top of page
< Back

Miscellanies: Bibliographical Serendipity

A. Schischa

<plain_text><page sequence="1">Bibliographical Serendipity A. SCHISCHA THE LONDON 1791 EDITION OF HAHAM AZULAY'S mi!3 AND T?? plSX These two slender booklets, Moreh b'Etzbah and Tsiporen Shamir, were first published by the author in Livorno, in 1786. Moreh b'Etzbah is a systematic collection of Laws and Customs, whereas Tsiporen Shamir is a compilation of prayers and moral readings for various occasions. Like all Haham Azulay's books, they were very popular and sold out quickly. The contents (or, more precisely, large parts of them) became in due course integral parts of the Sephardi liturgy. The London 1791 edition is the second edition,1 and it presents some problems. The London Publisher The publisher of the London edition was an itinerant scholar, Haham Joseph Serano,2 a citizen of Jerusalem. He was commissioned by the Hahamim of Safed to act as their shaliah in North Africa. He duly arrived there and began his arduous task. However, things did not work out as planned. Marauding bands of brigands, engaged in internecine fighting, roamed the country and made the lives of travellers unsafe. It was his misfortune to fall into the hands of some of these murderous bandits, and he was robbed of everything he had on him; indeed, he was lucky to get away with his life. To continue with his work in North Africa was impossible, so he decided to make his way to Europe as fast as he could. And, like so many North African Jews at that particular time, he too turned up in London, needless to say, destitute. To help him over his misfortunes he decided to reprint Haham Hida's two little booklets in one volume. He was sure that they would find a ready market in London, and thereby secure him a fair reward for his effort. To print this volume he commissioned the well-known London printer, L. Alexander. The format is duodecimo; in all, it contains fifty-eight leaves, including the two title-pages ?one for each of the two booklets. The pagination is in Hebrew characters [1]; [1]. The sheets are numbered 1 to 10 at the foot of each fifth page of the sheet, each in Hebrew and Arabic numerals. Nine sheets are complete?i.e., twelve pages to the sheet; the tenth sheet has only eight pages. There is no colophon at the end of the volume, but a printer's ornament with which Alexander often used to finish the books he produced. The two title-pages are integral parts of their respective sheets and were not printed separ? ately as prelims. Bibliographical Problems There are some strange bibliographical features about this publication. The HDDOn, that is, the letter of approval of the Sephardi Beth Din of London,3 which is, incidentally, the main source of information for the bio? graphy of Haham Serano,4 is one of the prob 1 For bibliography see: Dr. G. Roth, 'The Hebrew Printing in London' (Hebrew), Kiryat Sefer (Jerusalem, 1937), Vol. 14, offprint, p. 10, No. 64 (Dr. Roth lists only Moreh b'Etzbah; it seems he used the British Museum copy (1977 c 14), which lacks Tsiporen Shamir). N. Ben-Menahem, ibid., Vol. 21, p. 316. Ben-Menahem adds the biblio? graphical details of Tsiporen Shamir; Dr. G. Roth, ibid., Vol. 23, p. 332. Cf. also Dr Meir Benayahu, ?wVim TH r\0V U?n 'Ol (Jerusalem, 1959), p. 192 et seq., Nos. 7-8. 2 ?/70 UKTO TH *\W TT. 3 The signatories to this letter of approval are: 4 This letter of approbation is also the sole source of information regarding Haham Serano for the short biography in A. Yaari's monumental pH TTW, Jerusalem, 1951, p. 663. How? ever, there is just one more bit of information avail 233</page><page sequence="2">234 A. Schischa lems. There are copies known of this volume (a) which lack the Haskama; others (b) which contain the Haskama, but it is stuck into the volume in front of the title-page; and yet others (c) where the Haskama is stuck right at the back of the book. The normal position for the Haskama is following immediately upon the title-page, and any deviation from that has usually some sound bibliographical reason. The indications in our case are that the Haskama was not part of the original printing of the vol? ume and that it was added at some later stage. I should add that copies of (a) and (c) that I have seen were in their contemporary, most likely original, bindings.5 Variant Copy The problem becomes even more complicated with the discovery of yet a further Variant' copy. This particular copy contains in addition to the two booklets already discussed the apocryphal hymn HEND mV Tirm TIP, The Song of Unity [as composed] by the sons of Moshe. This Song is printed on a separate sheet of eight folds?i.e., sixteen pages. The leaves are paginated T-N, the eighth leaf bearing no pagination. There is no title-page to this section. The last leaf, the unnumbered one, contains on the recto page the already men? tioned Haskama to Haham Hida's booklets? inexplicably it omits all mention of the Song, etc. The reverse page is blank. None of the great libraries seems to possess a copy of this volume,6 that is, the two Haham Hida booklets and the Song of Unity, etc., nor is this volume in this make-up recorded in any of the standard Hebrew bibliographies.7 A partial solution may be suggested. The Mahamad of the Spanish and Portuguese community in London kept very strict control over what was to be allowed to be printed and/ or published by any one of its Yehidim. The very first known set of Ascamot, those instituted between the years 1663 and 1681, in El Libro de los Acuerdos, and so ably edited by the late Dr. L. D. Barnett, contained a proscription in the strictest terms:8 'No Jew shall be allowed to cause to be printed in this City [London] or outside it in this realm Hebrew or Ladino books or able about him. That rather colourful North African Haham, Moshe Edrehi, who spent some years in London, says in the introduction to his TWft "H^, Amsterdam, 1809, that it was 'the late' Haham Serano who brought him as a youth from his native Mogador to London. From this source we may therefore deduce that Haham Serano was no longer in the realm of the living in 1809. s Yaari in v'KtP 663 writes: fTim D^DOm nson *yio3 noDW ynnVa o'nnDon. i have not seen the copy Yaari used; it can neverthe? less be stated that *1D0n ^IDD HDDl^ cannot be correct. Technically this is impossible. Meir Benayahu (as footnote 1) is more cautious, DH^DOn T^n n&amp;DOm IDIOn. It may well be that Yaari and Benayahu used the same copy. 6 There is no copy in the British Museum, none in the Bodleian, Oxford, the Library of the Jewish Theological Seminary, New York, or the National and University Library, Jerusalem. 7 This statement needs some qualification. Friedberg, in hisDnDOH TpS7 TP2 2nd ed., Tel-Aviv 1954, Vol. 3, letter W, item No. 984, lists Shir ha' Tihud IVBnei Moshe as a separate publication, thus: [X7/3pn] JllTl1?. He does not state the number of pages, which indicates that he has not seen the book he thus describes, and ipso facto that his information is only second-hand. Friedberg does not give the source of his information, but this is revealed by Dr. P. J. Kohn (Kiryat Sefer, Vol. 23, p. 75, item No. 7) as having been taken from the bookseller Poppelauer's catalogue No. 19 (it should be No. 15, Berlin, 1907), item No. 1627. There it is in fact stated ,Ttttf pl?Sl mi? 1627 niVuoi noi? oth ,DiKn mimn ,N"Tn 7n jvmdoimb *im? rwn mV Tirrn ?"? X2pn (pillV) (X"n that is to say, he offered for sale Haham Hida's Moreh b'Etzbah and Tsiporen Shamir London, 1791, bound together in a half leather binding, with Shir ha-Tihud IVBnei Moshe (London), 1791. Neither the bookseller nor Fried berg (who after all only copied from Poppelauer? and that carelessly) realised that they dealt with one and the same book and not two books bound by chance together. However, it seems that this is the only time that somebody had in fact seen the book and described it in its original and complete state. Apropos of this, it came from the Rev. Joseph Kohn Zedek's library, which was particularly rich in books printed in London. I am indebted to Dr. J. Rosen wasser for permitting me to make use of his own copy of Poppelauer's catalogue. ?Oxford, 1931, p. 11, Ascama No. 30, dated London, 18 Heswan 5424 = 18 November 1663.</page><page sequence="3">Bibliographical Serendipity 235 [books] in any language without express permission of the Mahamad so that they may be revised or amended; and him who should contravene this Escama we straight? forward hold him to the penalty of Herrem, because it thus conduces to our preservation.' Permission to Print Needed This prohibition was reiterated in the 1785 revised edition of the regulations as Ascama 329 and in the 1831 edition it appears as para? graph 2710 under the heading 'Prohibition against Printing books without permission'. While the preamble to this prohibition declares that the primary reason for its codification was to avoid any controversy 'between us and the people of the country', the Mahamad nevertheless took it upon itself to cast a prying eye on everything that was intended to be printed. It expected and indeed made sure that all books, no matter how harmless the contents might be, were submitted to the authority of the Haham or the Mahamad for formal approval. On the evidence available, this by-law was administered in the strictest possible manner.11 It is only in the 1872 edition of the Laws and Customs that this onerous imposition was omitted.12 Haham Serano, the publisher, was a stranger to London and the internal restriction of the Sephardi community did not necessarily apply to him. Indeed, he may have been completely unaware of it. The Ashkenazi printer, Alex? ander, had no reason to draw Serano's attention to it. Serano may not have become aware of the omission of the statutory letter of approval from the Beth Din until after the first bound copies were distributed?which may account for the existence of copies in the original binding lacking the Haskama. However, as he would not have wished to lose the goodwill of the members of the Sephardi community, and forgo a potentially good outlet, it may be suggested that he quickly made amends. He must have asked for and in fact received the requisite written approbation, and no sooner had he re? ceived it than he had it printed. This was done, as we have seen above, on the last page of the ntMD mV Tirrn TP. The last leaf was then severed from the sheet and attached to the Haham Hida booklets. Thus copies already bound would have this leaf stuck in at the end of the book; but copies as yet to be bound would have it tipped-in at the beginning of the first sheet in front of the title-page, the over? lapping edge folded under and attached to the inner margin of the last fold. Consequently, in both cases the approbation is to be found in an unusual place. Printing Mysteries While this supposition may explain the existence of the three variant copies, it may also explain the existence of a copy which preserved the additional sheet containing the 7W? THTTI T?, with the n?DOn in the position as it left the printing press. There are, nevertheless, still a number of other questions. Why is it that no copy of the TW12 ^2^? "Tirrn 1W is recorded? Was it ever published independently? If so, what caused the almost complete disappearance of all the copies? Was it just natural wastage that condemned this tiny publication to oblivion? or are there some other reasons for it? It is very strange that in the approbation?which was, after all, part of the physical make-up of the Shir ha* Tihud sheet?no mention of the Shir ha'Tihud is made. Was it perhaps that the Beth Din would not approve of the publication of this apocryphal text, and without it Haham Serano would not publish the rest? Who can tell? [See Plates XXIII and XXIV] 9 I am quoting from N. Laski, Q,.C.: The Laws and Charities of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews' Congregation, London (London, 1952), pp. 13-14, n. 89. 10 Ascamot or Laws and Regulations of the Jewish Congregation entitled D^?t^H *1S7tP in London. London, 5591-1831, pp. 122-123, Ascama 27. 11 Cf. Albert M. Hyamson: The Sephardim of England, London, 1951, pp. 29, 184-185, 221, 256-257, 259, etc. 12 Ascamot: or Laws and Regulations of the Congrega? tion of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews, etc., Revised and amended 5632/1872. London, Wertheimer, Lea &amp; Co., 1872.</page><page sequence="4">236 A. Schischa ?*f CO ?O O ?fj *+ ?'O CO ?O CO- CO O *i* T -q* O O O CO f?WC0Q0co^&lt;???*00CO00(?00C0000000(?COO?()0UCW00 -a ? 5? a ? o = s c ? . . "~ .0 ? ^ ? ?; 5 2? *? ? ? ? ?2 t-? Cl CN 1 OJ CO ,CS ^ 43 ? .fi ^3 ? x x ^ '"EL &amp; .3 :&lt;3 3 ? ? H ? 5 ? W CO 5 ? 2 ? 8 s s C - ID % g 0 p &lt;V co *?&lt; r O O To ? : - ? ?? ? ?n ?? ?s v_ r-? Oi *~" m ?? . ?\ uj ?&lt;??: to fco t5 ^ Tl In M co r r? I er1 ^ .5 ? '3 W CO .a ^o ?" - t2 ? 5 c2 'E 3 ,9 2 g O ? P cc ^ ? &amp; ^ h5 ?2 ST S pq |? S ^ 5* o 3 d J s *r 03 w 9 ^ ~ ^ P *J tj 91 15 0 ? a - ^ ^ M CO CC &gt; S I 8 c ? * ^ 11 S O ? r" k5 ?1 + ^ S H M ?S Q 5 ? ^ 'S 5 ft tu .5 * II ?1 P4 p..</page><page sequence="5">Bibliographical Serendipity 237 O &lt;0 Jl O ? co -r o o o oo co oo go go 2 'E ? 2 - 3 ? s ,? 5' ?-s &lt;3 H: C ?-5 &amp; S ? Jj ? hp ? 3 ^ i ? t&lt; ? 0 r&gt; eo 1 ? ^ ?er1 ^ &gt;?? o -c P ? ? o ^ ? s ? 2 ? 'S - 3 ? ? C 'J ^ c ? ? CQ 3^ w O o C/5 C Ol h O O i?? CO rf CO CO O QO 00 00 00 00 b ^ b *s ^ ~ 3 &gt;-3 63 o in . j ? O -3 ? /r ?11 o ? to o a a ' d w 6 ? ? "o Oi vi o ?* 2 ^ 5 .5 ? CO w ?a ? 4 o ?-3 ?3 fi I. 2 1 55 S "^3 1^ i i J3 0i ^4 of1* w H }25 W o M I ?s O r W o</page><page sequence="6">238 A. Schischa REGISTERED COMMUNITIES IN 1851 The Marriage Act of 1836 (6 &amp; 7 Will. IV, c. 85 = 17 Aug.)1 made it a legal obligation for persons intending to enter matrimony to notify the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages of their impending marriage and to have it registered by an official, the Registrar, appointed for that purpose. Furthermore, the Act provided that such registration could only take place on premises registered for this specific purpose. However, if the parties concerned intended their marriage to be solemnised as prescribed by the tenets of the religion they adhered to, the Act made a clear distinction between those who followed the dominant faith and members of the Society of Friends (Quakers) and Jews. Whereas in the case of Protestants all parish churches were automatically registered and the local clergy became ex officio Registrars, in the case of Jews or Quakers certain conditions had to be met before the registration of their religious premises could take place. It had to be a 'place of worship'2 which was used for'regular public worship'3 by at least twenty heads of households for at least twelve months prior to the date the application was made to have the 'place' registered for that purpose. Once these prerequisites had been complied with, the owner of the 'place' (if it was not in the owner? ship of the community) or the trustees (if it was) could petition the Registrar General to have the premises registered. The registration would then follow as a matter of course, and a Marriage Registrar could be appointed. How? ever, this Act omitted to state who or what corporate body was entitled to make these appointments. This omission was made good by a subsequent Act of Parliament (6 &amp; 7 Will. IV, c. 86) which makes it clear who was to appoint the Secretaries to synagogues (par. 30) '... and also to every person whom the president for the time being of the London committee of deputies of the British Jews shall from time to time certify in writing under his hand to the registrar general to be the secretary of a syna? gogue in England professing the Jewish reli? gion . . .' Both these Acts of Parliament became opera? tive on 30 June 1837. Thus it fell upon Sir Moses Montefiore in his capacity as President of the London Committee (to become known later as the Board of Deputies) to certify the appointments of all Marriage Secretaries. At a meeting held on 1 September 1851 Sir Moses issued a certificate to the Secretary of the Sunderland community. This fact is included in the fifth half-yearly report of the Deputies.4 The opportunity was used to publish a complete list of all Marriage Secretaries thus far certified as an appendix to the said report, which is reproduced on pp. 236-7. From this tabulated list we learn that in mid-century there were, besides the six London synagogues, 33 pro? vincial ones which came up to standard?i.e. that they conducted regular worship and were frequented by some twenty or more households. It seems that the first certificates were issued on 27 June 1839, when three London syna? gogues and those of Bedford, Chatham, Cheltenham, Hull, Plymouth, and Ramsgate were certified. Lawyer members of the Jewish Historical Society might explain why it took two years to have these registrations certified and why the Great?i.e. Duke's Place?was not registered until January 1841. 1 Both these Acts of Parliament are fully dis? cussed in H. S. Q. Henriques, Jewish Marriages and the English Law, Oxford, 1909 (and to some extent also in his earlier book, The Jew and the English Law, Oxford, 1908). However, he concerned himself with the legal implications of these Acts, not with tech? nicalities. 2 The Act always uses 'the place' when referring to the meeting-house of the Quakers and the syna? gogue (with one exception). The Act c. 86 mentions 'synagogue' a number of times. 3 The Act does not define what is meant by regular public worship. 4 I am indebted to my friend Mr. M. Sanders for the loan of a copy of this report.</page><page sequence="7">Bibliographical Serendipity 239 LONGFELLOW'S *A PSALM OF LIFE' IN HEBREW Most of Longfellow's larger works were translated into Hebrew. Those which appeared as independent publications were listed with bibliographical details by Schapiro,1 and recorded with some additions in Friedberg's standard Hebrew Bibliography.2 What can be gathered from these two bibliographical aids is shown below.3 The discovery of a hitherto unrecorded broadsheet containing the famous and beauti? fully powerful A Psalm of Life in English and Hebrew adds yet another delightful item to Longfellow's Hebrew bibliography. It measures 25 x 37 cm. The English original and the Hebrew translation are printed in parallel columns on one side of the sheet. The translator is named as the Rev. Isidore Myers, B.A., and in his Hebrew signature he states that he translated the poem in Mel? bourne.4 The broadsheet was produced on the presses of the blind scholar-printer, A. M. Luncz, in Jerusalem.5 Myers was born in Poland and taken by his immigrant parents to Australia as a young boy. He received a sound religious education and prepared himself for the Jewish ministry. His secular education was acquired at the Univer? sity of Melbourne, where he gained his Bachelor of Arts degree. His first rabbinical post was with the Jewish community in Sand? hurst (Victoria), which he exchanged later for that of East Melbourne. He relinquished this in 1890 so as to be able to travel and see the world. He sailed from Australia on 1 April and his first visit was to the Holy Land, where he spent the latter part of that year. And after a prolonged preaching and lecturing tour on the European Continent and in England he returned to his former vocation, accepting a call from one of the communities in San Francisco, where he settled?it seems for good. According to his biographer, he was an accomplished lecturer and an eloquent preacher, and he delighted in writing poetry in Hebrew and English. That the quality of his translation of A Psalm of Life does not measure up to the flowing rhythm of the original is not surprising. Myers was a good and competent rhymester?but certainly not a poet to match Longfellow's lyre. Whereas the place of printing and the name of the printer are stated, the date of printing is missing. However, this may be assumed with near certainty. The only recorded visit of Myers to the Holy Land is that of the summer and autumn of 1890.6 It was certainly his first visit there, and it is more than probable that he there are seven of Longfellow's poems in Hebrew translation, amone them also A Psalm of Life. 1 Israel Schapiro, 'Bibliography of Hebrew Translations of English Works'. In Studies in Jewish Bibliography and Related Subjects, in Memory of A. S. Freidus, New York, 1929, pp. 182-218. 2 Ch. B. Friedberg, Beth Eked Sepharim, Biblio? graphical Lexicon, etc. (in Hebrew), 2nd ed., 4 vols. Tel Aviv, 1951, 1952, 1954, 1956. 3 (1) Evangelina (H^V?')!^), (trans.) S. Tscher nichovski, Berlin, 1923, 8?, 88 pp. (Ref: Schapiro, p. 200; Friedberg, letter N, No. 204). (2) Excelsior (n?*Hp)&gt; (a) (trans.) Z. H. Gershuni, Chicago, 1882, 8?, 4 fip. (Ref: Friedberg, letter p, No. 123); (b) S. Tchernichovski, (Tffllp) n.p., n.d. (Ref: Scha? piro, p. 201). (3) Judas Maccabaeus ("?MO mirf), (a) (trans.) J. Massel, Manchester, 1860, 12?, 60 pp. (Ref: Schapiro, p. 201; Friedberg, letter \ No. 264); (b) (trans.) Ben-Ami, (rDUn 03) Odessa, 1882, 8?, (Ref: Friedberg, letter J, No. 499). (4) The Song of Hiawatha (HDIXTl HTW), (trans.) S. Tchernichov? ski, (a) Odessa, 1913, 8?, 122 pp.; (b) Berlin, 1922 (Ref: Schapiro, p. 201). As this list is based on these two bibliographical aids, needless to say it cannot be treated as authori? tative. This is particularly so, as Schapiro is dated, and Friedberg, alas, is not always reliable and certainly not exhaustive. There were, of course, many more of Longfellow's poems translated into Hebrew, which appeared in periodicals, anthologies, and collectively with other related material. One particular anthology comes to mind: that of another Hebrew printer-poet, Joseph Massel, of Manchester. In his MVKnaf ha'Aratez Zern^r?lh (Hebrew), Manchester, 1897, 4 See L. A. Goldman, BA., The Jews in Victoria in the Nineteenth Century, Melbourne, 1954, as per index. (I am indebted to Mr. Edgar R. Samuel, B.A., F.R.H.S., for drawing my attention to this book.) 5 His bibliography in Jerusalem (a volume dedi? cated to Luncz's memory, in Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1928, A. R. Malachi, pp. 1-7; Gh. Luncz-Boletin, pp. 8-20. His most up-to-date biography, G. Kressl, intro? duction to Nethivoth Tzion ve1 Yerushalayim, Jeru? salem, 1970, pp. 9-126. 6 Goldman, op. cit.} p. 355.</page><page sequence="8">240 A. Schischa r r a .p-n a ?r 3 r a &amp; r!. .a T a-? r C r 2? ir ^ ? fli * ? Fi r IS la' - % O: n *! r- &amp;. I r C: r 5 o I a O IT: ^ fl 9 JS * &amp; %n 9 C&lt; ?! IT,. X 5, 8. E! cr P. r: a ? 9 w - &amp; * ? ? I ? ? ^ 'S S o a 2 ~ 3 OC - * ^ bC 2 .23 |s 2 i i 5 = ^ t &lt; "J o 8 2 3 S g * 2 ? ? * 2 - S 2 J8 J ^ tf &amp; 3 ? d ? S3 'S &lt;5 ?d o ? .2 ft p u o C t3 5 $ * &amp; = O 00 o o q 0 ^3 ^3 00 09 d 3 .2 ? ? ^ s - s bo , .2 a * 1 4) 80 ?a g&gt; ? 5 a 5 3 I bS Pi 0 0 5 ? .5 'S bo ?I s a S3 Sh a ? S3 ^ 3 Pi a S3 o</page><page sequence="9">Bibliographical Serendipity 241 4&gt; 3 3 g o ?5 fl &lt;3? 5 O fl go e* s ts I * a j GO s 3 o 2 -8 "5 6 3 a a ?2 5? ho o o a ,2 |? S ft I a 5 SP 3 9 ?? i? a 2 ? 1 8 2 " ? S a 3 ^ ?5 QQ . ^ O oj oS I 3 I I s 8P o fl 00 5bo * *a a 53 &lt;D ? 1 1 8 .S 3 ?S .S "1 CO "5 5 i h3 3 ? I O ;3 ?S 1</page><page sequence="10">242 A. Schischa used that occasion to print the translation of the poem, which he brought with him from Melbourne. It is indeed a most charming and appropriate memento of a visit to Jerusalem.7 7 As to separate editions of A Psalm of Life in English, Mr. H. W. Callaghan, M.A., Assistant Librarian, University College London, kindly informs me: 'There is an entry in the Library of Congress catalogue for an edition of (1900) New York, The Lovell Co., and three entries in the B.M. Cat. London, printed in Bavaria, Ernest Nister [1898]; London, printed in Bavaria, Ernest Nister [1902]; and London Harrap [1913]' (in a letter dated 11 November 1970). Thus, if my dating is correct, this edition of the English text in the broadsheet antedates all the other editions. It should, in that event, also be listed in Shoshanah Halevy's The Printed Books in Jerusalem during . . . 1841-1891 (in Hebrew), Jerusalem, 1963 (since this was written, a much enlarged second edition of Shoshanah Halevy's book has appeared: The First Hebrew Books printed in Jerusalem in the second half of the nineteenth century 1841-1890 (in Hebrew), Jerusalem, Ben Zvi Institute, 1975. It does not appear there either).</page><page sequence="11">PLATE XXIII [See 'Bibliographical serendipity*] ? niywn am moan oyo r?on n? mvonai mma cimioon am "ow *irmtannna9 ? ta vovao Vayt ? tnW&gt; arito.' . otiok x&amp; ? Ma MXQSa avmb trirtjn* ; ?ounnra? l?y* *?? ? bnv jvwm naia ?jm rottavo /Wte *w ?iwi ?rta "won ntD*mn?' * itea fno^MVi ? piomovocwnw . ? vTjn V133 auo ttth ? am flora ?an on^m pyi* owwto ? o"o u(h?o .717 qw? 7?MW 7"a ? 1 VC.* A/ore? b'Etzbah, London, 1791, the first title-page</page><page sequence="12">PLATE XXIV [See 'Bibliographical serendipity9] 1 07dV G7fM OVV ovo 1tom&gt; 70S? *&gt;3&gt; ir#l&gt;, ??"&gt;lS7 SD P7VDO W O0U 097'JlS WO? 7I?* 7971 :wn 7^5 prw9 i?*ft &gt;pw jrown'Atta? 0099'. 'V T*** v*1 P* ??to* ? &lt;jov.oMo*V* *0 7i99i ftVpura -4^ v?; W?P*'i ?*W VWftlftlp M3A. fl/I?f. ' :;^^&gt;ipw ft"97p t?6'5ici?7wi ? own* ?OfV m? "ln^ov V7:&gt; otefr 09ro |w6i 79 Vw fc? wft ;v:^.: Wll W"IWVW PWI 99#W C^PV pP*P &lt;90tP* Oft7?0; :;.; .:^^^^?VwS Mn ow m? pft-0S*9 [?V pp5 ^SSir : ^ ^: ^ ?wofo rj&gt;V9.|noP9 n cjniA on *9?i ton '' mpV 009 owpw Sto?t ?ppwS Sir* Sn** ftw pV/ Tv^^ \ r iw?V ? wro Vft wrtfr? o7w?0 dim/ *j9'pnjtt.?9ft; ;;f v , ^; OA ? w 57&gt; tyjn top* pio oSip? S? o wpS 7?i/iiV " !&gt;::^ &lt;f&gt;-; ? imop witrwo&gt;?vo?ito9 vo??a to ort MoreA b'Etzbah: The Haskamah of the London Beth Din, Adar 5551/1791</page></plain_text>

bottom of page