Abstract
Anyone who knows a little about German Bible translations knows the translation of the Hebrew Bible by Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig. Anyone who deals more intensively with the topic has also heard of other Jewish translations into German (“Zunz,” “Philippson,” “Tur Sinai”) or perhaps even used them before. But this is only a fraction of what can be discovered here and what Abigail Gillman unfolds with great care and extensive expertise in her study.
Gillman sorts the Jewish German translations into four waves: The beginning with Moses Mendelssohn (1783) was followed by a second wave in the first half of the nineteenth century with Joseph Johlson (1831), Gotthold Salomon (1837), Leopold Zunz (1838), and Salomon Herxheimer (1841–1848). Gillman then sees Ludwig Philippson (1839–1854) and Samson Raphael Hirsch (1867–1878) as representatives of the third wave, before the final fourth wave with Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig (1925–1927). Not all translations in this period are mentioned, but Gillman is concerned not with completeness, but with an overview of the Jewish German Bible translations as a whole. Incidentally, the scope of the translated texts varies considerably: some include only the Pentateuch, others, the entire Hebrew Bible.
Gillman wants to understand each translation above all in its religious and cultural-historical context. For this reason, she begins her survey even before Mendelssohn with two editions of the Bible in Yiddish which were published in Amsterdam in 1678 and 1679. And in addition to Buber–Rosenzweig, she presents the German translation of the “women’s Bible” Zeenah u-Reenah by Bertha Pappenheim (1930; not a Bible translation but Bible stories and teaching) as part of her “fourth wave.” Thus, her definition of the four waves underlines once again that the respective works have a context and can only be properly understood in that context.
The direct comparison of translation strategies, on the other hand, recedes into the background. For example, there is no table in which a particular verse or passage is presented at a glance in all translations covered. But there is an illustration for each Bible edition discussed, so that one can imagine the work a little better. This is indispensable, especially for the edition of Mendelssohn. Hardly anyone would recognize his Pentateuch translation as such at first glance. The layout is more reminiscent of a rabbinic Bible, because he even wrote the German translation in Hebrew letters. He named this part “Targum Ashkenazi” and placed it at the top left of the page. To the right was the Masoretic text. In another section are the Tikkun Soferim (Scribal Corrections). The lower and larger part of the page is then occupied by a commentary on the text which was written partly by Mendelssohn, partly by others. This page layout makes it clear from the outset that the translation is deeply rooted in Jewish tradition. At the same time, however, Mendelssohn with his translation wanted to build a bridge to the surrounding German culture for his Jewish readership. And even if he proceeded very cautiously, the following decades and the subsequent translations show that this bridge has been successfully built.
At this point, I would like to note an interesting detail. Although Gillman quotes rather few specific passages from Mendelssohn’s translation, two phrases from these examples seemed very familiar to me. Genesis 6.9 says of Noah that he wandelte mit Gott “walked with God.” And in Exod 15.1, God is praised as hoch erhaben “highly exalted.” Strikingly, both phrases are now part of the Luther Bible. This has been true for Gen 6.9 since 1964, and for Exod 15.1 since 2017. It cannot be assumed that the people entrusted with the revision of Luther’s translation expressly used Mendelssohn’s translation. But Mendelssohn was already closer to the Hebrew text in both verses than Luther himself in his time, and this insight then prevailed in the revision of the Luther Bible. A more detailed comparison could certainly identify other interesting points of contact here.
Similarly to Mendelssohn, later translators also tried to build bridges with their readership. The various translations thus also reflect the different currents in German-speaking Judaism. “Translation” stands not only for the text itself, but for the overall concept of the respective edition of the Bible. In his edition, Mendelssohn combines a comparatively modern German translation with a page layout that is deeply rooted in Jewish tradition. The language in the edition of the Bible named after Zunz, on the other hand, stays closer to the Hebrew text, but its page layout is more like a Christian Bible. And so, each of the works presented has its own profile, its own intention to have an impact. Some of them found a larger readership (e.g., Philippson and Buber-Rosenzweig), while others did not get beyond a first edition (e.g., Herxheimer).
Gillman is clearly right to consider the various works in their respective contexts. In order to understand the various translations and their concerns, one would actually have to have the edition in one’s hand and perceive for oneself what is offered—or not—in addition to the text. It is therefore only logical that Gillman does not compare translation techniques so much, but tries to convey an overall impression of each work.
Overall, Gillman succeeds very well in describing the rich tradition of Jewish German Bible translations from Mendelssohn to Buber–Rosenzweig in their respective profiles, and thus opens up an insight into the diverse and productive Jewish-German culture over these 150 years. One cannot read this book without being reminded of the terrible end of this particular culture. In fact, Martin Buber did not complete his translation until after the Holocaust. Hence, it also became a memorial and a lasting reminder of the fate of the people for whom this translation was actually intended.
Gillman’s work is not easy to read. She assumes solid knowledge of the culture and traditions of the audiences for whom the translations were intended. But her book is definitely worth reading, and it makes you want to pick up the translations yourself, study them further, and learn from their different approaches to the Old Testament.