The adventure of the maharal of Prague in London: R. Yudl Rosenberg and the golem of Prague

Tradition

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 26-58

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 62449139228     PISSN: 00410608     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (112)

1. S. Matlofsky, Bookseller, Judaica Booklist 105, May 1988, item 295
2. Encyclopaedia Judaica, Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 14, col. 159
3. Nor has the omission been rectified in the supplementary volumes. See, e.g., the various Encyclopaedia Judaica Tear Books and cf. The 1973-82 and the 1983-92 Encyclopaedia Judaica Decennial Books
4. Joseph Dan, Jerusalem, 1975, pp. 220-221. Cf. his 1(1981), pp. 85-86
5. 1911, appeared anonymously in Hebrew and Yiddish editions which differ slightly from each other. Although the work is clearly dependent upon R. Yudl's, Piotrkow, 1909 (assumes that a debate took place between Cardinal Johann Sylvester of Prague and the Maharal - a fact known only from), it does not appear to have been authored by R. Yudl. R. Yudl did not ordinarily shy away from claiming authorship or editorship of works he published. His name appears prominently on the tide pages of the first editions of the works he published (see, e.g., below, pp. 48, 50 and 52). Moreover, he often listed the titles of his earlier works on the title pages of his later works. See, e.g., R. Yudl's, Montreal, 1924, where he lists 11 of his previous publications and 2 of his unpublished manuscripts (awaiting publication) on the tide page. He was especially proud of his Maharal literary corpus; his name is prominendy displayed on the tide page of each work of the corpus., having appeared anonymously, does not conform to this pattern (see below, pp. 55 and 56). Moreover, nowhere does R. Yudl list as one of his works. Significant too is the fact that R. Yudl's, pp. 6-11, provides a detailed summary of the content of the alleged debates held between Cardinal Johann Sylvester of Prague and the Maharal. Yet, which purports to present the full text of the same debates, does not address 4 out of 5 of the key issues summarized by R. Yudl in Also, a close reading of (essentially a series of theological discourses based upon genuine passages from the Talmud and the writings of the Maharal) sets it quite apart, both in content and style, from the other members of R. Yudl's Maharal corpus. It would appear that the author (at the very least: editor) of was Dovberish Tursh (ca. 1863-1935). This is obvious from several passages in the Hebrew version of, where the text - using the first person Hebrew - refers the reader to passages from previous works by Tursh. Thus, e.g., p. 37, reads: the reference being to Tursh's, Warsaw, 1886. Again, p. 58, reads:, the reference being to Tursh's, Warsaw, 1895. Note too that Tursh's name appears in Russian on the tide pages of the first editions of (personal communication from Professor Ira Robinson, dated October 26, 1988; see, e.g., below, p. 55). On Tursh, see, New York, 1961, vol. 4, cols. 62-63
6. and G. Kressel, Tel Aviv, 1967, vol. 2, cols. 18-19
7. Both reference works ascribe to Tursh. Cf. C. B. Friedberg, Tel Aviv, 1951, vol. 2, p. 372
8. See, e.g., the tide page to R. Yudl's, New York, 1919. Cf. B. Z. Eisenstadt, New York, 1914, columns 319-320
9. See especially, p. 76, where R. Yudl lists the Maharal's immediate descendants. R. Yudl makes no attempt to "plug in" to any specific line
10. Z. Rejzen, Vilna, 1929, vol. 4, col. 114, lists 1865 as the year R. Yudl was born; most other sources list 1860. The correct date of birth is November 8, 1859
11. See below, pp. 47-52, where the tide pages, together with the additional pages that refer specifically to the Royal Library in Metz, are reproduced. In, Warsaw, 1904, a work ostensibly edited by R. Yudl's son, Meir Joshua Rosenberg, R. Yudl and the Royal Library in Metz are mentioned together for the first time (pp. 53-54). The only other reference to the Royal Library appears in the introduction to the Yiddish version of (see above, note 5), Piotrkow, 1911 (see below, p. 57)
12. The bibliographical history of is not without interest. For starters, the Hebrew edition is not listed in C.B. Friedberg, Tel Aviv, 1951, 4 vols. A Yiddish version, Lodz, no date, was probably published the same year as the Hebrew edition; the tide page notes that R Yudl "resides in Lodz." Copies of the first editions of are not easy to obtain. Many of the great Judaica collections in Jerusalem, New York, Cincinnati, and Cambridge (Mass.) do not own copies. This highlights another problem plaguing R. Yudl Rosenberg scholarship: no library seems to own a complete set of R. Yudl's publications. Since it is essential that the Hebrew and Yiddish versions be compared to each other, and that first editions be compared to later editions, only the diligent and itinerant scholar is likely to advance discussion. Other editions of are: Jerusalem, 1951, and New York, 1985 (the latter being a photographic reproduction of the Piotrkow edition). Taking its cue from the first Hebrew edition, the second Hebrew edition is not listed in M. Moria, Safed, 1974-77, 7 volumes. has also appeared in a variety of Yiddish and English versions. In common, none of these versions mentions R Yudl; in some versions, the story is ascribed to a new author/editor. Minor changes in the plot, characters' names, and place names are commonplace. See, e.g., S. A. Hirshkovits, ed., n", Bnei Brak, no date; Anonymous, in 7(1948), n. 1, pp. 4-6, n. 2, pp. 6-9, n. 3, pp. 8-10, n. 6, pp. 7-9
13. Israel Cohen, "The Choshen Mishpat: The Secret of the British Museum," Haderech 2(1953-54), n. 7, pp. 13-15, n. 8, pp. 7-9, n. 9, pp. 8-10, n. 10, pp. 9-12, n. 11, pp. 7-11
14. (reissued in Haderech, London, 1973 and 1979)
15. Anonymous, "The Mystery of the Twelve Stones," Talks and Tales 18(1959), n. 215, pp. 6-9, n. 216, pp. 6-8, n. 217, pp. 8-11, n. 219, pp. 6-8, n. 220, pp. 9-11
16. (reissued in: D. Grossman, ed., Leader's Guide: Shemot [published by Agudath Israel of America], New York, 1986, pp. 196-208)
17. G. Winkler's The Sacred Stones: The Return of the Golem, New York, 1991, is an original and imaginative novel based in part on R. Yudl's
18. The date 1590 was not arrived at arbitrarily. According to, the Golem was created in 1580 (p. 13) and destroyed in 1590 (p. 69), at which point the narrative portion of comes to a close. picks up precisely where left off
19. On R. Manoah Hendel, see The Jewish Encyclopaedia, New York, 1912, vol. 8, p. 296
20. For a list of his published and unpublished writings, see his introduction to a commentary on Bahya Ibn Paquda's Sulzbach, 1691 (also available in: S. Asaf, Tel Aviv, 1954, vol. 1, pp. 41-43)
21. See R.L. Green and J.M. Gibson, A Bibliography of A. Conan Doyle, Oxford, 1983, pp. 149-151
22. A. Conan Doyle's short stories were regularly translated into Russian, almost as soon as they appeared in print in England. See, e.g., R.B. De Waal, The World Bibliography of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson, Boston, 1974, pp. 79-83. Thus, for example, a Russian edition of Conan Doyle's collected works appeared in Moscow, 1904. Most New York libraries do not own complete sets of Conan Doyle's writings in English, much less so in Russian. Thus, I could not locate the earliest edition of The Jew's Breastplate in Russian. Nonetheless, there is no reason to question R. Yudl's claim that was drawn from a Russian translation of the original English version
23. See Z. Cohen and J. Fox, eds., Montreal, 1931, p. 5
24. cf. N. Shemen, in Toronto, 1943, p. 105
25. This will be obvious to anyone who reads Conan Doyle's The Jew's Breastplate and R. Yudl's Actually, R. Yudl as much as admits that he borrowed from Conan Doyle, though he doesn't reveal the full extent of the expropriation. In p. 5, R. Yudl writes: At p. 26 he writes:[sic] Conon Dyuil In the letter appended to the end of the two accounts, we read: .[sic] Conan Dqoil [sic] Eduard Martimer In any event, it is unlikely that R. Yudl's readers realized to whom he was referring. The earliest reference in print to the relationship between The Jew's Breastplate and appears in N. Shalem, in, Jerusalem, 1935, pp. 197-214 (reissued in: N. Shalem, Jerusalem, 1974, pp. 503-519)
26. See also S. A. Halpern, Tales of Faith, Jerusalem, 1968, pp. 11-12
27. Cf. Halpern's revised account in his The Prisoner and Other Tales of Faith, Jerusalem, 1981, pp. 11-12
28. A striking example, allegedly told by the Maharal in 1590, occurs when Captain Wilson explains to him that he succeeded in stealing the precious stones without being detected, due to the fact that he replaced them with fakes that were exact replicas of the original jewels. The text (on p. 11) reads
29. See A. Conan Doyle, Memoirs and Adventures, Boston, 1924, pp. 9-13, where he indicates that he studied Latin and Greek in school after a fashion, and learned French and German on his own. Hebrew is not mentioned
30. Personal communication dated October 9, 1987 from Andrea Reay, on behalf of the Head of the Reading Room, Bibliographical Information Service, The British Library
31. See F. Francis, Treasures of the British Museum, London, 1971, p. 9
32. See G. Scholem's review of H. Bloch's [Vienna, 1924] in 1(1924-25), p. 106, where he writes regarding the Royal Library in Metz: On a recent visit to Metz, I asked one of the head librarians at the Bibliotheque-Mediatheque, Metz' municipal library, whether he had ever heard of a Royal Library in Metz. He smiled, looked at me with disdain, and nodded his head back and forth, as if to indicate that my query confirmed his worst suspicions about American scholars and scholarship
33. This includes, among others, R. Zemah bar Ahai Gaon's, R. Manoah Hendel's, the Maharal's (see pp. 4 and 80), and R. Isaac b. Samson Katz's
34. See below, pp. 49, 51 and 54
35. Except for R. Yudl, no one seems to have met with, and bought manuscripts from, Hayyim Scharfstein. If one compares all the letters ascribed by R. Yudl to Hayyim Scharfstein, one notices subtle differences between the letters, which seem to cast doubt on their authenticity. In (1904), Scharfstein refers to R. Yudl as not In (1905), Scharfstein - in a letter allegedly sent from Metz - refers to R. Yudl as as well. The term refers to a blood relative, and it is unclear how between 1904 and 1905 Scharfstein and R. Yudl became blood relatives. In, Scharfstein refers to the library as In it is referred to as In it becomes with no mention of its "Royal" aspect. For these and similar arguments, which are suggestive but hardly decisive, see A. Benedict, 14 (1985), n. 3-4, pp. 102-113
36. Passing off fiction as fact is a well attested literary convention. But for an author who contributed simultaneously to rabbinic literature and belles-lettres, it invited confusion. For how was the reader to distinguish between fact and fiction? In the case of, R. Yudl is twice referred to as its (on the title page; and on the reverse side of the title page). R. Yudl may have been alerting his readers that this was fiction, not fact. The issue of plagiarism may not arise here, for Conan Doyle's contribution is acknowledged, at least in part. See above, note 17
37. See also Benedict's 16(1989), n. 9-10, pp. 124-130
38. cf. S. Fischer, 1(1989), n. 3, p. 69
39. S. Ashkenazi, 1(1989), n. 4, p. 122
40. and S. Mallin, ed., The Maharal Haggadah, Jerusalem, 1993, pp. 375-382
41. These studies free us from discussing the third member of R. Yudl's Maharal corpus, the Nonetheless, much more remains to be said about it. Suffice to note here that among the many misled by R. Yudl's edition of the Maharal's were: H.S. Leiner, Lublin, 1925, p. 48
42. E. Kitov, Jerusalem, 1963, vol. 2, p. 106
43. M. Kasher, Jerusalem, 1967, p. 177
44. M.Y. Katz, Brooklyn, 1972, pp. 251-252
45. Y. Tamar, Jerusalem, 1992, vol. 1, p. 291 (to j. Pesahim 10:1)
46. and S. and Z. Safrai, Jerusalem, 1998, p. 41, n. 112
47. A full bibliographical survey of the various editions and translations of remains a scholarly desideratum. I have consulted the following Hebrew editions of Piotrkow, 1909
48. Lvov, 1910 (a pirated edition that omits any mention of R. Yudl); Warsaw, 1913; and the edition printed in E. Yassif, ed., Jerusalem, 1991. I consulted two Yiddish versions: Warsaw, 1913; Jerusalem, 1968. I also used a bilingual Hebrew-Yiddish version entided no place, no date, but based upon the pirated Lvov, 1910 Hebrew edition listed above. English translations appear in: J. Neugroschel, Yenne Velt: The Great Works of Jewish Fantasy and Occult, New York, 1976, vol. 1, pp. 162-225
49. and G. Winkler, The Golem of Prague, New York, 1980
50. An already vast and still burgeoning literature on Golems in general, and on the Golem of Prague in particular, forces us to be selective in the titles we list here. Some of the more important studies on Golems in general are: B. Rosenfeld, Die Golemsage una ihre Verwertung in der deutschen Lieratur, Breslau, 1934
51. G. Scholem, "The Idea of the Golem," in his On the Kabbalah and Its Symbolism, New York, 1965, pp. 158-204
52. S. Mayer, Golem: Die Literarische Rezeption eines Stoffes, Bern, 1975
53. B.L. Sherwin, The Golem Legend: Origins and Implications, Lanham, 1985
54. M. Idel, Golem: Jewish Magical and Mystical Traditions on the Artificial Anthropoid, Albany, 1990 (cf. The expanded Hebrew version, Tel Aviv, 1996)
55. and P. Schäfer, "The Magic of the Golem: The Early Development of the Golem Legend," Journal of Jewish Studies 46:1-2(1995), pp. 249-261
56. For the Golem of Prague, see N. Grün, Der Hohe Rabbi Löw und sein Sagenkreis, Prague, 1885
57. V. Klein, "Prazky Golem," Vestnik Zidovske obce Nabozenske v Praze 3(1936), pp. 27-28
58. E. E. Kisch, "The Golem," in his Tales From Seven Ghettos, London, 1948, pp. 153-165
59. A.L. Goldsmith, The Golem Remembered,1909-1980: Variations of a Jewish Legend, Detroit, 1981
60. V. Sadek, "Stories of the Golem and their Relation to the Work of Rabbi Löw of Prague," Judaica Bohemiae 23(1987), pp. 85-91
61. and I. Mackerle, Tajemstvi Prazskeho Golema, Prague, 1992 (an account of a visit to the attic of Prague's Altneuschul, accompanied by photographs)
62. See M. Eckstein, Marmarossziget, 1910. Cf. A. Gottesdiener, Jerusalem, 1976, p. 100, note 1 [which appeared in print earlier in 4(1937), p. 348]
63. See David Gans (d. 1613), ed. M. Breuer, Jerusalem, 1983, p. 145
64. Cf. The testimony of R. Isaac b. Samson Katz (Maharal's son-in-law; d. 1624) published in S. Rubin, 16(1872), number 14, pp. 163-164; some, however, question the authenticity of this account of R. Isaac b. Samson's testimony
65. See H. J. Kieval, "Pursuing the Golem of Prague: Jewish Culture and the Invention of a Tradition," Modern Judaism 17(1997), p. 17, note 16
66. See, e.g., Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi 3(1920), pp. 297-354
67. 4(1935), p. 288
68. and 5(1952), p. 323
69. and cf. A. Frind, Die Geschichte der Bischoefe ttnd Erzbischoefe von Prag, Prague, 1873, pp. 178-249. This simple fact is a sample of the kind of information scholars need to investigate and clarify before they address the larger issues raised by R. Yudl's literary contributions. Regarding the origin of the name "Johann Sylvester," see the unlikely explanation proffered by A. Gottesdiener, op. cit. (above, note 30), p. 101, n. 3. A more likely explanation is that R. Yudl read about the sixteenth century Christian Hebraist, Johann Sylvester, and decided to borrow his name for the He could easily have seen a copy of J. Danko, Johann Sylvester Pannonius: Professor der hebraeischen Sprache an der Wiener Universitaet, Vienna, 1871
70. On Johann Sylvester, see R. Dan, 42(1967), pp. 497-502
71. cf. his remarks in Magyar Koenyv - szemie 85(1969), pp. 163-168
72. The earliest printed reference to the Maharal's Golem appeared in B. Auerbach, Spinoza, Stuttgart, 1837, vol. 2, pp. 2-3
73. Kieval's claim (in "Pursuing the Golem of Prague," p. 7; see above, note 32) that the first such reference appeared in 1841 needs to be revised accordingly. Two printed references (and the first by a non-Jew) to the Maharal's Golem appeared in 1841
74. For the non-Jewish reference, see F. Klutschak's "Der Golam [sic] des Rabbi Löw," Panorama des Universums 8(1841), pp. 75ff
75. reprinted in Kieval, "Pursuing the Golem," pp. 21-23
76. For the Jewish reference, see G. Philippson, "Der Golem," Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums 5(1841), number 44, pp. 629-631
77. This is obvious from the wording of all the early accounts, especially Auerbach's. See also A.M. Tendlau, "Der Golem des Hoch Rabbi Löb," in his Das Buch der Sagen und Legenden jüdischer Vorzeit, Stuttgart, 1842, pp. 16-18. In an additional note on p. 242, Tendlau attests that his knowledge of the Maharal's Golem is based entirely upon oral tradition
78. A tradition about R. Ezekiel Landau's (d. 1793) desire to visit the remains of the Golem in the attic of Prague's Altneuschul was recorded in the mid-nineteenth century and published in Rabbi N.H. Levin's notes to Meir Perles, Warsaw, 1864 (reissued in:, London, 1962, vol. 1, p. 19, n. 7)
79. Rationalism aside, what militates against the notion that the Maharal created a Golem is the fact that nowhere in his voluminous writings is there any indication that he created one. More importandy, no contemporary or disciple of the Maharal - neither Jew nor Gentile in Prague - seems to have been aware tiiat the Maharal created a Golem. Even when eulogized, whether in Gans' or on his epitaph, not a word is said about the creation of a Golem. No Hebrew work published in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries (even in Prague) is aware that the Maharal created a Golem. In this context, it is worth noting that R. Yedidia Tiah Weil (1721-1805), a distinguished Talmudist who was born in Prague and resided there for many years - and who was a disciple of his father R. Nathaniel Weil and of R. Jonathan Eibeschuetz, both of them long time residents of Prague - makes no mention of the Maharal's Golem. This, despite the fact tiiat he discusses golems in general, and offers proof that even "close to his time" golems existed. The proof is a listing of famous golems, such as the golems created by R. Avigdor Kara (d. 1439) and R. Eliyahu Ba'al Shem (d. 1583). Noticeably absent is any mention of the Maharal and his Golem. See Weil's, Jerusalem, 1988, p. 37
80. In his letter appended to K. Lieben, Prague, 1856, p. LIII
81. See G. Winkler, The Golem of Prague, p. 299
82. On literary forgery and the motives tiiat drive it, see A. Grafton, Forgers and Critics, Princeton, 1990, especially pp. 36-68
83. Z. Cohen and J. Fox, eds., Montreal, 1931
84. See J. Lehmann, Dr. Markus Lehmann, Frankfurt, 1910
85. cf. O.M. Lehmann, Faith at the Brink, Brooklyn, 1996, pp. 293-304
86. See B.A. Reich, 15(1999), pp. 211-212, and the appended editor's note
87. See Montreal, 1924, vol. 1, pp. 9-10
88. New York, 1925, vol. 3, p. 6
89. See the beginning ofp. 2, appended to New York, 1925, vol. 3. The Emden passage was also inserted at the end of, p. 44, appended to New York, 1925, vol. 4. In a recent three volume reprint (Jerusalem, no date) of it appears at the end of volume 1, opposite p. 14 a kabbalistic treatise appended to R. Yudl's
90. See Emden's Altona, 1769, and cf. R. Yudl's introduction to the Zohar on Leviticus in his vol. 3, p. 6
91. See Rabbi H.Y.D. Azulai, Jerusalem, 1979, vol. 2, pp. 44-45, entry R. David Luria, New York, 1951, p. 10
92. and R. Yeruham Leiner, New York, 1951, pp. 152-160
93. The bibliographies prepared by D. Rome, A Selected Bibliography of Jewish Canada, Montreal, 1959, pp. 16-18
94. and by H. L. Fox, 100 Montreal, 1980, pp. 273-277, are neither accurate nor comprehensive. In the bibliography Fox prepared for the New York, 1981, vol. 8, columns 333-334, he lists: A Yiddish or Hebrew book entitled and published either at Lodz, 1905 or Montreal, 1931 is unknown to Jewish libraries and bibliographers. R. Yudl's work was entitled The bibliographical blurbs seem to describe a scientific treatise of antiquarian interest. No mention is made of the Maharal or of a theft. Are these blurbs an attempt at revisionist history, i.e., an attempt at severing any relationship between R. Yudl's scholarly work (an alleged analysis of the jewels on the High Priest's breastplate) and the crude and obvious reworking of A. Conan Doyle's adventure that was ascribed to the Maharal?
95. See the apocryphal letter of the Maharal (to R. Jacob Ginzberg) - together with an alleged facsimile of the Maharal's autograph - published by H. Bloch, Vienna, 1924, pp. 86-94 and 110
96. The apocryphal letter was republished independendy by Rabbi J.M. Weiss of Spinka, Varenov, 1931, vol. 2, pp. 2-4. Bloch claims that he received the letter through the efforts of K Samuel Neuwirth of Vienna, but doesn't indicate its place of origin. The letter is clearly dependent upon moreover, the substance and style of the letter and are the same and complementary. It appears that whoever wrote the one wrote the other
97. In the case of it is evident that the Hebrew version preceded the Yiddish version. Apparendy, R. Yudl did not prepare the Yiddish translation. The tide page of the Yiddish version reads in part
98. For an amusing instance of a difference between the Hebrew and Yiddish versions, see p. 25, where R. Yudl writes in a gloss: The Yiddish version, p. 35, corrects the error
99. In this regard, R. Yudl's edition of Warsaw, 1913, is problematic. The title page of part two of reads: What follows is a Yiddish biography of Maimonides, which the innocent reader assumes was either written, edited, or translated (from the Hebrew) by R. Yudl, based upon trustworthy sources. In fact, the entire volume was authored in Yiddish by Israel Hayyim Zagorodski (1864-1931), and was published several times under its author's name prior to its inclusion in R. Yudl's. While R. Yudl did not explicitly claim the work as his own, he also did not identify the original author
100. This borrowing on the part of R. Yudl was first noted by Jacob I. Dienstag, "Maimonides in Yiddish Literature: A Bio-Bibliographical Survey," Yiddish 7 (1987), n. 1, pp. 92 and 99-100
101. See H.L. Fox, Tel Aviv, 1972, passim
102. R. Yudl's, 2 parts, Warsaw, 1902, is a classic commentary on [pseudo] Rashi and Ran to b. Nednrim. It has been reprinted numerous times and is probably the only work of R. Yudl included in many a yeshiva library to this very day
103. Among his halakhic contributions are: Toronto, 1914; New York, 1919; and Montreal, 1924. The last mentioned was especially controversial, and it continues to generate controversy (and literature) in halakhic circles
104. Aside from his translation of the Zohar, see, e.g., R. Yudl's, Bilgoray, 1935
105. For a general assessment of R. Yudl's translation of the Zohar, see I. Tishby, Jerusalem, 1971, vol. 1, Introduction, p. 113, n. 1
106. Professor Ira Robinson of Concordia University is preparing a definitive biography of R. Yudl entitled A Kabbalist in Montreal: The Life and Times of Rabbi Tttdel Rosenberg. His volume will surely address the issues raised here and many others as well. Meanwhile, see his "A Letter from the Sabbath Queen: Rabbi Yudel Rosenberg Addresses Montreal Jewry," in I. Robinson, P. Anctil, and M. Butovsky, eds., An Everyday Miracle: Yiddish Culture in Montreal, Montreal, 1990, pp. 101-114
107. "Literary Forgery and Hasidic Judaism: The Case of Rabbi Yudel Rosenberg," Judaism 40(1991), pp. 61-78
108. "The Uses of the Hasidic Story: Rabbi Yudel Rosenberg and his Tales of the Greiditzer Rabbi," Journal of the Society of Rabbis in Academia 1:1-2(1991), pp. 543-551
109. "The First Hasidic Rabbis in North America," American Jewish Archives 44(1992), pp. 501-515
110. and "The Tarler Rebbe of Lodz and his Medical Practice: Towards a History of Hasidic Life in Pre-First World War Poland," Polin 11(1998), pp. 53-61
111. H. Bloch, The Golem: Legends of the Ghetto of Prague, Vienna, 1925
112. I am deeply grateful to Professors David Berger, Elazar Hurvitz, Ira Robinson, and Richard C. Steiner; Rabbis Eliezer Katzman and Menachem Silber; and Zalman Alpert for sharing their knowledge with me. Their sound advice is the cause that there is wisdom in others. As usual, the members of the library staff at the Mendel Gottesman Library of Yeshiva University extended courtesies even beyond the call of duty. Regarding all the aforementioned: