
by Grand Duke Witold, refused to acknowledge 
Michael’s authority, and the matter was decided in 
their favor by the king. 

This appointment, while it shows the favorable 
attitude of Sigismund toward his Jewish subjects, 
Was actuated in the main by his desire to insure a 
thorough and prompt collection of the taxes im- 
posed on the Jewish communities, and to reward 
the valuable services rendered to the crown by 
Michael and his brother Abraham. On the whole. 
however, the office of senior was honorary and nom- 
inal, since the concentration of the powers of the 
Several communities in the hands of one person of 


the same religion was antagonistic to the traditions 
of the Lithuanian Jews. While it is true that soon 
after his appointment Michael excommunicated 
Itzko and Berek, two Jews of Brest, as traitors 
against God and the king (the said Jews having been 
sentenced to excommuuication with Prince Michael 
Krinsky), and ordered the excommunication “to be 
announced by trumpets,” it does not follow that 
Michael was invested with extraordinary judicial 
powers, since he was merely carrying out an order 
of the king, and similar excommunications had 
been proclaimed before (Bershadski, “ Litovskive 
Yevrei,” p. 358). The fact that Michael was author- 
ized by the king to employ a doctor (rabbi) shows 
that he himself was not a rabbi, and was not privi- 
leged according to Jewish law to assume the func- 
tions of one. Documents of a later date no longer | 
refer to him as the senior, but apply to him the title 
of “ fiscal agent to the king.” 

Michael’s commercial enterprises covered a period 
of almost half a century, and were intimately con- 
nected with the prosperity of the country. He took 
an active part in the affairs of his brother Abraham 

even before the expulsion of the Jews 


His Com- from Lithuania, and formed in 1487 
mercial with his brother Isaac a partnership 
Activity. which continued for forty years. In 


documents of 1516 and of subsequent 
date Michael is mentioned as collector of the king’s 
taxes of Lithuania and as farmer of the salt- and 
wax-taxes of Brest. In 1520 he was granted the 
farming of the customs duties of Vladimir and Lutsk ; 
and in 1522 he farmed the wax- and weights-taxes 
in Moghitef. Soon after this he leased the inns of 
Vitebsk for a period of three years, and a year later 
he icased the inns and farmed the taxes of Brest, 
Dorogitz, Grodno, Byelsk, Lutsk, and Vladimir. 
In 1524 he farmed, in partnership with Michael 
Shpis, the customs duties of the entire duchy of 
Lithuania. From 1525 to 1529 he extended his oper- 
ations to the farming of the taxes of Minsk and 
Novgorod. Aside from the collection of taxes and 
duties, Michael carried on also an extensive business 
in various articles of merchandise, such as cloth. 
Not content with all this, he with the king’s con- 
sent advanced money and goods to the king’s ofti- 
cers, protecting himself by liens on their salaries, 
while the king received for his good offices a certain 
share of the profits (* Dokumenty i Regesty,” No. 1, 
vol. viti.). The extremely valuable services ren- 
dered by Michael to his sovereign and the influence 
of his immense financial interests finally led the king 
to raise him to the hereditary nobility with the coat 
of arms of Leliva, formerly belonging to Gecrge 
Gyebovich, regent of Smolensk (¢., No. 96). 

The extent of Michael’s property may be gath- 
ered from a document which refers to the division 
in 1527 of the estate, real and personal, belonging 
to him and to his brother Isaac, and which enu- 
merates their respective possessions (74., No. 119). 

After Michael's death his son Abraham was con- 
firmed (March 15, 1533) in the privileges granted to 
the former (" Regesty,” No. 261). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Russko-Yevreiski Arkhiv, vol. ii., passim ; 
Bershadski, Litovsktye Yevrei, p. 858: Kraushar, Historya 
Zudow uw Polsce, ii. 49. Gritz, Gesch. Hebrew edgy i 


Michael 
Michelson 


MICHAEL, MAX: German painter; born in 
Hamburg March 28, 1828; dicd at Berlin March 24, 
1891. He studied art first at the Kunst-Akademie 
in Dresden, then for five years at Paris, after which 
he spent twenty years at Rome and Venice. In 
these cities he produced his first work, “Country 
Girl Writing ” (1866), now in the Ravené Gallery, 
Berlin. In 1870 hereturned to Berlin, and five years 
later was appointed professor of painting in the 
Royal Academy. He held this office until bis death. 
Other works of his are: “ Girls’ School in the Sabine 
Mountains,” in the Kunsthalle, Hamburg; “The 
Visit of the Cardinal to the Monastery ”; “Job Dis- 
puting with His Friends”; “ Bertini Painting an 
Altar-Piece in the Monastery of the Camaldolites.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. April 3, 1891, p. 9; Singer, All- 

gemeines Kitnstler Lexikon, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1899. 


S. F. T. H. 


MICHAEL BEN MOSES COHEN: Pales- 
tinian rabbi and liturgist; lived at Jerusalem in the 
seventeenth century. He wrote “Moreh Zedek” 
(Salonica, 1655), an index to the laws contained in 
the Shulhan ‘Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat, showing 
where they may be found in other works of the 
Posekim as well as in the responsa of later rabbis. 
There is aiso ascribed to him another work, “ ‘Et 
Je-Henenah ” (Venice, 1708), prayers to be recited at 
the western wall of the ancient Temple, with addi- 
tions by the author’sson Moses. According to Nepi- 
Ghirondi (“ Toledot Gedole Yisrael,” p. 228), how- 
ever, Michael only revised and edited that work. 
BiBLIOGRAPIY: F. Delitzseh, Geseh. der Jiidischen Poesie, 

pp. 06-57; First, Bibl. Jud. i. 182; Steinsehneider, Cat. 

Bodt. No. 3271; idem, Jewish Literature, p. 24. 

A. M. SEL. 

MICHAEL, MOSES GERSON: American 
merchant and capitalist; born Aug, 15, 1862, at Jef- 
ferson, Ga. At an early age he graduated as B.E. 
from the University of Georgia with highest honors, 
and shortly afterward entered with his brother Si- 
mon upon a commercial career at Athens, Ga. Here 
he has amassed a fortune in the dry-goods trade. 

Michael has been an influential factor in the de- 
velopment of northeastern Georgia, having been 
identified with a number of large industrial enter- 
prises. He holds the rank of lieutenant-colonel in 
the state militia, aud was aide-de-camp to Governor 
Candler during his administration, He is a mem- 
ber of the Democratic executive committee of the 
Eighth Congressional District, and a potent factor 
in the councils of the party. 

For a number of years Michacl has been superin- 
tendent of the Jewish Sabbath-school at Athens, 
which he makes his peculiar charge. 

A. H. E. C. 


MICHAEL BEN SHABBETHAT (called 
also Magister Zematus): Rabbi of Rome in the 
sixteenth century. Ina decision of 1539 his signa- 
ture reads “Michael b. Shabbethai pry,” the last 
word being the name of a place in Africa whence 
probably Michael’s ancestors originated, and becom- 
ing when Latinized “Zematus.” Michael was a 
prominent cabalist and as such was the teacher of 
figidius of Viterbo and of Widmanstadt (Perles, 
“Studien.” pp. 186, 189). Elijah di Nola (1555) 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


540 











speaks of Michael as the possessor of an cxcellent 
collection of cabalistic works (Perles, Jc. p. 217). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vogelstein and Rieger, Geseh. der Juden in 

Rom, ii. 92, 99, 260. 

K. M. SEL. 

MICHAEL BEN SHABBETHAI COHEN 
BALBO (called also Michael Cohen of Crete): 
Greek scholar, Hebrew poet, and preacher; born 
March 27, 1411. A manuscript preserved in the 
Vatican (No. 805) contains several works of his, 
namely: a poem composed in 14538 on the occasion of 
the capture of Constantinople by Mohammed the 
Conqueror and the cessation of the war; another 
poem (1456), lamenting his father’s death; a homi- 
letic commentary on Ps, xxvili.; and three sermons 
preached by Michael in Khania in 1471, 1475, and 
1477 respectively. Vatican MS. No. 254 contains 
an account of a disputation (“wikkuah ”) between 
Michael Cohen and Moses Cohen Ashkenazi on met- 
empsychosis (“gilgni”: Zunz (“ Additamenta,” p. 
320) is doubtful whether to identify the former 
with Michael b. Shabbethai or with Michael b, 
Elijah Cohen, copyist of Vatican MSS. Nos. 845 and 
346 (fourth part). Steinschneider doubts the cor- 
rectness of the name Michael b. Elijah. According 
to Assemani, the commentary ou Averroes’ com- 
mentary to Aristotle’s “Physics” (i.-vi.), con- 
tained in the former manuscript, was made by a 
pupil of Michael Cohen of Crete. Wolf (“ Bibl. 
Hebr.” i., No. 1418), however, ascribes the com- 
mentary to Michael Cohen, calling him a disciple of 
Averroes. Wolf thinks also that the author of the 
account of the disputation is Michael b. Moses ha- 
Kohen, who, in collaboration with Abraham Samuel 
of Sofia, wrote the “ Moreh Zedck.” 

A work entitled “Sha‘are Rahamim” (Vatican 
MS. No. 30, 8), which is a supercommentary ou 
Maimonides’ commentary on the eleventh chapter 
of Sanhedrin, and a commentary on Ibn Ezra’s 
hymn beginning “ Ehad Iebaddo be-en samuk,” both 
bear the name of Michael Cohen as author, who is 
supposed by Steinschneider to be identical with the 
subject of this article, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. p. 120; idem, 
in Mose, iv. 303 et seq., v. 267 et seq. 

J. M. SEL. 

MICHAELIS, JOHANN DAVID: Christian 
Orientalist and polyhistor; born at Halle Feb. 27, 
1717; died at Géttingen Aug. 22, 1791; grand- 
nephew of Johann Heinrich Michaelis. Ile was 
educated at the university of bis native city, and 
made scientific journeys in England and Ilfolland, 
returning to lecture at Halle on Semitic languages 
and Bible exegesis, For nearly half a century he 
wus professor at GOttingen University (he became 
assistant professor in 1746 and professor in 1750), 
where he lectured chiefly on Old Testament exege- 
sis, Hebrew antiquities, Mosaic law, and the Semi- 
tic languages. 

Besides writing a Hebrew grammar (1745) and a 
supplement to Hebrew lexicons (1784-92), Michaelis 
translated and commented upon the whole of the 
Old Testament (1769-838). He was also one of the 
first to write an introduction to the Old Testament 
(1787). His work on the Mosaic law (“Das Mo- 
saische Recht,” 1770-75) was one of the earliest 


cet waren rererenn, ae ee : 
SA ES SR SENN: . 
= pee EIT ACO TRL TLE A OT YN RN SPO et ne eee oe 


§41 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Michael 
Michelson 





scientific treatments of Jewish antiquities. Many 
of his essays on thissubject appeared in the “ Orien- 
talische Bibliothek,” edited by him from 1771 to 
1791. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. 

T. : 
MICHAELIS, JOHANN HEINRICH: Ger- 
man Christian theologian and Hebraist; born at 
Kletterberg July 26, 1668; died at Halle March 10, 
1738. Hestudied Ethiopic under Ludolf at Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, and became assistant professor of 
Oriental languages at Halle in 1699 and professor 
of theology in 1709. His chief work was a text of 
the Hebrew Bible founded on Jablonski, but with a 
comparison of uineteen printed editions and five 
manuscripts of Erfurt. This was published in 
1720 at Frankfort-on-the-Main and was reprinted 
throughout the eighteenth century. Some of his 
critical annotations were published separately in the 
same year. Michaclis wrote alsoa Hebrew grammar 
(1702); and two works on Hebrew accents (1696, 
4700), the latter of which, “ Institutio de Acecentibus 
Prosaicis et Metricis,” went. through five further 
editions, and was for a long time the standard au- 
thority on the subject. He composed also the Latin 
translation of the Ethiopic psalter published by Lu- 
dolf. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. 

qT: 

MICHAELMAS GEESE. 
GOOSE. 

MICHAL da ; lit. “rivulet ”): The younger of 
the two daughters of Saul, probably by Ahinoam 
(I Sam. xiv. 49-50). David, then a boy of about 
sixteen, was to have married her sister Merab; but 
the latter having been given to another, and Michal 
having fallen in love with David, Saul consented 
to the marriage of the two last-named, not insisting 
on the customary dowry (“mohar”), but requiring 
that David kill a hundred Philistines. David killed 
double this number; and Michal became his wife (22. 
xvill. 17-28). 

Michal was instrumental in saving her husband 
when her father, in a fit of anger, attempted to kill 
him. She lowered him through the window and, to 
deceive and delay the king’s messengers, substituted 
one of her teraphim in his place. On her stratagem 
being discovered she declared that David had threat- 
ened her with death if she did not Jet him go(¢d. xix. 
11-17). After David’s escape Saul bestowed Michal 
upon Phalti ben Laish of Gallim (@. xxv. 44). It 
would appear, however, that she was still regarded 
as the lawful wife of David; for at his earliest op- 
por tunity’ | he claimed her from Saul’s son, Ish-bo- 
sheth (II Sam. iii, 13-15), through Abner. 

One incident, however, occurred which caused 
their relations to be greatly strained and which 
probably resulted ina separation. The Ark of the 
Lord having been brought to Zion, David indulged 
ina joyful religious dance, for which he was severe- 
ly criticized by his wife (2b. vi. 16; 20). Either be- 
cause of this incident or owing to several other 
causes combined, they never lived together again. 
According to one tradition, Michal spent her re- 
maining years in bringing up the tive children of 
her sister Merah (7+. xxi. 8. if the reading 39% be 


See BARNACLE- 


| 


accepted instead of S59): according to another, she 
returned to Phalti ben Laish and lived as his pro- 
tegée, though not as his wife (Targ. to Ruth iii. 8). 

David seems not to have had any children by 
Michal (II Sam. vi. 23), though some authorities (e.g., 
Rashi and Cheyne) claim that Ithream was the re- 
suit of their union, and that “Eglah,” the name of 
his supposed mother (2d. iii. 5), like “Michal,” is 
merely a corrupted form of her real name, which 
must have been Abigail. 

This Biblical story has inspired J. L. Gordon with 
the subject for his popular “Ahabat Dawid u-Mi- 
Kal,” which has been published in many cditions. 

J. J. 8. R. 


MICHEL JUD (usually called “Wealthy Mi- 
chel”): A public character prominent in his day for 
wealth and influence; born about the end of the fif- 
teenth century at Derenburg, near Halberstadt; diced 
in 1549. He was described as of imposing appcar- 
ance and cloquent of speech, and was regarded as 
an illegitimate son of one of the counts of Regen- 
stein. Ifis wife, Merle, was the daughter of Joseph 
of Schleusingen. Michel, being well-mannered, was 
received by princes and nobles, who courted him 
on account of his wealth. The elector Joachim of 
Brandenburg, Duke Friedrich of Lieenitz, and Land- 
grave Philip of Hesse were among those who main- 
tained relations with him, On July 25, 1529, Duke 
Erich the Elder of Brunswick-Liineburg, ignoring 
the wishes of the magistrates of the city of Han- 
over, granted Michel permission “to build a house 
in the new city in the suburbs of Hanover” and to 
dwell therein with his wife, his children, and his 
servants. Besides the house in Hanover, Michel 
owned one in Derenburg, one in Frank fort-on-the- 
Oder, and one in Berlio. He was in the good 
graces of the elector Joachim ITI., who on Feb. 27, 
1544, sanctioned the jointure settled by Michel on 
his wife. From Duke Erich Michel received im- 
portant commercial privileges, and his business re- 
lations extended from France to Silesia and Poland, 
He played an important part in the imperial diets 
also. In 1548 he appeared at the Diet of Augsburg 
in very costly garments, wearing heavy gold chains 
around his neck, riding on a richly caparisoned 
horse, and accompanied by a retinue of ten or twelve 
servants, all Jews. Shortly afterward be was taken 
captive by Magdeburg knights on Brandenburg ter- 
ritory, but escaped, and on his accusation the 
knights were taken to Torgau and condemned to 
death by order of Joachim IJ. Count Ulrich of 
Regenstein, who hated Michel and is said to have 
published a pamphlet against him, was forced by 
Joachim to signa treaty favorable to him on May 
15, 1549. Michel died a few days later as the result 
of a fall down a flight of stairs. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Von Michel Juden Todt, Marbach, June 6, 1549; 
Boysen, in Hist. Magazin, v. 45 ; Raumer, Hist. Taschen 
buch, 3d series, ii. 279 et SEQ: Monatsschr ift, x. 239, xiv. 425, 
xvi. 383; W iener, Zur Geschichte der Judén in Hannover, 
in the Jahrbuch ftir die Gesch. der Juden und des Juden- 
thums, i. 187; L. Geiger, Zeitschrift, ii. 340, 372. 

D. M. K. 


MICHELSON, ALBERT A.: American phys- 
icist; born at Strelno, in the district of Bromberg, 
Prussia, Dec. 19, 1852. His father, Samuel Michel- 
son, emigrated to the United States and settled in 


Michigan ar 
Micrococcus Prodigiosus 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


542 








San Francisco, where Albert Michelson received his 
early education, After leaving the high school he 
entered the United States Naval Academy, at Annap- 
olis, Md., and graduated in 18738. For the purpose 
of extending his studies he went to Germany in 
1880, entered the University of Berlin, and remained 
there for ashort time. From Berlin he went to IIci- 
delberg University and studied there until1881. In 
that year Michelson resigned from the United States 
naval service and went to Paris, where he entered 
the Collége de France and the Ecole Polytechnique 
(1882). On his return to the United States he ac- 
cepted the chair of physics at the Case School, Cleve- 
land, Ohio, which position he resigned for the chair of 
physics at Clark University, Worcester, Mass. (1889). 
There he remained until, three years later, he was 
called to the professorship in physics at the Univer- 
sity of Chicago. This office he still holds (1994). 

Michelson has received the degrees of Ph.D. (lion.) 
from Stevens Insti- 


tute, D.Se. from 
Cambridge  (iing.), 


and LL, D. from Yale. 
He is a member of 
the National Acad- 
emy of Sciences, a 
foreign member of 
the Royal Socicty 
(London), a corre- 
sponding member of 
the Academy of Sci- 
ences of the Institute 
of France, and a 
member of the Inter- 
national Committee 
on Weights and 
Measures. He was 
awarded the Rum- 
ford medal by the 
Royal Institution of 
Great Britain. His 
international — scien- 
tific reputation is 
largely due to his de- 
termination of the ve- 
locity of light and 
to other experiments in the domain of optics which 
were marked by a high degree of accuracy. He de- 
signed a bew form of spectroscope, and has largely 
contributed to the scientific journals the results of 
lis researches on light. 

A. FAV. 

MICHIGAN: One of the Western states of the 
United States of America. There are no records of 
the settlement of Jews in Michigan prior to the year 
1848, when about a dozen families of Bavarian Jews 
settled in Detroit. Within a decade a few of the 
original settlers had traveled to the so-called “copper 
country ” inthe upper peninsula of Michigan, where 
not a few laid the foundation of a comfortable for- 
tune by peddling in the mining districts. The first 
Jewish organization in the state was the Beth El 
Society, out of which grew Congregation Beth El of 
Detroit. This was founded Sept. 22, 1850, by ten 
adult males, exactly the number required to forma 
minyan. The last of these charter members, Solo- 








Temple Beth El, Detroit, Michigan. 
(From a photograph.) 


| 


mon Bendit, died at St. Clair, Mich., in the fail of 
1902. 

From 1850 until the first great influx of Russian 
Jews into America (1882) the Jewish population of 
Michigan grew gradually, being especially aug- 
mented by the relatives of the carly settlers. Up to 
this time the Jews of Michigan were predominantly 
of German extraction, but the immigration of 1883 
not only more than doubled the number of Jews resi- 
dentin the state, but gave to the Russian and Polish 
Jews a large numerical majority. To-day, of the 
total number of the Jews of the state at least 65 per 
cent are of Russian or Polish nativity or extraction. 
In 1888 the Hebrew Relief Society of Detroit, assisted 
by the Baron de Hirsch Committee, settled a colony 
of Russian Jews near Bad Axe, Mich. About half 
of the original settlers are still there, having become 
successful and prosperous farmers. 

There are no exact statistics of the Jews resident 
in Michigan, but data 
carefully compiled 
render it possible to 
estimate the number 
at 16,000 (out of a 
total population of 
2 450,000), of which 
12,000 must be cred- 
ited to Detroit. 

There are regularly 
organized congrega- 
tions at Detroit (9), 
Grand Rapids (2), 
Kalamazoo (2), Bay 
City (2), Alpena, 
Port Huron, Sagi- 
naw, Jackson, 
Battle Creek, Lan- 
sing, and Hancock; 
and a number of 
cities support relig- 
ious schools and 
cemeteries. The total 
value of real estate 
held by congrega- 
tions in the state is 
about $800,000. Re- 
form congregations at Detroit, Kalamazoo, Grand 
Rapids, and Bay City support regularly ordained 
rabbis, while some of the smaller cities have the 
ministrations of these same rabbis through a well- 
organized system of circuit preaching; others en- 
gage rabbis or rabbinical students for the high holy 
days. 

All the large cities of the state have the usual 
benevolent societies, but, excepting in Detroit, 
there are none that have occasion to do any 
considerable work. At Detroit, however, the United 
Jewish Charities (organized Nov., 1899) carries on 
practically every phase of philanthropic work. It 
dedicated in Sept., 1903, a new and thoroughly 
equipped building of its own. About 318,000 is 
annually expended by the Jews of Michigan in or- 
ganized philanthropy. See DETrRorrT. 

All the principal lodges are represented in the 
cities of Michigan, notably the B’nai B’rith, Kesher 
shel Barzel. Brith Abraham, and Free Sons of Israel. 





543 





There are social clubs in Detroit, Kalamazoo, Grand 
Rapids, and Bay City, and educational organizations 
exist in the larger cities. Of these the most note- 
worthy are the Talmud Thora Association of De- 
troit, Which owusa modern and splendidly equipped 
school-buiiding; the Jewish Woman's Club of De- 
troit; and the Temple Literary Society of Kalama- 
700. One Jewish newspaper, the “Jewish Ameri- 
ean,” of Detroit, is published in Michigan. It is 
edited by Rabbi Leo M. Franklin. 

Quite a number of Jews in Michigan have held 
public offices of importance. Among those at pres- 
ent (1903) in office are Charles C, Simons, state sen- 
ator; Bernard Ginsburg, vice-president of the 
Municipal Lighting Commission of Detroit; Albert 
Kahn, art commissioner of Detroit; Samuel Folz, 
mayor of Kalamazoo; and M. Bloomrosen, mayor 
of Manistique. 

A. L. M. F. 

MICHMASH (wn5): A town of Benjamin, 
east of Beth-aven (1 Sam. xiii. 2 e¢ passdi ; Nel. x1. 
81). The ferm “ Michmas” (D931) occurs in Ezra 
i, 27 and in Neh. vii. 81, according to which the 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Michigan ee 
Micrococcus Prodigiosus 


duce a blood-red coloring-matter (sometimes pink, 
sometimes brownish). Cultures of this bacterium 
can be observed on gelatin, milk, meat, and other 
articles of food, especially on boiled potatoes (Fig. 
1), on bread, and on wafers (Figs. 2, 3). 

Its germs, though not very common, exist here 
and there in atmospheric dust, and are thus capable 
of accidentally producing “ blood-spots” on different 
substances. These spots were formerly interpreted 
as indicating the wrath of Heaven; and they gave 
rise to the belief in miracles of “bleeding hests,” 
“bleeding bread,” etc. Errera witnessed (1882) 
the “miracle” inake its appearance unexpectedly on 
loaves of bread on which he was cultivating a 
certain fungus for phytochemical study. A well- 
known case is the epidemic in 1848 of “blood- 
spots” on the bread produced in the military bake- 
liouses of Paris. The German naturalist. Ehren- 
berg mentions (in “Ber. der Berl. Ak. der Wiss.” 
1848, ‘p. 850; 1849, p. 106) a series of similar 
“miracles.” A very charactcristic one happened 
near Padua, Italy, in 1819, where Sette discovered 
its causein the growth of the Zaogalactina. Another 





CULTURES OF MICROCOCCTS PRODIGIOSUS ON (1) PoraTo AND ON (2 AND 3) WAFERS. 


hame may mean “hidden.” Michmash is particu- 
larly known as the scene of the war between the 
Philistinesand Saul and Jonathan (I Sam. xiii.-xiv. ; 
see JONATHAN No. 2); and it is praised in the Mish- 
nah for its excellent wheat (Men. viii. 1). 

J. M. Sex. 

MICROCOCCUS PRODIGIOSUS (“the mi- 
erobe of miracles”; known also as the Microbe 
of Bleeding Hosts): A microscopical organism, 
first mentioned in 1819 by an Italian doctor, Vin- 
cenzo Sette, who observed it on polenta, a sort of 
Italian maize pudding, and gave it the strange 
name of Zaogalactina tmetropha (from Caw = “I 
live”; yaZaytay = “ gelatin”; yuac = “TI am placed 
upon”; zpoo#—“food”); afterward called Monas 
prodigiosa by Ehrenberg (1848); iWicrococeus pro- 
digiosus by Colin (1872); and Bacillus prodigiosus by 
Fligge (1886). It does not beloug to the Lafusoria, 
as Ehrenberg believed, but is a short, roundish bac- 
terlum, varying from about one half to one thou- 
sandth of a millimeter in size, motile, and bearing 
@ Variable number of cilia. It multiplies by simple 
division and forms no spores. Its colonies emit 4 
disagreeable trimethylamin smell and generally pro- 


was observed by Ehrenberg in Berlinin 1848. Many 
of these “miracles” are of interest in connection 
with the subject of the desecration of the sacred 
hosts, the Jews having often been accused of trans- 
fixing those in which the microbes had appeared 
(see BRUSSELS; Host, DESECRATION OF). 

It may be assumed that many of the stories of 
biood-miracles had no material basis, and were 
mere inventions; but as the JAftcrococcus prodigzosus 
grows quite easily on wafers, it is not unlikely 
that some accusations had their origin in the actual 
appearance of red spots on sacred hosts which had 

been kept damp and become exposed 
The to atmospheric dust. Besides, other 
Myth of bacteria produce similar red spots, 


Host-Dese- ¢.9., Bacillus kiliensis Migula, B&. 
cration. plymouthensis Migula, B. ruber Cohn, 


and Sarcina rubra Menge; and other 
lower organisms, e.g., Saccharomyces glutinis, on 
starch, potatoes, and bread; Huglena sanguinea, on 
standing waters, ctc. Again, in other cases, red 
dust from ferruginous soils and precipitated by a 
shower may have produced so-calied * blood-rain ” 
or “blood-stains.” 


Microcosm 
Middot 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


544 





Nor must it be forgotten that the Christian belief 
in transubstantiation lent special force to any super- 
stition which associated the idea of blood with that 
of the sacred host. It is reported that this belief, 
which was at first much contested, became general 
only after the “ miracle” of 1264 at Bolsena. <A priest 
who doubted the real presence of Christ in the bread 
of communion suddenly saw “drops of blood” 
falling on his linen garment. This was considered 
a decisive proof; and Pope Urban IV. immediately 
ordered the event to be solemnized by the insti- 
tution of Corpus Christi Day. 

it is possible also, according to a passage of 
Lucian quoted by Ferdinand Colin, that the Pythag- 
orean prohibition against eating beans was due to 
the fact that bloodlike spots had been observed on 
cooked beans which had been preserved for some 
time. Perhaps the Jewish custom of placing some 
iron in contact with every dish, on four days of the 
year, in order to prevent the fall of blood, snp- 
posed to drop from heaven into the food (sce TE- 
KUFAU), may also have originated in some such case 
of xecidental blood-red spots. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vincenzo Seite, Memoria Storico-Naturale 
snl? Arrosstimento Straordinario di_Alcune Sostanze Ali- 
mentose Oxsxervato Nea Provineia di Padova VAnno 1819, 
Venice, 1824; Ehrenberg, MWonas (2) Prodigiosa, in Berichte 
der Berliner Akadcinie der Wisseischatten, 1848, p. 349; 
idem, Forisefzungy der Beoh. des Soyer. Blutes tm Brode 
als Moras Prodigiost, ib, 848, p. 354: idem, Fernere Mit- 
theilingen fiber Afonas Pradigtosa, ib. 1849, p. 1013 Fer- 
dinand Cohn, Veber Blutéihuliche Fdrbungen Dureh Mi- 
Kroskopische Orgeaenisnen, in Mittheilungen der Sehle- 
sixchen Gesellschaft fitr Vateridindische Cultur, 1850, p. 
39; idem, Briefan Bhrenhery ther Monas Prodigiosa auf 
Gekochten Bohnen und das Verbot_des Bohnenessens bet 
den Pythagordern, in Berichte der Berliner Akademie der 
Wissenschaften, 1850. p.5; idem. Blut auf Speisen, Hostien 
(in his Die Mikroskopische Welt, in Die Gegenwart, 
xi. 80S); Fligge, Die Mikroorganismen, 2d ed., 1886, p. 284; 
W. Migula, System. der Bakterien, ii. 845, Jena, 1900. 


a L. Er. 


MICROCOSM (Greek, pexpdc, small; xédouoc, uni- 
versc): Philosophical term applied to man when 
contrasted with the universe, which, in this connec- 
tion, is termed the macrocosm. The idea of an anal- 
ogy between man and the universe was expressed 
by the ancient Greek philosophers like Pythagoras, 
Plato, Aristotle, and especially by the Stoics, who 
developed it in connection with their doctrine of 
rvetua, They considered the universe to be an ani- 
mated being resembling a man and, like him, made 
up of a body anda soul. From this idea, exagger- 
ated and developed, proceeded the doctrine of micro- 
cosm and macrocosm, according to which man is a 
universe in little, and the universe a 
man in great. Thesoulof man, which 
forms a part of the universal soul, is 
to his body what the universal soul is to 
the universe; and the rational part of 
the soul performs in man the same functions as the 
universal intellect in the universe. From this as- 
similation of man to the universe resulted the pre- 
vailing belief in a mutual influence exercised by 
each on the other. 

The doctrine of man’s being a microcosm pene- 
trated early into Jewish literature. It is found, 
though only in a haggadic form, in the Abot de- 
Rabbi Natan (ch. xxxi.), where every part of man’s 
body is compared with a certain object. The hair 
represents the forest; the bones. woods; the lungs 


Man a 
Universe 
in Little. 


ee a 


are the wind; the loins, counselors; the stomach, a 
mill; the knees, horses; when erect the man re- 
sembles the mountain, when recumbent the plain. 
Less fantastic analogies between man and the uni- 
verse are given by Israeli (“Sefer ha-Yesodot,” ed, 
Fried, p. 59), Saadia (commentary on the “Sefer 
Yezirah,” iv. 1), and Shabbethai Donolo (commen- 
tary on Gen. i. 26). To them man is a microcosm 
owing to the correspondence of the four humors of 
which his body is up to the four elements 
which constitute the universe: the blood corre- 
sponds to the air; the phlegm, to water; the black 
bile, to earth; and the yellow bile, to fire. Ibn 
Gabirol expounds in his “ Mekor Hayyim” (iii., § 6) 
the theory of microcosm and macro- 
cosm in its metaphysical sense. “As 
the intellect,” he says, “which is the 
most sublime and the most simple of 
all the substances of the inicrocosm, 
is not attached directly to the body, 
but has for intermediaries the animal 
soul and the ethical spirit, so the most sublime and 
the most simple substances of the macrocosm must 
have intermediaries by means of which they are at- 
tached to corporeality.” In another passage of the 
same work (iii., § 44) Gabirol says: “If thou wishest 
to form an idea of the construction of the universe, 
thou hast only to observe the construction of the 
human body, in which thou mayest find an analogy.” 
Very original analogies between man and the heav- 
enly spheres are given by Bahya(“ Ma‘ani al-Nafs”; 
Hebr. version by I. Broydé, ch. xiii., Paris, 1894), 
As there are nine spheres, one contained within the 
other, so is the human body constituted of nine vari- 
ous substances entering one into another; namcly: 
the bones, which contain the marrow; the vessels 
and the veins, which contain the blood; the flesh; 

the skin; the hair; and thenails. To 

Bahya’s the twelve signs of the zodiac of the 
Analogies. heavenly sphere correspond the twelve 

apertures in the human body, six to 
the right, and six to the left: the eyes, the ears, the 
nostrils, the mouth, the breasts, the navel, and the 
two other openings. As every sign of the zodiac is 
supervised by a power proceeding from the univer- 
sal soul and returning to it, so is every limb of the 
human body governed by one of the powers of the 
soul. As the destinies of all living beings and natu- 
ral phenomena are regulated by the seven planets, 
so the maintenance and good order of the human 
body depend on the seven powers of the soul, com- 
bined with the physical faculties of man. As the 
stars are constituted of bodies and souls that have 
a visible influence on the animal and vegetable king- 
doms, so the human body is provided with seven 
physical powers by means of which it grows and 
maintains itself. To the seven intellectual powers 
of the heavenly spheres correspond the five senses 
with the faculties of perception and understanding. 
the first five resembling the five planets, and the 
last two the sun and the moon. 

The comparison between man and the universe is 
the central idea of the philosophical work of Joseph 
ibn Zaddik entitled “‘Olam Katan” (The Micro- 
cosm). To it are devoted the end of the first division 
and the whole second division of the book. There 


The Four 
Humors 
and the 

Four 

Elements. 


545 


Microcosm 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Middot 


ee 


ig nothing in the world, says Ibn Zaddik, that does 
not finda parallel in man. In him are found the 
four elements and their characteristics ; 
Joseph ibn for he passes from heat to cold, from 
Zaddik. moisture to dryness. He participates 
in the nature of minerals, vegeta- 
ples, and animals; he comes into being and passes 
out of being like the mincrals; nourishes and repro- 
duces himself like the plants; has feeling and life 
like the animals. Further, he presents analogies to 
the characteristics of things: his erect figure resem- 
ples that of the terebinth; his hair, grass and veg- 
etation; his veins and arteries, rivers and canals; 
and his bones, the mountains, In addition, he pos- 
sesses the characteristics of the animals: he is brave 
like a lion, timid like a hare, patient like a lamb, 
and cunning like a fox. Moses ibn Ezra, in his 
“‘Arugat ha-Bosem,” says that man is called micro- 
cosm because he resembles the macrocosm in his 
composition, derivation, and creation. With the 
spread of the Peripatetic philosophy, in the twelfth 
century, the doctrine of microcosm, which entered 
Jewish philosophy through the Arabian Neoplato- 
nists, and especially through the encyclopedists 
knownas “the Brethren of Sincerity ” (comp. Dicte- 
rici, “ Die Anthropologie der Araber,” pp. 41 e¢ seq.). 
lost all its significance. Maimonides is concerned 
only with the original Aristotelian idea from which 
the doctrine evolved, namely, that the whole uni- 
verse is one organic body, and that it has the prop- 
erties of a living being, possessing life, motion, and 
a soul: but he does not secm to believe in the nice- 
ties of the analogy between the human body and 
the universe as established by the Neoplatonists 
(see “ Moreh Nebukim,” i., chap. Ixxii.). WWowever, 
the doctrine became prominent in the Cabala. “The 
human body,” says the Zohar, “is the model of all 
the creations; it unites all the earthly and celestial 
worlds” (iii. 185a). In another pas- 
sage it is said: “The human figure 
unites all that is above and all that is 
below; therefore the Ancient of An- 
cients has chosen it for His form” (iii. 141b). In 
“Tikkune Zohar” man is regarded as a microcosm, 
and, viewed in his relation to the macrocosm, consid- 
ered as the great universal ideal man or ADAM 
Kapmon. It is probably through the influence of 
the Cabala that the doctrine of the microcosm came 
into great favor among the philosophers of the Re- 
naissance like Bruno, Paracelsus, and others, who 
held that in man’s nature is found the sum of all the 
cosmic forces. Heisable to understand the material 
world, because he unites in his body the finest es- 
Sence of all the material things; and as an intel- 
lectual being of sidereal origin, he has the faculty of 
conceiving the world of intellectual forms through 
the spark of the divine infused into his nature. 


In the 
Cabala. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fried, Sefer ha-Yesodot, p. 59: Jellinek, edi- 
tion of Ibn Zaddik’s ‘Olam Katan, Intro.; Bloch.in Winter 
and Wiinsche, Die Jildische Litteratur, ii. 729; Stein- 
schneider, Hebr. Uebers. p. 407; Kaufmann, <Attributen- 
ehre, p.5; Munk, Guide des Egarés, i., chap. 1xxii., note; 
Karppe, Etudes sur VOrigine et la Nature du Zohar, pp. 
452 et seq.; Joél, Beitrdge zur Gesch. der Philosophie, i. 29. 
J. I. Br. 


MIDDLEMAN, JUDAH: English rabbi of 
the first half of the nineteenthcentury. He was the 


VIII.—35 


author of “ Netibot Emet,” a work written in de- 
fense of the traditions of the Talmud against the 
attacks, in “Old Paths” (“Netibot ‘Olam ”), of the 
Rev. Alexander McCaul. Only the first part of 
the “Netibot Emet” was published, in 1847, under 
the title “Paths of Truth,” an English translation 
by M. H. Breslau appearing in the same year. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacobs and Wolf, Bibl. Anglo-Jud. p. 107. 
J. I. Co. 


MIDDOT: Treatise in the Mishnah; tenth in the 
order Kodashim. It deals with the dimensions and 
the arrangement of the Temple, and is divided 
into five chapters containing thirty-four paragraphs 
in all. 

Ch. i.; The night-watches in thesanctuary. The 
priests kept guard in three places, the Levites in 
twenty-one ($1). These watches were controlled 
by the captain of the Temple (“ish har ha-ba- 
yit”). When this official passed the priest or the 
Levite on guard, the latter was required to rise. 
If he failed to do so, the captain addressed him; 
and if it became evident that the guard was asleep, 
the captain struck him with his staff. The captain 
had also the option of burning the sleeping watch- 
man’s coat. The other guards then jested at the 
expense of the sleeper and shouted: “* A Levite is 
beaten and his clothes are burned because he has 
fallen asleep at his post” ($2). The gates of the 
hill of the Temple. On the eastern gate was a 
representation of Susa, the Persian capital, in token 
of the Persian supremacy (§ 38). The gates of the 
inner court ($$ 4-5) In the northeastern part of 
the forecourt was a cell in which the Hasmoneans 
preserved the altar-stones which were consecrated 
during the reign of the Greek (Syrian) kings (§ 6). 
The “place cf the hearth” (“bet ha-moked ”) was 
alarge hall with an arched ceiling. Around the 
walls were stone benches upon which the older 
priests rested, the younger ones sleeping on the 
floor ($$ 7-8). While a Levite kept watch outside. 
a priest within locked the doors, put the bunch of 
keys in a piace hollowed out for them, and covered 
them with a marble slab, on which he lay down to 
sleep (§ 9). 

Ch. ii.: The dimensions of the Temple hill: 500 
cubits square ($1). All who ascended the hill kept 
to the right excepting mourners and those under a 
ban, who walked on the left, that they might be 
distinguished from the rest. Those who met the 
erief-stricken grected them with the words, “May 
He who dwellethin this house comfort thee”; while 
to one under a ban they wished reconciliation with 
his friends and the consequent removal of the ban 
($2). Within the walls of the Temple hill was a 
railing which had been broken in thirteen places by 
heathen kings, but had been restored. Height and 
breadth of the steps and of the gates of the Temple. 
All the doors with the exception of those of the 
gate of Nicanor were covered with gold (§ 8). Di- 
mensions of the space allotted to women in the inner 
court. From this court the men’s court was reached 
by a flight of fifteen steps, corresponding to the fir- 
teen “songs of degrees” in the Psalms (Ps. cxx. - 
cxxxiv.); and on these steps the priests stood while 
singing (§ 5). Under the forecourt were cells in 


Middot 

Midian 

which the Levites kept their musical instruments. 
Enumeration of the thirteen gates of the forecourt 
(§ 6). 

Ch. iil. : Dimensions of the altar of burnt offerings. 
This at first was only twenty-five cubits square, but 
was afterward enlarged to thirty-two cubits (§ 1). 
The stones of the altar might not be hewn with an 
iron tool or changed in any way. The reason as- 
signed for this is noteworthy, and is at the same 
time an explanation of Ex. xx. 25. The weapon 
which shortens human life and causes early death is 
of iron, while the altar serves to prolong the life of 
man by expiating sin; hence it is not fitting that 
this destructive metal should be used on the altar 
(§ 4). Arrangement of the place, on the north side 
of the altar, for killing the sacrificial animals (§ 5). 
The laver between the porch and the altar (§ 6). 
The porch, the golden grape-vine with its golden 
tendrils, leaves, and grapes ($8 7-8; comp. Hul. 90b, 
where R. Isaac b. Nahmani remarks that this mish- 
nah— Mid. iii. 8—was one of the passages in which 
the wise had spoken words of exaggeration and 
hence were not to be taken literally). 

Ch. iv.: Detailed description of that part of the 
Temple called “hekal,” of its entrances—one of 
which, according to Ezek. xliv. 2, was never used 
—<loors, chambers, steps, and balustrades. 

Ch. v.: Description of the inner court and of its 
chambers. In this court was a hall built of square 
stones and called “lishkat ha-gazit,” where the 
Great Sanhedrin met and decided all matters touch- 
ing the priesthood. One of its chief duties was to 
examine the genealogy of each individual priest and 
to determine his fitness for service in the Temple. 
The priest in whom a blemish was discovered 
wrapped himself in black garments and left the 
Temple, but he inwhom no fault was found clothed 
himself in white, entered the Temple, and took his 
placeamong the other priests. Whenever it happened 
that all the priests who were examiued on a single 
day were without blemish, that day was celebrated 
asa holiday. There is no Gemara to this treatise. 
See also TEMPLE. 

8. 8. J. Z. W.. 

MIDDOT: THE SEVEN, OF HILLEL. Sce 
TaLMUD HERMENEUTICS. 

MIDDOT, SHELOSH-‘ESREH: The thirteen 
forms of mercy, enumerated in Ex. xxxiv. 6-7, 
whereby God rulesthe world. According to the ex- 
planation of Maimonides (* Moreh Nebukim,” i. 52), 
which is confirmed by the Sifre (Deut. 49 [ed. Fried- 
mann, p. 85]), these middot must not be regarded as 
qualities inherent in God, but merely as so many at- 
tributes of His activity, by which the divine govern- 
ance appears to the human observer to be controlled. 
In the Sifre, however, these attributes are not called 
“middot,” which may mean “quality” as well as 
“rule” and “measure” (comp. Ab. v. 10-15), but “ dera- 
kim” (ways), since they are the ways of God which 
Moses prayed to know (Ex. xxxiii. 18), and which 
God, according to the traditional explanation of Ex. 
Xxxiv. 6-7, proclaimedtohim. The number thirteen 
isadopted from the Talmudicand rabbinic tradition, 
while the Karaites count only nine, ten, or eleven 
middot (comp. Aaron b. Elijah, “Keter Torah,” 
ad loe,, Eupatoria, 1866), The rabbinical school in- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


546 


deed agrees that the middot number thirteen and 
that they are contained in Ex. xxxiv. 6-7, but with 
which word they begin and with which they con- 
clude are moot questions. According to Tobiah ben 
Eliezer, Midrash Lekah Tob, ad luc..ed. Buber, Wilna, 
1884: R. Jacob Tam, in Tos. R. H. 17b, catchword 
“Shelosh-‘Esreh Middot”; Abraham ibn Ezra in his 
commentary, ad loc.; Asher b. Jehiel; and Kalony- 
mus, “Meshoret Mosheh,” ed. Goldenthal, p. 14, 
Leipsic, 1845, the thirteen middot begin with the first 
“ Adonai,” in verse 6, and end with the 
word “we-nakeh” in verse 7. The 
single attributes are contained in the 
verses as follows: 

(1) ‘* Adonai,’’? compassion before man sins; (2) ‘ Adonai,” 

compassion after man bas sinned (comp. R. H. 17b); (3) ** El,’ 
mighty in compassion to give all creatures according to their 
need; (4) * Rahum,” merciful, that mankind may not be dis- 
tressed; (5) *‘Hanun,” gracious if mankind is already in dis- 
tress; (6) “‘Erek appayim,”’ slow to anger; (7) ‘*‘ Rab hesed,” 
plenteous in mercy; (8) ‘* Emet,” truth; (9)** Nozer hesed la- 
alafim,”’ keeping mercy unto thousands (comp. the explanation 
of Samuel b. Meir in “* Da‘at Zekenim,”’ ad loc.); (0) ** Nose 
‘awon,” forgiving iniquity; (11) ‘Nose pesha‘,’’ forgiving 
transgression; (12) *‘* Nose hata’ah,” forgiving sin; (18) ‘* We- 
nakeh,”’ and pardoning. 
According to R. Nissim (quoted in Tos. R. H., /.c.), 
Isaac Alfasi, and others, the thirteen middot begin 
only with the second “ Adonai,” since the first one 
is the subject of “wa-yikra” (and he proclaimed). 
To secure the number thirteen, some count “nozer 
hesed la-alafim ” as two (Nissim in Tos. /.¢.), while 
others divide “erek appayim” into two, since for- 
bearance is shown both to the good and to the 
wicked (comp. the gloss on Tosafot, Uc. and Ibn 
Ezra, /.c.), and still others end the thirteenth mid- 
dah with “lo yenakeh ” (he does not pardon; Mai- 
monides, “Pe’er ha-Dor,” p. 19b, Lemberg, 1859), 
this being considered a good quality, since through 
punishment man is moved to repentance, after 
which he is pardoned and pure (comp. Yoma 86a; 
Aaron b. Elijah, @.c.; and “‘Ez ha-Hayyim,” ch. 
xcii.). Others term “we-nakeh lo yenakeh” a sin- 
gle middah, the thirteenth being, in their opinion, 
“poked ‘awon abot ‘al-banim ” (visiting the iniquity 
of the fathers upon the children), “this being re- 
garded as compassionate since the transgressor is 
not punished immediately ” (Maimonides, ¢.c.; Aaron 
b. Hayyim, U.c.; comp. also “ Da‘at Zekenim ”). 

The general usage is based on the view of Lekah 
Tob, R. Tam, and Ibn Ezra, and the various reci- 
tations of the thirteen middot begin with the first 
“Adonai” after “wa-yikra,” and conclude with 

“we-nakeh.” They must not be re- 

Liturgical cited by only one person in prayer 
Usage. (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 568, 
5), but by an entire congregation, 

which must consist of ten persons at least (“ miu- 
yan”). They are recited on every holy day—not on 
the ordinary Sabbaths—when the Torah scroll is 
taken from the Ark, and it is also customary that on 
the fast-days on which Ex. xxxii. 11-14 and xxxiv. 
1-10 are read, the reader stops at the word “ wa- 
yikra” in order that the congregation may recite the 
thirteen middot, after which he continues his read- 
ing. The thirteen middot are very frequently re- 
cited in penitential prayers, in some of which they 
have even been hypostatized and are invoked, as 


Division. 


SOR TY: eens =H. 


<0 ey ene recy Sm aye ee eee 


547 


See 
inferior celestial beings, to aid the prayers of Israel 
avd ta present them before God. This is especially 
the case in the selihah of the eve of the New- Year, 
which is repeated at the morning service on the 
Day of Atonement, and which begins with the 
words “Shelosh ‘esreh middot,” and in the pizmon 
of Amittai b. Shephatiah for the fifth day of re- 
pentance, which is recited also at the evening serv- 
ice on the Day of Atonement, and in which the 
*middat ha-rahamim” (compassion) is particularly 
invoked. On fast-days as well as during the week 
pefore the New-Year (the so-called selihot days), 
and on the days between the New-Year and the 
Day of Atonement, called the days of repentance, 
many penitential prayers(“selihot”) are recited in ad- 
dition to the usual daily prayers. After every such 
petition the thirteen middot are recited with their 
introductory prayer, the well-known “El Melek 
yosheb,” which runs as follows: “ Almighty King, 
sittest on the throne of mercy, showing forth Thy 
compassion, and forgiving the sins of Thy people 
by ever taking away their former guilt, ofttimes 
granting pardon untosinners and forgiveness to the 
transgressors, making manifest Thy goodness both 
to body and to soul, nor punishing them according 
to their iniquity; Almighty One, as Thou hast 
taught us to recite the thirteen [middot], so remem- 
ber now the thirteenfold covenant, as Thou didst in 
former days proclaim it to the modest one [Moses], 
evenasitis written . . .” (then follow the verses Ex. 
xxxiv. 5-7a and 9b). The importance attributed to 
the thirteen middot in this prayer and the potency 
ascribed to the recitation of them in the penitential 
prayer are based upon an overliteral and partially 
erroneous interpretation of a passage from the Tal- 
mud, which runs as follows (R. H. 17%b): “ After 
God had proclairned the thirteen middot to Moses, 
IIe told him: ‘As often as Israel sha!'l offend, thus 
shall they do in My presence, and I will forgive 
them.’ Rab Judah says that a covenant was made 
that the thirteen middot should not be without 
effect.” The phrase “thus shall they do” was under- 
stood as requiring the recitation of the thirteen mid- 
dot in the same way as God had proclaimed them to 
Moses, while the words of Rab Judah were inter- 
preted to imply that even the mention of the thir- 
teen middot in prayer should not be without effect. 
In reality, however, the first sentence does not read 
“vomeru,” recite, but “ ya‘asu,” act, and, according 
to the correct explanation of R. Isaiah Horowitz in 
“Shene Luhot ha-Berit” (Amsterdam, 1698, p. 33a), 
the passage means that if one acts according to the 
pattern of these middot and shows himself compas- 
sionate, merciful, and forgiving toward his fellow 
creatures, God aiso will be compassionate and mer- 
ciful toward him and will forgive his sins (comp. 
the aphorism of Raba, R. H. 17a, and the remark in 
Sifre, Z.c., that the middot are the ways of God, in 
Which, according to Deut. xi. 22, mankind should 
Walk). In like manner, the words of Rab Judah 
really denote that if the thirteen middot are the rules 
of life and conduct, not mere formulas, they wil] not 
be inefficacious. The exercise and practise of these 
Virtues cause God to treat man with mercy and 
Compassion, for according to human actions, both in 


degree and in kind, divine recompense is measured | 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Middot 
Midian 


(Sotah 8b). If this correct interpretation of the Tal- 
mudic passage in question be adopted, the impor- 
tance attributed to the recitation of the thirteen mid- 
dot lacks all justification. 

s. J. Z. L. 


MIDDOT: THE THIRTEEN, OF R. ISH- 
MAEL. See TatmMup HERMENEUTICS. 


MIDIAN AND MIDIANITES: Midian was 
the son cf Abraham and Keturah. His five sons, 
Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abidah (R.V. “ Abida”), and 
Eldaah, were the progenitors of the Midianites (Gen. 
xxv, 1-4; I Chron. i. 82-83). The term “ Midian ” 
(qd), Which seems to be derived from the Arabic 
root #7 (= “place of judgment”), denotes also the 
nation of the Midtanites, the plural form, D°9"1», 
occurring only in Gen, xxxvii. 28, 86 (in the latter 
passage D°37% seems to be a scribal crror for 
mgm) and Num. xxv. 17, xxxi. 2. Their geo- 
graphical situation is indicated as having been to 
the east of Palestine; Abraham sends the sons of his | 
concubines, including Midian, eastward (Gen. xxv. 
6). But from the statement that Moses led the flocks 
of Jethro, the priest of Midian, to Mount IYoreb 
(Ex. iij. 1), it would appear that the Midianites 
dwelt in the Sinaitic Peninsula. Later, in the period 
of the Kings, Midian seems to have occupied a tract 
of land between Edom and Paran, on the way to 
Egypt (I Kings xi. 18). Midian is likewise described 

asin the vicinity of Moab: the Midian- 
Geograph- ites were beaten by the Edomite king 


ical Hadad “in the field of Moab” (Gen. 
Position. xxxvi. 35), and in the account of Ba- 


laam it is said that the elders of both 
Moab and Midian called upon him to curse Israel 
(Num, xxii. 4, 7). Further evidences of the geo- 
graphical position of the Midianites appear in a 
survey of their history. 

In the time of Moses the Midianites are first men- 
tioned as having had a priest by the name of Reuel 
or JETHRO, Who became afterward Moses’ father-in- 
law. Toward the close of the forty years’ wander- 
ing of the children of Israel in the wilderness, the 
Midianites were allied with the Moabites in the at- 
tempt to exterminate the Israelites. For this reason 
Moses was ordered by God to punish the Midianites, 
Moses, accordingly, despatched against them an 
army of 12,000 men, under Phinehas the priest; this 
force defeated the Midianites and slew all their 
males, including their five kings, Evi, Rekem, Zur, 
Hur, and Reba, It may be noted that these tive 
princes of Midian are called by Joshua (xiii. 21) the 
vassals of Sihon, the king of the Amorites. Itis pos- 
sible that Sihon had previously conquered Midian 
and made it a dependency, and that after his death 
the Midianites recovered their independence. The 
Israelitish soldiers set on fire all the 
cities and fortresses of the Midianites, 
carried the women and children into 
captivity, and seized their cattle and goods. The 
Israelites were afterward ordered by Moses to slay 
every Midianite male child and every woman, sparing 
only the female children (Num. xxxi. 2-18). It ap- 
pears from the same account that the Midianites were 
rich in cattle and gold. The narrative shows that cach 
of the five Midianite tribes was governed by its own 


Wars. 


Midian 
Midrash 





king, but that all acted together against a common 
enemy; that while a part of each tribe dwelt in 
cities and fortresses in the vicinity of Moab, another 
part led a nomadic life, living in tents and appar- 
ently remote from the seat of the war. For, after 
the Midianites had been “exterminated” by the 
army of Phinehas, they reappear some hundreds of 
years later, in the time of Gidcon. 

The Biblical account of the battle between the 
Midianites and Gideon (Judges vi.-vili.) asserts that 
the Israelites suffered at the hands of the Midianites 
for a space of six years. The Midianites seem to 
have been then a powerful and independent nation ; 
they allied themselves with the Amalekites and the 
children of the East, and they oppressed the Israel- 
ites so severely that the last-named were obliged to 
seek refuge in cavesand strongholds; they destroyed 
their crops and reduced them to extreme poverty 
(2b. vi. 1-6). The allied army of Midianites and 
Amalckites encamped in the valley of Jezreel (2. 
vi. 88) after having crossed the Jordan. Gideon 
with his army encamped by the fountain of Harod, 
the Midianite army being to the north of him. 
With 300 mcn Gideon succeeded in surprising and 
routing them, and they fled homeward across the 
Jordan in confusion (i). vii. 1-24). A point worth 


noting is that here only two Midianite kings, Zebah |! 


and Zalnuna, and two princes, Oreb and Zeeb, are 
mentioned (2d. vii. 25; vili. 8, 6, 10, 12, 18,21). This 
would show that only two tribes bore the name “ Mid- 
ianites,” while the remaining three probably were 
merged with other Arabic tribes, their kinsmen, and 
perhaps partly with the Israelites also. Midian is 
stated to have been “subdued before the children 
of Israel, so that they lifted up their heads no 
more” (2d. viii. 28). In fact, aside from allusions to 
this victory (Ps. Ixxxiii. 10, 12; Isa. ix. 4, x. 6; 
Hab. iii. 7), Midian is not mentioned again in 
sacred history except in Judith ii. 16, where the 
term “Midianites” scems to be a mistake for 
“ Arabians. ” 

The first recorded instance of a Midianite tribe 
surrendering its identity by attaching itself to an- 
other people appears in Judges i. 16. In this in- 
stance, which occurred in the period of the Judges, 
the Kenites, descendants of Jethro the Midianite, at- 
tached themselves to the Israelites in the wilderness 
of Judah, south of Arad. Later, in the time of 
Tiglath-pileser (745-727 B.c.), a tribe, called in the 
cunciform inscriptions “ Hayapa” and identified by 
Friedrich Delitzsch (“Wo Lag das Paradies?” p. 
304) with the tribe of Ephah, is said to have dwelt 
in the northern part of the Hejaz. Isaiah (1x. 6) 
speaks of Midian and Ephah as of two distinct peo- 
ples. The second son of Midian, Epher, is identified 
by Knobel with the Ghifar, an Arabic tribe which, in 
the time of Mohammed, had encampments near 
Medina. Traces of the Midianites existed in post- 
Biblical times. Ptolemy (“ Geography,” vi. 7) men- 
tions a place called Modiana, on the coast of Arabia: 
according to his statement of its position, this place 
may be identified with the Madyan of the Arabic 
geographers, in the neighborhood of ‘Ain ‘Una, op- 
posite the extremity of the Sinaitic Peninsula, and 
now known under the name of “* Magha ’ir Shu‘aib ” 
(= “the caves of Shu‘aib ” [“ Jethro ”)). 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


548 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cheyne and Black, Encye. Bibl.; Sir Richard 
Burton, The Gold Mines of Midian, London, 1878; idem, 
The Land of Midian Revisited, ib. 1879. 

Ss M. SEL. 


MIDRASH (yw 517, from the root wa, “to 
study,” “to investigate”): A term occurring as 
early as II Chron. xiii. 22, xxiv. 27, though perhaps 
not in the sense in which it came to be used later, 
and denoting “exposition,” “exegesis,” especially 
that of the Scriptures. Jn contradistinction to lit- 
eral interpretation, subsequently called “ peshat” 
(comp. Geiger’s “ Wiss. Zeit. Jiid. Theol.” v. 244), 
the term “midrash ” designates an exegesis which, 
going more deeply than the mere literal sense, at- 
tempts to penetrate into the spirit of the Scriptures, 
to examine the text from all sides, and thereby to 
derive interpretations which are not immediately 
obvious. The Talmud (Sanh. 4b) compares this 
kind of midrashic exposition to a hammer which 
awakens the slumbering sparks in the rock. The 
divergence between midrash and peshat increased 
steadily; and, although the consciousness of this 
divergence may not have increased in a proportion- 
ate degree, contrary to the view of Geiger (/.¢. pp. 
d3 et seq., 284 et seg.; comp. Weiss, “Dor Dor,” 
i. 167 et seq.) and others, it was never wholly ob- 
secured. Theconfession of Rab Kahana (Shab. 68a), 
that although he knew the entire Talmud by the 
time he was eighteen, it was many years later be- 
fore he learned the principle that a Bible verse can 
never lose its evident and literal meaning, is not 
to be taken as an indication of the general state of 
Bible study in his time; on the contrary, Rab 
IKkKahana wishes to indicate thereby that he was an 
exception to the rule. Raba’s statement in Yeb. 
24a likewise proves that a distinction was made be- 
tween midrash and peshat. At the most it can be 
proved that in some cases the Midrash was based on 
a peculiar interpretation of the literal meaning; 
thus, Sifra, Tazria‘, Neg. ix. 14 remarks in regard 
to the sentence “ We-im be-‘enaw ‘amad ha-netek ” 
(Lev. xiii. 37), “ in li ella be-‘ene ‘azmo be-‘ene beno,” 
etc. ; this shows that “be-‘enaw ” was explained as 
“jin his cyes,” an interpretation which certainly 
does not contradict the statement that the difference 
between midrash and peshat was recognized. 

The Bible exegesis of the Rabbis which had a 
moralizing or edifying tendency must be distin- 
guished from that which was of a legal nature: the 
former is known as Miprasu HacGeapDAu; the lat- 
ter, as MriprAsH HaLaKkan. Exegesis from an eth- 
ical or devotional point of view admits of more free- 
dom than hermeneutics aiming at the determination 
of legal maxims. This is true not only because the 
imagination has freer play in the former, and reason 
in the latter, but also because halakic exegesis, 
since it is intended for practical guidance and is 
more far-reaching in its results, is bound more 
closely by certain laws and principles (comp. the 
different view of Hirschfeld in “Halachische Exe- 
gese,” p. 13). 

As concerns the origin of the Midrash, Maimonides 
(“Sefer ha-Mizwot,” Hilkot “Shoresh,” 2) held that 
the Midrash was a product of the Halakah ; Nahmani- 
des, on the contrary, that the former was the source 
of the latter. It is impossible to decide whether 
either one was correct. Only this much can be said 


TS TN ne ernest oe te ae ee ey = pe RENNER reves 
FS ee eer nr a me ee 


549 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midian 
Midrash 





a priori, that there are certain expositions which 
could not have been evolved through mere theoret- 
ical speculation. Any other conclu- 


Origin of sions on the subject must be based on 
the a consideration of the various cir- 
Midrash. cumstances which favored the origin 


and development of the Midrash. 
In the first place, any application of theory to practise 
demands a more recondite interpretation than does 
the mere explanation of the literal meaning. <A gen- 
eral law demands special exposition in order to deal 
with the complications which frequently arise in 
daily life. Hven Moses was obliged to seek instruc- 
tion in several instances (Lev. x. 16, xxiv. 12; Num. 
xv. 34; the expressions “to expound unto them 
according to the mouth of the Lord” and “ because 
it was not declared what should be done unto him ” 
in the second and third of these passages respect- 
ively being cspecially noteworthy; see Krochmal, 
“Moreh Nebuke ha-Zeman,” p. 13). But even if 
the Midrash gave rise to the Halakah in certain 
cases in which an “investigation” of the Law be- 
came necessary for a practical decision, there were 
in all probability many more instances in which a 
legal basis, often difficult to find, was sought for 
certain rules which had arisen from the exigencies of 
life. That there were many such casesin which the 
Halakah was a subsequent justification of an accom- 
plished fact, though they are not always specifically 
noted, is shown by the well-known sentence of the 
Mishnah (Hag. 10a), “ Mikra mu‘at, halakot merub- 
bot,” by the sentence of R. Johanan (Yer. Ber. 4c), 
“Kol milla di-la mehawwera mesammekin lah min 
atrin saggin,” and by the remark “ Kera asmakta. be- 
‘alma,” which is frequently found in connection with 
very important rules, such as the determination of 
weights (Ber. 41b; Yer. Pes. 15a). Retroactive justi- 
fication is to be seen in many of the cases when one 
and the same halakah is variously deduced by dif- 
ferent tannaim (“ mishma ‘ot dorshin ”), and where the 
Amoraim fecl themselves compelled to assume a 
material difference, as in Pes. 84a, where no less 
than eight explanations are attempted. 

Great as was this twofold influence of actual 
practise on the origin and development of the Mid- 
rash, it must be borne in mind that speculation for 
its own sake in the obligatory study of the Law 
(Deut. vi. 7; Josh. i. 8) was likewise a factor; tor 
this exclusive and continued study probably con- 
tributed much tothe search for other interpretations 
than the merely literal one. The exegetes endeav- 
ored to find everything expressed in the Law; and 
Philo’s view that there were no superfluous words 
in Scripture, and that everything had a meaning 
(“De Profugis,” § 458), dominated not only the alle- 
gorical exegesis of Alexandria, but also to a large ex- 
tent the Midrash, even though no other connection 
existed between the two. On the rules by which 
the exegetes were guided in making these deduc- 
tions see MipRAsH HaLakaH and TALMUD. 

The history of the Midrash may be divided into 
three periods: (1) of the Soferim; (2) of the Tan- 
haim; and (3) of the Amoraim. (1) Midrashim 
ascribed to Biblical persons (Ber. 381b; Yeb. 7¥a e¢ 
passim) are haggadic aphorisms and may be recog- 
nized as such. Noteworthy is Shek. vi. 8, “Zeh 


Midrash she-darash Yehoyada‘ Kohen Gadol” (This 
is the Midrash which Jehoiada the High Priest 
taught), a statement which, however, 
Historical can not lay claim to historical value. 
View. The real date of the origin of the 
Midrash in question appears to be the 
period of the Soferim, the writers or scribes (Kid. 
dla; Yer. Shek. 48c), whose activity is summed up 
in the sentence, “So they read in the book, in the 
law of God, distinctly, and made them to under- 
stand” (Neh. viii. 8); however this verse is to be 
explained (Ned. 37b; Yer. Meg. 74d; “Responsen 
der Geonim,” ed. Harkavy, p. 217), it certainly in- 
dicates that the Soferim were much more than mere 
translators. Alleged traces of their Midrash, closely 
based upon the Bible, are Neg. xii. 5 et seg.; Sotah 
viii. 1 e¢ seg.; Ma‘as. Sh. v. 7 ef seg. According to 
Krochmal (¢.c.), the Soferim indicated which were 
their interpretations by means of peculiar script and 
certain signs (dots, kere and ketib, full and defect- 
ive writings); accordingly such midrashim as Sifra, 
Emor, ix. 3; 7. Shemini, v. 8; 7b. Behar, iv. 4; 
Mek., Mishpatim, 3, would belong to them; and even 
though the later explanations of these signs and this 
peculiar script are not established by tradition, but 
are in general controvertible and doubtful (comp. 
Sanh. 4a), the great age of some of the interpreta- 
tions is indicated by the Septuagint; e.g., Ex. xxii. 
7; Lev. xxin. 11, xxxiii. 40; Deut. xxv. 5 (comp, 
Frankel, “Ueber den Einfluss der Paliistinensischen 
Exegeseauf die Alexandrinische Hermeneutik,” pp. 
89 et seg.; Hoffmann, “Zur Einleitung in die Ha- 
lachischen Midraschim,” p. 74). 

(2) The beginning of the second period likewise 
is shrouded in obscurity. Of the “zekenim ha- 
rishonim,” whose date can not be definitely deter- 
mined, three midrashim have been preserved, Sifra, 
Wayikra, Hobah, xii. 1; 7. Mezora‘, ix. 12; Mek., 
Amalek, 2; Hkewise a few midrashim by Judah 
b. Tabbai and Simon b. Shetah, both of whom lived 
in the first century B.c. (Mek., Mishpatim, 20; 
Tosef., Sanh. viii. 3; Mak. 5b; Yer. Sanh. 22b). 
The opposition of the Sadducees, who rejected the 
oral law, and who were attacked by Tabbai and 
Shetah, naturally led to an attempt to base the oral 
law on Scripture, thus encouraging midrashic exe- 
gesis. The well-known interpretation of the pas- 
sage “aneye for an eye” (Ex. xxi. 24), contradicting 
the view of the Sadducees, who wished to apply the 
Law literally, gives evidence of a free and profound 
conception of the Biblical text even at that early 
date. In the following period Shemaiah and Ab- 
talion are mentioned as “darshanim gedolim ” (Pes. 
70; comp. Mek., Beshallah, 3). The seven rules 
of exposition propounded by Hillei—of whom, as 
of his opponent Shammai, only a few midrashim, all 
simple in character, have been preserved (Sifra, 
Shemini, ix. 5; 7. Neg. ix. 16; Yer. Pes, 33a; 
Tosef., ‘Er. iv. 7; Shab. 19a; Kid. 48a)—presup- 
pose a very extensive Midrash; and a like inference 
is to be drawn from the attempt of Hananiah b. 
Hezekiah b. Garon to harmonize the contradictions 
between Ezekieland the Pentateuch. The explana- 
tion in Sifre, Deut. 294, transmitted in the name of 
Hananiah’s son, and also mentioned in the passage 
Mek., Bahodesh, 7, is perhaps a fragment of this 


Midrash Haggeadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


550 





same Midrash. On the Mishnah of R. Akiba see 
JEW. ENCYC. 8.2. 

(3) In regard to the Midrash of the Amoraim the 
Babylonians employed more simple methods than 
the Palestinians, as Frankel correctly says (“ Mebo,” 
3b), though Weiss objects to this view (“ Bet ha- 
Talmud,” i. 69, note 4). But the exegesis of the 
Palestinian Amoraim was more simple than the Pales- 
tinian. For the midrashim of this period which have 
been preserved see MripRAsH HALAKAH. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Abraham b. David, exposition of the Baraita 
de-Rabbi Yishma‘elt in his commentary on the Sifra; Abu- 
darham, i}. pp. 35 et seg., Warsaw, 1877; Aaron ibn Hayyim, 
Middot Aharon ; Algazi, Yabin Shemu‘ah; B. Auerbach, 
Ha-Zofeh ‘al Darke ha-Mishnahk, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
1861; Bacher, Die Aelteste Terminologie der Jtidischen 
Schriftauslegung, Leipsic, 1899; J. Hagiz, Tehillat Hokmah, 
Amsterdam, 1709; Dobschiitz, ‘Die ‘Hinfache Bibelexegese 
der Tannaim, Halle-on-the-Saale, 1893; Derenbourg, Hist. 
pp. 393-395 ; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah: idem, Ueber Patltis- 
tinensische und Alerandrinisehe Schriftforschung, Bres- 
lau, 1854; idem, Ueber den Hinfluss der Paliistinensischen 
Eregese ‘auf die Alerandrinische Hermeneutik ; M. Plun- 
gian, Talpi y yot, 1849; Geiger, Wiss. Zeit. Jitad. Theol. v. 53 
et xeq.. 234: Levi b. Gershon, Sha‘are Zedek, reprinted in 
Berit Yu ‘koh, Leghorn, 1840; Sefer ha- Pel’ ah, pp. 74 et 
sey., Koret, "17843 Hamburger, R. B. T. s.v. Talmudische 
Sehriften; D. Hoffmann, Zur Binleitung in die Halachi- 
schen M idraschim, Berlin, 1886-87; idem, in Jitdlische 
Presse, 1892, Supplement, pp. 18 et seq.; idem, in Berliner 
Festschrift, 1903, pp. 45 ef seq.; Hirschfeld, Die Hulachische 
Evregese, 1840, reviewed in Orient, Lit. 1841; idem, in Afo- 
natsschrift, xxviii. 868-374; I. Horowitz, Torah slie-be‘al- 
Peh; A. L. J. Jehnda, Kizgur Kelale ha-Gemarah; Ibn 
Musa, in the collection Me-Harare Nemerim, Venice, 1599 ; 
Joshua ha-Levi, Hatikot ‘Olam; J. 8. Kaempf. Maintik Sod, 
Prague, 1861; 8S. Klein, Mi-Pene Kosht, Frankfort-on- the-Main 
1861; J. Caro, Kelale ha-Gemarah; Ch. Kases, Kin'at Sofe- 
rim, 1740; Koénigsberger, Die Quellen der Halacha, Berlin, 
1890; N. Krochmal, Moreh Nehbuke ha-Zeman, pp. 13 et seq.s 
Malbim. Ayyelet ha-Shahar, Introduction to his comments uy 
on the Sifra ; Malachi Cohen, Yad Malaki: J. Mecklenburger, 
Ha-Ketab wena-Kabhalan : 8. Rapoport, Dibre Shalom we- 
Emet, Prague, 1861; Rashi, commentary on Middot; Kobak, 
Seschurun, vi. 38 et seq.; Saadia, commentary on "Middot, 
reprinted by Schechter in Bet Talmud, iv, 235 et seq.; by 
Miller, in Saadia’s collected works, vol. ix., Paris: Samuel 
Valenci, in Me-Harare Nemerim; Scherschawski- printed 
an old exposition to Middot in Ha-Karmel, viii. 218 et seq.; 
8. Serillo, Kelale Shemuel ; Sarason of Chinon, Sefer Keritot ; 
Schwarz, Die Hermeneutische Analogie, reviewed in R. E. 
J. xxxvi.; idem, Der Hermeneutische Syllogismus; Moses 
Solomon, Netib Mosheh, Vienna, 1896; Strack, Midrash, in 
Herzog-Plitt, Real-Encye. ix. 507 et 8€9.2 Eliezer Trietsch, 
Sheb Shema‘teta: Weber, System der ‘Altsynagogalen Pa- 
ldstinischen T heoloyie, 1880, xix. et seq.; Weiss, Gesch. der 
Tradition; Zunz, G. V. pp. 37 et seq. 

J. S. Ho. 


MIDRASH HAGGADAHE: The subject will 
be treated under the following headings: 


General Statement. Ruth, Ecclesiastes, and 


Special Divisions: Esther. 
A. Midrash Haggadah in the 1. Shir ha-Shirim Rab- 
tannaitic midrashim, etc. bah. 
}. Mekilta. 2. Midrash Ruth. 
2. Sifra. 3. Midrash Kohelet. 
3. Sifre to Numbers. 4. Midrash Megiliat 
4. Sifre to Deuterono- Esther. 


IV. The other exegetical 


my. 
B. The purely haggadic mid- midrashim not dealing 


rashim. with the Pentateuch. 
I, The earliest exegetical (For Midrash Shemu’el, 
midrashim. Midrash Mishle, Mid- 


rash Tehillim see the 
several articles.) 


1. Bereshit Rabbah. 
2, Ekah Rabbati. 


IJ. The homiletic mid- 1. Midrash Yeshayah. 
rashim. 2. Midrash Yonah. 
1. Pesikta. 3. Midrash Iyyob. 
2. Wayikra Rabbah. V. Special haggadic 
3. Tanhuma Yelam- works. 


1, Pirke R. Eli‘ezer. 
2. Seder Eliyahu. 
(Other haggadic works 
referred to the article 
ee SMALL- 


R.) 
VI. Yalkut Shim ‘oni, Yal- 
kut ha-Makir, and Mid- 
rash ha-Gadol. 


medenu. 
. Pesikta Rabbati. 
. Debarim Rabbah. 
. Bemidbar Rabbah. 
Shemot Rabbah. 
Agadat Bereshit. 
We-Hizhir (Hash- 


$290 51 > 


kem). 
IIf. The exegetical mid- 
Trashim two Cantiecles, 


Midrash Haggadah embraces the interpretation, 
illustration, or expansion, in a moralizing or edify- 
ing manner, of the non-legal portions of the Bible 
(see HaGGapaH; Miprasw; Mrprasu HAaAtaKkan), 
The word “haggadah” (Aramaic, “agada”) meang 
primarily the recitation or teaching of Scripture; 
in a narrower sense it denotes the exegetic ampli- 
fication of a Biblical passage and the develop- 
ment of a new thought based thereupon. Like the 
formula “maggid ha-Katub”(=“the Scripture 
teaches ”), frequently found in the ancient writings, 
the noun “haggadah” (plural, “haggadot”) proba- 
bly had at first a general application, but at an early 

date was restricted to denote a non- 

Connota- halakic explanation (comp. Bacher, 

tion of “Ag. Tan.” 2d ed., pp. 461 e¢ seq.). 
Hagegadah. The word then came to be used ina 

more general sense, designating not 
the haggadic interpretation of single passages, but 
haggadic exegesis in general, the body of haggadic 
interpretations—in fine, everything which does not 
belong to the field of the Halakah. The haggadic 
Midrash, which confined itself originally to the ex- 
position of Scripture text, was developed in its 
period of tlorescence into finished discourses. “The 
Haggadah, which is intended to bring heaven down 
to the congregation, and also to lift man up to 
heaven, appears in this office both as the glorifica- 
tion of God and as the comfort of Israel. Hence 
religious truths, moral maxims, discussions concern- 
ing divine retribution, the inculcation of the laws 
which attest Israel’s nationality, descriptions of its 
past and future greatness, scenes and legends from 
Jewish history, comparisons between the divine and 
Jewish institutions, praises of the Holy Land, en- 
couraging stories, and comforting reflections of all 
kinds form the most important subjects of these 
discourses ” (Zunz, “G. V.” 1st ed., pp. 349 e¢ seq.). 

The opening words of this quotation are a para- 
phrase of a famous sentence in which the Haggadah 
was praised by the old haggadists themselves. “If 
thou wishest to know Him at whose word the world 
came into being, then learn the Haggadah, for 
through it thou shalt know the Holy One, praised 
be He, and follow His ways” (Sifre to Deut. xi. 
22). Indeed, the Haggadah, being exegesis from a 
religious and ethical standpoint, under took to influ- 
ence the mind of man and to induce him to lead a 

religious and moral life, “that he 

Object of might walk in the ways of God.” In 
Haggadah. conformity with the conditions of its 

time, it neither could nor would limit 
itself to the simple interpretation of Scripture, but 
included in its ever-widening circle of discussions 
and reflections on the Scripture text the highest 
thoughts of religious philosophy, mysticism, and 
ethics. It interpreted all the historical matter con- 
tained in the Bible in such a religious and national 
sense that the heroes of the olden time became pro- 
totypes, while the entire history of the people of 
Israel, glorified in the light of Messianic hopes, was 
made a continual revelation of God’s love and jus- 
tice. For this reason the importance for modern 
Jewish science of the study of the Haggadah can 
not be overestimated. 

The entire wealth of the haggadic Midrash has 


ON pe ee 


PPR ARN OY Eg ee ee tome 


TE Sem OG SPH A ASNT, Poy eacereh EERE ei 


551 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





been preserved in a series of very different works, 
which, like all the works of traditional literature, are 
the resultant of various collections and revisions, 
and the contents of all of which originated a long 
time before they were reduced to writing. The first 
traces of the midrashic exegesis are found in the 
Bible itself (see Mrprasit); while in the time of the 
Soferim the development of the Midrash Haggadah 
received a mighty impetus, and the foundations were 
laid for public services which were soon to offer the 
chief medium for the cultivation of Bibic exegesis. 
Much Midrash Laggadah, often mixed with foreign 
elements, is found in the Apocrypha, the Pseud- 
epigrapha, the works of Josephus and Philo, and 
the remaining Judeo-Hellenistic literature; but 
haggadic exegesis reached its highest development 
in the great epoch of the Mishnaic-Talmudic period, 
between 100 and 500 c.&., when all its different 
branches were fully worked out. The Haggadah of 
the Amoraim is the continuation of that of the Tan- 
naim; and, according to Bacher, there 
really is no difference between the 
ment of Amoraimand the Tannaim with refer- 
Haggadah. ence to the Haggadah. The final edi- 
tion of the Mishnah, which was of 
such signal importance for the Halakah, is of less 
significance for the Haggadah, which, in form as 
well as in content, shows the same characteristics in 
both periods. It may be said in particular, that in 
the field of the Haggadah the century after the 
completion of the Mishnah may be fairly compared 
with the century before its completion, as regards 
not only the wealth of the extant material and the 
number of the authors to be considered, but also the 
independence and originality of the subject-matter 
treated (comp. Bacher, “Ag. Pal. Amor.” vol. i., 
pp. vill. ef seq.). 

A story told in Yer. Hor. iii. 48b indicates the 
great extent of the haggadic exegesis and its general 
popularity at this time. When the aged Hanina b. 
Hama saw the people of Sepphoris flocking to the 
school of R. Benaiah, and heard that it was to hear 
R. Johanan deliver a discourse there, he exclaimed, 
“Praised be God that He permits me to behold the 
fruit of my labors during my lifetime. I have 
taught him the entire Haggadah, with the exception 
of that on Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.” In another 
passage, in a conversation between the patriarch 
Judah J. and Ishmael b. Jose, the story is told of R, 
Hiyya, that, lost in thought, he read through the 
whole Book of Psalms from the haggadic stand point 
(Yer. Kil. ix. 82b; Gen. R. xxxiii.). During the 
third and at the beginning of the fourth century the 
masters of Halakah were also the representatives of 
the Haggadah; but side by side with them appeared 
the haggadists proper (“rabbanan di- Agadta,” 
“ba‘ale Agada”), who subsequently became more 
aud more prominent, attracting with their dis- 
courses more hearers than the halakists. The high- 
est product of the Haggadah, the public discourse 
drawing upon ail the arts of midrashic rhetoric— 
sentence, proverb, parable, allegory, story, etc.— 
now received its final form. The ancient sen- 
tence “We-kullehon yesh lahem mikra we-yesh 
lahem mashal we-yesh lahem melizah ” (For each of 
them there is Bible text, a proverb, and a saying; 


Develop- 


comp, Cant. R. i. 1) may be applied to these prod- 
ucts of haggadic rhetoric. The epigoni of the 
Haggadah flourished in the fourth and at the be- 
ginning of the fifth century, and were followed by 
the anonymous haggadists who preserved and re- 
vised the immense haggadic material. Creative 
haggadic activity ceases with the end of the Tal- 
mudic period. The post-amoraic and the geonic 
period is the epoch of the collectors and revisers, 
during which the haggadic midrashim were reduced 
to writing, receiving the form in which they have 
been handed down more or less unchanged. Some- 
times the results of the Midrash Hag gadah—specitic 
deductions on the one hand, general precepts, sen- 
tences, and maxims on the other, obtained by a 
study of the Biblical books from the religio-ethical 
or historical side, or by penetration into the spirit of 
Scripture—were collected in special works, forming 
special branches of the Haggadah, such as ethical 
Haggadah, historical Haggadah, Cabala, ete. At 
other times single Scriptural interpre- 
Divisions tations, haggadic sentences, and stories 
of of all kinds, which originated or were 
Haggadah. used in the course of some halakie dis- 
cussion—and this was often the case 
—were included when that discussion was reduced 
to writing; and it is for this reason that the Mish- 
nah, Tosefta, and both Talmuds contain so much 
haggadic material. Or, finally, the mass of hag- 
gadic matter was collected and edited in the exe- 
getic midrashim proper—the midrashim par excel- 
lence, which formed either running haggadic 
commentaries to the single books of the Bible, or 
homiletic midrashim, consisting of discourses actu- 
ally delivered on the Sabbath and festival lessons or 
of revisions of such discourses. 

The following discussion of individual midrashic 
works will be restricted to the most important produc- 
tions in the field of the Midrash Haggadah proper; 
for the ethical and historical Haggadah, and suchas 
is included in halakic works, see ABoT; APOCA- 
LYPSE; APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE; APOCRYPHA; 
CaBALA; DEREK EREZ Rappan; ETHICS; ete. 
Similarly, as regards the Targumim containing or 
reflecting the Midrash Haggadah, reference must be 
made to the articles on the various targumim. It 
may be regarded as characteristic of the midrashim 
proper that they are anonymous—that is, the name 
of the editor who made the final revision is un- 
known; accordingly, haggadic works whose authors 
are known (e.g., R. Tobias b. Eliezer’s “ Lekah Tob”; 
R. Menahem b. Solomon’s “Sekel Tob”), and the 
haggadic commentaries of a Jater period, such as 
that published by Buber under the title “Midrash 
Agada” (Vienna, 1894), must likewise be excluded 
from this review. Haggadic exegesis was, as men- 
tioned above, assiduously cultivated in the period 
of its florescence by the most eminent rabbis, some 
of whom are praised in particular as being “learned 

in the Haggadah ” (“ bakiba-Agada”); 

Students and it becamea special branch of tradi- 

of the tional science for the “scholars of the 
Haggadah. Haggadah” (“rabbanan di-Agadta ”). 
It was the subject of study in the 

schools and furnished an inexhaustible supply of ma- 
terial for the sermons and discourses which were de- 


Midrash Haggadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


552 





livered on Sabbaths and feast-days, and which 
followed the Scripture lesson and formed a part of 
public worship, or could be separated from it at 
need. Opportunity, moreover, often arose, both on 
joyous and on sad occasions, to resort to haggadic 
expositions for words of comfort or of blessing, for 
farewell discourses, ete. 

References to the arrangement of the Haggadah, 
to connected haggadic discourses, to the writing 
down of single haggadic sentences, and even to books 
of the Haggadah, are extant even from early times. 
Thus R. Simon b. Pazzi was an editor of the Hag- 
gadah (“mesadder Agadta ”)during the time of R. 
Joshua b. Levi (comp. Ber. 10a). The latter, a Pal- 
estinian amora of tle first half of the third century, 
who was also a famous haggadist, was the author 
of the sentence explaining the phrase “works of 
God” in Ps, xxviii. 5 as referring to the haggadot 
(Midr. Teh. ad doe.); he, as well as his pupil R. 
Hiyya b. Abba, severely censures the reducing of 
haggadot to writing and the use of written hagga- 
dot, for it was in general considered that the pro- 
hibition against writing down the “words of the 
oral law” referred not only to halakot, but also to 
haggadot; for the latter in particular might be the 
expression of private opinions and interpretations 
which, not being under control of the schools, were 
likely to lead to abuses. The severity of this cen- 
sure indicates that it was not a question of writing 
down single haggadot merely. R. Joshua b. Levi 
himself says that he once looked into a haggadic 
work (“sifra di-Agadta”), and he quotes numerical 
interpretations therefrom (Yer. Shab. xvi. 15c; So- 
ferim xvi.); a “Haggadah-book of the school” is 
mentioned by R. Jacob bar Alia, the contemporary 
of Judah I. (Sanh. 57b); and it is said of R. Johanan 
and I. Simeon b. Lakish, the contemporaries of R. 
Joshua b, Levi, that they read a Haggadah-book on 
the Sabbath. They regarded such collections as de- 
manded by the times, and paraphrasing Psalm cxix. 
126 they declared that it were better to repeal an 
interdiction (¢.e., that against writing down the oral 
law, which they referred to the Haggadah) than to 
allow the Torah to be forgotten in Israel (Git. 60a; 
Tem. 14b). 

R. Johanan, who always carried a Haggadah with 
him, is the author of the saying, “A covenant has 
been made: whoever Jearns the Haggadah from a 
book does not easily forget it” (Yer. Ber. v. 9a). 
There are other scattered allusions to haggadic 
works in Talmudic-midrashic literature. There 
must also have been collections of legends and 
stories, for it is hardly conceivable that the mass of 
haggadic works should have been preserved for cen- 
turies by word of mouth only. These scattered al- 
lusions merely show, however, that the beginnings 
of the written Haggadah date very far back; very 
little is known of the nature of the old Haggadah- 
books, and it is impossible to determine what traces 
they left in the old Midrash literature. Much ma- 
terial from the various early midrashic collections, 
which gradually increased in numbers, was doubt- 
less incorporated in the exegetic midrashim which 
have been preserved; and the latter clearly indicate 
the nature of the early exegesis, the “manner of 
discourse of antiquity”; but only the herein mene 


tioned tannaitic midrashim—the Mekilta, Sifre, and 
Sifra, containing Haggadah mixed with Halakah— 
date in their earliest component parts from the sec- 
ond century, having been definitively edited in the 
post-tannaitic time. The purely haggadic-exegetic 
midrashim were edited at a much later time, after 
the completion of the Talmud. One may, as Bacher 
says, “speak in a certain sense of the completion of 
the haggadic Midrash as one speaks of the comple- 
tion of the Talmud, although the works belonging 
to this class continued to be produced for five cen- 
turies or more after that time.” 

It is of the utmost importance, in considering the 
several midrash works, to emphasize the fundamen- 
tal difference in plan between the midrashim form- 
ing a running commentary to the Scripture text and 

the homiletic midrashim. In order to 


Exegetic avoid repetitions later on, brief refer- 

and ence must here be mace to the connec- 
Homiletic tionof the midrashic homilies with the 
Midrash. Scripture lessons, which were deliv- 


ered at the public worship on the 
Sabbath and on feast-days after the Sedarim and 
Pesikta cycle; to the structure of the homilies; to 
the nature of the proems which occupy such an im- 
portant position in the entire midrash literature; to 
the halakie exordia, the formulas, ete. 

When the scholars undertook to edit, revise, and 
collect into individual midrashim the immense hag- 
gadic material of centuries, they followed the method 
employed in the collections and revisions of the 
halakot and the halakic discussions; and the one 
form which suggested itself was to arrange in tex- 
tual sequence the exegetical interpretations of the 
Biblical text as taught in the schools, or the occa- 
sional interpretations introduced into public dis- 
courses, etc., and which were in any way connected 
with Scripture; and since the work of the editor was 
often merely that of compilation, the existing mid- 
rashim betray in many passages the character of the 
sources from which they were taken. This was the 
genesis of the midrashim which are in the nature of 
running haggadic commentaries to single books of 
the Bible, as Bereshit Rabbah, Ekah Rabbati, the 
midrashim to the other Megillot, etc. 

But even the earliest of these works, Bereshit 
Rabbah, is essentially different in its composition 
from the tannaitic midrashim in that the several 
“parashiyyot ” (sections) are introduced by proems. 
These are characteristic of a different class of mid- 
rashim, the homiletic, in which entire homilies and 
haggadic discourses as delivered during public 
worship or in connection with it were collected and 
edited, and which accordingly do not deal in regu- 
lar order with the text of a book of the Bible, but 
deal in separate homilies with certain passages, gen- 
erally the beginnings of the lessons. These lessons 
were either the pericopes of the Pentateuch divided 
according to the three-year cycle-reading of the 
Torah as customary in Palestine and on which the 
division of the Pentateuch into from 154 to 175 
“sedarim” is based, or the Pentateuchal and pro- 
phetice sections as assigned in accordance with the 
Pesikta cycle to the various feast-days and special 
Sabbaths (e.g., the Sabbaths of mourning and of 
comforting from the 17th of Tammuz to the end of 


553 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





the Jewish calendar year). These may be desig- 
nated respectively as sedarim homilies and as pe- 
sikta homilies. The Sedarim homi- 


Sedarim lies are the homilies to the pericopes 
and of the Sedarim cycle—of which one 
Pesikta has been preserved in the Tanhuma 


Homilies. Midrashim, although it is not a collec- 
tion to the entire cycle, z.¢., to the entire 
Pentateuch—and to individual books of the Penta- 
teuch in Shemot Rabbah (in part), Wayikra Rabbah, 
Bemidbar Rabbah (beginning with ch. xv.), De- 
parim Rabbah, ete. The Pesikta homilies are the 
homilies to the Scripture sections according to the 
Pesikta cycle, as found in the Pesikta edited by Sol- 
omon Buber and in the Pesikta Rabbati: the 
designation 1s applied also to the homilies on Jes- 
sons of ithe Pesikta cycle in the Tanhumas and 
other Pentateuch midrashim. Jn brief, the arrange- 
ment and division of the Pentateuch midrashim, 
with the exception of Bereshit Rabbah, it is gen- 
erally recognized, is based on the Palestinian three- 
year cycle, with the sedarim of which its sections 
correspond almost throughout, These midrashim 
therefore contain homilies to the Sabbath lessons of 
the three-year cycle together with a number of 
homilies intended for the feast-days and Sabbaths 
o¢ the Pesikta cycle (Theodor, in “ Monatsschrift,” 
1885, pp. 356 et seq.). 

The sedarim and pesikta homilies are clear and 
comprehensive in structure, although this may not 
be recognized in the midrash editions, in which the 
homilies are often not properly arranged. In the 
Pesikta, Wayikra Rabbah, etc., the homilies begin 
with several proems; in the Tanhumas (with con- 
siderable differences in varions parts and in the dif- 
ferent recensions), the Pesikta Rabbati, Debarim 
Rabbah, and Bemidbar Rabbah, a halakic exordium 
more or less systematically precedes the proems. 
The latter are followed by the exposition proper, 
which, however, covers only a few of the first verses 
of the Scripture lesson; the first verse 
(or the first part thereof) of the lesson 
is generally discussed more fully than 
the remaining verses, The homilics 
generally close with verses from the Bible prophe- 
sying Israel’s auspicious future. This is the com- 
mon form of the homilies in all the homiletic 
midrashim; it allows, however, of the utmost 
freedom of treatment and execution in its various 
parts. The proems, which are the clearest evt- 
dence of the existence of a deliberate technical ar- 
rangement in the haggadic midrashim, constitute 
both in name (“petilah”) and in nature an intro- 
duction to the exposition of the lesson proper; to 
this, however, they lead up by means of the inter- 
pretation of an extraneous text, the proemial text, 
which must not be taken from the lesson itself; and 
the proems may be as different in structure and fin- 
ish as in contents. The proems are either simple, 
consisting of a simple exposition of the proem-text, 
often amplified by quotations, parables, etc., and 
connected throughout, or at least at the end, with 
the lesson or with the initial verse thereof. or com- 
posite (see JEW. Encyc, iii. 62, «7. BERESHIT 
Rabpan), consisting of different interpretations 
of the same extraneous verse, by one or by various 


The 
Proems. 


authors, and connected in various ways, but always 
of such anature that the last interpretation, the last 
component part of the proem, leads to the interpre- 
tation of the lesson proper. The direct transition 
from the proem to the lesson isoften made by means 
of a formula common to all the proems of the hom- 
ily, wherewith the proem is brought toa logical and 
artistic conclusion. Exegetic material for use in the 
proems, especially the composite ones, which are 
often very extensive, was always at hand in abun- 
dance; and the art of the haggadist appeared in the 
use he made of this material, in the interesting com- 
bination, grouping, and connection of the several 
sentences and interpretations into a uniform struc- 
ture so developed that the last member formed the 
fitting introduction to the exposition of the lesson 
proper. There are many formulas (“ Ketib,” “Wada 
hu di-ketib” [4 mm]. “Zeh she-amar ha-katub ” 
[A’wt]) with which the proem-text is introduced, 
which may, however, also appear without formula, 
as often in Bereshit Rabbah and in the Pesikta; 
and the final formulas, which frequently are very 
rigid in form, as in the Pesikta, are likewise very 
numerous, 

The various midrash works are differentiated by 
the relation of the simple to the compound proems— 
the structure of the latter, their development into 
more independent haggadic structures, the use of 
the various formulas, etc. By the method of se- 
lecting extraneous texts for the proems so many 
non-Pentateuchal, especially Hagiographic, verses 
were expounded, even in early times, in the proems 
to the Pentateuch homilies and interpretations, that 
these homilies became mines for the collectors of the 
non-Pentateuch midrashim. Many extensive inter- 
pretations which are found in connection with Scrip- 
ture passages in those midrashim are merely proems 
from various homilies, as often appears clearly in 
the final proem-formulas retained. In such cases 
these formulas offer the surest criterion for proving 
the dependence of one midrash upon another. 
While proems are characteristic of all the hom- 
iletic midrashim—and it was due to the popularity 
of this form of the old homilies that proems were 
added also to the parashiyyot of the Bcereshit Rab- 
bah, although this old midrash is a running com- 
mentary on the Scripture text—yet the practise of 
prefacing the haggadic discourse with the discussion 
of asimpler halakic question is observed only in a 
part of those midrashim. The halakic exordium 
begius in the Tanhumas with the words, “ Yelam- 
medenu rabbenu ” (Let our teacher teach us), This 
formula gave rise to the name “ Yelammedenu,” by 
which this midrash and an earHer version of it were 
frequently designated; the same formula occurs in 
the Pesikta Rabbati. In Debarim Rabbah the word 
“halakah ” is used, the question proper beginning 
in most of the exordia with “Adam mi- Yisrael.” 
The word “halakah” instead of the formula “ye- 
lammedenu rabbenn” is used also in the part of Be- 
midbar Rabbah which is derived from the Tan- 
huina. The interpretations which follow the proems 
and the halakic exordium in the halakic midrashim 
are confined, as mentioned above, tosome of the first 
verses of the lesson. 

In some homilies the proems are equal] in length 


Midrash Haggadah 


to the interpretations proper, while in others they 
are much longer. Even if the editors of the mid- 
rashim combined the proems of different authors 
from the various homilies they had at hand, it yet 
seems strange that they should have been able to 
select for each homily several proems, including 
some very long ones, while they could find only a 
limited number of interpretations to the lessons, these 
interpretations, furthermore, covering only a few 
verses, The disproportion between the proems and 
the interpretations has not yet been satisfactorily 
explained, in spite of various attempts to do so. 

The eharacter of the exposition in the exegetic 
midrashim like Bereshit Rabbah has been discussed 
in JEw. Encyc. iii. 68, s.0. BERESHIT RABBAH. 

Here the literal and textual explana- 
Character tion is not yet in contrast to the 
of Midrash Haggadah, as it often was in 
Exegesis. the time of the scientific exegesis. 
The old midrash contains many Scrip- 
tural interpretations which are exegetic in the truest 
sense of the word, affording a deep insight into the 
contemporary attitude toward the Scripture. But 
the haggadic midrash is the well-spring for exegesis 
of all kinds, and the simple exposition of Scripture 
is more and more lost in the wide stream of free in- 
terpretation which flowed in every direction. 

Zunz has divided the Haggadah into three groups, 
following the old designations which were subse- 
quently summed up in the word p’"B: (1) inter- 
pretation of the Scripture text according to its lit- 
eral meaning; (2) development of the thought in 
any desired form, with a free use of the text; (3) 
discussion of the mysteries of religion and the super- 
sensuous worlds (comp. “G. V.” p. 59). The words 
of Zunz, the master of midrash study, in his chapter 
“Organismus der Hagada,” may serve to close the 
first, general part of the present survey: “ Definite 
rules were as impossible for this exegesis as rules of 
rhetoric for the Prophets; the thirty-two ‘middot’ 
postulated by Eliezer ha-Gelili were in part cate- 
gories deduced from former works, which remained 
unobserved in the later Haggadah, and in part merely 
sentences given for the purpose of determining the 
literal meaning, and not intended to be applied in 
haggadic exegesis. For the power of this exegesis 
lay not in literal interpretation and in natural her- 
meneutics, .. . butin the unhampered application of 
the contents of the Bible to contemporary views and 
needs; everything that was venerated and beloved 
by the present generation was connected with the 
sacred though limited field of the past. ‘This method 
of free exegesis was manifested in many ways: the 
obvious sense of the Biblical passage was followed ; 
or the inner meaning of the text, to the exclusion 
of the literal sense, was considered; or recourse was 
had to the traditional haggadah (ASIN ANDY); 
or the results of the Masorah were taken into ac- 
count. ... But this liberty wished neither to falsify 
Scripture nor to deprive it of its natural sense, for 
its object was the free expression of thought, and 
not the formulation of a binding law ” (“G. V.” pp. 
325 e¢ seq.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. Berlin, 1882 (the basic work for 
the study of the midrash literature), Weiss, Dor. ii. 200 et 
seq., iii. 252 et seq.; Bacher, Ag. Tan. i. 451-475; idem, Ag. 


Pal. Amor. i., pp. vii. et seqg.; tii. 500-514; Theodor, Zur ! 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


554 


Composition der Agadischen Homilien, in Monatsschrift, 
1879; idem, Die Midraschim zum Pentateuch und der 
Dreijtihrige Paldstinische Cyelus, in Muonatssehrift, 1885- 
1887; Bloch, Studien zur Aggadah, ib. 1885, 


A. Midrash Haggadah in the Tannaitic 
(Halakic-Haggadic) Midrashim — Mekil- 
ta, Sifra, and Sifre. For the name, composi- 
tion, origin, and edition of these midrashim see 
special articles and MriprasH HaLAKan. 

1. The Mekilta: The Midrash to Exodus gen- 
erally known under this name, and which originated 
in It. Ishmael’s school, begins with Ex. xii., the first 
legal section in the book—on the Passover and the in- 
stitution of the Passover festival. The exegesis is 
continned, with the omission of a few verses, down 
to xxiii. 19, the end of the principal laws dealt with 
in the book, to which are added two shorter pas- 
sages on the law referring to the Sabbath—xxxi., 
12-17 and xxxv. 1-8. It appears from this that the 
editor of the Mekilta intended to compile a halakic 
midrash. But as the exegesis is in the nature of 
& running commentary to these passages without 
regard to whether the subject under discussion is 
legal or historical in nature, and as much haggadic 
matter is mingled with the halakic interpretations, 
it appears from @ comparison of all the haggadic 
passages with the halakic passages that the larger 
part of the Mekilta is really haggadic in nature; ¢.¢., 
nearly one-half of the exegesis in Bo to Ex. xii. 1 
et seg. is haggadic. Beshallah (ed. Friedmann, pp. 
23b~56b) is, with a few exceptions, hag gadic through- 
out; so is nearly the whole of Yitro (pp. 56b-74a), 
with the exception of a few verses, where even the 
exposition of the Decalogue contains only a small 
amount of halakic matter. But Mishpatim throngh- 
out and the exegesis of xxxi. 12 e¢ seg. and xxxv. I 
et seg. are halakic, including only a few haggadic in- 
terpretations. (The Mekilta is divided not accord- 
ing to the Biblical pericopes, but into massektot 
and purashiyyot.) The following are simple ex- 
egetic explanations such as frequently precede the 
haggadic elaboration. To xiii. 17: gn3 hasonly the 
meaning “to lead” (not “to comfort”), like AYMy in 
Ps, Ixxvii. 21 and on" in Ps. Ixxviii. 14. To xiii. 
18: Dower means “armed” (comp. Josh. i. 14), or 
(“dabar ahar”) “equipped” (comp. 73. iv. 12), or 
“one out of five,” or, according to others, “one out 
of fifty.” To xiii. 20: nap is the name of a place, 
like om'~: R. Akiba says, “ms5p means the clouds 
of the glory of God [which surrounded them like a 
hut],” ete. To xiv. 7: prundyny means “heroes” 
(comp. Ezek. xxiii. 23 e¢ seg.). To xiv. 8: “And the 
children of israel went 7D5 7°.” denotes that they 
went with uncovered heads (7.¢., as free men), or that 
the power of Israel wasabovethatofEgypt. Toxiv. 
27: INN means “his strength ” (comp. Num. xxiv. 
21). To xiii. 19: “3)5° SjH is interpreted homilet- 
ically as referring to both past and future: “God 
remembered you in Egypt, He will remember you at 
the Red Sea; He remembered you by the sea, ITe will 
remember you also in the desert; IIe remembered 
you in the desert, He will remember you also by the 
brook of Arnon; He remembered you in this world. 
He will remember you also in the future world.” 
The editor of the Mekilta had such a wealth of 
haggadic material at his disposal that he was en- 
abled to compile entire parashiyyot to single verses, 


555 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





as to Xiv. 10 and xv. 1 (two parashiyyot); xv. 2, 
11; xx. 2. See MEKILTA. 

Two passages may be translated here as speci- 
mens of the haggadah of the Mekilta: 


To Ex. xvii. 11: And it came to pasa, when Moses held up 
his hand, that [Israel prevailed: and when he let down his 
haud Amalek prerailed. Did the bands of Moses help Israel 
to victory or did they destroy Amalek? Neither; but as long 
as he pointed his band upward [{heavenward] the Israelites 
looked up to and believed tn Him who had commanded Moses 
to do thus, and the Holy One, praised be He, vouchsafed to 
them marvels and victory (comp. R. H. iii. 8). Similarly: ‘*‘ And 
the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent’? [Num. 
xxi. 8]. Can the serpent kill and make aliveagain? No; butso 
long as Moses did thus, the Israelites looked upon it and be- 
lieved in Him who bad thus commanded Moses, and the Holy 
One, praised be His name, gave them healing. Similarly: 
** and the blood shall be to you fora token... ” [Ex. xii. 18]. 
R. Eliezer said: **‘ What mean the words, ‘And Israel pre- 
vyailed,’ or ‘And Amalek prevailed’? So long as Moses kept 
up his hand he reminded Israel that they would be victorious 
through the word of the Torah, which was to be revealed by 
bim.”’ 

To Ex. xx. 17 et seg. (conclusion of the Decalogue) : In what 
way were the Ten Commandments given? Five on one table 
and five on the other. There it is written: *“‘I am the Eternal 
One, thy God,” and opposite to it, **Thou shalt not kill.” 
Scripture teaches that the person who sheds blood lessens the 
image of the king [the prototype of God for man}: simile of 
an earthly king who came into a province and erected statues 
and images, and minted coins; subsequently he overturned the 
statues, broke the images, destroyed the coins, and lessened the 
image of the king. Similarly, the person who sheds blood 
is adjudged to have lessened the image of the king, for it is 
written: ** Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood 
be shed ; for in the image of God made he man” {[Gen. ix. 6]. 
It is written, ‘* Thou shalt have no other gods,”’ and opposite to 
it, °° Thou shalt not commit adultery.’’ Scripture teaches that 
whosoever practises idolatry is adjudged to have committed 
adultery behind God’s back, as it is written, °““ A wife that eom- 
mitteth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her hus- 
band...” [Ezek. xvi.32]. It is written, ** Thou shalt not take 
the name of the Lord thy God in vain,’’ and opposite to it, 
“Thou shalt not steal.’ Scripture teaches that whosoever 
steals will finally swear falsely also, as it is written, ‘' Will ye 
steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely ?”’ [Jer. 
vii. 9]. It is written, ‘* Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy,” 
and opposite to it, ‘*Thou shalt not bear false witness.”’ Scrip- 
ture teaches that whosoever desecrates the Sabbath testifies 
that God did not create the world and rest on the seventh day ; 
but whosoever keeps the Sabbath testifles that God created the 
world in six days and rested on the seventh, as it is written, 
** Therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord ’’ [Isa. xliii. 12]. 
It is written, ‘‘ Honor thy father and mother,’’ and opposite to 
it, “* Thou shalt not eovet.’? Scripture teaches that whosoever 
lusteth will finally beget a son who will curse his father and 
mother and will honor him who does not honor his father. 
Therefore the Ten Commandments were given, five on one ta- 
ble and five on the other. This is the view of R. Hanina b. 
Gamaliel. The sagessay: ‘Ten were on one table and ten on 
the other.’’ 


2. The Sifra: The Sifra, or Torat Kohanim, 
originating in the school of R. Akiba, with addi- 
tions belonging in part to the school of R. Ishmael, 
and finally edited by R. Hiyya, “provides, in so 
far as it has been preserved intact, the text of the 
Book of Leviticus with a running halakic commen- 
tary which explains or turns almost every word into 
a source for a halakic maxim” (Hoffmann, “Zur 
Einleitung in die Halachischen Midraschim,” p. 
#1). It contains only a small proportion of hag- 
gadic matter, of which the most significant parts are 
to Lev, viii. 1-x. 7 (on the dedication of the Taber- 
nacle; ed. Weiss, pp. 40c-46b), to Lev. xviii. 1-5 
(7b. pp. 85c-86d), to some verses in the beginning of 
the pericope “ Kedoshim ” (Lev. xix. 1-3, 15-18), to 
Lev. xxii. 32 et seg., to the blessings and punishments 
announced in Lev. xxvi. 3-46 (7b. pp. 110c—112c). 


The following is a translation of the important pas- 
sage, to Lev. xix. 17-18, containing Akiba’s and 
Ben ‘Azzai’s sentences on the fundamental principle 
of Judaisin: 


Thou shalt not hate thy brother. One might take this to 
mean, Thou shalt not curse bim, nor strike bim, nor box his 
ears; therefore it is written, “ia thy heart,” which indicates 
that here merely such hatred as is harbored in silence is meant. 
And wherefore does it follow thet when you bave reproved him 
four or five times you shall continue to reprove hin)? Because 
it is written M2310 12315, This might be taken to mean in case 
you reprove him and bis countenance changes [shows shame]. 
Therefore it is written, ‘* that thou sin not on his account.” R. 
Tarfon said,** By worship ! [i.e.,°* by God ’’] there is no one in our 
time who is able to reprove.” R. Eleazar b. Azariah said, ‘* By 
worship! there is no person in our time who would accept a re- 
proof.” R. Akiba said, ** By worship ! there is no one in our time 
who understands how to reprove.” R.Johanan b. Nuri said, “I 
call heaven and earth to witness that Akiba was lashed by R. 
Gamaliel more than four or five times because I complained of 
him. And yet I know that he loved me al) the more on that 
account.” 

Thou shalt not take vengeance. What is meant by taking 
vengeance ? When one person says to another, ** Lend me your 
sickle,’ and he will not lend it; then on the following day the 
lattersays to the former, **Lend me your ax,’’ whereupon he 
replies, ** I will not lend it to you because you would not lend 
me your sickle.” 

Thou shalt not be resentful. What is meant by being re- 
sentful? When one person says to another, **Lend me your 
ax,” and he will not lend it; then on the following day the latter 
says to the former, ** Lend me your sickle,’’ whereupon he says, 
**Here it is; I am not like you, who refttses to Jend me your 
ax.’ Therefore isit written, ‘* Thou shalt not take vengeance,” 
and “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”’) R. Akiba says, °* This is 
the great principle in the Torah.” Ben *Azzai says, ‘*' This is 
the book of the generations of man’ [Gen. v. 1, Hebr.], which 
is a still greater principle.”’ 


3. Sifre to Numbers: Sifre to Numbers and 
Deuteronomy is not, as it exists in current editions 
and as it was formerly considered, a uniform work, 
but is in both of its parts a combination of two mid- 
rashim of different character and different origin. 
Sifre to Numbers is in its main part a midrash of 
the school of R. Ishmael, like the Mekilta (comp. 
Hoffmann, @.c. p. 52). Beginning with ch. v. 1, it 
forms arunning halakic commentary down to vi. 21; 
then it goes on to viii. 1-4, 23-26; ix. 1-14; x. 1-10; 
xv. 1-40; xviii. 1-32; xix. 1-22; xxvi. 52-56; xxvii. 
8-11; xxviii. 1 e¢ seg.; Xxx. 2-17; xXxxi. 17-20, 22-24; 
xxxv. 9-33. Haggadic are the comments to vi. 22- 
27 (priest’s blessing); vii. 1-18, 84-89 (presents and 
sacrifices of princes); x. 9, 10, 29-84 (on Hobab), 35 
ef seq. (YDI3 7%); xi. 1-xii. 16 (on the complaints 
of Miriam, Aaron, and the people against Moses) ; 
xv. 41 et seg.; xxv. 1 et seq. (Israel’s sojourn in Shit- 
tim), 12 e¢ seg.; xxvii. 1-7 (on the daughters of 
Zelophehad), 12-25 (command given to Moses to go 
up into Mount Abarim, etc.); xxxi. 1-16 (campaign 
against Midian), 21. It appears from this list that 
many passages are not commentated in Sifre to Num- 
bers (z.e., the beginning down toiv. 49; vii. 19-83; 
viii. 5-22; ix. 15-28; x. 11-28; xxv. 14-19: xxvi. 
1-51, 57-65; xxix, I-11, 14-84; xxxi. 25-xxxii 41: 
xxxili, 1-xxxv. 8; xxxvi. 1-43); nor is there, 
strangely enough, any haggadic treatment in this 
midrash to the long historical passages relating to 
the sending out of the spies (xiii. and xiv.), to the 
revolt of Korah, with its consequences (xvi. and 
Xvii.), to all the historical matter in pericope Npn 
beginning with xx. 1, and to the story of Balak and 
Balaam (xxii. 2-xxiv. 25). It is possible that Sifre 


Midrash Haggadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


556 





to Numbers has not been handed down in its com- 
plete form, or that the collector did not have access 
to haggadic material for all passages. Some pas- 
sages of the comment on the priest’s blessing (vi. 22 
et seg.) may be quoted: 


The Lord bless thee [with goods] and keep thee [in their 
posscesinn)., TR. Nathan says, **May He bless thee with goods 
and protect thee in thy hody.’? R, Isaac says, °* May He protect 
thee from the evil impulse, as itis written, * For the Lord shall 
be thy confidence, and shall keep thy foot from being taken’ ’’ 
(Prov. iii. 26]. Another explanation (** dabar ahar’’): And 
may He so protect. thee that others shall have no power over thee, 
as itis written, ** The sun shall not smite thee by day nor the 
moon by night’ [Ps. exxi. 6]; and it is written, ** Behold, he 
that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber hor sleep” (ib. 
4]; and it is written, *‘ The Lord is thy keeper: the Lord is thy 
shade upon thy right hand” [ib. 5); and it is written, ** The 
Lord shall keep thee from all evil” (ib. 7]; and it is written, 
**The Lord shall keep thy going out and thy coming in” [ih. 
8}. Another explanation: May He protect thee from all de- 
mons, as it is written, ** For he shall give his angels charge over 
thee, to keep thee in all thy ways”? [Ps. xci. 11]. Another ex- 
planation: He shall protect thee, He shall keep the covenant of 
thy fathers, as itis written, ** The Lord thy God shall keep unto 
thee the covenant and the merey which he sware unto thy 
fathers” [Deut. vii. 12]. Another explanation : He shall pro- 
tect thee, He shall keep for thee the end [i.c., of sorrows, the 
time of redemption], as it is written, ““The burden of Dumah 
[Edom]. He calleth to me out of Seir, Watchman, what of the 
night? ... The watchman said, The morning cometh, and 
also the night’ [Isa. xxi. 11 et seq.]. 

Another explanation: He shall protect thee: He shall protect 
thy soul in the hour of death, as it is written, “* But the soul of 
my Lerd shall be bound in the bundle of life” [I Sam. xxv. 
29}. One might think that tbis applied to sinners as well as to 
the pious, therefore it is written: “‘The souls of thy enemies, 
them shall he sling out, as out of the middle of a sling” [ib.). 
Another explanation: He shall Keep thee: He shall keep thy 
foot from hell,as it is wriften. “‘He will keep the feet of his 
saints’ (I Sam. ij.9]. Another explanation: He will keep thee 
in this worid, us it is written, ‘' But they that wait upon the 
Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with 
wings as eagles ** [Isa. xb. 81]. 

The Lord mathe his face shine upon thee. May He open thy 
eyes. R. Nathan says, “That is, the light of the Shekinah, as 
it is written, ‘Arise, shine; for thy light is come; ... for, be- 
hold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the 
people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee’ [Isa. Ix. 1-2]; and 
as it is written, ‘God be merciful unto us, and bless us; and 
cause his face to shine upon us’ [Ps. Ixvii. 2 (A. V. 1)]; and as 
it is written, “God is the Lord, which hath shewed us light’ 
[Ps. exviii. 27]. Another explanation: May He give light—that 
is, the light of the Torah, as it is written, * For the comimand- 
ment isa Jamp; and the Law is light’ [Prov. vi. 23]. 

The Lord he gracious unto thee (73m) in thy wishes, as it is 
written, * [I] will be gracious to whom I will be gracious’ [Ex. 
xxxiii. 19). Another explanation: May He grant tbee favor 
(42m) in the eyes of the pecple, as it is written, “* But the Lord 
was With Joseph, and shewed him mercy, and gave him favor 
in the sight of the keeper of the prison’? (Gen. xxxix.21]. An- 
other explanation: May He favor thee with knowledge, insight, 
understanding, good conduct, and wisdom. Another explana- 
tion: May He show favor to thee and give thee grace (q3™') by 
the study of the Torah, as it is written, **She shall give to thine 
head an ornament of grace [?7],” and ‘‘ For they shall be an or- 
nament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck” 
[Prov. iv. 9 and i. 9}. 


4. Sifre to Deuteronomy: This Sifre is as 
fragmentary in regard to the haggadah as Sifre to 
Numbers, and leads to the same conelusions arrived 
at regarding the Jatter midrash. The haggadah 
constitutes about four-sevenths of the Sifre to Den- 
teronomy, and is divided into two groups, which 
include between them the halakic exposition. This 
midrash therefore consists of three parts: (1) the 
first haggadic part to i. 1-80, iii. 283-29, vi. 4-9, xi. 
10-82; (2) the halakic exposition to Deut. xii. 1 (in 
pericope ANI)-xxvi. 15 (in pericope “YBN); (8) sec- 


ond haggadic part to xxxi. 14 (beginning of the 
seder according to the seder cycle), xxxii. and 
xxxili. (the sedarim and pericopes \34NM and ANY 
mp 91n). Halakic matter is found also in the first 
haggadic part, especially to vi. 8 et seq. and xi. 18; 
similarly there are haggadic expositions in the ha- 
lakic portion, as to xiii. 18-xiv. 2, xv. 4, xvii. 19, 
xviii. 12 et seg., xx. 8 et seg., xxiii. 5 et seg., xxvii, & 
et seg. According to Hoffmann’s investigations the 
middle halakic portion is a midrash of R. Akiba’s 
school, while the two haggadic portions belong to 
R. Ishmael’s school. Following are translations of 
two passages: 


Deut. xi. 18: To love the Lord your God. Perhaps thou 
sayest: I study the Torah that 1 may become rich and be called 
“rabbi,” and receive reward. Therefore it is written, **to Jove 
the Lord your God; all that you do you shall Go only for love 
{Hebr.J.””. And toserve him. Thatis, tostudy the Torah. Or 
is real work meant? Itis written, ** And the Lord God took the 
man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to 
keep it’? [Gen. if. 15]. What kind of work was there at that 
time, and what was there to keep? You conclude therefrom 
that *‘ to dress ” means “*to learn,” and “*to keep’? means ‘‘ to 
observe the commandments”; and as the service at the altar is 
called ** service,” so learning is called a ‘service’ [to God]. 
Another explanation: ‘To serve Him” refers to prayer. Thou 
sayest, Perhaps by “‘ prayer’ service is meant: and therefore it 
is written, ** with all yourheart.”? Is there then a service of the 
heart? When it is written, therefore, “ and to serve him with 
all your heart,”’ prayer is meant. 

Deut. xi. 26: Behold, I set before you this day a blessing 
and aecurse. Because it is written, “* I have set before you life 
and death, blessing and cursing’? [xxx. 19], the Israelites will 
perhaps say, Since God has shown us two ways, the way of life 
and the way of death, we will choose whichever way we please. 
Therefore it is written, ‘*‘ Therefore choose life, that both thou 
and thy seed may Jive” [ib.]. A man sat at a crossing, where 
two roads lay before him—one smooth in the beginning and fall 
of thorns at the end, and one thorny at the beginning and 
smooth at theend ; and he taught the travelers and said to them: 
* You see this path, which is smooth at the beginning? Two 
or three steps you will walk easily, and then you will come to 
thorns. You see that other path, full of thorns at the begin- 
ning? Two or three steps you will walk through thorns, and 
then you will reach the clear road.’? Thus Moses spake to Israel: 
* You see the sinners, that they are happy ? ‘Two or three days 
their happiness lasts in this world, but in the end they are cast 
out; as it is written, * For there shall be no reward to the evil 
man’ [Prov. xxiv. 20]; and as it is written, ‘And behold the 
tears of such as Were oppressed,’ etc. [Eecl. iv. 1}; and as it is 
written, ° The fool foldeth his hands,’ ete. [ib.iv.5}; and as itis 
written, ‘The way of the wicked is as darkness’ [Prov., iv. 19]. 
You see the pious, how hard is their way in this world? For 
two or three days they toil, but finally they shall rejoice, as it is 
written, *To do thee good at thy latter end’ (Deut. viii. 16]; 
and as it is written, ‘ Better is the end of a thing than the be- 
ginning thereof’ [Eccl. vii. 8}; and as it is written, ‘For I 
know the thoughts that [ think toward you’ [Jer. xxix. 11]; 
and as it is written, ‘ Light is sown for the righteous’ [Ps. xevii. 
11]; and as it is written, * The path of the just is as the shining 
light’ [Prov, iv. 18]. R. Joshua b. Karha said: ‘‘ A king pre- 
pared a meal, and had invited al! the guests; his friend sat 
among them, and thought to take a good portion, but he had no 
understanding. When the king saw that be had no understand- 
ing, he took his hand and Jaid it upon the good portion.” Simi- 
larly it is written, ‘‘ The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance 
and of my cup... The lines are fallen to me in pleasant 
places ... I will bless the Lord, who hath given me counsel” 
[Ps. xvi. 5-7], 


From quotations found in old authors and from 
longer extracts in the Yalkut and the Midrash ha- 
Gadol, three other tannaitic midrashim are known, 
namely, the Mekilta of R. Simeon to Exodus and 
Sifra Zuta to Numbers (both of R. Akiba’s school) 
and the Mekilta to Deuteronomy (of R. Ishmael’s 
school); probably they also contained much hag- 
gadic matter. 


557 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 


i ee ee ee 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. pp. 46 et seq., 84 et seq.; Z. Fran- 
kel, Darke ha-Mishnah, 1859, pp. 307 et seq.; Weiss, Dov, ii. 
995 et seg.: Bri, in Grdtz Jubelsehrift, pp. 179 et seq.; Hoff- 
mann, Zur hiinleitung in die Halachischen Midrasehin;: 
idem, Likkute Mekilta, in Hildesheitmer Jubelschrift: 
idem, Neve Collectaneen; Lewy, Bin Wort itber die Me- 
chilta deg R. Sinion; Bacher, Ag. Tarn. i. 235, ii, TR. See 
also the introductions to Weiss’s edition of the Sifra, 1862, and 
to Friedinann’s edition of the Mekilta, 1870. The review 
given above is based chiefly on Hoffmann’s researches. 


B. The Purely Haggadic Midrashim.—I. The 
Earliest Exegetical Midrashim—Bereshit 
Rabbah and Ekah Rabbati. 

1. Bereshit Rabbah: This midrash, which oc- 
cupies the first position among the midrashim in vir- 
tue of its age and importance, has been discussed 
in JEW. Encyc. ili. 62 et seg. As was said there, the 
opinion handed down by nearly all the old authors 
that R. Hoshaiah, an amora of the first generation, 
living in Palestine in the third century, was the au- 
thor of Bereshit Rabbah, may be interpreted to mean 
that R. Hoshaiah was responsible for the work inits 
original form; as such it was a running commen- 
tary (a form that originated in the tannaitic time), 
collecting and combining, verse by verse, according 
toa certain system, the various comments to Genesis, 
and forming a necessary supplement to the tannaitic 
midrashim to the other books of the Pentateuch. 
That there had been no similar halakic-haggadic 
midrash to Genesis is likely because in the compo- 
sition of the tannaitic midrashim, Mekilta, Sifra, 
etc., the collection of the halakie comments was 
probably the chief object in view, and Genesis 
contains only a small portion of legal matter. The 
tannaitic character of Bereshit Rabbah, as well as 
the antiquity of the sources it must have used, 
appears from the fact, among others, that it con- 
tains more than fifty controversies between R. 
Judah and R. Nehemiah. The author of the old 
Halakot Gedolot, furthermore, ranged Bereshit 
Rabbah with the tannaitic midrashim, Sifra, Sifre, 
and Mekilta. 
in its composition from the other purely haggadic 
Pentateuch midrashim, like Wayikra Rabbah, the 
Tanhumas, ete., which are homiletic midrashim, 
and do not comment upon the Scripture text con- 
secutively; on the other hand, Bereshit Rabbah in 
certain respects differs also from most of the tan- 
haitic midrashim — Mekilta, Sifre to Numbers, and 
Sifre to Denteronomy—which are, as has been seen, 
fragmentary in execution, while Bereshit Rabbah is 
(with the exception of a few passages not adapted 
to haggadic treatment) a running commentary, verse 
by verse, on the Book of Genesis from beginning 
to end. ‘ 

The chief difference in composition between the 
tannaitic midrashim and Bereshit Rabbah lies in the 
fact that the parashiyyot into which the latter is 
divided, begin, with a few exceptions, with proems, 
such as are always found at the beginning of the 
homilies collected in the homiletic midrashim. Be- 
reshit Rabbah, therefore, presents a combination 
of the form of the running commentary with that 
of the homily complete in itself (Tanhuma and 
Pesikta homilies). Although the original commen- 
tary on Genesis may have been divided into para- 
Shiyyot with rudimentary proems (see BERESHIT 
RaBBan)—traces of such proems appear also in the 
tannaitic midrashim—yet the addition of the many 


Bereshit Rabbah is entirely distinct — 


artistic proems found in the existing form of the 
commentary was doubtless the work of a later time, 
when the Bereshit Rabbah received its present 
form. By the addition of a mass of haggadic ma- 
terial from the time of the Amoraim it became a 
large and important midrash to Gene- 
Character- sis; and this was called “ Bereshit 
istics. Rabbah,” perhaps, to distinguish it 
from the original form or from in- 
termediate, but less comprehensive, amplifications. 
The date of the redaction of Bereshit Rabbah is 
difficult to determine exactly; but it is probably 
not much later than that of the Jerusalem Talmud. 
Zunz holds that it was collected and edited in the 
sixth century. The more recent conjecture, that it 
was not edited until the end of the seventh, or pos- 
sibly not until the beginning of the second half of 
the eighth, century, can not be maintained. Even 
after the redaction many interpretations may have 
been added, and the proems increased in number and 
amplitied; the midrash, beginning with the peri- 
cope “ Wayishlah,” contains lengthy passages pos- 
sessing the characteristics of the later Haggadah. 

The editing of Bereshit Rabbah does not seem to 
have been entirely completed, as appears from the 
pericopes “Wayiggash” and “ Wayehi” (for a fur- 
ther discussion of this subject, as well as for the 
number of the parashiyyot, their arrangement ac- 
cording to the open and closed sectionsin the Scrip- 
ture text, and in part according to the beginniugs 
of the sedarim, the proems, the character and ex- 
tent of the exposition, etc., see BEREsHIT RaBBAn). 
Attention has also been drawn to the disproportion 
between the extent of the parashiyyot which now 
form the pericope “ Bereshit” of the midrash and 
the leugth of the remaining part of the work; that 
pericope alone constitutes more than one-fourth of 
the midrash and contains twenuty-nime parashiyyot, 
several of which deal only with a few, and in some 
cases only with single, verses. This portion may 
have been taken from another and a larger haggadic 
work on Genesis that remained incomplete, and 
from which the midrash may have derived also the 
name “ Bereshit Rabbah.” 

The designation “Rabbah” was then applied to 
the midrashim to the other books of the Pentateuch, 
as Wayikra Rabbah, Shemot Rabbah, etc., which 
were copied, with Bereshit Rabbah, even in (later) 
manuscripts, this collection then being called “ Mid- 
rash Rabbot” (7.e., “Midrash of the Rabbot”), to 
which the midrashim most in use during divine 
service—to Canticles, Ruth, Esther, Lamentations, 
and Ecclesiastes—were subsequently added. Thus 
the Venice edition of 1545, in which the midrashim 
to the Pentateuch and to the Five 
Rolls were for the first time printed 
together, has on the title-page of the 
first part the words “Midrash Rabbot ‘al Hamish- 
shah Humshe Torah” (Midrash Rabbah to the Five 
Books of the Torah), and on that of the second part 
“Midrash Hamesh Megillot Rabbeta” (Midrash 
Rabbah of the Five Megillot). The editio princeps 
of the midrashim to the Pentateuch (Constantino- 
ple, 1512) begins with the words “Be-shem El athil 
Bereshit Rabba” (In the name of God I shall begin 
Bereshit Rabbah), and the title of the editio prin- 


Title. 


Midrash Hageadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


558 





ceps of the midrashim to the Five Rolls (Pesaro, 
1519) reads “Midrash Hamesh Megillot” (Midrash 
of the Five Megillot). 

Still more inexact and misleading is the term 
“Midrash Rabbah to the Five Books of the Penta- 
teuch and the Five Rolls,” as found on the title- 
page of the two parts in the much-used Wilna edi- 
tion. After Zunz, it is not necessary to point out 
that the Midrash Rabbah consists of ten entirely 
different midrashim. On the manuscript of the 
Bereshit Rabbah and some of the other rabbot to 
the Pentateuch see Theodor in “ Monatsschrift,” 
xXxxvii. 170 et seg. To these must be added the 
manuscript of Bereshit Rabbah in MSS. Orient. 4°, 
No. 82, in the Landesbibliothek in Stuttgart. Ac- 
cording to Solomon Schechter, there are not even six 
manuscripts of the rabbot to the Pentateuch and 
the Five Rolls in existence (comp. Midrash ha- 
Gadol, Preface, xi.). The following is an extract 
from the first proem of parashah 9 and the interpre- 
tations to Gen. i. 26, directed against the Christian 
view finding support for the doctrine of the Trinity 
in this passage, and other interesting interpretations 
showing the use of foreign words in Bereshit Rab- 
bah; the text followed is that of Theodor’s critical 
edition. 


And God said, Let us make man, ete. R. Johanan quotes the 
verse 19) °29¥ O57) MN [Ps. cxxxix. 5] and says: *‘If man 
is worthy of it, he enjoys two worlds, as itis written, ~Thou hast 
made me for afterward [the future world] and for formerly {this 
world],’ but if not, then he will have to give an accounting, as 
it is written, ‘ And [thou hast} laid thine hand upon me’ ” [%ib.]. 
R. Jeremiah b. Eleazar said, **‘ When the Holy One, praised be 
He. created the first man, He created him as a hermaphrodite 
[ardpoyuvos], as it is written, “Male and female created he 
them’” [Gen. vy. 2]. R. Samuel b. Nahman said, “ When the 
Holy One, praised be He, created the first man, He created him 
With a double face [wpoowros], and then eut him into halves 
and gave him two backs, one here, the other there.” [This co- 
incides with Plato’s doctrine that man was originally androgy- 
nous and had two faces; Philo also frequently expresses the view 
that the ideal man wag born as a man-woinan. ] He was inter- 
rupted, “It is written there, ‘And he took yoySysn nmns’” 
fGen. ii. 21]. He answered, “*It means one of his ‘sides’ [not 
ribs}, as it is written, y>won pos)” [* And for the second side 
of the tabernacle’; Ex. xxvi. 20]. R. Tanhuma, in the name 
of R. Bene Benaiah and R. Berechiah and R. Eleazar, said, 
**He created him as a golem [Adam in the primal state], who 
reached from one end of the world to the other, as it is written, 
‘Thine eyes did see my substance’’’ [Ps. exxxix. 16]. R. 
Joshua b. Nehemiah and R. Judah b. Simeon, in the name of 
It. Eleazar, said, ““He created him so that he filled the whole 
world, from east to west [also reflecting a Philonic view}, as 
it is written, “Thou hast formed me O7p) syns [= * behind, i.e., 
Westward and eastward’], from north to south,’ as it is writ- 
ten, ° From the one side of heaven unto the other’ ”’ [Deut. iv. 
32]. R. Eleazar said, °° 71m; t.€., aS the last one in the crea- 
tion of the last [sixth} day; op); é.¢.. and the first in the 
creation of the last day.’’ This corresponds with R. Eleazar's 
view, who said, ** Let the earth bring forth the living creature 
[Gen. i. 24; this is said in connection with the creation of the 
sixth day], that is, the spirit of the first man.” R. Simeon b. 
Lukish said, “ns; 7.e., as the last in the creation of the last 
day ; 3p); t.e., and as the first one in the creation of the first 
day.” This corresponds with R. Simeon b. Lakish’s view, who 
snid, ““And the spirit of God moved [Gen. i. 2], that is, the 
spirit of the first man,” as it is written, ‘* And the spirit of the 
Lord shall rest upon him,” ete. [Isa. xi. 2]. R. Nahman said, 
* As the last one after all the created works, and as the first one 
af the judgment’? [compare Gen. vii. 23]. R. Samuel b. 
Tanhuma said, “*In praising the Lord also he comes last, as it 
is written, ‘ Praise ye the Lord from the heavens’ [Ps. exlviii. 
1): and then, ‘ Praise the Lord from the earth,’ ete. [ih. verse 
7}; and then, ‘Kings of the earth,’”’ ete. [ib. verse 11]. R. 
Simlai said, “‘As he praises only after the animals and birds 
feomp. th. verses 10, 11 et seq.], so he was created after the 


animals and birds; first {it is written] ‘And God said: Let the 
waters bring forth abundantly,’ etc. [Gen. i. 20], and Jast, * Let 
us make man,’’’ ete. 

And God said, Let us make man, ete. With whom did He 
take counsel? R. Joshua b. Levi said. ** He consulted the 
works of the heaven and the earth, like a king who has two 
counselors [vvy«xAntos], without whose consent he does noth- 
ing.’ R. Samuel b. Nakman said, *‘He took counsel with the 
work of every day of creation, like a king who has a coregent 
[ovyxaGedpos], without whose consent he does nothing.” R. 
Ammi said, * He took counsel with his heart... .’’ R. Bere- 
chiah said, “ When the Holy One, praised be He, was about to 
create the first man, He foresaw that both the pious and the 
wicked would descend from him. He said, “If I create him, 
then the wicked will descend from him; if I do not create him, 
how can the pious descend from him?’ What did the Holy 
One, praised be He? He removed the path of the sinner from 
His face, and created the attribute of mercy {*‘middat ha- 
rahamim’’], as it is written, ‘The Lord knoweth [makes 
known] the way of the righteous; but the way of the ungodly 
shall perish’”’’ [Ps. i. 6]. R. Hanina did not say thus, but; 
** When He was about to create the first man He took counsel 
with the angels. He said to them, ‘Let us make man.’ They 
said to Him: ‘ What is his nature?’ He said to them, * Richt- 
eous men shall descend from him... .’ But He did not reveal 
to them that the ungodly should descend from him. For if He 
had revealed to them that the ungodly should descend from 
him, then the attribute of justice [‘ middat ha-din’] would not 
have consented that he should be created."’ R. Simeon said; 
“When the Holy One, praised be He, was about to create 
the first man the angels divided into groups; some of them 
said, * Let him be created’; the others said, “Do not let him be 
created, as it is written: ** Mercy and truth are met together ; 
righteousness and peace have kissed’ (Ps. Ixxxv.11]. Mercy 
said, ‘Let bim be created, for he will do works of mercy.’ 
Truth said, ‘Let him not be created, for he is full of deceit.’ 
Benevolence said, ‘Let him be created, for he will bestow 
benefits.’ Peace said, “Let bim not be created, for he is fil 
of quarrels.’ What did the Holy One, praised be He? He took 
Truth and cast her upon the ground. Then the angels said, 
‘Lord of the World, why do you curse your Truth? Let Truth 
rise up froin earth, as it is written, “Truth shall spring out of 
the earth*?’”’ [ib. verse 12], 

R. Huna the Elder of Sepphoris said, ** While the angels were 
disputing and discussing with one another, the Holy One, 
praised be He, created him.’”? R. Huna, in the name of R. Aibu, 
said, ““He created him with cireumspection, for He created 
first the things necessary for his life [the sane thought anda 
parable similar to the following are found also in Philo]. Then 
the angels spoke before the Holy One, praised be He: ‘ Lord of 
the World, what is man that Thou art mindful of him? and 
the son of man that Thou visitest him? Why should this sor- 
row be created ?? Then He said to them. * Why have all sheep 
and oxen been created, the fow! of the air and the fish of the 
sea—why have these been created? A castle with all good 
things, and there are no guests; what pleasure has the owner 
who takes his fill?’ Then the angels said, ‘O Lord our Lord, 
how excellent is Thy name in all the earth! Do what seems 
best to Thee’”’ [Ps. viii. 5-10 (A. V. 4-9)]. BR. Joshua of Shik- 
nin, in the name of R. Levi, said, ** He took counsel with the 
souls of the pious,... R. Samuel b. Nahman, in the name of 
R. Jonathan, said, “*“ When Moses wrote down the Torah, he 


‘noted therein the creative work of each day ; when he reached 


the verse, ° And God said, Let us make man,’ he said, * Lord of 
the World, why dost Thou give cause for attack to the “minim” 
[heretics] ?’ But He said to him, * Write ; let him err who will.” 
The Holy One, praised be He, said to him, ‘Moses, shall ] not 
produce great and small ones from the man whoin I create ? 
Then when the great one comes to ask permission from the 
small one, and says, ** Why do I need to ask permission frem 
the smali one ?’’ then the small one shall say to him, ** Learn 
from thy Creator, who created the upper and the lower beings, 
and when He was about to create man took counsel with the. 
angels !**’” 

R. Liya said: “‘ It is not the question here of taking counsel ; 
it is as a king who, walking before the gate of the palace 
[wadatvov], saw a block of stone [BvAapior], He said, * What 
shall we do with this?’ Some said, ‘Use it for public baths 
[Synucora]’; others said, ‘Use it for private baths [7peovatos].’ 
But the king said, ‘I will make a statue [avépras] of it; who 
shall hinder me?’”’’ The minim asked R. Simlai : ** How many 
gods have created the world? What means 892 D.wNT3 
ono?” He answered, “It does not sav ssmbs wo [the 
verb in the plural], but gynbx x2.” R. Simlai said, *‘ Where 
you find a sentence for the minim, there you will find beside it 


559 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





its refutation.”” They asked him, further, ‘“* What means God 
py OWN Awy2?” Then he said to them, *‘ Read what follows 
from it. It does not say O7NT OX ombdx NI34, but NIN” 
[the verb in the singular; Gen. i. 27]. KR. Hoshaiah said, 
«When the Holy One, praised be He, created the first man the 
angels erred and would have said before him ‘Holy!’ It is as 
a king who sat with a governor [evapxos] in a coach of state 
[xappovxa], The people wished to cry * Domine’ before the 
king, but they did not know which was he. What did the 
king? He pushed the governor out of the coach, and then they 
recognized the king. So the angels erred when the Holy One, 
praised be He, created the first man. What did the Holy One, 
praised be He? He put him into a deep sleep [comp. Gen. ii. 
21], and all then recognized that it was a man.” 


2. Ekah Rabbati: The midrash to Lamenta- 
tions, one of the oldest Palestinian midrashim, has 
been discussed in Jew. Excyc. v. 85 e¢ seg. Here it 
may briefly be repeated that Ekah Rabbati begins 
with a collection of thirty-six proems, which are 
followed by the commentary to Lamentations, verse 
by verse, together with numerous stories. The mid- 
rash has many parallel passages to Yerushalmi 
which were probably not taken directly from the lat- 
ter, for old collections were probably the common 
source for Ekah Rabbati, Bereshit Rabbah, and the 
Pesikta. It may be assumed with certainty that 
Ekah Rabbati was edited some time after the tinal 
edition of Yerushalmi, and that Bereshit Rabbah 
also must be considered to be older, but it has been 
by no means proved, as Zunz assumes for various 
reasons, that the entire work was not finished before 
the second half of the seventh century. For all 
details, as well as for another midrash to Lamenta- 
tions published by Buber in the Midrash Zuta, 
see Exan Rappaty. The following is from the be- 
ginning of the exposition to Lam.i.1, after the text 
of the Wilna (1899) edition of Buber (pp. 21a et seq.): 


How [Apes =*'Ekah’] doth the city sit solitary. Three 
prophets used the expression 7>°s In their prophecies—Moses, 
Isaiah, and Jeremiah. Moses said, ‘‘ How can [ myself alone 
bear .. .”? [Deut. i. 12]; Isaiah said, “* How is the faithful city 
become an harlot!” [i. 21]: Jeremiah said, ‘* How doth sit soli- 
tary.”’ R. Levisaid: “It is like a noble woman [matron] who 
had three friends : one of them saw her in her honor: another 
saw her in her abandon; and the third one saw her in her sor- 
row. Moses saw them [the Israelites] in their honor [their hap- 
piness], and said, “How can I myself alone bear’; Isaiah saw 
them in their abandon, and said, * How is become a harlot’: Jere- 
niiah saw them in their sorrow, and said,* How doth sit solitary ’”’ 
[R. Eleazar and R. Johanan interpreted 45°8 as two words—’x 
and 12]. R. Eleazar said, “* Where [7>x] is the ‘so’ [n>] whieh 
He spoke to Moses—‘ So shall thy seed be’ [Gen. xv. 5]; and R. 
Johanan said, ‘* Where [7's] isthe *so’[75] which He spake to 
Moses, ‘Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob’ ” [Ex. xix. 
3]. R. Judah and R. Nehemiah: R. Nehemiah said, ‘* 42°8 is 
merely the expression for wailing, as it is written [Gen. iii. 9], 
* And the Lord God called unto Adam and said unto him, 73°~’” 
(interpreted as 2° “X= ‘wo unto thee’). R. Judah said, 
*“a>>~ is the term for reproof, as itis written, ‘How [3°] do 
ye say, We are wise!” (Jer. viii.8]. Ben Azzai was asked, ana 
they said to him, ** Say to us a word concerning the Roll of Lam- 
entations.’’? He said to them [playing onthe letters of the word 
MADN], “Israel went into exile only after it had denied the 
Only One of the world [x], the ten words [*], the circumcision 
Which had been commended after twenty generations [i.e., to 
Abraham, who lived twenty [2] generations after Adam], and 
the five books [7] of the Torah.” 

Doth sit solitary [173]. R. Berechiah, in the name of R. 
Abdima of Haifa: ‘Like a king who had.a son whom he ar- 
rayed in magnificent garments when he fulfilled the wili of his 
father; but when the king was angry with him he let him wear 
Soiled [a172] garments. So with Israel; as long as he ful- 
filled the will of God he was clothed magnificently, as it is writ- 
ten, ‘I clothed thee also with anp7°”’ [Ezek. xvi. 10]. R. Sim- 
lai said: ‘‘ Thatis purple; Akylas translated it ‘garments em. 
broidered in colors [=7ok:ATa]’; but when they angered him 


he made them wear soiled garments.’’ R. Joshua b. Levi said, 
“The Holy One, praised be He, said to Israel, ‘So long as you 
did My will I allowed you to live secure, apart [723], as it is 
written, °° Israel then shali dwell in safety alone *? [Deut. xxxili. 
28]; but when you transgressed My will, then I banished you 
to unclean places, as it is written, ‘*‘ He [the leper] shall dwell 
alone [1723]; without the camp shall his habitation be’? *’ [Lev. 
xiii. 46]. Why is the Roll of Lamentations composed according 
to the alphabet? In order that the lamenters may recite it flu- 
ently. Another explanation: I thought to bless you from 
“alef” to “taw,’’ as it is written, “If [ox] you walk in my 
commandments ... upright” [Nyonyp, Lev. xxvi. 3-18; 1.e¢., 
this section, containing the divine blessings, begins with », in 
the word ox, and ends with >, in the word ryanp]. When 
was the Roll of Lamentations recited ? R. Judah says. *‘In the 
days of Jehoiakim.”’ R. Berechiah b. Nehemiah said, ** Do peo- 
ple weep for a person before he hasdied? It was rather written 
down in the days of Jehoiakim and recited after the destruction 
of the Temple.” 


II. The Homiletic Midrashim: As it is cus- 
tomary nowadays to distinguish between festival 
and Sabbath sermons, so in antiquity there were 
collections of homilies, haggadic discourses on the 
Scripture sections intended as lessons for the feast- 
days and special Sabbaths, as well as on the Sabbat- 
ical pericopes of the three-year cycle—either on the 
pericopes of the entire Pentateuch (hence covering 
the entire cycle) or on the pericopes from single 
books of the Pentateuch. Such collections are 
the Pesikta (erroneously ascribed to Rab Kahana, 
and called also “Pesikta de-Rab Kahana”), the 
Pesikta Rabbati, Wayikra Rabbah, the Tanhumia 
Midrashim, Debarim Rabbah, Bemidbar Rabbah (be- 
ginning with parashah 15), Shemot Rabbah, etc. 
The nature of the homilies has been sketched above; 
they begin with several proems, to which is added 
the exposition, which generally covers only a few 
of the first verses and verse-texts of the lesson in 
question, ending with a Messianic or other comfort- 
ing verse. The halakic exordium preceding the 
proems is peculiar to Tanhuma, Pesikta Rabbati, 
Debarim Rabbah, and Bemidbar Rabbah (part ii.). 
The homilies in Wayikra have the same form as 
those in the Pesikta. 

1. The Pesikta de-Rab Kahana: This Pe-° 
sikta exists in only one edition, that of Solomon 
Buber (Lyck, 1868); it consists of 88 (or 35) hom- 
ilies on the lessons forming the Pesikta cycle: the 
Pentateuchal lessons for special Sabbaths (Nos. 1-6) 
and for the feast-days (Nos. 7-12, 23, 27-82), the 
prophetic lessons for the Sabbaths of mourning and 
comforting (Nos. 18-22), and the penitential sections 
“Dirshu” and “Shubah” (Nos. 24, 25; No. 26 is a 
homily entitled “Selihot ”). According to the ar- 
rangement in this edition the homilies fall into three 
groups: Pentateuchal, Prophetic, and Tishri, “ pis- 
kot” (discourses on the lessons). An unnumbered 
“other piskah ” to Isa. lxi. 10, after two manuscripts, 
is printed after No. 22; similarly No. 29, after a 
manuscript, is designated with No. 28 as “another 
piskah” for Sukkot, and the piskah on pp. 194b e 
seg., recognizable as spurious by the halakic exordi- 
um, and also printed after a manuscript, is desig- 
nated with No. 30 as another version of the piskah 
for Shemini. Piskot Nos.12 and 32 each consist really 
of two homilies. But the second homily in No. 27 
(pp. 174b et seg.) does not belong to the Pesikta. 

The various manuscripts differ not only in regard 
to the above-mentioned second piskot and to other 
and longer passages, but also in regard to the ar- 


Midrash Haggadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


560 





rangement of the entire collection, which began, in 
a manuscript which is defective at the beginning, 
with the homilies to prophetical lessons Nos. 13-22 
and 24-25. These twelve homilies are designated 
by an old abbreviation as ww p’sx Ysa men. 
Another manuscript, entitled “TWaftarah Midrash,” 
contains only these homilies, with the exception of 
next to the last one. Entire homilicsof the Pesikta 
have been taken over, or sometimes worked over, 
into the Pesikta Rabbati; there are also a number 
of Pesikta homilies in the Tanhuma Midrashim. 
Wayikra Rabbah also contains some of the hom- 
ilies found in Pesikta. The parashiyyot 20, 27- 
30 in Wayikra Rabbah are, with the exception of a 
few differences, the same as piskot Nos. 27, 9, 8, 28, 28 
of the Pesikta. Zunz takes the Pesikta to be depend- 
ent on Wayikra Rabbah, assigning this midrash to 
the middle of the seventh century, but the Pesikta 
to the year 700. Weiss, while emphasizing still 
more strongly the dependence of Pesikta on Wa- 
yikra Rabbah, takes it to be nearly as old as Bereshit 
Rabbah; he thinks that the Pesikta took for its 
sources Bereshit Rabbah, Wayikra Rabbah, Ekah 
Rabbah, and Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah. But other 
authorities regard the Pesikta as the earliest midrash 
collection. 

Undoubtedly the Pesikta is very old, and must 
be classed together with Bereshit Rabbah and Ekah 
Rabbah. But the proems in the Pesikta, devel- 
oped from short introductions to the exposition of 
the Scripture text into more independent homi- 
letic structures, as well as the mastery of form 
apparent in the final formulas of the proems, indi- 
cate that the Pesikta belongs toa higher stage of 
midrashic development. The nature of certain 
Pentateuch lessons, intended apparently for the sec- 
ond feast-days (not celebrated in Palestine), still 
calls for investigation, as well as the question as to 
the time at which the cycle of the twelve prophetic 
lessons designated by nw, etc., came into use; this 
cycle is not mentioned in Talmudic times, but is 
subsequently stated to have been ordained or pre- 
scribed in the Pesikta. For further details and quo- 
tations of passages sce PESIKTA. 

2. Wayikra Rabbah: Wayikra Rabbahis gen- 
erally classed among the oldest midrashim; it con- 
sists of thirty-seven parashiy yot and as many hom- 
ilies, twenty-two of which belong to the Sabbath 
lessons of the sedarim cycle in the Book of Leviticus 
(according to various statements regarding this 
cycle), and five to feast-day lessons of the Pesikta 
cycle, taken from Leviticus. To certain of the 
lessons belong two homilies each: parashahs i. and 
ii. each contains a homily to Lev. i. 1; parashahs 
iv. and v. each one to Lev. iv. 1; and parashahs 
xx. and xxi. each one to the Pesikta lesson Lev. 
xvi. 1. As mentioned above, the five homilies on 
the feast-day lessons in parashahs xx., xxvil.-xxx. 
are identical with five piskotin the Pesikta. Buber, 
contrary to all manuscripts, has erroneously printed 
also Wayikra Rabbah, parashah xxi., as a contin- 
uation of piskah No. 27 (pp. 174b eé seg.). The in- 
clusion of the seven other parashiyyot may be due 
to another partly different arrangement of the se- 
darim cycle, just as there are, on the other hand, no 
homilies in Wayikra Rabbah to certain passages in 


Leviticus now known as commencements of sedarim. 
Wayikra Rabbah (section 3) contains an interesting 
statement in regard to the variations in the sedarim 
cycle and the general custom of introducing the 
exposition by a proem; R. Hanina b. Abba, when he 
came to a place where a pericope began with Lev. 
ii. 3, was asked which verse he used for the proem, 
The proems are more independent in structure, as in 
the Pesikta, with which Wayikra Rabbah has much 
in common regarding also the use of the final for- 
mulas for the proems. 

The frequent use of proverbs (“be-matla amerin,” 
“matla amer ”) is characteristic of this midrash: “ If 
you have knowledge, what do you lack? If you 
lack knowledge, what do you possess?” (parashah 
i. 6). “ Whoever lends on interest destroys his own 
and other property” Gii. 1) “She plays the co- 
quette for apples, and divides among the sick ” (70.). 
“Whoever leases one garden cats birds; whoever 
leases two gardens js eaten by birds” (23.). “ Where 
the master hangs up his weapon there the common 
herdsman hangs up his water-jug” (iv.1). “If one 
knot is unraveled, then two knots are unraveled” 
(xiv. 3). “ Whoever eats palm-cabbage is wounded 
by the palm-thorn ” (xv. 8). “Do not care for the 
good pup of a bad dog, much less for the bad pup of 
a bad dog ” (xix.6; comp. “ Monatsschrift,” 1881, p. 
509). See WAYIKRA RABBATI. 

3. Tanhuma Yelammedenu: While Wayikra 
Rabbah is a homily collection to a single book of 
the Pentateuch—Leviticus—the midrash Tanhuma 
is a collection covering the entire Pentateuch, ar- 
ranged according to the sedarim cycle, as appears 
from most of the Tanhuma homilies which have been 
preserved ; it contains also homilies to the feast-day 
and Sabbath lessons of the Pesikta cycle. The order 
of the Tanhuma homilies is as follows: halakic ex- 
ordium; several proems; exposition of the first 
verses; Messianic conclusion. The work derives its 
name “ Yelammedenu” from the formula “ Yelam- 
medenu rabbenu” (Let our teacher teach us), with 
which the halakic exordium begins; it is generally 
cited under this name, especially in the “ ‘Aruk.” 
It is called “Midrash Tanhuma” by many old au- 
thors. A number of its proems bear the name of 
R. Tanhuma, and the sentence “Thus R. Tanhuma 
expounded [or preached] ” is added to several larger 
sections. The author of Yalkut Shim/‘oni, however, 
cites two midrash works, one under the title “ Ye- 
lammedenu” and the other under that of “Tan- 
huma.” Furthermore, the midrash Tanhuma, which 
has been frequently reedited since the Constanti- 
nople edition of 1520-22, and the midrash which 
Solomon Buber published in 1885 from manuscripts, 
in so far as the parts to Genesis and Exodus are con- 
cerned are seen to be special collections. Variations 
in text, evidence for which is furnished by the two 
editions mentioned, as well as by quotations and 
extracts found in many writings, and by the fact 
that the work is known under various titles, can 
not be explained by assuming that the different col- 
lections now possessed—to which must be added 
Debarim Rabbah—or those formerly used were dif- 
erent revisions and extracts from the “original” 
Yelammedenu. 

If this mythical haggadic work was the common 


561 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 


Si eo se asin a eee ee ee oS ee en 


source for such different coilections, containing en- 
tirely different homilies to many of the lessons, it 
wust have been very voluminous and heterogeneous. 
Une is justified in assuming that even if the Yelam- 
ynedenu had covered the entire Pentateuch it would 
pave contained only one homily to each seder. But 
if the homilies consisting of halakic introductions, 
proems, and expositions to some verses be desig- 
pated as typical Tanhuma homilies, modeled on the 
form of the Tanhuma Yelammedenu (for the in- 
creasing popularity of sermons must have given rise 
toa great number of such homilies), then the exist- 
ence of collections of entirely different homilies, but 
modeled on this type and called * Tanhuma midrash- 
jm,” is easily explainable. Or perlaps works were 
compiled by omitting a number of homilies from an 
earlier collection (Yelammedenu) and adding others 
having the same form together with various other 
selections; instances of this kind can be seen in the 
parts to Genesis and Exodus in the extant two 
Tanhuma midrashim. Bacher assumes (“ Ag. Pal. 
Amor.” iii. 502 et seg.) that R. Tanhuma b. Abba, 
one of the foremost haggadists of the fourth century 
—of whom more proems have been preserved than 
of any other author and with whom the haggadic 
activity of Palestine was, in a sense, brought to an 
end—undertook to collect and edit the haggadic 
Scripture interpretations according to the pericopes, 
of both the sedarim and the Pesiktacycle; although 
the haggadic works he collected are no longer ex- 
tant, the two pesiktot and the Tanhuma midrashim 
were based on them. According to Bacher, these 
midrashim contain not only passages from the orig- 
inal Tanhuma, but passages from the other mid- 
rashim tothe Pentateuch and to the Five Rolls, even 
Bereshit Rabbah and Wayikra Rabbah having drawn 
directly or indirectly from the same source. This 
isa far-reaching hypothesis. Zunz believed that he 
“did not detract from the Yelammedenu ” by assign- 
ing its author to the first half of the ninth century. 
This view can not now be accepted. According to 
Briill, the Yelammedenu was completed by the mid- 
dle of the eighth century, and recognized as an au- 
thority, to which R. Aha of Shabha refers in the 
“She’eltot”; Brill thinks it was “composed about 
650-720” (Briill’s “Jahrb.” viii. 127 e¢ seg.). Yelam- 
medenu is quoted as early as Saadia’s time. The 
references to the rivers Tiber aud Ticinus do not 
prove that the Tanhuma was compiled in Italy. 

Tanhuma comprises 158 homilies in Buber’s edi- 
tion, and 161 in the other editions (in which it still 
shows in part the original division); Nos. 129 and 
182 are homilies to the sedarim and the Pesikta 
cycle. The part to Deuteronomy has been preserved 
very imperfectly. Tanhuma was divided according 
to the pericopes of the one-year cycle when that 
cycle was in general use. See TANHUMA. 

4. Pesikta Rabbati: The Pesikta Rabbati is 
a collection of homilies on the Pentateuchal and 
prophetic lessons, the special Sabbaths, etc.; it was 
-probably called “ rabbati” (the larger) to distinguish 
it from the earlier Pesikta. In common with the 
latter it has five entire piskot— No. 15 (“Ha-Ho- 
desh ”), No. 16 (“Korbani Lahmi”), No. 17 (“ Wa- 
yehi ba-Hazi”), No. 18 (“Omer”), No. 32(“ Aniyyah 
So‘arah”), and the larger part of No. 14 (“Para”); 

VIIT.—36 


but otherwise it is very different from the Pesikta, 
being inevery respect like the Tanhuma midrashim. 
In Friedmann’s edition (Vienna, 1880) it contains, in 
forty-seven numbers, about fifty-one homilies, part 
of which are combinations of smaller ones; seven or 
eight of these homilies belong to Hanukkah, and 
about seven each to the Feast of Weeks and New- 
Year, while the older Pesikta contains one each for 
Hanukkah and the Feast of Weeks and two for New- 
Year. Pesikta Rabbati contains also homilies to 
jessons which are not paralleled in the Pesikta. There 
are also various differences between these two Pesik- 
tot in regard to the feast-day lessons and the lessons 
for the Sabbaths of mourning and of comforting. The 
works are entirely different in content, with the 
exception of Nos. 15-18, 38, the part of No. 14, and 
some few minor parallels above mentioned. The 
Pesikta contains no halakic exordiums or proems by 
R. Tanhuma. But inthe Pesikta Rabbati there are 
not less than twenty-eight homilies with such ex- 
ordiums having the formula “ Yelammedenu Rab- 
benu,” followed by proems with the statement “kak 
patah R. Tanhuma”; two homilies, Nos. 38 and 45, 
the first of which is probably defective, have the Ye- 
lammedenu without proems with “kak patah,” ete. 

Some of the homilies have more than one proem 
by R. Tanhuma. The piskot taken from the Pesikta 
have of course no Yelammedenu or Tanhuma 
proems; the first part of piskah No. 14, which does 
not belong to the Pesikta, has at the beginning two 
halakic introductions and one proem of R. Tanhuma, 
Homilies Nos. 20-24, which together form a mid- 
rash to the Decalogue, are without these introduc- 
tions and proems. Only three of the homilies for 
the Sabbaths of mourning and comforting have 
such passages, namely, Nos. 29, 31, 83; but they are 
prefixed to those homilies, beginning with No. 38 


(except No. 46, which is of foreign origin), which 


have the superscription “Midrash Harninu” —a 
name used to designate the homilies for New- Year 
to the Feast of Tabernacles which the old authors 
found in the Pesikta Rabbati. The present edition 
of the Pesikta Rabbati, which ends with the homily 
for the Day of Atonement, is doubtless defective; 
the older Pesikta has also vrrious homilies for 
Sukkot, Shemini ‘Azeret, and the Feast of the 
Torah. Some of the homilies also, as Nos. 19, 27, 38, 
39, 45, aredefective. Pesikta Rabbati therefore ap- 
pears to be acomposite, the homilies of the older Pe- 
sikta, perhaps, being added later. It is said above 
that No. 46 is a foreign addition; here Ps, xcii. Lis 
interpreted as an acrostic mw (ascribed to Moses), 
and there is alsoa passage from the Midrash Konen; 
other passages also may have been added, as the 
passage in No. 20, which is elsewhere quoted in the 
name of the “ Pirke Hekalot” and of “ Ma‘aseh Bere- 
shit” (comp. also Jellinek, “ Bet ha-Midrash,” i. 58). 
No. 86 was considered doubtful on account of its 
contents; No. 26 is peculiar, referring not to aScrip- 
ture passage but to a verse or a parable com- 
posed by the author. The diction and styleare very 
fine in many passages. In the beginning of the first 
homily, which shows the characteristics of the 
“genuine” portions of the Pesikta Rabbati, in the 
proems of R. Tanhuma following the halakic exor- 
dium, the year 845 is indicated as the date of com- 


Midrash Hageadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


562 





position of the work; there are no grounds for re- 
garding the date as a gloss (see PEsikTA RABBATI). 

In the appendix to the Friedmann edition four 
homilies are printed from a manuscript, Nos. 1 and 
2 of which have yelammedenus and proems. The 
midrash referred to here is a later, shorter midrash 
for the feast-days, designated as “ New Pesikta,” and 
frequently drawing upon the Pesikta Rabbati; it 
has been published by Jellinek in “ Bet ha-Midrash,” 
vi. 36-70, 

5. Debarim Rabbah: Debarim Rabbah contains 
twenty-five homilies and two fragments of homi- 
lies on sections of Deuteronomy which are known 
for the larger part as lessons of the sedarim cycle. 
Homilies on the Pesikta lessons of Deut. xiv. 22 and 
xxv. 17 are not included in this midrash. Debarim 
Rabbah has been fully analyzed in Jew. Encyc, iv. 
487, where it has been said that it contains a much 
more complete collection of Tanhuma homilies in a 
much more original form than does the Midrash 
Tanhuma in Buber’s and the earlier editions; and it 
must be again especially noticed here that in De- 
barim Rabbah all homilies begin with halakic exor- 
diums (preceded by the word “halakah ” instead of 
the yelammedenu formula), while the portion of 
Midrash Tanhuma to Deuteronomy does not have 
that introduction in either edition. The proems in 
Debarim Rabbah are quite independent structures; 
while the old sources, as Yerushalmi, Bereshit Rab- 
bah, and Wayikra Rabbah, are used, a freer ren- 
dering is often noticeable, as well as the endeavor 
to translate Aramaic passages into Hebrew. Zunz 
ascribes the midrash to about the year 900. See 
DEBARIM RABRBAH. 

6. Bemidbar Rabbah: This midrash is, in its 
earlier portions, beginning with the pericope “Be- 
ha‘aloteka,” not an independent midrash, but an ex- 
tract from Tanhuma, giving, with some variatious 
and additions, the text of the earlier editions rather 
than that of Buber’s edition. The word “halakah” 
instead of “yelammedenu Rabbenu” isadded to the 
halakic exordiums in the editions, as in Debarim 
Rabbah; some of the homilies in Bemidbar Rabbah are 
without the halakic exordiums found in Tanhuma. 
The thirty homilies which are found here in para- 
shiyyot xv.-xxii. (see BEMIDBAR RABBAH), are on 
the whole identical with Tanhuma (the earlier edi- 
tions, from “Beha‘aloteka” to the end); noteworthy 
among the interpolations is parashah xviii., No. 21 
(remarkable on other grounds also), which is not 
found in the manuscripts of Tanhuma, but which 
was added to the editio princeps of Tanhuma, (Con- 
stantinople, 1520-22) from Bemidbar Rabbah. To 
the Tanhuma homilies to Numbers, beginning with 
ch. viil., was added a later haggadic elaboration of 
Num, i.-vii., which, according to Zunz, is not older 
than the twelfth century; it is laid ont on sucha 
large scale that, covering only the pericopes “ Be- 
midbar ” and “Naso,” it takes up nearly three- 
fourths of the Midrash Bemidbar Rabbah. The ex- 
position of “Naso” is, again, more than three times 
as long as that of “Bemidbar”; in it the method of 
revising and elaborating the old Tanhuma homilies 
may still be seen; in the pericope “Naso” nearly 
all traces of the old arrangement have been swept 
away by the new Haggadah. Itisdoubtful whether 


the midrash in both pericopes is the work of the 
same author, and it is improbable that originally 
it formed a part of a haggadic work which dealt in q 
similar way with the entire Book of Numbers. The 
extent of the development of the Midrash Haggadah 
in the course of the centuries, from the epoch of the 
tannaitic midrashim down to the period that pro- 
duced the Bemidbar Rabbah to Num. ch. 1.-vii., ap- 
pears on comparing the exegesis to Num. vii. 1 et 
seq., Which is so brief that only one verse relating to 
the gifts of the princes on the second day is ex- 
pounded, with that in Bemidbar Rabbah, in which 
the haggadist gavea twelvefold ingenious and sug- 
gestive exposition of the same gifts. See BEMIDBAR 
RABBAH. 7 

7%. Shemot Rabbah: The Midrash to Exodus, 
containing in the editions fifty-two parashiyyot, is 
likewise not uniform in its composition. In para- 
shiyyot i.-xiv. the proems are almost invariably 
followed by the running commentary on the entire 
seder or other Scriptural division (the beginnings of 
the sedarim are distinguished by an asterisk): 

(1) Parashah i., on *Ex. i. 1-ii. 25; (2) par. ii. and iii. on 
*Ex. iii. l-iv. 17; (3) par. iv. and v., Nos. 2-8, on *EXx. iv. 18-26; 
(4) par. v., Nos. 1, 9-23, on Ex. iv. 27-vi. 1; (5) par. Vi., on *Ex, 
vi. 212; (6) par. vii., on Ex. vi. 18 et seg.: (7) par. viii., on Ex. 
vii. 1 et seq. (a Tanhuma homily); (8) par. ix., on *Ex. vii. 
8-25; (9) par x., on Ex. vii. 26-viii. 16; (10) par. xi., on *Ex, 
viii. 16-ix. 12; (11) par. xii., on Ex. ix. 18-35; <12) par. xiii., on 
*Ex. x. 1-20; (13) par, xiv.,on Ex. x.21-29 (there is no exposi- 
tion nor, in the Tanhuma midrashim, any homily to *Ex. xi.1). 

Shemot Rabbah, beginning with parashah xv., 
contains homilies and homiletical fragments to the 
first verses of the Scripture sections, Many of the 
homilies are taken from the Tanhumas, though para- 
shiyyot XV., XVi.~xXix., Xx., Xxx., and others show 
that the author had access also to homilies in many 
other sources. In theeditionsthe text is sometimes 
abbreviated and the reader referred to such collec- 
tions, as well as to the Pesikta; in parashah xxxix. 
the entire exposition of the Pesikta lesson Ki Tissa 
(Ex. xxx. 11) has been eliminated in this fashion. 
Such references and abbreviations were doubtless 
made by later copyists. There is an interesting 
statement in parashah xliv. regarding the manner 
of treating a proem-text from the Psalms for the 
homily to Ex. xxxii. 18. The assumption is justi- 
fied that Shemot Rabbah down to Ex. xii. 1, with 
which section the Mekilta begins, is based on an 
earlicr exegetical midrash, constituting, perhaps, 
the continuation of Bereshit Rabbah. This would 
explain the fact that in the first part there are sev- 
eral parashiyyot to the open and closed Scripture 
sections, and tliat several expressions recall the ter- 
minology of the tanuaitic midrash. Zunz ascribes 
the composition of the entire work to the eleventh 
or twelfth century; although, immediately follow- 
ing Bereshit Rabbah in the collection cf the rabbot, 
it “is separated from the latter by 500 years” (“G. 
V.” p. 256). 

8. Aggadat Bereshit: Agvadat Bereshit is a 
collection of homilies to a number of sedarim of 
Genesis, notable for its artistic composition. In 
Buber’s edition (Cracow, 1903) it contains 88 hom- 
ilies in 84 chapters (really 8&8, since 82 and 88 form 
one chapter); each homily, down to ch. Ixxxi., is in 
three sections, so arranged that the first one connects 


563 


eee 
with a seder from Genesis, the second with a pro- 
netic section (which may be regarded as the haf- 
tarah to this seder), and the third with a psalm 
(which, perbaps, was recited during worship on the 
Sabbath for which this seder was a lesson). The 
several homilies are combined from proemial pas- 
sages generally connected with extraneous texts. 
Twenty-six of the twenty-eight sections of Genesis 
are known as sedarim from old lists; Gen. vi. 5 and 
xviii. 25, to which the homilies in ch. i. and xxii. 
pelong, and to which there are homilies in the Tan- 
huma midrashim (to Gen. xviii. 25 in ed. Buber), 
were probably beginnings of sedarim according to a 
different division of the sedarim cycle. Hence the 
Aggadat Bereshit contains the haggadic material for 
twenty-eight Sabbaths, on which, according to the 
three-year sedarim cycle, the following passages 
were read (the Roman numerals between paren- 
theses indicate the corresponding perakim in the 
Tanhuma): (1) Gen. vi. 5 with Ezek. xxxviii. 10 and 
Ps. li. (ch. i.-iii.); @) Gen. vili. 1 with Jer. xxxi. 
19 and Ps. xvii. (iv.-vi.); (8) Gen. viii. 15 with 
Micah vii. 9and Ps. xvii. (vii.-ix.); (4) 
Sedarim and Gen. ix. 18 with Micah vii. 9 and Ps. 
Homilies. xxvii. (x.-xii.); (5) Gen. xv. 1 with 
Isa. i. 1 and Ps. xxvii. (xiii.-xv.); (6) 
Gen. xvii. 1 with Jer. xxxiii. 25 and Ps. ex. (xvi.- 
xviii.); (7) Gen. xviii. 1 with Mal. iii. 19 and Ps. cx. 
(xix.-xxi.); (8) Gen. xviii. 25 with Mal. iii. 18 and 
Ps. cx. (xxii.-xxiv.); (9) Gen. xx. 1 with Judgcs 
ix. 22 and Ps. cx. (xxv.-xxvii.); (10) Gen. xxi. 1 
with I Sam. ii. 21 and Ps. cx. (xxviil.-xxx.); (11) 
Gen. xxii. 1 with Judges iii. 1 and Ps. exii. (x xxi.- 
xxxiii.); (12) Gen. xxiv. 1 with I Kingsi.1 and Ps. 
cxxi. (xxXiv.-xxxvi.); (18) Gen. xxv. 19 with J 
Kings i. 1 and Ps, cxxi. (xxxvii.-xxxix.); (14) Gen. 
xxvii. 1 with T Sam. il. 22 and Ps. Ixv. 10 (x1.-xlii.); 
(15) Gen. xxvii. 28 with Micah v. 6 and Ps. exxi. 
(xliii.-xlv.); (16) Gen. xxvili. 10 with Hosea xii. 
18 and Ps. exxi. (xlvi.-xlviii.); (7) Gen. xxix. 
31 with I Sam. i. J and Ps. cxxi. (xlix.-li. 1); (18) 
Gen, xxx. 22 with I Sam. i. 11 and Ps. exxi. (lii.- 
liv.); (19) Gen. xxxii.4 with Ob.i.1 and Ps. exxi. 
(lv.-lvii.); (20) Gen. xxxvii. 1 with Ob. i. 1 and 
Ps. exxix. (Iviii.-lx.); (21) Gen. xxxviii. 1 (correctly 
so aftera MS.) with Isa. xl. 27 and Ps. exxix. (Jxi.- 
Ixili.); (22) Gen. xxxix. 1 (so the MS.) with Isa. x1. 
27 and Ps. exxix. (ixiv.-lxvi.); (23) Gen. xli. 1 with 
Hag. i. 1 and Ps. exxix. (Ixvii.-lxix.); (24) Gen. 
xlii. 1 with Isa. xlix. 14 and Ps. exxix. (Ixx.-Ixxii.); 
(25) Gen. xhii. 18 with Jer. ii. 4 and Ps. Ixxvi. 
(Ixxiii.Ixxv.); (26) Gen. xliv. 18 with I Kings xviii. 
36 and Ps. Ixxvi. (Ixxvi.-lxxviii.); (27) Gen. xlvi. 
28 with I Kings xviii. 36 and Ps. Ixxvi. (Ixxix.- 
Ixxxi.); (28) Gen. xlix. 1 with Isa. xl] viii. 12 (Ixxxii.— 
Ixxxiii., belonging together, and Ixxxiv.; there is 
no Psalm exposition for this passage.) 

The collection is not complete, beginning only 
With Gen. vi. 5; there are no homilies to a large 
number of sedarim of Genesis, and the ending is de- 
fective. The assumption thatthe prophetic sections 
in Aggadat Bereshit are haftarot to the respective 
Sedarim according to the three-year cycle is in part 
supported by the list of the sedarim baftarot which 
has been published by Btichler, from a manuscript 
Source, in the “Jewish Quarterly Review ” (1894, vi. 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Hagzadah 


39 et seg.); here, as in Aggadat Bereshit, the sedarim 
Gen, xv. 1, xxi. 1, xxvii. 28, xxviii. 10, xxx. 22, 
xxxiil. 4 have assigned to them the haftarot Isa. i. 
1, I Sam. it. 21, Micah v. 6, Hosea xii. 13, I Sam. i. 
11, Ob. i. 1. After Biichler’s statements, the dif- 
ference in the haftarot to the other sedarim does not 
seem strange. But it is curious that several pro- 
phetic sections, as I Kings i. 1, xviii. 36, Isa. x1. 27, 
Ob. i. 1, Micah vii. 9, Malachi iii. 18, are repeated. 
The Psalms which are expounded in Aggadat Bere- 
shit present a problem that has not yet been ex- 
plained. Ps. xvii. occurs twice, xxvii. twice, Ixxvi. 
three times, cx. five times, cxxi. seven times. As 
is the case with the above-mentioned prophetical sec- 
tions, the sedarim in which the same Psalm is used 
are, With one exception, consecutive, the treatment 
being always a different one and displaying not a 
little of the art of midrashic exegesis. 

The contents of Aggadat Bereshit were taken, for 
the greater part, from Tanhuma, and there are 
many signs to indicate a late date of composition of 
the midrash; nor is it quoted, according to Buber, 
by the old authors. The author of this work 
must have been living in acountry where Greek was 
freely spoken; he uses Greek words not found in 
other midrashim—as in ch. xi., pinoy (aAzig)— 
words for which he could easily have substituted 
equivalent Hebrew expressions. The word in- 
stanced, a axaé Asyéuerov, was recognized to be 
Greek even by Menahem di Lonsano, who first ed- 
ited this midrash at the end of the coNection “Shete 
Yadot ” (Venice, 1618). 

9. We-Hizhir (Hashkem): Although thedis- 
cussion of the purely haggadic Pentateuch mid- 
rashim does not belong to this article, yet a brief 
mention of a work known to the old authors in- 
differently as Midrash we-Hizhir or Midrash 
Hashkem is required here. It took its halakic por- 
tion from the Talmudic sources, the baraita on the 
building of the Tabernacle, the “She’eltot,” and the 
“*Halakot Gedolot,” the “She’eltot” also being ar- 
ranged according to the one-year cycle and being in 
its minor portions especially dependent on Tanhuma. 
The first part of the Munich codex, after which the 
work was published (by I. M. Freimann, under the 
title “ We-Hizhir,” part i., Leipsic, 1873; part ii., 
Warsaw, 1880), is doubtless somewhat defective. It 
begins with a haggadic passage, which, belonging 
to Ex. viii. 16 (“ Wa-yomer hashkem ba-boker”), is 
found also in the carlier editions of Tanhuma (ed. 
Stettin, s.c. “ Wa’era,” no, 14). 

The work was called “ Hashkem ” after the second 
word in this introductory sentence. In the editions 
as well as in the codex this first passage, as well as 
the beginning of the following haggadic passage to 
Ex. ix. 22, included in both Tanhumas in the peric- 
ope “ Wa’era,” is erroneously combined with a pas- 
sage to Ex. x. 21—which also, perhaps, was taken 
from Tanhuma—as belonging to the pericope “ Bo.” 
The midrash was called by other authors “ We-Hiz- 
hir,” after the standing formula “ We-hizhir ha- 
Kadosh, baruk Hu,” with which nearly all the 
pericopes in the midrash as now extant begin, and 
which is occasionally found at the beginning of a 
new section in the middle of the pericope. No one, 
however, quotes Hashkem and We-Hizhir together 


Midrash Haggadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


564 





as two different works. “The halakic expositions 
refer in ‘Bo’ to the tefillin; in ‘ Beshallah’ to the 
rest on the Sabbath and the ‘ dine ‘erub’; in ‘ Yitro’ 
to the commandments connected with the Deca- 
logue; in‘ Mishpatim’ to the requirements of the 
judge: in ‘ Terumah?’ to the priestly gift; in ‘ Wa- 
yakhel’ tothe Sabbath; in ‘ Wayikra’ to slaughter- 
ing; in‘ Zaw’ to the oath and the testimony of wit- 
nesses: in ‘Shemini’ to the ‘hilkot terefot’; in 
‘Tazria‘’ to the ‘dine yoledot’; in ‘Mezora‘’ to the 
‘dine tum’ah’; in ‘Ahare’ and ‘ Kedoshim’ to for- 
bidden marriages; in ‘ Behukkotai’ to vows; in 
‘Bemidbar’ to the ‘dine bekor’ ” (Zunz, “G. 8.” ili, 
208). The haggadic portions are those mentioned 
above; also part i., pp. 4a et seg. (from the Mekilta); 
pp. 19a ef seg. (from Tanhuma, ed. Buber, and Me- 
kilta): p. 22b (from Mekilta); p. 76b (after Tan- 
huma); pp. lida et sey., 121b (after Tanhuma); p. 
128b (after Tanhuma, ed. Buber); part ii. pp. 84b 
et seq. (from Wayikra Rabbah, ix.); p. 128b (from 
Sifra), ete. 

The midrash, which ends in the edition with the 
halakic passage (to Num. v. 11 ef seq.) apm van 
"sarinwxS xopow 0 Say, is probably defective at 
the end as well as in some other passages (following 
the manuscript), and it can not be determined 
whether it covered Numbers only or Numbers and 
Deuteronomy. Several passages quoted by the old 
authors, but not found in the edition, may have been 
included in the missing portion of the work. Zunz, 
who closely examined the manuscript after which 
the edition was subsequently printed (4.¢. pp. 251 et 
seqg.), comes to the conclusion that We-Hizhir and 
Hashkem are one and the same work. This view 
must be unhesitatingly accepted (comp. also Geiger’s 
“ Jiid. Zeit.” 1875, pp. 9d ef seg.). The fact that some 
passages quoted by the old authors from the Mid- 
rash Hashkem do not correspond entirely with the 
edition, and that someare not found in it at all, does 
not prove that these are two different works (as 
Freimann, Buber, and Griinhut assume). The 
differences are not important, and both differences 
and omissions may be due to variations in the copies 
or to different revisions. The work, which is 
quoted as early as the middle of the eleventh cen- 
tury as a recognized authority, is assigned by Zunz 
to the tenth century. The assumption of the edi- 
tor expressed even in the title, that Hefez Alluf is 
the author of the work, lacks support. The quo- 
tations from Hashkem by the old authors have 
been collected by Griinhut (“Sefer ha-Likkutim,” 
part i.). 

See MIDRASHIM, SMALLER, for the Midrash Ab- 
kir (which probably covered Genesis and Ex- 
odus, and of which extracts are preserved in the 
Yalkut), for Tadshe (based on Gen. i. 11), for Wa- 
yissa‘u (on Gen. xxxv. 5), for Wayosha‘ (on Ex, 
xiv. 30-xv. 18), for the Midrash of the Ten Com- 
mandments, and for Esfa (on Num. xi. 16). 

III. The Exegetical Midrashim to Canti- 
cles, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, and Esther: The 
midrashim to the Five Rolls, which, like the Rabbot 
to the Pentateuch, are entirely separate midrashic 
works, are, as mentioned above, printed together in 
the editio princeps, Pesaro, 1519, under the title 
“Midrash Hamesh Megillot”; in the Venice edition, 


1545, the word “ Rabbeta” was added to the title, 
The sequence of the midrashim with the nameg 
given to them in the paginal superscriptions of the 
Venice edition (as in the editio princeps) is as fol- 
lows: (1) “Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah” (called “ Rab- 
bati” in the editio princeps, and, at the end, “ Mid- 
rash Shir ha-Shirim”); (2) “Midrash Ruth” (at the 
end, “Midrash Megillat Ruth”); (8) “Midrash Me. 
gillat Esther” (at the end, “ Midrash Ahashwerosh ”), 
(4) “Ekah Rabbati” (at the end, “Midrash Ekah 
Rabbati”); (5) “Midrash Kohelet” (at the end, 
“ Nishlam Midrash Hamesh Megillot”). Hence the 
words “Rabbah ” and “ Rabbati” are added to two 
only of the midrashim, each of the three others 
being called merely “Midrash.” The five works 
collected here were, perhaps, the most popular mid- 
rashim to the rolls used during divine service; other 
midrashim to the rolls have, in part, been published 
recently. The very old midrash Ekah Rabbati has 
been discussed above; the remaining four are treated 
below. 

1. Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, or Midrash Shir 
ha-Shirim (called also Midrash or Aggadat 
Hazit, after the proem-verse Prov. xxii. 29, quoted 
in the beginning): Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah is an ex- 
egetical midrash to Canticles, in which the anthor 
collected and edited, verse by verse, following the 
Biblical text, the wealth of material at his disposal. 
Canticles was made the subject of midrashic inter- 
pretation at a very early date; Akiba declared it to 
be “inmost holy,” taking it as an allegorical glorifica- 
tion of the relation between God and Israel. Rules 
for its exposition occur in the midrashim toi. 12, 
and ii. 4. “Canticlesmust not be interpreted to the 
shame [that is, erotically] but to the glory of 
Israel”; to i, 1, “ Where the word ‘king’ stands 
God [or, according to another view, Israel as a 
whole] is meant.” Some passages were explained as 
glorifications of the exodus from Egypt, the revela- 
tion of the Temple, etc. The numerous interpreta- 
tions of single verses in the Seder ‘Olam, Sifre, Me- 
kilta, and the Talmud follow this old allegorical 
method of interpretation. Much of this interpreta- 
tion is found in Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, taken di- 
rectly or indirectly from those old sources. But 
not all the comments are soold. The compiler of 
the Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, who intended to com- 
pile a running midrash to Canticles, took—as has 
often been remarked in connection with the exegetic 
midrashim—the expositions for the single verses 
wherever, and in whatever connection, he found 
these verses explained. 

There is a remarkable variation in the extent and 
character of the several expositions; there are clearly 
recognizable proems from older homilies; whole 
sermons, With many variations of texts, on several 
verses; and short, disconnected explanations of 
single words and sentences, the expositions to the 
same or similar verse-parts being repeated here two 
or three times, as in other old midrashim. Shir ha- 
Shirim Rabbah is dependent on the Pesikta and 
Wayikra Rabbah as well as on Yerushalmi and 
Bereshit Rabbah. The proems borrowed from these 
works may be recognized by the final formulas, 
which also were borrowed. More than one-fourth 
of Shir ha-Shirim is directly borrowed from Yeru- 


565 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





shalmi and the three old midrashim mentioned. 
Mishnah passages and baraitot are quoted very fre- 
quently. The five proems in the beginning of the 
midrash each close with the same sentence, taken 
from Seder ‘Olam. The author has, of course, used 
also other sources that are no longer extant. The 
longer passages, as those to Cant. iii. 9-10, iv. 1-4, 
and others, are, perhaps, taken from these sources, or 
they may be the work of the author himself; they 
contain interpretations of several verses, and most 
of them consist of several variations of the same 
theme (presented, however, in a way different from 
that found in the variations of the earlier midrashim), 
jn which entire sentences are frequently repeated 
verbatim, and in some of which many passages from 
the Mishnah, ete., are quoted. 

In the editions these passages are, almost inva- 
riably, wrongly divided, making a survey of them 
difficult. They belong, doubtless, to a later period 
of the midrash—.é., the time after the edition of 
Bereshit Rabbah, Wayikra Rabbah, and the Pesikta. 
The words “Sidra Tinyana” are inserted between 
the comments to Cant. ii. 7 and ii. 8; in the sedarim 
cycle there are no sedarim for Canticles. Two other 
midrashim to Canticles, lost for centuries, are now 
known—the Aggadat Shir ha-Shirim, published by 
Solomon Schechter (Cambridge, 1896; also by Buber 
in “Midrash Zuta,” pp. 1-41), and the Midrash Shir 
ha-Shirim, published by Griinhut (1897). For these 
midrashim and their relation to the Shir ha-Shirim 
Rabbah discussed here see SonG oF Sones, MIp- 
RASHIM TO. 

2. Midrash Ruth: Midrash Ruth (so called in 
the editio princeps and the Venice edition) contains 
comments, haggadic sentences, etc., following the 
sequence of the text, and is divided into eight para- 
shiyyot, beginning at Ruth 1. 1, i. 2, 1. 18, i. 22, ii. 
10, iii. 8, iii. 14, iv. 18. The midrash begins with a 
passage called a “ petihta,” consisting of six proems, 
and a lengthy exposition of an old haggadic rule 
(probably taken from Bereshit Rabbah or Wayikra 
Rabbah and found in other midrashim), “ which has 
been brought back from the Exile” and which de- 
clares that a time of sorrow is referred to wherever 
a Biblical story begins with the words “It happened 
in the daysof.” There are also proems to parashiy- 
yot iii., iv., vi., and viii. Parashab ii. begins with 
a composite exposition to I Chron. iv. 21-23; para- 
shah v. with an exposition to I Chron. xi. 18-18 
taken from Yerushalmi. Midrash Ruth has bor- 
rowed from Yerushalmi, Bereshit Rabbah, Pesikta, 
Wayikra Rabbah, ete., and, perhaps, from Babli 
also; it has several passages in common with the 
Midrash Kohelet, as, e.g., to Ruth iii. 18, the story 
of R. Mcir and his teacher Elisha ben Abuyah, 
which, probably, was not taken directly from its 
source, yer. Hag. il. T7b, c. 

Among the other longer passages may be men- 
tioned the sixfold interpretation (“shet shittin ”) of 
R. Johanan, referring to David, Solomon, Hezekiah, 
Manasseh, the Messiah, and to Boaz himself Boaz’s 
words to Ruth in ii. 14. The passage “ Famine came 
ten times into the world,” found in Bereshit Rab- 
bah xxv, (40), 64 to Gen. v. 29 (xii. 10), xxvi. 1, is 
quoted in connection with Ruthi. 1 (“there was 
a famine”), and is here further worked out with ref- 


erence to Elimelech. An inexact reference to Bere- 
shit Rabbah occurs in the editions, in a defective 
passage toward the end of the work. In this pas- 
sage, to Ruth iv. 18, there must have been the in- 
terpretation of the writing of the word mAYIDIN 
which is quoted by Abravanel in “ Yeshu‘ot Me- 
shiho” (ed. Kénigsberg, p. 55b) from the Midrash 
Ruth, and which is found also in Lekah Tob to 
Ruth 2. In regard to this interpretation a copyist 
has referred the reader to Bereshit Rabbah xii. (6); 
and in connection with the words pp yb there must 
have beenadded to the interpretation of oy and mos 
(found also in Bereshit Rabbah, ch. xii. [3]) that con- 
cerning the doubling of names; the latter is similarly 
added in Bereshit Rabbah,ch. xxx. (4) and is found 
alone 2b. ch. xxxviii. (12), ending in both passages 
with the words “ bisseru she-Yishma‘el ‘oseh teshu- 
bah,” which the copyist quotes as the conclusion 
of his abbreviated reference. 

The midrash to Ruth published by Buber in the 
“Midrash Zuta” (pp. 45-56) is entirely different in 
arrangement aud execution; it begins with a short 
proem by R. Tanhuma and contains a brief cx posi- 
tion according to the sequence of the text. See 
RutTH RaBBAnH. 

3. Midrash Kohelet (so called in the eclitio 
princeps and the Venice edition): The Midrash Kohe- 
let, or Ecclesiastes, was divided, probably, accord- 
ing to the sedarim of the Biblical book; it contained, 
aside from extensive borrowings from Yerushalmi, 
proems from Bereshit Rabbah, Ekah Rabbati, Wa- 
yikra Rabbah, Pesikta, and Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah, 
which make up a large portion of the work. But 
the author of the Midrash Kohelet takes many pas- 
sages from Babli as well, quotes from the “Sayings 
of the Fathers” with the reference “ Abot,” and refers 
to smaller treatises by name, betraying thereby con- 
clusively the relatively late date of composition of 
this midrash. Zunz designates this midrash as “a 
work of the laterepoch.” But it is difficult toagree 
with him, especially as regards Yelammedenu, 
when he adds: “Many passages from the above- 
mentioned hag gadot to Canticles, Ruth, and Ecclesi- 
astes have been incorporated in Yelammedenu, De- 
barim Rabbah, Pesikta Rabbati, and Shemot Rabbah; 
they occupy a middle position between the last- 
named and the earlier haggadah.” See KoHELET 
RaBBAH (in which comp. statement in regard to the 
other midrash to Ecclesiastes printed in Buber’s 
“Midrash Zuta,” pp. 83-144). 

4, Midrash Megillat Esther (so called in the 
editio princeps and in the Venice edition): This 
midrash consists of six parashiyyot introduced by 
one or more proems, beginning with Esth. i. 1, 1. 4, 
i. 9, 1. 18, ii. 1, and ti. 5, After this there is hardly 
any trace of a further division. As the division is 
not carried out systematically, so the exposition ap- 
pears to be incomplete. The midrash borrows from 
Yerushalmi, Bereshit Rabbah, Wayikra Rabbah, 
and from other sources, and has some points of sim- 
larity with the expositions to Esther in Babli. 
Especially noteworthy is the story of Mordecai’s 
dream and prayer, and of Esther’s prayer and her 
appearance before the king, recognized at an early 
date asan interpolation from “ Yosippon.” Bacher’s 
assumption that the passage is not a later addition, 


Midrash Haggadah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


586 





but was taken by the author of the Midrash Esther 
from a Hebrew apocryphon to the Book of Esther, 
can not be accepted in view of the literal agreement 
of that passage with “ Yosippon.” In JEw. Encyc. 
v. 241, s.c. EstHER Rapsan, aside from the Mid- 
rash Abba Gorion, another haggadic exposition to 
Esther is referred to, which was printed in Buber’s 
“Sammlung Agadischer Commentare,” etc., pp. 55- 
82. Entirely independent of this work is a South- 
Arabic midrash compilation to Esther, also printed 
by Buber (“ Agadische A bhandlungen,” ctc., Cracow, 
1897); this work borrows especially from Babli, the 
Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer, and from Alfasi and Maimon- 
ides. The midrash to the roll of Esther printed at 
Constantinople in 1519 and edited by C. M. Horo- 
witzinhis“Sammlung Kleiner Midraschim ” (1881) 
is also a later composition. Gaster published still 
another midrash, which he considers the oldest mid- 
rash to Esther, in the Kohut Memorial Volume 
(1897, pp. 167-177). See EstnrErR Raspbau. The 
following are some passages from this midrash, 
which has been included in the Rabbot collection; 


re 


they are taken from the exposition to Esth, ii. 5 
and 7: 


In Shushan there was a certain Jew [Yehudi]. The ex- 
pression 2°Nx teavhes that Mordecai was as important in his 
time as Moses had been in his time, of whom it is said, ‘* Now 
the man [v-sN7y] Moses was very meek” {Num. xii. 3]. As 
Moses stood in the breach, of whom it is written, ** Therefore 
he said that he would destroy them, had not Moses his chosen 
stood before him in the breach” [Ps. evi. 23], so also Mordecai, 
of whom it is written, ‘* [He] accepted of the multitude of his 
brethren, seeking the wealth of his people’’ [Esth. x. 3]. As 
Moses taught Israel the Torah, as it is written, ‘‘ Behold, I have 
taught you statutes and judgments ”’ [Deut, iy. 5], so Mordecai 
alsu, as it is written, °° words of peace and truth” [Esth, ix. 30], 
and ‘truth’ means the “Torah,” as it is written, ‘* Buy the 
truth, and sell it not ’’ (Prov. xxiii. 23]. 

Whose viame was Mordecai. In speaking of the wicked the 
name is placed first: ‘*Nabal is his name’’ [I Sam. xxv. 25); 
**Sheba, the son of Bichri by name” (II Sam. xx. 21]: but in 
the case of the pious the word **name” stands first: ‘‘and his 
name was Manoah” [Judges xiii.2]; ‘*and hisname was Kish ”’ 
{I Sam. ix. 1]: ‘‘and his name was Saul”’ (ib. ix. 2]; *‘and his 
name was Elkanah” [ib. i. 1]; “‘and his name was Boaz” 
{Ruth ii. 1]; ‘‘and his name was Mordecai’’; because they re- 
semble their Maker, as it is written, ’** But by my name JEHOVAH 
was I not Known to them” [Ex. vi. 3}. 

Yehudi. Why, since he was a Benjamite, was he called a 
Yehudi’? [{comp. Esth. ii. 5]? Because he confessed the 
name of the One God before the whole world, as it is written, 
** But Mordecai bowed not, nor did him reverence ” [Esth. iii. 2]. 
Was he quarrelsome and one who transgresses the commands of 
the king? No; but when Ahasuerus had commanded that 
every one should bow down to Haman, the latter graved an im- 
age of an idol in bis heart, in order that the people might thus 
bow down to the idol; and when Haman saw that Mordecai did 
not bow before him, he was very wroth. But Mordecai said, 
‘* There is a Lord who is above all; how shall I leave Him and 
bow down to an idol?*®’ And because he confessed the name of 
the One God, he was called ** Yehudi” [i.e., »117* Means spn = 
* confessor of the unity of God ”’]. Others say he was as great 
as Abraham in his time. As our father Abraham allowed him- 
self to be cast into the flery furnace [comp. the story in Bereshit 
Rabbah, xxxviii., end], thus leading men to recognize the Holy 
One, praised be He, as it is written, “‘and the souls that they 
had gotten in Haran” [Gen. xii. 5; according to the midrash 
the proselytes who were led by Abraham to recognize God are 
meant; comp. Sifre, Deut. 32; Gen. R. xxxix.], so men recog- 
nized the greatness of the Holy One, praised be He, in the days 
of Mordecai, as itis written, "And many of the people of the land 
became Jews” [Esth. viii. 17]. Heconfessed the name of the 
One God and sanctified Him, therefore he was called °** Jenudi.” 

And he brought up Hadassah. As the myrtle [1974] is 
sweet of smell and bitter of taste, so Esther was sweet for Mor- 
decai and bitter for Haman. For she had neither father nor 
mother. R. Phinehas apd R. Hama b. Gorion, in the name of 


ee ey 
es 


Rab: *‘ Was she a ‘shetukit’ [child whose origin must be con. 
cealed]? No; but when her mother became pregnant With ber, 
her father died, and when she was born her mother died.” R, 
Berechiah, in the name of R. Levi: ** The Holy One, praised be 
He, said to Israel, ‘ You weep and say, Orphans are we, Without 
father [comp. Lam. v. 3]. By your life, the redeemer, Whom ] 
will send to you out of Media, shall be without father anq 
mother, as it is written, **For she had neither father nor 
mother.’’’?”? 


IV. The Remaining Exegetical Midrashim 
not Dealing with the Pentateuch: For the 
midrashim to Samuel, the Psalms, and Proverbs see 
SAMUEL, PsALMs, and PROVERBS, MIDRASH TO. 

1. Midrash Yeshayah: This midrash is men- 
tioned by Abravanel, Abraham Portaleone, and the 
author of the midrash commentary “ Mattenot Ke- 
hunnah” (to Wayikra Rabbah, section 29, and Be- 
nidbar Rabbah, section 16). But no extract from 
this midrash is found either in Yalkut Shim‘oni or 
in Yalkut Makiri. 

2. Midrash Yonah: The midrash to the Book 
of Jonah, read on the Day of Atonement as haftarah 
during the Minhah prayer, contains a haggadic ver- 
sion of this prophetical book. In the editions the 
work consists of two parts; the second part, in 
which the story of Jonah is allegorically referred to 
the soul, beginning with the words “ Wa-yomer 
Adonai la-dag,” is reprinted in Jellinek, “Bet ha- 
Midrash ” (i. 102 e¢ seg.). This part is merely a lit- 
eral translation from the Zohar (comp. 74. p. Xx.); 
it is not found in the version printed by C. M. Horo- 
witz (after a Codex De Rossi) in the “Sammlung 
Kleiner Midraschim ” (Berlin, 1881). The first part, 
the midrash proper, is found also in the Yalkut to 
Jonah (part ii., $3 550-551), with the exception of a 
few missing passages and with several variations; 
but here the Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer is given as the 
source (for some passages, Yerushalmi and Babli). 

Jellinek assumes that the first part of the Midrash 
Jonah was compiled subsequently to Yalkut. But 
as many passages which the Yalkut has in common 
withthe Midrash Jonah—e.g., the penitential prayer 
given in Jellinek, “Bet ha-Midrash” (i. 99) and the 
description of Nineveh’s grandeur there—are not 
found in Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer; and as, further- 
more, the author of the Yalkut probably did not 
find all this material in the Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer, 
he must have taken his quotations from a midrash 
which was substantially identical with the Midrash 
Jonah (¢.e., with the first part). The author of this 
midrash borrowed nearly the whole of ch. x. from 
the Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer, and borrowed also from 
Yerushalmi and Babli. The version of the Codex 
De Rossi begins with the passage which in the Mid- 
rash Jonah is found in connection with iii. 83 e 
seg.; the extracts borrowed by the latter from Babli 
and Yerushalmi and inserted in the course of its 
commentary to this passage and later are missing in 
the Codex De Rossi. Then follows the end of part 
i. of the midrash, into which ch. x. of the Pirke 
Rabbi Eli‘ezer has been interpolated. It concludes 
with the exposition of some verses—Deut. iv. 31, 
Micah vii.18,and others. It may be noted, finally, 
that in a compilation included in the earlier editions 
of Tanhuma to the pericope “ Wayikra ” (ed. Stettin, 
2b. & 8), which dates from a later time, ch. x. of the 
Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer was also included. 


567 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Haggadah 





3. Midrash Iyyob: It can be doubted uo 
longer that the old authors possessed a midrash to 
the Book of Job. Extracts with express reference 
to the source Midrash Ivyob are found to Job i. 14 
(in the Yalkut Makiri to Isa. Ixi, 11), to Job i. 6 (in 
a MS. commentary of Rashi to Job), to Jobi. Land iv. 
12 (ina MS. Mahzor commentary; both these com- 
mentaries are in the possession of Abraham Epstein, 
in Vienna; comp. “ Ha-Hoker,” i. 325), to Job vii. 9 
(in the “ Recanati” to Gen. iii. 24), to Job ii. 1 (( 7]; 
in the “ Recanati”—according to the statement in 
“Rab Pe‘alim,” p. 34), to Job iv. 10 (in Yalk. Shi- 
m‘oni, ii, 897). The extracts found in the Yal- 
kut Maliri to Ps. li. 7 and Ps. exlvi. 4 with the 
eource-reference “ Midrash ” and referring to Job iii. 
8 and xxxviii. 1, are, perhaps, likewise taken from 
the Midrash Lyyob, as are many passages in the Job 
commentaries of Samuel b. Nissim Masnuth (“ Ma‘- 
yan Gannim,” Berlin, 1889) and Isaac b. Solo- 
mon (Constantinople, 1545). The extracts and 
quotations from Midrash lyycb have been collected 
by Wertheimer (“Leket Midrashim,” Jerusalem, 
1903; comp, also Zunz, “G. V.” p. 270; Briall’s 
“Jahrb.” v.-vi. 99). 

According to Zunz, there are also evidences of 
the existence of midrashim to Ezra and Chronicles 
(‘b, p. 271). For the Midrash al Yithallel, to 
Jer. 1x. 22 and to the Hallel Midrash, see MipRAsHIM, 
SMALLER, 

V. Special Haggadic Works: 1. Pirke (de) 
Rabbi Eli‘ezer: This work, consisting of fifty- 
four chapters, is quoted by the ancient authors either 
under this name or—especially by the author of the 
““Aruk”—as Baraita de Rabbi Eli‘ezer. It is 
not an exegetical or homiletical midrash like the mid- 
rashim discussed so far, although it contains occa- 
sional expositions, as to Jonah i. and ii. (in ch. x.) 
and to passages in Esther (in ch. xlix. and 1.); but 
it describes in lucid Hebrew, often having recourse 
to Biblical phraseology and poetic diction different 
from that of most of the other midrashim, the most 
important events of the Pentateuch—the works of 
God as revealed in the Creation and in the ancient. 
history of Israel. The plan of the work, as Weiss 
has happily stated (“ Dor,” iii. 290), is outlined in 
the words which the author puts into the mouth of 
R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus—whose fortunes and the 
recognition he received from R. Johanan b. Zakkai 
are related in the introductory chapters, i. and ii. 
—at the beginning of the discourse: “* Who can 
utter the mighty acts of the Lord? who can shew 
forth all his praise?” [Ps. evi. 2]. Is there one in 
the world able to utter God’s mighty acts and to 
proclaim His praise? Even the angels are not able 
to do so. We may speak only of one part of His 
deeds, namely, what He has done and will do, in 
order that the name of the Lord may be glorified 
by His creatures,” ete. 

In ch. iii.-xi. the creative acts of the several days 
are treated haggadically. Ch. ili. begins with the 
things created before the world—the Torah, hell, 
paradise, etc.; ch. iv. deals with the “hayyot” and 
the angels; in ch. vi.-viii. the author connects with 
the creative acts of the fourth day details in regard 
to the planets, the signs of the zodiac, calendric 
science, and intercalation; ch. ix., on the creative 


acts of the fifth day, connects with the above-men- 
tioned chapter on Jonah, who fled before God on 
the fifth day. 

The haggadah on the creation of man in ch. xi. 
connects with ch. xii.-xxi_, dealing with Adam and 
his descendants (note particularly ch. xiii., on the 
envy of the angels at the creation of man; 7. and 
part of ch, xiv., on Samael; ch. xv., on the angels 
who warn man from the path of evil; ch. xvi., on 
the deeds of love which God showed to Adam: ch. 
xvii., on comforting the mourning; ch. xviii., on 
Sabbath rest; ch. xx., on Adam at the end of the 
first Sabbath and on Habdalah). Ch. xxiii. and 
xxiv. deal with Noah, his sons and descendants: ch. 
XXV.-XXXL, With Abraham; ch. xxxii.-xxxv., with 
Isaac; ch. XXX Vi.-xXxxvii., with Jacob; ch. xxxviii.— 
XXxix., with Joseph (ch. xxix., on circumcision, 
and ch. xxxiii., on benevolence and resurrection); ch. 
xl.-xlvii., with Moses, the revelation of the Law, 
the Exodus, Amalek, and the golden calf (comp. 
ch, xlili., on penitence, and ch. xlvi., on the Day of 
Atonement). Connected with these chapters, prob- 
ably, are ch, xlviii., on the release from Egypt and 
on Moses; ch. xlix. and 1., on Amalek’s descendants, 
Haman, and Titus (together with comments to the 
Book of Esther); and ch. li., on future redemption. 
Ch. hii. deals with seven divine miracles; ch. Iii. 
and liv. deal with the sin of the evil tongue—slan- 
der and calumny. Aaron’s and Miriam's calumny 
against Moses (Num, xii. 1 e¢ seg.) is also mentioned 
here; the last chapter of the work closes with 
the account of Miriam’s punishment. 

It is hardly probable that this is the original end- 
ing of this haggadic work, which evidently was 
planned on a very large scale, “since a writer who 
goes so extensively into all the details of the Penta- 
teuch will hardly have laid down his pen with the 
story of the leprosy of Moses’ sister” (comp. Zunz, 
“G. V.” pp. 271 et seg.). The incompleteness of the 
work, or the failure to carry out the original plan, 
is evident from other facts also. Ch. xxvii., xxxiv., 
xxxv., xl., and xliti. end with the final sentences of 
the first five of the Eighteen Benedictions respect- 
ively ; the endings of ch. xlvi., li., liv. correspond with 
the three following benedictions of that prayer. 
This seems to point to the existence of a connective 
thread, which is broken at the end of the work. Inch. 
xiv. the haggadah of God’s ten appearances on earth 
is recounted (comp. Mekilta to Ex. xix. 11; Sifre, 
Num. 98; Gen. R. xxxviii. and xlix.; Ab. R. N., ed. 
Schechter, pp. 96, 102), and the same subject is 
treated in detail in ch, xxiv., xxv., xxxix., x1, xIi., 
xlvi., liv.; while the eighthappearance is discussed 
only in the last chapter. But it can not be demon- 
strated from the quotations which are found in the 
works of old writers, especially R. Nathan, that 
the midrash ever extended any further; it probably 
remained incomplete (comp. Zunz, J.¢. p. 278). 

No further proofs are required now to show that 
R. Eliezer b. Hyrcanus was not the author of the 
work. Aside from many indications recalling the 
productions of the geonic period, the interesting 
passage in ch, xxx., omitted in some editions, ex- 
plicitly referring to the building of the mosque on 
the site of the Temple, and the allusions to the 
deeds of the califs, clearly indicate that the author 


Midrash Haggadah 
Midrash Halakah 


lived under Arabic rule. According to Zunz, the 
work can not have been composed before the eighth 
century. It was used by Kalir, is mentioned by R. 
Nissim (¢. 1030), and is often quoted since Rashi and 
the “‘Aruk.” The author was doubtless a Pales- 
tinian. There are various other versions of the 
story of R. Eliezer b. Wyrcanus narrated in ch. i. 
and ii., namely, in Gen. R. xiii.; Ab. R. N., recen- 
sion A, ch. vi.; recension B, ch. xiii.; Tan., Lek 
Leka, 30 (ed. Buber); and elsewhere (comp. the list 
in Horowitz, “Bibl. Haggadica,” i., No. 1, pp. 1 e¢ 
seg.; Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer, ch. xxxix.-xli., is printed 
after a Codex De Rossi, zh. No. ii., pp. 21-25). 
An extract or a revision of the Pirke Rabbi Eli- 
‘ezer, ch. lil.—vi., ix., xi., was published by Horowitz, 
after a codex in the British Museum, in the collec- 
tion “Sammlung Kleiner Midraschim ” (pp. iv.-x., 
Berlin, 1881). On the important chapters vi.—viii. 
(on calendric science) compare Zunz, “G. 8.” iii. 
242, and Epstein, “Beitrige zur Jiidischen Alter- 
thumskunde,” pp. 21 ef seg. 

2. Seder Eliyahu, or Tanna debe Eliyahu: 
This work derived its name, its division into Seder 
Eliyahu Rabbah and Seder Eliyahu Zuta, 
and perhaps more or less of its contents, from anold 
work mentioned in the Talmud (Ket. 106a), where 
it is said that it was revealed to Rab Anan, a pupil 
of Rab in the third century, by the prophet Elijah, 
and that it included Seder Eliyahu Rabbah and 
Seder Eliyahu Zuta. Seven of the nine halakic and 
haggadic passages mentioned in different treatises 
of the Talmud with the formula “Tanna debe Eli- 
yahu” are found in the Seder Eliyahu. The work 
as now known was composed in the second half of 
the tenth century; this is evident from the dates 
(which must not be regarded as interpolations or as 
having been changed) in ch. ii., vi., and xxxi. of the 
Seder Eliyahu Rabbah (ed. Friedmann, pp. 7, 37, 
and 163 respectively). The purpose of the book is 
clearly expressed in the haggadic interpretation to 
Gen. iii. 24 at the beginning of the work (“Let man 
guard the way [of life] and the tree of life [the 
Torah} ”—that is, jet him glorify the Torah and 
study the Law) as well as in the exhortation to 
practise all virtues and pious works, which the au- 
thor understands the term “derek erez” to denote. 
To this are added some expositions and interpreta- 
tions—in part very extendcd—of the statutes, which, 
in a measure, transform the Seder Eliyahu into an 
exegetical midrash. 

Among the stories included those are most charac- 
teristic of the work in which the author speaks 
through the mouth of the prophet Elijah; further- 
more, many parables, maxims, prayers, and exhor- 
tations enliven the discourse. The unprejudiced 
ethics of the work and the attitude of the Israelites 

toward the non-Israelites appear in 


Liberal the sentence, “I call heaven and earth 
Character to witness that, whether Israelite or 
of the non-Israelite, whether man or woman, 
Work. whether male or female slave, the 


Holy Spirit rests upon man according 
to his deeds” (p. 48), and in many other fine pas- 
sages, as pp. 36, 65, 81, 88, 140 (comp. Theodor in 
“ Monatsschrift,” 1900, pp. 354, 558). The work is 
written in pure Hebrew, the diction of many pas- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


568 





_—— a RR pce 
_ yg 


sages is notably beautiful, and the style is fluent 
though frequently verbose; it is not always easy to 
follow the train of thought and to find the real con- 
nection between the several passages. The division 
into chapters is frequently merely an external ane, 
and the several chapters vary greatly in length. R, 
Nathan says in the “‘Aruk” (s.2. 145 [8]) that the 
Seder Eliyahu Rabbah has three “ gates” and thirty 
chapters, and the Seder Eliyahu Zuta twelve chap- 
ters; but there is no quotation from the work in 
the “‘Aruk.” In the Venice edition of 1598, which 


-was printed from a codex of the year 1186, the first 


part contains thirty-one chapters and the second 
part twenty-five chapters; Zunz, however, has 
shown (“G. V.” p. 117) that ch. xv.-xxv. of the 
Seder Eliyabu Zuta are a later compilation. In the 
Friedmann edition (Vienna, 1902), after a Vatican 
manuscript of the year 1073, part i. has been 
carefully divided into twenty-nine chapters, 
while part ii. closes with ch. xv. of the Venice 
edition. — 

The last chapter may be recognized as spurious, 
In a Codex De Rossi published by Horowitz (/.¢. L, 
No. ii., pp. 3-19), Eliyahu Zuta has only twelve 
chapters. 

The two editions of the entire work, the numer- 
ous extracts from it in Yalkut Shim‘oni, and the 
Seder Eliyahu Zuta according to the Codex De 
Rossi vary in many points, appearing in parts to be 
different versions. 

The work fared badly in the edition published 
by R. Samuel b. Moses Heida, with a prolix caba- 
listic commentary (Prague, 1677). This edition 
goes beyond allattempted reconstructions of modern 
midrash criticism; the text has been worked over, 
interpolated, and interspersed with entirely extrane- 
ous elements, and is designated as a “new version” 
(“nusha hadasha ”), destined to supplant the text of 
the Venice edition, the chapters of which, printed 
in smaller type, head the chapters of this edition. 
See TANNA DEBE ELIYAHU. 

For a pumber of special haggadic works, which 
vary greatly in content and which constitute, in 
part, a distinct class of literature, such as Dibre 
ha-Yamim sihel Moseh, Midrash Eleh Ez- 
kerah, Midrash ‘Eser Galliyot, Midrash 
Ma‘ase Torah, Meir Petirat Aharon. Midrash 
we-Yeterot, Meir Petirat Moseh, Meir Ta‘a- 
ma, Midrash Temurah, etc., as well as for the 
collections of similar works, see MIpDRASsHIM, 
SMALLER. 

VI. Yalkut Shim‘oni, Yalkut ha-Makiri, 
and Midrash ha-Gadol: A brief reference to 
these three works, more fully discussed under their 
respective titles, may here be given. As in thecase 
of the entire midrash literature, the author of the 
Yalkut Shim‘oni—a broadly planned midrashic the- 
saurus to the twenty-four books of the Bible, com- 
hining all the products of the Midrash, Halakah, 
and Haggadah, and which could easily furnish 
material for midrashic compendiums to the several 
books of the Bible—is unknown, or, rather, the iden- 
tity of the Simeon after whom the midrash is called 
has not yet been definitely determined. The words 
“Sefer Yalkut ha-Nikra Shim‘oni” occur on the 
title-page of the first part of the work in the editio 


569 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA - 


Midrash Haggadah 
Midrash Halakah 





princeps (Salonica, 1526-27; part ii., 2. 1521). <At 
the end of the first part, in the editio princeps only, 
jig a valuable appendix, introduced by the remark 
that R. Simeon ha-Darshan edited it after having 
composed the work. 

According to the statement on the title-page of 
the Venice edition, 1566, “Rabbenu Shimeon, the 
head of the ‘Darshanim’ of Frankfort,” composed 
the Yalkut. In this edition the corrector has taken 
the liberty of changing the readings of the Yalkut 
according to the text of printed midrash cditions 
(comp. Theodor in “ Monatsschrift,” 1895, pp. 390, 
484 et seg.; comp. also the paragraph numbers in 
part ii. of the editio princeps and the sequence of 
the prophetic and hagiographic books according to 
the Yalkut). The writer of the preface in the edi- 
tion of Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 1709, designates the 
author more explicitly as “IR. Shimeon of Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main.” But it is not certain either that 
his name was “R. Shimeon ” or that the author was 
a native of Frankfort-on-the-Main. Zunz’s view 
that the date of composition of the Yalkut Shim‘oni 
remains to be determined is to be accepted (“G. V.” 
p. 299; Epstein, in “ Ha-Hoker,” i. 85 et seqg., 188 et 
seg. ; Briill’s “ Jahrb.” v.—vi. 221 et seqg.). Theextracts 
in the Yalkut are often contracted and changed to af- 
ford a more suitable connection with the respective 
verses of the Biblical text; the names of the authors 
also are abbreviated, especially in the first part. It 
is furthermore evident that different manuscripts of 
the same midrash, etc., were used in the different 
parts of the work. But it must be emphasized, in 
answer to many accusations of both earlier and more 
recent times, that the Yalkut does not arbitrarily 
alter readings, but reproduces the text according to 
the manuscripts which the author or his collabora- 
tors had at hand. The readings of the Yalkut are 
of great critical value, especially when compared 
with the readings of other manuscripts, or when the 
latter are supported by the authority of the Yalkut 
(comp. Theodor in “ Monatsschrift,” 1900, p. 388). 

In the ecitio princeps of the Yalkut the sources 
are always given in the text, not in the margin. 
The reference to the sources was doubtless made by 
the compiler himself, who freely drew upon nearly 
the entire Talmudic-midrashic literature, the above- 
mentioned tannaitic midrashim (including Seder 
‘Olam, Baraita on the Tabernacle, etc.), the two 
Talmuds, the exegetic and homiletic midrashim, and, 
with few exceptions, the remaining haggadiec works; 
an exact list of the sources is given in Zunz, “G. 
V.” p. 298. It must be noted here that the follow- 
iug Rabbot are not used: Shemot Rabbah, Bemidbar 
Rabbah, the midrashim to Ecclesiastes and Esther. 
The midrash to Ecclesiastes published by Buber in 
Midrash Zuta, Abba Gorion, and other haggadot to 
Esther, have been used. 

Machir b. Abba Mari’s Yalkut ha-Makiri is doubt- 
less a Jater work than the Yalkut Shim‘oni; the 
following portions of it have recently been pub- 
lished: to Isaiah (ed. Spira, Berlin, 1894, not com- 
Plete); to the Psalms (ed. Buber, Berdychev, 1899) ; 
to Proverbs (ed. Griinhut, 1902, defective at the be- 
ginning and supplemented in “Sefer ha-Likkutim,” 
part vi.); a codex in the British Museum, defective 
at the beginning and the end, contains the Yalkut 


ha-Makiri to the Twelve Minor Prophets. In the 
prefaces of the Yalkut ha-Makiri to Isaiah and the 
Psalms, similar in wording, the author adds to his 
name the names of his ancestors for several gen- 
erations back; but otherwise nothing is kuown-either 
about the time in which he lived or about his home 
and the circumstances of his life. The Codex Ley- 
den, however (after which the Yalkut ha-Makiri to 
Isaiah was printed), contains a note referring to its 
sale, and dated 1415. From the above-mentioned 
prefaces it is known that Machir b. Abba Mari's work 
included the books of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Job 
also; hence it did not cover the entire Bible, as did 
the Yalkut Shim‘oni; nor were so many sources 
used as for that work, the compiler having taken 
hardly anything from the smaller midrashim. 

The sources are invariably noted in the text at the 
beginning of the extracts, which are given cutire, 
and without abbreviation of names, being therefore 
more exact than the extracts given in the other 
Yaikut, The versions of the midrash works used 
in Yalkut ha-Makiri are, in part, different from those 
used in the Yalkut Shim‘oni; the titles of the works 
likewise are differently given in the two collections; 
é.g., “Torat Kohanim” and “Midrash Tehillim ” in 
the Yalkut Shim‘oni, and “Sifra” and “Shoher 
Tob ” in Yalkut ha-Makiri. The author of the latter 
cites also from Shemot Rabbah, Bemidbar Rabbah, 
Kohelet Rabbah, and Esther Rabbah, designating 
the last-named as “Midrash Ahasuerus”; he does 
not seem to have known the Pesikta Rabbati. As 
different manuscripts were used for the two collec- 
tions, they vary, as regards many of the readings, 
both from each other and from other midrash texts, 
these variations constituting the greatest value these 
collections possess. 

While both of the two Yalkut works entirely ig- 
nore the Targumim, the works on mysticism, and 
the works of rabbinical literature, the Midrash ha- 
Gadol extracts from the “‘Aruk,” from Rashi, Ibu 
Esra, and Maimonides, and from the works of other 
rabbis, as appears from the part to Genesis published 
by Schechter (Cambridge, 1902; comp. Preface, p. 
xiii.). The anonymous author, who freely quotes 
Talmudic sentences and discussions, as well as ex- 
positions, from the halakicand haggadic midrashim, 
changing, transposing, and commingling them as 
required, nowhere gives his source, unlike the au- 
thors of the two Yalkuts. The above-mentioned 
publications by Lewy and Hoffmann on the tannaitic 
midrashim that had entirely disappeared, as well as 
the notes of the editor to many passages of the edited 
part, give an idea of the treasures contained in the 
Midrash ha-Gadol. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: See the special articles on the various works 
here treated. 

8. J. T. 

MIDRASH HALAKAH (“investigation of the 
Halakah”): Strictly speaking, the verification of 
the traditionally received Halakah by identifying 
its sources in the Bible and by interpreting these 
Scriptural passages as proofs of its authenticity. 
The term is applied also to the derivation of new 
halakot and legal enactments from the Bible, either 
by means of a correct interpretation of the obvious 
meaning of the Scriptural words themselves or by 


Midrash Halakah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


570 





the application of certain hermeneutic rules (see 
TaLMuD). The phrase “Midrash Halakah” was 
first employed by Nachman Krochmal (in his 
“Moreh Nebuke ha-Zeman,” p. 163), the Talmudic 
expression being “ Midrash Torah” = 
“investigation of the Torah” (Kid. 
49b). Since all halakic interpreta- 
tions were regarded as corresponding to the real 
meaning of the Scriptural texts concerned in each 
case, it was held that a correct elucidation of 
the Torah carried with it the proof of the Halakah 
and the reason for its existence. In the Midrash 
Halakah three divisions may be distinguished: 
(1) the midrash of the older Halakah, that is, the 
midrash of the Soferim and the Tannaim of the first 
two gencrations; (2) the midrash of the younger 
Halakah, or the midrash of the Taunaim of the three 
folowing generations; (8) the midrash of several 
younger tannaim and of a large number of amoraim 
who did not interpreta Biblical passage as an actual 
proof of the Halakah, but merely as a suggestion 
or a support for it (“zeker Je-dabar”; “asmakta”). 
The Midrash of the Older Halakah: The 
early Hlalakah sought only to define the compass 
and scope of individual laws, asking under what 
circumstances of practical life a given rule was to 
be applied and what would be its consequences. 
The earlicr Midrash, therefore, aims at an exact cefi- 
nition of the laws contained in the Scriptures by an 
accurate interpretation of the text and a correct de- 
termination of the meaning of the various words. 
The form of exegesis adopted is frequently one of 
simple lexicography, and is remarkably brief. A 
few examples will serve to illustrate the style of the 
older Midrash Halakah, It translates the word 
“yra‘ah ” (Ex. xxi. 8) “displease” (Mek., Mishpatim, 
3 [ed. Weiss, p. 85a]), which is contrary to the in- 
terpretation of R. Eliezer (Kid. 19b). From the 
expression “be-miksat ” (Ex. xii. 4), which, accord- 
ing to it, can mean only “number,” the older Hala- 
kah deduces the rule that when killing the Passover 
lamb the slaughterer must be aware of the number 
of persons who are about to partake of it (Mek., 
Bo, 3 [ed. Weiss, p. 5a}). Similarly the prohibi- 
tion against eating the Passover lamb uncooked is 
derived from the word “na” (Ex. xii. 9), which, 
it is declared, can signify only “raw ” 

Examples (Mek., Bo, 6 [ed. Weiss, p. 8b]). The 
of Style of statement that the determination of 
the Older the calendar of feasts depends wholly 
Halakah. on the decision of the nasi and his 
council is derived from Lev. xxiii. 37, 

the defectively written “otam” (them) being read 
as “attem” (ye) and the interpretation, “which ye 
shall proclaim,” being regarded as conforming to the 
original meaning of the phrase (R. H. 25a). When 
two different forms of the same word in a given 
passage have been transmitted, one written in the 
text (“ketib”), and the other being the traditional 
reading (“kere”), the Halakah, not wishing to desig- 
nate either as wrong, interprets the word iu such a 
way that both forms may be regarded as correct. 
Thus it explains Lev. xxv. 30—where according to 
the kere the meaning is “in the walled city,” but 
according to the ketib, “in the city which ts not 
walled "—as referring to a city that once had walls, 


The Term. 


but no longer has them (‘Ar. 32b). In a similar 
Way it explains Lev. xi. 29 (Hul. 65a). Accord- 
ing to Krochmal (/.¢. pp. 151 et seg.), the ketib was 
due to the Soferim themselves. who desired that the 
interpretation given by the Halakah might be con- 
tained in the text: for example, in the case of 
“otam” and “attem” noted above, they tuteution-. 
ally omitted the }. 

Another example of the methods of the older 
Halakah is found in Num. ix. 10 eé¢ seg., where it is 
ordained that if a man at the time of the Passover 
be unclean from contact with a corpse, or if he be 
“in a journey afar off” (“be-derek rehokah”), he 
shall keep the feast on the same day of the follow- 
ing month. In this passage no mention is made of 
any other defilement. The Halakah, however, as- 
sumes that one who is unclean, even though he hag 
not touched a corpse, may not partake of the feast. 
Justification for this interpretation is found in a dot 
which occurs over the final ® of the word “reho- 
kah,” and which shows according to the older 
Midrash that the ™ must be omitted in interpret- 
ing the word, and accordingly Sifre, Num. 69 (ed. 
Friedmann, p. 18a) makes the word refer to the man 
(“ish”), and not to the journey (“derek”) (“ish 
rahok welo derek rehokab,” Yer. Pes. ix. 2), and in- 
terprets that in some way he is “afar off from the 
temple,” z.e., that on account of his uncleanness he is 
forbidden to enter it. This interpretation is found 
in the Jerusalem Targum also, According to Geiger 
(“Urschrift,” p. 186), the dot was placed over the 
s at a later time, as in the case of the 4 men- 
tioned above. Asa matter of fact, all these inter- 
pretations and explanations are elucidations of the 
Biblical text and do not depart from the obvious 
meaning of the words as they were understood by 
the exegesis of the time. Hence the old versions 
are frequently found to agree with the older mid- 
rashic Halakah. Thus, . example, the midrashic 
explanation of Ex. xxii. 6 (Mek., Mishpatim, 15 
fed. Weiss, p. 97b]) agrees with that of the Septua-' 
gint, as does the explanation of “mi-moharat ha-' 
shabbat ” (Lev. xiii. 15) as meaning “from the mor- 
row after the feast ” (Men. 65b). 

The Midrash of the Younger Halakah: 
The younger Halakah did not confine itself to the 
mere literal meaning of single passages, but sought 
to draw conclusions from the wording of the 
texts in question by logical deductions, by combina- 
tions with other passages, etc. Hence its midrash 
differs from the simple exegesis of the older Hala- 
kah, lt treats the Bible according to certain gen- 
eral principles, which in the course of time became 
more and more amplified and developed (see TAt- 
MUD); and its interpretations depart further and 
further from the simple meaning of the words. A 
few examples will illustrate this difference in the 
method of interpretation between the older and 
the younger Halakah, It was a generally accepted 
opinion that the first Passover celebrated in Egypt, 
that of the Exodus, differed from those which 
followed it, in that at the first one the prohibition 
of leavened bread was for a single day only, 
whereas at subsequent Passovers this restriction 
extended to seven days. The older Halakah (in 
Mek., Bo, 16 [ed. Weiss, 24a]), represented by R. 


571 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Halakah 





Jose the Galilean, bases its interpretation on a dif- 
ferent division of the sentences in Ex. xiii. than the 
one generally received; connecting the word “ha- 
yom” (=“this day”), which is the first word of 


verse 4, with verse 3 and so making the passage | 


read: “ There shall no leavened bread be eaten this 
day.” The younger Halakah reads “ha-yom” with 
verse 4, and finds its support for the traditional ha- 
lakah by means of the principle of “semukot ” (col- 
location); that is to say, the two sentences, “ There 
shall no leavened bread be eaten,” and “This day 
came ye out,” though they are separated grammat- 
ically, are immediately contiguous in the text, and 
exert an influence over each other (Pes. 28b, 96b). 
What the older Halakah regarded as the obvious 
meaning of the words of the text, the younger infers 
from the collocation of the sentences. 

The wide divergence betwecu the simple exegesis 
of the older Halakah and the artificiality of the 
younger is illustrated also by the difference in the 
method of explaining the Law, cited above, in re- 

gard to uncleanness. Both halakot 


Contrast regard it as self-evident that if a man 
with be unclean, whether it be from contact 
Earlier with a corpse or from any other cause, 
Halakah. he may notshare in the Passover (Pes. 


93a), The younger Halakah, despite 
the dot over the 4, reads “rehokah” and makes it 
refer to “derek,” even determiving how far away 
one must be to be excluded from participation in 
the feast. In order, however, to find a ground for 
the halakah that those who are unclean through 
contact with other objects than a corpse may have 
no share in the Passover, it explains the repetition 
of the word “ish” in this passage (Lev, ix. 10) as 
intending to include all other cases of defilement. 

Despite this difference in method, the midrashim 
of the older and of the younger Halakah alike be- 
lieved that they had sought only the true meaning 
of the Scriptures. Their interpretationsand deduc- 
tions appeared to them to be really contained in the 
text; and they wished them to be considered correct 
Biblical expositions. Hence they both have the 
form of Scriptural exegesis, in that each mentions 
the Biblical passage and the halakah which is given 
in explanation of it, or, more correctly speaking, 
which is derived from it. 

It is to a law stated in this form—?.e., together 
with the Biblical passage from which it is derived 
—that the name midrash is applied, whereas one 
Which, though ultimately based on the Bible, is 
cited independently as an established statute is 
called a halakah, Collections of halakot of the sec- 
ond sort are the Mishnah and the Tosefta; compila- 
tions of the first sort are the halakic midrashim. 
This name they receive to distinguish them from 
the haggadic midrashim, since they contain halakot 
for the most*part, although there are haggadic por- 

tionsin them. In these collections the 


Abstract line between independent Halakah and 

and Midrash Halakah is not sharply drawn. 
Midrash Many mishnayot in the Mishnah and 
Halakah. in the Tosefta are midrashic hala- 


kot, eg., Ber. i. 3, 5; Bek. i. 4, 7; 
Hul. ii. 8, viii. 4; Tosef., Zeb. i. 8, xii. 20. On 
the other hand, the halakic midrashim contain inde- 


pendent halakot without statements of their Scrip- 
tural bases, ¢.g., Sifra, Wayikra, Hobah, i. 9-18 (ed. 
Weiss, p. 16a, b). This confusion is explained by 
the fact that the redactors of the two forms of hala- 
kot borrowed passages from one another (Hoffmann, 
“Zur Hinleitung in die Halach. Midraschim.” p. 8). 

Since the halakic Midrashim had for their sec- 
ondary purpose the exegesis of the Bible, they were 
arranged according to the text of the Pentateuch. 
As Genesis contains very little matter of a legal 
character, there was probably no halakic midrash to 
this book. On the other hand, to each of the other 
four books of the Pentateuch there was a midrash 
from the school of R. Akibaand one from the school 
of R. Ishmael, and these midrashim are still in 
great part extant. The halakic midrash to Exodus 
from the schoo] of R. Ishmael is the Mexia, while 
that of the school of R. Akiba jis the Mekilta of 
R. Simeon b. Yohai, most of which is contained in 
the Midrash ha-Gadol (comp. I. Lewy, 
“Kin Wort iiber die Mechilta des 
Rt. Simon,” Breslan, 1889). A halakie 
midrash to Leviticns from the school 
of R. Akiba exists under the name “Sifra ” or “ Torat 
Kohanim.” There was one to Leviticus from the 
school of R. Ishmael also, of which only fragments 
have been preserved (comp. Hoffmann, J.c. pp. 72- 
77). The halakic midrash to Numbers from the 
school of R. Ishmael is the “Sifre”; while of that of 
the scliool of R. Akiba, the Sifre Zuta, only extracts 
have survived in the Yalkut Shim‘oni and in the 
Midrash ha-Gadol (comp. 2. pp. 56-66). The mid- 
die portion of the Sifre to Deuteronomy forms a 
halakic midrash on that book from the school of R. 
Akiba, while another from the school of R. Ishmael 
has been shown by Hoffmann to have existed (D. 
Hoffmann, “ Likkute Mekilta, Collectaneen aus einer 
Mechilta zu Deuteronomium,” in “ Jubelschrift zum 
70. Geburtstag des Dr. I. Hildesheimer,” Hebrew 
part, pp. 1-32, Berlin, 1890; ¢dem, “Ueber eine 
Mechilta zu Deuteronomium,” 2). German part, pp. 
83-98; idem, “ Neue Collectaneen,” etc., 1899). 

This assignment of the several midrashim to the 
school of R. Ishmael and to that of R. Akiba respect- 
ively, however, is not to be too rigidly insisted upon; 
for the Sifre repeats in an abbreviated form some of 
the teachings of the Mekilta, just as the Mekilta in- 
cluded in the Midrash ha-Gadol has incorporated 
many doctrines from Akiba’s midrash (comp. Hoff- 
mann, /.¢c. p. 98). Midrashic halakot are found also 
scattered through the two Talmuds; for many halakic 
baraitot which occur in the Talmuds are really mid- 
rashic, recognizable by the fact that they mention 
the Scriptural bases for the respective halakot, often 
citing the text at the very beginning. In the Jeru- 
salem Talmud the midrashic baraitot frequently 
begin with “Ketib” (= “It is written”), followed 
by the Scriptural passage. From the instances of 
midrashic baraitot occurring in the Talmud which 
are not found in the extant midrashim, the loss of 
many of the latter class of works must be inferred 
(Hoffmann, “Zur Einleitung,” p. 3). 

The Midrash of Several Younger Tannaim 
and of a Large Number of Amoraim: The Mid- 
rash which the Amoraim use when deducing tan- 
naitic halakot from the Scriptures is frequently 


The Two 
Schools. 





Midrash Mishl TTS WOW 
Midrashim © THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 572 
very artificial; and its interpretations are in great | the excerpts in Yalk. 132, 234, 241, and 248). She- 


part so divergent from the obvious meaning of the 
words that they can not be considered as Scriptural 
exegesis In any sense. In lke maaner there are 
many explanations by the younger tannaim which 
can by no means be regarded as actual interpreta- 
tions. These occur chiefly as expositions of such 
halakot as were not based on Scripture but which it 
was desired to connect with or support by a word 
in the Bible. The Gemara often says of the inter- 
pretations of a baraita: “The Biblical passage should 
be merely a support.” Of this class are many of 
the explanations in the Sifra (comp. Tos. B. B. 66a, 
sc. “mikial”) and in the Sifre (comp. Tos. Bek. 
54a, so. “ushne”), The tanna also often says 
frankly that he does not cite the Biblical word as 
proof (“re’aya”), but asa mere suggestion (“zeker ”; 
lit. “reminder”) of the halakah, or as an allusion 
(“remez”) to it (Mek., Bo, 5 Jed. Weiss, p. 7b]; 
Sifre, Num, 112, 116 [ed. Friedmann, pp. 88a, 36a)). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Z. Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, pp. 1l- 

18, 307-314, Leipsic, 1859; A. Geiger, Urschrift, pp. 10-197, 

Breslau, 1857; D. Hoffmann, Zur Hinlettung in die Hala- 

chischen Midraschim, Berlin, 1888 ; Nachman Krochmal, Mo- 

reh Nebuke ha-Zeman, section 13, pp. 148-183, Lemberg, 


1868; H. M. Pineles, Darkah shel Torah, pp. 168-201, Vienna, 
1861; L. H. Weiss, Dor, i. 68-70 et passim, ii. 42-53. 


ae J. Z. L. 

MIDRASH MISHLE. See PROVERBS, MID- 
RASH TO. 

MIDRASH SHEMUEL. See Samuru, Mip- 
RASH TO. 


MIDRASH TANHUMA. SrEkE TANnuUMA. 


MIDRASH TEHILLIM. See PsAums, Mip- 
RASH TO. 


MIDRASHIM, SMALLER: A number of 
midrashimn exist which are smaller in size, and gen- 
erally later in date, than those dealt with in the arti- 
cles MiprasH Hace@aDan and Miprasn HALAKAn. 
The chief of these are: 

1. Midrash Abkir: This midrash, the extant 
remains of which consist of more than fifty excerpts 
contained in the Yalkut and a number of citations 
in other works, dealt, according to all accessible 
evidence, only with the first two books of the Pen- 
tateuch. It derived its name from the formula 
PSI 7 7~D 49'9"2 JON with which all these homilies 
closed, according to the testimony of R. Eleazar of 
Worms in a manuscript commentary on the prayer- 
book, and according to a codex of De Rossi. It is 
possible that these religious discourses were ar- 
ranged in the order of the sedarim of Genesis and 
Exodus, the beginnings of the sedarim being Gen. 
i. 1, ii. 4, iii. 22, vi. 9, xii. 1, xvii. 1, xviii. 1, xxii. 
1, xxvii. 1, xliv. 18; Ex. iii. 1, xvi. 4, and xxv. 1, 
to which belong the excerpts in Yalk., Gen. 4, 17, 
34, 50, 63, 81, 82, 96, 120, 150, and in Yalk., Ex. 169, 
258, and 368. If it may be assumed that in these 
homilies of the Midrash Abkir the expositions are 
not confined to the first verses, the fact that certain 
passages are not connected with the beginning of 
any seder need cause no surprise. 

The language of this midrash is pure Hebrew, 
while its contents and discussions recall the works 
of the later haggadic period. As in the Pirke Rabbi 
Eli‘ezer, angels are frequently mentioned (comp. 


mahsai and Azaecl, according to the account in 
the Midrash Abkir, descended to earth to hallow 
the name of God in a degenerate world, but could 
not withstand the daughters of man. Shemahsai 
was entrapped by the beauty of [stahar, who, through 
the marvelous might of the Divine Name, which she 
had elicited from him, ascended to heaven. Asa 
reward for her virtue she was placed among the 
Pleiades, while the angel did penance before the 
Flood, and in punishment of his seduction of the 
daughters of men was suspended head downward 
between heaven and earth. <Azael, however, still 
wanders unreformed among mortals, and through 
dress and adornment seeks to mislead women (Jel- 
lineck, “B. H.” iv., pp. ix. et seg.). The version of 
this story in Yalk. 44 (on Gen. vi. 2) concludes: 
“Therefore do the Israelites offer as a sacrifice on 
the Day of Atonement a ram [sic] to the Eternal One 
that He may forgive the sins of Israel, and a ram 
[sic] to Azazel that he may bear the sins of Israel, 
and this is the Azazel that is referred to in the 
Torah.” This passage of the midrash explains the 
words of Yoma 67b: “ According tothe school of R. 
Ishmael, Azazel is he who atones for the deed of 
Usa and Azael.” It is to be noted that in the edi- 
tio princeps of the Yalkut (Salonica, 1526-27) the 
source of the legend of the fallen angels (in § 44) as 
well as of the legend concerning the temptation 
of It. Mattithiah b. Heresh by Satan (in § 161), 
who was successfully resisted by the pious hero, is 
simply the ordinary midrash, not the Midrash Ab- 
kir. The latter legend is found also in the Mid- 
rash of the Ten Commandments (Jellinek, J.c. i, 
79) and in Tanhuma (ed. Buber, “Hukkat,” Ad- 
denda, § 1). 

In several other excerpts from the Yalkut, which, 
according to later editions, are derived from the 
Midrash Abkir, the source is indicated in the first 
edition merely by the word “ Midrash,” as in § 241, 
which discusses the legend of Usa, the patron of 
Egypt; here “Midrash” apparently means “ Midrash 
Wayosha‘ ” (Jellinek, /.¢. i. 89 e¢ seqg.). Yalk. 285 (on 
Ex. xiv. 24) relates that the Egyptian magicians 
JANNESANDJAMBRES obtained wings by theirart and 
soared to heaven, but were dashed down into the sea 
by the angel Michael. It can not be determined, 
however, whether this passage belongs to the frag- 
ment excerpted from the Midrash Abkir in Yalk. 
234. This midrash was at all events known to the 
author of the “Shemot Rabbah,” and was used or 
cited in the following works among others: the 
“Lekah Tob” of R. Tobias b, Eliezer, the “ Ha-Ro- 
keah” of Eleazar ben Judah of Worms, the “ Pa‘a- 
neah Raza,” the “Ketab Tamim” of Moses Talku, 
the “Kad na-Kemah ” of Babya ben Asher, a manu- 
script commentary by a grandson of R. Samuel of 
Speier, and the Yalkut Re’ubeni. The entire mid- 
rash was likewise known to Azariah dei Rossi (cor p. 
“Me'or ‘Enayim,.” ed. Wilna, p. 455) and to Abra- 
ham ibn Akra, The extracts in the Yalkut, which 
had been listed almost completely by Zunz, were 
collected by Buber in “Ha-Shahar,” xi. (reprinted 
separately, Vienna, 1883) and by Simon Chones in 
“Rab Pe‘alim,” pp. 138 e¢ seg. The legend of the two 
angels was also reprinted by Jellinek, Uc. iv. 127 e& 


573 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrash Mishle 
Midrashim 


_ 


sq. Jannes and Jambres are mentioned also in Men, 

aja and “Shemot Rabbah,” 9. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 282; Abraham Wilna, Rab Pe- 
‘alim, ed. Chones, pp. 22 et sey., 183 et seg., Wilna, 1894; Bu- 
per, Veri‘ot Shelomoh, pp. 9 et sey.; Neubauer, in R. E. J. 
xiv. 109; Briill’s Jahrb. y., vi. 98 ef seg. On the name of 
the midrash see especially Brill, Uc. i. 146; Chones, l.c. p. 203 
on the legend of the angels Shemahsai and Azael see Enoch, 
vi. et sea. in Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, ti. 238 et seq., 275; 
Targ. Yer.on Gen. vi. 4; Pirke R. El. xxii.; Midr. Petirat 
Mosheh, in Jellinek, J3. H. i. 129; Recanati on Gen. iv. 4, vi. 23 
Jellinek, l.c. ii. 86, v.. pp. xlii., 172; Epstein, Bereshit Rah- 
bati, p. 21: Briill’s Jakrb. i. 145 et seq. 

2. Midrash Al Yithallel: A midrash contain- 
jug stories from the lives of the wise Solomon, the 
mighty David, and the rich Korah, illustrating Jer. 
ix. 22. The text has been published according toa 
manuscript at Munich by Jellinek (“ B. H.” vi. 106- 
108), and according to a manuscript from Yemen by 
Grinhut (“ Sefer la-Likkutim,” i. 30 e¢ seg.), with val- 
uable references to sources and parallels. With the 
story of Solomon may be compared the passage cited 
in Jellinek (¢.c. ii. 86 et seg., from the “‘Emek ha- 
Melek ”); the history of David is similar to the mid- 
‘ash of Goliath (2d. iv. 140 e¢ seg.); and that of Korah 
to the passage in the Midrash Tehillim (ed. Buber 


on Ps. i. 15). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jellinek, B. H. iv., p. xiii.; vi., pp. xxvi. et seq. 


8. Midrash ‘Aseret ha-Dibrot: A midrash 
which dates, according to Jellinck, from about the 
tenth century, and which is devoted entirely to the 
Feast of Weeks, being actually called in a Vatican 
manuscript “a haggadah for Shabu‘ot.” Its author 
seeks to inculcate the doctrines of the Decalogue by 
citing pertinent tales of a moral and religious na- 
ture; and he employs, in addition to much material 
from unknown sources, many passages from treatises 
on the Creation, revelation, and similar topics, which 
he introduces with the phrase “ameru hakamim ” 
(the sages say); he seldom cites his authorities. 
He writes in a lucid Hebrew style. The separate 
commandments are prefaced by a general intro- 
duction based on Ps. cvi. 2: “Who can utter the 
mighty actsof the Lord? who can shew forth all his 
praise?” This verse is explained, with reference to 
Pirke R. El. iii., as follows: “Even the angels are 
unable to recount His mighty acts; only faintly may 
be shown what He hath created and what shall 
come to pass, that the name of the King of all 
kings, the Holy One, blessed be He! may be praised 
and honored.” 

After a few sentences follows the haggadah of the 
strife of the letters, which contended with each other 
for the honor of forming the beginning of Creation. 
The victor in this contest was the letter “bet,” the 
initial of the word MowERi13, while “alef” was com- 
forted by the promise that with it, as the first letter 
of ‘99x, the revelation of the Ten Commandments 
Should begin (comp. the recension of the Midrash of 
the Alphalet in Jellinek, “B. H.” iii. 50 e¢ seg.; Gen. 
R.i., ed. Theodor, p. 9). The word °39x is explained 
as a notarikon and as Egyptian (comp. Shab. 10da; 
Pesik. 109a). This section is followed by a mystic 
and cosmological discussion of the magnitude of the 
world, of the waters above and below the firmament, 
and of the seven heavens (comp. “Seder Rabbah de- 
Bereshit ” in Wertheimer, “Batte Midrashot.” i. 9, 
22 et seq.). The introduction then makes excursus 


on the modesty of Moses, which gained for him the 
honor of God’s revelation of the Torah; on the pre- 
existence of the Torah, and on God’s invitation to 
the Gentiles to accept it, which they all refused; and 
on the pledges which God required of Israel to keep 
the Torah, these pledges being their children (comp. 
Cant. R. to Cant. i. 3). In the discussion of the several 
cominandments (PWR WAI, ete., to pwn Wa, 
which are included in the editions of this midrash) 
only the first and sixth commandments, which have 
no story attached to them, are treated at any length 
in haggadic fashion. In the case of the other com- 
mandments, legends form the principal part of the 
discussion, and are arranged as follows: command- 
ment ii., the mother and her seven children, the 
limping Jew; commandment iti., one who never 
swore; commandment iv., the pious man and the 
cow; Joseph, who kept holy the Sabbath-day, the 
emperor and R. Joshua b. Hananiah, Tinnius Rufus 
and Rabbi Akiba; commandment v., three examples 
of the love of children, the child and the Book of 

Genesis; commandment vii., the temptation of Mat- 

tithiah b. Heresh, Rabbi Meir and the wife of his 

host, Mattaniah’s wife and death; the history of 

Saul, who by the help of Elijah was reunited with 

his wife aftcra long separation; commandment viii., 

Solomon and the thief, the merchant and the thievish 

innkeeper; commandment ix., the son of the pub- 

lican Baya. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. pp. 142, 144; Jelinek, B. H.i., p. 
xviii.; text of the Midrash, ib. pp. 62-90; Benjacob, Ozur ha- 
Sefarim, p. 301; Horowitz, Uralte Tosefta’s, v. 66 ef seq. 
Wertheimer, Batte Midrashot, ii. 8,26. On another recension 
of this midrash in the Hibbur ha-Ma'asiyyot, Verona, 1647, 
which contains a story on the honor due the Torah, as well as 
ona mina pAwy war, and which is contained in a manu- 
script of historical miscellanies, comp. Epstein in Ha-Hoker, 
i. 67; Mahzor Vitry, Introduction, p. 183. Winter and Wiin- 
sche’s Die Jiidische Litteratur, i, 669 et seq., contains a trans- 
lation of some fragments of another midrash to the Ten Com- 
mandments, attributed to Saadia Gaon (comp. Eisenstadter, 


Avrabiseher Midrasch zu den Zehn Geboten, Vienna, 1868; 
see also Weiss, Dor, iv. 152). 


4. Dibre ha-Yamim shel Mosheh: This mid- 
rash, which is written in pure Hebrew, and which 
is in many portions a mere cento of verses from the 
Bible in close imitation of Biblical style, presents 
a history of the life of Moses embellished with many 
legends which must be very old, since the same or 
similar stories are found as early as Josephus (“ Ant.” 
ii. 9, SS 2 et seg.).; viz., the stories of the wise men’s 
prophecy to the king of the birth of a child who 
some day will destroy the power of the Egyptians 
(in the midrash the interpretation of a dream replaces 
the prophecy; comp. also Targ. Yer. 1 to Ex. i. 15), 
upon which prephecy followed the command of the 
king to cast the male children of the Israelites into 
the river; the crown which the king places upon 
Moses’ head, and which the latter casts to the earth 
(in the midrash Moses is described as taking the 
crown from the king’s head); Mosesas leader of the 
Tsraclites in a war against the Ethiopians, his use of 
the ibis in combating the snakes that have made 
his way dangerous, and the love of the king’s daugh- 
ter for him (according to the midrash Moses enters 
the camp of the Ethiopian king p\3p*p, upon whose 
death he marries the latter’s widow, and, overcoming 
the dangers due to the snakes, captures the long- 
besieged city). For other older sources which 
agree in part with this midrash and differ from 


Midrashim 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


574 





it in some respects, see Moses IN RABBINICAL 
LITERATURE. 

According to Jellinek (“ B. H.” ii., p. viii.), the life 
of Moses was originally treated in detail in a chron- 
icle which employed sources still older. This work 
was Incorporated in the well-known collection of 
legends entitled “Sefer ha-Yashar”; and from this 
the Yalkut took extracts which agree with the 
“Sefer ha-Yashar” and not with the present Chron- 
icle of Moses. Ata later time, however, a shorter 
recension of the older chronicle was made, which is 
the one now existing. It was published at Con- 
stantinople in 1516, at Venice in 1544, and elsewhere, 
and was reprinted by Jelinek (/.c. ii. 1-18). Extracts 
were made from the chronicle by the author of the 
“Midrash Wayosha‘”; and it was oneof the sources 
of the “Shemot Rabbah ”; it was likewise cited in 
the “‘Aruk,” by Ibn Ezra (who rejects it as apocry- 
phal) on Ex. ii. 22, and by Samuel ben Meir on 
Numbers xii. 1. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 145; Rab Pe‘alim, p. 45; Jel- 
linek, B. H. ii., pp. vii. et seq. 

5. Midrash Eleh Ezkerah: This midrash re- 
ceives its name from the fact that a selihah for the 
Day of Atonement, which treats the same subject 
and begins with the words “ Eleh ezkerah,” recounts 
the execution of ten famous teachers of the Mish- 
nah in the time of the persecution by Hadrian. The 
same event is related in a very ancient source, 
Ekah Rabbati on Lam. it. 2, ed. Buber, p. 50b 
(comp. also Midr. Teh. on Ps. ix. 18, ed. Buber, p. 
44b), According to the Midrash Eleh Ezkerah, a 
Ronian emperor commanded the execution of the ten 
sages of Israel to expiate the guilt of the sons of 
Jacob, who had sold their brother Joseph—a crime 
which, according to Ex, xxi. 16, had to be punished 
with death. The names of the martyrs are given 
here, as in the seclihah already mentioned (varyimg in 
part from the Ekah Rabbati and the Midrash Tehil- 
lim), as follows: R. Simeon b. Gamaliel, R. Ishmael 
the high priest, R. Akiba, R. Hanina b. Teradion, 
R. Judah b. Baba, R. Judah b. Dama, R. Huzpit, 
R. Hananiah b. Hakinai, R. Jeshebeab, and It. Elea- 
zar b. Shammua’‘, 

Although this midrash employs other sources, bor- 
rowing its introduction from the Midrash Konen, 
and the account of the conversation of Rabbi Ish- 
mael with the angels in heaven probably from the 
“ Hekalot,” it forms, nevertheless, a coherent work. 
It was edited, on the basis of a Hamburg codex, by 
Jellinek (Leipsic, 1853, and in his “ B. H.” ii. 64-72), 
and, according to another manuscript, by Chones, 
in the “ Rab Pe‘alim” (pp. 157-160). A second and 
a third recension of the midrash were edited, on the 
basis of manuscript sources, in “B. H.” (vi. 19-35), 
and a fourth is contained in the Spanish liturgical] 
work “Bet Ab” (Leghorn, 1877). According to Jel- 
linek, “the fourth recension is the oldest, since it 
has borrowed large portions from the ‘ Hekalot’: 
next to this stand the second and the third; while 
the youngest is the first, which, nevertheless, bas 
the advantage of real conformity with the spirit of 
the race and represents this the best of all.” The 
martyrdom of the ten sages is also treated in the 
additions to the “ Hekalot” (“B. H.” v. 167 et seg.) 
and in the kinah for the Ninth of Ab. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 142; Jellinek, B. H. ii., pp, 
xxiii. ef seq.j Vv... p. xli.; vi., pp. xvii. et seq.; Benjacob, Ozar 
ha-Sefarim, p. 299. On the problem of the synchronism of 
the ten martyrs see Gratz, Gesch. iv. 173 et seqg., and Monats. 
schrift, i. 314 et seq. A German translation by P. Mébius ap. 
peared in 1854, 

6. Midrash ‘Eser Galiyyot: This midrash 
treats of the ten exiles which have befallen the Jews, 
counting four exiles under Sennacherib, four under 
Nebuchadnezzar, one under Vespasian, and one 
under Hadrian. It contains also many parallels to the 
Seder ‘Olam, ch. xxii. e¢ seg. <A citation of the com- 
meutator R. Hillel on Sifre ii. 48 (ed, Friedmann, 
p. 82a) justifies the inference that the Midrash ‘Eser 
Galiyyot originally stood at the end of the Seder 
‘Olam; and it is also possible that Abraham ben 
David likewise crew material from it, for an older 
edition of his “Sefer ha-Kabbalah” includes this 
midrash. The haggadah at the beginning of the 
midrash, to the effect that the Jews had suffered ten 
exiles, was cited, with the formula “Our teachers 
have taught,” by R. Zemah Gaon in his letter ad- 
dressed to the community of Kairwan in the latter 
part of the ninth century. The midrash has been 
edited by Jellinek (“B. H.” iv. 183-136) and, with 
valuable notes, by Griinhut (“Sefer ha-Likkutim,” 
ifi. 2-22). <A later recension which “cares little 
about haggadic chronology, but much about hag- 
gadic embellishment,” was printed in “B, H.” v. 
113-116. : 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jellinek, B. H. iv., p. xii; V.. p. ¥XXV.: Griin- 
but, ib. 5-18; Brill, in Ben Chananja, 1866, p. 325; Epstein, 
Eldad ha-Dani, pp. 7, 17; Ratner, Introduction to the Se- 
der ‘Olam, pp. 49, 123, and notes on the same work, pp. 48a, 
dla, 56a. 

7. Midrash Esfah: This midrash, which as yet 
is known only from a few excerpts in Yalkut and 
two citations in “Sefer Raziel” and “ Ha-Rokeah,” 
receives its name from Num. xi. 16: “Gather unto 
me [“Esfah-li”] seventy men of the elders of 
Isracl.” In Yalk. i1.,$ 736 is found a citation rela- 
ting to the same verse, which can not be traced to 
any other midrash, and is doubtless taken from Mid- 
rash Esfah. To this midrash may possibly be re- 
ferred a passagein the “* Halakot Gedolot ” (ed. War- 
saw, p. 288b) and a fragment on Num. xvii. 14, xx. 
1-8, in Wertheimer, “ Batte Midrashot,” iti, 8-10, 
which agrees in its concluding words with the ex- 
cerpt in Yalk., Num. 763 on Num. xx. 3 (found also 
tb, 262, on Ex. xvii. 2, which begins with the same 
words), The name of the midrash shows that it 
must have begun with Num. xi. 16. The other ex- 
cerpts inthe Yalkut from the Midrash Esfah, §§ 
737, 739, 742, 764, '778, and 845, are based on Num. 
xi. 24, xii. 8-7, xii. 12, xxi. 9, xxvi. 2 (found also 
7b. 684, on Num. i. 2, which begins with the same 
words), and Deut. vi. 16; the extent cf the mid- 
rash, however, can not be determined. 

The interesting extract in Yalk., Num. on Num. 
xi. 16 names the seventy elders in two of its recen- 
sions (a third recension of this passage is furnished 
by a Vatican manuscript); and one of these versions 
concludes with a noteworthy statement which justi- 
fies the inference that the midrash was taught in 
the academy of Hanina Gaon by Rabbi Samuel, 
brother of Rabbi Phinehas. It would seem, there- 
fore, that the midrash was composed in Babylon in 
the first half of the ninth century, 


575 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrashim 


nt ee Se ee 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz. G. V. pp. 219 et seq.; Chones, Rab Pe- 
‘alim, pp. 386 et seq.: Rapoport, Kerem Hemed, vi. Weiss, 
Dor, iv. 41, 216; Buber. in Acneset Yisrael, i. Miller, Bin- 
leitung in die Réexponsd. 1891, p. 73; Wertheimer, Batte Mid- 
rashot. Introduction. pp. 4 et seg. The excerpts from the 
Midrash Esfah have been collected by Buber (l.c.) and by 
Chones (1.¢, pp. 147-153; comp. Buber, Veri°ot Shelomoh, pp. 
13 ct seq.). 


8. Midrash Hallel. See PsaumMs, MripRAsH TO. 
9. Midrash Leku Nerannena. This midrash, 
which is cited in the Mahzor Vitry (§ 296, p. 384) 
and of which a few fragments are still preserved, 
scems to have been a homily (“pesikta”) for the 
Feast of Hanukkah. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Epstein, Ha-Hoker, i. 65 et seq. 

10. Midrash Ma‘aseh Torah: This midrash 
contains compilations of doctrines, regulations of 
conduct, aud empirical rules, arranged in groups of 
three to teneach and taken from various works. It 
is frequently found in manuscript, and has been 
edited at Constantinople (1519), Venice (1544), Am- 
sterdam (1697), and elsewhere, while it has appeared 
more recently in Jellinek’s “B. H.” (ti. 92-101) and 
is contained also in the “Kol Bo” (§ 118), where it 
frequently deviates from the Amsterdam edition even 
in the arrangement of its sentences. The fact that 
this midrash is ascribed to the patriarch R. Judah 
ha-Nasi (Rabbenu ha-Kadosh) receives its explana- 
tion from the fact that the Ma‘aseh Torah is merely 
another recension of the similar midrash found in 
the edition of Schénblum (in his collection “ Shelo- 
shah Sefarim Niftahim,” Lemberg, 1877) and in 
Griinhut’s “Sefer ha-Likkutim” (ii. 83-90). This 
latter midrash begins in both editions with the teach- 
ings which Rabbenu ha-Kadosh taught his son, and 
the work is accordingly called “ Pirke de-Rabbenu 
ba-Kadosh ” or “ Pirke Rabbenu ha-Kadosh ” in the 
two editions and in the manuscripts on which they 
are based. 

The editions in question comprise two different 
recensions. In the text of Schénblum the number 
of numerical groups is 24; and at the beginning 
stands the strange order 6, 5, 4, 8, followed by the 
numbers 4-24. On the other hand, in Griinhut’s 
text, which is based on a defective manuscript, the 
order of the “ perakim” proceeds naturally from 3 to 
12 (or 13), but the rest are lacking; and, quite apart 
from this divergence in the method of grouping, 
even Within the numerical groups the two editions 
differ strikingly in the number and occasionally also 
in the wording of individual passages. In an Ox- 
ford codex of the Mahzor Vitry a passage occurring 
in both editions (ed. Schénblum, p. 33a; ed. Griin- 
hut, p. 35) is cited as being in the Pesikta; and it is 
also stated that it treats of a scries of from 8 to 10 
objects (comp. the introduction to the Mahzor 
Vitry, p. 179; Tos. Ber. 8b; ‘Er. 19a). 

A similar collection, probably more ancient In 
origin, was edited by Horowitz in the “Kebod Hup- 
pah,” Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1888, the work being 
based on a codex of De Rossi of the year 1290. 
This compilation is named the * Huppat Elivahu ” 
or the “Sheba‘ Huppot,” on account of its opening 
words, “Seven canopies will God set up for the 
righteous in the world to come” (comp. B. B. 75a). 
This haggadah agrees for the most part with the 
Ma‘aseh Torah and the Pirke Rabbenu la-Kadosh, 
and presents the numerical groupings up to the 


number 24, arranged without much order; on the 
whole, it harmonizes more closely with the Pirke. 
According to Horowitz, the “ Huppat Eliyahu ” was 
revised and expanded into the “Huppat Eliyahu 
Rabbah.” 

The “ Huppat Eliyahu” was edited as far as No. 
16 by R. Israel Alnaqua at the end of his * Menorat 
ha-Ma’or”; and this portion of the compilation, 
together with other extracts from this work, was 
appended by Elijah de Vidas to his * Reshit Hok- 
mah” (comp. Schechter, “ Monatsschrift,” 1885, pp. 
124 e¢ seg., 234). Alnaqua mentions also among the 
sources which he used “Huppat Eliyahu Zuta we- 
Rabbah,” which were evidently merely parts of the 
same work, From them were probably derived the 
two extracts in paragraphs 201 and 247 of the “ Me- 
norat ha-Ma’or” of Isaac Aboab, which are cited as 
occurring in the “ Huppat Eliyahu Rabbah ” and the 
“Huppat Eliyahu Zuta.” Alnaqua was, further- 
more, the compiler of many maxims beginning with 
the words pbyy, Oy, and sbitg, and forming the 
“Or ‘Olam ” at the end of his “ Menorat ha-Ma’or.” 
This collection was likewise incorporated by De 
Vidas in his work, and has been reprinted by Jelli- 
nek (* B. H.” iii. 109-130) as the “ Midrash le-‘Olam ” 
and “ Midrash Gadol u-Gedolah.” 

The “ Ma‘aseh Torah” formed the model for the 
rich collection of Elijah Wilna which bears the same 
name, and which appeared at. Warsaw in 1804 with 
the additions of his son Abraham. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. pp. 284 et seg.; Chones, Fab Pe- 
‘alim, pp. 59 et seq.. 87 et seq.: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, 
37 et seq., B57 et seq.; Griinhut, Sefer ha-Likkutin, iii., 


pp. 337 
Introduction, pp. 17 et seg. Abundant material regarding 


this midrash has been collected by Horowitz: but the numer- 
ical relations of the midrashim require thorough investigation. 


11. Midrash Petirat Aharon: A _ midrash 
based on Num. xx. 1 e¢ seg., and describing the lack 
of water experienced by the children of Isracl after 
the death of Miriam and the events at the rock from 
which water was obtained. It Hkewise treats of 
Num. xx. 24 et seqg., recounting the death of Aaron. 
Aaron, escorted by the people, ascended the moun- 
tain with Mosesand Eleazar. There a cavern opened 
which Moses invited his brother to enter; in it were 
a table, a burning lamp, and a couch surrounded by 
angels. With gentle words Moses addressed Aaron, 
whose fate was to be happier than his own; for 
Aaron was to be buried by his brother, and his honor 
was to be inherited by his children. Aaron then lay 
down upon the couch, and God took him to Him- 
self. When Moses left the cavern it vanished; but 
at his prayer, his assertion that Aaron was dead be- 
ing disbelieved, the mountain opened again and the 
high priest was scen resting on the couch (see JEw. 
Encyc. i. 4a, sv. AARON; and on the beginning 
of the midrash, which is based on Zech. xi. 8, comp. 
Ta‘an. 9a and Sifre, Deut. 805). Authorities are no- 
where cited, but several statements are introduced 
by the formula Oba (7.€., by WX). The midrash 
was edited at Constantinople (1516), Venice (1544), 
and elsewhere, and has been reprinted by Jellinek 
(“B. EH.” i. 91-95). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz. G. V. p. 146; Jeilinek, B. H.i., p. xix. 

12. Midrash Petirat Mosheh: This midrash 
describes in great detail the last acts of Moses and his 
death, at which the angels and God Himself were 


Midrashim 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


576 





present. There are several recensions of it. The 
first, published at Constantinople in 1516 (Venice, 
1544, aud elsewhere; also in Jellinek, “B. H.” i. 115- 
129), begins with a brief exegesis by R. Samuel Nah- 
mani and R. Tanhuma of the first verse of the peric- 
ope “ We-zot ha-berakah ” (Deut. xxxiii. 1, xxxiv. 
12), closing with its last verses, and doubtless in- 
tended for Simhat Torah. The real content of the 
midrash is a haggadic treatment of Deut. xxxi. 14 
et seq., supplemented by an exegesis of Deut. iii. 
28 et seq., and is filled with somewhat tedious dia- 
logues between God and Moses, who is represented 
as unwilling todie. AJ] his tears and entreaties were 
in vain, however; for God commanded all the princes 
of heaven to close the gates of prayer. In the last 
days of his life, until the 7th of Adar, Moses inter- 
preted the Torah to Israel; and on the day of his 
death, according to R. Helbo, he wrote thirteen 
Torahs, of which twelve were for the twelve tribes, 
and the best was for the Ark of the Covenant (2d, 
Xxxi. 24 et seg.; comp. Pesik. p. 197a; Deut. R., 
Wayelek, end.; Midr. Teh. on Ps. xc.); some say 
that Gabriel descended, and took the Torah from the 
hands of Moses, bearing it through each heaven to 
show the piety of its scribe, and that the souls of the 
holy read from this Torah on Mondays and Thurs- 
days and on festivals. This is followed by a long 
section beginning with R. Josiah’s account of the 
honors which Moses rendered Joshua, and the serv- 
ice which he did him in the last days of his life. 
Especially noteworthy here is the poetic prayer of 
Joshua beginning pSyn pwr Yow i997 My. 

After this the close of Moses’ life is depicted, a 
bat kol giving warning with increasing insistence of 
the hours, even of the seconds, that remained for 
him. This enumeration of the hours and the con- 
ventional formula Sy M3 Ny’ areimportant for the 
determination of the dependence of the additions 
in Deut. R. xi. and the second recension on the orig- 
inal version. Early in the midrash the augels Ga- 
briel and Zangaziel, “the scribe of all the sons of 
heaven,” are mentioned; but in the last hours of 
the life of Moses it is Samael, the head of the Sa- 
tans, whose activity is most conspicuous as he 
watches for the passing of the soul, while Michact 
weeps and laments. At last Samael receives the 
command to bring the soul of Moses, but flees in 
terror before his glance. Again he appears with a 
drawn sword before Moses, but he has to yield be- 
fore the “shem ha-meforash,” carved on the staff of 
the leader of Israel. The last moment approaches, 
however, and God Himself appears to receive Moses’ 
soul. The three good angels accompany Him to 
prepare a resting-place for Moses, whose soul at 
length is taken in the kiss of death. See Mosks 1n 
RABBINICAL LITERATURE. 

Large portions of this midrash are contained in 
Deut. R., ed. Wilna, xi. 4, 7, 8, 9 (?), and 10, where 
they must be regarded as later additions, The en- 

tire passage represented by paragraphs 

Other Re- 9 and 10 of Deut. R. xi. is found also, 
censions. combined in the sume manner, in 
Yalk., Deut. 940 (on Deut. xxxi. 14), 

where the Midrash Petirat Mosheh is given as the 
source. Sifre 805 contains an exquisite little hag- 
gadah on Moses and the angel of death (comp. 


Pesik. p. 199b; Deut. R. xi. 5). A long Citation 
from the beginning of the midrash is also contained 
in a homily in Tan., Wa‘ethanan, 6 (on Deut. iii, 
26), treating of the same theme, the death of Moses, 

A second recension is based on Prov. xxxi. 39, ang 
is considered by Jellinek, but probably incorrectly, 
tobe the older. It was edited by him in “B. H.” vi, 
71-78, and has an entirely different beginning from 
that which is found in the other recension (comp. 
Deut. R. xi. 3). As it is based upon a defective 
manuscript, the manner in which this introduction 
was connected with the original midrash can not 
be determined; but what follows the missing por- 
tion does not differ essentially from that found in 
the first recension, although it is somewhat shorter 
and ischangedin arrangement. Moses’ lament that 
he may never taste the fruits of the land receives a 
long explanatory addition to the effect that he grieved 
not for the products of the earth, but because he 
would be unable to fulfil the divine commands per- 
taining to Palestine. 

A third recension or revision of the midrash wag 
published by Gaulmyn (Paris, 1692), together with 
a Latin translation and the first recension, In the 
“Assumptio Mosis” the manuscript ends abruptly 
before the account of the assumption from which 
that work receives its name. According to Schitrer, 
this concluding portion must have related to the dis- 
pute of the archangel Michael with Satan, men- 
tioned in Jude 9. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 146; Jellinek, B. H.i., p. xxi; 

vi., pp. xxi. et seqg.; Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., iii. 217 ct seq. 

13. Midrash Ta‘ame Haserot we-Yeterot : 
This midrash, which has been edited most completely 
by Wertheimer (Jerusalem, 1899), gives haggadic 
explanations not only of the words which are writ- 
ten defective or plene, as the title of the work im- 
plies, but also of a great number of those which 
are not read as they are written (comp. on the ketib 
in Wertheimer’s ed., Nos. 8, 11, 18, 19, 21-80, 37, 
51, 89, 106, 111, 118, 124, 125, 127-129, 181, 134, 138- 
140, 181, and No. 12 on a word which is read with- 
out being written). There are likewise notes on 
names and words which are read differently in differ- 
ent places (e.g., in Nos. 17, 20, 123, 126, 141, 142, 164, 
172), on the araf Zeyouevoyv AD Mw, Judgesiv. 18(No. 
108), on the peculiar writing of certain words (¢.7., 
No. 183 on saipb, Isa. ix. 6, and No. 163 on sisonn, 
Josh. x. 24),and on the suspended ictters in Judges 
xvili. 80, Ps. xxx, 14, and Job xxxviii. 15 (Nos, L14- 
114). The midrash may be termed, therefore, a Masor- 
etic one, although it frequently deviates from the Ma- 
sorah. The haggadic interpretations are derived for 
the most part from scattered passages in the Talmud 
and in the Midrashim, while the arrangement is 
capricious, the individual words being arranged 
neither according to the order of the alphabet nor 
according to the sequence of the books of the Bible. 
In the different manuscripts and editions of it this 
midrash varies considerably, not only in the number 
and arrangement of the passages which it discusses, 
but also in the wording of individual interpretations. 
It is cited under its present title in the Tosafot (Ber. 
34a), in the “Sefer Mizwot Gadol ” of Moses of Coucy, 
and by Asher ben Jehiel, while it is called “ Midrash 
Haserot we-Yeterot” by Solomon Norzi. <A brief 


2 i at spel ie. > 13516 ripe ae eae bras de wf ” at | 
3 pp tte el if 97 7 ones pp rhe 6 Ay ordi ofa cg 


m9 7 ae taor rt ete 





PAGE FROM MIDRASH ELEH EZKERAH, CONSTANTINOPLE (7), 1620. 
(From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) 


Midrashim 


extract from this work enumerating the words to be | 


written “defective” or “plene,” but omitting the 
reason therefor, is contained in the Mahzor Vitry, 
§ 518, pp. 696 ef seg. 

To the Masoretic midrashim belong also the 
explanations of passages read and not written or 
written and not read which have been edited from 
an old grammatical and Masoretic miscellany in the 
“Manuel du Lecteur ” of Joseph Derenbourg (Paris, 
1871), and in Jacob Saphir’s “Eben Sappir” (ii. 218 
et seq., Mayence, 1874), and reprinted by Jellinek in 
his “ B. H.” (v. 27-380). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: The midrash on the reasons for words written 
“defective”? and ‘“‘plene** was edited by Berliner on the 
basis of a Munich manuscript in his Peletat Soferim, He- 
brew section, pp. 36 et xeg., Breslau, 1872; by Wertheimer on 
the basis of a Genizah manuscript in the Batte Midrashot, i. 
32 et seq., lil. 1 et seq.; and on the basis of a codex of De Rossi 
in the edition mentioned in the text; comp. Berliner, l.e. 
German section, pp. 34 et seq.; the introductions of Wert- 


heimer in the various editions: Zunz, G. V. p. 284; Rab Pe- | 


‘alim, pp. 65 et seq.; Buber in Ha-Shahar, iy. 

14. Midrash Tadshe (called also Baraita de- 
Rabbi Pinehas b. Ya’ir): This small midrash be- 
gins with an interpretation of Gen. i. 11: “And God 
said, Let the earth bring forth” (“ Tadshe ha-arez ”). 
“Why,” asked R. Phinchas, “did God decree that 
grass and herbs and fruits should grow upon the 
third day, while light was not created until the 
fourth? To show His infinite power, which is al- 
mighty; for even without the light He caused the 
earth to bring forth [while now He creates all man- 
ner of trees and plants through the operation of the 
light].” The name of the author occurs twice (ed. 
Epstein, pp. xxi., xxxi.); and the midrash closes 
with the words “‘ad kan me-dibre R. Pinehas ben 
Yair.” Nootherauthorsare named. This midrash 
is peculiar in several respects, varying in many state- 
ments from other midrashim; and, although written 
in pure Hebrew, it contains numerous expressions 
which are not found elsewhere, such as 3)\yM Nn, 
nwa In, oyynw oa (= “ planets,” p. xix.). 
The structure of the midrash is very loose. 

The Midrash Tadshe is in the main symbolic in 
tendency, and it plays much on groups of numbers. 
Section 2 contains a symbolization of the Tabernacle; 
and, according to Epstein, the central idea of the 
midrash is the theory of three worlds—earth, man, 
and the Tabernacle. Section 10 contains a mystic 
ex planation of the numbers mentioned in connection 
with the offerings of the princes (comp. Num. vii. 
12 et seq.). Combinations and parallelisms based on 
the number ten are found in sections 5 and 15; on 
seven, in 6, 11, and 20; on six, in 20; on five, in 7; 
on four, in 20; on three, in 12, 18, etc. Desultory 
expositions of Gen. ii. 17; iii. 3, 14 e¢ seq.; Num. vii. 
12 et seg., 84 et seg.; Lev. xiii. 2, xiv. 34; Lam, i. 1, 
et seq.; Num. iv. 3, xxvii. 7; and Deut. xxxii. 12, 
are contained in sections 7, 10, 17, 20, 21, and 22. 
Especially noteworthy is section 8, on “the ages of 
the pious,” the Patriarchs, the Matriarchs, and the 
twelve sons of Jacob, giving also the dates of their 
births. In this list the mouthsare not designated as 
Nisan, etc., but as “the first,” “the second,” etc. 
The dates for Zebulun and Benjamin are lacking in 
the present text. but are given in a citation by 
Bahya and in the Yalkut, where, however, the 
months are named and not numbered. The length 
of life ascribed to the sons of Jacob agrees with that 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


578 


ee St, 
given in the Seder ‘Olam Zuta; but only the Book 

of Jubilees gives the days and months of theip 

births, and even it does not state the length of thejp 

lives (comp. Jubilees, xxvili. and xXxXil., where, 

however, some dates differ from those given in the 

midrash). On the other hand, section 6 of the Mid. 

rash Tadshe is in entire agreement with the Book 

of Jubilees (ii., iil., iv., vil., x., xii., XIV., XV., ang 

XXxlii.) in its statement that twenty. 


Analogies two varieties of things were created 
with the in the world—seven on the first day; 
Book of one on the second; four on the third, 
Jubilees. three onthe fourth; three on the fifth, 


and four on the sixth—and that these 
twenty-two varieties correspond to the twenty-two 
generations from Adam to Jacob (and to the twenty- 
two letters of the alphabet). 

Epstein bas drawn attention to other striking 
analogies between this midrash and the Book of 
Jubilees, especially to the strange theory of Rabbj 
Phinehas b. Jair (p. xxxi.) that Adam was created 
in the first week, and that Eve was formed in the 
second week, from hisrib; this serving as the founda- 
tion for the rule of purification given in Lev. xii. 2 
et seq., with which Jubilees, iii. 8 is to be compared, 
On these grounds, Epstein advances the hypothesis 
that in this and many other passages the author of 
the Midrash Tadshe used the Book of Jubilees, 
which existed at that time in Hebrew and was 
much larger in scope than at present, and was as- 
cribed, “on account of its Essenic tendency,” to 
Rabbi Phinehas b. Jair, who was famous for his 
great piety. It is hardly probable, however, that 
the present Book of Jubilees is incomplete; and a 
much more plausible view of Epstein’s is that 
which regards the Midrash Tadshe as the work of 
Rabbi Moses ha-Darshan. Either on account of its 
beginning, or for some other reason, R. Phinehas b. 
Jair was regarded as the author of this midrash, and 
Num. R. xiii. 10 and xiv. 12, 18 contain several ex- 
positions and maxims from it cited under the name 
of that tanna. The midrash, from which Yalkut 
excerpted several passages and which has been cited 
by various authors, has been edited according to 
manuscript sources by Jellinek (“ B. H.” ifi, 164-193) 
and by Epstein (* Beitrige zur Jtidischen Alter- 
thumskunde,” Vienna, 1887). 

The Midrash Tadshe must not be confused with 
another baraita bearing the title “Baraita de-Rabbi 
b, Jair,” which deals with gradations of virtues, the 
highest of which causes its possessor to share in the 
holy spirit (comp. Sotah, end, and parallels). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 280; Rab Pe‘alim, pp. L4et 

seq.; Jellinek, B. H. iii... pp. xxxiji. et seg.: Vi. p. XxIX. 

Epstein, i.c. pp. i--xiv.; idem, Le Livre des Jubilés, Phil- 

ton et le Midrash Tadsehe, in RR. hb. J. Xxi. 80 et scq., XXil- 

1 et xeqy.: Weiss, Dor. iv. 216; Kautzsch, Pseudepigraphen, 

ii. 37; Bacher, Ay. Tan. ii. 497, 499; Griinhut, Sefer ha- 

Likkutim, ii. 20b. 

15. Midrash Temurah (called by Me’iri Mid- 
rash Temurot): A small midrash consisting of 
three chapters. It develops the view that God in 
His wisdom and might has created all things on earth 
as contrasted pairs which mutually supplement each 
other. Life is known only as opposed to death, and 
death as opposed to life; and, in like manner, if all 
were foolish or wise, or rich or poor, it would not be 


known that they were foolish or wise, or rich °F 


579 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midrashim 


a OOOOGGew 


poor. “Therefore God created man and woman, 
peauty and deformity, fire and water, iron and wood, 
light and darkness, heat and cold, food and famine, 
drink and thirst, walking and lameness, sight and 
plindness, hearing aud deafness, sea and land, 
speech and dumpbness, activity and repose, pain and 
pleasure, joy and sorrow, health and sickness,” and 
the like. Inch. iil. the antitheses given in Eccl. iii. 
1 ef seg. are enumerated and are paralleled with Ps. 
exxxvi. Ch. i., which contains an interesting an- 
thropological passage, and ch. ii. begin with pseud- 
epigraphical interpretations ascribed by the midrash 
to Rabbis Ishmael and Akiba; the latter appear, 
consequently, as joint authors of the midrash. 

According to Jellinek, the Midrash Temurah was 
composed in the first half of the thirteeuth century, 
since it drew upon Ibn Ezra and upon Galen’s dia- 
logue on the soul, even though it is cited by Me’ iri 
and Abraham <Abulafia. It was first edited by 
Azulai (Leghorn, 1786), being appended to the sec- 
ond part of his “Shem ha-Gedolim ”; and it has been 
reprinted by Jellinek (“ B. H.” i. 106-114). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 118; Rab Pe'‘alim, pp. 123 et 

sey.; Jelinek, B. H.i., pp. xx. ef seq. 

16. Midrash Wa-Yekullu: A midrash named 
after Gen. ii, 1 (* Wa-Yekullu ha-Shamayim”), It 
contained both halakic and haggadic material, and 
doubtless covered several books of the Pentateuch; 
but it now exists only in citations by various authors 
after the middle of the twelfth century, In “ Ha- 
Rokeah,” &§ 192, 209, 820, and 324, passages from it 
are quoted as belonging to Gen. xix. 24, to the 
pericopes Behukkotat and Beha‘alotecka and_ to 
Deut. ii. 381. Judging from the tirst and fourth of 
these citations, the Midrash Wa-Yekullu was a 
homiletic one, since Tanhuma on Gen. xix. and on 
Deut. ii, 81, as well as Deut. R. on the latter pas- 
sage, likewise contains homilies. The midrash must 
have derived much material from the Tanhuma- 
Yelammedenu, since some of tlic few fragments that 
have been preserved agree more or Jess accurately 
with passages from the Tanhuma or with excerpts 
in Yalkut from Yelammedenu. The midrash seems 
also to have been called “ Wayekullu Rabbah.” 
The citations from it are collected in Griinhut’s 
“Sefer ha-Likkutim,” tt. 16b e¢ seg. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz. G. V. p. 281: idem. G. S. iii. 252; Rab 
Pe’alim, pp. 52 et seg.; Grinhut, Sefer ha-Likkutim, Intro- 
duction, pp. 13 et seq. 

17. Midrash Wayissa‘u: This smal] midrash, 
“the heroic legend of the sons of Jacob,” is based on 
Gen, xxxv. 5 and xxxvi. 6, and recounts the story 
of the wars of Jacob and his sons against the kings 
of the Amoritesand against Esau and hisarmy. The 
beginning cf its version of the former story is as 
follows: “ Our teachers said that although they did 
not pursue after them this time, yet seven years later 
all the kings of the Amorites gathered themselves 
together against the sons of Jacob.” That the legends 
contained in the Wayissa‘u are very old may be in- 
ferred from the Book of Jubilees; xxxiv., xxxvii. e¢ 
seq., and from the Testament of Judah (Kautzsch, 
“Pseudepigraphen,” ii. 97 et seg., 102 et seg., 471 et 
seq.); the midrash betrays its relationship to these 
Old pseudepigraphical writings in many details. 

Le war against the Amorites is treated at greater 


length in the “Sefer ha-Yashar,” pericope “ Wayish- 
lah.” The midrash itself igs contained in Yalk., 
Gen, 1838, and is mentioned by Nahmanides on Gen. 
xXxiv. 13, as “Sefer Milhamot Bene Ya‘akob.” 

ne text has been edited according to the Yalkut 
by Jellinck (* B. H.” iii. 1-5), and by Chones (iu his 
edition of “Rab Pe'alim,” pp. 158 ef seq.), and by 
Charles in his edition of the Book of Jubilees, Ap- 
pendix LII., Oxford, 1895. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. V. p. 145; Rab Pe‘alim, pp. 54 et 
seq.; Jellinek, B. H. iii., pp. ix. et seq. 


18. Midrash Wayosha‘: A midrash based on 
Ex, xiv. 80-xv. 18. It is an exposition in the style 
of the later haggadah and seems to have been in- 
tended for the “Shirah” Sabbath or for the seventh 
day of the Passover. Entire sections are taken 
verbatim from the Tanhuma, such as the passage 
on Kx. xv. 38 from Tan., Bo, and on xv. 5 from 
Hukkat, beginning, With the story in the exposi- 
tion of Ex. xiv. 30, concerning Satan, who appeared 
before Abraham and Isaac as they went to the sac- 
rifice, may be compared the addition in Tan., Wa- 
yera, ed. Stettin, No. 22; Yalk., Ex. $& 98-99, end; 
and “Sefer ha-Yashar,” end of pericope “ Wayera.” 
The midrash on Ex. xv. 2, 7 also contains extracts 
from the Chronicle of Moses, the passage on Usa, 
the genius of Egypt, agreeing word for word with 
the excerpt in Yalk., § 241. Here the first edition 
has merely “ Midrash,” while other editions give the 
Midrash Abkiras the source, although it is doubtful 
whether this haggadah ever occurred in that work. 

The sections begin for the most part with the 
words “ameru hakamim,” though Rabbi Joshua ben 
Levi and Rabbi Samuel b. Nahmani are occasionally 
givenas the authors. In the exposition of xv. 18 on 
the sorrows and the redemption in the Messianic time, 
the terrible figure of King ArM1Lts is described, and 
it is said that he will slay the Messiah of the race of 
Joseph, but will himself be slain by the Messiah who 
is the son of David (comp. Suk. 52a); God will then 
gather together the scattered remnant of Israel and 
hold the final judgment; and the wonderful beauty 
of anew world full of joy and happiness is revealed. 

The Midrash Wayosha‘ was first published at 
Constantinople in 1519 (Metz, 1849, and elsewhere), 
and has been reprinted by Jellinek (* B. H.” i. 85-87). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz. G. V. p. 28%: Rab Pe‘alim, p. 55; Jel- 

linek, B. H. i., p. Xvii.; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 299. 

The more recent collections of small midrashim 
mentioned in this articleandin Miprasnh HacGapan 
are the following: A. Jellinek, “B. H.” parts i.-iv., 
Leipsic, 1858-57; parts v.-vi., Vienna, 1873-738; 
Hayyim M. Horowitz, “Agudat Agadot,” ete., Ber- 
lin, 1881; ¢dem, “ Bet ‘Eked ha-Avadot: Bibliothc ca 
Haggadica,” 2 parts, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1881, 
idem, “Kebod Huppah,” 2. 1888: ¢dem, “Tosefta 
Attikta: Uralte Tosefta’s,” i.-v., 7). 1889-90: S. A. 
Wertheimer, “Batte Midrashot,” i.-iv., Jerusalem, 
1898-97; z¢dem, “Leket Midrashim,” 2). 1903: L. 
Griinhut, “Sefer ha-Likkutim, Sammlung Aelterer 
Midraschim,” ete., i.-vi., 72. 1898-1903; comp. also 
Abraham Wilna, “Rab Pe‘alim,” ed. Chones, pp. 
133 et seg.; H. L. Strack, in Herzog-Hauck, “ Real- 
Encyc.” s.¢. “ Midrasch.” 

In these collections, especially in Jellinek’s “ Bet. 
ha- Midrash,” there are many small midrashim, either 


Midwife 
Mielziner 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


580 


FO I De cg eee ee ee ee Ee Fe a I ga eR ae ee a ee ee Ne ge ee ae ee ng ee ee cs. 
[ 


edited there for the first time or reprinted, as well 
as a number of works under other names, a discus- 
sion of which belongs rather to an article on mystic 
literature. The following treatises, however, may 
be mentioned here, the titles being given for the 
most part according to Jellinek: 

(1) Agadat Mashiah (Haggadah of the Messiah; 
a, Vit, 141 et seqg.). (2) Baraita Ma‘ase Bereshit (in 
Chones’ addenda to Abraham Wilna's “Rab Pe- 
‘alim,” pp. 47 e¢ seq.); also Seder Rabbah de-Bereshit 
(in Wertheimer, 7.c. i. 1-81). (3) Gan ‘Eden we- 
Gehinnom (Paradise and Hell; 7. v. 42 et seq.). 
(4) Ma‘aseh R. Yehoshua‘ b. Levi (listory of R. 
Joshua b. Levi; 75, ii, 48 ¢¢ seg.). (5) Midrash Konen 
(in “1B. EE.” di. 28-89); Be-Hokmah Yasad (Divine 
Wisdom; 2d. v. 68-69); Masseket Gehinnom (Tract- 
ate of Gehenna; 7. i, 147-149). (6) Milhamot ha- 
Mashiah (War of the Messiah; 7). vi. 117 eé seq.). 
(7) Nisterot R. Shim‘on b, Yohai (Mysteries of R. 
Simeon b. Yohai; 7b. iii. 78 e¢ seg.). (8) Otiyot de- 
Rabbi Akiba (Alphabetical Midrash of R. Akiba; 
tirst and second recensions in “B. H.” iii, 12-64; 
comp. 7b. v, 381-33; vi., p. xl; Wertheimer, ¢.¢. ii. 
23 et seq.; and see AKIBA BEN JOSEPH, ALPHABET 
or); Hekalot Rabbati (Great Hekalot; in “B. H.” 
ili. 83-108); Masseket Hekalot (Tractate Hekalot; 
th, ii, 40-47; comp. also ¢@). i. 58 et seg., hii. 161 et 
seg., Vi. 109 et seq.); and “Baraita Ma‘ase Merka- 
bah” (in Wertheimer, dc. ii. 15-25). (9) Otiyot 
Mashiah (Signs of the Messiah; 7¢. ii. 58-63). (10) 
Pirke Mashiah (Sections Concerning the Messiah; 
2b, iil. 68 ef seg.). (11) Seder Gan ‘Eden (Description 
of Paradise; 7). ii. 52 et seg.; second recension, 7). 
iii, 1381-140; additions, 76. 194-198). (12) Sefer Eli- 
vahu (Apocalypse of Elijah; 76. ifi. 65 et seq.). (18) 
Sefer Zerubbabel (Book of Zerubbabel; 7d. ii. 54-57: 
comp. also Wertheimer, /.c. ii. 25 et seg., 29 et seq.). 

E. C. J. T. 


MIDWIFE.—Biblical Data: Midwives are re- 
ferred to in the Bible as having been employed among 
the Hebrews at an early period; thus Rachel and 
Tamar were assisted by midwives (Gen. xxxv. 17, 
XXXVIil. 28). They were called in, however, only 
in rare cases. For instance, the delivery of Rachel 
is expressly stated to have been a difficult one, and 
Tamar was delivered of twins. But in general 
midwives were dispensed with. Thus in Egypt, 
where the Hebrews multiplied rapidly (Ex. i. 7, 12), 
the names of only two midwives are recorded, 
Shiphrah and Puah; and it is stated that the He- 
brew women, unlike the Egyptians, “are delivered 
ere the midwives come in unto them” (2d. i. 15, 19). 
Sometimes the necessary service was rendered by 
friends or relatives (I Sam. iv. 20). 

The general Hebrew term for “midwife” is non 
(plural, nib); but the word nin (Ex. i. 19), also, 
is interpreted by Rashi to denote midwives, like 
the Aramaic gnYn. The word D'33N (2. i. 16), 
which is the dual form of jax (= “two stones”), 
has given rise to some difficulty. The Targumim 
and the later commentators, as Rashi and David 
Kimhi, interpret it as “the delivery-stool,” while 
Ibn Janah, Joseph Kimhi, and Parhon, followed by 
some modern commentators, as Eichhorn and Kno- 
del, render it “the womb.” Gesenius (“Th.”), re- 


jecting the idea that delivery-stools existed in Egypt 
at such an early period (comp. Ploss, “Das Weib,” 
2d ed., pp. 197, 282), trauslates “the stone bath.” 

Although it is not stated what were the functiong 
of a midwife after the delivery, yet the services 
enumerated in Ezek. xvi. 4 were most probably 
rendered by her. 

J. M. SEt. 
——In Rabbinical Literature: The midwife ig 
generally designated by AN, NAN (a term applied 
also to the lying-in woman) and by mpsn (= “the 
wise woman”; comp. the French “sage-femme”), 
but from Lev. R. xxvii. 7 it seems that the term 
xnSanp is also applied to the midwife (comp. Gen, 
R. lx. 8). Besides tying the umbilical cord (Shab, 
128b), she performed two other dutics, as may be 
inferred from the Talmudic passage Sotah 11h, 


, It is here implied that “Sbiphrah” and “ Puah” 


(sce MripwiFreE, Brsnican Data) were not the rea] 
names of the midwives, but only indicated their 
functions; the former meaning “the one who trims 
the child,” and the latter, “the one who talks to the 
child,” or, according to R. Hananeel, “the one who 
whispers”; that is to say, the midwife whispered 
in the woman’s ear in order to facilitate parturition. 

The question whether the delivery-stool was in 
use in Egypt during the Biblical period is answered 
by the Rabbis in the affirmative; for they translate 
ova “delivery-stool,” giving various reasons for 
so doing (Sotah Z.¢c.). The Talmudic interpretation 
of "3% (Hosea xiii. 18) also is “delivery-stool.” 

A midwife, when called to assist a woman in 
labor, is allowed to profane the Sabbath, if neces- 
sary, in the discharge of her duties (Shab. ¢.¢.; Yer. 
Shab. xviii. 3); and all concessions are granted to 
her as to one engaged in saving human life. 

Although many physicians studied obstetrics, and 
rabbis who were acquainted with that science (Sam- 
uel, among others) were consulted on certain occa- 
sions with regard to the ritual cleanness or unclean- 
ness of the mother, yet it does not appear from the 
Talmud that men were ever called to assist a woman 
in her delivery. It is also difficult to say whether in 
the Talmudic times midwives were specially trained 
for their profession or whether they gained their 
knowledge of it merely by watching the operations 
of others. The term psn, however, would seem 
to indicate that they were well trained, 

Midwives, as appears from the Talmud, were 
called to assist not only women, but even domestic 
animals (Hul. 48a). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wilhelm Ebstein, Die Medizin in Neen 

Testament und im Talmud, pp. 213 et seq., Stuttgart, 1903; 


L. Kotelmann, Die Geburtshilfe der Alten Hebriier, 1876. 
Ss. S. M. SEL. 


MIECZYSLAYV III. See Povanp. 

MIEDZYBOZ (MEDZHIBOZH): Russian 
town in the government. of Podolia; it has a total 
population of 5,100, including 8,400 Jews. Among 
the latter there are 1,009 artisans and 57 day-labor- 
ers. There are the usual charitable organizations. 
About 300 families were assisted in 1898 with fuel, 
and were given aid for Passover. A Jewish com- 
munity existed at Miedzyboz as early as the six- 
teenth century, but in the course of the Cossack 
uprising under Chmielnicki it was destroved. a 
few years later the census (1661) of the district of 


581 


eeeeeereers 
Podolia showed that Miedzyboz had only a few 
Jewish houses, including two inns; these were ex- 
empted from taxation by privilege. During the 
war between Russia and Poland for the possession 
of Little Russia, the Jews of Miedzyboz were again 
put to the sword (1664). About 1740 the founder of 
Hasidisin, Israel b. Eliezer Ba‘an Suem-Tops, settled 
there, and began to disseminate his teachings. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regesty t Nadpisi, i. 426, 453, 464, St. Peters- 
burg, 1899; S. Dubnow, Yevreiskaya Istoriya, ii. 428, Odessa, 


1897. 
H. QR. S: 


MIEDZYRZECZ (MESERITZ or MEZHI- 
RECHYE): Town in the government of Siedlce, 
Russian Poland; near Warsaw. It has (1904) a popu- 
lation of 13,681, of whom 9,000 are Jews. The first 
Jewish settlement dates probably from the six- 
teenth century, its members coming from Germany 


and especially from Frankfort-on-the-Main. The 
Jews control all the business of the town. The 


making of bristles for the German export trade, via 
Leipsic, is one of its important industries, in which 
many Jewish workmen are employed. Moses Mi- 
chel Migdal introduced this enterprise. 

The synagogue, a very imposing stone structure, 
with a seating capacity of approximately 3,000, was 
built about 1800; Count Potocki, who formerly 
owned the town, is said to have contributed a large 
sum toward its erection. The bet ha-midrash was 
built in 1859. Miedzyrzecz has several minor congve- 
gations, a Talmud Torah, and a yeshibah (founded by 
Bendet Barg; d. 1891), Many Jews from Miedzyr- 
zecz settled in the Holy Land, among them being Zebi 
Hirsch Fischbein (d. Jerusalem 1870)and David Jano- 
wer. Both contributed to the founding of a Talmud 
Torah in Jerusalem. The colonists of Yesod ha-Ma- 
‘alah, near Safed, in 1885, were all from Miedzyrzecz. 

The following isa list of the rabbis of Miedzyr- 
zecz: Zebi Hirsch b. Abbusch of Frankfort-on- 
the-Main (d. 1734); Isaac b. Zebi Hirsch (d. 
1771); Léb of Frankfort; Nahman b. Elijah; 
Ephraim Hliezer Zebi b. Zeeb Harlap (Eliezer 
Harlap; d. 1849; a descendant of Gedaliah ibn 
Yahya; he was a cabalist and left many manu- 
scripts, some of which have been published under 
the title “ Migdenot Eliezer”; in its introduction he 
traces his descent from King David); Yom-Tob 
Lippe Heilpern (author of “‘Oneg Yom-Tob,” 
responsa); Joshua Léb Diskin (d. Jerusalem 
1898); Simhah Samuel (author of “ Mesharet 
Mosheh,” novellee on Maimonides’ “ Yad”; d. 1865) ; 
Israel Isser Shapiro of Augustow (d. 1895); 
Nahman Baer Shapiro (son of Israel Isser). 

Micdzvrazecz has had several authors of note. 
Abraham Dob Berusch Flohm, maggid, was the 
author of “Hesed le-Abraham,” on the Haggadah 
(1836). IIe corrected for the press all the manu- 
scripts of Jacob, the maggid of Dubno. Jacob 
David Biederman was the author of annotations 
on “ Torat Kohanim”; he became rabbi of Kozenitz, 
a small town near Miedzyrzecz. Moses Hayyim 
Triwaks (b. 1868) was the author of “Nod De- 
ma‘ot” (Warsaw, 1888) and “Nahalat Mosheh” 
(1890). There is a congregation in New York city 
Whose members are mostly natives of Miedzyrzecz. 

H.R. J. D. E. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Midwife 
Mielziner 


MIELZINER, MOSES: American rabbi and 
author; born at Schubin, province of Posen, Ger- 
many, Aug. 12, 1828; died at Cincinnati Feb. 18, 
1903. His father, Benjamin, rabbi in his native 
town, gave him the first instruction in Talmudic lit- 
erature, While he received his secular education 
from L. I. Braunhart,a man of superior gifts, who, 
after having been a pupil of Heinrich Heine in the 
course founded by the Culturverein in Berlin, was 
appointed principal of the 
Jewish school in Schubin 
in 1835, and remained 
there until bis death in his 
ninety-eighth year in 1904. 
In 18438 Mielziner was 
sent to xin, where he at- 
tended the yeshibah of the 
aged rabbi Wolf Klausner, 
and in 1845 he went to Ber- 
lin in pursuit of further 
secular education, attend- 
ing at the same time the Talmudic course of Rabbi J. 
J. QOettinger. Having prepared himself privately for 
academic studies, he entered the University of Ber- 
lin in 1848, and remained there until 1852, when 
Samuel HoLDHEIM, who took a great interest in 
him, recommended him to Waren in Mecklenburg 
as teacher and preacher. The Orthodox reaction 
introduced by the “ Landrabbiner” Lipschitz in 1858 
forced Mielziner, much to the regret of his congrega- 
tion (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1854, p. 527; 1857, p. 869), 
to resign his position, He went to Denmark, where 
his brother Solomon was minister in Aalborg, and 
soon obtained a position at Randers in 1854. In 1857 
he was called as principal of the religious school to 
Copenhagen, where he remained until 1865, when 
he was called to the rabbinate of the Congregation 
Anshe Chesed in New York (“New Yorker Staats- 
Zeitung,” 1865, No. 215). When this congregation 
was absorbed by the Beth-E] congregation, he opened 
a private school, which he conducted until 1879, 
when he received a call as professor of Talmud and 
rabbinical literature from the Hebrew Union College 
in Cincinnati. Upon the death of Isaac M. Wise 
March 26, 1900, he became president of this institu- 
tion, and held this position until his death. 

Mielziner was not a voluminous writer. Apart 
from several sermons which he published, the first 
of which was delivered in Waren, 1854, he wrote 
“Die Verhiltnisse der Sklaven bei den Hebriern,” 
Copenhagen, 1859, this being the thesis for which 
he received the degree of Ph.D. from the University 
of Giessen. This book appeared also in an English 
translation under the title “Slavery Among the An- 
cient Hebrews,” Cincinnati, 1895. As a result of 
his lectures at the college he published: “Jewish 
Law of Marriage and Divorce,” Cincinnati, 1884; 
“Introduction to the Talmud,” 7d. 1894; second edi- 
tion, New York, 1908; and “ Legal Maxims of the 
Talmud,” 26. 1898. Mielziner edited a Danish alma- 
nac for the year 5622 — 1862-63, and “A Selection 
fromthe Psalms for School and Family,” Cincinnati, 
1890. He also contributed to the “ Allgemeine 
Zeitung des Judenthums,” “Ben Chananja,” the 
* American Israelite,” and “ Die Deborah,” and wrote 
articles for the “ Year-Book of the Central Confer- 





se 


Moses Mielziner. 





Mieses 
Migration 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


582 





ence of American Rabbis” and for THE JEwisu EN- 
CYCLOPEDIA. 

Mielziner married in 1861 Rosette Levald of 
Copenhagen, and of the seven children who sur- 
vived him, one, Leo, is an artist, living in Paris, 
and another, Jacob, is a rabbi at Helena, Mont. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : American Israelite, Feb. 26, 1903; Alig. Zeit. 
des Jud, 19038, pp. 271-278; Program of the Hebrew Union 
College, 1903, and Beretning om den Jédiske Religions- 
skole’s Virksomhed + de Forlébne 50 Aar, Copenhagen, 1904. 


A. 
MIESES: A family of German and Austrian 
scholars of the nineteenth century, of which the fol- 
lowing are prominent members: 

Fabius Mieses: Galician litterateur and phi- 
losopher; born at Brody Oct. 31, 1824; died at 
Leipsic Oct. 10, 1898. Up to his fifteenth year he 
studied Hebrew literature exclusively. At an early 
age he gave signs of great intellectual power, and 
was hailedasa genius. In the house of his father-in- 
law, I. Mieses, a scholar living in Dresden, he met, 
besides Kapoport and other Maskilim, his future 
teacher, M. Schéngut, who initiated him into the 
study of philosophy, and with whom he uscd to 
converse in Hebrew during their regular daily 
walks. At the same time he assiduously applied 
himself to the study of German, French, [talian, 
Latin, mathematics, and astronomy. In 1846 his 
German essay “Gegenwart und Vergangenheit im 
Judenthume” appeared in Fiirst’s “Orient”; and 
from that time he became assistant editor of and 
a regular contributor to that paper. In 1878 he 
published (at Lyck) a didactic poem entitled “ Ha- 
Emunah weha-Tebunah,” treating of Darwinism and 
its opponents. By this production he gained for 
himself a prominent and lasting place among He- 
brew poets. 

Mieses was a prolific writer. Besides frequently 
contributing to various Hebrew and German peri- 
odicals, he wrote the following independent works: 
“ Ha-Kabbalah weha-Hasidut” (Breslau, 1866; Odes- 
sa, 1871); “Korot ha-Filusufiyah ha-Hadashah” 
(Leipsic, 1887), a history of modern philosophy 
from Kant to Mieses’ own time; “Shirim” (Cra- 
cow, 1891), a collection of miscellaneous poems; 
“Die Bibel der Vernunft” (Leipsic, 1895). Upon 
this last work rests his chief claim to fame, as it is 
the first and only one of its kind which was written 
in the Hebrew tongue. Mieses was opposed to all 
religious reforms. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. Giinzig, Toledot FB’. Mieses, Cracow, 1890; 

Kenesct Yisrael, p. 118, Warsaw, 1887. 

8. I. War, 

Isaac Mieses: Austrian writer; born at Lem- 
berg 1802; dicd in 1883. A very talented boy, 
he acquired at an early age a knowledge of the 
Talmud and Kindred works. Later on he devoted 
himself mainly to philosophy. He removed to 
Thorn when nearly sixty years of age. 

His works include the following: “Beitrag zur 
Wirdigung der Wirren im Judentum,” Leipsie, 
1845; “Zofuath Paneach: Darstellung und Kritische 
Beleuchtung der Jiidischen Gehcimlchre,” in two 
parts, Cracow, 1862; “Benedict Spinoza und Sein 
Verhiltniss zum Kriticismus,” in “ Zeitschrift fiir Ex- 
acte Philosophie,” vol. tii.; and many other scientific 
essays published in various periodicals. 


eae E. Ginzig, Toledot Fabius Mieses, Cracow, 
S. A. H. R. 


Jacques Mieses: German journalist and chegg 
master; born at Leipsic Feb. 27, 1865; educated at 
the universities of his native city and Berlin, where 
he studied mainly the natural sciences. When sev- 
enteen years of age he won the first prize at the an. 
nual tournament of one of the Berlin chess clubs, 
and then for some time devoted himself chiefly to 
theoretical chess and problems. Of the latter he 
is generally admitted to be one of the leading solvers, 
Since 1888 he has participated in most of the inter. 
national tournaments, at each of which he has gained 
prizes: 

1888. Nuremberg. 
1888, Leipsic. 
1889. Breslau. 
1899. London. 


At the tourney held at Cambridge Springs, Pa., in 

1904, he was placed eighth, tying with Pillsbury. 
Mieses is the author of the following works on 

chess: “ Kieines Lehrbuch des Schachspicls” (Leip- 
sic); “Schachmeister-Partieen” (¢.); and, with ©. 
von Bardeleben, “Lehrbuch des Schachspiels” (7d, 
189+). Ife edits also the chess columns of the “ Ber- 
liner Tageblatt,” “ Leipziger Neueste Nachrichten,” 
and “Zur Guten Stunde.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The Hastings Chess Tournament, 1895, ed. 
Cheshire, p. 361, London, 1896; C. T. Blanchard, Ecamples of 
Chess Master-Play, second series, p. 117, London, 1894. 

S. As P. 

Judah Léb Mieses: One of the most promi- 
nent Maskilim of Galicia; died at Lemberg 1881. 
We was aman of wealth and education, and made 
his house the center of a literary circle. He en- 
couraged and aided Isaac Erter and other young 
men who showed eagerness for knowledge and self- 
culture, and he offered them the use of his valuable 
library. 

Mieses was a fluent Hebrew writer and a strong 
opponent of Hasidism. He was the author of 
“Kin’at ha-Emet” (Vienna, 1828; 2d ed., Lemberg, 
1879), containing an introduction and three dialogues 
between Maimonides and Solomon of Chelm, author 
of “Merkebet ha-Mishneh” (Salonica, 1777). In 
this work Mieses pleads for pure Judaism free from 
wll superstitious belief in spirits, dreams, demons, 
witchcraft, metempsychosis, etc., which in the 
course of time had obscured the light of the sub- 
lime religion. He sharply criticizes the zaddik for 
spreading the grossest superstition among the Hasi- 
dim, and for exploiting the credulity of the igno- 
rant masses. The author evinces a wide acqiaint- 
ance with Jewish and general literature; and he 
appends to his book, under the title “ Likkute Pera- 
him,” extracts from the writings of Judah ha-Levi, 
{bn Ezra, Kimhi, Albo, Abravanel, Joseph Del- 
medigo, and others, in support of his own views. 
He wrote also additions to David Caro’s “Tekunat 
ha-Rabbanim” (2d ed., Lemberg, 1879; see JEw. 
ENcYC. ili, 582, s.¢. Cano, DAVID). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p.530: Bikkure 
ha-Tttim, xi. 126-142, Vienna, 1880; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 3773 
Geiger, Melo Chofnajim, pp. xlviii., 51, and Hebrew text, p- 
6, Berlin, 1840; Gritz, Gesch. xi. 425-426, 488, Leipsic, 1570; 
Kerem Hemed, pp. 124-134, Vienna, 1833; Letteris, in Erter, 
Gesammelte Sehrificn, p. v., Vienna, 1864; Zeitlin, Bibl. 
Post-Mendels. p, 239. 

D. S. MAN. 


1900. Paris. 
1901. Monte Carlo. 
1902. Hanover, 


583 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mieses_ 
Migiation 





MIGAS, IBN. See Ibn Mie@as. 


MIGGO: An Aramaic word contracted from 
“min gaw ” (= “from within”), meaning to proceed 
from the content of a sentence or circumstance, and 
designating originally a conclusion based on aual- 
ogy. It is used in this sense in B. M. db. If it be 
assumed that one has transgressed a command- 
ment, and has taken money or property which does 
not belong to him, it follows that lie may be sus- 
pected with regard to an oath, and that he is likely 
tocommit perjury. Such a conciusion, however, 
is valid only when the breaking of a venial com- 
mandment is inferred from the violation of an im- 
portant one, and not conversely (comp. Tos. B. M. 
i.c., catch-word “de-hashid”), Another example of 
the use of “miggo” in this sense occurs in Suk. 7a, 
where, from the assumption that a ledge is consid- 
ered a wall in the case of a booth, the conclusion is 
drawn that a ledge is likewise a wall so far as the 
Sabbath is concerned. The Hebrew equivalent for 
the Aramaic “miggo” in this sense is “mittok,” a 
contraction of “min tok ” (= “from within”). An 
exauiple of the use of this term occurs in Bezah 
12a, where, from the fact that work is permissible on 
a holiday when it is necessary for a livelihood, it is 
inferred that it is allowed also when it is not neces- 
sary for subsistence: “ Mittok she-hutterah le-zorek 
hutterah nami shello le-zorek.” 

Later the expression “miggo” was frequently 
used as a legal term, connoting “for this reason.” 
When, for instance, a defendant or a plaintiff who 
bases his statements on a given assertion is known 
to have other and better reasons for his complaint 
or his defense, he is believed on the ground of the 

assertion made, and it is assumed that 

Bases of he has spoken only the truth; for had 

Legal he wished to perjure himself he would 
Argument. have alleged betterreasons. Thus the 
expression * The defendant (or the plain- 
tiff) has a miggo” signifies that he was in a position 
to produce more convincing grounds for his state- 
ments; and in like manner, the formula “ His case 
is decided on account of a miggo” signifies that. he 
is believed for this reason. 

The Mishnah does not contain the word “miggo,” 
but a similar idea is expressed in the sentence “ha- 
peh she-asar hu ha-peh she-hittir” (= “the mouth 
which has bound has loosed”)... An application of 
this principle occurs in Ket. 15b: “ When one says, 
‘This field belonged to thy father, but Ihave bought 
it from him,’ he is believed; for, had he wished to 
appropriate what was not his, he would not have 
called attention to the fact that the land had pre- 
viously belonged to another.” 

Miggo is not, however, conclusive proof, but 
Only evidence of probability. If two parties present 
their opposing statements to a judge who can not 
decide which is true, and if one party has a miggo, 
the fact that he did not plead other arguments 
Which he might have alleged is allowed to decide 
the matter and results in a favorable judgment for 
him. The miggo is valid, therefore, only when it 
must be admitted that the party in question omitted 
the presentaticn of other pleas within his power in 
good faith and not for some ulterior reason. If, on 


the other hand, the latter motive is to be assumed, 
the miggo is absolutely invalid. An example may 
make this clearer. A entrusts B with a given ob- 
ject. If B asserts that theobject so given him was 
destroyed through no fault of his, he is obliged to 
take the oath prescribed by the Bible, in spite of 
the fact that he hasa miggo—namely, he might deny 
that A had given him the object in question. But 
in the case in question B did not avail himself 
of this plea, only because he did not have the audac- 
ity to deny a fact known to A and because he pre- 
ferred to tell a falsehood which was not known by 
his opponents to be such (comp. Asheri to Shebu. 
45a). 

The miggo is, furthermore, subject to many limi- 


tations. Thus it is invalid when the better plea of 
the party in question is an unusual 

Limita- one, or one of an incriminating char- 
tions. acter, or one which is known only to 


lawyers. It is invalid also when the 
court recognizes the assertion made to be false 
(comp. Tos. B. B. 30a, 8.2. 15). Neither is the 
miggo valid when the assertion made is suspected 
to be based on error, although the defendant or the 
plaintiff believes he is speaking the truth. When, 
for example, a wife declares that her husband died 
in battle, she is not believed simply because she has 
a miggo—namely, she might have averred that he 
died elsewhere than in battle. The miggo can find 
no application here, because the woman’s veracity 
has not been questioned, the point at issue being 
whether or not she was mistaken and thought that 
her husband died on the field, whereas he was only 
severely wounded (Yeb. 118a). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Z. Frankel, Der Gerichtliche Beweis nach 
Mosaisch-Talmudischem Rechte, pp. 487-474, Berlin, 1546; 
Fink, Miggo als Rechtsbeweis im Babylonischen Talmud, 


Breslau, 1891. 
S, J. Z. L. 


MIGRATION: Removal from one region to 
another. Ever since the Exile, Jews have been 
forced to wander from country to country, and a 
full history of their migrations would be almost iden- 
tical witha complete history of that people. 

In the first century the center of Jewish popula- 
tion, taking the whole spread of the Diaspora, was 
probably somewhere about Tarsus. In the twelfth 
century it had moved to the neighborhood of Troyes 
because of the migration of the Jews to Rome, to 
Spain, to Gaul, to England, and to Germany. By the 
middle of the sixteenth century, owing to the ex- 
pulsion and migrations from western Europe, the 
center of Jewish population had moved over to 
Poland. It is impossible here to deal with these 
movements in detail, but the forcible migration of 
Jews to Babylonia in Bible times, whence they 
spread to Persia, and, it has been conjectured, even 
up to Caucasia, is a typical instance of such move- 
ments. Expulsion from England removed 16,000 
Jews; that from Spain is reckoned to have spread 
more than 300,000 over the lands bordering the 
Mediterranean. The medieval history of the Ger- 
man Jews consists almost entirely of wholesale 
movements of communities from one town to an- 
other. Unfortunately in few of these instances are 
any numerical details available. It was only re- 


Migration 
Mihaileni 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


584 





cently that new conditions enable some estimate to 
be made of the numbers of Jews forced through 
migration from their native countries. 

In recent timesa new kind of migration has taken 
place, due partly to economic causes and partly to 
persecution, which can be traced in some detail for 
the past quarter of acentury. The chief countries 
from which emigration has taken place are Russia, 
Galicia, and Rumania; the chief countries of imimi- 
gration, England and the United States. dis 


The emigration of Jews from Russia increased 
remarkably in the seventies and became wide- 
spread in the eighties of the nineteenth cen- 
tury. That until then the emigration movement 
was but slight is evidenced by the fact 
that between the years 1821-70 only 
7,500 Jewish emigrants trom Russia 
and Russian Poland set out for the 
United States, at that time the most important ob- 
jective point, and in the decade 1871-80 no less than 
41,057 came from Russia alone. 

The direct cause which led to the largely increased 
emigration may be found in the anti-Jewish riots 
which occurred in the early cighties. Maddened by 
fearafter these riots, the Jewish population, including 
not a few professional men, formed regular emigrant 
companies. These removed to Germany, Austro- 
Hungary, England, France, the United States, and 
Palestine. There are no exact figures at hand to 
show the extent of that first emigration movement. 
The emigration from Russia to the United States, 
which amounted, on the average, to no more than 
4,100 persons a year even in the decade 1871-80, 
reached in the decade 1881-90 an annual average of 
20,700. The following table gives the number of Rus- 
sian Jews who emigrated to the United States during 
{he several years of this decade according to the fig- 
ures of the United States Immigration Commission 
and of the United Hebrew Charities respectively: 


From 
Russia. 








—— 
ee 








| 


| 
| 




















ah | 

3 > | s Pep 

Z | 52 | oe aS 

a on & = Sh 

Year. a | o¢ Year, Pe = 

= a5 = o= 

= =~ E me 
SLs coc anti SR OBS, oe wate OO iwan ceases | 17,309 | 29,658 
TEBE awe sche 17,497 14,310 ST ve csaka cs 28,944 | 27,468 
tS eee ae B007 | acs eee 1888......... 31,256 | 31,363 
FSheo5.55 S045 (US ae Oe ee A Le! | ee 81,889 | 23,962 
TOS8De.  eaeates | 16,603 | 19,611 |; 1890......... | 83,147 | 34,308 


5S weal 


However, while the riots of 1881 were the immediate 
cause of the increased emigration, the true cause was 
undoubtedly the very unfortunate economic condi- 
tion of the Jewish population in Russia, and the 
riots merely supplied the stimulus. The pio- 
neers were scarcely settled in their new homes 
when their friends and relatives followed them. The 
relations between the Pale of Settlement and the 
countries whither the emigrants moved became more 
intimate, and because of the more favorable eco- 
nomic conditions in these countries the emigration 
to them increased. The fluctuations in the separate 
years covering the period may be explained mainly 
by the fluctuations in the commercial prosperity of 
these lands. 








The new and repressive measures inaugurated by 
the Russian government in the early nineties re. 
sulted in another increase of Jewish emigration, 
In 1891 and 1892 occurred the administrative ex- 
pulsion of the Jews from Moscow and a similar ex- 
pulsion from the villages and hamlets outside the 
Pale. It is estimated that there were expelled in 
this manner more than 400,000 persons. This mass 
of people rushed to the already overcrowded cities 
and towns of the Pale, and naturally enough could 
find no room there. As a result of this those who 
were expelled by the administration either emigrated 
themselves or crowded out others from the Pale, and 
the latter in their turn had to emigrate. The aver- 
age number of Jewish immigrants to the United 
States, by far the greater part of whom were from 
Russia, was in the nineties more than double the 
number in the preceding decade. For the single 
years the immigration was as follows: 





























B) as # as 

3 | pay | { = =~ fe 

New! lar — + 

Year. = af | Year es a§ 

5 Ss | S-  ee 
[Lo A ae eae 42,145 | 69,139 PI 5 ors 4 csc 45.13 iy whl ld 
TR wviatows 16,417 60,325 TBOT va be oi 22,700) i 20,684 
TOONS scaidaade ecu 39,626 | 32,948 ] 898 a prevesbine 27, ee | 27,409 
DOL es cate seme 36,725 | 22,108 oC) ey PASE TV warns 
1a! fy Re ee | $8,202 | 32,077 || 1900.........| Bi,OLL | ..... : 


j 
| 








In Russiathe emigration took place from every 
part of the Pale and from Poland, but the greater 
numbers came from the provinces which are nearest 
the boundary, such as Volhynia, Podolia, Kiev, 
Grodno, Kovno, Suwalki, ete. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Voskhod; G. M. Price, Russkiye Veuret v 
Amerikye, St. Petersburg, 1893; Alien Immigration, Re- 
ports to the Board of Trade, London, 1893. LW 

: Y. 


E. ¢. 

Statistics of the emigration of Jews from Austria 
and Rumania are accessible for the decade 1890-1900. 
These are obtained by subtracting the Jewish pop- 
ulation of the former date from that of the end of 
the century. The increase in the Jewish popula- 

tion of Austria during that period 

Austria was 81,594, but the excess of births 

and over deaths was 186,852, showing 

Rumania. that 104,758 had migrated from Aus- 

tria. The majority of these went 

from Galicia; and by the same process it is shown 

that 108,949 Jews left that province, some of them 

going to other parts of Austria (“ Oestcrreichische 
Statistik,” Ixvi., pp. xxxii.-xxxiii., Vienna, 1902), 

If the same method be applied to Rumania, from 
data supplied by J. Jacobsin “ The Jewish Chronicle,” 
Aug. 21, 1885, and by W. Bambus in Bloch’s * Oes- 
terreichische Wochenschrift,” 1902, p. 678, it would 
appear that between 1877 and 1894 the Jewish popu- 
lation increased 26,919, whereas the excess of births 
over deaths for that period ran to 69,198, showing 
that in those seventeen years 42,274 Rumanian Jews 
had emigrated. This number must have increased 
considerably in the last decade, during which perse- 
cution in Rumania has been more severe. 

As regards the countries to which these emigrants 
from Russia, Galicia, and Rumania wend their way, 


585 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Migration 
Iiihaileni 





jt must be borne in mind that most of the Continen- 
tal countries rigidly enforce the restrictions forbid- 
ding the Jews of eastern Europe to settle within 
their boundaries, yet, notwithstanding these restric- 
tions, it has been reckoned that nearly 30,000 have 
settled in Germany since 1875 (“ Ha-Maggid,” 1903, 
No. 19). Nevertheless, there have been practically 
only two asylums for the Jews of the new Exodus, 
Great Britain and the United States, though num- 
pers have gone to South Africa; but during the 
Boer war the emigration to South Africa stopped 
on account of the limitations prescribed by the Cape 
Parliament against immigration. It is still uncer- 
tain at the present time whether the new law will 
actually stop the migration of Jews to South Africa. 
A few of the emigrants have been transported by the 
Jewish Colonization Association to the Argentine 
Republic (see AGRICULTURAL COLONIES). 

So far as immigration to England is concerned 
there is difficulty in ascertaining the number, as no 

statistics of religion are taken there. 

England A conservative estimate (“Jewish 
and United Chronicle,” Feb. 7, 1902) reckoned the 

States. number of alien Jews in London as 

50,000, five-sevenths of whom were 
Russian Poles. The total Jewish immigration dur- 
ing the past twenty years has probably not ex- 
ceeded 100,000 for all the British Isles, of which 
80,000 came directly from Russia. 

For the United States fuller details can be given, 
as records have been kept at the chief ports of entry 
—New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore—since 
the great exodus In 1881. Between that year and 
1884 74,310 Jews were recorded as reaching the 
United States, though details no longer exist as to 
their provenience. From 188+ to October, 1903, the 
United Hebrew Charities recorded the nationalities 
of all Jewish immigrants landing at Castle Garden 
and Ellis Island, and furnish the following figures: 









































1] 
5 RO ne: Ss : g 8 
Nationality. | Total Ee Nationality. | Total RS 
| Oy | | ov 
| } 
ae Ant Fn ohn Rh el Se | ere 
: | we | ~ 
Russians..... 406,657 | 65.86 {| Dutech....... x24 08 
Austrians ....| 158,609 | 25.49 || Swedes...... BSO)  .06 
Rumanians ..| 36,099} 5.80 |} French...... dot, 05 
Germans.....| 15,469| 248 |! Danes.......| 225 | .04 
Engiish...... | 2,273 36 )}) | —--—- 
CUES sho 1,534 24 | OCR <i 5.2 | 622, 124 | 


— 





Besides these, up to 1903 there have come in at 
Philadelphia 50,264 and at Baltimore 28,487, ma- 
king a grand total of 775,181 of Jewish immigrants 
actually counted since 1881, of whom it may be con- 
jectured more than 500,000 were Russians, 180,000 
were Austrians, and 50,000 were Rumanians. 
Altogether during the quarter of a century from 
1881 to 1904 there has probably been a migration 
of Jews numbering close on a million souls, of 
Whom, so far as the imperfections of the records 
enable one to estimate, about 850,000 have gone to 
America, 100,000 to England, 30,000 to Germany, 
and 20,000 have been scattered throughout the rest 
of Europe. Of these 200,000 came from Galicia, 
100,000 from Rumania, and the remaining 700,000 
from Russia. Apart from these great streams of 


migration there is a natural ebb and flood of young 
men seeking their fortunes in most of the Euro- 
pean communities and almost all quarters of the 
globe. Their numbers are somewhat larger in pro- 
portion than those of the rest of the population, 
owing to their international relationships; but in the 
more settled communities like those of Holland, 
France, England, and the United States, where there 
is no active persecution, there is little tendency 
toward emigration. 

Among the results of migration of which notice 
will have to be taken in all statistical inquiries are 
the ages and sexes of the migrants. It has been 
reckoned that whereas in Russia persons between 
the ages of 14 and 45 form 45 per cent of the Jewish 
population, they constitute 70 per cent of those who 
migrate to America. So, too, while there are 95 
Jews to 100 Jewesses in Russia, there are said to be 
134 Jews as against 100 Jewesses among those emi- 
grating (“ Ha-Zefirah,” 1908, No. 62). This is con- 
firmed by the records of the United Hebrew Chari- 
ties in New York, between 1884 and 1902, which 
show that the immigrants consisted of 222,202 males, 
155,000 females, and 197,851 children. 

This tends to make the death-rate of any popula- 
tion consisting of Russian Jewish refugees very 
low, owing to the fact that so many of them are of 
the ages between 14 and 45, and at the same time 
renders the marriage-rate very high, as so many of 
the Jewish immigrants are between 20 and 30, the 
favorite age for marriage; but it must be borne in 
mind that there are three men to two women in the 
stream of migration. 


s. J. 

MIGUES, JOAO. See Nasi, Joseru (Joio 
MIGUEs), 

MIHAILENI: Small town in the district of 


Dorogoi, Rumania. It was formerly called Vladeni 
and Tirgu-Nou, and was founded in 1792 by a num- 
ber of Jews under an agreement with the proprietor 
of the domain. This agreement was confirmed by 
a decree of Prince Alexander Constantine Moruzi, 
dated May 80 of the same year. Besides certain 
personal ad vantages, the founders obtained the right 
to use gratuitously the grounds necessary for a syna- 
gogue, a bath, and a cemetery. 

When the town came into the possession of Prince 
Michel Sturza in 1835, he made it the capital of the 
district of Dorogoi. Actuated by a desire tochange 
the terms of the original agreement, he persecuted 
the inhabitants, especially the Jews, cruelly beating 
one of their leading men and imprisoning his son. 
Later, however, a law was enacted under which all 
artisans who should settle in the city were to be 
exempt for five years from the payment of rent 
for property held by emphyteusis. 

The law of 1888, framed by a commission which 
included seven representatives of the Jewish com- 
munity, provided that the large synagogue and 
two small ones, an oratory, and the bath should be 
exempt from rent. Because of such measures the 
Jewish population gradually increased. The num- 
ber of Jewish taxpayers increased from 60 i 1803 
to 129 in 1820; the census of 1831 reported 747 Jews 
and 72 Christians; and that of 1859 showed 2.472 


Mi-Kamokah 
Mikwa/’ot 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


586 





Jews and 1,812 Christians. The Jewish population 
reached its maximum in 1886, when there were 2,895 
Jews as compared with 1,075 Christians. The city 
was, however, neglected by the authorities, and 
began to decline. In spite of an excess of births 
and the fact that many Jews expelled from neigh- 
boring villages took refuge in Mihaileni, the number 
of Jews continued to diminish. According to the 
census of 1899 there were only 2,446 Jews in Mihai- 
leni; and this number has decreased considerably on 
account of emigration since 1900. 


ment), the traditional intonation of which is much 
later in style than that of any of the other services 
of the northern Jews. It differs from them very 
notably in its tonality also, which is that of the 
ordinary modern major mode, while the other 
services utilize seale-forms, surviving only in the 
early medieval piain-song of the Church, or in the 
folk-song of eastern Europe. This penitential set- 
ting is accordingly designated when “ Mi-Kamo. 
kah” is itself quoted as an ancient melody; and it 
is given in the accompanying transcription. 


MI-KAMOKAH 


Mi - ka - mo - kah ba - e- lim 





A-do - nai, 





mi - ka - mo - kah ne- dar bak - 





The income of the Jewish community, which 
amounts to 18,000 francs annually, is derived from 
a tax on meat, poultry, unleavened bread, and from 
certain other fees, including those from the bath. 
The Jews support a rabbit and four shohetim. The 
Talmud Torah of former years has been transformed 
into a modern school; but ten hadarim have been 


closed. In addition to the large synagogue, built 

when the city was founded, there are eleven small 

synagogues or oratories, and the community pos- 
sesses also a benevolent association and a Zionist 
society. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: T. Codreseu, Uricarwl, viii. 152, ix. 12; Bule- 
tinul Moldovei, March 16, 1839; N. Filipescu-Dubau, Dictiona- 
rul Geografie al Judetului Dorohoi, p. 218: Fraternita- 
tea, 1882, p. 345; Calendarul [sraelit-Tlustrat pe 5564, Bu- 
charest, 1903; M. Schwarzfeld, Excursiunt Critice Asupra 
Istoriet Evreitor, ib. 1888, pp. 16-17. 

G, E. Sp. 


MI-KAMOKAH (“Who is like unto Thee?”): 
Opening words of the verse Ex. xv. 11, which, 
with verse 18 of the same chapter (“ Adonai Yim- 
lok,” ete.), is regularly employed as a response in 
the evening and morning services between the 
SuEMA‘ and the SHEMONEH ‘EsREH. Normally, as 
on week-days and ordinary Sabbaths, these verses 
are chanted to the melody-type in the free employ- 
ment of which the particular service is intoned 
(comp. HazzantT). In one case, indeed, the setting 
of “Mi-Kamokah” may have itself determined the 
intonation of the whole of the service in which it 
finds a place. This is the evening service of the 
Days of Penitence (New-Year to Day of Atone- 


To the use of “Mi-Kamokah” as a response is 
due also the introduction of the more recent custom 
into the northern liturgies according to which certain 
melodies, usually of post-medieval adoption, sung 
in the synagogue or in the home on special ocea- 
sions, have come to be utilized as representative 
themes, and chanted as such not only with “ Mi- 
Kamokah” and the opening verses of Ps. cxviil. 
(see HALLEL), but also with other passages utilized 
on previous days as anticipatory references to the 
occasion. Asan example may be cited the practise 
customary on the last Sabbath in the month, when 
the day of the ensuing new moon is announced to 
the melody representative of any festival or fast 
which may occur in the approaching month. 

The first such melody utilized as a representative 
theme was probably that of Ma‘oz Zurn, the domes- 
tic hymn on the festival commemorating the tri- 
umph of the Maccabees, whose name. it was 
traditionally held, was itself compounded of the 
initial letters of the response “ Mi-Kamokah ba- 
elim Adonai”; so that the introducer of the cus- 
tom saw an eponymous connection between the 
text of the response and the melody. 

According to recent practise, “ Mi-Kamokah” and 
the accompanying passages are chanted on special 
oceasions to the following melodies, considered ag 
representative of the respective occasions, ViZ.: 
Festivals (including intermediate Sabbaths) : 

Passover...... Appir Hu. 
Pentccost.....AKDAMUT orelse Yezib Pitgam. 
Tabernacles...“ Lulab” chant (see HALLEL). 


587 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mi-Kamckah 
Mikwa/’ot 





Feast of Dedication 

(HANUKKAII)....MA‘oz ZUR. 
Sabbaths in the 

‘OMER Weeks.... LEKAm Doni of same. 
Sabbaths between 

the fasts of Tam- 

uczand Ab.....°ELr Zryyon. 

At acircumcision.,A melody specially introduced 
by the mohel into the morning 
service at references to “the 
covenant.” 


BIBLIOGRAPITY: The traditional melodies are collected in Baer, 
Ba‘al Tefillah, Nos, 26, 28, 30. 48b-51, 381-398, 533-585, 735- 
745, 974-977, 1050-1052, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1883; Cohen 
and Davis, Voice of Prayer and Praise, Nos. 25, 50, 182- 
134, 159, 292 and 294, London, 1899, 


A. BY ly, SC; 
MIKMAS, DAVID IBN MERWAN. Sce 
Davip IBN MERWAN AL-MUKAMMAS, 


MIKWA’OT (“ Baths”; called Mikwot by the 
Geonim, in the **Aruk,” and in the Mishnah, ed. 
Lowe): Treatise in the Mishnah and the Tosefta in 
the order Tohorot. The legal code of the Penta- 
teuch prescribes a bath for Jepers (Lev. xiv. 9) and 
for persons suffering from certain other diseases (2d. 
xv.). The bath, according to the rabbinical inter- 
pretation of Lev. xiv. 9, must hold at least forty 
seahs (=: 268.29 liters), and must be of such a size 
that the person who is to be cleansed may immerse 
his whole body (Hag. 11a). The water may be from 
aspring orariver, or it may be rain-water, but it 
must not be drawn. The treatise Mikwa’ot deals 
with a more exact definition of the rules upon these 
subjects. Jn most of the editions of the Mishnah as 
well as in the Tosefta this treatise is the sixth in the 
order Tohorot; but in the edition of the Babylonian 
Talmud it is the seventh, and in the editions of the 
Mishnah of 1559 and 1606 it stands first in this order. 
It is divided into ten chapters, containing seventy- 
one paragraphs in all. 

Ch. i.: There are six grades of bodies of water 
so far as cleansing and purification are concerned. 
The lowest in value is water from a 
pond, ditch, cistern, or cavern, as well 
as standing water which has flowed 
from a mountain. These waters, 
under certain circumstances, cause uncleanness, but 
they may, nevertheless, be lawfully used for wash- 
ing the hands and also for making dough (§$ 1-5). 
Water still flowing from a mountain is a grade 
higher, for it can never become unclean; and it 
may therefore be used in preparing the priestly 
heave-offering of dough (§ 6). Next in ascending 
order is a body of water which contains forty seahs, 
and is therefore suitable for ritual baths and for 
the purification of vessels. Still higher in grade 
isa spring to which other water drawn from some 
source is added, and which in certain respects resem- 
bles a body of water and in others a spring (§ 7). 
A yet higher grade of water is that from a mineral 
Spring, which cleanses even while flowing; and the 
highest of all is pure spring-water, which may also 
be used for the ritual sprinkling (8 8; comp. Lev. 
Xiv. 5-6: Num. xix. 17). 

Ch. ii.: When one has bathed and is uncertain 
Whether he has performed the ceremony correctly, 
Or when heis in doubt as to the size cf the mikweh, 


Kind of 
Water. 


or when, on being measured. the bath is found to be 
of insuflicient size, the person bathing is not consid- 
ered clean ($$ 1-2). When drawn water renders the 
mikweh unclean, even though it is doubtful whether 

it fell into the bath (g 8). Three 
Impurities. logs of water drawn intentionally ren- 

der the mikweb unfit, but if uninten- 
tionally drawn they do not have this elfect, even 
though such water has been preserved in a vessel 
($$ 4-9). Regulations concerning a mikweh of 
water and clay, and the degree of fluidity of the 
clay which requires that the latter be taken into 
account ($ 10). 

Ch, iii.: Additional regulations concerning drawn 
water. Tow a mikweh made unfit by drawn water 
may be rendered fit again ($$ 1-2). The method of 
reckoning drawn water derived from several vessels, 
and other methods of reckoning considered in con- 
nection therewith ($$ 3-4). 

Ch. iv.: How rain-water may be led into a 
mikweh and not be considered drawn water ($$ 1-8). 
On the mixing of rain-water and drawn water be- 
fore they reach the mikweh (§ 4). Cases in which 
a conduit of stone Is considered a vessel, so that the 
water in it is regarded as drawn water. Of the 
conduit of Jehu at Jerusalem (§ 5). 

Ch. v.: Cases in which a spring resembles a mik- 
weh, its water having cleansing properties when 
collected in a pool (“ashboran”), but not while it 

flows ($$ 1-3). Whether the sea may 

Flowing be considered a mikweh and whether, 

Water. even while flowing, it cleanses ( 4). 

Flowing or dripping water, and what 
objects may be used to stop the flow ($5). Regard- 
ing a wave of the sea which contains forty seals, 
and other bodies of water (§ 6). 

Ch. vi.: Of holes and rifts connected with a mik- 
weh ($1). Of dipping several objects at once (§ 2). 
Of reservoirs lying near one another (§ 3). Cases in 
which drawn water does not make the mikweh un- 
fit 4). Of large vessels standing in the mikweh 
or in the sea ($§ 5-6). Of the connection of mik- 
wa’ot with cach other ($$ 7-9). Of pipes fixed in 
bath-houses ($§ 10-11). 

Ch. vii.: Things which may make up the measure 
of forty seahs, such as ice, snow, and hail, and 
things which may not, although they do not make 
the mikweh unfit ($$ 1-2). Cases in which the mik- 
weh becomes unfit through a change of color in the 
water ($$ 38-5). Of bathing in a mikweh which 
contains exactly forty seahs ($$ 6-7), 

Ch, viii.: The baths in the land of Israel, even in 
its heathen cities, are clean and fit for use; but the 
heathen baths in other lands are to be considered 
clean only in one respect ($1). The bathing of 
those who have certain diseases, and how such per- 
sons are to bathe (S$ 2-5). 

Ch. ix.: Enumeration of things which, if they 

touch the bather, render the bath inef- 


Use of _—_ fectual (88 1-4). Things which have 
Mikweh. asimilar effect with regard to the bath 


in case they come in contact with ob- 

jects dipped in the water ($§ 5-6). 
Ch. x.: Detailed regulations concerning the dip- 
ping of objects which are to be cleansed (§§ 1-5; 
comp. Num. xxxi, 23). Regarding the purification 


Mikweh 
Miles of Marseilles 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


588 


——— ee ee ae eee ae ey eS 6 Sie 
| 


of water by contact (“ hashakah ”) with the water of 
the bath (§ 6). Of unclean foods and drinks which 
defile and of the method of reckoning them (¥$ 7-8). 

In the Tosefta the treatise Mikwa’ot is divided into 
seven chapters. Especially interesting in the To- 
sefta are the discussions between R. Tarfon and R. 
Akiba concerning the bath of Jabneh. Noteworthy 
also is the discussion between JOSE THE GALILEAN 
and Akiba in which R. Tarfon expressed his respect 
for Jose (viii. 11). 

S. J. Z. L. 

MIKWEH (rabbinic Hebrew, mikwah; plural, 
mikwa’ot): Literally, a “collection,” a “collected 
mass,” especially of water(Gen. i. 10; Ex. vii. 19; Lev. 
xi. 386; comp. Isa. xxii. 11). Because of the use made of 
this word in connection with ritual purification (Lev. 
xi. 36), it has become the term commonly used to desig- 
nate the ritual bath. Inall cases of ritual impurity it 
was necessary for the person or object to be im- 
mersed in a bath built in accordance with the rules 
Jaid down by the 
Rabbis (see ABLU- 
TION; Barus; Pv- 
RITY). Since the Dis- 
persion the custom of 
observing the laws 
of purity has on the 
whole fallen into des- 
uetude, except in 
the case of the im- 
pure woman (see Nib- 
DAH) With regard 
to her the laws are 
still observed in most 
Orthodox communi- 
ties, and therefore 
the ritual mikweh 
is still a necessary in- 
stitution there. Some 
observant Jews, espe- 
cially among the Ha- 
sidim, immerse them- 





Jewish Bath of the Sixteenth Century. 
(From Philipp von Allendorf, ‘‘ Der Juden Badstub,”’ 1535.) 


ities as ritually fit for use, although there is a differ- 
ence of opinion with regard to the manner of melt- 
ing the snow (Mik. vii. 1; Yoreh De‘ah, 201, 30; 
comp. SHak and * Pithe Teshubah,” ad loc. ; see also 
“ Hatam Sofer” on Yoreh De‘ah, 200, 218). 

The water contained in the mikwelh must not have 
passed through a vessel of such a form that it can 
hold objects placed in it. Pipes open on both 
sides are not regarded as vessels in the accepted 
meaning (Mik. iv. 1; “ Yad,” é.c. vi. 1, 2). In large 
cities, where the water-supply comes through 
underground pipes and where water is measured 
by meters, many points involving legal techni. 
calities must be observed in the construction of 
amikweh. In order to observe these the follow- 
ing is the process followed by some rabbis in the 
building of a mikweh in a large city: A small mik- 
weh, with a capacity of 40 se’ahs, is built near a 
large tank, and a conduit is made from the smaller 
tank that leads to an opening in the larger, 
The small tank 
or mikweh is first 
filled with snow 
or ice; when the 
snow or ice fills it to 
the brim the aperture 
leading into the large 
tank is opened, and 
water is poured over 
the ice or suow and 
passes into the large 
tank. Thus the 
original mikweh is 
made from snow or 
ice, about the ritual 
fitness of Which there 
is no doubt, and then 
as much water is 
added as is needed 
(Yoreh De‘ah, 201, 
36; “ Resp. Rosh,” 30, 
31: Caro,” Abkat Ro- 


AMAA 


aN 


NONE 


Lo 


Pet ii 


iin 


a 


ars 
were 


DN CAT 


Gi) 


' 
4 
aa 


R 


I 
olin 


Vie 





selves in the mikweh in cases also of impurity | kel,” pp. 50,51, 56; “Noda‘ bi-Yehudah,” 2d series, 


other than niddah. 

In order to be ritually fit for use, the mikweh 
must contain sufficient water to cover entirely the 
body of a man of average size. The Rabbis esti- 
mated that the mikweh should be 8 cubits long, 1 
cubit wide, and 1 cubit deep (= 44,118.875 widths of 

the thumb; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh 

Size and De‘ah, 201, 1), containing 40 se’ahs of 

Contents. water (‘Er. 4b; Yoma 8la; et al.; 
comp. Pes. R. 82b). The se’ah is de- 

scribed as a measure holding 144 eggs (Num. R. 
XViii. 11), ¢.¢., 24 logs (= 24 pints = 3 gallons approx- 
imately; see WEIGHTS AND MEASURES), so that the 
mikweh niust contain at least 120 gallons of water. 

The water of the mikweh must come from a nat- 
ural spring or from a river that has its source in a 
natural spring (Sifra to Lev. xi. 36). A tank filled 
by the rain may be used as a mikweh, althongh 
some authorities forbid the use of a pool whichis full 
of water in the rainy season and dried up in the sum- 
mer (Maimonides, “ Yad,” Mikwa’ot, iii. 1-8; Yoreh 
De‘ah, 201, 2, Isserles’ gloss). A mikweh derived 
from snow, ice, or hail is regarded by the author- 


Yoreh De‘ah, 136, 187; “Hatam Sofer,” 7. 198, 
199, 208, 204, 206; Berlin, “ Meshib Dabar,” ii. 38). 

If three logs (= pints) of water be poured into 
a mikweh which does not have the prescribed meas- 
ure of water, the mikweh becomes unfit for ritual 
use, even though the 40 se’ahs are later completed 
in a legitimate manner. In such acase, the mikweh 
has to be emptied and then refilled in the prescribed 
way. If, however, the mikweh has the required 
measure, Water from other sources may be poured 
into it without impairing its ritual fituess (Mik. fii. ; 
“Yad,” Zc. v.; Yoreh De‘ah, 201, 15 e¢ seq.). 

The ritual bath always formed one of the most 
important institutions of a Jewish community (see 
Abrahams, “Jewish Life in the Middle Ages,” p. 
73). In urgent cases it was permitted even to sell 
a synagogue in order to erect a mikweh (Berlin, 
“ Meshib Dabar,” ii. 45), 

A. J. H. G. 

MILAN (Latin, Mediolanum): Capital of Lom- 
bardy, and the largest commercial city of Italy. 
Jews settled there under Roman rule and were per- 
secuted even in the early Christian period. Am- 


589 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mikweh 
Miles of Marseilles 


oo _E____E 


rose, the patron saint of the city, was their invet- 
erate enemy, and hoped to become a martyr by the 
destruction of a synagogue. In 888, when the em- 
peror Theodosius commanded a bishop to rebuild a 
synagogue which he had bidden some monks to des- 
troy, Ambrose called Theodosius a Jew, and attacked 
him so bitterly that he countermanded his order. An 
jnscription commemorates his hatred of the Jews 


Shee, 








yaw du Den RK XR 
SRein GOLM ‘ao as Bad Mu 


Jewish Bath of the Sixteenth Century. 
(From a contemporary priut.) 


ANT 
eae 
f : 


(Giulini, “ Memorie Spettanti alla Storia di Milano,” 
vi. 162). The records of the following centuries 
mention Jews in Lombardy as large landowners. 
At Milan, in the tenth century, there was a mint- 
master named Gideon who was probably a Jew. 
During the period of the great wars and the rapid 
rise of the Italian cities the Jews seem to have been 
excluded therefrom, yet commerce and banking, 
which were in the hands of Jews in other countries, 
were so skilfully carried on by the Lombards that 
all competition seemed undesirable, especially when 
complicated by religious antipathies. During the 
great persecution of heretics in 1320 the podesta 
was obliged to promise to expel all Jews, and not 
to readmit any to the city or to the bishopric in op- 
position to the wishes of the archbishop, nor were 
they allowed to return to the territory of Milan be- 
fore the fifteenth century. On Jan, 
23, 1452, in consideration of the pay- 
ment of a large sum of money, the 
Jews of Milan received from the pope, 
through the intercession of the duke, permission to 
build synagogues, to celebrate their feasts, and to 
intermarry, yet the granting of these privileges was 
excused in ambiguous phrases, and the Jews were 
compelled to wear the yellow badge. 

The holocaust of the Jews at Trent in 1475 
aroused hatred against their coreligionists in the 
territory of Milan, and this was fanned by the 
Speeches of BERNARDINUS OF FELTRE. Although 
the dukes tried to protect the Jews, the latter seem 
to have been expelled from the city, so that the 
confirmation of the privileges granted by Pope Paul 
IT]. in 1541, the search of the Inquisition for inter- 
dicted Hebrew books in 1554 and 1566, as well as 





Expelled 
in 1820. 


the repeated decrees of expulsion issued by Philip 
IT. and Philip JIL, applied oul y to the communities 
in other cities of the dukedom, Alessandria and 
Cremona being the most important of these. Then 
no Jews were living at Milan, although some did 
reside in the neighboring cities of Padua and Lodi. 

When Milan came under Austrian rule in 1714 Jews 
seem to have settled there again. They were subject 
to the same laws as their coreligionists in Mantua. 

The interdiction against the forcible 
Under baptism of Jewish children, issued in 
Austrian 1765 and 1768, and still extant, was re- 
Rule. newed by the Austrian laws of 1803 
and1817. The remarkable growth of 
Milan after 1848 brought many Jews to the city, 
especially from Piedmont, Mantua, and the Papal 
States, and the community, which had formerly be- 
longed to Mantua, became autonomous. In 1857 it 
numbered 500 persons, and in 1901 about 2,000, to 
whom may be added many Jews who are not pub- 
licly known as such. 

The folowing persons may be mentioned among 
the prominent Jews of Milan: Joachim Baskvi (an 
eminent lawyer, counsel for Andreas Hofer), and the 
senators Tullo Massarani and Graziadio Ascomt. 
Of the rabbis the most prominent have been Moses 
Menahem Coen (Rapoport), who took part in the 
dispute regarding the mikweh at Rovigo, and, 
in the nineteenth century, Mose Mazliah Ariani and 
Alessandro da Fano. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ersch and Gruber, Encye. s.v. Juden, ii. 27, 
147 et seq.; Educatore Israelita, iii. 107 et seq. 
G. I. E. 
MILCAH (7535p): 1. Daughter of Haran, and 
wife of her uncle Nahor (Gen. xi, 29). She bore 
eight sons, the youngest of whom was Bethuel, 
father of Rebekah (2b. xxii. 21-23). Ibn Ezra 
commentary on Gen. xi. 29) thinks that Taran, 
Milcah’s father, was a different person from Haran, 
Abraham’s brother, and consequently that Milcah’s 
husband was not her uncle. 2. Fourth daughter of 
Zelophehad (Num. xxvi. 38). 
E.G. 


MILCOM. Sce Motnocn. 


MILES OF MARSEILLES, or SAMUEL 
BEN JUDAH BEN MESHULLAM (surnamed 
Barbaveira): Provencal physician and_ philoso- 
pher; bornat Marseilles1294. Insome manuscripts 
he is designated by the name “ Bongodos,” the Pro- 
vencal equivalent of “Ben Judah.” From early 
youth he devoted himself to the study of science 
and philosophy. While still young he left his na- 
tive place for Salon, where he studied astronomy 
under the direction of Abba Mari Senior Astruc de 
Noves. In 1822 he is met with at Beaucaire asa 
prisoner together with other Jews in the tower of 
Rodorte. Later he sojourned successively at Mur- 
cia, Tarascon, Aix, and Montélimar. 

Miles became known through his Hebrew transla- 
tions from the Arabic of scientific and philosophical 
works, These include: (1) “Ha-She’elot ha-Dibriy- 
yot meha-Derushim Asher Je-Filusufim,” transla- 
tion of questions or dissertations concerning some 
obscure points in the commentary of Averroes on 
certain parts of the “Organon,” finished May 8, 


M. SEL, 


Milhau 
Milk 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


590 





1320; (2) translation of the Middle Commentary of 
Averroes on Aristotle's “ Ethics,” completed at 
Beaucaire Feb. 9, 1821; (3) translation of the com- 
mentary of Averroes on Plato’s “Republic,” fin- 
ished Sept. 8, 1821, at Beaucaire, in the tower of 
Rodorte; (4) translation of the compendium made 
by Averroes of Aristotle's “ Organon,” completed at 
Tarascon Dec. 18, 1829; (5) translation of the text 
of the figures 80 and 81 of the treatise of Euclid on 


the five bodies (in completion of the translation of. 


Kalonymus, where these figures are wanting), fin- 
ished Aug. 23, 1835; (6) commentary on the “ Al- 
magest,” parts i.-iii.; (7) translation of a compen- 
dium of the “ Almagest ” by Abu Mohammed Jabar 
ibn Aflah, translated from the Arabic into Hebrew 
by Jacob ben Machir and corrected by Miles, finished 

Dec. 17, 1835, at Aix; (8) “Ma’amar Alexander ha- 

Firdusi,” treatise of Alexander of Aphrodisias on the 

soul, translated from the Greek into Arabic by 

Ishak ibn Hunain, finished July 4, 1840, at Monté- 

limar; (9) translation of the astronomical works of 

the vizier Abu Abdallah Mohammed ibn Mu‘adh of 

Seville, in two parts: (1) treatise in seven chapters 

ou the eclipse of the sun July 3, 1079; (2) “Iggeret 

be-‘Ammud ha-Shahar,” treatise on the aurora; (10) 

“Ma’amar be-Tenu‘at ha-Kokabim ha-Kayyamim,” 

treatise on the movement of the fixed stars by Abu 

Ishak al-Zarkala. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, G. S. iii. 189; Munk, Iélanges, p. 489; 
Neubauer, in R. WH. J. ix. 215; Kaufmann, tb. xiii. 200 eb 
seq.3 ‘Renan, Averroés et l Aver roisme, p. 191: Renan- 
Neubauer, Les Ecrivains Juifs Francais, pp. 207 et seqg.3 


Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. pp. 181, 138, ‘152, 2223 GTOSS, 
Gallia Judaica, p. 379. 


G. I. Br. 

MILHAU, JOSEPH BEN MOSES (called 
also Joseph Moscat): French scholar and liturgical 
poet; lived at Carpentras in the second half of the 
eighteenth century. He was the author of a work 
entitled “Ozerot Yosef” (Leghorn, 1783), a com- 
mentary on Rashi’s and Elijah Mizrahi’s commen- 
taries on the Pentateuch, and of a poem recited at 
Avignon at the circumcision ceremony. Zunz (“Z. 
G.” p. 470) says that “ Joseph of Milhau of the eight- 
eenth céntury ” composed several liturgical poems; 
and, indeed, the Mahzor of Avignon contains other 
pieces of his. But in Jost’s “ Annalen,” i, 341, Zunz 
attributes those poems to the Joseph of Milhau 
who in 1791 was a member of the rabbinical college 
and who was apparently another person than the 
subject of this article. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 345 ; Steinschneider, 
Cat. Bodl. col. 15138; Zunz, in Allg. Zeit. des Jud. iii. 682. 


s. M. SEL. 


MILHAU, MOSES BEN MICHAEL: 
French scholar and poet; lived at Carpentras in the 
second half of the eighteenth century. Moses Mil- 
hau seems to have been the father of Joseph b. 
Moses MILHAU, a8 may be concluded from the gen- 
calogy given by the latter in his work. Milhau 
was the author of: “ Mishpat Emet,” a philosophical 
essay on Job, a kind of theodicy ; “ Matteh Mosheh,” 
a rimed paraphrase of Ruth, with philosophical re- 
flections; and “Tggeret ha-Nehamah,” a rimed work 
purposing to console the reader in his sadness; all 
three works being published at Leghorn in 1787. 
A poem entitled “ Mizmor Shir le-Napoleon ” (Paris, 


1806) was composed in honor of Napoleon I. by a 
Moses Milhau, who is identified by Zedner (“Cat. 
Hebr. Books Brit. Mus.” p. 544) with the subject of 
this article; butif the latter was the father of Jo- 
seph of Milhau, it is not likely that he was stil] 
living in the beginning of the nineteenth century. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud, ii. ae: Gross, Gallia Ju 

daica, p. 345. 

§. M. SE. 


MILHAUD (Latin, Amiliavum; Hebrew, 
axeSip, 35) : Village in the department of 
Gard, France. In Renan-Neubauer, “ Les Rabbins 
Francais,” p. 665, its name is given as aby. It has 
been erroneously confounded with Millau (the an- 
cient Eimilianum or Amilbanum) in the department 
of Aveyron, where there probably never was a Jew- 
ish community. Thereare no documents to indicate 
the status of the Jewish community of Milhaud in 
the Middle Ages. Whatever it may have been, the 
Jews established there were expelled in 1306. They 
sought refuge in the Comtat-Venaissin, chiefly at 
Carpentras, where many of their descendants were 
living in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth 
centuries. The name “ Milhaud,” “ Milhau,” or “ Mil- 
liaud” is still a common one among the Jews of 
southern France. 

The scholars of Milhaud include: Don Diculosal; 
Abraham ben Reuben ben Joseph ben Joshua Ami- 
labi (14th cent.); Moses 3x5; Gabriel ‘3x54, 
translator and commentator of the medical work 
“Tabula Super Vita Brevis,” by Armmauld de Ville- 
neuve; Maestre Bonenfant or Hezekiah of Mil- 
haud, author of the medical work “Gabriel” (16th 
cent.); Immanuel ben Gad; Joseph of Milhau, 
member of the rabbinical college of Carpentras; 
David of Milhau; Moses ben Michael; and Joseph 
of Milhau (called also “Joseph Muscat”), author ofa 
commentary on Rashi entitled “ Ozerot Yosef” (18th 
cent.). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz and Carmoly, in Israetitische Annaten, 
1839, pp. 196, 341; Zunz, Ritus der Synagoge von Avignon, 
in Aug. Zeit. des Jud. 1839, p. 1786; idem, Z. G. p. 470; 
R. EF. J. ix. 216, xii. 197-220; Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 343- 
346 ; a Onan NeUnaller, Les Ecrivains Juifs Francais, pp. 


oo 76 
G. S. K. 


MILK (Hebrew, “halab”; Aramaic, “helba”): 
A common article of food among the ancient He- 
brews.—Biblical Data: Palestine is praised in the 
Bible asa “land flowing with milk and honey ” (Ex. 
iii. 8 e¢ al.), milk representing the common necessi- 
ties of life, and honey referring to luxuries. In Isa. 
lv. 1, milk is coupled with wine to denote a similar 
idea (comp. Ezek. xxv. 4). The Israelites used the 
milk of goats (Deut. xxxii. 14)and the milk of sheep 
(Prov. xxvii. 27). Cows’ milk is rarely mentioned 
(comp. Deut. é.¢.), probably because of its scarcity 
owing to the unsuitability of the mountainous couD- 
try of Palestine for pasturing large cattle. Milk 
was received in buckets (Job xxi. 24) and kept in 
skins (Judges iv. 19), and was used as a refreshing 
drink at meals (Gen. xviii. 8). 

Milk was supposed to give whiteness to the teeth 
(tb, xlix. 12), and was employed asa simile for the 
whiteness of the human body (Lam. iv. 7; comp. 
Cant. v. 12). Deborah refers to milk (“hem’ah” in 
parallelism to “halab”) as “a cup of the nobles” 


591 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Milhau 
Milk 


a a 


(Judges v, 25); and in several other texts it is spoken 
of as one of the most delicious beverages (comp. 
Cant. iv. 11, v. 1). Ben Sira counts milk among 
“the principal things for the whole use of man's 
life” (Ecclus, [Sivach] xxxix. 26). The abundance 
which the Israelites will enjoy in Messianic times is 
pictured in the figure that the hills of Palestine will 
flow with milk (Joeliv. (A. V. iii] 18; comp. Isa. 
vil. 22). Cream or butter (“hem’ah”) is also used 
as a figure denoting abundance (Isa. f.¢e.; Job xx. 
Li and i is frequently mentioned with rine (Gen. 


xviii. 8; Deut. xxxii. 14; Judges v. 25; Prov. xxx. 
38; ef al.). Sec CHEESE; Foon. 

g. J. H. G. 
——In Rabbinical Literature: Although re- 


garded as a pleasant beverage (Ket. 11la; “ Agadat 
Shir ha-Shirim,” ed. Schechter, p. 187, note, Cam- 
bridge, 1896), milk was probably used more by the 
poorer classes of the community than by the rich 
(Hul. 84a; Yallk., Prov. 961). It was especially used 
as food for infants (Seder Eliyahu Zuta, ed. Fried- 
mann, p. 199, Vienna, 19038; comp. Heb. v. 12; I Cor, 
iii. 2; [ Peter ii. 2), A mixture of milk and honey 
was regarded asa delicious drink (Cant. R. iv. 22). 
One is counscled against drinking beer or wine after 
milk (M. K. ila). In a figurative sense milk was 
used to denote whiteness and purity (Gen. R. xeviii, 
15; Cant. R. v. 10). One who wishes his daughter 
to be fair should feed her in her youth on young 
birds and on milk (Ket. 59b). Milk is one of the 
five things (three, in Yalk., Isa. 480) to which the 
Torah was compared (Deut. R. vii. 3; comp. 
Kimhi’s commentary on Isa. lv. 1). On this ac- 
count some maintain that the custom arose of eating 
food prepared with milk on the festival of Shabu‘ot 
(“Kol Bo,” 52; comp. Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hay- 
yim, 494, 3, Isserles’ gloss; see SHasu‘otT). He who 
devotes himself to the study of the Law will be 
greeted in the future world with sixty cups of milk, 
besides many other delicious beverages (“ Agadat 
Shir ha-Shirim,” p. 84, note). 

The permission to drink milk was regarded by the 
Rabbis as an exception (“hiddush ”), since it was held 
that the milk of mammals is derived 
from decomposed blood (Nid. 9a), and 
is furthermore something separated 
from a living animal and therefore to be included in 
the general prohibition against eating anything that 
comes from the living (“dabar min ha-hai”; Bek, 
6b). The milk of an unclean animal is forbidden in 
accordance with the general rule, “that which comes 
from the unclean is unclean; from the clean, clean ” 
(¢b. 5b; comp. Gen. xxxii. 16). It is forbidden also 
to use the milk of an animal suffering from a visible 
malady which causes the animal to be ritually 
unfit for food (“terefah”), or that of an animal 
found, after the ritual slaughtering, to have suffered 
from such a disease as late as three days before its 
death (Hul. 112b; comp. 22. lia, Tos., 8.7. “Atya”; 
Maimonides, “Yad,” Ma’akalot Asurot, iii. 16; 
Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 81). 

Milk bought from a non-Jew is forbidden, the ap- 
prehension being that the non-Jew in his carelessness 
or from a desire to improve it may have mixed with 
it some forbidden ingredient. If, however, a Jew 
has been present at the milking, the milk may be 


Halakah.,. 


used. Different customs prevail with regard to the 
use of butter bought from a non-Jew; and even 
with regard to milk and cheese later authorities are 
more lenient (‘Ab. Zarah 29b, 35b; “Yad,” de. iii. 
12-17; Yoreh De‘ah, 115; see CHEESE). The process 
of curdling milk was effected in Talmudic times 
either by rennet (“kebah,” ‘Ab. Zarah, lc.) or by 
the juice of leaves or roots (‘Orlah i. 7). 

Milk is one of the three beverages which, if left 
uncovered overnight, should not ie used, beeause it 
is possible that a serpent may have left its venom 
therein. In places where serpents are not found, 
this apprehension does not exist (Ter. viii. 4, 5; 
Yalk., Judges, 45; “Yad,” Rozeah, xi. 7; Yoreh 
De‘ah, 116, 1; comp. “Pithe Teshubah,” ad loc.). 
Milk is also one of the seven beverages that make 
articles of food liable to receive impurity (Maksh. 
vi. 4; see PURITY). 

The Rabbis did not hesitate to admit their inability 
to assign a reason for the prohibition against eat- 
ing meat with milk (“basar be-halab”), and they 

accordingly labeled it as “hiddush,” 

Milk and an exception, a unique law (Pes. 44); 


Meat. Hul. 108a; comp. Rashi tnd Tos. ad 
loc.). Maimonides says in this con- 
nection: “Meat boiled with milk is undoubtedly 


gross food, and makes overfull. But I think that 
it was probably prohibited because it was somehow 
connected with idolatry, forming perhaps part of 
the services at a heathen festival.” This latter 
theory he supports by the fact that in Exodus the 
prohibition against seething a kid in its mother’s 
milk is mentioned twice in connection with the 
festivals (“ Moreh,” iii. 48). 

Basing their opinions on an ancient tradition, the 
Rabbis explained the thrice-repeated prohibition 
against seething the kid in its mother’s milk (Ex. 
Xxiil. 19, xxxiv. 26; Deut. xiv. 21) as referring to 
three distinct prohibitions—(1) against cooking meat 
and milk together; (2) against cating such a mix- 
ture; and (8) against deriving any benefit from such 
a mixture (Hul. 115b; comp. there the various at- 
tempts made to find Biblical support for the prohi- 
bition against eating meat with milk). It iscurious 
to note in this connection that Onkelos, a most lit- 
eral translator, renders the passages in all the three 
places by “ye shall not eat meat with milk” oS 
abn awa pbs; comp. LXX. to Ex. xxxiv. 26). 
The expression “kid” was accepted to be a generic 
term including all mammals and, according to some, 
even birds (Hul. 118a). The prevalent opinion, 
however, is that the prohibition against eating 
poultry with milk is of rabbinic origin merely 
(Maimonides, “Yad,” Ma’akalot Asurot, ix. 4; 
Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘uh, 87, 3). Fish and lo- 
custs as well as eggs are excluded from the prohi- 
bition (Hul. 108b, 104a; Bezah 6b). 

The prohibition against eating meat with milk 
was extensively elaborated by the Rabbis, who 
provided for every possible occurrence. Not only 
was the eating of meat with milk forbidden, but 
also the eating of meat that hac a taste of milk, or 
vice versa; for “the taste of forbidden food is for- 
bidden as the food itself” (Ap*Yys Dyy; Hul. 98b, 
108a; Pes. 44b; ‘Ab. Zarah 67b; et al.). If a piece 
of meat that had become forbidden as food because 


Milk 
Millet 


it had absorbed milk to an extent which made the 
taste of the latter appreciable in it was cooked with 
other meat in a pot, all that the pot contained was 
forbidden, unless the contents were sixty times as 
great as the prohibited picce. It was not sufficient 
that there should be in the pot sixty times as much 
meat as the quantity of milk absorbed in the piece of 
meat; for with regard to meatand milk the principle 
was that the forbidden piece became in itself a “ car- 
cass,” é.e., a forbidden object; and when it could not 
be recognized, it was necessary that the taste of it 
should be annihilated (nSva) mwy2 ADnnN; Yoreh 
De‘ah, 92, 4; comp. Isserles’ gloss, where the prin- 
ciple is extended to all kinds of forbidden food). 

A pot in which meat has been cooked should not 
be used for cooking milk, and vice versa. If such 
a pot be so used within twenty-four 
hours after it has been used with milk 
or meat respectively, everything that 
is in it becomes ritually unfit, unless 
the contents of the pot are sixty times as much 
as the pot itself. If the second cooking takes place 
twenty-four hours or more after the first, the con- 
tents of the pot are permitted for use; for the food 
which the pot has absorbed in the first cooking has 
by that time lost its agreeable taste, and the general 
rule is that any vessel which communicates an of- 
fensive taste (ppd DY jni3) does not render food 
ritually unfit for use. The pot itself, however, 
should not be used either with meat or with milk 
(Yoreh De‘ah, 98, 1; comp. SHak ad loe.). 

Food prepared with milk and food in which meat 
is an ingredient should not be eaten at the same 
meal. The general custom is to wait six hours be- 
tween a meal at which meat has been eaten and one 
at which food prepared with milk is to be eaten, 
although custom varies in this particular, some per- 
sons waiting one hour only. There is no need to 
wait at all after eating food prepared with milk; it 
is necessary only to see that there is none of the food 
left on the hands, and also to wash the mouth be- 
fore partaking of meat. It is forbidden to place 
meat upon the table at the same time with food pre- 
pared with milk, lest by mistake both be eaten to- 
gether. In the households of observing Jews not 
only are there two separate sets of dishes and of 
kitchen utensils, but different table-cloths are used 
for meals consisting of food prepared with milk and 
those at which meat is eaten (Yoreh De‘ah, 88, 89). 
As bread is eaten with meat it is not permitted to 
prepare it with mijk unless the form and size of the 
loaf or cake are different from those of ordinary 
bread (7d. 96). See DreTARy Laws; Foon. 

A. J. H. G. 


MILL AND MILLSTONE. See Fiovur. 


MILLAUD (ARTHUR PAUL DAVID), AL- 
BERT: French journalist and playwright; born 
at Paris in 1836; died there Oct. 22, 1892; son of 
Moise MILLAuD. When only eighteen years of age 
he published a volume of poems which met with 
considerable success. In 1869 he joined the staff of 
the “Figaro,” for which he originated the style of 
feuilletonism which it has since adopted. To the 
“Figaro” he contributed a number of witty and 
Sarcastic poems and sketcnes, pudiished under the 


Cooking- 
Vessels. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


592 





pseudonyms “Baron Grimm” and “La Bruyére.” 
Later these were published collectively under the 
title “ Petite Némesis.” 

For the stage Millaud wrote, often in collabora- 
tion with others, a great number of excellent pieces, 
mostly in a sarcastic vein, the leading rdles of which 
were played generally by Madame Judic. Of these 
plays the following may be mentioned: “ Madame 
l’Archiduc ” (1874); “ Niniche ” (1878); “La Femme 
a Papa” (1879); “Lili” (1882); “Mam/’zelle Ni- 
touche” (1883); “Le Remords d’ Anatole” (1885), 
In his younger days Millaud, together with Abel 
Auerbach, founded the “ Revue de Poche,” and later 
the “ Gazette de Hollande,” but neither of these ven- 
tures proved successful. 
ee a Jew. Chron. Jan. 9, 1885; Nouveau Larousse 

ustré, 
. F.C. 

MILLAUD, EDOUARD: French barrister and 
statesman; born at Tarascon, Bouches-du-Rhéne, 
Sept. 27, 1834; educated at Lyons, and there ad- 
mitted to the bar in 1856. Taking an active part in 
politics, he was an opponent of the imperial govern- 
ment and became attorney-general for Lyons after 
the overthrow of Napoleon III. He resigned in 
1871; but in the same year he was elected to the 
Assembly as a member of the Extreme Left, was re- 
elected in 1876 and in 1877, always belonging to the 
Republican Union, of which political club he was 
one of the founders. In 1880 he was elected to the 
Senate, and in 1891 and 1900 was reelected. Being a 
good speaker, Millaud has taken a prominent part 
in the debates of the Upper House and has been a 
member of several commissions. In 1886 he became 
secretary of public worksin the cabinet of Freycinet, 
and in the following year in that of Goblet, resigning 
in 1887. 

Millaud has written several essays on jurispru- 
dence, including medical jurisprudence, in the pro- 
fessional journals, and is the author of: “ Etude sur 
V’Orateur Hortensius,” 1859; “ De la Réorganisation 
de l’ Armée,” 1867; “ Devons-Nous Signer la Paix?” 
1871. 


ter fia Curinier, Diet. Nat.; Nouveau Larousse Il- 
Uuslre. 
s. FT. i. 
MILLAUD, MOISE-POLYDORE: French 
journalist and banker; born at Bordeaux Aug. 27, 
1818; died at Paris 1871. The son of a poor Jew- 
ish tradesman, he received but a meager education, 
and entered a bailiff’s office as clerk. He applied 
himself to literature from his youth, and at the age 
of twenty established a small newspaper, “Le Lu- 
tin.” In 1886 he went to Paris and founded ‘Le 
Gamin de Paris,” the first newspaper to be sold at 
the doors of theaters, and “Le Négociateur,” con- 
cerned entirely with commercial matters. Although 
neither was financially successful, he gained val- 
uable training from them. In 1839 he founded 
“T,’ Audience,” devoted exclusively to the news of 
the law courts, which was very prosperous until 
1845; and he was the leading competitor of the “ Ga- 
zette des Tribunaux.” On Feb. 24, 1845, he estab- 
lished “La Liberté,” which strongly supported the 
cause of Prince Louis Napoleon. After the insur- 
rection of June the paper was suppressed. To 


593 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Milk 
Millet 


i 


gether with Mrre&s, his compatriot, he started an 
mdustrial and financial sheet, “Le Journal des 
Chemins de Fer.” which became a power in matters 
of speculation and finance. Availing themselves of 
the popularity of Lamartine, the two collaborators 
established the paper “Le Conseiller du Peuple,” 
and founded the two banking institutions Caisse 
des Actions Reanics and Caisse des Chemins de 
Fer. from which Mulaud retired in favor of Mirés 
in L808, after each had cleared 3,000,000 francs. 
The Caisse Générale des Actionnaires and the pur- 
chase of the rights of Girardin in “ La Presse ” proved 
less fortunate than the two preceding ventures. 
In 1863 he conceived the idea of starting a daily 
paper at the price of 5 centimes, and established 
“Le Petit Journal,” which was a signal success. 
He was the founder also of “Le Journal Illustré,” 
“ Le Soleil,” and “Le Journal des Voyageurs.” 

In 1859, in collaboration with Clairville, Millaud 
made his first essay in dramatic literature, and pro- 
duced a three-act light comedy, “Ma Mére et Mon 
Ours,” which had a great success. During the Second 
Empire, Millaud gave superb entertainments; but 
finally he lost the greater part of his large fortune. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Encyclopédie; Nouveau La- 

reusse Ilustre. 

fg. J. Ka. 

MILLENNIUM: The reign of peace, lasting 
one thousand years, which will precede the Last 
Judgment and the future life. The concept has as- 
sumed especial importance in the Christian Church, 
where it is termed also “chiliasm,” designating the 
dominion of Jesus with the glorified and risen saints 
over the world for a thousand years. Chiliasm or 
the idea of the millennium is, nevertheless, older 
than the Christian Church; for the belief ina period 
of one thousand years at the end of time as a pre- 
liminary to the resurrection of the dead was held in 
Parseeism. This concept is expressed in Jewish 
literature in Enoch, xiii., xci. 12-17; in the apoca- 
ly pse of the ten weeks, in Apoc. Baruch, xl. 8 (“ And 
his dominion shali last forever, until the world 
doomed to destruction shall perish”); and in IT 
Esdras vii. 28-29. Neither here nor in later Jew- 
ish literature is the duration of this 
Messianic reign fixed. It is clear, 
however, that the rule of the Messiah 
was considered as an interregnum, 
from the fact that in many passages, 
such as Pes. 68a, Ber. 34b, Sanh. 91b 
and 99a, Shab. 68a, 118b, and 141b, a distinction is 
made between Mwnr nid and xan odiy, although 
it must be noted that some regarded the Messianic 
rule as the period of the fulfilment of the prophecies, 
While others saw in it the time of the subjugation 
of the nations. 

There are various views regarding the duration of 
this kingdom, and there is considerable confusion in 
traditional literature on this point, one and the same 
Opinion being often quoted as held by different au- 
thorities. According to the two baraitot in Sanh. 
99a, the Messianic kingdom is to last for 4C, or 70. 
or 865, or 400, or even for 7,000 years. In the opin- 
lon of others its period is to equal the time from the 
creation of the world, or else from Noah, to the 
“present” day. Similar statements, often merely 


VIII.—38 


Messianic 

Period an 

Interreg- 
num. 


ascribed to other authors, are found in Yalk. 806. 
Sanh. 97a quotes Abaye and an old baraita, which 
is found also in ‘Ab. Zarah 9a, to the effect that the 
Messianic period comprises two of the six millen- 
niums of the world, while R. Ketina and a baraita 
make the interesting statement that the 6,000 years 
of the world will be concluded by the seventh thou- 
sand of the Messianic kingdom. In the passage in 
Yalkut already quoted, this same view is ascribed 
to two tannaim of the second ceutury. Both of 
these chronologies are based cn the calculation found 
in Ps. xe. 4 (“ For a thousand years in thy sight are 
but as yesterday ”), a comparison of which with the 
account of Creation formed the basis for the 6,000 
years of the duration of the world, while the Sab- 
bath corresponded to the seventh thousand, that of 
the Messiah. 

The calculation of. 6,000 or 7,000 years is found, 
according to Lagarde (“ Mittheilungen,” iv. 815), as 
early as the Greek trauslators of the Pentateuch, 
whom he places about 280 B.c., and is giver also in 

Enoch, xxxiii. The idea of the Mes- 

Found in  sijanic interregnum was later incor- 
Revela- porated in this form in Revelation 
tion. (ch. xx.). When Jesus has conquered 

the serpent, representing the hostile 

anti-Christian world, the martyrs of the faith will 
be raised from the dead and will rule with him for 
1,000 years as a band of kingly priests. This period 
is to be followed by the Last Judgment and the 
creation of a new heaven and a new earth. The 
concept of the Messianic kingdom, which is here 
described merely as a reign of peace, is elaborated 
more fully in the eschatological descriptions of 
apocalyptic literature (as in Papias), in the Epistle of 
Barnabas, and in the writings of Justin. Barnabas 
follows the Jewish theory that the world is to exist 
unchanged for 6,000 years, and that at the begin- 
ning of the Sabbatical or seventh millennium the 
gon of God will appear, although, unlike Papias, he 
regards this event as purely spiritual. The view of 
Justin (“ Dial. cum Tryph.” cxiii.) concerning the 
Messianic kingdom is nationalistic in coloring, being 
influenced, according to Hamburger, by the insur- 
rection of Bar Kokba. After the middle of the sec- 
ond century of the common era these ideas fell into 
abeyance, until the Montanists arose in Asia Minor 
(c. 160-220) and revived the ancient hopes, declar- 
ing, however, that their city of Pepuza was to be 
the site of the future Jerusalem and the center of 
the millennial kingdom. In the Greek Church chili- 
asm was displaced entirely by Origen’s Neopla- 
tonic mysticism, and was kept alive only in the Ori- 
ental branches of that communion. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Corrodi, Kritische Gesch. des Chitiasmus ; 
A. Harnack, Millennium, in Eneye. Brit.; Semiseh, Chilias- 
mus. in Herzog-Plitt, Real-Eineye.; Hamburger, R. B. T. s.v. 
Chiliasmus : Schiirer. Gesch. 2d ed., ii. 457 et seq.; F. Weber, 
Jtidische Theologie, 2d ed., pp. 371-3873. 

J. A. B. 

MILLET: An important species of grain which 
grows chiefly in sandy regions. In Arabia, Italy, 
and elsewhere a bread. excellent when fresh, is made 
of it, and also of the species Panicum ttalicum 
Linn. The grain is mentioned but once inthe Bible, 
in Ezek. iv. 9: “Take thou also unto thee wheat, 
and barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and 


Millet 
Minden 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


fitches, and put them in one vessel, and make thee 
bread thereof.” Since this passage was evidently 
intended to enumerate all the kinds of grain used 
for making bread, millet (“dohan”) was included ; 
but it is practically inipossible to decide which 
variety the prophet meant. Rosenmiillerand others 
preferred to translate “dohan” by “Indian millet,” 
because the Arabic “dukhn” was shown by For- 
skal to have this meaning, although Furrer had al- 
ready pointed out that panicum likewise bears the 
same name; it is best to translate “dohan” by 
“millet,” especially if the Biblical “sorah” be ren- 
dered “sorghum” (Isa. xxviii. 25, A. V., “wheat”; 
with which Sachau compares the py [7.c., “dur- 
rah” = “broom-cora”] of an inscription at Zenjirli; 
comp. Post, “Flora of Syria, Palestine, and Sinai,” 
p. 854, Beirut, 1896), and to use “panicom” as a 
translation of “pereg,” which is first found in the 
Mishnah. The Syrians, misled by their word “ pe- 
ragga,” have traced this Mishnaic word to the “ pan- 
nag” of Ezek. xxvii. 17. The Septuagint and the 
Vulgate, followed by the English versions, in- 
correctly translate “nisman” (Isa. xxviii. 25) by 
“millet,” 

In Mishnaic times millet of two kinds, rice, and 

sesame constituted a separate category of cultivated 

plants, which were grouped between 
Mishnah. grain and pulse, although rice and 

millet more closely approached the 
former (Léw, “ Pilanzennamen,” p. 102; Sheb. ii. 
7; Yer. Sheb. 84a, 10; Sifra, Behar, 105c; R. H. 
13b; Hal. i. 4; Mek., Bo, 8b, 12; 9a, 27; Sifre, i. 110, 
146; ii. 105; Yer. Peah i. 16c, 28; Mek., Deut. i. 14; 
Hoffmann). Dioscorides discusses the four kinds of 
plants in the same sequence. In spite of the fact 
that rice and millet are kinds of grain, they were not 
included among the recognized species (‘Er. 81a; 
Pes. 85a; Ber. 37a; “ Halakot Gedolot,” ed. Hildes- 
heimer, p. 54; Maimonides, “ Yad,” Berakot, v. 10; 
“Kesef Mishne,” ad loc.). 

Foreign names for millet occur in rabbinical 
works, ¢.g.: “hirse,” “hirsen ” (“‘Aruk ha-Kazer”; 
“Lebush,” Orah Hayyim, 208, 8; Isaac Tyrnau ; e¢ pas- 
sim), “arzan hindi” (Bacher, “Sefer ha-Shorashim,” 
No. 879), “dokhn” (Maimonides), “durra” (“Birke 
Yosef,” Orah Hayyim, 205), “mil,” “miglio” (D. 
Kimhi, “Zunz Jubelschrift,” Hebrew part, p. 97; 
Rashi), “ panis,” “ panitz ” (Rashi, and A. Berliner, 
* Festschrift,” p. 248), “panizo” (“Pahad Yizhak,” 
8.v.). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Beckmann, Beitréige, ii. 543; Rosenmiiller, 

Biblische Naturgesch. i. 84; Ibn Safir, Eben Sappir, i. 40a: 

Wonig, Die Phlanzen im Alten Aegypten, pp. 173 et seq., 


Leipsic, 1886. 
di: I. Lo. 


MILMAN, HENRY HART: Historian; born 
in London Feb. 10, 1791; died there Sept. 24, 1868. 
His career at Oxford was a brilliant one. He first 
became known through his dramatic poems “ Fa- 
zio” (1815), “Fall of Jerusalem,” “Martyr of An- 
tioch,” and others. In 18380 he published his “ His- 
tory of the Jews,” a work which brought down on 
him the censure of the Church. This history is ag- 
gressively rationalistic; it treats the Jews as an 
Oriental tribe, and all miracles are cither eliminated 
or evaded. He was nevertheless presented with a 


piece of plate by some representative Jewsin recog. 
nition of his sympathetic attitude. His history wag 
republished in 1863 and 1867. 

Dean Milman was appointed Dean of St. Paul's 
in 1849, He was the first to translate Sanskrit epics 
into English. He edited Gibbon in 1838, and Horace 
in 1849. His ecclesiastical and theological sympa. 
thies were very liberal, as is shown by his “ History 
of Latin Christianity ” (1855), in which also occur 
several sympathetic references to the Jews. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dictionary of National Biog. 

J. S. J. L. 

MILSAHAGI, ELIAKIM. Sce Samiter, 
A. G. 

MILWAUKEE: Metropolis of the state of 
Wisconsin. The oldest congregation of Milwau- 
kee, Bene Jeshurun, was organized in 1855 by Lobl 
Rindskopf, Leopold Newbauer, Solomon Adler, 
Emanuel Silverman, and others of the first Jewish 
settlers in the city. At the outset the congrega- 
tion had as hazzanim Messrs. Alexander, Lasker, 
and Marcus Heiman in the order named, and it then 
came under the guidance of Rabbis Isidor Kalisch, 
M. Falk, Elias Epstein, Emanuel Gerechter, and 
Victor Caro, the present (1904)incumbent. On Oct. 
18, 1869, under the leadership of David Adler and 
Henry Friend, a new congregation named “ Emanu- 
El” was organized, which was incorporated Feb. 17, 
1870. After a short period of service by M. Schul- 
hof as hazzan, Rabbis E. M. V. Brown, M. Spitz, 
Isaac 8. Moses, Sigmund Hecht, and Julius H. 
Meyer were successively the spiritual guides of the 
congregation. There are four other incorporated 
congregations. 

A federation of Jewish charitics was effected in 
Jan., 1908, the income of the new organization being 
about $12,000. Out of this sum the foliowing local 
charities are supported: the Hebrew Relief Associa- 
tion; the Settlement; the Jewish Hospital Associa- 
tion; the Ladies’ Relief Sewing Society; and the 
Sisterhood of Personal Service. From this source, 
also, the contributions of Milwaukee Jews to na- 
tional Jewish charities are made. 

In a total population of 300,000 there are about 
8,000 Jews. 


A. J. H. M. 
MI-MIZRAH UMI-MA‘ARAB. See PERIoD- 
IC ALS. 


MIN (pl. Minim): Term used in the Talmud 
and Midrash for a Jewish heretic or sectarian. Its 
etymology is obscure, the most plausible among nu- 
merous explanations being that given by Bacher, 
namely, that it is derived from the Biblical » (= 
“species ”), which has received in post-Biblical He- 
brew the signification of “sect”; and just as “ goy,” 
which in the Bible has only the meaning of “na- 
tion,” took later the sense of “non-Jew,” so “min” 
received also the signification of “sectary.” As eX- 
pressly stated by R. Nahman (Hul. 13b), the term 
“min” is applied only to a Jewish sectary, not to 
anon-Jew. It is variously used in the Talmud and 
the Midrash for the Samaritan, the Sadducee, the 
Gnostic, the Judeo-Christian, and other sectaries, a¢- 
cording to the epoch to which the passage belongs. 
Yerushalmi states that there were, at the time ° 


595 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Millet 
Minden 





the destruction of the Temple, no less than twenty- 
four kinds of minim (Yer. Sanh. x. 5). Thus the 
min who (the Midrash states) derided 

Various Alexander the Great for rising before 

Applica- the Jewish high priest Simon the Just 
tions of the (Lev. R. xiii.) was undoubtedly a 

Term. Samaritan. The minim referred to in 
Berakot ix., on whose account the 
custom was established cf closing the benedictions 
with the words “from eternity to eternity ” in order 
to emphasize the existence of more than one world, 
were undoubtedly Sadducees, who, as known, de- 
nied the existence of another world. In passages 
referring to the Christian period, “minim” usually 
indicates the Judzo-Christians, the Gnostics, and 
the Nazarenes, who often conversed with the Rabbis 
on the unity of God, creation, resurrection, and 
similar subjects (comp. Sanh. 39b). In some pas- 
sages, indeed, it is used even for “Christian”; but 
it is possible that in such cases it is a substitution 
for the word “ Nozeri,” which was the usual term 
for “Christian.” 

During the first century of Christianity the Rabbis 
lived on friendly terms with the minim. Rabbi 
Eliezer, who denied to the heathen a share in the 
future life, is said to have discoursed with the 
Judeo-Christian Jacob of Kefar Sekanya and to 
have quietly listened to the interpretation of a Bib- 
lical verse he had received from Jesus (‘Ab. Zarah 
16b; Eccl. R. i. 8). Ben Dama, a nephew of R. 
Ishmael, having been bitten by a snake, allowed 
himself to be cured by means of an exorcism uttered 
by the min Jacob, a Judxo-Christian. These 
friendly feelings, however, gradually gave way to 
violent hatred, as the minim separated themselves 
from all connection with the Jews and propagated 
writings which the Rabbis considered more danger- 
ous to the unity of Judaism than those of the 
pagans. “The writings of the minim,” says R. 
Tarfon, “deserve to be burned, even though the 
holy name of God occurs therein, for paganism is 
less dangerous than ‘minut’; the former fails to 
recognize the truth of Judaism from want of knowl- 
edge, but the latter denies what it fully knows” 
(Shab. 116a). 

On the invitation of Gamaliel II., Samuel ha- 
Katan composed a prayer against the minim which 
was inserted in the “Kighteen Benedictions”; it is 

called “Birkat ha-Minim” and forms 


Prayer the twelfth benediction; but instead 
Against of the original “ Nozerim” (= “ Naza- 
Minim. renes”; see Krauss in “J. Q. R.” v. 


55; comp. Bloch, “ Die Institutionen 
des Judenthums,” i. 193) the present text has “ we- 
la-malshinim ” (=“and to the informers”). The 
cause of this change in the text was, probably, the 
accusation brought by the Church Fathers against 
the Jews of cursing all the Christians under the 
name of the Nazarenes. It was forbidden to par- 
take of meat, bread, and wine with the min. Scrolls 
of the Law, tefillin, and mezuzot written by a min 
Were burned (Git. 45b; Yer. Shab. 14b; ‘Ab. Zarah 
40b; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 39,1; 7b. Yoreh 
De‘ah, 281, 1). An animal slaughtered by a min 
was forbidden food (Hul. 18a). The relatives of the 
Min were not permitted to observe the laws of 


mourning after his death, but were required to as- 

sume festive garments and rejoice (Sem. ii. 10; 

Yoreh De‘ah, 345). The testimony of the min was 

not admitted in evidence in Jewish courts (Shulhan 

‘Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat, 34, 22); and an Israclite 

who found anything belonging to one who was a 

min was forbidden to return it to him (see Hoshen 

Mishpat, 266, 2). 

According to Maimonides (“ Yad,” Teshubah, iii.) 
the term “min” is applied to five classes of heretics: 
to those who deny the existence of God and His 
providence; to those who believe in two or ii more 
than two gods; to those who ascribe to God form 
and figure; to those who maintain that there existed 
before the creation of the world something besides 
God; and to those who worship stars, planets, or 
other things in order that these may act as inter- 
mediaries between them and the Master of the 
World. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Sachs, in Orient, Lit. ii. 825; Dreifus, ib. iv. 
204, vi. 620; Kirchheim, ib. v. 1; Jost, Gesch. des Juden- 
thums und Seiner Sekten,i. 414; Gratz, Gnosticismus und 
Judenthum, Krotoschin, 1846, passim; M. Friedlander, Der 
Vorchristliche Jtidische Gnosticismus, Gottingen, 1898, pas- 
sim; Bacher, in R. £. J. xxxviii. 88; Israel) Lévi, ib. xxxviii. 
204; Schiirer, in Theologische Literaturzeitung, 1899, No. 6; 


Goldfahn, in Monatsschrift, xix. 163; J. Derenbourg, in R. 
E. J. xiv. 30; Krauss, in J. Q. R. ix. 515. 
J. I. Br. 


MINDEN, JUDAH (LOB) B. JOEL: Ger- 
man lexicographer; lived at Berlin in the sixth 
decade of the eighteenth century. In 1760 he pub- 
lished there, with the approbation of the rabbinates 
of Berlin and Halberstadt, the first Hebrew diction- 
ary produced by a Jew and using German as the 
medium of translation; it was, as Zunz says (“G, 
Vv.” p. 451), “the initial attempt to introduce the 
High German lauguage into the national literature.” 
The title “Millim le-Eloah” (comp. Job xxxvi. 2) 
was chosen for it, “ because it explains the words of 
the divine writings,” while its first word (p51) 
hints at the author's name (739%) 3°39 AT 193). 
The book, whichis based on David Kimhi’s diction- 
ary, contains also additions from the Concordance, 
as well as discussions of the grammatical functions 
of the letters. In 1765 Minden published a new 
edition of Musafia’s “Zeker Rab” as a supplement 
to his own work. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1344; idem, 

Bibliographisches Handbuch, pp. 93,98; Roest, Cat. Rosen- 


thal. Bibl. Hebrew part, No. 1108. 
T. W. B. 


MINDEN, LOB B. MOSES: Cantor and 
poet; born at Selichow (from which he is called also 
Judah b. Moses Selichower), in Lesser Poland, 
in the seventeenth century; died at an advanced 
age at Altona or Hamburg May 26, 1751. He 
acted as hazzan at Minden-on-the-Weser, whence 
his name “Minden.” He was the author of 
“Shire Yehudah,” Hebrew songs with German 
translations and music. One of these begins: “Ihr 
lieben Briider und Gesellen, die da sitzen und 
zechen,” and another, “Hort zu, ihr Leut, gedenkt 
an die Zeit.” In an epilogue to this work (Amster- 
dam, 1696) he exhorts the rabbis not to allow con- 
versation in the synagogue. He wrote also “Zemer 
wa-Shir,” which was printed by Solomon London, 
Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1714. 


Minerbi, Hirschel de 
Minis 





BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider. Cat. Boat. cols. 613, 1361, No. 
4064; Roest, Cat. Rosenthal. Bibl. p. 816; Appendix, pp. 211 


et seq. sd 
i. R. M. K. 


MINERBI, HIRSCHEL DE: Count of Os- 
carre: Italian diplomat; descendant of a wealthy 
and illustrious Jewish family of Triest; born April 
25. 1888; educated at the University of Padua, 
where he received his degree in law in 1864. He 
then went to Italy, and entered the government 
service in 1867, being first sent to Paris, later in 
turn to Bern, Constantinople, London, Brussels, and 
finally to London again, where he remained uutil he 
withdrew from the service. Before he retired to 
private life he set aside the sum of 80,000 lire 
which he directed to be used as a nucleus for the 
foundation of an institute for the benefit of the 


widows and orphans of diplomatists. 
S. VY. Cz 


MINES AND MINING: Mines did not exist 
in the land inhabited by the Israelites. In the de- 
scription of Palestine in Deut. vill. 9, it is true, the 
words “whose stones are iron and out of whose hills 
thou mayest dig brass” seem to refer to mining; but 
it is doubtful whether this passage is to be taken 
literally. The writer may have only meant that the 
stones were like iron in hardness. Here and there, 
however, superficial deposits of iron ore, such as 
pea ore or meadow ore, are to be found. In the 
Wadi Ajlun there are even thin deposits of red iron 
ore; but whether these were perhaps worked in some 
primitive mannerisunknown. Traces of iron-mincs 
anid of ancient copper-works are found in the Leb- 
anon. Possibly the words in Deuteronomy refer to 
this territory, though it was never inhabited by the 
Israclites. 

The author of Job xxvili. betrays a more exact 
knowledge of mining. In verses 4, 7, 8 he refers to 
the passages and galleries which run crosswise with 
many sharp turns, following the labyrinthine course 
of the vein of ore. Verse 3 refers to the miner’s 
light, which, according to Diodorus (iii. 11), the 
workers in Egyptian mines used to wear fastened to 
their foreheads. Verse 5 refers to the process of 
breaking the stone by making it intensely hot and 
then pouring water on it. This process also is 
mentioned by Diodorus. Verse 10 refers to the 
cleaving of a rock in which a vein of ore ran through 
it ina fissure. Water burst from the fissure, and the 
flow was stopped by closing up the gap. Perhaps 
the writer’s knowledge of the subject came from 
Egyptian sources. 

The rich gold-mines of which Diodorus (J.c.) 
speaks were on the boundary between Egypt and 
Nash, but more likely in this passage the allusion 
is to the copper-works of the Egyptians on the Sina- 
itic Peninsula. Traces of extensive mining opera- 
tions are still to be seen in the wadis Maghara and 
Nasb, in the heaps of rubbish, the piles of slag, and 
theruined passages. The inscriptions found on the 
rocks there intimate that the ore was excavated even 
before the time of Cheops (the builder of the great 
pvramid), under King Snefru. Mining was not car- 
ried on by regular miners, but by slaves, convicts, 
prisoners of war, etc. The anthor of Job xxviii. 
must in some way have become acquainted with 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


596 





such mines, and have used the picture with poetica] 

freedom for a general illustration of human skill iy 

obtaining precious metals. See METALS. 
E, G. H. 


MINHAG. See CUSTOM. 


MINHAH PRAYER: The afternoon devo. 
tional service of the Jewish liturgy. The term js 
probably derived from Elijah’s prayer at “the time 
of the offering of the evening (“ minhah ”] sacrifice” 
(I Kings xviii. 86). Minhah is one of the three daily 
services referred to in Dan. vi. 10. Tradition credits 
the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob with the 
authorship of the morning, afternoon, and evening 
prayers respectively (Ber. 26b). That Isaac was the 
original author of Minhah is deduced from the 
verse, “And Isaac went out to meditate in the field 
at the eventide ” (Gen, xxiv. 68). 

Minhah proper, otherwise known as “ Minhah 
Gedolah ” (major) begins at six and one-half hours 

of the day (12.80 P.m.); “ Minhah Ke- 
Divisions. tannah” (minor), at nine and one-half 

hours of the day (3.30 P.m.); and they 
both end at sunset (6P.M.). “Pelag” (split or semi-) 
Minhah divides the “ Minhah Ketannah” in half at 
ten and three-quarter hours of the day (4.45 p.m; 
Ber. iv. 1, 26a). Sunset is calculated to occur at 
the twelfth hour of the day (6 P.M.); no attention 
is paid to variations in the length of day and of 
night according to the seasons, but each is reckoned 
as containing cxactly twelve hours. 

The distinction between Minhah Gedolah and 
Minhah Ketannah corresponds to a division of ae- 
tivities into important and unimportant; it being 
forbidden to enter upon one of either class after the 
beginning of the corresponding Minhah; this rule 
was made as a precaution against any undertaking 
being continued after the limit of the time fixed for 
prayer (Shab. i. 2, 9a). Accordingly, one must not 
commence a large business transaction or sit down 
to a banquet after 12.30 P.m., nor begin a small 
transaction or partake of an ordinary meal after 
3.380 P.M., Without having previously recited the 
Minhah prayer. The semi-Minhah is a special di- 
vision made by Rabbi Judah, who sets the limit 
of the “ Minhah” time at one and one-quarter hours 
before sunset. 

It appears that some made it a practise to pray 
both at Minhah Gedolah and Minhah Ketannah. Kk. 
Mazliah did so; but Asheri rules against him, inas- 
much as there is an additional Minhah known as 
“ne‘ilah,” which is confined to Yom-Kippur and 
special fast-days (Asheri, Rule iv., § 18). The 
Shulhan ‘Aruk allows one to say the Minhah 
prayer twice, provided one Minhah is recited as an 
obligation (“hobah ”) and the other asa voluntary act 
(*reshut”). This, however, is allowed only to men 
of extraordinary devotion; this rule being supported 
by the words of Isaiah: “To what purpose is the 
multitude of your sacrifices unto me?” (Shulhan 
‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 284, 1). 

Minhah consists of Ps. exlv., “‘Amidah,” “Tah- 
nun” (except on Fridays), and “‘Alenu.” Wheo 
there isa quorum of ten (“minyan ”) the leader re- 
peats the standing prayer (“‘Amidah ”) aloud, and 
recites the “Kaddishim.” On Saturdays and ov 


Wea, 


597 THE JEWISH 





fast-days a portion of the Pentateuch is read in 
public before the “‘Amidah.” When time presses, 
the leader recites aloud only the first part of the 
prayer, through “Kedushshah” (“thrice holy ”), 
and the rest is said silently with the assembly. 

The third meal on Saturdays is eaten between 
Minhah and Ma‘arib or evening prayer. Formerly, 
a maggid sometimes preached in the synagogue after 
Minhah. Jn the ninetecnth century, when the peo- 
ple became more busy in worldly affairs, it was diffi- 
cult for them to assemble in the afternoon and again 
in the evening; hence the Minhah prayer was post- 
poned to very near sunset in order that it might 
be followed by Ma‘arib after a short interval. 

On the relation of the Minhah prayer to the sacri- 
fices in the Temple see PRAYER. 

BIBLIOGRAPIFY : Dembitz, Jewish Services in Synagogue and 

Home, pp. 76-81, 882, Philadelphia, 1898. 

J. J. D. E. 


Minerbi, Hirschel de 
Minis 


ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| 
| He was the author of the Talmudic commentary 
“Be’erot Yizhak.” 

Joseph ben Isaac Minir: Rabbi at Constan- 
tine; died before 1408; son of Isaac ben Joseph 
Minir; for ten yearsa pupil of Isaac ben Sheshet, 
who esteemed him highly for his scholarship. 

Moses Minir: Edited Hebrew works at Venice 
in 1598. 

Shem-Tob Minir: Contemporary of Joseph 
Caro; was living at Constantinople in 1569. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isaac ben Sheshet, Responsa, Nos. 19 et séq., 
123, 126, 896; Ozar Nehmad, ii. 99; He-Haluz, ii. 26, iv. 8&5 
Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 36b; Zunz, Literaturgesch. 
p. 504; Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Spanien, i. 78 et 


geq., 88. 
G, M. K. 


MINIS: American family especially prominent 
in the South. Its founder, Abraham Minis, went 
from England to America in 1733. The family tree 
is as follows: 


——— Minis (in England) 





Abraham Minis 
(b. 1691; settled in 


Savannah, Ga., 1785; d. 1757 


m, Abigail (b. 1701; 
d. 1794) 





Leah Minis 
(no descendants) 


Esther Minis 
(no descendants) 


Abraham Minis (b. Savannah, 
Ga., 1778; d. 1801) 








| 
Philip Minis (b. 1784; d. 1789) 


Isaac Minis (b. 1780; d. 1856) 
m. Divina Cohen of Georgetown, 8. C. 


Simeon Minis 
(no descendants) 


) 


other children 
m. Judith Pollack of New- (no descendants) 


port, R. - (d. 1818) 


If 





4 daughters 


(b. 1787; a. 1874) 


Philip Minis Sarah Ann Philipa Minis Abraham Minis Francis Rebecca Theodore Minis 6 other 
(b. 1805) Minis (b. 1811) (bo. 1818) (b. 1820: d. 1889} Minis Gratz (b. 1828) daughters 
m. Sarah Livingston m. Dr. Isaae m. Edward m. Lavinia Minis m. Emily Tobias 
of New York Hays of Phila- Etting (issue) Florance (no issue) 
delphia of New Orieans 
(issue: see. 
HAYS pedigree) 
3 sons 4 daugh- 
ters 
Jacob Florance Minis Maria Minis Isaac Minis Abram Minis Lavinia Minis 
m. Louisa Porter Gilner (b. 1857; d. 1893) m. Mabel A. Henry  m. Charles I. 
in. Eugenia P. of New York Henry of New 
Myers (issue) York (issue) 
| — | 
Isaae Minis, Jr. Carol Minis | 
J. BE. N.S. | 


PEDIGREE OF T 


MINIR (9:99): Family of scholars of Tudela, 
members of which are met with in the East and in 
Italy. 

Abraham ben Joseph Minir (probably a 
brother of Isaac ben Joseph Minir): Acah (Isaac) 
ben Hayyim and his son Abraham Minir; and 
Shem-Tob ben Samuel Minir were prominent 
members of the community of Tudela in 1368. 

Isaac ibn Minir: Contemporary of Isaac ben 
Sheshet. 

Isaac ben Joseph Minir: Commentator and 
liturgical poet; pupil of Yom-Tob ben Abraham of 
Seville, and contemporary of Solomon ben Adret. 


HE Minis FAMILY. 
| Abraham Minis: One of the earliest settlers in 
the colony cf Georgia; born e. 1696; died 1757. Tle 
arrived at Savannah with the group of Jewish col- 
onists which came from England July 11, 17383, 
shortly after Oglethorpe. Abraham was accon- 
panied by his wife Abigail, his daughters Leah and 
Esther, and his brother Simeon. He seems to have 
been a man of means. Someof the family silver he 
brought with him is still in possession of his descend- 
ants; and several pieces bear his crest. Abraham’s 
name appears among those of the few Jewish grant- 
ees mentioned in the general conveyance of town 
lots and farms executed in Dec., 1733, and which 


STinis 
Minnesota 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


598 





is virtually the earliest deed in the colony. Hesoon 
became a merchant, and is mentioned as such in 
Savannah as early as 1737. 

When many of the colonists, both Jew and Gen- 
tile, left Georgia about 1740, owing to the illiberal 
policy of the trustees, Minis was one of the few 
Jews who remained; he is mentioned in the trus- 
tees’ minutes of that period. His widow died in 1794. 

Simeon Minis: Brotherof Abraham Minis; also 
one of the original settlers. His name appears in 
the records as late as 1748, when he received an al- 
lotment of land. 

Philip Minis: Son of Abraham Minis; born at 
Savannah July 11, 1734 (being the first white male 
child born in the colony of Georgia); died 1789. 
He was a successful merchant at the outbreak of 
the American Revolution. An ardent patriot, he 
advanced considerable sums to the Revolutionary 
cause, mainly in connection with the payment of 
the troops. His name appears in the “Journal of 
the Continental Congress.” In 1778 Congress di- 
rected the payment to him of several thousands of 
dollars, advanced to the “acting paymaster and com- 
missary to the Virginia and North Carolina troops 
in the State of Georgia.” When, in Sept., 1779, the 
French auxiliaries besieged Savannah, Minis acted 
as guide through the woods, and was consulted as 
to the best place for landing. He also voluntecred 
to act as a patriot guide thereafter. In 1780 the 
British passed their famous “ Disqualifying Act,” 
whereby certain persons were disqualified from 
holding office, because of their prominence in the 
“rebel cause.” The name of Philip Minis is one 
of the 150 names appearing in this list. 

After the Revolution Minis took a lively interest 
in congregational affairs at Savannah. On the re- 
establishment of the congregation in 1786 he be- 
came parnas or president of the Mickva Israel con- 
gregation in that city. 

David Minis: A memberof the family who was 
prominent in masonic affairs as early as 1757. He 
was among those who, on behalf of the order, 
waited on Governor Ellis with an address of wel- 
come in that year. 

Judith (Judy) Minis (née Judith Pollack): 
Wife of Philip Minis; died 1818. She and her 
mother were both prominent patriots. On this 
account both were confined to their dwelling after 
the taking of Savannah, and were finally ordered to 
Jeave the town. 

Among the soldiers of the Georgia line in the 
Revolution are also found the names of William 
Minis and James Minis, presumably members 
of the same family. 

Isaac Minis: Son of Philip and Judith Minis; 
said to bave been born in 1780, in a cave near 
Charleston, 8. C., while that city was besieged and 
while Savannah was in the hands of the British; 
died 1856. Heserved asa private in the War of 1812 
in Capt. William Bullock’s company of artillery, 
Ist Regiment Georgia Militia. 

Abraham Minis: Son of Isaac Minis; born at 
Savannah 1820; died 1889. He was physically dis- 
qualified from serving in the field at the outbreak 
of the Civil war. Though disapproving of seces- 
sion, he, after hostilities commenced, espoused the 


Confederate cause, and filled a position in the com. 
missary’s office at Savannah. He also subscribed 
liberally to the issue of Confederate bonds. 

Isaac Minis: Son of Abraham Minis; born at 
Savannah 1857; died 1898. He was an active mem- 
ber of the Georgia Hussars for many years, until his 
death. 

Abraham Minis: Son of Abraham Minis; born 
1859. He joined the Georgia Hussars in 1881, and 
became first lieutenant. At the outbreak of the 
Spanish-American war he requested assignment to a 
cavalry regiment, but as no cavalry was called from 
Georgia he had no opportunity for active service. 
Later he was appointed quartermaster (with the 
rank of captain) of the Ist Regiment of Georgia 
Cavalry, of which body he is now (1904) adjutant. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Charles C. Jones, Hist. of Georgia, vol. L; 

idem, in Pub. Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. i. 5; George White, 

Historical Collections of Georgia, pp. 98, 102, 104, 389, New 

York, 1855; Oceident, 1. 247, 3881; George Gilman Smith, 

The Story of Georgia, pp. 517, 619, 627, Macon, 1900; George 

White, Statistics of Georgia, in Journat of the Transactions 

of the Trustees of Georgia, p. 418, Wormloe, 1896; W. B. 

Stevens, History of Georyia, vol. i., 1847; Georgia Gazette, 

March 12, 1789; Leon Hiithner, The Jews of Georyia in Colo- 

nial Times, in Pub. Am. Jew. Hist. Soe. x.; idem, The Jews 

of Georgia tn the American. Revolution; Charles P. Daly, 

Settlement of the Jews in North America, pp. 68-73, New 

York, 1893; Isaac Markens, The Hebrews in America, p. 49, 

New York, 1885; Journals of Continental Congress, 1778; 

Herbert Friedenwald, in Pub. Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. i. 67. 

A. L. Hi. 

MINKOVSKY, PHINEHAS: Russian can- 
tor; born at Byelaya Tzerkov April, 1859. His 
father, Mordecai, a descendant of Yom-Tob Lip- 
mann Heller, was cantor in the great synagogue of 
Byelaya Tzerkov, and he himself was a singer in his 
father’s choir. After having studied the Bible aud 
Talmud under different teachers, Minkovsky con- 
tinued his Talmudical studies alone in the bet ha- 
midrash of his native town. At theage of eighteen 
he began tostudy Russian and German, and he mas- 
tered these two languages. His first teacher in vocal 
music was his father; later he studied it under Nisan 
Spivak (Nisan Belzer or Nisan Berdychever), and 
finally he went to Vienna, where he continued under 
Robert Fuchs, now (1904) director of the Conserva- 
torium of Vienna, from whom he obtained a diploma 
as singer. From 1888 Minkovsky was successively 
cantor at Kishinef, Kherson, Lemberg, Odessa (in 
the great synagogue), New York (in the synagogue 
Kehal ‘Adat Yeshurun), and in 1892 he was called 
back to Odessa, where he is now cantor in the Bro- 
der Synagogue. He has written “Die Entwick- 
Jung der Synagogalen Liturgie bis nach der Refor- 
mation des 19jahrhunderts” (Odessa, 1902). Min- 
kovsky has contributed to many Hebrew periodicals 
and to “Die Wahrheit.” 

I. R. B. Et. 


MINKOWSKI, OSCAR: German physician: 
born at Alexoten, near Kovno, Russia, Jan. 13, 1858; 
educated at the universities of Freiburg, Strasburg, 
and Konigsberg (M.D. 1881). He became assistant 
at the medical clinic of Kénigsberg University in 
1882 and privat-docent in1885. Removing to Stras- 
burg in 1888, he was appointed assistant professor at 
the university there in 1891. In 1900 he became 
chief physician at the General Hospital at Cologne. 

Minkowski is a contributor to Leyden’s “ Hand- 
buch der Ernihrungstherapie,” Nothnagel’s “ Hand- 


599 








puch der Speziellen Pathologie und Therapie.” Lie- 
preich’s “ Eney klopiidie der Therapie,” and Lubarsch 
and Ostertag’s “Ergebnisse der Allgemcinen The- 
rapie.” Besides contributing many essays to the 
medical journals, he has written: “ Untersuchungen 
tiber den Diabetes Mellitus nach Exstirpation des 
Pankreas,” Leipsic, 1893; and “ Untersuchungen 
zur Physiologie und Pathologie der Harnsiiure,” 7d. 
1898. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. : 

S. F. T. H. 

MINNEAPOLIS: Chief commercial city of the 
state of Minnesota. In 1900 it had in a total popu- 
lation of 202,718 a Jewish community of about 6,000 
souls. ‘The first. Jewish settlers were Germans, Bo- 
hemians, and Russians, who went there between the 
years 1865-70, there being among them one Ralph 
Rees, still living, who came in 1866, and who was for 
many years the most active member of the commu- 
nity. In 1876 about a dozen families rented a hall 
for worship and engaged the Rev. Mr. Schreiber as 
nunister, In1878 the congregation was permanent- 
ly organized and incorporated, and shortly after a 
frame structure was erected as a synagogue on Jeased 
ground now situated in the very center of the busi- 
ness district. Such was the beginning of the pres- 
ent Jewish Reform Congregation Shaarei Tov. 
About five years later the synagogue was enlarged 
and moved to its present site, Fifth avenue and 
Tenth street south. Henry Lliowizi then became the 
rabbi of the congregation and remained here eight 
years. His successors have been: Rabbi 8. Marks, 
two years; A. Friedman, seven years; and 8. N. 
Deinard, the present (1904) incumbent, who was 
elected in 1901. The congregation dedicated a new 
synagogue in 1908. 

The great bulk of Russian and Rumanian Jews, 
who are now the predominating element of the 
community, have come since 1882. The first con- 
gregations organized by them were the Adath Ye- 
shurun, which existed for about seven years, and the 
Rumanian Hebrew Congregation Sons of Abraham, 
both in 1888. In 1890 the Congregation Beth Midrash 
Haggadol was started, but two years later was dis- 
solved and succeeded by the Congregation Keneseth 
Israel, which built its present synagogue in 1894. 
This congregation, the leading Orthodox one, main- 
tains a Hebrew Free School (daily) with about 70 
pupils, and a Sunday-school attended mostly by 
girls. With the congregation are connected a Heb- 
ra Tillim,a Hebra Mishnah, and a Hebra Gemarah. 
Other Orthodox congregations are: Mikra Kodesh 
Nusah Sfard; Congregation Anshe Tavrig; Adath 
Yeshurun (reorganized in 1908); and South Side 
Hebrew Congregation Agudath Ahim. They all 
own their houses of worship. The spiritual head of 
the Orthodox portion of the community was, until 
1901, Rabbi I. Yaffey, who has been succeeded by 
Rabbi M. 8. Silber. 

The following organizations attend 

Charitable to communal charity: the Hebrew La- 
Organiza- dies’ Benevolent Society, composed of 
tions. members of the Jewish Reform con- 
gregation; Sisters of Peace; Russian 

Hebrews Charity Association; Bikkur Holim of 
the North Side; Bikkur Holim of the South Side; 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Minis 
Minnesota 


and Haknasat Orhim (free temporary shelter for 
strangers)—the last five conducted and maintained 
by the Orthodox Jews. 

Before there was any established congregation in 
Minneapolis, the first few Jewish settlers bought a 
small tract of land about four miles from the center 
of the city, and organized themselves into what is 
now known asthe Montetiore Burial Association. It 
is not connected with any congregation, although 
its membership is composed of those who affiliate 
with the Reform congregation. In addition there 
are now the Adath Yeshurun Cemetery Association ; 
the Minneapolis City Lodge O. B. A. Cemetery As- 
sociation; and the Hennepin County Lodge O. B. A. 
Cemetery Association. 

Jewish secret fraternal organizations are particu- 
larly numerous in Minneapolis: one lodge of the 
J. O. B. B. with about 70 members; five lodges of the 
O. B. A. with a total membership of 1,250; two ledges 
of the Sons of Benjamin; one of the Free Sons of 
Israel; Mendelsohn Camp, M. W. A.; Baron Hirsch 
Camp, W. W.; and one Jewish lodge of each of the 
following: Modern Samaritans, Bankers’ Union, 
Knights and Ladies of Security, Loyal Mystic Le- 
gion of America, Supreme Court of Honor, and 
Modern Brotherhood of America. 

Zionism is represented by the Ohave Zion Kadi- 
mah and the American Daughters of Zion. There 
are several literary and social organizations. 

The professions are represented by nine lawyers 
(one of whom, Simon Meyers, was in the state legis- 
lature from 1897 to 1899) and six physicians; three 
Jewish names are on the faculty list of the Univer- 
sity of Minnesota: Robert Kolliner, professor at the 
University Law School; 8. N. Deinard, of the chair 
of Semitics; and Lilian Cohen, instructor of chem- 
istry. Dr. George J. Gordon is on the faculty of 
the Hamline Medical College. 

A. 8S. N. D. 

MINNESOTA: One of the northwestern states 
of the American Union. It hasa Jewish population 
of about 18,000, distributed in the following cities: 
Minneapolis, the largest city of the state, 6,000; 
St. Paul, the capital city, 5,000; Duluth, 1,000; 
and about 1,000 scattered over the rest of the state, 
where from 5 to 20 Jewish families may be found in 
most towns of 3,000 or more inhabitants, 

The three brothers Samuels, English Jews, who as 
early as 1802 had an Indian trading-post at Taylor 
Falls, on the Minnesota side of the St. Croix River, 
seem to have been the first Jewish settlers. One of 
the brothers, Morris Samuels, was captain in the 
Union army during the Civil war. Another Jew 
known to have been engaged in trading with the 
Indians in those early pioneer days was Isaac Marks, 
who had his residence in Mankato, and a trading- 
post about twelve miles from that place. 

About 1857 some Jews went to St. Paul and en- 
gaged in general business, which likewise consisted 
mostly in trading with the Indians. The first Jew- 
ish organization was not effected till 1871, when 
the present Mt. Zion congregation of St. Paul came 
into existence. At that time Minneapolis had only 
a very few Jews. Since then, however, the Twin 
Cities have had an extraordinary growth in popula- 
tion, and the Jewish communities in them have 


Minor 
Minsk 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


600 





grown in proportion, especially since 1882. Of late 
years several Jews of St. Paul have greatly pros- 
pered in business, and are now recognized factors in 
the commercial life of that city, sc that while the 
Jewish community of Minneapolis is the larger in 
point of numbers, that of St, Paul is the wealthier 
and more influential. 

In political and general communal activity the 
Jews of Minnesota have so far achieved little dis- 
tinction, though T. N. Cardozo of St. Paul was as 
early as 1855 appointed United States commissioner, 
and Joseph Oppenheim of St. Paul was early in the 
eighties a member of the state legislature for two 
consecutive terms. 

About 30 Jewsfrom Minnesota were in the United 
States service during the Spanish-American war, 
one of them, Albert Steinhauser of New Ulm, 
being captain of Company A, 12th Minnesota Vol- 
unteer Infantry (see “ American Jewish Year Book,” 
5661). 

There are 17 organized congregations in the state, 
to wit: 7in Minneapolis; 7 in St. Paul; and 3 in 
Duluth; one in each city—namely, Mt. Zion of St. 
Paul, Shaarei Tov of Minneapolis, and Emanuel of 
Duluth—belonging to the Reform wing of Judaism, 
while all the others retain the Orthodox ritual. 
These three have within the last two years dedicated 
new and handsomely built houses of worship. 
There is an I. O. B. B. lodge in each of the three 
cities, the one in St. Paul having been organized in 
1871, and the one in Duluth in 1904. In the Twin 
Cities many lodges of the other Jewish fraternal or- 
ders, particularly of the O. B. A., are in flourishing 
condition. Zionism is well represented in St. Paul, 
where a Zionist society with a large membership of 
young men and young women maintains a well- 
appointed club-house. 

“The Jewish Progress” of the Twin Cities, a 
weckly in English, is issued at Minneapolis. 
A. 3. N. D. 
MINOR, SOLOMON ZALKIND: Russian 
rabbi and author; born at Wilna 1827; died there 
Jan. 21, 1900. He received his elementary educa- 
tion from his father, R. Jekuthiel, a well-known Tal- 
midist. At the age of twelve Minor took up the 
study of Biblical and rabbinical subjects, but with- 
out the aid of a teacher. In 1849 the rabbinical 
seminary at Wilna was established, and Minor was 
among its first graduates. In 1854 he became in- 
structor in Talmud and rabbinical literature in that 
institution. and in 1856 was appointed special ad- 
viser on Jewish affairs in the office of the governor- 
gencralof Wiina. Among the sermons he delivered 
in German at that time in the Wilna seminary may 
be mentioned “Der Rabbiner und der Lebrer” 
(Wilna, 1858). It pictures the ideal rabbi as a de- 
voted guardian of the spiritual interests of his flock 
and as the advocate of his people. In 1860 Minor 
‘was appointed rabbi at Minsk; and for the next 
nine years he lived a life of conspicuously beneficent 
activity. Owing to hisefforts a Sabbath-school and 
a night-school for artisans were opened (1861), and 
a library for the Jewish community was established 
(1862). In1869 Minor was called to Moscow, where 
a Jewish congregation had recently been formed. 
There he succeeded in obtaining from the govern- 


ment the right to establish an independent Jewish 
religious organization, a right which the commun. 
nity of Moscow had, till then, never cnjoyed. At 
the same time he received permission to build a 
synagogue and other communal institutions, such ag 
a Hebrew free school, an industrial schoo}, and an 
orphan asylum. Healso taught the Jewish religion 
at the high school for girls in Moscow. 

In his younger days Minor delivered his sermons 
in German, but at Minsk and Moscow he delivered 
them in Russian, aud frequently had many Chris. 
tians among his hearers. Indeed, Minot was the 
first Russian rabbi to preach in the vernacular; 
and his sermons have since served as models for 
synagogal discourses in Russia. They consisted 
largely of elucidations of the principles of Judaism, 
explanations of historical events concerning the 
Jews, aud homilies on the duties of the Jews ag 
Russian citizens. Minor was a friend of Count Leo 
Tolstoy, whose studies in Hebrew and in the Old 
Testament he directed. In 1891, when the expul- 
sion of Moscow Jews began, Minor, owing to his 
too open expressions of sympathy for his people, 
was banished by the governor-general! to iis native 
town, Wilna, where he remained in seclusion until 
his death. , 

Minot’s sermons have been published (8 vols., 
Moscow, 1875-89). He was the author of: “ Rabbi 
Ippolit Lutostanski” (Moscow, 1879), directed 
against Lutostanski’s anti-Semitic book * The Jews 
and the Talmud”; an outline of the history of 
the Jewish people, after the German of M. Elkan 
(Moscow, 1880; 2d ed., 1881); “Poslye Pogromov” 
(tb. 1882), on the anti-Jewish riots in Russia; and 
“Biblia Ob Utotrebleniye Vina” (74. 1889), on the 
teaching of the Bible in regard to alcoholic bever- 
ages. Minor wrote articles for the Russian supple- 
ment to “ Ha-Karmel” (1866, Nos. 11-25), and for 
“Yevreiskaya Biblioteka ” (vol. iv.), and was a con- 
stant contributor to other Ilebrew and Russian peri- 
odicals. He also corresponded with many of the 
prominent Maskilim of his time. 

BIBLIOGRAPITY: Sokolov, Sefer ha-Shanah, ii. 288, Warsaw, 

1901; Voskhod, 1900, No.5: Sistematitsheski UChazatel, s.v. 


HW. R. J. G. L. 
MINORCA. Sce BALEARIC ISLEs. 
MINORITY. See Magontry. 


MINSK (formerly Mensk): Russian city; capi- 
tal of the government of the same name. Of the 
history of its Jewish community very little is 
known. In 1576 King Stephen Bathori granted the 
Jews of Minsk the privilege of engaging in trade or 
commerce of any kind. At the end of the sixteenth 
century the Minsk Jews, sharing the lot of their 
brethren in other parts of the country, were ex- 
pelled from Lithuania. In 1606, however, Jews are 
again found in Minsk, owning shops. In the same 
year King Sigismund III. confirmed the decree of 
expulsion; but within ten years (1616) he annulled 
it, and reestablished the privileges granted by 
Stephen Bathori. Moreover, in 1625 Sigismund 
granted the Jewish community permanent posses- 
sion of the tracts of land occupied by the syna- 
gogue and the cemetery. Subsequently (1629) he 
permitted them to own stores; but they were not 


601 





allowed to build houses. King Ladislaus IV., in re- 
sponse to a petition of the Minsk Jews, confirmed 
the privileges granted by his predecessors, In ad- 
dition he allowed them to “acquire lots and to build 
shops on them, as well as to buy old shops.” They 
were still precluded from building houses, though 
they might own such if they came into their pos- 
session for debts. Ladislaus also left in their pos- 
session the brick-built synagogue, which he ex- 
empted from taxation; and he gave permission for 
founding a new Jewish cemetery. 

In 1629 the superior of the Minsk Monastery of 
Peter and Paul brought before the civil court a 
complaint against the Jews of Minsk, charging them 
with having attacked the monastery during the 
baptism of a Jew. In 1648 another complaint of a 
similar character was made. On this occasion the 
waywode severely reprimanded the Jews, threat- 
ening them with prosecution if such a thing should 
again occur. In 1670 King Michael ordered the 
Minsk judicial starost not to allow unauthorized 
officials to judge the Jews and not to hinder the latter 
from appealing to the king or to the royal court, as 
they were subject only to the jurisdiction of the 
starost. During the second half of the eighteenth 
century the taxpayers of the Minsk Jewish com- 
munity repeatedly sent representatives to the chief 
Lithuanian exchequer court in Grodno with com- 
plaints against the elders of the Minsk kahal. The 
elders were charged with depleting the public rev- 
enues and with defrauding the taxpayers among the 
middle classes. 

On Jan. 1, 1896, the Jews of Minsk numbered 
43,658. There were about forty synagogues and 
numerous houses of prayer. Five of the synagogues 
belong to the Jewish community, the others being 
controlled by separate congregations or belonging 
to private individuals. Among the numerous ye- 
shibot the more important are: Blumke’s veshibah, 
the Little Yeshibah, and the yeshibah at the Syna- 
gogue of the Water-Carriers. The personnel of the 
Talmud Torah consists of eight “ melammedim ” and 
four instructors in general subjects; out of the 334 
pupils only 106 studied these subjects. The ex pendi- 
ture of the Talmud Torah amounted to 4,355 rubles 
(1885). In 1879 a Jewish trade-schoo] was estab- 
lished in Minsk with locksmiths’ and carpenters’ 
departments; instruction was offered also in gen- 
eral subjects, in Hebrew, and in religion. In 1885 
the schocl had 112 apprentices, and it expended 
0,912 rubles. The Jewish hospital, founded in 1829, 
has accommodations for seventy patients: its ex- 
penses amounted in 1885 to 8,068 rubles. The Jew- 
ish poorhouse, with eighty beds, had an expenditure 
of 5,356 rubles in the same year. Besides, there are 
many charitable associations, of which the more im- 
portant are: a society for the assistance of students 
of the Talmud, with an expenditure of 3,000 rubles 
(1885) ; a society for the assistance of indigent sick, 
With an expenditure of 1,500 rubles (1885); and a 
Society (founded about 1820) for the distribution of 
bread among the poor, with an expenditure of 3,310 
rubles (1884). 

H. R. M. R. 

The following are the names of the Jews of Minsk 
who obtained particular prominence: 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Minor 
Minsk 





DISTRICT RABBIS. 


Moses Zeeb b. Judah, author of ** Kol Yehudah.” 

Menahem Mendel, son of the preceding. 

Asher b. LOb, tosatist. 

Isaac Abraham (held office 1749-55: d. 1776). 

Raphael b. Jekuthiel Liflander (1756-66). 

Samuel of Indur (held office till 1777, when the district rab- 
binate was abolished by the government). 


LOCAL RABBIS. 


Moses (d. 1696), son of the martyr Mordecai, who was killed 
in Lublin Aug. 11, 1686, 

L6b Ba’al ha-Tosefot (d. about 1708). 

Léb b. Asher, author of ** Sha’agat Aryeh.” 

Jebie) b. Solomon Heilprin (d. about 1742), author of ‘* Seder 
ha-Dorot.”” 

Moses b. Jehiel Heilprin, succeeded his father about 1744. 

Joseph b. Simhah Rapoport, 

Gershon Harif (L778-93). 

Israel b. LOb Mirkes (d. about 1818). 

Samuel Segal (d. Dec. 27, 1818). 

Israel b. Hayyim Heilprin (d. 18386). 

Isaac b. Naphtali Wirz Pines (d. 1886), chief of the bet din. 

Judah L6b de Boton, son-in-law of Isaac Abigdor, author of 
** Pardes Rimmonim.” 

Zeeb Wolf b. Moses (dayyan; d. 1848). 

Judah L6b b. Abraham (d. 1851). 

David Tebele b, Moses, author of “* Bet Dawid” (d. 1861)e 

Moses Zebi, appointed rabbi by the government. 

Moses Samuel Pines (d. 1862), chief of the bet din. 

Baruch b. Zebi, ) 

Saul b. Solomon, y 

Hayyim Lipschitz, [ 

Joel Harif, 

Aryeli b. Jacob (d. 1866), chief rabbi; author of “ Be’er Heteb.”” 

Moses Judah Lob (d. 1889), son-in-law of David Tebele. 

Jeroham Judah L6bd Pearlman ben Solomon, Russian rabbi; 
born in Brest 1835; died in Minsk 1896. He was one of the 
greatest rabbis of his time, and was surnained *‘ Gadol”’ (great. 
one) on account of his prominence in the world of Talmudical 
scholarship. At the age of thirty he became rabbi of Seltz, near 
Brest, where he remained till 1871, when he was called to occupy 
the office of rabbi in Pruzan, government of Grodno. After the 
death of the two rabbis of Minsk, R. Gershon Tanhum and R. 
Aryeh of Umen, the congregation of that city decided to appoint 
him as its rabbi (1883): and he occupied the rabbinate till his 
death (Benzion Eisenstadt, ‘‘Rabbane Minsk wa-Hakameha,” 
pp. 24, 62, Wilna, 1899). 

Eliezer Rabinowitz, chief rabbi. 

Isane b. David Tebele, |... . 

Jacob b, Met, ( assistant rabbis. 

Abraham Haneles, appointed by the government. 

PRESIDENTS OF YESHIBOT. 


Aryeh L6b b. Zebi Horwitz, author of ‘* Margenita Taba.” 

Aryeh L6b b. Asher, author of ** Sha’agat Aryeh.”’ 

Raphael b. Jekuthiel. . 

Joshua Heshel, author of ‘* Mazmiah Yeshu‘ah ” and ** Yeshu* 
be-Rosh * ; died in Jerusalem. 

Dob Isaac b. Zebi Meir (d. 1851). 

Israel Michael Jeshurun (d. 1851). 

Abraham b. Joshua Evenzik (d. 1859). 

Issachar Bar, surnamed ‘‘ the diligent ’’ (** Masmid ’’ ; d. 1879). 

Gershon Tanhum b. Elijab Benzion (d. 1881). 

Solomon b. Saul Levin. 

ee ase, : instructors at the yeshibah. 

Abraham b. Asher Anshel, author of ** ‘Ammude ha-Yemini.” 


PROMINENT PREACHERS, 


Moses b. Judah, author of ‘*‘ Eben Shoham,’’ who was later 
(1764) appointed preacher in London, where he published that 
work. 

Israelit, Israel Asher b. Ozer, Russian preacher; born about 
1806; died in Minsk June 6, 1896. He was popularly known as 
the °° Grodnoer Maggid*’ and was the preacher of the Jewish 
community in Minsk for more than fifty-five years. Besides be- 
ing an able preacher he was an indefatigable communal worker 
and very charitable. His simple life and his untiring exertions 
in behalf of the poor endeared him to all classes of the popula- 
tion. Numerous stories are still related in Minsk about his 
merciful exertions to release men who Were unjustly impressed 
for military service in the last years of the reign of Nicholas I, 
as “* poimaniki” or substitutes for others (** Ahiasaf,’’ 5696, p. 
3L2). 


dayyanim. 


Minski 
Minyan 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


602 


———— )_CO06C00OO a —— Or Pnrerewmvmvlrvlwvw—ooOlllllllleeooeee aa 


Abraham b. Zechariah Hamburg. 
Joshua Isaac b. Jehiel, author of ‘° ‘Emek Yehoshua’.”’ 
Abraham Abele Rosens, author of ** Mahazeh Abraham,” 


H. Rk. Pe We 
AUTHORS, SCHOLARS, AND OTHERS. 


Bampi, Issachar, author of a book ‘on Jewish customs.” 

Broyde, Aaron (d. 1897), one of the directors of the Govern- 
ment Bank at Minsk; he was honored with various medals. 

Eliasberg, Judah Bezaleel (d. 1845). 

Eger, Samuel, son of Akiba Eger. 

Jolles, Isaiah Zechariah (d. 1853), author of °° ‘Et le-Dabber ”’ 
and ‘* Dober Mesharim.”’ 

Kaplan, Jacob, corrected and added notes to the ** Erez Kedu- 
mim.” 

Levanda, L., Hebrew-Russian writer. 

Luria, Jacob Aaron, honored by Nicholas I. with a medal for 
useful work in the Jewish conimunity. 

Luria, David, son of the preceding; contributor to the He- 
brew periodicals of his time. 

Libowitz (1758-1853), the miracle-worker; an intimate friend 
of Elijah Wilna. 

Maskileison, Abraham b. Judah Léb (da. July 19, 1848), author 
of ‘* Maskil le-Etan ** and other works. 

Maskileison, Naphtali (d. 1898), son of the preceding ; pub- 
lisher of the ‘‘ Seder ha-Dorot,”’ with his own critical notes and 
additions. 

Menahem Eliezer b. Levi (d. 1817), author of “ Ya‘ir Kinno.”’ 

Rabinowitz, Eliezer Lipman (d. 1887), an eminent Talmudic 
scholar, and owner of a famous library. 

Rapoport, Jekuthiel Siissel (d. 1872), member of the rabbinical 
committee appointed by the government. 

Solomonov. Mordecai (d. 1897), author of many novellx on 
Talmudical subjects. 

Solomon, Menahem b. Elijah, author of novellze on all parts 
of the Talmud. 

PIONEERS OF ** HASKALAH.” 

Brill, Joseph, Hebrew writer. 

Haneles, Abraham, rabbi appointed by the government. 

Horowitz, poet. 

Kapian, Israel, author of ** Le-Torah we-Da‘at.” 

Nofet, J. Zeeb, superintendent of the Jewish trade-school. 

Sirkin, Joshua, prominent Zionist. 

Sirotkin, Abraham, author. 

Wotlman, Israe! Mendel, ex-editor of the ** Ha-Kokabim.”’ 


PHILANTHROPISTS. 


Blimowitz, Bir; Eliasberg, Lipman; Eliasberg, Samuel Jo- 
nah; Ettinger, Hillel ; Goldberg, David ; Jolles, Zusman ; Luria, 
Hayyim; Luria, Samuel; Pollak, Benjamin; Pollak, Moses; 
Ragovin, Uriah ; Rapoport, Akiba; Simhowitz, Mordecai; Slias- 
berg, Solomon ; Solomonoy, Moses Zebi; Zeldowitz, Bar; and 
Zeldowitz, Baruch. 

H. R. N. T. L. 


MINSKI, NIKOLAI MAKSIMOVICH: Rus- 
siau poet and writer; born at Glubokoye, govern- 
ment of Wilna, in 1855. At the age of twelve Nikolai 
removed to Minsk and entered the local classical gym- 
nasium (graduated in 1875). The town of his gym- 
nasium course supplied him with his pseudonym 
“ Minski,” whereas his real family nameis Wilenkin. 
He began his literary career in 1876, and at once at- 
tracted attention by his highly artistic poem “Na 
Rodinye.” This appeared in the best Russian jour- 
nal, “ Vyestnik Yevropy,” in which Minski has pub- 
lished most of his poems. “Na Rodinye” is an 
inspired poetical response to the sufferings of the 
Bulgarian people when the Russo-Turkish war was 
at its height. The period of Minski’s elementary 
studies corresponded with that distinguished by the 


intense striving of Russian society for progress and 


enlightenment, and those auspicious years were im- 
portant also for the Russian Jewry. The stimula- 
ting influence of the times was. also reflected in the 
Jewish circle in which the future poet-philosopher 
lived and studied. He obtained his higher educa- 


tion in the department of law of the Universit 

of St. Petersburg, graduating in 1879 with the de. 
gree of bachelor of law. In that same year he 
published his best poem, “Byelyya Nochi,” whieh 
reflects the spiritual life of the contemporar 

youth with its restlessness and its dreams. The 
characteristic feature of his poctry is its pessimistic 
mood; it exhibits a desire to lay bare the miscry of 
life. Very frequently Minskti is the poet of sorrow, 
but this sorrow is impersonal and concerns some 
hated problem. The first volume of his writings 
appeared in 1887 and was received with high praige 
by the ecrities, who nevertheless pointed out the de. 
fects of his verses. A second edition of his book wag 
soon called for. In 1889 Minski wrote a historica] 
drama, “ Osada Tulchina,” which shows an unusual] 
clearness in character-drawing, a plot of absorbing 
interest, and an intimate knowledge of the history 
of the time, besides beauty of style. The drama 
describes in a characteristic manner the struggle 
of three peoples—the Jews, Poles, and Little-Rus- 
sians. Others of Minski’s writings likewise are 
of significance to Jews. In 1879-80 he published 
in the Russo-Jewish journal “Razsvyet ” a series 
of war feuilletons under the signature “ Nord- 
West,” written after the manner of Boérne’s “ Parvis- 
ian Letters.” In these writings he attacked fiercely 
the enemies of Judaism. In the more recent period 
of his literary activity, beginning with the nincties 
of the nineteenth century, Minski has turned from 
Jewish life and its interests, and has devoted hin- 
self to literary philosophy, tinged strongly with 
Christian mysticism (see Brockhaus, and also Ska- 
bichevski’s “ Istoria Noveishei Russkoi Literatury ”), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eintziklopedicheski Slovar, vol. vi., St. Peters- 
burg, 1892; Bolshaya Entziklopediya, vol. v., ib. 1901. 


H.R. N. R. 


MINTERS: Persons authorized to strike coin- 
age on behalf of a government. As early as 555 a 
certain Priscus struck coins at Chalons (“R. E. J.” 
x. 237). One Gideon was minter at Milan in the 
tenth century. In 1181 three Jews at Winchester 
were apparently fined for minting, though the read- 
ing of the document on which the statement, is based 
is ambiguous (Jacobs, “Jews of Angevin England,” 
p. 73). Several “short-cross” pennies exist of the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries with names of mon- 
eyers Which may be Jewish, as David of London, 
Isaac of York, Samuel, Simon, and Solomon of Can- 
terbury ; butit is doubtful whether these were really 
Jews (tb. pp. 892-896). A certain number of Ger- 
man coins of the twelfth century with Hebrew in- 
scriptions have been found (see Aronius, “ Reges- 
ten,” Nos. 351, 389). A certain Jew, Jehiel, is 
mentioned as mint-master on one of the coins of 
Bishop Otto of Wurzburg; another held a similar 
position in Treves (Lamprecht, “Deutsches Wirth- 
schaftsleben,” ii. 1452, 1472). Earlier than this a 
Jew named Schlom was mint-master to Leopold VY. 
of Austria. He appears to have been murdered 
during the Third Crusade (Scherer, “ Rechtsverbalt- 
nisse der Juden,” i. 121 e¢ seg.). In Hungary the 
early minters appear to have been exclusively Jews 
(Kohn, “A Zsid6k Tostenete Magrarorszagan,” }. 
240); and there are a number of Polish coins with 
Hebrew infcriptions (see NUMISMATICS). 


603 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Minski 
Minyan 


—_—————————————— Oo rrr 


MINYAN (pp): Literally, “count”; the quo- 
rum necessary for public worship. The smallest 
congregation which is permitted to hold public 
worship is one made up of ten men, boys over thir- 
teen years being for this, as for other religious 
purposes, countedasmen. See Bak Mizgwau. 

The minimum of tenis evidently a survival in 
the Synagogue from the much older institution in 
which ten heads of families made up the smallest 
political subdivision. Jn Ex. xviii. Moses, on the 
advice of Jethro, appoints chiefs of tens, as well as 
chiets of fifties, of Hundreds, and of thousands. In 
like manner there were the decurio among the Ro- 
mans and the tithingman among the early English. 

The rule is laid down in the Mishnah thus (Megil- 
lah iv. 3): “They do not [1] ‘divide’ over the 
Shema‘ [Hear, O Israel], [2] nor pass before the Ark, 
[3] nor lift their hands, [4] nor read from the Law, 
[5] nor conclude with the Prophets, [6] nor ar- 
range the standing and sitting, [7] nor say the 
penedictions of the mourners or the consolation of 
the mourners, [8] nor the benedictions of the bride- 
grooms, (9] nor use God's name in preparing for 
grace after meals, with less than ten.” 

The references in this rule are to: [1] The invo- 
cation “Bless ye” (“Bareku”) with its response, 
which, with or without a“ Kaddish ” preceding it, is 
recited before the first benediction of Shema‘ in the 
evening and morning service. [2] The repetition 
of the prayer proper, ¢@.e., the Highteen or Seven 
Benedictions, by the leader, and including the 
responsive KepususHaAn. [8] The priestly bless- 
ing (Num, vi, 24-26). [4] The reading from the 
Scroll and benedictions before and after the lesson, 
[5] The haftarah with like benedictions. [6} Some 
ancient funeral ceremonies. [7] Likewise forms no 
longer in use. About these it is said (Ket. 8a, b) 
that the mourners are not counted among the ten. 
[8] The seven benedictionus spoken at a wedding, or 
at any meal of the bridegroom and bride within a 
week from the wedding. [9] The sentence “ Let us 
bless ovr God, from whose wealth we have eaten,” 
instead of “ Let us bless Him from whose,” ete., with 
which latter words grace is begun when three or 
more have eaten at the same table (Ber. viii. 3). 
The distinctions there suggested between ten and 
eleven, or between ten and a hundred, have not been 
followed in practise. 

The Babylonian Talmud, in commenting on this 
section of the Mishnah, tinds the Scriptural authority 
for ten men constituting a congregation in the words 
(Num. xiv. 27): “How long shall I bear with this 
evil congregation which murmur against me?” 
which it refers to the scouts who were sent to spy 
out the land of Canaan, twelve in all, two of 
whom, Caleb and Joshua, were faithful, and only 
ten “evil.” 

All male Israelites of the proper age, unless they 
are under the ban, or have openly severed their con- 

nection with their brethren by profess- 

Eligible ing a hostile creed, are counted among 

for the needful ten even though they are 

Quorum. notorious and habitual sinners (Oral 

Hayyim, 55, 12). 

It is suggested (Ber. 47 and Yer. Ber. vii. 38) that 

While slaves or boys under thirteen are not counted 


in minyan, one slave or one minor boy may be ad- 
mitted along with nine qualitied men—at least when 
the boy is nearly of full age (a budding boy); and 
an example in an analogous case is given (Ber. 48a) 
of two prominent rabbis counting a boy as one of 
the three men necessary for saying grace after meals, 
it having been ascertained that he had ideas about 
God and prayer. The codes are somewhat divided 
on this subject: publi¢ service should be carried on 
with nine men and onc infant only in “case of need,” 
that is, if the attendance of a tenth man is not ex- 
pected for that service (Orah Hayyim, 55). Usage 
varies: in some synagogues nine adults and a boy 
over twelve years of age are deemed adequate for 
minyan; yet in the usage of other synagogues they 
are not adequate. 

While women may, in certain contingencies, take 
an active part in public service, by reading parts of 
the weekly lesson (Megillah 23a; allowed by all the 
codes, but rarely, if ever, carried out in practise), 
none of the authorities speaks of counting women in 
the minyan. 

The ten men include the leader. They and he 
should meet in one room or enclosure; Maimonides 
(Hil. Tefillah, viii.) discusses how the ten may be 
distributed in two adjoining rooms without des- 
troying the quorum; but they must be within hear- 
ing of each other. 

In the same chapter Maimonides explains as the 
advantage of reciting the prayer with minyan: that 
it ig sure to be heard; and, following the Talmudic 
passages below, the other codes concur. 

It was the firm belief of the sages that wher- 
ever ten Israelites are assembled, either for wor- 
ship or for the study of the Law, the Shekinah 
(Divine Presence) “dwells” among them, Thus 

(Abot iit. 6): “R. Halafta, the man of 


Presence Kefar-Hananiah, says: When ten men 
of the sit Gown together to study the Law 


Shekinah. [another reading has it: “to act as 

judges ”}, the Presence dwells among 
them; for it is suid (Ps. Ixxxii. 1): God [“ Elo- 
him ”} standeth iv the congregation of God [° El." ].” 
A baraita (Ber. 6a) puts it plainly: “ Whence 
do we know that the Holy and Blessed One is 
found at the synagogue; or that when teu men 
say prayers together the Presence dwells among 
them?” It answers each of these questions with 
the verse of the psalm quoted above; it being un- 
derstood that the word “‘edah” (congregation) 
means ten or more Israelites mecting for a religious 
purpose. And the words in Solomon’s prayer (I 
Kings vill. 28), “to hearken to the song and to the 
prayer,” are shown by Abba Benjamin (Ber. 70.) 
to mean that man’s prayer is best heard at the syna- 
gogue, for where men sing, there also they should 
pray. Both in the Mishnah and in the baraita 
quoted, consolation is held out to those who for 
study or prayer meet in smaller numbers—even to 
one who meditates or prays alone; but the stress is 
put upon the merits and sacredness of the minyan. 
The codifiers, such as Maimonides, his annotators, 
and the author of the Shulhan ‘Aruk, and many 
popular writers, have unitedly given strength to 
this sentiment, and have thus, for more than a thou- 
sand years, made the daily attendance at public 


Minz 
Mirabeau 





worship, morning and evening, the rule among both 
men and boys in Israel. 

The treatise Soferim, written in Babylonia in the 
seventh century, contains a passage (x. 7) often 
interpreted as asserting that in Palestine at that 
time seven men were allowed to hold public serv- 
ices. Correctly interpreted it refers to the repeat- 
ing of “ Kaddish ” and “ Bareku” at the synagogue 
for the benetit of Jate comers, and declares that in 
Palestine such a repetition is permitted only when 
seven (according to others, when six) men are present 
who have not yet heard these responsive readings. 
In modern times various authorities (e.g., the Rab- 
binical Conference at Breslau, the “ Oberrath ” 
Mecklenburg (1847), and Naphtali Zebi Judah Berlin 
in Woloshin) have declared the public worship per- 


missible without the presence of minyan. 
A. L. N. D. 


MINZ (p22): Family of rabbis and scholars, de- 
riving its name from the town of Mayence and found- 
ed in the fifteenth century. The family tree is as 
follows: 


Eliezer ha-Levi Isaac ha-Levi 
Judah Minz Mases Minz 


Abraham Minz 


Joseph Minz ce = Meir Katzenellenbogen 
Minz 


Moses Minz 


Hae enetem Samuel 2 udah Katzenellenbogen 
inz 


| 
Moses Minz Isaac jie bilonbeoen 
zeeb Wolf Minz 


Abush (Aaron) Minz (d. 1831) 


Alexander Mattathiah Abigdor Hirsch Judah Menahem 


Slisskind Minz Griinberg Kiatzko L6éb Nahum 
Minz Minz Minz 
(d. 1862) 


Meir Minz 
(d. L866) 

Judah b. Eliezer ha-Levi Minz (Minzi), the pro- 
genitor of the most prominent branch of the 
family, settled, or was born, in Italy in the fif- 
teenth century. His cousin Moses b. Isaac ha- 
Levi Minz (Minzi) was a rabbi in Germany. The 
name “Minz,” however, appears to have been 
borne by others in Italy who were not related to 
Judah Minz; for Joseph Colon (Responsa, No. 2) 
speaks of Joshua and Solomon, sons of an Abraham 
Minz who had formerly lived under the Duke of 
Milan and then removed to another town in Lom- 
bardy in order to avoid paying his part of the 13.000 
gold pieces which the Jews of Milan had pledged 
themselves to pay the duke. Asher b. Perez Minz 
of Naples was related, perhaps, to the German 
branch of the Minz family. The last known direct 
male descendant of Judah Minz was Moses b. 
Isaac Menahem Minz, a descendant in the fourth 
generation. 

At the beginning of the sixteenth century the 
Minz family of Padua united with that of Katzenel- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


604 


ig a en 
lenbogen through the marriage of the daughter of 
Abraham ben Judah Minz to Meir Katzenellenbogey 
of Padua. The descendants of this alliance emj. 
grated afterward to Germany and then to Russia, 
and Zeeb Wolf b. Isaac, in Russia, a descendant of 
the tenth generation, assumed the name of Minz. 
From him is descended the present family of Minz. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Eisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at Kedoshim, part jij, 
pp. 82-86; Nepi-Ghirondi, in Kerem Hemed, iii. 91; Mort 
tara, Indice, p. 39. 


Abraham ben Judah ha-Levi Minz: Italian 
rabbi; flourished at Padua in the first half of the 
sixteenth century; father-in-law of Meir Katzenel. 
lenbogen. Minz studied chiefly under his father, 
Judah Minz, whom he succeeded as rabbi and heag 
of the yeshibahof Padua. According to Ibn Yahya 
(“Shalshelet ha-Kabbalah,” p. 51a, Amsterdam, 
1697), it was with Abraham Minz that Jacob Pollak 
had the quarrel which ended in their excommunica- 
ting each other; according to most other authorities, 
the quarre] was with Judah Minz (see Jacob Pot. 
LAK). Ibn Yahya further says that the Italian rabhis 
believe that Pollak and Abraham Minz died on the 
same day (according to David Gansin 1580; accord- 
ing to Halberstam in 1541). Minz was the author 
of a number of decisions that were printed with 
those of R. Lewa of Ferrara(Venice, 1511). He was 
the author also of “Seder Gittin wa-Halizah,” a 
treatise on divorce and halizah, printed with the re- 
sponsa of bis father and of his son-in-law (2). 1558), 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nepi-Ghirondi, in Kerem Hemed, iii. 91; Mi- 
chael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 114; Mortara, in Afosé, v. "307s 
idem, Indice, p. 39; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 632. 


Fee: M. SE. 


Asher ben Perez Minz: German printer: type- 
setter in Azariah b. Joseph’s printing establishment 
in Naples, where was printed, in 1491, the Iebrew 
translation of Avicenna’s “Canon.” Wolf (* Bibl. 
Hebr.” i., No. 866), following Bartolocci, read xy» 
(“ mi Nigza” =“of Nizza”) instead of NyIw 
(“ Minza ”). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Rossi, Annales, p. 179 
Cat. Bodl. col. 2841. 


Judah ben Eliezer ha-Levi Minz: Italian 
rabbi; born about 1408; died at Padua in 1508. 
He was the most prominent rabbi of his time. He 
officiated as rabbi of Padua for forty-seven years, 
during which time he had a great number of 
pupils, among whom were his son Abraham Minz 
and the latter’s son-in-law Meir Katzenellenbogen. 
In a guarrel he had with Elijah Delmedigo he was 
supported by Elijah Mizrahi (comp. Joseph Solo- 
mon Delmedigo, “Mazref Ja-Hokmah,” p. 3b; 
iden, “Elim,” p. 29; Mizrahi, Responsa, No. 56). It 
appears from Solomon Luria’s responsa (No. 6) that 
Minz was the author of a number of ordinances 
(“takkanot”) at Padua. According to Ghirondi, 
he was professor of philosophy at “the University 
of Padua. Ghirondi further states that in recogul- 
tion of Minz’s services as professor the authorities 
of the university placed his portrait, with an appre- 
ciative inscription, in the hall of the university, 
over the staircase. But it is very likely that Ghr- 
rondi confounded Minz with Elijah Delmedigo oF 
Abraham de Balmes, both of whom lectured oD 
philosophy before Christian audiences. In the sack 
of Padua soon after Minz’s death almost all of His 


; Steinsehneider, 


605 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Minz 
Mirabeau 


as eg en ee 


writings were destroyed. Joseph b. Abraham 
Minz, his grandson, discovered sixteen of his re- 
spousa, and these were published (Venice, 15538) by 
Meir Katzenelenbogen, who printed in the same 
volume his own responsa and the “Seder Gittin 
wa-Halizah” of Abraham Minz. These responsa have 
been edited, and supplemented with an extended 
commentary and preface, by Johanan ben Moses 
preschel (Munkacs, 1898). Judah’s  responsa, 
though scanty, afford interesting information on the 
pistory of his age and on Jewish customs in Padua. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Iceneset Yisrael, p. 412; Frankel, in 

Orient, Lit. vii, 520 et seq.; Gritz, Gesch. 3d ed., viii. 253 et 

seg.;_ Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 1020; Nepi-Ghirondi, Tole- 

dot Gedole Fisrael. pp. 122-124; Preschel, in the preface to 
his edition of Minz’s responsa; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. 

col. 1844. 

Meir ben Alexander Siisskind Minz: Gali- 
cian scholar; born Oct. 6, 1814; died May 22, 1866. 
Having acquired a thorough knowledge of Hebrew, 
the Talmud, and of several European languages, 
Meir Minz devoted himself to the defense of Juda- 
jsm. Hewrote: “Ein Wort zur Zeit ” (1848); “ Lele- 
wels Kampf um Recht”; “ Die Judenfeinde.” 

Biel OGneray Eisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at Kedoshim, part iii., 

p. ov. 

Moses ben Isaac ha-Levi Minz: German 
rabbi of the fifteenth century; contemporary of 
Israel Isserlein, whom he frequently consulted, 
He was successively rabbi at Mayence, Landau, 
Bamberg, and Posen. In his responsa (No. 114) he 
mentious a certain Jacob Margolioth of spr (Luc- 
ca’), and refers to a case of divorce in Posen in 1444 
(Steinschneider gives 1474). Friinkel (“ Zeitschrift, ” 
iii, 887) doubts that Moses ever was at Posen. 
He suggests that 1312 (Posen) is 2 printer’s mistake 
for 71" (Pesaro). Moses’ responsa (Cracow, 1617) 
mention also Joseph Colon, Israel Isserlein, and his 
cousin Judah Minz. Responsum No. 46 contains a 
dispute overa philological point with Eliezer Treves 
(comp. M. Wiener in “ Monatsschrift,” xvi. 390). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 140; Conforte, 

Kore ha-Dorot, p. 27b; Furst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 380; Steinschnei- 

der, Cat. Bodl. cols. 1946-1947. 

D. M. SEt. 

MIPHKAD (pao; R. V. HAMMIPH- 
KAD): Name of a gate mentioned in connection 
with the repair of the wall of Jerusalem by 
Nehemiah (Neh. iii. 31). It seems that this gate 
was not in the wail of Jerusalem, but that the part 
of the wall facing it was to the east, between 
the Horse Gate and the Sheep Gate. Indeed, it 
is not mentioned among the gates of Jerusalem in 
Neh. xii. 81 e¢ seg. The word p59 designates 
in Ezek. xliii, 21 the place near the Temple where 
the sin-offering was burned, and it seems to 
mean “an appointed place,” to which the name of 
this gate may refer. But, while the Septuagint ren- 
ders Sppon spy by wiAy tov Madexad, Jerome trans- 
lates it by “ porta judicialis,” which induces Light- 
foot (“Horse Hebraice,” ii. 27) to suggest that it 
may refer either to the hall of judgment in the 
Preetorium or to the east gate of the Temple. Bar- 
clay (“City of the Great King,” p. 156), however, 
identifies the gate Miphkad with the “high gate of 
Benjamin” (Jer. xx. 2), locating it at the west end 
of the bridge which crosses the Tyropeon. 

S. M. SEL. 


MIRABEAU, GABRIEL HONORE RI- 
QUETI, COMTE DE: French statesman of the 
revolutionary era; born at Bignon March 9, 1749; 
died at Paris April 2, 1791. Sent by De Calonne 
on a secret mission to Prussia, he became acquainted 
at Berlin with several distinguished Jews belonging 
to the circle of Henriette Herz, and associated much 
with Dou, the author of “Ueber die Btirgerliche 
Verbesserung der Juden.” Recognizing the advan- 
tage which France might derive from the Jews, 
Mirabeau wrote, and published in London (1787), 
his “Sur Moses Mendelssohn, sur la Réforme Poli- 
tique des Juifs et en Particulier sur la Révolution 
Tentée, en Leur Faveur, en 1758, dans la Grande 
Bretagne.” When he was elected deputy from 
Provence to the States General, and one of his Jew- 
ish friends of Aix asked what he would do in the 
Assembly, he replied, “I will make a human being 
of you.” True to this promise, he seized every op- 
portunity to plead for the emancipation of the Jews, 
being, together with the Abbé Grégoire and the 
pastor Rabaud-Saint-Etienne, one of their most zeal- 
ousadvocates. Several times he took up their cause 
before the National Assembly: on Aug. 17, 1789, 
he proposed, in the name of the “Committee of 
Five,” the “ Declaration of the Rights of Man”; on 
Aug. 22 he eloquently attacked religious intoler- 
ance, and he was the first to protest against the in- 
stitution of a dominant state church—‘“ Nothing 
should dominate except justice; nothing should 
dominate but the rights of each man, to which all 
else is subject.” On Dec. 24, in speaking in favor 
of the admission of Jews to civil and military 
offices, he said: “I have heard with astonishment 
the honorable speaker [H. de Baumetz] state that 
the Jews perhaps do not desire the civil and military 
offices to which you declare them eligible, and draw 
therefrom the specious conclusion that it would be a 
gratuitous and i}l-advised generosity on your part 
to pronounce them fit for such positions. ... In a 
government such as you are establishing all men 
must be equal; you must exclude all who are not 
equal or who refuse to become so. The petition 
which the Jews, however, have laid before this 
Assembly contradicts the statement of the gentle- 
mau who has just spoken.” 

Like all who at that time took the part of the 
Jews, Mirabeau found his motives misinterpreted, 
being accused of accepting bribes from the Jews 
and of deriving benefit from ministerial appoint- 
ments; but he never allowed himself to be moved 
from his purpose. While Mirabeau in 1787 was 
already in favor of the emancipation of the Jews, 
he expected that, like other acts of the doctrinaires 
then in power, it would embitter the people against 
the Jacobins and lead to a moderate constitutional 
government. This appears clearly from the secret 
correspondence in which he furnished the king with 
reports of the proceedings of the National Assembly 
and with directions in regard to the policy to be 
pursued by the court (“Correspondance Entre le 
Comte de Mirabeau et le Comte de la Marck... 
Publiée par M. A. de Bacourt,” ii. 374-877, Paris, 
1851; Oncken, “Das Zeitalter der Revolution, des 
Kaiserreiches und der Befreiungskriege,” i. 340, 
Berlin, 1884). 


Miracle 
Mirels 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


606 


— ee CO ana  ea—re a Se ee e ee, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Weyl, Diseours Prononeé ad VOceasion de 
la Cérémonie Commemorative Célébrée au Temple Israétite 
de Marseille, p. 20; Halphen, Recueil des Lois, pp. 192-198 ; 
Léon Kabn. ‘Les Juifs ad Paris, p. 61; idem, Les Juifs de 
Paris Pendant la Révolution, pp. 16, 56, 


D. S. K. 


MIRACLE (x55, np, mw; lit. “wonder” or 
“sign ”,: An event which can not be explained by 
ordinary uatural agencies, and which, therefore, is 
taken as an act of a higher power. 

Miracles are by no means identical with myths. 
Myths are primitive or pagan personifications (or 
rather deifications) of the powers, or forms of nature, 
represented as acting like human beings. Miracles, 
on the contrary, place all things in nature under 
the control of a higher power, which uses them as 
means of working out its holier designs; they are, 
therefore, essentially monotheistic. It is true, how- 
ever, that ancient myths have frequently been 
transformed in support of the monotheistic idea into 
miracles performed by prophet or saint (see Stein- 
thal, “ Mythe und Religion ”), 

In the Bible every occurrence which contrasts 
with the ordinary happenings of life is counted a 
miracle or wonder. It is by the wonders which the 
Lord did in Egypt (Ex. tii. 20, vii. 8, xi. 9; Deut. 
iv. 34, vi. 22, vii. 19, xxvi, 8, xxix. 2; Judges vi. 
18; Jer, xxxti. 20, 21; Ps. Ixxviil. 438, evi. 7) that 
His power was made known. He alone “does won- 
ders” (Ex. xv, 11; Ps. Ixxii. 18, Ixxxvi. 10); there 
is nothing “too wonderful” (Gen. xviii. 14; Jer. 
xxxii. 17, 27 [A. V. “too hard”]) for Him. He 
worked wonders for Israel as for no other nation 
(Ex, xxxiv. 10; Josh. iii. 5). But He works won- 
ders without number in the natural world also (Job 
v. 9, xxxvii. 14; Ps. evil. 24). Asa matter of fact, 
every occurrence in nature is, in the Biblical view, 
an act of God. He sends the rain and causes the 
thunder (Job xxxvii, 4-6); “He bringeth out the 
stars by number” (Isa. xl. 26, Hebr.); every work of 
creation is an act of His providence (Ps. civ.). Yet 
only an uncommon or inexplicable event makes man 
ponder and see “the finger of God” (Ex. viii. 15); 
God must “make a new thing” in order to make 
men know that He rules (Num. xvi. 20). The rain, 
hail, fire, and brimstone that are treasured up in the 
heavens must come down in an unusual time and 
quantity to destroy the evil-doers (Gen, xx. 24; Ex. 
ix, 22-24; Josh. x. 11; comp. Ps. xviii. 13 [A. V 
12]; Job xxxvii. 6, xxxviii. 22); the waters of the sea 
and the river must leave the place assigned to them 
to show His might (Ex. xiv. 21-27; Josh. iii. 18-16); 
and sun, moon, and stars must be stayed in their 
course to show that God battles for Israel (Josh. x. 
10-14; Judges v. 20). 

The miracles of the Bible are performed either 
directly by the Deity—to manifest His punitive jus- 
tice, as in the cases of Sodom, of Egypt, of the Ca- 
naanites or Assyrians, or of individuals, such as 
Abimelech, Korah, Uzza, and others (Gen. xix. 24; 
Ex. viti.-xiv.; Josh. vi.-x.; IT Kings xix. 35; Gen. 
xii. 17; Num, xvii.; II Sam. vi. 7), or to protect 
His chosen oues, as in the furnishing of water, 
bread, and meat to Israel in the wilderness (Ex. xv. 
23, xvii. 7; Num. xii. 31), to Samson and Elijah 
(Judges xv. 19; I Kings xvii. 6, xix. 5)—or by the 
messengers of God in order to prove their divine 


calling (Ex, iv. 1-17; Deut. xxxiv. 11; Il Kings 
ii.-vi.). Every theophany, in fact, is a miracle (Ex 
xvi. 7-13, xxi. 17-19; Judges vi. 21-22), and ac. 
cordingly the revelation of the Lord on Sinai is the 
greatest of miracles (Deut. iv. 32-36). <A litera] 
belief in the Torah, therefore, necessarily implies a 
belief in the miracles told therein. 

Nevertheless, the Torah itself lays down the prin. 
ciple that miracles are no test of the truth of the 
thing for which their testimony is invoked. The 
Deuteronomic law says: “Ifa prophet arise amon 
you who giveth a sign or wonder, and the sign or 
wonder comes to pass, but he desires to lead you 
into idolatry, thou shalt not hearken 
to that prophet, for the Lord your 
God trieth you whether you truly love 
the Lord your God” (Deut. xiii. 2-4, 
Hebr. [A. V. 1-3]). This isa plain statement that 
miracles do not prove a religious truth, as they are 
performed also in the cause of untruth. 

Miracle has justly been called “des Glauben’s 
liebstes Kind” (the dearest child of faith). The 
belief in God’s omnipotence and all-encompassing 
providence necessitates at a certain stage of relig- 
ious consciousness the belief in miracles, that is, in 
supernatural help in times of great stress or peril, 
To deny the possibility of miracles appears to the 
believing soul to be tantamount to a denial of the 
absolute omnipotence of God. “Isanything impos- 
sible toGod?” “Ts the Lord’s hand waxed short?” 
(Gen, xviii. 14, Hebr.; Num. xi. 23) are questions 
asked ever anew by helpless man, Talmudic Ju- 
daism, therefore, accepts all the miracles related 
in the Bible, but at the same time it does not em- 
phasize belief in them as fundamen- 
tal to the faith, What Paul says 
of the Jews, “they seek signs while 
the Greeks seek wisdom ” (I Cor. i. 22, 
Greek), is certainly not true of the representatives 
and exponents of Judaism. Miracles, which occupy 
so conspicuous a place in the New Testament and in 
the history of Christianity, are viewcd as matters of 
secondary importance throughout the rabbinical lit- 
erature. 

The Talmudic sages made the very possibility 
of miracles a matter of speculation, stating that 
“when God created the world He made an agree- 
ment that the sea would divide, the fire not. hurt, 
the Hons not harm, the fish not swallow persons 
singled out by God for certain times, and thus the 
whole order of things changes whenever He finds it 
vecessary ” (Gen. R. v.4; Ex. R. xxi. 6). This view 
removes some of the objections to miracles as in- 
volving an interruption of the order of creation and 
as an admission of the insufficiency of the first crea- 
tive act. In the same spirit the Rabbis, in the 
Mishnah (Ab. v. 6; comp. Ab. R. N., Text B, 
xxxvii. [ed. Schechter, p. 95]; Sifre, Deut. 359; 
Pirke R. El. xix.; Targ. Yer. to Num. xxii. 28), 
enumerate the things created at dusk on the Sab- 
bath cf the week of creation, and that would appear 
in due time as miraculous works: the mouth of the 
earth (Num. xvi. 30); the mouth of the well (2d. XX). 
17); the mouth of the ass (¢d. xxii. 28); the bow 
(Gen. ix. 18); the manna; the rod (Ex. iv. 17); the 
tables of the Law; and soon. The underlying idea 


Belief in 
Miracles. 


Talmudic 
Judaism. 


607 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Miracle 
Mirels 


Te ee ae aap tl a ae ae Gy | ee ep i Sted ee SPL PO ee ae ge ae ee ee ae 


of these utterances is that miracles, instead of being 

jnterruptions of the divine order of things, are in 

reality foreordained by the creative wisdom and ap- 
ear only to man as something new. 

The Rabbis prescribe benedictions to be recited 
when approaching places made memorable by mi- 
raculous events (Ber. ix. 1, 53b-54a); they speak 
of miracles which occurred continuously during 
the time of the Temple (Ab. v. 5; Yoma 2la, b); 
they knew of saints to whom, as to the Prophets of 
old, miracles were of daily occurrence (“ melumma- 
dim be-nissim” ; Ta‘an. 21-25; Hul. 7a; see ESSENEs), 
Nevertheless, they pay little heed to the power of 
miracles. Simeon b. Shetah threatened Onias the 
saint with excommunication for his demonstrative 
appeal to God to send down the rain ina miraculous 
manner (Ta‘an. iii. 8). When asked by the Romans, 
“If your God is as omnipotent as you clan, why 
does He not destroy the idols?” the Jewish sages 
replied, “Shall God destroy sun, moon, and stars on 
account of the fools that worship them? The world 
goes on in its order, and the idolaters shall meet with 
their doom” (‘Ab. Zarah iv. 7). When Pappus and 
Lulianus were asked by their Roman executioners, 
“Why does your God not save you as He did the 
three youths in Nebuchadnezzar’s time?” they re- 
plied. “ We are probably not worthy of such a mira- 
cle” (Ta‘an. 18b). 

The current belief of the Talmudic time is that 
only former generations, because of their greater 
piety, were worthy of miracles occurring on their 
account (Ber. 4a, 20a; Sanh. 94b). “One should by 
no means incur perils while relying for safety upon 
the occurrence of a miracle” (Pes. 50b; Ta‘an. 20b; 
Ket. 61b). That miracles should not be invoked as 
testimony in favor of one religious opinion as against 
another is the principle asserted in a halakic contro- 
versy between R, Eliezer and R. Joshua (B. M. 59b; 
“The Torah is not in heaven that the decision should 
be made there”), The daily wonders of divine 
providence are extolled by some rabbis above the 
Biblical miracles: “Greater is the miracle that oc- 
curs when a sick person escapes from perilous dis- 
ease than that which happened when Hananiah, 
Mishael, and Azariah escaped from the fiery fur- 
nace” (Ned. 41a). The wonder of the support of a 
family in the midst of great distress is as great as 
the wonder of the parting of the Red Sea for Israel 
(Pes. 118a). 

The medieval Jewish philosophers endeavored as 
much as possible to bring the Biblical miracles 
Within the sphere of natural occurrences, without, 
however, denying the possibility of miracle in gen- 
eral. Saudia, while accepting every word of the 
Torah as divine, insisted that the truth of the Bible 
rests upon reason, and wherever the Bible seems to 
be in conflict with reason the words must be taken 
in a metaphorical sense (“‘Emunot we-De’ot,” ii. 
41,68); he therefore substituted for the speech of 
tle serpent (Gen. iii. 1) and of Balaam’s ass (Num. 
XNil. 28) that of the angel (Ibn Ezra to Gen. fii. 1). 
Maimonides, while maintaining against the Aristo- 
telian view of the unalterable law of necessity ruling 
Nature the absolute freedom of the Creator which 
makes miracle possible, finds at the same time in 
the rabbinical utterances quoted above (Gen, R. y. 


and Ab. v. 6) support for his view that the Creator 
implanted the powers of miracle in nature, so that 
in reality God did not effect any change after crea- 
tion (“ Moreh,” ji. 25, 29, and comment to Ab. v. 6; 
comp. Joél, “ Moses Maimonides,” 1876, p. 77; Lip- 
mann Heller to Ab. Z.c.). With finer acumen Ger- 
sonides discussed the problem of miracles in the last 
part of his “Milhamot” (see LEVI BEN GERSIION), 
ascribing them to the divine intelligence which 
foreordains all things, but denying the actuality of 
the performance within a given time. This is op- 
posed by Crescas, who nevertheless takes miracles 
as prearranged in the divine plan of creation (“ Or 
Adonai,” iii. i. 5). In the “Yad” (Yesode ha- 
Torah, viii. 1-3) Maimonides declares that the belief 
in Moses and his law was based on the actual reve- 
Jation of God on Sinai and by no means on the mir- 
acles performed; since miracles may be the work of 
witchcraft and of other non-divine agencies, they 
can not be accepted as proof. This position is 
taken also by Albo (“ ‘Ikkarim,” i. 18). 
Consequently miracles are never adduced in sup- 
port of the faith by Jewish writers; and Mendels- 
sohn, in his answer to Bonnet, who referred to the 
miracles of the New Testamentas proof of the truth 
of Christianity, was perfectly justified in declaring 
in the name of Judaism that miracles may be ap- 
pealed to in support of every religion and that there- 
fore they can not serve as proof of any (Mendels- 
sohn, “Gesammelte Schriften,” iii, 123 e¢ seg., 311). 
Modern historical research can no longer, says Joé] 
(see “Jahrb. fiir Jiidische Gesch. und Litteratur,” 
1904, pp. 70-78), view the narratives of the Bible in 
the same light as did the medieval thinkers who could 
not discriminate between the objectivity of the facts 
narrated and the subjectivity of the narrator. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Das Wunder in Seinem _Verhdltnisse zur 
Religion, in Jiidisches Literaturblatt, 1. 77-98. K 


MIRANDA, LALLA: Australian singer; born 
in Melbourne 1876. Both of her parents were sing- 
ers, and she herself sang in public when only thir- 
teen years of age. After completing her musical 
education in Europe, under Mdile. de Garette, and 
Madame Richard of the Grand Opera, Paris, she 
sang for three consecutive years at the opera-houses 
of Amsterdam and Rotterdam. Later she appeared 
at the Thédtre de la Monnaie, Brussels, and in 1900 
sang in “Rigoletto” at the opera, Covent Garden, 
London. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Harris, Jewish Year Book, 1901-2. 


J. M. W. L. 


MIRELS, MESHULLAM ZALMAN BEN 
DAVID (NEUMARK): German rabbi; born 
about 1620 at Vienna; died Nov. 28, 1706, at Al- 
tona. When, in 1670, the Jews were expelled from 
Vienna, he and his son Zeeb Wolf and other mem- 
bers of the Mirels family emigrated to Berlin. A 
few years later (1678) Mirels was elected chief rabbi 
(“ab bet din”) of the communities Altona, Ham- 
burg, and Wandsbeck, which position he held until 
his death. He was the father of a large family, 
ramified through Poland and Lithuania, and lived 
to see the fifth generation. Hisdaughter Sarah was 
the wife of Zebi Ashkenazi (Hakam Zebi) and the 
mother of Jacob Emden. 


Mirels 
Mishnah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


608 


————————————————————iaAAi i ae 


One responsum written by Mirels is found in 
the collection “Eben ha-Shoham.” See also JEw, 
Encyc. i. 474, s.c. ALTONA. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jacob Emden, Megitlat Sefer, ed. Kahana, 
pp. 10, 18, Warsaw, 1888; Dembitzer, Kelilat Yor, i., 8a, 91b, 
92a, Cracow, 1888; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 328. 

D. S. May. 

MIRELS, ZEBI HIRSCH BEN AARON: 
German Talmudist; rabbiof Schwerin in the middle 
of the cighteenth century. He received his early 
education in London. After studying at various 
yeshibot he became rabbi at Wreschen, Poland, and 
shortly after was appointed rabbi to the congrega- 
tion at Schwerin. He was the author of “ Mispar 
Zcba‘am ” (Berlin, 1787), a pilpulistic treatise on the 
Talmud, in two parts—“ Pinnot Zeba’aw” and “ Erez 
Zebi.” 


BipnioGRarHy: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, i. 285; Walden, 
Shen ha-Gedolim he-Hadash, i. 39; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bodl. col. 2757; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 380. 

S. J. L. 


E.C. 

MIRES, JULES ISAAC: French financier; 
born at Bordeaux Dec. 9, 1809; died at Marseilles 
in 1871. A broker in 1848, he became, after the 
February Revolution 
of that year, director 
of the gas company 
of Arles. Subse- 
quently he bought 
the “Journal des 
Chemius de Fer” 
and founded the 
“Conseiller du 
Peuple,” which be- 
came quite popular 
through Lamartine’s 
contributions.  To- 
gether with Millaud, 
Mirés organized the 
“Caisse des Chemins 
de Fer,” of which he 
became sole director 
in 1858. In 1851 he 
bought “Le Pays” 
and “Le Constitu- 
tionnel.” He under- 
took colossal works at Marseilles, including the 
construction of a harbor and of a new quarter 
of the city, and the installation of a system of 
illumination by gas. In 1860 he obtained the 
concession for the construction of the Roman 
railroads and for the negotiation of the Turkish 
loan. On July 11, 1861, he was sentenced to five 
years’ imprisonment and to the payment of a fine 
of 8,000 francs, but he succeeded in getting this 
verdict set aside on April 21, 1862, and was rehabili- 
tated by the court of Douai. Toward the end of 
1869 Mirés was sentenced to six months’ imprison- 
ment and fined 38,000 francs on account of his 
pamphiet “Un Crime Judiciaire,” attacking the ex- 
pert Monginotand the judges who had tried his suit 
against the firm of Pereire. 

He contributed several financial articles to “Le 
Constitutionnel ” and “La Presse,” and published a 
number of pamphlets, including “ Apercus Finan- 
ciers” (1868) and “Mémoires Judiciaires” (in his 
own defense). 





Miriam. 
(From the Sarajevo Haggadah of the fourteenth century.) 


He was decorated by Napoleon IIL. with the rip. 
bon of the Legion of Honor in 1860, His daughter 
married a French nobleman. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Vapereau, Dictionnaire des Contem DOTAing: 


2 


La Grande Eneyclopédie. 

S. J. Ka, 

MIRIAM.—Biblical Data: Prophetess. 
daughter of Amram and sister of Moses and Aaron 
(I Chron, vi. 8; Ex. xv. 20; Num. xxvi. 59). When 
Moses was left at the river Miriam watched from a 
distance until Pharaoh’s daughter took him up, 
whereupon she proposed to the princess to fing 
a Hebrew nurse; the princess assenting to this, 
Miriam returned with her mother (Ex. i. 4-7). After 
the Israelites had crossed the Red Sea Miriam sang 
a song of triumph, in which all the women joined 
(Ex. xv. 20-21). Miriam and Aaron spoke against 
Moses on account of the Cushite woman whom he 
had married, whereupon God summoned Moses, 
Aaron, and Miriam to the tabernacle of the congre- 
gation, reproved her, and punished her with lep- 
rosy. She was healed through the prayers of Moses, 
but was obliged to remain without the camp of the 
Israelites for seven 
days, although the 
people did not pro- 
ceed until she had 
returned (Num. xii.). 
Miriam died in the 
desert at Kadesh, 
where she was buried 
(Num. xx. 1). In 
Micah vi. 4 she is 
mentioned, with 
Moses and Aaron, 
asa leader of the 
people. 

8. J. Z. L. 
—In Rabbinical 
Literature: Miriam 
was born at the time 
when the Egyptians 
began to embitter the 
lives of the Israelites 
by imposing arduous 
tasks upon them (comp. Ex. i. 14), and for this reason 
she was called “Miriam,” since the consonants in 
the word “ Miriam” (p19) may also read “ marim” 
(=“bitter”; Cant. R. ii. 12. She was called also 
“Puah,” and was, like her mother, a midwife (comp. 
Ex. i, 15). When only five years of age she was 
skilful enough to help her mother (Ex. R. i. 17; see 
JOCHEBED). She had the courage to tell Pharaoh 
that he would be punished by God for his cruelty 
to Israel, and almost lost her life in consequence 
(22.). When her father, Amram, had divorced her 
mother as a result of the cruel edict referring to the 
exposure of the children, she induced him to take 
her mother back (¢.; Sotah 12a), and she sang and 
danced on the day of the remarriage of her parents 
(Ex. R. i. 28; B. B. 120a). She predicted to her 
father that a son would be born to him who would 
liberate Israel from the Egyptian yoke. When 
Moses was born her father kissed her and said, 
“Your prophecy, my daughter, is fulfilled.” But 
when subsequently the child had to be cast away 


ber parents upbraided her and asked what would 
pow be the outcome of her prophecy. Miriam there- 
fore went to the river (Ex. ii. 4) to see how her 
prophecy would be fulfilled (Ex. R. i. 26; Sotah 
12b-13u). 

Miriam is said to have had also the following 
names: Ephrath, Helah, Naarah, Azubah, Jerioth, Zo- 
har, Zereth, Ethan,and Aharhe] (comp. 
I Chron. ii. 18, iv. 5-8), which were 
given to her on special occasions (Ex. 
R. i. 21; Sotah 11b-12a). She was 
married to Caleb b. Jephunneh, or b. Hezron, to 
whom she bore Hur (comp. I Chron. ii. 18-21). 
Then she fell ill (hence her name “ Helah”) and 
was thereupon left by her husband (hence the name 
“Azubah”). Subsequently she regained her health, 
pecame again jike a young woman (hence the name 
*Naaral”), and was taken back by her husband 
(Ex. R. @e.), Miriam was the ancestress of King 
David, and of Bezalecl, who made the Tabernacle 
and its vessels. Bezaleel’s wisdom (comp. Ex. 
xXxXi. 3) is said to have been due to his grandmother 
Miriam (Ex. R. xlviil. 6). To have so illustrious a 
descendant was Miriam's reward for not obeying 
Pharaoh (comp. Ex. i. 21; Ex. R. d.c.). When Miriam 
talked against Moses (comp. Num. xii.) she did not 
intend to slander him; she wished him to live with 
his wife and raise children (Deut. R. vi. 6). But 
when she was punished with leprosy, and had to re- 
main without the camp, God honored her by officia- 
ting as priest Himself (Zeb. 102a). The Israelites 
waited for her seven days (Num. xii. 15; Sotah 9b), 
for she had once waited for Moses by the river 
(Ex. ii. di. 

Miriam is regarded as the savior of Israel (Ex. R. 
xxvl. 1). For her sake a marvelous well accompa- 
nied the Israelites, a rock from which water flowed. 
This well disappeared after Miriam’s death (Ta‘an. 


Her 
Names. 


Qa). It was subsequently shown in the sea (Shab. 
35a). Miriam, like Moses and Aaron, died by a kiss 


from God (M. K. 28a), for the angel of death could 
not take her; and worms did not touch her body 
(B. B. 17a). Another legend says that Miriam, 
like Moses and Aaron, died on account of the water 
of strife (“me meribah”; comp. Num, xx. 7-18). 
This seems inconsistent, for, according to the Bible 
as well as the legends, water became scarce only after 
Miriam’s death, with the disappearance of the well 
(Lev. R. xxxi, 5 and commentaries ad loe.). 
Ss, des Pig: ly, 


MIRKES, SOLOMON ZALMAN BEN JU- 
DAH LOB: Lithuanian Talmudist of the eight- 
eenth century; a native of Mir, government of 
Minsk. He published at Konigsberg in 1769 his 
“Derush,” a funeral oration on the death of R. 
Abraham, chief rabbiof Frankfort-ou-the-Main. In 
1771 he was rabbi of Frankfort-on-the-Oder, where 
he published in that year his two works: “Shar- 
Sheret ha-‘Abotot.” containing novella, decisions, 
and discussions upon Talmudic matters, and “Shul- 
han Shelomoh,” a compendium of the Shulhan 
‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, according to the Aharonim. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Furst, Bibl. Jud. ii, 380; Zedner, Cat. Heh. 
Books Brit. Mus. p. 726. 
M. SE. 


H.R. 
VITI.—39 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mirels 
Mishnah 





MIRROR: An object having a nearly perfect 
reflecting surface. In ancient times mirrors were 
invariably made of metal; in Egypt, of polished 
brass, It is no doubt this kind of mirror to which 
reference is made in Ex. xxxviii. 8 and in Job 
XXxvil. 18, Reflections might also be seen in still 
water (Prov. xxvii. 19). In the enumeration of 
women’s ornaments in Isa. iii, 28, hand-mirrors seem 
to beincluded; but thisissomewhat doubtful. Ref- 
erences to mirrors occur jn the Apocrypha (Ecclus. 
(Sirach] xxii. 11) and in the New Testament (I Cor. 
XXX1iI. 12). 

The Rabbis were acquainted with the use of mir- 
rors, sometimes employing metal (Kelim xxx. 2). 
On the Sabbath it was not allowable to look into a 
mirror unless it was fixed on a wall (Shab. 149a). It 
would appear that later there was a tendency to 
forbid men to view themselves in mirrors, as this 
was regarded as cffeminate (see Levy, “ Neuhebr. 
Worterb.” i. 236). Nevertheless, the members of 
Rabbi's family were allowed to do so (Yer. Shab. 
vi. 7) because they were “close to the government.” 

The modern Jews of eastern Europe have a 
number of snperstitions in regard to mirrors the 
exact origin of which it is difficult to trace. Mir- 
rors are covered when a person dies, The angel of 
death will be seen if one looks into a mirror at such 
atime. Ifamirroris broken, seven yearsof poverty 
will result; this is a general superstition, and not 
confined to Jews. In Galicia it is supposed that if 
one puts a mitrror in front of a sleeping man with 
a candle between them, the sleeper will follow a 
person whither the latter wills, Ifthe sleeper strikes 
one under these circumstances, the person stricken 
will not live more than a year, J. 


MI-SHEBERAK. Sce SacriFice. 
MISHLE SINDABAR. Sce SEINDABAR. 


MISHNAH (construct state, Mishnat): A noun 
formed from the verb “shanah,” which has the same 
meaning as the Aramaic “matnita,” derived from 
“teni” or “tena.” The verb “shanah,” which origi- 
nally meant “to repeat,” acquired in post-Biblica] 
Hebrew the special force of “to teach” and “to 
learn” that which was not transmitted in writing but 
only orally; the development of connotation being 
due to the fact that the retention of teachings handed 
down by word of mouth was possible only by fre- 
quent recitation. 

“ Mishnah,” the derivative of the verb “shanah,” 
means therefore: (1) “instruction,” the teaching and 
learning of the tradition, the word being used in this 
sense in Ab. ili. 7,8; and (2) in a concrete sense, the 
content of that instruction, the traditional doctrine as 
it was developed down to the beginning of the third 
century of the common era, “Mishnah” is fre- 
quently used, therefore, to designate the law which 
was transmitted orally, in contrast to “ Mikra,” the 
law which is written and read (eg., B. M. 88a; 
Ber. 5a; Hag. 14a; ‘Er, 54b; Kid. 80a; Yer. Hor. 
iii, 48c; Pes, iv. 180d; Num. R. xiii.; and many 
other passages); and the term includes also the ha- 
lakic midrashim, as wel] as the TosErra or explan- 
atory additions to the Mishnah (Kid. 49b; see Ba- 
RAITA). In this wider sense the word was known 
to the Church Fathers, who, however, regarded it as 


Mishnah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


610 


SS ep Ee ee ee Pe ee ee, 


the feminine form of “ mishneh,” analogous to “ mik- 
neh” and “miknah,” and supposed that it signified 
“second teaching ” (comp. “*Aruk,” s.2. ASW NAY 
anind), translating it by devrépware (See the passages 
in Schiirer, “Gesch.” 3d ed., i. 118). 

The term “mishnah” connotes also (8) the sum 
and substance of the teachings of a single tanna 
(e.g., Git. 67a; Yeb. 49b, 50a: “mish- 
nat R. Eliezer b. Ya‘akob” = “the 
teachings of R. Eliezer b. Jacob”; 
comp. Rashi ad loc.); or it may mean 
(4) the view of a tanna in regard to some one matter 
(e.g., Men. 18a: “mishnat R. Eliezer” = “the view of 
R. Eliezer,” and the expressions “ mislinah rishonah ” 
=“the earlier view,” and “mishnah aharonah” = 
“the later view,” Hag. 2a; Ket. v. 29d: M. K. ii1. 83b). 
It may furthermore denote (5) a single tenet (¢.¢., B. 
M. 83b; Hor. 13b; B. K. 94b; Shab. 123b), being in 
this sense parallel to the expression HALAKAu (on the 
difference between the two see Frankel, “ Hodegetica 
in Mischnam,” p. 8). It is used also for (6) any col- 
lection of such tenets, being thus applied to the 
great Mishnaic collections (“ Mishnayot Gedolot”) of 
R. Akiba, R. Hiyya, R. Hoshaiah, and Bar Kap- 
para, in Lam. R., Introduction, and in Cant. R. viii. 
2(comp. Yer. Hor. iii. 48c; Eccl. R. ii). 

Finally the name “ Mishnah” is applied particu- 
larly to (7) the collection of halakot made by R. Ju- 
dah ha-Nasi I. (generally called “ Rabbi”), which 
constitutes the basis of the Talmud, and which, with 
many additions and changes, has been transmitted 
to the present time. In Palestine this collection was 
called also *“ Halakot,” as in Yer. Hor. iii. 48c; 
Ber. i. 58c; Lev. R. ili. (comp. Frankel, Ze. p. 8). 
The designation “Talmud” is likewise applied to 
R. Judah ha-Nasi’s Mishnah (Yer. Shab. v. 1, 7b; 
Bezah ii. 1, 61b: Yeb. viii. 92; comp. also Frankel, 
Le. p. 285; O. H. Schorr in “He-Haluz,” 1866, p. 
42: A. Krochmal in the introduction to “ Yerusha- 
layim ha-Benuyah,” p. 6; Oppenheim, “ Zur Gesch. 
der Mischna,” p. 244). 

The “ Mishnah of R. Judah,” however, is not to be 
regarded as a literary product of the third century, 
nor R. Judah as its author. It is, on the contrary, 
a collection which includes almost the entire mate- 
rial of the oral doctrine as developed from the period 
of the earliest halakic exegesis down to that of the 
fixed and crystallized halakot of the early third cen- 
tury. Judah ha-Nasi, who was the redactor of this 
work, included in his compilation the largest and 
most tnportant portion of the earlier collections that 
he had at hand, and fortunately preserved, for the 
most part without change, the traditional teachings 
which he took from older sources and collections; 
so that it is still possible to distinguish the earlier 
from the later portions by their form and mode of 
ex pression. 

In order to obtain a correct conception of the 
Mishnah, as well as of its value and importance, it 

is necessary to consider its relation to 

Develop- preceding collections of similar con- 
ment of the tent as well as the general develop- 

Mishnah. ment of the oral doctrine from the 
earliest midrash of the Soferim down 
to the time when the Halakah received its final form. 

According to a reliable tradition, contained in the 


The 
Name. 


Letter of Sherira Gaon (Neubauer, “M. J.C.” p. 15) 
and confirmed by other sources (Hoffmann, “ Die 
Erste Mischna,” pp. 6-12), the earliest form of dig. 
cussion of halakic regulations was the Midrash (see 
MiprasH HALAKAH); and vestiges of such halakot 
may still be found in the Mishnah. 

In addition to this form of the Midrash, which 
connects the halakic interpretation with the Scrip. 
tural passage on which it is based, the independent, 
definitive Halakah, apart from Scripture, was used 
in very carly times in certain cases, and collections 
of such halakot were compiled (comp. Hoffmann, 
lc. p. 11, note 2). As early as the time of the See. 
ond Temple the definitive Halakah was used more 
frequently than the midrashic form. the change 
having begun, according to geonic accounts, as 
early as the time of Hillel and Shammai (comp. 
Hoffmann, fc. pp. 12-14). Although it can not be 
assumed that a collection of halakot, arranged in 
six orders, was undertaken when this change was 
made, or that Hille] himself edited a Mishnah, ag 
Lerner has attempted to show (Berliner’s “Maga- 
zin,” 1886, pp. 1-20), it is probable that the mate- 
rial of the Mishnah first began to be collected at the 
time of the “Zikne Bet Shammai” and * Zikne Bet 
Hillel,” the elder pupils of Shammaiand Hillel. The 
beginnings of the present Mishnah may be found in 
this first mishnah collection, which in the completed 
text is termed “ Mishnah Rishonah ” (Sanh. iii. 4; 
‘Eduy. vil. 2; Git. v. 6; Nazir vi. 1). <A large por- 
tion of this first Mishnah is still preserved in its 
original form, notwithstanding the many changes to 
which it) was subjected by the Tannaim; for many 
portions can be proved to have been redacted, in the 
form which they now bear, at the time of the schools 
of Shammai and Hillel, while the Temple was still 
standing (comp. Hoffmann, @.c. pp. 15-20; adem, 
“Bemerkungen zur Kritik der Mischna,” in Ber- 
liner’s “ Magazin,” 1881, pp. 170 et seq.). 

This first collection of the Mishnah and its separa- 
tion from the Midrash were intended, on the one 
hand, to reduce the traditional Halakah to a shorter 
form, and, on the other, to fix the disputed halakotas 
such; of these disputed halakot there were then but 
few. The isolation of the Halakah from the Midrash 
not only resulted in a shorter and more definite form, 
but also removed many differences then existing. 
Indeed in many cases the divergency had been merely 
one of form, the proof and the derivation from 
Scripture being differently stated for the same hala- 
kah by different teachers. This earliest Mishnah was 
intended toafford the teachers both a norm for their 
decisions and a text-book for their classes and dis- 
courses, and thus to preserve the uniformity of teach- 
ing. It did not accomplish this purpose entirely, 
however; for when the political disorders and the fall 
of the Jewish state diverted attention from careful 
doctrinal studies, many halakot of the Mishnah were 
forgotten, and their wording became a subject of 
controversy. Since, moreover, in addition to these 
differences each tanna taught the first Mishnah ac- 
cording to hisown conception of it, the one Mishnah 
and the one doctrine developed into many mishnayot 
and many doctrines (Sanh. 88b; Sotah 47b). This 
multiplication occurred during the period of the 
iater “Bet Hillel” and “Bet Shammai” (comp. Let- 


pt tenth ne Pm ee 


611 





ter of Sherira Gaon, Jc. pp. 4, 9; Hoffmann, é.c. 
p. 49). 

Toavert the danger which threatened the uniform- 
ity of doctrine, the synod of Jabneh was convened 
(Tosef., ‘Eduy. i.1; comp. Letter of Sherira Gaon, /.¢. 

p. 5; Dinner, * Eimiges iiber Ursprung 
The Synod und BedeutungdesTraktates Eduyot,” 
‘of Jabneh. in“ Monatsschrift,” 1871, pp. 37 et seq.), 

and under the presidency of Gamaliel 
II. and Eleazar b. Azariah it undertook to collect 
the ancient halakot, to examine and determine their 
wording, and to discuss and decide their differ- 
ences; thus there arose the collection ‘Epuyor (Ber. 
28a). This compilation, that in its original form 
was much larger than the treatise that now bears 
its name, included all the halakot which were then 
known, whether controverted or not, and was ina 
certain sense a revision of the first Mishnah. Even 
in the present form of the treatise there are many 
“‘eduyot ” which are expressly said to have modified 
the earlier Mishnah; and there are many others, not 
so characterized, which must likewise be regarded 
as modifications of the Mishnah as redacted for the 
first time. But neither the first Mishnah nor its 
revision, the ‘Eduyot collection, was arranged topic- 
ally or systematically. It is true, a geonic respon- 
sum, which was printed in “Sha‘are Teshubah,” 
No. 187 (Leipsic, 1858) and erroneously ascribed to 
Sherira (comp. Harkavy, “Einleitung zu den Te- 
schubot Hageonim,” pp. x. e¢ seg.), refers to six 
orders of the Mishnah said to date from the time 
of Hillel and Shammai, as does also the “Seder 
Tanna’im we-Amora’im” (ed. Luzzatto, p. 7), but 
this statement, which is probably based on Hag. 14a, 
is untrustworthy. 

The earliest Mishnah, however, must have been 
divided ‘in some way, possibly into treatises, al- 
though such a division, if it existed, was certainly 

arranged formally and not topically 
Divisions like the present tractates and orders. 
of Earliest The several halakot were grouped to- 
Mishnah. gether by a common introductory 

phrase, which served as the connect- 
ing-link, as may be inferred from various traces of 
this old method of grouping still to be seen in the 
Mishnah, especially in the last treatises of the order 
Mo‘ed. These phrases (comp. Oppenheim, J/.¢. p. 
270) referred for the most part to the similarity or 
the contrast between two or more halakot. More- 
over, the name of the author or of the transmitter 
was often used as the connecting-link for the vari- 
ous halakot, us is evident from the treatise ‘Eduyot 
in its present form (Diinner, l.c. pp. 62-68; A. 
Krochmal, in “ He-Haluz,” ii. 81-82). 

The ‘Eduyot collection, which now became the 
basis for the discourses delivered in the schools, was 
the means of preserving the uniformity of teaching; 
but, as the mass incorporated in it was difficult to 
handle, there was a growing need for a methodical 
arrangement. R. Akiba, therefore, undertook a 
sifting of this traditional material, and made a mish- 
haic collection which he edited systematically by 
arranging the different subjectsin different treatises, 
and perhaps also by combining the various treatises 
into orders. Inthe present Mishnah this collection 
is often mentioned in contradistinction to the first 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mishnah 


Mishnah (Sanh. iii. 4, and elsewhere; comp. Frankel, 
tc. p. 210; Hoffmann, J.¢. p. 88). 

The passage Ab. R. N. xviii. 1 indicates that 
Akiba arranged his Mishnah according to topics 
(comp. Oppenheim, l.c. pp. 287 e¢ seg.): and a like 
inference is to be drawn from the expression * tikken ” 
(Yer. Shek. v. 1), which does not mean “to correct,” 
as A. Krochmal supposed (“ Yerushalayim ha-Benu- 
yah,” pp. 34b-35a), but “to arrange.” “to redact,” 
the same word being applied to the work of Judah 
ha-Nasi in the redaction of his Mishnah (Yeb. 64b). 
Similarly the term “sidder,” meaning “to arrange,” 
is applied both to Akiba’s work (Tosef., Zab. i. 5) 
and to that of R. Judah ha-Nasi (Yer. Pes. iv. 30d), 
thus justifying the conclusion that Akiba’s method 
of division and arrangement of the Mishnah was 
the same as that followed by Judah ha-Nasi. Two 
treatises are definitely known to have been included 
in their present form in Akiba’s Mishnah., in which 
they even bore their present names. R. Meir men- 
tions the treatise ‘Ukzin by name in Hor. 18h; and 
R. Jose in like manner names the treatise Kelim 
(Kelim, end): both of these tannaim, who antedated 
Judah ha-Nasi, undoubtedly designated by these 
names the treatises Kelim and ‘Ukzin as included 
in the Mishnah of their teacher Akiba. 

R. Akiba’s treatment of the old Mishnah in 
editing his own Mishnah collection was entirely 


arbitrary. He excluded many of the halakot 
contained in the original text; and 
Mishnah those which he accepted he endeav- 


of ored to found upon some text, ex- 
R. Akiba. plaining their phraseology, and tra- 
cing their origin, but striving most of 
all to present the Halakah in short, clear, and ex- 
plicit form (comp. Tosef., Zab. i. 5). Many halakic 
sentences which he included called for more de- 
tailed explanation. For the sake of brevity. how- 
ever, and to aid his pupils in memorizing the Mish- 
nah, he omitted the required explanations and made 
an additional collection containing the comments to 
the Mishnah, thus laying the foundation for the 
Tosefta (comp. Letter of Sherira Gaon, /.¢. p. 16; 
Frankel, ¢.¢c. p. 806; Oppenheim, é.c. p. 270). 
Akiba’s method, which reduced the halakic col- 
lections to an orderly system, soon found imitators; 
and nearly every tannaitic head of a school, who, in 
virtue of his position, had a mishnaic collection, 
sooner or later adopted Akiba’s method of dividing 
and arranging the material. R. Meir especially fol- 
lowed this system, availing himself of it when the 
increasing number of new halakot, discovered and 
established by Akiba’s pupils, rendered a new 
mishnaic collection necessary. In this compilation 
he included the larger portion of Akiba’s Mishnah, 
but also drew upon other existing collections, such 
as that of Abba Saul (comp. Lewy, “Ueber Einige 
Fragmente aus der Mischna des Abba Saul,” Berlin, 
1876). He jJikewise incorporated many old halakot 
known in the schools but excluded by Akiba. He 
frequently cited the opinions of Akiba, without 
naming him, as “setam” and therefore authorita- 
tive for halakic decisions; but sometimes, when the 
opinion of the majority was opposed to Akiba’s 
view, he designated the former as “ setam ” and bind- 
ing for the Halakah (comp. Oppenheim, /.¢. p. 315). 


Mishnah 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


612 





R. Metr’s collection had a wide circulation, al- 
though it was not able to displace the other com- 
pilations. As every tanna at the head of a school, 
however, had, as stated above, his own mishnaic 
coHection in which the halakot of preceding teach- 
crs as Well as their controversies were differently ex- 
pounded, the uniformity in teaching which the re- 
dactors of the Mishnah had desired and which had 
almost been attained was again lost; for there were 
as many different teachings as there were Mish- 
nah collections. There was good ground, there- 
fore, for the complaint that the religious world was 
thrown into disorder by the teachers who gave hala- 
kic decisions according to theirown mishnaic collec- 
tions (Sotah 22a), since a clear and reliable Halakah 
could not be found in any individual compilation 
(Shah. 138b, 189a). 

To remedy this evil and to restore uniformity of 
teaching, Judah ha-Nasi undertook his collection, 

arrangement, and redaction of the 
R. Judah Mishnah, which work has survived to 
ha-Nasi. the present time. He followed his 
own method so far as the selection 
aud presentation of the material were concerned, 
but adopted the systems of Akiba and Meir in re- 
gard to the division and arrangement. This Mish- 
nah was intended to serve practical purposes and to 
be an authority in deciding religious and legal ques- 
tions. Judah often gives, therefore, the opinion ofa 
single teacher, where he regards it as the correct one, 
in the name of “the sages” (“hakamim ”) (Hul. 85a); 
and in order that the opinion of a single scholar may 
prevail as final, he ignores the fact that this view was 
controverted by many others, At times he, with- 
out mentioning his name, quotes his own opinion as 
“setam,” torecord it as authoritative (comp. Oppen- 
heim, /.c. p. 847, No. 16). Frequently, too, he explains 
or limits the earlier Halakah (see Yer. Hor. i. 46a), and 
endeavors to find a compromise in the case of dispu- 
ted halakot, or he himself decides the cases in which 
the halakah is to follow one opinion and in which 
the other (comp. Frankel, lc. pp. 195 et seq.). 

In addition to the practical purpose of restoring 
and preserving uniformity of halakic doctrine and 
of providing for teachers an authority for their de- 
cisions, Judah ha-Nasi had another purely theoret- 
ical object in view; namely, the preservation of the 
teachings of the ancients, except those which he re- 
garded as relatively unimportant or which he con- 
sidered to have been preserved in some other place in 
his collection. This fact explains many peculiarities 
of the Mishnah, which were regarded as shortcom- 
ings by those who considered it a legal code. The 
following are some of these peculiarities: Judah ha- 
Nasi quotes the opinion of a single authority even 
when invalidated, and he quotes the original view 
of a scholar even after such scholar had himself re- 
tracted it (Hul. 82b; comp. Oppenheim, Uc. p. 344). 
He quotes also a given halakah in one passage as 
being controverted (“mahloket”) and in another 
passage as authoritative (“setam”), or vice versa; 
and he cites contradictory teachings in different 
places. All these peculiarities are due to the fact 
that Judah wished to preserve the ancient teach- 
ings; and to attain this object more completely 
he included in his Mishnah, in addition to the col- 


lections of Akiba and Meir, which formed his chief 
sources, the major portion of all the other mish- 
nayot (Yer. Shab. xvi. 15c); according to a later ac- 
count, he used in all thirteen collections (Ned. 41a), 
ile dealt independently with his material; for while 
he frequently made no changes in the wording or 
form of the old Mishnah, and even included old 
halakot which had long since been refuted, he 
altered various others (comp. Hoffmann, “ Bemer- 
kungen zur Kritik der Mischna,” in Berliner’s 
“Magazin,” 1881, pp. 127 ef seg.). He expounded 
many of the old halakot (‘Ar iv. 2; Sanh. ix. 3; 
Yer. Sanh, 27a; comp, Oppenheim, l.c. p. 347), fol- 
lowing certain rules (Yer. Ter. i. 2, 40c), and en- 
deavoring to determine the text of the old Mishnah 
(Yer. Ma‘as. Sh. v. 1, 55d; comp. Letter of Sherira 
Gaon, J.c. pp. 9-10; Frankel, f.c. p. 214). The less- 
known halakot, as well as those which the pupils of 
Akiba had propounded, were interpreted by Judah 
ha-Nasi according to his conception of them. In 
this way he impressed upon his Mishnah the stamp 
of uniformity, and gave it the appearance of a work 
thoroughly revised, if not new; and his compilation 
displaced its predecessors by its inclusion of the 
major portion of their contents with the exception 
of those halakot which appeared to him untenable, 
or to which he had alluded in some other passage 
of his Mishnah. 

Because of his personal prominence and his dignity 
as patriarch (comp. J. S. Bloch, “ Eimblicke,” ete., 
pp. 59 e¢ seg.), his Mishnah soon became the only 
one used in the schools, and was known to teachers 
and students alike, Judah thereby attaining his 
object of restoring uniform teachings. Whereas 

the exposition of the various halakot 


The Au- given by the Tannaim and called 
thoritative “[Tannaitic] Talmud,” had been used 
Mishnah. hitherto in preference to the dry 


mishnaic collections (comp. Letter of 
Sherira Gaon, U.c. pp. 18-19), most of the teachers 
now resorted to R. Judah’s Mishnah, which included 
both the halakot themselves and the expository tan- 
naitic Talmud (this fact explains the application 
of the name “Talmud” to his Mishnah; B. M. 38a; 
Yer. Shab. xvi. 15c). Interest in this work was so 
highly esteemed that a haggadist said: “The study 
of the Mishnah is equal to sacrifice” (Lev. R. vii.). 
Every pupil was supposed, as a matter of course, 
to be familiar with the Mishnah of it. Judah ha- 
Nasi; and when any one propounded a sentence 
which was to be found in it, his hearers exclaimed, 
“What! do we not Jearn that ourselves from the 
Mishnah’” According to R. Joshua b, Levi, “The 
Mishnah is a tirm iron pillar”; and none may stray 
from it (é. xxi.). “The passage, Num. xv, 31, ‘He 
hath despised the word of the Lord,’ denotes him 
who does not consider the Mishnah ” (baraita quoted 
by Isaac Alfasi in his compendium to Sanh, x.). It 
was considered the only authority for legal decisions. 
R. Johanan said, “The correct halakie decision is 
always the one which is declared in the Mish- 
nah to be incontrovertible” (“ Halakah ki-setam 
Mishna”; Yeb. 42b, and parallel passages); and the 
most conclusive refutation of a sentence was [0 
prove that it was contradicted by the Mishnah. if 
a decision was accidentally made contrary to the 


613 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mishnah 





Mishnah, the decision at once became invalid (Sanh. 
6a, 88a; Ket. 84a, 100a). The Amoraim regarded 
the Mishnah as the Tannaim did the Scripture; and 
many of them interpreted and expounded it (comp. 
Bacher “Ag. Bab. Amor.” p. 38, note 207 on Rab). 
Even subsequently, when the collections which 
were made by the pupils of Judah ha-Nasi were 
widely used, his Mishnah remained the sole author- 
ity. In cases where the Mishnah conflicted with 
the Baraita, the former was considered decisive 
(Suk. 19b; B. K. 96b), while there is but a single 
example to show that the Gemara preferred the 
Baraita in such a disputed case (see JEW. ENcyc. ii. 
516a, so. BARArra). Some amoraim, such as Ifa 
and Simeon b. Lakish, even regarded the later col- 
Jections as unnecessary and useless, since their entire 
contents were included by implication in the Mish- 
nab, and all questions could be explained from. it 
without the aid of the subsequent compilations 
(Yer. Kil. 1. 6, 27a; Yer. B. K. v. 5a; Yer. Kid. iii. 
64b; Ta‘an. 22a; comp. Oppenheim, /.¢. pp. 344- 
845). Another sentence, likewise derogatory to 
these later collections, says: “If Rabbi has not 
taught it, how does R. Hiyya [the collector of the 
baraitot] know it?” 

This Mishnah, however, has not been preserved 
in the form in which Rabbi redacted it; for, as stated 
above, it was subjected to many changes, and re- 

ceived numerous additions before it 


Modifica- reacheditscdetinitive form. Notwith- 
tions of the sianding the superiority of Rabbi's 
Text. Mishnah to its predecessors, it had 


many defects, some of which may 
still beseenin the present Mishnah. Though Rabbi 
himself subsequently renounced many of his Mish- 
naic opinions, as his views changed in the course of 
time, he retained such discarded opinions in’ his 
Mishnah as he had held them in his younger days 
(B. M. 44a; ‘Ab. Zarah 52b; Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah iv. 44a), 
Occasionally he recorded one decision as authorita- 
tive in one passage of his Mishnab, considering it 
the correct view, and, deciding later in favor of an 
opposite opinion, he in another place gave this also 
as authoritative without retracting or suppressing 
his former view (Sheb. 4a). These shortcomings 
would not have been serious, since Rabbi did not 
intend to furnish a mere halakie code, if he had not 
failed to include in his collection many halakot 
which were taught in his school and which were, 
therefore, highly important, not only for halakic 
decision, but also for a knowledge of tradition in 
general. He furthermore excluded his own halakot 
and the points of divergence between him and his 
contemporaries. These omissious were the most 
serious defects in his Mishnah for his pupils, since, 
being a compendium of the entire traditional in- 
struction, it must have seemed incomplete inasmuch 
as it did not include the teachings of the last tan- 
naim, whose legal decisions should certainly have 
heen incorporated in it if It was to serve as an au- 
thoritative code. Rabbi’s pupils R. Hiyya, R. 
Hoshaiah, Levi, and Bar Kappara began, therefore, 
even during Rabbi’s lifetime and with his knowl. 
edge, to make additions and emendations to his 
Mishnah. Rabbi, who was aware of the deficien- 
cies of his work, probably approved many of these 


| 


corrections (comp. Oppenheim, /.¢. pp. 844 e€ seq.), 
and added some himself (Yer. Ket. iv. 29a, b). 
Most of the changes, however, were such as were 
contrary to his views, and were consequently con- 
ccaled from him by his pupils (see MEGILLAT SETA- 
RIM; comp. Weiss, “ Dor,” ii. 191). 

Thus arose new collections by R. Hiyya, R. 
Hosbaiah, and Bar Kappara, which were called 
“Mishnayot Gedolot,” since they were more volu- 
Mincus than Rabbi's collection. As these new 
compilations imperiled the uniformity of teaching, 
which was possible only through the existence of a 
Misbnah familiar to all teachers, the “ Debe Rabbi” 
(the scholars of Rabbi's school) undertook a revision 
of his Mishnah, probably long after his death. 
They made various changes and a large number of 
additions in agreement with current demands; and 
in this form the Mishnah has been transmitted to 
the present time. The majority of the additions 
made by the Debe Rabbi betray their later origin, 
although some of them are known to be supplemen- 
tary only by statements in the Gemara. For in- 
stanee, the diseussion between R. Hezekiah and R. 
Johanan, in Men. 104b, indicates that the passage 
in the present Mishnah (Men. xiii. 2), beginning 
“Rabbi omer,” is a later addition of which Hezekiah 
and Johanan did not know. The same is true of 
Mishnah Sanh. ix. 2, since the R. Simeon there men- 
tioned is Rabbi’s son, as is shown by Yerushalmi 
(ad loc, 2ia, b). Mishnah ‘Ab. Zarah ii. 6, where a 
decision of Judah ha-Nasi is quoted, also comes in 
Unis category, since it refers to Judah If., grandson 
of Judah ha-Nasi I., the original redactor of the 
Mishnah (comp. Tos. ‘Ab. Zarah 36a, s.c. “ Asher”), 
In general, all the passages in which something 
concerning Rabbi is related, or something which 
he did cither alone Gheb. vi. 4) or together with 
his colleague (Oh. xviii. 19), must be regarded 
as Jater accretions (comp. Frankel, dc. pp. 215 e 
seg.); and the same statement holds good of all the 
passages in which Rabbi's opinion is quoted after 
that of othertannaim. On the other hand, there are 
passages concluding with “dibre Rabbi” (the words 
of Rabbi), which are not necessarily additions; for 
tabbi may in such instances have quoted his own 
opinion anonymously as setam, as he frequently 
did, and the words “dibre Rabbi” may lave been 
added by later editors, Various sentences of the To- 
sefta also found their way into the Mishnah (comp. 
Hoffmann, @.c. pp. 156 et seg.). Many of these are hag- 
gadic in nature, such as those at the end of the trea- 
tises Makkot, ‘Ukzin, IXinnim, Kiddushin, and Sotah, 
as well as many sentences in the treatise Abot, which 
must be regarded as accretions. The later origin of 
many of these sentences is at once indicated by the 
name of the author, as in the cases of R. Joshua b. 
Levi, who belonged to the first generation of Amo- 
raim (‘Ukzin, end); Simon, son of Judah ha-Nasi 
(Ab. ii, 2); and Hillel, grandson of Judah ha-Nasi 
(ib, ii, 4 e¢ seqg.; comp. Lipmann Heller in Tos. 
Yom-Tob, ad loc.). Aside from these additions, the 
Debe Rabbi emended the phraseology and _ sin- 
gle words of the Mishnah (comp. Yer. Kid. iii. 64c), 
even as Rabbi himself had done (comp. B. M. iv. 1; 
‘Ab. Zarah iv. 4, and the Babylonian and Pales- 
tinian Gemaras, ad loc.). 


Mishnah 








_——— 


Many of Rabbi’s own emendations have been pre- 
served in the different readings of Yerushalmi and 
Babli, although the differences be- 


Babylo- tween these two versions are not all 
nian and due to his changes, as Rapoport as- 
Palestin- sumes (“Kerem Hemed,” vii. 157- 

ian 167); for most of the differences not 
Mishnah. duc to philological causes must be 


ascribed to the diffcrent mishnaic 
schools. In addition to the Debe Rabbi, later 
amoraim also emended the Mishnah if the received 
reading seemed untenable. These emencations 
were then incorporated into the Mishnah; those 
made by the Babylonian amoraim into the Mishnah 
which was taught in the Babylonian schools; and 
those made by the Palestmian amoraim into the 
Mishnah as taughtin the Palestinian schools. Thus, 
in ‘Ab. Zarah i., the Mishnah in the Palestinian ‘Tal- 
mud was corrected according to the Gemara (Yer. 
‘Ab. Zaralt 1. 89d), while the Mishnah in the Baby- 
lonian Talmud retained its original reading. Some- 
times—curiously enough—the Mishnah of the Pal- 
estinian Talmud was corrected to harmonize with 
the results of the discussion in the Babylonian Tal- 
mud, and vice versa (comp. O. H. Schorr in * He. 
Haluz,” vi. 82-47; Frankel, “Mebo,” pp. 19a-22a), 
although only a few of these emendations, of which 
there are many in the Talmud—introduced by the 
phrases “sami mi-kan” = “omit from here,” or 
“hasuri mihasra” = “something missing,” or “teni 
kak” = “teach thus”—found their way into the 
Mishnah itself. Many of the amoraim objected 
to corrections in the Mishnah, holding that the 
phraseology chosen by the ancients in their mishnaic 
collections shonld be retained unchanged (Yer. 
Nazir 1. 51a). 

The Mishnah is written in a peculiar kind of He- 
brew, which is far more different from the Hebrew 
of the earlier books of the Old Testament than from 
that of some of the later ones and which is, there- 
fore, correctly designated as “ Neo-Hebraic.” This 
language was spoken by the people of Palestine as 
late asthe second century of the common era, but 
was cultivated especially by the scholars; so that it 
was called “leshon hakamim ” = “the speech of the 
wise.” It contains many old Hebraic terms which 
were preserved in popular speech, although they 
are not found in the Bible, as well as numerous for- 
eign clements, especially from Aramaic, Greek, and 
Latin; the scholars being forced toadopt these loan- 
words as terms for objects and concepts which 
were formerly unknown and for which there were 
no designations in the Hebrew vocabulary. Foreign 
words were especially used to designate implements 
borrowed from foreign peoples (comp. Weiss, “ Mish- 
pat Leshon ha-Mishnah,” pp. 1-7; A. Geiger, “ Lehr- 
buch zur Sprache der Mischna,” pp. 1-3); and these 
borrowed terms were so Hebraized as to be taken by 
many for native words. 

From the first there were various opposing opin- 
ions regarding the problems when and by whom the 
Mishnah was reduced to writing. According to the 
Letter of Sherira Gaon (.c. pp. 2, 9, 12), Judah ha- 
Nasi himself performed this task: and this view is 
supported by Rabbenu Nissim b. Jacob (in the pref- 
ace to his “Sefer ha-Mafteah,” ed. J. Goldenthal, 


— 
— 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


614 





p. 8a, Vienna, 1847), Samuel Nagid (in his “Mebo 
ha-Talmud ”), Maimonides (in the introduction to lis 
commentary on the Mishnah and in the preface to 
the Yad ha-Hazakah), Meiri (in his “ Bet ha-Behi- 
rah”), and a commentary on Pirke Abot (pp. 6a, 8b, 
9a, Vienna, 1854); and many other medieval authors, 
as well as some modern scholars (comp. Strack, 
“Binleitung in den Talmud,” p. 54), hold the 
same opinion. Rashi, on the other hand (sce hig 
comnmentary on Shab. 130; ‘Er. 62b; B. M. 83a; Suk, 
28b; Kket. 19b), with some tosatfists 
The Writ- and other medievat and modern au- 
ten Text. thors (comp. Strack, /.¢. p. 55), held 
not only that the Mishnah was not re- 
duced to writing by Rabbi himself, but that even 
the later amoraim did not have it in written form. 
He maintained that it, together with the Gemara, 
was written by the Saboraim. This view is based 
principally on the passage Git. 60b, which declares 
that it was forbidden to record halakot, as well as 
on certain other statements of the Amoraim (comp. 
e.g., Lan., Ki Tissa, ed. Buber, pp. 59b e¢ seq.), which 
draw a distinction between the Bible as being a 
written doctrine and the Mishnah as a system of 
teaching which is not and may not be reduced to 
writing. It is, however, extremely unlikely that 
such a systematized collection, dealing with prob- 
lems so numerous and so diverse, could have been 
transmitted orally from generation to generation; 
and this improbability is increased by the fact that 
in the Talinud remarks concerning “resha” and 
“sefa” (the “tirst” and the “last” cases provided 
for ina single paragraph) are frequently added to 
Mishnah quotations, a fact explicable only on 
the assumption that the text of the Mishnah wag 
definitely fixed in writing. 

It must be assumed, therefore, that Rabbi himself 
reduced the Mishnah to writing in his old age, 
transgressing in a way the interdiction against re- 
cording halakot, since he deemed this prohibition 
liable to endanger the preservation of the doctrine. 
Ie did not abrogate this interdiction entirely, how- 
ever; for the oral method of instruction continucd, 
the teacher using the written Mishnah merely as a 
guide, while the pupils repeated the lesson orally. 
Thus the distinction between “mikra” (the law to 
be read) and “mishnah” (the oral teaching) was re- 
tained (comp, “ Pahad Yizhak,”s.e. “ Mishnah,” pp. 
219 et seg.: Frankel, “Hodegeticain Miscinam,” pp. 
217-218; Brill, “Einleitung,” ii. 10-13; Weiss, 
“ Dor,” p. 216). 

The Mishnah has been transmitted in four recen- 
sions: (1) the manuscripts and editions of the mish- 
nayot; (2) the Babylonian Talmud, in which the 
several mishnavot are separated by the Gemara in 
those treatises which have it, while in the trea- 
tises which have no Gemara they follow in sequence ; 
(83) the Palestinian Talmud, in which the Gemara 
follows each entire chapter of the Mishmnah, the ini- 
tial words of the mishnaic sentences to be ex pounded 
being repeated (of this version only the first four 
orders and chapters i.-iv. of the treatise Niddah of 
the sixth order are extant); (4) “the Mishnah on 
which the Palestinian Talmud rests,” published 
by W. H. Lowe in 1888 after the Mishnah manu- 
script (Add. 470, 1) in the library of the University 


615 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mishnah 





of Cambridge. On the relation of the first three 
editions to one another see above (comp. A. Kroch- 
mal, “Yerushalayim ha-Benuyah,” Introduction, 
pp. 10-14; Frankel, Jc. pp. 219-223; Weiss, le, ii. 
313). The relation of the fourth version to the pre- 
ceding three has not yet been thoroughly inves- 
tigated. 

The Mishnah is divided into six main parts, called 
orders (Aramaic, “sedarim,” plural of “seder”: 

Hebr. “‘arakin,” plural of “‘erek ”), 

Division the may “ID Aww (as in B. M. 85b) 

intoOrders. or the Maw») ‘sry ww (Pesik., ed. Bu- 

ber, Ta; Cant. R. vi. 4) being therefore 
frequently mentioned. The abbreviated name Dw 
(“shas ”) was formed from the initial letters of Ay 
mao (Hag. 3a, 10a; M. K.10b). Each order con- 
tains a uumber of treatises, “ massektot” (Mishnah, 
ed. Lowe, fol. 32a; Midr. Teh. to Ps. civ.) or “ masse- 
kot ” (Mishnah, ed. Lowe, fol. 69a), plural of “mas- 
seket,” or “massektiyyot” (Cant. R. vi. 9), the sin- 
gular of which is “massekta.” Each treatise is di- 
vided into chapters, “ perakim” (Singular, “ perck ”) 
(Ned. 8a: Hag. 9a; Men. 99b), and each chapter into 
paragraphs or sentences, “mishnayot,” or “hala- 
kot” in the Palestinian Talmud (see above). 

The six orders are first mentioned by R. Hiyya 
(B. M. 85b), and represent the original division. <A 
division into five orders is nowhere mentioned, al- 
though Geiger (“ Einiges iiber Plan,” etc., p. 487), 
misinterpreting the Midrash passage Num. R. xiii., 
considers only tive orders to be enumerated there. 
Ulla (Meg. 28b), when he alludes to those who teach 
and learn only four orders, does not imply that the 
Mishnah was divided into four orders, but refers 
merely to those who study only four. This conclu- 
sion is confirmed by a conversation in which Simeon 
b. Lakish communicates to a man who has studied 
only the first four orders a sentence belonging to the 
sixthorder(Meg.28h). The geonic tradition (“Sha‘are 
Teshubah.” No. 148) which refers to seven orders of 
the Mishnah seems to include the “Small Treatises ” 
(“Massektot Ketannot” ; Hoffmann, /.¢c. pp. 98-99). 
The names of the orders are old, and are mentioned 
by Simeon b. Lakish (Shab. 3la), who enumerates 
them, according to his interpretation of Isa. xxxiii. 
6, in the following sequence: Zera‘im, Mo‘ed, 
Nashim, Nezikin, Kodashim, Tohorot. This is the 
origina! order, which is found also in Nun. R. xii. 
There are other ennmerations with different se- 
quences. R. Tanhuma has the following in Yalk., 
Ps. xix.: Nashim, Zera‘im, Tohorot, Mo‘ed, Ko- 
dashim, Nezikin. He gives another series in Num. 
R. xiii.: Nashim, Zera‘im, Mo‘ed, Kodashim, Toho- 
rot, Nezikin. As R. Tanhuma evidently does not in- 
tend to give the actual sequence but only to explain 
the verses as referring to the orders of the Mishnah, he 
adapts his enumeration of the orders to the sequence 
of the verses. That Simeon b. Lakish’s sequence is 
the correct one may be proved also from other sources. 
For example, Ta‘an. 24b has: “Tn the days of Rab 
Judas they went in their studies only as far as the 
order Nezikin: but we study all six orders.” The 
parallel passage reads: “ We have proceeded in our 
studies as far as ‘Ukzin ” (the end of the sixth order 
Tohorot). It is clear from Meg. 28b that formerly 
only four orders were studied, of which Nezikin 


formed the conclusion (according to Ta‘an, 24a, 
where the shorter course of study in former times is 
mentioned in another form of expression). That the 
treatise ‘Ukzin of the order Tohorot was the end of the 
sixth order is shown by Ber. 20a. It is seen, there- 
fore, that the order Nezikiu is always mentioned as 
the fourth, and the order Tohorot as the sixth and 
last, thus conforming to the sequence of Simeon b. 
Lakish (comp, Brill, Ze. ii. 15; Weiss, U.c. iii. 186). 
Isaac ibn Gabbai, author of the mishnaic commen- 
tary “ Kaf Nahat,” has, consequently, no grounds for 
his reversal of the arrangement of the orders (comp. 
Lipmann I[Teller, @.¢e, Preface); nor is there any foun- 
dation for the attempt of Tobias Cohn to reverse the 
sequence (* Aufeinanderfolge der Mischna Ordnung- 
en,” in Geiger’s “Jiid. Zeit.” iv. 126 e¢ seg.). Fora 
justification of theaccepted sequence see the introduc- 
tion of Maimonides to his commentary on the Mish- 
nah; Frankel, /.¢. p. 254; Briill, Zc. ii. 15-16. It can 
not be ascertained whether Rabbi himself originated 
this sequence, or whether the orders were thus dlis- 
cussed in the academies. Isaac Alfasi and Asher b. 
Jehielapply the Talmudic passage “ En seder le-Mish- 
nah” (= “ Rabbi observed no definite sequence in the 
Mishnah ”) to the orders as well, and infer that this 
arrangement did not originate with Rabbi himself. 
Other authorities, however, assert that the passage 
“En seder le-Mishnah” refers only to the treatises, 
and not to the orders; for here Rabbi himself ob- 
served a definite series (comp. Lipmann Heller, Z.c.; 
zdem, commentary on Sotah ix.1). This view seems 
to be the correct one, since Simeon b. Lakish, who 
was in his youth a pupil of Rabbi (Yer. Bezah v. 2, 
63a), refers to this sequence of the orders as being 
well known. The names of the several orders, 
which are frequently mentioned in the Talmud (Suk, 
4b; Shab. 54b; Meg. Ta; Nid. 8a; Bek. 30b), were 
selected according to the subject of most of the 
treatises belonging to them. 

The division of the Mishnah into treatises is a 
very old device, the collections upon which Rabbi 
drew being also arranged in this same way. IT Esd. 
xiv. 44-46 mentions, in addition to the twenty-four 

written books of the Old Testament, 

Earlier seventy other books which may not 
Divisions. be written down, having been given 

by God to Moses for oral communica- 
tion to the elders of the people. According to an 
assumption of Ginsberg’s, which is supported by a 
comparison of the passage in Esdras with its parallel 
in the Tan., Ki Tissa (ed. Buber, pp. 58b-59a), these 
seventy books are the seventy treatises of the oral 
teachings, and hence of the Mishnah. The number 
seventy may be obtained by counting either the 
seven small treatises (comp. R. Kirchheim, Pref- 
ace to his edition of them, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
1851), or, as Ginsberg obtains it, the halakic mid- 
rashim Sifra and Sifre, the first of which was di- 
vided into nine parts. Inany case, it is evident that 
the division into treatises is a very old one, and that 
Rabbi arranged his Mishnah in conformity with it, 
although, as has been said, the present division is 
not the original one which he adopted, but has been 
subjected to many changes. 

Sixty-three treatises are now extant, although the 
traditional number is only sixty, as Cant. R, vi. 9 


Mishnah 





says, “Sixty queens, these are the sixty treatises of 
the halakot.~ The three “babot,” or gates, at the 
beginning of the order Nezikin formed originally only 
a single treatise, which also was called “ Nezikin ” 
(B. Ix. 102a: B. M. 10a, b; Lev. R. xix.), and which 
was divided mto three treatises on account of ils 
size. Makkot was originally a dependent. treatise 
combined with Sanhedrin, of which it formed the 
end (comp. Maimonides’ introduction to his com- 
mentary on the Mishnah). The names of the trea- 
tises, which were derived mostly from the con- 
tents, but occasionally from the initial letter, are 
old, being known to the Amoraim, aud in part even 
to the Tannaim. 

The following treatises are mentioned by name in 
the Talmud: Baba Kamma and Baba Mezi‘a (B. K. 
102a); Bekorot (Bezah 20a); Berakot (B. K. 30a); 
‘Eduyot under the name “ Behirta” (Ber. 27a) as 
well as under its own name (Ber. 28a); Kelim (Mish- 
nah Kelim, end); Keritot (Sanh. 65a); Ketubot 
(Sotuh 2a); Kiddushin (id. 76b): Kodashim (B. M. 
109b); Makkot (Sheb. 2b); Menahot (Meu. Ta); 
Middot (Yoma 16a); Nazivand Nedarim (Sotah 2a); 
Oholot under the name “ Ahilot ” (Er. 79a); Rosh 
ha-Shanah (Ta‘an. 2a); Shebu‘ot (Sheb. 2b); Tamid 
(Yoma 14h); Terumot (Pes. 34a); ‘Ukzin (Hor. 18b); 
Yoma (Yoma 14b); and Zebahim under the name 
“Shehitat Kodashim” (B. M. 109b). The names 
of the treatises have, however, been subjected to 
various changes, and have, in some cases, been re- 
placed by later terms. Thus the carlier name “ Mash- 
kin” gave way to the later “Mo‘ed Katan”; “Ze- 
bahim ” was substituted for “Shehitat Kodashim ”: 
and “Shehitat Hullin” was abbreviated to “ Hullin ” 
(on the names comp. A. Berliner in * Ha-Misderonah,” 
i. 20 et seq., 40 ef seq.; see also Frankel, fe. p. 
250; Brill, 2.¢. ii. 18-20). The treatises belonging 
to each order deal with similar subjects, or have 
some other bond of relationship which causes them 
to be placed in a given order, Although there are 
some tractates, such ag Nazir (comp. Naz. 2a) and 
Berakot, which apparently do not belong to the 
order in which they are included, a closer examina- 
tion reveals the reason for their inclusion (comp. 
Maimonides’ introduction to his commentary on the 
Mishnah; Brill, @c. ii. 17-18; Weiss, Ze. ii, 207: 
Geiger, J.¢. p. 486). 

It isa harder task to detine the principle on which 
the treatises are arranged within the various orders: 
and this difficulty is increased by the existence of 
many «different sequences, especially 
since it is uncertain which of these is 
the oldest. According to the Letter 
of Sherira Gaon (/.c. pp. 12-13), Rabbi 
observed no definite sequence, but discoursed on 
each massekta singly without reference to the other 
treatises, changing their arravgement at will. This 
statement is supported by ‘Ab. Zarah va,which states 
that for two treatises there was no definite order in 
the Mishnah—an assertion which Is all the more trust, 
worthy since it is recognized as a principle in ma- 
ing halakic decisions as well. I[t appears, on the 
other hand, from various passages in the Talmud 
(e.g., Sheb. 2b; Sotah 2a; Ta‘an. 2a), that even atan 
early period a certain arrangement of the several 
treatises within their respective orders was fol- 


The 
Treatises. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
a i 


Gig 


lowed, und it is necessary, therefore, to adopt Hoff. 
mann’s view (in Berliner’s “Magazin,” 1290, pp, 
322-323) that a definite sequence was gradually de. 
veloped and observed in the course of instruction 
in the Palestinian and Babylonian academies. The 
teachers of these schools arranged their material on 
pedagogic lines, and in interpreting an order of the 
Mishnal they selected the longest treatise for the 
beginning of the lesson, when the minds of their 
pupils were still fresh, and then passed on to the 
smaller tractates. Likewise in Maimonides’ ge. 
quence, Which was the one generally adopted, the 
treatises from the second to the sixth order are 
arranged according to length, as Geiger has re. 
marked (“Einiges iiber Plan,” ctc., in Geiger’s 
“Wiss. Zeit. Jiid. Theol.” ii. 480 e¢ seg.); and this 
principle is evident in the first order likewise (Hoff- 
mann, U.¢. p. 823; Geiger, /.¢. p. 402). Maimonides’ 
sequence secms, therefore, to have been the same as 
that adopted in the Palestinian and Babylonian 
academies, and hence was the original one (for other 
reasons for this sequence see Maimonides’ iutro- 
duction to his commentary on the Mishnah; Fran- 
kel, Ze. pp. 2595-264; Brill, le. di, 20-27). 

The division of the several treatises into chapters 
as well as the sequence of these chapters was the 
work of Rabbi himself (Letter of Sherira Gaon, @.c. 


p. 18). The portion discussed each 
The day constituted an independent perek ; 
Chapters. and this term was, therefore, applied 


elsewhere to a single discourse also 
(Ber. 11b; ‘Er. 36b; on a statement in the “Seder 
Tanna'im we-Amora’im,” to the effect that the 
Saboraim divided the treatises into chapters, see M. 
Lerner, * Die Aeltesten Mischna-Compositionen,” in 
Berliner’s “ Magazin,” 1886, p. 3, note1). Generally 
speaking, the original division and sequence of the 
chapters have been preserved, as appears from vari- 
ous passages of the Talmud (R. H. 81b; Suk. 22b; 
Yeb. 9a; Ket. 15a; Niddah 68b; Zeb. 15a). The 
names of the chapters taken from the initial letters 
ure likewise old, and some of them are mentioned 
even in the Talmud (B. M. 35b; Niddah 48a}. In 
the course of time, however, various changes were 
made in the division, sequence, and names of the 
chapters; thus, for example, the division of Tamid 
into seven chapters is not the original one. On 
other variations in sequence see Frankel, U.c. pp. 
264-265, and on the changes in the names see Ber- 
liner in ” Ela-Misderonah,” i. 40b. 

There are altogether 523 chapters in the Mishuah, 
divided as follows: Zera‘im 74 (Bikkurim 3), Mo‘ed 
Katan 88, Nashim 71, Nezikin 73 (Abot 5), Ko- 
dashim 91, Tohorot 126. Some authorities reckon 
624 chapters by adding a sixth chapter to Abot, 
while others count 425 by adding a sixth chapter to 
Abot and a fourth chapter to Bikkurim. 

The division of the chapters into paragraphs, 
which is likewise very old, has not been preserved 
in its original form, the different recensions of the 
present Mishnah having a different division (comp. 
Frankel, é.c. p. 265). The several paragraphs are 
mostly cast in the form of the fixed Halakah with- 
out a Scripture passage (see MrpRasH HaLAKan), al- 
though Weiss (/.c. ii. 211, notes 1-6) has enumerated 
217 passages in which the Halakah is given together 


617 





with the Scriptural text on which it is based, hence 
assuming the form of the Midrash. Some of these 
midrashic sentences in the Mishnah have the form 
of the earliest exegesis of the Soferim (comp. 
Frankel, ¢@.e. p. 5), and there are also many passages 
modeled on the tannaitic Talmud (comp. Weiss, é.c. 
ii. 209-210). 

The following is the list of the mishnaic orders 
with their treatises, according to Maimonides, the 
deviations in both Talmudim being given at the end 
of each order (for details see separate articles under 
the names of the respective orders and treatises; 
and on variations in certain editions of the Mishnah 
comp. Strack, @.¢. pp. 9-12): 


I. The order Zera‘im (‘Seeds’) contains the following eleven 
treatises: (1) Berakot (** Blessings’), divided into nine chapters ; 
deals with the rules for the daily prayer, and other prayers and 
blessings. (2) Pe’ah (*‘Corner’’); eight chapters; deals with 
the regulations concerning the corners of the fleld (Ley. xix. 9, 
10; xxiii. 22; Deut. xxiv. 19-22), and with the rights of the poor 
in general. (3) Demai (‘Doubtful ’’); seven chapters; deals 
chiefly with various cases in which it is not certain whether the 

offering of the fruit has been given tothe priests. 
Orders and (1) Kilayim (‘Of Two Sorts’’; ‘‘ Heterogene- 
Treatises. ous’’); nine chapters; deals chiefly with rules 
regarding forbidden mixtures (Lev. xix. 19; 
Deut. xxii. 9-11). (5) Shebi‘it (‘Sabbatical Year’); ten 
chapters; deals with the regulations concerning the seventh 
year (EX. xxiii. 11; Lev. xxv. 1-8; Deut. xv. 1 et seq.). (6) 
Terumot (°° Offerings *’) ; eleven chapters; deals with the laws 
regarding the offering to be given to the priest (Num. xviii. 8 
et seq.; Dent. xviii. 4). (7) Ma‘aserot or Ma‘aser Rishon 
( Tithes”’ or ** First Tithes ’’); five chapters; deals with the pre- 
scription regarding the tithe to be given to the Levites (Num. 
xviii. 21-24). (8) Ma‘aser Sheni (*‘ Second Tithe’); flve chapters ; 
deals with the rules concerning the fithe or its equivalent 
which was to be eaten at Jerusalem (Deut. xiv. 22-26). (9) 
Hallah (** Cake”) ; four chapters; deals with the laws regard- 
ing the heave-offering of dough to be given to the priests (Num. 
xy. 18-21). (10) ‘Orlah (‘‘Foreskin of the Trees’); three 
chapters; deals chiefly with the rerulations of Lev. xix. 23-25. 
(11) Bikkurim (* First-Fruits*’); three chapters; deals with the 
laws in Ex. xxiii. 19; Deut. xxvi. 1 ef seq. 

In many editions of the Mishnah, even eariy ones like those of 
Naples 1492, and of Riva 1559, as well as in most of the editions 
of the Babylonian Talmud, a fourth chapter to tbe eleventh 
treatise, Which does not belong to the Mishnah. has been added 
(comp. the gloss in the Wilna edition of the Talmud, p. 87b). 
The sequence of the treatises of this first order in both the 
Taimudim corresponds with that of Maimonides. 

II. Mo‘ed (‘‘ Festivals’’) includes the following twelve trea- 
tises: (1) Shabbat (* Sabbath’’); twenty-four chapters; deals with 
the laws regarding the seventh day asa day of rest (Ex. xvi. 23 et 
seqg., XX. 8-11, xxiii. 12, xxxiv. 21, xxxv. 2-3; Deut. v. 12-15). 
(2) ‘Erubiu (* Mingling’’) ; ten chapters; deals with the means 
by which inconvenient regulations regarding the Sabbath may 
be legally obviated. (8) Pesahim (** Passover Festivais*’); ten 
chapters; deals with the prescriptions remzarding the Passover 
and the paschal sacrifice (Ex. xii., xiii, 6-8, xxiii. 15, xxxiv. 15 
et seq.; Lev. xxiii. 5 et seq.; Num. ix. 2-14, xxvifi. 16 et seq.). 
(4) Shekalim (“ Shekels”) ; eight chapters; treats chiefly of the 
poll-tax of a half-shekel for each male, prescribed in Ex. xxx. 
12-16, and which was devoted to defraying the expenses of the 
services of the Temple. (5) Yoma (‘' Day’’), called also ‘* Kip- 
purim’”’ or * Yom ha-Kippurim” (= “‘Day of Atonement’’); 
eight chapters; deals with the prescriptions regarding wor- 
ship and fasting on the Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi., 
xxiii. 26-32). (6) Sukkah or Sukkot (*“* Booth”); five chap- 
ters; deals with the regulations coneerning the Feast of 
Tabernacles, the Tabernacle, and the garland on it (Lev. 
Xxiii. 34-36; Num. xxix. 12 et seg.; Deut. xvi. 13-16). (7%) 
Bezah (“Egg ’*’; so called from the first word, but originally 
termed, according to its subject, ‘““Yom-Tob”’ = * Feast- 
Day’’); five chapters; deals chiefly with the rules to be 
observed on the feast-days. (8) Rosh ha-Shanah (** New-Year 
Feast’); four chapters; deals chiefly with the regulation of the 
calendar by the new moon, and with the services on the New- 
Year. (9) Ta‘anit (‘‘ Fasting ’’); four chapters: deals chiefly 
With the special fast-days in times of drought or other untoward 
occurrences. (10) Megillah (°° Esther Scroll’): four chapters ; 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mishnah 


contains chiefly regulations and prescriptions regarding the 
reading of the seroll of Estherat Purim, and the reading of other 
passages in the synagogue. (11) Mo‘ed Katan (°° Half-Feasts “*; 
originally called * Mashkin.” after its initial word) : three chap- 
ters: deals with the reguiations concerning the intermediate 
feast-days, or the days between the first two and the last two 
days of Pesah and Sukkab, 12) Hagigah (** Feasting’); three 
chapters ; deals among other things with the manner of observ- 
ance of the three principal feasts. 

In the Babyionian Talmud the treatises of the order Mo‘ed are 
arranged as follows: Shabbat, ‘Erubin, Pesahim, Bezah, 
Hagigah, Mo‘ed Katan, Rosh ha-Shanah, Ta‘anit, Yoma, Sukkah. 
Shekalim, and Megillah ; while the sequence in the Palestinian 
Talmud is Shabbat, ‘Erubin. Pesahim, Yoma, Shekalim, Sukkah, 
Rosh ha-Shanah, Bezah, Ta‘anit, Megillah, Hagigah, and Mo‘ed 
Katan. 

Ill. Nashim (‘‘ Women’’) contains the following seven trea- 
tises: (1) Yebamot (‘* Widows Obliged to Contract a Levirate 
Marriage“) ; sixteen chapters: deals chiefly with the rules for 
the levirate marriage and of the HaLIZAH, whereby the widow is 
enabled to contract another marriage (Deut. xxv. 5-10). (2} 
Ketubot (°° Marriage Contracts) ; thirteen chapters ; deals chiefly 
with the mutual @uties and rights of husband and wife. (3) 
Nedarim (*‘ Vows”); eleven chapters; deals with the regula- 
tions concerning vows (Num. xxx. 2-17). (4) Nazir (‘‘ Naza- 
rite” ; called also ‘** Nezirut” = “ Nazariteship ’); nine chap- 
ters; deals chiefly with the prescriptions regarding the Nazarite 
vows (Num. vi. 1-21). (5) Gittin (‘*Documents’?; ‘‘ Bills 
of Divorce”); nine chapters; deals chiefly with the laws for 
the dissolution of marriage (Deut. xxiv. 1-4). (6) Sotah 
(* Woman Suspected of Adultery’): nine chapters; deals chiefly 
with rules concerning a woman suspected of infidelity (Num. 
v. 11-31). (7) Kiddushin c(t Betrothal *); four chapters; dis- 
cusses the questicn how, by what means, and under what con- 
ditions a legal marriage may be contracted. 

In the Babylonian Talmud the sequence of the treatises in 
this order is as follows: Yebamot, Ketubot, Kiddushin, Gittin, 
Nedarim, Nazir, and Sotah. In the Palestinian Talmud the 
sequence is: Yebamot, Sotah, Ketubot, Nedarim, Gittin, Nazir, 
and Kiddushin. 

IV, Nezikin (‘' Injuries”: called also ** Yeshu‘ot °=“ Deeds 
of Help,” asin Num. R. xiii.) contains the following ten trea- 
tises: (1) Baba Kamma (“ First Gate’’); ten chapters: deals 
chiefly with injuries and compensation for damages. (2) Baba 
Mezi'a (°° Middle Gate”); ten chapters; deals chiefly with the 
laws relating to sales, leases, objects found, and usury. (3) Baba 
Batra(“ Last Gate’): ten chapters; deals chiefly with the rights 
of sale, the ownership of real estate, and the rights of succession. 
(4) Sanhedrin (** Court of Law’); eleven chapters ; deals chiefly 
with judicial procedure and criminallaw. (5) Makkot (“Blows,” 
** Punishments **); three chapters; deals chiefly with the regu- 
lations concerning the number of stripes imposed as punish- 
ment by law (Deut. xxv. I-3). (6) Shebn‘ot (* Oaths ’’); eight 
chapters; deals chiefly with the rules regarding different oaths 
(Lev. v. 4 ef seq.). (7) ‘ Eduyot, or *‘ Ediyyot (** Evidences *’): 
eight chapters; contains the testimony of later teachers regard- 
ing statements of earlier authorities, a large part of this mate- 
rial being contained In other portions of the Mishnah as well. 
(8) ‘Abodah Zarab (“*Idolatrous Worship’’); five chapters ; 
deals chiefly with the regulations concerning the attitnde of the 
Jews toward idolatry and idolaters. (9) Abot,or Pirke Abot 
(‘Sayings of the Fathers’); five chapters; contains maxims 
and aphorisms. A sixth chapter called “ Perek Kinyan ha- 
Torah ” (=“‘Acquisition of the Law”) was subsequently added 
to this treatise, but it does not belong to the Mishnah. (10) 
Horayot, or Hora’ot (** Decisions”); three chapters ; deals chiefly 
With such religious and legal decisions as had been made 
through error. 

The sequence of these treatises is as follows in the Babylonian 
Talmud: Baba Kamma, Baba Mezi‘a, Baba Batra, ‘Abodah 
Zarah, Sanhedrin, Makkot, Shebu‘ot, Horayot, ‘Eduyot, and 
Abot. The usual sequence is observed in the Mishnah of the 
Palestinian Talmud. 

Vv. Kodashim (**Hcly Things’) contains the following 


‘eleven treatises: (1) Zebahim (“‘ Sacrifice’; originally called 


*Shehitat Kodashim * = ‘*Slaughtering of the Holy Animals”: 
B. M. 1096); fourteen chapters; deals chiefly with the laws re- 
garding sacrifices (Lev. t. et seq.). (2) Menahot (** Meat-Offer- 
ing’’): thirteen chapters ; deals chiefly with the rules concerning 
meat-offerings (Lev. ti.; v. 11-18; vi. 7-16; vii. 9-10: xiv. 10-20; 
xxiii. 18, 16; Num. v. Il et seq., vi. 18-20, xv. 24, xxviii., 
xxix.). (8) Hullin (* Profane’; called also “‘Shehitat Hul- 
lin’? = **Slaughtering of Non-Consecrated Animals”): twelve 
chapters; deuls chiefly with the laws for slaughtering and with 


Mishnah 
Missouri 





other rules relating to the eating of meat. (4) Bekorot (** First- 
Born’’); nine chapters; deals chiefly with the regulations con- 
cerning the various firstlings (Ex. xiii. 2, 12 et seq. Ley. xxvii. 
26 ef seq.; Nui. vill. 16-18, xviii, 15-17; Deut. xv. 19 et seq.). 
(5) ‘Arakin (‘* Estimations *’); nine chapters; deals chiefly with 
the prescriptions regarding the ransom of those who bave been 
dedicated to God (Lev. xxvii. 2 et sey.). (6) Temurah (‘ Ex- 
change’); seven chapters ; deals chietly with the laws regard- 
ing the exchange of a dedicated animal (Lev. xxvii. 10, 33). 
(7) Keritot C* Extirpations ™); six chapters ; deals among other 
subjects with the punishment by excommunication (°° Karet”*), 
which is frequently mentioned in the Old Testament. (8} Me‘ilah 
(* Trespass *’); six chapters; deals with the rules concerning 
trespass in the case of a dedicated object (Num. v. 6-8). (9) 
Tamid (* The Daily Morning and Evening Burnt Offering *’); 
deals among other subjects with the regulations for the daily 
sacrifice (Ex. xxix. 88-42; Num. xxviii. 2-8). In the editions 
of the Mishnah, Tamid is divided into seven chapters, excepting 
in Lowe's edition, where it has but six; while Levi b. Gershon 
(RaLBaG) enumerates only five chapters for Tamid in the in- 
troduction to his commentary on the Pentateuch. (10) Middot 
(** Measures **); five chapters; describes the apartments and 
furniture of the Temple. (11) Kinnim (“ Birds’ Nests’); three 
chapters ; deals with the prescriptions regarding the offering 
of doves (Lev. i. 14-17, v. 1 et seq., xii. 8). 

In the Babylonian Talmud the sequence of the treatises of 
this order is as follows: Zebahim, Menahot, Bekorot, Hullin, 
*Arakin, Temurah, Keritot, Me‘ilah, Kinnim, Tainid, and Middot. 

VI. Tohorot (°° Purifteations”) contains the following 
twelve treatises: (1) Kelim (‘* Utensils ”’); thirty chapters; deals 
chiefly with the regulations coneerning the different kinds of 
uncleanness of vessels (Lev. xi. 32 et seg.; Num. xix. 14 et seq.. 
Xxxi. 20 et seq.). (2) Oholot, or Ahilot (** Tents *’): eighteen chap- 
ters; deals chiefly with the laws regarding the defllement occa- 
sioned by a corpse (Num. xix. 14-20). (3) Nega‘im (** Leprosy”’); 
fourteen chapters; deals with the rules concerning the various 
kinds of leprosy (Lev. xiii., xiv.). (4) Parah (‘Red Heifer’’); 
twelve chapters; deals with the regulations concerning the red 
heifer and the purificative ashes obtained from it (Num. xix.). 
(5) Tohorot ("" Purities ”’ ; euphemistic for ‘* Impurities’); ten 
chapters; deals with minor defilements. (6) Mikwa’ot, or Mik- 
wet (‘ Ritual Baths’’); ten chapters; deals with the regula- 
tions concerning the bathing of the defiled (Lev. xiv. 8, xv. 5 et 
seq.). (7) Niddah (‘* Menstruous Woman”); ten chapters; 
deals with the laws concerning the defilement caused by men- 
strnation (Ley. xii., xv. 19 ef seg.). (8) Makshirin (** Predis- 
posings’’; called also ** Mashkin * = ** Liquids ’’); six chapters; 
deals with the rule which Geclares that an object is defiled by 
contaet with anything unclean only in case it was wet before- 
hand (Ley. xi. 34, 87, 38). (9) Zabim (“Sufferers from Dis- 
charges’); flve chapters ; deals with the rules in Lev. xv. (10) 
Tebul Yom (‘He Who Has Taken a Ritual Bath on That Same 
Day ’’); four chapters; deals chiefly with the effect produced 
upon an entire object which has come in contact with a “*tebul 
yon,” who, according to Lev. xv. 5, is unclean until sundown, 
even though this contact has been only partial. (11) Yadayim 
(** Hands”); four chapters; deals chiefly with the defilement 
and cleausing of the hands. (12) ‘Ukzin (‘* Stems’’): three 
chapters; deals chiefly with the relation of the fruit to the stems, 
skins, and seeds, with reference to defilement, uncleanness of 
the fruit affecting the stems, skins, and seeds, and vice versa. 

In the Babylonian Talmud the sequence of the treatises in To- 
horot is as follows: Niddah, Kelim, Oholot, Nega‘im, Parah, 
Tohorot, Mikwa’ot, Makshirin, Zabim, Tebul Yom, Yadayim, 
and ‘Ukzin. 

The Mishnah is extant in many editions, although 
only the earlier ones can be mentioned here: first 
edition, Naples, 1492, fol., with the Hebrew com- 

mentary of Maimonides; Venice, Jus- 


Editions tiniani, 1546-50, fol.; Venice, 1549, 
and Com- 4to, with the commentary of Obadiah 
mentaries. Bertinoro: Riva di Trento, 1559, 


fol., with the commentaries of Mai- 
monides and Obadiah; Sabbionetta and Mantua, 
1559-63, 4to; Venice, 1606, fol., with the same two 
commentaries. 

Many commentaries on the Mishnah have been 
written. Maimonides wrote one in Arabic with a 
general introduction on the history, origin, and ar- 
rangement of the Mishnah. This commentary, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





618 





whieh was translated into Hebrew several times, is 
printed in many editions of the text. The Arabic 
original of several treatises has recently been pub- 
lished, in addition to that of the entire sixth order, 
edited by Derenbourg (comp. the enumeration in 
Strack, Ze. p. 1138 and Appendix); the Hebrew 
translation, which is faulty in many passages, being 
corrected to agree with it. 

Asher b. Jehiel of Germany (d. Toledo 1827) 
wrote a commentary on the first and sixth orders, 
which was tirst printed in the Amsterdam edition of 
the Talmud, 1714-16, and in the Frankfort-on-the- 
Main edition, 1720-21. R. Samson of Sens also 
wrote & commentary on the same orders, which is 
printed in most of the editions of the Talmud, § R, 
Obadiah Bertinoro (end of 15th cent.) wrote a com- 
Inentary on the entire Mishnah, which is printed 
in most editions. The commentaries “Tosefot Yom- 
Tob” by Yom-Tob Lipmann Heller (1579-1654) and 
“Tif’eret Yisrael” by Israel Lipschitz are likewise 
printed in many editions of the Mishnah. The 
foowing commentaries may also be mentioned: 
“Kaf Nahat,” by Isaac ibn Gabbai, printed in the 
Venice edition of the Mishnah, 1609, and in some 
other editions; “‘Ez ha-Hayyim” (Leghorn, 1658 
et seq.), by Jacob Hagiz; “Kab we-Naki,” by Elisha 
b. Abraham, in ed. Amsterdam, 1697, 1698, etc.: 
“Zera’ Yizhak,” by Isaac b. Jacob Hayyut, Frank- 
fort-on-the-Oder, 1739; “Sefer Bet Dawid,” Amster- 
dam, 1739; “Melo Kaf Nahat,” by Senior Phoebus 
b. Jacob, in ed. Offenbach, 1737; Berlin, 1832-384; 
“Sefer Mishnat Rabbi Natan,” on Zera‘im (Frank- 
fort-on-the-Main, 1862), by Nathan Adler; and 
“Likkute lha-Mishnah” (Breslau, 1873), by Shraga 
Phoebus Frenkel. 

Of the translations of the Mishnah the following 
may be mentioned: (1) “ Mischna sive Totius Hebre- 

orum Juris, Rituum, Antiguitatum 


Transla- ac Legum Oralium Systema cum Cla- 
tions. rissimorum Rabbinorum Maimonidis 


et Bartenorre Commentartis Integris; 
Quibus Accedunt Variorum Auctorum Note ac 
Versiones in Eos Quos Ediderunt Codices ; Latinitate 
Donavit ac Notis Ilustravit Guilielmus Surenhu- 
sius,” Amsterdam, 1698-1708, 6 vols., fol.; the text 
in Hebrew and Latin, with the commentaries of Mai- 
monides and Obadiah Bertinoro in a Latin translation. 
(2) “ Mishnayot,” Berlin, 1832-34, 6 parts, 4to. (3) 
Vocalized Hebrew text of the Mishnah, with German 
translation in Hebrew letters. (4) The commentary 
“Melo Kaf Nahat,” and (5) a brief German introduc- 
tion with notes, published by the Geselischaft von 
Freunden des Gesetzes und der Erkenntniss, gener- 
ally known as “ Jost’s translation.” (6) Johann Jacob 
Rabe, “ Misclnah, oder der Text des Talmuds Ueber- 
setzt und Erlautert,” 6 parts, 4to, Onolzbach, 1760- 
1763. A new edition of the vocalized Hebrew text 
witha German translation has been undertaken by D. 
Hoffmann and E. Baneth, of which several parts have 
appeared. An Italian translation by Vittorio Cas- 
tiglione is likewise in course of publication (1904). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Letter of Sherira Gaon, ed. Neubauer, in M. 
J.C. pp. 8-41, Oxford, 1887; Maimonides, introduction to his 
commentary on the Mishnah, printed in many editions of the 
Talmud after the treatise Berakot; Z. Frankel, Hodegetica 
tn Mischnam, Leipsic, 1859; J. Brill, Mebo ha-Mishnah, 
part i., Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1876; part ii., ib. 1885; S. J- 
Rapoport, in Kerem Hemed, vii. 157-167; A. Krochmal, 


619 


Yoledot R. Fehudah ha-Nasi, in He-Haluz. ti. 75-83; 
idem, tb. fii. 118-124; idem, preface to his Yerushala- 
yim ha-Benaych, Lemberg, 1867; 0. H. Schorr, in He- 
Haluz, 1866, pp. 41-443 vi. 32-47; Z. Frankel, Introductio bi 
Patnud Hierosolymitanum, pp. 19a-22a, Breslau, 1870; 
ae Oppenheim. “uP Gesch. der Mixehna, in Bet Pati, 

L43-151, V2-17u. 237-245, 269-273, 304-315, 343-355 (also re- 
printed separately. oe 1882); A. Geiger, Biniges tiber 
Plan wid Anordiniasy der Mischna, in Geiger’s Wiss. Zeit. 
Jil. Theol, Lssb. ii. 474-492 5 idem, Lehrbueh zur Sprache 
der Mischna. Breslan, 1845; Tsaae Lampronti, Pahad Yigz- 
hak, s.v. Misha; W. Landsberg, Plan und System in der 
Aufeinanderfolge der EBinzelnen Mischnas, in Monats- 
sehvift, 1873, pp. 208-215; Tobias Cohn, Aufeinanderfolge 
der Mixehnaor ‘dnungen, in Geiger’s Jlid, Zeit. 1866, iv. 126- 
140; Dinner, Veranlassung, Zweck und Entwickelung der 
Halakischen und  tHatlakischeregetischen Samimlungen 
Wiihrend der Tannaimperiode im Umriss Daryestellt, in 
Monatssehrift, 1871, pp. 187 et seg., 158 ct seq., 313 et seq., 363 
et seq., 416 ef sey., 449 et seq.; idem, R. Jehuda Hanasi’s 
Antéeil an Unserer Mischna, ib. 1872, pp. 161 ef seq., 218 et 
seq. idem, Biniyes ther Crsprung und Bedeutuny des 
Traktates Edoyot, ib. 1871, pp. 388-42, 59-77; D. Hoffmann, 
Die Erste Misehna und die Controversen der Tannaim, 
Berlin, 1882; idem, Bemerkunger zur Kritik der Mischna, 
in Berliner’s Magazin, 1851, pp. 121-130, 169-177; 1882, pp. 96- 
105, 152-163; 1884, pp. 17-30, 88-92, 126-127; M. Lerner, Die 
acltesten Mischna- Compositionen, ib. 1886, pp. 1-20; J. 
Derenbourg, Les Sections et les Traités Ge la Misehna, in 
R. EJ. 188i, iii. 205-210; A. Berliner, in Ha-Misderonah, 
i. 20 et seq., 40 et seq.; J. S&S. Bloch, Hinblicke in die Gesel. 
der Ientstehung der Taimudischen Literatur, Vienna, 1884 ; 
1. H. Weiss, Dor, ii. 182-184, 207-217 ; idem, WZ ish pat Leshon 
ha-Mishnah, ib. 1867; L. A. Rosenthal, Veber den Zusam- 
menhang der Mischna; bin Be itrag zu Threr Entstehaungs- 
gesch. Strasburg, 189] Gp idem, Die Mischna, Aufbauund 
Ducllensencunaly: ib. 1903. 

Jie- Lise Li 


F.C. 
MISHNEH TORAH. Sce Moses sp. MAImMon. 


MISSISSIPPI: One of the southern states of 
the United States of America; admitted to the 
Union in 1817. In 1682 La Salle took possession of 
the territory for the King of France. It passed to 
England in 1765, was ceded to Spain in 1781, and 
to the United States in 1798. In 1724 a law was 
passed in France by which “Jews were expelled, 
and no other religion [than the Roman Catholic} 
was tolerated.” When the Spaniards took posses- 
sion in 1781, a more tolerant government was estab- 
lished. It seems that there were a few Jews in the 
Natchez district at. the close of the eighteenth cen- 
fury, Atany rate, in Natchez a tombstone has been 
found bearnig the name of Harris and the date 1828; 
and there are Indications that of the several people 
of that name one had lived in the city a number of 
years prior to his death. 

Ite was about 1840 that the Jews had become 
sufficiently numerous to found congregations; the 
establishment of cemeteries usually preceded the 
formation of religious organizations. In 1849 three 
pedlers came to “Woodville. One of them, Henry 
Burgance, died the same year. Loath to have their 
companion buried with Christians, the other two, 
Jacob Cohen and Jacob Schwarz, bought a small 

piece of land for $50 and founded a 





Early cemetery; thisis still used. Similarly 
Congrega- the few Jews who settled at Grand 
tional Gulf bought a cemetery, which they 
Activity. abandoned when, owing to frequent 


inroads of the Mississippi River, they 
moved to Port Gibson; the Jews of Natchez 
bought their cemetery in 1840, and organized Con- 
gregation B'nai Israel in 1843; Jackson organized 
a cemetery in 1854 and Congregation Beth Israel a 
few years later; Meridian. purchased a cemetery 
in 1868, and organized Congregation Beth Israel 
in 1869. In Columbus a B’nai Brith lodge was 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mishnah 
Missouri 





founded in 1872. a cemetery in 1875, and Congrega- 
tion B'nai Israel in 1879. 

Remarkable, and speaking well for Jewish zeal, 
is the fact that almost all congregations were 
founded by a few men. For example, Vicksburg 
(1843) could not have contained more than 10 Jew- 
ish families; Natchez (also 1843) had no more; 
Meridian (1869) organized with 8 men; Woodville 
held services on Rosh ha-Shanah, 1860, when but 7 
families lived there. Brookhaven now has but 
about 20; Canton, about 25; Columbus, 20; Sum- 
mit, about 10; yet all these places have organized 
congregations. Some of these congregations began 
as Orthodox; those organized in the seventies and 
after were Reform from the start. Now (1904) all 
those mentioned above are Reform. Early iu the 
eighties, however, a few Orthodox Jews settled 
here and there, and formed “ minyanim” for the holy 
days. Meridian first organized an Orthodox con- 
gregation (Ohel Jacob) in 1894; Vicksburg followed 
in 1900; these are at present the only places sup- 
porting a shohet. Orthodox services were held in 
Laurel in 1901 and 1903. 

In addition to the places mentioned above there 
are small communities with congregations in 
Brownsville, Greenwood, and Lexington. 

Except in the Natchez district (Natchez, Vicks- 
burg, Woodville, and Port Gibson), most of the con- 
gregatious lie within a limited strip of land run- 
ning east and west about the middle of the state. 
Very few Jews live south of 32° or north of 83° 30° 
N, Jat. 

In almost every instance Jews entered the state to 
transact mercantile business. Thus, coming in con- 
tact with Gentiles, and being isolated from their co- 
religionists, fast friendships were formed with those 
of other religious views, and to-day the members 

of the two faiths mingle freely. Dur- 
Communal ing the Mexican war there were too 
Life. few Jews living in the state to call for 
notice of their services: in the Civil 
however, Jew and Christian fought side by 
side, Federal soldiers displaced and mutilated 
tombstones in Jewish as well as in Christian 
cemeteries, thus effacing many records which would 
now be of great interest. Quite a number of Jews 
attained to the rank of captain; and there is no 
camp of Confederate Veterans in the larger places 
that does not include some Jewish members. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: American Jewish Year Book, 1901: The 


Oul (New Orleans), Aug., 1901; Franklin L. Riley, Hist. of 
Mississippi, Richmond, Va., 1900. 


A. W. Wr, 


MISSOURI: One of the central states of the 
United States; admitted to the Union in 1821. 
While yet a territory it was inhabited by Jewish 
settlers, the earliest of whom were the Bloch family. 
The Jewish communities of the state are as follows 

St. Louis: Jews began to settle here shortly 
after 1830. At the present time there are six per- 
manent and several temporary places of worship. 
The Reform congregations are: Shaare Emeth, Tem- 
ple Israel, B’nai El], and United Hebrew. These 
four congregations aggregate about 800 families. 
Of the Orthodox bodies there are: B’nai Emunah, 
Tifereth Israc], and the Beth Hamidrash Hagadol. 


war, 


Missour. 
Mitau 





All the Orthodox organizations have their places of 
worship on the north side of the city. Tifereth 
Israel was founded in 1899; its present membership 
is 160, and it hasa Talmud Toreh where 200 chil- 
dren receive daily instruction in Elebrew after pub- 
lic-school hours. The Rev. 8. Rosenberg is rabbi. 

The oldest of the Reform congregations are the 
Bnai El and the United Hebrew. The latter was 
established in 1888, It held its first services in a 
private residence, and its first synagogue was built 
in 1858. Dr, Illoway was then rabbi. In 1881 a 
new synagogue was erected at Twenty-first and 
Olive streets. The membership is 146. Dr. H. J. 
Messing has been rabbi since 1878. The Sabbath- 
school has 80 pupils. The congregation has a 
United Hebrew ladies’ aid society, consisting of 80 
members; and a young people’s literary circle. 

The B’nai El congregation was founded in 1852 
by a consolidation of two previously existing relig- 
ious organizations. Its synagogue, built in 1888, 
is at Choutean avenue and Eleventh street; pres- 
ent membership, 150. The Sabbath-school num- 

bers about 100 pupils. The Jastrow 
Congrega- prayer-book is used. The rabbi (since 
tions. 1877) is Dr. Spitz; he is also pub- 

3 lisher and editor of “The Jewish 
Voice,” established in 1888. The congregation has 
a ladies’ aid society of about 100 members, and a 
young people’s society of about the same number. 

Congregation Shaare Emeth was organized in 1866 
with 88 members. I[t worshiped first at the Harmo- 
nia Club on Market street. Its present synagogue, 
on the corner of Lindell boulevard and Vandeventer 
avenue, was erected in 1897; present membership, 
289. The Sabbath-school has an attendance of 246 
pupils. Dr. Samuel Sale has been rabbi since 1887. 
Associated with the congregation is a ladies’ aux- 
iliary society. 

Temple Israel congregation was organized in 1886. 
Its synagogue is on the corner of Pine and Twenty- 
eighth streets; present membership, 250. It has 
Saturday and Sunday services. Dr. Leon Harrison, 
rabbi since 1891, conducts services also in the United 
Charities building on Friday nights for residents of 
the Russo-Jewish quarter. This voluntary office 
was established by the Social Settlement League. 
Besides the regular religious instruction of the young, 
Temple [srael has a confirmation and postgraduate 
class, a Bible class for Women, and an alumni as- 
sociation. 

The following are the chief Jewish philanthropic 
societies and institutions in St. Louis: The oldest 
Jewish benevolent society of the city, probably the 
oldest in the West, is the Hebrew Benevolent Soci- 
ety, instituted in 1842. Jt was legally incorporated 
jn 1847; present membership, 66. It has the char- 
acter of a mutual benefit society. There is also a 
fraternal benefit association under the name of 
“Progressive Order of the West” (founded 1896), 
with sixteen lodges, thirteen of which are in the 
city; the total membership is 1,008 males and 848 
females. 

The first systematic relief of the Jewish poor was 
begun in i871. The influx of needy Jews after 
Chicago’s great conflagration made a union of char- 
itable activities necessary. JLater on the large im- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


620 
a a 
migration of Russo-Jewish refugees made such union 
still more needful. The United Hebrew Relief So. 
ciety then became the leading charitable organiza. 
tion of the Jewish community. The late Rev. Isage 
Epstein was president for many years. and Dr. 
Messing vice-president from 1878. There were, 
besides, three other benevolent societies. All of 
them were in 1897 merged into one common associa. 
tion under the name of * United Jewish Charities ” 
each retained, however, its own distinct existence 
as to officers and the particular scope of charitable 
work for which it had been founded: all relief jg 
dispensed at the main office of the Cnited Charities, 
This institution has its own building (erected 1901) 
on the corner of Ninth and Carr streets. Since its 
erection all the Jewish charitable and educational] 
societies of the city have joined the union; of 
these are to be mentioned: the Home fer Aged and 
Infirm Israelites; the Jewish Hospital; and the He. 
brew Free and Industrial School, founded in 1879 
by Dr. Messing. In this school over 400 children re- 
ceive religious instruction twice a 
week, and of this number 200 girls are 
taught domestic arts and industrial 
branches three times a week, The 
industrial department bas recently 
been put under the management of 
the Sisterhood of Personal Service. 
The pupils in the Jewish Alliance night-school 
(present enrolment 460) receive instruction four 
times a week in the elementary English branches, 
and free reading-rooms and a library are open to 
them. The Alliance and the Frec-School societies 
have recently been consolidated. 

The Jewish Hospital was founded in 1900 and 
dedicated in 1902; it occupies a lot of 200 feet 
fronting Delmar boulevard; free treatment is given 
to all poor applicants. It has also a training-school 
for nurses. The Home for Aged aud Infirm Israel- 
ites was established in 1880; it is located on Jeffer- 
son avenue. 

The Jews of St. Lonis number about 40.000 ina 
total population of 575,238. 

Kansas City: The Reform congregation B’nai 
Jehudah, organized in 1870, was incorporated in 
1872, with 86 members. The present rabbi is Dr. 
Harry H. Mayer; membership, 190. The Sabbath- 
school has 165 pupils and 8 assistant teachers. Free 
religious instruction is given to the children of non- 
members, mainly of poor parents, on Saturday 
afternoons. There are the usual two Sabbath serv- 
ices only. The synagogue is on the corner of 
Bleventh and Oak streets. There are about six 
congregations of the Orthodox persuasion. two of 
which have their own synagogues: the Keneseth 
Israel] with 110, and the Gomel Chesed with 90, 
members. The other Orthodox societies worship 
in rented halls. The various benevolent organiza 
tions of the Jewish community were within the last 
two years confederated as the United Jewish Cham- 
ties, with a board of directors. The charitable, edu- 
cational, and industrial work of its several depart- 
ments is carried on in a rented building on East 
Fifteenth street. 

The Jewish residents of the city number about 
8,000 in a total population of 163.752. 


Educa- 
tional and 
Charitable 

Institu- 
tions. 


621 


st. Joseph: The Jewish settlementat 5t. Joseph 
dates from about 1850. The congregation was es- 
tablished in 1859 with 7 members; in 1861 the mem- 
bership was 20, when an old church building was 
pought and transformed into a synagogue. This 
was burned a year Jater. A new site, on the corner 
of Sixth and Jule streets, was purchased, on which 
the present. synagogue was erected in 1866. The 
present rabbi. Dr. Isaac Schwab, has held the office 
since 1879. The congregation has a membership of 
a9. The Ladies’ Benevolent Society, with a present 
membership of 60, is an important charitable factor 
in the Jewish community, There is also an Ortho- 
dox congregation composed of Jews from eastern 
Europe. By their exemplary thrift these later com- 
ers have risen fron lowly beginnings to fair com- 
petencies, and in 1900 succeeded in building a syna- 
gogue of their own. There is a Hebrew school 
where daily instruction js given, and a ladies’ benev- 
olent society is connected with the congregation, 
The minister is 8. Kanter. There are 75 members, 
and about as many more families not aflihated with 
the congregation, making a total of about 800 per- 
sons in the Orthodox section of the community. 
The whole Jewish population of the city may fairly 
be figured at 1.200 in a total population of 102,979. 

Other Towns: There are a number of other 
towns of the state with Jewish populations avera- 
ging from 12 to 25. In others, again, the number 
is larger, as may be seen from the accompanying 
list: Columbia, 9 families; total number of indi- 
viduals, 31. Chillicothe, 14 familics, aggregating 
50 individuals: thercisa benevolent society. Han- 
nibal, 12 families. Joplin, 38 families, represent- 
ing a teial of about 150 persons; a ladies’ aid soci- 
etv. Jefferson City, 8 families, a total of 34souls; 
there is a synagogue. Moberly, 16 persons. Se- 
dalia, 16 families, aggregating 60 persons; a benev- 
olent socicty. Springfield, 25 families, with about 
100 individuals; a congregation and place of wor- 
ship, with Friday evening services; a ladies’ benevo- 
lent society. 

A. I. Scr. 


MITAU: Capital of the government of Cour- 
land, Russia; situated about 20 miles from Riga on 
the Drixa, an arm of the River Aa. The castle of 
Mitau was founded by the German Knights in 12638; 
and the town itself received its charter in 1435. 
Under the rule of the Knights, Jews were not per- 
mitted to residein Mitau. Inthe sixteenth century, 
when Mitau was already Polish territory, Jewish 
merchants carried on a more or less extensive bust- 
ness in the city; yet even then they were not recog- 
nized as permanent residents, and they had not the 
right to organize a community; and in the next 
century, after the Cossacks’ uprising (1648), the 
Christians of Mitau finally caused their expulsion 
from the city. The Jew Bir ben ha-Kadosh Rabbi 
Benjamin, whose father was killed in Lithuania 
during the Cossacks’ uprising, was court jeweler 
(1730) under Duke Ferdinand, and stood high in the 
esteem of the Knights. He made numerous gifts to 
the Jewish community, among them a funeral car- 
riage and a coffin, which were still preserved in the 
middle of the nineteenth century. A concession for 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 
5c Sa I a eS 


Missouri 
Mitau 





acemetery Was granted in 1730 to the Jewsof Mitau 
by the duke on the application of their representa- 
tive Isaac ben Judah; and a hebra kaddisha was 
founded in the same year. Zebi Hirsch Harif (d. 
1738), son of Rabbi Moses of Lemberg, and an emi- 
nent Talmudic scholar, acted as rabbi of the com- 
munity. Duke John Biron, Ferdinand’s successor 
(1737), was friendly toward the Jews and transacted 
business in partnership with his court Jew Lipman 
(Levi). At that time there was a considerable num- 
ber of Jewish residents in Mitau; under the name 
of “Schutzjuden” they lived in a separate quar- 
ter called the “Judengasse,” now the Doblen’sche 
Strasse. 

The Jew Meyer Kreslawe was given permission to 
open a Jewish inn in the center of the city. This 
was kuown as “Hotel de Jerusalem.” It still ex- 
isted in the middle of the nineteenth century, being 
then owned by H. Michelsohn. 

The successor of Zebi Hirsch Harif was another 
prominent rabbi, Samuel ben Elkanah (d. 1742), an 
thor of the responsa collection “Mekom Shemuel.” 
[Ie was probably followed by Jekuthiel ha-Kohen 
(d. 1775), father of Raphael ha-Kohen of Hamburg, 

and a descendant on his mother’s side 
Eighteenth of Mordecai Jaffe, author of the “ Le- 
Century. bushim.” He held the title “ Rabbi of 
the Province of Livland.” His son 
David Ezekiel Jekuthiel (d. 1823) succeeded him as 
rabbi of the community. When Duke Ernst Biron 
was banished to Siberia in 1741, the knights of Cour- 
land attempted to expel the Jews from Mitau; and 
in 1760 the Diet passed a resolution forbidding 
Lithuanian and Polish Jews to sojourn in Mitau 
for more than a day or two (see JEw. ENcyc. 
iv. 812b, se. CotrLanb). With Biron’s return 
from exile in 1762 the condition of the Jews im- 
proved; and his son and successor, Duke Peter, was 
also favorably inclined toward them. 

In 1784a prominent Jew of Mitau, Kalman Bor- 
kum, laid the foundation of a synagogue, which 
was erected entirely at his expense. Both he and 
his brother Samson Were very active in promoting 
the welfare of the Mitau community, and were 
strenuous champions in defense of the rights of the 
Courland Jewsagainst the German merchants, The 
son-in-law of Kalman Borkum, Dr. Elrich (d. 1809), 
was a native of Russia, and came to Mitau (1770) 
from Vilkomir, Lithuania, where he had practised 
as government and city physician and had received 
the title of court councilor. Markus HERz, husband 
of Henriette Herz, visited Mitau in 1775. Judah 
ben Mordecai ha-Levi Hurwitz, a prominent phy- 
sician and scholar, practised medicine in Mitau 
for a time. 

Notwithstanding the influence of prominent Jews 
at court, and in spite of the liberal views intro- 
duced from Berlin into German Courland, the Jews 
of Mitau did not enjoy the rights accorded to the 
Christians, and often suffered from official abuses 
and from the enmity of the German merchants. 
This is evident from the fact that in 1795 the mem- 
bers of the Jewish community of Mitau submitted 
a memorandum to the knights of Courland assem- 
bled at the Diet, in which they gratefully acknowl- 
edged the protection hitherto extended to them, and 


Mitau 
Mi'un 


asked for relief from their uncertain legal condition. 
Tie petition was signed by the elders Aaron Lipman 
and Isaac Moses Hides and by other prominent Jews 
representing the community. Among the latter 
were David Levi, Joseph Sholem. Joseph Kirschner, 
Marcus Jacob, Mareus Hirsch, Simon Abraham, and 
Abraham Danziger. In reply to this petition to the 
Diet submitted Jan. 18, 1795, the duke expressed an 
opinion favorable to the proposal that Jews be per- 
mitted to settle in Courland. However, before the 
duke had an opportunity to act in regard to the 
Jews, Courland was annexed to Russia (March 16, 
1795). Catherine IL., also, was very favorably dis- 
posed toward the Courland Jews, some of whom 
were among the early Jewish residents in St. Peters- 
burg. When Emperor Paul visited Mitau in 1797, 
representatives of the Jewish community were re- 
ceived by him in audience. In 1810 the Empress of 
Russia gave an audience to a Jewish deputation, 
and appointed Bir Seelig Klein and Samuel Kan- 
dauer as court factors. By a ukase of May 12, 
' 1797, the Jews of Courland received the same rights 
as the Jewsof Lithuania and Poland. Their privi- 
leges were further extended by Alexander I. in 1805. 

In 1885 the Jewish population of Mitau was 
4,987; in 1850, only 4,189. The decrease was due to 
the migration in 1840 of 863 Jews of Mitau to the 
South-Russian colonies, and also to the ravages of 
the cholera epidemic in 1848. The income from the 
meat-tax in 1850 was 8,010 rubles, and from the 
candle-tax, 2,188 rubles. The Jewish popuniation of 
Mitau at that time included 1 banker (who was an 
honorary citizen), 5 merchants of the second gild, 
49 merchants of the third gild, 48 merchant families, 
85 house and real-estate owners, 45 tailors, 80 shoc- 
makers, 28 capmakers, 25 milliners, 18 tinsmiths, 6 
polishers, 6 glaziers, 4 painters, 4 watchmakers, 4 
engravers, 2 opticians, 4 umbrella- 
makers, 3 cotton-spinners, 3 furriers, 
3 cigarmakers, 2 dyers, 2 beltmakers, 
4 turners, 1 bruslimaker, 3 pipe-deco- 
rators, 2 bookbinders, 1 tortoise-shell worker, 2 bas- 
ketmakers, 1 gold-plater, 12 expressmen and drivers, 
12 butchers, 6 innkeepers and cooks. There were 
also a number of hucksters, hostlers, horse-dealers, 
servants, day-laborers, porters, stone-crushers, wood- 
cutters, water-carriers, etc. There were no Christian 
porters in Mitau at that time; and for mauy years 
the moving of furniture was done by the Jews. 

The first Jewish government school in Mitau was 
established in 1850 with one Jewish and one Chris- 
tian teacher, a Jewish private school having existed 
there since 1824. In 1850 there were in Mitau a 
Talmud Torah (founded in 1805), 10 licensed Jewish 
private schools, a poorhouse, a synagogue, and two 
houses of prayer. The hebrakaddisha was founded, 
as has been said, in 1780; a hebra bikkur holim in 
1770; Jewish Women’s Society in 1840; Prisoners’ 
Aid Society in 1829; Artisans’ Association in 1815; 
and a number of Jewish learned societies during the 
early half of the nineteenth century. 

In 1853 the income and expenditures of the Jew- 
ish community amounted to1,200rubles. The Jew- 
ish artisans were represented in the city council by 
two delegates from among their number; the Jewish 
charities were managed by a committee elected by 


Occupa- 
tions. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


622 
ee pS ag SN ae 5 a 
the community; the Jews were represented on the 
schoo! commission by one rabbi and one merchant; 
and S. Waggenheim was attached to the governor’s 
office in the capacity of “learned Jew.” 

Prominent among the Mitau Jews of the nine. 
teenth century were the Sterns, Friedliebs, Rubin- 
steins, Traugotts, and Marcus Erben. Besides the 
rabbis already mentioned reference should be made 
to Elihu, son of David Ezekiel; Israel David Fried. 
man (probably also a son of David), 
who erected a synagogue at his own 
expense, and who died in Mitau in 
1843; Ephraim Israel Jacobson, day- 
yan (d. 1881); Moses Enoch Feiertag, dayyan (d. 
1848); Hirsch Rabinovich (died in the second half of 
the nineteenth century); Mendel Israclsohn (d, 
1861), assistant rabbi, honorary citizen, and member 
of the rabbinical commission of 1852; and Solomon 
Pucher (d. 1899), appointed government rabbi in 
1862. Reuben Joseph WUNDERBAR, author of a his- 
tory of the Jews of Livland and Courland, and 
Adolph EnRLIcH were natives of Mitau. 

The Jews of Mitau were more akin in language, 
manners, and dress to the Jews of Germany than to 
those of Poland and Lithuania. Notwithstanding, 
however, their higher culture, they were never held 
in favor by the Germans of Courland, who in the 
last quarter of the nineteenth century were strongly 
influenced by the anti-Semitic movement of Ger- 
many. The nationalistic movement of the Lets, the 
native population of Courland, and their growing 
activity in commercial and social affairs, have un- 
favorably affected the prosperity of the Jewish com- 
munity in Mitau. Moreover, the improved railroad 
facilities have made Mitau practically a suburb of 
Riga, which has attracted to itself most of the busi- 
ness once belonging tothe former. On the construc- 
tion of the Riga-Ditinaburg railroad many of the 
prominent Jewish merchants of Mitau removed to 
Riga. 

In 1904 Mitau had 8,402 Jews in a total popula- 
tion of about 85,000. See CourLAND. 


Prominent 
Persons. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wunderbar, Gesch, der Juden in den Pro- 
vinzen Biv- und Kurland, Mitau, 1853. LR 


MITER: A head-dress; one of the sacred gar- 
ments of the priests. The high priest’s miter was 
designated as “miznefet,” and was made of fine 
linen, to which the diadem (“ziz”) of pure gold, 
inscribed with the title “ Holiness to the Lord,” was 
fastened by means of a purple cord (Ex. xxviii. 4, 
89; xxxix. 31). 

The miter of the ordinary priests was called “ mig- 
ba‘ah”; but the term is found only in the plural 
form, “migba‘ot.” These miters were also known 
by the compound name “ pa’are ha-migba‘ot,” and 
were likewise of fine linen (#6. xxviii. 40, xxxix. 28). 
That “pa’are” (from “pe’erim”; sing. “pe’er” ) is 
not an adjective, but a noun, is evident from the 
expression “pa’are pishtim” = “miters of linen, 
worn by the priests” (Ezek. xliv. 18). Indeed, the 
use of the “pe’er” was not restricted to priests. It 
was a head-covering of distinction for a bridegroom 
and for the daughters of Zion (Isa. iii. 20, 1xi. 10). 
Being a personal ornament, it was removed during 
periods of mourning (é), Ixi. 8; Ezek. xxiv. 17, 28). 


623 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mitau 
Mivun 





The priestly miters are not described in the Bible, 
yet the name “miznefet,” like “zanif,” the miter 
which the prophet saw placed on Joshua the high 
priest (Zech. iii. 5), suggests a turban wound around 
the head. The term used to denote the miters of 
the common priests (“migba‘ot,” derived from 
“ gebia‘” = “cup ”) suggests a covering of conical 
shape, fitted tightly on the head, and the verb 
“ we-habashta ” (Ex. xxix. 9) seems to point to the 


same, “Pe’er” may be translated “a beautiful 
bonnet”; and the “pa’are ha-migba‘ot” worn by 


the priests may have been bonnets with a conical 

extension. 

Josephus’ description of the miter of the high 
priest and of that of the ordinary priests (“ Ant.” iii. 
7, $$ 8, 6) appears to be confused; but it might be 
elucidated by a study of the rabbinical literature on 
the subject. The Mishnah makes no distinction be- 
tween “miznefct” and “migba‘ot,” and cails the 
miter of the common priest likewise “miznefet” 
(Yoma vii. 5, 20a). The miter of the high priest 
was shorter, to allow room on the forehead for the 
diadem, which was two finger-breadths wide and 
reached from ear to ear (Suk. 5a), a space being 
left for the phylacteries (Zeb. 19a e¢ seg.). A ba- 
raita says that the high priest wore a woolen cap, 
to which was attached the diadem (Hul. 188a). 
Perhaps this cap served as an underlining for the 
miznefet. The miters were all made of six-cord 
threads (Maimonides, “ Yad,” Kele ha-Mikdash, viii. 
1, 2). The code of Moses of Coucy (“Semag,” No. 
178) and later authorities agree that the miter 
of the common priests was not coiled around like a 
turban, but wasrather a stiff, conical hat graduating 
to apoint at the top. Ibn Ezra, in his commentary, 
says the miznefet was like a woman’s bonnet and the 
migba‘ah like a man’s hat (fez). All authorities are 
unanimous in their opinion that the miznefet of the 
high priest was much smaller, covering only about 
one-half of his head. It was made of fine linen, 
twined around the head many times. 

Symbolically the miter and the rest of the priest’s 
vesture, like the sacrifices, represented certain sins 
to be forgiven. Using another symbol, R. Hanina 
said: “Let the miter on high combat the high spirit 
of the arrogant” (‘Ar. 16a). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Isserles, Torat ha-*Olah, ii. § 44; Rofe, Shilte 
ha-Gibhorim, ch. xlv.; Lipschitz, TifPeret Yisrael, introduc- 
tion to Mo‘ed, p. 39a; Azariah dei Rossi, Me’or ‘tnayim, ch. 
xlix., 1.; Braunius, De Vestitu Sacerdotum Hehraorum, 
pp. 517 et seq., AMsterdam, 1680; Bahr, Symbolik des Mosat- 


schen Cultus, ii. 110-115, Heidelberg, 1874. 
J: J. D. E. 


MITNAGGEDIM (lit. “opponents”): Title ap- 
plied by the Hasidim to their opponents, 7.¢., to the 
Orthodox Jews of the Slavonic countries who have 
not become adherents of Hasidism (see JEW. ENcyc. 
Vi. 254, 3.0. Hastpim). The latter have in course of 
time accepted that title, and “mitnagged” now 
means not necessarily an active or even @ passive 
opponent of Hasidism, but simply a non-Hasid. An 
alternative title for “mitnagged” is “‘Olam’sher 
Yid” (= “Jew of the world”), not in the sense of 
being worldly, but meaning one who belongs to the 
great mass of the Jews of the world who are not 
Hasidim. 

J. P. WI. 


MITRANI. Sce TRANI. 


MITZKUN, DAVID MOSES: Russian He- 
braist; born May, 1886; diedin Wilna July 238, 1887, 
He was a writer of Hebrew prose and poetry, and 
maintained himself chiefly by teaching Hebrew. 
A collection of his Hebrew poems entitled “ Kinnor 
Dawid” was published at Wilna in 1563. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohner, Heker Dahar, pp. 5-25, Warsaw, 

nae ; Fuenn, in Ha-Karimel, iii, No. 50; Ha-Asif, 1887, 

H. R. J. 8. BR. 

MY’UN: A Hebrew word signifying “refusal, 
denial, or protest”; used technically by the Rab- 
bis to denote a woman’s protest against a mar- 
riage contracted for her during her mincrity; also 
the annulment of such a marriage. 

A marriage contracted for a girl minor by her 
father was regarded as valid; and it necessitated the 
formality of a divorce if separation was desired (see 
DAUGHTER; MAJoniry; MARRIAGE). If, however, 
the minor was divorced or widowed after she had 
been given in marriage by her father, and then, 
while still in her minority, married again, or, in the 
case of the father’s death, was given in marriage 
by her brothers or by her mother, even when her 
consent was obtained, such a marriage was not valid 
until she reached the age of maturity. During her 
minority she might at any time declare her aversion 
to her husband and leave him without a get (Yeb. 


107a). Nor was any formal declaration on her part 
necessary. If she in any manner showed her dis- 


approval of the marriage contracted for her, or if 
she accepted betrothal-money (“kiddushin ”) from 
another man, she was released from the bonds of the 
marriage previously contracted in her behalf (Yeb. 
108a; Maimonides, “ Yad,” Gerushin, xi. 3; Shul- 
han ‘Aruk, Eben ha-‘Ezer, 155, 3). 

The usual procedure in regard to mi’un was that. 
the minor said, in the presence of two witnesses, “I 
do not wish to live with my husband . . .,” or used 
some other phrase denoting the same 
idea, and thereby became released 
(Yeb. 108a). Originally it was the 
custom to make out a so-called “ get 
mi’un,” in which the minor declared, “I do not like 
him; hedoes not please me; Ido not wish to remain 
with him as his wife.” This was subsequently 
abolished, and the following practise was intro- 
duced: The two men before whom such a declara- 
tion was made prepared a document, which, how- 
ever, was not necessary for the minor’s remarriage, 
since she became free as soon as she had made the 
declaration (Yeb. 107b, 108a). This document, as 
given by Maimonides (“ Yad,” /.c. xi. 11, and witha 
few unimportant variations in “Or Zarua’‘,” i. 687), 
reads as follows: 

“On... [day of the week],the ... dayof the month..., 
in the year... according tothe... era, ..., daughter of 
. . ., protested before us and said, ‘My mother [or my brothers] 
deceived me and gave me in marriage [or betrothed me] to...., 
son of ..., and now I declare before you that I do not desire 
him, and that I will not stay with him.’ We have examined this 
... and are satisfied that tae girl is yet a minor, and have 
written and signed and given [this] to her as a document and a 


clear proof. 
PET See aned veoeoe, Witness. ..., Witness.”’ 


If the marriage was contracted for the girl before 
she had reached the age of six, or after that age 


Form of 
Mi’un. 


eooteone er eeeeeor eee 


Mi’un 
Mizmor 


without her consent, the formality of mi un was not 
necessary. If the marriage took place with her con- 
sent when she was between the ages of six and ten, 
mi’un was necessary if she showed signs of intelli- 
gence and of appreciation of the symbols of mar- 
riage. After ten, mi’un was necessary even if the 
girl manifested no signs of intelligence (Yeb. 107b; 
Git. 65a; “ Yad,” de. xi. 7; Eben ha-'Ezer, 155, 2). 
Since mi’un was regarded as an annulment of mar- 
riage, and not merely as a separation, like divorce, 
the girl might afterward marry auy of the relatives 
of her presumptive husband, and he any of her rela- 
tives. She might marry a kohen, or might remarry 
her previous husband, even though she had been 
married to another after mi‘un (Yeb, 108a; “ Yad,” 
d.c. xi, 16, 17; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 155, 10; see Divorce), 
The institution of mi'un seems to have been of 
very early origin. The Rabbis speak of it asa well- 
established custom, although some of 


Antiquity them look upon it with disfavor. 
of Cus- Bet Shammai_ restricted mi’un to 
tom. betrothed minors, and prohibited it 


| after marriage had already taken place 
(Yeb, 107a). Bar Kappara includes min among 
the things which one should avoid (74. 109a); and 
oue is therefore advised against associating oneself 
with witnesses for the purposes of mi’un (“ Yad,” 
i.e. x. 16). In the Middle Ages some of the rabbis 
vigorously objected to the marriage of minors, giv- 
ing as one of their reasons the desire to make mi’un 
impossible (Tos., Yeb. 109a, sv. “ Wayitrahek ”: 
“Haggahot Maimuni” to “Yad,” le xi. 1; “Or 
Zarua‘,” i. 686; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 155, 1, Isserles’ 
gloss). . 
In the fifteenth century R. Menahem of Merseburg 


MIZMOR 


Poco lento, 
a 


OR i a ee 
eo © 2-22.12 





4 Ep =a 
=z, em ea es i ee _ _- ees eee es 


Miz - mor... le - Da - wid: 1. Ha - 


habu ladonai ka - bod wa - ‘oz 
3. Kol Adonai...... ‘al.. ha -~- mayim, 
4, Kol Adonai bak - ko = - ah, 
5. Kol Adonai sho - bera-ra - zim, 
7. Kol Adonai ho - zeb.. lahabot — esh. 
& - - rot, 


waye-hesof ye - 


.. lam-mab-bul ya - shab, 


10. Adonai.. 


11. 


aeoeereee 


Adonai ‘oz le‘am - mo.. yit - ten, 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Teme ae oe cee me cee eee en ie cee 





624 





wished to abolish the institution of mi‘un altogether, 
and while he did not secure for his decree unanj- 
mous adoption, the sentiment against the marriage 
of young children, which became stronger in later 
times, and the diffidence with which the Rabbis ap. 
proached a case of mi’un on account of the confiict- 
ing opinions, caused this institution to become al- 
most obsolete (sec Judah Minz, Responsa, No. 18, 
Firth, 1766; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 155, 22, Isserles’ gloss. 
and “ Pithe Teshubah,” ad doc. ; see also Masonry), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Low, Die Lebensalter, pp. 179-184, Szegedin, 
1875; Duschak, Das AMosaisch-Taimudische Eherecht, pp. 
142-143, Vienna, 1864; Mielziner, The Jewish Law of Mar- 
riage and Divorce, § 36, Cincinnati, 1884; Saalschiitz, Das 
Mosaische Recht, p. 507, note, Bertin, 1853; Weill, La Femme 
Juive, part i., eh. ili., iv., Paris, 1874. 
E. C. J. H. G. 


MIXED MARRIAGE. Scc INTERMARRIAGE. 


MIZMOR LE-DAWID ilit. “A Psalm of 
David”): The superscription to Ps. xxix., chanted 
on Sabbaths before the evening service, and at 
morning service while the scroll of the Law is being 
returned to the Ark. Settings by modern com- 
posers ure in most cases utilized in the morning 
service by the Ashkenazim, there being among 
them no recognized traditional melody. The Se- 
phardic synagogues, however, possess an ancient 
chant, of Peninsular origin, which, in its melodic 
outline, and in its extensive use of the third and 
fifth degrees of the scales as the reciting notes, and 
particularly the former as the closing one, charac- 
teristically illustrates the general tone of their tra- 
ditional melodies and intonations (comp, LEKAH 
Dopt: ‘Er Sra‘are Razon). The transcription 
here given exhibits the employment of both strains 
of the chant. 


LE-DAWID 








bu 





2. Habu ladonai kebod shemo, hishtaha wu.. la-do- 


E] ha-kabod hir - - - - ‘m,A-do - 
Kol A - - - - - - do - - 
wayesheb - = 5 = - ber A-do - 

. Kol A - - - z ss P do = . 
ube - - - - - - = he - ka - 
wa - ‘ . . - - s yesheb A - do- 


nai ye-ba - 





















625 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ae 
SS ee 
7 ee ne 
nai be-had-rat ko - - -  desh., 
nai... ‘al... ma- yim rab -_ bim. 
WAL oy dteta's .. be - ha -_ dar. 
nai... et ar- zZe...... ha-Leba-non. 6, Way-yar - ki- dem.. ke - mo... 
nai... ya -_ hil..... mid -_ bar, ya - hil A - do - nai mid-bar Ka - 
lo.... kul - lo o- mer ka- bod. 
Nal -sossstaens me - lek le - ‘o - lam. 
rek... et ‘am-mo..... ba - sha - lom. 
tee Dai Segno. :8: 


é= 


‘egel, 
desh. 9. Kol 


we - Sir - 


Le - ba - non 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Sola and Aguilar, Ancient Melodies of 
the Liturgy of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, No. 13, 
London, 1857; Cohen and Davis, Voice of Prayer and 
Praise, No. 16, London, 1899. 


A. F. L. C. 

MIZMOR SHIR LE-YOM HA-SHABBAT 
(lit, “A Psalm, a Song for the Sabbath Day ”): The 
superscription to Ps. xcii., chanted with Ps. xciii. 
before the commencement of evening service on Sab- 
baths (including festivals falling on that day) in the 
“Pesuke de-Zimrah” of the early part of morning 
service on Sabbaths and festivals (see Lirurey), and 
(without Ps. xciii.) after the Reading of the Law at 
Sabbath afternoon service. There is, strangely 
enough, no general musical tradition for the psalm 
in the northern uses. The modern hazzanim and 


MIZMOR SHIR LE-YOM 


A - do o eo e nal 





choir-masters have produced numerous settings 
(cboral and solo) for it. A noteworthy composition 
by Franz Schubert for verses 1 to 8, designed for 
special festival occasions, is included in Sulzer’s 
“Schir Zion” (i. No. 6). This setting is written for 
barytone solo, soli quartet, and chorus, and has been 
introduced by Georg Henschel at the London Sym- 
phony Concerts. 

Ordinarily, in the northern ritual, the psalm is 
read by the congregation, and the concluding 
verses, from No. 12, are then intoned by the hazzan 
in an elaborate melismatic recitative, of the charac- 
ter shown in the transcription commencing “ Zaddik 
ka-tamar” (comp. the similar passage in Sulzer’s 
“Schir Zion,” ii.). 


HA-SHABBAT 


ZADDIK KA-TAMAR 





Commodo. 
— aKa — re. Site SNS Sa 
se o—-0_-e—- of o-»— 7/0 See fo — 0 —ha 5 4 
aaa te — 
Zad - dik ka - ta - mar..... yif - rah,.... ke - @ - - rez ba- Le- ba - 
The right-eous asa palm - tree shall four-ish, asa ce - - dar in Leb-a - 
=~. se 
ey 3: >a ___ = 
oe a] 


—— =F a eau 
or a Ses ant Ae =e 
Sa a a a 





non yis - - 
non shall grow tall..... 
VIL. —40 


She-tu - lim 
Plant-ed 


in the House of the 


be- bet...... A-do - - nai, be - 


TLord,........ 


tr the 


Mizmor 
Mizpah 


pier, 


tities gion aie ee 


- rot E-Ilo- he - nu_ yaf 


pins bos Ady oh ate A 











THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


of our God they shall 


626 
me 
ica eS. eee i — i ad +s 
aa —— 4-4- 
ri - hus “Odus..20seiwasas ts ye-nu . 
blos - som. Still..... scoeeee Shall they shoot 








bun.. be-se- bah, de - she - nim... we-ra-‘a-ran - nim...... Cesta % yi - he.- 
forth.. in old age; eds. ful iariw teased of sap... and green.......... shall they 
= nT 
” —o—a_ 
| TEL REIS a SP Ee _________ oe, ee a = 
Se 
ee gg IO ee aa seas a 2 nese eek eee 
eS. ——— * oe eta aa i 
yu. Le - hag - - gid ki ya - shar.................. A - do - P 
be: To de - clare that up - right........... is the Lord;.......... 


nal; Pe ee Pree iedenyeacta cera 


my Rock is.... He; 


In the Spanish and Portuguese tradition there is 
preserved for the Sabbath Psalm an ancient chant 
of exceptional beauty and interest, which is utilized 
in England also in the synagogues of the Reform and 
the German and Polish rites. It has been effectively 


scored, as the Psalm of the day in the Temple ,; 


service, by Sir Edward Elgar in his oratorio “The 
Apostles,” which was produced at the Birmingham 
Musical Festival of 1903. The first strain (marked 
A in the transcription), the pair of simple musical 
phrases employed for ordinary verses, is very an- 
tique in character; and the secondary strain (marked 
B), even if a later addition to it, also must have origi- 
nated under Moorish influence. The ornamental fig- 
uration of the first two and parallel phrases in this 


there 


‘aw - la - tah.. bo. 
Him, 


is NOs he un - right-eous-ness in 


i secondary strain is of true Orienta! character, and 


appears frequently in Arab songs, as, for instance, 
those founded on the “Oriental chromatic” scale 
given by Bourgault-Ducoudray in “Trente Mélodies 
Populaires de Gréce et d’Orient,” Paris, 1876, par- 
ticularly No. 2 (quoted also by Ambros, in his 
“Gesch, der Musik,” and by others), No. 17, and the 
more modern No. 29. But it is important to note 
that this figure, and also that of the third phrase in 
the same strain, frequently occur in the traditional 
melody of the Jews of Teutonic and Slavonic lands 
as well as of those around the Levant (comp. JEW. 
Encyve. iii. 247, s.o. Brrkat Konantm [the Polish 
melody]; GESHEM [melody A]; NE‘ILAH; and espe- 
cially Music, SYNAGOGAL). 


MIZMOR SHIR LE-YOM HA-SHABBAT 


TOB LE-HODOT 


~ rege maestoso. 


aap 


1. Tob.. 


la - do - Dai, 


le - ho - dot 





u - le- zam-mer le - shim - ka... 


fais 
= 


‘el - yon. 


627 








a, 








wa 





THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


1 

——_—_ ot sot at 

: SSS 
ee —_————__. 


= = cae 
| = comares Dee VE 3-4 ——- 
or ae . | to “Ox y-0—|* _s ae 
__ &__. <—#- 03 _——= —_ ee See eee < Re tee: 
na = = = 


a, ee (: eee 





Mizmor 
Mizpah 























le - lot. 


we-e-mu- na-te-ka ba - 





1, ‘a - 


mfiempo pring —===——_ 


(SS = So 
| ss a eee ee a a io 
162 ences ws: hig-ga - yon........ be - kin - nor. 4. Ki sim-mah-tan-ni A- do- 

=f SSS a 





| —_@-o—_-_o-—_@-- 


be - ma - ‘a - se 





ee aa 5) a ae ee SE Gama | 
1-55 - [eo 9 oe —o_|- »— 52> ; 
a ob ee =f 








de - ka a - ran i nen. 


ya - 


The rest of the Psalm similarly, ail verses being chanted to A, except v. 9 and vv. 14, 15, which are 


set to B, 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Sola and Aguilar, Ancient Melodies of the 
Liturgy of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, No. 8 (gives 
also the traditional ending for Ps. xeiii.), London, 18357; Baer, 
Bow Tefillah, Nos. 368, 369, 373, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
1883; Salaman and Verrinder, "Music of the West London 
Synagogue of British Jews, vol. i. Pauer and Cohen, Tra- 
ditional Hebrew Melodies, No. 2, London, 1896: 
Davis, Voice of Prayer and Praise, No. 20, London, 1899. 


A. F. L. C. 


MIZPAH (MIZPEH; 7pyp): Name of sev- 
eral places in Palestine. It is derived from bY (= 
“to look”), cn account of which it is translated in 
certain instances by the Septuagint oxoved and opacce, 
and by the Targumim Xmj5p (Gen. xxxi. 49). Ex- 
cept in Hosea v. 1, “Mizpah” always occurs with 
the definite article prefixed; “ Mizpeh ” occurs three 
times with the article—(1) in Josh. xv. 38, where it 
designates a town of Judah; (2)in Josh. xviii. 26, 
where itis applied toa town of Benjamniu; and (8) 
in If Chron. xx. 24, where it probably signifies a 
watch-tower in the wilderness—and twice in the 
construct state; namely, in Judges xi. 29 (“ Mizpeh 
of Gilead”) and in I Sam. xxii. 3 (*Mizpeh of 
Moab”). 

Mizpah is first mentioned in the Bible in connec- 
tion with the meeting of Jacob and Laban on Mount 
Gilead, where the heap of stones which they erected 
as a witness, and which was called by Jacob 
“Galeed” and by Laban “Jegar-sahadutha,” was 
called “Mizpah” also, for the stated reason, “the 
Lord watch between me and thee” (Gen. /.¢.). This 
Mizpah is most probably identical with the Mizpeh 
of Gilead (see above), which, according to Schwarz 
(“Das Heilige Land,” pp. 17, 188), is the same as 
Ramath-mizpeh of Gad (Josh. xiii. 26), and which 
he identifies with the modern village of Al-Suf in 
the eastern mountain-range of Gilead. 


Cohen and | 





a 





- neither of which places has been identitied. 


The most important of the places bearing tlic 
name of “Mizpah” was that in Palestine, which on 
several occasions was the seat of as- 

Mizpah in semblies at which the Israelites dis- 
Palestine. cussed their affairs, ¢.g., in the time 
of Jephthah (Judges xi, 11), and dur- 

ing the war of Israel with Benjamin (22. xx. 1). 
Samuel, also, summoned Israel to Mizpah (1 Sam. vii. 
5-6, 11, 16); and, finally, in the time of the Macca- 
bees, Mizpah (Maco70a) appears again as a place of 
solemn assembly (I Mace. iii. 46). From the fore- 
going it would appear that at Mizpah a shrine for 
the worship of Yuw#H existed; but there is a di- 
versity of opinion as to the location of the place. 
There is no doubt that, since it is mentioned with 
Geba of Benjamin, the Mizpah which Asa fortified 


_ against the attacks of the King of Israel (I Kings 


20. 


xv. 22; II Chron. xvi. 6) was the Mizpah of Benja- 
min, Which was called “ Mizpeh” in Josh. xviii. 26 
(see above), and which was over against Jerusalem. 
It was also this Mizpah which became the seat of. 
the governor Gedaliah after the destruction of the 
Temple (II Sings xxv. 23; Jer. xl. 6 e¢ seg., xli. 1); 
for when Ishmael went forth from Mizpah he met 
certain people journeying from Shiloh to Jerusalem. 
W.F. Birch concludes that the other Mizpahs in- 
dicated as places of assembly are also identical with 
the same town of Benjamin (“ Pal. Explor. Fund,” 
1881, pp. 91 et seg.; 1882, pp. 260 ef seq.). Finally 
may be mentioned the opinion of Conder (“ Hand- 
book to Bible,” p. 277, London, 1879), who identi- 
fies Mizpah with Non. The Mizpeh of Judah (Josh. 
xv. 88; see above) is in the Shefelah or lowlands, 
mentioned as lying between Dilean and Jokthe-el, 
Schwarz 


Mizrah | 
Mizrahi 


(i.e. p. 74) identifies Mizpeh with Tel al-Safiyvah, the 


Alba Specula of the Middle Ages (comp. Robinson, 

“ Researches, ” ii. 368 et seq.). 
There was also a whole tract of Jand called “the 
land of Mizpah” (“ erez ha-Mizpah ”) or “the valley 
of Mizpeh” (“ bik'at Mizpeh”), men- 


Land of tioned in connection with the battle 
Mizpah. between Joshua and Jabin, King of 


Hazor, which took placeat the waters 
of Meron (Josh. xi. 3, 8). The topography indi- 
cated, “under Hermon in the land of Mizpeh” and 
“unto great Zidon and unto Misrephoth-maim, and 
unto the valley of Mizpch eastward,” taken in con- 
nection with Josh. xi. 17, suggests that the land or 
valley of Mizpah is to be identified with the valley 
of the Lebanon or the Coele-Syria of the Greck wri- 
ters. The Mizpch of Moab (see above) is mentioned 
only once ([ Sam. xxii. 3), as the residence of the 
King of Moab, to whose care David consigned his 
parents. 

J. M. SEL. 

MIZRAH: Hebrew term denoting the rising of 
the sun, the east (Num. xxi. 11; Ps. 1]. 1); also used 
to designate an ornamental picture hung ou the 
eastern wall of the house, or in front of the reading- 
desk in the synagogue, and applied to the row of 
seats In the synagogue on either side of the Ark. 
The custom of turning toward the east while at 
prayer, observed by the Jews living west of Pales- 
tine, is of great antiquity (Dan. vi. 11; comp. I 
Kings vill. 88; Ber. 28b; see East). The Jews of 
Palestine prayed with their faces turned westward 
(Snk. 51). In Jater times opinion varied on this 
subject. While some of the rabbis, claiming that 
the Divine Presence (“Shekinah”) is everywhere, 
maintained that it makes little difference in which 
direction one’s face is turned in prayer, others were 
of the opinion that the Divine Presence is especially 
located in the west, and that therefore one should 
turn westward. R. Sheshet positively objected to 
the custom of praying while facing the cast because 
the Minim prayed in that direction (B. B. 25a). The 
custom, however, predominated and was formulated 
in a baraita reading as follows: “One who is out- 
side of Palestine should turn toward Palestine; in 
Palestine, toward Jerusalem; in Jerusalem, toward 
the Temple; and in the Temple, toward the Holy 
of Holies ” (Ber. 80a; Yer. Ber. iv. 5). 

In accordance with this injunction, synagogues 
are so constructed that the Ark may be placed in 
the direction of Palestine, and that the people may 
turn toward it in prayer (Maimonides, “ Yad,” Tefil- 
lah, xi. 2; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 94, 1-3), 
In places east of Palestine, the Ark is placed in the 
west and the door opposite to it in the east (Tosef., 
Meg. ii. 14; Rosh, 2. ili. 12: Ber. 6a; Tos. s.7. 
“Ahure”; “Yad,” d.c.; comp. Orah Hayyim, 150, 5 
and Isserles’ gloss; “ Hatam Sofer,” zh. 27). 

In spite of the objection of the medieval rabbis 
to the presence of any object of art in the syna- 
gogue, there were still some figures and pictures re- 
tained (see ART). In many synagogues and jn al- 
most every bet ha-midrash of modern times an 
ornamental picture, usually bearing the inscription 
“From the rising of the sun unto the setting thereof, 
the name of the Lord is praised ” (Ps. exiii. 3, Hebr.), 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


I Sr pp 


628 


is hung in front of the reading-desk, which latte, 
is near the Ark, Many other passages, and even 
whole psalins, are added, and frequently are artis. 
tically strung together so as to form the likeness of 
the menorah or of some animal. One of the later 
authorities (“ Hatam Sofer,” Yorch De‘ah, 127) for- 
bids the engraving of the above-cited passage around 
a picture of the sun in one of the eastern windows 
of the synagogue (comp. “Sefer Hasidim,” ed. Wis- 
tinetzki, § 1625). No one, however, seems to raise 
any objection to the mizrah, which is found in syna- 
gogues and in many homes. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dembitz, Jewish Services in Synagogue and 
Home, pp. 65, 199, Philadelphia, 188; Hamburger. Rk. B. T 


ii. 1144. 
A. J. H. G, 


MIZRAHI: Family living in the Orient, tc 
which belong some well-known rabbinical authors, 
There are two main branches: one in Constantino- 
ple, and the other in Jerusalem. The name “ Miz- 
rahi” signifies “an Oriental,” and is used as a sur- 
name by many Persian Jews who have settled in 
Turkey. 

Abraham ben Baruch Mizrahi: Shohet at 
Jerusalem in the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- 
turies. He was the author of “Zikkaron li-Bene 
Yisrael,” containing laws pertaining to ritual slaugh- 
tering. It was printed with Moses Ventura’s “ Ye- 
min Mosheh,” Amsterdam, 1718. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud, ti. 88b; Steinschneider, Cat. 
Bodtl, cok. T0?. 


Absalom ben Moses Mizrahi: Oriental scholar 
of the fourteenth century. Abraham de Balmes 
in his “Mikneh Abraham” (in the chapter on 
prosody) quotes a work by Mizrahi entitled “Imre 
Shefer.”. This work was published by Carmoly, 
under the title “Kabbalah ‘al Meleket ha-Shir” 
(Paris, 1841), from a Paris manuscript, in which it 
is indicated that it was composed in 1891. Among 
the models which Mizrahi gives is the letter of Ibn 
Pulgar to Abner of Burgos, which Mizrahi styles 
“shir meyuhas” (noble poem, that is, a poem ar- 
ranged in Mosaic style). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Dukes, in Orient, Lit. iv. 435, vii. 808; 
Fuenn, Keneset Fisrael, p. 70; Steinsechneider, Jewish Lit- 
erature, p. 107. 

Elijah ben Abraham (Re’em), Mizrahi: 
Turkish rabbi and mathematician; born at Con- 
stantinople about 1455; died there 1525 or 1526. 
Mizrahi was a pupil in Talmud and rabbinics of 
Elijah ha-Levi, who was known for his mild atti- 
tude toward the Karaites, whom he taught the Tal- 
mud (Mizrahi, Responsa. Nos. 41, 57). But it ap- 
pears from a letter of Elijah Capsali (see Gritz, 
“Gesceh.” 3d ed., vill. 448) that Mizrahi studied also 
under Judah Minz of Padua, who warned him not 
to throw himself headlong into the quarrel between 
Joseph Colon and Moses Capsali. From this letter 
it is evident also that Elijah Mizrahi is not to be 
identified, as he is by Conforte (“Kore ha-Dorot,” 
p. 29a) and Azulai (“Shem ha-Gedolim,” i. 22), with 
Klijah Parnes, who is meutioned in Colon’s responsa, 
and who is called by Elijah Capsali a corrupt forget 
(comp. Zunz’s notes to the “Itinerary ” of Benjamin 
of Tudela, ed. Asher, ii. 40). 


CHAIOK MAN SuuNMiday s1une]y Jo uowsassod ayy uy) 
“HVUZIW TVOIdAL ¥ 


Adu 





Mizrahi | 
Mnemonics 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


630 





While still a young man, Mizrahi distinguished 
himself as a Talmudist and as an authority in rab- 
binical matters, on which he was consulted by many 
rabbis even in the lifetime of Moses Capsali. Al- 
though he was very religious, yet he devoted a part 
of his time to the study of the secular sciences, par- 
ticularly to mathematics and astronomy. which he 

studied under Mordecai Comtino (see 


Studies letter of Delmedigo in Geiger, “ Melo 
Mathe- MHofnayim,” p. 12). Mizrahi for some 
matics. time earned a livelihood by teaching 


Talmud, mathematics, astronomy, and 
other sciences; but owing to his weak constitu- 
tion the work proved too hard for him (Mizrahi, 
Responsa, No. 56). Though it would appear from 
his mathematical works that he read the Greek au- 
thors, it can not be said with certainty whether he 
read them in the original or in an Arabic translation. 
It is evident, however, that he was master of at 
least one, if not both, of these two languages. At 
the death of Moses Capsali (ce. 1495), Mizrahi suc- 
ceeded him as grand rabbi or hakam bashi of the 
Ottoman empire, which office he held till his death. 
Like his predecessor, Mizrahi had a seat in the 
divan assigned to him by the sultan beside the mufti 
and above the patriarch of the Christians. The 
work “ Me’ora‘ot ‘Olam ” (Constantinople, 1756) con- 
tains several legends in connection with Mizrahi 
and the sultan (Nepi-Ghirondi, “Toledot Gedole 
Yisrael,” p. 267). 

Mizrahi, who had previously written against the 
Karaites and who had entered into polemics with Eli- 
‘jah Bashyazi (comp. the introduction to the latter’s 
“Adderet Eliyahu”), changed his attitude toward 
them after he had become hakam bashi. Like his 
master, Elijah ha-Levi, he favored the idea of teach- 
ing the Talmud to the Karaites, provided the latter 
would abstain from reviling it. When the zealots, 
aiming at the destruction of every means of recon- 
ciliation between the Rabbinites and the Karaites. 
made so many restrictions with regard to the latter 
and threatened with excommunication those who 
would not observe them, Mizrahi was not in Con- 
stantinople. When he returned he was indignant 
at the restrictions; he declared that it was the 
duty of the Rabbinites to consider the Karaites 
as Jews, and that Elijah ha-Levi and Eliezer Cap- 
sali, whose piety uobody doubted, were of the 
same opinion (Mizrahi, Responsa, No. 57). He was 
opposed also to certain innovations of the caba- 
lists with regard to the interpretation of the Bible 
(1d. No. 1). 

The following are Mizrahi’s rabbinical and exe- 
getical works: “Tosefe Semag” (Constantinople, 
1520), novella on Moses of Coucy’s “Sefer Mizwot 
Gadol,” afterward published with the text under 
the title “Hiddushim” (7. 1541); “Sefer ha-Miz- 
rahi” (Venice, 1527), a supercommentary on Rashi’s 
commentary on the Pentateuch; “She’elot u-Te- 
shubot,” a collection of responsa in 
two parts: part i., containing 100 re- 
sponsa (Constantinople, 1546); part ii. 
containing 39 responsa, printed with 
the responsa of Elijah ibn Hayyim under the title 
“Mayim ‘Amukkim ” (Venice, 1647). Mizrahi him- 
self considered his commentary on Rashi the most 


His 
Works. 


important of his works (Responsa, Nos. 5, 78), 
Besides showing Rashi’s Talmudic and midrashie 
sourees, he endeavors to elucidate all obscure pas- 
sages, thus defending him from the strictures of the 
later commentators, particularly Nahmanides. The 
work was published after Mizrahi’s death by his son 
Israel, a fact which makes it possible to fix the ap- 
proximate date of the author’s death; for in Jan., 
1525, he was still alive (comp. Benjamin Zeeb, Re- 
sponsa, No, 284). A compendium made by Jacob 
Marearia (7) was published under the title “ Kizzur 
Mizrahi” (Riva di Trenta, 1561), and later one by 
Isaac ha-Kohen of Ostrog, entitled “ Mattenat ‘Ani” 
or “Kizzur Mizrahi” (Prague, 1604-9). Many com- 
mentaries and strictures were written on Mizrahi’s 
commentary, among the former being: “To‘afot 
Re’em,” by Mordecai Carvallo, and “Hayye Yiz- 
hak,” by his son Isaac Carvallo (printed together, 
Leghorn, 1761); Eliakim Gatigno's “ To‘afot Re'em ” 
(Smyrna, 1766); Isaac Haddad’s “Karne Re’em” 
(Leghorn, 1768); Joseph of Milhau’s (Muscat’s) 
“ Ozerot Yosef” (2b. 1783); and Moses Toledano’s 
“* Meleket ha-Kodesh ” (7. 1808). Among the critics 
were Samuel Edels (“ Hiddushe Maharsha,” Hanau, 
1716) and Samuel Zarfati (“ Nimmuke Shemu’el,” 
Amsterdam, 1718). 

Mizrahi’s mathematical works are “Sefer ha-Mis- 
par” (Constantinople, 1584), on arithmetic, and a 
commentary to Ptolemy’s “ Almagest” (no longer 
extant), of which Mizrahi was very proud, no com- 

mentary having been previously writ- 


Mathe- ten onthat work. Hesays (Responsa, 
matical No. 5) that, owing to the importance 
Works. of the science of astronomy, the study 


of which is considered as a “miz- 
wah” (good deed), he occupies himself daily with 
writing acommentary on the“ Almagest.” Accord- 
ing to Delmedigo (/.c.), Mizrahi wrote also a com- 
mentary on Euclid’s “Elements.” The “Sefer ha- 
Mispar” is in three books, divided into “ gates” 
(“she‘arim”), which are subdivided into chapters. 
Book i. consists of three gates, treating respectively 
of the four functions in (1) whole numbers, (2) frac- 
tions, and (8) mixed numbers. Book ii, also of three 
gates, treats of (1) the four functions in astronom- 
ical fractions, (2) the extraction of the square and 
cube roots, and (8) proportion. Book iii. is divided 
into two parts, the first containing arithmetical and 
the second geometrical problems. Each series of 
problems consists of two classes treated in two 
chapters, the first being problems that are solved 
with, and the second those that are solved without, 
the help of the rule of three. In the introduction, 
Mizrahi speaks of the relation between theology, 
mathematics, and the natural sciences, remark- 
ing that, while theology is in no sense concrete, 
the other two sciences are. He says also that 
mathematics is like a bridge by which one may 
pass from one science to the other, and that there- 
fore special attention should be paid to it. Mizrahi 
based this work mainly on Ibn Ezra’s “Sefer ha- 
Mispar”; and twenty-one out of the 100 problems 
which it contains are almost literally copied from 
the latter. He employed Greek and Arabic works 
also, often quoting Nicomachus of Gerasa, Euclid, 
and Heron of Alexandria. From the Arabs he took 


631 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mizrahi | 
Mnemonics 











material for his observations on fractions, extrac- | the historians. recalled that of the famous Isaac 


tion of the square root, and quadratic equations. 
An abridgment of Mizrahi’s work and of Abra- 

ham b. Hiyva’s “Sefer Zurat ha-Arez” was made 

by Sebastian Minster, to be used as a text-book by 
his pupils. This abridgment was published with 

a Latin translation by Schreckenfuchs (Basel, 1546). 

through which Mizrahi came to the knowledge of 

European scholars, his original work having become 

rare. A similar work attributed to Mizrahi was 

published at Lemberg (1807) under the title “ Mele- 
ket ha-Mispar.” It contains at the end lessons in 
chess. In answer toa question by Count Boncom- 
pagni of Rome as to whether a Jewish writer would 
occupy himself with the summation of the series 
1°--2°+38°+...-+n’*, Steinschneider trans- 
lated into Italian the parts of the “Sefer ha-Mispar ” 
relating to the question, together with the introduc- 
tion (* Brani dell’ Aritmetica d’Elia Misrachi.” pp. 

43-67, Rome, 1866). According to Delambre (“ His- 

toire de l’Astronomie du Moyen-Age.” p. 213, Paris, 

1819), Mizrahi was the first to treat of the extraction 

of the cube root. Itis true that Delambre ascribed 

to him a much earlier epoch than that in which he 
lived; for, considering Mizrahi as later than Ibn 

Yunus (d. 1008), he placed him in the twelfth cen- 

tury. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 3la: Fuenn. 
Keneset Yisrael, p. 116; idem, in Ha-Karmel, ivy. 214 et 
seq.; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 381 et seq.; Gritz, Gesch. 3d ed., 
ix. 30 et seq.; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. cols. 946 et seq.: 
idem, Jewish Literature, pp. 118, 121, 189; idem, Heb. 
Uebers. pp. 508, 524; idem, in Abhandlungen zur Gesch. 
der Mathematik, ix. 477, Leipsic, 1899; G. Wertheim, Die 
Arithmetik des Elia Misrachi, Brunswick, 1896. 

Israel ben Elijah Mizrahi: Turkish Talmud- 
ist; livedat Constantinople in the sixteenth century. 
He edited his father’s “Sefer ha-Mizrahi” (Venice, 
1527), adding to it a preface in which he asked the 
readers, in case they were unable to understand cer- 
tain passages, not to criticize his father, but toapply 
to him (Israel) for explanation. A responsum of 
Mizrahi’s is found in “Abkat Rokel” (No. 180). 
He corresponded with Abraham Treves, the author 
of “ Birkat Abrahain.” 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 115; Fuenn, 
Weneset Yisrael, p. 698, 

Israel Meir ben Joseph Mizrahi: Palestinian 
rabbi; liead of the yeshibah of Jerusalem in the first 
half of the eighteenth century. He distinguished 
himself as a rabbinical scholar at an early age, and 
although he died when still young, he left impor- 
tant works. In 1727 he was sent to Constantinople 
to collect alms; and there he published his responsa 
collection “ Peri ha-Arez,” followed by a “ Kontres ” 
containing novell to Maimonides’ “ Yad” and its 
commentaries. He wrote also “Ner Mizrahi,” a 
commentary on Elijah Mizrahi’s novelle to the “Se- 
mag,” and “Tif’eret Yisrael,” sermons. Both of 
these works remain unpublished. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 699; First, Bibl. 
Jud. ii, 382; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1168. 
E. C. MC. Set. 
Raphael Abraham Shalom Mizrahi (better 

known as Rab Sharabi): Rabbi in Jerusalem; 

bern at Yemen; died in 1777. He enjoyed the rep- 
utation of being the most learned cabalist of his 
time, while his fervent piety, which, according to 


Luria of Safed and which has become proverbial, 
secured for him the position of president of the 
yeshibah IXahal Kadosh Hasidim. 

Of Sharabi's writings on the Cabala the principal 
ones are * Rehobot ha-Nahar” and “ Derek Shalom.” 

Sharabi’s son Isaac Mizrahi Sharabi (d. at 
Jerusalem in 1803) bore the same high reputation 
for piety as his father, whom he succeeded at the 
veshibah. 


sIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, s.v., Hazan, Ha- 
Maalot li-Shelomoh, pp. 20, 47, 98, 103. 
M. Fr. 


s. 8, 

Reuben ben Hananiah Mizrahi: Rabbi of 
Constantinople in the seventeenth and eighteenth 
centuries: a descendant of Elijah Mizrahi. He was 
the author of “Ma‘yan Gannim ” (Constantinople, 
1721), a work containing decisions upon ritual mat- 
ters and homilies on the Pentateuch, with a preface 
by Aaron Hamon. In the preface are mentioned the 
following works by Mizrahi, which are still unpub- 
lished: “Be’er Mayim Hayyim,” commentary on 
the Zohar; “Nozelim Min Lebanon,” commentary 
on the “Tikkunim”; “ Peri ‘Ez Hayyim,” commen- 
tary on Maimonides’ “Yad”; “Kappot Temarim,” 
commentary on Midrash Rabbah; “‘Arbe Nahal,” 
commentary on Pirke Abot and Esther; “ ‘Ez 
Abot,” responsa; “Ketem Paz,” commentary on 
the Turim Orah Hayyim and Eben ha-‘Ezer; and 
novell on the Talmud. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 350, No. 1706; 
First, Bibl, Jud. ii. 382; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yis- 
rael, pp. 312-314 ; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 2139. 


E. ¢, M. SEL. 
MIZRAIM. Sce Ecypv. 
 MIZWAH. See COMMANDMENT. 


MNEMONICS (Hebrew, “simanim ”= “signs ”): 
Certain sentences, words, or letters used toassist the 
memory. Such aids are employed in the Mishnah, 
in both Talmuds, and in the Masorah, as well as by 
the Geonim and by the teachers of the Law during 
the Middle Ages. In thisarticle only the Talinudic 
mnemonics will be discussed, together with those 
employed by the later teachers of the Law. For 
Masoretic signs and their use see Masoran. The 
mnemonics employed in the Talmud may be divided 
into the following two groups: 

(1) Mnemonics which are formed from a Scrip- 
tural passage, a mishnah, a halakic sentence, or a 

proverb or maxim taken from life or 
Formed of from nature. These simanim, which 
Sentences. are introduced by the word “ we-sima- 

nak” (= “and let thy sign be ”), stand 
invariably after the halakic sentences for which 
they serve as signs; and it is usually stated who 
invented and used them. Many originated with 
the Babylonian amora R. Nahman b. Isaac, who 
employed them with special frequency. They oc- 
cur very often in ‘Abodah Zarah, Hullin, and Shab- 
bat, as well as in Bekorot, ‘Erubin, Yebamot, Ta‘a- 
nit, and the remaining treatises. Mnemonics are used 
to prevent confusion where for any reason it might 
easily occur. Thus Ps. cxxxix. 5a (“Thou hast set 
me behind and before”) is employed as a mnemon- 
ic for ‘Ab. Zarah 8a. to show that in the enumera- 
tion of heathen feasts the Mishnah “goes from the 


Mnemonics 
Moab 


end toward the beginning,” and that the feasts 
which were celebrated later are mentioned first; 
it might be supposed that the Mishnah had followed 
the order of the seasons in which the several festi- 
vals occurred. In like manner, when there is a dif- 
ference between two things which are apparently 
alike,a sign is employed to avoid possible confu- 
sion (see several examples in Hul. 62b-63a). These 
simanim are used especially to keep the authors of 
divergent teachings distinct. Thus, for example, in 
Hul. 46a, where it is said that R. Hiyya used to 
throw away the liver, while R. Simon, the son of 
R. Judah ha-Nasi, used to eat it, the saying “ashirim 
mekammezin ” (= “the rich are economical ”) is em- 
ployed, inasmuch as the rich R. Simon b. R. Judah 
was frugal and did not wish to throw away the 
liver. If two or more scholars bear the same name, 
a sign is used to show which one of them is meant. 

Thus in Pes. 114a, where it is said 


To Distin- that the R. Isaac who in halakic sen- 
guish Au- tences is called “Shema‘ata” is R. 
thorship. Isaac b. Aha, the phrase “shema‘uni 


ahai” (I Chron. xxviii. 2) is used as a 
sign, 7.e., the son of Aha is one of the Shema‘ata 
to whom halakic sentences belong. 

(2) A wholly different kind of sign, found in the 
mnemonic sentences which are composed of single 
words each of which is a catchword for a halakic 
sentence, a teaching, or an opinion; or of the names 
of the authors and together with words made up of 
single letters either of the authors’ names or of the 
catchwords characteristic of the sentences, or again 
of both. There are only a few examples of these 
sentences which have any meaning, most of them ma- 
king nosense. With one exception (Zeb. 7b), they all 
stand before the sentences which they are to impress 
on the memory, and are never introduced by “ we- 
simanak,” but by “siman,” which word stands some- 
times before and sometimes after the mnemonic term. 
Mnemonics, however, are often found 
without the word “siman” to desig- 
nate their character (e.g., Shebu. 35a; 
Sanh. 88a), and have thus sometimes 
been wrongly considered as parts of the halakic 
sentences, as in Meg. 3la (comp. N. Briill in his 
“ Jahrb.” ii. 119). On the other hand, there is a case 
(B. B. 118) where the mnemonic term was lost, and 
the introductory word “siman” was then supposed 
to be the name of an amora (comp. J. Brill, “ Die 
Mnemotechnik des Talmuds,” p. 18). 

These mnemonics, which are nearly all anony- 
mous, designate the order of succession of the sen- 
tences which are to follow, or of the transmitters 
of the sentence about to be given, or even how many 
times and in what passages the name of the same 
transmitter occurs in the treatise under discussion. 
A few examples may be given. In Hul. 4a the say- 
ings of R. Manasseh which occur in the treatise are 
comprised in a single sentence which itself contains 
a regulation concerning circumcision. In Hul. lla 
different amoraim of various periods give different 
reasons for one fundamental law. Out of single 
letters taken from the names of these authors is 
formed the mnemonic sentence “zeman shebah me- 
kannesh,” denoting that time collects that which is 
good; 7.¢., in this case time has not caused the excel- 


Single 
Words. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


632 





lent sayings of the amoraim of different times to be 
forgotten. Occasionally these mnemonics show that 
something is missing in the Talmud (comp. Tos. , 
Men, 20a, s.o, “Sheken”). With the exception of 
‘Arakin, Bezah, Hagigah, Me‘ilah, Rosh ha-Shanah, 
Sukkah, Tamid, and Temurah, such simanin: are 
found in all the treatises of the Babylonian Talmud, 
It is probable, however, that in the treatises just 
cited there were likewise simanim which were after- 
ward lost, especially since many mnemonics are 
missing in the present editions of the Talmud which 
were to be found in earlier copies (comp. N. Briill, 

d.c. li. 62 et seq.). These mnemonics 

Means of were used by students as early as the 
Preserving period in which the Halakah was still 

Halakot. handed down only orally. The pro- 

hibition against committing halakot to 
writing did not apply to these simanim; and they 
thus furnished aids to the memory. 

Most of the mnemonics, however, appear to have 
originated after the Talmud had been collected and 
arranged, but was not yet reduced to writing. 
Many of them presuppose the order of succession of 
the sentences, and contain the entire Talmud in 
stenographic signs. When the Talmud was written 
down these mnemonic notes were used as a basis for 
the work. After its completion the signs were re- 
tained, since they were of great assistance to many 
pupils who still had to memorize the Talmud, ow- 
ing to the lack of written copies. They were inserted 
in the text likewise because they were very 
useful as superscriptions and indexes, since a pas- 
sage in the Talmud could be more precisely referred 
to by means of them (comp. N. Briill, Ze. it. 61). 
Similarly the Geonim and the teachers of the Law 
during the Middle Ages employed such sentences to 
formulate their legal decisions (comp. Brill, @.¢. p. 
66, note 105). Mnemonics were also invented to in- 
dicate the order of succession of the treatises, or of 
the chapters of individual tractates, as well as of 
the weekly readings from the Pentateuch (see R. 
Bezaleel Ashkenazi at the end of the “Shittah Me- 
kubbezet ” on Men., and Judah of Modena in “ Leb 
ha-Aryeh,” ii. 2). Such is the sign “zeman nakat,” 
employed by Maimonides in his introduction to the 
Mishnah to indicate the sequence of the six mishnaic 
orders, and which means “time has preserved,” 7.¢., 
“has preserved the literary products of ancient 
times.” Furthermore, each letter of these two words 
indicates the name of an order of the Mishnah and the 
place of such order among its fellows; thus, “za- 
yin” = “Zera‘im”; “mem” = “Mo‘ed”; “nun” = 
“Nashim ”; etc. See also ABBREVIATIONS. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. J. Rapoport, in Kerem Hemed, vi. 252 et 

seqg.: J. Brtill, Die Mnemotechnik des Talmuds, Vienna, 

1864; N. Brill, in his Jahrh., ii. 59-67, Frankfort-on-the- 

Main, 1876, 

T. Jd. Z. L. 


MOAB (Hebrew, 3x19; LXX. Modf; Assyrian, 
“Mu’aba,” “Ma’ba,” “Ma’ab”; Egyptian, “Muab ”): 
District and nation of Palestine. The etymology of 
the word is very uncertain. The earliest gloss is 
found in the Septuagint, Gen. xix. 37, which ex- 
plains the name, in obvious allusion to the account 
of Moab’s parentage, as ex Tov matpé¢ pov. Other 
etymologies which have been proposed regard it as 


- 633 


—_— 


2 corruption of ON ‘9 — “seed of a father,” or asa 
participial form from 3X" = “to desire,” thus con- 
poting “the desirable (land).” The latest explana- 
tion is by Hommel (“ Verhandlungen des Zwdélften 
Internationalen Orientalisten -Congresses,” p. 261, 
Leyden, 1904), who regards “ Moab” asan abbrevia- 
tion of “Immo-ab” = “his mother is his father.” 

According to Gen. xix. 30-388, Moab was the son 
of Lor by his elder daughter, while AMMON was 
Moab’s half-brother by a similar union of Lot with 
his younger child. The close ethnological affinity 
of Moab and Ammon which is thus attested (comp. 
ulso Judges iii. 18; IT Chron. xx. 22; Isa. xi. 14; 
Jcr. XXvVi. 21) is confirmed by their subsequent his- 
tory, while their kinship with the Hebrews is 
equally certain, and is borne out by the linguistic 
evidence of the MoABITE STONE. They are also 
mentioned in close connection with the Amalekites 
(Judges iii. 18), the inhabitants of Mount Seir (II 
Chron. xx. 22; Ezek. xxv. 8), the Edomites (Ex. 
xv. 15; Ps. lx. 10 [A. V. 8]; Isa. xi. 14; Jer. xxv. 
21), the Canaanites (Ex. xv. 15), the Sethites (Num. 
xxiv. 17), and the Philistines (Ps. Ix. 10 [A. V. 8]; 
Isa. xi. 14), 

Moab occupied a plateau about 3,000 feet above 
the level of the Mediterranean, or 4,300 feet above 
the Dead Sea, and rising gradually from north to 
south. It was bounded on the west by the Dead 
Sea and the southern section of the Jordan; on the 
east by Ammon and the Arabian desert, from which 
it was separated by low, rolling hills; and on the 
south by Edom. The northern boundary varied, 
but in general it may be said to have 
been represented by a linedrawn some 
miles above the northern extremity of 
the Dead Sea. In Ezek. xxv. 9 the 
boundaries are given as being marked by Beth- 
jeshimoth (north), Baal-meon (east), and Kiriathaim 
(south), That these limits were not fixed, however, is 
plain from the lists of cities given in Isa. xv.-xvi. and 
Jer. xlviii., where Heshbon, Elealeh, and Jazer are 
‘mentioned to the north of Beth-jeshimoth; Medeba, 
Beth-gamul, and Mephaath to the east of Baal- 
meon; and Dibon, Aroer, Bezer, Jahaz, and Kir- 
hareseth to the south of Kiriathaim. The principal 
rivers of Moab mentioned in the Bible are the Arnon, 
the Dimon or Dibon, and the Nimrim. The lime- 
stone hills which form the almost treeless plateau 
are generally steep but fertile. In the spring they 
are covered with grass; and the table-land itself pro- 
duces grain. Jn the north area number of long, 
deep ravines, and Mount Nebo, famous as the scene 
of the death of Moses (Deut. xxxiv. 1-8). The rain- 
fail is fairly plentiful; and the climate, despite the 
hot summer, is cooler than that of western Palestine, 
snow falling frequently in winterandinspring. The 
plateau is dotted with hundreds of rude dolmens, 
menhirs, and stone-circles, and contains many ruined 
villages, mostly of the Roman and Byzantine 
periods. The land is now occupied chiefly by Bed- 
ouins, who render the district by no means the 
safest in Palestine. 

At the time of the Hebrew invasion the Moabites 
Seem to have been so powerful that conflict with 
them was avoided (Deut. ii. 9; Judges xi. 16; II 
Chron. xx. 10), although the Israelites defeated and 


Geogra- 
phy. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mnemonics 
Moa 


we 


slew Sihon, the Amorite king of Heshbon, who 
himself had conquered a former king of Moab (Num. 
Xxi, 21-31; Deut. ii. 24-85). Moab, 
on the other hand, under its king 
BALAK, meditated a resistance to the 
invaders which it dared not carry out (Num. xxii.- 
xXiv.; Deut. xxiii. 4; Judges xi. 25). After the 
conquest the Moabite territory was allotted to the 
tribe of Reuben (Josh. xiii. 183-21; comp. Num. 
xxxil. 87-88). The Moabites seem to have sub- 
mitted to the control of the Hebrews for a time, 
until Eglon, King of Moab, with the help of the 
Ammonites and the Amalekites, succeeded in con- 
quering them, and ruled over them eighteen years. 
At the end of this period a Benjamite named Ehud 
obtained access to Eglon and treacherously assas- 
sinated him, whereupon the Hebrews arose apd 
slaughtered 10,000 Moabites (Judges iii. 12-80). A 
few years later Saul waged a war, apparently of 
little importance, against them and their allies (I 
Sam. xiv. 47). David also subdued them and made 
them tributary (II Sam. viii. 1-2, 11-12; I Chron. 
Xvill, 2,11), although it is noteworthy that even be- 
fore this time a Moabite named Ithmah was one of 
his generals (I Chron. xi. 46). 

After the death of Ahab the Moabites under Mesha 
rebelled against Jehoram, who allied himself with 
Jehoshaphat, King of Judah, and with the King of 
Edom. At the direction of Elisha the Israelites 
dug a series of ditches between themselves and the 
enemy, aud during the night these channels were 
miraculously filled with water which was as red as 
blood. Deceived by the crimson color into the be- 
lief that their opponents had attacked one another, 
the Moabites became overconfident and were en- 
trapped and utterly defeated at Ziz, near Engedi (IJ 
Kings iii.; If Chron. xx., which states that the 
Moabites and their allies, the Ammonites and the 
inhabitants of Mount Seir, mistook one another for 
the enemy, and so destroyed one another). Accord- 
ing to Mesha’s inscription on the Moabite Stone, 
however, he was completely victorious and regained 
all the territory of which Israel had deprived him. 
The battle of Ziz is the last important date in the 
history of the Moabites as recorded in the Bible. In 
the year of Elisha’s death they invaded Israel (II 
Kings xiii. 20), and later aided Nebuchadnezzar in his 
expedition against Jehoiakim (2). xxiv. 2). 

Although allusions to Moab are frequent in the 
prophetical books (e.g., Isa. xxv. 10; Ezek. xxv. 8- 
11; Amos ii. 1-8; Zeph. ii. 8-11), and although two 
chapters of Isaiah (xv.-xvi.) and one of Jeremiah 
(xl viii.) are devoted to the “burden of Moab,” they 
give little information about the land. Its prosper- 
ity and pride, which brought on the Moabites the 
wrath of Yawn, are frequently mentioned (Isa. xvi. 
6; Jer. xlviii. 11, 29; Zeph. ii. 10); and their con- 
tempt for Israel is once expressly noted (Jer. xlviii. 
27). From this time Moab disappears as a nation; 
and in Neh. iv. 7 the Arabians instead of the Moab- 
ites are the allies of the Ammonites (comp. I Macc. 
ix, 32-42; Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 18, § 5; xiv. 1, § 4). 

References to the religion of Moab are scanty. 
The Moabites were polytheists like the other early 
Semites; and they induced the Hebrew invaders to 
join in their sacrifices (Num. xxv. 2; Judges x. 6). 


History. 


Moab 
Moabite Stone 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


634 


Se 


Their chief god was CueEMosnH (Jer. xiviii. 7. 18). so | cluding a German missionary named Klein) it was 


that they are even called the “people of Chemosh * 
(Num. xxi. 29; Jer. xlviii. 46), At 
times, especially in <lire peril, human 
sacrifices were offercd to him, as by 
Mesha, who gave up his son and heir to him (II 
Kings ili, 27). Nevertheless, Solomon built, for 
this “abomination of Moab,” on the hill before Jeru- 
salem, a “high place” (I Kings xi. 7) whieh was not 
destroyed until the reign of Josiah (II Kings xxiii. 
13). The Moabite Stone also mentions (line 17) a 
female counterpart of Chemosh, Ishtar- (or Ashtar-) 
Chemosh, and a god Nebo (line 14), the well-known 
Babylonian divinity, while the cult of Baal-peor 
(Num, xxv. 5; Ps. evi. 28) or Peor (Num. xxxi. 16; 
Josh. xxii. 17) seems to have been marked by sensu- 
ality. Since the Moabites had opposed the invasion 
of Palestine, they, like the Ammonites, were ex- 
cluded from the congregation unto the tenth gener- 
ation (Deut. xxiii. 3-4; comp. Neh. xiii. 1-3). This 
law was violated during the Exile, however; and 
Ezra and Nehemiah sought to compel a return to the 
ancient custom of exclusion (Hzra ix. 1-2, 12; Neh. 
xiii. 23-25). The exilian usage had had royal 
sanction: the harem of Solomon included Moabite 
women (I Kings xi. 1). On the other hand, the fact 
that the marriages of the Beth-lehem-judah Ephra- 
thites Chilion and Mahlon to the Moabite women 
Orpah and Ruth (Ruth i, 2-4), and the marriage 
of the latter, after her husband’s death, to Boaz 
(th, iv, 10, 13), who was the great-grandfather of 


Religion. 


David, are mentioned with no shade of reproach, . 


shows that the law had fallen into abeyance ata 
comparatively early period and had become a mere 

priestly restriction. 
In the Nimrud clay inscription of Tiglath-pileser 
the Moabite king Salmanu (perhaps the Shalman 
who sacked Beth-arbel [Hos. x. 14]) 


In Assyr- is mentioned as tributary to Assyria. 
ian and = Sargon EL. mentions on a clay prism a 
Babylo- revolt against him by Moab together 
nian In- with Philistia, Judah, and Edom; but 

scriptions. on the Taylor prism, which recounts 


the ex pedition against Hezekiah, Kam- 
musu-Nadbi (Chemosh-nadab), King of Moab, brings 
tribute tu Sargon as his suzerain. Another Moabite 
king, Muzuri (“the Egyptian” ?), is mentioned as 
one of the subject princes at the courts of Esar-had- 
don and Assurbanipal, while Kaashalta, possibly his 
successor, is named on cylinder B of Assurbanipal. 
In the Egyptian inscriptions Moab is mentioned 
once, on the base of one of six colossal figures at 

Luxor, where Rameses IT. (¢. 13800 B.c.) includes 

“ Mu’ab” in the Hst of his conquests. See MoasItEe 

STONE. 

SIBLIOGRAPHY : Tristram, The Land of Afoab, London, 1874; 
George Adam Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy 
Land, ib. 1897; Clermont-Ganneaun, Recueil @Archéologie 
Orientale, ii. 185-234, Paris, 1889; Baethgen, Beilriige zur 
Semitischen Religionsgeschichte, Berlin, 1888; Smith, Rel. 


of Sem. Edinburgh, 1894. 
J. L. H. G. 


MOABITE STONE: Name usually given to 
the only known surviving inscribed monument of 
ancient Moab. It was discovered in 1868 at Dhi- 
ban, the ancient DrsBon, four miles north of the 
River Arnon. When first seen by Europeans (in- 


an inscribed slab of black basalt 34 feet long by 2 
feet wide. The Arabs of the neighborhood, dread- 
ing the loss of such a talisman, broke the stone into 
pieces; but a squeeze had already been obtained by 
Clermont-Ganneau, and most of the fragments were 
recovered and pieced together by him. The recon- 
structed monument is now, together with the 
squeeze, in the museum of the Louvre in Paris. 

The inscription consists of thirty-four lines con- 
taining about 260 words and is well engraved in 
old Hebrew (Phenician) characters. It was written 
about 860 B.c. in the name of Megsta, the King of 
Moab. The translation of the first two-thirds of the 
inscription is as follows: 

**f am Mesha, son of Chemosh... (?), King of Moab, the Dibo- 
nite. My father reigned over Moab thirty years, and I became 
king after yay father, and I made this high place for Chemosh 
in mnap, the high place of deliverance, because he had de- 
livered me from all that attacked me, and because he had made 
me see iy desire upon all my enemies. Omri, King of Israel, 
oppressed Israel] many days because Chemosh was angry with 
his Jand; and his son succeeded him, and he also said, ‘I will 
oppress Moab.’ In my days he said this, and I saw my desire 
upon him, and Israel was humbled with everlasting humilia- 
tion. Omri had taken possession of the land of Medeba and 
{his people] occupied it during his days and half the days of his 
son, forty years; but Chemosh restored it in my days.... 
And the men of Gad had occupied the land of Ataroth fora 
long time, and the King of Israel had built up Ataroth for him- 
self. And I fought against the city and took it, and I slew all 
the people from the city, a sight for the eyes of Chemosh and of 


Moab. ... And Chemosh said to me, °’Go, take Nebo against 
Israel.” And I went by night and fought against it from the 


break of dawn until noon, and I took it and slew all [that were 
in] it, seven thousand men and boys and woinen and girls and 
maid servants; for to Ashtor-Chemosh I had devoted it. AndI 
took from there the vessels of YHWH and brought them before 
Chemosh. And the King of Israel had fortified Jahaz and occu- 
pied it while he was at war With Ine, and Chemosh drove him 
out from before me. And I took of Moab two hundred, all its 
chiefs, and I attacked Jahaz and took it, in order to add it to 
Dibon.”* 

In the rest of the inscription Mesha tells of re- 
storing and fortifying cities that rightfully belonged 
to Moab, of building a palace for himself, and of 
constructing reservoirs for water. 

The inscription is by far the most important yet 
found in Palestine. It has added essentially to the 
scanty knowledge of the history and religion of 
Moab itself, and has thrown light on the fortunes of 
Israel east of the Jordan, as well as upon the foreign 
relations of the dynasty of Omri. The character of 
the language of Moab is also pretty fairly indicated. 

In regard to the last point it may be noticed that 
the inflections depart but very seldom from those of 
classical Hebrew. The masculine plural ends in 
“-in” instead of “-im,” and there is an ifte‘al verb- 
stem. “Waw” consecutive with the first person 
imperfect is regularly followed by the cohortative 
or subjunctive. The vowel-letter 7 is used for the 
pronominal suffix of both genders. 

In matters of religion Moab is seen to furnish 4 
close parallel to Israel. Chemosh here bears exX- 

actly the same political relation to his 

Religious people as Jehovah does to His (comp. 
and His- Num. xxi. 29; Judges xi. 24). In both 
torical Im- nations religion is the basis of a fierce- 
portance. ly intense patriotism (comp. II Kings 
iii, 27), and the king is the nearest 
representative of the Deity in executing all His 
will, The vivid picture given of the border wal- 





ee 


oe 
ti 


Bk oT a, 





Bre he year ta 





THE MOABITE STONE. 


CAfter Smend and Socin.) 


ON 


ng 
a 


INSCRIPTIO? 


ee Google 


Moabite Stone 
Moch 


fare between Moab and Israel helps one to under- 
stand the bitter hostility of each people toward the 
other, and the race hatred to which Judah became 
heir after the fall of the Northern Kingdom. Of 
Israel’s history it is learned that the warlike Gadites 
had absorbed the tribe of Reuben, and that they up- 
held the banner of Israel east of the Jordan. <A 
clearer idea is obtained of the epoch-making deeds 
of Omri, under whom, in spite of the wars with 
Damascus, a large portion of Moab was annexed and 
the whole kingdom forced to pay an enormous trib- 
ute (comp. II Kings iii. 4); but after his day Israel 
gradually lost its hold upon Moab, which was thus 
left to its habitual repose, and, like wine, “settled 
on his lees” (Jer. xlviii. 11). 

The literature in connection with the Moabite 
Stone is quite large. Inasmuchas the elucidation of 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


MOBILE. Sce ALABAMA. 


MOCATTA: An Anglo-Jewish family which 
can be traced back to one of the earliest of the re. 
settlers in England. 


David Mocatta: English architect; born jp 
London 1806; died May 1, 1882; son of Moses Mo. 
catta, translator of “Faith Strengthened.” Having 
shown in early youth a leaning to art pursuits, he 
made the choice of architecture as a profession, and 
studied for many years in Italy under competent 
masters, returning to England to practise his pro- 
fession. He wasengaged on many important build- 
ings, and was frequently employed by the directors 
of the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway. 
On the death of his father he succeeded to an ample 
fortune, which was subsequently increased to 4 con- 


Moses Mocatta 
(1677 5; merchant, London) 


Abraham 
= Grace, daughter of 
Abraham Levy Ximenes (1712) 


Rebecca Sarah 
= (1) Isaac Levy Ximenes 
= (2) Moses Lumbroso de Mattos (1730) 


Abraham Lumbroso de Mattos 
= Esther, daughter of Isaac Lamego 


| | | 
Isaac Rachel Moses’ Grace 
= Abigail, daughter 
of Daniel Baruch 


Lousada 


Esther 
= Moses Montefiore, 
son of Samuel 
Haim Monteflure 


Abraham (1792-1830) 
= Grace, daughter 
of Jacob Mendes 
da Costa 


| | 
Rebecca. Abraham (1831 -1900) 
= Judah 
Nahon 


Abigail 
= Isaac Lindo 
Mocatta 


Isaac 


ter of Elias Charles 
M. da Costa 
(1834-84) 


Benjamin 
= Marian Lucas 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Jan 4, 1901. 





Rebecea 


L Rebecea (1820-55) 
= (1857) Grace, daugh- = Sigismund Schloss 


David F. Schloss 


| | | | 
Esther Jacob Sarah Aaron Daniel 
(1770-1825) 
= (L794) Rebecea, 
daughter of 
Baruch Lousada 


Elias 


Abraham (1797-1880) 
= (1818) Miriam, 
daughter of 
Gabriel Israel Brandon 


ee ar : 
Jacob Miriam 

=JulHiana = Samuel 
Elkin Mocatta 


Frederick David 
= (1857) Mary, 
daughter of 
Frederick Goldsmid 


A. de Mattos 
= Florence Justina Cohen 


J. 


Marian Helen 
= Herbert G. Lousada 


MocatTtTA PEDIGREE. 


the Janguage of the inscription is continually pro- 
gressing, the later treatises are the most valuable for 
practical purposes. Translations with notes were 
given in 1870 by Clermont-Ganneau, Néldeke, Gins- 
burg, Schlottmann, and Derenbourg, and in 1871 
by Wright. Recent discussions give results based 
on reexamination and closer criticism of the text. 
It may be noted that an attempt to disprove the 
authenticity of the stone was recently made by A. 
Léwy (Berlin, 1908). The most important of the 
later studies are cited in the bibliography. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Smend and Socin, Die Insehrift des Koénig’s 
Mesa, 1886; Clermont-Ganneau. La Stéle de Mesa, in 
Journal Asiatique, Jan., 1887; Nordlander, Die Inschrift 
des Kénigxz Mesa, 1896; Lidzbarski, Ephemeris ftir Semi- 
tische E/pigraphie, 1900; comp. Driver, Mesha, in Cheyne 
and Black, Encyc. Bibl. 

J. J. F. McC. 


siderable extent by property bequeathed to him by 
his brother Benjamin Mocatta. When the late 
Sir John Soane bequeathed his collection to the na- 
tion, David Mocatta was appointed a trustee, SirJohn 
having been one of his teachers before he left Italy. 

Mocatta was one of the original Council of Found- 
ers of the West London Reform Synagogue. He had 
been directing architect of the temporary synagogue 
in Burton strect, and he likewise superintended the 
construction of the building in Margaret street. On 
the death of Sir Francis Goldsmid he became chair- 
man of the council of the congregation. He was 4 
member of the council of the University. College 
Hospital, and of the Cancer Hospital. He married 
the eldest daughter of Alexander Goldsmid, brother 
of Sir Isaac Lyon Goldsmid. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Moabite Stone 
Moch 








637 

BIBLIOGRAPUY : Jow, Chron. May 5. 882° The Times, May 4, 
1882. 
J. I. H. 


Frederick David Mocatta: 
thropist and communal worker; born in London 
Jan. 15, 1828; retired from the tirm of Mocatta & 
Goldsmid, bullion-brokers to the Bank of England, 
in 1874, and devoted himself almost exclusively to 
the study of charitable and social questions. The 
condition of the working classes of all creeds, the 
improvement of their dwellings, and the adminis- 
tration of charity with a view to promoting the in- 
dependence of the poor 
on the lines of the Char- 
ity Organization Society, 
are some of the principal 
subjeets that lave en- 
gaged his attention. His 
philanthropic work is 
conducted on certain 
well-defined principles, 
foremost among them 
being the unification and 

Warm, systematic organization 
my | yi of charity so as to pre- 
) Ne vent the undue multi- 
plication of institutions. 
He acted as chairman of 
the committee appointed 
to effect the unton of the 
Jews’ Hospital and Orphan Asylum. In 1871 a 
Jewish Workhouse was started, which was subse- 
quently amalgamated under his presidency with 
the Hand-in-Hand Asylum. He has been active 
also in abrogating the voting system in Jewish 
charitable institutions. 

Mocatta is a vice-president of the Anglo-Jewish 
Association; served asa member of the Rumanian 
and Russo-Jewish committees; and in 1882 was de- 
puted by the Mansion House Committee to proceed 
to the verious Continental centers in which the refu- 
gees from persecution were congregated. In 1895 
Mocatta reorganized the Jewish Home for Incura- 
bles. At the beginning of his seventieth year he 
was presented with a testimonial from over 200 
philanthropic, literary, and other institutions of 
which he was a member. 

Mocatta was specially interested in the prome- 
tion of Jewish learning, having been one of the 
most active members in the Society of Hebrew Lit- 
crature, Among works partly or wholly subven- 
tioned by him may be mentioned Zunz, “Zur Ge- 
schichte und Literatur” and “ Literaturgeschichte 
der Synagogalen Poesie” ; Berliner, “ Juden in Rom” 
Jacobs, “Sources of Spanish Jewish History ”; thie 
English translation of Graetz,“ History of the Jews ” 
etc. He himself was the author of “The Jews and 
the Inquisition,” London, 1877, of which German, 
Hebrew, and Italian translations haveappeared. In 
1906 he was elected president of the Jewish Histor- 
ical Society of England. He died Jan. 16, 1909. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Young Israel, March, 1897; Jew. Chron. Jan. 
15, 1897; Jewish Year Book, 5661, pp. 304-305. GL 
J. . é 


Isaac Lindo Mocatta: Author; born in Lon- 
don 1818; died at Reading 1879. His early life was 


English philan- 





Freder ick wad id Mocatta. 


passed in the business pursuits which he carried 
on in South America. He likewise spent three 
years in Australia. Qn settling in England he in- 
terested himself in Jewish charitable work. Later 
in life, like his father before him, he devoted him- 
self to writing. His two best-known works are 
entitled: “ Moral Biblical Gleanings ” (London, 1872), 
illustrating moral principles by Biblical examples, 
and “The Jewish Armory” (Brighton, 1877, pri- 
vately printed). Some of the Sabbath readings is- 
sued by the Jewish Association for the Diffusion of 
Religious Knowledge were from his pen. He de- 
signed and printed some ingenious pictorial repre- 
sentations of moral truths. His secular works in- 
clude “Times and Places,” London, n.d., and vari- 
ous pamphlets on social subjects. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Chronicle, November 21, 1879. 


Moses Mocatta: Broker, author, and commu- 
nal worker; born in London February, 1768; died 
September, 1857. He was connected with the most 
influential Sephardic families of his day. His sis- 
ter Rachel was the mother of Sir Moses Monte- 
fiore. For many years he was a partner in the firm 
of Mocatta & Goldsmid (bullion-brokers to the Bank 
of England), which had been founded by his father. 
He retired from business in middle life and devoted 
himself to study and to communal work. He was 
wu diligent student of Hebrew, and well read in 
Biblical and Jewish literature. The “Hebrew Re- 
view ” (1846) as well as the works of Grace Aguilar 
found in him a generous patron. Theological con- 
troversy Was a subject which particularly interested 
him. His “Faith Str engthened ” (1851) is a transla- 
tion from the Hebrew of the famous “ Hizzuk Emu- 
nah” of Isaac ben Abraham of Troki. His other 
translation, entitled “ The Inquisition and Judaism ” 
(1845), was a contribution to controversial literature, 
and comprised a sermon on Isa. xiii. 22 addressed to 
Jewish martyrs on the occasion of an auto da fé at 
Lisbon in 1705, and a reply to the sermon by E. 
Vero (a posthumous work of the author of the 
“Secret History of the Inquisition”). The sermon 
was translated from the Portuguese, and the reply 
from the Spanish. Moses Mocatta compiled also 
“The Wisdem of Solomon; a Selection from Prov- 
erbs and Ecclesiastes in Hebrew, with a Corrected 
Version on Parallel Lines” (1884). 

As &@ communal worker Moses Mocatta rendered 
conspicuous service to the Shaaré Tikva schools and 
other institutions of the Spanish and Portuguese 
Congregation. When the schism of 1841 occurred 
Mocatta was one of those members of Bevis Marks 
who seceded from the parent community, and helped 
to establish the West London Synagogue of British 
Jews, his considerable knowledge of Hebrew and 
Jewish literature proving of great value to the new 
movement. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Chronicle, Oet. 2, 1857; Jan. 4, 1901; 

Leisure Hour, July, 1886. 

J. I. i. 

MOCH, JULES: French officer; colonel of the 
130th Regiment of Infantry ; born at Sarrelouis Aug. 
4, 1829; died at Paris Aug. 8, 1881. On completing 
his classical studies at the lycée of Metz, he entered 
the military school of Saint-Cyr (1849) and was ap- 
pointed sublieutenant of infantry in 1851. Moch 


Mod ‘ai 
Modona 





took part in the campaigns in the Crimea (1855-56) 
and in Syria (1860-61), and in the occupation of Rome 
(1868-67); in the Franco-Prussian war (1870-71) he 
was commander of the battalion of the 8d Regiment, 
which had the mournful distinction of tiring the last 
shots of the war, and took an honorable part in the 
battle of Sedan (Sept., 1870). During the interval 
between the Crimean and Syrian campaigns he was 
tutor at the school of Saint-Cyr, to which he re- 
turned later on as examiner. 

After the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian war 
Moch published in the military journals a number 
of articles on the reorganization of the army. He 
was one of the founders and also vice-president of 
the Assembly of Officers (known later on as the 
“ Military Club ”), whose ofticial organ was “ Le Bul- 
letin ” (now the “ Revue du Cercle Militaire”). Moch 
was a chevalier of the Legion of Honor, officer of 
the Academy, commander of the Order of Charles 
Ill. of Spain and of Nisham-el-Istikhar (Tunis), 
and was decorated with the stars of the Order of 
Nisan-i-Medjidie and the Order of Pope Pius IX. 
Moch openly professed Judaism. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gaston Moch, Sedan; les Derniers Coups de 
Feu, Paris, 1885; Zadoc Kahn, Souvenirs et Regrets, pp. 
121-125, Paris, 1898. 

8. J. Ka. 

MOD‘AI: Family of Turkish authors. 

Hayyim Mod‘ai (the Elder): Rabbinical author; 
born at Safed 1709; died there 1784. He was sent 
by the Safed community to Europe to collect haluk- 
kah. From 1755 to 1776 he lived at Constantinople, 
returning in his old age to Safed. He left a num- 
ber of manuscripts, two of which have been pub- 
lished—*“ Tib Gittin,” a treatise on divorce (Jerusa- 
lem, n.d.), and “Sefer Hayyim le-‘Olam,” responsa, 
2 vols. (Smyrna, 1785). 

Hayyim Mod‘ai (the Younger): Rabbinical au- 
thor; grandson of Hayyim Mod ‘ai the Elder; lived 
at Smyrna in the middle of the nineteenth century. 
His “Sefer Memar Hayyim,” responsa, was printed 
with his grandfather’s “Sefer Hayvyim le-‘Olam” 
(Smyrna, 1879). Healsoedited Said Leon’s “ Yissad 
ha-Melek,” homilies (2. 1866). 

Nissim Mod‘ai: Printer; lived at Smyrna in 
the middle of the nineteenth century. He was in 
partnership with Jacob Ashkenazi. The “ Kiryat 
Sefer” of Moses Cohen Na‘aris among the works 
printed by Mod‘ai and Ashkenazi. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hazan, Ha-Ma'‘alot li-Shelomoh, pp. 31, 39, 90. 
D. M. Fr. 


MODEL, MARX: Court Jew to Margrave 
William Frederick of Brandenburg-Ansbach (1703- 
1723), From 1691 Model and his family were exempt 
from the payment of duties on the goods which they 
imported, and in the saine year were given the priv- 
ilege of printing the Talmud. The margrave pro- 
tected him by several decrees, and ordered the au- 
thoritics to take the necessary measures to collect 
debts due to him “so that Model may surely be able 
to help us.” 

Model sometimes used his influence in favor of 
his coreligionists, but he was very domineering, 
especially as an elder of the community of Firth. 
He threatened them with imprisonment and heavy 
fines if they should refuse to carry out his orders. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


638 


eee ee 

Like all court Jews, Model had to suffer much 
from the hatred and jealousy of his rivals. Elhg. 
nan Frankel (see Hanavu, Zenr Hrr=cH) was one of 
his most dangerous and embittered enemies. Fray. 
kel tried several times, especially in 1711, to turn the 
margrave against Model and to have the latter ip. 
prisoned on the charge of dishonesty; but the court 
Jew and his family kept their place at court, while 
Frinkel became involved in a serious charge ang 
was ruined. 

About 1716 Model was denounced for having par. 
ticipated in defrauding the public revenues. A}. 
though he was not convicted, his reputation became 
so much damaged by the long investigation that he 
and some of the family retired from court, and others 
emigrated into the county of Pfalz-Neuburg. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Haenle, Gesch. der Juden im Ehematligen 
Fiirstentuin Ansbach, passim. 
D. A. FE, 
MODENA: City in central Italy: formerly the 
capital of the duchy of Modena. Of its Jewish 
community, which has been, during the last few 
centuries, one of the most important in Italy, there 
is no record until a comparatively late date. Al- 
though Jews were living in the territory of Mo- 
dena as early as the year 1000, no reference to them 
as dwelling in the city itself occurs before 14650, 
There, as in So many other places, they seem at first 
to have been bankers who established themselves in 
Modena with the approval of the dukes of Ferrara, 
and they were treated exactly like the other Jews in 
the duchy. Ontheextinction of the house of Ferrara 
in 1598, the duchy did not come under the control 
of the States of the Church, but of a collateral 
branch of the house of Este. The Jews of Modena 
did not suffer to the same extent, therefore, as their 
coreligionists elsewhere, although they were sub- 
ject to all the hardships of the ecclesiastical laws. 
The Jewish community increased considerably in 
the seventeenth century, when it occupied an im- 
portant position because of its rabbis and of the 
studies which were pursued there. Prominent 
among its scholars of this period was Abraham 
Joseph Solomon GRaAzrIANo (d. 1685). Cabalistic 


‘thought predominated; and the community was 


one of the first to introduce the daily penitential 
services spb onaniw. The political status of the 
Jews remained uncertain, with the exception of a 
temporary improvement during the French Revolu- 
tion; and the Jews were not emancipated until the 
city was incorporated with the kingdom of Italy in 
1861. Jn1845 Cesare Rovighi of Modena edited the 
first Italian Jewish periodical, the “ Rivista Israeli- - 
tica,” which was published at Parma. 

The following rabbis and scholars of Modena may 
be mentioned. Fifteenth century: Samuel of Mo- 
dena, corresponded with Joseph Colon (Responsa, 
No. 128). Sixteenth century: Gershom b. Moses: 
Abraham b. Daniel Modena (1548), author of many 
liturgical prayers; Baruch Abraham da Spoleto 5. 
R. Pethahiah (1584). Seventeenth century: Ger- 
shom b. Israel Chezigin, Menahem b. Elbanan Cases. 
Moses Israel Foa b. Vardama, Judah b. Jacob Pog- 
getto, Abraham Rovigo b. Michael Raphael, Moses 
David Valle, Elijah Usili, Meshullam Levi, Nahman 
b. Nahman b. Joseph, Joseph Melli b. Joseph Israel, 


639 





David b. Elijah Ravenna, the above-named Abra- 
ham Joseph Solomon Graziano (1685), Aaron Bere- 
chiah Modena, Ephraim b. Elijah da Ostra, Abraham 
Jedidiah b. Menahem Samson Basilea. Eighteenth 
century: Judah Mazliah Padua (-— 1722), Manasseh 
Joshua Padua (1728), Ephraim Coen (1728), David 
Coen b. Abraham Isaac, Jacob Hayyim b. Reuben 
Yahya, Moses b. Levi, Abraham Hai b. Menahem 
Grassini, Abraham Vita Sinigaglia b. Solomon Jedi- 
diah, Solomon Jedidiah, Abraham Vita II., Moses 
Elijah b. Solomon Jedidiah (d. 1849), Ishmael Coen 
b. Abraham Isaac, Ephraim b. Joseph Gallico. 
Nineteenth century: Elishama Meir Padovani, Sol- 
omon Nissim, Solomon Teglio, Moses Ehrenreich, 
Solomon Jonah, Guiseppe Cammeo. 

Since 1900 the monthly “L’Idea Sionista” has 
been published at Modena by Carlo Conigliani, pro- 
fessor of law in the university there. At present 
(1904) the Jews of the city number about 1,200 ina 
total population of 64,941. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ersch and Gruber, Hneyce. section ii., part 27, 
p. 156, s.v. Juden; R. E. J. xx. 35 et seq.; Mortara, Lidice, 
passim. 


a. I. E. 


MODENA: An Italian family the most distin- 
guished members of which are: 

Aaron Berechiah Modena. See Aaron BERE- 
CHIAH BEN Moses BEN NEHEMIAH OF MODENA. 

David ben Abraham Modena: Supposed au- 
thor of the anonymous Hebrew-Ftalian school dic- 
tionary “ Dabar Tob” (Venice, 1596, 1606), in three 
parallel columns in Hebrew, Italian, and German. 
The existence of the author and the book is, how- 
ever, called in question. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. i. 198: Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. 
i. 288; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 855. 


David Zacuto b. Mazzal Tob Modena: Italian 
scholar of the nineteenth century ; popular preacher 
and teacher at Modena. He wrote a number of di- 
dactic, religious, and casuistic works in Hebrew and 
Italian, including: (1) “Zeker Dawid,” on customs of 
circumcision, two parts (Leghorn, n.d.); (2) Lim- 
mude Adonai,” fundamental principles of religion for 
children, with Italian translation, three parts (Reg- 
gio, 1814, 1824); (8) responsa to the four Turim; (4) 
commentary to the prayer-book and the Mahzor 
according to the Italian ritual; (5) “ Shelal Dawid,” 
notes to the Pentateuch; and 800 sermons. Only 
the first three of these works have been printed. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 78; 
Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, passim. 


Judah Aryeh Modena. 
ARYEH) OF MODENA. 

Pomona Modena: Mother of Abraham b. Daniel, 
who wrote over 1,000 liturgical prayers between 
1586 and 1552, in which he celebrated her as a pious 
woman, These prayers are contained in the Codex 
Bislichis 72. Pomona Modena was versed in the Tal- 
mud, and David of Imola addressed a detailed Tal- 
mudic responsum to her. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Zunz, Literaturgesch. p.535; Benjacob, Ozar 
Sars p. 494; Kayserling, Die Jiidischen Frauen, 


a I. E. 


MODIANO, JOSEPH SAMUEL: Turkish 
rabbinical author; lived at Salonica at the end of 
the eighteenth century. He belonged to a family 


See LEon (Jupan 


THE JEWISIL ENCYCLOPEDIA 


EP er EE A A 


Mod ‘ai 
Modona 


originally from Modena, Italy, the descendants of 
which are prominent in financial and industrial en- 
terprise in Salonica. He corresponded with Hayyim 
ben David Abulafia, rabbi of Smyrna. Modiano 
published two works—*Uryan Telitai” (Salonica, 
1795) and “Rosh Mashbir,” responsa (2 vols., 2d. 
1821 and 1840). The former is a collection of no- 
velle on various Talmudic treatises by Nahmani, 
Ibn Migash, Yom-Tob b. Abraham, R. Samuel Isaac 
of Salonica (18th cent.), and by Modiano himself. 
The latter work was published posthumously. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Hazan, Ha-Ma‘ alot li-Shelomoh, p. 90; Azu- 
lai, Shem ha- Gedolim, s.v. Uryan Telitai. 


D, M. FR. 

MODIGLIANI, ELIA: Italian traveler, natu- 
ralist, and author; born at Florence June 13, 1861; 
graduated at Pavia in 1883. From early youth he 
showed a marked inclination for natural science and 
a special fondness for travel. He visited the Malay 
Peninsula and returned with a very rich collection 
of specimens, which he presented to the museums of 
Genoa, Florence, and Rome. Among his numerous 
published works may be mentioned his “ Ricerche 
sulla Grotta di Bergeggi”; “L’Isola di Nias”; “Un 
Viaggio all’ Isola di Nias.” Milan and Treves, 1890; 
and “L’Tsola delle Donna.” 
BIBLIOGRAPILY : De Gubernatis, Diz. Biog. 

s. V.C. 

MODIN (MODA‘IM, MODI‘IM, MODEIN, 
MODI‘SIT). See Marrararas MaccaBEws, 

MODON, SIMSON HA-KOHEN: Poet; born 
in Mantua Aug. 1, 1679; dicd there June 10, 1727. 
He received a thorough education and was recog- 
nized as an accomplished linguist. He was one of 
those sent by the congregation in Mantua to do 
homage to Emperor Charles VI. at Vienna, where 
he acquitted himself most creditably and gained the 
emperor’s good-will. Encouraged by David Finzi, 
rabbi of Mantua, he devoted himself to the writing 
of poetry; Finzi added some of his own poems to 
the collection “ Kol Musar,” published by Modon at 
Mantua in 1725 (Lemberg, 1845). Others of his 
poems are “ Keter Torah” (Venice, 1721); “Zir ha- 
Zirim” (7b, 1722), an elegy on his teacher Judah 
Brill; and “Shigyon Shimshon.” ‘The last isa poem 
of three hundred lines, each commencing with the 
letter w. He also compiled a rabbinical encyclo- 
pedia, arranged alphabetically, and called “Sefer 
Zikronot”; this and the “Shigyon Shimshon” are 
in manuscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 2636; Fiirst, 
Bibl. Jud. ii. 386 ; Samuel della Volta, in Kerem Hemed, li. 
113 et seq.; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1838, p. 216: Mortara, Indice, 
p. 413; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 159, No. 185. 


Ss, S. J. L. 


MODONA, LEONELLO: Italian Orientalist ; 
born at Cento in 1841; educated at the Istituto 
degli Studi Superiori of Florence. Besides com- 
piling several library catalogues he has written: 
“TL’Uomo ela Natura”; “La Safo Storica e il Mito 
di Safo e Faone”; “La Leggenda Cristiana del Mito 
della Caduta degli Angeli in Rapporto a Due 
Tavolette del Museo Britannico ”; “Sara Copia Sul- 
lam”; “Di una Edizione del Sidur Tefilot.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Gubernatis, Diz. Bing. 


Ss. V. C. 


Mo‘ed 
Moghilef 





MO‘ED (“Feasts”): Name of an order of the 
Mishnah and the Tosefta both in Babli and in Yeru- 
shalmi. The name “ Mo‘ed,” which is mentioned in 
the Talmud itself (Suk. 4b), is applied to this order 
because all the treatises belonging to it contain reg- 
ulations and rules regarding tle Sabbath and the 
feast-days. It is the second order in the Mishnah 
(Shab. 31a), and is divided into twelve treatises con- 
tuining altogether eighty-eight chapters. The fol- 
lowing are the names of the treatises: Shabbat, 
‘Erubio, Pesahim, Shekalim, Yoma, Sukkah, Be- 
zah, Rosh ha-Shanah, Ta‘anit, Megillah, Mo‘ed 
Katan, and Hagigah. On their contents and their 
sequence in the order Mo‘ed, as well as on the single 
instance where the order is enumerated as the third 
in the Mishnah, see MrsuNnan. 

In the editions of Babli the Palestinian Gemara to 
Shekalim is printed together with that treatise, no 
Babylonian Gemara to it being now extant, and 
none, in all probability, having ever existed. The 
Palestinian Gemara is lacking to ch. xxi.-xxiv. of 
the treatise Shabbat. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, pp. 208- 

259, Leipsic, 1859. 

s. J. Z. L. 

MO‘ED KATAN (“Smaller Festival”): Trea- 
tise in the Mishnah, in the Tosefta, and in the Baby- 
lonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. It deals principally 
with the regulations concerning the semi-feasts, or in- 
termediary festivals, which are termed “ mo‘ed ” and 
are the days between the first two and the last two 
days of the feasts of Passover and Sukkot. The 
treatise receives its name from this designation, 
with the addition of “ Katan ” to distinguish it from 
the whole Seder Mo‘ed (I. Derenbourg, in “R. E. J.” 
xx. 186 e¢ seg.). In the manuscript of the Mishnah 
edited by Lowe and in the “‘Aruk” of Nathan ben 
Jchiel, Mo‘ed Katan is called “Mashkin” from its 
opening word, signifying “they waver, give to 
drink.” In the Mishnah of the Seder Mo‘ed it is 
the eleventh treatise, and is divided into three chap- 
ters, which contain twenty-four paragraphs in all. 

Ch. i.: What agricultural work may be under- 
taken on the intermediary festivals (§§ 1-4). In con- 
nection with the rule that the irrigating ditches 
may be repaired if they are injured, 
it is stated that municipal water-works 
and canals, as well as public streets, 
may be putin good condition, and in general any 
labor necessary for the public welfare may be per- 
formed (§ 2b). The treatise contains also regula- 
tions for the avoidance of mourning on these days 
(8 5); for digging graves and sepulchers and pre- 
paring coffins (§ 6); for marriage (8 7); for sewing 
(all may sew as usual, except tailors, who must 
take irregular stitches; § 8); for erecting an oven 
and a hand-mill (§ 9); for constructing balustrades; 
and for making repairs (§ 10). 

Ch. ii.: Rules for pressing olives or wine and 
garnering fruit ($§ 1-8), for purchasing houses, 
slaves, and cattle (§ 4), and for selling fruits, clothes, 
and utensils (8 5). 

Ch, ni.: Enumeration of the occasions upon which 
a man may cut his hair and wash his clothes during 
the intermediary festivals ($& 1-2); what one may 
write during these days (documents of all kinds), 


Contents. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


640 
Ee eae ene en ee ore eae ee Ser 
and what may not be written (¢.g., promissory notes 
books, etc.; §$ 3-4). The feast-days interrupt 5 
period of mourning and end it altogether; but if the 
mourning has not yet begun, they are not reckoneg 
as part of it, while the Sabbath, on the contrary, jg 
included in the period of mourning and does not 
terminate it (§ 5). Enumeration of the feasts which 
resemble the Sabbath in this respect (§ 6), and the 
mourning ceremonies observed in the intermediary 
festivals; with a description of how the women are 
to sing the dirges on these days (§§ 7-8) and, in con- 
nection with this, how the dirges are to be sung at 

the New Moon, on Hanukkah, and on Purim (§ 9), 
The Mishnah to this treatise, like its Tosefta, 
which is divided into two chapters, contains much 
important matter relating to Jewish 


Tosefta social life, such as information regard. 
and ing furniture and tools, housework 
Gemaras. and agriculture, public institutions, 


and mourning customs. 

The Gemaras of both Talmuds explain the several] 
mishnayot. In the first chapter the Babylonian Ge- 
mara contains also a number of tales, proverbs, and 
benedictions, which give examples of the picturesque 
style of the Rabbis. In the third chapter, besides the 
explanations of the individual mishnayot, the Baby- 
lonian Gemara contains etailed regulations concern- 
ing the different forms of the Ban and its removal 
(pp. 15a-17b), as well as narratives of remarkable 
incidents which took place when certain teachers 
died or were buried (p. 25a, b), and iegends con- 
cerning the manner in which death overtook them 
(p. 28a). Here are also found interesting specimens 
of dirges and funeral orations delivered in Hebrew 
and showing traces of paronomasia and rime (p. 
25b), besides Raba’s citation of examples of wailing 
songs sung by the hired mourning-women in the 
vernacular at Shekanzib (p. 28b). 

Especial mention should be made of the enumera- 
tion of modifications which had taken place in the 
course of time in many of the usages connected with 
mourning and burial (p. 27a, b). All these changes 
were made for the sake of the poor, who could not 
afford the luxury of the old customs. The sums 
expended in the preparation of the body were so 
large that the relatives often left the corpse unburied 
because they conld not meet the enormous outlay. 
It was not until after Rabban Gamaliel had been 
buried in simple linen garments that this custom be- 
came general. Ata later period simplicity was car- 
ried still further, and the cheapest coverings were 
used for the burial of the dead (p. 27b). 

Ss. 8. J. Z. L. 

MOGADOR (or SUERAH): Seaport of Moroc- 
co, on the Atlantic; founded by Sidi Mohammed ibn 
Abdallah in 1759. It has a total population of 29,- 
000, including 10,000 Jews. Mogador is divided 
into three parts: the Kasbah, where the governor, 
some Mohammedans, the European officials, and a 
number of Jewish merchants reside; the Medi- 
nah, or city, of the Moors; and the Mellah, or 
Jewish quarter, which has two fortified gates. The 
Medinah contains the old Jewish quarter, called 
“Al-Mellah al-Kadim” (the old Mellah), In 1807 
the governor, Ibn ‘Abd al-Saddik, found it nec- 
essary for the security of the Jews to found the 


641 


en ee 


present Mellah. The condition of the Jews has 
always been better in Mogador than in many other 
yarts of the empire, as the sultans—especially those 
of the Sherifian dynasty—in many instances favored 
them. «An exception, however, was made in this 
respect by the sultan Muley Yazid, who in order 
to convert ten Jews of Mogador tortured them for 
ten days by repeatedly hanging them head downward 
ina dry cistern and bastinadoing them. When the 
news of the death of Muley Yazid came, some of 
them had expired and one had embraced Islam; the 
rest were set frec. 

The Sherifs encouraged the commerce of the Jews 
in every possible way by granting them privileges 
and loans; this condition lasted until the end of the 
government of Muley al-Hassan, when the European 
merchants began to give protection to their Moroc- 
can agents. When the French navy, in 1846, bom- 
barded Mogador, the Arab tribes of the neighbor- 
hood suddenly attacked the city and pillaged the 
houses of Jews and Mohammedans, dishonoring the 
women, and killing many of the inhabitants. Those 
who could escape fled as far as the city of Morocco 
in order to findashelter. When peace was restored, 
they returned to Mogador in a condition of abject 
poverty. In 1860, again, when Spanish war-ships 
were sent to Morocco, the Jews left the city and fled 
to the southern province of Haha, where they were 
protected by the governor. The mission of Sir 
Moses Montefiore to Morocco brought about a better 
state of affairs for the Jews of Mogador and resulted 
in the abolition of the bastinado. The condition of 
the Jews of Mogador to-day, however, is still far 
from being secure. 

The commerce of the city, mostly with England, 
France, and Germany, lies chiefly in the hands of 
the Jews, so that the Mohammedans are compelled 
tosuspend business on the Jewish Sabbaths and holy 
days. Religious matters and also civil cases are de- 
cided by a board of three rabbis, and Jewish con- 
gregational affairs by a committeeof seven members 
of the community, chosen annually. The Mellah is 
represented in civic and political affairs by a sheik, 
who is installed by the government and is responsi- 
ble to it for the regular payment of the Jewish tax, 
which amounts to 250 “doros.” The expenses of 
the Jewish community, including the salaries of the 
rabbis and charity for the poor, are met by a meat- 
tax, a tax on imported and exported merchandise, 
and by donations from a French and an English 
shipping company by whose ships the Jews have 
agreed to export their merchandise. The commu- 
nity has a bet ha-midrash, a French and an English 
school for boys (founded respectively in 1862 and 
1864), and two English schools for girls, one, 
founded in 1887, being supported by the Anglo- 
Jewish Association, the other being a private school. 

Since its foundation the community has had the 
following rabbis: Yahya, from Agadir; Jacob 
Bibaz. from Rabat; Abraham Coriat, author of 
“Sefer Zckut Abot.” (went to Leghorn in 1793); 
Havyiin Pinto (d. 1846); David ibn al-Hazzan (d. 
1828); Joseph ben Jacob Almalih, called Joseph al- 
Kabir (d. Jerusalem 1837); Abraham Coriat IT., au- 
thor of “Sefer Berit Abot”; Joseph ben Aaron 
Atmanig: Abraham ibn ‘Attar (d. 1882); Moses 

Viltl.—41 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mo‘ed 
Moghilef 





Cohen (emigrated to the city of Morocco); and 
Abraham Sabah (d. 1903). The present (1904) rabbis 
of Mogador are Judah ben Maniel, Masud Knafo, 

and Joseph ibn ‘Attar. 

D. M. Ky. 

MOGHILEF (MOHILEV): 1. Capital of the 
government of the same name in White Russia; sit- 
uated on the Duieper. Though the city was well 
known as an important trading center as early as 
the fourteenth century, the first mention of Jews 
there occurs ina document dated 1522, wherein King 
Sigismund awards a lease, for a period of three 
years, of the various taxes of Moghilef to MicHAEL 
JESOFOVICH, the noted merchant of Brest. This 
lease was renewed three years later, and subse- 
quently taken up by the Jesofovich family and 
other Jewish merchants, as appears from 4 number 
of documents. Toward the end of the sixteenth 
century Jews had probably settled in Moghilef in 
considerable numbers, although there are no docu- 
ments extant to show that they had a well-organized 
community at that time. In 1583 Arrras Racu- 
MAELOVICH, &@ prominent Jewish merchant of Mo- 
ghilef, carried on an import and export trade with 
Riga and Lublin. The presence of a considerable 
number of Jews in Moghilef at the end of the six- 
teenth century is attested also by the petition, dated 
March 5, 1585, of the burghers of the city to King 
Stephen Bathori praying that Jews might be pro- 
hibited from settling in Moghilef, since they would 
be a serious menace to the prosperity of the Chris- 
tian merchants. The king promised to grant the 
request of the burghers; but in spite of this the 
agents of the Jewish tax-farmers continued their 
business in Moghilef, asis shown by certain lawsuits 
brought by them in 1589 against some Christian 
merchants for selling spirituous liquors without a 
license. In a document dated Jan. 31, 1597, a Jew, 
Avram Rubinovich, is mentioned as residing on 
Pokrovsky street. A Jewish community seems to 
have existed in Moghilef for some 


Commu- time prior to 1621, in which year the 
nity in local gild of butchers passed resolu- 
1621. tions making it illegal for Christian as 


well as Jewish members of the gild to 
buy cattle outside of the city, and requiring Chris- 
tian butchers who wished to sell kasher meat to do 
business in certain places where the Jewish butchers 
were established. In the following year the mu- 
nicipal council of Moghilef borrowed from the Jew 
Gabriel Samuelovich and his wife, Rukhana Itzkha- 
kovna, 100 Lithuanian kop groschen for a term of 
ten years, and as security gave to Gabriel a house 
belonging to the city, situated on Nikolski street. 
The growing antagonism on the part of the Chris- 
tian merchants, provoked by the competition of the 
Jews, caused the former to make repeated com- 
plaints to the king, and finally led to the promulga- 
tion of an edict (July 23, 1626) by Sigismund IIL, 
whereby all Jews owning houses on the market-place 
were ordered to remove to the street on which their 
prayer-house was situated, “inorder to prevent the 
conflicts due to the residence of Jews and Christians 
on the same streets.” Equivalent areas were assigned 
to the Jews on the Jewish street. This edict was con- 
firmed by Ladislaus IV. (March 8, 1683), who also 


Moghilef 
Mogulesko 


THE JEWISH 
prohibited the Jews from building baths and brew- 
eries Within the city limits. This and other docu- 
ments show that the populace was being incited 
against the Jews by the burghers and the clergy. 
In 1689 the burghers reported to the city council 
that a Christian servant who had been employed for 
ten years by the Jewess Lyuba Jose- 


Conflicts fova, had died under suspicious cir- 
with cumstances and that the Jews had bur- 
Citizens. ied her without giving notice of the 


funeral to her relatives. The investi- 
gation revealed that the deceased had been drinking 
heavily in the monastery and had fallen uncon- 
scious in the street near the house; that Lyaba with 
the aid of the servant's sister had carried her into the 
house, where she dicd soonafter; and that the son of 
the deceased, accompanied by other relatives, had 
buried her, a fact corroborated by numerous wit- 
nesses. Other unfounded accusations were repeat- 
edly made against the Jews of Moghilef, especially 
as to their responsibility for the frequent conflagra- 
tions occurring 
in the city. 

The enmity 
toward the Jews 
found — expres- 
sion in a riot 
which occurred 
on the Jewish 
New-Year’s 
Day, Sept. 21, 
1645. Led by 
the  burgomas- 
ter, Roman Reb- 
rovich, an armed 
mob attacked 
the Jews, who 
had gone to the 
River Dnieper 
for the observ- 
ance of the relig- 
ious custom of 
“Tashlik ”; the 
mob wounded 
menand women, 
robbed them of their jewelry, and attempted to 
throw them into the river. The case was carried 
to Prinee Radziwil, the chief marshal of the 
duchy of Lithuania, whose influence enabled the 
burgomaster to escape punishment. This inci- 
dent, one of many, throws light on the popular 
attitude toward the Jews a few years before the 
uprising under Chmielnicki. The Jews of Mo- 
ghilef apparently escaped the first fury of Chmiel- 
nicki’s Cossacks in 1648; and they benefited in the 
following year by the renewal of the charter of 
privileges granted to many Lithuanian communities 
by King John Casimir (Feb. 17). 

The security of the Moghilef community was, 
however, of short duration. In 1654 the city was 
annexed to Russia. and by order of 
the czar Aleksei Mikhailovich in re- 
sponse to a petition of the Moghilef 
burghers the Jews were commanded 
to leave (Sept, 15, 1654). In spite of this order they 
remained in Moghilef (probably as the result of 


Expelled 
1654. 


ENCYCLOPEDIA 





synagogue at Moghilef, 
(After a photograph.) 


642 
oye a ay Se 
bribery of the local officials), but they paid dearly 
for so doing. In 1655 most of them were mag. 
sacred by the Russian soldiers outside of the city 
walls, where the Jews had assembled by order of the 
Russian commander Poklonski (sce JEw. Excye 
iv, 286b, «7. Cossacks’ UprisinG), The only Jews 
spared were those who had not yet left the city. ang 
who, fearing a similar fate, had declared their read. 
iness toaccept baptism, The Father Superior Orest, 
commenting on this incident in his nemoirs, laments 
the fact that after the war, when the danger to the 
Jews had passed, most of the converts returned to 
Judaisin, only a tenth part of them remaining Chris. 
tians. 

In 1656 Moghilef was again under Polish rule; 
and the old charter of privileges was renewed hy 
King John II. Inthe memoirs of Orest. referred 
to above, mention is made also of Shabbethai Zebj 
(whom Orest calls “Sapsai Gershonovich "). 

The first rabbi of Moghilef and of “the Russian 
province” of whom record is preserved in Jewish 
documents, was 
Mordecai Siiss- 


kind Rutten- 
burg, who was 
living in Moghi- 
lef in 1686, as 
appears from his 


ROT SSE eS responsa (i. 44); 
SSS l (i. 44); 


Amsterdam, 
1746). He was 
probably among 
the first (if not 
the first) of the 
rabbis of the 
Moghilef —com- 
munity after 
permission was 
given the Jews 
in {678 to. re- 
side anywhere 
in the city. For 
the next century 
the Jews of 
Moghilef  re- 
mained secure under the protection of the Polish 
crown, with the exception of the period covered 
by the Swedish war, when Moghilef was for a 
time on the battle-ground between the Swedes 
and the Russians. Orest describes in his memoirs 
the entry of Peter the Great into Moghilef, when 
the Jewish inhabitants together with the rest came 
to welcome him, and presented him with a live 
sturgeon. 

With the partition of Poland in 1772 Moghilef be- 
came a part of the Russian empire. Catherine IJ. 
visited the city in 1780 and was received by the Jews 
with expressions of joy. They decorated the public 
square with flowers and erected an arch bearing the 

inscription “ We rejoice as in the days 





Under of King Solomon.” They also e2 
Russian vaged a band of music to play in the 
Rule. daytime and in the evening, During 


the successive reigns of Catherine, 
Paul, and Alexander the prosperity of the commu: 
nity increased. The Jewish merchants of Moghile 


643 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 





were especially prominent as traders in timber, 
npemp, aud grain, which were sold in Riga, wherea 
number of Jews of Moghilef settled iater. Impor- 
tant commercial relations were maintained also by 
way ©f the Dnieper with Kiev and Kherson, To- 
ward the middle of the nineteenth century and later 
the Jewish merchants of Moghilef became prominent 
also a8 government contractors, and carried on an 
extensive trade with Moscow. 

In 1897 the Jews of Moghilef numbered 19,398 in 
a total population of 48,106. The city had two syn- 
agogues and about forty houses of prayer; thirty- 
five hadarim and three yeshibot; a Jewish hospital 
aud a number of dispensaries; Jewish elementary 
schools for boys and girls; a Talmud Torah, and 











Moghilef 
Mogulesko 


in a private school for girls (68), and in the city 
school (130, the total heing 820). Among the char- 
itable institutions is a hospital. Iv 1897 there was 
founded a loan association which lends small sums 
of money without interest to petty traders and arti- 
sans. <A society for aiding the poor, founded in 1899, 
gives special attention to supplying artisans with 
proper tools and to aiding them to dispose of their 
wares. Poverty is steadily increasing, leading to 
increased emigration. During the war between the 
Russiansand the Poles many Jewsof Moghilef were 
killed by the Cossacks and the Russian troops (1664). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Sion, 1861, No.30; Vosihod, 1898, No. 2; 1899, 
Nos. ¢ and 56; 1900, No. 54: 1901, Nos. 5S and 6&8; Regestyt 
Nadpisi, vol. i., No. lU21, St. Petersburg, 1899. 

HW. R. Ss. J. 


iy 


es 





INTERIOR OF A SYNAGOGUE AT MOGHILEF, RUSSIA, 
(After a photograph.) 


the usual Jewish charitable organizations. By far 
the greater portion of the Jews of Moghilef are arti- 
sans earning scanty wages. Since the construction 
of the railroad, which did not touch Moghilef, the 
prosperity of the city has declined. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY : Regesty, vol. i, 8.v.. Russko Vevreiakt Ar- 
khiv, i., 8.v.; Levontin, in Keneset Yisrael, i. 4; Mstislav- 
ski, in Voskhod, 1886, ix. and x. 

H.R. J. G. L. 
2. City in the government of Podolia, Russia; 

situated on the Dniester; it has a population of 22,- 

093, of whom 14,000 are Jews. The latter include 

3,306 artisans and 131 day-laborers; 61 are employed 

in the shops and factories, The Jewish children 

are taught in fifty-eight hadarim (700 pupils), in the 

Jewish school with its industrial department (140), 


| 


MOGHRABI (MAGHRABI), JOSEPH AL-. 
See JOSEPIE BEN JUDAH IBN “AKNEN, 


MOGULESKO, SIGMUND (SELIG): Amer- 
ican comedian; born in Kaloraush, Bessarabia, Dec. 
16, 1858; now residing in New York. He possessed 
a fine voice from early youth, and was the favorite 
“meshorer” or choir-singer with several well- 
known hazzanim. He went to Bucharest, Rumania, 
while very young, and for some years studied there 
at the Conservatory of Music. He joined Gornn- 
FADEN soon after the organization of the Yiddish 
theater, and since that time has been recognized as 
the best comedian on the Yiddish stage. He trav- 
eled with various companies over Russia, Austria, 
Rumania, and England. He went to the United 


Wohammed 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


644. 


a 


States about the year 1886, since when, except for 

an interruption of three years through illness, he has 

followed his profession to the present time (1904). 

He is known also asa leading composer of music 

for the Yiddish stage. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hapgood, Spirit of the Ghetto, pp. 188, 150 et 
seq., New York, J902; Seifert. Die Viddisehe Btihirne, vol. ii. 
(Geschichte von Viddischen Theater), New York, L997. 


s. Pe WV 


MOHAMMED: Founder of Islam and of the Mo- 
hammedan empire: born at Mecca between 569 and 
o71 of the common era; died June, 682, at Medina. 
Mohammed was a posthumous child and Jost his 
mother when he was six years old. He then came 
under the guardianship of his grandfather ‘Abd al- 
Muttalib, who at his death, two years later, left the 
boy to the care of his son Abu Talib, Mohammed’s 
uncle. The early years of Mohammed's life were 
spent among the Banu Sa‘d, Bedouins of the desert, 
it being the custom at Mecca to send a child away 
from home to be nursed. From the stories told of 
these early years it would appear that 
even then he showed symptoms of 
epilepsy which greatly alarmed his 
nurse, It has been stated that the boy 
was once taken on a caravan journey to Syria, and 
that he there came in contact with Jews and Chris- 
tians. But he could very easily have become ac- 
quainted with both at Mecca; hence this theory 
is not necessary to explain his knowledge of Jew- 
ish and Christian beliefs. When Mohammed was 
twenty-five years old Abu Talib obtained for him an 
opportunity to travel with a caravan in the service 
of Hadijah, a wealthy widow of the Kuraish, who 
offered Mohammed her hand on his return from the 
expedition. Six children were the fruit of this 
union, the four daughters surviving their father. 
Hadijah, although fifteen years his senior, was, as 
long as she lived, Mohammed’s faithful friend and 
sympathizer. 

G. M. W. MT. 

Mohammed’s religious activity began with the for- 
tieth year of his life. The Islamic tradition assigns 
as the beginning of this new career a sudden marvel- 
ous illumination through God. The Koran, however, 
the most authentic document of Islam, whose be- 
ginnings are probably contemporaneous with Mo- 
hammed’s first sermons, speaks of this revelation on 
the “fateful night” rather vaguely in a passage of 
the later Meccan period, while the earlier passages 
give the impression that Mohammed himself had 
somewhat hazy ideas on the first stages of the reve- 
lation which culminated in his occasional intercourse 
with God, through the mediation of various spiri- 
tual beings. Smal! wonder that his pagan country- 
men took him to be a “Kahin,” ¢.e., one of those 
Arab soothsayers who, claiming higher inspiration, 
uttered rimed oracles similar to those found in the 
earliest suras. Historical investigations, however, 
show that Mohammed must not be classed with those 
pagan seers, but with a sect of monotheistic visiona- 
ries of whose probable existence in southern Arabia, 
on the borderland between Judaism and Christianity, 
some notice has come down in the fragment of an 
inscription recently published in “W. Z. K. M.” 
(1896, pp. 285 e¢ seg.). This fragment ascribes to 


Early 
Years. 


God the attribute of vouchsafing “revelation” (0 
and “glid tidings” (“bashr.” te, “gospel” te 
“gift of preaching”), meaning prob. 
South-Ara- ably the occasional visionary illuyj. 
bian Vi- nation of the believer. As the same 
sionaries. inscription contains other religious 
concepts and expressions which para]. 
lel those in the Koran, Mohammed may well be as. 
sociated with this religious tendency. The name 
of this South-Arabian sect is not Known; but the 
“Hanifs ” of the Islamic tradition belonged probably 
to them, being a body of monotheistic ascetics who 
lived according to the “religion of Abraham” ang 
who bitterly inveighed against the immoral prac. 
tises of paganism. 

Islam in its earliest form certainly did not go fay 
beyond the tenets of these men. Mohammed con. 
demns idolatry by emphasizing the existence of g 
single powerful God, who has created and who main. 
tains heaven and earth: but he condemns still more 
emphatically the vices born of idolatry, namely, 
covetousness, greed, and injustice to one’s neighbor; 
and he recommends prayer and the giving of alms 
as a means of purifying the spirit and of being 
justified at the divine judgment. This gospel in- 
cludes nothing that was not contained in Judaism 
or in Christianity, nor anything of what constituted 
the fundamental difference between the two. Islam, 
however, did not undertake to bridge the gulf be- 
tween them. Mohammed’s teaching, on the con- 
trary, was at first expressly directed against the 
Arab pagans only; and even in the Jater Meccan 
period it refers to its consonance with the doctrines 
of the “men of the revelation,” z.e., Jews and Chris- 
tians. Nothing is more erroneous than to assume — 
that the watchword of the later Islam, “ There is no 
God but Allah, and Mohammed is His prophet,” was 
characteristic of the very beginning of the religious 
movement inaugurated by Mohammed: not the be- 
lief in dogmas, but the recognition of ethical obli- 
gations, was the object of his mission to his country- 
men. That meant that the Arab prophet strove te 
gain in every believer an ally to help him to wage 
war upon the corruptions of the day. Mohammed’s 
political astuteness, which was a sigual characteristic 
of his Medina period, is apparent even in the organ- 
ization of the first community. Its members were 
mostly poor but intellectually eminent Kuraish like 
Ali, Abu Bakr, Zubair, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Auf, 
Sa‘d ibn Abi Wakkas, Othman, and others. They, 
being in the execution of their religions dutics under 
Mohammed’s personal supervision, soou grew to be 
so dependent upon him that their tribal conscious- 
ness—the strongest instinct in the social life of the 
ancient Arabs—was gradually super- 
seded by the consciousness of being 
Moslems, thecommunity thus de velop- 
ing into a small state with Mohammec 
as its chief. Hence in time sharp conflicts arose be- 
tween the powerful Meccans, the sheiks of the lead: 
ing families, and Mohammed. For years they bad 
suffered him as a harmless dreamer, a soothsayer, 4 
magician, and even as one possessed of demons; 
then, when his prediction in regard to the imminent 
judgment of God remained unfulfilled, they ha 
mocked him; but when the community grew-—evel 


The First 
Moslems. 


645 





-~ 


eminent personages like Hamzah swearing by Islam 
—they grew hostile and began to persecute him and 
his adherents, their action culminating in the ostra- 
cism of Mohammed's family, the Banu Hashim. 
Restricted in his missionary activity, and separated 
from a large part of the faithful who had sought 
refuge in Christian Abyssinia, the prophet lost 
heart. His preaching, in so far as its nature can be 
gathered from the Koran, was filled with references 
to the persecutions to which the earlier messengers 
of God had been subjected, and to their final 
rescue by Him; and it emphasized “rahmah ”—7.e., 
mercy shown to the good, and long-suffering to 
the wicked—as being God’s chief attribute. Vari- 
ous dogmatic-theosophic discussions were added, 
among them being the first protests against the 
Christian doctrine of the son of God. The teach- 
ings of Islam, which at first had been merely a 
body of precepts, developed more and more into a 
regular system which reflected in its chief tenets 
the later Judaism. 

When the leading families of Mecca revoked the 
ban pronounced against the Banu Hashim, which 
had been maintained for nearly three years, they 
might well have believed that Mohammed’s polit- 
ical importance at Mecca was destroyed. The proph- 
et himself perceived, especially after the death of 
his protector Abu Talib and of his (Mohammed’s) 
wife Hadijah, that his native city was not the 
proper place in which to carry out his communal 
ideas; and he cast about for a locality better 
adapted to his purposes. After various unsuccess- 
ful attempts to find a following among neighboring 
tribes, he happened to meet, during the annual fes- 
tival of the temple at Mecca, six people from Yath- 
rib (Medina); the Arab inhabitants of this city had 
come into close contact with monotheistic ideas 
through their long sojourn among the Jewish tribes 
which had been the original masters of the city, as 
well as with several Christian families. These men, 
being related to Mohammed on his mother’s side, 
took up the cause of the prophet, and were soactive 

in its behalf among their people that 
The Hegira after two years seventy-five believers 
(622). of Medina went to Mecca during the 
festival and proclaimed in the so-called 
““akabah,” or war assembly, the official reception 
of Mohammed and his adherents at Mecca into the 
community of Yathrib. The consequence was that 
Within a short time all the Moslems removed to 
Medina; and the prophet himself, as the last one, 
closed the first period of Islam by his hasty depar- 
ture, as in flight (“ Hegira”; Sept., 622). 

Mohammed’s entry into Medina marks the begin- 
ning of an almost continuous external developmentof 
Islam, which asa religion, it is true, Jost in depth and 
moral content, and crystallized into dogmatic for- 
mulas, but as a political entity achieved increasing 
success through the eminent political ability of the 
prophet himself. The Arab inhabitants of Medina, 
the tribes of Aus and Khazraj, all joined the religion 
of the prophet within two years from the Hegira. 
Political differences, however, arose between them, 
especially after Mohammed had reserved for himself 
exclusively the office of judge; and these differences 
led to the formation of a moderate party of opposi- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mohammed 





tion, the Munatij, or weak believers, who often, and 
without detriment to his cause, restrained the 
prophet’s impetucsity. But the propaganda came 
toa halt among the numerous Jews living in the 
city and the surrounding country, who were partly 
under the protection of the ruling Arab tribes, the 
Banu ‘Auf, Al-Harith, Al-Najjar, Sa’idah, Jusham, 
Al-Aus, Tha‘labah, and partly belonged to such 
large and powerful Jewish tribes as the Banu Kurai- 
za, Al-Nadir, Kainuka‘. In the first year of the Heg- 
ira Mohammed was apparently on friendly terms 
with them, not yet recognizing their religion to be 
different from his; indeed, they were included ina 
treaty which he made with the inhabitants of Mcdina 
shortly after his arrival among them. The prophet 
and his adherents borrowed from these Jews many 
ritual customs, as, forinstance, the regularity and 
formality of public prayers, fasting—which later on, 
following the Christian example, was extended to a 
whole month—the more important of the dietary 
laws, and the “kiblah ” (direetion in which one turns 
during prayer) toward Jerusalem, which was subse- 
quently changed to the kiblah toward Mecca. But 
the longer Mohammed studied the Jews the more 
clearly he perceived that there were irreconcilable 
differences between their religion and his, especially 
when the belief in his prophetic mission became the 
criterion of a true Moslem. 

The Jews, on their side, could not let pass unchal- 
lenged the way in which the Koran appropriated 
Biblical accounts and personages; for instance, its 
making Abraham an Arab and the founder of the 
Ka‘bah at Mecca. The prophet, who looked upon 
every evident correction of his gospel as an attack 
upon his own reputation, brooked no contradiction, 

and unhesitatingly threw down the 

Relation gauntletto the Jews. Numerous pas- 

to Jews. sages in the Koran show how he grad- 

ually went from slight thrusts to mali- 
cious vituperations and brutal attacks on the customs 
and beliefs of the Jews. When they justified them- 
selves by referring to the Bible, Mohammed, who 
had taken nothing therefrom at first hand, ac- 
cused them of intentionally concealing its true 
meaning or of entirely misunderstanding it, and 
taunted them with being “asses who carry books” 
(sura lxii. 5). The increasing bitterness of this 
vituperation, which was similarly directed against 
the less numerous Christians of Medina, indicated 
that in time Mohammed would not hesitate to pro- 
ceed to actual hostilities. The outbreak of the lat- 
ter was deferred by the fact that the hatred of the 
prophet was turned more forcibly in another direc- 
tion, namely, against the people of Mecca, whose 
earlier refusal of Islam and whose attitude toward the 
community appeared to him at Medina as a personal 
jusult which constituted a sufficient cause for war. 
The Koran, in order to lead its adherents to the be- 
lief that side by side with the humane precepts of 
religion were others commanding religious war (‘ ji- 
had”), even to the extent of destroying human life, 
had to incorporate a number of passages enjoining 
with increasing emphasis the faithful to take up the 
sword for their faith. The earlier of these passages 
enunciated only the right of defensive action, but 
later ones emphasized the duty of taking the offen- 


Mohammed 
Mohilewer 





sive against unbelievers — /.¢., in the first place, 
the people of Mecca—until they should accept the 
new faith or be annihilated. The prophet’s pol- 
icy, steadily pursuing one object. and hesitating at 
no means to achieve it, soou actualized this new 
doctrine. , 

G, Il. G. 

Mohanuned's first attacks upon the Meccans were 
of « predatory nature, made upon the caravans, 
which, as all classes had a financial interest in them, 
were the very life of the city. The 
early expeditions were of compara- 
tively little importance; and the bat- 
tle of Badr in the second year of the 
Hegira was the first encounter of really great mo- 
ment. In this battle the Moslems were successful 
and killed nearly fifty of the Kuraish, besides taking 
prisoners. This battle was of supreme importance 
in the history of Islam. The prophet had preached 
the doctrine that war against the unbelievers was a 
religious duty; and now he could claim that God 
was on his side. His power was consolidated; the 
faith of the wavering was strengthened; and his 
opponents were terrified. The die was cast; Islam 
was to be a religion of conquest with the sword. 
After the battle of Badr, Mohammed dared to mani- 
fest his hostility to the Jews openly. <A Jewess, 
named Asma, who had written satirical verses on 
the battle of Badr, was assassinated, by command 
of Mohammed, as she lay in bed with her child at 
the breast. The murderer was publicly commended 
the next day by the prophet. A few weeks later 
Abu ‘Afak, aJewish poet whose verses had similarly 
offended, was likewise murdered. It is said that 
Mohammed had expressed a desire to be rid of him. 
These were single instances. The prophet soon 
founda pretext for attacking ina body the Banu 
IXarNuKA‘, one of the three influential Jewish tribes 
at Medina. They were besieged in their stronghold 
for fifteen days, and finally surrendered. Moham- 
med was prevented from putting them all to death 
only by the insistent pleading in their behalf of 
Abdallah b. Ubai, the influential leader of the op- 
position whom Mohammed did not dareoffend. In- 
stead, the whole tribe was banished, and its goods 
were confiscated. The prophet was thus enabled to 
give material benefits to his followers. 

Medina now enjoyed a few months of comparative 
quiet, disturbed only by a few unimportant maraud- 
ing expeditions. The third year of the Hegira was 
marked by the assassination of a third Jewish poet, 

Ka‘b b. al-Ashraf, who by his verses 


First 
Raids. 


Death to had stirred up the Kuraish at Mecca 
Jewish against Mohammed. The prophet 
Poets. prayed to be delivered from him; and 


there was no lack of men eager to ex- 
ecute his wishes. The circumstances attending the 
murder were particularly revolting. At about the 
same time a Jewish merchant, Abu Sanina by name, 
was murdered, and the Jews complained to Moham- 
med of such treacherous dealing. A new treaty 
was concluded with them, which, however, did not 
greatly allay their fears. Some months after these 
events (Jan., 625) occurred the battle of Uhud, in 
which the Meccans took revenge for their defeat at 
Badr. Seventy-four Moslems were killed in the 


THE JEWISIL ENCYCLOPEDIA 


646 


a a 
fight; Mohammed himself was badly wounded; ang 
the prophet’s prestige was seriously affected. The 
Jews were especially jubilant, declaring that if te 
had claimed Badr to be a mark of divine favor 
Uhud, by the same process of reasoning, must bea 
proof of disfavor. Various answers to these doubtg 
and arguments may be found in the Koran, sura ijj. 
Mohammed now needed some opportunity to re. 
cover his prestige and to make up for the disap. 
pointment of Uhud. He found it the next year jp 
an attack upon the Banu aL-Nanir, 


Attacks another of the influential Jewish tribes 
the Banu in the vicinity of Medina. A pre. 
al-Nadir. text was easily invented. Mohammed 


had visited the settlement of the tribe 
to discuss the amount of blood-moncy to be paid for 
the murder of two men by an ally of the Jews, when 
he suddenly left the gathering and went home. He 
is said by some to have declared that the angel 
Gabriel had revealed to him a plot of the Banu al- 
Nadir to kill him as hesat amonythem. The latter 
were immediately informed that they must leave 
the vicinity. They refused to obey; and Mohamn- 
med attacked their stronghold. After a siege last- 
ing more than a fortnight, and after their date-trees 
had been cut down—contrary to Arabian ethics of 
war—the Jewish tribe surrendered and was allowed 
to emigrate with all its possessions, on condition of 
leaving its arms behind (Sprenger, “ Das Leben des 
Mohammad,” ili. 162; “ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” pp. 48, 
| 92). The rich lands thus left vacant were distrib- 
‘ uted among the refugees who had fled with Mo- 
hammed from Mecca and who had hitherto been 
: more or less of a burden on the hospitality of the 
people of Medina. The prophet was thus able both 
| to satisfy his hatred against the Jewsand materially 
to strengthen his position. 

In the fifth year of the Hegira the Banu Kuraiza, 
the last Jewish tribe remaining in the neighborhood 
of Medina, were disposed of. Again the direct cause 
for attack was a matter of policy. The Kuraish of 
Mecca, whose caravans were constantly betng har- 
assed by the Moslems and by other disaffected tribes 
including the Jews, had formed the project of uni- 
ting their forcesagainst Mohammed. The leaderof 
this enterprise was the able and vigorous Abu Suf- 
yan of Mecca. The allies encamped before Medina 
and engaged in what is known as “the battle of the 
trenches,” so called from the manner in which Me- 
dina was protected from attack. The Moslems suc- 
ceeded in keeping the Banu Kuraiza out of the fight 
by making them and the allies mutually suspicious, 
and the allies finally withdrew without having ac- 
complished their purpose. The Moslems also were 
disappointed in having no plunder, so that Moham- 
med felt called upon to provide a diversion. The 
allies had scarcely departed, the Moslems had not 
yet laid down their arms, when the prophet claimed 
to have received acommunication from Gabriel bid- 
ding him march instantly against the Banu Kuraiza. 

_ The last-named, who had no time to prepare fora long 
siege, retired to their castles, and surrendered after 
two weeks, trusting to escape as their kinsmen of 
the Banu Kainuka‘ and the Banu al-Nadir had done. 
Their fate was left to the decision of Sa‘ad b. Mu- 

| ‘adh, who, although of the tribe of Aus, the alliesof 


647 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


MWohammea 
Mohilewer 





the Kuraiza, felt bitter toward them on account 
of their supposed treachery toward the Moslems. Ele 
decided that all the men should be 


Destroys killed, the women and children sold 
the Banu as slaves, and the property divided 
Kuraiza. amongthearmy. The carnage began 


the next morning, and between 600 
and 700 victims were beheaded beside the trenches in 
which they were to be buried. Mohammed refers to 
the siege of Medina and the massacre of the Jews in 
sua XXXHL 

There were now no more Jews in the vicinity of 
Medina, but those at Khaibar continued to annoy 
the prophet. Abual-Hukaik of the Banu al-Nadir, 
who had settled at Khaibar, was suspected of in- 
citing the Bedouins to plunder the Moslems. <Ac- 
cordingly five men of the Banu Khazraj were sent 
secretly and murdered him. Usair, wlio succeeded 
him as chicf of Khaibar, was likewise assassinated at 
Mohammed's command. In the sixth year of the 
Hegira Mohammed made a treaty with the Kuraish, 
at Hudaibiyah, whither he had proceeded with some 
of his followers with the intention of making the pil- 
grimage to Mecca. The IJXuraish objected to his 
entering the city, and this treaty was made instead. 
It provided for a cessation of hostilities for ten 


years. In the same year Mohammed sent embassies 
to the rulers of the six surroundmg 

Attacks | states inviting them to embrace Islam, 
Jews of butthe King of Abyssinia was the only 
Khaibar. one who sent a favorable reply. In 


the next year the prophet attacked the 
Jews of Khaibar in order to reward with the rich 
plunder of that piace the followers who had ac- 
companied him to Hudaibiyah. The Jews were 
conquered after a brave resistance, and their leader, 
Kinanah, was killed. Mohammed married the chief’s 
young wife on the battle-field; and a very rich 
booty fell into the hands of the Moslems. Some 
Jews were still left at Khaibar, but merely as tillers 
of the soil, and on condition of giving up one-half the 
produce. They remained until Omar banished all 
Jews from the country. The Jews of the Wadi al- 
Kura, of Fadak, and of Taima were still left; but 
they surrendered before the end of the year. An 
attempt on the life of Mohammed was made at 
Khaibar by a Jewish woman named Zainab, who, 
in revenge for the death of her male relatives in 
battle, put poison in a dish prepared by her for the 
prophet. One of Mohammed’s followers who par- 
took of the food died almost immediately afterward ; 
but the prophet, who had eaten more sparingly, es- 
caped. He, however, complained of the effects of 
the poison to the end of his life. 

During the twenty-five years of his union with 
Hadijah Mohammed had no other wife; but scarcely 
two months had elapsed after her death (619) when he 

married Sanda, the widow of Sakran, 

His who, with her husband, had become 
Domestic an carly convert to Islam and who 
Life. was one of the emigrants to Abyssinia. 

At about the same time Mohammed 

contracted an engagement with ‘A’ishah, the six- 
year-old daughter of Abu Bakr, and married her 
shorily after his arrival at Medina. ‘A‘ishah was 
the only one of his wives who had not been previ- 


ously married; and she remained his favorite to the 
end. After his death she exercised great influence 
over the Moslems. In his married life, as well as in 
his religious life, a change seems to have come over 
Mohammed after his removal to Medina. In the 
space of ten years he took twelve or thirteen wives 
and had several concubines: even the faithful 
were scandalized, and the prophet had to resort 
to alleged special revelations from God to justify 
his conduct. Such was the case when he wished to 
marry Zainab, the wife of his adopted son Zaid. 
Two of his wives were Jewesses: one was the beau- 
tiful Rihanah of the Banu Kuraiza, whom he mar- 
ried immediately after the massacre of her husband 
and other relatives: the other was Safya, the wife 
of Kinanah, whom, as stated above, Mohammed 
married on the battle-field of Khaibar. None of these 
wives bore himany children. Mohammed built little 
huts for his wives adjoining the mosque at Medina, 
each wife having her ownapartment. At hisdeath 
there were nine of these apartments, corresponding 
to the number of his wives living at that time. Mo- 
hammed’s daughter Fatimah, by Hadijah, married 
Ali and became the mother of Hasan and Husain. 
The last three years of Mohammed's life were 
marked by a steady increase of power. In the 
cighth year of the Hegira (680) he entered the city 
of Mecca as a conqueror, showing great forbearance 
toward his old enemies, This event decided his 
eventual supremacy over the whole of Arabia. 
Other conquests extended hisauthority to the Syrian 
frontier and as far south as Ta‘if; and in the follow- 
ing years embassies poured in from the different 
parts of the peninsula bringing the submission of 
the various tribes. Mohammed's death occurred in 
the eleventh year of the Hegira, after he had been 
ill with a fever for over a week. He was buried 
where he died, in the apartment of ‘A’ishah; and 
the spot is now a place of pilgrimage. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Griame, Wohamimed;M. Hartmann, in Ally. 
Zeit. des Jud. lviii. 66-68, 79-80, 89-92, 102-104; Ibn Hisham, 
Das Leben Mohammeds, ed. Wiistenfeld, Géttingen, 1858 ; 
W. Muir, The Life of Mahomet, London, 1877; A. Sprenger, 
Das Lehen und die Lehre des Mohanimad, Bertin, 1869. 
See also ISLAM; KORAN, 


G. M. W. M. 
MOHEL. See Crrcumcrsion. 


MOHILEWER, SAMUEL: Russian rabbiand 
Zionist; born in Hluboka, government of Wilna, 
April 25, 1824; died in Byelostok June 10, 1898. 
His father, Judah Léb, educated him not only in He- 
brew, but alsoin secular subjects, and Mohilewer be- 
came in consequence an advocate of the introduction 
of Kuropean culture among his people. Ordained 
in his eighteenth year, he occupied the rabbinates 
successively of his native town (1848-56), Szaki 
(1856-60), Suwalki (1860-68), Radom (1868-83), and 
Byelostok (1888-98). With a keen eye for the prac- 
tical needs of his people, Mohilewer devoted his 
energies and his fortune to Zionism. In 1875, on 
the occasion of the celebration of the ninetieth birth- 
day of Sir Moses Montefiore, Mohilewer openly de- 
clared himself in favor of the colonization of Pales- 
tine. After the great persecution of the Jews in 
1881 he accompanied the Russian refugees as far as 
Lemberg and suggested to the Emigration Commit- 
tee that they be sent to the Holy Land. On his re- 


Mohilewer 
Moise 





turn in 1882 he founded the first Chovevei Zion Soci- 
ety in Warsaw. In the same year, and again in 
1886, he undertook journeys to western Europe to 
winadherents forthe movement. In Paris, with the 
help of Zadoc Kahn and 
M. Erlanger, he succeeded 
in gaining the support of 
Baron Edmond de Roths- 
child, who commissioned 
him to select a number 
of Russian Jewish fami- 
lies as colonists. Their 
colony, Ekron, prospered 
at first, but when the 
colonists in 1888 were in- 
fluenced by agitators to 
stop work, that year 
being a Shemittah year, 
economic failure became 
imminent, At this junc- 
ture Mohilewer and other 
prominent Russian rab- 
bis stepped in, and re- 
assured the colonists of the religious propricty of 
resuming work. On another occasion, in 1889, 
when quarrels arose between the administration and 

the population of the colony Rishon le- 





Samuel Mohilewer. 


Favors Ziyyon, Mohilewer acted as arbitrator. 
Palestine In 1896 he again favored the non- 
Coloniza- observance of the Shemittah year. In 

tion. 1890 he went to Palestine himself to 


inspect the colonies, and from this 
journey gained “new hope for a brighter future for 
Israel as soon as Israel] shall take the right path and 
every Jew shall consider the honor of the nation 
rather than his own personal advantage.” During 
his stay in Palestine Mohilewer, backed by certain 
wealthy Russian Zionists, bought 1,556 acres of land 
near Jaffa and founded the colony Rehoboth (see 
JEW, Eneyc. i. 250, 6.0. AGRICULTURAL COLONIES 
IN PaLeEsTINE). In 1891, hearing of the intention 
of Baron de Hirsch to found colonies, he again went 
to Paris and urged, though unsuecessfully, the 
choice of Palestine instead of the Argentine Repub- 
lic as the land of Jewish colonization. 

In the Zionist movement as outlined at the first 
Basel Congress in 1897 Mohilewer took a prominent. 
partas Jeader of the Russian Zionists. His influence 
and activity in the propagation of this movement 
were remarkable. As the condition of his health 
had prevented him from attending the first Basel 
Congress, he had sent a letter of greeting in He- 
brew, full of wise and practical ad vice. 

The day before his death Mohilewer wrote a cir- 
cular letter to all friends of Zion, recommending the 
foundation of the Jewish Colonial Bank and the 
colonization of Palestine, and at the same time ur- 
ging again the idea of unity. This last letter may be 
regarded as containing his testament to his people. 
Among his posthumous works are a collection of re- 
sponsa, commentaries on Hoshen Mishpat, and ser- 
mons. His Hebrew treatise entitled “ Massa Polen,” 
concerning the condition of the Jews in Poland, ap- 
peared in a German journal in 1872, 

Mohilewer’s son, Joseph, also a Zionist, was 
elected to the rabbinate of Byelostok in 1902. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


ee Nr, 
$$ rar, 


$48 
an eee 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1808, No. 24 (Der Ge. 
meindebote, p. 4): Makel (1, Nissenbaum), Rabbenu Shemyey 
Mohileber, Berdychey, 1898; I. Nissenbaum, Luah Ahig. 
siaf, 1898, p, 289; Ha-Meliz, 1898, No. 27, p. 5; Jlidischep 
Volkskalender, 1897-98, p. 109; 1898-99, p. 202; Die Weit 
HN i., No.3; W. Bambusg, in Zion, vol. iv., No. 6, Ber. 
in, 180s. 





H. QR. M. Sc. 
MOHR, ABRAHAM MENDEL. See Mvar, 
ABRAHAM, 


MOINESHTI: Small town in Moldavia, district 
of Bakau. The census of 1820 reported forty. 
two Jewish taxpayers in the town, who constj- 
tuted the larger part of the population. The Jews 
are engaged in exploiting the petroleum-wellg 
which abound in that region. In 1860 the Jew 
Wolf Lazarovici installed the first petroleum-re- 
finery, and six years later he built a paraffin-factory, 
The town and the district passed later into the hands 
of the Theiler brothers, naturalized Jews, who de- 
veloped scientifically the output of petroleum and 
parafiin, and gave a remarkable impetus to the in- 
dustry in that region. 

In spite of the fires which periodically devastated 
the town, the Jews of Moineshti were prosperous 
until 1880, when the expulsion of a large number of 
Jews from the neighboring villages increased the 
Jewish population of Moineshti, but diminished its 
prosperity. In this town the first group of Ruma- 
nian emigrants and colonists was recruited for Pal- 
estine in 1882. From that time the poverty of the 
community increased, and Jews of Moineshti were 
among the emigrants to America after the latter 
part of 1899. The emigration from the town con- 
tinues steadily, and the Jewish population is much 
decreased in numbers since the census of 1899 re- 
ported 2,363 Jews resident there. The community 
is organized and derives its revenues from a, tax of 
20 centimes per kilo on Kkasher meat and 20 centimes 
per head on poultry, from the money collected at a 
bath owned by the community, and from a tax on 
unleavened bread. The community supports a 
rabbi and three shohetim, and gives aid to the poor 
and sick, in addition to maintaining the Passover re- 
lief fund. Thereare three synagogues at Moineshti, 
a school for boys, one for girls, two charitable soci- 
eties, and a Zionist society. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ortensia Racovitza, Dictionar Geografic al 


Jud. Bacau, pp. 32, 367-368, 543-544, Bucharest, 1895; ire- 
ternitatca, 1882, iv. 269-270; Calendarul Israelit: Tliustrat 


pe 5664. 
G. EE. Sp. 


MOISE: American Jewish family descended from 
Abraham Moise, who was bornin Alsace and emi- 
grated to the West Indies, where he married a mem- 
ber of a Jewish family of St. Eustace. He amassed 
great wealth, but in 1791 was compelled to flee on 
account of the insurrection of the slaves. With his 
wife, Sarah, and his sons, Aaron, Benjamin (d. un- 
married), Cherie, and Hyam, he reached South Car- 
olina. Three other sons and two daughters were 
born to him in Charleston, 8S. C. 

A. Welborne Moise: Eldest son of Aaron 
Moise, the lawyer and editor; born in 1846, After 
serving as page in the United States House of 
Representatives from 1857 to 1861, he entered the 
service of the Confederacy and served through the 
war with distinction, being promoted for bravery- 


649 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Mohilewer 
Moise 





After the surrender he studied law, practised for a 
time in Richmond, Va., and then went West. 

Aaron Moise: FEldcr son of the founder of the 
family; cashier of the Bank of the State of South 
Carolina, He married Sarah Cohen of Kingston, 
Jamaica, by whom he had ninechiJdren. He studied 
inedicine, but did not follow it as a profession. 

Aaron Moise: Lawyer and editor; born in 
Charleston, 8. C., 1820; died in Richmond, Va., 1889. 
He was appointed clerk in the United States Treas- 
ury in 1853, which position he resigned in 1861, 
when he went to Nashville, Tenn., and was ap- 
pointed captain in a Tennessee regiment. Three 
months later he was called to Richmond and made 
chief clerk in the auditor’s oflice of the Confederate 
government. After the war he took up the practise 
of law, which he continued until his death. 

Abraham Moise: Lawyer; born 1799, the first 
of the family born in America; died 1869. He mar- 
ried Caroline, granddaughter of Meyer Moses, and 
left two sons (Charles H. and Edwin W.) and 
one daughter. His brother Isaae married [Ietty 
Lopez, descendant of the Newport family of Lopez. 
Isaac died early, leaving three sons—Isaac, Edwin, 
and David—and four daughters. All three sons 
served throughout the Civil war on the Confederate 
side. David afterward studied law, and was judge 
of one of the courts of New Orleans at the time of 
his death. 

Abram Moise: Succeeded his father as cashier 
of the Bank of Charleston, 8. C., which position he 
retained until his death; died without issue. He 
married Louise Lopez, a member of the Newport 
family of Lopez. 

Camillus Moise: Son of Aaron Moise; died at 
the age of twenty-seven while serving in the Mexi- 
can war. 

Cherie Moise: Third son of Abraham Moise, the 
founder of the family. He married Hetty Cohen 
of Charleston, 8S. ©. Their daughter Cordelia (b. 
1809; d. 1869) was known for her gift of poetry. 
She wrote a number of the hymns used by the Por- 
tuguese congregation of Charleston. 

Columbus Moise: Son of Aaron Moise; born in 
Charleston, 8. C., 1809; died in Virginia 1871. He 
married a daughter of D. C, Levy of Philadelphia, 
Pa. For thirty-five years he was president of the 
principal bank of New Orleans, La. He was post- 
master of that city, and was chosen by its citizens to 
receive Gen. Zachary Taylor on his return from the 
battle of Buena Vista. He was granted a large 
tract of Jand in Florida for services rendered in 
the Indian war. Columbus Moise wrote many 
short poems, one of which was sung at the laying 
of the cornerstone of the Portuguese synagogue in 
Charleston, 8. C. 

Columbus Moise: Son of Columbus Moise; 
born in New Orleans, La., 1855; died in Kansas 
City, Mo., 1895. He was city attorney of East Las 
Vegas, N. M., regent of the Territorial College, mas- 
ter in chancery of the United States Court of New 
Mexico, and chief justice of New Mexico. He 
wrotea number of short stories and poems, contribu- 
ting to “ Harper’s Magazine,” the “Century Maga- 
zine,” and other periodicals, under the nom de 
plume “C. Esiom.” 


Edwin Warren Moise: Son of Hyam and 
Cecilia Moise; born at Charleston, 8S. C., 1811; died 
in New Orleans, La., 1868. After being educated 
as a physician at Charleston Medical College, he 
went to Woodville, Miss., where he practised his 
profession with great success, In 1840 he removed 
to New Orleans, studied law there, and for many 
years practised at the bar of Louisiana. He was 
elected for a number of consecutive terms to the 
State House of Representatives, of which he was 
speaker for many years; later he was appointed 
United States district attorney, and in 1861 was made 
judge of the Confederate States Court in Louisiana. 
Under the administration of Governor Wycliffe he 
became attorney-general of the state. He was a 
secessionist of the Calhoun school, an acknowledged 
leader in the Democratic party of Louisiana, and 
was Closely identified with the history of the state 
during the Civil war. Two of his sons, Harry and 
Theodore S., are identified with various railroad 
enterprises; the latter is now (1904) superintendent 
of the Georgia Central Railroad. Another son, 
E. W. Moise, resides in California, where he is 
well known as a financier. 

Edwin Warren Moise: Son of Abraham and 
Caroline Moise; born May 21, 1832, in Charleston, 
8S. C.; died in Sumter, S. C., Dec. 9, 1902. He mar- 
ried Esther Lyon of Petersburg, Va., in 1854. In 
1856 he opened a law-officein Columbus, Ga. When 
the Civil war began he organized a company of 
120 men, 50 of Whom he mounted and equipped at 
an expense of $10,000—the whole of his fortune. 
This company bore his name until it became Com- 
pany A, 7th Confederate Cavalry, with Moise as its 
captain; in 1863 he became major of the regiment, 
and was in command of it at theend of the war; he 
had not received his colonel’s commission, but he 
had been recommended for promotion after the bat- 
tle of Burgess’ Mills, and tie recommendation had 
been approved by General Lee. He fought in all 
the battles of the army of northern Virginia under 
General Lee, was slightly wounded at Gettysburg, 
had three horses killed under him in the battles 
below Petersburg, and was with Hampton in his 
raid and capture of Kilpatrick’s camp. With 200 
of his men he built the dams at Hatch’s Run which 
protected Lee’s left flank against Grant, and at 
Smithfield, N. C., in 1865, he performed the service 
of burning the bridges in the retreat of Generals 
Hampton and Butler from Bentonville to Raleigh. 
He surrendered with Gen. Joseph Johnston at 
Greensboro, N. C. 

Edwin Moise emerged from the war penniless and 
settled in Sumter, 8S. C., where he practised law with 
success. He was largely instrumental in redeeming 
South Carolina from radical rule in 1876, giving up 
his practise to cooperate with Hampton for that 
purpose. He was nominated as adjutant- and in- 
spector-general of his state on the same ticket with 
Hampton, receiving more votes than his leader. 
Reelected in 1878, he served four years and declined 
renomination in 1880. He gave the whole of his first 
term’s salary to the public schools of his state. He 
was a delegate to the Reconstruction Convention in 
1865, was presidential elector in 1880, and was repeat- 
edly sent as a delegate to various state conventions. 


Mouse 
Moll 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


650 





His son, Marion Moise (b. June 15, 1855, at Sulli- 
van's Island, 8. C.), was educated at the Virginia 
Military Institute and South Carolina College. He 
was elected intendant of the city of Sumter, 8. C., 
in 1884, serving two terms, and was chosen state 
senator from Sumter county in 1886, serving four 


years. He is now (1904) prominent asa lawyer at 
Sumter. He married (1877) Isabel de Leon of 


Charleston, 8. C. 

Hyam Moise: Fourth sou of Abraham Moise; 
born at Port-au-Prince 1755; died 1811. He mar- 
ried Cecilia Wolfe of Charleston, 8. C.. by whom he 
had two sons—Theodore Sydney and Edwin 
Warren. 

Jacob Moise: Youngest son of the founder of 
the family; died in 1837. He married Rebecca 
Cohen, of Charleston, §. C., and settled in Augusta, 
Ga.; they were the first Jewish family there. His 
eldest daughter, Sarah Ann, showed literary abil- 
ity at the early age of twelve. She married T. W. 
Dinkins, an editor, and is known for her stories, 
sketches, poems, and for numerous contributions to 
the Jewish press. Her youngest brother, Howard, 
served through the Civil war on the Confederate side. 
He was wounded three times and was made deaf 
by exposure and by the bombardment of Fort Sum- 
ter. He helped to build the batteries on Morris 
Island in 1860. THe now lives (1904)in Sumter, 8S. C, 

A, L. C. H. 

Penina Moise: Daughter of Abraham Mofse, 
~ who settled in Charleston, 8. C.. in 1791; born April 
23, 1797, at Charleston; died Sept. 18, 1880. Her 
father died when she was about twelve years of age, 
and the helpless condition of the large family he Jeft 
compelled her to give up school at that age. She 
gave early promise of literary ability, and her verse 
soon became known throughout the South. In 
1883 she published a collection of poems entitled 
“Fancy’s Sketch-Book,” which was favorably re- 
ceived. From that time on she became a regular 
contributor to the publications of her day. Among 
the periodicals to which she contributed may be 
mentioned the “Washington Union,” “The Home 
Journal of New York,” “The Boston Daily Times,” 
“Heriot’s Magazine,” “The New Orleans Com- 
mercial Times,” “Godey’s Lady’s Book,” “ The Oc- 
cident,” and the “ Charleston Courier.” She contrib- 
uted also several articles to the first copy of the 
“Charleston Book,” a well-known publication in its 
day. Her contributions to the daily press were fre- 
quently of «humorous character. As a poet she 
was so highly esteemed that her fellow citizens 
looked to her for the celebration of every local event 
of importance. 

An ardent Jewess, Penina Moise wrote much on 
topics affecting her race. She took a lively interest 
in communal affairs, and was for years the superin- 
tendent of the Sabbath-school of the Charleston 
synagogue. During this period she wrote many 
hymns and religious pieces. Her book of hymns 
has been in use in the Congregation Beth Elohim 
of Charleston and in otber Southern congregations. 

In 1854, during the epidemic of yellow fever in 
South Carolina, she devoted herself to caring for 
the victims, Whom she nursed irrespective of creed. 
Just before the outbreak of the Civil war her sight 


began to fail The war compelled her to leave 
Charleston, but at its close she returned with her 
sister, Rachel Moise, and opened a school which be- 
came widely known. Finally she lost her sight 
completely and met with other misfortunes as well, 
BIBLIOGRAPHY : Appleton’s Eneye. of American Biography ; 
Mrs. S. A. Dinkins, in American Jews’ Annual, 18853 Isaac 
Markens, The Hebrews in America, p. 59, New York, 1888; 
M. Kayserling. Die Jitdischen Frawen, Leipsie, 1819; Char- 
lotte Adams, in The Critic, xv. 327. 
A, L. Ht. 
Theodore Sydney Moise: Elder brother of the 
attorney-general of that name; born in Charleston, 
S. C., 1806; died in Natchiteches, La., July 2, 1883. 
He married Cecilia F. Moses, granddaughter of 
Meyer Moses of Revolutionary times; by her he had 
one daughter, who married her cousin, Charles HH. 
Moise. Theodore Moise was an artist of ability, 
His portraits are found in many homes in South 
Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Kentucky 
(where he painted a portrait of the beautiful Sallie 
Ward, a famous Kentucky belle of that day), 
In 1886 he removed from Charleston to Mississippi, 
and afterward to New Orleans, La. Heserved dur- 
ing the Civil war on the staff of General Herbert of 
Louisiana, and his ingenuity contributed to the 
planning of the fire-rafts which were used to repel 
the Federal fleet. His second wife, Mathilde 
Vaughn, bore him six sons: Robert (entered the 
Catholic priesthood); Charles; ‘‘ Brother Am- 
brose” (lead of the Christian Brothers’ College in 
St. Paul, Minn.; won the gold medal offered during 
the World’s Fair at Chicago for the best epic on the 
discovery of America); and three others who be- 
came prominent lawyers, one of them, James C. 
Moise, being at the time of his death (1901) judge 


of the criminal court of New Orleans. 
A. 1. @; A. 


MOISEVILLE. See AGRICULTURAL COLONIES 
IN THE ARGENTINE REPUBLIC. 

MOKAMES, DAVID AL-. See Davin (ABu 
SULAIMAN) IBN MERWAN AL-MUKAMMAS. 


MOKIAH, MORDECAI. See Morpecar Mo- 


KIAH. 
MOLAD. See CALENDAR. 
MOLDAVIA. See RuMANIA. 


MOLE: Traditional rendering of the Hebrew 
“haparparah ” (Isa. it. 20). Some give “mole” as 
the translation also of “holed” (Lev. xi. 29), which 
is, however, generally assumed to mean WEASEL. 
“Tinshemet,” which the Septuagint, the Vulgate, 
and the Targum take for some kind of mole. is 
commonly admitted to mean either a lizard (Lev. 
xi. 3) or some kind of bird (2d. verse 18). 

The mole proper (7p) does not occur in Pales- 
tine. The animal which would auswer the descrip- 
tion of Isa. ii. 20 is the mole-rat (Spalax typhlus), 
which is common about ruins, loose débris, and 
stone-heaps, and which in external appearance re- 
sembles the mole. 

The Talmud has for the mole the terms “tinshe- 
met” (Hul. 68a) and “ishut” (Kelim xxi. 3; comp. 
Targ. to Lev. xi. 30). The mole is described as hav- 
ing no eyes (comp. Aristotle. * History of Animals.” 
iv. 8, 2, and Pliny. “Tlistoria Naturalis,” xi. 87, 52) 


€51 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Moise 
Moll 





and as being destructive to grain and plants (M. K. 
61). In Ber. 57b (comp. Tos. to M. K. 6b) "RX 5 5p, 
which Rashi explains by “talpa,” is mentioned 
alongside of the bat and weasel, whose appearance 
in dreams is a bad omen. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Tristram, Nat. Hist. p. 120; Lewysohn, Z. T. 


p. 101. 
, I. M. C. 


He ds, 


MOLIN, JACOB BEN MOSES HA-LEVI. 
See MGLLN, JACOB BEN Moses, 


MOLINA, ISAAC: Egyptian rabbi of the six- 
teenth century; a native of Venice. He had a con- 
troversy with Joseph Caro on the subject of R. 
Gershom’s “takkanot” (comp. Caio, Responsa on 
Eben ha-‘Ezer). There is also a responsum of 
Molina in Caro’s “ Abkat Rokel,” No. 180, the fol- 
lowing number being Caro’s answer. Molina col- 
lected all the responsa of Asher b. Jebiel and some 
of other rabbis into one volume, which he entitled 
“Besamim Rosh,” providing it with notes and with 
a preface (Berlin, 1798). In his preface he claims to 
have written responsa and novelle on the Talmud 
and on Maimonides’ “ Yad.” 


H. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 106; Conforte, 
Kore ha-Dorot, p. 36b; First, Bibl, Jud. ii, 887; Stein- 
schneider, Cat, Bodl, col. 1139. ‘ 

F.C. M. SE. 


MOLITOR, JOSEPH FRANZ: German Chris- 
tian cabalist; born June 8, 1779, in Ober Ursel, in the 
Taunus: died in Frankfort-on-the-Main March 23, 
1860. Early in life he interested himself in the phi- 
losophy of Kant, Fichte, and Schelling, writing under 
the influence of the last-named’s teachings “Ideen 
zu einer Kiinstlichen Dynamik der Geschichte” 
(1805). In the same year he published his “ Ueber 
den Wendepunkt des Antiken und Modernen,” which 
shows the influence of Baader’s theosophy. “Ueber 
die Philosophie der Modernen Welt” came out in 
1806. About this time Prince von Dalberg founded 
an institution for the uplifting of Judaism, and 
Molitor became teacher there. Becoming interested 
in the various phases of Judaism, he began the 
study of Hebrew and Aramaic, then Talmud, and 
later, actuated by anv insight into tlie Cabala he had 
received from the Jewish cabalist Metz in 1818, he 
turned his attention to the study of the Zohar, to 
which henceforth he devoted himself entirely. He 
wrote the first volume of his “Philosophie der Ge- 
schichte oder iiber die Tradition” in 1824, as a re- 
sult of his cabalistic studies, The second volume 
(1834) contains a compendium of the Cabala and a 
reference to the need of divine revelation. This was 
followed by a third volume (1839), containing a gen- 
eral account of paganism, Christianity, and Judaism, 
and a discussion of the Jewish laws of impurity. 
The fourth volume of this work, published in 1853, 
shows the relation of the Cabala to Christianity. 
The fundamental object of this work is to show 
the superiority of cabalistic mysticism over that 
of the Christian, and that Christianity is Judaism 
obscured by a false mysticism. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Deutsche Biog., s.v.; La Grande En- 

cyclopédie, s.v.; Allg. Zeit. 1860, Supplement to April 21: J. 


FE. Erdmann, Grundriss der Gesch. der Phitologie, 3d ed., 


vol. ii., pp. 506 et seq. 
s, S. J. L. 


MOLKO, SOLOMON: Marano cabalist; born 
a Christian in Portugal about 1500; died at Mantua 
in 1532. His baptismal name probably was Diogo 
Pires. He held the post of secretary in one of the 
higher courts of his native country. When the adven- 
turer David Reubeni came ostensibly on a politicai 
mission from Khaibar, in Africa, to Portugal, Molko 
wished to join him, but was rejected. He then cir- 
cumcised himself, though without thereby gaining 
Reubeni’s favor, and emigratedto Turkey. Highly 


Autograph of Solomon Molko. 
(After a manuscript in the possession of the Alliance Israelite Universelle.) 


endowed, but a visionary and believer in dreams, 
he studied the Cabala with Joseph Taytazak and 
became acquainted with Joseph Caro. He then 
wandered, as a preacher, through Palestine, where he 
achieved a great reputation and announced that the 
Messianic kingdom would come in 1540. In 1529 
Molko published a portion of his sermons under the 
title “ Derashot,” or “Sefer ha-Mefo’ar.” Going to 
Italy, he was opposed by prominent Jews, who 
feared that he might mislead their coreligionists, 
but he succeeded in gaining the favor of Pope 
Clement VIJ. and of some Judeophile cardinals at 
Rome. He is said to have predicted to the pope a 
certain flood which inundated Rome and various 
other places. After his many cabalistic and other 
strange experiments, Molko felt justified in pro- 
claiming himself the Messiah, or his precursor. In 
company with David Reubeni, whom he came across 
in Italy, he went in 1582 to Ratisbon, where the 
emperor Charles V. was holding a diet. On this 
occasion Molko carried a flag with the inscription 
9259 (abbreviation for “Who among the mighty is 
like unto God?”). The emperor imprisoned both 
Molko and Reubeni, and took them with him to 
Italy. In Mantua an ecclesiastical court sentenced 
Molko to death by fire. At the stake the emperor 
offered to pardon him on condition that he return 
to the Church, but Molko refused, asking for a mar- 
tyr’s death. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gratz. Gesch. 3d ed., ix. 234 et seq., note 5; 


Neubauer, VM. J. C. ii. Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der 
Juden in Ron. 


< P. B. 


MOLL, ALBERT: German physician; born at 
Lissa May 4, 1862; educated at the universities of 


Molin 
Moloch 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


652 





Breslau, Freiburg, Jena, and Berlin (M.D. 1885). 
During the following two years he took postgrad- 
uate courses at Vienna, Budapest, London, Paris, 
and Nancy, and in 1887 established himself as a 
neuropathologist in Berlin. In 1894 he visited the 
leading medical institutions of eastern Europe, and 
in 1898 those of North America. 

Moll has written several essays in the medical 
journals, and is the author of: “ Der Ny pnotismus,” 
Berlin, 1889 (3d ed. 1895); “Die Kontriire Sexual- 
empfindung,” 7b. 1891 (8d ed. 1899); “ Der Rapport 
in der Hypnose,” Leipsic, 1892; “ Untersuchungen 
iiber die Libido Sexualis,” 72. 1897; “Das Nervdése 
Weib,” db. 1898; and “ Medizinische Ethik,” zd. 1900. 

8, F. T. H. 


MOLLN (MOLIN): Name of a family of Ma- 
yence. Thename py, which, according to D. Kauf- 
mann (“ Der Grabstein des R. Jacob ben Moses ha- 
Levi,” in “Monatsschrift,” xlii. 26), is to be read 
“Molin” rather than “ Mélln,” is not intended to in- 
dicate the place from which Moses came, but is a 
personal name, as is evidenced by the fact that one 
of the sons of MalTIaRIL is called simply “ Molin,” 
after the name of his grandfather. “ Molin” is usu- 
ally considered to be a pet name for “ Moses”; the 
correctness of this theory, however, is doubted by 
Salfeld (* Martyrologium,” p. 406). 

Jacob ben Moses Molln (MaHaRIL): Rabbi 
and teacher of Mayence; born about 1365; died in 
1427. The fact that he is termed “ Maharil,” “Ma- 
hari Segal,” or “Mahari Mélln” has caused much 
confusion. His father’s name being Moses, his own 
name was really R. Jacob b. Moses ha-Levi. Te was 
apuapil of R. Shalom of Austria, rabbi at Wiener- 
Neustadt, and won a reputation even in his youth for 
Talmudic Jearning and piety, while in problems of 
ceremonial Jaw his responsa were sought. At Ma- 
vence he attracted many pupils, the most nhateworthy 
of whom was Jacob Weil (MallaRIN: rabbi at Nu- 
remberg, Augsburg, and Erfurt), whose responsa. 
were considered authoritative. M6lln and his teacher 
were the first two rabbis to bear the title * Morenu, ” 
which was at that time applied to scholars in order 
to put an end to the abuses practised by unauthor- 
ized persons in performing marriage ceremonies or 
in granting divorces (comp. in regard to this point 
David Gans, “Zemah Dawid,” ed. Offenbach, 30a, 
s.0. 59719). 

M6Un lived during the period of the Hussite wars, 
which brought misery upon the Jews of the Rhine, 
of Thuringia, and of Bavaria, all of Whom appealed 
to him to intercede with God for them. Accord- 
ingly he sent messengers to the neighboring com- 
munities (which were in their turn to commission 
others), urging them to institute a general season of 
fasting and prayer. The German commutities, 
obeying the call, fasted for seven days (Sept., 1421). 
Soon afterward the imperial army and the mer- 
cenaries mobilized at Saaz, dispersed, and the very 
soldiers who had threatened the Jews now came to 
them te beg bread and received food from them 
(comp. G. Pollak, “ Halikot Kedem,” pp. 79 et seq. : 
Gritz, “Gesch.” 2d ed., vill. 186; Zunz, °S. P.” 
p. 48). 


Jacob Mélln was considered the greatest author-. 


ee ST TE I PN SW SFSU hg th oe 


ity of his time, Communities far and wide sought 
his advice; and his discourses and responsa, in which 
he emphasized the importance of tradition, and 
in general followed Alexander Stisslein ha-Kohen 
(d. 1349), the author of the * Aguddah” frequently 
mentioned in the codes, were regarded as authori- 
tative in the congregations and exerted a decisive 
influence, not only on his contemporaries, but 
also on later teachers. Ilis death occurred before 
he could publish his responsa, which be bad col- 
lected carefully, but a part of them appeared at 
Venice, 1549, and frequently later. His chief work 
is the “Sefer ha-Maharil” or “ Minhagim.” pub- 
lished by his pupil Zalman of St. 
Goar at the request of his contempo- 
raries. This book is frequently quoted 
in the codes and commentaries, and has become 
a valuable source for later scholars. In addition 
to sermons, regulations of the ceremonial! law, and 
textual comments, it contains a detailed description 
of religious observances and rites within and with- 
out the synagogue, and outlines, therefore, a faith- 
ful picture of the life of the German Jews. It was 
first published, with various additions, at Sabbio- 
netta, in 1556, and frequently later. It exerted 
ereat influence on the Jews of central Europe, being 
largely responsible for the high esteem accorded to 
religious tradition (“ minhag ”) in the communities, 
M6lln frowns upon any changes, and demands im- 
plicit obedience to the time-honored observances, 
even in regard to the liturgical melodics and the 
piyyutim (comp. R. Moses Isserles to Orah Hay- 
vim, 619). According to tradition he composed 
most of the synagogal hymns, and his “ Minhagim ” 
actually contain many references to the use of cer- 
tain melodies. <A third work, “ Biurim” to Yoreh 
De‘ah, is extant in manuscript (comp. Wolf, “ Bibl. 
Hebr.” i. 604). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch, 2d ed., viii. 156: Winter and 
Wiinsehe, Die Jiidische Litteratur, ti. 498 et seq., H6L et seq., 
iii. 515: Gitdemann, Geseh. iti, 17, 111: Or ha-Hayyin, 


Frank fort-on-the-Main, 1891, pp. 497 et seq. as 
s. Bao SN 


Moses ben Jekuthiel ha-Levi Molln: Rabbi 
in Mayence in the second half of the fourteenth 
century. In two ordinances concerning the admin- 
istration of the three communities, Speyer. Worms, 
and Mayence (*Takkanot ShUM”), dated respect- 
ively 1881 and 1386, his signature appears first 
(see Moses Minz, Responsa, ed. Lemberg, 1851, p. 
11b; Neubauer, “Cat. Bod]. Hebr. MSS.” No. 820). 
A responsum of his, dated 13869, is preserved 
among the responsa of his son MaHaRIL (ed. 
Hanau, 1610, No. 233), who succeeded him in the 
rabbinate of Mayence. 

Of Mélln’s other children are known hy name: 
Jekuthiel, Simon, Gumprecht, and two daugh- 
ters, Simhah and Bonlin or Bonchin. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gidemann, Gesch. tii. 17; Michael, Or ha- 
Hayyim, No. 1121, 
D M. Sc. 


MOLO, FRANCISCO: Dutch financier and 
statesman; lived in the seventeenth century. In 
1679 he settled in Amsterdam as financial agent of 
John Iil., King of Poland. a fact which hardly 
agrees with De Barrios’ statement (“Panegyrico al 
Laureado Juan Tercero, Rey de Polonia”) that 


Works. 


653 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Moiln 
Moloch 





Molo was a Spanish Jew. He was beld in high 
esteem on account of his ability in financial matters; 
and in recognition of the services which he had ren- 
dercd to the Dutch state, he was exempted for two 
years from the payment of taxes. Molo’s influence 
with the States General was so great that through 
his mediation Louis XIV. was enabled to conclude 

the treaty of Ryswick (1697). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Koenen, Geschiedenis der Joden in Neder- 
lowed, p. 219% Ctreeht, 1843; Lamberti, Mémoires, i, 11, Am- 
ieee ae Wagenaar, Vaderlandsche Iistorie, xvi. p. 
Db, M. SEL. 
MOLOCH (MOLECH).—Biblical Data: In 

the Maseretic text the name is “Molech”; in the 

Septuagint “Moloch.” The earliest mention of 

Molech is in Lev. xviii. 21, where the Israelite is 

forbidden to sacrifice any of his children to Molech. 

Similarly, in Lev. xx. 2-5, it is enacted that a man 

who sacrifices his seed to Molech shall surely be put 

to death. Then, curiously, it is provided that he 
shall be cut off from the congregation. In I Kings 

xi. 7it is said that Solomon built a high place for 

Molech in the mountain “that is before Jerusalem.” 

The same passage calls Molech an Ammonite deity. 

The Septuagint as quoted in the New Testament 

(Acts vii. 48) finds a reference to Moloch in Amos 

v. 26; but this isa doubtful passage. In 11 Kings 

xxiii. 10 it is stated that one of the practises to 

which Josiah put a stop by his reform was that of 

sacrificing children to Molech, and that the place 
where this form of worship had been practised was 
at Topheth, “in the valley of the children of Hin- 

nom.” This statement is confirmed by Jer. xxxii. 

35. From If Kings xxi. 6 it may be inferred that 

this worship was introduced during the reign of 

Manassch. The impression left by an uncritical 

reading of these passages is that Molech-worship, 

with its rite of child-sacrifice, was introduced from 

Ammon during the seventh century B.c. 

Critical View: Thename “ Molech,” later cor- 

rupted into “ Moloch,” is an intentional mispointing 

of “ Melek,” after the analogy of “bosheth” (comp. 

Hoffmann in Stade’s “ Zeitschrift, ” iii. 124). As to the 

rites which the worshipers of Molech performed, it 

has sometimes been inferred, from the 





Nature phrase “pass through the fire to Mo- 
of the lech,” that children were made to pass 


Worship. between two lines of fire as a kind of 
consecration or februation; but it is 

clear from Isa. lvii. 5 and Jer. xix. 5 that the chil- 
dren were killed and burned. The whole point of 
the offering consisted, therefore, in the fact that it 
was a human sacrifice. From Jer. vii. 31 and Ezek. 
xx. 25, 26. it is evident that beth prophets regarded 
these human sacrifices as extraordinary offerings to 
Yuwu. Jeremiah declaresthat Yuwu had oot com- 
manded them, while Ezekiel savs YHWwH polluted 
the Israelites in their offerings by permitting them 
to sacrifice their first-born, so that through chastise- 
ment they might know that Yuwm was Yuwu. 
The fact, therefore, now generally accepted by crit- 
ical scholars, is that in the last days of the kingdom 
human sacrifices were offered to YHwH as King or 
Counselor of the nation and that the Prophets dis- 
approved of it and denounced it because it was in- 
troduced from outside as an imitation of a heathen 


cult and because of its barbarity. In course of time 
the pointing of “ Mclek ” was changed to “ Molech” 
to still further stigmatize the rites. 

The motive for these sacrifices is not far to seek. 
[t is given in Micah vi. 7: “Shall I give my first- 
born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for 
the sin of ny soul?” In the midst of the disasters 
which were befalling the nation men felt that if the 

favor of Yuwu could be regained it 

Motive of was worth any price they could pay. 
Sacrifices. Their Scmitic kindred worshiped their 
gods with offerings of their children, 

and in their desperation the Israelites did the same. 
For some reason, perhaps because not all the priestly 
and prophetic circles approved of the movement. 
they made the offerings, not in the Temple, but at 
an altar or pyre called *'Tapheth” (LXX.), erected 
in the valley of Hinnom (comp. W. R. Smith, “Rel. 





(From Menaut, ‘* Glyptique Orientale.’’) 


of Sem.” 2d ed., p. 872). “ Tapheth,” also, was later 
pointed “'Topheth,” after the analogy of “ bosheth.” 
In connection with these extraordinary offerings the 
worshipers continued the regular Temple sacritices 
to YHwo (Ezek. xxiii. 39). 

From the fact that I Kings xi. 7 calls Molech the 
“abomination of the children of Ammon” it was 
formerly assumed that this worship wasan imitation 
of an Ammonite cult. But so little is known of the 
Aimmonite religion that more recent scholarship has 
looked elsewhere for the source. Because of the 
mention in IJ Kings xvii. 31 of Adrammelech (= 
Adar-malik) and Anammelech (= Anu-malik) as gods 
of Sepharvaim transplanted to Samaria, it has been 
inferred that this form of worship was borrowed 
from Babylonia (comp. Bithgen, “ Beitriige zur 
Semitischen Religionsgesch.” pp. 288 et seg.). This 
view rests on the supposition that “Sepharvaim ” is 
equal to “Sippar,” which probably is not the case. 
Even if it were, Anu and Adar were not gods of 
Sippar; Shamash was god of that city. From this 
verse, therefore, a Babylonian or Assyrian origin can 
not be demonstrated. 

Support for this view has been sought also in 
Amos v. 26. If, as is probable, Siccuth and Chiun 
in that passage are names or epithets of Babylonian 
deities (comp. Ciiun), the use of “Melek” in con- 
nection with these affords no sound basis for argu- 
mert. The whole passage may be, as Wellhausen 
and Nowack believe, a late gloss introduced on ac- 
count of II Kings xvii. 31, and is in any case too 
obscure to build upon. Furthermore, there is no 


Mombach 
Money 





evidence that the sacrifice of the first-born was a 
feature of the worship of Babylonian deities. Be- 
cause Child-sacritice was a prominent feature of the 
worship of the Phenician Malik-Baal-Kronos, Moore 
(in Cheyneand Black, * Encyc. Bibl.”) seeks to prove 
that the worship of Moloch was introduced from Phe- 
nicia. The evidence of itsexistencein Phenicia and 
her colonies is especially strong. Diodorus Siculus 
(xx. 14) tells how the Carthaginians in a siege sacri- 
ficed two hundred boysto Kronos. Burning was anu 
important hago as of the rite. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. Smith, Rel. of Sem. 2d ed., pp. 372 et 
sey... Bathgen, "Bilrdee zur Semitischen Religionsgesch, 
1888, pp. 237 ef seq.; Moore. The Image of Moloch, in Jour. 
Bib, Lit. i897, xvi. 161 ef seq.; M. J. Pagtanee. Etudes sur 


les Religions Séncitiques, 1903, pp. 99-109. 
s. G. A. B. 


MOMBACH, JULIUS LAZARUS: Musician 
and composer: born in Pfungstadt 1818; died at 


London, England, Feb. 8, 1880. In 1828 he went 
to London and received a good musical education 
under Enoch Eliasson. On the election of Simon 
Ascher to the position of reader at the Great Syna- 
gogue, Mombach entered the choir. Subsequently 
he became director of the choir, and held this posi- 
tion till his death. He took part In all the services 
at the Great Synagogue for a period of fifty-two 
years; and threw all his energy into the task of im- 
proving the musical portion of the service. TTIe ac- 
quired the reputation of a skilful pianist, and of a 
clever composer of synagogue music. Nearly all 
the music in use in the German synagogues of Ene- 
land and the English colonies was composed by 
him. 

Mombach’'s services as choirmaster were sought 
on almost every occasion of special Importance in 
the history of the London and chief provincial syna- 
gogues; and many of the readers in English and 
colonial synagogues owed their training to him. He 
taught the singing of hazzanut to the students of 
sews College; was a member of the Committee for 
the Diffusion of Religious Knowledge; and directed 
the singing of the senior pupils of the S abbath classes 
of the Association for Religious Instruction. For 
several years he conducted the concerts at the Jew- 
ish Workingmen’s Club, Aldgate. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Feb. 13, 1880. 

ci G. L 


MOMMSEN, CHRISTIAN MATTHIAS 
THEODOR: Jurist, archeologist, and historian: 
born Nov. 30, 1817, at Garding, Sleswick-Holstein ; 
died Nov. 1, 1903, at Charlottenburg, near Berlin. 
His most important work is his “ Rémische Gesch.” 
(vol. i., 9th ed., Berlin, 1908; vols. ii., iii., 8th ed., 
1889; vol. v., 3d ed., 1886; vol. iv. was not pub- 
lished). In vol. iii, he treats exhaustively the posi- 
tion and influence of the Jews in the Romanempire ; 
and in vol. v. he devotes a chapter headed “ Judda 
und die Juden” to the spiritual and religious devel- 
opment of Judaism in the Persian, Greek, and Ro- 
man periods. 

As a member of the Prussian Diet (1873-82) and 
of the German Reichstag (1881-84), Mommsen be- 
longed to the Liberal party and strongly opposed 
the anti-Semitic movement. In his pamphlet “ Auch 
ein Wort tiber Unser Judentum ” (1881), which was 
written in reply to Treitschke’s arguments in “Ein 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


654 





Wort itiber Unser Judentum,” he warmly pleaded for 
tolerance and humanity, and argued that the Jewish 
clement in the German empire is a wholesome one. 
He was among the first who signed the declaration 
of German notables (Nov. 12, 1880) in which Jew- 
baiting (* Judenhetze”) was designated a “ national 
disgrace.” The passage in his “ Rémische Gesch.” 
dii. 850), “ Auch in der alten Welt war das Juden- 
tum ein wirksaies Ferment des JXosmopolitismus 
und der nationalen Dekomposition und insofern ein 
vorzugsweise berechtigtes Mitglied in dem ciisa- 
rischen Staate, dessen Politik doch eigentlich nichts 
als Weltbirgertum, dessen Volkstiimlichkeit im 
Grunde nichts als Humanitiit war,” having been 
misunderstood and misinterpreted by the anti-Sem- 
ites, was omitted by Mommsen in a later edition. 
Mommsen was an active member of the Verein 
zur Abwehr des Antisemitismus (founded 1891) until 
his death. He also declared himself against the ac- 
cusation of ritual murder. In a prefatory letter to 
Errera’s “Les Juifs Russes” (see JEw. Excyc, v. 
203, sc. Errera, Leo-ABramM) he expressed the 
hope “that the statesmen of a great empire and the 
sovereign arbiter of Europe may no longer be dom- 
inated by the blind action of a resuscitated Tor- 


quemada.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brockhaus Konversations-Levikou;, Mit- 


theilungen aus dem Verein zur Abwehr des Antingmitin 
mus, 1893, p. 177; 1894. p. 55; 1897, p. 887; 1903, pp. 345. 
Hermann Vogelstein, in lly. Zeit. tes Jud, 1904, a 103- Te 
D. S. MAN. 
MONASTIR: Capital of Rumelia, European 
Turkey ; 400 miles west of Constantinople: the an- 
cient Vitolia. It has a population of 65,000, in- 
cluding 6,000 Jews. There are no documents re- 
ferring to Jews in Monastir before the arrival of the 
Spanish exiles in 1492. In the middle of the six- 
teenth century there was a Talmudic school in 
Monastir which was under the direction of I. 
Joseph ibn Leb, the author of four volumes of 
responsa (see “Kore ha-Dorot,” ed. Cassel, p. 
37b). In 1863 a terrible fire swept over the city; 
1,008 out of the 2,080 houses and shops that were 
burned belonged to Jews. In 1884 there were 4,000 
Jews in Monastir. In 1900 the Jews were accused 
of ritual murder in connection with the disappear- 
ance of an Orthodox Bulgarian, sixty years of age. 
The affairs of the community are administered by 
a chief rabbi (“hakam bashi”; officially recognized 
by a decree of the sultan), a bet din or religious 
court, and a council of notables; from the taxes 
levied by the last-named the chief rabbi, the judges, 
and the schools are supported, and the poor relieved. 
There are three synagogues and five batte midrashot; 
a large Talmud Torah with 250 children; a boys’ 
school with 150 pupils, founded in 1895, and sub- 
sidized by the Alliance Israélite Universelle and tlic 
Anglo-Jewish Association; a girls’ school with 110 
pupils, also aided by the Alliance ; and day-nurseries 
that care for about 120 infants. Its two hebra kad- 
dishahs date back to the first settlement of the 
Jews in the city. The occupations followed by the 
community are as follows: 600 merchants, including 
bankers; 150 cobblers; 150 tailors; 150 blacksmiths; 
50 tinsmiths; 250 porters; and 150 dealers in old 
elothes (in which the Jews have the monopoly). 
The Jewish workmen belong to unions. Formerly 


655 





they lived in “ cortijos,” or groups of houses enclosed 
by a wal!, but most of these have been destroyed 
by the frequent fires. Down to the beginning of 
the last century the Monastir Jews put no inscrip- 
tions on their tombstones. 

The following have occupied the rabbinate of 
Monastir: Joseph Jacob J[srael (c. 1768); Joseph 
Israel (c. 1790); Jacob Joseph Israel (1854-89; au- 
thor of “ Yismah Mosheh,” a book of devotions in 
Judeo-Spanish, published by his grandson; Bel- 
grade, 1896); Abraham Levi of Janina (1896-98). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Schwab, Histoire des lsraélites, p. 2883 

Bulletin All. Isr. 1884, 1900, 1901; M. Franco, Histoire des 

Tsraélites de UV Empire Ottoman, p. 206: Bl Avenir di Salo- 

nica. Dec. 31, 1902 ; Jacob Joseph Israel, Vismah Mosheh, Bel- 

grade, 1896. 


D. M. Fr. 

MONATSSCHRIFT FUR DIE GESCHICH- 
TE UND WISSENSCHAFT DES JUDEN- 
THUMS: The oldest and most important monthly 
devoted to the science of Judaism. It was founded 
by Zacharias FRANKEL in Dresden in the year 1851, 
in continuation of his “Zeitschrift fiir die Religiésen 
Interessen des Judenthums,” which had been sup- 
pressed in 1846. Frankel believed that the objects 
striven for in the contest of 1848 had been attained, 
and that the Jews no longer had separate political 
interests. He therefore considered that the time had 
arrived for them to undertake a scientific investiga- 
tion of their history and literature. 

The first seventeen volumes of the “ Monatssebrift ” 
were edited by Frankel, who was succeeded by 
the historian Heinrich Grarrz. The latter cdited 
vols. Xvill. to XXXxvi. inclusive, being assisted by 
Pinkus Frank! of Berlin in vols. xxxili. to xxxv. 
Publication was stopped in 1887, but was resumed 
in 1892, with M. Brann and David Kaufmann as 
joint editors (vols. xxxvil. to xliii.). Upon Kauf- 
mann’s death (1899) Brann became sole editor. Since 
Jan., 1904, the “ Monatsschrift ” has appeared as the 
organ of the Gesellschaft zur Fdérderung der Wis- 
senschaft des Judenthums. 

The “ Monatsschrift ” was first published in Dres- 
den. Some volumes were then issued at Krotoschin 
and some at Berlin; but the greatest number ap- 
peared in Breslau. A complete table of contents 
for the first seventeen volumes is appended to vol. 
xvii., and a similar table for the years 1869 to 1887 
is given at the end of vo]. xxxvi. This table has 
been published separately also. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Moviatsschrift, vol. i.. Preface; S. P. Rabbi- 
nowitz, Zacharias Frankel (in Hebrew), pp. 143 ef sey., 
Warsaw, 1898. An exhaustive criticism, by Atlas, of vol. 
XXxiii. appears in Ha- Asif, ii. 432-450. 

P. Wi. 


S. 

MONCALVO (rdpa1) : Small town in the prov- 
ince of Alessandria, Piedmont, Italy. Jews settled 
there after their expulsion from France. The com- 
munity, like those of Asti and Fossano, long retained 
the old French ritual, and still uses the Ger- 
man Mahzor with several additions from the French 
rite. The history of the community is similar to 
that of the other communities of Savoy. In 1866 it 
contained 220 persons, including a large number of 
artisans cugaged in various trades, but it is now 
considerably smaller. It formerly had various phil- 
anthropic societies and foundations, ritual institu- 
tions, etc. Joseph Lattes (d. 1880) officiated for a 
time as rabbi. 


THE JEWISID ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Wombach 
Money 





BIBLIOGRAPHY: Luzzatto, in Halikot Kedem, p. 51; idem, 
Mebo le-Mahzor, p. 7; Zunz, Ritus, p. 64; Corriere Israe- 
litico, iv. 315. 

G. I. E. 


MOND, LUDWIG: English chemist; born at 
Cassel, Germany, March 7, 1889; educated at the 
Polytechnic School, Cassel, and at the universities 
of Marburg and Heidelberg. In 1862 he went to 
England and engaged in the Le Blane soda indus- 
try, introducing his process for recovering sulfur 
from alkali waste. In 1873 he established, in part- 
nership with T. T. Brunner, at Winnington, North- 
wich, Cheshire, the manufacture of ammonia soda 
by the Solvay process, which he perfected; and 
the works there now constitute the largest alkali 
establishment in the world. Mond patented many 
inventions of great scientific and commercial im- 
portance. He also founded and endowed the 
Davy-Faraday Research Laboratory of the Royal 
Institution in 1896. 

Mond held various high scientific positions. He 
was fellow of the Royal Society; a vice-president 
of the Royal Institution; vice-president of the 
Chemical Society ; ex-president of the Society of 
Chemical Industry; and ex-president of the chem- 
ical section of the British Association for the 
Advancement of Science (1896). He wrote also 
numerous papers and addresses which have becn 
published in the transactions and proceedings of 
these societies and institutions. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Who’s Who, 1904: Jewish Year ae 

J. 5 


MONDAY AND THURSDAY PRAYER. 
See Lrrurey. 


MONEY.—Biblical Data: TI. As far back as the 
history of Israel can be traced, gold and silver were 
used as standards of value and mediums of exchange, 
and, as the Egyptian tribute-lists show, they were 
thus employed in Canaan even before the Israelites 
inhabited it. The general use of the word “kesef,” 
meaning “silver,” to designate money shows that 
silver was the prevailing medium of exchange. Up 
to the time of the Exile, and even later, the metals 
were not coined, but were weighed (Ex. xxii. 16; 
If Sam. xviii. 12; I Kings xx. 89; see Numismart- 
Ics). The scales and weights were carried about 
with the precious metal in a bag attached to the 
girdle (Deut. xxv. 13 e¢ seq.; Isa. xlvi. 6; Prov. xvi. 
11). An adulteration or debasement of the value of 
the precious metals by means of certain alloys seems 
not to have occurred; at least the practise was not 
given any thought, and warnings are uttered only 
against false measures (Deut. U.¢c.; Lev. xix. 36). 

To disprove the opinion that during the whole 
period before the Exile coined money was unknown— 
that is, money under state control in regard to 
weight, purity, etc.—the passage in I Sam. ix. 8 is 
cited. Here it is related that Saul’s slave gave him 
the fourth part of a shekel of silver, which he had 
with him. The conclusion, however, that this isa 
reference to coined money is too hasty. The only 
inference to be drawn is that at the time when the 
author of I Sam. ix. lived silver pieces of a certain 
weight may have existed and that they were cast 
into certain shapes known to every one, in order to 
obviate the necessity of weighing them at each 


Money 
Monogamy 


transaction, Perhaps the name for “talent” (“ kik- 
kar” = “ring”) is derived from such forms, since 
Egyptian documents show that it was quite usual 
to cast the metalsinto such rings orinto bars. These 
forms were not found among the assyrians, who, 
however, used wedge-shaped pieces of gold, which 

are mentioned in Josh, vii. 21. 
For money, as for weight, the shekel was the 
standard unit, the pieces of metal being either frac- 
tious or multiples of the shekel. The 


The struggle between the Egyptian deci- 
Shekel. mal systcm and the sexagesimal meth- 


od of the Babylonians first made itself 
feltin regard to weights of gold and silver. The 
Picnicians were probably the mediators; and a mina 
of 50 shekels was established as a standard. Ac- 
cording to certain indications, the relative value of 
gold to silver was as 10 to 1. Later, in consequence 
of the great increase in the supply of silver, the 
relative value was as 40 to 3. This may, perhaps, 
have affected the possibility of introducing the sex- 
agesimal system. 

The gold shekel originally weighed J, of a mina. 
The silver shekel, to have had an equal value, must 
have weighed 4° x j, =2o0famina. Asthis would 
have been impracticable for use, it was decided to 
make a smaller piece, one more suitable for circula- 
tion. Two methods presented themselves: (1) either 
the silver equivalent of the gold shekel could be 
divided into ten parts, in which case a silver shekel 
of 2, =: of ashekel of weight would result; or (2) 
the silver equivalent could be divided into fifteen 
parts, in which case a silver shekel would weigh +2, 
of a mina. 

When the decimal system made its way into use, 
the gold mina as well as the silver mina was 

reckoned at 50 such shekels. Conse- 
The Mina. quently there was (1) the Babylonian 

silver mina, equivalent to £2 = 1° of 
a& mina of weight; (2) the Phenician silver mina, 
equivalent to 122 = 3? of a mina of weight. 

In the earlier system of Babylonian silver values 
(which was used also in the Lydian and Persian 
kingdoms) the silver shekel was divided into thirds, 
sixths, and twelfths, whereas in the Phenician sys- 
tem it was divided into halves, fourths, eighths, etc. 

The Phenician silver shekel is found among the 
Jews also. This is proved by the fact that they 
had the same method of division: the quarter- 
shekel appears in I Sam. ix. 8; the half-shekel is the 
Temple-tax in the Priestly Code. The shekels of 
the Maccabean period which have been preserved 
vary between 14.50 and 14.65 gr., which is exactly 
+2, of the large “common” (see WEIGHTS AXD 
MEASURES) Babylonian mina. The mina accord- 
ingly weighed 727.7 gr., and the talent 43,659 kg. 

In the Persian period the Babylonian shekel, 
equivalent to one-tenth of the mina of weight, came 
into use, since Nehemiah (x. 33 [A. V. 82]) assessed 
the Temple-tax at one-third of a shekel. This Per- 
sian system of coinage had the small minaasa basis. 

The unit was the siglos, which cor- 
The Siglos. responded to one-half of a Babylonian 
shekel. The relation between it and 
the Jewish one was 3 to 8. It was considered as the 
one-hundredth part of a minaand not the fiftieth. It 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


656 





amounted to5.61-5.73 gr. ; the niina, to 561-573 gr, ; 

and the talent to 33,660-34,880 kg. In the Macea- 

bean period the Phenician silver sheke] was again in 

use. Consequently the Temple-tax was again a 

half-shekel (Matt. xvii. 24, 27). 

II. Coined money did not come into use among 
the Jews until the time of the Persians. In the Old 
Testament, Persian darics (A. V. “drams”) are men. 
tioned in Ezra viii. 27 and I Chron. xxix. 7 as “adar- 
kon,” and in Ezraii, 69and Neh. vii. 70-72as “ darke- 
mon.” They weighed 8.40 gr., thus corresponding 
almost exactly to one-sixtieth of the Babylonian 
light mina. The corresponding silver coin was one- 
twentieth of the daric; which, perhaps, was meant 
by the term “shekel” in Neh. v. 15, x. 83. See Nv- 
MISMATICS. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benzinger, Hebrdlische Architologie, pp. 
189-198; Madden, Coins of the Jews, London, 1881; Nowack, 
Lehrbuch der Hebritischen Archtinologie, 1894; Herzfeld, 
Handelsgeschichte der Juden des Alterthums, Brunswick, 
1879, pp. 171-185; F. de Sauley, Recherches sur la Numisma- 


tique a 1854; Levy, Geschichte der Jiidischen 
Miinzen, 1862. 
W. ON. 


E, G. H. 
——In Rabbinical Literature: In conformity 
with the unvarying usage of the Mosaic law, the 
Mishnah (B. M. iv. 1) treats both gold and copper 
coins aS commodities when they come to be ex- 
changed for silver coins (see ALIENATION); but the 
Gemara upon this section gives a glimpse into the 
history of the battle of the gold and silver stand- 
ards, which raged with varying fortunes from the 
days of Hillel and Shammai, in King Herod’s time, 
to the compilation of the Mishnah by Rabbi. The 
latter’s leading disciple, R. Hiyya, addresses him: 
“Rabbi, you teach us now in your old age that gold 
[as a commodity] gives title to silver; but when you 
were young you taught us the contrary!” In the 
discussion that follows the Mishnah is referred to 
(Ma‘as. Sh. ii. 7). The school of Shammai says: 
“A man must not turn shekels into gold denarii [for 
transport of second tithe to Jerusalem].” The 
school of Hillel permitted it. The former school 
seemed to look on gold as a commodity, at least as 
compared with silver; the latter school was willing, 
for this purpose, at least, to treat both alike as 
money, if not to give gold a preference over silver. 
The Hillelites seemingly yielded to the Roman in- 
fluence of their time, which maintained the gold 
standard. | 

The gold denarius passed generally for twenty- 
five silver denarii—that is, 6} shekels, It is urged 
in favor of gold as the true money that it was usual 
in the redemption of the first-born son for the 
father to give a gold denarius to the kohen, and for 
the latter to return five zuz, or silver denarii, in 
change, though the rate of exchange between silver 
and gold at the time might be such as to make the 
former worth either more or less than twenty-five of 
the latter. Another point is made in a responsum 
by R. Hiyya himself, that a loan made in gold may 
be recovered in gold, though it has risen in ex- 
change value, without violating the law against 
usury (B. M. 44b-45b). Rabbi, as most of the in- 
tervening patriarchs, was one of Hillel’s descendants, 
and naturally followed his teachings. It was prob- 
ably a change in the Roman currency laws and in 


657 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Money 
Monogamy 





the habits of business which induced him in his later 
years to reestablish the old silver standard among 


the Jews. 
Ss, L. N. D. 


MONEY-LENDING. Sce Usury. 


MONIES, DAVID: Danish portrait and genre 
painter; born in Copenhagen June 3, 1812; died 
there April 29, 1894. He was admitted to the 
school of the Academy of Arts in 1824, and was 
twice (1827 and 18382) awarded silver medals for 
meritorious work. In 1830 he began painting, pro- 
ducing and exhibiting portraits of eminent contem- 
poraries. 

In 1888 Monies produced “En Kunstner som 
spdger med en Bondepige.” In 18385 he went to 
Munich, and in the following year 400 rix-dollars per 
annum was awarded to him from the public funds 
to enable him to continue his studies abroad. In 
1848 he was elected a member of the Danish Acad- 
emy of Arts, and in 1859 he received the title of 
professor. Among other paintings by Monies, the 
following may be mentioned: “To Bérn ved et 
Vandloéb,” 1888; “ Erindring fra Danseboden,” 1849; 
“Jvonfirmanden”; “Pengebrevet”; “En Skovtur” 
{in the royal gallery at Copenhagen). Monies es- 
sayed also historical painting, and his “ Episode af 
Troppernes Hjemkomst,” 1850, vividly expresses 
the feeling of joy mingled with sadness which ani- 
mated the Danish people on the occasion of the home- 
coming of the troops after the Three Years’ war. 
This painting is in the museum in Frederiksborg Cas- 
tle. Monies was less fortunate in the large pictures 
in which he depicted scenes from the history of the 
Jewish people. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: C. F. Bricka, Dansk Biografisk Lexicon ; 

Weilbach, Nyt Kunstnerlexicon. 

S. F.C. 

MONIS, JUDAH: Americanscholar. Hannah 
Adams in her “ History of the Jews” says that he 
was born in Algiers about 1688, and that he died in 
Northborough, Mass., in 1764; while Josiah Quincy 
in his “History of Harvard University” gives the 
year of his birth as 1680 and that of his death as 
1761. Little is known of his early career. He is 
said to have received his education in Italy, and to 
have emigrated to Boston in the early part of the 
eighteenth century (Adams, é.c.). The first event of 
his life of which thereis authentic record is his bap- 
tism (March 27, 1722) in the College Hall at Cam- 
bridge, Mass. After that he was an active and 
energetic worker in the cause of his new faith, al- 
though he observed throughout his life the Jewish 
Sabbath. He held the appointment of instructor 
in Hebrew at the university from 1722 till 1759, 
when, on the death of his wife, he resigned and 
removed to Northborough. 

On the occasion of his baptism, after the sermon 
of the officiating clergyman, he delivered a discourse 
in which he formulated and defended his confession 
of faith. The title of this address (printed by S. 
Kneeland for O. Henchman “at the Corner Shop on 
the South Side of the Town House,” Boston, 1722) is: 
“The Truth, Being a Discourse which the Author 
delivered at his Baptism, Containing Nine Principal 
Arguments the Modern Jewish Rabbins do make to 


VITT.—42 


prove the Mlessiahis yet toCome; With the Auswers 
to each. . . not only according to the Orthodox 
Opinion, but even with the Authority of their own 
Authentick Rabbins of Old, and Likewise, With the 
Confession of his Faith, at the Latter End. Dedi- 
cated to the Jewish Nation and Prefac’d by the Rev- 
erend Increase Mather, D.D.” Monis was the author 
also of two short essays, both treating of the same 
subject as his address. 

In 1735 he published in Boston the first Hebrew 
grammar printed in America. It bore the title: 
“ Dickdook Leshon Gnebreet. A Grammar of the He- 
brew Tongue, Being an Essay To bring the Hebrew 
Grammar into English to Facilitate the Instruc- 
tion of all those who are desirous of acquiring a 
clear idea of this Primitive Tongue by their own 
studies; In order to their more distinct Acquaint- 
ance with the Sacred Oracles of the Old Testament, 
according to the Original. And Published more 
especially for the Use of the Students of Harvard 
College at Cambridge, in New England.” 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Joseph Leboyich, Judah Monis, in Jewish 

Comment, Baltimore, Aug. 22, 1902: Hannah Adams, His- 

tory of the Jew x, London, 1818; Josiah Quincy, History of 

Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass., 1840; G. A. Kohut, 

in American Journal of Semitic Languages, xiv. 217 el seq.; 


Publ. Am. Jew. Hist. Soc., i. 10, 423 
T F. T. H. 


MONOGAMY: In Judaism the Law tolerated 
though it did not enact polygamy ; but custom stood 
higher than the Law. From the period of the re- 
turn from the Babylonian Exile, monogamy became 
the ideal and the custom of Jewish married life. 
That monogamy was the ideal may be secn from 
several facts. Not only does the narrative of Gen- 
esis, containing the story of the first man and woman, 
point to monogamy, but Gen. ii. 24 is best explained 

in the same sense. So, too, in the 
Monogamy story of the Flood, in which the res- 
the Jew- toration of the human race is depicted, 
ish Ideal. the monogamous principle is as- 
sumed. Also the polygamous mar- 
riages of some of the patriarchs are felt by the nar- 
rator (J) to need excuse and apology, as being 
infringements of a current monogamous ideal. 
Even more unmistakable is the monogamous ideal 
displayed in the Wisdom literature. The “Golden 
AB C of the Perfect Wife” in Prov. xxxi. 10-31 
is certainly monogamous; in fact, throughout the 
Book of Proverbs “monogamy is assumed” (Toy, 
“Proverbs,” p. xii.; comp. Cheyne, “Job and Solo- 
mon,” p. 136). Ben Sira, moreover, as well as Tobit, 
confirms this cenclusion (comp. History of Susanna 
23, 69), though, while Ben Sira’s view of woman is 
lower on the whole than that of the canonical Prov- 
erbs, Tobit’s is quite as high as the highest ideal. 
Job is monogamous. So is the Song of Solomon. 
Harper gives a most convincing argument in 
this sense in his edition of the Song of Solomon 
(Cambridge, 1902; comp. especially pp. xxxi. 
and xxxiv.). 

From another side the monogamous ideal is illus- 
trated by the prophetic use of marriage as typical 
of the relation between God and Israel. In this 
sense monogamy becomes the corollary of the divine 
Unity (comp. Hamburger, “R. B. T.” 1., 8.0. “ Viel- 
weiberei”). It isa commonplace of prophetic im- 


Monogamy 
Monotheism 





agery to describe God as the husband and Israel as 
the bride (comp. Hosea, passim ; the exquisite passage 
Jer, li. 2; also 2d. iii, 14, xx xi, 32), in contrast to idol- 
atry, which is typical of impure married life (Isa. 
liv. 5, and many other passages). Infidelity toward 
God is expressed under the figure of whoredom (see 
Driver on Deut. xxxi. 16). The same figure of the 
relation of God to Israel passed over to the later Ju- 
daism; and a similar figure is prominent in Chris- 
tianity also. 

As to the Law, the facts have already been treated 
in part under BraaMy. Monogamy was not legally 
enforced. In the case of the LEVIRATE MARRIAGE, 
monogamy was legally invaded; otherwise, polyg- 
amy was merely tolerated and not set up as a laud- 
able rule. Buton the other hand the Law made sev- 
eral provisions which are of a nature to act as bars 
to polygamy. By positively prohibiting an Israclite 
eunuch-eclass (Deut. xxiii, 1) the possibility of the 

large Oriental harem was much di- 


Legal minished (see, however, Eunvuct). 
Aspects. Royal license in the matter cf polyg- 


amy is denounced (Deut. xvil. 174), 
and in later times it is chiefly the un-Jewish Herod 
who is represented as having a large harem. The 
high priest, in the traditional explanation of Lev. 
xxi, 18, was restricted to one wife (Yoma i. 1; Yeb. 
59a; Maimonides, “ Yad,” Issure Biah, xvii. 13). 
Perhaps the most effective deterrent of polygamy 
was the equality of rights established among a 
man’s Wives if he took more than one. The Jaw of 
Ex. xxi. 10, “if he take himself another wife, her 
food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, he 
shall not diminish,” must in ancient as in medieval 
times have made polygamy unattractive, if not im- 
possible, except to the very wealthy (comp. Luck- 
ock, “Tlistory of Marriage,” 1894, pp. 18 ct seq.). 
Again, the law of inheritance, by which the child 
of a second and favorite wife could not be preferred 
to the child of a less-beloved wife, must have stood as 
a bar to a second marriage. This law (Deut. xxi. 
15), by its use of the terms “hated ” and “beloved ” 
of the two wives, also gives incidentally the main 
social objection to polygamy, namely, the difficulty 
of maintaining under a polygamous régime cordial 
relations within the home (Nowack, “ Hebriische 
Archiologie,” i. 159). It is certain that polygamy 
did not largely prevail in Israel (74, 158). Until 
stricé monogamy generally established itself after 
the Exile, the Jew had for the most part only 
one wife, with, perhaps, a secondary consort of 
lower status (a similar custom is revealed by the 
code of Hammurabi; sce Johns in Hastings, “ Dict. 
Bible,” extra vol., p. 599a). 


It was the consideration of the difticulty of main-_ 


taining a happy home-life that practically abrogated 
polygamy among the Jews after the Exile. The 
ideal of Jewish family life is very high in the Wis- 
dom literature; and the ideal continually rose with 
subsequent centuries. Giidemann rightly sees in 
this argument the strongest evidence of the monog- 
almous condition of the Jews for centuries before 


monogamy was legally enforced (comp. Giidemann, ' 


* Das Judenthum,” 1902, pp. 7 e¢ seq.). It may be 
clearly seen from Ps. exxviii., in which the do- 
mestic happiness of the monogamist God-fearer is 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


658 


Se, 





depicted. This psalm has thus been appropriately 
introduced into the Church marriage service, as 
well as into the Synagogue processional for the 
Bridegroom of the Law. 

That polygamy survived into the Christian erg 
is, however, asserted by Josephus (“ Ant.” xvii, 1, 
§ 2); and he himself (‘* Vita,” § 75) seems to have 

had one wife in Palestine and another 


Josephus in Egypt (comp. Liéw, “Gesammelte 
and the Schriften,” iii. 47). Such a practise js 
Talmud. forbidden by a baraitain Yeb. 37a; and 


this prohibition is (with certain limita- 
tions) introduced into the Shulhan ‘Aruk (Eben ha- 
‘Ezer, i. 11). The Talmud certainly does not enact 
monogamy (see BiGAMy); and as far as the Law is 
concerned, Justin Martyr (“ Dial. cum Tryph.” § 134) 
is not wrong in asserting that in his time (2d cent, 
c.E.) Jews were permitted to have four or five 
wives. But itis very doubtful whether they availed 
themselves of the permission. Frankel (“ Grund. 
linien des Mosaisch-Talmudischen Ehereclhits,” 1860) 
maintains the prevalence of monogamy; and his 
view was not seriously shaken by the criticisms of 
Léw (/.c. pp. 48 ef seg.), who does not contest Fran- 
kel’s main position, but merely adduces some evi- 
dence to show that Frankel’s conclusion was per- 
haps stated without sufficient reserve. It is uot 
necessary to examine the details further here: for 
the main fact remains that the general impression 
made by the Talmudic evidence is altogether favor- 
able t> Frankel’s contention (comp. the statement 
of Airamin “The Jewish Law of Divorce.” 1897, 
p. 76, note 3: “There are many indications in the 
Mishnah that monogamy was theruleand polygamy 
the exception”; he cites Yeb. ii. 9, 10—on which 
Frankel also lays stress—where the presumption 
that a messenger bringing a document of divorce 
from foreign parts had assisted in divorcing the 
woman because he wished to marry ber himscif, is 
rebutted by the fact that he had a wife living at the 
time). It is, however, on the general impression 
that one relies in adopting the view of Frankel. 
Edersheim (“ Hist. of the Jewish Nation,” 1896, p. 
272) is equally emphatic. 
The Jewish law reached the Middle Ages with 
polygamy permitted, but not much practised. The- 
oretically a man might have several 
The Middle wives if le wished, for R. Ami’s view 
Ages. to the contrary does not seem to have 
been accepted (Yeb. 63a, below). So 
in his codification of the Jewish law, Maimonides 
(“Yad,” Ishut, xiv.; comp. Shulhan ‘Aruk, Eben 
ha-‘Ezer, i. 9) makes it lawful for man to contract 
many simultaneous marriages. But this must not 
be taken to represent the personal opinion of Mai- 
monides, especially if the letter attributed to him 
concerning the French (Provencal) rabbis be au- 
thentic. In that letter Maimonides scorntully attacks 
the practise of bigamy with an abusive vigor cer- 
tainly unusual with him (on this letter see Kobak’s 
“Jeschurun,” iii. 46-55), The law, as laid down 
in the Talmud and codified by Maimonides, re- 
quired, however, that the husband should not only 
insure to each wife adequate maintenance (e2ch 
wife could claim a separate domicile), but should 
also secure for each full conjugal rights. Such 


659 


_—ome 





restrictions are essentialiv foreign to a polygamous 
condition. 

It may be inferred that, except in the case of child- 
lessness, very few European Jews in the Middle 
Ages were other than monogamous. It must be re- 
membered that in the Jewish view the purpose of 
marriage was not to satisfy carnal desires, but to 
raise up a family; hence it was not uncommon that 

aman was permitted and even urged 


Monogamy to take a second wife when this pur- 
Becomes pose was unfulfilled. It is open to 
Jewish = uestion whether a simultaneous mar- 

Law. riage or a divorce of the first wife 


would be the more himane or expe- 
dient course; but while the Jewish theory as to the 
purpose of inarriage prevailed, one or other course 
was natural in case of the wife’s sterility. At all 
events when R. Gershom at the beginning of the 
eleventh century succeeded with the utmost ease in 
making monogamy the law for Western Jews, he 
was merely formalizing current see (comp. 
Giidemann, “Gesch.” i. 11, ii. 165, 
hams, “Jewish Life in the Middle ee Soli Vilas 
Gractz’sarguinents to show that poly gamy prevailed 
in Europe in R. Gershom ’s time are refuted by Har- 
kavy in the Hebrew edition of Graetz (ili. 3867, note 
ep). On R. Gershoim’s celebrated lerem see 
Bicamy and GrrRsiom B, JUDAH. 

In Mohammedan parts of Europe, as well as in 
the Orient generally, the law of monogamy was 
not, and is not, formally accepted. Occasional cases 
of bigamy are found in Spain as late as the four- 
teenth century (for a case in 13822 comp. Iayserling 

1“ Monatsschrift,” 1865, pp. 890-3891, and add the 
evidence from the Respousa of Isaac b. Sheshet, 
1901, § 20). But it may be doubted whether any 
clear cases can be produced of such marriages ex- 
cept for specific reasons which the Jewish theory 
of marriage regarded as adequate (comp., for in- 
stance, RaSHBA’s testimony in Tur Eben ha-‘ Ezer). 
The objection in the Orient to Gershom’s rule 
turned on this very point as well as on the 

levirate difficulty. That even in the 

Conditions Oricnt bigamy was against the senti- 
in ment of many may be seen from the 

the Orient. customary undertaking (included in 
the ketubah) by the husband that he 

will not take a second wife. The insertion of such 
a clause is termed “customary” in the Tur Eben 
ha-'Ezer, § 119, near end (comp. Abrahams, lc. p. 
120, and Jew. Encyc. vii. 476, sc. Kercusau). Thus 
in the East a voluntary promise often replaced what 
was law in the West. No doubt cases of bigamy 
still oceur among Eastern Jews (see references in 
Westermarck, “ History of Human Marriage,” Index, 
sr. “ Jews”); but such cases are surprisingly rare. 
In addition to the citations in Kalisch (Commentary 
on Leviticus, ii. 374), the following may be quoted: 
“As a rule, the Oriental Jews are practically monog- 
anists” (Lucy Garnett, * The Women of Turkey.” 
1891, p. 12); “Bigamy [in Morocco; is also legal, 
though uncommon ” (Budgett Meakin, “ The Moors,” 
1902, p. 448); “They [the Yemenites] rarely marry 
more than one wife” (M. Thomas, “Two Years in 
Palestine and Syria,” 1900, p. 40). Forsimilar state- 
ments as to Teheran and Safed see “Revue des 


Ls, Abra-. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


| 





Monogamy 
Monotheism 





Ecoles de }’ Alliance Israélite Universelle,” No. 2, fp. 
166; No. 3, p. 195. It is indeed to the schools, now 
so beneficently established in most parts of the East, 
that one inust look for a complete legalization of 
what is after all the ordinary rule and custom in 
regard to monogamy. 
J. | eae 
MONOTHEISM : The belief in one God. The 
French writer Ernest Renan has propounded the 
theory that the monotheistic instinct was a Scenitic 
trait, and that therefore the universal belief that it 
was characteristic of the Hebrews alone must be 
modified. But later research into Semitic origins 
has demonstrated the untenability ef Renan’s con- 
tention. Robertson Smith has summed up the mat- 
ter with the statement that “what is often described 
as anatural tendency of Semitic religion toward eth- 
ical monotheism is in the main nothing more than 
a consequence of the alliance of reiigion with mon- 
archy ” (“ Rel. of Sem.” p. 74; Montetiore. “ Hibbert 
Lectures,” p. 24; Schreiner, “Die Jitingsten Urtheile 
tiber das Judenthum,” p. 7). The Hebrews alone of 
all the Semitic peoples reached the stage of pure 
monotheism, through the teachings of their prophets; 
however, it required centuries cf development before 
every trace of idolatry disappeared even from among 
them, and before they stood forth as a “unique 
people on earth,” worshipers of the one God and of 
Him alone. 
In Hebrew tradition the origin of the belief in the 
one God is connected with the religious awaken- 
ing of the patriarch Abraham. Later 
Rise of the legends describe circumstantialiy how 
Belief. Abraham reached this belief (Beer, 
“Leben Abrahams nach Auifassung 
der Jiidischen Sage”; see ABRAHAM). Though the 
tradition contains without doubt fhe kernel of the 
truth, modern criticism holds that the Hebrew 
tribes were brought to a clear realization of the 
difference between their God and the geds of the 
surrounding nations through the work and teach- 
ings of Moses. The acceptance of the pure mon- 
otheistic belief by the whole people was a slow 
process at best; how slow, many statements in the 
historical and prophetical books of the Bible prove 
amply, Throughout the period of the first com- 
monwealth there was constant reversion to idolatry 
on the part of the people (comp. Judges ij. 11-13, 
17, 19; iii. 7; viii. 83; x. 6, 10,13; I Sam. viii. 8, 
xii. 10; [I Kings ix. 9, xiv. 9, xvi. if Wings 
xvii. 7, xxii. 17; Isa. ii, 8, x. 11 xxxi. 7; Jer. 
16; vii. 9,18; ix. 18; xi. 10, 18,17; xii. 16; xiii. 10; 
xvi. 11; xix. 4-5, 23; xxii. 9, xxxii. 29, 385; xliv. 
3,9, 15; Hos. ii. 7, ili. 1, iv. 17, vill. 4, xi. 2; Ps. 
evt. 86; IIT Chron. vii. 22; xxiv. 18; xxviii. 2, 25; 
XXAUii. 7; xxxiv. 25). Forgetful of their obligation 
to worship Yuwu and Him alone, the people fol- 
jowed after the “ba‘alim”; the “bamot” and the 
“asherot” dotted the land; frequently, too, the Is- 
raelites confounded the worship of 
Monolatry. ‘iwH with the worship of Baal. 

In the development of religious be- 
lief in Israel there are indications of a growth 
through various stages before the conception of ab- 
solute uncompromising monotheism was reached. 
Down to the eighth-century prophets, the religion 


Monotheism 
Montagu 





of the people was monolatrous rather than monothe- 
istic; they considered Yitwit to be the exe God and 
their God, but not the one and only God. Tle was 
ihe national God of Israel as Chemosh was the god 
ot Moab and Milkom the god of Ammon (Num. 
xxi. 29; Judges xi. 24: I Kings xi. 33). He was 
not yet the God of all the nations and of the uni- 
verse. The existence of other gods was not detini- 
tively denied; even the second commandment does 
not. disclaim the existence of other gods; it merely 
forbids Israel to bow down to them or serve them 
(comp. Deut. iv. 19). There was, in truth there 
could be, no other God in Israel; but this, it is held, 
did not affect the reality of the gods of other nations; 
though, in comparison with the might and glory of 
Yruwi, they were weak and powerless. A very 
early poem has the words, “ Who is like unto thee, 
O Lord, among the gods?” (Ex. xv. 11)—a sufiicient 
indication that the idea that there were other gods 
was in the writer's mind. In alater psalm there is 
a reminiscence of this early state of thought— 
“There is none like unto thee among the gods” (Ps. 
Ixxxvi. 8, R. V.). 

As among other Semitic peoples (Smith, @.¢. p. 
91), so, too, in early Israel the closest relationship 
was supposed to subsist between the Deity, the 
land, and the people. Ymuw1 was the God not only 
of Israel the people (II Sam. vii. 23; I Kings viii, 

99), but of the land of Israc]; He could 

God, Land, be approached nowhere clse (comp. 
and the story of Naaman, II Kings v. 15); 
People. the great conception of His omnipres- 
ence as held by the author of the 139th 

Psalm was not yet reached. Thus when David was 
compelled by his enemies to flee he complained bit- 
terly: “They have driven me out this day that I 
should not cleave unto the inheritance of the Lord, 
saying, Go, serve other gods” (I Sam. xxvi. 19, R. 
V.); and the prophet Hosea speaks of the domain of 
the Israelites as “God’s land” (ix. 3). The triple 
relationship of God, people, and land is forcibly 
expressed in as late a passage as the prayer of the 
Deuteronomist, “Look down from thy holy habita- 
tion, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and 
the land which thou hast given us ” (Deut. xxvi. 15). 

In Israel, then, and in Israel’s land Yuwu was 
sole God. Even this preparatory stage to uni- 
versal monotheism was not reached until centuries 
after the occupation of the land; there was a syn- 
cretism of religious cults; the people were tolerant 
of the local ba‘alim; Jeroboam was able to set up 
the calf-gods at Dan and Bethel without arousing a 
great outcry. 

YuwWH alone in the land, the land YHwu’s alone, 
the worship of no other god to be tolerated in the 
land—this was the program of the zealous prophet 
Elijah, and in his activity there was a decided step 
forward to the recognition of YHwu alone as the 
God of Israel. For Elijah it was Yuwu only or 
nothing; “How long halt ye between two opinions? 
if the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal, then 
follow him” (I Kings xviii. 21). Monolatry reaches 
its supreme expression in Elijah: “Yauwnu is God ” 
is the watchword of his activity; there is room for 
bone other in Israel. 

From this attitude of Elijah it was but a step to 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDLA 


SS EL EC TTC SSP PS Sy 


660 


Re Pee Og eg a 
pure monotheism; the belief is found in full flower 
in the speeches of the great cighth-century prophets. 
the genius of Amos and his successors carried the 
conception of the “oneness” of Yuwirt to its utter. 
most limit, although even in their time the people 
did not reach this height of thought; it was only 
after the return from the Babylonian exile that the 
monotheistic belicf was a positive possession of the 
people as well as of the great spirits to whom the 
truth was first vouchsafed. 

The modern view of the development of religious 
thoughtin Israelis that the conception of pure mono- 
theism was reached through three channels—through 
the recognition of Ged in nature and in history, 
and through the belief in the ethical character or 

holiness of God. When Yuws wag 

True Mono- recognized as the Creator of heaven 
theism. and earth and all that in them js 
(comp, Amos v. 8, Ix. 6), When the 

appellation “the Lord of the heavenly hosts” wag 
given Him (Amos iv. 18, v. 27, Hebr.), when the 
whole earth was spoken of as being full of His glory 
(Isa. vi. 8), then there was room for no other god; 
for the conception of God as the Lord and Creator 
of nature carried with it, as a necessary corollary, 
the belief that there was no god beside Him (Jer. 
x. 11). The great conceptions of the Prophets that 
YuWH punishes wrong-doing not only in Israel but 
in other nations (Amos i.-ii.), that He is the arbiter 
of the destinies of such other nations (2). ix. 7), that 
lle uses heathen kings as insfruments of punishment 
or salvation, as when Isaiah speaks of the Assyrian 
monarch as “the rod of God’s anger,” when Jere- 
miah points to the Babylonian king as the instru- 
ment whereby God will punish Jerusalem, and 
when deutero-Isaiah refers to Cyrus as God’s 
anointed—all this involves the conclusion shat there 
was no god but Yuwu, for His dominion extended 
not only over Israel, but over the nations of the earth 
also, and His guiding hand directed the course of 
kings and peoplesin the working out of their history. 

But the conception of the holiness of YHwH (Isa. 
v. 16, vi. 3; Hab. i. 13), the recognition of His eth- 
ical character, led more than anything else to mono: 
theism, as Kuenen has pointed out (“ Hibbert Lec- 
tures,” 1882, p. 127). As long as YHwu was looked 
upon as only the national God, it was a question of 
the supremacy of the strongest as between Tim and 
the national gods of other peoples. But when God 
was presented primarily in His ethical character and 
worshiped as the God of holiness, there was no longer 
any measure of comparison, If Ynwu was the 
holy God, then the other gods were not. Here was 
an entirely new element; YHWH as the moral gov- 
ernor of men and nations was absolutely unique; 
the gods of the nations were “elilim” (= “noth- 
ings”; Isa. ii. 8, 18, 20; x. 10-11; xix, 1, 3; Xxx! 
%: Hab. ii. 18; Ezek. xxx. 13), “vanity” (Jer. i. 
5, viii. 19, x. 15, xvi. 19, xviii. 15; Isa. xliv. 9, 
lix. 4), “lies” (Amos ii. 4; Hab. ii. 18; Jer. xxix. 
31), “abomination ” (Hos. ix. 10; Jer. iv. 1, vii. 30, 
xiii. 27, xxxii. 84; Ezek. v. 11; vii. 20; xx. 7-8, 
30; Isa. xliv. 19). 

The doctrine of absolute monotheism is preached 
in the most emphatic manner by Jeremiah (x. 10: 
xiv. 22; xxiii. 86; xxxii. 18, 27) and the Deuterono- 


www 4 


661 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Monctheism 
Montagu 





mist (iv. 35, 39), but the Biblical teaching on the sub- 
ject may be said to have culminated in Isaiah 
of Babylon. Yuwn, though in a peculiar sense the 
God of Israel, is still the God of all 
the world. This prophet’s standpoint 
is uncompromising: “T, even I, am 
the Lord; and beside me there is no 
savior” (xlili. 11); “I am the first. 
and Iam the last; and besides me there is no God ” 
(xliv. 6, xivili. 12); “that they may know from the 
rising of the sun to the setting thereof that there is 
none besides me; [am God and there is none else” 
(xlv. 6, Heby.). In the post-exilic psalms and such 
other portions of the Bible as were produced during 
the second commonwealth—Proverbs, Job, Song of 
Songs, Ecclesiastes, Daniel—the belief in the one God 
and in Him alone is positively assured. Not only in 
Palestine was monotheism now the sure possession 
of the Jewish people, but it may be said that the 
Judaism of the Diaspora is conscious of itself as the 
bearer of the monotheistic doctrine and as being 
therein distinguished from all its surroundings 
(comp. Friedlander, “Gesch. der Jiidischen Apolo- 
getik,” p. 217). In proof of this latter statement 
many passages can be cited from the apocryphal 
and the pseudepigraphical writings. “Let them 
[the nations] know thee, as we also have known 
thee, that there is no God but only thou, O God” 
(Ecclus. xxxvi. 5; comp. also xliii. 28); “neither is 
there any God besides thee, that careth for all” 
(Wisdom of Solomon xii. 13); “O Lord, Lord God, 
the Creator of allthings, .. . who alone art King 
and gracious, who alone suppliest every need, who 
alone art righteous and almighty and eternal” (II 
Mace. 1. 24-25; comp. Ep. Jer. 5, in Kautzseh, ‘ Apo- 
kry phen,” i. 226; Aristeas Letter, 184: 7. 11.16; Sibyl- 
lines, Proem, 7, 15, 54; til. 584 ef seg., v. 16 ef seq. : th. 
j. 184, 196, 207; comp. also Josephus, “ Ant.” iv. 8, 
5D}, 
The spread of Christianity with its doctrine of the 
divinity of its founder called forth a number of ex- 
pressions from the Jewish sages touch- 
ing the subject of the absolute unity 
of God; thus a commentary on the 
first commandment reads, “ A king of 
flesh and blood has a father and a brother: but God 
says, ‘ With Me it isnot so; “fam the first ” because 
I have no father, and “I am the last ” because J have 
no brother; and “besides me there is no God,” be- 
cause I have no son’” (ix. R. xxix. 5). A similar 
expression is used in explanation of Ecclus. iv. 8 
(“Thereisonealone, and there is not a second ”): “he 
hath neither child nor brother; but hear, O Israel, the 
Lord is our God, the Lord is One” (Deut. R. ii. 88). 
There can be little doubt that such a saying as 
“Whoever draws out the pronunciation of the word 
‘one’ [in the Shema‘], his days and years will be 
lengthened ” is of similar import (Ber. 18b); the em- 
phasizing of the unity was the particular character- 
istic of the faithful in a world of dualistic and trini- 
tarian propaganda. As long as a man _ refused 
allegiance to other gods he was looked upon as a 
Jew: “ whoever denies the existence of other gods is 
called a Jew ” (Meg. 18a). 

The unity of God was a revealed truth for the 
Jew; there was no need of prvofs to establish it; it 


Culmina- 
tion 
in Isaiah. 


pene 


uw 


Talmudic 
Attitude. 


was the leading tenet of the faith; nor is any at- 
tempt at such preof found until the time of the 
medieval Jewish philosophers, who, in building up 
their systems of religious philosophy, devoted con- 
siderable space to the consideration of the attributes 
of God, especially of His unity. Proofs for the 
unity are given at length by Saadia (“ Emunot we- 
De‘ot,” i. 7), Maimonides (“ Moreh,” ii. 1), Gerson- 
ides (“ Milhamot Adonai,” iii. 3), and Hasdai Creseas 
(“Or Adonai,” iil. 4), 

The belief in the unity was formulated by Maimon- 
ides as the second of the thirteen articles of the faith 
known as-the Maimonidean Creed: “I believe that 
the Creator, Blessed be His name, is One, and that 
no unity is like His in any form, and that He alone 
is our God, who was, is, aud ever will be.” Solo- 
mon ibn Gabirol expressed the idea in another man- 
ner in his great liturgical poem “ Keter Malkut”: 
“Thou art One, the first great Cause ot all; Thou 
art One, and none can penetrate—not even the wise 
in heart—the mystery of Thy unfathomable unity ; 
Thou art One, the Infinitely Great.” This state- 
ment of belief found constant expression in the lit- 
urgy, as inthe Minhah service for Sabbath afternoon 
(“Thouart One and Thy name is One”), and in such 
liturgical poems as the “Adon ‘Olam” (“ He is One 
and there is no second, to compare to Him or asso- 
ciate with Him ”)and the “ Yigdal” (“ He is One and 
there is no unity like His unity. . . . is unity is. 
unending 7). 

The profession of the unity is the climax of the 
devotion of the greatest of the holy days, the Day 
of Atonement. At death it is the last word to fall 
from the Jew’s lips and from the lips of the by- 
standers, This has been Judaism’s great contri- 
bution to the religious thought of mankind, and still 
constitutes the burden of its Messianie ideal. the 
coming of the day when all over the world “God 
shall be One and His name One” (comp. Zech. xiv. 
9). See SHEMA‘. 

J, De P. 

MONREAL: City in Navarre, situated three 
miles from Pamplona; to be distinguished from a 
city of the same name in Aragon. A small number 
of Jews lived here in a “Juderia.” In 1820 the 
Jews of Pamplona, who were threatened by the 
shepherds, fled to Monreal and, supported by the 
brave D. Alfonso of Aragon, united with their co- 
believers in defending themselves against the pur- 
suing herdsmen; 170 of them were, however, killed. 
In 1366 there were fourteen Jews in Monreal: in 
1380 the Jews paid taxes to the local abbot; in 
1477 their number had become so small that they 
held divine worship in a private house. D. Juze 
Orabuena, chief rabbi of Navarre and body-physi- 
cian to the king, received houses in the Monreal 
Juderia as a present from the king. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Usque, Consolacam, p. 182a; Ibn Verga. She- 
bet Yehudah, p.6; Joseph ha-Kohen, ‘Emel ha-Baka, p. 
61; Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Spanien, i. 36; Gratz, 
Gesch. viii.; Jacobs, Sourees, Nos. 1465, 1571; Boletin Acad. 
Hist. xxiti. 142; R. E. J. xxvii. 275, u 
Ss M. K. 


MONSTER. Sce LEVIATHAN. 


MONTAGU, HYMAN: English numismatist 
and lawyer; died in London Feb. 18, 1895; son of 
Samuel Moses (having later assumed the name of 


Montagu 
Montefiore 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


662 





Montagu); educated at the City of London School. 
Articled to a firm of lawyers, he passed his final ex- 
amination with distinction, and established himself 
as an expert in bankruptcy law In early life a 
collector of beetles, he afterward took up coin- 
collecting. which he pursued with enterprising in- 
dustry, becoming a numismatist of the highest rank. 
He prescnted a valuable collection of coins to the 
British Museum. 

His principal works on numismatics are: (1) 
“Catalogue, with Illustrations, of a Collection of 
Milled English Coins Dating from the Reign of 
George [. to that of Queen Victoria” (1890); (2) 
“The Copper, Tin, and Bronze Coinage, and Patterns 
for Coins of England from the Reigu of Elizabeth to 
that of Queen Victoria” (1885-93). Ehs collection 
of Greek coins was especially noteworthy; and the 
sale catalogue of it became the standard work cn 
the subject. He was the author of many essays on 
coinage, contributed to the publications of learned 
societies, and was a fellow of the Society of An- 
tiquaries. 

Montagu compiled the catalogue of coins for the 
Anglo-Jewish Historical Exhibition, London, 1887, 
for which, too, he wrote an introductory essay on 
Jewish coins aud medals. He was for many years 
honorary secretary of Jews’ College ana a member of 
the education committee of that institution. He was 
also honorary solicitor for the industrial committee 
of the Stepney Jewish and the Board of Guardians 
schools, and a member of the committee of the Aged 
Needy Society. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Feb. 22, 1895. 
J. G. LL. 


MONTAGU, SIR SAMUEL, Bart.: English 
banker and communal worker; born at Liverpool 
Dec. 21, 18382; son of Louis Samuel, his name, 
“Montagu Sainuel,” having been in his early boy- 
hood reversed by his parents. He went to London in 
1847, and in 1858 founded the firm ef Samuel Mon- 
tagu & Co., foreign bankers, in Leadenhall street, 
afterward in Old Broad street. 

In the Jewish community of London Montagu has 
been a prominent figure. For over a quarter of a 
eentury he has been connected with the Jewish 
Board of Guardians, the Board of Deputies, the 
United Synagogue, and other Jewish institutions. 
In 1870 he established and became president of 
the Jewish Working Men’s Club. He has also been 
greatly interested in the building of new syna- 
gogues. In 1875 he founded, in conjunction with 
Lord Rothschild, the first industrial Jewish school 
in Jerusalem. Jn 1882, at the instance of the Man- 
sion House (Russo-Jewish) Committee, of which he 
became treasurer, he went to Brody to inspect the 
emigration to America. In 1884 he visited the 
United States toinspect the Jewish agricultural col- 
onies there. In 1886, Montagu visited several towns 
in Russian Poland and Russia proper, but was 
ordered by the Russian government to leave Moscow 
within twenty-four hours. In 1890 he merged the 
various hebras in the East End of London in the 
Federation of Synagogues, of which he became the 
first president. 

In the general community Sir Samuel is or has 


A A rr, 


been a justice of the peace for London and Hamp. 
shire; deputy lieutenant for the Tower Hamlets, 
member of the Gold and Silver Commission (1887~ 
1890); and member of Parliament in the Liberal in. 
terest for the Whitechapel Division of the Tower 
Hamlets (1885-1900). He was created a baronet by 
Mr. Gladstone in 1894. In Oct., 1900, he contested 
unsuccessfully the parliamentary seat for Central 
Leeds. He has taken great interest in the proposal 
to introduce decimal coinage into England. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Banker's Magazine, Sept., 1888; Jew. Chron, 


Aug. 5, 1892; Sept. 28, 1600. 
Js G. L. 


MONTALBAN: Cityin Aragon; not te be con- 
fused with Montalban in Castile, in the archbishop- 
ric of Toledo, which was also inhabited by Jews, 
Montalban possessed a Jewish community as early 
as the fourteenth century. In 1806 the governor of 
the place received permission to admit ten Jewish 
families which had been expelled from France. He 
was then given charge of the Jews and was empow- 
ered to adjust all their litigations. At the disputa- 
tion in Tortosa the Montalban community was rep- 
resented by Abu Ganda. A certain Jacob of Mont- 
alban died a martyr at Ancona in 1556. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isaac b. Sheshet, Responsa, § 510; Shebet 
Yehudah, p. 68; R. EB. J. xi. 153; Jacobs, Sources, Nos. 749, 
1095, 1197. 

J M. K, 

MONTALTO, FILOTHEO ELIAU (ELI- 
JAH): Portuguese physician; born at Castello 
Branco in the middle of the sixteenth century; died 
at Tours, France, in 1616. According to Kayser- 
ling (“ Die Juden in Navarra,” p. 146), Montalto was 
a brother of the physician Amatus Lusitanus; but 
this supposition is not sufficiently corroborated to 
make it probable. 

Montalto was brought up by his Marano parents 
in the Jewish religion, and to this he remained 
faithful during his entire life. Having graduated as 
physician, he left his native country, where he was 
always exposed to the rigors of the Inquisition, and 
went to Italy. He settled first at Leghorn (e¢. 1598), 
and several years later at Venice. In the latter city 
he made the acquaintance of Concino Concini, on 
whose recommendation he was invited by Maria de 
Medici to come as physician to the French court. 
Montalto had declined many high positions in Italy 
—chief among them being that of successor to the 
renowned Mercurial in the University of Padua— 
because he feared thatif he accepted them he would 
not be able to perform his religious obligations. In 
accepting Maria de Medici’s invitation, therefore, he 
made it a condition that he should have complete 
religious freedom, and be exempt from any service 
ou Saturday, although the rabbis of Venice decided 
that in cases of emergency he might travel on that 
day. 

Montalto, who became a general favorite, was ap- 
pointed councilor; and he remained at the French 
court until his death, which occurred suddenly while 
he wasaccompanying Louis XIII. to Tours. Maria 
de Medici caused the body to be embalmed, and 
sent it, accompanied by Morteira and certain of Mont- 
alto’s relatives, to Amsterdam for burial. 

Montalto was considered a high authority, not 


663 


only in medicine but in all branches of science. 
Among his numerous works on medicine the most 
important were: (1) “Optica Intra Philosophie et 
Medicine Aream de Visu, de Visus Organo et Ob- 
jecto Theor. Accurate Complectens” (Florence, 1606) ; 
(2) “ Arcbhipathologia in Qua Internarum Capitis 
Alffectionuim, Essentia, Cause Signa, Preesagia, et 
Curatio Accuratissiina Indagine Disseruntur ” (Paris, 
1614; St. Gervais, 1618; Nuremberg, 1686); (8) ° Con- 
sultationes Medice Itemque de Sensu et Sensato 
Super Aristotelem ” (1614). Montalto was the author 
also of the following polemical works, still extant 
in manuscript: (1) “Sobre el Capitulo 53 de Ezayas 
é Outros Textos da Sagrada Escritura,” divided into 
three parts (Columbia University [New York] MS.); 
(2) “Livro Fayto . . em Que Mostra a Verdade 
de Diversos Textos, e Cazos, Que Alegio as Gentili- 
dades para Confirmar Suas Seictas” (Wolf, “ Bibl. 
Hebr.” iii. 104); (8) “ Razonamiento del Sefior H. 
M....em Paris, por Mandado del Rey Enrique 
IV. Delante de los Mayores Teologos y Doctores de 
Su Corte.” 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Barrios, Relacion de los Poctas y Eseritores 
Espafioles dela Nacion Judayca, p. 53; Manasseh ben I[s- 
rael, Mikweh Yisrael, p. 573; Gritz, Geseh. ix. 485-499; Kay- 
serling, Bibl. Esp. -Port.-Jud. Dp. . 

D. I. Br. 

MONTANA: One of the northwestern states of 
the American Union. It was organized asa territory 
in 1864, and admitted as a state in 1889. It has the 
following Jewish communities: Helena, the capital 
of the state, with a benevolent association founded 
in 1872 and a congregation, Emanu-El, founded in 

1887. Its rabbi is Jacob Mielziner. IJlelena has 

also a social club and a ladies’ auxiliary society. 

Butte, with two congregations. Of the older, the 

B’nai Israel, founded in 1897, the present rabbi is 

Harry Weiss; the community has a Hebrew benevo- 

lent association founded in 1881. Anaconda, with 

a congregation, B’nai Israel. A. 


MONTAUBAN, R. ELIEZER. See Dav- 
PHINE. P 
MONTE DI PIETA. See PAWNBROKERS. 


MONTEFIORE: Anglo-Jewish family which 
derivesits name fromatown in Italy. In 1856 there 
were three towns so named in the Pontifical States, 
but from which of the three the family came is not 
definitely known, As far back as 1630 the Monte- 
fiores were scttled at Ancona as merchants. From 
Ancona they, or some of them, seem to have gone to 
Leghorn. Thither, about the end of the seven- 
teenth or the commencement of the eighteenth 
century, Judah Montefiore went, and was taken 
into business by his uucle, Isach Vita Montefiore. 
Judah married a daughter of the Medinas, by whom 
he had four sons. The third son, Moses Vita 
(Haim) Montefiore, married, in 1752, Esther Han- 
nah, daughter of Massahod Racah, a Moorish mer- 
chant of ‘Leghorn. Moses had seventeen children, 
The third, Samuel, married Grace, daughter of 
Abraham Mocatta, and became the grandfather of 
Haim Guedalla. The fourth, Joseph Elias, was 
the father of Sir Moses Montefiore. The seventh, 
Eliezer, married a granddaughter of Simon Bar- 
row of Amsterdam, and emigrated to the West In- 
dies. He became the father of Joseph Barrow 


THE JEWISIT ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Montagu 
Montefiore 





Montefiore (1808-93) and Jacob Montetiore (1801-95), . 
both of whom were among the early pioneers of 
Australia. But the most notable was the sixth son, 
Joshua, who had seven children by a second mar- 
riage. 

Abraham Montefiore: Stock-broker; born in 
London 1788; died at Lyons 1824; son of Joseph 
Elias Montefiore and brother of Sir Moses Monte- 
fiore, with whose commercial career he was after- 
ward identified. He first adopted a trade and was 
apprenticed to Mr. Flower, silk-merchant of Wat- 
ling street. In the silk trade he realized a small 
fortune, but being ambitious to push forward more 
rapidly, he joined his brother Moses in business; the 
firm of Montefiore Brothers thus formed carried on 
business in Shorters’ court, Throgmorton street. 

Montefiore was exceptionally fortunate on the 
Stock Exchange and left behind hima very large 
fortune. In 1824 he died at Lyons, on his way 
home from Cannes, whither he had gone for the 
reestablishment of his health. Ic was twice mar- 
ried: by his first wife. a daughter of George Hall 
of the London Stock Exchange, he had one daugh- 
ter, Mary, who married Benjamin Mocatta; and by 
his second wife, Henrietta Rothschild, he had two 
sons and two daughters. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Wolf, Life of Sir Moses Montefiore, pp. 

13, 15, 18, 25, London, 1885. 

Charlotte Montefiore : Authoress; born in Lon- 
den 1818; died there July 2, 1854. She took an 
active part in the Jewish Ladies’ Benevolent Loan 
and Visiting Socicty as well as in the Jewish Emi- 
gration Society, of which she was one of the found- 
ers. She was the active fricnd of the Jews’ Free 
School, the Jews’ Infant School, the West Metropol- 
itan School, and of many other educational estab- 
lishments. Her reading was extensive, especially in 
moral and ethical philosophy. She was a contribu- 
tor to many publications calculated to improve and 
elevate Jewish youth. For the “Cheap Jewish Li- 
brary ” she wrote “The Way to Get Rich,” “The 
Birthday,” “Caleb Asher,” etc.; she wrote also “A 
Few Words to the Jews” (London, 1851). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. July 14, 1854; Kayserling, Die 
Jiidischen Frauen, pp. 275-276. 


Claude Goldsmid Montefiore: English scholar 
and philanthropist ; younger son of Nathaniel Mon- 
tefiore; born in 1858. He was educated at Balliol 
College, Oxford, where he obtained a first class in 
the classical final examination, and where he came 
under the influence of Jowett and T. H. Green. In- 
tended originally for the ministry of the Reform 
congregation of England, he studied theology in 
Berlin, but finding himself unable to sympathize 
with thearrest of the Reform Movement, he devoted 
himself instead to scholarly and philanthropic pur- 
suits. He nevertheless continued to be a spiritual 
teacher and preacher, though in a lay capacity, and 
published a volume of sermons, in conjunction with 
Israel] Abrahams, entitled “Aspects of Judaism” 
(London, 1894). In 1886 he was selected by the 
Hibbert trustees to deliver the Hibbert course of 
lectures for 1892 (“The Origin of Religion as Illus- 
trated by the Ancient Hebrews”). In these lec- 
tures Montefiore made a permanent contribution to 
the science of theology. In 1896 he published the 


um BIOL SoLIVYyO 











Rodaqoty -nluog 
mein = Bsoxt, = plodoay = unefuag L eae 6 eo aa 
EII3IS TaUMARSg | | | | yt jan wey | usIgqg on Jon vult -BIQY = 
| SUOWUOLOS SUVS] -UBLUIT JANUNVS VIOIS BIOTA -vIQgY ALIVA Ydosor -VIOH{ MOLIV'T -UIVS -dAq OSOY VBILIS BIGdOS oS] 
anwueg §=vyoIS WVAT] Ureyviqy viqdos = sasop | | | | { | | | [ | | | | 
1108 (1Rt °a) Ma et UE sy ee, | 
“AOULOG = Ud | (CERT “4) CS“ Ul polyyes) | (TEeE °a) 


SIONIO Q ULUTAR  euuuy uayo) ururfosg = (Leet ‘a) TeyoRy WVAS SLLIOW = ROL MBING WEYBIGY = vo0IQe] 
| i] 


L | | | 




































RUS WeUIW Udesor (G/8T “Q) (PLST °Q) 
ee ee ie a e10q sous V q19q19H (E181 °4) 
asood Tiny meyviqy  s2UBIOLZ Wepre 
BUIIUIA UINBQUIO AA -BUINYD | | | 
e009 | jonwWes = feyoey jenues =U siemog  Yyoorr = vunsne 
SaIVYD INTUV eq AVN AULT INUWY LT 2 -101A l | ai | cdusiio mamas 
| | | | | | | | | | souBLOLA ulwefueg | (1FRT °q) 
| | (ZeaT “Q) soup =| (O@8L°q) Jo deiqsnup ‘euamoy = Ydasor 
wing Vv (9¢8T “Q) (SPST °G) aodaT UodIdE] UNOL = [tesIay PABIIY = vowry 
S19JO F  syvUs] AlUaL_ = YUpl IY = ding | | SAG | (9TST °4) 
{ | SIDUYO F IqHUd = soso 
| wIeUa OVRST [| YJ 
(LIST “Q) JO MOPLM pue | (SERI-L811) 
(OERT A) = dapuRXDTV ‘T[2AaO]VH OVVsE | (SFSI~RBLT) (SC8T “D) (O88T-!821) ByBOOW VBS] = (QERT-CRI TL) 
BIBYIO OT WLvyRIGy sITY = veqsoH SI9TIO G jo .19}qanep ‘vias = weuwqy ellepenys qepnr = ea ies jo Jayqsnep ‘1LeqIs_ = sesso 
esse ee een | | | 
(281 °P) (LALIT “Q) St[[qy ugor (LLL1 °Q) 
eee a = Se (e99 *d 999) = YRiry yepusy 
SLT” | 
IVYVAGIY) JO (61-8E2T) C1100 W (FO8T-6GLT) eyRoOoOW UIBABIQN | (FR-LSLT) | (GGT °Q) (FGLT °9) 
[avis] WCyBIqY = Yeas jayoeys = SVlpy udasor JO J07YTuNep ‘vovis) = paNUNg = 2 quay = prarg poryessey 
Die | | | 
(GE8T °Q) Olodsolg 
. ] (IGLT °) (O6LT °&) (88LT °4) uopuoyT jo (98BLT °G) (@8LT "O) 
(9641 °4) Plaed ; a a si se iis Q10POUOW Tepne ap ¢ = VIA ore yepne aes 
Wtf St 8 
[aqoey vay ¢ (0941 °4) Gepne 21099100N (QCLI “Q) 
= BIA platg oOledsolg PouesseN VILA SAISON ap Tepne = qruvg wudig yepne 
| | | | 
(STAT a) (GI8T-SELD (68-2TLT) (S6LT “A) (SILT °Q) 
1IZOWTA TUBE LoS = BILA SOSON qdesor prtaed 
De mcs eae tes let tgs a Me eel 
SOIVATY (00 | 
EY COVIEN LCOS G -er Jo Jajysnep SUIPOW plawq Jo (SILT °) (OTLT *4) 
SILA [OBIS] = 197987 “RINT (ZOLT) <= OBBST PIAed ioryqgnep ‘qWeivs (O/T) = uepne yepur ydasor 
aera 
(I8LT “P) 9109] U0 WN | (LL9T °4) 
qepue [OBUsy jenue py javydey sasowW yepur op 1aIYsa = VITA YR 
Mee ee te ee ee ee ST a 
| 
(199T psuoljaem) (L#9T °Q) 
OIpewly yeizs = ydasor 


| | 
| 


INJOATIO TaMOeY = (COQT *A) D1OPaIMOW Voy Yepre 





‘HAUNOIGAG AUOMALNOW 


Uo{ZUIPpsg VIUaLO|_T = 
AUURT BYWeLUaH ONRBIOH Yyeresg 
| 











STIOWOIN eyjoueH = onei0oH uosdues eulMg 
pleurzey inqwy OULjeUMWUg = INng.y uruelueg [oUOryT @31094) REE soouBly 
| | | pe es ha hee re ee eS eee | 
711 Vd0 
prarg Jo (6841 “4) 
MUU (CERT a) (6zgt-a) BLoINyY | (QegT"a) Jalysnep (gest a) (96LT “) usqop (CBLT °G) 
“RICY SUSOW Oplypepy "Wop 'y = jeuwwey ‘yeivg = ydesor praeq  ulmvluog (QIsT) = eursue (QNS8l) JOATOW seOn’T 
| | | | | (gGgT “4) SIMOT = AlU3H = 
a PIUISP[O) SUTTBSOYT WIVQABIQY veiHNe 
epuelyp Scr at Ca VoITV 
PRE tees Seer 
epvsnoy snusey 
apne] dUNBT PAPMPY 
= opnewm = VION pur WVTIM saylegg Wary 
UBLITT uve = -I plod | | { 
rea aa | 
| (€S8T 4) 
€11910,,4 pueu jsaulq uuvuyeids ILO FILO 
[99 YyeIey puoulIpg -ipsaq sasop QLOPIS] (6/8T) = WeLIPW poqaey spWewieA— INYWVy 
| | | | | j QWOK vras1ayeqd ploy 
gulqueis ‘TOMO “q 
“000 10H THAD = eee) JoABH 
= QUUY BDUBISUOD UOA'T IBUST PUBMPT WeyRiqy 2 
[Serene jo Jo1ysnep re es | 
l Q1OPOIUO|, ‘VWI, = | 
(QL-OTR1) PITUOSMIOW «= ONNVIOH = ~— (SRG TT) [a{olg Voslwusly7 
gp AUONIUY Ig = RYVUS JOAT IN 81{0L1U0H (0981) = 
(1g81 °G) BSInO'T ait ied ca (08-9181) Josey Ydesor 
LESSER: Pe ae re ee 
uayqop sInoy jo 
Jayysnep 
usyog (108 “4) ospraed smoy = ‘aple[apy = (CT8T °Q) 
(ANSST) uluefuegd O™LOYII iajyqgsnep (061-227) e[[epons) WIV (@nssy OU) 
AOU AM [QUOI] = PIUIspjoy) -MOM qover = | O10 UO = (6I8T “4) (Z981-F6L1) 
qovur = oyu UOIBY = (8-118) seonvT dittdd = -duqag ydesor euLWor UdYOg [Ad] 
UPIGEA vyuueq BIydOg eIPATT vuysne Joyyusnep qdoesor _| eye00N = (GIST “P) Jo Joyqanep 
Teme es eee eee mers | | | tuuvtueg = AleW ‘qiipn f= 
| | pIUISpIOy) (Lest “P) | | (9981-1621) (S981 F821) 
(66-2081) (6981-861) (F981 “P) JOUSY = (G8LT A) «= BeQag eH 941095 Jo | (FZRT-88LT) A100 | PITGOSTIOY (98LT °4) d10FaJUOW 
SUOUIOJOS Ydesor = YovVeQsy ZWeduloxy urweflueg = [1esIQy soso, = YRieg = OUIOTOS Jayqanep ‘Arey (g) = -oyuox UIvyRIqgy = ByelluoH (T) 





(T#8T-Z9LD) 
VJBIOW UeGRIGy 


J3T39H sasO]t IIS 





(FO8T-6S2T) 


Jo JaJUSNep ‘[oyvsey = svljq qdesor 


“Panurzjuuoyj— “AAUDNICAG WUOMALINOW! 


Montefiore 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


666 





first volume of his “Bible for Home Reading,” 
forming a commentary on the Bible with moral re- 
flections from the standpoint of the “higher criti- 
cism”; the second volume appeared in 1899. In 
1890 Montefiore founded and edited, in conjunction 
with Israel Abrahams, the “Jewish Quarterly Re- 
view,” a journal that stood on the very highest 
level of contemporary Jewish scholarship, and in 
which numerous contributions from his pen have 
appeared, 

Montefiore is one of the leading authorities on 
questions of education; he was for some time a 
member of the School Board for London, and he is 
(1904) president of the Froebel Society and the Jews’ 
Infant School, London, and a member of numer- 
ous other educational bodies. Montetiore has been 
mainly instrumental in enabling Jewish pupil teach- 
ers at clementary schools to enjoy the advantages of 
training in classes held for the purpose at the uni- 
versities; he is on the council of Jews’ College and 
of the Jewish Religious Education Board. He 
ranks as one of the leading philanthropists in the 
Anglo-Jewish community and holds office in vari- 
ous important bodies. He was elected president of 
the Anglo-Jewish Association in 1895, and he is a 
prominent member of the Council of the Jewish 
Colonization Association. 

Montefiore has shown great sympathy with all 
liberal tendencies in Jewish religious movements in 
London and is president of the recently formed Jew- 
ish Religious Union. He was president of the Jew- 
ish Historical Society in 1899-1900. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Jacobs, in Young Israel, June, 1897. 


J. G. L. 


Sir Francis Abraham Montefiore (Bart.): Eng- 
lish communal worker and Zionist; son of Joseph 
M. Montefiore, president of the Board of Deputies; 
born Oct. 10, 1860. In 1886 he took up the bar- 
onetcy previously held by Sir Moses Montefiore. 
He became high sheriff of the county of Kent in 
1894, and of Sussex in 1895. He is chairman of the 
executive committee of the English Zionist Federa- 
tion and has represented the English section at re- 
cent Zionist congresses. Montefiore was recently 
elected chairman of Elders of the Spanish and Por- 
tuguese congregation. , 
Borne Jewish Year Book (London), 5659 (=1898- 


J. V. E. 


Jacob Montefiore: Merchant; born in Bridge- 
town, England, Nov. 28, 1801; died Nov. 3, 18985. 
He entered into business with his brother Moses, 
and when in the early thirties the movement for 
the financing of Australian colonization from Lon- 
don was incepted Montefiore, who had been con- 
nected with the Colonial produce trade, became 
active in the various public schemes as a member of 
the South Australian Colonization Association, or- 
ganized to settle South Australia on the Wakefield 
system. He was also appointed member of the first 
board of commissioners entrusted by the British 
government with the administration of the colony. 
He visited the colony in the year 1843 and again in 
1854. His reception on his first visit by the gov- 
ernor, Sir George Grey, and the people was enthu- 
siastic. During his visit to South Australia in 1843 


he acted asanagent for the Rothschilds, at the same 
time holding a partnership with his brother Joseph 
Barrow in the firm of Montefiore Brothers of Lon- 
don and Sydney. The township of Montefiore, at 
the confluence of the Bell and MacQuarrie rivers, in 
Wellington Valley, was founded by the brothers, 
and they contributed actively to the establishment 
there of places of worship for all denominations. 
The organization of the Bank of Australasia wag 
largely due to their efforts. In Adelaide there isa 
hill named after them. In 1885, at the request of 
the directors of the Art Union Gallery of Adelaide, 
Jacob sat for the artist B. S. Marks, the portrait 
being hung in that gallery. 

J. T. SE, 

Jacob Isaac Levi Montefiore: Australian mer- 
chant; son of Isaac Levi and Esther Hannah Levi 
(daughter of Eliezer Montefiore); born at Bridge- 
town, Barbados, Jan. 11, 1819; died at Norwood, 
London, 1885. In 1887 he proceeded to Sydney, 
where heassumed his mother’s maidenname. There 
he became one of the leading merchants and took an 
active part in the development of the city. In 1857 
he was nominated a member of the first legislative 
council of the colony of New South Wales. He 
acted as president of the chamber of commerce, and 
was for many years a director of the Bank of Aus- 
tralasia. In 1876 he left Australia and settled in 
England, where he became a director of the Queens- 
land National Bank, the Queensland Investment 
Company, and several other important commercial 
undertakings. Oneof his brothersis Edward Levi 
Montefiore, a member of the financial house of 
Cahen d’Anvers et Cie., and another, George Levi 
Montefiore, of Brussels, is a member of the Bel- 
gian Senate; both are still living (1904). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish World, Jan. 30 and Feb. 2, 1885. 


Ai J. H. 


Joseph Barrow Montefiore: Merchant; son of 
Eliezer Montefiore; born in London June 24, 1808; 
died at. Brighton, England, Sept. 4, 1893. In 1826, 
during the mayoralty of Sir William Magnay, he be- 
came one of the twelve “Jew brokers” in the city 
of London, purchasing the privilege for £1,500. He 
did not remain jong in the city, but seized a favor- 
able opportunity of emigrating to Australia, where 
several members of his family were already settled. 
In New South Wales he traded in partnership with 
his brother and made many fortunate speculations 
in town allotments. He helped to found the town- 
ship of Montefiore and the Bank of Australasia, and 
was one of the chief agents in the organization of 
the Jewish congregation in Sydney. In 1882 he 
obtained a grant of land from the government fora 
Jewish burial-place. At the same time he helped to 
organize the society which developed into the Syd- 
ney Hebrew Congregation. On retiring from busi- 
ness Montefiore settled in London and joined the 
Reform Congregation. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Sept., 1893. 


Joseph Elias Montefiore: Son of Moses Vita 
(Haim) Montefiore; born in London 1759; married 
Rachel Mocatta (1783). He became the father of 
three sons and five daughters, the eldest son being 
Sir Moses Montefiore. The second son, Abraham, 


667 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Montefiore 





was twice married, and by his second wife, Hen- 
rietta Rothschild, became the father of Joseph Mayer 
(father of Sir Francis Montetiore), Nathaniel (father 
of Claude G. Montefiore), Charlotte (d. 1854: author 
of “A Few Words to the Jews”), and Louisa 
(afterward Lady Anthony de Rothschild). The 
third son, Horatio (1798-1867). became a merchant 
in London, and was one of the principal founders of 
the London Reform Community (1841). He married 
a daughter of David Mocatta, by whom he had six 
sons and six daughters. The youngest of these 
sons, Emanuel Montefiore (b. 1842), became a 
lieutenant-colonel in the Royal Artillery, assistant 
secretary of the London Charity Organization Soci- 
ety, commandant of the Jewish Lads’ Brigade, and 
a member of the council of the West London Re- 
form Synagogue. 

Of the daughters of Joseph Montetiore the eldest, 
Sarah, married Solomon Sebag of London; she be- 
came the mother of Joseph Sebag, afterward Sir 
Joseph Sebag-Montefiore (1822-1908), who had three 
sons—Arthur (father of Robert Sebag-Monte- 
fiore), Cecil, and Edmund. Sarah had also five 
daughters: Jemima (married Haim Guedalla), Es- 
ther (died prematurely), Abigail (wife of Benjamin 
Gompertz, the mathematician), Rebecca (imarried 
Joseph Salomons, brother of the late Sir David Salo- 
mons), and Justina (married Benjamin Cohen, father 
of Arthur Cohen and Lionel Benjamin Cohen), 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lucien Wolf, Life of Sir Mouscs Montefiore, 

London, 18833 Jew. Chron. April 28, 1876. 

ap I. . 

Joseph Mayer Montefiore: English communal 
worker; nephew of Sir Moses Montetiore; born in 
Loudon May 10, 1816; died there Oct. 9, 1880. In 
1844 he was elected a member of the Board of Dep- 
uties, London, as one of the representatives of the 
Spanish- Portuguese congregation. Te retired from 
the office in 1858, but was reelected in 1857. In 
1858 he became vice-president of the board, acting 
as president during the absence abroad of Sir Moses, 
whom he succeeded, Oct., 1874. Montefiore was 
elected treasurer of the Spanish-Portuguese Syna- 
gogue in 1846, and warden in 1851. He was a lib- 
eral subscriber to and took much interest in the char- 
itable and educational institutions connected with 
the congregation. Ile was a director of the Alli- 
ance Insurance Company for twenty-three years, and 
acted fer some years as director of the National 
Provincial Bank of Ireland. He was a justice of 
the peace and deputy-lieutenant for Sussex, and 
served as high sheriff of that county in 1870. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. and Jew. World, Oct. 15, 1880, 


Sir Joseph Sebag-Montefiore: Stock-broker; 
son of Solomon Sebag and Sarah, eldest sister of 
Sir Moses Montefiore; born in 1822; died at London 
Jan. 18, 1908. On succeeding (1885) to the estate of 
his maternal uncle he assumed the name of Montefiore 
by royal license. He was one of the leading mem- 
bers of the London Stock Exchange, on which he 
amassed a large fortune. 

He was a justice of the peace for Kent and the 
Cinque Ports and lieutenant of the city of London; 
and in 1889 he served as high sheriff for Kent. 
He was for many years a leading member of the 
Spanish-Portuguese congregation and was presi- 


dent of the elders of that body. In 1895 he became 

president of the Board of Deputies, after having 

been vice-president for many years; and in 1896 he 

Was appointed by the King of Italy Italian consul- 

general in London. Ne was knighted in 1896, 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron, May 22, 1896; Jewish Year 
Bool: (London), 3659 (= 1898-99). 

Joshua Montefiore: English lawyer, soldier, 
and journalist; born in London Aug. 10, 1762; died 
at St. Albans, Vt., June 26, 1848. After graduating 
at Oxford he studied law and was admitted to the 
bar in 1784. While practising in London he attained 
considerable success as an author, his “Commercial 
Dictionary ” being regarded as the standard work of 
its kind. In 1791 he joined a band of adventurers 
under Moses Ximenes, who purposed establishing a 
colony on the coast of Africa; Montetiore took 
charge of the military side of the expedition. The 
party occupied the Island of Bulama and raised the 
British flag; but after several conflicts with the na- 
tives, they were compelled to withdraw. Of this 
early attempt at African colonization he has left a 
lively account. Before the settlement was broken 
up Montefiore attempted to cstablish schools for the 
children of his companions. On his return to Eng- 
land he declined the honor of Knighthood and entered 
the army as a captain, being the first Jew to holda 
military commission in England. ie was present 
as an officerof the York Light Infantry at the taking 
of Martinigue and Guadalupe in 1809. After serv- 
ing in various parts of the world, he resigned his 
commission and emigrated to the United States; for 
some time he published and edited in New York 
“Men and Measures,” a weekly political journal; he 
afterward took up his residence at St. Albans, Vt. 

Montefiore published: “Commercial Dictionary ” 
(1808); “Commercial and Notarial Precedents” 
(1804); “Trader’s Compendium”; “United States 
Trader’s Compendium”; “Law of Copyright”; 
“Synopsis of Mercantile Laws” (1830); “Law and 
Treatise on Bookkeeping ” (1831); “Laws of Land 
and Sea” (1881). 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. World, Oct. 31, 1884: L. Wolf, Centen- 
nial Biog. of Sir Moses Montefiore, London, 1884; Cyclope- 
dia of American Biog. 

Lady Judith Montefiore: Wife of Sir Moses 
Montefiore; daughter of Levi Barent Cohen; born 
in London in 1784; died Oct. 1, 1862. She was an 
accomplished linguist and musician. She married 
Moses Montefiore in 1812, For thirteen years they 
lived at New Court, Saint Swithin’s Lane, London. 
Her prudence and intelligence influenced all her 
husband’s undertakings, and when he retired from 
business the administration of his fortune in phil- 
anthropic endeavors was largely directed by her. 
Lady Montefiore accompanied her husband in all his 
foreign missions up to 1859, and was the beneficent 
genius of his memorable expeditions to the Holy 
Land, Damascus, St. Petersburg, and Rome. By 
her linguistic abilities she was enabled to materially 
assist her husband in his self-imposed tasks. Dur- 
ing the journey to Russia, in 1846, she was indefat- 
igable in her efforts to alleviate the misery she saw 
everywhere around her. The wife and daughter of 
the Russian governor paid her a ceremonious Visit 
and expressed the admiration she had inspired among 


Montefiore 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


668 








all classes. Her sympathies were greatly widened 
by travel; two journals of some of these travels 
were published anonymously by her. Phe last vears 
of her life were spentalternately in London and Rams- 
gate. At herdeath Sir Moses founded in her memory 
the Judith Moutetiore College at the latter place. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lucien Wolf, Life of Sir Moses Montefiore, 


pp. 1s¥-212; Morais, Eminent Israelites, pp. 240-242; Jew. . 


Chron, Oct. 3, 1862; Kayserling, Div. Jiidischen Frauen, pp. 
272-275, BU8: L. Loewe, Diaries of Sir Moses and Lady 
Montefiore, 1890. 
J. G. L. 
Leonard Montefiore: English author and phi- 
lanthropist; brother of Claude G. Montefiore; born 
in London May 4, 1858; 
died at Newport Sept. 6, 
1879; educated at Balliol 
‘olNege, Oxford, where 
he came under the influ- 
ence of Jowett, T. H. 
Green, and of his fellow 
student Arnold Toynbee. 
Even before he left col- 
lege he had contributed 
to some of the principal 
periodicals, as “The 
Nineteenth Century ” 
and “The Fortnightly 
Review,” and was at the 
time of his death devo- 
ting himself to the study 
of the German struggle 
for emancipation, on 
which he published some 
preliminary essays. 
Montefiore was associ- 
ated with many philan- 
thropic movements, es- 
pecially with the move- 
ment for women’s 
emancipation. His 
“Literary Remains” 
were privately printed 
by his family after his 
death (1880). 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Memoir in 
his Literary Remains; 
Atheneum and bicaminer, 
Sept. 13, 1879; Women’s 
Union Journal, Nov., 1879; 
Jew. Chron. and Jew. 
World, Sept. 12, 1879. 


J. 


Sir Moses Monte- 
fiore (Bart.): English 
philanthropist; born in 
Leghorn, Italy, Oct. 28, 
1784; died at Ramsgate, England, July 25, 1885. 
Moses Hayyim Montefiore and his wife, both of Leg- 
horn, settled in London in the middle of the cight- 
eenth century. Oneof their seventeen children, Jo- 
seph Elias Montefiore, took his young wife, Rachel, 
daughter of Abraham Lumbroso de Mattos Mocatta, 
ona business journey to Leghorn, where their eldest 
child, Moses, the subject of this article, was born. 
On their return they lived at Kennington, where 
Moses went to school and was apprenticed to a pro- 
vision merchant. Later heentered a counting-house 





Sir Moses Montefiore in 1818, 
(From s sketch by Dighton.) 


in the city ef London, and ultimately becaine one 
of the twelve Jewish brokers then licensed by the 


city. ITis career was not entirely un- 
Jewish checkered by adversity. In 1806 he 
Broker. was dcceived by a man whom he had 


trusted in a large transaction in Ex- 
chequer bills, and had to ask for time in which to 
settle certain obligations. This his high character 
and popularity enabled him to secure. His brother 
Abraham joincd him in business; and they re- 
mained in partnership till 1816. Moses married 
(1812) Judith, daughter of Levi Barent Cohen. 
Levi Barent Cohen was an Ashkenazi, and it was 
a sign of indifference, on 
the part of the Monte- 
fiores, to current preju- 
dice that, although they 
belonged to the London 
Sephardim, they married 
German Jewesses, Mo- 
ses lived in New Court, 
close to his fricnd Roths- 
child; and the brothers 
Montefiore, as the bro- 
kersof that financial gen- 
ius, became wealthy men, 
Moses was able to retire 
fromtheStock Exchange 
in 1821; and in 1824 he 
assisted in founding the 
Alliance Assurance Com- 
pany, of which he was 
the first president. Tle 
was among the founders 
of the Imperial Conti- 
nental Gas Association, 
which extended = gas- 
lighting to the principal 
European cities; and he 
was one of the original 
directors (1825) of the 
Provincial Bank of Tre- 
land, which gained for 
him the honorary free- 
dom of Londonderry. 
For a short time he was 
also a director of the 
South Eastern Railway. 
In 1886 he was madea 
Fellow of the Royal So- 
ciety; and in 1887 he 
was elected sheriff of 
the city of London, being 
the second Jew to fill that 
office (See SALomons, Sir 
David). In the same year he was knighted by Queen 
Victoria on her accession. He had become ac- 
quainted with her in 1834, while she was staying at 
Broadstairs with her mother, the Duchess of Kent, 

to whom he had been able to show 
Dignities. courtesy by placing at her disposal the 

secluded grounds of his house near that 
seaside resort. Jn 1846 he was created a baronet, and 
in 1847 became high sheriff for Kent. He was a 
deputy lieutenant and a magistrate in more than one 
jurisdiction. At an earlier period of his life (1810- 


S569 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Monternsra 





Pid) he had been captain in the Surrey local militia 
und practised assiduously the bugle calls and drill, 
qn part he owed his stately bearing to these early 
days of military training, 

While Sir Moses was winning wealth and social 
distinction, he was living the life of a most pious 
and observant Jew. His diaries record his regular 
attendance at the synagogue, his scrupulous per- 
formance of the functions of a member of the ancient 
Society of Lavadores, which made ita sacred duty to 
perform the last rites for members of the synagogue; 
and they show also that under great difficulties he 
strictly complied with the dictary laws as well as 
with those which enjoin rest and forbid travel upon 
Sabbaths and festivals. 
In pursuance of inflex- 
ible principle, he re- 
sisted all attempts at 
congregational reform. 
The following is an 
account in his own 
language of his life in 
1820: 

“With God's blessing, rise, 
say prayers at 7 o'ciock. 
Breakfast at 9 Attend the 
Stock Exchange, if in Lon- 
don, 10. Dinner, 5. Read, 
write, and learn. if possible, 
Hebrew and French,6. Read 
Bible und sav prayers, 10. 
Then retire. Monday and 
Thursday mornings attend the 
Synagogue. Tuesday and 
Thursday evenings for visit- 
ing.” “IT attended,” he says 
on another occasion, “*many 
meetings at the City of Lon- 
don Tavern, also several 
charitable neetings at Bevis 
Marks, in connection with 
the Spanish and Portuguese 
Synagogue; sometimes pass- 
ing the whole day there from 
ten in the morning till half- 
past eleven at night (Jan. 
25, 1820), excepting two hours 
for dinner in the committee- 
room: answered in the eve- 
Ding 350 petitions from poor 
women, and also made fre- 
quent visits to the Villa Real 
School.” 

He cooperated also 
with the Rothschilds and 
the Goldsmids in the 
movenent for parlia- 
mentary emancipation 
of the Jews. In 1814 he became treasurer of the 
Sephardic Synagogue in London, and in due 
course passed through all its highest offices, be- 
ing six times warden-president. From 1888 to 
1874 he was president of the Board of Deputies of 
British Jews; and on his retirement £12,000 was 
subscribed as a testimonial to him and was used 
by his wish in aid of building industrial dwellings 
at Jerusalem. His time in office was vigorously 
employed in the relief of his suffering brethren. 

Seven times Sir Moses Montefiore visited Pales- 
tine. in 1827, 1888, 1849, 1855, 1857, 1866, and 1875; 
being accompanied by his wife each time before her 
death in 1862, and making the Jast journey when he 





(From s photograph when 100 years old.) 


was ninety-one vears old. Another regular compan- 
ion was Dr. L. Loewe. who became his Hterary ex- 
ecutor. Inthe Holy Land he endowed 

Visits to hospitals and almshouses, set on foot 

Palestine. agricultural enterprises, planted guar- 
dens, and built synagogues and tombs. 

He not only gave bounteously of his own means, 
but administered public and private subveutions, 
among others a fund bequeathed by Judah Touro 
of New Orleans, who left $50,000 to be applied as 
Sir Moses thought fit, for the benefit of the Jews 
inthe Holy Land. The events of these journeys 
were carefully narrated in his own diaries and in 
those of Lady Montefiore, some of which have been 
published in full, while 
others have  unfortue 
nately been destroved. 
though not till extracts 


from them had been 
printed. Besides pass- 


ing references to interest- 


ing personages whom 
the travelers met, the 


diaries furnish inciden- 
tally a history of the 
gradual development of 
the means of travel. In 
their early adventures 
the courageous couple 
cncountered serious dan- 
gers; even in England 
they were shot at, pre- 
sumably by highway- 
men, on the Dover Road. 
But they were not de- 
terred by the fears of 
slavery and imprison- 
ment which then beset 
travelers in the East, or 
by breaking ice or by 
wolves in Russia. On 
one of his journeys 
(1840) Sir Moses obtained 
from the Sultan of Tur- 
key a firman denouncing 
the inveterate charge of 
ritual murder brought 
against the Jews. He 
obtained promises of 
friendliness from two 
ezars (1846 and 1872), 
crossed the desert ot 
the Atlas and at the age of seventy-nine won for 
his brethren the favor of the Sultan of Morocco; made 
an unsuccessful journey to Rome to obtain the re- 
turn to his parents of the boy Mortara 
(1858), and went to Rumania (186%), 
where he presented himself at an open 
window to a mob at the imminent 
risk of his life. It was at the age of seventy-six 
that he went to the office af the London * Times ” 
after midnight, with a letter soliciting relief for the 
Christians of Syria. His own contribution was 
£200, and he collected over £20.000. The affection 
which his magnetic personality and his native good- 
ness inspired can not be exaggerated. In Palestine 


Visits 
Morocco. 


Montefiore THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA - 670 


Mon 





his brethren flocked to kiss the hem of his garment. — pee : rane ae (London), ce = Sn er oy 
‘ er ‘ f 2s, cannes 2 «A 2d, Isdo; Jew. Chron, Aug. 2, ; June Io, A, es 1. 
On his ertering into his one hundredth year (Nov, 8, | Loewe, Diaries of Sir Moses and Lady Montefiore, 1890 ; 


Israel Davis. Sir Moses Montefiore: a Biographical Sketch, 


1883) Queen Victoria, Albert Edward ps 
1884; Lucien Wolf. Sir Moses Montefiore: a Centennial 


His Popu- Prince of Wales, asd many hundreds Biography, London, 1884; Lady Judith Montefiore, Diary 
larity. of his most distinguished fellow citi- of a Visit to Eyypt ‘privately printed, n.d.); Liebermann, 
zens sent telegrams of congratulation. Se Te re-cilbum, 1884; Hayyim Guedalla, 

The birthday was a public festival at Ramsgate, | J. I. Da. 
where he passed the evening of his days. Nathaniel Montefiore: English communal 


Sir Moses was buried at Ramsgate, near the syna- | worker; second son of Abraham Montefiore and 
goguc he had founded, side by side with his wifeinthe | Henrietta, daughter of Mayer A. de Rothschild; 
mausoleum which he had erected for the purpose, a | born in London 1819; died there 1888. He married 
reproduction of the building known as the Tomb of | Emma, the youngest daughter of Sir Isaac Lyon 
Rachel on the Bethlehem road. By his will (proved | Goldsmid. He was trained for the medical profes- 
at £370,000) he directed the continuance of many | sion at Guy’s Hospital and was elected a member of 





SYNAGOGUE AND TOMB OF SIR MOSES MONTEFIORE, RAMSGATE, ENGLAND. 
(From a photograph.) 


and various charities, and among others added to | the Royal College of Surgeons in 1858. He did not 
the endowment of the Montefiore College and Li- | establish a practise, but used his medical knowledge 
brary, Ramsgate, which he had first established in | for the benefit of the inmates of the Beth Holim Hos- 
memory of his wife. Thecollege is now devoted to | pital, an ancient charity of the Spanish-Portuguese 
a few learned men who spend their days in thestudy | Jews of London of which he was treasurer for over 
of the Law. Fora time an institution for younger | a quarter of a century. He filled also numerous 
students was also maintained, but the trustees in ; other communal oftices. He was president of the 
lieu thereof make an annual subvention to Jews’ | Jewish and General Literary Institution, in Leaden- 
College, London. hall street, which was known as “Sussex Hall”, 

Sir Moses Montefiore had no children; but the | president of the Jews’ Infant Schools; and president 
baronetcy was revived by the crown in favor of | of the Jews’ Emigration Society. But mest of his 
Francis Montefiore, grandson of Abraham, Sir | communal work was in connection with the Span- 
Moses’ brother and partner; while hisseat at Rams- | ish-Portuguese congregation, to which most mem- 
gate was by his will entailed upon Joseph Sebag | bers of his family belonged. He served as senior 
(afterward Sir Joseph Sebag-Montefiore), son of | warden of the congregation, president of the board 
Sir Moses’ sister. | of elders, president of the Gates of Hope school, and 


671 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Montefiore 
Month 





represcutative of the congregation on the Board of 
Deputies. Ie was buried in the Balis Pond Ceme- 
tery of the West London Reform Synagogue, by 
the side of his son Leonard. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jew. Chron, and Jew. World, March 30, 1883. 


J I. Hi. 


MONTELIMAR (Hebrew, "NX or Sony 
OTN): A city of the department of the Drdme, 
France. A large number of Jews lived here from 
the beginning of the fourteenth century. They 
possessed a synagogue in the Rue du Puits-Neuf, 
formerly the Rue de la Juiveriec, as well as a school 
situated near the Porte Saint-Martin, a cemetery, 
and a slaughter-house, the privilege of maintaining 
the latter being ratified by the Dauphin Louis in 
1455. 

The condition of the Jews of Montélimar was 
comparatively prosperous. The following were the 
principal men among them during the fourteenth 
and fifteenth centuries: Solomon, Isaac Maignan, 
Lionel de Livron, Josse Nercas, Isaac de Lattes, 
Solomon Massip, Isaac Saul de Mornas, and Bonsen- 
hor Bonafossa. In 1839 and 1340 Samuel ben Judah 
of Marseilles revised at Montélimar his Hebrew 
version (made in 1824) of the “Treatise on the Soul” 
by Alexander Aphrodisius, a work which had been 
translated from Greek into Arabic by Isaac ibn 
Hunain. 

In 1439 the lords of Montélimar required the Jews 
of the city to wear the badge, from which the toler- 
ation of the consuls had hitherto exempted them; 
and this decree was renewed two years later by Jean 
de Poitiers, Bishop of Valence. In 1458 the Jews 
were commanded to attend Christian worship, and 
a preacher was appointed to convert them to Chris- 
tianity. After this the Jewish community gradually 
lost its importance; and in 1468 it contained but 
seven families, which, on account of accusatious— 
admitted to be false by the parliament of Grenoble 
—were maltreated by the inhabitants and expelled 
from the city In that year. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: De Costou, Histoire de Montélimar, 1878, i. 
olds, ii. 570; Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 319, 8813 R. B. J. ix, 
Ge S. K. 


MONTEZINOS, ANTONIO DE (AARON 
LEVI): Marano traveler of the seventeenth century. 
He claimed that while journeying in South America 
about 1641 near Quito, Ecuador, he met with sav- 
ages who practised Jewish ceremonies and recited 
the Suema‘ and who were of the tribe of Reuben. 
He mct other savages of the tribe of Levi. Going 
to Tfolland in 1644 he told this story to Manasseh beu 
Israel; the latter repeated if to Thomas Thorow good, 
by whoin it was printcd in his “Jews in America,” 
pp. 1-9 e¢ sey. It was also published by Manasseh 
ben Isracl in his “ Hope of Israel,” pp. 1-7. 
BIBLioGRaPHY: L. Wolf, Menasseh ben Isracl’s Mission to 

Oliver Cromwell, pp. Xxiv.; Xxvii., 154. 

D. J. 

MONTEZINOS LIBRARY: Division of the 
library of the Portuguese Rabbinical Seminary ‘Ez 
Hayyim at Amsterdam, Holland. It was be- 
queathed in 1889 by D. R. Montezinos (b. Dec. 6, 
1829), the well-known bibliophile of that city, and 
was dedicated on April 10, 1891, after the seminary 


had enlarged its structure in order to accommodate 
the valuable collection. 

The Montezinos Library consists of 20,000 vol- 
umes of Hebraica and Judaica, including a number 
of incunabula and about seventy volumes of re- 
sponsa. Besides, it contains more than 1,000 pam- 
phiets and about 800 portraits of Jewish celebrities. 
The collection includes a number of very rare He- 
braica and Judaica, several of which are not re- 
corded by Jewish bibliographers. Among its man- 
uscripts are to be found a few by Isaac Cohen 
Belinfante, Isaac Sasportas, and David Franco 
Mendes. 

Montezinos, who for some time was in charge of 
the ‘Ez Hayyim library, supervised the arrangement 
of the entire library of the seminary, when his col- 
lection was added to it. 

J. I. G. D. 


MONTGOMERY. See ALABAMA. 
MONTH (Uebrew, “verah,” “hodesh”; plural, 


“yerabim,” “hodashim”): A unit of time; the 
period between one new moon and another. Ac- 


cording to the account of Creation in Genesis, it 
was decreed that the “lesser light” shouid “rule the 
night” and serve “for signs and for scasons” (Gen, 
i. 14). The Psalmist also says, “ He appointed the 
moon for seasons” (Ps. civ. 19). In round numbers 
thirty days constituted a month, as is evident from 
the Flood narrative, counting 150 days for five 
months from the 17th of the second to the 17th of 
the seventh month (Gen. vil. 11, 24; vill. 4): and 
the mourning period, reckoned as a full month in 
Deut. xxi. 18, is elsewhere fixed at thiriy days. 
That twelve months constituted a year aiso is evi- 
dent from the Flood narrative (Gen. viii. 5-18). 

Undoubtedly there was an occasional interpola- 
tion of au extra month to correct the lunar year to 
the solar cvcle; and it is evident from the fact that 
the festivals numed In given mouths—such as Pass- 
over, Pentecost, and Tabernacles—all had to do with 
crops, and therefore solar seasons, that this correc- 
tion to solar time is of the highest antiquity. The 
relation of the months to the signs of the zodiac is 
a further evidence that the solar-lunar year was 
employed, 

Prom the first Babylonian exile the Jews adopted 
the Babylonian names of the months (R. Hanina, in 
Yer. R. H. i. 2). Prior to the Exile the months 
were designated partly by names and partly by 
numbers. Thus Nisan was called * Abib” (Ex. xii. 
2), lyyar= “Ziw” (1 Kings vi. 1, 37), Tishri = “ Ye- 
rah ha-Etanim ” (28. viil. 2), and Heshwan = “ Yerah 
Bul” (¢d. 6, 38). The Babylonian name * Ara-ah- 
sham-nu” means the eighth month = 9}ye"nM. 
According to Kimhi, pwnd is transposed from 
pow"ni). The pronoun “Mar” was at a later 
period sometimes dropped, leaving the name “ Hesh- 
wan,” 

The following names of the months are mentioned 
in post-exilic Biblical writings: Kislew, the seventh 
month, and Shebat, the eleventh month, in Zech. 1. 
7, vii. 1; Kislew, Nisan, and Elul in Neh. i. 1. ii. 
1, vi. 15; Nisan, Siwan, Tebet, and Adar, the 
twelfth month, in Esth. ii. 16, iii. 7, viii. 9. The 
months Tishri, Marheshwan, Iyvar, Tammuz, and 


Monti 
Montpellier 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


672 





Ab are not mentioned in the Bible, but are found in | 
the Talmud, Tishri is characterized as the month of 
the birth of the Patriarchs; Tebet, as the month of 
marriages (Meg. 18a); Nisan, as the month of coro- 
nations (Shab. 87b); Adar, as that cf rejoicing; and 
Ab as the month of mourning (Ta‘an. 26b, 29a). In - 
the Middle Ages Elul became the month of repent- 


Anton de Montoro, who was welcomed by the 
noblest families of Cordova, and whose verse Was 
valued highly by some of the best poets of his time, 
as by the Marquis de Santillana, Juan de Mena, etc., 
was treated with contumely by poets of his own 
race. At sixty-five he wrote a poem to Queen Is- 
abella in which he complains that he is still treated 








ance. See ALMANAC; CALENDAR; NEW Moon; | asa Jew and called “the old. coutemptible Jew.” 
ZODIAC. Commendador Roman, who posed as a pious Cbris- 
TABLE OF THE JEWISH MONTHS. 
: No. of During 20th Cent. Constellations of 
Hebrew Names. Assyrian Names. Daves First of Month Zodiac Corresponding 
y Occurs Between to the Months. 
Ls Se) IGM iarsweserena suena es TaslisPltlsessr56 oo 0440d ees 30 Sept. 6-Oct. 0... ces eeee osixp Libra. 
2 pwroin Marheshwan.............5: A-ra-ab-shain-nu. ... vere eeel 29-30 Oct. 6B-NOV.4......00000: apy Scorpio. 
CMMI nak 5, See eC Ki-Si-li-MU . 06. eeeeeseeeeeees | 20-30 | Nov. 4-Dec. 3........00. nw» Sagittarius. 
4. ASS Teh achecgeecstmiaenesga TPL da ond Rabie steele Sa.ccw's 29 Dec. 4-Jan. 2.....-..0086 "4 Capricornus. 
ae D3 SHOR isecccwes oa Powers pees | SBREDORE tssice eskaseaataw eas 30 Jan. 2-Jan. 31........54- 4 Aquarius. 
6. VAS: AGAIs 10° 3 Sip Ketartcankess| MOAT. s cacniraa st At4eed Ciar 29-30 | Feb.1-March 2.......... Gut Pisces. 
swoants We-Adar (Leap-Year).... -| Arhu-na-ak-ra Ad-da-ru. .... 29 Mareh 3-March 138....... 
7 IDS S DSAMi css poses reroswaees | IND-BAKEADENU 0 5 o.a¢ociseee casas 30 March 18-April J1....... aby Aries. 
8, AWS IVVAy oh 1ediesslasckaecene’ ASU. 25408 chaweheseans: se 29 April 12-May 1l......... 1 Taurus, 
9. TPL BIW Os cease prone? SI-WBN s 65.5:92 Bae Pe SAC eat aed 30 May 1l-June 9.......... oeDINN Gemini. 
10. Pisses NTRS 2a uaa aceate aa am ees PMING- 24 tskaeex taeaeraa 29 June 10-July 9.......... 72D Cancer. 
11. owt. AU sccocavs ema teaeeyeredeany D1 | Pee eee SENT ee ae er 30 July DAU. To... ce cece max Leo. 
12 My Naa datnnd xx vada howe aed Nok oe 5G cakes wees 29 Aug. 8-Sept. 6..........- mona Virgo. 





BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benzinger, Arch. pp. 198-203; Epstein, Mi- | 
Kkadmoniyyot ha-Yehudim, i. 1-30. Vienna, 1887; Leven- 
son, O”2°5 91p>, p. 62, Warsaw, 1878; Weiss and Fried- 
mann, Bet Talniud, ii. 20, 54, 248, 


A. J. D. E. 
MONTI, ANDREA DI. See JOSEPH ZARFATI. 


MONTICELLI: Small town in the province of 
Piacenza, northern Italy, with a Jewish community 
dating from the expulsion of the Jews from the 
duchy of Milan in 1597. The first settlers were the 
Soavi and Sforni families of Cremona, The com- 
munity brought its German ritual from Lombardy, 
and has retained it until the present time. <A soci- 
ety for nursing and for study, entitled “Hebrat 
Bikkur Holim,” founded in the sixteenth century, 
is also still in existence. In 1865 the Jewish inhab- 
itants numbered 148; but in 1901 they had become 
reduced to 32. Flaminio Servi officiated as rabbi in 
1868. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Corriere Israelitico, v. 338. 

G. I. E. 

MONTORO, ANTON DE: Spanish poet of the 
fifteenth century; bornin Montoro 1404; died after 
March, 1477: son of Fernando Alfonso de Baena 
Ventura, and a near relative of the poet Juan Al- 
fonso de Baena. His vocation was that of a “ropero” ; 
he calls himself “el Ropero ” or “ Aljabibe,” both sig- 
nifying a dealer in old clothes. When advanced in 
years he was baptized, but despite his baptism he re- 
mained aJew at heart throughout his life; and in a 
poem to a magistrate in Cordova, his place of resi- 
dence, he laments that, driven by hunger, he had 
had to break the oath of his ancestors and buy pork, 
as he found no other meat in the butcher’s shop. 
Even in his old age he took a lively interest in his 
persecuted coreligionists. Thus he addressed a pa- 
thetic complaint to King Henry IV. in reference 
to the plundering of the houses of the Maranos of 
Carmona in 1474. 


tian, taunted Montoro with the fact that his father 
had been a hazzan; Juan de Valladolid, Rodrigo 
Cota, and others scorned him because of his former 
faith. He was in high favor with D. Pedro de 
Aguilar and with his son D. Alonso Fernandez de 
Aguilar, the noble protector of the Maranos, whom 
he celebrated in several poems. After the persecu- 
tion of the Maranos in March, 1478, Anton de Mon- 
toro, who was also made to suffer under this calam- 
ity, found protection and refuge with D. Alonso de 
Aguilar. He settled in Seville, but soon returned 
to Cordova, where, old and weak, he made his will 
March, 1477, and soon afterward died. His poems 
were collected by Emil Cotarelo y Mori, and pub- 
lished with an excellent introduction and valuable 
notes under the title “ Cancionero de Anton de Mon- 
toro” (Madrid, 1900). 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Sephardim, pp. 85 et seq.; R. BE. 

J. xiii. 261 et seg.; Gratz, Gesch. viii. 306. 

J M. K. 

MONTPELLIER (Hebrew, ySwayny or 
Swaps): Capital of the department of Hérault, a 
part of the old province of Languedoc, France. It 
is sometimes called also “ Har Ga‘ash” = “ Mountain 
of Trembling,” “ Har ha-Nikra Pissulano ” =“ Mount 
Pessulanus,” or simply “Har” = “Mountain.” In 
the Middle Ages Montpellier was divided into two 
distinct cities, one being the capital of the Guillems, 
and the other the fiet of the bishops of Maguelone. 
One of the most important communities of Langue- 
doc existed here from the second half of the 
eleventh century. Through their relations with 
their coreligionists all over the world, the Jews of 
Montpellier helped enormously to build up the 
commerce of the city; and they at the same time 
contributed largely to the development of the school 
of medicine established there in the twelfth century. 
Guillem VIII., Lord of Montpellier, granted them in 
1180 the right to practise medicine; and the kings of 


673 





Aragon and Majorca, James [and James I., merely 
added (in 1272 and 1281 respectively) the proviso 
that the Jewish physicians must pass the regular ex- 
aminations before exercising their profession. The 
progress made by these Jewish physicians was such 
that in 1800, according to Astruc (“Mémoires pour 
Servier 4 VHistoire de la Faculté de Médecine de 
Montpellier,” p. 168), the Jew Jacob 
School of b. Machir, called “ Don Profiat” (Latin, 
Medicine. “Profatius Judxus”), was appointed 
regent of the faculty of medicine. 
James I. interested himself in the Jews on many oc- 
casions, especially in 1252, 1266, and 1268, and con- 
firmed them in all the privileges which they had 
enjoyed under his predecessors. 

These fortunate conditions changed in 1292, when 
Bérenger of Frédol, Bishop of Maguelone, ceded to 
King Philip the Fair of France the Jews then living 
in his territory. They were expelled in 1306, but re- 
turned to Montpellier in 1319, having been recalled 
by King Sancho, who protected them in 1320 against 
the fury of the Pastoureaux. On demand of the 
consuls, King John of France compelled the Jews in 
1363 to wear the Jews’ badge. In 1368 the same 
consuls forbade them to drink or to draw water from 
any well other than that which had been assigned 
to them (“Petit Thalamus,” pp. 166-167). Finally, 
a royal edict issued on Sept. 17, 1894, put an end to 
the existence of the Jewish community of Mont- 
pellier. 

In the sixteenth century a number of Marano 
fugitives from Spain fled to Montpellier. The phy- 
sician Felix Platter of Basel, who resided in the city 
from 1552 to 1559, knew several of these Maranos, 
whom he mentions by name and whose customs he 
describes (autobiography of Felix Platter, ed. Fech- 
ter, Basel, 1840). In the seventeenth century some 
Jews from the Comtat-Venaissin joined the Spanish 
refugees. The parliament of Toulouse authorized 
them at first to remain at Montpellier for one month 
only in each of the four seasons; but thanks to the 
tolerance of the consuls, the assistance of the Mar- 
quis of Grave, proprictor of the markets of Pont- 
Juvénal, and, especially, the protection of Louis 
Basil of Bernage, commissary of Languedoc, the 
Jews, in spite of the most bitter complaints of the 
Christian merchants, established themselves defi- 
nitely in the city. In the beginning of the nine- 
teenth century the Jewish community numbered 105 
persons. 

The site of the Jewish quarter was often changed. 
At first it was near the synagogue and the Jewish 
baths (traces of which still exist in Rue Barralerie 
No: 1), extending northward as far 
as the tolerance of the kings of Ma- 
jorca permitted. The Jews acquired 
some houses near the square of Castel- 
Maton, and spread themselves as far as the right 
side of Rue Vieille-Intendance. By order of the 
Duke of Anjou in 1365 they were restricted to the 
Rue de la Vacherie (“ Vacaria ”), near the gate of La 
Saunerie. In this street was the synagogue which 
the Bishop of Montpellier permitted the community, 
on the representations of Hélias of Loan and Samuel 
Caylli, to erect in 1887, in consideration of the pay- 
ment of 400 pounds Tours currency. Finally, in 

VIII.—438 


Jewish 
Quarter. 


Mo 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Montpellier 


the beginning of the sixteenth century the Jews es- 
tablished themselves in the blind alley of the Vieux 
Consulat, called “Juiverie” or “Juzétarie,” which 
has now disappeared. 

The Jews owned successively two cemeteries. 
One of these was situated between the gates of La 
Saunerie and St. Guillem. In 1263 James I. pre- 
sented it to the Cistercians of Valmagne, who estab- 
lished a theological college there. The other ceme- 
tery was in the suburb of Villefranche, between 
the present seminary and Boutonnet. It was sold 
in 1306 by Philip the Fair; but in 1819, by permis- 
sion of King Sancho, the Jews of Montpellier re- 
purchased it. In 1287 James I. permitted the Jews 
to establish their own slaughter-house. A_ police 
regulation of 1364 forbade the Christian butchers to 
sellor to permit the sale of meat to the Jews (“ Petit 
Thalamus,” p. 166). 

Benjamin of Tudela, who visited Montpellier in 
1165, speaks in terms of the highest praise of the 
scholars of that city, who devoted themselves to the 
study of the Talmud. The Jewish school was a 
very important one. It was compared to the San- 
hedrin of Jerusalem (“Har ha-Bayit”; “Temim 
Deim,” No. 7) and to the great school of Granada 
(“Rimmon Sefarad”; Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl, Hebr. 
MSS.” p. 17), and was sometimes called “the Holy 
Mountain,” “the Mother of Israel” (“Har ha-Ko- 
desh,” “Em le-Yisrael”; Solomon ben Adret, Re- 

sponsa, i. 418). This school issued the 
Rabbinical first anathema against the writings of 
Schools. Maimonides. In 12382 RabbiSolomon b. 
Abraham together with two of his pu- 
pils, Jonah b, Abraham Gerundi and David b. Saul, 
prohibited the “Moreh Nebukim.” He even went 
so far as to invoke the ecclesiastical authorities 
against his adversaries and to denounce Maimonides’ 
work as impious and injurious to the Christian 
faith. But the only result was that the adversaries 
of Maimonides were declared to be calumniators; 
and it is said that some of them were condemned to 
have their tongues burned. 

After a time, however (1803-6), the battle against 
Maimonides’ writings waged afresh. The chief 
author of the new attack was another rabbi of 
Montpellier, Abba Mari of Lunel. Two of his par- 
tizans, Todros of Beaucaire and Simeon b. Joseph, 
called “En Duran of Lunel,” signed, together with 
twenty-four notables of the community of Montpel- 
lier, the letter which he addressed to Solomon ben 
Adret of Barcelona. But Abba Mari found even at 
Montpellier bitter opponents, in the above-men- 
tioned Jacob b. Machir, in the physician Solomon 
of Lunel, in Judah b, Moses ibn Tibbon, and espe- 
cially in Jedaiah ben Abraham BEDERsI, one of 
Maimonides’ most enthusiastic admirers. The con- 
troversy was carried on bitterly by both sides, and 
it was stopped only by the cruel persecutions at- 
tendant on the expulsion of the Jews from France 
by Philip the Fair in 1306. 

In addition to those that have been referred to 
above, the following scholars of Montpellier should 
be mentioned here: Abraham b. David of Pos- 
quieres (RABaD IIT.), Moses b. Samuel ibn Tibbon, 
Judah (Aryeh) Harari, Elijah, Levi b. Abraham of 
Villefranche, Reuben b. Isaac, Aaron b. Joseph ha. 


Montreal 
Monuments 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


674. 


—_—_——_———— ss ——§_e_ees i oo~- roo 


Levi, and Abraham Bonet b. Meshullam b. Solomon 
Abigdor. 

In 1902 there were from thirty to thirty-five Jew- 
ish families in Montpellier, subject to the authority 
of the consistory of Marseilles. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Astruc, Mémoires pour Servir d V Histoire 
de la Faculté de Médecine de Montpellier, pp. 7 et seq.; 
D’Aigrefeuille, Histoire de Montpellier, 2d ed., tii. 518; 
Germain, Histotre de la Commune de Montpellier, i., In- 
troduction and pp. 61, 240; ii. 420; iii. 92, 107, 246 et seqg.; 
Dom Vaisséte, Hist. Générale du Languedoc, ii. 151, 418; iii. 
28, 119; Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, pp. 514, 
593-623, 647-695; Gratz, Gesch. Vii. 38 et seg.; Carmoly, Hist, 
des Médecins Juifs, pp. 73,90; Saige, Les Juifs du Langue- 
doc, pp. 100, 102, 128, 808-319, 326; Gariel, Ser. Praes. part 
i., p. 436; Bédarride, Les Juifs en France, pp. 226, 236, 465— 
466, 539-542: Depping, Les Juifs dans le Moyen Age, pp. 
182-133: AR. H. J. xix. 259, xxii. 264, xxiii. 265, xxiv. 272, 
XxXxiii. 283, xxxiv. 276, xxxv. 91; Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 
322-335 ; S. Kahn, Les Ecoles Juives et la Faculté de Méde- 
cine de Montpellier, pp. 6 et seqg.; L. Guiraud, Recherches 
Topographiques sur Montpellier au Moyen Age, in Mé- 
moires de la Société Archéologique de Montpellier, 2a 
series, i, 208-213, 


8. S. K. 

MONTREAL: Metropolis of the Dominion of 
Canada, situated on an island in the St. Lawrence 
River; the most important center of Jewish popula- 
tion in British North America. In 1901 the Jewish 
population of Montreal was 6,790. Owing to the 
large influx of settlers from eastern Europe since 
that date the present (1904) Jewish population is 
about 15,000 in a total population of 370,000, in- 
cluding the suburbs. For the history of its com- 
munity see Jew. Encyc. iii. 524 et seg., s.v, CAN- 
ADA. In religious, philanthropic, and educational 
work the Jews of Montreal have shown much ac- 
tivity, and their communal organizations are nu- 
merous and important. The first congregation was 
founded in 1768, but it was not until 1858 that the 
community had grown sufficiently large to support 
a second synagogue. In 1882 a third congregation 
was formed, and between that year and the present 
(1904) the growth of the community has been so 
rapid that eleven other congregations have been or- 
ganized ; some of these havea large membership, and 
possess commodious synagogues, while some have 
hardly passed the formative stage. In the western 
part of the city are the places of worship of the con- 
gregation of Spanish and Portuguese Jews, Shearith 
Israel (organized in 1768); of the English, German, 
and Polish congregation, Shaar Hashamayim (1858); 
and of Temple Emmanuel (1882). Other congre- 
gations are the B’nai Jacob (Russian; 

Congrega- 1885), the Beth David (Rumanian; 


tions. 1888), the Shaaré Tefilla (Austro-Hun- 
garian; 1892), and the Chevra Kadisha 
(1893). The more recently established congregations 


are: the Beth Hamidrash Hagadol, Chevra Shass 
(1894), the Aavath Achim (1896), the K. K. Ohel 
Moshé (1902), the Chevra Tillim (1902), the Beth 
Israel, Chevra Shass (1903), the K. K. Adath Jeshu- 
run (Galician; 1903), the Kether Torah (1903), and 
the Tifereth Israel (1904). All the congregations 
are Orthodox with the exception of Temple Em- 
manuel, whose founders introduced Reform when 
the congregation was organized. 

The secular education of Jewish children in the 
Province of Quebec is provided for by a bill passed 
by the legislature in 1903. By the “ Provincial 
Education Act” Protestant and Catholic school com- 
missioners maintain separate public schools. Pre- 


vious to 1908 Jews were given the option of con- 
tributing their taxes to either the Protestant or 

Catholic panel. Generally they paid 
Education. their taxes into the former, and sent 

their children either to the Protestant 
public schools or to Jewish schools subsidized by 
the commissioners. So loug as the number of Jewish 
pupils formed but a small ratio of those attending, 
there were no ditlicultics, but with the growth of 
the population serious differences arose. The law 
attributed the tax to the landlord, whether paid by 
him or by the tenant, and as the ratio of Jewish 
landowners was small, this led to the claim that the 
Jewish contribution to the tax was not in propor- 
tion to the number of Jewish pupils attending the 
schools of the Protestant Board. Although the 
Protestant commissoners continued to receive Jewish 
pupils at their schools, they declined to acknowl- 
edge any obligation to educate children of the Jew- 
ish faith whose parents were not owners of immov- 
able property subject to taxation for school purposes; 
and they claimed the right to refuse to receive Jew- 
ish pupils in the event that the schools should be- 
come too crowded. 

A crisis was provoked when a scholarship won by 
a Jewish pupil was withheld by the Protestant com- 
missioners. The case was carried into the courts in 
1908, and the validity of the Protestant commission- 
ers’ contention was judicially established. Vigorous 
measures were promptly taken to alter an act which 
was soopposed to the full civil rightssecured tothe 
Jews by the act of 1831. Public opinion was unan- 
imous in demanding that the anomalies of the law 
should be corrected. A committee of the Jewish 
Educational Rights Movement, representative of 
every section of the community, waited on the gov- 
ernment, and with the cooperation of the Protestant 
commissioners a law was passed in April, 1903, 
enacting that all Jews were to pay their taxes into 
the Protestant panel and enjoy equal rights with 
the Protestants in the schools under the Protestant 
commissioners. A conscience clause was provided 
protecting Jewish children in their religious ob- 
servances, | 

In addition to those that attend the ordinary pub- 
lic schools a large number of Jewish children are 
educated at the school attached to the Baron de 
Hirsch Institute; they receive instruction in He- 
brew and in secular subjects, the cost in the case of 
the latter being assumed by the Protestant Board. 
A night-school is also connected with the Baron de 
Hirsch Institute. The Talmud Torah Association 
(founded 1896) maintains a large school for the train- 
ing of children in Jewish religion and history and in 
the Hebrew language. Instruction in these subjects 
is imparted also in the several schools supported by 
the congregations, 

The Jewish philanthropic organizations of Mon- 
treal are numerous, The excellent work performed 
by The Baron de Hirsch Institute and Hebrew 
Benevolent Society in relieving distress and assist- 
ing immigrants has been mentioned in the article 
Canaba, referred to above. Other associations 
which have performed important charitable work 
are the Ladies’ Hebrew Benevolent Society (founded 
1877), the Ladies’ Chevra Kadisha (1878), the He- 


675 


brew Sick Benefit Association (1892), the Hebrew 

Benevolent Loan Society (18938), the Hebrew Young 

Ladies’ Sewing Society (with Diet 

Organiza- Dispensary ; 1894), the Hebrew Ladies’ 

tions. Aid Society (1894), the Charity So- 

ciety of the Chevra Tillim (1898), and 

the Jewish Endeavor Sewing School (1902). Several 

of the congregations maintain theirown aid societies 
and sewing circles. 

Montreal is the headquarters of the Federation of 
Zionist Societies of Canada, and in 1904 supported 
six local branches of the movement. Among other 
communal organizations are four lodges of the Inde- 
pendent Order of the Sons of Benjamin, the Montreal 
Lodve of B’nai B'rith, the Zion Cadet Corps and 
Jewish Lads’ Brigade, the Montetiore Club, the 
Maimonides Literary Circle, the Gereuth Circle, the 
Young Men’s Hebrew Association, and the Montreal 
Branch of the Jewish Theological Seminary; the 
Anglo-Jewish Association maintained a branch in 
Montreal from 1881 to 1891, and the Kesher Shel 
Barzel supported a lodge from 1872 to 1890. In 1895 
the Montreal Chovevei Zion Society No. 2 pur- 
chased 4,000 “duman” of land in Palestine, east of 
the Jordan, for colonization; this land, however, 
was afterward transferred to other hands. Several 
other philanthropic and literary societies established 
in the earlier days of the community have been 
replaced in their activities by later organizations. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Statutes of Province of Quebec, 1903; Jew- 

ish Year-Book (London), 1903; Ville-Marie, Montreal 

ieee and Present, Sandham, 18/0; Gazetteer of Montreal, 

A. C. I. bE 8. 

MONUMENTS IN THEIR BEARING ON 
BIBLICAL EXEGESIS: For centuries the evi- 
dence of the authenticity of the Old Testament 
Scriptures had to be sought from within; of con- 
temporaneous external testimony there was practi- 
cally nothing. All this is now changed. The civi- 
lized nations by whom Israel was surrounded have 
risen, as it were, from the dead, and there is at 
hand as much information about the culture of 
Egypt and western Asia in the Mosaic age as about 
the culture of Athens in the age of Pericles. The 
books of the Old Testament are taking their place as 
part of a vast and ever-increasing literature which 
explains and illustrates them and at the same time 
affords the only sure and certain test of their 
veracity. 

The belief that the use of writing for literary pur- 
poses was of comparatively late date has been swept 
away forever. There were schools and libraries in 
Egypt and Babylonia long before Abraham was 
born. Under the dynasty of Hammurabi or Am- 
raphel, the contemporary of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 1), 
Babylon was the center of a great literary move- 
ment. Qld literary works were reedited, and new 
poets and writers arose who cast the ancient legends 
and traditions of the country into literary form. In 
Egypt there was already an extensive literature, 
and “The Proverbs of Ptah-hotep,” of which there 
is now a copy in the Louvre, Paris, was written in 
the time of the Old Empire or at least as early as 
3,000 B.C. 

The Mosaic age, accordingly, belongs to a late 
epoch in the history of Oriental literature; and there 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Montreal 
Monuments 


is no need for surprise at finding that it was em- 
phatically an age of readers and writers, of schools 
and students, of books and correspondence. The 
cuneiform tablets discovered in 1887 at Tell el- 
Amarna in Egypt have shown that from one end of 
the civilized world to the other letters 
El-Amarna were being constantly sent, sometimes 
Tablets. on the most trivial of matters; that 
Canaan was the center of the corre- 
spondence; and that it was carried on in the lan- 
guage and script of Babylonia. As the language of 
Babylonia was not that of most of the writers it is 
evident that schools must have existed throughout 
the civilized world of the East in which the foreign 
language and writing were taught and learned, as 
well as libraries in which Babylonian books and the 
native archives could be preserved. Indeed, among 
the El-Amarna tablets fragments of Babylonian lit- 
erary works have been found, some of which were 
used for purposes of study. Fragments of diction- 
aries have also been discovered. When it is remem- 
bered that among the correspondents of the Egyp- 
tian court are Bedouin sheiks and a Canaanitish 
lady, an idea may be formed of the extent to which 
education had spread. At all events Moses could 
have written the Law, and some at least of the 
Israelites could have read what was written. More- 
over, there was plenty of material in the libraries of 
Canaan, not to speak of those of Egypt and Baby- 
Ionia, with the help of which the historian could 
have compiled a truthful history of the past. Uru- 
salim, or Jerusalem, and Gezer, more especially, 
are prominent in the El-Amarna letters. 

From the Babylonian inscriptions it has been 
learned that in the Abrahamic age Canaan was a 
province of the Babylonian empire, and that colo- 
nies of “ Amorites,” as its inhabitants were called, 
were settled in Babylonia itself. One of the wit- 
nesses to a contract dated in the reign of Hammu- 
rabi’s grandfather is an “ Amorite,” the son of Abi- 
ramu or Abram. For some years Babylonia had 
been under the domination of Elam, and Eri-aku or 
Arioch, the son of an Elamite prince, had been es- 
tablished at Larsa in the south of the country, but 
Hammurabi in the thirty-second year of his reign at 
last succeeded in shaking off the Elamite supremacy 
and in ruling over a united Babylonian empire. 
The Babylonian monuments have proved that the 
migration of Abraham was no isolated or unusual 
event; and they have further proved that the polit- 
ical position described in Gen. xiv. is in strict accord- 
ance with fact. They have also shown that Baby- 
lon was at the time under the rule of kings who 
belonged to the western branch of the Semitic race, 
who revered the god Samu (Sumu) or Shem, and 
who spoke a language resembling those of Canaan 
and southern Arabia rather than that of Babylonia. 
Canaanites were settled in Babylonia; and among 
them are found the names of Abram (Abi-ramu), 
Jacob (Ya‘kub-ilu), and Joseph (Yasupu-ilu). 

In the sixteenth century n.c. Canaan passed from 
the Babylonians to the Egyptians. The kings of 
the eighteenth dynasty made it an Egyptian prov- 
ince, so that Canaan became for a while the political 
brother of Mizraim and Cush. The same close in- 
tercourse which in the Abrahamic age had existed 


Monuments 
Monzon 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


between Canaan and Babylonia now existed between | 


Canaan and Egypt. In Egypt itself the land of 
Goshen has been rediscovered by Pro- 
fessor Naville. It lay in the Wadi 
Tumilat on the southeastern border of 
the Delta, in touch with Asia, and 
separate from the cultivated land of 
Egypt proper. The Pharaoh Me(r)neptah states 
that it had been handed over as pasturage to “ for- 
ejgn” herdsmen from the southot Canaan. Naville 
has discovered the site of Pithom also, now Tell el- 
Maskhuta, in the district of Succoth (Thukut) and 
on the edge of the land of Goshen. It was built by 
Rameses IT., and the store-chambers have been 
found in which provisions were laid up for the sol- 
diers and travelers who passed into Asia. Rameses 
IT. was the builder also of the city of Rameses (Ex. 
i. 11), an account of which is given in a papyrus. 
Zoan, moreover, was restored by him and made one 
of the residences of the court. 

Rameses I., the grandfather of Rameses IT., was 
the founder of the nineteenth dynasty and the repre- 
sentative of a national reaction against the Semitic 
tendencies of the kings who had immediately pre- 
ceded him. The Canaanitish oflicials who had held 
high places at court were driven away, and the 
Semitic form of religion which had been introduced 
by the Pharaoh himself was suppressed. In accord- 
ance With this policy, every effort was made to 
wenken the Semitic settlers who still remained in 
Egypt. An explanation is thus afforded of the 
treatment of the Israclites; they were turned into 
royal bondsmen, and the male children were des- 
troyed. The massacre is referred to in a hymn of 
victory in honor of Me(rjneptah, the son and suc- 
cessor of Rameses II., which was discovered by 
Flinders Petrie at Thebes. Tere it is said that “the 
seed” of the “I-s-r-a-i-l-u,” or Israelites, had been 
destroyed, so that the women of Khar or Edom were 
left, “like the widows of Egypt,” without husbands. 
The hymn was written just after the defeat of the 
Libyan hordes who had invaded the Delta in the 
fifth year of Me(r)neptah; and, while all the other 
peoples mentioned in it have a country assigned 
to them, the Israelites alone are without local habi- 
tation. They must therefore already have left 
Egypt and not as yet been settledin Palestine. The 
Exodus was probably effected under cover of the 
Libyan invasion; Me(r)neptah states that the in- 
vaders had encamped at the western cxtremity of 
the land of Goshen, where they were in contact with 
“the foreign ” herdsmen, while three years later an 
Egyptian official writes to the Pharaoh that the dis- 
trict had been deserted and that he had accordingly 
allowed a fresh body of herdsmen from Edom to oc- 
cupy it. It may be added that the geographical 
background of the Exodus as described in the Pen- 
tateuch is the eastern Delta as it was in the time of 
the nineteenth dynasty, and at no subsequent date, 
and that even the name of Moses appears as 
“Messu” or “ Messui” in the Egyptian inscriptions 
of that period. There was a Messui, for example, 
who was governor of Ethiopia in the reign of 
Me(r)neptah. 

The conquest of southern Palestine by a king of 
Aram-naharaim in the early days of the Judges has 


Canaan 
Under the 
Egyptians. 


a, 


mm I 


been explained by the El-Amarna tablets, from 
which it has been learned that Aram-nabaraim, or 
Mitanni as it was called by its inhabitants, interfered 
from time to time in the internal politics of Canaan. 
The King of Jerusalem refers to its intrigues in his 
letters to the Egyptian court, and Rameses HI., the 
contemporary of Othniel, includes Mitanni among 
his enemies. 

A flood of light has been thrown upon the later 
history of Jerusalem by the Assyrian monuments, 
The Biblical chronology, so long the despair of his- 
torians, has been corrected by means of the syn- 
chronisins established between Assyrian and IJsrael- 
itish history. Shalmaneser II, (858-823 3.c.) made 
repeated attacks on Hamath and Damascus, and in 
853 defeated a league which had been formed by 

Hamath, Arvad, Ammon, and other 


Biblical — states under the leadership of Hadad- 
Chronol- ezer of Damascus, the Ben-hadad of 
ogy. the Old Testament. The decisive bat- 


tle took place at Karkar, among the 
allies being Ahab of Israel, who contributed 2,000 
chariots and 10,000 men. Twelve years later Jehu 
of Beth-omri or Samaria is met with, paying tribute 
to the Assyrian king. His envoys are represented 
on a black obeiisk now in the British Museum. The 
capture of Damascus by Assyria in 804 (when 
Samaria again paid tribute to the Assyrian con- 
queror) had doubtless much to do with the successes 
of Jeroboam IT. (I Kings xiv. 25, 28). The older 
Assyrian dynasty was overthrown in April, 745, and 
the throne seized by Pul, who took the name of 
Tiglath-pileser IIT. The Assyrian army was reor- 
ganized, and a new policy was entered upon, that of 
uniting the whole of western Asia under the rule of 
Nineveh. Jn 738 tribute was paid to Assyria by 
Menahem of Samaria and Rezon of Damaseus; and 
the appeal of Ahaz for help in 734 gave Tiglath- 
pileser a further opportunity of asserting his suze- 
rainty over Palestine. Rezon was blockaded in his 
capital, while Samaria, Ammon, Moab, and Philistia 
were overrun. In 732 Damascus was taken, Rezon 
put to death, and his kingdom placed under an As- 
syrian prefect. Pekah had already been murdcred, 
and Hoshea, an Assyrian nominee, placed upon the 
throne, a fine of 10 (?) talents of gold and 1,000 of 
silver being exacted from him. After this Tiglath- 
pileser held an assembly of the subject princes; 
among them was Ahaz, to whom the Assyrian 
scribes give his full name of Jeho-ahaz (see IT Kings 
xvi. 10). Tiglath-pileser died in Dec., 727, and was 
succeeded as king by Ulula, who took the name of 
Shalmaneser TV. The revolt of Hoshea caused him 
to besiege Samaria: but before the siege was ended 
he died (Dec., 722), and another usurper, Sargon, 
made himself king. Sargon soon captured Samaria, 
and carried the upper and military classes into 
captivity. The captives amounted in all to 27,280 
persons, but only fifty chariots were found in the 
city. Samaria was now placed under an Assyrian 
governor. 

The death of Shalmaneser had allowed the Baby- 
lonians to recover their independence under a “ Chal- 
dean ” from the Persian Gulf, Merodach-baladan by 
name. For some years Sargon was too much occu- 
pied in fighting against his northern neighbors to 


G77 


ere 


turn to the south. But by 711 B.c. his hands were 
free, and Merodach-baladan accordingly began to 
look for allies. An embassy was sent to Hezekiah, 
and an anti-Assyrian league was formed in the west 
between Judah, Edom, Moab, and Egypt, of which 
Ashdod (at that time under the suzerainty of Judah, 
like the rest of Philistia) was the head. But Sargon 
moved too rapidly for the allies. Ashdod was taken 
by the tartan or commander-in-chief; the states of 
southern Syria were compelled once more to pay 
tribute; and Sargon himself invaded Babylonia. 
In 709 he entered Babylon in triumph, and Meyro- 
dach-baladan fied to his ancestral domains. 

Sargon was murdered in 705 B.c., and his son 
Sennacherib succeeded him in the following July. 
In 701 the revolt of Hezekiah and the neighboring 
princes, who had trusted to Egyptian help, brought 
Sennacherib to Palestine. The Sidonian king fled to 

Cyprus; Ammon, Moab,and Edom sub- 

Assyrio- mitted; Judah was wasted with fire and 

logical sword, and Hezekiah alone held out be- 
Evidence. hind the strong wallsof Jerusalem. He 

was, however, compelled to restore to 
Ekron its former ruler, whom he had imprisoned in 
Jerusalem in consequence of his faithfulness to As- 
syria. Tirhakah of Egypt indeed came to Heze- 
kiah’s assistance, but was defeated at Eltekeh, and 
Hezekiah vainly endeavored to buy off his offended 
suzerain by numerous presents, which included, 
according to Sennacherib, 30 talents of gold, 800 
talents of silver, his Arab body-guard, his daugh- 
ters, singing men and singing women, and furni- 
ture inlaid with ivory. The Jewish king was shut 
up in his capital, “like a bird in a cage,” but 
suddenly, for reasons which Sennacherib naturally 
does not state, the Assyrian forces were withdrawn 
and the rebellious vassal remained unpunished. 
Sennacherib had to content himself with the pres- 
ents sent to him at Lachish—the capture and 
plunder of which are represented in a bas-relief now 
in the British Museum—and with the spoil of the 
country districts, 200,150 Jews being carried into 
captivity. 

Sennacherib was murdered by two of his sons in 
Dec., 681 3B.c.; but a battle soon afterward near 
Malatiyeh placed the crown on the head of Esar- 
haddon, who formally ascended the throne at Nine- 
veh in May, 680. Esar-haddon adopted a policy of 
conciliation, one result of which was that Judah re- 
turned to its allegiance, and the name of Manasseh 
appearsamong his tributaries. Babylon, which had 
been destroyed by Sennacherib, was restored and 
made one of the capitals of the empire (see II 
Chron. xxxiii. 11). The conquest of Egypt was ef- 
fected by Esar-haddon and completed by his suc- 
cessor, Assurbanipal, in whose reign Thebes, the No- 
amon of Nah. iii. 8 (R. V.), was razed to the ground. 

The inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar and his suc- 
cessors which have been thus far found contain but 
few references to political events, and therefore do 
not touch directly upon the Old Testament, The 
invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar, however, is 
mentioned as taking placein the thirty-seventh year 
of his reign (see Jer. xliii. 10-13), and there exists a 
very full account of the conquest of Babylonia by 
Cyrus, and of the peaceful occupation of Babylon by 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Monuments 
Monzon 


his general Gobryas. Belshazzar, the eldest son of 
Nabonid, the last Babylonian king, is also named in 
the inscriptions; he seems to have been in command 
of the Babylonian army, and he is found acting asa 
wool-merchant and paying tithes to the temple of 
the sun-godat Sippara. The restoration of the vari- 
ous exilesin Babylonia with the images of their gods 
(or, in the case of the Jews, their sacred vessels) is 
alluded to by Cyrus ina proclamation issued by him 
shortly after his occupation of Babylon. 

Outside the cuneiform inscriptions the most im- 
portant illustration of Old Testament history comes 
from the inscription of the Moabite king Mesha 
which was discovered at Diban or Dibon in 1868. 
In this reference is made to the “oppression” of 
Moab by Omri and Ahab, and to its successful revolt 
under Mesha and still more successful war against 
Israel. Mesha describes also his restoration of the 
ruined Moabite towns, as well as of his capital, with 
the help of Israelitish captives. See MoaBiTE 


STONE; also ASSYRIOLOGY; BABYLONIA; SILOAM 
INSCRIPTION. 
E. C. A. HI. SB. 


MONZON: Town near Lerida in the ancient 
kingdom of Aragon, Spain. It had a considerable 
Jewish community, the members of which were en- 
gaged in business, especially money-lending. In 1260 
Solomon de Daroca was one of the wealthiest Jews in 
Monzon; he was probably also a farmer of the taxes. 
He often advanced large sums of money to the court, 
and received as security the taxes of the Jewries of 
Monzon and Lerida. In 1262 he appears as lease- 
holder of the salt-works of Arcos (Jacobs, “Sources,” 
Nos. 221, 249, 336 ef seq.). 

When the Jews of Aragon were called upon to 
render King James IJ. pecuniary assistance in his 
war against Sicily, the Jews of Monzon, by a special 
agreement with the king, were exempted from 
contributing. During the bitter persecution of 
the Jews of Aragon in 13849 the Jews of Monzon 
fasted and prayed and fortified themselves within 
the Jewry, which they did not leave until the dan- 
ger had passed. According to Jewish chronicles, a 
general massacre of the Monzon Jews took place on 
the middle days of a certain Passover festival. 
Some Jews were engaged in playing blind man’s 
buff, when a quarrel arose between them and cer- 
tain Christians who were passing by. In order to 
avenge themselves on the Jews, the Christians 
lodged a complaint against them with the justice, 
who believed their statements. Without, however, 
awaiting the results of an investigation the people 
fell upon the Jews and caused terrible bloodshed, 
while many children were forcibly baptized (“Shebet 
Yehudah,” p. 39). This massacre occurred probably 
in 1891, in which year several Jews in Monzon 
submitted to baptism. 

Among the richest Jews in Monzon at that time 
were the Zaportas, of which family several members 
were converted. Louis Zaporta’s daughter married 
a son of the first duke of Villahermosa. Jaime 
Ram, the son of Rabbi Ram (the word “Ram” being 
formed perhaps of the initial letters of “ Rabbi 
Abraham [or Aaron] Monzon”), was considered one 
of the leading jurists of his time. The Jewish com- 
munity of Monzon, which in the beginning of the 


Monzon 
Morais 


fifteenth century paid 350 sueldos in taxes, was rep- 
resented at the Tortosa disputation by Don Joseph 
ha-Levi and R. Yom-Tob Carcosa. The study of 
the Talmud was pursued with zeal at Monzon; and 
the rabbinical college there was recognized by Solo- 
mon b. Adretas among the foremostof theday. At 
Monzon lived En-Parid Saladin, who was among 
Isaac ben Sheshet’s opponents when the latter 
was rabbi in Saragossa; Judah Alshech; Hayyim 
Emtabuch (?), who corresponded with Isaac ben 
Sheshet; the industrious translator Elijah Habillo; 
and others. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rios, Hist. ii. 146; iii. 82, 91; Isaac b. Sheshet, 
Responsa, Nos. 314 et seq., 481, 483, 495 et seg., 507; Shebct 
Yehudah, p. 68; Joseph ha-Kohen, ‘Emek ha-Baka, p. 60. 
D. M. K. 
MONZON, ABRAHAM (the Elder): Rabbi 

of the latter part of the sixteenth century; died at 

Constantinople. He was a pupil of Bezaleel Ash- 

Kenazi, and on account of his knowledge and acu- 

ep was called by his contemporaries “Sinai we- 

‘Oker Harim” = “ Polyhistor, and Eradicator of 

Mountains.” He officiated as rabbi first in Egypt, 

but later went to Constantinople, where he remained 

until his death. He was an excellent scribe, and 
wrote many Torah scrolls, which are still extant in 

Egypt. He was also the author of a large number 

of decisions and responsa, which are included in 

great part in the collections of Samuel of Medina 

(ii. 175 et seg.), Solomon ben Abraham Cohen (ii. 5; 

ili, 2, 20 et seq.), Abraham de Boton (Nos. 28, 29), 

and Joseph di Trani (i. 104, 121, 122, 144; ii. 40). 

Other respousa of his, as well as his novell, his 

collections of “derashot,” and his defense of Vi- 

tal against Menahem di Lonsano, still exist in 

manuscript. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 4lb; Azulai, 
Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 13; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 388. 
M. K. 


E. C. 

MONZON, ABRAHAM (the Younger): 
Rabbinical and Talmudic scholar of the middle of 
the sixteenth century. He was originally from 
Tetuan in Morocco, where he was engaged in com- 
merce. He left that city and settled successively in 
Algiers, Oran, and Cairo. At Cairo a generous 
patron enabled him to devote his time to study, 
while Jonah Nabon of Jerusalem was one of his cor- 
respondents. Monzon was the author of the follow- 
ing works, all of which exist in manuscript: “ Toze’ot 
Hayyim,” a reply to the “ ‘Ez ha-Hayyim” of Hay- 
yim Abulafia; “Eshel Abraham,” a collection of re- 
sponsa; “Shulhan Shabbat,” a commentary on the 
Talmudic treatise Shabbat; and “‘Ez ha-Da/‘at,” a 
commentary on the Yoreh De‘ah. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii. 152; Hazan, 
Ha-Ma'‘alot li-Shelomoh, p. 5. = 
M. K.—M. Fr. 


He, 

MOON.—Biblical Data: The most common 
Hebrew word for the moon is “yerah,” the root of 
which is probably akin to “arah,” so that the mean- 
ing of the term would be “the wanderer.” Poetic- 
ally, it is called, on account of its whiteness, “leba- 
nah,” a term occurring in the Bible three times only 
(Cant. vi. 10; Isa. xxiv. 23, xxx. 26). The word 
“hodesh,” which also occurs thrice (J Sam. xx. 5 and 
18; If Kings iv. 23), as its meaning indicates, denotes 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


678 


the New Moon. In the narrative of the Creation, 
the moon is indicated, without any special name, as 
one of the two great luminaries. Relatively to the 
sun, it is “the lesser light to rule the night”; and 
it is to serve together with the sun for signs, seasons, 
days, and years (Gen. i. 14, 16). In Ps. civ. 19 
it is expressly stated that the moon was created in 
order to indicate the seasons. Its course, like that 
of the sun, was stopped by the divine will (Josh. 
x. 18). 

Like the other celestial bodies, the moon was be- 
lieved to have an influcnce on the universe. Its in- 
jurious influence on man is referred to in Ps. cxxi. 
6, which passage probably refers to the blindness 
which, according to Eastern belief, results from 
sleeping in the moonlight with uncovered face 
(Carne, “ Letters from the East,” p. 77). It was also 
believed that the moon caused epilepsy (comp. the 
Greek ocAnvagopuevog and the Latin “lunaticus” ; 
Matt. iv. 24). On the other hand, there are “ precious 
things put forth by the moon” (Deut. xxxiii. 14); 
that is to say, the growth of certain plants is influ- 
enced by it. Steuernagel, however, thinks the allu- 
sion is to the dew. 

The moon was regarded by all Oriental nations 
as a divinity, whose worship was forbidden to 
the Israelites (Deut. xvii. 3). Nevertheless, the lat- 
ter practised for a long time the cult of the “queen 
of heaven,” making sacrifices to her (Jer. vii. 18, 
xliv. 17). Kissing the hand on seeing the moon, an 
act of adoration, is referred to in Job xxxi. 26-27. 
The moon-shaped ornaments which adorned the 
necks of the Midianite camels in the time of Gideon 
(Judges viii. 21, 26) and the “round tires like the 
moon” of the Israelitish women (isa. iii. 18) were 
probably results of the same idolatrous tendency. 
The moon is frequently used in figurative language: 
it is the emblem of beauty (Cant. vi. 10) and of 
eternity (Ps. lxxii. 5, 7; Ixxxix. 37). Its eclipse (Isa. 
xiii. 10, xxiv. 28; Joel ii. 10) and its turning to 
blood (2d. ii. 31) are tokens that the day of God’s 
wrath is near. The light of the moon will be as 
the light of the sun when Yuwu shall have restored 
His people to their former state (Isa. xxx. 26). See 
CALENDAR; MONTH. 

In Rabbinical Literature: Referring to 
Gen. i. 16, where the moon and sun are first called 
“the two great lights” and the moon is then styled 
“the lesser light,” R. Simeon b. Pazzi declared that 
at the time of the Creation the moon was of the 
same size as the sun. The moon then objected that 
it would not be decorous for two kings to use 
one crown, whereupon God diminished her size. 
In reply to the moon’s question “Ought I to be 
punished for having spoken reasonable words?” 
God consoled her by promising that she also should 
reign in the daytime; and on her objecting that the 
light of a candle in the daytime was useless, God 
promised her that the Jews should count the years 
after the moon. The latter again objecting that 
the sun served a similar purpose, God consoled 
her with the idea that certain righteous men would - 
bear the same epithet (“the smaller one ”), e.g., Jacob 
(Amos vii. 5), David (I Sam. xvii. 14), and Samuel 
ha-Katon. The moon, however, remained discon- 
solate, and God therefore required that a he-goat be 





’ fessor. 


679 


# 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


NiLonzon 
Morais 





sacriticed on the first of every month as a sin-offer- 
ing tor His having diminished the moon’s size (Hul. 
60b). According to R. Johanan, God required that 
sin-offering for having caused the moon to encroach 
on the domain of the sun. God appeased the com- 
plaints of the moon also by surrounding her with a 
host of stars, like a veritable queen (Pesik. R. 15: 
Gen. R. vi. 8-4). R. Hanina thinks that at first the 
sun alone was created to give light, and that God 
subsequently created the moon because He foresaw 
that the sun and moon would be worshiped like 
gods, and He said: “If when they are two, rivaling 
each other, they are considered as divinities, how 
would it be if the sun were alone?” (7. vi.1). The 
orbit of the moon is, like that of the sun, in the sec- 
ond heaven (¢). vi. 9; comp. Heller, “Tosafot Yom- 
Tob” to R. H. ii. 6). 

There isa disagreement between R. Judah and the 
other rabbis as to the setting of the moon and the 
sun. According to the former, after setting they 
continue their route above the celestial vault; and 
itis for this reason that in summer the springs are 
colder than the surface of the earth. The Rabbis 
argued that, after setting, both moon and sun travel 
below the vault and consequently under the earth; 
and this is why in the winter the springs are not as 
eold as the surface of the earth (Gen. R. vi. 8). The 
reason why the Jews count the days of the year 
by the moon is that, like the moon, which reigns 
both in the daytime and at night, the Jews have 
both this world and the future one (2d. vi. 2). On 
this account the eclipse of the moon is considered 
by the Rabbis as a bad sign for the Jews. The 
eclipse of the moon and stars is caused by four kinds 
of sin: (1) forgery, (2) false witness, (8) breeding 
small cattle in Palestine (for they spoil the land), 
and (4) cutting down fruit-trees (Suk. 29a). The 
fact of women spinning their wool or flax by the 
light of the moon is mentioned several times in the 
Talmud (Sotah vi. 1 [= p. 3la]; Git. 89a; e¢ passim). 

The moon, on account of its monthly reappearance, 
is considered as the emblem of Israel; the latter, like 
the moon, undergoing several phases through per- 
secution without being destroyed. Therefore the re- 
appearance of the moon is sanctified, like the entrance 
of the Sabbath or festivals, by the recitation of ben- 
edictions known in the liturgy as “Kiddush ha- 
Lebanah ” or “ Birkat ha-Lebanah.” See New Moon, 
BLESSING OF. 

S. M. Sex. 

MOOS, SOLOMON: German otologist; born at 
Randegg, near Constance, Germany, July 10, 1881; 
died at Heidelberg July 15, 1895; educated at the 
universities of Prague, Vienna, and Heidelberg 
(M.D. 1856). He settled in Heidelberg and was ad- 
mitted to the medical faculty of the university there 
in 1859. In 1866 he was appointed assistant pro- 
From 1875 he practised otology, and he was 
elected assistant professor of that science in 1891. 
He founded the otological clinic hospital and dis- 
pensary at Heidelberg, of which he remained chief 
surgeon and director until his death. 

Moos wrote many essays and monographs on his 
specialty, and conjointly with Knapp founded in 
1868 the “ Archiv fir Augen- und Ohrenheilkunde,” 
which journal now appears in Wiesbaden under 


the title “Zeitsarift ftir Ohrenheilkunde.” He 
translated Tovnbe’'s “ Diseases of the Ear ” under 
the title * Lehrbudi der Ohrenkrankheiten ” (Wirz- 
burg, 1863). 

Of his works nay be mentioned: “ Klinik der 
Ohrenkrankheit,” Vienna, 1866; “ Anatomie und 
Physiologie der Eistachischen Réhre,” Wiesbaden, 
1875; “ MeningitisCerebrospinalis Epidemica,” 1881 ; 
“Ueber Pilzinvasin des Labyrinths im Gefolge von 
Einfacher Diphtlzrie,” Wiesbaden, 1887: “Ueber 
Pilzinvasion dvs Libyrinths im Gefolge von Masern,” 
7b. 1888; “* Histolorische und Bakterielle Untersuch- 
ungen tiber Mittlohrerkrankungen bei den Ver- 
schiedenen Forme. der Diphtherie,” 7b. 1890. 

Moos was one ofthe leading otologists of his time. 
He succeeded in dmonstrating that in various infec- 
tious diseases micoorganisms enter the labyrinth, 
causing disturbanes in the auditory organs and in 
the equilibrium. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Page, Biog. Lex. 


8. F. T. H. 


MORAIS, HiNRY SAMUEL: American 
writer and ministe; born May 138, 1860, at Philadel- 
phia, Pa. ; educatd at private and public schools of 
that city. Herecdved his religious instruction from 
his father, SabatoMorais. For about twelve years 
he was a teacher i: the schools of the Hebrew Edu- 
cation Society ani in the Hebrew Sabbath-schools 
of Philadelphia. ‘lorais was the principal founder 
and for the first wo years managing editor of the 
“Jewish Exponen.” He edited also “The Musical 
and Dramatic Stmdard” (Philadelphia) and “The 
Hebrew Watchwod and Instructor” (zd.), and has 
been a frequent catributor to the Jewish and gen- 
eral press of the Lnited States; he was on the repor- 
torial and special taff of the “ Philadelphia Public 
Ledger” almost far years. 

Morais has been uccessively acting minister of the 
Mikve Israel congegation in Philadelphia (1897-98) 
and minister of the Adath Yeshurun congregation, 
Syracuse, N. Y. (899-1900 and again 1902-3), and 
of the Jeshuat hbrael congregation at Newport, 
R. L (1900-1). Heis the author of: “ Eminent Israel- 
ites of the Nineteath Century,” Philadelphia, 1880; 
“The Jews of Phiadelphia,” 7d. 1894, the most im- 
portant local histey of the Jews in America thus 
far published; ancof various pamphlets. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Markns, The Hebrews in America, pp. 231- 

232, New York, 1858. : 

A. I. G. D. 


MORAIS, SA3ATO: American rabbi; born at 
Leghorn, Italy, Ajril 18, 1823; died at Philadelphia 
Nov. 11, 1897. Eb was the elder son and the third 
of nine children oj/Samuel and Bona Morais. The 
Morais family cane originally from Portugal, being 
probably among tie large number of Jews who fled 
thence from the Inquisition. At the time of Saba- 
to’s birth Italy wa inthe thick of her great struggle 
for freedom. Samuel Morais was an ardent repub- 
lican, at one time indergoing imprisonment for his 
political views; ar his father, Sabato Morais, was 
prominently identfied with the political movements 
of his day. Uponyoung Sabato early rested the re- 
sponsibility of aidug in the support of the family. 
While still a chill he earned a little by teaching 


Morais 
Moravia 


Hebrew hymns and prayers to other children, mean- 
time pursuing his own studies under Rabbis Funaro, 
Curiat, and others, and then under his Hebrew mas- 
ter, Rabbi Abraham Baruch Piperno, and gaining 


honorable mention in belles-lettres 
Early under Prof. Salvatore de Benedetti. 
Years. In addition to Hebrew and Italian, he 


acquired familiarity with Aramaic, 
French, and Spanish. He remained at his home 
studying and teaching until 1845, when he went to 
London to apply for the vacant post of assistant 
hazzan of the Spanish 
and Portuguese con- 
gregation in that city. 
Owing to his unfamili- 
arity with English he 
was unsuccessful and 
returned to his home; 
but in the following 
year (1846) he accepted 
an invitation to be- 
come Hebrew master 
of the Orphans’ School 
of the same congrega- 
tion. Here he remained 
five years, meantime 
perfecting himself in 
English. During this 
period he formed a 
close friendship with 
Joseph Mazzini; and that patriot’s struggle for 
Italian freedom was warmly seconded by Morais. 
In 1850, owing to the withdrawal of Isaac Leeser, 
the pulpit of the Mickve Israel congregation at 
Philadelphia, Pa., became vacant, and Morais was 
an applicant for the post. He arrived in Philadel- 
phia on March 17, 1851, and was elected April 18 
following, the synagogue services in the interval 
being conducted by him. In 1855 he married Clara 
Esther Weil, who died in 1872, leaving seven children, 
From the date of his installation as hazzan until his 
death his influence was a continually growing power 
for conservative Judaism. The synagogue now oc- 
cupied by the Mickve Israel congregation was built 
and consecrated during his incumbency. Though 
his ministry covered the period of greatest activity 
in the adaptation of Judaism in America to changed 
conditions, he, as the advocate of Orthodox Juda- 
ism, withstood every appeal in behalf of ritual- 
istic innovations and departures from traditional 
practise, winning the esteem of his opponents by his 
consistency and integrity. His ser- 





Sabato Morais. 


Elected mons covered a wide scope of thought 
Hazzan in and action; and he showed the lofti- 
Philadel- ness of his spirit when, in spite of 

phia. congregational opposition to the ex- 


pression of his views during the 
American Civil war, he continued, both in prayer 
and in his discourses, to show his warm sympathy 
with the cause of the slave. In appreciation of his 
attitude during these trying times the Union League 
Club of Philadelphia placed him on the roll of its 
honorary members, 
When, in 1867, Maimonides College was estab- 
lished in Philadelphia, Morais was made professor 
of the Bible and of Biblical literature; and he held 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


680 





the chair during the six years that the college ex- 
isted. Fora number of years thereafter he felt the 
urgent need of an institution for the training of 
Jewish ministers on historical and traditional lines; 
and the declarations of the Pittsburg Conference in 
1885 urged him to immediate action. After a consid- 
erable agitation of the subject he succeeded, in con- 
junction with a few others, in establishing (Jan., 
1886) the Jewish Theological Seminary at New 


York. He was at once made presi- 

Aids in dent of the faculty and professor of 
Founding Bible, holding both posts until his 
the Theo- death. Unquestionably the establish- 
logical ment of the seminary constitutes Mo- 
Seminary. rais’ most lasting influence upon 


Judaism in America. The directors of 
that body have fittingly recognized his memory by 
naming the chair of Biblical literature and exegesis 
“the Sabato Morais professorship.” In 1887 the 
University of Pennsylvania conferred upon him the 
honorary degree of doctor of laws, he being the first 
Jew so honored by that institution. 

In addition to the work which he did in official 
positions, Morais was most active in religious, edu- 
cational, and charity matters. The Hebrew Sunday- 
School, Society, the Hebrew Education Society of 
Philadelphia, and the Young Men’s Hebrew Asso- 
ciation of that city numbered him among their most 
steadfast friends. In his own home he gathered 
vbout him a small band of young men whom he 
instructed in Hebrew, Talmud, and Jewish history, 
and in whom he inspired a zealous love for Juda- 
ism which has had a very marked effect upon the 
character not only of his pupils, but of the commu- 
nity at large. The strong conservatism of the 
Jews of Philadelphia and the warm interest in the 
higher things of Judaism evinced by the younger 
men of that city may be in a large measure directly 
traced to the intluence of Sabato Morais. He was 
greatly interested in the Alliance Israélite Univer- 

selle, and was in constant correspond- 
His Multi- ence with rabbis and scholars in Eu- 

farious rope and the Orient. Through his 

Activity. friend Chevalier Emanuel Felice Vene- 

ziani, the almoner of Baron de Hirsch, 

he was enabled to secure timely aid for the agricul- 

tural colonies in New Jersey and was the representa- 
tive of Baron de Hirsch in the Carmel Colony. 

When the Russo-Jewish exodus began, in 1882, 
and Russian Jews in large numbers settled in Phila- 
delphia, Morais immediately became their friend. 
Although unable to speak their language, his per- 
fect familiarity with Hebrew asa living tongue gave 
him a ready means of communication. Among Gen- 
tiles also he was widely known and esteemed, and 
was very frequently called upon to address public 
assemblies. 

Besides his sermons, he contributed to Jewish lit- 
erature much in the form of addresses to various 
Jewish organizations and of theological, polemical, 
literary, and critical articles for the Jewish press 
at home and abroad. He wrote classic Hebrew 
in prose and in verse with ease and elegance. 
Among his later works are: a translation of the 
“Prolegomena toa Grammar of the Hebrew Lan- 
guage,” by 8S. D. Luzzatto (in “Fifth Biennial Re- 


681 


port of the Jewish Theological Seminary ”); “An 
Hssay on the Jew in Italy ” (in “Second Biennial Re- 
port” of the same); “Italian Jewish Literature ” (in 
“Publications of Gratz College,” 1897). His transla- 
tion of the Book of Jeremiah for the Bible of the Jew- 
ish Publication Society of America was completed 
shortly before his death. 
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Morais, The Jews of Philadelphia, Philadel- 
phia, 1894; memoir by H. S. Morais in Sixth Biennial Re- 


port of the Jewish Theological Seminary Association, New 
York, 1896. 


A. C.L.8. 
MORATA, OLYMPIA FULVIA. See HEtr- 
DELBERG. 


MORAVIA: Austrian province, formerly part 
of the kingdom of Bohemia, containing 44,255 Jews 
in a total population of 2,437,706 (1900). The first 
historical notice of Jews in Moravia is found in the 
toll law of Raffelstetten (JEw. Encyc. ii. 322), which 
mentions Jews who came from Moravia (Dudik, i. 
381). This, however, does not prove conclusively 
that Jews lived in Moravia in the beginning of the 
tenth century, for itsregulations applied probably to 
traveling merchants who went to Moravia chiefly to 
buy slaves (Thietmar’s “ Chronicon,” vi. 86, in Pertz, 
“ Monumenta Germanix Scriptores,” iii, 821; “ Vita 
Sancti Adalberti,” in Pertz, 2d. iv. 586 and 600; 
Dudik, iv. 211). Jews must have lived in Moravia 
in the eleventh century, for Cosmas of Prague, the 
Bohemian chronicler (1040-1125), refers to them on 
various occasions. He gives the somewhat improb- 
able report that, in 1096, when the Jews, having 
heard of the approach of the Crusaders, desired to 
emigrate, Duke Bretislav issued an order for the con- 
fiscation of all property belonging to the Jews; for, 
he said, “they have made their money in 
the country, and therefore should leave 
it there” (Pertz, “Scriptores,” ix. 103- 
104; Dudik, iv. 216; D’Elvert, “Zur 
Geschichte der Juden in Miéhren,” p. 49, Briinn, 
1895; Gritz, “Gesch.” vi. 94, 3d ed.). Cosmas re- 
ports also that Duke Ladislaus (1109-25) ordered 
that thereafter (1124) no Christian should serve a 
Jew, because a certain Jew had taken holy relics from 
the altar of a church and had thrown them into a 
sewer. For this crime the Jews were forced to pay 
1,000 pounds of gold and 3,000 pounds of silver as 
ransom (Pertz, l.c. ix. 128). 

The attempt which had been mace by the territo- 
rial lords to wrest from the emperor jurisdiction over 
the Jews especially affected Bohemia also, as King 
Ottocar IT. (Margrave of Moravia from 1247 and King 
~ of Bohemia 1253-78), after the death of Duke Fred- 
erick II. of Austria in 1246, claimed succession to the 
latter’s possessions, in which the ducal jurisdiction 
had been proclaimed in 1244 (Jew. Encyc. ii. 322), 
In his charter of March 29, 1254, Ottocar promulgated 
the same law that Frederick had proclaimed for Aus- 
tria, but omitted the limit of the rate of interest, 
and added the prohibition against accepting Church 
vestments as pledgesand the provision thata Chris- 
tian who accuses a Jew of child-murder, and who can 
not support his charge with the testimony of three 
Christians and three Jews, shall be punished as the 
Jew would have been punished. This last provision 
isidentical with one in the bull of Innocent IV. of the 


Early 
Traces. 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


Morais 
Moravia 


same year (Jirecek, “Codex Juris Bohemici,” i. 181- 
148; Roessler, “Prager Stadtrecht,” pp. 177-187). 
A second charter, granted 1268, confirms that of 
1254 and adds that, except in the presence of two 
sworn city officials, the Jews of Briinn shall not be 
permitted to receive a pledge after nightfall, nor to 
buy horses or cattle on which there rests a suspicion 
of theft. They were required to contribute one- 
fourth of the cost of maintaining the city’s fortifica- 
tions. The last provision was a concession to the 
rising hostility of the cities against the Jews, a hos- 
tility which affected the Jews of Moravia as those 
of other countries of western Europe until the be- 
ginning of the nineteenth century. An undated 
document promulgated by Ottocar exempts the 
Jews for one year from all taxes “ because they have 
been mulcted by foreign lords, and because we shall 
soon derive profit from them, they being of our 
exchequer” (“Cod. Dipl. Mor.” iv. 17-22; Dudik, 
viii. 232). 

The animosity of the Church, which allied itself 
with the cities against the princes, did not affect the 
Jews in Moravia at that time. Bishop Bruno of 
Olmiitz did not attend the council of Vienna (JJEw. 
Encevyc. ii. 328), held in 1267, which passed resolu- 
tions hostile to the Jews; and he absented himself, 
as Dudik thinks (vi. 40), probably on account of the 
Jews who were favored by the king in the charter 
issued the following year. The passing of the 
country into the hands of the Hapsburgs did not 
produce any change. King Rudolf ordered (1278) 
that the Jews of Olmiitz, like those of Briinn, 
should contribute to the city’s ex penses (“ Cod. Dipl. 

Mor,” iv. 218, v. 267; Dudik, viii. 285). 
Under Olmiitz must have had an important 
the Haps- congregation in the twelfth century, 
burgs. for Isaac of Durbalo in his notes to the 
Mahzor Vitry quotes a decision which 
he had heard in that city (Mahzor Vitry, p. 388, 
Berlin, 1896-97). The RINnpFLEIscH riots, which 
started in Franconia in 1298, spread also to Bohe- 
mia and Moravia. The Jews intended to flee, but 
King Wenzel IJ. (1288-1805) would not permit it. 
“He spared their lives, but took from them immense 
wealth ” (Chronicle of Koénigsaal, in Dudik, viii. 
218). Perhaps this is an exaggerated report of the 
sums exacted by the same king for confirming the 
charter of Ottocar ITI. about 1800. 

While Bishop Bruno of Olmiitz became hostile to 
the Jews, and ina report to Pope Gregory XII. in 
1273 complained that they were guilty of violating 
the Church canons by keeping Christian servants 
and by accepting Church vestments as pledges, and 
that they were exploiters of the country as usurers 
and tax- and mint-farmers, the cities became more 
favorably disposed toward them, since the kings had 
ordered that they might be taxed for municipal pur- 
poses. Icauau asked even for the privilege of keep- 
ing Jews, and the Iglauer “Stadtrecht” restricted 
to Maundy Thursday the prohibition that Jews may 
not appear in public during Holy Week (Pertz, 
“Leges,” iii. 426). When King John (1810-46) 
came to Briinn in 1311 the Jews participated in the 
festivities, and met the king outside of the city 
limits (Dudik, xi. 103). In 1822 King Charles 
IV. gave permission to the Bishop of Olmitz to 


Moravia 


allow one Jew to settle in each of his four cities, 
including KrEmsrR. 

A great change occurred in the fifteenth century, 
due partly to the general hostility then manifested 
toward the Jews in the cities, and partly to local 
conditions, as the country was the prey of warring 
factions owing to the Hussite movement, and the 
Jews were accused of favoring the rebels. The 
first expulsion occurred in Iglau in 1426; and it was 
probably due to the influence of the Franciscan friar 
John of CaPisTRANO on the young king Ladislaus 
Posthumus (1440-57) that the Jews 
were later expelled from Briinn, Zna- 
im, Olmiitz, and Neustadt (“ Luah,” 
ed. by Epstein, Briinn [1887, or 5648] ; 
Willibald Miller, pp. 12-17), The king gave them 
only four months’ time to find another home. The 
citizens of the places from which the Jews were ex- 
pelled were compelled to pay their debts to the lat- 
ter, but without interest; and they received, more- 
over, the synagogue cemeteries and baths; but they 
had to pay the king an annual tribute equal to the 
amount which had been collected from the Jews in 
the form of taxes. Occasional expulsions occurred 
during the sixteenth century, as in Hradisch, 1514, 
. and in Neutitschein and Sternberg, 1562. The edicts 
of expulsion against all Jews of the kingdom of 
Bohemia promulgated by Ferdinand J. in 1541 and 
1557 were not carried into effect. The Jews ex- 
pelled from the cities settled in small towns under 
the protection of the feudal lords, although the rec- 
ords of their activities and sufferings are very 
meager until the Thirty Years’ war, when the Jews 
came into greater prominence. Ferdinand IL., al- 
though a bigot, treated the Jews comparatively 
well, because he needed the revenues derived from 
their taxation to wage his wars and because he con- 
centrated all his efforts to crush Protestantism in 
nis dominions, By a charter, dated Oct. 15, 1629, 
he permits Jews to visit fairs even in the cities 
where they have no right of residence; he promises 
not to exact more than the sum of 12,000 florins 
annually, and forbids that they be taxed by any 
one but their lords, to whom, moreover, they shall 
pay no more than the usual tribute. Further, it 
was expressly stipulated that they should not have 
to pay more toll than the legal rate. Still it would 
seem that these laws were never strictly enforced, 
for as early as 1635 the “ Landtshauptmann ” (gov- 
ernor), Cardinal von Dietrichstein, had to admonish 
the royal cities to allow the Jews free passage. 
Cities and states continued to lay complaints before 
the emperor that the Jews adulterate spices, mis- 
represent the quality of the fabrics, woolen goods, 
and hides they deal in, buy stolen goods, seduce 
Christian women, and “take the scanty bread from 
the mouths of Christians.” Nevertheless, Ferdi- 

nand II. (1657) and. Leopold I. (1659) 

Right to reconfirmed the charter of 1629, and 


Expul- 
sions. 


Attend especially their right to frequent the 
Fairs. fairs in the cities in which they had 
no right of residence (Miller, pp. 19- 

31). The expulsion of the Jews from Vienna in 


1670 brought a great many of them to Moravia, 
and possibly the growth of the congregation of 
Nikolsburg dates from that period. The new- 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


- 682 


comers were heavily taxed, and, notwithstanding 
the solemn promise made by Ferdinand II. in 1629 
that they should not be taxed beyond the limit 
stated in his charter, they were continuously har- 
assed with “special” and extraordinary imposts by 
the imperial treasury, by their lords, and by the 
cities to which they went on business, and were 
constantly deprived of the means of earning a live- 
lihood. 

The emperor, while in need of the taxes paid 
by the Jews, had to consider the wishes of the 
states and the cities which complained of the con- 
stant increase in the Jewish population, and it was 
repeatedly stipulated that only those Jews who had 
lived there in 1657 might transmit their right of resi- 
dence to their children. Still the emperor Charles 
VI. not only confirmed their privileges (May 13, 
1728), but even reduced their annual taxes from 
12,000 to 8,000 florins, renewed their right to visit 
all fairs, and allowed them to enter the crafts. 
These favors seem to have aroused the enmity of 
the states, for on Sept. 15, 1726, the emperor pro- 
claimed a law decreeing that in any Jewish family 
only one son should be allowed to marry (Famr- 
LIANTEN GESETZ), and on Dec. 8, 1726, the Jews were 
driven into ghettos, having been compelled to sell 
all their houses and to accept others which were 
assigned to them. The reason for these harsh meas- 
ures seems to have been religious fanaticism, for the 
edict of the emperor refers specifically to the fact 
that the Jewish houses were near the church and 
that the object of the tyrannical measure was “die 
ungehinderte Uebung des Cultus divini.” The de- 
struction of the synagogue of AussEs in 1722, upon 
the false accusation that the Jews had assaulted the 
Catholic priest who attempted to convert them to 
Christianity, may have given occasion for the pro- 
mulgation of that law. The Bishop of Olmiitz, to 
whose diocese the priest belonged and who was par- 
ticularly anxious to save him from the punishment 
which he had incurred by disturbing the peace of a 
synagogue, reported that the Jews of Rausnitz had 
mocked at the rites of the Catholic Church. Thisre- 

port, which was written May 6, 1727, 
Segregated seems to have had a decisive effect, for 
in on June 27, 1727, the order to separate 

Ghettos. the Jewish houses from those of the 

Christians was finally issued. Further 
hostile measures were planned. The Jews should be 
compelled to wear beards and a distinctive costume ; 
they should not be locksmiths or goldsmiths; for- 
eign Jews should not be tolerated in the country, 
and private synagogues should not be permitted. 
These propositions were submitted to the “ Landes- 
rabbiner” Issachar Berush Eskeles, who curiously 
enough took occasion to ask the government to 
issue a prohibition against shaving with a razor, 
but at the same time declared himself against the 
distinctive costume and against the order to compel 
the Jews to wear beards (Schram, “Ein Buch fiir 
Jeden Briinner,” iit. 39, Briinn, 1908; Miller, pp. 
68-72), 

A time of severe trial for the Jews of Moravia 
began with the reign of Maria Theresa (1740-80). 
As soon as war broke out the Jews were accused of 
aiding the enemy. General von Seherr, the com- 


Be 


bra 





PAGE FROM THE MINUTE-BOOK OF A MEETING OF MORAVIAN CONGREGATIONS HELD IN 1713. 
(In the possession of Prof. Gotthard Deutsch, Cincinnati, Ohio.) 


Moravia 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 


684 





mander of the fortress of Briinn, gave orders that no 
Jew be adinitted into the city, no matter what pass- 
port he held. On March 14, 1742, he ordered also 
that the Jews of Moravia should pay within six 
days the sum of 50,000 florins under penalty of mas- 
sacre and pillage. Upon the intercession of Baron 
Diego d’ AGtinaRr and of the “ Landesrabbiner ” Es- 
keles, the empress repealed this order temporarily ; 
but the Jews had to pay the amount afterward. 
The second war between Frederick the Great and 
Maria Theresa brought still greater trouble upon 
the Jews, and the empress, influenced by the persist- 
ent report of a conspiracy of the Jews with the 
Prussians, ordered the expulsion of the former from 
the kingdom of Bohemia within six months. For 
the province of Moravia this edict was promulgated 
Jan. 2, 1745 (Trebitsch, “ Korot ha- 
In the Sev- ‘Ittim,” pp. 17b et seg.; D’Elvert, /c. 
en Years’ pp.1901 e¢ seq. ; Gritz, “ Gesch.” 3d ed., 
War. x. 899; Kaufmann, “ Barthold Dowe 
Burmania,” in “Gritz Jubeischrift,” 
pp. 279-313, Breslau, 1887). HKfforts made by the 
Jews, who were supported not only by some foreign 
powers, as the Netherlands and the Hamburg Senate 
(“ Oesterreichische Wochenschrift,” 1902, p. 187), 
but even by the local authorities, induced the em- 
press to grant a temporary suspension of the cruel 
law (May 15, 1745). Later a further suspension 
was granted which permitted the Jews to remain 
ten years, and finally the entire edict was relegated 
toobscurity. The imperial office (“ Hofkanzlei”) ex- 
pressly stated in 1762 that the suspicion of high trea- 
son under which the Jews had suffered had never 
been proved (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1887, p. 678). 
But the attitude of the empress did not become any 
more favorable to the Jews. Immediately after the 
edict of expulsion had been revoked she considered 
the suggestion of a Jew named David Heinrich 
Lehmann of Prague to put a tax on ErroaiM, and 
demanded of the Jews of the Bohemian kingdom 
an annual sum of 40,000 florins for the privilege of 
importing this fruit, of which tax the Jews of 
Moravia were to pay five-twelfths, The impossi- 
bility of collecting this exorbitant sum led to a re- 
duction of the amount in 1746 to 4,000 florins; and 
in 1748, when the Jews were given permission to re- 
main another ten years in the province, this tax, 
like all other Jewish special taxes, was abolished, and 
the Jews of Moravia were called on to pay annually 
a “Schutzgeld ” of 87,000 florins during the first five 
years, and of 76,700 florins during the next five 
years. In 1752, when the first five years had ex- 
pired, the tax was increased to 90,000 florins, but in 
1773 it was reduced to 82,200. For the empress the 
ten-year limit was evidently merely a means of sa- 
ving herself from the embarrassment ofa direct repeal 
of the edict of expulsion, and she ordered at once a 
compilation of the existing statutes regulating the 
affairs of the Jews of Moravia. Alois von SONNEN- 
FEI8 was ordered to prepare a translation of the old 
Jewish constitution as it had grown out of the de- 
liberations of the periodical assemblies (“Shay Tak- 
kanot,” 311 articles), The product of hislabors was 
the “General-Polizei-Prozess- und Kommerzialord- 
nung fiir die Judenschaft des Markgrafthums Maeh- 
ren,” published in 1754. 


In its attempt at reg- | 


ulating all details of congregational life if is typ- 
ical of the spirit of institutionalism prevailing in 
Austria. It states who has the right 


The to confer the title of “ Reb” (Haber) and 
‘“*General- of “doppelter Reb” (Morenu), makes it 
ordnung” the duty of the “Landesrabbiner ” to 
of 1754. assign to the other rabbis which “so- 


called Masechte” they should teach 
during the coming term, regulates the marriage fees 
of the rabbi, hazzan, and sexton, and contains several 
very humiliating regulations, e.g., that the “ Landes- 
rabbiner” should every other year pronounce the 
“great ban” against thieves and receivers of stolen 
goods. This law contains also a civil code and a 
constitution of the Jewish congregations. The em- 
press was very fond of interfering in every detail of 
government. Thus she revised pcrsonally the 
cost of the elections of the elders for the province 
in 1758 (G. Wolf, in Wertheimer’s “Jahrbuch, ” 
vol, x., pp. 14 et seqg.); she had acensus of the Jewish 
families taken in 1754, and limited the number of 
all Jewish families in the province to 5,106 (Yon 
Scari, p. 3; D’Elvert, d.¢. p. 177). 

Under the reign of Josern IT. (1780-90) conditions 
were considerably improved. Although most of the 
officials and the city councils did not favor it, he 
issued his “Toleranzpatent” in Briinn on Feb. 
13, 1782. Limitation of the number of Jewish 
families remained, but the number was increased 
to 5,400. The “Schutzgeld”” wasabolished, but the 
Jewsstill had to pay special taxes—namely, a family 
tax of five florins annually for each head of a family, 
and an impost on every article of consumption—so 
that the treasury should not lose the 82,200 florins 

paid theretofore by the Jews of the 
Under province. From the surplus of these 
Joseph II. taxes a fund was created which still 
exists as the “Maehrisch-Juedischer 
Landesmassafonds.” The tax on articles of con- 
sumption was especially burdensome, and its method 
of levy led to constant quarrels and accusations. 
The dues on cattle and fowl were levied when they 
were killed, but fish had to be carried from the mar- 
ket to the revenue office, and a receipt for two 
kreutzer had to be shown when the collector ap- 
peared in the house, which he did very often during 
the Friday night meal. Similar vexatious measures 
were applied in the case of wine which the Jews 
used for their own households. These conditions 
remained almost unchanged until 1848. 

Under Francis I. further restrictions were added: 
an edict of 1803 prohibited the Jews from dealing in 
flour and grain; and an edict of 1804 required that 
Jews should not be permitted to buy any cattle in 
the markets, unless they could prove that they 
needed it for the purposes of retail trade as butchers 
or feeders, or could show a written order from a 
butcher for whom they acted as agents. When 
the Reichstag of Kremsir proclaimed freedom of 
religion the Catholic clergy protested, and the cit- 
ies and villages where Jews had not been before 
toierated also opposed the new policy. The city 
of Sternberg, whence Jews had been ex pelled in 1562, 
passed a resolution that it would never allow a Jew 
to settle there (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1849, p. 506). 
In the village of Raitz as late as 1861 the mayor 


685 


would not allow a Jewish family to settle. In other 
cities Where Jews had been living from times im- 
memorial, the population arose against them when 
they left the ghetto and opened stores in the part of 
the city formerly not open to them. This was 
the case in Trebitsch, Pirnitz, Strassnitz, and Ol- 
miitz in 1850 (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1850, pp. 296, 
314, 339, 359). But after the proclamation of the 
constitution of Dec. 20, 1867, the old restrictions 
were entirely removed, and the Jewish population 
shifted from its former habitations to the cities, es- 
pecially to the larger ones from which it had 
been excluded; so that when, in accordance with the 
liw of March 21, 1890, the new congregational dis- 
tricts were formed by the minister of worship (June 

15, 1891), of the previous fifty-two 


Present congregations twelve were dissolved, 
Constitu- while ten new ones were formed, 
tion. among Which are the largest, namely, 


Briinn, Olmiitz, and Mihrisch Ostrau. 

A pecularity of Moravia is the fact that it still has 
(1904) twenty-five Jewish settlements which are reg- 
ular townships, as they used to be up to 1848, when 
almost every Jewish settlement was governed as a 
political community (“Jiidisches Volksblatt,” Vi- 
enna, June 24, 1904). These communities have been 
required since 1884 to have separate boards for re- 
ligious and municipal affairs (D’Elvert, Z.c. p. 207); 
their members are those living within the old ghetto 
confines, so that in many instances the community 
counts more Christians than Jews, while the major- 
ity of the latter lve in “the Christian city.” The 
“ Landesmassafonds ” (to which fines and other rev- 
enues were later added) for assisting poor congrega- 
tions which through excessive special taxes fell 
into debt. is now used exclusively for the assist- 
ance of needy congregations and congregational 
ollicials. It was handed over to the Jews in 1868, 
and is administered by a board of eleven members, 
chosen by the congregations. It amounted when 
first given over to the Jews, to 911,846 florins, and 
in 1908, to 2,201,404 kronen ($440,000). A conven- 
tion of rabbis, teachers, and congregational officers, 
called together by the government in the city of 
Briinn Oct. 30, 1868, to consider the question of re- 
ligious instruction and especially that of prepara- 
tory theological education, did not reach any definite 
results (“ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1868, pp. 989 e7 seg.). 
Another peculiar Moravian institution was that 
of the LANDESRABBINER, which, according to the 
“ Generalordnung ” of 1754, existed “at all times” in 
Nikolsburg. The “Landesrabbiner ” was nominated 
by the six representatives of the congregations—those 
situated in each of the six districts (“ Kreis ”) sending 
one elector—and appointed by the government. 
Those known to have held the office are: JuDAH 
LOEW BEN BEZALEEL, Yom-Tob Lipmann HEL.L&Er, 
Menahem Mendel KrocHMAL, Gershon ASHKENAZI, 
David Oppenheimer, Gabriel EskELEs, his son [ssa- 
char Berush EskELES, who however, held the office 


END OF 


THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ; 


wre rn rr ce et pr SE RY SS SO 9 “OV 


RRA A py 


Moravia 


merely noninally, as he was inthe banking business 
in Vienna. After him the office was held by Aaron 
Lemberger (Lwow ; 1753-57) ; he lived in conflict with 
the local rabbi Gershon Pollitzer, who succeeded him 
as “Landesrabbiner” (1738-72); Schmelke Horo- 
wiz, called Samuel Herschel Lewi (1774-78) ; Ger- 
shon Chajes (1780-89); Mordecai BENET (1789- 
1829); Nehemiah Treprtscu (1882-42); Samson 
Raphael Hirrscn (1847-51). Hirsch was the last 
regularly elected “ Landesrabbiner.” After his res- 
ignation Abraham Placzek was appointed by the 
government as temporary “ Landesrabbiner,” which 
office he held until his death in 1884. During his 
last years his son Baruch Placzek was made his as- 
sistant. An attempt to provide for the office of 
the “ Landesrabbiner” in the law regulating the af- 
fairs of the Jews of Austria March 21, 1890, failed, 
but the minister declared that the present law had 
not abolished theoffice. Still it was not revived, al- 
though the present (1904) incumbent, Baruch Plac- 
zek, is given that title by the government. His 
recent application to have Solomon Funk of Bosko- 
witz appointed as his successor was not granted 

(“ Oesterreichische Wochenschrift,” 1904, p. 190). 
Many famous rabbis occupied the rabbinical seat 
in Nikolsburg and in other cities of Moravia, among 
whom may be mentioned, apart from those already 
noted, Shabbethai Kohen, Nathan 


Distin- ADLER, and Eleazar Loew, who made 
guished Moravia a seat of Talmudic learning; 
Rabbis. a number of Talmudic authors are 


natives of the province or have lived 
there, as Eliezer Nin of Nikolsburg, Samuel Loew of 

Boskowitz, Naphtali Hirsch Spitz, and others, The 

modern Haskalah movement had some devotees there, 

as Joseph Fleisch in Rausnitz ; and the science of Ju- 
daism had also a number of representatives, among 
whom may be mentioned: Leopold Loew, Ad. Jel- 
linek, Moritz Steinschneider, Isaac Hirsch Weiss, 

Nehemias Bruel!, and David Kaufmann. A printing- 

office opened in Briinn during the latter part of the 

eighteenth century by a convert named Neumann 

did not produce anything remarkable. 

While in the seventeenth and the eighteenth cen- 
tury complaints were constantly made that the 
strictest rules against the increase of the Jewish 
population were without avail, the Jewish popula- 
tion decreased in the ten years from 1890 to 1900 
from 45,524 to 44,255, though the general popula- 
tion of the province during the same time increased 
by 160,000. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dudik. Maehrens Allgemeine Geschichte, 
Briinn, 1860-89; D’Elvert, Zur Geschichte der Juden in 
Miihren und Oesterreichisch-Schlesien, Briinn, 1895; Wil- 
libald Miller, Beitrdige zur Geschichte der Méihrischen Ju- 
denschaft, Olmiitz, 1903; Abraham Trebitsch, Korot ha-‘It- 
tim, Briinn, 1801 ; Low, Das Mtihrische Landesrabbinat sett 
Hundert Jahren, in Gesammelte Schriften, vol. ii., pp. 165 
et seq., Szegedin, 1890: Benjamin Frinkel, in Kohez ‘al Yad 
of the Mekize Nirdamim, Berlin; Yon Seari, Systematische 
Darstellung der in Betreff der Juden in Mdhren... Er- 
lassenen Gesetze ..., Briinn, 1839. 

D. 


VOL. VIII.