No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A New Volume of Hungarian Essays by Ignaz Goldziher*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2007
Extract
Though best known for his formative and decisive contributions to the field of Arab-Islamic studies, the Hungarian orientalist Ignaz Goldziher (1850–1921) also had a considerable impact on the field of Jewish studies. His first publication, at the age of twelve, already reveals his interests in the history of Judaism and its prospects in the modern world,1 and his doctoral dissertation, prepared as a teenager working under the supervision of the great H. L. Fleischer (1801–1888) in Leipzig on the thirteenth-century Jewish philologist and exegete Tanḥūm ben Joseph Yerūshalmī,2 already displays its author as “a very distinguished scholarly mind”.3 His first extended monograph dealt with issues concerning the function and importance of mythology among the ancient Israelites,4 and further, with the anti-Semitic and racist theories of European scholars and intellectuals like Ernest Renan (1823–1892).5
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2007
Footnotes
*
A review essay on Ignaz Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, [Összeállította: Kőbányai János; Szerkesztette és a jegyzeteket fordította: Zsengellér József] (Budapest: Múlt és Jövő Kiadó, 2000). pp. 717. ISBN 963 9171 50 6. This is the second recent publication of valuable articles in Hungarian by Goldziher. The other is a two-volume collection entitled Az arabok és az iszlám: válogatott tanulmányok (“The Arabs and Islam: Selected Studies”) (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtára, 1995), edited by István Ormos. I would like to thank István Ormos for reading an early draft of this essay and offering numerous helpful and important suggestions and corrections.
References
1 Ignaz Goldziher, Sichat-Yiczchak. Abhandlung über Ursprung, Eintheilung und Zeit der Gebete (Pest: Johann Herz, 1862). This work, printed in the old Frakturschrift, is extremely rare, with one copy in Budapest and a partly defective photocopy in Jerusalem. Here I will quote from the re-edition of the text in my forthcoming Der Bildungsweg eines Islamwissenschaftlers. Ignaz Goldziher und sein “Sichat-Jiczchak”.
2 Ignaz Goldziher, Studien über Tanchûm Jerûschalmi (Leipzig: List und Franke, 1870). On Goldziher in Leipzig, see Róbert Simon, Ignác Goldziher: His Life and Scholarship as Reflected in his Works and Correspondence (Budapest: Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1986), pp. 35–40; Róbert Simon, Goldziher Ignác: Vázlatok az emberről és a tudósról (Budapest: Osiris Könyvtár, 2000), pp. 46–51; Holger Preißler, “Ignaz Goldziher in Leipzig – Ein ungarischer Jude studiert Orientalistik”, Leipziger Beiträge zur jüdischen Geschichte und Kultur 3 (2005), pp. 293–315; Simon Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, in Éva Apor and István Ormos, eds., Goldziher Memorial Conference (Budapest: Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 2005), pp. 125–127; Peter Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft. Der ungarische Orientalist Ignác Goldziher (1850–1921) (Köln: Böhlau Verlag, 2006), pp. 112–116.
3 Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, p. 126.
4 Ignaz Goldziher, Der Mythos bei den Hebräern und seine geschichtliche Entwickelung (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1876); trans. Russell Martineau as Mythology among the Hebrews and its Historical Development (London: Longmans, Green, 1877). On this work see Róbert Simon, “Bevezetés”, in Ignaz Goldziher, Az iszlám kultúrája: művelődéstörténeti tanulmányok, ed. Róbert Simon (Budapest: Gondolat, 1981), I, pp. 9–19; idem, Ignác Goldziher, pp. 77–87.
5 There is an enormous corpus of critical literature on Renan. Some of the studies most relevant here are Georges Sorel, Le système historique de Renan (Paris: C. Jacques, 1905–1906); André Cresson, Ernest Renan: sa vie, son œuvre, avec un exposé de sa philosophie (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1949); Harold W. Wardman, Renan: historien philosophe (Paris: Éditions C.D.U.-SEDES, 1979); Francis Mercury, Renan (Paris: O. Orban, 1990); Charles Chauvin, Renan (1823–1892) (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 2000); Matthias Dörries, Ernest Renan: a Prophet in a Scientific Age (Berlin: Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte, 2000). For Goldziher's views on Renan, see Lawrence I. Conrad, “Ignaz Goldziher on Ernest Renan: From Orientalist Philology to the Study of Islam”, in Martin Kramer, ed., The Jewish Discovery of Islam: Studies in Honor of Bernard Lewis (Tel Aviv: Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, 1999), pp. 137–180. Since the appearance of this study Goldziher's own assessment of Renan in Hungarian has been published in German translation; see n. 16 below.
6 Ps.-Baḥya ben Joseph ben Paquda, Buch vom Wesen der Seele, ed. Ignaz Goldziher (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1907).
7 “Mélanges judéo-arabes”, Revue des études juives 43 (1901), pp. 1–14; 44 (1902), pp. 63–72; 45 (1902), pp. 1–12; 47 (1902), pp. 41–46, 179–186; 49 (1904), pp. 219–230; 49 (1904–1905), pp. 32–44; 50 (1905), pp. 182–190; 55 (1908), pp. 54–59; 60 (1910), pp. 32–38.
8 Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, p. 112–115 (p. 115 for the quotation).
9 But he was never a professor at this institution. See Samuel Löwinger, ed., Seventy Years: a Tribute to the Seventieth Anniversary of the Jewish Theological Seminary of Hungary (1877–1947) (Budapest: Neuwald Illés Utódai, 1948), p. 45.
10 The most important of these are Christiaan Snouck Hurgronje, “Ignaz Goldziher”, De Gids 4 (1921), pp. 489–499; = Snouck's Verspreide Geschriften, ed. A. J. Wensinck (Bonn and Leipzig: Kurt Schroeder, 1923–1926; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1927), VI, pp. 453–464; C. H. Becker, “Ignaz Goldziher”, Der Islam 12 (1922), pp. 214–222; = Becker's Islamstudien (Leipzig: Verlag Quelle und Meyer, 1924–1932), II, pp. 499–514; Richard Hartmann, “Ignaz Goldziher”, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 76 (1922), pp. 285–290; Immánuel Löw, “Goldziher Ignác”, in his Száz beszéd 1900–1922 (Szeged: Schwarz Jenő kiadása, 1923), pp. 299–309; A. S. Yahuda, “Die Bedeutung der Goldziherschen Bibliothek für die zukünftige Hebräische Universität”, Der Jude 8 (1924), pp. 575–592; László Kosztka, “Goldziher Ignác, az író” (“Ignaz Goldziher, the Author”), Budapesti Szemle 210 (1928), pp. 456–466; Julius Németh, “Goldzihers Jugend”, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 1 (1950–1951), pp. 7–25; Joseph de Somogyi, “Ignaz Goldziher (1850–1921)”, Muslim World 41 (1951), pp. 199–208; idem, “My Reminiscences of Ignace Goldziher”, Muslim World 51 (1961), pp. 5–17. Cf. also Raphael Patai, “The Seminary and Oriental Studies”, in Moshe Carmilly-Weinberger, ed., The Rabbinical Seminary of Budapest, 1877–1977: a Centennial Volume (New York: Sepher-Hermon Press, 1986), pp. 184–193, at pp. 187–192; Alexander Scheiber, “Goldziher Ignác”, in Goldziher, Az iszlám kultúrája, II, pp. 1065–1082. A full listing of the published obituaries and memorial pieces on Goldziher was included by Alexander Scheiber in his edition of Goldziher's Tagebuch (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1978), pp. 329–330; updated in his bibliography to Goldziher, Az iszlám kultúrája, II, pp. 1093–1095.
11 From the very beginning Goldziher intended his Tagebuch to serve as a record that would be seen by his family and close friends. See Tagebuch, pp. 15, 55, 116, 218 (17 April 1898); also István Ormos, “Goldziher's Mother Tongue: a Contribution to the Study of the Language Situation in Hungary in the Nineteenth Century”, in Apor and Ormos, eds., Goldziher Memorial Conference, pp. 236–237. This diary frequently presumes a posthumous readership and guides the reader to where relevant items of interest may be found in his library or correspondence: Tagebuch, pp. 111, 112, 116, 156 (30 December 1892), 228 (9 May 1900), 250 (4 March 1906), 264 (5 March 1910), 269 (25 August 1911), 275 (9 April 1913), 276 (12 May 1913), 281 (9 January 1914), 300–301 (3 August 1917), 313 (1 September 1919).
12 The editors provide no original publication details for this study. The first five sections comprised lectures delivered in Budapest in the winter of 1887–1888; they were published in Magyar-Zsidó Szemle 5 (1888), pp. 1–14, 65–80, 138–155, 261–279, 389–406. The final lecture was not published until the entire series was reprinted shortly after Goldziher's death in a new two-volume edition by József Bánóczi and Ignác Gábor (Budapest: Népszerű Zsidó Könyvtár, 1923–1924).
13 For this study as well the editors provide no original publication details. It first appeared in Értekezések a nyelv- és széptudományok köréből 13.3 (1886), pp. 1–72.
14 I.e. the famous Jewish grammarian and lexicographer (d. ca. 1050) and the most eminent scholar of these fields in Hebrew in the Middle Ages. Still useful is Wilhelm Bacher, Leben und Werke des Abulwalîd Merwân ibn Ganâh, und die Quellen seiner Schrifterklärung (Leipzig: Schulze, 1885; repr. Amsterdam: Philo Press, 1970). This article is also reproduced in facsimile in Ormos, ed., Az arabok és az iszlám, I, pp. 407–414.
15 Translated from “Tradition und Dogma”, Allgemeine Zeitung des Judentums 1 (1914), pp. 6–8; 2 (1914), pp. 22–23; 3 (1914), pp. 33–35. An English translation, “Tradition and Dogma”, appeared in The Reform Advocate (Chicago) 48 (1914), pp. 6–9, 39–42.
16 German trans. by Peter Zalán as Renan als Orientalist, ed. Friedrich Niewöhner (Zürich: Spur-Verlag, 2000). On Renan see n. 5 above.
17 See below, n. 58.
18 Also reprinted in Ormos, ed., Az arabok és az iszlám, I, pp. 415–458. On Fleischer see below, n. 56.
19 See below, n. 59.
20 On the Hungarian architect and art historian Max Herz (1856–1919), see István Ormos, “Max Herz (1856–1919): His Life and Activities in Egypt”, in Mercedes Volait, ed., Le Caire-Alexandrie: architectures européennes, 1850–1950 (Cairo: Institut français d'archéologie orientale, 2001), pp. 161–177; and on his relationship and correspondence with Goldziher, cf. the same author's “The Correspondence of Ignaz Goldziher and Max Herz”, in Apor and Ormos, eds., Goldziher Memorial Conference, pp. 159–201.
21 For a further assessment of this study, with a German translation of the text, see my “Goldziher über den Weltkrieg und die Solidarität zwischen Wissenschaftlern”, in Lawrence I. Conrad, ed., Die sind anders. Fremdbilder und Feindbilder – Festschrift für Gernot Rotter (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), forthcoming.
22 These deceased older brothers were Nátán, who was born in 1845 and died a few months later, and Vilmos, born in 1847 only to die in 1849. See József Harmat, “Goldziher Ignác gyermekkora. A székesfehérvári zsidó fiú”, Bástya. A Vörösmarty Társaság és a Kodolányi János Főiskola antológiája, ed. István Bakonyi et al. (Székesfehérvár, 2004), p. 122. His younger sister Mária was born in 1852 and died in 1884.
23 See his Tagebuch, pp. 17–23, and for the comment on lost youth, p. 23: “Es war keine Kindheit, es war eine Zeit ernster Vorbereitung und Stärkung für das Leben das nun folgen sollte”. Goldziher's youth has been discussed in Németh, “Goldzihers Jugend”, pp. 7–25; Harmat, “Goldziher Ignác gyermekkora”, pp. 116–121; Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 55–67.
24 This phenomenon has been grossly exaggerated by Raphael Patai in his Introduction to his translation of the Oriental Diary; Ignaz Goldziher and His Oriental Diary: a Translation and Psychological Portrait (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987), pp. 13–79. Cf. my detailed critique of his “psychological portrait” in my study, “The Dervish's Disciple: On the Personality and Intellectual Milieu of the Young Ignaz Goldziher”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1990, pp. 225–266. Two points are worth stressing in this connection. First, Patai's father, the poet and Hebrew translator József Patai (1882–1953), was an activist in the Zionist movement in Hungary and the founder and first editor of the Jewish cultural quarterly Múlt és Jövő; see József Patai on the Jewish question in Péter Hanák, ed., Zsidókérdés, asszimiláció, antiszemitizmus: tanulmányok a zsidókérdésről a huszadik századi magyarországon (Budapest: Gondolat, 1984), pp. 86–91; also Mária Schmidt, “Múlt és Jövő: Irodalmi, művészeti, társadalmi és kritikai folyóirat, 1911–1944”, Kultúra és Közösség 6 (1987), pp. 62–68; Peter Haber, Die Anfänge des Zionismus in Ungarn (1897–1904) (Köln: Böhlau, 2001), pp. 83–84. Goldziher, on the other hand, opposed Zionism, preferring instead to encourage Jewish assimilation into the societies of the emerging European national states; see Conrad, “The Dervish's Disciple”, pp. 262–263; and on anti-Zionist sentiments in Hungary at this time, Haber, Anfänge, pp. 85–128. This brought the two into conflict; Patai referred to Goldziher as a roshe, or “thoroughly evil man” (cf. Raphael Patai, Ignaz Goldziher and His Oriental Diary, pp. 14, 78), while Goldziher vilified Múlt és Jövő as filth that would defile any Jew who touched it, referring to Leviticus 11:43 (Tagebuch, p. 300; 3 August 1917). Raphael Patai, far from writing as an objective observer, clearly held Goldziher's position on Zionism against him and was influenced by his father's negative attitude towards him. Second, István Ormos has recently shown that the model of the psychologically tortured misfit, as Patai depicted Goldziher, ill accords with the impressions of Goldziher's contemporaries, who regarded him as a friendly and good-natured individual; many testimonies to this effect are assembled by Ormos in his “The Correspondence of Ignaz Goldziher and Max Herz”, pp. 166–171.
Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 230–235, sees Goldziher as a “marginal man”. The phrase belongs to the pioneering American sociologist Robert E. Park (1864–1944) and Haber cites it from Park's famous essay “Human Migration and the Marginal Man”, American Journal of Sociology 33 (1928), pp. 881–893; repr. in Richard Sennett, ed., The Classic Essays on the Culture of Cities (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1969), pp. 131–142, where Park defines the “marginal man” as one who is obliged to live in two societies and in two cultures that are not only different but also antagonistic; his thinking thus represents the fusion of a variety of conflicting elements and influences. But Park developed the concept as a model for explaining ethnocentrism and group antagonisms, and while Goldziher certainly shows such sentiments in his diaries, this falls far short, I think, of explaining his behavior as a scholar.
25 These overtures included invitations to Prague, Heidelberg, Cambridge, Breslau, Strasbourg, Uppsala, the Collège de France in Paris, various universities in the United States, the new Hebrew University in Jerusalem, and Cairo. See, for example, Karel Beránek, “Der Vorschlag zur Berufung Ignaz Goldzihers nach Prag”, in Stanislav Segert, ed., Studia Semitica philologica necnon philosophica Ioanni Bakoš dicata (Bratislava: Vydavatelstvo Slovenskej akadémie vied, 1965), pp. 71–77; Simon, Ignác Goldziher, pp. 57–60; István Ormos, “Ignaz Goldziher's Invitation to the Egyptian University”, The Arabist 23 (2001), pp. 183–192; Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 176, 188–189, 212.
26 See Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, pp. 96–99, on two such projects that Goldziher clearly had in mind but did not pursue to fruition: an Encyclopädie der semitischen Philologie and a Lexicon der hebräischen grammatischen Terminologie, for both of which Goldziher was already collecting and framing materials in the 1860s, i.e. as a teenager. Another was the Encyclopaedia of Islam, on which I hope to say more on another occasion.
27 V. V. Barthold, “Ignats Goldtsier, 1850–1921”, Izvestiya Rossiyskoy Akademii Nauk, Seriya 6, 16 (1922), p. 149.
28 He refers to his habit of withholding books from publication in a letter to Martin Hartmann (1851–1918); see Ludmila Hanisch, ed., Machen Sie doch unseren Islam nicht gar zu schlecht. Der Briefwechsel der Islamwissenschaftler Ignaz Goldziher und Martin Hartmann, 1894–1914 (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 2000), p. 306. For specific examples see Lawrence I. Conrad, “The Pilgrim from Pest: Goldziher's Study Tour to the Near East (1873–1874)”, in Ian Richard Netton, ed., Golden Roads: Migration, Pilgrimage and Travel in Mediaeval and Modern Islam (London: Curzon Press, 1993), p. 146.
29 Heller, “Goldziher Ignác” (in this volume), p. 12, makes a passing observation on this already in 1927. Cf. also Johann Fück, Die arabischen Studien in Europa bis in den Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1955), p. 229.
30 Goldziher, Tagebuch, p. 231 (16 May 1902).
31 Conrad, “The Pilgrim from Pest”, pp. 110–111, 146. Cf. also idem, “Ignaz Goldziher on Ernest Renan”, pp. 164–165; Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, pp. 129–130.
32 Az iszlám. Tanulmányok a muhammedán vallás története köréből (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtára, 1881). Cf. the review by Wilhelm Bacher in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 36 (1882), pp. 720–724. The book was reprinted in 1980 by the firm of Magvető, but unfortunately with a thorough modernisation and Magyarisation of Goldziher's vocabulary. The numerous basmalas and illustrations of Arabic script from Qur'ān manuscripts also do not belong to the book as the author published it.
33 Ignaz Goldziher, Die Żâhiriten. Ihr Lehrsystem und ihre Geschichte: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der muhammedanischen Theologie (Leipzig: O. Schultze, 1884), v.
34 Or such is my sense of things, despite Goldziher's explicit dating of the German version to the period beginning only in 1885; Tagebuch, p. 110.
35 Muhammedanische Studien (Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1889–1890); ed. and trans. S. M. Stern and C. R. Barber as Muslim Studies (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967–1971). This famous work, still important today, is the one Haber refers to as “Muhammedanische Schriften”; see his Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 176–177.
36 Cf. Goldziher, Tagebuch, pp. 68–72; idem, Keleti naplóm, Ms. Jewish Theological Seminary (New York), Small Collections, Box 1, pp. 93–106; (= idem, Oriental Diary, pp. 144–153).
37 Ignaz Goldziher, “Muhammedán főiskolai élet” (“The Life of a Muhammedan University”), Budapesti Szemle 20 (1879), pp. 302–323.
38 Ignaz Goldziher, “Universitäts-Moschee el-Azhar”, in Georg Ebers, Aegypten in Bild und Wort (Stuttgart and Leipzig: E. Hallberger, 1879–1880), II, pp. 71–88. On Ebers see Elisabeth Müller, Georg Ebers. Beitrag zum Problem des literarischen Historismus in der zweiten Hälfte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (no place or publisher mentioned, 1961); Elke Blumenthal, “Ägyptologie in Leipzig bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg”, Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, Gesellschafts- und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe, 28 (1979), pp. 121–124; Hans Fischer, Der Ägyptologe Georg Ebers. Eine Fallstudie zum Problem Wissenschaft und Öffentlichkeit im 19. Jahrhundert (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, 1994).
39 Goldziher, Tagebuch, p. 76.
40 On him see M.J. de Goeje, Biographie de Reinhart Dozy, trans. Victor Chauvin (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1883); Fück, Die arabischen Studien in Europa, pp. 181–185. Goldziher was not especially fond of Dozy and regarded him as a scholar inferior to his teacher, Fleischer, although Dozy himself had been appreciative of Goldziher when the latter was a young researcher in Leiden. Cf. Goldziher's “Emlékbeszéd Fleischer Leberecht Henrik a M. Tud. Akadémia kültagja felett”, Akadémiai Emlékbeszédek 5.4 (1889), pp. 42–44/repr. in Goldziher, Az arabok és az iszlám, I, pp. 456–458/repr. in Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, pp. 590–591; also his Tagebuch, p. 50.
41 Zsengellér also refers to this in his postscript; see Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, p. 717.
42 Cf. below, n. 65.
43 Beyond my brief comments here stands a crucially important and extremely complicated question bearing on personal and communal identity in nineteenth-century Hungary. See Ormos, “Goldziher's Mother Tongue”, pp. 203–243, arguing that Goldziher's first language was German. Ormos feels uncertain about the strength of his case, but taken as a whole I find it absolutely convincing. Cf. also Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 181–184.
44 Goldziher to Nöldeke, ALS, Budapest – 13 May 1905, in Simon, Ignác Goldziher, p. 277.
45 Hopkins, “The Language Studies of Ignaz Goldziher”, pp. 87–89.
46 See Conrad, Bildungsweg, “Einleitung”.
47 Cf. n. 1 above.
48 Cf. also Ormos, “Goldziher's Mother Tongue”, pp. 235–236.
49 Goldziher, Tagebuch, p. 37.
50 Max Nordau, Erinnerungen erzählt von ihm selbst und von der Gefährtin seines Lebens (Leipzig: Rennaisance Verlag, 1928), pp. 10–28.
51 Goldziher, Tagebuch, p. 226 (9 April 1900).
52 Nöldeke to Goldziher, ALS, Strassburg – 12 February 1904, in Simon, ed., Ignác Goldziher, p. 251.
53 See n. 20 above.
54 Cf., for example, his Tagebuch, p. 124, where he sarcastically refers to the high regard with which the Jews of Pest regard the Pester Lloyd, to which he nevertheless contributed seven articles and one book review between 1873 and 1918. See Bernard Heller, Bibliographie des oeuvres de Ignace Goldziher (Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1927), p. 6.
55 Cf. Goldziher, Tagebuch, pp. 115–116, 214 (11 April 1897).
56 For other appraisals see Fück, Die arabischen Studien in Europa, pp. 170–172; Wolfgang Reuschel, “Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer (1801–1888). Der Begründer der Leipziger Schule der Arabistik”, in Karl-Marx-Universität 1409–1959. Beiträge zur Universitätsgeschichte (Leipzig: Hirzel, 1959), I, pp. 422–438; idem, “Dr. Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer”, Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 15 (1976), pp. 63–74; Manfred Müller, “Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer und die Entwicklung der Assyriologie”, in Wolfgang Reuschel, ed., Orientalische Philologie und arabische Linguistik (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1990), pp. 40–45; Holger Preißler, “Friedrich Rückert und Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer. Beziehungen zwischen zwei Orientalisten”, in Wolfdietrich Fischer and Rainer Gömmel, eds., Friedrich Rückert. Dichter und Sprachgelehrter in Erlangen (Neustadt an der Aisch: Degener, 1990), pp. 23–34; idem, “In memoriam Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer (1801–1888)”, in Reuschel, ed., Orientalische Philologie und arabische Linguistik, pp. 7–12; Manfred Fleischhammer, “H.L. Fleischers ‘Arabische Gesellschaft’. Notizen aus den Jahren 1841–1846”, in Dieter Bellmann, ed., Gedenkschrift Wolfgang Reuschel. Akten des III. Arabistischen Kolloquiums, Leipzig, 21–22. November 1991 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1994), pp. 97–115; Regina Karachouli, “Vermutungen über das Orientbild des Leipziger Orientalisten Heinrich Leberecht Fleischer (1801–1888)”, in Bellmann, ed., Gedenkschrift Wolfgang Reuschel, pp. 175–184; Sabine Mangold, Eine “weltbürgerliche Wissenschaft”. Die deutsche Orientalistik im 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart: Steiner, 2004), pp. 79–103, 151–155; Preißler, “Ignaz Goldziher in Leipzig”, pp. 293–315.
57 Goldziher, Tagebuch, p. 286 (25 October 1915).
58 On Vámbéry see Lory Alder and Richard Dalby, The Dervish of Windsor Castle: the Life of Arminius Vambery (London: Bachman and Turner, 1979); Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 77–96, 121, 197–198, 213–214; Ruth Bartholomä, Von Zentralasien nach Windsor Castle. Leben und Werk des Orientalisten Arminius Vámbéry (Würzburg: Ergon Verlag, 2006). This last work contains an extensive bibliography, including the most important works on Vámbéry in Hungarian. On Goldziher's (very good) reasons for despising Vámbéry see my “The Dervish's Disciple”, pp. 243–265.
59 On Kaufmann see Haber, Zwischen jüdischer Tradition und Wissenschaft, pp. 120–121, 164; Éva Apor, ed., David Kaufmann Memorial Volume: Papers Presented at the David Kaufmann Memorial Conference, November 29, 1999 (Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 2002).
60 On these lectures see Máté Hidvégi, “Immánuel Löw's Reflections on ‘The Essence and Evolution of Judaism’ in his Letters to Ignaz Goldziher in 1888”, in Apor and Ormos, eds., Goldziher Memorial Conference, pp. 75–79, with the further comments by István Ormos in his “Editor's Note”, pp. 79–81.
61 Goldziher's articles should be read in conjunction with his Der Mythos bei den Hebräern, in which he sought to synthesise all these different approaches.
There is a vast literature on form criticism and its various exponents. See, for example, Klaus Koch, The Growth of the Biblical Tradition: the Form-Critical Method, trans. from the second German edition by S. M. Cupitt (New York, N.Y.: Charles Scribner's Sons, Macmillan, 1988); Martin J. Buss, Biblical Form Criticism in its Context (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999); Marvin A. Sweeney & Ehud Ben Zvi, eds., The Changing Face of Form Criticism for the Twenty-First Century (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2003). On Kuenen see P.B. Dirksen and A. van der Kooij, eds., Abraham Kuenen (1828–1891): His Major Contributions to the Study of the Old Testament: a Collection of Old Testament Studies Published on the Occasion of the Centenary of Abraham Kuenen's Death (10 December 1991) (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1993).
62 Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, pp. 316–320.
63 On this see Conrad, “The Pilgrim from Pest”, pp. 129–132.
64 Titus Tobler, Itinera et descriptiones Terrae Sanctae, ed. Auguste Molinier (Geneva: J.-G. Fick, 1877). A more recent and very important collection is John Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims before the Crusades, 2nd ed. (Warminster: Aris and Phillips, 2002).
65 Cf. Simon, Ignác Goldziher, pp. 59–63; Conrad, “The Pilgrim from Pest”, p. 128.
66 Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, pp. 611–612.
67 Ibid., p. 613.
68 Proceedings of the XVIIth International Congress of Orientalists, Oxford 1928 (London: Oxford University Press, 1929), pp. 12–21 (lists of participants), 90–103 (the toasts).
69 Heller, Bibliographie, listing a total of 592 items.
70 Alexander Scheiber, “A Supplementary Bibliography of the Literary Work of Ignace Goldziher”, in Samuel Löwinger and Joseph de Somogyi, eds., Ignace Goldziher Memorial Volume, I (Budapest: Globus, 1948), pp. 419–429; idem, “Addenda to the Bibliography of Goldziher”, in Samuel Löwinger, Alexander Scheiber and Joseph de Somogyi, eds., Ignace Goldziher Memorial Volume, II (Jerusalem: Rubin Mass, 1958), pp. 209–214; also Goldziher, Tagebuch, pp. 331–334.
71 It is important to note that while this translation is of some general service to a Hungarian audience it is of no scholarly worth whatever. Alexander Scheiber, having published almost the entire text in the original German, imposed a severe censorship on the text that would be translated here by his wife Lívia, omitting all remarks hostile to the Rabbinical Seminary of Budapest, to specific Jewish personalities, and to the Hungarian Jewish community in general. On these omissions see Simon, Goldziher Ignác, pp. 245–250.
72 See n.1 above.
73 This sort of thing is also well attested in the Tagebuch. For a few random examples, see pp. 15: “Confirmationstage”, 56: “Parliermaschine”, 84: Executionsorgan”, 151 (13 September 1892): “Collegehöfen”, 203 (27–30 September 1896): “Geldspeculation”, 208 (17 December 1896): “Textrevision”.
74 Goldziher, A zsidóság lényege és fejlődése, p. 717.
75 The book is held at the British Library, the University of Chicago's Regenstein Library, the library of the Asien-Afrika-Institut (Universität Hamburg), Harvard University's Weidener Library, the Jewish National and University Library (Jerusalem), and the University of Michigan Library (Ann Arbor). Other online catalogues checked, with no positive result, were those of the Bibliotheque nationale (Paris), Cambridge University, the Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Halle, the Jewish Theological Seminary (New York), Universiteit Leiden, the Library of Congress (Washington, DC), Oxford University, Princeton University, the School of Oriental and African Studies (London), and Universität Tübingen. The GBV Gesamtkatalog seems to indicate that in Germany the book is available only in Hamburg.