aan: eee 3) ape SSSA E SK we AN RIC SM AS Fe res > > geet Yass, es En batons ies ey ae. ors ee : eae eee q 1 Ey - POR HRT A SATS ite ene : ea ate ERTS eigen wae eR Per ued perce: a, * TAGS eRe eee FS ” as 5 < b » . . pas eet Oras ame ares Gen ae meet Se arse, ; Sh owe & 5 4 Po reve rh af Lee one Sor Ae a ms oe SU eee ay ak 34a Hlbion College Library al STOCKWELL-MUD sees i a: i: A> ae a ee : % 3 5044 00045 8890 ir 4 # = ~ or Pa ee e = =e a as ay fo ~ 7 ad “a rs a "pas _https://archive.org/details/bwb_W8-BJW-775_ 5 7 > at) ea wien 4 lids Os) 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- KKAUFMANN KOHLER, PH.D. (Departments of Biblical Antiquities ; the Jews of America). Theology and Philosophy). GoTTHARD DeEutscH, PH.D. (Department of HERMAN ROSENTHAL (Department of the Jews of History from 1492 to 1904). Russia and Poland). RICHARD GOTTHEIL, PH.D. (Departments of History from Ezra to 1492; History of Post- Talmudic Literature). Emit G. Hirscu, Pu.D., LL.D. (Department of ISIDORE SINGER, PH.D. (Department of Modern the Bible). Biography from 1750 to 1904). JosEPH Jacoss, B.A. (Departments of the Jews CRAWFORD H. Toy, D.D., LL.D. (Departments of England and Anthropology; Revising Editor). of Hebrew Philology and Hellenistic Literature). SoLomon SCHECHTER, M.A., Litr.D. (Dedart- ment of the Talmud). ISAAC K. FUNK, D-D., LL.D. FRANK H. VIZETELLY, F.S.A. Chairman of the Board Secretary of the Board WILLIAM PopprEr, 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 COMPLETE IN TWELVE VOLUMES EMBELLISHED WITH MORE THAN TWO THOUSAND ILLUSTRATIONS NEW YORK AND LONDON uN K AND WAGNALES COMPANY THE Jewish Encyclopedia A DESCRIPTIVE RECORD OF THE HISTORY, RELIGION, TOMS OF THE JEWISH LITERATURE, AND CUS- 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 Cyzus Apiex, PH.D. (Departments of Post- Biblical Antiquities ; the Jews of America). Gorrusrp Deurecu, Pu.D. (Department of History from 1492 to 1904). RichsAkp Gorn, PHD. (Departments of History from Lura to 1492; History of Post- Talmudic Literature). Emit G. Hinecu, Pu.D., LL.D. (Department of the Bible). Joseru Jacons, B.A. (Departments of the Jews of England and Anthropology; Revising Editor). ISAAC K. FUNK, D.D., LL.D. Chairman of the Board BOARD KAUPMANN KonLer, PH.D. (Departments of Thealagy and Philosophy). HY2ZMAN ROSENTHAL (Department of the Jews of Russia and Poland ). SoLomon Scuecuirer, M.A., Litt.D. (Depart ment of the Talmud). Isipozye Sincez, Pu.D. (Department of Modern Bigraphy from 1750 to 1904). Crawrorp H. Toy, D.D., LL.D. (Departments of Hebrew Philology and Hellenistic Literature). FRANK H. VIZETELLY, F.S.A. Secretary of the Board WILLIAM Porrrz, M.A, PHD. 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 VII ITALY—LEON NEW EDITION FUNK AND WAGNALLS COMPANY YORK AND LONDON NEW COPYRIGHT 1904, I9I0, I9I2, 1916 AND 1924, 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 Antiquities ; the Jews of America.) President of the American Jewish Historical Society; Libra- rian, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. 0. GOTTHARD DEUTSCH, Ph.D. (Department of History from 1492 to 1908.) Professor of Jewish History, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio; Editor of ** Deborah.” RICHARD GOTTHEIL, Ph.D. (Departments of History from Ezra to 1492; History of Post-Talmudic Literature.) Professor of Semitic Languages, Columbia University, New York; Chief of the Oriental Department, New York Public Library ; President of the Federation of American Zionists. EMIL G. HIRSCH, Ph.D., LL.D. (Department of the Bible.) Rabbi of Chicago Sinai Congregation, Chicago, Ill.; 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,”’ etc. KAUFMANN KOHLER, Ph.D. (Departments of Theology; 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 Library. SOLOMON SCHECHTER, M.A., Litt.D. (Department of the Talmud.) President of the Faculty of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York ; Author of “ Studies in Judaism.” ISIDORE SINGER, Ph.D. MANAGING EDITOR. (Department of Modern Biography from 1750 to 1908.) 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.) Gustay Gottheil Lecturer in Semitic Languages, Columbia University, New York (1903-04); Author of ‘* Censorship of Hebrew Books.”’ AMERICAN BOARD OF CONSULTING EDITORS 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. O. MARCUS JASTROW, Ph.D. (DECEASED), Late Rabbi Emeritus of the Congregation Rodef Shalom, Phila- delphia, Pa.; Author of “* Dictionary of the Talmud.” 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 Portw: guese), New York; President of the Board of Jewish Ministers, New York. vi LITERARY DIRECTORATE MOSES MIELZINER, Ph.D., D.D. (DECEASED), Late President of the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio ; Author of ** Introduction to the Talmud.” GEORGE F. MOORE, M.A., D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and the History of Religions in Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.; Author of “4 Commentary on the Book of Judges,” etc. DAVID PHILIPSON, D.D., Rabbi of the Congregation Bene Israel; Professor of Homiletics, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio; President of Hebrew Sabbath School Union of America. IRA MAURICE PRICE, B.D., Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Languages and Literatures, University of Chicago, Il.; Author of ‘ The Monuments and the Old Testament,” etc. JOSEPH SILVERMAN, D.D., President of Central Conference of American Rabbis; Rabbi of Temple Emanu-E], 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,” etc. FOREIGN BOARD OF CONSULTING EDITORS ISRAEL ABRAHAMS, M.A., Coeditor of ‘‘ The Jewish Quarterly Review ’”’; Author of “ Jew- ish Life in the Middle Ages,”’ etc.; Reader in Talmudic, Cambridge University, England. W. BACHER, Ph.D., Professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary, Budapest, Hungary. M. BRANN, Ph.D., Professor in the Jewish Theological Seminary, Breslau, Ger- many ; Editor of ** Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums.”’ H. BRODY, Ph.D., Rabbi, Nachod, Bohemia, Austria; Coeditor of ‘‘ Zeitschrift fiir Hebriische 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. 8. M. DUBNOW, Author of ‘* Istoriya Yevreyev,’’ Odessa, Russia. MICHAEL FRIEDLANDER, Ph.D., Principal of Jews’ College, London, England; Author of “The Jewish Religion,” etc. 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., Ohief 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-Jiidische Gemeindebund, Berlin, Germany. SAMUEL POZNANSKI, 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 fiir 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 Shail; 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: ® Not noted at the beginning or the end of a word ; otherwise’ or by dieresis; e.g., pe’er or Meir. 3 6 yeee >) l B (with dagesh), p w sh hy GF nh pm 5 (without dagesh), f y s sd bt 2” ¥ 2 nt nh ee) Ds pk w S) 1 ys ,r NoTE: The presence of dagesh lene is not noted except in the case of p. Dagesh forte is indi- cated by doubling the letter. %. The vowels have been transcribed as follows : = (kamez) a zu =a saan Si ‘0 ~ (kamez hatuf) o = iC. = © eee vin ae 1 aC, comm, 3 U The so-called ‘‘ Continental” pronunciation of the English vowels is impiied. 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. 1. 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 xabove ¢ kh uo sh q gh wn See ord BOY a oh we g ah wt G* oe oth He ey BE os Cj j# bz J? a Ms 8 em 2. Only the three vowels—a, i, u—are represented : é wet} Sra) =e 4 No account has been taken of the imalah; 1 has not been written e, nor u written o. *In al) other matters of orthography the spelling preferred by the StanDaRD Drotionary haé usually been followed. Typo- graphical exigencies have rendered occasional deviations from these systems necessary. * Viii SYSTEMS OF TRANSLITERATION AND OF CITATION OF PROPER NAMES we ee 3. The Arabic article is invariably written al, no account being taken of the assimilation of the / to the following letter; e.g., Abu al-Salt, not Abu-I-Salt; Nafis al-Daulah, not Nafis ad-Daulah. The article is joined by a hyphen to the following word. 4, At the end of words the feminine termination is written ah; but when followed by a genitive, at; eg., Risalah dhat al-Kursiyy, but Hv at al-Aflak. 5. No account is taken of the overhanging vowels which distinguish the cases 3 GG, ‘Amr, not ‘Amru or ‘Amrun; Ya‘kub, not Ya‘kubun; or in a title, Kitab al-Amanat wal-I‘tikadat. 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 Ha n In shch BO b Oo (4) Bs mute BB v I a yy Hla Yy Er h,v, or g Pp r bps half mute Le d Cc 8 BS ye Ee e and ye TT t 99 e aretha hm ah MES U 10 0 yu 38 g ® if Aa ya Uuli t Xx kh 0 @. F KE k Igy te Ve ce Ax l ay ch Wik i Mm m I m sh Rules for the Citation of Proper Names, Personal and Otherwise. 1. 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 Drohobiczer. 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 WMeiri; to Samuel Kansi from Samuel Astruc Dascola ; to Jedaiah Penini from both Bedersi and En Bonet; to John of Avignon from Moses de Roquemaure. 2. 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 ot his birth or residence; e.g., Johanan ha-Sandlar ; Samuel ha-Nagid ; Judah he-Hasid; Gershom of Metz; Isaac of Corbeil. 3. Names containing the words d’, 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 Illescas. The order of topics is illustrated by the following examples : 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 In has come to be a specific part of a name, as Inn 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. Pe ee ee ee a, a ee ee Se a ee ee ae a ee LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS [Self-evident abbreviations, particularly those used in the bibliographies, are not included here. | PA Diesen cies nicieleie'e-'s'e ADOL, PIT KE ERM 2 enste aicfeite sisivioe ster English ate aes peor ++ Abot de- oa! Natan np enaniis, Heres. aNd ar ee els Heereses Pallenisscese OORDPZ20an ee eS ce eties +eeees EFubin (Talmu BON OC ners cs vivcsinxets at the place; to the passage cited ursch and ' Ersch and Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopidie CRERDS Carat oe sine OK © 4's in the year of the Hegira Gruber, Encyc.. der Wissenschaften und Kiinste Allg. Zeit. des Jud.. Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums ES cisscrs ss o+eee ESdras cee soo. Ane a -American Jewish Historical Society = sed: sagnooocaan < -and following m. Jour. Semi usebius, Hist. Eccl.Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica Lang.. : ‘ American Journal of Semitic Languages Ewald, Gesch..... Ewald, Geschichte des Volkes Israel Anglo-Jew. ‘Assoc.. -Anglo-Jewish Association Frankel, Mebo..... Frankel, Mebo Yerushalmi Reoe Balas aver ae ACaHed ees ace Bibl. - ae ... Furst, Bibliotheca Judaica WOO sere stole sacs. pocrypha lirst, Gesch. des | p.: F Apost. Const........ Apostolical Constitutions Karaert.... .... Furst, Geschichte des Kardéerthums eee ters stet. bGaster, Bevis Marks Memorial Volume Aronius, Regesten zur Geschichte der Juden Mer, Geiger, Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Aronius,Regesten j in Deutschland Geiger, Ursenrit. Bibel in Ihrer Abbangigkeit von der In- PANE arne tale yet sveleversisye,e Das Alte Testament neren Entwicklung des Judenthums Op LViaterelsieietoineivicoe clare Pee pomice Geiger’s Jiid. Zeit Hee Boe ygeone Zeitschrift fir Wissen- WOO COCO OOO en or bar or born ; schaft und Leben peer. Ag. Bab. Geiger’s Wiss. Geiger’s Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift fiir AT { Bacher, Agada der Babylonischen Amorder Zeit, Jad. Theol. f° Jaaische Theologie Bacuer — Pal. ios Agada der Palastinensischen Amo- GOSCHS cic caiceriele tiers Geschichte Amor.. i raer Gesenius, Gr.......Gesenius, Grammar Bacher, Ag.” ‘Tan. ...-Bacher, Agada der Tannaiten Gesenius, Th....... Gesenius, Thesaurus eee Batra (Talmud) nate pects ae History of the Decline and Fall of ane ore the Christian era and Fall. .......« the Roman Empire Bekorot (Talmud) Ginsburg’s Bible { Ginsburg’s New Massoretico-Critical Text Se ae citar Archaologie aie 2 ef e oe ee Bible Berakot (Talmu Uorrletelocuinesterscs sie/erets Gittin (Talmu Berliner Fest- ‘ Graetz, Hist........ Graetz, History of the Jews schrift ........ a Festschrift zum 70ten Geburtstag Berliners | Gritz, Gesch.......Gratz, Geschichte der Juden Berliner’s es Berliner’s Magazin fiir die Wissenschaft des Gidemann Giidemann, Geschichte des Erziehungs- Magazin....... Judenthums Gesch : wesens und der Cultur der Abendlandi- IBIDISERAD. sic sics-cc0s BipliothecashapbiniCaee Pee teen eect ess schen Juden kaa tye viecceve ec. bikKurim (Talmud) TAG aceies verereecosier Haggai fi e Mh aideane ena +++ Baba oe eeny. ae watinemieaseeuceee SRC eT Mier ern. babaMezia(ralmud) 9 . . Wi Hal wwecicneccsaccrere ‘ BoletinAcad.Hist en de la Real Academia de la Historia Hamburger, | Hatiboreer, Realencyclopadie fiir Bibel B Ge ay biicher fiir Jiidische Geschichte Hastings. Dict. an nese gee rull’s Jahrbti p . : - Briill’s Jahrb. naatteratGan Bibles Heeungs, Dictionary of the Bible Bulletin All. Isr.... Bulletin of the Alliance Israélite Universelle hae Brotelorcisteleie srerajeeiers Epistle (0 the pebrowe Ci teliee cee b's oviews.e e sADOUL ODES pee sieainee amas asoretic Tex ISG em raicrera\eia(are: ....Canticles (Song of Solomon) : Herzog-Plitt or) Real-Encyklopadie fiir Protestantische The- Meee Anglo-Jew. (Catalogue of Anglo-Jewish Historical Ex- ie SA a ologie ee Kirche (2d and 3d editions re- Ye hE iipel O9.@ 8 arene § hibition eal-Encyc..... spectively Cazés, Notes Bi- ' Cazés, Notes Bibliographiques sur la Littéra- Hirsch, Biog. Lex | Hirsch, Biographisches Lexikon der Hervor- bliographiques. ture Juive-Tunisienne : zs ragenden Aerzte Aller Zeiten und Vélker CAM yeeros s vonie sroScen common era HOV cctietsterersieste sacle Horayot (Talmud) Glos Qo ca dneQnBeaonoe chapter or chapters aul ai cloleteinintacarereincaveate Hullin ee eee Te Tan Ns «Greve c’ete-aoeee antaos e place Cheyneand Black; | Cheyne and Black, Bneyclopeedia Bibliea | Wore same author Ohwol. Jubil Recueil des Travaux Rédigés en Mémoire | Isr. Letterbode... ‘TIsraelitische Letterbode yelaie ublee ’ du Jubilé Scientifiquede M. Daniel Chwol- | J.......s..000. eee Jahvist re wee son, 1846-1896 Jaarboeken voor de Israeliten in Neder- C. 1. A.............Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum Jaarboeken ...... land Ou 6 6 Raponcponond . Corpus Inscriptionum Greecarum Jacobs Sources. { Jacobs, Inquiry into the Sources of Spanish- C.1.H..............Corpus Inscriptionum Hebraicarum 3 Jewish History C.I.L..............Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum Jacobs and Wolf, Jacobs and Wolf, Bibliotheca Anglo-Judaica C.1.S..............Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum Bibl. Anglo-Jud. comp oveeeee COMpare Jahrb. Gesch. der { Jahrbuch fiir die Geschichte der Juden und panier. Diet. _{E E. Curinier, Dictionnaire National des “Anis Sao pacot dot ; ae al nsensnunis ee eon a NAG sic ies oie's le sts, « re ho age Sen Jastrow, Dict... es =e me ne “ ns ee ‘arg ‘ e ye ETI Deuteronomist Jelinek, B. H......Jellinek, Bet ha-Midrash De Gubernatis, ee Gubernatis, Dizionario Biografico degli | Jew. Chron......... Jewish Chronicle, London Diz. Biog.......§ _ Scrittori Contemporanei Jew. Encyc........ The Jewish Encyclopedia De Gubernatis, a Gubernatis, Dictionnaire International Jew. Hist. Soc. Eng.Jewish Historical Society of England Kcrivains du Jour des Ecrivains du Jour Jew. World........ Jewish World, London De le Roi, Juden-| De le Roi, Geschichte der Evangelischen Josephus, Ant,..... Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews Mission........) _Juden-Mission Josephus, B. J......Josephus, De Bello Judaico Dem...............-Demai (Talmud) ; )’Histoire et la Géo sear ccere ao Contra Apionem renbourg, Essai sur stoire et la = OBE ig a otainis aicis aiss’9) 5. Derenbourg, Hist. { wari ae la Palestine, etc. Jost’s Annalen..... Jost’s Israelitische Annalen De Rossi, Dizio-| De Rossi, Dizionario Storico degli Autori | Jour. Bib. Lit...... Journal of Biblical Literature NSGAION ote'stetelsiaciais Ebrei e delle Loro Opere Day Roceeenienicrls Jewish custo Beer ree De Rossi-Ham-) De Rossi-Hamberger, Historisches Worter- Der ken Acteciecceie ....Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society peer Hist. peck Ca aes be Schriftsteller und | J eee Dial. cum | Justin, Dialogus cum Tryphone Judwo TtErd. 2.5 rer Werke pireleisyese Ae Introduc- 8. R. Driver, An Introduction to the Liter- Kaufmann Ge-} Gedenkbuch zur Erinnerung an David Kauf- OT sis'ccseicvecse ature of the Old Testament denkbuch...... mann : Agiden ad it odoadA: GOgeCnOOG lee ete Apok- Beat meus neortae seudepigraphen des adiceveleis(sisia cries eCCLCB Sa vactents Becltis. ( (Sirach) alee a trio aaa Bro hg ee ee Espafiola-Portugueza- GeSeicvenvsviecs cess on = .-Jud.. *Eduy ...,.......... Eduyot (Talmud) Kayserling, Die Die Jtidischen Frauen in der Geschichte, Ludwig Eisenberg’s Grosses Biographisches Jidischen Frau- tur und’Kunst Bisonberg, Blog.) “Lexikon der Deutschen Bihne im XIX. | _en........ extern x Kevevoeeeeeee ( Jahrhundert Ker...--+........+-Keritot (Talmud) Encyc. Brit.,.......Encyclopsdia Britannica Ket ........+++++-.-Ketubot (Talmud) x LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS a eee { Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testa- 1-13 BO saGgnaga00 ment, ed. Marti Ile Ge saeanrHunogobe Kiddushin (Talmud) Kill cdaweneedecs cles Kilayim (Talmud) KIN ctieaesylecssice'e Kinnim (Talmud) Kohut Memorial ve ea] Kohut Colne tees Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Krauss, Lehn- | Krauss Griechische und Lateinische Lebn- WoOrter ....5..2: Kuenen, ergy core Historisch- ‘Kritische ‘Binleitung in TUNG cv sseree die Biicher des Alten Testaments {et § Larousse, Grand Dictionnaire Universel du Larousse, Dict.... | -XIXe Sidvle UO atetarertaierelsietststols 4,0 in the place cited Levy, Chal. ae Chaldiisches Worterbuch itber die Worterb,....... Targumim Levy, Neuhebriiisches und Chalddisches Levy, penne Worterbuch iiber die Talmudim und Mid- Worterb.. raschim eaten Z. T.. . Zoologie des Talmuds Ga CDARSERAORODOD literally Pee eer ae Lebensalter } Laie Lebensalter in der schen 1 1. ©. Gana APraoceroOod Septuagint TA AC OOO OO OOODO married Ma‘as Ma‘aserot (Talmud) ..Ma‘aser Sheni (Talmud) MACC.......0----... Maccabees Maimonides, Moreh.Maimonides, Moreh Nebukim Maimonides, Yad ..Maimonides, Yad ha-Hazakah MaKoraeiecse ce ..Makkot (Talmud) Maksh . .Makshirin (Talmud) Ee abot . Masorah arene 3 “jmectnt k and § Cyclopedia of Bib eClintock and Strong, Cyclop me) ib- MeClintock and lical, Theologica), and Ecclesiastical Liter- Strong, Cyc.. ature MGa avec eetoteonice Megillah (Taimud) Me Dir ctrosieisens.s sive Me‘ilah (Talmud) MGK eee niclosecslensts Mekilta MGI TRG wet ucsisretes.s Menahot (Talmud) Mid ese Seicrinieevran Middot (Talmud) INIT erates acters Midrash Mid ehi comers Midrash Tehillim (Psalms) WOU 6 canocongodooou6 Mikwaot (Talmud) Ma Koes Becerealeveterne Mo‘ed Katan (Talmud) Monatsschrift _ J Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissen- schaft des Judenthums Mortara, aie ...Mortara, Indice Al!fabetico Miller, Frag.Hist. area Fragmenta Historicorum Grsco- CREA oqcendeana rum y ; Munk, Mélanges. peas sees de Philosophie Juive Murray’s Eng. Dict.A. H. Murray, A New English Dictionary INBZ a ninciacisaic se or sise Nazir (Talmud) rates . no date INGdieea silts aentnctnee Nedarim (Talmud) INCGereiceicieie/sisiei ster ovoes Nega‘im Neubauer, Cat. PAs Catalogue of the Hebrew MSS. Bodl.Hebr. MSS. in the Bodleian Library Neubauer G. T....Neubauer, Géographie du Talmud Neubauer, M. J. C..Neubauer, Medigeval Jewish Chronicles PD aecaec cre sciecees no place of publication stated Se cratinectstsTotiacives New Testament Oest. Wochenschrift.Oesterreichische Wochenschrift @isacadoaaacsanasor Ohalot (Talmud) Onk.. -Onkelos Orient, Li .Literaturblatt des Orients ORL: .Old Testament Piceinectetr ie vats . Priestly Code Pagel, Biographisches Lexikon Hervorragen- Pagel, Biog. Lex. | der Aerzte des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts Pal. Explor. Fund..Palestine Exploration Fund Pallas Lex.........- Pallas Nagy Lexicon ee a x: Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopidie der Clas- Real-Encyc.. sischen A ltertumswissenschaft ROS aisianscastatetsatsitere’s Pesahim (Talmud) Peshiteeaascidcs erat Peshito, Peshitta Pesikirey nc innanenine Pesikta de-Rab Kahana IP OSIK CER spatele cis nicielo Pesikta Rabbati Pirke R. El Se letsieiainnts Pirke Rabbi Eli‘ezer POC Moons Proceedings Publ... UmQoodpabs Publications sy n pisiersiais iene pia'erare .-Rab or Rabbi or Rabbah ahmer's Jtd. _{ Rahmer’s Jitdisches Litteratur-Blatt Regesty . Regesty i Nadpisi ROVE c0cek fess Revue Biblique RoR escens .Revue des Etudes Juives Rev. Bém.......0.. Revue Sémitique Rene ones Rene emia (Talmud) mador de los Rios, Estudios Histéri Rios, Estudios, OE Ba Politicos y Literarios, ete. mador de los Rios, Historia... de los Rios, Hist. . een Judios de Espafia y Portugal Ritter, Erdkunde. Hace Die Erdkunde im Verhaltnis zur Natur und zur Geschichte des Menschen Pepe son: Re- ' Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine, Mt. Sinai, and Arabia Petreea . . . 1838 Robinson, Later t Robinson, Later Biblical Researches in Pal- Researches estine and the Adjacent Regions .. . 1 Roest, Cat. teas Catalog der Hebraica und Judaica osenthhe Bibl. aus der L. Rosenthal’schen Bibliothek logium eee es ee Memorbuches Saihineees creases Sanhedrin (Talmud) By Jehsonees soucins Sacred Books of the East B.0.T { (Sacred Books of the Old Testament) Poly- 8. B. 0. T......5. chrome Bible, ed. Paul Haupt A eee orate 208, _{ Schatt-Herzog, A Religious Encyclopsedia Schrader, 7a Sora Tes Cuneiform Inscriptions and the CET OSA aera Old Testament, Eng. transl. ay Schrader, K. A. 1’. scene Keilinschriften und das Alte Tes- Schrader, K. B.....Schrader, Keilinschriftliche Bibliothek 85 Schrader, K. G. F. { Schrader, Kellinsehriften und Geschichts- Schtirer, Gesch..... Schiirer, Geschichte des Jiidischen Volkes POMS wow diners Reece Semahot (Talmud) SHAD aeeocecesenacs Shabbat (Talmud) Shepic.cincanmcncncs Shebi‘it (Talmud) SHED Us esr stores Shebu‘ot (Talmud) RIS) Gass coneooodson Shekalim (Talmud) Sibyllines.......... Sibylline Books Smith, Rel. of Sem..Smith, Lectures on Religion of the Semites Soc. Bibl.Arch.. eee of the Society of Biblical Ar- Stade’s Zeitschrift ; erat 3 Be iste te die Alttestament- Steinschneider, | Steinschneider, Catalogue of the Hebrew Cat. Bodl....... Books in the Bodleian aces oe ‘tai A Steinschneider, Die Hebraéischen and- a eretan schriften der K. Hof- und Staats-Biblio- ne 26 thek in Miinchen sfebr. Bibl. ee f Steinschneider, Hebriiische Bibliographie Steinschneider, if! Steinschneider, Hebraische Uebersetzungen a Das Blut im Glauben und Aber- glauben der Menschheit Hebr. Uebers.. Strack, Das Blut.. SuiKe.crcmyemteciuserers Sukkah (Talmud) CHOveAG odotincoscudodo under the word NR eaG eso Gormic Ta‘anit (Talmud) Pana ens Tanhuma Sy acer Y dante Targumim Targ. Onk ... Targum Onkelos Targ.. Yer. ...Targum Yerushalmi or Targum Jonathan MOM icnveree ...Temurah (Talmud) OR Sev icca eae sate Terumot (Talmud) Test. Patr Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs ROWE can asics Tohorot SPOS Byawiateleyessieatelereterers Tosafot WOSCE 5. veh ma cee masa Tosefta "ER siersicincae ers ne ataiacles Transactions fraNshie vcccaws ews translation Tristram, Nat. Hist.Natural History of the Bible 4 BANG Tebul Yom (Talmud) “Ukzin (Talmud) Univers Israélite Virchow’s Archiv fiir Pathologische Anato- mie und Physiologie, und fiir Klinische Medizin ...-Vulgate ++ sees... Weiss, Dor Dor we-Dorshaw Wellhausen, eae Israelitische und Jiidische Devgd shia ciacerefuernne Geschichte Winer iB. Rane. aan. Winer, Biblisches Realwérterbuch Wisdom. Sancucacys Wisdom of Solomon Wolf, Bibl. Hebr...Wolf, Bibliotheca Hebrea W.Z. K.M § Wiener Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde des Sita ree ue ( Morgenlandes SYR tere aromatase Yadayim (Talmud) eSAViald i ii ecasueanrccdencte Yad ha-Hazakah RC ebqa eo anuoconce Yalkut ....Yebamot (Talmud) ...-Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud) .. Yahweh, Jehovah oe ain Sate eitschr er Deutschen Morgenlandi- Z. D. M. G.... ve schen Gesellschaft : Z.D.P.V.......... Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palistina-Vereins ZOD sean soeeeses Zebahim (Talmud) Zedner, Cat. Hebr. a Catalogue of the Hebrew Books in Books Brit.Mus. the British Museum Zeit. fiir Assyr.....Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl.Zeitschrift fiir Hebriische Bibliographie a Biro Post- Zetia Bibliotheca Hebraica Post-Mendels- endels we sohniana Zunz, G.S..........Zunz, Gesammelte Schriften Zunz, G. V....,....Zunz, Gottesdienstliche Vortrige ee een. 2uDs, bea abe oars: ¥ igh co) der Synagogalen COMB GOORIS oesie Zunz, Ritus...... el naa Ritus des Synagogalen Gottes- Zunz, 8. P.........Zunz, Synagogale Poesie des Mittelalters Zunz, Z. G..........Zunz, Zur Geschichte und Literatur CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VII J wosHtoosonae Cyrus Adler, Ph.D., President of the American Jewish Historical Society ; President of the Board of Directors of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America; Librarian of the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. +....A, Amar, Paris, France. J Neva. ES onbeee Alexander Biichler, Ph.D., Rabbi, Keszthely, Hungary. / Spel isdasaooe A. Freimann, Ph.D., Editor of the “Zeitschrift fiir Hebrdéische Bibliographie”’; Librarian of the Hebrew Department, Stadtbibliothek, Frankfort-on- the-Main, Germany. A, ¥e.......,.Alfred Feilchenfeld, Ph.D., Principal of the Realschule, Firth, Bavaria, Germany. A, F.-G......A. Frankl-Griin, Ph.D., Rabbi, Kremsir, Moravia, Austria. A.A... A. Ga........ Abraham Galante, Editor of ‘‘La Buena Esperanca,’’ Smyrna, Asia Minor. EPS GPW. sce Adolf Guttman, Ph.D., Rabbi, Syracuse, N. Y. i Ns 02 Sepp eeeas Abraham de Harkavy, Librarian of the Hebrew Department of the Imperial Public Library, St. Petersburg, Russia. A.H.E..... A. H. Rosenberg, New York City. A. K........ 4. Kaminka, Ph.D., Rabbi; Secretary of the Israelitische Allianz zu Wien, Vienna, Austria. A. Kai....... Alois Kaiser, Cantor, Temple Oheb Shalom, Baltimore, Md. iN 2.8 Wenaaone Alexander Kisch, Ph.D., Rabbi, Prague, Bohemia, Austria. 2 ‘53 <' Wheana . A. Kurrein, Ph.D., Rabbi, Teplitz, Bohemia, Austria. J Na Gi aBagoe Albert M. Friedenberg, B.S., LL.B., Counselor at Law; Correspondent of ‘* The Jewish Comment,” Baltimore, Md.; New York City. / Noa fo cbaeoR0ne A. Porter, Formerly Associate Editor of ‘*The Forum,”’ New York; Revising Editor ‘** Standard Oyclo- pedia,’? New York City. A. Pe........A. Peiginsky, Ph.D., New York City. A. B.........A. Bhine, Rabbi, Hot Springs, Ark. A. 8. W......A. 8. Waldstein, B. A., New York City. 1S? US ean paennc Benue)] H. Brumberg, Contributor to ‘* National Cyclopedia of Amer- ican Biography,” New York City. B. Ki.....,-..Benzion Eisenstadt, New York City. B, Fr.......,.B. Friedberg, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Germany. B.L..........Benno Lewinson, Counselor at Law, New York City. BP reescen es Bernhard Pick, Ph.D., D.D., Formerly Pastor of St. Joiin’s Lutheran Church, Albany, N. Y.; New York City, 1 Y aGonosae . Blanche Tausik, Néw York City. Be LOssccsasce Bernhard Templer, Ph.D., Rabbi, Vienna, Austria. BAY Asdadnaonne Bernhard Ziemlich, Ph.D., Rabbi, Nuremberg, Germany. OS GAT rene Charles C. Torrey, Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Languages, Yale Uni- versity, New Haven, Conn. 0. I. de $....Clarence I. de Sola, President of the Federation of Canadian Zionists, Montreal, Canada. CoS. Ml... Charles J. Mendelsohn, Philadelphia, Pa. 1+... Caspar Levias, M.A., Instructor in Exegesis and Talmudic Aramaic, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. CES ieccccns Carl Siegfried, Ph.D., LL.D. (deceased), Late Professor of Theology, University of Jena, Germany. DD raateiveee st ee Gotthard Deutsch, Ph.D., Professor of Jewish History, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. (o7 FaGe De Baw. s--c: David Bachrach, Baltimore, Md. DING cece: Baron David von Ginzburg, St. Petersburg, Russia. 8 9b 8 oopangaboc David Philipson, D.D., Rabbi, B’ne Israel Congregation ; Professor of Homiletics, Hebrew Union College, Cincin- nati, Ohio. De Sw... ... David Sulzberger, Philadelphia, Pa. D.W. A... David Werner Amram, LL. B., Counselor at Law, Philadelphia, Pa. E.A.........Edouard André, Paris, France. E. C.......... executive Committee of the Editorial Board. E. G. H......Emil @. Hirsch, Ph.D., LL.D., Rabbi, Sinai Congregation ; Professor of Rab- binical Literature and Philosophy, University of Chicago; Chicago, Ill. Bike Wevscees E. I. Nathans, Philadelphia, Pa. E. J..........Mmil Jelinek, Vienna, Austria. Bela cesccces Eude Lolli, Chief Rabbi; Professor of Hebrew, Univer- sity of Padua, Italy. E. Mae........ Edgar Mels, New York City. E.N..........Eduard Neumann, Ph.D., Chief Rabbi, Nagy-Kanisza, Hungary. E.N.A...... Elkan N. Adler, London, England. E. Schreiber, Ph.D., E. Schr..... Rabbi, Emanu-E] Congregation, Ohicago, Il. xii CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VII a E. Sd........ E. Schwarzfeld, LL.D., Secretary of the Jewish Colonization Associa- tion, Paris, France. E, Sl.........E. Slijper, Amsterdam, Holland. F. C.........Frank Cramer, B.Sc., New York City. ¥. H. V......Frank H. Vizetelly, F.S.A., Associate Editor of the ‘‘Columbian Cyclo- pedia’”’ and cf the STANDARD DIOTIONARY ; New York City. F.L. C..... Francis L. Cohen, Principal Rabbi, Sydney, N.S. W., Australia. Doh y 22 Sonne Frederick T. Haneman, M.D., Brooklyn, N. Y. Gerace dereresieys Richard 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......G@eorge Alexander Kohut, Formerly Rabbi in Dallas, Texas; Assistant Librarian of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York City. G. F. M......George F. Moore, M.A., D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and the His- tory of Religions, Harvard University, Cam- bridge, Mass. G. L..........@oodman Lipkind, B.A., Rabbi, New York City. G. Ro........@. Rosenmann, Ph.D., Vienna, Austria, H. Ab..,..... Herman Abramowitz, New York City. 02 i8 bocdoo0as H. Brody, Ph.D., Rabbi; Coeditor of the “Zeitschrift fiir He- bréische Bibliographie’’; Nachod, Bohemia, Austria. ... a. Baar, Formerly Rabbi in New Orleans; Superin- tendent, Hebrew Orphan Asylum, New York City. ...H. G. Enelow, D.D., Rabbi, Congregation Adath Israel, Louisville, Ky. .. A. Guttenstein, New York City. ..... 4artwig Hirschfeld, Ph.D., Professor, Jews’ College, London, England. H. Hirs...... H. Hirschenson, New York City. H.M......... Henry Malter, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. A 9 fsnoodiaua H. Necarsulmer, Counselor at Law, New York City. .. Herman Rosenthal, Chief of the Slavonic Department, New York Public Library, New York City. H.8.......... Henrietta Szold, Secretary of the Jewish Publication Society of America ; New York City. ... Hermann Vogelstein, Ph.D., Rabbi, Kénigsberg, East Prussia, Germany. I. A..........[srael 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- vera of Berlin, Germany; Jerusalem, Pal- Cy H. Ba.... H. V...... I. Ber....---- Israel Berlin, Chemist, New York City. I. Br........-l82a¢ 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. E..........4emar Elbogen, Ph.D., Instructor at the Lehranstalt fir die Wissen- schaft des Judenthums, Berlin, Germany. 1% (682 8 hogno08 I. George Dobsevage, New York City. 1 2 Banat Sacaur Israel Lévi, Rabbi; Professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary, Paris; Editor of ** Revue des Etudes Juives’’; Paris, France. I. M. O...... I. M. Casanowicz, Ph.D., United States National Museum, Washington, D.C. bt 20% 2 Yonnped Ira Maurice Price, B.D., Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Semitic Languages and Litera- ture, University of Chicago, Chicago, Il. Ot = engaeaanade I. Schwartz, Paris, France. Ignaz Ziegler, Ph.D., Rabbi, Carlsbad, Bohemia, Austria. T..cseceeeee+..008eDh Jacobs, B.A., Formerly President of the Jewish Historical Society of England; Corresponding Member of the Royal Academy of History, Madrid: New York City. I. Z... eoeeeee J.D. E......J. D. Eisenstein, New York City. J.E.B...,...J. E. Boutelje, Amsterdam, Holland. TecRMl ees J. F. McLaughlin, M.A., B. D., Professor of Oriental Languages and Litera- ture, Victoria College, Toronto, Canada. J. F. McO...J. Frederic McCurdy, Ph.D., Lu.D., Professor of Oriental Languages, University College, Toronto, Canada. Cine mu Phasodd J. G. Lipman, Ph.D., Assistant Agriculturist, New Jersey State Ex- periment Station, New Brunswick, N. J. J.de H......J. de Haas, ocurnalist; ‘Secretary of the Federation of American Zionists, New York City. ... Julius H. Greenstone, Rabbi, Philadelphia, Pa. Upit= G15 Woaood Joseph Hermann Hertz, Rabbi, Pretoria, South Africa. dime = & moocnpoes J. Hyams, e Bombay, India. Sia) ER Bictstareiiniots Jacques Kahn, Rabbi, Paris, France. J. So..... .... Joseph Sohn, Contributor to ‘‘The New International En- cyclopedia”’; formerly with ‘The Forum”; New York City. J. Sto....... Joseph Stolz, D.D., Rabbi, Chicago, Il. J. Stos.......Joseph Stéssel, Ph.D., Rabbi, Stuttgart, Wiirttemberg, Germany. Cs! Sooasadooud J. Theodor, Ph.D., Rabbi, Bojanowo, Posen, Germany. RUBEN Aoadaace ...Jacob Voorsanger, D.D., Professor of Semitic Languages and Litera- ture, University of California, Berkeley, Cal. ; Rabbi, Congregation Emanu-El, San Fran- cisco, Cal. J.Z.L.,.....0. Z. Lauterbach, Ph.D., New York City. K.....+.0.....aufmann Kohler, Ph.D., Rabbi Emeritus of Temple Beth-El, New York; President of the Hebrew Union Cole lege, Cincinnati, Ohio. CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VII xiii K. B..........Karl Budde, Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Univer- sity of Marburg, Germany. L. B..........Ludwig Blau, Ph.D., Professor, Jewish Theological Seminary; Edi- tor of “Magyar Zsidé-Szémle’’; Budapest, Hungary. 1 ee: T eoqonedon L. Belleli, London, England. OGRE 15 5s) oceres:ois L. Edelstein, New York City. L.G.......... Louis Ginzberg, Ph.D., Professor of Talmud, Jewish Theological Sem- inary of America, New York City. L. Gru......Lazarus Griinhut, Director, Orphan Asylum, Jerusalem, Pales- tine. 125 1 yc oona00 .Laura Landau, New York City. Ta Lise 0050 Leo Lewinsohn, New York City. ELS EGIME 0/s0.2 cca se L. Magnes, Ph.D., Rabbi, Brooklyn, N. Y. 182s oe asonae Lewis N. Dembitz, D.H.L., Counselor at Law, Louisville, Ky. 3 "\ ogotinee . Ludwig Venetianer, Ph.D., Rabbi, Ujpest, Hungary. L. Wie....... Leo Wiener, Assistant Professor of Slavic Languages, Har- yard University, Cambridge, Mass. ity, 3S6Gedcqnen L. Ysaye, Vienna, Austria. 3. (oe Roonaan M. Abrahams, Leeds, England. M,. Ad....... Michael Adler, B.A., Rabbi, Hammersmith Synagogue; Fellow of Jews’ College, London, England. M.A. M..... Martin A. Meyer, Rabbi, Temple Beth Emeth, Albany, N. Y. BIOs cioee 50s Max Cohen, Counselor at Law, New York City. PRE RE 5 «515101 Mathias Eisler, Ph.D., Rabbi, Klausenburg, Hungary. PR SES ale wiassie.e's Michael Friedlander, Ph.D., Principal, Jews’ College, London, England. 1.) 163 4) daanmeden M. Franco, Principal, Alliance Israélite Universelle School, Démotica, Rumelia, Turkey. M. Gar....... M. Garsson, New York City. M. Go........ Milton Goldsmith, Philadelphia, Pa. ME. Gr........ M. Grunwald, Ph.D., Rabbi, Vienna, Austria. M. J. K......Max J. Kohler, M.A., LL.B., Counselor at Law; Recording Secretary of the American Jewish Historical Society, New York City. M.K....,....Meyer Kayserling, Ph.D., Rabbi, Budapest, Hungary. M. L. B......Moses Lob Bamberger, Ph.D., Rabbi; Lecturer in Rabbinic, Jewish Semi- nary, Wiirzburg, Bavaria, Germany. M. Lo........Max Lohr, Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Theology and Ex- egesis, University of Breslau, Germany. MM. Mr.,......M. Margel, Ph.D., Rabbi, Pozega, Slavonia, Austria. M.R........AMax Rosenthal, M.D., Visiting Physician, German Dispensary, New York City. M. Sc........Max Schloessinger, Ph.D. (Office Editor), Rabbi, New York City. MoSaly. ic. Max Seligsohn (Office Editor), Doctor of the University of Paris, France; New York City. 1 SE oooqqond Marcus Stieglitz, Berlin, Germany. M. Sta....... M. Stark, Rabbi, Konigliche Weinberge, near Prague Bohemia, Austria. ME Sul sie ostice Mayer Sulzberger, Philadelphia, Pa. OOM Angodand Max Weisz, Ph.D., Budapest, Hungary. DES WY Oisice coy M. Weissberg, Stanislaw-Zaremcze, Galicia, Austria. M. W.L..... Martha Washington Levy, B.A., Contributor to ‘‘The New International Em. cyclopedia,’”’ New York City. M. W. M....Mary W. Montgomery, Ph.D., New York City. M. Z.....- ... WM, Zametkin, New York City. Nee Pisccscccss N. Porges, Ph.D., Rabbi, Leipsic, Germany. BS tSD onganae N. Slouschz, Paris, France. ONG) Wepatiocetes N. T. London, New York City. 1) 3 aouncatiooe Philipp Bloch, Ph.D., Rabbi, Posen, Germany. P. Wi........Peter Wiernik, Journalist, New York City. 154 (En ooscane Raphael Guggenheimer, Ph.D., Rabbi, Kolin, Bohemia, Austria. R. H. K...... Rosa H. Knorr, New York City. Siivresicinee crete Isidore Singer, Ph.D., MANAGING EDITOR, New York City. S.A. B....... Samuel Augustus Binion, M.D., New York City. BS Baisces cess Solomon Bamberger, Strasburg, Germany. S. Be.........Simon Bernfeld, Berlin, Germany. 8. Ei co.cscece Samuel Ehrenfeld, Ph.D., Prague, Bohemia, Austria. SEL ccec une Siegmund Frankel, Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Philology, University of Breslau, Germany. SPE yes .. Siegmund Frey, Rabbi, Chicago, Ill. Bake csvese: S. Kahn, Rabbi, Nimes, France. S. Kr........Samuel Krauss, Ph.D., Professor, Normal College, Budapest, Hungary. S. Levy, M.A,, Rabbi, London, England. S. Lev....... 8S. Levene, Brooklyn, N. Y. Ba lOcccvsess S. M.........8. Mendelsohn, Ph.D., Rabbi, Wilmington, N.C. 8. Man.,....8. Mannheimer, B.L., Instructor, Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio. 8. Mdl.......S. Mandl, Ph.D., Rabbi, Neutitschin, Moravia, Austria. 8. Mu........8. Miihsam, Ph.D., Chief Rabbi, Gratz, Styria, Austria. 8. P..,.......8amuel Poznanski, Ph.D., Rabbi, Warsaw, Poland, Russia. 8. Po.........8. Posner, Warsaw, Poland, Russia. xiv CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME VII 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. .. Sigmund Seeligmann, Rabbi, Amsterdam, Holland. ME vatare(Cietsyeleve .... Orawford Howell Toy, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Hebrew, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. S.Se...... WS Cuiases .. Umberto Cassuto, Florence, Italy. Wis Oise «+ Vittore Castiglioni, Chief Rabbi, Rome, Italy. V. E......... Victor Rousseau Emanuel, Laurel, Md. V. R.........Vasili Rosenthal, Kremenchug, Russia. V. Ry........ Victor Ryssel, Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis and Semitic Languages, University of Zurich, Switzerland. W.B.........W. Bacher, Ph.D., Professor, Jewish Theological Seminary, Buda- pest, Hungary. W.N........ Wilhelm Nowack, Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis, Uni- versity of Strasburg, Germany. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VII N. B.—In the following list subjects likely to be sought for under various headings are repeated under each heading. Amierica: see JAMAICA; LANCASTER. Amygdalon, Pool of: see Hezexi1an, Poon or. PAGE atROL ONY CLEOL Wo OL USAIEIN i Yorch fore! otucs lar arora/ ore ale eral dle-s(efeie s lereleld ers cleidi vlads e Sad owe tauleneien cab nk ee 139 “ Arba‘ Turim,” Page from the First Edition of Jacob ben Asher’s, Piove di Sacco, 1475............. 29 Archeology: see Corn; ELt-AmMarna; JEHU; LacuisH ; SEAL; Tomps. mrches, street Of, Jerusalem... 5 css cecesecsswscesees BOD O.CHOCSR DO CONCADUna Oren eHOCrOSend ca oe 155 Architecture: see JAcHIN; Josp’s WELL; SyNacoGuEs; TomBs. Ark of the Law and Perpetual Lamp of the Synagogue at Ramsgate, England............. ewer: 599 —— —— Entablature of the, of the Synagogue at Lancaster, Pa............. 0.0.0 cece eee ee eeeeees 605 PURTBSTOISITAOLLO Jal Ores. wc cs sic ets os eee ee Mee events avevavese ettelalstorsic’s Vere srevekess Gelataletane svete ere aera oeeaterte 61 Be AOLACHOTA CWS Otro LLCON DUT 25g rcrcnicrs ln cies Sepsors oes eis onewieig wie aw wie Sie aie ie ele lSe ius oletelons clavols else he 3874 Art: see ARCHEOLOGY; ARCHITECTURE; Coat or Arms; CostuME; KAuFMANN, Isipor; Kerusag; Lamps, PERPETUAL; LAmMps, SABBATH; MANUSCRIPTS; TYPOGRAPBHY. Ashkenazic Synagogue, Jerusalem. After Schwarz, 1850...........cccccescccccccccccsccecccececs 137 eet NOLTeAt, JCTUSALCIN:. 6. vccscice os Onc sowie ve sens eedewedas Bsa tareraenetauetntiavene s fersiate SeceT eso Atonement, Day of, Kapparot Ceremony Before the.......... BH OOnEOL eieretelersysrerteterstcioteiete sPelera tes Sad eee ot 435 Bar Kokba, Obverse of a Coin of, Bearing a Laver...........0.ceeecceeceetes Saewie le Sao eae ete 630 Basins and Ewers, Used for Washing of the Hands by Priests............ 0000 ccc eeesccuccceaccs 630-633 BivAyyubor Job's Well, South of Jerusalem... 20.06.0066 000000000 sneitiees sieloacicne SoCadoou Geox 202 Black Obelisk, Tribute of Jehu to Shalmaneser II., as Depicted on the............-.ceeeees wiske averse 89 Boaz, Column of: see JACHIN. Cairo Genizah, Thirteenth-Century Manuscript of Kohelet Rabbah, from the..............---00% Koo, api Catacombs, Plan of the, on the Mount of Olives, Hast of Jerusalem,....... she haves Siewert onic erne tte 147 —— see also Tomas. Cave Leading to the Traditional Tombs of the Judges, Near Jerusalem...............eceeccseeeceee 147 —— Leading to the Traditional Tombs of the Kings, Near Jerusalem............... sodoSbouddo0so4 148 —— on the Top of Tell Jafat, Site of Ancient Jotapata............... Syooapoon gees soaond boone bo5¢ 298 Censorship: see CUZARI. Ceremonial: see ARK OF THE Law; KetTuBAH; LAMpPs, PERPETUAL; LAMpPs, SABBATH; LAVER. Citadel of Zion, Jerusalem............... ier esertiete arsiers siete ec kre ace 895 Aa OER On on Rai ITO AN CIS Ore 144 Coat of Arms of Sir Otto Jaffé........... OS See iaeia c sthe Hetero neseeeic nie ar oreralt ctoralcteters 61 Coin of Bar Kokba, Bearing a Laver.......... Motetnercorie eter eters Sa jetaie ceislaleyeiessisie er tudieae epee or aretelepeerotsre 630 Column of Jachin as Restored by Chipiez....... ieteleietetolerentie sie eteneielolerclereletere eleleicleletelsiote eis iciere Hbocosesac 19 Contracts, Marriage: see KeTuBauH. Costume, Amsterdam, Seventeenth Century......... ACIDE UAGODOUD OAC OOGNOONU SST ODOG ecisisiere oi cerseier 601 MEV OLTINT OMIA eee cieyeicle sisjelers c.cle eee «isisje'eis.c oe eve ASE, GS AOU HOR ITASCA ro macicnide SOIC 143 MEEOIEICATAILGOOWS ccicisic ce occ neo sos ciss soci cnevicis cis ccs BOGOTA donno cacmedaraae apres wisieVersit ete . 442, 445 . IRV FETE 6 6 no dnti6 SOR OOD OOROCOSIETID HOD BED SUD DUOC OOO ne OOOOnOUrn rcs AIO AR OOO LCOS dicots 408 ‘Cuneiform Tablet Found at Teen Mentionin g Abdi Heba of 5 CRUSAIOCIM ec ric cice ect siierecskonletere ctevexs 120 * Cuzari,” Censored Page from the First Edition of Judah ha-Levi’s, Fano, 1506.......... SG Soonebar 349 Damascus Gate, Jerusalem.............-- SAP OU EC ODD ODOR ae Regie cere ota vtitesis etevele’ sine Si etaisina vera sheets ove 150 David, Tower of, Jerusalem.......-. SAGO CU ODN Rea ais eaieiensiavie vlenise isis Wrateve Dieta etaiar ties elesre ee eee 142 xvi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VII David’s Street, Jerusalem......ccsceceeeeeereerececceresceccees AOSGOLGOGS 4s SA dibs] Sleare ereltrewle steietetete Documents: see KETUBAH. “Eben Bohan,” First Page from the First Edition of Kalonymus’, Naples; 1499.....c1-: s0s'ecs onsen eem El-Amarna, One of the Tablets Found at, Mentioning Abdi Heba Of Jertisalem.. <0 s0:0 siscisec cas sae oelismlae En-rogel or Job’s Well, South of Jerusalem ......---++++ ABGABOSADDO oaenlh os ¢'saleeiecine ona salsa autieameue Eternal Lamps: see Lamps, PERPETUAL. Europe: see ITaALy; KARLSBAD; KGNIGSBERG. Fano: see JUDAH HA-LEVI. First Editions: Censored Page from Judah ha-Levi’s “Cuzari,” Fano, 1506.......++eseceeeeereceeees 349 —— —— Page from Jacob ben Asher’s “ Arba‘ Turim,” Piove di Sacco, 1475...... oa’, 008s « aca paiale ste eee —— —— Page from the Judeo-German “ Yosippon, ” Zurich, Niameinnce pe oo 263 —— —— Page from Kalonymus’ “Eben Bohan, ” Naples, 1489.. eT Chere oriccricorinoatonos 22 —— —— Page from Mordecai Jaffe’s “ Lebushim,” Lublin, 1500-4. eee PoHNaAOdOMDTIOSC 56 tat!) —— —— Page from the “ Yosippon,” Mantua, 1475-80...... o's sou Ue ob elyie bu Gace ely eheteele mm eleceeletsteraten naan Gate, Damascus, Jerusalem........... <.s6 ope bb. .0.0,8s 0:6 0 '0'e op lus Big Slots 6 1S 2,a)0 ornielela sale glace] aren manna —— Exterior of the Golden, Jerusalem..........++6- welelavoisle: dle (aie 's elersalolersieleraeraiersieretercnate aeieeisie Ane 6els —— Interior of the Golden, Jerusalem...........+6- s:ar6 kG aidic s 'elavbiecese. 6 bole s(alelere a steleleimerster te eter aetna —— Square Outside the Jaffa, Jerusalem. .......seeesecceccercccvcesscccccesecscecscserecs coe noel = ZION SELUGAlEIeeire tere cietetacrtersie'e aad eS Geld ieee ia 6! eluieleteletereleteleve ere le oretaiel erotelareieve:elaletele cistetctertetamneene Germany: see KARLSBAD; KGONIGSBERG. Golden Gate, Exterior and Interior Views of the, Jerusalem ........ccccccccssescceecsessceeecs 145, 151 Grave of Maimonides, Near Tiberias.............seeeeseenee sfefereie stelererstels Sie) ois oil] cfaisieiale evetelateletartatete 215. Grotto of Jeremiah, North of Jerusalem............-.0esseeseeees Fema AR OOODDOODOOUCUO. Per mts. —— Leading to the Traditional Tombs of the Kings, Near Jerusalem..........cseeceeceeevereceeees 148 HaramyArea; Site of the Lemp ler eleleiejtoleferercle(eretelolelelelelelnieielolatel=lolele lel *ieleletoletstars Silo elsivleivielereiclalsisleriaets 153 Hereford Mappa Mundi, Dated 1280, Showing Jerusalem in the Center of ‘he Worlds oc ccmccn sare 128 Hezekiah y Poolvofird erusalemrrcrssiacvctoleieleroicieieisetelels cyalelsiatatetaretetaicte rate wi'se(eieie.eie sie olaletele/e!sialeie'e\e\e\sielcketateter eee cso Hippicus, Tower of, Jerusalem...............6. POISE Sievaie.e #rsie 6 ee aleiere eale.eiuteleale elavcrolerelersleieterereeee ee Incunabula: see ARBA‘ TuRIM; EBEN BoHAN; ORAH HAyYyIM; YOSIPPON. Inscriptions: see Coin; SEAL. Isaac Blessing Jacob. From a “Teutsch Chumesh” ,........ AB DAAEOOS siele'ele of eta)s/erele claleceve cveicleveleleisteleremrenc ——-——. From the Sarajevo Haggadah, fourteenth century........... ADOC HOOdnmocoonodcoda. ©!) Italy, Map of, Showing Places Where Jewish Communities Have Existed.........cccccccccsccecssss 9 Ixar, Page from Jacob ben Asher’s “Orah Hayyim,” Printed in 1485 at... ceccseccecevescessscesess 18 Jabal Karantal and Probable Site of Ancient Jericho............. Sia) 0: hele bl0e wl eiainl cleVeretelerare crete cia sitet rLeEe Jachin, Column of, as Restored by Chipiez,....... pundoucsbsadnoce #41 Gieielsis sivicieia clslaleie an Tele lmieieleseteicicrtemenee Jacob Receiving Isaac’s Blessing....... toes iesorehianvianers Senreicered da.o 010 oa Sraiscaivisie eee recelone Ciefermteleetete mem PACOD'S DEAE Sakic mnie eeicie ete os er eee AS ricyAr ne arate ehreretae sisigre W shovels sie arererenelt Jacob ben Asher, Page from the First Edition of the « Arba‘ "Purim,” Piove di Sacoa pe Yi Pec oadaso kL —— —— Page from the “Orah Hayyim,” Printed at Ixar, 1485..... Jacobi, Abraham, American Physician.......... mreieisie ctarsieieie eerste soveceesiitthes gues ae ry Jacobson, Israel, German Reformer....... SROSHGnARA ecmpeleccssne @-0'9.0:9 0:8 ibe o eleje ele leis sleeves cleleleleleleiietemmeadl Jacoby, Johann, German Physician and Statesman...........csccocccsseccsececccccccccececccee. es 49 Jaffa Gate, Square Outside the, Jerusalem......... s/0e.cle © bin 0:00.00 6 6 ees bie.0/erais © olv'e eielelelererelerstanencerere enema eG —— Plan of the Modern City of sis S161 aluieisielelels slatereietoteisintete 62 Jaffe, Mordecai, Page from the First Edition of the Seishin 4 ' Lublin, 1590. a ee a eo Jae Sit Otto. ATM sO fee eee aren cee ee Me ateaiceare ee aH ouKC veetentdacdai ceiitee a a Jamaica, Synagogue at Spanish Town.............. AGodaded.s sloreieieie ¢siers aletoreteretratererticte os ee 67 Jastrow, Marcus, American Rabbi and. Scholar, j0.0ces. ov ob s0is cede eee eee ee 78 Jehoshaphat, Valleyof ¥.<.7.e 0-12. ee 1 secady send enda tulas deneleea eae 87 Jehu, Tribute of, to Shalmaneser II. From the Black Obelisk..........,.,.. We 89 Jeiteles, Jonas Mischel, Austrian Physician...... ovata ave.e/e a7a/atefolenelererataneerete us ee 91 Jellinek, Adolf, Austrian Rabbi and Scholar...... aNiatelaters dacvenevantegtecteet eee 92 ee ee ee oe hth Pere es Peer ae eT ee ee Oe a ee — a ae LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VII xvii PAGE Jeremiah, Grotto of, North of Jerusalem............ amet eiecrciscellelsicieie’s ecieie erates Malaita s sare: s 98 Jericho, Jabal Karantal and Probable Site of Arent. AD SOCIO ACO TOES Mteel eee eee eevee 110, 111 Jerusalem, Ashkenazic Synagogue. After Schwarz, 1850..... Moveleieieletsnisers siseiewie’sicieiae sews nie ce meyerets 137 SPAM ICAL NtRCOLUIN «euros coats sie ease os of cae cade esate Pare crtetarouaeoretees piecerereceiovel siecle aratahey tye 154 SBD CES EU VC MV LC WO Lie serie’ sie cits 's sree sic eae 3c aid Cake eis 4 ve ees eiareeaatete tisialare: oles. «prea laweeie ee 140 — Cave Leading to the Traditional Tomb of tie J Stirieek IN Ga linetetn ctetele micelete eit ote civil sereitvsiee tetra 147 AO OF NOT rete mee ener eee ce oes sale soars o.0k wen Oh oe Saas Sates acs taeasds voeves’ 144 Cross-Sectional View of (West to Hast), as Seen from the South............cceeceeccecceccecees 118 coeaee LINASC USE CALC ery arery aie) etare tata ce ceiaiors wr0re/aiaccies «asievescie'e afareterslovslieteTevarelele\sisjaleie eVolere sisvsieveveiers’s)¢ reeLOO MI EVIC SHS ULOCL teense. osaie ars sls vale Seite eee else's Ca 19000506 Ssteleieeias sVovoyatatelercroie) ofsiere sv ersiahetsietareiera netavers 156 —— Exterior of the Golden Gate...............005 ietererateverers cielsrotets ofais alate a oietcreliate (artca sieitictiys s oreretarater 145 Seem O Cen G ates trommyvau ning thes @ityiol erica secs «ccices celeie sete ce arate Jo ever sicis'e cuapeercuversten s/ale 151 —— Great Ashkenazic Synagogue............... Balerererstersieiciciete arora sale rel Spiers tert ehareinreclarslorsrolnerelaeiereciste axe 138 CHO UOLO lee CREMUMALIN INOLULNOL saraieyiercic erase tele clots cic eidew creece si cicieea'ce ARCO GDC TODO paren 98 —— Grotto Leading to the Traditional Tombs of the Kings, Near..........cccescscccccsseceecceces 148 —— Haram Area, Site of the Temple....... BSCS GOI DO CRO IAGO BORIC ORT ERIE IC EEL COCCO CERI C Cention 1538 — Hereford Mappa Mundi, Showing Jerusalem in the Center of the World..........2....ceceeeees 128 Ee JOD{S Well, SOUtH Of ss... cams secieee serene sfareuatercroretsuristeteraleretels lel cieteversceravareuste srs sists tela tereteenstomiers 202 Hi OOO ORC ER TCR CSI Re alerslaletereleleiclareicicteisraisivic eects eicisie) LL OMLUSDLCCE ONOMMAD eeksiolel oatererere elefercierstemiclovs SaonsococdGeSdoo doo duc ol 1keB3 — —— Showing Topographical Features......... alasaNeioteisie syercettisicce eelere teens vere. Reais Frontispiece —— —— Time of the Crusades............ ccc ceccccceeces Bosra tench ean oiaaie vatace sista scareleretainersis Frontispiece —— — Time of Destruction (70 ©.B.)............ Bi avs abbvel erat cteye Sialete oysisia a) eae seis wees eich steers Frontispiece a TITOLOL ON COM La limon arsrersiate steve, eters oie oysters ajveisoia0 ole 4,6 eras eee 6 6 ss evcvielveee griseus cates Frontispiece —— One of the El-Amarna Tablets Mentioning Abdi Heba of........cccseccceessccsserccccceccsecs 120 FRAN OAM AOL WTOCELI reseie, stcleietsiicistrale die sie wie ave elie isis: na es miclorcrerretacrs oe terres folder between 144-145 —— Plan of the Catacombs on the Mount OLBOM VES, HASt Olina (selec sreserdieis cralerei scaly s/srsieie eaicloleie, ote etek ates 147 See eMC UO uremic tairsisferareis ota ays tine S’elevels.s)3.9 en's e's o/s eeere%s areveretevofots Ao OF COCO COORD DOUG AGH AGGOEID 135 —— —— the Tombs of the Judges (Upper Level).............. O60 HmOCOt an aeOn avarciohe: o/s ate seetreteraderetete 146 Fam ORO MM ELE ZO Klavlltererevereyonsres: eats lakatsy scare arsitis ee levsnaiisinie s rgiels. acerausisie eo a wale sacea eee HATOMOUD OAC IO CHCOnOS 186 PR CCUONAlMVIC WHOL OER LOMNOS Oh the UGMESy INCAD sy teins icicles sisieisie icleie es cle ss eceevcas sie cence 146 KEL CHES NO WIN Se ODO STAD MICA MCALUTESOfsa. ts. srsjel'e.e so: vie siieieie se sles visit eve oe Siely cies, elsleve-e's e/ejee « 119 ERO IALC OU SLAG: b Cred MELE A Ose cecaerch-toyere aie yaye) el o)0i6/ ies. oseieirelo ev sielees'srsie.* e010 nodooodadodboauo oe dis srese eke sialeyerele 244 Joseph and His Brothers. From the Sarajevo Haggadah..............- Good ou coooadadaadDODODoONS 247 —— Sold by His Brothers. From the Sarajevo Haggadah........... OOO AO SHOUREC aialere teal 8 eerste sie tertiers 248 PE radigional Lomb Oty Near Nablus (SheECHEM). << cacdeceesccc esos ecee cee se cesisiecccsesieee ices 246 — ben Gorion: Page from the First Edition of the J there Goenan “Yosippon,” Zurich, 1546....... 263 —— —— Page from the First Edition of the “ Yosippon,” Mantua, 1475-80....... Detele sie felereletniel seit she 261 Jost, Isaac Marcus, German Historian........... BtLOTREO HOCH AO OSE CRODU TN ORIG sisisis sere sicelele eistevere 296 Jotapata, Cave on the Top of Tell Jafat, Site of Ancient Ree itte oe idle srmrcatie fers cicie oancia, sclaiernes eelereieisteneree 298 Judah ha-Levi; Censored Page from the First Edition of the “Cuzari,” Fano, 1506. Ap GeDOOOOCUOURCIED wnt) Judah Lévw-ben Bezaleel, Tombstone of, at Prague.. RPS atte takers ie sere oi ols elutataiatorclsveleieleueletis e's sie jet OU sudenburg, Arms of the Jews Of. ......-5-.sccescrsseesesvecsseccucs afore siereieuaeieteleCiclevoisieieicieie cieteraie Oe Judges, Tombs of the, Cave Leading to the Traditional, Near Jerusalem ......ccccccccccccsccsscoses 147 —— —— Plan and Sectional View of the Traditional, Near Jerusalem........sscecccesecsceccecrees 146 xviii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VII Se PAGE ‘6 Kaddish,” Music of......0.-.ecseee seer eeeeccceces wale sisieieis cas ieieertoe era . ide alah one te gn ea Kaempf, Saul Isaac, Austrian Rabbi and Orientalistacrwa cc AB DOGO ODOC Seo ahs ees ots emer ate et ate oretoers 408 Kahn, Zadoc, Chief Rabbi of France............+.. siiarecs soateneoece'e dona vie, sual Gniare ot oben beemererertcerehe neleiaters 413 Kalischer, Zebi Hirsch, German Rabbi..........+:esseeeee cee cee reese secret ences see age A421 Kalonymus ben Kalonymus; First Page from the First Edition of the “Eben Bohan,” Naples, 1489... 427 Kapparot Ceremony Before the Day of Atonement........+++++eeersereecerereres sravaie’s’aaierenete reeees | 435 KATAItORICWS meena cee esis AM rh Aces Fe Caotiomavinoaco08 IG: j nteisteiele ese te siecioristerere 442, 445 Karlsbad, Synagogue at ...... esses cece eee e renee reeeeres i dlb s elaieve steve erste sltiere) she ietteenevommicr sts aiate se... 449 Kaufmann, David, Austrian Scholar..........--.+-++-- Bat ateserse itis etovnie alot vie aie Sales oacsusseseelereoete 457 —— Isidor, “The Chess-Players,” from the Painting by..............++-.-+0- stetlesieae Peso tonaon ... 458 Kayserling, Meyer, German Rabbi and Historian............ sislsvelaiefe eiers.e slorsicloleselsiteeiate ts Disteco eee Coreetees 460 SR efOWOts - MUBICSOL, Pelee otaet aa ose oh se uieeml ns Mier ester inte aie sale ee aivlere eveie Pca: CAL Ketubah, or Marriage Contract, Dated Amsterdam, DATO SFL GOO acetarerereeveiccersi ielers APOEOR OEE Reta Poe ake: a INC ONES, WHO = MO ocroboccobbotuonoul acc pnboc boopooTodeT stele dina (orate ac ekclere sore chore mene AG? == HONStANLMOp Le, O09 le=—. 1 Seale ereretetale etter elt -toletoltololelsteler=t-(oaal S05DM ook Geisnaistereaicteresate s5do086 477 ee Manta Oo0 rl Coole ciecietterealeetrteiete ie eiots Asfereieieetete suavecevate eherevere eters tsieiereeisleterere Dies sate ade FROME OOO Se OU ee raatereteleretaretereteigtoveiet ole ohictohel e)elore: eens stelotareTctetelste aya late sieve, eletetaterster eects Ree ks) ROME AOD LOA LOU Oncverelereters iste eteetoleRaetel TareteteterstolerrereksiTers Sectors wile ie g AG e eletd ore recente: 475 Key and Bolt Used in Modern Syria...........0..ececceeececcceceecees sroleie clelolslele ciereieclerieiatete Bopico on iow) Kiamil Pasha, Turkish Officiai........... ASR ROC REE BORGO ONC eee state eis Se iactee edeslee Beets SKAUIAO ING: Cll eV LUSIC OLeepis se onteriinie acta laretaroraroeioc loin eistniclerastetorrericts eal eslarate aa’ s afelotetecersrer Soiclere clea eanoe King: Seal of Obadiah, “Servant of the King”. .......... . 2c cecsececccesscccsessccrscess Seance Bue Kings, Tombs of, Grotto Leading to the Traditional, Near Jerusalem........... atesavale Savesstere Juice OL LS Kohelet Rabbah, Thirteenth-Century Manuscript of. From the Cairo Genizah....................-- 531 SCO MENT Cn ae NLUSTC © Larercueterereioiyarorereicee! «leis BaguouEoOC Sn Gopoouauot dele efete ofelcisete titre larely An OL Oa 542-546 Kompert seo pold, PAtISETIAM A ULMOL sores ore eessiecetersicis choeiereersterereite al eietesatslchestoistete ekeleter 8.0 01e. oe Sietalsa eames KOnISS PELE SY MASOLUCs AT. ce sien sictele/cielolelerctolel cetera alocclel are eral ateveleteteroreletetereletersiarteteens AM OOO OO OCo GE) Konigswarter, Baron Moritz, Austrian Deputy and Pailanthropee ESO OpacoDcacd SIOOGOOOS SSocuu0Dc Be “Kotel ha-Ma‘arabi”: see WAILING-PLACE. Kuranda, Ignaz, Austrian Deputy and Political Writer.................00. SopAnaoI OC Bon soseonodse ete - Lachish : Sectional View of Excavations at Tell al-Hasi, Showing Seven Strata of Cities............ 593 — Siege of, by the Troops of Sennacherib........... MOPS ATOM Onaauecone do yd iis ot Sak eee . 591 —— Tell al-Hasi, Site of Ancient...........0.eceeeeer ees AA totacncicddiocs odusdagshannecn 592 amps, Perpetual), Various Horm, ..4...cs...e« 500s eee eeeees Ate SA had «e--. 599-601 —— Sabbath, Lighting the. From a Passover Gopeaden of 1690.2.%7.. Sa orseatodeiccntancmacn aut 601 —— Sabbath, Various Dorms... 254 iai%.% ope se oon s oben ees xm eels eater eee nk ecient ...- 602-603 Lancaster, Entablature of the Ark of the Law of the Synagogue at, Eighteenth Century........ a oe OOO Landau, Ezekiel, German Rabbi............eecescsccoes Seen Tn SCO chook ocd ise veraemOOG Lasker, Eduard, German Politician....... eDAE BREE LG Aw ele oie alee ba aarea aseeehe as felevantiar ene ABUSOSSOoo! We Lassalle, Ferdinand, German Socialist.............05 SA cies ins adic Scenics sone wictaecelere See Laver, Obverse of a Bar Kokba Coin, Bearing a........... eats. ouenneaee chia eee Meee Swietoes 630 Lavers, Consisting of Ewers and Basins, Various Forms of..........eeeeeese5 A ees eine 6380-6383 iazarus, Emma, American (Poetessu-s <5 a. kkheeis cok cnn Ren Renee ee ee eee b Dea tarer ash stehoreretetete -.- 650 —— —— Tablet with Poem by, Affixed to the Liberty Monument, New VWorkscs \atas eee dar oos 651 ——— Moritz, German: Wiiter..anannnn ess eeee cee ceet met eee Ene SoGGA Ades Saaecocdc weveses OBB Lebanon, Mount, The Forests of ...... ipa e albiels 9 ever tahvetefeiere Sortdod aia aie eke Slaluieis 0.0 eraluitialsieterstereteletermmttiorte Lebensohn, Abraham, Russian Hebraist and Poet..........ccccececcccccuccccccee Baars eta suine (OON “Lebushim,” Page from the First Edition of Mordecai J aite’s; Lublit, 159052... 62. ce eee eee Nonaes Ot) “Le-Dawid Baruk,” Music of........ nae te a etels Mei domacode nah ks Aedeee ARR ack veeees 660-661 Leeser, Isaac, American Rabbi.............ccceee AOCEOO.G Rinve wb eA ab bie olee ni mlateiets ole oie Ree ee Slate seOOe: Leghorn, Synagogue at..........0c000. HOBO odoror Pts are ae Ridius domodsecdd vesbeccecces OOF ~meckah Dodi,” Muse Of. xu wiesns oud Gabe avee ae Cee CRU nee eo wisn’ sis Bie ere eVelelaiuieie Satine ae mires "676-877 ene Interior of mee (ey nagog te on Weeksloreere sy eieiararn eer sae eee ene ArKO ECAR C Cae a ee tet rene we eleicieie ee OS) simone, Grave of, Near Tiberias wi crala, Gis... eke oKellagelave om colehsterete tet coon acer Taeeeae gab s nein. ot eas TE Se eeeeeoeteeosreceeesereseoos 261 pe es ee ee ee ee ee ey, a ee eT ee LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME Vii xix PAGE Map of Italy, Showing Places Where Jewish Communities Have Existed...... SSD COue: CTR ESOS OSE 9 —— of Jerusalem, Showing Position of Southern Wall at Various Times............ccceccececeecece 128 Beets MOCOTM ys o1e one cicloe en ate woe cus. eiollotelsrere ane Caisse trices aie serrercis tieracare Prontiepidte aid 149 —— —— Showing Topographical Features..............- steeree e's oes BOCA OA OC MESES SGC Frontispiece “—— —— Time of the Crusades............ aiajeiwie oles Oe aisleieteterete aie sis eles crete wise lewis Frontispiece a IME OlMOEStrUCtION (10.C.H.),.00c6s6ssceccscveccscccves eletelaletelelntelcieisisioiere eorcielsiersmr cl OVLUIS IL CCE —— —— Time of Nehemiah........ meet es Rare eee aah istecsiels Steeievsse wusYeeioh Ga wee cere ceeee Lrontispiece RE Be OME REY OILY COM MAING fest 4 cay aes bn < v/a'v a v6 ox vu ccaevnsccaswaweectesarcsceace Soensosmb 52 —— The Hereford Mappa Mundi, 1280, Showing Jerusalem in the Center of the World. Marriage Contracts: see Knrusan. onuments: see BLACK OBELISK; LACHISH. eisicicisie’sieice eae cO Mosque of Omar, Jerusalem,...... AOD RO rOG Pieleleterstdyareeinwis cisiemrele BO OCA COR coi 153 msicn “Kaddish””.. os... +0. stidcomanbubDonoudaAD siete s/sistaieisl sieve sitie susie's fe aril esafecetpo sin ere’ersieleiwiniere © 404-407 Se RICOLOD OL. sn ire Sicie scoae eels e 80 piolateiekerarsines siareyerciersis crelete = svetaysiniese.o.er6cs Her Somer: Ueetaic a eetaks ara lois ane tele 469-471 — “Ki Lo Na‘eh”......... eroiclefelelelerereiolsiels ve leicleiieici eet Maieysie Sierecele eleoiele Sieiee He eine sit wise Sq0oonC.06 493 -— “Kol Nidre”.......... afeirelajereievarstes eysereisiiais weiss siecle sieeecis ate ste ¢ Anemouad Ranieloniniete sretere 542-546 — “Le-Dawid Baruk”....... pboneoggated SE OUSEOe jocbigoostosuduGsede bgiacae eioreleletaieiercre 4 BE 660-661 — “Lekah Dodi”...... Bieiisieiel cieiee tei rascasaie ¢ sreiecofeierers sisteiotstotsteterciele SOU CORED Ane scncuooucod WES H< Nablus (Shechem), Traditional Tomb of Joseph, Near.............0. A RAE CaS OOP ODES RACOWO 246 Naples, First Page from the First Edition of Kalonymus’ “ Eben Bonan: ” Printed in 1489 at.......... 427 Olives, Mount of, Plan of the Catacombs on the,...........ccecceccscceses Netoletetaieveiclssletersicrels arayreyarsuel a RTM OS UOMO Hp NOUUSH LCL atcteyatarctorevc ac yereicie st iolo/ers nieis (ale Gidls sieve a\elad sleidivie o.e's.o'ee siecle eoelee s SEOOODDG ODS 153 “Orah Hayyim,” Page from Jacob ben Asher’s, Printed at Ta WAS Digevorelers erate ele ain eters tolotaalete scoocd | 63 Palestine: see JAFFA; JERICHO; JERUSALEM; JOTAPATA; LacuisH; LEBANON; Tomss, Periodicals: see JEwisH CHRONICLE. Ee PL ODO nV ATIOUS el OFS OL. 0. oc a5 2s om nr oe nie nip vip ane aseiasia'e pate eu eats oh} ehatebt vise% 599-601 Piove di Sacco, Page from the First Edition of Jacob ben Asher’s “ chat Turim,” Printed in 1475 at.. 29 Plan of the Catacombs on the Mount of Olives, East of Jerusalem............ccc eee e cece eeeeeesees 147 — of Excavations at Tell al-Hasi (Lachish)..........00.. ee eee Erica ete t ee sis ne bless Sede vaticahiee cc00o ———— of Jerusalem, Crrcd 1600. rc. ccs secre sucvccvece SETS OL ORE 2 Re re RAE aaislceisls sre eitee a LOO P——aOrimewtodernvCity Of Jaita.. 1c. sce. se essere cacees ees aeveretererMaterettetr Breton aogtidcuacosd: 52 —— of the Traditional Tombsof the Judges...... aoaboonaG eeierereteee i creisyeece 2) SOODOMOUCO NOS BO0 146 Pool of Hezekiah, Jerusalem...........+.-+. Aciadiariciacaae eee sents cet SB iar iiaer ie OR DCnO DERE S ee aes Portraits: see JACOBI, ABRAHAM. KAEMPF, SAUL ISAAC. LANDAU, EZEKIEL. JACOBSON, ISRAEL. KAHN, ZADOC. LASKER, EDUARD. JACOBY, JOHANN. KALISCHER, ZEBI HIRSCH. LASSALLE, FERDINAND. JASTROW, MARCUS. KAUFMANN, DAVID. LAZARUS, EMMA. JEITELES, JONAS MISCHEL. KAYSERLING, MEYER. LAZARUS, MORITZ. JELLINEK, ADOLF. KIAMIL PASHA. LEBENSOHN, ABRAHAM. JESSEL, SIR GEORGE. KOMPERT, LEOPOLD. LEESER, ISAAC. JOEL, MANUEL. K6NIGSWARTER, BARON MORITZ. Jost, ISAAC MARCUS. KURANDA, IGNAZ. Prague, Tombstone of Judah Léw ben Bezaleel at........... potatolelorelelelelereisietaveielaicle/sisicte eisieloiclslolelsticie t= 854 Ramsgate, England, Ark of the Law of the Synagogue at .......scceeesscececeserceenes Shosocoo6 WL Sabbath Lamp, Lighting the. From a Passover Haggadah of 1695......sssecsecceseecseceeseseees 601 —— Lamps, Various Forms 0f...,.....+-s.-eseeeeeee Meee iisaiviel aisle eesiss osicie s sieisieldsisisiesieietes OUe-OUc Seal of Josel of Rosheim................ Misiciieleees SOGOCOOTOBOS SOONG BEE OOOO COUR UB OOUH IOUOBUCOOG ten: — of Obadiah, “Servant of the King” nitcverewsts ne eleinictaistarers olson tinicioe ici arcs’ ee inreislacersiow nee coe Sennacherib, Troops of, Besieging Lachish..............+.++- cINddIOL DOCU OODOMOMIOOOr Sbistee slesie roo Shalmaneser II., Tribute of Jehu to. From the Black Obelisk..........sssseesecceceserssceecssees 89 Share Certificate of the Jewish Colonial Trust...........s.s0+ seeeeeoeee SRC HE SU OAC ODE son boG HFK! Sicily, Map Showing Places Where Jewish Gommunttics Have Extstcd EOE aictereraleve aleisl seilelsre stetelaistote siamo Siege of Lachish by the Troops of Sennacherib... pondndenos6n0Dor Pane eaae aa ea souacee eames Cn Spanish Town, Jamaica, sles o scsi Sous ng robeaetovvese gheveres 67 xXx LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME VII a eee Te PAGE Street, A Typical, in Jerusalem..........2:s000 corccceoce svolotaletststoc cre crete ene Oe apeiors Dee. ch gee oo 3 Seow —— of Arches Leading to the Palace of Herod, Ji arsaler® LUe's aeatcleranatel soe ieee SEH EO OGDEOUROS water LOO Synagogues: see JAMAICA; JERUSALEM ; Karuspab; KOnIGsBERG; LEGHORN; LEMBERG. —— see also ARK OF THE LAw. Tablet, Cuneiform, Discovered at Lachish, Mentioning Abdi Heba of Jerusalem...........+.++++++2 120. — with Poem by Emma Lazarus Affixed to the Liberty Monument, New York..........s+ssseeee 651 Tell al-Hasi, Sectional View of Excavations at, Showing Seven Strata of Cities.... ........00- Spoe00 ast == =H ite OL ANCIENT WACHISHs srermateciersre tere eke piers teers iereleleleloeerel ittel eleva alotatlsveray Navsieta pieiers ovate sles OO et —— Jafat, Cave on the Top of, Site of Ancient Jotapata............ BAGS ASoacosb bac doobp BOUROOOOO: Like Memples Site of. wnes Haram eATe awrite tetas tertile tee tels Sesoda00 po SbdObOROECL SONS sop sonacooo BE — see also JACHIN. Tomb, Traditional, of Johanan ben Zakkai, Near Tiberias...... etareretele we dialbwnad a blsie o 5ce) batevetn ele Sig altee eee LO) —— ——— Of Joseph; Near, Nablus (Shechem)\iyrsa0 esters sleleie eleisterereiele)e eters endvon00de POPC ve adcseremeeu Mombsiof the Judes, Cave Leading to the, Jerusalem jos. seiesce eee eeiisiciereeieecicier termite vievsevie 147 ——— ——— T'raditional), Plan and SectionalVaew of the, Jerusalem... -ccscine sees cielo sicieterercietetele sieieis .. 146 — of the Kings, Traditional, Grotto Leading to the, Jerusalem......... POOR E ee Svea wes ecesiore 148 Tombstone of Judah Low ben Bezaleel at Prague............. inloiss\s)slalolele! sle/aie)eleinlalaieielsalvteleletstestats o.. 804 Topographical Meatures of Jerusalem. -........-+.cre-sssee0es sisisiele creratte ecccsesees Hronhispiece and 119 Mower of-Antontawd CrUsalemnaerventes wee cer teiet eee siecieie cei eielete sieiavesieletersis aieliioieicroerts AOC Aree) Wowers:of Davidiiand Hippicus. ss « sccacc vincte/cteiers «siete leiors eve aievelera slerereteletaleteislelsre etercrets aieiele lets clejetolarqyerermene, Tribute of Jehu to Shalmaneser II. From the Black Obelisk..............0s.ecceeees acpocddaooanes eh! Types: see KARAITRESs. Typography: see Fano; Ixar; Lusiin; Mantua; Napius; Prove pi Sacco; Zuricu. ValleysotJchoshaphathieriisalemmnnn eisai aiaeiermeceneers Be dave caller oe none rete te enter BAGG: 187! Wailing-Place, Jerusalem. After the Painting by Bida.................... Spounoudesocscdsoondos 148 Walls of Jerusalem‘at Various Times..........0-.cccscoccce eeleralersoete ccccccccccces Hrontispiece and 123 Wielivor Joby SouchrotrJerusaleniaeamree te renters erecta teeta sjeveje’s|oicis erele slerererersterersiere tn are eeroe 202 ‘“Yosippon,” Page from the First Edition of the, Mantua, 1475-80........ ierefelerelenie aereteteieters o's osieiers 261 —— Page from the First Edition of the Judeo-German, Zurich, 1546.............. scoiaresnye eles Slee 263 Zion, Citadel, of; Jerusalem yc2.2. 0x oeescaigic $4.00 ohlv eo eres hans oh oe ae ee ee 144 ra Gate, Jerusalem .o020 5.00 ofasro ed sve O ese ee Oee sean eels Aaa ee sister etal oe Zurich, Page from the First Edition of the Judeo-German “ Yosippon,” Printed in 1546 at........... 268 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ITALY: Kingdom of southern Eurone, with a total population of about 34,671,377, in which there are about 34,324 Jews (1911). This country, which the Israelites, punning upon the name, called “I Tal Yah” =“the land of the dew of the Lord” (comp. Gen. xxvii. 39), has been prominent in the history of the Jews. This prominence has not been due to the number of Jews in Italy, which has never been particularly large, but rather to the fact that they were not subjected to those continued and cruel persecutions to which they were exposed in other countries; and they may be said to have en- joyed, especially at certain periods, a fair degree of liberty. The first definite appearance of Jews in the history of Italy was that of the embassy sent by Simon Mac- cabeus to Rome to strengthen the alliance with the Romans against the Syrians. The ambassadors re- ceived a cordial welcome from their coreligionists who were already established there, and whose num- ber at the time of the emperor Claudius was com- paratively so great that when, for some unknown reason, he was desirous of expelling them, he did not dare to do so. Moreover, when, toward the end of his reign, by reason of trouble provoked by a Chris- tian propagandist, he actually expelled a portion of the Jews, there remained in Rome a fully organ- ized community, presided over by heads called dap- - xovrec or yepovordpyot. The Jews maintained in Rome several synagogues, whose spiritual head was called apylovvaywyoc; in their cemetery the tombstones bore the symbolic seven-branched candlestick. Even in the time of Tiberius—who pretended to be friendly to the Jews, but really was as hostile to them as Augustus had been—many converts to Judaism were made in Rome. It was when the wife of his friend, the senator Saturninus, became a convert to Judaism, that Tiberius showed his enmity toward the adherents of this faith by publishing, on the advice of his minister Sejanus, an edict cominanding all Jews and proselytes who should not have abjured their faith before a fixed date to leave Rome under penalty of perpetual bondage. A large number of young Jews was ordered to fight Under thé against the brigands in Sardinia, Empire. where the greater part of them lost their lives. This was the first persecu- tion of the Jewsin the West. There were other Jew- ish colonies at that time in southern Italy, in Sicily, VII.—1 and in Sardinia, but they were neither large nor important. From Rome, where Judaism had many adherents and enjoyed a certain influence even at court, the Jews spread into other parts of Italy ; but the greater number of those who came to such parts somewhat Jater immigrated from other countries. Thus in Sicily there came from Africa to Palermo about 1,500 families, and to Messina about 200 families. To Tuscany Jews came from Spain; to Lombardy, to Piedmont, and to the territory of Genoa, from cen- tral Italy. But they were never numerous; only in Milan, Turin, and Genoa were there communities of some importance; and even from these provinces they were frequently expelled and after an interval allowed to reenter. From the Orient, where the Venetian republic had important colonies, many went to Venice, and also to Ancona and Pesaro. From these cities, too, as from Ferrara, they were at times expelled; and, as elsewhere, they were re- admitted. There were some Jews in almost every village of the Venetian possessions; at Padua, Ve- rona, Mantua, and Modena there were long-estab- lished and important communities. In the Neapol- itan realm the greater number of the Jews were settled in Naples, in Capua, and in other large towns along the Adriatic coast, such as Bari, Otranto, Brindisi, Taranto, Benevento, Sulmona, Salerno, and Trani. In the interior there were scarcely any Jews. After Judea had been declared a Roman province, the procurators sent thither by the Senate became more and more cruel in their treatment of the Jews, and finally incited them to a rebellion which ended in the ruin of the Jewish state under the emperor Titus (70 c.E.). A large number of prisoners and soldiers were transferred to Italy; but naturally the vanquished did not feel disposed to emigrate to the land of their conquerors and oppressors. Titus had a reign of short duration; and his successor, Domi- tian, treated the Jews cruelly. To him is attributed the intention to execute a decree which he had forced tlhe Senate to approve, and under which, within thirty days after its promulgation, all the Jew- ish subjects of Rome were to be massacred. The pa- triarch, with three of the most illustrious tannaim, repaired to Rome in order to prevent the carrying out of this infamous project; soon afterward Do- mitian died, and his successor, Nerva, showed himself favorable to his Jewish subjects. He re- Italy THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 2 mained on the throne but a short time and was suc- ceeded by Trajan, a persistent opponent of the Jews, and in whose wars many thousands of them lost their lives in Babylon, in Egypt, and in Cyprus. Ha- drian, in turn, was at first inclined to favor the Jews, and he even granted them permission to re- build the Temple at Jerusalem (118). This conces- sion he later withdrew, and, indeed, he became one of their most bitter enemies, issuing an edict for- bidding them to continue their religious practises. A few years later this hostile legislation, which for the most part had never been enforced, was re- pealed, and the condition of the Jews was for a short time improved. Through the growth and diffusion of Christianity, however, it soon be- came worse and worse. As the Christians detached themselves from the Jews, the former became the fiercest enemies of the latter. When Constantine, who at the beginning of his reign had advocated liberty of conscience, became a con- Influence vert to Christianity, he established op- of Christi- pressive laws for the Jews; but these anity. were in turn abolished by Julian the Apostate, who showed his favor to- ward the Jews to the extent of permitting them to resume their scheme for the reconstruction of the Temple at Jerusalem. This concession was with- drawn under his successor, who, again, was a Christian; and then the oppression grew considera- bly. Thus periods of persecution were followed by periods of quiescence, until the fall of the Roman empire. At the time of the foundation of the Ostrogothic rule under Theodoric, there were flourishing com- munities of Jews in Rome, Milan, Genoa, Palermo, Messina, Agrigentum, and in Sardinia. The popes of the period were not seriously opposed to the Jews; and this accounts for the ardor with which the latter took up arms for the Ostrogoths as against the forces of Justinian — particularly at Naples, where the remarkable defense of the city was main- tained almost entirely by Jews. After the failure of the various attempts to make Italy a province of the Byzantine empire, the Jews had to suffer much op- pression from the Exarch of Ravenna; but it was not long until the greater part of Italy came into the possession of the Lombards, under whom they lived in peace. Indeed, the Lombards passed no ex- ceptional laws relative to the Jews. Even after the Lombards embraced Catholicism the condition of the Jews was always favorable, because the popes of that time not only did not persecute them, but guaran- teed them more or less protection. Pope Gregory the Great treated them with much consideration. Under succeeding popes the condition of the Jews did not grow worse; and the same was the case in the several smaller states into which Italy was di- vided. Both popes and states were so absorbed in continual external and internal dissensions that the Jews were left in peace. In every individual state of Italy a certain amount of protection was granted to them in order to secure the advantages of their commercial enterprise. The fact that the historians of this period scarcely make mention of the Jews, proves that their condition was tolerable. There was an expulsion of Jews from Bologna, it is true, in 1172; but they were soon allowed to re- turn, A nephew of Rabbi Nathan ben Jehiel acted as administrator of the property of Alexander III., who showed his amicable feelings toward the Jews at the Lateran Council of 1179, where he defeated the designs of hostile prelates who advocated re- strictive and odious anti-Jewish laws. Under Nor- man rule the Jews of southern Italy and of Sicily enjoyed even greater freedom; they were considered the equals cf the Christians, and were permitted to follow any career; they even had jurisdiction over their own affairs. Indeed, in no country were the canonical laws against the Jews so frequently dis- regarded as in Italy. A later pope—either Nicholas IV. (1288-92) or Boniface VIII. (1294-1303)—had for his ‘physician a Jew, Isaac ben Mordecai, sur- named Maestro Gajo. Among the early Jews of Italy who left behind them traces of their literary activity was Shabbethai DonnoLo (died 982). Two centuries later (1150) there became known as poets Shabbethai ben Moses of Rome; his son Jehiel Kalonymus, once regarded as a Talmudic authority even beyond Italy; and Rabbi Jehiel of the Mansi (ANaw) family, also of Rome. Their compositions are full Early of thought, but their diction is rather Literature. crude. Nathan, son of the above- mentioned Rabbi Jehiel, was the au- thor of a Talmudic lexicon (“‘Aruk”) which became the key to the study of the Talmud. Solomon Parhon compiled during his residence at Salerno a Hebrew dictionary which fostered the study of Biblical exegesis among the Italian Jews. On the whole, however, Hebrew culture was not in a flourishing condition. The only liturgical author of merit was Joab ben Solomon, some of whose com- positions are extant. Toward the second half of the thirteenth century signs appeared of a better Hebrew culture and of a more profound study of the Talmud. Isaiah di Trani the Elder (1232-79), a high Talmudic author- ity, was the author of many celebrated responsa. David, his son, and Isaiah di Trani the Younger, his nephew, followed in his footsteps, as did their de- scendants until the end of the seventeenth century. Meir ben Moses presided over an important Tal- mudic school in Rome, and Abraham ben Joseph over one in Pesaro. In Rome two famous physi- cians, Abraham and Jehiel, descendants of Nathan ben Jehiel, taught the Talmud. One of the women of this gifted family, Paola dei Mansi, also attained distinction; her Biblical and Talmudic knowledge was considerable, and she transcribed Biblical commentaries in a notably beautiful hand- writing (see Jew. Encyc. i. 567, 8.0. PAOLA ANAW). About this period Frederick II., the last of the Hohenstaufen, employed Jews to translate from the Arabic philosophical and astronomical treatises; among these writers were Judah Kohen of Toledo, later of Tuscany, and Jacob Anatolio of Provence. This encouragement naturally led to the study of the works of Maimonides—particularly of the “Moreh Nebukim ”—the favorite writer of Hillel of Verona (1220-95). This last-named litterateur and philosopher practised medicine at Rome and in other Italian cities, and translated into Hebrew several 3 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA medical works. The liberal spirit of the writings of Maimonides had other votaries in Italy; e.9., Shabbethai ben Solomon of Rome and Zerahiah Hen of Barcelona, who migrated to Rome and contributed much to spread the knowledge of his works. The effect of this on the Italian Jews was apparent in their love of freedom of thought and their esteem for literature, as well as in their adherence to the literal rendering of the Biblical texts and their op- position to fanatical cabalists and mystic theories. Among other devotees of these theories was Im- MANUEL B. SOLOMON of Rome, the celebrated friend of Dante. The discord between the followers of Maimonides and his opponents wrought most seri- ous damage to the interests of Judaism. The political and social status of the Jews was also destined to suffer because of the advent to the papal throne of Innocent III. (1198-1216), the chief origina- tor of the many persecutions suffered in later times by the Jews in all Christian Jands. This retrogressive pope, the most bitter enemy of freedom of thought, set into operation against the Jews most illegitimate measures; especially did he threaten with excommunication those who placed or maintained Jews in public positions, and he insisted that every Jew holding office should be dismissed. The deepest in- sult was the order that every Jew must always wear, conspicuously displayed, a special badge. In 1235 Pope Gregory IX. published the first bull against the ritual sacrifice O77 ndvby. Other popes followed his example, particularly Innocent IV. in 1247, Gregory X. in 1272, Clement VI. in 1348, Greg- ory XI. in 1371, Martin V. in 1422, Nicholas VY. in 1447, Sixtus V. in 1475, Paul ITI. in 1540, and later Alexander VII., Clement XIII., and Clement XIV. The rise of poetry in Italy at the time of Dante in- fluenced the Jews also. The rich and the power- ful, partly by reason of sincere interest, partly in obedience to the spirit of the times, became patrons of Jewish writers, thus inducing the greatest activ- ity on their part. This activity was particularly noticeable at Rome, where a new Jewish poetry arose, mainly through the works of Leo Romano, translator of the writings of Thomas Aquinas and author of exegetical works of merit; of Judah Sici- liano, a writer in rimed prose; of Kalonymus ben Kalonymus, a famous satirical poet; and especially of the above-mentioned Immanuel. On the initia- tive of the Roman community, a Hebrew transla- tion of Maimonides’ Arabic commentary on the Mish- nah was made. At this time Pope John XXII. was on the point of pronouncing a ban against the Jews of Rome. The Jews instituted a day of public fast- ing and of prayer to appeal for divine assistance. King Robert of Sicily, who favored the Jews, sent an envoy to the pope at Avignon, who succeeded in averting this great peril. Immanuel himself de- scribed this envoy as a person of high merit and of great culture. This period of Jewish literature in Italy is indeed one of great splendor. After Im- manuel there were no other Jewish writers of im- portance until Moses da Rieti (1388), a writer of He- brew as elegant as his Italian; but despite this, his wearisome and unnatural style could not compare with the pleasing and spirited works of Immanuel. Innocent JOO, Italy The Jews suffered much from the relentless per- secutions of the antipope Benedict XIII.; and the accession of his successor, Martin V., was hailed with delight by the Jews. The synod convoked by the Jews at Bologna, and continued at Benedict Forli, sent a deputation with costly XIII. gifts to the new pope, praying him to abolish the oppressive laws promul- gated by Benedict and to grant the Jews those priv- ileges which had been accorded them under previ- ous popes. The deputation succeeded in its mission, but the period of grace was short; for Martin’s suc- cessor, Eugenius IV., at first favorably disposed toward the Jews, ultimately reenacted all the re- strictive laws issued by Benedict. In Italy, how- ever, his bull was generally disregarded. The great centers, such as Venice, Florence, Genoa, and Pisa, realized that their commercial interests were of more importance than the affairs of the spiritual leaders of the Church; and accordingly the Jews, many of whom were bankers and leading merchants, found their condition better than ever before. It thus became easy for Jewish bankers to obtain per- mission to establish banks and to engage in mon- etary transactions. Indeed, in one instance even the Bishop of Mantua, in the name of the pope, accorded permission to the Jews to lend money at interest. All the banking negotiations of Tuscany were in the hands of a Jew, Jehiel of Pisa. The influential position of this successful financier was of the greatest advantage to his coreligionists at the time of the exile from Spain. The Jews were also successful as medical practi- tioners. William of Portaleone, physician to Ferdi- nand, King of Naples, and to the ducal houses of Sforza and Gonzaga, was one of the ablest of that time. He was the first of the long line of illustrious physicians in his family. The revival of interest in the studies of ancient Greece and Rome stimulated the study of Biblical literature; and such men as Pico di Mirandola and Cardinals #gidius da Viterbo and Domenico Gri- mani devoted themselves to the study of Hebrew and Hebrew literature. This produced amicable rela- tions between Jews and Christians. At the time of the Medicis Jews frequented the universities and were active in the renascence of letters and of the sciences; but they remained strangers to the fine arts, sopeually painting and sculpture. The print- ing establishments of Reggio, Pieve Tadnence di Sacco, Mantua, Ferrara, Bologna, of the and Naples were founded at this Renas-_ period. Obadiah of Bertinoro, elo- cence ; quent preacher and famous commen- Printing. tator of the Mishnah; Messer Leon (Judah ben Jehiel) of Naples, rabbi and physician at Mantua; and Elijah Delmedigo, the philosopher, flourished at this period. Pico di Mirandola was a disciple of the last-named, as were many others, who learned from him the Hebrew language or studied philosophy under his guidance. Driven from Germany and Poland by persecutions, many learned rabbis and Talmudists went to Italy; among these were Judah Minz, who became rabbi at Padua, and Joseph Colon, of French extraction, rabbi successively at Bologna and Mantua. Both Italy THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 4 a were opposed to the liberal ideas then dominant in Italy ; and soon strife and controversy arese between Colon and Messer Leon, between Minz and Elijah Delmedigo. Toward the end of the fifteenth century the monks disturbed the relatively peaceful condition of the Jews. The most bitter enemy was Bernardinus of Feltre. Not succeeding in inflaming the Italians with his calumnies, he instigated a bloody persecu- tion of the Jews of Trent, then under German rule. The murder of the infant Simon was attributed to them. In their favor appeared the Doge of Venice, Peter Mocenigo, and Pope Sixtus 1V., who at first refused to proclaim as a saint the child found dead, firmly declaring the story of the ritual murder to be an invention. A great number of the exiles from Spain (1492) betook themselves to Italy, where they were given protection by King Ferdinand I. of Naples. Don Isaac Abravanei even received a position at the Neapolitan court, which he retained under the suc- ceeding king, Alfonso II. The Spanish Jews were well received also in Ferrara by Duke Hercules I., and in Tuscany through the mediation of Jehiel of Pisa and his sons. But at Rome and Genoa they experienced all the vexations and torments that hunger, plague, and poverty bring with them, and were forced to accept baptism in order to escape starvation. In some few cases the immigrants ex- ceeded in number the Jews already domiciled, and gave the determining vote in matters of communal interest and in the direction of studies. Refugees From Alexander VI. to Clement VII. from Spain. the popes were indulgent toward the Jews, having more urgent matters to occupy them. Indeed, the popes themselves and many of the most influential cardinals openly violated one of the most severe enactments of the Council of Basel, namely, that prohibiting Christians from em- ploying Jewish physicians; and they even gave the latter positions at the papalcourt. The Jewish com- munities of Naples and of Rome received the greatest number of accessions; but many Jews passed on from these cities to Ancona and Venice, and thence to Padua. Venice, imitating the odious measures of the German cities, assigned to the Jews a special quarter (“ghetto ”). Isaac Abravanel with his sons exercised a benefi- cent influence alike upon the native Jews and the newcomers. Among the sons the most influential was Samuel; he and his wife, Benvenida, were on terms of intimacy with the court of Naples. The daughter of the governor, Don Pedro de Toledo, was attached to Benvenida, whom she called mother, and continued her love and respect after her mar- riage to Cosimo II., Duke of Tuscany. These rela- tions with powerful and illustrious families made Abravanel the pride and shield of the Italian Is- raelites. The Talmudic school at Padua, presided over by Judah Minz, enjoyed greatrepute. Not only young men but those advanced in life came to him from Italy, from Germany, and even from Turkey, to at- tend his lectures. He died at an advanced age; and his son Abraham continued the school, though with diminished success. At Bologna during the first half of the sixteenth century flourished Obadiah Sforno, who, while practising as a physician, ap- plied himself with much earnestness to Biblical ex- egesis and to philosophy. He dedicated some of his works, written in Hebrew but furnished with a Latin translation, to King Henry III. of France. At Ferrara Abraham ben Mordecai Farissol, philos- opher and exegete, enjoyed the protection of Her- cules I. of Este, a patron of literature, science, and art. It became common in the Italian cities for learned Jews to enter into discussions of theological questions with the monks, and in several of these Farissol took part. By order of the duke his dis sertations, originaJly written in Hebrew, were trans- lated into Italian, so that his opponents could pre- pareadefense. Among those whoassisted Reuchlin in aid of the Jews was #gidius da Viterbo, head of the Augustinians, disciple and patron of Elijah Levita, and student of Hebrew literature and poetry. “Fighting with you,” he wrote to Reuchlin, “we fight for light against darkness, aiming to save not the Talmud, but the Church.” The watchword which went forth from Italy and passed on every- where was “For the salvation of the Talmud.” In Italy Elijah Levita numbered many Christians among his disciples. Just as many illustrious Ital- ians, among them princes of the Church, devoted themselves with zeal to Hebrew studies, so the Jews with equal ardor devoted their energies to Italian, which they spoke with ease and elegance and which they sometimes employed in their writings. A famous writer was Leo Hebreeus (Judah Abrava- nel), Known through his “ Dialoghidi Amore.” His language was fluent and correct, and his work was every where enthusiastically received. : In the sixteenth century cabalistic doctrines were introduced into Italy by Spanish exiles, Abra- ham Levita, Baruch of Benevento, and Judah Hay- yat, among others. These awakened Spread of much interest, and their mystical ideas the Cabala. appealed to many. Moreover, the fact that prominent Christians, suchas /Hgidius da Viterbo and Reuchlin, were devoted to the Cabala, exercised a great influence upon the Jews. The wide-spread dispersion of the Jews had weakened in many minds faith in a final redemp- tion; so that the new Messianie interpretations of the cabalists appealed to them. The indefatigable Abravanel wrote three works in which he attempted to show the truth of the Messianic doctrines; but, carried away by the dominant error of the times, he unwisely fixed a date for the advent of the Messiah. In Istria—a country which had been under Venetian dominion—appeared Asher Liimmlein, a German, who pretended to be a prophet, and who announced with much solemnity the coming of the Messiah in the year 1502. In this “year of penitence” there were much fasting, much prayer, and a generous dis- tribution of alms. The movement was so general that even Christians believed Limmlein to be pos- sessed of the true prophetic spirit. The year came to an end, and the prophecy remained unfulfilled. Discouraged, many embraced Christianity. The cabalists, however, were not disheartened, and, sup- ported by reports of miraculous happenings, they began to revive the courage of their coreligionists Sih " Tie ee a ee oe eee ee ee ee | ee eee ow ee 5 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Italy and to preach again faith in the coming of the Messiah. They were disposed to place credence in the most improbable assertions; and accord- ingly, when David Reubeni made his Pseudo- appearance in Italy, he found ready a Messiahs. large body of supporters. His mis- sion was to gain support, especially from the pope, to fight the Turks. David went to Venice and to Rome, where he presented himself before Pope Clement VII., by whom he was received with all the honorsaccorded to anambassador. The idea of a crusade of Jews against Turks was a most pleasing one to the pope. After a year’s sojourn in Rome David was called to Portugal. Here he found a champion ina Marano in service at the court, who, undergoing circumcision and changing his name to Solomon Mo1xo, announced his fealty to Judaism. The Maranos and cabalists maintained generally that the sack of Rome in 1527 was a sign of the coming of the Messiah. But David lost favor, and was ex- pelled from Portugal. Thereupon the Maranos were condemned to the stake by thousands. Many suc- ceeded in escaping to Italy; and the pope, together with the college of cardinals, wishing to restore pros- perity to Ancona, assigned to the exiles an asylum in that city. Molko also went to Ancona, where, as a professed Jew, he delivered public Messianic sermons, and held theological disputations with illustrious Christians. In some of his sermons he prophesied a great flood. At Rome, where, after thirty days of fasting, he presented himself to the pope, he was favorably received, and was given a safe-conduct through all the papal dominions. The flood which he had prophesied really came to pass (Oct., 1580) ; and on his return to Rome he was greeted as a ~prophct. Accompanied by a faithful servant, he escaped the Inquisition and reached Ancona, where he again began his preaching. The fierce persecu- tions suffered by the Spanish and Portuguese Ma- ranosinduced Molkoand Reubeni to repair to Ratis- bon and appear before the emperors Charles VY. and Ferdinand of Austria to solicit their aid. Josel of Rosheim gave them his support; nevertheless both enthusiasts were made prisoners. Molko was burned on the pyre at Mantua, and Reubeni was imprisoned in Spain, where he died three years later. The ultra-Catholic party tried with all the means at its disposal to introduce the Inquisition into the Neapolitan realm, then under Spanish rule. Charles V., upon his return from his victories in Africa, was on the point of exiling the Jews from Naples, but deferred doing so owing to the influence of Benvenida, wife of Samuel Abravanel. had no head in Jerusalem, the seat of authority being in Wilna. The Hasidim, mostly from Volhynia, had at their head Nissim Bak, who with the aid of Moses Montefiore (/.c. p. 22) was the first to establish a printing-press in the city. The Habad were Hasi- % dim who got their name from the initial letters of i the words “ Hokmah,” “ Binah,” and “De‘ah.” The ’ Warsawers were made up of Perushim and Hasidim. ; They had separated from the other Ashkenazim , about the year 1850. The Germans, or as they called | ' Cstguog Sq qdes80j,0yd v mi014) "WATVSOUAL AQ MALIA AAG-S,CaIg Se ae ee a themselves “ Anshe Hod ” (7.e., men of H[olland and] D[eutschland]), had separated a year later. Zion, the large synagogue of the Sephardim, was really made up of four synagogues, which together occu- : pied considerable space. According to tradition it had been built 460 years before Frankl’s time. The 141 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem synagogue of the Ashkenazim (Hurbat R. Yehudah he-Hasid) was rebuilt about 1856, a man named Eze- kiel of Bagdad contributing 100,000 piasters for the purpose (“Nach Jerusalem,” p. 58). Frankl esti- mates the money sent every year in charitable gifts to Jerusalem at 800,000 piasters. In 1856 the Turkish authorities gave permission to all persons to visit the mosques; and this brought more Europeans, who commenced to build churches and hospices. The American Mission had been es- tablished in the city in 1821; the Eng- Further lish, in 1826. In 1845 the seat of the Benefac- Greek Orthodox Patriarch had been tions. moved from Constantinople to Jerusa- lem; and in 1847 the Latin Patriarchate had been renewed. In 1849 the Jerusalem Literary and Scientific Society had been formed, out of system having ruined the Jewish banking business there, and the gifts of the charitable Europeans hay- ing been in the hands of the Kolel (“ Ben Chananja,” 1867, p. 45). Inthe same year the water-works were rebuilt, and water was brought to the city from ‘En ‘Etam and from the Pools of Solomon. In this year Montefiore made his fifth visit, and contributed £300 on condition that the water should be led into the Jewish quarter. A Jewish manual school was founded by Baron Franchetti of Turin. In 1867 Al- bert Cohn of Paris commenced the work later contin- ued by the Paris Rothschilds and the Alliance Israé- lite Universelle, and laid the foundation for a Jewish library (2d. p. 174). A serious attempt was made to provide better dwellings for the Jews, who lived in miserable huts; this was largely due to the munifi- cence of the brothers Hirsch in Halberstadt (db. pp. r- JERUSALEM AS VIEWED FROM THE NORTH. (From a photograph by the American Colony, Jerusalem.) which the Palestine Exploration Fund developed. The Jews also continued toincreasein numbers. In 1854 the American Judah Touro gave $60,000 for the purpose of founding hospices for them; these were built on the road to Hebron, and were called D NY MiyDwyd ong, cr “ Montefiore Homes, ay because the money wasexpended partly through that philan- thropist and partly through the “North American Relief Society for the Indigent Jews of Jerusalem, In 1864 the Rothschilds of London established the Evelyn de Rothschild School for Girls. In 1865 there was an epidemic of cholera, and many Jews were victims. The poverty in the city was very great; flagrant abuses of the Halukkah 459, 659). In 1870 Prof. H. Gritz and M. Gottschalk Lewy of Berlin were in Jerusalem, and, seeing the sad plight of the orphans left by recent Jewish im- migrants, founded the Verein zur Erziehung Ji- discher Waisen in Paliistina, the seat of which was in Frankfort-on-the-Main. The work was taken up by M. Herzberg. Despite the strongest possible op- position, a certain R. Kuttner having put the ban on the learning of foreign languages, a school was established in which Arabic, Hebrew, German, French, and English were taught. The Wirttem- berg Templars (a Christian sect) founded a colony in Jerusalem in 1878 and introduced the soap-manu- facturing industry. In 1878 the hospital Misgab Jerusalem THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 142 la-Dak was founded for the Jews, without distinc- tion of party. In 1879 the English Mission Society founded, specifically for Jews, a hospital, a pilgrim- house, and schools at an expense of £10,000 a year, but the results of these missionary efforts were in- considerable. In the same year the colony Petah Tikwah was founded by Jerusalem Jews, as well as an orphan asylum for the Ashkenazim, together with a school which was afterward joined to the Limel School. In 1881 the number of Jews had grown to 18,920; in 1891, to 25,822. In 1882 the London Society for the Assistance of Persecuted Jews, founded by the Earl of Shaftesbury, bought a piece of property called “ Abraham’s Vineyard,” in which Jews were employed. The colony of Artuf was bought by Jews in 1896. The School for and 15 houses on the Mount of Olives. Other societies were founded to enable Jews to acquire landed property, e.g., Elef She‘arim, Nahalat Ya‘a- kob (1886), Hibbat ha-Arez, and Yishshub Erez Yis- rael (1896). These were aided by similar societies in Europe, among them the Lema‘an Ziyyon, founded by Israel Hildesheimer in Berlin, the Moses Montefiore Testimonial Fund, and the Esra in Germany. In addition to the Jews, the Russians and the French Catholics have done a great deal to build up modern Jerusalem, ~The Russian buildings are nearly all in a walled quadrangle on the Jaffa road. They con- tain an insane asylum, mission- and pilgrim-houses, and a cathedral. On the Mount of Olives also the Russians have built a church and a hospice for pilgrims. A Mrs. Spofford, who claimed prophetic TOWERS OF DAVID AND HIPPICUS, JERUSALEM. (From a photograph by Bonfils.) Boys (Bet Sefer), founded by the Alliance, dates from 1882. The British Ophthalmic Hospital was founded and is maintained by the Knights of St. John, A change for the better came with the Russian Jews (1881-91), who brought with them more mod- ern ideas of life. It was impossible to find room for all in the old Jewish quarter between the traditional Zion and the Temple mount. New Spread of portions were built up north and west Modern of the city, especially by building so- Jerusalem. cicties suchas Mahanch Yehudah, Sha- ‘are Zedek, and Oholeh Mosheh. In 1891 there were eighteen such societies, owning 400 houses in front of the Jaffa and Damascus gates, powers, came from America and formed a commu- nity in Jerusalem, im = jo) & ° aI Zz i=) a PLAN OF THE CATACOMBS ON THE (After Schick.) NEAR JERUSALEM. CAVE LEADING TO THE TRADITIONAL TOMBS OF THE JUDGES, (From a photograph of the Palestine Exploration Fund.) Jerusalem THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 148 70. 135. 186. 862. 614. 628. 637. 688. 1046. 107’ 1099. 1100. 1140. 1178. 1187. 1211. 1218. 1267. 1437. 1492, 1517. 1580, (Ab 9.) Jerusalem destroyed by Titus. Hadrian rebuilds the city. Jerusalem called Alia Capitolina. Restoration of the Temple undertaken by Julian the Apostate. Jews aid the Persian Chosroes II. in attack on Jerusalem. Retaken by Heraclius; Jews forbidden to enter the city. Omar puts Jerusalem under Moslem power. ‘Abd al-Malik builds the Dome of the Rock. Solomon ben Judah head of the yeshibah at Jerusalem. . Seljuk Turks capture Jerusalem. (July 15.) Crusaders put 70,000 infidels to the sword, and found a new Christian kingdom. ‘‘Assize of Jerusalem” established by Godfrey of Bouillon. Judah ha-Levi visits Jerusalem. Benjamin of Tudela visits Jerusalem. (Oct. 2.) Saladin defeats the Franks and takes Jerusalem. Several hundred English and French rabbis settle in Jerusalem. Al-Harizi visits Jerusalem. (Aug. 12.) Nahmanides visits Jerusalem. Elijah of Ferrara made chief rabbi. 1862. (Sept. 5.) Treaty to preserve the Holy Sepulcher signed by Russia, France, and Turkey. 1880. Siloam Inscription discovered. ; 1892. (Sept. 13.) Railway from Jerusalem to Jaffa, built bya French company, opened. : 1898. (Nov. 1.) William II. of Germany visits Jerusalem in state and receives a Jewish deputation. 1900. Abarbanel Library founded. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Only the chief works of the very large litera- ture on the subject can be mentioned. Numerous articles are to be found in the publications of the Palestine Exploration Fund, the Deutsche Verein zur Erforschung Palastinas, and the Société de Orient Latin. for the older literature: Rohricht, Bibliotheca Geographica Palestinc, Berlin, 1890 (see the additions in Z. D. P. V. xiv. 113; xvi. 209, 269), For the archeological material : Survey of Western Palestine : Jeru- salem, 1867-1870: C. W. Wilson, Ordnance Survey of Jeru- salem, Southampton, 1866 ; C. Warren, Underground Jerusa- lem, London, 1876; H. Guthe, Ausgrabungen het J erusalem, Leipsic, 1883; Frederick J. Bliss, Hxcavations at Jerusalem, London, 1898; W. Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospels, Ox- ford, 1903. For a general account: Edward Robinson, Re- searches, 1856; E. Starck, Paldistina und Syrien . . . Lexi- kalisches Hilfsbuch, p. 86, Berlin, 1894; Buhl, Geographie GROTTO LEADING TO THE TRADITIONAL TOMBS OF THE KINGS, NEAR JERUSALEM. (From a photograph by Bonfils.) Jews expelled from Spain settle in Jerusalem. Capture by Ottoman Turks. Nahmanides synagogue closed by the Moslems, claiming that it had previously been a mosque. . Isaiah Horowitz and a number of his friends settle in Jerusalem. Ibn Farukh, governor of Jerusalem and persecutor of the Jews, deposed. Jews subjected to certain vexatious restrictions in mat- ters of attire. . Napoleon visits Palestine ; Jewish community of Jerusa- lem accused of assisting him and its members threat- ened with death. . First visit of Moses Monteflore. . Edward Robinson commences archeological research in Jerusalem. . Crémieux, Montefiore, and Albert Cohn visit Jerusalem. . (Nov. 7.) §S. M. 8. Alexander, convert to Christianity, consecrated first Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem. . Albert Cohn establisbes many charitable institutions. des Alten Paliistina, pp. 93 et seq., 182 et seq. For the Mohammedan period: Guy le Strange, Palestine Under the Moslems, London, 1890. For the Crusading period: Besant and Palmer, The History of Jerusalem, London, 1888 ; J. R. Sepp, Jerusalem und das Heilige Land, 2d ed., 1873; R. Réhricht, Gesch. des Kénigreichs Jerusalem, Ber- lin, 1898. For modern Jerusalem: Badeker’s Palestine and Syria (by Socin and Benzinger), 8d ed., Leipsic, 1898. For the history of the Jews: Various articles by A. M. Lunez in his Jerusalem, vols. i.-vi.; Schwartz, Tebwot ha-Arez (best edition by Lunez, Jerusalem, 1890); Steinschneider, Bibli- ography of Hebrew Works, in Jerusalem, vols. jii., iv.; Sol- omon b. Menahem (Mendel), Zikkaron bi-Yerushalayim (on the synagogues, schools, graves, etc.), Jerusalem, 1876; Joel Moses Solomon, Bet Ya‘alkob (on the Ashkenazic syna- gogue), ib. 1877; Lob Urenstein, Tal Yerushalayim (on the customs of the Jerusalem Jews), ib. 1877; Shibhe Yeru- shalayim, ed. Jacob Baruch, Leghorn, 1785; Sefer Hibbat Yerushalayim, pp. 35b et seq., Jerusalem, 1844; Farhi, Kaf- tor wa-Ferah, 2d ed., ib. 1902; Frumkin, Eben Shemuel (on Jewish men of learning in Jerusalem), Wilna, 1894; idem, Massa’ Eben Shemuel, Jerusalem, 1871. G 9 (if BORMAY & CO., N.Y. 600 Cubita 400 SYNAGOGUES £8 Stephens Gate \ Golden Gate L) ac land Absal MODERN 600 $00 1000 Feet cy 200 400 09 2 JERUSALEM Vj. “Yeg) uw WIM nu wit Wy Yi) Uj. QUed; a ZB yf yi AS Gfh\eoco00 MG La LSroms of the Kings Montefioré | Hospice \ i Jerusalem THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 150 Modern: The modern city of Jerusalem (Ara- bic, “ Al-Kuds”) practically covers the site of the an- cient city. Excavations have shown, however, that the old city extended farther to the south; while tothe north, and particularly to the west, the modern city far exceeds the ancient one, whole settlements lying beyond the walls of the medieval city. The west- ern city wall coincides with the line of the original wall; the northern wall is held by some to be iden- tical in its course with the ancient third wall, and by others with the second; and the eastern wall follows the course of the eastern Temple enclosure. The present wall, erected by the Osman sultan, Sulaiman the Magnificent, is thirty-eight and one-half feet high, and forms an irregular quadrangu- lar enceinte two and one-half miles in extent. It is pierced by eight gates: Jaffa, Zion, Dung, St. Stephen’s, Herod, Damascus, New, and Golden, the last-named being sealed. Parts of the old city wall are still in situ, especially on the southern and east- ern sides, and much of the old material was used in the re- construction, evidences of which are abun- dant. On the north an old moat, separating the Hill of Jere- miah from Be- zetha, is used as part of the city’s defenses. Within the walls the city is divided into four quarters: the Christian, the Moslem, the Jewish, and the Armenian. David street, running east and west from the Jaffa gate to the Temple place, and Damascus Divisions. street, with its continuation, Bazaar street, which starts from the Da- mascus gate and runs north and south, form the boundary-lines for these quarters. The Christian quarter is in the northwestern corner of the city; Square Outside the Jaffa Gate, Jerusalem. (From a photograph by Dr, W. Popper.) Damascus Gate, Jerusalem. (From a photograph by the American Colony, Jerusalem.) the Moslem, in the northeastern and eastern parts, including the Temple place; the Jewish, in the southern part, on the eastern slope of the tradi- tional Mt. Zion; and the Armenian, in the south- western part. In recent years the Moslem quarter has been invaded by the Jews; and outside of the walls, along the Jaffa and Da- mascus roads, are numerous colonies. of Jews. The homes of many of the better classes of Chris- tians and Mos- lems, as well as the foreign con- sulates, the more important con- vents, monaster- ies, hospitals, schools, and hotels, are also in this extra- mural quarter. Within the walls the streets are narrow,crooked, and steep. Many of them are cov- ered over so that sunlight never enters; and the sanitary conditions are, on the whole, very poor. The style of the ar- chitecture is typical, the houses consisting of a series of low, square, flat-domed rooms, built about an open court, which generally contains a cistern for gathering water. An occasional latticed bal- cony is seen; and almost all roofs are pro- vided with a bal- ustrade. Out- side the walls the streets are wider and better cared for, and the houses are more European in appearance. The climate is mild; but the extremes of heat and cold are not unknown. Snow and frost are oc- casionally expe- rienced in the winter, a season of long-protracted rains. The late summer is very uncomfortable, owing to the heavy dust and the hot eastern winds. The absence of foliage and the glare of the bare stone seem to in- tensify the natural heat of the sun. With the exception of the Spring of Siloam (‘Ain Sitti Maryam), Jerusalem is without any natural water-supply, Every house therefore is provided J x 4 151 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalen. a a with one or more cisterns for gathering rain-water. The well-being of the city is thus directly dependent on the amount of the rainfall. Theold Weather aqueduct from Solomon’s Pools has and Water. recently been replaced by a modern pipe-line. The amount of water thus conducted is small; and the Temple place is more di- rectly benefited than the city proper. The increase of private cisterns of late years has reduced the amount of water formerly collected in the large public pools, which are now used only in case of necessity by the poorest of the population. Some water is brought in by train and cart from Bittir and damage. are in use. The present population of Jerusalem is about 85,000. Of this number 48,400 are Jews; 8,500, Moslems; and the remaining 9,000, Christians of different sects. Each of the properly accredited confessions has its representatives in the town council (“Majlis Baladiyyah”), of which the mayor of the city is president. Jerusalem forms an independent sanjak, subject to the sultan, who appoints the “mutasarrif.” A regiment of infantry is main- tained in the city, in the Tower of David. Without the walls modern carriages Popula- tion. THE GOLDEN GATE FROM WITHIN THE CITY OF JERUSALEM. (From a photograph by Bonfils.) and ‘Ain Karim, mostly for the use of the European inhabitants. The large pools are all of ancient con- struction: the Birkat Isra‘in (Bethesda ?), to the north of the Temple place; the Birkat al-Sultan (upper Gihon?), southwest of the Jaffa gate; the Birkat al-Batrak (Hezekiah’s Pool?), in the city, west of the Muristan; the Birkat Mamilla, in the Moslem ceme- tery, west of the city; and the upper and lower pools of Siloam, southeast of the city. Jerusalem is now reached by railfrom Jaffa. The station is twenty minutes’ ride southwest of the city, in the plain of Rephaim, near the German col- ony of the Templars. Transportation within the city is by means of horse, camel, or donkey, only few streets being practicable for wheeled conveyances. Certain streets which ave very much crowded have low iron bars across them to prevent camels from entering, their large loads causing much confusion Up to 1837 the number of Jews in the Holy City was very small; and of these the great majority were Sephardim. In previous centu- Jews of ries Ashkenazim had preferred to set- Jerusalem. tle in the Galilean cities. The earth- quake at Safed and Tiberias in 1837 caused many to move southward; and this gave the first impetus to the growth of the Jewish colony in Jerusalem. The next great movement toward Jeru- salem occurred in connection with the persecutions in Russia; and since then the growth of the commu- nity has been extraordinary. From 38,000 in 1887, the Jews have, as stated above, increased to 29,000 in 1908. Rumania, Persia, Mesopotamia, Morocco, and Yemen have each furnished a quota to the now complex Jewish community of Jerusalem. The Sephardim number about 15,000, and comprise, be- sides the original Spanish-Portuguese stock, colonies Jerusalem THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 152 of Eastern Jews of various nationalities. The Ash- kenazim are broadly divided into Hasidim and Pe- rushim, which in turn are divided into numerous small “halukkah” congregations. A few Karaites still remain. Modern Jerusalem is a city with no commerce except the importation of the necessities of life, the export of souvenirs, and the tour- ist trade, and manufactures little but olive-wood souvenirs and sacred scrolls. Jerusalem is dependent upon the tourist and upon charity. The Jew gets the least from the former, and a large part of the latter. There is but one good Jewish hotel (Hotel Jerusalem, Kaminitz)where Europeans are accommodated, though there are several Jewish inns. A small number of Jews is engaged in the administra- tion of the vari- ous charitable and educational institutions es- tablished in the city by their brethren abroad. These include the physicians, chemists, teach- ers, and other paid officials. About 2,000 Jews are crafts- men, occupied in carpentry, tai- Occupa- tions. loring, capma- king, shoema- king, printing, tin- and copper- smithing, ba- king, engineer- ing, etc. These trades are, how- ever, all over- .crowded, and regular employ- ment is scarce. A few Jews are engaged in money-changing, and one is a banker; writing sacred scrolls gives employment to a small number; many drive cabs; and a great number are engaged in petty trading. A store is a sign of prosperity, no matter how mean it may be. A large portion of the Jews exist on the charity that pours in from abroad. Much is done in aid of the Jew; but so abject is his poverty, and so limited are his chances for im- provement, that even the best-directed efforts do not suffice to relieve the situation. For the benefit of the Jewish poora number of dwellings have been erected which are either let at a nominal rental or occupied free. Free dispensaries are maintained in Zion Gate, Jerusalem. (From a photograph by Bonfils.) connection with the hospitals and by the Le-Ma‘an Ziyyon Society. There are four Jewish hospitals: the Bikkur Holim, under the auspices of the Ash- kenazim; the Misgab la-Dak, under the Sephar- dim; the Sha‘are Zedek, under the Orthodox of Germany; and the Rothschild. Two orphanages for boys have been established. There are also an institute for training blind children, an asylum for incurables and the insane, and a home foraged menand women. There are a large school for girls, the Evelina de Rothschild School (founded 1864), at present uuder the Anglo-Jewish Association of Lon- don; a German school for boys, the Edler von Laem- mel School (1856), under the Frankfort Soci- ety ; the elemen- tary school (1884) for boys; and the technical shops (1886) of the Alliance Is- raélite Univer- selle. At the schools many of the children are provided with food and cloth- ing. A library (the Jewish Cen- tral Library) has beenestablished, and contains a promising col- lection of 20,000 books (see ABAR- BANEL I[1- BRARY). There is a large number of Orthodox ha- darim and yeshi- bot scattered through the city, where stu- dents are sup- plied with an education in the traditional sense of the term, and with the neces- saries of life. The working men have organized for purposes of mutual aid and the encouragement of industries in the city. The great majority of the Jews is, as statec above, dependent on foreign charity. The Jewish Colonization Association and several other societies dispense doles through their agents; but the haluk- kah system reaches more people than all the others combined. “Halukkah” is the term applied to the funds sent by pious Jews from abroad for the support of needy scholars in the Holy City, who in return pray and study, at the holy sites, inmemory of their benefactors. While accomplishing a great deal of good, the system is regarded by some as thoroughly Institu- tions. FE ee Oe a ee ON ee ERI EPO ee ee ws Csjguog 4q ydvasojoyd ve wor) ‘GIANG FHL AO ALIS ‘VaUV WVYVH FHL Jerusalem THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 154 iniquitous because of its pauperizing tendencies and of the inequality of the distribution of the funds. See HALUKKAH. Two weeklies (“Ha-Habazzelet,” edited by A. Frumkin; and “ Hashkafha,” by Ben Judah) as well as an annual almanac (“Jerusalem,” by Luncz) are published by the Jews of Jerusalem. Besides the Talmudic works of the Orthodox rabbis, other works of real importance and value appear from time to time. The names of Griinhut, Ben Judah, Luncz, Simeon Hakam, and Yellin are most prominent in this connection. The Sephardic community is recognized by the government, its chief rabbi, the hakam bashi, when installed being invested by the sultan with an official robe and an order. Rabbi Abraham Hayyim Gagin was the first to receive an irade as hakam bashi of Palestine, in 1842. He died in 1848, and was succeeded by R. Jacob Covo (d. 1854). Since the latter’s death the following have held the office: Hayyim Nissim Abulafia (d. 1860), Hayyim David Hazan (d. 1869); Abraham Ashkenazi (d. 1880); Meir Pa- nisel (d. 1898); and Saul Jacob El] Yashar, the present incum- bent (1904), who has a place on the town coun- cil, but, owing to age, has dele- gated this office to his grand- son. The hakam bashi is respon- sible for the taxes of the Jews and for their good behavior; and has the right to collect for the communal treas- ury the meat-tax (“gabella”) and any fines he may impose. He has jurisdiction over his people; and the Turkish authorities are at his service for enforcing his decrees and those of his court (“bet din”). The “shaikh al-Yahud” is an administra- tive officer under the chief rabbi, whose duty it is to police the Jewish quarter and to collect the taxes, etc. Formerly the military tax (“‘askariy- yah”) was paid out of the communal taxes, but recently Baron Edmond de Rothschild has defrayed this expense for all the Jews of Palestine. The Ashkenazim refuse to recognize the authority of the hakam bashi, and have their own organiza- tion. They have one head, Samuel Salant, to whose administrative ability the present state of affairs is A Typical Street in Jerusalem, (From a photograph by Bonfils.) attributable. An assistant was lately called from Russia, E. D. Rabbinowitz-Tummim. This organi- zation is of course unofficial; and these rabbis de- pend on their moral and personal influence for the enforcement of their decisions. Most of the Ashke- nazim enjoy the protection of some foreign consu- late. There are about 250 places of prayer for the Jeru- salem Jews, about seventy of which are in independ- ent buildings. The Ashkenazim possess two large, commodious synagogues, both in the city proper —the Neu Schul of Salant and the synagogue of the Hasidim. The other synagogues of the Ash- kenazim are Bet Ya‘akob, Sha‘are Ziyyon, and Mena- hem Ziyyon (all of which are built about the court- yard of R. Judah he-Hasid, and are owned by the members of the Perushim com- munity), and Tif’eret Yisrael, also known as “the synagogue of R. Nissim Bak,” Bak hav- ing collected the funds for its building. The principal synagogues of the Sephardic Jews are the Kehal Istambul, the official syn- agogue in which the hakam bashi is installed and in which he officiates on holy days; the Kehal Emza‘i, so called because it is in the midst of the other syn- agogues; Bet ha-Keneset KR. Johanan b. Zak- kai; Kehal Tal- mud Doraihe All of these are united and form one group. There is a small syn- agogue, Bet El, used by the Cabalists, and an- other, Kehal Ma‘arabim, used by the Syna- Moroccan Jews. The Karaites also gogues and have an interesting place of worship; Yeshibot. and the services of the Yemenite, Persian, and Bokharian Jews are worthy of notice because of the variations in the forms of the ritual. Besides the larger synagogues within the city, there are several smaller ones. Outside the walls each Jewish colony has a synagogue of its own; the largest of these are Me’ah She‘arim, Bet Ya‘akob, Nahalat Shib‘ah, Bet Yisrael, Yemin Mosheh, Mazkeret Mosheh, Ohel Mosheh, and Rehobot, the last-named belonging to the colony of the Bokharian Jews, oo Veeega eer cr ae ae ee el ee ee oe Oe ee 155 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jerusalem The famous Wailing-Place (“ Kotel Ma‘arabi Hans interesting from every point of view. Every Friday afternoon and after morning service on Sabbaths and holy days the Jews assemble in a picturesque crowd to bewail their departed glory. This is the great show-place of the Jerusalem Jewry, as the Temple place is for the Moslems, and the Church of the Holy Sepulcher for the Christians. Of the yeshibot those of the Sephardim are mostly foundations in which the hakamim, who are bene- ficiaries, have to study and to offer prayers daily for the souls of the deceased testators. Chief of these yeshibot are: Hesed le-Abraham, an ancient trust which benefits ten rabbis, in- cluding the ha- kam bashi; Ka’id Nissim Shamama of Tu- nis, which has an annual in- come of 6,000 franes, divided among fifty ha- kamim; Mazzal Zomeah, sup- | ported by the Sassoon family of Bombay, at which ten rabbis each receive 200 francs annually ; Menahem Elijah of Vienna, which grants 200 francs a year to each of ten rabbis; Ge- daliah, presided over by the hakam bashi, and founded and maintained by Hayyim Gue- dalla, a nephew of the late Sir Moses Monte- fiore; Bet Ya- “akob, in which ten rabbis re- ceive each an an- nual allowance of 140 francs; and Tif’eret Ye- rushalayim, for young students, each of whom re- ceives a small annual income. The yeshibot of the Ashkenazim are more in the nature of colleges, at which young men spend their time in the study of the Talmud and the codes. Each student receives a monthly allowance varying from 10 to 80 francs. Their chief yeshibot are: ‘Ez Hayyim, attended by about 100 students, under the supervision of R. Samuel Salant; Me’ah She‘arim, with 50 students, under R. Saul Hayyim Hur- vitz; Torat Hayyim, managed by R. Hayyim Weingrad; and Hayye ‘Olam, a small yeshibah for Hasidim. (From a photograph by Bonfils.) Typography: The following books have been printed in Jerusalem since 1842: 1842. Azharot (published by Israel Bak), selections read on Shabu‘ot night by the Moroccan Jews. 1848. Be’er Sheba‘ (I. Bak), commentary on the Pentateuch, by Moses David Ashkenazi. 1843. Dibre Shalom (I. Bak), by Abraham Shalom Mizrahi. 1843, Ohole Yehudah (I, Bak), commentary on Rambam, by Judah ha-Kohen. . 1846. Be’er ba-Sadeh (I. Bak), by Menahem Danon. 1855. Ge Hizzayon (I. Bak), a life of Sir Moses Monteflore, by Jacob Sappir. 1863. Sefer ha-Goralot of R. Hayyim Vital (Bril, Cohen, and Salo- mon), published from a manuscript found in Yemen by Jacob Sappir. 1864. Dim‘at ha- *“Ashukim (I. Bak), on local disputes, by Salomon Bo- jarsky. 1868. Ohole Yosef (I. Bak), on the ritual laws, by Elias Joseph Rivlin. 1871. Fben Shelomoh (J. M. Salo- mon), com- mentary on some difficult passages in the Talmud, by Rabbi Salo- mon of Tolot- shin. 1871-76. Imre Binah (J. M. Salo- mon), respon- sa, by Meir Auerbach. 1872. Arzot ha-Hay- yim (Jos. Schmer), by Hayyim Pa- laggi, chief rabbi of Smyrna. 1875. Darke Ish (Nis- sim Bak), ser- mons, by Ju- dah Arewass. 1876. Em _ la-Masso- ret (N. Bak), by Aryeh Lob Harif. 1876-79. Or ha-Hok- mah (J. M. Salomon), commentary on the Zohar, by Abraham Azulai. 1877. Eleh Toledot Yizhak (A. M. Luncz), biog- raphy of the French statesman, Isaac Cremieux, by Luncz. 1878. Ha-Yehudim bi-Sefarad we-Portugal (Frumkin), trans- lated from the English of Frederick D. Mocatta by I. B. Frumkin. La 1881. Ohel Abraham (J. M. Salomon), responsa and * dinim,”’ by Abraham Schag. 1882. Ohel Mo‘ed (Agan), commentary on passages from the Pentateuch, the Five Scrolls, Joshua, Judges, and Samuel, by Abraham Bick. 1883. Erez Yisrael (J. M. Salomon), by E. Ben Judah. 1884. Zeker ‘Olam (Goshzini), a journey to Palestine, by Re- becca Lippe. ; Alfasi Zuta (A. M. Lunez), an outline of Alfasi, by Mena- hem Azariah da Fano; edited by N. Nathan Coronel. 1886. The life of Sir Moses and Lady Judith Montefiore (Zucker- mann), by Ezra Benvenisti. ne THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 156 Jeshua 1886. Ohel Mo‘ed (S. Zuckermann), by R. Samuel Yarundi. 1899. pi aete for the eighth day of Pesah, with the Persian 1887. Eben Shelomoh (Isaac Hirschensohn), commentary on Lunez). ‘ ; ee some difficult passages in the Talmud and the Tosafot, 1899. Wa-Ye’esof Dawid, sermons, by David Kazin of eo : by Salomon Epstein. 1901. Ben Ish Hayil (Frumkin), sermons, by David Hayyim o 1887. Iggeret le-Dawid (J. M. Salomon), a letter by David Cohen, Bagdad. ,, ad, 5 Ee reahte some references to the events of the year 1901. Bet Hayil (Ben Judah), ** Domestic Economy,’’ a Hebrew 5648. reader, by Joseph Meyuhas. ir wie 1891. Or le-Hayyim (I. B. Frumkin), by Hillel Gelbstein. The present hakam bashi has published ** ‘Olat Ish, Ma/‘ase 1893-94. Batte Midrashot (G. Lilienthal), old midrashim, col- lected and edited by 8S. A. Wertheimer. Ish,’ and “*Simhah le-Ish (w»x=the initials of Saul Jacob El Yashar in inverted order) ; A. M. Luncz has issued six volumes 3 Ee NFS WN 2 2 .Z bewas DAYVID’S STREET, JERUSALEM. (From a photograph by the Palestine Exploration Fund.) 1894. Ezor Eliyahu (J. M. Levy), commentary on Pirke Abot, ete., by Elihu ha-Kohen Etmari. 1898-1900. Jehoiada on some passages of the Talmud (Frumkin). 1899. Agudah (Frumkin), ritual code, by Alexander Susslin Cohen of Frankfort-on-the-Main. 1899. Or Yekarot (I. N. Levy), a commentary on the Mishnaic order Tohorot, by Asher Luria. 1899. Ben Ish Hay (Salomon), on the Pentateuch, by Joseph Hayyim, chief rabbi of Bagdad. of his year-book ‘‘ Jerusalem,”’ as well as a new edition of Estori Parhi’s ‘‘Kaftor wa-Ferah,’”’ and Rabbi Joseph Schwarz’s “ Tebu’ot ha-Erez’’; L. Griinhut has published some midrashim, *‘Kobez Midrashim”; David Jellin, a Hebrew reader; Hayyim Hirschensohn, the work ‘* Mosedot Torah She-be’al Peh”’’; §. A. Wertheimer, ‘‘Midrash Haserot we-Yeterot’’?; Sliman Mani of Hebron, ‘*Siah Yizhak”; M. Baruch of Bokhara, a volume of sermons, ‘‘Tebat Mosheh”’; and I. M. Pines has edited the ““Emek Berakah” of David Friedman, chief rabbi of Karlin. 157 Besides these there haye recently been published in Jerusa- lem for the Jews of Yemen and Bokhara yarious works in He- brew, Arabic, and Persian. Among them may be mentioned a Siddur of the Yemenite Jews (1894); ‘* Keter Torah,” or * Taj,” Pentateuch with Targum and Saadia’s ae ha ae 189 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joab 2. Sk Se a and gooutto kill our people!” Joab thereupon ran her through with his sword, after which his hand was healed. He then went into the street, killed every one he met on his way to the gates, slew the guard and threw open the gates. The Israelites had seen the blood flowing under the gates and shouted for joy. After ordering them to send for David, Joab climbed on to a tower in order that all might see him, and then saw the twentieth Psalm written on his right foot. Joab slew all the people of the city except the king, whom he left for David himself to kill. Then Joab put the slain king’s crown on David’s head while his troops were en- gaged in carrying off the spoils of the city (Jellinek, “B. I.” v. 146-148). 8. 8. M. SEL. —Critical View: In the Biblical account of Joab’s life the endeavor is palpable to shield David and Solomon, and to paint Joab as a man moved by motives of private revenge, and unscrupulousin the methods of accomplishing his designs. It is he who, contrary to the intentions of the king, assas- sinates Abner, though David must have had an equally strong reason for the removal of this parti- zan of Saul’s son and a possible rival to the throne. In the narrative of Absalom’s death, the same tend- ency is clearly visible. It is Joab who, contrary to David’s instructions, ends the crown prince’s life. Il Sam. xix. reveals the true situation. Amasa was probably under the suspicion of playing into the hands of Sheba (II Sam. xix. 14, xx. 18 et seqg.), and as a loyal adherent of David, Joab may have deemed it justifiable to put the lukewarm commander eftec- tually out of the way. In the narrative as now extant private jealousy is suggested as the motive; and this is later consist- ently adduced to shield Solomon for having sacri- legiously ignored the right of asylum in the sanctu- ary (I Kings ii. 28). It was in execution of David’s last will, to avenge the assassination of Abner and Amasa—that of Absalom, though logically it should also have been included, is of course omitted, for it would not do to represent Solomon as requi- ting the death of his rival’s brother, who, had he lived, would have been the legitimate heir—that this outrage upon the right of asylum is represented as having been perpetrated. Joab was aloyaland will- ing toolin the hands of his master David; a sturdy, unscrupulous military chieftain, such as surround Asiatic despots and leaders of freebooters. eG 2. Son of Seraiah, and descendant of Kenaz (I Chron. iv. 14); prince of Gk-HARAsHIM, : 8. Head of an important family that returne with Zerubbabel from captivity, the number of whose descendants together with those of Jeshua is given as 2,812 (Ezra ii. 6; Neh. vii. 11). A Joab is also mentioned in Ezra viii. 9 whose descendants numbered 218; but this may be a different person from the preceding. . E, G. H, M. SEL. JOAB: Jewish family to which belonged AARON B. SAMUEL HA-Nast, who lived for some time at Oria in A’pulia in the second half of the ninth cen- tury. The name “Joab” has been especially fre- quent since the tenth century in the Roman family of Anaw, within which it is characteristic of the branch that calls itself “ Beth-el,” “Min ba-Keneset,” or “De Synagoga” (see Jew. Encyc. i. 566, 3.2. Awnaw). Inthe Anaw family the name occurs as follows: (1) Joab, great-great-grandfather of Nathan, the author of the ‘Aruk (second half of 10th cent.). (2) Joab b. Solomon b. Abraham (1166), great- great-grandson of No. 1. (8) Joab, grandfather of Paola, descendant of Nov: (4) Joab b. Benjamin b. Solomon (1280-1304), grammarian and Biblical exegete in Rome. (5) Joab b. Solomon b. Shabbethai b. Mattithiah, father of Menahem, in Rome (about 1840). In the fourteenth century a synagogue of R. Joabin Rome is mentioned. The following is a genealogical table of the Joab family : L Abraham Jehiel Benjamin Rofe Jekuthiel Jehiel, 1260-89, author of napa mdyo Jekuthiel, 1280 Joab of Bethel, 1309 Jekuthiel of Bethel Jehiel Rofe of Bethel, 1377 Joab of sist 1399-1404 Jehiel Hai, 1419-45 Jekuthiel of Bethel. 1890-1487 Il. Joab nDj39 yD Benjamin Nakdan, 1284-92 Joab D357 7D Abraham Meshullam Rofe Joab, 1371-1417 Abraham Rofe, Perugia, 1396 Nathan, 1899 Isaac Finzi, 1436 Meshullam Nehemiah, Meshullam pI eae ae ee Abraham Finzi, b. in Recanati ; lived in Anco- na, 1456. III. Jehiel Moses wyqpn Benjamin Joab Benjamin Joab, b. 1851 Benjamin, Montalcino, 1408 Joab Joachimsthal THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 190 Most of the persons named in the genealogical table are known merely as copiers of Hebrew man- uscripts. Only the following are more important: Benjamin b. Joab: A writer of religious poems (Paris MS. 814; Zunz, “ Literaturgesch.” p. 365). Benjamin b. Joab Nakdan: Grammarian and Biblical commentator in Rome. He is the author of a manuscript work dating from 1284, and is men- tioned in another manuscript dated 1292. He was probably the teacher of the poet Immanuel b. Sol- omon. Jekuthiel b. Jehiel (bs Mad) DNS WAN): No less than twelve manuscripts of his have been preserved. Joab of Bethel: Synagogal poet of the four- teenth century. Whether he is identical with the religious poet attacked by Immanuel b. Solomon can not be determined. Zunz mentions three poets of this name. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Berliner, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii. 1, p. 50, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1893; Landshuth, *“Ammude ha- ‘Abodah, p. 81, Berlin, 1857; Luzzatto, x09 nD OX NAN, p. 28, DOT MI, p. 35; Steinschneider, Polemische und Apologetische Literatur, p. 284; idem, Hebr. Bibl. vii. 115, xi. 104, xiv. 61; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. 332, 426, 446, Berlin, 1896; Zunz, G. S. iii. 169, 171; idem, Literatwrgesch. pp. 501, 709. The following persons are known as belonging to the Beth-El family : Baruch b. Solomon b. Joab: Lived in Lar- ricia 1451. Bezaleel b. Baruch in Larricia: Son of pre- ceding; flourished 1457-63. Ishmael Rofe b. Moses: 1562. Jehiel (Hiel) of Bethel: Contemporary of Im- manuel b. Solomon, who speaks of him as “one who is in Hades” (“ Mahberot,” xxviii., ed. Berlin, p. 256). Joab b. Abraham b. Joab (npy5n }0): Writer in Tivoli 1338. Joab b. Nathan b. Daniel: gogal poetry. Joab Raphael b. Benjamin, of Montesanto, president of the synagogue Quattro Capi in Rome, 1539-50, doubtless belongs to this family. Mattathiah b. Jehiel, of Pisa (14th cent.; see Schorr in “ He-Haluz,” ix. 50). Mordecai da Pisa b. Solomon da Camerino (1483). Shelumiel b. Jehiel, of Tivoli: Lived in Rome 1578. It is probable that the following persons also be- longed to the Beth-El family: Abraham b. Joab Eliashib (1488), Baruch b. Joab: Member of the rabbinical board in Rome 1588-42. Benjamin b. Joab: Lived in Ravenna 1579. David b. Joab (1468). Eliezer Moses b. Joab (1463). Elijah b. Joab: Banker in Rome 1536. Elijah Melammed b. Joab: Lived in Rome 1524. Ephraim b. Joab b. Moses, of Modena: Writer and poet (1462); lived at Abruzzo 1481. Jehiel b. Joab: Pupil of Shabbethai b. Solo- mon in Rome 1290. Judge in Rome Writer of syna- Jekuthiel, of Tivoli (1416). Joab: Teacher of Benjamin b. Abraham Anaw at Rome in the first half of the thirteenth century. Joab: Lived in San Miniato in the sixteenth cen- tury. Joab b. Abraham Finzi (c. 1660). Joab b. Baruch Lampronti: Lived in Ferrara about 1730. Joab (Dattilo) b. Baruch degli Piatelli: Teacher in Rome; supported Joshua Menaggen’s efforts and defended Jacob Zahalon’s writings. He wrote introductions to two works by the latter which appeared in Venice in 1665. Joab was rabbi of Sienna at the time of his death. Joab b. Benjamin: Lived in Rome 1555. Joab b. David: Copyist and writer of syna- gogal poems (ec. 1426). Joab Elijah b. Joab (1483; see R. Judah Minz, Responsa, Nos. 2, 3). Joab Hazzan: Writer of synagogal poems. Joab Immanuel Finzi (1466-77). Joab b. Jehiel, of Modena. Joab b. Jekuthiel, of Tivoli (1414). Joab b. Joseph, of Modena (1495). Joab b. Mazliah de Ceprano: Sonof Mazliah b. Menahem Ceprano; lived in Rome 1575. Joab Melammed: Lived in Rome 15389; per- haps identical with Joab Fattore in Rome (1539) and with Joab Melammed de Recanati, who lived in Rome 1553. Joab b. Menahem Joseph (1460). Joab b. Mordecai Trioufo: Lived in Rome 1539. Joab b. Moses. Joab b. Moses: Lived in Rome 1584. Joab b. Obadiah, of Tivoli: Lived in Rome 1599. Joab della Ripa (or of Larricia ?). His widow, Fresca Rosa, died in Rome 1565 (Berliner, “ Aus Schweren Tagen,” No. 82). Joab b. Shabbethai: Lived in Rome 1499, Joab Shemariah, of Corregio (1503). Joab Valencin: Lived in Venice 1594. Joseph b. Joab Elijah (1461). Joshua b. Joab (1405). Mazliah b. Menahem Ceprano: Rome 1562. Menahem b. Joab, of Ascoli (1479). Menahem b. Joab: Lived in Ferrara 1745. Mordecai b. Joab, 53.21): Banker in Rome; “fattore” of the Roman congregation 1536-38, Mordecai b. Joab. Obadiah b. Joab: Presider in Rome 1554. Shabbethai b. Joab Calabrese: Presider and rabbi in Rome 1539-58. Jacob b. Joab Elijah ha-Kohen de Fano, author of “Shilte ha-Gibborim,” certainly does not belong to this family, nor does Joab of Salerno (about 1800). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Berliner, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, vol. ii., part 1, pp. 114 et_seq., Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1893: Stein- schneider, Hehr. Bibl. xi. 108 et seq.; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. 332 et seq., ii. 417-422 et passim, Berlin, 1895-96; Zunz, G.S. iii. 162 et seq.; idem, Literatur- gesch., passim. : Qa. Hes Lived in 191 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joab Joachimsthal JOAB BEN JEHIEL: Liturgical poet; lived at Rome in the fourteenth century. He belonged to the Beth-El family, and was the author of five piy- yutim (inserted in the Roman Mahzor) for Passover, having for their subject the Canticles, and piyyu- tim for Shabu‘ot and the New-Year (before “ Nish- mat”), and for the Day of Atonement (before “ Kad- dish”). In the Roman Mahzor, also, a prayer en- titled “ Ashmurot ha-Boker” for Thursdays on which the “ Tahanun ” is not recited, is signed “Joab”; and a selihah bearing the same signature is found in the selihot collection at Tripoli. Joab is believed to be identical with the young poet whom Imman- uel satirized (“ Mahberot,” viii. 66). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Luzzatto, Mebo, pp. 23, 26; Zunz, G. S. iii. 171; idem, Literatwrgesch. p. 501; Landshuth, ‘Ammude ha- “Abodah, p. 81; Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. 446. ; G. I. Br. JOACHIM, JOSEPH: Hungarian violinist ; born at Kittsee, near Presburg, Hungary, June 28, 1831. He began to study the violin when he was five years old, and was placed under Szervaczinski, leader of the orchestra at the Budapest opera-house. He ad- vanced so rapidly that after two years he was able to make his first appearance in a public concert given at the Adels Casino, Budapest, March 17, 1839, At the age of nine he was sent to study with Joseph Bohm at the Vienna Conservatorium, whence, after a course of three years, he went to Leipsic. There he met Mendelssohn and played at a concert of Madame Viardot’s. A few months later he played Ernst’s “ Otello Fantasia” ata Gewandhaus concert, and achieved such success that in the following year—that is, at the age of twelve—he was invited to play in a violin quartet with Ernst, Bazzini, and Ferdinand David. Joachim remained in Leipsic until 1849, studying with Ferdinand David (violin) and Moritz Haupt- mann (composition), and making occasional concert tours through Germany and elsewhere. In 1844 he was taken by Mendelssohn to England, where he made his début at a benefit concert given at Drury Lane in March, 1844. He revisited England in 1847, and thereafter played annually at the Monday Popular, the Crystal Palace, and other concerts. In 1849 he spent two months at Paris, where he achieved his first success in an orchestral concert given by Hector Berlioz. Shortly afterward he accepted the position of concert-master at Weimar. In 1852 he accepted a call as solo violinist to the King of Han- over; and it was here, in 1863, that he married Amalie Weiss, the well-known contralto. After a residence of sixteen years at Hanover, - Joachim, in 1868, removed to Berlin, where he was appointed director of the newly established Konig- liche Hochschule fiir Musik, and member of the Academy of Fine Arts (musical section). His fa- mous quartet, originally established in 1869, and later consisting of Joachim, De Ahna, Wirth (followed by Kruse and Halir), and Hausmann, has, by reason of its artistic character and perfect ensemble, set the standard for high-class chamber-music perform- ances.” Among the compositions of Joachim, most of which are somewhat tinged by the influence of Schumann, the Hungarian concerto in D minor is generally regarded as the most perfect as to both form and content. Other important compositions are: overture to “Hamlet,” for orchestra, op. 4; “Hebrew Melodies,” for viola and piano, op. 9; nocturne in A for violin and small orchestra, op. 12; “Dem Andenken Kleists,” op. 14; “Szene der Marta” (from Schiller’s “ Demetrius ”), for contralto solo and orchestra, op. 14; 8 cadenzas to Beethoven’s violin-concertos, etc. Joachim embraced Christi- anity, and died Aug. 15, 1907. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Moser, Joseph Joachim, 1900; Lahee, Famous Violinists, pp. 244-260; Grove, Dict. Music and Musicians. s. J. So. JOACHIMSEN, PHILIP J.: American jurist and commurfal worker; born in Breslau Nov., 1817; died in New York city Jan. 6, 1890. He emigrated to New York in 1827, and was admitted to the bar there in 1840. During the Civil war, he organized and commanded the Fifty-ninth New York Volunteer Regiment, and was injured at New Orleans. For his services he was made brigadier-general by brevet. After having assiduously practised law, he was elected judge of the New York Marine Court in 1870 and acted as such up to 1877. He then resumed practise. Joachimsen was the first president of the Hebrew Orphan Asylum (1859). In 1879 he organized the Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society for Children in New York. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Isaac Markens, The Hebrews in America, p. 228, New York, 1888; The New York Times, Jan. 7, 1890; Simon Wolf, The American Jew as Patriot, Soldier, and Citizen, p. 262, Philadelphia, 1895. A. Ase VIG en JOACHIMSTHAL, FERDINAND J.: Ger- man mathematician; born May 9, 1818, at Goldberg, Silesia; died April 5, 1861, at Breslau. In the year of his graduation (Ph.D. Berlin, 1842) he was ap- pointed teacher at a “Realschule” in Berlin, and in 1846 was admitted to the philosophical faculty of the university as privat-docent. In 1856 he was appointed professor of mathematics at Halle, and in 1858 at Breslau. Joachimsthal contributed essays to Crelle’s “Journal,” 1846, 1850, 1854, 1861, and to Torquem’s “ Nouvelles Annales des Mathématiques.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. s. Oe Abe, dele JOACHIMSTHAL, GEORG: German physi- cian; born at Stargard, Pomerania, May 8, 1863; died Feb. 28, 1914. He graduated as doctor of medicine from the University of Berlin in 1887 and settled in Berlin the following year. In 1890 he became assistant in orthopedic surgery at the uni- versity dispensary, where in 1898 he was appointed privat-docent in the medical faculty. In 1897 he received the Pourat prize of the French Institute for his essay “Etude des Changements Morpholo- giques et Fonctionels qu’on Peut Produire Expéri- mentalement sur l’Appareil Locomoteur.” Joachimsthal contributed practical studies to the medical journals, and from 1897 collaborated with J. Wolff in the orthopedic section of Virchow’s “‘Jahresbericht uber die Leistungen und Fort- Joash Job THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 192 schritte in der Gesammten Medizin.” He was the author of ‘Die Angeborenen Verbildungen der Oberen Extremititen,’’ Hamburg, 1900. : F | Lew. SV. BL Pagel, Biog. Lew. s. TOE JOASH (wy, contraction of wim = “ given by Yuwu”). 1. (Called also Jehoash.)—Biblical Data: Son of Ahaziah and Zibiah of Beer-sheba; eighth king of Judah (II Kings xii. 1, 2). Joash was the only descendant of the house of David living at the time of Ahaziah’s death that escaped slaughter at the hand of his grandmother ATHALIAH. Only a year old when the royal family was exterminated, he with his nurse was concealed by his paternal aunt Jehosheba in “the bedchamber,” where he re- mained six years (II Kings xi. 1-38; II Chron. xxii. 10-12). When he was seven years old he was brought out from his hiding-place by JeEworapA and placed on the throne of hisancestors. As Joash was the only living member of David’s line his corona- tion is particularly narrated; after he was crowned the covenant was renewed between God, the king, and the nation, and after having destroyed the altars of Baal and killed Mattan, the priest of Baal, the king was conducted with great ceremony to the throne (II Kings xi. 4-19; If Chron. xxiii. 11-20). Jehoiada, desiring to secure the permanence of the throne of David, chose two wives for Joash, who begat sons and daughters (II Chron. xxiv. 8). Under the guidance of Jehoiada the young king es- tablished the worship of Yawn, though the “high places” continued to be used for worship (II Kings xii. 3-4). The first public religiousact of Joash was to order the repair of the Temple, which had been despoiled by Athaliah (II Chron. xxiv. 7). To this end the king entrusted to the priests the duty of setting aside all the money resulting from the sale of dedi- cated things and the money offered by the people. But the twenty-third year of Joash’s reign saw the Temple still unrepaired, so the king took away from the priests the charge of the money (II Kings xii. 5-8). In II Chron. xxiv. 5 it is stated that the king ordered the priests and Levites to travel through the cities of Judah and collect money, but that the Levites were slow in their mission. A chest was therefore placed by Jehoiada beside the altar (ac- cording to II Chron. xxiv. 8, without the gate and at the command of Joash), in which the princes and all the people placed contributions, and when enough had been collected the money was given to the artisans that restored the Temple (II Kings xii. 10-17; IL Chron. xxiv. 8-14). After the death of Jehoiada, Joash proved weak enough to permit himself to be worshiped by the princes of Judah, and this turned the people from the worship of Yuwu. Joash showed his ingratitude toward Je- hoiada by slaying the latter’s son Zechariah for censuring his (the king’s) acts (II Chron. xxiv. 17-22), An important event in Joash’s life is differently stated in II Kings and II Chronicles; according to the former (xii. 18-19 [A. V. 17-18]) when Hazael, the Syrian king, marched against Jerusalem, Joash bribed him with the gold of the royal and sacred treasuries to turn back; in the latter (xxiv. 23-25) it is said that after the Syrian army had destroyed all the princes of Judah the soldiers “executed judg- ment against Joash,” so that they “left him in great diseases.” Joash was assassinated by his own serv- ants at Beth-milo, after a reign ot forty years, and his assassination is recorded as an act of revenge for the blood of the son of Jehoiada (II Kings xii. 1, 21; II Chron. xxiv. 1, 25). II Kings and II Chronicles differ also with regard to the burial of Joash: ac- cording to the former (xii. 22), Joash was buried with his fathers in the city of David, while in the latter (xxiv. 25) it is expressly said that he was buried in the city of David, but “not in the sepulchers of the kings.” BE. G. H. M. SEL. —In Rabbinical Literature: As the exter- mination of the male descendants of David was a di- vine retribution for the extermination of the priests by David (comp. I Sam. xxii. 17-21), Joash escaped death because in the latter case one priest, Abiathar, survived (Sanh. 95b). The hiding-place of Joash was, according to R. Eleazar, one of the chambers behind the Holy of Holies; according to R. Samuel b. Nahman, one of the upper chambers of the Tem- ple (Cant. R. i. 66). Although a king who is the son of a king need not be anointed, exception was made in the case of Joash, as well as of Solomonand Zedekiah, the suc- cession of each of whom was contested (Lev. R. x. 8). Particular mention is made of the crown placed on Joash’s head (II Kings xi. 12), because it fitted exactly, showing that he was qualified for king- ship (‘Ab. Zarah 44a). Joash was one of the four men who pretended to be gods. He was persuaded thereto particularly by the princes, who said to him. “ Wert thou not a god thou couldst not come out alive from the Holy of Holies” (Ex. R. viii. 3). He was assassinated by two of his servants, one of whom was a son of an Ammonite woman and the other the offspring of a Moabite (II Chron, xxiv. 26); for God said: “Let the descendants of the two ungrateful families chas- tise the ungrateful Joash ” (Yalk., Ex. 262). Sue: M. Set. 2. (Called also Jehoash.) King of Israel 798- 782 B.c. He was the sonand successor of Jehoahaz, and one of the greatest of the Israelitish kings. In three signal and successive victories he overcame the Syrians, and retook from them the towns which Hazael had captured from Israel. He was also in- volved in a war with Amaziah, King of Judah. In the battle at Beth-shemesh Jehoash defeated Ama- ziah, advanced to Jerusalem, broke down the wall of that city fora distance of 400 cubits, and carried away to Samaria the treasures of the Temple and of the palace (II Kings xiv. 11-14). Although Jehoash, like his predecessors, worshiped the golden calves, he held the prophet Elisha in high honor, looking up to him as a father. When Elisha was about to die, Jehoash repaired to the bedside of the prophet, “wept over his face, and said, O my father, the chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof” (¢d, xiii. 14). Jehoash died soon after his victory over Ama- ziah, and was buried in Samaria (2d. xiv. 16; comp. If Chron. xxv. 17-24). 3. Father of Gideon (Judges vi. 32; II Sam. xi. 21). Joash belonged to the tribe of Manasseh and 193 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joash Job lived at Ophrah, where he was buried. He must have been a man of importance, because an altar of Baal was in his house, and he had more than ten servants (Judges vi. 25, 27); and he alone was able to check the fury of the people against his son (7b. 30-31). See GrpEon. M. Set. 4. Son of Ahab. When the latter was about to set out to meet the Syrians in battle at Ramoth- gilead, he entrusted the prophet Micaiah, whose prophecy had been against him, to Amon, the govy- ernor of Samaria, and to Joash, the king’s son, saying, “Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of afflic- tion, until I come in peace” (I Kings xxii. 26, 27). It may be that Joash was an under-officer of Samaria; or, as Rawlinson suggests, the word trans- lated “king’s son” may refer to a state officer, such as is found in Jer. xxxvi. 26. There is no other mention of this Joash. IU, Ey Ee 5. A descendant of Shelah, the son of Judah; one of the men “ who had the dominion in Moab” (I Chron. iv. 22). 6. Son of Shemaah the Gibeathite; one of David’s warriors (7. xii. 8). 7. (wy\.) Son of Becher, the son of Benjamin (2d. vii. 8). 8. Over- seer of David’s cellars of oil (db. xxvii. 28). E. G. H. M. Set. JOB (a3)s).—Biblical Data: Titular hero of the Book of Job. He was a native of Uz, rich, very pious, and upright, and he had seven sons and three daughters. His sons used to make a feast in their houses, one each day; and at the end of the week Job would bring seven holocausts, according to the number of his sons, thinking perhaps that the latter, while feasting, had committed sins (Job i. 1-5). One day in the heavenly council, in consequence of a question asked by God, Job’s piety was dis- cussed by the accuser Satan, who maintained that if Job should be stricken with calamity he would certainly sin. Satan, having received permission to deal with Job as he pleased, first brought poverty on him by causing all his cattle to be stolen; then he caused the death of all Job’s children. But Job did not sin. On the contrary, he declared God’s act to be just, saying, “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away ” (2d. i. 6-22). Atasecond gathering of the “sonsof God” Satan obtained permission to afflict Job’s own person. He accordingly smote him with a most painful dis- ease (clephantiasis ?); still Job did not complain. Even when his wife advised him to curse God and die, he replied that he had to accept evil at His hands, just as he had received good (2d. ii. 1-10). Three friends came to condole with him, and stayed with him seven days and seven nights in silence (7. ji. 11-18), after which began the colloquies between him and his friends that form the text of the Book of Job. Finally, God restored Job to his former state, giv- ing him twice as much as he had before, even four- teen sons. The daughters, however, born to him after his restoration were only three in number. Job lived 140 years after this and saw four genera- tions (2b. xlii. 10-17). He is mentioned by Ezekiel (Ezek. xiv. 14, 20) with Noah and Daniel as among the three most righteous men. See Jos, Book or. E. G. H. M. SEt. VII.—13 In Rabbinical Literature: Owing to the importance of the Book of Job, the Talmudists occu- pied themselves frequently with its chief character. One of the amoraim expressed his opinion in the presence of Samuel b. Nahmani that Job never ex- isted and that the whole story was a fable (B. B. 15a). An opinion couched in similar words and pronounced by Simeon ben Lakish was interpreted to mean that such a person as Job existed, but that the narratives in the drama are inventions (Gen. R. lvii.). Apart from these utterances all of the rabbis took it for granted that Job existed, but they dif- fered widely as to the epochin which he lived and as to his nationality, two points of discussion closely connected. Every one of the Talmudists inferred Job’s epoch and nationality from an analogy be- tween two-Biblical words or sentences. Accord- ing to Bar Kappara, Job lived in the time of Abra- ham; according to Abba b. Kahana, in the time of Jacob, he having married Dinah, Jacob’s daughter (2b.; B. B. 15b; comp. additions in Targ. Yer. to Job ii. 9). R. Levi said that Job lived in the time of Jacob’s sons; and he also said, in the name of Jose b. Halafta, that Job was born when Jacob and his children entered Egypt and that he died when the Israelites left that country. Job consequently lived 210 years (comp. Rashi on Ex. xii. 40). When Satan came to accuse the Israelites of being idola- ters, God set him against Job, whence Job’s mis- fortunes (Gen. R. /.¢.). This opinion Opinions is supported by the statement that Job as to Date. with Jethro and Balaam was consulted by Pharaoh as to the means of reducing the number of the children of Israel and that Job was stricken with calamity because he had remained silent (Sanh, 106a; Sotahiia). It may be mentioned that this legend is narrated differently in the “Sefer ha-Yashar ” (section “Shemot,” p. 110a, ed. Leghorn, 1870) as follows: At first Job, who was one of Pharaoh’s eunuchs and counselors, advised Pharaoh to have every male child murdered (Ex. i. 16). Afterward Pharaoh, having had a dream which prog- nosticated the birth of a helper, again consulted Job. The latter answered evasively: “Let the king do as he pleases” (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” /.c. p. 111a). Levi b. Lahma also held that Job lived in the time of Moses, by whom the Book of Job was written. Some of the rabbis even declare that the one servant of Pharaoh who feared the word of God (Ex. ix. 20) was Job (Ex. R. xii. 8). Raba, specifying the time more accurately, said Job lived in the time of the spies who were sent by Moses to explore the land of Canaan (B. B. 15a). According to these rabbis, Job was a Gen- tile—an opinion which is elsewhere expres8ed more fully, in that Job is said to have been a pious Gentile or one of the prophets of the Gentiles (7. 15b; Seder ‘Olam R. xxi.). Other tannaim place Job variously in the reign of Saba, in that of the Chaldees, and in that of Ahasuerus. R. Johanan and R. Eleazar both declared that Job was one of those who returned from the Captivity and that his bet ha-midrash was at Tiberias (Yer. Sotah v.8; B B. J.c.; Gen. R. U.c.). Itis said in B. B. (2d.) that these tannaim necessarily considered Job an Israel- ite; but R. Hananeel (ad loc.) has in his text, “ All the Tannaim and Amoraim, with the exception of ep THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job, Book of 194 the one who placed Job in the time of Jacob, were of opinion that Job was an Israelite” (comp. also Gen. R. l.c.). Job is prominent in haggadic legends. His pros- perity is thus described: Samuel). Isaac said: “He who received a ‘perutah’ from Job prospered in his affairs.” Jose b. Hanina inferred from Job i. 10 that Job’s goats could kill wolves; and R. Johanan inferred from Job i. 14 that God gave Job a fore- taste of the bliss of paradise (B. B. 15b). Satan, see- ing Job’s extraordinary prosperity, was filled with envy and therefore began in the councils of heaven to disparage Job’s piety. According to the Targum Yerushalmi (Job i. 6, li. 1) the twe councils of heaven took place respect- ively on Rosh ha-Shanah and Yom Kippur. When the messenger told Job that the Sabeans had seized his oxen, he armed his men and prepared to make war upon them. But the second messenger came, telling him that a fire from heaven had destroyed his sheep, and he then said: “ Now I can do nothing ” (Lev. R. xvii. 4). The wind that blew down his house was one of the three great winds whose power was suflicient to destroy the world (Gen. R. xxiv. 4). Job was stricken by Satan with fifty different plagues (Ex. R. xxiii. 10). His house was filled with a bad smell, and Job sat down on a dunghill. His flesh was filled with worms which made holes in his body and began to quarrel with one another. Job thereupon placed every worm in a hole, saying: “It ismy flesh, yet you quarrel about it’ (Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, p. 164; comp. Kohler, Testament of Job, v. 6-8, in Kohut Memorial Vol- ume, pp. 264-295), Job’s sufferings lasted twelve months (‘Eduy. ii. 10; comp. Testament of Job, v. 9, where the number of years is given as seven); then God, yielding to the prayer of the angels, healed him and restored to him twofold what he had before (Ab. R. N. /.c.). Only the number of Job’s daughters was not doubled. Nevertheless their beauty was doubled, and therefore their names (Job xlii. 14), indicating their extraordinary charms, are given (B. B. 16b). The legendary accounts of Job extend also to his three friends. These entered his house simultaneously, though they lived 800 miles apart. Hach had a crown or, according to another statement, a tree on which the images of the three friends were carved; and when a misfor- tune befell any one of them his image was altered (ib.; comp. Targ. to Job ii. 11). It has been said that Job lived 210 years; this is inferred from Job xlii. 16, where it is said that he lived 140 years after his recovery (Gen. R. lviii. 3, lxi. 4; comp. Yalk., Kings, 248, and Testament of Job, xii. 8). It is said also that the whole world mourned Job's death (Sotah 35a). But it was chiefly Job’s character and piety that concerned the Talmudists. He is particularly rep- resented as a most generous man. Like Abraham, he built an inn at the cross-roads, with four doors Opening respectively to the four car- Job’s dinal points, in order that wayfarers Generosity. might have no trouble in finding an entrance, and his name was praised by all who knew him. His time was entirely occupied with works of charity, as visiting the sick and the like (Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, pp. 83-34, 164; Midrash Ma‘yan Gannim, ed. Buber, p. 92; comp. Gen. R. xxx. 9). Still more characteristic is the conclusion of Raba that Job used to take away, ostensibly by force, a field which belonged to orphans, and after making it ready for sowing would return it to the owners (B. B. /.¢.). Job was also of exemplary piety. Like Abraham he recognized God by intuition (Num. R. xiv. 7). Nothing in his possession had been acquired by rapacity, and therefore his prayer was pure (Ex. R. xii. 4). He, Melchizedek, and Enoch were as spot- less ag Abraham (Midr. Teh. to Ps. xxxvii.). He took the greatest care to keep himself aloof from every unseemly deed (Ab. R. N. ch. ii., Recension B, ed. Schechter, p. 8). According to Targ. Sheni to Esth. i. Job’s name was one of the seven en- graved on the seven branches of the golden candle- stick. But these features of Job’s character made the Rabbis apprehend that he might eclipse Abraham; and some of them therefore depreciated Job’s piety. Johanan b. Zakkai used to say that Job’s piety was only the result of his fear of punishment (Sotah 27a; Yer. Sotah v. 5), In Ab. R. N., Recension A, p. 84, where the generosity of Job is so much praised, it is concluded that when he, after having been afflicted, complained that he was inadequately rewarded, God said to him: “Thy generosity has not yet attained tothe half of that of Abraham.” R. Levi even went as far as to exculpate Satan, declaring that he had the same apprehension that God might forget the piety of Abraham (B. B. 16a). Still even among the Tannaim Job had his de- fenders, ¢.g., Joshua b. Hyrcanus, whose opinion was that Job worshiped God out of pure love (Sotah J.c.). This difference of opinion existed with regard to Job’s attitude at the time of his mis- fortune. R. Eliezer said that Job blasphemed God (the Talmudic expression being “he desired to up- set the dish”), but R. Joshua considered that Job spoke harsh words against Satan only (B. B. 16a). This discussion was continued by Abaye and Raba, of whom the former pleaded for Job, while Raba followed R. Eliezer’s opinion. Raba’s (according to another text, Rab’s) expression was “dust into the mouth of Job.” He inferred from the passage “and yet Job sinned not with his lips” (Job ii. 10) that Job sinned in his heart (2d.). In the Talmudic literature it is generally assumed that Job sinned or, as the expression is, “he re- belled” (“ba‘at”; Midr. Teh. xxvi.). It is further said that if Job had not sinned people would recite in prayer “and the God of Job,” just as they recite “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” but he re- belled (Pesik. R. Ahare Mot, ed. Friedmann, p. 190a; comp. Ex. R. xxx. 8). Job’s chief complaint was, according to Raba, that although man is driven to sin by the seducer (“yezer ha-ra‘”), whom God Himself has created, yet he is punished (comp. Job x. 7). But Eliphaz answered him: “Thou castest off fear” (7d. xv. 4), meaning, if God created the seducer, He also created the Torah, by which a man can subdue the seducer (B. B. J.c.). Raba con- cluded also that Job denied resurrection (7d.). A more picturesque treatment of Job’s bitterness \ 195 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job Job, Book of against God is recorded by Rabbah (according to B. B. 16a), or Raba (according to Niddah 52a): Job blasphemed God by using the term “tempest” when he said, “ For he breaketh me with a tempest” (Job*ix. 17), which passage is interpreted by the Rabbis to mean, “Perhaps a tempest passed before Thee which caused the confusion between 3) [= “Job” ] and 2x [= “enemy ”]” (comp. also Ecclus. [Sirach] xlix. 9, the Hebrew, Greek, and Syriac ver- sions, and the commentaries ad loc.). God therefore answered him out of the tempest (db. xxxviii.- XXxix., which are interpreted as a refutation of Job’s charge). Still, Rabbi’s opinion was that Job spoke in praise of God more than Elihu did (Ex. R. POX TV, ll). It has already been said that the Book of Job was ascribed by the Rabbis to Moses. Its place in the canon is between Psalms and Proverbs (B. B. 14b). The high priest read the Book of Job for diversion before Yom Kippur (Yoma i. 4 [18b]). According to the Talmudists, he who sees the Book of Job in a dream may anticipate a misfortune (Ber. 57b). There was an ancient Targum to Job which was re- garded by the Talmudists as a dangerous work (comp. Tosef., Shab. xiv.). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Israel Schwarz, Tikwat Hnoash, Berlin, 1868; Wiernikowsky, Das Buch Hiob, Breslau, 1902. M. SEt. 8. 8. — Critical View: The hero whose name has furnished the title of the Book of Job appears only as a legendary figure. It is idle to inquire whether the story has any historical basis, since nothing definite relating to Job can be ascertained. The story originated in the land of Edom—a background that has been retained in the Hebrew poem. The names of Job and his three friends have been partly Hebraized. “Iyyob,” the Hebrew form of “Job,” is either passive, meaning “the person attacked [by Satan]” (comp. “yillod” = “the born one” ; Ex. i. 22; Josh. v. 5; “shilloah” in Job ix. 7= areoraa- pévoc), or active, meaning “the attacker [?.¢., of the ancient doctrine of retribution] ” (comp. Merx, “ Das Gedicht von Hiob,” 1871, pp. xvii., xxxv.), like “yissor,” Job xl. 2= “the reprover”; the Arabic etymologies given in Ewald, “Das Buch Ijob” (2d ed., 1854, pp. 19 et seg.: “the returning, repenting ”), and in Hitzig, “Das Buch Hiob” (1874, pp. xix. e¢ seq.: from the Arabic tribe “banu Awwab” = “sons of the evening star,” 7.¢., “of the returning one”), are doubtful. Eliphaz the Temanite (Job ii. 11) appears also in Gen. xxxvi. 4, 11,15, as Hsau’s eldest son. Bildad the Shuhite is mentioned only in the Book of Job. According to Néldeke (in “Z. D. M. G.” xlii. 479), the name means “Bel has loved” (comp. “ Eldad ”). In Gen. xxv. 2 “Shuah” is the name of a tribe, not ofaplace. “Zophar” also occurs only in the Book of Job. His home, Naamah, is mentioned in Josh. xv. 41 as a city within the Judaic “shefelah.” Job’s home, Uz (Xépa Avoiric in the Septuagint), is men- tioned in Lam. iv. 21 as being in Edom; according to Wetzstein (in Delitzsch, “Hiob,” pp. 576 e¢ seq.) it was.in Hauran, east of the Jordan. For other opinions see Budde, “Das Buch Hiob,” 1896, pp. x. et seq. The poem of Job as found in the Old Testament is a combination from two sources. The earlier of these, a folk-book, comprises the prologue (Job i. =e and ii.) and the epilogue (¢. xlii. 7-17). L€omposite According to this source Job was a Nature of rich Edomite sheik, of irreproachable Book of Job. piety (7b. i. 1, 3, 8), as is shown espe- cially by his punctiliousness in ritual observances (i). i. 5) according to the customs of the time. The accusing angel Satan (7d. i. 6) in the presence of God casts reflections on the causes of Job's piety (dd. i. 9-11), and, in agreement with the conceit that the evil upon earth is not caused by God directly, but is brought by one or many interme- diary angels, receives permission to test Job by mis- fortune (Gen. xix.; I] Sam. xxiv. 16 et seq.; Ezek. ix. 4 et seg.4 comp. kodaotixy Shvauicin Philo, “ Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit,” § 34 [ed. Mangey, i. 496]; “middat ha-din” in the Jewish midrash, Gen. Re xdis): The first trial consists in the destruction of Job’s possessions (Job i. 12-19), in which he is the victor through his resignation (7). i. 20-22). Satan de- clares this trial to have been insufficient, and de- mands another to consist in personal bodily suffer- ing. Thisalsois granted, and Job isagain victorious (tb. ii. 1-10). Job’s wife (zd. ii. 9, 10) here shows how great in such cases is the temptation to do wrong. That the friends of Job, who come to com- fort him (7d. ii. 11-18), also sin on this occasion is evidenced in Job xlii. 7-10a, where Job, who alone remains guiltless, has to intercede for them when they bring the burnt offerings. The nature of their sin does not appear, since the folk-book is inter- rupted at this point by the interpolation of the poem of Job (2d. iii. 1-xlii. 6). The folk-book is further differentiated from the poem by its employment of the name of Yuwu, which it naively puts into the mouth of the Edom- ites (7b. i. 7, 21b; xlii. 7). Here again Job refrains from sinning with his lips (2d. ii. 10), even in his deepest suffering, and says to Yuwu only what is just (““nekonah”; 2d. xlii. 7b, 8b), whereas in the poem he utters the most offensive sentiments against God, beginning by cursing the day of his birth. In the folk-book the sins consist mainly in un- seemly speeches to and about God (2d. i. 10; xlii. 7, 8; comp. 20. i. 22, “natan tiflah”). He who refrains, like Job, is “sar me-ra‘” (= “one who escheweth evil”) and “yere Elohim” (= “who feareth God”) (ib. i. 1). In other respects piety here, as among the Patriarchs (Gen. xxii. 3), is a matter of ritual, con- sisting in burnt offerings (Job i. 5). Job’s dress isthat worn by the Patriarchs; his flocks are remi- niscent of Gen. xii. 16, xxxii. 5; his servants (“‘abuddah”), of Gen. xxvi. 14. According to Duhm (“Das Buch Hiob,” 1897, p. viii.) Ezek. xiv. 14 et seg. indicates that the writer of that passage knew the folk-book. E. G. H. JOB, THE BOOK OF.—Biblical Data: A dramatic poem in forty-two chapters, the characters in which are Job, his wife (mentioned only once, ii. 9), his three friends—Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar— Elihu, and God (see DRAMA, HEBREW). Ch. i.—ii.: Prologue, describing Job’s prosperity, its disap- Cas: Job, Book of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 196 pearance, and the calamities sent upon him at the suggestion of Satan. Ch. iii.: Job’s complaint. He curses the day he was born; wishes he had died immediately after birth; thinks death preferable to alife of misfortune. Ch.iv.-v.: Reply of Eliphaz. He declares that a truly righteous man is never afflicted; that a man sometimes thinks himself just, though he is unjust; hence his complaint. He ex- horts Job to turn to God insincerity, who will surely restore him to well-being. Ch. vi.-vii.: Job re- sumes his complaint. His afflictions are greater than he can bear; his sole desire is to die at once, all his friends having deserted him. He relates his suf- ferings, and reproaches God, who takes delight in torturing him. Ch. viii.: Reply of Bildad. He reproaches Job for his injustice toward God, declar- ing that if he were really upright, God would not have so afflicted him, and that the prosperity of the wicked, of which Job complains, is unstable. Ch. ix.-x.: Job represents God as a capricious tyrant, who lets His hand fall on both the Complaint just and the unjust. He maintains and that God knows that he is not wicked, Rejoinders. and yet tortures him. Ch. xi.: Zo- phar, in reply, accuses Job of wicked- ness, for which he is being punished, and exhorts him to repent. Ch. xii.-xiv.: Job declares that he is as wise as his friends and that he needs not their counsel. God is ruler, and therefore he com- plains directly to Him of the prosperity of the wicked and of the suffering of the righteous. God, the Omnipotent, ought not to bring under judgment so frail a creature as man. Ch. xv.: Eliphaz re- plies; Job’s own words prove his guilt. He repeats the assertion that the prosperity of the wicked is not of long duration. Ch. xvi.-xvii.: Job again accuses God of injus- tice. Ch. xviii.: Bildad confirms his friends’ as- sertion that the wicked, in spite of present prosper- ity, willcome toa badend. Ch. xix.: Job accuses his friends of being unjust toward him, laments that now he has none to whom he may go for com- fort: God persecutes him, his friends and acquaint- ances have abandoned him, even his wife turns against him. Ch. xx.: Zophar makes the same re- ply as Bildad in ch. xviii., but in other words. Ch. xxi.: Job refutes his friends’ assertions, maintain- ing that only the wicked prosper, that they spend their lives in pleasure and pass swiftly to the grave. Even if misfortune overtakes their children, the wicked have departed, and will know it not. Ch. xxii.: Eliphaz asserts that God has no profit in man’s righteousness, only man himself profits by it; that Job is being punished for his manifold sins. He again exhorts Job to repentance, telling him that therein he will prosper at last. Ch. xxiii.-xxiv.: Job complains that, not know- ing the abode of God, he can not bring his case di- rectly before Him. Then, changing his theme, he describes the perverseness of the wicked and mar- vels that God, who sees everything, does not check them, Ch. xxv.: Bildad rejoins that man has no right to complain, as he can not be perfect. Ch. XXV1.-xxxi.: Job, after declaring to Bildad that he knows well that God is omnipotent and omnis- cient, cites a parable, maintaining that he is up- right and a stranger to wickedness. The wicked are destined to destruction, and will not profit in their great wealth. In ch. xxviii. he exalts wisdom, and contrasts, in the two following chapters, his pres- ent condition with his former prosperity. Formerly, he was respected and beloved by all for his generosity and his charitable deeds, and the wicked feared his power. Now, he is mocked by the meanest, by the outlawed; he again speaks harshly against God. He describes his generosity and his uprightness, calling upon God to witness it. Ch. xxxii.-xxxvii.: Elihu’s speeches. Seeing that Job’s three friends remained silent, unable to answer him, Elihu takes their place. He had re- mained silent because the others were Speeches of older; but being now convinced that Elihu. wisdom is not in years, he assumed the duty of replying to Job. The chief points of Elihu’s speeches are that God is never wrong, that calamity isa warning from God to man to repent, that God,who neither profits in man’s righteousness nor suffers in his sins, always chastises the wicked and rewards the righteous. Ch. xxxviii.-xxxix. are theophanous; they pre- sent a cosmographical sketch and take the form of questions addressed to Job by God, who speaks to him out of the whirlwind. They tell of the creation of earth, seas, light, darkness, snow, hail, rain, the heavens, and the celestial bodies; the habits of the wild goat, the unicorn, the peacock, the ostrich, the horse, and the eagle are spoken of in passages of great beauty. Ch.xl.—xli.: Continuation of God’s address with a brief reply from Job. These two chapters describe the nature and habits of the hip- popotamus (“behemoth”) and the whale (“levia- than”). Ch. xlii.: Epilogue; after a short speech from Job declaring his repentance, an account of his restoration to his former state of prosperity is given. The sublime grandeur of the final theoph- any, the simple directness of the narrative portions, and the imaginative coloring of the soul-problems raised in the book make it, regarded merely as liter- ature, the most striking production of the Hebraic genius. See Jos, Brsuicat Dara. ih, M. SEL. Critical View: The poem which is contained in Job iii. 1-xlii. 6, exclusive of later interpolations, discusses a religious problem which could scarcely have been formulated in the early period of the Israelitic people; for it presupposes a high spiritual development and a maturity of. judgment which are acquired by a people only after great trials and sore tribulations. This view excludes all the earlier opinions which assign the date of the composition of the poem either to the patriarchal age (so Eich- horn, Jahn, Bertholdt, Haneberg, and others), or to the time of Moses (B. B. 15a), of David (Herder), of Solomon (Schlottmann, Haevernick, and Hahn), and even of Hezekiah (Ewald). The special problem discussed in Job concerns the justice of the divine government of the world. It could have been formulated only after the prin- ciples of that justice had been announced in Deute- ronomy ; according to which earthly happiness was promised as a reward to the faithful followers of the Law and of Yuwu, and earthly misfortune was held 197 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job, Book of up asa punishment to the recalcitrant (Deut. xxviii.- xxx.). Hence the poem must have been composed after the promulgation of the Deuteronomic code. And the question as to God’s dealings with His world must have become paramount at a time when experience directly contradicted the principles laid down in that code. After the reforms of Josiah (622 B.c.) Israel undoubtediy had a right to unal- loyed happiness. Instead there came a succession of catastrophes: the defeat of Megiddo (609), and the Babylonian exile (587), by which the congrega- tion of the Lord in Israel in particular was most deeply smitten. Merx, Stickel, Reuss, Dillmann, Hirzel, Hitzig, and Ley (in “ Studien und Kritiken,” 1898, pp. 84-70) assume the seventh century B.C. as the date of com- position; Gesenius, Vatke (“Biblische Theologie,” i. 563), and Duhm (“Das Buch Hiob,” p. ix.) place it as late as the fifth century; while Budde (“Das Buch Hiob,” p. xiv.) assigns it even to the year 400. But the question involved in the poem must have become imperative, not when righteous Israel was pitted against the heathen evil-doers (as in Hab. i. 2-5, ii. 4), but when the oppressed Israelitic congre- gation presented a violent contrast to its wicked op- pressors who were joined by traitors to their own religion and people. This contrast is found in the Exile, but still more markedly perhaps at the time of the Maccabees, when Israel was persecuted by Antiochus Epiphanes (2d cent. B.c.). The same designations are applied to him in the Book of Job as are found, according to advanced critical views, in the Psalms. On the one hand there are the “yesha‘im ” (Job xx. 5 et seq., xxi. 7 et seqg., 16 et seq.); the “po‘ale awen” (xxxi. 3); the “‘arizim” (xxvii. 18); the “ hanef ” (xxvii. 8); the “ ‘awwal ” (xxix. 17); the “‘ashir” (xxvii. 19), etc.; on the other, the “zaddikim ” (xxii. 19); the “ebyonim ” (xxiv. 4); and the “‘aniyye arez” (xxiv. 4b); comp. “‘ani we- ebyon” (xxiv. 14 et seg.); “yashar” (xxiii. 7); “naki” (xxvii. 17), etc. Many catastrophes had been recently witnessed falling upon great nations (xii. 23); e.g., when the Assyrians were vanquished by the Babylonians, and the latter in turn by the Persians. Jt had indeed become a matter of daily occurrence to witness countries given into the hands of evil-doers, and to see Yuwu mock at the despair of the innocent (ix. 23, 24) and to behold the triumph of the wicked (xxi. 7 et seqg.). The doom of the evil- doer (xv. 20 et seg.) is described in terms which seem to allude to the fate of Alexander Janneus. The language of the speeches in the Book of Job, the late Hebraic words recurring in it (comp. Barth, “Beitriige zur Erklirung des Buches Hiob,” 1876, p. 4; Stade, “Lehrbuch der Hebr. Grammatik,” 1879, p. 12), and the many Aramaisms (comp. Budde, “Beitrige zur Kritik des Buches Hiob,” 1876, p. 141) and Arabisms (comp. Stade, U.c. pp. 12 et seq.) all point to a comparatively late time. From the references to many Egyptian matters, Hitzig has assumed that Egypt was the home of the poet; but the passages referring to the hip- popotamus and crocodile may be suspected to be later interpolations. The Egyptian mines (xxviii. 1-11) were known in Palestine, as were also the swift ships of the Nile (ix. 26), the papyrus-rolls (xxxi. 86; comp. viii. 11), the war-horse (xxxix. 19), and the pyramids (A. V. “desolate places”; iii. 14). From “them that go by the way” (xxi. 29), also, much may have been learned of foreign countries. The poet himself may have joined caravans (vi. 15- 19); the descriptions of the sufferings of the pious in Israel indicate that he also had suffered (xi. 15, 19a; vii. 1-8). He wrote his poem with his heart’s blood (Duhm). It had become necessary to assail the popular doc- trine that obedience to the Law would be rewarded, and its transgression punished. For both of these principles were interpreted in an entirely external way: reward meaning a long and pleasant life (Ex. xx. 12; Lev. xxvi. 3 e¢ seq.), and punishment misfor- tune and an early death (Deut. xxviii. 20 et seg. ; Lev. xxvi. 15 et seg.; Gen. ii. 17 et seg.). The leper espe- cially was considered to be smitten by God; hence the term “nega‘” (=“blow”; Lev. The xiii. 22) for leprosy. The sufferings Doctrine of of the law-abiding Israelite or of the Retribu- righteous seemed therefore irrecenci- tion. lable with Yuwu’s justice and truth- fulness; for He smote him who de- served praise, and punished where He had promised a reward. The ancient doctrine of retribution is developed at great length by Job’s three friends. According to it God shows His anger by inflicting suffering; He turns from man as from an enemy (xiii. 24, xix. 11); looks at him angrily (vii. 19a, xiv. 6a, xvi. 9); smites him with His hand (xiii. 21b, xix. 21); makes him afraid by His terrors (ix. 34, xiii. 21b, xxiii. 16); covers him with darkness (xix. 8b); stands in his way (iii. 23); overwhelms him with His power (ix. 12, 18, 19a; xxiii. 6); pierces him with His arrows (vi. 4, xvi. 14); punishes him with His scourge (ix. 23). The poet introduces also the imagery of the prison (vii. 12, xiii. 27, xiv..16), the net (xix. 6), the storm (ix. 17, xxx. 22), and an army assailing an un- fortunate captive (x. 17, xvi. 18, xix. 12), who in the end succumbs (xxx. 12 e¢ seg.). He vainly questions how he may have incurred the inscrutable anger of God (x. 2, xiii. 23). The burning pain will not let him rest (xxx.17). Imagery from the animal world is also used (x. 16). God’s hostility calls up fear of further visitation (ix. 18, x. 18-15, xxx. 23) and de- spair because of the unending misery (ix. 11 e¢ seq., xxiii. 15 et seg.), so that the prayer for a short res- pite (vii. 16-19, x. 20, xiv. 6) is interwoven with the cry for death (vi. 9, 10; vii. 15). Added to all these sufferings of the stricken one is the bitterness of seeing that his enemies as well as his friends heartlessly consider him to be a sinner branded by God (xvii. 6). His enemies snatch at the opportunity to vent their malice on him (xvi. 10 ée seg., Xxx. 1-14); his servants and followers refuse him obedience (xix. 15, 16); his wife and children, as well as relatives and friends, abandon him (xii. 4; xix. 18-14, 17-19, 21 e¢ seq.). His guilt is assumed as a matter of course, and no one thinks of doubting it; otherwise God would have to be accused of in- justice—an accusation that would be the most griev- ous blasphemy (iv. 7, viii. 3). Hence it becomes the imperative duty of the sufferer to find out, by a frank examination of his past life and thoughts, in Job, Book of what way he has sinned. For there must be some guilt (iv, 18-19, xv. 14-16, xxv. 4-6)—this must be assumed a priori in order to explain the suffering (viii. 11, xxii. 5 e¢ seg.). If the sufferer admits his guilt God will forgive him (v. 17-27, viii. 5-7, xi. 13-19, xxii, 21-30); but if he obstinately persists in declaring that he is innocent he adds another griev- ous sin to his former guilt, and his punishment will increase accordingly (xi. 4, xv. 18, xxii, 3-4), In answer to all these arguments of his friends Job insists, in the first place, that the sufferer has the right to complain (vi. 5-7). He points out the heartlessness to which their doctrine leads; for instead of comforting the sufferer in his pain, they reprove him for his alleged sins (vi. 14-22), But it is cheap wisdom to repeat the ancient doctrine of divine retribution in all sorts of variations and to apply these to an unfortunate man (xii. 2-8, xiii, 2, xix. 2-5). Although the supreme power of God makes it impossible to rebel against His blows, the justice of His decrees is not thereby proved (ix. 2- 2130-85; x. 1o—07 > xi, 143) xiii. 3; xix. 6 et seg: xxi. 31), Experience shows that in the catastrophes of nature the perfect and the wicked are alike smit- ten by God (ix. 22-23); and it often happens that the wicked live prosperously to the end of their days (xii. 6; xxi. 7-15, 32 et seq.), being made the judges of right and wrong (ix. 24), although occa- sionally the ancient doctrine of retribution brought them to the bar of justice (xix. 29). But no power on earth can take away the feeling of innocence from the sinless sufferer, or force him to declare himself guilty against his better convic- tions (x. 6, 7; xiii. 18 ef seg.; xvi, 17; xxvii. 5, 6; xxxi. 1 et seg.). He has the right to appeal to God’s judgment, as being superior to the condemnation his friends pretend to see in his present misfortunes (xii. 4, xiii, 7-10, xvi. 18-20, xix. 17). It is useless to say that no man is clean in the eyes of God (xiv. 4); for even according to that argument it is in- comprehensible why the comparatively just person should be most heavily stricken and the worst evil- doers go unpunished (vii. 21, xiii. 26, xiv. 17). The negative result reached by these arguments of the Book of Job may be stated as follows: What hitherto has been called divine justice is merely the display of the omnipotence of God. His decisions are devoid of all moral qualities, and are pronounced indiiferently, as blessings oras curses, upon all men, upon the good and the bad alike. In the same way men are prosperous or unhappy according to the fortuitous events of their lives, quite independently of their ethical qualities. The gifts of fortune and the strokes of calamity are in no wise connected either with God’s justice or with man’s moral nature. But as these-arguments deprived the divine om- nipotence, as manifested in the world, of all ethical quality, the danger arose of excluding this quality al- together from the divine nature, and of actually des- troying the attribute of justice in God. Hence the poet attempted to rehabilitate the latter in a round- about way, succeeding, however, only by means of a postulate, He declares that many of the phenomena of nature are indeed the manifestations of an om- Job’s Replies. THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ES 198 nipotence that overwhelms man by the terrors of its sublimity (xxvi. 6-14), but that this is not the only thing that nature declares of God. The marvelous law. and order of those phenomena, of nature and the multiplicity and curious modes of life of her creatures, are also the manifestations of a hidden wisdom, to which man simply must submit. The author of the Book of Job incorporated the folk book into his work in a manner still showing traces of the component parts. The use of this pre- existing material very cleverly placed the problem outside of Palestine, thereby excluding the possible objection of orthodox theology that such a case—a perfectly righteous man persecuted by Compo- YHwH—could not occur in Israel. sition of Yuwu, moreover, did not inflict the the Book. suffering; it was inflicted by Satan with Yuwu’s permission. The prob- lem is discussed in a disputation between Job—who like a leper sits on the dust-heap (Ar. “mazbalah ”) outside the nomad village (on the separation of lepers see II Chron, xxvi. 21)—and his three friends who, according to the folk-book, come to comfort him (ii. 11). In the body of the book, however, they bring no comfort, but heap the bitterest accusations upon Job. Job opens the discussion with the ancient cry of all sufferers (iii., Hebr.): “O, that I had never been born! and since I was brought into the world, why could I not, even in the hour of birth, have found the eternal rest of Sheol” (comp. Sophocles, “ C&di- pus Coloneus,” line 1225; 10 «7 givat tov dxavta viKG Adyov ; Eccl. iv. 2-8): and in his questionings at the end of this monologue (iii. 26 e¢ seg.) he formulates the problem as to the cause of this inexplicable suffering, The friends defend the views of the orthodox doc- trine of retribution, according to which all suffering is a punishment for some sin; while Job defends the views of the clear conscience, which knows itself to be free from sin, and declares his suffering to be in- explainable from the Old Testament point of view. The discussion is held in a threefold series of dia- logues (iv.-xxxi.), in each of which Job alternates once with each of the three friends. Hence arises — the following scheme, aside from the additions to be discussed later on: First series of dialogues: Eliphaz (iv.-v.); Job (vi.-vii.); Bildad (viii.); Job (ix.-x.); Zophar (xi.); Job (xii.-xiv.). Second series: Eli- phaz (xv.); Job (xvi.-xvii.); Bildad (xviii.); Job (xix.); Zophar (xx.); Job (xxi.), Third series: Eli- phaz (xxii.); Job (xxiii.-xxiv.); Bildad (xxv.-xxvi. 5-14); Job (xxvi, 1-4, xxvii. 2-23, xxviii.-xxxi.); Zophar; Job (not in Hebrew text in the Masoretic arrangement), Thethird series of dialogues especially has been altered by interpolations. The beginning of Bildad’s speech (xxv. 1-6) has been separated from the portion continuing it (xxvi. 5-14). It is followed by Job’s answer (xxvi. 1-4; xxvii. 2-6; xxix. 1-6, 19, 20, 7-11, 21-28, 12, 13, 15-17, 24, 25, 14, 18; xxx, 1-24, 26-31; xxxi. 1-20; xxx. 25; xxxi. 21-28, 38-40, 24-37, 40; for this arrangement see C. Sieg- fried,“ The Book of Job,” critical ed., especially pp. 42 et seg., Leipsic and Baltimore, 1893). These speeches do not present a direct, continuous train of thought developing or elaborating some cen- tral idea. The art and power of Semitic rhetoric con- 199 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job, Book of sist rather in the rich elaboration of a single thought expressing the same idea in a varied profusion of imagery (comp. Ecclus, [Sirach] i. 5-10; Franz Delitzsch, “Gesch. der Jiidischen Poesic,” pp. 21 et seq., Leipsic, 1886). In general it may be said that Eliphaz represents on the whole the proof of author- ity, basing his arguments on a vision (iv. 12-21). Bildad appeals chiefly to experience, which proves the truth of the doctrine of divine retribution (viii. 8 et seq., xviii. 5-21). Zophar argues with all the fervor of religious conviction and appeals to the divine decision (xi. 5 et seq.). It appears from Job’s speeches that, overawed by the veneration clinging to the old sacred doctrine of retribution (xii. 12), he at first does not dare to pro- claim his innocence, of which he is so firmly con- vinced. He begs his friends to grant him the right to complain (vi. 2-18); not to refuse him the comfort he had expected from them (vi. 14-21), nor to attack him so mercilessly (vi. 24-27). He points out that experience shows only that the misfortunes befalling men are manifestations of God’s omnipotence, and that because His decisions are strong enough to over- come all resistance it does not necessarily follow that they are just (ix., xii. 7-25). He therefore boldly asks the reason for his suffering (xiii. 18-28). In the second dialogue Job develops the thought that while in some cases God’s judgment is in ac- cordance with the old doctrine of retribution (xxi. 16-21), very frequently just the oppo- Second site happens, as appears in the undis- and Third turbed good fortune of the wicked Dialogues. (xxi. 7-15, 22-34). He persists, more- over, even more strongly in declaring his innocence, appealing to the judgment of God, who apparently is so hostile to him, but whose jus- tice will ultimately induce Him to become the avenger (go’el) of that innocence (xvi. 17-19, xix. 25-27). In the third dialogue, as the friends begin to weaken in their attacks, Job emphasizes the impossi- bility of contending with such an opponent as God. Of course Job must outwardly succumb; but even against God he will maintain his right, and is willing to prove it, if God will appear and answer (xxvii. 1-6, xxxi.). The discussion is ended by Yuwn’s appearance in the storm (xxXviii.-xxxix. 30, xl. I- 5). YHwuH reminds Job of the limitations of human nature, and Job, humbly admitting them, no longer seeks an answer to his question. In the course of time various interpolations were made in the text of the poem. These comprise: (1) a number of passages that have been placed among the foot-notes in the edition by Siegfried mentioned above; (2) the parallel texts, so called because they are parallel developments of the corresponding pas- sages in the genuine text; é.g., as Vil. Later Ad- 1-10; x. 18-22; xii, 46; xiv. 1, 2; ditions and xiii. 28; xiv. 5, 7-12, 14, 18-22; xvii. Changes in 11-16; xl. 6-32; xli. 1-26, xlii 1-6; the Text. (8) corrections and revisions of Job's speeches made for the purpose of har- moniging them with the orthodox doctrine of retri- bution (these revisions include xii. 7-10 [11, 12 as glosses], 18-25; xiii. 11; xxi. 16-18; xxiv. 13-24; XXvii. 7-23); (4) passages containing a polemic against the ideas expressed in the poem (xxviii. 1-28 and the so-called speeches of Elihu, xxxii.—-xxxvii), Ch, xxviii. rejects the effort to fathom the di- vine wisdom and to discover the rule of its work- ings, these being regions into which human under- standing and empiric knowledge can not penetrate. Speculation here must give way to faith. The fear of Yawn (“yir’at Adonai”; xxviii. 28), that is, relig- ion, and the departure from evil (“sur me-ra‘ ”), that is, morality, take the place of science, which here has reached the end of its resources. The speeches of Elihu contradict the fundamental teachings of the genuine poem of Job, according to which it is impossible that the righteous should suf- fer, all pain being a punishment forsomesin. Elihu, however, assumes that suffering may be decreed for the righteous for pedagogic reasons, as a protection against greater sin, and for moral betterment (xx xiii. 17 et seqg., 28-30). How little these Elihu speeches come into the general scheme of the poem is shown by the fact that Elihu is not mentioned either in the prologue or in the epilogue, being entirely ignored by Yuwu in the latter. They have been defended as genuine by Umbreit, Stickel, Schlott- mann, and Budde (1876; and in his commentary [1896], especially pp. xxxv.-xxxvili.). On’Studer’s criticism in “Jahrb. fiir Protestantische Theologie ” (1875, pp. 688 e¢ seg.; 1877, pp. 545 e¢ seg.) and in “Das Buch Hiob fiir Geistliche und Gebildete Laien” (1881) comp. Budde, “ Beitriige zur Kritik des Buches Hiob,” pp. 77 e¢ seq. The textual criticism of Job must rest on the Maso- retic text (see Baer, “Liber Jobi,” 1875). As La- garde has pointed out (“Anmerkungen zur Griech- ischen Uebersetzung der Proverbien,” 1868, pp. 1 e¢ seqg.), that text goes back to a single original manu- script, so that nothing in regard to textual correc- tions is gained by a collation of manuscripts. The recently discovered Babylonian Bible manuscripts are important only for the history of the vocalization and accentuation of the Biblical text (comp. Harkavy and ; Strack, “Katalog der Hebriischen Bibelhandschriften der K. Bibliothek in St. Peters- burg,” 2 parts, 1875), Jerome, who in his version of Job closely followed the Hebrew, calls for little notice (comp. Hupfeld, “Beleuchtung Dunkler Stellen in der Alttestamentlichen Textgesch.” in “Studien und Kritiken,” 1880, pp. 1571 et seg.; No- wack, “Die Bedeutung des Hieronymus fiir die Alt- testamentliche Textkritik,” G6ttingen, 1875). The Septuagint version, being a very free render- ing of the Book of Job (comp. Bickell, “De Indole ac Ratione Versionis Alexandrinze in Interpretando Libro Jobi,” 1862), must be used very cautiously; yet it can not be denied that it con- tains many traces of the correct read- ing (comp, A. Merx, “Das Gedicht von Hiob,” 1891; C. Siegfried, * The Book of Job,” 1893). For the Targum of Job see W. Bacher in “ Monatsschrift,” xx, 208-223. The Syriac translation (“Peshitta”) may also be con- sulted, but as it was corrected after the Septuagint, its agreement with the latter does not mean much textually. For the Arabic translation of the poem by Saadia Gaon see I. Cohn, Altona, 1889; “diuv- Textual Criticism. Transla- tions. Job, Testament of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 200 res Complétes de R. Saadia Gaon,” v. (ed. Bacher), Paris, 1899. Emendations of the poem must often be based on conjecture. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Commentaries: For the earlier exegesis, Ro- senmiiller, Scholia in Vetus Testamentum, v.; and the com- mentaries and introductions to the O. T. For modern views compare especially H. Ewald, 1836; 2d ed. 1854; L. Hirzel, 1839; 2d ed. by I. Olshausen, 1852; 3d ed. 1869; 4th ed. by A. Dillmann, 1891; Ferdinand Hitzig, 1874; A. Klostermann, Hiob, in Herzog-Hauck, Real-Hncyc. viii. 97-126; K. Budde, 1896 ; B. Duhm, 1897. Translations with commentaries: A. Merx, 1871; G. Studer, 1881; E. Reuss, Das Alte Testament, 1892- 1894; idem, Vortrag tiber das Buch Hiob, 1888; G. Hoff- mann, 1891; F. Baethgen, in Kautzsch, Die Heilige Schrift des Alten Testaments, 2d ed.; idem, Hiob: Deutsch mit An- merkungen fiir Ungelehrte, 1898; Friedrich Delitzsch, Das Buch Hiob, Leipsic, 1902. For problems in the Book of Job, J. Meinhold, Das Problem des Buches Hiob, in Neue Jahrb. fiir Deutsche Theologie, 1892, pp. 63 et seq.; I. Ley, Die Probleme im Buche Hioh, in Neue Jahrb. fiir Philologie und Pdidagogik, 1896, pp. 125 et seq. For special questions on composition, I. Grill, Zur Kritik der Composition des Buches Hiob, Tiibingen, 1890; T. K. Cheyne, Job and Solomon, 1887 ; Duhm, as above; L. Laue, Die Composition des Buches Hiob, 1895. For textual criticism, G. Bickell, Kritische Bearbet- tung des Jobdialogs, in Wiener Zeitschrift fiir Kunde des Morgenlandes, vi. 1387-147, 241-257, 327-334; vii. 1-20, 153-168 ; idem, Dichtungen der Hebréier, ii., 1882; idem, Das Buch Job nach Anleitung der Strophik und der Septuaginta, Vienna, 1894; P. Vetter, Die Metrik des Buches Hiob, in Biblische Studien, ed. Bardenhewer, ii. 4, Freiburg, 1897; H. Grimme, Metrisch-Kritische HEmendationen zum Buche Hiob, in Theol. Quartalschrift, 1xxx. 295-304, 421-482 ; Ixxxi. 112-118, 259-277; O. Voigt, Hinige Stellen des Buches Hiob, 1895; I. Ley, in Studien und Kritiken, 1895, pp. 685 et seq. ; G. Bir, Der Text des Buches Hiob, 1895; idem, in Stade’s Zeitschrift, 1896, pp. 297 et seq. E. G. H. C. 8. JOB, TESTAMENT OF: Greek apocryphal book, containing a haggadic story of Job. It was first published by Angelo Mai in the seventh volume of the “Scriptoram Veterum Nova Collectio” (pp. 180-191, Rome, 1833), and was translated in Migne’s “Dictionnaire des Apocryphes” (ii. 408), but re- mained unnoticed by critics until Montague Rhodes James, in his notes tothe “Testament of Abraham ” (in “Texts and Studies,” p. 155, Cambridge, 1892), called attention to it. Kohler, in the “Kohut Me- morial Volume” (1897, pp. 264-338), republished and translated Mai’s text, with introduction and notes, and about the same time M. R. James reedited the work, after a Paris manuscript (which gives a text by no means superior in value to Mai’s), in “Apocrypha Anecdota” (pp. 104-187, Cambridge, 1897, with an introduction). The book was con- demned as apocryphal by Pope Gelasius I., about 496, in his decree concerning canonical and non- canonical books. In Mai’s version it has a double title: “Testament of Job the Blameless, the Con- querorin Many Contests, the Sainted ” (which seems to be the older title) and “The Book of Job Called Jobab, and His Life, and the Transcript of His Tes- tament.” For the identification of Job with Jobab (Gen. xxxvi. 33) see Septuagint, Job xlii.; also Aristeas, in Eusebius, “ Preeparatio Evangelica,” ix. 25; comp. Kohler, J.¢. pp. 267 et seg., and James, lc. p. Xxxv.). Like the Patriarchs (comp. Test. Patr., Adam, 14, and Tan., Wayehi, 8, ed. Buber, and Bo, 2), Job in a farewell address to his children re- Contents of views his life, telling them that he is the Book. of the generation of Abraham, a de- scendant of Esau (Gen. /.c.), and was known as “Jobab,” a rich ruler of the land of Uz (Ausitis), before God called him “Job” because of his martyrdom (see Jon, CriricAL Virw); that his second wife, their mother, was Dinah, the daughter of Jacob (comp. B. B. 15b). Like Abraham, he had changed from idolatry to the worship of the true God, the Maker of heaven and earth (comp. Num. R. xiv.); yet as he had set out to destroy the idols of the land, the work of Satan, he had been told by the archangel of God to prepare for a life- long battle with Satan, but at the same time he had been promised lasting renown as a great spiritual athlete and a crown of amaranth in the world to come, after the resurrection. “I shail from love of God endure until the end,” Job said, and received from the angel the seal of life (comp. Sotah v. 5, and Kohler, /.c. pp. 271, 316). Satan, after having first attempted, in the guise of a beggar, to get Job into his power, but without success, secured from God permission (comp. Targ. Job i. 12) to take away all his possessions (ch. i.-ii., ed. Kohler; ch. i.-viii., ed. James). Job then relates how he used his great wealth for the benefit of the poor; how of the 130,- 000 sheep he owned he separated 7,000 His Wealth for the clothing of orphans and wid- and ows, of poor and sick; 800 dogs Charity. watched his sheep (comp. Job xxx. 1), and 200 his house. Of his 9,000 camels he caused 3,000 to work for the poor; and he sent out ships laden with goods for the feeble, sick, and unfortunate. Of the 130,000 (840,000, Mai’s text) wild asses in his possession he set 500 aside, and the offspring and all the proceeds therefrom were given to the needy. The four doors of his house were opened to the poor, who came from ali parts of the country to en- joy his hospitality (comp. Gen. R. xlviii., lxix.; Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, i. 7, ii. 14). Thirty tables loaded with all kinds of food were set for the strangers, twelve of them for widows, and none were turned away hungry. Of his 3,500 yokes of oxen, 500 were for the use of the poor. He em- ployed fifty bakeries for the bread of the poor (comp. Ber. 58b; Hana b. Hanilai) and assigned special slaves to serve them at the tables. Some poor persons were hired for that purpose, so that they might support themselves; he released many poor from theirindebtedness. The milk of his cows and ewes flowed in such plenty that passers-by were invited to take a share (comp. Job xxix. 6), and the servants that distributed the meat among the wid- ows and the poor were so overburdened with their task that they broke out into eursings (comp. Job xxxi. 81). At the table slaves played on harps and on other musical instruments, and he himself took the cithara, intoning a song of thanksgiving and praise to God (comp. Gen. R. xlix., liv., and Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, Text A, vii.; Text B, xiv. 33-34). After each feast held by his children in turn, to atone for any possible offenses committed by them through pride, he not only offered sacrifices (Job i. 5) but also gave gifts of charity to the poor. These things, however, Satan begrudged Job, so he destroyed his sheep and camels and herds by fire, or had them taken by marauders. Satan’s Finding that Job inhis piety still gave Mischief. praise to God, instead of blaspheming, he came in the guise of the King of Persia and besieged his city, capturing all the goods thereof; then he overthrew the house of Job and 201 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job, Testament of killed all his children, and everything he possessed was taken. Yet under all these sad happenings Job bravely spoke the words: “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord” (Job i. 21). While Job sat on his throne mourning over his children, Satan came in the form of a great hurricane (comp. “ruah kozmi- kon,” Gen. R./xxiv.; Yer. Ber. ix. 18d; Mek., Beshallah, to Ex. xiv. 24), threw him upon the ground, and smote him from head to foot with lep- rosy, so that his whole body was covered with sores and worms (comp. Ab. R. N. l.c.; Tischendorf, “ Apocalypses, Apocrypha,” p. 67). Forseven years (48 years; Paris MS.) he sat on a dunghill outside of the city, while his wife, Sitis, who had been brought up in royal luxury, served as water-carrier to win bread for herself and him. Afterward (after 15 years; Paris MS.), when she was no longer al- lowed to take him bread, Satan, disguised asa bread- seller, went to meet her, asking, as the price of three loaves of bread for her starving husband, for the hair on her head; to save her husband from famish- ing, she consented (comp. Shab. 59a; Akiba’s wife). At last, when under the influence of Satan, her pa- tience gave way, and in an impassioned appeal, full of pathos (contrasting her former riches and glory with her present state of gloom and poverty) and poetic grandeur, she called upon Job to curse God and die (comp. LXX. Job ii. 9). Job, however, in- dignantly rebuked her, and challenged Satan, who had been hidden behind her all this while, saying: “Only acoward fights with frail woman; come forth and wage war with me!” Then Satan broke forth into tears, and said, “I yield to thee who art the great wrestler,” and left him, abashed (ch. fii.-vi., ed. Kohler; ix.-xxvii., ed. James; comp. B. B. 16a: “The grief of Satan was greater than that of Job”), As to Job, the great “athlete” or “wrestler,” see IV Mace. vi. 10, xvii. 15-16; and Philo [where Job is frequently characterized as such]; comp. Heb. x. 382. The three friends of Job, kings like himself, Eli- phaz, King of Teman (comp. Targ. to Gen. xxxvi. 12; “Ma‘yan Gannim,” ed. Buber, p. 9), Bildad of Shuah (Gen. xxv. 2), and Zophar (B. The Three B. 15b; Yalk. i. 766), who had come Friends with their body-guards to see him, were of Job. dumfounded at finding Job, who had excelled them all in wealth, in such a state; Eliphaz offered a song of lamentation, in which all joined, recalling all Job’s former splendor, each strophe ending with the refrain “ Whither has thy glory gone?” Job in his reply pointed to “the splendor and glory that will be mine at the right hand of the Savior in heaven among the Holy Ones in the imperishable world. Kings perish and their glory vanishes like the shadow ina mirror, but God’s kingdom lasts forever, and its glory is in the chariot of my Father” (ch. vii., ed. Kohlor; xxviii.-xxxiii., ed. James). The whole chapter is a most powerful effusion of Hasidean sentiment, and has its exact parallel in the penitential prayer of Asenath (sce JEw. Encye. ii. 178, s.v. ASENATH). Eliphaz, on hearing Job in his abject state speak thus contemptuously of his friends and their glory, became furious, and said, “ Let us go hence!” but Bil- dad, pacifying him, said, “Instead of upbraiding a man thus afflicted, let us see whether his mind has not given way under his great ordeal.” Bildad ac- cordingly began arguing with Job concerning God and destiny. Job, however, proved to be his su- perior in wisdom, and showed that he was initiated into the mysteries of God which he (like the Essenes) would not betray. Finally, Zophar, stepping forth, said: “ We have brought our physicians with us to cure you”; but Job declined, saying, “My cure cometh from God, the Maker of physicians.” Here follows a remarkable scene. While ‘¢ The the friends were thus conversing Dead Shall Sitis appeared, dressed in rags, and Live.” prostrated herself before the kings, ask- thg them for the sake of their former friendship to have the bodies of her children taken out from the ruins of her house in order that they might be given decent burial. But Job interfered, saying, “My children will not be found; they have been taken up to their Master inheaven.” “ Behold, he raves!” the kings exclaimed; but instantly Job spelled the Ineffable Name, and all beheld the chil- dren of Job, with crowns on their heads, near the throne of God. Sitis, overcome with emotion, went back to her master, lay down in the manger of his cattle, and died. The animals and afterward all the people of the city wept and mourned for her, and the dirge that was sung (says the writer) “is found in the Chronicles” (ch. ix., ed. Kohler; xxxiii.- x]., ed. James). These marvelous things, however, did not pre- vent the friends of Job from contending that he must have sinned terribly to have brought upon himself so much suffering, and when he resented these insinuations, Elihu came forward, imbued with the spirit of Satan, andspoke hard words to Job. God showed Job afterward that Elihu was a wild beast (“serpent”), not aman (comp. Elihu Elihu, the asidentified with Baalamin Yer. Sotah Satanic v.20d). The three friends finally con- Beast. fessed their error, brought to Job ani- mals to be offered as sin-offerings to the Lord, and obtained pardon through Job; Elihu, however, was not pardoned. A peculiar lyric song closes this episode, in which the three friends offer praise that their sin is taken away, while Elihu, “the evil one, the son of darkness, the lover of the Serpent, the Northern One [“Zephoni”], and the hater of the saints,” is cast into Sheol. The story of Job’s restoration to health is missing in the narrative. It continues with Job’s return to the city, where he held a feast of thanksgiving, ask- ing the people each to give hima lamb for the cloth- ing of the poor and four drachmas of gold or silver for their support. Thus taking up again his former work of charity, he soon became rich, married Dinah, and became the father of ten children, as before. Job finally admonishes his sons, summing up his ethics and his religion in the following pre- cepts: “Forsake not the Lord! Be charitable to the poor and do not disregard the feeble. Take not unto yourselves wives from strangers.” This last command proves beyond the possibility of doubt that the book is Jewish in character and concep- tion. Job, Testament of Jochelson THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 202 After having distributed his property among his seven sons, Job gave to each of his three daughters, out of a hidden treasure-box, three-stringed girdles which God had given him that by their Job’s Three magic power he might be cured of his Daughters. leprosy and be endowed with new physical and spiritual strength, so that he might forecast all the secrets of the future. As soon as his daughters put these girdles around their bodies they were transfigured, and, in the voices of angels, archangels (heavenly archons), and cheru- bim, sang hymns echoing the mysteries of heaven, all of which were written down by Nahor, the brother of Job. Job, on seeing death approach, gave a cithara to -bis first daughter, Day (“Yemimah”), a censer to his second, Kassiah (“ Perfume”), and a_ timbrel COMDAS= thirds Amaltheas Horn (“Keren ha- Parke) )) tihta t they might wel- come the holy angels who came to take his soul; and while they played and glo- rified God in the holy dia- lect, He who sitteth upon the Great Chariot came and took the soul of Job away with a kiss and carried it eastward, where the Heav- enly Throne is erected. Amid the singing of his daughters and the great mourning of the people, par- ticularly the poor and the fatherless, his body was taken to the grave. The dirge is given at the close of the book (ch. xi.-xii., ed. Kohler; xli.-lii., ed. James). ; James (/,c. Introduction) hesitates to assign the whole book to Jewisb sources, but the Midrashic parallels in Kohler (/.c.) sufficiently prove that the work is one of the most remarkable productions of the pre-Christian era, explicable only when viewed in the light of ancient Hasidean practise, 'T. K. JOB, WELL OF (the modern Bir Ayyub and the Biblical En-rogel [Josh, xv. 7, Ixviii, 26; II Job’s Well, South of Jerusalem. (From a photograph by the American Colony, Jerusalem.) Sam. xvii. 17; I Kings i. 9]): A deep well, situated just below the junction of the valley of Hinnom with that of Jehoshaphat, the channel of the Kidron being at this point 845 feet lower than the level of the Temple plateau. The well is of an irregular quadrilateral form, walled up with large square stones—according to Al-Kasim, five yards in length and two in height (Mujir al-Din, “ History of Jeru- salem,” anno 1495 p.c., published in “ Fundgruben des Orients,” ii. 180). Titus Tobler (in “Das Aus- land,” 1866, No. 12) reports its depth to be 38 meters. When Robinson (“ Bibl. Researches,” i. 332) visited it, he found 50 feet of water, which he de- scribes as sweet but not very cold. In the rainy season the well fills up and sometimes over- flows at the mouth, the over- flow being con- sidered by the inhabitants of the adjacent villageofSilwan to be the augury of a fertile year. Usually, how- ever, the water runs off under the surface, find- ing an outlet 40 yards below. Besides in Mujir al-Din’s history, “Well of Job” occurs for “En-rogel” in the Arabic Version on Joshua in the Paris and Lon- don _ polyglots (Josh. xv. %). The well is not mentioned by the earlier his- torians of the Crusades; but later it is desig- nated the “ Well of Nehemiah,” and is identified with the “Well of Fire,” on the supposition that it was in this well that Nehe- miah hid the sacred fire during the Captivity (I Mace. i. 19-22; Robinson, J.c. p. 331, note 5). It is designated also the “ Well of Jeremiah” (Tobler, “Die Topographie von Jerusalem,” ete., ii. 50, note 3). The Jewish itinerary published by Hottinger in his “Cippi Hebraici” gives it the name “Well of Joab,” supposedly on the strength of I Kings i. 7, 9 (see Schwarz, “Paliistina,” pp. 288 et seq.). But as this designation occurs only after the sixteenth century, “Job” in this connection can not be, as has 208 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Job, Testament of Jochelson To been suggested, a corruption of “Joab,” the reverse being true. The identification given by Brocardus with the En-rogel of the Old Testament admits of no doubt, Josephus notwithstanding (“ Ant.” vii. 14, § 4, where En-rogel is described as situated in the royal gardens). 10h (En 13 JOBAB: 1. Son of Joktan the Shemite (Gen. x. 29; I Chron. i. 23), 2. Son of Zerah of Bozrah; second king of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 83, 34; I Chron. i. 44-45). In the Greek version of the Book of Job, at the end, there is the following addition: “This man is described in the Syriac book as living in the land of Ausis, on the borders of Idumza and Arabia; and his name before was Jobab; and he, having taken an Arabian wife, begot a son whose name was Ennon. And he himself was the son of Zare, who was one of the sons of Esau, and Bosorrha; so that he was the fifth in descent from Abraham. And these were the kings who reigned in Edom, which country he also ruled over: first Balak, the son of Beor, and the name of his city was Dennaba; and after Balak Jobab,” etc. From this it has been supposed that this Jobab was identical with Job. 38. Canaanitish king of Madon (LXX. “Maron ”), whose aid Jabin, King of Hazor, invoked in the struggle with the Israelites (Josh. xi. 1). 4. Son of Shaharaim by his wife Hodesh (LXX. “Ada”); of the tribe of Benjamin, although appar- ently born in Moab (I Chron. viii. 8-9), In the Sep- tuagint this Jobab is called “Jolab.” '5. A Benjamite, son of Elpaal (I Chron. viii. 18). E.G. H. Bake. JOCEUS (JOCE) OF YORK: English Jew ot the preexpulsion period; leader of the York com- munity at the time of the massacre in 1190. He is mentioned in the first English shetar, of 1176 (Ja- cobs, “Jews of Angevin England,” p. 58). He was one of those who attended the coronation of Richard I., doubtless as the representative of the York con- gregation, and escaped the massacre (7b. p. 101). On his return to York, where he had a house which rivaled a citadel in the scale and magnificence of its construction, he was attacked by the mob, and with his wife and children joined other fugitives who sought refuge in Clifford’s Tower. When the de- cision was reached to put one another to death rather than fall into the hands of the enemy, Joceus was the first to act, slaying his wife, Anna, and his children; he himself was slain last by Yom-Tob of Joigny (ab. p. 127). It is probable that Joceus and Samuel Hoppecole held the land in London on which the chief syna- gogue was built (7d. p. 284). J. JOCHANAN. Sce JoHANAN. JOCHEBED (7425)').—Biblical Data: Wife and aunt of Amram, and mother of Aaron, Moses, and Miriam (Ex. vi. 20). She was the daughter of Levi, and was born in Egypt (Num. xxvi. 59). In the account of Moses’ birth, Jochebed is indicated merely as being the daughter of Levi, her name not being given (Ex. ii. 1). Ei Gu EH. M. SEL. —In Rabbinical Literature: Jochebed is iden- tified by the Talmudists with Shiphrah, one of the midwives ordered by Pharaoh to kill the new-born male children (Ex. i. 15 et seg.); the name is given various interpretations (Sotah 11b; Ex. R. i. 17). The “houses” with which God recompensed the midwives (Ex. i. 21) were those of priesthood and royalty, realized, in the case of Jochebed, in the persons of her two sons Aaron and Moses (Ex. R. xlviii. 5). She is further identified with Jehudijah (I Chron. iv. 18), this name, interpreted as “the Jewess,” being given to her because, by disobey- ing Pharaoh’s order, she founded the Jewish nation (Lev. R. i. 8). To elucidate Gen. xlvi. 15, where the children of Leah are said to be thirty-three, while only thirty-two are enumerated, the Midrash names Jochebed as the thirty-third. But as this would ap- pear to conflict with Num. xxvi. 59, where Jochebed is said to have been born in Egypt, it is further ex- plained that she was born when her parents were entering Egypt, in the “ gateway of the city ” (Gen. Ee XClV none Lixar Lls 28), Moses was eighty years old when the Israeiites went out from Egypt (comp. Ex. vii. 7), and the Israclites were in Egypt 210 years; Jochebed there- fore was 130 years old when she bore Moses. An allusion to this is found in the weight (180 shekels) of the silver chargers offered by the princes for the dedication of the altar (Ex. R. 1.23; Num. R. xiii. 19). The Midrash also explains why Jochebed could hide Moses no longer than three months. When Pharaoh had given the order to throw the male chil- dren into the river, Amram repudiated Jochebed, who had been pregnant three months. But, urged by Miriam, he immediately remarried her, and the Egyptians calculated the time for Moses’ birth from that day (Ex. R.i.17). The second wedding was as splendid as the first; Jochebed sat in her nuptial chamber, and Miriam and Aaron danced before her (2b. i. 28). The story of Jochebed was used by Rabbi (R, Judah ha-Nasi) to divert his audience when they became sleepy. There wasoncea woman in Egypt, he told them, who gave birth to 600,000 children at once; on being asked who that woman was, he said she was Jochebed, whose son Moses was worth 600,000 Israelites (Cant. R. iv. 2). In the Mahzor Romi (p. 79a, Mantua, 1718) there is a piyyut for Simhat Torah, beginning “ Azlat Yo- kebed,” the subject of which is Jochebed’s lamen- tation over Moses’ death (comp. Epstein, “ Mi-Kad- moniyyot ha-Yehudim,” pp. 128 and xlv.). Ss. S. M. SEL. JOCHELSON, WALDEMAR: Russian ex- plorer and ethnologist; born in Wilna Jan. 1, 1856. He graduated from the gymnasium of Wilna, and became identified with the revolutionary movement. Compelled to leave Russia (1880), he went to Swit- zerland, where he remained four years, studying at Zurich and Bern, and keeping in touch with the revolutionary movement as editor of the “ Vyestnik Narodnoi Voli,” which had a clandestine circulation in Russia. On his return to Russia in 1884 he was arrested and confined for three years in the Petro-Pav- lovsk fortress in St. Petersburg, and in 1887 was sen- tenced by order of the czar to exile for ten years in northern Siberia, in the province of Yakutsk. In Siberia Jochelson made a special study of the language, manners, and folk-lore of the aboriginal Jod Joel, Book of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA inhabitants, especially that of the Tungus, Yakuts, and the fast-disappearing Yukaghirs. His articles on those subjects began to attract attention, and in 1894 he and a fellow exile, Bogoras (Tan, also of Jewish descent), were by special permission attached to the first expedition of the Imperial Russian Geo- graphical Society (1894-97), which had been sent to that part of Siberia at the expense of a wealthy Russian promoter of art and science named Sibiry- akoy. On that expedition Jochelson discovered among the natives in the outlying regions two Yuka- ghir dialects then considered as extinct. The Impe- rial Geographical Society published his discoveriesin the field of ethnology, while the linguistic reports of his investigation were acquired for publication by the Imperial Academy of Science. When the Jessup expedition to north Asia was be- ing fitted out by the American Museum of Natural History (New York), the Russian Imperial Academy of Science, in answer to a request, recommended Jochelson and the above-named Bogoras as the men best fitted to contribute to its success by knowledge of the country and of the native dialects. After another two years anda half in the distant north, Jochelson returned with the expedition to the United States, and is now (1904) studying there the ma- terial which he and his wife, who accompanied him in the last journey, have collected. Jochelson’s chief work on his special subject is “Materyaly po Izucheniyu Yukagirskavo Yazyka i Folklora” (Ma- terial for the Study of the Language and Folk- Lore of the Yukaghirs), published by the Imperial Academy of Science (vol. i., St. Petersburg, 1900). He wrote also “Ueber die Sprache und Schrift der Jukagiren” (Bern, 1900). He has contributed largely to scientific journals in various languages. H. R. lee e Wie JOD. See ALPHABET, HEBREW; Yop. JOEL.—1. Biblical. Data: The superscription of the second book of the so-called Minor Prophets names as the author of the book “Joel, the son of Pethuel.” Further historical record is wanting. It is even impossible to get an idea of the prophet’s personality from the contents of his book, because, in correspondence with its partly oratorical, partly visionary style, all personal traits have been omitted. Only this can be concluded from his writing, that he was a Judean and that at the time of his pro- phetical activity he lived in Jerusalem. On the other hand, imaginative suppositions try to prove from passages like Joel i. 9, 18; ii. 17 that he be- longed to the tribe of Levi. Critical View: The name “Joel” was quite common, being borne by the first-born son of Samuel (I Sam. viii. 2), and by prominent Levites of the time of David (I Chron. vi. 18 e¢ seg.) and of Hezekiah (II Chron. xxix. 12). “Joel” means “ Yawn is God” (comp. Ps. 1. 1; Jer. xxii. 24); it is, therefore, the transposed form of \7%x._ ‘In the face of this clearly recognizable and wholly appropriate meaning of the name, it is not necessary to suppose (with Baudissin) that itis the jussive of S917 (= “may He [7.e., God] prove”); nor (with Nestle) that itis the participle of Sy, which, corresponding to the proper names $y or 9x) (Arabic, “ wa’il”) occurring often in the Sinaitic 204 inscriptions, is supposed to mean “strong-willed.” The fact that Oye is found also as a Phenician proper name (see “C. I. §.” 182), proves nothing against the most natural interpretation of the name. What non-Biblical sources tell of the prophet be- longs to the realm of fable. According to pseudo- Epiphanius (ii. 245), Joel was from the town Bethor of the tribe of Reuben; but according to the Syr- ian pseudo-Epiphanius, the true reading is “Bet Me‘on” (to be read instead of yy719 m2), the place mentioned in the Mesha inscription (line 9) as Moa- bitic, but which, according to Josh. xiii. 17, orig- inally belonged to Reuben. BIBLIOGRAPHY: See bibliograpby under JOEL, BOOK OF. We, Ryg 2. Eldest son of Samuel and father of Heman the singer (I Sam. viii. 2; I Chron. vi. 18 [A. V. vi. 33]). His name is omitted in I Chron. vi. 13 (A. VY. vi. 28); the word ‘3wm) (= “and the second one”), cor- rupted into ‘yw, is erroneously supposed to be the name given by the chronicler to the eldest son of Samuel. Joel and his younger brother Abiah, or Abijah, were made judges in Beer-sheba when Sam- uel was old and could no longer make his usual cir- cuit (comp. I Sam. vii. 16, 17). They disgraced their office by taking bribes and perverting judg- ment; and their misdeeds provoked the people to ask for a king (db. viii. 5 e¢ seg.). For the different opinions of the Talmudists with respect to the sins of these two judges see ABIJAH IN RABBINICAL LITERATURE. 8. An ancestor of Samuel who is mentioned in I Chron. vi. 21 (A.V. 36), and who in verse 9 (A.V. 24) is called “Shaul.” 4. A Simeonite prince (7d. iv. 85). 5. A Reubenite; father of Shemaiah (7d. v. 4, 8). 6. A Gadite chief (2b. v. 12). 7. A chief of Issachar (7b. vii. 3). 8. One of David’s mighty men, indicated as the brother of Nathan (zd. xi. 38). In the parallel list of Il Sam. xxiii. 36 he is called “Teal, the son of Nathan.” 9. A Gershonite Le- vite, a prince in the time of David (I Chron. xv. 7, xxiii. 8, xxvi. 22). 10. Son of Pedaiah; a Manas- site chief in the time of David (7d. xxvii. 20). 11. A Kohathite Levite in the time of Hezekiah (II Chron. xxix. 12; comp. No. 2, above). 12. One of those who married foreign wives (Ezra x. 48). 18. Son of Zichri; a Benjamite overseer after the Exile (Neh. xi. 9). EB; .Geelts M. SEL. JOEL, BOOK OF.—Biblical Data: The prophecies of the Book of Joel are divided into two parts, comprising respectively (1) ch. i. 2-ii. 17 and (2) ch. ii, 18-iv. 21. The contents of the first part may be summarized as follows: The prophet at the beginning calls the attention of the elders and of all the inhabitants of the land to a coming event the like of which has never been seen, a terrible visitation by locusts (i 2-7), which will be coincident with a famine, and which will together reduce the entire land to the bitterest misery (i.10- 12, 16-20). The prophet exhorts the people to fast, to pray, and to mourn (i. 13 et seg., ii, 1-12 et seq.). In this double visitation the prophet perceives the approach of the “day of the Lord” (i. 15), which is to be ushered in by a terrible affliction (ii. 2-11) unless the people become truly repentant (ii. 12-17). 205 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jod Joel, Book of In the second part it is first related how the peo- ple did actually bring about a gracious change in God’s plans by obeying the prophet’s injunctions (ii. 18); this is followed by Yuwu’s answer to the prayer of the people (ii. 19 et seg.) ; then there is the promise of relief from famine through abundant rains and through a marvelous fruitfulness, after which the spirit of prophecy is to be poured out overall flesh, and the day of the Lord will draw near, accompanied by terrifying signsin heaven and earth. These terrors, however, are not for the Jews, who will be rescued in the day of judgment because they called on the Lord, but for their enemies (iii. 1-5), At the time of the change in the fate of Judah and Jerusalem the Lord will gather all nations into the valley of Jehoshaphat (see JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY oF), there to be destroyed through the fulfilment of the divine judgment of wrath (iv. 11-13), because they have plundered the treasuries of the Lord and have sold the sons of Judah and of Jerusalem to the sons of the Grecians (iv. 5-8). . God will be a refuge for His people (iv. 16); strangers will no longer pass through Jerusalem (iv. 17); the soil of Judah will become exceedingly fruitful, and a fountain will even water the valley of Shittim (é.e., the un- fruitful Jordan valley), whereas Egypt and Edom will be changed into a wilderness on account of the evil they have done to Judah (iv. 18-19). —Critical View: § 1. That Joel consists of two parts appears from ii. 18, which, if therules of He- brew syntax are applied, must be con- Duplicate strued as a narrative reporting the Character. change of God’s attitude subsequent to the exhortation to repentance. Only through a misunderstanding of the method of He- brew narrative will the demand be urged, in oppo- sition to this construction, that such a report should necessarily include the story of the actual accom- plishment of penitence. Stylistic carelessness is very usual in Hebrew narrative; and the act of peni- tence is left to be supplied by the reader from the context—/.¢., in this instance from the prophetical exhortation to repentance (the accomplished peni- tence must be supplied between verses 17 and 18). On the other hand, neither the interpretation of the imperfects in verse 17as jussives nor even the read- ing of the consecutive imperfects (N)p%}, etc.) as simple historical imperfects (N3p%, etc.) justifies the following translation approved by De Wette, Baudis- sin, and others: “Then will Yuwu be jealous for His land and will protect His people; and YawH will speak and say to His people,” etc. In this ren- dering, which is inadmissible on linguistic grounds, the words following verse 17 appear as a promise connected with the foregoing petition for a return to favor, and the prophecy of Joel would then form a consecutive whole. But even the acceptance of this theory would not remove the difficulties in the way of fixing the time of Joel’s prophecy. § 2. Date of the Book: Theory of a Pre-Exilic Period : (2) According to the formerly generally ac- cepted opinion, Joel wrote in the beginning of the reign of King Joash (836-797 b.c.), and was there- fore the oldest prophet to leave a book of proph- ecies, This theory of an early date of composition was, above all, strongly supported by the fact that no mention is made of the Assyrians. The beginning of the reign of Joash was urged in view of the failure of the book torefer to or toname the Damascus Syrians, who, according to II Kings xii. 18 et seg., seriously threatened Jerusalem under Joash (comp. Hazaxrt), In further support of this theory stress was laid on the absence of any reference to the king, which would point to the period of the mi- Reasons for nority of Joash, while the predomi- the Time nance of the priestly influence led to of Joash. the conclusion that Joash, at the be- ginning of his reign, was under the in- fluence of the high priest Jehoiada. Another point of agreement jn favor of this date was the hostility shown to the Israelites by the nations, mentioned in iv. (A.V. iii.) 4, 19, which was made to refer to the rebellion of the Edomites under King Jehoram of Judah (849-842 B.c.), on which occasion the Arabs and the Philistines plundered Jerusalem (II Chron. xxi. 8 et seqg., 16 et seg.; comp. § 8, below). (0) Konig places the composition of the book at a much later date, but still in the pre-exilic period; namely, in the time of King Josiah, or in the period immediately following. His reasons are these: The form of the prophecies is too finished to date from the beginning of the prophetic style of wri- ting; indeed, the linguistic character is that of about the seventh century B.c. Moreover, the contents reflect the time of Josiah, because it was then that the great famine occurred which Jeremiah (Jer. xiv. 2-6) describes in a similar way to Joel. Finally, the mention of the Egyptians points to the last years of Josiah (or else those immediately Reasons for following), referring to Josiah’s cam- the Time paign against the Egyptians. The of Josiah. fact that neither the Assyrians nor the Babylonians are alluded to militates against. Kénig’s dating, since all the other pre-exilic prophets, from Amos to Jeremiah, recognize God’s judgment, which is to fall on His people precisely in the extension of the Assyrian and, later, of the Babylonian empire. Theory of a Post-Exilic Period: This theory was first, and in the beginning rather hesitatingly, brought forward by Vatke; since then it has been adopted by Merx (who takes the book for a midrash written after 445 B.c.), by Stade, Kuenen, Well- hausen, Wildeboer, Nowack, Kautzsch, Duhm, Oort, Cornill, and others. The last named scholar. hold ing the book to be a compendium of late Jewish eschatology, places it in the year 400 B.c., because Jerusalem at that time not only was inhabited, but had a temple (i. 14, ii 15), as well as a wall (ii. 9), which would indicate a period after Nehemiah, But he overlooks the fact that the walls mentioned in the text are certainly those of the houses within the city. Of all that has been adduced in support of the post-exilic theory, only passages like iv. (A. V. iii.) 17 really have any weight. The statement, “Then shall Jerusalem be holy, and there shall no strangers pass through her any more,” indicates a city that had been destroyed—a fate that befell Jerusalem only under Nebuchadnezzar (see further § 3, below). Joel, Book of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 206 On the other hand, iv. (A.V. iii.) 1 can not be ap- pealed to, since the words niayw aw do not mean, as was formerly believed, “to bring back the cap- tivity ”—which would indeed lead to the presup- position that deportation of the inhabitants of Judea and Jerusalem had preceded—but more correctly “ to turn the fate.” The other reasons advanced for the post-exilic the- ory are not very plausible. Thus the fact that the king is not mentioned is not remarkable, since the king is likewise not mentioned in Nahum and Habak- kuk. If silence of this sort is of weight, it ought to be considered just as decisive against a post-exilic dating if the governor and high priest were not mentioned in a work. Neither is the absence of any mention of the high places and their cult beside the Temple at Jerusalem remarkable, since Isaiah and, before him, Amos recognize only the Temple at Jeru- salem as the habitation of God; and Isaiah, unlike Anios and Hosea, even polemizes against. other places of worship. When, however, Joel ini. 9 speaks of the discontinuance of the meat- and Objections drink-offerings as acalamity, and in i, to Post-Ex- 13 e¢ seq. calls on the priests to fast in ilic Date. consequence, this should not be con- sidered as proof of any high regard for the ritual, an attitude so utterly foreign to the pre-exilic period. Isaiah also mentions the meat- offering (Isa. i. 18), and Amos emphasizes the ob- servance of the Sabbath (Amos viii. 5); and when the pre-exilic prophets reject the external worship of God, they do so only in so far as it tends to represent the whole of man’s religious life and to displace en- tirely the true inner relationship to God (obedience). On the other hand, the appointment of a fast on the occasion of exceptional afflictions is found in the narratives of the Book of Kings (I Kings xxi. 9; comp. II Chron. xx. 8). It has justly been pointed out that the way in which Joel, by dint of his pro- phetic office, gives, as it were, higher commands to the priests, does not at all agree with the position which the priesthood occupied during the time of the Persians and later. The post-exilic composition of the book can least of all be proved from the men- tion of the “elders” (see especially i. 14, where, however, D'9p? is accusative, not vocative), since Joel does not speak of them as official persons, but con- notes by “old men” only the most respected of the ‘people. The post-exilic theory, moreover, far from remov- ing difficulties, gives rise to various additional ones of a serious nature. In the first place, the accept- ance of the post-exilic theory of composition neces- sitates the wholly improbable hypothesis that the prophet ini. 1 e¢ seg. places himself at the end of time and speaks to the generation of the last day. Since there is no announcement of the final day, the conclusion is natural that the opening ad- dress of the book was intended for the contem- poraries of the speaker; but, if so, the apocalyptic interpretation of the opening words becomes impos- sible, and this negatives one of the most weighty arguments in favor of the late date of composition. It must be noticed, moreover, that no mention of a future judgment is made until after iii. 1 (A. V. ii. 28), for which reason the nations hostile to Israel are not mentioned until then (¢g., in iv. [A. V. ili.] 2). Another difficulty arises when, for the sake of the post-exilic theory, the locusts are taken to mean not real but “apocalyptic locusts” ; The that is, such as the fantasy of the Plague of prophet has invented to illustrate the Locusts. final judgment. But the plague of locusts is represented as actually hav- ing begun; the prophet describes it without indica- ting that it is to be expected in the future; and he therefore exhorts his countrymen, who have suf- fered this affliction with him, to lamentation and re- pentance. Moreover, by “locusts” is not meant, as some have held, the mounted army of a human en- emy, for there is nothing in the description to indi- cate anything else than a real plague of locusts. If it were true that by them the prophet intended horsemeén of the enemy, there would result the in- congruity of comparing an army of horses and riders to heroes and warriors (ii. 4. et seg.). When the swarms of locusts are called “northern ” (93)5¥) in ik 20, it is indeed most natural to think of an army com- ing from the north, because locusts in Palestine al- ways come from the south. Whereas it is not unrea- sonable to argue that the locusts here described might have been driven into Palestine by a north- east wind from the Syrian desert (so Volck). this theory, in face of the more natural explanation of ‘\DY, appears only a makeshift. But the difficulty disappears with the hypothesis next to be con- sidered. § 3. Theory of the Origin of Joel in Two Different Parts Written at Different Times: The theory that ch. iii.-iv. (A. V. ii. 28-iii,) are to be separated from i.-il. was first brought forward by Rothstein in the German translation of Driver’s “Tntroduction to the Old Testament,” Berlin, 1896 (p. 883). He starts out with the fact that the gen- eral assumptions in the two parts are wholly dif- ferent: in ch. i. e¢ seg. people and state (Judah) appear in unimpaired integrity; the evil of the day is a ter- rible plague of locusts together with an all-devour- ing drought; in the passages where the relation to other nations is characterized, there is no trace of a distressing condition brought about, in a political sense, by the enemy (ii. 17; comp. 7. 19b). On the other hand, in iii. et seg. (A. V. ii. 28 et seg.) the whole historical background is a political one; a reference to the time of need indicated in i. 1 et seq. is not to be discovered (no more so in ii. 18); moreover, the people, at least a very large part of them, are in exile; the judgment from which they are to be saved according to i. et seg. has long since come to pass; and Jerusalem is already trodden down and desecrated by Gentiles. Finally, it must be added ‘that a large number of passages in iii. (ii, 28 e¢ seg.) are wholly lacking in originality (with the exception of iv. [iii.] 9 e¢ 8eq., where probably fragments of a vigorous original have been preserved). Rothstein concludes from this that ch. i. and ii. were written by Joel during the minority of King Joash; that, on the other hand, ch. iii. (ii. 28 e¢ seg.) and iv. (iii.) date from a post- exilic pericd, and were written by an author who Difference of Back- ground, 207 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joel, Book of was lacking in originality, so that he connected his elaboration with the older prophecy in ch. i. and ii., as is the recognized case with Obadiah, verses 10-21 (with which section many parallels are found in Joel lii. e¢ seq. [ii. 28 etseg.]) and 1-9. This author, how- ever, who for his part regards the plague of locusts announced in ch. ii. as a symbolic reference to the inroad of hostile hordes, also wrote ii. 20, in which place he expressly chose expressions which would lead one to think of the “northern” army (7.¢., the army of heathen which had already entered the country) together with the swarms of locusts which he interprets symbolically. In the same way ii. 10- 11 (or else only 11a) originated from the same hand, since these verses give the impression that the au- thor meant powerful armies rather than locusts. When, on the other hand, it is objected (by Bau- dissin, in “ Kinleitung in die Biicher des Alten Tes- taments,” 1901, p. 499) that in this way the difficul- ties attendant on the time determination are by no means removed, since the reasons for and against a pre-exilic date apply to both halves of the book, it must still be recognized (as Baudissin himself admits) that the difficulties of the pre-exilic theory are greater in the second part. Moreover, it can not be admitted that the reasons which could justify the acceptance of the pre-exilic theory are found almost entirely in the second part only. The placing of the prophecy in the opening period of King Joash’s reign, which rested on the identification of the hos- tilities mentioned in iv, (iii) 4 e¢ seg. with the re- volt of the Edomites under Jehoram, will, how- ever, have to be abandoned. The difficulty arises that these descriptions apply even less Reasons to a post-exilic period than to the time for the of King Joash (see below). At any Division. rate the prophetic character of ch. i. and ii., in contrast to the apocalyptic character, which actually begins with iii. 1 (ii, 28), is alone sufficient (as is also emphasized by Baudis- sin) to justify the chronological determination of the two parts. Furthermore, the oratorical attitude, the vigorous language, and the originality of ex- pression and of illustrations—of which the picture of being spread out like the morning upon the moun- tain is found only in Joel (ii. 2)—speak for the older date of composition of the first part. It is wrong to suppose that the perfection of form of this prophecy indicates that it was not written in the first period of prophetical composition, because, in the face of the song of Deborah and of the elegies on Saul and Jonathan, the possibility of perfection of form in the period in which Joel wrote can not be denied; just as in other literatures also the first poetical writings have always been preceded by a longer stage of poetic development. Whether or not Joel really prophesied under Joash, or is to be placed only shortly before Amos, is irrelevant, if one separates ch. iii. and iv. and at the same time ii. 4,11, which are based on the early theory. In favor of the time shortly before Amos, Baudissin has sug- gested, not without justice, that also in Amos a plague of locusts together with a drought is men- tioned as a divine punishment (Amos iv. 6-9; comp. vii. 1-6), and that in this book, as also in Joel iv. (iii.) 4 et seq. (if this passage as well as iv. [iii.] 9 et seg. also dates from an older prophecy), there is a complaint concerning the delivery of captured slaves (Amos i. 6, 9) which, in spite of single variations, makes it easy to suppose that the same event is here meant, namely, the killing of the Judeans at the time of the revolt of Edom against Judah under Jehoram (comp. Amos i. 11 and Joel iv. [iii ] 19), The mention of the “sons of the Grecians” (in iv. [iii.] 6, if this still belongs to the older part) can hardly be taken as a proof against this theory (al- though it has been brought forward to prove a very late date of composition), since there is no reason why Greeks should not have been mentioned in an early pre-exilic period. On the other hand, the fact that most of the data pointing to a post-exilic composition are found in the second half of the book, after ch. Reasons iii. (ii. 28), speaks for the later compo- for Later sition of ch. iii. and iv. (ii. 28-iii.). Composi- This is assumed on the following tion. grounds; Only Judah is expressly mentioned, whereas the idea seems to be to connote both Judah and Israel (thus ch. iv. [iii.] 2; but not so in ii. 27); also because in the de- scription of the approaching day of judgment for the nations and the glorification of God’s people there is no reference to Ephraim; finally, above all, because in iv. (iii.) 17, as has already been remarked, not only the destruction of Jerusalem is presup- posed, but also the dispersion of God’s people, Israel, among the nations, and the division of Israel’s land. As to the question concerning the prophetic sources of the respective passages, it is probably easier to derive the passages iii. 5 (ii. 82) from Obadiah, verse 17; iv. (iii.) 18 from Ezek. xlvii. 1 e¢ seg.; and iv. (iii.) 16 from Amos i. 2—all of them in a part which gives the impression of a dull and barren style of writing—than to suppose these passages in Joel to have been original. For these reasons the supposition that iii. and iv. (ii. 25-iii.) were written in a post-exilic period seems to offer the easiest solu- tion of the difficulty. § 4. Theory of the Revision of an Older Book in a Later Period: The division of the book into two parts convinces Baudissin (/.c. p. 499) that such a revision must have taken place. He considers the description of the judgment of the nations with its reference to the scattering of Israel, the division of the land of Yuwnu, and the passing of strangers through Jerusalem as additions of the reviser. But the theory leaves open the possibility that single parts of the second half of the book may have be- longed to the original composition and were incor- porated in the compilation of the later writer, di- rectly or else with certain changes to suit the times. In view of this, and of the further supposition, first suggested by Rothstein, that the second author made changes and additions also in the first part, there is little difference between the two theories. Moreover, it is possible to agree with Baudissin that the original writing does not need to have originated in the Persian period. It is indeed advisable to place its composi. tion as late as the time of the Ptolemies, since then the mention of Egypt might refer to the war in Egypt. Joél, David Joél, Manuel THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 208 BIBLIOGRAPHY : Commentaries: Hitzig, in Kommentar zw den Kleinen Propheten, 1888 (new ed. by J. Steiner, 1881, in Kurzgefasstes Exegetisches Handbuch); Keil, in Biblischer Kommentar, 3d ed., 1888; Orelli, in Strack and Zoeckler, Kurz- gefasster Kommentar, 2d ed., 1888; J. Wellhausen, Die Klet- nen Propheten (transl. with notes in Skizzen und Vor- arbeiten, part y.), 1892; W. Nowack, in Handkommentar, 1897; B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets, 1888; F. W. Farrar, The Minor Prophets, Their Lives and Times, in Men of the Bible series, 1890; K. A. Credner, Der Prophet Joel, Uebersetat und Erklirt, 183.; E. Meier, Der Prophet Joel, Neu Uebersetzt und Erklirt; Aug. Wiinsche, Die Weissa- gung des Propheten Joel, 1872 (gives a complete bibliography on Joel to 1872); Adalbert Merx, Die Prophetie des Joel und Thre Ausleger, 1879; Beck, Die Propheten Micha und Joel, Erklirt, ed. Lindemeyer, 1898; Ant. Scholz, Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Joel, 1885; Eugene le Savoureux, Le Prophete Joel: Introduction, Critique, Traduction, et Commentaire, 1888; W. W. L. Pearson, The Prophecy of Joel; Its Unity, Its Aim, and the Age of Its Composition, i. 885; Gritz, Joel, Breslau, 1872; E. G. Hirsch, he Age of Joel, in Hebraica, New York, 1879; Kessner, Das Zeitalter des Propheten Joel, 1888; G. Preuss, Die Prophetie Joels, 1889; H. Holzinger, Sprachcharakter und Abfassungszeit des Buches Joel, in Stade’s Zeitschrift, ix. 89-181; G. B. Gray, The Parallel Passages in Joel in Their Bearing on the Question of Date, in The Expositcr, 1893, Supplement, pp. 208 et seq.; J.C. Matthes, in Theologisch Tijdschrift, xix. 34-66, 129-160; xxi. 357-881; A. B. Davidson, in The Ev- positor, March, 1888; Volek, Der Prophet Joel, in Herzog- Plitt, Real-Hncyc. ix. 284-237; Robertson Smith and Driver, Joel, in Encyc. Brit. E. G. H. View itive JOEL, DAVID: German rabbi and author; born Jan. 12, 1815, at Inowrazlaw, Posen; died Sept. 7, 1882, at Breslau; brother of Manuel Joél. His father, who went in 1832 as chief rabbi to Schwerin-a-W., as wellas R. Akiba Eger of Posen, instructed him in the Talmud. In 1886, in order to complete his education. he went to Berlin, where he attended the Talmudic lectures of Rabbis Oettinger and Landsberg, and, at the same time, the secular courses of Friedrich von Raumer, H. Steffens, and Neander at the university. After being ordained rabbi (1842) he accepted (1848) a call to Schwersenz, Posen. There he wrote “ Midrash ha-Zohar,” or “Die Religionsphilosophie des Sohar und Ihr Verhiiltniss zur Allgemeinen Theologie” (Leipsic, 1849). This book, which is at the same time a criticism of Adolphe Franck’s “La Cabale,” is indispensable to every student of the Zohar, A year after the publication of his work he received his degree as Ph.D. From 1859 to 1879 he acted as rabbi at Krotoschin, Posen. cepted a call to the Jewish Theological Seminary at Breslau, and entered upon his duties with the be- ginning of the year 1880. During the period that he remained at Breslau— somewhat less than three years—he wrote his book “Der Aberglaube und die Stellung des Judenthums zu Demselben,” only two parts of which appeared; part i., accompanying the annual report of the semi- nary at Breslau for 1881; part ii., published after the death of the author by his brother Manuel Joél, and accompanying the annual report of the semi- nary for 1883. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jahreshericht des Jitdisch-Theologischen Seminars zu Breslau, 1881, pp. ii. et seq. s. Bae JOEL B. ISAAC HA-LEVI: German tosafist of the twelfth century; born probably at Bonn; died at Cologne about 1200. Joel studied in his youth at Ratisbon under ErpuRratm B. Isaac, Isaac b. Mordecai, and Moses b. Joel, with whom he later kept up a learned correspondence. It is not known whether he also studied under Isaac b. Asher ha- In the latter year he ac- . Levi of Speyer; but as Isaac b. Mordecai and Moses b. Joel were pupils of this great tosafist, they would naturally have communicated to their own pupils the doctrines of their master. Joel studied also at Wiirzburg and Mayence, where he was the pupil of Evrezer B. NarHan, who speaks of him with much affection, and whose son-in law he be- came. Joel taught chiefly at Bonn and Cologne, and at his death was succeeded by his son ELIEZER zn, JorL ag rabbi and teacher in the latter city. Another son, Uri, died as a martyr at the stake in 1216; and his friend Morpecar B. ELImzER wrote a dirge on his death. : Joel, who was among the most eminent Talmudic authorities of his time, wrote tosafot to various treatises of the Talmud. They have not, however, been preserved; though they are quoted in the man- uscript of the “ Mordekai,” where Joel’s “ Yesod” and “ Perishah” are also mentioned. Itis difficult to de- termine the nature of these two works, but they were probably short commentaries tothe Talmud. Many of Joel’s responsa and decisions are found in the works of his son Eliezer; in the “ Mordekai,” whose author was Eliezer’s great-grandson; as well as in Isaac B. Mosgs’ “Or Zarua‘” and in ASHER B. JEHIEL’S halakot. Joel’s relation to Ephraim b. Isaac is noteworthy. Although he was originally a pupil of this pecu- liar man, he subsequently became his persistent an- tagonist, the teacher assuming an attitude of exas- peration toward his former pupil. Joel attempted to uphold the authority of later tradition against Ephraim’s excessive independence; his manner was very decisive, though he never forgot the respect due to his old master. Joel also wrote liturgical poems, of which six have been preserved, and which all deal with the bloody persecutions of the Jews of Germany. Though simple in language and not very artistic in form, they are touching dirges on the sorrows of Israel. ; BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, in Monatsschrift, xxxiv. 314-816; Brisch, Gesch. der Juden in Coln, pp. 48-49; Kohn, Mardo- chat b. Hillel, pp. 1138-114, 182; Landshuth, “Ammude ha- ‘Abodah, pp. 81-82; Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 1036; Zunz, Literaturgesch. pp. 269-270; idem, S. P. pp. 251-252 (contains a German transl. of a selihah by Joel) ; idem, Z. G. Index. Ss. 8. L. G. JOEL B. JUDAH SELKI HA-LEVI (LAM- MEL ?): Author of “ Dibre ha-Iggeret,” a descrip- tion of the sufferings of the Jews of Glogau when that town was besieged by the Prussians in the winter of 1740-41. It was published at an un- known place in 1741, but became so rare that many of the bibliographers did not know of it. It was re- cently reprinted by Joseph Fischer (Cracow, 1895) together with Nathan Hannover’s “ Yewen Mezu- lah,” under the title “Shene Sefarim Niftahim.” In the “ Dibre ha-Iggeret,” which is written in the style of piyyutim common to that period, the name of the author occurs several times, but the surname “Limmel” is never added. At the end there isa song by his brother Asher Lammel, who was a dayyan in Glogau; and this is probably the rea- son why the name “Limmel” was added by Stein- schneider to Joel’s name. Ss. 8. P. Wi. of Birnbaum. 209 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joel, David Joé6l, Manuel JOEL, KARL: German philosophical writer; born March 27, 1864, at Hirschberg, Silesia; son of Rabbi H. Joél of that city and nephew of David and Manuel Jotl. Educated at the gymnasium of his native town and the universities of Breslau and Leipsic, he graduated as Ph.D. in 1886. The following year he went to Basel, where he was admitted to the philosophical faculty as privat- docent in 1893, becoming assistant professor in 1897, and professor in 1902. Joél has written many philosophical and philo- sophico-historical essays in specialist journals, as the “Zeitschrift fiir Philosophie und Philosophische Kritik ” (vols. xevii., cix. e¢ seg.); “ Archiv fiir die Gesch. der Philosophie ” (vols. viii. e¢ seg.); “ Woch- enschrift fiir Classische Philologie”; ete. He is also the author of: “Zur Erkenntnis der Geistigen Entwicklung und der Schriftstellerischen Motive Platos,” Berlin, 1887; “Der Echte und der Xeno- phontische Sokrates,” vol. i., 7b. 1898; vol. ii., 2d. 1901; “ Philosophenwege,” 7d. 1901. 8. 1h MNS sds; JOEL, LEWIS: British consul-general to Chile; born in Dublin 1824; died in London Feb. 28,1899. He was educated at Bristol; in May, 1861, was appointed unpaid British vice-consul at Cobija; and from Sept., 1863, to June, 1866, was acting French consul there. In 1867 he was for a short time acting chargé d’affaires at Caracas, and in the following year was nained commissioner in the mixed British and Venezuelan commission for the settlement of British claims against the government of Venezuela. In 1869 Joel was again acting chargé d’affaires as well as consul-general at Caracas, and in the following year was promoted to be consul at Rosario, a position which he occupied for seven years. Subsequently he became consul successively at Brindisi, Italy; Georgia, U. 8. ; and Cadiz, Spain; and he was then promoted to be consul general for the departments of Panama, Bolivar, Magdalena, and Cauca. Later on Joel became consul-general to Chile, and had charge of the legation of Santi- ago, from which he retired on a pension in Jan., 1894. Joel was the author of London, 1879. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. March 17, 1899; Times and other London daily newspapers of same date. Is Gila: JOEL, MANUEL: German rabbi; born Oct. 19, 1826, at Birnbaum, province of Posen; died at Breslau Nov. 8, 1890; son of Rabbi Heimann Joél In 1849 he went to the University of Berlin to study classical philology and philosophy, In 1852 Joél passed his examination as “ Oberlehrer,” and took the Ph.D. degree at Halle in1854, In that year he accepted a call to the Jewish Theological Seminary of Breslau, where he taught for nine years. In 1864 he was appointed successor to Abraham Geiger, rabbi of the Breslau congregation. Jo#l’s first literary work consisted of biographies of the most prominent followers of R. Akiba—R. Meir, R.*Simeon ben Yohai, R. Jose ben Halafta, and R. Judah ben ‘Ilai (“ Monatsschrift,” 1855-57). His preference, however, was for religious philosophy, VII.—14 “A Consul’s Manual,” in which he was to do pioneer work. His series of essays on Ibn Gabirol (“ Monatsschrift,” 1857-59; reprinted in his “Beitriige zur Gesch. der Philoso- phie,” 1876) was intended as a critical review of Solomon Munk’s “Mélanges.” Heshows Ibn Gabi- rol’s “ Mekor Hayyim” to be nothing buta text-book of Neoplatonic philosophy, and that its author had no claim whatever to originality. Joél then turned his attention to ; Maimonides, devoting iy two papers to him, one being a comprehensive \ account of Maimon- 1 Bega ides’ system (“Die Re: | 42 ligionsphilosophie des |g. | Moses ben Maimon,” ‘# q in the Breslau Jew. Theol. Seminary: Pro- gram of 1859; re- printed in “ Beitriige,” \ i.), the other proving him to be one of the sources of Albertus Magnus (“ Verhiiltniss Albert des Grossen zu Maimonides,” in the Breslau Jew. Theol. Seminary Program of 1863 ; reprinted in his “ Beitriige,” i.). After this Joél] devoted himself to the exposition of the systems of two almost forgotten Jewish phi- losophers, Levi ben Gershon (“Levi b. Gershon als Religionsphilosoph,” in “ Beitriige,” i.) and Hasdai Crescas (“Don Chasdai Crescas’ Religionsphilo- sophische Lehren in Ihrem Geschichtlichen Ein- flusse Dargestellt,” in “ Beitriige,” ii.). Inquiry into the philosophy of the latter led Jo#l to the discov- ery of Spinoza’s dependence on Jewish thinkers (“Spinoza’s Theologisch-Politischer Tractat auf Seine Quellen Gepriift; zur Genesis der Lehre Spi- noza’s,” in “ Beitriige,” ii.). Joél’s object in his pub- lications was twofold: first, he wished to make possi- ble a better comprehension of the Jewish philosophy of the Middle Ages; secondly, he desired to show the influence which had been exerted by Jewish philos- ophy on the Christian scholastics (“ Etwas tiber den Einfluss der Jiidischen Philosophie auf die Christ- liche Scholastik,” in “ Beitriige,” i.) and on the non- Jewish world in general (“ Ueber den Wissenschaft- lichen Einfluss des Judenthums auf die Nicht-Jii- dische Welt,” in “ Beitriige,” ii.). Of Joél’s other publications the following may be mentioned: “Zur Orientirung in der Cultusfrage ” (1867); “Festpredigten” (1867); “Notizen zum Buche Daniel”; “Etwas iiber Sifra und Sifre” (1878); “ Religionsphilosophische Zeitfra gen” (1876) ; “Gutachten tiber den Talmud” (1877); “Die An- griffe des Heidenthums Gegen Juden und Christen in den Ersten Jahrhunderten der Rémischen Cesa- ren” (1879); “Blicke in die Religionsgesch.” (2 vols., 1880-83), a work of profound research and of great value for the student of Jewish and Christian lit- erature of the first and second Christian and pre- Christian centuries; “Gegen Gildemeister” (1884); “Predigten aus dem Nachlasse von Dr. M. Joél” (3 vols., 1892-98). The “Jahrbuch fiir Jtidische Geschichte und Litteratur,” pp. 25-90, Berlin, 1904, Manuel Joél. Joel ibn Shufaib Johanan b. Nappaha THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 210 contains a posthumous essay by Joél entitled “Der Mosaismus und das Heidenthum.” BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gedenkblilter zur Hrinnerung an Dr. Man- uel Joél, Breslau, 1890; J. Freudenthal, Ueber die Wissen- schaftliche Thitigkeit Dr. M. Joél’s, in Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1890, pp. 589 et seq.; Eckstein, Zw Dr. M. Joédl’s Jahrzeits- tage, ib. 1891, p. 558; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. s. 1B, Zi. JOEL IBN SHU‘AIB. See Isn Suv‘ars, JOBL. JOHANAN B. BAROKA: Teacher of the sec- ond century (second and third tannaitic periods) ; disciple of Joshua. b. Hananiah and colleague of Eleazar b. Hisma (Tosef., Sotah, vii. 9; Hag. 8a). He maintained a scholarly intercourse with Johanan b. Nuri. Quite a considerable number of halakot has been handed down in his name, and many of them, particularly those concerning marital and civil affairs, were adopted as law (‘Er. viii. 2; B. K. x. 2;B. B. viii. 5; Kelim, xvii. 11), Heisalsocited in the Haggadah. According to him, the saying (Gen. i. 28), “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,” implies that the duty of racial propagation devolves upon woman as well as upon man (Yeb. vi. 6). He taught that whoever profanes the name of God, even secretly, is punished publicly, whether the deed is committed intentionally or unintention- ally (Ab. iv. 4; Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, p. 35a), BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. i. 448, Brtill, Meho ha- Mishnah, i. 187; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 131; Weiss, Dor, ii. 122. 8. 8. Ss. M. JOHANAN GADI (Greek, Taddec); Eldest of the five sons of Mattathias the Maccabee (I Mace. ii. 2; Josephus, “ Ant.” xii. 6, § 1), though the least important. When JonarHan took the leadership and was being hard pressed in the country east of the Jordan, he sent Johanan with the baggage to the friendly Nabatzans; but another tribe, the sons of Jambri, seized it and killed Johanan, His death was avenged by his brothers Jonathan and Simeon (I Mace. ix. 85-42; Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 1, $$ 2-3; “B. J.” i. 1, § 6). This tragie end is in strong con- trast to the surname “Gadi” (43, meaning probably “the Lucky”). The rabbinical sources ascribe more importance to Johanan, but these accounts are con- Luseds(Gces eH a dine xxexn alley), G SakoRs JOHANAN B. GUDGADA: Scholar and chief gatekeeper at the Temple in the last years of its existence (Tosef., Shek. ii. 14); senior of Joshua b. Hananiah. He survived the destruction of Jeru- salem, and was present at the memorable sessions of the Jabneh (Jamnia) Sanhedrin that laid the founda- tion of the Talmudic treatise ‘Epuyor, and before which he gave certain “evidences” (Yeb. xiv. 2; Git. v. 5; comp. ‘Hduy. vii. 9). One rabbinical source makes of him a disciple of Gamaliel II. and an expert mathematician (Hor. 10a); but this evi- dently rests on an error, 9'3.9 (=R. JOHANAN B. Nor) having been mistaken for 9"4 (= R. Johanan b. Gudgada). As it reads, the story is anachronis- tic, since Johanan was older than Joshua, who was the senior of Gamaliel. Of Johanan’s life and work nothing more is known than that he gave the above- mentioned evidences (see also Hul. 55b), and that he was a Hapmr (Hag. ii. 7). Two of Johanan’s grandsons, or nephews, are said to have lived in the days of Rabbi. They were deaf-mutes, but regularly attended Rabbi’s_lec- tures, and by the motions of their heads and lips appeared to follow and understand him (Hag. 3a). Now, as Johanan had reached the age of manhood prior to the destruction of the Temple (70 c.x.), it is chronologically incredible that his nephews, or even his grandsons, should have attended Rabbi’s lectures in the last decades of the second century. It might therefore be assumed that here also 3”3°9 was misread §"5°9, were it not that another, more reliable source precludes that assumption. There it is said: “The sons of Johanan b. Gudgada were deaf-mutes; still they were entrusted with the direc- tion of ritualistic matters in Jerusalem” (Tosef., Ter. i. 1; Yer. Ter. i. 40b). They were therefore contemporaries of Joshua; and accordingly it may be conjectured that in the Babylonian version the initial sign in "5 (= R. Joshua) was converted into the letter 3 ; hence the erroneous name °3> (“ Rabbi”). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brill, Mebo ha-Mishnah, i. 93; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 99; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii., 8.v.; Weiss, Dor, ii. 122. 8. 8. Ss. M. JOHANAN BEN HA-HORANIT: Palestin- ian tanna of the first generation; disciple of Hillel (according to Frankel, “ Darke ha-Mishnah,” p. 58, note 8, a disciple of Shammai) and teacher of Eleazar b. Zadok. Once, during a famine, his pupil Eleazar found him eating dry bread with salt and told his father thereof, whereupon the latter, a disciple of Shammai, sent Johanan some olives. But Johanan, noticing that the olives were wet, and therefore, ac- cording to Hillel, liable to be unclean, refused to eat them (Tosef., Suk. ii. 8; Yeb. 15b). It is also recorded that a visit was paid to him, on the Feast of Tabernacles, by the elders of both Hillel’s and Shammai’s schools (Suk. 28a; ‘Er. 13b), BIBLIOGRAPHY : Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii.; Weiss, Dor, M. SEL. Tei 8. 8. JOHANAN BEN ISAAC OF HOLLE- SCHAU: Rabbi of the German community of London at the beginning of the eighteenth century. He edited “Teshubot ha-Geonim,” responsa of con- temporary rabbis on the pronunciation of the divine names, with additions of hisown (Amsterdam, 1707), and wrote “ Ma‘aseh Rab,” in which he sharply crit- icized the action of a certain London rabbi in regard to a divorce and an excommunication (published together with the preceding work). See HamMBRo’ SYNAGOGUE. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Flrst, Bibl. Jud. s.v. Holleschau, i. 405; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1897. Af S. Man. JOHANAN BEN JEHOIADA: High priest under Artaxerxes Ochus (859-888 B.c.); perhaps identical with the one mentioned in Neh. xii. 11 (“Johanan ” being read instead of “Jonathan ”) and 22. He murdered his younger brother Jesus in the Temple, probably fearing that, supported by the Per- sian general Bagoas, whose favor he enjoyed, Jesus would deprive him of the dignity of high priest (Josephus, “ Ant.” xi. 7, 81; see ARTAXERXEs IIL. ; Bacoas). The incident is not historically authen- 211 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joel ibn Shu'‘aib Johanan b. Nappaha a a eee eee eee ticated, the account being perhaps based upon events that happened in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. A similar story is narrated in Tosef., Yoma, i. 12: Two brothers, both priests, attempted to ascend to the altar at the same time, when one stabbed the other to the heart with a dagger. The high priest Jaddua was the son of Johanan. G. S. Kr. JOHANAN BEN KAREAH (np): General of the Israelites at the time of Nebuchadnezzar (e. 586 B.c.). After the kingdom of Judea had been des- troyed by the Chaldeans, the Babylonian king ap- pointed Gepaian b. Ahikam governor, with resi- dence at Mizpah, over the remnant of the people that had remained inthe country. Before him, as the rep- resentative of the government, appeared the Israel- itish generals Ishmael b. Nethaniah, Johanan and Jonathan, the sons of Kareah, and others. This is the reading of the Masoretic text (Jer. xl. 8), but the name of Jonathan seems incorrect, and is omit- ted in the Septuagint, in Josephus (“ Ant.” x. 9, § 2, where, furthermore, the name ’Iwddyc, hence “Joiada,” replaces “Johanan” in Niese’s text), and also in II Kings xxv. 23. The generals noticed that Ishmael intended to kill Gedaliah; and Johanan, who seems to have had an especial feeling of friendship for Gedaliah, volun- teered secretly to kill Ishmael before it might be too late; Gedaliah, however, would not consent (Jer. x1. 15-16). Ishmael carried out his intention, and Jo- hanan b. Kareah, at the head of the other generals, fought with Ishmael “by the great water in Gibeon.” The people who had been imprisoned by Ishmael at once went over to Johanan, and Ishmael had to flee (Jer, xli. 11-15). Johanan then gathered about him the generals and all the people he had saved in the hamlet of Chimham (Jer. xli. 17; Josephus, “ Ant.” x. 9, § 5, has Mavdpa = “hamlet,” the name appar- ently having been lost), intending to lead them into Egypt, beyond the reach of the Chaldeans. The people sought counsel of Jeremiah, who advised them, addressing himself chiefly to Johanan (Jer. xlii. 8), to stay in the country. But the generals and the much-tried people rejected the prophet’s advice, and emigrated to Egypt under Johanan’s leadership (Jer. xliii. 1-7). Here all trace of him is lost. G. S. Kr. JOHANAN BEN MERIYA: Palestinian amora of the fifth or sixth generation (4th and 5th cent.) Johanan is frequently mentioned in the Tal- mud of Jerusalem in connection with both halakic and haggadic subjects, instances of the latter, however, predominating. Ina controversy between R. Mana and R. Hananiah as to whether any high place may temporarily be used by a prophet as an altar, Jo- hanan used Josh. viii. 30 and I Sam. vii. 9 to support the affirmative opinion of Hananiah (Yer. Meg. i. 14; Lev. R. xxii. 6; Midr. Teh. to Ps. xxvii. 6, where the name “Jacob” occurs). He also trans- mitted a haggadah of Johanan b. Nappaha (Yer. Peah i. 1). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 722; Frankel, Mebo ha-Yerushalmi, p. 97b. 8. 8. M. SEL. JOHANAN B. NAPPAHA (HA-NAPPAH): Palestinian scholar; born at Sepphoris in the last quarter of the second century; died at Tiberias 279. He is generally cited as “ Johanan,” but sometimes by his cognomen only (Yer. R. H. ii. 58b; Sanh. 96a), which he himself uses once (Mak. 5b); but he is never cited by both together. He traced his de- scent from the tribe of Joseph (Ber. 20a), but he knew neither of his parents, his father having died before, and his mother at, his birth; he was brought up by his grandfather. His first teachers were the last Tannaites or semi-Tannaites Yannai, Hanina b. Hama, and Hoshaiah Rabbah. Fora short time he also attended the lectures of Judah I. (Rabbi); but, as he himself said, his acquaintance with Rabbi * was only slight (see Yer. Bezah v. His 68a.) He mentions again his pupil- Teachers. age under Rabbi in a reference to an occasion when he sat seventeen rows behind Rab (Abba Arika), and could not compre- hend the discussions (Pes. 8b; Hul. 187b). But in the short time he sat under him he is said to have manifested such aptness as to convince Rabbi that great things might reasonably be expected of him (Yoma 82b). By Hanina he was instructed in the homiletic interpretation of the Bible—except the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes (Yer. Hor. iii. 48b)—and probably in medicine, in which he be- came skilled (Ab. Zarah 28a). Johanan had an agreeable presence and a pleas- ing disposition; he was kind and considerate to the stranger as well as to his brethren; to the non-ob- servant as to the pious; to the ‘am ha-arez as to the haber ; wherefore he was beloved by his teachers and honored by all (B. M. 84a; Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah iii. 42c; Meg. 10b, 16a; ‘Ab. Zarah 26b; Yer. Dem. ii. 28a; Bek. 31a). Fora time he subsisted on the pro- ceeds of some arable land, a vineyard, and an olive- orchard, which he had inherited, and which he sold one after another in order to obtain an education. As he expressed it, he exchanged the things that God created in six days for the things the delivery of which required forty days (Ex. xx. 11, xxxiv. 28; Deut. ix. 10; Cant. R. viii. 7). But all his re- sources having been at last exhausted, he was com- pelied to follow some bread-winning occupation. After a short time, however, he felt impelled to return to his school, where he earned, not without a strug- gle, the encomiums of his masters (Ta‘an. 21a; Yeb. 57a; Yer. Yeb. viii. 9b; Yer. R. H. ii. 58a et seg.; Shab. 112b; ‘Er. 24a). At last, owing to the universal homage paid to the young master, the patriarch ac- corded him a pension, and soon a lecturer’s place was found for him. Johanan began teaching at his native place, Sep- phoris, and quickly became very popular there. One day his former teacher Hanina noticed unusu- ally large crowds hurrying toward one His place. Inquiring the reason of his at- Teaching. tendant, he was told that Johanan was to lecture at the college lately presided over by R. Banna’ah, and that the people were flocking to hear him. Hanina thereupon thanked God for permitting him to see his life’s work bear- ing such blessed fruit (see HANINA B. Hama). How long Johanan continued to act as teacher at Sepphoris Johanan b. Nappaha Johanan ha-Sandalar can not be ascertained; but he removed some time before Hanina’s death. They had-disagreed on two points of ritual, and Johanan, not wishing to oppose his master at his home, removed to Tiberias (Yer. Bezah i. 60a; Yer. Sheb. ix. 88c, where the text is mutilated). It is doubtful whether the two ever met again. With his other teachers he maintained intimate relations to the end of their days. This was particularly the case with Hoshaiah. He, tco, removed from Sepphoris and settled at Cesarea, where he opened a college and whither Johanan often went from Tiberias to consult him on difficult problems (Yer. Ter. x. 47a; Yer. Hal. i. 58b). These visits to his aged teacher Johanan continued during the last thirteen years of Hoshaiah’s life, but they were merely social visits, Johanan no longer needing Hoshaiah’s help: “ He that pays his respects to his teacher is considered as one waiting on the Divine Presence” (Yer. Sanh. xi. 30b). At Tiberias Johanan opened an academy, which soon drew large numbers of gifted students, native and foreign, among whom were the great scholars Abbahu, Ammi, Assi II., Eleazar ben Pedath, Hiyya ben Abba, Jose ben Hanina, and Simon ben Abba; as many scores of his disciples accepted and taught his decisions, and as he himself did not confine his labors to the precincts of the college, but visited and lectured at other places (Yeb. 64b; Ket. . Za), his fame spread far and wide, and his name more than that of any other teacher was on the lips of scholars. In the Diaspora, whither his teachings were carried by his disciples, his authority was al- most as great as in his native land, and few contem- porary scholars in Babylonia opposed him. As for Johanan himself, he recognized no foreign authority except that of Rab (ABBA ARrIKA), his senior school- mate under Judah I. With Rab, Johanan kept up a correspondence, and addressed him as “our master in Babylonia.” After Rab’s death Johanan wrote to Rab’s colleague SAMUEL, but addressed him as “our colleague in Babylonia.” Samuel sent him a com- plete calendar covering the intercalations for a period of sixty years; Johanan, however, admit- ted merely that Samuel was a good mathematician. But when Samuel transmitted to him a mass of dis quisitions on the dietary laws, Johanan exclaimed, “T still have a master in Babylonia!” He even re- solved to pay him a visit, but rumor made him be- lieve that Samuel had in the meantime died (Hul. 95b). Johanan pursued a strictly analytical method in his studies of the Halakah, Penetrating deeply into the sense of the Mishnah, and subjecting every part toa thorough examination and careful comparison with more or less related laws, he soon perceived that Rabbi’s compilation contained contradictory decisions, based in many cases on the opinions of individuals. These he endeavored to reconcile; but as that could not always be done, he perforce re- jected many halakot adopted in the Mishnah, pre- ferring the authority of baraitas taught by his former masters Hiyya and Hoshaiah. To carry out his line of thought systematically and consistently he laid down certain rules for the final decision of His Pupils. Halakic Method. THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Sa a eh ec 212 cases where two or more tannaim were found to have entertained opposite opinions, or where hala- kot are ascribed to recognized authorities, but are in conflict with anonymous opinions given else- where (see ConFLIcT OF OPINION). Some rules of this kind had been devised before his, but had proved insufficient. Johanan therefore elaborated and supplemented them (see Yer. Ter. iii. 42a; Shab. 39b; ‘Er. 46a et seqg.; Yeb. 42b; Git. 75a), and most of his rules are to this day authoritative for the stu- dent of Talmud. All of them were collected in the geonic period and embodied in the so-called “ Order of the Tannaim and Amoraim” (D°S4)9N) DNIN WD; abridged, &"IND), which is ascribed to Naashon b. Zadok of the ninth century (see Gritz, “ Einleitung in den Talmud von Jbn-Aknin,” p. vii.). Later Talmudists, seeing that Johanan was so prolific an amora that his name is more frequently mentioned in the Gemara than any other, ascribed to him the compilation of the Palestinian Gemara (see Maimon- ides, “Hakdamah,” ed. Hamburger, p. 58, Berlin, 1902). Modern scholars for obvious reasons deny this, but admit that he projected the compilation, which, however, was not completed till over a cen- tury after him (see TALMUD YERUSHALMI). The Midrash to the Book of Psalms also has been errone- ously ascribed to Johanan (see Buber, “ Midrash Tehillim,” Introduction, p. 2a). He was one of the most prolific hag gadists. In his religious decisions Johanan was compara- tively liberal. He aided Judah II. in the repeal of the prohibition against using oil made by pagans (‘Ab. Zarah 86a); he permitted Greek to be studied by men, because it enabled them to defend them- selves against informers, and by women because familiarity with that language is an attractive accomplishment in their sex (Yer. Peah i. 15c); he allowed the painting of decorative figures on the walls (Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah iii, 42d). Under certain cir- cumstances he permitted emigration from Palestine: “Tf thou art mentioned [nominated by the Romans] for office make the Jordan thy boundary friend [es- cape over the Jordan], even on a semiholiday ” (Yer. M. K. ii. 81b). Johanan is the subject of many legends (Ber. 5b; Yer. Ber. v. 9a; Hag. 15b; B. K. 117a et seq.; B. M. 84a; B. B. 75a), in which some further traits of his are preserved. His servants he treated with great kindness: “Did not he that made me in the womb make him?” (Job xxxi, 15; Yer. B. K. viii. 6c). He was blessed with many children, but lost ten sons. ‘The last one is said to have died by fall- ing into a caldron of boiling water. The bereft father preserved a joint of the victim’s little finger, which he exhibited to mourners in order to inspire resignation. “This is a bone from the body of my tenth son,” he would say (Ber. 5b; see Hiddushe Geonim ad loc.). However, he himself was not resigned at the death of his brother-in-law Resh Lakish, his fellow amora, whom he affectionately called “my counterpart” (395w—Ket. 54b, 84b). He mourned for him long and deeply, weeping often and crying, “Bar Lakish, where art thou? O Bar Lakish!” At last he became melancholy, and for three years and a half could not attend his college; His Decisions. 213 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Johanan b. Nappaha Johanan ha-Sandalar SSS SS SSS SS ee eee ee but it seems that he finally recovered his health and resumed his labors (Yer. Meg. i. 72b; B. M. 84a). On his death-bed he ordered that he should be dressed neither in white nor in black, but in scarlet, so that on awaking after death he would not feel out of place in the company either of the pious or of the wicked (Yer. Ket. xii. 85a; Gen. R. xevi. 5). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. i. 205-839 ; Fran- kel, Mebo, pp... 95b-97b ; Gratz, Gesch. 2d ed., iv. 257 et seq. ; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, ii. 149b et seq.; Hamburger, R. B.T.; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii.; Jost, Gesch. des Juden- thums und Seiner Sekten, ii. 149, passim; Weiss, Dor, iii. 69 et seq. 8. Ss. S. M. JOHANAN B. HA-NAZUF: Friend of Ga- maliel II. (first and second centuries). It is related that HaLArra once went to Tiberias and found Ga- _maliel at the house of Johanan b. ha-Nazuf (= “the excommunicated”), reading a targum of the Book of Job. Halafta informed the patriarch that he had been present at Jerusalem when a targum of the same book was laid before his grandfather Gamaliel IL, and that that patriarch had ordered it entombed in a wall. Thereupon the second Gamaliel also ordered that the targum be suppressed (Tosef., Shab. xiii. [xiv.] 2; Shab. 115a). This Johanan has been identified by Levy (“ Wérterbuch,” i. 470) and Ber- liner (“ Onkelos,” ii. 90) with Johanan Sofer, scribe or secretary to Gamaliel II. J. Derenbourg, how- ever, thinks that he was the son of Eliezer b. Hyr- canus, and, consequently, the nephew of Gamaliel II. (“ Magyar Zsid6-Szémle,” iii. [1885] 484; comp. Sanh. 68a), BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., iii. 373; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 57; Joel Miller, Briefe und Responsen in der Vorgaonitischen Literatur, pp. 7, 21, Note 29. 8. 8. S. M. JOHANAN B. NURI: Tanna of the first and second centuries; junior of Gamaliel II. and senior of Akiba (Sifra, Kedoshim, iv. 9; ‘Ar. 16b; comp. Sifre, Deut. 1). A great halakist, always provided with satisfactory answers to all questions, he was familiarly called “pedler’s basket” or “bundle of halakot” (Ab. R. N. xviii.; Git. 67a); the number and diversity of halakot cited under his name in the Mishnah alone, about forty, justify those appella- tions. Besides exhaustive rabbinical knowledge, he acquired familiarity with the general science of his time, especially geometry. It was said of him, as of his colleague Eleazar b. Hisma, that he could ap- proximately state the number of drops contained in the sea; like Eleazar, also, he was very poor. Through the influence of Joshua b. Hananiah both were appointed by Gamaliel to remunerative offices (see ELEAZAR B. HisMA; comp. Sifre, Deut. 16). Johanan showed himself grateful to Gamaliel. When, after that patriarch’s death, Joshua proposed a change in a rule established by Gamaliel, Johanan opposed him: “I have observed that the head is always followed by the trunk; as long as Gamaliel lived we observed the rule laid down by him, and now you propose to veto his directions. Joshua, we shall not harken to thee” (‘Er. 41a). Between him and Halafta also intimate scholarly relations existed (comp. Tosef., B. B. ii. 10 with B. B. 56b and parallels). In his discussions of halakot Johanan considered expediency and economy as well as law and author- ity. When Tarfon declared that only olive-oil was appropriate for the Sabbath-lamp, Jokanan be- came impatient: “And what shall the Babylonians do where none but sesame-oil is to be had; and what shall the Medians do, who have nothing but nut-oil; and the Alexandrians, who have nothing but radish-oil; or the Cappadocians, who have only naphtha?” (Shab. 26a). On another occasion, when Akiba suggested that a married woman who has be- come the common talk of the “spinsters by the moon” ought to be divorced, Johanan remarked, “In that case there is no chance for a daughter of Judah to live with a husband! Only where infidel- ity is fully established by legal evidence may a divorce be imposed” (Git. 89a; see Deut. xix. 15, xxiv. 1). In the Haggadah he is not often cited. He was very pious, and therefore later rabbis said that when one dreams of Johanan b. Nuri one may hope to develop a wholesome fear of sin (Ab. R. N. xl. [ed. Schechter, p. 64b]). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. i. 372; Brill, Mebo_ha- Mishnah, i. 122; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 123; Ham- burger, R. B. T.; Weiss, Dor, ii. 118. Ss. M. 8, 8. JOHANAN HA-SANDALAR (“the sandal- maker”): Tanna of the second century; one of Akiba’s disciples that survived the Hadrianic perse- cutions and transmitted the traditional law (Gen. R. lxi. 8; Eccl. R. xi. 6; comp. Yeb. 62b). With sev- eral colleagues he repaired to the Valley of Rimmon to institute a leap-year, and in the course of the dis- cussions that ensued he betrayed considerable pas- sion. Meir had just cited an opinion which he ascribed to Akiba, but the authenticity of which Johanan denied, adding, “I have waited on R. Akiba standing [by his side asan advanced student] longer than thou didst sitting [as a mere hearer].” The learned company took umbrage at this deroga- tory remark, and murmured, “Johanan ha-Sandalar is a true Alexandrian [given to gasconade].” The incident, however, ended in reconciliation, and the disputants did not leave the session without kiss- ing each other (Yer. Hag. iii. 78d; see Rapoport, “*Erek Millin,” p. 102a). Because he is called here “a true Alexandrian,” it is assumed that he was a native of Alexandria. As a halakist he is sometimes cited in the Mishnah (Yeb. xii. 5; Ket. v. 4; Kelim v. 5), and Simon b. Gamaliel II. reports two halakot from him (Tosef., Kelim, B. K. iv. 2, 5). To obtain an authoritative de- cision in a doubtful case he once exposed himself to great danger; it was during the Hadrianic persecu- tions, when many rabbis had been put to death for teaching Judaism, and Akiba was imprisoned and awaiting his doom at the command of Rufus. A mar- ital question agitated the collegians, and Johanan undertook to procure the closely guarded master’s advice upon it. Disguised as a pedler, he offered some trifle for sale near the prison: “Who wants needles? Who wants hooks? How about private Hauizan?” Akiba, looking out through an aper- ture, said in reply, “ Hast thou spindles? Hast thou kasher?” (= “valid! ”—Yer. Yeb. xii. 12d). At one time during the persecutions, Johanan and Eleazar I. (b. Shammua) left Palestine, intending to betake themselves to Judah b. Bathyra in Nisibis; but they Johanan b. Torta Johanan b. Zakkai THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 214 did not carry out their intention. By the time they arrived at Sidon they felt too homesick to proceed any farther, and returned (Sifre, Deut. 80). In the Haggadah Johanan is not mentioned, ex- cept as author of the following maxim: “An assem- bly that aims to glorify the name of the Gmni- present will have permanence, but one that does not go aim will not endure” (Ab. iv. 11; comp. Ab. R. N. xl. [ed. Schechter, pp. 64b, 65a]). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 265; Brill, Mebo ha- Mishnah, i. 198; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 175; Gratz, Gesch. 2d ed., iy. 177, 186; Weiss, Dor, ii. 166; Zacuto, Yu- hasin, p. 47a. Sa. RG JOHANAN B. TORTA : Scholar of the first and second centuries; contemporary of Akiba. When Akiba hailed Bar Kokba as the Messiah, the latter exclaimed, “ Akiba, grass will have grown out of thy jaws ere the Son of David appears” (Yer. Ta‘an. viii. 68d; Lam. R. ii. 2). To a legend of a cow that refused to work ona Sabbath, and thereby caused the conversion of Johanan, who had been a pagan, is referred Johanan’s by-name “ben Torta” (son of a cow; Pesik. R. xiv. 56b e¢ seq.). No halakot are ascribed to him, and only one haggadah bears his name: “Shiloh was destroyed because there sacred things were treated contemp- tuously ” (see I Sam. ii. 17); “the first Jerusalem Temple was destroyed because at the time people perpetrated the sins of idolatry, incest, and blood- shed. But we know that in the age of the later Temple people studied the Law and carefully tithed their produce: why then were they exiled? Because they loved Mammon and hated one another! From this we may learn that to hate man is grievous in the eyes of the Omnipresent, and that it is para- mount to idolatry, incest, and bloodshed” (Tosef., Men. xiii. 22; comp. Yoma 9a e¢ seq.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 557; Gratz, Gesch. 2d ed., iv. 150; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. (see ib. s.v. Hanina b. Torta). s. Ss Sy ME JOHANAN B. ZAKKAI: The most impor- tant tanna in the last decade of the Second Temple, and, after the destruction of Jerusalem, the founder and first president of the academy at Jabneh. Ac- cording to the theory formulated in the Mishnah (Ab. ii. 8), that traditions were handed down through an unbroken chainof scholars, Johanan, in receiving the teachings of Hillel and Shammai, formed the last link in that chain. But it is rather as a pupil of Hillel than of Shammai that he is known (Suk. 28a). Before his death Hillel is said to have prophetically designated Johanan, his youngest pupil, as “the father of wisdom” and “the father of coming generations” (Yer. Ned. v., end, 39b). Like that of Hillel, Johanan’s life was divided into periods of forty years each. In the first of these he followed a mercantile pursuit; in the second he studied; and in the third he taught (R. H. 80b). Another version has it (Sifre, Deut. 857) that in the last forty years of his life he was a leader of Israel. If the last statement be accepted as approximately correct, and it is assumed that Johanan lived at the latest. one decade after the destruction of Jerusa- lem, his public activity as the recognized leader of the pharisaic scribes must have begun between the years 30 and 40 of the common era. Some data have been preserved concerning Jo- hanan’s public activity in Jerusalem before the de- struction of the Temple. Together Activity with Simon b. Gamaliel I. he sent Before De- orders to the different districts of Pal- struction estine concerning the delivery of the of Temple. tithe (statement of his pupil Joshua b. Nehunya in the Mekilta of Simeon b. Yohai; Midr. ha-Gadol to Deut. xxvi. 13). He re- futed the objections of the Sadducees to the Pharisees (Yad. iv. 5), and opposed the halakah of the Sad- ducees (Men. 65a; B. B. 115b). He prevented a Sad- ducean high priest from following the Sadducean regulations at the burning of the red heifer (Tosef., Parah, iii. 8; comp. Parah iii. 7, 8). It was Johanan’s activity as a teacher in Jerusalem which was espe- cially extolled by tradition. His school was called the “great house,” after the expression in JI Kings xxv. 9 (Yer. Meg. 73d). It was the scene of many incidents that formed the subjects of anecdote and legend (Lam. R. i. 12, passim; Gen. R. iv.). The oft-repeated story concerning Johanan’s most im- portant pupil, Eliezer b. Hyrcanus, shows Johanan’s bet ha-midrash (academy) as the scene of a pathetic meeting between son and father (Tan., ed. Buber, to Gen. xiv. 1). An old tradition (Pes. 26a) relates that Johanan sat in the shadow of the Temple and lectured the whole day; but that of course was not the permanent place for his teaching. The state- ments regarding five of his pupils, his verdict con- cerning them, and the question he put to them as to the best road for a person to pursue through life (Ab. ii. 8) are reminiscences of the period before the destruction. Johanan’s residence in ‘Arab, a place in Galilee, which was perhaps his home, belongs to this period. Two questions of a legal Residence nature (regarding the observance of in the Sabbath) which he answered while Galilee. there (Shab. xvi. 7, xxii. 3) gave rise to the statement that he lived there for eighteen years (probably a round number) and that he was moved by the religious indifference of the inhabitants to exclaim: “O Galilee, Galilee, thou hatest the Torah; hence wilt thou fall into the hands of robbers!” Another prophetical exclama- tion of asimilar nature is ascribed to Johanan. The gates of the Temple had ominously opened of them- selves, whereupon he apostrophized the sanctuary : “O Temple, Temple, why dost thou frighten thy- self? I know of thee that thou shalt be destroyed ; Zechariah the son of Iddo [Zech. xi. 1] has already prophesied concerning thee; ‘Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars’” (Yoma 39b; comp. Ab, R. N., Recension B, vii., ed. Schechter, p. 21). Johanan’s part in the last struggle of Jerusalem against Rome has been immortalized in the legends concerning the destruction of that city, which, how- ever, have a historical kernel (Git. 56b; Lam. R. i. 5; Ab. R. N. iv.). He counseled peace; and when the strife of parties in the besieged city became un- bearable he had himself carried to the Roman camp in a coffin. Like Josephus, Johanan prophesied imperial honors for the general Vespasian, quoting the words of the prophet Isaiah: “Lebanon [that is, the sanctuary] shall fall by a mighty one” (Isa. 215 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Johanan b. Torta Johanan b. Zakkai . 84). Hesought and obtained permission to settle n Jabneh (Jamnia) and to exercise his profession of acher there. In Jabneh, surrounded by his pupils, Johanan received the terrible news that the Temple was burned to ashes. They tore their garments, wept, and made lamentation as for the dead (Ab. R. N. iv.). But the aged master in the catastrophe which had befallen the Jewish people After the kept his vigor unimpaired. He con- Destruc- verted the school at Jabneh into a tion. center for Judaism in Palestine. The college, of which he was president, exercised the functions of the great law court (San- hedrin) of Jerusalem, and by this institution of an authorized board the continuity of spiritual leader- ship was maintained uninterrupted. Johanan saw to it that Jabneh took the place of Jerusalem as the Jewish religious center. He ordained that certain privileges peculiar to Jerusalem and the sanctuary should be transferred to Jabneh (R. H. iv. 1, 8). Other regulations of his dealt with the determina- tion of the exact time when the new month begins —a matter then markable epithets characterize the work of Johanan and his importance for his period. The blessing which just before his death he pronounced upon his pupils at their desire consisted of the prayer: “May it be God’s will that the fear of heaven be as strong in you as the fear of flesh and blood” (#d.). His last words were: “ Put the vessels out of the house, that they may not become unclean, and prepare a throne for Hezekiah, the King of Judah, who is coming” (¢b.). By this puzzling reference to Heze- kiah, Johanan plainly meant the coming of the Mes- siah, of which he was thinking in his last moments. A son of Johanan died before him (Ab. R. N. xiv., end). In one anecdote (B. B. 10b) his sister’s sons are mentioned. One of these nephews, Ben Batiah, is named as one of the Zealot leaders (Lam. R. to i. 4; Jew. ENcyY. ii. 673). Johbanan ben Zakkai’s motto was, “If thou hast learned much of the Torah, do not take credit for it; for this was the purpose of thy creation” (Ab. ii. 8). He found his real calling in the study of the Law. The following description of him was handed down by tradition very important —and with the acceptance of the testimony on which such de- termination is based (id. iv. 41; Baraita, R. H. 21b). His order that, as had been customary in the Temple, the trumpets should sound in Jabneh on New-Year’s Day even when it fell on the Sabbath, was opposed, but unsuccessfully, by some of the members of the council (Baraita, R. H. 29b). It is not known how long Johanan remained at the head of the bet ha-midrash and of the legal council, It may be accepted as certain that Johanan was succeeded by Gamaliel II. while the former was sti!l living, inasmuch as he did not die in Jabneh; for itis related (Eccl. R. vii. 7; comp. Ab. R. N. xiv.) that his pupils went to Jabneh after hisdeath. And furthermore, since a place, Berur Hayil, is mentioned as the seat of a legal council over which Johanan presided (Sanh. 82b; Sifre, Deut. 144), and at an- other time it is related that Joshua b. Hananiah visited his teacher in Berur Hayil (Tosef., Ma‘aser al-Rishon, i. 1), it may be concluded that Johanan spent the last years of his life and died at this piace, which was near Jabneh (concerning the name comp. Krauss’s conjecture in Berliner’s “Magazin,” xx. 119; Derenbourg, in “ Monatsschrift,” xxxvii. 804). His pupils were present at his death. The solemn conversation between the dying master and his dis- ciples (Ber. 28b) begins with a question from the latter: “Light of Israel, pillar of the sanctuary, strong hammer, why dost thou weep?” These re- Traditional Tomb of Johanan ben Zakkai, near Tiberias, with the Grave of Maimonides to the Right. (From a photograph by Dr. W. Popper.) no (Suk. 28a): “He never spoke an idle word; he did not go four yards without reflecting on the Torah and with- out the phylac- teries; no one ever preceded him in entering the bet ha-mid- rash; he never slept in the bet ha-midrash, and was always the last to leave it; one ever found him en- gaged in anything but study.” His knowledge was spoken of as though it included the whole of Jewish learning (Ab. R. N. xiv., end; His Suk. 28a; B. B. 184a; Masseket Sofe- Teaching. rimxvi.8). He advisesa priestly fam- ily in Jerusalem, the members of which died young, to occupy itself with the study of the Torah so as to ward off the curse of dying in the prime of life, which is laid upon the descendants of Eli (from whom they may have descended) in I Sam. ii. 23 (R. H. 18a). He, however, warned against a one-sided devotion to study, as in his verdict con- cerning scholars and those free of sin: “ Whoever possesses both these characteristics at the same time is like an artist who has his tools in his hands” (Ab. RaUNG Scxdi.): In the halakic tradition Johanan is but seldom re- ferred to as an originator of maxims. His halakah is doubtless to be found in that of Hillel’s school and in the sayings of his pupils, especially of Elie- zer and Joshua. The haggadic tradition, on the other hand, connects numerous and varied sayings with hisname. Mention may first be made of con- versations between him and his pupils, or between Johanan b. Zakkai Johlson THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 216 him and unbelievers who were versed in the Bible, in which questions of textual interpretation were discussed. At one time he asked his pupils what the words in Prov. xiv. 84 meant (Pesik., ed. Buber, 12b; comp. B. B. 10b, where the ac- counts of two conversations have been confused). He himself interpreted them as follows: “ Benevolence [hesed] on the part of a nation has the atoning power of a sin-offering ” (B. B. /.c.), In the same sense he inter- preted the words of the prophet (Hosea vi. 6), “I de- sired mercy [hesed], and not sacrifice,” with which he comforted his pupils for the destruction of the Temple and the discontinuance of the sacrifice of atonement (Ab. R. N. iv.). He answered several questions of a polemical tendency put by a Roman commander (7/yezov), who can not be identified owing to the different ways in which his name is writ- ten. These questions referred to the contradiction between the figures in Num. iii. 22, 28, 34 and the total sum in verse 89 of the same chapter (Bek. 5b), between Ex. xxxviii. 26 and 27 (¢d.), and between Gen. i. 20 and ii. 19 (Hul. 27b); also to the legal regulation in Ex. xxi. 29 (Yer. Sanh. 19b), and to the law concerning the red heifer (Pesik. 40a). In connection with the last-mentioned question Johanan refers the Gentile to a Gentile analogy: Just as the evil spirit isdriven out of a person possessed through burning certain roots and by other means, so the process of purification drives out the “unclean spirit ” (Zech. xiii. 2). To his pupils, however, who were not satisfied with this answer, he said: “By your lives, death does not make impure, nor water clean; but it [the law concerning the red heifer] is a decree of the All Holy, whose reasons we must not question” (comp. Lazarus, “Die Ethik des Juden- thums,” i. 189, 246). A special group of Johanan’s haggadic text inter- pretations is given the name “homer,” which term is related to the designation “ doreshe hamurot,” applied to the ancient ex- positors of the Bible. In this group the interpretations are symbolic, seek- ing to penetrate into the spirit of the Bible text. One source (Tosef., B. K. vii. 3 et seg.) puts five such explana- tions of Johanan together. They answer the following ques- tions: ‘*Why is the ear of a Hebrew slave bored who volun- tarily refuses to be made free?” (Ex. xxi. 6; comp. Kid. 22b). ‘“ Why is iron excluded from the building material of the altar?’ (Ex. xx. 25; Deut. xxvii. 5; comp. Mek., Yitro, Bahodesh, 11). “What does the remarkable word ‘asher’ in Lev. iv. 22 mean ?” (comp. Hor. 10b). ‘‘ Why was Israel exiled specially to Bab- ylon?”’ (comp. Pes. 87b). ‘*Why were only the first tables of the testimony, and not the second, considered to be the work of God?” (Ex. xxxii. 16). Besides the explanations to these questions, Johanan gave others of a similar character. He explained why a thief is punished more severely than a robber (B. K. 79b), and by ex- plaining the Biblical numbers symbolically he answered the question: ** Why does the Scripture [Ex. xxii. 1] ordain fivefold restitution for an ox and only fourfold for a sheep?” (ib.). The forty days of rain during the Flood which destroyed sinful man (Gen. vii. 12) corresponded, he said, to the forty days of the formation of the human embryo (Gen. R. xxxii.). The ten gerah (= a half-shekel) of the atonement money (Ex. xxx. 13) corresponded to the Ten Commandments, for the transgression for which atonement is to be made (Pesik. 19b). Among other things Johanan explained the following: The exhortation to those who are freed from military service to return home (Deut. xx. 5-7):—this, he said, was given in order that the cities of Israel might not become depopulated in times of war (Sifre, Deut. 192). The passage Gen, ii, 19:—he His Exegesis. The Homer. does not find that the account of the creation of the animals is here repeated but that their subjection to man is described (Gen. R. xvii). Tbe words ‘‘And the eyes of them both were opened” (Gen. iii. 7):—this means that God opened their eyes to the eyil they had brought upon future generations (Gen. R. xix.). Abraham’s vision of the future (Gen. xv. 18):—this showed Abraham the present world only, not the future one (Gen. R. xliv.). Johanan’s views on piety (comp. his motto given above) correspond to his teaching that Job’s piety was not based on the love of God, but on the fear of Him (Job i. 1; Sotah v. 5, reported by Joshua b. Hananiah). He explains the exhortation in Eccl. ix. 8 allegorically: “White garments and costly oils are not meant here,” he says (Eccl. R. ix. 6), “for the Gentile peoples have these in plenty: it is rather an exhortation to fulfil the Law, to do good deeds, and to study the Scriptures.” In a tradition concerning the knowledge of eso- teric doctrines (“Ma‘aseh Bereshit” and “ Ma‘aseh Merkabah ”), related by Jose b. Judah, a tanna of the second half of the second century, it is said that Joshua b. Hananiah, the pupil of Johanan, under the eye of his master occupied himself with eso- teric doctrines and that Akiba learned them from him (Hag. 14b). According to another tradition (2d.), it was Eleazar b. ‘Arak with whom Johanan studied thé mystic doctrines. A remarkable saying of Johanan’s has been preserved, which is in accord with his study of mystic doctrines (Hag. 18a; comp. Pes. 94b). In this saying man is advised to bring the infinity of God, the Creator of the world, nearer to his own conception by imagining the space of the cosmos extended to unthinkable distances. In conclusion may be mentioned the historical meaning which Johanan, ona certain sad occurrence, gave to a verse of the Song of Solomon (Yitro, Bahodesh, 1). In Ma‘on, a town of southern Judea, Johanan saw, probably not long after the destruc- tion of Jerusalem, a young Jewess picking out grains of barley from the ordure of an Arab’s horse, in order to still her hunger. Johanan said to his pupils who were with him: “My whole life long I have tried to understand that sentence in the Song of Solomon [i. 8]: ‘If thou know not, O thou fairest among women,’ etc. Now for the first time I catch its meaning: ‘You did not wish ’—so goes the word reproving Israel—‘ to submit to God; hence you are made subject to foreign peoples. You did not wish to pay God a half-shekel for each person; now you pay 15 shekels to the government of your enemies. You did not wish to repair the roads and streets for the holiday pilgrims; you must now repair the road-houses and watch-towers for your oppressors. And in you is fulfilled the prophecy [Deut. xviii. 47-48, R. V.]: Because thou servedst not the Lord thy God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, by reason of the abundance of all things, therefore shalt thou serve thine enemies, which the Lord shall send against thee, in hunger and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things.’ ” Johanan felt the fall of his people more deeply than any one else, but—and in this lies his historical importance—he did more than any one else to pre- pare the way for Israel to rise again. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Frankel, Mebo; Gritz, Gesch. {ii.; Weiss, Dor, 1; Brill, Hinleitung ; Derenbourg, Histoire; Bacher, Ag. Pal. Esoteric Doctrines. a oe 217 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Johanan b. Zakkai Johlson Tannaiten, 2d ed., i. 22-42; W. Landau, in Monatsschrift, {. 163; Joseph Spitz, R. Jochanan b. Zakkai, 1883; Schlatter, Jochanan b. Zakkai, der Zeityenosse der Apostel, 1899. Spach W. B. JOHANNES DE CAPUA. See Joun or CAPUA. JOHANNES HISPALENSIS: Baptized Jew who flourished between 1185 and 11538 ; his Jewish name is unknown and has been corrupted into “Avendeut,” “ Avendehut ”=“ Aven Daud,” “ Aven- dar.” He was a native of Toledo, and hence is called also Johannes (David) Toletanus. He was one of the earliest translators from the Arabic. As Steinschneider—who was the first to determine his identity—has shown, he was for a time associated with the archdeacon Dominieus QGundisalvi, for whom he probably interpreted the few translations ascribed to that cleric. Johannes translated principally astrological and astronomical, likewise some philosophical and a few medical works. With Gundisalvi’s assistance he translated Gabirol’s “Fons Vite” from the Arabic into Latin. In 1142 Johannes compiled from Arabic sources his “Epitome ‘lotius Astrologie,” Nurem- berg, 1548. Johannes Hispalensis must be distin- guished from the archbishop John of Seville, who corresponded with Hugo a St. Victor. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1402; idem, Hebr. Uebers. pp. 281 et seq., 380, 582, 981 et seq. a. EK JOHANNES PAULI: German humorist and convert to Christianity; born about 1455; died at Thann 15380. He became a distinguished preacher of the Franciscan Order at Oppenheim and Stras- burg, at which latter place he took notes of Geiler’s sermons, which he edited at Schlettstadt 1517. He is known chiefly, however, for his collection of jests under the title “Schimpf und Ernst” (Thann, 1519), which went through innumerable editions, imita- tions, and explanations, making it the “Joe Miller” of Germany. Some of his stories were taken over into the “Hundred Merry Tales” used by Shake- speare. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Veith, Ueber den Barfiisser Johannes Pauli, Vienna, 1839; H. Oesterley, introduction to Schimpf und Ernst, 1863; idem, in Allg. Deutsche Biographie. Ga. JOHANNES (DAVID) TOLETANUS. See JOHANNES HISPALENSIS. JOHANNESBURG: Largest city in the Trans- vaal and principal center of Jewish life in South Africa. The Jewish community there was estimated at 10,000 in a total population of 237,104 in 1911— the largest relative number, outside of Aden and Gibraltar, in the British empire. From its founda- tion, immediately upon the discovery of the Wit- watersrand gold-fields at the end of 1885, Jews have formed about 10 per cent of the white population. The first attempts at religious organization took place July 10, 1887, when about eighty-eight pio- neers, mostly from the Barberton gold-fields, the Kimberley diamond-fields, the coast towns, Eng- land, and Australia, formed the Witwatersrand Gold- Fields’ Jewish Association. A death having occurred as early'as May 12, 1887, the Boer government made a grant of the present Jewish cemetery, in which, up to the end of 1908, 829 burials had taken place. During the greater festivals of 1887 the Rev. Joel Rabbinowitz of Cape Town conducted the services. On Jan. 29, 1888, the association bought two build- ing-plots on President street for a synagogue, and at the same time changed its name to “ Witwaters- rand Hebrew Congregation.” The Rev. Mark L. Harris of Kimberley, who preached at the laying of the foundation-stone (Novy. 9, 1888), was elected rabbi, retaining that post till March 31, 1898. He was succeeded by the Rev. W. Wolf (reader) and Dr. J. H. Hertz (rabbi). In 1891 two secessions occurred: a small Russian section formed the Bet ha-Midrash, with mikweh, synagogue, and dayyan (Rabbi Dagutzky, succeeded by Rev. M. Friedman); and a larger Anglo-German- Polish section constituted the Johannesburg Hebrew Congregation. The senior body in consequence in- serted the word “Old” in its name. The new con- gregation obtained from the governmenta free grant of ground on which it erected a synagogue, which President Kruger, delivering bareheaded a speech in Dutch, declared open. There is no truth, how- ever, in the assertion that he did so “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The Rev. P. Wolfers be- came its rabbi, and was succeeded by the Revs. H. Isaacs, David Wasserzug, 5S. Manne (reader since 1899), and Dr. J. L. Landau (since 1908). The mem- bership of the two larger synagogues is about 450 each. There is also a synagogue ip the suburb of Jeppestown (1903), as well as the various “hebrot ” in Fereiras Township and in the suburb of Fords- burg. The Rand Modern (Reform) Hebrew congre- gation, formed in 1898, dissolved after a few months. Johannesburg has a ladies’ benevolent society; a flourishing Gemilut Hasadim society for free loans to deserving poor; the Jewish Ladies’ Communal League (maintains the South-African Jewish Orphan- age); the Jewish Guild, a young people’s charitable and literary society; a Talmud Torah; religious classes in connection with the English congregations; a Jewish social club; several Yiddish newspapers; and, intermittently, a Yiddish theater. The Wit- watersrand Jewish Helping Hand and Burial Soci- ety, founded in 1887, combines the functions of a hebra kaddisha with those of a “United Hebrew Charities,” has a membership of two thousand, and an income (July, 1902—June, 1903) of £4,801, with an expenditure of £3,972. The Jewish School, with an attendance of 400, is subsidized by the British government. Johannesburg is the seat of the exec- utive of the Jewish Board of Deputies for the Trans- vaal and Natal, of the South-African Zionist Feder- ation, and of the Transvaal Zionist Association. The Jewish population has always formed an integral portion of the business, intellectual, social, and polit- ical life of the city. Since the British occupation, Johannesburg Jews have sat in the Legislative Council of the Transvaal. See Sourn AFRICA. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Souvenir of the Decennial Celebration of the Witwatersrand Old Hebrew Congregation, 1898 ; Joel Rabbinowitz, Early History of the Witwatersrand Old He- brew Congregation, Cape Town, 1899; Jew. Chron. (various dates). Ue Ao da Jel. JOHLSON, JOSEPH (Asher ben Joseph Fulda): German Bible translator and writer on educational topics; born in 1777 at Fulda; died at John John Casimir THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 215 Frankfort-on-the-Main June 18, 1851. He was sometimes called “Fulda,” after his native place, where his father was acting rabbi. In 1818 he was called to Frankfort as teacher at the Philanthropin, the recently founded Jewish school. He introduced systematic religious instruction, and in 1814, devo- tional exercises in connection with the school. He published the Twelve Minor Prophets, Carlsruhe, 1827, and “Die Heiligen Schriften der Israeliten: Nach dem Masoretischen Texte Wortgetreu Ueber- setzt” (Genesis to Kings, 1831-36). Johlson’s chief work was “Alume Yosef,” an elementary book for Jewish schools, consisting of: (a) “Shoroshe ha-Dat,” lessons in the Mosaic religion, 1814 (4th ed. 1840); (2) “ Shire Yeshurun,” Hebrew hymn-book, 1816 (4th ed., containing 600 hymns, 1840); (¢) “Toledot Abot,” a chronologically arranged Bible history, 1820 (2d ed., 1839). He wrote also: “ Yesod ha-Lashon,” a Hebrew grammar for schools (1883); “‘Erek Millin,” a Bib- lical Hebrew dictionary, with the corresponding syn- onyms, 1840; and, under the pen-name “ Bar Amit- tai,” “Ueber die Beschneidung in Historischer und Dogmatischer Hinsicht ” (1848). Several letters ad- dressed by him to L. Zunz have been published by S. Maybaum in the twelfth report of the “ Lehran- stalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums in Berlin.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. xv. 357; Jost, Neuere Gesch. der Israeliten, iii. 17, 47 et seq.; Furst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 99 et seq. Ss. M. K. JOHN. See New TESTAMENT. JOHN ALBERT (Jan Albrecht or Ol- bracht): King of Poland (1492-1501). He ascended the throne of Poland in the same year in which his brother Alexander Jagellon became grand duke of Lithuania. The one-sided training received by John Albert showed itself in his attitude toward the Jews. He placed Buonocorsi Callimachus at the head of his advisers, who were as unpopular as the king himself. The hatred of the Jews instilled into him in his boyhood and youth by his teachers Buonocorsi and John Dlagosz led him to adopt re- pressive measures toward the Jews, although he had at first confirmed the privileges granted them by his father, Casimir IV. He ratified at the general diet of Petrokov (1496) the Nyeshav statute limiting the rights of the Jews. To him is also ascribed the creation of the first ghetto in Poland. In 1494 a conflagration destroyed the greater part of Cracow, and the mob availed itself of the opportunity to plunder the Jewish houses. In consequence of this the king ordered that the Jews, who were then scat- tered throughout the city, should move to Kazi- mierz, a suburb of Cracow, and there live alone. From that time Kazimierz became an isolated Jew- ish town, which had for centuries a life of its own, connected with the outer world only by economic interests. On the expulsion of the Jews from Lith- uania (1495) by ALEXANDER JAGELLON, John Albert allowed them to settle in Ratno and its vicinity; later he extended their right of residence to all Polish towns already inhabited by Jews. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Cromer, De Origine, ete., p. 439; M. Bielski, Kronika Polska, p. 893; Volumina Legum, 1.3; Sternberg, Gesch, der Juden in Polen, p. 106, Leipsic, 1878; Dubnow, Yevreiskaya Istoriya, i. 240, Odessa, 1896. H. R. J GAL: JOHN THE BAPTIST: Essene saint and preacher; flourished between 20 and 80 c.B.; fore- runner of Jesus of Nazareth and originator of the Christian movement. Of his life and character Jo- sephus (“ Ant.” xviii. 5, § 2) says: ““He was a good man [comp. ib. 1, §5], who admonished the Jews to practise abstinence [apernv = “ Pharisaic virtue” = ‘““pe- rishut’’; comp. ‘B. J.” ii. 8, $2], lead a life of righteousness toward one another and of piety [evo¢Bevav = “‘ religious devo- tion”] toward God, and then join him in the rite of bathing [baptism]; for, said he, thus would baptism be acceptable to Him [God] if they would use it not simply for the putting away of certain sins [comp. II. Sam. xi. 4] or in the case of proselytes {see Sotah i12b; comp. Gen. R. i.], but for the sanctification of the body after the soul had beforehand been thoroughly purified by righteousness. The people flocked in crowds to him, being stirred by his addresses. King Herod Antipas, fearing lest the great influence John had over the people might be used by him to raise a rebellion, sent him to the fortress of Macherus as a prisoner, and had him put to death. “The people in their indignation over this atrocious act beheld in the destruction which came soon afterward upon the army of Herod a divine punishment.” John the Baptist was made the subject of a legend- ary narrative embodied in Luke i. 5-25, 57-80, and iil. 1-20, according to which he was the son of Zacha- rias, a priest of the section of Abia, and of Elisa- beth, also of priestly descent, and was born in their old age. The angel Gabriel announced John’s birth to Zacharias while that priest stood at the altar offering incense, and told him that this child would be a Nazarite for life (“nezir ‘olam”; Na- zir i. 2); filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb, he would be called upon to con- vert the children of Israel to God, and with the power of Elijah would turn the hearts of the fathers to the children while preparing the people for the Lord (Mal. iii. 24 [A. V.iv.6]). Zacharias, hesitating to believe the message, was struck dumb, and his mouth was opened again only after the birth of the child, when at the circumcision a name was to be given him; then he answered simultane- ously with his wife that he should be called “John,” as the angel had foretold. Zacharias, filled with the Holy Spirit, blessed God for the redemption of the people of Israel from the hand of their enemies (the Romans) through the house of David (a Messianic view altogether at variance with the New Testa- ment conception), and prophesied that the child John should be called “ Prophet of the Legend Highest,” one that would show how of Birth. salvation should be obtained by remis- sion of sins (through baptism; comp. Midr. Teh. to Ps. cxix. 76), so that through him a light from on high would be brought to “those that sit in darkness.” John remained hidden in the desert until, in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, the word of God came to him, and he stepped forth, saying in the words of Isa. xl. 2-5: “Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand ” (Matt. iii. 2), and preaching to the people to undergo baptism in repentance for the remission of their sins, and instead of relying on the merit of their father Abraham like hypocrites (“many-col- ored vipers”; see Hypocrisy), to prepare for the coming day of judgment and its fiery wrath by fruits of righteousness, sharing their coats and their meat with those that had none. To the publicans also he preached the same, telling them to exact no more = 219 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA John John Casimir taxes than those prescribed; to the soldiers he de- clared that they should avoid violence and calumny (as informers) and be content with their wages. (The sermon of John the Baptist given here is obviously original with him, and the similar one of Jesus, Matt. xii. 83-34, xxiii. 38, is based thereon.) When asked whether he was the Messiah, he answered that with his baptism of repentance he would only» prepare the people for the time when the Messiah would come as judge to baptize them with fire, to winnow them and burn the chaff with fire unquenchable (the fire of Gehenna; comp. Sibyllines, iii. 286; Enoch, xlv. 3, lv. 4, ]xi. 8)—a conception of the Messiah which is widely different from the one which saw the Messiah in Jesus. Among the many that came to the Jordan to undergo the rite of baptism in response to the call of John, was Jesus of Nazareth, and the influence wrought through him created a new epoch in those circles among which Christianity arose, so that henceforth the whole life-work of John the Baptist was given a new meaning—as if in his Messianic ex- pectations he had Jesus in view as the true Messiah (see Matt. iii. 14; John i. 26-86). John the Baptist was regarded by the multitude as a great prophet (Matt. xiv. 5; Mark xi. 382). His powerful appeal (see Matt. xi. 12) His Ap- and his whole appearance reminded pearance. the people forcibly of Elijah the prophet; “be wore raiment of camel’s hair, and a Jeathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey” (Matt. iii. 4; comp. xi. 7-8). He stationed himself near some water-fountain to baptize the people, at Bethabara (John i. 28) or ASnon (John iii. 23). While he “preached good tidings unto the people” (Luke iii. 18), that is, announced to them that the redemption was at hand, he made his disciples prepare for it by fasting (Matt. ix. 14, xi. 18, and parallel passages). The prayer he taught his disciples was probably similar to the so-called Lorp’s Prayer (Luke xi. 1). John, however, provoked the wrath of King Herod because in his addresses he reproached the king for having married Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, and forall the evil thingshe haddone. Herod there- fore sent for him and put him in prison. It was while in prison that John heard of the work of preaching or healing done by Jesus (Matt. xi. 2-19; Luke vii. 18-85). Herod was afraid of the multi- tude and would not put John to death ; but Herodias, says the legend (Matt. xiv. 6; Mark vi. 19 et seq.), had plotted revenge, and when on Herod’s birthday a feast was given at which Herodias’ daughter in- gratiated herself into his favor by her dancing, she, at the instigation of her mother, asked that the head of John the Baptist be given her ona charger, and the cruel petition was granted. John’s disciples came and buried his body. The influence and power of Jobn continued after his death, and his fame was not obscured by that of Jesus, who was taken by Herod to be John risen from the dead (Matt. xiv. 1-2 and parallel pas- sages). His teaching of righteousness (Matt. xxi. 32) and his baptism (Luke vii. 29) created a movement which by no means ended with the appearance of Jesus. There were many who, like Apollos of Al- exandria in Ephesus, preached only the baptism of John, and their little band gradually merged into Christianity (Acts xviii. 25, xix. 1-7). Some of the disciples of John placed their master above Jesus. John had thirty apostles, of whom Simon Magus claimed to be the chief (Clementine, Recognitions, i. 60, ii. 8; 2b. Homilies, ii. 28). No doubt along the Jordan the work begun by John the’ Baptist was continued by his disciples, and later the Mandeans, called also “Sabians” (from “zaba‘” = “to baptize”) and “Christians according to John,” retained many traditions about him (see Brandt, “ Die Mandiische Religion,” pp. 137, 218, 228; “ Mandier,” in Herzog-Hauck, “ Real-Encyc.”). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Herzog-Hauck, Real-Encyc. s.v. Johannes der Tiiufer (where the whole literature is given); Soltau, in Vierteljahrschrift fiir Bibelkunde, 1903, pp. 87 et seq. kK JOHN OF CAPUA: Italian convert to Chris- tianity, and translator; flourished between 1262 and 1269. He translated Rabbi Joel’s Hebrew version of “ Kalilah wa-Dimnah” into Latin under the title “Directorium Vite Humane”; and his translation was the source from which that work became so widely spread in almost all European tongues (see Jacobs, “Fables of Bidpai,” Table of Versions, 1887). It was edited by Joseph Derenbourg (Paris, 1887). John of Capua translated also Maimonides’ “ Diet- ary ” (Steinschneider, “ Hebr. Bibl.” xi. 76), and Ibn Zuhr’s (Avenzoar’s) “ Al-Taisir,” on diseases. Be ae: Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. pp. 748, 772, 10-5 E. C. J. JOHN CASIMIR: King of Poland (1648-68). He was elected to the throne with the aid of Chmiel- nicki, who after the election returned to the Ukraine. To the commission sent to him by the king he dic- tated that no Jew should be allowed on the Cos- sacks’ lands. When the Jews who had escaped the Cossack massacres returned to the country John Casi- mir allowed those who had been baptized by the Cossacks under fear of death to return to Ju- daism. He could do that without conscientious scruples, for, although he was a Jesuit, he did not recognize the validity of the Greek Orthodox faith, to which the Jews had been converted by force during the Cossack uprising. This privi- lege was especially sought by the Jewish women who had been compelled to marry Zaporogians. Hundreds of Jewish children who had lost their parents and relatives were brought back to Juda- ism; and in order to prevent marriage between near relatives, the Jews took pains to ascertain the de- scent of such children, and supplied them with parchment-rolls containing records thereof, which they hung around their necks. In 1651 CHMImL- NICKI renewed the war on the Jews. John Casimir confirmed, Feb. 17, 1649, the privi- leges conferred by his predecessors on the Jews of Wilna, Brest, Moghilef, Minsk, Grodno, Pinsk, Orsha, and other places. He reaffirmed the Magde- burg rights for Kremenetz Jan. 20, 1650; for Pinsk, Dec. 31, 1650; he confirmed the privileges of the Jews of Kremenetz Jan. 26, 1650, and of the Jews of Pruzkany Dec. 31, 1650. On Feb. 22, 1653, he is- sued a decree forbidding the Jews of Wilna to keep Christian servants. They were given a period of John Casimir John of Giscala THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 220 six weeks within which to discharge any such servants, and they were to pay a fine on their fail- ure todo so. If Christian servants should again be hired after the payment of the fine, Jews employing them were to pay a second fine, and the third time the community was to be deprived of its synagogue, which was to be removed to a place assigned for it outside of the city gates. By a decree dated June 23, 1655, it was ordered that no infringement of the rights of the leasehold- ers of Brest should be allowed. A decree dated June 16, 1661, granted privileges to the Jews of Kamenetz, permitting them to have, besides the regular market-day on Saturday, a special market- day on Tuesday. Casimir also permitted them to build a synagogue, provided it was inferior in its dimensions and ornamentation to the Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches; and also to build a bath- house and to lay outacemetery. Besides these privi- leges he also granted them special rights in trading and in industrial occupations, in the purchase of lands, houses, etc. In July of the same year he ordered that the Jews of Brest be relieved for three years from the pay- ment of excise duties because of the ruin of their houses, stores, and other buildings, and reaffirmed the rights given to them by the law of the land. By a decree of June 20, 1662, Casimir ordered that the Jews of Lithuania, in consideration of their great poverty, be relieved from the payment of that portion of the 12,000 gold ducats levied upon them by the Diet which was still unpaid. On Feb. 21, 1668, he issued another decree in reference to the employment of Christian servants by the Jews, and ordered the discharge of servants within four weeks, under heavy penalties in cases of disobe- . dience. On April 18, 1664, he decreed that the Jewish butchers of Moghilef be forbidden to sell meat in any other place than that adjoining the synagogue; and on June 8 of the same year he prohibited the Jews of Wilna from dealing in non-Hebrew books. On March 16, 1666, he decreed that the Jews of Brest be relieved from all military duties, in order to avert their entire ruin, and he further ordered the commander of the garrison not to require from the Jews of Brest either the quartering of soldiers or the supply of provisions, nor to burden them with any other requisitions. The same exemption from taxation of the Jews of Brest was reaffirmed by a decree dated Warsaw, May 23, 1667. For in spite of the explicit orders of the king, the Jews of Brest had been compelled to pay the exactions of the military commanders, as appears from the order of Hetman Patz, who also ordered the military not to make any levies on the Jews, and in- formed the officers that they would be held responsi- ble for any injury inflicted. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kostomaroy, ii. 175, 372; Gritz, Gesch. x. 67, 69; Akty Yuzhnoi + Zapadnoi Rossii, iti. 278-3807, 369; Akty Vilenskot Arkhivnot Kommissii, i. 220: iii. 874; v. 198, 208, 247, 297; Sobraniye Gosudarstvenykh Gramot i Do- govoronv, part iii., p. 453; Chteniye Mosk. Obschest. Istorii 4 Drevn. 1859, i., division iv., pp. 1-16; Arkhiv Yug. Zapad. Rossii, i., part 5, p. 38; Akty Vilens. Arkhiv. Kommis. vols. i.-x.; Istor. Yurid. Materialy, ed. Sazonoy, xii. 275; Akty Vilenskot Arkhivnoi Komm. ix. 57. u BRIaY. Enact- ments. JOHN OF GISCALA (Johanan ben Levi): Native of the small Galilean city of Giscala (w3 an), who took an important part in the great war against Rome (66-70). He was originally poor, weak in body, and not at all eager for battle; but the vices that Josephus ascribes to him, saying that he was covetous and bloodthirsty, a cunning and ready liar, and greedy for glory (“B. J.” ii. 21, § 1; iv. 2, § 1; comp. 20. vii. 8, § 1), may have been strongly colored by that writer, his mortal enemy. Josephus says also that John was so unwarlike and unambitious that he endeavored to persuade his na- tive city to remain loyal to the Romans; but when the city was attacked and burned by the Gadarenes, the Baraganeans, and the Tyrians he called together his fellow citizens, armed them, conquered the invaders, and rebuilt Giscala so that it was more beautiful than before. Healso built walls for future protection (Josephus, “ Vita,” § 10; comp. 7b. § 38), but not at Josephus’ command, as the latter says in another passage (“B. J.” ii. 20, § 6). Four hundred fugitives from Tyrian districts gathered about John (7d. ii. 21, § 1), their number quickly increasing to between 4,500 and 5,000 (2d. $7; “Vita,” $66). Herealized large sums of money from the sale of his oil to Jewish cus- tomers in Cesarea Philippi; and this money he used in paying his soldiers (“ Vita,” § 18). He asked permission of Josephus, at that time governor of Galilee, to seize the grain stored for the emperor; and when Josephus, unwilling to break with the Romans, re- fused, John took the grain with the permission of Josephus’ fellow ambassadors, and built the walls of Giscala with the proceeds. These coambassadors, therefore, who were very prominent men and loyal patriots, had confidence in John. This was the be- ginning of the conflict between John and Josephus, which grew still more serious. Josephus takes false credit for having refrained from injuring John when the latter was in his power (tb. § 15): for at first the enmity between the two men was not deep enough to call Gathers Troops. Conflict for any act of violence; and later on with John was always on his guard. Among Josephus. the cities of Galilee, Tiberias and, later, Tarichese were especially de- voted to Josephus, while Giscala and Gabara sided . with John (2, §§ 25, 45). When John asked Jose- phus’ permission to use the warm baths of Tiberias, Josephus not only granted the request, but also provided lodgings and ample food for John and his companions (%. § 16). This happened after the affair of Josephus with the youths of DABERATH (2d. § 26; “B. J.” ii. 21, § 3); for it was then that John first became suspicious of him. As Josephus was at that time absent, John seized the opportunity to persuade the people of Tiberias to secede from Rome, and was much alarmed at Josephus’ unex- pected return. The latter now began to exhort the people; but when he heard that John had picked out, for the purpose of killing him, the most. reli- able men from among the 1,000 that he (John) had with him, he immediately fled to Tariches (“ Vita,” $$ 17-18). John, seeing his scheme frustrated, re- turned to Giscala, and wrote to Josephus, with 221 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA John Casimir John of Giscala many protestations, that he had not instigated the attack. John now began an agitation against Josephus in Jerusalem itself. He sent his brother Simon and Jonathan, son of Sisenna, with 100 armed men to that city to demand the recall of Josephus. Simon b. Gamaliel, the leader of the Pharisees, was John’s friend; Josephus, on the other hand, was supported by the high-priestly families. The priests, however, decided to recall Josephus. The lat- Measures ter had intercepted letters in which Against John had attempted to incite the peo- Josephus. ple of Galilee against him (“ Vita,” §46). John and the envoys of the gov- ernment of Jerusalem had assembled at Tiberias in the house of Jesus b. Sapphia, which was strongly fortified, hoping to take Josephus prisoner there; but this attempt also failed ; and John finally returned to Giscala. According to Josephus’ account, the Galileans desired to seize John and turn him over to hisenemy ; but Josephus prevented them, as they would thereby have occasioned a civil war. Josephus, however, was again in great danger, as John marched against him at Tiberias with an army, obliging him once more to fly to Tarichex (ib. § 59), whereupon John returned to Giscala. The latter, however, had succeeded in inciting the people of Tiberias against Josephus, sending them a detach- ment of his men. Josephus was compelled to subdue Tiberias with an armed force (¢d. § 63), John’s 4,000 followers (8,000 according to “B. J.”) surrendering, and he himself retaining only 1,500 men (2,000 ac- cording to “B.J.”). Thenceforward he remained at Giscala (“ Vita,” § 66; “B. J.” ii. 21, 8§ 7, 8). John showed himself a true patriot and hero in open war with the Romans much more than in the petty strife with Josephus. When Josephus had been conquered and Galilee was in the hands of the Romans, Giscala still held out (“B. J.” iv. 2, § 1). Titus, commissioned by his father, Vespasian, to re- duce the city, attacked it with 1,000 horse. John did not dare to engage in battle, having probably only his countrymen, peaceful tillers of the soil, about him. On the pretext that the Sabbath was approaching be asked for a truce of one day, which Titus granted. But John left the city secretly in the night; and the next day the citizens opened the gates. Titus was so angry at this deception that he sent men in pursuit; but John found refuge in Jerusalem (“B. J.” iv. 2, §§ 2-5). The second stage of John’s activity began at Jeru- salem. Here he persuaded the people that it was better to repulse the Romans from behind strong walls than to die to no purpose in the John at smalltownsof Galilee. His followers, Jerusalem. several thousand strong, who passed in Jerusalem under the name of “ Gali- leans,” distinguished themselves by wild bravery ; more than 2,000 men from Tiberias alone were in the city (“Vita,” § 65). Josephus accuses them of plunder and rape. John made himself the tyrant of Jerusalem, then rent by parties; and to the end he remained a chief personage of the war. His head- quartets were at first on Ophel (“B. J.” iv. 9, § 11); and from this position he forced the Zealots back into the Temple. He was joined by the Idumeans that had remained at Jerusalem. The peace party of Jerusalem now called Simon BAR GiorA and his army into the city; but this was to their detriment, as they now had two tyrants over them (db. § 12; comp. 2). v. 18, § 1). Another party now arose, Eleazar b. Simon seceding from John’s command and occupying the inner court of the Temple (2d. v. 1, §2; Tacitus, “Hist.” v. 12). This step must have materially weakened John’s power, especially as the Idumeans he had called to his aid were no longer in thecity. The latter had murdered the high priest Anan b. Anan, a deed for permitting which John must be blamed; and Eleazar’s defection proves that likewise after that event he did not hesitate to com- mit acts of violence. Circumstances almost justified John in seizing the dictatorship (“B. J.” iv. 7, $1; comp. 9, § 10)% The three parties in Jerusalem now fell upon one another. John fought both with Bar Giora and with Eleazar. He repulsed the followers of the former from the colonnades of the Temple; and the missiles that the Eleazarites hurled from the Temple he stopped by machines, in the construction of which he used even the timber that had been provided for alterations to the holy house (¢. v. 1,§ 5; comp. vi. 8, § 2). On the occasion of the last Passover that the Jews ever celebrated in the Temple Eleazar ad- mitted the country people into the building; but John’s followers pressed in among them with con- cealed weapons and attacked them (¢d. v. 3, § 1). When Eleazar disappeared from the scene, John took possession of the Temple. He now had 8,400 followers, including 2,400 Zealots. They burned the part of the city lying between the forces of John and those of Simon that they might be better able to fight; and John and Simon bar Giora did not unite until the Romans were at the gate. Then they so arranged matters that the followers of John defended the part of the wall at ANvonrA and the northern stoa of the Temple, while the followers of Simon defended the rest (7b. 7, § 8; comp. 9, § 2). When the engines were brought, John had from within undermined the space that was over against the tower of Antonia, as far as the banks themselves, and had supported the ground over the mine with beams laid across one another, whereby the Roman works stood upon an uncertain foundation. Then he ordered such materials to be brought in as were daubed over with pitch and bitumen and set them on fire; and as the cross-beams that supported the banks were burning, the ditch yielded on the sud- den, and the banks were shaken down and fell into the ditch with a prodigious noise (¢b. v. 11, § 4). As the people had nothing more of which they could be robbed, John laid hands upon the vessels of the Temple. All being nearly lost, John was asked to surrender; but even now he reviled Jose- phus—who had been commissioned by Titus to make the demand—still hoping that the city would not be conquered. After the Temple fell John suc- ceeded in escaping to the upper city, and when again asked to surrender he demanded free retreat with lis arms. As this request was not granted the fighting was continued. In Elul, 70, the upper city also fell into the hands of the Romans; the John’s End. John, the Gospel of Joint Owners THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 222 a te leaders, however, did not surrender, but hid in subterranean passages. John was finally forced by hunger to give himself up to the Romans. Con- demned to lifelong fetters, he was reserved for the Roman triumph of Titus, and he probably died in a prison at Rome (7. vii. 5, § 8). BIBLIOGRAPHY: In addition to the sources cited in the article, Gritz, Gesch. 4th ed., iii. 478-546; Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., i. 608 et passim; Wellbausen, I. J. G. 4th ed., pp. 370 et seq. G S. Kr. JOHN, THE GOSPEL OF. See New Tesra- MENT. JOHN HYRCANUS. See Hyrcanus. JOHN SOBIESKI: King of Poland (1674-96). During his reign Poland had already lost its promi- nent position among European peoples, and, except during a few years, her lost prestige was never re- gained. With the loss of Poland’s power came also the waning prosperity and influence of her Jewish communities. The poverty of the Polish Jews at that time increased to such an extent that many sought workin Prussia, where they hired themselves out as common laborers in the fields of Catholic landlords (Kénig, “ Annalen der Juden in den Preus- sischen Staaten,” p. 85). During the reign of Sobieski, King Charles XI. of Sweden, who was actuated by the desire to con- vert the Jews to Christianity, commissioned Prof. Gustavus Perringer of Lillienblad (¢. 1690) to go to Poland in order to study the manners Commis- of the Karaite Jews and to purchase sion to copies of their writings at any cost. Polish Perringer first went to Jithuania, Karaites. where there were a number of Karaite communities. He probably failed to get much information or to secure many books, for the Lithuanian Karaites had become ignorant, and were of less intelligence than their brethren in Constantinople, in the Crimea, and in Egypt; and they knew little of their own origin and history. About this time the Polish Karaites were ordered by King Sobieski to leave their most populous commu- nities, such as Troki, Lutsk, and Halicz, and to dis- perse in the smaller towns. The Karaite judge Abraham ben Samuel of Troki, who was a favorite of Sobieski, transmitted this order, and the Karaites thus became distributed (Easter, 1688) as far as the northern province of Samogitia. In this manner the Polish Karaites were made to mingle more inti- mately with their neighbors, and gradually assumed the manners and customs of the Polish peasants. Sobieski always showed himself to be a stanch friend of the Jews. He granted them many privi- leges in Lithuania and Poland, endeavored to coun- teract the agitation of the priests against them, and sought to discredit the false accusations brought forward by their enemies. At the same His time he often found himself unable to Stanch intervene effectually in their behalf, Friendship since the royal power had become toa for the great extent nominal. The Jesuits Jews. had already succeeded in imbuing the lords and the minor nobility (“schly- akhta”) with a spirit of intolerance and suspicion, as is shown by the charge of host-desecration made in 1670 against the Jews of Mlava. The increase of the influence of the clergy was favored also by the frequent absences of Sobieski in times of war. Still, the Jews found in him a powerful protector. Dur- ing his reign the Jewish communities partly re- gained their former prosperity, and their organiza- tion, including that of the Council of the Four Lands, was strengthened. Besides the special privileges granted to the Jew- ish community of Zolkiev situated on his personal estate, Sobieski also issued about twenty decrees in favor of the Jews of Lemberg, which edicts included warnings to the magistrates and priests not to op- press the Jews (“Acta Grodzkie i Ziemskie Miasta Lwowa,” vol. x.). When the four districts of the Lithuanian council — Wilna, Grodno, Brest, and Pinsk—could not agree as to spheres of influence, Sobieski ordered (Feb. 8, 1682) that the question be settled within twelve weeks (Bershadski, “ Litov- skiye Yevrei,” p. 19). In 1682 he ordered, in re- sponse to a petition of the Jews of Wilna, that they be relieved from the supervision of the magistrates (Bershadski, /.c. pp. 18-19). Healso renewed the old edicts by a decree dated May 6, 1672. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kluczucki, Acta Johannis Sobieski, Cracow, 1880-82; Gritz, Gesch. Hebrew transl., viii., passinv; Neu- bauer, Aus der Petersburger Bibliothek, p. 139; Mordecai, Dod Mordechai, ch. vii. IR JOHN OF VALLADOLID: Jewish convert to Christianity ; born 1835. An able speaker, and pos- sessed of some knowledge of rabbinical literature, he persuaded King Henry of Castile that he could convince the Jews of the truth of Christianity if they were obliged to listen to him and to answer his questions. An order was accordingly issued, com- pelling the Jews to attend John’s lectures in their synagogues and to discuss them with him. Incom- pany with another Jewish convert, John traveled throughout the Castilian provinces and lectured and debated in the synagogues, but with a signal lack of success. At Avila he assembled the Jews four times and discussed with them the tenets of Christianity be- fore numerous Christian and Moslemaudiences. At Burgos he summoned Moses ha-Kohen of Tordesil- las to a religious controversy in the presence of Archbishop Gomez of Toledo. John endeavored to demonstrate from the Bible the Messianic claims and the divinity of Jesus, and the truth of the dogma of the Trinity and of other Christian doctrines. Thus, for instance, he claimed that the final closed “mem” used in the word 7aqod (Isa. ix. 6) is an allusion to the immaculate conception. Moses ha- Kohen had no difficulty in refuting arguments of this kind, and the controversy was broken off in the middle of the fourth sitting. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Moses ha-Kohen of Tordesillas, ‘Ezer ha- Emunah, Introduction; Gritz, Gesch. viii. 20; Isidore Loeb. in R. EB. J. xviii. 228. : K. I. Br. JOHNSON: American family, members of which have attained distinction in Ohio, Texas, and New York, The family is from England, the most important members being: David Israel Johnson: The earliest known member of the family; married Eliza Davis May 16, 1816. Before leaving England one son was born to them—Edward I. Johnson, Feb. 14, 1817. This 223 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA John, the Gospel of Joint Owners son enlisted in the Texan War of Independence, became lieutenant of artillery, and lost his life at the Alamo, in 1836, at the age of nineteen. Edgar M. Johnson: Youngest child of David Israel Johnson; born Nov. 5, 1836; adinitted to the Cincinnati bar in 1854, at the age of eighteen. He became prosecuting attorney of the police court of Cincinnati by appointment in 1857, and was elected to the office in 1859, serving one full term. Johnson was a member of the school board of Cincinnati from 1867 to 1871, and was mainly instrumental in bringing into the courts the famous controversy as to the reading of the Bible in the public schools, the controversy resulting in the discontinuance of the reading. In 1864 Johnson, with John P. Jackson and the Honorable George Hoadly, then a judge of the su- perior court of Cincinnati, formed a partnership under the name of “Hoadly, Jackson & Johnson.” In 1877 Johnson and Hoadly went to New York city and associated themselves with Edward Lauterbach under the firm name of “Hoadly, Lauterbach & Johnson,” which partnership continued until the death of Johnson on Dec. 8, 1893. In 1881 Johnson was nominated as lieutenant-governor of Ohio, but failed of election. Frederic A. Johnson: Third son of David Israel Johnson; the first Jewish child born in Ohio; born in Cincinnati, Ohio, June 2, 1821; died Jan. 20, 1898. He was elected justice of the peace of Cincinnati township, Hamilton county, Ohio, in 1869, and served continuously until 1884. In 1885 he was elected to the General Assembly of Ohio as amember of the House of Representatives. In 1889 he was again elected to a justiceship, and served until 1892. Henry D. Johnson: Second son of David Israel Johnson; born at Connersville, Ind., Feb. 21, 1819. He was the first Jewish child born in Indiana—in fact, the first, so far as known, born west of the Alleghanies. Henry served in the Mexican war and died in California. James W. Johnson: Sixth child of David Israel Johnson; born April 238, 1830; died Oct., 1889. He wrote the music and words of the following songs, which were very popular for a time: “ At home thou art remembered still”; “ Wipe away each dripping tear”; “ Awake from thy slumber.” He wrote also “ Affinity,” a novel, published in the “Cincinnati Times” about 1867. He served as deputy treasurer of Hamilton county, Ohio, from 1874 to 1880. Selina Emma Johnson: Fourth child of David Israel Johnson; born Sept. 13, 1828; still living (1904); the first Jewish female child born in Ohio. She married Eleazar Ezekiel Dec. 8, 1841, became a teacher in the public schools of Cincinnati, and was for a time acting principal of the girls’ department of the Center street school. Eleazar Ezekiel having died, she married Abraham Abraham Sept. 24, 1851. A. 1Dy, des JOIADA (y7%}"; in LXX. once ‘Iwdae): Son of Eliashib, high priest about 450 B.c. (Neh. xii. 10-11, 22). One of his children became a son-in-law of SanbaMat the Horonite, and was removed from the Temple by Nehemiah (Neh. xiii. 28). a. S. Kr. JOIGNY: Chief town in the department of the Yonne (the ancient Champagne), France, situated on the River Yonne. It had an important Jewish community, which flourished especially in the twelfth century. The “notables of Joigny” are mentioned in the Mahzor Vitry (No. 244). The rabbis of this place were reckoned among the most important of France; ¢.g., Menahem ben Perez (died toward the end of the twelfth century) and Yom- Tob ben Isaac, surnamed “the Holy,” 7.e., the martyr, who died at York, England, in 1190. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 250. oy It, 13) JOINT OWNERS: In the Mishnah joint own- ers are knownas “shuttafin.” When the joint own- ers are coheirs the Mishnah speaks of them as “the brothers”; btit the relation arises apart from com- mon descent, as when two or more people make a purchase in common, or when a sole owner sells shares in his land or chattels to another. I. For cases in which some of the joint owners desire a division, against the wish of the others, the Mishnah (B. B. i. 6) lays down this principle: “Whenever the several parts, after division, are great enough, so that each of them can bear the name of the whole, any part-owner is entitled to claim a division; otherwise not; but a sacred book can not be divided, though all the owners be willing.” Thus a courtyard for twoor more houses should not be divided unless large enough to leave four cubits square for each part. The smallest field deserving of the name would be sown with nine cabs of grain, which, according to the commentators, would mean an area of 8,750 square cubits, or 6,666% square feet; a garden must have for each share an area enough for half a cab of seed; similarly a dining-hall, or a dove-cot, or a bath-house, or an irrigation sluice, or an oil-press, ora shawl. In the Gemara (B. B. 12a) the minimum of an orchard (“ pardes ”) is fixed at the area for three cabs of Limits of seed. But all these measurements are Division. meant for Palestine; in Babylonia a field for each part-owner must be large enough for one day’s plowing, and an orchard or vineyard must be sufficient for thirty-six trees or vines—as many as one man can dress in a day; and these greater limits were generally recognized in the countries of the Diaspora (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Hoshen Mishpat, 171, 3). It is the opinion of some rabbis (2b. 171, 4-5) that if a part-owner has land adjoining the land held in common, he can be compelled to divide, though his share of the latter by itself would be below the mini- imum; also that the part-owner can not be com- pelled to take a share which has no other outlet than over the share of a companion. When the rule of partition applies as above any joint owner can call for its enforcement, no matter how the joint owner- ship arose. Where the land is all of the same qual- ity and can be partitioned by measurement alone, a part-owner who has an adjoining field may ask that his share be laid off next to that field, and it must be done; but if there are countervailing qualities (e.g., one part being nearer to the river, another having better soil) each owner must be satisfied with what the lot gives him, and none has a right to Joint Owners Jonah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 224 choose. According to later authorities, in case of need a division in which the quality of the land is taken into account may be made by three unlearned men, provided they are known to be men of integ- rity and well acquainted with land-values. The first-born son gets his double share in one continuous tract, and so does one of several pur- chasers of land who has a share twice as large as any of the others. But one who has Assign- bought out another part-owner must ment by ~° be satisfied to have the old and the Lot. newly bought share both assigned by lot, and take the chance of their being together or apart. So the “yabam” (a brother who has taken his childless brother’s widow to wife, and whose eldest son by her is heir to the dead brother’s share) must draw separately for his own and for his son’s share. When the land is flanked on two sides by a river, and on the other sides by roads, it should be cut diagonally so as to give, as far as possible, to each part-owner access to the river as wellas to the roads (Maimonides, “ Yad,” Shekenim, xii. 1-3, following B. B. i. 6). Where there are two parcels, such as two houses, of like uses and of nearly the same value, held jointly by two owners, the court should rather listen to him who proposes to assign one to each part-owner than to divide each separately; but where two things jointly owned have different uses, such as two women slaves, one being a spinner and the other a cook, or two pieces of land, one a vine- yard and the other a corn-field, neither of the owners can demand a division by assignment of one to each. II. Where, by the above principles, a partition in kind can not be adjudged, the next alternative, when there are only two part-owners, is for either of them to say “gud o agud” (buy, or Division Ishall buy; B. B. 18b), of course at by Com- the same price. The price so named pulsory may be far above the appraisement or Purchase. true value. But one who is unwilling to buy can not compel his companions to buy, even at the lowest price. However, if of the two owners, say the two coheirs, of something in- divisible, as a bath-house or a wine-press, one is too poor to buy out his companion and is unable to borrow the money for the purpose, he may sell his half with the incident right of saying “ gud 0 agud,” to a third person. It is the better opinion that this offer must always be made on a cash basis. “Buy thou on time payments or I will buy on time pay- ments!” might be very unfair where one part-owner is amply solvent and the other is irresponsible. In the case of two articles used for different purposes, instanced above, the “gud 0 agud” proposition may be made for both jointly. Where one of the joint owners is an infant the proposition can not be made, for the guardian appointed for the infant has no power to sell real estate. Tlf. When neither a division in kind nor the “buy or sell” alternative is possible, the parties can, of course, sell the land, or whatever thing is held in coinmon, to others; or the court can order sucha . sale on the application of any one of them (Hoshen Mishpat, 171, 7); in such a case the law of Ap- PRAISEMENT, of valuation and advertisement, ap- plies, and the proceeds in money can be divided. IV. But when for any reason none of the parties will ask for a settlement by sale, they must enjoy the thing in common; and this com- mon enjoyment is also regulated by law. When they are coheirs of a former owner who has leased the prop- erty, they divide the rent as it comes in. R. Moses Isserles (on Hoshen Mishpat, 171, 8} thinks that in leasing the plan of “gud c agud” should be tried before a lease is made to a stranger; that is, cach of the two part-owners can offer to buy or sell half of the rights forayear. But if the place is not intended for renting, and the owners can not or do not wish to occupy it jointly, they should alternate in occupation by years; and if one owns two-thirds and the other one-third, the former should occupy for two years and the other for one year at atime. A bath-house, however, can be used by two or more owners successively every day; and so in the case of other indivisible things. VY. When a division in kind has been made, new duties between the former joint owners arise. Where a courtyard is divided, and each part-owner takes a house and part of the yard, each can claim the right of privacy (7.e., that his new Results of neighbor shall not look over into his Division. ground), and insist on the building, at the common expense, of a partition wall four cubits in height, to be placed in the middle (¢.e., one-half on the ground of each). The Mishnah (B. B. i. 1, 4) prescribes the thickness of the wall ac- cording to the material, which, after the custom of the several parts of Palestine, was either of rubble- stone, or cut stone, or half-baked brick, or full-baked brick—a wall of the last-named material having at least the thickness of three palms’ breadth (7d. i. 2). In dividing a garden a stone fence can be required, unless the custom is to the contrary; and custom may require such a fence in a divided field also (B. B. 4a). Should the wall or fence fall the place and stones belong to both incommon. In that case each must contribute one-half to rebuild it to the height of four cubits. So in any division of a court for which a watchman is kept, each of the new owners must contribute toward building a gate-house. VI. What the Talmud in this connection (B. B. 18b e¢ seg.) says about the division of sacred books is not a matter of jurisprudence but of ritual, for a bodily division is unlawful with or without the consent of the owners. The duties of part-owners often run into communal duties toward their fel- low citizens, in a town, a community, or among the dwellers of some court or alley. The term “shuttafin,” which in the Talmud stands for “part-owner,” is in the later law literature ap- plied also to “partners” (see PARTNERSHIP), For other aspects of joint ownership see BERERAH. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Maimonides, Yad, Shekenim; Shulhan ‘A Hoshen Mishpat, $8 158-174. : le S. IDREINEN DY JOINVILLE (Old French, Joanville): French town in the department of Haute-Marne; in the Tosafot occur Sy, Synyvs, xa, xdvaro, and other variants (Yoma 81; ‘Er. 24; Ber. 8; Bek. Common User. y 225 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joint Owners Jonah 82;etc.). The counts of Champagne drew abundant revenue from the Jews of Joinville, who were prac- tically their serfs. In 1284, when Philip the Fair took possession of Champagne, they had to contrib- ute 25,000 livres as a gift “on his happy advent.” Among the Jewish scholars of Joinville were the following: R. Bonet or Benoit (93) of xoaow (Gross, “ Gallia Judaica,” p. 255); Samuel ben Aaron, the tosafist; Simeon ben Samuel, son of the prece- ding and himself an eminent tosafist and Bible com- mentator. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Renan-Neubauer, Les Rabbins Francais, p. 447; Zunz, Z. G. p. 93; Brussel, Usage Général des Juifs en France, vol. i., book ii., ch. 39; Depping, Les Juifs dans le Moyen Age, p. 116; Gross, Gallia Judaica, pp. 254-255, a. Saks JOKTAN (jop’).— Biblical Data: Younger son of Eber and progenitor of thirteen Arabic tribes (Gen. x. 25-29; I Chron. i. 19-23), many of which —as Hazarmaveth, Shebah, Ophir, and Havilah— have been identified. The name seems to mean “the younger” or “the smaller,” but in Gen. R. xxxvii. 10 it is interpreted as “he who humbles himself,” and for his humility Joktan was rewarded by being made the ancestor of thirteen tribes. The place of settlement of Joktan’s descendants is given as “ from Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar, a mount of the east” (Gen. x. 30). The district indicated is in Ara- bia, but Targum pseudo-Jonathan identifies Sephar with Sepharvaim. Josephus (“ Ant.” i. 6, § 4) as- serts that their dwelling was “from Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Asia adjoining it.” M. SEL. —In Arabic Literature: Joktan in Arabic Jit- erature bears the name “Kahtan.” In Gen. x. Joktan is described as the ancestor of several south- Arabian tribes. In accordance with this statement Arab genealogists hold Kahtan to be the first king of Yemen, and his son and successor Ya‘rub the first person who spoke Arabic. Thisis but the legendary form of the tradition that Kahtan was the progeni- tor of the southern Arabs, or Arabs proper, while the Ishmaelite Arabs were originally of non-Arab stock; but, pretending to be Arabs, they adopted Arab customs and intermarried with genuine Arabs, being therefore called “ Musta‘rabs.” Another son of Kahtan, who was called Jurhum, emigrated to northwest Arabia, and founded a kingdom in the Hijaz. This tradition was probably invented at a later date in order to establish a close relationship between the northern and southern Arabs, because itisadded that Ishmael married a woman of the tribe of Jurhum and became a member thereof. H. G. H. H. Hir. JOLLES, ZECHARIAH ISAIAH B. MOR- DECAI: Rabbinical scholar and author; born at Lemberg about 1814; died at Minsk, Russia, May 14, 1852. In 1834, after having married the daugh- ter of Jacob Dokshitzer, one of the wealthiest Jews of Minsk, he settled in that city. Jolles sympa- thized with the HASKALAH or progressive movement, and is said to have sided with Lilienthal when the latter visited Minsk in 1844 for the purpose of in- ducing the Jews to establish schools in accordance with the governmental program. Jolles’ published works are: “Dober Mesharim ” Vil.—15 (Lemberg, 1881), on the emendations of the Tal- mudical text by Mordecai Jaffe, surnamed “ Le- bush”; ““Et le-Dabber” (7b. 1834), an epistle to candidates for the rabbinate, in which various phases of contemporary Jewish life are discussed in the spirit then prevailing among the progressists: “Zeker Yeshayahu” (Wilna, 1882), novelle on the code of Maimonides, and responsa, published pos- thumously by his son Siissman Jolles. He is said to have written more than twenty-five other works on rabbinical and scientific subjects. It is understood that R. Akiba Eger’s responsum No. 176 is addressed to Jolles. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenstadt, Rabbane Minsk wa-Hakameha, pp. 29-30, 46, Wilna, 1898; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Menidels. p. 161. K. Pe Wie JOLOWICZ, HEYMANN (HAYYIM BEN ABRAHAM): German preacher and author; born Aug. 28, 1816, at Santomischl, province of Posen; died at Koénigsberg, Prussia, Jan. 81, 1875. He at- tended the University of Berlin and then filled the position of preacher in Marienwerder, Kulm, and finally in Késlin. He belonged to the ultra-Reform party and always expressed his views fearlessly. After he retired from his office, he settled at Kénigs- berg, where he delivered a series of lectures (1864- 1865) on the history and development of Judaism and on the history of the Synagogue service. He established a radical Reform congregation, with Sunday services and German liturgy, which, how- ever, was of short duration. Jolowicz was very active as an author, beginning in his student years. The following is a list of his publications: Die Fortschreitende Entwickelung der Kultur der Juden. Reprinted from *‘ Orient, Lit.’ Berlin, 1841. Das Buch Kusari Uebersetzt und Commentirt (together with D. Cassel, parts i. and ii.). Leipsic, 1841-43. Rationalismus und Supranaturalismus, Ihr Verhaltnis und Ihre Beziehung zur Auslegung der Bibel. K6nigsberg, 1844. Harfenklange der Heiligen Vorzeit. Leipsic, 1846. Geist utid Wesen der Israelitischen Religion. Kdéslin, 1847. Moses Mendelssohn’s Allgemeine Einleitung in die Finf Biichern Moses. Kodslin, 1847. Zwei Biicber Rabbinischer Weisheit, 2d ed. Thorn, 1849. Polyglotte der Orientalischen Poesie. Leipsic, 1853. Die Himmelfahrt und Vision des Propheten Jesaias (trans- lated from the Ethiopian). Ib. 1854. Die Germanische Welt in Ihrer Beriihrung mit dem Christen- thume. Ib. 1854. The First Epistle of Baruch (translated from the Syriac). London, 1855. Sharpe’s History of Egypt, German transl. Leipsic, 1857. Bibliotheca Aegyptiaca. Leipsic, 1858; supplement, ib. 1861. Bliithenkranz Morgenlandischer Dichtung. Breslau, 1860. Gesch. der Juden in Kénigsberg. Posen, 1867. German translation of Lecky’s * History of the Rise and In- fluence of the Spirit of Rationalism.’’ Leipsic and Heidelberg, 1868. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jolowicz, Gesch. der Juden in Kénigsberg, pp. 180 et seq.: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. xxxix. 158. MK Ss. ‘ 5 JONADAB. See JEHONADAB. JONAH.—Biblical Data: Prophet in the days of Jeroboam II.; son of Amittai of Gath-hepher. He is a historical personage; for, according to II Kings xiv. 25, he predicted in Yawu’s name the extent to which Jeroboam II. would restore the boundaries of the Northern Kingdom, “from the en- tering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain.” The Jonah Jonah, Book of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 226 wording of the passage may also imply that Jonah’s prophecy was uttered even before Jeroboam IL., perhaps in the time of Jehoahaz (thus Klostermann to II Kings xiii. 4). In any case Jonah is one of the prophets who advised the house of Jehu, and it is not unlikely that with him the series of prophets that began with Elijah came toa close. The next succeeding prophet, Amos of Tekoa, whose activity fell in the reign of Jeroboam II., begins an entirely new series, as regards not only his position toward the king and the people, but also his method of communication, in that he resorted to writing in- stead of the spoken word. Jonah belongs only seemingly to the prophets who were also writers; for the book bearing his name does not afford the least evidence of having been writ- ten by the prophet himself. It merely tells his his- tory, as the Books of the Kings tell of Elijah, Elisha, Micaiah, or Yimlah ben Zimlah. The book, however, doubtless refers to the same prophet Jonah as is mentioned in II Kings xiv. 25; for the name of both is Jonah ben Amittai. This identity has recently been denied by Hugo Winckler (“ Altorientalische Forschungen,” 1900, ii. 260 e¢ seg.; see also Cheyne in “Encye. Bibl.” ii. 2570), but Winckler’s reasoning, however ingenious, does not suffice to make his the- ory more than possible. It is one and the same prophet that is mentioned in both places: in the superscription to the Book of Jonah, with the name of his father; in the histcrical narrative, with the name of his home also. Indeed, the account in the Book of Jonah depends on that in the Book of Kings; nor has it been proved, as some have held, that the Book of Jonah was written to account for the non-fulfilment of the predictions against Nine- veh contained in the prophecy of Nauum, and that the Jonah of Kings and the Jonah of the prophet- ical book can consequently not be identical. Winck- ler retracted his opinion in “ Allgemeine Evange- lisch-Lutherische Kirchenzeitung,” 1903, p. 1224. E. G. H. 1 18% —In Rabbinical Literature: The tribal atfini- ties of Jonah constitute a point of controversy ; generally assigned to Asher, he is claimed for Zebu- lun by R. Johanan on the strength of his place of residence (II Kings xiv. 24); these opinions were harmonized by the assumption that his mother was of Asher while his father was of Zebulun (Yer. Suk. v. 1; Gen. R. xcviii. 11; Yalk., Jonah, 550; Abravanel’s commentary to Jonah). According to another au- thority. his mother was the woman of Zarephath that entertained Elijah (¢b.; Pirke R. El. xxxiii.). As this prophet, who was also of priestly descent, would have profaned himself if he had touched the corpse of a Jew, it was concluded that this woman, whose son (Jonah) he “took to his bosom” and re- vived, was a non-Jew (Gen. R. J.c.). He received his prophetic appointment from Elisha, under whose orders he anointed Jehu (II Kings ix.; Kimhi, ad doc.; and Zemah Dawid). He is said to have attained a very advanced age (more than 120 years accord- ing to Seder ‘Olam; 180 according to Sefer Yuhasin), while Ecclesiastes Rabbah viii. 10 holds that the son (Jonah) of the Zarephath widow never died. The “holy spirit” descended on him while he par- ticipated in the festivities of the last day of Sukkot (Yer. Suk. v. 1, 55a). His wife is adduced as an ex- ample of a woman voluntarily assuming duties not incumbent on her, for she is remembered as having made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem on the “regel” (holiday ; Yer. ‘Erubin x. 1, 26a; “Seder ha-Dorot Ws and “Shalshelet ha-Kabbalah ”). Jonah was induced to flee because, after having won his reputation as a true prophet (‘NOX = “one whose words always came true”) by Reason for the fulfilment of his prediction in the Flight. days of Jeroboam II. (II Kings xiv.), he had come to be distrusted and to be cajled a false prophet, the reason being that when sent to Jerusalem to foretell its doom its inhabitants repented and the disaster did not come. Knowing that the Ninevites also were on the point of re- penting (“keroLe teshubah”), he anticipated that among them, too, he would earn the reputation of being a false prophet; he therefore resolved to flee to a place where the glory of God, or His Shekinah, could not be found (Pirke R. El. x.; but comp. Ibn Ezra’s commentary). The phrase in Jonah iii. 1, “and the word of God came unto Jonah the second time,” is interpreted by Akiba, however, to imply that God spoke only twice to him; therefore the “word of Yuwu” to him in II Kings xiv. 25 has no refer- ence to a prophecy which Jonah delivered in the days of Jeroboam II., but must be taken in the sense that as at Nineveh Jonah’s words changed evil to good, so under Jeroboam Israel experienced a change of fortune (Yeb. 98a). When Jonah went to Joppa he found no ship, for the vessel on which he had intended taking passage had sailed two days before; but God caused a con- trary wind to arise and the ship was driven back to port (Zohar, Hayye Sarah). At this Jonah rejoiced, regarding it as indicating that his plan would suc- ceed, and in his joy he paid his passage-money in ad- vance, contrary to the usual custom, which did not require its payment until the conclusion of the voy- age. According tosome he even paid the full value of the ship, amounting to 4,000 gold denarii (Yalk., l.c.; Ned. 38a). But all this happened to teach him the fallacy of his conclusion that God could be evaded (Yalk., ¢.c.; and Rashi, ad loe.), for the contrary wind affected his ship only; all others on the sea at that time proceeded uninterruptedly on their courses. The storm which overtook Jonah is quoted as one of three most noteworthy storms (Eccl. R. i. 6). After the sailors’ prayers to their idols, as well as their efforts to turn about and lighten the ship, had proved futile, the crew finally was The Ship. compelled to believe Jonah’s state- ment that this calamity had befallen their craft on his account, and assented to his peti- tion to be thrown overboard, Praying that they might not be held accountable for his death, they first lowered him far enough for the waters to touch his knees. Seeing that the storm subsided, they drew him back into the ship, whereupon the sea at once rose again, They repeated this experi- ment several times, each time lowering him deeper, but taking him out again, and each time with the same result, until finally they threw him into the sea (Yalk., J.c.). The fish which swallowed Jonah had been created 227 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jonah Jonah, Book of in the very beginning of the world in order to per- form this work (Zohar, Wayakhel; Pirke R. El. x.; see also Gen. R. v. 5). Therefore this fish had so large a mouth and throat that Jonah found it as easy to pass into its belly as he wouid have found it to enter the portals of a very large synagogue (d.). It had eyes which were as large as windows, and lamps lit up itsinterior, According to another opin- ion, a great pearl suspended in the en- trails of the fish enabled Jonah tosee all that was in the sea and in the abyss. The fish informed Jonah that he was to be devoured by Leviathan. Jonah asked to be taken to the mon- ster, when he would save both his own life and that of the fish. Meeting Leviathan, he exhibited the “seal of Abraham,” whereupon the monster shot away a distance of two days. To reward him for this service the fish showed Jonah all the wondrous things in the ocean (¢.g., the path of the Israclites across the Red Sea; the pillars upon which the earth rests). Thus he spent three days and three nights in the belly of the fish, but would not pray. God then resolved to put him into another fish where he would be less comfortable. A female fish quick with young approached the male fish in which Jonah was, threatening to devour both unless Jonah were transferred to her, and announcing her di- vine orders to that effect. Leviathan confirmed her story at the request of both fishes, and then Jonah was ejected from one fish into the over-filled belly of the other. Cramped for room and otherwise made miserable, Jonah finally prayed, acknowledging the futility of his efforts to escape from God (Ps. exxxix.). But he was not answered until he had promised to redeem his pledge to capture Leviathan. As soon as God had his promise, He beckoned to the fish and it spat out Jonah upon the dry land, a dis- tance of 968 parasangs. When the crew of the ship saw this they immediately threw away their idols, sailed back to Joppa, went to Jerusalem, and sub- mitted to circumcision, becoming Jews (Yalk., d.¢. ; Tan., Wayikra, ed. Stettin, 1865, pp. 870 et seg. ; see also Pirke R. El. x.). In the Zohar (Wayakhel) it is related that the fish died as soon as Jonah entered, but was revived after three days. When Jonah was thrown into the sea his soulimmediately left his body and soared up to God’s throne, where it was judged and sent back. Assoon as it touched the mouth of the fish on its way back to the body, the fish died, but was later restored to life. The fish’s name is given in “Shalshelet ha- Kabbalah” as Oy (¢.e., “cetos” =“ whale”). The fate of Jonah isallegorized in the Zohar (Wayakhel) as illustrative of the soul’s relation to the body and to death. In the assumption that Jonah is identical with the Mussrau, the son of Joseph, the influence of Christian thought is discernible (comp. Matt. xii. 39-41). The gourd of Jonah wasenormous. Before its ap- pearance Jonah was tortured by the heat and by in- sects of all kinds, his clothes having been burned by the heat of the belly of the fish; he was tortured again after the worm had caused the gourd to wither. This brought Jonah to pray that God should be a merciful ruler, not a strict judge (Pirke R. El. x.; Yalk. 551). 8. 8. ID, Kee lal, The Fish. JONAH, BOOK OF. — Biblical Data: The Book of Jonah stands unique in the prophetical canon, in that it does not contain any predictions, but simply relates the story of its hero, beginning for that reason with “wa-yehi,” like a passage taken from history. The contents may be summa- rized as follows: Ch. i.: Jonah is commanded by YHwuH to prophesy against Nineveh. Hoping to escape from this commission by flight into another country, he goes down to Joppa to take ship for Tar- shish (Tartessus in Spain). YHWu then sends a terrible storm, and the pious heathen mariners, after all their labors to lighten the ship and all their prayers prove vain, cast lots to find out on Whose account this misfortune bas come upon them (comp. Achan in Josh. vii. and Jonathan in I Sam. xiv.). The lot falls upon Jonah, and upon being questioned he answers that he is a Hebrew and worships YHWH, the God of Heaven; he ad- mits his guilt and requests that he be thrown into the sea. After having prayed to YHwu the mariners comply with his wish, and when the storm has subsided they give thanks to YHWH with sacrifices and vows. Ch. ii.: YHWwH prepares a great fish to swallow Jonah, who remains for three days and three nights in the monster’s belly ; after having there praised YHWH, Jonah is cast up by the fish upon the dry land. Ch. iii.: YHWH’s command being repeated, Jonah goes to Nineveh, and announces to the city that it shall be destroyed within forty days. Then all the inhabitants, following the example of the king and the nobles, repent in sackcloth and ashes; even the flocks and herds fast and are covered with sack- cloth. YHWH, repenting of the punishment He had intended for them, permits the Ninevites to go free. Ch. iv.: YHWH’s action displeases Jonah exceedingly; he prays YHWH to let him die. YHWH comforts him by prepar- ing a “*kikayon” (castor-oil plant?) to spring up beside his booth, which gives Jonah great pleasure. But YHWH prepares a worm to smite the plant, so that it withers; the sun beating upon the head of Jonah causes him to faint: and again he begs for death. YHWH then says that if Jonah is sorry for the gourd, which sprang up of itself in one night, and withered also in one night, how much more must YHWH feel sorrow for the mighty city which contains more than twelve myriads of inno- cent people besides much cattle. 1k, 183. E. G. H. —Critical View: The text on the whole has been fairly well preserved. The following variants of the Septuagint deserve notice: i. 2: ONY Npyy, probably a combination of two variants, ONpyy being placed side by side with onyo (comp. Gen. PX Ville ex UX LS) ism de: mby3 is lacking and not S KaTa needed; verse 16: p’ma} instead of nd}; iii. 2: Td Khpvypa TO éurpoobev 6 éy® éAdAyoa, equivalent to ‘NID (DIN WN TAIWNID ANP, probably correct, since only absolute obedience to the first command would agree with the context; iii. 4: nwby instead of DYIIN, but probably only an error following verse 8, end; iii. 7: Dy instead of Dyn; ii. 9: aw” is lacking, probably correctly so in view of the fol- lowing 3w}; iv. 2: by is lacking; iv. 6: wrod Sy mov; iv. 11: \bw* instead of w»—hardly the original reading, but a possible one. H. Winckler (“ Altorientalische Forschungen,” ii. 260 et seg.), especially, has proposed important emen- dations of the text that are all worthy of careful ex- amination. He transposes i. 13 to come directly after i. 4, which makes a better connection at both places. Again, he transposes i. 10 to follow imme- diately i. 7, at the same time striking out in verse 8 the words yoy y7)N") and (like many other emenda- tors and critics) WWNa to 195, besides 10b entirely. This wili not do, however, as verse 10a, depicting the fright of the men, with their exclamation, “Why hast thou done this?” is intelligible only after Jonah Jonah, Book of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 228 has told the men why he was on the ship. Still this | 2) offered a convenient connection, the interpolator explanation should not have been given in 10b, but rather either in 9ba (which would then read sypspy 38 Dw nbs mn‘) or as an addition to verse 9 (v.e., MID ON yapdsp)). If this phrase be inserted here it is necessary merely to delete the corresponding phrase in verse 10 (7.¢., 10b), and to omit also 8a, which disturbs the context. Winckleralso transposes iv. 5 to follow iii. 4, which is at the first glance a sim- ple and entirely obvious emendation. The verse could follow ch. iii. only with the introduction 7731") Ny’, and even then would have to precedeiv. 1. Ch. iv. 4 must be stricken out (as Béhme has proposed), being a poor repetition of iv. 9, which probably came in with the erroneous interpolation ofiv.5. Ch. iv. 3 connects closely with iv.6. Inthe latter verse Well- hausen, and after him Nowack, strike out ) boyy \nynn; Winckler strikes out instead wen by by nynd because Jonah was protected by the booth (iv. 5). Winckler furthermore says that the sun could not have stricken Jonah if he had been protected by the booth; he therefore proposes to insert the statement in verse 8 that the east wind blew down the booth. This is a happy conjecture; for }NJD“NN DIAN could have easily been corrupted to form the enig- matical nw n (even Cheyne’s nwa, “ Encyc. Bibl.” ii. 2566, is unsatisfactory). It must be remarked, however, that this would duplicate the motive, while verse 9 mentions the gourd only. It may be questioned therefore whether the mention of the booth is not a later interpolation, in which case iv. 5 should not be transposed after iii. 4, but should be simply stricken out together with iv. 4 and the mention of the east wind in iv. 8, so that the text would read simply: 4m) wownm mnt ony ‘) wown. Verse 6 would then remain unchanged. The last-named considerations, which were touched upon by Hitzig and Béhme, lead to the question whether Béhme (in Stade’s “ Zeitschrift,” vii. 224 e¢ seg.; for earlier attempts see Cheyne, l.c. p. 2565, note) is correct in attempting to trace the Book of Jonah to various scurces. Since his attempt the question has been answered everywhere in the nega- tive, probably correctly. This popular story, in its present state, rather creates the impression that ex- traneous matter has been added here and there, as in the cases of the Book of Daniel and that of Esther, or that such additions were transferred to the Maso- retic text from manuscripts going more into detail. To this might be due the grotesque detail in ch. iii. that even the flocks and herds should take part in Nineveh’s general penitence, by fasting in sack- cloth, and perhaps also by uttering loud cries (verse 8). Yet the words ApAaAA) OANA (iii. 8) must not be simply stricken out as an addition, as Bohme, Well- hausen, and Nowack propose; for they now fit in admirably with the legendary tone of the whole. Cheyne rightly refers to what Herodotus (ix. 24) re- counts of the Persians. The psalm (ii. 8-10) was in any case added to the original composition later (comp. Stade’s “Zeitschrift,” 1892, p. 42). As a prayer of thanks it is undeniably in the wrong place, since Jonah is still in the belly of the fish. That it was added at this point is probably due to the fact that the words my'7m ‘yon mandy now SSany (verse wishing to give the exact words of the prayer. Originally verse 2 was immediately followed by verse 11 thus: “Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly ; and the Lord spake unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land.” The psalm certainly seemed appropriate, be- cause it speaks, even if only metaphorically, of Jonah being cast into the midst of the seas, and of the salvation whichisof the Lord. And it was per- haps added also partly because the book contained no connected speech of the prophet. The time at which this interpolation was added can be conjec- turally fixed only after the sources and the origin of the book have been discussed. The book does not bear the least evidence of hav- ing been written by the prophet or even during his time; and its age must be gathered from different indications. It has long since been held that it is one of the latest books of the Hebrew canon. This is proved in the first place by the language, as con- sidered lexically, grammatically, and stylistically (comp. on this point the commentaries, and books like 8. R. Driver’s “ Intro- duction”). Only Esther, Chronicles, and Daniel are of later date. Again, the way in which Nineveh is referred to shows that the city had long since vanished from the face of the earth and had faded into legend (comp. iii. 3). The King of Nineveh, also (iii. 6), could have been referred to only in a late myth; and the legendary atmos- phere of the whole story, from beginning to end, is in accord with the length of time that had elapsed since the events recounted took place. This be- comes evident both in the episode of the fish which swallows a man and then casts him up alive after three days, and in that of the plant which in one night grows high enough to overshadow Jonah. These things might, it is true, be considered as divine miracles; but such an explanation can not be offered for the three days’ time that it takes to pass through Nineveh (iii. 3), nor for the fasting, sackcloth, and penitent cries of the animals (iii. 7 e¢ seqg.), much less for the conception that an Israelitish prophet could preach penitence to the city of Nine- veh, and that the king and the citizens would listen to him. Everything about the story is, and was intended to be, miraculous.and legendary. The Book of Jonah isa midrash. The book must undoubtedly be placed in this class; and it remains only to see whether a more definite position can be assigned to it in the Midrashic literature. The writer of this article has attempted to do this (in Stade’s “Zeitschrift,” 1892, pp. 40 et seq.), suggesting that the Book of Jonah is a section from the Midrash of the Book of the Kings mentioned in II Chron. xxiv. 27, which in all probability was the chief source used by the author of the Chronicles. The suggestion is supported by the simple fact that the prophet Jonah ben Amittai is referred to in no other place except in II Kings xiv. 25. Furthermore, it is highly improba- ble that at the time of the earliest Midrashic literature any other notice of him could have existed; and, finally, since the Book of Jonah begins without any superscription—it begins not simply with the word “wayehi,” which introduces a period of time (comp. Age and Origin. 229 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jonah, Book of en ——— , Ruth i. 1; Esth. i. 1), but with the phrase 94 ‘7°) ‘8/2 7D ON AN, which certainly assumes a pre- vious mention of Jonah—the suggestion proposed is the most natural one. If this be correct, then Chronicles of course omitted the passage found in its source and mentioning the prophet, a circum- stance that is explained by the fact that the scene is laid in the Northern Kingdom, with which Chroni- cles has nothing to do. The suggestion would be invalid if Winckler (see, however, JONAH, BrexicaL Dara, end) and Cheyne were correct in maintaining that the Jonah of the story is a different person from that mentioned in the Book of Kings. It is impossible, however, to refute the suggestion by referring to the distinctive char- acter of that midrash, as Kénig (Introduction, p. 879) and Smend (“ Alttestamentliche Religionsgesch.” 1st ed., p. 409) have done. If extensive stories of per- sonal events happening to Elijah have been included in the Book of Kings(e.g., I Kings xvii., xix.), why should not the same have occurred (against Konig) in the case of Jonah? And Smend’s assertion that, compared with the Book of Jonah the Midrash of the Book of the Kings was “a work of such a different character that its (Jonah’s) author would not have buried his book therein,” can not be substantiated. On the contrary, just the passage in the mid- rash referring to Jonah seems to be closely related to the Book of Jonah as regards the contents. The author of the Book of Kings puts into Yuwu’s mouth warm words of mercy toward the sinful Northern Kingdom (II Kings xiv. 26 e¢ seq.). It is easy to see how a midrash could be added show- ing that this mercy was extended even to an alien, heathen empire. If there were any reasons for as- suming the existence of another Midrash of the Book of the Kings than the one mentioned in Chronicles, the Book of Jonah might have been taken from the latter; but at present the writer of this article does not see what reasons could be brought forward in supportof suchatheory. Inany case the connection of the book with II Kings xiv. 25 must be insisted upon. In agreement with the view here expressed, the date of the book would fall some time toward the end of the fourth or in the fifth century; sucha date is supported by other considerations. The inclusion of the Book of Jonah among the Minor Prophets is paralleled by the inclusion of II Kings xviii.-xx. in the Book of Isaiah (ch, xxxvi.- xxxix.), but with this exception that in the latter (as also in Jer. lii.) his- torical passages are added to an al- ready existing prophetical book, while an entirely new personality and an entirely new book are added to the canon of the Prophets with the Book of Jonah. How may this have happened? Smend’s assumption (/.c.), that the author wrote the book with the intention of adding it to the “Twelve Minor Prophets,” may be set aside, for the styles of the two differ too widely, as noted above; nor, if that had been the intention, would it have been nec- essary to introduce a psalm in order to make the book fit into its surroundings: there are numerous examples‘ to show that the writers of later periods knew how to reproduce the style of the Prophets when they desired to do so. On the other hand, it Inclusion in Canon. can not have been the intention of inserting stories of the Prophets in the books of the Prophets; for if it had been, the “ Earlier Prophets” would have of- fered the right place therefor. This is proved in the case of I Kings xiii., a story, relating to a prophet, which has many points of similarity to the story of Jonah and is of about the same length. It likewise is probably derived from the Midrash of the Book of the Kings (comp. Stade’s “ Zeitschrift,” 1892, xii. 49 et seq.) and was added later to the canonical Book of Kings. The reasons for the inclusion of Jonah in the “ Twelve Minor Prophets” must be sought in the book itself. The fixing of the number of the “ Minor Prophets” at twelve was certainly intentional, and the Book of Jonah must have been included in order to make up that number, although it does not harmo- nize with the other books, and originally belonged elsewhere. The necessity for including it arose, perhaps, only in later times; for the enumeration (without Jonah) of precisely eleven books in the canon is not entirely self-evident. It need only be pointed out that Zech. ix.-xi. and xii.-xiv. are added very loosely to Zechariah, and may equally well have been regarded as independent books; that Mala- chi, on the contrary, at first probably had no super- scription (comp. Mal. iii. 1), and might have been added as an appendix to Zechariah. According as these matters were arranged, it might occur that there were only eleven books found where formerly twelve had been counted. The passagein Num. R. Xviii. seems in fact to refer to a time when the Book of Jonah was not included in the twelve Prophets. It becomes necessary to inquire into the purpose and teaching of the book, because of the fact that it is not a historical narrative, but a midrash, and also because of its conclusion. The whole story ends with the lesson received by Jonah, the purpose of the book having thus been accomplished; and as one can not follow the effects of this Purpose lesson on Jonah’s further career (un- and like the story of Elijah in I Kings Teachings. xix.), the lesson itself is in reality ad- dressed to the reader, 7.e., to the Jew- ish congregation. It is not probable that the story was carried on further in its original place in the Midrash of the Book of the Kings. This short story, as Wellhausen has best expressed it, is directed “against the impatience of the Jewish believers, who are fretting because, notwithstanding all predictions, the antitheocratic world-empire has not yet been destroyed ;—because YHwH is still post- poning His judgment of the heathen, giving them further time for repentance. Yuwu, it is hinted, is hoping that they will turn from their sins in the eleventh hour; and He has compassion for the inno- cent ones, who would perish with the guilty.” In agreement with this synopsis of the purpose, the book is closely akin to and emphasizes the basic passage, II Kings xiv. 26 et seg., which also shows, and as it were explains, how it is possible that YuwH can grant a prophecy of good things to come to the disloyal Northern Kingdom and to aking who, according to verse 24, persists in all the sins of all his predecessors, and can then fulfil what He has promised. This purpose harmonizes perfectly with the idealized description of the piety of the heathen Jonah, Book of - Jonas, Emile THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 2380 SE mariners (ch. i.) and of the king and the inhabitants of Nineveh (ch. iii.). The book is therefore in a way the negative pole to the positive pole in the Book of Ruth. The first shows why YuwuH does not destroy the heathen; the second, why and how He can even accept them among His people and bring them to high honor. Both these tendencies pecame apparent in Israel after the puristic reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah, which rigorously drew a sharp line between Israel and the pagan world. The opposition to this dominating doctrine was clothed in the unassuming but all the more effective garb of poetry and of story, as has happened time and again in similar cases. Cheyne rightly points to the parable of the good Samaritan in the New Testa- ment and to the story of the three rings in Lessing’s “Nathan der Weise.” All the details of the book are subordinated and made subservient to this one purpose; and there is every probability that it was invented only for that purpose, whereby of course appeal to other, well- known motives also is not excluded. The story of Elijah on Horeb (I Kings xix.) fur- Details of nished the model for the general out- the Story. line, and for the lesson taught the prophet, who was filled with doubts and was weary of his office. No search was neces- sary for the name of the hero, which was given in I Kings xiv, 25. The fact that “Jonah” means “dove” is a coincidence which must not be inter- preted allegorically, as Cheyne hasdone. Nor must the fact that Israel is spoken of as a prophet in Deutero-Isaiah and is called “Servant of Yawu” be used in order to attenuate the personality of Jonah to an allegory of the people of Israel; nor that he was swallowed by the sea, to an allegory of the Exile. All these are comparisons, it is true, which may easily be madeand which are fully justi- fied as secondary considerations, but they must not be allowed to confuse the simplicity of the original story. Nor must mythological motives, although they may easily be deduced from the story, be regarded as constitutive elements that were introduced con- sciously. This applies to the Andromeda myth as well as to that of Oannes, of Nineveh as the “Fish City ” (“nun”), etc., and to the chaotic dragon Tiamat, which has recently become a favorite myth with scholars (comp. Cheyne, /.¢c., s.v. “Jonah,” for details). Theauthor of the story was of course famil- iar with all the current conceptions regarding the sea; and he probably had in mind, whether conscious- ly or not, the myths and sagas clinging to it (comp. the rich collection of material relating to these myths in Hermann Usener, “Die Sintfluthsagen,” 1899). It was probably the intention of the author, however, to confine himself to the narration of a story which, dealing with the prophet Jonah known to tradition, should be a vehicle for the lesson he meant to teach. In the New Testament Jesus (Luke xi. 29-32) makes use of the book in its original sense, referring to the people of Nineveh as examples of the faith and repentance that he missed among his contempo- raries, while refusing them the miracle that they were asking at his hands. The endeavor to find more than this simple reference in the “sign of Jonas,” which is akin to the tendency of the artificial inter pretations mentioned above, has led in Later Uses the parallel passage (Matt. xii. 39-41) and Inter- to the interpolation (verse 40), accord- pretation. ing to which Jonah’s three days in the belly of the fish are a prophecy of the three days that Jesus would spend in the grave. The early Christian Church more correctly elevates Jonah’s rescue from the belly of the fish into the standing type of the resurrection from the grave, a type which is found in all the plastic representa- tions that decorate the early Christian sarcophagi and other monuments. As far as can be seen, the canonicity of the book has never been seriously doubted. One might rather find in the Midrash ba-Midbar and perhaps also in Ta‘an. ii. a vague reference to a time when the book was classed, not with the “ Nebi’im,” but with the “Ketubim.” In that place it would at least find a sufficient counterpart in Ruth. This, however, is only a remote probability, and does not touch the question of the origin of the work. BIBLIOGRAPHY: The commentaries contained in Lange’s Bi- belwerk (Kleinert) and in the Kwrzgefasstes Exegetisches Handbuch ; Hitzig, 4th ed., 1904, by H. Steiner ; those of G. A. Smith in his Twelve Prophets; of J. Wellhausen, Die Kleinen Propheten, 1892, 3d ed. 1898; and of Nowack in his Kleine Propheten, 1897, 2d ed. 1904; Kalisch, Bible Studies, ii.; T. K. Cheyne, in Theological Review, 1877, pp. 211-217; C. H.H. Wright, Biblical Studies, 1886 ; J. 8. Bloch, Studien zur Gesch. der Sammlung der Althebrdischen Litteratur, 1875. Kes JONAH: Palestinian amora of the fourth cen- tury; leading rabbinical authority in the fourth amoraic generation. With Jose II., his early school- mate and lifelong colleague and business partner, he studied under Ze‘era I. and Ela (Bek. 30a; Yer. Ter. ii. 41d); and when, as young men, they called on Abbahu to express their sympathy with him in his bereavement, he treated them as prominent scholars (Yer. Sanh. vi. 23d). But Jonah’s special master was Jeremiah (Yer. Hal. i. 57c, ii. 58b), From these masters and others the youths acquired a thorough familiarity with the traditions, and gradually rose from pupils to fellows. Thus, it is said, “Haggai opened the discourse and Jonah and Jose closed it” (Yer. R. H. ii. 58b). Finally they succeeded to the rectorate of the academy at Tiberias. In his office Jonah was distinguished by his paternal care for his pupils, to whom he gave both advice and material support (Yer. Bezah i. 60c). According to the Biblical and rabbinical re- quirement he gave away the tithe of his income, but to those who studied the Law, not to priests or Levites, deriving his authority from II Chron. xxxi. 4 (Yer. Ma‘as. Sh. v. 56b). When he discovered a worthy man who was poor, he would aid him in such a way as not to hurt his self-respect. “I un- derstand,” he would say to him, “that you have fallen heir to an estate” or “that your debtors will soon pay you; borrow some money of me, which you may repay when you come into possession of your fortune.” As soon as the proffered loan had been accepted he would relieve the borrower from his promise by telling him, “This money is thine as a gift.” This procedure he regarded as suggested by the Psalmist: “Blessed is he that considereth E. G. H. \ 231 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA {Hebr. Sow = “dealeth prudently with”] the poor” (Ps. xli. 2 [A. V. 1]; Yer. Peah viii. 21b; Midi. Teh. to passage). Jonah also enjoyed a certain respect among the Romans (Yer. Ber. v. 9a; Ta‘an. 23b). He was in- cluded among those styled Sewers NYINT TD pn (“the mighty ones of the land of Israel”), because, the Rabbis explained, of the efficacy of his prayers in times of drought. The following miracle is re- lated of him: Once, on a Sabbath, fire broke out on his premises. A Nabateean whose property ad- joined Jonah’sattempted to extinguishit, but Jonah would not permit him thus to profane the Sabbath. “Dost thou rely on thy good luck?” mockingly asked the Nabatean; to which Jonah replied, “Yes”; whereupon the fire was quenched (Yer. Yoma viii. 45b). As rectors of the academy at Ti- berias, Jonah and Jose had many disciples, some of whom became leaders in the next generation, and spread and perpetuated their master’s doc- trines. Jonah left a worthy son and successor in the person of Mani II. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal..Amor. iii. 220-231; Frankel, Mebo, p. 98a; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, ii. 188b; Weiss, Dor, iii. 110. 8. 8. S. M. JONAH (ABU AL-WALID MERWAN IBN JANAH). See Ipn JANAn. JONAH BEN JUDAH GERSHON: Rabbi and author; died in Wilna 1808. He was dayyan of that city, and devoted his time to the study of the Tosefta, which he considered indispensable to a better understanding of the Mishnah and Gemara. But, finding the text corrupt, he undertook the work of preparing a critical edition of it and of providing it with a commentary by the aid of the citations from the Tosefta in the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds and their early commentaries. He made use also of the annotations of Elijah Wilna, in manuscript. Only the first part of Jonah’s work, on “ Zera‘im,” was published (Wilna, 1799). Thecom- mentary on the part “ Mo‘ed” is still in manuscript, in the possession of his grandson Jonah Gerstein. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, p. 206; idem, Keneset Yisrael, p. 449. 8. 8. , Ney Tels: JONAH LANDSOPHER. See LANDSOPHER, JONAH. JONAS, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN: Amer- ican lawyer, soldier, and statesman; born in Will- jiamstown, Grant county, Kentucky, July 19, 1884. In early youth he removed to Adams county, Illi- nois, where he received his education. In 1853 he went to New Orleans, where he took up the study of law, receiving his diploma from the law depart- ment of the University of Louisiana in 1855. Throughout the Civil war Jonas fought on the Confederate side, as a private of artillery, and subse- quently as acting adjutant of artillery, in Hood’s corps of the Army of Tennessee. From 1865 until the consummation of reconstruc- tion Jonas was a member of the Louisiana legisla- ture; and in the Democratic National Convention of 1868 he was chairman of the Louisiana delega- tion. Jonas was the Democratic candidate in 1872 for the office of lieutenant-governor of Louisiana, Jonah, Book of Jonas, Emile but resigned in favor of the Fusion nominee. The same year he was elected state senator. In 1874 Jonas was elected to the office of city at- torney of New Orleans, and was reelected in 1876. In the latter year he became a member of the National House of Representatives, serving up to the end of the session of 1877. In Congress Jonas was chairman of the judiciary committee. During this period he was the Democratic national com- mitteeman from hisown state. From March 18, 1879, to March 8, 1885, Jonas was United States senator from Louisiana in succession to James B. Eustis. On the expiration of his term of office President Cleveland appointed him surveyor of the port of New Orleans. He died Dec. 21, 1911. BIBLIOGRAPHY: The American Jewish Year Book, pp. 518, 519, Philadelphia, 1900; Pacific Jewish Annual, p. 141, San Francisco, 1898. A. Acie BY JONAS, EMIL (JACOB; pseudonym, Graf Loéwenbalk v. Hohenthal): German writer and publicist; born July 14, 1824, at Schwerin, Meck- lenburg; educated at the gymnasium of his native city and at Heidelberg. In 1845 he became editor of the “ Flensburger Zeitung.” This paper took the part of the Danish government, which had emanci- pated the Jews in Denmark as early as 1836, while in the duchies of Sleswick and Holstein Jews were merely tolerated. Weary of the lengthy political struggles, Jonas went to Copenhagen in 1847, where he engaged in teaching. A pamphlet that he wrote on the political conditions in Denmark and in the two duchies attracted the attention of the crown prince, who on his accession to the throne in 1848 as King Frederick VII. called Jonas to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and entrusted him with several im- portant missions. In 1849, when a liberal con- stitution was under discussion, Jonas published a pamphlet entitled “Das Hin- und Zweikammersys- tem,” which met with the approval of the king, who in 1851 appointed Jonas “ Kammer-Assessor” and private secretary. In 1852 he was transferred as “Kammer-Rath” to the ministry of Holstein. He resigned in 1854 for political reasons, although he remained connected with the court down to the king’s death. After the war of 1863-64 Jonas went to Berlin, where he engaged in literature, devoting himself chiefly to the translation of Scandinavian works and to the publishing of travelers’ guide-books, including “Reise- und Skizzenbuch fiir Schweden,” 1875; “Il- lustrirtes Reisebuch fiir Norwegen,” 1876; “Reise- handbuch fiir Kopenhagen,’’ 10 editions, 1886. His works include also a history of the Franco-Prussian war, a text-book for self-instruction in Swedish according to the Toussaint-Langenscheidt system, a German-Danish lexicon, and also ‘‘Konig Oscars Gedichte und Prosa-Schriften,” 1872-94, and “Anthologie Hervorragen-der Skandinawischer Dichter,”’ 1903. He died Feb. 2, 1912. Ss. JONAS, EMILE: -French musician; born at Paris March 5, 1827. He entered the Conservatoire in 1841, where he took the first prize in harmony in 1847 and the Grand Prix de Rome in 1848. Two overtures by him were played in the Conservatoire in 1851 and 1852 respectively. He later devoted him- Jonas, Moses Jonathan THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 232 self principally to the composition of comic oper- ettas in the style of Offenbach’s, his principal pro- ductions being: “Le Duel de Benjamin” (Bouffes Parisiens, 1855); “La Parade ” (1856); “ Le Roi Boit ” and “ Les Petits Prodiges ” (1857) ; “ Job et Son Chien” (1868); “Avant la Noce” (1865); “ Deux Arlequins ” (1865); “Le Canard a Trois Becs” (1869); “Javotte” (1871; afterward given in London as “ Cinderella”); “Le Premier Baiser ” (1883). From 1847 to 1866 Jonas was professor of sol- feggio at the Conservatoire, where he also conducted aclassin harmony for students of military music. He was musical director at the Portuguese synagogue of Paris, and has published a work entitled “ Recueil de Chants Hebraiques” (1854). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Baker, Biog. Dict. of Musicians, s.v. 8. J. So. JONAS, MOSES. See Bonn, JoNAS BEN Moses. JONATHAN, JEHONATHAN (jn3)', n°): 1. Son or descendant of Gershom, son of Moses. He officiated as a priest to the idol of Micah—a service continued in his family till the Israelites were driven from their country (Judges xviii. 80). In the passage in which Jonathan’s parentage is mentioned “Moses” is written with a suspended 3, so that it may be read “ Manasseh” ; and this reading is given by the Septuagint. On the other hand, the only son of Gershom, son of Moses, is called “Shebuel” in I Chron. xxiii. 16. Still, according to the Talmudists and to Jerome, Jonathan was the descendant of Moses. The Talmudists declare (B. B. 109b) that the “nun” was inserted in the name of this Moses out of respect to the great law giver, and that the former’s name was changed to “ Manasseh ” because the wick- edness of Jonathan resembled that of King Manasseh. They identify Jonathan with the above-mentioned Shebuel (zd. 110a), saying that he was so named be- cause he repented bx jaw = “he returned to God ”). The same interpretation is given by the Targum to I Chron. xxiii. 16. The adventure of Jonathan is narrated as follows: A young Levite of Beth-lehem-judah, in search of a home, happened to come to the house of Micah, and he was appointed by the latter to be his private priest. He was afterward recognized by the five Danite spies who were sent by their tribe to select a territory. When, later, the spies came that way with the warriors of their tribe, they attacked Micah’s house, and carried off the gods and the young Levite. The Danites conquered Laish, established there the idol of Micah, and appointed Jonathan to be their priest (Judges xvii. 7-xviii. 80). E. G. H. M. SEt. 2. Biblical Data: Eldest son of Saul (I Chron. viii. 83). Soon after his father’s accession (I Sam. xiii. 2) Jonathan is represented as sharing his father’s perils and enterprises, as the leader of a thou- sand men—one-third of the force kept under arms by Saul. Like Saul, Jonathan possessed great strength and agility, and, as becoming in a Benjamite, was a clever archer (II Sam. i. 22-28; I Chron. xii. 2). It was Jonathan who put to the sword the garrison of the Philistines in Geba, and thereby gave the signal for a general rising of the Israelites (I Sam. xiii. 3). This led to the complete overrunning of the land by the Philistines. The two armies, Israelitish and Philistine, met at the passage of Michmash, and took up positions on opposite sides of the ravine (I Sam. xiii. 16, 23). Jonathan, accompanied by his armor-bearer, scaled the opposite rock and surprised the Philistines, having previously decided to take an omen from the conduct of the enemy: if the enemy, on seeing him, should make a move as though about to attack him, he would wait in the ravine; but if the enemy dared him to ascend, he would doso. The lat- ter took place, and the daring act of Jonathan put the Philistines to flight (I Sam. xiv. 6-23). On that occasion Jonathan narrowly escaped death at the hands of his father. Before pursuing the Philistines Saul had pronounced a curse upon any one who should eat before the evening; Jonathan, unaware of this, ate some honey, and Saul sentenced him to death; the people, however, interfered on his behalf and saved him (I Sam. xiv. 24-45). Jonathan’s attachment to David began soon after the latter’s victory over Goliath; “the soul of Jona- than was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul” (I Sam. xviii. 1). The latter expression is repeated in I Sam. Jonathan xx. 17, their love being further de- and David. scribed in II Sam. i. 26 as “passing the love of women.” The friendship was confirmed by a covenant, Jonathan giving David his garments, sword, and bow, and on several occa- sions David escaped death at the hands of Saul through the intervention of Jonathan. Their part- ing was full of pathos, and was marked by passion- ate embraces and tears (I Sam. xvili. 8-4; xix. 1-7; xx. 1-84, 41-42). The disinterestedness of Jonathan’s affection for David is emphasized in the fact that Saul himself reminded him that while he had nothing to gain through David be had much to lose. It seems that Jonathan fully understood that popular feeling was running toward David, and that his father’s insan- ity was weakening the probability that the throne would remain with his family. Jonathan himself said to David at their last meeting, “Thou wilt reign over Israel and I will be thy second” (I Sam. xx. 80-31, xxiii. 17; comp. xviii. 5). In fact, their cov- enant stipulated that David should not exterminate Jonathan’s posterity (I Sam. xx. 15, 42). The greatest affection is said to have existed be- tween Jonathan and Saul; and when Jonathan un- dertook the dangerous attack on the enemy he had to conceal his intention from his father (I Sam. xiv. 1). Saul’s words, “though it be . . . Jonathan my son, he shall surely die” (I Sam. xiv. 89), show the father’s love for his son. When Saul decided on the death of David he consulted Jonathan, who in- duced him to abandon his intention (I Sam. xix. 1, 4-6). Jonathan was incredulous when told that his father, without revealing to him his decision, had again decided to slay David (I Sam. xx. 2). “Dur- ing Saul’s growing insanity the mutual attachment of father and son seems to have weakened. Saul on one occasion rebuked Jonathan, and cast his spear at him, whereupon Jonathan left the table (I Sam. xx. 30-34), Jonathan fell with his father and two younger brothers on Mount Gilboa (I Sam. xxxi. 2, 6). E. G. H. M. Set. 238 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jonas, Moses Jonathan ——In Rabbinical Literature: Jonathan’s omen (see BrsticaL Dara, above) is considered by Rab to be the typical omen (Hul. 95b). When it became known that Jonathan had transgressed Saul’s vow (comp. I Sam. xiv. 45), Saul would have slain him with the sword, but the people argued that Jona- than did it through ignorance, and redeemed him with a burnt offering (Pirke R. El. xxxviii.). In Midrash Shemuel (xvii. 8) the incident is stated differently. According to R. Eleazar, the people gave to the sacred treasury Jonathan’s weight in gold; according to R. Johanan, the people merely argued that Saul cursed only him who would eat bread, whereas Jonathan ate honey; R. Simeon b. Lakish assumed that Jonathan tasted, but did not eat. According to the Rabbis, when the virtues of David were enumerated before Saul (I Sam. xvi. 18), the latter in his jealousy exclaimed, “My son Jonathan possesses them too” (Sanh. 93b). The battle between Jonathan and the Philistines (I Sam. xiv. 18) was one of the three in which the heathen combined against the children of Israel, but were hindered by God from achieving their evil intentions (Gen. R. Ixxxi. 4). Jonathan’s love for David is considered the type of disinterestedness (Ab. v. 17). Jonathan is ranked by R. Judah the Saint among the great self-denying characters of Jewish history, though one of the rabbis remarked that his love for David may have been a result of his conviction that David’s great popularity was certain to place him on the throne in the end (B. M. 85a). Jonathan is declared guilty of the destruction of Nob (I Sam. xxii. 18-19), and of its consequences, which he could have prevented by lending David two loaves of bread (Sanh. 104a). 8. 8. M. Set. 8. Son of Shimeah and nephew of David, who slew a giant of Gath (II Sam. xxi. 20-21; I Chron. xx. 6-7); perhapsidentical with the Jonathan, uncle of David, who is styled “a wise man, and a scribe” (I Chron. xxvii. 32). 4. Son of Abiathar the priest, and last descendant of Eli. As a courier, he ren- dered great services to David during Absalom’s re- bellion (II Sam. xv. 27, 386; xvii. 17, 20). He also brought to Adonijah the news of Solomon’s acces- sion (I Kingsi. 42 e¢ seg.). 5. Son of Shage the Hararite; one of David’s mighty men (I Chron. xi. 84). The parallel list gives “Shammah the Hara- rite” (II Sam. xxiii. 33). 6 (Jehonathan). Son of Uzziah; one of David’s treasurers (I Chron. xxvii. 25). 7 (Jehonathan). Scribe in whose house Jere- miah was imprisoned (Jer. xxxvii. 15, 20). 8. Son of Kareah and brother of Johanan; one of the cap- tains after the fall of Jerusalem (Jer. xl. 8). In the Septuagint his name is omitted. 9. Father of Ebed, who returned from captivity at the head of fifty males of the children of Adin (Ezra viii. 6). 10. Son of Joiada. See JoHANAN BEN JEHOIADA. 11. Son of Asahel; he opposed (R. Y.) or assisted (A. V.) Ezra in regard to marriage with foreign women (Ezrax. 15). 12. Father of Zechariah the priest, who was one of the musicians in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. xii. 35). E. G. H. M. SE.. JONATHAN (NATHAN): Tanna of the sec- ond century; schoolfellow of Josran, apart from whom he is rarely quoted. Jonathan is generally so cited without further designation; but there is ample reason for identifying him with the less frequently occurring Jonathan (or Nathan) b. Joseph (or Jose; comp. Mek., Yitro, Bahodesh, 10, with Sifre, Deut. 32; Mek., Ki Tissa, 1, with Yoma 85b; Tosef., Nid- dah, ii. 2, Ket. 60b, and Yer. Sotah vii. 19c). In con- sequence of the Hadrianic religious persecutions he determined to emigrate from Palestine, and with several other scholars started on a journey to for- eign parts. But his patriotism and innate love for the Holy Land would not permit him to remain abroad (Sifre, Deut. 80). Jonathan and Josiah were educated together at the academy of Ishmael b. Elisha (Men. “57b), whose dialectic system, as op- posed to that of Akiba, they acquired. It is even reported that Jonathan all but converted Ben ‘Azzai, a “fellow student” of Akiba, to Ishmael’s system, and made him deeply regret his failure to study it more closely. Ben ‘Azzai then exclaimed, “ Wo is me that I have not waited on Ishmael” (Hul. 70b et seg.). Nevertheless, in later years, probably after Ishmael’s death, both Jonathan and Josiah adopted some of Akiba’s principles. Of Jonathan it is ex- pressly stated that “he followed the system of his teacher Akiba” (Yer. Ma‘as. v. 51d). Together, Jonathan and Josiah devoted their an- alytical minds to halakic midrashim, interpreting laws as they understood them from the correspond- ing Scriptural texts, but not suggesting them. Only one halakah unconnected with a Scriptural text bears theirnames. Their argumentations are mostly embodied in the Mekilta (about thirty) and in the Sifre to Numbers (over forty; see Hoffmann, “Zur Einleitung in die Halachischen Midraschim,” p. 38). Neither Jonathan nor Josiah appears in Rabbi’s compilation of the Mishnah, with the exception of a single sentence, in the name of Jonathan, in Abot iv. 9: “ Whoso observes the Law in poverty shall live to observe it in affluence; and whoso neglects the Law in affluence shall at last be compelled to neglect it because of poverty” (comp. Ab. R. N. xxx. 1 [ed. Schechter, pp. 41b, 45a]). Of other an- cient compilations, the Tosefta cites these scholars once (Tosef., Sheb. i. 7: the text has “ Nathan,” but the context shows unmistakably that “Jonathan ” is meant), while the Sifra mentions them twice (Sifra, Kedoshim, ix. 5, 11) by their names; once (Sifra, Behar, i. 9; comp. Ket. 60b) “Jonathan b. Joseph” occurs; and some of Josiah’s midrashim are cited, but anonymously (comp. Sifra, Wayikra, Hobah, xx. 8, with B. M. 54a; Sifra, Ahare, iv. 9, with Yoma 57b). Jonathan was the author of many aphorisms, among which is the following: “Consoling the mourner, Visiting the sick, and practical beneficence bring heavenly grace into the world” (Ab. R. N. xxx. 1). Contrary to the astrological views of his times, Jonathan taught the Scriptural idea of nat- ural phenomena; quoting Jer. x. 2, he added: “Wclipses may frighten Gentiles, but they have no significance for Jews” (Mek., Bo, 1; comp. Yalk., Ex. 188). To the question as to the permissibility of profaning the Sabbath to save human life he an- Jonathan ben Absalom Jonathan Levi THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 234 Sega eg a Ea ce ya CY a ed ee swered, “The Law says (Bx. xxxi. 16), ‘The chil- dren of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations’; but one may profane one Sabbath in order to preserve a man that he may observe many Sabbaths” (Mek., Ki Tissa; comp. Yoma 85b). According to him an ‘AM HA-AREz is one who has children and does not train them in the knowledge of the Law (Sotah 22a; comp. Ber. 47b). Jonathan contradicted the gen- eral opinion of earlier and of contemporaneous rabbis that a “rebellious son” as defined by the teachers of traditional law never was and never will be exe- cuted, and that communal apostasy never did and never will occur (sce CAPITAL PUNISHMENT); he de- clared that he himself had sat on the grave of an executed prodigal and had seen the ruins of a city which had been razed to the ground for general apostasy (Sanh. 71a). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 351 et seq.; Brill, Mebo ha-Mishnah, i. 153; Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 146; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii.; Weiss, Dor, ii. 126. 8.8. S. M. JONATHAN BEN ABSALOM: General of Simon Maccabeus. At the command of the latter he took possession of Joppa, and drove out the in- habitants in order that they might not be able to surrender the city to Tarfon (I Macc. xiii. 11; Jo- sephus, “ Ant.” xili. 6, § 4). G. S. Kr. JONATHAN B. ‘AKMAT: Palestinian amora of the third generation. According to Yer. Ter. xi. he was one of the teachers of Abbahu. It is proba- ble that he was a descendant of the ‘Akmai family of Jerusalem, in which there were many high priests (Yeb. 15b). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frankel, Mebo, p. 99. Ss. 8: AS He RR: JONATHAN (NATHAN) B. AMRAM: Semi-tanna of the second and third centuries; disci- ple of Judah I. and senior of Jannai, who consulted him concerning ritual questions (Hag. 20a; ‘Ab. Zarah 26b). Reluctance to make the possession of learning a means of material gain, so insistently in- culcated by the Rabbis (Ab. iv. 5 e¢ al/.), was charac- teristic of him. When there was a famine in the land, Judah I. offered food to any needy ones who were possessed of somelearning. Jonathan, forced by want, applied for aid, but not on the ground of scholarship. He denied his identity, and when asked what entitled him to Judah’s bounties, he replied, “Nothing more than being an animal and feeling the want of sustenance.” His plea was admitted; and when Judah’s son discovered the dissimulation and brought it to the notice of the patriarch, the condition was removed, and relief was thereafter granted to all applicants indiscriminately (B. B. 8a). 8. 8. JONATHAN B. ANAN: Sonof the high priest Anan; was appointed by Vitellius high priest in the place of Joseph Caiaphas, at the time of the Pass- over in the year 86 (Josephus, “Ant.” xviii. 4, § 8). For reasons unknown he was deposed by Vitellius when the latter was in Jerusalem the second time, and his brother Theophilus was appointed in his place (vb. 5, § 3). When King Agrippa I. deposed Simon Cantheras (c. 48) he wished to appoint Jonathan againas high priest; but the latter refused the office, saying he was satisfied to have once worn the high- priestly garments. He recommended his brother Matthias for the office; and the latter was appointed (ib. xix. 6, § 4). During the sanguinary conflict between the Judeans and the Samaritans, under the procurator CuMANUS, Jonathan together with several nobles represented the cause of the Judeans before the Syrian legate at Tyre, and he also went in the same capacity to the emperor Claudius at Rome, He brought about the appointment of Felix as procura- tor in the year 52 (Josephus, “B. J.” ii. 12, §§ 5, 6; comp. “Ant.” xx. 8,§ 5). Jonathan often exhorted Felix to mend his ways, in order that the people might not reproach him (Jonathan) for having brought the procurator into the country. As Jona- than was hated by the Sicarii also, this just and peaceable man was treacherously assassinated at the instigation of Felix (“B. J.” ii. 18, § 3; “ Ant.” xx. 8, § 5). G. S. Kr. JONATHAN (NATHAN) OF BET GUB- RIN (= Eleutheropolis ; Rapoport, “‘Erek Mil- lin,” pp. 58 ef seg.): Palestinian scholar of the third century; junior of Joshua b. Levi and senior of Simon b. Pazzi (Cant. R.i. 1). He confined his labors to the Haggadah, and contributed to the Mid- rash several homilies, some of which, however, are given under different names in other compilations. One of his sayings was: “Four great languages have been given to the world: Greek for song, Ara- maic for dirges, Hebrew for conversation, Latin for war” (Yer. Meg.i. 71b; comp. Esth. R. iv. 6; Midr. Teh. xxxi. 21). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 592. s. 8. poses JONATHAN BEN DAVID HA-KOHEN OF LUNEL: French philosopher; flourished in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. He defended Maimonides against the severe attacks of Abraham ben David of Posquiéres (RABaD), and at Jona- than’s instance Maimonides sent to Lunel his “ Moreh Nebukim,” which Samuel ibn Tibbon translated into Hebrew. Jonathan is the author of a commentary on a work by Alfasi. About 1210, shortly before his departure for Palestine, whither he went with Tobiah and Samuel ben Simson, he corresponded with Isaac ben Abraham of Dampierre, who had sent him a Talmudic responsum on a subject con- cerning the Holy Land. BIBLIOGRAPHY: I. Lattes, Sha‘are Ziyyon, p. 't4; Gross, in Monatsschrift, 1874, p. 21; Steinschneider, Hebr. Uebers. p. 416; R. EB. J. vi. 177. G. Soak JONATHAN BEN ELEAZAR: Palestinian scholar of the third century; contemporary of Ha- nina b. Hama (Shab. 49a et seg.); disciple of Simon b. Jose b. Lakonya. Rabbah b. Hana twice reports com- munications which he had with Jonathan in which the latter speaks of his intercourse with Simon (Pes. 5a; see Rabbinowicz, “Dikduke Soferim,” ad (oc. ; Bek. 88b). It is also related that Jonathan once propounded to Simon a ritualistic question, and that 235 the teacher misunderstood it and chided him. But when Jonathan respectfully corrected his teacher, explaining his problem more clearly, Simon found it too difficult for him to solve, and invited his pupil to follow him to another school in quest of the needed solution, which they obtained from a baraita taught by Hezekiah (Yer. Hor. ii. 45d; comp. Sheb. 18b). Sometimes he is cited as “Jonathan b. Elea- zar Sar [Ish] ha-Birah [Castellan],” or as “ Jonathan Ish ha-Birah” (Tan., Wayiggash, 12, ed. Buber; Gen. R. xcv. 3). Generally, however, he is cited without either patronymic or cognomen, and his name ap- pearsin this form quite frequently in both Talmuds. Jonathan was a Babylonian by birth, and his first associates in Palestine were the foremost Babylonian immigrants, Hiyya Rabbah and Hanina b. Hama (Hul. 45a; Yer. Ber. v. 9a; Yer. Pes. vi. 83b). In company with the latter and Joshua b. Levi he once made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem (Yer. Ma‘as. Sh. iii. 54b). He was very charitable; when a prominent official came to his city he would make him costly presents, in order, as he said, to pave the way for eventual intercession on behalf of a widow or an orphan whose suit might be subject to the decision ot that official (Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah ii. 41d). To him is also ascribed the halakah that a son may be com- pelled to support his parent; and it is related that once, while he was in the company of Yannai, he was humbly kissed by a stranger. Yannai asked whether he knew the man, and Jonathan informed him that the man had once appealed to him against his hard-hearted son, who would not support him, and that he had forced the son to do his duty toward his father (Yer. Peah i, 15d; comp. Ket. 49b). As a halakist he paid due regard to expediency. According to him, one may do anything or use any- thing (otherwise forbidden) as a remedy against dis- ease—idolatrous objects, lawless cohabitation, and bloodshed excepted (Yer. Shab. xiv. 14d; comp. Pes. 25a). He taught that “One must appear justified be- fore men as well as before God.” He based this doc- trineon dicta in the Prophets and Hagiographa(Josh. xxii. 22; Prov. iii. 4), but mainly on Num. xxxii. 22: “Yeshall. . . be guiltless before the Lord, and be- fore Israel” (Yer. Shek. iii. 47c). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. i. 58-88; Frankel, Mebo, p. 99a; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, ii. 149a; Weiss, Dor, iii. 52. 8. 8. 5. M. JONATHAN BEN HORKINAS (ARCHI- NAS): Palestinian scholar of the first century; contemporary of Eleazar b. Azariah and a disciple of the school of Shammai. He was reputed for his acuteness, in recognition of which he was styled “bekor satan” (= “first-born as adversary,” 7.é., a fierce disputant; Yer. Yeb. i. 6; Yeb. 16a; comp. Rashi ad loc., and rabbinic dictionaries, s.v. “Be- kor”). R. Zemah, however, amends the reading to “bekor shoteh” (lit. “ foolish first-born son”; applied to a son first-born to the mother—but not to the father; Zacuto, “ Yuhasin,” ed. Filipowski, p. 11). Although the school of Hillel was the standard au- thority in halakic matters, Jonathan prevailed upon some of the Rabbis to permit, in accordance with the school of Shammai, marriage between aman and his brother’s widow, where she was the co-wife of his THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA aa Se eee Jonathan ben Absalom Jonathan Levi daughter. The Jerusalem Talmud (Yeb. /.c.) relates concerning this the following incident: The disciples of Hillel, having heard that a son of Horkinas had granted this permission, credited it to Dosa b. Horki- nas, Jonathan’s older brother, of the school of Hillel, and consequently went to Dosa for an explanation. Dosa referred them to his brother Jonathan, who, he said, had three hundred arguments in favor of such a marriage. The Rabbis then went to Jona- than, whom Dosa had warned by letter to prepare for a visit from the wise men of Israel. Jonathan, accordingly, explained to the Rabbis his arguments, but they could not understand them. Becoming impatient, he cast clods of earth at them and drove them out through three different doors. Then he wrote to his brother: “Thou hast informed me of the visit of the wise men of Israel, but those that came to me are in need of learning.” Meeting Akiba, Jonathan said to him: “Thou art lucky to have acquired such renown while thou hast not yet acquired the knowledge of a cowherd” (Yeb. J.c.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., iv. 20; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. So 4 M. SEL. JONATHAN BEN JACOB: Hungarian Tal- mudist and author; flourished at Buda (Ofen) toward . the end of the seventeenth century. In 1688, when Buda was taken by the imperial troops, Jonathan was among the captives, but he was ransomed by the Jews of Nikolsburg. Jonathan wrote: “Ke- set Yehonatan” (Dyhernfurth, 1797), a treatise on morals and asceticism taken from the “Shene Lu- hot ha-Berit”; “Sefer Hasidim,” and other caba- listic works; “Neu Ma‘aseh-Buch ” (2b. 1797), a col- lection of Judzeo-German stories. He had previously edited the “Ma’amar ha-‘Ittim” of Menahem Aza- riah di Fano (7. 1698). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 105; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1482. G. M. SE. JONATHAN BEN JOSEPH: Lithuanian rabbi and astronomer; lived at Risenoi, government of Grodno, in the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- turies. In addition to his Talmudical acquirements Jonathan was proficient in astronomy and mathe- matics. In 1710 a terrible plague visited the town of Risenoi, and Jonathan and his family lived an entire year in the fields. He then vowed that, should he be spared, he would disseminate astro- nomical knowledge among his coreligionists. To fulfil this vow Jonathan, although he became blind, went to Germany, where the bibliographer Wolf met him in 1725. Jonathan was the author of “ Yeshu‘ah be- Yisrael,” an astronomical commentary on Maimonides’ laws on the neomenia (Frankfort- on-the-Main, 1720), and “Bi’ur,” a commentary on Abraham ben Hiyya’s astronomical work “Zurat ha-Arez ” (Offenbach, 1720). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wolf, Bibliotheca Hebrova, iti., No. 844¢; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 184; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1483; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 428. a. BR: JONATHAN LEVI ZION: Representative of the Jewish community of Frankfort-on-the-Main in its defense against the attacks of John Pfeffer- korn. When the latter had obtained from Emperor Jonathan Maccabeus THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 236 Maximilian I. an edict ordering the confiscation of all Hebrew books (Aug. 19, 1509), Jonathan Levi Zion went to Worms to obtain its suspension by the imperial court. Failing in this, he was sent to Italy to plead before the emperor personally. When he reached the emperor’s headquarters at Verona, he met there Isaac of Triest, through whose influ- ence he obtained an audience with the emperor, who promised that he would send them his decision. A week later the Margrave of Baden, whom the em- peror appointed procurator, promised Jonathan to do everything in his power in favor of the Jews. But Pfefferkorn’s arrival (Oct. 29, 1509) frustrated the hopes of the Jewish delegate. Whenever he met Jonathan in the streets of Verona he intimi- dated him by threats and insults. Fearing for his personal safety, Jonathan threw himself at the feet of the emperor and asked for protection. For a time Maximilian was inclined to submit the affair to a committee of princes. But the two Jewish dele- gates asked for a postponement in the hope of find- ing substitutes more able to plead their cause against their opponent. A letter from Archbishop Uriel of Mayence, ex- posing Pfefferkorn’s ignorance, and a renewed ap- peal of the Jews made some impression upon the emperor. At the beginning of November he issued a decree authorizing the archbishop to examine the confiscated books; ina second decree he enjoined the magistrate of Frankfort to submit to the deci- sion of the archbishop. Through Erwin Hutten, Jonathan had knowledge of these decrees before they were sent, and reported to Frankfort this favor- able turn of affairs. But on Novy. 10 the emperor modified the first decree and ordered the continu- ance of the confiscation. After vainly protesting Jonathan returned to Frankfort. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Gratz, Gesch. ix. 93-94, 523 et seq.; Kracauer, in Zeitschrift fiir die Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland, i. 170 et seq. D. S. Man. JONATHAN MACCABEUS: Son of Matta- thias; leader of the Jews in the Maccabean wars from 161 to 148 B.c. He is called also Apphus (Argoic [Syriac, wipn] = “the dissembler,” “the diplomat,” in allusion to a trait prominent in him; I Mace. ii. 5). With his brother Judah, Jonathan had taken an active part in the battles against the Syrians, and although he displayed less bravery than Judah, his courage had been frequently tried, and he gave brilliant proof of it on many occasions in his career. After Judah’s death the Syrian gen- eral Bacchides proceeded with crushing rigor against the Maccabean party ; and at the same timea famine broke out in the land. In this ex- Leader of tremity the Jews chose Jonathan for the Jews. their leader. Noticing that Bacchides was trying to entrap him, he retired with his brother Simeon and his followers to a desert region in the country east of the Jordan, camping near amorass by the name of Asphar. As Bacchides followed him even there, overtaking him on a Sab- bath, Jonathan gave all the baggage into the hands of his brother Johanan. Johanan went to the friendly Nabatzans; but a hostile tribe, the sons of Jambri of Medaba, killed him and his companions and seized the baggage (I Macc. ix. 82-36; Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 1, § 2). Jonathan subsequently avenged this treachery. On that Sabbath Jonathan and his companions were forced to engage in battle with Bacchides. Jonathan had encountered and had raised his hand to slay Bacchides, when the latter evaded the blow; the Jews, defeated, sought refuge by swimming through the Jordan to the western bank. In this first encounter Bacchides lost about 1,000 men. Soon after this event, informed that one of the sons of Jambri was leading home a noble bride in great pomp, the Maccabean brothers proceeded to Medaba, ambushed the bridal procession, killed the entire party, to the number of 300, and seized all the treas- ure (I Mace. ix. 87-49; Josephus, /.c. xiii. 1, §§ 3-4). They remained, however, in the swamp in the coun- try east of the Jordan, and Bacchides thought them so insignificant that, after the death of the high priest Alcimus, his creature, he left the country. Two years afterwards the Hellenistic Jews in the Acra, whom Jonathan had certainly endeavored to injure, went, as in the time of Judah, to King Demetrius and asked to have Bacchides sent back, thinking that Jonathan and his followers could be destroyed inanight. But this proved impossible, as Jonathan was on his guard, and Bacchides in his anger killed fifty of the leaders of the Hellenists. Jonathan and Simeon thought it well to retreat far- ther, and accordingly fortified in the desert a place called Beth-hogla (“Bet Hoglah” for BySadaya in Josephus; I Macc. has Ba:dGact, perhaps = Bet Bosem or Bet Bassim [“ spice-house ”], near Jericho) ; there they were besieged several days by Bacchides. Jonathan left his brother Simeon in charge of the defense, while he himself made inroads into the neighboring country, fought with a certain Odares and his brothers, and with the sons of Phasiron, and attacked the rear of the army of Bacchides, who, compelled to retire, again punished the Hellenists at Jerusalem. When Jonathan perceived that Bacchides re- gretted having set out, he asked for peace and an exchange of prisoners. Bacchides readily consented, swore that he would nevermore make war upon - Jonathan, and then returned home. Jonathan now took up his residence in the old city of Michmash, and cleared the land of the godless and the apostate (I Macc. ix. 55-73; Josephus, J.c. xiii. 1, &§ 5-6). The chief source, the First Book of the Maccabees, says that with this “the sword ceased in Israel”; and in fact nothing is reported for the five following years (158-153). But Jonathan must have used this period to good advantage, for he was soon in possession of great power. An important event brought the design of the Maccabeans to fruition. Demetrius I., Soter, lost the friendship of the kings of Pergamus and Egypt, who set up against him an adventurer, Alexander Balas, as rival king. Demetrius was now forced to recall the garrisons of Judea, except those in the Acra and at Beth-zur; he also made a bid for the loyalty of Jonathan, whom he permitted to recruit an army and to take the hostages kept in the Acra. Jonathan gladly accepted these terms, and took up his residence at Jerusalem, which he began tu 237 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jonathan Maccabeus ee fortify (153). “Balas, however, offered Jonathan still more favorable terms, even appointing him high priest; Jonathan thereby became the Jonathan official leader of his people, and the High Hellenistic party could no longer at- Priest. tack him. On the Feast of Taber- nacles in 153 Jonathan put on the high priest’s garments and officiated for the first time. He had determined to side with Balas, not trustin g Demetrius, who in a second letter made promises that he could hardly have kept and conceded pre- rogatives that were almost impossible (I Macc. x. 1-46; Josephus, “ Ant.” xiii. 2, §$ 1-4). The events justified Jonathan’s action; Demetrius lost his throne and life, and Balas became King of Syria. The Egyptian king, Ptolemy Philometor, gave Balas his daughter Cleopatra to wife, taking her as far as Ptolemais to meet him. After the wedding, Jonathan was invited to that city. He appeared with presents for both kings, and was permitted to sit between them as their equal; Balas even clothed him with his own royal garment and otherwise ac- corded him high honor. He would not listen to the Hellenistic party that still accused Jonathan, but appointed Jonathan as strategus and “meridarch ” (¢.€., civil governor of a province; details not found in Josephus), and sent him back with honors to Jeru- salem (I Macc. x. 51-66; Josephus, “Ant.” xili. 4, § 1). Jonathan proved grateful. Demetrius II. tried to win back his father’s throne (147), and Apollonius Taos, governor of Cele-Syria, who Victory probably had joined Demetrius, chal- over Ap- lenged Jonathan to battle, saying that ollonius. the Jews might for once leave the mountains and venture out into the plain. Thereupon Jonathan and Simeon appeared, with 10,000 men, before Joppa, where the forces of Apollonius lay, and the gates of which were opened to them out of fear. But reenforced from Azotus, Apollonius appeared with 3,000 men in the plain, relying on his cavalry, and forced Jonathan to en- gage in battle. The missiles of the horsemen re- bounded from the shields of Simeon’s men, who suc- cessfully resisted the enemy’s onslaughts. Jonathan in the meantime vanquished the infantry, scattered it in wild flight, and pursued it to Azotus, which city he took by assault, burning it and its villages, including the Temple of Dagon. In reward, Balas gave him the city of Ekron with the outlying terri- tory. The people of Azotus vainly complained to King Ptolemy Philometor, who had come to make war upon his son-in-law Balas, that Jonathan had destroyed their city and temple. Jonathan met Ptolemy at Joppa, accompanied him as far as the River Eleutherus, and then returned to Jerusalem (I Macc. x. 67-89, xi. 1-7; Josephus, l.c. xiii. 4, §§ 3-5). Ae was vanquished by Ptolemy, and Demetrius II. ascended the throne of the Seleucids (145). Jon- athan took this opportunity to conquer the Acra, still garrisoned by a Syrian force and inhabited by the Jewish Hellenists (I Macc. xi. 20; Josephus, l.c. xiii. 4,§ 9). The king was greatly incensed; he ap- peared with an army at Ptolemais and ordered Jon- athan to come beforehim. Without raising the siege Jonathan, accompanied by the elders and priests, went to the king, and pacified him with presents, so that the king not only confirmed Under De- him in his office of high priest, but metrius II. gave to him the three Samaritan topar- chies of Ephraim, Lydda, and Rama- thaim. In consideration of a present of 800 talents the entire country was exempted from taxes, the ex- emption being confirmed in writing. Jonathan in return left the Acra in Syrian hands. A new pre- tender to the throne appeared in the person of the young Antiochus VI., son of Balas, in the care of a certain Trypho, who himself had designs on the throne. In face of this new enemy, Demetrius not only promised to withdraw the garrison from the Acra, but also called Jonathan his ally and requested him to send*troops. The 3,000 men of Jonathan protected Demetrius in his capital, Antioch, against his own subjects (I Macc. xi. 21-52; Josephus, J.c. xiii. 4, § 9; 5, §§ 2-3; “R. E. J.” xlv. 34). As Demetrius did not keep his promise, Jonathan thought it better to support the new king when Try- pho and Antiochus seized the capital, especially as the last-named confirmed all his rights and appointed his brother Simeon strategus of the seacoast, from the “ Ladder of Tyre” to the frontier of Egypt. athan and Simeon were now entitled to make con- quests; Ashkelon submitted voluntarily, and Gaza was forcibly taken. Jonathan vanquished even the strategi of Demetrius far to the north, in the plain of Hazar, and Simeon at the same time took the strong fortress of Beth-zur on the pretext that it har- bored Demetrians (I Macc. xi. 53-74; Josephus, J.c. xiii. 5, $$ 3-7). Like Judahin former Friendship years, Jonathan sought alliances with with Rome foreign peoples. He renewed the and treaty with Rome, and exchanged Sparta. friendly messages with Sparta and other places. (It should be added that this point and the documents referring to it are open to question.) The followers of Demetrius collected at Hamath, but scattered again at the ap- proach of Jonathan. The latter vanquished an Ara- bian tribe, the Zabadeans, entered Damascus, and went through the whole country. On his return to Jerusalem he had a conference with the elders, for- tified the city, and cut off all intercourse with the Acra (I Macc. xii. 1-22, 24-37; Jose- phus, /.c. xiii. 5, §$ 8, 10-11). Even before this, Simeon had sent a Jewish garrison to Joppa and fortified the city of Hadid in the west of Judea. This made Trypho suspicious; he went with an army to Judea, invited Jonathan to Scythopolis for a friendly conference, and per- suaded him to dismiss his army of 40,000 men, promising to give him Ptolemais and other fortresses, Jonathan fell into the trap; he took with him to Ptolemais 1,000 men, all of whom were slain; he himself was taken prisoner (I Macc. xii. 383-38, 41- 58; Josephus, J.c. xiii. 5, § 10; 6, §§ 1-8). When Trypho was about to enter Judea at Hadid, he was confronted by the new Jewish leader, Simeon, ready for battle. Trypho, avoiding an engage- ment, demanded one hundred talents and Jonathan’s two sons as hostages, in return for which he promised to liberate Jonathan, Although Simeon Trypho. Jon- * Jonathan the Sadducee Jose, Abba THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 238 oe ee Ss SE ES ES roe did not trust Trypho, he complied with the request in order that he might not be accused of the death of his brother. But Trypho did not liberate his pris- oner; angry that Simeon blocked his way every- where and that he could accomplish nothing, he killed Jonathan at Baskama, in the country east of the Jordan (148; I Macc. xiii. 12-80; Josephus, J.¢. xiii. 6, § 5). Jonathan was buried by Simeon at Modin. Nothing is known of his two captive sons. One of his daughters was the ancestress of Flavius Jose- phus (Josephus, “ Vita,” $1). See Jupas Macca- BEUS. G. S. Kr. JONATHAN THE SADDUCEE: Friend of the Hasmonean prince John Hyrcanus (135-104 B.c.). As the Pharisees belittled the prince’s fitness for the office of high priest, Jonathan incited the prince against them, with the intention of driving them out of office. He succeeded in doing so, for toward the end of his life John Hyrcanus turned-from the Pharisees and favored the Sadducees (Josephus, “Ant.” xiii, 10, § 6). Josephus calls Jonathan ‘Iwvddyc, In the corresponding Talmudic account (Kid. 66a) Eleazar b. Po’era is mentioned as having worked for the same object. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Derenbourg, Hist. p. 79; Paris, 1867; Gritz, Gesch. 4th ed., iii. 116, 684; Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., i. 272; I. Lévi, in R. H. J. xxxv. 220. G. 8. Kr. JONATHAN SAR HA-BIRAH. See Jona- THAN BEN ELEAZAR. JONATHAN BEN UZZIEL: Hillel’s most dis- tinguished pupil (Suk. 28a; B. B. 184a). No hala- kot of his have been preserved, though a tradition makes him the author of a halakah which, if au- thentic, proves him to have possessed the quality of unselfishness in a marked degree. A man whose children had misconducted themselves had _ be- queathed to Jonathan the whole of his property. Jonathan, however, kept only one-third, giving one- third to the sanctuary, and one-third to the chil- dren of the deceased (B. B. 184a). According to another version, Jonathan’s father, Uzziel, disin- herited him and left his estate to Shammai, who, however, declined to receive it (Yer. Ned. v. 6). Ac- cording to Meg. 3a, Jonathan wrote a targum to the Prophets to remove all impediments to the under- standing of the Scriptures. It is, however, gener- ally conceded to be doubtful whether the targum to the Prophets that has been preserved is his. He is said to have desired to translate the Ketubim also. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Weiss, Dor, i. 177. 8. 5 ye On JONATHANSON, AARON B. ZEBI: Rus- sian Hebraist and poet; born about 1815; died in Kovno July 27, 1868. His father, a great-grandson of Jonathan Eybeschiitz, settled in Wilna, and there Aaron followed the profession of teacher until about 1859, when he removed to Yanova, near Kovno. He corresponded with Isaac Erter; and Judah Lob Gordon, who was one of his pupils, remembered him with great affection and thought well of his poetry. Jonathanson was the author of “Kele Shir” (Wilna, 1864), a collection of poems and epigrams. His son Zebi Jonathanson (born in Wilna 1841) is the author of “Shire Ziyyon” (Warsaw, 1893), a volume of poetry. Another son, Jonathan Jona- thanson (born in Wilna July 5, 1858), now (1904) residing in New York, is a contributor to the Yid- dish periodical press under the nom de plume “ Kal wa-Homer.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Karmel, vii., No. 22; Ha-Meliz, viii., No. 34: Eisenstadt, Hakme Yisrael be-Amerika, p. 55, New York, 1903. PA Wit. H, R. JONES, ALFRED T.: American editor and communal worker; born in Boston July 4, 1822; died at Philadelphia Oct. 3, 1888. In 1842 he be- came a resident of Philadelphia, and was succes- sively engaged in the wholesale clothing and print- ing businesses. In 1875 he established the “Jewish Record,” a newspaper which remained in existence until 1886. Jones was the secretary of the first Jewish Publi- cation Society (organized 1845), president of the Jewish Benevolent Society and of the Hebrew Soci- ety for the Visitation of the Sick and Mutual As- sistance, manager of the Hebrew Relief Society, sec- retary of the Fuel Society, director of the United Hebrew Charities, member of the advisory board of the Jewish Foster Home, secretary and vice- president of the Hebrew Education Society, past master of the Shekinah Lodge of Masons, and for over thirty years its secretary, besides being promi- nent in other lodges. Jones was first president of the Jewish Hospital Association, first president of the Jewish Immigrants’ Aid Society, and president of the Congregation Beth-El-Emeth, all of Phila- delphia. A. D. Su. JONES, THOMAS: English publisher; con- vert to Judaism; born in 1791; died in London May 25, 1882. By birth a Roman Catholic, his change of faith was the result of deep study and conviction. Jones, who for many years pursued the business of publisher and bookseller in Paternoster Tow, was well versed in Biblical literature, and was a frequent attendant at the Spanish and Portuguese synagogue, being specially scrupulous in his ob- servance of the sacred festivals. Later, by reason of ill health and reduced circumstances, he resided with his daughter, who was a Sister of Mercy at the Hospital of St. John of Jerusalem. Here he re- mained steadfast to his adopted faith, BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. June 2, 1882, ai G. L. JOPPA. See JAFFA. JORAM. See JEnoRAM. JORDAN, THE (}4>"): Principal river of Pales- tine, formed by the confluence of three streams ri- sing respectively at (1) Baniyas (Paneas), (2) Tell al- Kadi (Dan), and (8) Hasbeyah (Baal Gad) at the foot of Mt. Hermon. The Jordan flows south through the Bahr al-Hulah (Lake Merom) and Bahr al-Ta- bariyyah (Lake of Tiberias or Gennesaret) and emp- ties into the Dead Sea at its northernmost point, 137 miles in a straight line from the river’s source. The Jordan’s course is so winding that between Ti- berias and the Dead Sea, a direct distance of 65 miles, it measures 200. At Tiberias the water is 239 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jonathan the Sadducee Jose, Abba clear, but farther down it becomes yellow. The stream is very rapid, for it has a fall of 3,000 feet from its source to its mouth. The Jordan valley (in Arabic “ Al-Ghor”) is geologically remarkable as compared with the remainder of Palestine. The lower portion lies far below the level of the sea, and it is furthermore lined on both sides by cliffs which rise precipitously above it in abrupt terraces and shut it off from all breezes. Its climate is there- fore tropical, the temperature being rarely below 77° and sometimes as high as 180°. In flora and fauna it is to a corresponding degree distinct: plants characteristic of Nubia, Abyssinia, and the Sahara grow in rank luxuriance; fishes proper to Lake Tanganyika are found in the Sea of Galilee; and birds which belong naturally in Ceylon and India are seen throughout the valley. —Biblical Data: Except in Ps. xlii. 7 (A. V. 6) and Job xl. 23, “Jordan” occurs with the defi- nite article, its meaning being “the descender.” The Jordan is pointed out as the source of fertility to a large plain (“Kikkar ha-Yarden”), called on account of its luxuriant vegetation “the garden of God” (Gen. xiii. 10). There is no regular descrip- tion of the Jordan in the Bible; only scattered and indefinite references to it are given. Jacob crossed it and its tributary, the Jabbok (the modern Al]- Zarka), in order to reach Haran (Gen. xxxii. 11, 23- 24). Itis particularly noted as the line of demarca- tion between the “two tribes and the half tribe” set- tled to the east (Num. xxxiv. 15) and the “nine tribes and the half tribe of Manasseh” that, led by Joshua, settled to the west (Josh. xiii. 7, passim). The sources of the Jordan are not mentioned; and only in the short description of the eastern boundary of the latter tribes (Num. xxxiv. 10-12) is the Jor- dan mentioned in connection with Chinnereth (Gen- nesaret) and the Dead Sea, the latter being the southern end of the boundary-line. Opposite Jeri- cho it was called “the Jordan of Jericho” (Num. xxxiv. 15, xxxv. 1, passim). The Jordan in gen- eral is very deep (comp. I Macc. ix. 48), but it has a number of fords, and one of them is famous as the place where 42,000 Ephraimites were slain by Jeph- thah (Judges xii. 5-6). It seems that these are the same fords mentioned as being near Beth-barah, where Gideon Jay in wait for the Midianites (Judges vii. 24). In the plain of the Jordan, between Suc- coth and Zarthan, is the clay ground where Solomon had his brass-foundries (I Kings vii. 46). In Biblical history the Jordan appears as the scene of several miracles, the first taking place when the Jordan, near Jericho, was crossed by the Israelites under Joshua (Josh. iii. 15-17). Later the two tribes and the half tribe that settled east of the Jordan built a large altar on its banks as “a-witness” be- tween them and the other tribes (Josh. xxii. 10, 26 e¢ seqg.). 'The Jordan was crossed dry-shod by Elijah and Elisha, each of whom divided the waters with a stroke of the mantle (II Kings ii. 8, 14). Elisha performed two other miracles at the Jordan: he healed Naaman by having him bathe seven times in its waters, and he made the ax of one of the children of the prophets float by throwing a piece of wood into the water (II Kings v. 14, vi. 6). The Jordan was crossed by Judas Maccabeus and his brother Jonathan during their war with the Nabateans (I Macc. y. 24). A little later the Jordan was the scene of the battle between Jonathan and Bacchides, in which the latter was defeated (I Macc. ix. 42-49). E.G. H. M. SEL. —In Rabbinical Literature: According to the Talmud jw" is a compound, 1 aa" (= which de- scended from Dan”), and the river was called thus because it takes its source in the grotto of Paneas, in the city of Dan (the Biblical Leshem; Bek. 55a; comp. Josephus, “B. J.” iii. 10,§ 7). The Jordan is one day’s march from Jerusalem (Ma‘as. Sh. v. 2). It traverses lakes Samko (Samachonitis) and Tibe- rias, the Dead Sea, falls into the Mediterranean, and there flows into the mouth of Leviathan (Bek. 55a; B. B. 74b). However, by a miracle, the water of the Jordan, the use of which in the Temple was prohibited on account of its impurity (Parah viii. 9), does not mingle with the waters of the Lake of Tiberias (Gen. R. iv.), The river bears the name “Jordan” only below Bet Jericho (Bet Jerah, ac- cording to the reading proposed by Neubauer, “G. T.” p. 80), on the Lake of Tiberias (Bek. 55a). Its current is so strong that boats can not ascend it, but can only cross from one shore to’ the other (Yer. Shab. iv. 2). When the Israelites came to the Jordan the water piled itself intoa pillar twelve miles in height, leav- ing dry a space equivalent to that occupied by the Israelitish camp, so that the whole people could cross together. According to Eleazar ben Simeon the water formed itself into arches more than three hundred miles in height, which were seen by all the kings of the East and West (Sotah 34a; Ler. Sotah vii. 81b). The hornet which fought for the Jews stopped at the Jordan, but did not cross it (Sotah 86a). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Neubauer, La Géographie du Talmud, pp. 29 et seq. 8. 8, eBR JOSE (Joseph), ABBA, BEN DOS. TAT (Do- sai; Derosai; Dosa): Palestinian tanna of the second century; mentioned as both halakist and haggadist. He transmitted a halakahof R. Jose the Galilean (Tosef., Ta‘an. ii. 6). His haggadot con- sist chiefly of reconciliations between contradictory Biblical passages, almost all of them being trans- mitted by Rabbi (Judah I.). A series of them is in the Sifre to Num. 42; they are reproduced in Num. R. xi. 19, and single haggadot occur in Sanh. 82a, Yoma 22a, Zeb. 116b, and elsewhere. Lev. R. xxiv. 3 and Tan., Kedoshim, 9, preserve a demon-story the hero of which is called Jose of Zitor; while according to Midr. Teh. to Ps. xx. 7, where the same story occurs, the hero is Abba Jose b. Dositai. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 888; idem, Ag. Pal. Amor. ii. 450; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 8. 8. M. SEL. JOSE, ABBA, BEN HANIN: Palestinian tanna of the last decades before the destruction of the Temple; contemporary of E1imzER B. JACOB and of Hanina B. ANTIGONUS, with both of whom he is mentioned in a halakic discussion (Tosef., Suk. iv. 15). His name occurs also as “Abba Jose b. Hanan,” or “b. Johanan ” (which is erroneously fol- lowed by “ish Yerushalayim ”), “ Abba Joseph,” and Jose, Abba Jose ben Halafta THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 240 wee oe ee et a Ee ae ee “Abba Issi.” Jose’s halakot are also mentioned in Sifre, Num. 8, Mid. ii. 6, and Sotah 20b. He trans- mitted a haggadah of Abba Cohen Bardela (Sifre, Deut. 2) and one of Samuel ha-Katon (Derek Erez Zuta ix.). A sentence of Jose’s, rebuking the priestly families that acted violently toward the people, transmitted by Abba Saul b. Botnit, reads as follows: “ Wo unto me for the house of Baithus and its rods; wo unto me for the house of Hanin and its calumnious whispering; wo unto me for the house of Katros and its pens; wo unto me for the house of ISHMAEL B. PHABr and its fists” (Pes. 57a, where he is called “ Abba Joseph”). In Yeb.. 538b an “Abba Jose b. Johanan” (“b. Hanan” in Rashi) is mentioned as having transmitted a halakah of R. Meir, who lived a century later. Bacher (“ Ag Tan.” i. 46, note 2) therefore supposes that the author of the sentence quoted above was Abba Saul b. Botnit, and that it was transmitted by the Abba Jose of Yebamot (comp. Biichler, “ Die Priester und der Cultus,” p. 80). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, in R. EH. J. xxxvii. 299; Heilprin, Se- der ha-Dorot, ii. 8. 8. M. SE. JOSE, ABBA, OF MAHUZA: Scholar of the third (?) century; mentioned once only (Mek., Be- shallah, Wayehi, 3), a haggadah of his being trans- mitted by R. Nathan. In Mek., Bo, 17, there is mentioned an Abba Jose together with R. Jonathan; and as the above-mentioned haggadah of Abba Jose is ascribed in Men. (87a) to R. Jose ha-Horem, Weiss (introduction to his edition of the Mekilta, p. xxix.) conjectures that “ha-Horem” may be amended to “ha-Mahuzi.” 8. M. SE. JOSE B. ABIN (called also Jose b. Abun and Jose b. R. Bun): Palestinian amora of the fifth generation (4th cent.); son of R. Abin I. (Bacher, “Ag. Pal. Amor.” iii. 724) and the teacher of R. Abin II. (Yer. Ned. 8b). He was at first the pupil of R. Jose of Yodkart, but the latter’s indif- ference to his own family caused Jose to leave him and follow R. Assi or Jose II. (Ta‘an. 23b; Weiss, “Dor,” iii. 117). Jose was the most important among the last halakists of the Palestinian amo- raim. He had a thorough knowledge not only of the Palestinian customs and halakot, but of the Babylonian, a fact that has led some scholars to maintain that Jose must have resided at some time in Babylonia. It is probable, however, that he de- rived his knowledge of Babylonian teaching from his father, who had traveled in Babylonia. Jose’s chief work in the field of the Halakah was the expounding of the Mishnah and the halakot of the Amoraim, though some halakot are credited to him. In Haggadah he excelled in the transmission and elucidation of the sayings of his predecessors, especially those of R. Hiyya, Joshua b. Levi, R. Johanan, and R. Simeon b. Lakish. His chief halakic opponents were R. Mana and Jose b. Zebida. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Aq. Pal. Amor. iii. 724 et seq.; Weiss, Dor, iii. 117 et seq.; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 224; Fran- kel, Mebo, 102a ; Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, iii. 122 et seq. 8. 8. A. S. W. JOSE (ISI, ISSI) BEN AKABYA (AKIBA): Tanna of the beginning of the third century. The name “Issi” or “Assa” is derived from “Jose,” and was borne by many tannaim and amoraim; hence the confusion that prevails in the Talmud concerning the identity of each of them, the same halakic or haggadic saying being attributed sometimes to one and sometimes to another of that name. Thus the prohibition against riding on a mule is reported in the Yerushalmi (Kil. 81c) in the name of Issi ben Akabya, while in the Tosefta (Kil. v. 6) it is attrib- uted to Issi ha-Babli, who is undoubtedly identical with Issiben Judah. Bacher supposes that Issi ben Akabya was the brother of Hananiah ben Akabya, the interpreter (“meturgeman ”) of R. Judah. Issi was a diligent student of the Bible, and some of his interpretations have been preserved in the midrashic literature. From I Kings viii. 64 he infers that the expression ADIN Mar (Ex. xx. 24) means an altar of copper filled with earth (Mekilta to Ex. xx. 24). In reference to Ex. xxi. 14 he says that though the murderer of a heathen can not be convicted by a Jewish tribunal, he must answer for his crime to God (Mekilta, wd loc. 80b). The permission expressed in Deut. xxiii. 25 is, according to Issi, extended to everybody and not only to the workers in the field; but the permission applies only to the harvest-time (Yer. Ma‘as. 50a). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 225; Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 371. 8. 8. I. Br. JOSE THE GALILEAN: Tanna; lived in the first and second centuries of the common era. Jose was a contemporary and colleague of R. Akiba, R. Tarfon, and R. Eleazar b. Azariah. Neither the name of his father nor the circumstances of his youth are known, though his name (“ ha-Gelili”) indicates that he was a native of Galilee. He suffered from the prejudice commonly held against the Galileans by the Judeans; on one occasion a woman whom he had met on the street and had requested to direct him to Lydda called him a “stupid Galilean” (“Gelili shote”; ‘Er. 53b). When he entered the academy at Jabneh, he was entirely unknown. It is also noted that he was extremely modest and ad- dressed R. Tarfon as “my master” (“rabbi”; Zeb. 57a). He was, nevertheless, a thorough scholar even then, and his arguments nonplused both R. Tarfonand R. Akiba. His first appearance at Jabneh thus obtained for him general recognition, and the two rabbis considered him not as a pupil, but as a colleague. Akiba was obliged to endure more than one sharp criticism from Jose, who once said to him: “Though thou expound the whole day I shall not listen to thee” (Zeb. 82a). R. Tarfon ex- pressed his high esteem of Jose by interpreting Dan. viii. 4-7 as though it contained an allusion to him: “Tsaw the ram, that is, R. Akiba, and saw that no beast might stand before him; and I beheld the he- goat, that is, Jose the Galilean, come, and cast him down to the ground” (Tosef., Mik. vii. 11; Sifre, Num. [ed. Friedmann, p. 44a]). Asa matter of fact, Jose was the only one who opposed Akiba success- fully, and the latter frequently abandoned his own interpretation in favor of his opponent’s (Hag. 14a; Pes. 86b). 241 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jose, Abba Jose ben Halafta Jose frequently showed a tendency to revert to the older Halakah (see Miprasu Havaxkan), explaining the text according to its literal meaning (Mek., Bo [ed. Weiss, pp. 4b, 9b]; Mek., Beshallah [ed. Weiss, p. 44a]; Sifre, Deut. [ed. Friedmann, p. 97b]; ‘Ab. Zarah 45a; et al.). But generally his halakic exegesis differed little from that of Akiba, and both often em- ployed the same rules of interpretation (comp. Ket. 44a; Kid. 82b; Pes. 28a, 36a; Bezah 21a, b). Only two of his halakot need be cited here. He taught that poultry may be cooked in milk and caten (Hul. 118a), as was done in his own native town (¢). 116a); also that at the Passover one may enjoy anything that is leavened, except as food (Pes. 28b). Of his hag- gadic opinions the two following may be mentioned: The command of the Torah that the “face of the old man” shall be honored (Lev. xix. 82) includes, by implication, the young man who has acquired wisdom (Kid. 82b). The words “ He shall rule over thee” (Gen. iii. 16) do not refer to power of every description (Gen. R. xx.). Jose’s married life was unhappy. His wife was malicious and quarrelsome, and frequently insulted him in the presence of his pupils and friends; on the advice of the latter he divorced her. When she mar- ried again and was in straitened circumstances, he was magnanimous enough to support her and her husband (Gen. R. xvii.). Jose was famed, moreover, for his piety. An amora of the third century says: “ When, for their sins, there is drought in Israel, and such a one as Jose the Galilean prays for rain, the rain cometh straightway” (Yer. Ber. 9b). The popular invo- cation, “O Jose ha-Gelili, heal me!” survived even to the tenthcentury. Thisinvocation is justly con- demned by the Karaite Sahal b. Mazliah (comp. Pinsker, “ Likkute Kadmoniyyot,” p. 32). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, pp. 125- 127, Leipsic, 1859; Brill, Hinlettung in die Mischna, pp. 125-130, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1876; Bacher, Ag. Tan. i. 252-265; Weiss, Dor, ii. 119-120. 8. J. Z. L. JOSE BEN HALAFTA (called also simply Jose): Palestinian tanna of the fourth generation (2d cent.). Of his life only the following few de- tails are known: He was born at Sepphoris; but his family was of Babylonian origin (Yoma 66b). According to a genealogical chart found at Jeru- salem, he was a descendant of Jonadab b. Rechab (Yer. Ta‘an. iv. 2; Gen. R. xcviii. 18). He was one of Akiba’s five principal pupils, called “ the restorers of the Law” (Yeb. 68b), who were afterward or- dained by Judah b. Baba (Sanh. 14a). He was, be- sides, a pupil of Johanan b. Nuri, whose halakot he transmitted (Tosef., Kelim, B. K. Ixxxii. 7; B. B. Ixxxvii.), and of Eutolemus (‘Er. 35a; R. H. 15a). It is very likely that he studied much under his father, Halafta, whose authority he invokes in sev- eral instances (B. K. 70a; Me‘i. 17b). But his princi- pal teacher was Akiba, whose system he followed in his interpretation of the Law (Pes. 18a; Yeb. 62b). After having been ordained in violation of a Roman edict (Sanh. J.c.), Jose fled to Asia Minor (B. M. 84b), where he stayed till the edict was abro- gated. Later he settled at Usha, then the seat of the Sanhedrin. As he remained silent when his VII.—16 fellow pupil Simeon b. Yohai once attacked the Roman government in his presence, he w&& forced by the Romans to return to Sepphoris (Shab. 88b), which he found in a decaying state (B. B. 75b). He established there a flourishing school; and it seems that he died there (Sanh. 109a; comp. Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah iii. 1). Jose’s great learning attracted so many pupils that the words “ that which is altogether just shalt thou follow” (Deut. xvi. 20) were interpreted to mean in part “follow Jose to Sepphoris” (Sanh, 32b). He was highly extolled after his death. His pupil Judah ha-NasiI. said: “ The difference between Jose’s generation and ours is like the difference be- tween the Holy of Holies and the most profane ” (Yer. Git. vi. 9). His halakot are mentioned throughout the greater part of the Mishnah, as well as in the Baraita and Sifra. His teaching was very system- His atic. He was opposed to controversy, Halakot. declaring that the antagonism _be- tween the schools of Shammai and Hillel made it seem as if there were two Torahs (Sanh. 88b). For the most part, Jose adopted a compromise between two contending halakists (comp. Ter. x. 3; ‘Er. viii. 5 [= 86a]; Yoma iv. 3 [= 48b]). Like his master Akiba, Jose occupied himself with the dots which sometimes accompany the words in the Bible, occasionally basing his halakot on such dots (Pes. ix. 2[=98b]; Men. 87b). He was generally liberal in his halakic decisions, espe- cially in interpreting the laws concerning fasts (Ta‘an. 22b) and vows (Ned. 21b, 28a). In those cases where there was a difference of opinion be- tween Jose and his contemporaries, it was Jose’s decision that was adopted as the norm for the prac- tise (Yer. Ter. iii. 1; “Er. 51a). Jose was also a prominent haggadist; and the con- versation which he had with a Roman matron, re- sulting in her conviction of the superiority of the Jewish religion (Gen. R. lxviii. 4), shows his great skill in interpreting Biblical verses. Bible Chro- Jose is considered to be the author of nology. the Seder ‘Olam Rabbah, a chronicle from the Creation to the time of Ha- drian, for which reason it is called also “ Baraita de R. Jose b. Halafta” (Yeb. 82b; Niddah 46b; comp. Shab. 88a). This work, though incomplete and too concise, shows Jose’s system of arranging material in chronological order. Jose is known for his ethical dicta, which are char- acteristic, and in which he laid special stress on the study of the Torah (comp. Ab. iv. 6). He exem- plified Abtalion’s dictum, “Love the handicrafts” (ib. i. 9); for he was a tanner by trade (Shab. 49a), and followed a craft then commonly held in con- tempt (Pes. 65a). A series of Jose’s ethical sayings in Shab. 118b shows his tendency toward Essenism. As has been said above, Jose was opposed to dis- putation. When his companion Judah desired to exclude Meir’s disciples from his school, Jose dis- suaded him (Kid. 52a; Nazir 50a). One of his char- acteristic sayings is, “He who indicates the coming of the Messiah [ppm ns yn], he who hates schoJars and their disciples, and the false prophet and the slanderer, will have no part in the future world” (Derek Erez R. xi.). According to Bacher, in Jose b. Jacob Jose ha-Kohen THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 242 “Monatsechrift,” xlii. 505-507, this was directed against the Hebrew Christians. Owing to Jose’s fame as a saint, legend describes bim as having met Elijah (Ber. 3a; Sanh. 118b). Jose, complying with the Law, married the wife of his brother who had died childless; she bore him five sons: Ishmael, Eleazar, Menahem, Halafta (who died in his lifetime), and Eudemus (Yer. Yeb. i. 1). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 150-190; idem, Ag. Pal. Amor. ii. 158 et vassim; Brill, Mebo ha-Mishnah, pp. 156-160, 178-185, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1876; Frankel, arke ha-Mishnah, pp. 164-168; idem, in Monatsschrift, iv. 206-209; Joél, ib. vi. 81-91; Weiss, Dor, ii. 161-164. Ss. 8. M. SEL. JOSE B. JACOB B. IDI: Palestinian amora of the fourth generation (4th cent.). He was the col- league of R. Judan of Magdala (Yer. Ta‘an. i. 3), and one of the expounders of the haggadot of R. Ahathe Lydian. He has also some original sayings, in one of which he makes the statement—based on I Kings xii. 27, and with reference to Deut. xxxi. 11—that Jeroboam was elected king in the Sabbat- ical year, when the head of the nation was required to read publicly in the Temple at Jerusalem the pre- scribed portion of the Law; and that, in order to avoid celebrating the festival in the Holy City, where he would have had the mortification of seeing the King of Judea read the Law, he (Jeroboam) set up another place of worship with the golden calves (Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah 39b). Only one halakah of Jose’s has been preserved (Yer. Yeb. 10d). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 729; Frankel, Mebo, p. 95a. 8. 8. Ieis. Vie JOSE BEN JOEZER OF ZEREDAH: Rabbi of the early Maccabean period; possibly a disciple of Antigonus of Soko, though this is not certain. He belonged to a priestly family. With him and Jose ben Johanan of Jerusalem, his colleague, begins the period known in Jewish history as that of the “zu- got” (duumvirate), which ends with Hillel and Sham- mai. According to an old tradition, the member of the “zugot” mentioned first occupied the office of president of the Sanhedrin, while the one mentioned second served in the capacity of vice-president. Jose belonged to the party of the Hasidim, and was a de- cided adversary of Hellenism. To prevent Jews from settling beyond Palestine he declared all hea- then countries “unclean” (Shab. 46a), He declared also glass utensils “unclean,” probably because they were manufactured in heathen countries. In other respects, however, he was very liberal, and re- ceived the surname “Sharaya” (“one who permits”) for having rendered three liberal decisions on certain ritual questions (‘Eduy. viii. 4; Pes. 15a). The first halakic controversy known in the Tal- mud was that between Jose ben Joezer and his col- league Jose ben Johanan. It arose over the question whether the laying of hands on the heads of the sacrifices is permitted on feast-days (Hag. ii. 2). Jose ben Joezer was distinguished for his piety, and is called “he pious of the priesthood” (“hasid she- bi-kehunnah”; Hag. ii. 7). He professed great ven- eration for scholars, one of his sayings being: “ Let thy house be a meeting-place for the wise; powder thyself in the dust of their feet, and drink their words with eagerness” (Abot iv. 4). Jose was probably among the sixty pious men who, at the instigation of the high priest Alcimus, the son of his sister, were crucified by the Syrian general Bac- chides (I Mace. vii. 16). The Midrash reports the following dialogue be- tween Alcimus and Jose ben Joezer while the latter was on the way to execution: Alcimus: ‘See the profit and honors that have fallen to my lot in consequence of what I have done, whilst thou, for thy ob- stinacy, hast the misfortune to die asacriminal.”’ Jose, quietly: ‘*Tf such is the lot of those who anger God, what shall be the lot of those who accomplish His will?’ Alcimus: “Is there any one who accomplished His will more than thou?” Jose: “If this is the end of those who accomplish His will, what awaits those who anger Him?” On this Alcimus was seized with remorse and committed suicide (Gen. R. i.65; comp. ALCIMUS). Jose ben Joezer left a son whom he had disinherited for bad conduct (B. B. 188b). See ALcrMus. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Yuhasin, p. 60a, ed. Kénigsberg; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, p. 211, ed. Warsaw; Weiss, Dor, i. 98; Braunschweiger. Die Lehrer der Mishnah, p. 165, Frankfort- on-the-Main, 1903; Z. Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, pp. 31, 32; Gratz, Gesci. 3d ed., iii. 3; Schiirer, Gesch. ii. 202, 352, 357, 407 s. 8. TAeBRs JOSE (JOSEPH) BEN JOHANAN: Presi- dent of the Sanhedrin in the second century B.c.; a native of Jerusalem. He and Jose b. Joezer were the successors and, it is said, the disciples of Antigo- nus of Soko (Ab. i. 4-5), and the two together formed the first of a series of duumvirates that transmitted the traditional law; in each pair one, according to tradition, was prince-president (“nasi”), and the other vice-president, of the Sanhedrin (“ab bet din”; Hag. ii. 2 [16a]). One of Jose’s sayings was: “ Let thy house be opened wide; and let the needy be thy household; and prolong not converse with woman ” (Abot i. 5). A disagreement between the two col- leagues in regard to halakic decisions gave rise to the formation of two different schools (see JosE B. JOEZER). Both men were opposed to Hellenism, and both belonged to the Hasidim. Jose b. Joezer and Jose b. Johanan were the last of the “ eshkelot ” (derived by some from oyoa#; Rapoport, “‘Erek Millin,” p. 237) (Sotah ix. 9 [47a] ; comp. Tosef., B. K. vili. 18; Yer. Sotah ix. 10). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Frankel, Darke ha-Mishnah, pp. 29 et seq.; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., ii. 274, iii. 3; idem, in Monatsschrift, xviii. 20 et seq.; Heilprin. Seder ha-Dorot, ii.; Schiirer, Gesch. 3d ed., ii, 202, 352, 357 ; Weiss, Dor, i. 108 et seq. 8. 8. M. Set. JOSE BEN JOSE: The earliest payyetan known by name; flourished, at the latest, about the end of the sixth century in Palestine. He is callea “ha-yatom ” (the orphan), probably because, bearing his father’s name, it was assumed that the latter died either before his son’s birth or before his cir- cumcision, Larlier sources state that Jose was a priest, even a high priest, but this assertion is not supported. Asa poet Jose deserves the recognition and appreciation which have been accorded him, His style is raised above the level of mere prose by his use of new though not difficult words and para- phrases, and by frequent archaic expressions. He employs no rime, nor is he conversant with the other self-imposed restrictions of payyetanic poetry. The use of acrostics constitutes the only external 243 ornamentation of his compositions, which are dis- tinguished by depth of thought, conciseness of ex- pression, imagination, and tenderness. The paral- lelism characteristic of his verse lends it additional charm. In one of his poems (No. 2, below) he em- ploys the refrain. The following poems of his are known: (1) VY TVS smb mbbry, an intercalation in the Musaf prayer for New-Year’s Day designated by the term “teki‘ata,” a term which is found already in the Talmud. The “teki‘ata” is recited on the second day of the New- Year in the Polish and German rit- uals. (2) YOY IDDWN DION, a sort of confession of sins (“ widdui”) for the evening of the Day of Atone- ment (Kol Nidre), with quadruple alphabet and two alternating refrains, included in the Polish and Ger- man rituals, although in most communities only a part of it is recited. (38) mbx NIWA WSN, an ““‘abodah ” for the Day of Atonement, including the alphabet ten times in acrostics, while the letter n occurs eighteen times. Saadia has included the poem in his Siddur (Oxford MSS.), and Rosenberg has re- printed it in “Kobez Ma‘ase Yede Ge’onim Kad” (Berlin, 1856). (4) tpn-a73 diy mond Ans, an- other ‘abodah that has been assigned to Jose. Zunz quotes many passages to show that it frequent- ly corresponds in phraseology with the “ Azkir.” The initial letters of its verses form a quadruple alphabet, which is followed by a second quadruple alphabet. It was formerly recited in Burgundy and France, and is still used in the communities of Asti, Fossano, and Moncalvo, in Piedmont. Luz- zatto has printed it in Rosenberg’s “ Kobez” (pp. 111 et seq.), and as an appendix to the Italian Mah- zor (ed. Leghorn, 1861, ii. 212 et seg.); it is also printed in the separate edition of Luzzatto’s “ Mebo.” The introduction aban }MN (reprinted in Zunz’s “Literaturgesch.” p. 646) by an unknown author— said to be the apostle Peter—belongs to this ‘abo- dah. The ‘abodah won ody n3D AnN, included in Spanish rituals, was written before Jose’s time, and has been ascribed to him only through being confounded with his poem dealing with the same subject and beginning in the same way. (5) A piyyut, of which only one verse has been preserved. pdyy 3)8 has also been ascribed to him, though its authorship is doubtful. It isa short fragment of the earliest known “ Yozer,” which originally con- tained probably the entire alphabet quadrupled in acrostics. In the Polish and German rituals it pre- cedes the “Yozer” on feast-days; in the Roman ritual it precedes the Sabbath prayers also. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rapoport, Bikkure ha-‘Ittim, 1829, p. 116; Sachs, in Rosenberg’s Kobez, ii. 85; Luzzatto, ib. p. 107; idem, Mebo, pp. 9, 13; Landshuth, ‘Ammude ha-‘Abodah, p. 85; Zunz, in Geiger’s Jtid. Zeit. ii. 306; idem, Literatur- gesch. pp. 26, 643; Harkavy, Studien und Mittheilungen, v. 105. G. il, 38} JOSE B. JUDAH: Tanna of the end of the second century. He is principally known through his controversies with R. Judah I. As specimens of his exegeses, the following may be given here. On theexpression pyy pn (Lev. xix. 36) he com- ments, “Let thy yea be yea and thy nay nay ” (Sifre to the verse; B. M. 49a; comp. Matt. v. 87). Deut. viii. 5 he explains thus: “ Dear to God are the afflic- THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jose b. Jacob Jose ha-Kohen tions destined for man, for on whomsoever they come, the glory of God reposes, as it is said, ‘It is the Lord thy God who chastiseth thee’” (Sifre, Deut. vi. 5). As characteristic of his poetical mind, the following may be cited as his view on the re- pose and peacefulness of the Sabbath: “Two angels, a good and a bad one, accompany man on the Sab- bath eve from the synagogue into his house. When the man finds the lamp lit, the table laid, and the bed made, the good angel prays, ‘May it be Thy will, O Lord, that it be the same next Sabbath!’ to which the evil angel, against his will, responds ‘Amen!’ If, however, the man finds his house in disorder, the wicked angel says, ‘ May it be the same next Sabbath!’ to which the good angel is forced to respond ‘Amen!’” (Shab. 119b). Of a controversial nature is probably the saying in which Jose insists that the proselyte must show his readiness to accept even the precepts of the sages in their capacity as interpreters of the Law (see Tosef., Demai, ii. 5; Sifra, Lev. xix. 34). Jose, like his father, Judah b. ‘Iai, and through the teachings of his father, was the depositary of many old traditions, which appear in his name. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Weiss, Dor; Bacher, Ag. Tan. ii. 417-421. 8. 8. S. Ley. JOSE B. KAZRATA (Kuzira; Kazra): Palestinian amora of the first amoraic generation; son-in-law of R. Jose. Kohut is of the opinion that the surname is derived from “Kazzara” (washer) ; but in Tan., Wayehi, the name “Kazra” is found. Two other amoraim with this patronymic are men- tioned in the Talmud—R. Johbanan b. Kazrata and R. Isaac b. Kazrata; but as both of them cite R. Jona, an amora of the third generation, they can not have been Jose’s brothers. Jose b. Kazrata taught that the Creator chose the finest earth with which to make the first man (Gen.R. xiv.). In Yer. B. B. x. 17 Jose discusses a halakah concerning marriage in which he maintains the interests of woman. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, s.v.; Frankel, Mehbo; Kohut, Aruch Completum; Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 596. s. S. Ae ET anh JOSE HA-KOHEN (‘‘the Pious”): Tanna of the second generation; flourished in the first and second centuries; pupil of Johanan ben Zakkai. It is said of him that he never allowed any writing of his to remain in the hands of a heathen, lest he should carry it on Sabbath (Tosef., Shab. xvii. 13; Shab. 19a). Jose valued friendship above all worldly goods. “The good a man should cleave to is a good friend, and the evil a man should shun is an evil neighbor” (Ab. ii. 12). His maxim was: “ Let the property of thy friend be precious unto thee as thine own; set thyself to learn the Torah, for it is not an heirloom unto thee, and let all thy actions be taken in the name of Heaven” (#d). Jose’s name is associated in the Halakah with that of Zechariah ha- Kazzab (Ket. 27a). The Haggadah has preserved two sayings of Jose. One is connected with the death of the son of Johanan ben Zakkai. Jose en- deavored to console the father by reminding him that the high priest Aaron lost two sons in one day and yet he continued his services in the Tabernacle without interruption (Ab. R. N. xiv.). The other Jose of Mallahaya Josel THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 244 Coenen eee eee ee eee eee eee ee eee ee ee ee ene eee eee Eee was in answer to a question addressed by a female proselyte to the patriarch concerning the seeming contradiction between Deut. x. 17 and Num. vi. 26. Iliustrating his answer by a parable, Jose said that Deut. x. 17 refers to offenses against man that can not be forgiven, while Num. vi. 26 refers to offenses against God that are always forgiven (R. H. 17b). Jose is said to have been devoted to mystical studies (Yer. Hag. ii.). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 211 ; Weiss, Dor, i. 192, ii. 73; Bacher, Ag. Tan. i. 67 et seq. 8. 8. IE 1ehe, JOSE OF MALLAHAYA:: Palestinian amora of the fourth generation. According to his explana- tion of Ps. lvii. 5 the disasters that overtook the Jews were caused by their inclination to slander, com- mon among them even in the time of David (Lev. R. xxvi.). There are two halakot emanating from him, one referring to the transfer of land (Yer. Kid. 60c), the other prescribing the rules governing the purification of utensils that have been used by Gen- tiles (Yer. ‘Ab. Zarah 41c). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 724; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot; Kohut, Aruch Completum. 5 8. 8. SAR EL et JOSE OF MAON: Popular preacher of the be- ginning of the third century; delivered his ad- dresses in a synagogue at Tiberias which bore the name of the locality—“ Maon” (AN IYD), Whence probably his surname AND (= “of Maon”). He is said to have been aggressive in his speeches and to have been no respecter of persons; he attacked even the house of the patriarch (Yer. Sanh. ii. ; Gen. R. lxxx. 1). See Jupau II. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 221; Frankel, Mebo, p. 101b; Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. ii. 114, note 5; iii. 595 et seq. 8. 8. BR JOSE B. NEHORAT: Palestinian amora of the first generation; halakot are transmitted in his name by Johanan (Rashi, B. M. 41a). Of his haggadic explanations the following may be cited: With reference to Eccl. iii. 15 he explains the word 447) to mean “the persecuted,” “the hunted,” and gives the passage the meaning that God will always assist the persecuted, and that even when a righteous man persecutes a wicked man God will assist the latter. Jose gives various Scriptural instances in support of this view (Lev. R. xxvii. 5). As to the religious rites which children are required to perform R. Jose thought that they have an educational purpose, but are not obligatory (Yer. Ber. iii. 6b). He taught also that, except in the case of taxes for maintaining schools, the tax-collectors must not be harsh in their dealings (Lev. R. xxx. 1). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 597; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot; Frankel, Mebo. 8. S. ING lel, 1R¢ JOSE B. SAUL: Palestinian amora of the first generation (3d cent.). He is known chiefly as a transmitter of the sayings and traditions of the patriarcn Judah I., whose disciple he was. These as well as his own sayings are further transmitted by R. Joshua b. Levi and by Hiyya ben Gamda. In one place the following order is given: Simon b. Pazzi says in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi in the name of R. Jose b. Saul in the name of R. Judah ha-Nasi in the name of the holy assembly of Jeru- salem (Bezah 14b, 27a; Tamid 27b). The Palestin- ian Talmud has preserved only one anecdote of his in the Aramaic (‘Ab. Zarahii. 8). His brothers were Johanan and Halafta, with the former of whom he used to hold halakic controversies (Shab. 125b). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bacher, Ag. Pal. Amor. iii. 598; Heilprin, Seder ha-Dorot, ii. 221, Warsaw, 1882. 8. 8. ASS awe JOSEFFY, RAFAEL: American piano virtu- oso; born in 1852 in Hunfalu, Hungary. In the following year the family moved to Miskolez, where he spent his childhood and received his first musical instruction. At the age of ten he made his first public appearance at a concert in Budapest; and such was its promise that in 1864 his father took him to the Conservatorium at Leipsic, where he stud- ied under Wenzel and Moscheles. Thence he went in 1866 to the Berlin Conservatorium, where for three years he was taught by Carl Tausig. After two- summers (1869-70) with Liszt in Weimar, and con- siderable practise and study, he made successful concert tours through Europe, making Vienna his home until 1879, when Herman Colell took him to America. His New York début at Chickering Hall was successful. He became domiciled in the United States, and in 1900 took the oath of citizenship. Joseffy lives at Tarrytown-on-the-Hudson, and devotes himself to music, occasionally giving pub- lic concerts. He has written a “Schule des Héheren Clavierspieles” for advanced players, in addition to a great number of compositions for the piano. He is the head of the department of piano in the National Conservatory of Music in New York. A. Bate JOSEL (JOSELMANN, JOSELIN) OF ROSHEIM (JOSEPH BEN GERSHON LOANZ): The great advocate (“shtadlan ”) of the German Jews during the reigns of the emperors Maximilian I. and Charles Y.; born about 1480; died March, 1554, at Rosheim, Alsace.. While still young he worked for the welfare of his coreligionists, and probably was instrumental in thwarting the hostile plans of Pfefferkorn. In 1510 he was made by the Jewish communities of Lower Alsace their “parnas u-man- hig” (sworn guide and leader). As such he had “to keep his eyes open in special care of the community,” and possessed the right to issue enactments for the Jews of his dis- trict and to put under the ban (“herem”) refractory members. On the other hand, he had to defend in- dividuals and communities against oppression, and, if necessary, to appeal to the gov ernment and to the emperor. During the first years of his public activity Josel lived in the town of Mittelbergheim. In 1514 he with other Jews of this place was accused of having profaned the con- secrated host, and was put in prison for several months, until his innocence was established. Soon afterward Josel moved to Rosheim, in which place he remained until his death. bsiobb) Seal of Josel of Rosheim. 245 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Jose of Mallahaya Josel In 1515-16 he aided his oppressed brethren in Oberehnheim by bringing their complaints person- ally before the emperor Maximilian I. and obtaining a special imperial safe-conduct for them. During the peasants’ war in 1525 Josel succeeded in protect- ing the Alsatian Jews against oppression and in in- ducing the army of the peasants, already drawn up at the gates of Rosheim, to leave the town in peace. Josel was the advocate of all the Jews in the Ger- man empire. Soon after Charles V. had ascended the throne (1520) Josel procured a letter of protec- tion from him for the whole German Advocate Jewry; ten years later he obtained of the its renewal. Several times he inter- German ceded successfully with King Ferdi- Jews. nand, brother of the emperor, in favor of the Jews of Bohemia and Mora- via. In 1530, in presence of the emperor and his court at Augsburg, Josel had a public disputa- tion with the baptized Jew Antonius Margarita, who had published a pamphlet full of libelous ac- cusations against Judaism. The disputation ter- minated in a decided victory for Josel, who obtained Margarita’s expulsion from Augsburg. At this same Reichstag Josel defended the Jews against the strange accusation that they had been the cause of the apostasy of the Lutherans. Josel’s most im- portant action at the Reichstag of Augsburg was the settlement of rules for business transactions of the Jews. They were forbidden to exact too high a rate of interest, to call a negligent debtor before a foreign court of justice, ete. Josel announced these articles to the German Jews as “governor of the Jewish community in Germany.” ‘While still occupied with the Augsburg articles Josel had to hurry to the court of Charles Y. of Bra- bant and Flanders in order to defend the calumniated German Jews there (1531). In this to him most inhospitable country—for no Jews were living there then—he spent three months, occupying himself, when he was not officially engaged, with Hebrew studies. Though his life was once in danger, he suc- ceeded in attaining the object of his journey. At the Reichstag of Regensburg (1582) he tried in vain to dissuade the proselyte Solomon Mo.nko from carrying out his fantastic plan to arm the German Jews and to offer them asa help to the emperor in his wars with the Turks. Molko did not follow Josel’s advice, and soon after was burned as a here- tic. In 1584 Josel went to Bohemia In to make peace between the Jews of Bohemia. Prague and those of the small Bohe- mian town of Horowitz. He suc- ceeded in his mission, but the Jews of Horowitz plotted against his life, and he had to seek refuge in the castle of Prague. In 1535 Josel traveled to Brandenburg-Ansbach to intercede with the margrave Georg in favor of the Jews of Jigerndorf, who had been falsely ac- cused and thrown into prison; and he obtained their freedom. Two years later Josel tried to help the Saxon Jews, who were threatened with expulsion by the elector John Frederick. He went to Saxony with letters of high recommendation to that prince from the magistrate of Strasburg, and to Luther from Capito, the Alsatian reformer. But Luther had become embittered against the Jews on account of their faithfulness to their creed, and he refused every intercession, so that Josel did not obtain even an audience with the elector. But at a meeting in Frankfort (1539) he found occasion to speak to the prince, whose attention he attracted by refuting, in a public dispute with the reformer Butzer, some spiteful assertions about the Jews. In the same Neichstag Melanchthon proved the innocence of the thirty-eight Jews who had been burned in Berlin in 1510, and this helped to induce Kurfiirst Joachim of Brandenburg to grant Josel’s request. The Elector of Saxony then also repealed his order of expulsion. The same year Josel heard that the Hessian Jews had tosuffer many persecutions because of a pam- phlet by Butzer. He therefore wrote a defense of Judaism in Hebrew, to be read in synagogue every Sabbath for the comfort of his coreligionists. The magistrate of Strasburg having expressed the belief that attacks on Christianity were contained in the defense, Josel had a verbatim translation made and sent to him. Soon Josel had to defend the Jews against the attacks of Luther himself, who in 1548 had published a very spiteful pamphlet Refutes entitled “Vonden Juden und Ihren Luther’s Liigen,” which had Jed to harsh treat- Charges. ment of Jews in different Protestant districts. Joselrefuted Luther’s asser- tions in a voluminous petition to the magistrate of Strasburg, and the latter thereupon inhibited a new edition of Luther’s book. In 1541 Josel appeared as “ chief of the Jews in the German lands” at the Reichs- tag of Regensburg, and succeeded in averting a dan- gerous edict which would have forbidden the Jews to engage in any monetary transaction. He succeeded at the Reichstag of Speyer in 1544 in obtaining a new letter of protection for the German Jews from the emperor, wherein they were expressly allowed to charge a much higher rate of interest than the Christians, on the ground that they had to pay much higher taxes than the latter, though all handicrafts and the cultivation of land were prohibited to them. At the same time Josel paid to the emperor in the name of the German Jews a contribution of 3,000 florins toward the expenses of the French war. In the Speyer letter of protection. referred to above, the emperor disapproved of the accusation of rit- ual murder, and he ordained that no Jew should be put in prison or sentenced for this crime without sufficient proof. Josel was anxious to obtain this order because in 1543 at Wirzburg five Jews ac- cused of ritual murder had been imprisoned and tor- tured. After having personally interceded in favor of these prisoners Josel at length obtained their par- don from the emperor. In 1546 Josel was called upon to interfere in be- half of the whole body of German Jews, who suf- fered much during the Smalkaldic war. Through Granvella, the influential counselor of the emperor, Josel obtained an imperial order to the army and a mandate to the Christian population in favor of the Jews, so that they were not molested in the course of the war. As a proof of their gratitude Josel caused the Jews to provide the imperial army with victuals wherever it passed. In recognition of the great services rendered by Josel to the emperor on Josel Joseph this occasion and previously, Charles V. renewed at Augsburg in 1548 the safe-conduct for Josel and his family, which thereby received the right of free pas- sage throughout the German empire and free resi- dence wherever Jews were allowed to live. Josel’s life as well as all of his belongings was thus pro- tected by a special imperial order. Even in the last years of his life Josel was able to make himself use- ful to Charles V. In 1552 he sent to the emperor at Innsbruck by a special messenger a warning that Elector Mcritz of Saxony intended to invade Tyrol, and the emperor was thus enabled at the last mo- ment, to effect his escape. Josel worked for the welfare of his people to the last, dying suddenly in March, 1554. In his active life he always found time to study Literary religious literature, and besides his Activity. apologetic pamphlets he wrote several religious and ethical works, which in part are still extant. His most important books are: (1) “ Derek ha-Kodesh,” written 1531 in Brabant, con- taining rules tor a pious life, especially in cases where a Jew has to bear martyrdom. Two frag- ments of this work, other- wise lost, are re- tained in the book “Yosif Omez,” by Jo- seph Hahn, Frankfort - on - the-Main, 1728. (2) “Sefer ha- Miknah,” fin- ished 1546, the first part of which contains words of admo- nition against traitors in the midst of Israel, the second part being cabalistic. A manuscript in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (Neubauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 2240), contains the greater part of this work. Josel’s memoirs (printed in the He- brew original with a French translation in“ Rev. Mtudes Juives,” xvi. 84) contain reports (incom- plete) of some important events in his life until 1547, especially some relating to his public activity. They seem to have been written down soon after that year. BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. Bresslau, in Geiger’s Zeitschrift fiir Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland, 1892, v. 807-834; M. Stern, tb. iii. 66-74; Kracauer, in Rev. Etudes Jwives, xvi. 84, xix. 282; Scheid, th. xiii. 62, 248; Gritz, Gesch. ix., passim; M. Leh- mann, Rabbi Joselmann von Rosheim, Frankfort-on-the- Main, 1879; Ludwig Feilchenfeld, Rabbi Josel von Rosheim: Hin Beitrag zur Gesch. der Deutschen Juden im Reforma- tionszeitalter, Strasburg, 1898, where the earlier bibliogra- phy is to be found. D. A. FR. JOSEPH (5p)"; ADIN in Ps. lxxxi. 6).—Bib- lical Data: Eleventh son of Jacob and the elder of the two sons of Rachel; born at Haran (Gen. xxx. 24). The meaning given to the name (/.c.) is “shall THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Traditional Tomb of Joseph near Nablus (Shechem). (From a photograph by Bonfils.) 246 add”: “The Lord shall add to me another son.” It seems probable, however, from Ps. 1xxxi. 6, that, like all other Hebrew names beginning with the syllable “Jo,” it has Yuwn as its first element, and is a con- traction, the original form being “ Jehoseph,” while in Gen. xxx. 23 there is an allusion to the connection of “ Joseph” with }DN (“to take away ”). Upon Joseph centered the love of his father, Jacob, who showered upon “the son of hisoldage ” many tokens of special favor and arrayed him ina “coat of many colors.” This favoritism, however, excited the envy of his older brothers, and Joseph increased their envy by telling them of two dreams which prognosticated his ruling over them (Gen. xxxvii. 2-11). When a lad of seventeen, Joseph was sent by his father to inquire after his brothers, who were pasturing the flocks in Shechem. He found them at Dothan, and when his brothers saw him approaching they planned to kill him. Reuben, however, took his part, and, in order to remove him from the fury of the others, advised them to throw Joseph into a pit (Gen. Xxxvii. 13-24). Different ac- counts are giv- en of the sale of Joseph, which immediately followed; ac- cording to one, the brothers, while eating at some distance from the pit, sighted a cara- van of Ishmael- ites, to whom they decided, at Judah’s advice, to sell Joseph. In the mean- time some Mid- ianite mer- chants passing the pit drew Joseph out and sold him for twenty pieces of silver to the Ishmaelites, who took Joseph to Egypt (Gen. xxxvii. 25-28). The last statement is repeated in Gen. xxxix. 1, while in Gen. xxxvii. 36 it is said that the Midianites (Hebr. “Medanites”) sold him to Potiphar in Egypt. In Potiphar’s house Joseph fared well, for, see- ing that he prospered in all that he did, his master appointed him superintendent of his household. But Joseph was “a goodly person and well favored,” and his master’s wife conceived a passion for him. Her repeated advances being repulsed, she finally attempted compulsion; still failing, she brought a false accusation against him before her husband, and Joseph was thrown into prison. There, too, YuHWH was with Joseph; the keeper of the prison, seeing that he could place confidence Cast into in him, committed the other prisoners Prison. to his charge (Gen. xxxix.). Soon afterward two of Pharaoh’s officers, the chief cupbearer and the chief baker, having offended the king, were thrown into the prison where Sold as Slave. 247 Joseph was, and Joseph was appointed to serve them. One morning both officers told Joseph their dreams of the previous night, which they themselves were unable to interpret. Joseph concluded from their dreams that the chief cupbearer would be reinstated within three days and that the chief baker would be hanged. Joseph requested the chief cupbearer to mention him to Pharaoh and secure his release from prison, but that officer, reinstalled in office, forgot Joseph (Gen. xl.). Joseph remained two years longer in prison, at the end of which period Pharaoh had a dream of seven lean kine devouring seven fat kine and of seven withered ears devouring seven full ears. Great importance was attached to dreams in Egypt, and Pharaoh was much troubled when his magicians proved unable to interpret them satisfactorily. Then the chief cupbearer remembered Joseph and spoke of his skillto Pharaoh. Accordingly he was sent for, and he interpret- ed Pharaoh’s dream as fore- telling that seven years of abundance would be fol- lowed by seven years of famine and advised the king to appoint some able man to store the sur- plus grain dur- ing the period of abundance. Pleased with his interpretation, Pharaoh made him viceroy over Egypt, giving him the Egyp- tian name of Zaphnath - paa- neah and con- ferring on him other marks of royal favor. Joseph was then thirty years of age. Pharaoh married him to Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera, priest of On, through whom he had two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim (Gen. xli. 1-52). During the seven years of abundance Joseph amassed for the king a great supply of corn, which he sold to both Egyptians and foreigners (Gen. xli. 48-49, 54-57). The famine having ex- As tended to all the neighboring coun- Viceroy tries, Joseph’s brothers, with the ex- of Egypt. ception of Benjamin, went to Egypt to buy corn. Joseph recognized his brothers, who prostrated themselves before him and therein fulfilled, in part, his dreams. He received them roughly and accused them of being spies, thereby compelling them to give him information about their family. Desiring to see Benjamin, Jo- seph demanded that they substantiate their state- ments by sending one of their number for Benjamin while the others remained behind. He accordingly THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA eee so een de Joseph and His Brothers. (From the Sarajevo Haggadah, 14th century.) Josel Joseph imprisoned them for three days, and then sent them away with corn, retaining Simeon as a hostage (Gen. xlii. 1-25). The famine in Canaan continuing, Jacob was again obliged to send his sons to Egypt for corn. As Joseph had commanded them not to appear before him again without Benjamin, Jacob was compelled to let Benjamin go with them. He sent also a present to Joseph in order to win his favor, together with the money which had been, by Joseph’s orders, put into their sacks. The second time Joseph received them very kindly and prepared a feast for them, but paid spe- cialattention to Benjamin (Gen. xliii.). Desiring to know what his brothers would do if under some pretext he retained Benjamin, Joseph gave orders to fill their sacks with corn, put their money into their sacks, and put his silver goblet in Benjamin’s. On the following morning the brothers departed, but before they had gone far a messenger overtook them, accusing them of stealing : : the goblet. Te : The messenger iM SUSKS HS searched their ied fe sacks and found : the goblet in Benjamin’s sack; this com- pelled them to return. Joseph reproached them for what they had done, and Judah, speaking on behalf of his brothers, ex- pressed their willingness to remain as slaves to Joseph. The latter, however, declined their offer, declaring that he would retain Benjamin only (Gen. xliv. 1-17). Overcome by Judah’s elo- quent appeal (Gen. xliv. 18-84) and convinced of his brothers’ repentance, Joseph disclosed ! | } i? i i { Makes himself to them. He inquired after Himself his father, but as they were too much Known amazed and startled to answer him, to His he assured them that in treating him Brothers. as they did they had been carrying out the will of God. He then urged them to return home quickly, loaded them with presents for his father, and supplied them with vehicles for the transportation of the whole family (Gen. xlv.). Joseph met his father in the land of Goshen. He recommended his brothers to represent themselves as shepherds so that they might remain in Goshen un- molested. ‘Then he presented five of his brothers to Pharaoh, who granted them a domain in Goshen; and, after having introduced Jacob to Pharaoh, Jo- seph domiciled the whole family, at Pharaoh’s com- mand, “in the land of Rameses,” where he supplied them with all they needed (Gen. xlvi. 29-xlvii. 12), Joseph THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 248 SOW ke) Se eee As a ruler, Joseph changed the system of land- tenure in Egypt. The famine being severe, the people first expended all their money in the pur- chase of corn, then they sold their cattle, and finally gave up their land. Thus all the cultivated land in Egypt, except that of the priests, became the prop- erty of the crown, and the people farmed it for the king, giving him one-fifth of the produce (Gen. xlvii. 14-26). Hearing of his father’s sickness, Jo- seph went to him with his two sons, whom Jacob blessed, conferring upon Joseph at the same time one portion more than the portions of his brothers (Gen. xlviii.). Joseph carried Jacob’s remains to the land of Canaan, where he gave them stately burial. His brothers, fearing that he would avenge himself upon them, then sent to implore his forgiveness. Jo- seph allayed their fears and promised that he would con- tinue to provide for their wants. He lived to the age of one hun- dred and_ ten, and saw his great-grandchil- dren grow up. Before his death he made the chil- dren of Israel take an oath that when they left the land of Egypt they would take his bones with them. Iis body was embalmed and placed tem- porarily in a coffin. At the Exodus his bones accompanied Moses, and were finally buried in Shechem (Gen. |.; Ex. xiii. 19; Josh. xxiv. 32). J. M. SEL. —In Rabbinical Literature: Joseph occupies a very important place in the Haggadah, and no patriarch was the subject of so many Midrashic leg- ends. As Rachel was visited by the Lord on Rosh ha-Shanah (R. H. 10b), Joseph was born in due course on the 1st of Tammuz, 2199 (Book of Jubi- lees, xxviii. 82). He is represented as a perfectly righteous man (“zaddik gamur”) and as the coun- terpart of his father; not only did Joseph resemble his father in appearance and in having been born circumcised, but the main incidents of their lives were parallel. Both were born after their mothers had been bar- ren for a long time; both were hated by their brothers; both were met by angels at vari- ous times (Gen. R. Ixxxiv. 6; Num. R. xiv. 16). Joseph is extolled by the Rabbis for being well versed in the Torah, for being a prophet, and for supporting his brothers (Tan., Wayesheb, 20). Ac- cording to R. Phinehas, the Holy Spirit dwelt in Joseph from his childhood until his death (Pirke R. Like His Father. Joseph Sold by His Brothers. (From the Sarajevo Haggadah, 14th century.) El. xxxviii.). Jacob’s other children came into the world only for Joseph’s sake; the Red Sea and the Jordan were passed dry-shod by the children of Israel through the virtue of Joseph (Gen. R. Ixxxiv. 4; Lekah Tob to Gen. xxxvii. 2). When Joseph and his mother bowed to Esau (Gen. xxxiii. 7), Joseph shielded his mother with his figure (Targ. pseudo- Jonathan, ad loc.), protecting her from the lascivious eyes of Esau, for which he was rewarded through the exemption of his descendants from the spell of the evil eye (Gen. R. lxxviii. 18; comp. Ber. 20a; Sotah 86b). When Joseph reported to his father the evil do- ings of his brothers (Gen. xxxvii. 2), his design was merely that his father might correct them (Lekah Tob, ad loc.). The nature of the “evilreport” is variously giv- en by the Rab- bis. According to Pirke R. El. Xxxviii., Joseph spoke only against the sons of Bilhah and. Zilpah, that they ate meat which they had not slaughtered in accordance with the Law (comp. Targ. pseudo- Jonathan, ad loc.). According to R. Judah, Jo- seph reported that the sons of Leah slighted the sons of the concubines by calling them slaves. R. Simeon’s opinion was that Joseph spoke against them all, ac- cusing them of “looking at the daughters of the land” (Gen. R.1xxxiv. 7). The reason for Jacob’s special love toward Joseph was, according to R. Judah, that Joseph resembled Jacob in appear- ance; but according to R. Nehemiah it was that he transmitted to Joseph all the halakot he had studied in the school of Shem and Eber (7d. 1xxxiv. 8). Joseph is represented as an exemplar of filial re- spect, for when his father requested him to go and see how his brothers fared, he went promptly and with gladness of heart, although he knew that they hated him (Mek., Beshallah, Wayehi, 1; Gen. R. Ixxxiv. 12, 15). When he went to his brothers, he was accompanied to Dothan by three angels (dd. Ixxxiv. 13; comp. Targ. pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. xxxvii. 15, and “Sefer ha-Yashar,” section “ Waye- sheb”). When the brothers saw Joseph approaching from a distance, they de- cided to set the dogs upon him (1.c.). After being beaten by his brethren, Joseph was thrown by Simeon into a pit, among serpents and scorpions; but Joseph prayed to God and the reptiles retired to their holes (¢b. Ixxxiv. 15; Targ. pseudo-Jonathan, adloc.). Afterward, Simeon Sent to Brothers. c—— 77. 249 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joseph i ee ordered stones thrown into the pit (Tan., Wayesheb, 18; Yalk., Gen. 142). The brothers encamped at a distance from the pit that they might not hear Jo- seph’s cries, and while they were eating a company of Midianites passed by the pit, heard Joseph call- ing for help, and drew him up. A struggle then ensued between the brothers and the Midianites. The former declared that Joseph was their rebel- lious slave; the latter regarded their statements with suspicion; but the difference was settled by the sale of Joseph tothe Midianites (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” J.c.). The brothers then divided among themselves the purchase-money —twenty pieces of silver (Gen. XXXvii. 28), each taking two pieces, with which they bought shoes (Pirke R. El. xxxviii.). As Joseph had been thrown naked into the pit, the Midianites would have compelled him to accompany them so, but God, not willing that so righteous a man should travel in an unseemly manner, seut Gabriel to trans- form into a long garment the amulet Joseph wore on his neck. The brothers, however, on seeing the garment, demanded it of the Midianites, saying that they had sold them a naked slave, but, after some altercation, consented to take four pairs of shoes in exchange. Joseph wore the same garment when he was Potiphar’s slave, when he was in prison, and when he became the viceroy of Egypt (Jellinek, “B. IL se, Ia, vals AD). When the Midianites noticed the nobility of Jo- seph’s countenance, they understood that he was not . a slave and regretted having bought him. They would have taken him back to his father had not the distance been too great; but when they met, soon after, a company of Ishmaelites they sold Joseph to them. Passing his mother’s grave, Joseph pros- trated himself upon it, weeping bit- Joseph in terly and imploring her assistance; Captivity. from her grave she answered that she was afflicted by his troubles, but that he must hope and await the intervention of God. The Ishmaelites violently dragged Joseph away, beat him cruelly, and continued their journey. They final- ly met fourmerchants, descendants of Medan, towhom they sold Joseph; and the Medanites in turn sold Jo- seph to Potiphar for four hundred pieces of silver (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” /.c.; comp. Gen. R. Ixxxiv. 20.) Joseph was sold by his brothers on Yom Kippur (Book of Jubilees, xxxiv. 15). In reward for his righteousness, the Ishmaelites, who generally dealt in ill-smelling articles, were on that occasion influ- enced by Providence to carry fragrant spices in order that Joseph’s journey to Egypt might be more agreeable (Gen. R. 1xxxiv. 16). When Jacob’s sons reached home, affirming that Joseph had been de- voured by a wild beast (comp. Gen. xxxvii. 38), Jacob ordered them to arm themselves and capture the beast. They accordingly went forth and re- turned with a wolf; but when Jacob began to re- proach the beast for its cruelty, the wolf answered, in human language, that it had not committed the crime of devouring Joseph, and that it was itself searching for its lost cub; Jacob therefore let the wolf go (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” /.c.). Jacob did not wholly believe that Joseph was dead, because he could not forget him, while the dead are soon forgotten. He therefore hewed out twelve stones and placed them in a row, after wri- ting on them the names of his twelve sons with their corresponding months and zodiacal signs. Then he commanded them to bow to the stone of Reuben, but no stone moved; then he commanded them to bow to Simeon’s stone, with the same result; but when he came to the stone of Joseph, all the other stones bowed to it. Even then Jacob was not sure that Joseph was alive, and repeated the same ex- periment with sheaves, getting the same result, with- out, however, reaching a conviction. He was finally convinced by a vision which he had of the future priestly organization, interpreting the names of Eliashib, chief of a division of the sons of Aaron (I Chron. xxiv. 12), and Elkanah, a noted Levite (I Sam. i. 1), as signifying respectively “God will bring him back?’ and “he was bought by Potiphar” (Soferim xxi. 9). The prosperity of Joseph in Potiphar’s house is described by the Rabbis as follows: “The wishes of Potiphar were executed in an instant; when he desired that the cup which Joseph handed him should be warm, it was warm; and if he desired that it should be cold, it was cold” (Tan., Waye- sheb, 16; Gen. KR. Ixxxvi. 6). At first Potiphar was of the opinion that Joseph was a magician, and he wondered, saying, “Is there a lack of magicians in Kgypt?” but afterward he saw that the Shekinah dwelt in Joseph (Gen. R. /.c.; Lekah Tob to Gen. xxxix. 3). Joseph’s character was anti- thetical to the characters of all the other slaves; the latter were rapacious, while Joseph never enjoyed anything that was not his (Zeb. 118b); the other slaves were given over to lust, while Joseph was chaste; the others ate the priestly portions because they were slavesof the priests (see Lev. xxii. 11), while Joseph, through his righteousness, caused the de- scendants of his master, who were his own descend- ants as well, to eat those portions; this identifies Joseph with Putiel, Eleazar’s father-in-law (Gen. R. Ixxxvi. 8; comp. Mek., /.c.; Sotah 48a). Like all other righteous men, Joseph was tried by God (Gen. R. Ixxxvii. 3; comp. Test. Patr., Joseph, 2). He was one of the three men who successfully resisted temptation; for this he was rewarded by having the letter 7 (one of the letters composing the Tetragram- maton) added to his name (Lev. R. xxiii. 10; comp. Ps. Ixxxi. 6). The day on which Joseph “went into the house to do his work ” (Gen. xxxix. 11- 12) was the Sabbath day, and the work consisted in repeating the Torah, which he had learned from his father (Midrash Abkir, quoted in Yalk., Gen. 146). Some rabbis, however, charged Joseph with vanity, saying that, even before being sold, he took too much pains with his personal ap- pearance (Gen. R.1]xxxiv.7),and that he continued to do so as ruler over Potiphar’s house, forgetting his father, who was mourning over his disappearance. God punished him, therefore, by setting against him Potiphar’s wife (Gen. R. Ixxxvii.3). Certain rabbis declared even that Joseph was ready to yield to his mistress, but that his father’s image suddenly ap- peared to him and called him to his duty (Sotah 86b; Gen. R. Ixxxvii. 9; comp. Pirke R. El. xxxix.). The story of Joseph and Zelikah (Zulaikha), the Joseph’s Tempta- tion. Joseph THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 250 wife of Potiphar, is narrated in the “Sefer ha- Yashar” (/.c., following Arabic sources, as the very name “Zelikah” shows) as follows: Zelikah at first attempted to seduce Joseph by arraying him in fine garments, putting before him the most delicious viands, and speaking to him in amorous terms. These means failing, she used threats, but without effect, for Joseph remained inflexible (comp. Test. Patr., Joseph, 3), The vehemence of her unrequited passion soon impaired her health. On one occasion, when some noble ladies of Egypt had come to see her, she told her maid to give them orangesand sent Joseph in to wait upon them; the women, unable to turn their eyes from Joseph, cut their fingers while peeling the oranges, and when Zelikah asked them the cause, they answered that they could not help looking at Joseph. She then said: “ What would you do if, like myself, you had him every day before your eyes?” According to Gen. R. lxxxvii. 5 and Test. Patr., Joseph, 4-5, Zelikah told Joseph that she was ready to kill her husband so that he might marry her legally. But Joseph ex- claimed: “After inducing me to commit adultery, thou desirest me to become a murderer!” Zelikah promised that, if he would yield to her, she would embrace his religion and induce all the Egyptians to do the same. Joseph answered that the God of the Hebrews does not desire unchaste worshipers. She next brought Joseph into her chamber in the inner part of the house and placed him on her bed, over which was the image of her Egyptian god. Then she covered her face with a veil, and Joseph said: “Thou art afraid of an idol; shall I not fear Yuwu, who sees all things?” (Gen. R. /.c.). It happened that, at the Nile festival, all the peo- ple of the house except Joseph and Zelikah had gone to see the ceremonies; Zelikah feigned illness as her reason for not attending the festival (comp. Sotah 86b). With one hand she grasped a sword and with the other caught Joseph’s garment, and when he attempted to release himself a rent was made in the garment. Afterward, when Joseph was brought be- fore the priests for judgment, and while they were deliberating, Zelikah’s child of eleven months sud- denly began to speak, accusing its mother and de- claring Joseph’sinnocence. The priests then ordered the garment to be brought in order that they might see on which side it had been rent; seeing that it was rent in the back, they declared Joseph innocent. Joseph was nevertheless thrown into prison by Poti- phar, who was anxious thus to save his wife a pub- lic exposure (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” /.c.; comp. Gen. R. Ixxxvii. 10). According to Midrash Abkir (Yalk., Gen. 146), Zelikah requesied Joseph her female friends to testify that Jo- in Prison. sephhadassailedthem also. Potiphar was going to kill him, but his wife prevailed on him to imprison him and then sell him, so as to recover the money he had paid for Joseph. According to the same Midrash, it was Asenath who told Potiphar of her mother’s false accusation. Joseph’s duties took him every day to his master’s house, and this gave Zelikah opportunities to renew her entreaties and threats. As Joseph continued to look downward, she put an iron spear under his chin to force him to look at her, but still Joseph averted his gaze (Gen. R. lxxxvii. 11; comp. “Sefer ha-Yashar,” /.c.). There is a disagreement among rabbinical writers as to the length of time Joseph spent in Potiphar’s houseandin prison. According to Seder ‘Olam (Neubauer, “M. J. C.” ii. 28) and Gen. R. (Ixxxvi. 7, after the correction of “ Mattenot Kehunnah”), Joseph was one year in Potiphar’s house and twelve years in prison; according to Pirke R. EL (i.c.), he was in prison ten years; according to the Book of Jubilees (xlvi. 7), he was ten years in the house and three years in prison. The last opinion seems to be supported by Gen. R. 1xxxix. 2 and Tan., Mikkez, 2, where it is said that Joseph remained two years longer in prison as a punish- ment for having trusted in the promises of man (comp. Gen. xl. 14-15). When the chief butler told Pharaoh of Joseph’s skill in interpreting dreams (Gen. xli. 12-18), he endeavored at the same time to discredit Joseph, but an angel baffled the chief but- ler’s design (Gen. R. 1xxxviii. 6, Ixxxix. 9). Ac- cording to Sotah 36b, Gabriel taught Joseph the seventy languages which a ruler of Egypt was obliged to know, and it was then that he added the let- ter 5 to Joseph’s name (comp. Num. R. xiv. 16). Joseph was released from prison on Rosh ha-Shanah (R. H. 10b). When Joseph interpreted Pharaoh’s dreams, the king asked him for e sign by which he might know that his interpretation was true. Joseph then told him that the queen, who was about to be delivered of a child, would give birth to ason, but that at the same time another son, two years of age, would die; and it so happened. As a viceroy, Joseph built himself a magnificent palace, placing in ita great number of slaves. He equipped also a considerable army, with which he marched to help the Ishmaelites against the Tarshishites, winning a great victory (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” section “ Mikkez ”). Joseph showed great discernment in preserving the grain which he gathered, by storing in each dis- trict only the amount which had grown there (Gen. R. xc. 5). Later, when the famine waxed sore and the Egyptians went to Joseph for grain, he compelled them to undergo circumcision, refusing food to un- circumcised people (7d. xc. 6, xci. 5). He stored up in Egypt all the gold and silver of the world, and it was carried away by the Israelites when they left Egypt. According to another opinion, Joseph placed the gold and silver in three hidden treasuries, of which one was discovered by Korah, one by Anto- ninus, son of Severus, and one is being kept for the righteous in the future world (Pes. 119a; comp. “Sefer ha-Yashar,” section “ Wayiggash ”). Joseph always kept in mind his father and broth- ers, and during the twenty-two years he was away from home he drank no wine (Shab. 189a; Gen. R. xciv. 25; Test. Patr., Joseph, 3). It is said also that Joseph wore sackcloth and fasted much (Gen. R. Ixxxv. 2; Test. Patr. /.c.). He is represented as very modest, so that though viceroy of Egypt he was not vain of his power (Ex. R. i. 7). Knowing that his brothers would come to buy grain, Joseph gave orders that nobody should be permitted to enter until he had given in writing his own and his father’s names, His brothers, fearing the evil eye, Joseph as Ruler. a ee ee 251 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Joseph entered the city at ten different gates, and in the evening the gatekeepers brought their names to Joseph. Three days passed, and the brothers had not appeared before Joseph; so Joseph sent seventy strong men to search for them. The brothers were found in the street of the harlots, whither they had gone with the object of looking for Joseph. When they were brought into Joseph’s house, Joseph, feigning divination through his goblet, enumerated all their deeds, how they had destroyed Shechem, how they had sold their brother; and the fact of being found in the street of the harlots proved, he said, that they were spies. A struggle ensued be- tween Joseph’s men and his brothers, Joseph who were on the point of destroying and His Egypt, but they were subdued by Brethren. Manasseh, who imprisoned Simeon (Gen. R. xci. 6; comp. “Sefer ha-Ya- shar,” /.c.). Later, when, under the pretext of his having stolen the goblet, Benjamin was detained by Joseph (Gen. xliv.), another violent struggle ensued between Joseph and his brothers, who would have carried Benjamin off by force. Seeing that his brothers, especially Judah, were again becoming furious, Joseph, with his foot, struck a marble pil- lar on which he was sitting, shattering it into frag- ments (Gen. R. xcili. 7). According to the “Sefer ha-Yashar” (section “Wayiggash”), where the whole struggle is nar- rated at great length, Manasseh was the hero of that exploit (see Targ. Yer. to Gen. xliv. 19). Joseph allowed himself to be recognized by his brothers for fear they might destroy Egypt (Gen. R. Z.c.). Cer- tain rabbis underrated Joseph’s merit by declaring that he died before his brothers because he had made them feel his authority (Ber. 55a; comp. Tan., Wayiggash, 8). According to other Why opinions, Joseph died before them be- He Died cause he embalmed his father’s body Before His instead of relying on God to keep the Brothers. body from decay; or because he heard Judah say “thy servant my father” several times without correcting him (Pirke R. El]. xxxix.; Gen. R.c. 4). Joseph’s solicitude on behalf of his brothers is pointed out by Pesik. R. 3 (ed. Friedmann, p. 10b) as follows: Although he honored his father greatly, he always avoided mecting him, so that he would not have known that his father was sick had not a messenger been sent to him (Gen. xlviii. 1); Joseph apprehended, perhaps, that his father would ask him how he came to be sold by his brothers, and would curse them. When Jacob pre- pared himself to bless Joseph’s two sons, the Holy Spirit had left him, but it returned to him through Joseph’s prayer (Pesik. /.c. p. 12a). Joseph is said to have himself superintended his father’s burial, al- though he had so many slaves; he was rewarded in that Moses himself carried his bones (Sotah 9b; comp. Ex. xiii. 19), and in that his coffin was carried in the wilderness side by side with the Ark of the Cov- enant (Mek., /.c.). According to most rabbinical authorities, Joseph’s coffin was sunk in the Nile (Targ. pseudo-Jonathan to Gen. 1. 26; Mek., Beshallah, Wayyehi, 1; Ex. R. xx, 17);* but according to R. Nathan, Joseph was buried in the royal palace. In the time of the Exo- dus, Serah, daughter of Asher, showed Moses where the coffin was sunk. Moses threw a pebble into the water there and cried out: “Joseph! Joseph! the time has come for the Israelites to be rescued from their oppressors; come up and do not cause us any further delay!” The coffin thereupon floated up (Mek., @.c.; Ex. R. J.c.). It may be added that the piyyut beginning “ Arze ha-Lebanon” and recited on Yom Kippur is based on the legend that Joseph was bartered for shoes (comp. Amos ii. 6). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Adolf Kurrein, Trawm und Wahrheit, Le- bensbild Josephs nach der Agada, Regensburg, 1887. 8. 8. M. Sen. ——Critical View: The narratives concerning Joseph (Gen. xxxvii. and xxxix.—l.) are composed of two principal strata: a Jahvistic stratum and an Elohistic one, with a few details here and there from the compiler of the Priestly Code (for details see J. KE. Carpenter and G. Harford-Battersby, “ Hexa- teuch,” pp. 58-79). According to the Jahvistic nar- rative, Joseph is rescued by Judah when his breth- ren plot against him, and is afterward sold to Ishmaelites, who in turn sell him to an Egyptian of high position whose name is not given. The wife of this Egyptian brings an accusation against Joseph, and he is cast into prison; but the jailer makes him overseer of the other prisoners. The Jahvistic ac- count of his escape from prison has been omitted; and in the sequel nothing is said about Simeon’s be- coming a hostage. The brethren open their sacks ata halting-place and find their money ; Judah offers to become surety to his father for Benjamin’s re- turn; the Israclites settle in the land of Goshen; and Jacob’s life closes with his poetic blessing. In the Elohistic portions Joseph is rescued from his other brethren by Reuben and thrown intoa pit, from which he is taken and sold to the Midianites; they in turn sell him to Potiphar, captain of the guard, who makes him ruler over the prisoners con- fined in his house. Afterward, when his brethren are accused of being spies, they volunteer the infor- mation about the younger brother. Simeon is left in Egypt asa hostage; the others open their sacks at the end of their homeward journey ; Reuben offers to become security for Benjamin’s return; and there is no mention of Goshen. In other respects the nar- ratives seem to have been closely parallel. The Priestly Code adds a few statistics and gives a list of the people who went down to Egypt. Modern critics have made various estimates of the historical worth of these narratives of Joseph. As the reputed ancestor of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, he is regarded by some as altogether legendary or even mythical. Thus Winckler held the story of Joseph to be a sun-myth (“Gesch. Israels,” partii., pp. 73-77; see, however, his “ Abra- ham der Babylonier, Joseph der Egypter,” 1908); while the fact that “Jacob-el” and “Joseph-el” ap- pear in a list of Thothmes III. as the names of places in Palestine (W. Max Miller, “ Asien und Europa,” pp. 163 et seq.), lends to the legendary view some prob- ability. Still, even if these narratives should prove to be legendary, not every legend is a sun-myth. On the other hand, archeological evidence has been urged in favor of the historical character of Joseph. Two of the El-Amarna tablets (Schrader, Joseph THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 252 “Kk. B.” v., Nos. 44, 45) show that a Semite held a position in Egypt quite analogous to that attributed to Joseph. The Egyptian “Tale of Two Brothers” shows that such situations as that in which Joseph found himself with the wife of his master were not unknown in Egypt (comp. Sayce, “Verdict of the Monuments,” pp. 209-211). The Egyptians attached great significance to dreams, as they are said to have done in the Biblical narrative (comp. Brugsch, “ History of Egypt,” pp. 200, 314, 406); famines of long duration were also not infrequent, being produced by the failure of the Nile overflow. One such, from 1064 to 1071, is attested by the Arabic historian Al-Makrizi (comp. Stanley, “Jewish Church,” i. 79). Such instances of the cor- rectness of the portraiture from an Egyptian stand- point might be greatly multiplied. At the most, however, they do not prove the historical character of the narrative, but that, if it is fiction, it is very realistic fiction. In either case the narratives were not written till after the ninth century B.c.; for such names as “Potiphar” (Gen. xxxix. 1) and “Zaphenath-paneah ” (Gen. xli. 45) do not occur in Egyptian before that century (comp. Brugsch in “Old Testament Student,” xi. 481). — Those who regard the Joseph stories as historical generally hold that the Pharaoh by whom Joseph was made the practical ruler of Egypt was one of the Hyksos kings. This result is reached partly by reckoning back from Rameses II., who is regarded as the Pharaoh of the oppression, and partly by as- suming that the Hyksos were Semitic or Asiatic, and that such a situation was more possible under them. The El-Amarna tablets cited above make it clear, however, that it would have been equally possible under the kings of the eighteenth dynasty, such as Amenophis IIJ. or Amenophis IV. (about 1400 B.c.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: In addition to the literature cited above, see the commentaries of Dillmann and Gunkel on Genesis, and Driver in Hogarth, Authority and Archeology, pp. 46-54. E. G. H. Ga A.B: —In Arabic Literature: The story of Joseph or Yusuf as it is told in Arabic literature has the same general outlines as the Biblical narrative; but in the Arabic account there is a wealth of accessory detail and incident. Some of these amplifications have been borrowed by Jewish writers (as in the “Sefer ha-Yashar”; see Griinbaum, “Zu ‘ Yussuf und Suleicha,’” in “Z. D. M. G.” xliii. 1 e¢ seq.). Joseph is regarded by the Arabs as a prophet (Koran, suras vi. 84, xl. 36). He is also a type of manly beauty; so that one often finds the expression “a second Joseph,” meaning one extraordinarily beautiful. He is likewise called the “Moon of Ca- naan.” ) SSD OM) Ynian YD * TOR tte na notbyaho cup oy aR AS 7 ‘mad - pMEne ay ovepwores > oan so 04.909 TED OOH A OMSID NEMS 3D SD eT” yo ohasn Somos | Ap re yore arane-o50 No) ONES MIAN TON 1D son bay, ASIN OMA & se m3) 8 pn 3 RS! oH robes on nim Aone "00. a 907 jo 22 bape Sh Smo josc% 5) ee Ton jo IN ee — A Sign orem ’ ae crete sg 777 AR a0 de PAGE FROM THE FIRST EDITION OF THE wy a1 HID - soy a7 pehor soe = ansiggg bys 6 708) yeblat) oy S70) ope sai SOD VIN HID INN angoinson propre < Sas Se A = SMO BIND MNS3 ON “Pyro piapa o2 4a nah os a ys ZDNET ch 34 oe 2 mM DDDIS AA OZ TD ers oe vhaiern. Son ron ans pen che my aa free BAOMSIDAINATY : pombingnovso. oy oat pug oon shy 4O3 DMSO TINS OMISIOMN _ an 20 MND Doh oa om 7 Ty) POIV Mp So | ons DAMON IBDN EI . 22 3°54 ans 1 aa aay bn bie) regnboon one anos roy rey eS) , LSpyIIB ITN _ oman sh oman on seh ae n Diepainte Oven". Lm cheval my ‘ 70% Be : 2 maa 1703 te eS Poretiaeiear Net eae * YOSIPPON,”’ MANTUA, 1475-80, (In the Library of Columbia University, New York.) CAD mos ~ “pup nyo, ohesno-rte ee OVI SSN 23)" ) 3 ee sha jena orem MO u, 303°2.0 Sarmsoneins web “UE VINTS "2 apy ppmpton ar dedi Levon mM = esse Ase ca 3 < “ . \ a i NE a oN : sence, “9% ay Ss a Sa9 ISHS a BRIN Sd ea Joseph, Henry Joseph ben Isaac THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 262 we ee eee dar (Halberstam MS. No, 321). Another, similar treatise on the calendar, under the title “ Mozne Ze- dek ” (Hamburg MS. No. 246), written by a “ gaon of Troyes,” may perhaps also be ascribed to Joseph. Zunz furthermore ascribes to him the anonymous grammar pw (so the title is given; probably an error for Dyy or oAw; comp. “ Minhat Yehudah,” p. 28b). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Z. G. pp. 84, 112; Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. xviii. 67; idem, in Berliner’s Magazin, xii. 213; idem, Cat. der Hebriischen Handschriften in Hamburg, p. 125, note; Gross, Gallia Judaica, p. 284. 8. 8. A. PE. JOSEPH, HENRY SAMUEL: English con- vert to Christianity ; born in 1801; died at Strasburg, Alsace, Jan. 28, 1864. At first a preacher in the synagogue at Bedford, he became converted to Christianity and was ordained in 1839 as a literate in the Church of England, and afterward he became traveling secretary to the London Society for Pro- moting Christianity Among the Jews. From 1847 to 1856 he acted as chaplain to Chester Castle. _ Joseph was the author of “Reasons for Embra- cing Christianity ” (1834) and “ Memoirs of Convicted Prisoners ” (Chester, 1853). BIBLIOGRAPHY: De le Roi, Juden-Mission, 2d ed., ii. 71; F. Boase, Modern English Biography, s.v. GL J. é 5 JOSEPH BAR HIYYA: Gaon of Pumbedita from 828 to 833. In the controversy between Daniel and the exilarch David ben Judah, the gaon Abra- ham ben Sherira seems to have been deposed by one party and Joseph bar Hiyya, the “ab bet din,” ap- pointed gaon of Pumbedita. Abraham, however, by means of influential friends, regained his posi- tion, and Joseph was compelled to recognize Abra- ham’s authority, Both nevertheless continued as geonim of the same school until, on the occasion of an annual meeting at Bagdad in the synagogue of Bar Nasla, Joseph, moved by the weeping of the congregation because of the dissensions between the heads of the school, rose and declared: “I herewith voluntarily renounce the office of gaon and resume that of ab bet din.” Thereupon Abraham rose and blessed him, saying: “ May God give you a share in the world to come.” After Abraham’s death (828) Joseph bar Hiyya became his legal successor and retained the office until his death in 888 (Letter of Sherira, in Neubauer, “M. J. C.” i. 38). See GAON. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Gratz, Gesch. v. 197; Halevy, Dorot ha-Ri- shonim, iii. ch. 21; Weiss, Dor, iv, 28. 8. 8. M. Sc. JOSEPH BEN IBRAHIM IBN WAKAR. See Inn WAKAR, JOSEPH BEN ABRAHAM. JOSEPH BEN ISAAC BEKOR SHOR OF ORLEANS: French tosafist, exegete, and poet; flourished in the second half of the twelfth century ; pupil of Jacob Tam, Joseph Caro, and Samuel ben Meir (RaSHBaM). The identity of Joseph Bekor Shor and the tosafist Joseph ben Isaac of Orleans has been sufficiently demonstrated by Gross, who showed that the same explanations given in the Tosa- fot (Hul. 112b; Yeb. 25b, 36b) in the name of Jo- seph ben Isaac, are quoted in the “Semak” (No. 205) and in Meir of Rothenburg’s Responsa (ed. Prague, No. 863) as those of Joseph Bekor Shor. Joseph was on very friendly terms with his teacher Jacob Tam, with whom he carried on a learned cor- respondence (“Sefer ha-Yashar,” p. 71a). Besides tosafot on the greater part of the Talmud, he wrote a Biblical commentary marked by considerable acu- men. Even more than Rashi, to whose exegetical school he belonged, he confined himself to literal in- terpretations(“peshat ”). Anticipating later Biblical criticism, he assumed the presence of duplicate nar- ratives in the Bible; and he strove to give rational explanations to the miraculous stories. Thus he in- terprets “tree of life” (Gen. ii. 9) as “tree of heal- ing,” explaining that the fruit of the tree possessed the virtue of healing the sick, without, however, bestowing eternal life. In regard to the transfor- mation of Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt (Gen. xix. 26) he explains that, disbelieving in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, she lingered on the road, and was overtaken by the rain of brimstone and fire, which are usually mixed with salt. Well acquainted with the Vulgate and Christian Biblical exegesis, Joseph, in commenting on Psalm ii., cites Jerome, whose explanation of the word 73 he criticizes. His commentary on the Pentateuch is still extant in manuscript in the libraries of Leyden and Munich. Part of it, on Genesis and Exodus, was published by Jellinek (Leipsic, 1855). Ex- tracts from the remaining books were published by Berliner in “ Peletat Soferim ” (1872). Joseph was the author also of a number of litur- gical poems. Besides the short hymns in the style of Ibn Ezra with which he concludes each section of the commentary, he wrote the following selihot: yaw 9D>y pos ‘3, believed by Zunz to have been written on the martyrs of Bloisand Bray ; MPN }\IN yi (fourteen strophes); nods 35 IN (with two refrains—awm and 3); yas pad ps (fifteen strophes, ending with mmSon) onan yonbe mb); sy98) OoTdNT nds Sx (fourteen strophes); oss naw j)20 (twenty-six strophes). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Carmoly, in Univers Israélite, 1852, p. 365 ; Gei- ger, Parschandatha, pp. 37 et seq.; Zunz, Literaturgesch. Pp. 282, 285; idem, Z. G. p. 74; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1446; Zadoc Kahn, in R. HE. J. iii. 6; Gross, in Berliner’s Magazin, i. 93; idem, Gallia Judaica, p. 34, K. I. Br. JOSEPH B. ISAAC OF CHINON: French tosafist ; lived in the second half of the twelfth and at the beginning of the thirteenth century. He is mentioned as a prominent Talmudist in “Ha-Te- rumah” (ed. Zolkiev, No. 44) and in “ Rokeah ” (ed. Lemberg, p. 475). He is quoted in the Tosafot un- der the name of “Joseph” (‘Ab. Zarah67b). J oseph corresponded with the somewhat younger Judah Sir Leon of Paris. Some of his Talmudic decisions are quoted in “Or Zarua‘” (ed. Jitomir, ii. 115a, 116a; ed. Jerusalem, 111) to B. B. 34. The last-cited de- cision, which is also included in the responsa of Meir of Rothenburg, is addressed to Isaac b. Samuel of Dampierre, or Isaac the Elder. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, Z. G. p. 52; i Larry p Gross, Gallia Judaica, 8. 8. A PE: JOSEPH BEN ISAAC HA-LEVI: Lithua- nian philosopher of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. He was well versed in philosophical NS Vhod ted gg wsplanyay pS pi es Eps 8 3K opt ow | ieee DV © pansy YK ) Sit piaw7 M6 IK DID AY, 414 fs DIK] TK] aK Fak] alk A ae joey pr PS Kis ae pIDD Wy Pw jis IK DDK sb pw : nvr pre jon} via Ww ke fist au? iru Sug Ds gt wap Fey DLT pe OFT jN34p ue ress Re ' ah [SAW OK THE [MK KI 82 B16 Nee Ts WHE fh pit whic mis we ahey is as ply) pe ire re pois ul FP fw aw pK owe 1S fan pone pabey ake ee wT : oo 7 : pyrex TK TH aie? 1245s ais wpe FPA WT JIYVY RAE PK WT Zi OMT pK 795 pray fre wz for 7 (2 PPE"Aw WYK LAW OT 7K [°K 3 wy Sas jDemrzais pV? Gow V5 pT SKN WwW ois 87" es S Disa aw Sig oes wre ens SF aS pot PAGE FROM THE FIRST EDITION OF THE JUDHO-GERMAN “ YOSIPPON,”’ ZURICH, 1546. (From the Sulzberger collection in the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, New York.) por i [awa Trans aii 6 paw prague 7 GI spe [RK 9 2_OMHIY WT [Iw [Hs [5 SD Sik Wy Joseph Israel Joseph ben Johanan THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 264 works, and when in Prague was asked by Yom- Tob Lipman Heller to explain to him the “Moreh Nebukim.” He then wrote “Gib‘at ha-Moreh,” containing criticisms on the “Moreh,” published with annotations by Yom-Tob Lipman Heller, Prague, 1611. The work is divided into three parts: the first criticizing Maimonides’ proofs of the exist- ence of God; the second, on the negation of anthro- pomorphisms ; and the third, on Maimonides’ proofs of the unity of God. It is quoted by Joseph Del- medigo in his “Miktab Ahuz,” and was approved by Ephraim Lentschutz, Isaac Katz, and Mordecai Jaffe. In another work, entitled “ Ketonet Passim ” (ib. 1614), Joseph expounded the principles con- tained in the “ Moreh.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. Sachs, in Ziyyon, ii. 78; Zunz, Z. G. p. 288, No. Bria mae aaa Cat. Bodl. col. 1473; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 115. Ke BR. JOSEPH ISRAEL. See JAcoB BEN JOSEPH ISRAEL. JOSEPH, JACOB: Russian-American rabbi; born at Krozhe, government of Kovno, Russia, 1848; died at New York July 28, 1902. He studied in the yeshibah at Volozhin under Hirsch Leib Ber- lin and Israel Salanter, and his aptness as a student won him the title “harif” (= “sharp-witted”). He became successively rabbi of Vilon (1868), Yurburg (1870), and Zhagory, Kovno, and his fame as a preacher spread, so that in 1883 the community of Wilna selected him as its “maggid” (preacher). In response to a call from a number of congrega- tions in New York Joseph emigrated to the United States, and on July 8, 1888, was chosen chief rabbi of the Russian Orthodox communities of New York. His funeral (July 80, 1902), which was attended by more than 50,000 Jews, was marked by a public dis- turbance in which a number of persons were in- jured. He published “Le-Bet Ya‘akob” (Wilna, 1888), a collection of homilies and novelle. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenstadt, Hakme Yisrael be-Amerika, pp. 56, 57, New York, 1903; The Jewish Journal, Aug. 1, 1902; New York Times and New York Herald, July 29 and 31, 1902; Der Jude, Cracow, pp. 9, 10, Aug. 21, 1902; Interna- tional Yearbook, New York, 1902; American Review of Reviews, Aug., 1902. A. 1 Ge 1D) JOSEPH BEN JACOB (known also as Bar Satya [xN’pD]): Gaon of Sura about 930-986 and 942-948. He was chosen by the exilarch David ben Zakkai to fill the place of Saadia (c. 980) when the latter was deposed. In 9386, however, when the exilarch became reconciled to Saadia, Joseph was deprived of his position, though the income attached to it continued to be paid to him. After Saadia’s death (942) Joseph was reappointed gaon, which office he held until 948, when, on account of the impoverishment and general decadence of the Acad- emy of Sura, he left for Bassora, where he died. See GAONn. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Abraham ibn Dand, in M. J. CO. i. 65, 66; letter of Sherira Gaon, tb. i. 40; comp. ib. ii. 81-88; Gritz, Gesch. v. 260, 277 et seq.; Weiss, Dor, iv. 158-159. G. M. Sc. JOSEPH B. JACOB ISAAC: Rabbi at Yam- pol, Russia, later at Zamoscz; died in 1807. He was the author of “Mishnat Hakamim,” on various subjects, including Maimonides’ “Madda‘” (Lem- berg, 1792). Appended to the book are some no- vellee by his son Isaac, rabbi of Chelm. He refers also to his son’s responsa on the laws of Sabbath and festivals, entitled “ Otot le-Mo‘adim.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenstadt-Wiener, Da‘at Kedoshim, pp. 69- 70; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 469. NTL Sus: JOSEPH BEN JACOB OF PINCZOW: Lithuanian Talmudist of the seventeenth century. He was a pupil of Zebi Hirsch, rabbi in Lublin. In 1687 he was rabbi at Kosowi, Russia, whence he was called to Syeltzy. In 1702, compelled to leave Syeltzy on account of the persecution of the Jews under the temporary rule of the Swedes, he went to Hamburg, where he remained until 1706. He re- turned to Syeltzy in that year, but in 1710 was compelled again to leave it by the outbreak of an epidemic. This time he went to Berlin, where he published his “Rosh Yosef,” notes on various Tal- mudic treatises. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, p. 96. 8. 8. AGERE, JOSEPH BEN JACOB IBN ZADDIK (Ara- bic, Abu Omar): Spanish rabbi, poet, and philos- opher; died at Cordova 1149. ), as the Hebrew word for“bride”; but the manner in which this meaning has been connected with a con- vention of teachers (Levy, “Neuhebr. Worterbuch,” li, 821) has not been satisfactorily explained. Per- haps the word is merely another form of the Ara- maic xd53 = “totality,” although this word never occurs in traditionary literature as a designation for a collection or assembly of people. It may be con- nected also with the Aramaic nbs De garlands the assembly of teachers being thought of as a gar- land adorning the academy (comp. “Hazi ha-Goren ” and “Kerem” as designations of the circle which the Sanhedrin formed).~ In Latin, also, “corona” means “circle,” 4assembly.” Kohut (“ Aruch Com- pletum,” iv. 428a) has a similar ex planation, although he adds an incorrect comparison with a Persian word. The importance of the Katlah (referred to under another name) is extolled in the Midrash Tanhuma (Noah, § 3): “God hasappointed the two academies | ““yeshibot”] for the good of Israel. In them day and night are devoted to the study of the Torah; and thither come the scholars from all places twice a year, in Adar and Elul, and associate with one another in discussions on the Torah.” The greater the attendance at the convention, the greater was the renown of the academy. Hence Abaye says (Ber. 6b): “The most important part of the Kallah isa crowd.” The unpleasant side of this crowd is char- acterized by Abaye’s colleague Raba as follows (a. 6a): “The crowd at the Kallah is caused by the mazzikim” (the unseen tormenting spirits which hoveraround people). There was a sayingin Baby- lonia that whoever dreamed of going into a forest would become president of the Kallah (the Kallah being likened to a forest). That treatise of the Mishnah which formed the subject of explanation and discussion at each sepa- rate Kallah was called “the treatise of the Kallah” according to Ta‘an. 10b (see R. Hananeel in Kohut, l.c. iv. 227b). The sentence in question is a tan- naitic maxim, the latter part of whichis: “. among the scholars is to be counted he who is able to answer every question concerning every halakah which he has studied”; to this the words Sop nb5 napN. (“even that referring to the treatise of the Kallah”) are added on account of Babylonian conditions. In Palestine there was no Kallah. It is true that A. Schwarz (“Jahrbuch fir Jiidische Gesch. und Litteratur,” 1899, ii. 102) claims that this can not be asserted with certainty; but the sources show that the Kallah was purely a Babylonian in- stitution. As a matter of fact it resulted from the circumstance that the Babylonian Jews were scat- tered over an unusually extensive territory, and felt the need of coming together at stated times to study in common. See ACADEMIES IN BABYLONIA; GAON. Gq. Wii 183. RED KALLIR, ELEAZAR B. ELEAZAR: Hun- garian rabbi and author; died at Kolin, Bohemia, in 1805; grandson of Meir Eisenstadt, author of “ Panim Me’irot.” Kallir, who was rabbi of Rechnitz and of Kolin, wrote: (1) “Or Hadash,” in three parts: Kalman Kalonymus THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 424 (a) commentary on the Pentateuch which forms a part of his grandfather’s work “Kotnot Or” (Firth, 1766); (0) novelle on Pesahim; and (¢) novelle on Kiddushin (Frankfort - on - the - Oder and Vienna, 1766-99); (2) “Hawwot Ya’ir Hadash ” (Prague, 1792), sermons; (8) “Heker Halakah,” part i. (Vienna, 1838), responsa. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 142; Gans, Ze- mah Dawid, Supplement, p. 207; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 417. SS. ING 405 1be KALMAN VERMEISA (OF WORMS): Po- lish rabbi; died in Lemberg on April 28, 1560; the first known rabbi of that community and one of the earliest great rabbis of Poland. Though prob- ably a native of Worms, as his surname suggests, he was rabbi and head of a yeshibah in Lemberg for forty-two years, and is mentioned in responsa and by his contemporaries as one of the foremost Tal- mudical authorities of his time. R. Joseph ha- Kohen of Cracow, author of “She’erit Yosef,” states in that work that he submitted a question to him and was sustained in his opinion (Responsum No. 1, where R. Eliezer b. Manoah, his son-in-law, is also cited). One responsum by R. Kalman (dated 1558) and another by R. Eliezer (Nos. 15 and 16 in the responsa of R. Moses IsseRLEs) contain all that has been preserved of their writings. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Dembitzer, Kelilat Yofi, pp. 73-76, Cracow, 1888; Buber, Anshe Shem, pp. 200-201, Cracow, 1895; Suchas- tav, Mazzebet Kodesh, ii., No. 1, iv. 18a, Lemberg, 1863-69. Ss. 8. Paar. KALMANKES. See Jarre. KALOMITI, ABRAHAM BEN MOSES: Turkish scholar of the fifteenth century. To him is attributed the rationalistic commentary on Job found in manuscript in the Bodleian Library (Neu- bauer, “Cat. Bodl. Hebr. MSS.” No. 2248). In this commentary (fol. 57) the author quotes the “Sefer ha-Middot,” a work of his on the “Ethics” of Aristotle. Kalomiti’s claim to its authorship is, however, questioned by Steinschneider, who sup- poses that the commentary on Job was only copied for Kalomiti. The surname “Kalomiti,” which is the equivalent of the Hebrew O°) 4N, was borne by several prom- inent Turkish Jews. A certain David p*y) 4X and one Samuel O°) 4N are highly praised by Ephraim ben Gershon ha-Rofe in his sermons. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, in Hebr. Bibl. xvii. 111, 135; xix. 31; idem, Hebr. Uebers. p. 219, note 807b. G. I. Br. KALONYMUS: A prominent family (originally from Lucca, Italy), which, after the settlement at Mayence and Speyer of several of its members, took during many generations a leading part in the de- velopment of Jewish learning in Germany. The name ought really to be spelled “Kalonymos,” as Kalonymus b. Kalonymus and Immanuel of Rome both rime it with words ending in “-mos” (see Zunz in Geiger’s “Zeitschrift,” iv. 199). The origin of the name, which occurs in Greece, Italy, and Provence, is uncertain. Wolf thought it a translation of the Hebrew “Shem-Tob” (Zunz, “G. 8.” ii. 83); Zunz, that it represented the Latin “Cleonymus ” (Geiger’s “Zeitschrift,” ii, 316). See also Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” col. 1872. Traces of the family in Italy may be found as early as the second half of the eighth century. As to the date of the settlement of its members in Germany, the opinions of modern schol- ars are divided, owing to the conflicting statements of the Jewish sources (Eleazar of Worms, “ Mazref la-Hokmah,” p. 14b; Solomon Luria, Responsa, No. 29; Joseph ha-Kohen, “‘Emek ha-Baka,” p. 18). Rapoport, Zunz, and many others place the settle- ment in 876, believing the King Charles Qbaxp) mentioned. in the sources as having induced the Kalonymides to emigrate to Germany, to have been Charles the Bold, who was in Italy in that year; Luzzatto and others think that it took place under Charlemagne, alleging that the desire to attract scholars to the empire was more in keeping with the character of that monarch; still others assign it to the reign of Otto II. (973-988), whose life, accord- ing to the historian Thietmar von Merseburg, was saved in a battle with the Saracens by a Jew named Kalonymus. The following table, compiled from the accounts of Eleazar of Worms and Solomon Luria, gives the Italian and German heads of the family, which produced for nearly five centuries the most notable scholars of Germany and northern France, such as Samuel he-Hasid and Judah he- Hasid (for another genealogical tree, see KALONYMUS BEN ISAAC THE ELDER): Meshullam I. (780) (2) Ithiel I. (800) Meshullam II. (825) (11) Moses I. (850) Jekuthiel I. (876) Kalonymus I. (900) Moses II. (926) Jekuthiel II. (4) Kalonymus II. (950) (9) Meshullam the Great of Rome or Lucca (976) (5) Kalonymus III. (1000) | (1) Hananee!l I. (12) Moses IIT. (1020) ae II. Kalonymus IV. Hananeel II. (3) Jekuthiel of Speyer Moses IV, (1070) (1060) | Moses V. of (10) Meshullam Speyer of Mayence (1080) {ior0) Although all of them are mentioned as having been important scholars, the nature of the activity of only a few of them is known. 1. Hananeel I. (ben Kalonymus): Litur- gical poet; flourished at Mayence or Speyer in the eleventh century; brother of Moses TIT. He was the author of the piyyut nwyin ‘wy ywon to the kerobot of the last day of Passover, t» which his brother wrote the PMN NN. 2. Ithiel I.: A short selihah in eight strophes, beginning with 3999 ‘inv1 nan and concluding 425 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kalman Kalonymus soos a ee et with DY ND ambyn, bears the name of Ithiel with- out any other indication astoits authorship. It was translated into German by Zunz (“S. P.” p. 289). 3. Jekuthiel ben Moses: Liturgical poet; flourished at Speyer in 1070. He was the author of the reshut ‘n° to Kalir’s kerobah for the feast of ' New-Year. A son of Jekuthiel named Moses of Speyer is quoted as a high Talmudical authority (“Pardes,” p. 48a; “Rokeah,” p. 811; “Pirke Re- kanati,” p. 189; “Maimoniyyot,” now, xxx.; “Shib- bole ha-Leket,” p. 89, where the name is erroneously given as Simhah instead of Moses). 4. Kalonymus II. (ben Moses): Halakist and liturgical poet; flourished at Lucca or at Rome about 950. He was consulted on ritual questions by Gershon Me’or ha-Golah; and twelve responsa of his are included in the collection compiled by Joseph ben Samuel ‘Alam Tob and published by D. Cassel under the title “Teshubot Geonim Kadmonim” (Nos. 106-118). Gershon Me’or ha-Golah remarks (“Shibbole ha-Leket,” § 18) that there exists in rab- binical literature a confusion concerning the identity of Kalonymus and his son Meshullam the Great, and ' the saying of one is sometimes attributed to the other. Thus Rashi quotes three emendations in the Talmudical text in the name of R. Meshullam (Zeb. 45b), while Jacob Tam (Tos., Men. 109b) gives them in the name of R. Kalonymus. Kalonyimus was the author of a kerobah for feast-days (“Ma‘aseh Ge- onim,” § 172). To him probably belong the rehitim Ny xs which bear the signature “Kalonymus” or “Kalonymus the Elder.” Eleazer of Worms attributes also to him the piyyut in ty bapa ymabp. 5. Kalonymus III.(ben Meshullam): Litur- gical poet; flourished at Mayence about 1000. He figures in the Amnon legend as having written the “U-Netanneh Tokef,” which had been revealed to him in adream by the martyr AMNON oF MAYENCE. 6. Kalonymus ben Isaac the Elder: Ger- man halakist; lived at Speyer in the eleventh and twelfth centuries; father of Samuel he-Hasid, grand- father of Judah he-Hasid, and great-grandfather of Judah ben Kalonymus, as the following pedigree shows: 88, 245, 290), and in the “Mazref la-Hokmah” (p. 14a), it may be inferred that he was rabbi in Ma- yence, and that during the First Crusade (1096) he was compelled to flee to Speyer. He died in Dec., 1127. His body could not be buried because of the investment of the city by Lothar, the burial-ground being outside of the place. Ata later time it was interred at Mayence. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, p. 572; Wiener, in Monatsschrift, xii. 164; Epstein, ib. xli. 448. 7. Kalonymus b. Judah or Kalonymus the Elder: Lived in Mayence at the beginning of the twelfth century. He was a contemporary of Elia- kim b. Joseph, the teacher of Eleazar b. Nathan (RaBaN). 8. Kalonymus ben Judah or Kalonymus the Younger: Liturgical poet; flourished at Speyer (?) about 1160; probably a grandson of Ka- lonymus ben Isaac the Elder. He was a contempo- rary of Isaac b. Shalom, grandfather of Isaac Or Zarua‘, and was the author of many liturgical poems in various styles, e.g., ofan, zulat, and reshut, and especially of selihot. Thirty of his poetical produc- tions have been incorporated in the Mahzor. Among his selihot the most noteworthy are: dyn ns, in which the author describes the readiness shown by the Jews, in the persecutions of the Crusades, to die for the faith of their fathers; the kinah jn DD ‘WN, on the sufferings of the Jews during the persecutions of 1147 (“ Monatsschrift,” xx. 257); and Dv" Nim, on the fate of the Jews from the times of the Pharaohs to the destruction of the Temple by Titus. The whole of the first selihah and the end of the second have been translated into German by Zunz. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Zunz, S. P. pp. 16, 196; idem, Literatur- gesch. pp. 164-166, 255; Epstein, in Monatsschrift, xli. 449. 9. Meshullam the Great (called also the Ro- man, ‘917 YN): Halakist and liturgical poet; flour- ished at Rome or at Lucca about 976. He carried on with Gershon Me’or ha-Golah and Simon the Great a scientific correspondence, which is included in the “Teshubot Geonim Kadmonim” (18a), and was the author of a commentary on Abot (“‘Aruk,” 8.2, (6) Kalonymus b. Isaac the Elder (d. 1126) Samuel can Abraham Judah he-Hasid (author ‘Sefer ha-Hasidim”’ ; d. 1217) Moses Saltman Tobiah xolde (Briill’s ‘‘ Jahrb.” ix. 45) Eleazar ha- Darshan (c. 1240) Moses Azriel ha-Darshan (c. 1280) Kalonymus is quoted in the Tosafot (Hul. 47b), and a responsum of his is included in the collection of responsa of Meir of Rothenburg (No. 501). From the account of Kalonymus given in the “ Mordekai”. (Pes. NDD byb by “1b, end), in the “ Pardes” ($§ 75, (8) es Rie Daughter = (c. 1160) ( Judah Meir Moses Samuel Simhah (c. 1223) Kalonymus | “*ha-Parnes’’) David (c. ne Meshullam (c. 1240) Judah Meir (Zunz, °°. Z. G.” p. 53) syp). Meshullam engaged in polemics with the Karaites. From the Bible text he demonstrates that, contrary to their opinion, one may quit one’s house on Sabbath and have one’s house lighted on the night of Sabbath (“Semag,” No. 66; “Sefer Hasi- Kalonymus THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 426 dim,” No. 1147). Meshullam was a prolific liturgical poet. Of the piyyutim contained in the kerobah of the “Shaharit ” service of the Day of Atonement, at least twenty (possibly thirty-two) belong to him. He wrote also: an “‘Abodah,” recited after the prayer for the synagogue reader and containing a cursory review of Biblical history from Adam down to Levi; a yozer for Passover; and two zulot. Al- together thirty-eight piyyutim are attributed to him. Although their language is labored, they are distin- guished by their elevation of thought and concise- ness. There was another payyetan called “Me- shullam the Great,” to whom probably belongs the Aramaic poetical Targum on the Decalogue which is generally attributed to Meshullam the Great ben Kalonymus (comp, Landshuth, “‘Ammude hia- ‘Abodah,” 8.2.). 10. Meshullam ben Moses: Liturgical poet; lived at Mayence in 1080. He was the author of the following five piyyutim: (1) oy ‘Sax MANIDN yond, a yozer for a marriage Sabbath, based upon I Chron. xxix. 14-12; (2) -prars mad snbyap, in seven-lined strophes; (3) an Elijah poem, Y\8 W'S Nop; (4) an Aramaic illustration cf the third com- mandment, beginning with pw MIIADD WtN; and (5) a kedushshah for the Musaf service. Meshullam was among those who killed themselves May 27, 1096, in order not to fall into the hands of the Crusaders (Neubauer and Stern, “ Hebriiische Berichte iiber die Judenverfolgungen,” p. 6). 11. Moses I. (ben Meshullam): Liturgical poet; lived at Rome or at Lucca about 850. Two tahanunim of his are incorporated in the Mahzor: one, beginning with *nywn bys ‘T. NIN, Comprises thirty-eight lines of four words each; the other, be- ginning with Ssnw 1p, consists of forty-six lines, with a double acrostic on the name of the author at the beginning of the line; translated into German by: Zunz (@S) Bp. 193); 12. Moses ben Kalonymus: Liturgical poet; flourished at Mayence in 1020. He was the author of NII Nd ’s and of a kerobah consisting of various poems for the seventh day of Passover, which used to be recited in the congregations of Mayence. Citations from several of the kerobah poems are given in various earlier Bible commen- taries. (On the confusion existing in the rabbinical sources concerning the identity of the author of the TMNT Nid N, see Zunz, “Literaturgesch.” pp. 104-108.) BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rapoport, in Bikkure ha-‘Ittim, x. 40 et seq., 111 et seqg.; xi. 100; Carmoly, in Jost’s Annalen, i. 222; Luz- zatto, Giudaismo Illustrato, p. 80; Zunz, G. V. Index; idem, Literaturgesch. Index; idem, Z. G. Index : Monats- schrift, 1854, pp. 236 et seq.: 1878, pp. 250 et seq.; Gritz, Gesch. v. 193; Giidemann, Gesch. i. 11 et seq.; Giesebrecht, Kaixser- zeit, i. 849; Bresslau, in Zeitschrift ftir die Gesch. der Juden in Deutschland, i. 156 et seq.; Aronius, ih. ii. 82 et fae Vogelstein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. G. I. Br. KALONYMUS. See Bravcatrn. KALONYMUS BEN DAVID BEN TO- DROS: French translator; lived in the first half of the fourteenth century. He translated (after 1328) from the Arabic into Hebrew, under the title “Hap- palat ha-Happalah,” the treatise of Averroes against Ghazali’s “Tahafut al-Falasifah.” The translation is preceded by an introduction in rimed prose, in which Kalonymus excuses himself for having un- dertaken to propagate a work written by such a heretic as Averroes, and alleges that the arguments of the latter are sometimes so weak that they serve to strengthen Ghazali’s attacks against the philoso- phers. Moreover, having been urged by his friends to give a Hebrew version of the work, he felt un- able to refuse, although there already existed a Hebrew translation made by Isaac, or Bonisaac, 5)n95, and another had been commenced by Kalon- ymus ben Kalonymus. The introduction was pub- lished by Steinschneider in the catalogue of the Berlin Library. Kalonymus has been confounded by many bibliographers with the Venetian physi- cian of the same name, who was also a translator. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, La France Israélite, p. 93; Stein- schneider, Cat. Leyden, p. 88; idem, Berlin Cat. p. 133 ; idem, Hebr. Uebers. p. 332; Gross, in Monatsschrift, 1880, p. 61; Renan-Neubauer, Les Ecrivains Juifs Frangais, p. 61. 4 G BR KALONYMUS BEN GERSHON: German Talmudist of the thirteenth century. He was acon- temporary of Eleazar of Worms and Menahem ben Jacob, with whom he disputed concerning a halakic decision. The controversy is quoted by Mordecai ben Hillel (“Mordekai,” Yebamot ix., end) and in the “Haggahot Maimoniyyot ” (“ Hilkot Gerushim,” xiii.). : BIBLIOGRAPHY: Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, p. 572. a. I. Br. KALONYMUS BEN JUDAH (known as Maestro Calo): Italian physician; born in Naples; lived at Venice in the first half of the sixteenth cen- tury. He attained a high reputation in the Chris- tian world by the following translations into Latin made by him: Zerahiah ha-Levi’s Hebrew version of Ghazali’s “Tabafut al-Falasifah,” published under the title “ Destructio ” (Venice, 1527); Samuel ibn Tibbon’s Ilebrew version of Averroes’ treatise on the intellect, published under the title “De Con- versione Intellectus ” (¢b.); Moses ibn Tibbon’s He- brew version of Alpetragius’ treatise on astronomy (Venice, 1531). Kalonymus also translated into He- brew, probably from Latin, Johannes Regiomon- tanos’ “Fundamentis,” which is still extant in man- uscript (Parma MS. No. 836, 9). He was the author of a treatise on the Hebrew accents, entitled “Sha‘ar ba-Ta‘amim,” written as a supplement to Abraham de Balmes’ grammar, “Mikneh Abram” (Venice, 1528). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1575; idem, Hebr. Uebers. pp. 333, 341, 551, 641; Mortara, Indice, p. 9: G. I. Br. KALONYMUS BEN KALONYMUS BEN MEIR (called Maestro Calo): Provencal philos- opher and translator; born at Arles 1286: died after 1828. He was a descendant of a prominent Proven- cal family, several members of which held high posi- tions among the Jews. The father of Kalonymus and Kalonymus himself each bore the title “Nasi” (prince). The latter studied philosophy and rab- binical literature at Salonica, under the direction of Senior Astruc de Noves and Moses ben Solomon of Beaucaire. He also studied medicine, although he seems never to have practised it. we’ ee > ageh PPT 9) ge re sm eqemny » oR om ap “me whad, om om. i ’ ra) See DROIT) ‘= 7 re: bats ts ! er Ng We ee og OK =p ym Selebee J DEP San 75) meee Sans my gee es cay ‘ : : (ee, ‘ : 7 . ca — 2 i x Py eh 4 wm 7 OSS wee an oe ey 2 ee oN IVTPP waee ee “rT : ‘3% Sse £ math os % Peo a rs Z k ar : = ye rer ci ss é ee am ae so oe s= A \ oe wor * pense: = : 2 ae » we o ie a ad wr ox e tw eg = re Sone Re bt Doe ey = oa on gem a é wman ey Tie 2 mh extn au’ mms cm eee Mees _ eq i CE S Oe eg epi ig we ae te Looe yp &? ree eo 3 . . % ca ot a as ae ees ana ¢ oye in me 9 yet saape pate e y prt wt ws | ans swt re 5 A’ b ae Oe f 4 ; { Ss = x . | mi A ee SY EES 4 oe > ae, oe a; {TR eNe aN T om gen any or =- ™} be 9 oo aS yee, Ves’ ew.” oo iw fst wr & y pee he Ake, ie! : f i ee : % Ssh es: k Ped er amue soy ‘ = PRL FLFR t LED RAR DS. fs ft wow vere sore Pps P oe < eo t ut Be 4 £8 =: 7 wm Kae mer eey & re rn ail omy sm E ae ee, aap un as p id aha f a sr eo Ppsr ez Bae pao snr S32 ve. y i ye t 4 : mre ey aoe =r, ee Sass =? ; Vere S Pig Genin =n > << ream) PO; pe LS \ aw me RHR ~~ Ac omeee Be, HR & res te: REX 8 2 =) ros be D es ee pr ee ek Nie es lad A uae a rare read we, a lo Sie eb) —shaebe) pipe’ poo} SPisspon sr - pos Pe, SPE NEED LB HP ew oo ie wr wor Pack: £2) eas custoress cy by: Yes Op) MEShS PEP ae S : sas ® ra ee on moss permed Sahm io wee coesns sien ga Ed oe 5 ve : S eke -~ ee an ah : why ¥ Gomi P “ sor ypers igs o355 : i eek ee mcr ity {o> ese) r] ers: sete: ee hs Bag fo ie wi { 1 ee e 428 x” ASE nee te, caer Amos ®, % ol ee Lp bie 39. bases fo {> gee: . s| fk "pega Ags PS pam, By ty, RENRE ie *SsSP> eS SEP =P ee Be ear 9 ; fk ok < : nia " ‘eran E ae, wanyects mpi Sons aa is as “ead! ® is Pre E me fs ay < * ; be we ; - or R : 2 a : : eo wits Hs ‘ & eomg goe 8 tae . 1828-29); “Ahabat Emet, us homilies and essays (2b. 1829). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 180; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 2433; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1838, No. 67. ch M. SEL. KAUFMAN, ALEXANDER ARKADYE- VICH: Russian political economist; born 1864. After graduating in law from the University of St. Petersburg, he was commissioned (1887-90) by the minister of domains to investigate the economic life of the peasants in the governments of Tobolsk and Tomsk. In 1894 he made a study of the economic condition of the new settlers in a part of the gov- ernment of Tomsk, and published his investigations under the title “ Materialy dlya Isucheniya Ekono- micheskavo Byta Gosudarstvennykh Krestyan Za- padnoi Sibiri.” Kaufman likewise contributed to, and edited, “Krestyanskoye Zemlepolzovaniye i Khozyaistvo v Tobolskoi i Tomskoi Guberniyakh” (St. Petersburg, 1894), Other works by Kaufman are: “Khozyaistvennoye Statisticheskoye Izslvedo- vaniye Tobolskoi Gubernii” (“ Yuridicheski Vyest- nik,” 1890, vol. x.); “Ocherk Obschinnykh Poryad- kov Ishimskavo Okruga” (“ Russkaya Mysl,” 1890, vol. xi.); “ Vliyanige Pereselencheskavo Elementa na Razvitiye Selskavo Khozyaistva i Obschinnoi Zhizni v Zapadnoi Sibiri” (“Syeverny Vyestnik,” 1891, vol. iv.); “Zastyvshaya Istoriya Obschiny ” (“ Vyestnik Yevropy,” 1898, vol. vi.); “ Obzor Sposoba Polevod- stva 1 Syevooborotov v Zapadnoi Sibiri” (“Sels- koye Khozyaistvo i Lyesovodstvo,” 1893, vol. vi.); “Ocherk Krestyanskavo Khozyaistva v_ Sibiri” (Tomsk, 1894); “Obschina i Uspyekhi Selskavo Khozyaistva v Sibiri” (“ Russkoye Bogatsvo,” 1894, vol. x.). Kaufman’s investigations have won him the gold medal of the Imperial Geographical So- ciety. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Entziklopedicheski Slovar, xiv. 773. Ho R: is MER aby KAUFMAN, ARKADYA (AARON): Rus- sian communal worker; born at Grodno early in the nineteenth century; died at St. Petersburg April 19, 1898. While receiving a thorough Talmudic education he acquired also by his own unassisted efforts the French and German languages. He made a study of forestry in its relation to ship- building and was appointed by the government overseer of shipyards. Kaufman was an author- ity on sculpture and painting, and possessed a valu- able art collection, as well as a collection of rare Hebrew books and manuscripts. He took a deep interest in the affairs of the St. Petersburg com- munity, and it was as a result of his efforts that it received permission to establish a Jewish cemetery and ¢rect a synagogue. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Asif, iv. 164, ee JI. GL. 457 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Katzenelson Kaufmann KAUFMAN, ILLARION IGNATYEVICH: Russian political economist; born at Odessa 1847. He graduated from the University of Kharkof, and entered the government service in 1870. Kaufman’s writings deal chiefly with problems of currency and loans, especially of state debts. When he became connected with the central statis- tical commission Kaufman’s investigations were first published in the “ Vremennik” of the commis- sion (series ii.). They contain much valuable mate- rial on the history of Russian finance, particularly his “Statistika Gosudarstvennykh Finansov Rossii v 1862-1884” (St. Petersburg, 1886). Among his other writings may be mentioned: “Teoriya Kole- baniya Tsyen,” Kharkof, 1867; “K Ucheniyu o Dengakh i Kreditye,” 7b. 1868; “Statistika Russkikh Bankoy,” St. Petersburg, 1872-76; “Kreditnyye Bilety, Ikh Upadok i Vozstanovleniye,” 7b. 1888; “Vekselnyye Kursy Rossii za 50 Lyet, 1841-90,” 2. 1892. He has also published a number of articles in “Vyestnik Yevropy ” (1872-85). Since 1893 Kaufman has been professor of statis- tics in the University of St. Petersburg. He was a member of the board of directors of the Land- owners’ Bank for fifteen years, and is at present (1904) a member of the directorate of the Imperial Bank, St. Petersburg. BIBLIOGRAPHY: HEntziklopedicheski Slovar, xiv., St. Peters- burg, 1895; Bolshaya Entziklopedia, ib. 1902. ist INA ds (Er, 1bp KAUFMANN, DAVID: Austrian scholar; born at Kojetein, Moravia, June 7, 1852; died at Karlsbad, Bohemia, July 6, 1899. He was educated at Kojetein; and from 1861 to 1867 he attended the gymnasium at Krem- sir, where he studied the Bible and Talmud with Jacob Brill, rabbi of Kojetein, and with the latter’s son Nehe- miah. In 1867 he went to the Jewish Theo- logical Seminary at Breslau, where he studied for ten years, attending at the same time the university of that city. In the sum- mer of 1874 he received his Ph.D. from the University of Leipsic; and on Jan. 29, 1877, he was ordained rabbi. In the latter year he de- clined the offer of a professorship at the Jewish Theo- logical Seminary, Cincinnati, preferring to accept in- stead the chairs of history, philosophy of religion, and homiletics at the newly founded rabbinical school at Budapest, which he continued to hold till his death. He also at the same time taught Greek and German in the preparatory school of the same insti- tution, ¢arrying on this work in the Hungarian lan- guage, which he had rapidly mastered. As libra- rian of the seminary he acquired the large library of Lelio della Torre of Padua, the library of the sem- inary becoming by this addition one of the most val- David Kaufmann. uable Hebrew libraries of Europe. As a teacher Kaufmann was highly successful; and his relation to his students was that of friendly ad- His Life. viser. He maintained a lively corre- spondence not only with the most emi- nent Jewish scholars, but also with the leaders in other branches of science. Kaufmann was a corre- sponding member of the Royal Academy of Sciences of Madrid and a member of the executive commit- tee of the Budapest branch of the Alliance Israé- lite Universelle. Kaufmann displayed a many-sided literary ac- tivity. The bibliography of his works which M. Brann compiled for the “Gedenkbuch zur Erinner- ung an David Kaufmann” (ed. M. Brann and F. Rosenthal, Breslau, 1900) includes 546 items, cover- ing nearly every branch of Jewish science. His voluminous contributions to the periodical literature of the last two decades of the nineteenth century show him asa finished writer both of German and of Hebrew. His first and most important works, dealing with the philosophy of religion, include: “Die Theologie des Bachja ibn Pakuda, Verfasser des ny22bA main,” a prize essay written while a student at the seminary (in “Berichte der Kaiser- lichen Akademie der Wissenschaften,” Vienna, 1874); “Geschichte der At- tributenlehre in der Jiidischen Reli- gionsphilosophie des Mittelalters von Saadia bis Maimuni” (Gotha, 1877-78), his chief work, being a survey of the Jewish and Arabic religious philosophy of the Middle Ages; “Die Spuren al-Batlajusi’s in der Jiidischen Religionsphi- losophie Nebst einer Ausgabe der Hebr. Uebersetz- ung Seiner Bildlichen Kreise ” (Budapest, 1880; also in Hungarian); “Die Sinne. Beitrige zur Gesch. der Physiologie und Psychologie im Mittelalter. Aus Hebriiischen und Arabischen Quellen” (Budapest, 1884; also in Hungarian); an edition of the “ Minhat Kena’ot” of Jehiel b. Samuel Pisa (Berlin, 1898, form- ing a part of the Mekize Nirdamim collection); “Studien tiber Salomon ibn Gabirol” (Budapest, 1899; also in Hungarian); a large number of essays in various periodicals, noteworthy among which is the paper “Der Fiihrer Maimuni’s in der Weltlit- teratur” (reprinted from “ Archiv fiir Gesch. der Philosophie,” by L. Stein, xi., No. 8). His most important historical monographs are: “Die Letzte Vertreibung der Juden aus Wien, Ihre Vorgeschichte (1625-70) und Ihre Opfer” (Vienna, 1889; also in Hungarian); “Zur Gesch. Jiidischer Familien: Samson Wertheimer, der Oberhoffactor und Landesrabbiner, 1658-1724, und His Works. Contribu- Seine Kinder” (Vienna, 1888); “ Ur- tions to kundliches aus dem Leben Samson Jewish Wertheimers” (Budapest, 1891; also History. in Hungarian); “Die Familien Prags nach den Epitaphien des Alten Jii- dischen Friedhofs in Prag, Zusammengestellt von Simon Hock, aus Dessen Nachlasse Herausgegeben, mit Anmerkungen Versehen und Biographisch Ein- geleitet von Prof. Dr. D. Kaufmann” (with Hebrew title-page, Presburg, 1892); “Zur Gesch. Jiidischer Familien: I., R. Jair Chajjim Bacharach, 1688-1702, und Seine Ahnen ” (Treves, 1894); “Dr, Israel Cone- gliano und Seine Verdienste um die Republik Vene- Kaufmann Kayser THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 458 dig bis nach dem Frieden von Carlowitz” (Buda- pest, 1895; also in Hungarian); “Die Erstiirmung Ofens und Ihre Vorgeschichte nach dem Berichte Isaak Schulhofs [Megillat Ofen], 1650-1782; Heraus- gegeben und Biographisch Eingeleitet” (Treves, 1895); “ Aus Heinrich Heine’s Ahnensaal” (Breslau, 1896); “Die Memoiren der Gliickel von Hameln” (Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1896, with Hebrew title- page); “Die Chronik des Achimaaz aus Oria” (re- print from “ Monatsschrift,” 1896). Kaufmann was the first to take up the history of Jiidische Gelehrsamkeit ” (Leipsic, 1887), a defense of his friend and master Zunz; “ Wie Heben Wir den 2Religidsen Sinn Unserer Madchen und Frauen” (Treves, 1893); introduction to 8. Heller’s “Die Echten Hebriiischen Melodien ” (dd. 1898). He was also an active member of the Mekize Nirdamim, a society for the publication of old Hebrew manu- scripts. Kaufmann was the possessor of a large library, which contained many valuable manuscripts, in- cunabula, and first editions, and of which the Marco THE CHESS-PLAYERS. (From the painting by Isidor Kaufmann.) art in the synagogue. The following works of his in this field may be mentioned: “Zur Gesch. der Kunst in den Synagogen” (Vienna, On Jewish 1897); “Zur Gesch. der Jiidischen Art. Handschriften-[lustration ” (contribu- tion to the edition de luxe of “Die Haggada von Sarajewo” by D. H. Miller and I. v. Schlossar, Vienna, 1898); “Sens et Origines des Symboles Tumulaires de l’Ancien Testament dans VArt Chrétien Primitif” (“R. E. J.” xiv. 33, 217). Kaufmann also polemized much in behalf of Ju- daism. Noteworthy among his writings along this line are: “Ein Wort im Vertrauen an Herrn Hof- prediger Stécker von Einem, Dessen Name Nichts zur Sache Thut” (Berlin, 1880); “Paul de Lagarde’s Morrara library, acquired by Kaufmann, formed the nucleus. BIBLIOGRAPHY: An entire Kaufmann literature has arisen, of which the following works may be mentioned: F. Rosenthal, biography in the Kaufmann Gedenkbuch; 8. Krauss, Da- vid Kaufmann, Berlin, 1902; H. Bloch, in _Abendblatt of the Pester Lloyd, July 10, 1899; D. H. Miiller, in Jahrb. des Ve- reines fiir Jtid. Gesch. und Literatur, Berlin, 1900; L Blau, in Jahresbericht der Landesrabbinerschule, 1900. 8. M. W. KAUFMANN, ISIDOR: Hungarian painter; born March 22, 1853, at Arad. He was originally destined for a commercial career, and could fulfil his wish to become a painter only later in life. In 1875 he went to the “Landes-Zeichenschule” in Budapest, where he remained forone year. In 1876 he went to Vienna, but being refused admission to the 459 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kaufmann Kayser Academy of Fine Arts there, he became a pupil of the portrait-painter Aigner. He then entered the “Malerschule” of the Vienna Academy, and later became a private pupil of Professor Trenkwald. He devoted himself especially to genre painting. Particularly noteworthy are his paintings from Polish Jewish life. Among his works the follow- ing may be mentioned: “Der Besuch des Rabbi” (the original of which is in possession of the em- peror Francis Joseph, in the court museum of Vi- enna); “Schachspieler”; “ Der Zweifler” (for which he received the gold medal at the Vienna exhibi- tion). Some of the other honors awarded to him are: the Baron Ké6nigswarter Kinstler-Preis; the gold medal of the Emperor of Germany; a gold medal of the International Exhibition at Munich; and a medal of the third class at Paris. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kohut, Bertihmte Israclitische Mdinner und Frauen. 8. L. La. KAUFMANN, MOSES JEKUTHIEL (known also as Kaufmann Kohen Krotoschin) : Polish Talmudist; born at Krotoschin about the middle of the seventeenth century. He was a son- in-law of Abraham Abele Gombiner, and was rabbi at Kutno, Poland. He wrote “Hukkat Torah,” or “Yismah Yisrael,” annotations to Shulhan ‘Aruk and to later halakic works, in four parts, published between 1693 and 1701 at various places. He wrote also “Lehem ha-Panim I.,” annotations to Yoreh De‘ah (Hanau, 1716; twice reprinted), and “ Lehem ha-Panim II.,” a new recension, with additions, published by his son Abraham and printed with Abraham Abele Gombiner’s glosses to Tosefta Ne- zikin (Amsterdam, 1732). He left in manuscript: “Hayyim Arukkim,” on Orah Hayyim; “ Hukkat ha-Pesah,” on the Pesah Haggadah; “ Kele ha-Day yanim,” on Hoshen Mishpat. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 187, 282, 261; Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 180-181; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. cols. 1880-138 1. D. S. Man. KAULA AL-YAHUDI: Jewish general of the eighth century; appointed by Tarik; fought val- iantly at Xerez against the Visigoths at the head of his army of Jews and Berbers, and .occupied a part of Catalonia. He rose against the tyrannical A1- Hurr ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman, governor of Spain. A1- Hurr attacked him with a superior army and com- pelled him to retreat toward Lerida. There he was defeated, taken, and executed (718). The Jews in his army, pursued by Al-Hurr, were hospitably re- ceived by their coreligionists in the cities of Cata- lonia. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Rios, Hist. i. 117 et seq., 244 et seq.; Gratz, Gesch. Vv. 186. G. Wil, JEG, KAULLA: Wiirttemberg family, distinguished for patriotism and benevolence. The leading mem- bers have been: Jacob Raphael Kaulla: German court banker; born at Buchau on the Feder-See about the middle of the gighteenth century; died at Hechingen May 1, 1810. By a decree dated June 27, 1806, King Frederick of Wiirttemberg, “in view of the various services that the Kaulla family has rendered to the country in critical periods,” conferred upon Jacob and a number of his immediate relatives and their descendants of both sexes all rights of citizenship in Wirttemberg. Jacob Kaulla and his sister Frau Kiefe Auerbacher (d. Hechingen March, 1809) were distinguished as philanthropists. Leopold von Kaulla: Attorney at the supreme court of Bavaria; director of the Hofbank at Stutt- gart; born March 25, 1813; died Jan. 16, 1886. He reorganized some of the institutions founded by his family, transferring them to Stuttgart, where they were incorporated under the name of “ Kaulla’sche Familien-Stiftung ” by King William I. of Wirttem- berg March 18, 1856. He was an honorary mem- ber of the Jewish consistory of Wiirttemberg. S. z J. STOs. KAVALA or CAVALA: Settlement in Mace- donia, on the Aigean Sea opposite the island of Thasos. It is nine miles southwest of Old Kavala, the ancient Neapolis. Kavala has 4,000 inhabit- ants, one-fourth of whom are Jews, originally from Salonica and Serres. The community was founded in 1860. It possesses a Jewish school attended by forty boys; a synagogue, erected in 1888; and a benevolent society, Ahawat ha-Ger. The Jews of Kavala are engaged mostly in the manufacture of tobacco products, the work being done only dur- ing the summer. The industry is fostered and sub- sidized by Jewish firms in Salonica. The rabbi (Abraham Molko in 1901) is also reader in the syn- agogue, mohel, and shohet. D. E. Ms. KAWWANAH (plural, kawwanot): Aside from the general idea of devotion conveyed by this Hebrew word (see DEvorion), the term is used in the plural form by cabalists to denote ideas sug- gested by certain lettersand words. Insome prayer- books these are contained in marginal notes; in others they are inserted in the body of the text. They are generally traced to Rabbi Isaac Luria (16th cent.); and the title of such prayer-books con- tains the phrase bry YN OD by m5 = “thoughts according to the view of R. Isaac Luria of blessed memory” (e.g., “Seder ‘Abodah u-Moreh Derek,” Stawita, 1821; and “Seder Tefillah mi-Kol ha-Sha- nah ke-Minhag Kehillot Sefaradim,” Vienna, 1819). With regard to certain religious acts pre- scribed by the Law, kawwanah (7.e., the intention to carry out a divine precept) is required; and the question arises whether, for example, one who has accidentally heard the sounding of the shofar on the first day of Tishri without thinking of the divine command (Num. xxix. 1) may be considered as hav- ing satisfied the Law (being “ yoze”). The Talmud- ical authorities are divided on the question (R. H. iii. 7-8; Ber. 18). All agree, however, that kaw- wanah in the performance of a “mizwah” is desir- able; wherefore it became a general custom before saying the blessing to make a distinct declaration, “I am.ready and prepared to perform the divine com- mand of...” Regarding intention as a decisive factor in violations of the Law, see IGNORANCE OF THE Law; INTENTION. ike WES Te KAYSER, PAUL: German jurist and diplo- mat; born at Oels, Silesia, Aug. 9, 1845; died at Kayserling Kayyara THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 460 Tr ee te ee ae Leipsic Feb. 13, 1898. He was admitted to the bar in 1872; became city judge in Berlin in 1875; was appointed “ Regierungsrath” in the department of justice in 1880, and “ Geheimer Regierungsrath ” in the imperial department of insurance (“ Reichsver- sicherungsamt”) in 1885. In that same year he was transferred as “ Wirklicher Legationsrath” and “ Vor- tragender Rath” tothe department of state. He be- came “Geheimer Legationsrath” in 1888, assistant chief of the colonial department in 1890, and “ Wirk- licher Geheimer Legationsrath” in 1891. In 1894 he was made chief of his department. Having been connected for more than ten years with the colonial department, he received (1896) the appointment of “Senats-Prisident” in the “ Reichsgericht ” (the highest judicial court of Germany) at Leipsic. He embraced the Protestant faith. Kayser wrote: “ Ab- handlungen aus dem Prozess- und Strafrecht,” Ber- lin, 1878; “Die Strafgerichtsverfassung und das Strafverfahren,” Paderborn, 1879; “Die Gesamten Reichsjustizgesetze,” Berlin, 1879-80, 5th ed. 7. 1894; “Die Aktiengesetznovelle von 18 Juli, 1884, mit Erliuterungen,” 2b. 1884, 2d ed. 1891; “Die Ge- werbeordnung mit Erliuterungen,” 2d. 1883, 2d ed. 1884. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. s: 185 “an dak KAYSERLING, MEYER: German rabbi and historian; born in Hanover June 17, 1829; died at Budapest, April 21, 1905; educated at Halber- stadt, Nikolsburg (Moravia), Prague, Wiirzburg, and Berlin. He devoted himself to history and philosophy. Encouraged in historical researches by Leopold von Ranke, Kayserling turned his attention to the history and literature of the Jews of the Pyrenean peninsula. In 1861 the Aargau government appointed him rabbi of the Swiss Jews, which office he held until 1870. Dur- ing his residence in Switzerland he devel- opeda zealous activity in favor of civil equal- ity for his coreligion- ists, both then and later valiantly facing the charges brought against them. In 1870 he accepted a call as preacher and rabbi to the Jewish community of Budapest. Kayser- ling, who was a mem- ber of the Royal Academy in Madrid, of the Trinity Historical Society, ete., was the author of the fol- lowing works : Meyer Kayserling. Moses Mendelssohn’s Philosophische und Religidse Grund- satze mit Hinblick auf Lessing, Leipsic, 1856. Sephardim. Romanische Poesien der Juden in Spanien. Ein Beitrag zur Literatur und Gesch. der Spanisch-Portugiesischen Juden, Leipsic, 1859; Hebrew transl. in * Ha-Asif,”’ iv., v. _Ein Feiertag in Madrid. Zur Gesch. der Spanisch-Portugie- sischen Juden, Berlin, 1859. Gesch. der Juden in Navarra, den Baskenliindern und auf den Balearen, oder Gesch. der Juden in Spanien, I., Berlin, 1861. Menasse ben Israel. Sein Leben und Wirken. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Gesch. der Juden in England, Berlin, 1861; English transl. by F. de Sola Mendes, London, 1877. apt Moses Mendelssohn. Sein Leben und Seine Werke, Leipsic, 1862; a second edition of this work, enlarged and revised, bears the title “‘ Moses Mendelssohn. Sein Leben und Wirken,”’ Leipsic, 1888. Der Dichter Ephraim Kuh. Deutschen Literatur, Berlin, 1864. Zum Siegesfeste. Dankpredigt und Danklieder von Moses Mendelssohn, Berlin, 1866. Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, Berlin, 1867. Die Rituale Schlachtfrage, oder Ist Schichten Thierqualerei ? Aargau, 1867. ; Bibliothek Jtidischer Kanzelredner. Eine Chronologische Sammlung der Predigten, Biographien und Charakteristiken der Vorziiglichsten Jiidischen Prediger. Nebst einem Homile- tischen und Literarischen Beiblatte, 2 vols., Berlin, 1870-72. Die Judeninsel und der Schiffbruch bei Koblenz, Baden, 1871. Die Jiidischen Frauen in der Geschichte, Literatur und Kunst, Leipsic, 1879; translated into Hungarian by M. Reismann, Buda- pest, 1883. Das Moralgesetz des Judenthums in Beziehung auf Familie, Staat und Gesellschaft, published anonymously, Vienna, 1882. Die Blutbeschuldigung von Tisza-Eszlar Beleuchtet ; also in Hungarian, Budapest, 1882. Der Wucher und das Judenthum; also in Hungarian, Buda- pest, 1882. Moses Mendelssohn. Ungedrucktes und Unbekanntes von Thm und iiber Ihn, Leipsic, 1853. Refranos 6 Proverbios de los Judios Espafioles, Budapest, 1889. Biblioteca Espafiola-Portugueza-Judaica. Dictionnaire Bib- liographique, Strasburg, 1890. Dr. W. A. Meisel. Ein Lebens- und Zeitbild, Leipsic, 1891. Sterbetage aus Alter und Neuer Zeit, Prague, 1891. Gedenkblatter. Hervorragende Jtidische Persénlichkeiten des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts. In Kurzen Charakteristiken, Leipsic, 1892. Christopher Columbus and the Participation of the Jews in the Spanish and Portuguese Discoveries, translated from the author’s manuscript by Charles Gross, New York, 1894; German ed., Berlin, 1894; Hebrew transl., Warsaw, 1895. Die Jiidische Litteratur yon Moses Mendelssohn bis auf die Gegenwart, reprinted from Winter and Wiinsche, “Die Jiidische Litteratur seit Abschluss des Kanons,”’ Treyes, 1896. Ludwig Philippson. Eine Biographie, Leipsic, 1898. Die Juden als Patrioten, a lecture, Berlin, 1898, Die Juden von Toledo, a lecture, Leipsic, 1901. Isaak Aboab III. Sein Leben und Seine Dichtungen, in Hebrew, Berdychey, 1902. Kin Beitrag zur Gesch. der Besides these works and a number of sermons published at different times, Kayserling contributed to the different Jewish magazines published in Hebrew, German, English, and French; he also issued a new revised edition of Hecht’s “ Handbuch der Israclitischen Gesch.” (1874; 7th ed. 1901) ; and since 1884 he prepared that part of the “Jahres- berichte der Geschichtstorschung” (Berlin) which treats of the Jews. the Time, Condon: Morais fiwaene Heenan Crt a teenth Century, Philadelphia; Pallas Lex.; Das Li z rische Deutschland, Berlin, 1887. Litera: 8. KAYSERLING, SIMON: German educator and writer; born at Hanover Aug. 31, 1834; died there April 22, 1898; brother of Meyer Kayser.ine. He attended the Talmud school in Wirzburg and the University of Berlin. He was the principal teacher and inspector of the M. M. David’sche Frei- schule from 1861, and taught for several years in the Jewish teachers’ seminary in Hanover. Kayserling translated into German from a French version, which had been corrected by Lelewel, J. J. Benjamin’s “Yewen Mezulah” (Hanover, 1863), an account of the Polish-Cossack war and of the sufferings of the Jews in Poland during the period Wall Coes. ey PCW ey) ee ee et 461 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kayserling Kayyara 1648-58; also F. D. Mocatta’s “The Jews of Spain and Portugal and the Inquisition ” (7.. 1878). 8. MK. KAYYARA, SIMEON: Babylonian halakist of the first half of the ninth century. The early identification of his surname with “ Kahirah,” the Arabic name of Cairo (founded 980), was shown by Rapoport (“ Teshubot ha-Ge’onim,” ed. Cassel, p. 12, Berlin, 1848) to be impossible. Neubauer’s sug- gestion (“M. J. C.” ii., p. viii.) of its identification with Kayyar in Mesopotamia is equally untenable. It is now generally and more correctly assumed that “Kayyara” is derived from a common noun, and, like the Syro-Arabic “kayyar,” originally denoted a dealer in pitch or wax. Kayyara’s chief work was the “ Halakot Gedolot,” or, as it is called by some Spanish authors, to dis- tinguish it from later halakic codices The of a similar nature, “ Halakot Risho- ‘“‘Halakot not” (see “Ha-Ma’or,” Ket. v.; Hul. Gedolot.” i.; RaMBaN, “Milhamot” to Shab. iii.; I. Halevy, “ Dorot ha-Rishonim,” ili. 108). It gives the entire halakic and practical material of the Talmud in a codified form, and seems to represent the first attempt to treat it according to its contents rather than according to the arrange- ment of its treatises (for further details see Law, CODIFICATION OF). As to the time of its composition all the older au- thorities are silent. Abraham ibn Daud alone has an allusion to this problem, which has caused much perplexity. According to him (“Sefer ha-Kabba- lah,” in “M. J. C.” i. 68), “Simeon Kayyara wrote his work in the year 741, and after him lived Yehudai Gaon, author of the ‘Halakot Pesukot,’ which he compiled from Simeon’s ‘ Halakot Gedolot.’” Ac- cording to Epstein, there can be no doubt that Simeon Kayyara wrote the “Halakot Gedolot,” although some authors ascribe this work to Yehudai Gaon. Ancient authorities, like the geonim Sherira and Hai ben Sherira (“Teshubot ha-Ge’onim,” ed. Har- kavy, No. 376; Isaiah di Trani, “Ha-Makria‘,” No. 86; ““eshubot Ge’onim Kadmonim,” ed. Cassel, No. 87, Berlin, 1848), Samuel ben Jacob psy, of Kabez, author of Arabic rules for slaughtering (see Stein- schneider in Geiger, “Jiid. Zeit.” ii. 76), Israel ben Abba Mari of Marseilles (“‘Ittur,” ed. Warsaw, p. 65a; comp. “Halakot Gedolot,” ed. Warsaw, 191b; ed. Hildesheimer, p. 387), and others, testify to this fact. Itisalso evident from the statements of these authorities that Simeon Kayyara’s chief sources were the “She’eltot” of R. Aha of Shabha and the “Halakot Pesukot” of Yehudai Gaon. The Hildesheimer edition of the “Halakot Gedo- lot,” Index, p. 140, gives no less than eighty-three passages in which the “She’eltot” has been cited (Reifmann, in “ Bet Talmud,” iii. 111 e¢ seg., gives 109 passages); and it has in addition more than forty lit- eral though unacknowledged quotations from this game source. It is more difficult to trace material bor- rowed from Yehudai Gaon’s “Halakot Pesukot,” « since the original form of that work has Sources. beenlost. A comparison with the re- daction of Yehudai Gaon’s composi- tion, which has been preserved as the “ Halakot Pesu- kot” or “Hilkot Re’u” (ed. Schlossberg, Versailles, 1886), shows that most of the halakot in that recen- sion are found in the “ Halakot Gedolot,” although they deviate from it both in wording and in arrange- ment. Simeon Kayyara, however, used yet another recension of the “Halakot Pesukot,” and at times cites both. There were of course other sources at his disposal which have not been preserved. Not only does the fact that both the “She’eltot” and the “ Ha- lakot Pesukot” were used, but also certain passages in the “ Halakot Gedolot” of themselves, prove that the work was composed about the year 825, appar- ently at Sura, since many explanations and usages of the “ Halakot Gedolot” are elsewhere cited under the names of Geonim of that place. Jn the course of time the “ Halakot Gedolot” un- derwent many changes. In Spain and in North Africa the legal decisions of the Geonim were incor- porated into the book, and its whole appearance was so changed that gradually a different recension was developed. The original or Babylonian redaction exists in printed form in the editions of Venice (1548), Amsterdam (1762), Vienna (1810), etc., and finally in that of Warsaw (1874, with anindex of passages and notes by 8. A. Traub). This redaction was used by the Babylonian geonim and by the Interpre- German and northern French schol- tations and ars; for the citations of the latter Redactions. from the “Halakot Gedolot,” which work they ascribe to Yehudai Gaon, refer to this recension. The second or so-called Span- ish redaction (S‘DDDN MIND) exists in a manu- script in the Vatican, and has been edited by I. Hildesheimer in the collection of the Mekize Nir- damim (Berlin, 1888-92). The material of this re- cension is much richer and more comprehensive, since it contains many passages from the Talmud, mnemonic introductory words (“simanim”), the order of the weekly lessons, and, most important of all, legal decisions of the Geonim, usually indicated by the term“ shedar ” (= “he sent”), which are lacking in the earlier redaction (see I. Hildesheimer, “ Die Vatica- nische Handschrift der Halachoth Gedoloth,” in “Beilage zum Jahresberichte des Rabbinerseminars zu Berlin,” 1885-96, and Schorr in “ He-Haluz,” xii. 100). The first gaon of whom a “teshubah ” is men- tioned in this recension is Yehudai Gaon; the last, Zemah ben Paltoi (d. 890). Epstein has concluded, accordingly, that this redaction was made, or rather finished, about the year 900, insome place where the Jews were in close literary correspondence with the Babylonian seminaries. This was either in Spain or in northern Africa—probably in Kairwan, the center of Talmudic studies at that time. Evidence in favor of Kairwan is supplied by a passage in the “ Hala- kot Gedolot” (ea. Hildesheimer, p. 175), which men- tions a usage as being common among the “Bene Afrika”; for it is known that “ Afrika” frequently connotes Kairwan. From northern Africa or Spain this recension was carried into Italy: it was used by the scholars of these three countries; and allof them regarded Simeon Kayyara as its author. In the twelfth century the recension was brought to northern France, and in the thirteenth to Ger- many, where it is sometimes cited by the scholars of both countries as “ Halakot Gedolot shel Aspamia ” (see R. Tam, “Sefer ha-Yashar,” No. 509; “Or Za- pee Kedushshah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ri 462 Nc ag NG pre el a dn rua,” B. M. No. 276; Sanh. No. 23). On the other hand, the Babylonian redaction in the thirteenth cen- tury reached Italy, where it was used by Isaiah di Trani (see “ Ha-Makria‘,” No. 31). BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Epstein, in Ha-Goren, iii. 46 et seq.; Har- kavy, Teshubot ha-Ge’onim, pp. xxvii., 374 et seg.; Rapoport, in Kerem Hemed, vi. 236; Schorr, in Zuinz Jubelschrift (Hebr. part), pp. 127 et seq.; He-Haluz, xii. 81 et seq.: Weiss, Dor, iv. 26, 32 et seq., 107, 264; Briill, in his Jahrb. ix. 128 et seq.; Gratz, Gesch. v. 234; idem, in Monatsschrift, vii. 217 et seqg.; S. T. Halberstam, i). viii. 379 et seq., xxxi. 478 et seq.; I. Halevy, Dorot ha-Rishonim, iii. 200 et seq.; see also the bibliography of the article YEHUDAI BEN Mag G. 7 WC. KAZ: A frequent Jewish family name, spelled also “Katz,” and found in similar forms, such as “Katzer.” It is an abbreviation formed from the ini- tials of the name “ Kohen Zedek ” (p"D), and has been used since the seventeenth century, or perhaps some- what earlier, as an epithet of the supposed descend- ants of Aaron. The collocation is most likely de- rived from Melchizedek (“king of righteousness ”), who is called “ the priest [“ kohen ”] of the most high God” (Gen. xiv. 18), or perhaps from Ps. cxxxii. 9: “Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness fe zedek 1s ” If the reading is correct, this abbreviation occurs on a tombstone, dated 1586, in the cemetery of Prague (Hock, “Die Familien Prag’s,” p. 175); it is found also on a tombstone of the year 1618 in Frank- fort-on-the-Main (M. Horowitz, “ Die Inschriften des Alten Friedhofes der Israelitischen Gemeinde zu Frankfurt-a.-M.” 1901, p. 68), in the books of the Soncino family of Prague of the seventeenth cen- tury (Zunz, “Z. G.” p. 262), and in one of the pref- aces to Shabbethai ben Meir ha-Kohen’s notes on the Hoshen Mishpat (Amsterdam, 1668). See Conmn, 1D. KAZIMIERZ. See Cracow. KEAN, EDMUND: English actor; born in London Novy. 4 (?), 1787; died at Richmond, near London, May 15, 1833. He was the natural son of Aaron Kean, a Jew (Stirling, “Old Drury Lane,” ii. 181). Contemporary writers have alluded fre- quently to Kean’s Jewish physiognomy. Kean was deserted by his mother in infancy and was reared by a Miss Tidswell, while his uncle Moses gave him perfunctory instruction in mimicry. In May, 1801, Kean appeared in “ King John” as Prince Arthur to the King John of Kemble and the Constance of Mrs. Siddons. Finding his mother, Kean went into the provinces with her; later he was adopted by a Mrs. Clark, but ran away in 1808 and joined a traveling circus, in which he broke both his legs. On his recov- ery he was summoned to Windsor to recite before theking. Refusing an offer to join the Drury Lane Theatre on the ground of lack of experience, he traveled through the provincial towns, at one time with Mrs. Siddons. The turning-point of Kean’s career occurred on Nov. 14, 1813, when his acting drew the attention of Dr. Arnold, a director of the Drury Lane Theatre, who engaged him for three years at a salary ranging from eight to twelve guineas weekly. On Jan. 26, 1814, Kean appeared in “The Merchant of Venice.” His performance of the part made him famous immediately. He took rank as the first actor of the day, and even displaced John Philip Kemble, whose powers were now de- clining. For eleven years he maintained his posi- tion, but in 1825 was made corespondent ina divorce suit instituted by Alderman Cox, and when he next appeared before the public he was hooted off the stage; from this period his popularity sensibly de- clined. In 1820 Kean went to America, and appeared in New York (Nov. 29). He scored great successes in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia. In 1825 he re- turned to America to escape the unpopularity which the suit had created, but Boston mobbed and stoned him, and he had to be smuggled out of the city at night. He remained in America, however, to the end of 1826; on his return to England he was cor- dially received, but dissipation had wrecked his health, and on March 25, 18388, he broke down while playing Othello to the Lago of his son Charles. He died a few weeks later. Kean wasa master of high- tensioned emotion. In level scenes he was very in- different. He was admirably adapted for such char- acters as Shylock, Othello, and Richard III. Romeo, as he himself confessed, was beyond his powers. BIBLIOGRAPHY: J. Doran, Inand About Drury Lane, p. 29, London, 1881; Biography of the British Stage, 1824, pp. 93- 131; Proctor, Life of Edmund Kean, 18385; J. ¥. Malley, Life and Adventures of Edmund Kean, 1888; Dict. Na- tional Biog. xxx. 258-265; Chambers’s Cyclopedia. An E. Ms. KECSKEMET. See Huneary. KEDAR: One of the sons of Ishmael (Gen. xxv. 13; I Chron. i. 29). The name is also applied in Scripture to the tribe that sprang from him, and is likewise used for the Bedouins generally, whose characteristic traits are ascribed to Kedar (Cant. i. 5; Isa. xis 16)
  • fe ree oe a oe @ Sipe asa ———— ee poor THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 470 KEROBOT (Reshut and Versicle Theme—Penitential Days) Grave. he ae eN 2 oN eee en = —— ae ee ee eee eee ee SS - o—@ o @ = a m Adib. £2, Ca EDT TS. ESSE sl Es a es ee ee —_ ——— ok 4 | = SS See vi Per PELE tr enc fcc, KEROBOT (Melodies for Kaliric Strophic Hymn) 1. Moderato. eS a ee oe SSS SS SO a ea ————— eee — 3. Andantino. = ae a SS aa ce a a a ae —— ate =! = = —— SSS ee SS oe a oe os? ee a 471 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kerobot Kertch KEROBOT (Refrain Triplets Ending in Kadosh) 1. —— al TSS ee = ———S== | - = — —_= > reese reese fe" = a Serene ne = SS —! Pe ee Se a 7 — P 2. Moderato. (eee Versicles founded on Ps. cxlvi. 10 and xxii. 4 lead to the next division of the Kerobot scheme, which is pervaded by verse-forms due to Eleazar Ka- Lik (¢. 800), and presents, from inter- nal evidence, some of the antique mel- ody which Duran (/.c.) attributed to him. The section is ushered in by a short group of triplets concluding with the word wisp. These are followed by acrostic strophic hymus written by Kalir or his imitators, in which, on the penitential days, after the rime scheme, “aaa, bbb,cce” (the italicized member being recited by the congregants in response to the two members chanted by the officiant), the triplet end- ing in “kadosh” is introduced as a refrain. For all such hymns, and others from the same sources chanted at this point in the Ashkenazic liturgy, there are utilized traditional melodies which, al- though divergent in a number of variants, bear traces of a common early medieval origin, and of a primal tonality agreeing with the third mode of the Catholic plain-song (“E” to “ce” in the natural scale), with the semitones characteristically falling between the first and second and between the fifth and sixth degrees. This quaint archaic scale-form (“tertius mysticus”) is that in which the prayers for the ‘penitential mornings are, in the northern tradition, likewise cast. The original model tune was most probably due to one of the earliest writers of synagogal hymnody, who, like Kalir himself, composed and recited both verses and melody, and handed them on to distant congregations by means of their ever-wandering pupils (Zunz, “ Ritus,” pp. Kaliric Forms. 7 et seq.). In one form it was particu- Model larly widely quoted in old ritual man- Melody. uscripts as an inherited air to be util- ized also for other poems (Zunz, “S. P.” p. 115; Dukes, in “Orient, Lit.” iv. 540), the rubric J°DNN p93 (“to the tune of A‘apid,’” which mes o~ 2 a ee ol 6 eee = paasa Spree a happens to be among the first of this class of piy- yutim met with as the liturgy is gone through) being one of the most frequent of such superscrip- tions. Another variant of the melody is known and prized in the Reform liturgy. It is the original of the tune for the hymn “To Thee We Give Our- selves To-Day,” No. 103 in the American “Union Hymnal.” But these original melodies, whose identity is plain under all their modern variations, are not ' the only melodies which have been followed in the chant for the refrain triplets ending in “kadosh,” since Polish cantors often utilize a later but not less effective secondary theme, recalling Levantine tonal- ity as the other also does. The Kerobot finally come to an end in a long meditation ushering in the KeDUSHSHAH, which is aptly entitled the “Silluk” (= “eonclusion” or “cessation,” ¢.e., of the singing). BIBLIOGRAPHY: The chants are assembled in Baer, Ba‘al Te- fillah, Nos. 650-660, 1057-1107, et passim, Géteborg, 1887, ‘Frankfort, 1883. The two forms of the refrain triplet are contrastingly arranged in The Voice of Prayer and Praise, Nos, 202 and 203, by F. L. Cohen and D. M. Davis, London, 1889. For the variants of the antique hymn-tune see espe- cially Baer, l.c. Nos. 1099, 1102, and 1274 ; Marksohn and Wolf, Synagogal-Melodien, No. 12, Leipsic, 1875; Pauer and Cohen, Traditional Hebrew Melodies, No. 17, London, 1897. A. By. C: KERTCH: Russian seaport at the eastern ex- tremity of the Crimean peninsula; the ancient Pan- ticapeon. A Greek inscription on a marble slab found in Kertch and preserved in the Imperial “ Er- mitage” in St. Petersburg shows that a Jewish com- munity and synagogue existed in Kertch in 80-81 B.c. A number of tombstones unearthed near Kertch in 1867 bear the representation of a “menorah,” with Greek inscriptions, showing that they belonged to Jews. In a message of the patriarch Fotius to Archbishop Antony of Kertch (858-891), the former thanks the archbishop for his efforts to convert the Kesitah Ketubah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 472 Jews of Kertch. Ina letter of Joseph, king of the Chazars, to Hasdai ibn Shaprut (c. 960), Kertch is mentioned as among the possessions of the Chazars. The presence there of Jews in the seventh century is confirmed by inscriptions found in the earliest Christian catacomb known in that region (Brun, “Q Raznykh Nazvaniakh Kertchi,” etc., p. 18, Odessa, 1877). With the addition of Kertch to the territories of the Chazars the condition of the Jews there was markedly improved. The Chazars established a military post there to guard against the attacks of the Russians and Uzes. In 1818 Kertch was ceded to the Genoese, but in 1340 it was compelled to ac- knowledge the supremacy of the Mongols, who offered the Venetians the privilege of settlement in Bosporus under the same conditions that the Genoese were offered in Kaffa. In the fifteenth century Kertch was taken by the Turks; in 1773 it was added to the territory of Russia. During the Crimean war it was destroyed by the French and the English. Kertch has a total population of 56,770, including about 5,000 Jews, a few of whom are Karaites. Its Jewish community is well organized, and possesses a large synagogue and a number of charitable insti- tutions. Its members are prominently connected with the oil-refineries and with the salt and dried- fish industries. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regesty i Nadpisi. H.R. Aly Gi, ey KESITAH. Sce NuMmISMATICS. KETUBAH (or Ketubbah).—Legal: A mar- riage contract, containing among other things the settlement on the wife of a certain amount payable at her husband’s death or on her being divorced. This institution was established by the Rabbis in order to put a check on freedom of divorce, to ob- tain which no consent is required on the part of the woman (see Divorce). Some of the rabbis con- sidered the ketubah of a virgin to be of Mosaic origin (Yeb. 89a; Ket. 10a; Tos. s.v. “ Amar”; comp. Tobit vii. 14). The minimum amount payable under a ketubah was 200 zuz (a zuz = about 15 cents) for virgins, and 100 zuz for women who were not virgins at marriage; the priestsand the noble families of Jeru- salera doubled these sums (Ket. 12a). The amount could be increased by the husband and mentioned either in the ketubah itself or in a special deed (Tosafot Ketubah; Ket. 54b; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Eben ha-‘Ezer, 66, 7). Besides these items, the ketubah mentioned also the amount of the dowry and the addition thereto made by the husband (the custom at present is to add 100 per cent to the amount of the dowry), as well as the ordinary obligations of a husband to his wife. The ketubah, like other legal documents, was written in Rabbinic language. It is given in full in Maimonides, “ Yad,” Yabam, iv. 33; and with a few unimportant modifications occasioned as by slips of copyists it reads as follows (for Hebrew text see BETROTHAL): “On... [day of the week], the . in the year. . ‘ . . day of the month... - Since the creation of the world, the era accord- ing to which we are accustomed to reckon here in the city of ... how... son of ... said to this virgin . . . daughter Of are ‘ Be thou my wife according to the law of Moses and Israel, and I will work for thee, honor, support, and maintain thee in accordance with the custom of Jewish husbands who work for their wives, honor, support, and maintain them in truth. And I willset aside for thee 200 zuz, in lieu of thy virginity, which belong to thee (according to the law of Moses), and thy food, clothing, and necessaries, and live with thee in con- jugal relations according to universal custom.’ And... this virgin consented and became his wife. The dowry that she brought from her father’s house, in silver, gold, valuables, dresses, and bedclothes, amounts to . . . [100 silver pieces], and _ . . the bridegroom consented to increase this amount from his own property with the sum of. . . [100 silver pieces], making in all... [200 silver pieces]. And thus said. . . the bride- groom, ‘I take upon myself and my heirs after me the responsi- bility of this marriage contract, of the dowry, and of the addi- tional sum, so that all this shall be paid from the best part of my property, real and personal, that I now possess or may here- after acquire. All my property, even the mantle on my shoul- ders, shall be mortgaged for the security of this contract and of the dowry and of the addition made thereto.’ . . . the bride- groom has taken upon himself the responsibility for all the obli- gations of this ketubah, as is customary with other ketubot made for the daughters of Israel in accordance with the insti- tution of our sages — may their memory be for a blessing! It is not to be regarded as an illusory obligation or as a mere form of document. We have followed the legal formality of symbolical delivery [“kinyan”’] between ... sonof...,the bridegroom, and. . . daughter of . . . , this virgin, and have employed an instrument legally ft for the purpose to strengthen all that is stated above, and everything is valid and established. Form of Ketubah. stutais/efeieavcrere arte IBYIGERTOON 1a) | ena enna t Witnesses.” Thus the ketubah formed a lien upon all real es- tate owned by the husband during his lifetime, and if at his death, or when he divorced Lien on his wife, he possessed no estate, it Husband’s could be collected out of any property Property. he had sold or gifted since the ketubah had been written (Git. 48b, 55b; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 100, 8). This, however, was not originally the case; and it was only after a series of changes, tending toward the restriction of arbitrary divorce, that this became the rule. At first the marriage set- tlement was deposited with the wife’s father; then it was converted into some valuable household uten- sil, of which the husband also could make use, and entrusted to the wife; and when this regulation also was found unsatisfactory, Simeon b. Shetah or- dained that the amount of the ketubah should re- main with the husband, but become a lien on his property (Ket. 82b; Tosef., Ket. xii. 1; comp. com- mentaries ad loc.). The Geonim still further strengthened the security of the ketubah by making his personal estate also liable for the ketubah (“ Yad,” Ishut, xvi. 7; “Maggid Mishneh,” ad doc. ; Eben ha- ‘Ezer, 100, 1). There could be no conjugal relations between hus- band and wife before the ketubah was prepared, or if it contained a sum less than that stipulated by the Rabbis (Ket. 54b). If the ketubah was lost, a new one had to be written. In sucha ease, the docu- ment to replace the lost one (NDOD7°xX4 mains) was drawn up by two (according to some authorities, three) witnesses, constituting a court, who were re- quired to sign the document and to record the fact that the original ketubah was lost and that the hus- band had asked them to write another. If the date of the first ketubah was known, the same date had to be given in the second document; but if it was 473 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kesitah not known, the date of the preparation of the second | The ketubah was the inalienable right of the woman ketubah was inserted (“Nahalat Shib‘ah,” § 18 and | and even if she possessed no written document she notes ; Adler, “Tikkun Shetarot,” § 9; comp. Eben | could collect the minimum sum (Ket. 16b). In a ha-‘Ezer, 66, 3, Isserles’ glosses and commentaries). | case where the husband refused the wife her con- Sonn von oabe neon aw mewnd ov wy oes pays ee pigeon by saraepo anos ng DMA yew 2b Dwi opym aos rbrysts Syand nasa Syboaa pny ma ae1o27 3 pays DN aNS MDI NUID TSN yr ADD MA pAMwT TY DID Ay eA AAD Nd | DTONT INT TPT AhoN Nan NIE TEPID oe SHA RODIN | SOUDA pred poMOm DMP rats la pans sr “maNa ms Syar soit imag anit 9 wn ARD MADD yo NII" | Poyans I ae oS PINT a9 NOI TTY PAD PNT WAND Tarun 1 oNdba pny 99 "357 MY FOI TIS Pow Nw DD > DOMAINE ROD by pros ey nena NASON yo Me aI) 7 INT MIT ANDD 7a ste AOI>L PADS pyaTN SI RNaOT RIND NADIND PITT NAIM TaN PAN ype bybbry ansen22 7K 731, Mb Pyprrozmsnew doy syed wana nt by Sp roma ynooim PPPS [IO INT POI 3999 QIN TNIV NPT RTw So pnp STINT RNAI NID Od PRS IP NINN TI PITT NINN Ie 77 SINT ~ TANMDIenatsans sys y 3% 1D ea Noa Ty ST NMODINI NAT Soy Sap NADI NID NNN [OL TOMI Ay? 25s TROY | PMY a moe Sa Tam psa ps pany eon png m2 SES) pmsnON? ROT pW oA Py Sete M3 TAIT pInso Sato asin yw oybbria ome p22 ten We MII UWI DDTeD ayo wIen aot yb by RISD Me Nw PI yyy 74997 Ss a he. aN — + Ee cuaf NIGP REe I PEs TEN ritT KETUBAH, OR MARRIAGE CONTRACT, DATED MANTUA, 5398 = 1638. (In the New York Public Library.) Althougif the woman could sell or give away her | jugal rights, the amount of the ketubah was in- right to a stranger, she could not release her hus- | creased by the court thirty-six grains of silver every band from his obligation or even from part of it | week during the time of his default. If the wife (Ket, 51a; “Yad,” /.c. x. 10; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 66, 9). | spitefully refused her husband conjugal rights, the Ketubah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 474 court sent her warning that if she persisted in her spitefulness she would lose her ketubah; and if she still remained obdurate, the fact was announced in the synagogue for four successive Sabbaths. Another warning was then administered, and if she still per- sisted, the husband was relieved from his duty to support her, and after twelve months he might di- vorce her. There were, however, various modifica- tions made by later authorities with regard to such a case, which took into consideration the conditions and circumstances that induced the wife to take such a persistent course (Ket. 63a; “Yad,” /.c. xiv. 8-15; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 77, 1-8, Isserles’ gloss, and com- mentaries ad loc.). The woman forfeited her right to the settlement made upon her in the ketubah not only when she was found guilty of adultery or of antenuptial incontinence, but also when she committed wrongs or follies of a less serious character. If she gave her husband food that was ritually forbidden, or if she permitted cohabitation during the Ketubah period when she was ritually unclean, Forfeited. or if she broke her vows, her husband could divorce her and was not obliged to pay her the amount of the ketubah. Similarly, if she transgressed the laws of decency—e.g., if she went with uncovered head in the street, orif she flirted with strangers, or if she cursed her husband’s parents in his presence—she forfeited her right to the ketubah. If she had subjected herself to vows before her mar- riage and did not speak of them to her husband, or if she had physical defects of which the husband had no knowledge before marriage, she also lost her ketubah. The woman who refused to follow her husband from one place to another in the same country, or from any country to Palestine, or from any city in Palestine to Jerusalem, lost her ketubah (Ketei2an byllObr Yads 5 ce xxiv. 10520, exxyvas Eben ha-‘Ezer, 115-117; see Domiciz). With the ketubah in her possession, the woman could collect the amount many years after her hus- band’s death or her divorce, even after Conditions she had been married to another. If of she did not have the ketubah, and Collection. if she left his house or was married to another, she could collect the money only within twenty-five years after her husband’s death, and not after that; for it was presumed that if she did not collect it during that period, she waived her claim. In case of divorce, however, this presumption did not hold good, and she might always collect the amount due to her by the ketubah (Ket. 104a; “ Yad,” /.c. xvi. 28; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 101, 1, 4). When the widow came to collect her ketu- bah, the court made her swear that her husband had not given heranything in payment thereof and that she had not taken anything without his knowl- edge. The heirs, however, could relieve her from this oath (Ket. 87a; “Yad,” .c. xvi. 16-19; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 96, 1-3). There were various conditions included in the ketubah, or implied in it by the decree of the Rabbis, which had to be fulfilled by the husband or by his heirs; for example: the male children inherited the ketubah even if their mother died before the death of their father; if there were children by other wives, the amounts of the ketubah were first sub- tracted from the inheritance and distributed among the respective heirs on the mother’s side, the residue of the property being then divided equally among all the sons (“ketubat benin dikrin”; Ket. 52b; see INHERITANCE); the daughters had to be sup- ported from the estate until they were married or until they reached their majority (¢.; see Daven- TER); the widow also had to be supported from the estate until she remarried or until she left the hus- band’s house. In some places the phrase “until the heirs shall be willing to pay her the amount of the ketubah” was inserted in the contract (7d. ; “Yad,” dc. xii. 2; Eben ha-‘Ezer, 69,2; 93,3; 94,1; 111; 112). By a decree of the sages of To- ledo (ndyordyn %~DN) the widow could collect only one-half of the property, even when her ketubah amounted to much more. The second half was divided among the heirs (Eben ha-‘Ezer, 118). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hamburger, R. B. T. s.v.; Nahalat Shib‘ah, 8§ 12-20, Warsaw, 1884; Mayer, Die Rechte der Israeliten, Athener und Rimmer, part ii., § 226, Leipsic, 1866 ; Bloch, Der Vertrag, § 100, Budapest, 1893; idem, Das Erbrecht, 88 32- 37, ib. 1890; idem, DPN NWN pL, series ii., part i., 88 6, 7; part ii., §§ 25, 84,99, ib. 1900; Weill, La Femme Juive, part ii., ch. vi., Paris, 1874; Buchholz, Die Familie, Breslau, 1867; Mielziner, The Jewish Law of Marriage and Di- vorce, 8$ 48-50, Cincinnati, 1884; Amram, The Jewish Law of Divorce, ch. x., Philadelphia, 1896; Kaufmann, Zur Gesch. der Khethubba, in Monatsschrift, 1897, xli. 213-221. A. Jit Gs Archeologic and Paleographic: It is dif- ficult to trace the origin of the ketubah. Rashi (on Gen. xxv. 6) claims that the difference between the status of Keturah’s sons and that of Isaac consisted merely in that the latter’s mother, as the lawful wife, hada ketubah while Keturah had none—a dis- tinction drawn in the Talmud (Sanh. 91a) also be- tween David’s wivesand hisconcubines. Tobit (vii. 14) bids Edna, his wife, bring him a Early tablet, on which he writes the deed of History. marriage, sealing it before witnesses. This ovyypady, Griitz suggests, was the ketubah which differentiated the marriage from an aypugog yauoc (Neubauer’s Chaldaic. text reads “ke- tubta”). The whole Talmudical treatise Ketubot deals chiefly with this subject, and pages 10a and 82b record that “the wise men, long before Simeon b. Shetah, instituted the ketubah for the daughters of Israel.” Maimonides (“ Yad,” Ishut, xvi.) also refers to it as having been established by “the Great San- hedrin in order that a Jewish wife should not be light in her husband’s eyes.” An early form of Palestinian ketubah, though not the earliest, is quoted in Tosef., Ket. xi. 9, and B. M. 104a, with the suggestion that Hillel the elder adopted it as a safeguard against the matrimonial irregularities of the Alexandrians. The Mishnah (Ket. iv. 9-11) distinguishes the forms used respect- _ ively by the men of Jerusalem, Galilee, and Judah. The Jerusalem form provided for the succession of the wife’s property to her male children, and con- tained an additional proviso compelling the husband to redeem his wife if taken captive by Gentiles, and to take her back. bah was a regular institution among the Jews even in pre-Christian times; but there can be no doubt that its language became settled under Greco-Roman It is thus clear that the ketu- ‘ar KETUBAH, OR MARRIAGE CONTRACT, DATED ROME, 5576 = 1816. (In the United States National Museum, Washington, D, C.) Ketubah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 476 influence. Inthe “Corpus Papyrorum” of the arch- duke Rainer several Greek contracts dating between the second and sixth centuries are given. In a pagan marriage contract of the earlier date the husband agrees to give his wife the necessaries of life, clothes, and what beseems a wife, who, on her part, must conduct herself blamelessly and without reproach. A Christian formula, four centuries later, follows this, but adds an obligation on the wife’s part to “love, cherish, and honor” her husband, who has to do all that “beseems a free-born wife from a worthy husband.” Substituting “Jewish” for “ free- born” and “worthy,” this is the Aramaic formula, still in vogue among Jews, an almost literal translation of its prototype in Roman law. That there is ex- tant no Byzan- tine marriage contract after the sixth cen- tury is not sur- prising, as the emperor Justin- jan did away with “ dotalia in- strumenta” (“ Const.” 22, 28, vii.c.54), though they were after- ward regarded as necessary in the case of mar- viages between persons of high rank, iishve Jews, conserva- tive inall things, have proved themselves espe- cially so in the matter of mar- riage settle- ments, The spoils of the Cairo Geni- zah contain nu- merous exam- ples of ketubot from the tenth century downward. These Egyptian documents often add some relic of the early Roman empire in a detailed list of the bride’s parapher- nalia; but such lists were afterward discarded for the sake of uniformity and to avoid shaming the poor, During the height of Karaite controversy Maimonides introduced a clause obliging the parties to observe the “dine tohorah” or traditional rules of ritual purification (Maimonides’ Responsa, No. 149), A manuscript in the Cambridge Library, written in 1295, contains such a ketubah. The concerning clause runs: “And we, the undersigned, have warned the bride and made known to her that she shall keep the purification regulations accord- Ketubah Blank, Amsterdam, 5419 = 1659. (In the possession of A, Wolf, Dresden.) ing to Rabbinite rules, and that if she does not she will lose the whole ketubah.” In this document there is also a clause in which the bridegroom pledges himself not to take another wife, nor to keep in the house a servant-girl of whom the bride disapproves. Another important ketubah from the Cairo Geni- zah is that marked T. 8. 141, also in the Cambridge Library (published by Schechter in “J. Q. R.” v. xiii. 122). It is dated 1082, and is a contract be- tween the Rabbinite, the nasi David, and the daugh- ter of the Karaite Moses ben Aaron ha-Kohen. In this the bridegroom pledges himself not to compel his future wife to have light on Friday wei € (which is forbid- den according to the Karaite in- terpretation of IBD: 60-67-83), nor to eat certain kinds of animal fat, prohibited by the Karaites; while the bride pledges herself to observe with him the feasts according to the Rabbinite calen- dar without pro- faning her own. A peculiar characteristic of many ketubot is a more or less elaborate pre- amble; but there does not seem to have been any uniformity in this regard. Thus ketubot of 1084 and 1242 have none, nor has an ancient Egyptian for- mulary, nor the Mahzor Vitry, nor the “‘Hz Hayyim” of R. Jacob ben Judah Hazzan of London of the thir- teenth century. And when there is a preamble it varies from the most ornate poetry to The the simplest brevity. A ketubah of Preamble. 1079 has five words which may be translated “In the Creator’s name may they build their house and prosper”; another, only two, signifying “In a good hour.” Others, and those the most common in modern times, especially in Italy, have three letters, »"1p3, meaning “ With good luck.” A Cretan one of 1856 is headed by verse 22 of Prov. xviii., “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing.” The Yemenite formulas of modern times, like the Persian ones of medieval days, and WALAPATL. CEL TAG, OK RAKE CAA AQ Aq Ca ae e KETUBOT, OR MARRIAGE CONTRACTS. 1, Ancona, 5565 = 1805. 2. Constantinople, 5591 = 1831. (in the British Museum.) Ketubah Ketubot those of the Egypt of Saadia and Maimonides, are generally much more elaborate, and combine a prayer for good luck with one of Date and good wishes for the rosh yeshibah or Ornamen- nagid of the time and his college with tation. those for the bride and bridegroom. The date given in the ketubah is in Oriental countries invariably the “ minyan shetarot ” —the Seleucidan era, beginning 312 B.c. In Eu- rope it is gener- ally the “annus mundi” which is used; butina ketubah execu- ted in Metz in 1820 the year (6th) of Napo- leon is given, showing an ap- parent intention to start a new era with him as the modern Al- exander. The place of the marriage is always given with geograph- ical accuracy. Thus in preex- pulsion times Paris is stated to be on the rivers Seine and Biévre ; London, on the Tamesis and Galbrook (= Walbrook). The ketubah, as the external symbol of so auspicious an event among so domestic a peo- ple, lent itself to decoration of the most varied kind. The Ital- jan specimens of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were specially ornate. Some choice ex- amples are in the Musée Cluny and in the Smithsonian Institu- tion. Earlier ornamentation was generally in the nature of illumination, writing in gold, ete., and calligraphy. Sometimes, as in Masoretic Bibles, the decoration is supplied by designs in which lines are replaced by minuscule writing. Thus in one beautiful specimen of a marriage contract at Co- lorno near Parma of 1688 the whole of Canticles makes up the elaborate floral design surrounding the body of the deed. Turkish ketubot generally rely on the embellishment provided by Moorish and THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ie Ketubah, or Marriage Contract, Dated Rome, 5562 = 1802. (In the possession of A, Wolf, Dresden.) 478 Mosaic designs. Later Italian specimens often in- corporate illustrations more or less, appropriate to the contracting parties. Thus, where the bride is named Esther, a picture of Ahasuerus holding out his scepter to Queen Esther is given. So, too, when an Isaac is the bridegroom, there is given a repre- sentation of the sacrifice of Abraham’s son of that name. Occasionally, however, conventional pic- tures of two hearts pierced by a dagger, a pair of love-birds, or a true-lovers’ knot take the place of such personal pictorial allu- sions. But an- gels and coro- nets, flowers and fruits, are the most usual of the Italian dec- orations. Often “tena im” | OF pecuniary stipu- lations, more or less complicat- ed, are written alongside of the ketubah. BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Bloch, Das Mosa- isch-Talmudische Eherecht, Buda- pest, 1890; idem, Sha‘are Torat ha- Takkanot, —Cra- cow, 1894; Kauf- mann, Zur Gesch. der Khethubba, in Monatsschrift, 1897; idem, Aus einem Briefe El- ome NN. Adlers, ib. ING ADR INE Ja KETUBIM. See HacioGra- PHA. KETUBOT : Treatise in the Mishnah, the To- sefta, and in the Babylonian and Jerusalem Tal- muds. In the Mishnaic order of the Seder Na- shim, Ketubot stands second. It is divided into thirteen chapters, containing in the aggregate 101 paragraphs, of which the following is a synopsis: Ch. i.: Wednesday is the appointed wedding-day for virgins, and Thursday for widows (§ 1); the amount of the settlement is 200 zuzim if the bride be a virgin on her wedding-day, and 100 zuzim in other cases (S§ 2-4); in the case of the marriage of a priest’s virgin daughter the amount of the ke- tubah is fixed by the court of the priests at 400 zuzim (§ 5); the credibility of a woman regarding her own Chet. and ii. 479 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Ketubah Ketubot 0 ees eT a a a a statement as to the loss of her virginity ($§ 6-7); whether a woman may be believed concerning the lineage of the man with whom she has had intercourse or concerning the paternity of her child (&§ 8-9). Ch. ii.: How far the ceremonies observed at the wedding of a virgin serve as evidence when she comes to demand her ketubah (§ 1); credibility of those who declare an act to be invalid or annulled by another in case the act in question is known only through their own statements (see Mraco; §§ 2-5); credibility of those who testify to their own or to one another’s advantage (§§ 6, 7, 9); credibility of a witness in regard to priestly descent (§ 8); cases in which adults may be trusted to testify to what they saw when they were minors (§ 10). Ch. iii.: Punishments for seduction of a virgin (Ex, xxii. 15-16) and for assault on one (Deut. xxii. 25 et seg.); the classes of women to Ch. iii.-v. which the laws contained in Deut. Xxii. 28-29 are applicable (§§ 1-3); difference between a seducer and one who commits assault (§§ 4-6); method of estimating the fine (§ 7); certain civil laws varying with theage of the victim (§ 8); how far punishment is reducible by volun- tary confession (§ 9). Ch. iv.: To whom the fine belongs ($§ 1-2); of the female proselyte (§ 8); rights ofa father; rights and duties of a husband (§ 4); when the husband’s duties begin (§ 5); duties of the husband to the wife or her heirs; what belongs to the widow and her daughters after the death of the husband and father, even when there is no distinct provision ($$ 6-12); differences in the form of the ketubah adopted re- spectively by the people of Judea and by the Gali- leans (§ 12). Ch. v.: Additions made by the husband to the minimum amount of the ketubah, mentioned above (§ 1); the time to be allowed the woman wherein to prepare for the wedding (§§ 2-8); extent of the control of the husband over the earnings of his wife, and whether he may assign them to the Temple (§ 4); what work must be performed by the wife, since it is considered advisable that she have some employment lest idleness lead her to an evil life (§ 5); the mutual duties of husband and wife in their conjugal and other relations ($§ 6-9). Ch, vi.: To what extent a husband is entitled to share in money belonging to his wife, whether earned by work or acquired by inherit- Ch. vi.-ix. ance (§ 1); the wife’s dowry; the responsibility of the husband for the dowry brought to him is decided by the custom of the land (§§ 2-4); dowry of a daughter (§§ 5-7). Ch. vii.: The following are grounds for the dis- solution of marriage: vows, certain diseases, faith- lessness to the marriage vow on the part of the wife ($§ 1-8); by transgression of certain Mosaic laws or Jewish customs, the wife forfeits all rights to her ketubah (§ 6); cases in which marriages may be annulled in consequence of the sickness or disreputa- ble status of the husband ($$ 9-10). Ch. viil.: Property of the woman before and dur- ing wedlock, and the rights of the husband over it ($8 1-5); of the rights of the man over the property of his deceased brother’s widow with whom he has contracted a levirate marriage ($$ 6-7). Ch. ix.: How the husband may surrender his rights to his wife’s possessions (§ 1); rights of the wife to property left by her husband, and the cases in which she must take oath that she has not re- ceived her ketubah ($$ 2-8); cases in which the wife may obtain her ketubah without showing her bill of divorce (§ 9). Ch. x.: Laws applicable to cases where the hus- band dies and leaves more than one wife. Ch. xi.: Rights of the widow to Ch. x.-xili. property of the heirs (§ 1); right of the widow tosell, pawn, or give away her ketubah (§§ 2-4); cases in which sales by auction are invalid (§ 8); what women have no claims to the ketubah (§ 6), Ch. xii.: The rights of an adopted daughter (§§ 1-2); right of a widow to remain in her husband’s house or to be supported in her father’s house by her husband’s heirs (§ 8); cases in which the require- ments of the ketubah lapse. Ch. xiii.: Opinions and maxims of Admon and Hanan, judges of Jerusalem (§§ 1-9); cases in which the wife is obliged to follow her husband to foreign lands; superiority of the land of Israel over other lands, and of Jerusalem over the other cities of Pal- estine (§§ 10-11). The Tosefta contains much which serves to illus- trate and supplement the Mishnah. Especially noteworthy is its description of the Tosefta and ancient marriage customs of Judea Gemara. and Galilee (i. 4), the peculiar mode of betrothal in Alexandria (iv. 9), and the plan of Simeon b. Shetah to make divorces more difficult (xii. 1). Both Gemaras discuss and explain the statements of the Mishnah, and contain, moreover—especially the Babylonian Gemara—a mass of stories, legends, aphorisms, and proverbs, as well as other important haggadic interpretations and comments. The following passages from Ketubot may be cited: “ When impure words are spoken, close thine ears” (5b); “He who useth impure speech will for- feit all the rewards of his life” (8b); “The creditor need not keep the paid bill” (19b); “Thou shouldest have neither a savage dog nor a broken stairway in thy house, lest people come to harm ” ' Maxims (41b); “‘ His righteousness endureth and for ever’ (Ps. cxii. 3) refers to him Hagegadot. who learns the Torah and teaches others, and to him who has books and lends them to his fellow students in order to make their study easier” (50a); “Do not act as judge in the case either of thy friend or of thine enemy, for thy sentiments will not allow thee to be just to both” (105b); “It were better to submit thyself to the torture of a death by fire than to cause shame to thy neighbor in public” (67b). Special mention should also be made of the enu- meration of the benedictions customary at a wed- ding (7a-8b), of the Hebrew words of consolation (8b), of the catalogue of the ordinances which were established at Usha (49b-50a), of the narratives of several teachers who were absent from their families an unusually long time for the sake of study (62b- 63a), of the detailed account of the death of R. Judah ha-Nasi (103a-104a), and of the words of many teach- Keturah Kherson THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ers who extolled the superiority of Palestine, ex- pressing their longing for the land of their fathers, aud who, when they had reached their goal, kissed the stones and cast themselves in the dust (110b— 112b). 8. 8. do Yo, 1b KETURAH (7 7)0)p, lit. “incense ”): Abraham’s second wife, whomhe married after the death of Sarah (Gen. xxv. 1; I Chron. i. 32). She was the ancestress of sixteen tribes, among which were Ara- bian and Midianite ones. In I Chron. i. 32 Ke- turah is called “the concubine of Abraham,” and, probably for this reason, she is identified in the Midrash (Gen. R. 1xi., quoted also by Rashi) and in the Palestinian Targumim with Hacar, who was the first concubine of Abraham. The Midrash explains the name “ Keturah” as based on her acts, which were pleasant like frankincense. In Gen. xxv. 5 the Midrash (/.c.) reads the term “ha-pillag- shim” (=“the concubines”) without the yod, which is the sign of the plural (owibpn), ex- plaining that there was only one concubine, key as a symbol of authority is also met with in the Talmud: “Three keysare in God’sown hand which He never entrusteth to any angel: the key of rain; that of childbirth; and that of the resurrection of the dead. The Western (Palestinian) Talmudists say also the key of nourishment” (Sanh. 118a; Ta‘an. 2a). LG. H. M. SEL. KEYSER, EPHRAIM: American sculptor; born at Baltimore, Md., Oct. 6, 1850; educated at the City College of Baltimore and at the art acad- emies of Munich (where he won a silver medal for a bronze statue of a page) and Berlin. In 1880 he settled in Rome, Italy, where he maintained a studio for six years and where he received a prize for a statue of Psyche. In 1887 he returned to the United States, and lived in New York until 1898. Since then he has resided in Baltimore, where he is now (1904) instructor in modeling at the School of Fine Arts. Among his works may’ be mentioned: the- statue of Gen- eral de Kalb, erected by the government at Annapolis, Md. ; the design for the tomb of as Hagar and Keturah were one person. Still it seems that such was not the opinion of the Talmudic doctors; for the children of Ish- mael and _ the children of Ke- turah are kept distinct in the story of their complaints against the Jews before Alexander the Macedonian (Sanh. 91a). ive Chile M. SE. KEY (nn5b): In Biblical times the key, as its Hebrew name indicates (“ mafteah” = “ the opener”), was used chiefly to open the door which was locked by means of a boit (“beriah”). This bolt, like that used in the Orient to-day, had a number of holes into which fitted iron points in the door-post, so ar- ranged that they dropped into the corresponding holes as soon as the bolt was pushed into the open- ing made for it in the door-post. The key, made of wood, was provided at the end with a similar num- ber of nails, arranged to correspond with the iron points holding the bolt. Introducing the key from the side into the run of the bolt, one was able by these nails to push up from below the iron points and then draw the bolt back. Thus Ehud could lock the door of Eglon’s palace without the aid of a key, while only Eglon’s servants “took the key and opened” (Judges iii. 25). The expression “to bear the key on his shoulder” denotes possession of office (comp. Isa. xxii. 22). In the time of Ezra, four Levites, the chief porters, were in charge of the key of the Temple (I Chron. ix. 27). The Bolt and Key Used in Modern Syria. 1. Locked. 2. Unlocked. Chester A. Ar- thur, President of the United States, at Al- bany, New York; and va- rious busts, among them those of Cardi- nal Gibbons, Sidney Lanier, and Henry Har- land. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Appleton, Cyclo. of American Biography. Ay Dog ME Ma KHAIBAR: Fortified town of Arabia in the dis- trict of Hejaz, and four days’ journey northwest of ue city of Medina. In the time of Mohammed, the name “Khaibar” was borne by a whole prov- ince, which was inhabited by various Jewish tribes; the name became famous in consequence of the prominence of the town in the Islamic wars. Ac- cording to Mohammedan historians, the first inhab- itants of the district of Hejaz were the Amalekites, who had been expelled by the Israelites. There are various traditions in regard to the settlement of Khaibar by the Jews: that they settled there in the time of Moses; of Joshua; of Saul (who was sent by Samuel to exterminate the Amalekites); of David, when he fled before hisson Absalom. But the most probable supposition is that of Rapoport (in “ Bik- kure ha-‘Ittim,” 1824, p. 53), that the Jews of Khai- bar are the descendants of Jonadab b. Rechab, on whose recommendation they continued to live like nomads. They settled in that fertile place after the destruction of the First Temple, and, having no inter- course with Jews in other parts, they were entirely ignorant of the existence of the Talmud. As the 481 Rechabites were of one family with the Kenites (I Chron. ii. 55), Rapoport identifies the name “ Khai- bar” (92°) with “Heber” (43m), the name of the chief of the Kenites. The Jews in the province of Khaibar in the time of Mohammed had seven for- tresses or castles, similar to those of the Christian knights (the Arabian geographers, among them Yakut, derive the name from a Hebrew word mean- ing “fortress”), the strongest of which was Kamus, built by the chief Inn Hukaik; these fortresses pro- tected the Jews against the predatory incursions of the Bedouins. In regard to the history of Khaibar prior to Mo- hammed, the historians report only the single fact that Al-Harith al-A‘raj, King of Ghassan, made an incursion into it in 524. One hundred years later, during Mohammed’s war in Hejaz, a Jewish tribe, the Banu Nadir, deserted the prophet’s camp and sought refuge in the town of Khaibar. This war- like tribe exhorted its coreligionists there to resist Mohammed in the event of his besieging them. Mohammed invaded the district in 628, and the Jews retreated to their fortresses, where they bravely defended themselves. Their leaders were Kinanah ibn Rabi‘, a Nadirite, and Marhab, of Him- yarite origin. The greatest resistance was offered by the fortress of Kamus, which, in spite of the overwhelming numbers of Mohammed’s forces, held out two months. Finally, the Jews capitulated, but they were allowed to remain on paying a certain tribute. Omar, the second calif, violated the treaty of Mo- hammed and drove the Jews from Khaibar about 640, assigning them a strip of land near Al-Kufah, on the Euphrates. Benjamin of Tudela reports 50, - 000 Jews in the city of Khaibar, among whom were many learned scholars; but Ibn Sappir (book i., ch. xv.) corrects his mistake. It is hardly probable that Jews ever returned to the place. The expres- sion “ Yahud al-Khaibar” has remained as a term of reproach. Travelers of the eighteenth century, as Niebuhr and Seetzen, reported merely hearing of Jewish nomads in Khaibar. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Abu al-Fida, Annales, ed. Adler, i. 65: Yakut, Mu‘jam, ii, 504; Niebuhr, Voyage en Arabie, p. 826; S. de Sacy, in Mémoires del Académie des Inscriptions et Belles- Lettres, xlviii. 670; Caussin de Perceval, Hssat_sur_l His- toire des Arabes, ii. 287, 642-645; iii. 87, 123, 180, 132, 159, 160, 193-195, 444; Rapoport, in Bikkure ha-‘Ittim, iv. 51-68 ; Briill’s Jahrb. vii. 53; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., v. 66, 67, 100- 108; vi. 250; Benjamin of Tudela, Itinerary, ed. Asher, p. 72; Benjamin II., Mas‘e Yisrael, p. 80, Lyck, 1859; Weil, Mohammed der Prophet, pp. 171, 186, 418; Hirschfeld, in R. E. J. viii. 167 et seq. a. M. SEL. KHERSON: Russian city; capital of the gov- ernment of the same name; situated on the right bank of the Dnieper, near its mouth. It was founded by Prince Potemkin in 1778. When per- mission was given the Jews to settle in New Russia by a ukase of Nov. 16, 1769, a number established themselves in the district which later included Kherson; some of these were among the first inhab- itants of Kherson. By 1781 the Jews in Kherson had become numerous enough to organize a commu- nity, and the pinkeses show that the by-laws of the hebra kaddisha were prepared in that year. Ac- cording to these records, the head of the brotherhood was elected for life, and the governing body was VII.—81 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA -_—_e—nrre eee eee Keturah Kherson chosen from among the members by ballot. From 1839 to 1859 there were ninety-three members. When a commission was organized (Aug. 1, 1840) in Odessa by order of the government to consider the feasibility of establishing the office of government rabbi, the Kherson community voluntarily elected Moses Warshavski, a local merchant, as delegate to represent it before the commission. According to the official report (1856) of the “learned Jew” Marcus Gurovich to the governor-general of New Russia, there were at that time in the city of Kher- son eight Jewish prayer-houses, including one large new synagogue, one Talmud Torah supported by private funds, and one Jewish hospital supported partly by the corftributions of the wealthy merchant Feker and partly from funds derived from the bas- ket-tax. The Talmud Torah was founded in 1860; its course of instruction at first included Hebrew sub- jects only, but later, owing to the efforts of the young rabbi, Faitel Blumenfeld, a graduate of the Jitomir rabbinical school, was expanded to include the study of general non-Hebrew subjects. In 1865 Blumenfeld succeeded in adding industrial classes to the Talmud Torah, and in 1867 he secured per- mission to open a technical school in Kherson, though, in consequence of the indifference of the community, it was never opened. The income of the community in 1881 from its meat-tax was 31,000 rubles; from this sum 3,800 rubles were assigned to the two large synagogues, and an equal sum to the ten prayer-houses. A fixed proportion of the meat-tax was assigned for the use of the Jewish hospital. On Oct. 6, 1881, a commis- sion of twenty-eight, appointed to consider “the Jewish question,” was convened in Kherson. It included three Jewish members— Dr. Zetkin of Yeli- savetgrad, Blumenfeld of Ananyev, and Bunzelman of Kherson. In a paper presented to the commis- sion by the Christian merchants of the govern- ment, the latter praise the Jewish agriculturists of Kherson as peaceful and honest neighbors, who till the soil by their own labor, show no disposition to evade military service, and are seldom guilty of in- subordination. They perform their duties faith- fully, and furnish the smallest proportion of crimi- nals. The commission voted in favor of permitting to Jews unrestricted rights of residence throughout Russia. The Jews of Kherson have contributed to the de velopment of the trade in timber and other forest products with White Russia, and have been influen- tial in the expansion also of the export trade iz grain. In 1881 there were in the city 4 Jewish merchants of the “first gild” in a total of 6; 66 Jewish merchants of the “second gild” in a total of 186; 55 Jewish merchants licensed for retail trade in a total of 184; and 54 Jewish clerks in a total of 139. Of the 40 lumber-yards of Kher- son, 86 were owned by Jewish mer- chants. The lumber trade in 1880 amounted to 2,500,000 rubles. The members of the Kherson community are distinguished for their progressive spirit and their recognition of the value of a modern education. In 1899 Kherson had eight prayer-houses, five synagogues (one of them Karaite), one Jewish technical school, one Tal- Institu- tions. Khin Kiddush mud Torah, one Jewish dispensary, and a number of hadarim. Among the prominent members of the Jewish community in Kherson have been Nahum Finkelstein, Julius Kranzfeld, Julius and Solomon Rosenthal, Tobias Felzer, Dr. Marcus Popich, Dr. Herzenstein, Mordecai Feker, Jacob Reznikov, Moses Hyam Serebrennik, Jacob Posner, Eliezer Lipman Golizki, Rabbi Faitel Blumenfeld, his son Herman Blumenfeld, Rabbi Isaac Judah Deutschman, Rabbi Pesker, P. Bunzelman, Nahum Gorodetzki (who was made hereditary honorary citizen), Abraham Jacob Brux (who from 1861 was for many years teacher of the Hebrew government school, and who in 1862 founded on very liberal lines a Jewish school for girls [“Ha-Maggid,” 1862, p. 300]), and Judah Behak, the writer (who went to Kherson in 1856). Behak exerted a beneficial influence on the edu- cation of the Jews in the city; the community erected a school in commemoration of his eightieth birthday, and named it Bet Yehudah. In 1912 Kherson had a total population of 91,858, of which about 30,000 were Jews. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lerner, Yevret v Novorossiskom Kraye, pp. 24, 73, 92, Odessa, 1901; Voskhod, 1881, ix. 173; Levanda, Potny Khron. Sbornik Zakonov, p. 23, St. Petersburg, 1874 ; Mysh, Rukovodstvo k Russkim Zakonam o Yevreyakh, p. 175, St. Petersburg, 1898; Razsvyet, 1879-80, Nos. 4, 21, 26, 29, 31, 34, and 36, H.R. de, Gite las KHIN, RACHEL MIRONOVNA: Russian authoress; born in White Russia in 1868; educated at the Women’s gymnasium, Moscow; studied medi- cine at St. Petersburg and history and literature at Paris. Her novelsand sketches first appeared in the “Vyestnik Yevropy,” “Russkaga Mysl,” “ Nedye- lya,” and “ Voskhod,” and were later issued in book form under the titles “Siluety ” (Moscow, 1894) and “Pod Goru” (4b. 1900). Her novels deal mostly with the life of the middle- class Russian landlords and the wealthier Jewish merchants. She vigorously criticizes the tactless manners of the Jewish upstarts, and pictures the unenviable position of the intelligent Jew who has to choose between the love of Russian culture, in which he has been educated, and the love of. his downtrodden coreligionists, who are deprived of their rights. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Entziklopedicheski Slovar, xxxvii., St. Pe- tersburg, 1903. M. R. H, R. KHOLM (CHELM): Russian district town in the government of Lublin. Its Jews are mentioned in various documents of 1550 to 1569. In the latter year the delegate from Kholm to the Diet of Lublin complained of the growing power of the Jews and proposed that “the Jews and Gipsies be treated ac- cording to the Constitution.” On Easter Day, 1580, while a church procession was in progress the burgher Timosh, with many companions, all armed with various weapons, attacked the synagogue dur- ing religious service. They threw stones through the windows, fired shots into the building, broke down the doors, damaged the roof, and wounded many of the congregation. .A formal complaint against the rioters was lodged by the Jewish elders Pinkus, Saul, Avram Pestich, and Kalman, their statement being corroborated by the noble Foma THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 482 Stano. The estimat d loss to the synagogue was 2,000 gold ducats. z On May 1, 1582, Saul Novakhovich, Shlioma Ya- kubovich, Marek, Jacob the Doctor (Rabbi), and Bysko complained of the principal of the Kholm school, stating that he came drunk to the synagogue while the Jews were engaged in prayer, and that he shouted, mocking the singing. During the Cossack uprising of 1648-49 most of the inhabitants of Kholm were killed, among them about 400 Jews. In 1666 the delegate from Kholm to the Diet of Warsaw was instructed to demand the confiscation of land owned by the Jews without legal title thereto, and formerly the property of the Dominican monks. In 1912 the Jews of Kholm numbered about 17,000 in a population of 27,251. The town is a commercial center of considerable importance; and practically all the commerce is in the hands of Jews. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regesty i Nadpisi, i., Nos. 284 et passim. Hy: J. 6G The following is a list of the rabbis who officiated in Kholm since the second half of the sixteenth century : Simon Auerbach; Solomon Zalman (mentioned in Solomon Luria’s Responsa, No. 101); Elijah b. Ju- dah Aaron (called Enizan Ba‘au SHEM; pupil of Solomon Luria); Samuel Eprts (1610-14); Eliezer Perles; Isaac b. Samuel ha-Levi (until 1627); Moses Katzenellenbogen (son of Meir Wahl; d. 1689); Saul Katzenellenbogen (son of Moses Katzenellenbogen ; d. 1691); Jekuthiel b. Hosha Aaron of Lublin (d. 1697); Hillel b. Jonah ha-Levi (called from Kholm to Wilna in 1690; grandson of Eliezer Ashkenazi; d. 1690); Meir b. Benjamin Wolf (d. 1718); Solomon b. Simhah Rapoport (d. 1763); Zebi Hirsch b. Selig; Saul Margolioth (d. 1801); Samuel (gave his appro- bation to the “Lehem Yehudah ” in 1704); Solomon (author of “ Merkebet ha-Mishnah”; d. 1756); Isaac b. Mordecai ha-Levi (until 1776; d. 1799; grandson of Joshua Reitzes, “the martyr”); Hirsch b. Joseph (author ofa treatise on the improvement of the posi- tion of the Jews in Poland and on the ways to make them useful citizens of their fatherland; 1789); Hayyim b. Jacob (author of “ Kokebe Ya‘akob”; d. 1820); Isaac b. Joseph (author of “Mishnat Haka- mim”); Joseph Kezis (d. 1830); Léb Neuhaus (son of Joseph Kezis). BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Rabinowitz, in Ha-Meassef, p. 154, St. Pe- tersburg, 1902; J. Lewinstein, Dor Dor we-Dorshaw, War- saw, 1898. H. R. VAR: KHORASAN (“The Land of the Sun”): One of the five great divisions of Persia, bounded on the east by Afghanistan; on the north by Zakaspie, the transcaspian territory of Russia; and on the south by Kirwan. In ancient times it was the territory | immediately east of that ruled by the Sassanids, who occasionally exiled political offenders thither. Thus, in 930 Saadia’s friend Josiah the anti-exilarch was banished to Khorasan. The cities of the province in which Jews are most numerous are Meshed and Herat. In Meshed there is a colony of about 2,000 crypto-Jews, known as “ Jadidin,” who were nominally converted to Islam early in the nineteenth century under the cruel reign of Shah Nur al-Din’s father. Some have mi- 483 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Khin Kiddush grated to transcaspian territory, and practise Juda- ism at Merv, Aschabad, Bokhara, and Samarcand. Dz AB WSig vse, KHUDAIDAD. See Jupao-Prersian Lrrera- TURE. KHURILKAR, JOSEPH DANIEL: Beni- Israel soldier; bahadur subahdar in the Anglo- Indian army. He enlisted in the Sixteenth Regi- ment Bengal Native Infantry, and was successively promoted to the ranks of jemidar (July 14, 1856), subahdar (Jan. 1, 1858), and subahdar major (Jan. 1, 1872). He was decorated with the Indian Mutiny medal (1857), and with the star of the Order of British India (2d class). ie J. Ey. KHURILKAR, SAMUEL EZEKIEL: Beni- Israel soldier; subahdar in the Anglo-Indian army. He enlisted in the Sixteenth Native Infantry of Bengal in 1790, and was made subahdar May 21, 1802. He was decorated with a bronze medal da- ted May 4, 1799, on one side of which is the figure of the British Lion subduing the Indian Tiger (Tipu Sahib); the reverse represents the entry of a British army into Seringapatam, and bears an in- scription in Persian, dated “27 Zilkad, A.n. 1213.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Catalogue of Anglo-Jewish Historical Ha- hibition, p. 45, London, 1887, Ji Ue leh KIAMIL PASHA: Turkish official; born at Nicosia, Cyprus, in 18382. Educated on that island and in Egypt, he at the age of seventeen entered the service of the Egyptian government, afterward passing into that of Turkey, under which he has successively held the following important political positions: mayor of Touzla (1859); presi- dent of the administra- tive council of Saida; subprefect of Beirut, of Damascus (1866), of Aleppo (1867), of Phil- ippopolis (1868), of Jerusalem, of Cyprus (1874), and again of Beirut (1875); and vali of Aleppo (1876). Re- signing in 1878, he re- turned to office in 1881, being successively ap- pointed councilor to the ministry of the in- terior, minister of pious foundations (1882), and minister of public in- struction (1888). In 1884 he was elevated to the rank of grand vizier (“Sadriazam”). He resigned, but was recalled to the same functions in 1891. Kiamil Pasha is now (1904) governor of the vila- yet of Aidin, with residence at Smyrna. In recog- nition of hig services he has received the Turkish orders of Imtiaz, Osmanie, and Medjidie, the medal of Crete, and other decorations. Born in the Jew- ish faith he has been a professed Mohammedan since his boyhood. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Salnameh (Official Annual) for 1809 A.H. 8. M. FR. Kiamil Pasha. KIBROTH-HATTAAVAH (fixnn nap): A station of the Israelites in the wilderness on the journey from Sinai to Kadesh (Num. xi: 84, xxxiii. 16). The name, which means “the graves of lust,” was given to the place on account of its being the burial-ground of the multitudes that died through glutting themselves with quail flesh (Num. xi. 84). It would seem from Num. xi. 8, 4, that Kibroth- hattaavah was identical with Taberah, which was three days’ journey from Sinai (comp. 7b. x. 38). In Deut. ix. 22, however, the two stations are men- tioned as distinct places. Kibroth-hattaavah is identified by Schwarz (“Das Heilige Land,” p. 213) with the modern ‘Ain al-Shihabah, in the interior of the desert (comp. Robinson, “ Researches,” i. 264). BE. G. H. M. SEL. KID. See Goar. KIDDUSH: Ceremony and prayer by which the holiness of the Sabbath or of a festival is pro- claimed. For the Sabbath the Scripture imposes this duty in the words: “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” which, according to Shab. 86a, means that its holiness must be recognized in speech during the day. It is a positive duty and connected with a set time; yet women as well as men are bound by it; forthe “remember” of Ex. xx. 8 is coextensive with the “keep ” of Deut. v. 12 (see Ber. 20a). The middle benediction of the prayer ends with the words: “Blessed . . . who sanctifieth the Sabbath; blessed ... who sanctifieth Israel and theseasons . . .; blessed . . . the King over all the earth who sanctifieth Israel and the day of Memorial”; this is deemed a fulfilment of the Scrip- turalcommand as to the Sabbath (Ber. 52b). How- ever, under an old custom, recognized by the Mish- nah (Ber. viii. 1), the Sabbath and the festivals are sanctified in another cheerful and impressive way —over a glass of wine before the evening meal, even though the benediction has already been re- cited in the prayer. The drinking of the wine, with the recitation of the accompanying words, con- stitutes the ceremony of Kiddush, in which husband, wife, children, and dependents take part together. According to Ber. 38a, the origin of the Kiddush can be traced back to the time of the Great Syna- gogue; indeed, from the controversies between the schools of Shammai and Hillel on various points connected with the Kiddush, it is clearly seen that the ceremony is very old. For Passover evening the Yemenite prayer-book has a different Kiddush, reproduced in the “Eben Sappir” of the traveler Jacob Safir. Although the Talmud (Pes. 107a) declares strong drink other than wine improper for the Kiddush, such drink, of necessity, takes the place of wine to a great extent in northeastern Europe. It is re- garded, however, as more dignified, Substitutes where wine can not be had, to pro- for Wine. nounce the Kiddush over the bread (see Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 271, 26) than to substitute beer or brandy. At the beginning of Sabbath two whole loaves of bread are laid down in memory of the double measure of manna that was gathered on Friday (Shab. 117b), with a white cloth under and over them (Orah Hay- iddush iddushin THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 484 oR a a el a Nn I a er yim, 271, 9). There is no true Kiddush except at the place of the meal (implied in Ber. viii. 2, and ex- pressly asserted by Samuel in Pes. 101a). However, there ig a custom (which Samuel reproves) of pro- nouncing the Kiddush at the end of the evening service in the synagogue. Abudarham, in his work on the services, in the chapter on the beginning of Sabbath, wonders how this custom ever took root, and quotes Hai Gaon, the last of the Geonim, against it. It was defended on the ground that at one time travelers were housed and took supper in a room adjoining the synagogue, and that thus the Kiddush was really celebrated near the place of the meal; the custom persisted among the Ashkenazim because no one would take the responsibility of abolishing it, though the occasion for it had long ceased. The Kiddush for the Sabbath is made up of two benedictions: that for the wine (or bread, when wine is not used) and that for the day. Fol- lowing the opinion of Hillel’s school, that for the wine is said first: “Blessed be Thou, O Lord, our God, King of the World, the Creator of the fruit of the vine. Blessed be thou, O Lord, The Bene- our God, King of the World, who hast dictions. sanctified us by Thy commandments and wast pleased with us, and hast given us for a heritage, in love and favor, Thy holy Sabbath, a memorial of the work of creation. For it precedes all the holy convocations in memory of the going forth from Egypt. Thou hast indeed chosen us above all nations, and hast given us, in love and favor, Thy holy Sabbatl. fora heritage. Blessed be Thou, O Lord, who hallowest the Sabbath.” Before these benedictions it is customary to re- cite Gen. ii. 1-8, the account of the Sabbath of Creation, in obedience to the saying of the Talmud (Shab. 119b) that one who recites it makes him- self, in a sense, a partner with God in the work of creation. In the German ritual these verses are preceded in a low voice by the last words of Gen. i.: “And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” The indirect reference to the departure from Egypt is probably based on Pes. 117b, though this is primarily meant for the Kiddush on the Pass- over. On the three festivals the benediction for the day takes this form, the words in brackets being inserted on the Sabbath: “Blessed . . . , who hast chosen us from every tribe and lifted us over every tongue; Thou gavest us, O Lord, our God [in love Sabbaths for rest, | set times for gladness, feasts, and seasons for joy, [this Sabbath day and] this . . . day of the feast of unleavened bread, the season of our liberation . . . in memory of our going forth from Egypt; for Thou hast chosen us, and hast hallowed us, and hast given us [in love and favor] in gladness and joy [the Sabbath and] Thy holy set times for a heritage; blessed be Thou, O Lord, who hallowest [the Sabbath and] Israel and the seasons.” (On Pen- tecost, the Feast of Booths, and the eighth day of Solemn Assembly necessary changes in wording are made.) On New-Year’s night the benediction pro- ceeds thus: “Blessed . . . Thou gavestus... this Day of Memorial, a day of sounding the shofar, a holy convocation, in memory of the going forth from Egypt; and Thy word is true and standeth forever; blessed be Thou, O Lord, King over all the earth, who hallowest [the Sabbath and] the Day of Memorial.” On all the festivals other than the last days of Passover, the celebrant thus gives thanks for having reached the joyfultime: “Blessed . . . who hast let us live and sustained us, and made us reach this season.” When the festival night follows the Sab- bath, the Kiddush embraces two other benedictions by way of “separation” (“habdalah”) between the higher sanctity of the Sabbath and the lower one of the festival, the place of these benedictions being before the giving of thanks for having reached the day: “Blessed be . . . , Creator of the light-rays of the fire. Blessed be . . . , who distinguishest be- tween holy and profane, between light and darkness, between Israel and the nations, between the seventh day and the six work-days. Between the holiness of the Sabbath and the holiness of the holy day Thou hast distinguished, and Thou hast distinguished and hallowed Thy people Israel in Thine own holi- ness. Blessed be Thou, O Lord, who distinguishest between Holy and Holy.” See HaBpALAH. The full text of this benediction is not given in the Talmud, but its nature is discussed (Pes. 102b, 105a). The idea of distinguishing between Holy and Holy is derived from the veil in the Temple which divided the Holy from the Holy of Holies. After reciting the Kiddush the master of the house sips from the cup, and then passes it to his wife and to the othersat the table; then all wash their hands, and the master of the house blesses the bread, cuts it, and passes a morsel to each person at the table. Beside the Kiddush at the evening meal there is another of later origin and of lessimportance, called, by inversion, the “Great Kiddush.” It consists sim- ply of the recitation of some Bible verses referring to the Sabbath or the current festival, and of the benediction for wine, and precedes the first morning meal (see Orah Hayyim, 271-272). Regarding the origin of the Kiddush see Lirrurey. A. Ih, ING 1D) KIDDUSH LEBANAH. See New-Moon. KIDDUSH HA-SHEM and HILLUL HA- SHEM (“Sanctification ” and “ Desecration of the Name”): Terms denoting the highest positive and negative standards of Jewish ethics, the one indica- ting that everything within man’s power should be done to glorify the name of God before the world, the other that everything should be avoided which may reflect discredit upon the religion of Israel and thereby desecrate the name of God (see L. Lazarus, “Zur Charakteristik der Talmudischen Ethik,” p. 40). The terms are derived from Lev. xxii. 82: “ Neither shall ye profane my holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel; I am the Lord which hallow you”—the verse called by Jel- linek (“ Predigten,” 1862, i. 225 et seq.) “ Israel’s Bible in miniature.” Referring in the text to the priests as the appointed guardians of the Sanctuary, the commandment, in its positive and in its negative forms, was applied at an early time to the whole peo- ple of Israel as the priest-people, whose very lives and history stand for the belief in the world’s holy God. Sifra, Emor, xiii. reads: “I have brought you out cf Egypt upon the condition that you sacrifice 485 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA iddush iddushin your very lives should the honor of My name require it” ; hence every Israelite is enjoined to surrender his life rather than by public transgression of the Law desecrate the name of God (Sanh. 74a, b ; Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, clvii.). Throughout Jewish history martyrdom in the cause of religion is called “sanctification of God’s name.” Hananiah, Mishael, and Aza- Jewish riah (Dan. iii.; Pes. 58b; Sanh. 98a; Martyr- Sotah 10b), the men who in Maccabean dom. times were “ for the Lord’s sake killed all day long” (Psalms xliv. 23 [A. V. 22], Ixxix. 2), the generation of martyrs in Bar Kokba’s time (Ber. 20b; Midr. Teh. to Ps. xvi. 4), are singled out as preeminent among those who glorified the name of God by their death, and as models for ali the coming generations of Isracl, the martyr-people. Only of the non-Jew, even when an observer of the Noachian laws common to all hu- manity, it is not expected that he sanctify the name of God by martyrdom (Sanh. 74b). Very dramat- ically R. Nathan describes the Jewish sentiment pre- vailing in a time of (Hadrianic?) persecution: “ Why art thou brought out to be killed?”—“ Because I have performed the rite of circumcision upon my son.” “Why art thou to be stoned to death? ”— “Because I have observed the Sabbath.” “Why art. thou led out to die by fire?””—“ Because I have studied the Law.” “ Why art thou to be crucified?” —“ Because I have observed the law of the unleav- ened bread on Pesah.” “ Why art thou to be beaten with sticks? ”—“ Because I have swung the lulab on sukkot. All these things happen to me because I am the beloved one of my Father in heaven” (Mek., Yitro, 6; Midr. Teh. to Ps. xii. 5). After martyr- dom had begun to imperil the existence of the Jew- ish nation in Palestine the council of Lydda decreed that only with regard to the three fundamental laws, against idolatry, incest, and murder, should death be preferred to transgression (Sanh. 74a). But when the transgression is demanded as a public demonstration of apostasy or faithlessness the rule is that death should be preferred for the sake of the sanctification of God’s name (see Maimonides, “ Yad,” Yesode ha-Torah, v.). The ‘Akedah read on New- Year was taken by the Jewish people as a pattern of martyrdom which Isaac was to offer to all his descendants (Git. 57b; 1V Macc. xiv.-xvii.; Lam. R.i. 16; Schreiner, “ Die Jiingsten Urtheile iiber das Judenthum,” 1902, pp. 179-180). But the familiar term Kiddush ha-Shem assumed for the Jew in the course of time a still wider mean- ing. Every act of humanity and gen- erosity done to the non-Jew appeals to the Jew as dictated by the impulse to hallow God’s name before the Gentiles. Just as the prophet Ezekiel (xx. 31, xxxix. 27) emphasizes the necessity to hallow God’s name in the eyes of the nations, so did the Jew at all times pay especial regard to what the people around him would say (Gen. xxxiv. 30-31; Ex. xxxii. 12; Ps. cxv. 2); and he felt all the more con- strained to observe the law of integrity and purity in the sight of the non-Jewish world. Simeon b. Shetah was held up foranexample; when he bought an ass from the Arabs and his servants expressed de- Works a Powerful Spell. light at discovering a necklace of jewels around its neck, he immediately returned the necklace to the owner, who exclaimed: “ Blessed be the God of the Jews, who renders His people so scrupulous in their dealing with other men!” (Yer. B. M. ii. 8c; Deut. R. iii.). It is the Jew’s deep feeling of responsibil- ity for his religious faith that works such a power- ful spell upon him and inspires him to manifest by noble deeds of righteousness and love his allegiance to the God of his fathers. Still more powerful as a deterrent from evil acts is the expression “hillul ha-shem,” instilling fear lest the name of Israel and of Israel’s Hillul God be brought into contempt by the ha-Shem. misconduct of the Jew. A theft com- mitted against the non-Jew is more heinous than a theft against the Jew, because to the transgression of the Law is added the sin of desecra- ting the Name (Tosef., B. K. x. 15). “All sins may be atoned for by repentance, by means cf the Day of Atonement, or through the chastening power of affliction, but acts which cause the desecration of the name of God will not be forgiven, for “Surely this iniquity shall not be purged from you till ye die, saith the Lord God of hosts” (Isa. xxii. 14; Mek., Yitro, 7; Yoma 86a; Matt: xii. 32 et al. has, for “the Holy Name,” “the Holy Ghost”). The greater the man, the more he must guard against causing hillul ha-shem by the slightest deviation from the path of strictest rectitude and moderation (Yoma 84a, 86a; Pes. 49a). To this day the warning against hillul ha-shem tends to keep the commonest Jew from committing any act that might disgrace the Jewish community. BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Lazarus, Zur Charakteristik der Talmudi- schen Ethik, pp. 40-48, Breslau, 1877; M. Lazarus, Hthik des Judenthums, i. 196 et seq.; J. Perles, Bousset’s Religion des Judenthums, Kritisch Untersucht, pp. 68-71, Berlin, 1903; Schreiner, Die Jiingsten Urtheile tiber das Judenthum, Berlin, 1902. K KIDDUSHIN (}witp = “ Betrothal”): Name of a treatise in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and the Babylo- nian and Jerusalem Talmuds; it is devoted chiefly to discussion of the various modes of betrothal and the conditions which must be fulfilled to make a marriage valid. “Kiddushin” is the rabbinical term for betrothal, because the wife becomes thereby the sacrosanct possession of the husband. In the mish- naic order of Seder Nashim this treatise is the sev- enth and last. Strictly, it should precede Gittin, but the Mishnah follows the Scriptural order, which mentions marriage after divorce (Deut. xxiv. 1-2). Inthe Mishnah, Kiddushin is divided into four chap- ters, and comprises, in all, forty-seven paragraphs. Ch.i.: The husband obtains his wife in three ways: by money, however small the sum; bya written an- nouncement; by sexual intercourse; the wife be- comes free by divorce or the death of her husband (§ 1). This leads to a discussion of the acquisition and emancipation of Jewish and heathen slaves of both sexes (S§ 2-3), of the acquisition of cattle (§ 4) and real or personal property (§§ 4-6), and of the dis- tinctions between man and woman regarding fulfil- ment of the laws, those pertaining only to a definite time not being binding on a woman (§§ 7-8); laws dealing with real estate apply only to Palestine (§ 9). Contents. Kiddushin Kiev THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 486 oo ee eee In the last paragraph, which is haggadic in nature (§ 10), the reward for the observance of a law is de- scribed, and itis further stated that he who is learned in the Scriptures, possesses a knowledge of the Mishnah, and has good manners is fairly guarded against sin, whereas he that knows neither the Scrip- tures nor the Mishnah, and is devoid of manners, can not be regarded as a civilized being. Ch. ii.: Rules and conditions for marriage by proxy. A man may wed through a representative ; so may a woman (§ 1); but any error or fraud on the part of either invalidates the union (§§ 2-8, 5- 6); so does any failure of the proxy to Marriage follow exactly his instructions (§ 4). by Proxy. In case the marriage is effected by the gift of some article of value, it must be an object the use of which is not forbidden ($$ 8-10). Ch. iii.: Further rules and conditions for mar- riage by proxy (§§ 1-7); regulations for cases in which a father betroths one of his daughters while they are yet minors, but without stating definitely which one (§ 9), or in case either the man or the woman denies that a marriage ceremony has been performed (§$§ 16-11); circumstances under which the custody of the child is granted to the man (or the woman), or under which the child is regarded as illegitimate ($$ 12-18). Ch. iv.: Enumeration of the ten families of di- verse origin that removed from Babylonia to Pales- tine, and as to which of them may intermarry (§§ 1-3) ; the tests by which purity of lineage is proved (§§ 4- 5); rules for the attestation of marriages contracted in distant lands ($§ 10-11). Ethical injunctions: a man must not remain alone with a woman ($§ 12-13); a father must teach his son one of the honorable trades enumerated and discussed, though the pre- eminence of the study of the Law over every other occupation is emphasized (§ 14). Special interest attaches to the exclamation of Simeon b. Eleazar: “The beasts, created to serve me, find nourishment easily; therefore I, created to serve God, should find nourishment still more easily; yet, for my sins, it is hard for me to gain my food.” The chapter closes with the statement that Abraham had observed all the precepts of the Torah even before it was revealed. In the Tosefta this treatise is divided into five chapters. Particularly noteworthy are the eulogy of craftsmanship (i. 11) and the assertion which was made by Akiba that the Biblical prohibition against intermarrying with certain nations even after con- version to Judaism (see Deut. xxiii. 4-9) had been abrogated, since the conquests and deportations by the Assyrian kings (comp. II Kings xvii.) had so dis- persed the peoples that none of them remained in its original abode (vy. 4). Both the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Gemaras contain elucidations of the individual mishnayot, in addition to discussions and decisions of questions not contained in the Mishnah itself. The Babylonian Gemara has, furthermore, numerous interesting com- ments and maxims, of which the following specimens may be cited: “Who teacheth not his son a trade teacheth him robbery” (29a); “Rewards for good deeds come not in this world” (39b); “It is the duty ofa father to have his son instructed in the Scriptures, the Mishnah, and the Talmud, as well as in halakot and haggadot.” The ancients were called “Soferim ” because they counted the letters of the Torah; they said that the “waw” in the word }\n) (Lev. xi. 42) divided the letters of the Torah into two equal groups, as does the “‘ayin” in the Masoretic word 43) (Ps. 1xxx. 14). The word Divisions. wrt (Lev. x. 16) divides the words, and Lev. xiii. 48 the verses, of the Pentateuch in half, while Psalm |xxvii. 38 plays a similar part in the Book of Psalms (80a). These Masoretic observations are of special impor- tance, inasmuch as they differ from the present Maso- rah (comp. the marginal notes to the Wilna edition of the Talmud). A very interesting characterization of certain nations is found in 49b, which says that the highest wisdom is the possession of Israel, and the most perfect beauty the heritage of Jerusalem; the ancient Romans possessed the greatest wealth, while the direst poverty is found in Babylon; the Persians are the bravest nation; magic flourishes best in Egypt, and wantonness in Arabia; women are most inclined to loquacity and slaves to laziness. There is an account of the conflict between John Hyrcanus (here called “ Yannai”) and the Pharisees in 66a, and in 72b it is related that when Akiba died, Judah ha-Nasi was born; when he died, Rab was born; when Rab died, Raba was born; and when Raba died, Ashi was born. Another reference to Akiba is found in 81b, where it isrelated that when- ever he read Lev. v.17 he wept: “If he that has un- wittingly transgressed must make atonement for his transgression, how much more he that has sinned consciously.” It must be noted that the passage from “ Ha-ishah niknit ” (2a) to “ We-en dabar aher kortah” (8b), at the beginning of the Gemara to the first chapter, is a later addition of the Saboraim (comp. the letter of Sherira Gaon in Neubauer, “M. J. C.” p. 26). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Z. Frankel, Hodogetica in Mischnam, p. 260, Leipsic, 1859, Bas Js a. 165 KIDNAPING. See Aspucrion. ' KIDRON (j)77p): A ravine on the east of Jeru- salem, separating the city from the Mount of Olives (comp. II Sam. xv. 28, 30). Except in II Kings xxiii. 4, “ Kidron ” is always preceded by “ Nahal,” which, like the Arabic “ Wadi,” has the double meaning of “brook” and “valley.” Fora part of the winter only, after heavy rains, the Kidron indeed is a torrent, for which reason it is called by the Septua- gint Xeappove Kedpov, The latter word, which means “dark,” relates to the dark color of the stream or ravine; but the translation of the Septuagint in II Sam. xv. 23 and I Kings xv. 18, Xecudppove tov Kédpov, suggests a Greek name given to the place on account of the cedars abounding there. The Kidron is first mentioned in the Old Testa- ment as having been crossed by David in his flight (II Sam. xv. 23); then as having been indicated by Solomon to Shimei as the limit beyond which he might not go, under penalty of death (T Kings ii. 37). Later it became the repository of the imple- ments of idol-worship when removed from the Tem- ple. It was there that Asa burned his mother’s idols 487 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kiddushin iev (I Kings xv. 38; II Chron. xv. 16) and that Josiah destroyed the Asherah (II Kings xxiii. 4, 6, 12; II Chron. xxix. 16, xxx. 14). It would appear that in the time of Josiah, Kidron was the cemetery of the common people (II Kings xxiii.6; comp. Jer. xxxi. 89 [A. VY. 40]), hence the statement of Josephus (“ Ant.” ix. 7, § 8) that Athalia was executed in the Valley of Kidron. It is also mentioned as having been crossed by Jesus on his way to Gethsemane (John xxiii. 1, A. V. Cepron). The Valley of Kidron is generally identified with the Valley of Jehoshaphat (see JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY oF). For the Hebrew inscription found there in 1880, see SILOAM INSCRIPTION. E. @. H. M. Seu. KIERA (ESTHER): Jewish favorite of the sul- tana Baffa, who was the wife of Murad IIL. and the mother of Mohammed III. (not, as Graetz desig- nates her, the mother of Mohammed IYV.); died 1600. The widow of one Elias Chandali, Esther gained great influence in the palace as the protégée of Baffa. In a firman of Osman II. issued in 1618 the privileges granted to Esther by his predecessors are confirmed and secured to her grandchildren. From this firman it appears that Esther was first re- warded by Sultan Sulaiman II. in 1548 for services rendered by her to his mother. The extent of Kiera’s influence with Baffa may be seen from the following facts, undoubtedly au- thentic: When Catherine de Medici wrote in 1584 to Baffa asking her support for the promotion of the way wode of Wallachia, Esther was employed by Baffa to see that the Turkish translation accompany- ing the Italian text of the letter wascorrect. Again in 1587 Baffa wrote a letter of recommendation and approval in regard to a certain lottery started by Kiera. The favorable attitude of the Venetian repub- lic toward this lottery was the cause of the issuance of seven firmans granting certain privi- leges to the republic. This shows that the business transactions carried out by Esther were made possible by the cooperation of the harem through the personal in- fluence of Baffa. Many important diplomatic transactions and many appointments to military and administrative offices Her Influence. were made through Kiera; and her long career | under three sultans testifies to her ability and inge- nuity. Therepresentatives of the European powers often applied to Kiera and secured concessions through her. They variously refer to her in their writings as “ Kiera,” “Chiera,” “ Chierara,” “ Chiraz- za,” or “Chiarazza ” The name “ Kiera” is of Turk- ish origin, Kiera’s Jewish name being Esther; and it appears that toward the end of her life she adopted the Mohammedan faith and was then given the name “Fatima,” as she is so styled in the firman of Osman II. Her sons were not converted with her, as is shown by the statement that one of them later saved his life by becoming a Mohammedan (he was called “ Aksak Mustafa,” and he died in the reign of Ibrahim I. [1640-49]) ; and her grandchildren also are styled Jews in the firman referred to. Kiera was not always scrupulous in her dealings. Many of the appointments made through her in- volved bribery ‘and created bitter animosity. The Turkish soldiers known as the Spahis resented the appointment through her of some mili- Her tary officers, and plotted to kill her. Assassina- Gathering near the palace they de- tion. manded her surrender to them, and the deputy grand vizier Khalil, wish- ing to save her life, ordered her and her sons to be brought to his own palace. The mob, led by the Spahis, overcame the guard, and taking Kiera and her sons (Aksak Mustafa excepted) from the very steps of the palace killed them (1600). Cutting off Kiera’s limbs they nailed them to the doors of the dwellings of those officials who had obtained _ posi- tions through hér influence. The sultana Baffa was very indignant and accused Khalil of unwilling- ness to protect her favorite, and in consequence he was removed. The historian Katib Tshelebi, in his “ Pheslike” (ed. Constantinople, i. 128), gives a somewhat different version of the affair. Accord- ing to him, Khalil Pasha had Kiera brought to his palace and with his own hand thrust a dagger into her and killed her. Her entire fortune (estimated at about 100,000 ducats) was confiscated by the Turk- ish government. The contemporary Jewish historians speak highly of Kiera for her readiness to help her coreligionists. While there was a considerable number of well- to-do Jewish merchants in Constantinople in those days, they were always subject to the greed of the sultan’s body-guard, which plundered the Jewish houses in times of municipal disorder and at fires. At such times Kiera came to the aid of the sufferers. She also very generously aided Hebrew writers in publishing their books. The Spanish physician Samuel Shulam published Zacuto’s chronicle “ Yu- hasin” at Kiera’s expense. Kiera became the heroine of European fiction. Thus she undoubtedly appears in“ Byegly Vzglyad na Nastoyashchi i Prezhni Seral” in Chistyakov’s “Zhurnal Dlya Dyetei,” 1864, Nos. 5 and 6. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vostochnyya Zamyetki, Sbornik Statei i Tzslyedovani, p. 35, St. Petersburg, 1895; Hammer, Gesch. des Osmanischen Reiches, iv. 156, 159; Akrish, Preface to Commentaries on the Song of Solomon; Samuel Shulam, Preface to Yuhasin, Constantinople, 1566 H. R. AKER thy KIEV: “The mother of Russian cities”; situated on the right bank of the Dnieper, in the government of the same name. In 1912 it had a population of 594,356, including about 40,000 Jews. Itis difficult to decide when Jews first settled in Kiev. The city was probably built by the Chazars not later than the eighth century, and it is likely that Jews from the Byzantine empire, the Crimea, Persia, and the Caucasus settled there with the Chazars about the same time (see Malishevski, in “Trudy Tretyavo Arkheologicheskavo Syezda,” Feb. 12, 1878; “Kievskiya Gubernskiya Vyedo- mosti,” 1878, No. 24). Brunn is of the opinion that the Chazars derived “Kiev” from “Kioba” or “Kiaba,” the name of three brothers (“Trudy Tretyavo Arkheologicheskavo Syezda,” Feb. 12, 1878, p. 89). Zakrevski (in “Opisaniye Kieva,” p. 311, Moscow, 1868) is also of the opinion that the Chazars were the means of bringing the Jews to Kiev THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 488 ee ee ee ee SSE Kiev; this being so, the Jews antedate the Russians as citizens of that place. Malishevski, in “ Yevrei v Kievye i na Yugye Rossii,” published in the “Trudy Kievskoi Dukhovnoi Akademii,” says that Jews from the Orient (776) and from the Cau- casus emigrated to Chazaria, and thence to Kiev, where they found a community of Crimean Jews. Joseph ha-Kohen (in “‘Emek ha-Baka ”) is authority for the statement that Jews entered Russia in 690, after the defeat of the Persians by the Settled Arabs. When Kiev was taken by the Under the Varangians many of the Jews escaped Chazars. to Chazaria and to the countries on the Volga and the Don, and after the de- feat of the Chazars by Svyatoslav in 969 many Jews emigrated tothe Crimea. According to Theophanus a numerous Jewish community existed in Kiev in the eighth century (Malishevski: 10th cent., 7b. p. 44). The Grand Duke Vladimir found there a large Jewish community, and although he was averse to adopting their religion, yet, according to the Arabic writer Ibn Haukal, he was favorably inclined toward the Jews. In the chronicles whose authorship is as- cribed to Nestor it is related that Chazarian Jews went to Kiev in 986, immediately after the Bulgars and Germans, in order to induce Vladimir to accept their religion. Tatishchev remarks in regard to this that it does not exclude earlier arrivals of Jews, for the Jews taken captive by Svyatoslav were settled by him in Kiev, on the River Ross, and in numerous other places, and that their number was considerable (“Istoriya Tatishcheva,” ii., note 176). Unfortu- nately there isno other source to corroborate Tatish- chev’s statement, as Harkavy has already pointed out (“Voskhod,” 1881, i.). Gatzuk mentions the current traditions according to which settlements of Jews in the vicinity of Kiev existed in the tenth century. In the eleventh cen- tury Jews from Germany settled in Kiev. When Russia celebrated the one thousandth anniversary of the founding of Kiev (1865), the Jews in an ad- dress mentioned that Jews had lived in Russia be- fore the empire was founded. During the reign of Vladimir (d. 1015) and under Svyatopolk after him the Jews lived in Kiev undisturbed. The first bishop appointed by Yaroslav, in 1085, was called “Lucas, the Little Jew” (“Luka Zhidyata”), who evidently was either of Jewish descent or had some connection with the history of the Jews in Kiev. He always preferred in his teachings to dwell on the Decalogue, and often used Biblical quotations common among the Talmudic Jews (Harkavy, in “Voskhod,” 1881, i. 78). A Russian cleric, Philaret, in a review of Russian theological literature (in “Uchonyya Zapiski II Ot- delyeniya Akademii Nauk,” iii. 8, St. Petersburg, 1865), remarks that from the work of Illarion of Kiev it is evident that the Jewish missionaries from the Chazars, who had failed to convert him to Ju- daism, did not relinquish their hope of making proselytes among the Russians. Feodosi Pecherski (1057-74) certifies to the existence of a considerable Jewish community in Kiev in his time. During the reign of Grand Duke Izyaslav, the bazaar of Kiev was removed from the lower part of the city (* Podol”) to the Kiev heights, where the Jews were settled. At that time the Jewish community was augmented by new arrivals, probably driven from Germany and other western countries by the perse- cutions of the Jews immediately before the First Crusade. In 1097 the Jews of Kiev are mentioned in connection with the salt monopoly, when Svyato- polk closed the road from Galicia and the Jews in- creased the price of salt (Zakrevski, 2b. p. 28; Malishevski, 7d. p. 102). Benjamin of Tudela (12th cent.), in his “Massa‘ot shel Rabbi Binyamin,” re- fers to Kiev. In the “Sefer ha-Yashar” (pp. 52a, 522, Vienna, 1811) Rabbi Moses of Kiev is mentioned as one of the pupils of the tosafist Jacob Tam (d. 1170), the grandson of Rashi. This shows that in the twelfth century Russian Jews studied at the famous Tal- mudic academies of northern France. It is known that the Russian Grand Duke Svyato- In the polk (1098-1112) held the Jews of Twelfth Kiev in favor. After his death, the Century. rabble revolted against his widow and the supporters of her husband and at- tacked the Jews of Kiev (11138), but Vladimir Mono- mach induced the rioters to disperse. In 1124 the Jewish quarter in Kiev was destroyed by fire. In the “Ipatiev Chronicle” the “Jewish Gate” is men- tioned (1146 and 1151). From facts collected from different sources it is quite evident that in the twelfth century Kiev was the center of trade be- tween the Eastand the West, and that the Jews and the Italians controlled most of it. From the his- tories of South Russia it appears that Jews lived in Kiev in the thirteenth century, but when in 1289 the Tatars overwhelmed the southwestern cities of Rus- sia and destroyed them the Jews shared the fate of the other inhabitants. In the following year (Dec. 6, 1240) Batu Khan captured and destroyed Kiev, which resulted in the subjection of Russia to the Tatar yoke. The Jews of Kiev suffered with the rest of the inhabitants, but when the “ Grand Khan,” after conquering South Russia, appointed the Rus- sian Prince Daniil Romanovich as the regent of Kiev and South Russia, Daniil called (1259) Germans, Jews, Poles, and other foreigners to settle in Kiev. His son Mstislav Daniilovich also invited Germans and Jews to settle in his land. That Vladimir Vasil- kovich also favored the Jews is evident from the fact that, according to the chronicles, in 1288 they were among those that lamented his death “as much as they had lamented the capture of Jerusa- lem.” Kiev being a Tatar dependency at that time, the Jews there were allowed the privileges given them in other Tatar countries, and for this reason the other inhabitants of Kiev were ill-disposed toward the Jews. When the Lithuanian Grand Duke Gedimin (d. 1825) conquered (c. 1820) South Russia, including Kiev, and founded the Lithuanian Russian empire, the Jews received many privileges (Solovyev, “ His- tory,” book i., part iv., ch. iii.). According to Zak- revski (2d. ii. 216), the number of Jews in Kiev at that time increased considerably. During the reign of Withold (1892-1430), who granted privileges to all the Jews of Lithuania, they enjoyed great pros- perity. Casimir IV. (1444-92) granted them addi- tional privileges, knowing that through their com- 489 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kiev Ss a a a a ee mercial skill they would replenish his depleted funds (Zakrevski, J.c. ii. 818). In 1486 Mordecai Gadaye- vich and Perka Yudinovich, Jews of Kiev, are mentioned as the farmers of the customs duties at Bryansk. In 1488 the Jewish tax-farmers Simkha, Rya- bichka, Daniilovich, and Samodyelka are mentioned in a message of Czar Ivan Vasillivich to King Casi- mir, in which the czar complains that the Moscow merchants were taxed too heavily (“Sbornik Imp. Istoricheskavo Obschestva,” xxxv. 10-12). About 1425 the Jupaizinc Heresy originated among the Russians in Kiev, and spread thence In the to Novgorod and Moscow through Fifteenth Zechariah of Kiev, who went from Century. Kiev to Novgorod in the suite of the Prince Mikhail Alelkovich (Solovyev, 7b. book i., part v., ch. v.; see ALEKSETI). In the fifteenth century the Jewish community of Kiev contained many scholars, and the saying became current that “from Kiev learning is spread.” Among these scholars was Moses ben Jacob Ash- kenazi ha-Gole (b. 15th Kislew, 1449; d. Kaffa 1529). He wrote in Kiev his notes to “Gan ‘Eden ” and his work “Shushan Sodot.” When the Jews were expelled from Lithuania by Alexander Jagel- lon in 1495, Moses ha-Gole with the rest of the Kiev Jews emigrated to the Crimea. As is evident from the statement of Abraham ha-Rofe of Troki, the Tatars invaded and plundered Kiev (1482) and car- ried many Jewish captives to the Crimea. In the sixteenth century (according to Zakrevski, 7b. ii. 817) Jews lived in Kiev in great numbers. Zakrevski mentions also the grant to them by King Sigismund I. of Poland of a tract of land for burial purposes near the gate of Lvov, formerly known as the “Jewish Gate,” by the bazaar which is even now called the “Jewish Bazaar.” The Jewish quarter was at that time in the portion of the city known as “Stary-Gorod,” extending as far as the Kudrya- vetz Hill. By a deed dated Cracow, March 4, 1507, King Sigismund farmed out the taxes of Kiev to the Jew Shamak Daniilovich, who farmed the taxes also of Lutsk and other places. In the same year Abraham Jesofovich is mentioned as tax-collector of Kiev ; he was made a member of the hereditary nobil- ity. In the latter half of the sixteenth century the condition of the Jews of Kiev underwent a change for the worse. Thus in 1576 King Stephen Bathory had to remind the waywode of Kiev, Prince Ostrov- ski, not to place foreign merchants, Christians as well as Jews, under the jurisdiction of the local cas- tle court, since, according to the Magdeburg Rights granted to them by Alexander, they were under the jurisdiction of the municipal authorities. The for- eigners had no right to conduct a retail business in Kiev, for that right belonged only to the citizens of Kiev (“Sbornik Mukhanova,” No. 221; “Acty Za- padnoi Rossii,” iii. 97). In 1585 the noblemen of the Greek Orthodox faith made a complaint before the Metropolitan of Kiev about the disorder reigning in his bishopric, and petitioned him to protect their coreligionists from the oppressions of the Roman Catholics and the Jews (“ Acty Zapadnoi Rossii,” iii. 88, Govorskavo, 1865). In 1618, and again in 1619, the merchants of Kiev made complaint to King Sigismund III. that the Jewish merchants who arrived in Kiev did not stay at the “Gostinny Dom” (the inn as- During the signed to them) and trade with other Sixteenth outside merchants; that they had and Seven- built houses in Kiev, had taken the teenth local trade in their hands, and were Centuries. getting rich at the expense of the local merchants. In response to this petition the king decided that as the frontier town of Kiev would be protected, not by Jews, who would do nothing to repel the enemy, but by the Ukrainian merchants, and since Jews had not before lived in Kiev, where they had no right to live, “they must henceforth stay at the town inn to trade exclusively with local merchants; that they may not remain more than one day; and that they may not settle there permanently, on penalty of losing their mer- chandise, half of which would be turned over to the crown and the other half to the merchant gild of the place.” Notwithstanding these restrictions and the privileges granted the Christian merchants, the Jews gained possession of the most important trade of Kiev and other South-Russian cities. Being ex- cluded from participation in the affairs of the city by the Magdeburg Rights, the Jews were placed directly under the jurisdiction of the waywode. In the frequent absence of this official his power reposed in his assistant, who regarded it as a source of in- come; in this way the Jews managed to attain their ends in spite of the restrictions (“Starozytnosci Polskie,” ii. 257). In 1628 a decree of Sigismund III. in part con- firmed the decision of the Kiev municipal court in the suit of the Jew Missan Josephovich, the farmer of the water-taxes, against the burgher Khmel for unpaid water-taxes. By this decision Missan’s de- mands were partly allowed, and Khmel appealed to the king, who confirmed the decision of the court. It is well known that, notwithstanding the restric- tions imposed upon them, Jews lived in considerable numbers in Kiev during the first half of the seven- teenth century, owning lands, houses, and factories there (Zakrevski, 7d. ii. 315). The uprising under Chmielnicki destroyed the Jewish community in Kiev. Samuel Phoebus, the author of “Tit ha-Yawen,” is the only Jewish wri- ter who mentions Kiev among the cities which suf- fered in the Chmielnicki uprising. He states that Chmielnicki went to the “great city Ruined by of Kiev,” where he found a man Chmiel- named Etiezer who was very wealthy nicki. (“like Korah”); that the Cossacks killed him and his family and took all his property. From Russian sources it is known that Chmielnicki and his Cossacks raged in Kiev for four days and killed off most of the Poles and the Jews. Even the graves in the cemeteries were opened and the bones thrown to the dogs. Only those Jews and Poles who had hidden in the vaults of the Greek Orthodox monasteries escaped death (Solovyev, 7. ii., book x., ch. iii.). According to the truce concluded by Chmielnicki with King John Casimir, the Jews were not to be permitted to live in Kiev or in the Ukraine. In the peace agreement made in 1661 at Byelaya Tzerkoy, the king de- Kiev Kihaya THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 490 manded that the Jews be allowed to return to the Ukraine and to own property in Kiev. The Jews returned accordingly, but Chmielnicki soon turned over the Ukraine to Czar Alexis Mikhailovich, and they were again driven out from Kiev and the Ukraine. Thus from 1655 until near the end of the eighteenth century only a small number of Jews were to be found in Kiev, or in any part of the Ukraine. Toward the end of the reign of Catherine IL., by an order dated June 23, 1794, Jews were again per- mitted to settle in Kiev, and even to acquire prop- erty, conditionally, however, on their paying double the tax imposed on the Christians. From that year the Jews began to resettle in Kiev, and in the reign of Catherine’s son Paul Petrovich the Jewish com- munity numbered 452. At that time Judah Léb Lowenberg was granted by the governor-general Sherkov a tract of land for a cemetery; the gov- ernor-general, upon his representations, gave per- mission also for the building of asynagogue. The tract known as “Zwyerinetz,” just outside of Pe- chersk, was assigned for a cemetery. At that time also a hebra kaddisha was organized and a constitu- tion adopted (1797 or 1798). Among those resting in the old Kiev cemetery may be mentioned Meir Lebush Malbim and Raphael Nata Rabbinovicz, author of the “ Dikduke Soferim.” With the accession to the throne of Alexander I. Jews were permitted to reside in Kiev unhindered by any restrictions. They were registered by the city magistrates with other citizens and received passportsfromthem. Asthe Jews increased rapidly the Christian citizens of. Kiev petitioned the govern- ment in 1810 to expel them, claiming that the privileges granted to the citi- zens of Kiev by Sigismund in 1619 excluded the Jews from residence in Kiev. Notwithstanding this petition and the money spent in its furtherance by the citizens (see Baratz, “Den,” iii., No. 22), their attempts were not success- ful, The reply which they received (Jan. 18, 1810) pointed out that in the fifteen years which had elapsed since the permission of settlement by Catherine the Great the Jews had acquired property, and that justice did not permit the government to expel them, since they would thereby have lost their pos- sessions: it is the business of government to see that justice is done between man and man. The con- flicts between the Jews and Christians of Kiev were found by the government to be due more often to the Christians than to the Jews, and the administra- tion of Kiev was ordered to see that no disturbances occurred between Jew and Gentile (¢b.). The anti- Semites of Kiev made no further complaint for the time being. In 1815 the Jewish population of Kiev numbered 4,500, and then a synagogue was built by special permission of theemperor. At the head of the Jew- ish community at that time stood Judah Léb ben Jacob Lowenberg, Ozer ben Bezaleel Rosenfeld, and Zeeb ben Abraham Segal. At the head of the hebra kaddisha was Moses ben Abraham. Beside the syn- agogue, the Jewish community built at that time two large houses of prayer, one on the Podol near the Prolovski monastery, and the other on the Pe- chersk, not far from the synagogue that burned down Under Al- exander I. in 1829 (Zakrevski, 2d. ii. 316). When Nicholas I. ascended the throne in 1825 he withdrew from the Jews the right of residence in Astrakhan and the concessions granted them in 1804 by Alexander I. The Christian inhabitants of Kiev availed them- selves of the opportunity to petition the czar to expel the Jews from Kiev, basing their petition on the same ground as in 1810; the petition was granted, and a ukase was issued by Nicholas on Dec. 2, 1827. It reads as follows: “*(1) Jews are strictly prohibited from building any house of prayer in Kiey, and the old building is to be sold at auction at once; (2) Jews who are registered with the city magistrates of Kiey must immediately leave the city and register in some town inside of the Pale. Those Jews who have residences, business houses, or factories in Kiev are given two years in which to settle their affairs; all the others to leave the city within six months.”’ The governor-general Zheltukhin did all he could to render unbearable the life of the Jews remaining in Kiev; the latter, however, applied Under tothe czar through two of their prom- Nicholas I. inent merchants, Berner and Kerner, and received permission to settle out- side the city limits in the village of Lyebed; and through the efforts of the new governor-general, Levashev, who pointed out their usefulness in the development of commerce in Kiev, the czar was in- duced to write in hisown hand a permit for them to stay until Feb., 1835, but he withdrew permission from them to settle in Lyebed. When Feb. 1, 1835, arrived, the Jews, who had hoped for a change for the better, were greatly disappointed. The admin- istration would make no further concessions, and they were compelled to leave Kiev immediately and to sell their property for whatever they could get. Exception was made only in favor of the few Jewish contractors who had built the fortress of Kiev and the University of St. Vladimir. The next governor-general, Bibikov, watched carefully to see that no Jews settled in Kiev. He organized a special gendarmerie to look after the Jews who came there on business, and who re- ceived permits to stay only from one to five days. To facilitate police supervision, two exclusively Jewish hotels were established, one in the Podol and the other in the Lyebedskaya; and all incoming Jews were compelled to stay in oneof thetwo. The guests were obliged to pay exorbitant prices for food and drink, and the hotel-keepers, both Chris- tians, could afford to pay the heavy license, which was soon raised from 3,600 to 6,500 rubles. When a Jew was found in the city without a permit to reside there he was dealt with as a criminal without passport. At ten in the evening every Jewish guest was obliged to return to the hotel, where as many as ten would be crowded into one room, and when the time of departure came the hotel servants would rudely hurry them out. In 1856, about a year after Alexander IT. ascended the throne, the condition of the Jews throughout Russia began to improve, and those of Kiev, in particular, felt the liberal spirit of the new legisla- tion. The regulation requiring incoming Jews to stay at specified hotels was abolished and Jewish artisans were permitted to establish themselves in the city. Prince Vasilchikov, the governor-general, 491 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kiev Kihaya 0 ee ee ee ae ee, ee ee ee and Hesse, the civil governor of Kiev, advocated warmly the amelioration of the Jews’ condition, and the abolition of Jewish disabilities in so far as circum- stances would permit. An edict was issued Oct. 80, 1861, which made it permissible for Jewish gradu- ates of universities, Jewish merchants of the first gild, and foreign Jewish merchants, with their fam- ilies, clerks, and servants, to establish themselves in Kiev. The community of Kiev received a still larger accession through the ukase of 1866, which granted Jewish artisans the right to Under Al- reside outside the Pale. The prosper- exander II. ity of the Jewish community added materially to the prosperity of the en- tire city. The activity of the Jewish merchants of Kiev stimulated the development of the sugar in- dustry. Kiev became a prominent sugar market and an important general commercial center. Its Jewish merchants played a leading part in the es- tablishment of banks, stimulated the development of navigation on the Dnieper, increased the export trade in grain, and thereby conferred a direct bene- fit on the farming communities of the entire govern- ment. This prosperity continued until the outbreak of the anti-Jewish riots in South Russia. On May 8, 1881 (April 26) anti-Jewish riots broke out in Kiev, as. they had elsewhere, and there is sufficient evi- dence to show that the riots were premeditated. Prominent members of the Jewish community had been warned personally by Von Hiibbenct, the chief of police, who advised them to take measures for their protection, and even offered, in some cases, to place cannon at their doors. Rumors that anti-Jew- ish riots were being planned were circulated in Kiev several weeks before Easter, and Von Hiibbenet him- self had informed members of the community that a trainload of Great Russians, all wearing red shirts, had arrived in the city, the purpose of their coming being the organization of the riots. The police in the synagogues on May 7 thought it would not be safe for the Jews to keep their stores open on the following day. When the outbreak began on that day the police and military were evidently in sympathy with the rioters, and some of the Chris- tian merchants looked on with pleasure while prop- erty valued at about 2,000,000 rubles was being destroyed. This does not take into account the enormous loss incurred through the enforced idleness of the Jewish artisans. Not content with the de- struction of stores and houses, the rioters attacked the synagogue and tore into shreds the scrolls of the Law. Thousands were rendered homeless, men once wealthy were reduced to poverty and despair, and many were seriously injured. In all 3,150 persons, or 750 families, were reduced to absolute want, - among them being 403 families of artisans and la- borers. The riots spread to the neighboring towns and villages, particularly Smyela, where 20 Jews were killed and 40 wounded. The riots were followed by repressive police measures—directed against the victims of the riots. The military tribunal, whose duty it was to examine the persons accused of attacking the Jews, openly sympathized with the suspects instead. The pro- cureur général, Major Strielnikov, repeatedly evaded his duty during the trials, and instead of raising his voice against the authors of the disorders spoke against the victims. He went so far on one occa- sion as to express a desire to see all the Jews driven over the frontier. The openly expressed wish of the procureur général was followed by numerous expulsions, by the police, of Kiev Jews. A depu- tation of Jews from Demiyevka, a suburb of Kiev, which went toseek the intervention of Drenteln, the governor-general, was dismissed with the sneering remark that they were at liberty to emigrate to Jerusalem if not satisfied with existing conditions. A member of the deputation retorting that they could not even leave the country without the per- mission of the government, the governor-general replied hastily that the government was quite ready to grant the authorization. The measures of the police authorities led to the emigration of a considerable number of Jews from Kiev and vicinity in July and August of the same year (1881). Some of these were enrolled as mem- bers of the first Jewish agricultural colony estab- lished in Louisiana in the fall of 1881. Forced emi- grations continued throughout the latter part of 1881 and during 1882, and factory employees and ar- tisans were continually expelled by the police with- out any authorization by existing laws. The emi- gration assumed much larger proportions after the issue of the “May Laws” in 1882. Since 1881 the condition of the Jews in Kiev has not improved. c= = ee == Awe by His throne is; Dreadround His throne is; Glo - ry His throne is; ms m Judg-ment His throne is; Tis seem - ly God a - lone to praise: Mire cy His throne is; Power at His throne is; Splen-dor His throne is; Vig - or His throne is; ee 5 , a a Pea = oa] = Eeyare Sees : Blest He a - lone is His cho - sen ones End - less a - lone is His faith - ful ones High He a - lone is His in - no- cents King He a - lone is His lov - ing ones : cons No - ble a - lone is His own great hosts/ loud the chant raise, Tis Quick-’ner a - lone is His right - eous ones Truth He a - lone is His up - right ones Wise He a - lone is His zeal - ous ones Lord, tis Thine, yea, ly Thine; O centuries both hymns have been used together on each occasion. Somewhat similarly to “ Addir Hu,” “Ki lo Na’eh” is constructed in eight stanzas, iden- tical save for the three varying words which suc- cessively bear as their initialsthe twenty-two (or, with the last thrice utilized, twenty-four) letters of the Hebrew alphabet. In strange contrast to “ Addir Hu,” “Kilo Na’eh” has been associated with but one all-pervading tune, despite the melodious value of several of the airs to which it has been traditionally sung. The melody in Rittangel’s “Haggadah” of 1644 is the eS SS Lord, the King-dom Thine own is. KIMBERLEY. See Soutn Arrica. KIMHI: Name of a family of scholars, the ear- liest known members of which lived at the end of the eleventh andin the twelfthcentury. The name was so common that it was used by R. Michael in his “Seder ha-Get” as a paradigm word. It is evident- ly not unconnected with the feminine form “ Kim- hit ” in the Talmudic literature (see Yer. Meg. i. 72a; “Ben Kimhit” and “Simeon b. Kimhit,” Yer. Yo- ma, iii. 47d, v. 42b; “Ishmael b. Kimhit,” Tosef., Yoma, p. 189, 1. 18 [ed. Zuckermandel]). In a pun- Kimhi THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 494 ning way it is connected by Zacuto (“Sefer Yu- hasin,” p. 225, ed. London) with the verse in Pirke Abot, “Im en Kemah en Torah,” and Joseph b. Todros wittily calls David Kimhi “ Ha-Hitti.” Ina manuscript of the commentary of David Kimhi to the Prophets, dated 1347, in the National Library at Madrid, the name is punctuated “Kamhi” (Stein- schneider, “Hebr. Bibl.” xi. 138), as also in three manuscripts of the “ Miklol ” in the Bibliothéque Na- tionale of Paris. ‘This must have been the pronun- ciation in Arabic-speaking countries (from the Ara- bic “Kamh”). Steinschneider has called attention to the Arabic name “ Al-Kamhi” found ina Bodleian manuscript (“Monatsschrift,” xxxiv. 528). The Hebrew pronunciation was “Kimbi” (from “ Ke- mah”), as was perhaps indicated by the fact that Immanuel of Rome rimed it with “Simhi” (see the discussion in the “Athenreum,” March 22, 1884; “Hebraica,” ii. 116; B. Felsenthal, in the Kohut Memorial Volume, p. 126). The modern Italian form of the name is “Chimichi.” In Provence the name “ Petit” was added to “ Kimhi.” From Spain and Provence the family spread into Italy, Turkey, Syria, and England. The genealogy of its remotest members runs as follows: Isaac (¢. 1090); Joseph (e. 1125); David (c. 1160); Isaac; Mordecai (¢. 1290); Solomon (¢. 1800); Joseph; Isaac (¢. 1400). The more important of the later members of the family are noted below, in alphabetic order: Abraham Kimhi: Rabbi in Constantinople (1710-20; see Roest, “Cat. Rosenthal. Bibl.” i. 265, 524, 579, 986). Benjamin Kimhi: Printerand editor at Salonica about 1770. He edited and annotated the “Sha‘are Rahamim” of Hayyim ha-Kohen and Solomon Ab- badi (Nepi-Ghirondi, “Toledot Gedole Yisrael,” p. 62; Benjacob, “ Ozar ha-Sefarim,” p. 605, No. 1189). Conprado (?) Kimhi: Rabbi in Constantinople during the first half of the eighteenth century. Frankl identifies him with the Samuel Kimhi men- tioned in the “Shem ha-Gedolim.” G. David Kimhi (ReDaK; surnamed Maistre Petit): French grammarian; born in Narbonne 1160; died there 1285; youngest son of Joseph Kimhi, and brother of Moses Kimhi. His father having died while David was yet a child, the latter was brought up by his elder brother Moses, Later he supported himself by teaching Talmud to the young. He was well versed in the whole range of Hebrew literature, and became the most illustrious representative of his name. Later generations ap- plied to him the saying from Abot (iii. 21), “ With- out kemah [= “flour,” the etymon of the name “Kimhi”] no Torah”; and he exerted an influence which is felt even to-day. Kimhi’s most important work is his “ Miklol,” in two parts: the first containing a comprehensive ex- position of Hebrew grammar; the sec- As Gram- ond, a dictionary of the Bible. The marian. second part, however, having been later considered as a separate work, un- der the title “Sefer ha-Shorashim,” the title “ Miklol ” has been given exclusively to the grammar. In these works Kimhi, while not original, can not be considered a mere compiler. He digested and as- similated his material most thoroughly; and every- where there is evident the remodeling and rearran- ging hand of one who is conversant with the entire range of his science and who surveys the whole with the glance of an adept. Above all he possesses in a high degree the power of systematization and of popular exposition. He excerpted from his prede- cessors copiously and circumspectly, and arranged his material with such comprehensiveness, clearness, and lucidity of exposition that, while he popular- ized the opinions of his illustrious forerunners, he at the same time made their works superfluous and helped to sink them into an oblivion from which they were not rescued until the nineteenth century. Kimhi was, however, conscious of his position as an epigone, as is evident from his short preface to the “Miklol.” His grammatical material is drawn chiefly from the works of Hayyuj and Ibn Janah and from the writings of his own father. He tries to understand the language from itself, seeking analogies in later Hebrew, less frequently in Aramaic and Arabic. Joseph Caspi and Profiat Duran fre- quently attack him, but Elisha b. Abraham defends him in his work “Magen Dawid” (Constantinople, 1517). The “ Institutiones” and the “ Thesaurus” of Sanctus Pagninus are essentially nothing else but elaborations of Kimhi’s “ Miklol”; and Reuchlin and Sebastian Miinster have also made considerable use of his work. The latest important work on Hebrew grammar, by E. Konig, is written “with constant reference to Kimhi.” Also connected with grammar is Kimhi’s work ““Et Sofer,” containing rules for the writing of Bible-rolls, Masgoretic notes, and accents. His “Book of Roots,” the second part of the “Miklol,” shows Kimhi to be even more independ- ent. Although based primarily on the As Lexi- dictionary of Ibn Janah, he is quite cographer. self-reliant in the treatment of his sub- ject. Besides Ibn Janah he quotes as authorities Jacob b. Eleazar and his own father. He refers frequently in his dictionary to Masorah and grammar. He increased lexicological material through numerous fresh etymologies as well as through new comparisons with modern Hebrew and Aramaic. Many words he translates into his Pro- ven¢al vernacular, and at times compares this latter with Hebrew. Kimhi wrote commentaries on Genesis, the Proph- ets, the Psalms, and Chronicles. Some scholars ascribe to him also commentaries on As the remaining books of the Bible. He Exegete. wrote, too, a philosophic explanation of the cosmogony and of Ezekiel’s vi- sion. In the introduction to his commentary on the Prophets he explains the duty of expounding the Bible from a religious standpoint. In a general way he adheres to the literal meaning of Scripture; and — his exegesis is based on grammar and rationality. At times, however, he introduces into his expla- nations philosophy; and some Biblical narratives he, following Maimonides, explains as visions. His commentary on the Psalms is especially noted for its polemics against Christianity. The numerous quotations from the Targumim scattered through- out his writings furnish valuable material for a fu- 495 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kimbi ture critical edition of these works. In the Middle Ages Kimhi’s commentaries were held in high repute among Christians as well as Jews, and nu- merous Latin translations were made of them: the influence of his commentaries on the English Bible is evident on every page (comp. Abrahams, “Jewish Life in the Middle Ages,” ch. xix.). Besides his commentaries he wrote “ Bi’ur Shemot ha-Nebu’ah ” and “ Bi’ur Sheloshah ‘Asar ‘Ikkarim.” Kimhi’s polemics against Christianity, contained in his commentary on the Psalms, were, after they had been omitted by the censor in later As Contro- prints, published separately under the versialist. title “Teshubot la-Nozerim.” His ““Wikkuah,” against Christianity, is contained in “Milhemet Hobah” (Constantinople, 1790). In the quarrel between the Maimonists and the anti-Maimonists, Kimhi took a very active part, defending Maimonides. At an advanced age he traveled as a delegate from the cities of Lunel and Narbonne to Spain to induce the Jewish communi- ties there to side with the Maimonists. Having fallen sick in A vila he could not complete his journey, and entered into correspondence with Judah al- Fakhkhar, but with little success. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. i. and iii., No. 495: Stein- schneider, Cat. Bodl. No. 4821; De Rossi-Hamberger, Hist. Worterb. pp. 164 et seqg.; Geiger, Ozar Nehmad, ii. 157 et seq.; P. F. Frankl, in Ersch and Gruber, Mnicyc. section ii., art 86, p. 54; Schiller-Szinessy, in Hncyc. Brit. 9th ed., xiv. 4; J. Tauber, Standpunkt und Leistung des R. David Kimchi als Grammatiker, Breslau, 1867; W. Bacher, in Winter and Wiinsche, Die Jiidische Litteratur, ii. 191 et seq.; E. Bliith, in Berliner’s Magazin, xviii. 269 et seq. (gives a comparison of the Miklol with Joseph Kimhi’s Sefer Zikka- ron); Miklol, 1st ed. 1525, in Italy; with notes by Elijah Le- vita, Venice, 1544-45; with notes by Hechim also, Fiirth, 1793, and, with additional notes by J. Rittenberg, Lyck, 1862; a new edition is being prepared by H. L. Strack; Agatho Guidacerio, Liber Miklol (gives the first section of the gram- mar, fols. 1-28, in vocalized text with a Latin translation); ‘Et Sofer, Lyck, 1864; Eppenstein, in Monatsschrift, xli. 165 et seq. (gives a list of Kimhi’s original comparisons of Hebrew and Arabic words); Sefer ha-Shorashim, first ed. in Italy, n.d., nk (before 1480); with the notes of Elijah Levita, Ven- ice, 1546 (the best edition is that by J. H. R. Biesenthal and F. Lebrecht, Berlin, 1847) ; W. Bacher, in Winter and Winsche, l.c. ii. 806 et seqg.; Luzzatto, Kerem Hemed, v. 26; Briill’s Yahvrb. vii. 116. Commentaries: Genesis, ed. A. Ginzburg, Presburg, 1842; Harlier Prophets, ist ed. Guadalaxara, 1482; Later Prophets, Soncino, 1485; Psalms, Bologna, 1477 (a crit- ical edition of the First Book of Psalms was edited by M.S. Schiller-Szinessy, Cambridge, 1883); Chronicles, in the Rab- binic Bible, ed. 1547; the Haftarot, 1505. Allcommentaries, except the last two, are given in all rabbinic Bibles since 1516 with various omissions. On the question of a commen- tary to Job, comp. A. Geiger’s Jiid. Zeit. vii. 145; against it, Frankl, Monatsschrift, 1885, p. 144; Graetz, Hist. of the Jews, Eng. transl., Index; Briill’s Jahrb. iv. 1-83; Teshubot la-Nozerim, at the end of Kimhi’s commentary to Psalms, Isny, 1542, at the end of Lippmann’s Nizgzahon, Altorf, 1644, and frequently. G. Ca David Kimhi: Lived in France about 1350; for him Moses b. David Kimhi (see below) wrote, in 1383, Vatican Manuscript No. 221, 4 (Steinschneider, “Hebr. Bibl.” xi. 185). David Kimhi: Lived in Constantinople prior to 1738. David b. Joseph Kimhi: Lived at Frascati, Italy, in 1326 (Berliner’s “ Magazin,” i. 45). Flaminio Kimhi: Died in Rome in 1717; his epitaph was published by Berliner in “Monats- schrift ” (xxxiv. 382) and in “ Hildesheimer Jubel- schrift ” (p. 105). Hayyim Kimhi: Father of Sinai Kimhi; rabbi in Constantinople about 1700. Isaac Kimhi: Lived in Castiglione, Italy, about 1378 (see Buber, “Sifre de-Agudta,” p. 1b, Wilna, 1880; Berliner, in “ Monatsschrift,” xxxiv. 882). Isaac b. David Kimhi: Rabbi in Constanti- nople, where, in 1736, he wrote an approbation for the “ Reshit Hokmah ” (Roest, /.c. p. 337). Isaac b. Joseph Kimhi: Lived in Arles in 1394 (Gross, “Gallia Judaica,” p. 89). Isaac b. Joseph Kimhi: Lived in Arles about 1393 (see Gross in “ Monatsschrift,” xxix. 174). Isaac b. Mordecai Kimhi: Casuist and litur- gist at Nyons (France) during the fourteenth cen- tury; known also as Mestre Petit de Nyons. He was the author of a responsum, of “azharot” found in the Avignon and in the Carpentras mah- zors, and of a commentary upon the azharot of Solomon ibn Gabirol. A number of responsa of Sol- omon b. Adret are addressed to Isaac. He is said to have written other Talmudic works, and is in general highly spoken of by his contemporaries (see Zunz, “Z. G.” p. 466; Landshuth, “‘Ammude ha-‘Abodah,” p. 124; Renan-Neubauer, “Les Rabbins Francais,” p. 680; Gross, “Gallia Judaica,” p. 885). Isaiah Solomon Kimhi: Rabbi about 1783. Israel Kimhi: Author of “‘Abodat Yisrael” (Smyrna, 1736), of an explanation of the ‘Abodah of the Day of Atonement, and of a responsum found in “Mayim Rabbim ” (see Azulai, “Shem ha-Gedolim,” ii. 50; Benjacob, “Ozar ha-Sefarim,” p. 427). in Hebron Jacob Kimhi: Hebraist and pedler; born at Constantinople 1720; died in London about 1800; a son of Samuel Kimhi, and a descendant of the an- cient and noted family of Kimhi. He was a well- known character in the city of London, where, asan itinerant vender of Oriental slippers, he frequented the vicinity of the Royal Exchange. Kimhi was the author of “Shoshannat Ya‘akob,” a commentary on the tractates Bezah and Ta‘anit (Constantinople, 1748). His portrait was painted by Oseas Humphreys (1799), who was attracted by Kim- hi’s picturesque appearance. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, s.v. np Sximw ; Leisure Hour, London, Aug., 1886; Cat. Anglo-Jewish Hist. Ewh. p. 54. af 8. Le. Joseph b. Isaac Kimhi (RIKaM; surnamed Maistre Petit): Grammarian, exegete, poet, and translator; born in southern Spain about 1105; died about 1170. Forced to leave his native country ow- ing to the religious persecutions of the Almohades, he settled in Narbonne, Provence, where he prob- ably spent the rest of his life. The report that he was buried in Mayence deserves no credit. He lived in poor circumstances, and in addition to his literary labors he was active as a teacher. Of his many students the names of only a few have come down. Besides his own son Moses there are mentioned R. Joseph ibn Zabarah, R. Menahem b. Simon of Posquiéres, and R. Solomon b. Isaac ha- Nesiah. His son David, though but a child at the time of his father’s death, may also be considered one of Kimhi’s pupils, either directly through his works, or indirectly through the instruction he (David) received from his elder brother Moses. Abraham ibn Ezra, who in his wanderings visited Kimhi THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 496 eee Narbonne in 1160, must have met Joseph. The lat- ter followed Ibn Ezra in some particulars, ¢.g., in the use of the stem 9w for the paradigm of the verb. Ibn Ezra, on the other hand, quotes Kimhi in his commentaries on the Bible. Both scholars worked at the same time and along Relations the same lines to popularize Judzo- with Arabic science among the Jews of Ibn Ezra. Christian Europe by excerpting from and translating Arabic works. Al- though Ibn Ezra was Kimhi’s superior in knowl- edge, the latter can rightly claim to have been the first successful transplanter of Judso-Arabic sci- ence in the soil of Christian Europe. His diction is elegant and lucid, the disposition of his material scientific, his treatment of his subject even and without digressions; so that his works are much better adapted for study than those of Ibn Ezra, which lack all these qualifications. Another famous contemporary of Kimhi was R. Jacob b. Meir, surnamed “R. Tam,” of Ramerupt, who was the greatest Talmudic authority of the day. This scholar, wishing to settle the literary quarrel between the followers of Menahem b. Saruk and of Dunash b. Labrat, had written a book of “hakra‘ot” (decisions), in which he took the part of Menahem. These decisions did not satisfy Kimhi; and, feeling himself better able than R. Tam to pass judgment in the case, he wrote (1165) his “Sefer ha-Galui.” This work falls into two parts: the first treats of the differ- ences between Menahem and Dunash; the second contains independent criticisms on the former’s dic- tionary. In the introduction Kimhi apologizes for daring to come forward against so eminent a manas the leading Talmudic authority of his time. Hear- ing that the ignorant among the people will attack him on that account, he puts into their mouths the words which Abner, the captain of Saul, spoke, when David cried out to the king: “ Who art thou that criest to the king?” (I Sam. xxvi. 14). His fears were realized; for Benjamin of Canterbury, a pupil of R. Tam, made observations on the “Sefer ha-Galui,” defending his teacher. He also called Kimhi in a contemptuous sense “ Ha-Kore” (= “The Crier”), because the latter ventured to cry his con- tradictions to the “king,” ¢.¢e., R. Tam. In Kimhi’s grammatical works “Sefer Zikkaron ” (edited by Bacher, Berlin, 1888) and “Sefer ha- Galui” (edited by Matthews, 2b. 1887) he is depend- ent on Hayyuj for the treatment of his subject, but in his explanations of words he relies mainly on Ibn Janah. On the whole, he is not orig- As Gram- inal; in minor points, however, he marian and goes his own way, becoming therein Lexicog- the model for future generations. rapher. Thus he was the first to recognize that the hif‘il has also a reflexive and an intransitive meaning; he was also the first to arrange a list of nominal forms, to indicate eight verb classes, and to classify the vowels into a system of five short and five long ones. In his works he pays frequent attention also to the language of the liturgy. In his etymological explanations he seeks for analogies in Bible, Talmud, Targum, and in Arabic. In cases where such analogies are wanting or unsatisfactory R. Tam. he is guided by the principle, “The unknown must be deduced from the known.” Not seldom he ex- plains difficult words on the basis of phonetic laws laid down by himself. Of his exegetical works few have been preserved. Mention is made of his “Sefer ha-Torah,” a commen- tary on the Pentateuch; his “Sefer ha-Miknah,” a commentary on the Prophets; and his “ Hibbur ha- Leket,” of unknown contents. A commentary by him on Canticles exists in manuscript; his commentary on Proverbs has been published by Bar Dubrowo under the title “Sefer Hukkah” (Breslau, 1868) ; and variants to the badly printed text are given by Eppenstein in “Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl.” v. 148 e¢ seg. A fragment of his commentary on the Book of Job has been published by Schwarz in his “Tikwat Enosh” (Berlin, 1868); the remaining portions, by Eppenstein in “R. E. J.” xxxvii. 86 e¢ seg. Many exegetical remarks are scattered throughout Kim- hi’s grammatical works. His method is mostly that of the peshat, ¢.e., literal interpretation. He fre- quently follows the Spanish school, without, how- ever, reading into the Scriptural text the scientific knowledge of his own time. He pays a great deal of attention to the context, a point usually neglected by haggadists. Hisexplanations are short and terse. While criticizing at times some untenable explana- tions of his predecessors, he accepts such as seem to him to be correct. He is the first eclectic of the Provencal school of exegetes. Kimhi tried his hand also at writing poetry. His liturgical hymns and other poems which have come down are indeed distinguished by beauty of form and elegance of language. In spirit, however, they can not be compared with the works of the great Spanish poets. Neverthe- less he retains importance as one of the Provencal poets. His poems met with consider- ation at the hands of later generations and were fre- quently quoted by them. He translated Bahya ibn Pakuda’s ethical work “ Hobot ha-Lebabot ” from Arabic into Hebrew; and he turned Ibn Gabirol’s “ Mibhar ha-Peninim ” into metrical form under the title “Shekel ha-Kodesh.” Of the translation only a fragment hasbeen preserved, which has been published by Jellinek As Trans- in Benjacob’s edition of Ibn Tibbon's lator. translation of that work (Leipsic, 1846); the “Shekel” is still unprinted. In his translation, aiming chiefly at elegance of expres- sion, Kimhi does not keep to the original. He works too independently and, carrying into the work his own spirit, he often obscures the thought of the author. Notwithstanding its defects, his transla- tion is not without merit. It has contributed to a better understanding of the Arabic authors, and is, therefore, to be considered in a certain sense as sup- plementing the works of the Tibbonides. Finally mention must be made of Kimhi’s apolo- getic work “Sefer ha-Berit,” a fragment of which was published in “Milhemet Hobah” (Constan- tinople, 1710). This work was written at the re- quest of one of his pupils who wished to have a collection of all the prophetic passages in Scripture that might serve as aids in refuting those persons As Exegete. As Poet. 497 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kimhi who denied the Torah. Itisin the form of a dialogue between a loyal Jew and an apostate. The loyal Jew claims that the true religion of As the Jew may be recognized by the Apologete. moral conduct of the individual; all Jews are intent on carrying out in their lives the Decalogue; they give no divine honors to any one besides God; do not perjure themselves; commit no murder; and are not robbers. Their children are educated in the fear of God; their women are chaste; the Jews are hospitable toward one another, perform works of charity, and redeem captives—all virtues which are not found in such a high degree among non-Jews. The apostate admits all these claims, but points out that Jews demand high interest on loans. This objection the loyal Jew mects with the statement that non-Jews also are usurers, and that they impose upon members of ‘heir own faith, while rich Jews lend money to their coreligionists without any interest whatever. The “Sefer ha-Berit” is of importance as showing the moral condition of the Jews at that time, and as bearing testimony to the conditions of those days, in which the Jews in the Provence could freely ex- press themselves not only with regard to their own religion, but also with regard to the religion of their neighbors. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bliith, in Berliner’s Magazin, xviii. eae 89; Eppenstein, in Monatsschrift, or yr xli. 88; R. XxxVii. 86; Zeit. fiir Hebr. Bibl. v. G. C. L. _ Joseph b. Saul Kimhi: Author of a commen- tary to the astronomical tables of Jacob Bonet (1361; Renan-Neubauer, “ Ecrivains Juifs,” p. 701). Judah Raphael Kimhi: Lived about 1671, in the East. A responsum of his is cited in Moses Benveniste’s “Pene Mosheh,” ii., § 123 (see Ben- jacob, J.c. p. 30). Mordecai b. Isaac Kimhi: Grandson of David Kimhi; lived in Provence toward the end of the thirteenth century. For him the cabalist Jacob b. Jacob ha-Kohen wrote his “ Perush ha-Otiyyot” (see Steinschneider, in “ Monatsschrift,” xxxiv. 528). Moses Kimhi: Father ofSamuel; perhaps iden- tical with Moses ha-Zaken Kimhi ; lived about 1342 in Sicily (see Zunz, “Z. G.” p. 516; Steinschneider, “Hebr. Bibl.” xi. 185). Moses b. Abraham Kimhi: His epitaph, dated Rome, 1726, has been published by Berliner, in “Monatsschrift ” (xxxiv. 382), and in the “ Hildes- heimer Jubelschrift ” (p. 105). Moses b. David Kimhi: Wrote the Vatican manuscript No. 221, 4, in 1883, in Rodez, France (Steinschneider, /.c. xi, 185). Moses b. Joseph Kimhi (ReMaK): Commen- tator and grammarian ; elder brother and teacher of David Kruut. He presumably lived together with his father and his brother in Narbonne, and must have died about 1190. The works of his which have been preserved are: commentaries on Proverbs, Ezra, and Nehemiah, printed in the rabbinic Bibles as the work of Abraham ibn Ezra; a commentary on Job, published by Schwarz in his “Tikwat Enosh” (Berlin, 1868); “Sekel Tob,” a grammatical treatise, published by Castelli in “R. E. J.” xxviii. VII.—82 212, xxix. 100; and “Mahalak Shebile ha-Da‘at,” the first concise methodical text-book of Hebrew grammar. His terminology deviates in some essen- tial points from that of his father, a phenomenon probably due to the influence of Ibn Ezra. As par- adigm for the verb appears here for the first time the verb “pakad”; also the following order of the conjugations: “kal,” “nif‘al,” “pi‘el,” “pu‘al,” “hifil,” “hof‘al,” “po‘el,” “hitpa‘el.” Both these innovations influenced the later text-books on He- brew grammar. Kimhi’s “Mahalak” became of importance in the first half of the sixteenth century, when it formed the shortest and most useful text-book for the study of Hebrew by non-Jews. It was edited many times, and was translated into Latin by Sebastian Miinster. Elijah Levita wrote annotations to it. Besides the works enumerated above, some liturgical poems of Kimhi’s have been preserved. Mention is made of his “Sefer Tahboshet,” probably a work on anoma- lous grammatical forms, and of “Ta‘anug Nefesh,” a work on ethics. BIBLIOGRAPHY: A. Geiger, in Ozar Nehmad, ii. 17-24; Stein- schneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1888; Lebrecht and Biesenthal, D. Kimhi’s Liber Radicum, col. xxxviii.; Bacher, in R. H. J. xxi. 281, xxix. 292; idem, in Winter and “Wiinsehe, Jiidische Li- teratur, ii. 198, 306; Dukes, in Ozar Nehmaa, : 101, 182; Orient, Lit. viii. 25, ix. 11; Epstein, in R. eek xx. 138; Lippmann, in Zion, ii. 1138; Reifmann, in Orient, Lit. li. 7503 Ha-Hoker, i. 43; Berliner, in Kobak’s Jeschurun, vi., Hebr. parte: Dp pee es 104; idem, in Magazin, i. 76, ix. 129; and Ozar ob, p. 3 a. Ca: Moses b. Nissim Kimhi: 1413. Nissim Joseph David Kimhi: Rabbi in Con- stantinople; died 1886; father of the author of “Meleket Shelomoh.” Samuel Kimhi: Wrote, in 1346, a philosophical and allegorical commentary to the “ Perek Shirah ” (Steinschneider, J.¢. xiii. 105). Samuel Kimhi: Rabbi in Constantinople in the time of Judah Rosanes (d. 1727). Some of his re- sponsa are to be found in Moses Israel’s “ Mas’at Mosheh ” (Constantinople, 1734; see Azulai, /.c.). Shabbethai Kimhi: His epitaph, dated Rome, 1712, is given by Berliner, in “ Monatsschrift ” (xxxiv. 382) and in “ Hildesheimer Jubelschrift ” (p, 105). Sinai b. Hayyim Kimhi: Edited the “Hid- dushe Rashba ” to Kiddushin (Constantinople, 1717). Solomon Kimhi: Great-grandson of David Kimhi; lived in Provence about 1300. Solomon Kimhi: Son of Nissim Joseph David Kimhi (see above). Lived in Rome in BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. F. Frankl, Die Familie Kimchi, in Mo- natsschrift, xxxili. 552 et seq. idem, in Ersch and Gruber, Encyc. section ii., part 36, pp. 54 et seg.; Berliner, in Monats- schrift, xxxiv. 382. G KIMHI, SOLOMON: Turkish rabbinical au- thor; lived at Constantinople in the middle of the nineteenth century. In 1862 he published “ Mele- ket Shelomoh,” in which he tried to prove that the Karaites are animals, that it is forbidden to teach them the Law, and that it is permitted to kill them. When the Karaites protested, the chief rabbi of Con- stantinople commanded that all the copies of the work which could be found should be burned. Kimhi Kinah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 498 wrote two other works: “ Yahel Shelomoh ”(Smyrna, 1870) and “ Yeme Shelomoh” (Salonica, 1874). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Franco, Histoire des Israélites dev Empire Ottoman. ae M. Fr. KINAH (plural, kinot): Lamentation chanted in honor of the dead; it has a halting movement peculiar to itself, and ranges from a dirge or wail to the elegiac form (comp. David’s elegies on the deaths of Saul and Jonathan [II Sam. i. 17] and on the death of Abner [2d. iii. 83]). The term is derived, according to Wetstein, from the Arabic “kana ” (= “to form artistically ”); it occurs once, in Ezek. ii. 10,as “kinim.” Among the Hebrews, as in many Semitic lands at the present day, the kinah was sung by professional mourning-women (Jer. ix. 17). In prophetic literature such elegies were chanted also over inanimate objects poetically per- Classes of sonified. To this class belong the Kinot. kinot on the arid plains, deserted by all living things (Jer. ix. 10), on fallen cities (Ezek. xxvi. 17, xxvii. 1), and on lands and peoples (see Budde, “ Das Hebriaische Klagelied,” in Stade’s “ Zeitschrift,” ii. 1 e¢ seg.; idem, “The Folk- Songs of Israel in the Mouths of the Prophets,” in “The New World,” pp. 28 e¢ seg., Boston, 1898). Even in the Talmudic period a kinah was sung at a burial by at least one mourning-woman, who was accompanied by two flute-players (Yer. M. K. i. 5; Ket. 46a; comp. Shab. 158a). Fragments of elegies of this period, composed by the “safdana” (funeral orators), have been preserved (M. K. 28b; comp. I. Perles, “Die lLeichenfeierlichkeiten im Nachbi- blischen Judenthume,” in “ Monatsschrift,” x. 382 e seq.). To the kinah was soon added the FuNERAL ORATION, which steadily increased in importance as compared with the kinah, until the latter was omitted entirely. But although the kinah was thus excluded from the public funeral rites, it still sur- vived as an individual expression of grief for the loss of friends or kinsmen (see PomTry, BIBLICAL). From the individual, or personal, kinah must be distinguished the national, or general, kinah, the subject of which is the misfortune of the whole nation or of a single community. The national kinah was created by Amos, the oldest National of the prophets whose writings have Kinot. survived, on the occasion of a harvest festival in Beth-el, about 760. Fore- seeing the impending destruction of the Northern Kingdom, he chanted in the midst of the populace, as though destruction had already overtaken it, “The virgin of Israel is fallen; she shall no more rise” (Amos v. 2). But the national kinah found its most perfect expression in the “lamentations ” which both Talmud and Midrash ascribe to the prophet Jeremiah (B. B. 14b; Yer. Shab. xvi. 15c; Lev. R. xv. 4). Even as early as the Talmudic period, the kinot of Jeremiah were recited on the eve of the 9th of Ab, the anniversary of the destruction of the Tem- ple and of the Jewish state (Yer. Shab. l.c.; Lev. R. /.c.). It seems that, at least in Palestine, the Epistle of Baruch (the portion of the Book of Baruch written originally in Hebrew—i. 1-iii. 8), which was a national confession of sins and a justification of the divine punishment, was read also during the public service of this day (see Jaw. Encyc. ii. 557, 8.0. BARUCH). The more intolerable conditions became for the Jew in the following centuries the more he loved to commemorate the events of the happier past. New wos created new kinot, and therefore the Jew could not confine himself to the recitation of the Lamen- tations of Jeremiah on the 9th of Ab. Even the Hellenistic period, poor as far as national poetry is concerned, brought into existence an elegy on the destruction of Jerusalem (Greek Apoc. Baruch, x. 6-8). This was originally written in Hebrew, but it is not known that it had a place in the ritual of the Synagogue (see Jew. Encye. ii. 556, s.o. Ba- RUCH). Early in the geonic period the poets of the Syn- agogue began to compose selihot, kinot, and hosh‘a- not, although very little of that literature has survived (Delitzsch, “Zur Gesch. der Jiidischen Poesie,” p. 51; Mahzor Vitry, ed. Hurwitz, p. 226). Among the older Spanish, North-African, and Pro- vencal poets the national or general elegies for the service of the 9th of Ab were the product of innate poetical feeling, while among the Roman-German poets it was distress and desperation that brought new kinot into existence. “I must speak; I must haveair; my soul, embittered by grinding slavery, is overwhelmed,” says the German synagogal poet of the thirteenth century (Zunz, “S. P.” p. 176). Thus the essence of the kinot consists in a lamentation over the loss of the nation’s past greatness, as well as (in the Roman-German rites and among the younger poets) over the disastrous events of the present. In the Siddur of Amram Gaon (ed. Warsaw, 1884, p. 48b), aside from the Lamentations of Jeremiah, there are no special kinot prescribed Early Use for the 9th of Ab, although, according in Ritual. to Luzzatto, some of the kinot con- tained in the present ritual were prob- ably used in Amram’s time; they are not mentioned by Amram because, perhaps, their recitation was not obligatory (see Luzzatto, “ Amram Gaon Baruch ben Sheshna,” in “Orient, Lit.” viii. 296). Accord- ing to Amram and other reliable sources, in the geonic period in Babylon, however, selihot were read on the morning of the 9th of Ab, since that fast-day was dedicated to penitence and contrition (see Zunz, “Ritus,” p. 125). Saadia’s prayers for this day likewise are called “selihot,” though in content and form they are very similar to the kinot of Kalir. But even the selihot were afterward re- placed by the more melancholy kinot. Traces of these selihot are preserved in the Sephardic ritual. Kalir, however, was probably the first to give the uname of kinot to some parts of the great elegy which he composed for the 9th of Ab. At any rate, they were so called not later than the eleventh cen- tury. Beginning with the contrast between the happiness of the past and the misery of the present, Kalir describes in this elegy several scenes from the history of the destruction of the Jewish state, such as the burning of the Temple, the slaughters in Jerusalem, and the death of King Josiah. Sometimes, breaking out into prayer and lamentation, the poet t 499 ————— THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kinah expresses his conviction of hisown guiltiness and of the justice of the Lord, laments the power of Edom, and mourns the misery of Zion, for the restoration of which he prays; he closes with a description of the final redemption of Israel and the future salva- tion. This elegy, consisting of about 12,000 words, beginning with the Eighteen Benedictions (“ Kero- bah”) and concluding with prayers of comfort (“nehamot”), has been preserved almost in its orig- inal form in the older Roman rite. Whereas the lat- ter uses Kalir’s kerobah “Zekor Ekah,” the German ritual has Kalir’s second kerobah, beginning with “ abik,” which is of a more general character, and which was, perhaps, originally destined by Kalir for the service on the afternoon of the 9th of Ab. Moreover, in the German rite consolations are wanting; they are replaced, however, by other kinot composed between the twelfth and sixteenth centu- ries. Inthe German rite then follow the “ Zionides,” which are named after the well-known elegy on Zion of JupAn HA-LeEvi, beginning with “Ziyyon Halo Tish’ali.” This elegy is to be found in every Jewish ritual for the 9th of Ab, and from ita special “Zionide” meter and rime have been developed (see Dukes, “Zur Kenntniss der Neuhebr. Religidsen Poesie,” p. 71; Delitzsch, “Zur Gesch. der Jiidischen Poesie,” pp. 159-163). The “Zionides” are not usually recited by the hazzan himself, but by mem- bers of the congregation, alternatcly; at one time they were recited by the most prominent member. In the German Mahzor are to be found sixty kinot for the 9th of Ab, and the authorship of about fifty of them is known. The more important are as fol- lows: Abraham Hozeh (‘‘Astronomer’’): *‘ Ziyyon Kehi Kol Zori Gil- e‘ad”’ (Zunz, “* Literaturgesch.”’ p. 490; translated into German by J. Freund, in Karpeles, ‘* Zionsharfe,’’ p. 43). By some scholars this elegy is ascribed to Solomon ibn Gabirol, and by others to Elijah ha-Zaken. Abraham ben Jacob: “ Ziyyon Asher Yomeru’’ (Zunz, l.c. Supplement, p. 26). Abraham ben Meir (perhaps a contemporary of Abraham ben Dayid): ‘‘Esh’ag mi-Nahamat Libbi we-Et’onen,’’ describing the punishment of a Jewish community such as was often visited upon the communities of Germany and England in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries (Zunz, l.c. p. 464). Eleazar ha-Kalir: ‘‘ Kerobah’’ and the first seventeen kinot (from ‘‘Shabat Suru Menni’’ to ‘‘ Amarti She'u Menni’’; see Luzzatto, ‘‘Mebo le-Mahzor ke-Minhag Bene Roma,” pp. 24 et seq.). Eleazar b. Judah b. Kalonymus of Worms (author of ‘‘ Ha- Rokeah”’): ‘* Ziyyon Halo Tish‘ali li-Shelom ‘Alubayik”’ (first Zionide), on the slaying of his wife and children in Erfurt in 1214 (Zunz, l.c. p. 320). Eleazar b. Mosheh ha-Darshan of Wiirzburg: *‘ Ziyyon ‘Ateret Zebi Simhat Hamonayik”’ (Zionide). Baruch b. Samuel (died in Mayence in 1221): ‘‘ Ezbe‘otai Shafelu we-Oshyotai Nafelu, Oyah.” David ha-Leyi ben Samuel (contemporary and correspondent of Rashi): ** Emunim Shararu be-Tok Yam ‘Aberu”’ (Zunz, l.c. p. 164). F ; David b. Alexander (date unknown): “ Ezkerah Neginotai”’ (Zunz, 1.c. p. 483). : Judah b. Moses ha-Kohen (c. 1240; German rabbi): ** We-Et’- onen wa-Akonen Marah,” on the riot in Frankfort-on-the-Main in 1241 (Zunz, l.c. p. 479). Bie Judah ha-Levi of Castile: ‘* Ziyyon Halo Tish’ali” (Zionide); “Yom Akpi Hikbadti”’ (Zunz, l.c. p. 206). Joel ha-Leyi ben Isaac of Bonn: ‘t Yibkeyun Mar Mal’ake ha- Shalom,” lamentation for the victims of the Second Crusade, which occurred during his lifetime (Zunz, l.c. p. 269). Joseph ben Kalonymus ha-Nakdan (c. 1238): ‘* Amorer ba- Beki” (Zunz, l.c. p. 98). Jehiel b. Jacob of Eisenach (who witnessed the persecution at Fulda): ‘‘ Asirim be-Shir Yeze’u,” contrasting the time of the wandering of the Israelites in the desert and that of the de- struction of the Temple (Zungz, l.c. p. 29). Jacob: ** Ziyyon Yedidut Yadid”’ (Zionide). Isaac (12th or 18th cent.): ‘** Azkir Rahab” (Zunz, l.c. p.552). Yakar ben Samuel ba-Levi (contemporary of Meir of Rothen- burg; lived in Cologne and Mayence): ‘“ Ziyyon Adonai La- kem.” Kalonymus ben Judah of Mayence (11th cent.): ‘“* Mi Yitten Roshi Mayim”’; ** Amarti She‘u Menni’’; both dedicated to the victims of the Second Crusade (Zunz, l.c. p. 166). Meir b. Baruch of Rothenburg: ‘‘ Sha’ali Serufah,”’ on the public burning of the scrolls of the Lawin Paris about 1254 (see Gratz, ** Gesch.” vii. 405 ; translated into German by A. Geiger, “ Jiidische Dichtungen,” Leipsic, 1856). Having the strophic rhythm of the Zionides, it found a place among them. Meir ben Jehiel: ** Arze ha-Lebanon,” describing the death of the ten martyrs and based upon Midrash Eleh Ezkerah (Zunz, Lc. p. 489; Landshuth, ‘*‘Ammude ha-‘Abodah,”’ p. 161). Michael b. Perez (before 1550): “* Ziyyon Menat Shalom’; ** Ziyyon Kedosh Mishkene ‘Elyon”’ (Zionides; Zunz, l.c. p. 580). Menahem ben Jacob of Worms (d. 1203): ** Me‘one Shama- yim” (Zunz, l.c. p. 294). Menahem b. Makir of Regensburg (survived the First Cru- sade): ‘“ Ebel A’orer’’ (Zunz, l.c. p. 158). Menahem Zion b. Meir (c. 1430; author of the ‘ Ziyyuni’’): “ Ziyyon Me‘on Hesbki” (Zunz, l.c. p. 523; idem, “S. P.”’ p. 110). Moses ben Jacob: ** Ziyyon Me’oz Kiryat Melek” (Zionide; Zunz, ** Literaturgesch.” p. 388; Landshuth, l.c. p. 225). Solomon ibn Gabirol: ‘tShomeron Kol Titten ”’ (Zunz, ** Ritus der Synagoge von Avignon,” in ‘‘ Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums ”’ [1838], ii. 454; comp. also J. L. Gordon, “ Let- ters,”’ pp. 98, 216); “‘Shekurat Lo mi-Yayin.” This list is based upon Baer’s edition of the kinot; see espe- cially the introduction, Berlin, 1865. The kinot of the Spanish, North-African, and Provengal rites, again, form a group by themselves. In the simpler Spanish rite, especially, several Psalms have been used for the ritual for the 9th of Ab, among them Ps. lxxix. and cxxxvii. (“By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, Kinot of yea, we wept, when we remembered Spanish Zion”), They are composed in the Mahzor. rhythm of the kinah, and are used to open the service on the eve of that fast-day in the Sephardic ritual. The kinot of this group of rituals confine themselves on the whole to the themes furnished by the history and legends of the destruction of Jerusalem. Therite of Fez, how- ever, contains a kinah on the persecutions of the Jews in Toledo, Seville, Majorca, etc., in 1891. With the exception of the rite of Avignon, the seli- hah “ Eleh Ezkerah ” is common to all these rites, as is the “ Zionide ” of Judah ha-Levi. In the former each chapter of the Lamentations of Jeremiah is preceded by small poems (see Zunz, “ Ritus der Synagoge von Avignon,” in “Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1888, ii. 454). In Jerusalem an Arabic elegy was recited, and in Persia Hebrew-Persian kinot were used (Zunz, “Ritus,” p. 89). As writers of kinot for these rites may be mentioned: Abba Mari b. Moses Yarhi of Montpellier (lived in Arles in 1306); *‘ Abo Le’esof Mahanot’’ (Avignon ; Zunz, “ Literatur- gesch.” p. 492). Abraham ha-Leyi ben Isaac: Three kinot (Zunz, l.c. p. 518). Isaac ben Sheshet of Valencia (died in Algiers about 1406): Four kinot (Zunz, l.c. p. 514). Isaac ibn Zabarra (c. 1400): “*Ziyyon ha-Tede‘i Zeman”’ (Zionide; Zunz, l.c. p. 514). Israel Najjara (rabbi of Gaza in the sixteenth century): One kinah (Zunz, l.c. p. 419). Joseph (date not known): Two kinot (Avignon; Zunz, l.c. pp. 569-574). Judah ben David Yahya (lived in Castile about 1400): ** Yehu- dah we-Yisrael De‘u Mar Li Me’od”’ (Sephardic; Provencal; Zunz, l.c. p. 514; Landshuth, l.c. p. 67). Kinah King THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 500 (ee eee Judah b. Jacob: ‘* Yomam we-Layelabh Ebkeh”’ (Carpentras ; Zunz, l.c. p. 567). ‘ Judah ha-Levi: The same as in the Roman-German ritual. Moses Nathan: “ Mi-Gam Bakem” (Avignon; there are two synagogal poets of this name; Zunz, l.c. p. 517). Moses Zacuto (of Spanish descent; lived and died in Italy): * arim Kol Bikyi’’ (Sephardic; Zunz, l.c. p. 440; Landshuth, lc. p. 218). Samuel (time unknown): “Oyah Erez Zilzul” (Avignon; Zunz, l.c. p. 593). Sheshet: ‘‘ Ekah Ya‘ib”’ (Avignon; Zunz, l.c. p. 475). Simeon ben Zemah Duran (lived in Algiers, 1861-1444): Three kinot (Zunz, l.c. p. 522). Solomon ibn Gabirol: ‘*Shomeron Kol Titten’’ (Avignon, Roman-German, Polish, etc.). Solomon b. Bonfed: Six kinot (Zunz, l.c. p. 518). . Zerahiah ben Isaac Gerundi of Lunel (author of the “* Ma’or’’): “Ze’ebe ‘Ereb’’? (Provencal; Sephardic; Zunz, l.c. p. 461; Landshuth, l.c. p. 63). In the Karaite ritual also are found kinot for the anniversary of the downfall of the Jewish state. Local history and local preferences operated to vary the selection of kinot, so that those preferred in one synagogue or district were comparatively unused in another. By no means all national or general kinot found a place in any single mahzor, and not all the kinot found in the mahzor of any congregation were re- cited; a selection was made, as the heading “ Kinah Aheret,” sometimes attached to the collection, may indicate. Nor was it only on the 9th of Ab that kinot were read in the synagogue; on the three—in the Karaite ritual on the five—preceding Sabbaths also piyyutim or kinot were recited (Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 88; adem, “8S: BP.” p. 72). The “Tikkun Hazot,” the ritual of which was es- tablished in Palestine about three hundred years ago, whence it spread over Europe, also contains several kinot. One of them, used in all Italian and German rituals, was composed by R. Moses Alsheh ben Hayyim, who flourished in Safed in the six- teenth century. In the Reform congregations, which still celebrate the 9th of Ab, only a very few of the kinot for that day are recited. Geiger, in his “ Plan zu einem Neuen Gebetbuche,” p. 15, includes only Ibn Gabirol’s “ Sho- meron Kol Titten” for the evening service, and Ju- dah ha-Levi’s “Ziyyon Halo Tish’ali” and Meir of Rothenburg’s “Sha’ali Serufah” for the morning service. For editions and translations of kinot see Steinschneider, “Cat. Bodl.” cols. 452 et seq. ; Zedner, “Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus.” pp. 469 et seg.; Van Straalen, “Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus.” pp. 148-151 et seg. See As, Ninto Day or. G. NET OCs KINANAH: Opponent of Mohammed; son of the poet Al-Rabi‘ ibn Abu al-Hukaik, who flour- ished at Medina in the seventh century, prior to the appearance of Mohammed at that town. He had two brothers—Al-Rabi‘ and Sallam; all three were de- vlared enemies of the Prophet. Kinanah is said to have urged Mohammed to give up the custom during prayer of turning his face toward Mecca (“kiblah”) in favor of Jerusalem, as had been the custom in Islam at first. After the expulsion of the Banu al- Nadir, of which tribe he was a member, he and his family retired to Khaibar, where they possessed a cas- tle called Kamus. The Jewish strongholds at Khai- bar were soon after conquered by Mohammed, and Kinanah was made a prisoner of war. There were two reasons why Mohammed desired Kinanah’s death: Kinanah was accused of having hidden the treasure of the Banu al-Nadir, and Mohammed coveted his wife Safiyyah, the daughter of Huyayy, a rabbi who had been murdered ona previous occasion. Kinanah died under torture. He is erroneously confounded by Tabari with Kinanah ibn Rabi‘, the brother-in-law of Mohammed’s wife Zainab. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hirschfeld, in R. H. J. x. 29. G H. Hrr. KINDBETTBRIEF. See CHILDBIRTH. KINDERFREUND, ARYEH LOB: Polish scholar; born at Zamosc, government of Lublin, 1798; died at Lemberg 1873. In the earlier part of his life he was in very good circumstances, but he soon lost his fortune and had to make use of his knowl- edge of classical philology and the modern lan- guages. He went to Galicia, where he earned his livelihood by teaching. Kinderfreund was the author of “Shirim Shonim ” (Lemberg, 1834), poems relating to various subjects, and distinguished both for purity of style and for richness of ideas. In addition Kinderfreund left in manuscript the following works: Hebrew poems, among which one compares the Jewish New-Year with that of other creeds; a work in Latin in which is demonstrated the priority of the Hebrew language; an apologetical treatise in which are reproduced religious controversies between the author and a prominent Christian whose children he instructed. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Jost’s Annalen, ii. 148; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post- Mendels. p. 171. H. R. I. Br: KINDLING OF LIGHTS. See Lieuts. KING : Chief ruler of a nation.—Biblical Data: In Jewish history the first ruler called “king” was Saul, son of Kish, but in Palestine almost every chief- tain bore this title. According to Josh. xi. 1-2, the country contained numbers of kings, and in the Song of Deborah (Judges v. 19) reference is made to the “kings of Canaan.” These can have had little more power than a modern sheik. Some of them, doubtless, held more extensive sway than others, and the ruler of the federation of the five cities of the Philistines might more deservedly be dignified with the name. The special need of a military leader in primitive times was due to the constant warfare in which even the more settled population of the country passed its existence, and while in the nomad state the Israelites needed a warrior chief like Moses or Joshua to keep them united and under discipline. As soon as the Israelites were settled in the Holy Land decentralizing tendencies became paramount, and the local jurisdiction of the elders superseded the earlier régime. This led to various attempts at reconstruction under the Jupars. In two cases, those of Gideon and Abimelech, attempts were made to found petty kingdoms. Similarly, Jephthah seems to have established a minor king- dom east of the Jordan, in Gilead (Judges xi. 6-11); but none of these attempts were sufficient to unite the whole of the Israelitish tribes for warlike pur- poses against their enemies in plain and mountain. In the time of Samuel, however, the tribes were for a time united. The manifest advantages of this 501 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA inah ing ee a ee eee union led Samuel himself to arrange later for a sec- ular head of the Israelite forces, who should be sanc- tified by the choice of the oracles of God; Saul, therefore, became, by election, the first King of Israel. Dissatisfied with Saul’s conduct, the impe- rious Samuel selected David to replace him, who, after Saul’s death, immediately succeeded in ruling over Judah, and some years later was acknowledged king of all Israel. David had taken possession of the great fortress of Jerusalem, and, possibly influ- enced by the career of the king-maker Samuel, at- tempted to combine the ecclesiastical and the mili- tary headship by making his chapel royal, or Temple, the center of the national worship. This policy was carried out by his son Solomon, who attempted further to break down the old tribal divisions by di- viding the whole country into twelve or thirteen districts (I Kings iv. 7), severally presided over by one of his officers; each of these officers, it has been conjectured, was required to supply the court or the army with provisions during one month of each year. Butthisattempt proved premature, and after Solomon’s death his kingdom was divided into two parts (see IskAEL; JUDAH). The advantages of aral- lying-point for the national forces was nevertheless thenceforth clearly recognized, and both divisions _ were ruled by kings till the superior forces of the sur- rounding nations destroyed fora time the national independence. As indicated by the sketch above, the chief duty of the king was to act as war-lord and commander- in-chief of the army. One result of the establish- ment of the kingship was the foundation of a stand- ing army, which began with the three Functions. thousand men kept by Saul in the field against the Ammonites (I Sam. iii. 2). The “Gibborim,” or the mighty men who formed the body-guard of the king, constituted the nucleus of this force. War being regarded by the Hebrews as a sacred occupation (see Schwally, “Kriegsaltertiimer,” 1901), the king was intimately connected with the religious organization of the peo- ple, and itis possible that at an early stage he was re- garded as the center of it, though there are no such traces of taboos around Hebrew royalty as are found among other primitive nations (see Frazer, “Golden Bough,” i., passim). It is certain that the king per- formed priestly functions. Saul offered sacrifices (I Sam. xiii. 9-11), and David wore the ephod (I Sam. vii. 19); Solomon addressed the people in the Temple (I Kings viii. 14); the high priests received their appointment from the king, at any rate in the earlier stages of the monarchy (II Sam. viii. 17; I Kings ii. 26-27). The fact that Solomon built a temple and dedicated it shows the intimate relation of the king with the national sanctuary, which was attached to his palace. In addition to their military and ecclesiastical functions, the Jewish kings, like all Oriental monarchs, discharged those of judges (comp. I Kings iii. 16 e¢ seg.), and in the palace there was a special porch for judgment (I Kings vii. 7). How fdr the king had the right to originate laws is doubtful. Later legislation required him to agree to abide by the Deuteronomic Law (Deut. xvii. 18, 19), but he must have had considerable latitude in interpreting it. In the cases of Saul and David, the fact that they had already proved themselves redoubtable leaders in warfare was doubtless the reason why Samuel chose them for the kingly office when he had reluc- tantly come to the conclusion that such Selection a head for the nation was necessary. and When once the kingship had been Anointing. established, the hereditary principle arose naturally. For nearly eight years Saul’s son Ishbosheth retained the position of his father among the more northern tribes. The king appears to have had the right to select his successor from his descendants, as was done by David in the case of Solomon (I Kings i.), who seems to have been the youngest among his sons (see JUNIOR Rien), Although the act of selection was the monarch’s, the priestly caste seems to have had some voice in the decision, while the elders and the peo- ple generally expressed by acclamation their satis- faction at the result (II Kings xiv., xxi., xxiii.; see also Josephus, “B. J.” i. 88, § 9). The chief ceremony by which a ruler was conse- crated king was that of anointing, mentioned in the cases of Saul (I Sam. x. 1), David (II Sam. ii. 4), Jehu (II Kings ix. 6), and Joash (II Kings xi. 12). In all these cases, excepting the last, the function appears to have been a private one, and hence it has been suggested that it was performed with the be- ginning of anew dynasty. The general reference to the king as “the anointed one,” or “the Lord’s anointed ” (I Sam. ii. 10; Ps. ii. 2; Lam. iv. 20), seems to show that anointing was the normal and charac- teristic part of a king’s inauguration, though it oc- curred also in the appointment of a high priest (see ANomnTING; Mzsstan; see also Wellhausen in “Archiv fiir Religionswissenschaft,” 1904). The chief external signs of dignity were the crown (II Kings xi. 12), which was worn by Saul even on the battlefield (II Sam. i. 10; see Crown), and the scepter (Ps. xlv. 7 [A. V. 6]). It is doubt- ful whether the spear, so often mentioned in connec- tion with Saul (I Sam. xx. 33, xxii. 6, xxvi. 7), was used by him as a sign of his dignity; it is not men- tioned elsewhere in connection with the kings, though modern sheiks use it for that purpose (Tris- tram, “ Land of Israel,” p. 59). Naturally, the king’s house was of larger dimensions and of more preten- tious architecture than that of any of his subjects, and special accounts are given of the palaces of Sol- omon (I Kings vii.), Jehoiakim (Jer. xxii. 18, 14), and Ahab (I Kings xxii. 89). The king’s seat was known as the “throne” or “judgment-seat.” An elaborate description is given of that of Solomon (I Kings x. 18 e¢ seg.; see THRONE). The chief officer of the king was the “captain of the host” (II Sam. ii. 8). Another high military officer was the captain of the body-guard (II Sam. viii. 16, xx. 28), who, for prudential reasons, was not placed under the orders of the commander-in- chief. Of the officials connected with the royal household the chief appears to have been the high chamberlain, or the officer “over the household ” (II Kings xviii. 18). Next come the “sofer,” or scribe, who acted as sec- retary of state (7d.), and the “mazkir,” or historiog- rapher (¢b.). An official less frequently mentioned Officers. King Kings, Books of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 502 was the “king’s servant” (II Kings xxii. 12); a seal that belonged to one of these king’s servants, whose name was Obadiah, has recently been dis- covered. Besides these, several minor officials, as “keeper of the ward- robe” (II Kings xxii. 14) and “chamberlains” (II Kings xxiii. 11), were connected with the royal household. Other titles, like those of “king’s friend” and “ counselor,” can scarcely be regarded as Official. The means by which this state was maintained were various, and doubtless differed with the period. The royal domains and flocks (partly obtained by escheat) must have con- tributed much to its support (I Chron. xxvii. 25-28). The kings may have claimed a tithe ef the produce of the land (I Sam. viii. 15-17), but no later evidence is given of this, and such a claim would conflict with the similar claims of the priest- hood. Regular presents, doubtless, were made by the king’s chief vassals (I Kings x. 25), and tributes were brought in by conquered tribes (I Kings iv. 21; II Chron. xxvii. 5). Solomon probably derived some profit from his trading ventures (I Kings ix. 28), as well as from the customs levied on the for- eign merchants trading in Palestine (I Kings x. 14). Resources such as these enabled the king to keep up considerable state. He dressed in royal robes (I Kings xxii. 10; II Chron. xviii. 9), drank from gold vessels (I Kings x. 21), and possessed a large harem (II Sam. xvi. 21). All who approached him bowed down and touched the ground with the forehead (I Sam. xxiv. 8; II Sam. xix. 24). After the de- struction of the monarchy, memories of its glory still remained in Israel, and Ezekiel regarded royalty as inseparable from the ideal Jewish state (Ezek. xlvii.). The term “king” wasapplied symbolically to any great leader, even to death (Job xviii. 14); but above all it was applied to God as the “King of Kings” (see THEocracy). It is likewise applied to a crocodile (2b. xxiv. 384). Seal of Obadiah, ** Servant of the King.” (After Benzinger.) Revenue. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benzinger, Hebriiische Archiiologie, pp. 303- 315; K. Budde, Schiitzung des Koénigtwms im Alten Testa- ment, Marburg, 1903. BE. G. H. Je — In Rabbinical Literature: In Talmudic times every official position on earth was regarded as of divine appointment, and the rule of the king was compared with that of God (Ber. 58a). One had, therefore, to pray for a good king (Ber. 55a) and for the good of the king (Abot iii. 2). The office was regarded as hereditary (Hor. 11b; comp. Zeb. 102a). There was a special benediction to be pronounced on seeing a king, and no one should avoid greeting him appropriately (Ber. 58a). Even prayers may in certain cases be interrupted to an- swer a king (Ber. 82b). Intriguers against the royal majesty lost in certain cases their property and were put to death (Sanh. 48b), while any disrespectful gesture was punished (Pes. 57b). To defraud the cus- toms was a great crime against the king (Ned. 28a), and he received one-thirteenth of all booty captured in war (B. B. 122a). The anointing of the king was done with balsam before he was crowned (Hor. 12a). But a king must stand during the reading of the Law (Sotah 41b), and must not arise from his knees until he has finished his prayer (Ber. 34b). The glory of a king is truth (Ta‘an. 32a), and, therefore, his word must be irrevocable (B. B. 8b). He should set an example to all in his obedience to the Law (Suk. 30a). The relations of a king to his courtiers was a fa- vorite subject of the Rabbis in their parables. I. Ziegler has collected no less than nine hundred and thirty-seven parables of this kind, scattered through Midrashic literature, but it is clear from the descrip- tions of the king’s regalia that the model before the Rabbis was the Roman emperor with his purple mantle, laurel crown, and curule chair. These par- ables, though interesting in their way, seldom throw light upon the rabbinical views about kings, being more of the nature of folk-tales. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Lewysohn, in Orient, Lit. 1850, No. 33; I. Ziegler, Die Kinigsgleichnisse des Midrasch, Breslau, 1903. 8.8: J. KINGDOM OF GOD (“Malkuta de-Adonai”: Targum to Zech. xiv. 9 and Ob. 21; “Malkut Shad- dai”: ‘ALENU; and “ Malkut Shamayim”: Ber. ii. 2, - and elsewhere in Mishnah and Haggadah): Reign or sovereignty of God as contrasted with the king- dom of the worldly powers. The hope that God will be King over all the earth, when all idolatry will be banished, is expressed in prophecy and song (Wx; xv. 183" Zech. xiv. 93 Isa.) xxiv. c3, ters Micah iv. 7; Ps. xxix. 10), and with special em- phasis in the later Psalms (xciii.-xcix.). God’s Kingdom is spoken of in Ps. xxii. 29 (A. V. 28), ciii. 19, cxlv. 11-18; Ob. 21; Dan. iii. 83 (A. V. iv. 8); Tobit, xiii. 1; Sibyllines, iii. 47-48, 767; Psalms of Solomon, xvii. 3; Wisdom, x. 10; Assumptio Mosis, x. 1; Song of the Three Holy Children, 38; Enoch, Ixxxiv. 2. The words “ The Lord shall be King” are translated in the Targum, “The King- dom of God shall be revealed”; and the ancient lit- urgy culminates in the prayer that “God may estab- lish His Kingdom speedily ” (see ‘ALENU; KADDISH). The Kingdom of God, however, in order to be es- tablished on earth, requires recognition by man; that is, to use the Hasidzean phrase borrowed from Baby- lonia or Persia, man must “take upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of God” (“‘O] Malkut Shama- yim”; “Heaven” is a synonym of “God”; see HEAVEN). This the Israelites do daily when reciting the SHemA‘ (Ber. fi. 2); so do the angels when sing- ing their “Thrice Holy” (HmrKaLor); and in the future “all men shall take upon themselves the yoke of the Kingdom of God when casting away their idols” (Mek., Beshallah, ‘Amalek, 2). Accordingly, says the Midrash (Cant. R. ii. 12), “when the King- dom of Rome has ripened enough to be destroyed, the Kingdom of God will appear.” Upon the Red Sea, Israel first sang the praise of God’s Kingdom (Ex. R. and Targ. Yer. to Ex. xv. 19), and at Mount Sinai they accepted the yoke of God’s Kingdom (Sifra, Kedoshim, xi.), just as Abraham did (Book of Jubilees, xii. 19), making — J 503 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA King Kings, Books of Him King upon earth (Sifre, Deut. 313); each proselyte, in joining Judaism, “takes upon himself the yoke of God’s Kingdom” (Tan., Lek Leka, ed. Buber, p. 6). The Hebrew slave who declares his wish to bea slave for life has his ear pierced, be- cause “he casts off the yoke of God’s Kingdom to bend to the yoke of another sovereignty ” (Tosef., B. K. vii. 5; Yer. Kid. 59b). The yoke of God’s Kingdom—the yoke of the Torah—grants freedom from other yokes (Abot iii. 4). Especially was it the principle of one party of the Hasidzans, the Zealots, not to recognize as king any one except God (Josephus, “ Ant.” xviii. 1, $$ 1, 6; comp. Philo, “Quod Omnis Probus Liber,” §§ 12-18, and the prayer AbinuU MALKENU—“ Our Father, our King, we have no King except Thee!” The greater, then, the oppression of the Worldly Kingdom (Rome), the more eager the Jewish people, particularly the pious ones, were for “the Kingdom of Heaven,” as they called it, to come speedily. This is the ever-reiterated object of the prayers in the liturgy (Masseket Soferim, xiv. 12; e¢ al.). It was even laid down that no benediction would be effective without reference to the Kingdom (Ber. 12a). It is the approach of this King- Christian dom of Heaven, in opposition to the and Jewish Kingdom of Rome, which Joan Tur Concep- Baptisrannounced (Matt. iii. 2; comp. tions. Lukei. 71-74, iii. 17). Jesus preached _ the same Kingdom of God (Matthew has preserved in “Kingdom of Heaven” the rabbin- ical expression “ Malkut Shamayim”), and when he said, “the kingdom of God cometh not by obser- vation [that is, calculation] . . . for, behold, the kingdom of God is among [not within] you” (Luke xvii. 21, Syriac version), he meant, “It does not come through rebellion or by force” (see Jew. ENcyc. iv. 51, 8.0. CHRISTIANITY). When, however, the trend of events led early Christianity to make a decided disavowal of all political expectations antagonistic to Rome, the conception of the Kingdom of God was made an entirely spiritual one, and was identified with the “‘olam ha-ba” (= “the world to come”), the spiri- tual life, in which “there is no eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the holy spirit” (Rom. xiv. 17, Greek; comp. John xviii. 36). Rab speaks of it in the same way: “In the world to come there is neither eating, nor drinking, nor procreation, nor strife; but the righteous sit en- crowned and enjoy the splendor of the Shekinah” (Ber. 17a). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bousset, Die Religion des Judenthums, pp. 199-201, Berlin, 1908; Dalman, Die Worte Jesu, pp. 75, 119, Leipsic, 1898 ; Schechter, in J. Q. R. vi. 640-643, vii. 195-204. KS KINGS, BOOKS OF.—Biblical Data: Fourth book of the second canonical division of the He- brew Bible, the Prophets (D°x'2)). It contains a - history of the kings of Judah and of Israel from the last days of David till the capture of Zedekiah by Nebuchadnezzar. This work is divided into two books, I Kings (’x o'D$) and II Kings (‘3 o°351); the former consisting of twenty-two, the latter of twenty-five, chapters. The following is a synopsis of their contents: First Book of Kings: Ch. i.: David having grown old, his son Adonijah forms a plot with Joab and Abiathar to seize the kingdom. But Solomon’s mother, Bath-sheba, helped by Nathan the prophet, baffles Adonijah’s design, and Solomon is anointed and crowned with great solemnity. Hearing of this, Adonijah and his guests, who are banqueting at the time, retire precipitately. Ch. ii.: David’s charge to Solomon, whom he en- joins to let neither Joab nor Shimei die a natural death. On the other hand, he is to show kindness to the children of Barzillai the Gileadite. Adonijah asks Solomon for David’s concubine Abishag, and pays for his imprudence with his life. Abiathar is deposed from the high-priesthood, and Joab is killed by Benaiah at the command of Solomon. Shimei, ignoring acommand of the king, is killed by Benaiah in fulfilment of David’s charge to Solomon. Ch. iii.: Solomon marries the daughter of the King of Egypt. God appears to him ina vision by night at Gibeon, and prom- ises him extraordinary wisdom and great riches. Solomon’s judgment in the case of the two harlots, in which he discovers the real mother of the living child. Ch. iv.: Solomon divides his kingdom into twelve commissariat districts, and appoints officers over them; each district being required to support the royal house during one month every year. Ch. v.: Account of Solomon’s kingdom, his daily provision, the number of his horses, his great wis- dom, the prosperous state of Israel under his rule, his alliance with Hiram, and his preparations for the construction of the Temple. Ch. vi.: A full account of the Temple, the con- struction of which lasted seven years. Ch. vii.: Description of Solomon’s palace, the erection of which occupied thirteen years, and of the Temple vessels made by Hiram the artificer. Ch. viii.: Inauguration of the Temple. After the Ark and the vessels are brought in, Solomon ad- dresses to God a long prayer and blesses the people. He then dedicates the Temple with numerous peace- offerings, and the people hold a feast of fourteen days. Ch. ix.: Second appearance of God to Solomon. He admonishes the king to observe His command- ments, otherwise the Temple will be of no avail. Solomon makes another treaty with Hiram, builds several cities, and imposes a heavy tribute on the descendants of the former inhabitants of the land. Solomon’s navy, under the direction of Tyrians, sails to Ophir for gold. Ch. x}: The Queen of Sheba comes to Jerusalem and admires Solomon's wisdom; she gives him costly presents. A description of his golden tar- gets, his ivory throne, his vessels, the great number of his chariots and horses. Ch. xi.: Decline of Solomon; his numerous wives and concubines draw him into idolatry, for which God threatens him with the loss of his kingdom. An account of Solomon's adversaries; namely, Hadad, who flies to Egypt; Rezon and Jeroboam, to the latter of whom Ahijah prophesies that he will become king. Solomon dies after a reign of forty years, and is succeeded by his son Rehoboam. Solomon. Kings, Books of THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 504 Ch. xii.: Division of the kingdom. The Israelites assemble at Shechem for the purpose of crowning Rehoboam. Headed by Jeroboam, they ask the king to relieve them of the burdens placed on them by his father. Rchoboam, refusing the advice of the old men, and following that of the young ones, answers the people roughly. All the tribes of Israel, with the exception of Judab and Benjamin, revolt; they kill Adoram, and cause Rehoboam to flee. The latter is made king over Judah and Ben- jamin, while the other ten tribes follow Jeroboam, who strengthens himself by building Shechem and Penuel and places therein two golden calves as ob- jects of worship. Ch. xiii. : Jeroboam’s hand, as heis about to strike aman who has prophesied against the altar, withers, but at the prayer of the prophet is restored. This same prophet, deceived by an old prophet of Beth-el, eatsat the latter’s house in defiance of Kings and God’s command and is slain by a lion. Prophets. He is buried by the old prophet, who directs his children when he himself shall die to bury him by the prophet’s side. Jero- boam, in spite of the miraculous restoration of his hand, persists in his idolatry. Ch. xiv.: Abijah, Jeroboam’s son, being sick, Jeroboam sends his wife, disguised, with presents to the prophet Ahijah of Shiloh. The latter, on seeing Jeroboam’s wife, announces to her the exter- mination of Jeroboam’s family and the death of Abijah. Jeroboam is succeeded by his son Nadab. Rehoboam, falling into idolatry, is attacked by Shishak, King of Egypt, who despoils the Temple and the royal house. Rehoboam is succeeded by his son Abijam. Ch. xv.: Abijam, during a wicked reign of three years, is continually at war with Jeroboam. He is succeeded by his son Asa. The latter, a worshiper of Yuwu, is forced on account of his war with Baasha, King of Israel, to make a league with Ben- hadad. He is succeeded by his son Jehoshaphat. Nadab, after a wicked reign of two years, is assas- sinated by Baasha, who succeeds him and whose reign is an evil one. Ch. xvi.: Jehu prophesies against Baasha, who after a reign of twenty-four years is succeeded by his son Elah. The latter is assassinated by Zimri, who succeeds him and exterminates the whole fam- ily of Baasha, thus carrying out Jehu’s prophecy. Seven days later the soldiers make their general Omri king, who forces Zimri to destroy himself by fire. The kingdom of Israel is divided between Omri and Tibni, the former of whom finally becomes sole king. After a sinful reign of twelve years, during which he builds Samaria, Omri is succeeded by his son Ahab, who does “evil in the sight of the Lord above all that were before him.” Ch, xvii.: Elijah the Tishbite, having foretold a drought, hides himself at Cherith, where he is fed by ravens. He is then sent by God to Zarephath; he sojourns at the house of a widow, whose son he raises from the dead. Ch. xviii.: Elijah is commanded to go to Ahab to announce that God will send rain; he meets Oba- diah, who brings Ahab to him. Elijah, having re- proved Ahab for his wickedness, convinces him of the superiority of Yawu by calling down fire from heaven. Having slain all the prophets of Baal, Elijah obtains rain by prayer and accompanies Ahab to Jezreel. Ch. xix.: Elijah, threatened by Jezebel, flees to Beer-sheba; he then goes into the wilderness, where, being weary of his life, he is com- Elijah and forted by an angel. At Horeb God Elisha. appears to him and sends him to anoint Hazael, Jehu, and Elisha. The last-named takes leave of his parents and friends and follows Elijah. Ch. xx.: Ben-hadad besieges Samaria, demanding of Ahab all that he possesses. Encouraged by a prophet, Ahab is successful in two battles, slaying many Syrians. The Syrians submit to Ahab. Ahab sends Ben-hadad away free with a covenant, and in consequence a prophet pronounces God’s judgment against Ahab. Ch. xxi.: Ahab, demanding Naboth’s vineyard, meets with a refusal. At Jezebel’s instigation, Na- both is condemned to death for blasphemy, and Ahab takes possession of the vineyard. Elijah fore- tells God’s judgment against Ahab and Jezebel, but as Ahab repents, the punishment is deferred. Ch. xxii.: Ahab, visited by Jehoshaphat, urges the latter to accompany him to the war with Aram. Encouraged by false prophets, Ahab, contrary to the advice of Micaiah, starts for the war, and is slain at Ramoth-gilead. He is succeeded by his son Aha- ziah. Asummary of Jehoshaphat’s beneficent reign and acts; he issucceeded by his son Jehoram; short account of Ahaziah’s evil reign. Second Book of Kings: Ch. i.: Moab rebels after Ahab’s death. Ahaziah, being sick, sends to Baal-zebub; the messengers meet Elijah, who fore- tells Ahaziah’s death. Elijah, sent for by Ahaziah, destroys by fire from heaven two captains of fifty with their men; he spares the third captain and his fifty, and comes to Ahaziah, whose death he fore- tells. Ch. ii.: Account of Elijah’s translation. Having divided the Jordan with his mantle, the prophet takes leave of Elisha, granting him his request that a double portion of Elijah’s spirit may rest upon him; Elijah is then taken up in a fiery chariot to heaven. Elisha is acknowledged as Elijah’s suc- cessor; he heals the waters of Jericho, curses chil- dren who mock him, and returns to Samaria. Ch. iii.: Jehoram, Ahab’s second son, succeeds his brother Ahaziah, and, accompanied by Jehosha- phat and the King of Edom, marches against Moab. Being distressed for lack of water, the allied kings obtain it through the intervention of Elisha, who also promises them victory. The Moabites, de- ceived by the color of the water, come to plunder the allied armies, and are overcome. The King of Moab, by sacrificing his eldest son, raises the siege. Ch. iv.: Account of the miracles performed by Elisha. He multiplies the widow’s oil; gives a son to a Shunammite woman; brings to life her dead son; healsat Gilgal the deadly pottage; and satisfies 100 men with twenty loaves. Ch. v.: Naaman, on the advice of a captive maid, asks Elisha to cure him of his leprosy. Elisha sends him to bathe in the Jordan; Naaman does so and is 505 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kings, Books of sp a a cured. Elisha refuses Naaman’s gifts, but his serv- ant Gehazi takes them, for which he is smitten with leprosy. Ch. vi.: Elisha, giving leave to the young proph- ets to build a dwelling, causes theax of one of them, which has fallen into the Jordan, to float on the sur- face of the water. He discloses to the King of Israel the Syrian king’s secrets; he smites with blindness the army sent to apprehend him, brings it to Samaria, and then dismisses it in peace. Samaria, besieged by Ben- hadad, suffers from a severe famine in which women eat their children. The king sends a messenger to slay Elisha. Ch. vii.: Elisha foretells plenty in Samaria; but announces to an officer, who expresses disbelief in the prophecy, that he shall not participate therein. Four lepers, having visited the camp of the Syrians, bring word of their flight. The King of Israel sends men to spoil the tents of the enemy; abun- dance of food is secured. The officer who has doubted Elisha’s prophecy is trodden to death. Ch. viii.: The Shunammite, in order to avoid the predicted famine, leaves her country for seven years; when she returns she finds her land seized by other people. The king, in recognition of Elisha’s mira- cles, orders her land to be restored to her. Ben- hadad, being sick, sends Hazael with presents to Elisha, who prophesies that Hazael will succeed his master. Hazael kills Ben-hadad and ascends the throne. Short account of the evil reign of Jehoram, King of Judah. Edom and Libneh revolt. Jeho- ram is succeeded by his son Ahaziah; account of his sinful reign. Ch. ix.: Elisha sends a young prophet to anoint Jehu at Ramoth-gilead. Jehu, made king by the soldiers, kills Joram, Ahab’s son, in the field of Na- both, and Ahaziah in Gur. Jezebel is thrown out of a window and eaten by dogs. Ch. x.: Jehu exterminates Ahab’s family; he causes seventy sons of Ahab to be beheaded, kills forty-two of Ahaziah’s brothers, takes Jehw’s up Jehonadab into his chariot with Iniquities. him, and destroys all the worshipers of Baal. Jehu himself follows the sinful practises of Jeroboam, as a punishment for which Israel is oppressed by Hazael. Jehu is suc- ceeded by his son Jehoahaz. Ch. xi.: Athaliah destroys all the royal family with the exception of Joash (Jehoash), who is hid- den by his aunt Jehosheba in the house of God for six years. In the seventh year Joash is anointed king by Jehoiada, and Athaliah is slain. Jehoiada restores the worship of YHwuH. Ch. xii.: Joash is a worshiper of YuwuH all the days of Jehoiada. Account of Joash’s activity in repairing the Temple. MHazael is diverted from Jerusalem by a present from the sacred treasury. Joash, after a reign of forty years, is assassinated by his servants and succeeded by his son Amaziah. Ch. xiii.: Account of Jehoahaz’s evil reign. Je- hoahazs‘oppressed by Hazae], prays to God, who relieves him. He is succeeded by his son Joash, who, after a wicked reign of sixteen years, is fol- lowed by his son Jeroboam. Elisha dies; his bones, by the touching of them, bring to life a dead man. Elisha’s Career. Hazael is succeeded by his son Ben-hadad, from whom Joash recovers the cities which his father lost. Ch. xiv.: Amaziah’s reign; his victory over Edom, and his defeat by Joash. Amaziah, slain by conspirators, is succeeded by his son Azariah. Ac- count of Jeroboam’s reign; he is succeeded by his son Zechariah. Ch. xv.: Short account of Azariah’s good reign; he dies a leper, and is succeeded by his son Jotham. Zechariah, the last of Jehu’s dynasty and an idolater, is slain by Shallum, who succeeds him and who, after a reign of one month, in turn is slain by Menahem. Account of Menahem’s victories; he secures the as- sistance of Pul, King of Assyria. Menahem, dying, is succeeded by/his son Pekahiah. The latter is slain by Pekah, during whose reign Tiglath-pileser seizes a part of the land of Israel. Pekah is slain by Hoshea and is succeeded by him. Jotham after a good reign of sixteen years is succeeded by his son Ahaz. Ch. xvi.; Account of Abaz’s wicked reign. As- sailed by Rezin and Pekah, he bribes Tiglath-pile- ser to help him against them. Ac- The Later count of the altar built by Uriah Kings. for Ahaz and of the latter’s spolia- tion of the Temple. Ahaz is suc- ceeded by Hezekiah. Ch. xvii.: Account of Hoshea’s wicked reign. Being subdued by Shalmaneser, he conspires against him, the result of which is the capture of Samaria as a punishment for the sins of Israel. Account of the strange nations transplanted in Samaria by the King of Assyria; lions being sent among them, they make idols and set them in the high places. Ch. xviii. : Account of Hezekiah’s beneficent reign ; he destroys idolatry and prospers. Israel is carried away into captivity. Sennacherib, invading Judah, is at first pacified by tribute; but heafterward sends Rab-shakeh, who reviles Hezekiah and incites the people to revolt (see Isa. xxxvi.). Ch. xix.: Hezekiah requests Isaiah to pray for his kingdom, and is comforted by the prophet. Sen- nacherib, obliged to leave Jerusalem in order to en- counter Tirhakah, sends a blasphemous letter to Hezekiah. Hezekiah’s prayer and Isaiah’s prophecy are followed by the annihilation of Sennacherib’s army (see Isa. xxxvii.). Ch. xx.: Hezekiah, being sick, is told by Isaiah that he will die; in answer to his prayer his life is lengthened. The shadow goes ten degrees back- ward. Merodach-baladan’s embassy to Hezekiah, and Isaiah’s prophecy with regard to it (see Isa. XXXVili._xxxix.). Hezekiah issucceeded by his son Manasseh. Ch. xxi.: Account of Manasseh’s reign and of his flagrant idolatry. He issucceeded by hisson Amon, who, after a reign of two years, is slain by his serv- ants; he is succeeded by his son Josiah. Ch. xxii.: Josiah during his long and good reign is very active in repairing the Temple. MHilkiah having found a scroll of the Law, Josiah sends to consult Huldah concerning it; she prophesies the destruction of Jerusalem, but not untilafter Josiah’s death. Ch. xxiii.: Josiah, having read the Law in a sol- emn assembly, renews the covenant of Yawn. Jo- Kings, Books of Kinnim THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 506 eee __ nee siah’s activity in the destruction of idolatry; he celebrates the Passover. Having provoked Pharaoh- nechoh, Josiah is slain by him at Megiddo. Jehoahaz, Josiah’s son, succeeds to the throne. Pharaoh-nechoh, having imprisoned Jehoahaz, makes Jehoiakim king ; the latter reigns indifferently for eleven years. Ch. xxiv.: Jehoiakim, subdued by Nebuchadnez- zar, rebels against him. He is succeeded by his son Jehoiachin, during whose wicked reign the King of Egypt is vanquished by the King of Babylon, Jeru- salem also is taken, and the royal family, inclu- ding the king, and most of the inhabitants are car- ried captive to Babylon. Zedekiah is made king and reigns till the destruction of Judah. Ch, xxv.: Account of the siege of Jerusalem and of the capture of Zedekiah. Nebuzar-adan destroys the city and the Temple, carries away the Temple vessels, and deports most of the people to Babylon. Gedaliah, who has been made ruler over those who remain in Judah, is slain, and the rest of the peo- ple flee into Egypt. Evil-merodach, King of Baby- lon, releases Jehoiachin from prison; and the latter is honored at court. 8. M. Seu. —Critical View: A superficial examination of the Books of Kings makes clear the fact that they are a compilation and not an original composition. The compiler, or editor, constantly cites certain of his sources. In the case of Solomon it is “the book of the acts of Solomon” (I Kings xi. 41); for the Northern Kingdom it is “the book of the chronicies of the kings of Israel,” which is cited seventeen times, ¢.e., for all the kings except Jehoram and Hoshea (see, ¢.g., 2b. xv. 81); and for the kings of Judah it is “the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah,” which is cited fifteen times, 7.e., for all the kings except Ahaziah, Athaliah, Jehoahaz, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah (see, e.g., tb. xv. 7). Whether the editor had access to these “ chronicles,” as they were deposited in the state archives, or sim- ply to a history based upon them, can not with cer- tainty be determined. It is generally assumed that the latter was the case (comp. Kuenen, “ Historisch- Kritische Einleitung in die Biicher des Alten Testa- ments,” p. 68, and Cornill, “Hinleitung in das Alte Testament,” p. 128). It was not the purpose of the compiler to give a complete history of the period covered by his work; for he constantly refers to these sources for addi- tional details. He mentions asa rule a few impor- tant events which are sufficient to illustrate the atti- tude of the king toward the Deuteronomic law, or some feature of it, such as the central sanctuary and the “high places,” and then proceeds Object and to pronounce judgment upon him ac- Method cordingly. Hach reign is introduced of Work. witha regular formula; then follows : a short excerpt from one of his sources; after which an estimate of the character of the mon- arch is given in stereotyped phraseology; and the whole concludes with a statement of the king’s death and burial, according to a regular formula (comp., e.g., 1 Kings xv. 1-9 for the formula used for the kings of Judah, and 7. xv. 25-82 for that used for the kings of Israel). The standpoint of the judgments passed upon the various kings as well as the vocabulary of the com- piler (comp. Driver, “Introduction,” 1891, p. 190, for a list of his words) indicates that he lived after the reforms of Josiah (621 B.c.) had brought the Deuteronomic Jaw into prominence. How much later than this the book in its present form was com- posed, may be inferred from the fact that it con- cludes with a notice of ‘Jehoiachin’s release from prison by Evil-merodach (Amil-Marduk) after the death of Nebuchadnezzar in 562. The book must have taken its present form, therefore, during the Exile, and probably in Babylonia. As no mention is made of the hopes of return which are set forth in Isa. xl.-lv., the work was probably concluded be- fore 550. Besides the concluding chapters there are allusions in the body of the work which imply an exilic date (see, ¢.g., 1 Kings viii. 34, xi. 39; II Kings xvii. 19, 20; xxiii. 26, 27). To these may be added the expression “beyond the river” (I Kings y. 4), used to designate the country west of the Eu- phrates, which implies that Babylonia was the home of the writer. On the other hand, there are indications which imply that the first redaction of Kings must have occurred before the downfall of the Time of Judeanmonarchy. The phrase “unto Redaction. this day” occurs inI Kings viii. 8, ix. 21, xii. 19; II Kings. viii. 22, xvi. 6, where it seems to have been added by an editor who was condensing material from older annals, but de- scribed conditions still existing when he was wri- ting. Again, in I Kings xi. 36, xv. 4, and II Kings viii. 19, which come from the hand of a Deuteronomic editor, David has, and is to have, a lamp burning in Jerusalem; 7.¢., the Davidic dynasty is still reign- ing. Finally, I Kings viii. 29, 30, 31, 38, 35, 38, 42, 44, 48; ix. 8; and xi. 86 imply that the Temple is still standing. There was accordingly a pre-exilic Book of Kings. The work in this earlier form must have been composed between 621 and 586. | As the glamour of Josiah’s reforms was strong upon the compiler, perhaps he wrote before 600. To this original work IT Kings xxiy. 10-xxv. 30 was added in the Exile, and, perhaps, xxiii. 81-xxiv. 9. In addition to the supplement which the exilic editor appended, a comparison of the Masoretic text with the Septuagint as represented in codices B and L shows that the Hebrew text was retouched by an- other hand after the exemplars which underlie the Alexandrine text had been made. Thusin B and L, I Kings v.7 follows on iv. 19; vi. 12-14 is omitted; ix. 26 follows on ix. 14, so that the account of Solo- mon’s dealings with Hiram is continuous, most of the omitted portion being inserted after x. 22. II Kings xxi., the history of Naboth, precedes ch. xx., so that xx, and xxii.,-which are excerpts from the Same source, come together. Such discrepancies prove sufficient late editorial work to justify the as- sumption of two recensions. In brief outline the sources of the books appear to have been these: I Kings i. and ii. are extract- ed bodily from an early court history of David’s private life, which is largely used in II Sam. ix.-xx. The editor (Rd) has added notes at ii. 2-4 and 10-12. For the reign of Solomon the source is professedly Sources. 507 “the book of the acts of Solomon” (xi. 41); but other sources were employed, and much was added by Rd. Ch. iii. isa prophetic narrative of relatively early origin, worked over by Rd, who added verses 2, 8,and 14, 15. Ch. iv. 1-19 is presumably derived from the Chronicle of Solomon. Ch. iv. 20-v. 14 contains a small kernel of prophetic narrative which has been retouched by many hands, some of them later than the Septuagint. The basis of v. 15-vii. 51 was apparently a document from the Temple archives; but this was freely expanded by Rd (comp. Stade in his “Zeitschrift,” 1883, pp. 129 e¢ seq.), and vi. 11-14 also by a later annotator. Ch. viil. 1-18, the account of the dedication of the Tem- ple, is from an old narrative, slightly expanded by later hands under the influence of P. Ch. viii. 14-66 is in its present form the work of Rd slightly re- touched in the Exile. Ch. ix. 1-9 is the work of Rd, but whether before the Exile or during it is disputed. Ch. ix. 10- x. 29 consists of extracts from an old source, presumably “the book of the acts of Solomon,” pieced together and expanded by later editors. The orderin the Masoretic text differs from that in the Septuagint. For details see Kittel, “Die Konigsbiicher,” in Nowack’s “Handkommentar.” Ch. xi. 1-18 is the work of Rd; xi. 14-22 is a con- fused account, perhaps based on two older nar- ratives (comp. Winckler, “ Alttestamentliche For- schungen,” pp. 1-6); and xi. 26-31 and 89, 40 prob- ably formed a part of a history of Jeroboam from which xii. 1-20 and xiv. 1-18 were also taken. The extracts in ch. xi. have been set and retouched by later editors (comp. Kittel on I Kings xi. 23-48). From ch. xii. of the First Book onward these books are characterized by an alternation of short notices which give epitomes of historical events, with longer narratives extracted from various sources. The following sections are short epitomes: I Kings xiv. 21-xvi. 84; xxii. 41-58; II Kings Narratives viii. 16-29; x. 32-86; xii. 18-xiil. 18; and and xiii. 22-xvii. 6. In some cases Epitomes. short extracts are even here made in full, as in xiv. 8-14 and xvi. 10-16. The longer narratives, which are frequently re- touched and expanded by Rd, are as follows: I Kings xii. 1-20, xiv. 1-18, from an older narrative of Jeroboam, to which xii. 21-82 and xiv. 19, 20 are additions; xii. 83-xiii. 34, a comparatively late story of a prophet; xvii.-xix. and xxi., an early pro- phetic narrative written in the Northern Kingdom (comp. xix. 3); xx. and xxii. 1-40, an early north- Israelitish history of the Syrian war in which Ahab lost his life; II Kings i.-viii. 15 and ix. 1-x. 31, north-Israelitish narratives, not all from one hand, which are retouched here and there, as in iii. 1-8, by Rd; xi. 1-xii. 17, a Judean narrative of the over- throw of Athaliah and the accession of Joash; xiii. 14-21 and xiv. 8-14, two excerpts from material written in the Northern Kingdom (comp. xiv. 11); xvii. 7-23 is Rd’s commentary on the historical no- tice with which the chapter opens; xvii. 24-41 is composite (comp. verses 32, 34, and 41), probably written in the Exile and retouched after the time of Nehemiah; ».viii.-xx. is compiled by Rd from three sources (comp. Stade, /.c. vi. 174), Rd himself pre- fixing, inserting, and adding some material; xxi. is, THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kings, Books of Kinnim throughout, the work of Rd; xxii.-xxiii. 25 is an extract from the Temple archives with slight edit- ing; and xxiii. 29-xxv. 30, the appendix of the ex- ilic editor, is based on Jer. xl. 7-xliii. 6. From Jer- emiah, too, the exilic editor drew his information, which he presented in briefer form. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kuenen, Historisch-Kritische Einleitung in die Biicher des Alten Testaments, pp. 62-99, Leipsic, 1890; Cornill, Hinleitung in das Alte Testament, 1891, pp. 120-182; Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testa- ment, 1891, pp. 175-193; Kittel, Die KOnigsbticher, 1900, in Nowack’s Handkommentar; Benzinger, Die Bticher der Konige, 1899, in K. H.C.; Silberstein, in Stade’s Zeitschrift, xiii. 1-76. ia Gee GaeAceb: KINGSTON. See Jamaica. KINNIM (“Birds’ Nests”). Name of a treatise of the Mishnah in the series Kodashim. The Penta- teuchal law ordains the sacrifice of two turtle-doves or of two young pigeons for a person that has been cured of an issue (Lev. xv. 14-15, 28-29). A similar sacrifice is prescribed for poor lepers when they have become clean again (Lev. xiv. 22, 30), for poor women after childbirth (Lev. xii. 8), and for such of the poor as have trespassed in regard to Lev. v. 1 et seq. Of the two turtle-doves or pigeons of which this sacrifice consists, the one is for a sin-offering, the other for a burnt offering. The Law further- more provides (Lev. i. 14) that one who has vowed an offering of fowls may bring turtle-doves or young pigeons. This is the so-called “free-will offering.” The treatise Kinnim discusses these regulations in de- tail. In this connection are instanced a number of cases, some of them being hypothetical and care- fully elaborated, of confusing pigeons brought by different persons for different sacrifices. In the Mishnah of the Babylonian Talmud this treatise is the ninth in the series Kodashim, but in most editions of the Mishnah it is the eleventh and last. It is divided into three chapters, containing fifteen paragraphs in all. Ch. i.: The blood of a sin-offering of fowls is sprinkled below the line which divides the altar, that of a burnt offering of fowls, above; the free- will dove-offerings can be brought only as burnt offerings; difference between the vowed offering (“neder”) which, if it dies or is stolen, must be re- placed, and the free-will offering (“nedabah ”), which can not be replaced (§ 1). Concerning the confu- sing of a sin-offering with a burnt offering, and vice versa, and concerning the confusing of different pairs of sacrificial birds ($§ 2-4). Ch. ii.: Cases in which one of a pair of fowls for sacrifice flies away before it has been decided which was to be the sin-offering and which the burnt offering (§§ 1-8); cases in which one escapes after the decision has been made (§ 4). An offering may consist either of turtle-doves or of young pigeons, but not of one turtle-dove and one young pigeon. Cases in which heirs must supply the offering (§ 5). Ch. iii.: Further details concerning the confusion of different sacrifices; a more precise treatment of matter discussed in ch. i. ($$ 1-5). R. Joshua ex- plains the proverb, “The ram has one voice during its life, and seven after its death,” by pointing out that his horns, skin, thigh-bones, and intestines are used in the making of musical instruments (§ 5). The chapter, and the treatise, ends with a saying of Kinship Kirkisani THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 508 SON ee eS R. Simeon ben ‘Akashya, that “the folly of the ignorant increases with age, while the intellect of scholars becomes clearer and firmer.” This hagga- dic conclusion is a confirmation of the view that the treatise Kinnim terminated the series Kodashim. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Z. Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, p. 262, Leipsic, 1859. ris nh ae KINSHIP. See Famity AND Famity LIFE. KINSMAN. See Faminy AND Famity LiFe. KINYAN. See ALIENATION AND ACQUISITION. KIPPURIM, YOM HA... Day oF. KIR: A peopleand country subject to the Assyr- ian empire. In II Kings xvi. 9 and Amos i. 5, ix. 7, Kir is mentioned as the place whither the Syrians went before they settled in the regions north of Pal- estine, and to which Tiglath-pileser sent the prison- ers after the conquest of Damascus. In Isa. xxii. 6 Kir is mentioned in connection with Elam: “ And Elam bare the quiver with chariots of men and horsemen, and Kir uncovered the shield.” The Septuagint translates the last clause ovwvayoyf rapa- Tagewc, omitting “Kir” altogether and taking A7y for my, hence ovvaywy#. Hitherto it has not been possible to identify the place. E. G. H. Bee KIRALFY, IMRE: Musical composer; born in Budapest, Hungary, Jan. 1, 1845. He received his musical education at Budapest, Vienna, and Paris. Kiralfy, who commenced composition of music at the age of twelve, is the author, originator, and producer of a series of spectacular exhibitions given inthe United States andin England. Among these may be mentioned: “Around the World in Eighty Days,” 1878, which held the stage for many years; “ America,” produced at the Columbian Ex- position at Chicago, 1893;‘*Venice in London,” 1895 ; “Military Exhibition,” 1901; “Paris in London,” 1902. He is also the author of: “Our Naval Victories,” produced in New York, 1898; “ Women of all Nations,” 1900; “China, or the Relief of the Legations,” 1901. Of his compositions the follow- ing have been published: “ Nero,” “ Venice, the Bride of the Sea,” “Columbus,” “Our Naval Victories,” “ America,” “China,” and “ India.” Kiralfy, who now (1904) resides in London, had two brothers, Arnold and Bolossy Kiralfy, who were long associated with him. The Kiralfy Brothers built in 1876 the Alhambra Palace, the present South Broad Street Theater, in Philadelphia, where until the early part of 1877 they produced their spectacular exhibitions. EC ERY orate wake Jews of Philadelphia, pp. 382- A. KC. KIRCHHEIM, RAPHAEL: Germanscholar; born in Frankfort-on-the-Main 1804; died there Sept. 6, 1889. For some time he was shohet in the Orthodox congregation of Samson Raphael Hirsch in Frankfort, in which city he spent his whole life. He assented to the protest of the seventy-seven Orthodox rabbis against the decrees of the Rabbin- ical Conference at Brunswick (1844), and attacked See ATONEMENT, in am open letter (“Offener Brief,” 1845), signed “Km,” A. Adler, rabbi of Worms. When Abra- ham Geiger became rabbi at Frankfort, Kirchheim developed into a radical partizan of Reform. He had then to give up his position as shohet, but being a partner in a banking firm he had ample means. Kirchheim was of a pugnacious disposition and took a very active part in the general attack on the Am- sterdam administration of the Halukkah in 1843-44, which was especially directed against Hirsch Leuren of Amsterdam, president of the board of administration (see “Orient,” iv. 391 et seq.). Kirchheim severely criticized Samson Raphael Hirsch’s “ Der Pentateuch” in a pamphlet entitled “Die Neue Exegetenschule: Eine Kritische Dornen- lese ” (Breslau, 1867). Kirchheim published: 8. L. Rapoport’s “Toka- hat Megullah, Sendschreiben an die Rabbinerver- sammlung zu Frankfurt-am-Main ” (Hebr. and Ger- man, the translation being by Kirchheim him- self), Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1845; Azulai’s “Shem ha-Gedolim” and “ Wa‘ad la-Hakamim” with the annotations of A. Fuld and E. Carmoly, 72d. 1847; “ Karme Shomeron,” an introduction to the Talmud- ical treatise “ Kutim,” with an additional letter by 8. D. Luzzatto, 7b. 1851 (the appendix gives the seven smaller treatises of the Jerusalem Talmud, accord- ing to a Carmoly manuscript); Eliezer Ashkenazi’s “Ta‘am Zekenim,” 2). 1854; B. Goldberg’s edition of Jonah ibn Janah’s “Sefer ha-Rikmah,” with addi- tional notes of his, 2d. 1856; “ Perush ‘al Dibre ha- Ya- mim, Commentar zur Chronik aus dem X Jahrhun- dert,” 7b. 1874; Abraham Geiger’s “ Nachgelassene Schriften,” v. 1, Berlin, 1877. He wrote also additional notes to: A. Ginzburg’s “Perush ReDaK ‘al ha-Torah,” Presburg, 1842; S. Werblumer’s edition of Joseph ibn Caspi’s “‘Am- mude Kesef,” 2b. 1848; and Filipowski’s “Sefer Teshubot Dunash ben Labrat.” Besides he pub- lished many articles in German magazines. Kirchheim left a valuable collection of Hebraica and Judaica, which at present belongs to the relig- ious school of the M. Horovitz Synagogue at Frank- fort. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1889, p. 587; S. Bernfeld, Toledot _ha-Reformazion, p. 214; Zeitlin, Kiryat Sefer, p. 171; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 415. 8. M. Sc. KIRIMI, ABRAHAM: Crimean rabbi of the fourteenth century. According to Firkovitch (“C. I. H.” No. 50), Kirimi was a proselyte and a pupil of AARON BEN JOSEPH THE KARAITE. He derived his name from his native town Kirim, or Sulehat, in the Crimea. Kirimi was the author of “Sefat Emet,” a com- mentary on the Pentateuch, in which he tries to refute the interpretations of the Karaites when they are in contradiction to those of the Rabbinites. Kirimi says in the preface that he wrote the work at the request of many notable Jews and especially of his Karaite pupil Hezekiah b. Elhanan ha-Nasi, whom he held in high esteem. A part of the pref- ace is in verse, the last two lines of which may be translated: “To the one who asks for the author’s name, answer ‘Abraham who was born at Kirim. His date is 5118 [1858].’” Steinschneider ané 509 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kinship Kirkisani Fuenn consider this date to be that of the composi- tion of the work; but it seems rather to be that of the author’s birth. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. xi. 38, 39; Fuenn, Ha-Karmel, iii. 53 et seq.; idem, Keneset Yisrael, p. 62. (ShoSt, M. SEL. KIRJATH-ARBA. See Hepron. KIRJATH-JEARIM (“city of forests”): 1. A descendant of Caleb, the son of Hur (I Chron. ii. 50, 52, 58). 2. One of the towns of the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 17), which belonged to the tribe of Judah (4b. xv. 60; Judges xviii. 12), on the border of Ben- jamin (Josh. xviii. 15; I Chron. ii. 50), to which it was finally assigned (7b. xviii. 28). At Kirjath- jearim the Ark was kept before its removal by David to Jerusalem, having been brought from Beth-shemesh after its return from the land of the Philistines (I Sam. vii; I Chron. xiii.). After the Captivity Kirjath-jearim was repeopled (Ezraii. 25; Neh. vii. 29). Its site appears to have been not far from Beeroth (Ezra ii. 25). The prophet Urijah, the son of Shemaiah, put to death by King Jehoiakim, was a native of Kirjath-jearim (Jer. xxvi. 20 et seq.). Other names for the same place are “ Baalah ” (Josh. xv. 9, 10; I Chron. xiii. 6) and “Kirjath-baal” (Josh. xv. 60). E. G. H. 1Be 1k KIRJATH-SEPHER: City in the hill-country of Judah (Josh. xv. 49), situated to the south of He- bron (x. 88), on a prominence not very far from that city (¢. xv. 15). It was the former name of Debir (#0. xv. 15; Judges i. 11), and was also known as “Kirjath-sannah” (Josh. xv. 49), for which the Septuagint gives méA¢ ypaypdrwr (“city of letters”), the usual translation of “ Kirjath-sepher.” Debir was among the cities which were assigned to the priests (Josh. xxi. 15; I Chron. vi. 58). It is iden- tified with the present Al-Dahariyyah. The name seems to indicate that it was the “city of the roll,” z.e., for enrolment or enlisting purposes; but the sec- ond element, “sepher,” may possibly be the name of a deity. To explain it as “Library-city ” appears to be assuming too much. EB. G. H. Bae: KIRJATHAIM (R. VY. Kiriathaim, pnp = “two cities”): 1. City on the Moabite plateau, assigned by Moses to Reuben; mentioned with Heshbon and Elealeh (Num. xxxii. 37) as well as with Kedemoth and other cities which had previ- ously belonged to Sihon (Josh. xiii. 18-20). It is spoken of as a Moabite town in Jer. xlviii. 28, Ezek. xxv. 9, and in the inscription of Mesha (line 10), who, calling it “Kiryatan” (jmp), declares that he had built or fortified it. Kirjathaim gave its name to the plain Shaveh Kiriathaim (Gen. xiv. 5). In the “Onomasticon” (s.v. Kaprabasiu, Kapiaba) it is de- scribed as a Christian village situated ten Roman miles west of Medeba. It is identified by many scholars with the ruins now called “ Kariyah,” south- west of Macherus (see Conder in Hastings, “ Dict. Bible,” and the bibliography there given). 2. A city in Naphtali assigned to the Gershonite Levites (I Chron. vi. 61 [A. V. 76]). In the parallel list of Josh. xxi. 82, it is called “ Kartan.” E. G. H. M. SEL. KIRKISANI, ABU YUSUF YA‘KUB AL- (according to Steinschneider, Yusuf Abu Ya‘- kub): Karaite dogmatist and exegete; flourished in the first half of the tenth century; a native of Cir- cassia (whence the name of Kirkisani). He seems to have traveled throughout the Orient, visiting the centers of Mohammedan learning, in which he was well versed. In 937 Kirkisani wrote an Arabic work on the precepts—under the title “Kitab al-Anwar wal-Marakib” (known in Hebrew as “Sefer ha- Me’orot,” or “Sefer ha-Ma’or”), with the subtitle “Kitab al-Shara’i‘” (“Sefer Mizwot Gadol”)—and a commentary entitled “Al-Riyad wal-Hada’ik ” (“Sefer ha-Gannim we-Pardesim,” or “Sefer ha- Nizzanim”), on those portions of the Pentateuch which do not deal with the laws. Of these two volumes the more interesting is the former, which not only provides valuable informa- tion concerning the development of Karaism, but throws light also on many questions in rabbinical Judaism. It comprises thirteen treatises, each di- vided into chapters, and the first four treatises form an introduction to the whole work. In the first treatise, of eighteen chapters, Kirkisani gives a com- prehensive survey of the development of the Jewish sects, the material for which he drew not only from the works of his predecessors, as David ibn Merwan al-Mukammas, whom he mentions, but also from his personal experiences in the learned circles in which he moved. The enumeration of the sects is given in chronological order, beginning with the Samaritans, and concluding with the sect founded by Daniel al- Kumisi. Kirkisani declares the Rab- Contents of binites to be a Jewish sect founded by “Kitab al- Jeroboam I., although it did not make Anwar.” its appearance until the time of the Second Temple. Zadok, the founder of the Sadducean sect, in his excursuses against the Rabbinites, revealed part of the truth on religious subjects, while Anan disclosed the whole. How- ever, in spite of Kirkisani’s admiration for Anan,” he often disagrees with him in the explanation of the precepts. It is noteworthy that Kirkisani includes Christian- ity among the Jewish sects. In the third treatise (ch. xvi.) he says that “the religion of the Chris- tians, as practised at present, has nothing in com- mon with the teachings of Jesus.” It originated with Paul, who ascribed divinity to Jesus and pro- phetic inspiration to himself. It was Paul that denied the necessity of carrying out the Command- ments and taught that religion consisted in humility ; and the Nicene Council adopted pre- View of cepts which occur neither in the Law, Chris- nor in the Gospels, nor in the Acts of tianity. Peterand Paul. Kirkisani devotesa great portion of the first treatise to attacks upon the Rabbinites, in which he does not show himself impartial; but he is not blind to the faults of the Karaites. In the last chapter he draws a sad picture of the spiritual condition of Karaism in his time. “ You can scarcely find two Karaites of one and the same opinion on all matters; upon almost any point each has an opinion different from those of all the rest.” He deplores the neglect by the Karaites of the study of rabbinical literature, Kirgisani ish THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 510 which, according to him, would furnish them with weapons for their controversies with the Rabbinites. Here Kirkisani is referring to the discrepancies fre- quent in haggadic and mystic literature, such as the “Shi‘ur Komah,” which, indeed, he often uses in his attacks against the Rabbinites. The second treatise, of twenty-eight chapters, dis- cusses the duty of applying critical methods to the study of religious matters. Kirkisani is the first Karaite known to have been a firm believer in the study of the sciences, and he criticizes those who, although accepting the fundamental principle of in- dependent inquiry and research, are against the demonstrative sciences of dialectics and philosophy. Reason is the foundation upon which every article of faith is based, and from which all knowledge flows. The third treatise, of twenty-three chapters, is a critical review of adverse religious sects and Christianity. In the seventeenth and eighteenth chapters Kirkisani refutes the doctrine of metem- psychosis, though among its exponents was Anan, who wrote a work on the subject. For Kir- kisani, the solution of the question, much debated by the Motazilite Kalam, concerning the punish- ments inflicted upon children is not to be found in the doctrine of metempsychosis, but in the belief that compensation will be given to children in the future world for their sufferings in this. In the fourth treatise Kirkisani expounds, in sixty- eight chapters, the fundamental principles leading to the comprehension of the particular religious prescriptions. The remaining treatises are devoted to the precepts themselves, which are arranged in systematic order. Kirkisani quotes the views of the earliest Karaite authorities (as Anan, Benjamin Nahawendi, Daniel al-Kumisi, etc.), which he often refutes. Belonging to the Ba‘ale ha-Rikkub, he is particularly severe in his views on the laws of In- cEst, and he combats the opinion of his contempo- rary Jacob ben Ephraim al-Shami, who permitted marriage to the daughter of one’s brother or sister. Most of the “ Kitab al-Anwar” and the beginning of the“ Al-Riyad wal-Hada’ik” are still extant in manuscript, in the Firkovich collec- Extant tion in the Imperial Library of St. Manu- Petersburg (Nos. 1142-1444). The scripts. first treatise of the “ Kitab al-Anwar,” dealing with the Jewish sects, was pub- lished by A. Harkavy in the memoirs of the Orien- tal section of the Archeological Society (viii. 1849). Various fragments of seven treatises (ii.—vi., viii., ix.—xii.) are found in the British Museum (Oriental MSS. Nos. 2,524, 2,526, 2,5'78-2,582). They were analyzed by Poznanski, who published’ the text of chapters xvii. and xviii. of the third treatise, dealing with the doctrine of metempsychosis, and chapter xxxv. of the fifth treatise, in which Kirkisani dis- cusses the question whether it is permitted to read on the Sabbath books written in other than Hebrew characters (Kohut Memorial Volume, pp. 485-462; “Steinschneider Festschrift,” pp. 195 et seq.). The text of the sixteenth chapter of the third treatise, dealing with the criticism of Christianity, was pub- lished by H. Hirschfeld in his chrestomathy. A dis- sertation on the Decalogue by Kirkisani, and which Steinschneider supposes to be the first chapter of the sixth treatise, beginning with proofs of the existence of God, is found in the Bibliothéque Nationale (No. 755). Both the “Kitab al-Anwar” and the “Al- Riyad wal-Hada’ik” were abridged, the former by a certain Moses ben Solomon ha-Levi‘jayn. Har- kavy deduces from quotations that Kirkisani trans- lated the Bible into Arabic, wrote commentaries on the Book of Job and on Ecclesiastes, and wrote a work on the unity of God (“ Kitab al-Tauhid ”). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Geiger, Melo Chofnajim, p. 74; Munk, in Ts- raelitische Annalen, iii. 76, 93; Delitzsch, to Aaron ben Bli- jah’s ‘hz ha-Hayyim, p. 313; Dukes, Beitrdige, i. 28; Stein- schneider, Cat. Leyden, pp. 181, 185; idem, Hebr. Bibl. xx. 107, xxi. 18; idem, Hebr. Uebers. p. 449; idem, Die Ara- bische Literatur der Juden, $43; Pinsker, Likskute Kadmo- niyyot, i. 169, ii. 201; First, Gesch. des Kardert. ii. 140; Firkovich, Bene Reshef, pp. 20, 21; Harkavy, Meassef Nid- dahim, pp. 2, 16; idem, Studien und Mitthetlungen, iii. 44; idem, in Memoiren der Orientalischen Abtheilung der Archoologischen Gesellschaft zu St. Petersburg, 1894, viii. ; Poznanski, Die Qirgisani Handschriften im Brit. Mus. in Steinschneider Festschrift, 1896, pp. 195-218; idem, Aus Qirgisani’s Kitab al-Anwar, in Kohut Memorial Vol- ume, pp. 435-462 ; idem, Jacob ben Ephraim, in Kaufmann Gedenkbuch; Bacher, in J. Q. R. vii. 687 et seq. LB K. 5 R. KIRK-KILISSEH: City in Thrace, European Turkey, 102 miles north of Constantinople. The name signifies in Turkish “forty churches.” Kirk-Kilisseh is an ancient Greek city, and it con- tained no Jews when Sultan Murad II. conquered it in 1436. Archbishop Melissinos Christodoulo relates that in 1674 Sultan Mohammed IV., after having taken Bessarabia from the Poles, brought a large number of Jews from Kaminiec to Kirk-Kilisseh, where he placed a garrison of 2,000 spahis. The descendants of these Jews are called “ Eskenazi,” which seems to prove that Kirk-Kilisseh originally contained Jews of Spanish-Italian origin, if one may judge from their names—Mitrani (from Trani in Italy), Rodrigue, Castiel, Hasdai, and Shaprut. The oldest epitaph in the local cemetery, dated 5423 (=1668), is that of a rabbi, Abraham Molina, origi- nally from Uskup. During the Turco-Russian war of 1877-78, the Jews of Kirk-Kilisseh joined with their fellow citi- zens, and with the Jews from Yambol who had taken refuge in the city, in bravely defending the place against the attacks of Circassian pillagers. Before the first Balkan War, 1912-13, there were about 1,000 Jews in a total population of 15,000. It possesses an ancient synagogue, two schools con- taining 200 pupils (boys and girls), two benevolent societies, and a reading-room. Kark-Kilisseh being very rich in vineyards, the Jews, like their fellow citizens, are engaged in the autumn in wine-making. During the remainder of the year they follow different trades. Three Jews of the city are officials of the local government. At Lule-Burgos, in the neighborhood of Kirk- Kilisseh, there were sixty Jewish families, and at Baba-Eski ten families. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Melissinos Christodoulo, Weprypady ‘Ioro- proypapiky THs "Exapxtas Sapavra "ExxAnowwv, Athens, 1881. Dz M. Fr. KIRSCHBAUM, ELIEZER SIMON: Aus- trian physician and writer; born at Sieniawa, Gali- cia, 1797; died at Cracow 1860. After studying philosophy and medicine in Berlin, he settled asa physician in Cracow, and as “ Der Berliner Doctor” 511 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kirkisani ish soon acquired an extensive practise and accumulated a considerable fortune. In order to be able to secure the estate of Siemota, near Chrzanow, he adopted the Christian religion, and assumed the name of “Sigismund.” As a mar- ried man he permitted his wife to remain a law- abiding Jewess throughout her life. Kirschbaum was the author of a long Hebrew es- say, entitled “ Hilkot Yeme ha-Mashiah.” In the Ger- man language he published “ Der Jiidische Alexan- drinismus,” Leipsic, 1841, and “Der Familie Apo- theose,” Cracow, 1858. 8. M. WE. KIRSTEIN, MORITZ: German physician; born at Filehne 1880; died in Berlin July 12, 1896. He studied at the Gymnasium zum Grauen Kloster, in Berlin, and later at the university of that city, obtaining his M.D. degree in 1855: The same year he went to Vienna and Prague to take a post- graduate course under Oppolzer, Skoda, Dittel, Schuh, and Hebra. Kirstein then settled as a phy- sician in Berlin, where, in 1860, he was the first practitioner to make use of the laryngeal mirror in exploration of the larynx and the thoracic cavities. At the time of his death he was a member of the Berlin board of health. He contributed to various specialist publications. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Anton Bettelheim, Biographisches Jahr- buch, 1897, p. 154. 8. K. Ms. KISCH: Family of some distinction; migrated in the 16th century from Chiesch in Bohemia ; the found- er of the family lived in Prague in the eighteenth century, and the members are now spread through- out Europe. The most prominent members are: Abraham Kisch: Physician, and one of the teachers of Moses Mendelssohn; born at Prague in the first half of the eighteenth century (1720?) ; died June 5, 18038. Compelled to leave Prague with his core- ligionists in 1745, he went to Germany. During his sojourn at Breslau he founded a hebra kaddisha and a hospital, both of these being modeled after similar institutions at Prague. Thence he went to Berlin, where he completed his studies under the guidance of Aaron Gumperz; here he instructed Moses Mendelssohn in Latin. In 1749 he received from the University of Halle his degree of Ph.D., and in the same year that of M.D. for his disserta- tion, “ Theoria et Therapia Phthiseos Pulmonalis.” The empress Maria Theresa having in the mean- time permitted the Jews to return to Prague, Kisch was elected physician of the community and di- rector of the Meisel Hospital. These offices he re- tained until 1763. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Kayserling, Moses Mendelssohn, p. 15; Hock- Kaufmann, Die Familien Prags, p. 314, Presburg, 1872; Carmoly, Les Médecins Juifs. D. A. Kt. Alexander Kisch: Austrian rabbi and writer; born Oct. 5, 1848, at Prague. From 18638 to 1872 he studied at the Jewish Theological Seminary of Bres- lau. He then went to Paris as tutor to the family of Baton Horace de Ginzburg. In 1874 he was called as rabbi to Brix, Bohemia, and subsequently to Zurich; in 1886 he was called to the Meiselsyna- gogue at Prague, succeeding Dr. A. Stein. Kisch has published: “Der Septuagintal-Kodex des Ulfilas,” Breslau, 1873; Prague, 1902; “Papst Gregor des IX. Anklage Gegen den Talmud,” Leip- sic, 1874; “Hillel I.,” Prague, 1875; “Das Testa- ment Mordecai Meisel’s,” Frankfort, 1898; “Das Mosaisch-Talmudische Eherecht R. Ezechiel Lan- dau’s,” Leipsic, 1900. S. Enoch Heinrich Kisch: Austrian balneother- apist; born at Prague May 6, 1841. He received his education at his native town, graduating as M.D. in 1862. The following year he established himself at Marienbad, where he is still (1904) practising. He became privat-docent in balneotherapeutics at Prague University in 1867, and was appointed assist- ant professor_in 1884, Since 1868 Kisch has edited the “ Allgemeine Bal- neologische Zeitung” and the “Jahrbiicher ftir Bal- neologie, Hydrologie und Kliniatologie,” and is collaborator for palneotherapeutics to the “System of Physiologic Therapeutics,” a cyclopedia pub- lished in Philadelphia, Pa. He has written several es- says in the medical journals. Among his works may be mentioned: “Ueber den Hinfluss der Fettlei- bigkeit auf die Weiblichen Sexualorgane,” Prague, 1878; “Das Climacterische Alter der Frauen und die Behandlungen der Leiden der Menopause,” Er- langen, 1874; “ Handbuch der Allgemeinen und Spe- ciellen Balneotherapie,” Vienna, 1875; “Die Lipo- matosis Universalis,” 7d. 1888; “Die Sterilitit des Weibes,” 2d. 1895; “Grundriss der Klinischen Balne- otherapie,” 7. 1897; “Uterus und Herz,” 2d. 1898. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biog. Lea. 8. 1 old Ba se Hermann M. Kisch: Postmaster-general of Bengal; born in 1850. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, and was called to the bar in 1883. Entering the Indian Civil Service in 1878, he became under-secretary to the Bengal government, and assisted in the work of relief in Bengal during the famine of 1874, and at Madras in the famine of 1877. As postmaster-general, to which position he was appointed in 1884, Kisch organized the posts for the Sikkim campaign of 1888. He represented In- dia at the International Postal Congress of Vienna, 1891, and at that held at Washington in 1897. He attended also, in the same capacity, the Imperial Penny Postage Conference at London in 1898. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jewish Year Book, 1901-2. Je MS Wier di. KISH: The father of Saul, the first king of Israel (I Sam. ix. 3, xii. 21, xiv. 51; I Chron. ix. 39, xii. 1, xxvi. 28). He was a wealthy and powerful Benjamite, the son of Ner (I Chron. viii. 33, ix. 39) and the grandson (I Sam. ix. 1 reads “son”) of Abiel. The home of Kish and of his family was at Gibeah, according to I Sam. x. 5, 10 (rendered “the hill of God” and “the hill” in the English versions), but according to II Sam. xxi. 14, at Zelah, where the bones of Saul and Jonathan were buried “in the sepulcher of Kish.” The text is no doubt corrupt. The only incident mentioned respecting Kish is that he sent Saul in search of some of his asses (I Sam. ix. 8). In the New Testament (Acts xiii. 21) Kish is called “Cis.” E.G. H. Je 12 Kishinef KISHINEF (KISHINEV): Russian city; capital of the government of Bessarabia; it has a population of 125,000 (1911), including about 50,000 Jews. The Jewish community of Kishinef has taken an important part in the commercial and in- dustrial growth of the city since the eighteenth cen- tury, when it became prominent as a trading center. Jewish merchants are intimately connected with the local and export trade in grain, wine, tobacco, lard, wool, hides, fruit, etc., and the trade with Odessa and Austria is largely controlled by Jews. Still more conspicuous is the part taken by Jews in the industries of the city. It appears from the reports of the Jewish Colonization Association (1898) that Kishinef has 6,837 Jewish artisans, of that number 2,115 being masters; and the total number of per- sons supported by their labor is at least 10,000. About one-third of the artisan popuiation is com- posed of tailors and seamstresses, whose annual in- come does not average more than 250 rubles each. Numbers are engaged in shoemaking (925), cabinet- making (625), and in other crafts, their average in- come being between 250 and 300 rubles each per annum. Most of the other departments also of skilled labor are represented by Jews, as, for in- stance, photography, printing , engraving, watch- making. A large number of Jews (877) is employed as day-laborers, as porters, drivers, etc. During the harvest season many take charge of the thrashing- machines in the neighboring villages, and aid in the gathering of the harvest of grain and fruit, both in the gardens in the city and its environs, and in the neighboring villages. At least 500 Commer- are employed during the season in cial and pressing grapes, and about 500 more Industrial work in their own vineyards and gar- Activity dens, which comprise altogether about of Jews. 377 deciatines of land. But the most important agricultural occupation among the Jews is that of market-gardening, which occupies about 200 families. About 115 are engaged in the cultivation of tobacco. The land used for this purpose is partly within the limits of the city (60 deciatines), but the majority of tobacco-growers living in the city own plantations outside it. Dairy- ing occupies about 63 persons. The number of shops and factories belonging to Jews is about 85, and in- cludes tobacco-warehouses, distilleries, vinegar-fac- tories, cigar- and cigarette-factories, and flour-mills. The majority of the factories are small and employ from 20 to 80 hands; but a few of them employ 60 or more. There are in these shops and factories 598 Jewish laborers, almost exclusively men. The women and children take little part in the work of the factories. The number of Jewish poor in Kishinef in propor- tion to the entire Jewish population is considerable, and increases from year to year. In 1895 the num- ber of destitute Jewish families applying for aid was 808; the number in 1896 was 1,181; in 1897 it was 1,006. The increase of poverty appears even more clearly in the number of families that apply for aid for Passover: 1,200 in 1895; 1,142 in 1896; ae in 1897; 1,494 in 1898; 1,505 in 1899; 2,204 in 1900. THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 512 This rapid increase in the number of Jewish poor is explained, aside from the legal and economic con- ditions of Jewish life in Russia, by personal admin- istrative oppression at the hands of the governors of Bessarabia. Among the innumerable cases which illustrate the tyranny of the administration it is suf- ficient to cite one, in which Jewish merchants and laborersare prohibited from going to the stone-quar- ries situated ten versts from Kishinef, the prohibi- tion being justified by the assertion that Jews have no right to live outside cities or boroughs! In 1898 the various charitable institutions of Kish- inef united, with official sanction, under the name of “the Society in Aid of the Poor Jews of Kishinef.” The activities of the society include the supply of cheap fuel tothe poor and the distribution of aid for the Passover. There are four committees of char- ity: the committee in charge of the dining-hall and tea-house for the poor; the orphan asylum commit- tee; the committee for the care of sick women; and the committee for the care of poor children. The total income and expenditure of the society for 1900 were each 82,220 rubles. The sum assigned from the BaskEeT-TAx for charitable work in Kishinef (ac- cording to the census of 1900) was 58,526rubles. Of this sum, 35,000 rubles were expended on the sup- port of a Jewish hospital and dispensary, and about 10,000 rubles on the support of a Talmud Torah with its industrial school. H.R. M. R. A serious anti-Jewish outbreak occurred in Kish- inef April 19-20, 1903, during which 47 Jews were killed, and 92 severely, and 500 slightly, injured. Great material losses were inflicted on Anti- the Jewish community: 700 houses Semitic were destroyed; 600 stores were pil- Riots. laged; 2,000 families were utterly ruined. The outbreak undoubtedly had been planned beforehand, and was not in any degree spontaneous. For six years previous to the outbreak a certain Pavolachi Krushevan, the Mol- davian editor of the only daily paper in the city, the “Bessarabetz,” had carried on a campaign against the Jews, publishing various false accusa- tions against them, and not even hesitating to accuse them of ritual murder. Having poisoned the minds of the Christian population, Krushevan availed himself of the opportunity created by the murder of a boy (by his own relatives) in an adjoining village, and the suicide of a Christian girl in the Jewish hospital of Kishinef; he laid both tragedies at the door of the Jews, declaring emphatically that both were murders committed for ritual purposes; he described the incidents of these “ritual murders” with a wealth of sickening detail, and in inflam- matory articles appealed to the people for venge- ance. The local government authorities, while aware of the utter falsity of the accusations and of the grave danger of such appeals to passion and ignorance, did nothing. That they were guilty of having con- tributed to the outbreak is evident, since the “Bes- sarabetz” was subsidized by the government for the printing of official news, and was thus made an official organ; the vice-governor, Ostrogov, while occupying the position of censor, was himself a col- i) ool a 513 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kishinet laborator on the paper; moreover, the police were in open sympathy with the rioters, and made no at- tempt to interfere; and Davidovich, one of the offi- cials appointed to investigate into the causes and course of the outbreak, had himself participated in the formation of an anti-Jewish organization. The rioters were mostly Moldavians, with a small pro- portion of Great Russians; some of the latter un- doubtedly had been sent to Kishinef for the occa- sion, under the leadership of a few seminarists and students disguised as laborers. These events called forth expressions of indig- nation throughout the civilized world, and repre- sentations on the subject were made to the Russian government, which refused to take official notice of them. A petition to the czar was prepared in the United States, signed by many thousands of all beliefs, and entrusted to President Roose- velt for transmission to St. Petersburg. The peti- tion, although its text was transmitted to the Rus- sian government jn an official despatch, was never sent, for the Russian Foreign Office intimated that it would not be received. During the trials of the numerous persons indicted as participators in the riots the judiciary was openly hostile to the Jews, and most of the rioters received trivial sentences. The unfair attitude of the government officials dur- ing these trials created grave apprehensions among the Jews of South Russia; great loss was inflicted upon commerce throughout that region, and hun- dreds of Jewish families were impelled to emigrate to other countries. The cry of horror which went up from the whole civilized world in reference to the massacres at Kish- inef was followed by a cry for justice and by a de- mand that the affair be investigated and the guilty ones punished. Public opinion in Europe and America was aroused to sucha pitch that the Rus- sian government was obliged to institute legal in- quiries. “Justice will take its course,” said Murawyev, minister of justice, who desired to pacify indignant Europe; but in this case justice could take only the course carefully marked out for it. Anything else would have meant disaster to the definite anti- Semitic policy of the government, and Trial would have implicated high govern- of the ment officials. This, of course, was Rioters. not to be thought of. Russian policy is known to be persistent, though it sometimes appears to give way to the representa- tions of others. Accordingly legal proceedings were instituted, but the conduct of them proved only a mockery of justice. The trial was to be kept strictly secret; and no newspaper might publish the slightest mention of the proceedings. Russian subjects were not to be led to doubt their right to persecute Jews with im- punity, nor to conceive of any other explanation of the atrocities than that diligently spread by anti- Semitic papers in the pay of the government, namely, that the uprising at Kishinef was an out- break of popular hatred against the Jews. The judge in charge of the case was ordered on no ac- count to incriminate either the prime movers in the affair or the civil and military officials who were VII.—83 the real instigators of the riots. He was to punish only those persons who, as it appeared later, had received explicit secret instructions as to how they should act at the time of the riots. Finally, in order to remove all appearance of preconcerted action, the court, instead of treating all the events of April 19 and 20 as a single case, was ordered to deal with them as separate cases. The request of the lawyers on both sides to combine all accusations into a single case was refused by the president of the court, who, in order to minimize the importance of the trial, de- cided that it should be conducted as one involving twenty-two separate cases. A session of the special department of the Odessa Chamber of Justice (Sudebnaya Palata) was held at Kishinef for the purposes of the trial from Nov. 19 to Dec. 21, 1903. The first case, the murders of the boy Baranovich and of Benzion Galanter, Drachmann, and others was begun on the first-mentioned date. Thirty-seven defendants, fifty-three injured persons, and 547 witnesses were cited. The public prosecu- tor stated that the crime had been perpetrated during the Christian Easter days. He pointed out also that the Christian populace was incited against the Jews by certain articles in the “ Bessarabetz.” He ignored the story given out by Minister von Plehve and published in the “Pravitelstvenny Vyestnik,” the government organ, to the effect that the Jews themselves had caused the riot by jostling a Chris- tian woman and her child near a carousel. It was brought out in the preliminary examination that the carousel was not in operation on that day, and that no such jostling took place. From the evidence of the witnesses, including ex-Mayor Schmidt, who was in office at the time of the massacre and had filled the mayoralty for twenty- seven years; General Beckmann, commander of the garrison at Kishinef; Dr. Sizinsky, the mayor of Kishinef elected after the riots; the military sur- geon Dr. Miller, and others, it was proved that the Jews and Christians in Bessarabia had always lived together in perfect harmony, and that the Molda- vians—the native population of Bessarabia—even held the Jews in high esteem; that the hostility toward the Jews had manifested itself only since the foundation of the anti-Semitic paper, the “ Bes- sarabetz”; that the riots had been planned before- hand and systematically arranged by the authori- ties; that the rioters were careful to spare Christian houses; and that Krushevan, the editor of the ~ Bessarabetz,” had expressed himself as being sure of the protection of the government. It was further proved that during April 19 and 20 there had been in the city at least 5,000 soldiers, who could easily have quelled the riots had orders to that effect been given. Only when Governor von Raaben had ex- pressed the fear that the rioters might attack even the Christian population were preventive measures taken; and order was then restored immediately. It was proved also that the accused were merely the tools of certain agitators belonging to the so-called cultured classes. On behalf of the Jews the ad- vocate Zarudni demanded of the court that the real instigators of the riots should be brought to justice. He was joined by four lawyers for the defense. Only the anti-Semitic counsel, Shamakov, shared the view Kishinef Kiss and Kissing THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 514 of the government prosecutor that the organization of the riots should in no case be inquired into, The court acceded to these demands. Attorney at Law 5. Shamouin in his address said that the facts which had been brought out during the proceedings compelled the defense to request the court, in agreement with paragraph 549 of the criminal code, that the whole matter be referred back for preliminary examination. He pointed out that before April 19 the governor knew of the coming riots; that an anti-Jewish prop- aganda was encouraged, and proclamations inviting to lawlessness by the promise of indemnity to the participants in the outbreak, and by threatening those who kept aloof, were publicly distributed. The excesses, he said, began at the same hour in about 200 different places; the gangs of rioters were numbered; 120 young men were even armed in the same manner; the chief of police, Levendall, mingled with the gangs, exhorting them to attack the Jews. Levendall also kept troops for special purposes, and even terrorized the governor of Bessarabia, compel- ling him to do his bidding. Shamouin then announced his conclusion that Levendall himself had organized the excesses, and in doing so had merely carried out the plans of those in higher circles. It had been proved that the riots were permitted by the authori- ties, and that previous to Easter Day agents of the police had informed the populace that during three days the Jews were to be massacred. Attorney at Law Karabtschewski threw more light upon the in- stigators of the riots. As the presiding judge emphatically denied the demands of counsel for both parties (with the ex- ception of Shamakov and Romanenko) that the real instigators of the riots be cited, nearly all the lawyers retired from the case on Dec. 7. After this the ex- amination of the numerous Jewish witnesses became a mere farce, as they were not permitted to say anything in reference to the general character of the riots, nor to the way in which they had been planned. Sentence was pronounced on Dec. 21 on the first group of the accused. Twenty-five out of the thirty-seven accused were found guilty of hav- ing attacked Jewish property with intent to rob, and of having made a compact to that effect with one another and with other persons whose guilt was not proved. Twenty-one of these twenty-five were charged with murder also, namely, Girtchin, the slayer of Baranovich, and Marasyuk, slayer of Galanter, who were sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor, the former for seven years, and the lat- ter for five. Twenty-two of the accused were sen- tenced to hard labor for periods ranging from one to two years, and one was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment. Twelve of the accused were dis- charged. No notice was taken of the forty-eight civil cases brought before the court. The next session of the Chamber of Justice began on Feb, 22,1904. A. Kuiban and K. Rotar, accused of murdering Abraham Cohen, were both acquitted on that charge, but were found guilty of taking part in the riots, and were sentenced to hard labor, The civil suit for damages was dismissed. Other cases were disposed of as follows: Feb. 23, 1904. O. Dubchak and M. Polyakov, accused of murdering Kella Koza on April 20, 1908. Adjourned on account of the non-appearance of witnesses. Feb. 24, 1904. Nikita Gutz and Isai Gitziu, con- victed of inflicting heavy wounds upon Israel Ull- man which caused his death. Gitziu was sentenced to imprisonment with hard labor for two and one- half years, and Gutz to imprisonment for one year. The civil suit for 25,000 rubles damages was won by the complainants. Feb. 25, 1904. Jacob and Daniel Petresko, ac- cused of murdering Judka and Itzek Cruchnikov, and of inflicting wounds upon Moisha Ushomirski. Sentenced to four years at hard labor in the mines. Feb. 26, 1904. Fifty-eight persons, of whom nine- teen were accused of taking part in the killing of Jankel Tupik Sura and Sisya Panarassi; the others, for taking part in the riots. The court adjourned without finishing the case. Six other cases of anti- Jewish riots in Kishinef were divided into three groups, and postponed until the next session of the court, May, 1904. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Michael Davitt, Within the Pale, New York and Philadelphia, 1903; Leo Errera, Les Massacres de Kish- inev, Brussels, 1903; Isidore Singer, Russia at the Bar of the American People, New York, 1904; Told, Judenmassacres in Kishinev, Berlin, 1903 ; Cyrus Adler, The Voice of America on Kishineff, Philadelphia, 1904. Vai Bhs, KISHON (ju p bry): River in central Pales- tine; it rises to the south of Mount Gilboa, flows through the middle of the plain of Esdraelon, trav- erses a narrow pass north of Mount Carmel, de- scends into the plain of Acre, and enters the seaa little north of Haifa. Its general course is north- westward. It drains nearly the whole of the fertile plain of Esdraelon and the adjacent hills, receiving its chief tributaries from the south. In Judges vy. 19 it (or some of its tributaries) is spoken of as the “waters of Megiddo,” and in Josh. xix. 11 (R. VY.) it is, probably, the “ brook that is before Jokneam” (comp. 2. xii, 22). The Arabscall it El-Mukatta‘, a name which some identify with the ancient Megiddo (see G. A. Smith, “ Historical Geography of the Holy Land,” pp. 886-887; against this view see Moore, “Commentary on Judges,” p. 158). The upper streams of the system are dry early in summer, ex- cept near the springs, much of the water being used in irrigation. After entering the plain of Acre, the Kishon flows sluggishly through thick jungles and extensive marshes. In the rainy season it is subject to sudden and dangerous floods, when the fords are often impassable. The neighborhood of Megiddo (probably the mod- ern Lejjun) is extremely treacherous. It was there that the host of Sisera was defeated by Barak, “in Taanach by the waters of Megiddo” (Judges v. 19). It was at the “brook Kishon,” at the foot of Mount Carmel, that Elijah slew the prophets of Baal (I Kings xviii. 40). The place of Elijah’s sacrifice has been identified with El-Mahrakah (“place of burnt sacrifice ”), a rocky plateau near the east end of Carmel, from which a steep path descends to the river. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pal. Explor. Fund, Memoirs, ii.; Conder, Tent-Work in Palestine; Thomson, The Land and the Book; Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy Land; Robinson, Researches ; MacGregor, Rob Roy on the Jor- dan; Moore, Commentary on Judges. BE. G. H. J. BE. M. Z ae a eg. ae a hee if PP ee ee ee ed NTN 515 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kishinef Kiss and Kissing KISLEW: The ninth month of the Jewish cal- endar, corresponding to December. It has either twenty-nine or thirty days. In the Septuagint Kislew is called Xacede; in the Macedonian, ’A7e?- Aaioc; on Palmyrene inscriptions, bbb: and in As- syro-Babylonian, “ Kislivu.” Kislew is twice men- tioned in the Old Testament; namely, in Zech. vii. 1and Neh. i. 1. On the twenty-fifth of Kislew the - HANUKKAH festival (the ’Eyxaiva of the New Testa- ment, see John x. 22) commences. According to II Mace. x. 6, the festival was celebrated in the man- ner of the Feast of Tabernacles; viz., by carrying branches and singing songs of praise; indeed, in I1 Mace. i. 9 the festival is specifically mentioned as “the feast of tabernacles in the month Casleu [Kis- lew].” According to the Mishnah (R. H. i. 8) the month of Kislew belongs to those six months in which messengers were sent out. See also I Macc. iv. 36-59; Josephus, “ Ant.” xii. 7, $& 6-7. E. G. H. Ihe TPR KISS, JOSEPH: Hungarian poet; born Noy. 8, 1845, at Mezécsat. Being obliged by the death of his mother and financial ruin of his father to give up his college studies, he engaged in teaching. As tutor in the country he had an opportunity to be- come acquainted with the village Jews and the peasants; and this experience furnished him with the material for his poems. In 1868 he went to Budapest, as corrector in a printing-office; and in the same year he published a volume of poems, “Zsid6é Dalok,” or “Jewish Songs.” Between 1870 and 1873 he edited a literary journal, “ Képes Vilig.” This was suspended shortly after his marriage (April 28, 1878), and Kiss, desperately in need of money, wrote a sensational story, “Budapesti Rej- telmek,” or “Secrets of Budapest,” in eight volumes, under the pen-name “Szentesi Rudolf.” Kiss’s for- tunes changed in 1875, when his ballad “Simon Judith ” fell into the hands of the art critic and his- torian Franz Toldy, who introduced the unknown poet to the public. This poem marks the beginning of his popularity throughout the country. From 1876 to 1882 Kiss was secretary of the Jew- ish community at Temesvar; then he accepted a position with the Hungarian-French Insurance Com- pany, and on its failure, in 1889, he founded the pop- ular literary periodical “A Hét” (“The Week”). His collected poemsand his longer poetic tales have passed through numerous editions. Many of his poems have also been translated into German by Neuge- bauer, Albert Sturm, and especially by Joseph Stein- bach, a physician at Franzensbad, who has issued two volumes of them, “Das Lied von der N&hma- schine” (Leipsic, 1884), and “Gedichte von Joseph Kiss” (Vienna, 1886, dedicated to Crown Prince Rudolph). In his most important ballads Kiss deals chiefly with types of the Jewish and Hungarian people. The poem that Kiss wrote on the strong anti-Sem- itic movement in 1882, “Az ar Ellen” (“Against the Stream ”), created such a sensation that it was translated by Max Falk into German, and found its way ina Hebrew translation into Russia, where it was sung even in many synagogues. Kiss’s ballad “Jehova” also attracted unusual attention, being recited in 1893 by the actress Marie Jaszai in thirty- five cities of Hungary. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Lex. 8. Ibe ANE KISS AND KISSING: The custom of kissing is not found among savage races, among whom other forms of greeting, such as rubbing of noses, take its place. Among Orientals, who keep the sexes strictly separated, kissing on the mouth is not prac- tised, except as an expression of strong affection (Cant. i. 2; comp. Gen. R. xc. 3). It is doubtful whether any reference to kissing on the mouth as a mere salutation can be found in the Old Testament, Gen, xli. 40 and Prov. xxiv. 26 being susceptible of another interpretation. The Oriental method was, and is, to kiss the cheeks alternately, placing the right hand sometimes upon the shoulder, sometimes under the chin, as did Joab with Amasa (II Sam. xx. 9). Kissing is, therefore, usually reserved as an expression of affection between relatives. Isaac desires to kiss Esau; Esau falls upon Jacob’s neck and kisses him; Joseph kisses his brethren and the face of his dead father (Gen. xxvii. 27, xxxiii. 4, xlvili. 10, 1. 1). Similarly, Orpah kisses Naomi (Ruth i. 14), and Laban his sons and daughters (Gen. xxxi. 55). Elisha desires to kiss his father and mother before following Elijah (I Kings xix. 20). Raguel kisses Tobit (Tobit vii. 6). The kiss occurs also, however, as a salutation between persons not closely related, but united by affection, as were Jona- than and David ([Sam. xx. 41). Hence Biblical royal or highly placed persons may Instances. desire to express their favor by kissing, perhaps the more formal salutation with the hand on the shoulder and the cheeks placed together, as in the case of Absalom or David (II Sam. xv. 5, xix. 89). The response to such a mode of salu- tation would be of the more respectful kind: in the case of Samuel kissing Saul ([Sam. x. 1) he may have kissed him either on the cheek asa mark of affection or on the hand as an expression of reverence. Kissing the feet is mentioned in the New Testament (Luke vii. 45), and, probably, is referred to in the Old Testa- ment by the metaphorical expression to “lick the dust” (Ps. Ixxii. 9; Isa. xlix. 28; Micah vii. 17; Isa. xlix. 23 seems to imply actual contact between feet and lips). The same reverence shown toward a king or conqueror was displayed toward gods as repre- sented by their idols or symbols. Schwally (“Das Leben Nach dem Tode,” p. 8) suggests that the kiss given by Joseph to Jacob when he saw that his father was dead was of the nature of worship of a divine being, as in Hosea xiii. 2, where reference is made to those who, when sacrificing, kissed the golden calf. According to I Kings xix, 18, Elijah could find only 7,000 men in all Israel that had not kissed Baal. A similar custom was found among the Arabs (see Wellhausen, “Reste,” p. 109), and is retained to the present day in the Mohammedan cer- emony of kissing the Kaaba at Mecca. When Job denies that his mouth has kissed his hand (Job xxxi. 27) he refers to an idolatrous practise in which the hand was kissed toward the object of worship, as the rising sun was greeted in ancient Greece. The idea appears to have been that in some way the Kiss and Kissing Klaczko THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 516 Se Ne ee ee breath was the life of man, and that giving a part of the breath to the object adored was in the nature of a sacrifice (comp. ADORATION, FORMS OF). According to the Rabbis, kissing was to be avoided as leading to lewdness; but it was permitted as an act of respect for dignity, as the kiss given by Samuel to Saul; after prolonged absence, as Aaron’s kiss to Moses (Ex. iv. 27); and on parting, as in the kiss of Orpah (Gen. R. clxx.). Rabbi Tanhuma added the kiss of relationship, as in the case of Jacob and Rachel (Gen. xxix. 11; Ex. R. v.). On the kiss as a salutation in the early Christian Church see PEACE, KIss OF. By a beautiful image the death of God’s favorites was supposed to be produced by a kiss from God (“bi-neshikah”). Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Aaron, Moses, and Miriam were taken in this manner (B. B. 17a; Deut. R. xi.). This mode of de- Death by parture is considered the easiest of all God’s Kiss. deaths, and is reserved for the most pious (Ber. 8a). According to the Rabbis, kissing an idol was not punishable by death (Sanh. 60b), and it would appear that the custom of kissing the feet, mentioned in the New Testament, was current among the Pharisees (B. B. 16a); it is mentioned that Rabbi Johanan was treated in this way (Yer. Kid. i. 61c). The Rabbis interpreted Cant. i. 2 as meaning that if one spends his time with teachers in whose presence he must keep his lips closed—the teachers of mystical law—all men will later kiss him on the mouth (Cant. I. 5b). A curious explanation is given why every letter of the word \Apwy (Gen. xxxiii. 4) is marked by the Masorites with dots. Some of the rabbis explain that the kiss given by Esau was insincere (see Sifre, Num. 61), and even at the present day the expres- sion “a kiss with dots” is used by Jews in Slavonic countries for an insincere kiss. According to Akiba the Medes kissed the hand only (Ber. 8b), and for this practise Simeon ben Gamaliel, who was opposed to kissing on the mouth, gives praise to all Oriental peoples (Gen. R. Ixxiv. 1). The Zohar represents the son and disciples of Simeon b. Yohai as kissing his hand during life (i. 88b), while at his death his son Eleazar kissed his hand and Abba kissed the dust at his feet. The story is told that of two athletes who were struggling, the one about to be overcome kissed the hand of his adversary, and thereby saved himself by making the latter feel more kindly dis- posed (Tan., Wayiggash). Legend asserts that when Isaac Alfasi was at the point of death the young Maimonides, aged five, entered and kissed his hand (Gavison on Prov. xvii. 6). To this day it is customary in Smyrna for the relatives to kiss the hand of the dead when taking a last parting (“R. E. J.” xxiv. 152). Kissing still survives among Jews as a mark of reverence, It is a religious custom among them to kiss the zizit of the tallit when putting it on, the mezuzah at the door when entering and leaving, and the scroll of the Law when about to read or pro- nounce a blessing over it (“ Bet Yosef,” on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim, 28, in the name of Abudar- ham). On Simhat Torah it is customary for the congregation to touch the scrolls of the Law with the zizit as they are being carried round, after which the zizit is kissed; in the old Sephardic ritual this was done when the scroll was carried round be- fore Kol Nidre. Russian Jews are accustomed to use the index-finger for the mezuzah and the little finger for the scroll of the Law. If a Hebrew book is dropped it is customary, though not necessary, to kiss it. Beers: Gegenias LI and Levy, Neunebr, Worterbe s.v. pw2; W. Bacher, in R. BH. J. xxii. 137, xxiii. 187. IN, KISSINGEN: Bavarian health-resort; it has a total population of 4,024, including 333 Jews. Jews lived in Kissingen as early as the thirteenth century, and they suffered greatly from persecu- tions under Rindfleisch in 1298 (Salfeld, “ Martyro- logium,” pp. 64-66). Tn the town hall of Kissingen there is a helmeted and bearded figure of a man carved in stone. Re- port declares it to be in memory of a Jew who, during the siege of Kissingen by the Swedes, cast for the defenders bullets that never missed their mark. From that time he and his descendants went under the name of “Schwed.” In 1650 and 1656 the Kissingen butchers complained in regard to the slaughtering of cattle and selling of meat by the Jews living in houses under the jurisdiction of the manorial lords; in 1725 the Kissingen citizens ob- jected to the buying of property by the Jews. In 1775 and again in 1791 disagreements occurred be- tween the Jews of the bishopric of Wiirzburg and the Jewish representative of Kissingen, Herz Low. There were three classes of Jews in Kissingen: Jews of the principality of Erthal, of Von Heller, and of the bishopric of Wiirzburg. In 1792 the Jewish representative of Kissingen charged the Jews of Erthal with unwarranted inter- ference, in matters of ritual, with the local syna- gogue; six years later the citizens of Kissingen com- plained of the increase in the Jewish population. The present synagogue was dedicated in 1902. The synagogue built in 1853 is still standing, but is not used at present; it occupies the site of an earlier house of worship the history of whose origin is not known. In the year 1892 the Bavarian Jews of the district of Gersfeld were placed under the juris- diction of that of Kissingen, which now includes about thirty communities. Of the rabbis who oftici- ated there the names of the following are recorded: R. Moses (1799-1809), who was also hazzan; L. Adler (1840-52); Gabriel Hirsch Lippman (1852-64), who edited several works of Ibn Ezra; Moses Lib Bamberger (1867-99), who left many manuscripts (see the oration delivered at Rabbi Bamberger’s funeral by Dr. 8. Bamberger of Schrimm [Paks, 1900], his successor). The last-named edited the Mid- rash Lekah Tob to Ruth, and “Zikron Abraham,” Abraham Bing’s glosses to the Shulhan ‘Aruk, and wrote a commentary on the Pirke Abot, to be used as a text-book. D. S. Bas KITE. See Vurrure. KITTSEER, MICHAEL: Talmudic author; ’ born in Kittsee (Képesény), Hungary, about 1775; died at Presburg Sept. 28, 1845. He was a disci- ple of Marcus Benepicr, and, while not an officia- Oe ee Dy ee ee a a 517 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kiss and Kissing Klaczko ting rabbi, he devoted his time to rabbinical studies. Strictly observant in his religious practise, he was tolerant of those who differed from him. He wrote “Shalme Nedabah” (see Ezek. xlvi. 12), Presburg, 1838, notes on various Talmudic treatises. The second part, published in Presburg in 1848, con- tains, besides notes on Talmudic treatises, notes on the Shulhan ‘Aruk and homilies. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 589 (where the name is given as ** Kitse’’; the same spelling is found also in Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 414, and in Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 190); Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1845, p. 680; Weiss, Abne Bet ha-Yozer, pp. 63 et seq., Paks, 1900. D KITZINGER, JACOB BEN JOSEPH: Au- thor and poet; lived in the second half of the six- teenth and at the beginning of the seventeenth eentury. He wrote “Hag ha-Pesah” (Cracow, 1597), a commentary on the Passover Haggadah, with glosses by his father, a poem on the Passover ritual, and a long introduction. Thereto is added “Kez ha-Pela’ot,” on the end of the Exile and the com- ing of the Messiah. BIBLIOGRAPHY: First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 190-191; Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 169. D. S. Man. KIZWEH (= “ Kizbah”): In popular parlance, the weekly portion allotted to the local poor; also charity in general. The word “kizbah,” in New He- brew (Pes. 71b), connected with the Biblical Hebrew “Kezeb” (Jonah ii. 7), means “limit,” so used of the toll (B. K.118a) and of God’s infiniteness (e.g., “ There is no limit to Thy years,” in the “ Musaf” prayer for New-Year). Lampronti does not give the word, nor does it occur in the older legal literature con- tained in the Shulhan ‘Aruk. Benjacob, D. KLAAR, ALFRED: Austrian writer; born at Prague Nov. 7, 1848; studied law and, later, Ger- man philology at the universities of Vienna and Prague (Ph.D. 1870). In 1868 he became assistant editor of the “ Tagesbote aus Béhmen,” and in 1873 was made dramatic and art critic of the “ Bohe- mia” at Prague, in which city he settled. In 1885 he became privat-docent in German literature at the German technical high school at Prague. In 1901 he removed to Charlottenburg, near Berlin. Of Klaar’s numerous works may be mentioned: “Die Litteratur des Auslandes,” Vienna, 1873; “Jos. Victor Scheffel,” Prague, 1876; “Joseph II.” 7b. 1880; “Das Moderne Drama, Dargestellt in Seinen Richtungen und Hauptvertretern,” Prague and Leipsic, 1883-84; “Franz Grillparzer als Dramati- Kkemasbracue, 1891; ~ FF. Schmeykal,” 7b. 1894; “Borne’s Leben und Wirken,” 2). 1899; “ Der Faust- cyclus,” 2d. 1899. He has written also several dramas, among which are: “Fahrende Komddianten,” Prague, 1876; “Der Empfang,” Dresden, 1888; “Diskretion,” and “Wer Schimpft der Kauft,” 2d. 1890. : rs Konversations- Lexikon. ES ala Meye oT KLACZKO, JULIAN (JUDAH): French publicist; born in Wilna, Russia, Nov. 6, 1825. His father belonged to one of the best Jewish families of Wilna, and instructed his son in Hebrew and in Polish. Klaczko early developed poetical ability, and a Hebrew song addressed to his parents, com- posed for the occasion of his bar mizwah, was pub- lished as “ Minhat Todah” (Wilna, 1838). A collection of his Hebrew poems entitled “ Ha-Duda’im,” mostly imitations of Polish masters or direct translations, was published in Leipsic (1842), and a few songs from his pen appeared in “Pirhe Zafon” (No. 2, 1844). He left Wilna, never to return, about 1840, and studied in Heidelberg and at the Koénigsberg University, graduating as Ph.D. (1846). Settling in Paris (1849), he became assistant librarian in the Bibliothéque du Corps Législatif and a constant contributor to the “Revue des Deux Mondes.” His writings, in whieh he displayed great ability and an intense hatred for both Russia and Prussia, attracted the attention of the Austrian premier, Count Beust, who invited him to Vienna (1869) and appointed him Aulic Councilor in the Ministry of Foreign Af- fairs. Klaczko was also elected (1870) a member of the Galician Landtag, where he delivered a memor- able speech advocating the cause of France and in- sisting that Austria should take her part in the war against Prussia. Failing in his purpose he left Austria in the same year and went to Italy, where he remained until 1875; then he returned to Vienna, where he now (1904) resides. In 1887 he was elected a corresponding member of the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques of the Institut de France. He severed his connection with Judaism early in his career. Klaczko is considered one of the foremost repre- sentatives of Polish thought and aspiration in west- ern Europe. He edited the weekly “ Viadomosci Polski” in Paris (1858-60) and the correspondence of Mickiewicz; translated Piotrowski’s “ Memoirs of a Siberian”; and wrote: a short history of Polish literature in the nineteenth century, an English translation of which appears as an introduction to the English edition of Krasinski’s “ A Divine Com- edy ”; “ Roezniki Polskie ” (Polish Year-Book), a col- lection of his Polish writings in four volumes (Paris, 1865); “Etudes de Diplomatie Contemporaine” (1866); “Les Cabinets de l’Europe en 1863-64” (1866); “Une Annexion d’Autrefois: 1’Union de la Pologne et de la Lithiouanie ” (1869); “ Les Prélimi- naires de Sadowa ” (1869); “les Deux Chanceliers ” (1876); “Causerie Florentine” (1880); “Rome et la Renaissance, Jules II.” (1898); ete. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1839, p. 589; 1842, p. 402; Bodek_ and Mohr, Yerushalayim, ii., Lemberg, 1845; La Grande Encyclopédie, s.v.; Nowveau Larousse Illustré, s.v.; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, s.v.; Wiernik, An Kminent Russian Jew, in Jewish Gazette (English supple- ment) March 24, 1899. P. WI. Ho R: KLACZKO, LEVI JERAHMEEL: Russian educator; born in Wilna June 28, 1840. Formerly a school-teacher in Berdyansk, Crimea, he now fol- lows the same calling in Odessa. He wrote “‘Erek Tefillah,” a critical investigation of the history and the language of the prayers (Wilna, 1868); “Tal- mud Torah,” a religious and historical primer in Hebrew and Russian (Warsaw, 1884; 4th ed., 1890) ; “Ha-Omen,” elementary Hebrew primer, with a Russian glossary (¢b. 1889); “Rishon le-Hinnuk,” Hebrew and Russian (. 1892); and “ Mesillat Ye- sharim,” a Russian-Hebrew school-book (8d ed., ¢. Klapp Klausner THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 1898). He has also contributed numerous articles to Hebrew and Russian periodicals, notably one on the Siddur of the Jews of Crimea, in “ Ha-Karmel,” vili. 138 et seq. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Shahar, ix. 136, 335; Sokolow, Sefer Zik- karon, p. 100, Warsaw, 1890; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 173. H. R. VR. Vie. KLAPP, MICHAEL: Austrian journalist and author; born in Prague 1834; died Feb. 25, 1888. He removed in 1855 to Vienna, where he devoted himself to journalism. In 1859-60 he was editor of the literary section of Kuranda’s “Ostdeutsche Post,” and later special correspondent in Italy and Spain of the “Neue Freie Presse.” Subsequently, together with Jacob Herzog, he founded the “ Mon- tagsrevue,” with which he continued to he associated till his death. Of Klapp’s works may be mentioned: “ Komische Geschichten aus dem Jiidischen Volksleben,” Berlin, 1859; “Die Flagellanten”; “In London Unter den Feniern,” Troppau, 1869; “Revolutionsbilder aus Spanien,” Hanover, 1869; “ Reisetagebuch des Schah von Persien,” 1874; the novels: “Zweierlei Juden,” Vienna, 1870, and “ Die Bankgrafen, Roman aus der Schwindelzeit,” 2 vols., Bern, 1877. He wrote also several comedies, among which was “ Rosenkranz und Giildenstern” (Vienna, 1885), which was pro- duced on all the stages of Germany after its pres- entation at the Vienna Burgtheater, where it could be played only without mention of the name of its author. 8. Iby We KLATZKO, MORDECAI BEN ASHER (surnamed Meltzer): Russian rabbi and author; born in Wilna 1797; died in Lida July 2, 1888. He wasa descendant of Rabbi Mayer Katzenellenbogen of Padua. Klatzko received the usual Talmudical education and soon distinguished himself by his keen mind and retentive memory. After lecturing privately for some time in his native city he was appointed (1881) chief teacher in the newly estab- lished yeshibah founded by Mayla. The stories circulated about difficulties between him and the great Talmudist Israel Lipkin, who for a short time was a subordinate teacher at the yeshibah, are now mostly discredited. In 1844 Klatzko was chosen dayyan of Wilna; he retained his positions at the yeshibah and in the rabbinate until 1852, when he was called to Kal- variya, government of Suwalki, to succeed Lib Shapiro of that place, who had become rabbi of Kovno, Klatzko remained in Kalvariya till 1864, when he was elected to the rabbinate of Lida, gov- ernment of Wilna, which position he held until his death, Klatzko was considered one of the most eminent rabbis of Russia. He had many pupils, and prob- ably ordained more young rabbis than any of his contemporaries. He was the author of novelle on the Talmud and the Shulhan ‘Aruk, some of which were published posthumously by his son under the title “ Tekelet Mordekai” (Wilna, 1889). This work contains his novelle on Berakot, Mo‘ed, and the first part of the Shulhan ‘Aruk. The work was compiled by his pupil Aba Joseph Triwosch, who wrote down what he received from him orally. BIBLIOGRAPHY: H. N. Steinschneider, in Ozar ha-Sifrut, iv. 531-541; idem, ‘Ir Wilna; Triwosch, biography of Klatzko appended to Tekelet Mordekai. L. G. ING le KLAUS (German, “Klause,” from the medieval Latin “clusa” = cloister): An institution where Talmudic scholars are given free lodging, and often a stipend in addition, in order that they may devote all their time to the study of the Talmud (sometimes also to teaching and lecturing). From the seven- teenth century it became a custom for wealthy peo- ple to donate funds for the perpetual maintenance of such institutions (called sometimes Brer HA-Mip- RASH). It is said (Gans, “Zemah Dawid,” part i., ad 5852 [1592]) that Rabbi Low ben Bezaleel founded the klaus of Prague, which is still in exist- ence, though used only asa synagogue. The klaus at Vienna was founded by Zechariah Levi in 1656 (Kaufmann, “Letzte Vertreibung der Juden aus Wien,” p. 67, Vienna, 1889); and a similar institu- tion was established at Altona about 1690, when Zebi Ashkenazi was in office (Emden, “ Megillat Sefer,” p. 11, Warsaw, 1896), to which Benjamin Levy of London bequeathed a legacy in 1704 (“Jewish Chronicle,” July 31, 1903). Bermann (Berent Lehmann) of Halberstadt founded in 1703 the klaus still existing in that city (Auerbach, “Gesch. der Jiidischen Gemeinde Halberstadt,” pp. 61 et seg., Halberstadt, 1866); Lemle Moses Reinga- num founded that of Mannheim, 1706 (Léwenstein, “Gesch. der Juden in der Kurpfalz,” pp. 170 e¢ seq., Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1895): its funds are at pres- ent used tor the maintenance of a second rabbi. About the same time Samson Wertheimer founded a klaus at Frankfort-on-the-Main (Kaufmann, “Samson Wertheimer,” p. 72, Vienna, 1888). Jost Liebmann and his wife, Esther, founded in Berlin a klaus for their nephew and son-in-law, Aaron ben Benjamin Wolf, about 1701, which was discontinued about 1712. Somewhat later Veitel-Heine Ephraim founded in the same city a klaus which is still in existence, although under entirely different rules, and known as the “ Veitel-Heine Ephraim’sche Lehranstalt.” The Breslau, Hanover, Lissa, and other German congregations possess institutions of the same kind. In Wolfenbiittel various members of the Samson family founded similar institutions; these in 1807 were united to form a school which is still in existence as a Jewish high school (Ehren- berg, “Die Samson’sche Freischule,” in “Orient, Int.” 1844, No. 5; separately printed, Leipsic, 1844; Zanz, “Samuel Meyer Ehrenberg,” Brunswick, 1853). In Leghorn, which had a wealthy Jewish community, various institutions existed intended to support prebendaries who should devote their lives to Talmudic studies, occasionally delivering lec- tures; as was often the case in other parts of Europe, with such an institution, called “midrash ” or “bet ha-midrash,” a synagogue was usually connected. In the midrash founded by Franco, Elijah Benamo- zegh held a position (Sokolow, “Sefer Zikkaron,” pp. 128 et seg., Warsaw, 1889). Wealthy members of the Leghorn community often supported such a midrash in Jerusalem (see Haaiz, Jacos, and Ha- 518 J, EA NP ey ee a a TD Ne = a TREE ee a ee ae TT ef See ee shape ia \ 519 _ a1z, Mosus), and Oriental Jews still maintaim sirai- lar institutions there (Lunez, “Luah Erez Yisrael, 5661,” p. 140, Jerusalem, 1900). A modern institution of a similar character was founded by Sir Moses Montefiore in Ramsgate in 1869. It was for a short time a college for the edu- cation of rabbis; but now, although still maintained under the name “ Judith Montefiore Theological Col- lege,” it is merely a home for rabbinical scholars (Harris, “ Jewish Year Book,” 1908). The Hasidim call their synagogue “klaus”; and each of their miracle-workers maintains a klaus of his own, as do also his followers in other cities. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Besides the works cited in this article, Blitter aus der Michael David’schen Stiftung, Hanover, 1870. 10 KLAUSENBURG (KOLOZSVAR) : Royal free city of Kolozs county, Hungary ; formerly cap- ital of the grand duchy of Transylvania (1691-1848). Until 1848 no Jews were legally allowed to live in Klausenburg; but the law of 1526, by which the Jews were expelled from Hungary and Transyl- vania, was not strictly carried out. In 1578 the Transylvanian Diet decreed that the Jews might stop temporarily in the cities when visiting the fairs. Goods are mentioned as being imported by Jews into Klausenburg asearly as 1591. When Klausenburg was captured by the imperial general Georg Basta, Sept. 13, 1600, all the Jews in the city were slain. This did not deter others from visiting the fairs there; for in the annual balance of the city custoim- house for the year 1681 the “Jews’ linen” is espe- cially mentioned. About the middle of the seven- teenth century an edict of the ruler (“ Approbatze Constitutiones Regni Transylvanix,” pars v., ed. 82) assigned to them for their exclusive habitation Carlsburg, the temporary residence of the princes of Transylvania. Thence they continued to visit the fairsof Klausenburg so frequently that the gen- eral city council on March 7, 1698, set apart for them an especial place in the market. With the act of exclusion still in force, a Jew, Lob! (Leopold) Deutsch by name, succeeded in sct- tling in the city about 1770-80. This marks the beginning of a lengthy struggle for the right to settle and trade in Klausenburg between the Jews and the municipal authorities, the latter being in league with the state government. Supported by an imperial decree of 1781, which in accordance with one of an earlier date restricted the right Beginnings of settlement of the Jews in Transyl- of Jewish vania to Carlsburg, the authorities Residence. steadily refused to admit Jews into Klausenburg. But the latter had ob- tained a footing in the city. Although Lobl Deutsch and those that followed him even fifty years later were threatened with expulsion, this threat was only partially carried out, and a certain number of Jews re- mained permanently in the city, though merely on sufferance. This struggle ended only in the stormy days of 1848. The nutnber of Jews in Klausenburg gradually increased. In 1780 there is no official record of a single Jew in the city, although in the county of Kolozs eight Jews were found. But in 1785 there were twelve Jews in a population of 9,703 persons. THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA o Klapp Klausner Within fifty years (1835) the number rose to 109; in 1846 there were fifty-six Jewish families, sixteen of which, however, being new arrivals, were to be expelled. About fifty years later (1891) the Jews in Klausenburg numbered 2,414 in a population of 32,756, and in the county of Kolozs 4,813 in a popu- lation of 192,443. Ten years later (1901) there were _ 4,730 Jews. In 1910 the total population was 60,808. The first traces of communal life date from the second decade of the nineteenth century. At that time Joseph Kain, reputed to have been versed in the Talmud, is mentioned as “ecclesiasticus.” An actual rabbi, however, was out of the question, since even in 1830 the community itself was not ofti- cially constituted. But since the hebra kaddisha was founded in 18387, the formal organization of the community must be placed somewhere between these two dates. It was only a branch congregation, which, like the other congregations of Transylvania since the middle of the eighteenth century, was sub- ordinated to the general rabbinate of Organiza- Carlsburg. When in 1852 Hillel (Hein- tion. rich) Lichtenstein was called as first rabbi to Klausenburg, the district rabbi, Abraham Friedmann, protested, recognizing Lichtenstein merely as deputy rabbi. The latter left Klausenburg two years later. Until 1861 the cantor, Marcus Klein, who was versed in the Talmud, officiated as rabbi. He was succeeded by Philipp (Feisch) Fischmann (1861-62). From 1863 to 1877 Abraham Glasner of Monor (formerly at Gyénk) filled the position. After his death there wasa split in the community. At the time of the Jewish Con- gress of 1868-69, the members believing in Reform had separated from the rest of the congregation, which adhered to the Orthodox tenets, and had formed a distinct congregation, which, however, existed for a short time only. The present Reform congregation, founded in 1880 was served by Alex- ander Rosenspitz (formerly in America), 1887-88; by Jacob Klein, 1888-90; and since 1891 by Mathias Hisler. Inthe Orthodox congregation Moses Glasner succeeded his father. Their synagogue was built in 1851; the temple of the Reform congregation in 1887. At the beginning of the nineteenth century the Jews of Klausenburg had no cemetery, since they could acquire no real estate. In 1848 they were al- lowed to fence in, together with an adjacent piece of land which they had purchased, the place where they buried their dead. The Reform congregation has its own cemetery. The following institutions are supported by the Jews of Klausenburg: a parochial school (since 1860) ; a Talmud society, “hebrat shas”; a literary society ; and a women’s philanthropic society. It is worthy of notice that the University of Klausenburg is one among the few universities of Europe where lectures on post-Biblical Jewish literature are delivered ; such lectures have been delivered there since 1898. D. M. Et. KLAUSNER, ABRAHAM: Austrian rabbi and ritualist; flourished at Viennain the second half of the fourteenth century. He shared the rabbin- ical office at Vienna with Meir b. Baruch ha-Levi (Jacob Weil, Responsa, No. 151). Aaron Blumlein and Shalom, rabbi of Wiener-Neustadt, were among Kiausner Klein his contemporaries. Two of his pupils were Isaac Tyrnau and Jacob Mélln. His collection of ritual customs (“minhagim”), with his notes, was published at Riva di Trento in 1559. The editor of Mélln’s “Minhage Maharil” added in several cases some of the minhagim collected by Klausner. His responsa are referred to by Isserlein in his “Pesakim u-Keta- bim ” (No. 6). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 63; Gratz, Gesch. 3d ed., viii. 11; Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, No. 218. G. M. SEL. KLAUSNER, JOSEPH: Russian Hebrew wri- ter; born at Olkeniki, government of Wilna, Aug. i4, 1874. In 1885 he went to Odessa and became a pupil in the yes! ‘oah there, studying both Tal- mudic and secular subjects. From 1897 to 1902 he studied philosophy and Semitic languages at the University of Heidelberg, and, returning to Russia, became (1908) editor of the Hebrew monthly “ Ha- Shiloah” and of other publications of the Ahiasaf Society. In 1904 he was appointed editor of the Warsaw department of the “Ozar ha-Yahadut,” a Hebrew encyclopedia. Klausner is a versatile and prolific writer and a sound critic, and there are few Hebrew publications to which he has not contrib- uted. He is one of the champions of the moderni- zation of the Hebrew language and literature. Klausner has written the following: “Ziyyun la- Meshorer Gordon,” on J. L. Gordon as a poet, 1895; “Sefat ‘Eber Safah Hayyah,” on Hebrew philol- ogy, in “Ozar ha-Sifrut,” Cracow, 1896; “ Ruhot Menashshebot,” criticisms, in “Ha-Zeman,” War- saw, 1896; “Ha-Adam ha-Kadmon,” on anthropol- ogy, Warsaw, 1900; “Millon shel Kis,” pocket-dic- tionary of modern Hebrew (with Grazowski), 7. 1908. In Yiddish, he has written “Joseph Nassi,” Berdychev, 1901; and in Russian, “ Novo-Yevrei- skaya Literatura,” on the Hebrew literature of the nineteenth century, 2b. 1900; “Duchovny Sionism,” on spiritual Zionism, St. Petersburg, 1900. He is the author also of “Die Messianischen Vorstellungen des Jiidischen Volkes im Zeitalter der Tannaiten,” Cracow, 1903. H. R. A. 8S. W. KLEEBERG, CLOTILDE: Pianist; born at Paris June 27, 1866, of German parents. She stud- ied with Mmes. Retz and Massart at the Conserva- toire, where, at the age of eleven, she received a medal as well as the highest honors in the competi- tive examination. The following year she made her début at the “Concerts Populaires,” playing Bee- thoven’s C Minor Concerto and several difficult com- positions by Chopin. In 1881 she made a success- ful tour through Denmark, Russia, Austria, and Holland, and in 1883 appeared in London, where she soon became a popular favorite. After establish- ing her reputation abroad she, in 1887, made her début in Germany, where her graceful and poetic interpretation of the great masters insured her a warm welcome. In 1894 she was named “ Officier de 1’ Académie,” and in 1898 she revisited England, where she achieved a series of brilliant triumphs. Her repertoire was very extensive, including works of composers ran- ging from Bach to Liszt. She died Feb. 4, 1909. THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 520 BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ehrlich, Celebrated Pianists of the Past and Present Time; Baker, Biog. Dict. of Musicians, New York, s. ; Ah tsi, KLEEBERG, MINNA COHEN: German- American poetess; born in Elmshorn, Holstein, Ger- many, July 21, 1841; died in New Haven, Conn., Dec. 31, 1878. Her father, Marcus Cohen, a physi- cian, gave her a careful education. Her poetic en- dowment showed itself early. At fourteen she wrote for a journal in Hamburg, and later for one in Budapest and for L. Stein’s “ Der Freitag- Abend.” After her marriage in 1862 to Rabbi L. Kleeberg, she lived in Rhenish Prussia, where she moved in a circle of literary men, chief among them Emil Rit- tershaus. In 1865 her poem, “Ein Lied vom Salz,” a plea for the removal of the tax on salt in Prussia, spread her reputation to wider circles. Her abiding inter- est in public and patriotic questions was charac- teristic. The Franco-Prussian war, the Fifteenth Amendment, Friedrich Hecker, the emancipation of women, and the cause of liberty and democracy were among the themes that stimulated her muse. Jew- ish national and religious feelings were equally a source of inspiration. The aspersions cast upon the Jewish race by Wagner and Billroth she repelled with indignant vigor. The most attractive of her verses, however, are those on the joys and sorrows of domestic life, especially the poems addressed to her children. In 1866 Minna Kleeberg emigrated to the United States, living until 1877 in Louisville, Ky., where Dr. Kleeberg had been elected rabbi of a congre- gation, and removing thence to New Haven. A col- lection of Minna Kleeberg’s poems, “ Gedichte,” was published in 1877; and she was a frequent contribu- tor to “Das New-Yorker Belletristische Journal.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Appleton’s Cyclopedia of American Biog- raphy; Morais, Eminent Israelites of the Nineteenth Cen- tury; Nabida Remy, Das Jiidische Weib; Kayserling, Die Jiidischen Frauen, p. 243; Das New-Yorker Belletris- tische Journal, Jan. 10, 1879; Deborah, 1879. A. Hess KLEIN, ADOLPH: German medical author; born at Merseburg-on-the-Saale May 18, 1829. He was educated at Leipsic (M.D. 1851), and practised medicine at Kénigsberg from 1859 to 1870. In the latter year he adopted a journalistic career, becom- ing successively editor of a large number of papers, among them “ Das Rothe Kreuz,” “ Deutsche Frauen- blitter,” “ Berliner Eisenbahn-Zeitung,” and “ Gross- Lichterfelder Wegweiser.” Most of Klein’s contri- butions to literature have been on medical and sociological topics. His more important writings are: “ Anthropologie und Makrobiotik” ; “ Ueberwindung des Wissenschaftlichen Materialismus”; “Philo- sophie und Anthropologie”; “Der Chemisch-Me- chanische Theil des Menschlichen Organismus und Seine Lebenskraft”; “Geheimnissvolle Funktionen der Sympathischen Ganglien”; “Die Magnetischen Funktionen des Eisengehaltes im Blute 2 oD ig Geistbewusste Persénlichkeit und Ihre Unverging- lichkeit als Weltprinzip”; ‘‘ Wissenschaftliche Bei- trige zum Hypnotismus”; “ Religions-Einigung”; “Weshalb Theologie, Materialismus und Spiritualis- mus in Bezug auf das Menschenrithsel zu Falschen fe el Sts he oe eS ee a ee ee ee 521 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Klausner Klein Schliissen Gelangen?”; “Sozialpolitische Beitriige zur Judenfrage.” A few of his works, of marked liberal tendencies, have been printed in New York under the pseudo- nym “ Dr. Nielk Floda.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Das Geistige Berlin, i. pes Berlin, 1897. 8. eG KLEIN, CHARLES: English dramatist; born at London Jan. 7, 1867; educated at the North Lon- don Collegiate School. Klein is the author of “A Mile a Minute” (produced by Minnie Palmer); “The District Attorney”; the libretto of “El Capitan” (produced by De Wolf Hopper); “Dr. Belgraff” (produced by Wilton Lackaye); “ Heartsease” (pro- duced by Henry Miller); “The Charlatan” (pro- duced by De Wolf Hopper); ‘Hon. John Grigsby ” (produced by Sol. Smith Russell); “A Royal Rogue” ; “ The Auctioneer ”; “ Mr. Pickwick ” ; “ The Lion and the Mouse,” anda number of other plays. A. E. Ms. KLEIN, FELIX: German mathematician; born at Diisseidorf April 24, 1849; educated at the University of Bonn, where he became assistant in the institution of physics in 1866. In 1868 he re- ceived his degree of Ph.D. and took a postgraduate course at Berlin and Gottingen. He became privat- docent at Géttingen in 1871, and in the following year was elected professor of mathematics at the University of Erlangen. In a similar capacity he went to the technical high school at Munich in 1875, to the University of Leipsic in 1880, and to the Uni- versity of G6ttingen in 1886. In 1893 he repre- sented the German empire as a member of the edu- cational department at the Columbian Exposition at Chicago, and in 1898 he represented his country at the conference in London which established the In- ternational Catalogue of Scientific Literature. Klein was appointed one of the editors for the publication of Pliickler’s unpublished works. Since 1875 he has been coeditor with A. Mayer of “ Die Mathematischen Annalen.” Of his many works may be mentioned: “ Vergleichende Betrachtungen iiber Neuere Geometrische Forschungen,” Erlangen, 1872; “Ueber Riemann’s Theorie der Algebraischen Funk- tionen und Ihrer Integrale,” Leipsic, 1882; “ Vorle- supgen tiber das Ikosaéder und die Auflésung der Gleichungen vom 5. Grad,” 2b. 1884; “ Vorlesungen iiber die Theorie der Elliptischen Modulfunktionen,” with Fricke, 7b. 1890-91; “Einleitung in die Hohere Geometrie,” Gottingen, 1893; “ Vortriige tiber Aus- gewiihlte Fragen der Elementar-Geometrie,” Leipsic, 1895; with Sommerfeld, “Ueber die Theorie des Kreises,” 2b. 1897. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Meyers Konversations-Lexikon ; haus Konversations-Lexikon. 8. In ks Iek KLEIN, HERMANN: English musical critic; born at Norwich July 23, 1856. He studied singing under Manuel Garcia from 1874 to 1877, and in 1888 was appointed professor of singing at the Guildhall School of Music, London. Having begun his career as a musical critic as early as 1876, he was appointed to “The Examiner” in 1879, and in 1881 to the “Sunday Times.” He was also connected in a sim- ilar capacity with the “ Manchester Guardian” and Brock- “The. Scotsman.” Klein is the author of “Musical Notes,” London, 1886-89, and joint editor of Man- uel Garcia’s “ Hints on Singing,” 1894. Klein has composed several vocal pieces. He is a fellow of the Institute of Journalists of London. In 1902 Klein removed to New York. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Harris, Jewish Year Book, 1901-2. ats IM Vis Lae KLEIN, HUGO: Hungarian writer; born at Szegedin July 21, 1853; educated at the University of Budapest. He was for several years editor of the “Ungarische Lloyd,” and Jater dramatic and art critic of the “Neue Pester Journal.” In 18838 he removed to Wienna, where he became connected with the leading journals, and is at present (1904) editor of the “Schéne Blaue Donau.” Klein is the author of: “Das Rendezvous in Monaco” and “Der Blaustrumpf,” operettas, 1883; “Im Puszta Lande,” 1884; “Blinde Liebe” and “ Zauberkiinste,” 1890; “Die Hexenpfeifer,” 1900. He has written also the librettos to “Der Liebe Augustin” (music by Brandl) and “ K6nig und Spiel- mann” (music by Kerner), which latter has been translated into Hungarian. He embraced Chris- tianity. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Eisenberg, Das Geistige Wien, Vienna, Be ja Ws KLEIN, JOSEPH. See Kiss, Josepu. KLEIN, JULIUS: Hungarian rabbi; born Aug. 2, 1850, at Zichyfalva; died July 24, 1895, at Alt-Ofen; educated at the gymnasia at Kecskemet and Nagy-Karoly, the Talmud schools of Mayer Perls and Israel Hildesheimer, and the universities of Vienna and Tiibingen. At the age of twenty- two he was called as rabbi to Szigetvar, and thence, in 1887, to Alt-Ofen. Klein was one of the first to introduce preaching in Hungarian into the synagogue service. His chief work, besides his collection of material for a history of the Jewish community of Alt-Ofen, which ap- peared in the periodical “Magyar Zsid6 Szémle,” was his translation of the Talmud into Hungarian, with notes. Of this only the first part, the treatise Berakot, was published (Budapest, 1885). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Egyenliseg, 1895, No. 30. s. lis, We KLEIN, JULIUS LEOPOLD: Hungarian poet and writer; convert to Christianity ; born at Mis- kolez, Hungary, 1810; died at Berlin Aug. 2, 1876; educated at the gymnasium at Budapest and the universities of Vienna and Berlin. After an extended trip through Italy and Greece, he returned to Berlin, where he completed his studies and graduated as doctor of medicine. He established a practise in the German capital, but soon relinquished it and de- voted his time entirely to literary work. He wrote several dramas, which did not have much success. His influence asa critic was more pronounced, although his greatest work, “Gesch. des Dramas” (18 vols., Leipsic, 1865-76; Index by Ebner, 1886), was never finished. Klein’s collected works appeared in seven volumes under the title “Dramatische Werke,” 7. 1871-72. Among his tragedies may be mentioned “Maria von Medici,” Klein Kletzk THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 522 fe ee eee 1841; “Luines,” 1842; “Zenobia,” 1847; “ Moreto,” 1859: “Maria,” 1860; “Strafford,” 1862; and “ Heli- odora,” 1867; and among his comedies, “Die Her- zogin,” 1848; “Kin Schitzling,” 1850; “Voltaire,” 1852. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Brockhaus Konversations-Lexikon; Meyers Konversations-Levikon. 8. 127, 4M, dal KLEIN, MAX: Hungarian sculptor; born Jan. 7, 1847, at Goncz; son of a poor country school- teacher. He was apprenticed first to a grocer at Kaschau, and then to a watchmaker at Miskolez; but his love for art caused him to give up his trade in 1861, and he went in the most indigent circum- stances to Budapest, where he entered the studio of the sculptor Professor Sandhaz. In 1863 he went to Berlin, and then to Rome, and, in spite of the utmost difficulties, finally succeeded in achiev- ing an honored position among modern sculptors. His group “Old Germans in the Roman Circus,” exhibited at the Kunstausstellung at Berlin in 1878, created a sensation by the boldness and energy of its realism, which is a characteristic of Klein’s work. This group attracted attention at the Paris Salon also, and was awarded a gold medal at the Inter- nationale Kunstausstellung at Munich, assuring Klein’s position in the art world. Klein’s sketches received the first prize in the competition for statues, in heroic size, of the ancient philosophers, for the Joachimsthaler Gymnasium at Berlin. He executed also the two large busts of Field-Marshal Manteuffel and General Werder in the Ruhmeshalle at Berlin. The following are the best known of. Klein’s works: “Hagarand Ishmael”; “Samsonat the Fect of Delilah”; “The Anchorite”; “The Conquered ” ; “The Fisher’s Dream”; “The Deluge”; and the fine fountain group in the court of the first National Savings-Bank building at Budapest. He died Sept. 23, 1908. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pallas Lew. x. 8. Vis KLEIN, MORITZ: Hungarian rabbi; born July 7, 1842, at Miskolez; studied philosophy at the University of Prague, attending at the same time lectures on Jewish theology by Chief Rabbi Solomon Rapoport. In 1868 he received his Ph.D, degree and his rabbinical diploma, and was appointed director ot the Jewish communal school in his native city, where he officiated also as preacher at the Great Synagogue. In 1869 he was called as rabbi to the Reform congregation (“ Congress-Gemeinde ”) of Ungvar; in 1876 he went to Papa; and in 1880 he accepted a call as chief rabbi to Nagy-Becskerek, which office he still (1904) holds. He is a member of the board of examiners of the Rabbinical Seminary at Budapest. Klein’s works include Hungarian translations of (1) Maimonides’ “Moreh Nebukim,” under the title “A Tévelygok Utmutatdéja,” in three volumes, with notes (1878-91), and (2) Jedaiah Penini’s “Behinat ‘Olam,” under the title “A Lélek Tragediaija” (1901). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Kiszlingstein, Kényvészet ; Szinnyei, Magyar Irok Hlete, vi. 513. sy : See 8. 1B NG KLEIN, PHILIP: American rabbi; born May 22, 1848, at Baracska, Hungary. He was educated in the Talmudical schools of his native country and continued his studiesin the gymnasium of Presburg and in the universities of Vienna, Berlin (Ph.D.), and Jena. After receiving his rabbinical diploma from B. H. Auerbach of Halberstadt, he became rabbi at Libau, in Courland, Russia (1880-90). In 1890 he emigrated to New York, where he was ap- pointed rabbi of the Hungarian congregation Oheb Zedek, perhaps the most important position among the East Side congregations of New York. This position he still (1904) holds. BIBLIOGRAPHY: American Jewish Year Book, 1903-4, p. 69. KLEIN, SOLOMON: Austrian oculist; born at Miskolez, Hungary, Aug. 12, 1845; M.D., Vi- enna, 1870. Since his graduation he has practised in the Austrian capital. In 1883 he became privat- docent of ophthalmology, and in 1895 department chief at the General Dispensary, and oculist at the Rothschild Hospital, as well as at the Institute for the Blind at the Hohe Warte, near Vienna. In 1902 he was appointed assistant professor at the Univer- sity at Vienna. Klein has written many papers in the medical journals, as well as articles for Eulenburg’s “ Real- encyklopiidie der Gesammten Heilkunde,” Nagel’s “Jahrbuch fiir Ophthalmologie,” etc. Among his independent works may be mentioned: “Die An- wendung des Augenspiegels,” Vienna, 1876; “Au- genspiegelstudien bei Geisteskranken,” 7). 1877; “Grundriss der Augenheilkunde,” 7. 1886; and “Das Auge und Seine Diitetik,” Wiesbaden, 1892. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lew. 1901. 8. Dyed Bal bE KLEIN, SOLOMON: French rabbi; born at Bischheim, Alsace, Oct. 14, 1814; died at Colmar, Alsace, Nov. 10, 1867. He was successively district rabbi at Bischheim (1839-41), Durmenach (1841-48), and Rixheim (1848-50). From 1850 to 1867 ke was grand rabbi at Colmar, which rabbinate had been occupied by Hirsch Katzenellenbogen, Simon Cahn, and Seligmann Goudchaux. Klein was the author of the following works: “Nouvelle Grammaire Hébraique Raisonnée et Com- parée,” Durmenach, 1846; “Traduction Francaise et Annotation du Sefer Yesodot ha-Maskil de R. David ben Bilia du Portugal, XTV® Siécle,” in the “Dibre Hakamim” of Eliezer Ashkenazi, Metz, 1849; “Notions Elémentaires de Ja Grammaire Hé- - braique”; “Guide du Traducteur du Pentateuque,” 1851; rules for the Hazzan and for the Shohet, in Hebrew and German, 1855; “Le Judaisme ou la Vérité sur le Talmud” (German transl. by Mann- heimer), Milhausen, 1859; “M. Philippson et Sa Traduction de la Bible,” in “ Univ. Isr.” 1860; “Re- cueil de Lettres Pastorales et de Discours d’Inaugu- ration,” Colmar, 1868; “Cours de Thémes et de Ver- sions Hébraiques a l'Usage des Commencants,” Miilhausen, 1866; “La Justice Criminelle chez les Hébreux,” published posthumously in “ Arch. Isr.” 1898. 8. Ue IA, KLEIN, THEODORE: French physician; born in Durmenach, Upper Rhine, May 380, 1845; died in Paris May 4, 1902; son of the chief rabbi of Colmar. After completing his studies at the college of Col- ad ne STEEN DS chen Re yf Sop eae aE y, lS Te ee ee ee TU TE ee a Oe Ne i ih ie Bint it ‘ eer 7 ~~ 2 Se ey a Pee ee 523 mar, Klein went to Paris, where he engaged in the study of medicine. While still a student he to- gether with Emil Javal translated into French Helm- holtz’s “Handbuch der Physiologischen Optik.” In 1873 he took his degree of M.D., his thesis being “L’Influence de 1|’Eclairage sur 1’ Acuité Visuelle,” which was awarded a prize by the medical faculty of Paris. In 1871 he published “ La Thérapeutique de ]’CSil au Moyen de la Lumiére Colorée,” a French translation of the German work by Boehm. He contributed to “L’Opinion Nationale,” editing its scientific page from 1872 to 1876, and also to the “Revue des Sciences Médicales” and other medical journals. He further wrote: “Le Diabéte Sucré,” 1876; “Le Psautier du Dr. Graetz,” 1877; “La Circoncision,” 1888; Sur]’Origine de Quelques Idées des Délirantes dans la Paralysie Générale,” 1888; “ Polémiques Nombreuses dans 1’ Univers Israélite.” The minister of the interior decorated him in 1900 with the Golden Medal for his long and disinter- ested servicesin behalf of the poor. Klein was a member of the Jewish Consistory of Paris, and during eighteen years president of the Société de l’Etude Talmudique. He was the rep- resentative, both within and without the consistory, of ultra-Orthodoxy; and as he was a profound Tal- mudist, his views carried great weight in the delib- erations of the various societies of the Jewish com- munity in the French capital. : BIBLIOGRAPHY: A la Mémoire du Dr. N. Th. Klein, Membre du Consistoire Israélite de Paris, published by the Société de Etude Talmudique, Paris, 1902. EA s Dey Jal, KLEIN, WILHELM: Austrian archeologist; born Nov. 28, 1850, at Karaénsebes, Hungary. He first studied Jewish theology and then philosophy at Vienna and Prague. The Austrian government subsequently sent him to Italy and Greece, where he engaged in archeological investigations, studying especially antique pottery. Klein is professor of archeology at the German University of Prague, and a member of the Gesellschaft zur Forderung Deutscher Wissenschaft, Kunst, und Literatur in Boéhmen, as well as of the German Archeological Institute. Hehas published: “ Euphronius” (18886) ; “Die Griechischen Vasen, mit Meisterinschriften ” (2d ed., Vienna, 1887); and “ Praxiteles” (1897). 8. AY IKY. KLEMPERER, GEORG: German physician; born at Landsberg-on-the-Warthe May 10, 1865; son of Wilhelm Klemperer; studied at the universities of Breslau, Halle, and Berlin (M.D. 1885). From 1887 to 1896 he was assistant to Professor von Ley- den; he was admitted, as privat-docent in 1889, to the medical faculty of the University of Berlin, where in 1895 he became professor. Klemperer has written many essays in the pro- fessional journals, and since 1899 has been editor of the “Therapie der Gegenwart.” Among his works may be mentioned: “Grundriss der Klinischen Diagnostik,” Berlin, 1890 (8th ed. 1900); “Unter- suchungen itiber Infection und Immunitiit bei Asia- tiseher Cholera,” 7). 1894; “Untersuchungen tiber Gicht und Harnsiiure Nierensteine,” 7d. 1896; “ Jus- tus von Liebig und die Medizin,” 7. 1899. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biog. Lew. 1901. 2 : S. J Mtoe el, THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Klein Kletzk KLEMPERER, GUTTMANN: Austrian rabbi; born 1815 at Prague; died at Tabor, Bohe- mia, Jan. 20, 1882. On his mother’s side he was a descendant of Yom-Tob Lipmann Heller. He com- pleted his Talmudic studies at Presburg as a pupil of Moses Sofer, and he also passed the gymnasium examinations at the lyceum (Protestant gymnasium) in the same place. On his return to Prague he at- tended courses in philosophy at the university and the Talmudic lectures of Solomon Judah Rapoport. In 1844 he went as rabbi to Tabor, where he labored until his death. At Tabor he introduced the regu- lated worship of the Prague Temple. Of Klemperer’s numerous published writings the following may be mentioned: (1) Speech on the occasion of the abolition of the Jews’ tax in Bohemia, Prague, 1847; (2) “Hayye Yehonatan,” biography of Jonathan Eybeschiitz, 7. 1858; (3) “ Jiidischer Geschichtskalender ” (“ Pascheles Volks- kalender,” 1855-59) ; (4) “ Der Patriarch R. Juda II., ein Charakterbild,” Prague, 1861; (5) “R. Salomo Luria,” 7b. 1862; (6) “Das Armengesetz nach Tal- mudischen Prinzipien,” 7b. 1868; (7) “Das Erzie- hungswesen nach den Prinzipien Unserer Altvor- - dern,” 2). 1864; (8) “R. Lowe ben Bezalel, Lebens- bild eines Prager Oberrabbiners,” 7b. 1873; (9) “ Das Wesen der Jiidischen Geheimlehre,” 2b. 1875-79. Of his German translation of David Gans’s “Zemah Dawid,” with notes, only parts i. and ii. have been published, by Moritz Griinwald. 8. pAr Kir KLEMPERER, WILHELM: German rabbi; born March 30, 1839, at Prague; son of Guttmann Klemperer. After attending the gymnasium of his native city, he studied (1856-1863) at the univer- sity and the Jewish theological seminary in Breslau (Ph.D., Leipsic, 1861) and was ordained rabbi in 1863. He was successively rabbi at Landsberg (1864- 1885) and Bromberg (1885-91); he was called in 1891 as preacher to the Reform congregation of Berlin. Klemperer has published: “ Fest- und Gelegen- heitspredigten,” Breslau, 1866; “Christian Thoma- sius”; “Voltaire und die Juden”; “Beitrige zur Vergleichenden Gnomologie.” 8. Wil, tee KLETZEK: Russian town, in the government of Minsk. It is believed to have been founded in the eleventh century, but the earliest known mention of the Jewish community there refers to 1522. A doc- ument dated Sept. 5, 1522, was issued by King Sig- ismund, in which he awarded for three years to Isaac Jesofovitch, a Jew of Brest-Litovsk, for the sum of 800 “kop groschen,” a lease of the inns and other sources of revenue in Kletzk. The next men- tion of the Kletzk community is found in a docu- ment dated Jan. 21, 1529, which imposes military duties on its inhabitants, as well as on those of other towns. On June 15, 1542, the boyar Grishko Koche- vich brought suit against Zachariah Markovich, a Jew of Kletzk, the latter’s oxen having broken into Grishko’s field and injured the growing grain; the court awarded to Grishko twelve “ruble groschen ” damages. A census taken in 1552-55 shows that the Jewish householders lived chiefly on Wilna street, on the Sloboda, and owned gardens in the Kletzk Knot THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 524 suburbs. Kletzk is mentioned in the assessment on the Lithuanian communities in 1566, and from its small proportionate assessment it appears that the community was not important at that time. In 1670 the Jews of Kletzk were accused of hav- ing murdered a baptized Jewess, the wife of Geliash Yevchich. She had gone to the fair of Kletzk and had stopped first at the house of a Christian, and then at the house of the Jew Goshko Tzeperski, where she was last seen. At the time she disap- peared she had a large sum of money in her posses- sion. Her body was not found, and it is probable that she was induced by her former coreligionists to leave her husband and return to Judaism in some distant place, such cases having frequently occurred among the Jews of Lithuania after the Cossack up- rising. Until 1628 Kletzk belonged to the district of Brest-Litovsk. After that date it was transferred, together with the neighboring towns, to the district of Pinsk. According to tradition, the town origi- nally was located on the opposite bank of the Vis- tula, on the road leading to Lyakhovich; but after the destructive fire of 1705 it was rebuilt, at the in- stance of the governor, on its present site. Thus the cemetery, formerly very near the town, is now two miles distant, and during the spring floods the Jewish community finds it difficult to provide for the burial of its dead. There is a large synagogue, built by Prince Radziwil in 1796; a bet ha-midrash fully two hundred years old; and fifteen smaller houses of prayer. The first rabbi of Kletzk was Ju- dah ben L6b, who had under his jurisdiction also the community of Mechit. He was succeeded by Michael ben Meir Eisenstadt, who in turn was followed, about 1762, by his son Moses Hisen- stadt (d. Oct. 25, 1795). The old people of Kletzk still speak of the sojourn there of the philosopher Solomon Maimon, who lived there for several years, and was intimate with R. Moses Hisenstadt. In the nineteenth century the town was repeatedly des- troyed by fire—in 1817, 1845, 1865, and 1886—yet the large synagogue always escaped the flames. In 1903 Kletzk had a total population of about 8,000, of which about 6,000 were Jews. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Russko-Yevreiski Arkhiv, i., Nos. 72 and 341; ii., Nos. 10, 34, 249; Regesty i Nadpisi,i., Nos. 256, 473, 493, 726, and 1101; Pamyatnaya Knizhka Minskoi Gubernii, Minsk, i876; Levik, Talpiyot, Berdychey, 1895. 180, 3, J. G. L.—B. Et. KLEY, ISRAEL (or EDUARD as he called him- self): German preacher, educator, and writer; born at Bernstadt, Silesia, June 10, 1789; died at Ham- burg Oct. 4, 1867. He attended the Wilhelm school at Breslau—in which he soon after gave instruction himself—and the gymnasium there. He studied also at the Berlin University under Fichte and Schleier- macher. In 1817 he accepted a call to Hamburg as head teacher and director of the free school, founded in 1815. Thisschool gave the impulse to the found- ing of the temple at Hamburg, which inaugurated a reform in the liturgy and stood, in general, for the adaptation of Jewish worship to the spirit of the times. Kley, who had already officiated as preacher at the Jacobson Temple in Berlin together with Auerbach and Giinsburg, was the first preacher at the Hamburg Temple, which position he retained for over twenty-one years, resigning it May 9, 1840. He was director of the free school until 1848. An insti- tution bearing his name, for aged and destitute teachers, was erected in Hamburg. Kley was a very prolific writer. Together with K. S. Giinsburg he published “Erbauungen tiber Gottes Werk und Wort” (Berlin, 1813-14), and “ Die Deutsche Synagoge” in 2 parts (7d, 1817-18). Sev- eral editions of his “Katechismus der Mosaischen Religionslehre” (Leipsic, 1814) were published, the last in 1850; also of his “Israelitisches Gesangbuch ” (Hamburg, 1818), for which special melodies were written (2b. 1846). He published also a large num- ber of sermons, either separately or in collections. Of the latter may be mentioned “ Predigten in dem Neuen Israelitischen Tempel zu Hamburg” (¢. 1819-20); “Die Feste des Herrn”; “Israelitische Predigten fiir Alle Festtage des Jahres” (Berlin, 1824); “Sammlung der Neuesten Predigten Gehalten in dem Neuen Israel. Tempel zu Hamburg,” edited by Ed. Kley and G. Salomon, 2 vols. (Hamburg, 1826-27); “Die Ruhe der Religion Mitten in der Welt Unruhe,” five sermons (¢). 1831); “ Blatter der Erinnerung: Letzte Kanzelvortriige im Neuen Israel. Tempel” (¢d. 1844). Kley, who is often called the Jewish Schleier- macher, published also sketches of sermons on the first Book of Moses (Griinberg-Leipsic, 1844), and on the second Book of Moses (Leipsic, 1856); further “Geschichtliche Darstellung der Israel. Freischule zu Hamburg” (Hamburg, 1841); “Die Erste Mor- gengabe zur Lehre und Bildung” (Grinberg, 1843) ; “Noch ein Wort zur Israel. Reformfrage” (Ham- burg, 1845). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jonas, Lebensskizze von Dr. E. Kley, Ham- burg, 1859; Illustrirte Monatshefte fiir die Gesammten Interessen des Judenthums, ii. 419 et seq.; Kayserling, Bibliothek Jiid. Kanzelredner, i. 47 et seq. S. Ve KE KLEY, WILHELM: German economist and educator; born at Steinbach, district of Meiningen, Germany, June 25, 1869. He taught for several years at various schools, and then studied political econ- omy, pedagogics, and philosophy at Giessen, Zurich, Basel, and Gottingen universities. After taking his doctor’s degree he became teacher at the school for builders at Cassel. Since 1901 he has been di- rector of the technical and commercial school of Harburg. Kley has published: “ Die Berufskrankheiten und Ihre Stcllung in der Staatlichen Arbeiterversicher- ung in Nationalékonomischer Beleuchtung” (Cas- sel); “Die Schwindsuchtim Lichte der Statistik und Sozialpolitik ” (Leipsic); “Bei Krupp” (¢.); “Ge- setzeskunde und Buchfiihrung fiir Baubeflissene, Ins- besondere zum Gebrauch an den Kéniglichen Bauge- werkschulen ” (Wittenberg); “Das Genossenschafts- wesen im Handwerk”; “ Warum Sollen und Miissen Sich die Handwerker zu Innungen und Genossen- schaften Zusammenschliessen? ” (Cassel, 1901) ; “Die Entwickelung des Geldwesens der Stadt Harburg,” “Der Auf- und Ausbau der Deutschen Gewerbe- und Fortbildungschule ” (éd.). Kley hasalso contributed articles to the “Zeitschrift fiir Sozialwissenschaft,” edited by Wolf in Breslau. 8. 3 : Y : 525 KLINGER, GUSTAV. See BucueginpEr, BrRNHARD. KLOTZ, LOUIS LUCIEN: French journalist and deputy; born in Paris Jan. 11, 1868; of Alsa- tian descent. After his education was finished, he was enrolled as advocate at the Cour d’Appel in Paris. At the age of twenty, with a view to popu- larizing the Franco-Russian alliance, he founded the “Vie Franco-Russe,” an illustrated paper. In 1892 he became editor of the “ Voltaire,” and commenced a campaign against the reactionary policy of Jules Ferry. In the following year he was an unsuccess- ful candidate for his Paris district at the legislatorial elections. ‘Two years later he founded the “ Fran- cais Quotidien,” a paper devoted to national de- fense, with which the “ Voltaire” was subsequently amalgamated. After another failure at the polls, he was elected by an overwhelming majority for Montdidier at the general election of 1898 as a radical socialist. Klotz is a member of several communal and charitable societies, among which are the Society for the De- fense of Children, the Prison Society, and the Cen- tral Committee for Labor. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Curinier, Dictionnaire National. s. V. E. KLUGER, SOLOMON BEN JUDAH AARON: Chief dayyan and preacher of Brody, Galicia; born at Komarow, Russian Poland, in 1788; died at Brody June 9, 1869. He was successively rabbi at Rawa (Russian Poland), Kulikow (Galicia), and Jozefow (Lublin), preacher at Brody, and rabbi at Brezany (Galicia) and, again, at Brody (where he held the offices of dayyan and preacher for more than fifty years). During his long life Kluger wrote a great number of works — one hundred and sixty volumes. He wrote on all the branches of rabbinical literature as well as on Biblical and Talmudic exegesis; but only the following of his writings have been published: “Sefer ha-Hayyim” (Zolkiev, 1825), novelle on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim (his novelle on the other parts of the Shulhan ‘Aruk have not been published); “Me Niddah” (7d. 1834), halakic and haggadic novelle on Niddah; “‘En Dim‘ah” (part 1; 2b. 1834), funeral sermon on the death of Eph- raim Solomon Margaliot; “Ebel Yahid” (Warsaw, 1836), funeral oration on Menahem Manis Mor- decai Teomim; “Nidre Zerizin” (Zolkiev, 1839), novelle on Nedarim; “Ebel Mosheh” (with “‘En Dim‘ah,” part 2; Warsaw, 1843), funeral orations on Moses Schreiber (Sofer) and Jacob Lissa; “She- not Hayyim” (Lemberg, 1855; the first part contains responsa on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Orah Hayyim; the sec- ond, responsa and novelle for scribes); “Sefer Setam ” (dd. 1856), laws for scribes; “ Moda‘a le-Bet Yisrael” (Breslau, 1859), responsa, chiefly of other rabbis, concerning mazzot made by machine; “Tub Ta‘am wa-Da‘at” (Lemberg, 1860; the first part contains the laws of terefah; the second, entitled ff Kin’Aat Soferim,” contains laws for scribes and vari- ous laws of the Yoreh De‘ah); “Hiddushe Anshe Shem” (Leipsic, 1860), novellee on Shulhan ‘Aruk, Eben ha-‘Ezer; “Ma‘aseh Yede Yozer” (Lemberg, 1863), commentary on the Pesah Haggadah; “Sefer THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kletzk Knot ‘Abodat ‘Abodah ” (Zolkiev, 1865), novellz on ‘Abo- dah Zarah. Kluger’s takkanot concerning slaugh- tering are printed in Ganzfried’s “Torat Zebah ” (Lemberg, 1848), and two of his responsa in David Solomon Eybeschiitz’s “ Ne’ot Deshe ” (¢b. 1861). BIBLIOGRAPHY : Ha-Maggid, xiii.. No. 25; E. Kohn, Kin’at Soferim, pp. 108a-109b, Lemberg, 1892; Strelisker, in Ha- Maggid, xiii., No. 29; Van Straalen, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 125; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. pp. 414- 415; Judah Aaron Kluger, Toledot Shelomoh, Lemberg, 1898. Siig: M. SEt. KMITA, PETER. Sce Bona Srorza. KNASMAHL. See MArriace. KNEFLER, FREDERICK: American sol- dier; born in*Hungary in 1833. He went to Amer- ica, and when the Civil war broke out he enlisted as a privatein the 79th Regiment Indiana Volunteer Infantry. He became successively captain, major, colonel, and brigadier-general. For meritorious serv- ice at Chickamauga he was promoted to the rank of brevet major-general. He participated in the engagements of the Army of the Cumberland and marched with Sherman to the sea. No other Jew attained such high rank in the army. After the war Knefler was made United States pension agent at Indianapolis. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Simon Wolf, The American Jew as Patriot, Soldier, and Citizen, p. 179, Philadelphia, 1895: Markens, The Hebrews in America, p. 1381, New York, 1888; Pub. Am, Jew. Hist. Soc. No. 3, p. 35. A. ACS MSE KNOT: Some form of quipu or knot-alphabet appears to have been adopted in Biblical, or, at least, in Talmudical times, to judge from the form taken by the zizit. Whether any mystical influ- ence was connected therewith is uncertain, but te- fillin are not knotted, except with the permanent knot of the head phylactery. It was even disputed down to the time of R. Tam whether the head knot should be tied afresh every day (Responsa, No. 182). To the rigid Sabbatarians of the Talmudic period, to make a knot was an act of labor, and, therefore, forbidden on the Sabbath (Shab. 111b), and this forms part of the Jewish law to the present day. Not alone is the making of a knot forbidden, but also the loosing of one. Consequently ultra-Ortho- dox Jews who will not carry a handkerchief ex- cept in the form of a girdle merely twist it around and do not tie it in a knot. Children, however, might go out on the Sabbath with stalks of madder knotted together, seemingly as an amulet (Shab. 66b). In the discussion on the restriction of mar- tyrdom some of the extremists held that one should suffer martyrdom rather than tie even the knots of one’sshoes like the Romans (Sanh. 74b). Itis stated that Ex. xxxiii. 23 really means that God showed Moses the knots of the tefillin (Ber. 7a); the pas- sage, however, is interpreted by Ibn Ezra (ad Joc.) as referring to the knowledge of the physical laws of nature (comp. Maimonides, “ Moreh,” i. 35). In Jewish folk-lore knots play a certain part, though how far the folk-lore is Jewish in origin generally remains uncertain. Among the children of Kiev one of the ways of determining who shall be “it” is to tie a knot in a handkerchief; the chil- dren pick out the corners, and the one selecting the knotted corner is “it.” In Kovno, when a wart is Knoxville Kodashim THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 526 removed, a knot is tied around it with a thread, and this knot is placed under the threshold. To cure a person who is possessed one counts nine knots (“Sefer Hasidim,” § 1159): this seems to be German (comp. Wuttke, “Deutscher Aberglaube,” p. 157). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Levy, Neuhebr. Worterb. iv. 399-400; Giide- mann, Gesch. ii. 205. A die KNOXVILLE. See TENNESSEE. KOBER, GUSTAV: Austrian actor; born at Vienna April 21, 1849. He was trained for the stage by Emilie Dorr in that city and made his début at the Elysiumtheater, Stettin, in 1868. He then ap- peared at the following theaters: Budapest and Linz (1869-72), Thaliatheater in Hamburg (till 1877). In 1877 he joined the Meininger Company, remaining with this famous troupe of comedians until 1881, and accompanying them on their tours to Amsterdam and London. From 1881 to 1882 Kober played at the Berlin Resideuztheater and the next two yearsat the Carltheater, Vienna; 1884-86 at the Thaliatheater, Hamburg; 1886-88 at the Landes- theater, Prague; and 1888-89 at the Lessing- theater, Berlin. After a year devoted to a starring tour in various cities, Kober returned to the Les- singtheater, Berlin. He appeared also at the Irving Place Theater, New York city. Kober’s principal réles are Franz Mohr, Carlos in “Clavigo,” Wurm, Richard I1l., Shylock, lago, Me- phisto, and Perin. BIBLIOGRAPHY: O. G. Fliiggen, Biihnen-Lewikon, 1892, p. 172. 8 E. Ms. KOBNER, HEINRICH: German physician; born at Breslau Dec. 2, 1888. He studied medicine at Berlin and Breslau (M.D. 1859), taking post-grad- uate courses at Vienna and Paris in 1860 and 1861. Establishing himself asa physician in Breslau (1861), he founded a dispensary for dermatology. In 1869 he became privat-docent and in 1872 professor of dermatology and syphilology. Indifferent health forced him to resign all his positions in1878. After spending some time in southern Europe, he settled in Berlin, where in 1884 he again founded a dispen- sary. In 1897he received the title “ Geheimer Medi- zinalrat.” He died Sept. 8, 1904. Kébner wrote many essays in the medical jour- nails, among which Arznei-Exantheme, Insbesondere iiber Chinin-Ex- anthem,” in “Berliner Klinische Wochenschrift,” 1877; “Uebertragungsversuche von Lepra auf Thiere,” in Virchow’s “ Archiv,” 1882, His works in book form include: “ Kiinische und Experimentelle Mitteilungen aus der Dermatologie,” etc., Erlangen, 1864. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Pagel, Biog. Lex.; Hirsch, Biog. Lex. s. ing WN, Jet KOBO. See Covo. KOBOR, TAMAS. See Bermann, ADOLF, KOBRYN : District town in the government of Grodno, Russia; situated on the Muchavetz and Kobrynka rivers. In 1902 it contained more than 8,000 Jews in a total population of about 10,000. A Jewish congregation was in existence there at the may be mentioned “Ueber. beginning of the sixteenth century ; it is mentioned among the Lithuanian Jewish congregations to which in 1514 Sigismund I. renewed privileges granted to them by his brother Alexander. The city and its suburbs, where the Jews had the right of residence, covered considerable space in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The small town of Gorodetz, about five miles distant from Kobryn, once formed a part of the latter; but it was nearly ruined in 1658, when it was besieged by the Swedish army, the Jews and their property suffering greatly, especially at the hands of the Polish soldiers, who mutinied on account of non-payment of their salaries and com- pensated themselves at the cost of the Jews. In 1766 Kobryn was officially reduced to the status of a village; but was restored in 1795 to the rank of a district town. The city was bombarded by the French army in 1812, and again suffered much, the Jews showing great courage. In the old Jewish cemetery there are still legible some dates of the fifteenth century. The earliest known rabbi was Bezaleel b. Solomon Darshan (d. 1678). His successors have been: Jacob b. David Shapiro, or Spiro, the author of “Ohel Ya‘akob,” and founder of a yeshibah in Kobryn, where more than 400 pupils were instructed in his time (d. 1718); Minz (d. 1819); Shemariah, who was also a rabbi of the Hasidim of Riuboshow (d. 1835); Moses, rabbi of the Hasidim of Kobryn(d. 1858); Meir Meirim Shafit (d. 1878), author of the well-known work “Nir al-Yerushalmi”; Elijah, popularly known as “Rabbi Elinke Lider” (d. 1876); Saul Epstein (d. 1891); and last the present incumbent, Rabbi Meir Atlas. Kobryn has many charitable societies and institu- tions, a magnificent synagogue, two batte mid- rashot, and eleven houses of prayer of different Hasidic sects. Formerly the Jews were mostly en- gaged in agriculture and distilling; but in 1882, by a ukase of Alexander III., the renting of farms was prohibited to Jews, as was also residence outside the city limits. Further, in 1897 the distillery busi- ness was monopolized by the government. In con- sequence, the present economic position of the Kobryn Jews is very deplorable; and they are em- igrating in large numbers to America and Africa. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Duke Dimitri Sopiega, Revizia Kobrynskoi Ekonomii, 1563 (the ducal author was at the time super- visor under the government; the manuscript is now in the municipal archives of Kobryn); Hntziklopedicheski Slovar, St. Petersburg, 1895; Regesty, vol. i. s.v., ib. 1899. H. R. 1B AD) KOBRYN, BEZALEL B. SOLOMON. See BEZALEL B. SOLOMON oF KoBRYN. KOBURG. See Saxr-Cospure-GornHa. KOCHER, HERMANN FRIEDRICH: Ger- man Christian Hebraist; born at Osnabriick in 1747; died April 2, 1792. He was the author of “Specimen Observationum Philologicarum in I Sam. ii.” Jena, 1772; “Comm. Sistens Explicationem Vocum DN et NIP Gen. i. 8,5, de Deo Usurpatorum,” 2d. 1778; “Comm. ad Gen. ii. 18-20, de Vocatis ab Adamo Animantibus,” 2b. 1779; “Stricturarum Antimasore- thicarum in Kirjan et Chetib ad Librum Judicum Specimen,” 7b. 1780; “ Versuch einer Erklirung der Gesch. Saul’s mit der Betriigerin zu Endor,” Gera, 527 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Knoxville Kodashim 1780; “ Nova Bibliotheca Hebraica” (with a preface by J. G. Kichhorn), 2 vols., Jena, 1788-84, a supple- ment to Wolf’s “ Bibliotheca Hebrea.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Winer, Handbuch der Theologischen Liter- atur, i. 69; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 194; McClintock and Strong, Cyc. Supplemert. T. Bak: KODASHIM : Name of the fifth of the six orders (“sedarim”) of the Mishnah, so called because all the treatises belonging to it contain regulations and laws concerning sacrifices, priestly contributions, and other matters pertaining to the cult. Both the name of this order and its position as the fifth in the Mishnah are old, and are recorded at an early date. Simeon b. Lakish (8d cent.), who considered the six orders of the Misbnah to be intended by the words “emunat, ‘iteka, hosen, yeshu‘ot, hakmat, wada‘at ” (Isa. xxxiii. 6), enumerates them in the following order and with the following names: “Zera‘im, Mo‘ed, Nashim, Nezikin, Kodashim, Tohorot” (Shab. 81a). The sedarim are given in the same order and with the same names in Esth. R. i. 2 and in Num, R. xiii. Another amora, R. Tanhuma, al- though deducing from Ps. xix. 8-10 a different order of the sedarim, likewise reckons Ko- Position in dashim as the fifth (Yalk., Ps. xix. 8 Mishnah. ¢¢ seg.). According to another version of Tanhuma’s statement, the order of the sedarim is as follows: Nashim, Zera‘im, Mo‘ed, Kodashim, Tohorot, and Nezikin (Num. R. J.c.). In this passage, however, the order is evidently de- termined by that of the Biblical verses to which the treatises are there referred. It may, therefore, be safely assumed that Ko- dashim has always been the fifth of the orders of the Mishnah. According to Maimonides, Kodashim comes after the first four sedarim because they have their exegetical basis in Exodus, whereas Kodashim has its foundation in Leviticus. On the other hand, Kodashim stands before Tohorot because the regula- tions concerning sacrifice (Lev. i.-x.) precede those on cleanness and uncleanness (7), xi.-xv.). Another explanation is given by Zacharias Frankel in his “Hodegetica in Mischnam,” p. 262. With the exception of the 1559 edition of the Mishnah, which regards the two treatises Hullin and Bekorot as belonging to the sixth order, Kodashim in all editions of the Mishnah contains eleven trea- tises. It is doubtful whether Keritot originally be- longed to the order Nezikim, as Brill supposes (“ Kinleitung in die Mischna,” ii. 28). In the following survey the eleven treatises are outlined in the order given by Maimonides (/.c.), which has been followed in the editions of the Mish- nah since 1606. 1. Zebahim (“Bloody Sacrifice”), entitled also Shehitat Kodashim (“Killing of the Consecrated Animals”; B. M. 109b), and Korbanot (“Sacri- fice”; in the Tosefta); divided into 14 chapters. Contents: Regulations for killing sacrificial animals and for sprinkling their blood; how the sacrifice may be- come an abomination (“piggul”), or invalid (“pa- sul”); things consecrated by heathen; upon what the thoughts must be concentrated during the sacrifice; of the mingling of different sacrifices; Treatises. from which sacrifices the priests receive meat; which priests partake of such flesh, and which have no share in it; what the altar, the steps, and the vessels sanctify and in how far that which has been placed on the altar may not be removed from it; sacrifice offered outside; history of places of wor- ship. 2. Menahot (‘“Meal-Offering”), divided into thirteen chapters. Contents: Regulations concern- ing the intention required; the preparation of the meal-offering and itsingredients; places from which the materials for the meal-offering are to be brought; meal-offerings from which only a handful (“ komez ”) is to be taken, and those which are to be placed en- tire upon the “altar; concerning the waving (“te- nufah ”) of the meal-offering, and the laying of hands on the sacrificial victim (“semikah”); the peace- offerings, the wave-offerings, the showbread, the pentecostal bread, and the drink-offering; the tem- ple of Onias. 3. Hullin (“ Profane,” “Unconsecrated ”), called also Shehitat Hullin (“Killing of Unconsecrated Animals”), divided into twelve chapters. Contents: Regulations concerning slaughtering; who is per- mitted to slaughter, by what means, and when; cutting through the neck; the dam may not be killed on the same day with her young; covering up the blood after slaughtering; diseased cattle; what is fit to eat (“kasher”), and what is unfit (“tere- fah”); clean and unclean animals; what meat may not be cooked in milk; the portions of the slaugh- tered animals which must be given to the priest; the first of the fleece. 4. Bekorot (“First-Born”), divided into nine chapters. Contents: Regulations concerning the first-born; how long the first-born of clean animals are to be kept before being given to the priest; hair and wool of the first-born of clean animals; blem- ished first-born of animals; blemishes which make the first-born unfit for sacrifice; rights of the first- born son in regard to inheritance; rights of the priest to the ransom for the first-born son. 5. ‘Arakin (“Estimations”), divided into nine chapters. Contents: Rules for determining the amount which must be given toredeem one pledged to God, or, in case his value has been vowed, for as- certaining its equivalent; who may make such val- uations, and in regard to whom they may be made; on reckoning the equivalent according to the wealth and age of the person in question; valuation when a limb or the half of the value of a person has been vowed; obligations of heirs; distraint when the equivalent is not paid. 6. Temurah (“Exchange” [of a consecrated object]), divided into seven chapters. Contents: Mainly regulations concerning exchanges; objects exchange of which may be effected; concerning the young of the sacrificial victim when exchange has taken place; exchange in case of a sin-offering; for- mulas for exchange. 7. Keritot (“Extermination”), divided into six chapters. Contents: Enumeration of the sins to which the penalty of excision (“karat”) is attached when they have been committed wittingly though without previous warning against them, but which require a sin-offering if they have been committed Kodashim Kohelet Rabbah inadvertently; different cases in which sacrifice is necessary; whena guilt-offering or sin-offering is respectively necessary. 8. Me‘ilah (“ Trespass” [on what has been con- secrated]), divided into six chapters. Contents: Regulations especially concerning trespass; sacri- fices in which trespass may occur, and when it begins; things in which no trespass can take place, although they may not be used; reckoning in cases of trespass, and the question whether several per- sons may trespass in connection with the same thing ; trespass through an agent. 9. Tamid (“The Daily Offering, Morning and Evening ”), divided into seven chapters, in most edi- tions, but see below. Contents: The Temple organ- ization and the apportionment of the various official duties among the different priests by lot; on bring- ing the sacrificial lamb, killing and dividing it, and placing its various parts on the altar; the morning prayer; the incense-offering; the priestly blessing; hymns of the Levites on the different days of the week. 10. Middot (“ Measures” [of the Temple]), di- vided into five chapters. Contents: Descriptions of the arrangement of the Temple and the dimen- sions of the separate divisions of the porches; of the forecourt and its chambers. 11. Kinnim (“ Birds’ Nests”), divided into three chapters. Contents: The offering of pigeons, which was to be brought by indigent women after confine- ment and by such of the poor as had committed any of the trespasses enumerated in Ley. v. 1 et seg. There are also in passing discussions of various cases ot confusion of birds belonging to different persons or to different offerings. Maimonides (/.c.) endeavors to account for this arrangement of the treatises of Kodashim, but his arguments are artificial, while Frankel (/.c. p. 262) attempts to explain it logically. Apparently, how- ever, there was no real reason for the order of the treatises, which were probably arranged according to the system of study adopted in the Arrange- Palestinian and the Babylonian acad- ment of emies. The teachers there were natu- Treatises. rally influenced by pedagogical con- siderations, and placed the longer tractates before the shorter ones (Hoffmann, in Ber- liner’s “ Magazin,” 1890, p. 323). The treatises within the seder or order were thus arranged according to the number of chapters, the one containing the great- est number being placed first (Geiger, in his “ Wiss. Zeit. Jiid. Theol.” ii. 489-492). This supposition of Geiger’s holds good for Kodashim, except that Tamid, with seven chapters, follows Me‘ilah, which has but six. Originally, however, Tamid did not have this number of chapters. In Léwe’s edition of the Mishnah this treatise has only six chapters, while Levi b. Gershon (RaLBaG), in his preface to the commentary on the Pentateuch, allows Tamid five only. In Kodashim there is, accordingly, the fol- lowing arrangement of treatises with a diminishing number of chapters: Zebahim, 14 chapters; Menahot, 18; Hullin, 12; Bekorot, 9; ‘Arakin, 9; Temurah, 7; Keritot, 6; Me‘ilah, 6; Tamid, 6 or 8; Middot, 5; Kinnim, 8. Various other orders of arrangement are found in different editions, which have been de- THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 528 scribed by Strack (“Einleitung in den Talmud,” p. 11). Noteworthy is the sequence given by RaLBaG (J.c.), namely: Zebahim, Hullin, Menahot, Bekorot, ‘Arakin, Temurah, Me‘ilah, Keritot, Tamid, Middot, Kinnim. In every system of arrangement Zebahim is the first treatise and in Num. R. xiii. it is ex- pressly designated as the beginning of the Seder Kodashim. In the Tosefta Kodashim has eight treatises only, Tamid, Middot, and Kinnim being omitted. The Babylonian Talmud has Gemara for In Tosefta the first nine treatises, but none for and the last two, Middot and Kinnim. Gemara. There is no Jerusalem Gemara for Ko- dashim, nor is there any citation from one in the older commentaries and decisions. Isaac Alfasi, who uses Yerushalmi frequently, does not cite it for the treatise Hullin, nor is it quoted by Maimonides, Asheri, or Solomon b. Adret. The supposed citations by other commentators have been shown by Frankel and Buber either not to refer to Kodashim or to be erroneous. Maimonides, however, says (/.c.) that there was a Palestinian Gemara for five whole orders (thus in- cluding Kodashim), but only for Niddah in the sixth order. It is also known that much attention was paid in Palestine to the Seder Kodashim, for the treatises Zebahim and Hullin inthe Babylonian Tal- mud contain many statements of Palestinian amo- raim. It is evident, therefore, that there was once a Jerusalem Gemara to Kodashim, but Jerusalem that it was lost at an early period and Gemara. was no longer used even by the oldest commentators. Maimonides, however, had heard of its existence and believed that it was still extant, as is clear from his statement (/.c.); but it is evident that he never saw it, since if be had seen it he would certainly have made citations from it. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Maimonides, preface to his commentary on the Mishnah, printed in many editions of the Talmud after the treatise Berakot ; Z. Frankel, Hodegetica in Mischnam, pp. 262 et seq., Leipsic, 1859; idem, Introductio in Talmud Hie- rosolymitanum, pp. 45a et seqg., Breslau, 1870; Solomon Bu- ber, Die Angebliche Existenz eines Jerusalem Talmuds zur Ordnung Kodaschim, in Berliner’s Magazin, 1878, pp. 100-105; Abraham Geiger, Hiniges iiber Plan und Anord- a der Mischnah, in his Wiss. Zeit. Jtid. Theol. ii. 474~ He OC; Ji, Lomas KODESH HA-KODASHIM. See Hoty or Houims. KOENEN, HENDRIK JACOB: Dutch histo- rian of the Jews; born at Amsterdam Jan. 11, 1809; died at Buitenrust, near Haarlem, Oct. 18, 1874. He was educated for the bar, and received his degree of doctor of law in 1831. For many years he was a member of the common council of his native town and of the provincial states of North Holland. He was the author of many works on history. His “ Ge- schiedenis der Joden in Nederland ” was awarded a prize, and was published by the Prov. Utrechtsch Ge- nootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen, Utrecht, 1843. It is the first history of the Jews in Hol- land, and in it many hitherto unknown historical sources are cited. s. Je Hee KOF (p): Nineteenth letter of the Hebrew alpha- bet; for its form see ALPHABET. The meaning of =i A aad A ee ee eee rm ns Nn ol hg hy 529 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA odashim Kohelet Rabbah the name is uncertain. It corresponds in form to the Greek “koppa” and the English “q,” and is dis- tinguished in pronunciation from Kar in that it is produced, with a glottal catch, from the rear of the palate. It interchanges, in related languages, with 3,5, andy. Kof occurs only asa root-letter, never as a prefix or suffix. Asa numeral it stands, in later usage, for 100. is TBR: KOHATH (nnp); KOHATHITES: Kohath was the second son of Levi (Gen. xlvi. 11; Ex. vi. 16; Num. iii. 17; I Chron. vi. 1) and progenitor of the Levitical division of the Kohathites. Born in the land of Canaan, he was one of those who went with Jacob to Egypt (Gen. xlvi. 8, 11), where he died at the age of 188, leaving four sons (Ex. vi. 18). The division of the Kohathites was more im- portant than the other two Levitical divisions. Even when wandering in the wilderness, the Kohath- ites were divided into four families (Num. iii. 27); the whole number of their males over a month old was 8,600 (7d. iii. 28) and from thirty to fifty years of age, 2,750 (2b. iv. 2, 8, 836). To them was en- trusted the transportation of the sanctuary and its furniture (2b, iii. 31, iv. 4-15), a very honorable office, and one in which great precautions had to be taken not to touch the objects carried (dd. iv. 15, 18- 20). In the camp their position was south of the Tabernacle (iii. 28); and when journeying they pre- ceded the Gershonites (¢d. iv.; Josh. xxi.). Owing to the great holiness of their burden, the Kohathites carried it upon their shoulders (Num. vii. 9). In the wilderness their chief was Elizaphan ben Uzziel (a. iii. 30). After the settlement of the Israelites in the land of Canaan, thirteen cities out of Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin were allotted to the priests, descendants of Kckath (Josh. xxi. 4, 18-19), and ten others out of Ephraim, Dan, and western Manasseh to the rest of the Kohathites (7). xxi. 5, 20-26; I Chron. vi. 57-61, 67-70). Besides Moses and Aaron, there were other emi- nent Kohathites; ¢.g., the prophet Samuel and his grandson Heman. In David’s division of the Le- vites into groups, descendants of the four Kohath- ite families are mentioned as heads of fathers’ houses (I Chron. xxiii. 12-20). They are described also as taking part in the Temple service in the time of Jehoshaphat (If Chron. xx. 19) and as cooperating in the cleansing of the Temple in the reign of Heze- kiah (¢b. xxix. 12, 14). There is no mention of the Kohathites after the Exile. BE. G. H. M. SE. KOHELET MUSAR: Hebrew weekly; founded at Berlin in 1750 by Moses Mendelssohn (at that time he was not more than twenty-one) and 7. Bock. Only two issues appeared; these contained philosophical and moral reflections of the Leibnitz- Wolff school. BLIOGRAPHY: Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 518; I. David- een. The Genesis of Hebrew Periodical Literature, p. 3, Baltimore, 1900; F. Delitzsch, Zur Gesch. der Jtidischen Poesie, p. 100; Kayserling, Moses Mendelssohn, p. 99. G. “ M. Sc. KOHELET (ECCLESIASTES) RABBAH (called in ed. Pesaro, 1519, and in ed. Venice, 1545, Midrash Kohelet) : Haggadic commentary on Ke- VII.—3+4 clesiastes, included in the collection of the Rabbot. It follows the Biblical book verse by verse, only afew verses remaining without comment. In the list of the old sedarim for the Bible four sedarim are assigned to Ecclesiastes, namely, to i. 1, iii. 18, vii. 1, and ix. 7; and the Midrash Kohelet was prob- ably divided according to these sections. This appears from the phrase “Sidra tinyana” in- serted between the comments to Eccl. vi. 12 and to vii. 1, and the phrase “Sidra telita’a” between the comments to Eccl. ix. 6 and to ix. 7. These phrases occur at the end of the second and third midrash sections, in the same way that “Selik sidra” indicates the end of sections in Ruth R. and Esth., R. in the earlier editions. The commentary to iii. 12 having been lost, the exposition of the conclusion of the first section is missing. Nothing remains to indicate where one section ends and another begins, as there is no introductory remark to the comment on ii. 18. But an introduction is also lacking to the comment on vii. 1 and ix. 7. ‘The author confined himself chiefly to collecting and editing, and did not compose new introductions to the sections. He, however, used Adapta- to a great extent the introductions tions from which he found either in the earlier Earlier midrashim—Bereshit (Genesis) Rab- ' Mid- bah, Pesikta, Ekah (Lamentations) rashim. Rabbati, Wayikra (Leviticus) Rabbah, Shir ha-Shirim (Canticles) Rabbah—or in the collections from which those midrashim were compiled. This shows the important part which the introductions to the earlier midrashim played in the later midrashim, in that they served either as sources or aS component parts of the latter. For introductions to commentaries on the Bible text and for homilies on the sedarim and Pesikta cycle, it was customary to choose texts occurring not in the Pentateuch, but chiefly in the Hagiographa, inclu- ding Ecclesiastes. This, even in very early times, gave rise to a haggadic treatment of numerous passages in Ecclesiastes, which in turn furnished rich material for the compilation of the Midrash Kohelet. The longest passages in the Midrash Kohelet are the introductions to Pesikta and Wayikra Rab- bah, all of which the author used. Some introduc- tions were abbreviated, and introductions from differ- ent midrashim were combined in a comment on one passage of Ecclesiastes. For instance, the long pas- sage on Eccl. xii. 1-7 is a combination of the intro- duction to Wayikra Rabbah xviii. 1 and the twenty- third introduction in Ekah Rabbati (ed. Buber, pp. 9a-12a). Of the ninety-six columns which the Mid- rash Kohelet contains in the Venice edition (fols. 66c-90b), nearly twenty are occupied by expositions which the author took from introductions in Be- reshit Rabbah, Pesikta, Wayikra Rabbah, and Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah; namely, the comments to Eccl. i. (So mOml Seeing mio bmolee cosmids tls, LG.) Via. ly, S Wie Sal Pie Vath, IL, CB Ge Cams wath Ip ibe Ce 15; x. 20; xi. 2,6; xii. 1-7. Many other passages be- sides the introductions have been transferred from those sources to the Midrash Kohelet. Moreover, it contains several passages in common with Ruth R.; compare especially the comment on Eccl. vii. Kohelet Rabbah THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 530 8, which includes the story of R. Meir and his teacher Elisha b. Abuya, with Ruth Rabbah vi. (to Ruth iii. 13), with which it agrees almost verbatim. In this case the story was not taken direct from its source in Yer. Hag. ii. 77b, c. The author of the Midrash Kohelet of course fre- quently consulted the haggadah of the Palestinian Talmud. At the same time, it may Passages beassumed that various passages were from the taken directly from the Babylonian Babylonian Talmud; and this assumption would Talmud. prove the relatively later date of Kohe- let Rabbah, though the end of the midrash, which istaken from Hag. 5a, must be con- sidered as an addition. A further characteristic indication of the late composition of the work is the fact that in the comments on Eccl. v. 5 and vii. 11 passages from Pirke Abot are quoted, with a reference to this treatise (comp. Wayikra R. xvi.), and in the comment on v. 8 several smaller treatises arementioned. Inthe same comment onv. 8, at the beginning of a proem in Wayikra Rabbah xxii., a modification of the passage in the latter is made which gives ample proof that the Midrash Kohelet was written ata later time than the other midrashic works mentioned. In Wayikra Rabbah the passage reads: “Even what is superfluous on the earth is a part of the whole ; and also the things which thou regardest as superfluous to the revealed Torah, as the prescrip- tions relating to fringes, phylacteries, and mezuzah, they also belong to the idea of the revealed Torah.” In the Midrash Kohelet it reads: “The things which thou regardest as superfluous to the Torah, as the tosafot of Rabbi’s school and those of R. Nathan and the treatise on proselytes and slaves [“ Hilkot Gerim wa-‘Abadim”], they also were revealed to Moses on Sinai, and treatises like ‘Hilkot Zizit Tefillin u-Mezu- zot’ belong to the sum total of the Torah.” As Zunz assumes (“G. V.” p. 266), the Midrash Kohelet belongs to the time of the middle midrashim. On the other hand, the author of Midrash Kohelet must not be charged with “ proceeding entirely in the spirit of la- ter compilers” merely because, in connection with certain Bible texts, he repeats accepted or approved passages which were written upon the same or sim- ilar texts. Such repetitions are frequently found in the earlier midrashim. In Midrash Kohelet the same comments are found on Kecl. i. 2 as on vi. 12; oni. 8 as on xi. 9; oni. 18 as on iii. 10; on iii. 16as on x. 4; on vi. 1 as on ix. 13; and on vii. 11 as on ix. 10; etc. Verses ii. 24, iii. 18, v. 17, viii. 15 receive the same explanation; and it is interesting to note that the Epicurean and hedonistic view expressed in them—that for all of man’s troubles his only com- pensation is the gratification of the senses: eating, drinking, and taking pleasure—is interpreted alle- gorically and given a religious significance: “ Where- ever eating and drinking are spoken of in this way, the pleasure is meant which the study of the Bible and the performance of good works afford; as it is written (ch. viii. 15): ‘it accompanies him py [Sin his labor”], which must be interpreted as Wows [“in his world”]’: not eating and drinking accom- pany man to the grave, but the Torah and the good works which he performs.” The following con- nected passage on Eccl. ii. 4-8 may serve to indicate the manner in which in this midrash the allegorical interpretation is connected with the simple literal interpretation; it also shows how the author, in or- der to explain a passage, has fused the material collected from different sources, and illustrates his use of stories and of foreign words (the Bible text of Ecclesiastes is printed in italics) : “ THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 536 KOHUT, ADOLPH: German writer; born Nov. 10, 1848, at Mindszent, Hungary; brother of Alexander Konuv. For three years he attended the Jewish Theological Seminary in Breslau. He then studied philosophy, literature, and Oriental Jan- guages at the university in that city, and obtained his Ph.D. degree at Jena in 1877. Meanwhile he was active in journalistic work, becoming the ed- itor successively of the “Berliner Zeitung,” the “Breslauer Nachrichten,” the “Diisseldorfer Zei- tung,” the “Schleswig - Holsteinische Tageblatt” (Kiel), the “Tribun” (Berlin), the “ Orchester,” the “ Siegfried,” and the “ Kieler Nachrichten.” In Diisseldorf and Dresden he was appointed mu- sical and dramatic critic of the two leading dailies. He published a “History of the Dresdener Hof- theater” as well as a long series of biographical monographs, on Rossini, Meyerbeer, Auber, Rubin- stein, Weber, and others. Several of the monographs were issued by the publishers Reclam of Leipsic, in their Universalbibliothek. In addition to these, he published many volumes on musicaland dramatic criticism. He edited a volume of Weber’s unpub- lished letters; wrote the standard biography of the poet Theodor Korner (now used as a text-book in many of the German high schools); issued several volumes of biography dealing with princes and statesmen, notably on Bismarck and Emperor Will- iam I.; and published several volumes of transla- tions from the Hungarian, especially the works of the Hungarian national poet Alexander Petéfy. He published also critical editions of a number of Ger- man classics. While editor of the “Berliner Zeitung,” his atti- tude toward Bismarck and the government was so aggressively antagonistic that on Sept. 18, 1884, he was expelled from Prussia, remaining in compara- tive obscurity in Dresden until- his pardon was granted in 1889. Emperor Francis Joseph conferred upon him the Cross of Merit, with the Crown, for his services to Hungarian literature, and in 1892 made him Knight of the Order of Francis Joseph. Kohut was recently elected a member of the Acad- emy of Sciences in Budapest, and for many years was president of the German-Hungarian Society in Berlin. Besides publishing more than 200 books and mon- ographs, Kohut has been a frequent contributor to the literary periodicals of Germany, Hungary, and America. Of his works of Jewish interest may be mentioned the following: “Alexander von Hum- boldt und das Judenthum,” Leipsic, 1871; “Die Goldenen Worte der Bibel,” 2b. 1878; “Was Lehrt die Bibel iber den Gehorsam Gegen Staat und Obrig- keit?” Diisseldorf, 1875; “Aus Meiner Rheinlind- ischen Mappe,” 7. (containing many pages on Heine); “Heinrich Heine und die Frauen,” 2.; “Moses Mendelssohn und Seine Familie,” Dresden, 1886; several volumes on Ferdinand Lassalle; “Gesch. der Deutschen Juden,” Berlin, 1898; “Be- rtiihmte Israelitische Minner und Frauen,” 2 vols., Leipsic, Reudnitz, 1900-1. The two last-named works comprise about 1,750 pages, and contain a vast amount of historical and biographical material, somewhat unsystematically put together and not always reliable, but, nevertheless, valuable. They 5387 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kohn, Tobias Kohut, Alexander eee are of particular interest because of the great num- ber of photographs and other illustrative matter, brought together for the first time, from sources either unknown or not readily accessible. His wife, Elizabeth Kohut Mannstein, is a noted singer, and was for many years “ Hofopern- singerin” in Dresden. His son, Oswald Kohut, is an author and journalist. BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. Reines, Dor, Dor we-Hakamaw, p. 99, Cracow, 1890; Das Geistige Berlin, p. 256. Ci dls TR 8. KOHUT, ALEXANDER (known in Hebrew literature as pn): Rabbi and Orientalist; born April 22, 1842, at Felegyhaza, Hungary; died May 25, 1894, in New York. He belonged to a family of rabbis, the most noted among them being R. Israel Palota Qo iSy), his great-grandfather, R. Amram (called “The Gaon,” died in Safed, Palestine, where he had spent the last years of his life), and R. Hayyim Kitssee (Ayy'p), rabbi in Erza, who was his great-granduncle. The last-named was the au- thor of several rabbinic works (Reines, “Dor Dor we-Hakamaw,” p. 94, note). Kohut’s father, Jacob Kohut, was a great lin- guist, and was well versed in rabbinic literature. He was so poor that he could not afford to send his son to the village school. There being no Hebrew school (“heder”) in his native town, Alexander reached his eighth year without having learned even the rudiments of Hebrew or Hungarian. Ata very tender age, while selling his mother’s tarts in the market-place, he was kidnaped by Gipsies, because of his extraordinary beauty. His Early family soon removed to Kecskemet, Training. where Kohut received his first instruc- tion. He attended the gymnasium and at the same time studied Talmud with an old scholar, Reb Gershom Lévinger. In his fifteenth year, while trying to decipher some foreign words in the Talmud with the aid of Landau’s Dictionary, he conceived the plan of writing a complete lexicon of the Talmud, not having found the etymology of many words in Landau (see the autobiographical sketch of Kohut in the “American Hebrew,” 1890; and in Reines, /.c. p. 96). After finishing the gymnasium course in Kecske- met, he removed to Budapest. Anxious to continue his rabbinical studies, he went to Breslau. In 1865 he received a call to the rabbinate of Tarnowitz, Upper Silesia. He then spent another year in Bres- lau, devoting his time to Oriental philology and Semitics. During the previous year he received his Ph.D. degree from the University of Leipsic, his dis- sertation being “ Ueber die Jiidische Angelogie und Daemonologie in Ihrer Abhiingigkeit vom Parsis- mus.” ‘The essay was published by the “ Deutsche Morgenlindische Gesellschaft ” in 1866, it being the first Jewish work issued under the auspices of that society. He obtained his rabbinical diploma in 1867. It was in 1864 that he began to collect materials for a, critical edition of the “‘Aruk” of Nathan ben Je- hiel. In186%he was called to the rabbinate of Stuhl- weissenburg, Hungary. Baron Joseph von Kétvés, the famous Hungarian poet and novelist, and after- ward “Cultusminister,” appointed him superintend- ent of all the schools in the county, this being the first time that such a position had been tendered to a Jew. The Congress of Jewish notables held in Buda- pest in 1868 appointed Kohut its secretary. Notable among his literary labors falling in this period is his study entitled “Etwas tiber die Moral und Abfas- sungszeit des Buches Tobias,” originally published in Geiger’s “Jiid. Zeit.” vol. x., several monographs in the “Z.D. M.G.” which developed his original thesis concerning Persian influence on Judaism, and his “Kritische Beleuchtung der Persischen Penta- teuch-Uebersetzung des Jakob ben Joseph Tavus” (Leipsic, 1871). Among his literary remains are to be found materials for a critical edition of the Persian text of this version. In 1872 he was elected chief rabbi of Fiinfkirchen, Hungary, remaining there eight years. By this time his reputation as a Hun- garian orator had spread so far that many noted statesmen and church dignitaries came to hear him from distant towns. About 1873 Kohut began to compile his Diction- ary of the Talmud, entirely in German, encouraged by the promise of a Christian nobleman to bear all costs of publication. Hehad proceeded as far as the third letter of the alphabet when he Talmud found that the work was assuming Dictionary. such gigantic proportions as to pre- clude the possibility of its being con- fined within the projected limits. Arduous as the merely mechanical labor of copying the manuscript was, he rewrote what he had written, intending to publish the original text of the old “‘Aruk,” with a German commentary. On the advice of Zunz and Buber, however, who argued that the “‘Aruk,” be- ing a national classic, ought to be compiled in He- brew throughout, he again rewrote the work in that language, the labor of copying occupying two more years. It is this trait of untiring patience, which scorned all obstacles, that made the publication of vol. i., in 1878, possible. His Meecenas, in the mean- time, had died, and Kohut was left to bear the bur- den of expense alone, save for the subvention of the Academy of Sciences in Vienna and of the Cultus- ministerium in Berlin. He called his work “ Aruch Completum” or “‘Aruk ha-Shalem,” and its pro- duction occupied twenty-five years of his life. The first four volumes were printed during his residence in Hungary, and the last four during his sojourn in America, covering a period of fourteen years (Vienna, 1878-92); the supplement appearing from a New York press; and the whole work aggregating more than 4,000 double-column pages. Seven man- uscripts of the “‘Aruk ” were used by the editor in determining the etymology of the words, and count- less doubtful and corrupted passages in the Talmud were thus corrected and restored. Kohut identified in an elaborate special study (printed in the supple- ment) the often unacknowledged sources of Nathan ben Jehiel’s information, though everywhere defend- ing him against the charge of plagiarism. The “«Ayuk” has been justly characterized as one of the monuments of Hebrew literature. In 1880 Kohut was called to Grosswardein, Hun- gary, where he remained until 1884, While there he’ published (1881) “A Szidék Torténete, a Biblia Befejezésctél a Jelenkorig” (introduced into many schools in Hungary as a text-book), and translated Kohut, Alexander Kol Nidre THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 538 Ce ee eee the entire Bible into Hungarian. Part of the manu- script was, however, lost, and the work never ap- peared in print. At Grosswardein he became ac- quainted with Koloman von Tisza, prime minister of Hungary, who, hearing him speak at a national gathering of notables, was so carried away by his eloquence that he caused him to be called to the Hungarian parliament as representative of the Jews. In 1885 Kohut was elected rabbi of Congregation Ahavath Chesed in New York. His arrival in the United States was the signal for rallying the con- servative forces of American Jewry; and it was not long before he was bitterly assailed by the radical wing. A series of lectures on “ Ethics of the Fathers,” only the first part of which was printed in book form (New York, 1885), clearly set forth his conservatism ; and so marked was this attitude and the influence it had upon the public mind that the leaders of Reform felt called upon to institute the memorable Pitts- burg Conference (see CONFERENCES, RABBINICAL), to accentuate their own advanced views and their in- dependence of the historic traditions of the past. Kohut was associated with the Rev. Sabato Morais in founding the Jewish Theological Seminary of New York, becoming one of itsadvisory board, and being active as professor of Talmudic meth- odology up to the time of his death. In 1889, on the occasion of his finish- ing the “ Aruch Completum,” he was the recipient of many honors, notably at the hands of various learned bodiesin Europe. In1891 he was appointed examiner in rabbinics at Columbia Col- lege. In March, 1894, while delivering a stirring eulogy on Kossuth, he was stricken in his pulpit, and, after lingering a few weeks, expired on the eve of the Sabbath. A volume containing memorial addresses and tributes was published by Congregation Ahavath Chesed in 1894 in New York; and another, contain- ing learned essays by forty-four noted scholars in Europe and America, entitled “Semitic Studies in Memory of Rev. Dr. Alexander Kohut,” was pub- lished in Berlin in 1897 by his son, G. A. Kohut. The latter work contains a memoir of Kohut’s life written by his brother, Dr. Adolph Kohut. A complete list of Kohut’s published writings has been compiled by G. A. Kohut, in the appendix to the “ Proceedings of the Fourth Biennial Convention of the Jewish Theological Seminary Association ” (New York, 1894) and in “Tributes to the Memory of Rev. Dr. Alexander Kohut,” pp. 49-64 (7. 1894). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Moses Reines, Dor Dor we-Hakamaw, pp. 93-115, 182-183, 187, Cracow, 1890; American Hebrew, 1885- 1894; Reports of the Jewish Theological Seminary, 1894, 1900; A. Kohut, Bertihmte Israelitische Manner und Frauen, ii. 344-346, 8. (Oy AXy Jae His son, George Alexander Kohut, isan Amer- ican writer and bibliographer; born Feb. 11, 1874, at Stuhlweissenburg, Hungary. He was educated at the gymnasium in Grosswardein, at the public schools in New York, at Columbia University (1893- 1895), Berlin University, and the Berlin Hochschule fur die Wissenschaft des Judenthums (1895-97). In the year 1897 he became rabbi of the Congrega- tion Emanu-Ei, Dallas, Texas, a post which he oc- At New York. cupied for three years. In 1902 he became super- intendent of the religious school of Temple Emanu-El in New York, and is now (1904) assistant librarian of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America. Kohut is the author of: The Index to the Italian words in the “Aruch,” published in A. Kohut’s “. Aruch Completum,” vol. viii. (1892) ; “ Early Jewish Literature in America” (“ Publications Am. Jew. Hist. Soc.” No. 8, 1895, pp. 103-147); “Sketches of Jewish Loyalty, Bravery, and Patriotism in the South Amer- ican Colonies and the West Indies,” in Simon Wolf’s “The American Jew as Patriot, Soldier, and Citizen” (1895); “Martyrs of the Inquisition in South Amer- ica” (1895); “A Memoir of Dr. Alexander Kohut’s Literary Activity,” in “Proceedings of the Fourth Biennial Convention of the Jewish Theological Sem- inary Assoc.”; “Bibliography of the Writings of Prof. M. Steinschneider,” in the “Steinschneider Festschrift” (Leipsic, 1896); “Simon de Caceres and His Project to Conquer Chili” (New York, 1897); “Ezra Stiles and the Jews” (¢b. 1902), and many other monographs on historical subjects and on folk- lore. He also edited “Semitic Studies in Memory of Rev. Dr. Alexander Kohut” (Berlin, 1897), and, since 1902, has edited “Helpful Thoughts,” now the “Jewish Home,” a monthly periodical pub- lished in New York. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Kohut, Beriithmte Israelitische Mdinner und Frauen, ii. 346. i KOJETEIN, BARUCH. See Gorrern, BARUCH. KOKABI, DAVID B. SAMUEL. See Davin BEN SAMUEL OF ESTELLA. KOKABI, JOSEPH BEN ABRAHAM: Ger- man physician, a native of Ulm; lived at Ferrara in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. “ Kokabi” is the Hebrew equivalent of his German name, “Stern”; in Latin his signature was “Stella.” He was the author of a medical work entitled “Toze’ot Hayyim” (Venice, 1714). He is also mentioned in Tobiah b. Moses’ medical work “ Ma‘aseh Tobiyyah.” BIBLIOGRAPHY : First, Bibl. Jud. i. 181; Mortara, Indice, p. 14; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1533. G. MESSE KOKEBE YIZHAK: Hebrew annual; pub- lished at Vienna from 1845 to 1872 by M. Stern, and from 1872 to 1873 by M. Weissmann (Chajes). The annual was devoted to literary history, philology, exegesis, and Hebrew poetry, and many able disser- tations by Jellinek, Luzzatto, and other leading scholars of the time are to be found in it. The last number was reviewed by A. Geiger in his “Jii- dische Zeitschrift,” i. 217-223, ii. 71. A second edi- tion of the first annual was published at Vienna in 1847. a. I. Br. KOL BO: Collection of ritual and civil laws, the meaning of the title being “all is init”; who its author was has not yet beenascertained. The work in content resembles earlier codes, as, for instance, the Turim or the “Orhot Hayyim,” though in its form it is very different; it does not pretend to any order; the laws of the Orah Hayyim are found among the laws of the Yoreh De‘ah and those of the Eben ha-‘Ezer among those of the Orah Hayyim; ee ee ae ee ee ae en a ee ee 539 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kohut, Alexander Kol Nidre many laws are entirely missing in the“ Kol Bo.” It is peculiar in that some of the laws are too briefly stated, while others are stated at great length, with- out division into paragraphs. After the regular code, terminating with the laws of mourning (No. 115), there comes a miscellaneous collection, contain- ing the “ takkanot ” of R. Gershom and of Jacob Tam, the “ Ma‘aseh Torah” of Judah ha-Nasi I., the legend of Solomon’s throne, the legend of Joshua b. Levi, a cabalistic dissertation on circumcision, a disserta- tion on gematria and notarikon, sixty-one decisions of Eliezer b. Nathan; forty-four decisions of Samson Zadok (TaShBeZ), decisions of Isaac of Corbeil, and responsa of Perez ha-Kohen, decisions of Isaac Orbil, of the geonim Natronai, Hai, Amram, Nah- shon, laws of the “mikweh” taken from Perez’s “Sefer ha-Mizwot,” responsa, and finally the law of excommunication of Nahmanides. For this reason it is quoted under the title of “Sefer ha-Likkutim” in “ Abkat Rokel,” No. 18. As to the author of the “ Kol Bo,” there are differ- ent opinions; Joseph Caro, in saying that the words of the “Kol Bo” are identical with those of the “Orhot Hayyim” of Aaron b. Jacob ha-Kohen, seems to have suggested that the “Kol Bo” is an abridgment of the “Orhot Hayyim.” This is also the opinion of Azulai, and according to Aaron Schlitzstadt, the epitomizer was a certain Shemariah b. Simhah, in the fourteenth century (see Benjacob, “Debarim ‘Attikim,” ii. 9); others think that it was Joseph b. Tobiah of Provence. By some scholars it is attributed to a pupil of Perez ha-Kohen; by others it is identified with the “Sefer ha-Nayyar”; and by Gedaliah ibn Yahya it is attributed to Isaac b. Sheshet (comp. “Sifte Yeshenim”). Benjacob (“Kerem Hemed,” viii. 167 e¢ seg.) concluded that the author of the “ Kol Bo” was Aaron b. Jacob ha- Kohen, author of the “Orhot Hayyim,” and that the “Kol Bo” wasan earlier form of the “Orhot.” Its lack of system and the inadequacy of its authorities are due, Benjacob considers, to the youth of the author. Zunz (“Ritus,” p. 180) refutes Benjacob’s arguments, his opinion being that the “Kol Bo” is a compendium of the “Orhot Hayyim.” The oldest edition bears neither place nor date, but Zedner (“Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus.” p. 191) conjectures that it was published at Naples in 1490 (see In- CUNABULA); the second edition is dated “ Constanti- nople, 1519.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, ii.; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, p. 239; Conforte, Kore ha-Dorot, p. 25b ; Gross, in Monatsschrift, xviii. 444; Zunz, Ritus, pp. 32, 179- 180; M. Schlesinger, in the introduction to his edition of Aaron ha-Kohen of Lunel’s Orhot Hayyim, Berlin, 1902. A M. SEL. KOL MEBASSER. See PERIODICALS. KOL NIDRE (7) $5 = “all vows”): Prayer recited in the synagogue at the beginning of the evening service on the Day of Atonement; the name is taken from the opening words. The “Kol Nidre” has had a very eventful history, both in itself and in its influence on the legal status of the Jews. Intro- duced intg the liturgy despite the opposition of rab- binic authorities, repeatedly attacked in the course of time by many halakists, and in the nineteenth century expunged from the prayer-book by many communities of western Europe, it has often been employed by Christians to support their assertion that the oath of a Jew can not be trusted. Before sunset on the eve of the Day of Atonement, when the congregation has gathered in the syna- gogue, the Ark is opened and two rabbis, or two leading men in the community, take from it two Torab-scrolls. Then they take their places, one on each side of the hazzan, and the three recite in concert a formula beginning with the words 7A wD mbyn Sw, which runs as follows: “In the tribunal of heaven and the tribunal of earth, by the permission of God—blessed be He—and by the permission of this holy congregation, we hold it lawful to pray with the trans- gressors.”’ 5 Thereupon the cantor chants the Aramaic prayer beginning with the words “ Kol Nidre,” with its mar- velously plaintive and touching melody, and, grad- ually increasing in volume from pianissimo to fortis- simo, repeats three times the following words: Form of Prayer. “All vows [47 52], obligations, oaths, and anathemas, whether called ‘ konam,’ ‘ konas,’ or by any other name, which we may vow, or swear, or pledge, or whereby we may be bound, from this Day of Atonement until the next (whose happy com- ing we await), we do repent. May they be deemed absolved, forgiven, annulled, and void, and made of no effect; they shall not bind us nor haye power overus. The vows shall not be reckoned vows; the obligations shall not be obligatory ; nor the oaths be oaths.”” The leader and the congregation then say together: ‘* And it shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel, and the stranger that sojourneth among them, seeing all the people were in ignorance ’”’ (Num. xv. 26). This also is repeated three times. The hazzan then closes with the benediction, }s"nnmw: “Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, who hast preserved us and hast brought us to enjoy this season.” In many congregations Num. xiv. 19-20 is recited before this benediction. After it the Torah-scrolls are replaced, and the customary eve- ning service begins. The tendency to make vows was so strong in ancient Israel that the Pentateuchal code found it necessary to protest against the exces- sive estimate of the religious value of such obligations (Deut. xxiii. 23). Rash and frequent vows inevitably involved in dif- ficulties many who had made them, and thus evoked an earnest desire for dispensation from such re- sponsibilities. This gave rise to the rite of absolu- tion from a vow (“hattarat nedarim”) which might be performed only by a scholar (“talmid hakam ”), or an expert (“mumheh”) on the one hand, or by a board of three laymen on the other. On ac- count of the passionate nature of the Jews and of Orientals in general, however, and in view of their addiction to making vows, it might easily happen that these obligations would afterward be wholly forgotten and either not be kept or be violated un- intentionally (see L. Low, “Die Dispensation von Gelobnissen,” in “Gesammelte Schriften,” iii. 361 et seg.). The religious consciousness, which felt oppressed at the thought of the non-fulfilment of its solemn vows, accordingly devised a general and comprehensive formula of dispensation which was repeated by the hazzan in the name of the as- sembled congregation at the beginning of the fast of Atonement. This declared that the petitioners, who Origin. Kol Nidre THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 540 oe ee were seeking reconciliation with God, solemnly re- tracted in His presence all vows and oaths which they had taken during the period intervening be- tween the previous Day of Atonement and the pres- ent one, and made them null and void from the beginning, entreating in their stead pardon and forgiveness from the Heavenly Father. This is in accordance with the older text of the formulaas itis preserved in the “Siddur” of Amram Gaon (ed. Warsaw, i. 47a) and in the “Likkute ha- Pardes” (p. 12b). The “Kol Nidre” was thus evi- dently developed from the longing for a clear con- science on the part of those seeking reconciliation with God. The date of the composition of the prayer andits author are alike unknown; but it was in exist- ence at the geonic period. The readiness with which vows were made and the facility with which they were annulled by the scribes gave the Karaites an opportu- Adoption nity to attack the Rabbinites, and into the forced the Geonim to minimize the Ritual. powerof dispensation. Yehudai Gaon of Sura (760), author of the “ Halakot Pesukot,” went so far as to forbid any study what- soever of Nedarim, the Talmudic treatise on oaths (Alfasi on Nedarim, end; L. Léw, /.c. p. 863). Thus the “ Kol Nidre” was discredited in both of the Baby- lonian academies and was not accepted by them (8. Kk. Stern, in “Kebuzat Hakamim,” ed. Warnheim, 1861), as is affirmed by the geonim Natronai (853- 856) and Hai Bar Nahshon (889-896; Miller, “ Maf- teah,” p. 108; Cassel, “Teshubot Geonim Kadmo- nim,” p. 9; Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 189; Tur Orah Hay- yim, § 619; “Kol Bo,” § 68). Amram Gaon in his “Siddur” (.c.) calls the custom of reciting the “Kol Nidre” a foolish one (“minhag shetut”). Ac- cording to Natronai, however, it was customary to recite the formula in various lands of the Jewish dis- persion, and it is clear likewise from Amram’s “ Sid- dur” (ii. 37a) that the usage was wide-spread as early as his time in Spain. But the geonic practise of not reciting the “ Kol Nidre” was long prevalent; it has never been adopted in the Catalonian or in the Algerian ritual (Zunz, J.c. p. 106); and there were always many congregations in lands where the Provengal and Spanish ritual was used which did not recite it (“Orhot Hayyim,” p. 105d; comp. also RaN to Ned. 23b, where it is said: “There are some congregations which usually recite the ‘ Kol Nidre’ on the Day of Atonement”). Together with the “Kol Nidre” another custom was developed, which is traced to Meir of Rothen- burg (d. 1293; “Orhot Hayyim,” p. 106b). This is the recital before the “Kol Nidre” of the formula mentioned beginning “Bi-yeshibah ‘“*Bi-Yeshi- shel ma‘alah,” which has been trans- bah shel lated above, and which gives per- Ma/‘alah.” mission to transgressors of the Law or to those under a ban (“‘abaryanim”) “to pray with the congregation ” (7b. ; “Kol Bo,” § 68, end), or, according to another version which is now generally prevalent, to the congregation “to pray with the transgressors of the Law.” To justify prayer on that day with such transgressors and with persons under a ban, a hagyadic saying (Ker. 6b) was quoted to the effect that a fast-day was to be counted as lost unless “the wicked” were present (see Mahzor Vitry, ed. Hurwitz, p. 381; Zunz, /.¢. p. 96). re Germany (Tur Orah Hayyim, § 619) this custom spread to southern France, Spain, Greece, and probably to northern France, and was in time generally adopted (Shulhan ‘Aruk, Yoreh De‘ah, 619, 1; Zunz, Jc. p. 96). The assertion that the “Kol Nidre” was introduced on account of the Spanish Maranos (Mandelstamm [anon.], “Hore Talmudice,” vol. ii.; “Reform in Judenthum,” pp. 7% et seq., Berlin; comp. also “ Ha-Zefirah,” 1885, p. 361; Liebersohn, in “ Ha-Meliz,” 1868, p. 270) is in- correct, although the formula may have been used in Spain with reference to them. An important alteration in the wording of the “Kol Nidre” was made by Rashi’s son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel, who changed the original phrase “from the last Day of Atonement until this The Ver- one” to “from this Day of Atonement sion of until the next.” Thus the dispensa- Meir ben tion of the “Kol Nidre” was not as Samuel. formerly a posteriori and concerned with unfulfilled obligations of the past year, but a priori and having reference to vows which one might not be able to fulfil or might for- get to observe during the ensuing year. Meir ben Samuel likewise added the words “we do repent of them all” (}F2 NIDINS nnbp), since, according to the Law, real repentance is a condition of dispensa- tion. The reasons assigned for this change were that an “ex post facto” annulment of a vow was meaningless, and that, furthermore, no one might grant to himself a dispensation, which might be given only by a board of three laymen or by a com- petent judge (“mumheh”). Meir ben Samuel cited further, in support of his arguments, Ned. 23b, which reads: “ Whoever wishes all the vows he may make throughout the year to be null and void shall come at the beginning of the year and say: ‘ May all the vows which I shall vow be annulled.’” This change made by Meir ben Samuel is given by Rab- benu Tam in his “Sefer ha-Yashar” (ed. Venice, 1816, § 144), although it did not emanate from him, as the old authorities incorrectly supposed (e.g., Isaac ben Moses of Vienna, “Or Zarua‘,” p. 126b; Aaron ha-Kohen of Lunel, “Orhot Hayyim,” p. 106b; RoSH to Ned. 23b and Tur Orah Hayyim, § 619). It appears to have been Rabbenu Tam, however, who accounted for the alteration made by his father as already stated, and who also tried to change the perfects of the text, Change of “which we have vowed,” “have Tense. sworn,” etc., to imperfects. Whether the old text was already too deeply rooted, or whether Rabbenu Tam did not correct these verbal forms consistently and grammatically, the old perfects are still retained at the beginning of the formula, although a future meaning is given to them. There has been much discussion concern- ing the correct reading of the formula as affecting the tenses, yet even men like Jacob Emden (see “She’elat Yabez,” i., No. 135) and Wolf Heiden- heim (introduction to the Mahzor, ed. Hanover, 1837) did not venture to introduce the change into the Mahzor. Mordecai Jaffe, author of the “Le- on eas ee ee 541 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kol Nidre bushim,” states that he often tried to teach the hazzanim a more correct form of the “Kol Nidre,” but that as often as they recited it in the synagogue they lapsed into the old text to which the melody of the hymn had accustomed them (Heidenheim, l.c.). The alteration made by Meir ben Samuel, which agreed with Isaac ibn Ghayyat’s view (see Isaac ben Sheshet, Responsa, No. 394, end), was accepted in the German, northern French, and Polish rituals and in those dependent on them, but not in the Spanish, Roman, and Provengal rituals (see Zunz, “Die Ritus von Avignon,” in “ Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1838, p. 303). The old version is, therefore, usually called the “Sephardic.” The old and the new versions are some- times found side by side (see Mahzor of Aragon, Sa- lonica, 1805). The change was bitterly opposed, especially by the Italian Isaiah di Trani (in 1250), since the old text was known to all and was in every Mahzor (“Tanya,” ed. Cremona, 1565, p. 102b), and even in the places which adopted the alteration there were always authorities who pre- ferred the old reading and rejected the new, such as Jacob Landau (“Agur,” ed. Sedilkow, 1884, p. 73b). It should be noted, furthermore, in regard to the text of the “Kol Nidre,” that in the “Siddur” of Amram (/.c.) and in the Roman Mah- Language. zor (Zunz, “ Ritus,” p. 96) it is wholly in Hebrew, and therefore begins “ Kol Nedarim” (comp. also “Likkute ha-Pardes,” J.c.). The determination of the time in both versions is Hebrew. The words “as it is written in the teach- ings of Moses, thy servant,” which were said in the old form before Num. xv. 26, were canceled by Meir of Rothenburg (Abudarham, p. 75b). In many places the “ Kol Nidre” was recited once only (see Rabbenu Tam, J/.c.); in others, twice, so that late comers might hear it (“ Likkute ha-Pardes,” p. 12b); in some congregations, however, it was said three times. This last usage is justified by Rab- benu Tam on the ground that there are many rabbin- ical formulas which are repeated thrice, such as “ Ha- luz ha-Na‘al” in the “Halizah” or “Muttar Lak” (“ May it be permitted thee ”) in the absolution from a vow. As to the manner in which the hazzan is to recite the “Kol Nidre,” the Mahzor Vitry (p. 888) gives the following directions: “The first time he must utter it very softly like one who hesi- Method of tates to enter the palace of the king to Recitation. ask a gift of him whom he fears to approach; the second time he may speak somewhat louder; and the third time more loudly still, as one who is accustomed to dwell at court and to approach his sovereign as a friend.” The number of Torah-scrolis taken out for the “Kol Nidre” varied greatly according to the differ- ent “minhagim.” In some places it was one; in others, two, three, seven, or even all (see “ Hayye Abraham,” p. 47a, Leghorn, 1861). The first To- rah-scroll taken out is called the “Sefer Kol Nidre.” The “Kol Nidre” should be recited before sunset, since dispensation from a vow may not be granted on the Sabbath or on a feast-day, unless the vow refers to one of these days. The “ Kol Nidre” has been one of the means wide- ly used by Jewish apostates and by enemies of the Jews to cast suspicion on the trust- Use by worthiness of an oath taken by a Jew Anti- (Wagenseil, “Tela Ignea, Disputatio Semites. R. Jechielis,” p. 28; Eisenmenger, “Entdecktes Judenthum,” vol. ii., ch. ix., pp. 489 et seg., Kénigsberg, 1711; Bodenschatz, “Kirchliche Verfassung der Heutigen Juden,” part ii., ch. v., § 10, Frankfort and Leipsic, 1748; Roh- ling, “Der Talmudjude,” pp. 80 et seg., Miinster, 1877); so that many legislators considered it neces- sary to have a special form of oath administered to Jews (“Jew’s oath”), and many judges refused to allow them to take a supplementary oath, basing their objections chiefly on this prayer (Zunz, “G. S.” ii. 244; comp. pp. 246, 251). As early as 1240 Jehiel of Paris was obliged to defend the “ Kol Nid- re” against these charges. It can not be denied that, according to the usual wording of the for- mula, an unscrupulous man might think that it offers a means of escape from the obligations and promises which he had assumed and made in regard to others. The teachers of the synagogues, however, have never failed to point out to their cobelievers that the dispensation from vows in the Refers “Kol Nidre” refers only to those Only to which an individual voluntarily as- Individual sumes for himself alone (see RoSH to Vows. Ned. 23b) and in which no other per- sons or their interests are involved. In other words, the formula is restricted to those vows which concern only the relation of man to his conscience or to his Heavenly Judge (see especially Tos, to Ned. 28b). In the opinion of Jewish teach- ers, therefore, the object of the “Kol Nidre” in de- claring oaths null and void is to give protection from divine punishment in case of violation of the vow. No vow, promise, or oath, however, which concerns another person, a court of justice, or a community is implied in the “ Kol Nidre.” It must be remembered, moreover, that five geonim were against while only one was in favor of reciting the prayer (Zunz, “G. V.” p. 890, note a), and furthermore that even so early an authority as Saadia wished to restrict it to those vows which were extorted from the congregation in the synagogue in times of persecution (“Kol Bo,” l.c.); and he declared explicitly that the “Kol Nid- re” gave no absolution frem oaths which an indi- vidual had taken during the year. Judah ben Bar- zillai, a Spanish author of the twelfth century, in his halakic work “Sefer ha-‘Ittim,” declares that the custom of reciting the “Kol Nidre” was unjus- tifiable and misleading, since many ignorant persons believe that all their vows and oaths are annulled through this formula, and consequently they take such obligations on themselves carelessly (“ Orhot Hayyim,” p. 106a). For the same reason Jeroham ben Meshullam, who lived in Provence about the middle of the fourteenth century, inveighed against those fools who, trusting to the “Kol Nidre,” made vows recklessly, and he declared them incapable of giving testimony (“Toledot Adam we-Hawwah,” ed. 1808, section 14, partiii., p. 88; see Zunz, “G. V.” p. 390). The Karaite Judah Hadassi, who wrote the “ Eshkol ha-Kofer” at Constantinople in 1148 (see Nos. 139, Kol Nidre THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 542 140 of that work), likewise protested against the “Kol Nidre.” Among other opponents of it in the Middle Ages were Yom-Tob ben Jewish Abraham Isbili (d. 1350) in his “ Hid- Opposition. dushim”; Isaac ben Sheshet, rabbi in Saragossa (d. 1406), Responsa, No. 394 (where is also a reference to the preceding); the author of the “Kol Bo” (15th cent.); and Leon of Modena (d. 1648 [see N. S. Libowitz, “Leon Mo- dena,” p. 83, New York, 1901]). In addition, nearly all printed mahzorim contain expositions and ex- planations of the “Kol Nidre” in the restricted sense mentioned above. Yielding to the numerous accusations and com- plaints brought against the “Kol Nidre” in the course of centuries, the rabbinical conference held at Brunswick in 1844 decided unani- In the mously that the formula was not es- Nineteenth sential, and that the members of the Century. convention should exert their influence toward securing its speedy abolition (“Protocolle der Ersten Rabbiner Versammlung,” p. 41, Brunswick, 1844). At other times and places during the nineteenth century emphasis was fre- quently laid upon the fact that “in the ‘ Kol Nidre’ only those vows and obligations are implied which are voluntarily assumed, and which are, so to speak, taken before God, thus being exclusively re- ligious in content; but that those obligations are in no wise included which refer to other persons or to non-religious relations” (“Allg. Zeit. des Jud.” 1885, p. 396). The decision of the conference was accepted by many congregations of western Europe and in all the American Reform congregations, which while retaining the melody substituted for the formula a German hymn or a Hebrew psalm, or changed the old text to the words, “May all the vows arise to thee which the sons of Israel vow unto thee, O Lord, . that they will return to thee with all their heart, and from this Day of Atone- ment until the next,” etc. Naturally there were many Orthodox opponents of this innovation, among whom M. Lehmann, editor of the “Is- raelit,” was especially prominent (see 2b. 1863, Nos. 25, 88). The principal factor which preserved the great religious authority of the “Kol Nidre” well into the nineteenth century, and which continually raises up new defenders for it, is doubtless its plain- tive and appealing melody, which made a deep im- pression even on Lenau (see his remarks in “ Der Israelit,” 1864, No. 40, pp. 588 e¢ seq.) and which was the favorite melody of Moltke, who had the violinist Joachim play it for him. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Joseph Aub, Die Hingangsfeier des Versohn- ungstages, Mayence, 1863; Z. Frankel, Die Hidesleistung der Juden, pp. 84 et seq.; W. Heidenheim, Sefer Kerobot, Han- over, 1887, Introduction ; Lampronti, Pahad Yizghak, iv. 82b; H. L. Strack, in Herzog-Hauck, Real-Encyc. x. 653 et seq. Je M. Sc. —The Melody: Even more famous than the formula itself is the melody traditionally attached to its rendition. This is deservedly so much prized that even where Reform has abolished the recital of the Chaldaic text, the air is often preserved, either in association with some other passage—e.g., Ps. ciii. or cCxXxx., or a series of versicles, or a vernacular hymn such as “O Tag des Herrn, Du Nahst!” or “Gott der Liebe und der Barmherzigkeit ”—or as an organ prelude to attune the mind of the con- gregation to thesolemnity of theevening. And yet there are probably no two synagogues in which the melody is chanted note for note absolutely the same. So marked is the variation in the details of the mel- ody that a critical examination of the variants shows an approach toward agreement in the essentials of the first strain only, with transformations of the greatest diversity in the remaining strains. These diver- gences, however, are not radical, and they are no more than are inherent in a composition not due to a single originator, but built up and elaborated by many in turn, and handed on by them in distinct lines of tradition, along all of which the rhapsodical method of the Hazzanur has been followed (see Music, SYNAGOGAL), KOL NIDRE (1) OPENING PHRASES ee a es a 4 j [{_————— |_—______ 2 a Kol nid - - re, ye TU ee ci ataome S ont s oon kol nid - re (German) —_—_—_——_—__ if =———— 3 = —— —— |= 5 ae ee SSE re Se ae eee dW OOS On Cea T AAco tropes be Scoro nnn 6 aot aeeto rg akc kol - = nid - re, eo eS ee ee Te ——— 7) n= 543 On a critical investigation on comparative lines, the structure of “ Kol Nidre” is seen to be built upon a very simple groundwork, the melody Original being essentially an intermingling of Elements. simple cantillation with rich figura- tion. The very opening of “Kol Nidre” is what the masters of the Catholic plain- song term a “pneuma,” or soul breath. Instead of announcing the opening words in a monotone or in any of the familiar declamatory phrases, some an- cient hazzan of South Germany prefixed a long, sighing tone, falling to a lower note and rising again, as if only sighs and sobs could find utterance before the officiant could bring himself to inaugu- rate the dread Day of Atonement. Breslaur draws attention to the similarity of these strains with the first five bars of Beethoven’s C sharp minor quartet, op. 1381, period Reminis- 6, “adagio quasi un poco andante.” cences of An older coincidence. shows the Catholic original element around which the Plain- whole of “ Kol Nidre” has been built Song. up. The pneuma given in the Sarum and Ratisbon antiphonaries (or Cath- olic ritual music-books) as a typical passage in the first Gregorian mode (or the notes in the natural scale running from “d” to “d” [“re” to “re”]), al- most exactly outlines the figure which prevails throughout the Hebrew air, in all its variants, and reproduces one favorite strain with still closer agree- ment. The original pattern of these phrases seems KOE NIDRE THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kol Nidre to be the strain of melody so frequently repeated in the modern versions of “ Kol Nidre” at the introduc- tion ofeach clause. Such a pattern phrase, indeed, is, in the less elaborated Italian tradition (Consolo, Nos. 3 and 6 in the following transcription), re- peated in its simple form five times consecutively in the first sentence of the text, and a little more elaborately four times in succession from the words “nidrana lo nidre.” The northern traditions prefer at such points first to utilize its complement in the second ecclesiastical mode of the Church, which ex- tends below as well as above the fundamental “re.” The strain, in either form, must obviously date from the early medieval period, anterior to the eleventh century, when the practise and theory of the sing- ing-school at St. Gall, by which such typical pas- sages were evolved, influenced all music in those French and German lands where the melody of “ Kol Nidre” took shape. Thus, then, a typical phrase in the most familiar Gregorian mode, such as was daily in the ears of the Rhenish Jews, in secular as well as in ecclesias- tical music, was centuries ago deemed suitable for the recitation of the Absolution of Vows, and to it was afterward prefixed an introductory intonation dependent on the taste and capacity of the officiant. Many times repeated, the figure of this central phrase was sometimes sung on a higher degree of the scale, sometimes on a lower. Then these be- came associated; and so gradually the middle sec- tion of the melody developed into the modern forms. (2) CENTRAL PHRASES (Sarum ANTIPHONARY) = aaa ALICIA 7 Se ee eee eee INVA ores, 6 oc pice SO ed OBIS oH OORT Ela GIO OR CORIO Om AGO OIRO RCO CODE OE RG. ORO NOOO Dai Siaci ENO Cia = (Consouo) k _ ag a a ee ee —— o—}4- INU s ono Sn Okan Teo AEC COUd DONO IU 2OBOOOn SoBuadt Kol Nidre THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 544 Wa - - ha = Oe ae 3 me (LEwANDOWSE!) Se aes ‘ y Fane ETS a ae — : = He sonal Ag 5 nad oo 2% aes a> =cu 3» Pe fa er ee Beer) + —_ og. aoa (= eased oe ae = = —}— 3 | io — a 3 Mei - nes Fle - hens Stim - me, mei - nes Fle - hens Stim - me. (KoESSLER) LEAS a Pes ane ‘A - na | ae, Ura de = cishwer te =) bay But the inspiration of a later hazzan was needed to shape the closing section of the melody, in which the end of the chant soars away into a Closing bold and triumphant strain, expressing Phrase confidence and determination rather from than the humble sorrow of the older ““‘Alenu.” ending in the minor, which still sur- vives in the Italian tradition. Now this bold closing phrase belongs, according to the general tradition, also to ‘ALENU (the words “ ke- mishpehot ha-adamah ”). cordance with the scheme of the hazzan’s artif one such officiant transferred the “‘Alenu” phrase to “Kol Nidre,” with the determined aim of associa- ting the texts themselves in the minds of his hear- KOL NIDRE Adagio non troppo, molto con espressione, It would be quite in ac- ; ha-rim ~- =) nae ers. The speculation is ventured that this was done about the year 1171, when thirty-four men and sev- enteen women perished at the stake at BLotIs, chanting the “‘Alenu,” and when all the Rhenish Jews, as well as those of France, were bewailing the martyrdom as the encyclical of R. Tam reached their congregations. The full transcription following differs from the version best Known to the general public, that for violoncello, etc., by Max Bruch, in that it repro- duces the florid vocalization of the Polish school and omits the secondary and contrasting theme quoted by Bruch from the service of quite another part of the Jewish year (see “Jewish Chronicle,” London, April 1, 1904). (3) piangendo. —— — esac aaa aan “ed KERNS ae Oe ee el | a ee J fe= ee eae [ ; a 2 ae Se eee Z — eo = eee ~ —— as 005000 Oe 0 O06 82 010: 60, 6b 910) 010 (0.8 0) Olas 6 wwe SS piareie sie) SnatTTenennnnnn FS a I + — oo Cees sees = See 2 een Iie eto cabelas ca a 7 oes ‘2 me, 545 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kol Nidre Ong, —— = eS Sa Se = te Mey a = SS td Or Bod CII Bm Dit oheeee TO ONG CRORES a RCI eS eoee es we - —_—_—— as p rit. ~) a tempo. bel: x ses] ey te eae a cee Ce ns saa — Se ——— te oe o—- o-.-o-|4#-—_ oo @ -@ o—— @— ~~ kin - nu - ye, u - ke -na - se, u-she- bu - - - = Oba ae di- ne - ge Se __ meg _y__s Sf —— Ear i A — i - gy¥— q==\8 %& —___%_|__@ —- o— _—— os mares _ o-—_*,-0 © o-9-¢ @o— @—|+-——__ o-g-6-° —_@.-9 | —_ 2 <9 o a we es a dar - - - na, u - de-ish - te - ba‘ - . - na, u - de - = SS dolce — . sie cee beh at see —— 35 —}—eg =e =e | a SS = —— aa 9 9 _@ = a Ee eee a go te —S a = it is ms EE esi ere ye et kes ha - rim - na, WO! c= 3 a eS oe fs Sg eoe Gg Pals o See Ne e fue ae ieee boa o_o — Sa eee ° KIN cscs she - bi - - Lathomouanod betes o Thi, TW BS aneiieatiy ic = ee onome a a \ 7, a — Re Sos -~e— Zetepes eo ae eee eee “2 ae : ©" Oe Lins. lo - she- ri - rin, we-lo kay -ya-min; nid -ra - - - na 546 Kol Nidre THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kolisch cres. mar ae = — re aS : 2 Se ae ae ee © “Fe a oe ak @ o. 8 6 os _ _ oo la - - - - nid - re we - @ - s& - Ya = na la e@- sa - Sf piu moto. — ff poco allegro, = a =a = a ae = ae = a Sel ot a= —_— Ss ae a ee See es re, u - she- bu - - - ‘a - ta na [WE C OE HE ME A OOGeMAGEOGoUGAGD DOC IC. nn a —_—__,-+._-# >ta—# ole ———— —-++— So SS | =e BIBLIOGRAPHY: Vocal: A. Baer, Ba‘al Tefillah (Der Prak- tische Vorbeter), Nos. 1801, 13802a, 1302b, Géteborg, 1877, Frankfort, 1883; E. Breslaur, Sind Originale Synagogen und Volks-Melodien bei den Juden Geschichtlich Nach- weisbar? (three settings, including one by Lewandowski), Leipsic, 1898; F. Consolo, Libro dei Canti dIsraele, No. 346, Florence, 1892; M. Deutsch, Col Nidre, Text und Me- lodie nach der Tradition (also in his Vorbeterschwle), Breslau, 1872; H. Késsler, Kol Nidre, nach Zahlreichen Ausgaben Kritisch Revidiert, Strasburg, 1902; L. Lewan- dowski, Kol Nidre, Hebrilischer und Deutscher Text (also in his Todah we-Zimrah), Leipsic ; J. L. Mombach, Sacred Musical Compositions, p. 198, London, 1881; S. Sulzer, Shir Ziyyon, No. 111, Vienna, 1840; H. Weintraub, Tempelgesdinge, Leipsic, 1859; Jewish Chronicle, Oct. 3 and 10, 1902. Instrumental: Various pianoforte, organ, and especially string arrangements by M, Bruch, P. Franz, A. Garfinkel, L. Lewandowski, L. Mendelssohn, J. Rosenfeld, A. H. Russotta, F. Singer, E. D. Wagner, H. Weintraub, and G. Wohler; M. Hast, Divine Service, ii. 129, London, 1879; S. Naumbourg, Recueil de Chants Religiewx, No. 4, Paris, 1874; and espe- cially A. Marksohn and W. Wolf, Auswahl Alter Hebréi- ischer Synagogal-Melodien, No. 7, Leipsic, 1875. A. 10, 1b (OL KOLETKAR, MOSES: Sirdar bahadur in the Anglo-Indian army. He enlisted in the Highth Regi- ment Native Infantry April 1, 1842, and was later transferred to the Twenty-seventh Regiment. He was appointed jemidar and native adjutant Jan. 1, 1858; transferred again, to the Twelfth Regi- hemian schock. ber of Jews were living here in the fourteenth cen- tury, and they had their own synagogue. A stone inscription from a former synagogue, preserved in the present synagogue, bears the date 1642. When King Ferdinand I. expelled the Jews from Bohemia in 1541, the Jews of Kolin went with their movable goods to Poland. At Braunau the emigrants en- countered thieves, who robbed them of 20,000 Bo- In 1551 the Bohemian Jews were permitted to return; but the Jews of Kolin could find no rest in their city. For unknown reasons ~ King Ferdinand granted them safe-conduct in 1557, — enabling them to remain for one year in the coun- — try to collect their debts, after which period they — were to leave again. Their affairs delayed them, however, and they did not leave the city until 1561. After Ferdinand’s death, in 1564, his successor, Maximilian IJ., permitted the Jews to return to Kolin; but the wealthiest among them did not avail themselves of the permission. In 1618 the Jewish © community of Kolin was, next to that of Prague, the — largest in Bohemia. It had to pay heavy taxes into the royal treasury; in 1618 the sum — ment; promoted to the rank of subahdar Nov. 6, In the amounted to 18,000 thalers, or 47 tha- 1858; sirdar bahadur (with Order of British In- Seven- _lers per head. In 1603 the municipal dia, Ist class), Oct. 25, 1859; transferred to the teenth council forbade the Jews to appear on Seventeenth Regiment Native Infantry; made su- | Gentury. Sundays and and other Christian holi- bahdar-major Jan. 24, 1876; and bahadur (receiving at the same time the Order of British India, 2d class), Jan. 1, 1877. He was present at the battle of Hyderabad (medal) and at the action of Kolhapur (medal). He is said to have given first information ot the mutiny to the officers of the Twenty-seventh Regiment Native Infantry. J. J. Hy. KOLIN: Town in Bohemia. Its Jewish com- munity is one of the oldest in thecountry. A num- days in those parts of the city inhab- ited by Christians; it prohibited them from keeping dogs; and forbade also Jewish butchers to sell meat to Christians. In 1611 a special prison was built in the Jews’ street for the Jews, at their request and at their expense; it has only recently been demol- ished, after having served as a dwelling for poor families for more than one hundred years. No Jew was permitted to own any real estate except his house, nor more than one horse. Jews were forbid- 547 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kol Nidre Kolisch den also to engage in those trades or lines of husi- ness in which their Christian fellow citizens were en- gaged; they were obliged, therefore, to establish con- nections with foreign houses. The municipal council, which was intent upon isolating the Jews from the Christian population, forbade the latter to enter the service of the Jews; even washerwomen were not allowed to do laundry-work forthem. As the Jews were accused of having brought the plague into the city on returning from their business trips, they were not permitted to remain outside of their own street for any length of time, nor to draw water with their ves- sels from the Christians’ wells. During this appear- ance of the plague (1613-14) the municipal council had both entrances to the Jews’ street walled up. On Sept. 8, 1621, the Jewish communal director David was elected to the municipal council. Va- rious petitions which the council of Kolin sent to Prince Lichtenstein, with a view to interfering with the trades of the Jews, were not granted. In Dec., 1621, the knight Jan Vazlav Grizl of Grizlov was made captain of the imperial estate of Kolin and Bie- beritz. He permitted the Jews to engage in those trades and lines of business which had hitherto been open only to Christians; and on several occasions he showed them favor. When an epidemic of dys- entery appeared in Kolin in 1660, Rabbi Borges and his son Schaje (Isaiah) were accused, June 25, of having killed a pig which had escaped from the house of the widow Sperlink into the Jews” street, and of having thrown the same into the communal well, thereby poisoning the water. Both fled from the city. A resolution of the Bohemian royal chamber, of Feb. 3, 1655, was of great benefit to the Jews, re- moving them from the jurisdiction of Jurisdic- the municipal council, and directing tion and _ them to organize themselves as a com- Organiza- munity with their own court, which tion. was to be under the direct supervision of the imperial judge of Kolin acting in the name of the royal chamber. Only in crim- inal cases were the Jews to be tried by the judge of Kolin. The affairs of the community were con- ducted by a primator, two councilors, and a certain number of elders, assisted by a secretary, a treasurer, and two servants. This arrangement was in force down to 1788. Empress Maria Theresa decreed, Dec. 18, 1744, that all the Jews should leave Bohemia by the end of the following month. In 1745 there were at Kolin forty-two houses belonging entirely to Jews and valued at 19,210 gulden. On June 12, 1745, a contract was made between the Jewish and the Christian community, that when the Jews left the country their debtors should remain in possession of such houses; but if the Jews should obtain permis- sion to return within two years, the houses should be restored to them at a price to be fixed by valua- tion. The empress’ decree was, however, rescinded. In 1750 three Jews of Kolin received from the mu- nicipal council the concession for the sale of tobacco in Kolin. During the dearth in the winter of 1846-47 the Jews of Kolin distinguished themselves by twice contributing large sums for the relief of 100 Chris- tian families. Down to 1849, when full civic equality was given fo the Jews, they were not permitted to buy houses or land belonging to Christians, but from the time of Emperor Joseph IL. they were permitted to rent stores from Christians. The community for a long time had a primary school near the synagogue, in which Hebrew also was taught. In 1788 forty-one children attended the school, and in 1789 fifty. In 1904 the Talmud Torah Society of the Jewish congregation also supported a school for the study of Hebrew and the Bible. The affairs of the congregation were administered by a board consisting of a president and seven trustees, together with twenty-four members of the congre- gation. In 1910 the total population was 16,470. The following rabbis of Kolin deserve notice: Abraham Borges, 1653; his son Schaje (Isaiah), 1660; Simon Oppenheim, author of “ Nezer ha-Kodesh,” middle of the eighteenth century; Jacob Illovi of Ungarisch-Brod, 1775-78; Eleazar Kallir, author of “Or Hadash ” and “ Hawwot Yair,” 1780-1800; Wolf Léw Boskowitz, 1806-12; Wolf Low, 1812-26; Joa- chim Deutschmann, 1828-86; Daniel Frank, 1889-60; Dr. Josef Gugenheimer, 1861-96; his son, Dr. Ra- phael Gugenheimer, the present incumbent. D. R. Gu. KOLISCH, BARON IGNAZ VON: Hun- garian merchant, journalist, and chess-master; born at. Presburg April 6, 1837; died at Vienna April 30, 1889. Both in business and as a chess-player he was eminently successful. He founded the Wiener Borse-Syndikatskasse in 1869, and in 1878 estab- lished a commission house in Paris; and by prudent management he acquired considerable wealth. As a chess-player Kolisch soon became known for his brilliant and aggressive style, but he was not a frequent participant in tournaments. In 1860 he won the first prize at the international tourney held at Cambridge, England; in 1861 he lost a match with Anderssen, the strongest player of the day, by one game only; the same year he drew a match with Paulsen; and in 1867 at the Paris tournament he secured the leading position, defeating both Wina- wer and Steinitz. Kolisch was the founder and editor-in-chief of the “Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung,” to which, under the pseudonym “ Ideka” (formed from the initials of his name), he contributed many feuilletons. BIBLIOGRAPHY: E. T. Blanchard, Hxamples of Chess Master- Play, 1st series (transl. from the German of Jean Dufresne), Index, New Barnet, 1893. s Aaa: KOLISCH, RUDOLF: Austrian physi- cian; born at Koritschan, Moravia, Dec. 10, 1867; studied medicine at Vienna and Heidelberg (M.D. 1891). In 1895 he became privat-docent in medicine at the University of Vienna. Besides lecturing dur- ing the sessions of the university he practises medi- cine at Carlsbad during the sumimer months. Kolisch has written several essays in the medical journals, and is the author of “ Uratische Diathese,” Stuttgart, 1894; “Lehrbuch der Diiitetischen The- rapie,” Vienna, 1899. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. 8 ja, AM Jee KOLISCH, SIGMUND: Austrian poct and historical writer; bornat Koritschan, Moravia, Sept. 548 Bors Rene THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Konigsberg 15, 1817. He was educated at the University of Vienna, where he studied classical philology, his- tory, and philosophy. After a short sojourn in Italy (1847) he took part in the revolution at Vienna in 1848, and after the victory of the imperial troops under Windischgritz he escaped to Germany. The next twenty years he spent in Germany, France, and Italy, returning to Vienna in 1868. Among his works may be mentioned: “Todten- feier in Oesterreich,” Briinn, 1848; “ Kleine Romane aus Wien,” Leipsic and Brinn, 1848; “Ludwig Kossuth und Clemens Metternich,” Leipsic, 1850; “Auf dem Vulkan,” Stuttgart, 1868; and the trag- edy “Die Christin,” Vienna, 1875. He has also contributed many articles and essays to German and Austrian journals, and during 1848 was editor of the revolutionary paper “Der Radi- kale.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Briimmer, Deutsches Dichter-Lexikon. 8. 1 AN ae KOMPERT, LEOPOLD: Austrian author; born at Miinchengriitz, Bohemia, May 15, 1822; died at Vienna Nov. 28, 1886. He studied at the universities of Prague and Vienna, and was for sev- eral years tutor in the house of Count George An- drassy. In1857he entered the service of the Vienna Creditanstalt. As a member of the Vienna city council Kompert displayed a useful activity in the interest of education, and likewise, aS a member of 2 the board of the Jewish gate congregation, in the promo- IN H tion of religious instruc- tion. He took an active part also in the Israeli- tische Allianz of Vienna. i We f= As vice-president of the Is- Md raelitischer Waisenverein he | devoted considerable atten- tion to the education of orphans, and used his in- fluence in the foundation of Baron Todesco’s institution for the benefit of orphans who had left the asylum. He also held for many years honorary offices in the Schillerverein. Kompert began his literary activity in the “ Press- burger Zeitung.” From 1848 to 1852 he was editor of the “Oesterreichischer Lloyd.” As creator of ghetto literature he is called the Auerbach of the ghetto. His stories depicting the life, customs, and manners of the Bohemian Jews have become clas- sical and have found many imitators. Hedraws the transition from the life in the narrow ghetto to the farmer’s life in the open field; and he shows the struggles, doubts, and misgivings of those who, yielding to the impulse of modern times, undergo the changes of their newly chosen career. Seeing that under the leveling influence of the present day the characteristic inner Jewish life is threatened to vanish, he endeavors to preserve its originality, its deeper psychological, sentimental, and ethical spirit, for the knowledge of posterity. Kompert’s first story, “Der Schnorrer,” appeared —— S = Leopold Kompert. in 1846 in L. A. Frankl’s “Sonntagsblatt,” No. 7. Then followed “Geschichten aus dem Ghetto,” Leip- sic, 1848; “ Béhmische Juden,” Vienna, 1851; “Am Pfiuge,” Berlin, 1855; “Neue Geschichten aus dem Ghetto,” Prague, 1860; “Geschichten einer Gasse,” Berlin, 1865; “Zwischen Ruinen,” 2b. 1878; “ Franzi und Heini, eine Wiener Geschichte,” 2b. 1880; “ Ver- streute Geschichten,” 7. 1888. In “Franzi und Heini,” a picture of Vienna society, the Jewish pedler woman Perl Blithenstern plays an important part. Some of these stories were first published in Wertheimer’s “Jahrbuch fiir Israeliten.” A com- plete edition of Kompert’s works in eight volumes appeared in Berlin, 1882-838, and a new edition in Leipsic, 1887. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Brockhaus Konversations-Lexikon ; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon ; Newzeit, 1886, ee 443-444; Oester- reichische Wochenschrift, 1886, pp. 545-546; Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1886, p. 793. s. S. Man. KOMPSE BAR KOMPSE. See KAMZA AND Bar KAMZA. KONIG, FRIEDRICH EDUARD: German Protestant theologian; born at Reichenbach, Sax- ony, Nov. 15, 1846; Ph.D., 1874, Leipsic; D.D., 1888, Erlangen. He was appointed professor of theology, first at Leipsic, then at Rostock, and, in 1900, at Bonn. Konig has published “ Gedanke, Laut und Accent als die Drei Faktoren der Sprachbildung, Comparativ und Laut-Physiologisch am Hebriischen Dargestellt” (1874); “Neue Studien tiber Schrift, Aussprache und Allgemeine Formenlehre des Aethiopischen” (1877) ; “ De Criticze Sacree Argumento e Lingue Legi- bus Repetito ” (1879) ; “ Historisch-Kritisches Lehrge- _ biiude der Hebriiischen Sprache,” 38 vols. (1881-97), a comprehensive study of Hebrew grammar, indis- pensable for scholars; “ Der Offenbarungsbegriff des Alten Testaments” (1882); “Die Hauptprobleme der Altisraelitischen Religionsgeschichte” (1884; English transl. “The Religious History of Israel,” — Edinburgh, 1885); “ Historisch-Kritische Hinleitung ins Alte Testament ” (1893); “The Exiles’ Book of Consolation” (Edinburgh, 1899) ; “ Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik Comparativ in Bezug auf die Bibel Darge- stellt ” (1900); “ Hebriiisch und Semitisch, Prolego- mena zu einer Gesch. der Semitischen Sprachen” (1901) ; “ Fiinf Neue Arabische Landschaftsnamen im Alten Testament” (1901); “Neueste Principien der Alttestamentlichen Kritik” (1901); “Bibel und Ba- bel” (10th ed. 1903); “Die Gottesfrage und der Ur- sprung des Alten Testaments ” (1908). aT Bok KONIG, JULIUS: Hungarian mathematician; born Dec. 16, 1849, at Raab. He entered the Uni- versity of Vienna to study medicine, but being more interested in mathematics, he went thence to Heidel- berg, and studied physics with Helmholtz and mathe- matics with Kénigsberger. a 4 ee eds a te Here he took his doc- — tor’s degree with the thesis “Ueber die Elliptischen _ Modulen” in 1870, producing in the same year — the work “Beitriige zur Theorie der Electrischen Nervenreizung.” K®onig then went to Berlin to attend the lectures of Kummer, Kronecker, and Weierstrass. Returning to Budapest in 1872, he became privat-docent at the Polytechnic high school, — ; oe a 549 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA EKompert K6énigsberg being appointed professor at the same institution in 1874. Konig is recognized as the foremost living mathe- matician of Hungary. An original thinker, he has advanced many new theories and methods in differ- ential calculus that have been generally accepted. His most important works are the following: “Zur Theorie der Modulargleichungen,” Heidelberg, 1871; “Ueber die Darstellung von Funktionen Durch Unendliche Reihen” (in “Math. Annalen,” v.); “Nouvelle Démonstration du Théoréme de Taylor” (in “Annales de Math.” 1874); “Zur Theorie der Funktionen einer Reellen Variabeln” (in “ Monats- hefte fir Math.” i.); “ Ueber eine Reelle Abbildung der Nicht-Euklidischen Geometrie ” (in “ Nachrichten der Kon. Gesell. d. Wissenschaften zu Gottingen,” 1872); “Ueber Rationelle Funktionen von Elemen- ten” (in “Math. Annalen,” xiv.); “Die Faktoren- zerlegung und Eliminationsprobleme” (¢b. xv.); “Zur Theorie der Resolventen” (2. xviii.); “Ueber Endliche Formensysteme” (¢.); and “Beitriige zur Theorie der Algebraischen Gleichungen ” (7d.). He has also contributed a large number of articles to the Hungarian mathematical journals. From 1886 to 1890 Kénig was dean, and from 1891 to 1898 rector, of the Polytechnic high school; and in 1889 he was elected a member of the Royal Acad- emy of Sciences. In the last-mentioned year he re- ceived baptism. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Magyarorszdg és a Nagy Yuen, 1875, No. 21; Szinnyei, Magyar Irék Hlete; Pallas L 8. be AY KONIGLICHE WEINBERGE: A southeast- ern suburb of Prague. The city of Kdénigliche Weinberge was built within a few years after the Austro-Prussian war of 1866, when the walls of Prague were removed. As the site had been formerly occupied by vineyards that were cultivated mainly by Jewish farmers, Jews may be regarded as the first settlers of the city. Many Jewish families from Prague moved into the new suburb as soon as it had been laid out; and approximately 400 families settled there about 1880. Still no need was felt fora distinct religious organization, as the new inhabitants re- tained connection with their former congregations at Prague. Special religious institutions and services were found to be necessary only after a number of Jewish families from the country went to Wein- berge. The first services were held in the city on New- Year’s Day, 1882, in a hall rented by Simon Engel of Raudnitz. Rabbi M. Stark of Horazdowitz, who had been teacher of the Talmud and of religion in secondary schools at Prague, was elected rabbi of Weinberge.in 1884. He at once took steps for the building of a synagogue; and through his efforts a fund of 9,000 florins was raised. This sum was entirely insufficient; and as the congregation was unable to borrow money, having no security to give, the building of the synagogue had to be de- ferred until. the congregation became a community with the right of taxing its members, in conformity with the law of March 21, 1890. With the sum of 1,000,000 crowns, borrowed from the state bank, an imposing building in the Renaissance style was erected. The small synagogue in the left wing, seating 200 persons, was dedicated in Sept., 1894; and the large temple, seating 2,000 persons, was dedicated two years later. The services are modern, with organ and mixed choir. Services in Czech are held by Dr. Wiener for the inhabitants of the city who speak that language. In 1908 the Jewish community numbered 1,200 families, and, with the exception of Prague, was the largest in the country. The Frauenverein (founded 1887) and the Hilfsverein (1897), together numbering 600 members, with a fund of 8,000 crowns, have charge of the poor and sick. The community of Weinberge does not own any ceme- tery, its dead being buried by the Hebra Kaddisha of Prague. The orphan asylum for boys, founded by the Verein zur Errichtung und Erhaltung eines Allgemeinen Israelitischen Waisenhauses fiir Boh- men, and the Kaiser Franz Josef Jubiliums-Stiftung Waisenheim fiir Miidchen, founded by Moritz Hahn of Prague, are at Weinberge. These institutions me together seventy inmates in 1903. M. Sta. KONIGSBERG: Capital of the province of East Prussia. It was founded by the knights of the Teutonic Order, the laws of which excluded the Jews from its territory. After the secularization of the order Duke Albert granted to two Jewish physi- cians the privilege of practising medicine at Konigs- berg (1588 and 1541). But the city objected fora long time to the admission of Jews. Not until 1654 was the Jew Lazarus, who was warmly recom- mended to the “Great Elector” by the King of Poland, granted the privilege of unrestricted com- merce at Kénigsberg, in spite of the objections of the municipal authorities. A similar privilege was granted at the same time to the electoral factor Israel Aron. For some decades afterward Jews could stop in the city only for a few days at a time, on payment of a high toll. In 1680 they were per- mitted to set up a chapel in the “ Burgfreiheit” (that part of the city which was not under municipal ad- ministration). An official register of the year 1706 enumerates ten heads of families. A few years later a number of families, fleeing from the disturb- ances in Poland, settled there, and were joined in 1734 by the Jews expelled from Danzig when that city was besieged. There were 307 Jews at Koénigs- berg in 1756; 1,027in 1817; 3,024 in 1864; and more than 5,000 about 1880. This number was consider- ably decreased by the expulsion of Russian subjects; in 1910 there were about 5,100 Jews in a total population of 245,994. The larger number of the Jews worshiping in the chapel erected in 1680 were foreigners, residing temporarily at Kénigsberg. The con- Formation gregation of Kénigsberg was founded of Congre- in 1704, when the cemetery was ac- gation. quired. Before that time the Jews were obliged to bury their dead be- yond the frontier, in Poland. On Nov. 23, 1704, a “hebra kaddisha” was founded. The community received a constitution by the law of April 7, 1722; the synagogue was dedicated Dec. 23, 1756; des- troyed by the great fire in the suburb in 1811; and rebuilt on the same site in 1815. It served for gen- eral worship down to Aug., 1896, when it was Konigsberg Konigswarter transferred to a society of Russian Jews living at Konigsberg. The earliest extant constitution of the community, aside from the law of 1722, is dated 1811; this has been revised several times, the latest draft being dated 1903. The Jewish community of Konigsberg is distin- guished as one of the pioneers of modern culture. Its first rabbi, Solomon Fiirst, was a matriculate of the university in the first quarter of the eighteenth century, and was assistant in the royal library. In the second half of that century the Friedlander fam- ily especially, and men like Isaac Euchel, Marcus Herz, and Aaron Joel, pupils of Kant, introduced the ideas of Mendelssohn into Kinigsberg. In that city Buchel issued his appeal for the founding of a Hebrew liter- ary society and the periodical “Ha-Meassef,” the first volumes of which ap- peared there; and there he published, in 1782, a circular letter (“Sefat Emet”) in which he advocated in- stitutions for the education of the young modeled after the “ Frei- schule” at Ber- lin. But his efforts in this di- rection did not succeed, owing to the opposition of the Orthodox. In 1812, and again in 1820 (when Isaac Asher Francolm was called as preacher and teacher of relig- ion), the school question occa- sioned further dissension; Francolm finally THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ee a ee agogue of the community was dedicated Aug., 1896. Four physicians of Koénigsberg have taken a prominent part in the struggle for the emancipation of the Jews: Dr. Johann JAcosy; Dr. Ferdinand Falkson (who defended, against the government, the validity of his marriage with a Christian); Dr. Raphael Koscn (chiefly instrumental in securing the abolition of the Jews’ oath in Prussia, in 1869) ; Dr. Simon SAMUEL (who secured for Jews the right of admission to the faculty of K6- nigsberg University). The following rabbis have officiated at K6nigsberg: Solomon Fiirst (called in 1707; his term of office and the year of his death are not known; he was still officiating in 1722; heis the author of a caba- listic work and of a prayer printed in He- brew and Ger- man); Aryeh (L6b) EpstrErn b. Mordecai (1745-1775): Samuel Wig- dor (called in 1777; evidently died before 1784); Samson b. Mordecai (died in 1794); Joshua Bar Herzfeld (1800- 1814; grandson of R. Jacob Joshua of Frankfort; sub- sequently rabbi at Rawitsch); Levin Joseph Saalschitz (1814-28; father of the preacher; vice-rabbi ad in- terim); Wolff Laseron (1824~ 1828); Jacob Hirsch Meck- Rabbis. was obliged to resign (1826), and his position remained vacant until 1885. During the incumbency of his successor, Joseph Levin Saalschititz (1835-68), the first Jewish professorat Kénigsberg, services were held for a short time (in 1847) on Sunday morning. After his death and that of Rabbi Mecklenburg, who had held the rabbinate during Saalschiitz’s term of office, the functions of rabbi and preacher were com- bined. When the organ was installed in the communal synagogue, in 1870, a number of Orthodox members formed a separate congregation, which subsequently took the name of “Adass Jisroel.” Besides these, there are three private synagogues. The new syn- Synagogue at Kénigsberg. (From a photograph.) lenburg (1831- 1865; author of “Ha-Ketab we- ha- Kabbalah ”); Isaac BAMBERGER; Hermann Vogelstein (called 1897). The rabbi of the Adass Jisroel congregation is (1904) A. Liebermann. ; Among the cantors at Kénigsberg were Hirsch Weintraub (1838-79; d. 1881; previously cantor at Dubno) and Eduard Birnbaum (from 1879; b. 1854 at Cracow; previously cantor at Magdeburg and at Beuthen in Silesia). Besides various charitable and educational societies, Kénigsberg has two orphan asylums and a home for the aged. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Borowski, Beitrag zwr Neueren Gesch. der Juden in Preussen, Besonders in Beziehung auf Ihre 550 at hie ee ee, ee’ = a a 651 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Konigsberge Konigswarter a ee Freieren Gottesdienstlichen Uebungen, in Preussisches Archiv, ii., Konigsberg, 1790; idem, Afoses Mendelssohns und David Kypkers Aufsdtze ber Jidische Gebete und Fest- feiern, ib. 1791; Jolowicz, Gesch. der Juden in Koénigsberg in Preussen, Posen, 1867; Saalschiitz, Zur Gesch. der Syna- gogengemeinde in Koénigsberg, in Monatsschrift, vi—-ix.; Vogelstein, Beitrdge zur Gesch. des Unterrichtswesens in der Jtidischen Gemeinde zu Kénigsberg in Preussen, Konigsberg, 1903. D. Jel, \Ye KONIGSBERGER, LEO: German mathema- tician; born in Posen Oct. 15, 1837. He studied in Berlin (Ph.D. 1860), and was appointed instructor in mathematics and physics at the Military Acad- emy, Berlin, in 1861; in 1864 he was made assist- ant professor, in 1867 professor, of mathematics in Greifswald; and in 1869 he succeeded O. Hesse as professor in Heidelberg. In 1875 he was called to the polytechnic school of Dresden, and in 1877 to Vienna University. He is at present (1904) professor of mathematics at the University of Heidelberg, and is a member of the academies of Berlin, Munich, and Gottingen, as wellas of many other learned societies. Besides publishing many essays and contributions to scientific journals, Kénigsberger is the author ot the following works: “Modulargleichungen der Elliptischen Functionen,” Leipsic, 1868; “ Vor- lesungen iiber die Theorie der Elliptischen Func- tionen,” 7b. 1874; “Vorlesungen iiber die Theorie der Hyper-Elliptischen Integralrechnung,” ¢). 1878; “Zur Gesch. der Theorie der Elliptischen Transcen- denten 1826-29,” 2b. 1879; “ Allgemeine Untersuch- ungen zur Theorie der Differential Gleichungen,” 2d. 1882; “ Principien der Mechanik,” 1901. He is also the biographer of Helmholtz (“ Herman von Helm- holtz,” 3 vols., Brunswick, 1902-3). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Poggendorff, Biographisch-Literarisches Handworterb. zur Gesch. der Exacten Wissenschaften, Leipsic, 1898. Sh H. Gut. KONIGSTEIN, LEOPOLD: Austrian oculist; born at Bisenz, Moravia, April 26, 1850; M.D., Vienna, 1878. On graduating he engaged in prac- tise as an oculist in the Austrian capital; in 1882 he became privat-docent, and in 1901 assistant pro- fessor of ocular surgery, at his alma mater. Among his works may be mentioned: “ Praktische Anleitung zum Gebrauch des Augenspiegels,” Vienna, 1889; “Die Behandlung der Hiufigsten und Wichtigsten Augenkrankheiten,” in four parts, 2d. 1889-98; “Die Anomalien der Refraction und Accommodation,” 2d. 1895. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. 1901. s. (Hye ee Ele KONIGSWARTER: A family that resided in Konigswarte, near Tachau, Bohemia, about the middle of the eighteenth century, when Jonas Hirsch Konigswarter emigrated thence to Firth, Bavaria. There he established a business that made him wealthy, enabling him to bequeath to his sons not only an honorable name, but means sufficient to sure a position in the world. At his death (1805) he left five sons, who founded banking-houses succes-. sively in Frankfort-on-the-Main, Vienna, Amster- dam, and Hamburg. Jonas Kénigswarter: Born at Firth Aug. 10, 1807; died at Vienna Dec. 8, 1871; son of Marcus and Jeannette Konigswarter, the latter being a mem- ber of the family of the imperial court agent Samson WERTHEIMER, Jonas received a careful and strictly religious training, and early manifested extraordi- nary intellectual gifts and a genius for finance. On one occasion, when his father had presented him with 20 ducats, Jonas, although but a schoolboy at the time, had the foresight to invest his little capi- tal in bonds, which in a short time made him the possessor of 10,000 florins, a venture of which he frequently boasted in later years. In 1825 he accom- panied his father to Vienna on a visit to his uncle, Moritz Koénigswarter, to whose daughter Josephine he soon afterward became engaged. The wedding- day had been scarcely settled when Moritz Konigs- warter was stricken with typhoid fever, to which he succumbed. Jonas KO6nigswarter now decided to settle in Vienna, where he became the head of the banking- house founded by his uncle, who had left no son. His business prospered; and the bank came to be ranked among the leading institutions of Austria. As a natural consequence, Kénigswarter was called upon to fill high public offices. In 1838 he became examiner of the Austrian National Bank, and in 1850 a director of that institution. Later he was elected to a directorship in the Oesterreichische Creditgesellschaft, the Kaiser Ferdinand’s Nord- bahn, the Siid-Norddeutsche Verbindungsbahn, and the Béhmische Westbahn, and he served as presi- dent of the last-named railroad for many years. He was also a member of the advisory committee of the Vienna Stock Exchange, and president of the Jewish congregation of the city. In recognition of his public services, K6nigswar- ter was decorated with the Order of the Iron Crown of the third class, and elevated to the knighthood; and in 1870 he received the decoration of the second class of the same order, and was raised to the bar- onetage. Konigswarter, however, rated far more highly than these distinctions the warm personal esteem with which Emperor Francis Joseph regarded him. Konigswarter’s memory has been perpetuated by numerous endowments, the most notable being the Jewish Institute for the Blind near Vienna (Hohe Warte), the inauguration of which the donor did not, however, live to see. S. Louis Jean Konigswarter: French economist; born at Amsterdam March 12, 1814; died in Paris Dec. 6, 1878. He wrote: “Essai sur la Législation des Peuples Anciens et Modernes Relative aux En- fants nés hors Mariage” (1842); “Etudes Histo- riques sur le Développement de la Société Humaine ” (1850); “ Histoire de l’Organisation de la Famille en France” (1851); “Sources et Monuments du Droit Francais Antérieur au X Vme Siécle ” (1858). In 1851 he was elected corresponding member of the Aca- démie des Sciences Morales et Politiques; and he founded the “ Prix Kénigswarter” (1,500 francs), to be given every three years by the academy for the best work on the history of law. BIBLIOGRAPHY: La Grande Encyclopédie. S. S. Man. Maximilien, Baron von Ko6nigswarter: French banker and deputy ; born in Amsterdam 1817; Konigswarter Konitz Affair THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 552 died in Paris Oct. 12, 1878. In 1848 Konigswarter left Amsterdam for Paris, where he became naturalized, opened a banking establishment, and became an earnest adherent of Napoleon, in support of whose cause he established a journal. On Dec. 2, 1851, Konigswarter became deputy cf the Seine department in the legislature. His ardent advocacy of the im- perialist régime lost him his seat in 1863, when he was defeated by Jules Simon. Kénigswarter was a member of the Paris municipal council and an officer of the Legion of Honor. : ise, Dict. sae eee Larousse, Dict V. E. Moritz, Baron von Kénigswarter: Austrian banker and philanthropist; born in Vienna July 16, 1837; died there Nov. 14, 1893; son of Jonas Konigs- warter. He early undertook journeys abroad to study the principal financial institutions, and by the time of his father’s death he was an active partner in the bank, which he had entered in 1860. From 1870 onward he participated in all the great financial opera- tions originated in Vien- na, besides assisting in the management of the many important institu- tions with which his firm’ was connected. During the financial cri- sis of 1873 he rendered valuable services to the Austrian government, which were acknowl- edged by the emperor with the bestowal of the cross of the Order of Francis Joseph. He was a director of a great num- ber of railroads and financial institutions; and he acted also as consul-general for Denmark. In 1879 Kénigswarter was appointed by the em- peror a life member of the Austrian House of Peers (Oesterreichisches Herrenhaus). He joined the group of Liberals, and never missed an opportunity of speaking in behalf of his coreligionists. At the general elections of 1884 he was elected by the first district of Vienna a member of the Diet of Lower Austria. One of his most important speeches in that body was directed against the idea of a “Ger- mania Irredenta.” K6nigswarter converted a large portion of his im- mense wealth into landed property, acquiring ex- tensive estates in Bohemia, Moravia, and Hungary. He was a great lover of paintings; and his collection was one of the most valuable private galleries in the world, including some of the finest works of Rubens, Van Dyck, Rembrandt, Ruysdael, and Hobema. Besides aiding numerous private charities, he was one of the greatest public benefactors of Austria, taking especial interest in the Institute for the Blind at the Hohen Warte, near Vienna, which had been endowed by his father; in the Franz Josefsstiftung, in the foundation of the Israelitisch-Theologische Lehranstalt of Vienna, ete. Although Voltaire was one of his favorite authors, Moritz Kénigswarter. Jews. Konigswarter was very conservative in matters of religion, the dietary laws being strictly observed in all of his residences, although members of the high- est Austrian aristocracy and the most prominent dignitaries of the Church were often guests at his table. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Nov. 17 and_24, 1893; Oester- reichische Wochenschrift of same dates; Neue Freie Presse, Noy. 15-17, 1893. g Wilhelm Kénigswarter: German philantbro- pist; born at Firth March 4, 1809; died at Meran~ May 15, 1887. His grandfather Jonas went to Fiirth from Koénigswart, Bohemia, and married Charlotte Oppenheim of that city. Konigswarter’s mother, Elisabeth, Edle von Limmerfeld, died May 24, 1814, when he was but five years old. His father, Simon, who founded numerous charitable institutions in Firth, died Dec. 15, 1854. In memory of his fa- ther Wilhelm established on July 28, 1855, the Si- mon-Konigswarter-Stiftung to promote, by annual prizes, morality and industry among mechanics and apprentices; and on Jan. 23, 1856, he endowed, in memory of his mother, the Elisabeth-Kénigswarter- Stiftung for indigent Jews. Konigswarter left his large fortune to his native city, which had made him (Oct. 21, 1867) an honorary citizen; a street was named after him in memory of his munificent bequest. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fronmiiller, Chronik der Stadt Fiirth, ee: 215, 302, 338, 346, 349, passim, Furth, 1887; Kayserling, Ge- denkbliitter, p. 42, Leipsic, 1892. on s. . BAS KONITZ AFFAIR: An accusation of ritual murder, based on the unexplained assassination of the student Ernst Winter in Konitz, West Prussia. Winter, the son of anarchitect of Prechlau, attended the gymnasium of Konitz. Although only nineteen years old, he was known for his licentiousness. On March 11, 1900, he left his boarding-house after din- ner, and did notreturn. It wasimmediately thought probable that the young man had fallen through the ice while skating on the lake. Accordingly the lake was searched, and on March 15 parts of his body were discovered. His right arm was found in ?. the cemetery, where some one had thrown it over — the fence; and on April 15 his head was recovered from a pool. The body had been dismembered by some one possessing a knowledge of anatomy; and therefore suspicion first turned against the local butchers, especially against the Christian butcher — Hoffmann, whose daughter had been frequently seen in Winter’s company, and a member of whose household had been heard to express threats against Winter on account of his attention to the young woman. Anti-Semites, however, tried from the outset to turn suspicion against the Jewish inhabitants, and as there was no evidence implicating any Israelite, they accused the police of intentions to shield the On May 9, 1900, the “ Staatsbtirgerzeitung,” the leading anti-Semitic organ of Berlin, said: “No one can help forming the impression that the organs of the government received orders to pursue the in- vestigation in a manner calculated to spare the Jews.” The opposite was true. Detectives and 553 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Konigswarter Konitz Affair judges took up eagerly the most improbable state- ments implicating Jews, while Christian witnesses withheld important testimony. The wife of the school superintendent Rohde, in whose handkerchief the head of Winter was found wrapped, ignored the appeal of the police asking the owner of this hand- kerchief to report; and it was by mere accident that the ownership became known. Further, two young men who were last seenin Winter’s company never revealed their identity. A Jew, Wolf Israel- ski, was arrested on the flimsy charge that, two days previous to the discovery of the head, he had been seen walking in the direction of the place where the head was found, with a sack on his back in which there was some round object. Although he denied the fact itself, and although the state of preserva- tion in which the head was found proved conclusive- ly that it must have lain in the ice for some time, Israelski was kept in prison for nearly five months, until his trial (Sept. 8) proved his innocence. The butcher Hoffmann, who also had been ar- rested, was discharged; and the city council, of which he was a member, gave him a cordial recep- tion when he first appeared after his release. The language of the court in dismissing the case against Hoffmann was, moreover, such that the accusation of ritual murder was indirectly confirmed. Among the grounds for dismissal the court held that the deed must have been perpetrated by several people and according to a premeditated plan. Dr. Miiller, the county physician (“Kreisphysikus”), rendered the opinion that Winter had bled to death, which, as subsequent investigations proved, was untenable. This opinion was published in the “Staatsbiirger- zeitung,” before the investigation of the court had been closed; and for this breach of confidence, Miiller’s son, who had communicated the document to the press, was censured by a court of honor (“Ehrengericht ”). On June 8 of the same year a shed near the syn- agogue of Konitz was set on fire; and two days later excesses were committed against the synagogue and against Jewish homes to such an extent that the mili- tary had to be called out. Similar riots, though not of such a severe char- acter, occurred at Czersk (April 22), Stolp and Biitow (May 21-22), Tuchel (June 10), and Komarezyn (June 17). An old man named Landecker, of Cammin, was without any provocation knocked down witha pitchfork. In all of these cases the sentences imposed upon the rioters or assailants were very light, while Jews, whenever they came before the court, met with hostile senti- ment and received heavy sentences for the slightest offenses. A county official to whom a Jew com- plained of the insults to which he had been sub- jected on the street, replied: “You can easily ob- tain relief, if you give up the murderer.” A synagogue sexton who defended himself with a stake against a crowd which assailed him was sen- tencedsto spenda year in jail; and asimilar sentence was imposed on a Jewish apprentice because he had beaten a boy who had jeered at him. A highly respected citizen, Jacob Jacoby of Tuchel, was sen- tenced to confinement for one year in the peniten- Anti- Semitic Agitation and Excesses. tiary for perjury (Oct. 10), because he had sworn that he had called some boys who had shouted “Hep-Hep!” after him “limmel” (toughs) only after they had insulted him, while the boys swore that he had first called them offensive names. This sentence was indeed so repugnant to public opinion that the emperor commuted it to six months in jail, and revoked that part by which the convict was deprived of civil rights (March, 1901). The worst case of persecution was that of Moritz Lewy, re- ferred to below. Very lenient was the attitude of the authorities with regard to two dangerous agitators who tried to make’capital out of this affair, the Attitude 4ilesian count Piickler and the Pome- of the ranian pastor Krésell. The former, Courts. whom a court afterward adjudged in- sane, delivered in various cities vio- lent diatribes against the Jews, in which he declared among other things that they must be clubbed out of the country and that the Christians must wade in Jewish blood up to their ankles. Krdésell, who later on had to withdraw from the ministry in order to escape a sentence of expulsion on account of his immoral life, delivered in the neighborhood of Ko- nitz lectures on ritual murder and on the immorality of rabbinical literature; but neither the ecclesiastical nor the state authorities would interfere; and the population appreciated Krésell’s work to such a de- gree that in 1903 he was elected to the Reichstag. In the Reichstag, where this case was made the sub- ject of an interpellation (Feb. 8-9, 1901), the Prus- sian minister of justice Schénstedt limited himself to a defense of the authorities against the charge of shielding the Jews; but he carefully refrained from uttering one word in condemnation of the ritual-murder charge, and even from stating that there was no reason for assuming such a motive in the case of Ernst Winter. The anti-Semites naturally were unscrupulous in their desire to make capital of this opportunity. Liebermann von Sonnenberg, their political leader, said in a public address: “The Christians have not yet become accustomed to bear without a murmur the killing of Christian youths in an unnatural fashion by Jews within the city walls.” The anti- Semitic papers, including the organs of the Clerical party like “Germania,” and those of the Conserva- tives like the “Kreuzzeitung,” constantly stirred up religious fanaticism and fostered the prejudice that the government had been bought by the Jews. A society for the investigation of the murder was formed in Konitz. The statement was spread that the coroner’s commission had not searched the ritual bath near the synagogue, and had left undisturbed a room in the house of the butcher Adolf Lewy in which his wife was supposed to be sick. This statement was untrue; not only had all the rooms in Lewy’s house and every nook and corner in the synagogue been searched, but the commission had even taken a sample of the blood of chickens from the yard which was used for killing fowl (see SHxr- HITAH), thusadding to the suspicions of the populace. The police were evidently mistaken as to traces of the deed, for some of the garments of the mur- dered youth were kept in a house in the city un- Konitz Affair Koplik THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA til Jan., 1901, without being discovered by them, and were subsequently found on different days in a public park. The members ofa highly respectable family named Rosenthal in Cammin were kept in prison for six months, because a servant-girl of bad character testified that she had heard Rosenthal say that he would hang himself on a hook in the ceiling of his room, as he was unable to bear the remorse he felt for having participated in the murder of Winter. Investigation proved that this was intentionally false testimony. In the room, where, according to the girl’s statement, Rosenthal had pointed to the hook, there never had been sucha hook; but the case against the girl was dismissed on the plea of insanity (1902). The fact that the manner in which Winter’s body had been dismembered showed a skilful hand led from the start, as stated above, to a Trial suspicion against butchers, and Adolf of Moritz Lewy, whose house was near the lake Lewy. where the trunk of Winter’s body was found, was one of the suspects. From the state of the contents of Winter’s stomach it was proved, however, that Winter could not have died later than seven o’clock in the evening. For- tunately Adolf Lewy and his son Moritz could prove an irrefutable alibi for the hours during which the murder had been committed; but the anti-Semites, who desired their implication, testified that Moritz Lewy had been frequently seen in Winter’s com- pany. Lewy denied having been acquainted with Winter, although he admitted that he might have spoken to him, and even have walked with him a certain distance, as witnesses bad testified, without knowing him by name. At the trial for perjury of the normal-school student Speisiger, who had made various statements implicating Jews, Lewy renewed his statement that he had not known Winter, while various witnesses testified that they had seen them together. Lewy was arrested Oct. 6, 1900. The charges against the Lewys rested on the testimony of a disreputable person, named Masloff, and his mother-in-law, named Ross. Masloff alleged that he had passed by Lewy’s cellar on the evening of the murder and had been attracted by groaning and by an unusual light which proceeded from it. Ly- ing on the ground, he watched people who had some human remains on a butcher’s block, and he saw three of them after a while leave the house witha package and go in the direction of the lake. The testimony was manifestly false, and contained many contradictions which Masloff tried to explain by an alleged confession that he had gone to the place in order to commit an act of burglary. Per- sons who had passed Lewy’s house about the time that Masloff claimed to have been watching the per- sons in the cellar had not noticed any one lying on the ground. Thata man should remain for an hour and a half on the ground on a cold night in March was in itself highly improbable; the murder could not have been committed at sucha late hour; and an investigation of the cellar showed no traces of such a deed nor any evidence of the thorough clean- ing which its commission would have rendered neces- sary. The woman Ross seems to have been the inciter of the conspiracy, which most likely had for its object the securing of the promised great 554 reward for the discovery of the murderer. She had worked in the Lewy family, and claimed to have seen Winter’s cigar-case with his photograph in the possession of the Lewy family. It was, however, proved that no photograph of Winter existed. Mas- loff was sentenced to one year and his mother-in-law to eighteen months ia the penitentiary for perjury (Oct. 25, 1900); but the jury signed a petition for their pardon, which the emperor did not grant. The accusation against the Lewys, which had rested on this false testimony, was now disproved, although the government in its anxiety to purge itself from the charge of shielding the Jews brought the mat- ter to trial (Sept. 25, 1901), when the case was dis- missed. Meanwhile Moritz Lewy had been com- mitted for perjury on the ground of his denial of acquaintance with Winter; and although he held to his original statement, and in spite of the fact that he could have had no reason for perjuring himself other than the fear of involving himself in difficul- ties, he was sentenced to four years in the peniten- tiary (Feb. 18, 1901). He was released, however, on Oct. 12, 1908, when the emperor granted his pardon. His father had long before removed to Berlin, as his business had been entirely ruined, which also was the case with many others, so that the number of Jews residing in Konitz fell from 481 in 1900 to 350 in 1903. Of great importance was an investigation made in Danzig by the board of health (K6énigliches Medi- zinalkollegium) for West Prussia, The Reason which proved that Winter had been for the choked to death, and that, contrary to Crime. the statement of the county physician, his death was not the result of the cut- ting of his throat. This opinion, rendered Sept. 7, 1901, was confirmed by the highest medical authority, the Wissenschaftliche Deputation fiir Medizinalwe- sen (state board of health), Jan. 15, 1902. It was further shown that jealousy was, in all likelihood, the motive of his death. Again, it was evidently for political reasons that the appeal of Winter’s father to the superior court (Oberlandesgericht) of Marienwerder was consid- ered sufficiently well founded to be made the basis of a trial, which was held June 4, 1902, and which proved the baselessness of all the accusations against the Jews. The government showed itself stronger in prose- cuting cases of libeling the authorities. Bruhn, the publisher, and Botticher, the editor, of the “Staats- birgerzeitung,” which paper had from the begin- ning accused the police and the courts of shielding the perpetrators of the crime because they were Jews, were sentenced for libel, the former to six months and the latter to one year in jail (Oct. 11, 1902). Both of them, however, were elected to the Reichstag in 1903. Previously G. A. Dewald, a Berlin publisher, had been sentenced to six months in jail because on the first anniversary of Winter’s assassination he had published souvenir postal cards representing Winter suspended by his feet in Lewy’s cellar and the Jews ready to cut his throat. A sad sequel to the Konitz trial was the cruel murder of a Polish typesetter, Abraham Levy, in Steegers, West Prussia (Sept. 28, 1903), by two 555 drunkards, who taunted him with the murder and, when he resented the insult in offensive language, beat him to death. Of the perpetrators of this crime one was sentenced to spend a year in jail, while the case against the other was dismissed (Jan. 18, 1904). Mysterious as the Konitz case undoubt- edly is, it has at least been clearly established, as has been noted above, that the motive of the crime was jealousy. BIBLIOGRAPHY: The completest history of the case will be found in Mittheilungen aus dem Verein zur Bektimpfung des Antisemitismus, 1900 et seq. Anti-Semite pamphlets : Sutor, Der Konitzer Mord, Berlin, 1900; idem, Die Konitzer Prozesse: Hin Weiteres Wort zur Aufklirung, ib. 1900 ; Der Blutmord in Konitz mit Streiflichtern auf die Staats- rechtliche Stellung der Juden im Deutschen Reiche mit einem Vorworte von Liebermann von Sonnenberg, ib. 1901; Das Gutachten der Sachversttindigen tiher den Konitzer Mord, ib. i904; W. Zelle, Wer Hat Ernst Winter Ermordet ? Brunswick, 1904. D KONKI (CONQUI or CUENQUI). See CoNQUE. KONTRES (5703)); Levita punctuates Dip 1p): Usual designation, among the Tosafists, of Rashi’s commentary onthe Talmud. Rashihimself uses the expression once to designate a written Talmudic in- terpretation by his “old teacher” (Jacob b. Yakar on Git. viii. 82a). In the commentary on Ta‘an. 21b, a “kontres of Rome” is mentioned, which elsewhere (commentary on Ker, 5a) is called “perush [com- mentary] of Rome” (see Berliner, “ Beitrige zur Gesch. der Raschi-Commentare,” p. 4). Rashi’s Bible commentary likewise is termed “kontres” by himself and by his pupils (/.c. pp. 10, 19); in one place it is called pomp3yp (plural; /.c. p. 11). The word does not designate the commentary itself, but the note-book, or books, in which it was written. Rashi himself, in explaining the Talmudic word which designates the clasp (see Blau, “ Buchwesen,” p. 171) used to hold the leaves of a book in place, speaks of the “leaves of the kontres” (DADIIPA ‘D7; commentary on Shab. 98a; Men. 32a). In the Yal- kut to Ps. xlv. 5 (§ 746) an unwritten kontres is mentioned (pdr D1Dp); the source of the Yalkut (Midr. Teh., ed. Buber, p. 271) has DMO Ap (xapr70). “Kontres” was used to designate explanations writ- ten in a book even before it was so used by Rashi; afterward it became customary to designate Rashi’s Talmud commentary as the “kontres” par excel- lence. Elijah Levita (“ Tishbi,” s.x. D72)p) states itas the generally prevailing opinion that Rashi’s Talmud commentary was originally written in sin- gle blank books, which were then bound together to form one book, for which reason it was called “kontres.” Zunz, who appropriately translates the word “lecture note-book ” (“Zeitschrift fiir die Wis- senschaft des Judenthums,” p. 324), holds it to be an abbreviation of py 21p (“commentarius”; Git. 8b). In the Talmudic passage mentioned by Zunz this word is used only in the plural (D°D10391)) ; the singular does not occur at all (see Krauss, “ Lehn- worter,” ii. 509 et seg.). Zunz is undoubtedly right in holding that pqDp)p isa singular, formed from the Talmudic word. The form found in the Sifre to Num. xxvii. 12 (§ 134) is without a 1 before the 9 (D°D"731P). That “kontres” came to be used in the sense of a THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Konitz Affair Koplik “writing-book” appears to have been due to its re- semblance in sound to “ quinternio” or “ quaternio,” from which Levita derives it. However, such a derivation leaves the s at the end of the word unex- plained, and it is better to have recourse to the words “quaternus,” “quinternus,” which likewise were used to designate books of four or five leaves (see Wattenbach, “Das Schriftwesen des Mittel- alters,” Index). Nevertheless in Rashi’s school the existence of the Talmudic word doubtless contrib- uted to establishing the form p703\p. In other than Jewish circles “ quaternus” (“ quaternio ”) indicated a writing-book, without any reference to the num- ber of its pages (Wattenbach, /.c. p. 178). Mussafia’s explanation may be mentioned as a curiosity (see Kohut’s “Aruch Completum,” vii. 122a), namely, that the word is shortened from “commentarius ” (“explanation,” or “one who explains”), a deriva- tion which has been adopted by Levy (“ Neuhebr. Worterb.” iv. 265b). The original meaning of “kontres,” which was spoken and written also with 4 (D‘73\p) has been preserved in later literature. The leaves of a book are called 0D"773\p (see Steinschneider, “ Cat. Bodl.” col. 10938; comp. also p. Ixvi.). A small book is called DIOP or D773 (see Steinschneider, “ Vor- lesungen iiber die Kunde MHebriiischer Hand- schriften,” p. 23). Benjacob (“Thesaurus Libr. Hebr.” p. 524a) defines the bibliographical meaning of “kontres” thus: A “kontres” is a small opus which is not large enough to form a separate vol- ume, but which is usually appended to another vol- ume. Benjacob enumeratesa large number of books and treatises of which “Kontres” either is the only title or else is prefixed to the title (pp. 524-526; Nos. 228-310). In modern times the writings of A. Jelli- nek may be mentioned, in which the word “ Kon- tres” forms part of the titles, and which furnish a systematic bibliography to various fields of Jewish literature (see Lippe, “ Bibliographisches Lexicon,” pp. 209 et seg., Nos. 82-87). BIBLIOGRAPHY : In addition to citations in the article, see S. M. Schiller-Szinessy, Cat. Hebr. MSS. i. 181, Cambridge, 1876 ; Giidemann, Gesch. i. 193. 6. Wis 18h KOPLIK, HENRY: American physician; born at New York Oct. 28, 1858; educated at the Col- lege of the City of New York and at the College of Physicians and Surgeons (M.D. 1881). He took a postgraduate course at the universities of Leipsic, Prague, and Vienna, and on his return to America established himself as a physician in his native city (1883). There he became connected with Bellevue Hospital, the Good Samaritan Dispensary, and other medical institutions. Since 1899 he has been assistant professor of pediatrics at Bellevue Medical College. Koplik was the first to describe an early diagnos- tic sign in measles, since known as “ Koplik’s spots” ; and he found, too, the bacillus of whooping-cough. He also introduced the free delivery of Pasteurized milk to the needy poor, in which he was followed later by Nathan Straus. Besides essays in the medical journals Koplik is the author of “ Diseases of Infancy and Childhood,” New York, 1902. A. iy “abe Jak. Koppelmann Koran THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 556 eae ee a ee ee ee ee eee KOPPELMANN: Rabbi at Nuremberg toward the end of the fourteenth century. In 1406 Rabbi Israel went to Nuremberg and taught there, at first together with Koppelmann. Afterward they had a controversy, which Rabbi Jacob Weil, interfering, strongly urged the council of the Jewish community toend. Thereupon the latter settled the question by deciding that the two rabbis should lecture on alternate days, the pupils to have the right to attend the lectures of either. The peace, however, does not appear to have been of long duration; for in 1412 a “Koppelmann, son of the schismatic,” was forever banished from the city. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Barbeck, Gesch. der Juden in Niirnberg und Fiirth, pp. 20, 23; Likkute Mahril, ed. Hanau, 1730, p. 71a; Jacob Weil, Responsa, pp. 151, 163; Israel Iserlin, Responsa, ey ML. B. KOPPELMANN, JACOB BEN SAMUEL: German author and translator; born in the district of Breisgau 1555; died 1598. In 1583 he went to Frankfort-on-the-Main, but was obliged to leave that city on account of the plague. While on the road he composed his “Ohel Ya‘akob” (Freiburg, 1584), a commentary on the “‘Ikkarim” of Joseph Albo. He published also: a Judxo-German translation of the Five Megillot, with the Targum Sheni to Esther (2b. 1583); a translation in Yiddish of Bere- chiah ha-Nakdan’s “ Mishle Shu‘alim” (2d. 1588); and “‘Omek Halakah” (Cracow, 1598), expositions of mathematical passages in the Talmud illustrated by figures (this book received the approval of the Council of Four Lands). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 540, Warsaw, 1886; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1252; Nepi-Ghirondi, Toledot Gedole Yisrael, p. 198, Triest, 1853. D. IBwER: KOR. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. KORAH (mp): 1. Son of Esau by Aholibamah ; mentioned as a “duke” (9x) of the land of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 5, 14, 18; I Chron. i. 85). 2. Son of Eliphaz, Esau’s son by Adah; also mentioned asa “duke” of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 16). 3. Son of He- bron of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. ii. 43). 4. Biblical Data: Son of Izhar, of the family of Kohath, and great-grandson of Levi (Ex. vi. 22; in I Chron. vi. 7 he is mentioned as a son of Kohath, but verse 22, following, also mentions him as the son of Izhar the son of Kohath). During the jour- ney of the Israelites in the wilderness, Korah, with Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, On, son of Peleth, and two hundred and fifty other “men of renown,” rebelled against the leadership of Moses and Aaron (Num. xvi. 1-3). Moses ordered Korah and his company to appear in the Tabernacle on the following day, each bearing a censer filled with lighted incense, and the Lord would decide who were the rightful leaders of the people (xvi. 4-17). Korah and his company obeyed, and went to the Tabernacle with their lighted censers, followed by the whole congregation. The congregation was commanded to separate itself from Korah and his band, and when this order was carried out “the earth opened her mouth,” and the arch conspirators “and all that appertained to them went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them,” while a fire from the Lord consumed their two hundred and fifty attendants (xvi. 18-85). Korah’s children, however, did not die with their father (xxvi. 11). The censers of the conspirators were made into broad plates to cover the altar, as a warning to future con- spirators (xvii. 1-5, Hebr.). After Korah’s destruc- tion the people murmured against Moses for having caused it, and a plague was sent by the Lord to des- troy them. This plague killed 14,700 men before its ravages were stopped by an atonement offered for the people by Aaron (xvii. 6-15, Hebr.). From Korah were descended the Korahites, or Korhites, first mentioned in Ex. vi. 24, and reap- pearing as Levites in Num. xxvi. 58 and I Chron. ix. 31. Several Psalms (xlii., xliv.—xlix., Ixxxiv., Ixxxv., Ixxxvii., ]xxviii.) are headed “for the sons of Korah,” and the Korahites appear again as sing- ers before Jehoshaphat fought the Moabites and Am- monites (II Chron. xx. 19). Several Korahite war- riors joined David while he was at Ziklag (I Chron. xii. 6). Korahites are mentioned also as porters at, and gate-keepers of, the Tabernacle (I Chron. ix. 19, SONoly Up ID) J. IR. Cx Jas —In Rabbinical Literature: The name “ Ko- rah” (Mp) is explained by the Rabbis as meaning “baldness.” It was given to Korah on account of the gap or blank which he made in Israel by his revolt (Sanh. 109b). Korah is represented as the possessor of extraordinary wealth, he having dis- covered one of the treasures which Joseph had hid- den in Egypt. The keysof Korah’s treasuries alone formed a load for three hundred mules (Pes. 119a; Sanh. 110a). He and Haman were the two richest men in the world, and both perished on account of their rapacity, and because their riches were not the gift of Heaven (Num. R. xxii. 7; comp. Ex. R. li. 1). On the other hand, Korah is represented asa wise man, chief of his family and as one of the Kohathites who carried the Ark of the Covenant on their shoulders (Tan., ed. Buber, Korah, Supple- ment, 5; Num. R. xviii. 2). The chief cause of Korah’s revolt was, according to the Rabbis, the nomination of Elizaphan, son of Uzziel, as prince over the Kohathites (Num. iii. 30), Korah arguing thus: “Kohath had four sons [Ex. vi. 18]. The two sons of Amram, Kohath’s eldest son, took for themselves the kingdom Cause of and the priesthood. Now, aslam the Revolt. son of Kohath’s second son, I ought to be made prince over the Kohathites, whereas Moses gave that office to Elizaphan, the son of Kohath’s youngest son” (Num. R. xviii. 1; Tan., Korah, 3). Korah plied Moses with the following questions: “ Doesa tallit made entirely of blue wool need fringes?” To Moses’ affirmative answer Korah objected: “The blue color of the tallit does not make it ritually correct, yet according to thy state- ment four blue threads do so” (Num. xy. 88). “Doesa house filled with the books of the Law need amezuzah?” Moses replied that it did; whereupon Korah said: “The presence of the whole Torah, which contains 175 chapters, does not make a house fit for habitation, yet thou sayest that one chapter thereof does so. It is not from God that thou hast received these commandments; thou hast invented 557 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Koppelmann Koran them thyself.” He then assembled 250 men, chiefs of the Sanhedrin, and, having’ clad them in tallitot of blue wool, but without fringes, prepared for them a banquet. Aaron’ssons came for the priestly share, but Korah and his people refused to give the pre- scribed portions to them, saying that it was not God but Moses who commanded those things. Moses, having been informed of these proceedings, went to the house of Korah to effect a reconciliation, but the latter and his 250 followers rose up against him (Num. R. xviii. 2; Tan. J.c.; comp. Targ. pseudo-Jonathan to Num. xvi. 2). Korah consulted his wife also, who encouraged him in the revolt, saying: “See what Moses has done. He has proclaimed himself king; he has made his brother high priest, and his brother’s sons priests; still more, he has made thee shave all thy hair [comp. Num. viii. 7] in order to disfigure thee.” Korah an- swered: “But he has done the same to his own sons.” His wifereplied: “ Moses hated thee so much that he was ready to do evil to his own children provided the same evil would overtake thee ” (Midr. Agadah to Num. xvi. 8; Yalk., Num. 750; comp. Num. R. l.c.; Tan. /.c.; Sanh. 110a). Korah incited ali the people against Moses, argu- ing that it was impossible ‘to endure the laws insti- tuted by the latter. He told them the following parable: “A widow, the mother of two young daughters, had a field. When she came to plow it, Moses told her not to plow it with an ox and an ass together (Deut. xxii. 10); when she came to sow it, Moses told her not to sow it with mingled seeds (Lev. xix. 19). At the time of harvest she had to leave unreaped the parts of the field prescribed by the Law, while from the harvested grain she had to give the priest the share due tohim. The woman sold the field and with the proceeds bought two sheep. But the first-born of these she was obliged to give to Aaron the priest; and at the time of shearing he required the first of the fleece also (Deut. xviii. 4). The widow said: ‘I can not bear this man’s demands any longer. It will be better for me to slaughter the sheep and eat them.’ But Aaron came for the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw (z. verse 3). The widow then vehemently cried out: ‘If thou persistest in thy demand, I de- clare them devoted to the Lord.’ Aaron replied: “In that case the whole belongs to me’ (Num. xviii. 14), whereupon he took away the meat, leaving the widow and her two daughters wholly unprovided for” (Num. R. xviii. 2-8; Tan., Korah, 4-6). The question how it was possible for a wise man like Korah to be soimprudent as to rebel is explained by the fact that he was deceived through his own pro- phetical capacity. He had foreseen that the prophet Samuel would be his descendant, and therefore con- cluded that he himself would escape punishment. But he was mistaken; for, while his sons escaped, he perished (Num. R. xviii. 7; Tan., Korah, 12). At the time of Korah’s engulfment, the earth be- came like.a funnel, and everything that belonged to him, even linen that was at ti2 launderer’s and needles that had been borrowed vy persons living at a distance from Korah, rolled till it fell into the chasm (Yer. Sanh. x. 1; Num. R. /.c¢.). According Korah’s Parable. to the Rabbis, Korah himself underwent the double punishment of being burned and buried alive (Num. R. d.c. 14; Tan., Korah, 28). He and Destruc- his followers continued to sink till tion of Hannah prayed for them (Gen. R. Korah. xcviii. 3); and through her prayer, the Rabbis declare, Korah will ascend to paradise (Ab. R. N. xxxvi.; Num. R. xviii. 11; comp. Sanh. 109b). Rabbah bar bar Hana narrates that while he was traveling in the desert, an Arab showed him the place of Korah’sengulfment. There was at the spot a slit in the ground into which he introduced some wool soaked in water. The wool became parched. On placing his ear to the slit, he heard voices cry: “Moses and his Torah are true; and we are liars” (B. B. 74a; comp. Tan., ed. Buber, Korah, Supplement). 8. 8. M. SE. —Critical View: Korah in the chief narrative concerning him (Num. xvi.) is associated with Dathan and Abiram in leading a revolt against Moses and Aaron. A close examination of the chapter shows that two independent narratives—one in which Dathan and Abiram figure and one in which Korah alone appears—have been woven together. In verses 12-15, 27b-82 Moses speaks with Dathan and Abiram, while in the rest of the passage he speaks with Korah alone. Then, as the narrative now stands, Korah and his followers are killed twice, once in xvi. 82b-33 and again in verse 35. The Deuteronomist (Deut. xi. 6) knew only the story asrelated of Dathan and Abiram. This form of the tale comes from JE. The story of Korah thus separated originally re- lated a contest between a band of Israelites and Moses and Aaron over the right of the Levites to exercise the priestly office. This narrative belongs to P. A still later writer, by inserting “the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi” in verse 1, and by adding verses 8-11, made the contest ap- pear as one between a band of Levitesand the house of Aaron over the priesthood. Wellhausen (“Composition des Hexateuchs,” p. 108) points out that Korah in I Chron. ii. 48 is a Judahite clan, and Bacon (“Triple Tradition of the Exodus,” pp. 194 e¢ seg.) has argued strongly for the view that the original P narrative is based ona Judahite story of J. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kuenen, Hewxateuch, pp. 95 et seq., 334; Bacon, Triple Tradition of the Exodus, pp. 191 et seq.; J. Estlin Carpenter and G. Harford Battersby, Hexateuch, ii. 212 et seq. dis abe: GarAmb: Ac- KORAN: The sacred scriptures of Islam. cording to Mohammedan belief, based upon the tes- timony of the book itself, the Koran consists of sep- arate revelations vouchsafed by God to Mohammed through the angel Gabriel (sura ii. 91, xxv. 34). These were delivered in Arabic (xxvi. 195) and were thus first of all for the Arabs, who had previously received no manifestation of the will of God (xxxiv. 48). They were designed, also, to confirm the older books of the Torah and the Gospels, and to lead mankind in the right way (iii. 2, e¢ al.). Mo- hammed is, therefore, the messenger of God (xceviili. 2, etc.) and the seal of the Prophets (xxxiii. 40). In the prime of life this remarkable man, whose devel- Koran THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 558 opment is traced in no authentic records, voluntarily retired to solitude. There, through vigils and fast- ing, he fell into religious trances, in which he felt himself inspired to warn his fellows of an impending judgment. The oldest portions of the Koran represent the material result of this inspiration. They reflect an extraordinary degree of excitement in their language —in their short, abrupt sentences and in Form of their sudden transitions, but none the Revela- less they carefully maintain the rimed tion. form, like the oracles and magic for- mulas of the pagan Arab priests (Al-A‘sha, in Ibn Hisham). This form is preserved in the later sections also, in some of which the move- ment is calm and the style expository. The book, which is about equal to the New Testament in size, was put together long after the prophet’s death; and its 114 sections were arranged without any re- gard for chronological sequence. Quotations from the Koran are found as early as the period of Mohammed’s activity in Mecca (Ibn Hisham, 7d. p. 226). The oldest fragments may have been recited by the prophet himself before a band of followers, though probably a small one, who could more easily preserve them, either orally or in writing. The following extracts, referring to the most impor- tant articles of faith taught in the Koran, will give an approximate idea of its language and mode of thought: “ Allahisthe Creator of the heavensand the earth ; when He says ‘ Be,’ it is” (ii. 111; iii. 42, 52). “ With Him are the keys of the unseen. None Allah and knows it save Him; His is the under- Creation. standing of all that is in the land and in the sea; and no leaf falls without His knowledge” (vi. 59). “Should God touch thee with harm, there is none to remove it save Him; and if He wish thee well, there is none to restrain His bounty ” (x. 107). “Do not the unbelieving see that the heavens and the earth were one until We clove them asunder and made every living thing from water” (xxi. 31). “He it iswho appointed the sun for brightness; He established the moon for light and ordained her stations, that ye may know the number of the years and the reckoning of them ” (x. 5). “The cattle, likewise, have We created for you; in them are warmth and much profit, and of them ye eat. In them is there beauty for you when ye fetch them from their pastures, and when ye drive them forth to graze. They bear your heavy burdens to towns which ye could not otherwise reach, save with great wretchedness of soul: verily, your Lord is gracious and merciful!” “ Horses, too, has He created, and mules, and asses, for you to ride upon and for an ornament” (xvi. 5-8). “He it is that sends rain from heaven, whereof ye drink; from which grow the trees whereby ye feed your flocks.” “He makes the eorn to grow, and the olives, and the palms, and the grapes, and all man- ner of fruit: verily, herein is a sign unto them that reflect” (xvi. 10, 11). “He it is that subjected the sea unto you, that ye may eat fresh meat therefrom and bring forth from it the ornaments which ye wear; and thou mayest see the ships that sail upon it” (xvi. 14), “He it is that created you of dust, then of a drop, then of clotted blood, and then brought you forth as children; then ye attain your full strength; then ye become old men—though some of youare taken sooner—and then ye reach the time appointed for you” (xl. 69). “Oye men! fear your Lord! Verily the earth- quake of the Hourisa mighty thing!” “On the day ye shall see it, every suckling woman Last Judg- shall forget her sucking babe; and ment; Res- every woman with child shall cast urrection. forth her burden; and thou shalt see men drunken, though they have drunk naught” (xxii. 1, 2). “And the day when We shall move the mountains, and thou shalt see the earth a level plain; and We shall gather all men together, and leave no one of them behind: then shall they be brought before thy Lord inranks. Now are ye come to Us as we created you at first! Nay, but ye thought that we would never make Our promise good! And each shall receive his book, and thou shalt see the sinners in alarm at that which is therein; and they shall say, ‘Alas for us! what a book is this, leaving neither small nor great unnumbered!’ And they shall find therein what they have done; and thy Lord shall deal unjustly with none” (xviii. 45-47). “We shall set just balances for the Day of Resurrection, and no soul shall be wrong; even though it be the weight of a grain of mustard-seed, We shall bring it” (xxi. 48). “ Verily, those that be- lieve, and those that are Jews, and the Sabeans, and the Christians, and the Magians, and those that join other gods with God—verily, God will decide be- — tween them on the Day of Resurrection” (xxii. 17). “Verily, We have prepared for the evil-doers a fire, the smoke whereof shall encompass them; and if they cry for help they shall be helped with water like molten brass, which shall scald Hell and their faces” (xviii. 28). “But for Paradise. out garments of fire; there shall be poured over their heads boiling water; what is in their bellies, and their skins, shall be dissolved; and for them are maces of iron. Whenever in their pain — they shall come forth, they shall be thrust back into it” (xxii. 20-22). “Nay, when the earth shall be crushed with crushing on crushing, and thy Lord shall come, and the angels, rank on rank, and hell - on that day shall be brought nigh—on that day man shall be reminded! But how shall he have a re- minder? He will say, ‘ Would that I had prepared in my life for this!’ But on that day none shall be punished with a punishment like his, and none shall be bound with chains like his!” (Ixxxix. 22- 27). “On that day shall there be joyous faces, well pleased with their past deeds, in a lofty garden where they shall hear no vain discourse; wherein is a flowing fountain; wherein are high couches and goblets set, and cushions laid in order, and carpets spread!” (Ixxxviii. 8-16). “Verily, the righteous” shall dwell among delights; seated on couches they shall gaze about them; thou mayest recognize in their faces the brightness of delight; they shall be given to drink wine that is sealed, whose seal is musk; for that let theaspirantsaspire! And it shall — be tempered with Tasnim, a spring from which those those that misbelieve, for them are cut — 559 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Koran EE eae that draw nigh to God shall drink” (1xxxiii. 22-28). “QO thou soul that art at rest! return unto thy Lord, well pleased and pleasing him! And enter among my servants, and enter my paradise ” (xx xix. 27-80). Although the passages here quoted contain many original phrases and figures, they are frequently reminiscent of similar passages in the Old and New Testaments. These points of contact are the more numerous because Mohammed repeats many Bib- lical narratives. These are found especially in the later suras, which have all the characteristics of ser- mons. The chief subjects taken from the Old Tes- tament are: the Creation; Cain and Abel; Noah; Abraham and his sons; Jacob and his Old and sons; Moses and Aaron; Saul; David New and Solomon; ‘Tob and Jonah; but Testament fromthe New Testament, besides Jesus Stories. and Mary, only. John is mentioned. In the Old Testament narratives the Koran frequently follows the legends of the Jewish Haggadah rather than the Biblical accounts, as Geiger pointed out in his “ Was Hat Muhammad aus dem Judenthume Aufgenommen?” (Bonn, 1834; 2d. ed. Berlin, 1902). Thus, the story of Abraham’s de- struction of the idols in his father’s house, and his answer to those that asked who had done it (xxi. 58-64), agree with Gen. R. xvii.; the sign that re- strained Joseph from sin (xii, 24) corresponds to Sotah 86b; the refusal of Moses to accept food from the Egyptian women (xxviii. 11) parallels Sotah 12b; and the account of Solomonand the Queen of Sheba (xxvVii.) harmonizes with the commentary of Targum Sheni to Esther i. 13. For many of these borrowed narratives the sources are unknown. ‘Thus, for instance, the story in the “Sefer ha-Yashar” of the Egyptian women that cut their fingers in bewilderment at Joseph’s beauty (xii. 81) is based on the Mohammedan narrative, and no older Jewish source thereof is known. For the legend of Samiri, comp. “Z. D. M. G.” lvi. 73. In its version of the story of Jesus the Koran shows more dependence on the apocryphal than on the canonical Gospels. Thus the story of the giv- ing of life to the bird of clay (iii. 48, v. 110) is found in the Gospel of Thomas (ed. Tischendorf, ii. 2). The account of Mary’s marvelous food (iii. 82) is given in the Protevangelium Jacob, viii., as well as the casting of lots for the care of her (ch. ix.), found in iii. 39. Furthermore, there are many variations, especially in the case of proper names, which are due to con- fusion on the part of Mohammed himself. Thus, Pharaoh desires to build a tower (xxviii. 38), the story being based on the account of Nimrod (Jose- phus, “Ant.” i. 4, 8$ 2-3); by a confusion with Miriam, Mary is called the sister of Aaron (xix. 29); Haman is the servant of Pharaoh (xxviii. 88); and Azar becomes the father of Abraham (vi. 74)—a reminiscence in Mohammed’s mind of the name of Eliezer (comp. also, for the account of Idris [xix. 57], Néldeke in “ Zeit. fir Assyr.” xvii. 88). There are frequent anachronisms in the teachings of Mohammed. Thus, the regulation concerning prayer and almsgiving is mentioned in connection with God’s compact with Israel (v. 15); God commanded Moses and Aaron to provide places of prayer in Egypt (x. 87); and the destruction of Lot’s wife was foreordained by God (xv. 60). Other additions were made to suit Arabic conditions, such as the descrip- tion of Moses’ staff (xx. 19); the reason assigned for his approach to the burning bush (“I Applica- will bring you a blazing brand from tion of it”; xxvii. 7); crucifixion on palm- Quotations trees as a punishment (xx. 74); and and Joseph as guardian of his brothers’ References. baggage (xii. 17; comp. Wellhausen, “Skizzen,” iv. 157; for the description of Solomon’s glory, “dishes as large as cisterns”; comp. Al-A‘sha, in Al-Mubarrad, 4, 14). A fundamental alteration, which has a direct bear- ing on the Arabs and on Mecca, is found in the story of Abraham and his sons, the Koran representing the Biblical patriarch as the founder of the sanctu- ary at Mecca. Ishmael is not mentioned with him until the later suras, whereas, according to the ear- lier ones, Isaac and Jacob are the sons of Abraham: probably a confusion in Mohammed’s own mind (comp. Snouck Hurgronje, “Het Mekkaansche Feest,” p. 82). In all the Biblical narratives which are found in the Koran the words placed in the mouths of the speak- ers are intended to convey Mohammed’s opinions and beliefs. The relation of Mohammed to the Mec- cans is but thinly disguised under the warnings of individual prophets to a sinful people, and in the answers of the latter. Noteworthy in this connec- tion are the words of Adam and Eve (vii. 22); of Abel (v. 82); of Noah (vii. 57, 59; xi. 27); of the unbelievers in Noah’s time (vii. 58; xi. 34, 45, 48); of Jacob (xii. 99); of Joseph (xii. 33, 87); of Moses (vii. 108, xxviii. 15); of the Egyptian magicians (xx. 75); and of Jesus (xix. 31). A few legends, in addition to the Biblical narra- tives, have been taken into the Koran, such as the legend of Alexander the Great, with “the two horns ” (xviii. 82 et seqg.), which is derived from a Syriac source (Néldeke, “Beitriige zur Gesch. des Alex- anderromans,” p. 82); the legend of the Seven Sleepers (xviii. 8 e¢ seg.; comp. Koch, “ Die Sieben- schlifer Legende,” Leipsic, 1883; Guidi, “Testi Orientali Inediti Sopra i Sette Dormienti di Efeso,” Rome, 1885); the legend of Moses and the servant of God (xviii. 64 e¢ seg.); and the story of the one hundred years’ sleep (ii. 261; comp. the story of Honi ha-Me‘aggel, Yer. Ta‘an. iii. 66d; Guidi, “Sette Dormienti,” p. 108). The Koran contains also native Arabic legends, apparently somewhat altered in form, which are in- cluded for the moral they convey. To this class belong the stories of the destruction of the Thamud (the Oapovd#vor of Diodorus Siculus, iii. 44; Ptolemy, vi. 7, 21; “Notitia Dignitatum, ” ed. Seeck, pp. 58, 59, 73), on account of their disobedience to their prophet (vii. 71, e¢ al.); of the Madyan (vii. 88, e¢ ai. ; the 1) of the Bible and the Madcaua of Ptolemy, vi. 7, 27); and of the ‘Ad (xi. 62, e¢ al.), a general term for a mythological, prehistoric people (comp. Noldeke, “Fiinf Mu‘allakat,” iii. 31, in “Sitzungs- berichte der Wiener Akademie,” 1908). Here, also, belong the story of the breaking of the dam in Yemen (xxxiii. 14) and the speeches placed in the mouth of Lukman (xxxi. 12 e¢ seg.), who is mentioned Koran Korner THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 560 likewise in old Arabic poems. The Koran, in ad- dition, includes many passages of a legislative char- acter and of later date. These contain regulations concerning the pilgrimage (ii. 185); fasting (ii. 181); almsgiving (ii. 278 e¢ seg., Ixiv. 17 et seg.); the spoils of war (viii.); marriage (iv. 23, e¢ al.); inheritance (iv. 2, e¢ al.); and the like. In these portions, also, the typical expressions of the earlier passages rela- ting to articles of faith recur as interpolations in the text itself. The language of the Koran is held by the Moham- medans to be a peerless model of perfection. An impartial observer, however, finds many peculiari- ties in it. Especially noteworthy is the fact that a sentence in which something is said concerning Allah is sometimes followed immediately by another in which Allah is the speaker; examples of this are suras xvi. 81, xxvii. 61, xxxi. 9, and -=xliii. 10 (comp. also xvi. 70). Many peculiarities in the positions of words are due to the necessities of rime (Ixix. 81, Ixxiv. 8), while the use of many rare words and new forms may be traced to the same cause (comp. especially xix. 8, 9, 11, 16). See also IsLam; MoHAMMED. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fliigel, Corant Textus Arabicus, Leipsic, 1869; Concordantie Corani Arabicw, ib. 1842; H. O. Fleischer, Beidhawii Commentarius in Coranum, i., ii., ib. 1846-48; Wherry, A Comprehensive Commentary on the Quran, with additional notes and emendations, 4 vols., Lon- don, 1883-86; Ullmann, Der Koran aus dem Arabischen Uebersetzt, 6th ed., Bielefeld, 1862; Kasimirski, Le Koran, Traduction Nouvelle, Paris, 1864; E. H. Palmer, Transla- tion of the Quran, in S. B. E. vols. vi. and ix., Oxford, 1880; Th. N6éldeke, Geschichte des Qorans, Gottingen, 1860. a. S. Fr. The dependence of Mohammed upon his Jewish teachers or upon what he heard of the Jewish Hag- gadah and Jewish practises is now generally con- ceded. ‘The subject was first treated from a gen- eral point of view by David Mill, in his “Oratio Inauguralis de Mohammedanismo e Veterum Hebre- orum Scriptis Magna ex Parte Composita ” (Utrecht, 1718); and by H. Lyth in his “ Quo Successu Davidi- cos Hymnos Imitatus Sit Muhammed ” (Upsala, 1806— 1807). Geiger’s epoch-making work laid the founda- tion for the study of the Koran in its relation to Jewish writings. J. Gastfreund, in his “Mohamed nach Talmud und Midrasch” (i., Berlin, 1875; ii., Vienna, 1877; iii., Leipsic, 1880), has attempted to show the parallels, also, in later Mohammedan liter- ature; though not always with success, as Sprenger has pointed out (“Z. D. M. G.” xxix. 654). Further parallels are given by Griinbaum (?d. xliii. 4 et seq.). The subject has received an exhaustive treatment at the hands of Hartwig Hirschfeld, in his “Jiidische Elemente im Koran” (1878), in his “Beitriige zur Erklarung des Koran” (Leipsic, 1886), and more es- pecially in his “New Researches into the Composi- tion and Exegesis of the Qoran” (London, 1902; comp. the remarks of August Miller in “Theolo- gische Literaturzeitung, ” 1887, No. 12, cols. 278 et seq.). Hebrew translations of the Koran were not un- known, and fragments of these may lie buried in Oriental genizahs. Before such translations were . made asimple transliteration into Hebrew characters sufficed. Portions of such a transliteration are to be found in Bodleian Manuscript No, 1221 (= Hunt No. 529), the first parts of which are even punctu- ated; on the margin are Hebrew translations of some passages and references to the Hebrew Bible and the haggadic literature; the Trans- manuscript isin a modern Spanish rab- lations. binical script. Additional fragments of such manuscripts are in the libraries of the Deutsche Morgenlindische Gesellschaft (from the Crimea; see Rédiger in “Z. D. M. G.” xiv. 485), the Vatican (Cod. 357, 2), and the Vienna bet ha- midrash (Pinsker, No. 17). In a bookseller’s list cited in “J. Q. R.” xv. 77 is mentioned a volume containing the Torah, the Targum, and the Koran bound together (NIP) DIN AN WA 4"). A trans- lation into Hebrew from the Latin was made in the seventeenth century by Jacob b. Israel ha-Levi, rabbi of Zante (d. 1634; see Neubauer, “Cat. Bod). Hebr. MSS.” No. 2207); and, in modern times, by Herrman Reckendorf Ganpbs, Leipsic, 1857). A translation into Spanish of sura 70 (“ Al-Mi‘raj”) was made in the thirteenth century, at the behest of Alfonso X., by the physician of Toledo, Don Abraham ; a French rendering of this was afterward made by Bonaven- tura de Seve. Koran citations, either for polemical purposes or in translations from the Arabic, are oc- casionally found in Hebrew writings (e.g., in those of Saadia and Hai Gaon). Simon Duran (1428), in his critique of the Koran (see “Keshet u-Magen,” ed. Steinschneider, in “Ozar Tob,” 1881), quotes the Koran; but he mixes such quotations with others from the Sunnah, and probably takes them from translations of Averroes’ works. In some translations from the Arabic, the citations from the Koran were occasionally replaced by quotati-ns from the Bible (e.g., in Al-Bataljusi, and in Judah Nathan’s trans- lations of Ghazali’s “ Makasid al-Falasifah ”), BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Hebr. Bibl. pp. 309, 339, 591, 854; Z. D. M. G. xv. 381, xlviii. 354; J. Q. R. xii. 499; Pole- mische Literatur, pp. 3138-316. G ; 3 KORANYI, FRIEDRICH: Hungarian physi- cian and medical writer; born Dec. 20, 1828, at Nagy- Kallo. In 1851 he took his doctor’s degree at Buda- pest, and after practising for two years in the surgi- cal clinic ef Professor Schuh at Vienna, he settled as a physician in his native town. In 1865 he be- came privat-docent for nervous diseases at the Uni- versity of Budapest, and in the following year was appointed director of the internal clinic and full pro- fessor. In 1881 Emperor Francis Joseph conferred upon him the Order of the Iron Crown; in 1884 he was raised to the Hungarian nobility; and in 1891 he became a member of the Hungarian House of Magnates. He was decorated with the cross of the Order of St. Stephen. Koranyi has contributed numerous essays to the medical journal “Orvosi Hetilap.” The following works, written by him in German, may also be noted: “Der Milzbrand ” (in Nothnagel’s “ Specielle Pathologie und Therapie”); “Die Rotzkrankheit ” (2b.); “Zoonosen” (7b.); “Die Lungenschwindsucht in Ungarn”; “Die Krankheiten der Lunge” (in Eu- lenburg’s “ Realencyklopiidie der Gesammten Heil- kunde”). Kordnyi has embraced Christianity. Sy See tah Pesti Naplé, Oct. 21, 1897; Pallas Lew. x., . T. Ve 561 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Koran Korner KORBAN (lit. “an offering”): 1. A sacrifice of any kind, whether bloody or bloodless; term used by Josephus in the sense also of a vow-offering, or of something devoted to God (“ Ant.” iv. 4,$ 4; “Con- tra Ap.” i. 22; Mark vii. 11). 2. The sacred treas- ury in which the gifts for the Temple, or the alms- box in which the gifts for the poor, were kept (Josephus, “B. J.” ii. 9, § 4; comp. Matt. xxvii. 6). The term “korban” was frequently used in vows. By saying, “Let my property be to you korban ”— that is, a gift consecrated to God—a man could pre- vent another from deriving any benefit from what he possessed (Ned. i. 4). This, of course, led to great abuses, as, in fact, all inconsiderate vows did, and, therefore, was much opposed by the sages (see Eccl. v. 1-5). Jesus (Mark vii. 11-13; comp. Matt. xv. 5-9) had such a vow in view when he said: “If aman say to his father or mother, That wherewith thou mightest have been profited by me is Korban, ye no longer suffer him todo aught for his father or his mother, making void the word of God by your tradition” (Greek). But the charge of hypocrisy, or lip-service, raised against the Pharisees in this connection is entirely unfounded; for pharisaic tra- dition did actually provide a remedy against rash vows by empowering any sage consulted to dis- solve the vow in case it could be shown that it was not made with a full consideration of all its consequences; this very power “to loosen that which is bound” by the Law being declared to be a privilege of the Rabbis, derived from the spirit of the Law while seemingly against the letter (“hetter nedarim”; Hag. i. 8). It is expressly declared, however, by R. Eliezer that if a vow infringes upon the honor due to father or mother, the right procedure is to endeavor to con- vince him who made it that he failed to consider the consequences sufficiently, and then to dissolve the vow; others, however, dissented, holding that God’s honor ought to be considered first (Ned. ix. 1). Against this, R. Meir declares (Ned. ix. 4) that “wherever a vow is made which infringes the laws of humanity, the vow should be dissolved by the sage.” Thus the Mishnaic code shows the instance quoted in the New Testament to be, instead of a reproach of pharisaism,-as contended by Oort in “Theol. Tijdschrift,” xxxviii., a vindication of the humane spirit prevailing among the Rabbis; possi- bly Jesus had only the rigorous class of teachers in mind, while his more humane views were those shared by others. See ALMs. rc a. : KOREFF, SOLOMON: German Talmudist; born about 1700; died in Prague May 24,1774. For more than forty years he presided over a large yeshi- bahat Prague. On the record of the appointment of Bzekiel Landau as chief rabbi of Prague (1754; see Kaufmann in “Ha-Bshkol,” i. 177-184, Cracow, 1898) is found the signature of Solomon Koreff, al- though he, like many others, was said to be an op- ponent of the newly elected rabbi on account of the quarrel about Jonathan Eybeschiitz. When the*empress Maria Theresa issued the de- eree banishing the Jews from Prague (Dec. 18, 1744), a deputation of influential Jews at once proceeded to the government authorities to protest. Koreff VII.—386 was the speaker of this deputation, and when, in his excitement, he became too loud, and was rebuked in consequence, he made the memorable answer, “Ten thousand souls cry from within me.” It is said that he alone was allowed toremain. After the Jews had left Prague (March 31, 1745) on account of the impossibility of enduring the new conditions imposed upon them, negotiations with the govern- ment were maintained until they terminated (Aug., 1748) in the repeal of the act of banishment. Solo- mon Koreff’s name is repeatedly found among the number of the “Schtadlanim” who signed the me- morials submitted to the government between 1745 and 1748. After the Jews had been readmitted, Koreff was appoiated by the government one of the four elders of the community. BIBLIOGRAPHY: S. Hock, Die Familien Prags, ed. D. Kauf- mann, pp. 3827-328, Presburg, 1892; G. Wolf, Die Vertrei- bung der Juden aus Bohmen, in Jahrb. fiir die Gesch. der Juden, iv. 169 et passim, Leipsic, 1869; Abr. Trebitsch, Korot ha-‘Ittim, p. 19b, Briinn, 1801. a. eh, 1BL KORIYYAT. See Cortar. KORN, SELIG (FRIEDRICH N. NORK): German writer and mythologist; born April 26, 1808, at Prague; died at Teplitz Oct. 16, 1850. Ex- pelled from the gymnasium of his native town on account of a poem composed by him satirizing a teacher, he adopted a mercantile career, educating himself during his leisure hours. However, he soon became dissatisfied with his position, and in 1829 left for Leipsic. The following years he spent in Budapest, Vienna, Prague, Dresden, Leipsic, and Stuttgart, engaged in literary work. After the death of his parents he became a convert to Chris- tianity. Among Korn’s many writings, mostly satirical, some of which he published under one or the other of the noms de plume “ Friedrich N. Nork ” or “Spiritus Asper” and “Spiritus Lenis,” may be mentioned the following: “Zeriel’s des Infernalischen Schauspiel- directors Reise auf die Oberwelt,” Leipsic, 1830; “Belial und Astarte, oder die Liebe der Teufel,” 18382; “Panorama von Ofen und Pest,” 2b. 1883; “FWigaro’s Memoiren,” 1833; “Die Seleniten,” 1834; “ Humoristische Charactergemilde,” 1835; “ Mythen der Perser,” 1836; “ Brahminen und Rabbinen,” 1886; “Vergleichende Mythologie,” 1886; “Der Prophet Elias, ein Sonnen-Mythus,” 1837; “Versuche der Hieroglyphik,” 1887; “Das Leben Mosis,” 1888; “Rabbinische Quellen und Parallelen zu Neutesta- mentlichen Schriften,” 1839; “Biblische Mytholo- gie,” 1842-48; “Etymologisch Symbolisches Real- worterbuch,” 1843. Neither his satirical works nor his mythological studies brought Korn any success; and his writings, with few exceptions, are now forgotten. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, xxiv., Leipsic, 1887. s Jag ats 1e KORNER, MOSES B. ELIEZER: Russian Hebrew author of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; grandson of Yom-Tob Lipman Heller. He was for some time rabbi at Rendsburg; he lived next at Shklov; and from 1802 he lived at Grodno. Toward the end of his life he traveled for some years in Europe, with the purpose of securing Kornfeld Kos THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 562 aid in the publication of his works. He published: “Torat Mosheh,” Biblical and Talmudic exegesis (Novidvor, 1786); “Zera‘ Kodesh,” on Talmudic and rabbinical literature (Berlin, 1797); an edition of Elias Levita’s “Tishbi,” with notes (Grodno, 1805); “Ke-Or Nogah,” strictures on the “Sefer ha- Berit” of Phinehas Elijah b. Meir (Breslau, 1816) ; “Tegeret Rishpe Keshet,” the story of his wan- derings and hardships (Hanover, 1881); “ Birkat Mosheh,” a treatise on the benediction “ She-Hehe- yanu ” (Berlin, 1883); “Seder Hosha‘not,” according to the ritual of German and Polish Jews (ed. with preface, Hanover, 1834); an edition of the “ Megil- lat Ebah” of Yom-Tob Lipman Heller, with a Ger- man translation by J. H. Miro (Breslau, 1836). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 6499; Roest, Cat. Rosenthal. Bibl. i. 648, Amsterdam, 1875; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. H. R, Ate amV KORNFELD, AARON: Austrian Talmudist; born Aug. 2, 1795, at Goltsch-Jenikau, Bohemia; died there Oct. 26, 1881. His only teacher was his father, Rabbi Mordecai Bir Kornfeld, head of a yeshibah, who taught him both the Talmud and the profane sciences. Kornfeld was only eighteen years old when he took over the direction of the yeshibah at his father’s death. The fame of the school was so great that sometimes as many as eighty pupils were in attendance. When Sir Moses Montefiore was passing through Bohemia on his return from Damascus, he undertook the difficult journey to Goltsch-Jenikau purposely to become acquainted with the celebrated Talmudist. In 1864, when Kornfeld suffered from an affection of the eyes and was not allowed to read until an operation had been performed, he composed from memory a compendium of 300 commandments which he skilfully clothed in the gematriot of their Bib- lical verses. It appeared under the title “ Ziyyunim le-Dibre ha-Kabbalah,” Prague, 1865. Besides a short article, printed in “Shomer Ziyyon ha-Ne’e- man,” this is Kornfeld’s only publication. BIBLIOGRAPHY: M. H. Friedlander, Das Leben und Wirken der Hervorragendsten Rabbinischen Autoritdten Prags, pp. 51-59, Vienna, 1902. 8. A. Kr. KORNFELD, HERMANN (nom de plume, SAMUELO): German physician; born at Posen 1840; son of the Talmudist Samuel ben Nahman Kornfeld and grandson of R. Akiba Eger. He re- ceived his education at Breslau, Berlin, and Vienna, taking his degree in 1863. Until 1871 he was phy- sician at a hospital in Breslau; since 1901 he has been “ Landgerichtsarzt.” Kornfeld is the author of: “Paralyse der Irren beim Weiblichen Geschlecht ” (1877); “Sitz der Geis- tesstérungen” (1878); “Ueber Nattirlichen und Abnormen Tod” (1879); “Handbuch der Gericht- lichen Medicin” (1884); “Die Entmitindigung der Geisteskranken ” (1901). The last-named work has an appendix showing that the circulation of the blood must have been known to the ancient He- brews. In two articles, “Was Sollen Wir Essen?” and “Ueber die Bedeutung des Bluts” (published in “Sitzungsberichte fiir Gerichtliche Medizin,” and in Virchow’s “Archiv,” 1875), he discussed, from a hygienic and humanitarian standpoint, the eventual effects of a general introduction of the Jewish method of slaughtering, and of the dietary ee KORNIK (KURNIK), MEIR BEN MOSES: German rabbi and calendar-maker; born at Glogau, where he was afterward rabbi; died at Hamburg Aug. 9, 1826. Kornik was the author of the following works: (1) “‘Ezrat ha-Sofer ” (Amsterdam, 1796), a manual for scribes on the writing of the scroll of Esther. (2) “Hadre Kodesh” (Dyhernfurth, 1817), a vocabulary to the first and the last mishnayot of the “Sefer Yezirah” and to the passages of the Zohar which are recited in the nights of Shabu‘ot and Hosha‘na Rabbah. (8) “Dabar be-‘Itto” (vol. i., Breslau, 1817), elements of a Jewish calendar, but chiefly a refutation of Lazarus Bendavid’s “Zur Berechnung und Gesch. des Jiidischen Kalen- ders” (see BENDAvID, LAzARus). This work, in which Kornik mentions another work of his, “ Me’ir ‘Ene ‘Ibrim,” is furnished with some glosses by M. B. Friedenthal. (4) “System der Zeitrechnung in Chronologischen Tabellen ” (Berlin, 1825), a concord- ance of the Julian, Gregorian, Jewish, and Moham- medan calendars. This work was the basis of Jahn’s “Tafeln” (Leipsic, 1856), and is highly pratsed by Isi- dore Loeb (“ Tables du Calendrier Juif,” Paris, 1886). A series of corrections of Kornik’s tables has been given by Max Simon in Berliner’s “ Magazin,” xviii. 296. BIBLIOGRAPHY: David Frankel, in Sulamith, vy. 242 et seq.; First, Bibl. Jud. ii. 206; Zeitlin, Bibl. Post-Mendels. p. 184. 8. M. Set. KOROBKA (“meat-tax”): That part of the Basket-Tax which is levied in Russia on kasher meat and poultry. The tax on salt, preserved pro- visions, flour, and grain, while in some instances included in the basket-tax, should not be con- founded with the meat-tax proper. The meat-tax was originally devised by the Jews themselves in- order to supply funds for various communal needs, such as the support of the poor, and the main- tenance of hospitals and other charitable or educa- tional institutions. At first under the direct control of the KAWAL, it was later placed under the juris- diction of the corresponding municipal government. With the abolition of the kahal organizations in 1844 its character was somewhat changed, and it was made obligatory instead of voluntary on the part of the Jewish communities. 2 The imposition of this tax and the consequent increase in the price of meat have been the cause of much dissension within the communities. The bur- densome character of the tax has increased since the abolition of the kahal, the present system of farm- ing out the kasher meat monopoly to individuals having led toa lax collection of the other portions of the basket-tax and the more rigid collection of the meat-tax proper. Kasher meat costs in many places from 2 to 3 cents per pound more than other meat; and the burden of taxation thus falls most heavily on the poor, resulting in their imperfect nourishment and stunted development. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Levanda, Polny Khronologicheski Sbornik Zakonov, s.Vv., St. Petersburg, 1874; Mysh, Rukovodstvo kh Russkim Zakonam o Yevreyakh, 2d ed., p. 434, ib. 1898; M. Morgulis, in Yevreiskaya Biblioteka, vi. 61; Budushchnost, 1901, No. 7. J.@. L. H. R. 563 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kornfeld Kos a KOROSI, JOSEPH: Hungarian statistician; born April 20, 1844, at Pesth. He was educated privately, and then accepted a position with an in- surance company, and also entered the field of jour- nalism. In 1867 he became editor of the depart- ment of economics on the “Pesti Napl6,” subse- quently joining the staff of the “Reform.” His literary activity resulted in his appointment as di- rector of the bureau of statistics at Budapest in 1870. He was elected member of the Royal Hun- garian Academy in 1879; honorary M.D. of the Uni- versity of Pennsylvania; and honorary member of the University of Klausenburg in 1896, in which yearalso King Francis Joseph I. elevated him to the Hungarian nobility with the preenomen “de Szant6.” Besides numerous papers in Hungarian, Kérosi is the author of the following works: “Bulletin Annuel des Finances des Grandes Villes,” 18 vols. ; “Bulletin Hebdomadaire de Statistique Internation- ale,” 24 vols. ; “ Projet d’un Recensement du Monde,” Paris, 1881; “ Armuth und Todesursachen,” Vienna, 1886; “Kritik der Vaccinations-Statistik,” Berlin, 1890; “Beitriige zur Frage des Impfschutzes,” 7d. 1891; “ Demologische Beitriige,” 7b. 1892; “ Plan einer Mortalitiits-Statistik fiir Grosstiidte” (7b.); “Maass und Gesetze der Ehelichen Fruchtbarkeit,” Vienna, 1894; “An Estimate of the Degree of Legitimate Natality,” London, 1895; “Die Seculare Weltziih- lung vom Jahre 1900” (Berlin, 1897). Kérési proposed an international movement for the uniformity of the census of 1900, and his plan was adopted by the Institut International de Statis- tique. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Szinnyei, Magyar Irdk Elete; Pallas Lex. X., XViii.; Meyers Konversations-Lexikon. 8. Le Ve KOS, COS, or COOS (Greek, Ké¢ or Kéoc): An island belonging to the Sporades group in the igean Sea near the Carian coast; known also as Meropis and Nymphea. Diodorus Siculus (xv. 76) and Strabo (xiv. 657) describe it as a well-forti- fied port. Its position gave it a high importance for the #igean trade; while the island itself was rich in wines of considerable fame (Pliny, xxxy. 46). At a comparatively early period Jews are men- tioned among the population of Kos; and under A1- exander the Great and the Egyptian Ptolemies (from 386 B.c.) the town developed into one of the great Jewish centers in the Aigean. Josephus (* Ant.” xiv. 7, § 2) quotes Strabo to the effect that Mithridates sent to Kos to fetch the gold deposited there by Queen Cleopatra and “800 talents belong- ing to the Jews.” Jews of Kos are mentioned at the time of Antiochus VII., Sidetes, Kos being one of the islands to which the rescript of the Roman consul Lucius was sent (139 B.c.; I Macc. xv. 28). It appears probable that in course of time the Jews became the chief bankers in the island, and that they took charge, at a certain rate of interest, of the large sums of money owned by the temples. In the sac- rificial tablet of the Temple of Adrasteia and Neme- sis, they are mentioned (lines 17, 18) as tévre¢ ind t[wv tpa]reertov 4 GAAwe (Herzog, “Critische For- schungen,” p. 35). This inscription is of the first cen- tury B.c. Rayet (“ Mémoire sur 1’Te de Kos,” p. 80) thinks that the 800 talents ($960,000) deposited by Cleopatra were held by these Jewish tparelérac; but of this there is no evidence (Paton and Hicks, “ In- scriptions of Cos,” p. xxxviii.). In 49 B.c. the Koans are reminded by the consul Caius Fannius to obey the decree of the Roman Senate and to allow safe passage to Jewish pilgrims traveling to Jerusa- lem (Josephus, /.c. xiv. 10,§ 15). Herod is said to have provided an annual stipend for the benefit of prize- winners in the athletic games (Josephus, “B. J.” i. 21, § 11); and a statue was erected there to his son Herod the Tetrarch (“C. I. G.” 2502). The epigram- matist Meleager, who was living at Kos about 95 B.C., complains of having been abandoned by his mistress for a Jew (Epigram No. 83, in “ Anthologia Greeca,” v. 160)" The modern name of Kos is Stau- chio (Greek, Itaukos, Isola Longa). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kiister, De Insula Co, Halle, 1833; Béttger, Topographisch-Historisches Lexicon zu Flavius Josephus, p. 95; Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Hncyc. ii., s.v.; Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 1891. E. G. H.—G. In Medieval and Modern Times: It is not known whether Jews continued to live at Kos from Roman times down to the conquest of the island by the Knights of Rhodes in 1825. Under the rule of the knights, however, Jews were banished (1502) from the island (Coronelli, “Isola di Rhodi,” p. 180) and transported to Nice, in accordance with the decree promulgated by Pierre d’Aubusson, grand master of the Hospitalers of St. John. It is not defi- nitely known whether the Jews returned from Nice to Kos a year after their banishment, 7.¢., during or after the conquest of the island by the Turks. But, according toa document, now at Rhodes, containing some notes on the administration of the community of Rhodes, the community of Kos was in 1685 de- pendent on that of Rhodes, paying to the latter a tax collected from eighteen persons whose names are mentioned in the document. The amount of the tax, which was paid up to 1870, indicates probably that the community was not very large and had no chief rabbi, but was under the direct control of the chief rabbi of Rhodes. In 1747 a certain Eliezer Tarica built at his own expense a handsome little synagogue; the date of building and the name of the builder Synagogue are commemorated in a gilt Hebrew and inscription in relief, placed above the Cemeteries. door of the tabernacle. Subsequently two shops and a house were be- queathed for the support of this synagogue; and the income from these covers the expenses even to- day. There are two Jewish cemeteries at Kos. One very old one, situated on the seashore at Cape Sable, is no longer used. he other, more in the interior of the island, contains over one hundred tombs, the earliest dating from 1715. Following are the names of the chief families which the present writer copied from the gravestones in 1901: Romano, Capelluto, Angel, Tarica, Gabai, Couriel, Benveniste, Coenca, Alhadef, Mir, Pisante, Habib, Abzaradel, Franco, Finz, Ergas; the most prominent among these fam- ilies being those of Tarica, Alhadef, and Franco. The last-named was engaged especially in exporting raisins, the chief product of the island, and had connections at the principal centers of commerce of 564 ocr THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kovel Europe. Later on Jews from Salonica came every schrittspartei ”). year to the markets of Kos to buy the products of the island. In 1850 the Jews of Kos were accused of ritual murder under the following circumstances: Some Greeks, having found the dead body of an old man named Tiringongo, a habitual drunkard, accused the Jews of having killed him, and, aided by the gov- ernor of theisland, Amin Bey, entered and searched the synagogue one Fri- day evening. Not finding anything, they came back the following day, searched the garden of the temple, and maltreated the Jews. Fortunately for the latter, the colonel in charge of the soldiers on the island, Ramiz Bey, took their part, pointing out to the governor the respon- sibilities he would incur should he lend support to the Greeks. Thereupon the Greeks and Jews were gent to Rhodes, where the former were punished, and the latter acquitted in conformity with the firman which Sultan ‘Abd al-Majid had granted to the Jews subsequent to the calumnies of Damascus and Rhodes (1840-41). Three years later the slayer of the drunkard Tiringongo was discovered. He was a Mohammedan, named Haji Salih, who, seeing Tiringongo stealing in his field, had shot and killed him. His body was thrown into the street by a negro, who subsequently made this revelation. In 1851 the body of a Jew who had died at Kos was found the day after burial absolutely naked with the hands mutilated. Investigations being made by the governor of the island, Mustafa-Sharif Pasha, the act was traced to some Greek shepherds, who confessed that they had cut some Mutilation fingers from the hands of the Jew for of a Jewish the purpose of placing them among Corpse. their flocks, in order to increase the number of the beasts, according to a belief common among them that the hand of the Jew brought fruitfulness and increase of wealth, The Jewish population of Kos consisted in 1850 of 40 families, in 1872 of 25 families, and in 1901 of only 10 families, half of whom were strangers. The Jews are engaged in retail business, and live in per- fect harmony with the other inhabitants. They have in the synagogue three sacred rolls, and they support a shohet, who is at the same time school- master and officiating rabbi at the temple. The Kos Jews speak Turkish and Greek in addition to the Judseo-Spanish dialect. G. A GA. KOSCH, RAPHAEL: German physician and deputy; born at Lissa, Posen, Oct. 5, 1808; died at Berlin March 27, 1872. Educated at the University of Kénigsberg (M.D. 1826), he became assistant at the surgical-ophthalmological clinic there and com- menced to practise in 1832. Kosch soon became interested in the political life of Prussia. In 1848 he was sent as representative from K6nigsberg to the Prussian National-Ver- sammlung, where he was elected a vice-president. From 1850 to 1860 he took no active part in politics, but again became interested therein in 1861, when he was elected from Kénigsberg to the Prussian Lower House, of which he remained a member until his death. He belonged to the party of the Left (“Fort- Blood Ac- cusation. It was partly through his energy that the oath “ More Judaico” was repealed in 1869. Kosch, who was unmarried, bequeathed his for- tune to an orphan asylum of K6nigsberg. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1903, No. 41; H. Vogel- stein, in the Hartungsche Zeitung (K6nigsberg), evening ed., Oct. 5, 1903. s FY. Te KOSINI, LEVI. See Cosin, LEwI. KOSLOV. See EuPATORIA. KOSMINSKY, MARKS: Founder of the town of Nhill in the colony of Victoria, Australia; died there May 6, 1895. He founded most of the local. institutions, the hospital, Mechanics’ Institute, the Agricultural and Pastoral Society, the Masonic lodge, and the fire-brigade. He took an active part in the movement to provide the town with water, and it was through his efforts that local land-boards, courts, and public buildings were established. BIBLIOGRAPHY: yew. Chron. June 28, 1895. Ale G. L. KOSSARSKI, JULIUS: German poet; born 1812 at Bromberg; died there July 1, 1879. He went to Berlin to take up the study of literature, afterward studying philosophy and philology at the university. Ill health induced him, however, to return shortly to his native city, where he turned to numismatics. He published the following works: “Wallfahrt in Palistina” (1847); “Sagen des Mor- genlandes ” (1852); “ Der Ménch von Meran ” (1855); “Titus oder die Zerstérung von Jerusalem” (1855); and others. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Briimmer, Lexikon Deutscher Dichter und Prosaisten des 19. Jahrhunderts, p. 442; Kayserling, Die Jiidische Literatur von Moses Mendelssohn bis auf die Ge- genwart, pp. 164 et seq. s M. K. KOSSARSKI, LUDWIG: German poet and writer; brother of Julius Kossarskr; born 1810 at Bromberg; died Nov. 3, 1878, at Berlin. He stud- ied medicine at Berlin, but soon devoted himself en- tirely to German literature, becoming a contributor to several periodicals and journals. He published poems and stories, including: “ Nachklinge ” (1834); “ Dimmerungen, Novellen” (1840); “ Friedrich Wil- helm III.: Skizzen aus Seinem Leben in Poesie und Prosa ” (1840); “ Hier und Dort” (1855). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Briimmer, Lexikon Deutscher Dichter und Prosaisten des 19. Jahrhunderts, p. 443 8. M. Kg KOSTEL (PODIVIN): Townin Moravia. Its Jewish community is said to be the oldest in Mora- via. According to Cosmas of Prague (d. 1125), a Jew named Podiva founded (1067) the castle which was named after him “ Podivin”; this is still‘the Slavic name of the town (Pertz, “Monumenta Ger- mani Scriptores,” ix. 80; D’Elvert, “Zur Gesch. der Juden in Mihren und Oesterreich-Schlesien,” pp. 49, 52, Briinn, 1895; comp. Griitz, “Gesch.” vi. 61). This community may therefore be regarded in a cer- tain sense as the mother of the Moravian communities. Local documents relating to it do not, however, reach back further than 200 years. According to popular tradition, the synagogue was built about 150 years ago. The earliest tombstones are dated 1690, Kostel is one of the congregations of Moravia which possess the rights of a township. With its branch at Eisgrub—the summer residence of the 565 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kos Kovel sovereign Prince of Lichtenstein—it numbers about 500 persons (1908). Its institutions include a paro- chial school, a ritual bath, a hebra kaddisha, and a women’s society. The ofliciating rabbis have been: Aron Unger, last decade of the eighteenth century ; Markus Blatt, end of the eighteenth century to 1839; Samson Kulke, 1840-94, son-in-law of the late Rabbi Nehemiah Trebitsch of Nikolsburg; S. Mandl, 1895-99; present incumbent, Abraham Weiss, since 1899. The well-known ghetto poet Eduard Kulke, who portrayed in his stories types from his native community of Kostel, was a son of the above- mentioned Samson Kulke. D. S. Mbt. KOSTELIZ (COSTELLEZ), ABIGDOR BEN SIMON: Egyptian rabbi and cabalist; born before 1572; died 1659. He studied under Moses ha-Kohen, head of the yeshibah in Egypt, one of his fellow pupils being David ConrorrTsE. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, i. 2; Conforte, uae ha-Dorot, pp. 4la, 50a; Michael, Or ha-Hayyim, K.. M. SEL. KOVEL: District town in the government of Volhynia, Russia. In the beginning of the four- teenth century it was given by Gedemin to his grandson, Theodor Sangushko, and in 1518 the Magdeburg Rights were granted to it by Sigis- mund I. About the beginning of the sixteenth cen- tury the Jews and Christians of Kovel were freed from military duties in return for a specified con- tribution for various government needs. In 1540 the Jews of Kovel together with those of other Lithuanian towns protested to King Sigismund against an accusation made by a baptized Jew that they were preparing to remove with all their pos- sessions to Turkey, and that meanwhile they were killing or circumcising Christian children. The court appointed by the king established the inno- cence of the Lithuanian Jews. In response toa petition of the Kovel Jews, Queen Bona ordered in 1547 that the Jewish house-owners be relieved from the payment of the annual taxes, and that, instead, they pay on each house a yearly tax of one gold ducat. People living in rented houses were to pay one-half gold ducat per year; but the house occupied by the rabbi was to be ex- empt. As to other duties, the Jews were to share them with the remaining inhabitants of the town; and they were also to share their privileges. This document was presented for entry in the city records by the Jewish citizen Hirsh Itzkovich. Some years later (1556) Queen Bona decreed, in response to the - petition of a number of the burghers of Kovel, that Jews be forbidden to reside in the market-place, and that it should be the duty of the magistrate of Kovel to see that Jews owning houses in the market- place should remove to the Jewish streets, in ac- cordance with a tradition which precluded them from being numbered at the census among the Christians. On the other hand, the queen ordered that Christians living in the Jewish streets should remove thence and, in accordance with the custom of other towns in the district, should own no houses there. This document was successively confirmed by Sigismund August and Sigismund III. About 1565 the town was presented by King Sig- ismund August to the Russian prince Andrei Mik- hailovich Kurbski, who had been induced to betray his country and to enter the service of the Polish king. Escaping with his followers from Yuryev (Dorpat) to Lithuania, Kurbski established him- self within sixteen miles of Kovel, which he ruled through trusted agents, and often compelled the Jews to advance him large sums of money. On July 14, 1569, his agent at Kovel, Ivan Kelemet, attacked the Jews at the instigation of a baptized Jew named Lavrin, and, in defiance of their ancient rights and privileges, placed Yuska Shmoilovich, Avram Yakovovich, and Bogdana, the wife of Agron, in a dungeon in which was much water, and closed and sealed all the houses, stores, and tav- erns of the Jews with all their merchandise, personal property, and provisions. Some Jews of Vladimir having protested against this action, Kelemet stated that he was merely carrying out the wishes of Prince Kurbski, who was free to punish the Jews of Kovel, who were his subjects, as he pleased. He also ad- mitted that he had placed the two Jews and the Jewess in the dungeon and had immersed them up to their necks because they, having become security for Agron Natanovich, had failed to produce him at the appointed time. The matter was carried by the Jews to the king at the Diet of Lublin, and he ordered the release of the imprisoned Jews. Kele- met, however, refused to recognize the royal decree, claiming that he was subject only to his master, Prince Kurbski; and he ordered all the Jews of Kovel to leave the town on the following day. After an imprisonment of five weeks (doubtless not in the dungeon) the prisoners were liberated by order of Kurbski, who was finally compelled to obey the royal decree. He gave directions also for the removal of the seals from the synagogue, houses, and stores belonging to the Jews; but at the same time he warned them that he would obtain satisfac- tion from them at a future time. Notwithstanding these threats, however, the prince continued to deal with the Jews and to borrow money from them, as is shown by his will dated June 5, 1581, wherein he admits that he owes Mordecai Shichich of Kovel 100 gold ducats. This debt and sums owing by Kurbski to other Jews remained unpaid in 1585; and the creditors were obliged to bring suit against the estate. In 1616 the burghers of Kovel complained to the king that the Jews bought up taverns and houses without having the right to do so, thus crowding out the Christians, some of whom had been reduced to beggary by the unjust exactions of Under Kurbski. Petitions the Jews; that the latter farmed the Against taxesimposed by the Diet, as well as Jews. private taxes; that by exacting enor- mous profits the Jews were ruining the town, in consequence of which people were re- moving from it; and, finally, that the Jews took no interest in providing for the repair of the walls and in guarding the town. The king appointed a com- mission to investigate the complaint, and to render a decision, each side to have the right to appeal to the king within six months thereafter. Kéves Kovno THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 566 The resentment of the Christian merchants against their more successful Jewish competitors was in- tensified during the following thirty years, and found emphatic expression in the turbulent times of Cumreunicni. In 1648 the magistrate of Kovel reported to the authorities at Vladimir that the local burghers had helped the Cossacks to drown both the Jews and the Catholics who had remained in the town, being unable to get away on account of their extreme poverty. In 1670 King Michael issued at Warsaw a grant of privileges, containing among other items a recapit- ulation of a document issued by Sigismund III. in March, 1609, in which the Jews of Kovel were ordered to share with the Christian burghers the cost of re- pairing the town walls and the performance of sen- try duty. There is also recapitulated a document issued by Ladislaus IV. March 28, 1685, confirming the decree issued by Queen Bona in which the Jews were ordered to live and to build their houses in a separate street; also a document of Sigismund III. providing that the taxes should be paid direct to the collector and not to the Jews, who usually farmed them from the collector, thereby ruining the town and injuring the burghers. In 1661 there were only twenty Jewish house-owners in Kovel. Of the history of the Kovel community from the seventeenth to the nineteenth century, no informa- tion of importance is forthcoming. In 1898 the Jewish community numbered 6,046 souls in a total population of 17,304. It hada Tal- mud Torah, a synagogue, and a number of charita- ble institutions. Among the more prominent Jews were: Aaron Solomon Feuerman (d. 1897); H. Gel- ler, the Hebrew journalist; Rabbi Yehudah Idl; Dr. Perelman; and Rabbi L6b Gershonov Diament. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Regesty, i. s.v.; Russko-Yevreiski Arkhiv, i. and ii., passim; Ha-Zefirah, 1898, No. 160; Antonovich, Monografiya po Istorii Zapadnot i Yugo-Zapadnoi Rossii, i., Kiev, 1885. Ae Crs Ibe ERs KOVES, JOSEPH: Hungarian painter; born at Nagy Karoly 18538. When only fourteen he left home, and, earning his living as he went, arrived two months later at Budapest, where he became a mer- chant. When twenty-two years of age he entered a drawing-school, graduating as a teacher of draw- ing in 1879. In the following year he went to Paris, where he became a pupil of Fleury, Lau- rens, Le Roux, and others. In 1882 he returned to Budapest, where he has since resided. Many of his paintings deal with Jewish subjects; among these may be mentioned: “Homeless”; “The Jews in the Triumphal Procession of Titus”; “Moses Mendelssohn and Frederick the Great”; “Spinoza and His Judges”; “ King Mathias and His Wife Wel- comed by the Jews of Ofen”; “The Disputation at Tortosa”; etc. He was commissioned by the gov- ernment to make a painting of the national hero Johann Hunyadi. BTA Noe BBs igo: BA gn aa Familienblatt, s. im, 4, del: KOVNER, SAVELI GRIGORYEVICH: Russian physician; born at Wilna 1887; died at Kiev Sept. 22, 1896; graduated from the University of St. Vladimir, Kiev, in 1865. He remained at the same university as a stipendiary to prepare for a profess- orship, but in 1867 was appointed city physician at Yalutorovsk, government of Tobolsk, and shortly afterward transferred as county physician to Ne- zhin. In 1873 he was appointed chief physician of the Nezhin Hospital and physician of the Lyceum of Prince Bezborodko. In 1879 he gave up his position in order to devote himself entirely to science. Kovner settled permanently at Kiev in 1890. In 1865 he published “Spinoza and His Philoso- phy.” Knowing the classical languages as wellas ~ Hebrew and Arabic, he made a special study of the history of medicine, the results of which are con- tained in “ Drevnyayai Srednevyekovaya Meditzina” (3 vols., Kiev, 1879). In the first volume of this work there is a chapter on the practise of medicine among the Jews, which constitutes a valuable addi- tion to the history of Jewish civilization. Of his contributions to various Hebrew periodicals the most valuable is “ Ha-Rambam be-Tor Rofe,” in “ Ha- Meliz,” 1895. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Khronika Voskhoda, 1896, No. 38; Ahiasaf, p. 319, Warsaw, 1897. H. R. MR: KOVNO or KOVNA: Russian fortified city in the government of the same name; situated at the junction of the Viliya and the Niemen. There is documentary evidence that Jews lived and traded in Kovno toward the end of the fifteenth century. At the time of the expulsion of the Jews from Lithuania by Alexander Jagellon (1495) the post of assessor of Kovno was held by ABRAHAM JEsorovicu. By an edict dated Oct. 25, 1528, King Sigismund awarded to Andrei Procopovich and the Jew Ogron Nahimovich the farming of the taxes on wax and salt in the district of Kovno (“Me- trika Litovskaya Sudebnykh Dyel,” No. 4, fol. 20b). In the Diet of 1547 a proposition was submitted to the King of Poland to establish at Kovno, Brest- Litovsk, Drissa, and Salaty governmental timber depots, in order to facilitate the export of timber, and to Jevy on the latter a tax for the benefit of the government. This measure found favor owing to the claim that the Jewish and Christian merchants of Kovno and of other towns derived large profits from the business, while they at the same time de- frauded the owners of the timber and encouraged the destruction of the forests. The proposition was adopted by the Diet and sanctioned by the king (“Kniga Posolskaya Metriki Litovskoi,” i. 86). In 1558 a Jew of Brest-Litovsk, David Shmerle- vich, and his partners obtained a monopoly of the customs duties of the city of Kovno on wax and salt for three years, for an annual payment of 4,000 kop groschen (“ Aktovyya Knigi Metriki Litovskoi, Zapisi,” No. 37, fol. 161). David of Kovno, a Jew- ish apothecary, is mentioned in a lawsuit (Oct. 20, 1559) with Moses Yakimovich, a Jew of Lyakhovich (“Aktovyya Knigi Metriki Litovskoi In the Sudnykh Dyel,” No. 39, fol. 24b). By Sixteenth an agreement of about the same date Century. between Kusko Nakhimovich, a Kovno Jew, and Ambrosius Bilduke, a citizen of Wilna, it would seem that the latter had beaten and wounded the Kovno rabbi Todros, and that 567 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Koves Kovno Kusko, in consideration of 2 kop groschen, had set- tled the case and was to have no further cluim against Bilduke (/.c. No. 41, fol. 120). From a decree issued by King Stephen Bathori Feb. 8, 1578, it is evident that Jews were living in Kovno at that time (“Akty Zapadnoi Rossii,” iii. 221). Another document (June 19, 1579), presented to Stephen Bathori by the burghers of Troki, both Catholic and Greek-Catholic, and by the Jews and Tatars, contains their petition concerning the Christian merchants of Kovno, who had prohibited the complainants from entering the city with their merchandise, and from trading there; this in spite of the fact that the burghers of Troki had from time immemorial enjoyed the privilege of trading in Kovno on an equality with the other merchants, both Christian and Jewish, of the grand duchy of Lithuania. In reply, the king ordered the Kovno merchants not to interfere for the time being with the Jewish and other merchants of Troki, and prom- ised an examination of the complaint at the end of the war then in progress (“Akty Gorodov Wilna, Kovno, i Troki,” ii. 175). On March 28, 1589, Aaron Sholomovich, leader of the Jewish community at Troki, in his own name, and in behalf of his Jewish brethren of Troki, complains to King Sigismund of the merchants of Kovno, who have forbidden the Jews of Troki to trade in Kovno, and have confiscated their wares in defiance of privileges granted by the Polish kings and by the Grand Duke of Lithuania. In response to this complaint the king orders the magistrate of Kovno, Prince Albrecht Radziwill, to protect the Jews of Troki from molestation by the native mer- chants (2). ii. 180). A document issued twelve years later (Aug. 14, 1601) shows that the Jews of Grodno and of other Lithuanian towns were deprived of the old privilege of shipping to Kovno grain, salt, and herring, re- taining only the right to trade at retail and to keep inns (“ Akty Wilenskoi Arkhivnoi Kommissii,” vii. 108, 125; “Akty Yuzhnoi i Zapadnoi Rossii,” ii. 18). At the beginning of the eighteenth century the Jews of Kovno made an agreement with the Chris- tian merchants of that city whereby the former in return for the privileges of residence In the and trading in Kovno assumed the Eighteenth obligation to pay a fifteenth part of Century.- all the taxes and of the city expendi- tures. In time, however, the docu- ments relating to this compact were lost, and the merchants began to oppress the Kovno Jews and to withdraw from them their privileges. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court of Poland at Warsaw, and by a decision of Sept. 14, 1758, the Jews were given the right to reside only in the dis- trict of Starochinska. They were allowed also to trade at the fairs. A few years later Proser was ap- pointed mayor of Kovno, and he began to persecute the Jews not only in the city, but throughout his jurisdiction. In 1761 he instigated a riot during which the Jewish houses of the district were burned. When Christian neighbors attempted to stop the ex- cesses of the mob, they were prevented by the offi- cials. After the rebuilding of the Jewish dwellings Proser drove the Jews out of the city. The case was carried to the Supreme Court, which ordered (Jan. 20, 1766) an investigation of the wrongs in- flicted upon the Jews, and compensation for the losses sustained by them; these latter to be deter- mined by the findings of a commission appointed for that purpose. The mayor and his followers, fearing the result of the investigation, attempted to discredit it, and to place obstacles in the way of the commission. As the oppression of the Jews was not discontinued, the leaders of the Jewish community of Slobodka, a suburb of Kovno, brought the matter before the Supreme Court. In 1781 Prince Carl Stanislaus Radziwil, the owner of Slobodka, intervened, and showed that great injustice had been and was being done to the Jews. In 1782 the court ordered the city of Kovno to pay to the Jews damages amount- ing to 15,000 florins besides the costs of the case. The mayor of Kovno and his associates were sen- tenced to two weeks’ imprisonment (A. Tabilovski, in “ Keneset Yisrael,” i. 57, Warsaw, 1886). There is in the possession of the heirs of Rabbi Isaac Zeeb Soloveichik of Kovno a megillah, bear- ing the Hebrew date 1 Adar II., 5548, The Kovno and written in commemoration of the Megillah. granting of the right of residence to the Jews of Kovno by King Stanislaus Augustus Poniatowski (1783). Therein it is stated that Jews had lived in Kovno since ancient times, and that when they were driven out of the city in 1753, they had found an asylum in the suburb of Kovno, then a part of the king’s private estate. When they were again expelled, in 1761, all their houses and the synagogue had been plundered and destroyed by the mob. The megillah lauds the king’s generosity, and praises those members of the community who had taken an active part in defend- ing the rights of their brethren. These were Rabbi Moses of Kovnoand Slobodka and his brother Abra- ham, the sons of Rabbi Isaac Soloveichik. They also built the large synagogue in Slobodka, which was then known as Williampol. The author of the megillah, as appears from an acrostic contained in it, was Samuel ha-Katan of Wilna, a resident of Kovno. The style shows that he was a learned man and a fluent Hebrew writer. Fuenn thinks that he was the Samuel ha-Katan who had an only son Joseph, as is mentioned on a tombstone over the grave of Zipporah, Joseph’s daughter, in the Kovno cemetery (Fuenn, “ Kiryah Ne’emanah,” p. 196, Wilna, 1860). A manuscript Hebrew prayer- book entitled “ Kol Bo,” preserved in the synagogue of Brest-Litovsk, was written by Samuel ha-Katan, undoubtedly the writer of the megillah. In 1887 the Jewish community of Kovno (inclu- ding Slobodka) numbered about 36,000 persons. In 1911 the total population was 87,986, of whom about one-half were Jews. It had twenty-five synagogues and prayer-houses, and many yeshibot supported by wealthy men, one of them by Lachman of Berlin. The leader of the students in the yeshibot was Isaac Blaser, formerly of St. Petersburg. In 1876 the society Mahzike ‘Ez-Hayyim was founded by Siisman Novikhovich and Hirsh Rabinovich, rabbi of Mitau, for the study of the Talmud, rabbinical literature, and the Hebrew language. The Talmud Kovno Kraus THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 568 ase ak re er mar ec Torah has from 300 to 400 pupils, and a teaching staff of 6 “melammedim” and 6 teachers of Hebrew, Russian, and arithmetic. The annual expenditure of the Talmud Torah amounts to about 1,600 rubles, and is provided for out of the meat-tax and by pri- vate contributions, in addition to 15 per cent of the income from the cemetery. There is another Tal- mud Torah, situated in the more modern portion of the city, knownas “ Neuer Plan,” and connected with the synagogue Nahalat Yisrael. It has 50 pupils and 2 teachers. The non-Jewish middle-class schools in the city of Kovno showed in 1887 the following proportion of Jewish pupils: classical gymnasium for boys 104 Jews in a total of 369; classical gym- nasium for girls 115 Jewish girls in a total of 310 (“ Voskhod,” 1888, iv. 4). The hospital was reorganized in 1813 by Benjamin Ze’cb ben Jehiel, father of Rabbi Zebi Naviyazer, and Eliezer Lieberman. They began a new pinkes in place of the one lost at the time of Napoleon’s invasion (1812), when the inhabitants fled, and the city archives, including the pinkes, disappeared in the ensuing disorder. In 1854 Hirsh Naviyazer made great efforts in be- half of the hospital and succeeded in collecting enough funds to erect a stone building for the Philan- institution. In1875Tanhuma Levinson thropic and Ze’eb Frumkin reorganized the bos- and Chari- pital on a modern basis. The annual table In- income and expenditure are each about stitutions. 15,000 rubles. There are accommoda- tions for more than 600 patients; and 4,000 patients are treated annually in the dispensary. Among the other philanthropic and charitable or- ganizations of Kovno may be mentioned the societies known as “Somak Nofelim” and “Gemilut Hesed,” the former founded in 1862 by Zebi Shafir, and Isaac Zeeb, father of Joseph Dob, rabbi of Brest-Litovsk (Fuenn, “Keneset Yisrael,” ii. 163). The hebra kaddisha was founded in 1862. Of the leaders of the community (in the 19th cent.) may be mentioned Israel Bacharach, Abraham Dembo, Nahman Reich- seligman, Fishel Kahn, Ezekiel Jaffe, Solomon Osinsky, and Lieberman Shakhovski, grandson of Eliezer Shakhovski. Rabbi Israel Lipkin, known widely as Rabbi Israel Salanter, was prominent in the life of the Kovno community during the latter half of the nineteenth century. He successfully conducted for many years the local yeshibah. His son, Lipman Lipkin, Abraham Mapu, and the lat- ter’s brother were all born in Kovno. A statistical study of the Jewish artisans in 1887 shows that in the city and district of Kovno there were 5,479 masters, 1,148 assistants, and 766 appren- tices, distributed among the different trades. The greatest numbers of mas- ters were to be found in the following trades: tailors and seamstresses, 445; shoemakers and workers in allied trades, 380; cigar- and cigarette-makers, 866; butchers and fishermen, 330; bakers, 445; gardeners and truckers, 338; drivers and coachmen, 509; common laborers, 595. Jewish artisans were also well represented among book- binders, carpenters, blacksmiths, machinists, masons, brick-makers, brewers, wine-makers, barbers, and millers (“ Voskhod,” 1889, i.—vi.). Joby lee Jewish Artisans. KOWNER, ABRAHAM URI: Russian He- brew critic; born at Wilna about 1887. He became renowned on account of a campaign which he conducted against many of the Hebrew Maskilim and which called forth violent polemics between himself and the latter. He first published his arti- cles in “Ha-Karmel” and “Ha-Meliz”; then he wrote against the editors of those papers. Kowner was afterward involved in a bank defalcation, on account of which he was banished to Tomsk, Siberia, where he embraced Christianity and became a gov- ernment official. : He published his criticisms and other essays in two small volumes: “ Heker Dabar,” Warsaw, 1865; and “ Zeror Perahim,” Odessa, 1868. The first work contains, after criticisms on Mitzkun’s “ Kinnor Dawid” and Lerner’s “ Moreh ha-Lashon,” an essay on the place of the Hebrew language in modern education. He wrote this essay in answer to the questions of the government published in the “Kievlyanin ” concerning the education of the Jews. Among other questions were the following: “In what way can culture be spread among the Jews?” “Should the books be written in Hebrew or in Judzo-German?” Kowner declared that the He- brew language must be adapted to modern require- ments; otherwise it were better to write in Judeo- German. The main thing was that the Jews must | be instructed; therefore, there was no need of He- brew books filled with poetical and antiquated ex- pressions. He praises highly Lewinsohn, Slonim- ski, Mapu, and Erter, whose Hebrew works brought much good to the Jews, as well as the Judeo-German writers. But he castigates all the others; proving that not only is there no utility in their works, but that they corrupt the Hebrew language. ; The second work is an answer to the attacks of his contemporaries, which, it must be admitted in justice to Kowner, while pretending to refute his criticism, consist only of insults. Zederbaum is most of all criticized in this work as the editor of “ Ha- Meliz,” while in the first work he is praised for his editing of a Judeo-German newspaper entitled “Kol Mebasser.” Kowner contributed also to “ Yev- reiskaya Biblioteka” and other Russian periodicals. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ha-Meliz, 1868, No. 16; Sistematicheski Ukazatel, Index. H.R. M. SEL. KOZZI, MOSES. See Mosrss. JAcosp or Coucy. KRACZWSKI, JOS. IGNATZ. See Ponanp. KRAMER, MOSES BEN DAVID: Lithu- anian Talmudist of the seventeenth century; died at Wilna Oct. 19, 1683. After officiating as rabbi in a number of Lithuanian cities, he in 1628 went in the same capacity to Wilna. His contemporaries, who refer to him frequently, mention him as an impor- tant Talmudist. He left no works except a few glosses, which are contained (1) in “Rosh Yosef” by his son-in-law, Joseph ben Jacob, (2) in “Zera‘ Yisrael” by his grandson Jacob ben Joseph, and (3) in “Pi Shenayim.” Kriimer is still the subject of many local tales in Wilna, where marvels are re- lated of his piety and scholarship. Among his de- scendants was Elijah of Wilna. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fuenn, Kiryah Ne’emanah, p. 95. Ss A. PE 569 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kovno Kraus KRAMSZTYK, ISAAC: Polish writer and preacher; born at Warsaw 1814; died there 1889. He graduated from the rabbinical school of War- saw, in which he became a teacher, filling that posi- tion up to the closing of the institution in 1862. He at the same time was preacher in the synagogue of Warsaw. At first he preached in German; but out of patriotism he in 1852 delivered the first ser- mon in Polish, which aroused the ire of certain fanatics. Kramsztyk officiated as preacher without any remuneration up to 1868, with an intermission of a few months in 1861-62 spent at Bobruisk. From 1863 to 1868 he lived in Saratov. Kramsztyk’s works in Polish were: “Mowa Miana,” etc., a sermon at the consecration of the synagogue (1852); “ Przeklad Przyslow Salomona” (1867), a translation of Proverbs, with a commen- tary; “Prawda Wieczna,” etc. (1871), on the eternal truth, or the foundation of the Mosaic religion (1871); and “ Kazania,” a collection of his sermons, with biographical notes (published posthumously, Cracow, 1892). BIBLIOGRAPHY: Orgelbrand, Hncyklopedja Powszechna, Warsaw, 1900. H. R. M. R. KRAMSZTYK, STANISLAUS: Polish nat- uralist; born at Warsaw 1841; son of Isaac Kram- sztyk; educated at the Warsaw gymnasium, and studied medicine in the Medico-Surgical Academy, and physics and mathematics in the University, whence he was graduated in 1866 as master of natu- ral sciences. Unable, on account of his religion, to obtain an appointment as teacher in the gymnasium, Kramsztyk took a position in the Polish Bank at Warsaw, where he was employed until the clos- ing of the same in 1886. Simultaneously he was a teacher in the Commercial College and in various private schools. Kramsztyk’s literary activity began in 1862, when he became a collaborator on the Polish periodical “Przyjaciel Dzieci.” Since 1868 he has also con- tributed largely to the “ Wszechswiat,” “ Ateneum,” “Biblioteka Warszawska,” “Przeglad Pedago- giczny,” and other periodicals. His most important works are: “Fizyka,” War- saw,1876;“ Wyklad Arytmetiki Handlowy” (Manual on Commercial Arithmetic), 1879; ‘“ Wiadomosci Poczatkawe z Fizyki,” on the rudiments of physics, 7b. 1883 (2d ed. 1886; Russian transl. 1896) ; “ Fizyka bez Przyrzadow,” 2 vols., 1891-98; “Szkice Przy- radnicze z Dziedziny Fizyki Geofizyki i Astron- omji,” 1893; “Ziemia i Niebo,” 1898; “Komety i Gwiazdy Spadajace,” 1899; “Bibljoteczka Nauk Przyrodniczych” (Little Library of Natural Sci- ences), 3 vols. He also translated: Mohn’s “The Bases of Meteorology,” 1883; Ball’s “ Experimental Mechanics,” 1894; Mack’s “ Popular Scientific Lec- tures,” 1899; Helmholtz’s “On the Relation of Nat- ural Sciences to Other Branches of Knowledge.” Kramsztyk edited the department of natural sciences of the “ Encyklopedja Powszechna,” and is the editor.of the department in the latest edition of that work. On the Great Illustrated Polish Encyclo- pedia he has charge of the department of physics and astronomy. H. R. M. R. KRANZ, JACOB. KRANZ OF DUBNO. KRASNOPOLSKI, HORACE: Austrian ju- rist; born Nov. 5, 1842, at Pistyn, Galicia, where he received his earliest education in the heder. From 1858 to 1861 he attended the gymnasium at Czerno- witz, in the latter year entering the University of Prague, where he studied law and graduated in 1868. In 1871 he attended the lectures of Thdl, Roscher, and Wachter at the universities of Gdt- tingen and Leipsic, and in 1872 became privat-docent of commercial and Austrian civil law at the Uni- versity of Prague, his inaugural dissertation being: “ Kinleitung in die Lehre von der Zession der Forder- ungsrechte”; im 1876 he was appointed assistant professor, in 1881 professor, of Austrian civil law. He was thrice dean (“dekan”) of the juridical fac-' ulty—in 1883, 1891, and 1896. Krasnopolski wrote: “ Die Haftung Aussergenos- senschaftlicher Verbindlichkeiten”; “Ueber die Priorititsabtretung ”; “Die Gewerbenovelle vom 8. Mirz, 1885”; “Studien iber das Anfechtungsrecht der Glaubiger nach Vesterreichischem Recht ”; “ Das Anfechtungsrecht der Gliubiger nach Oesterreichi- schem Recht Systematisch Dargestellt”; “Zur Lehre von den Vertrigen zu Gunsten Dritter”; “Zur Auslegung des § 68 des Allgemeinen Burger- lichen Gesetzbuches”; “Das Ehehindernis der Hodheren Weihen”; “Die Haftpflicht der EHisen- bahnen nach Oeéesterreichischem Recht” (in the See JACOB BEN WoLF “Staats-Woérterbuch”); “Lehrbuch des Oester- reichischen Privatrechtes” (1904). He died Sept. 18, 1908. Xs 1sGe KRAUS, ADOLF: American lawyer; born at Blowitz, Bohemia, Feb. 26, 1850; emigrated to the United States at the age of fifteen, and worked suc- cessively on a farm, in a factory, and ina store. In 1871 he went to Chicago, Il., and while engaged in mercantile pursuits studied law and was admitted to the bar (1877). Kraus attained to prominence in his profession; and, notwithstanding the claims of an extensive practise, he has always found time to take an active part in local public affairs. He has been a member of the board of education (1881-87), serving two years as its president; he was appointed corporation counsel in 1893; and was the second president of the civil service commission (1897), Fora time he was editor and proprietor of the “ Chicago Times.” Kraus is likewise interested in Jewish communal affairs, being a grand officer of the I. O. B. B., presi- dent of Isaiah Temple, Chicago, and a member of the executive board of the Union of American He- brew Congregations. A. J. Sro. KRAUS, ALFRED, BARON VON: Austrian general; born 1822 at Pardubitz, Bohemia; the son of a Jewish tenant-farmer. He received his early education, which was strictly Orthodox, from his cousin Joseph Kisch, father of Heinrich and Alexan- der Kisch. At the age of thirteen he went to Prague, where he attended the gymnasium and subsequently studied law at the university. After taking his de- gree and accepting baptism, he entered the army, where he received appointments befitting his legal Kraus Krefeld THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 570 attainments. At Mantua in 1849 he conducted the trial of Orsini, who had been arrested there; and at Parma he conducted the trial of the murderer of its duke. He then entered the adjutant corps as cap- tain, and was appointed, with the rank of major, aide- de-camp to General Degenfeld, the minister of war. For a number of years he was connected with the imperial military court, acting as deputy president from 1869 to 1880. é In April, 1881, Kraus was appointed president of the Military Supreme Court, and was decorated with the Order of the Iron Crown of the second class. In July of the same year he became governor-general of Bohemia, receiving other decorations and the title of privy councilor. He retired in 1896 and has since lived in Vienna. 8. Fx GG KRAUS, FRIEDRICH: Austrian physician; born at Bodenbach, Bohemia, May 31, 1851. He stud- ied at the gymnasium at Prague and at the univer- sities of that city and of Vienna, obtaining his M.D. degree in 1882. From that time until March, 1885, he was assistant in the Physiological-Chemical In- stitute of Prague, and in November of that year he took a similar position at the Pathological- Anatomical Institute in the same city. In 1888 he was appointed privat-docent in internal pathology at the University of Prague, a position which he held until 1890, when he became assistant to Kohler at the clinic of the Allgemeines Krankenhaus, Vi- enna. Kraus was made assistant professor in the University of Vienna in 1893, and a year later pro- fessor of medical pathology and therapeutics of the indoor clinic at Graz. Kraus, who has made a specialty of the study of alkalis and the oxidation of sugar in the blood, is the author of: “ Ueber Ermiidung als Mass der Con- stitution und iiber Siure Autointoxication ” ; “ Krank- heiten der Mundhodhle und Speiserdhre”; and “Krankheiten der Sogenannten Blutdriisen.” He is the author also of a number of articles on similar subjects in specialist magazines. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Pagel, Biog. Lex. 1901, pp. 910-911; Das Geistige Wien, ii. 280. s. E. Ms. KRAUS, LEOPOLD GOTTLIEB: Austrian physician ; born at Kolin, Bohemia, Dec. 22, 1824; died in 1901. He studied at the University of Prague, making a specialty of neurology, and obtained his degree in 1847, Kraus then became a practising phy- sician in Leipnik and Vienna. He was the author of: “Vollstaéndiges Therapeutisches Taschenbuch ” (1868); “ Compendium der Speciellen Pathologie und Therapie Unserer Haussiugetiere” (1867); “ Ency- klopiidisches Worterbuch der Staatsarzneikunde ” (1872-78); “ Compendium der Speziellen Pathologie und Therapie ” (1874); “Die Behandlung der Syphi- lis ” (1875) ; “ Die Hygiene” (1878). His brother Ber- nard Kraus was one of the first. contributors to the “Allgemeine Wiener Medicinische Zeitung” (1856- 1879) and to the “ Zeitschrift fiir Gerichtliche Medicin und Oeffentliche Gesundheitspflege ” (1865-68), BIBLIOGRAPHY : Das Geistige Wien, ii. 280-281, 8. E. Ms. KRAUSHAR, ALEXANDER: Polish jurist and author; born 1843 at Warsaw; educated at the Royal Gymnasium in that city and at the prepara- tory college instituted by the marquis Wielopolski, where he devoted himself to the study of juris- prudence and graduated master of law and admin- istration in 1866. He practised law till 1872, and was appointed to the high position of government advocate in the senatorial department of Warsaw (1878). Kraushar’s first literary products appeared in the “Jutrzenka”: “Kolko Domow,” “ Przeglad Ty- godniowy,” and “Niwa.” He has also published numerous articles in other literary periodicals of Warsaw and other cities. Among Kraushar’s numerous works, which treat mainly of historical subjects, are: “ Historie Zydow w Polsce” (2 vols., Warsaw, 1865-66), “Syn Pul- kownika Berka” (Frank i Frankisci Polscy, 2 vols., 1895), etc. His poetical compositions include “Ty- tana,” “ Argona z Koryntu,” “Strofy,” and “Elekcja w Babinie.” Kraushar has been elected member of learned societies in Paris, Posen, and Cracow, and has re- ceived a decoration from the reigning prince of Schaumburg-Lippe for his work “Sprawa Zyg- munta Unruga.” His wife, Jadwiga Krausharowa (b. Warsaw 1858), has written several important works, among them “ Jedua Noc,” “ Na Monte Pincio,” and “ Alfred de Musset ” (a biographical sketch). REN ES Encyklopedya Powsiechna, viii., Warsaw, 5. ASebe KRAUSKOPF, JOSEPH: American rabbiand author; born in Ostrowo, Prussia, Jan. 21, 1858. Heemigrated to America (New York) in July, 1872, and from New York he went to Fall River, Mass., where he found employment as clerk in a tea- store. Through the influence of friends Krauskopf secured admittance into the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati (Oct., 1875). While studying there and in the University of Cincinnati, Krauskopf acted as a tutor, contributed articles to journals, and pub- lished (with H. Berkowitz) “The First Union He- brew Reader” and “Second Union Hebrew Reader ” and “ Bible Ethics” (1888). He graduated from the university and from the Hebrew Union College (rabbi) in 1883. In 1885 the faculty of the college conferred upon him the degree of D.D. Krauskopf received and accepted a call from the Bnai Jehudah congregation in Kansas City, Mo. He was ap- | pointed by the governor of Missouri as a life-mem- ber of the Board of National Charities and Correc- — tions, and in 1885 was elected vice-president of the Pittsburg Conference, of which Dr. I. M. Wise was president. In the same year Krauskopf received a call from the Keneseth Israel congregation (Re- form) of Philadelphia. Krauskopf entered on his duties in Philadelphia, Oct. 19, 1887. He established a Sunday service in addition to the regular Sabbath service; under his ministration the congregation flourished, and has be- come one of the largest Jewish congregations in the United States. Seventeen volumes of Kraus- kopf’s lectures, embracing subjects in the fields of re- ligion, ethics, and social science, have been published since 1888. He aided in the organization of the H.R. 571 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kraus Krefeld eS SS SS EE eee Jewish Publication Society of America, in the spring of 1888. In the spring of the year 1894, when the stream of immigration of Russian Jewish exiles into the United States was at its fullest, Krauskopf resolved to visit Russia. He made a study of the condition of the Jews within the Pale of Settlement and of the agricultural colonies in the interior. One of the institutions Krauskopf visited was the Jewish Agri- cultural School at Odessa, the excellence of which so impressed him that immediately after his return to the United States he set to work to establish a National Farm School, at Doylestown, Pa.; Kraus- kopf is president of that institution. By his efforts Keneseth Israel succeeded in building its present house of worship in 1892. Shortly after the out- break of the Spanish-American war (1898), Kraus- kopf was chosen by the National Relief Commission as one of three special field commissioners instructed to visit the camps of the United States and Cuba, and to render such relief as was found necessary. In March, 1908, he was elected director-general of the I. M. Wise Memorial Fund, and in July of the same year president of the Central Conference of American Rabbis. Krauskopf is the author of the following: “The Jews and Moors in Spain” (1886); “Sunday Dis- courses ” (1887-1902); “The Evolution of Judaism ” (1887); “Service Ritual” (1888); “Service Manual ” (1892) ; “ Gleanings from Our Vineyard ” (1895); “ The Mourners’ Service” (1895); “ Sabbath-School Serv- ice” (1896); “Society and Its Morals” (1900); “A Rabbi’s Impressions of the Oberammergau Passion- Play” (1901); “The Seven Ages of Man” (1902); “Old Truths in New Books” (1902). A M. Go. KRAUSS, FRIEDRICH SALOMON (pseu- donym, Suljo Serhatlija): Austrian folklorist; born at Pozega, Slavonia, Oct. 7, 1859. He studied classical philology at the University of Vienna (Ph.D.), and then devoted himself to South-Slavo- nian folk-lore, which he was the first to investigate scientifically. He was commissioned by the Aus- trian crown prince Rudolph to travel through Bos- nia, Herzegovina, Slavonia, Croatia, and Dalmatia, where he discovered an unsuspected wealth of Mos- lem and Slavicsongs. For eight years he edited the folk-lore monthly “Am Urquell.” Krauss is the author of a great number of publi- cations, the most noteworthy of which are: “ Arte- midoros Symbolik der Triiume ” (1881), “Sagen und Miirchen der Siidslaven” (2 vols., 1883-84), “Siid- slavische Hexensagen ” (1884), “Siidslavische Pest- sagen” (1884), “Sitte und Brauch der Stidslaven ” (1885), “Volksglaube und Religidser Brauch der Siidslaven ” (1900); with L. Scherman, “ Allgemeine Methodik der Volkskunde ” (1899), “ Die Volkskunde in den Jahren 1897-1902,” “ Kiinstlerblut,” drama in four acts. Krauss was for a number of years secretary of the Israclitische Allianz zu Wien. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kosel, Biographien, pp. 354 et seq.; Eisen- berg, Biog. Lex. i. 286; Meyers Konversations- Lexikon. S. 15}, bing KRAUSS, SAMUEL: Hungarian philologist and historian; born in Ukk, a village in the county of Szala, Hungary, Feb. 18, 1866. At the age of eleven he was sent for two years to the Talmud school of the Lo Alman Yisrael society at Janoshaza, and he studied subsequently for more than three years at the Talmud school of Dr. Solomon Breuer, at the time rabbiat Papa. Hethen taught fora time in small villages, entered the rabbinical seminary at Budapest in 1884 (graduated 1889), took the theo- logical course in that institution, and attended lectures at the same time at the University of Buda- pest. He continued his studies at the Lehranstalt fiir die Wissenschaft des Judenthums and at the universities of Berlin (1892) and Giessen (Ph.D. 1893, his dissertation being “Zur Griechischen und Latei- nischen Lexicographie aus Jiidischen Quellen,” pub- lished in “Byyantinische Zeitschrift,” vol. ii). In 1894 Krauss was appointed professor of Hebrew at the Jewish teachers’ seminary at Budapest, a posi- tion which he still (1904) retains. In the same year he was ordained rabbi. Besides a large number of philological and _his- torical essays, Krauss has published: ‘“ Rendszeres Zsid6 Vallis es Erkélestan,” a manual of Jewish religion and ethics; “Talmudi Eletszabalyok és Erkélesi Tanitasok,” on Talmudic maxims and eth- ical teachings (Hungarian transl. of Derek Erez); “Griechische und Lateinische Lehnwdérter im Tal- mud, Midrasch, und Targum” (2 vols., with notes by Immanuel Léw, Berlin, 1898-99); “Das Leben Jesu nach Jiidischen Quellen” (7b. 1902). With W. Bacher and J. Ban6éczi he has edited the Hungarian translation of the Bible. 5. KREFELD: Prussian manufacturing town near Diisseldorf, in the province of the Rhine. Small neighboring villages, embraced in the former elect- orate of Cologne, and which probably contained Jews, are mentioned in accounts of persecutions as early as the First Crusade, but no Jewish commu- nity is spoken of in connection with Krefeld. While the first mention of Krefeld as a town dates back to the middle of the twelfth century, the first Jew to settle there was Jacob of Mors, in 1617. The Jew- ish population of Krefeld increased but slowly, and when the town, in 1702, came under Prussian con- trol, the community was still small. Eleven years after this a royal edict required the magistrate to admit only such Jews as had received the king’s permit. In 1765 Krefeld’s small Jewish community erected a synagogue at its own expense; up to that time it had worshiped with the neighboring congregation of Hills. In 1780 it contained but eleven Jewish families (about seventy individuals). In 1808 the synagogue there was rebuilt on a larger scale, L6b Karlsburg being installed as rabbi. Under the French government Krefeld formed a consistorial diocese, the Jews of which were citi- zens of the empire, with full legal rights. By the Peace of Paris (May 30, 1814) Krefeld became again a part of Prussia; the existing conditions were al- lowed to stand, but a cabinet order of March 8, 1818, renewed the Napoleonic edict of May 17, 1808, which had imposed restrictions on Jewish money-lenders during a term of ten years, although in France itself the edict had lapsed (see Jew. Encyc. v. 469, 8.0. FRANCE). Following R. Karlsburg, Dr. Ullmann Kremenetz Kremsir THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 572 (to Sept. 4, 1848), L. Bodenheimer (1845-68), and Dr. J. Horowitz (since 1869) have successively occupied the rabbinate. The present synagogue took the place of the old in 1853 (dedicated June 17). Jew- ish benevolence is exercised through a number of institutions, in addition to the usual societies, among them being the Verein zur Férderung und Unter- stiitzung des Handwerks und des Schulwesens im Rabbinatsbezirk Crefeld. Krefeld has a population of 129,406, including about 2,000 Jews. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Keussen, Die Stadt und Herrlichkeit Kre- felds, Krefeld, 1859; Salfela, Martyrologium, p. 418; Horo- witz, Festschrift zum 125 Jéhrigen Jubileum der Chebra Kadischa zu Crefeld, 1890; Roenne and Simon, Die Ver- hiiltnisse der Juden im Preussischen Staate, pp. 36 et seq. D. S. Sa. KREMENETZ (Polish, Krzemieniec): Dis- trict town in the government of Volhynia, Rus- sia. The Jews of Kremenetz are first-mentioned in a charter of privileges granted by the grand duke Svidrigaila of Lithuania May 9, 1438, to the way- wode of Kremenetz, the German Yurka. In this charter the latter is given jurisdiction over the Ruthenians, Poles, Wallachians, Germans, Arme- nians, Jews, and Tatars of the town. The next mention of Jews is under date of March 15, 15386, when Kremenetz had come under Polish rule. At that time King Sigismund granted the Magdeburg Rights to the city, which deprived the Jews of cer- tain commercial advantages. In an edict of Nov. 27, 1551, the Jewish community of Kremenetz is mentioned among those exempted from the payment of the special tax known as “Serebschizna” (tax on silver). This shows that it was not in a prosperous condition at that time—a conclusion which is sus- tained by the fact that in 1552 there were only 48 Jewish house-owners in the town. A few years later, however, wealthy Jewish mer- chants bid successfully on certain leases. In 1556 the Canon of Plock (Plotzk) and Warsaw, Yan Makovetzki, who was sent by the king to investi- gate the administrative affairs of the castle of Kre- menetz, reported that Avram (Abraham) Mosheye- vichand Pesakh Khaimovich, Jews of Kremenetz, bid for the lease of commercial taxes, inns, etc., the sum of 300 kop groschen per annum, an amount greatly in excess of that paid by the Christian leaseholders, the aldermen Semashko and Kuibyeda. ‘The king’s reply, characteristic of the contemporary policy of the Polish court, was: “ We should always endeavor to increase our income from the towns and castles; and through the competition of the Jews the value of our leases has always increased. This compe- tition may impel the Christians to bid even more.” Hence the king ordered that the leases be awarded to the Jews. The success of the Jewish tax-farmer Avram Mosheyevich led to an attempt at retaliation by the previous tax-farmer, the alderman Semashko, as appears from a document dated July 4, 1557. In a lawsuit brought by the Jew Eska Zelmanovich against Avram Mosheyevich, Semashko, who acted as judge, decided in favor of the for- mer, but the decision was reversed on appeal to the king, who had ordered the case to be brought before him. Five other Jewish leaseholders, Levon Itzkhako- vich, Pesakh Khaimovich, Moshe and Yanush Lease- holding. Davidovich, and Eska Kheskilovich, are mentioned in a document dated Dec. 15, 1557. The prediction of the king as to the increase in revenue owing to the competition of the Jews was fulfilled; for it appears that the leases and taxes of Kremenetz, which formerly had been farmed for 450 kop groschen per annum, were now leased for the annual sum of 600 kop groschen to a non-resident, the Jew Jacob Felixovich, son of the well-known Felix, manager of the Wilna mint. In the second half of the sixteenth century the community of Kremenetz was much less important than those of other Volhynian towns, as is evidenced by the apportionment of taxes among the Jewish communities of Lithuania on July 25, 1563. A cen- sus of Kremenetz taken in that year shows that the Jews owned property as follows: on Hill street, 13 lots; on Middle street, 554 lots; on the Jewish street, 67 lots; on Resurrection street (Voskresenskaya), 11 lots; on Viesnevetzkaya street, 94 lots; on Grand street, 14 lots; on Khrusvitzka street, 124 lots. Among the buildings, the synagogue, the Jewish meeting-house, the houses of Rabbi Samuel, of two other rabbis, and of Bella, a rabbi’s wife, the Jew- ish hospital, and the house of the Jewish sexton are mentioned. The most important Jewish prop- erty-owners were Sarko and certain members of his family. According to the above-mentioned tax schedule, Kremenetz was to pay 140 kop groschen, while Vladimir was to pay 500, Lutzk 550, and Ostrog 600. In 1569 by an edict of King Sigismund August, the Jews cf Kremenetz were placed under the jurisdiction of the waywode Alexander Czar- toryski. Perles, in his “Gesch. der Juden in Posen” (“ Mo- natsschrift,” 1864, p. 366, note), mentions Kremenetz as one of the places where the Council of Four Lands was held in 1607, and where the “Takkanot” were drawn up. This statement, which has been ac- cepted by Graetz and other historians, is an errone- ous one; for in that year the Council was held at the “Gramnitza ” (Candlestick) fair at Lublin—the similarity of the two names doubtless causing the. error (see Harkavy, “ Hadashim gam Yeshanim,” p. 38, in supplement to the Hebrew edition of Graetz’s “Gesch.” vol. vii.). Yom-Tob Lipman HELLER in his “ Megillat Ebah ” refers to Kremenetz in connection with the Council of Four Lands in 1685. Duting the Cossack up- rising (1648-49) many thousands of Jews were killed in Kremenetz; but the community was not entirely destroyed, as is evidenced by the edict of King John Casimir, dated Jan. 26, 1650, renewing its charter of privileges. But little is known of the life of the Kremenetz community during the eighteenth century. Among the rabbis who were called to take part in the debate with the Frankists in 1757 was a certain Joseph Kremenetz of Moghilef (Podolia). His name indicates either that he was born in Kremenetz or that he had officiated there as rabbi before he went to Moghilef. Jekuthiel Solomon, the great-grandfather of Isaac Bir Levinsohn, who acquired considerable wealth, was a native of Kremenetz. Levinsohn’s grand- father Isaac, his father-in-law, the wealthy and learned Zalman Cohen, and his father, Judah Le- 573 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Kremenetz Kremsir vin, who also was a wealthy merchant and was equally popular among Jews and Gentiles, like- wise livedthere. At the beginning of the nineteenth century Kremenetz gained fame through its son Isaac Bir Levinsohn, “the Russian Mendelssohn,” as he was sometimes called. His presence there at- tracted to Kremenetz many scholars and friends of learning. Levinsohn’s friend, Mendel Landsberg, was known in the literary world for his extensive collection of books. Aryeh Léb Landsberg, who died at Odessa in 1861, and his son David Isaac, who was an instructor at the Hebrew school in that town, also came from Kremenetz. The Hebrew poet A. B. Gottlober resided for some years in the town. Since the organization of the Kremenetz community many noted rabbis have held office. Prominent among them have been: Abraham Hazzan (d. 1510), author of “* Hibbure Leket”” ; Isaac ha-Kohen (d. 1573), president of the yeshibah ; Mordecai Jaffe (d. 1612), author of ‘* Lebushim” (c. 1590-92); Simson ben Bezaleel, brother of Liva (Maharil) of Prague; Aaron Samuel b. Moses Shalom (d. 1617), author of ‘‘ Mishnat Adam” and ** Be’er Sheba‘; Abraham, who was elected to the Council of Four Lands in 1595 (Perles, in ‘* Monatsschrift,”” 1864); Moses Harif Hayyim (d. 1649); Meir, a de- scendant of Liva ben Bezaleel and of Mordecai Jaffe (7), lived at the beginning of the eighteenth century; Samuel, who claimed (1690) that the Karaites could never be recognized as true brethren of the Rabbinite Jews; Johanan ben Meir (a. 1724), author of ** Orah Mishor”’; Phoebus (d. 1770), author of ““Mishnat Hakamim~’; Jacob Israel (d. 1788), preacher, author of ‘“Shebet mi-Yisrael’’; David Zebi ben Aryeh Lob Auerbach (d. 1793); Shalom Zebi ben Naphtali Rokeah of Brody (d. 1811); Mordecai ben Michael (d. 1817). In 1912 the total population of Kremenetz was 18,752, of whom about one-third were Jews. They are actively interested in the grain and tobacco trade with Austria. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Russko-Yevreiski Arkhiv, ti., passim, St. Petersburg, 1882; Regesty, i., passim, ib. 1899; Gratz, Gesch. Hebrew ed. by Rabinowitz, vols. vii. and viii. s.v. R KREMER, MOSES B. DAVID. See Kri- MER, Moses B. DAVID. S KREMNITZER, JOHANAN B. MEIR: Polish rabbinical author; lived in the seventeenth century at Kalisz. He wrote “Orah Mishor” (Sulzbach, 1692), a commentary on “Darke Mosheh” to Yoreh De‘ah, by Moses Isserles. Kremnitzer was the author also of “Orah Mishor” (Berlin, 1724), novelle on the tractate Nazir containing corrections of the text of the Gemara, of Rashi, and of the Tosafot. It was published together with the second (revised and en- larged) edition of the “ Orah Mishor” on the “Darke Mosheh” to Yoreh De‘ah. A third, separate edi- tion of the “Orah Mishor” to the “Darke Mosheh” appeared in Firth in 1766. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Azulai, Shem ha-Gedolim, part i., p. 72; Benjacob, Ozar ha-Sefarim, pp. 49, 120; Heilprin, Seder ha- Dorot, p. 262, Warsaw, 1891; Fuenn, Keneset Yisrael, p. 437; Zedner, Cat. Hebr. Books Brit. Mus. p. 419. Ses. Ns KREMSER, SIMON: German army commis- sary ; born Sept. 15, 1775, at Breslau, Germany ; died 1851. He became commissary agent to Bliicher in 1806, and was entrusted with the Royal Prussian war- chest. For his services in saving this at the risk of his life he received the order “Pour le Mérite.” Throughout the Napoleonic war Kremser retained Rabbis. his position, but afterward he retired to an estate purchased from General York, and married the Baroness von Adlersthal. Losing his fortune, he in 1822 obtained a concession to run omnibuses in Ber- lin, and the vehicles were called “Kremser” after him. In 1827 he gave up this business and went to Russia as a commissary, obtaining the honorary rank of major in the Russian army. For his serv- ices he obtained a pension and two Russian orders. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Juden als Soldaten, 1897, p. 6. s. J. KREMSIER, MORDECAI BEN NAPH- TALI HIRSCH: German Talmudist and poet; lived at Cracow in the seventeenth century. He wrote: “Kinah” (Lublin [?], c. 1650), a dirge in which he mourns over the 120,000 Jews who perished in the Chmielnicki riots in Russia; “ Ketoret ha-Miz- beah” (Amsterdam, 1660), novelle on the Haggadah in the Talmud treatise Berakot (this work is called also “Tosafot Maharam”); “Ketoret ha-Sammim ” (2b. 1660; in the Pentateuch ed. 2. 1671), commentary on the Targumim to the Pentateuch of pseudo-Jona- than and of Jerusalem. The title, taken from Ex. xxxi. 11, and which in Aramaic has the equivalent “Mura Dakya,” is an allusion to the author’s name, “ Mordecai,” which is explained in Hul. 189b as be- ing derived from the two words just mentioned, meaning “pure myrrh.” BIBLIOGRAPHY: Fiirst, Bibl. Jud. ii. 208; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1671. S. M. SEL. KREMSIR: Town in Moravia, Austria, twelve miles southwest of Prerau. The oldest authentic records of its Jewish community date from the year 1822, when John, King of Bohemia and Poland, gave to the Bishop of Olmiitz permission to settle one Jew in Kremsir and one in each of three other cities of his diocese. Soon, however, other Jews came to Kremsir and at once formed a community. The building of the first synagogue may be placed in the fifteenth century, and even at this early date the community appears to have owned a cemetery likewise. Tombstones dating from 15385 have been found in the old Jewish burial-ground, and there were doubtless others even more ancient; for the register of deaths, which is still preserved, extends back to the year 1482. The Jewish community in Kremsir was under the bishops of Olmiitz, who in general exercised a benev- olent régime. The community was destroyed by the Swedes in the Thirty Years’ war (1642). It was built up again in 1670, when Bishop Karl, Count of Lichten- stein, granted permission to a few emigrants from Vienna tosettlein Kremsir. Since these newcomers were mostly energetic merchants, the community flourished and became one of the largest in Moravia. In 1699 the Jews were threatened with expulsion, probably merely in order to extort money from them. The danger was avoided, however, and the community grew in numbers, while its prosperity increased as well. The Jews of Kremsir suffered also during the war of the Austrian Succession. The reason in this case, as in that of the Thirty Years’ war, was the situa- Kremsir Krochmal THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA — tion of the town, which lay at the intersection of so many commercial and military roads. Kremsir was plundered like many other Moravian communities, and money for the release and protection of Jewish captives was exacted with ruthless Plundered severity. Consequently many Mora- During _vian families, among them some from War. Kremsir, left the country. Of the 5,400 Jewish families tolerated by Maria Theresa, 106 lived in Kremsir (see FAMILIAN- TEN GESETZ). When the French entered Kremsir in 1805 the Jewish community had to surrender its silverware. Aged men still remember Oct. 18, 1818, the Day of Atonement, when Crown Prince Ferdinand was es- corted under the baldachin to the temple, and there attended service. A memorial tablet commemorates this festal occasion. Then came the year 1848, which freed the Jews of Kremsir from episcopal control. Kremsir was the first city in the province which received permission to remove the gates of the ghetto. In the Reichstag which convened in Kremsir five Jewish members had seats. The polit- ical revolution which took place before the eyes of the Kremsir Jews meant also a turning-point in their religious life, and a change in the internal condition of the community. For a time there was peace; but dissensions soon arose both in the religious and in the civil spheres. Several decades passed thus, alternating between internal calm and strife, a prominent cause of contention being the condemnation of the old ceme- tery by the city, to which measure the congregation, after protracted litigation, finally had to yield (1882). In 1910 the Jews of Kremsir numbered 1,200 in a total population of 16,528. The new cemetery has been in existence since 1850; and the present syna- gogue was built in 1693. Jcremsir boasts a long line of rabbis. From 1680 to 1700 the town was the seat of the Moravian “Landesrabbiner.” The more impor- tant rabbis have been: M. M. Krocu- MAL (1636-42), Issachar Berush Es- KELES, 8. Helman, Elias Herz, and Nathan Feitel, the last-named of whom went to Kremsir with many emigrants from Vienna. Since 1877 the rabbinate has been occupied by the present incumbent, éEe“FWC. SSS eg WS" CC{UqumM”™’{’|“:_ mE ne. 290 : oak aan a) Ps SECTIONAL VIEW OF EXCAVATIONS AT TELL AL-HASI (LACHISH), SHOWING SEVEN STRATA OF CITIES. exegete commenced in 1751 after he had been ap- pointed to the chair in Biblical exegesis founded in the Sorbonne by the Duc d’Orleans. It was then that Ladvocat began to publish those theses on sev- eral books of the Old Testament—particularly the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Book of Job—that won for him fame even in foreign countries. Two years after his new appointment he wrote “Gram- maire Hébratque 4 l’Usage des Ecoles de la Sor- bonne” (Paris, 1753; last ed. 1822). It is, however, his “Interprétation Historique et Critique du Psalm 68” (2d. 1767) that deserves a prominent place in the history of Biblical criticism. In a letter prefixed to the “Interprétation ” Ladvo- cat dwells on the impossibility of a correct compre- hension of the Scriptures without a pure and correct Hebrew text. “Without the latter,” he says, “all commentaries must needs beerroneous. Asamatter of fact, all our Hebrew Bibles, not excluding the edition of Athias (1705), are printed without taste, without critical judgment, according to the most modern and least correct manuscripts, and thus are VII.—88 City 1A. 53 ft ~----2 Gottingen Dec. 22, 1891. His father was Wilhelm Bétticher; and his earlier writings (1847-52) were published under the name “P. A. Bétticher,” the name De Lagarde, which was in his mother’s fam- ily, being legally assumed by him in 1854, when he was adopted by his maternal great-aunt, Ernestine de Lagarde. Lagarde’s early education was obtained in the Friedrich Wilhelms Gymnasium, in which his father wasa teacher. He studied theology and Oriental lan- guages at the universities of Berlin, where the poet- scholar Friedrich Rickert was his teacher in Arabic and Persian, and Halle, habilitating at the latter in 1851. The next two years were spent chiefly among the manuscripts in the libraries of Parisand London. Lagarde’s hopes of securing on his returna position in a university faculty were disappointed; and from 1854 to 1866 he taught in Berlin schools. In 1869 he became professor of Oriental languages at Got- tingen, succeeding Heinrich Ewald. Lagarde’s earliest publications were in the field of comparative philology; and of his maturer works Lagarde Lambert THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 594 ee See ee that on noun-formation in Aramaic, Arabic, and Hebrew (1889) is an important contribution to the subject. He edited many texts, chiefly Biblical and ecclesiastical, in Syriac, Aramaic, Arabic, Hebrew, and Coptic, as well as in Greek and Latin. What he regarded as the great work of his life, to which the principal part of the foregoing editions was subsidiary, was the critical reconstruction of the text of the Septuagint by a methodical regress from the recensions current in the fourth century. His “Librorum Veteris Testamenti Canonicorum Pars Prior Greece,” 1888 (Genesis-Esther in the Syrian recension of Lucian), was one step in thisplan. His minor writings, collected from time to time (“Sym- micta,” “ Semitica,” “ Orientalia,” “ Mittheilungen ”), cover an extraordinary range of erudition and con- troversy. He wrote much and vigorously also on contemporary questions in politics, religion, and education; his “ Deutsche Schriften” (1878-81; last ed. 1891) is a collection of such pieces. Mention may be made of those writings of La- garde which are of especial Jewish interest. His “Prophets Chaldaice” (Leipsic, 1872) is a service- able edition of portions of the Reuchlin codex of the Targum, but without the vocalization; and his “Hagiographa Chaldaice” (1873), excepting Chron- icles, which he edited from an Erfurt MS., is a re- print from the Bomberg Bible of 1518. Lagarde had a sense of the importance of a study of Talmudic lit- erature because of its bearings on the history of the Bible text. He was not unacquainted with post-Bib- lical Hebrew. He edited, for the use of his students and not critically, the “ Makamat ” of Judah al-Harizi (Gottingen, 1883), and gave an account of the He- brew manuscripts in Erfurt (“Symmicta,” i. 130; see Steinschneider, “ Hebr. Bibl.” xix. 28), and of a part of a Talmud manuscript in the Gottingen Li- brary (“Semitica,” i. 69), besides explanations of Aramaic words (“Erkliirung Chalditischer Wdorter,” ib. i. 83 et seg.). But both in his scientific and in his political writings he was a virulent anti-Semite, his theory of the corroding influence of the Jews being based upon his peculiar ideals of a German state. This is seen in his “Juden und Indogerma- nen: Hine Studie nach dem Leben” (“ Mittheilung- en,” ii, 262), in his “Purim: Hin Beitrag zur Gesch. der Religion” (Géttingen, 1887), and in his criti- cism of Berliner’s edition of the Targum Onkelos (7d. ii. 163 e¢ seg.). He came into direct conflict with Jew- ish scholarship by the dissertation of his pupil Lud- wig Techen, “Zwei Gottinger Machzorhandschrif- ten” (1884), which contained an attack upon the merits of Leopold Zunz’s work. This was answered, among others, by A. Berliner (“ Prof. P. de Lagarde, nach Seiner Natur Gezeichnet,” Berlin, 1887), D. Kaufmann (“Paul de Lagarde’s Jiidische Gelehr- samkeit,” 2b.), and by B. Ziemlich (“ Einer der Nicht Liturgiker Sein Will,” 2d.). Lagarde replied in his “Lipman Zunz und Seine Verehrer” (“ Mittheilung- en,” ii. 108 e¢ seg.), and in his “ Juden und Indogerma- nen,” cited above. A responsum on the Talmud by Lagarde will be found in “Mittheilungen,” iii. 3 et seq. The latest two accounts of Lagarde are by G. F. Moore in “The University Quarterly ” (New York), vii. 166 et seg., and by E. Nestle in Herzog-Hauck, “Realencyc.” xi. 218 (also separately with additions). BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. A. de Lagarde, Ueber Einige Familien des Namens Botticher, 1867; Anna de Lagarde, Paul de Lagarde: EBrinnerungen aus Seinem Leben, 1894 (both privately printed). A classified bibliography of Lagarde’s wri- tings, by R. J. H. Gottheil, will be found in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, xv. 211-229 (privately re- printed with addenda). fee Tah bel LAGARTO, JACOB: South-American rabbi and Talmudist of the seventeenth century ; probably a sonof Simon Lagarto of Amsterdam. He went to Brazil when a young man, and about 1680 was hakam of the Jews at Tamarica. He was the au- thor of a work entitled “Ohel Ya‘akob ” or “Tienda de Jacob,” conjectured by Wolf (“ Bibl. Hebr.” iii. 1066b) to have contained Talmudicaphorisms. Kay- serling thinks it was not written in America. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Publ. Am. Jew. Hist. Soc. ii. 16 and 17; Kayserling, Bibl. Esp.-Port.-Jud. p. 55. A LAGUNA, DANIEL ISRAEL LOPEZ: Spanish poet; born in Portugal about the middle of the seventeenth century of Marano parents, who subsequently settled in southern France. He stud- ied the humanities at a Spanish university. Perse- cuted and imprisoned by the Inquisition as a Ma- rano, he languished for several years in captivity, finally succeeding in escaping. He then went to Jamaica, British West Indies, where he openly con- fessed Judaism. At Jamaica Laguna completed the poetical work ~ which he had begun in prison—a Spanish paraphrase of the Psalms. In the introductory poem contain- ing an acrostic, “A el Zeloso Lector” (To the Kind Reader), he relates his varied experiences, and in several of his versions of the Psalms he alludes to his sufferings in the dungeons of the Inquisition. With this work, the fruit of twenty-three years of labor, he went to London, where several of his rela- tives, members of the Laguna family, were then living. Here he found a patron in the person of the © learned Mordecai Nunes Almeyda, who arranged to have the work printed. It appeared in a handsome edition, under the title “Espejo Fiel de Vidas Que Contiene los Psalmos de David en Verso” (London, 1720), with an approbation in Spanish by Haham David Nieto, another, in Hebrew, by Joseph ibn Danon, and an artistic “geroglifico” by Abraham Lopez de Oliveyra. It was dedicated to Almeyda, and was praised in Spanish, Latin, and English verse by many, including Almeyda; the latter’s mother, Manuela Nunes de Almeyda, and sisters, Bienbenida Cohen Belmonte and Sarah de Fonseca Pina y Pimentel; Sarah’s husband, Manuel Fon- — seca Pina, and son Moseh de Manuel Fonseca Pina; — as well as Jacob Henriquez Pimentel (alias Manuel de Umanes), and his son Abraham, who wrote a long introduction to the work; David Henriquez Pimen- tel; and Abraham Gomez Silveyra. David Chaves, — the physician, and Isaac de Sequeira Samuda wrote Latin hexametersin its honor, and Samson Guideon, then a young financier, as well as Abraham Bravo, a friend of the author, praised the work in English verse. The poet’s eldest son, David Lopez La- guna, and his nephew, Jacob Lopez Laguna, wrote Spanish poems on it. Laguna subsequently returned to Jamaica to his wife, Riki, and his three sons, David, Jacob, and Isaac. He died at the age of seventy; but the date of his death is not known. 595 Another Daniel Lopes Laguna from Bordeaux died in Paris March 8, 1780 (“Revue Et. Juives,” XXvi. 244), Other members of the Laguna family, Abraham Laguna, Jacob Laguna, and Rebecca Lagu- na, were naturalized at Jamaica between 1740 and 1748. MIBIDL. Dsp.-PortJud, pease tome tad” On Fe a 309 ot seq.; Gaster, Hist. of Bevis Marks, pp. 117 et seq.; Publ. ee Hist. Soc. iii. 110 et seq., iv. 121 et seq., 162 et seq., v. 112 et seq. Af M. K. LAIBACH: Capital of the Austrian province of Carniola. The first mention of Jews in Laibach dates from 1218, when it is recorded that they re- built their synagogue much handsomer than it was before. The usual accusations against Jews in medieval times are found in connection with Lai- bach. In 1290 they are charged with the murder of a Christian child; in 1387 they are accused of hav- ing poisoned the wells; and in 1403 three Jews are killed in a riot, caused by the trial of a Jew who was put to death for having violated a Christian girl. The occupation of the Laibach Jews was chiefly money-lending, but they are also mentioned as merchants having an important trade with Italy, and as artisans. The Austrian law of 1244 was not valid in Carniola; and the legal status of the Jews was defined by special charters granted to individ- uals by the rulers. They were permitted to hold real estate, and in criminal cases were placed on an equal footing with Christians, while in civil cases they were asarule under the “ Judenrichter ” of Mar- burg in Styria. As regards the payment of taxes they formed one body (JtépiscHuErt) with their co- religionists of Styria and Carinthia; but they were also required to bear their share in the city levy. The expulsion of the Jews from Styria and Carin- thia (1496) did not at first affect those of Laibach, and in 1510 Emperor Maximilian decreed that they should be protected in their ancient privileges; but in 1513 he yielded to the demands of the citizens, and prohibited the Jews from engaging in mercantile pursuits. Finally, on Jan. 1, 1515, upon the peti- tion of the citizens, they were expelled from Lai- bach. Occasionally Jews seem to have been in the city after that time; for in 1672 Leopold I. addressed an edict to the governor in which he ordered that no Jew should be tolerated in the province. In 1762 the governor desired to give the Jews permission to deal at wholesale in goods of domestic manufacture ; but the merchants’ gild objected. Joseph II., how- ever, permitted them in 1788 to frequent the fairs. When, after the peace of Vienna (Oct. 14, 1809), Carniola became part of the French province of Illyria, Abraham Heimann of Memmelsdorf in Bavaria settled there and had to contend with the ill-will of the municipal authorities, but was pro- tected by the French governor. Immediately after the reincorporation of the province into Austria through the peace of Paris (May 30, 1814), Heimann received an order of expulsion (Aug. 18); and al- though an imperial order of Dec. 6, 1817, restored his rights, he had continuously to fight the munici- pal and provincial authorities, who persecuted him constantly, until the events of 1848 secured him in THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Lagarde Lambert his rights. Subsequent reaction prevented for a long time the settlement of other Jews in the city; and it was not until the constitution of Dec. 21, 1867, gave the Jews civic equality that they again settled in Laibach. In a total population of 47,127 there were in 1910 about 250 Jews, who, however, have not yet formed a religious community. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Scherer, Die Rechtsverhiiltnisse der Juden in den Deutsch-Oesterreichischen Liindern, pp. 518-528, Leipsic, 1901, where the older literature is quoted, among which Dimitz, Die Juden in Krain, in Laibacher Zeitung, 1866, is the most important; for the highly interesting history of the Heimann family, Simon Heimann, in Allg. Zeit. des Jud. 1849, pp. 24 et seq. D. L’ALBENC. See DavpHiné. LAMA. Sce Loans, EvisAn BEN Mosss. LAMB IN SACRIFICE. See Sacririce. LAMBERT, MAYER: French Orientalist; born Dec. 28, 1868, at Metz; son of Elie Lambert, author of religious text-books, grandson of Chief Rabbi Lion Mayer Lambert of Metz, great-grandson of Chief Rabbi Aaron of Worms, and descendant through the last-named of Gershon Ulif Ashkenazi and of Elijah Blin, rabbiand hazzan of Worms in the sixteenth century. After finishing his studies at the lycée of Metz, he attended the lectures of the Tal- mud Torah and the Séminaire Israélite of Paris, pursuing, at the same time, courses in Semitics at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes. He received his rabbi’s diploma in 1886. In 1887 he was appointed professor of Arabic and Syriac at the Séminaire, and in 1889 he took charge of Hebrew at the Ecole Normale of the Alliance Israélite. He taught He- brew at the Talmud Torah, 1890-94, and subse- quently at the Séminaire. From 1886 to 1895 he was the collaborator of Joseph Derenbourg. In 1902 he was appointed lecturer of Hebrew and of Syriac at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes. Lambert has published the following works: “Eléments de Grammaire Hébraique ” (Paris, 1890); “Une Série de Qeré Ketib ” (7b. 1891) ; “ Commentaire sur le Livre de la Création par Saadia” (2b. 1891); “Arabic Version and Commentary to Proverbs, by Saadia” (db. 1894), in collaboration with Joseph De- renbourg; “Premiers Eléments de Grammaire Hé- braique” (7b. 1900); “Glossaire Hébreu-Fran¢ais,” MS. 302 of the Bibliothéque Nationale, published by Lambert in collaboration with M. L. Brandin (1908). Of his numerous contributions to the “Revue des Etudes Juives,” the “Journal Asiatique,” the “Revue Sémitique,” etc., the following deserve par- ticular mention: “Observations sur Ja Théorie des Formes Nominales” (“Journal Asiatique,” 1890); “T,’ Accent Tonique en Hébreu” (“R. E. J.” 1892); “a Formation du Pluriel en Hébreu” (2b.); “ L’In- scription d’Eryx” (“Revue Sémitique,” 1893); “Le Vav Conversif” (7d. 1895); “La Syntaxe de |’ Impé- ratif Hébreu” (db. 1897); “L’ Article dans la Poésie Hébraique” (7d. 1898); “De l’Accent en Arabe” (“Jour. Asiatique,” 1888); “Le Cantique de Moise” (“R. E. J.” 1898); “Les Dates et les Ages dans la Bible” (2d. 1902). His contributions to “ La Grande Encyclopédie” include the articles: “Langue Hé- braique,” “Massore,” “Onkelos,” ete. In his arti- cles contributed to the “ Univers Israélite ” Lambert endeavors to show that Judaism must give up dog- Lamden Lamentations THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 596 aa acre a ee matism, modifying the customs and laws which are contrary to modern ideals while laying more stress on religious instruction. 8. I dN LAMDEN, or LAMDAN (plural, Lamdanim): Late Hebrew expression fora man who is well in- formed in rabbinical literature, although not a scholar in the technical sense of the term (“talmid hakam”); it does not seem to have been used before the eighteenth century. Ezekiel Katzenellenbogen (1670-1749) decided that rabbinical scholars were ex- empt from paying taxes even though scholars then were not scholars in the proper sense of the word, “ for the law does not make a difference between lam- dan and lamdan” (Resp. “ Keneset Yehezkel,” Ho- shen Mishpat, No. 95, p. 118a, Altona, 1732). Jacob Emden (“Megillat Sefer,” p. 21, Warsaw, 1896) speaks of Baer Kohen (Berent Salomon), the founder of the Klausin Hamburg, as having been somewhat of a scholar (“kezat lamdan,” the equivalent of the Judeo-German “ein stiickel lamden”). Authorities of the sixteenth century, when they have to speak of the difference between a scholar in the technical sense of the word and a well-informed man, do not use the term “lamdan,” but say “zurba me-rabba- nan” (see Joshua Falk ha-Kohen in “Sefer Me’irat ‘Enayim,” Hoshen Mishpat, 15, 4; Shabbethai ha- Kohen, 7d. 1, 19, and Yoreh De‘ah, 244, 11). LAMECH (q05 = “vigorous youth”?): 1. De- scendant of Cain (Gen. iv. 18-24). He had two wives, Adah and Zillah. Adah bore him two sons, Jabal (the father of suchas dwell in tents) and Jubal (the father of such as handle the harp and organ). Zillah had one son (Tubal-cain, instructor of those that wrought in brass and iron) and one daughter (named Naamah). Lamech is especially remembered for the address to his two wives given in Gen. iv. 23-24. The general opinion of modern scholars is that this utterance is a glorification by Lamech of the weapons forged by his son Tubal-cain, while Wellhausen holds (“Die Composition des Hexa- teuchs,” p. 305) that it is simply a boastful outburst of the kind common in Arabic literature. The Talmudists and the ancient Jewish commen- tators, interpreting the words op* oynpay (Gen. iv. 15, “Cain shall expiate his crime after seven gener- ations”), evolved the following legend: Lamech lost his sight and had to be led by his son Tubal-cain, who was of the seventh generation from Cain (comp. Gen. iv. 17-18). One day Tubal-cain saw in the distance something that he took for an animal; it was Cain, however, who had been killed by an arrow from Lamech’s bow. When they found that it was Cain, Lamech in sorrow clapped his hands together, by which action he killed Tubal-cain. His wives deserted him (Rashi, ad loc.). According to Gen. R. xxiii. 5, Lamech killed no one, but his wives refused to associate with him on the ground that the descendants of Cain would be destroyed after seven generations. Lamech, however, allayed their fears, saying: “Have I slain a man or a youth that my offspring should be destroyed? If Cain shall expiate his crime after seven generations, surely Lamech, who killed no one, shall expiate his sins after seventy-seven generations.” This interpreta- tion was adopted by Onkelos and pseudo-Jonathan. Josephus (“ Ant.” i. 2, § 2) saw in the word “sev- enty-seven ” the number of Lamech’s sons. 2. Descendant of Seth and father of Noah (Gen. v. 28-30), whom Lamech begat at the age of 182 years; his life covered a period of 777 years. The coincidence of the names “ Lamech” and “ Enoch” in the Cainite and Sethite genealogies, as well as the similarity between other names in the two lists, has led modern scholars to suppose that these are two different recensions of the same list. B. G. H. M. SEL. LAMED (5): Twelfth letter of the Hebrew alphabet; on its form see ALPHABET, The mean- ing of the name is uncertain. The letter isa liquid, pronounced like the English “1”; it interchanges with the other liquid consonants and semivowels, and sometimes passes into 4,4, or. It is some- times inserted after the first radical or added to the third to form quadriliterals from triliterals. As a numeral it has, in late usage, thé value of 30. 7D; I. Br. LAMED-WAW: The thirty-six hidden saints called among Russian Jews Lamed-waw-niks. The legend that there are in every generation thirty- six secret saints, through whose piety the world ex- ists, is based upon the following passage in the Tal- mud: “Abaye has said: ‘There are in the world not less than thirty-six righteous persons in every generation upon whom the Shekinah rests; for it is written, “ Happy are all they that wait for him” 5]. The last word stands numerically for thirty- six’” (Sanh. 97b; Suk. 45a). The “ Tikkune Zohar” (ch. xxi.) goes still further, and, quoting Hos. x. 2, “Their heart [oS] is divided,” deduces from p35, which numerically represents seventy-two, that there are thirty-six saints in Palestine and an equal number outside of the Holy Land. Around these sayings clusters a whole series of legends celebrating the Lamed-waw-niks. The lat-_ ter are represented as hiding their sanctity and as — not obtruding it forshow. They usually follow the humble vocation of artisans, unrecognized by the — community, and denying their identity when it is accidentally discovered. In cases of extreme dan- ger to the Jewish community they come forward — to avert it; but after their work is done, they retire to some place where they can again live undisturb- edly. This belief has been so universal as to raise a suspicion against any mysterious personage that he is a Lamed-waw-nik. Wiener in his “ Yiddish Literature” cites a char- — acteristic legend of such a saint living at Cracow in the time of Moses Isserles. Disguised as Hayyim, a tailor, this saint frustrated a plan of the Polish — king to extort a sum of money from the Jews, and by his secret powers forced the king to abandon it. The king’s minister who had concocted the scheme fled, and became converted to Judaism. Legends concerning Lamed-waw-niks are connected also with Israel Ba‘al Shem-Tob, Elijah Wilna, and other popular personages. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Wiener, Yiddish Literature, pp. 36-38, New 3 es oh ae era Miscellany, p. 185, Lon- mn, ; at Zaddikim, Lemberg, 1865; ‘Aliyyot Eli- yahu, p. 62, Wilna, 1889." * e iy H.R. AS SeaWe 597 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Lamden Lamentations LAMEGO: City in Portugal. Its Jewry was formerly situated in the Cruz da Pedra street, the present Rua Nova. Lamego was the meeting-place of many rich secret Jews or Neo-Christians, who were bitterly hated by the Christian population of the city. One of the most active representatives of the Portuguese Maranos in the struggle against the introduction of the Inquisition was Jacome da Fonseca of Lamego. The establishment of a tribunal of the Holy Office in the city (1542) was hailed with rejoicings by the Christian population. In the program of the cele- bration of the opening of the tribunal, which con- sisted of doggerel and which was displayed at all the public places in the city, the richest and most distinguished of the Maranos were divided into two groups, musicians and dancers, and caricatured. The panic among these secret Jews was so great that most of them fled to Tras-os-Montes, where many were seized by the bailiffs, and led back to Lamego. The tribunal of Lamego was in existence for about six years. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Kayserling, Gesch. der Juden in Portugal, pp. 49, 234, G. WE UG LAMEL, SIMON EDLER VON: Austrian merchant; born at Tuschkau near Pilsen, Bohemia, Aug. 28, 1766; died at Vienna April 18, 1845. Early bereft of his father, he quickly developed an incli- nation for mercantile pursuits, so that, when only twenty-one years of age, he established a wholesale house in Prague which soon ranked among the most important in thecountry. He encouraged im- provements in the raising of sheep, and also intro- duced new methods in the carding and manufac- turing of wool. Prompted by feelings of patriotism, he rendered his country valuable services, especially during the Napoleonic war. Thus, in 1801 he pur- chased all the magazines containing salt, flour, and wheat which had been captured by the French, and in 1805 he bought all the artillery pieces taken by the enemy, thereby saving Austria more than 3,000,- 000 gulden. In 1809 he negotiated the purchase of 450 tons of biscuit for military provisions, declining to accept any profits or commission. Liimel gave further evidence of his devotion to his emperor and his country by lending the government large sums of money. In order to facilitate the withdrawal of the French troops from Vienna he in 1809 lent to the state his entire fortune. In view of his recognized services he requested permission to purchase a house in Vienna, but on March 17, 1811, the emperor declined to grant this petition. In the same year, however, Liimel was elevated to the hereditary nobility, and he and his children were given permission to reside in Vienna, in which city Jews were at that time hardly toler- ated. In 1818 Field-Marshal Prince Schwarzenberg appointed Limel commissary of the army, relieving him from quartering soldiers. Saxony as well as Austria profited by Limel’s services.; and several autograph letters from the kings of the former country assured him of their esteem. His endeavors were the cause, at least in- directly, of the abolition of the body-tax (“ Leibzoll ”) in Saxony. Liimel was ever active in his efforts to ameliorate the sad condition of his coreligionists. In 1817 he succeeded in having the taxes of the Bohemian Jews reduced, and was assured at the same time that they would shortly be abolished altogether. He did not seek to escape this taxation himself, even when he removed to Vienna. —-., Othe : and exposing [| === i) BA the methods of the Hasidim. nine smaller synagogues, two batte ha-midrashot, the “ Chorschule,” or “ Temple ” (dedicated in 1846), a commodious Jewish hospital, an orphan asylum, a technical school, regular Talmud Torah schools, and several yeshibot. A new Jewish hospital costing 800,000 crowns ($160,000) was founded Oct. 1, 1902, to commemorate the seventieth birthday of Prof. Moritz Lazarus. Title to the old Jewish cemetery was granted by the city au- thorities in 1414, when several burials had al- ready been made, as indi- cated by a tomb- stone, of a youth named Jacob, dated 1348, and by another tombstone, of Miriam, or Ma- rysia, daughter of Samuel, dated on 1880 (Tammuz Ah i fu Ay is 2d). This ceme- yy ee ah tery is sur- ays [hina Parmel rounded by a a ea ‘ stone wall, with Karaite graves close to the wall. The second cemetery was opened in 1856. Lemberg has seven Jewish printing estab- lishments, the first dating from 1611. During the eighteenth century it was the principal Austrian center a By y i { @ ANY | Sap / =) Bs a Won hin Pe = Til — se . for Hebrew pub- A {i Mt Hl I AMR ' ah, i ii MW EG lications. Since i ih Zp g the removal of censorship in a Rapoport found- 1848 the print- ing of Jewish ed a literary circle with a li- brary supported by Judah Lob Mises (d. 1831), thus providing ambitious young men with a liberal education. Lemberg is well provided with Jewish institu- tions. The first synagogue was built by the Ka- raites in 1582. The Ashkenazic synagogue, the title P to which was contested by the Jesuits, Institu- followed in 1632; this ancient build- tions. ing has capacious vestry-rooms that are now used as separate synagogues. Since the Karaites removed from Lemberg their syn- agogue has been occupied by Rabbinite Jews. Al- Interior of the Synagogue on Wechslergasse, Lemberg. (From ‘Die Oesterreichisch-Ungarische Monarchie in Wort und Bild,”’) works has great- ly increased. As a commercial and industrial center Lemberg is even more important than Cracow. Next to the Germans, the Jews control the greatest amount of business. The following is a list of the rabbis of Lemberg: Levi b. Jacob Kikenes (d. 1503; it is doubtful if he was ever official rabbi); Kalman of Worms (teacher of Isserles; rabbi from 1518 to 1560); Asher b. Isaac Kohen (d. 1582); Eliezer (son-in-law of Kalman of Worms; d. 1590); Moses b. Mordecai Ashkenazi (d. 1600); Jacob Koppel b. Asher ha-Kohen (d. 1630); Mordecai Zebi-Hirsch Ashke- nazi (d. 1636); Joshua-Hoschel Falk 4. Joseph (author of ‘* Maginne Shelomoh” and ** Pene Yehoshua*‘”’; d. in Cracow Lemberg Lenchitza THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 680 en 1648); Meshullam Salzburg b. Abraham Ashkenazi (a. 1845); Joseph b. Eliakim Goetz (d. 1652); David b. Samuel ha-Levi (d. 1667; author of ‘‘ Ture Zahab”); Hirsch Klausner (rabbi in the city); Judah b. Jacob of Lublin (rabbi outside the city; d. 1697); Elijah b. Abraham Kal- mankes of Lublin (d. 1636, while delivering a lecture on the Sabbath preceding Passover); Solomon b. Isaac ha-Levi (d. 1638); Meir b. Abraham Sack (d. 1654); Naphtali Herz b. Judah Selki of Cracow (d. 1669); Zebi Hirsch b. Zechariah Mendel Klausner (d. 169i in Lublin); Moses Phinehas b. Israel Harif (d. 1702); Joel b. Isaac (Ei- sik) Heilprin (d. 1710); Zebi Hirsch b. Jacob Ashke- nazi (the ‘ Hakam Zebi’’; d. 1718); Simhah b. Nahman ha-Kohen Rapoport of Lublin (d. 1718); Moses Hay- yim Lemberger (d. 1725); Jacob Joshua b. Zebi Hirsch (till 1731; d. 1756 in Berlin); Judah Lob Oettin- ger b. Eliezer ha-Levi (4.1739); Aryeh Lob b. Saulof Cracow (d. 1771); Hayyim ha-Kohen Rapoport b. Simhah (4d. 1741); Solomon b. Moses Chelma (author of ““Merkebet ha-Mishnah”; d. 1785 in Jerusalem); Meir b. Zebi Hirsch Margolioth (author of “ Meir Netebim” ; a. 1790); Abraham b. Jacob Koppel (d. 1828); Jacob Meshullam Ornstein (author of ‘‘ Yeshu‘ot Ya‘akob’’; d. 1839); Simhah Nathan Ellenberg ; Joseph Saul Na- thansohn (author of ‘*Shoel u-Meshib,’’ responsa; d. 1875); Isaac Aaron Ettinger (author of a collection of responsa ; d. 1891); Zebi Hirsch Ornstein (d. 1898). The latter rabbis were Isaac Schmelkes and Dr. Caro. Among the writers whose names are associated with Lemberg are: Joshua Falk ha-Kohen (Kata b. Alexander (author of ‘Sefer Me’irat ‘Enayim’’; d.1614); Abraham Schrenzel ha-Kohen Rapoport (author of ‘‘Eton ha-Ezrahi”; d. 1651); Isaac Hayyot b. Jacob (author of ‘‘ Zera‘ Yizhak”’); Abraham Hayyim b. Naphtali Schorr (author of “Torat Hayyim”’; d.1632); Abraham b. Moses Heilbron Ashkenazi (author of ** Ahabat Ziyyon”’; d. 1649); Metrb. Samuel Te’omim (author of “ Birkat Yosef’’); Joseph b. Meir Te’omim (author of “* Peri Megadim’’); Samuel So- lar (author of ‘‘ Shem me-Shemuel’’); Zebi Hirsch Rosa- nus (author of “Tesha* Shittot”); Meshullam b. Joel Kohen (author of ‘‘ Pithe Niddah”); Isaac b. Zebi Ash- kenazi (author of ‘‘ Torat ha-Kodesh’’); Abraham Mendel Mohr (author of ‘* Shebile ‘Olam’’). In 1904 the president of the Cultus Gemeinde was S. von Horowitz. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ezekiel Caro, Gesch. d. Juden in Lemberg (up to 1792), Cracow, 1894; Schtitz, Magzebet Kodesh, Lem- berg, 1860; Dembitzer, Kelilat Yofi, Cracow, 1888; Mohr, Shebile ‘Olam, 1880, p. 111; Voskhod, 1895, x.7; Buber, Anshe Shen, Cracow, 1895. J. D. £E. H. R. Following is a summary of the provisions of the regulation of 1569: The waywode must appoint, as his representative for the administration of Jewish affairs, none but an estated Polish nobleman. The Jewish books or records must be kept in the Jewish prayer-house, or synagogue, encased, and under lock and key. If the judge [a Polish nobleman] having the books in his possession inserts therein any records or reg- ulations whatsoever without the consent of the Jew- ish elders, such records or regulations shall be void. The judge has no right to appoint, without the consent of the Jewish elders, a secretary for the keeping of the Jewish books. The Jewish elders shall be elected by the members of the community only. The election of the elders must be approved by the waywode. The waywode shall not impose upon a Jew a fine greater than three ten-copeck pieces; the judge re- ceives as his fee from the offender one pound of pepper, in compliance with the prescriptions of the royal statute [7.¢., the privileges of Boleslav of Ka- lisz]. These fines, moreover, must be in conformity with the law, and must be imposed by the judge in conjunction with the Jewish elders. The Jewish synagogue can not be closed nor its property attached otherwise than by special im- perial order. The right is left to the Jews to kill their cattle and sell them to Christians and to any others as they will, ia compliance with the customs practised among other Jews, as those of Cracow, Posen, and Lublin. The Jewish elders have the right to punish Jews by excommunication or otherwise, in compliance with their Law, and none shall hinder them in so doing. The waywode has no right to appoint apy rabbi other than the one elected to the office by the Jews themselves. The judge appointed by the way wode has no right to make any decree except in conjunction with the Jewish elders. Theelders shall be tried only by the waywode or by the judge appointed by him, and may then appeal to the tribunal of the king himself; summoned otherwise, they are not obliged to re- — spond, and may treat such a summons as unauthori- tative. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Bershadski, in Voskhod, Sept., 1895, pp. 7-9. H. R. ASS We LEMBERGER, JUDAH LOB: Judezo-Ger- man author of the seventeenth century. He was probably the son of the publisher Abraham Lem- berger of Prague. Judah Léb Lemberger was the author of a work in Judseo-German, entitled “Kin Hiibsch Gdttlich Biichel” (Prague, n.d.), a selec- tion of moral sayings from the Talmud and other rabbinical works, with an appendix, “Hibbut ha- Keber,” on the sufferings of the dead in the grave. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1837; idem, in Serapeum, 1848, pp. 324, 333. G. An Sia Wa LEMBERGER JUDISCHE ZEITUNG. See PERIODICALS. LEMMLEIN (LAMMLIN), ASHER: Pre- tended forerunner of the Messiah. He appeared in Istria, near Venice, in 1502, and announced the com- ing of the Messiah in that very year, provided the Jews showed repentance and practised charity. Having gained many adherents in Italy, Lemmlein traveled through Austria and Germany, receiving there both sympathy and credence. Even Christians are said to have believed in his Messianic prophecy. The chronicler Ganz relates that his grandfather des- troyed an oven destined for the baking of unleav- ened bread, firmly believing that at the next Pass- over he would be with the Messiah in Palestine. There were much fasting, much praying, and much distribution of alms wherever Lemmlein passed, so that the year of his propaganda was called the year of penitence. But he suddenly disappeared; and the agitation came to an end. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ganz, Zemah Dawid, ed. Frankfort, 1692, p. 43a; Joseph ha-Kohen, Dibre ha-Yamim, ed. Amsterda s 58b; Gratz, Gescl. ix. 242 and note 3. aay a. I. Br. LEMON, HARTOG (called in contemporary Hebrew works Hirz b. Hirsch Wiener or Hirg 681 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA Lemberg Lenchitza eae Levi Rofe): Dutch physician and worker for the emancipation of the Jews; born about the middle of the eighteenth century; died at an advanced age at Amsterdam Dec. 5, 1828. On the completion of his medical studies he was appointed physician for the poor by the parnasim of the Ashkenazic community of Amsterdam (1788). When the French took pos- session of Holland (1795), Lemon became one of the leaders of the Felix Libertate Society, which aimed at winning civic equality for the Jews (see AMSTERDAM). The parnasim, who did not approve of this movement, dismissed him from his office (April, 1795). Lemon, however, continued his ef- forts to procure the emancipation of the Dutch Jews; and he interested himself also in the organ- ization of a new Jewish community at Amsterdam. He was successful in both directions: the Jews of Holland were emancipated on Sept. 2, 1796; and on June 23, 1797, Lemon as president delivered the in- augural address of the synagogue of the new con- gregation Adath Jeschurun (published Amsterdam, 1797). On Aug. 1, 1797, Lemon, together with 8. Bromet, was elected a member of the parliament (“Nationale Conventie”). The Adath Jeschurun also sent him, together with two other members, as delegate to the Great Sanhedrin at Paris, where he delivered two discourses (“Bijdragen Betrekkelijk de Verbetering van den Maatschappelijken Staat der Joden,” parti., pp. 471-472, 513-515, The Hague, 1806-7). When in 1808 the two congregations were re- united, Lemon was a member of the Opper Consis- torie der Hollandsche-Hoogduitsche Israeclietsche Gemeenten in Holland. Accused of participating in aconspiracy against the French government, Lemon was suddenly arrested during the night of Feb. 12-18, 1818, and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment and a fine of 500 francs, with costs. He was taken first to the state prison at Ham (France), and then to Amiens, and was not liberated until April 6, 1814. On his return to Hol- land be wrote a defense, under the title “Jets Over de Nooit Plaats Gehad Hebbende Zamenzwering te Amsterdam in Februari, 1818” (Amsterdam, 1815). Lemon was a physician of repute. His two works, “ Voorschrift ter Genezinge van de Tusschen- Poozende of Zoogenaamde Koude Koortsen door Middel van Tourniquets” (7d. 1808), and “ Proeve eener Beknopte en Letterkundige Geschiedenis van het Stelsel van Brown ” (2d, 1811), testify to his scien- tific attainments. Among his other literary works may be mentioned a Dutch translation of the Ger- man tragedy “Bella” (7b. 1789). One of Lemon’s daughters was married to J. Litt- wak, a well-known Jewish mathematician of Am- sterdam, who also took part in the struggle for eman- cipation. D. 8. Sz. LEMOS, HENRIETTE DE. See Herz, HEn- RIETTE. LEMUEL: A king mentioned in the superscrip- tion to Prov. xxxi., which is addressed to him by his mother. Various theories have been proposed in explanation of the superscription. Cheyne reads “Jerahmeel.” Others (¢.g., Wildeboer) join the phrase “ Lemuel the king” with the following word, “massa” (A. V., following the Masoretic punctua- tion, “prophecy ”), which they take as a proper name, and read “King of Massa,” an Ishmaelite people (Gen. xxv. 14). Toy (“Proverbs,” p. 589) rejects this together with any symbolical interpreta- tion. The word “ Lemuel,” like “ Lael,” means “God- ward” (comp. Gray, “Hebrew Proper Names,” p. 207, s.v. “Nemuel”), E. G. H. E. I. N. LENCHITZA (Polish, Leczyca): Polish town, formerly in the government of Kalisz, Rus- sian Poland, On April 20, 1639, members of its Jew- ish community were accused of ritual murder, owing to the disappearance of a Christian child, aged one and one-half years, from the village of Kamashitza, and the subsequent discovery, in the adjacent woods, of its body covered with many wounds. Suspicion fell on a local tramp, Foma, who, when arrested and questioned, confessed to having ab- ducted the child at the instigation of the Jews of Lenchitza. The ancient right of appeal to the king being ignored, the case was tried by the local au- thorities, who were openly prejudiced against the Jews. Many members of the community were placed on the rack; and two of them, Lazar and Maier, were quartered. The monks in the local Bernardine monastery made use of the incident to inflame pop- ular hatred against the Jews. They placed the re- mains of the supposedly martyred child in the cathedral, together with a painting and a detailed description of the murder. The superstitious Cath- olic masses made pilgrimages to the relics of the supposed saint; and the income of the Bernardine monastery was thereby greatly augmented. In commenting on the frequent charges of ritual mur- der against the Jews shortly before the Cossack up- risings, Bershadski says: “Such was the condition of the Jews on the eve of the Cossack and Shlyakhta wars. Abandoned by the kings and the Shlyakhta, and in constant warfare with the clergy, they were helpless in dealing with the accusations of ritual murder. Such accusations were, moreover, easily spread. When a child left alone had disappeared, and its body had been found covered with wounds several days or a week later in the woods, it was immediately concluded that the members of the nearest Jewish community were guilty of the mur- der. They were formally charged with it; legal proceedings were instituted; and the rack invari- ably showed the guilty one!” Among the prominent rabbis born at Lenchitza should be mentioned Rabbi Ephraim, author of “‘Olelot Efrayim,” who died in 1619. The Jewish community of Lenchitza suffered se- verely at the hands of the Polish general Czarnt- ECKI, 300 of their number perishing by the sword. In 1710 seven Jews were burned at the stake under the accusation of stealing consecrated bread and of ractising the magic arts: 2 In 1904 the Thies Jews numbered about 2,000 in a total population of 9,044. IOGRAPHY: 8S. Bershadski, Stwrinnoe Sredstvo, in Vos- ened, 1894, x.; Dubnow, Istori Cheskiya Soobshcheniya, ib. 95, Li. i R. J. G@. L. Lengfeld Leon THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 682 i LENGFELD, FELIX: American chemist; born at San Francisco Feb. 18, 1863; educated at the San Francisco College of Pharmacy, the Univer- sity of California, Johns Hopkins University, and at Zurich, Liége, Munich, and Paris. Lengfeld has been fellow of Johns Hopkins University (1887-88), professor of chemistry in the South Dakota School of Mines (1890-91), instructor in chemistry at the University of California (1891-92), and docent-in- structor and assistant professor in chemistry at the University of Chicago (1892-1901). He is the author of “Laboratory Manual of Inorganic Preparations,” and has contributed numerous articles to American and foreign journals of science. A. TeGaw: LENTILS (Hebr. “‘adashim”; Arabic‘ “‘adas”): Edible seeds first mentioned in the Old Testament in Gen. xxv. 29-34, where it is related that Jacob-gave Esau “bread and pottage of lentils” for his birth- right. Lentils were also among the provisions brought by Barzillai to David when the latter was in exile (II Sam. xvii. 28); and they seem to have been, as at present in Palestine and in other countries, a common article of food (comp. 2d. xxiii. 11). From Ezek. iv. 9 it appears that in times of scarcity len- tils, ground and mixed with other ingredients, were made into bread, a practise still in vogue in modern Egypt. According to De Candolle (“ Origin of Plants,” p. 257), the lentil (Hrowm Lens) was probably a native of western Asia. In some parts of Palestine it is still the predominant crop. Of the several varieties the red lentil (comp. Gen. xxv. 30) is considered the best. The lentil held a high place also among the ancient Egyptians, and the variety of Pelusium was especially celebrated (comp. Vergil, “Georgics,” i. 228; Pliny, “Historia Naturalis,” xvi. 201). In Talmudic times lentils seem to have been one of the staple foods of Palestine. Thus in Pes. 3b lentils as human food are contrasted with barley as food for cattle (comp. Shab. 76b). In Bezah 14b they are even referred to as a feast-day dish in the house of Gamaliel. The Egyptian lentil is pointed out as being of medium size, and as the measure of a particle from a “creeping thing” (“sherez ”) to cause uncleanliness (Kelim xvii. 8; comp. Ma‘as. v. 8). In connection with Gen. xxv. it is said (B. B. 16b; comp. Gen. R. Ixiii. 14) that lentils form a suitable dish for mourners because they have no “mouth” (¢.¢., “slit”), like the mourner who in his anguish is struck dumb, and by their round form they symbolize the going around of trouble and loss in this world. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Trisiram, Nat. Hist. p. 461, London, 1867. 8. 8. I. M. C LEO: Court physician to Grand Duke Ivan ITI. VassILIvicu of Russia; executed at Moscow April 22, 1490. With the arrival at Moscow of the grand duke’s second wife, Sophia Palsologus, niece of Con- stantine, the last Byzantine emperor (1478), active intercourse began between Russia and western Eu- rope. In 1490, when the brother of the grand duch- ess, Prince Andreas of Morea, and the Russian am- bassador to Rome visited the court of Moscow, they brought with them, besides some artists and me- chanics, a physician from Venice, named Leo. He was a Jew by birth, and is mentioned by the Rus- sian historians as “Mister Leon Zhidovin” (= “the Jew”). He was probably the first physician from western Europe to enter Russia. Leo had to pay for his temerity with his life; for he fell a victim to the superstition of the Musco- vites. Soon after hisarrival he had an opportunity to show his skill. Ivan Ivanovich, the son of the grand duke, had the gout; Leo, placing too much faith in his skill, assured the grand duke that he could effect a cure, and pledged his head in case of failure. He treated the patient with herbs and dry- cuppings; but the prince became worse, and died March 7, 1490. At that time the people believed inthe infallibility of medical science, and accordingly they accused the unsuccessful physician of ill-will. Leo was arrested, and, after the forty days of mourning had elapsed, was publicly beheaded at Bolvanov Place. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Richter, Gesch. der Medicin in Russland, i. 228-234; Russkaya Lyetopis po Nikon. Spisku, vii. 12; Polnoe Sobranie Russkikh Lyetopisei, vi. 239; Vremennoe Moskovskoe Obshchestvo Istorii, v. 5; Solovyev, Istoriya Rossii, v. 84, 260 (where the author erroneously calls Leo a German). H. R. NLR: LEO III.; LEO IV. See CHazars. LEO X. (GIOVANNI DE MEDICI): Two hundred and twenty-fourth pope; born at Florence Dec. 11, 1475; elected March 11, 1518; died Dec. 1, 1521. His pontificate was very favorable for the Jews in general and for the Jews of Rome in par- ticular. The latter saw in the kind treatment they received at his hands a sign of the arrival of the Messiah; and so much impressed were they with this idea that the leaders of the Roman community asked those of Jerusalem if such signs were not vis- ible in the Holy Land. While still a cardinal, Leo showed his spirit of toleration in bestowing his favor upon two Jewish musicians, Joan Maria and Jacopo Sansecondo, especially upon the former, who sub- sequently received from him the title of count. Like his predecessor, Alexander VI., Leo attached to his person as physician the Jewish rabbi Boner DE Lares; and De Lates exercised such influence upon the pope that Reuchlin solicited his interven- tion in connection with the examination of the “ Augenspiegel.” Another Jew who was persona grata at the papal court was Sabbatiano Solomonis, upon whom, in acknowledgment of his services, Leo bestowed a yearly pension of 60 gold ducats. The Jews of Rome were not the only beneficiaries of Leo’s generosity. Ina bull issued Sept. 8, 1514, Leo expressed his desire that the rights of the Jews should be respected, and repealed the edict of the Bishop of Carpentras, who had prescribed a special badge to be worn by the Jews of Avignon, Carpen- tras, and Venaissin. Of still greater importance was the bull of Nov. 1, 1519, in which the pope re- mitted the Jewish hearth and banking taxes, granted amnesty for all offenses committed by Jews, con- firmed all the privileges and advantages granted to them by his predecessors, and prescribed that a Jew- ish offender should be arraigned before qualified judges and should be condemned only on evidence given by trustworthy witnesses. Leo took a lively 683 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA a — interest in Jewish learning. In 1518 he authorized the establishment of a Hebrew printing-office in Rome, and in the same year granted a special privi- lege for the issuance of a new edition of the Talmud. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Hergenroether, Regesta Leonis X. Rome, fasc. vii., viii. 8, No. 18,652; Burckhardt, Gesch. der Cultur der Renaissance, ii. 137 et seg.; Lebanon, y. 406 et seq.; Kaufmann, in R. HE. J. xxi. 205; Gratz, Gesch. ix. 140 et seq.; Berliner, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, i. 78, 83, 103; Vogel- stein and Rieger, Gesch. der Juden in Rom, ii. 33 et seq. G. i BR: LEO HEBREUS (Abravanel, Judah): Phy- sician, philosopher, and poet; born in Lisbon in the second half of the fifteenth century, and died at Venice in 1585. He accompanied his father, Isaac Abravanel, when the latter went to Spain and after- ward to Naples, and became physician in ordinary to the Spanish captain-general Gonsalvo de Cordova. Thence he went to Genoa and later to Venice, where he finally settled. He never abandoned the faith of his forefathers (B. Zimmels, “ Neue Studien,” Vienna, 1892; E. Carmoly, “Ozar Nehmad,” ii. 70; Steinschneider, “Monatsschrift,” xlii. 420). His most important work, “Dialoghi di Amore” (Dia- logues of Love), was written about 1502, and pub- lished at Rome 1535. Its polished Italian and the lofty Platonic spirit with which it is imbued made it very popular. In the space of twenty years it went through five editions and was translated twice into French, three times into Spanish, and once into Latin; later also into Hebrew. Beside this work, he wrote, at the request of Pico de Mirandola, an astronomical work, which has remained unpublished, and several Hebrew poems, which have been embodied in the works of his father. He wrote also an elegy on the vicissitudes of the age in which he lived. This book was quite recently published. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Carmoly, Médecins Juifs, pp. 142 et seq.; Delitzsch, Orient, Lit. 1840, pp. 81 et seq.; Geiger, Ozar Nech- mad, ii. 225, similarly Gratz, Gesch.ix.7 et seq., 236 et seq.; Steinschneider, Cat. Bodl. col. 1602. G. Wi Les, LEO, LEWIS: Synagogue musician; born in London in 1809; died there Sept. 11, 1876; second son of the Rev. Simon Leo. He wasa musician and composer of much ability, and was the first to ar- range the various Hebrew chants and melodies for part-singing (1838), which eventually replaced the old “ bass-and-singer” style. Leo wrote the music for the inaugural service of the New Synagogue, and for the reconsecration of the Western Syna- gogue in 1836. His father, Simon Leo, was hazzan at the Den- mark Court Synagogue, London. In 1826 he re- moved with the congregation to St. Alban’s Place, and continued to officiate there. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Ansell Leo, about 1837. The latter left England for New York in 1846, where he held a similar position. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jew. Chron. Nov. 24, 1876; ib. Nov. a nae Je . . LEON: Ancient Spanish kingdom, bounded by Old Castile, Portugal, and Galicia. The Saracens ruled here until driven out by the Spaniards, who founded a kingdom of their own, which in 1218 was incorporated with Castile. In this kingdom of Leon, ‘ with its capital of the same name, Jews were living Lengfeld Leon at an early date, certainly at the end of the tenth century. They were engaged in cultivating the vine and in various trades. Hebrew bills of sale dating from the beginning of the eleventh century have been found at Leon. Before the year 1006 the Abbess of Santiago purchased a vineyard from the Jew Jayu (Haya). Other Jews of Leon are also mentioned in this period; e¢.g., Ezekiel, Samuel (1007), Vitas-Hayyim (1008), Jacob (1081), and Shem-Tob (1049). According to a document pre- served in the archives of the Cathedral of Leon, the Infanta D. Fronilda, daughter of D. Pelayo, who restored Christian supremacy after the invasion of the Saracens, purchased Nov. 4, 1053, from the Jew Joseph b. Joab Escapat for the sum of 50 dineros a vineyard at Montaurio; and in 1187 Auro Tota, daughter of Cid Crescent, and her husband, Isaac b. Moses of Leon, sold one-half of a vineyard situated in Castrillo de la Ribera, near Leon, to the “canon- icus” Albertin. In 1151 Pedro Pelasz bought a vine- yard from Auro, daughter of Cid, and her husband, Abraham b. Meir Mogusi (“R. E. J.” ii. 186, iv. 226). The earliest Hebrew inscription in Spain was found at Fuente Castro, the ancient “Castrum Ju- deorum” at Leon; it came from the tombstone of Yahya, the son of the goldsmith Joseph b. Aziz of Leon, who died on the 15th of Kislew, 4860 (= Nov. 18, 1100), and is now preserved in the archeological museum at Leon (Rios, “Estudios,” p. 29; ¢dem, SHISti ie OUree vant den lise oD), The Jews of Leon were assured equal rights with the Christian inhabitants of the country by the Cortes assembled at Leon in 1020 as Rights and well as in the Fuero of 1090; they Restric- were also permitted to take part in tions. duels; but they were subjected to special taxes. The Bishop of Leon received for himself and his clergy 500 sueldos a year from those taxes. When the Cortes, assembled at Leon in 1349, proposed that the Jews and Moors “living in the cities, boroughs, and villages of the kingdom of Leon” should pay the salaries of the judges and alcaldes, “because they pronounce sen- tence for them,” the king declared that no taxes in addition to the special taxes could be imposed upon the Jews (Cortes de Leon y Castilla, of the year 1849, Pet. ii.). In 1290 the Jews of Leon paid alto- gether 218,400 maravedis. The most important “aljamas” of the country were: Leon, Mansilla (Mansiella) de las Mulas, Mayorga, Sahagun, Pare- des, Valencia de Don Juan, Rueda, Astorga, Al- manza, and Carrion de los Condes. At Leon, where the Jews, like those at Mansilla, were very wealthy, there lived in the first half of the fourteenth century D. Abraham Royuelo, who, together with Sara, widow of Samuel Commineto, and Saul b. Uzziah of Mansilla, lent money to the knight Pedro Al- fonso de Boygas of Rueda on his estates, which after his death passed into the possession of the monas- tery of San Miguel de Escalana. D. Abraham, who then rented from the spendthrift prior of the monas- tery all the privileges and income of the same for a period of twenty-five years, in consideration of 5,000 maravedis a year, was ordered by the king after a few years to renounce all his claims. Many Jews Leon THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA 684 at Leon, Mansilla, and other cities succumbed to the plague in 1348 and 1849. In 1365 King D. Pedro of Castile obliged the Jews of Leon to contribute to the municipal taxes, from which they had hitherto been exempt. The Jews of Leon escaped neither the persecutions of the year 1391 nor the missionary sermons of Vicente Ferrer in 1412. The storm broke out at Benevent, as a dirge says, sweeping across Leon, Valencia de D. Juan, Astorga, Mayorga, and Palencia (Introduction to Simeon b. Zemah Du- ran’s “Magen Abot,” ed. A. Jellinek, Leipsic, 1855). King Alfonso VIII. commissioned the Jews of Mayorga to guard the castle there. Carrion de los Condes was inhabited chiefly by Jews, who enjoyed ancient privileges. The Jews of Valencia de D. Juan erected in 13879a handsome large Syna- synagogue in place of a small one,. gogues in thereby incurring the anger and envy Leon. of the clergy of that city; the-syna- gogue was in consequence transformed into a church soon after its completion. The Jews of Bembibre, a place not far from the city of Ponfer- rada, had a similar experience. Together with their coreligionists who lived scattered round about, they had replaced their old synagogue by a larger and handsomer building a few years previous to the gen- eral expulsion. It had just been dedicated when an abbot of the city forcibly entered it, removed the Torah rolls, set up a crucifix, and consecrated the building as a church. The Jews appealed to the authorities, who ordered the removal of the crucifix, and the restitution of the synagogue to its owners. The abbot, however, insisted that since the building had been dedicated as a church, it must remaina church, and he carried the matter to the Bishop of Cordova, D. Inigo Manrique, formerly Bishop of Leon and subsequently grandinquisitor. The latter decided the case in agreement with a bull of Inno- cent IV., dated April 15, 1250, according to which the Jews of Leon and Castile were not allowed to build new synagogues without special permission. As they had not complied with this condition they had forfeited their property rights; and the syna- gogue, having been dedicated as a church, could not be restored to them.. The abbot, however, was ordered to erect instead a substantial new building, 200 feet (five “tapicas”) high, 35 feet long, and 25 feet wide, on a site to be assigned to him by the city, and to hand it over to the Jews within six months. This verdict was delivered to the abbot in presence of the representative of the “aljamas,” R. Isaac Connueto, on May 19, 1490. The synagogue dedi- cated as a church still exists. Two years later the Jews of the former kingdom of Leon left the coun- try. Their movables and real estate, which they were obliged to sell at any price, fell inypart into the hands of the clergy. See Patrencta; SAHAGUN. BIBLIOGRAPHY : Boletin Acad. Hist. xxxii. 106 et seq., 116 et seq., 182; R. HB. J. iv. 2380, xxxvi. 187 et hes 140 et seq.; Rios, Hist. i. 174, 180 et seq., 331, 546 et seq.; ii. 57. ae G. bs a END OF VOL. VII. 7 i 4 _ Bal ™ _ \ - é = e . § y < ~~ Pie oe a : =——* » “ce oe a 7, a : j ~ Oo * gk = J = . 4 : ‘ / . Yi = “ / j = / - ; Ae : 3 ° & 2 ae sexs ~ err se SS fea> Sei Sse a et ies See : Se aes See Se Se — = eS —- SSS S SSE PES = * * 4 = Eco gna be Saas S55 73 pe ee se SS : =: = = =.= . acto: hye attire “a “4 Sts eee SR ES iE : s Re SSS 5 : ase SSE ae BS a Beaty een cess