For those of you interested in the life of the celebrated Hebrew journalist and lexicographer Eliezer Ben-Yehuda (1858-1922), the most dominant single figure in the revival of Hebrew as a spoken language in late 19th- and early 20th-century Palestine, a new book purporting to be about him, “Resurrecting Hebrew” by Amherst College professor Ilan Stavans, has just appeared in the Schocken-Nextbook Jewish Encounters series.
Unfortunately, “Resurrecting Hebrew” is more about Stavans (a Mexican-born Jew who was educated in Yiddish and Hebrew and writes in English) and his meandering reflections and interviews with various pundits on language and multilingualism than it is about Ben-Yehuda, on the subject of whom it is not terribly enlightening.
This is a pity, because Ben-Yehuda, quite apart from the many legends and myths that have accrued to him, was a quixotically fascinating personality who has not been the subject of a full-length book written in English since Robert St. John’s 1952 biography and a 1972 study by Jack Fellman. Not all the stories told about him are necessarily true, such as the one about how, when his wife, Hemda, called out, “Eliezer, help, I’ve been bitten by an akrev!” he answered, “Hemda, how many times do I have to tell you that a scorpion in Hebrew is akrav?” (Like a great deal of Ben-Yehudiana, this does not appear in Stavans’s book.) But even if some of these tales are apocryphal, one can easily imagine them happening, for Ben-Yehuda was a stubborn man who always insisted on going his own way. Had it been up to him, we might this week be celebrating the start not of 5769, but of 1940.
This, too, cannot be found in “Resurrecting Hebrew.” Yet when Ben-Yehuda began publishing his weekly Hebrew newspaper Hatsvi in Jerusalem in the autumn of 1884, the date on its first issue was, “Friday, 5 Heshvan, 1816 years since the destruction of the Temple, 5645.” (There was no Gregorian date at all.) This formula was followed in the first seven issues of Hatsvi, after which “5645” was dropped. From then on, the only year on the masthead referred to the destruction of the Second Temple, which Ben-Yehuda chose to date to the beginning of the Romans’ siege of Jerusalem in 68 C.E. rather than to their final victory in 70. In everything else that he published, including his monumental 16-volume dictionary, he followed the same system.
Ben-Yehuda was an ardently nationalistic Zionist and an equally ardently anti-religious secularist, and his method of dating served both ideologies, replacing a chronology that started with God’s creation of the world with one that started with the loss of Jewish political independence in antiquity. And yet, just as he was always looking for justifications in Hebrew sources for his many linguistic innovations, so was his dating rooted in the past. Counting the years from the destruction of the Temple was actually quite common among Jews in the early centuries of the Christian era and was a system used in many ancient Hebrew documents and contracts. Although its year zero was eventually replaced by that of Creation, traces of it can still be found in Sephardic and Yemenite prayer books. Thus, for example, in some Sephardic liturgies for the fast day of the Ninth of Av, the day of mourning for the Temple, there is the passage:
“Alas for the destruction of the Temple! Alas for the burning of the Torah! Alas for the murder of righteous Jews! Alas for the sorrow of the Messiah [in having his coming delayed]! Today is ______ number of years since the destruction of our holy shrine.”
And though he was the first to revive this custom, Ben-Yehuda was not the only one. A number of other Hebrew and Jewish writers followed in his wake, including the editor of the Zionist publication Die Welt, Nachum Sokolov, who dated it as Ben-Yehuda had done with Hatsvi, and, in the years before his death, the renowned German-Jewish historian Heinrich Graetz.
In the end, of course, Ben-Yehuda’s innovation did not prevail. Indeed, with characteristic impulsiveness he overthrew it himself, for when the Balfour Declaration was issued by Great Britain in 1917, marking, so he believed, the beginning of the restoration of Jewish independence, he began to date everything to that. His tombstone on the Mount of Olives reads:
“Eliezer Ben-Yehuda
The Reviver of the Hebrew Language
And Author of the Great Dictionary
Died in Jerusalem in his 65th year the 26th of Kislev
Year 6 from the Balfour Declaration.”
And yet, had he lived to be 150, Eliezer Ben-Yehuda probably would not be wishing you a happy 91 this year either. The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 would have trumped the Balfour Declaration, and we would currently be initiating the year 60.
There’s something to be said for sticking to tradition. A happy 5769 to you all!
Questions for Philologos can be sent to philologos@forward.com.
It should be sadly noted that the Forward never gives the Hebrew date - neither in its Yiddish nor in its English edition. I don't know why. Perhaps, someone thinks that the Hebrew date is "religious", and the Forward is not a religious newspaper. Well, it should then be noted that the year 2008 has a much more obviously religious connotation. It could be that the Hebrew date is simply irrelevant to the vast majority of American Jews. I would imagine that just a very few could actually recite the names of the twelve months. However, a Jewish newspaper should always assume that its public has a Jewish point of reference (even if it's not true anymore in the USA) - and hence state that "Hebrew was revived in the Land of Israel" (Palestine is the term of the non-Jewish public), and hence note that today's date is 4 Tishrei.
I agree about the Hebrew date, but disagree that 2008 has religious implications any more. It's simply the year of the Common Era (C.E.), the international standard (ISO 8601) for dating. Almost all countries use the Common Era officially, the exceptions being Israel, Japan, Thailand, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and various Islamic countries -- but not all: Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim country, uses the Common Era. It is in common use, as its name indicates, in every country. Although 1 C.E. was originally intended to represent the birth year of Jesus, it's fairly clear that it doesn't, since he is said to have been born during the rule of Herod the Great, the Roman client king of the province of Judaea -- but the consensus of historians is that Herod the Great died in 4 B.C.E. In any case, original intent does not specify modern use.
The religious significance of the common era dating cannot be brushed aside. A date such as 2008 has a point of reference, even if that point of reference has been miscalculated by a few years. Now, if the reason for determining such a point of reference had been entirely forgotten, well, then I could agree that the common era has no religious connotation. However, it is common knowledge that the point of reference is the birth of Jesus, and hence that event is defined as being very significant. I'm not protesting the use of the Gregorian calendar by the Forward. It is indeed a very common and convenient way of dating. I'm protesting the total non-usage of the Hebrew calendar. If the non-usage of the Hebrew calendar is because of its perceived religious importance, then it should be noted that religion is at the basis of the common era calendar as well. The real reason that the Hebrew calendar is not used, unfortunately, is that the Jewish literacy of the public is so weak. The Hebrew date is simply meaningless to the English-speaking Jewish public, and so we have a silly situation in which a Jewish newspaper can wish a "shana tova" to its readers without ever stating anywhere which year this is. The Hebrew date should be added even as an act of education for a Jewish public that really is in need of it.
Perhaps the web-design firm that the FORWARD employs doesn't have a Hebrew calendar option? That being said, most FORWARD online readers have prob'ly already received calendars for 5769, either ordered from Judaica suppliers, or gratis from their shul, kosher market, local Chabad, and who knows else. In the US, whether the year 2008 is followed [preceded?] by an AD or CE is only an issue for the "America was founded as a Christian country" set, conservatives who still belittle "political correctness" and pushy ee-vangelicals [if they can be differentiated]. For example, down here in Texas, below the big ol' rodeo buckle of the Bible Belt, college students routinely challenge the convention in archaeology and paleoanthropology of using the Common Era date. Ketivah tovah
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.