This article was downloaded by: [Hebrew University]On: 15 July 2013, At: 04:48Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Jewish Culture and HistoryPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjch20

Judaizing Robinson Crusoe: maskilictranslations of Robinson CrusoeRebecca Wolpe aa Department of Yiddish, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem,IsraelPublished online: 31 Oct 2012.

To cite this article: Rebecca Wolpe (2012) Judaizing Robinson Crusoe: maskilic translations ofRobinson Crusoe , Jewish Culture and History, 13:1, 42-67, DOI: 10.1080/1462169X.2012.712885

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1462169X.2012.712885

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Judaizing Robinson Crusoe: maskilic translations of Robinson Crusoe

Rebecca Wolpe*

Department of Yiddish, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

At least seven ‘Jewish translations’ (in Hebrew, Yiddish and German in Hebrew characters)of Robinson Crusoe were published between 1784 and 1900. However, the Robinson storydid not reach Jewish audiences in continental Europe in this period through Defoe’s origi-nal work or even close translations thereof, but rather through the reworking of the storyas a didactic tractate by the German writer and pedagogue Joachim Heinrich Campe(1746–1818). This article examines the roundabout journey taken by Defoe’s RobinsonCrusoe to reach the Jews of Europe and the reasons for the popularity of the Robinsonstory (according to Campe) among maskilim (Jewish enlighteners). It analyses the differenttranslations published in the period, thereby following the development of the Robinsonstory as largely a tool by which the maskilim communicated moral and practical educationto literary works which emphasized aesthetic quality.

Keywords: Robinson Crusoe; translations; Hebrew; Yiddish; enlightenment; Haskalah; Joa-chim Heinrich Campe; educational tool

1. Introduction

Analysing the state of Yiddish translations of Robinson Crusoe in an article published in1937,1 M. Taykhman points to why Robinson Crusoe was so popular amongst maskilic writ-ers (writers of the Haskalah or Jewish Enlightenment):2 it was perceived as a perfect vehiclefor pleasurable instruction, simultaneously educating and entertaining.3 Taykhman however,bemoans the lack of good Yiddish translations of Defoe’s original text. The story of RobinsonCrusoe reached Jewish audiences through translations of a German reworking of the text,Robinson der Jüngere (1779) by Joachim Heinrich Campe4. Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe wasnot considered an acceptable text by maskilic translators: although moral, political and eveneconomic messages are discernible in it, its aim is not explicitly to educate the reader and itis first and foremost a novel (it is also an overtly Protestant text). It was only by translatingCampe’s reworking of the story into a pedagogical text with the clear aim of pleasurableinstruction that the fictional tale of Robinson Crusoe could be brought to Jewish readers.

At least seven ‘Jewish translations’ of Robinson Crusoe published between 1784 and1900 survive: two in German written in Hebrew characters, two in Yiddish and three inHebrew; in addition there exist references to others, either incomplete or lost.5

Evidence that these works were widely read and popular is found in the number of edi-tions published6 and in testimonies of readers, among them Yiddish writers such as SholemAleykhem and Shlomo Ettinger. Mary Antin, describing her uncle’s home in Vitebsk at the

*Email: chanochandrebecca@yahoo.co.uk

Jewish Culture and HistoryVol. 13, No. 1, April 2012, 42–67

ISSN 1462-169X print/ISSN 2167-9428 online� 2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1462169X.2012.712885http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

end of the nineteenth century, notes that on the bookshelf were works in Russian and Yiddishthat were ‘neither works of devotion nor of instruction. ... These were story-books andpoems’.7 Amongst these books, which she read with both surprise and delight, the only onethat she remembered by name was Robinson Crusoe. The work deeply affected Antin’s ownencounter with the sea during her voyage to America:

I would imagine myself all alone on the ocean, and Robinson Crusoe was very real to me. I wasalone sometimes. I was aware of no human presence; I was conscious only of sea and sky andsomething I did not understand.8

It is mere conjecture to suggest that Antin read Robinson Crusoe in Yiddish. However, on thebasis of her reaction to the sight of the open sea during her voyage to America it is possibleto conclude that the book she read was not a translation of Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoebut rather Joachim Heinrich Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere, since Campe’s description ofRobinson’s first encounter with the open sea – a subject upon which Defoe’s text is silent –is clearly echoed in Antin’s words:

Was der Robinson für Augen machte, da er vor sich nichts als Luft und Wasser sahe ... und nunsahe er über sich nichts, als Himmel, und um sich nichts, als Wasser. (23)[How widely he opened his eyes in surprise, as he saw before him air and water ... and now hesaw above him nothing but sky and around him nothing but water]9

The enduring influence of Robinson Crusoe in Hebrew and Yiddish literature is also evi-denced by a number of works which may be classified as part of a global and ongoing ‘Rob-insonade’, texts which share significant features of style, plot or characterization withRobinson Crusoe, but which are not offered as direct translations.10

This article provides an overview and analysis of the maskilic translations of RobinsonCrusoe published in Hebrew, Yiddish and German written in Hebrew characters, andattempts to explain the popularity of Robinson Crusoe among the maskilim and their read-ers. It applies a holistic approach, particularly regarding language. To examine maskilictranslations of Robinson Crusoe in one language is to see only part of the picture, especiallysince Hebrew and Yiddish translations were published simultaneously and by writers withsimilar aims and ideologies.11 My analysis necessarily begins with the roundabout journey,in part due to the politics of language, taken by Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe to reach the Jewsof Europe.12

2. Robinson Crusoe reaches the Jews of Europe: J.H. Campe

Researchers designate Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe as one of the first ‘novels’.13 Campe’s Robin-son der Jüngere, on the other hand, is less easily classified. Helmut Germer categorizes it asone of the 392 ‘novels of education’ published in Germany between 1764 and 1792, whichhe describes as addressing the readers’ need for entertainment and the writers’ desire toinstruct readers in a moral and productive life.14 Yet although Robinson der Jüngere containssome characteristics of the ‘novel’ – for example the reality of the portrayal of the humanexperience, the development of the characters and the rejection of traditional or epicfeatures15 – its structure and aims define it as an instructional text.

The Robinson Crusoe myth – Robinson shipwrecked on an island with nothing, forced tostart from scratch – which dominates popular thinking about the novel and whose influencehas extended, in the modern day, into the media of art, film and television is surprisingly

Jewish Culture and History 43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

different from the novel itself. Jean Jacques Rousseau, writing in Emile (published in 1762),may have created/been the first to disseminate this erroneous myth in his praise of RobinsonCrusoe:

there is one book which, to my thinking, supplies the best treatise on an education according tonature. This is the first book Emile will read; for a long time it will form his whole library, and itwill always retain an honoured place ... What is this wonderful book? Is it Aristotle? Pliny? Buf-fon? No; it is Robinson Crusoe.16

The story, Rousseau continues, begins with Robinson’s arrival on the island and ends withhis departure from it, passing over the hero’s many other experiences as recounted in Defoe’snovel and its sequel. Rousseau’s concept of the story differs starkly from Defoe’s text, as dohis views on various topics, including colonialist values and the bourgeois ethos. Rousseaufocuses on the novel’s didactic possibilities, the material therein for both ‘work and play’ –how a child could learn by imagining himself to be Robinson on the island, debating Robin-son’s options and decisions, examining his behaviour and especially his mistakes.

It was this vision of the Robinson story as a didactic tool which influenced the Germanphilanthropist pedagogue and writer Joachim Heinrich Campe (1746–1818). In the introduc-tion to his work, Campe notes that Rousseau was mistaken in his summary, yet he decides toapply this mistake and Rousseau’s suggested pedagogical methods to his own reworking, andin so doing he produced a text guided by Rousseau’s words. Campe’s Robinson der Jüngerehad great social impact both inside and outside Germany.17 According to some, its popularitysurpassed that of Defoe’s original and some accepted it as the original work, the epitome ofRobinson Crusoe.18

Campe and the philanthropist writers who were his contemporaries sought to conveymoral instruction to young readers in innovative fashion, believing that rigorous moralinstruction could not create a lasting impression – moral lessons not learned through exampleare easily forgotten – and thus preferring to use games, competition, independent activity andcloseness to nature as educational tactics.19 Their works utilize various experiential educa-tional methods. In light of this pedagogical ideology, it is not surprising that Campe found insea voyage narratives, amongst other genres, a perfect vehicle for his educational works.20

Indeed, they provide the ideal opportunity to communicate both moral and general instruction.Campe’s adaptations of sea voyage narratives draw out what Robert Foulke describes as themoral value of seamanship – bravery, endurance in terrible conditions, order, respect andteam-work.21 He likewise uses these accounts to focus on facts of geographical, anthropologi-cal and historical importance – introducing the children to far-away places and foreigncultures.22

Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere is told through a series of conversations between a fatherand a group of children which integrate, through digressions from the narrative, extra infor-mation which is not essential to the story itself – for example on animals, flora, fauna, ships,slavery and so on. The children are asked to imagine how Robinson can resolve a particularproblem – where he can live or how he can make a bag or an axe. They also question, criti-cize or praise the hero’s actions as the story is told; debates spring up amongst the childrenon moral issues such as the killing of animals, cutting down trees, Robinson’s reaction to thediscovery of savages on the island, slavery and others.

As Rousseau had suggested, the children take upon themselves to recreate Robinson’s lifeon the island in many ways: they attempt to make things from scratch; write letters to Robin-son; learn about abstinence and living modestly through fasting or giving up something theylove dearly. The father also teaches them, through experience, to accept disappointment. He

44 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

stresses repeatedly that man cannot always understand the reason why things happen but thatevents are nonetheless for the best – something that Robinson discovers many times. Campeemphasizes virtues such as trust in providence, Spartan severity, secular asceticism and stoi-cism; the over-arching themes of the work include ‘starting from scratch’ and ‘necessity isthe mother of all invention’.23

As in Defoe’s novel, which clearly builds on the genre of the sea voyage narratives sopopular with the British public at the time of his writing, the sea is a major component inCampe’s text. From the outset descriptions of the sea and the hero’s reactions to it are length-ier than those in Defoe’s work. On his first voyage, Robinson is shocked by his first sight ofthe open sea (as was noted above). His seasickness and the first storm he encounters aredescribed at length, including the churning waves which rock the boat from side to side andthe crew’s salvation at the hands of another vessel.

The hero experiences or witnesses numerous sea disasters, all of which provide Campewith the perfect opportunity to emphasize philanthropist values: the danger of sea travelnecessitates team work within the social microcosm of the ship’s crew and terrible stormslead to the life-saving involvement of outsiders, total strangers. When the ship on which Rob-inson makes his first voyage from Hamburg to London is in danger of sinking during a stormin the British channel, salvation comes from another vessel, the crew of which is endangeredduring the rescue.24 On the journey from London to Guinea (Campe’s Robinson neverreaches Brazil but is shipwrecked on the way), the hero witnesses two disasters at sea (basedon episodes from Defoe’s The Further Adventures of Robinson Crusoe; in Defoe’s work Rob-inson himself is captain of the ship and thus responsible for the rescues). These encountersemphasize God’s role as deliverer – when the survivors thank God for their wonderful salva-tion – as well as the attributes of humanity and benevolence (Menschlichkeit). As in The Fur-ther Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, the captain risks the safety of his own ship during therescue and refuses to accept any reward for his efforts, stating that it was his duty and hewould expect others to help him in similar circumstances (35–6).25 The inclusion of theseepisodes not only provides an opportunity for moral instruction, but also adds yet more char-acteristics of the sea adventure, increasing the excitement and drama of the story.

The shipwreck and island experience are central to the development of the character ofCampe’s hero. Although Defoe’s Robinson thanks God upon reaching the island, his thanksare short-lived and he soon sinks into dark thoughts about his ‘dreadful deliverance’ (Robin-son Crusoe, 35–6) and the possibilities of providing for himself. The experience of the ship-wreck and being stranded alone on an island causes Robinson introspection and self-concern.Defoe’s Robinson finds his way to religion only later in the novel, following his illness andrecovery, when he is comforted by reading from the Bible. Campe’s hero, on the other hand,reacts permanently to his salvation from the sea: he drops down onto his knees from happi-ness and awe, raises his hands to heaven and thanks the Lord of heaven and earth in a loudvoice (Robinson der Jüngere, 46).

The sea and sea voyage form important components of the religious commentary of thework. God’s role as lord of the sea is emphasized throughout, from Robinson’s first voyagesto his attempt, together with Friday, to flee the island in a canoe. When the children ask theirfather why only Robinson survived the shipwreck and none of his fellow sailors, the fatherresponds that only God can decide such matters, knowing that some people may be danger-ous or wicked, He allows them to drown, taking their immortal souls to a better place (Robin-son der Jüngere, 48–9). Robinson is also aware that God has placed him on this island as awell-deserved punishment (Robinson der Jüngere, 57–8).

Robinson’s and (after his religious instruction) Freitag’s (Friday’s) faith in God is testedby the sea. Their attempt (in Defoe’s work this episode takes place before Friday’s arrival on

Jewish Culture and History 45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

the island) to build a boat in which they can escape the island ends in disaster: they areunable to cross the sea – the wind strands them and they fear that they will die of hungerfloating on the open water (Robinson der Jüngere, 240 ff.), emphasizing the danger of thesea and its role as separator.26 This episode tests the faith and courage of both characters:Freitag suggests jumping overboard, since they are going to die of hunger at any rate; Robin-son reproaches him for his lack of faith, urging him to trust in providence and the almighty.His belief is proved correct, and the two are indeed saved from death and manage to return totheir island. In this episode the sea tests Freitag’s new faith just as it tested Robinson’s whenhe was shipwrecked on the island: through an encounter with the sea, Freitag learns that hemust trust in God without asking questions; at the same time Campe once again reminds hisreader that God is Lord of the ocean and all that happens at sea is under His control.

Following this, Robinson also fears the sea and neither he nor Friday can muster thecourage to embark on another voyage for some time. Indeed, when they see a stormwhich wrecks a ship off their island Robinson notes how glad he is not to be at sea(Robinson der Jüngere, 256). Freitag, a much more proficient fisher and diver than Robin-son, jumps into the water and swims to the wreck to investigate. Friday also later savesRobinson from the waves as a storm overturns their raft returning from the wreck withtheir spoils, an episode added by Campe which once again demonstrates the dangers ofthe sea.

Whilst Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe is an overtly Protestant text, with clear discussions ofthe Christian religion and quotations from the New Testament. Campe’s reworking ismuch more universal. References to God are not specific to a certain religion, and evenin Robinson’s religious instruction of Freitag there is no mention of overtly Christianbeliefs (although it is noted that Robinson is a Christian): it is limited to converting Frei-tag from paganism to monotheism and drawing him away from cannibalism. God is por-trayed as a hidden yet omniscient and omnipotent being. His ways cannot be understoodby man but He always (not always immediately, but in due course) punishes the bad andrewards the good.

As well as his sincere trust in God (which is also expressed in the songs that the herosings at various stages in the work), Campe’s Robinson is more earnest and compassionatethan Defoe’s. He experiences sincere regrets and remorse during his first night on the island,leading to visions of his parents and a terrible nightmare that causes him to fall from the treein which he had taken refuge; in contrast to Defoe’s hero, who falls fast asleep and wakesthe next morning feeling refreshed. Defoe’s Robinson, well aware of his own insincerity,especially in religious matters, even reproaches himself:

I know not what it was, but something shock’d my Mind at that Thought, and I durst not speakthe Words: How canst thou be such a Hypocrite, (said I, even audibly) to pretend to be thankfulfor a Condition, which however thou may’st endeavour to be contented with, thou would’st ratherpray heartily to be deliver’d from. (Robinson Crusoe, 83)27

He never regards his labour as anything but a humiliating punishment for his sin.28 Even afterhis return from the island he is unable to settle into a sincere thankfulness for his deliverance.

Defoe’s Robinson is constantly attracted by the lure of the sea. Unable to persevere atany work, he is repeatedly drawn to sea travel: he leaves his home and family twice for thisreason (first his parents, later his children) and abandons a successful plantation in Brazil forthe adventure of a sea voyage. His constant attraction to the sea recalls W.H. Auden’sdiscussion of the sea and the garden as metaphors for society:

46 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

The ship, then, is only used as a metaphor for society in danger from within or without. ... A voy-age ... is a necessary evil, a crossing of that which separates or estranges ... The sea is no placeto be ... to try to cross it betrays a rashness bordering on hubris.29

Campe’s Robinson, on the other hand, after his island sojourn, returns to Hamburg where hepursues the honest, simple and austere profession of carpentry for the rest of his days, his desirefor travel seemingly sated by his island experience. Whilst in Defoe’s text sea journeys are ameans to an end, Campe continually emphasizes the ambivalent role of the sea which bringsRobinson to the island and surrounds him during his sojourn. The sea is joiner and separator,protector and block, provider of food, at times stormy and at times calm, taker of life but bringerof salvation from slavery (Robinson der Jüngere, 310 ff.), an unknown and unpredictable force,uncontrollable by humans and at the mercy of God’s will. It is the sea which at once protectsRobinson (from cannibals on neighbouring islands) and separates him from the rest of the world.Yet the sea also brings the cannibals to his island for their rituals, and brings him his companion,Freitag. The stormy sea brings about the wreck of another boat off the island, as well as themutiny on board the English ship which is to be his salvation.

It is significant that that Campe’s story ends with another shipwreck, on the final stretchof the hero’s return journey to Hamburg. This final shipwreck leaves him with nothing – hebrings home no tokens of his years away from home and no riches. Once again, the sea isshown as a dangerous and fickle force – the first parts of the homeward voyage pass withoutmishap, yet on the very last stretch Robinson is once again cast into the sea and forced toswim for his life. The sea leaves him with nothing, a lesson to all those who seek to findwealth in the New World. Yet, as Susanne Zantop notes, Robinson’s moral legacy of coloniz-ing remains – his profit is immaterial, spiritual – and he anchors colonialism ‘in the imagina-tion’ of all those who come to hear his story.30 Campe does not completely oppose travel orcolonial projects on distant continents across the ocean, but wishes to instil in his readers theneed to become educated and skilled before embarking on such a journey.

3. Robinson Crusoe and the Maskilim

Scholars have discussed at length the environment in which early Hebrew children’s literaturewas produced in Germany and its exclusively pedagogic aims.31 What guided the maskilim increating this new literature and in choosing texts and target language was ideology.32

The maskilim in Germany at the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenthcenturies sought to lure the Jewish public away from using Yiddish, which they considered tobe jargon. This resulted in two different trends: the desire to replace it with either Hebrew orGerman. The first two Jewish translations of Robinson Crusoe are examples of the attempt toencourage the use of German by using the German language transcribed into Hebrew letters.Zamośź’s Hebrew translation is an example of the desire to replace Yiddish with the Hebrewlanguage. As the Haskalah movement moved eastwards to Eastern Europe, the works pro-duced by maskilim were different to those produced by members of the German Haskalah.Due to the differing nature of Jewry in Galicia, Poland and the Pale of Settlement, the maski-lim in these lands adapted Haskalah ideology and methodology to suit their target audiences.Although the maskilim wished to communicate with their readers through Hebrew, the beauti-ful and true language of the Jewish people, in order to reach a wider public the authorsneeded to consider carefully their choice of language. Hebrew works were only accessible tothe most educated strata of society and few Jews knew enough Russian for this to be apractical choice. Any maskil wishing to reach the lower levels of society – those whose edu-cation had progressed no farther than the heder, who were unable for economic or other rea-

Jewish Culture and History 47

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

sons to continue to study, and most women – could do so only through the use of Yiddish.33

Thus the maskilim soon realized, to their own disappointment and chagrin, that if they wantedto reach the masses, they had no choice but to degrade themselves by writing in Yiddish.

In addition to issues of language and ideology, the author of the work to be translatedwas of great significance: Campe came to be ‘regarded by the Jewish writers as the mostimportant German writer for children of the Enlightenment’.34 Of Campe’s works (more than24 in total) six35 were translated into Hebrew and Yiddish repeatedly over the course of thenineteenth and early twentieth centuries.36 Campe’s popularity is explained by the combina-tion of didactic elements, universal religion and enlightenment values to be found in hisworks, within the framework of an exciting story. One of the first accomplishments of anymaskil was to translate one of his books. As Zohar Shavit notes, ‘[t]ranslations of Campe’sworks in fact provided a blueprint for the scope of children’s literature in Hebrew’.37 Campe‘continued to function as a model for Hebrew texts late in the nineteenth century’.38 As Sha-vit also notes, ‘it was as if a certain circle was drawn at a specific point of time around vari-ous texts and various process of development of German children’s literature; this circle laterbecame the signal frame of reference of Hebrew children’s literature for almost a century’.These comments certainly apply to Robinson der Jüngere, which continued to be translatedand adapted by Jewish writers well into the twentieth century.39 Yet despite this, and all thepoints in its favour, even Campe’s text underwent changes, at times to a greater degree, attimes less severe, at the hands of the maskilim.

Shavit designates a number of characteristics of maskilic translations40 which apply to theworks under discussion here: a) they are independent transformations of the original text; b)most do not even mention the original author; c) they were directed at a wider target audiencethan the original children’s works; d) the conversational device often employed by Campe isremoved by almost all translators and the works are presented as non-fictional narratives; ande) Enlightenment values are emphasized, but the authors are always careful not to contradictJewish values and religious law. The Hebrew translators also faced linguistic difficulties infinding vocabulary and means of expressions for modern ideas and inventions.41 In addition,it should be added that most of the translations discussed herein include some degree ofJudaization.

In tracing the fine line between translation and adaptation that is evidenced by the ‘Jewishtranslations’ of Robinson Crusoe, this paper draws out not only the influence of Campe, butalso the traces of Defoe’s novel within the cultural formations of nineteenth century Judaism.Indeed, some of the Jewish translations come closer to Robinson Crusoe’s original genre (forexample in the removal of the dialogue structure). Likewise, whilst Robinson der Jüngerewas clearly written as children’s literature, most of the Jewish translations are directed atwider audiences.

4. The Jewish Translations

4a. Historye oder zeltsame und vunderbare bagebenheiten einem yungen zeefarers [Storyor the odd and wonderful circumstances of a young seafarer]42 (H)

Published anonymously in Prague in 1784, this work is the earliest Jewish translation ofCampe’s Robinson der Jüngere, written in German in Hebrew characters.43 The title pageinforms the reader that the story demonstrates the power of God and providence and is intendedto be instructional and useful to young people. An introductory paragraph sets the scene of theframework story: a tale told by a father to his good and obedient children, in the company of hisvirtuous wife, for the twin aims of enjoyment and education. Although at the beginning of the

48 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

work there is a reasonable amount of dialogue between the father and children, the discussionsand interjections become increasingly rare as the father continues with his narrative, at timesprefaced by a request for permission to question their father. The children react to events in thestory in the same manner as those in Campe’s work, expressing sympathy for or disappointmentin the hero, as well as crying ‘bravo’ upon his return to Europe (H, 43).

The language used is, for the most part, the same as that of Campe’s text: whole sen-tences are transcribed into Hebrew characters. However, since almost all discussions on prac-tical educational topics are omitted, the work is significantly shorter than the source text andhas undergone some changes; often the adaptor finds it necessary to make changes to the lan-guage or phrasing in order to make his omissions smoother.

This translation retains much of the moral, ethical and pious instruction included in the origi-nal, following Campe’s ideology closely. Although omitting debates on some of the ethicalissues that Robinson faced (such as bloodshed or chopping down trees), the father emphasizesthe need to keep busy and not be idle, using the exact wording which appears in Robinson derJüngere (H, 19/Robinson der Jüngere, 169–70). The father tells his children that they shouldpity the savages, who know no better than to eat other men, and be grateful that they were bornto cultured and educated parents (H, 20/Robinson der Jüngere, 188). The father praises theslaves who were humane enough to save their captors from a sinking ship and the natives whowelcomed the shipwrecked Spaniards (H, 35/Robinson der Jüngere, 310 ff.). Robinson’s reli-gious instruction is identical to that in Campe’s text, using the same language (H, 26/ Robinsonder Jüngere, 232 ff.), as is the approach to religion and piety throughout the work. The fatheralso constantly notes the presence of God, His omniscience and omnipotence, as well as com-menting on the hero’s faith and praise of the almighty (the first of Robinson’s songs of praise isincluded in the text). It is interesting that a number of the changes relate to moral and ethicalquestions, emphasizing piety and correct behaviour. The adaptor adds questions posed by thechildren which facilitate moral discussions not found in the source text. For example the chil-dren ask their father if Robinson is still alive, during his illness, since the father had told themthat he was waiting for death to take him (H, 18). The father responds with another question:cannot God save him from death? On the following page, the children interrupt their father’sdescription of Robinson’s recovery, shocked that he was so ‘profligate and godless that aftersuch a wonderful recovery he did not thank God’, to which the father responds that he has notyet told them of this aspect of Robinson’s recovery, and begins to relate to them the hero’s pietyand spiritual awakening. The children also question Robinson’s lies to the English mutineersabout the number of men under his command, the father replying that he lied in order to instilfear in his enemy and prevent bloodshed; thus he should be pardoned for lying. Aside from theseand some other minor changes, the text remains faithful to Campe’s original. It exhibits no Juda-ization in language or content, and the ideal qualities and behaviour portrayed in the text followCampe’s ideology closely.

4b. Historye fun der zeefahrer Robinzon [The story of the seafarer Robinson] (RH)

A further German translation of Robinson der Jüngere in Hebrew characters appeared anony-mously in Frankfurt an der Oder in 1812/13. Its title page describes it as a ‘wonderful’ storyintended to educate, specifically directed at young people, as an example of the importance oflistening to elders. Besides this nothing is known of the ideological intentions of the writer.This work is extremely short – 15 pages in total44 – and it omits large sections of Campe’soriginal. Most of the major events are speedily covered, creating a string of episodes; the rea-sons behind actions are not explained. Robinson’s feelings and reflections are omitted, as wellas all of Campe’s discussions of science and nature. The work does not arouse the sympathy

Jewish Culture and History 49

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

of the reader for Robinson’s condition (Robinson is only once referred to as ‘poor Robin-son’), nor does it provide moral lessons.

The only indication that this is work is anything more than a good story and that it con-tains an educational goal is to be found at its close. At the end of his work, Campe describeshow word of Robinson’s return spread through Hamburg and everyone wanted to see himand hear his story: he had to tell it repeatedly all day long. When telling his story, Robinsongives moral advice to parents – ‘Parents, if you love children, get them used to a pious, mod-est and industrious life already from early on’ – and children, ‘Children, be obedient to par-ents and elders; whatever you have the opportunity to learn, learn diligently, fear God, andkeep yourself – Oh keep yourself – from idleness, out of which comes nothing but badthings’ (Robinson der Jüngere, 346). Robinson’s father, it goes on, was a broker and wantedhis son to join him in his trade, but Robinson preferred to work with his hands and learnedcarpentry, emphasizing the value of physical and creative labour as opposed to trading ormoney lending, and the advantages of a simple lifestyle.

Robinzon, historye fun der zeefahrer succinctly includes all the points which Campe makes,without mention of religion or the need for piety. Nonetheless, it concludes with a moral:

עגנויעלהיפךיואןגניגסע,ןעהעזינרעגםהיאןטלוווועללאעטכישעג]סנאזניבאר[טימללאפרהאוו]גרובמאה[ץנאגאיזסאד,רהעזעללאאיזעטנהאמרעפרע,ןעטלאהרעטנואוצםהיאטימךיזםואםהיאאייבןטאהןרטלעךאנאידעטיילףיואערהאיףלעווציצנאגרעסאדןלאזןעמענלפמעסקעןייאםהיאןארונךיזאיזסאדדנוא,ןלאזןגלאפןרטלעערהיאגיסימטכינרונםואךאדסעטהאטדנוא,עטאהגיטיינטכינךאדרעסכלעוועטאהטעטייבראעגגיסיילפלעזניארענייאסעזידךיוארעסאדןבאהרעיטלאוווזזלאיטיילףיוקאייברעלקאמןייאראוורטאפןייז]ןהאזניבאר[ןונ,ןהעגוצטייבראץלאהעלהיפלעזניארעדףיואךיא]...[רטאפרביל,ךארפשדנואוצאדטסולינייקיטאהרערבא,לאזןעדרעוו...ןנרעלרעוצךילדנירגקרעוודנאהרלשיטסאדטסולךאנךיואךיאיטעהאזלאעבאהגיטרעפרעפ

[All Hamburg was full of Robinson’s tale, everyone was eager to see him, also many young peo-ple who still had parents went to him to converse with him, he preached to them all intensely thatthey should obey their parents and they should learn a lesson from him how he spent twelveyears on an island, where he worked hard although he did not have to, and only did it so as notto be idle. Now Robinson’s father was a broker for merchants so he wanted that he should alsobecome one, but he [Robinson] did not want to, and said ‘dear father … since on the island I dida lot of wood work, so I would like to study professionally the art of carpentry…]

There are also substantial differences in the descriptions of how the heroes lived the rest oftheir lives. Whilst Campe emphasizes his characters’ virtues – their love of mankind, piety,engagement in useful occupation, modesty and weekly remembrance of the manner in whichthey lived on the island – in the Jewish version, Robinson and Fraytig (Freitag) contract goodmarriages which bring them great wealth. They celebrate annually the day on which theywere saved from the island with a great feast:

רעזןעטבעלאיזדנוא,ןמאקעבעבאגטימרוצדלעגליפרהעזאיזאווןעטהארייהעכייררהעזעדייבאיזןעטהאטךאנרעדםוצאיזןעטליה,דניזןעראווטעטערגלעזניארעדןאפאיזסאדםאקגאטרעדןעוורהאיעללאדנוא,ןעמאזוצטגינגרעפ...טסעפסעסארגןייאןעקנעדנא

[Afterwards they both contracted very rich marriages which brought them a lot of money andthey lived very happily together, and every year when the day of their salvation from the islandarrived, they held in commemoration a big festival…]

These changes appear, at least in part, to be signs of Judaization: Campe’s heroes are tryingto escape capitalism (Robinson preferring a life of simplicity over his father’s merchantbusiness),45 yet the Jewish version ends with a good marriage as a symbol of economic suc-

50 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

cess; a typical Jewish ending. It reflects the importance of marriage and economic successwithin Jewish society in early nineteenth century Germany; Campe’s asceticism was clearlyperceived as not appropriate for a Jewish audience. The same reason may lie behind thechange from a weekly day of remembrance of island life to a yearly celebration of redemp-tion. Yet the change in the values accentuated in this text also results in an ideological corre-spondence with Defoe’s economic and familial ethos rather than Campe’s.

4c. Robinzon der yingere [The younger Robinson] (RY)

In 1823/24, the Galician maskil David Zamośź (1789–1864) published his Hebrew translationof Robinson der Jüngere for young readers.46 Zamośź justifies the translation of the text, not-ing that ‘if the words were sweet in a foreign tongue, how much will they please our souls inHebrew’. He uses biblical motifs to praise the quality and content of the original work,reworking the biblical text of Genesis 2:9–13 into a paean to wisdom. He admits the diffi-culty of translating a work such as this, especially due to the need to translate the names forvarious objects not mentioned in the Bible (from which most of his language was drawn): forsome of these he used nouns from the Talmud or other later sources, often noting his sourcefor a specific word.47 It is clear from the introduction that two aims lay behind his decisionto translate this text: 1) educating the youth and 2) advancing the use (and perhaps increasingthe vocabulary) of the Hebrew language.

Zamośź was typical of the Hebrew writer of the Haskalah, described by Moshe Pelli as

forced to grapple with a newly emerging Hebrew tongue and with the new demands of moderncomposition. He sought to express a new path and a new approach, and in his sensitivity to thelanguage problem he was rebelling, first of all, against the Rabbinic style, which he saw asexpressing an old world. The Hebrew Maskil sought new and modern means of expression toconvey the new world-picture he wished to draw.48

Pelli notes that the ‘utilization of familiar, conventional idiom, derived from the rich array ofsources in the Hebraic cultural heritage, led … to the creation of the Haskalah-type melitzah,in its modern use’.49 Amongst other aspects of this linguistic style, Zamośź uses biblical frag-ments or inlays (shibutz); at times these are neutral (primarily linguistic in function) and attimes they act ‘via knowledge of the source text’, enriching Zamośź’s text.50

Although Zamośź states that he did not translate ‘word for word’ from Campe, and addedin ‘wisdom’ as he thought appropriate, this translation is very close to the source text withinthe confines of the language available; undoubtedly the closest of all the translations dis-cussed herein. It is the only one to retain the original structure of conversations betweenfather and children, including most of the digressions and interjections by the children.Indeed, for the most part the content is identical to Campe’s original. Rather than addingmaterial, as Zamośź claimed in his introduction, most of the changes in the text are omissionsof some explanations or shortening of episodes. However, for the most part the changes arerelatively minor: they have no effect on the plot, messages or characterization, all of whichremain faithful to Campe.

Zamośź includes the songs sung by Campe’s Robinson which, despite differences in lan-guage and small changes in meaning, remain true to Campe’s text and messages. So too, thereligious philosophy and concept of God in the work remain the same, as do references toChristianity: Robinson remains a Christian. However, despite this there is nothing in the textto contradict the Jewish religion. Campe reports that Robinson taught Freitag a hymn to singbefore sleep every night, ‘das Loblied: Nun danket alle Gott!’ (Robinson der Jüngere, 275).

Jewish Culture and History 51

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

The hymn is not reproduced in the text, only referred to by its title, indicating that it must havebeen popular enough not to require an explanation.51 Whilst allowing some references toChristianity to remain in his translation, this hymn was too overtly Christian for Zamośź tomaintain and he omitted the name of the hymn. In its place he includes the full text of a songof praise which describes God’s benevolence and man’s service of Him (Robinson der Jüng-ere, 275; RY, 128).52

Whilst Campe’s text refers to God as Gott or Providence, Zamośź does not only use theterm םיהלא to refer to God, but also .ה’ In translating Campe’s songs, despite maintaining thecontent, the descriptions of and titles attributed to God have clearly Jewish echoes. Forexample:

Sei du mein Retter in Gefahr, יתיגשםאונבלעבאכילעםחרMein Vater, wenn ich fehle (75) )33(,ילרצבינממךינפרתסתלא[Be my saviour in danger, [Do not hide Your face when I am in trouble,

Have mercy upon me as a father on his son when Ierr]

My father, when I err]

Seht, lieben Kinder, so machte es Robinson, umtäglich besser und frömmer zu werden (183)

םא,וישעמםויםויביטיןעמלןאזניבארתוחראןכ!ינבואר)85(והומכושע,םכלביטיהל’התאושקבתםכבבללכב

[See, dear children, this is what Robinson did, inorder to become better and more pious by theday]

[See my children! Thus Robinson improves hisdeeds day by day, if with all your heart you willseek out God so that it will be well with you, doas him]

The latter example uses inlays from the Jewish prayer, shema, said each morning and night:

םכשפנלכבוםכבבללכבודבעלוםכיהלאהוהיתאהבהאלםויהםכתאהוצמיכנארשאית‍וצמלאועמשתעמשםאהיהו(Deuteronomy 11, 13)

[And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto My commandments which I com-mand you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and withall your soul]53

Other examples of biblical inlays in Robinzon der yingere include the use of the familiarphrase describing God’s redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt תורחלתודבעמ (fromslavery to freedom [from the blessing of the new month]) in a discussion of slaves (RY,131); Robinson’s utensils are םינושםילכמםילכ (diverse vessels, Esther 1:7) (RY, 134); thevolcanic eruption is described as לודגשערלוק (the voice of a great rushing, Ezekiel 3:12)(RY, 119); Friday is ודגנלרזע (a help meet, Genesis 2:18) for Robinson (RY, 99), comparableto Eve in the Garden of Eden, who alleviated Adam’s loneliness and provided him withcompanionship.

Some of Zamośź’s biblical inlays may be neutral or primarily linguistic, but many of themcomplement and enrich his text through their meaning, allowing readers to ‘derive a special,sometimes a surprising flavour from the new knit of old familiar verses’,54 adding a uniquelyJewish character to the otherwise universal work.

In summary, Zamośź’s Robinzon der yingere is for the most part a close translation ofCampe’s Robinson der Jüngere. It follows the source text closely, retaining the dialogue form,the characterization of the speakers, the moral advice and the practical teachings of the work.However, its Jewish nature is very clear from a number of aspects, including biblical allu-sions, the language used, references to sources for Hebrew words and the presence of theJewish God throughout the work.

52 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

4d. Robinzon: Di geshikhte fun Alter Leb, eyne vare und vunder bare geshikhte tsumunterhalt und zur belerung [Robinson, the story of Alter Leb: A true and wonderful storyfor entertainment and instruction] (AL)

Discussions of what is probably the most well-known and researched Jewish translation ofRobinson Crusoe, Alter Leb,55 generally focus on the work’s most innovative factor: its totalJudaization.56 The hero, Alter Leb (Old Darling), is a Jew, legitimizing the text for a traditionalaudience. As Roskies has noted, the more extreme the propaganda, the more necessary its‘camouflage’. Since the Haskalah in Galicia in the 1820s, the place of origin of this text, wasso embattled, pressure to legitimize the text for a traditional Jewish readership was extreme.57

A clear indication of the combination of Jewish and enlightenment values in the text isthe figure of the narrator, a pious merchant who embodies Haskalah ideals: he combines wis-dom, understanding and Torah with work, good deeds and love of one’s fellow man. Theintertwining of enlightenment and Jewish values is exemplified in statements such as:

רעדנאםעדרענייאטוטבילךייאטאהטאגןעגיצנייאםעדןאטביילגלאמדנעזיוטרונלאמןייאטינךייאגאזךיאןישנעמ.ןייטשעבטלעוורעדףיואקילגטימןינעקגנאלךאניאדוואטעווריאנואתונמחרןרעדנאםעדףיוארענייאטאהתובוט

[People, I tell you not once but a thousand times, believe in the one God, love each other and dogood one to another, have mercy one upon the other and you will certainly remain happily in thisworld for a long time. (AL, 1:46)]

Alter Leb is depicted in a highly negative light at the beginning of the work, even more sothan in other translations (AL, 1:6–7). These disparaging descriptions of Alter Leb’s characterserve to make the transformation which he will undergo on the island even greater than thatof Campe’s hero. During his sojourn on the Canary Islands, for example, Alter Leb drinkstoo much wine. His drunkenness results in restlessness, and he joins a ship bound for Brazilwhich is wrecked during its voyage, stranding him on a deserted island.58 The narrator statesthat Alter Leb’s terrible nightmare during his first night on the island was his own fault: badpeople have bad dreams.

The second volume of Alter Leb opens with Haskalah propaganda.59 Following Campe(and Defoe’s original plot), the hero is seriously ill, on the verge of death. As his situationbegins to improve, Alter Leb falls into a very deep death-like sleep. The narrator uses thisexample (since if anyone had seen Alter Leb in this state, they would have thought he wasdead and buried him alive) to embark upon a discussion of the need to wait more than 24hours before burying a dead body, as is dictated by Jewish law (AL, 2:3 ff.).60

The discussion of religion between Alter Leb and Shabes (Friday)61 outlines Jewish con-cepts including belief in one God, the Torah and the after-life. However, here too the narratordoes not miss the opportunity to emphasize the importance of enlightenment values, notingthat these are to be found even in the Torah. Recalling how Hillel condensed the whole ofthe Torah into ‘Love your neighbour as yourself’, the narrator introduces the concept of uni-versal brotherhood into the religious discussion as the bottom line of the whole Torah. Thenarrator also reminds his readers that they must pray for the rulers of the countries in whichthey live (AL, 2:49).

The close of the work also reflects this combination of enlightenment and Jewish values.Alter Leb and Shabes work hard to earn their keep, yet are rewarded with a typically Jewishhappy ending. The two learn Torah, contract good marriages and live happily, as the narratorconcludes, ‘so should God help all good people. Amen’.

In her discussions of Alter Leb, Garret claims that the sea plays a more important role in thistranslation than in Campe’s. This is observed in the explanation to a ‘landlocked Jewish reader-

Jewish Culture and History 53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

ship’ of the basics of ship travel – for instance, describing in detail an anchor and a lighthouse.62

Yet the children in Campe’s work also need to have the basics of ship travel explained to themfrom time to time. More importantly, Garret claims that Alter Leb develops morally and intellec-tually through his travels: he learns geography, becomes more worldly, and, most importantly,from his encounter with Turks during his first shipwreck, becomes a voice promoting the broth-erhood of man. His travels, while undertaken rashly and to the dismay of his parents, educatehim about the world in general and the tenets of the Haskalah in particular. In Defoe and Campe,Garret claims, ship travel does not broaden Robinson Crusoe’s mind in such a radical way. Themajor changes in their protagonists only occur once Robinson is settled on the island.63

While Garrett is undoubtedly right regarding Defoe’s Robinson, this is not the case withrespect to Campe’s hero. As was discussed above, the sea voyage and shipwreck on theisland are significant factors in the development of Campe’s hero. However, it is certainly truethat in typically maskilic fashion the sea voyage functions in this text to allow the traveller toexperience the many wonders of God’s natural world, thus increasing his faith in the almighty(AL, 1:20).64

This text presents a combination of traditional Jewish and enlightenment values, moral edifi-cation and general education. Often the text stresses not the hero’s ability to survive from noth-ing, to make tools, clothes, food, but what God gives to him. The image of a returning son isalso significant, especially for the maskilic writer and perhaps it is possible to suggest that hehimself is battling with the desire to leave tradition on the one hand and on the other to remainwithin it.

4e. Maʿ aseh Robinzon [Robinson story] (MR)

Maʿ aseh Robinzon, translated by Eliezer Bloch and Shimon Hakohen, was first published inWarsaw in 1849 and reprinted twice.65 This translation is much shorter than Campe’s original,omitting most of the practical and factual knowledge, as well as much of the moral advice.

Maʿ aseh Robinzon exhibits significant Judaization and references to Christianity have beenremoved. Although the songs on pages 16 and 21 of Maʿ aseh Robinzon are close translationsof Campe’s (Robinson der Jüngere, 57 and 74), as in Zamośź’s translation, instead of theLoblied, the authors include an apparently original song which expresses some of the senti-ments of the Loblied. Robinson’s prayer of thanks following his recovery has overtly Jewishconnotations and biblical inlays (MR, 31), many of which are taken from Psalms or theprophets:

... יתואתעגהתומירעשדעינתיארהןוגיוהרצ.ינממךפאבשךאיבתפנאיכךדוא:יאורלאהתא[You are a God of seeing; I will thank You, for even though You were angry with me

Your anger is turned away from me. You showed me trouble and sorrow, to the gates of deathYou brought me…]

יארלאהתאהילארבדההוהיםשארקתו יאורלאהתא[Genesis 16:13 ‘And she called the name of the LORD that

spoke unto her, Thou art a God of seeing’]

ינמחנתוךפאבשייבתפנאיכהוהיךדואאוההםויבתרמאו ינממךפאבשךאיבתפנאיכךדוא[Isaiah 12:1 ‘And in that day thou shalt say: “I will give thanks

unto Thee, O LORD; for though Thou was angry with me,Thine anger is turned away, and Thou comfortest me”’]

. תומירעשדעועיגיוםשפנבעתתלכאלכ יתואתעגהתומירעשדע[Psalm 107:18 ‘Their soul abhorred all manner of food, and they

drew near unto the gates of death’]

54 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

On finding the remnants of the savages’ visit to the island (MR, 35), Robinson declares

םדאילהשעיהמאריאאלילהוהי . ילםדאהשעיהמ,האריאליתחטב’דב[Psalm 118, 6: God is for me; I will not fear;

what can man do unto me][In God I trusted I will not fear whatman will do to me]

When Robinson teaches Fraytig (Friday) about religion, not only are biblical and Jewish reso-nances clear in the language used, but also in the content of the instruction including somedetails of the creation story (MR, 43–4; Robinson der Jüngere, 233–4).

Although the tone of the work is religious – the presence of God, the protection He givesand Robinson’s religious reformation and repentance – it is lacking in moral tone and advice.The text emphasizes the good deeds of the sailors who saved Robinson and the crew fromthe first shipwreck off the British coast.66 Robinson has no regrets about killing an animal toeat its meat – his internal debate on the subject detailed by Campe (Robinson der Jüngere,79 ff.) is omitted.

There are a few points at which the text seems a little confused and the authors seem eitherto have misunderstood the source text or they do not express themselves adequately. Theseinclude the return of Robinson and Fraytig to the island following their attempted escape inthe canoe (MR, 47) – they seem to be on a different island. This confusion continues later(MR, 63) when there is mention of the gold that Robinson found on ‘the first island’.

Many of the anti-slavery elements of Campe’s text have been toned down or removedaltogether.67 On saving Fraytig, Robinson comments that ‘Fraytig, will he not be a slave tome because he is a Kushite [negro]?’ (MR, 41). Although there is some exchange ofknowledge between Robinson and Friday (fire, making the canoe), and Friday does save Rob-inson from drowning, these factors are less prominent. The theme of Robinson as master orking and Friday as servant is often repeated, echoing Defoe rather than Campe.

This translation provides a narrative of Robinson’s adventures according to Campe, forthe most part without debates, questions or information on Robinson’s feelings. Yet in somerespects, such as the colonial elements of the work, it echoes Defoe rather than Campe. Like-wise it has a more overtly religious and less universal tone than Campe’s work; the text’sJudaization is clear from the language used and the constant presence of God; Robinson’srepentance and improvement are obvious to the reader, especially through his prayers.

4f. Sefer kurʿ oni [The furnace of affliction] (SKO)

Sefer kurʿ oni, by Yitzhak ben Moshe Rumsch,68 was first published in 1861 and in three fur-ther editions.69 According to Uriel Ofek, this translation was the first classic adventure storyin Hebrew children’s literature and achieved great popularity amongst Hebrew reading youthin Eastern Europe. However, as Ofek himself notes, Rumsch perceived in this work muchmore than a simple ‘adventure’ story.70 In fact, Rumsch begins his introduction by noting theattributes of the work – the combination of which clearly results in a work of pleasurableinstruction – moral lessons, glory and a good story that will delight the soul of the reader. Inturn this delight will awaken in him trust in God and the desire to pursue righteousness.

In his introduction, Rumsch mentions earlier Hebrew translations of Robinson Crusoe intoHebrew: for example an unfinished translation by Yitshak Erter, which he praises as a valianteffort to plant ‘this faithful tree in the land of Judah’. He is highly critical of Zamośź’s effort,almost unobtainable by this time. He describes it as a ‘word for word’ translation, suited tochildren aged five or six years old and written in Zamośź’s very limited language: ‘thespirit of the young man who is able to understand Hebrew will not suffer more childish

Jewish Culture and History 55

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

conversations like these’. Rumsch takes issue with the framework dialogue used by Campe(and Zamośź): in his eyes it is childish, boring and not aesthetically pleasing. He is highlycritical of a further translation by someone from Vilkovishk (Maʿ aseh Robinzon), which hedismisses as worthless (4 ff.), although he notes that this version at least is without conversa-tions. This is an indication of Rumsch’s awareness of the developments in the literary climateduring the four decades between Zamośź’s writing and his own, and the increased sophistica-tion of Hebrew literature by the 1860s. What the Hebrew reader now desires are not suchclearly instructional texts and tractates, but accomplished literary works.

Ofek’s analysis of Sefer kurʿ oni places it within the context of the first Hebrew transla-tions of adventure stories for children and the first steps of original Hebrew fiction in the1860s. However, Sefer kurʿ oni was not only intended for young readerships and cannot becategorized as children’s literature alone: in his introduction Rumsch notes that this work isappealing to young and old alike. Likewise, although Rumsch sought to veer away from theprecedents of earlier translations and accomplish something different in the creation of histext, he was unable (or unwilling) to escape completely the influence of Campe.

In his introduction, Rumsch claims that the work is based on the original English by the‘great’ writer Defoe, of which many different translations and reworkings exist. In his opin-ion, a recent German translation by one Dr. Rauch is the best – Franz Rauch’s RobinsonsLeben und Abenteuer (Berlin, 1840). Rauch’s work is itself not a close translation of Robin-son Crusoe; Rauch made a number of significant changes to the source text, in terms of char-acter, ideology and piety, including some influenced by Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere.71

This is unsurprising in light of Rauch’s own comments in his introduction, in which he sur-veys some of the German translations/adaptations of Robinson Crusoe, noting that althoughCampe’s familial dialogue is tiring, his Robinson der Jüngere is a masterpiece (RobinsonsLeben und Abenteuer, iii). Rauch’s ideological changes include the removal of Robinson’sinvolvement in the slave trade (his voyage from Brazil to Guinea is to purchase gold dustand grains, not to trade in human beings, Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 35) and the con-tinual emphasis on divine salvation and how Robinson’s struggles bring him to greaterfaith.72 It is highly doubtful that Rumsch would have found Defoe’s original Robinson Cru-soe as praiseworthy or as suited to his maskilic ideology as Rauch’s work.

Likewise, despite his praise of Rauch’s work, Rumsch does not hide the fact that he didnot translate it as it was, but used the story as a frame and ‘fixed’ it anew in the holy lan-guage, according to the spirit of the Jewish people, once again demonstrating the need forchange before a text was acceptable for Jewish readerships.73 However, Rumsch’s alterationsto Rauch’s text are not restricted to Judaization. Rather, on comparing Rumsch’s Sefer kurʿ oniwith Rauch’s Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, it is clear that Rumsch himself was influencedby Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere. Rumsch also adds to the work on his own initiative. Theclose of the work combines elements of Campe and Rauch’s works with Rumsch’s own addi-tions to create an innovative ending.

For the most part Rumsch follows Rauch’s work which, as was noted above, includes anumber of significant changes to the characters and events of Defoe’s original story. Oneexample is the description of Robinson’s father (see Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 2–3;SKO, 1–3) who wanted Robinson to leave England for his homeland (Germany) to help theoppressed as a lawyer, since he (Robinson’s father) was unable to bear the exploitation ofthe people. However, Robinson states that he could not follow his father’s wishes because‘the spirit of the British had entered me’ (causing him to want to go to sea).

Near the close of the work, Rauch describes Freitag’s internal debate on whether to leavethe island with Robinson or to wait for his father to return, thus explaining Friday’s departurewithout his father (in Defoe’s text this is left unexplained; Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer,

56 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

300–303).74 This internal dialogue enhances Freitag’s character with an extra dimension: hedoes not go meekly after his master but thinks for himself. Rauch’s Robinson is more piousand emotional, from his very first voyage to his return to England. When waiting for themutineers aboard the English ship to be defeated Robinson prays; when the captain is victori-ous and Robinson hears the canon fire to signal this he cries and embraces Freitag (RobinsonsLeben und Abenteuer, 390–91).

These and other changes embellish the story and serve to make its characters more realis-tic, and at times more morally and religiously exemplary, than those of Defoe’s original work.Likewise, they insert some of Rauch’s own ideology into the text, increasing the weight ofRobinson’s sin against his parents and his people, emphasizing the virtues of loving and hon-ouring one’s parents and trusting in God. The hero’s punishment of a solitary island experi-ence is all the more justified since he had followed his own whimsical desires rather thanhelping the oppressed. Likewise, the derogatory comment that the ‘spirit of the British’caused Robinson to wish to go to sea demonstrates a somewhat ambiguous attitude to thecolonial enterprise, which was perhaps reserved for the British. Yet Rauch’s descriptions ofthe sea, the island and other natural phenomena demonstrate why the ‘spirit of the British’,the desire to go to sea, is so powerful.

Many of the changes which Rumsch introduces into his translation are a result of his desireto create a text suited to Jewish readers. The very title of the book uses a biblical fragment –‘furnace of poverty’ (Isaiah 48:10) – which is found on a number of occasions in the text itselfdescribing the state of poverty in which the hero finds himself on the island. In depicting astorm at sea, the translator utilizes well-known biblical verses as inlays, including םימתולוקמ

םירידאםיבר (Psalm 93:4 ‘Above the voices of many waters, the mighty breakers of the sea’).Rauch’s pious outlook is accentuated even further in Rumsch’s translation and given a par-

ticularly Jewish slant. Rumsch’s text is littered with references to God, His presence, protection,provision and other attributes. The God to whom Robinson prays is very clearly the JewishGod (SKO, 18), quoting Psalm 65:8 and 1 Samuel 2:6. Upon finding food, Robinson says thathe ate, was satisfied and blessed God. Robinson also notes that he ‘prayed the prayer of Moses,man of God; this prayer was a cure for my heart and pleasure for my soul’ (SKO, 46). Otherbiblical inlays are taken mainly from Psalms and the prophets. Rumsch prefaces chapter 10, inwhich the character Friday (named Shesbetsar) is introduced to the readers, with a quote fromProverbs 12:13 – ‘Hope deferred maketh the heart sick; but desire fulfilled is a tree of life’ –followed by the words ‘and now had arrived the time of mercy’. Thus Rumsch builds up thedrama and tension which precede the end of the hero’s total isolation on the island.

When celebrating the anniversary of his landing on the island, Robinson makes a festival(SKO, 58), which he celebrates according to the description of the Sabbath in Leviticus 23:3:

טפשמכיעיבשהםויתאתבשאו’הלםישדקויהיתונתשעוינויגהלכו,וביתישעאלהכאלמלכ,’הלגחותואיתוגחתותבש

[I made a festival to God, I did no work and all my thoughts and deliberations were dedicated toGod and I rested on the seventh day according to the law of Sabbaths.]

All mention of Christianity is removed from Robinson’s religious instruction of Friday (SKO,109 ff.; Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 215 ff.). Following the first part of Rauch’s transla-tion of this section, God is described as creator of all, strong, hidden, giving, good to allmankind, omnipotent and omniscient. Rumsch omits the following lessons about Christianity,adding his own comments on religion and noting that, ‘God raised up for us as teachers ofrighteousness, to show us the right and straight path’.

Jewish Culture and History 57

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

The Judaization of this text is also clear in Robinson’s final farewell to his island. Rauch’s(Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 306) ‘Du meiner Thränen, meiner Prüfung Land, ich lasseDich zurück, doch segnend denk’ ich Dein!’ (You my tears, my land of trial, I leave youbehind, yet through consecration I remember you) is translated using a biblical inlay from Isa-iah יתפרצנויתנחבנךבינערוכ,יתועמדץרא (the land of my tears, furnace of poverty in which I wastested and refined) (SKO, 157).75 Robinson’s final farewell is reminiscent of the Jewish expres-sion of remembrance of Jerusalem in Psalm 137: ‘I will forget my right hand if I forget you’.

Robinson’s reactions to and descriptions of the island in Sefer kurʿ oni are different tothose of any of the other translations. They are a great deal more poetic, and display a mix-ture of pleasure and despair. On the one hand Robinson describes his new home as a Gardenof Eden, on the other hand he despairs that he has fallen into total poverty. These mixed con-templations recur throughout the work. Rumsch emphasizes the burden of isolation – ‘Thelife of a man alone is a burden, and the land of the living becomes purgatory and devastation’(SKO, 56) – and alludes to the biblical Adam in the Garden of Eden before the creation ofEve, ‘as the first man before He gave him a help meet’ (SKO i, 60). However, at the sametime, what Rauch’s hero calls (Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 110) his ‘traurigen Landung’the Hebrew refers to, with more piety and gratitude, as ‘the day upon which God brought meback from the depths of the sea, that day on which I set foot upon this island for the firsttime’ (SKO, 58). When stranded in the open sea in his canoe, attempting to escape the island,Rumsch’s Robinson refers to the island of his captivity as a Garden of Eden, the wildernessof Kadesh, an orchard of pleasures (SKO, 76). As Robinson is leaving the island he gives anemotional speech bidding farewell to every part of his island, stating that his emotions onleaving were indescribable, yet using a number of metaphors in his attempts to do so (includ-ing an orphan or a man leaving his wife, SKO, 157). These themes are also brought to thefore in the choice of Friday’s name, Sheshbetsar ( רצבשש ), a reminder of the sixth day, Friday,on which God gave to Robinson, in his sorrow ( רצ ), what he most desired: a faithful brotherand friend (SKO, 104).

Sefer kurʿ oni also includes elements from Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere not found inRauch’s Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer. One example of this is the inclusion of one ofCampe’s songs (Robinson der Jüngere, 74–6/ SKO, 27–9). Although not always found at thesame points in the narrative as in Robinson der Jüngere, the influence of Campe’s lengthymoralizing is certainly felt throughout SKO, for example in relation to the condemnation ofidleness, man’s inability to understand divine providence and the need for physical and emo-tional strength. When Robinson discovers a cave and must summon all his courage to investi-gate the strange noises emanating from within (which are in reality the death throes of anold, dying ram – SKO, 88), he warns parents against pampering their children, which willlead to weakness. Rumsch inserts a lengthy paragraph praising the savages’ respect for andlove of their elders upon Sheshbetsar’s reunion with his father, instructing his readers thateven enlightened Europeans have much to learn from these simple peoples (SKO, 124).76

Rumsch makes substantial changes to the closing of the work, some of which reflectCampe’s influence, while others appear to be his own innovations. On his return, Robinsonfinds his parents dead and is not recognized by his sisters. Thus far, Rumsch follows Rauch.However, rather than having Robinson travel to Lisbon to discover the fate of his plantationin Brazil, and relating all the adventures that follow (Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 315ff.), Robinson gives his sisters certain signs by which they identify him and he is receivedwith a great welcome. Similar to Campe’s ending, news spreads that Robinson has returnedand the townspeople stream in to hear his story, which he tells so that others may learn fromit. The message of Robinson’s story is similar to Campe’s closing advice: parents must

58 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

educate their children well, not spoil them, and instil in them a work ethic. He instructschildren to listen to their parents and never be lazy or unemployed.

His parents having presumed him dead, they left him no inheritance, so Robinson is leftpoor. His sisters offer him part of their share, which he refuses. Life on the island has taughthim to live simply and he decides to get by on the little gold he brought with him. He buys aplot of land and he and Sheshbetsar work it together. He refuses to sail to Brazil to claim hisplantation. He and Sheshbetsar live a quiet, fraternal and peaceful life. Thus the conclusion ofthe story utilizes Campe’s moral messages yet does not ignore elements of Rauch’s RobinsonsLeben und Abenteuer – Rumsch explains why Robinson does not go back to Brazil and whathas happened to the hero’s sisters.

Rumsch’s combination of source texts with his own, often poetic, literary innovations isdemonstrated in his portrayal of the sea. Descriptions of the sea form a prominent and poeticfactor in this work (more than in any of the source texts or any of the other Jewish transla-tions). The presence of the sea is felt almost constantly, from the first storms, to events onthe island. Campe’s influence is evident in the lengthy and lyric passage portraying Robin-son’s amazement at his first confrontation with the vast open sea (see above). Yet Rumschalso notes Robinson’s fear upon seeing this ‘new sight’, wonderful and terrible at once andreferring to the primordial watery chaos through his use of biblical analogy and inlay (Gene-sis 1:2):

חורכהדבלהינאהקרו,דחאעגרומתופסלבתיאצאצלכיתיארםימוםימשךא...יתביבסלכתאהסכתםימתעפש!ותלוזספא,םימהינפלעתפחרמ

[The abundance of water covered all around me … only sky and water could I see, all the crea-tures of the universe disappeared in one moment and only the ship was left alone as a spirit77

floating on the surface of the water, nothing is like it!]

He goes on to describe the way in which the waves play with the boat, rocking it up anddown, and how the sun’s rays glimmer on the water, how this sight filled all the chambers ofhis heart with joy and delight.

Following Rauch, the sea affects Rumsch’s hero deeply – causing him visions of his par-ents and regret at his sin of leaving them (SKO, 5; Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 5–6).Descriptions of the sea present to the reader the calm of the waves when the sea is quiet(SKO, 30) and the angry waves during a storm, boiling as a pot of water on a stove, whichcauses Robinson to thank God for saving him (SKO, 36). Throughout the work, the changesin the sea are clearly attributed to God. Likewise, it is Robinson’s lyric contemplation of therise and fall of the waves that leads him to the conclusion that there must indeed be a Godwho created everything and who continues to rule over the world (SKO, 52).

Rumsch refers repeatedly to the dangers of the sea, presenting it as a necessary evil to beventured onto only out of extreme necessity.78 Indeed, he claims that man’s constant desire formore is for man’s own benefit, because without it man would not dare to put his soul at themercy of the angry sea (SKO, 69–70).79 This approach is quite different to that found in Defoe,in which Robinson forsakes a profitable plantation and easy life in favour of sea travel.

Sefer kurʿ oni is a combination of (at least) two sources and the translator’s own innova-tions. It is poetic and thoughtful, adding more emotion and dimension to the characters of thestory as well as the descriptions of the sea and landscape. Rumsch adds moral commentarywhich demonstrates Campe’s influence; however these lessons are not emphasized as often oras thoroughly as in Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere, but rather at a number of strategic points.Sefer kurʿ oni is also very pious in tone and content, even more so than Rauch’s Robinsons

Jewish Culture and History 59

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

Leben und Abenteuer; God’s constant, yet hidden, presence is clearly felt throughout the workand reinforced from a specifically Jewish perspective through the use of biblical phrases, thedescriptions of God’s attributes and the hero’s prayers. The use of the sea in Rumsch’s Seferkurʿ oni is indicative of the traits of the translation as a whole: descriptions of the sea arepoetic and at times lengthy; the sea is ruled over by God, reinforcing His ever present role.

4h. Robinzon Kruzo der yingere (RKY)

A further Yiddish translation of Robinson der Jüngere was published in 1874 in Sklod. Itclaims that this is a true story, which took place in Hamburg 100 years before, andemphasizes the usefulness of the work. It is intended not only for enjoyment, but containsmany useful things: in other words the work is one of pleasurable instruction. Althoughsome episodes and aspects of Robinson der Jüngere are omitted, this translation remainsclose to Campe’s German, including most of the practical knowledge and moral advice. Italso adds some extra information to explain matters with which readers may not be famil-iar, including llamas (where they live, their wool and what they are useful for) and otheraspects of life on the island and seafaring. It includes details of how Robinson makes histools; on fear of thunder and lightning, since he did not know that the creator made themfor human benefit (RKY, 30); his lack of knowledge about potatoes (RKY, 34); how salt isformed from sea water (RKY, 37); his debate about whether to cut down a fruit tree inorder to make a canoe and much more.

As in Campe’s work, there is recurring emphasis on the fact that humans do not alwaysknow why things happen, but they are for the best, for example when Robinson and Fraytiglose the canoe they had made (RKY, 95). Robinson takes the loss of the boat well andattempts to cheer Fraytig by telling him that even though they do not know the reason for it,he is sure it is for the best.

It is interesting that religion is almost completely absent from the text: the presence of Godis much less apparent than in all the other Jewish translations and Campe’s original. Robinson’sinstruction of Freitag in religion is removed. It is true that Robinson says his prayers (RKY, 59–60) and thanks the creator at various points in the narrative, often referring to Him as ‘almighty’.There are reports of some of Campe’s shorter songs in prose form – the hero remembers that hehad once heard that the God who provides for ravens will not forsake humans – but the herodoes not sing religious songs of praise and there are no songs in direct speech in the text.Although Robinson trusts in God, this trust is not emphasized to the same extent as in the othertranslations. Rather, perhaps as is indicated by the introduction, this text is much more practicalin its approach, emphasizing universal values and general knowledge.

5. Conclusion

The number of different translations of Robinson Crusoe by maskilic writers indicates the popu-larity of the Robinson story.80 This popularity was not restricted to translations of Campe’srewriting of the original story but, in the latter half of the nineteenth century, extended into Rob-insonade texts such as Ayzik Meyer Dik’s Di antlofene tokhter, Maʿ oz hayam oder di viste inzland ʾIyey hayam, which include sea voyages and desert island experiences.81 The enduringattraction of the text was undoubtedly rooted in the components of the story – excitement, explo-ration, sea travel, adventure, isolation and salvation. Sea travel and adventure provide not onlyan exciting frame story but also the opportunity for general education – on geography, nature,history and more – and moral edification – on values including team work, brotherhood, equalityand piety.

60 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

Based on the number of editions, the most popular translations were Maʿ aseh Robinzon,Alter Leb and Sefer kurʿ oni. Already in the 1850s, according to Rumsch in his introduction toSefer kurʿ oni, it was almost impossible to obtain a copy of Zamośź’s Robinzon der yingere.Likewise the two early works in German written in Hebrew characters and the 1874 Yiddishtranslation Robinzon Kruzo der yingere were never reprinted.

The popularity of these three translations reflect the development of Jewish literature inthe period and the changing tastes of the readers as Haskalah ideals and literature weretransferred from Western to Eastern Europe. Along with this transferral, the target audience,and style, content and justifications of the text all underwent necessary changes. Whereasthe earliest 1784 version and Zamośź’s work were highly influenced by the ideology ofCampe and the early Haskalah, including much moral and ethical instruction and support-ing the use of the German or Hebrew languages respectively, Yosef Vitlin, adaptor of AlterLeb, aimed to reach a Yiddish reading audience of all ages. To do so its author heavilyJudaized the text, as well as implementing changes in style, format and content, in order tojustify his text to traditional readers.

Maʿ aseh Robinzon is not overtly didactic, but rather a literary narrative with some edu-cational content. Similarly, Sefer kurʿ oni is didactic in nature and yet is written in a beau-tiful poetic style, with a specific focus on piety. In both of these works, the elements ofeducation and edification are worked into the text less obviously than the earlier transla-tions, producing smoother and more literary texts, indicating that by the time these werepublished Hebrew literature was already taking a turn away from the didactic towards theliterary. The sophistication of Sefer kurʿ oni in particular is demonstrated in its poetic andlyric descriptions (especially of nature and the sea) and its seamless combination of sourcetexts. The last Yiddish translation discussed herein, Robinzon Kruzo der yingere, is alsoindicative of the same phenomenon. Despite retaining some educational material, it is farless overtly didactic.

Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe may not have been acceptable to maskilim or suitablefor the Jewish literary canon. However, once it had been reworked into a didactic text at thehands of Joachim Heinrich Campe, the Robinson story became popular amongst maskilimand, following a further process of rewriting and Judaization, with their readers. However,Defoe’s work was not completely consumed by Campe’s: indeed some of the values empha-sized in the Jewish translations at times appear to return to the economic and familial princi-ples of Defoe rather than stressing Campe’s austerity, simplicity and brotherhood. Some ofthe Jewish translations, in their style and format, are closer to Defoe’s original novel thanCampe’s overtly pedagogical tractate.

It is clear that in their efforts to educate and edify their readers, the maskilim werelured by the eternal attraction of the sea and sea travel. Thus Robinson Crusoe became animportant text in the maskilic canon, allowing readers to discover faraway places andexperience the highs and lows of seafaring and solitary island life from their homes inEurope.

AcknowledgementsThis article is based on a chapter of my PhD thesis, “The Sea and Sea Voyage in MaskilicLiterature” (PhD thesis, Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2012), written under thesupervision of Professors Israel Bartal and Chava Turniansky at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem,to whom I am indebted for their constant input and support. A paper on this subject was presentedat the conference Towards Jewish Maritime Studies in October 2009 at Southampton University. Iwould like to thank Dr Stephanie Jones for her insightful comments on the presentation and duringthe writing of this article.

Jewish Culture and History 61

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

Notes on contributorDr Rebecca Wolpe recently completed her PhD in the department of Yiddish at The Hebrew Universityof Jerusalem. Her thesis was entitled ‘The Sea and Sea Voyage in Maskilic Literature’. Researchinterests include Haskalah literature, travel writing, maskilic attitudes to conquest, slavery, nature andcolonialism and Hebrew/Yiddish translations of works from European languages.

Notes1. Taykhman, M. “Tsu der yidisher oysgabe fun robinzon kruzo.” Literarishe bleter 40, October 1,

1937: 699 [Yiddish].2. There are various definitions of Haskalah or Jewish enlightenment, its historical markers and period,

all beyond the scope of this article. At its outset in Germany in the 1780s and 1790s, the maskilimwere a very small group, the central core never reaching more than a few hundred. According toShmuel Feiner they were ‘first and foremost writers who produced literary works of various genres,primarily in Hebrew, and considered themselves the bearers of a social and cultural mission. Theyregarded themselves as an avant-garde in Jewish society, adopting a critical approach to their sur-roundings and aspiring to shape a new Jewish ideal consistent with the future they envisaged’. Shm-uel Feiner, Haskalah and History, The Emergence of a Modern Jewish Historical Consciousness,trans. Chaya Naor and Sandra Silverston (Oxford: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization,2002), 10.Later, the Haskalah spread to and flowered in Galicia in the 1820s and Russia in the 1830s. How-ever, these two movements were decidedly different, not only in terms of their time period but alsothe fact that the German Haskalah was marked by encouragement and incentive from the surround-ing society, whilst in the east it faced obstacles and hindrance. Amongst the wide variety of litera-ture existing on Haskalah see for example Feiner, Haskalah and History; Shmuel Feiner, TheJewish Enlightenment, trans. Chaya Naor (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar, 2004); Shmuel Feiner, TheJewish Enlightenment in the Nineteenth Century (Jerusalem: Carmel, 2010) [Hebrew]; Jacob Katz,Out of the Ghetto: The Social Background of Jewish Emancipation 1770–1870 (Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press, 1973); Yehuda Reinharz and Walter Schatzenberg, eds., The JewishResponse to German Culture: From the Enlightenment to the Second World War (Hanover: Univer-sity Press of New England, 1985); on Haskalah literature see Moshe Pelli, “Haskalah Literature –Trends and Attitudes,” Jewish Book Annual, vol. 39 (New York: Jewish Book Council, 1981–82);on the Haskalah in Russia see Jacob S. Raisin, The Haskalah Movement in Russia (Philadelphia:The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1913).

3. See Charles L. Batten Jr, Pleasurable Instruction: Form and Convention in Eighteenth Century Tra-vel Literature (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978).

4. Joachim Heinrich Campe (trans.) Robinson der Jüngere, 1779.5. On a lost translation by Yitzhak Erter see Uriel Ofek, Hebrew Children’s Literature: The Beginnings

(Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics, 1979), 174–5 [Hebrew].6. A total of 15 publications from 1784 to 1914.7. Mary Antin, The Promised Land (Kessinger Publishing, 2004), 104.8. Ibid., 120.9. All quotations from Robinson der Jüngere are from Alwin Binder and Heinrrich Richartz’s critical

edition (Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam Jun, 1981) [German]. All translations, aside from biblical texts,are by the author.

10. For more details on the concept of the ‘Robinsonade’ see Martin Green, The Robinson Crusoe Story(Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press, 1997). See also Martin Green, Seven Types of Adven-ture Tale: An Etiology of a Major Genre (Philadelphia: Pennsylvania University Press, 1991).

11. The maskil Mordekhai Aharon Gintsburg translated Campe’s Die Entdeckung von Amerika into bothHebrew and Yiddish (1823 and 1824 respectively), declaring that his Yiddish translation was for thosenot capable of reading his beautiful Hebrew one: ‘This [Yiddish] translation of The Discovery (Amer-ica) I made from my Hebrew translation into a clean Yiddish-German language, without the Hebrew,Polish, Russian and Turkish [!] words which are to be found mixed into the Yiddish language I havedone this for those who cannot use my the beautiful Hebrew translation, so that they can buy this bookand find in it something more useful than what they read in A Thousand and One Nights.’

12. Only one of the translations has been discussed in any detail to date, the Yiddish translation AlterLeb (section 3.d). See Leah Garrett, “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” Comparative Literature 54, no.3 (2000): 215–28, and David Roskies, “Ayzik-Meyer Dik and the Rise of Yiddish Popular Litera-

62 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

ture” (PhD thesis, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, 1976), 78–83. Sefer kurʿ oni has been dis-cussed briefly by Joseph Klausner, History of Modern Hebrew Literature (Jerusalem: Ahiasaf,1951–59), vol. 3, 228–30 [Hebrew], and Getzel Kressel, Lexicon of Hebrew Literature in the RecentGenerations, vol. 2 (Jerusalem Sifriat Poalim, 1964–67), 849 [Hebrew].

13. Ian Watt, The Rise of the Novel: Studies in Defoe, Richardson and Fielding, 2nd ed. (Berkeley: Uni-versity of California Press, 2001).

14. Helmut Germer, The German Novel of Education from 1764 to 1792: A Complete Bibliography andAnalysis (Berne: Peter Lang, 1982), 9–12.

15. See Watt, The Rise of the Novel, and M. Bakhtin, “Epic and Novel,” in The Dialogic Imagination:Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin, ed. and trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist (Austin: Univer-sity of Texas Press, 1981), 3 ff.

16. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile, trans. Barbara Foxely (London: Everyman, 1911), 205–6.17. By 1894, 117 German editions of the work had been published and it had been translated into

numerous languages. See Susanne Zantop, Colonial Fantasies: Conquest, Family and Nation in Pre-colonial Germany, 1770–1870 (Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press, 1997), 105.Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere stayed in print for over 100 years without interruption. By 1900there were over 724 editions of the work, including translations, adaptations and continuations. Aslate as the 1930s it was reworked by German writer Gustav A. Grahner. Green, The Robinson Cru-soe Story, 50. Taykhman notes the popularity of the German reworkings worldwide and states that itis hard to find a European who had not read or at least heard about Robinson in school but throughthese German translations, rather than from the original.

18. Green, The Robinson Crusoe Story, 49. See also Elisabeth Stambor, “L’entrée de Robinson Crusoédans la littérature enfantine: naissance du mythe, de De Foe à Campe, 1719–1779” (MA Thesis, TelAviv University, 1992) [French], and Lina Lamanauskaitė Geriguis, “Discovering the LithuanianReinscription of Robinson Crusoe: A Literary Construct of Nineteenth Century Cultural, Politicaland Historical Discourses in Lithuania,” Lithuanias 54, no. 4 (2008). http://www.lituanus.org/2008/08_4_07%20Geriguis.html. She writes that ‘Campe’s text became a best-seller and served to furthercommunicate Defoe’s myth to many different languages, including Eskimo, Greek, and Yiddish.While Campe’s translation was only one of the many German imitations of Robinson Crusoe, it wasused as a model since it was taken to be the original adaptation. Among the generations of readersto whom Campe’s translation became the epitome of Robinson Crusoe was the renowned Lithuanianhistorian Simonas Daukantas (1793–1864), who chose to translate Campe’s Robinson der Jüngereinto a story in his native tongue. Renaming it Rubinaičio Peliuzes Gyvenimas (The life of RubinaitisPeliuze) (1846)...’

19. Michael A. Meyer, ed., German-Jewish History in Modern Times (New York: Columbia UniversityPress, 1996), 356 ff.

20. This is also demonstrated in his collection of travel narratives, Joachim Heinrich Campe, Sammlunginteressanter und durchgängig zweckmäßig abgefaßter Reisebeschreibungen für die Jugend, Wolfen-buttel: Schulbuchhandlung (Zweite Auflage, 1786) and his three-part work on the discovery ofAmerica, Die Entdeckung von Amerika (1786). See Rebecca Wolpe, “The Sea Voyage Narrative asan Educational Tool in the Early Haskalah” (MA thesis, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2006).

21. Robert Foulke, The Sea Voyage Narrative (New York: Routledge, 2002).22. These passages provide Campe with an outlet to compare savages to modern civilization and com-

ment on colonialization, as is discussed at length by Zantop in Colonial Fantasies.23. Zantop notes that Campe’s aims in Robinson der Jüngere go beyond Rousseau’s ideological agenda.

He wishes to create “an awareness in his readers of the preferability of social life over life in isola-tion” as part of a socializing project. Zantop also warns against reading the work as a didactic com-panion or utopian programme and thus ignoring its connection to the European expansionist orcolonialist project. See Zantop, Colonial Fantasies, 102–20, esp. 105.

24. In later editions of Campe’s work, this episode differs slightly (the change was made either byCampe himself or by an editor). The ship which rescues Robinson is of Turkish origin, leading intoa discussion of the need to help others, regardless of race or religion. Both David Zamośź and YosefVitlin used a source text which included this addition, as did one of the English translators of Rob-inson der Jüngere, R. Hick, whose translation was published by Routledge in London in 1855.

25. The first, 33–7, tells of a French merchant ship bound for Quebec which went up in flames at sea.The people managed to escape in the life boats and were saved by Robinson’s ship. The second,39–41, tells of a boat whose main mast was blown off in a storm, and was left stranded at sea. Bythe time Robinson’s ship came upon them their food supplies were running out and the people were

Jewish Culture and History 63

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

beginning to starve. The basis for these episodes is in Daniel Defoe, The Further Adventures ofRobinson Crusoe (Rockville, MD: Serenity Publishers, 2009), 15–25.

26. Campe also uses this opportunity to provide detailed information on reefs, currents and the need fora compass – including what exactly this is and what it does

27. Quotations from Robinson Crusoe are from Michael Shinagel, ed., Robinson Crusoe: An Authorita-tive Text, Contexts and Criticism (New York: Norton, 1993).

28. Maximillian E. Novak, “Robinson Crusoe’s ‘Original Sin’,” Studies in English Literature 1, no. 3(1961): 26–7.

29. W.H. Auden, The Enchafed Flood (Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 1950), 8–10.30. Zantop, Colonial Fantasies, 115.31. Zohar Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lesebuch to the Jewish Campe: The Beginning of Hebrew Chil-

dren’s Literature in Germany,” Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 33 (1988): 396; Zohar Shavit, Poeticsof Children’s Literature (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1986), 146–57; Uriel Ofek, HebrewChildren’s Literature: The Beginnings, 13–27. For a good overview see Hayim Shoham, Inspired bythe German Enlightenment (Tel Aviv: Porter Institute, 1996) [Hebrew].

32. Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lesebuch to the Jewish Campe,” 389–91.33. See Shaul Stampfer, “What Did “Knowing Hebrew” Mean in Eastern Europe?,” in Hebrew in Ash-

kenaz, ed. Lewis Glinert (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 129–40.34. Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lesebuch to the Jewish Campe,” 406.35. Not five, as scholarship has suggested up until this point.36. Robinson der Jüngere, Die Entdeckung von Amerika, Theophron oder der erfahrne Rathgeber für

die unerfahrne Jugend, Sittenbüchlein für Kinder aus gesitteten Ständen, Merkwürdge Reis-ebeschreibungen and Sammlung interessanter und durchgängig zweckmäßig abgefaßter Reis-ebeschreibungen für die Jugend. The most popular were undoubtedly Robinson der Jüngere, DieEntdeckung von Amerika and individual stories taken from Sammlung interessanter und durchgän-gig zweckmäßig abgefaßter Reisebeschreibungen für die Jugend.

37. Zohar Shavit, “Literary Interference between German and Jewish Hebrew Children’s Literature dur-ing the Enlightenment: The Case of Campe”, Poetics Today 13/1 (1992): 51.

38. Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lesebuch to the Jewish Campe,” 410.39. Ibid., 396.40. Although the works in Hebrew and Yiddish were ostensibly “translations,” as will become clear in

the course of this article most of them, along with the two German versions, are in reality adapta-tions of the source text, having undergone significant changes. Yet since the maskilic authors ofthese works perceived them as translations, often referring to them as such, and since the approachto translation was very different to that accepted today, herein they will be referred to as works oftranslation. For further discussion of maskilic translation see Gideon Toury, “Translating English Lit-erature via German – and Vice Versa: A Symptomatic Reversal in the History of Modern HebrewLiterature,” in Die literarische Übersetzung: Stand und Perspektiven ihrer Erforschung, ed. HaraldKittel (Berlin: Erich Schmidt, 1988), 139–57, and for general discussions of translation see ItamarEven-Zohar, Polysystem Studies. Special Edition, Poetics Today 11, no. 1 (1990).

41. Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lesebuch to the Jewish Campe,” 407–10; Toury, “Translating EnglishLiterature via German – and Vice Versa,” 142–3.

42. Historye oder zeltsame und vunderbare bagebenheiten einem yungen zeefarers [Story or the odd andwonderful circumstances of a young seafarer], 1784.

43. Not in Yiddish, as Ofek claims. Ofek, Hebrew Children’s Literature: The Beginnings, 88, note 4.44. For further discussion of the languages used by the maskilim see Shavit, “From Friedländer’s Lese-

buch to the Jewish Campe,” 389–90.45. Green, The Robinson Crusoe Story, 53.46. Zamośź was born in Kampen, Poznan. At the age of 13 he moved to Breslau where he acquired a

secular education and became a teacher. He tried his hand at business for a time but on losing hiscapital returned to teaching and writing. He wrote mainly for children and schools: his compositionsinclude poetry, stories, plays and translations. Of Campe’s works he translated Tehophoron, Robin-son der Jüngere and Die Entdeckung von Amerika (although of the last no copies survive). He alsopublished various works of poems, Hebrew grammar and German and Hebrew translation exercises.For more information see Getzel Kressel, Lexicon of Hebrew Literature in Recent Generations,vol. 1, 744–5 [Hebrew], and Ofek, Hebrew Children’s Literature: The Beginnings, 79–86.

47. When Zamośź encounters one of the words which he had difficulty translating he often includes afootnote with a Yiddish explanation. Examples include: anchor (8); canon (8); sugar cane (14); and

64 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

cherry – in this case Zamośź notes that his translation is drawn from Avodah Zarah, BabylonianTalmud (39) and Rashi (34).

48. Moshe Pelli, “On the Role of Melitzah in the Literature of Hebrew Enlightenment,” in Hebrew inAshkenaz, ed. Lewis Glinert (New York: OUP, 1993), 102.

49. Moshe Pelli, Struggles for Change (Tel Aviv: University Publishing, 1988) [Hebrew], quoted in Pel-li, “On the Role of Melitzah,” 102.

50. Dan Pagis defines three types of biblical inlay or shibutz: a) neutral, primarily linguistic, b) actingvia knowledge of the source text; c) a conceptual or descriptive centre of the text. Dan Pagis, Inno-vation and Tradition in Secular Hebrew Poetry: Spain and Italy (Tel Aviv: Keter, 1988), 75[Hebrew], quoted in Pelli, “On the Role of Melitzah,” 103.

51. Das Loblied was composed by Martin Rinckhart, a Lutheran pastor, following the end of the ThirtyYears War. The third verse includes the lines: ‘Lob, Ehr und Preis sei Gott/Dem Vater und demSohne’.

52. The reference to the Loblied indicated not only the words of the song but also its tune. Zamośź pro-vided a substitute melody: ‘Approximately to the tune of “You, whose eyes watered with tears”’.

53. All biblical translations are based on the JPS translation of the Bible (New York: JPS, 1917). TheHebrew is according to the masoretic text.

54. Pelli, “On the Role of Melitzah,” 103.55. The first (and incomplete) edition of the anonymous Alter Leb held by the National Library of Israel

was printed in Lvov in 1850/51. However, this is not the first edition of the work, which Garrettdates to 1820. The fact that Shlomo Ettinger refers to a Yiddish translation of Robinson Crusoe enti-tled ילעטלא , writing in the 1830s, indicates that the earliest edition was published well before theextant edition. In 1937 Ber Shlosberg identified Yosef Vitlin, a Galician maskil, as the translator,and this line was also followed by Dov Sadan, David Roskies and Leah Garrett, who has discussedthis translation at length in her article “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe”. See Max Weiner, Tsu dergeshikhte fun der yiddisher literatur in 19tn johrhundert (New York: YKUF, 1945), 255 [Yiddish],and Garrett, “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” 216.The National Library of Israel holds three other editions – only the last of them complete – Vilna,

1894 (also in Montreal and YIVO), Cracow, 1897/98 and Cracow, 1906/7. Each one of the editionsis different from the others in terms of language, spellings, grammatical structure and Jewish vs.practical content. The fullest translation is undoubtedly the earliest; however large sections of it aremissing. This edition has more references to Jewish sources than any other, but also the most practi-cal content. The later editions seem to be reworkings of this one (or an even earlier one) which pickand choose what to include and omit from the available material of that translation. The 1894 edi-tion contains less Judaization but a good deal of the details of how exactly Alter Leb survived onthe island, his tools, nature and so on. Most of this is missing from the 1897 edition, making it sig-nificantly shorter and reducing it to more of a story narrative with less instructional material. Yetthis edition has more Jewish content than the previous one. Likewise, the later editions contain illus-trations not to be found in the earliest extant edition, perhaps indicating a change in the target audi-ence from the general public to younger readerships. Unless otherwise stated, all quotes are fromthe 1897 edition.

56. Small details add to the Judaization of the text. Alter Leb begins his repentance on the island bysaying shema, washing his hands before eating and praying. He eats herring rather than oysters(1:27); he marks Shabbat and Yom Tov on his calendar (yet the narrator remarks that the calendarcannot have been accurate); and he prays daily in his לקניווחרזמ (corner facing east) (2:7). Garrett,“The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” 223, notes that by replacing oysters with herring, the hero is eatingan acceptable food. In the 1850 edition, Alter Leb also rejects turtle meat, which he knows that hemust not eat, then goes out to look for llamas instead, which the translator says is because he didnot know that they are not kosher animals!

57. David Roskies, “The Medium and Message of the Maskilic (Yiddish) Chapbook,” Jewish SocialStudies 41, no. 3/4 (1979): 283. Roskies and Garrett also assert that the use of a Western text legiti-mated the author as a maskil and demonstrated his worldliness in choosing a canonized Europeannarrative, while the Judaization of the text legitimated it for Jewish readers who needed to recognizethe literary terrain as Jewish. Garrett, “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” 219.

58. The descriptions of the sights he sees on his journey are very poetic, especially that of the Canaryislands, “like a beautiful bride, adorned with gold and pearls”, the vines on their mountains, the peak ofTenerife (with an additional description of the production of Madera wine in the 1894 edition),18–19.

Jewish Culture and History 65

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

59. The 1850 edition has a longer discussion of this issue, including a description of the horrible deathresulting from being buried alive, with numerous examples of people from various countries andtime periods who were saved from being buried alive by luck and then went on to live happy andhealthy lives.

60. The original controversy over burying the dead had begun in 1772, involving, amongst others, JacobEmden and Moses Mendelssohn. It was renewed by maskilim in 1785–86 as part of a maskilic cam-paign for changes in some aspects of Jewish law, including a series of articles in Hameasef by IsaacEuchel; for example see Hameasef, Tammuz, Av and Ellul 1785. For more information see MoshePelli, The Age of Haskalah: Studies in Hebrew Literature of the Enlightenment in Germany (Leiden:E.J. Brill, 1979), 207 ff.

61. Although the relationship between Alter Leb and Shabes is described as king-master (2:13), at thesame time, Alter Leb’s prayer of thanks to God for sending him a companion clearly stresses theequality of all mankind (2:14), and the text emphasizes the physical and emotional capabilities of“savages” (2:18). The 1850 edition is yet more explicit. On page 42 the hero declares that thusspeaks a wild man whilst he (Alter Leb), who was born in the enlightened world with thousands ofhouses of study (batei midrash) with holy books and thousands of teachers was so stupid and madehis parents so miserable.

62. Garret, “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” 222.63. Ibid., 223.64. Examples of maskilic writings which emphasize nature as a way to experience and find deeper

understanding of God can be found in articles on natural phenomena published in Hameasef (forexample see Nissan 1787, letters, or Tishrei 1788, review of Baruch Lindau’s Reshit Limmudim)and the descriptions of geography and nature in Yosef Perl’s annual calendar published 1812–14.Similar expressions recur in Hebrew and Yiddish translations of Campe’s Die Entdeckung von Ame-rika and later in works by A.M. Dik and Nehemiah Dov Hoffman. See also Rebecca Wolpe, “TheTrue Way to Loving God: Nature in the Haskala,” The University of Toronto Journal of JewishThought Issue 3, available at http://cjs.utoronto.ca/tjjt/node/51.

65. Warsaw, 1874, and in 1912 in Przemysl as Sippur Robinzon, both anonymous.66. There is no mention that the sailors were of Turkish origin, suggesting that this translation is based

on a different version to that used by Zamośź and Vitlin.67. For further discussion of maskilic writers’ commentary on slavery see Rebecca Wolpe, “From Slavery

to Freedom: Abolitionist Expressions in Maskilic Sea Literature,” AJS Review 36, no. 1 (2012): 43–70.68. Yitzhak Rumsch, 1822–94, a Lithuanian maskil, writer, translator and educator. For more details on

Rumsch see Mordechai Zalkin, “Itzhak Romash, Between ‘Educating the Periphery’ and ‘PeripheralEducation’,” in Old World, New People: Jewish Communities in the Age of Modernization, ed. EliZur (Sdeh Boker: Ben Gurion Institution, 2005), 185–213 [Hebrew].

69. 1872 in Eydtkuhnen; 1883 and 1910 in Vilna.70. Ofek, Hebrew Children’s Literature: The Beginnings, 174–5.71. For example, Robinson falls from a tree due to nightmares after his stranding on the island (Robin-

sons Leben und Abenteuer (Berlin: 1840), 43, Robinson der Jüngere, 52).72. Ofek, Hebrew Children’s Literature: The Beginnings, 176.73. Mordechai Zalkin notes that Rumsch, and many of his contemporaries, saw it as their duty to suit

their works to the world of their Jewish readers. See Zalkin, “Itzhak Romash, Between ‘Educatingthe Periphery’ and ‘Peripheral Education’,” 175.

74. Garrett, “The Jewish Robinson Crusoe,” 224, argues that only in the Yiddish translation Alter Leb“Shabes [Friday] gradually becomes a fully voiced, independent, and autonomous character, farmore developed than his counterpart in Defoe (and Campe).” However, in Campe’s text, Fridayexcels at activities at which Robinson flounders: he is the better swimmer, he brings Robinson fire(all of Robinson’s attempts to make a fire had failed) and teaches him various other crafts. There isan exchange of knowledge and skill between the two, not a teacher–student hierarchy. Likewise,Campe’s Friday does not speak pidgin German (one of the criticisms of Defoe’s character), seeCharles Gildon, in his parody of Robinson Crusoe entitled The Life and Strange Surprizing Adven-tures of Mr. D–––– DeF–– (London: J. Roberts, 1719). Although their relationship reflects colonialhierarchy – Friday’s culture being totally subsumed by what he learns from Robinson – and someremnants of a master–servant relationship, the relationship in Campe’s text between these two is acomplex combination of friendship and patriarchal care; the development of Friday’s character inAlter Leb and Sefer kurʿ oni is not the innovation of the translator/adaptors but a continuation of theprocess initiated by Campe in Robinson der Jüngere.

66 R. Wolpe

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3

75. Isaiah 48:10 ינערוכבךיתרחבףסכבאלוךיתפרצהנה ‘Behold, I have refined thee, but not as silver; I havetried thee in the furnace of affliction’.

76. These comments are certainly compatible with Campe’s descriptions of Peruvians in Die Entdeckungvon Amerika and the natives of the Pelew Islands in volume 9 of Sammlung interessanter und dur-chgängig zweckmäßig abgefaßter Reisebeschreibungen für die Jugend.

77. The word חור can also mean wind. Genesis 1:2 – ‘Now the earth was unformed and void, anddarkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters’.

78. This corresponds to an earlier view of seafaring prevalent from ancient times, which held that seatravel should be embarked upon only out of necessity. This concept changed with the voyages ofdiscovery, exploration and conquest. On this see for example Auden, The Enchafed Flood; PhilipEdwards, Sea-Mark: The Metaphorical Voyage, Spenser to Milton (Liverpool: Liverpool UniversityPress, 1997), and Philip Edwards, The Story of the Voyage: Sea Narratives in Eighteenth CenturyEngland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).

79. Rauch, Robinsons Leben und Abenteuer, 133: ‘Es ist indessen eine Eigenthümlichkeit des Mens-chen, daß seine Wünsche nimmer aufhören; wodurch, wenn nicht Andere, mindestens eine bestän-dige Regsamkeit ihm bewirkt und unterhalten wird’.

80. Campe’s Robinson der Jüngere was translated into Yiddish again in 1910 by Sh. and Z. Reisen,entitled Robinzon (Warsaw).

81. Ayzik Meyer Dik’s story of star-crossed lovers stranded on a deserted island, separated by savages,surviving there for 16 years, Di antlofene tokhter [The runaway daughter], 1856, 1874, 1882 and1885, was certainly very popular amongst readers. ʾIyey hayam [Islands of the sea] (Vilna, 1856)contains elements of the Robinsonade and Maʿ oz hayam oder di viste inzl [The strength of the seaor the desert island] (Vilna, 1864) is the story of a castaway on a desert island. For brief summariessee David Roskies, “An Annotated Bibliography of Ayzik-Meyer Dik,” in The Field of Yiddish, ed.Marvin Herzog, Barbara Kishenblatt-Gimblett, Dan Miron and Ruth Wisse (Philadelphia: ISHI,1980), 140 ff. For a discussion of Dik and the Robinsonade see Rebecca Wolpe, “The Sea and SeaVoyage in Maskilic Literature” (PhD thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2012), 188 ff.

Jewish Culture and History 67

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Heb

rew

Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

4:48

15

July

201

3