I recently bought the first volume of Jacob Neusner's five volume series of books named in the title of this thread.
This volume, I think, was originally published by E J Brill in 1964. The other four came out between then and 1970. All five volumes were re-issued by Wipf & Stock as paperbacks in 1999.
Anyhow, I wonder if I can get the opinion of others who may have read this volume (covers Parthian politics and the involvement of the Jewish inhabitants, ca. 140 bce to 227 ce). The paperback is still available for about $25 USD.
This is not my first attempt to read books by Neusner. If anything, the guy is extremely sure of himself. He speaks with erudition, but there are times I cannot seem to grasp his logic, regardless of how plausible his suggestions sound to my untrained ear. The other books I have are The Economics of the Mishnah (1969), The Oral Torah (1986), The Memorized Torah (1985), and A Midrash Reader (1990). I have at best perused them, but did noticed that Neusner can change his mind - a lot. His biggest turn-around was after his mentor Morton Smith passed away. Previous to this event, he was gushing praise for the man as editor of a Festschrift commemorating Smith. After Smith's death, in an intro to another scholar's book on memorization by Jews in the 1st century, Neusner rips (no pun intended) Smith to pieces.
Neusner is an ordained rabbi (Reform Judaism, I think), and has published English translations of the Mishnah and both the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmud. I own these translations in one form or another, and to be honest, he seems to take great pains to give detailed outlines of the discussions (whose speaking to whom, scriptural allusions. etc.), which I like a lot.
However, I have seen online posts that seem to cast doubt on his understanding of Mishnaic Hebrew and Talmudic Aramaic, but I wonder if the real objection has to do with Neusner making these discussions more understandable to non-Jews, or among Jews those, at least, who are non-rabbis.
I suppose the examples they give are nit picking, but I am no expert, and do not read either Hebrew or Aramaic. I'd like to get some opinions and see if we can get a productive discussion going.
DCH
The History of the Jews in Babylonia
-
Secret Alias
- Posts: 18922
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: The History of the Jews in Babylonia
I am rushing out the door but while doing research on Smith and Neusner's relationship I uncovered hundreds of stories about how nutty Neusner was (he is still alive but apparently has advanced Parkinsons). You are probably aware of the fact that what set off Neusner against Smith was that Smith was fed up with Neusner's awful scholarship. His translation of the Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud was apparently the last straw. Smith went to the famous SBL event and made his break public at a Neusner lecture and proceeded to hand out sloppy errors in his translation noted by Saul Lieberman (who died in a plane crash).
In any event, Neusner was very difficult to work with. He made enemies with virtually everyone in his department especially a German scholar of Josephus at Brown. In the Reagan era (because undoubtedly he was far right of Mussolini) he ended up sitting on the national endowment for grants for scholars in the Reagan era. This gave him tremendous power over scholarship. He came into conflict with many including Theodore Gaster. Gaster's daughter told me that Smith had previously attempted to help his friend get money from Neusner (all the while carrying on an affair with Gaster's wife according to the daughter) but Neusner wouldn't give it to him.
Gaster's Hebrew was impeccable. He had a great sense of nuance which Smith admired but Neusner apparently didn't like his efforts to go back to Ugarit and other Semitic linguistic and religious roots. In any event Gaster was starving basically in Philadelphia. Smith couldn't get Neusner to get Gaster a grant. Neusner apparently used his position on the endowment board to get people to publish with him. In any event this is all heresay ultimately but from the individuals involved and their survivors at Brown, Harvard, University of South Florida.
In the end they managed to sack Neusner from Brown after a prolonged effort in the 80s. He was particularly embittered apparently. He went to South Florida which - as one professor noted - was a serious step down especially at that time (being basically the equivalent of a for profit college). I haven't read that particular volume but I have a few of his other books.
Some interesting gossip. Constance the wife of the German professor noted that even though he was ordained rabbi and kept a kosher house he routinely ate non-kosher food at her house. She noted he wouldn't let his kids watch TV and kept severe discipline at home. She said she felt sorry for his kids. Apparently they didn't even have a dishwasher for the longest time, no microwave. It was inferred he routinely hit his children and his wife but again how Constance would know that is another question.
All the papers of the German professor went to one of his most productive students who - interestingly enough - ultimately fell under the influence of Neusner (so I couldn't get access to them to see all the litigation and internal correspondences at Brown which attempted to remove Neusner from office). Other professors apparently signed non-disclosure agreements. But most of this available online (if you go to my blog I paid for newspaper articles and copy and pasted them).
In any event, Neusner was very difficult to work with. He made enemies with virtually everyone in his department especially a German scholar of Josephus at Brown. In the Reagan era (because undoubtedly he was far right of Mussolini) he ended up sitting on the national endowment for grants for scholars in the Reagan era. This gave him tremendous power over scholarship. He came into conflict with many including Theodore Gaster. Gaster's daughter told me that Smith had previously attempted to help his friend get money from Neusner (all the while carrying on an affair with Gaster's wife according to the daughter) but Neusner wouldn't give it to him.
Gaster's Hebrew was impeccable. He had a great sense of nuance which Smith admired but Neusner apparently didn't like his efforts to go back to Ugarit and other Semitic linguistic and religious roots. In any event Gaster was starving basically in Philadelphia. Smith couldn't get Neusner to get Gaster a grant. Neusner apparently used his position on the endowment board to get people to publish with him. In any event this is all heresay ultimately but from the individuals involved and their survivors at Brown, Harvard, University of South Florida.
In the end they managed to sack Neusner from Brown after a prolonged effort in the 80s. He was particularly embittered apparently. He went to South Florida which - as one professor noted - was a serious step down especially at that time (being basically the equivalent of a for profit college). I haven't read that particular volume but I have a few of his other books.
Some interesting gossip. Constance the wife of the German professor noted that even though he was ordained rabbi and kept a kosher house he routinely ate non-kosher food at her house. She noted he wouldn't let his kids watch TV and kept severe discipline at home. She said she felt sorry for his kids. Apparently they didn't even have a dishwasher for the longest time, no microwave. It was inferred he routinely hit his children and his wife but again how Constance would know that is another question.
All the papers of the German professor went to one of his most productive students who - interestingly enough - ultimately fell under the influence of Neusner (so I couldn't get access to them to see all the litigation and internal correspondences at Brown which attempted to remove Neusner from office). Other professors apparently signed non-disclosure agreements. But most of this available online (if you go to my blog I paid for newspaper articles and copy and pasted them).
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
-
andrewcriddle
- Posts: 2852
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am
Re: The History of the Jews in Babylonia
I like Neusner's work but there are some issues.
a/ The proofreading is sometimes sloppy (a negative can be omitted).
b/ Without going into the feud involving Lieberman, Neusner and Morton Smith, there is a real issue with the Palestinian Talmud translation. Neusner's is (at least IMHO) the best translation of the Palestinian Talmud in a modern European language, however what Neusner did was take a standard published text of the Hebrew/Aramaic and do a paraphrase/translation of it. For the other texts Neusner translated this is legitimate, but it is claimed by Neusner's critics that the Palestinian Talmud is so textually corrupt that those without detailed knowledge of the textual issues (which Neusner lacked) have no business doing a translation of it.
Andrew Criddle
Edited to Add
It has also been claimed that Neusner in his translations is negligent in getting right the sort of details necessary in order to use a rabbinic work as a reliable giude in living kosher. His translations have a different sort of audience in view.
a/ The proofreading is sometimes sloppy (a negative can be omitted).
b/ Without going into the feud involving Lieberman, Neusner and Morton Smith, there is a real issue with the Palestinian Talmud translation. Neusner's is (at least IMHO) the best translation of the Palestinian Talmud in a modern European language, however what Neusner did was take a standard published text of the Hebrew/Aramaic and do a paraphrase/translation of it. For the other texts Neusner translated this is legitimate, but it is claimed by Neusner's critics that the Palestinian Talmud is so textually corrupt that those without detailed knowledge of the textual issues (which Neusner lacked) have no business doing a translation of it.
Andrew Criddle
Edited to Add
It has also been claimed that Neusner in his translations is negligent in getting right the sort of details necessary in order to use a rabbinic work as a reliable giude in living kosher. His translations have a different sort of audience in view.